1. Train your Field Crews how to properly and efficiently code field data.
•If your field crews are not using a consistent set of field codes and are not line coding you are throwing money out the window. Developing a standard set of code does not take long to make or remember. With the technology available today you can have this list on your data collector so that field crews can quickly enter in the proper code. I’m still amazed that still today I hear, “ …our crews won’t use the codes or it takes too long in the field to collect using line codes. “ My answer to the “My crews won’t use the codes” is fire your crews and hire ones that will. My answer to, “…it takes too long to collect figures…” is complete bull. If all you do is enter a single letter like the letter B after the feature code when you store a point then you already increased your productivity by at least 50%.
2.Train your field crews how surfaces are generated.
•There is a significant amount of field crews who do not understand how Surface Models (Contours) are created by a CAD system. Simply understanding how these programs triangulate points that are collected will enable your crews to take the proper amount of shots. Another common statement I hear is,” … I can collect X hundred shots a day…” It really doesn't matter how many shots you collect if you collect the right shots and use proper coding methods as stated above you will cover more ground on a site and improve your productivity.
3.Stress basic surveying practices.
•I regularly run into surveyors who attempt to collect data using only GPS. When they run a traverse they don’t close the final angle. They leave the site without a sketch and attempt to document everything using the collector. I have a saying that just because you can doesn't always mean you should. Yes with proper coding you can collect overhead utilities. However I typically find it is easier to have a sketch of the utilities and draft them using your CAD system. With today’s technology is becomes real easy to over model or over depend on the black box. Carry a fieldbook to document your day of surveying and leave the site with a sketch with building dimensions simple basic surveying practices that will save you significant time when trying to remember what you did or collected.
4.Improve the basic use of technology.
•Many companies purchase a new instrument, collector and even software but continue to use it with outdated practices and workflows. I know many firms who don’t take advantage of the map feature on the data collector. Or as mentioned above don’t enter their code list into the controller. Make use of the note feature to document the collection. Many CAD users continue to use outdated drawing methods and routines. CAD continues to improve with every new release. New features and commands when used will improve workflows and reduce errors
5.Constant Improvement
•The statement,” …I can type commands in CAD faster than I can find and click on an icon.” Or “I can draw that line in 5 clicks or less”, is also a myth. It’s the same as how many shots can you collect in one day. It doesn't matter how many clicks it takes. It’s about the workflow and proper use of technology. Technology requires constant support, training and consulting. . Would you or your staff want a 3 day class once every three to four years? Or would they want to have a little bit of training when they actually need it? Getting constant training and support while embedding training into your daily workflow you will constantly improve and become more productive.
These five items are easily achievable no matter if you are a one man survey shop or a multi-crew organization. They also cost very monetary investment.
<>
Mike, this is one of the most accurate assessments I have ever read. HOWEVER, HUSH!! +o( Let them make excuses for lazy field crews. Let them keep spouting "We have always done it this way!". Let everyone else be mediocre. :pinch:
When a company does all of the things that you list, they become "competition" and will be able to complete jobs as fast and accurate as you. You do not want that!! Let them stay in the stone ages. You will be able to complete projects faster and thus less expensively than your competition. You will make more profits and have more repeat business. Don't be giving away all of our secrets!! 😀
My main gripe about CAD practices is the continuing use of color based line weights. We have been able to set the line weight separately for at least 10 years yet this practice persists.
Your gripe really holds no water. For most people, color based line weights are a matter of convienience. Seeing that using the *.ctb file you can set any width on any color, your complaint isn't real fact. Colors are not locked to any specific line width.
Actually, most people set the colors to deliniate features and then set the width to show proper emphasis of that feature. I don't think anyone has locked widths in stone base on color since 1998.
Then throw in the ability to add "screening" in your *.ctb file and we are then in a whole nother world.
If people you know are still using purely color for widths, then what you have is a prime example of the differances between a "surveyor" and a "mapper".:-P
I set the line weight in the layer box. That way the color can be anything I want .
I can do that on drawings which stop at me (boundary surveys). On projects that go past me to the engineers (topography) I have to use their National CAD standard based template which assigns line weight by color plus I hate the over use of layers (but that is another story).
