U.S. patent application number 12/537732 was filed with the patent office on 2010-01-14 for methods and apparatus for quality assessment of a field service operation based on geographic information.
This patent application is currently assigned to CertusView Technologies, LLC. Invention is credited to Curtis Chambers, Jeffrey Farr, Steven E. Nielsen, David Pennington.
Application Number | 20100010862 12/537732 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 41448565 |
Filed Date | 2010-01-14 |
United States Patent
Application |
20100010862 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Nielsen; Steven E. ; et
al. |
January 14, 2010 |
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF A FIELD SERVICE
OPERATION BASED ON GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Abstract
Methods, apparatus and systems for computer-aided determination
of quality assessment for locate and marking operations based on
geographic information. In one example, information related to a
locate and marking operation is electronically analyzed such that a
quality assessment is based at least in part on first geographic
information indicating at least one first location of a
field-service technician following issuance of an instruction to
perform the locate and marking operation, and second geographic
information indicating at least one second location at which the
location and marking operation was requested to be performed in the
instruction.
Inventors: |
Nielsen; Steven E.; (North
Palm Beach, FL) ; Chambers; Curtis; (Palm Beach
Gardens, FL) ; Pennington; David; (Juno Beach,
FL) ; Farr; Jeffrey; (Jupiter, FL) |
Correspondence
Address: |
WOLF GREENFIELD & SACKS, P.C.
600 ATLANTIC AVENUE
BOSTON
MA
02210-2206
US
|
Assignee: |
CertusView Technologies,
LLC
Palm Beach Gardens
FL
|
Family ID: |
41448565 |
Appl. No.: |
12/537732 |
Filed: |
August 7, 2009 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
12493109 |
Jun 26, 2009 |
|
|
|
12537732 |
|
|
|
|
12204454 |
Sep 4, 2008 |
|
|
|
12493109 |
|
|
|
|
61076253 |
Jun 27, 2008 |
|
|
|
61102151 |
Oct 2, 2008 |
|
|
|
61102169 |
Oct 2, 2008 |
|
|
|
61102186 |
Oct 2, 2008 |
|
|
|
61102205 |
Oct 2, 2008 |
|
|
|
61151574 |
Feb 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
61151578 |
Feb 11, 2009 |
|
|
|
61184092 |
Jun 4, 2009 |
|
|
|
61220491 |
Jun 25, 2009 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
705/7.42 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06Q 10/06398 20130101;
G06Q 30/02 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
705/9 |
International
Class: |
G06Q 10/00 20060101
G06Q010/00 |
Claims
1. In a computer comprising at least one hardware processor, at
least one tangible storage medium, and at least one input/output
(I/O) interface, a method for evaluating a quality of a locate
operation to identify a presence or an absence of at least one
underground facility pursuant to an instruction to a field-service
technician, the method comprising: A) receiving, via the at least
one I/O interface, first geographic information indicating at least
one first location of the field-service technician following
issuance of the instruction to the field-service technician; B)
receiving, via the at least one I/O interface, second geographic
information indicating at least one second location at which the
locate operation was requested to be performed; C) determining a
distance between the at least one first location and the at least
one second location; D) determining whether the distance is within
a predefined range; E) if it is determined that the distance is
within or equal to the predefined range, generating at least one
first indication so as to indicate that the locate operation is
approved; and F) if it is determined that the distance is not
within the predefined range, generating at least one second
indication so as to indicate that the locate operation is
unsatisfactory.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein C) comprises comparing the at
least one first location to the at least one second location to
determine the distance between the first location and the second
location.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one first location
is where the field-service technician performs the locate
operation.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the first geographic information
is obtained from an electronic manifest of the locate operation,
and wherein the at least one first location is a geographic
location at which the electronic manifest was created.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the first geographic information
is obtained from locating equipment used by the field-service
technician.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the first geographic information
is obtained from a global navigation satellite system (GNSS)
receiver.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the GNSS receiver is situated in
a vehicle used by the field-service technician.
8. The method of claim 6, wherein the GNSS receiver is situated in
a handheld computer used by the field-service technician.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein the second geographic information
is obtained from a ticket received by the field-service technician
describing the locate operation to be performed.
10. The method of claim 9, wherein the second geographic
information comprises a street address of the at least one second
location, and wherein the method further comprises: geo-coding the
street address to determine a latitude and longitude for the at
least one second location.
11. The method of claim 1, wherein the second geographic
information is obtained from a virtual white line image that
indicates where excavation is planned.
12. The method of claim 2, wherein the first geographic information
includes first latitude and longitude coordinates of the at least
one first location, wherein the second geographic information
includes second latitude and longitude coordinates of the at least
one second location, and wherein C) comprises comparing the first
latitude and longitude coordinates to the second latitude and
longitude coordinates to determine the distance between the first
location and the second location.
13. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one I/O interface
comprises at least one display device, and wherein the method
further comprises: G) displaying, via the at least one display
device, the at least one first indication indicating that the
locate operation is approved or the at least one second indication
indicating that the locate operation is unsatisfactory.
14. The method of claim 13, wherein G) comprises displaying the at
least one first indication on a graphical user interface (GUI)
displayed by the display device, the GUI including at least one
region in which the at least one first or the at least one second
indication is displayed.
15. The method of claim 14, wherein the at least one first
indication includes a first color displayed in the at least one
region, and wherein the at least one second indication includes a
second color, different from the first color, displayed in the at
least one region.
16. An apparatus for facilitating an evaluation of a quality of a
locate operation to identify a presence or an absence of at least
one underground facility pursuant to an instruction to a
field-service technician, the apparatus comprising: at least one
input/output interface; at least one tangible storage medium to
store processor-executable instructions; and a processor coupled to
the at least one input/output interface and the at least one
tangible storage medium, wherein upon execution of the
processor-executable instructions by the processor, the processor:
A) controls the at least one I/O interface so as to receive first
geographic information indicating a first location of the
field-service technician following issuance of the instruction to
the field-service technician; B) controls the at least one I/O
interface so as to receive second geographic information indicating
a second location at which the locate operation was requested to be
performed; C) determines a distance between the first location and
the second location; D) determines whether the distance is within a
predefined range; E) if it is determined that the distance is
within or equal to the predefined range, generates at least one
first indication so as to indicate that the locate operation is
approved; and F) if it is determined that the distance is not
within the predefined range, generates at least one second
indication so as to indicate that the locate operation is
unsatisfactory.
17. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein in C) the processor compares
the at least one first location to the at least one second location
to determine the distance between the first location and the second
location.
18. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the at least one first
location is where the field-service technician performs the locate
operation.
19. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the first geographic
information is obtained from an electronic manifest of the locate
operation, and wherein the at least one first location is a
geographic location at which the electronic manifest was
created.
20. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the first geographic
information is obtained from locating equipment used by the
field-service technician.
21. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the first geographic
information is obtained from a global navigation satellite system
(GNSS) receiver.
22. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the second geographic
information is obtained from a ticket received by the field-service
technician describing the locate operation to be performed.
23. The apparatus of claim 22, wherein the second geographic
information comprises a street address of the at least one second
location, and wherein, upon execution of the processor-executable
instructions, the processor: geo-codes the street address to
determine a latitude and longitude for the at least one second
location.
24. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the second geographic
information is obtained from a virtual white line image that
indicates where excavation is planned.
25. The apparatus of claim 17, wherein the first geographic
information includes first latitude and longitude coordinates of
the at least one first location, wherein the second geographic
information includes second latitude and longitude coordinates of
the at least one second location, and wherein in C) the processor
compares the first latitude and longitude coordinates to the second
latitude and longitude coordinates to determine the distance
between the first location and the second location.
26. The apparatus of claim 16, wherein the at least one I/O
interface comprises at least one display device, and wherein upon
execution of the processor-executable instructions by the
processor, the processor: G) displays, via the at least one display
device, the at least one first indication indicating that the
locate operation is approved or the at least one second indication
indicating that the locate operation is unsatisfactory.
27. The apparatus of claim 26, wherein in G) the processor displays
the at least one first indication on a graphical user interface
(GUI) displayed by the display device, the GUI including at least
one region in which the at least one first or the at least one
second indication is displayed.
28. The apparatus of claim 27, wherein the at least one first
indication includes a first color displayed in the at least one
region, and wherein the at least one second indication includes a
second color, different from the first color, displayed in the at
least one region.
29. At least one computer-readable storage medium encoded with
instructions that, when executed by a processor in a computer
comprising at least one input/output (I/O) interface, perform a
method for evaluating a quality of a locate operation to identify a
presence or an absence of at least one underground facility
pursuant to an instruction to a field-service technician, the
method comprising: A) receiving, via the at least one I/O
interface, first geographic information indicating a first location
of the field-service technician following issuance of the
instruction to the field-service technician; B) receiving, via the
at least one I/O interface, second geographic information
indicating a second location at which the locate operation was
requested to be performed; C) determining a distance between the
first location and the second location; D) determining whether the
distance is within a predefined range; E) if it is determined that
the distance is within or equal to the predefined range, generating
at least one first indication so as to indicate that the locate
operation is approved; and F) if it is determined that the distance
is not within the predefined range, generating at least one second
indication so as to indicate that the locate operation is
unsatisfactory.
Description
CROSS-REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application claims a priority benefit, under 35 U.S.C.
.sctn.120, as a continuation (CON) of U.S. Non-provisional patent
application Ser. No. 12/493,109, filed Jun. 26, 2009, entitled
"Methods and Apparatus for Quality Assessment of a Field Service
Operation."
[0002] Ser. No. 12/493,109 in turn claims a priority benefit, under
35 U.S.C. .sctn.120, as a continuation-in-part (CIP) of U.S.
Non-provisional patent application Ser. No. 12/204,454, filed Sep.
4, 2008, and entitled "Quality assessment System For And Method Of
Performing Quality Control In Field Service Applications." Ser. No.
12/204,454 in turn claims a priority benefit, under 35 U.S.C.
.sctn.119(e), to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No.
61/076,253, filed Jun. 27, 2008, and entitled "Quality assessment
System For And Method Of Performing Quality Control In Field
Service Applications."
[0003] Ser. No. 12/493,109 also claims a priority benefit, under 35
U.S.C. .sctn.119(e), to each of the following U.S. Provisional
Applications: Ser. No. 61/102,151, filed Oct. 2, 2008, and entitled
"Data Acquisition System For And Method Of Analyzing Locate
Operations Based On Marking Device Actuations;" Ser. No.
