Saturday 9 July 2016

Yet another Civil 3D major bug (and a minor one) : Assembly properties​...get value from...end elevation (not getting it)

I really can not understand how is it possible for such a bug to exist after so many years and so many users.

http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/autocad-civil-3d-general/assembly-properties-get-value-from-end-elevation-not-getting-it/td-p/6426929

Assembly properties​...get value from...end elevation (not getting it)

07-08-2016 11:51 PM 

I create an assembly with a subassembly that is capable of getting value from a "Target elevation" (eg LinkSlopeToSurface) when in "Assembly properties>Construction>Input values". In Parameter reference i check the "Use" next to "Target elevation". I select a "xxx.End elevation".
Elevation applied is wrong. It is the default constant value of the eg LinkSlopeToSurface.
If i change the target to "xxx.Begin elevation" the correct elevation is apllied.
This happens to what ever subassembly can get a "Target elevation".
My conclusion. "xxx.End elevation" property is not exposed.

This also takes place when using my custom SAC subassemblies and i almost got crazy trying to find the bug in my coding.

Three notices.

The good one.
Having opened both assembly properties and cross sections window when changing the get value target there is an immediate response to the graphics at the cross sections window without rebuilding corridor although corridor at toolspace is marked as needing rebuild !!!

Althought graphics response to this property value change is immediate, when changing a subassembly name, the "Get value from" is not immediately informed and the old name is used. User must close and reopen "Assembly properties".

The bad one.
The rule is that property values among different subassembly groups are not exposed.
Group eg B cannot see group A values. BUT if names of subassemblies are identical the property values exposed are the ones of the first whatever group!!! The rule is not applied in this case!!! Leak it is. A serious mistake can take place.
I think this is a logical mistake that the Development Team should take care off.