Civil Integrated Management (CIM) for Departments of Transportation, Volume 2: Research Report (2016)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

56 CIM Implementation Framework— Formulation and Validation The research team analyzed the project’s research findings and expert insights to understand DOTs’ fundamental require- ments for integrating CIM tools and functions with project delivery processes. Surveys and case studies demonstrated that DOTs have varying levels of expertise with processes, and operations for project delivery and facility management varying widely among them. A generalized implementation framework for DOTs to use to determine their current state of CIM practice and prioritize their decisions on investing in CIM tools by gaug- ing the practical challenges would be valuable. The framework would also form the basis for widespread implementation across agencies. Accordingly, the data and knowledge gathered through the research efforts was reorganized and a process cycle developed. Explanations of these stages and associated termi- nologies are described in detail in the companion Guidebook. Table 7.1 illustrates the conceptual relationship among the research findings, the implementation stages (in the Guide- book), and the objectives of this research. The research team also conducted external validation of the Guidebook, collecting and implementing specific comments as per the request of participating organizations. The team prepared a questionnaire, focusing on the content and orga- nization of the draft Guidebook, for the validation process to ensure consistency in the data collection process. Options were included to help the participants think independently and critique and comment on the draft Guidebook. The organizations that participated in the validation pro- cess include TxDOT, CDOT, and Bentley Systems, Inc. The research team conducted meetings with experienced person- nel and executives from each of the participating agencies, either online or in a face-to-face format. There were several rounds of meetings, each lasting 1 to 2 hours. The research methodology and implementation framework were presented to the participants, followed by a discussion of key research findings. The team received several useful comments and recommendations from these meetings. Appendix E con- tains the detailed questionnaire used. A consolidated sum- mary of these comments and associated modifications in the Guidebook are presented in this chapter. 7.1 Validation Process—Consolidated Summary of Comments and Recommendations The participants made several recommendations for revisions to the Guidebook. The research team revised the Guidebook accordingly. The participants also reviewed the implementation framework and the supporting case examples presented in the Guidebook. The general conclusion was that the proposed framework makes a favorable case for integrating CIM in agencies’ practices and provides a sequence of steps that are practical and comprehensive. They stated that the maturity model adequately captured the range of practices typically found in practice today and the potential oppor- tunities for the future. The experience-based case examples and lessons learned sections were found to be useful for addressing the implementation challenges encountered while advanc- ing CIM. In addition, some key points were put forward for discussion and potential inclusion in the Guidebook. They are presented in the following subsections, with notes on the way they are implemented in the Guidebook. 7.1.a Construction Modeling One of the expert participants made the following comments: There needs to be some consideration for the common practice of Construction Modeling, which, most commonly, entails trans- forming design content to 3D content suitable for machine control/ machine guidance. Contractors have hired construction modelers or employ independent consultants from the cottage industry that has sprung up to support this need. The text appears to imply that “digital design data” can be used directly with AMG without data preparation. It is rarely that straightforward. In between receipt of the digital design data, the model must be densified and other C H A P T E R 7

57 operations for AMG. This is an important and oftentimes costly step and should be highlighted in the document. The team concurs that construction modeling is a signifi- cant function that transforms the 3D design deliverables to machine-readable formats for AMG. Simply put, this process involves incorporating required details (such as ensuring the addition of all surface elements in 3D, breaklines at neces- sary places, densification of points and grade lines, etc.) in the model that could enable machine automation and reliable quality control. The team believes that in a fully integrated CIM environment, agency designers and design consultants can take up this role while creating design deliverables and handover information for construction. Accordingly, the team clarified the roles and responsibil- ities of designers in the CIM workflow (Chapter 3) in the Guidebook and provided suitable investments in training (Chapter 4, Section 4.2) for construction modeling. 7.1.b Reality Modeling and Digital Photography Another expert suggested examining digital photography. Reality modeling is an emerging term meant to describe the soft- ware that transforms digital photography taken by a drone into a 3D mesh model of current conditions. This is but one example of an array of data collection post-processing tools that likely should be recognized for their ability to create models of existing conditions. Table 7.1. Summary of relationship between implementation framework and research objectives. Implementation framework (see Guidebook) Supporting research findings from this report Objectives of the research Stage Description Assessment (Stage I) This stage begins with a holistic analysis of the functional capabilities of DOTs using a formal maturity model and identifying areas (i.e., divisions such as surveying and design, among others) that warrant further attention for potential process-related improvements through CIM tools. It requires that the DOTs communicate and identify authorized needs through a CIM Implementation Plan (CIP). The state-of-practice survey data (Chapter 5) helped in gauging the state of practice across the United States and establishing baseline maturity levels. The empirical data on CIM usage at project work areas (Figure 5.5) and statistics for cumulative CIM usage map (Figure 5.6) are the key contributors to the formulation of a maturity model. Objective 1—The maturity model and supporting guidelines can help assess an agency’s use of digital information in project delivery and asset management. Investment analysis (Stage II) This stage focuses on the principal CIM tools identified from the CIP and provides general guidelines on the methodologies and requirements for benefit-cost analysis. While investment needs are identified for CIM tools, the anticipated benefits are mapped to the corresponding CIM functions. As such, benefits must be determined by modeling anticipated work process improvements within and across CIM functions. Case examples highlight agency’s practices for selected CIM tools. The specifications for this stage are drawn from multiple data collection efforts such as literature review, surveys (Chapter 5), and case studies (Chapter 6). While it was practically infeasible to quantify benefits of the system of CIM tools, literature and case studies provided information for some key components. Objective 3—The expected costs and benefits have been identified for the noted CIM tools. The considerations for prioritizing these considerations have been identified to help agencies increase reliance on CIM. Implementation considerations (Stage III) This stage highlights the lessons learned and recommendations that state agencies obtained from executing projects and deploying CIM tools at their agency level. Albeit not necessarily quantifiable, these practices play an integral part, while dealing with contractual and governance-related issues. The case studies of the projects that successfully demonstrated integration of major CIM practices and cross-case analysis (Chapter 6) supported the guidelines developed for this stage. Objectives 2 and 4—The issues discussed herein highlight contractual, governance, and process-oriented strategies to enhance reliance on digital project delivery and asset management.

