2005 Indiana GIS ConferenceMarch 9-10 - Indianapolis, Indiana
City of Columbus, Ohio
CMOM and Sewer System Digital Mapping
Presented by: Derek Mair, GIS Section ManagerDate/Time: March 10, 2005 – 10:15AM
Introduction
CMOM – Capacity Maintenance Operations and Management– Program administered by EPA to ensure that
Utilities are eliminating known Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSO) and properly maintaining their systems
Consent Order (July 2002)– Legal agreement between City of Columbus and
Ohio EPA to outline CMOM program implementation. Includes points and deadlines.
Introduction
Project Team Selected– EMH&T is part of a team led by Brown and
Caldwell, LLC
EMH&T Tasks– System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance
Plan (SECAP) (paragraph 13)• Stop and mitigate impact of SSO’s
– Mapping (paragraph 8)• 8.f – Maintain a map• 8.g – Proper Management of Information
Comprehensive Mapping Project– Scope Definition– Project Management Plan– Schedule and Prioritization– Application Definition and Development– Data Development Approach– Quality Control Standards and Procedures– Deliverable Format
Results and Findings
Introduction
Scope Definition
Digital Mapping – Digital Atlas Creation
Some things to consider in scoping– Platform for access (MetaMAP)– Format of data (MetaMAP)– Study Area (Entire collection system)– Data Development Approach (Heads-up)– Source Material (Engineering drawings)– Level of Detail
Scope Definition
Three options for level of detail– Level 1. Atlas Attributes– Level 2. Core Attributes– Level 3. Extended Attributes
Selected a combination of 1 and 3– Level 3 for 6 specific SECAP Study Areas– Level 1 for everything else
Would have liked level 3 for everything, but budget would not allow – CMOM is a big initiative and many $$ already obligated
Scope Definition
Examples of Detail Levels for Mains
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
“Atlas Attributes” “Core Attributes” “Extended Attributes”
Identifier [Level 1, plus] [Level 2, plus]
Map reference Material Invert Elevations
Shape Year Built Datum
Diameter Given Slope Plan Length
Scope Definition
PROS– Graphical quality is equivalent between all three options– Less time and less money– As-builts already scanned, so research of detail
information is simplified
CONS– Sometimes working with profiles can show additional
nodes such as change in material or change in slope– Lose some information useful in advanced applications– Deal with mix and match data
Everyone is informed and OK – Move Forward
Scope Definition
Tasks OrganizationTask 1 – Project Setup
Task 2 – Data Import
Task 3 – Sewer Atlas Update and Numbering
Task 4 – Digital Sewer Atlas Creation
Task 5 – Delivery
Task 6 – Configuration Management
Task 7 – SECAP Model Data Support
Task 8 – Project Management and Administration
Project Management Plan
Guiding principle– Accept the present situation and plan for the
future
Accept Present = Focus on deliverables– Atlas Maps– MetaMap– Model
Project Management Plan
Project Team– Columbus Division of Sewerage and Drainage
(DOSD)– Brown and Caldwell, LLC– Prime Engineering & Architecture, Inc.
Plan for the FutureCoordinating meetingESRI Columbus Office
– Geodatabase – Reporting Tool– Existing Data
Project Management Plan
Task 1 – Project Setup1.1 Document Project Specifications
• SECAP Model• MetaMAP graphics/attributes• Atlas Layout
1.4 Develop Work Plan
Schedule and Prioritization
Work Plan Development– Only 18 months of data development– 543 Atlases to complete
• Some had work done previously – “Reformats”• Others had nothing – “New”
– Target• Model = Detailed attributes• Others = Simple attributes
Schedule and Prioritization
17 Submittals were arranged
One submittal per month– Months 2 through 18– March 2003 through August 2004 – Average of 32 Atlases per month– Actually higher (61 max) because we wanted to
start slowly and confirm quality and procedure
Submittal #1 – Total of 6 atlases
Schedule and Prioritization
Submittal #1 – “Unofficial” Prototype
What were we trying to learn/confirm?– Format suitable for modeling– Quality assurance procedure and levels– Production capacity for City and EMH&T– Deliverable format: Digital– Deliverable format: Hardcopy
Schedule and Prioritization
First priority was the SECAP data– 92 Atlases were required– 32 “New” and 60 “Reformats”– Accomplished in first 6 submittals– “Reformats” were in 4 of those submittals
Next three (3) submittals designed to finish off core area of city and remaining detailed reformats
Schedule and Prioritization
UPDATE NEW REFORMAT TotalSubmittal Due Atlases Accum Atlases Accum SECAP Atlases Accum SECAP Atlases Accum.
