Gregory Smith
My feedback
35 results found
-
12 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
2 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
8 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
2 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
4 votes
Thanks for the additional information and good idea!
An error occurred while saving the comment Gregory Smith
shared this idea
·
-
8 votes
Interesting idea.
We need more information on the problem of pipe clashes. Are these unconnected pipes in the model or are they referencing Asset networks, or Water networks?
How granular of a view does one need? I.e. are you interesting in generally where these crossing occur, or are you trying to identify how close you can cross something else?
Gregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
16 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Gregory Smith
commented
I agree, this is a shortcoming to ICM. Additionally a vertical rectangular orifice would be useful in modelling real world pits.
-
10 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
9 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
84 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesGregory Smith
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Gregory Smith
commented
Excellent idea
-
7 votes
Currently under discussion how to support AutoCAD Civil 3D drawings files, including prioritization of objects and defining workflows.
Gregory Smith
supported this idea
·
Seems pretty self explanatory to me. In order to examine the ground model, it is necessary to be able to view the levels to more than 1 significant figure. 100mm (your minimum) is a lot in drainage design. The ground model should be able to be interrogated to at least 10mm (2 significant figures). This would also be good for checking potential discrepancies such as the pit grate sticking out of the ground model.