61/102,169, filed Oct. 2, 2008, and entitled "Data Acquisition
System For And Method Of Analyzing Locate Operations With Respect
To Facilities Maps;" Ser. No. 61/102,186, filed Oct. 2, 2008, and
entitled "Data Acquisition System For And Method Of Analyzing
Locate Operations With Respect To Historical Tickets;" Ser. No.
61/102,205, filed Oct. 2, 2008, and entitled "Data Acquisition For
And Method Of Analyzing Locate Operations With Respect To
Environmental Landmarks;" Ser. No. 61/151,574, filed Feb. 11, 2009,
and entitled "Marking Device That Has Enhanced Features For
Underground Facility Locate Operations;" Ser. No. 61/151,578, filed
Feb. 11, 2009, and entitled "Locating Equipment That Has Enhanced
Features for Underground Facility Locate Applications;" Ser. No.
61/184,092, filed Jun. 4, 2009, and entitled "System For And Method
Of Determining A Locate Operations Quality Assessment Score;" and
Ser. No. 61/220,491, filed Jun. 25, 2009, and entitled "Methods and
Apparatus for Assessing Field Service Operation Tickets."
[0004] Each of the prior applications identified above is
incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
BACKGROUND
[0005] Field service operations may be any operation in which
companies dispatch technicians and/or other staff to perform
certain activities, for example, installations, services and/or
repairs. Field service operations may exist in various industries,
examples of which include, but are limited to, network
installations, utility installations, security systems,
construction, medical equipment, heating, ventilating and air
conditioning (HVAC) and the like.
[0006] An example of a field service operation in the construction
industry is a so-called "locate and marking operation," also
commonly referred to more simply as a "locate operation" (or
sometimes merely as "a locate"). In a typical locate operation, a
locate technician visits a work site in which there is a plan to
disturb the ground (e.g., excavate, dig one or more holes and/or
trenches, bore, etc.) so as to determine a presence or an absence
of one or more underground facilities (such as various types of
utility cables and pipes) in a dig area to be excavated or
disturbed at the work site. In some instances, a locate operation
may be requested for a "design" project, in which there may be no
immediate plan to excavate or otherwise disturb the ground, but
nonetheless information about a presence or absence of one or more
underground utilities at a work site may be valuable to inform a
planning, permitting and/or engineering design phase of a future
construction project.
[0007] In many states, an excavator who plans to disturb ground at
a work site is required by law to notify any potentially affected
underground facility owners prior to undertaking an excavation
activity. Advanced notice of excavation activities may be provided
by an excavator (or another party) by contacting a "one-call
center." One-call centers typically are operated by a consortium of
underground facility owners for the purposes of receiving
excavation notices and in turn notifying facility owners and/or
their agents of a plan to excavate. As part of an advanced
notification, excavators typically provide to the one-call center
various information relating to the planned activity, including a
description of the dig area to be excavated or otherwise
disturbed.
[0008] A locate operation typically is initiated as a result of an
excavator providing an excavation notice to a one-call center. An
excavation notice also is commonly referred to as a "locate
request," and may be provided by the excavator to the one-call
center via an electronic mail message, information entry via a
website maintained by the one-call center, or a telephone
conversation between the excavator and a human operator at the
one-call center. The locate request may include an address or some
other location-related information describing the geographic
location of a work site at which the excavation is to be performed,
as well as a description of the dig area (e.g., a text
description), such as its location relative to certain landmarks
and/or its approximate dimensions, within which there is a plan to
disturb the ground. One-call centers similarly may receive locate
requests for design projects (for which, as discussed above, there
may be no immediate plan to excavate or otherwise disturb the
ground).
[0009] Based on the information provided in a locate request for
planned excavation or design projects, the one-call center
identifies certain underground facilities that may be present at
the indicated work site. For example, one-call centers generally
have access to various existing maps of underground facilities in
their jurisdiction, referred to as "facilities maps." Facilities
maps typically are provided by underground facilities owners within
the jurisdiction and show, for respective different utility types,
where underground facilities purportedly may be found relative to
some geographic reference frame or coordinate system (e.g., a grid,
a street or property map, GPS latitude and longitude coordinates,
etc.).
[0010] Most often, using such facilities maps, a one-call center
identifies a significant buffer zone around an identified work site
(i.e., based on the address or location information provided in the
locate request), so as to make an over-inclusive identification of
underground utilities that may be present (e.g., to err on the side
of caution). This practice of creating a buffer zone around an
identified work site with reference to one or more facilities maps
commonly is referred to as generating a "polygon" or "polygon map."
Based on these generally over-inclusive polygons (and in some
instances significantly over-inclusive polygons), the one-call
center identifies all of the underground facilities that may fall
within the polygon so as to notify the corresponding facility
owners and/or their agents of the proposed excavation or design
project. Again, it should be appreciated that polygons or polygon
maps utilized by one-call centers for this purpose typically
embrace a geographic area that includes but goes well beyond the
actual work site, and in many cases the geographic area enclosed by
a given polygon is significantly larger than the actual dig area in
which excavation or other similar activities are planned.
[0011] Once facilities implicated by the locate request are
identified by a one-call center (e.g., via the polygon process),
the one-call center generates a "locate request ticket" (also known
as a "locate ticket," or simply a "ticket"). The locate request
ticket essentially constitutes an instruction to inspect a work
site, and typically identifies the work site of the proposed
excavation or design and a description of the dig area, typically
lists on the ticket all of the underground facilities that may be
present at the work site (e.g., by providing a member code for the
facility owner of an underground facility that falls within a given
polygon), and may also include various other information relevant
to the proposed excavation or design (e.g., the name of the
excavation company, a name of a property owner or party contracting
the excavation company to perform the excavation, etc.). The
one-call center sends the ticket to one or more underground
facility owners 140 and/or one or more locate service providers 130
(who may be acting as contracted agents of the facility owners) so
that they can conduct a locate and marking operation to verify a
presence or absence of the underground facilities in the dig area.
For example, in some instances, a given underground facility owner
140 may operate its own fleet of locate technicians (e.g., locate
technician 145), in which case the one-call center 120 may send the
ticket to the underground facility owner 140. In other instances, a
given facility owner may contract with a locate service provider to
receive locate request tickets and perform a locate and marking
operation in response to received tickets on their behalf.
[0012] More specifically, upon receiving the locate request, a
locate service provider or a facility owner (hereafter referred to
as a "ticket recipient") may dispatch a locate technician to the
work site of planned excavation to determine a presence or absence
of one or more underground facilities in the dig area to be
excavated or otherwise disturbed. A first step for the locate
technician includes utilizing an underground facility "locate
device," which is an instrument for detecting facilities that are
concealed in some manner, such as cables and pipes that are located
underground, to verify the presence or absence of underground
facilities indicated in the locate request ticket as potentially
present in the dig area (e.g., via the facility owner member codes
listed in the ticket). An underground facility locate device is
used to detect electromagnetic fields that are generated by a
"test" signal provided along a length of a target facility to be
identified. Locate devices typically include both a signal
transmitter to provide the test signal (e.g., which is applied by
the locate technician to a tracer wire disposed along a length of a
facility), and a signal receiver which is generally a hand-held
apparatus carried by the locate technician as the technician walks
around the dig area to search for underground facilities. The
signal receiver indicates a presence of a facility when it detects
electromagnetic fields arising from the test signal. Conversely,
the absence of a signal detected by the receiver of the locate
device generally indicates the absence of the target facility.
[0013] Subsequently, the locate technician then generally marks the
presence (and in some cases the absence) of a given underground
facility in the dig area based on the various signals detected (or
not detected) using the locate device. For this purpose, the locate
technician conventionally utilizes a "marking device" to dispense a
marking material on, for example, the surface of the ground along a
detected underground facility. Marking material may be any
material, substance, compound, and/or element, used or which may be
used separately or in combination to mark, signify, and/or
indicate. Examples of marking materials may include, but are not
limited to, paint, chalk, dye, and/or iron. Marking devices, such
as paint marking wands and/or paint marking wheels, provide a
convenient method of dispensing marking materials onto surfaces,
such as onto the surface of the ground.
[0014] In some environments, arrows, flags, darts, or other types
of physical marks may be used to mark the presence or absence of an
underground facility in a dig area, in addition to or as an
alternative to a material applied to the ground (such as paint,
chalk, dye) along the path of a detected utility. The marks
resulting from any of a wide variety of materials and/or objects
used to indicate a presence or absence of underground facilities
generally are referred to as "locate marks." Often, different color
materials and/or physical objects may be used for locate marks,
wherein different colors correspond to different utility types. For
example, the American Public Works Association (APWA) has
established a standardized color-coding system for utility
identification for use by public agencies, utilities, contractors
and various groups involved in ground excavation (e.g.,
red=electric power lines and cables; blue=potable water;
orange=telecommunication lines; yellow=gas, oil, steam). In some
cases, the technician also may provide one or more marks to
indicate that no facility was found in the dig area (sometimes
referred to as a "clear").
[0015] As mentioned above, the foregoing activity of identifying
and marking a presence or absence of one or more underground
facilities generally is referred to for completeness as a "locate
and marking operation." However, in light of common parlance
adopted in the construction industry, and/or for the sake of
brevity, one or both of the respective locate and marking functions
may be referred to in some instances simply as a "locate operation"
or a "locate" (i.e., without making any specific reference to the
marking function). Accordingly, it should be appreciated that any
reference in the relevant arts to the task of a locate technician
simply as a "locate operation" or a "locate" does not necessarily
exclude the marking portion of the overall process.
[0016] Inaccurate locating and/or marking of underground facilities
can result in physical damage to the facilities, property damage,
and/or personal injury during the excavation process that, in turn,
can expose a facility owner or contractor to significant legal
liability. When underground facilities are damaged and/or when
property damage or personal injury results from damaging an
underground facility during an excavation, the excavator may assert
that the facility was not accurately located and/or marked by a
locate technician, while the locate contractor who dispatched the
technician may in turn assert that the facility was properly
located and marked. Proving whether the underground facility was
properly located and marked can be difficult after the excavation,
because in many cases the physical locate marks (e.g., the marking
material or other physical marks used to mark the facility on the
surface of the dig area) will have been disturbed or destroyed
during the excavation process.
