Topic: Pipe Networks & Labels

[BlackBox]

I'm short on time, and not coming up with what I need in a brief search; hope for some help, which I already know that I should already know... The kicker is, that I used to know, as I remember fixing this, just too long ago.



I'm adding a Sanitary Pipe Network -

I need the pipe to end at the inner wall of my structure, but the rule doesn't seem to be applying.

The minimum cover is wrong, or is at least based on something that I don't care about, and need it to be based on the Structure's Rim elevation (rim elevation is showing as correct)... As example, high point of the run should be Structure Rim elevation - (minus) 3.50 FT

Following an Apply Rules, downstream pipes seem to raise themselves, despite needing to be 0.1 drop across structure?

One of my Structure Labels includes a Block which represents the structure number - the Block attribute is ignored, okay, so be it - I've added text component to correct, but the block doesn't show in dragged state, WTF?


TIA

[mjfarrell]

sample please

[mjfarrell]

you will want to use an expression - to get pipe length to inside or outside walls..and use that in your label


as to rules...IF based on RIM elevation...

it might be easier to build a reference surface using only points at rim centers...and use that as the surface the rule should consider....

[BlackBox]

I need the pipe to end at the inner wall of my structure, but the rule doesn't seem to be applying.

Fixed this - Structure Style, Plan tab, uncheck 'Enable part masking'.

The minimum cover is wrong, or is at least based on something that I don't care about, and need it to be based on the Structure's Rim elevation (rim elevation is showing as correct)... As example, high point of the run should be Structure Rim elevation - (minus) 3.50 FT

Following an Apply Rules, downstream pipes seem to raise themselves, despite needing to be 0.1 drop across structure?

Skipped this - remembered I have the benefit of using SincPac's PIPEELEVATIONEDITOR Command.

One of my Structure Labels includes a Block which represents the structure number - the Block attribute is ignored, okay, so be it - I've added text component to correct, but the block doesn't show in dragged state, WTF?

Still need to figure this out - the Block shows fine when in default label location, but as soon as the label is in dragged state, the block disappears?

[mjfarrell]

is your dragged label

"as composed"


or otherwise?

[BlackBox]

As composed does retain the block; just Not sure why stacked text removes the block component (never realized it was THAT literal Haha).

I rarely use As Composed because it precludes the ability to remove leader justification, and inherently requires a Left / Right if not also Upper / Lower versions of the same style, which is a complete waste to my mind.

Is there a way to have a Structure's Profile Label leader NOT point to the Structure's center when in dragged state?

I've set the default label location to be the top of structure (the MH rim in the case of sanitary), but the leader still points to structure center which is just dumb.

Thanks for all of the prompt replies, MJF.

Cheers

[Jeff_M]

BB, Drag the label straight up, add a vertex to the leaderon the straight up leaderline, PIN the label, drag as desired.

[mjfarrell]

which is a complete waste to my mind.

Is there a way to have a Structure's Profile Label leader NOT point to the Structure's center when in dragged state?

Yes as shown above, and all this label gymnastics, is a long standing issue of all users and pipe labels that autodesk just continues to ignore.
One would think they never saw a set of storm or sanitary plans, ever.  Or if they did, they didn't bother to notice how or why we label things in the real world.

[BlackBox]

BB, Drag the label straight up, add a vertex to the leaderon the straight up leaderline, PIN the label, drag as desired.

Thanks, Jeff - that does help me to 'correct' the leader's attachment to the top of the structure.

I'm still having an issue though, where the leader no longer attaches properly to the now 'as composed' label content... Prior to 'as composed' the leader would attach to middle, etc.

Also, using 'stacked text' removes the block from the label contents as noted above, but I just noticed that it also changes the structure number (located within the block's placement, since the block's attribute is not being used), so that it is no longer the text height specified under Layout tab (larger than the structure content)... Do I really need to add two separate labels (one for structure number, and another for structure content)?

Cheers

[BlackBox]

Okay, changing the dragged state leader's arrow head size to 0.0 fixes the leader's attachment to the 'as composed' content.

[Edit] - I also broke the labels out into 'structure info' and 'structure number' which provides the look I was after; both selected to show the grips in dragged state:

[mjfarrell]

what a hack-fest, right?

[BlackBox]

what a hack-fest, right?

Regretfully, this [still] is.

I'll be using my difficulties & frustrations in this thread to as reference in the beta forums later.

[mjfarrell]

what a hack-fest, right?

Regretfully, this [still] is.

I'll be using my difficulties & frustrations in this thread to as reference in the beta forums later.

