AASHTO Technology Implementation Group TIG FY 2007 AASHTO

AASHTO Technology Implementation Group (TIG) FY 2007 AASHTO TIG Focus Technologies Linear Reference System (LRS) Steve Kadolph – Iowa DOT Jonathan (J. J. ) Du. Chateau – Wisconsin DOT Oscar Jarquin – California DOT Eric Abrams – Iowa DOT

Technology Implementation Group l l l AASHTO’s TIG invests time and money to accelerate selected technology adoption by agencies nationwide. TIG’s lead states team objective is to share information with AASHTO member agencies to improve the Nation’s transportation system The LRS TIG objectives are l l Knowledge and experience related to LRS implementation Webinars to share experiences and educate others Customized state visits Iowa’s LRS Maintenance Tool and system at no charge

NCHRP 20 -27 (2) LRS Model l Linear Referencing System Data Model Developed in response to the need to integrate linearly referenced data Includes l l l Multiple linear referencing methods (LRM) Multiple cartographic representations Multiple Network Representations Multiple Route Names Business data integration is supported through transformations among methods, networks and cartographic representations by associating with a central linear datum

What Does a 20 -27 (2) System Contain l Spatial representation of a transportation system l l Datum most stable layer over time Network Layer l l Accurate Centerline Multiple Cartographic abstraction layers Links and Nodes that define the network LRM Location l l Data required for those methods Programs and interfaces to supply a LRS location to business data

What Does a 20 -27 (2) System Does Not Contain Business data is separated from the 20 -27 (2) model order to minimize the impact on existing business data

Why Implement a 20 -27 (2) Model Single source for transportation systems l Navigable network l As many LRMs, routes and cartographies as needed l Minimizes changes to existing business data l Can support needs of multiple business areas l

TIG LRS Team Members l Iowa Lead State l l l l Peggi Knight ( Team Leader) Eric Abrams (Gis Coordinator) Karen Carroll (LRS Manager) Mike Clement (QA LRS) Steve Kadolph (Technical Exp. ) Ryan Wyllie (QA LRS) Other States l l l o David Blackstone (Ohio) Jonathan (J. J. ) Du. Chateau (Wis) John Farley (N. Car. ) Oscar Jarquin (Calif. ) Thomas Martin (Minn. ) Non State l Tim Bisch (Bentley Systems, Inc. ) Dave Fletcher (Geographic l Mark Sarmiento l Paradigm Computing, Inc. ) (FHWA)

Iowa’s LRS Experience

Agenda l What Iowa’s LRS includes l What do the DOT’s business units gain l What allowed Iowa to succeed

Iowa’s LRS Implementation of NCHRP 20 -27 model. Which separates business data from the location components of linear features (roads, navigable rivers, railroads, pipelines, etc. ).

NCHRP 20 -27 Model Crash Coordinate Route PMIS Reference Post Base Record Coordinate Route Inventory Milepoint Project Data Stationing LRS Components Centerline Representation 1 Centerline Representation 2 Program Literal Description Address Range Centerline Representation 3

LRS Components (all public roads 114, 000 miles) l Cartography l l l Datum (Anchor Sections & Points) Network (Transport Links & Nodes) Routes l l l Traveled Way Spatial Roadway Spatial Parsed Names Paths LRM Components (i. e. Reference Post)

Transformations between supported business location referencing methods (LRM) A common linear description of the network that can relate all the methods. LRM Transform Datum LRM Transform LRM

How does LRS benefit the DOT Improved Accuracy Entire road system (all public roads) are created based upon same standard l A separate abstraction layer call Roadway exist that provides a single representation of divided roadways l The system is represented over time (from 1/1/2001) l

How does LRS benefit the DOT Central location of data l Route names for all roadway systems l One navigable network l Centerline for all roads l History of road network

How does LRS benefit the DOT Clearly defined rules and practices l LRM usage and results l Data staged has same location component l Processes and QC processes clearly defined l Metadata for all LRS components l Source for centerlines identified and dated l Who owns LRS components known

