Autocad Civil 3d Sample Drawings Of Neighborhoods
I think InfraWorks 360 can definitely help you with conceptual design, review, final design, and presentation of your urban neighborhood model. Can you tell me a little bit more about your model? How was it built? Did you design it using CAD software, or are you working with physical documents?
If you have a digital model, what software did you use, and what types of data are you working with? How big is the model, in terms of file size and/or geographic extent? A couple of good starting points to consult would be the, the, and, and our. Thanks, Elliott. 2 million square meters is equal to 20 square kilometers, so your neighborhood will definately fit into Infraworks and run smoothly.
If you already have it in AutoCAD, you're off to a good start. If you just want a nice model, use Model Builder and adjust it per your drawing. If you want a functional model, clean up your current drawing and import it into Infraworks, using styles. Infraworks can visualize the attributes, similar to GIS. If you had linework for pipes in AutoCAD that was on a certain layer for 6' Sewer for example, you could have an Infraworks 'style' for 6' Sewer. The same would work for local roads, collector roads, Residential buildings, commercial buildings, etc.
Infraworks is quite powerful, but you don't need to use all that 'power' to make a good model, but the potential is certainly there. Model builder will simply take the best available 'free' data from the internet and slap it together to make a model.
It's far from perfect, however it provides a great starting point. With a little clean up and adjusting of styles, you could likely get to a complete model.slightly. faster than if you were to do it from scratch. Even if I have most of the data I need to make a scratch model, I'll often use Model Builder just to see what comes in.
Sometimes the terrain and imagery is better than what I have, or they have buildings when I do not. It's simple to remove what you don't want using the Model Explorer. It's just as easy to change the styles of many objects at once too. Once objects are in the model, regardless of how it was 'built', everything can be changed/adjusted. Not just visually through styles, but geometrically as well. Don't let your boss or coworkers know this, but using Infraworks is usually more 'fun' than 'work'.
You could also use Open Street Map for building and road and rail data, but you mention that your area of interest in the real world is not built. Therefore this is your opportunity to start designing your neighborhood. You can use the sketching tools or import data from other sources. InfraWorks can handle a bunch of different data types and formats. What do you want to adds to your model? Do you have 3D models from other programs of your intended designs?
Or do you need to acquire more data that represents the current as-built conditions? Jason was referring to a way to publicly access and download satellite imagery and building road alignments that you can import into InfraWorks 360. I would recommend that you read up on the InfraWorks 360 tutorials as a starting point.
Autocad Civil 3d Sample Drawings Of Neighborhoods. Suggested asking if one of you kind folks on the forums might be able to provide me with some sample drawings/files that I can open in civil 3d, ideally with the following things included:existing ground/finished ground surfaces and a volume surface (to calculate cut and fill), something. I am trying to draw a parcel map in AutoCAD, using the distance and bearing info that was added by to the original hand-made drawing by the surveyor. With today's technology, this is often relatively easy, but you still may run into issues when dealing with older neighborhoods, laid out in past times when. AutoCAD Civil 3D helps the City of Beloit, Wisconsin produce more uniform, consistent project documentation and react quickly to changes - no matter how late in the project those. The city boasts a lively riverfront development, vibrant residential neighborhoods, a historic downtown, and thriving business districts.
Feel free to add some more detail here about what types of features you want to add to your model. Hi Heitz, Considering that you have a Civil 3D project of the area already, I would definitely recommend working with both IW360 and Civil3D for this effort. A nice option you have is to open your Civil 3D drawing in InfraWorks 360. You can bring Autodesk AutoCAD Civil 3D data into your InfraWorks 360 model by referencing a local AutoCAD Civil 3D DWG drawing or an IMX file exported from AutoCAD Civil 3D. For help on how to do this, check out this topic:.
