Alan, in your method of using one template does the “type of code above” designation play any factor in corridor linking? If so how? If seems like it could be used to link different instructions that use the same source node between the end station ("?" in a table) of one instruction and start of the other; rather than perpendicular drops.
This would allow the one template method to be used without the need for 0 offset table entries, thereby eliminating doubled up nodes, wouldn’t it?
Which leads to next question: What is the best method to create layered 3D linework from a corridor for staking/layout purposes the same as the guys in the field are used to seeing in non corridor models. Is it to explode & relayer by name all the exploded lines; then find, break and remove those double lines created from the 0" offset nodes mentioned previously?
Also, it would be really nice to have an option to define a slope as “node to node” in a table. This would eliminate the need for another instruction and yet another 0 offset node double line.
Thank you.
The Type of Code Above only affects Template Transitions and the Intersection Design Tools, they play no part in single template road models at this time at least.
I am not sure what you mean by 0 offset table entries and doubled up nodes - if for example you have a template element that is 12’ wide and -2% slope that goes all the way through the job, and then you have a second line that starts at station 200 of the first line at 0 offset and widens to 6’ offset say at station 250, then depending on what happens outside that line would for me dictate how I defined it in the template
For example if there is nothing outside of it then I would define it using an offset slope instruction and use a Table for the Offset and start the table at station 200,0 and then 250,6 so that this line starts at station 200 and goes to 250 at 6’ and then stays at 6’ to the end of the job.
For the next node if there is one, and if the next line starts at station 0 and is say 1’ offset from the EP and then 1’ offset from the second line that starts at 200 you could use Previous node as the reference and then it would attach to EP for the first 200’ and then the second line thereafter - if that relationship is always the same then that will work well.
However if the second line starts at 200 and then stops to skip over an intersection with eg a driveway, but the EP goes all the way through, using previous will cause the 3rd line to step in and be 1’ off the EP through the driveway which is likely not what you want, so you would then have to add tables into that to stop it across the driveway and start it again the other side.
In this way you can not have 0 offset lines - however they don’t always work this way, and sometimes you need a Zero offset line to control something outside of it. In those situations then yes I would likely explode the lines out of the corridor and delete the zero offset lines that I did not need if I felt they would be a problem for the field crews - or you could name them and then as you relayer them (Relayer by Name) you could put them on a layer (based on a name) that you don’t select and send to the field or you work through them Breaking as needed before sending to the field.
I agree that using Node to Node in a Table would be helpful - I have asked for that many times and it has never been implemented unfortunately - I guess this is why I do so much in Excel - I tabluate all my slopes in Excel and then just Copy and Past into Slope Tables as needed. If you can create the 3D lines from the corridor that you have built so far (provided it is right) you can add the lines as Reference Lines to the corridor and then use those to define slopes or attach elements of the template to - I will often do that in complex areas e.g. Gores or where two sideslopes are intersecting (coming together or departing from each other) to define the 3D lines that are needed and then I use those to form the sideslpes rather than sideslope instructions for example).
Hope that this helps
Alan
2 Likes