Hi everybody,
I was wondering if anyone has a way to have certain controllers appear in the schedules for certain POCs.
To explain more: I have a plan which wants two separate systems with their own POCs and controllers: One for the sports field, and one for everything else. When I run my schedules the controllers don't appear in the schedules at all.
So far my work around has been to draw work areas around my individual systems but I was wondering if there was a better way.
Thank you all so much,
Michael
I was wondering if anyone has a way to have certain controllers appear in the schedules for certain POCs.
To explain more: I have a plan which wants two separate systems with their own POCs and controllers: One for the sports field, and one for everything else. When I run my schedules the controllers don't appear in the schedules at all.
So far my work around has been to draw work areas around my individual systems but I was wondering if there was a better way.
Thank you all so much,
Michael
Accepted Answer
Michael,
Since the controllers are not physically connected to the mainline, the work area method is the best method.
We have been considering adding logic for it to know which controllers to include. For instance for POC “A”, if the controller was also labeled as “A”. Would something like that work for you?
—J
Since the controllers are not physically connected to the mainline, the work area method is the best method.
We have been considering adding logic for it to know which controllers to include. For instance for POC “A”, if the controller was also labeled as “A”. Would something like that work for you?
—J
Accepted Answer
Michael,
Since the controllers are not physically connected to the mainline, the work area method is the best method.
We have been considering adding logic for it to know which controllers to include. For instance for POC “A”, if the controller was also labeled as “A”. Would something like that work for you?
—J
Since the controllers are not physically connected to the mainline, the work area method is the best method.
We have been considering adding logic for it to know which controllers to include. For instance for POC “A”, if the controller was also labeled as “A”. Would something like that work for you?
—J
Thanks so much for the response. And yes, something like that would be amazing in the future, but for now I'm just glad I haven't been missing some glaringly obvious tool that already exists:! 
My hope too is that if the controllers can be somehow tied to the POC, then the valves on that POC could use that controller to calculate their wire estimation. Not that its a huge deal anyway, most of the time when I have to run multiple POCs like this the controllers are usually decoder based anyway.
Anyway, thanks a lot for your time!
-Michael
My hope too is that if the controllers can be somehow tied to the POC, then the valves on that POC could use that controller to calculate their wire estimation. Not that its a huge deal anyway, most of the time when I have to run multiple POCs like this the controllers are usually decoder based anyway.
Anyway, thanks a lot for your time!
-Michael
I'm not sure why your controllers don't show up at all in the schedule. Is the valves and equipment box checked?
As Jeremiah stated, we also label our controllers to coincide with our controllers.
POC-A: POC-A
Controller: A
Valves: A1, A2, ....
POC-A: POC-B
Controller: B
Valves: B1, B2, .... - LandFX will label the valves accordingly once started. It will also allow for adding a valve in the middle of a design and accommodate it by shifting all of the valves up one number. I don't think that it makes the same accommodation for removing one. JER?
As Jeremiah stated, we also label our controllers to coincide with our controllers.
POC-A: POC-A
Controller: A
Valves: A1, A2, ....
POC-A: POC-B
Controller: B
Valves: B1, B2, .... - LandFX will label the valves accordingly once started. It will also allow for adding a valve in the middle of a design and accommodate it by shifting all of the valves up one number. I don't think that it makes the same accommodation for removing one. JER?
Seaweed,
That's a great idea with labeling the valves, I didn't realize LandFX would pick up on that so thank you!
I definitely have the valves and equipment boxes checked when generating the schedule. When I generate a schedule for a specific POC the schedule will show the valves, backflow, and meter but leaves out the controller and controller accessories (weather sensor, etc).
It also leaves out the sleeving. I made sure again before I posted this but I sleeved by selecting the pipe to sleeve first rather than just clicking open space. Not exactly what I asked for originally, but if there would be a way to incorporate the sleeves into the POC specific schedules as well as the controllers that would be amazing!
Again, the work area workaround is definitely workable and I love using this program, I'm mostly trying to find the easiest ways to have my team do things.
Thanks,
Michael
That's a great idea with labeling the valves, I didn't realize LandFX would pick up on that so thank you!
