intelligent design & construction guidance document

INTELLIGENT DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION GUIDANCE DOCUMENT

i

DISCLAIMER

The authors alone are responsible for the preparation and accuracy of the information,

data, analysis, discussions, recommendations, and conclusions presented herein. The contents do

not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, endorsements, or policies of the Utah Department of

Transportation or the U.S. Department of Transportation. The Utah Department of

Transportation makes no representation or warranty of any kind, and assumes no liability

therefore.


ii

TECHNICAL REPORT ABSTRACT

1. Report No. UT- 17.04

2. Government Accession No. N/A

3. Recipient's Catalog No. N/A

4. Title and Subtitle INTELLIGENT DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION GUIDANCE

DOCUMENT [DRAFT]

5. Report Date March 2017

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) George Lukes - UDOT, Jim McDowell - Lochner

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address Utah Department of Transportation Preconstruction Division

P.O. Box 148460

Salt Lake City, UT 84114-8460

10. Work Unit No.

11. Contract or Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Utah Division Federal Highway Administration

2520 West 4700 South

Suite 9A

Salt Lake City, UT 84129410

13. Type of Report & Period Covered Final

Feb 2013 to Mar 2017 14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

Prepared in cooperation with the Utah Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of

Transportation, Federal Highway Administration

16. Abstract

17. Key Words Intelligent Design and Construction, pilot projects,

3D model, CM/GC, design/bid/build, Bentley,

Trimble

18. Distribution Statement Not restricted. Available through:

UDOT Research Division

4501 South 2700 West

P.O. Box 148410

Salt Lake City, UT 84114-8410

www.udot.utah.gov/go/research

23. Registrant's Seal

N/A

19. Security Classification

(of this report) Unclassified

20. Security Classification (of this page)

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages

61

22. Price N/A

http://www.udot.utah.gov/go/research


iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................................. vii

LIST OF ACRONYMS ....................................................................................................................... viii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 4

Overview ................................................................................................................................4

Background ............................................................................................................................4

Pilot Projects ..........................................................................................................................7

Outline of Report ...................................................................................................................8

2.0 PILOT PROJECT 1: SR-20, PASSING LANE MP 10 TO MP 12 .................................................. 9

Project Details ........................................................................................................................9

Project Description ................................................................................................................9

Procedures ............................................................................................................................10

2.3.1 Survey .......................................................................................................................... 10

2.3.2 Construction survey ..................................................................................................... 11

2.3.3 Inspection survey ......................................................................................................... 11

2.3.4 Workspace .................................................................................................................... 12

2.3.5 Construction inspection ............................................................................................... 12

2.3.6 As-builts ....................................................................................................................... 12

Use of Models ......................................................................................................................13

Use of Paper Plans ...............................................................................................................14

Benefits of Using IDC .........................................................................................................14

2.6.1 Clearing and grubbing boundaries ............................................................................... 14

2.6.2 Models to surfaces for AMG ....................................................................................... 14

2.6.3 Quick turnaround for design changes .......................................................................... 14

2.6.4 Use of the rover to inspect surfaces ............................................................................. 15

2.6.5 Use of Masterworks ..................................................................................................... 15

2.6.6 Schedule savings .......................................................................................................... 16

Factors Contributing to Success ..........................................................................................16

2.7.1 Selection of straightforward pilot project and CM/GC contracting method ................ 16


iv

2.7.2 Selection of a contractor with advanced technical skills ............................................. 16

2.7.3 Flexibility of the design team, support from management, and access to experts ....... 17

2.7.4 Bentley ICM to TBC .................................................................................................... 17

2.7.5 Breaking models down to component models ............................................................. 17

Lessons Learned ..................................................................................................................18

2.8.1 Methods are needed to accept inspected surfaces with the rover ................................ 18

2.8.2 Survey completeness is essential ................................................................................. 18

2.8.3 More detailed guidance is needed for topographical surveys ...................................... 18

2.8.4 UDOT inspection personnel were able to play a more active role .............................. 19

2.8.5 Masterworks streamlined the inspectors’ roles ............................................................ 19

3.0 PILOT PROJECT 2: SR-10, US-6 TO RIDGE ROAD CM/GC PHASE I .................................... 20

Project Details ......................................................................................................................20

Project Description ..............................................................................................................20

Procedures ............................................................................................................................21

3.3.1 Survey .......................................................................................................................... 21

3.3.2 Workspace .................................................................................................................... 21

3.3.3 Construction inspection (scheduled summer 2018) ..................................................... 22

3.3.4 As-builts ....................................................................................................................... 22

Use of Models ......................................................................................................................22

Use of Paper Plans ...............................................................................................................24

Model Review and QA/QC ..................................................................................................24

Takeaways ...........................................................................................................................24

3.7.1 Workspace ................................................................................................................... 24

3.7.2 IDC methods and workflows ....................................................................................... 25

3.7.3 Knowledge transition ................................................................................................... 25

4.0 PILOT PROJECT ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 26

Software ...............................................................................................................................26

Workspace ..........................................................................................................................29

Workflows ...........................................................................................................................31

Models and Plan Quantities .................................................................................................32

Preconstruction Survey ........................................................................................................32


v

Terrain Survey .....................................................................................................................33

Models .................................................................................................................................34

5.0 CONSIDERATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 36

D/B/B Contracting ...............................................................................................................36

As-Built Drawings ...............................................................................................................37

UPlan ...................................................................................................................................38

Knowledge Preservation and Education ..............................................................................38

Advancement and Discovery ...............................................................................................39

Agency Adoption .................................................................................................................40

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS .............................................................................. 41

Pilot Project Delivery ...........................................................................................................41

6.1.1 CM/GC project: Advertise project with model/preconstruction package as the legal

document using CM/GC to develop and refine method with increasing complexity 41

D/B/B Project: Advertise Project with Model/Preconstruction Package as the Legal

Document ...........................................................................................................................41

Preconstruction Survey ........................................................................................................42

6.3.1 Develop guidance for how and when to perform the initial survey control, when to

contract for the survey, and how to define it according to the Geomatics manual ... 42

6.3.2 Develop recommendations for when a point cloud is needed, how designers need to

receive that information, and how/when to get a survey contract executed to keep

design schedules on time .......................................................................................... 42

6.3.3 Develop language for the Geomatics manual to more rigorously define collection

methods for hardscape and softscape surveys .......................................................... 42

6.3.4 Develop a method that enables contractor survey crews to verify and accept the

preconstruction survey .............................................................................................. 42

Preconstruction/Design ........................................................................................................43

6.4.1 Develop model surfaces such that granular borrow, untreated base course, and

asphalt/Portland cement can be paid as plan quantities ............................................ 43

6.4.2 Develop and refine method for associating metadata with model features ................. 43

6.4.3 Develop method for generating workspace modifications required for IDC............... 43

6.4.4 Implement UDOT IDC workspace based on OpenRoads SS4 .................................... 43


vi

6.4.5 Develop OpenRoads CONNECT workspace .............................................................. 44

6.4.6 Develop OpenRoads CONNECT Workflows ............................................................. 44

6.4.7 Develop guidance on how to use Quantity Manager ................................................... 44

6.4.8 Develop guidance on how to deliver models for the most efficient consumption by

contractors and their subcontractors ......................................................................... 44

6.4.9 Develop guidance on QC/QA and review of preconstruction package/model ............ 45

6.4.10 Develop guidance on ICM generation and best practices .......................................... 45

6.4.11 Develop guidance on how to package models for advertisement with digital

signatures .................................................................................................................. 45

6.4.12 Develop method through which contractors can receive and comment on model and

ultimately agree to accept it as legal document ........................................................ 46

Construction/Inspection .......................................................................................................46

6.5.1 Develop and explore alternate methods for viewing CADD and GIS data in the field 46

6.5.2 Develop/provide guidance for field crews on how to document various surface

measurements ............................................................................................................ 46

6.5.3 Document when plan sheets are used (summaries, details, typicals)........................... 47

6.5.4 Accommodate model usage cases ................................................................................ 48

6.5.5 Develop guidance and contract language for specification of as-builts by contractor 48

6.5.6 Develop language to define the as-built deliverables with enough detail to provide the

agency with maximum flexibility and utility ............................................................ 49

7.0 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................... 50

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 52

GLOSSARY ......................................................................................................................................... 53


vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Automated Machine Guidance Concrete Paver in Action ...............................................5

Figure 2: SR-20 Finished Project .....................................................................................................9

Figure 3. Steep Terrain in SR-20 Project Area ..............................................................................11

Figure 4: SR-10 Project Existing Conditions.................................................................................20

Figure 5: SR-10 Project Model ......................................................................................................23


viii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

2D two-dimensional

3D three-dimensional

4D four-dimensional

AMG automated machine guidance

ATMS advanced traffic management systems

CADD computer-aided drafting and design

CM/GC construction manager/general contractor

D/B/B design/bid/build

DOT Department of Transportation

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FIO for information only

GIS geographic information systems

GPS Global Positioning System

ICM Integrated Consensus Model

IDC Intelligent Design and Construction

MOT maintenance of traffic

ORN OpenRoads Navigator

PDBS Project Development Business System

PDF Portable Document Format

PIH plan-in-hand

QA/QC quality assurance/quality control

SR State Route

TBC Trimble Business Center

UAV unmanned aerial vehicle

UDOT Utah Department of Transportation

WiFi wireless fidelity


1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 2013, the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) began investigating methods,

branded as Intelligent Design and Construction (IDC), that would better take advantage of the

efficiencies afforded by advances in highway design software, construction methods, and

automated machine guidance (AMG). In January 2014, UDOT visited the Iowa Department of

Transportation to learn from its experience delivering electronic plan sets as part of its

construction deliverables. UDOT also conferred with the Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA) about its experience and guidance related to the use of 3D models for construction.

In April 2014, UDOT formally kicked off its IDC effort by hosting the FHWA 3D

Engineered Models for Construction Workshop. A broad range of experts from the Association

of General Contractors, the American Council of Engineering Companies, software vendors, and

UDOT technical staff and management participated in the FHWA workshop and in follow-up

meetings and workshops. These meetings led to the publishing of short-term and midrange plans

for the implementation of 3D models for construction. These plans included

The identification of key team members and management commitments to provide

resources for the development of IDC.

