Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
LSS utilized FME to create a workspace designed to dramatically reduce the facility footprint of an electric company. Using the workspace, the company reduced their One Call ticket volume by roughly 25%. This presentation will provide an overview of the problem and how FME was used as the solution.
Citation preview
Using FME to Refine Electric Company Facility Data
Louis Panzer, Locate Support Systems
Overview
Introduction You have GIS – how is it being utilized? Review of the damage prevention components Case study: preliminary background Customized application Integration of solution with internal data How are facilities protected better? How are costs reduced at the same time? Conclusions
You Have GIS: How is it being utilized?
For many companies, GIS is used to fulfill many important functions (asset inventory, outage, repairs, new construction)
The question to ask is, “if digital facility maps are available, why aren’t they being used for locate registration and ticket review?”
Some possible answers might be: GIS department unaware that this need exists Update issues: what is a correct frequency? No system in place to regulate ticket flow Mapping confidence level
Review of Damage Prevention Components
Areas in which maps are utilized in the process include: One Call registration One Call ticket review Field Locating
(but not as a replacement for a locate)
Tampa Electric Company previously utilized a service territory that was registered using grids
These grids resulted in tickets being sent for the entire Hillsborough county area
100% of these tickets were sent to the field Due to over notification, $900,000 of 2008
$1.15M budget was spent for no conflict tickets to be field visited whether a visit occurred or not
This method of ticket management also resulted in more risk to facilities
Preliminary Background
YEAR 2006 2007 2008 2009
BUDGET $1.3M $1.2M $1.15M $1.1M
Ticket count from Sunshine One Call for 2009: 88,500 tickets
Used IRTHNet to pass the tickets through for reports
Preliminary Background Cont.
Polygon
Grid size
Customized Application One Call Registration
STEP 1: Refined database with Sunshine One Call of Florida (IRTH system) to register facilities using buffered polygons instead of grids.
Just the pure 100 foot polygons
One Call Registration
• LSS utilized FME to extract UG lines and features from Tampa Electric Oracle database
• Workspace carved up data into chunks, collapsed and merged the data. Rob?
• These lines and features were converted into polygons to meet IRTH requirements (size and vertices)
Zoomed view to show improved coverage Note facility polygons in blue, grids in red.
One Call Registration
Two sets created: 100 foot buffers (for Sunshine), 25 foot buffers (for screener)
Can be created weekly or even daily if needed
Before
After
Estimated savings over a year: $150,000
One Call Registration Results
ACTUAL REDUCTION: 28% avg. (Calculated using the last 3 months of tickets as an average.
Estimated savings over a year: $150,000
Results - Step 1: Ticket Reduction from One Call
ACTUAL REDUCTION: 28% avg. (Calculated using the last 3 months of tickets as an average
Integration with Internal Data Use of 25 Foot Buffers
Using the 25 foot buffers, the screener is able to review recommendations from the system first. In a high volume situation this is a good combination of mapping and ticket management “pre-screening.”
A closer detailed view of the 25 foot buffers
Integration Use of 25 Foot Buffers
Estimated total savings over a year: $390,000 +* * will be higher when excavation stabilizes.
Integration (Results) Ticket Reduction with Internal Data
ADDITIONAL REDUCTION: 50% AVG. BRINGS TOTAL DAILY SAVINGS TO: $1,500 AVG.
Estimated total savings over a year: $390,000 +* * will be higher when excavation stabilizes.
Results
ADDITIONAL REDUCTION: 50% AVG. BRINGS TOTAL DAILY SAVINGS TO: $1,500 AVG.
Integration with Internal Data
FIRST: Review all
tickets using IRTHNet
Check work type, depth and location
Integration Using All the Tools
SECOND Use GIS,
CIS and Google to verify clears
CIS Address OH/UG Service Check
G-Tech GIS Viewer
Integration Using All the Tools
SECOND Use GIS,
CIS and Google to verify clears
Google maps check: using front and overhead views
Integration Using All the Tools
SECOND Use GIS,
CIS and Google to verify clears
Integration Using All the Tools
THIRD Make
phone calls if needed.
WHEN IN DOUBT...
SEND IT OUT!
How Does This Process Help Further Protect Facilities?
Helps GIS to keep database updated • Full circle GIS review:the process provides a
regular review of the maps (against CIS and G-tech GIS) to identify when areas need to be added.
Provides a higher degree of confidence: every ticket is either thoroughly reviewed or field located
How Does This Process Reduce Costs?
ROI within 3 months System can be automated to generate new
shape files when areas have been added Improves the overall efficiency of the one call
ticket process Directly reduces locate costs, whether
internal or contracted
Conclusions
Ticket management remains a critical piece to the efficiencies and improved protection
Ticket management works best when integrated with accurate mapping
Not every company has GIS Those that do many can use this functionality to
reduce costs Those that don’t can consider building a GIS
system and funding it with the savings
