This is why TBC is far easier for processing linework when Access is the field software. Modify a code and tap F4 to recompute, and the linework is fixed. Export out 2D or 3D polylines that go directly to C3D for breaklines or planimetric lines (or both), and no messing with survey figures.
I'm trying to figure out how if possible to do similar things with Leica, I fear though that the IP lawyers were involved and won't let the two softwares get too close to the same type of workflows..
I suspect anyway
Everyone's situation is different. We are a full trimble/access/civil3d shop and create and use survey figures on a daily basis in survey and in engineering. While, I agree that the survey figure functionality could and should be smoother, it works for us. It has certainly taken time and really all stems from accurate codes. But, changes and errors do happen that require modification of the survey figures. Our process is: select the figure>survey figure properties> this opens up a window where you can add/delete points in any order you want. The interface could use some work, but it works. Then, with the figure still selected, rclick and select update database from drawing.
We only export points from TBC, nothing more.
We haven't had any major issues with survey figures in our survey to engineering workflow with our staff of over 50 in many many years.
Then, with the figure still selected, rclick and select update database from drawing.
Yeah, I've found that saves the edit which is great. A quirk I'm noticing is even after I save the edit if I process linework again it puts the old linework back in the drawing. It's faster to delete that old linework than redraw the edit so I'm at least gaining ground, but at the same time things are STILL more complicated than they need to be.
if I process linework again it puts the old linework back in the drawing.
Never ever reprocess the linework, that's one of our number 1 rules. Nothing good comes of it, ever.
if I process linework again it puts the old linework back in the drawing.
Never ever reprocess the linework, that's one of our number 1 rules. Nothing good comes of it, ever.
Edit the point in the database, and rerun the linework, if that is what you want.
Edit the point in the database, and rerun the linework, if that is what you want
How do you do that? The database points are locked and can only be edited at the source. Maybe I'm missing something?
Anyone know if there's a way to have Civil 3D redraw only survey figures that have been affected by changes to the points that define them?
what exactly are you changing about the points?
Anyone know if there's a way to have Civil 3D redraw only survey figures that have been affected by changes to the points that define them?
what exactly are you changing about the points?
Usually just fixing a coding error. We try to catch the errors in TBC but on bigger projects sometimes a handful slip through.
This is why TBC is far easier for processing linework when Access is the field software. Modify a code and tap F4 to recompute, and the linework is fixed. Export out 2D or 3D polylines that go directly to C3D for breaklines or planimetric lines (or both), and no messing with survey figures.
I'm trying to figure out how if possible to do similar things with Leica, I fear though that the IP lawyers were involved and won't let the two softwares get too close to the same type of workflows..
I suspect anyway
Agree on the TBC and Access. We are a Carlson field and C3D office shop. Once you set up the FtF for the DC, it just works. Advisable to set it up in Carlson Survey (ie. ease of entering in the data, GIS options, etc.), but it can be done solely on a controller if you do not have Carlson Survey. I did it that way before we bought it. Not advisable, but it can be done.
We used to use C3D for linework. It worked well, but it's better to see the linework in the field. We tell our crews that if it looks like spaghetti in the field, it will look like spaghetti in the office.
I don't like spaghetti. 😉
The last time I did FtF with Leica was with 1200 hardware. You could do FtF with it then. It didn't seem to enter the line codes in the code description when I did it. I imagine one could futz about with Geo Office/Infinity to get it to do so if desired.
We just switched the Carlson Special Codes to the C3D ones. The crews had already learned them so it didn't make sense to relearn them. Also, that way we can still use the SDB if we want to.
We fix linework by:
1. Looking at it on the DC. If it's wrong, fix it, rerun, re-export.
2. In C3D, convert the 3p to a Feature line (FL). Weed/eliminate if necessary, fix geometry from looking at the point codes/field notes/aerial/etc., and add back into DTM.
Our civil guys want 3d faces and 2d linework. I can understand why large multi-office, multi-divisional companies want to use the Survey DB. Combined with things like the vault, it would be a super useful, well, database. For "meat and potato" shops, it's a tough sell. It's making us wonder why we still pay for C3D. If Carlson came out with a FL alternative, we wouldn't think twice.
Think I found the solution-- there's a button in the survey editor panel that says update database from drawing. So click the edited line and click that button and it appears to store the edit.
IMHO, this is important. You want the database to be correct, not just the current drawing. In a project spanning many years, you can have a database with a dozen or more files associated with it. For that database to be useful, it should contain correct information.
Those simply making changes to the linework and creating a pretty picture are following a great path if the project is a one off. But, if you will be revisiting the project over time, and that database matters for more than simply creating linework, then it is worthwhile makin sure the database is correct.
Think I found the solution-- there's a button in the survey editor panel that says update database from drawing. So click the edited line and click that button and it appears to store the edit.
IMHO, this is important. You want the database to be correct, not just the current drawing. In a project spanning many years, you can have a database with a dozen or more files associated with it. For that database to be useful, it should contain correct information.
Those simply making changes to the linework and creating a pretty picture are following a great path if the project is a one off. But, if you will be revisiting the project over time, and that database matters for more than simply creating linework, then it is worthwhile makin sure the database is correct.
IMHO, this is important. You want the database to be correct, not just the current drawing. In a project spanning many years, you can have a database with a dozen or more files associated with it. For that database to be useful, it should contain correct information.
Those simply making changes to the linework and creating a pretty picture are following a great path if the project is a one off. But, if you will be revisiting the project over time, and that database matters for more than simply creating linework, then it is worthwhile makin sure the database is correct.
Our decade+ experience is different. While I agree it is good to have the database be correct it is not necessary as it relates to survey figures. Most of our projects last many years and our survey database typically have 20-50 entries, some much more. We have never had any issues with databases not matching drawing adjusted figures, ever. I can't think of a situation where it would be an issue with our workflow.
IMHO, this is important. You want the database to be correct, not just the current drawing. In a project spanning many years, you can have a database with a dozen or more files associated with it. For that database to be useful, it should contain correct information.
Those simply making changes to the linework and creating a pretty picture are following a great path if the project is a one off. But, if you will be revisiting the project over time, and that database matters for more than simply creating linework, then it is worthwhile makin sure the database is correct.
Our decade+ experience is different. While I agree it is good to have the database be correct it is not necessary as it relates to survey figures. Most of our projects last many years and our survey database typically have 20-50 entries, some much more. We have never had any issues with databases not matching drawing adjusted figures, ever. I can't think of a situation where it would be an issue with our workflow.
About the same amount of time in experience, but I was self taught on this, so I could be wrong. As they say...doing the same thing incorrectly for 1000 times doesn't count as "experience".
@bstrand you are probably better off editing the figure after you’ve stopped reimporting your data file. That’s what I do
