ORD Template Transitions

Jason,

It doesn't appear that you have a transition going on there, just regular modeling around curves at a distance that causes what you're seeing. Remember, InRoads/OpenRoads only models at the "Interval" and then it's a linear interpolation between those stations. (yes, there are other ways to increase the modeling locations like Key Stations, External Controls, Etc.)

Have you tried using a Corridor Feature Definition that has the Densify Horizontal Curve set to True? This used to be a toggle in the Roadway Modeler in SS2 but is now a setting in the FD. It will add template drops (aka- modeling stations) to your corridor between the PC and PT of your curves, tightening up the modeling in those areas and giving you what appears to be a more "true curve".

Jason,

It doesn't appear that you have a transition going on there, just regular modeling around curves at a distance that causes what you're seeing. Remember, InRoads/OpenRoads only models at the "Interval" and then it's a linear interpolation between those stations. (yes, there are other ways to increase the modeling locations like Key Stations, External Controls, Etc.)

Have you tried using a Corridor Feature Definition that has the Densify Horizontal Curve set to True? This used to be a toggle in the Roadway Modeler in SS2 but is now a setting in the FD. It will add template drops (aka- modeling stations) to your corridor between the PC and PT of your curves, tightening up the modeling in those areas and giving you what appears to be a more "true curve".

Joe,

Thank you for your response. 

So the middle third of the curve has its own template (pool) and i need to transition from the straight template (riffle) to the pool, and then from the pool to the riflle.  I was able to do this in SS2, but am unable to do this in ORD.

I would prefer not to have to edit each transition as I can have 100's of them to do for an alignment.

I can send the file(s) if it helps to see how my 'simple' templates are set up.

Jason,

Ahhhh ok I didn't catch that. Unfortunately, in OpenRoads (as was the case in SS2) if you want smooth "transitions" from one template to a different one, you have to have Transitions enabled. In OpenRoads you have to build the Transitions manually, unlike in SS2 where they are added to the corridor automatically based on the Station entries at template drops.

In OpenRoads you add the beginning and ending stations for where you want a template to run. Preferrable you'd have a gap between different templates. Then you go and use the Add Transition tool (selecting the first template then the second one). The tool will build the transition EXACTLY the same way it does it in SS2 from there. You can edit the transition (as in SS2) as well as release any Point Constraints (as in SS2) from within the Transition Editor.

Hope this helps,

-Joe

Joe,

That is the process I used to generate the first image.  I have the same point names in the templates, but the transitions are not connecting to the common point names.  I think that it is the way I have the templates created with the point constraints i.e. base width, channel depth, top of bank width etc., necessary for each template/  Having to remove these constraints in every transition make the process very time consuming.

I appreciate all of your assistance on this.

You may be misunderstood or unclear regarding the reason for the transition.  Are you dropping a portion of a template to another (e.g. 1 segment/lane becomes two segments/lanes)?  OR Are you simply changing the width/depth? 

From what I can tell from your screenshots, you're merely changing widths and depths of the "points" and template portions.  If this is correct and all you need to do is taper from one to another, there are better ways to accomplish the task. (side note: save corridor template "transitions" for when you are shifting from a different amount of points of a template).

Here are your options (one of these will do the trick): 

Parametric Constraint labels for width changes over a station range (No need for additional graphics).

Point Controls driven by 2D geometry (requires more data and elements/graphics in the file).

Horizontal Feature Constraints on your template points driven by Corridor References aka External References within the Corridor Objects dialog. (Historically increases processing time or reduces efficiency when overused)

As Joe Muni  mentioned, you definitely need to look at your Template Drop Intervals and the Corridor Design Stage (Feature Definition) that dictates how the 3D Graphics are produced.  Some Design Stages are prelim by default and merely interpolate 3D over 50 feet skipping over design controls and transition areas.

Shawn,

Thanks for the information.  I guess i do not know enough about templates to do this correctly in ORD.  I will need to learn quickly.