Is this purely a problem working with Civil 3D. I work in Carlson and save to dwg. I send dwg to client and they open it in whatever software they are using. I have not used Civil 3D but if it can't just read and write dwg files what's the point in using it?
Norman Oklahoma, post: 344110, member: 9981 wrote: Pain free. Takes a matter of seconds. Rather intuitive also, which isn't a given with many C3d commands.
That may be the solution to much of this.
While we're on the topic here I'd like to toss my 2 cents in about proprietary software.
I am a land surveyor. Due to my niche in the industry, my 'production' consists almost exclusively of R/W prints and documents for recordation. Although the majority of them are pdfs, how I produce those documents is up to me. I suppose I could hand draft them if I had a mind to.
From time to time I will perform a survey that is more common, along the lines of an ALTA. I just finished one for a large fast food chain. The contract specifically called for 5 each 24x36 signed originals. The contract said nothing about digital files. I assumed that the site might be heading for design since one of the requirements was also 1' contours and spot elevations on a 25' grid. As I had figured an A&E firm called and asked for a CAD file.
I sent them a dgn. Their cad-tech called me and said he couldn't open the dgn, could I send him a dwg. I told him MicroStation can export to a dwg, but the conversion requires input of variables probably more suited for the end user to know (font, levels, scale and linestyles usually). I told him the best bet would be for me to send a dxf, and I did.
It took this guy almost a week of daily phone conversations to finally get satisfied. His biggest trouble was after he finally had MY data in HIS dwg, the elevations were about 12 times what they should be (hmm...imagine that..;-)) and I'm not so sure the contours really translated that well. I also gave him an ascii point file. I was a little irritated with his attitude when he remarked, "It would be a lot easier if I had AutoCAD." I wanted to tell him what be a lot easier was if his parents had never met, but I kept my mouth shut.
I don't have a problem with providing digital data to clients as long as I know what is they're expecting. In this case, my client only asked for 5 printed originals.
What I do have a problem with is, as some have stated above, someone expecting me to modify my data to make it easier on them. Like I said earlier, I build entire dgns from prints and don't have a problem doing so. Just because a surveyor has been to the site does not necessarily mean there is a design ready cad model that should be made available at someone's beckon call. Just another example of some inexperienced personnel that was convinced their CAD standards (at the only place he's ever worked) should be what everybody else uses.
There are 2 advantages to C3d ,IMO. Both come with baggage.
One is the reactivity. You change a cogo point in your database and it ripples through everything. The surfaces your created using the point, the volume calcs that used the surfaces, etc., etc.
Two is that the points database, the surface, the alignments, etc., etc, are all in the dwg file. There is no batch of companion database files. The exception is the Survey database, which is separate. This is why it is necessary to Export a C3d file to AutoCAD rather than just SAVEAS.
There is a third advantage to using a recent edition of C3d over LDT, and that is that the field to finish works a lot better. A lot.
Recent editions (ie/ 10years +/-) of LDT/C3d can import dgns, no big deal. I've done it a hundred times. Recent editions of Microstation can saveas dwg.
Well said Paden. If it's not in the contract they most certainly are not getting digital files without additional compensation. Most private clients have no clue about the digital Cad world. You are merely a cog in the wheel and the driver is usually the big architect or design firm. They are the ones that need to have the foresight to address the digital receivable prior to expecting a digitial receivable that meets their needs. The technicians are way down the food chain in that scenario and you shouldn't be too hard on them...but yes that is frustrating.
Have your client download and convert their data to the old format using DWG TrueView. ( http://www.autodesk.com/products/dwg/viewers ).
This works most of the time, but may need to install the Civil 3D object enablers for their AutoCAD drawings.
I've touched Civil 3D once in the past seven months - best seven months of my life.
We run into these architects all the time who ask for 2000 format...
Even worse is sometimes our clients go and use an architect who still does everything by hand. When plotting his plans, the houses do not close. There are errors.
And to make things even WORSE, he calls us to plot up the house and see if it fits within the setbacks since he doesn't have cad. Or asks what the setbacks would be to see if he can make the house bigger, then calls back a day later with new dimensions and asks to do it all again.
In my opinion this should be professional misconduct. If you are so behind times then you should retire. The errors are inexcusable in today's digital times. Can you imagine a surveyor surveying with only a compass and chain to this day?
skwyd, post: 344107, member: 6874 wrote: On the topic of standards, I find this comic particularly applicable.