SUMMARY
[0017] As discussed above, in various field service operations, a
number of field technicians typically are dispatched to perform
field operations at any given time, and over any given time period
each technician may be assigned numerous work orders, or "tickets"
specifying aspects of the field operations to be performed. The
volume of tickets per technician may be particularly high in the
construction industry, especially in connection with locate and
marking operations. The inventors have recognized and appreciated
that implementing and performing meaningful oversight and quality
control activities in a timely fashion for several field
technicians each performing several field operations in a given
time period may present challenges, and that failure to perform
meaningful oversight and quality control activities may adversely
affect customer satisfaction.
[0018] Additionally, the inventors have appreciated that the time,
effort, and cost that is associated with re-performing work in the
field, or with correcting and/or improving poorly performed field
calls, may be unacceptable. Consequently, the inventors have
realized that a need exists for methods of providing oversight and
quality control in field service operations in order to improve
customer satisfaction, to identify and reduce the number of poorly
performed tickets, and to improve visibility into distributed
workforce operations.
[0019] In view of the foregoing, various inventive embodiments
disclosed herein relate generally to methods, apparatus and systems
for computer-aided determination of quality assessment for locate
and marking operations. In some embodiments, a quality assessment
decision is solely under the discretion of a human reviewer, albeit
facilitated in some respects by computer-aided display of
information, and electronic record keeping and communication
functions associated with the quality assessment result(s). In
other embodiments, information related to a locate and marking
operation is electronically analyzed such that a quality assessment
is not based solely on human discretion, but rather based at least
in part on some predetermined criteria and/or metrics that
facilitate an automated determination of quality assessment.
[0020] More specifically, in some embodiments the methods,
apparatus and systems described herein enable human approvers
and/or managers to review and assess the quality of locate
operations, in which a quality assessment decision is solely under
their discretion. Approvers and/or managers may employ
computer-aided techniques (e.g., computer-aided display of
information, and electronic archiving of information, communication
of information, etc.) in connection with the quality assessment. In
other embodiments, methods, apparatus and systems according to the
present disclosure relate to at least partially automating
oversight and quality assessment in underground facility locate
applications and/or other field service operations. For example, in
some embodiments, an automated quality assessment system may
receive information related to a locate and marking operation from
one or more sources of electronic data, analyze the contents of the
received electronic data, and automatically assess the quality of
the operation based at least in part on the analysis. In other
embodiments, automated analysis of at least some of the received
electronic data relating to the locate and marking operation
facilitates further analysis and/or quality assessment by a human,
in which the quality assessment is not based solely on the
discretion of the human, but is significantly informed in some
manner by automated analysis of data.
[0021] In sum, one embodiment of the present invention is directed
to a method for evaluating, in a computer comprising at least one
hardware processor, at least one tangible storage medium, and at
least one input/output (I/O) interface, a quality of a locate
operation to identify a presence or an absence of at least one
underground facility at a work site pursuant to an instruction to a
field-service technician. The method comprises: A) receiving, via
the at least one I/O interface, first information describing at
least one act of the field-service technician following issuance of
the instruction to the field-service technician; B) electronically
analyzing the first information; C) automatically generating, based
on B), at least one indication of a quality assessment of the
locate operation; and D) electronically storing on the at least one
tangible storage medium, and/or electronically transmitting via the
at least one I/O interface, the at least one indication of the
quality assessment so as to provide an electronic record of the
quality assessment.
[0022] According to another aspect of the present disclosure, an
apparatus for facilitating the evaluation of a quality of a locate
operation to identify a presence or an absence of at least one
underground facility at a work site pursuant to an instruction to a
field-service technician is presented. The apparatus comprises: at
least one input/output interface; at least one tangible storage
medium to store processor-executable instructions; and a processor
coupled to the at least one input/output interface and the at least
one tangible storage medium, wherein upon execution of the
processor-executable instructions by the processor, the processor:
A) controls the at least one I/O interface so as to receive first
information describing at least one act of the field-service
technician following issuance of the instruction to the
field-service technician; B) electronically analyzes the first
information; C) automatically generates, based on B), at least one
indication of a quality assessment of the locate operation; and D)
controls the at least one tangible storage medium so as to
electronically store, and/or controls the at least one I/O
interface so as to electronically transmit, the at least one
indication of the quality assessment so as to provide an electronic
record of the quality assessment.
[0023] According to a further aspect of the present disclosure, at
least one computer-readable storage medium encoded with
instructions that, when executed by a processor in a computer
comprising at least one input/output (I/O) interface, perform a
method for evaluating a quality of a locate operation to identify a
presence or an absence of at least one underground facility within
a work site pursuant to an instruction to a field-service
technician is presented. The method comprises: A) receiving, via
the at least one I/O interface, first information describing at
least one act of the field-service technician following issuance of
the ticket to the field-service technician; B) electronically
analyzing the first information; C) automatically generating, based
on B), at least one indication of a quality assessment of the
locate operation; and D) electronically storing on the at least one
computer-readable storage medium, and/or electronically
transmitting via the at least one I/O interface, the at least one
indication of the quality assessment so as to provide an electronic
record of the quality assessment.
[0024] According to another aspect of the presented disclosure, a
method is presented for evaluating, in a computer comprising at
least one hardware processor, at least one tangible storage medium,
and at least one input/output (I/O) interface, a quality of a
locate operation to identify a presence or an absence of at least
one underground facility at a work site pursuant to an instruction
to a field-service technician. The method comprises: A) receiving,
via the at least one I/O interface, first geographic information
indicating a first location of the field-service technician
following issuance of the instruction to the field-service
technician; B) receiving, via the at least one I/O interface,
second geographic information indicating a second location at which
the locate operation was requested to be performed; C) determining
a distance between the first location and the second location; D)
determining whether the distance is within a predefined range; E)
if it is determined that the distance is within or equal to the
predefined range, generating at least one indication so as to
indicate that the locate operation is approved; and F) if it is
determined that the distance is not within the predefined range,
generating at least one indication so as to indicate that the
locate operation is unsatisfactory.
[0025] According to a further aspect of the present disclosure, an
apparatus for facilitating an evaluation of a quality of a locate
operation to identify a presence or an absence of at least one
underground facility at the work site pursuant to an instruction to
a field-service technician is presented. The apparatus comprises:
at least one input/output interface; at least one tangible storage
medium to store processor-executable instructions; and a processor
coupled to the at least one input/output interface and the at least
one tangible storage medium, wherein upon execution of the
processor-executable instructions by the processor, the processor:
A) controls the at least one I/O interface so as to receive first
geographic information indicating a first location of the
field-service technician following issuance of the instruction to
the field-service technician; B) controls the at least one I/O
interface so as to receive second geographic information indicating
a second location at which the locate operation was requested to be
performed; C) determines a distance between the first location and
the second location; D) determines whether the distance is within a
predefined range; E) if it is determined that the distance is
within or equal to the predefined range, generates at least one
indication so as to indicate that the locate operation is approved;
and F) if it is determined that the distance is not within the
predefined range, generates at least one indication so as to
indicate that the locate operation is unsatisfactory.
[0026] According to another aspect of the present disclosure, at
least one computer-readable storage medium encoded with
instructions that, when executed by a processor in a computer
comprising at least one input/output (I/O) interface, perform a
method for evaluating a quality of a locate operation to identify a
presence or an absence of at least one underground facility at a
work site pursuant to an instruction to a field-service technician
is presented. The method comprises: A) receiving, via the at least
one I/O interface, first geographic information indicating a first
location of the field-service technician following issuance of the
instruction to the field-service technician; B) receiving, via the
at least one I/O interface, second geographic information
indicating a second location at which the locate operation was
requested to be performed; C) determining a distance between the
first location and the second location; D) determining whether the
distance is within a predefined range; E) if it is determined that
the distance is within or equal to the predefined range, generating
at least one indication so as to indicate that the locate operation
is approved; and F) if it is determined that the distance is not
within the predefined range, generating at least one indication so
as to indicate that the locate operation is unsatisfactory.
[0027] According to a further aspect of the present disclosure, a
method is presented for evaluating, in a computer comprising at
least one hardware processor, at least one tangible storage medium,
and at least one input/output (I/O) interface, a quality of a
locate operation performed by a field-service technician at a work
site to detect a presence or an absence of at least one underground
facility. The method comprises: A) receiving, via the at least one
I/O interface, first information describing at least some aspects
of the locate operation as performed by the field-service
technician at the work site, wherein the first information is
generated by equipment used by the field-service technician to
perform the locate operation; B) providing a plurality of quality
assessment criteria; C) for each of the plurality of quality
assessment criteria, providing at least two scoring categories,
each scoring category associated with a scoring value or grade; D)
for each scoring category, providing an expected data value or
range of expected data values; E) determining, for each of the
plurality of quality assessment criteria, into which of the at
least two scoring categories the locate operation falls by
comparing the first information to the expected data value or range
of expected data values for at least one of the at least two
scoring categories; F) for each of the plurality of quality
assessment criteria, assigning to the locate operation the scoring
value or grade associated with the scoring category into which the
locate operation falls; G) combining the scoring value or grades
for all of the quality assessment criteria to generate at least one
indication of the quality assessment; and H) electronically storing
on the at least one tangible storage medium, and/or electronically
transmitting via the at least one I/O interface, the at least one
indication of the quality assessment so as to provide an electronic
record of the quality assessment.
[0028] According to another aspect of the present disclosure, an
apparatus for facilitating the evaluation of a quality of a locate
operation performed by a field-service technician at a work site to
identify a presence or an absence of at least one underground
facility within the work site is presented. The apparatus
comprises: at least one input/output interface; at least one
tangible storage medium to store processor-executable instructions;
and a processor coupled to the at least one input/output interface
and the at least one tangible storage medium, wherein upon
execution of the processor-executable instructions by the
processor, the processor: A) receives, via the at least one I/O
interface, first information describing at least some aspects of
the locate operation as performed by the field-service technician
at the work site, wherein the first information is generated by
equipment used by the field-service technician to perform the
locate operation; B) provides a plurality of quality assessment
criteria; C) for each of the plurality of quality assessment
criteria, provides at least two scoring categories, each scoring
category associated with a scoring value or grade; D) for each
scoring category, provides an expected data value or range of
expected data values; E) determines, for each of the plurality of
quality assessment criteria, into which of the at least two scoring
categories the locate operation falls by comparing the first
information to the expected data value or range of expected data
values for at least one of the at least two scoring categories; F)
for each of the plurality of quality assessment criteria, assigns
to the locate operation the scoring value or grade associated with
the scoring category into which the locate operation falls; G)
combines the scoring value or grades for all of the quality
assessment criteria to generate at least one indication of the
quality assessment; and H) electronically stores on the at least
one tangible storage medium, and/or electronically transmits via
the at least one I/O interface, the at least one indication of the
quality assessment so as to provide an electronic record of the
quality assessment.
