TheSwamp
CAD Forums => Vertically Challenged => Land Lubber / Geographically Positioned => Topic started by: Mark on September 20, 2007, 10:11:02 AM
-
Mastering AutoCAD Civil 3D 2008 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0470167408?ie=UTF8&tag=civil3dcom-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0470167408)
Dana Probert E.I.T. (Author)
James Wedding P.E. (Author)
P.E. Mark Scacco (Collaborator)
Jason Hickey (Collaborator)
-
Hey, they got it out just in time to revise it for 2009... :-D
Congrats, guys! I know that book took a lot of effort. Ain't it fun trying to document a moving target like Civil-3D?
-
Congrats
I look forward to purchasing!
-
I saw a gmail notification on my desktop from Amazon last week and thought "grand, they are finally shipping my book" . . . No such luck - the new expected shipping date is 10/22 - 10/24. :pissed:
RAZZBERRIES to the publisher
-
Email notice received overnight that my book has been shipped - about a week earlier than the last estimate.
-
When will this hit the shelves?
-
DG,
You might not need it any longer, after class next month.
-
Mine from Barnes and Noble showed up today. ordered monday. NUMA
-
Mine from Barnes and Noble showed up today. ordered monday. NUMA
So it would seem the early bird doesn't always get the worm.
-
mine arrived about 5 minutes ago . . . but then I still have an avi about data references to watch first. Thanks for fixing that email link Michael
-
You are welcome! I'll know it went well, if you have ONE question. To be clear the AVI is on XDREFS not Data References. Although I do have that one ready, it isn't posted yet.
-
Apologies . . . yes XDREFS . . . I was trying to eat dinner, arrange some backup files and post via a keyboard balanced on my knees under the desk . . . when it comes to multi-tasking I am more DOS than Windows - perhaps CP/M.
-
DG,
You might not need it any longer, after class next month.
You order yours yet Mike?
Not jerking your chain just curious.
-
I don't know why I would, considering that at no point in my contact with authors here at The Swamp, they were unable, or unwilling, to actually answer any question I posed of them. Given that I still find much fresh material in reading the help file, and solving all these real world issues, I don't know that I have time for the recreational reading involved. Now if on the other hand they had ever been willing, able to assist I might be more inclined, however much of the attitude I saw expressed here http://www.theswamp.org/index.php?topic=16512.msg200716#msg200716 (http://www.theswamp.org/index.php?topic=16512.msg200716#msg200716) makes me less so.
To be clear; I am not saying there might not be a nugget or two in there, it just might be a while before it gets on my book of the month club.
-
I....however much of the attitude I saw expressed here.
I followed that link and could find no 'attitude' that you are talking about. What I did find, and it surprised me, was that James & Dana are no longer members here. :-( Guess that explains why I haven't seen them poking around here for a while.
-
Jeff, perhaps attitude is the wrong phrase. The comment in that thread "You'll have to came to AU. Can't giveaway all my best stuff" was probably made tongue in cheek.
Yes it is a shame that they all bailed out. Perhaps as questions about the book, and its contents, or exercises pop up they will reappear to resolve those issues.
-
Mine from Barnes and Noble showed up today. ordered monday. NUMA
Nooo!!!! next time, AMAZON.COM!! B&N=$55.99 ($50.39 member)
Amazon=$44.07
Some people just have more money than they know what to do with!! Next time, order from Amazo and send me the cost difference !! ^-^
-
Dent, I ordered from Amazon in July and was informed that my order would be delayed until the first week of Nov. When I saw others who ordered from Amazon in Oct. and received their books, all around the same time I was told about the delay, I complained to Amazon. They "guaranteed" me it would ship the next business day......I got another "delay" email on that day. I cancelled the order. I then placed an order with B&N (at $48.99 non-member) and had the book 2 days later (no shipping charges). For < $5, screw Amazon and their customer service.
-
... For < $5, screw Amazon and their customer service.
Exactly
-
They must know who you are. :evil: I've never had a problem with either one of those book sellers. That's why I play the price game. ^-^
-
I was not pleased that it took Amazon so long to get the book to me but to be fair, I think most of the problem was in distribution from the publisher. To Amazon's credit, they had my card number since early August but the charge did not appear until the same day I got the shipping notice. I had delivery within a week of the first indications it was available to ship and within 2 hours of the delivery of another copy I know about in this area from Barnes & Noble.
