INTRODUCTION
This chapter summarizes practices at other state departments of transportation (DOTs) and various local government agencies in Texas regarding engineering data management.
STATE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION
The researchers conducted an online search, which indicated that most state DOTs use document management systems to support business operations. In general, the use of these systems tends to fall into two categories: document management during the project development process and document archival of completed projects. Several state DOTs are currently in the process of, or are considering, linking document management systems to a GIS. Although linking GIS with images and documents is not new, most out-of-the-box GIS applications only provide basic table joining capabilities, making simple “hotlinking” inadequate in an environment where projects may generate thousands of documents. To address this limitation, a number of applications have appeared over the last few years that customize document management systems by including GIS interfaces and query forms that combine data elements from both document management system and GIS environments. A small sample of applications of GIS techniques at the state DOT level to support document management processes follows:
• Georgia DOT (GDOT). GDOT’s Transportation Explorer (TREX) is a web-based GIS application that displays a wide range of transportation datasets, including the location of active and completed projects, traffic cameras and traffic counts, bus and bike routes, aviation facilities, rivers and lakes, and railroad facilities (64, 65). Project data include attributes such as project identifier, project type, location description, and status. The interface also provides links to documents such as preconstruction or construction status report and plans. TREX uses ESRI ArcGIS Server™, Oracle, and Falcon/DMS®.
• Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC). KYTC’s Project Managers Toolbox is a set of web-based tools designed to monitor and analyze project data (66, 67). The application enables users to query project budget, expenditure data, and corresponding funding documents. The toolbox also displays maps of active construction projects and projects in the six-year plan. Along with scheduling and construction status data, the interface can load a separate map using ESRI Arc Internet Map Server™ (ArcIMS) that shows the project extent and other relevant map layers.
• Maryland State Highway Administration (MDSHA). MDSHA’s Traffic Engineering Design Division’s (TEDD) Plan Locator is a web-based GIS application that enables the capture and display of archived signal, signing, lighting, and pavement records and plans
• New Jersey DOT (NJDOT). Through Rutgers University, NJDOT developed a prototype GIS-based management information system (GISMIS) that integrates a database of scanned roadway plans and ROW maps with highway features (69). The system interface enables users to click on map locations to retrieve route information and associated documents. GISMIS runs on a platform that includes GeoMedia
Professional™, Intergraph® Modular GIS Environment™ (MGE), and Falcon/DMS.
LOCAL TEXAS AGENCIES
The researchers contacted a sample of jurisdictions in Texas to develop an understanding of current engineering data management practices and plans around the state. The focus of the inquiry was the use of document management/imaging technologies and integration of GIS and CAD technologies. The researchers contacted the cities of Austin, Dallas, Denton, Houston, Richardson, and San Antonio, as well as Bexar and Harris counties.
City of Austin
In the City of Austin, different groups use GIS for a variety of applications. For example, the Austin Water Utility uses an Intranet portal, which includes a viewer that displays water and sanitary sewer facilities, as well as tools for feature location and editing. The utility also uses Hansen’s GeoAdministrator™ to assist with asset management activities such as work orders, requests, and project tracking (70). The system facilitates linking documents and data to GIS features. The Public Works Department uses GIS primarily as a tool to provide base data, e.g., by converting GIS data (e.g., parcels, streets) to drawing exchange format (DXF) for import into MicroStation. The department uses MicroStation for capital improvement plan (CIP) projects.
The city has standards for levels, cell libraries, and project folders but not for file naming
conventions. No formalized process exists for managing engineering documentation throughout the project development process. Consultants are required only to provide hardcopies of
construction and built plans. However, the city has started to encourage submission of as-built plans in digital format.
Austin uses a legacy system called Permitting, Inspection, Enforcement, and Review (PIER), originally designed for permitting functions, for document archival. PIER stores several types of documents: permits, water taps, sewer taps, subdivision plats, and engineering plans. In general, the archival process involves converting as-built CAD files or Mylar plans to TIF format and indexing the files using attributes such as street name and project name. The city is replacing PIER with a CSDC Systems’ AMANDA™ enterprise application (71), which will include document archival and permitting, as well as a GIS component for visualization.
