Topic: Corridor driving me crazy

[KATHYC]

I'm having alot of trouble with a corridor. I havn't had much experience with civil 3d 2008. I have the book Mastering AutoCad Civil 3d 2008. But I havn't been able to solve my problem. Can anyone help me. I 'm going to try and post the drawing. There is a gap at the center of the bulb on the cultesac, and at the beginning of the alignment i want my transition lane to go to the centerline of the new road not flare around to the existing road. There is also an small offset between the left and right corridor from the fg1 corridor. Thanks in advance for any suggestions. I'm trying hard to learn this program but some areas are kicking my butt.

[mjfarrell]

For your corridor to be correct you will need to create both a Bulb Left and Bulb Right assembly.
The baseline will follow around your lip or back of gutter alignment and PGL, the pavement section will need be either BLT or Lane Outside super, such that you can target the centerline alignment, to fill in the pavement section in that region, and the Centerline Profile so that it maintains your desired cross slopes. And All will be well.

Further review suggests that you need only add the pavent sub assembly to the left side of the Right assembly, and on the Left side of the Right assembly. And then in your corridor properties assign the proper targets as outlined above.

Let me know if you want me to create one of those assemblies and post the partial solution for you to follow through and finish the other region. OK?

Although I have 2009 here yours looks to be in 2007 or 2008 version, I do have access to 2008 if required.

[KATHYC]

Thanks, I'll give it a try.

[dfarris75]

Thanks for confirming what I have said repeatedly; One can not master c3d from that book.
And exactly why I have issues with both the title of the book, and the authors of same for allowing it to be titled as such.
And some thought I was just being over critical of their work. I was only being honest in my observations; which I thought they wanted when asking for comments about it.
I will review your data and reply with a solution shortly.

Well they had to have a catchy title for the book in order to sell the thing Mike. It's marketing. It wouldn't sell so many if they had called it "Almost Mastering Civil 3D" or "Wannabe Civil 3D Master" right?

[mjfarrell]

Thanks, I'll give it a try.

You will do just fine...I can feel your success from here. 

And when and or if you folks want to truly MASTER C3D I stand ready to be of assistance.

[mjfarrell]

So?




How did it go?  Or do you want me to post the solution in 2008 format?
If so I will do Half of that cul de sac and let you follow to finish the other half.

[scout]

How did it go?  Or do you want me to post the solution in 2008 format?
If so I will do Half of that cul de sac and let you follow to finish the other half.

I'd also love to see the finished product. I'm not sure I am getting the OP's design intent. I've got the drawing open and messing around with it.

[mjfarrell]

I already have the corridor finished with 2009, although due to autodesks' insistence that there products NOT work backward or forward with each other the user would need me to redo this with 2008 so that they could use/open the file.

[scout]

I'd also love to see the finished product. I'm not sure I am getting the OP's design intent. I've got the drawing open and messing around with it.

Is your design based on the Fg(1) alignment location, or the centerpoint of the cul de sac? (see image) If it is based on the centerpoint, you can always make a second alignment that is not shown on plans, but that you use for design purposes. If that is the case, you only need one region around your cul de sac EOP and one subassembly. (Per the cul de sac example in Mastering C3D)

If you can put up a sketch, I would be happy to work it out for you.

For your intersection, can you explain what you need? Maybe a sketch? I get the "not flare into the existing road" part. Do you mean you want to stop at the EOP of the existing road (to leave the crown intact) like the image on page 433 of Mastering C3D?

[mjfarrell]

What the user will want to do is have an Alignment at the Edge of Traveled Way (Edge Pavement or Lip of Gutter to the rest of the world) So that at the intersection the pavement portion of the Assembly will target the EP alignment and Profile for the first Region along those curb returns. The blue lines in the sketch attached. Then in the second region the user will target the East West Centerline alignment and profile to finish the entry there will be a similar process on the left (north) side of the street.

[scout]

What the user will want to do is have an Alignment at the Edge of Traveled Way (Edge Pavement or Lip of Gutter to the rest of the world)

Gotcha. Just like the grey sidebar on pages 421 through 422 of Mastering C3D shows.

