Topic: I need help - Editing a Field Book

[MSTG007]

I forgot how to edit the fieldbook file... lol
How do I know when lines close, etc.

here is my example: TXT file

102,1701702.548,221627.808,809.400,nail
1001,1701053.029,221699.770,807.786,cbs
1002,1701004.656,221646.074,809.265,b ec ep
1003,1701047.859,221646.181,809.239,ec ep
1004,1701099.838,221646.492,809.121,e ec ep
1005,1701099.611,221646.849,809.175,b gut
1006,1701099.599,221647.981,809.557,b bc rolled 6in
1007,1701099.572,221647.873,809.451,c3 bc rolled 6in
1008,1701081.238,221656.867,809.369,bc rolled 6in
1009,1701076.202,221671.947,809.142,bc rolled 6in
1010,1701096.802,221647.093,809.088,c3 gut
1011,1701080.469,221655.489,808.868,gut
1012,1701074.821,221672.113,808.696,gut
1013,1701075.103,221672.271,808.764,c3 gut
1014,1701079.574,221683.203,808.696,gut
1015,1701085.746,221687.902,808.462,gut
1016,1701076.768,221675.505,809.270,c3 bc rolled 6in
1017,1701081.019,221683.052,809.082,bc rolled 6in
1018,1701086.060,221685.824,808.957,bc rolled 6in
1019,1701138.075,221686.978,809.458,bc rolled 6in
1020,1701138.183,221687.869,808.979,gut
1021,1701150.129,221687.968,809.052,gut
1022,1701150.089,221687.281,809.485,bc rolled 6in
1023,1701198.153,221687.365,809.264,bc rolled 6in
1024,1701198.109,221688.115,808.943,gut
1025,1701255.738,221688.898,808.531,gut
1026,1701255.775,221687.971,809.012,bc rolled 6in
1027,1701306.374,221688.161,808.503,bc rolled 6in
1028,1701306.453,221688.957,808.040,gut
1029,1701336.050,221689.273,807.822,e gut
1030,1701336.295,221688.288,808.316,e bc rolled 6in
1031,1701328.553,221701.962,807.483,bore
1032,1701344.877,221713.898,807.612,b gut
1033,1701343.783,221715.040,808.163,b bc rolled 6in
1034,1701343.897,221715.152,808.194,c3 bc rolled 6in
1035,1701340.256,221715.251,808.217,bc rolled 6in
1036,1701337.606,221719.080,808.311,bc rolled 6in
1037,1701343.823,221714.271,807.783,c3 gut
1038,1701339.164,221715.012,807.815,gut
1039,1701336.597,221719.729,807.940,gut
1040,1701336.640,221733.196,808.165,e gut
1041,1701337.754,221733.464,808.642,e bc rolled 6in
1042,1701336.999,221733.421,808.147,b gut
1043,1701337.802,221733.496,808.601,b fc
1044,1701337.793,221733.903,808.687,b bc
1045,1701337.491,221738.116,808.578,b bw
1046,1701301.909,221738.110,808.812,bw
1047,1701310.289,221758.860,808.763,bw
1048,1701308.553,221760.325,809.661,re tennis court
1049,1701306.359,221760.407,810.005,bw
1050,1701297.153,221738.008,808.785,bw
1051,1701295.415,221734.081,808.827,bc
1052,1701295.053,221733.796,808.890,fc
1053,1701294.912,221733.556,808.391,gut
1054,1701265.951,221733.365,808.672,gut
1055,1701266.051,221733.488,809.038,fc
1056,1701265.168,221734.046,809.085,bc
1057,1701261.067,221737.755,809.171,bw
1058,1701261.129,221718.135,809.403,bw
1059,1701265.172,221718.328,808.903,c3 bc
1060,1701264.158,221715.391,808.806,bc
1061,1701261.217,221713.986,809.083,bc
1062,1701265.588,221718.121,809.037,c3 fc