City of Dallas
The City of Dallas’ Development Services Department uses Intergraph’s Asset and Information Management™ (AIM) system for building inspection, planning, and subdivision plats. The system contains about 1.6 million records, a third of which are engineering or architectural
drawings, including scanned paper plans. On average, some 100 external users per week use AIM. The system does not have a GIS component, does not interface with other city systems, and has limited search capabilities. The department also uses Computronix POSSE® land management system (72) to consolidate the review process (e.g., permitting and inspections) of private development initiatives. Although the system can store video files, pictures, and scanned documents, the system is not geared for large construction drawings. The city does not use the system to archive historical maps or subdivision plats. The system has interfaces to other
systems, e.g., the department’s GIS system, which enables linking permits to address locations as well as documents to parcels. Users access the system through a client server application or via the Internet using security options and restricted access. Several city departments use the system. In general, several city departments have their own document imaging systems, which has prompted the city to implement a new citywide document imaging/management system.
City of Denton
The City of Denton recently implemented a LaserFiche® document imaging system. Several departments are now using the system, including the Engineering Department, which uses LaserFiche to manage a variety of files such as easement documents, ordinances, as-built drawings, plats, contracts, and project files. The system also has about 650 gigabytes of data covering 950,000 pictures and video files showing city street conditions and ground penetrating radar-produced imagery. These data are geo-referenced, which facilitates their display in a GIS environment. Documents accessed the most are as-built drawings, plats, and water and sanitary sewer camera video files. To facilitate access to documents and data, including work orders, the city developed a web-based application called One Stop Street Information Access Tool that integrates LaserFiche and Cartegraph’s Work Order® databases (73, 74). The web-based GIS viewer displays a wide range of layers such as streets, work orders, sanitary sewer lines, work orders, buildings, and pavement condition. The LaserFiche implementation received the 2003 Best of Texas “Most Innovative Use of Technology” award and a Public Technology Institute Solutions award in 2004 (75).
City of Houston
The City of Houston’s Public Works and Engineering Department (PWE) uses ePlus’
DigitalPaper XE® document imaging system to store and archive TIF and PDF versions of CAD files. The system supports a wide range of page sizes, from letter size to E size. Through an interface with PWE’s Capital Improvement Project Management System (CIPMS), DigitalPaper XE enables inspectors to access scanned project documents wirelessly and enables customers to submit electronic drawings instead of paper plans.
PWE’s CIPMS is a web-based system to manage and centralize CIP data (76). CIPMS has a series of dropdown menus based on facility type (street and traffic, storm drainage, water, and sanitary sewer). Each project has a summary table containing key contacts and project data.
PWE’s Graphics and Engineering Management Group maintains a web-based application called the Geographic Information and Management System (GIMS), which enables users to access a wide range of datasets grouped under categories such as reference, land base and roads,
boundaries, underground utilities, buildings and structures, environmental, permits, solid waste, construction projects, aerial photography, and miscellaneous (77). GIMS also enables users to access other related web-based applications, e.g., applications devoted to ROW and street cut permitting, utility analysis, and traffic engineering. GIMS runs on an Azteca Systems’
Cityworks™ platform.
City of Richardson
At the City of Richardson, the Capital Projects Department and the Engineering and Planning Department use FileNet for managing engineering documentation (78). The system enables users to store scanned documents (mainly TIF versions of CAD files) and characterize each document using with a wide range of custom properties. One of the properties is sheet type (e.g., drainage, sewer, or plat). The system allows associating sheets with multiple types (i.e., drainage and sewer). System access is possible through an online FileNet viewer, an ArcIMS-enabled website, or an ArcGIS extension in ArcMap™, which provides document “hotlinking” to GIS features such as subdivision polygons, CIP polygons, and water line segments. Currently, the system has about 70,000 documents, occupying about 500 gigabytes. The city is currently expanding the use of FileNet to other departments.