58 The team agrees that the list of CIM tools, especially in the sensing technologies category, can be extended further with more options. With time, more technologies will pen- etrate the industry markets along with efficiency improve- ments to existing tools. It can be very challenging to present all of the known technologies—including foundational, advanced, and emerging technologies—in one guidebook. Considering their growing popularity and relevance for rapid data collection during project development and sur- veying, the team included digital photography and other relevant context-capture tools (for surveying) in CIM work- flow (Chapter 3). 7.1.c Model-Based Quantity Take-Offs and Estimating An expert recommended that QTOs from models for own- ers (such as DOTs) bid estimates be highlighted in CIM func- tions (possibly under design). Ideally, this data would end up in owner preconstruction and cost estimation packages such as AASHTOWare’s Project Cost Estimation, Project Estima- tion, Project Estimator, and Project Preconstruction. It was also pointed out that owner-oriented construction super- vision, such as AASHTOWare Site Manager, enables owners to examine contractor-earned value claims. The team ensured that these suggestions were adopted and expanded current discussions on QTOs into the Guidebook to address these comments. The definitions for “5D estimat- ing” under Project Management Function was expanded (Section 2.2.4) and details were added to the Construction Planning and Procurement Phase (Section 3.1.4) to high- light the role of 5D estimating or model-based QTO and estimating processes. 7.1.d Work Packaging and CIM Integration Work packaging, as a project management principle, is gain- ing popularity among capital industry (such as power, oil, and gas processing etc.). It seeks to manage the daily project activi- ties by “disaggregating into manageable parts and assigning responsibility for detailed management of each level and ele- ment. In the case of a construction project, the parts involve engineering, procurement, construction, and startup” (Con- struction Industry Institute IR 272 2013). Recent advancements also demonstrate that CIM and work packaging integration can also streamline the transition to model-based construc- tion monitoring and operation. An expert asked the team to consider introducing the significance of the work packaging practice and exploring the potential of CIM integration for the highway infrastructure. The team believes that work packaging is an emerging prac- tice in the highway industry that can contribute in many ways to an agency’s objective in terms of CIM workflow. Hence, the team included the definition of work packaging, along with brief explanations of its role for CIM in the Guidebook (Refer Section 4.3.1). In-depth investigations and implementation methodologies for CIM and work packaging integration were deferred for future research because this was not the primary objective of this project. 7.1.e Asset Modeling With more agencies transitioning to CIM for project deliv- ery and asset management, various requirements of assets maintenance need to be given due consideration. An expert member made the following comments during the validation process: Asset management consists of both asset information manage- ment and asset modeling—modeling the degradation of an asset over time and the effects of various treatments. For example, a pavement management system has to manage information of the characteristics and condition of thousands of roadway segments. But it also has to forecast the degradation of the roadway due to time and traffic, be able to analyze the effects of different treat- ments such as minor resurfacing, reconditioning, or reconstruc- tion, compare the C/B of the treatments and provide recommenda- tions across the system. The team concurs that asset modeling plays an integral role in efficient management of assets, specifically pavements and structures. It has to be noted that deploying sophisticated performance and degradation prediction models need not directly reflect a CIM-related capability (or a function); CIM functions include only those that are positively affected by the enumerated CIM tools. Nonetheless, using state-of-the- art models reflects the maturity of the agency for pavement maintenance. Thus, the team included this capability under the operations and maintenance phase of the maturity model (Figure 3.2) in the Guidebook. 7.1.f Miscellaneous Comments and Modifications • The learning curve for transitioning to 3D design and modeling and the system benefits after widespread adop- tion were highlighted for beginners. An expert member made the following comments to clarify this situation: In any change, the initial transition may take some time to regain production performance, but once the new system or process is learned there are substantial productivity gained. For example:

59 quantities become faster, changes are seen and performed quicker in a modeling environment, inter-disciplinary decisions and conflicts are easier to determine in a model environment, deliverables for management and public hearings are a by-product of the modeling process and not another process. • An expert stated that the identified standards (Section 3.1.7 in the Guidebook) for model-based information exchange were representative examples. More work needs to be done to overcome their current limitations and adequately cover the scope of modeling all entities for highway infrastruc- ture. The expert elaborated as follows: Current examples (such as LandXML, TransXML, IFC, and COBIE, among others) are not adequate and self-sufficient to han- dle the size of files transferred in a model-based, information-rich environment, especially when using point clouds. Furthermore, not all of the civil geometry and model entities of a highway infrastruc- ture are supported yet. • A new CIM function (Contracts) has been added to the Guidebook under Project Management to account for activ- ities such as construction project administration, Requests for Information, contract administration, and change order management (Section 2.2.4).