Infrastructure BIM and GIS data integrations
Designers link infrastructure drawings and models to geographic location and existing networks. It is clearly noted which location data has been measured and which have yet to be verified.
Design document and model editions are transmitted without a clear scope of use and coordinated review by participants. The work section can be adapted to the next stage solution, and the approval of the change has to be restored from the correspondence.
How the solution works
- Participants determine the link between a stretch or object and appropriate information permissions for a specific stage.
- Sources of geometry are checked against the deduction, units, accuracy and relevance.
- Model and geographical data are linked while maintaining their different purpose and detail.
- A known spatial interaction is checked, and an unreliable or missing section is raised for additional examination.
- The approved change is passed on to the affected participants with its scope and the connection of previous objects.
Key challenges
- Project data disaggregated
- BIM and GIS data not linked
- Conflicts in engineering networks are detected late
Solution capabilities
Linking records of the same object
The codes and sections of different systems are linked to a real scope; splitting, merging and changing preserves history.
Spatial Reference Check
Coordinates, height basis, units are checked and a transformation is applied according to the agreed by professionals.
Permits and data uses
The project information environment specifies which version is allowed for a specific use; geographic copy does not become a competing permission.
Data Accuracy and Coverage
The position of the old drawing, examination and re-measurement has a separate reliability basis; an unknown section remains visible.
The course of spatial conflict
Verification applies agreed upon rules to the available geometry and forwards a specific question to the specialist responsible, retaining an approved answer.
Business context
- Project data disaggregated
- Design document and model editions are transmitted without a clear scope of use and coordinated review by participants. The work section can be adapted to the next stage solution, and the approval of the change has to be restored from the correspondence.
- BIM and GIS data not linked
- The technical model, geographic location and linear section are linked without checking the reference, object partitioning and different detail. On-screen matching entries may indicate another physical scope or a false location.
- Conflicts in engineering networks are detected late
- The position of the existing network is presented with the same reliability as the new measurement, and unchecked sections are not distinguished. Automatic verification may overlook a real obstacle that was missing or inaccurately marked in the data.
- Project solutions explained by the actual local situation
- It is important for the customer to know whether the proposed solution evaluates existing networks and what accuracy the data is based on. Linked spatial information allows earlier indication of potential conflicts. This helps to justify the need for additional research and avoid an unreasonably accurate price or term promise.
Core features
- Linking records of the same object
- Spatial Reference Check
- Permits and data uses
- Data Accuracy and Coverage
- The course of spatial conflict
Key integrations
- Design and Document Environment
- Permission, technical object and version for a specific stage.
- Sources of geographic information
- Location of the object, territories and network data with their update information.
- Geodetic data
- The basis for reference and accuracy and control measurements have been verified.
- Operation Register
- Appropriate asset relationship and required extent of approved replacement.
Potential impact (%)
The ranges indicate an illustrative relative change in the metric under the stated assumptions. Results depend on the starting position and actual use of the solution. Percentages for different metrics must not be added together.
Spatial and design data reconciliation work
16–42%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 40-70% of information searches and repeated cross-checks can be addressed. That share is assumed to fall by 40-60%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable workload and the resulting change.
The active time of the same volume section's location, version and code revision is compared.
Correctional work for unappreciated spatial reference
12–36%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 30-60% of manual data entry and handover work can be addressed. That share is assumed to fall by 40-60%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable workload and the resulting change.
An additional work of data preparation or review is measured at the approved level for a non-harmonised reference.
Conditional calculation scenarios. The assumptions have not been validated against client measurements.
When this solution is relevant
- The model element on the map appears to be in the right place, but its heights are linked to another reference base.
- When a section is split, the previous note or document no longer reaches the correct new section.
Implementation requirements
For infrastructure data, specialists align the basis for the identification of coordinates, heights and objects. The reliability of different sources and the partitioning of sections must be traced through the transmission of design permissions and actual installation information.
Further development options
- Adding additional network owners' data based on verified accuracy and access
- Automation of the transmission of changes to the slats after the screening of the rules for partitioning objects