Trimble Business Center

So I've had this problem where on my report it'll show Zero on my cut and fill and it is usually because the line crosses itself, usually happens when im joining up linework. TBC will usually show me where that error is with a blue flag, very helpfull, but on other occasions my Report will spit out a quantity in certain areas within my closed polyline (See image below) When I run a Report with several boundaries it can be easy to miss the fact that one of the boundaries did not calculate correctly. Im just not sure what it could be and why it would only calculate, from what I can tell, a random area.

Both my intial and final surfaces cover the entire boundry area so i should have and isopach for the entire thing. Has anyone had the same issue?

I would need the data in order to see what is going on here - please either post the VCE file here or send it to me at alan_sharp@trimble.com so I can take a look for you on Monday

Alan

Alan, 

I have attached the VCE file. The boundry that im using is in the "AOI_LOTS" Layer.

Eric

The Cut Fill Map references two surfaces as shown below here

The Cut Fill Map will create the Isopach Surface only where the two surfaces overlap - when I look at these two surfaces in the plan view I get the following

This is surface YCS_053019(DTM SUB ALL) in grey color - the red triangles are surface YCTopo_190923

The Red Surface does cover the whole of the Grey Surface Area so you should get a CF Map that is where the overlaps are if you run without any boundary lines

So now I ran a CF Map using the two surfaces and no boundary line and I get this

and this is what I get

When I apply your boundary AOI to the CF Map I get the same result as you did, however I made a copy of your AOI Boundary and changed it to look as below here

Now I applied these two boundaries as Surface Boundaries because based on what I could see from your AOI Boundary it is these two areas that you want to report (and an AOI can have two areas in one AOI as shown below)

And the CF Map now looks as I think you wanted it to look.

I attach the modified project here as a reference

What you did on paper looks OK and I will send it in to QA to take a look at what happened in your AOI case - While this was the way that Paydirt AOIs worked, TBC has the ability to do separate islands in the model and holes etc in models which Paydirt did not, and I guess the two areas separated by the narrow gap with this specific set of data and the underlying surface models and the way that the Triangle Faces and Boundary Lines do / do not line up is some data glitch - because I also did an offset line 0.05' inside your AOI line and I get the result you wanted

So I guess it is a "zero check error" of some kind here where the boundary line is slightly off the triangle sides of the surfaces but so close that it throws some kind of error in the calculation - if you see this type of thing happening, often a very small offset to your boundary line will make all the difference - our internal "point tolerance" is 0.1mm which is 0.00032' (very small), but sometimes these small defects cause this type of issue - so I would sometimes offset my boundary line by anything from e.g. 0.001' or 0.005' or 0.01' just to see if that makes a difference.

Hope this helps

Alan

Alan,

Thank you for taking time out of your day to look into this. I was afraid this was going to be the case and was hoping that it was something I was doing on my end. I had offset the line myself but i was hoping I didn't have to since it ends up cutting into the other AOI's even if its just .01 - .10 

So I noticed you used the "Define Areas of Intereset" Command and ill be honest and say I've never used it and my only question is how did you Run an Earthwork Report using the two closed boundaries? I usually have about 5 AOI's (Streets,Lots,Ponds,Drains,Site) and I run a Custom Earthwork Report where each Boundry has the name of what im trying to report (Example Attached below)

If im able to use the "DefineAOI" command and use those AOI's with my custom Earthwork Report I believe i can avoid this issue all together 

I only used the Define AOIs as an example - that really only applies to the

Takeoff workflow. If you are modeling and computing volumes or creating

drawings then the AOI approach is not necessary. When you apply Surface

Boundaries to a Project, if there are 2 distinct areas like in your project

then I would typically build two boundaries and apply two boundaries to the

surface - where they are separated like in your case - they will become two

island models and volumes would only come out of those areas filled by the

CF Map. If one boundary was inside the other then they will form a

"Doughnut" ie a Surface with a hole in it. If you have multiple islands

inside an outer boundary then you will get multiple holes in the surface

etc.

While you can do what you did, I personally try to avoid complicated

boundary shapes, especially if they don't work first time. The problem with

models is that every one is different and is ceated in a different way, and

we sometimes find small defects such as this, caused purely by combination

of data issues - we try to resolve those as they arise and that makes the

modeling engine stronger for the future.

Thanks for flagging the issue

Alan

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 11:13 AM esalgado@yantiscompany.com <

Hi Eric,

Would you mind sending me the Terramodel .pro file that you imported into this project.  I want to look into how one of the surfaces is getting two material types.

tim_mcclannahan@trimble.com