1 Apr 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 6 65 May 50 56 9 15 0 0 0 0 9 156 Jun 121 177 15 30 15 2 2 2 17 322 Jul 122 299 0 30 0 13 15 13 13 453 Aug 122 421 0 30 0 27 42 27 27 724 Sep 122 543 11 41 11 18 60 18 29 1017 Oct 0 543 0 41 0 39 99 0 39 1408 Nov 0 543 28 69 0 0 99 0 28 1689 Dec 0 543 13 82 0 25 124 0 38 206
10 Jan 0 543 24 106 0 11 135 0 35 24111 Feb 0 543 26 132 0 14 149 0 40 28112 Mar 0 543 18 150 0 20 169 0 38 31913 Apr 0 543 19 169 0 42 211 0 61 38014 May 0 543 25 194 0 14 225 0 39 41915 Jun 0 543 26 220 0 12 237 0 38 45716 Jul 0 543 27 247 0 28 265 0 55 51217 Aug 0 543 24 271 0 7 272 0 31 543
Totals 543 -- 271 -- 32 272 -- 60 543 --
Project Management Plan
Task Production (months)On-Site Support
Remote Support
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24Task 1 X X X X
Project Setup
Task 2 X X X X XData Import
Task 3 X X X X X XSewer Atlas Update and Numbering
Task 4 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XDigital Sewer Atlas Creation
Task 5 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XDelivery
Task 6 X X X X X X X X X X XConfiguration Management
Task 7 X X X X X X X X XSECAP Model Data Support
Task 8 c X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X c X X X X XProject Management & Administration
Project Management Plan
Highlights
Tasks 1, 4, 5, 7 and 8 went very well– Cooperation from City– Latitude from Brown & Caldwell– Experience of EMH&T
Challenges
Task 2 – Data Import– Allowed plenty of time to request and receive,
but apparently not enough
Project Management Plan
Challenges (Continued)Task 3 – Sewer Atlas Update and Numbering
– Designed to be turned over to City upon completion, but did not happen that way
Task 6 – Configuration Management– Quarterly updates ended up being monthly due to
volume/quantity
To be determinedTask 6 – Transfer/Training beginning now
Application Definition and Development
Two relevant application categories– Production Support– End-user Applications
Production Support– Atlas Tracking – SQL Server/Access front-end– Node Numbering – Web-based SQL Server– Task Management – Microsoft Outlook®
Application Definition and Development
End-User Applications– MetaMAP® - just wanted
more information– CMOM GIS Application
CMOM GIS Application - SSO Reporting
– “Live” now on Internet– (
http://www.gis.columbus.gov/sso/)
– (http://gis.emht.com)– Developed by EMH&T using
ORACLE®, ArcIMS®, ArcSDE®
Data Development Approach
Source Material– Base Map (various GIS) [Task 1]– Orthophotos (image files) [Task 1]– Imported Data (ESRI) [Task 2]– Atlas Maps (scan) [Task 3]– Structure Number Atlas (scan) [Task 3]– As-built drawings (scan)
Preparatory TasksTask 1 - Project Setup
Task 2 - Data Import
Task 3 - Sewer Atlas Update and Numbering
Data Development Approach
Task 1 - Project Setup1.2 Prepare Source Material
• Base Map – Collect and import to MetaMAP®• Orthophotography – 2000, 6 inch pixel
TIFF = 60GB
JPEG = 7GB
• As-Built drawings copied
1.3 Setup Customized Production Environment• AutoCAD® in multi-user environment
– Wide Area Network (WAN) connection
Data Development Approach
Task 2 - Data Import– Information available from various projects
• Special engineering studies• Previous mapping projects
– City provided information– EMH&T assessed for import– If suitable, then data was imported– Data attribute (SOURCE) tagged
Data Development Approach
Task 3 - Sewer Atlas Update and Numbering– Sewer Map Room had the up-to-date atlas
without structure numbers– EMH&T had an atlas set with structure numbers– Maintenance Section had other information they
wanted reflected
Update and improve structure number atlases and provide to City
Data Development Approach
Task 4 - Digital Sewer Atlas CreationSteps
#1 Markup
Review
#2 Digitizing
#3 Entry
QA/QC
#4 Atlas Preparation
Final Checks
Data Development Approach
Step #1: Markup
EMH&T uses redline notes to record calculations and assumptions that are performed as part of the attribute extraction process
These digital redline files are a valuable record of decisions made during data conversion that will be available for future reference in cases of discrepancy
Data Development Approach
Step #2: DigitizingScanned image registered to base featuresOrthophotos used, when possible, to assist in
determining the proper placement of visible sewer features
Each feature is captured as a CAD graphic element with a linkage to an associated record in the database
Unique database identifier and the construction drawing reference are tagged to each graphical feature to assist in overall production checking and final quality control
Data Development Approach
Step #3: EntryEMH&T enters attribute information for each utility
feature into the production databaseData entry forms will be used to standardize data