An AutoCAD Civil 3D user can also bring InfraWorks 360 model data into AutoCAD Civil 3D by referencing a local InfraWorks 360 model or an IMX file exported from InfraWorks 360. For help with this, check out this topic. No problem. Yes, importing your AutoCAD DWG to InfraWorks 360 is also an option, with some caveats. Is the DWG file a 3D object or a 2D vector layer?
The current release of InfraWorks 360 does not support 2D DWG vector terrain overlays. However, with the current release of InfraWorks 360:. You can import 2D line data with elevation from AutoCAD DWG.
You cannot import blocks. Only the geometry is imported. Here's some information on that:. Also, you can check out the option to for a starting point to use as a guide when sketching. Additionally, I can confirm that the ability to add 2D DWG vector overlays to InfraWorks 360 is a feature that you can access from the Rolling Sandbox (assuming that you are a member of the sandbox). Or, if you are able to install the newest release of InfraWorks 360 when it goes live (most likely next week), you can.most likely. also bring in a 2D vector layer then (.please note that due to the nature of software release cycles I cannot guarantee that 2D DWG vector overlays will be included in the next release of InfraWorks 360, but I can tell you that there is a very strong likelihood).
Please let me know how this works out! Best, Elliott. Hey Elliot, So, in order to get all the ideas straight, let me ask you a question? How would you start if you were in my position?
Situation: You have the neighborhood project all done. The C3D drainage, earthworks and etc are split in lots of files. You have the masterplan (the ground plan) in a single AutoCAD file where there is the homes, roads, plants, etc location. Apparentely, the location of the neighboorhood on the Model Builder is empty (have no idea how to proceed with this). The idea of having a functional and beautiful project on IW is amazing, but the first goal is to have a nice and groundbreaking 3D model for presentation.
So, importing the DWG files and start sketching is the best start in your opinion? Thanks already. I think I would have to say that a combination would be the best approach. I am curious - where is the project location, if you can tell me? I'd like to see why you aren't getting any OSM buildings/roads/rails. 1) create Model Builder model and locate any additional data you can that represents the current location, in terms of building SHP footprints, roads, rails, etc.
2) Import DWG and sketch buildings if you haven't located building and roads data. 3) Import separae IMX files from C3D per feature class. How does that sound?
(I also put this question out to my team in case there are any other best-practice suggestions. I'll keep you posted.) Thanks, Elliott.
In, I had this to say about AutoCAD 2018’s changed DWG format: Why does AutoCAD 2018 need a new DWG format? It probably doesn’t. The 2013 DWG format is capable of holding pretty much anything you want Although Autodesk cites performance reasons with certain drawings, I strongly suspect the new DWG format was introduced purely to make life difficult for competitors, and to encourage wavering customers to stay with Autodesk for fear of losing compatibility. In other words, it seems likely this is an anti-competitive change rather than a technical one. In, highly respected Swiss-based Autodesk development and research person had this to say on that subject: The main reason for the break in compatibility is some longer-term work that’s going on inside the AutoCAD codebase.
For now this is really only surfacing in small ways – I expect it’s contributing some performance benefits, for instance – but the work is absolutely critical to the long-term viability of the product. Kean’s a straight-shooter and I’m always ready to be corrected if it can be shown that I’m wrong.
So I would be interested to learn more detail about this long-term work that’s critical to the long-term viability of the product. It might be good news for customers or really terrible news. If the groundwork is being laid for a file format that’s more heavily cloud-reliant or subject to continuous change, say, that would be an absolute tragedy for customers. Autodesk is clearly manoeuvring customers into a position of maximum tie-in using various nefarious means, and if the DWG format change is part of that then it’s to be condemned. Maybe further information would help alleviate such concerns.
Kean can’t provide that information, and neither can the who were given some insight under NDA last week, but I’m sure someone at Autodesk could. That is, if there really is nothing to worry about. Kean also had this to say: AutoCAD continues to be a core part of Autodesk’s business – and it continues to receive significant investment in terms of development resources – but don’t expect that to translate to buckets of shiny new features: AutoCAD’s feature maturity means the investment is rightly being focused in other areas (at least for now).