-
My comments
http://discussion.autodesk.com/thread.jspa?threadID=619694
It's good stuff.
-
Some people just have more money than they know what to do with!!
All because of the VAST improvements in efficiency, teamwork, and excitement at each and every bright new day we gained with C3d. . Everyone in the office is extremely excited about C3d. We are taking a company camping trip this weekend, a 'retreat' to reward everyone for successfully completing so many profitable projects with C3d.
We never have been able to design and get approved and build a subdivision with near the quality and time savings as we do now with C3d. In fact, I'm so good at it, I'm offering a training seminar. It's a LOW LOW price, email me for details.
-
(http://www.theswamp.org/screens/mp/itsatrap.png)
-
It's good stuff.
To be fair JP you have previously shown an great deal of bias towards JW, et al.
-
Some people just have more money than they know what to do with!!
All because of the VAST improvements in efficiency, teamwork, and excitement at each and every bright new day we gained with C3d. . Everyone in the office is extremely excited about C3d. We are taking a company camping trip this weekend, a 'retreat' to reward everyone for successfully completing so many profitable projects with C3d.
We never have been able to design and get approved and build a subdivision with near the quality and time savings as we do now with C3d. In fact, I'm so good at it, I'm offering a training seminar. It's a LOW LOW price, email me for details.
Somehow I doubt this book really changed the way you use or view C3D. :roll:
-
There was talk one time about making up some kind of Sarcasm tags (like quote and code). Mebbe we should revisit that thought. :-D
-
(http://www.theswamp.org/screens/mp/sarcasm.png)
-
Some people just have more money than they know what to do with!!
All because of the VAST improvements in efficiency, teamwork, and excitement at each and every bright new day we gained with C3d. . Everyone in the office is extremely excited about C3d. We are taking a company camping trip this weekend, a 'retreat' to reward everyone for successfully completing so many profitable projects with C3d.
We never have been able to design and get approved and build a subdivision with near the quality and time savings as we do now with C3d. In fact, I'm so good at it, I'm offering a training seminar. It's a LOW LOW price, email me for details.
Somehow I doubt this book really changed the way you use or view C3D. :roll:
Not likely.
However, since there are only a handful of really talented implementors out there (such as yourself) and several thousand users, college classes and such that are hungry for help... someone had to step up to the plate and hammer something out. It isn't the same as having an experienced human over your shoulder, that's for sure. And there are definite gaps and room for improvement, but out of the small collection of bound paper out there that calls itself Civil 3D learning material... you get my point.
-
It's good stuff.
To be fair JP you have previously shown an great deal of bias towards JW, et al.
If you take amazon's truncation, that should be Dana Probert, E.I.T., et al.
Of course he shows bias. Last year at AU he got hugs from each author. Hugs go a long way.
-
Some people just have more money than they know what to do with!!
All because of the VAST improvements in efficiency, teamwork, and excitement at each and every bright new day we gained with C3d. . Everyone in the office is extremely excited about C3d. We are taking a company camping trip this weekend, a 'retreat' to reward everyone for successfully completing so many profitable projects with C3d.
We never have been able to design and get approved and build a subdivision with near the quality and time savings as we do now with C3d. In fact, I'm so good at it, I'm offering a training seminar. It's a LOW LOW price, email me for details.
Somehow I doubt this book really changed the way you use or view C3D. :roll:
Not likely.
However, since there are only a handful of really talented implementors out there (such as yourself) and several thousand users, college classes and such that are hungry for help... someone had to step up to the plate and hammer something out. It isn't the same as having an experienced human over your shoulder, that's for sure. And there are definite gaps and room for improvement, but out of the small collection of bound paper out there that calls itself Civil 3D learning material... you get my point.
