Numeric point codes

Depending on your software both methods may be possible.

David Livingstone, post: 444047, member: 431 wrote: Any tricks to making this an easier transition?

First, CAD & Data Collection standards are not to be dreaded. Quite the opposite for me, I hate it when I get randomized product.

Hopefully there is some rhyme and reason to the numbering. For instance:

[INDENT]500 Sanitary Manhole
501 Sanitary Cleanout
502 Sanitary Locate Paint Marks

520 Storm Drain Manhole
521 Storm Drain Cleanout
522 Storm Drain Locate Paint Marks

540 Water Valve
541 Water Meter
542 Water Line Locate Paint Marks

550 Gas Valve
551 Gas Meter
552 Gas Line Locate Paint Marks
[/INDENT]
So there are repeating patterns, making it easier to remember.

There will be about 20-30 codes that cover 90% of everything that is shot. Once you and your staff get those in your head numeric is actually easier. Don't fight it.

So here is a quick list of the most commonly used descriptors:

1. G Spot Elevation
2. BL Breakline
3. EC Edge of Concrete
4. EP Edge of Pavement (Asphalt)
5. EG Edge of Gravel
6. TC Top of Curb
7. GL Gutter line
8. BF Building Face
9. FNC Fence
10. TREE
11. SSMH Sanitary Manhole
12. SS Sanitary Locate Paint
13. SDMH Storm Drain Manhole
14. SD Storm Drain Locate Paint
15. CB Catch Basin (Center of grate)
16. CBfl Catch Basin (at gutter line)
17. WV Water Valve
18. WM Water Meter
19. WTR Water Line Locate Paint
20. GV Gas Valve
21. GM Gas Meter
22. GAS Gas Line Locate Paint
23. PP Power Pole
24. OHL Overhead wires
25. CHK Check shot to control
26. CP Control Point
27. FD Found Boundary Monument

If you can memorize the numbers for that list, well within the abilities of most, you've got it beat. You will only have to consult your code card occasionally.

Astute observers will note that I don't have separate codes for TOP, TOE, DITCH, etc. Just BL for breakline. Breaklines are breaklines. Also, no seperate codes for ground, top of concrete, top of pavement, top of grass, top of dirt, blah, blah. Just spot elevations. And I usually shoot building faces (reflectorless), not corners, and intersect the wall lines.

Mark Mayer, post: 444058, member: 424 wrote:
G Spot Elevation.

LOL

I don't really hate having the standards, like you say, in many ways good. I'm just not liking numeric codes. I'm sure I'll adjust but the list has over 600 of them. Alphabetical helps, but what letter is it filed under. For example, is EOP under E for edge, P for pavement, A for asphalt etc.

Also, we don't get to make the list, it was created by our state DOT and thats what were using.

Another example, the new CAD standard drawing has 495 layers. Seems a little to much for me.

David Livingstone, post: 444064, member: 431 wrote: Alphabetical helps, but what letter is it filed under. For example, is EOP under E for edge, P for pavement, A for asphalt etc.

NO! That's the worst! Organize them by relevance.

TOPO

• SPOT
• BL

ROAD

• EC
• EP
• EG
• TC
• GL

BUILDINGS

• BL
• BC

FENCES/WALLS

• FNC
• FNCcy
• FNCbw

VEGETATION

• TREE
• CONIFER
• DECIDUOUS

SANITARY

• SSMH
• SSCO
• SS

STORM

• SDMH
• SDCO
• SD

WATER

• WV
• WM
• WTR

GAS

• GV
• GM
• GAS

ELECTRIC

• PP
• OHL

COMMUNICATION

• JBOX
• UGD
• FO
• RISER

MISC. UTILITIES

CONTROL

• CP
• CPO (CONTROL BY OTHERS)
• CPU (RESECTED INSTRUMENT POSITION, NOT MONUMENTED)

BOUNDARY

• FD
• SFNF

This has the side benefit of helping the crew see the survey as a series of systems to be accounted for, rather than a sea of points.

Check to see if your Data Collector supports loading a Feature Data Library. The firm I work for uses number codes as well. Electric Utilities are coded in the 200 range, Sanitary Sewer in the 600 range, etc. I memorized those ranges and when I start typing 6, a menu with all of the sanitary codes pops up. I can then organize those by the description in the right hand column. It has made working with the numbers a lot easier.