This had me wondering if Kean mistyped “immaturity”, because almost every AutoCAD feature from the last decade was released immature and only the lucky few eventually got finished. There’s a huge mass of outstanding work left to do in AutoCAD just to bring its existing half-baked features up to scratch, practically all of which could be done without disrupting customers with a new DWG format.
As for the feature set itself being mature, I can’t agree with that, either. Maybe it’s considered mature within Autodesk because of defeatist thinking about what’s possible with DWG-based CAD software? Kean’s comments seem to reinforce that impression. From where I’m standing, the lack of progress in recent AutoCAD releases demonstrates a severe lack of imagination and hunger to improve the product, not any inherent natural plateau in CAD development. I believe this because Autodesk’s keener competitors have shown that no such plateau exists.
Bricsys has proven that to improve an AutoCAD-like DWG-based product with genuinely useful and productive new features, and they can do it without changing the DWG format. Incidentally, my preliminary tests indicate BricsCAD V17 opens and saves DWG significantly faster than AutoCAD 2018, again without the need for a new format. More on that in a later post.
Back to Kean: This is a tricky balance – and could easily be interpreted as a big company not caring about (some of) its users and only being interested in milking its cash-cow – but the work happening behind the scenes is significant and I believe will ultimately prove to be of real value to our customers. History has taught me to be dubious about that.
Many things that Autodesk promotes as being of value to customers turn out to be of net negative value. Time will tell with this one. Sorry, but I really don’t believe that Autodesk cares about AutoCAD and its users as anything but an income source. I know there are still honest, hardworking, enthusiastic people within Autodesk (like Kean) who want to improve the product on behalf of customers. Good luck to those people, because their efforts are being stymied by management.
The results we’re seeing out here in customer land are dismal, and no matter what spin is put on that, it must be disheartening. Autodesk people, caring about users? Autodesk, the public listed company, as directed from the top? Autodesk’s actions and inactions tell me otherwise.
Zero cares are given. No words can fix that, no matter who they come from.
AutoCAD really is being treated as a cash cow; hang one of those bells around its neck and be done with it. As anyone can verify in the AutoCAD Saveas dialog box, the DWG format changed in R14 (1997), R2000, R2004, R2007, R2010, R2013, and R2018. So you can see that it’s been about every three years between versions, except for the latest version, which has been five years. As anyone can see, the latest format change is less frequent than before. Here’s what I wrote in Help: “The DWG format has been updated to provide improvements in the efficiency of open and save operations, especially for drawings that contain many annotative objects and viewports. Additionally, 3D solid and surface creation now uses the newest geometric modeler (ASM), which provides improved security and stability.” The word security refers specifically to emerging problems in many formats where criminal, mercenary, and state-sponsored hackers doctor data files in targeted software that execute code when opened (using buffer overflow and other techniques). Many of these vulnerabilities have now been closed.
Finally, I couldn’t help but notice that in the image you chose of an adorable and highly intelligent Swiss cow, you accused her of. As a Swiss immigrant, I can only encourage you to avoid making accusations until you have credible evidence! I just wonder why Adesk did not change the format in 2016 release. This thing of feature maturity is funny. If the adesk developers worked in a real company that shares xrefs between teams, they would think their tools were in pre-school, taking naps every day. If they just asked the question “how would a user know where a file is xreffed?” they could start a whole new set of features that could really addict a company to their product. But then they would have to actually work with real companies to get the tools right enough, and that might reveal their big secrets like when the developed the CUI system that continues to be broken in really bad ways.
As Trump would say”Its broken really bad, its terribly broken.”. That thing about security continues to annoy me.