[0029] According to another aspect of the present disclosure, at
least one computer-readable storage medium encoded with
instructions that, when executed by a processor in a computer
comprising at least one input/output (I/O) interface, perform a
method for evaluating a quality of a locate operation performed by
a field-service technician at a work site to identify a presence or
an absence of at least one underground facility within the work
site is presented. The method comprises: A) receiving, via the at
least one I/O interface, first information describing at least some
aspects of the locate operation as performed by the field-service
technician at the work site, wherein the first information is
generated by equipment used by the field-service technician to
perform the locate operation; B) providing a plurality of quality
assessment criteria; C) for each of the plurality of quality
assessment criteria, providing at least two scoring categories,
each scoring category associated with a scoring value or grade; D)
for each scoring category, providing an expected data value or
range of expected data values; E) determining, for each of the
plurality of quality assessment criteria, into which of the at
least two scoring categories the locate operation falls by
comparing the first information to the expected data value or range
of expected data values for at least one of the at least two
scoring categories; F) for each of the plurality of quality
assessment criteria, assigning to the locate operation the scoring
value or grade associated with the scoring category into which the
locate operation falls; G) combining the scoring value or grades
for all of the quality assessment criteria to generate at least one
indication of the quality assessment; and H) electronically storing
on the at least one computer-readable storage medium, and/or
electronically transmitting via the at least one I/O interface, the
at least one indication of the quality assessment so as to provide
an electronic record of the quality assessment.
[0030] According to a further aspect of the present disclosure a
method is presented for evaluating, in a computer comprising at
least one hardware processor, at least one tangible storage medium,
and at least one input/output (I/O) interface, a quality of a
locate operation performed by a field-service technician at a work
site to detect a presence or an absence of at least one underground
facility. The method comprising: A) receiving, via the at least one
I/O interface, first information describing at least some aspects
of the locate operation as performed by the field-service
technician at the work site and second information relating to a
description of the locate operation to be performed; B) selecting a
plurality of quality assessment criteria based at least in part on
the first information and/or the second information; C) for each of
the plurality of quality assessment criteria, providing at least
two scoring categories, each scoring category associated with a
scoring value or grade; D) for each scoring category, generating an
expected data value or range of expected data values based, at
least in part, on the first information and/or second information;
E) selecting, based, at least in part, on the first information
and/or the second information, a weighting factor for each of the
plurality of quality assessment criteria, the weighting factor for
each quality assessment criterion indicating the relative
importance of the quality assessment criterion to each of the other
quality assessment criteria; F) determining, for each of the
plurality of quality assessment criteria, into which of the at
least two scoring categories the locate operation falls by
comparing the first information to the expected data value or range
of expected data values for at least one of the at least two
scoring categories; G) for each of the plurality of quality
assessment criteria, assigning to the locate operation the scoring
value or grade associated with the scoring category into which the
locate operation falls and weighting the scoring value or grade
using the weighting factor for the assessment criterion; H)
combining the weighted scoring value or grades for all of the
quality assessment criteria to generate at least one indication of
the quality assessment; and I) electronically storing on the at
least one tangible storage medium, and/or electronically
transmitting via the at least one I/O interface, the at least one
indication of the quality assessment so as to provide an electronic
record of the quality assessment.
[0031] According to another aspect of the present disclosure, an
apparatus for facilitating the evaluation of a quality of a locate
operation performed by a field-service technician at a work site to
identify a presence or an absence of at least one underground
facility within the work site is provided. The apparatus comprises:
at least one input/output interface; at least one tangible storage
medium to store processor-executable instructions; and a processor
coupled to the at least one input/output interface and the at least
one tangible storage medium, wherein upon execution of the
processor-executable instructions by the processor, the processor:
A) receives, via the at least one I/O interface, first information
describing at least some aspects of the locate operation as
performed by the field-service technician at the work site and
second information relating to a description of the locate
operation to be performed; B) selects a plurality of quality
assessment criteria based at least in part on the first information
and/or the second information; C) for each of the plurality of
quality assessment criteria, provides at least two scoring
categories, each scoring category associated with a scoring value
or grade; D) for each scoring category, generates an expected data
value or range of expected data values based, at least in part, on
the first information and/or second information; E) selects, based,
at least in part, on the first information and/or the second
information, a weighting factor for each of the plurality of
quality assessment criteria, the weighting factor for each quality
assessment criterion indicating the relative importance of the
quality assessment criterion to each of the other quality
assessment criteria; F) determines, for each of the plurality of
quality assessment criteria, into which of the at least two scoring
categories the locate operation falls by comparing the first
information to the expected data value or range of expected data
values for at least one of the at least two scoring categories; G)
for each of the plurality of quality assessment criteria, assigns
to the locate operation the scoring value or grade associated with
the scoring category into which the locate operation falls and
weights the scoring value or grade using the weighting factor for
the assessment criterion; H) combines the weighted scoring value or
grades for all of the quality assessment criteria to generate at
least one indication of the quality assessment; and I)
electronically stores on the at least one tangible storage medium,
and/or electronically transmits via the at least one I/O interface,
the at least one indication of the quality assessment so as to
provide an electronic record of the quality assessment.
[0032] According to a further aspect of the present disclosure, at
least one computer-readable storage medium encoded with
instructions that, when executed by a processor in a computer
comprising at least one input/output (I/O) interface, perform a
method for evaluating a quality of a locate operation performed by
a field-service technician at a work site to identify a presence or
an absence of at least one underground facility within the work
site is presented. The method comprises: A) receiving, via the at
least one I/O interface, first information describing at least some
aspects of the locate operation as performed by the field-service
technician at the work site and second information relating to a
description of the locate operation to be performed; B) selecting a
plurality of quality assessment criteria based at least in part on
the first information and/or the second information; C) for each of
the plurality of quality assessment criteria, providing at least
two scoring categories, each scoring category associated with a
scoring value or grade; D) for each scoring category, generating an
expected data value or range of expected data values based, at
least in part, on the first information and/or second information;
E) selecting, based, at least in part, on the first information
and/or the second information, a weighting factor for each of the
plurality of quality assessment criteria, the weighting factor for
each quality assessment criterion indicating the relative
importance of the quality assessment criterion to each of the other
quality assessment criteria; F) determining, for each of the
plurality of quality assessment criteria, into which of the at
least two scoring categories the locate operation falls by
comparing the first information to the expected data value or range
of expected data values for at least one of the at least two
scoring categories; G) for each of the plurality of quality
assessment criteria, assigning to the locate operation the scoring
value or grade associated with the scoring category into which the
locate operation falls and weighting the scoring value or grade
using the weighting factor for the assessment criterion; H)
combining the weighted scoring value or grades for all of the
quality assessment criteria to generate at least one indication of
the quality assessment; and I) electronically storing on the at
least one computer-readable storage medium, and/or electronically
transmitting via the at least one I/O interface, the at least one
indication of the quality assessment so as to provide an electronic
record of the quality assessment.
[0033] For purposes of the present disclosure, the term "dig area"
refers to a specified area of a work site within in which there is
a plan to disturb the ground (e.g., excavate, dig holes and/or
trenches, bore, etc.), and beyond which there is no plan to
excavate in the immediate surroundings. Thus, the metes and bounds
of a dig area are intended to provide specificity as to where some
disturbance to the ground is planned at a given work site. It
should be appreciated that a given work site may include multiple
dig areas.
[0034] The term "facility" refers to one or more lines, cables,
fibers, conduits, transmitters, receivers, or other physical
objects or structures capable of or used for carrying,
transmitting, receiving, storing, and providing utilities, energy,
data, substances, and/or services, and/or any combination thereof.
The term "underground facility" means any facility beneath the
surface of the ground. Examples of facilities include, but are not
limited to, oil, gas, water, sewer, power, telephone, data
transmission, cable television (TV), and/or internet services.
[0035] The term "locate device" refers to any apparatus and/or
device for detecting and/or inferring the presence or absence of
any facility, including without limitation, any underground
facility.
[0036] The term "marking device" refers to any apparatus,
mechanism, or other device that employs a marking dispenser for
causing a marking material and/or marking object to be dispensed,
or any apparatus, mechanism, or other device for electronically
indicating (e.g., logging in memory) a location, such as a location
of an underground facility. Additionally, the term "marking
dispenser" refers to any apparatus, mechanism, or other device for
dispensing and/or otherwise using, separately or in combination, a
marking material and/or a marking object. An example of a marking
dispenser may include, but is not limited to, a pressurized can of
marking paint. The term "marking material" means any material,
substance, compound, and/or element, used or which may be used
separately or in combination to mark, signify, and/or indicate.
Examples of marking materials may include, but are not limited to,
paint, chalk, dye, and/or iron. The term "marking object" means any
object and/or objects used or which may be used separately or in
combination to mark, signify, and/or indicate. Examples of marking
objects may include, but are not limited to, a flag, a dart, and
arrow, and/or an RFID marking ball. It is contemplated that marking
material may include marking objects. It is further contemplated
that the terms "marking materials" or "marking objects" may be used
interchangeably in accordance with the present disclosure.
[0037] The term "locate mark" means any mark, sign, and/or object
employed to indicate the presence or absence of any underground
facility. Examples of locate marks may include, but are not limited
to, marks made with marking materials, marking objects, global
positioning or other information, and/or any other means. Locate
marks may be represented in any form including, without limitation,
physical, visible, electronic, and/or any combination thereof.
