parent/child relationship vs display rules

RE: parent/child relationship vs display rules

Brian Nilson — Wed, 19 Aug 2020 12:50:40 GMT

Thanks Chris

RE: parent/child relationship vs display rules

Brian Nilson — Wed, 19 Aug 2020 12:50:21 GMT

I have been accused of creating frankentemplates! I do this to reduce the number of template drops created. All common components that are used repeatedly are only in the template once. When changes occur (and they always do) there is less editing taking place, reducing the opportunity for error. Charles, thanks for your input. Enjoy the discussion.

RE: parent/child relationship vs display rules

caddcop — Wed, 19 Aug 2020 12:28:57 GMT

Some people refer to this as a "FrankenTemplate" where one template fits every design instance by using a variety of point controls and/or, horizontal feature seeking. This is somewhat like GEOPAK criteria where plan view graphics controlled what the cross section drew, except this controls the 3D model that is built. This technique is often used to drop in driveways, leave gaps at intersections and apparently to draw curb and gutter or some other roadside grading.

Even in this instance, the parent/child relations simplify maintenance.

RE: parent/child relationship vs display rules

Chris Andrew — Wed, 19 Aug 2020 09:40:53 GMT

OK yes, same principal as i described but instead of manually controlling if Curb and sidewalk is on with Parametric Constraints and Point Controls. The demo in the SIG sounds like they are using Horizontal Feature seeking to determine if a curb & sidewalk is needed.

RE: parent/child relationship vs display rules

Brian Nilson — Tue, 18 Aug 2020 18:36:40 GMT

Thanks

RE: parent/child relationship vs display rules

Brian Nilson — Tue, 18 Aug 2020 18:35:47 GMT

Chris, thanks for the response. I did not do a good job of explaining what was presented in the SIG. Say I have a curb with a sidewalk behind it. The sidewalk was only going to be there if the curb was built. Display rule to turn on the curb with the sidewalk a child to the curb. What he was doing on the SIG was he built a DNC end condition seeking the curb. Then had the curb and sidewalk as children to the DNC end condition. DNC end condition does not find curb and then the curb and sidewalk not shown. I was just curious if there was an advantage to doing this way.

RE: parent/child relationship vs display rules

caddcop — Tue, 18 Aug 2020 18:31:39 GMT

I've had a situation where some component was not displayed, but others were. I don't recall the reason for the one component to be off, but it was much simpler to use the parent chile approach than to figure out was was going on and what settings would also turn off the other components. Since they were unwanted if the first component was not displayed, it was the logical solution.

The only caveat is when deleting components, deleting a parent deletes all children too.

RE: parent/child relationship vs display rules

Chris Andrew — Tue, 18 Aug 2020 18:18:25 GMT

I use both. Display rule to turn off say a curb and the parent/child to turn off the grass verge and earthworks.

But verge and earthworks have their own display rules allowing me to leave the curb but turn off the verge and earthworks or just remove the earthworks.

Parent/child arrangements in median with regards to Barrier would allow you to set a series of Barrier foundations that only apply when you have a barrier and a different pavement solution with no barrier.