When defining model requirements, we want to define the template drop interval and a stroking distance to densify template drops through vertical and horizontal curves. This will insure that models are designed to meet construction standards and specifications.
Currently, OpenRoads treats each template drop method (interval, horizontal densification, vertical densification) separately and does not consider one another when calculating drop locations. This causes a large number of unnecessary and messy templates to be dropped, especially when using a large number of curves. As you can see in the attached pictures, if each template drop were to consider the other, the number of drops would dramatically reduce.
The additional drops make the model harder to design and unnecessarily large in construction. Template drops need to be standardized and predictable to be able to convey the information to users in a consistent manner.
| Civil Product Used | OpenRoads Designer, OpenRail Designer |
Hey James, sorry, I was waiting for an email and totally missed this message!
I totally understand what you are saying. But ever since we started talking about submitting models, we have heard one question over and over - "what is a good model?" We are responsible for communicating the model requirements to designers, and further compensating firms for the required amount of work.
In the (very crude) example, a 50' template drop will require approximately 20 template drops (1,000'). If I include .1 stroking, the number of templates, for only 1 horizontal and 1 vertical curve, jumps to over 55 template drops. Designers are going to be forced to design, trouble shoot, and solve these extra template drops and it would therefore be our responsibility to pay them for their time and effort.
If I go the other route and only include a template drop requirement (10', 5', 25' etc) then there is a chance that these vertical / horizontal changes do not get accounted for and construction can not construct to their tolerances.
I totally agree that these cross sections at locations are critical. I just want each densification to consider the other. In no world do you need a template drop at 4+50 and 4+52 when there is no change. Inevitable, the subgrade, or side slope, or pavement edge is going to mess up, and the design is going to have to spend time and effort (and money) to fix it, or turn in a model that isn't "good".
I would really like the densification to use the template drop intervals as a starting point, then add template drops only when necessary to meet the stroking tolerance.
Thanks again,
Thank you for your detailed explanation and the attached pictures.
I understand your concern about the current implementation leading to a large number of unnecessary template drops, making the model harder to design and unnecessarily large in construction.
However, it’s important to note that the current implementation is the culmination of requirements from transportation organizations worldwide. It’s designed to cater to a wide range of scenarios and use cases. There are many organizations that require cross sections at these locations and, in order to be through, we want to keep as many template drops to maintain model accuracy.
Could you please elaborate on the specific problem you’re trying to solve? This will help us understand your needs better and potentially offer a more targeted solution.