Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

AASHTOWare Bridge Management Review Formerly. Utilized by 44 DOTs plus local and intl. agencies BrM/Pontis 5.2 is funded by a voluntary participation.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "AASHTOWare Bridge Management Review Formerly. Utilized by 44 DOTs plus local and intl. agencies BrM/Pontis 5.2 is funded by a voluntary participation."— Presentation transcript:

1 AASHTOWare Bridge Management Review Formerly

2 Utilized by 44 DOTs plus local and intl. agencies BrM/Pontis 5.2 is funded by a voluntary participation from more than 20 state DOTs, under DOT guidance and expertise Tools that are easier to use and understand: – Planning – Deterioration – Risk – Multi-objective analysis – Lifecycle costs – Project models – Dashboards – Corridor planning AASHTOWare Bridge Management

3 What’s in a Number and a Name? Pontis 4.5 Pontis Pontis BrM BrM Pontis BrM 5.2.3

4 What’s in a Number/Name? Pontis Version 4.5 – C++ based – Standalone or Client/Server Windows Application – CoRe Elements – Management and Inspection software Pontis Version – Microsoft.NET – Standalone (.NET) or Enterprise Web Based Application – CoRe Elements – Only Inspection software – Can share common database with 4.5 for management

5 What’s in a Number? Pontis Version / – Microsoft.NET – Standalone (.NET) or Enterprise Web Based Application – NBEs/BMEs – Only Inspection software – Management depends on 5.2 BrM Version 5.2.X – Microsoft.NET – Standalone (.NET) or Enterprise Web Based Application – NBEs/BMEs – Advanced Bridge Management Software – Cross Browser Compatible

6 5.2 Architecture 5.2 utilizes a flexible web-based architecture – Microsoft.NET application – Microsoft SQL or Oracle database support – Accessible anywhere/anytime via web-browser New technology/capabilities: – XML for transferring bridge data – Google Maps for GIS/Mapping – Cross Browser Compatibility

7 Why are we doing 5.2? Many lessons learned from 4.X and previous versions New technology allows flexible web-based approach for better features, access, and support Inclusion of new AASHTO Elements including protective systems, defects Opening up the black box providing full transparency of why values are obtained

8 Development on 5.2 is rapidly moving forward with coordinated efforts between the Task Force, TRT, and Contractor Phased releases Version 5.1.2/5.1.3 (Mar 2012 / May 2013) New inspection and inventory functionality, integration with mapping Version (Feb 2014) Core program framework, risk assessments, integrated utility functions, network corridors Version (Mid-2015) Implementation of new deterioration models and multi-objective analysis Version (Planned 2016) Integrated project and program planning All administrative features

9 Inspection Bridge Groups, Risk, Utility Functions Deterioration Modeling, Preservation Action, and Projects Project/Program Planning and Administration Features

10 Bridge Management Major Release (5.2.1) with 2 Service Packs (SP1 + SP2) Key Features Google Mapping Functions Utility Functions Needs Prioritization Support For 2013 Element Inspection Manual and Federal Submission Cross-Browser Support Key User Requests

11 Better fit for agency workflow and business processes Improved Decision Making Tools Tradeoff and Balance New functionality: Balance multiple objectives More control of results More transparency Risk Time-sensitive deterioration Indirect Costs Life cycle cost Condition Risk and vulnerability Better Tradeoff Analysis Mobility

12 Multi Objective Analysis In this example, the bridge has a utility value of In this example, the Condition component is weighted the most heavily of all components of a bridge (weighted to be more important than Risk, Mobility, and Life Cycle) In this example, an agency is able to see exactly how every component and subcomponent exactly impacts the overall utility of the asset

13 Multi-Objective/Utility Function By incorporating utility functions, BrM is able to combine elements of Risk, Lifecycle Cost, Condition, Mobility, and other agency defined criteria to calculate the utility or value of a particular bridge.

14 Full Transparency for Utility Values

15 Preservation (and other) Actions Default Actions supplied by State TRT members Actions have a default cost Attach actions to benefit groups

16 Benefit Groups which define what effects an action has Benefit Groups can apply to any elements, fields, and/or risks.

17 Individual Bridge Analysis Pages show benefits of actions Provides snapshot of work candidates and a detailed view of effect of each View includes all related utility value information and criterion

18 Recommended Actions Calculates the cost/benefit ratio for all possible actions Ranks all available actions providing recommendations on what should be applied to a bridge

19 Visualize Needs with Maps

20 Bridge Analysis Groups to Assist with Preservation Ability to create groups based on any inventory criteria combination i.e. Steel bridges with ADT over 30,000. Apply analysis to groups.