I'm very lazy when it comes to holding the crown, so I rarely target the EOP- its just another piece of geometry to maintain. If it works out, I like to just leave an empty lane region and let the triangulation do the work on th final surface. It isn't always appropriate, and it may not work in this case. Since the OP has the book -check out the grey sidebar on pages 432 through 433.

[scout]

With all due respect IF the book was helping the user with this issue, they wouldn't be needing our help here.

I'd like to hear that from the user. They might not have seen those particular sidebars. If they did, and they weren't helpful, I would like to know why so that I can facilitate potentially improving the language and approach.

I have plenty of books on my shelf that have lots of answers that I didn't see right away until someone points me in the right direction.

[scout]

you are hearing it from the reader in the form of I have this 'book' that isn't helping....

let's start with....perhaps they shouldn't be in sidebars and go from there.....

I'd like to hear it from a reader who doesn't already know how to do it. From someone looking at it with new eyes.

But from your perspective, Michael, what about the images? Are they not clear enough? do they not convey the message? If someone is familiar with creating targets from the "blended" intersection example, are they not armed with enough information to adjust their targets based on the first image in the grey area of page 421? Should it be another step by step exercise? More callouts? More arrows?

[Jeff_M]

Removed not too helpful commments. Sorry Kathy.

Jeff

[scout]

However WE digress. I'm going to channel my energies back towards the users issue with the corridor model.

I am here to help as well. Once the OP responds with their design intent (my post with the cul de sac image) I will gladly post several alternatives to achieve that requirement. Without clarification, it is impossible to read their minds.

The OP simply said the book didn't help on this issue. They didn't say which chapter they were looking for answers in. I am an author of that particular text, and I imagine that I will be contributing to plenty of additional Civil 3D documentation in the near future. My intentions are always to continue improving the material that I influence. Though my employment has changed, my intentions are still as I wrote here: http://www.theswamp.org/index.php?topic=23136.msg279622#msg279622.

With that, I hope that the OP hasn't been scared off by our side conversation.

[KATHYC]

Thank you to all that are helping me.  I have been assign another project that has become more pressing, so I won't be back on the one I posted until early next week.  I'll post the final product when I'm done.  Jeff_M  I don't need your critism  everyone overlooks things every now and then.  I thought this was a place to ask question when your stumped.  Mike you were right on at the intersection  I didn't explain myself very well.  Scout I did miss the side bar, I knew I read it somewhere (book, webpage or somewhere but I overlooked in my attempt).

[Jeff_M]

Kathy, I apologize for sounding like I was criticizing you, that was not what I had intended. Yes, it did come out that way, I was more peeved at Michael for finding yet another way to jump on the text & authors of, what I find to be a very good teaching aide. I shouldn't have even posted in this thread, and even deleted a post I had composed earlier than the one I did post.

This IS a great place to ask questions and, usually, get quality feedback. Again, my sincerest apologies for making you think otherwise.

FWIW, I also had worked up an example of the final corridor based on your drawing, initial post, and the text from the book (as I understood it) and had planned to post that. But since Dana (scout) has chimed in, she will be better suited to that since she wrote it in the first place.

[John Mayo]

I though about staying out of this but then remembered why I don't come here much anymore.


The real issue is Michaels NEED to drag others into his own battle.

Appologies should go to the OP who most likely has no idea what is really going on here.

It's a good book that has help MANY.

[Jeff_M]

<deleted stuff>

Now I'm off to have a beer and relax. Have a good weekend everyone!

Oops, not so fast. I feel compelled to resond once more....

<deleted some more stuff>

And NOW I 'm off

[Edited to delete some useless stuff - Jeff]

[mjfarrell]

Casual observation as to how the book is ineffective; to which neither of you needed to respond, thus prompting me to repeat my opinion. 

There may not be a reason as you see it for my first post; that being the case let me appear unreasoned then.


And you will both take note that none of this impacts the speed nor care that I will affect in answering your questions at any future time.  If I were unreasonable, I would hold a grudge, and stop helping you out when in need. However that is not in my nature. As always I stand ready to be of assistance. I guess just don't ask me for a book review, or recommendation for books or movies because obviously we disagree there..

