March 22, 2007
Intriguing information that sparks your curiosity might have you buried in books, making notes and writing down your own ideas. You could well decide to learn as much about this subject as you can, holly, whether it involves business, current affairs, or intellectual subjects such as history or philosophy. You're likely to be interested in this subject for a while, so be prepared to learn as much as you can!
so this is why this is correct. yes, it is another learning day. turns out what i learned yesterday was just the beginning of my problem. grrrrrr....
so, when you get a file that you need to transfer from an autocad file (dwg) to microstation (dgn), it should be simple if everything is lined up correctly. in other words...say i am on project 106045. in the directory, it should be for that specific file (say like w:/work/106045). in the project scroll (the one that goes in the order of user: hjohnson, project: 106045, then interface: itd) this should line up to that same directory. i noticed that there was no project directory for 106045 in there, although there definitely was a file directory for the actual directory itself. this means that i will be able to open the drawings, but references will naturally detach since there is no element of attachment within the project directory. there is nothing that it can be claimed as existant in for that project.
then, this is the annoying new problem faced.
when trying to convert dwg>dgn, this would usually be extraordinarily easy. it would come down to a regular save as, dwg>dgn. done. simple as that. the problem is, that's if you are using regular autocad map. we have to consider the form of autocad you are using. in this case, i'm stuck with a file that was done with autocad land development desktop. this is totally different, considering it is done for civil work. this means that there are many various points that will be read within the dwg format, BUT!! it will not read in dgn unless written by another bentley program (inroads). this makes the process very complicated. it comes down to taking that file, writing a point script, then inserting into inroads. then retopography of the surfaces, etc. reason? your points will not convert over. it's not text, its rtext...its script. it doesn't read the script. what was the way to take care of the issue?
well, this cartoon helps signify the tragedy i just created.
yes. i exploded the points. this was the process i did. i never suggest this. ever. oh, and i had to send this to the state too, which makes this even more of an "oh my holy mother of god" sort of situation. oh, and my references were not showing up in the paper space, but oopsy daisy on that stuff. they can reattach, i guess.
so! i took my autodesk LDD drawing and did a saveas, taking the secondary file and exploded my points. this way it isn't going to be read as script anymore. instead, it transfers it all into simple multitext (or mtext for you cad people out there). the points are just simple x's, the points will however no longer be true points. instead, they are 2d, simple tracking spots that some kid could have put in for all we know. you'd never assume the surveyor did that. we had no choice though, based on what the IT person also suggested. therefore, exploding occurred.
after taking the exploded file, i opened it with microstation, switched the filetype to dgn, and changed it back to the original name it was previously. the paths were still saved in all the other drawings, so even though it doesn't show up in the paper space, it does show up in the model space. this caused me days of horrible confusion and anguish, and it really isn't still totally resolved. at the same time though, as i was told by the IT person, the state will just have to deal with what they get.
personally i want to take care of the issue entirely. i don't think we should be sending off the document if everything does not seem to be lining up correctly. however, time is of the essence. i guess based on our deadline, we'll just have to send what we have. i guess either way this was definitely a learning lesson.
No comments:
Post a Comment