A strategy to use construction manager/general contractor (CM/GC) contracting on a

series of increasingly complex pilot projects to develop IDC capabilities.

A goal to deliver the model as the contract document on CM/GC and

design/bid/build (D/B/B) projects.

The first two successful pilot projects were the SR-20, Passing Lane MP 10 to MP 12,

and SR-10, US-6 to Ridge Road, CM/GC Phase I projects. These projects developed and

validated many IDC methods and workflows.

The SR-20, Passing Lane MP 10 to MP 12, IDC pilot project was designed by UDOT

Region 4 and constructed during the 2016 construction season. Several significant advancements

came from the SR-20 project. Most significantly, the project demonstrated the ability to deliver


2

3D models as the contract document in lieu of paper plans and the ability of contractors to

construct the project on the basis of those models—something that had never been achieved by

any other state department of transportation. As a result of the milestones that were achieved and

the technology and methods that were developed and validated, the SR-20 project was named the

2016 UDOT Innovative Project of the Year.

Major accomplishments on the SR-20 project included

Awarding the model as the legal document and providing plan sheets for information

only.

Validating the need for a high-quality construction survey during preconstruction.

Demonstrating the feasibility of delivering 3D design surfaces for use in AMG.

Developing methods for displaying design models on mobile devices for construction

and inspection.

Validating a method for the use of 3D design surfaces to inspect constructed surfaces

using the survey rover.

Illustrating the amount of plan production time that could be reduced or eliminated

by producing more detailed models.

Demonstrating the value of tight integration between the design and construction

software vendors and the design team and their consultant partners.

Building on the success of SR-20 and the efforts underway on the SR-10 pilot project,

additional pilot projects are being conducted with the goal of delivering 3D models as the

contract document on a D/B/B project. From the lessons learned in the initial pilot projects and

to satisfy the goals established in the IDC plans, the I-80 Climbing Lanes project in Region 2

(construction 2018, CM/GC), SR-68 in Region 2 (construction 2017, CM/GC), the I-70

rubblization/rehabilitation project in Region 4 (construction 2017, D/B/B), Bangerter Highway to

12600 South urban widening, I-15 climbing lanes MP 20 in Region 4, and the SR-193 greenfield


3

connector highway project in Region 1 (construction 2017, D/B/B) are currently being conducted

as IDC pilot projects. The goals for these projects include the advancement and refinement of the

technology and methods that have already been demonstrated on the SR-20 and SR-10 pilot

projects and the extension of IDC methods to D/B/B.


4

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Overview

In 2016, the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) received State Transportation

Innovation Council funding from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to document the

processes and decisions resulting from the ongoing effort to deliver 3D models as the contract

document on highway construction projects. On a pilot project, UDOT became the first

department of transportation (DOT) in the nation to achieve this goal. This documentation is

intended to catalog the existing efforts and serve as an internal roadmap for the continued

development and ongoing refinement of Intelligent Design and Construction (IDC) methods for

producing and delivering 3D models for construction. With advances in technology opening up

possibilities to streamline the design and construction of projects, UDOT has embraced this

technology, with the ultimate goal of delivering projects in a more accurate, safe, efficient, and

cost-effective manner.

Background

Over the past 25 years, roadway modeling software has evolved from primitive packages

that could generate tables of earthwork quantities to sophisticated tools that can create an exact

virtual 3D replica of the proposed design. Agencies have taken advantage of some of the new

modeling features to create realistic visualizations for public involvement and education efforts,

but the majority of the modeling capabilities have been underutilized. For many years, UDOT

has used modeling software for visualizations on sensitive design projects, such as the Legacy

Parkway, and on projects that require driver education, such as the continuous flow intersection

on Bangerter and the diverging diamond interchange at Pioneer Crossing. However, for standard

design projects, modeling has been limited to that required to produce and deliver 2D paper

construction plans—the standard deliverable on highway construction projects.

Over the same period, contractors have adopted technology that enables them to be more

accurate and more efficient in delivering projects. Contractors have adopted construction-

specific modeling software to transform the paper plans delivered by transportation departments


5

into 3D models. Contractors use these models in estimating quantities, designing construction

phasing plans, designing maintenance-of-traffic (MOT) plans, surveying, and guiding

construction equipment with automated machine guidance (AMG).

Figure 1: Automated Machine Guidance Concrete Paver in Action

With engineers creating 3D models for design and contractors using 3D models for

construction, it is logical that engineers could supply contractors with 3D design models. This,


6

however, has not been the case. The traditional design deliverable, used in all 50 states, entails

engineers creating 3D models and then reducing those models to a series of 2D views that can be

printed as paper plans and delivered as part of the engineering bid package. The contractor then

takes the 2D plans and reverse engineers them to create 3D digital models that are used in

construction. It is estimated that as much as 50 percent of the time spent designing a project is

used to produce 2D paper plans, and contractors invest significant time and resources turning the

2D paper plans back into 3D models.

In recognition of these inefficiencies and recent advances in technology, UDOT has

piloted a series of projects under the umbrella of IDC. The goal with these projects is to develop

the technology, methods, and workflows necessary to eliminate 2D plan sheets and replace them

with the design and delivery of the 3D model as the contract document. This piloting effort is an

attempt to advance a project-lifetime data model that will eliminate the current inefficiencies of

the designer using design modeling software to design in 3D and then convert to 2D paper plans

for bid purposes, followed by the contractor using construction modeling software to convert the

plans back to 3D models for construction. The IDC approach seeks to leverage the benefits of

highly detailed digital models that are directly consumable by contractors and can also be

retained by the agency as a high-fidelity representation of the constructed reality or as-built

condition.

Prior to 2014, some contractors had obtained digital files directly from designers, but

starting in 2014, UDOT began formally supplying digital surfaces and other design files, along

with paper plan sheets, as part of the deliverable package. On the initial projects, the digital

models were supplied for information only (FIO). Contractor feedback was positive; many

contractors reported that obtaining the model files provided a valuable check against the models

they were creating from the paper plans.

This delivery of FIO digital models complemented the guidance provided by FHWA in

its April 2014 3D Engineered Models for Construction Workshop conducted at UDOT. A

handful of state agencies across the country had reported the potential for more accurate

earthwork computations, earlier detection and resolution of clashes, faster collaborative decision

making, more efficient bid preparation, and the ability to use models for surveying and AMG


7

during construction. After the workshop, UDOT formulated a plan to explore and evaluate the

benefits and risks of adopting IDC methods.

Beginning in summer 2014, UDOT hosted a series of workshops to identify and mitigate

the risks associated with delivering models as the legal document. The participants included

UDOT management and staff, design consultants, members of the American Council of

Engineering Companies, contractors from the Association of General Contractors, and software

suppliers, including Bentley and Autodesk. In these workshops, a dialog was opened between

contractors, UDOT, and technical experts about what would serve the agency and the design and

construction community best for delivering 3D models instead of 2D plans. These collaborative

efforts identified many of the risks and benefits that would likely result from moving toward a

more model-driven design deliverable and served as the foundation for the goals set forth in the

UDOT IDC short- and midterm plans published in 2014 and 2015 (1, 2).

Concurrently with the risk and mitigation workshops, UDOT decided to move forward

with a pilot program to develop IDC methods and workflows. UDOT Central and UDOT Region

4 proposed using construction manager/general contractor (CM/GC) contracting, in recognition

that developing the model as the legal document required input and concurrence from the

designers and the contractor. CM/GC allowed the contractor to provide feedback and specifics

on exactly what types of models they could use and gave the design team the opportunity to

understand the specifics of how contractors integrated models into their construction processes.

Pilot projects were selected in a way that allowed IDC to be developed on uncomplicated

projects initially and then implemented in more complicated projects as the methods and

workflows became established.

Pilot Projects

As outlined in the 3D Engineered Models for Construction Implementation Plan (3), four

projects—SR-68 in Region 3, I-15 Farr West to Brigham in Region 1, SR-20 in Region 4, and I-

215 in Region 2—were identified to develop and refine the UDOT design team’s OpenRoads

modeling capabilities and the IDC methods. Due to circumstances including project delays due

to funding and software implementation issues, the projects’ usefulness for developing IDC


8

methods and workflows was limited, except for the SR-20 project. The lessons learned from

these projects mostly centered on the importance of having specific features available in the

software and time available in the schedule to devise workarounds, as required, to overcome

software limitations.

The first two IDC pilot projects that were able to utilize OpenRoads SS4, a version that

included updates that remedied some of the problems encountered on the early projects, were the

SR-20, Passing Lanes MP 10 to MP 12, and SR-10, US-6 to Ridge Road, CM/GC Phase I

projects in UDOT Region 4. Both were selected due to their relative simplicity of design and

limited number of design disciplines (roadway, drainage, signing, striping, and right-of-way).

During the risk workshops, it was determined that candidate pilot projects should be as

straightforward as possible so that time could be focused on developing the IDC workflows and

methods instead of solving complex design challenges.

Outline of Report

This report details the progress made and lessons learned on the two Region 4 pilot

projects, discusses considerations for future IDC pilot projects, and recommends next steps in

IDC implementation. The report is structured as follows:

Introduction

Pilot Project 1

Pilot Project 2

Pilot Project Analysis

Considerations

Recommendations and Next Steps

Conclusion


9

2.0 PILOT PROJECT 1: SR-20, PASSING LANE MP 10 TO MP 12

Project Details

Project PIN: 11430

Project Number: F-0020(10)10

Contracting Method: CM/GC

Designers: UDOT Region 4

Inspection: UDOT

Status: Constructed summer 2016

Figure 2: SR-20 Finished Project

Project Description

The SR-20 pilot in UDOT Region 4 was a project to add climbing lanes to SR-20

between mileposts 10 and 12 on the side of a mountain with steep slopes above the road and

long, heavily vegetated fill slopes below.