[0038] The term "actuation" refers to starting or causing any
device, program, system, and/or any combination thereof to work,
operate, and/or function in response to some type of signal or
stimulus. Examples of actuation signals or stimuli may include, but
are not limited to, any local or remote, physical, audible,
inaudible, visual, non-visual, electronic, mechanical,
electromechanical, biomechanical, biosensing or other signal,
instruction, or event. The term "actuator" refers to any method or
device used to generate one or more signals or stimuli to cause or
causing actuation. Examples of an actuator may include, but are not
limited to, any form or combination of a trigger, lever, switch,
program, processor, screen, microphone for capturing audible
commands, and/or other device or method. An actuator may also
include, but is not limited to, a device, software, or program that
responds to any movement and/or condition of a user, such as, but
not limited to, eye movement, brain activity, heart rate, other
data, and/or the like, and generates one or more signals or stimuli
in response thereto. In the case of a marking device or other
marking mechanism (e.g., to physically or electronically mark a
facility or other feature), actuation may cause marking material to
be dispensed, geographic location data to be logged, and/or type
data (e.g., facility type or landmark type) to be logged (e.g., in
an electronic file stored in memory). In the case of a locate
device or other locate mechanism (e.g., to physically locate a
facility or other feature), actuation may cause a detected signal
strength, signal frequency, and/or depth to be logged (e.g., in an
electronic file stored in memory).
[0039] The terms "locate and marking operation," "locate
operation," and "locate" are used interchangeably and refer to any
activity to detect, infer, and/or mark the presence or absence of
an underground facility. In some instances, the term "marking
operation" is used to more specifically refer to that portion of a
locate operation in which a marking material and/or one or more
marking objects is/are employed to mark a presence or an absence of
one or more underground facilities. The term "locate technician"
refers to an individual performing a locate operation. A locate
operation often is specified in connection with a dig area, at
least a portion of which may be excavated or otherwise disturbed
during excavation activities.
[0040] The term "user" refers to an individual utilizing a locate
device and/or a marking device and may include, but is not limited
to, land surveyors, locate technicians, and support personnel.
[0041] The terms "locate request" and "excavation notice" are used
interchangeably to refer to any communication to request a locate
and marking operation. The term "locate request ticket" (or simply
"ticket") refers to any communication or instruction to perform a
locate operation. A ticket might specify, for example, the address
or description of a dig area to be marked, the day and/or time that
the dig area is to be marked, and/or whether the user is to mark
the excavation area for certain gas, water, sewer, power,
telephone, cable television, and/or some other underground
facility. The term "historical ticket" refers to past tickets that
have been completed.
[0042] It should be appreciated that all combinations of the
foregoing concepts and additional concepts discussed in greater
detail below (provided such concepts are not mutually inconsistent)
are contemplated as being part of the inventive subject matter
disclosed herein. In particular, all combinations of claimed
subject matter appearing at the end of this disclosure are
contemplated as being part of the inventive subject matter
disclosed herein. It should also be appreciated that terminology
explicitly employed herein that also may appear in any disclosure
incorporated by reference should be accorded a meaning most
consistent with the particular concepts disclosed herein.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0043] FIG. 1 illustrates a functional block diagram of an example
of a quality assessment system for performing oversight and quality
control, in accordance with the present disclosure;
[0044] FIG. 2 illustrates a flow diagram of an example of a method
of performing oversight and quality control using the quality
assessment system, in accordance with the present disclosure;
[0045] FIG. 3 illustrates an example of an approver inbox GUI for
use in the quality assessment system, in accordance with the
present disclosure;
[0046] FIG. 4 illustrates an example of an approver image viewer
GUI for use in the quality assessment system, in accordance with
the present disclosure;
[0047] FIG. 5 illustrates an example of a QC referral popup window
for use in the quality assessment system, in accordance with the
present disclosure;
[0048] FIG. 6 illustrates an example of a QC approver inbox GUI for
use in the quality assessment system, in accordance with the
present disclosure;
[0049] FIG. 7 illustrates an example of a QC approver image viewer
GUI for use in the quality assessment system, in accordance with
the present disclosure;
[0050] FIG. 8 illustrates an example of a reject QC popup window
for use in the quality assessment system, in accordance with the
present disclosure;
[0051] FIG. 9 illustrates an example of a coaching popup window for
use in the quality assessment system, in accordance with the
present disclosure;
[0052] FIG. 10 illustrates another example of the approver image
viewer GUI for use in the quality assessment system, in accordance
with the present disclosure;
[0053] FIG. 11 illustrates an example of a ticket summary GUI for
use in the quality assessment system, in accordance with the
present disclosure;
[0054] FIG. 12 illustrates a block diagram of an automated quality
assessment system for assessing the quality of a field service
operation, in accordance with the present disclosure;
[0055] FIG. 13 illustrates a flow diagram of an example of a
process for automatically assessing the quality of a field service
operation, in accordance with the present disclosure;
[0056] FIG. 14 illustrates a functional block diagram of an example
of an automated quality assessment application for automatically
performing quality control in underground facility locate
applications, in accordance with the present disclosure;
[0057] FIG. 15 illustrates a flow diagram of an example of a method
of automatically performing quality control in underground facility
locate applications using the automated quality assessment system,
in accordance with the present disclosure;
[0058] FIG. 16 illustrates a flow diagram of an illustrative
process for automatically assessing the quality of a field service
operation by determining whether the field service operation was
performed at the requested work site, in accordance with the
present disclosure;
[0059] FIG. 17 illustrates an example of a graphical user interface
for viewing the outcome of a quality assessment generated by an
automated quality assessment application, in accordance with the
present disclosure;
[0060] FIG. 18 illustrates a flow diagram of an illustrative
process for determining a locate operations quality assessment
score using a locate operations scoring system, in accordance with
the present disclosure;
[0061] FIG. 19 illustrates a functional block diagram of an example
of an automated quality assessment system that includes the
automated quality assessment application for automatically
performing quality control in underground facility locate
applications, in accordance with the present disclosure; and
[0062] FIG. 20 illustrates a flow diagram of an example of a method
of using the automated quality assessment system that includes the
automated quality assessment application, in accordance with the
present disclosure.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0063] Various inventive embodiments disclosed herein relate to
methods, apparatus and systems for performing oversight and quality
control in field service operations, such as locate and marking
operations. In various aspects, approvers and/or managers may
review the quality of these locate operations in real time and/or
within a certain amount of time (e.g., within one day) of
completion of the operation. The review of a locate and marking
operation by a human (e.g., an approver or manager) and the
determination of a quality assessment for the operation based
solely on the discretion of the human is referred to herein as a
"manual quality assessment."
[0064] Some embodiments described herein are related to methods,
apparatus and systems for at least partially automating oversight
and quality assessment in underground facility locate operations
and/or other field service operations. For example, in some
embodiments, an automated quality assessment system may receive
information related to a locate and marking operation from one or
more sources of electronic data, analyze the contents of the
received electronic data, and automatically assess the quality of
the operation based at least in part on the analysis. In other
embodiments, automated analysis of at least some of the received
electronic data relating to the locate and marking operation
facilitates further analysis and/or quality assessment by a human,
in which the quality assessment is not based solely on the
discretion of the human, but is significantly informed in some
manner by automated analysis of data. As contrasted with the
above-discussed "manual quality assessment" of a locate operation
by a human, this type of assessment (e.g., based on some degree of
electronic analysis of data relating to a locate and marking
operation) is referred to herein as "automated quality
assessment."
[0065] Embodiments relating to manual quality assessment and
embodiments relating to automated quality assessment are each
described below. It should be appreciated, however, that aspects of
manual quality assessment may be combined with aspects of automated
quality assessment, such that some aspects of a locate and marking
operation (or other field service operation) are reviewed/assessed
manually and others are reviewed/assessed automatically.
[0066] I. Manual Quality Assessment
[0067] Some embodiments relate to methods and systems for
performing oversight and quality control in field service
operations, such as locate operations, in which a quality
assessment decision is solely under the discretion of a human
reviewer, albeit facilitated in some respects by computer-aided
display of information and electronic record keeping and
communication functions associated with the quality assessment
result(s). The system and method of these embodiments enable
approvers and/or managers to review the quality of locate
operations in real time and/or within a certain amount of time
(e.g., within one day) of the completion of the locate
operation.
[0068] In some embodiments, a quality assessment software
application (e.g., a set of processor executable instructions) may,
when executed by a processor, provide a graphical interface for
viewing information associated with the performance of a field
service operation (e.g., a locate operation or other type of field
service operation). Any suitable information associated with the
performance of the field service operation may be provided via the
graphical interface. Based on a review of this information, an
approver and/or manager may provide an indication of the quality of
the operation.
[0069] The approver and/or manager may indicate the quality of the
operation in any suitable way, as the invention is not limited in
this respect. For example, in some embodiments, the approver and/or
manager may indicate an assessment of the quality of the operation
by categorizing the operation into one of a plurality of predefined
quality categories. Any set of categories may be used, as the
invention is not limited in this respect. For example, in some
embodiments, an operation may be categorized as either: (1)
approved, no further action needed; (2) satisfactory, but the
quality of the operation warrants coaching or training of the
technician that performed it; or (3) unsatisfactory, the ticket
needs quality control (QC) action.
[0070] In some embodiments, the quality assessment software
application may maintain a numerical count of the number of tickets
that have been categorized into each quality category. For example,
the quality assessment software application may track the number of
total tickets that have been reviewed, and may also track the
number that have been categorized as approved tickets, the number
that have been categorized as satisfactory, but warranting training
of the technician, and the number that have been categorized as
unsatisfactory.
[0071] In some embodiments, when a ticket is categorized by an
approver and/or manager as unsatisfactory, an action to rectify the
operation may be taken. For example, when a ticket is categorized
as unsatisfactory, a technician may be dispatched to re-perform the
operation.
[0072] FIG. 1 is a functional block diagram of a ticket approval
system 100 for performing oversight and quality control in locate
operations, in accordance with some embodiments. System 100 may
include a work management server 112, which is maintained and
operated by a locate service provider 110, and which may be any
local or centralized hardware computing device that includes a
hardware processing unit 154, a memory 152, and a communication
interface 154. In some embodiments, work management server 112 may
be configured as a networked application and/or web server, and may
execute and host a software application program, such as a quality
assessment application 130.
[0073] Users that may access system 100 may include, but are not
limited to, managers 114, QC approvers 116, approvers 118, QC
technicians 120, and locate technicians 122 of locate service
provider 110.
[0074] Managers 114 may be high-level managers of locate service
provider 110, including directors and/or company executives of
locate service provider 110 that oversee QC approvers 116,
approvers 118, QC technicians 120 and locate technicians 122.
Managers 114 may interact with the quality assessment application
130 via a device 156A (having at least one user input device 158A)
coupled to the work management server 112. In some embodiments,
device 156A that is coupled to the work management server 112 may
be a computer, including a display device and at least one user
input device 158A (e.g., a keyboard, a mouse, a touch screen,
and/or any other suitable input device) that executes a client
application program for interfacing with quality assessment
application 130. The client application program may be any suitable
type of application program, such as, for example a web browser, a
custom-coded client application program, or any other type of
client application program.