Then I encourage you to look at(try) all various pipe and or structure labels; that should give you about 5 pages of defects.

Like why the pipe labels will not go to invert/pipe  end @ structure wall....like we really label them (NOT) center line at end, i.e. center of structure.

[mjfarrell]

OH, and IF they really want to fix a busted up part of pipe functionality...

Let them consider this....

Let say one has a pipe run that starts someplace and ends at the desired connection point, like an existing manhole.
Now consider that it doesn't match vertically like top or bottom existing pipe...

One should be able to go to furthest pipe and raise or lower as required, and have that change ripple through all pipes and structures in that run.

As it currently exists, one must manually edit each pipe in the run. because each pipe acts as if it is NOT connected to anything else in the universe.
Rather stupid, compared to how Land Desktop would allow a change to an entire run, including adjusting slope throughout.

[BlackBox]

At the risk of agreeing with you twice in one year, I'll instead simply say that you're not wrong about your issues with Pipe Networks.

You should participate in the beta forums, and express these issues there, matter-of-factly, and often.



That said, this (automagically adjusting a pipe network's 'rippled' elevation changes) sounds like an amazing new SincPac feature to me, and *may* even build on the sewer latteral functionality.

Cheers

[mjfarrell]

At the risk of agreeing with you twice in one year, I'll instead simply say that you're not wrong about your issues with Pipe Networks.

You should participate in the beta forums, and express these issues there, matter-of-factly, and often.



That said, this (automagically adjusting a pipe network's 'rippled' elevation changes) sounds like an amazing new SincPac feature to me, and *may* even build on the sewer latteral functionality.

Cheers

It's something I spoke to some developer or the other at or about the 2nd release with pipes in it...and he totally agreed it was knackered...yet there it is STILL broken...
really it is as if they simply do not care

[alanjt]

Okay, changing the dragged state leader's arrow head size to 0.0 fixes the leader's attachment to the 'as composed' content.

[Edit] - I also broke the labels out into 'structure info' and 'structure number' which provides the look I was after; both selected to show the grips in dragged state:

You don't call out structure type and FDOT index numbers?

[mjfarrell]

Okay, changing the dragged state leader's arrow head size to 0.0 fixes the leader's attachment to the 'as composed' content.

[Edit] - I also broke the labels out into 'structure info' and 'structure number' which provides the look I was after; both selected to show the grips in dragged state:

You don't call out structure type and FDOT index numbers?

not here in TX

[alanjt]

Okay, changing the dragged state leader's arrow head size to 0.0 fixes the leader's attachment to the 'as composed' content.

[Edit] - I also broke the labels out into 'structure info' and 'structure number' which provides the look I was after; both selected to show the grips in dragged state:

You don't call out structure type and FDOT index numbers?

not here in TX

Interesting.
I know bb, like myself, works in America's wang with all their crazy requirements.

[BlackBox]

Okay, changing the dragged state leader's arrow head size to 0.0 fixes the leader's attachment to the 'as composed' content.

[Edit] - I also broke the labels out into 'structure info' and 'structure number' which provides the look I was after; both selected to show the grips in dragged state:

You don't call out structure type and FDOT index numbers?

I used to - but I've been working for a much smaller firm the past two+ years, which has its trade offs, but they only do things one way here - 'old school'

Providing examples would easily degrade into my venting, so I just won't right now.



It's really good to hear from you though, my friend.

[alanjt]

Okay, changing the dragged state leader's arrow head size to 0.0 fixes the leader's attachment to the 'as composed' content.

[Edit] - I also broke the labels out into 'structure info' and 'structure number' which provides the look I was after; both selected to show the grips in dragged state:

You don't call out structure type and FDOT index numbers?

I used to - but I've been working for a much smaller firm the past two+ years, which has its trade offs, but they only do things one way here - 'old school'

Providing examples would easily degrade into my venting, so I just won't right now.



It's really good to hear from you though, my friend.

It's nice to be around. I've been so busy, I barely have time to think.

When  you did show the FDOT index info, did you use a separate label style for each, or did you do something else?

[BlackBox]

It's nice to be around. I've been so busy, I barely have time to think.

That's where I have been for the past two years, as well; another discussion for another time.

When  you did show the FDOT index info, did you use a separate label style for each, or did you do something else?

