Mapchecks in AutoCAD 2010 - Civil 3D

Coy Glasscock · Post by **Coy Glasscock** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:50 pm

Has anyone found a way to manually input the non-tangent curveâ€™s radial bearing while running mapchecks in AutoCAD 2010 Civil 3D? I just can't seam to find it.

My problems are that while reviewing legalâ€™s for the cities I do my own mapcheck and start with an empty drawing, then hand type each line and curve as I read the Legal. I have not found a way of doing this without â€œChordâ€ bearings.

I know that California is one of very few states that â€œsuggestâ€ to a PLS to use Radial instead of a chord. So I am sure it is no concern to AutoCAD designers but it sure does make it hard.

The other quick way that Civil 3D run mapchecks is to read each label (and not the line) in the actual CAD file. However some counties require all bearings to read a northerly direction and this requires a lot of time to over write in the software.

Any help or Ideas?

Coy Glasscock · Post by **Coy Glasscock** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 1:01 pm

According to Autodesk's users webpage:

"Currently, when creating a parcel either by Map Check, drawing lines/curves commands and using the transparent command there is no options, for creating a non-tangent Curve based on having a Radial Bearing. This forces the users to manually calculate the Chord Bearing for Map Check routine or having to manually draw the radial bearing and radius distance, which adds a needless extra steps."

Coy Glasscock · Post by **Coy Glasscock** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 1:08 pm

And another post from a User group:

"If your a Surveyor wishing to use Civil 3D for survey work, the sad truth is that your going to need to learn programming and customization. Civil 3D is not surveyor friendly, and does not recognize such concepts of Radial Bearings. You'll also notice when using Mapcheck Analysis and simply drawing parcels that contain non-tangent curves Civil 3D has no methods for importing such non-tangent curves using Radial Bearings. When inputing non-tanget curves you must manually calculated the Chord Bearing."

Anyone know a cheap third party mapcheck software just used for mapchecks? Don't need line work, just hand input and a report.

Gromatici · Post by **Gromatici** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 2:08 pm

Carlson with the intellicad engine is $1,500. Seems like a lot until you start doing everything in it instead of C3D and realize that you saving hundreds of dollars on each job. If you want it .dwg compatible you'll have to buy their AutoCAD OEM engine version for $2,995. I don't work for them or get any money... just my honest opinion.

Basically they make too much money from A&E firms, and not enough from surveyors to bother.

Coy Glasscock · Post by **Coy Glasscock** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 2:46 pm

Just spoke with one of our Cities and they are considering, that since they require all work performed for them to be in Civil 3D format and that is what they are starting to use, "all survey work going through their plan checks should contain chords".

May start seeing more of that.

Coy Glasscock · Post by **Coy Glasscock** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 7:40 am

Not trying to get the lines in, just trying to get Mapcheck reports. Doing plan checks for taxpayers, we do not want to have to spend extra time re-creating the line work. We just want to sit down with a legal in one hand and type in bearing, distances and curve data and print out the report.

Am searching the software used by title companies now, looks like in the $100 range.

Ric7308 · Post by **Ric7308** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 8:17 am

I still use LDT for my mapchecks using the Figure commands. Doesn't allow entry of non-tangent curves either, but I still complete the entry. The Figures command generates a new polyline which allows me to snap the curve points to the correct location and the mapcheck works appropriately with that.

Basically, any of the inquiry options under Figures is reading the polyline and converts the report into the appropriate units as configured.

Not having ventured too far in C3D, I thought that the LDT commands were still available, but Figures was under the old Survey module and may not be there.

Ric

Coy Glasscock · Post by **Coy Glasscock** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:48 am

You can still do it that way, the difference is that you can no longer pick the lines to run your check off of. You now have to create the lines then create the labels, and then pick your labels to run a mapcheck. Just adds extra steps. If you are doing your own in house mapcheck of a ROS. You have to change your labels for this. (Orange County likes to see all labels running in a northerly direction) if this is done in your drawing you will need to create a new set of labels running clockwise just for a mapcheck. the other option is to use you northerly lables and then go back and edit your mapcheck files before running reports. Either way, way too long of a process.

What used to take 5 minutes is an easy 30 minute job. If chords where given in the legal description it would be back to a 5 minute job.

Brian Christensen · Post by **Brian Christensen** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:53 pm

You mean you can't "define by polyline"?

I still use the archaic LDD 2000. If I want to generate map checks, I draw p-lines, starting at the POB, proceeding through the parcel (snapping on the end points of the already mapped parcel) and close the figure. If I have a non-tangent curve, just an extra step, I grip on the mid-curve of the p-line and snap it to the mid-curve of the parcel. Pull down my "Parcels' menu and define by polyline. The process in quick and flawless.

Interested to know how other people do it as I am self taught in autocad.

JMS8070 · Post by **JMS8070** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:04 pm

Brian, I'm using LDD2007 and do the exact same thing. (But I'm also self taught).

Ric7308 · Post by **Ric7308** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 6:16 pm

Well, that's three of us. Would be interesting to see how the other "leading" surveying CAD packages handle this.

Brian Christensen · Post by **Brian Christensen** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 7:04 pm

Coy Glasscock wrote:We just want to sit down with a legal in one hand and type in bearing, distances and curve data and print out the report.

