Practices for Construction-Ready Digital Terrain Models (2021) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 65-79
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 65... ...
65 Survey Results A P P E N D I X B Use Cases: The following tables show the distribution of DOT responses for each use case in the survey. Grade Work Count DOT Never 2 Rhode Island, Minnesota Rarely 4 South Carolina, Alabama, Texas, Indiana Sometimes 8 Oregon, Illinois, Montana, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Connecticut, Maine, New Mexico Often 17 Utah, Virginia, Florida, Arkansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Michigan, Idaho, West Virginia, Missouri, Delaware, Colorado, Kentucky Always 6 New Hampshire, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Wyoming, Washington, Mississippi Quantity Measurements Count DOT Never 2 Rhode Island, Minnesota Rarely 8 Utah, New Jersey, South Carolina, Nebraska, Alabama, Michigan, Texas, Kentucky Sometimes 14 Wisconsin, Illinois, Montana, Florida, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Maine, Missouri, New Mexico, Indiana, Colorado Often 9 Oregon, New Hampshire, Virginia, Arkansas, Alaska, Connecticut, Idaho, West Virginia, Mississippi Always 3 Wyoming, Washington, Delaware
|
From page 66... ...
66 Practices for Construction-Ready Digital Terrain Models Field Stacking Count DOT Never 4 Rhode Island, Ohio, Connecticut, Minnesota Rarely 8 Utah, South Carolina, Nebraska, Alabama, Idaho, Maine, New Mexico, Indiana Sometimes 10 Virginia, Illinois, Montana, Florida, Arkansas, Nevada, Missouri, Texas, Colorado, Kentucky Often 10 Oregon, Wisconsin, North Carolina, North Dakota, Alaska, Iowa, Michigan, Washington, West Virginia, Delaware Always 4 New Hampshire, New Jersey, Wyoming, Mississippi Automated Machine Guidance Count DOT Never 5 Rhode Island, Arkansas, Connecticut, Texas, Minnesota Rarely 5 Virginia, South Carolina, Alabama, Idaho, Indiana Sometimes 7 Oregon, Illinois, Nebraska, North Dakota, Washington, New Mexico, Colorado Often 17 Utah, Pennsylvania, Montana, Florida, Wyoming, North Carolina, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Michigan, Maine, West Virginia, Missouri, Mississippi, Delaware, Kentucky Always 3 New Hampshire, Wisconsin, New Jersey Survey Verification Count DOT Never 3 Rhode Island, Utah, Minnesota Rarely 7 New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Montana, Nebraska, Alabama, Texas, Kentucky Sometimes 9 Wisconsin, Illinois, South Carolina, Wyoming, North Carolina, Maine, Missouri, Indiana, Colorado Often 16 Oregon, Virginia, Arkansas, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Michigan, Connecticut, Idaho, Washington, West Virginia, Delaware, New Mexico Always 3 Florida, New Jersey, Mississippi
|
From page 67... ...
Survey Results 67 Cost Analysis for Initial Construction Bid Count DOT Never 9 Rhode Island, New Jersey, South Carolina, Nebraska, Alabama, North Carolina, Texas, Minnesota, Kentucky Rarely 8 Oregon, Utah, New Hampshire, Florida, Michigan, Connecticut, Mississippi, Indiana Sometimes 10 Virginia, Illinois, Montana, North Dakota, Alaska, Iowa, Nevada, Maine, West Virginia, Colorado Often 6 Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Ohio, Missouri, New Mexico Always 4 Wyoming, Idaho, Washington, Delaware QA/QC, Clash Detection, or Reducing Plan Discrepancies Count DOT Never 10 Rhode Island, New Jersey, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Texas, New Mexico, Indiana, Minnesota Rarely 10 Oregon, New Hampshire, Alabama, Michigan, Idaho, Maine, West Virginia, Mississippi, Delaware, Kentucky Sometimes 13 Utah, Wisconsin, Virginia, Illinois, Montana, South Carolina, Wyoming, Alaska, Iowa, Nevada, Connecticut, Washington, Colorado Often 4 Florida, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Missouri Progress Checks Count DOT Never 5 Rhode Island, North Carolina, Idaho, New Mexico, Minnesota Rarely 12 Utah, Illinois, Arkansas, New Jersey, Nebraska, Alabama, North Dakota, Nevada, Maine, Texas, Indiana, Kentucky Sometimes 11 New Hampshire, Virginia, Montana, Florida, South Carolina, Wyoming, Alaska, Michigan, Washington, Missouri, Colorado Often 7 Oregon, Wisconsin, Ohio, Iowa, Connecticut, West Virginia, Delaware Always 1 Mississippi
|
From page 68... ...