City of San Antonio
The City of San Antonio’s Public Works Department follows a traditional paper-based engineering document management approach. Consultants provide the vast majority of CIP plans in the department. In general, the department keeps plan sheets in MicroStation and paper formats. Hardcopy plan sheets are stored in pigeonholes, and project documentation (e.g., cost estimates, preliminary design reports, correspondence, fees, change orders, and accounting information) is stored in project folders and/or on shelves. The department provides printed construction drawings and other relevant materials to prospective bidders. Construction specifications are available online (79), although the department can provide printed copies if required.
GIS is used primarily for planning purposes within the Planning Department, not for design or documentation. Nonetheless, the Public Works Department uses GIS to produce maps for council members and meetings and to add new subdivision parcels into the city’s parcel GIS dataset.
Bexar County
There are two document management initiatives at Bexar County: one for active CIP projects and the other one for historical documents. For CIP projects, the goal is to store all drawings and as-built plans in PDF format. Consultants handle most, if not all, project design work. They
typically submit drawings throughout the project development process (in PDF format), as well as as-built drawings (in both PDF and hardcopy formats). The county stores all digital versions of the plans. As needed, the county digitally “redlines” scanned PDF files or re-scans redlined paper plans. After project completion, the county moves digital project files from “active” to
“completed” folders and moves paper project documents to offsite storage. In general, the policy is not to scan paper project documents such as reports.
For historical documents, the county is scanning engineering documents that go back at least to the 1920s. These documents include construction data, plats, flood maps, and permits. Scanned documents are saved in PDF format, and physical documents are stored in a vault. Folder structures for scanned historical documents replicate the corresponding physical folder
structures. An Access database contains an index of scanned documents along with searchable attributes such as project names, roadways, and grid locations.
The county maintains GIS datasets for CIP and maintenance projects. The CIP project dataset has fields for name, extent, and status, along with an overall indication of project status (design, construction, or complete). The county uses this information to generate project status
reports (80).
Harris County
The Harris County Public Infrastructure Division (HCPID) has started the implementation of an asset management system called the Condition-Based Asset Management System (CAMS) (81) to comply with Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) reporting standards, in particular GASB-34 (82). The system architecture covers a wide range of county-controlled assets (e.g., roads, bridges, tunnels, parks, buildings, utility, and land improvements). The county has developed a prototype viewer that enables users to extract project data by navigating an interactive map and selecting the project of interest. The application breaks down reports into smaller deliverables (e.g., cover, executive summary, or design). Associated with each
document are custom properties that provide metadata and allow searching. The preview runs on a Microsoft SQL Server/SharePoint™ platform.
Consultants submit paper documents, which the county scans and converts to PDF format.
Consultants are not required to submit electronic documents. Internally, the county generates plans in AutoCAD and then converts those files to PDF format. The county developed CAD standards and ensures compliance with those standards by applying quality control checks via code (e.g., to ensure features are located on their designated layers). The county is also scanning historical plans and moving paper plans to an off-site location.
Common Trends and Issues
The researchers made the following general observations from the interaction with the various
• Consultants tend to generate the vast majority of design and construction plans, with the rest completed by in-house staff. In most cases, consultants are only required to submit paper copies, although agencies are beginning to encourage or require the submission of plans in digital format. Typical file submission formats include native CAD file formats and PDF. Internally, the agencies tend to archive digital files in TIF or PDF. Some agencies have developed standards for symbology and layers, and at least one agency has developed quality control checks via code to ensure features are located on their
designated layers.
• The use of EDMS is increasing, with different agencies at different stages in the
implementation of those systems. Implementation approaches vary widely, ranging from systems developed internally to COTS software combinations. Integration of GIS into EDMS also varies widely, from no integration to relatively simple interfaces to more sophisticated custom-built interfaces. Agencies noted many benefits derived from the implementation of EDMS, which are consistent with literature reports (83, 84).
Examples include the following:
o reduction in the amount of time waiting for plan reviews;
o improvements in document production and processing accountability;
o elimination of time-consuming paper document searches, enhanced record security, and substantial reduction in physical storage space requirements and costs; and
o increased access by internal and external users, particularly using web-enabled interfaces and procedures.