10

UDOT’s goal was to award the model as the legal document. SR-20 was chosen due to its

lack of design complexity, the limited number of design disciplines, and the resulting reduction

in risk associated with those elements. To further increase the likelihood of success, CM/GC

delivery was used to allow collaboration between the contractor and the design team during the

production of the 3D model package as the legal document. The SR-20 project successfully

delivered the model as the legal document and won the UDOT 2016 Innovative Project of the

Year award.

Procedures

2.3.1 Survey

The initial survey control network was established by UDOT’s survey consultant per the

2015 UDOT Survey & Geomatics Standards (4). A 1-cm geodetic survey was completed, and

level loops were run through all the network control points.

The initial terrain survey was conducted by the same UDOT consultant using

(static/terrestrial) lidar. After CM/GC contractor selection, UDOT was made aware by the

contractor that the slope surveys on portions of the project were inaccurate and could not be

relied on for quantities. Due to the density and type of vegetation, much of the lidar coverage

outside of the roadway prism was determined to be insufficient; lidar returns captured the tops of

the vegetation and not the existing ground. To remedy this situation, the UDOT survey

consultant collected supplemental survey points. Per the Geomatics manual, side slope data was

collected via cross sectioning, using a Global Positioning System (GPS) rover, and added to the

points generated from lidar. The survey data was compiled and incorporated into the existing

ground model.

On award of the project, the contractor performed a spot survey to validate the existing

ground model. After the additional survey points were compared with the UDOT existing ground

model, it was determined that more survey points were needed on the steep, heavily vegetated

slopes to account for the grade breaks between cross sections. Additional points were collected

and merged with all the previous survey data, and a new surface was generated for use in


11

construction. The Region 4 designers re-ran the design with the new surfaces, and new quantities

were generated.

Figure 3. Steep Terrain in SR-20 Project Area

2.3.2 Construction survey

When the contractor mobilized, contractor personnel went to the project site and set up

the construction survey network on the same basis as the preconstruction survey network. This

construction survey network was used for all the AMG control. All machinery was calibrated

and registered on the survey control network, and surfaces were constructed according to the

design surfaces that were transferred to the AMG construction equipment.

2.3.3 Inspection survey

The inspectors used the preconstruction survey control network, which had been accepted

as the construction survey control network, as the basis for all inspection survey data. Survey

rovers, supplied by the contractor and registered on the construction network, were used to

inspect all features on the project.


12

2.3.4 Workspace

The workspace used on the SR-20 project was the production version of the UDOT

ProjectWise workspace developed to support OpenRoads SS4. No feature definitions or item

types developed specifically for IDC were incorporated into the workspace.

2.3.5 Construction inspection

For the inspection of the graded surfaces, the UDOT designers supplied the UDOT

inspectors with design surfaces that were loaded into the survey rover. The survey rover was

supplied by the contractor and tied in to the construction survey network but was operated by

UDOT inspection personnel.

The surface information in the rover allowed inspectors to compare the elevation of

points on the ground with the corresponding points on the theoretical design surface. This

allowed the inspectors to directly inspect the graded surfaces and provide real-time feedback on

whether the construction surfaces met the design intent. The inspection points collected by the

inspectors were supplied to the design team for use as a quality check and in daily log

documentation using Masterworks software.

The inspection team reported that using Aurigo Masterworks greatly reduced the time

spent creating the daily diary. Without Masterworks, to get a photo into the system, inspectors

took the photo on a phone, emailed it, put it in a Word document, printed the Word document to

Portable Document Format (PDF), and then put the PDF in ProjectWise and sent out the link.

With Masterworks, inspectors were able to snap photos from their iPads and, as soon as they

connected via WiFi, the data automatically synchronized. This method greatly simplified the

inspection process and reduced the delays associated with getting inspection information into the

UDOT system. In addition to this efficiency, daily reports were available to all field crews

immediately, which substantially reduced the administrative time compared to previous projects.

2.3.6 As-builts

In efforts that are underway as of January 2017, as-builts are being created by combining

lidar scans with elevation data derived from photos collected by unmanned aerial vehicles


13

(UAVs). In addition, UDOT is testing the ability to transfer feature data to geographic

information systems (GIS) using Safe FME software.

Use of Models

The effective use of models evolved over the 12 months of design and construction.

When the project design started, the software documentation suggested that it was possible to

publish Bentley design models in an Integrated Consensus Model (ICM) format that could be

converted 1:1 to a Trimble Business Center (TBC) model for use by the contractor. However, the

UDOT Region 4 designers and the contractor discovered that the conversion utility did not work

correctly and could not be used. As a result, UDOT Central began a series of biweekly calls with

Bentley and Trimble to coordinate the successful fix of the software.

While the software was being fixed, UDOT Region 4 designers and the contractor

devised a workaround to allow the exchange and comparison of the design and construction

models and achieve model consensus. The workaround involved UDOT supplying the native file

formats (.dgn, .alg, .dtm, and LandXML) to the contractor. The contractor then used Autodesk

Civil3D to convert those files into components used to build the contractor’s TBC models. This

workaround was cumbersome since it introduced time and complexity between when the model

was supplied by the designers and when it was available for comparison by the contractor. This

lag between the design model being supplied and the construction model being available for

feedback resulted in models being passed back and forth for many months to achieve model

consensus.

During construction, the Bentley-to-Trimble, ICM-to-TBC conversion utility was fixed

and made available to the team. Although it is anticipated that the ICM will streamline the effort

required to generate and pass surfaces to the contractor, its use on SR-20 was limited due to its

late arrival. Instead, the native files were awarded as the legal document.


14

Use of Paper Plans

For some construction activities, paper plans that were supplied FIO were used to

construct and inspect the SR-20 project. The paper plans were utilized or referred to by

inspectors approximately 15 to 20 percent of the time at the beginning of construction. As the

construction engineering team became more familiar with Bentley OpenRoads Navigator (ORN)

and after additional leader notes were added to the models displayed on the inspectors’ mobile

tablets, reliance on paper plans diminished. The contractor also used ORN extensively as the

project progressed.

Benefits of Using IDC

The use of models instead of paper plans resulted in several significant benefits on the

project, as outlined in this section.

2.6.1 Clearing and grubbing boundaries

Through the use of iModels of the project boundaries loaded onto ORN, the contractor

was able to set rough clearing and grubbing boundaries prior to the construction survey network

being established. This process resulted in the contractor being able to start clearing and

grubbing immediately and shaved several days off the overall schedule.

2.6.2 Models to surfaces for AMG

Designers supplied design surfaces in a format that could be converted to AMG. This

process saved time compared with the traditional method of the contractor building surfaces

from paper plans and ensured that the design surface and construction surface were identical.

2.6.3 Quick turnaround for design changes

When it was discovered that supplemental survey data was needed, UDOT Region 4

design personnel were able to receive the data from the contractor, reprocess that data into a new

surface, and supply the data back to the contractor in less than a day. Since construction staking


15

was unnecessary, the contractor implemented the changes in its AMG equipment and proceeded

with construction without lengthy delays. This process resulted in significant schedule savings.

2.6.4 Use of the rover to inspect surfaces

UDOT inspectors used the surfaces supplied by the UDOT Region 4 designers to inspect

the constructed surfaces. The designer-supplied surfaces were loaded onto the contractor-

supplied rover, which was tied in to the construction survey network. The inspectors then used

the surface model in the rover to randomly check any point on the finished surface against the

UDOT design surface. The rover display showed inspectors the numerical difference between

the field shot and the model value. If the two points were within tolerance, the screen showed the

difference in green. Out-of-tolerance values were shown in red. This tool allowed the inspectors

to quickly determine if points on the graded surface were within the construction tolerance of the

design surfaces and enabled valuable communication between the UDOT construction crews and

the contractor on rough-graded surfaces.

In one case, by comparing the design surface to the graded surface using the rover,

inspectors found a significant out-of-tolerance condition. When the errors were traced to their

source, it was determined that the AMG equipment had experienced blade wear, which caused

surfaces to be graded too high. The contractor noted that the equipment had not checked in with

the control network on a regular enough schedule, which allowed the error to propagate. Once

the equipment began checking in regularly and the blade wear was accounted for, the regraded

surfaces were reinspected and found to be within tolerance. This entire episode validated the

method for checking surfaces against the theoretical design surface and demonstrated the

necessity of having all AMG equipment check in with the control network on a frequent (daily)

basis.

2.6.5Use of Masterworks

Logging the daily diary using Masterworks resulted in a significant reduction in the effort

required by inspectors to log and document inspection data. This reduced the workload

associated with keeping the daily diary and allowed more time for inspectors to be actively and

constructively involved in the project.


16

2.6.6 Schedule savings

The original construction schedule for the project was estimated as 90 days. In large part

due to the time savings outlined in the above sections, the project was completed approximately

23 days ahead of schedule. Much of this saving was credited to the use of IDC methods.

Factors Contributing to Success

Prior to the SR-20 pilot project, very few methods and workflows existed to guide the

process. In many cases, the functionality that was needed in the software did not exist, and

workarounds were necessary. This required flexibility from the designers and support from the

software manufacturers and outside experts. Several key factors and decisions positively

influenced the outcome, and those decisions are detailed in this section.

2.7.1 Selection of straightforward pilot project and CM/GC contracting method

The careful screening of the project before its selection as a pilot project helped make it

successful. The limited number of disciplines and the comparative simplicity of design enabled

the team to effectively allocate resources and develop the workflows and methods necessary to

deliver the model as the contract document. The use of CM/GC contracting allowed for an

iterative design and model delivery process, which was essential for developing the IDC

workflows. The discussions between the contractor and Region 4 designers enabled the project

team to fully develop methods and workflows that would not have been possible on a D/B/B

project.

2.7.2 Selection of a contractor with advanced technical skills

The development of IDC methods benefited from having a contractor that had advanced

technical knowledge of modern construction methods and possessed Bentley OpenRoads

software skills on par with the designers. The ability for the contractor to directly incorporate the

Bentley legacy file formats (.alg, .dgn, .dtm) and convert them to TBC using ACAD Civil3D,

when necessary, greatly contributed to the success of the project.