After spending several hours looking through a borrowed copy of this book, here is the unvarnished review:
Given the number of errors and ommisions that are being reported; it would seem that simply hammering something out is an apt description. Not to denigrate the authors; they should have taken the time to at least have a peer review of the material so that the reader would not need to edit the book. Typical is the instruction that it is OK to delete TIN lines from within a surface for building and ponds surfaces; this is simply wrong and a bad idea. Truth is properly collected a building pad as break lines WILL have triangles in it at the Finished Floor elevation and no one should chop them out. Scientist, and doctors typically follow a peer review process to keep such errors out of print. The authors however are much better politicians than I, as they do a fantastic job of glossing over defects, and deficiencies in the product. The problem with that type of wordsmithing is that if you don't identify a problem as such it rarely get solved; because no one admits that it is a problem. If however a user has no other source of training then the book should at least get them started with using C3D. However remember Don't judge a book by it's cover, i.e. this is NOT a mastering level book from my perspective
-
>>here is the unvarnished review:<<
really? :lol:
-
>>here is the unvarnished review:<<
really? :lol:
Yes, unvarnished. Notice that I did not mince words or otherwise attempt to sweeten my speech to be politically correct or otherwise?
:|
EXAPLE of VARNISHED review:
The authors did a fantastic job of covering much of the material. Many of the topics were covered well; with a few exceptions.
I did not say un-opinionated. What I said is exactly my opinion. Given that they left out medians, four way intersections, roundabouts, I find it hard to give it the MASTERING title they applied to it. Especially since it claims the reader will be able to perform said modeling on the back cover. Is this a false claim or false advertising, you decide. Even as you said in an earlier dialog; it is an 'essentials' type of manuscript. I have seen others attempt to dismiss the 'errata' as inevitable with this type of work. The fact is said errata could have been avoided by implementing good peer review of the material, and editing prior to publishing it.
Asking for readers to fact check, or otherwise perform QA/QC on the book's content afterward is ( insert word here).
To be clear I am not attacking the authors, I am attacking the method that much like Autodesk's of 'rushing' a product to market that isn't quite ready and then asking the user (reader) to beta test it for them. My thought is that it would have delayed the publication by as little as four weeks to have it reviewed, and or add the material required to bring it the MASTERING level.
-
your comments are well taken, however, they belie the fundamental idea that the software exists to be software. I don't agree with this, as I believe the software is but a tool for the greater good of getting homeless children off the street. I am sure there is great value in debating the products shortcomings, and there are many. However, I do not believe that the product, IF PROPERLY MANAGED, interferes with the process of getting homeless children off the street any more than the local city governments do.
It is easy for one to get wrapped up in a one on one battle over the use of the product, and I admit I have done this, my coworkers have done this. The simple fact is, we were ALL designing, and publishing plans, and coping with the cities long before c3d came along, and we will continue to do so after it has come and run it's course. It is but a single blip on the radar screen of engineering know how, practices, training, and real education. It is but a grain of sand in the shorts of the IT person that implements, it is but a the tiniest of concerns compared to the lasting solidness of single 4'x4' area inlet.
The book does it's job of providing some guidance when sometimes you simply can't remember a specific procedure, where a command might exist, or where a function might lie.
I know many of you take this program very very seriously, and consider every little retarded thing that Autodesk does a personal afront. I know that every city comment stikes as a personal afront upon your grand design. Apparently someone, somewhere told you that engineering isn't about trial and error. Apparently there is some bright shining light that I ignore that makes every little change, comment etc some sort of insult.
The book is fine, it works and has value far beyond the $50 it costs.
water still flows downhill, subdivisions get built, homeless children still get off street
-
Numa,
To be clear, homeless children and my comments about this tome are not even on the same plane in my world view.
Second, the actions or inaction of Autodesk, are not "a personal affront", my comments are merely a distillation of the input that I get from real users during my interactions with them. Just that fact that I am willing to give voice to them and attach my REAL name to those comments is the difference.
One of my personal peeves about this site, adesk news groups, and others; is the tendency of users to hide their true identity.
I encourage all of you to throw your masks away and show people who you really are.
-
One of my personal peeves about this site, adesk news groups, and others; is the tendency of users to hide their true identity.
I encourage all of you to throw your masks away and show people who you really are.
Methinks you don't understand the nature of using a discussion forum. I absolutely do not want to be linked to a real name, why? BECAUSE IT IS FUNDAMENTAL TO USING A DISCUSSION SYSTEM, our identities are paramount. The last thing I want is some jack*** calling me at my real job, to discuss my use of Autodesk products. Trust me, if Autodesk thought they could get everybodies real name, and send them more marketing junk, they would.