• Issues that various agencies noted in relation with the implementation of EDMS and the integration of GIS technologies into those systems include the following:
o Data quality and completeness. In addition to scanning efforts, populating document indexes is a major effort, often performed by consultants. The quality and completeness of document index data is a serious issue. Some agencies have had to assign staff members to clean large amounts of index data and/or work with consultants to ensure the quality of the data.
o System redesigns and adjustments. As system implementations progress, some agencies have found it necessary to make adjustments. Examples include revising file naming standards, adding library structures due to limitations on the number of physical documents stored in folders, and reducing the number of document custom properties.
o Acceptance. Agencies linked success in the implementation of an EDMS to the identification of strong project champions, subject matter experts, and supportive management and decision makers. Agencies also mentioned off-site hardcopy storage as a strategy to encourage users to start relying on on-site digital copies because users do not have to use paper documents unless there are quality control problems or the need to double check documentation content. Also important is
the availability of large-format scanners and large flat-panel monitors to facilitate document viewing by users.
o Maintenance costs. In addition to the cost of the original investment, agencies are realizing the cost to maintain the system is quite substantial, to the point that some agencies are beginning to consider other strategies for document
management (e.g., using a system from a different vendor). Some agencies noted the need to include appropriate contingencies in the budget to minimize cost overruns.
o Implementation strategy. Different implementation strategies have met different challenges. For example, one agency focused on scanning documents first but paid little initial attention to the indexing effort. As a result, finding documents quickly became difficult. In another case, two parallel systems were in place (the old one and the new one) at the same time, forcing users to use two systems depending on the date of a project.
o Standardization. Some agencies noted that the lack of standardized enterprise-wide GIS data models and database implementations has resulted in serious data translation and compatibility issues, limiting the usability of the data.
CHAPTER 4. ENGINEERING DESIGN DATA MODEL
INTRODUCTION
The review of engineering design data practices at TxDOT and other agencies described in Chapters 2 and 3 led to the development of a prototype data model for managing engineering design data in a GIS environment at TxDOT. This chapter describes the process used to develop the corresponding conceptual, logical, and physical data models. Subsequent chapters describe the development and implementation of a prototype database and the corresponding testing results. For convenience, the researchers named the prototype model “Engineering Design Data Model” (EDDM).
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND SCOPE
For the development of the prototype data model, the researchers took into consideration a number of requirements that guided the development and testing phases. A summary of general requirements and guiding principles used during the research phase follows:
• Data integration. To optimize existing computing resources, the researchers identified integration points with TxDOT existing systems, such as DCIS, FileNet, and MST.
Chapter 2 provides a summary of these systems, which are also described in published TxDOT documents (43). Readers should note that the identification of integration points with existing TxDOT systems was at a high conceptual/logical level because with the exception of MST, detailed database design documents of other systems were not available to the researchers. In the specific case of FileNet, unfortunately, TxDOT did not provide samples of database representations of district or division FileNet libraries.
The alternative would have been to acquire a FileNet license during the research phase to develop the prototype model using the FileNet database structure directly. However, the cost associated with the deployment of a single FileNet license to support the research would have been extremely high – in addition to the license fee, it would have been necessary to acquire a dedicated server and incur additional vendor-mandatory
installation fees – making this option infeasible. Given these limitations, the researchers decided to create “place holders” in the prototype database structure for tables and fields that are related to project data (which are DCIS related) or engineering documents (which are FileNet related). During implementation, it should be possible to replace the “place holders” with pointers to relevant existing systems, provided the necessary application programming interface (API) components are in place.
• Compatibility with existing TxDOT information systems. The data model developed in this research is compatible with existing TxDOT data architecture requirements (43).
To the extent possible, the prototype is also compatible with other existing engineering data standards, e.g., TxDOT’s CAD standards.
offline (standalone) and online prototype GUIs. As described in Chapter 6, the offline prototype GUIs used standard ArcGIS and Access interfaces, while the online prototype GUI used ArcIMS-based web pages. Readers should note that the level of functionality
offline (standalone) and online prototype GUIs. As described in Chapter 6, the offline prototype GUIs used standard ArcGIS and Access interfaces, while the online prototype GUI used ArcIMS-based web pages. Readers should note that the level of functionality