An update to [msg=270733]Field to Finish Question[/msg]:
After much heated debate, we have come to some consensus on coding of points. One argument I have made that some of my codes are industry standards. I have been tasked in acquiring the codes of some of my peers. I understand that some may not want to give that information and I'm ok with that, but if you could email me a list of your codes, I would appreciate it. I just want to make sure we are aligned with some of the industry.
There are a lot of philosophies regarding point coding, some better than others, but all personal preference.
My $0.02 is that if you will be doing (or think about doing) any TxDOT work, use TxDOT for all your projects. This will alleviate having your crews learn more than one set of codes. If you have more than one set, then they WILL use the wrong ones at the wrong time.
TxDOT coding, while extensive, does leave some things out, but it is a standard, readily available and if you use microstation, all the libraries are set up for you (via TxDOT’s template).
Miguel A. Escobar, LSLS, RPLS
Can you cite your source for the "Industry Standard"? I agree that most code lists that I have seen (written by surveyors) are similar IE: EP = Edge of Pavement. My agreement with the field crews is that we use what is on the code list and if they can present a good reason to change something we will revised the code list and they can use it. If something is not on the list, they make a code and note in the data collector and in the fieldbook. If the item becomes a recurring theme, we add it to the code list. The opposite problem with that is adding every possible code that may ever exist to the code list to the point of becoming unmanageable.
I have always used just one code list regardless of the deliverable. We perform surveys for DOTs and Federal Agencies. The field procedures are almost identical for every survey. The office procedure is where the project deliverable is customized. The F2F procedure is usually the same and the base cad file is translated to the Client's Specifications with graphical interface files. Asci translators are sometimes used to modify point descriptions. Another approach is substitution codes in the F2F process. Of course, success hinges on the field crew using the approved code list. Keep it simple as possible in the field.
My "industry standards" are common codes that I have found used with many companies that I have worked for or dealt with. I would have a hard time believing that the codes that I have ran across in my different occurrences are not some sort of "standard." I understand that coding is personal and differ from company to company, but there are similarities among the different companies. Most of our codes come from TxDOT, but some of those codes are cryptic or don't describe the data accurately if you were just analyzing only the data.
Most DOTs have adopted the ASHTO Standard feature codes. They may a standard for highway engineers but it is evident that a surveyor had little to do with them. Some of their codes that I remember off top of my head are
TEAP = TOP EDGE ASPHALT PAVING
TRP = TOPO RANDOM POINT
TPBL = TOPO POINT BREAK LINE
and one of my all time favorites
UMHST = UTILITY MANHOLE STORM
I understand your desire to keep it simple.
Good luck.
> One argument I have made that some of my codes are industry standards.
The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them.
(I first heard that over 20 years ago in reference to digital communications, but it holds true for F2F as well.)
No there are no standards, the old (1980's era) standard for the HASP mini-tower system were all number codes, which I really liked by the way. If you do pipeline work there will be extensive coding, and if you do DOT work there will be extensive, but different coding.
Working with a number of engineering firms which all use the DOT coding, that is what our field guys are used to and they use it. If I go out and do a simple topo, I use simple codes that are fast, (b-break, g-ground, f-flowline, eg-edge gravel, ect.) probably cause I want it done quickly and I'm drawing it myself.
It depends on who you are working for and what they want to use.
I'd drop into your local DOT office and ask if they might let you copy a code book, probably set-up to use with micro-station.