now my fbk file
NE SS 13 1700772.77100 222379.17800 812.27700 "cp nail"
NE SS 14 1700893.29200 222144.48800 811.35000 "cp nail"
NE SS 15 1700416.37500 222188.08900 810.34900 "cp nail"
NE SS 16 1700146.63900 222037.95300 811.24600 "cp nail"
NE SS 17 1699835.88100 221726.43400 811.83900 "cp nail"
NE SS 18 1700068.17600 221811.72300 811.25700 "cp x"
NE SS 19 1701006.41300 222042.90200 810.48700 "cp pk"
NE SS 102 1701702.54800 221627.80800 809.40000 "nail"
NE SS 1001 1701053.02900 221699.77000 807.78600 "cbs"
BEG ec
NE SS 1002 1701004.65600 221646.07400 809.26500 "ep"
CONT ec
NE SS 1003 1701047.85900 221646.18100 809.23900 "ec ep"
CONT ec
NE SS 1004 1701099.83800 221646.49200 809.12100 "ep"
END ec
BEG gut
NE SS 1005 1701099.61100 221646.84900 809.17500 "gut"
BEG bc
END
END
NE SS 1006 1701099.59900 221647.98100 809.55700 "6in"
CONT bc
C3
NE SS 1007 1701099.57200 221647.87300 809.45100 "6in"
CONT bc
NE SS 1008 1701081.23800 221656.86700 809.36900 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT bc
NE SS 1009 1701076.20200 221671.94700 809.14200 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT gut
C3
NE SS 1010 1701096.80200 221647.09300 809.08800 "gut"
NE SS 1011 1701080.46900 221655.48900 808.86800 "gut"
NE SS 1012 1701074.82100 221672.11300 808.69600 "gut"
CONT gut
C3
NE SS 1013 1701075.10300 221672.27100 808.76400 "gut"
NE SS 1014 1701079.57400 221683.20300 808.69600 "gut"
NE SS 1015 1701085.74600 221687.90200 808.46200 "gut"
CONT bc
C3
END
END
NE SS 1016 1701076.76800 221675.50500 809.27000 "6in"
CONT bc
NE SS 1017 1701081.01900 221683.05200 809.08200 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT bc
NE SS 1018 1701086.06000 221685.82400 808.95700 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT bc
NE SS 1019 1701138.07500 221686.97800 809.45800 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT gut
NE SS 1020 1701138.18300 221687.86900 808.97900 "gut"
NE SS 1021 1701150.12900 221687.96800 809.05200 "gut"
CONT bc
END
END
NE SS 1022 1701150.08900 221687.28100 809.48500 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT bc
NE SS 1023 1701198.15300 221687.36500 809.26400 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT gut
NE SS 1024 1701198.10900 221688.11500 808.94300 "gut"
NE SS 1025 1701255.73800 221688.89800 808.53100 "gut"
CONT bc
END
END
NE SS 1026 1701255.77500 221687.97100 809.01200 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT bc
NE SS 1027 1701306.37400 221688.16100 808.50300 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT gut
NE SS 1028 1701306.45300 221688.95700 808.04000 "gut"
NE SS 1029 1701336.05000 221689.27300 807.82200 "gut"
END gut
END
END
NE SS 1030 1701336.29500 221688.28800 808.31600 "6in"
END bc
NE SS 1031 1701328.55300 221701.96200 807.48300 "bore"
BEG gut
NE SS 1032 1701344.87700 221713.89800 807.61200 "gut"
BEG bc
END
END
NE SS 1033 1701343.78300 221715.04000 808.16300 "6in"
CONT bc
C3
NE SS 1034 1701343.89700 221715.15200 808.19400 "6in"
CONT bc
NE SS 1035 1701340.25600 221715.25100 808.21700 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT bc
NE SS 1036 1701337.60600 221719.08000 808.31100 "bc rolled 6in"
CONT bc
CONT gut
C3
NE SS 1037 1701343.82300 221714.27100 807.78300 "gut"
NE SS 1038 1701339.16400 221715.01200 807.81500 "gut"
NE SS 1039 1701336.59700 221719.72900 807.94000 "gut"
NE SS 1040 1701336.64000 221733.19600 808.16500 "gut"
END gut
END
END
NE SS 1041 1701337.75400 221733.46400 808.64200 "6in"
END bc
BEG gut
NE SS 1042 1701336.99900 221733.42100 808.14700 "gut"
BEG fc
NE SS 1043 1701337.80200 221733.49600 808.60100 "fc"

thanks for the help!

[Dent Cermak]

One thing to look at is that the software automatically adds a begin when you add a different descriptor code. In your first 3 shots you got messed up because you have "ep" and "ec ep". It's now created 2 entities. The first 3 entries all should have had descriptors as "ep" only. You can tie your concrete line to this point later using a RECALL. Another thing to look at is when you get 2 "END" entries. That's telling you that the computer is confused. Look at  the file as begin means "pencil down" and end means "pencil up". That may help you fix things.
This reflects some of the problems inherent in running your shots "cross section style". I've been running these files since 1988 and my company has learned that it is better to run the features as linear strings rather than cross section style. All of the time you save in the field can easily be lost in the office editing these file and then adjusting the drawing. We have a few crews that can track things cross section style, but the newer crews do much better running the lines linearly. Up one edge of the asp, back down the centerline, back up the other edge of asphalt, etc. No EA1 and EA2 to mess with. (This is often referred to as a form of the KISS System ("keep it simple stupid").) Any field system needs to be as simple and bullet proof as possible.