68 Practices for Construction-Ready Digital Terrain Models Work Planning Productivity, or Efficiency Count DOT Never 18 Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Montana, New Jersey, South Carolina, Nebraska, Alabama, North Carolina, Ohio, Iowa, Michigan, West Virginia, Texas, Indiana, Minnesota, Kentucky Rarely 7 Illinois, North Dakota, Nevada, Connecticut, Idaho, Maine, Colorado Sometimes 5 Wisconsin, Virginia, Arkansas, Washington, Delaware Often 4 Florida, Alaska, Mississippi, New Mexico Always 1 Wyoming Cost Analysis for Future Maintenance Count DOT Never 24 Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Montana, Florida, Arkansas, New Jersey, South Carolina, Wyoming, Nebraska, Alabama, North Carolina, North Dakota, Iowa, Michigan, Idaho, West Virginia, Texas, New Mexico, Indiana, Minnesota, Kentucky Rarely 9 Virginia, Illinois, Ohio, Nevada, Connecticut, Washington, Maine, Mississippi, Colorado Sometimes 2 Alaska, Delaware Pavement Thickness Checks Count DOT Never 11 Rhode Island, Utah, Arkansas, South Carolina, Wyoming, North Carolina, Connecticut, Missouri, Texas, Indiana, Minnesota Rarely 10 Oregon, Virginia, Montana, Nebraska, Alabama, North Dakota, Iowa, Michigan, West Virginia, New Mexico Sometimes 9 Wisconsin, Illinois, Alaska, Ohio, Idaho, Maine, Delaware, Colorado, Kentucky Often 5 New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada, Washington, Mississippi Always 1 New Jersey
|
From page 69... ...
Survey Results 69 Field-Based Training on Hardware and Software Count DOT Not selected 17 Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Virginia, Oklahoma, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Iowa, Idaho, West Virginia, Texas, Delaware, New Mexico, Indiana, Colorado, Minnesota Selected 20 Oregon, Utah, Illinois, Montana, Florida, Arkansas, New Jersey, South Carolina, Wyoming, Alabama, North Carolina, Alaska, Nevada, Michigan, Connecticut, Washington, Maine, Missouri, Mississippi, Kentucky Classroom-Based Training on Hardware and Software Count DOT Not selected 21 Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Montana, Oklahoma, New Jersey, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Idaho, West Virginia, Texas, Delaware, New Mexico, Indiana, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 16 Oregon, Virginia, Illinois, Florida, Arkansas, South Carolina, Wyoming, Alabama, Alaska, Michigan, Connecticut, Washington, Maine, Missouri, Mississippi, Colorado DTM Training Provided to Construction Inspection Staff: The following tables show the distribution of DOT responses for each type of training offered to construction inspection staff. Informal, Peer Training Count DOT Not selected 11 Rhode Island, Utah, Oklahoma, New Jersey, Nevada, Maine, Missouri, Delaware, New Mexico, Indiana, Minnesota Selected 26 Oregon, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Virginia, Illinois, Montana, Florida, Arkansas, South Carolina, Wyoming, Nebraska, Alabama, North Carolina, North Dakota, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Michigan, Connecticut, Idaho, Washington, West Virginia, Mississippi, Texas, Colorado, Kentucky
|
From page 70... ...
70 Practices for Construction-Ready Digital Terrain Models No Training Provided Count DOT Selected 5 Rhode Island, Oklahoma, Delaware, New Mexico, Minnesota DTM Barriers: The following tables show the distribution of DOT responses for each barrier in the survey. Insufficient Knowledge or Training for Inspectors (DOT or CEI)
|
From page 71... ...
