I'm working with a TDS RW5 file, originally coded for InRoads Survey. It is a sample file used for training. It uses a number of TMPL codes, most of which work as expected. But this one that was a top of curb, bottom of curb and gutter edge was doing something unexpected. The master figure is create with a code of BC ST PC TMPL and the two parallel figures are started with TC ST PC and EPR ST PC.
So what is the problem? THis is what it looks like on screen with all three figures selected. Notice the locations of the two offset figures compared to their Manipulators locations. And, if I change the code on the master figure to an ST, they suddenly draw correctly but are no longer curved figures. Adding a ArcSingle to the middle point to try an reintroduce the curved figure results in the figure resetting it back to the bogus offsets. And changing the ST PC to an ST on either parallel figure starting point completely removes the figure from the file, renumbering similar figures in the process.
So far, the other TMPL codes in the file seem OK.
Apparently, I spoke too soon. I've found a few others where no parallel figures are created and no amount of edits seems to change anything. If I had to make a recommendation, I'd probably recommend not using the TMPL code.
Hello Chuck. Once again I found this code to be very unpredictable. I thought I posted a thread on the TMPL code issues. It's another NO GO code. I will say, I think your at the end of the list of failed linking codes, as far as I remember. Try a survey redraw to regenerate the linework from linking codes. Also verify your project explorer setting below:
If you have linear feature linking set to by linking code you'll have never ending trouble. Set it to Force Point List Features in your seed file so its permanent.
Thanks for posting, others will appreciate knowing I'm sure.
We are dipping our toes into ORD survey workflows. Not sure if any of these issues are persistent. I'll post my findings.
Cliff
What is the difference between By Linking Code vs Force Point List Features?
We need to keep our crews coding in a single format, that being the intersection of InRoads Survey Codes and OpenRoad Survey Codes, as we will be in transition between the two for many years. Would changing this setting impact this or not?
Charles (Chuck) Rheault CADD Manager
MDOT State Highway Administration Maryland DOT - State Highway Administration User Communities Page
Chuck,
The project explorer setting has no effect on field coding procedures. This setting impacts how the linking codes interact with post import edits. Short answer is the linking codes remain in an active state as they were imported. Post import edits will not be persistent. Changing the setting post import will only affect the files imported after the change, nothing imported before the change will be affected.
Was that clear or helpful? Our DOT has not changed the setting in the seed files they distribute with the FDOT workspace. I make the alterations and push them out to our survey staff.
I believe so.
We will try it out. This might explain why sometimes after turning a figure into a Point List to transpose it, the original figure seems to return with bad consequences.
Sounds symptomatic of the project explorer settings. Hope that helps.