I definitely have the valves and equipment boxes checked when generating the schedule. When I generate a schedule for a specific POC the schedule will show the valves, backflow, and meter but leaves out the controller and controller accessories (weather sensor, etc).
It also leaves out the sleeving. I made sure again before I posted this but I sleeved by selecting the pipe to sleeve first rather than just clicking open space. Not exactly what I asked for originally, but if there would be a way to incorporate the sleeves into the POC specific schedules as well as the controllers that would be amazing!
Again, the work area workaround is definitely workable and I love using this program, I'm mostly trying to find the easiest ways to have my team do things.
Thanks,
Michael
Michael,
I don't know how you are generating your schedule. There are five (5) different types of schedules related to irrigation available. We use them all for different reasons. But if we are generating the actual Irrigation Schedule. I don't know how you can generate a schedule by POC there. I don't know how you are generating the schedule by POC. I'd like to know that. Have you defined the sleeves under the pipe settings? You'll want to do that, so they show up the way that you want. Jer mentioned using work areas. That may not work for you. It doesn't work for us since the two POC's may be located right next to each other and the two mainlines sometimes cross and would otherwise necessitate crossing work areas.
If we need to create separate schedules for separate POC's we separate them into separate drawings and ref them both into the paper sheet. This alllows you to create separate schedules. If you want, you can aslo create a master schedule including all elements (probably for bidding purposes and agency probable costs) you can have one of the xrefs overlaid into the other and run the schedule with the "Include Xrefs" box checked. You can use this for your bid list/specs.
So, using separate xrefs, your paper sheets will show both POC's and mainlines, etc., but you can have separate schedules. Also, you can have a combined, all-inclusive schedule. That's flexibility! There is a drawback. I don' think that "Verify Laterals" will notice crossing pipes. Looking for "Pipe Hops" will be done manually.
I hope that this helps.
Seaweed,
Steve Cook
I don't know how you are generating your schedule. There are five (5) different types of schedules related to irrigation available. We use them all for different reasons. But if we are generating the actual Irrigation Schedule. I don't know how you can generate a schedule by POC there. I don't know how you are generating the schedule by POC. I'd like to know that. Have you defined the sleeves under the pipe settings? You'll want to do that, so they show up the way that you want. Jer mentioned using work areas. That may not work for you. It doesn't work for us since the two POC's may be located right next to each other and the two mainlines sometimes cross and would otherwise necessitate crossing work areas.
If we need to create separate schedules for separate POC's we separate them into separate drawings and ref them both into the paper sheet. This alllows you to create separate schedules. If you want, you can aslo create a master schedule including all elements (probably for bidding purposes and agency probable costs) you can have one of the xrefs overlaid into the other and run the schedule with the "Include Xrefs" box checked. You can use this for your bid list/specs.
So, using separate xrefs, your paper sheets will show both POC's and mainlines, etc., but you can have separate schedules. Also, you can have a combined, all-inclusive schedule. That's flexibility! There is a drawback. I don' think that "Verify Laterals" will notice crossing pipes. Looking for "Pipe Hops" will be done manually.
I hope that this helps.
Seaweed,
Steve Cook
Seaweed,
That's a cool idea with drawing them in different Xrefs and then overlaying them! I had never thought of that!
With the multiple POC thing, though, when I have a drawing with multiple meters or other POCs (for example: one 1" meter, and a separate 1.5" meter to water a sports field) and I try to generate a schedule, the command line will prompt me to select which POC I want or just to hit enter to generate the schedule for everything in the drawing. I get that prompt for the Critical Analysis as well as the Valve and Irrigation schedules. I haven't tried it with the runtime or watering schedules though since I don't really use those, but I'd assume it works the same way. Not sure why you're not seeing the prompt.
And the sleeves show up fine in the regular schedule. They're whatever class pipe I set them to and whatever size I've manually sized them to, I just haven't seen them show up in the POC specific schedules. And since they are for bidding and cost estimation purposes, I do need them to be specific to certain POCs which is why I have been doing the work area method and just drawing boxes around the individual POCs.
That's a cool idea with drawing them in different Xrefs and then overlaying them! I had never thought of that!
