Activity Feed › Discussion Forums › Software, CAD & Mapping › Missing F2F codes in carlson
Missing F2F codes in carlson
Posted by beuckie on August 12, 2022 at 9:03 amUsing carlson for my linework but having used other software where there was a possibility to code a few nice and handy stuff.
-coding the intersection of lines in the field. Handy when the corner of a line is obstructed
-coding the offset through a measured point instead of typing OH and OV. Sometimes it is difficult to measure the values.
Maybe @ladd-nelson can give his opinion about these ones?
Norman_Oklahoma replied 1 year, 8 months ago 4 Members · 5 Replies- 5 Replies
Are you thinking of the “Special Codes”?
@norman-oklahoma
They would fit under Linework Special Codes.
But i don’t see an intersection code?
Is this parallel code the OO (only offset) one?
- Posted by: @beuckie
But i don’t see an intersection code?
Is this parallel code the OO (only offset) one?
I’m not aware of an “Intersection” special code as I could see three types of intersection approaches (with or without offset value[s] which are handled in the SurvPC COGO [coordinate geometry] – Intersections routine):
- “direction-direction intersect” (aka bearing-bearing intersect) – You’d have to shoot two points per line to define each line and then specify the coding between each pair of measured points to determine how/where the intersection point is determined, or,
- “distance-distance intersect” – You’d have to shoot two known points with a specified distance to measure from each point and then govern the proper applicable solution (if one exists) for the desired intersection location, or,
- “direction-distance intersect” – You’d have to shoot two points to define a line and shoot another point with a specified distance and then govern the proper applicable solution (if one exists) for the desired intersection location.
Figuring approach #1 would be the most applicable (e.g. corner of a line is obstructed), I’d be curious about the desired syntax of the “intersection” code vs. the use of the COGO routine?
As for coding the offset from (say) a point and its linework code based on the measured distance to some other point, my approach would be to:
- Shoot the point (e.g. back of curb) and give it “place holder” descriptions of OH and/or OV (for offset horizontal and/or offset vertical) and then,
- Shoot the point (e.g. face of curb) and then perform a 2D or 3D inverse between these two points and then,
- Modify the description of the first point to contain the inversed distance(s).
I’d tend to want to control the placement of the descriptive data vs. a routine that might go back to an earlier measurement and update the description I’ve already placed. If, however, there is a better work-flow to either of these scenarios, feel free to back-channel me at lnelsonATcarlsonswDOTcom and/or direct it to the Carlson Tech Support team so I/they can elevate to the development teams.
I hope this information helps.
I’m not aware of any intersection linework code in C3d either. If I knew of such a thing I would certainly use it.
Log in to reply.