Does anyone have an example of a code list used for F2F to the National CAD Standards? It seems like it would be hard in some cases without a ton of very special codes. For example we use EOA for "Edge of Asphalt". In the NCS they want you to distinguish between driveway asphalt, parking lot asphalt, and road asphalt. Would I need a specific code for each of those?
On the CAD side would it be possible for the figure library to recognize attributes from field data? For instance I can Code "ASPH" and then have the DC prompt for an attribute such as "ROAD", "DRIV", Or "PRKG".
Tom
TxDOT has a file "TxDOT06A-Z.txt" that I found on their website thru the Texas State Portal that I hand out for my guys to use when they are in doubt as to what to place as the description.
😉
> Does anyone have an example of a code list used for F2F to the National CAD Standards? It seems like it would be hard in some cases without a ton of very special codes. For example we use EOA for "Edge of Asphalt". In the NCS they want you to distinguish between driveway asphalt, parking lot asphalt, and road asphalt. Would I need a specific code for each of those?
>
> On the CAD side would it be possible for the figure library to recognize attributes from field data? For instance I can Code "ASPH" and then have the DC prompt for an attribute such as "ROAD", "DRIV", Or "PRKG".
>
> Tom
I don't have any examples but I got tasked to setup all this F2F with the CAD standards. Layer names and all.
I can't answer on the CAD side. I was a field man who knew enough to get F2F to render properly in the office. My hard time was tree sizes and symbols. Perhaps I tried to over do it - but it worked.
> Does anyone have an example of a code list used for F2F to the National CAD Standards?
Several years ago, I adapted the codes specified by the Iowa DOT (PDF) and applied NCS layering conventions to each of the codes. Other contributors provided their assistance along with some additional codes (mainly Section corner specific codes) and a spreadsheet version is in Google Docs.
For anyone using Carlson survey-oriented programs, I have a SurvCE-friendly FCL file and a Survey-friendly FLD file hosted on DropBox.com.
Any of these could serve as a starting point.
THANK YOU!
The "National CAD Standards" are an effort driven by the architect's out there. Those codes and the ones that you can download for the Army Corps Of Engineers are both "overkill". The CofE has 250+ layers and still does not cover a whole lot of survey stuff.
To me, the real power of F2F is the ability to gather the data without having the data collector guy end up writing a book. Time is money. This is a prime case where the KISS system really needs to be employed. The less time spent on descriptors, the more time to shoot stuff.
I have a code list that I print out, laminate and put on a belt hook carbineer for the field guys. If something is a shot ON asphalt, then the code is "A", edge of asphalt is "EA", and so on. Using the forward slash in the descriptors allows for you to add additional definitions to the shots.
I have ONE set of codes that are used on all our regular work AND on our code work. The breakout for all the silly layers takes place in my office FLD file.
The crews need the consistency of using the same codes all the time. Trying to get them to operate using 3 or 4 different code lists is a recipe for disaster.
Also, when setting up layers for in house use, my layer names are whatever that layer depicts. List this line and it will say layer "CONC", or whatever. The same code list when using the Corps set up will produce the same line work but will list out as V-ROAD-ASPH.
Usually the client gets all squirrelly over the layer names rather than what descriptor you use.
If you will email me, I will be more than glad to send you a copy of my code list for you to look at.
New Orleans District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Minimum Survey Standards Edition 4 Appendices 2 and 3 may be of some help. As has been mentioned here by many the USACE CAD standard is compatible with the National CAD standard.
Yeah I agree with a quick and easy code list and we have a very efficient F2F setup in house right now. But I have a big project where we need to use the NCS and I have had some of my larger clients complain that my layers do not conform to the standards they use (generally NCS). So I'm looking to change to something similar to the NCS for our daily use to be more inline with what my clients are using.
The question is certainly one for the office side of things. Similar to my previous example, say we shoot a curb...we have a few curb codes for different types and one curb layer that they all go into. But if I try to go by what the NCS wants, they have a Curb layer for parking lots, a curb layer for roads, and a curb layer for driveways. How would that be coded...BCR for BC Road, BCP for Parking Lot, etc? That would put them on the right layers but then I would have to put in the type as a descriptor I guess.
This presents the same problems...They have a "Driveway" code which is fine but I would have to manually change the layer to Driveway Asphalt or Driveway Dirt in CAD. They way around this would be a DRVA or a DRVD or a DRVG code which would put it all on the right layer but I think might over complicate the code list a bit.
> This presents the same problems...They have a "Driveway" code which is fine but I would have to manually change the layer to Driveway Asphalt or Driveway Dirt in CAD. They way around this would be a DRVA or a DRVD or a DRVG code which would put it all on the right layer but I think might over complicate the code list a bit.
The trick is not over-stratify the code system. The extra details, get them to use annotations or note it in the sketch. Whoever is at the helm should be doing a side visit anyway, that usually takes care of the question marks.
This sounds like a "layer" problem and NOT a "descriptor" problem. They want everything on the proper layers and really don't care what your descriptor codes are.
This "magic" is all done with your F2F .fld file.
The separation of the pavement into categories needs to be done to a standard established in the office and done by the drafters. Otherwise you are asking the field crews to determine that break point between the street and the parking lots and doing so consistently. They have enough to do already.
Let the guys in the Air Conditioned environment do those splits and layer adjustments. This is what I have to do everyday and it is much quicker for me to do it rather than slow down the field crews with this kind of minutia.
Much can be pre-set in the .FLD file, the rest is done by the drafter.
That's solid advice right there