17

2.7.3 Flexibility of the design team, support from management, and access to experts

Since there was no published information on how to approach and conduct an IDC

project, it was vital to have a skilled and flexible design team, supported by management, with

direct access to the software manufacturers, technical consultants, and the contractor’s technical

experts. A major portion of the project involved discovering and devising workflows and

methods that were necessary to overcome software bugs and the lack of existing software

functionality. Involving experts, having management support, and being able to adapt and

change directions allowed the team to overcome major roadblocks that otherwise would have

resulted in the abandonment of IDC methods and reversion to traditional methods to deliver the

project.

2.7.4 Bentley ICM to TBC

Early attempts to use the Bentley-to-TBC workflow for ICMs were unsuccessful. At the

behest of UDOT, Bentley and Trimble engaged in cooperative calls with UDOT and the

contractor to solve the problem. Due to time constraints, a workaround was devised to pass

model data to the contractor using legacy file formats, but by the end of the project, the project

ICM was validated to match the project TBC model developed by the contractor. This validation

is a very promising step toward advertising D/B/B projects with the model as the legal document.

2.7.5 Breaking models down to component models

In response to problems encountered when trying to use comprehensive ICMs and

iModels, it was decided to simplify the workflows and break large models down into component

models. Live nesting caused problems with model generation, and software limitations

associated with saved views made large, comprehensive models impractical. Therefore, the IDC

team devised methods to break comprehensive models into simplified component models for

consumption by the contractor.


18

Lessons Learned

Several important lessons were learned during this pilot project, and those lessons are

outlined in this section.

2.8.1 Methods are needed to accept inspected surfaces with the rover

The SR-20 UDOT inspectors were able to inspect the built surfaces using the design

model loaded into the rover, but the inspectors identified the need for guidance on inspecting,

accepting, and documenting surfaces. Normal construction methods often rely on constructing

and inspecting only a portion of a given surface during a certain phase of construction.

Inspection methods are needed to reconcile the realities of piecemeal surface construction.

Dividing surfaces into lots that could be inspected and accepted has been suggested as a

possibility, as has the use of point-to-reference model surface comparison reports generated by

the rover. These possibilities will be tested on future pilot projects.

2.8.2 Survey completeness is essential

Construction based on the model is only as accurate as the survey on which the model is

based. Although the roadway terrain survey was very good, discrepancies existed between the

existing conditions survey on the side slopes and the augmented slope survey that was collected

after clearing and grubbing had concluded. To reduce quantity errors in construction, the design

needs to be based on the same survey that the contractor uses for construction and surfaces need

to be collected at sufficient density, detail, and accuracy to generate a realistic representation of

the actual natural ground surface.

2.8.3 More detailed guidance is needed for topographical surveys

On SR-20 there were steep side slopes with considerable vegetation and topographic

variation. Because of the vegetation and long slopes, lidar was not effective at collecting accurate

slope contours. Supplemental survey points that were collected using a rover also proved to be

insufficient due to the difficult and varied nature of the slope and the method used to collect the

data (cross sectioning). On the basis of this experience, UDOT noted that more detailed survey


19

collection guidance in the Geomatics manual was needed to support the point density and detail

needed for the IDC methods.

2.8.4 UDOT inspection personnel were able to play a more active role

Inspectors noted that using the rover to inspect surfaces was empowering. The inspectors

became active participants in the construction of the project and were able to provide valuable

real-time feedback. Inspectors who worked on SR-20 indicated that they were enthusiastic to

work on future IDC projects.

2.8.5 Masterworks streamlined the inspectors’ roles

The ability to maintain the daily diary in a time-efficient manner greatly simplified a

process that sometimes causes delays on projects. Although not a direct byproduct of the IDC

process, the ability to efficiently maintain the daily diary helped inspectors keep up with the

faster-paced IDC project.


20

3.0 PILOT PROJECT 2: SR-10, US-6 TO RIDGE ROAD CM/GC PHASE I

Project Details

Project Number: F-0010(75)66

Project Pin: 13664

Contracting Method: CM/GC

Designers: Consultants

Inspection: UDOT

Status: Scheduled for construction summer 2018

Project Description

SR-10 is a rural widening project that will add a center turn lane, curb and gutter, and

draining improvements over sections of the roadway and make changes to the vertical alignment

to improve safety

.

Figure 4: SR-10 Project Existing Conditions


21

Procedures

3.3.1 Survey

The initial geodetic control survey was performed by UDOT per the 2015 UDOT Survey

& Geomatics Standards (4). A survey consultant performed a GNSS 1-cm survey to densify the

control network where necessary and provide coverage over the entire project limits. Vertical

control was obtained through differential digital leveling. The topographical survey was

collected with lidar, augmented with rover shots in locations where lidar coverage was occluded

by vegetation or otherwise impractical.

The surveyor processed the point cloud data into surfaces and features. Existing features

such as signs, power poles, power lines, striping, drainage features, and road features were

classified and modeled by the surveyor.

3.3.2 Workspace

On the basis of the experience gained from the SR-20 project and familiarity with other

agencies’ implementation of OpenRoads, the UDOT computer-assisted drafting and design

(CADD) workspace for SR-10 was modified to better facilitate the development of IDC methods

and workflows. In coordination with the UDOT staff responsible for the CADD workspace and

with Bentley, several workspace features and workflows were tested and implemented. Those

features and workflows are defined in broad terms as follows:

Changes were made to provide the granularity to control, display, and export models

produced by OpenRoads. Workspace changes were made to add levels, items, and

feature types and create templates that could automatically generate surfaces that

could be directly consumed by the contractor.

Changes were made to creating a top view in the 3D models similar to a roll plot; the

changes included annotation and the ability to display colored model elements in

grayscale, similar to a paper plan set.


22

Changes were made to set up 2D and 3D files for proper display in Bentley’s ORN.

The CADD ProjectWise workspace that was developed for SR-10 was delivered to

UDOT and installed on the UDOT ProjectWise system for use on the I-80 Climbing Lanes IDC

pilot project that is currently (January 2017) underway (construction summer 2018).

3.3.3 Construction inspection (scheduled summer 2018)

The plan for inspection is similar to the plan used on SR-20. Inspectors will use a rover

supplied by the contractor to compare constructed surfaces to the design surfaces. The subgrade

surface will be exported by the designers to a format that can be fed directly into the survey rover

being operated by the inspection team, which will eliminate the need for the contractor to convert

the surfaces before using them.

Inspectors will also rely on the annotated scroll plot iModels displayed in ORN on iPads

to view design data. PDF copies of the views from the models will also be supplied as a

reference, similar to what was used for the plan-in-hand (PIH) review (see Use of Models

section).

3.3.4 As-builts

A strategy for collecting as-built data will be developed after the results of the SR-20 as-

built effort have been evaluated.

Use of Models

The design workflow for the SR-10 design effort was fully modified to take advantage of

capabilities that became available on August 1, 2016, in the 08.09.11.872 version of the Bentley

OpenRoads software. Individual component models for roadway, drainage, removals, and

signing and striping were created for the PIH review. These component models were tailored for

display in ORN on mobile tablets. A similar set of models will be included in the project

deliverable package for use in the field for construction and inspection. The consultant is

working with Bentley to provide additional functionality in ORN to enable the display of station,


23

elevation, and offset from named geometry, along with a host of other features. This

functionality will greatly enhance the usability of models in the field on mobile devices.

Surface meshes that can be directly exported to the contractor’s modeling platform

(TBC) will be supplied in ICM and LandXML format. These models will be used by the

contractor to program the AMG earthwork equipment and by field technicians to inspect the

surfaces.

Additionally, models tailored to appear like a scroll plot were created for the PIH review

and will be created for the final submittal. PDF versions of these models are being used as part of

the PIH review and will be used by construction and inspection personnel to orient themselves in

the field in lieu of paper plans.

Figure 5: SR-10 Project Model


24

Use of Paper Plans

Content that would traditionally be included in paper plans will be provided in 3D models

that have been symbolized with familiar plan set symbols and locked into a viewing orientation

that is similar to a scroll plot. PDF copies of the scroll plot views will also be linked and

packaged with the models for printing and markup as required. Cross sections, details, standard

drawings, and specifications will be available as linked content that can be viewed on a mobile

device in the field using ORN.

Model Review and QA/QC

For PIH review, iModels annotated as scroll plots and PDF views are being supplied to

the reviewers as part of a Bluebeam PDF Studio Session. Bluebeam Studio is a collaborative

software feature that allows invited reviewers to simultaneously open and comment on or mark

up PDF documents in real time. Bluebeam Studio was hosted by the consultant, and the free

version of Bluebeam Revu was installed at UDOT and configured so that comments from all

reviewers were collected in a single review document for preservation as the quality

assurance/quality control (QA/QC) record. The model will be reviewed and compared using

Autodesk Navisworks and Bentley Navigator. After the PIH review is complete, the

effectiveness of the review method will be evaluated and adjusted as necessary. It is anticipated

that the plans, specifications, and estimate review will be conducted in a similar fashion.

Takeaways

Some of the takeaways from the SR-10 project will be carried forward into future pilot

IDC pilot projects. The key takeaways are outlined in this section.

3.7.1 Workspace

A preliminary version of the SR-10 modified UDOT IDC workspace has been supplied to

UDOT for use on the I-80 IDC pilot project. UDOT will incorporate the elements that align with

overall agency goals and install the workspace for use on future pilot projects. A method for


25

creating additional item types and feature definitions will be supplied, and any training materials

that are needed will be identified.

3.7.2 IDC methods and workflows

Designers are developing methods to create, symbolize, and display models on iPads that

will look similar to paper plan sheets. The designer is working directly with Bentley to improve

ORN by adding functionality to track named geometry and display station offset and elevation,

along with improvements to ORN’s ability to use saved views.

3.7.3 Knowledge transition

Consultant design staff from the SR-10 project are assisting the UDOT Region 2 design

staff on the I-80 Climbing Lanes IDC pilot project, which commenced in October 2016. The

consultant will assist the staff get up to speed on the methods and workflows necessary for IDC.