[mjfarrell]

you might want to bring it in as a 'batch' file, and then you can step through each entry mnaking note of where you need to end the figures, or one can make a best guess...

[MSTG007]

Ok... Then I guess I will forward this over to my field crew person. As for the above code. I will print it out and start writing it up! Lets see how I do

[mjfarrell]

Point of contention, one need NOT survey in a linear fashion, should one master the art of line coding.
It takes a little practice, and observation as to what you enter, and how, and the results one produces.
Then one need not walk up and down the road unless one wants all that extra exercise or time in the (sun, wind, cold, humidity).

If one spends the time to become proficient with line coding the time saved both in the office and the field yields huge returns.

I am always happy to spend the time with your crews to make sure they understand the process.

[MSTG007]

I know you are. And I appreciate that you are will too as well.

My field crew dude has a question for you guys.

What other commands can he use with Civil 3D 2009 besides the (B, C3, E)?

Also, like "RECALL". How do you put that in the topcon data collector?
You can see how they place the codes in the txt file above. Is it as simple as RECALL 100, then take a shot and you are done?

[MSTG007]

Oh by the way, my field guy is lazy too. He rides the Quad and has a bracket he puts the rod on.
Seems Smart to me!

[sinc]

There is a complete list in the help.  Sometimes it's easier to find if you search for something like BEG C3, which should turn up the "Figure Commands" page pretty fast.  It's usually pretty hard to find if you search for something like "Figure Commands".

Our field guys have pretty much completely stopped using the C3 command in favor of multicurves, now that they fixed the problems with them.  I don't think the multicurve commands work properly in C3D 2008 and earlier (they give bad vertical data) - at least, I believe they did not fix this issue until C3D 2009.  It gets hard to keep track of all the bugs.

[mjfarrell]

the multi curve command seemed to yield a very differrent curve than one shot with the C3 function, you might want to test them again.

the broad list is....here; however NOTE not all survey command window commands translate into useable line codes. (go figure)


The following table lists the figure-related AutoCAD Civil 3D survey commands and briefly describes their functionality.

NoteThese commands must be entered in the Survey Command Window. For more information, see Survey Command Window.
Command
 Description
 
AREA [figure] Lists the area and perimeter of a figure.
BEG [figure] Begins a new figure.
C3 Draws a 3-point curve.
CLOSE Closes a figure.
CLOSE BLD Closes a figure
CLOSE RECT [offset] Closes a figure
CONT [figure] Continues a figure to add additional vertices to it.
CRV [DELTA, LENGTH, DEFL, MID, TAN, CHORD] [radius] [value] Creates a curve in the current figure.
DEL FIG [figure] Deletes a figure from the drawing.
DISP FIGS Lists all the existing figure names in the current drawing.
END Indicates the end of a figure.
FIG AD [angle] [distance] Creates a figure vertex using an angle and distance.
FIG DD [deflection] [distance] Creates a figure vertex using a deflection angle and distance.
FIG ZD [azimuth] [distance] Creates a figure vertex using an azimuth and distance.
FIG BD [bearing] [quadrant] [distance] Creating a figure vertex using a bearing and distance.
FIG NE [northing] [easting] Creates a figure vertex using known coordinates.
ID FIG Identifies a figure.
INVERSE FIG [figure] Displays the exact closure (inverse) information for a figure.
MCS Starts a multi-point curve within an active figure.
MCE Ends a multi-point curve within an active figure.
MAPCHECK [figure] Displays mapcheck information for a figure.
OFFSET [figure] [distance] Offsets a figure.
PC Specifies that the next shot is a point of curvature.
POINT [point] Selects an existing point to be the next vertex in the figure.
RT [distance] Defines a right turn in a figure.
SET (point) Creates a point at the current location in a figure.
START [figure] Extends a figure from the start point.
XC ZD (BULB) [radius] [chord azimuth] [chord distance] Creates a curve using the chord azimuth.
XC BD (BULB) [radius] [chord bearing] [quadrant] [chord distance] Creates a curve using the chord bearing.
XC AD (BULB) [radius] [chord angle] [chord distance] Creates a non-tangential curve.
XC DD (BULB) [radius] [chord deflection] [chord distance] Creates a curve using the chord deflection.
XC C3 [point on curve] [end point] Creates a curve using a point on the curve.
XC PTS [radius] [radius point] [end point] Creates the curve radius.