While it is easy to select a Label, right click, select the 'Edit Label Text...' context menu item, ultimately, I found it easier to create a handful of Label Styles... To list a few:

DBI-<Type> - No inner dimensions listed
DBI-<Type> J\BOT (Round) - This listed the inner diameter
DBI-<Type> J\BOT (Rectangular) - This listed the inner width/length dimensions
MH-P-8 - No inner dimensions listed
MH J/BOT (Round) - This listed the inner diameter
MH J/BOT (Rectangular) - This listed the inner width/length dimensions

* Don't forget 'Drop' (Sanitary) and/or 'Sump' (Storm) variants for any applicable Styles

To avoid Part Builder at every chance - and this is before FDOT rolled out their latest C3D State Kit, which you can now totally install on a non-production machine, and pilfer their Parts Catalogs, Styles, etc. to benefit from the tax payer dollars that customized these elements, yet mitigate having the full malarkey installed on production machines - I would end up using many of the *NF Structures for Storm networks, with the applicable Structure Style applied for Plan.

HTH

[BlackBox]

Converting 'dumb' utility polylines to Feature Lines, quickly grading them using SETFEATUREGRADE Command, dropping them to the appropriate cover depth, projecting them into Profile View to also grade any 'dips' or high points for ARVs, etc. and then creating a Pipe Network with Null structures at vertices using said Feature Line works pretty well, actually, IMO.

In the same drawing, I've done this now a few times, for proposed Force Main, future Water Main, future Reuse Main, and now proposed Water Main.

For some reason, the respective Pipe Network's Null structures, with the same Standard Style applied, and on visible/thawed layers, behave differently... Some show up as the 'circle', and others don't show up at all, requiring me to right click select from Toolspace until I find the right one, or simply change them all to a non-Standard Style which uses a Block in plan. Grrr



Sometimes they 'appear' after matching one Pipe Style to another (i.e., Water Main --> Water Main Restrained), others they might 'appear' after I intentionally pull one pipe end away from the location of a Null structure, and then graphically 'reconnect' it - even though they're already connected.

Am I missing something?

[BlackBox]

Am I missing something?

The @#$%&* Pipe Style?! Aghhh

Something about the Pipe Style prevented the Null structures in plan, and the few Drawn in Profile View to show up. Taking a working Pipe Style (that does show properly in both), copying, and modifying in kind (after renaming the aforementioned), did the trick.

Too bad Toolspace, Settings tab, right click 'Replace with...' doesn't account for Parts Lists.

[mjfarrell]

setting your feature and command settings before doing the work, perhaps?

[BlackBox]

setting your feature and command settings before doing the work, perhaps?

Nope; did that, but there's something different about the Pipe's Styles that precluded the same Null Structures to show/not show.

Further, setting the Command settings is a crap shoot for anyone who does more than one utility's Pipe Network in a drawing, and a PITA to have to change each-and-every-single setting, for various related Commands to get it to work smoothly from start to finish for each utility type.

Many settings can be modified using LISP as I've demonstrated elsewhere, but you still have to identify each setting that needs changing first, which is fantastic use of billable time. Haha

Cheers

[mjfarrell]

true command and feature settings are sort of...a pain to juggle in a real world work-flow environment.

[BlackBox]

true command and feature settings are sort of...a pain to juggle in a real world work-flow environment.

IMO, the Commands settings themselves could do with pseudo-named 'Command Sets', much like an Alignment or Profile can use 'Label Sets'.

Cheers

[BlackBox]

_Really_ wish that Pipes allowed for 'masking' in Profile View -

Both the option to fully mask (block anything), and change the visual result of any utilities 'behind' it, respective to Profile View + relative to Alignment side, such that utilities behind it are 'hidden', 'dashed', grayed out (with ability to choose color for each Pipe/Structure Style), etc.

[mjfarrell]

_Really_ wish that Pipes allowed for 'masking' in Profile View -

Both the option to fully mask (block anything), and change the visual result of any utilities 'behind' it, respective to Profile View + relative to Alignment side, such that utilities behind it are 'hidden', 'dashed', grayed out (with ability to choose color for each Pipe/Structure Style), etc.

sort of like OBSCUREDLTYPE and the related settings...you know I never tried to apply those to civil objects...

would be interesting and potentially valuable when putting multiple utilities in the same profile....thus reducing chances it would ever get implemented

sorry for being pessimistic about it.

[mjfarrell]

also on that...IF autodesk had remained committed to "consistency" across the interface, even pipes would posses more styles and would have incorporated label sets....

but they really dropped the ball on that, in those areas....

[BlackBox]

They did -

It's painfully apparent when adding multiple Pipe Networks to a Profile View, and all of the labels come in on the same layer, despite each Pipe Network having Pipe/Structure layer settings.