26

4.0 PILOT PROJECT ANALYSIS

The SR-20 and SR-10 pilot projects had different timelines for completion, and thus

many components of the technology and understanding were at different points in their evolution

at the equivalent point in design. Some approaches, problems, and solutions were the same;

others relied on later software releases and process advancements that were not available for the

earlier project.

Software

For 3D models to be an effective means of delivering a project, data from many sources

must be packaged and included in the model. As-built drawings, survey data, pay item

information, standard drawings, specifications, GIS data, and a host of other data are used to

create a plan set for the advertised deliverable. For models to be the advertised deliverable, the

same information must be included in the model.

Project data is produced, stored, translated, and consumed in many software packages

and systems that are produced by different vendors or developed by UDOT. Some of the

software is natively compatible, but most is not. Therefore, some form of translation, often

requiring manual steps, is required.

Currently, these are the packages that produce or integrate the data used to produce,

deliver, and transmit the project deliverable:

Bentley MicroStation: CADD platform for producing and packaging data into sheets

or models. For paper plans, MicroStation is the tool used to properly construct

drawing features and align and display the annotation necessary to transmit the

design intent.

Bentley InRoads/OpenRoads: the latest version of Bentley InRoads is called

OpenRoads (current version: SS4). OpenRoads is used to produce all highway

geometry (horizontal and vertical alignments), along with all the surfaces and models


27

used in the design. OpenRoads runs inside of MicroStation and has become more

integrated with MicroStation with every major release.

Bentley ProjectWise: a work-sharing platform that stores and provides access to the

engineering content on a project. Engineers, designers, and drafters conduct all their

MicroStation and InRoads design work on the ProjectWise platform. The design files

for every UDOT design project ultimately reside in ProjectWise.

Bentley ORN: an application that runs on iOS, Android, and Windows and that is

designed to display and mark up drawings, documents, and models.

UDOT Electronic Project Management: a system that offers UDOT employees, local

government customers, and consultants access to electronic program management.

This system provides information on the planning, funding, scheduling, and staffing

of UDOT design projects.

UDOT Project Development Business System (PDBS): a highway construction

management tool and database. It was developed by UDOT to help facilitate and

electronically document the advertising, bidding/awarding, and construction

activities of all federal, state, and local government projects.

UPlan/GIS: a customized GIS platform capable of serving fully attributed, web-

accessible 2D maps that have been published to the UPlan ArcGIS website. UPlan

currently hosts asset, maintenance, pavement, planning, project, reference, and traffic

and safety data. The complete list can be found in the Open Data Guide (5).

Due to the pioneering nature of the IDC process, many of the features needed to

successfully design models that can be directly consumed in the field by contractors are lacking

or underdeveloped in the current software. This lack of fully implemented functionality greatly

impacted both pilot projects. Not only was some functionality missing from the software, but

some functionality was not refined or did not work as advertised.


28

The SR-10 and SR-20 project teams both experienced software bugs and other issues

during design, model production, and publishing that complicated or hindered final project

delivery. Some of these challenges were addressed with workflow modifications or by

compromising on the form and function of the final output; others relied on temporary fixes or

the use of paper plans.

On the SR-20 project, the UDOT Region 4 design team worked directly with Bentley and

Trimble, the software providers, to resolve software issues. On the SR-10 project, UDOT and the

design consultant are working directly with the Bentley developers to help steer the development

process to get the necessary functionality added to the software. To support the UDOT IDC

efforts, Bentley has hired a senior product manager to be the liaison between UDOT, its design

consultants, and the Bentley developers. The product manager has an extensive background in

OpenRoads use and has already supplied some beneficial information on how to streamline some

of the UDOT workflows.

In a dynamic, rapidly evolving process, this type of high-level support will continue to be

essential in sorting through the various software problems to keep the design teams moving and

make sure that the necessary functionality is included in future software releases.

Issues that have been fixed in the software itself are not discussed further, as they are

now obsolete. However, the important lesson for any design team is that it is imperative to have

the latest release of the CADD platform and the civil vertical applications (i.e., OpenRoads)

installed, along with the latest CADD workspace, before commencing with any IDC project.

Software continues to change, and new functionalities are introduced with each new

release. In particular, there have been many improvements in publishing models to mobile

devices for display in the field in lieu of paper plans. Having an advanced understanding of the

software is essential, and staying current on the latest software changes is important.


29

Workspace

Modern CADD software is extremely powerful, complex, flexible, and configurable.

There are thousands of setting combinations and many resource files that define things such as

levels, feature definitions, seed files, line styles, text, and almost every other aspect of software

behavior. Together, these settings and files are referred to as the workspace. How the CADD and

ProjectWise staff configure these files and resources has a significant impact on the performance

of the CADD applications and the overall ease of use for the end users.

Different workspaces were used for the SR-10 and SR-20 pilot projects. SR-20 was

hosted on the UDOT ProjectWise server with the UDOT SS4 managed workspace installed.

During SR-20 design development, a few minor modifications to the workspace were made, but

the majority of the workspace remained stock UDOT SS4. Not having a workspace modified for

IDC created problems for the SR-20 design team. As a result, the team had to devise complex

workspace workarounds since the scope, budget, and time to develop the workspace were not

available on the project.

One of the SR-10 pilot project goals was to develop a UDOT SS4 workspace with the

customizations necessary to support the workflows required for IDC. The workspace and project

were hosted on a consultant ProjectWise system, with the idea that many settings and workspace

components would need modification. In addition, the SR-10 project team had the benefit of

starting after the SR-20 project team had uncovered many of the software and workspace issues

and benefited from running later versions of all the software packages.

Not all software currently has the

functionality required for IDC.

IDC designers must use the most recent

applications, platforms, and workspaces.

Advanced and up-to-date understanding of

the software is essential.

IN SUMMARY…

3D models must contain the same data as a

traditional plan set.

This data is stored in many different

software packages; not all are compatible

with each other.


30

To implement the changes to the UDOT SS4 workspace, UDOT engaged internal staff

with expertise in workspace configuration and the OpenRoads products, in particular. Using best

practices and approaches that have been proven in other OpenRoads early adopter states, like

Florida, UDOT created and deployed a modified version of the current UDOT workspace,

customized to accommodate 3D model production, display, and delivery. Throughout the

project, refinements and modifications to the workspace will continue to be made to

accommodate the IDC process and project needs.

One of the most significant workspace changes was the addition of feature definitions

and item types for specific disciplines to enable model elements to be tagged with attributes. This

modification was important because it added intelligence to features and could be published or

exported as part of the model.

Pay item information from PDBS was used to tag the corresponding OpenRoads model

elements on the SR-10 project, which allowed them to be published to iModels and therefore

viewed in the field on iPads or other mobile devices. Infusing the workspace with information

from PDBS that will carry all the way through to construction, as-builts, asset management, and

the final data repository is a goal that is being tested and will be refined on SR-10 and future IDC

pilot projects.

UDOT is currently (January 2017) installing the workspace developed on SR-10 for use

on the I-80 IDC pilot project. The scope of the SR-10 workspace was specific to the disciplines

involved in the SR-10 project. Prior to commencing any pilot project, it is important for project

teams to understand the workspace modifications that will be needed to support the project and

have a mechanism in place to produce the necessary modifications. Currently, features and item

Before each pilot project, the team must

determine what workspace modifications

will be needed to support the project.

All modifications should be coordinated with

UDOT Design and Standards.

IN SUMMARY…

CADD workspaces are almost endlessly

customizable.

The UDOT SS4 workspace has now been

modified to support IDC workflows. More

modifications will be necessary as the

workflows become more developed.


31

types are being added as needed for the disciplines that are involved with the pilot projects. At

some point, if resources merit, a comprehensive workspace modification to add all PDBS pay

items to the feature and item type libraries may be warranted. Coordination with UDOT Design

and Standards is essential so that all added information is consistent with UDOT standards and

can be added to the main UDOT workspace as required.

Workflows

The order of operations necessary to produce a desired outcome is referred to as a

workflow. For IDC, workflows cover everything from setting up models, assigning features and

item types, breaking models into component models, publishing models to iModel format,

creating iModels that can be published as ICM models for conversion to AMG, and every other

nuanced set of steps for producing models. A properly configured workspace presents the user

with all the configurations, settings, and tools to produce a design, but the order of operations

and methods—the workflow—is vital for producing the desired results. Educating users on

workspace and workflow best practices is important.

A best practices library in ProjectWise is being maintained with documents and links to

videos and other content necessary to produce models for IDC. The current content has been

produced by UDOT and consultants, and the plan is to continue developing and refining the best

practices as required. New software functionality and capabilities greatly influence design

practices and workflows, and maintaining a current set of best practices has been identified as a

key step for advancing the IDC methods from one project to the next.

An IDC best practices library is being

maintained in ProjectWise.

Maintaining and updating these practices

will be a key factor in the successful

advancement of the IDC program.

IN SUMMARY…

The IDC workflow—the order of operations

and methods—is essential in producing the

desired results.

IDC teams must be well versed in workspace

and workflow best practices.


32

Models and Plan Quantities

In general terms, quantities are the difference between the existing conditions at the

beginning of a project and the as-built condition at the end of the project. Removals, earthwork,

paving, and the construction of designed features are all elements that are quantified and paid for

on a project. Earthwork and paving are the two quantities that influence contractor bids the most,

and historically, earthwork accounts for the majority of cost overruns on UDOT projects.

Therefore, the IDC team has adopted the goal of minimizing the errors associated with earthwork

and pavement quantities to better manage budgets and reduce the number and size of cost

overruns.

In rough terms, earthwork is the measured difference between the existing subgrade and

natural ground at the beginning of the project and the constructed subgrade at the end. If the

design and construction are based on a common survey and the design models and construction

models are the same, the plan quantities and the construction quantities should be the same.

