Fog Ahead, Captain

I’ve been thinking over how the typical proposal describes deliverables at each phase when the software used is PowerGeopak. The first phase will usually state that the horizontal and vertical alignments will be designed along with a geometric layout, preliminary drainage design (the meaning is usually vague), driveway profiles, typical sections, and cross sections.

I’ve come across many well detailed scopes. I’ve also seen some that looked like they were drawn up by a man before the mast instead of a navigator. Regardless if the scope was made by Captain Smollett or a mutineer, we need more clarification about the new waters ahead. I’d like to point to two patches of fog directly in front of the Hispaniola, namely, driveway profiles and cross sections. 

Where’d My Button Go?

The old way of doing driveway profiles, according to my DOT’s workflow, was to make them as half cross sections. Drawing the centerlines as pattern lines and using the DOT’s cross section criteria, you’d smash the “run” button like the good little engineer you are and end up with a set of driveway “profiles” for one side of the road. You then repeat it for the other side.

This process was always pretty rough since you didn’t really design any profile but let the criteria do it for you. No one ever wanted to admit it but the driveway aprons drawn with it weren’t to the correct dimensions. But enough about DOTs and their QAQC.

I do know that the new process in OpenRoads Designer is much longer. To make a whole driveway profile, then drop the civil cell (and redoing it over and over) and finally provide plan production for it, it will take nearly an hour. I’m sure the process could be streamlined better but due to hopping around different DGNs and having to make a drawing model for each driveway profile and all the other hopping for the labeling, it takes a lot of time and focus.

I like to think that for the first phase, the scope needs to be clear with how far down the process it will go. Will the phase only design the driveway profiles and provide a sheet showing them? Will it need to also include civil cells and modeling to show impacts on the plan view sheets? And how on earth do we expect to deal with side drains? Are we going to deal with those in a later phase?

Cross sections are a different troublesome bunch. If I had the power, I’d wipe that word from our industry’s vocabulary. OpenRoads Designer, unlike Geopak, creates a model. What does the scope even mean with just the words “cross sections at 50 feet”? Should this mean the model ought not have any designed transitions such as a ditch behind a retaining wall falling down into a normal roadside ditch? If it does, then all is well. But the proposal needs to be clear if the model will have certain developments throughout the phases. Without this laid out, the designer will have no clue the level of detail needed to accomplish what was proposed in the scope.

A Brief Conclusion

All in all, the scope, I believe, should be different from what it has been in the past. The design now takes more time in some parts and less time in others. Talk with your designers and look at the official workflows yourself to make a judgement on how to move forward. Discussions about reforming the scope held now will only benefit the project and everyone involved.

And for the love of all that is holy, please do not allow for the received survey to be done in AutoCAD. It was bad for Geopak and it’s much worse in OpenRoads Designer. It’s almost as bad as bringing along a one legged man named Long John Silver as your ship’s cook.