nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Symbology Display

IraJenkins

We are currently GPSing our assets and when adding system valves we gps the top of the valve box. So while digitizing record plans we are given coordinates for the operating nut as well as the valve body. We are trying to find the best way to display that in Pro. Below is how we are trying to display it so the valve is not floating, but it also causes issues with out locators displayed in the last picture when they locate the area.

Find more posts tagged with

Water Distribution

Accepted answers

ScottFortman1

I would definitely keep the valve body in line with the mains. When we have a butterfly valve where the nut is offset from center, we just show the GPS points for the nut and have it displayed. This way the topology stays intact and our locators/field crews can still locate the operator nut.

We are in process of converting to the UN and was not aware of the solution mentioned by @RobertKrisher but that seems like a good idea for us to consider when we make the transition.

All comments

IraJenkins

Someone else suggested that symbology idea in our office as well and others couldn't let go that the gps point/ system valve was floating, then others wanted to represent the valve body and the operating nut as two different valves. So we are looking for the best temporary solution until we get to the UN that doesn't cause us alot more work later down the line.

ScottFortman1

I think our error would be must not have dangles, which could be an exception (like at the end of mains where we have blow offs). We do have the rule for valves not being covered by a line but would not give that error in this scenario if still touching the endpoint of a line.

So after thinking about it more, the topology isn't an issue really, but if you want to do tracing in the geometric network or UN in the future, I don't see how the trace would stop at that valve if it's position was closed. It would just bypass that valve since it is not in line. I think it would be worth it to get your valve points in a position that works with the network now, otherwise you will have a lot of work later on.

We had a similar dilemma years ago and another idea that came up that we didn't go with was making a symbol with maybe an arrow on it and rotating it to point on what side of the main the nut was on. If you don't have that many butterfly valves, that may be something to consider.

IraJenkins

So does your topology give you an error of the valve not being covered by a line?

IraJenkins

Thanks for this, we have a ways to go before we are ready for the UN, but we just setup topology rules to start cleaning up our data and this was something we have been discussing. So currently we record the system valve and operating nut in one field because probably 98% of our valves are gate valves and the nut is directly on top. Would we only use the operating nut feature when it's offset and would the connection between the two be visible without a actual line feature.

ScottFortman1

We are in process of converting to the UN and was not aware of the solution mentioned by @RobertKrisher but that seems like a good idea for us to consider when we make the transition.

RobertKrisher

I would recommend having the operating nut be a separate feature in the GIS with its own symbology. It would also be good to show a connection from the operating nut to the valve it operates or have a relationship between the two. Here's an example of how this is handled in the utility network, where an operating nut has a connectivity association with a system valve.

Join the Conversation

Signed in members can post, follow updates, and more. New here? Register a free account.

Quick Links

Community Help
Find useful guides, FAQs, and documents to help you navigate and make the most of Esri Community.