entryDrop down lists are used to restrict entry to
predefined valuesAttributes are taken from the construction drawingsWhen information is not available from construction
drawings, appropriate placeholder values will be used
Data Development Approach
Step #4: Atlas PreparationSewer main and node features are annotated
to support operations in MetaMap® and the production of the standard 200-scale atlas product
Pipes includes diameter, flow direction and construction drawing reference
Node features includes a nine-digit identifierPrepare a consistent cartographic product
across the DOSD service area
Quality Control – Standards and Process
Everybody was checking this data– EMH&T checked at three different times– DOSD checked it– B&C checked it
Two different types of checking– Production Testing– Acceptance Testing
Quality Control – Standards and Process
Acceptance Testing– No contracted specification for error % rate– That was not a priority– City had 20 working days– Visual checks primarily– Completeness and correctness of the atlas
product– EMH&T had 20 days to correct
Quality Control – Standards and Process
Independent check by Brown & Caldwell– Concurrent checks of first six submittals
• SECAP Study area
– 25 Atlas Sheets (5% of overall)• Visual comparison – complete
– 10% random sample• Spatial positioning• Attribute completeness
Confidence building and procedure development
Quality Control – Standards and Process
Production Testing– No contract specification for % error rate– EMH&T committed to fix every error found while
continuing to move forward – no rejection– The detailed checking of the first six submittals
was the compromise to build confidence in the deliverable
BUT – EMH&T had the BEST incentive to find and fix every error as soon as we could possibly detect and repair them
Quality Control – Standards and Process
Per item (Atlas) fee structureCascading errors
– The more you find and the later you find them, the more time is required to fix them – the more $$ you chew up
– We certainly did not want them to get through to the client and have us fix them in numerous places and products
City liked it– Invoices are simple– City only pays for what they receive and accept
Quality Control – Standards and Process
What we did to avoid and remove errors
Step QC Solution
#1 – Markup Full review - Manual
#2 – Digitizing Entry constraints: Menus
Automated Checks - Self
#3 – Data Entry Entry constraints: Forms, fields
Automated checks – vs. Graphics
#4 – Atlas Prep Automatically generated
Check plots - Manual
Quality Control – Standards and Process
Results of QA/QC program– The product is exceptional – only 400 total
errors in more than 300,000 features converted– Brown & Caldwell indicated that this is the best
data they have seen. They said they expected many more errors given the detailed nature of the work
– Client has confidence in the data
Deliverable Format
Tasks 5 and 6Scope calls for following:
– Digital Product• MetaMAP• Digital Atlas (PDF)
– Hardcopy Product– Routine Updates– Maintenance Tools– Maintenance Training– Support of System
Results and Findings
Don’t be afraid to start simple – you can always enhance it later– City has elected to prepare Level 3 attributes for all features
Consider early priorities and work them in appropriatelyCommunicate openly and frequently
– Be up-front about problems and search for solutions– Resolution is more “painful” the longer you wait
Develop a system of penalties and incentives to guide progress
Get “expert” input and opinions whenever possible– Even if you are doing the work in-house, there are simple
opportunities to get help
Results and Findings
Outline expectations and obligations of all parties and stick to them
Interim deliverables for checking only, not for interim releaseFocus on confirming quality at every stepIndependent quality checks are beneficialAlways perform some level of prototype or pilot project
– Even if it’s and “unofficial” one
Document specifications and get them accepted/approved by all parties
Consider limitations of scope decisions and make all parties aware of them
Comprehensive Mapping Project– Scope Definition– Project Management Plan– Schedule and Prioritization– Application Definition and Development– Data Development Approach– Quality Control Standards and Procedures– Deliverable Format
Summary of Project Considerations
Summary of Tasks
Tasks OrganizationTask 1 – Project Setup
Task 2 – Data Import
Task 3 – Sewer Atlas Update and Numbering
Task 4 – Digital Sewer Atlas Creation
Task 5 – Delivery
Task 6 – Configuration Management
Task 7 – SECAP Model Data Support
Task 8 – Project Management and Administration
Questions
Derek Mair
EMH&T, Inc.
614 470-9470
www.emht.com