ORD 2021R1 Update 1 (10.10.01.03)
I'm having an issue with element profiles, in this case projecting to the offside edge of a diverge nose (highlighted).
The mainline channel is profiled using 0% from the corridor element, its profile is on the left, and is as expected
The nose profile is created at -2.5% from the mainline channel using Profile By Slope From Element, but gives steps and bumps as can be seen on the left profile.
These irregularities are not present in the geometry, the superelevation, the profiles of the corridor elements, or the duplicate element of the mainline channel, so where are they coming from and how can I remove them?
Put a ticket in for this. We found this yesterday and looks to be a new issue in 2021 R1 when the Reference/Source geometry does not have a profile that spans its entire length and has a different bearing to the original.
OpenRoads Designer 2021 R2 (10.10) | Microstation CE Update 16.3 | ProjectWise CE 3.4
Where do I do that?
It was doing this in 2020 R2 as well, I updated on Monday and got through checking all my DGNs were OK with the update, tried deleting the profiles first and reapplying them, then reconstructing the layout fully, then using a fully fresh DGN.
Surely the "Slope relative to target" option in the profile properties would determine which element normals for projection are taken from?
You can do that here: Bentley.com - Technical Support
If it was, we were lucky to have not seen it - i'm 100% sure it doesnt happen in 2020 R3 though.
I thought that as well, but it doesn't look to work that way. I'm yet to get any official info from Bentley as to what it actually does.
Tried even just extending the mainline crossfall, and even though the two source elements are parallel, it's showing skewed projections in the extension which aren't at a normal to any of the elements
The strange thing is that the taper of the diverge doesn't have the issue, its -2.5% comes in perfectly, no jumps, wiggles, or steps, while a constant offset of the element on the transition (spiral) at the same grade gives issues.
The difference seems to be that one is located on a transition and the other isn't, so it could be the transition itself or the superelevation change that's causing the skewed projections