Brian Jones
My feedback
24 results found
-
2 votes
Thank you for the suggestion and thanks to those who commented and voted.
The inlet pipe will always try to sync to the bed level of your Storm Water Control (SWC), however, you can easily lock the pipe and manipulate the level so your inlet pipe can be higher and your outlet pipe can be lower. You can introduce inlet and outlet chambers and you will have full flexibility in dropping the levels as required.
Does the above address the issue?
Brian Jones
shared this idea
·
-
2 votes
Thank you for the suggestion and thanks to those who commented and voted.
We agree that in scenarios where multiple pipes are discharging into a steep swale at various points, the bed level might not be the best level to sync to. This has been discussed and it's been agreed that we will interpolate the right level using the centre line and sync the connection to it. This is now in the road map for future implementation.
Brian Jones
shared this idea
·
-
2 votes
Thank you for the suggestion and thanks to those who commented and voted.
FSR is an outdated rainfall method which was developed in the 1970s, this is why various LLFAs around the UK are now rejecting drainage statements submissions when FSR was used as a rainfall. This is one of the reasons why we would be hesitant to invest into investing more time into this. We are currently working on FEH22 implementation which will be made available to UK customers in future releases of the software.
However, FSR has a 1km2 resolution, therefore, you can still get the exact site accuratley by hoovering over the map and keeping an eye on the coordinates on the top-left corner (see screenshot). Take one coordinate from your site and use the first three digits from the easting and the first three digits from the northing to establish the exact location on the FSR…
Brian Jones
shared this idea
·
-
3 votes
Thank you for the suggestion and thanks to those who commented and voted. This is to confirm that we've received your suggestion and that it will be reviewed for future consideration.
Brian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
2 votes
Thank you for the suggestion and thanks to those who commented and voted. This is to confirm that we've received and reviewed your suggestion and here is our response:
We believe that stormwater controls are the most critical element of the drainage design. Hence we show the results of SWCs as soon as the simulation is finalised.
Users can/should check the rest of the model to ensure that there aren't any bottlenecks in the system.
It might be feasible to implement a dropdown menu within the SWC results so we can still show results from SWCs, but we make it easier for users to jump to different screens and check the inflows, connections and junctions.
Would the above address what is required for this case?
Brian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
2 votes
Thank you for the suggestion and thanks to those who commented and voted. This is to confirm that we've received your suggestion and that it will be reviewed for future consideration.
Brian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
6 votes
Thank you for the suggestion. This is to confirm that we've received your idea and it will be reviewed by the product management and development team for future consideration.
Brian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesBrian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesBrian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
3 votesBrian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesBrian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
8 votes
Thank you for submitting, commenting and voting on this User-Voice idea. We have reviewed the requirements, and this is now on our roadmap for development for future releases of InfoDrainage.
Brian Jones
shared this idea
·
-
5 votes
Thank you for the suggestion and thanks to those who commented and voted.
In order to get rid of the dendritic numbering system that was in MicroDrainage which prevented users from modelling bifurcation, we had to introduce the design wizard rather than an optimise button that looked at the whole system. This means that users will have to run a design wizard to check the velocities. However, we've introduced various flexibilities for turning on and off design criteria parameters which will make these iterations easier.
Does the above address your suggestion?
Brian Jones
shared this idea
·
-
2 votesBrian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesBrian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
3 votesBrian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
4 votesBrian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
17 votes
Dear User,
Thanks for posting, commenting and voting for this idea. We have reviewed the requirements for implementing a clash detection tool in InfoDrainage, and this is currently in Development for future releases of the software.
As for the comments regarding the pipe thickness, we will enable customers to insert a tolerance value so users can account for both the pipe trench width/height and the pipe thickness when deciding the vertical and horizontal tolerance values.
Kind Regards,
InfoDrainage Product Management team
Brian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
8 votesBrian Jones
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesBrian Jones
supported this idea
·
