Start a new topic

Calculation Grid

I was wondering if for example you choose to add a calculation whether 2pts, 3pts or polygon if the choice of point spacing could be modified so that you could have another choice with a max point spacing in either directions instead of a set value for both directions.

The idea would be that the grid points will start and finish on the points selected for the area. It would only work well for a rectangular area but a lot of areas we do are rectangular.

In the worth case you could do multiple rectangular grids over the area and create a statistical grid covering the whole of the area.

You could also possibly create a rectangular grid covering most of the area and delete the few points going over the area, for example in one corner.

See attached grid sample for a carpark, all I would need to do is to select a max point spacing value and the four corners of the grid area.

The idea is to save time in situation where a grid calculation location and spacing is restricted according to the recommendation of the Standard.  


The dictates of the grid spacing in AS1158 cannot be complied with in a vast number of real-life projects. You can't have an equal grid spacing in both 'X' and 'Y' directions and always avoid exceeding half-grid spacing at the edges.

Changing AGi32 to come up with some max point spacing will not fix that. The Standard hasn't been thought through properly.

The grid spacing does not have to be equal in both X and Y spacing as long as it is less than 5m.

Yes it does. Read your Standard.

You are right about the current standard (currently under review) but there is no real need for the grid to be the same in both directions.

The current Standard is the only one that has relevance to a discussion on making a program comply or assist with it, and because the Standard says the grid should be uniform then that is the need.

The fact that real life situations result in the inability to comply with it makes it farcical.

At this stage I was only wondering whether it could be done in AGI, I did not mean to enter into a discussion about standards.  

Lucky you - you got the bonus version! I've now saved you the heartache of trying to comply incorrectly.

Login or Signup to post a comment