[0075] QC approvers 116 may be the individuals that are responsible
for handling QC referrals (e.g., tickets categorized as
unsatisfactory) and may be, for example, supervisors of QC
technicians 120. Like managers 114, QC approvers 116 may interact
with the quality assessment application 130 via a device 156B
(having at least one input device 158B) coupled to the work
management server 112, which may be a computer, including a display
device and at least one user input device 158B (e.g., a keyboard, a
mouse, a touch screen, and/or any other suitable input device) that
executes a client application program for interfacing with quality
assessment application 130. The client application program may be
any suitable type of application program, such as, for example a
web browser, a custom-coded client application program, or any
other type of client application program.
[0076] QC technicians 120 may be technicians that are dispatched
into the field for performing QC activities. For example, QC
technicians may be technicians that are dispatched into the field
to re-perform or rectify a locate operation that has been indicated
by a reviewer as warranting QC action.
[0077] Approvers 118 may be, for example, supervisors (and in some
cases the direct supervisors) of locate technicians 122. Approvers
118 may interact with the quality assessment application 130 via a
device 156C (having at least one input device 158C) coupled to the
work management server 112, which may be a computer including a
display device and at least one user input device 158C (e.g., a
keyboard, a mouse, a touch screen, and/or any other suitable input
device) that executes a client application program for interfacing
with quality assessment application 130. The client application
program may be any suitable type of application program, such as,
for example a web browser, a custom-coded client application
program, or any other type of client application program.
[0078] In some embodiments, managers 114, QC approvers 116, and/or
approvers 118 may be, for example, the personnel of the customers
of locate service provider 110. For example, managers 114, QC
approvers 116, and/or approvers 118 may be service managers of the
customers of locate service provider 110 who wish to verify the
quality of the workflow of locate service provider 110. In other
embodiments, managers 114, QC approvers 116, and/or approvers 118
may be employees of the locate service provider 110. In some
situations, managers 114, QC approvers 116, approvers 118, QC
technicians 120 and other locate technicians 122 may also serve in
a QC capacity.
[0079] In some embodiments, QC technicians 120 and locate
technicians 122 may capture one or more images associated with a
locate operation using an image capture mechanism 124 and upload
these images to an image server 126. Image capture mechanism may be
any suitable image capture device, such as, for example, a consumer
or professional grade digital still or video camera, or a device
for creating and/or providing an electronic manifest of underground
facility locate marks that is described in U.S. patent application
Ser. No. 12/029,732 (the "'732 patent application"), entitled
"Electronic manifest of underground facility locate marks," that is
incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. An electronic
manifest is a collection of information in electronic form about a
completed locate operation. For example, in some embodiments, the
electronic manifest may include an aerial image or other digital
image of the area in which the locate operation was performed,
along with information added by a user (e.g., the locate technician
that performed the operation) that indicates what, if any,
underground facilities were detected during the locate operation
and where any such underground facilities were located. An example
of such a manifest is shown in the ticket manifest display field in
FIG. 4, which is described below in greater detail.
[0080] In some embodiments, image capture mechanism 124 may be used
to capture one or more images that may be used to verify certain
aspects of a locate operation. For example, image capture mechanism
124 may be used to capture one or more images that may be used to
verify the actual address at which the locate operation was
performed versus the requested address (i.e., as specified in the
original ticket). Such images may be, for example, one or more
photographs of one or more landmarks near the requested address,
such as, for example, a house at the address, a mailbox having the
address number on it, a street sign, or any other suitable
landmark. In some embodiments, image capture mechanism may be used
to capture one or more images that may be used to verify that the
requested locate operations were actually performed. Such evidence
may be, for example, one or more photographs of the marking
material that the locate technician put on the ground to mark the
location of the underground facilities.
[0081] In some embodiments, image capture mechanism may be a
digital camera equipped with integrated geographic or global
positioning system (GPS), which allows captured image data to be
stored with geo-location information that indicates the location at
which the image was captured. In such embodiments, the geo-location
data may be used to verify that the image was captured at the work
location identified on the ticket.
[0082] Information captured by image capture mechanism 124 (e.g.,
photographs and/or an electronic manifest) may be transmitted to
and stored on, for example, an image server 126. Each image from
image capture mechanisms 124 may be associated with a certain
ticket. Image server 126 is connected to the work management server
112 via a wired or wireless network 128. Network 128 is, for
example, a wide area network (WAN), a local area network (LAN), a
telephone network, such as the Public Switched Telephone Network
(PSTN) or a cellular network, an Internet connection, an Intranet
connection, one or more communication links, and/or a combination
of networks.
[0083] In some embodiments, the images captured by image capture
mechanism 124 may be transmitted directly to work management server
112 (i.e., without first being transferred to image server
126).
[0084] As noted above, work management server 112 executes a
quality assessment application 130 that is implemented via
processor-executable instructions stored in a memory of the work
management server and executed by the processing unit of work
management server. A database 132 (e.g., a database created and
maintained by any suitable database software), may store tickets
and images captured by image capture mechanism 124. The database
may also store information indicating with which ticket each image
is associated, which locate technician 122 performed the locate
operation for each ticket, and which approver 118 is responsible
for assessing the quality of the locate operation performed in
connection with each ticket.
[0085] In some embodiments, quality assessment application 130 may
be a software application program that provides a graphical
interface for performing oversight and quality control in a locate
operation. FIG. 2 shows a process for performing oversight and
quality control of a locate operation using quality assessment
application 130. Examples of screens (e.g., graphical interfaces)
that may be displayed by quality assessment application 130 (or the
client application programs that interface with quality assessment
application 130) are described with reference to FIGS. 3 through
11.
[0086] In FIG. 2, process 200 begins at act 210, where the locate
technician completes a ticket (i.e., completes the locate operation
associated with a particular ticket) and provides dig area and/or
image data to the quality assessment application (e.g., directly,
via image server 126, or in any other suitable way). For example,
locate technician 122 may be assigned a certain ticket and may be
dispatched to a specific dig area identified in the ticket to
perform a locate operation. In the process of performing the locate
operation, locate technician 122 captures dig area data and/or
image data using, for example, image capture mechanism 124. Thus,
for example, when image capture mechanism 124 comprises a digital
camera, locate technician 122 may provide a digital photograph that
shows the street number on a building, another digital photograph
of a paper manifest, and/or a digital photograph of the dig area,
showing locate marks. A paper manifest is a handwritten manifest
that is intended to serve as evidence that the locate operation was
performed. The paper manifest may include a hand-drawn sketch of
the dig area, including hand-drawn lines indicating where the
locate technician detected underground facilities.
[0087] In embodiments in which image capture mechanism 124
comprises a device for generating an electronic manifest, the
electronic manifest maybe provided to the quality assessment
application or the image server (i.e., instead of or in addition to
any of the photographs discussed above). As discussed above, the
electronic manifest may include an image of the dig area that has
locate marks electronically overlaid thereon in the area where the
locate technician detected one or more facilities. Upon completion
of the locate operation, the dig area data and/or image data from
image capture mechanism 124 may be transmitted to image server 126
or directly to work management server 112, such that the dig
area/image data is accessible to quality assessment application
130. Additionally, an association may be formed between the
uploaded dig area/image data and the ticket. This association
between the dig area/image data and the ticket is maintained
throughout process 200.
[0088] After act 210, the process continues to act 212, where an
approver accesses quality assessment application 130 and selects a
certain locate technician and ticket for quality control review.
Each approver 118 may be responsible for assessing the quality of
locate operations performed by a certain group of locate
technicians 122. This approver-specific group of locate technicians
122 may be called an approver group.
[0089] FIG. 3 illustrates an example of an approver inbox graphical
user interface (GUI) 300 suitable for use in system 100. Approver
inbox GUI 300 may be the user interface that is presented to
approver 118 upon logging into quality assessment application 130.
Approver inbox GUI 300 displays one or more locate technician
windows 310 (310a-310i), whereby each of locate technician windows
310 is associated with a certain locate technician 122 of the
approver group. A display area of approver inbox GUI 300 may
indicate the total number of new tickets, coaching referrals and QC
referrals for the approver group. For example, in FIG. 3, there are
142 new tickets to be reviewed, one ticket that has been
categorized as approved but warranting coaching or training of the
technician that performed the locate operation associated with the
ticket, and three tickets that have been categorized as
unsatisfactory and warranting QC action.
[0090] Approver 118 may select a new ticket to review by selecting
a new ticket icon in one of the locate technician windows 310. For
example, to review a ticket completed by Joseph Narissi, approver
118 may select icon 312. Approver 118 may also select tickets to
review that have been categorized as warranting quality control
action via a quality controlled ticket icon. For example, to review
tickets completed by Joseph Narissi that have been categorized as
warranting QC action, the approver may select icon 314.
[0091] Approver 118 may also select tickets to review that have
been categorized as warranting coaching via a coached ticket icon.
For example, to review tickets completed by Joseph Narissi that
have been categorized as warranting coaching, the approver may
select icon 316.
[0092] When approver 118 selects a new ticket icon in one of the
locate technician windows 310, quality assessment application 130
may read in the ticket information from tickets 134 and dig
area/image data 136 of database 132 for the tickets completed by
the selected locate technician.
[0093] After act 212, the process of FIG. 2 continues to act 214,
where an approver 118 reviews the ticket information and dig
area/image data of a selected ticket. For example, approver 118 may
review a ticket of locate technician window 310a selected at step
212.
[0094] FIG. 4 illustrates an example of an approver image viewer
GUI 400 suitable for use in quality assessment application 130.
Approver image viewer GUI 400 may include an image display area
410, multiple text display fields, such as a TICKET MANIFEST
display field, and a WORK PERFORMED display field. In the example
of FIG. 4, image display area 410 displays an electronic manifest
generated by the locate technician that illustrates where the
locate technician put marks on the ground indicating the presence
of one or more underground facilities. Other information may be
displayed, such as the ticket number, locate technician name,
ticket details, locate marks used, and a locate technician signoff
field.
[0095] Additionally, approver 118 may select a navigate back icon
412 in order to return to a previous GUI, may select an approved
icon 414 in order to categorize the ticket as satisfactory, may
select a QC icon 416 in order to categorize the ticket as
unsatisfactory and warranting QC action, and may select a coach
icon 418 in order to categorize the ticket as satisfactory, but
warranting coaching or training of the locate technician.