21 Bridge Management SP2 Currently in Beta testing Key Features Support Element Submission to FHWA Crystal Reports 2013 High Usage Optimization High Priority Requests

22 Modernization Service Pack 2 Includes the improved support for Microsoft operating systems and web browsers introduced in SP1 Crystal Reports –The software now includes the latest version: SAP Crystal Reports 2013 –Each agency has their own license to the software –Improvement of Crystal Reports security NBE Elements 2015 –Ability to collect bridge element inspection information in accordance with the 2015 Mandates

23 Stabilization & Performance Enhancements Usability Improvements Issue Resolution Addressed a number of key use requests and issues from previous versions Software Optimization Greatly improved stability experienced by agencies with many users using the software concurrently

24 User Group Concern/Priority DescriptionAlert StatusPriority LevelTask Force Direction FHWA Metrics reportFHWA Requested 23 metric logic from FHWA FHWA translatorFHWA Requested 23 metric logic from FHWA #1 priority ‐ 2013 Elements High1Complete Inspections TAG requested to look at layout and rules (Eric Christie lead)High2Underway Software issues resolution trackingHigh3Underway Resurrect Database TAG (Todd Thompson lead)High4Complete Concerns about possible conflict of interest within contractor in terms of competing/complementary products, etc. High5Complete. The contract executed between AASHTO and Bentley Systems, Inc. addresses the issue of intellectual property and conflict of interest. New coding guide verificationHigh6Included in 5.2. Database in English units ONLYHigh7BrM is expected to store data in U.S. customary units and support conversion to metric Clarification of developer's priority :release schedule vs. fitting in all items Ongoing. Content versus delivery is regularly prioritized by the Task Force. Users are updated quarterly. Crystal Reports version is fully functional with BrM/PontisMed In Progress. Version compatibility and licensing are being investigated Help file refers back to old version (help file should pertain exclusively to current version) Med In Progress. Working to consolidate and improve the help file and manuals into a more useful configuration. Focus on the development of the 5.2.X user manual is a top priority. Documentation for will be a living document (both online and printable). 5.2.X documentation will not include references to older versions of the software. The documentation will be delivered after the release. Update the FHWA edit checks to include the most recent changes.Med Complete. Updated in An XML download will be provided for Maintaining historical inventory data (Gupta)Low No Action Taken. Would require fundamental database changes. No software action will be taken on this request. Modeling validationsLow A TRT group for modeling will be established to work closely with the Task Force and Bentley staff to ensure all models are validated. Performance management/risk assessmentLow Clarification is needed on what actions should be taken. The Task Force reviewed each of the User Group priorities and has documented the decisions from these discussions

25 Mid-2015 Deterioration Modeling New Inspection Screen Project Planning/Analysis Program Stubs GUID Implementation Easy agency customization and API integration Conversion of Metric Database Data to Engish

26 Deterioration Modeling -Implement new deterioration model logic -Weibull approach to include time factor -Easy to construct/new elicitation process -Utilize AASHTO Elements -Protective Systems -Defect Flags -Allow for Multi-path deterioration

27 Deterioration Modelling An agency is able to see the direct impact of performing work on an asset, and how it will impact the bridge currently, as well as years into the future Also able to see the direct impact of performing work at a later point in time. This aids an agency in the decision to determine when the optimized time would be to perform the selected work.

28 Deterioration Modeling and Multi Objective Analysis (example)

29

30 Project Planning Preservation Actions Project Planning – Ability to create and view projects. – Define projects by grouping together work items and bridges – Determine cost and effectiveness of projects and the end result of performing the selected work on the selected bridges. – Dashboards to view higher level numbers and effects, while also being able to drill down to specific results and details

31 Project Details – Bridge View

32 Project Details – Map View

33 Main Project Screen

34 Project Details – Summary

35 Project Details – Analysis

36 Cross browser compatibility Continuing to update BrM with latest support for all major browsers – IE 9,10,11+ – Chrome – Firefox – Safari Allow for newer technologies to be integrated in the future (e.g. HTML5)

37 Demo


Download ppt "AASHTOWare Bridge Management Review Formerly. Utilized by 44 DOTs plus local and intl. agencies BrM/Pontis 5.2 is funded by a voluntary participation."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google