Dennis Wadas's Activities

When using Openroads Designer, how to bring back side toolbar just like Power Civil?

Shan Li — Thu, 26 Oct 2017 06:54:53 GMT

Could Openroads Designer display side toolbar just like Power Civil? I am not quite familiar with the ribbon interface on ORD, so I want to change back to side toolbar just like what Power Civil looks. See below picture. Some of our customers have the same question.

I searched similar questions, and found that V8i style Tasks could be displayed in MicroStation CONNECT Edition using the configuration variable MS TASKNAVIGATION CONFIGURATION.

The website is: https://communities.bentley.com/products/microstation/w/microstation__wiki/24481/how-to-display-the-v8i-style-tasks-dialog-in-microstation-connect-edition

And I tried this method on ORD but it did not work. Maybe there is other configuration variable that we could change in order to solve this problem?

Thank you for your help!

Terrain Edit- Deleting of Triangles-Not an editable terrain

Chethan ML — Fri, 12 Jan 2018 06:18:02 GMT

Hi,

Imported topo/Survey through "Attach Reference" method to prepare the Terrain. But its not allowing to edit the terrain/triangles and it is showing as "NOT AN EDITABLE TERRAIN"

Kindly suggest the Correct Terrain Preparation method to edit the triangles.

Thanks

Alternative approach to Corridor/Template Design - 3D Linear Method

Alex Badaoui — Mon, 24 Sep 2018 15:09:00 GMT

Fellow Engineers, Modelers, Bentley Operators, etc.

Last year in July 2017 at the 9th International Visualization In Transportation Symposium I presented an abstract detailed an alternative approach to working with Corridor/template design.

This approach is called "3D Linear Method". It is the complete opposite on what Bentley encourages in their teaching workshops, and consequently the opposite what is demonstrated by every major Department of Transport I have encountered. A brief outline on how it works:

Instead of single templates/corridors spanning the whole width of each roadway alignment, the corridors are broken up by element. 1 corridor per curb, lane, shoulder, guard rail, end condition, wall, barrier, etc. Each piece is connected to each other, eventually connecting directly or indirectly to control lines.

While this creates 100's of extra corridors, the advantages make this technique far superior to the designer, and end user (client of contractor) than the current approach for the following reasons:

1) Templates are simple, easy to create, and have no complex display rules so they are functional for the novice user

2) The same template can be re-used 1000's of times, across any project, making the data consistent 100% of the time, giving reliable consistent symbology when the data is visualized

3) The consistent nature of common templates used always simpler digital quantities to be extracted, as similar objects can be collected by symbology

4) Changes are more manageable - change only the parts you need to change, and the connectivity of all the other corridors will automatically be adjusted

5) More than 1 user can work on the same road in the same section at the same time as everything is broken into smaller pieces

6) Simpler to train - for those unfamiliar with a 3D environment, this 3D Linear Method is identical to criteria

7) Processing is substantially reduced - it is quicker to process 100's of small corridors with no complex rules than 1 or 2 massive corridors with lots of display rules by a factor of 10.

This technique has been implemented across every designer I have worked directly with in Illinois over the past 4 years, and there has been 3 distinct reactions:

a) Those with some 3D knowledge embraced it fully, recognizing that this is the ONLY way to utilize the software, no exceptions

b) Those with minimal or zero 3D knowledge dismissed it entirely, citing "This is not the way Bentley teaches it"

c) Those with medium experience recognize its power, and use a toned down version of 3D Linear method - they build templates that span all lanes, 1 for shoulders, then 1 for end conditions, for example.

Overall it has been received positively from those who understand the software's limitations, and widely used across Illinois Tollway I-294 project currently underway.

This modeling technique has caused quite a controversy here from the State Government in Illinois (IDOT) due to the radically different approach. So I wanted to hear from the greater community regarding this technique.

If you would like to contact me directly about this, feel free to do so:

Alexander Badaoui, PE: P 312.467.0123 | abadaoui@terraengineering.com

The presentation I made showing this in more detail is found here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se8oQvVNw_w&feature=youtu.be

The attached PDF is a summary of the abstract presented.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7jwku3ns2cu7aql/Abstract%20-%20Developing%20Visualization%20Transportation%20Models%20-%203D%20Linear%20method.pdf?dl=0

This was geared towards a non-technical audience. The following power point below is more technically driven, detailing how the naming convention operates in Illinois:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dxq9nrm5z5vc63i/2018-03_AB%20to%20IBUG_May%202018%20-%20Part%201.pptx?dl=0

Thanks in advance for your feedback on this technique.

Raster Transparency Not Printing FDOT Connect 10.10

MD IMRAN SHAH — Fri, 04 Nov 2022 17:49:20 GMT

I have raster image (Aerials) referenced where I set the transparency to 70%. Transparency is showing correctly in dgn but when I print to pdf the raster transparency is ignored. I know checking the rasterized option is a solution but the printed pdf is not text searchable. How can I have transparent raster image with text searchable pdf. Any help would be highly appreciated. I am using Open Roads Designer & FDOT Plot Config.

Civil Labeler acting very weird on a profile

Dennis Wadas — Wed, 21 Sep 2022 16:53:16 GMT

Has anyone had trouble with the civil labeler not holding labels were you put them? If I try to label a station/offset on my profile it moves off of the profile after I click on the next station offset location. On the below example, I put the first station/offset in and then try and put a second station/offset on my profile. As soon as I snap on the profile to put the second label in, the first label moves up for some reason.

Place Label in Rotated View? ORD

Zane Pratt — Wed, 21 Feb 2018 16:15:00 GMT

In OpenRoads Designer, is there a setting to allow labels to be placed relative to the current view? Similar to how dimensions and notes have always worked in Microstation.