Survey Results 71 Insufficient Knowledge or Training for Field Survey Staff Count DOT Not selected 14 Utah, Pennsylvania, Florida, Arkansas, Wyoming, Alabama, Iowa, Idaho, Washington, West Virginia, Mississippi, Texas, Colorado, Minnesota Selected 23 Oregon, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Virginia, Illinois, Montana, New Jersey, South Carolina, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Alaska, Ohio, Nevada, Michigan, Connecticut, Maine, Missouri, Delaware, New Mexico, Indiana, Kentucky DTMs Are Often Incomplete and Inconsistent with Contract Plans Count DOT Not selected 19 Oregon, Utah, New Hampshire, Montana, Florida, Arkansas, New Jersey, South Carolina, Wyoming, Alabama, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Idaho, Missouri, Texas, Indiana, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 18 Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Virginia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nevada, Michigan, Connecticut, Washington, Maine, West Virginia, Mississippi, Delaware, New Mexico, Colorado Designer Fear of Problems with DTM/ Lack of Confidence Count DOT Not selected 22 Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Florida, Arkansas, New Jersey, Wyoming, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan, Idaho, West Virginia, Missouri, Mississippi, Texas, Delaware, New Mexico, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 15 Virginia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Montana, South Carolina, Alabama, North Carolina, North Dakota, Alaska, Ohio, Nevada, Connecticut, Washington, Maine, Indiana
|
From page 72... ...
72 Practices for Construction-Ready Digital Terrain Models Insufficient Knowledge or Training for Equipment Operators Count DOT Not selected 23 Oregon, Utah, Pennsylvania, Montana, Florida, Arkansas, Nebraska, Alabama, North Carolina, Ohio, Iowa, Michigan, Idaho, Washington, Maine, West Virginia, Missouri, Mississippi, Texas, Indiana, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 14 Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Virginia, Illinois, New Jersey, South Carolina, Wyoming, North Dakota, Alaska, Nevada, Connecticut, Delaware, New Mexico High Cost for Owner to Stay Current with Field Technology Using DTMs Count DOT Not selected 25 Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Montana, Florida, Arkansas, New Jersey, Nebraska, North Carolina, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Michigan, Idaho, Washington, Maine, West Virginia, Missouri, Mississippi, Delaware, New Mexico, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 12 Oregon, Rhode Island, Virginia, Illinois, South Carolina, Wyoming, Alabama, North Dakota, Nevada, Connecticut, Texas, Indiana Fear of Contractor Changing Terrain Model or Introducing Error into Electronic Plan Files Count DOT Not selected 26 Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Montana, Florida, Arkansas, Wyoming, Nebraska, Alabama, North Dakota, Alaska, Iowa, Michigan, Connecticut, Idaho, Washington, West Virginia, Missouri, Texas, Delaware, Indiana, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 11 Virginia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, South Carolina, North Carolina, Ohio, Nevada, Maine, Mississippi, New Mexico
|
From page 73... ...
Survey Results 73 High Cost for Owner for Initial Software and Hardware Count DOT Not selected 26 Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Montana, Florida, New Jersey, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Alaska, Iowa, Nevada, Michigan, Connecticut, Idaho, Washington, Maine, West Virginia, Missouri, Mississippi, Delaware, New Mexico, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 11 Oregon, Rhode Island, Virginia, Illinois, Arkansas, South Carolina, Wyoming, Alabama, Ohio, Texas, Indiana Inadequacy of Information Technology (IT) Infrastructure Count DOT Not selected 29 Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, New Jersey, Wyoming, Nebraska, Alabama, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Michigan, Connecticut, Washington, Maine, West Virginia, Missouri, Mississippi, Texas, Delaware, New Mexico, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 8 Virginia, Illinois, Montana, Florida, South Carolina, Alaska, Idaho, Indiana Incompatibility of Existing Software Count DOT Not selected 29 Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Montana, Florida, Arkansas, New Jersey, Wyoming, Nebraska, Alabama, North Dakota, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Connecticut, Idaho, Washington, West Virginia, Missouri, Mississippi, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 8 Oregon, Virginia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Michigan, Maine, Delaware, Indiana
|
From page 74... ...
74 Practices for Construction-Ready Digital Terrain Models Incompatibility of Existing Hardware Count DOT Not selected 35 Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Montana, Florida, Arkansas, New Jersey, Wyoming, Nebraska, Alabama, North Carolina, North Dakota, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Michigan, Connecticut, Idaho, Washington, Maine, West Virginia, Missouri, Mississippi, Texas, Delaware, New Mexico, Indiana, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 2 Virginia, South Carolina Benefits of Using DTMs Are Unknown. The Return on Investment (ROI)
|
From page 75... ...
