Hi, My Name Is...... [Archive]

ccallen

2005-01-27, 05:14 PM

Well, let's give this a shot. I thought we might use this thread to just introduce ourselves, explain why we're using Civil 3D, and what we see as issues. Then, if we use new threads for each of our questions or problems or concerns or whatever, hopefully we'll all find this forum more useful. If there aren't enough of us, and this doesn't work, I guess we'll just go back to limping along as we were. Sigh.

Anyway, I'm Carolyn Allen. I work for Advanced Geomatics just north of Detroit. We're land surveyors. We do a lot of work for McDonald's and The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT). So I draw topographical and boundary surveys and a lot of roads and bridges.

I've worked with computers for almost 30 years, computer graphics for over 25, and CAD (including some Microstation) for 8.

Other than basic line work and labels and such our primary needs are COGO. I'm concerned about annotation (bearings and distances), but mainly I need to be able to import points and put their attributes on different layers. EaglePoint, our old COGO software made this easy. AutoCAD does not.

We switched to Civil 3D because our IT person (my boss's son, who - admittedly is VERY good) thinks AutoCAD is phasing out Land DeskTop and replacing it with Civil 3D. My boss refuses to give up AutoCAD R14 and EaglePoint and there's a BIG part of me that doesn't blame him. I don't want to give it up, either, but I feel like we're being pressured to.

Ok, who's next?

(I wish there was a moderator who could "pin" this thread to keep it on top.)

Mike.Perry

2005-01-27, 05:18 PM

(I wish there was a moderator who could "pin" this thread to keep it on top.)Hi Carolyn

I think we should let the GIS Moderators make that decision, after all they are the ones that look after these Sub-Forums.

Thanks, Mike

srsherrill

2005-01-27, 05:37 PM

Stephen R. Sherrill aka The Dinosaur
Kansas City, MO

I was using r13 and EaglePoint this time last year.

We do 3 to 10 phase subdivisions and some small commercial sites along with several ALTA's. We will be start phasing in Civil 3D for the plats, street and grading plans and converting back to LDDT for sanitary and storm sewer plans. So far I like Civil 3D more than LDDT except for the missing Hydrology and Pipe works modules. The program is more drawing based rather than project based LDDT. This lets you start working straight away rather than set up a project and directory structure first which I think is overkill for a small project such as ALTA's and single site commercial projects. This also means, however, all of your drawing and label settings must be placed in each drawing so preparing a custom .dwt file is a must before really starting production. I am still trying to figure out the multitude of settings but so far I have been able to create the look I want for the drawing which I could not do in LDDT.

MHultgren

2005-01-27, 06:52 PM

Hi Carolyn and Stephen,

I started using ACAD with DCA (softdesk's predecessor which became LDT in Rel. 2000) back in the 80's. I mainly do design, CAD Management and Project Management for large master planned communities and subdivisions. My largest was 24,000 acres just outside of Las Vegas, Nv. Since then I have used Microstation, Inroads, VersaCAD and a couple other programs, but I keep coming back to Autodesk products. It is easier (for me) to customize and develop routines that can do many of the mundane aspects of the design for me. Inroads is a great program for roadways, but is a bit cumbersome to use on subdivisions. C3D, I see as a good PRELIMINARY layout tool, but I use LDT for the actual nuts and bolts of all of my Construction Plans. I don't see Autodesk pushing C3D into Mainstream production for at least another two releases, but you never know.;-)

ccallen

2005-01-27, 07:04 PM

Mike Perry: It was just a suggestion. Thanks.

Stephen: Thanks for this. It gives me hope.

Mark: That's interesting. I guess I'm a little put off by the thought that I'll have to use one package to do one thing; and use another to do something else. I've always liked sort of "melding" two programs together and using them as one, so to speak (like C3D on top of AutoCAD 2005, etc., but based on what we do maybe I still can).

I really enjoy hearing about the different things you guys do out there in Reality and how you do them. I hope we can get more people to respond, here.

MHultgren

2005-01-27, 07:19 PM

Carolyn,

Don't get me wrong, I use C3D to do my preliminary design work for grading and lot layout then export it out as LandXML to use in LDT. But many times in the course of a design, you have "Minor" modifications ( yeah right - minor is, only half the project has changed to the developer) That make it tough to followup in two packages. I am loooking forward to seeing what Autodesk is going to incorporate from CAICE into both ( or one) package(s) in the future releases.
And then you have Oracle on the horizon with a DB driven system for design (maybe).

srsherrill

2005-01-28, 01:26 AM

Other than basic line work and labels and such our primary needs are COGO. I'm concerned about annotation (bearings and distances), but mainly I need to be able to import points and put their attributes on different layers. EaglePoint, our old COGO software made this easy. AutoCAD does not.
You will not be able to control your points in the same manner you are used to doing, but I think you will be pleasantly surprised once you get started. You can control what is visible at any given time by setting up different point display styles for any given need. Just change the style and only the node (which can even be a specified block) is visible or a spot elevation can be any style node with just the elevation showing. If you want the number, elevation and descriptor all showing they will appear as you are accustomed, remove one and the others shift position and if only one is to be visible it will move to the center position. Points can also be grouped and filtered for display properties, surface creation or visibility. I think you will find this way of handling points to be far superior once you are become familiar with them and the terminology.

Good luck, the learning curve is quite steep especially from r13 &r14.

ccallen

2005-01-28, 04:57 PM

Unfortunately I know about using (at least Land DeskTop) and displaying various node attributes, etc., etc. OUR problem is that we HAVE to have the attributes for FOUR different node groups on different layers because when we translate the files to Microstation that's the only way to continue to control the visibility of the attributes (by turning off levels). It has to do with our work for MDOT and what they require (THEY only use Microstation).

I am not particularly worried about the AutoCAD stuff. I can handle the 2004/2005 AutoCAD stuff without too many problems - I *LOVE* AutoCAD. It's the COGO stuff with either Land DeskTop or Civil3D that's the real issue.

I am increasingly apprehensive about how COGO is handled by Autodesk. I *COULD* be wrong, but from what I've heard so far, even what *I* consider simple COGO commands readily available in the old EaglePoint (let alone more complex stuff) are all OVER in various Autodesk products. That WILL NOT work.

Using multiple packages to work on ONE drawing is a pain in the posterior, but we do it all the time. For example: 1) We have an in-house program written by our IT guy to handle processing all our field data which uses a huge symbol library I maintain in Access to correspond to MDOT's specs to generate the correct symbols on nodes and also lines like curbs and buildings, etc. (along with other things). This program only works in Civil 3D. So I use Civil 3D to run that. 2) Then I have to use a batch conversion program to convert that file to R14. 3) I import all the nodes in R14. 4) Most of my work, and my boss's is done in R14. 5) Then I convert the file using DGNLink to Microstation and do some final work in Microstation. For any updates to the drawing, I go thru the same process.

