• State Suggested Answer
  • Replies 15 replies
  • Answers 2 answers
  • Subscribers 141 subscribers
  • Views 9330 views
  • Users 0 members are here

Problems showing existing storm drain pipes on the sections. - Geopak SS3

Philip Mashuda
Offline

I am attempting to show existing storm drain pipes on the sections.

 I created features and element templates for the pipes. The element template uses a cell for the pipe.

Everything appears correct in the cross section view in the modeler. The pipes are viewed properly.

 When I create cross sections I get bad results.

Proposed roadway model does not appear, geopak cells are not grouped properly, pipes do not show as in modeler.

The proposed cross section DGN (mHC-MD197_MD197.dgn) is a mess.

 I started the cross sections using a 2d seed model. I referenced the 2d corridor model with no nesting then the 3d corridor model with nesting depth=99.

 The cross section file is mHC-MD197_MD197.dgn

The main corridor DGN is MD197.dgn

 I uploaded/posted the files to the Road and Site Design as

Geopak_Support_2014_08_27.zip

 Thank you for your assistance.

 

Philip Mashuda

  • 0 Offline in reply to Nico Roman

    Nico,

    I hope that your suggestion still works because I am having no luck plotting utilities using features.

    Thanks,

    Phil

  • 0 Offline in reply to Philip Mashuda

    I was informed that there is a charge for SUE tools so I guess that option is out.


    For more information about the Road and Site design tools, visit the Road and Site design WIKI at: http://communities.bentley.com/products/road___site_design/w/road_and_site_design__wiki

  • 0 Offline in reply to Beebe Ray

    Philip:  Beebe and others can help you with the original workflow you started, although it seems that you have arrived at what I think is the expected result.  The utility feature lines will show as a point in the cross-sections which can then be labeled with a text notation.  If you want more than simply an X at the location on the cross-sections then you can define a cell in the element template, which can produce (for example) a circle. But, you probably already figured this out.

    The SUE tools will produce 3D models of the utility lines and thus the cross-sections will show a LOT more detail since you will se a slice of the actual solids.  The learning curve is not steep.  You could be producing models of utility lines in an hour or less and I am happy to help you with this if you are interested.  If you need customized utility node structures then there is some additional setup required, but sounds like your main interest is the buried linear utilities.

    However, there is an additional license fee for SUE.  I'm happy to discuss these costs along with your account manager if you wish.  I would suggest that a conversation about the cost versus efficiency gains in the workflow you are attempting would be worthwhile.  Keep in mind that you do not need to maintain a 1:1 ratio of SUE licnese compared to the number of geopak licenses you own.  A small percentage of SUE license shared among your staff staff of many geopak users is adequate in many organizations.

    Robert Garrett
    Senior Product Engineer
    Bentley Systems Inc.



  • 0 Offline

    The bad results in cross section is occurring due to the design file having a shift in the global origin.  A defect has been filed on this that will be either fixed in the upcoming SS3 MR or SS4.

    The workaround is to create a dgn file from your 3D seed.  The seed has the shift in GO for X,Y,Z.  Then create a 2D design model in the dgn for your geometry.  Then when you attach a 3d file or create 3d geometry OpenRoads will create the 3d model with the global origin shifted in the x,y,z to match your design file shift.


    For more information about the Road and Site design tools, visit the Road and Site design WIKI at: http://communities.bentley.com/products/road___site_design/w/road_and_site_design__wiki

  • 0 Offline

    Beebe,
     
    I tried your workaround.
    Very odd results.
    I started in a 3d file with the desired GO then created a 2d model with-in the file.
    I imported the horizontal geometry from the gpk file to the 2d model.
    At this point I have a 2d and a 3d model.
    I referenced the dtm DGN to the 2d model. (the DTM DGN has the proper GO)
    I create a corridor in the 2d model from the imported horizontal alignment and profile.
     
    I now have another 3d model with attachments and with the proper GO.
    The original 3d model is empty.
     
    To create the cross section DGN, I start in a 3D file.
    Reference the corridor 2d model with nesting=2
    Create the cross sections results in a “Model”
     
    The original 3D model in the corridor file is never used.
     
    Is the above workflow what I need to follow with this client?
    Can I fix the existing corridor files or must I start the project over? (The GO in the 3D corridor model is at 0 not at the client standard )
     
     
    Thanks,
     
    Phil
     
     
     
    From: Beebe Ray [mailto:bounce-Beebe_Ray@communities.bentley.com]
    Sent: Monday, September 08, 2014 9:17 AM
    To: RoadSiteDesign@communities.bentley.com
    Subject: RE: [Road and Site Design Forum] Problems showing existing storm drain pipes on the sections. - Geopak SS3
     
    View and reply online
    Replying to this email posts your reply in the thread.
     

    The bad results in cross section is occurring due to the design file having a shift in the global origin.  A defect has been filed on this that will be either fixed in the upcoming SS3 MR or SS4.

    The workaround is to create a dgn file from your 3D seed.  The seed has the shift in GO for X,Y,Z.  Then create a 2D design model in the dgn for your geometry.  Then when you attach a 3d file or create 3d geometry OpenRoads will create the 3d model with the global origin shifted in the x,y,z to match your design file shift.

Communities
Support and Services
Training and Learning
Social Media