Second, at the end of the day when someone on hear proclaims that none of us understand the product, or are somehow inferior because of the way we use the product, we can blow it off, call the guy an a**hat, and never think twice about it. Its when somebody starts using my name, and my family name, to make a considerably more personal attack, well, then we leave and never come back.
My pet peeve about this board and AUGI, and adesk's fanboy site, are the turf wars. The Hey don't poke your head up over the wall or the turf king is going to come squash you.
Back to the subject at hand, the book is very nicely done, and what you want is the book to denigrate autodesk for screwing up here or screwing up there? Then that book becomes a 'commentary on the failure of megacorp'. Wow, what a thriller. I bet that one would sell like hot-cakes. The book has lots of great info, and for those of us that learn well from books, and learn by self-teaching, and exploration, then it's a great book, and good resource.
Cheers.
-
The last thing I want is some jack*** calling me at my real job,
freaking exactly.
-
One of my personal peeves about this site, adesk news groups, and others; is the tendency of users to hide their true identity.
I encourage all of you to throw your masks away and show people who you really are.
Methinks you don't understand the nature of using a discussion forum. I absolutely do not want to be linked to a real name, why? BECAUSE IT IS FUNDAMENTAL TO USING A DISCUSSION SYSTEM, our identities are paramount.
I've been using my real name here and other places for more than 4 years without problems.
-
it would seem that simply hammering something out is an apt description. Not to denigrate the authors; they should have taken the time to at least have a peer review of the material so that the reader would not need to edit the book.
hmmm. simply hammering. i can assure you that the hammering was not simple. try 8 months of learning how books are made, starting from blank pages, dealing with editors, beta software and taking thousands of screen captures and hundreds of drawings only having to revisit, rename and renumber them and fight with editors over which ones will be included. throw in a service pack every few months to make it all obsolete and do this hammering for all for the promise for less money than my cousin cleared at his bar mitzvah in 1985 all while growing life, raising kids, and trying to keep a real job.
you can consider the fact that thought there are books on civil 3d already published, not one of them has truly attempted to scratch deeper than a nanometer, nor to include any ideas for possible best practices. Best practices are never set in stone and it takes great leaps of faith to put yourself out there with what works for you.
Take any three civil 3d peers and put them to task to review a procedure and each one will have a completely different spin.
the atmosphere in this industry is so macho and competitive that after awhile people stop expressing their spins because they arent interested in being shot down as idiots. I remember raising my hand at an Autodesk function a few years ago and asking about Structure to Structure design then being called a hillbilly no-nothing because the folks in attendance were all centerline to centerline designers and thought that structure to structure was absolutely absurd. It took me awhile before i realized my towns werent totally alone. Try the entire country of New Zealand also designs that way.
On the Mastering note, I was often floored by people who considered themselves Land Desktop experts, but if I brought up the cross sections menu they didn't know what I was talking about. In the early Civil 3D days and even now I am still surprised at the dead air I get on the autodesk DG and even from my peers on certain subjects. The truth is that I am not a Master of Civil 3D nor do I truly know any Masters of Civil 3D. I know a whole bunch of people who know the basics and can't do squat, and I also know a whole bunch of people who know the basics, were shown some techniques on real projects and ran with it and continue to run with it every day. Those people will become Masters someday. The title of the book? It's a series. The publisher says- here is a book. Keep it to X pages. Go. You know Mastering Viz, Mastering AutoCAD, Mastering Your Own Destiny :)
On the subject of using real names... you all know who I am. I come to the swamp to leave that behind and I'd rather not be searchable and immediately judged by the name on my login- which is why I deleted my other account. But I guess that was too much to ask?
-
I've been using my real name here and other places for more than 4 years without problems.
Mark Thomas is a good name to have when using your real name. Unfortunately, there is only one person listed in the US white pages with my name :)
-
I, for one, was delighted to see you come back to TheSwamp and I sincerely hope you feel like you can stay this time . . . welcome back.
Real names . . . I had been burned at another site before I joined here and chose to hide behind a user name. I opened things up for view in my profile after I became a moderator and even included my name in the sig line up until last week after foolishly joining a second forum under the same user name. There are two sides to this issue and I think it is up to the individuals to find and maintain their own comfort level. I know for certain a few eyebrows would be risen were the true identity of certain members here be public.