That's just life. We had HOPED to do steps 3 & 4 in Civil 3D. If we have to go back and forth between Civil3D and Land DeskTop to do that it's not acceptable. And THAT'S the problem.

So far, (and, again, I could be wrong) I seem to see AutoCAD trying to satisfy a LOT of different types of user's needs by producing many programs that don't work together. This MAY satisfy a certain percentage of users who work within certain set guidelines. But I wonder what percentage of people are left "outside" these strictures - whose work does not fit the models someone at Autodesk created and who wind up having to use bits and pieces from several packages.

Although, to some degree, that's Autodesk's problem - *IF* they even care. Maybe they have such a hold on the market they feel they don't HAVE to care. I don't know.

Even more of a concern to ME, however, is that with all these specialized programs they're producing, NONE of them seem to have really comprehensive COGO capabilities. Possibly they don't see - or haven't been made aware of - enough users of our genre' to put all of our needs in one package. I don't know.

I'm going to start entering some threads asking for solutions to specific COGO related problems. Maybe the answers will prove I'm wrong about the above. I *HOPE* so.

srsherrill

2005-01-29, 10:11 PM

I miss many things form EaglePoint as well, but the greatest adjustment has been the difference in terminology. Have you examined the Civil 3D "Transparent Commands" toolbar yet? There are some very usefully looking COGO tools there.

ccallen

2005-01-31, 06:35 PM

Yes, but it isn't clear yet how they will fit in with our needs. I guess what it's coming down to is listing what the RESULTS were from various essential EaglePoint commands and then trying to figure out how to achieve those results in Civil 3D. Of course what worries me is that we aren't going to be ABLE to achieve those same results.

I feel like AutoCAD seems to think we have nothing else to do with our time except muddle thru their increasingly obtuse software. WIth no real guidance or help from them.

walford

2005-01-31, 06:42 PM

srsherrill

2005-01-31, 07:11 PM

I agree completely. I have tried to follow the tutorials provided, but keep getting lost in the terminology. I think the program has a way to do about whatever is required but the steps can be somewhat surprising. I am finding that the drawings are more groups of entities, somewhat like a block, that are edited in tool space rather than lines,arcs and circles that I am used to dealing with. I am looking at a finished grade profile that I have finally been able to create by going through the creation by layout dialog. One entity is the frame with stations and elevations, there are 2 profiles - one existing style and one design style and a block shown the full information for each vertical curve. The only way to modify them is from within tool space prospector or settings. I have not tried to work with COGO yet and this is only a guess, but perhaps there is some kind of creation and modification dialog similar to the profiles.

MHultgren

2005-01-31, 10:25 PM

When you work in C3D, everything ( or almost everything) is an Object, not lines, arcs and entities. You manipulate the appearnce of the object by applying Styles to them. So, for a Grading Object as an example, in one window you can make it show in Perspective view with shademode on and in another window in the same file at the same time, you can have it display as contours. So when you modify the object, it will update in both displays at the same time. For Points, you can have them display the information (PNEZD and Geo Data) with one "Style" and have it show as a block with only the elevation labelled (such as Manhole Rim Elev.) the way the style has it defiend. So if your style says the MH Label should look like this

SMH
Rim El. = 1234.56

It will do it for you by pulling the Elevation Property from the Point Object.

srsherrill

2005-01-31, 10:33 PM

Be patient Walford - the next release of Civil 3D is supposed to include Pipe works. I would also advise you to start learning what you can now as this program is very different from Civil Design that was officially retired Jan 15. It is a safe bet that the new version will handle the pipes in the same manner as everything else and the more familiar you are with its procedures the better of you will be.

Stephen R. Sherrill

srsherrill

2005-01-31, 10:43 PM

Mark,

I think the problem with Carolyn's points is the ability to export them into a format that will allow each attribute to have its own layer to control visibility in R14 and Microstation. In EaglePoint the nodes are handled in this manner and additionally, alternate styles can be used upon import to provide a new set of layer names. The only way I can figure to get the results she wants is to import them in the EaglePoint program rather than using the nodes translated down from Civil 3D.

MHultgren

2005-01-31, 10:55 PM

Carolyn,

It looks as if you will need to define a Point File Export Format and then export the pointss to an ASCII file that your boss can import into MS or ACADR14. Or write a little script\lisp routine that will read each line and set the layer(s) accordingly. If your boss has Softdesk for R14, you can use the Batch file in the Survey Module to do this rather quickly.

MHultgren

2005-01-31, 11:02 PM

Another way to do this is to import the Points in C3D onto separate layers with the defined "Style" you need for the info. You can re import the points again with the new Style current on a separate layer and repeat as needed. Your IT folks should be able to modify the program they wrote easily enough to handle that. Place the Blocks in the first pass with one style, switch layers and repeat as necessary.

srsherrill

2005-01-31, 11:24 PM

Mark, I thought about that, but didn't know if the visibility of the attributes an a given layer would translate down or if they would all be on on each layer when they get to r14. It would be worth a try for her at least.

Thanks for helping out.

Stephen R. Sherrill

MHultgren

2005-02-01, 02:03 PM

If she runs it through placing the labels on each layer as needed, then disassociating them afterward and removing the points, then insert the points again with the new settings, it should come in as expected. Of course she would have to repeat this process for each new item\layer that she needs. I do this with my point labels (in LDT) all the time for my grading plans. The points don't change, but the label placement does along with the justification. An example is the Top of Curb shots on each side of the street. I insert my TC Point group using the label style I set up and then disassocite the labels and change the justification, location and rotation as needed, so they work correctly and stay where I put them in case someone has their point settings set to reset the labels. It also makes it easier to port the drawing down to R14 as the labels come in as MText instead of not coming in at all. Of course when porting over to MS, she will have to reset the MText width as MS does not "See" the width property of MText correctly.

ccallen

2005-02-01, 07:04 PM

1) My boss doesn't do any of the translating to Microstation. I do it all.

2) We use EP/R14 to do all the manipulation of points, objects, lines, etc., etc. I only use Civil3D for our in-house symbol/line generator program. We are a small company. We only have ONE IT person (who also does other things). His time is limited. As is mine.

We have limited time to figure out this stuff in either Land DeskTop or Civil3D.

3) My boss has currently said we will go back to using Land DeskTop rather than Civil3D until everything is available in Civil3D. We received an announcement from Autodesk titled "Information for Autodesk Civil Engineering Customers" stating that Autodesk is aware that "functionality gaps do exist" in C3D which is why we still have "companion" licenses for Land DeskTop etc.

