(01-29-2018, 10:00 AM)GTipp Wrote: I have the same issue with being able to define retaining walls and then back fill behind these. Some of my project have structural fill to allow buildings on them and others with batters slopes to marry back to existing ground. It would be great to be able to calc all this for fill volume.
Hi GTipp,
Thanks for the feedback. We do have a retaining wall element planned as part of the surface definition in the future. Then you will be able to define outlines, contours, points,
and retaining walls in the take-off form. I think this will be really useful for your situation and perhaps also for TimO.
Meanwhile I have a suggestion that you might both find useful...
You could use a narrow path with steep slopes to define the retaining wall, and then a platform behind it for the back-fill. I think this will achieve the effect you're after. I've attached some screenshots to try to illustrate what I mean. For the platform you can define side slopes to achieve the batter back to the existing ground, whereas for the path I would define a batter of 0.01 to make it basically vertical.
It's important the the platform edges along the wall are drawn within the width of the path element, otherwise the platform's side slopes will extend over the wall.
Bear in mind that for back-fill it's best to use the 'fill only' mode so that the software will calculate fill, but not cut. This means it will tie into the existing ground where the back-fill meets the ground, or if you define the back-fill above all the ground it will have side slopes with the angle you have defined to meet the ground.
Cheers,
Leo
