Notifications
Clear all

Missing F2F codes in carlson

6 Posts
4 Users
6 Likes
429 Views
beuckie
(@beuckie)
Posts: 310
Member Member
Topic starter
 

Using 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?

 
Posted : August 12, 2022 2:03 am
Topic Tags
Norman Oklahoma
(@norman-oklahoma)
Posts: 6671
Member Member
 

Are you thinking of the "Special Codes"?

 
Posted : August 12, 2022 7:51 am
christ lambrecht
(@christ-lambrecht)
Posts: 1381
Member Supporter
 

@norman-oklahoma

They would fit under Linework Special Codes.

 

 

 
Posted : August 12, 2022 8:12 am

Get the 2023 SurveyorConnect Wall Calendar

beuckie
(@beuckie)
Posts: 310
Member Member
Topic starter
 

But i don't see an intersection code? 

 

Is this parallel code the OO (only offset) one?

 
Posted : August 12, 2022 9:27 am
Ladd Nelson
(@ladd-nelson)
Posts: 731
Member Member
 
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):

  1. "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,
  2. "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,
  3. "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:

  1. 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,
  2. Shoot the point (e.g. face of curb) and then perform a 2D or 3D inverse between these two points and then,
  3. 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.

 
Posted : August 15, 2022 10:58 am
RADAR, RADAR and RADAR reacted
Norman Oklahoma
(@norman-oklahoma)
Posts: 6671
Member Member
 

I'm not aware of any intersection linework code in C3d either. If I knew of such a thing I would certainly use it.   

 
Posted : August 15, 2022 11:44 am

Get the 2023 SurveyorConnect Wall Calendar