4) I have been meeting regularly with my boss and our IT person about the info I have been reading here.

5) My boss is SERIOUSLY considering going back to EaglePoint. EaglePoint makes ALL of the COGO stuff so easy to use our learning curve would be negligible.

I don't know what to say. Doing what we need to do in EITHER C3D or LDD, as described above, is way too difficult without specific training for us which is not readily available. Each of us does very unique things and EACH of us would need some basic training, but also individualized training which costs more money. Plus it still isn't entirely clear to us that even with specific instruction, AutoCAD would be able to DO what we need it to do. Maybe we're alone amongst other AutoCAD users. Maybe we're being stupid, here. I don't know.

I can tell you what I came up with in regarding to putting four separate groups of points, each with four separate attributes (node, description, number and elevation) on different layers in LDD. I set up (I could be wrong about terminology here - it's been a year and I haven't had time to go thru it again more recently) four different node styles assigning EACH of the four attributes INDIVIDUAL color numbers. Then I imported the nodes, one style at a time. Then I exploded all of them and used simple command macros to filter on specific color numbers assigning everything with that color number to a specific layer. It worked. I don't know, however, since we never actually did any real testing further, whether, by using that method, we lost any abilities to search on or manipulate the resulting pieces.

This was just ONE of many COGO related issues. I really want to enter more threads with specific cogo info we need to be able to access. I just haven't had TIME. Sigh.

Thanks for all the time people have put in here. I appreciate it. I wish I could tell you what we're going to do. But it keeps changing.

MHultgren

2005-02-01, 07:34 PM

Carolyn,
You can defne Point Label Styles in LDT that will bring in your points on separate layers, with Blocks associated to the point based on the label style. It will even put the text on a different layer, but all of the text defined in that style goes on that layer. So, if for example, you wanted to bring in a sewer manhole symbol and label the Rim elevation, point number, description, Lat and Long, Northing and Easting all on thier own layers ( one for the symbol and one for each text string) you would need to define the Label style for each string and include the symbol in one of these styles. Then you would have to Insert the point group seven times in this case. Once you have them inserted then you can select all the points using Quick Select and then right-click and pick Disassociate labels. This would leave your points in the Database, (and the drawing) your symbol would be on it's own layer and each string of text would be on it's own layer. Then when you get all of this done, you could Remove points from drawing and save it for working in R14\MS. The Seven steps is on the premise that your LAT would be on one layer and your Long would be on another, Northing on another, easting on it's layer and so on. By using Point Group Manager, you could import all your points with the appropriate layers, text strings and symbols in fourteen mouse clicks (click to select the group-right-click to insert them) and the three more for disassociating the labels, three more to remove the points. The time would be for the initial point group setup, override settings and filtering.

srsherrill

2005-02-02, 04:54 AM

Carolyn

If you do not have a lot of time to become familiar with Civil 3D, you might be well advised to go back to LDDT or EaglePoint. Mark has outlined steps that I guess should work, but I would wonder if there were enough benefit to go through such a complex mix of translations. If you have the "Survey" package with LDDT, there should be a way to have it do much the same point and linework you are getting from Civil 3D. Our surveyor has his own program for this that I know works with either LDDT or EaglePoint so we have not used "Survey". Either one really should have a greater impact on the field procedures as it would likely require different coding of the survey shots. I am sorry, I know that just through another new program at you, but it may solve your problem.

The Dinosaur

MHultgren

2005-02-02, 02:08 PM

What STurner said is correct. If you have the Survey module, you can create a batch file that will do all of what I described (and more, like linework) in one step. The downside, (again like he said above) is either your surveyors change thier coding in the input, or you change it once you get it. The problem with you making the changes, is, are you sure which points are connected and which ones are not concerning the linework. In the batch file, you can set your layers, symbols, and.... "I Beleive"..... even your label style and\or point groups.

ccallen

2005-02-03, 04:34 PM

We don't have the Survey package. We use our own in-house program for all that.

I'll say this - reading the stuff described above, I can see why NO one is suggesting that Civil3D is "intuitive." It feels like you need a degree in it. Yet EaglePoint has the whole process of points/attributes/layers literally built-in. Obviously we aren't the ONLY people who need/want that. I just find the disparity curious.

We are going back to LDD for the moment, although I'm waiting to see what my boss says when he takes a look at the latest EagelPoint.

Thanks for the help.

MHultgren

2005-02-03, 04:44 PM

Actually, about the ONLY thing I don't like about eagle point is the fact that it creates an APPID for almost everything it does. When I open a file that was worked on in EP, I get a list of literally hundreds of APP-ID's that start with EP----. I could see one for all the different types of annotation, but it looks more like there is one for EACH annotation object\entity. Did they ever fix the dashed line segmentation problem? It has been a few years, and that was my biggest pet peeve back when I did use it. When I would port it over to ACAD, I had to make sure all my linework was the continuous linetype or the end product would be individual pieces of lines.

srsherrill

2005-02-03, 05:51 PM

Mark,

I never had the dashed line problem using EaglePoint 95 w r13, but I have probably tallied a weeks worth of time setting while the registered apps went by in the text window. We would still be using the program if our new plotter would play nice with it. Do you know if the newer versions of EP still have that great drafting suite?

The Dinosaur

MHultgren

2005-02-03, 06:40 PM

From this website,http://www.eaglepoint.com/survey/drafting/features.htm it looks as if it's still there. Not sure as to the workability of it, as from what I read (quick perusal of the high points), it looks as if they went to a format similar to LDT.
It could have been Terror Model (I know it's actually called TerraModdel) that gave us the linework problems, been so long ago, don't remember exactly. When I was doing this, three different offices were all using different software packages. Microstation, Autocad, Inroads, TerrorModel, Softdesk, COGOPC and GEOPAK. Talk about a compatibility nightmare!!!

srsherrill

2005-02-04, 12:54 AM

I hope they didn't follow the LDDT model too closely. I have been trying to assemble a package that would restore at least my most favorite routines to use with 2k5.

ccallen

2005-02-04, 04:21 PM

The Michigan Society of Professional Surveyors yearly convention is in Detroit next week and both my boss and I - assuming EaglePoint is going to be there - intend to grill them relentlessly. :)

I've only had to convert our EP/ACAD files to Microstation and we've never had a problem. I don't know what you mean by the APPID problem. I've certainly never seen anything like that????

srsherrill

2005-02-04, 04:55 PM

If EaglePoint is there and handing out demos or information, would you try to get me copies as well? You can attach anything electronic to an email and I would provide snail mail info otherwise.