> ...Let them keep spouting "We have always done it this way!". Let everyone else be mediocre.
Consistency is only a virtue if you aren't a screwup.
> My main gripe about CAD practices is the continuing use of color based line weights. We have been able to set the line weight separately for at least 10 years yet this practice persists.
The last time I tried plot style based drawings it was a one way street. You can convert your color based drawing to a plot style based drawing but you can't go back. So plot style based drawings are great if you are the final user, or have control over the CAD standards of the complete design process. But if you work in a collaborative environment (ie/ your drawing file is delivered to others for further use) you pretty much have to stick with color based.
I'm with you Dave. IMO Layers should define colours, lineweights, etc. Everything should be run through the layers box when possible.
Nothing worse than opening a survey to find 50% of it is yellow because that's lineweight 0.25mm. That's nice, but we don't plot them. We use them directly from the screen.
IMO, what you see on the CAD screen, should be what is plotted.
As for the 5 points. I think everyone should ignore them and just do it the way they always have done it. It makes it far easier for progressive companies to take their work away. 😀
> Your gripe really holds no water. For most people, color based line weights are a matter of convienience.
At the expense of WYSIWYG.
I greatly prefer plot styles. If any of my downstream users have trouble with them, they've yet to say anything about it.
If you guys want to get really confused over colors and line weights go peruse the Corp Of Engineers CADD Standards 4.0. Color is vaguely related to items and has absolutely nothing to do with line width. Color yellow has a multitude of line widths assigned to it. Same is true for all the other basic colors.
The day is soon coming that you will need to send a copy of your *.ctb with each drawing to each different client. The best I hope for is that everything goes digital and a plotter will become tomorrow's blue line machine.
I still have a ctb file but the first 7 colors plot black and lineweight is bylayer.
Most of my maps are black on white.
What do you mean by "Crews"...lol...Its just me in the field
"<>"
Thank You - from the field crew.
Check, Double-Check.............
Check, Double-Check, triple check, and check again before you leave the job site.
While your other points are also very true I've found that the biggest time saver and therefore money maker is to take every precaution that data is collected properly, staking and grading is correct, and that nothing is missed. I usually go to three to five job sites per day and I wouldn't be able to do anywhere near the volume in one day if I didn't take just five to ten minutes before leaving a job to make sure it's complete, correct, and all equipment is collected.
Digital photographs of the site work wonders.
Digitals can be a life saver as can Google earth, BUT the best bet is using software in the field that draws your stuff as you shoot it. That way you are looking at the same thing that the office guys will be looking at and you can hook up ALL of the utilities in the field, make sure you have all of your manhole inverts shot, building corners shown and all the odd little things on the site located.
Our crews are running Carlson Field on Toughbook data collectors, so they can see everything I will eventually see. Plus they can download their dwg and crd files on the office server and the next cfew that goes on the site knows exactly what has been shot and the point numbers of the features they need to tie too.
When this systen is run correctly, my job is MUCH easier, return trips to the site are non-existant and everybody working on the project is on the same map. Life is good. (The problem is getting the crew to do the stuff correctly. But then, the office types have learned how to fix a lot of the little "burps". As long as you don't try to take a simple system and change it into rocket science, all works well.)
Check, Double-Check.............
> Check, Double-Check, triple check, and check again before you leave the job site.
:good:
Yes, back when I had field crews. "Guys, lets do it right the first time!"
agree with the digital camera in the field.
get one of those point & shoot so that the field guys don't have to figure aperture & shutter speed in the field.
i have one of those that can shoot panorama mode. the user just shoots several overlapping images and the camera stitches all into a seamless image.
i don't know how many times i was able to detect a missing elec post in the data collector that i saw in the picture. usually these errors are just coding errors.
I suppose those points are valid if you are doing nothing but engineering base map type development surveys with lots of tops/toes/breaklines,pavement edges.
You contradict yourself with at least two of your points, though. First, saying shoot and code everything in the field, then complaining about people that shoot and code every thing in the field.
just pointing out that NOT every surveyor is generating huge as built topo maps.
How so?