(10-14-2022, 07:48 PM)msnowdowne Wrote: Hello,
I recently had a job where the engineer did not show existing conditions - I was able to get a round it by using an orthographic satellite image of the site to take-off the removals.
When a subcontractor asked which areas are asphalt roads and which are grassed, it wasn't easy to send him a map.
I had to take pictures of me selecting each element type to highlight them in the map.
see Picture 1 and 2 (first and last pic)
I think a solution is do add a setting under View to turn off cut/fill shading and turn on a solid colour or hatching to each element.
As the colour that has priority is on top it's be helpful to the modeler as the element order of precedence is right in your face; you can see what element has priority very easily.
This is important as it will hide outlines if they don't have priority.
The drawings become extremely messy if you don't hide the lines in an element that is behind another.
I included a picture of another job at the bottom where there are a lot of elements and it can be tough to manage it solely in your head.
I just realized the report function does something similar to this. Except it's showing surface elements on top of other elements which is not what I'm looking for.
See pic 3 (middle pic), the large ditch along the bottom right side of the drawing is to receive 150mm topsoil (Element = Topsoil @ Main Site).
The ditch element is just applying contours - not telling it what type of surfacing it will get (paving/concrete/topsoil/etc).
see Picture 3, 4, and 5 (middle three pics)
Have a nice weekend.
Thanks.
Sorry - i can get the pics to show up in order.
The picture title from top to bottom is in this order: 1, 4, 3, 5, 2
Hi msnowdone
Thanks for the screenshots and the feedback. This is quite an involved topic with a lot of different considerations. I will try to answer in regard to the current situation, then Kubla Cubed 2023 and then Kubla Cubed VFuture. I do agree this is an area that needs improvement.
Kubla Cubed 2021
Currently in Kubla Cubed the only display that will show this is the earthworks report in Picture 3 as indicated. A few notes about your project before I continue. Firstly it looks like there are lot of complex outlines maybe connected to each other. Did you know if you do an outline within another outline it will act as a 'punch out' and create a negative space in the boundary. Also boundaries can be 'islands', you don't need to connect them.
Secondly you have used the 'reduce' method, first defining absolute elevations (we usually recommend using a single feature surface for this not multiple ones) and then reduce elements to reduce to 'subgrade' level. I actually think the offset method would be better here perhaps.
Also the ditch you have looks extremely large and deep. Is this correct, it looks like a mistake ? It is quite easy to accidently define a trench with absolute elevations or a path with depths resulting in these mistakes.
So the problem is fundamentally that the visualisation you are trying to produce does not technically belong to that phase, that phase shows subgrade elevations not 'surface materials'. You should be able to see a report of reduce adjustments in the report though which should then correlate to the same areas of the surface if you have a 1 to 1 relationship between reduce elements and surface materials (e.g don't combine all 150mm adjustments into 1). The recommended future technique would be to raise up to subgrade in a subsequent phase called 'Finished Levels' and then use raise elements to fill from subgrade to FFL. A report of that phase would then give you the breakdown you want.
However in practical terms the reduce elements should give you the diagram you want. If an element say @ProposedHeadworks is totally covered by a reduce element then it shouldn't show in the report. However in your report it is there which indicates either :
- It doesn't require an adjustment
- It is partially only partially covered by a reduce.
- It is being adjusted with the offset method.
If it is being offset I would suggest sticking to either the offset method or the reduce method. Not combining the two methods in one.
In a scenario like this I would put all elevations in a 'Feature Surface' named Final Finished Levels (FFL) then reduce the different areas with reduce elements. Then the diagram should show all the reduce elements as expected, the areas where there is no reduction will show as 'Finished Floor Levels' which makes sense in the context of the diagram as the other levels are at subgrade whereas the areas at FFL will say so.
Kubla Cubed 2023
In Kubla Cubed 2023 we are moving things forward in a couple of different areas relevant to this. The drawing report (PDF\CAD) will feature this diagram. Which is the same as in the report but more detailed.
Kubla Cubed 2023 Alpha Build - Showing element breakdown diagram in drawing export
Kubla Cubed vFuture
We are working on a new idea which would allow you to create areas that were linked to elements. After KC2023 is launched we will look to include this somewhere in the plans. This would allow you to create area elements and style them how you like. We have also been thinking of allowing styling of elements by disturbance area as well. Currently you could just create areas by copying and pasting and doing a screenshot. In KC2021 there is no report of areas though, however in KC2023 there will be one, so something to consider.
Ultimately the long term and technically correct solution is to create another phase with raise elements going to 'FFL' these raise elements would be set to a material and you could then show this material diagram. This is ultimately what you need and the direction the program is heading for. There would be a special 'Material' view that would allow you to see the areas quite distinctly in the program (not in the subgrade phase though that would just show earth, as the reduce in that phase simply represent adjustments not material).
Hope this answers your questions, in summary your assumption that you could do this with the reduce elements is correct, but I think something is not quite setup correctly. For this to work well refer to the way I have setup the above in the first image. A Feature Surface for all FFL levels and reduce elements below. The map will then show reduce adjustments and in the remainder it will report 'Finished Levels (FFL)'.