Stephen R. Sherrill

MHultgren

2005-02-04, 06:11 PM

I hope they didn't follow the LDDT model too closely. I have been trying to assemble a package that would restore at least my most favorite routines to use with 2k5.Stephen,
Like I said, I just did a quick perusal of the website. They have demos you can download and watch and Info packets available on the site also. I just didn't have time to look into it in depth.

srsherrill

2005-02-04, 06:30 PM

Mark

I watched the little demo on the site, but they are more an overview of what the package does. What I really want to see is what type of text is created with the annotation and how it behaves with manipulation. I REALLY miss the simple commands that placed middle justified DTEXT above, beneath or along a line and the annotation commands that produced the same labeling. I have had to dust off my old r12 lisp routines and modify them to do many EP one pick commands with LDDT and some things I have gone back to r10 procedures to get the desired results.

Steve

MHultgren

2005-02-04, 06:45 PM

AHHHH, the good old days :( . Stephen, check out Dotsoft on the web, they have some good tools available that are real timesavers.

quiggle

2005-02-07, 05:43 AM

Quiggle here, from Colorado
Our firm does mainly small subdivisions and commercial sites. We thought maybe Civil 3D would be less cumbersome than land dev and civil design. It seems on the surface to meet our needs fine if it does eventually include pipeworks, but lacking that it seems more trouble than benefit. I have seen that we could export the linework into civil design for the piping but WHAT linework? I have one small development in Civil 3D at the moment and I am hard pressed to find any linework to export as everything seems to be several pieces of blocks and labels combined into a few "objects". The lots are 2 or 3 segments that combine with a label to make a parcel. I have three complete street profiles that appear to be composed of three objects each. I am about finished with my first corridor, but I think it will also be only one object. Will these all be "exploded" into objects autocad can work with after export? If so, how? I tried an XML file and nothing usable was sent to autocad. It looks this far into the project that we will need to have parallel drawings in order to design sanitary and storm sewers. Are we missing some critical step?

MHultgren

2005-02-07, 02:02 PM

Quiggle,

Did you define the Alignments before you exported to LandXML? You can define your Pipe runs as an alignment and then Include it in your Export. You can pick and choose what you want to export as well, Just Points, suface(s), alignments or any combination of three including everything. Then when you import these into Land your data will be there, your alignment CL will come in and you simply define the alignment as a pipe run. You will need to join the alignment as a polyline and then define it, but it does come in.

quiggle

2005-02-08, 04:29 AM

Mark
The preliminary work on this site was created in land dev with the current street alignments preliminary grades and lot layout. As the alignments are unchanged, should we overwrite the land dev files with Civil 3D alignments? What about the profiles, should the new grades be imported as well? Is there any benefit to exporting the pipeline alignments over just creating them in the old base sheet in land dev? Would it be better to xref the Civil 3D drawing into the old base sheet and create all the project sheets in land dev or bring back everything into Civil 3D? Actually, I am not sure if we really have a surface to export. We have created finished grade contours within a corridor, but it does not appear to be a true surface that can be manipulated. The export to surface from corridor did not generate the same contours and were really quite a mess. There are areas that require special attention that are seemingly beyond our ability to address with corridor assemblies.

MHultgren

2005-02-08, 03:31 PM

Quiggle,

The way it is "Supposed" to work is: If you have the alignment already in one or the other, the data "SHOULD" update. As long as you do not change the names, or move the profiles around. You may need to redraw the profiles ( should be able to just redraw the selected surface).

quiggle

2005-02-16, 01:13 AM

How about a report of an unqualified success with Civil 3D!

I just tried exporting a surface for someone to start working the sewers. He just cut the alignment in LDDT and came up with a great looking design profile - very smooth and far better than what we have gotten from Civil Design. I've been bumped down to a LDDT project this week and it sure feels clunky.

quiggle

2005-03-07, 05:52 AM

Is it worth a try to revive this thread?

How about posting an update on the projects mentioned earlier? I know that mine has hit the rocks after numbers for the the first billing cycle surprised everyone and over in the wishlist board it looks like someone else's had the same fate.

A bit of more hopeful news would be nice to see about now. Surely there must be some more people out there trying to use Civil 3D by now. I have heard of at least one very large project in Florida being done with this software. Perhaps someone on that project will stop by and leave an inspiring update.

stephen.cowling

2005-03-09, 01:49 AM

C3D is becoming my drafting environment of choice, because I have Advanced Road Design (a third-party add-on to LDDT/C3D), map (mostly cleanup) and LDDT commands and multiple document interface, all without necessarily having to create projects and so on. Once my template files are set up, the transition from straight drafting to 3D design should be almost easy. I'm hoping to be able to remove land enabled Map from my diet fairly soon.

quiggle

2005-03-09, 03:04 AM

I agree, Stephen. I liked using the program and I think with just a little real training it would do a tremendous job for us. Even with all of the tricks it threw at me, I want to give it another try. I am keeping my old project alive on my own and will do a start over with it to see if I can find where I went wrong with some things.

quiggle

2005-03-09, 03:59 AM

Also, Stephen, did you ever solve you station format issue?

stephen.cowling

2005-03-09, 04:12 AM

What I did with an existing project was to bring it all into C3D and set up the surface display to look nice and pretty. With practice and patience (and templates!) this should get easier. Then I continued to work in LDDT, and didn't have to worry about accidentally deleting the contours (and especially the labels) when importing new contours etc.
This is a pretty lame use, but it does allow an intriduction to styles and provide a better way of modifying contour labelling.

quiggle

2005-03-09, 04:24 AM

What really stopped us was trying to get realistic numbers for cut and fill. The surfaces all looked very good and the design profiles were very smooth, but we kept getting very different numbers after changes in a critical profile and the engineers didn't trust the output. It was a small site with no room for the errors they thought they were getting.

stephen.cowling

2005-03-09, 04:38 AM

stephen.cowling

2005-03-09, 04:39 AM

Also, Stephen, did you ever solve you station format issue?
Yes, I solved it, but only the hard way, which isn't really very hard, just harder than I had hoped.
Wow, that was cryptic. Sorry.

In short, station label formats seem to be set independently of each other in various places around the settings tree (eg. alignment labels, profile labels). I still don't know if changing the ambient setting can be used on a fresh set of settings to eliminate the need for changing each one individually. This is because I don't know how to start with a fresh set of settings... file>new creates a new file based on a template, which already has its settings, and the ambient settings have no effect.

In shorter, yes and no.

quiggle

2005-03-23, 02:58 AM

I haven't done this with C3D yet. Can you create a volume surface as in LDDT? At least you'd be looking at a picture of the volume as well as just a number. Numbers have a habit of staring at you and looking wrong :)
We were not deriving the cut/fill numbers through the quantity calcultions. Our site had a peculiar layout thd caused corridor to generate a surface ofer the entire site. We found a utility to compare the quantities from the surface from corridor to existing rather than going through quantities. I do believe that a volume surface can be created with Civil 3D, but we never got that far.