AutoCAD looks to several files on startup that can be modified to do bad things, but really one one has ever happened, the bad acad.lsp that someone started. So Autodesk seriously allowed us to sign lisps! Of course they did not distinguish between startup lisps, and others, so got that feature wrong. They did some bandaid fixes to try to address startup stuff but why can’t they just ask long time cad managers like me and others how to do things as we are always the ones telling them how they should have been done after. Dang, if I can’t mine gold and someone keeps telling me I’m doing it wrong, and they mine gold successfully all day, maybe they should listen.
Yes, exactly. And so can previous versions of DWG. And so can PDF (as you probably know, Adobe hardened this format considerably as a result of widespread and well-known abuse), Microsoft DOCx, and most other software formats! Some months ago, I was horrified to see a video of someone opening a DWG file in AutoCAD, which resulted in MS Paint executing. The key here is (1) the level of criminal or terrorist motivation to execute code in your organization, (2) the level of popularity of the format, (3) the value or sensitivity of the content in the format, and (4) the level of difficulty of doctoring the format. US government agencies are now beginning to prohibit the purchase of software that doesn’t meet their security standards.
No exceptions. Hi James, It’s hard to answer your question of why there was no format change in AutoCAD 2016 (or 2017). All I would say is that it’s not done unless there are a good number of really compelling reasons to do so.
Regarding DMCS and workflow, I agree with you. Getting the level of control and complexity right is very difficult. Remember Autodesk WorkCenter many years ago? Every change to a document spawns a cascade of workflow items/notifications/ approvals, which in turn spawns set of document changes. The tools available for documentation management range from file systems to configuration management systems. Workflow tools range from email to process management. The big thing now is access control.
These tools are often not employed well, resulting in a stifling amount of administrative overhead. Please don’t underestimate the experience of our software engineers. For example, one of them has a degree in Aeronautical engineering, Their director has a PhD in Civil Engineering. If you prepare a wishlist of improvements to the CUIx editor, I’ll be happy to deliver it for planning consideration. You can post it to the AutoCAD Customer Council, post it here, or email me (dieters@somesoftwarecompany.com). Thanks, Dieter.
Software engineering ain’t rocket science. If it was, maybe your highly qualified people would be able to compete with their Bricsys counterparts in terms of code efficiency, instead of needing literally ten times as much program to do less, slower.
I’ve been providing specific, actionable feedback about the CUI editor since it rolled out poorly designed, ridiculously slow, buggy, and horribly unfinished with AutoCAD 2006. 12 years later, I’m still working around some of the original bugs and design failings. I literally did that just yesterday. Maybe James’ suggestions could be put into the same planning consideration black hole as mine for convenience? @jmaeding This is exactly the problem that 3ds Max development has as well. The developers don’t use the software and the outsourced beta seems to only focus on the “new” features.
There are two things you can count on in every Max release: Backburner net rendering will be broken and random default keyboard shortcuts and menu items will be changed, moved or renamed. As a bonus for 2018 Mental Ray has been removed.
@Steve It isn’t easy to haul 25+ years of legacy code and horrible hacks around. The developers are doing the best they can before the next round of layoffs. There were a bunch of security updates to the DCC programs (and Revit) back in December which had to do with the FBX SDK. If there is an issue with ASM and associated dlls this could also affect 3ds Max and anything else that can load DWG. I guess if it is as serious as Autodesk says, “save as previous” in Max is going to be a problem if there aren’t additional security updates to legacy releases. I just noticed the “hi DPI awareness” new feature of acad 2018 missed the VLIDE: @ Dieter, don’t get me wrong, the programmers and people at Autodesk are top notch.
Autocad Civil 3d Sample Drawings Of Neighborhoods 2017
They make my coding skills look juvenile, no question. They are too disconnected from revision iterations though. Its fine to try something one way, but you fix when it flops. The whole thing of a main and enterprise menu, with partials daisy-chained on was a horrible idea. We went from an all adult party in 2005, to a two adult and their kids party in 2006. Enterprise read only menu idea is fine, but not the “main menu loads kids” thing when it used to be “profile loads everyone”. Autodesk forgot we run bare acad and verticals and several other things I could go into.
