Topic: split profile view elevation range

[reno]

It's like the Automatic part of SplitProfiles only recognizes Dynamic profiles.

jeff,

in the profile view properties, on the profiles tab, you can choose which profile the splits will be calculated for.

[drizzt]

once I get my culverts designed, and redo the sheet set, I will try this.

[mjfarrell]

once I get my culverts designed, and redo the sheet set, I will try this.

I'm almost sure that part isn't going to solve the issue you have with the datum not being low enough...
getting the pipes into the parent profiles however will.

[drizzt]

cool, cause that is what I am doing first

[Jeff_M]

It's like the Automatic part of SplitProfiles only recognizes Dynamic profiles.

jeff,

in the profile view properties, on the profiles tab, you can choose which profile the splits will be calculated for.

Ah Ha! The things that get glossed over when one doesn't need them sometimes are the most obvious. Thanks!

[mjfarrell]

It's like the Automatic part of SplitProfiles only recognizes Dynamic profiles.

jeff,

in the profile view properties, on the profiles tab, you can choose which profile the splits will be calculated for.

Ah Ha! The things that get glossed over when one doesn't need them sometimes are the most obvious. Thanks!

And hidden right there in the tutorial of all places, right?   

[Jeff_M]

Thanks, Michael. As I said, I don't use SplitPV's so it hasn't been on my radar to learn or figure out. But while I'm learning so much today, I still haven't seen why using a homemade PV style vs a stock style helps any of this.

[mjfarrell]

Thanks, Michael. As I said, I don't use SplitPV's so it hasn't been on my radar to learn or figure out. But while I'm learning so much today, I still haven't seen why using a homemade PV style vs a stock style helps any of this.

As stated, some of the stock profile views are set in such a fashion...that they are NOT dynamic, with regards changes to the PGL. And when one drags any design element BELOW the calculated datum the grid does not adjust and the design element line is CHOPPED OFF.
Monkeying around with changing the setting from USER specified to Automatic...sometimes cures this, other times not.
As such I advise against using the stock profile view styles.  That being said, having encountered this undesirable behavior since the initial beta release, I can honestly say I have not tested to see if this is resolved in 2010/2011; although I'm a little skeptical that it has.  because I'm certain that Adesk would consider this behavior 'as designed' and not as a flaw or defect so most likely would not have altered their functionality.

Aditionaly I have found that by not using any of the stock styles for anything, one learns C3D faster, and has a deeper understanding of how and why things work, or not by setting up all styles from scratch.  As they say YMMV.

[drizzt]

I'm going to pay attention to that on the next go around!

[mjfarrell]

NOTE:  The undesired effect occurs with the parent profile, not provile view splits as in theory one would never be dragging vertical alignment elements around in them.

[drizzt]

nothing seems to work, so, I drew in a profile line below where I wanted the grid to clip at. I chose to clip the grid there, but not to draw it in the sheets......


nope... no dice

I am just going to go with the grid as is and drag the labels

[drizzt]

ok, you have to draw the profile drawn for grid clip only when creating the sheets, but then turn it off in the sheet set

[mjfarrell]

ok, you have to draw the profile drawn for grid clip only when creating the sheets, but then turn it off in the sheet set

NO, you need to STOP using the Adesk supplied profile view styles, as indicated in several of my responses regarding this issue.

[drizzt]

I tried to create my own from scatch. It did not work!

[mjfarrell]

I tried to create my own from scatch. It did not work!

Did you do it my way?

If Yes, did you apply said style to ALL Profile Views?

Or just whatever seemed to be the way? 

As I said...Intuitive as an Anvil; No?