How is your project progressing? I haven't heard reports from anywhere for a while but there must be some projects still going.

I have heard that the 2006 release definitely has piping and some other enhancements. We can only hope it will prove to be more stable than current.

Ammon

2005-06-20, 06:02 PM

Hello everbody,
I loaded C3D on my computer to check it out. Seems interesting but have not got to deep into it because it lacks the pipe routines (i.e. storm and sewer) that I need. I guess I could switch back and forth from C3D to LDD but am to lazy until I am forced to.
I also recently loaded C3D to my computer and tried to do a small project with it. I wasn't familiar with it at all and the boss had told us we couldn't install any new programs until we got less busy :lol:

Well by the time I had some time to try new software I had both 2005 and 2006 on my desk. I started with 2005 and was gravely disappointed. I worked for a couple hours on the project and had the software crash when I tried to edit something. I tried to open what I had done already and it gave me an error mesage. I tried to recover and got the same error. After going through this process a few times and being frustrated that I didn't have an alignment database, surface database, point database, or anything else in the project from which to re-build my drawing, I uninstalled the program and am reluctant to try 2006 until there is some serious downtime to figure out how to work it.

I do like LDT 2005 and have been using it since I installed the 2005 software. If I have to flip between two software programs to do every project, I don't think it would be worth the trouble. We are a small office that works on small projects. Why can't the objects of C3D be incorporated into the database type projects of LDT?

I found the C3D tutorials somewhat helpful, but they don't cover all of the features that I would like to use, if these features are available. If they are going to phase out LDT, then they need to incoroporate much more of the LDT features, including the pipeworks.

ccallen

2005-06-20, 06:15 PM

We finally gave up on using AutoCAD in any form for our COGO stuff and bought Carlson. I have it working on top of LDT which I still prefer to Civil 3D. Someone on one of these forums finally came up with a solution to our original problem, but my boss decided he liked the way Carlson handled so many other things he wanted to go with that.

I've used AutoCAD for going on 9 years now and I have always preferred it to other CAD packages, but I think it's getting harder and harder to pick up for new users; I think new versions come out too often (we've vowed to only upgrade every OTHER year); and the support for it is too disjointed. I've taken seminars on it now and feel ok using it like we always have, but I'd sure hate to try to do anything MORE - or anything really different with it. And I still prefer LDT to Civil 3D.

Good Luck.

Ammon

2005-06-20, 07:37 PM

I can't claim the same amount of experience as you. I learned AutoCAD on r13 and r14. I have enjoyed most of the improvements and have yet to find a CAD program that I find as intuitive. What I've seen of 2006 it is becoming less so. Just in 2005, there are so many hidden commands that you can't find reference to in the help file. Forums like this is where you find out about settings and commands that you never knew existed.

ccallen

2005-06-20, 07:59 PM

I went to one of AUGI's "Cad Camps" last winter and I find that sort of thing helpful in terms of picking up on new stuff, but it's also too general to help sort out specific needs. If you continue to do the same things with CAD, picking up each upgrade shouldn't be that much of a problem, but my FEELING is that that isn't true anymore with AutoCAD - it's becoming harder and harder to ramp up with a new version. However, my real sympathies go to people just starting out, or maybe changing what they do with the package.

I was involved with designing a "computer conferencing" program (an early version of today's forums like this one) in 1980-1985. The problem quickly became apparent. Those of us who had used the package from the start didn't really have any serious problems everytime an upgrade would come out, but after even a couple years, the commands (it was ALL command-oriented back then - no mousies yet) - all the stuff you could do with the program - had become SO dense it was almost too intimidating to any NEW users.

And people were just using that program more or less for fun, or at least a free-time thing. That's not true with AutoCAD - I am amazed when I hear about people out there WORKING in CAD who can take a couple weeks to get "oriented" to a CAD upgrade. I sure couldn't do that. And I think that is becoming more of an issue.

Ammon

2005-06-20, 08:24 PM

I agree. When it takes at least a couple of weeks to upgrade to a newer version of AutoCAD just to learn the new idiosincracies, it is difficult to justify the upgrade.

Ammon

2005-06-20, 08:45 PM

Especially when I just get used to using one release, they release a new one.

I like the new abilities they do, but the time saved in learning how to operate the new release is not always worth the price and learning time of the upgrade.

robert.11726

2005-07-18, 05:05 PM

What version of EP are you guys on?
I use the latest stuff and LOVE the Command Line COGO they now have in the new version of the software.
As for Civil 3D I think that your IT person is right on the money, my sorces and they go pretty high up tell me the same thing.
As for them getting COGO any easier I would not look for that to happen. They use Carlson Survey for all of their Survey software now a days. And from what I have heard Carlson has a very nice COGO package too, although I have not use it nor have I seen the one that Autodesk sells.
But I do know that your cost to upgrade your existing EP is cheeper then if you wher to purchase new software, plus the added cost of new training on the new software is much higher.

kevin.breslin

2005-11-24, 06:54 PM

I agree that in general CAD software is becoming more complex but it seems that the complexity is simply a natural byproduct of the more complex abilities of the software. With any type of powerful software it makes sense to be trained on how to use the software by a professional. The alternative of muddling through using the software and trying to learn on the fly is by far more time consuming and although there are no easily quantifiable costs associated to self-learning, the on-the-clock time spent guessing will definitely add up and will most likely exceed the cost of a training class. I’m very familiar with Civil 3D and LDT and feel that both programs offer an outstanding array of COGO functionally, the real trick to making the most of the software is understanding how it works.

MHultgren

2005-11-28, 08:59 PM

(Jumps up on soapbox here!) With so many Self-taught GURUS out there from the early years, it makes sense that they would balk at new approaches and methodologies. Take a look back, when Vlisp was not available, people were a bit reluctant to try Lisp, until they saw how much it increased production. Does that mean that everyone needed to learn how to write Lisp? No, just how to load and run a routine. As the software packages get more complex, it is the job of us CAD Managers and Project Managers to determine which methods work the best for our type of work and the way we do it. That is why AU is held EVERY year! Where else can you get not only training from those who actually wrote the program (or parts of it) but also get to give them your input on what you think would make it even better!
I do my best to get some advanced training every year, I figure I am a professional and as with any profession, you need to maintain a certain level of annual education to stay abreast of advances in your industry. Those who would like to keep using AutoCAD like it was release 10, are either lazy (IMHO) or are not looking at what they do as a profession, to them it is just a 9 to 5 waste of time that they get a paycheck for. Steps off soapbox
I have put over twenty years into CAD and it really irritates me when folks complain about software getting too complex to use, when you think what it used to take to do this by hand (with a slide rule or calculator and a drawing board) using tools like a Planimeter and Triangles, T squares, templates and Rapidograph's. Or how about having to erase an entire column of text on a sheet of linen with an exacto knife!
Sorry for my ranting, but how easy do you think it is to calculate the volume of an irregular shaped pond with an irregular varying depth by hand? :veryevil:

backwoods

2005-12-05, 10:28 PM

Hi, my name is...well, should be easy to figure out...I am also the local It guy at our company. I believe Civil 3d is a gigantic step in the right direction, and it is alot closer then you guys are realizing.