[mjfarrell]

To the concerned gentlemen; as you both felt so strongly that my only intent is or was to besmirch another I have removed those comments.

From this point forward however; if you take offense to an opinion expressed by this member, please remember that it is only an opinion and you need not comment any further on same.


So come on back and and enjoy the posts and information that you find helpful. And those post in which I express something you do not appreciate; I trust you will do the same thing I do from time time when I see others post information of comments not to my liking, I often do not hit the reply button and simply move on.  Much like a buffet take the stuff that you like and is good for you, and just walk quickly and quietly past the boiled chicken feet, hog nostrils, entrails, etc that you do not like, without pointing and saying " Ewwwww Gross Pig Lips" and don't upset the serving line.

[Jeff_M]

Hi Kathy, Scout suggested I go ahead and post my solution to your query. Here's a pic of what my result looks like.

As MF & scout had asked, I, too, thought that  the crown would likely curve from the point where the cul-de-sac begins to it's radius point. To achieve this, I created a new alignment "FG-crown" that follows the FG(1) alignment until the point of curvature, then curves the the left to the RP. I then created a profile, superimposed the FG(1) Finish grade profile to it, and created a new FG-Crown FG profile. For the actual crown profile through the new curve I just held the elevations of the original FG profile at the BC & RP for a straight grade between the two. This is easily altered if desired.

I then added BasicLaneTransition subassemblies the 2 partial assemblies. The width & slope do not matter since I set the transition toggle to "Change ofset and Elevation". Next up I added an alignment, using the TIN lines of the surface, along the assumed EOP, and created a profile of the EG from the surface (I didn't need to see this so I didn't add a ProfileView). I also made sure all of the Daylight slopes used the same params.

Finally I edited the Corridor properties. First I edited the Bulb region to set the targets for the LaneTransition to the FG-Crown alignment & Profile. For the 2 curb returns I Split them, using the intersection of the EOP alignment with the FG(1) alignment as the split point (you cannot snap to this, so a zoomed in eyeball pick works for this). Now I set the targets for first region of each return to be the EOP alignment & EG profile, for the second region of each I used my FG(1) alignment and FG profile as the targets. Lastly I used the Set All Targets to set the EG as the target for the daylights. Note that the ditches are funky at the curb returns, this comes from those portions being in a Fill condition,m whereas the remainder of the corridor is in Cut. ALso note that the daylighs fail at the end of the cul-de-sac due to the surface not completely covering this area.

There are other ways, I'm sure, to do this, but this is pretty much what I've used for some time now. One thing I would like to mention, and others may have something to say about this, too, is that ALL of my curb returns I define in the same direction. IOW, all curves curve to the right. The begin & end stations do not matter, but it allows me to use just 1 Assembly (aptly named Base Curb Return) for all of my returns.

I hope this helps to clarify things. If you still get stuck & you'd like to use the drawing, just say so & I will post it.

[mjfarrell]

I suggest that users not create ALL curb return alignments in a single direction. The method I employ is to create those alignments in what ever is the natural direction of the baseline alignment. As the process of adding baselines and regions, etc is still a fundamental process that will be required in other areas of various corridors there is no sound reason to avoid doing so for these features. Yes, this requires a user to create a Right and Left Assembly for the purpose, this too is a fundamental skill the user will need to acquire and to some degree easier to learn and use than to 'remember' to draw all returns in a single direction, and the names of the assemblies let the user know to use the Return Left, on the anticlockwise returns, and the Right Return assembly when the returns, knuckles, or bulbs turn to the right. (Notice: even autodesk placed a right and left return assembly on the default tool palette in 2009 for this very reason)

You might have also pointed out to the user that you increased the sample frequencies in all those regions to some short distance to get all those projection lines. And the reason that you DID NOT use the 'superimposed' profile as your target in the corridor model is that quite often it FAILS to work correctly; thus you essentially 'traced' over it to create a profile by layout to prevent this failure in C3D from being an issue. Additionally you did this to cover the fact that the superimposed profile is NOT and exact representation of the profile you used to create it from, due to it being created as just a bunch of segments depending on the accuracy settings one employs when creating it.