[0096] Approver 118 may visually inspect the information that is
displayed on approver image viewer GUI 400 and, in particular, may
compare the dig area image (e.g., the electronic manifest) in image
display area 410 with the information in the TICKET MANIFEST
display field and a WORK PERFORMED display field. For example, the
approver may verify that technician performed the locate operation,
may evaluate whether the work was performed at the correct address,
may evaluate whether a locate operation was performed for each
member code identified in the ticket, and/or may evaluate the
quality of the manifest generated by the technician.
[0097] If approver 118 determines that substantially all aspects of
the locate operation are satisfactory, approver 118 may select
approved icon 414 and process 200 may continue to act 216. For
example, if the information in the WORK PERFORMED display field and
the markings that are shown at the dig area in image display area
410 satisfactorily match the information in the TICKET MANIFEST
display field, the approver may select the approved icon 414 and
method 200 may proceed to step 216. In this case, the risk of a
locate error and damage to facilities during excavation is
diminished.
[0098] If approver 118 determines that the locate operation itself
is satisfactory, but certain aspects of the information that is
provided by locate technician 122 needs improvement, approver 118
may select coach icon 418, which generates a coaching referral, and
the process proceeds to step 218. For example, in some embodiments,
the locate operation may be deemed satisfactory when the
information in the WORK PERFORMED display field and the markings
that are shown at the dig area in image display area 410
sufficiently match the information in the TICKET MANIFEST display
field, but certain details of the markings could be improved. For
example, the electronic manifest or paper manifest may not include
sufficient reference information to be able to determine where the
locate technician put marking material on the ground.
[0099] That is, it may be desired that the electronic manifest
and/or paper manifest include sufficient information to enable a
person to determine where the locate technician put marking
material on the ground, should the marking material be removed
(e.g., if paint is washed away by rain). This may be accomplished
by including in the manifest information that identifies where the
marking material was placed relative to a fixed reference point
(e.g., fire hydrant, telephone pole, sidewalk curb, building
feature, or any other suitable reference point). These reference
points are sometimes referred to as "anchor points" or "tie down"
points. If an approver determines that the technician has included
insufficient reference information (e.g., has not included enough
reference information to be able to recreate the marks, the anchor
points used by the technician are problematic, and/or there is
another aspect of the reference information that warrants
improvement), the approver may select coaching icon 418 to generate
a coaching referral for the technician that performed the
operation, and process 200 continues to act 218.
[0100] If approver 118 determines that important aspects of the
locate operation are unsatisfactory, approver 118 may select QC
icon 416, which generates a QC referral, and process 200 proceeds
to step 224. An approver may determine that the locate operation
was performed unsatisfactorily if, for example, the technician
performed the locate operation at the wrong address, did not
generate a manifest or failed to properly document the locate
operation, or failed to perform a locate operation for all of the
facilities identified in the ticket. For example, if the TICKET
MANIFEST calls for gas, power, and water lines to be located and
marked, yet the information in the WORK PERFORMED display field and
site image in image display area 410 shows that only the gas and
power lines were marked, the approver may determine that the
operation is unsatisfactory. In this example, because the water
lines were not marked, there may be an increased risk of damage to
the water lines during excavation, and immediate corrective action
may be warranted.
[0101] In the example of FIG. 4, image display area 410 displays a
single image, which is an electronic manifest of the locate
operation. It should be appreciated that the invention is not
limited in this respect, as the GUI used by an approver to assess
the quality of a locate operation may display multiple images,
including one or more digital photographs of the site at which the
operation was performed (e.g., photographs of a nearby address sign
or street sign, photographs of the marking material placed by the
technician on the ground at the site, a photograph or scan of a
paper manifest created by the technician, and/or any other suitable
photograph that may be useful in evaluating the quality of the
locate operation) and/or the electronic manifest.
[0102] FIG. 5 illustrates an example of a QC referral popup window
500 that may be displayed when an approver selects QC icon 416. QC
referral popup window 500 shows a selection of various reasons for
which a QC referral may be generated as well as a text box for
entering notes. The approver may select the box next to the
appropriate reason for QC referral and may enter notes that more
specifically describe the reason for QC referral. In the example of
FIG. 5, QC referral popup window 500 shows that the reason for
referral is "Member underground facility not seen as noted on
manifest" and clarifying notes are shown. QC referral popup window
500 includes a submit QC referral icon 510 that may be selected to
generate the QC referral and a cancel QC referral icon 512 that may
be selected to cancel the QC referral. It should be appreciated
that FIG. 5 is illustrative of one example of a GUI that may be
used in some embodiments, and the invention is not limited to any
of the particular selections or formatting shown in FIG. 5.
[0103] As discussed above, when an approver indicates a particular
ticket as approved, the process continues to act 216, and the
quality assessment process for that ticket is completed. In some
embodiments, the dig area and/or image data that is associated with
approved tickets may be stored with the appropriate ticket(s) as a
part of an archival process. The numerical count of approved
tickets for the entire system, for each approver group of locate
technicians 122 and for individual locate technician 122, may be
updated and stored.
[0104] When an approver indicates a particular ticket as warranting
coaching of the technician, the process continues to act 218, where
the coaching referral is routed to the approver's inbox. For
example, the coaching referral that is generated at step 214 may be
maintained in the inbox of originating approver 118 for a certain
period of time, such as, for example, ten business days. This
serves as a reminder for the approver to schedule a coaching
session with the technician that performed the locate operation and
allows for coaching schedules to be developed and completed in a
timely manner.
[0105] After act 218, the process continues to act 220, where
approver 118 performs the coaching activity with locate technician
122. For example, approver 118 may step through one or more
coaching referrals in his or her inbox for targeted locate
technician 122 and may perform one or more coaching activities,
based on the contents of each coaching referral.
[0106] The process then continues to act 222, where locate
technician 122 and approver 118 sign off on the coaching activities
as acknowledgement that the coaching activity has been completed. A
positive report of completing the coaching activities may be
logged, for example, in the personnel file of locate technician
122. The one or more coaching referrals may then be removed from
the inbox of approver 118.
[0107] When an approver, at act 214, determines that a locate
operation warrants QC action and selects QC icon 416, the process
continues to act 224, where a QC referral is routed to a certain QC
approver 116 for review. For example, a QC approver 116 opens
quality assessment application 130, views his or her inbox and
selects a certain locate technician and ticket for which a QC
review has been requested.
[0108] FIG. 6 illustrates an example of a QC approver inbox GUI 600
for use in the ticket approval system of the present disclosure. QC
approver inbox GUI 600 may be the user interface that is presented
to certain QC approver 116 upon logging into quality assessment
application 130. QC approver inbox GUI 600 (610a-610c) displays one
or more locate technician windows 610, whereby each locate
technician window 610 is associated with certain locate technician
122 and QC referral. A display area of QC approver inbox GUI 600
shows the total number of QC referrals. QC approver 116 may select
any locate technician window 610, for example, to view the ticket
for that locate technician that has been categorized as warranting
QC action. For example, QC approver 116 may selects locate
technician window 610a to review a ticket for Joseph Narissi that
has been categorized as warranting QC action.
[0109] Upon such a selection, quality assessment application 130
may read in the associated ticket information and dig area/image
data from tickets 134 and dig area/image data 136 of database
132.
[0110] The process continues to act 226, where QC approver 116
determines whether to accept or reject the QC referral. For
example, QC approver 116 may review the dig area/image data of the
selected QC referral. FIG. 7 illustrates an example QC approver
image viewer GUI 700 for use in the ticket approval system of the
present disclosure.
[0111] QC approver image viewer GUI 700 may include image display
area 410, the TICKET MANIFEST display field, the WORK PERFORMED
display field, and other information, as described in approver
image viewer GUI 400 of FIG. 4. Additionally, QC approver image
viewer GUI 700 includes a navigate back icon 412, an approved icon
414, a QC icon 416 and a coach icon 418, as described in approver
image viewer GUI 400 of FIG. 4. QC approver image viewer GUI 700
may also include a text field for displaying notes that were
entered by originating approver 118 and additional selections
and/or text fields for routing the QC request to original locate
technician 122 or to certain QC technician 120.
[0112] QC approver 116 may visually inspect the information that is
displayed on QC approver image viewer GUI 700 and compares the dig
area image in image display area 410 with the information in the
TICKET MANIFEST display field and a WORK PERFORMED display field.
QC approver 116 determines whether he or she is in agreement with
originating approver 118 that the ticket warrants QC action. If QC
approver 116 determines that QC action is warranted, QC approver
116 may select icon 416, and process 200 may continue to act 228.
If QC approver 116 determines that no QC action or coaching is
warranted, QC approver 116 may select icon 412, and process 200 may
continue to act 234.
[0113] FIG. 8 illustrates an example of a reject QC popup window
800 which may be displayed if QC approver 116 selects icon 412.
Reject QC popup window 800 may include a text field for entering
the reason for rejection as well as a submit QC rejection icon 810
and a cancel QC rejection icon 812.
[0114] QC approver 116 may determine that no QC action is
warranted, but coaching of the technician is recommended. Thus, in
some embodiments, a coaching icon 418 may be provide in GUI 700.
When QC approver 116 selects icon 418, a coaching popup window may
be displayed and upon submission of the coaching referral, the
process may proceed to act 218.
[0115] FIG. 9 illustrates an example of a coaching popup window 900
that may displayed when QC approver 116 selects icon 418 in GUI
700, or when approver 118 selects icon 418 in GUI 400. Coaching
popup window 900 may include a text field for entering the reason
for coaching as well as a submit coaching request icon 910 and a
cancel coaching request icon 912.
[0116] If QC approver 116 agrees that the locate operation warrants
QC action, he or she may select QC icon 416 in GUI 700, and the
process may continue to act 228, where the ticket is routed to a QC
technician for execution (i.e., taking of corrective action). For
example, QC approver 116 may make a note of the QC action that is
needed via QC approver image viewer GUI 700. Thus, in the example
discussed above in which the water lines should have been marked,
but were not, QC approver 116 may make a note that the water lines
were not marked. QC approver 116 then routes the QC request to the
original (or an alternate) locate technician 122 or to a QC
technician 120 who, at act 230, returns to the dig area to perform
the corrective action (e.g., to mark the water lines in the example
discussed above).