We use Trimble Access on our DC and TBC has A Feature Definition Manager that we use to build the appropriate file.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

I developed a 2 letter code system in the early 90s. It traveled with me until 2015. Still fall back to the previous list. Find replace is a wonderful thing..

I'm not sure a feature library would help? Maybe. If I start to type something now, say BOC, it starts to bring up the past descriptions starting with B, but in the case of numeric codes, it would just show the numbers. I don't know if I can add text to the library that goes with the numbers or not. We are using TDS survey pro.

A field code for Fence Corner (FC) fat fingered to a FV gives you a good idea of what happened.. A 900 that should be 800 is hard figure. With ASCII editors and graphical interface files, I had my guys use the same codes for all projects and we converted to the final format in the office. The only way that I could use hundreds of numeric codes would be looking at the list each time a non common feature is shot. The final deliverable does not necessarily dictate field procedure. In fact, the numeric code use by most DOT field crews will eventually be converted to an AASHTO codes. It never ceases to amaze me how engineers will take something that is relatively simple and try to add several layers of complexity. I never had anyone ask about my field procedures when the final deliverable was according to their specifications.

In the mid 80s we started using a number coding system for field to finish. I liked it, sounds as if you will ne driven by the DOT, do whatever they want, it will be easier in the long run.

It's kinda funny because the local DOT is all letter codes BKLS is breakline, they moved everyone away from number coding which was in the old HASP computer systems

Do these numerical codes get spelled out in the field notes in the event a descriptor gets fat fingered or otherwise mislabeled? It's not unheard of for an operator to get distracted and forget to change the code and the field notes are really the only way to verify what the shot was intended to be.

David Livingstone, post: 444047, member: 431 wrote:

Any tricks to making this an easier transition? Maybe a short list of the 10 common ones?

When I used a geodimeter 4400 with the big RPU, there was plenty of space on the RPU and I created 'cheat sheets' that I taped to it. The most common codes right in front of me and the lesser used codes were taped to the side of the unit. Depends on what you're doing but after a few days you will have 10 - 20 of the most used codes in your head.

Whatever your equipment is, there is always room to tape something to it; yes, reduced size text etc but handier than a paper list stuffed in a vest.

As far as I know you don't see the alpha descriptors until you download the data collector.

MightyMoe, post: 444084, member: 700 wrote: ..they moved everyone away from number coding which was in the old HASP computer systems

wow..you ARE old. 😉

Hey Paden, do you remember what HASP stood for? Hogan's Aerial Survey Program. It was very primitive but so was AutoCad back then. I had a lady drafter that absolutely hated computers, especially HASP. She quit and went to work for another outfit that did not use computers to draft the maps, her hand drawn maps and lettering were a dream to look at, very clean and easy to read. Yes, we are getting older MightyMoe, but that is okay.

The DOT may already have a data dictionary created. In Ohio, ODOT has pages upon pages of codes, BUT they supply the data dictionary. The bonus of the dictionary is that it allows for descriptions of codes.

Alternately, you can create a table in your CAD software to apply your current coding as the new codes. We set this up for crews visiting other states. When our Michigan crews have to assist Ohio crews with ODOT collection, they don't have to learn a new system.

Good luck!

Combining energies is always tough. Yes, there are standards, but you purchased that company for a reason. If they were profitable doing it their way, does it really make sense to change? I understand both sides of the argument, but I'm more of a "where there's a whip, there's a way," and follow the standards. Haha.

I just got some files from a surveyor who fell ill and couldn't complete a project. They used numerical codes of their own design for point descriptions. I seriously considered going out and re-locating everything... I am in agreement with typing a letter description and using an edit program in the office to convert the data, it is so much easier to catch letter mistakes than a 501 that should of been a 510 for example. And a bonus, the editing program will find the strange code and tell you about it. Not as good for if the crew forgets to change codes, but can't fix everything.

Monte, post: 444102, member: 11913 wrote: it is so much easier to catch letter mistakes than a 501 that should of been a 510 for example.

I'd argue the opposite. If 501 was entered, and transposition was suspected, there are a limited number of alternatives and the length of the correct expression is known. I've used numeric for 20 years and this just simply hasn't been a big problem.

People making descriptions up off the top of their heads is a much bigger problem. Alpha Codes have the disadvantage that crews think they know the correct code and don't bother to check. Which will foul up F2F.

As far as not changing codes for many shots ..... it doesn't matter if you are using Alpha, numeric, or Egyptian hieroglyphics.