Topic: civil 3d: swapping parts not updating in data shortcuts

[alanjt]

http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/autocad-civil-3d-general/part-swapping-pipe-network-not-showing-correctly-in-data/m-p/3702746#M189479

Just stumbled across this. This has to be the dumbest bit of information I've ever read. I can't believe this is how pipe networks are designed.

Pipe networks (NOT WORKS)  are such a terrible attempt , and largely abandoned in place (my opinion) by autodesk.
The programmers should hang themselves in shame.

This goes towards my frustration that they are now investing so much energy into INFRAWORKS instead of fixing the 'design' tool we all already own.
Given that INFRAWORKS is or was initially released as "A visualization tool", NOT a design tool.
And now they want to somehow shoehorn a bunch of 'design' tools into it, at the expense of fixing the broken mess that is pipes of any nature inside Civil 3d.

I would have argued with you until this headache. So much time wasted on this endeavor.

[Jeff_M]

So much time wasted on this endeavor.

Have you submitted a support request with Autodesk? I encourage you to do so, if not. They only know we, as end users, need something different than what they've programmed if they are told about it. And the more that report the same thing, the better chance we have of getting it fixed. Follow it up with emails to the support crew (look on the Infrastructure blog for their email addresses), possibly even to the Product Manager. Join the Beta team where the developers DO look at the forum posts.

And, yes, they ARE still developing and working on Civil3D. I was asked a number of times at AU what I thought could be added/changed to the API for programmers. I know there were some roundtable discussions to get input from end users as well (of which I only attended one due to other commitments).

[mjfarrell]

So much time wasted on this endeavor.

Have you submitted a support request with Autodesk? I encourage you to do so, if not. They only know we, as end users, need something different than what they've programmed if they are told about it. And the more that report the same thing, the better chance we have of getting it fixed. Follow it up with emails to the support crew (look on the Infrastructure blog for their email addresses), possibly even to the Product Manager. Join the Beta team where the developers DO look at the forum posts.

And, yes, they ARE still developing and working on Civil3D. I was asked a number of times at AU what I thought could be added/changed to the API for programmers. I know there were some roundtable discussions to get input from end users as well (of which I only attended one due to other commitments).

Jeff,  sorry but most of the beta stuff at present is ALL about INFRAWORKS, unless I'm reading the page totally wrong.

The API is great for developers, however core functionality and improvements to same seem to be no where on anyone's agenda.

Does anyone really think that they are not aware of the serious mess that pipes and part builder really are at this stage of the game?   Really? 

[Jeff_M]

Jeff,  sorry but most of the beta stuff at present is ALL about INFRAWORKS, unless I'm reading the page totally wrong.

The API is great for developers, however core functionality and improvements to same seem to be no where on anyone's agenda.

Does anyone really think that they are not aware of the serious mess that pipes and part builder really are at this stage of the game?   Really? 

I am a member of the Beta group. I do NOT use, test, or even look at anything that has to do with Infraworks. I am ONLY interested in Civil3D, so I'm thinking you are either reading the page wrong or not on the right one.

"Serious mess", really? I use the Pipe Networks (NOT Pressure pipes yet) with very few issues. Granted, I don't use the SSA tool so not sure how bad that back and forth trip is. I also rarely need to swap parts after creating sheets so had never noticed the issue Alan brought to light. AFAIC, this "mess" is far better than what I was using prior to C3D (LDT). Sure, there are some things I've learned to workaround. There are others that I wrote new commands to handle (PipeElevationEditor and SPAddPipesByPolyline in Sincpac, for two). And there are others that could/should be better/fixed. But I'm still far more productive with this mess than I would be without it at all.

[mjfarrell]

Jeff,  sorry but most of the beta stuff at present is ALL about INFRAWORKS, unless I'm reading the page totally wrong.

The API is great for developers, however core functionality and improvements to same seem to be no where on anyone's agenda.

Does anyone really think that they are not aware of the serious mess that pipes and part builder really are at this stage of the game?   Really? 

I am a member of the Beta group. I do NOT use, test, or even look at anything that has to do with Infraworks. I am ONLY interested in Civil3D, so I'm thinking you are either reading the page wrong or not on the right one.

"Serious mess", really? I use the Pipe Networks (NOT Pressure pipes yet) with very few issues. Granted, I don't use the SSA tool so not sure how bad that back and forth trip is. I also rarely need to swap parts after creating sheets so had never noticed the issue Alan brought to light. AFAIC, this "mess" is far better than what I was using prior to C3D (LDT). Sure, there are some things I've learned to workaround. There are others that I wrote new commands to handle (PipeElevationEditor and SPAddPipesByPolyline in Sincpac, for two). And there are others that could/should be better/fixed. But I'm still far more productive with this mess than I would be without it at all.

An obvious statement, any tool is better than none.
However a tool that is at best a 40% 'solution' this far into a products' life cycle is abysmal to me.
The pipes in Land desk top were better than civil 3d in that structure inverts would attach to the bottom of the structure without playing games in the label composer to force them. Further elevation editing and or maintaining slope across the network was so easy one need do nothing more than lower the start or end pipe in the run, and
ALL other pipes and structures would adjust.  But try lowering a pipe in C3D, and notice all other pipes just sit there like nothing ever happened.