I am afraid if you don't start taking notice now, that as releases get more advanced, then a few days of training will not get you very far. I have been knee deep in Civil 3d going 8 months or so and use it for everything I possibly can. I cannot stand Land Desktop anymore. It works, and I will use it when forced, but it just does not have near the functionality and efficeincy that civil 3d has.
[done bragging]

Anyways, I am forced into Land desktop still for survey duty. Carlson desktop is an excellent program. I am a former survcadd user and sucked it up when we switched to ldd and tried the fieldbook experiment. Didn't enjoy it, and immediately picked up carlson desktop. I have been happy with this, and heard at au that carlson for civil 3d is right around the bend, so that has me excited!

To me, this is the first time we can allow cadd to do what we always wanted. I never understood why we had a z value but never took advantage of it. We are finally exploring the possibilities in infrastructure. And they are endless.

Jmurphy

2005-12-06, 08:16 PM

Hi. My name is Murph. I been a AutoCAD user for a long long time........ started with R11/12 and now use Map 3D here at work but the management wants to swith over to a more robust GIS system. The EEEEEEEESRI platform :| so being the faithful AutoDesk user I got a copy of C3D to learn with, in case I decide to move on to better pastures. If you hit up the regular Map NG or the map forum you may of seen me there along with other news groups or forums that I hang out in.

Jmurphy

2005-12-06, 08:21 PM

I agree with you. Either keep up people or get out of the way because you're going to get ran over.

(Jumps up on soapbox here!)
<snipped to save space>
.

Phil Ferguson

2005-12-06, 09:59 PM

Hi, my name is Phil. I started using Autocad (R10 maybe?) and a host of lisp routines as a field surveyor somewhere around 1996. At the time, working in the field, it made sense for me to come into the office after doing some topo to "connect the dots". After that, I secured a position with my current employer in the survey dept. as a survey/cad technician. Sometime around 1999, the company decided to start using LDD for R14 (as opposed to Eagle Point and to replace a not-so-well-known software called Vango). It wasn't long before I made the "leap" to the engineering dept. I guess you could say...the rest is history.

Now, getting to the current "topic"...Knowing what the software that you are using is capable of is half the battle. This is why I believe that many of the opportunities that are available to see these software packages in action are valuable. The first training that I received for LDD was not much more than a "show-and-tell" (although it was 2 days worth of it). This training armed me with at least a little knowledge about what the software was supposed to be able to do. The environment around here was such that people would spend some time trying to figure out the functionality of a certain feature and if they couldn't get it to work, they went back to the way they knew to get the job done. As we learned things we SHARED with our coworkers and we all benefited from it (including the management). The management also knew that it was going to take a long time for them to see a return on their investment but they would benefit in the long run. After more than six years of using LDT, I still look at it as if it were a game. How do I make this do what I want it to do? Is there a better way? Is there someone around here that can teach me how to use this software more effectively? These are the types of questions that I feel are my responsibility to ask myself...not only for myself, but for my employer and my industry as a whole. The idea of just settling for the abilities that I currently have or have had in the past has not spent more than a fleeting moment moment in my mind. As a result, I no longer use LDT as a mere drafting tool nor only as a production tool...I use it as a design tool.

Now looking to the future...I have not had the opportunity to spend much time with Civil 3D nor has anyone else within the company. I have proposed to the corporate system administrator (I'm the local system administrator) that we install Civil 3D on each of the technician workstations that we have, not to replace but to supplement LDT. This will give techs/designers/project managers a chance to "see what it looks like". Once this has been done, each office would have a couple users spend time in light training with the software. Eventually, a few users would receive more extensive training (perhaps AU and beyond) and be able to then teach their coworkers. With a little luck and cooperation from the management, this will be accomplished before LDT is a thing of the past...

For those of you that have been using Civil 3D or that have experience changing software platforms (virtually), does this seem to be an effective plan? Any feedback on the subject would be greatly appreciated.

backwoods

2005-12-07, 06:02 PM

Go bucks!!

At our office, c3d was/is available to everyone. I put it on all the local systems and everyone has the ability to work with it. But they designated myself and one of my coworkers as the first to get into it. We had a reseller come in and train 3 other guys also. It is a work in progress, and you do have to decide which guys are going to benefit and pick up on this and which ones are just going to stay where they are at. We had the ability to go to AU, with our company picking up a large part of the tab, and in essence, they were trying to decide who wanted to improve their positions, and who didn't. Sadly only two of us signed up. But to our benefit the company paid the way.

I guess I said all of that to say this, bringing everyone along slowly works, and works best if you have a couple guys who can really get into the software, and use them to more or less train everyone else. Seems this software allows you to quickly decide who should be trained and who doesn't even need access to it.

Phil Ferguson

2005-12-07, 07:16 PM

Seems this software allows you to quickly decide who should be trained and who doesn't even need access to it.
This is one of the things that spooks me about Civil 3D...as nice as it seems that you can, for example, grip an alignment and revise it and have the profile update as well...it frightens me that someone could accidentally make a change to something without anyone knowing about it. Is there a way to lock/unlock these items once they have been finalized? If not, then I certainly would question who should be using the software and who shouldn't.

melanie.santer

2005-12-07, 09:04 PM

This is one of the things that spooks me about Civil 3D...as nice as it seems that you can, for example, grip an alignment and revise it and have the profile update as well...it frightens me that someone could accidentally make a change to something without anyone knowing about it. Is there a way to lock/unlock these items once they have been finalized? If not, then I certainly would question who should be using the software and who shouldn't.
There is not currently a feature that allows you to lock alignments, a work around or idea to avoid accidentally moving these objects may be to create sub folders in a Land Desktop type format, store your alignment and profiles in one folder, your surfaces in another, your base files and so on and so forth and maintain an xref environment.

backwoods

2005-12-08, 02:51 PM

Another option is, create your design drawing, and just create a copy for others to work in. Your second drawing, you can just explode they objects, so they are no longer dynamically linked.