[sinc]

We've been using multicurves a lot lately.  They work fine in C3D 2009, but they were out to lunch in earlier versions.

[therock003]

What's the use of fieldbooks anyway? Isnt one supposed to export cordinates or dxf files from the instrument? How do fieldbooks work?

[MSTG007]

we use a topcon fc-2000. We just do the normal stuff that you see above.
StartSurveyLink and convert from a TXT to a FBK. Then Import!

[mjfarrell]

What's the use of fieldbooks anyway? Isnt one supposed to export cordinates or dxf files from the instrument? How do fieldbooks work?

The beauty and power of the FBK is that when properly done, it adds productivity and accuracy to ones survey drawings.
The lines that represent physical features on the ground, are drawn automatically, and later added directly to the terrain model.

The lines are being described by the surveyor whom actually sees the site, not some technician attempting to play 'connect the dots' attempting to decipher point descriptions without aid of a field sketch.

When I taught this in the Spring session at Southeast Technical Institute the Survey instructor at the school, completely revised his curricula for all future classes to maximize the use and instruction in proper use of line coding in the field.  Let's just say it was a paradigm shifting experience for most that attended!

[sinc]

What's the use of fieldbooks anyway? Isnt one supposed to export cordinates or dxf files from the instrument? How do fieldbooks work?

The beauty and power of the FBK is that when properly done, it adds productivity and accuracy to ones survey drawings.
The lines that represent physical features on the ground, are drawn automatically, and later added directly to the terrain model.

Really, that's the beauty and power of a Field-to-Finish solution.  The FBK counts as an F2F solution, but in comparison with other such solutions, it's rather weak.  Things have gotten better in C3D 2010, where we no longer need to use the clunky FBK format for F2F.

[mjfarrell]

I was trying to stay positive....

[MSTG007]

So what is new in Civil 3D 2010 for coding? What makes it easier?
Is there away you can import the TXT files or CR5 type files from your data collector and it draws it?

[therock003]

More importantly, why not finish the drawing in the field software and export it directly as a dxf. They seem to have all the necessary tools. TopSURV can even export to civil 3d directly, other can export landxml format.

So how could .FBK benefit F2F when taking the above factors into account?

[Jeff_M]

TopSURV SAYS it can export direct to C3D. Yet, when I've had C3D2007, C3D2008, C3d2009, & now C3D2010 all I get when I use that function is: "Civil3D is not installed, aborting..." Yes, I filed a bug report, no, I never heard from them about it.

A dxf from the collector/survey software is just dumb lines & text. Using a FBK to bring the data into C3D creates "smart" C3D objects.

[sinc]

The big reason we don't do F2F in our data collectors is that they are too old, and do not have that capability.  Eventually, we'll upgrade, but that isn't in the cards for the immediate future.

As far as creating everything in the data collector, I've heard varying feedback on that route.  We haven't tried it yet ourselves, though, so I can't give a first-hand account.  I haven't really noticed much benefit of having "smart" 3D objects from field data import - actually, that creates problems.  So we don't care so much about that, except for the aspect of adding breaklines to surfaces easily (something that is easy in C3D, as long as you only work with one surface per Survey Database).

The big complaint I've heard of the F2F solutions is that, when the guy in the field is trying to create what is essentially your final linework, it takes more time.  I can't corroborate that from first-hand experience, though.  But even if it takes only an extra half-hour for the field guy to complete an 8 hour survey, then it isn't worth it for us.

Say we send a field guy out and he spends 8 hours doing a topo survey.  With C3D and its linework coding, when everything is working and the field guy knows what he is doing, we typically have complete linework inside of C3D, along with a fully-built surface, in 15-30 minutes.  When everything is EXACTLY right, we have it within 5 minutes.

We've heard from multiple sources that, when the guy in the field tries to create these complete drawings, it ends up slowing the field work by a good chunk.  And if it takes a field guy 9 hours to do that Survey complete with linework drawn in the data collector, it already doesn't make sense, because with C3D and fieldbook coding we can do the same thing in 8 hours of field time + 30 minutes max of office time.  Actually, even if the field guy takes EXACTLY the same amount of time, and can complete that survey in 8 hours complete with linework with no office time, it is still a borderline call.  We would have to buy new data collectors and software, and train the field guy to use the new stuff...  All to cut out that 5 to 30 minutes of office time per job.  That's a tight call...  Is that really enough savings to justify the expense?