TDS Foresight.

Coy Glasscock · Post by **Coy Glasscock** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:08 am

Brian Christensen wrote:You mean you can't "define by polyline"?

That's what I can't find, I have been on many CAD web forums and everyone says the same thing, in AutoCAD Civil or Civil 3D you can not define by linework. only manually or by labels.

If someone knows how to define by line-work please let us in on the secret.

pls7809 · Post by **pls7809** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:03 pm

I usually make it the submitting surveyor/engineer's problem if a mapcheck closure report is not included with the submittal package. Send it back and request a report, withold approval until they send one.

I have always been taught since the day of the first time I submitted something anywhere for review that you always include a closure report. I only review for one city right now but I would guess only about 50% of subdivision maps are submitted with closures and only 90% of legal descriptions or LLA's are submitted with them. I'll usually check what I can and request closures for the next round. Most of the submittals I see can probably go only 1 review if they sent the closures in the first time around.

Maybe I'm too strict.

subman · Post by **subman** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:36 pm

Has anyone used PC Survey? You can download and use for a 30 day free trial. I am waiting for them to activate the free trial. Here is the website:

http://www.pcsurvey.com/

Berk Blake, PLS CA · Post by **Berk Blake, PLS CA** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:05 pm

Civil 3D isn't set up for you who want to work in planes, nor is it able to use most of the line commands that LD used to use and are still in their lines pulldown. It seems that lines that are sloped, can't be extended, turned angles from, etc. I believe that this program has stepped entirely away from what LD used to offer and I doubt that it will every revert. My installer questioned the project manager for Civil 3D when I complained and the response was "why would anyone want flat lines?"

I have 4 licenses of C3D, currently 2009, 3 are running with LD2008 on the same computer that they are on.

I am also the proud new owner of Carlson Survey 2009 and one Civil.

RasterMaster · Post by **RasterMaster** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 3:06 pm

Berk,

Are you saying in C3D 2010 you can not snap to "Apparent Int"? I have not used 2010 yet but 2009 and less, well down to 14, one can do that task.

RM

Berk Blake, PLS CA · Post by **Berk Blake, PLS CA** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 5:57 pm

I'm saying that I can no longer draw lines through topographic points (lines by point numbers) for my fences, e.p.'s etc. that have no elevation, because in C3D they all have elevations. I am sure that o-snaps work just fine and I kind of understand the direction C3D has taken. It just didn't include me in that direction.

Ben Lund · Post by **Ben Lund** » Tue Sep 01, 2009 7:16 am

Berk,
Some AutoCAD definitions:
“Line” is a line between two points that can have different X,Y,Z coordinates.
“Polyline” is a line between two or more points that can have different X,Y coordinates but the same Z coordinate.
“3D Polyline” (LD) is a line between two or more points that can have different X,Y,Z coordinates.
“Feature Line” (Civil 3D) is the equivalent to the “3D Polyline” (but with more features).

LD had the option to import points at an elevation of zero or the true elevation of the point. If you inserted the points with an elevation of zero, anything you snap to it will also have an elevation of zero and vica versa.

I don’t believe Civil 3D can insert the points to an elevation of zero so you will have to draw your lines (or polylines) and then use the “flatten” command on them to make all the Z values equal 0.

Hope that helps.

Edward Reading · Post by **Edward Reading** » Tue Sep 01, 2009 8:16 am

In Civil 3-D you can insert points at elevation zero.
It is controlled by the point label style, and can be toggled at will after insertion.

Berk Blake, PLS CA · Post by **Berk Blake, PLS CA** » Tue Sep 01, 2009 11:30 am

I have been with LD since it was DCA and I wasn't asking for help just giving my opinion. I left C3D last September and didn't miss the Subscription cost for 4 seats at all, in fact it paid for my 3 seats of Carlson Survey and the one civil.

Ben Lund · Post by **Ben Lund** » Tue Sep 01, 2009 11:35 am

Sorry Berk, didn't mean to offend.
4 seats of C3D = 3 seats of Carlson Survey and 1 seat of Carlson Civil?

Berk Blake, PLS CA · Post by **Berk Blake, PLS CA** » Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:04 pm

The subscription cost for 4 seats of C3D = 3 seats of Carlson Survey and 1 seat of Carlson Civil.

I've being paying subscription costs to ADESK form their first invention of the Subscription. The bad part is that for the last 4 or 5 years ADESK did nothing to improve or correct LD choosing rather to try to force feed us with C3D.

I understand Edward Reading's statement, but based on my observations, it looked like map making in C3D was going to be slower than it is in LD. The surfaces were cool, but not that much cooler.

Berk Blake, PLS CA · Post by **Berk Blake, PLS CA** » Tue Sep 01, 2009 3:41 pm

It certainly does distinguish the difference. My problem wasn't with a program that ADESK hasn't updated for years, it was with C3D, which has some of the same problems that are in LD and introduces a whole new level of problems. I don't mind change for production, but I didn't want to live in a 3D world for tract maps, records of survey, parcel maps, lines other than contours in topographic maps, legal plats, etc.

I did not see the purpose and went a different way.

California Surveyors Forums