No matter how you look at it, the biggest short falls in civil 3d is the restrictions for locking/exporting objects to a project, and the insane amounts of time it takes to plot.

xstat21x

2005-12-09, 06:43 PM

GO BLUE!!!!

Hey everyone. I'm fairly new here. Name is Deran, and I'm from Lakeland, Florida... originally from Michigan. I work mostly on residential subdivisions. My company just upgraded (finally) from LD3 to Civil 3D. Awesome, awesome program. I work in the survey dept. I start by creating the survey drawing of a vacant piece of land (anywhere from 20 to 5,000 acres) and create the survey drawing, including the surface. I then take the 3D surface and boundary and create the lot layout, roads, etc., and set up all fo the plan sheets and plan and profiles for the drafting department upstairs. This program pretty much rocks!

And oh yeah, Go Blue!

rad.77676

2005-12-09, 07:50 PM

~the first step is admitting you have a problem~
My name is Rob, and I'm a Cadaholic....

Our company is making the transition to Civil 3d and I think this software has some great potential, but the performance issues are a big concern at this point.

Points: To delete points from drawings takes 10 - 30 minutes depending on number of points. I havent' even been able to get up the nerve to remove more than 50,000 points, but we have some projects with a million points or more.

Surfaces & Alignments: Copy Surface results in a fatal error every time.

Styles: Dragging styles from one drawing to another, results in a variety of errors.

Anyone else going through these growing pains?

Phil Ferguson

2005-12-09, 09:35 PM

GO BLUE!!!!

Hey everyone. I'm fairly new here. Name is Deran, and I'm from Lakeland, Florida... originally from Michigan.

I am so sorry.

And oh yeah, Go Blue!

Which Bowl is it that Michigan is going to?

GO BUCKS!

k.sosay

2006-01-03, 06:28 PM

Stephen Reed
Using CAD for about 5 years now. First release used was R14, then used just about everything in between then and now. 24 years old, self taught (on the job while moving a civil firm into its new building) I am located in Jacksonville Florida. Worked with the best Engineers in the state, and the worst as well. Moved companies and requested Civil 3d so I wouldn't lose my footing on the up and coming releases and having to do this all by myself in a small company =)

Dont know much about it, took a 3 day class on it so I will be trying to give as much information as I know as possible. Good luck to us all!

connie.barrett

2006-05-25, 05:53 PM

Connie Barrett
Land Survey and Civil Engineering Designer
Currently Director of Data Visualizations at Pacific Soils Engineering in Southern California.

I've used autocad since version 2.6
Back in 1988/89 DCA (then softdesk, then LDD) shipped in it's first version. They shipped the software before the manuals were printed.
HA! That was fun, figuring out how to use it without manuals.

Versions 11-13 or 14 I used to teach the 3-day class.
Nowdays doing a lot of 3D as it relates to design functions.

aclink

2006-07-20, 03:47 PM

Hey everybody. Been posting for a little bit now, and I thought I'd put my general info out. My name is Andrew Clink, and I'm a draftsmen working with a Civil Engineering firm in Glynn and Camden County, Georgia. Took a lot of CAD courses in High School, so this is a big career step for me. Anyways, I'm hoping to get some more knowledge on the new Civil3D stuff (the last one I worked on seriously was 2002 and 2004; talk about a jump).

coondog45

2007-05-28, 08:10 PM

Hi, My name is John. I am a SR Engineer for a large heavy highway general Contractor. I am currently a lead estimater in our South Florida office. I have just ordered a copy of Civil 3D to see if it will work in project modeling as well as helping in quantity take offs for estimates. I will sort of reverse engineer a previous design to take off the quantities of work as a contractor needs them . I have been using ACAD for years mainly performing modeling functions for construction site planning. I intend to use modles of the earthwork as well as the structures . I also use models of the cranes etc to help plan the construction sequence. I think C3D will work great. I will let you know of any successes.

dgordon.68443

2007-05-31, 04:50 PM

Hello,

My name is Dan Gordon. I work for Prein&Newhof, a medium sized company with about 80-100 employee's. We do Civil Engineering, roads, plats, subdivisions, survey, sanitary, water, storm sewer. I have used Civil 3D for about a year now starting with 2006 and currently have version 2007 with service pack 3. I took a 3 day training course that went over the basics, and then I took what I learned back to my work and started applying it to what I do. I do mostly engineering type drafting and design for everything from road reconstruction to construction drawings for plats and condo's to site plans for new commercial buildings. I have been in cad heaven ever since I started using Civil 3D. I am more excited about the capabilities of this release then I have been about any new autocad release. I hear 2008 is even better.

I could go on for hours about the new features I like, but I will stick with just a few of the most incredible ones.

1. Corridors - these are so awesome. I used to be limited to using one alignment to project a road thru a template and then export the points in order to create a surface from them. Now I can and infinite number of alignments and link them all together into one proposed surface. Intersections have never been easier to build and to show correct contours. Retaining walls are a piece of cake now as well as ponds and other things that used to be difficult in Land Desktop.

2. Profile views - This is one of my favorites. I love the ability to show the existing ground shots every 50 ft and have it be dynamic to the profile. More recently I figured out how to use the elevations on the side of the profile so that they could be dynamic also. Not to mention how easy is it to cut a profile into 1000 ft segments to show on plan sheets.

3. Styles - Styles make everything so very much more efficient. Even people who do not normally use your standards and easily and quickly put together plans that conform to your standards.

Well this is long enough... :) Hope to hear from more people here. seems many look in but few post here.

randyc

2007-06-19, 10:47 PM

Hi, my name is Randy Casey. I see this thread hasn't been posted on for a few days, but I thought I would add to it anyways to put my 2 cents in on the LDD/C3D debate. I am an Engineering Technician for the City of Salinas, California and have been here for 4 years designing whatever is thrown at me (parks, streetlights, roads, parking lots, sewer, storm drain, etc...). Before that I worked for the Police Department for 8 1/2 years until an injury prevented me from doing my job and I had be reclassified.

The reason I mention this is because when I first got here I knew nothing about AutoCAD (or even Civil Engineering for that matter). I originally started on R14 with Softdesk, but did not use the Softdesk features as no one really knew it well enough to train me, so I used just the vanilla CAD for designs.

About a year later our department upgraded to LDT 2004. Within 3 months I got my first design project; design a basketball/volleyball court in an existing park. I know, not really a big deal which is why supervisor thought it would be a good pilot project for LDT 2004 as well a good training exercise for me. I was given the topo for the park which had been created from a recent survey and was told to go to it. My supervisor gave me some training on how to use COGO and was there for advice and help when needed, but essentially the project was mine to control. Through persistence and my unwavering determination to learn, learn, learn, I taught myself how to use LDT 2004. That and a well timed training class (which helped me iron out a few wrinkles and polish up my project) allowed me to finish my project on time.

