Topic: Profile view and crossing pipe near perpendicular issues

[sourdough]

Hi All
   I have noticed that my inspection of crossing pipes that run near perpendicular are showing at best, odd looking. Has anyone else got a sure fire method for showing the interference offset depth between pipes figured out. This particular example I'm working with is a storm line vs a sewer line and a sewer lateral. I'm using I believe the right style with crossings, but when I label the depth between the outside dia. of the pipes crossings the results are not very believable. One, it looks not to be correct where the intersecting pipe direction and I can't see a really good result as to where the pipe is really crossing all the time. Sometimes I have seen it as I think it should look, but other times it looks bad. So, showing the boss the interference is a crap shot to prove the depth of interference. That doesn't build a lot of confidence. Are there any methods or style tips that would help nail this calculation for depth of crossing pipes? I would also like to be able to label in plan view the elev. along the pipe at the crossing either on top of pipe or below. I did some digging in styles but haven't found a way to label along a pipe the pipe elev. invert or on outside of pipe. I have used the interference check routine in pipes but it doesn't have a feature to label. I also used the profile view depth and it doesn't look right when the crossing is near perpendicular. My particular disadvantage also was that I had 2 structures that also were perpendicular and so it would block out the point of crossing, thus making the measurement in the profile difficult to show.

Thanks in advance

MJP

[mjfarrell]

sounds like the problem is the solution on this one...


you will need to share one of your drawings with us on this one, to verify your styles and settings for all of the things you believe to be incorrect, the software is most likely dong exactly what you have told it to do; which in this case turns out to be not what you want it to...



as a test one could shrink the pipe to be a mere segment; say 0.5' long right at the crossing/interfence location, then label the invert/top of each pipe, to verify that it is or is not displaying the information 'correctly' which may or may not be what you expect it to look like...

[sourdough]

sounds like the problem is the solution on this one...


you will need to share one of your drawings with us on this one, to verify your styles and settings for all of the things you believe to be incorrect, the software is most likely dong exactly what you have told it to do; which in this case turns out to be not what you want it to...



as a test one could shrink the pipe to be a mere segment; say 0.5' long right at the crossing/interfence location, then label the invert/top of each pipe, to verify that it is or is not displaying the information 'correctly' which may or may not be what you expect it to look like...

Your right the software is doing it correctly, just can't quite see it. In profile view the structures that are perpendicular are doing a wipeout of the pipe that connects to them. Yes, I could do another profile, but then with the structures and pipes are then again perpendicular. I have used when not perpendicular and it worked fine. Just when they can wipe the pipe out between is when this comes up. That is why I was wondering if there is a style that could label in plan view the stat/elev of the pipe that has a grade top/bottom of pipe.
I tried to make a style that could show this and just couldn't find the option to do a call of the stat/elev in plan view. Here is the dwg in ?. My problem area is where the prop. storm and Sewer line cross. It just seems to me that doing a crossing if you have your pipes in and to the grade you want that you could test by station the depths by point and click by style. Just a wish, but would be alot faster than doing the profile. This is a request from my boss. He wants the fast answer. Evidently, this is a real world problem when the ditch washed out and is exposing the pipes over 12' below the oridinary surface and eroded half a buildings foundation. So, they are in a big hurry to find a solution. We have the info we need at the moment, but this was a can we do this next time.

MJP
the dwg was started by one of our eng. who doesn't have alot of C3D yet, but he is trying.

[mjfarrell]

there are two types of interference checks (three) technically.

which one(s) of the three did you employ?

the interference style WILL show the location of the conflict in Plan view, it will NOT label the elevation of that conflict.

in either case the interference shows you where it happens, yet provides NO easy method to label the invert of the conflict...

this tool is really intended as a DESIGN check, not a(n) as built tool, as such one will need the full arsenal of C3D skills and tools to do what you are after, including changing the the Structure style such that it does NOT block the perpendicular part, or use of the Draw part in profile view, and draw only the pipes and NOT structures to review only the pipes, and then perhaps drawing ONLY the structures in the profile view to review them...

[mjfarrell]

[MJP
the dwg was started by one of our eng. who doesn't have alot of C3D yet, but he is trying.

We really need to get your people trained...so that THIS training issue can cease to be an excuse....or a reason...whatever...

The cost of not knowing the application is much higher than the cost of one of my classes.

[sourdough]

there are two types of interference checks (three) technically.

which one(s) of the three did you employ?

I used the Pipe interference check and after finding and using them did what we needed to do to redesign the slope of the storm. Like you said it won't label the interference, thus why I was asking if there just might be a utility to do so. I took off the interferences in the dwg in plan view I sent you, but in 3D they were still showing.