I should stress again that we haven't actually tried one of these F2F solutions.  I'm open to arguments, though, because we'll be hitting the point soon where we'll want to upgrade, and we're interested in the solution that works best overall, in real-world usage in real survey firms.  We are not locked in to any one thing.  But our current solution leverages the strengths of both our office and field personnel, and works quite well.

It could also be one of those things where the ideal solution varies.  I've heard that some one-man shops really like the complete solutions that do F2F in the data collectors, because it's the same guy doing all the work in either case.  Don't really know myself...

[therock003]

Well i'm not a guru myself obviously but since i've been aiming to get a Data Collector i've been running DC software demos for the past couple of weeks, and the software they're running seems pretty straight forward and automated.

They include code lists and feature attributed, and even layers with pre-determined properties.

You can set linework by selecting which point to connect and stuff like that.

So I'm really wondering how can a fieldbook top that?

Before deciding to upgrade just sign-up to the companies pages (Trimble/Topcon/Microsurvey/Carlson) and you can try the PC demo versions of data collectors and make up your mind.

I'm not saying they're better than fieldbook (since of course i dont really know what a fieldbook is all about), but they seem pretty damn good.

If you dont mind me asking, what would you like from a field software?

A dxf from the collector/survey software is just dumb lines & text. Using a FBK to bring the data into C3D creates "smart" C3D objects.

Well not really, you can assign layers with specific properties to each object, you can even create figure is some of them i think.

-Do you mean that with FBK you can create directly AECC objects?

[Dent Cermak]

Check out the Carlson products for you field use.
A DXF file does not compare, in any way, to a DWG file. DXF should have died long ago.
Our crews are doing the line work in the field and, now that they know how to do it, the process takes no longer than before. Matter of fact, over all, it takes a little less time. Drawing as they shoot cuts WAY down on bad shots and bad back sight entries.
Hooking up the underground and overhead utilities is MUCH faster and easier now.
The "lost time" is during the learning curve. The idea is to get every thing setup and train the crews how to use it.
If you are just goint to hand them the software and tell them to go at it, it will never work.

[mjfarrell]

Dent, 

I concur as you know I support training, and continuing education practices.

[therock003]

I pretty much enjoy education and learning new practice, but bottom line is the use of fieldbook files something that the modern man needs to be concerned about?

What are the better alternatives that C3D and other equivalents have to offer?

[sinc]

Well, for the "better" alternative in C3D, you have the new linework codesets in 2010.  I believe the FBK import has mostly gone away, unless you are trying to use the Survey Database and Survey Networks in C3D.  For a variety of reasons, we ignore these, and do various processing in other software, rather than in C3D's Survey Database.  So starting with 2010, we should ostensibly be able to drop the nasty FBK entirely.  (We're still using 2009, though, so we still convert our survey data from CSV format to a FBK file, which we dump into C3D, in order to get the linework drawn.)

There are also solutions such as CadApps' Stringer and Dotsoft's Mapworks, which are still more-flexible than C3D 2010's linework features.  (It's great to finally see some improvement in this area in C3D, but Autodesk still has a ways to go to match the features in other existing products.)

With F2F solutions in the data collector, you basically create the drawing in the field, using your data collector.  So there should be no real need for a FBK.  The question we have is whether it is more efficient for a field guy to create a full drawing in the field, or for a field guy to use linework codes that are then processed in the office.  If creating the drawing adds any more time at all to the field guy's time in the field, then it is probably not really worth it.  That's what we've heard from several sources - that trying to get the field guys to do a complete drawing in the field slows them down, and net result is a solution that is not as efficient as the one we are already using.  So far, Dent is the only one (outside of salesmen) I've heard give a contrary opinion.  And we haven't yet tried such a solution ourselves - our current hardware is not capable of it, and since we currently do not have the budget to replace our data collectors, we haven't yet been trying any demos of newer hardware.

Dent, didn't you also say your field guys are actually using laptops, and not the more-traditional data collectors?

[Dent Cermak]

Combination of the two systems, notebook computers and the Carlson data collectors. Both run the same software F2F set up files. The advantage of the notebook computers is a larger screen area, but both have graphics capabilities.
We use the Carlson Field 2007 software in the handhelds and Carlson Survey 2009 in the notebooks.
The office will soon be running the Carlson Survey 2009 with embeded AutoCad.
The overall costs of the Civil3D package is not justifiable for a purely survey company.
I will be able to get a purely Survey package with a whale of a lot more tools PLUS training for the users for about 1/3 the cost per seat of Civil 3D.  Plus the ease of setup of the F2F files which are much more robust. The descriptor keys AND the linework codes AND the Point Groups are ALL set up in one file. Once you get used to it, it appears to be a better and easier system.