Not sure the below image will be readable, but the issue is simple (solution may not be).
Plan (horizontal) is annotated using chord definition of stationing. It seems right.
Profile still seems to "want to" annotate using arc method stationing. The two tracking boxes that pop up when using tracking (aka civil analysis) show different results. The one on the right (blue text on white background) shows arc method stationing when there are no equations in the alignment. When equations are added, I honestly don't know what it's showing. The box on the left appears to show the CORRECT station and coordinates (verified via plan view).
More important, both the annotation AND output files seem to be following whatever's in the "bad box" on the right. In other words, the station in plan view is different than the station in profile view.
BTW: We're still looking at it, but it appears even the "legacy" software (Inroads/BRT) may have also done this. There wasn't really a convenient way of checking it in the past with simultaneous tracking.
Jon, I'll send you an e-mail. We can set something up to discuss tomorrow afternoon if you have a sec. I can catch you up to speed with what I have found as I have been digging into this a bit and am curious as to other folk's take on this in the industry.
-Dan
We have found similar issues with vertical profile annotations with chord defined alignments. We have found differences of up to 4 feet of variance between the cogo and plotted annotation in profile grid for cardinal points.
Johnathan, do you happen to get any resolution on this issue?
We've just noticed issues with the profile annotations using chord definition for horizontal curves. When vertical curves occur in horizontal tangent sections the values shown in the curve annotations are as expected. When the vertical curve occurs within a horizontal curve the annotation values don't come in as we would expect.
For example, the annotations for 100' vertical curve in a horizontal tangent section displays the values shown below: L = 100' VPC = 3+34.00 VPI = 3+84.00 or VPI = VPC + (L/2) VPT = 4+34.00 or VPT = VPC + L
These values are accurate to at least the two decimal places our annotations are set to.
Further in the same alignment we have another 100' vertical curve however it occurs in a horizontal curve. The annotations display the values shown below: L = 100' VPC = 46+47.77 VPI = 46+97.68 VPT = 47+47.64
Are we wrong to expect the annotations to follow the formulas shown in the earlier curve?
Has anyone figured out a solution or a workaround for this issue?
There is a defect logged for that issue. It should be fixed in upcoming release.
Bug 1289915: Stations in profiles annotation incorrect when using chorded alignments