With the multiple POC thing, though, when I have a drawing with multiple meters or other POCs (for example: one 1" meter, and a separate 1.5" meter to water a sports field) and I try to generate a schedule, the command line will prompt me to select which POC I want or just to hit enter to generate the schedule for everything in the drawing. I get that prompt for the Critical Analysis as well as the Valve and Irrigation schedules. I haven't tried it with the runtime or watering schedules though since I don't really use those, but I'd assume it works the same way. Not sure why you're not seeing the prompt.
And the sleeves show up fine in the regular schedule. They're whatever class pipe I set them to and whatever size I've manually sized them to, I just haven't seen them show up in the POC specific schedules. And since they are for bidding and cost estimation purposes, I do need them to be specific to certain POCs which is why I have been doing the work area method and just drawing boxes around the individual POCs.
Sorry Michael. Sounds like Jer or Jake will have to help you. I’ve reached the end of my assistance. Good luck. Your need will probably help us all in the end.
Recapping the multiple issues mentioned here.
First, is running the irrigation schedule by POC, to have the Controller and Sleeves appear on the schedule.
We can solve the controller fairly easily enough, by matching the controller attribute with the POC attribute. But in the cases where the attribute doesn't match exactly, we're back to square one. Which is also where we are with the sleeves. For the sleeves drawn by first clicking on a pipe, that gives us an ability to link the sleeve with the pipe. But sleeves drawn otherwise, back to a head scratcher. What will undoubtedly be necessary, is an additional chunk of logic when running the schedule by POC, with the system assembling the additional items that are not connected to the POC (Controller, Controller Accessories, Sleeves), and seeing if they are within a certain distance of any segment of connected pipe, and then include them.
And then lastly is the issue in associating valves with controllers for scheduling purposes, but also in just suggesting of next available number. This is scheduled with a redo of the valve callout dialog box. But it does intersect all of this, in an enforcing of the attribute of the Controller.
So while fairly soon here we will be able to add the additional logic to associate a controller with a POC as long as the attribute values are identical, that still doesn't address the sleeves or controller accessories. So for the immediate future, a Work Area is going to remain the best method of separating schedules.
--J
First, is running the irrigation schedule by POC, to have the Controller and Sleeves appear on the schedule.
We can solve the controller fairly easily enough, by matching the controller attribute with the POC attribute. But in the cases where the attribute doesn't match exactly, we're back to square one. Which is also where we are with the sleeves. For the sleeves drawn by first clicking on a pipe, that gives us an ability to link the sleeve with the pipe. But sleeves drawn otherwise, back to a head scratcher. What will undoubtedly be necessary, is an additional chunk of logic when running the schedule by POC, with the system assembling the additional items that are not connected to the POC (Controller, Controller Accessories, Sleeves), and seeing if they are within a certain distance of any segment of connected pipe, and then include them.
And then lastly is the issue in associating valves with controllers for scheduling purposes, but also in just suggesting of next available number. This is scheduled with a redo of the valve callout dialog box. But it does intersect all of this, in an enforcing of the attribute of the Controller.
So while fairly soon here we will be able to add the additional logic to associate a controller with a POC as long as the attribute values are identical, that still doesn't address the sleeves or controller accessories. So for the immediate future, a Work Area is going to remain the best method of separating schedules.
--J
Jeremiah,
I didn't really think it would be a super easy fix, especially once I started thinking about how the program might understand what is and isn't linked together in my head, haha.
The work areas really do help for a lot of things and solve most of my problems well enough.
You guys really are amazing in addressing everybody's concerns, even a newcomer like me. It really is appreciated! Thanks a ton!
Michael Reid
I didn't really think it would be a super easy fix, especially once I started thinking about how the program might understand what is and isn't linked together in my head, haha.
The work areas really do help for a lot of things and solve most of my problems well enough.
You guys really are amazing in addressing everybody's concerns, even a newcomer like me. It really is appreciated! Thanks a ton!
Michael Reid
- Page :
- 1
There are no replies made for this post yet.
Contact
- Land F/X
Our software tailors AutoCAD® to the needs of landscape architects, irrigation designers, and other professionals. We automate your most tedious tasks and ensure accuracy, giving you more time to design.