The round trip into and out of SSA is so very poor, little if any information assigned within C3D makes the trip into SSA, and the same is true with information assigned in SSA making the trip back into C3D.  Also no real integration, so IF one edits the network another trip must be made because the network model is not linked to SSA in any
way.

And I wont even start on the poor implementation of Part Builder, largely unimproved since its initial release.

And pressure pipes are useless as a design tool as NO analysis of the network can be performed, i.e., they are little better than just drawing with polylines.
Because there are no analysis tools.  The part creator is far better, however add in no support for exporting pressure networks via LandXML those pipes are largely a dead end.


And please point me to any Civil 3D beta projects by title (that are not 'programming' related) and I'll see if I can find them.

[alanjt]

So much time wasted on this endeavor.

Have you submitted a support request with Autodesk? I encourage you to do so, if not. They only know we, as end users, need something different than what they've programmed if they are told about it. And the more that report the same thing, the better chance we have of getting it fixed. Follow it up with emails to the support crew (look on the Infrastructure blog for their email addresses), possibly even to the Product Manager. Join the Beta team where the developers DO look at the forum posts.

And, yes, they ARE still developing and working on Civil3D. I was asked a number of times at AU what I thought could be added/changed to the API for programmers. I know there were some roundtable discussions to get input from end users as well (of which I only attended one due to other commitments).

I have not. How can I do this?

[Jeff_M]

Submit a support case through the Subscription Center, if you are on subscription.
If not on subscription, use the Product Feedback form.
To request to be placed on the Beta team via email: civil3d.futures@autodesk.com

[alanjt]

Submit a support case through the Subscription Center, if you are on subscription.
If not on subscription, use the Product Feedback form.
To request to be placed on the Beta team via email: civil3d.futures@autodesk.com

I am on subscription. I'll do both first thing in the morning. Thank you, Jeff.

Out of curiosity, what is your method for pipe networks?

1. How do you display plan?
2. How do you deal with needing them in separate files (plan/profile, etc.)?
3. Having them in the base file and xrefing in and labeling would be perfect if it wasn't for the fact that I've encountered issues where profiles will not load on open if you have the pipe network(s) xrefed and drefed in (xrefed because they're in the base file and drefed in because you have to have them in the drawing to cut profiles.

For small jobs, I've been fine with just creating my profiles & cross sections in the same drawing as my pipe networks, so I never have a need to dref them, but with very large jobs where I have 100+ sheets, creating all profiles and cross sections in the same drawing, in addition to pipes, etc. just isn't practical. Hell, we recently did a 5 mile road design and it the plan/profile had to be cut into 10 files, 7 sheets per file. They were still laggy as hell, and that's after I extracted the contours, putting them in the base file for display, rather than drefing the surface in, because the size of the surface model kept crashing the files when you would try and print. Even with that, it still took a good 30 minutes to PDF the plan/profile sheets.

[BlackBox]

Submit a support case through the Subscription Center, if you are on subscription.
If not on subscription, use the Product Feedback form.
To request to be placed on the Beta team via email: civil3d.futures@autodesk.com

FWIW -

I've already posted a brief description of this issue, and a link to this thread 'elsewhere' in the hopes that the product team will view (and I'll leave it at that); but this is no substitute for Alan reporting through subscription center as Jeff has advised.

Cheers

[Jeff_M]

Submit a support case through the Subscription Center, if you are on subscription.
If not on subscription, use the Product Feedback form.
To request to be placed on the Beta team via email: civil3d.futures@autodesk.com

I am on subscription. I'll do both first thing in the morning. Thank you, Jeff.

Out of curiosity, what is your method for pipe networks?

1. How do you display plan?
2. How do you deal with needing them in separate files (plan/profile, etc.)?
3. Having them in the base file and xrefing in and labeling would be perfect if it wasn't for the fact that I've encountered issues where profiles will not load on open if you have the pipe network(s) xrefed and drefed in (xrefed because they're in the base file and drefed in because you have to have them in the drawing to cut profiles.

You're welcome, Alan. I used to use the combination of Xref/Dref for the pipe networks. Until sp3 for C3D2012 broke that ability by not fully synchronizing Drefs when that situation is encountered. So I changed my workflow by having a drawing for my pipes only that is only Xrefed to drawings not needing Dref's (such as a drawing with the sewer & water laterals which are just dumb blocks). I then use Drefs only for the Plan/Profile output sheets. However, as I previously mentioned, I rarely need to swap network parts after I've created my sheets so have not experienced the style issue you've reported.

I HAVE had an issue where the structure styles are incorrect when I first create the Dref's in my sheets. In fact, the last big project I worked on had this issue with every sheet, where all of my Curb Inlets came in with the first style in the rectangular structure parts list instead of the style defined in the master drawing. I had to fix this in every sheet created, and this was in C3D2012-SP3. I suspect this is related to what you are seeing. I did not report this as a bug since it was in an older version, and have not checked if it still occurs in the newer versions.

[mjfarrell]

it does