Preconstruction Survey

In the earliest workshops and pilot project meetings, contractors emphasized that the first

thing they did on a project was check the survey. Discrepancies are viewed as risks, and

contractors noted that they are generally risk averse and account for risk by pricing it into the

bid. If a sawcut line, where new construction will be tied to existing conditions, is discrepant,

contractors adjust their quantities and bid accordingly. The same occurs for any differences noted

in the existing ground survey. If contractors find discrepancies in the existing ground survey,

they adjust their earthwork quantities and bids. Contractors noted that they never relied on the

By enabling design and construction to be

based on the same survey and models, IDC

should greatly minimize errors in these two

quantities and should therefore reduce

costs and overruns.

IN SUMMARY…

Earthwork and paving are the two quantities

that most influence contractor bids.

Earthwork is a major cause of project

overruns.


33

preconstruction survey and, instead, resurveyed every project prior to estimating, bidding, or

building.

In recognition that designing on the basis of the preconstruction survey and building on

the basis of a separate construction survey inherently introduces errors into the quantities, the

IDC team set goals for the pilot projects to develop methods and workflows to achieve a single

set of control and terrain surveys that could be used for preconstruction and construction.

Multiple contractors noted that they used more rigorous standards and methods for their

construction control survey than were used for the preconstruction survey. In response to that

feedback, changes were made in the 2015 Geomatics manual to how the preconstruction control

survey should be conducted. Along with the changes, it was noted that a better way to inspect,

verify, and document the preconstruction survey was needed so that contractors could easily

validate the sufficiency of the preconstruction survey. Therefore, goals have also been added to

the pilot projects to satisfy this requirement.

On the SR-10 and SR-20 projects, the survey control network was set up per the revised

Geomatics manual. Supplemental survey was added to densify the grid and extend the control to

the limits of the project. On both projects, the contractor was satisfied that the preconstruction

control network was sufficient for construction. No errors were noted, and no additional control

work was needed on either survey.

Terrain Survey

Lidar scanning augmented with traditional methods was used to collect the existing

ground survey on both pilot projects. On the SR-20 project, dense vegetation and steep slopes

An IDC goal was to develop more rigorous

protocols that would enable the contractor

to rely on the preconstruction survey.

The more rigorous survey was accepted by

the contractor as sufficient on both pilot

projects.

IN SUMMARY…

Contractors always resurvey before bidding.

Discrepancies between the UDOT and

contractor preconstruction surveys are

viewed by the contractor as risk, and that

risk is priced into the bid.


34

caused problems with the accuracy of the existing ground survey. Although the surveyor

followed the methods in the Geomatics manual for collecting cross section shots on the slopes,

the variation in the natural ground was more extreme than was captured by the survey. As a

result, areas of the survey were insufficient.

The IDC team noted that changes were needed in the Geomatics manual to help prevent

such situations, in which the survey was collected per the manual but was not sufficient to

represent the true contours of the existing ground. Therefore, IDC goals have been added to

explore options for collecting sufficient existing ground data on projects with steep, heavily

vegetated side slopes and to revise or amend the Geomatics manual as required.

On the SR-10 project, lidar data was collected and augmented with ground shots.

Because of the gentler nature of the terrain and the less dense vegetation, the lidar and

supplemental shots appear to be sufficient to accurately detail the existing ground. The CM/GC

contractor has not noted any deficiencies with the survey, but the final analysis of the survey

adequacy will not be available until construction commences.

Models

Throughout the SR-20 project, the UDOT Region 4 design team supplied models to the

contractor using native Bentley files (.alg, .dtm, and .dgn). The contractor had the technical

expertise necessary to properly open the files in OpenRoads and generate the surfaces needed in

TBC for use in surveys and AMG. Supplying the contractor with the raw design files was

necessary, since at the beginning of the project there was no other means of generating a format

On the SR-10 project, lidar and

supplemental shots have likely been

sufficient to detail the existing ground.

IN SUMMARY…

On the SR-20 project, dense vegetation and

steep slopes affected the accuracy of the

existing ground survey.

The Geomatics manual needs to be updated

to account for such locations.


35

that could be directly converted to TBC format. Instead, the contractor used the native Bentley

files and Autodesk Civil3D software to convert the files to the required formats.

By the end of the SR-20 project, the software and workflows were developed enough to

use ICM models to exchange surface data. However, by this point, surfaces had already been

constructed on the project. Although the designers and contractor did not use the method to

exchange live data, the team was able to use the method as a quality check to validate the surface

data that had been exchanged in the native file format. The team recommended that the ICM-to-

TBC method should be added to the best practices documents for further testing and use on

future pilot projects.

The designer and contractor did use the

method for QC.

The ICM-to-TCB method should be added to

the IDC best practices library.

The method will be used on future pilot

projects.

IN SUMMARY…

Workarounds were needed on the SR-20

project while the software was modified to

enable ICM-to-TCB conversion.

The modifications were not completed in

time for the designer and contractor to

exchange live data.


36

5.0 CONSIDERATIONS

D/B/B Contracting

CM/GC contracting was used on the early pilot projects since it afforded the opportunity

for collaboration between the contractor and the designer on the survey and design models prior

to award and construction. Both the contractor and the designers were able to provide feedback

and make iterative adjustments as required. The intent of the collaboration was to reduce the risk

of network control, terrain surveys, and models being rejected by the contractor at award.

The challenge of translating IDC methods to D/B/B contracting is the lack of opportunity

for iterative refinement of the survey and design between the contractor and the designers. When

the project is delivered for advertisement, the survey and design have to be final. Any mistakes

in the design models or discrepancies in the survey identified by the contractor will be priced

into the resulting bids. This makes it critical for the preconstruction survey to be complete and

accurate enough to be used for construction.

Through the pilot projects, UDOT is investigating ways to ensure that survey accuracy is

achieved. Details and guidelines for a standardized survey compliance report have been

developed for the Geomatics manual. Along with the standardized report and improved guidance

on how to conduct the preconstruction survey, the possibility of using a third party to verify the

survey is being considered. The ultimate goal is to ensure that the survey matches the ground, the

construction matches the model, the construction quantities match the design quantities, and all

parties agree to be bound by the model as the legal document.

An accurate preconstruction survey, on

which all else is based, is therefore vital.

IN SUMMARY…

The lack of collaboration between the

design and contractor before advertisement

is a challenge for the implementation of IDC

in D/B/B projects.

Any errors in the model or survey will be

priced into the bid as risk.


37

As-Built Drawings

After a project is built, as-built drawings are generally marked up by the contractor and

delivered to UDOT, where they are stored in ProjectWise with the original design drawings. For

a model-based system, the desirable outcome is for the design models to be updated with the as-

built data so that the as-built conditions can be stored and displayed. The disposition of as-builts

has been identified as one of the goals for the upcoming pilot projects. Major points of emphasis

will be the methods for collecting the as-built data and for displaying that data in a readily

accessible way.

Fundamental to the as-built discussion is the question of what the as-built condition is. If

a project is built to specifications and meets all the inspection criteria, one possibility is to allow

the design model along with the “as inspected” data to represent the as-built conditions.

Someone accessing the as-built would be presented with the 3D design model and a listing or

report showing the actual values for the inspected models. If packaged in an accessible way, this

approach may serve the needs for as-built deliverables.

Another option is to scan the finished project using lidar or another survey method and

use the scanned points to create surface meshes representing the true as-built dimensions. This

approach might supply more accurate data, but future pilot projects will need to weigh the

theoretical accuracy of a scanned solution against the utility of keeping the model in a true model

format. If a section of roadway is a quarter-inch higher than the theoretical profile, it needs to be

determined if there is any added benefit to using the actual scanned surface represented by

irregular triangles as opposed to theoretical flat surfaces with annotations that it is a quarter-inch

high in specific locations.


38

The ultimate solution may involve combining both methods into the deliverable.

UPlan

As part of the SR-20 and I-80 pilot projects, UDOT GIS specialists are investigating tools

and software that would allow attributed model data from OpenRoads to be converted to GIS

data for display on UPlan, along with the inverse operation of supplying GIS data and converting

it to OpenRoads model data. If this two-way conversion is possible, it may allow UPlan and GIS

to play an expanded role in the storage and display of project data, including as-builts. Although

GIS data lacks civil geometry information, which provides the ability to query station, offset, and

elevation data from models, richly attributed GIS data may be useful to augment the project data

used by construction teams in the field, similar to what has been done with utility data currently

in UPlan.

Knowledge Preservation and Education

A central repository is needed for the current best practices, lessons learned, and

institutional knowledge. Resources have been expended, and a large effort has been made to

Another approach would be to scan the

finished project and use the scanned points

to create surface meshes of the true as-built

dimensions.

The second approach would be more

accurate but would sacrifice the true model

format.

IN SUMMARY…

Methods of collecting and displaying as-built

data are a focus of upcoming pilot projects.

One approach would be to store “as

inspected” data with the design model as a

report.

If the two-way conversion is possible, UPlan

and GIS could play an expanded role in the

storage and display of project data.

IN SUMMARY…

UDOT GIS specialists are investigating ways

of converting OpenRoads model data to GIS

and vice versa.


39

develop and test the IDC workflows and methods. It is important that this knowledge be

leveraged by future participants in the IDC process.

Some of the elements that are needed include a repository of live training materials that

can be kept up to date with current best practice. The materials need to be a curated so that stale

data is removed and new material is promoted. Since the technology is rapidly changing and new

capabilities are constantly added to existing software, methods and workflows need to be

maintained and evaluated after every major software release. Additionally, as new functionality

and possibilities are discovered in existing or future software, workflows and methods need to be

updated. The development of IDC will continue to be a very fluid process until the technology

stabilizes and the methods prove out.

Additionally, a design process map that details the IDC process needs to be created and

maintained. As with the training materials, this design process map will need to be maintained as

a live document.

Advancement and Discovery

More pilot projects and workshops are needed to explore and understand the technology

and methods necessary for IDC. As technology and software become accessible, UDOT will

All information in the repository should be

regularly updated as software improves and

IDC workflows are modified.

The materials should be curated to ensure

that old versions are archived and new

versions are accessible.

IN SUMMARY…

Preservation of the knowledge gained

through the pilot projects is vital to

successful IDC implementation.

The educational repository should include

live training materials and a design process

map.