Long story short, in the end I became the only person in our department who knew how to use any of the advanced features of LDT and was being called upon to teach the other CAD users in their projects (by this time I had been using CAD for about 2 years including my time on R14/Softdesk).

Now, fast forward to the Summer of 2006, our department has just upgraded to AutoCAD 2007 Civil (C3D, LDT, Map). I knew nothing of C3D, other than what I was able to read about in articles and see in webcasts and demonstrations. Hearing that LDT was about to go the way of the dinosaur, I made the blind leap into C3D (I attended AU 2006 and received some cursory knowledge of the program beforehand). About this same time I was given a project (ironically it was a park project, in the same park I mentioned before). This time I was to design a pad for a small "tot-lot". There were several design constraints which would require my design to be flexible.

I started out by importing my original LDT design of the park into C3D. I quickly learned how to start using FEATURE LINES and found them extremely easy to work with. Within a week I had not only completed my design, but actually had redesigned it at least 12 times (this included moving it, rotating it, adjusting slopes and elevations, etc.) all of which would have taken me weeks to do in LDT (in one day alone I had moved the pad 4 times).

Since then, I have not even started LDT on my workstation. I realize that C3D is still lacking in hydrology, and I'm still not sure what I would do if faced with a project that required it (fortunately, there aren't any on the horizon, for now, so I might get lucky and we will have C3D 2008 or 2009 before one I do get one). I still find bugs and glitches to this date, but overall it is far easier to use than LDT ever was. Once again I find myself in the position of being the most experienced user in our department. I am a senior member of the CAD standards committee as well as a lead CAD user. I have been promoted twice in the last 4 years, all based on my technical ability and my work ethic.

Anyways, long story short...again :roll:. If someone with no CAD or Civil background, like myself, can learn this software, and succeed, then anyone can. It just takes dedication and patience. Pick a pilot project if need be and be willing to learn and take any and every opportunity to attend classes, watch webcasts, read books, etc. Make time, take the initiative, twist your bosses arms, get what you need to make it happen! If you are not learning the software you or your organization are buying, then you/they are just wasting money...

slong

2007-12-03, 04:42 PM

I am a registered surveyor with 24 years in the industry managing the Surveys, Design and GIS for the 4th largest MD city.

We are seriously considering a new Software conversion from Eaglepoint to Civil 3D

We have a VERY robust field-to-finish operation set up in EAGLEPOINT and want to know about conversion issues to Civil 3D involving operation code similarity (designators for drawing commands) as well as feature-code libraries and linework libraries. I saw some old post from several years ago, but wondered wether there are new enhancements.
The modular based-ness of Eaglepoint and "sales-designed division of commands" among them drives me crazy. But the network sharing of licenses I like.
We also have a pretty established GIS with ESRI product.
I did see that Civil 3D handles all the projection/transformation end of coordinates systems as GIS does (and Eaglepoint doesn't)

The other Design Software we're looking at is Carlson Civil Suite (that has a pretty suite "Switch-over-to-me deal going on right now with there civil suite (also has some sweet routines for pretty completely converting our Field to finish coding and lining libraries). I'm familiar with Carlson and see that they produce Carlson Civil Desktop companion and another companion product that runs inside Land-Desktop Civil 3D?. It looks like it enhances some shortfalls in Autodesk's product in the data-collection arena.
The Autodesk integrated inhouse development of Civil 3D appeals to me though. Does Civil 3D work with Network/concurrent license framework?
Does anyone have any comments or brand new info concerning these- and the choice I need to make in the next 4 weeks.
This will be the first change in 14 years (the last one was away from DCA/Softdesk software)
One good point is that we will need to learn something new either one we move to so we'll be doing it together ;-[

Thanks

Steve

brian.hailey933139

2007-12-03, 08:37 PM

Welcome Steve. You'll find a lot of great info here.

To answer some of your questions, Civil 3D is built on top of AutoCAD Map 3D so you will have full functioning GIS capablities. You can connect directly to your ESRI shape files with Civil 3D. Civil 3D also has survey functionality. You can do field-to-finish work with Civil 3D using figure prefixes and description keys. Sinc (one of the users that frequents this discussion group) knows more about the survey side of things then just about anyone else (even most deskers).

If you have any specific questions, feel free to ask away!

Valuesize

2008-08-14, 05:02 PM

Hell every one just got started my post today. Been working for 2 yr doing Civil drafting and i come here ofter to look for thing that i have trouble with and try and find ppl that have to same things. But this time i could not find any one with a Spell check problem so i signed up and did a post. But glad to be and looking forward to helping out as much as i can.

fseguin

2008-08-23, 08:45 PM

Patrick.

I'm from Sweden. Have been working as a surveyor for seven years and as a civil engineer for one. During time as CE i've been working mostly in c3d 2008. At my company we are making plans for parks, kindergarten, roads and parkingslots.

I tried out the demo during autumn -08 and then we decided to buy the program.

The reseller told me that I could learn c3d in 3 month. Well almost true, but i keep learning all the time. There are always a lot of news around the corner.

See you all!

//Patrick Ericson, Jönköping, Sweden.

Matt_Drainage

2008-09-08, 03:52 PM

Hi,

Im Matt and currently working with Civil 3D 2008 with Coastal Science and Engineering. We currently design, survey, and nourishment of beaches and canals. Im currenlty a CAD Technician working primary on Civil 3D while I continue in school earning my Master in Engineering with Civil. So far I enjoy working with Civil because it allows such a wide variety of improvements of LDD. The company tried to upgrade to 2009 but that was quickly stopped after numerous issues over transferring files to other organization who do not use 2009 at the moment. I am learning as I go and have been helped numerous times by members of this forums to help answer technical questions, Thanks for answers and many more as time goes by..

Thanks Matt

randy.herx

2008-09-24, 12:34 PM

Hi, my name is Randy Herx:

And I'm a C3D addict (among other things!)

I'm a land surveyor currently working with an engineering/surveying/planning/environmental firm in Virginia, USA. I left Florida when the market started drying out and ended up here. I am a registered land surveyor in the state of Florida and will have my Virginia license next month. I've been an Autocad user for MANY years and love convincing other people that it is the best cad package out there. I'm also an avid programmer who started out with machine language back in the early 80s, then on to basic, pascal, C, VB, a little C#, and finally ending up with VB.NET. I absolutely LOVE writing code for the company I work for and whenever I can see a repetitive task that can be shortened, I write an addon. Or if I notice Civil 3D lacking a feature, I just write some code and can generally accomplish what we are needing. Anything to increase billability in these rough times.