Barney
I have spent today mapping data from TBC v5 to AutoCAD (Not Civil 3D). The enclosed document (which I will update tomorrow when I have finished testing all objects) covers what I have found out so far. If you are aware of tools in AutoCAD that to this point I have missed please let me know as I am not an "Expert AutoCAD User".
I hope that you find this document useful as a resource - let me know if not and what is missing and I will try to address it for you. I will be starting a Blog on the BC-HCE Forum on this so that it is captured there (once my research is finished).
What I have done is also flag for comment items in Red where AutoCAD 2019 appears to have support for additional items (Parameters, properties etc.) that we could leverage more strongly, or where object data in TBC doesnt Map correctly / at all to the DWG files and should.
Please comment on any item where I may be off track.
My understanding of this set of needs is as folllows
1) Private Land Surveyors work for Engineers much of the time. One of the deliverables to the Engineer is a DWG File, along with CAD Drawings or Plans created from the CAD Drawings. Because of this need Private Surveyors use AutoCAD to "Finish" their Drawings because that "is the only way to guarantee the deliverable is fit for purpose to the Engineer". If TBC could do this more strongly / reliably then this would negate the need to have to use AutoCAD to "Finish a Project".
2) Some people are just more comfortable with AutoCAD as a Drawing Creation Tool. As a result they do work in TBC and then throw the data at AutoCAD to "Finish the Project"
Couple of questions
1) When creating the Finished Drawings - are you doing that in 2D or 3D? Is 3D needed in this process
2) When delivering a CAD DWG to an Engineer do you want it to be 2D or 3D.
Note AutoCAD is not as strong as TBC for 3D Drawings or Models. It is limited in many ways by the CAD objects. To pass "strong 3D data' to DWG means compromising Alignments, 3D Filled objects, 3D Linestrings, Polylines and Polygons that contain Elevations and curve geometry. These all become chorded geometry or need to have 2D / fixed elevation geometry in order to pass the fills for example.
3) How do you perceive those known gaps between TBC and AutoCAD. Is there any way that you would see us doing Better - we can output a 2D file, a 3D file or I guess we could do a composite where we output 3D and 2D data where needed to pass the integrity of the data across.
When we pass information from TBC to AutoCAD using XDATA - are we providing enough information and are we passing it in the best way possible (Application Name, Code Number, Data like Name or Boundry Type etc. What other XDATA would you want to see on objects (like Start Station, True Perimeter / Lenght (not chorded). True Area (not chorded area etc.
let me know - this is a good conversation to have and I would like your views on this as a community.
Thanks
Alan