UDOT needs to continually evaluate new or

upgraded technology and assess its

potential to improve IDC delivery.

IN SUMMARY…

IDC should continue to be explored through

additional pilot projects and workshops.


40

need to evaluate the capabilities and impacts that are made possible. Competing software

solutions and new ways to integrate existing software solutions will continue to propel the

process. The agency needs to stay abreast of current technology and evaluate new technology

that would help streamline IDC project delivery.

Agency Adoption

As the IDC process evolves, what is possible from a technology standpoint will have to

be evaluated against all the other requirements and responsibilities that UDOT is governed by.

IDC has a broad scope that will benefit from evaluation by every department in the agency.

Current workflows as far upstream as environmental studies may someday help to influence the

IDC process and benefit from the results. As models become more standardized and more data

becomes integrated into the models, the method for accessing, viewing, and evaluating project

data will likely change. As deliverables for projects and by projects are redefined, the agency

will have to continue to be responsive to stay abreast of changes.

IDC delivery must continually be evaluated

against all the requirements and regulations

that UDOT is governed by and be modified

as these requirements change.

IN SUMMARY…

IDC has the potential for use by many UDOT

departments. Input from these departments

would be highly beneficial.


41

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS

From the lessons learned from the IDC development efforts and the current status of the

pilot projects, a list of goals has been established. The intention is for these goals to be

accomplished on future pilot projects and in workshops. Some of the goals will produce results

that are directly incorporated into future IDC projects; others will result in the discovery of

additional capabilities that need to be explored.

The goals are outlined in this chapter and divided into their respective stages in project

delivery.

Pilot Project Delivery

6.1.1 CM/GC project: Advertise project with model/preconstruction package as the legal

document using CM/GC to develop and refine method with increasing complexity

The initial pilot projects were deliberately chosen for their lack of complexity and

involvement of the fewest disciplines. To expand on the IDC development, more complex

projects, possibly in urban settings, along with more design disciplines, including structures,

need to be tested in a CM/GC environment. The I-80 Climbing Lanes project on Parleys Summit

is one of the projects that has been chosen to expand on the current capabilities.

D/B/B Project: Advertise Project with Model/Preconstruction Package as the Legal

Document

The CM/GC contracting method was chosen for pilot projects since it allows for

collaboration between the designers and contractors to ensure that the contractors receive the

models and design information they need for construction. On D/B/B projects, the process needs

to be pre-scripted, since there is no opportunity for changing what is delivered after the fact. The

details and workflows necessary to deliver the model as the contract document need to be

explored and developed on future pilot projects.


42

Preconstruction Survey

6.3.1 Develop guidance for how and when to perform the initial survey control, when to contract

for the survey, and how to define it according to the Geomatics manual

A high-quality geodetic control survey was established on both the SR-20 and SR-10

projects early in preconstruction. The surveys were augmented and densified to collect the data

needed to model the existing ground conditions. Guidance is needed for how and when the initial

survey is collected, and the Geomatics manual should be updated with those requirements.

6.3.2 Develop recommendations for when a point cloud is needed, how designers need to receive

that information, and how/when to get a survey contract executed to keep design schedules on

time

Lidar data has proven useful and efficient on both the IDC pilot projects. Guidance is

needed to define when lidar would be warranted on projects and when in the project schedule the

data should be collected.

6.3.3 Develop language for the Geomatics manual to more rigorously define collection methods

for hardscape and softscape surveys

To collect the more accurate survey data necessary for the IDC modeling efforts,

guidance is needed to precisely define the requirements for conducting hardscape surveys and

softscape surveys. Traditional methods of cross sectioning at defined intervals are not sufficient

for the majority of IDC projects. Guidance is needed in the Geomatics manual to reflect the more

rigorous requirements for collecting data on an IDC project.

6.3.4 Develop a method that enables contractor survey crews to verify and accept the

preconstruction survey

One of the largest sources of error in construction projects arises from discrepancies

between the preconstruction survey used for the design and the construction survey used for

construction. During the IDC development process, it has become evident that creating a single

accurate survey that can be used for design and construction is essential. Some of the


43

possibilities for reconciling the differences include using a third-party surveyor as quality

control. Any proposed method will need to be properly vetted and documented.

Preconstruction/Design

6.4.1 Develop model surfaces such that granular borrow, untreated base course, and

asphalt/Portland cement can be paid as plan quantities

This broad goal is tied to the way models are generated in the design software. The SR-

10 project will supply a data point for comparing model (plan) quantities to actual quantities and

provide another comparison of the correlation between volumes generated from surface

differentials and end area volumes.

6.4.2 Develop and refine method for associating metadata with model features

In the absence of text callouts to annotate paper plans, methods are required to associate

metadata as attributes of model features. These capabilities are being developed on the SR-10

project. Bentley has delivered a utility that enables the bulk editing of model feature attributes,

but this tool needs to be tested, and training materials will be needed to educate designers on the

methods required to create UDOT-compliant attributes.

6.4.3 Develop method for generating workspace modifications required for IDC

Every design discipline will require the modifying of item types and feature definitions in

the UDOT CADD workspace on ProjectWise. When internal resources are not available to make

the extensive changes, other methods of developing the workspace need to be explored. Using a

contractor or Bentley to make changes all at once or requiring the changes as part of future IDC

pilot projects are options.

6.4.4 Implement UDOT IDC workspace based on OpenRoads SS4

The workspace that was developed on the SR-10 project has been installed on the UDOT

ProjectWise system for use on the I-80 Climbing Lanes pilot project. That workspace will be


44

modified as needed, and it is anticipated that it will be the feedstock for all future IDC pilot

projects.

6.4.5 Develop OpenRoads CONNECT workspace

The next version of Bentley software, called CONNECT, will require an IDC workspace.

Most of the features from the IDC version of the V8i OpenRoads development efforts should

translate, but new functionality in the CONNECT version of the software will require a

reworking of the workspace.

6.4.6 Develop OpenRoads CONNECT Workflows

OpenRoads CONNECT will have additional functionality. The entire IDC process and all

workflows will need to be evaluated, and modifications to the workflows will need to be tested

on future pilot projects.

6.4.7 Develop guidance on how to use Quantity Manager

Region 4 explored the use of Quantity Manager on the I-215 project. Further testing of

Quantity Manager will be included in future pilot projects. Quantity pull-offs and reporting for

summary sheets or summary reports in an automated fashion will require testing on a pilot

project.

6.4.8 Develop guidance on how to deliver models for the most efficient consumption by

contractors and their subcontractors

This guidance should include requirements for

Documenting how models are consumed by contractors.

Documenting which models are used to create AMG.

Documenting how models are converted from design surfaces to AMG.

Documenting which surfaces are used by subcontractors.


45

Defining which component models are needed for contractors and subcontractors.

This goal will be fulfilled and documented on the SR-10 project with the delivery of

Delaunay-compliant surface models for AMG and annotated component models for project

navigation and use by subcontractors.

This broad goal will be addressed on all pilot projects. See the discussion of the SR-20

and SR-10 pilot projects (Chapters 2 and 3) for technical details on how contractors consume

models. This goal is especially important to satisfy the requirements of IDC for D/B/B

contracting, for which models need to be in final format before the package is advertised.

Very few contractors in Utah use Bentley products, and ORN will be new to

subcontractors. Since subcontractors often comprise 60 percent or more of a project, model

deliverables and methods that will allow subcontractors to consume the model will need to be

developed.

6.4.9 Develop guidance on QC/QA and review of preconstruction package/model

Standardized methods for inspecting and reporting key elements within the model and for

running OpenRoads geometry reports and survey conformity reports need to be developed. With

paper plans, key points are annotated for emphasis and QA/QC inspection. A similar method

needs to be developed for extracting the key points in models and verifying compliance.

6.4.10 Develop guidance on ICM generation and best practices

Documentation and training videos are needed as part of the knowledge preservation and

education component of the IDC program as the methods of ICM generation are refined during

the pilot projects.

6.4.11 Develop guidance on how to package models for advertisement with digital signatures

The SR-20 and SR-10 projects have demonstrated that a single composite model may not

have much value for construction. Instead, a series of component models and surfaces will be

generated. The details of how to deliver models in an indelible package need to be developed.


46

Florida DOT has a tool that allows a folder full of files to be packaged into an unchangeable

single deliverable. Similar functionality will be needed to package the models and auxiliary data

required for a bid package.

6.4.12 Develop method through which contractors can receive and comment on model and

ultimately agree to accept it as legal document

Sometimes in the standard D/B/B contracting workflow, errors and omissions are

discovered in the bid package but not divulged by contractors until after the bid has been

awarded. This inefficiency leads to cost overruns. UDOT seeks to explore methods that enable

discrepancies in the bid package to be discovered and corrected prior to advertisement. The

survey control network and existing ground surveys are areas that have been identified as

potential sources of overruns. If there were a method for discovering errors and correcting them

before the package was advertised, it may be possible to bind contractors to design quantities in

the bid package and reduce the risk of cost overruns.

Construction/Inspection

6.5.1 Develop and explore alternate methods for viewing CADD and GIS data in the field

Currently, the only way to view model files in the field is through Bentley ORN.

However, UDOT is investigating other technology that would allow for attribute data from

models to be associated with GIS data. If model data can be mapped to GIS data, it may be

possible to use proven methods of viewing GIS data to view model data. This technology was

explored on the SR-20 project and will be part of the I-80 Climbing Lanes project.

6.5.2 Develop/provide guidance for field crews on how to document various surface

measurements

This guidance should cover

The method for using the rover on the construction network to verify constructed

surfaces.


47

The method for processing design surfaces into rover surfaces.

The method for processing collected rover points into easy-to-use

deviation/acceptance reports.

Criteria for inspecting surfaces as they are constructed (inspection lots).

The method for documenting inspected and accepted surfaces.

On the SR-20 project, the designers supplied the contractor with the design surface. The

contractor then used construction modeling software to convert the design surface into a surface

that could be exported to the survey rover supplied to UDOT inspectors.

