Topic: Autodesk and Surveyors

[therock003]

Bentley lists the following as surveying applications.

http://www.bentley.com/en-US/Markets/Civil/Surveying.htm

Cmon guys lets gather here surveying apps and see what they got to offer.

BTW.:Whats the significance of the Bricscad support?

[Swift]

Bentley lists the BTW.:Whats the significance of the Bricscad support?

Have you priced BricsCad v Autocad lately?

The biggest thing holding back the Intellicad platform has been the lack of capable vertical applications, that seems to be changing now.

[mjfarrell]

I don't think the challenge is that the SURVEY market is small as a user asserts; as EVERY single construction job is and must be supported by survey of one form or another.  I think Autodesk does not respond to their customers needs, or complaints. And sticking a SURVEY tab inside C3D does NOT a fully functioning survey application make.

[MSTG007]

That is one way to look at it too. On the other hand. I am sure there are plunty of expierenced civil 3d surveyors who are using everything they need inside of Civil3D. I know this is corny. but if you have been using this all your life, the old LDT with survey, then the new Survey Civil3d you just need to search around for it. commands and processes.

[sinc]

Maybe that's where we're different.

For the engineers, C3D is a completely different world.  There have been massive improvements.

You are saying that we merely need to hunt in the nooks and crannies of C3D, and we can find many of the old Land Desktop features for survey support.

Well, shouldn't surveyors be able to expect new features in new software, too?  If the engineers aren't still using 15-year-old technology, why are we expected to still use FBK files?  As surveyors, we seem to be expected to simply benefit from the engineering improvements that "flow over" into Surveying, such as better surface generation, etc.  Well, there's also the Survey database, but because of many decisions Autodesk made in its implementation, we have basically found we cannot really use it.  So they thing they worked on the most is something we can't even use.

And I actually have found a HUGE number of things missing and/or misimplemented in C3D when it comes to Surveying.  I have addressed some of the biggest gaps with the Sincpac-C3D, and am addressing more, though, so things are much better now than they were when we first tried to use C3D, and we didn't have the Sincpac-C3D.

I suppose at this point, it would actually be to my benefit if Autodesk continues to ignore Surveyors.  As time goes on and I add more and more to the Sincpac-C3D, eventually I'll have a pretty high-powered add-on for C3D that addresses the lack of Survey support.  It already makes a massive difference, and I've only implemented a small sliver of my ideas so far.

[mjfarrell]

The 'need' to use the FBK instead of the .job files with "Trimble Link" is due in part to the relationship betwixt Autodesk and Trimble. In theory If you are running the more Expensive Survey Pro on your controller, then you can use the .job file. However if you are running the basic software on your Trimble controller then you can not. So they decided you had to pay a toll in order to use the tools, only THEY never quite tell you that when the demo(hype) C3D to Surveyors.

Trust, that I do 'root' around in the application.

[MSTG007]

Another biggy MJ. you are diffently right about that. I do not know how this may go, but it does sound political. More money, sure you will get all the bells and whistles. But for some who want the LX model, or basic... I guess you get lucky for some of the free things they might throw your way.

Sinc - Have you been apart of the Beta Team for testing the surveyor tools in Civil 3D? On an engineering side, I have issues and give them ideas they take it as far as they can. By the way, in beta stage alot of crashes and "X#$#()*$@()" on your send report do give you alot of points, for what I dont know.

And again Sinc, Since you have figured out how to program some of the tools within Civil3d.( i am jealous) YOU have alot more capilbilties... If I knew what you knew on a Engineers side of programing woo hoo... I tell you I know how my stuff would be quick easy and well ... I will leave it at that.

Another Idea... Show some of the Beta Team your tools, and ask them to implament them.

[sinc]

The 'need' to use the FBK instead of the .job files with "Trimble Link" is due in part to the relationship betwixt Autodesk and Trimble. In theory If you are running the more Expensive Survey Pro on your controller, then you can use the .job file. However if you are running the basic software on your Trimble controller then you can not. So they decided you had to pay a toll in order to use the tools, only THEY never quite tell you that when the demo(hype) C3D to Surveyors.

Are you saying that if we weren't using Trimble equipment, we would be able to create linework and breaklines inside of Civil-3D, after getting all the points into C3D?  That isn't the impression I got...  I had gotten the impression that the FBK files were an Autodesk thing, and were used regardless of the survey equipment...