It will never get fixed now and I can say 95% of the customization my users used to do easy is indeed rocket science now. Hello again Dieter, the brave one. I’d suscribe to MDT 2018 “Cyber espionage accounts for 60% of the breaches in the Manufacturing sector and 52% of the breaches in the Professional sector.” Isn’t the requirement for continuous Internet connectivity responsible for 100% of those breaches?
Way back in the dark days before pre-cloud lies, when ws received all-in-the box deliveries, once in a while updates downloaded onto an isolated Internet machine ten releases ago – those breaches required burglary. I don’t have no pHd, but I do know that unplugging the ethernet cable offers unbreachable electronic security. Written on a throwaway tablet while my CAD gently weeps. @Dieter If you walk into a room of unhappy cad users wearing the Autodesk pinata costume they will beat on something until the candy comes out.
Not really disparaging but more like a plain, slightly pointed, truth. Sometimes you do what you have to do to get it out the door.
Maybe it is cleaned up later maybe it isn’t. I wonder if there are any colorful dev comments in ACAD, Max, Maya etc. For regressions. @blueginkgo It certainly makes better cost benefit sense to the vendor to get a customer to pay to fix vendor defects than to fix them for free. It is unlikely the customer will see any value in that and even less value in paying for zero feature enhancements.
“Nice project you got there, would be a shame if something happened to it”. Hi DieterDo you think Google is wasting their time with this:? I think the best defense against cyber threats is the free and open exchange of information about vulnerabilities.
It’s possible that the AutoCAD 2018 format was changed in order to make it more secure. Unlikely, but possible. I think it’s more likely that it was changed in the misguided belief that a new format would force users onto a newer “more secure” platform.
However, if it’s true that data saved in pre-2018 formats is inherently vulnerable, then I think Autodesk have an obligation to share details so potential victims can properly evaluate their risk exposure and take action on equal footing with the bad guys, who presumably already know all about it. @Dieter, But aren’t our questions and comments based on constructive criticism your organization desperately needs? I write software too and tell my users to be “picky and greedy” to get the best results in terms of productivity. I take it as a compliment when they say some feature needs minor or major changes, as that is a healthy relationship. Anyway, I did want to mention that I have done several focused study groups with various products, and it has been a disaster. Many of them literally ask me if a button should be on the left or right, or they show me some interface and I am supposed to offer a reaction.
Its as if I am being presented art work with no info and am supposed to talk out loud. My reactions are always “what was the team trying to do?”, but you know I am way too late on the scene at that point. I have talked to certain product developers early on, but they have not maintained the conversation and ended up with good ideas implemented just poorly enough that I can’t use them.
So my opinion at this point is Autodesk does not maintain client relationships how normal software makers would to get features “correct”. We wish they did, as you would find we have years of history and usage testing but can never seem to find the person who can do anything with it. Maybe you can, would love to hear how adesk wants us to truly be part of its development efforts.
On the security issue, I have yet to see any virus or malicious code get executed or even detected from a dwg as long as I recall. Honestly, I would thing dwg is a ripe target too as its a data file type people sling around. However, the time I spend dealing with corrupted AEC objects, excess reg apps, layer filters, materials, and anno scales is 100x more than it should be. So if Autodesk claims it wants to make dwg secure, it should first patch up the holes in the hull before looking at potential, much less real, leaks. This comes up fast when sharing files with Bricscad users. I routinely have to delete the civil3d dictionary portion of a dwg to get xrefs to resolve in bcad.
Autocad 3d Sample Drawings
Its starting to get where the acad verticals are regarded as contaminating dwg’s. I know that is not easy to just change, but there is a distinct lack of file cleaning tools from adesk, which is the easier answer to the trouble than fixing the architecture involved.