I think standards are great. That's why I have a set of my own.
If one of the major software developers (Autodesk or Carlson for example) would deliver their software with a fully developed and workable standard pre-installed it would probably be widely used in short order.
Similarly, if one of the surveyor magazines published an article detailing a standard and made the necessary files freely available it would be widely implemented before long.
There is a US National CAD Standard which has gained some acceptance, but they want money for the full version, it doesn't include field to finish, and the symbology isn't well suited to the kind of work most surveyors are doing day to day.
Scott Ellis, post: 343995, member: 7154 wrote: With the Civil 3D if you save it down, you will lose a lot of information blocks, symbols, etc... the points will be become text instead of points.
Correct about the loss of "smart, dynamic" data but at that point, this is their problem for choosing an old format. Exporting to an older autocad version is the way to go but it makes the data simple and dump with no dynamics. We always define the data deliverable type and version in our contract when a digital delivery is going to be required. If they need something special we note that in the contract so there are no surprises at the end.
I work for a large organization and we hire consultants to do a lot of our surveying work for us. We use the AEC CADD standards, MicroStation and InRoads. The insultants know up front the version and software that they are to deliver the final product in. About 25 years ago we had lots of trouble with drawing files translated from Autocad to MicroStation. We talked to our Insultants and explained the problem to them, and our solution. They all started using MicroStation for our projects. If a client wants Autocad version 10 with LDD, give it to them in that format or decline the job. Be sure that the deliverables are defined in your contract and if they change the format mid project, make the change for a reasonable fee. I have heard of other groups that require insultants to provide them topographic surveys in both Autocad and MicroStation in both feet and meters and that the drawings all a relay perfectly.
If a client requests an earlier version of Acad - no prob here.
Utilizing the export and knowing about the point block issues, proxy entities, lwpoly's etc...Wait aren't we suppose to be surveyors?
We left the Civil 3d monster almost 2 years now..
We anticipated the future of Civil3d would become less intuitive for our world... Wow we were spot on! We jumped ship and went with Carlson.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I really don't understand why users of Civil 3D are so disgruntled. I have never used it so do enlighten me. As far as I am concerned the industry standard for many years now has been the dwg file format. I send all digital drawings out in that format.
The way I see it AutoCAD have come up with a new format to try and lock every other vendor out of the market, you users of Civil 3D have jumped on board and now complain because everyone else is not using the same software as you and your drawings don't play well with everyone else's.
I am sorry but I will stick with the dwg format. You are the ones that need to make it work for the majority I suspect are not using Civil 3D.
I kind of agree..I mean subscribers pay thousands of dollars a year for the updates that insure nobody else can read their files...and then complain about it.
Well, my complaint is not that other people aren't using C3D. My complaint is that others are told that I am using C3D then complain when what I send them is not compatible with their system. My complaint is also when I send out exactly what I've told them I would, then they ask me to "just change this one thing"..."oh, and this other little thing"..."and can you adjust this whole area over here?"..."you know this would be a lot easier if you just used my standard instead of your own, even though you told me what you would be providing".
I think that every company should use whatever software suits their own interests. And I have no problem working with the standards and expectations of another company so long as I know, up front, what those expectations are. But I think it is absolutely ridiculous for a company to hire me to prepare surveys (typically topographic surveys with 3D surface models), sign my contract that states I will be providing AutoCAD Civil3D data, then ask me to change it AFTER I've already sent them what I said I'd provide in the first place. That's my only complaint. (Well, my only complaint on this subject).
I saw a cartoon on Facebook along these lines:
There are 14 standards. We need one standard everyone uses.
So they develop it.
Now there are 15 standards LOL.
Totalsurv, post: 344420, member: 8202 wrote: I really don't understand why users of Civil 3D are so disgruntled. I have never used it so do enlighten me. As far as I am concerned the industry standard for many years now has been the dwg file format. I send all digital drawings out in that format.
The way I see it AutoCAD have come up with a new format to try and lock every other vendor out of the market, you users of Civil 3D have jumped on board and now complain because everyone else is not using the same software as you and your drawings don't play well with everyone else's.
I am sorry but I will stick with the dwg format. You are the ones that need to make it work for the majority I suspect are not using Civil 3D.
FYI: Civil3d is Autocad and uses DWG format.
been there done that, both as a provider and as a consumer.
I adamantly agree, product and format needs to be defined up front, problem is the salesmen and purchasing agents often set the pace...