MJP

the interference style WILL show the location of the conflict in Plan view, it will NOT label the elevation of that conflict.

in either case the interference shows you where it happens, yet provides NO easy method to label the invert of the conflict...

this tool is really intended as a DESIGN check, not a(n) as built tool, as such one will need the full arsenal of C3D skills and tools to do what you are after, including changing the the Structure style such that it does NOT block the perpendicular part, or use of the Draw part in profile view, and draw only the pipes and NOT structures to review only the pipes, and then perhaps drawing ONLY the structures in the profile view to review them...

Thanks, I also read your last post and can't tell you how much I agree with the training. We are so far behind it isn't funny. Sounds like there isn't a tool to label this circumstance yet. Maybe Sinc has something.

MJP

[mjfarrell]

OK,  this might provide a process....

Create the Pipe Network(s)

Export use the Reports Tab, run the Structures Report, take the Northing, Easting and Invert data into a TXT file.

Import this information as Figure Lines, create feature lines representing the Outer walls of the pipes, (name them well)

Then you can Break the feature lines where there cross, then using a General Note, Segment End Z, or Segment Start Z it will label the elevations for you....

It isn't exactly elegant however it will do what you needed....

[mjfarrell]

one might even do something crazy, like assign pipe diameters equal to the conflict check distances...and then label the inverts directly
us some style settings that allow these pipes to NOT plot....crazy...however it would work directly from your pipe data...

[sourdough]

one might even do something crazy, like assign pipe diameters equal to the conflict check distances...and then label the inverts directly
us some style settings that allow these pipes to NOT plot....crazy...however it would work directly from your pipe data...

Thank you very much.
I'll do that and let you know.
I can see another wish list item, though.
MJP

[mjfarrell]

OK,  this might provide a process....

Create the Pipe Network(s)

Export use the Reports Tab, run the Structures Report, take the Northing, Easting and Invert data into a TXT file.

Import this information as Figure Lines, create feature lines representing the Outer walls of the pipes, (name them well)

Then you can Break the feature lines where there cross, then using a General Note, Segment End Z, or Segment Start Z it will label the elevations for you....

It isn't exactly elegant however it will do what you needed....

OR

set a point on the endpoint, with the label style set to show Invert=, or Pipe crossing Top Pipe=, whatever

[mjfarrell]

OK

I may want to rest after this one...

What I found also to work is fairly elegant.

Create a block from a small diameter circle, I named mine Int_Type1, create as many or few as then number of interference styles you need to check for.
Create or edit your interference styles to use this custom block as the marker.
Run the interference checks, using the style you just made.
Save your Work
Then use File Menu>>Export to Autocad>>Select ver 2000 DXF as your file type.
Attach to this file with MAP, run a query against the block name(s) you used in your interference styles.
Set your alter Properties, to place Text or Annotation at the insertion Point,
or set a point at insertion points (center) of the point block marker to label the interference (the help file doesn't indicate if this is the Centroid of the location marker, or the actual clash location) using an Expression to compensate for 1/2pipe diameter + pipe wall thickness would do the trick nicely.

[sourdough]

OK

I may want to rest after this one...

What I found also to work is fairly elegant.

Create a block from a small diameter circle, I named mine Int_Type1, create as many or few as then number of interference styles you need to check for.
Create or edit your interference styles to use this custom block as the marker.
Run the interference checks, using the style you just made.
Save your Work
Then use File Menu>>Export to Autocad>>Select ver 2000 DXF as your file type.
Attach to this file with MAP, run a query against the block name(s) you used in your interference styles.
Set your alter Properties, to place Text or Annotation at the insertion Point,
or set a point at insertion points (center) of the point block marker to label the interference (the help file doesn't indicate if this is the Centroid of the location marker, or the actual clash location) using an Expression to compensate for 1/2pipe diameter + pipe wall thickness would do the trick nicely.

I'll try this when I get some time as we are under another crunch.
Thank you for working on this for me.
We are getting a lot of washouts in our city with pipe breaks. This was the biggest sink hole in a neighborhood. It needed some fast attention with our ample rain cycle we are in. A pipe broke when a contractor decided to trim the existing
storm pipe to make the sewer line fit. I break ensued, Operator error!

MJP

[mjfarrell]

OK

I may want to rest after this one...

What I found also to work is fairly elegant.

Create a block from a small diameter circle, I named mine Int_Type1, create as many or few as then number of interference styles you need to check for.
Create or edit your interference styles to use this custom block as the marker.
Run the interference checks, using the style you just made.
Save your Work
Then use File Menu>>Export to Autocad>>Select ver 2000 DXF as your file type.

Start a new file, and then use File>>Import>>or DXFIN and import the file you just made above, save and close the file.

Attach to this file with MAP, run a query against the block name(s) you used in your interference styles.
Set your alter Properties, to place Text or Annotation at the insertion Point,
or set a point at insertion points (center) of the point block marker to label the interference (the help file doesn't indicate if this is the Centroid of the location marker, or the actual clash location) using an Expression to compensate for 1/2pipe diameter + pipe wall thickness would do the trick nicely.

Left out a simple step....