And finally back on topic . . . the book is a much needed resource for taming this beast of a program. Whatever the errors of omission or outright errors, it is infinitely better than the pathetic internal "HELP" functions and "New Features Workshop" topics. The book is there on a shelf if I need it instead of sneaking onto the internet and trolling the forums and discussion groups. It also makes it less likely I have to send a mayday call to my teacher and wait for an answer. It is a $55 book and I would not expect it to contain the entire known collection of wisdom regarding Civil 3D. I can only thank you for your time and effort in producing this book, fighting publishing deadlines and watching as some really good stuff gets cut by the editors.
-
I think some of you should:
A)
Go read the first post a little closer; I never said it was a bad book. I said it fell short of being able to truly call itself MASTERING. In fact a few pages in, the book actually admits to it's own limitations, if only THAT were one the cover.
B)
The "hammering" phrase was lifted directly from James Wedding himself.
C)
I am not trashing the book for leaving out any Best Practices, go read it again never said it. The peer review I was suggesting would be to ferret out the errors and omissions the authors are now soliciting from the purchasers of said book.
D)
Clean up your language. It is more than clear what you are implying; however I can take it without calling in the Moderators, or quiting the group or the discussion.
E)
As authors you should have asked said publishers to give it a more realistic title; ever hear of artistic control of ones work?
F)
Need not remind me of the childish playground politics of those other places; as you all know I am all to familiar with their ways.
First welcome back 'scout'! If I must spell it out, 'scout' I am not outing you, or attacking you. If however the 'less money..." is an issue for you then perhaps you should have passed on it. I am not discounting the work involved, I am suggesting that together the group of you missed a great opportunity to help make the product much better IF you had chosen to not use language to obfuscate the defects and deficiencies. Perhaps it wouldn't have been published IF you as a group had been honest about the failings of the product. However IF that honesty motivated 'the good folks in Manchester' to clean this mess up then something almost as good as getting those kids off the street could have happend.
Read the last sentence carefully, I am not suggesting a diatribe on the failings of 'megacorp', I'm suggesting not putting spin on how the product actually fails to function in those areas that it does so. We all know that there are far more 'bugs' than the one item that was called out as one.
Mark, I with you on using my real name without any issues so far. I think many use the anonymity of their user name to act in a manner that they otherwise might not if they used their real name and identity.
The real 'problem' at any of the 'official' sites is the censorship and pandering to their partners. The fact the real issues and real concerns can not be discussed unless one is exceedingly 'diplomatic' and that one not express a few that might look like it is too negative towards Autodesk, AUGI, Solid Vapor, etc.
I do find it interesting that you folks have no trouble promoting, and defending said book here, however you conveniently left a link to The Swamp out of the book.
-
Real names . . .
I know that the information/advice provided by superCad0po3r4tor may be just as reliable as that from Jim Bloggs ..
.... but it's a matter of perception and taking responsibility for your actions.
similarly, I feel more inclined to share my time resolving problems with 'Jim' than with Mr oneNamefitsAll.
I consider it's similar to individuals who run sites who don't make their names available .... I assume articles are posted by my gardener.
p.o.o.
-
Thank you Kerry, that is a point very well taken.
-
C)
I am not trashing the book for leaving out any Best Practices, go read it again never said it. The peer review I was suggesting would be to ferret out the errors and omissions the authors are now soliciting from the purchasers of said book.
No, you said some of our best practices were stupid- like erasing TIN lines or some such.
"Hammering" yes. "Simply Hammering" was what I was refuting.
I was not aware a link to the swamp was left out.
-
I've been using my real name here and other places for more than 4 years without problems.
Mark Thomas is a good name to have when using your real name. Unfortunately, there is only one person listed in the US white pages with my name :)
Yours is not as unique as mine by any means and I have NEVER had the problems you relate. I guess you have to really have answers to grt phone calls? I've always found cute screen names to be a little paranoid. One assumes someone else wouls stalk you because you are so very interesting. Some of us never have that problem. ^-^
-
Yeah, look up Mike Williams and see what you find.
Of course, if you read my many posts in here, you'd be able to find me with ease, but if you're new, it might be like finding a needle in a haystack.
-
No, you said some of our best practices were stupid- like erasing TIN lines or some such.
I was not aware a link to the swamp was left out.