The issue earlier in this thread about Structure Label placement - which as it happens, has a workaround (thanks again, Jeff!), but even that still has issues if you move the Profile View. The 'pinning' is in WCS, and not relative to the Profile View?!

The issue not discussed here, of Pipe Label placement - Center of Pipe only - really?! Where's Pipe Top/Bottom? Never mind the redundant issue of dragged state leader attachment to pipe.

Don't even get me started on Direction Drills/Bores - just finished multiple miles of a Water extension project, and ended up having to use  Profiles by Tangent and Curves via HDPE radii in Curve Settings for top of pipes.

Casings? Don't even bother.

Pipe materials, and sizes? Painfully inadequate... Seriously, you didn't include 16 PVC?

Pressure Pipes? In Ductile Iron only? See previous. Even after you take the time away from billable work to setup the myriad materials, classes, pressure ratings, radii, pipe walls, etc. via Content Catalog Editor, Civil 3D doesn't properly recognize them.


... All of which I'm working to address with the product teams, some of which have been accepted to-date, so don't go holding your breath, though. Haha


Cheers

[mjfarrell]

The issue not discussed here, of Pipe Label placement - Center of Pipe only - really?! Where's Pipe Top/Bottom? Never mind the redundant issue of dragged state leader attachment to pipe.

Actually I think I did mention POOR and or inadequate selection for pipe label attachment location(s) in another similar topic...

What frustrates me most...is that some people think ALL I am want to do is criticize autodesk, yet the fact is the deficiencies, failings, etc. that I speak of are REAL and persistent.
And not just something I make up, or invent as being problematic...

IF

autodesk would fix only 33% of the junk, users would be THRILLED to pay their subscription fees every stinking year.  THRILLED  I tell you!

[BlackBox]

Actually I think I did mention POOR and or inadequate selection for pipe label attachment location(s) in another similar topic...

I'm certain that I'm redundantly stating observations others have had for years - more collating them for my use later in the beta forums. Haha

IF

autodesk would fix only 33% of the junk, users would be THRILLED to pay their subscription fees every stinking year.  THRILLED  I tell you!

Strewth.

[Jeff_M]

Casings? Don't even bother.

But I like to bother! Casing pipe

[mjfarrell]

I've also used BIG Pies for casings...in a similar fashion.

No one here has ever asked about them. 

[BlackBox]

Casings? Don't even bother.

But I like to bother! Casing pipe

... A Pipe raincoat, on your Pipe.

#Strewth

[BlackBox]

I have to be overlooking this somewhere - where do I find the ADDLABELS Command settings, to set 'Save command changes to settings' == YES...?

It's the most annoying thing in the world for the ADDLABELS dialog (Annotate tab, Labels & Tables panel, Add Labels button) to remember my last used Pipe & Structure Label Style selections, and not the 'Feature' nor 'Label type'.


Cheers

[mjfarrell]

I have to be overlooking this somewhere - where do I find the ADDLABELS Command settings, to set 'Save command changes to settings' == YES...?

It's the most annoying thing in the world for the ADDLABELS dialog (Annotate tab, Labels & Tables panel, Add Labels button) to remember my last used Pipe & Structure Label Style selections, and not the 'Feature' nor 'Label type'.


Cheers

Ambient settings...General three down from top

[BlackBox]

I have to be overlooking this somewhere - where do I find the ADDLABELS Command settings, to set 'Save command changes to settings' == YES...?

It's the most annoying thing in the world for the ADDLABELS dialog (Annotate tab, Labels & Tables panel, Add Labels button) to remember my last used Pipe & Structure Label Style selections, and not the 'Feature' nor 'Label type'.


Cheers

Ambient settings...General three down from top

... No joy.

Even after that setting is changed to YES, The ADDLABELS dialog still defaults to Note for 'Feature' and Note for 'Label type'... As that's how it's set in the template used to create this drawing, and will be rectified once I get this to work, of course.


Separately, is there a way to 'push' settings into multiple drawings, or is one natively relegated to opening each-and-every-single drawing, and manually importing same?

If the latter, then I'll probably just drop a small snippet of LISP in AcadDoc.lsp to do this for me; again, once I figure out how to get this to work.


Cheers

[mjfarrell]

one could set a template...

import and explode the drawings you want to have the new settings/styles in

save as>>>back to their old name

[BlackBox]

one could set a template...

import and explode the drawings you want to have the new settings/styles in

save as>>>back to their old name

That setting has no affect on the ADDLABELS dialog in my drawing.

Nor did it have any affect in a new drawing on first run, based on this change to one of my templates, which is kind of the purpose of settings (to have an affect).

