Carlson Software Forum

I've had some discussions with colleagues in the office who are claiming that a tin file is more an accurate representation of a surface than a Carlson Grid.
I've always found grid files provide better profiles and sections especially when the 3D data is mainly polyline contours. In the past I have had inaccurate earthwork estimates by using tin files generated by LDD. That's why I began using Carlson Software. Now Carlson has both types of surfaces. Does anyone else have an opinion on this and had a similar experience with Tins? I am sort of old school in that I believe not every thing has to be modeled. At times grading by hand and then digitizing contours to a drawing file is the most efficient design process.

Given that a tin file should capture every vertices of each contour, that should be more accurate than a standard grid that does not capture each point on the contours. If each intesedction of the grid has a valid elevation, then you should come close, BUT you will miss the irregularities that a tin will catch. The flatter the ground, the better a grid will work. In rolling terrain, you will miss stuff with a simple grid solution.