Not a 'best practice' that I was critiquing. The example come in the form of the Surface Editing command descriptions where it is suggested that the user should delete TIN lines from within a building area or a pond. This information is totally wrong practice. One should NEVER delete tin lines from the interior of a surface model. There are other means that do not damage the integrity of the surface model. As there will be and should be TIN lines defining the building footprint. Those faces simply must remain. In the case of a pond, one could debate a need to remove them, given that the surveyors had collected the pond bottom elevations. Otherwise how could one calculate the volume of fill required to fill in the pond? Given one could get the permits to do so. If you want to call a wrong practice 'stupid' O.K. by me.
And there was no link to The Swamp included. (Have you actually read the book that has your name on it??)
-
No, you said some of our best practices were stupid- like erasing TIN lines or some such.
I was not aware a link to the swamp was left out.
Not a 'best practice' that I was critiquing. The example come in the form of the Surface Editing command descriptions where it is suggested that the user should delete TIN lines from within a building area or a pond. This information is totally wrong practice. One should NEVER delete tin lines from the interior of a surface model. There are other means that do not damage the integrity of the surface model. As there will be and should be TIN lines defining the building footprint. Those faces simply must remain. In the case of a pond, one could debate a need to remove them, given that the surveyors had collected the pond bottom elevations. Otherwise how could one calculate the volume of fill required to fill in the pond? Given one could get the permits to do so. If you want to call a wrong practice 'stupid' O.K. by me.
And there was no link to The Swamp included. (Have you actually read the book that has your name on it??)
I didn't write that particular chapter, and I agree with you in theory about keeping the integrity of the surface intact. However, when the firms I work with come forward and ask me the question about building pads, and they want to remove the contours from within the footprint because their jurisdiction will not allow them to show contours through the building, I run through the usual options such as, add a featureline to represent finished floor so you have a true model. or try a mask or wipeout, etc etc. many of those solutions are just not terribly satisfying to clients and they would rather delete the TIN lines.
So while deleting TIN lines may not be the best possible solution, it is indeed a typical use in practice for the delete TIN lines option.
Also note that that the offensive "stupid practice" as you say is mentioned in one small line on page 140 as an example of why you might use the delete line tool. It isn't a full blown sidebar highlighting this as a must-do technique.
While we all wish everyone was fully leveraging their 3D tools, there are still plenty of people who need to figure out real ways to get their work done.
The book is taken from us and goes through about four levels of editing. We don't even get to see where the images wind up until the very end. The first time I had access to the entire book was when mine was delivered to me in early October- two weeks after the birth of my son. I wrote about 400 pages of it, so I've read those over and over and over again over the past 8 months. The rest of the book- I am still reading it. I am on page 323. It's pretty hard to hold a 800 page book while nursing a newborn and taking care of a 3 year old, but I'll get there.
-
It's pretty hard to hold a 800 page book while nursing a newborn and taking care of a 3 year old, but I'll get there.
Congratulations on the birth of your latest family addition. I used to "surf the net" whilst bottle feeding my son in the evenings after work. :-)
Apologies for the tangent.
-
Perhaps we have more work to do in training persons on properly modeling their surfaces. Properly done contour lines will not cross a building pad. Think about it; even IF the pad elevation is EXACTLY at a contour interval say 1250, the 1250 contour will not cross the pad it will in fact inscribe the pad perimeter and there will be nothing to erase or mask. Even IF one is using 0.1, or other intervals or other increments the contour will not cross a properly modeled surface.
And 'scout' I asked all to go read my post again, YOU are the one using the word stupid to describe the practice, not me. I did not use that word, go read it again slowly.
-
Scout was my screen name in college and lately I've felt pretty old. Maybe I was looking to reclaim my youth?
-
Scout was my screen name in college . . .
Not "UGA"? :evil:
-
Perhaps we have more work to do in training persons on properly modeling their surfaces. Properly done contour lines will not cross a building pad. Think about it; even IF the pad elevation is EXACTLY at a contour interval say 1250, the 1250 contour will not cross the pad it will in fact inscribe the pad perimeter and there will be nothing to erase or mask. Even IF one is using 0.1, or other intervals or other increments the contour will not cross a properly modeled surface.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. The trouble is that many users aren't so much required to model the building pad as the grading around the building pad, and since that is sometimes at odd elevations at each corner (like garages and walkouts), you wind up with contours going through what the review agency sees as "the building" and that doesnt make sense to them. So yes, the users need to just add another feature line or other such to get the surface to truly represent what they need.