Survey Results 75 DTM (or XML) Provided as "For Information Only" for Contractor to Use at His/Her Own Risk Count DOT Not selected 7 Rhode Island, Montana, Wyoming, Alaska, New Mexico, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 29 Oregon, Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Virginia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Florida, Arkansas, New Jersey, South Carolina, Nebraska, Alabama, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Michigan, Connecticut, Idaho, Washington, West Virginia, Missouri, Mississippi, Texas, Delaware, Indiana, Colorado Extent of DOT's Liability for the Accuracy of the DTM Count DOT Not selected 19 Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Montana, Arkansas, South Carolina, North Carolina, Alaska, Ohio, Michigan, Connecticut, Idaho, Missouri, Delaware, Indiana, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 17 Oregon, Utah, Illinois, Florida, New Jersey, Wyoming, Nebraska, Alabama, North Dakota, Iowa, Nevada, Washington, West Virginia, Mississippi, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado Survey Practices Count DOT Not selected 21 Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Montana, Arkansas, South Carolina, Nebraska, North Dakota, Nevada, Connecticut, Washington, Missouri, Texas, Delaware, New Mexico, Indiana, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 15 Oregon, Utah, Illinois, Florida, New Jersey, Wyoming, Alabama, North Carolina, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Michigan, Idaho, West Virginia, Mississippi
|
From page 76... ...
76 Practices for Construction-Ready Digital Terrain Models Extent of DOT's Liability for Use of DTM in the Field Count DOT Not selected 22 Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Montana, Arkansas, South Carolina, Wyoming, Alabama, North Carolina, Ohio, Nevada, Michigan, Connecticut, Idaho, Missouri, Texas, Delaware, Indiana, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 14 Oregon, Utah, Illinois, Florida, New Jersey, Nebraska, North Dakota, Alaska, Iowa, Washington, West Virginia, Mississippi, New Mexico, Colorado Model Handover Policy from Designer to Contractor Count DOT Not selected 26 Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Virginia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Montana, Arkansas, South Carolina, Nebraska, North Carolina, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Connecticut, Idaho, Washington, Missouri, Mississippi, Texas, Delaware, New Mexico, Indiana, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 10 Oregon, Wisconsin, Florida, New Jersey, Wyoming, Alabama, North Dakota, Nevada, Michigan, West Virginia Plan Production Methods Count DOT Not selected 32 Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Montana, Arkansas, New Jersey, South Carolina, Wyoming, Nebraska, Alabama, North Carolina, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Connecticut, Idaho, Washington, West Virginia, Missouri, Mississippi, Texas, Delaware, New Mexico, Indiana, Colorado, Minnesota, Kentucky Selected 4 Illinois, Florida, North Dakota, Michigan
|
From page 77... ...
Survey Results 77 As for using DTM as a legal document, the following DOTs either did not reply or did not use DTM as a legal document. Using DTM as a Legal Document DOT No reply Oklahoma, Georgia, Kansas DOTs that do not use DTM as a legal document Rhode Island, New Hampshire, New Jersey, South Carolina, Nebraska, North Carolina, Ohio, Connecticut, Maine, West Virginia, Missouri, Texas, Colorado, Minnesota DOTs that do not use DTM as a legal document but are planning to Oregon, Wisconsin, Virginia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Montana, Arkansas, Nevada, Washington, Mississippi, Delaware, New Mexico, Indiana, Kentucky DOTs that use DTM as a legal document Utah, Florida, Wyoming, Alabama, North Dakota, Alaska, Iowa, Michigan, Idaho The following table shows more details on DOTs that do not use DTM as a legal document, but are planning to in the future (NA means the DOT did not provide details)
|
From page 78... ...
78 Practices for Construction-Ready Digital Terrain Models Mississippi NA Delaware We are working on giving model to contractor as a supplement to the plans. Targeting May 2020.
|
From page 79... ...
Survey Results 79 Iowa Rank 1: 2D drawings Rank 2: Written specifications Rank 3: 3D model Michigan Rank 1: Written specifications Rank 2: 3D model Rank 3: 2D drawings Idaho Rank 1: Written specifications Rank 2: 2D drawings Rank 3: 3D model
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.