I know this speaks more to workflow than software development, but I do not believe that the workflow will disappear just because the software develops.
I understand that the corridor model is the desired output from Openroads, and if everything is done 100% correctly, the model will account for all of the design in a project. When that is achieved, all quantities can be developed from that model.
I am concerned that not all projects can or will be done to 100% completion via modeling. If the software has no options for hand editing, or processing after hand edits are made, it is going to create more work.I work with several older engineers. They are not planning to retire any time soon. To them, the time spent creating templates and end conditions and all of the controls to fit every single condition perfectly is wasted because "we could just draw it and be done by now". I have one engineer who will not use modeling at all, and draws his proposed cross sections by hand if the job is "short enough".
Geopak calculated earthwork end areas by examining the elements of each cross sections, and using those to determine areas. While this is less precise then generating a complete corridor and comparing model volumes, it was very useful because it allowed for hand editing of cross sections when necessary without completely breaking the usefulness of the sections. What options will OpenRoads offer to engineers who choose to only utilize a portion of the software?Or, if you don't use it all (perfectly) you will just be out of luck?
I had a similar question with our team as I'm digging back into modeling. I agree that many don't see the time well spent adjusting templates to get a complete model and chalk it up to a % error.
On the Ohio DOT's web site is a Users Group webcast. At the 2:40 mark, a presentation starts on two projects - one in Ss4 and one in ORD. The Ss4 project is under construction and in the modeling process, they found ways to reduce the costs by 30%. Way more money than would be spend modeling to a pretty tight level of detail.
http://media.dot.state.oh.us/DOTMediasite/Play/8b3888fbf3b74ae584c2cb7d22aa35ea1d
Charles (Chuck) Rheault CADD Manager
MDOT State Highway Administration Maryland DOT - State Highway Administration User Communities Page
Unfortunately it is about money still.I have received the same question more times when I'm training OpenRoads. How can I often hear sighs of designers it is not possible to model all details of corridor. Some designers create basic corridor only and then lot of details do in resultant cross sections. It is more faster and more effective then to create precise templates. For detailed and good paid projects we can spend more time to create precise templates but it is not possible for all types of projects.I know "all world" speaks about BIM, but realy life is sometimes different.
We can save the DOT a bunch of money, but at the end of the day we are still paid the same amount. How do we justify extra money from them? Change orders just like a construction contract? If we can prove to save them 30% can we recoup 5% in fees? They nickel and dime my PM for weeks to save money and cut scope. Now they require 3D models and still cut fees. As a consultant there is no winning that battle.
Perhaps one of the options might be to create a model/terrain from cross section elements. It wouldn't be as precise as something modeled down to the gnat's hair, but it would allow some use of hand-edited cross sections. And it could be adjusted with the other "surface" tools to generate a better approximation after it is created.
Does OpenRoads have anything that would generate a corridor/model/terrain from cross section elements? Should I write that up into the "Ideas"?
MaryB
Power GeoPak 08.11.09.918Power InRoads 08.11.09.918OpenRoads Designer 2021 R2