Structure Labels: Differentiating Between Proposed and Existing

[PaulS00]

So I have an existing manhole that has existing pipes and a new pipe. We label the existing flowlines with parentheses (36"FL=100.23(N)). The proposed are labeled as 36"FL=100.23(N). However, I cannot figure out a way to make this differentiation in the label.

 

Is there any way to differentiate which pipes are "incoming" versus "outgoing?" That way I can insert the parentheses with the label editor for outgoing or incoming pipes?

 

Thanks

[ReMark]

Re: Incoming vs. Outgoing. Maybe I'm asking the obvious but don't the elevations of the pipes tell us which is which?

 

Re: Proposed vs. Existing. When I manually drafted sewer plan and profile sheets the existing elevations were done by hand while the proposed were done using Leroy lettering. You could easily mimic both styles. Existing = some sort of "freehand" font. Proposed = romanS font.

[CyberAngel]

Obviously, it depends on what kind of labels they are, but could you create one style for existing and a separate style for proposed?

[PaulS00]

Obviously, it depends on what kind of labels they are, but could you create one style for existing and a separate style for proposed?

 

Won't work because the label needs to have both proposed and existing flowlines. For example:

 

EX. SDMH

RIM: 100.55

48"FL=90.00(N)

36"FL=91.01(S)

(36"FL=91.01(E))

(24"FL=91.01(W))

 

I was thinking about creating another label style for existing, but without the leader and other info, to align underneath the other label. However, Pipes differentiates only between outgoing and incoming, but you can't designate which pipe is incoming or outgoing.

[ReMark]

I think the extra parenthesis are a distraction and could be mis-read in the field. If a contractor makes a mistake in the field and installs a new pipe at the wrong elevation your firm will take the blame. I hope it has good "errors and omissions" insurance.

 

This (italics) would work.

 

RIM: 100.55

48"FL=90.00(N)

36"FL=91.01(S)

36"FL=91.01(E)

24"FL=91.01(W)

[PaulS00]

That is irrelevant to my problem....

[ReMark]

Not really. Do you have any idea what that could cost your company?

 

Your drawings should be clear and concise and leave no chance for ambiguity. Anyone who reads them should be able to come to the same conclusion.

 

You could always clearly define which is which by adding the words Existing and Proposed or their abbreviations.

 

You could also use a font like Arial which allows for the use of bold or italics without changing the font. It can be done right within the MTEXT editor. I would go with italics as it would be easier to recognize when printed. Test it and see for yourself.

Edited August 27, 2013 by ReMark

[Organic]

Your drawings should be clear and concise and leave no chance for ambiguity. Anyone who reads them should be able to come to the same conclusion.

 

This ^

 

Putting a bracket around one or putting one in italics isn't good enough unless clearly defined in your legend, and even then it is easy to misread.

[Bill_Myron]

I would have one label for all of the connected pipes.

 

You could then "Edit Label Text" and add the brackets to the existing pipe inverts.