I am trying to place a label (station, offset) in a design model with the view rotated parallel to the alignment.

Level display settings keep reverting

Kelly Sextro — Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:37:26 GMT

Anyone having issues with levels not sticking after you turn them on/off and save settings? I am trying to print plans and every time i go into the sheets the topo reverts along with any other layers i have turned off/on.

Sheeting a single alignment that has two pgl profiles

Dennis Wadas — Wed, 07 Sep 2022 20:29:09 GMT

I am working on a curved roadway the has a single alignment but has two separate proposed profiles. The first profile is the proposed grade line for the Eastbound lanes and the second profile is for the westbound lanes. These profiles are offset from the centerline.

To create my profiles, I have stored them on the centerline alignment. To know were existing ground is at the offsets, I created projected existing ground profiles that were projected from my PGLs to the centerline. The reason I did this was to store my profiles with the centerline stationing.

I would like to show my two profiles on a double profile sheet (the top profile will be westbound and the bottom profile will be eastbound). No matter what I do, both profiles show up on both views. Is the only way to do this would be by putting the two profiles on different levels and shutting one off on each view? Is there a better way?

Thanks so much for any help,

Dennis W

Roadway Template Point Property Dialog is Hidden

Keith Kennon — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 16:09:42 GMT

How do you get back to the Point Properties dialog when it becomes hidden? When another application takes the focus away from the Point Properties modal window, it gets lost and I cannot figure out how to get back to it.

ORD 2021 R1 - Survey Graphical / Textual Manipulators Issues

The Zen Dude — Tue, 21 Dec 2021 03:55:23 GMT

Hey All!,

Is anyone else experiencing issues with ORD Survey 2021 R1 and the Graphical Manipulators and Link Code Textual Manipulators?. In any 2020 version you can select a survey chain and the Link Codes will textually appear along with the Graphical Manipulators (GM). Hovering the cursor over the GM will produce a 'tool tip' that says 'Move". You can also just select any single Survey shot, and hover over the GM and it will also say "Move". If you select that GM, it sticks to the cursor (like flypaper) and allows it to be moved. Back to selecting a survey chain or line, the Link Codes will appear. It might say NONE on most of them, but there will be STARTs and whatever else is coded on that chain. If you hover over that text a 'tool tip' will say "Link Code" and it will highlight showing that it's 'active'. If you select that text, it will produce a drop-down list of all the available Link Codes for you to choose from to associate to that shot.

Well, this works fine in any 2020 version, but doesn't work in 2021. Is anyone else seeing this? Am I missing something? I've tried this in my own Workspace as well as Bentley's... same result. It sure seems broken unless there is something unique added it 2021 to activate or deactivate this functionality but I can't find anything.

I've tried this on my primary computer and my Surface Pro, as well as with an associate on his computer. All instances, all Workspaces, produced the same result.

CE 16.2 How is paper size selected when creating a .pset with Sheet Index??

mwlong — Wed, 13 Apr 2022 13:52:25 GMT

10.16.2.34

I am trying to create a .pset from the Sheet Index. I have Print Styles setup but, I am not able to select a paper size. I have a Print Style setup to use ANSI D & one to use ANSI B but, it does not matter which style I select the ANSI B is used. Is it because ANSI B is set as the default paper size in the .pltcfg?

Is there any way to change the paper size after the .pset is developed?

Dynamic cross section view is not showing corridor

Taylor Brownlow — Mon, 19 Aug 2019 15:43:10 GMT

I am trying to view the cross sections but only see the center node at any station. I tried deleting the cross section view from the civil display browser but it is not listed there to delete.The view worked last week. The only elements in this file are the corridor elements, where everything else is referenced in. Any thoughts? Thanks

Named Boundaries and Plan Production

Chris Snyder — Fri, 25 Oct 2019 23:48:24 GMT

We are having some issues with understanding the ORD Plan Production tool set and controlling level overrides in the drawing or sheet models. When we create a series of plan and profile sheets, we start with a fresh 2D seed file, reference in the necessary reference files, turn on/off levels or set level overrides for the plan set’s needs in the design model, and then use the ORD Named Boundaries workflow to create the drawing models and sheet models.

The problem that we are having is none of the level overrides are being honored in the resulting drawing or sheet models. Additionally, if we need to make any changes to the level on/off settings or additional level overrides from the host design model, none of these changes are dynamically shown on the drawing or sheet models.

We typically have hundreds of plan and profile sheets for projects and having to manually set the level on/off or overriding symbology is not a workflow option. Our preferred workflow would be to have a single design model used for controlling all of the sheet model level settings.

Is this a known problem with ORD Plan Production? Thanks in advance for any help.

OpenBridge Modeler Question - Variable Constraint on a skewed deck

Dennis Wadas — Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:58:45 GMT

I have been trying all morning to get my variable constraint on an approach slab thickness to model correctly. As far as I can tell, the parametric constraint only works perpendicular to the bridge alignment. I need to change the thickness of my approach slab at the last 2 feet to a thicker slab but be parallel to the approach slab skew and support lines. Is there a switch I'm missing to tell it to run the variable parallel to my supports??? I have looked everywhere but just cannot find it. I hope this is an easy one. I'm using OBM CE 10.10.00.85

OpenBridge and Superelevation

Dennis Wadas — Thu, 14 Oct 2021 22:10:26 GMT

I have been trying all day to assign superelevation transitions to my deck and it just dosnt seem to work at all. My deck is skewed. Does superelevation not work on a skewed deck?

Thanks so much,

Dennis