From what I gather, there is a major problem with C3D's linework generation, and it exists regardless of the survey equipment being used.  The big problem with this is that the linework and breaklines are created as part of the import process.  If there is an error in the fieldwork, then there are some minimal edits that can be done inside of C3D, but for the most part, errors must be fixed in the raw data, and then the import process must be done again.  This is incredibly inefficient workflow, an incredibly difficult way to work and incredibly annoying.  Not to mention, the Survey Figure Commands are weak, custom linetypes are weak, and a slew of other problems.

Now it's true that a number of these issues are solved by 3rd-party apps such as Stringer.  Maybe that's all there is to it - if you expect to use Civil-3D as a Surveyor, expect to need 3rd-party apps.

Of course, that introduces another major issue, in that it means that C3D is MORE EXPENSIVE for Surveyors than for Engineers.  This is backwards, since Engineers get far, far, far more value out of C3D than Surveyors do.

[mjfarrell]

No, what I am saying is there are a ton of folks trying to import the .job file, only to discover that they can't because they are running the base software in the collector.  And yet, you are correct, even IF done in the field, they then have limited editing capabilities AFTER the data is imported. And yes that would require the backwards workflow you imagine.

See this: http://discussion.autodesk.com/adskcsp/thread.jspa?messageID=5225580

or: http://discussion.autodesk.com/adskcsp/thread.jspa?messageID=5486092

[jpostlewait]

When the model gets dumped straight into the "Blades" who needs surveyors?
That's the direction the software people are headed.
And yes I know that the surveyors are still needed for other aspects but construction staking will soon be very limited.
Lidar dumps into software, to design, to model to equipment is the path that is being pursued.

[Craig Davis]

Now it's true that a number of these issues are solved by 3rd-party apps such as Stringer.  Maybe that's all there is to it - if you expect to use Civil-3D as a Surveyor, expect to need 3rd-party apps.

Of course, that introduces another major issue, in that it means that C3D is MORE EXPENSIVE for Surveyors than for Engineers.  This is backwards, since Engineers get far, far, far more value out of C3D than Surveyors do.

Couldn't agree more on this point. I really can't understand how a major player in the CAD field can't get fully functional survey working. It's not really rocket science is it? (that's no disrespect to surveyors of course it's in repsect to the stringing functionality)

We can't have a whole package of Civil3D just sitting there waiting for a surveyor to use it a couple of times a week. They need to create a surveyor package similar to Autocad lite etc.

Once they get a fully functional survey package reasonably priced they might find more people taking up their Civil3D package.

Why did you get me started.   

[Dinosaur]

I know you are just relaying the software geeks theories but I just have to say something about what little guys like us face with that logic.  I am not sure about the contractors your guys work with John, but with the crews that win the bids on all of our jobs, the only data they will accept from us is in the form of polylines at elevation.  All of those nice Civil 3D surfaces get the explode button twice and exported out in 2000 dwg format.  That leaves me with precious little ammo to defend the keeping the surface intact and "unsullied" all the way through design when the contractor either can't or won't use it.  And that is just addressing grading and maybe curb staking.  What does this fancy new equipment know about staking the storm, sewer and water?  What happens when a manhole gets misplaced either vertical or horizontal?  I know this shouldn't happen, but then if it didn't we wouldn't have to spend all of that time on as-builts.

[jpostlewait]

I'm not saying it's here yet Dino, just the direction it's going.
As far as sewers go why can't the lasers the contractors use be GPS equipted?
I'm still getting over the heart attack of the surface grading machines being GPS equipted and grading a downloaded model.

[Dinosaur]

I knew what you were getting at John, I was just venting about what I thought of the idea.  The machines can have the grading, but I don't want them near my pipes yet.  All the lasers, GPS and robotic stations you can throw at it will still run into shallow rock or some other weird " field surprise" and have to adjust the rest of the line so the stuff still flows down hill within or "close" to design criteria and use all of the original structures because they are already built and on site.

As far as alternate software solutions, I still can't give an honest opinion for Bentley products, but everything else I have seen looks to be Land Desktop clones.  Civil 3D still seems to be the only really different solution.

[mjfarrell]

I think part of the problem might be a trend that I have noticed of late. There is a disconnect in the Civil industry, as not all firms that survey, do design. And the Design firms do not survey, and the ones that do both sometimes do not use the software anywhere near it's capacity. So this leads to certain functions not being explored, exploited, tested until failure what ever.

In general C3D does some great stuff. It is when you push it that you start to discover the omitted, obtuse, overlooked, crash inducing pile of code with a foul oder. (If one could smell software)