I've already said that I'll fix this in our templates... But I need it to actually work, before I go making myriad changes.

[Jeff_M]

That AddLabels dialog is one the most annoying dialogs in C3D. It ALWAYS does as you describe, BB, no settings that I have ever found control it.

[Jeff_M]

BB, check out the SPAddLabels command...it helps, a lot, with this.

[BlackBox]

That AddLabels dialog is one the most annoying dialogs in C3D. It ALWAYS does as you describe, BB, no settings that I have ever found control it.

Thanks for confirming.

BB, check out the SPAddLabels command...it helps, a lot, with this.

Doh - It's right next to PIPEELEVATIONEDITOR Command button, too!

Email sent.



Cheers

[BlackBox]

Is there a way to take the pipe and structure labels in plan and profile, and reassociate them in-place to another pipe network?

As example: Alignment Station Offset Labels, can be reassociate S to a different Alignment, Profile, etc.


When I DREF a Pipe Network into a drawing, the structures do not retain their rotation in the Source drawing. I'd rather just XREF the source drawing, and reassociate the labels to the XREFed Pipe Network, without having to add all of the Labels, and position them for plot again from scratch.


Cheers

[alanjt]

Is there a way to take the pipe and structure labels in plan and profile, and reassociate them in-place to another pipe network?

As example: Alignment Station Offset Labels, can be reassociate S to a different Alignment, Profile, etc.


When I DREF a Pipe Network into a drawing, the structures do not retain their rotation in the Source drawing. I'd rather just XREF the source drawing, and reassociate the labels to the XREFed Pipe Network, without having to add all of the Labels, and position them for plot again from scratch.


Cheers

That would be nice.
I've found it best to use ATTACH instead of OVERLAY. Seems like you lose C3D connections when using overlay.

[BlackBox]

Is there a way to take the pipe and structure labels in plan and profile, and reassociate them in-place to another pipe network?

As example: Alignment Station Offset Labels, can be reassociate S to a different Alignment, Profile, etc.


When I DREF a Pipe Network into a drawing, the structures do not retain their rotation in the Source drawing. I'd rather just XREF the source drawing, and reassociate the labels to the XREFed Pipe Network, without having to add all of the Labels, and position them for plot again from scratch.


Cheers

That would be nice.
I've found it best to use ATTACH instead of OVERLAY. Seems like you lose C3D connections when using overlay.

Thanks, Alan.

Aside from just the Labels - which I've not even begun to peruse in the .NET API, apart from this a while ago - I'd ideally like to see 'Demote to DREF'  functionality be implemented, where the Object is replaced by a DREF in-place, and any related plan/profile/section Labels were 'transferred' to the now DREF object(s), so that the Labels would retain their layer, color, drag/location, etc. *wishful thinking*


Cheers

[alanjt]

Is there a way to take the pipe and structure labels in plan and profile, and reassociate them in-place to another pipe network?

As example: Alignment Station Offset Labels, can be reassociate S to a different Alignment, Profile, etc.


When I DREF a Pipe Network into a drawing, the structures do not retain their rotation in the Source drawing. I'd rather just XREF the source drawing, and reassociate the labels to the XREFed Pipe Network, without having to add all of the Labels, and position them for plot again from scratch.


Cheers

That would be nice.
I've found it best to use ATTACH instead of OVERLAY. Seems like you lose C3D connections when using overlay.

Thanks, Alan.

Aside from just the Labels - which I've not even begun to peruse in the .NET API, apart from this a while ago - I'd ideally like to see 'Demote to DREF'  functionality be implemented, where the Object is replaced by a DREF in-place, and any related plan/profile/section Labels were 'transferred' to the now DREF object(s), so that the Labels would retain their layer, color, drag/location, etc. *wishful thinking*


Cheers

Good god yes.
Actually, if dref structure styles would update and custom fields weren't so temperamental, I couldn't totally live with the functionality of pipe networks.
I did run into an annoying situation the other day where I was regrading an area in my corridor file, when it crashed. Thinking about saving time, I went and grabbed the autosave file and overwrote my corridor file. I've gotten in the habit of having a separate FG surface file that I dref in different surfaces, and from there I paste together for one overall. Thankfully I do this because when I opened the FG surface file to rerun my cut/fill calcs, it wouldn't display the corridor surface. I had to delete the surface dref, open the corridor file and recreate the shortcut, then re-dref it back in my FG surface file. I know it has to do with the code string at the end of the xml shortcut file.
Thankfully I only had to fix one file, because my overall FG surface is referenced to all files that I actually use for production.