Since the TIN cannot have a vertical edge, the featureline must be offset the min (0.01ft) amount. If the true pad or ff is 2ft or more above the outside grade, you get a stack of close contours btwn the two feature lines.
in the case of basements or vert sided ponds, those stacked contours may have depression ticks that further ugly things up.
Users get frustrated and would rather just delete the tin instead of spending the extra time to make flat building pad feature lines that give an unattractive result. In some subdivisions, that can be hundreds of houses.
-
There are some residual 'cad' data the user left behind as he moved towards creating this site plan in a 3rd day exercise. However I think if he had used a tighter snap when creating the feature lines that would become the dock seawalls.
And this 'vertical' face issue has been asked to be fixed all the way back to Softdesk 6.3. These are the the type of problems-challenges that they should have placed way ahead of a 3d obit for what are most typically going to be PLAN labels in the label style composer.
-
There are some residual 'cad' data the user left behind as he moved towards creating this site plan in a 3rd day exercise. However I think if he had used a tighter snap when creating the feature lines that would become the dock seawalls.
I downloaded it. What would you like me to look at? I'm lost.
-
Scout was my screen name in college . . .
Not "UGA"? :evil:
you'd best be kidding.
-
There are some residual 'cad' data the user left behind as he moved towards creating this site plan in a 3rd day exercise. However I think if he had used a tighter snap when creating the feature lines that would become the dock seawalls.
I downloaded it. What would you like me to look at? I'm lost.
That there is nothing to see. Thanks for the discussion! I think we just found a unique solution to this pesky problem. ! :-D !
-
And this 'vertical' face issue has been asked to be fixed all the way back to Softdesk 6.3. These are the the type of problems-challenges that they should have placed way ahead of a 3d obit for what are most typically going to be PLAN labels in the label style composer.
I suspect we have 3D-orbits in the label style composer out of laziness. They already had an object viewer that did 3D-Orbits, so it was probably less work to reuse the object viewer code for the label style composer. I suspect it might have been more work for them to disable the 3D-orbit rather than leave it in.
But I agree about the vertical-face thing. I haven't tried doing it, but it seems like there must be some algorithm that can handle volume calcs even if there are true vertical faces, even if it is slower. A slower-but-better algorithm may not have been a good choice once-upon-a-time, when it would take 8 hours of churning for CAD to generate contours for a moderately-sized surface, but I would think it would be possible now.
If nothing else, it would have been nice if they had designed Corridors so that they can handle vertical faces in subassemblies, because it is a pain dealing with this issue all the time when creating custom subassemblies...
-
Scout was my screen name in college . . .
Not "UGA"? :evil:
you'd best be kidding.
:lol: Of course I was kidding . . . but I'd bet you wouldn't have to wait in line for it on your campus.
College rivalries . . . one of the best parts of campus life! :lmao:
-
Nope, not a 'solution' as much as a process. :|
-
Mastering AutoCAD Civil 3D 2008 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0470167408?ie=UTF8&tag=civil3dcom-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0470167408)
if we only have Civil3D 2007 and won't be upgrading any time soon, is it still worthwhile to order this book or Harnessing Autodesk Civil 3D 2007 (http://tinyurl.com/39ypwf) is better?
thanks for your input.
btw, we bought these books that i asked about in this thread http://www.theswamp.org/index.php?topic=17084.msg206766#msg206766.
Digging Into Autodesk Civil 3D 2007
Digging Deeper Into Autodesk Civil 3D 2007 - Level 2 Training
haven't had chance to read them. so no comments for now. just trying to order a couple more books on C3D.
-
You will not be able to do any of the provided exercises if you use 2007. Most of the basic procedures are the same, but there are a number of significant differences introduced in 2008. This is an excellent resource for the 2008 program, but I think you might be better served finding something specific to 2007, especially if you are not contemplating an upgrade.
-
You will not be able to do any of the provided exercises if you use 2007.
but I think you might be better served finding something specific to 2007, especially if you are not contemplating an upgrade.
Stephen, thanks for your suggestion! We'll just get the book for C3D 2007 for now.