It would be beneficial to bypass the intermediary steps and have designers supply the

design surfaces needed for inspection directly to the inspectors. Guidance and testing is needed

to accomplish this goal.

Additionally, once the inspectors have the surface loaded in the rover, a standardized way

to inspect and document the acceptance or rejection of the surfaces is needed. The rover

reporting capabilities are likely part of the solution, but ways to graphically integrate the reports

to show deviations from the design should be explored and tested.

Any method to inspect and document must account for the realities of construction

phasing. Contractors do not build the entire subgrade at once. The inspection methods need to

allow for buying off on portions of the surface as they are constructed.

6.5.3 Document when plan sheets are used (summaries, details, typicals)

Chapter 2, on the SR-20 pilot project, detailed which paper plans were needed to augment

the surfaces and models supplied for construction. The SR-10 designer and UDOT are working

with Bentley to develop dynamic cross-sectioning capabilities in ORN so that cross section

sheets are not needed.


48

For non-earthwork or pavement section features, such as lighting, signal, advanced traffic

management systems, structures, and so on, detail sheets will remain part of the design package

until IDC methods can be extended to those disciplines.

6.5.4 Accommodate model usage cases

Contractor implementation of models for construction can be broken into four broad

usage cases:

Estimating and quantities: desktop, iPad, converted to construction modeling

software.

4D and MOT: construction phasing and MOT (construction modeling software).

Construction: AMG (models converted from ICM or other design deliverable format

to construction modeling software).

Survey: location of features via the rover or iPad.

Each usage case requires slightly different models for consumption. Whereas survey

models and those used for AMG only need to be single surfaces, those used for estimating and

quantities, construction phasing, and MOT need to be more comprehensive. The first priority for

the advertised design deliverable is that it meets the design intent and includes all the

information that is normally contained in a paper plan set. Without much extra effort, the model

package may be tailored in a way that is much more useful to contractors.

6.5.5 Develop guidance and contract language for specification of as-builts by contractor

This guidance should include:

Developing a method for integrating accepted surfaces into design models for as-

builts.

Developing a method for incorporating as-builts into a usable format.


49

Investigating attribute conversion software, such as FTE.

When a project is built, the resulting as-built condition varies slightly from the theoretical

design represented by the design model. Inspected construction surfaces will vary within the

design tolerances of the theoretical design surface. One option is to store the design model along

with the inspection reports that show the “as inspected” conditions. Another option is to rescan

the surfaces and incorporate the scans into the as-built models.

In either case, the pilot projects will focus on developing a method to harvest as-built data

that has maximum utility for the agency.

6.5.6 Develop language to define the as-built deliverables with enough detail to provide the

agency with maximum flexibility and utility

For as-builts to be useful, they have to represent the physical environment in sufficient

detail and in an accessible format. Still to be determined is whether the as-builts should be

composed of the design model with indicators of the variance between the design and the

constructed conditions or whether the as-built should be an accurate model created from a scan

of the finished conditions. The SR-20 project explored the capabilities of using lidar and UAV-

based photography. Other projects will need to test other methods for collecting and reporting as-

built conditions.


50

7.0 CONCLUSION

In 2014, UDOT began investigating the benefits of delivering roadway projects in a way

that was responsive to changes in technology in the design and construction industry. The early

feedback and results from the SR-20 and SR-10 pilot projects show promise for reducing the

costs, streamlining the delivery process, and reducing the cost overruns associated with the

inefficiencies of designing projects in 3D, advertising as 2D plans, and then converting the 2D

plans back to 3D models for construction.

The SR-20 pilot project brought some significant challenges to light but also

demonstrated some of the significant benefits of the IDC method for CM/GC projects. The

ability to provide models that could be easily converted for AMG, the ability to use design

surfaces for the inspection of built surfaces, the ability to rapidly turn around design changes,

and the usefulness of project navigation on a mobile platform were all positive accomplishments.

The SR-10 project has demonstrated the ability to create models that are rich with design

data and has explored methods for supplying surface models that are directly consumable by

contractors for AMG. Modifications to the UDOT workspace have allowed the creation of

models that are annotated similarly to plan sheets, and modifications to the design workflow

have enabled the creation of component models that can be consumed as required by contractors

and inspectors for MOT, construction phasing, and construction inspection.

Upcoming pilot projects will help refine and extend the IDC process. The I-80 Climbing

Lanes project in Region 2 (construction 2018) and the SR-68 project in Region 2 (construction

2017) will help develop IDC workflows and methods in the CM/GC environment. The I-70

rubblization/rehabilitation project in Region 4 (construction 2017) and the SR-193 greenfield

connector highway in Region 1 (construction 2017) will provide an opportunity to test the ability

to deliver the model as the legal document on D/B/B projects. All the pilot projects will provide

valuable opportunities for the Region design teams to refine and further develop the skills

necessary to lead the way in UDOT’s pioneering effort to deliver 3D models for construction.

IDC at UDOT has shown great promise to increase quality and add value by streamlining the

production and delivery of highway construction projects in the state of Utah. Stretching design


51

dollars by leveraging innovation and technology in a way that reduces costly construction

overruns is in line with UDOTs strategic goals and mission statement. According to Bentley,

which serves a large majority of state DOTs, UDOT is leading the nation in the advancement of

IDC.


52

REFERENCES

1. IDC short-term plan.

2. IDC midrange plan.

3. 3D Engineered Models for Construction Implementation Plan.

4. Survey and Geomatics Manual. Utah Department of Transportation, Salt Lake City,

2015.

5. Open Data Guide. Utah Department of Transportation, Salt Lake City, 2016.

https://maps.udot.utah.gov/uplan_data/documents/DataGuide/OpenDataGuide.pdf.


53

GLOSSARY

2D: Any data set that lacks a value or property that represents elevation. 2D geometry is

represented at a single elevation value—often zero. In a 2D-only work environment, the

elevation coordinates are omitted from being reported since all values are the same. On a

Cartesian plane, the X and Y values correspond to the easting and northing (E,N = X,Y) of the

survey coordinates system. 2D coordinate systems are graphically represented as a plane.

3D: Data that includes the elevation values or that is represented in 3D space across a

range of elevation values. 3D coordinate systems are represented as a cube. Typical in civil

engineering, the elevation data is reported as a Z coordinate. In our survey coordinate system, X,

Y, and Z equate to easting, northing, and elevation.

3D model: In this document, 3D models refer to the 3D geometrics created that match

the design intent. This is an inclusive term that can mean 2D and 3D linear geometry, mesh, and

solid objects that are stored in the model space and manipulated or authored by CADD software

and their companion civil vertical applications (InRoads, OpenRoads, OpenBridge, etc.).

AMG: Automated machine guidance is a broad spectrum of hardware and software

technologies that enable heavy equipment and other robotic tools to operate with minimal human

or no human control. The design intent is represented with 3D geometry that is rendered into an

instruction set that activates and manipulates the controls of the machine such that its operation

creates an output that precisely matches the design in the real world. This equipment allows for

safer, faster, and more precise construction and is being implemented on all manner of

construction equipment.

Data model: The organizational structure, outline, and approach to defining and applying

data attributes to the 3D model. In this document, the term is analogous to a database schema.

ICM: The Infrastructure Consensus Model is a proprietary Bentley file format created to

improve the downstream sharing of design data with surveyors and contractors. This format is

read only and allows for a single packaging of data that can be more easily imported into

industry standard applications like TBC.


54

iModel: A generic term that is inclusive of a range of Bentley file formats that share

some common traits but are customized to specific usage cases. IModels include the following

formats:

.ICM: see ICM definition.

.DGN: can be viewed in MicroStation and Navigator Desktop.

i-model: SQL-Lite version of the. dgn format, used inside the Bentley mobile apps.

These file formats have some notable commonalties: they are all read only, and they all

require some publishing effort out of MicroStation or other authoring products Bentley supports

(e.g., Revit or Navigator Desktop).

Item Types: A technology introduced in the MicroStation CONNECT edition that allows

a standard library of database attributes to be organized and then applied to the model geometry.

These attributes can be authored and applied in the CONNECT edition or in the legacy V8i

edition with the use of a custom VBA recently written by Bentley. There are still limits to what

property values can be edited in the V8i version, but all attached attributes will publish out of

V8i to the various iModel formats.

Links: Hyperlinks that can be applied to geometry to allow a user to connect to and

access a wide range of external files and formats. These links are very similar to hyperlinks in

the Microsoft Office products and can be used link to web addresses, folders, ProjectWise files

and folders, PDF and images files, Microsoft Office files, model spaces inside .dgn files, and

myriad other locations.

MicroStation CONNECT edition: The next evolution of the MicroStation CADD

platform. Unlike previous versions, this release is a true 64-bit application. It sports a new

ribbon-style interface and is better able to leverage cloud services. CONNECT is available;

however, all new vertical applications like OpenBridge and OpenRoads Designer, as well as

supporting infrastructure applications like ProjectWise, are still being redesigned to leverage this

new CADD platform.


55

Model space: A file-based container, like a. dgn or .dwg file (MicroStation and

AutoCAD native formats, respectively). The file space or containers for 2D or 3D data are

included in this file. MicroStation has “models” that correspond to the AutoCAD concepts of a

model space versus a paper space. In this report, “model space” is used as a generic term for any

file-based container that can store any 2D or 3D geometry.

OpenRoads: A new core civil design toolset that is available inside the legacy Geopak,

InRoads, and MX software packages. OpenRoads is an entirely new set of design tools that is

slated to replace the legacy tools in a future single version, simply called OpenRoads Designer.

OpenRoads Designer will only run inside the CONNECT edition of MicroStation. OpenRoads

heavily leverages the very mature InRoads technology while moving all the core data out of

separate files and into the MicroStation CADD platform directly.

ORN: OpenRoads Navigator is a Bentley mobile application that allows for cross-

platform (iOS, Android, Windows) leveraging of i-model content. This mobile application is

relatively new, and new functions and features are rapidly being added to help deliver design

content to the field in a manner that is accessible and useful enough to supplant the need for

traditional paper or PDF plans.

intelligent design & construction guidance document

Documents