LRS how did Iowa succeed l Business case for creation of LRS l Division Level Sponsors l Business data kept separate from location l Business unit ownership LRS l Active project management

Implementation Issues l Time span (1998 2001 -2009) l Digitize roads (2001 -2005) l Develop maintenance tool (2003 -2008) l Create LRS components (2004 -2009) l Cost to develop maintenance tool l Dollars l Multiple vendors

Wisconsin’s LRS Experience

Wisconsin’s LRS Similarities to Iowa l Most concepts in Iowa’s slides also apply to WI’s implementation l Separate business data components from Coordinate Reference Coordinate Literal LRS Milepoint Stationing Route Post Route Description l Linear Datum that serves as a LRS “hub” LRS Components l Multiple LRMs supported. Address (each tied to the Range Crash PMIS Base Record Linear Datum) Centerline Inventory Project Data Program LRM Centerline Representation 1 Representation 2 Representation 3 LRM LRM Datum LRM

Wisconsin’s LRS Difference from Iowa l l l WI’s Linear Datum & Network are one and the same Built state roads (1993), then local roads later (2002) In-house solution (mainly because commercial solutions didn’t exist at this time) Best practice to store Linear Datum location instead of LRM for business event data Iowa has put more emphasis on statistics for determining linear measurement accuracy

Wisconsin’s Experience 17 years production experience with these LRS concepts l Design driven by Information Engineering principles l LRS design was essentially a data modeling & normalization exercise l l Results l in many of the 20 -27 concepts Allows management of one LRS component not to dictate management of another LRS component

Wisconsin’s Experience Designed so linear data processing can be done outside of GIS software l Only “GIS” layer required is a roadway centerline representation l LRS transformation processes to create cartographic representation of business data l

Wisconsin’s Experience l Conceptual & design details are important to understand l Entity Definitions, Business Rules, Use Cases Such as: l What is a “road”? l Where does a route start/end? l What events cause birth/death of a LRS object?

Wisconsin’s Experience l Implementation considerations for LRS entities need to be weighed l Is each linear location uniquely described? l How many nodes should represent an intersection? l What constitutes a divided roadway? l What point should be used for merging/diverging roadways?

Wisconsin’s Experience l Additional LRS functionality considerations (Some things not explicitly mentioned in 20 -27) l Ability to associate still valid portions of old Anchor Sections to its replacement(s) l Ability to associate opposite direction Anchor Sections l The temporal aspect of this data is much harder than it seems

California’s LRS Experience

California Business Driver… Corridor Management

Multiple LRM’s County ORA Route Postmile 405 R 23. 000 Route Kilo. Post 405 R 33. 877

Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) Applications Other GIS St. Hwy Inv. HPMS CTIS Parcels PEAR Envir. TIMI Asset Mgt Security Linear Referencing Mapping Others Doc Mgt Other Functions SHARED FUNCTIONS Search Functions CAD Others Locals Google Earth Public SOA (Service Oriented Architecture) State Agencies Internet Data Files SOA output via GIS = Planning, PID, Design, Proj. Mgt. , Constr. , Operations, etc. for system performance, geometrics, etc. Java/XML Message Bus PMS TASAS TMCs (loops, CMS, etc. ) Main Frame HPMS Hwy. Inven. Web Pages Traffic Volume Programming Other TSM OE-PSE CT PASS External Sources

Identifying Common SOA Components

Geospatial Data Management Google Earth GIS Files Cadastral CADD Post Mile Info Web Geospatial Data GIS Micro. Station Geodatabase / Web Services

Postmile Lookup Tool

Arc. GIS Tool Bar

The LRS TIG objectives are • Knowledge and experience related to LRS implementation • Webinars to share experiences and educate others • Customized state visits • Iowa’s LRS Maintenance Tool and system at no charge

Technology Implementation Group l The LRS TIG objectives are l l Knowledge and experience related to LRS implementation Webinars to share experiences and educate others Customized state visits Iowa’s LRS Maintenance Tool and system at no charge