For grins Jeff, when one creates this 'fictional' crown alignment in this manner the corridor will work nearly as well using an assembly with offsets within that Bulb, and at the curb returns. Give that method a try and see how you like it. (Yes I know there are a couple additional targets to set that way) and right at the very end of the bulb the model gets a little weird using this method. This is due to autodesk NOT allowing us to actually use the offset alignment stations to control the offset group stationing within the corridor, a function sorely lacking. IMO

[Jeff_M]

I suggest that users not create ALL curb return alignments in a single direction. The method I employ is to create those alignments in what ever is the natural direction of the baseline alignment.

As I said, there are other ways to do this. I've tried numerous methods and found I prefer the "all CR's in the same direction with 1 Assembly" method.

You might have also pointed out to the user that you increased the sample frequencies in all those regions to some short distance to get all those projection lines.

Why would I say this when I didn't change any Frequency settings. Those you see are the same as the drawing Kathy posted.....

And the reason that you DID NOT use the 'superimposed' profile as your target in the corridor model is that quite often it FAILS to work correctly; thus you essentially 'traced' over it to create a profile by layout to prevent this failure in C3D from being an issue. Additionally you did this to cover the fact that the superimposed profile is NOT and exact representation of the profile you used to create it from, due to it being created as just a bunch of segments depending on the accuracy settings one employs when creating it.

Actually, the only purpose for the superimposed profile was to easily get the elevations at the BC & RP from the original profile. I could have gotten these a number of other ways, too. The crown in the bulb is the only place I used this crown FG as a target...I kept the original FG as the target elsewhere.

For grins Jeff, when one creates this 'fictional' crown alignment in this manner the corridor will work nearly as well using an assembly with offsets within that Bulb, and at the curb returns. Give that method a try and see how you like it. (Yes I know there are a couple additional targets to set that way) and right at the very end of the bulb the model gets a little weird using this method. This is due to autodesk NOT allowing us to actually use the offset alignment stations to control the offset group stationing within the corridor, a function sorely lacking. IMO

I use offsets for knuckles. I once tried them for a bulb and did not like the results what-so-ever. I WILL admit that I haven't done too much with c-d-s's (5 or 6) due to the local gov't agency determining that they are banned in any new development. They tend to "impede the flow of pedestrian traffic which leads to more vehicular traffic". 

[mjfarrell]

Just explaining the loginc behind doing this another way, as you say there are many, only in reality there are not that many ways with C3D's tool set.

It appeared that you had, as I did not really make a note of the sampling frequency, only the source of the users confusion within that particular corridor.

Merely pointing out a weakness of the superimposed profile tool. You will also discover that at times it does not project correctly into the destination profile views, often coming up short and being of little use.


As stated your bulb results were poor (or not to your liking) at the ends due to autodesk NOT allowing the user to actually use the offset alignment's stationing withing the corridor.

You need not defend your methods, as you said there are many, and I was offering an alternate. And in no way implied that yours was in error, flawed, or otherwise inadequate.   

[KATHYC]

Thank you for all your help.  I have worked through the intersection successfully.  As for the bulb, I have tried two alignments and it gave me a bowtie at the curve to the RP.  I then made 3 alignments around the bulb  ( I know overkill)  and it gave me a gap at the curve to the RP.  I know have tried one alignment and there is places that the asphalt is running over to the face of curb.  There is also extra triangulation at the curve going to the RP and an area at the lip of the gutter.  Can someone explain why this could be happening?  Thanks

[mjfarrell]

It appears some of your targeting, and or assembly construction assignments (left, for right) are twisted, so check your targeting carefully.

It is highly suggested you name them Target Me to this alignment and that profile, and to name your groups within the assembly so you know if you are Right or Left. And if you are left when you need to be right; well that would be wrong. Also some times I name stuff with no target, Target me Not, so I know to leave them alone.  Some might suggest this is over kill, however I am a human and can only really keep so much in my brain and the more complicated your corridor assembly usage becomes the more relevant good component naming plays in good corridor modeling practices.

[mjfarrell]

I have seen the file in question.  So very close!  After the repairs are made me thinks this kat will be well on her way to making some mighty fine corridor models!