[0117] The technician that performs the corrective action (i.e., a
locate technician 122 or to a QC technician 120) completes the
ticket and provides updated dig area/image data. Upon completion of
the QC operation, the dig area/image data of the image capture
mechanism 124 is transmitted to image server 126 or directly to
work management server 112, such that the updated dig area/image
data is accessible to quality assessment application 130.
[0118] The process then continues to act 232, where approver 118
that originated the QC referral opens approver inbox GUI 300 and
reviews the updated ticket via approver image viewer GUI 400. FIG.
10 illustrates another example of an approver image viewer GUI 400
that includes additional information. For example, approver 118 is
able to view additional notes that have been added along the entire
history of the ticket by, for example, QC approver 116 who
processed the QC referral and/or QC technician 120 who was assigned
to perform the QC operation. Additionally, approver 118 is able to
view the original dig area images supplied by original locate
technician 122 as well as the new dig area images supplied by QC
technician 120. The process then returns to act 212 where approver
118 may again review the updated ticket in a manner similar to that
of any other ticket.
[0119] In addition to the operations shown in FIG. 2, other
operations may occur, such as tracking the status of QC referrals,
flagging delinquent QC referrals, tracking the status of coaching
referrals, flagging delinquent coaching referrals, tracking the
total ticket numbers across the entire service provider, and
dashboard reporting. For example, FIG. 11 illustrates an example of
a ticket summary GUI 1100 that may be used in quality assessment
application 130. At any time, manager 114 may view the current
numerical count of approved tickets, coaching referrals and QC
referrals. For example, the ticket summary GUI 1100 shows a summary
of these counts, organized by approver groups.
[0120] In an alternative embodiment, an example of a real time (or
substantially real time) method of performing oversight and quality
control in locate operations using the ticket approval system of
the present disclosure may be enabled by use of, for example, email
infrastructure. In this embodiment, work management server 112 and,
in particular, quality assessment application 130 may be accessible
via an email application and there may be email communication
between entities. Upon completion of a ticket, locate technician
122 may send an email to approver 118 that includes substantially
the same content as shown in approver image viewer GUI 400. By use
of an email application, approver 118 may process the ticket much
the way that has been described in FIGS. 1 through 11, wherein the
various GUIs are viewed and processed via the email application. In
this embodiment, the workflow is being pushed from locate
technicians 122 to approvers 118, rather than being pulled by
approvers 118 from locate technicians 122. It is further
contemplated that approver 118 will provide a signature, such as,
an electronic signature or other indicator to signify completion of
the review process.
[0121] Similarly, the use of additional communication devices such
as mobile telephones, PDAs, portable computers (i.e., laptops and
tablet PCs), text messaging and the like are contemplated within
all aspects of the present disclosure. By use of one or more of the
additional communication devices, any manager/approver/QC
technician/locate technician (114, 116, 118 and 120) may process
the tickets much the way that has been described in FIGS. 1 through
11, wherein the various GUIs are viewed and processed via any of
the one or more additional communication instruments.
[0122] Further, it is contemplated that dig area and image data,
tickets and related communications according to the present
disclosure can be made through wireless interfaces including, for
example, an Intranet connection, Internet, Bluetooth.RTM.
technology, Wi-Fi, Wi-Max, IEEE 802.11 technology, radio frequency
(RF), Infrared Data Association (IrDA) compatible protocols, Local
Area Networks (LAN), Wide Area Networks (WAN), Shared Wireless
Access Protocol (SWAP), combinations thereof, and other types of
wireless networking protocols.
[0123] Additionally, the wireless interface may be capable of
capturing signals that reflect a user's intent. For example, the
wireless interface may include a microphone that can capture a
user's intent by capturing the user's audible statements or
commands. Alternatively, the wireless interface may interact with a
device that monitors a condition or biological state of the user,
such as eye movement, brain activity, heart rate, and/or other
subtle signals.
[0124] While the ticket approval system and methods of FIGS. 1
through 11 have been described in the context of underground
facility locate applications, this is only for exemplary purposes.
The ticket approval system and method according to FIGS. 1 through
11 may be applicable to any field service or distributed workforce
application.
[0125] Furthermore, while the ticket approval system and methods of
FIGS. 1 through 11 have been described in the context of oversight
and quality control of locate operations, the system and methods of
the present disclosure are not limited to locate operations
involving underground facilities only. For example, the systems and
methods described herein can be used in other industries and
practices such as, for example, in the inspection practices of the
building and construction fields.
[0126] In addition, in the examples described above, a quality
reviewer (e.g., an approver 118 or a QC approver 116) categorizes
the quality of a locate operation as either approved, satisfactory
but warranting coaching of the technician, or unsatisfactory and
warranting QC action. However, the invention is not limited in this
respect as, any suitable indication of quality may be assigned to a
locate operation. For example, in some embodiments a quality
reviewer may assign a numerical score to an operation (e.g.,
1-100), a letter grade (e.g., A, B, C, D, F), or any other
indication of quality.
[0127] II. Automated Quality Assessment
[0128] As discussed above, some embodiments described herein are
related to automated quality assessment methods, apparatus, and
systems for facilitating and/or performing quality assessments for
underground facility locate operations (or other types of field
service operations). For example, in some embodiments, information
relating to a locate and marking operation may be received from one
or more sources of electronic data associated with the locate
operation, and at least some of the contents of the received
electronic data may be analyzed electronically (e.g., according to
predetermined criteria and metrics for the criteria) so as to
facilitate or perform an automatic assessment of the quality of the
locate operation.
[0129] In some embodiments, methods, apparatus and systems
according to the present invention may automatically output one or
more of a variety of indications of the assessed quality of a
locate operation. In one aspect, the indication of the assessed
quality of a locate operation may be a categorized into one or more
of a plurality of quality categories. Any suitable number and type
of categories may be used, as the invention is not limited in this
respect. For example, in some embodiments, a locate operation may
be automatically categorized as either, (a) approved--no further
action needed; (b) satisfactory, but the locate technician needs
coaching or training; (c) unsatisfactory--the ticket needs quality
control (QC) action; or (d) real-time prompt--an aspect of the
assessment may be suitable for prompting the locate technician in
real time with respect to, for example, performing an immediate
verification and/or corrective action. In other implementations, a
score, grade, or other graduated indication (e.g., based on some
maximum range or scale) may be provided as an indication of quality
assessment in connection with a locate operation.
[0130] An aspect of the automated quality assessment methods,
apparatus, and systems of the present disclosure is that the
ability to receive information from one or more of a plurality of
electronic data sources and then automatically analyze at least
some of the data to perform a locate operation quality assessment
reduces, and may, in some embodiments, even eliminate, any reliance
on manual processes to evaluate quality assessment.
[0131] For example, in some embodiments, the automated quality
assessment system and automated quality assessment methods
described herein may be used as a "first-pass quality assessment"
of a locate operation. More specifically, the system and methods
described herein may identify locate operations that do not warrant
further manual review and indicate these locate operations as
approved and warranting no further action. In some implementations,
locate operations that are unable to be automatically cleared in a
first-pass assessment may subsequently be manually reviewed by a
quality reviewer to assess quality (e.g., using the above-described
techniques for manual review of a locate operation). In this
manner, the number of locate operations that are manually reviewed
for quality is reduced, as only the locate operations that were not
automatically approved by the automated quality assessment system
and methods are reviewed manually.
[0132] In other embodiments, the automated quality assessment
system may be used to evaluate quality and output an indication of
the quality assessment without any manual quality review or
assessment.
[0133] Another aspect of the automated quality assessment systems
and methods of the present disclosure is that these systems are
methods are readily scalable, as any number of sources of
electronic data that are associated with locate operations may be
used to provide information may be analyzed electronically and in
an automated fashion.
[0134] In some embodiments, the system and methods described herein
may use electronic data that is associated with a locate operation
to automatically assess the quality thereof in real time and/or
within a defined time period, such as, for example within one day.
In particular, some embodiments relate to an automated quality
assessment application program that enables automatically
processing the information, such as digital information and/or
digital images, that is associated with a locate operation, which
facilitates the quality assessment of the locate operation with
reduced reliance on manual interaction.
[0135] FIG. 12 is a block diagram of an automated quality
assessment system 1800. Automated quality assessment system 1800
may be, for example, a computer system having at least one hardware
processor 1803, a memory 1805 that comprises at least one tangible
storage medium (e.g., RAM, ROM, Flash memory, one or more magnetic
storage devices, one or more optical storage devices, or any other
type of tangible storage medium), and at least one communications
interface 1801. Memory 1805 may store computer-readable
instructions of an automated quality assessment application 1200,
which may be executed by processor 1803. When executed by processor
1803, automated quality assessment application 1200 may obtain
information associated with a field service operation (e.g., a
locate and marking operation) from data sources 1216 via
communication interface 1801, analyze the data to assess the
quality of the field service operation and may output (e.g., via
communication interface 1801) one or more indications of the
quality assessment of the field service operation. In some
implementations, one or more indications of the quality assessment
may be stored in the memory and/or transmitted via the
communication interface to provide an electronic record of the
quality assessment.
[0136] FIG. 13 is a flow chart of process 1900 that may be
performed by quality assessment application 1200 to automatically
assess the quality of a field service operation, such as, for
example, a locate and marking operation. Process 1900 begins at act
1901, where the automated quality assessment application receives
electronic information associated with a field service operation.
The process next continues to act 1903, where the automated quality
assessment application analyzes at least some of the received
information to automatically generate a quality assessment of the
field service operation. The process next continues to act 1905,
where the automated quality assessment application outputs an
indication of the quality of the field service operation that is
based on the assessment generated in the act 1903.
[0137] Referring to FIG. 14, a more detailed functional block
diagram of automated quality assessment application 1200 and data
sources 1216 is presented. Automated quality assessment application
1200 may be, for example, a rules-based computer software
application that includes, for example, an information processing
component 1210, quality assessment outcomes 1212 (e.g., one or more
indications of the quality assessment), and a feedback component
1214. Automated quality assessment application 1200 may be fed by
any number of data sources 1216, which may include various types of
electronic information and/or records of data associated with
locate operations performed in the field.
[0138] For example, the automated quality assessment application
1200 of the present disclosure may automatically review "closed" or
completed tickets (i.e., tickets pursuant to which a locate and
marking operation has been performed) and their associated
manifests (which may or may not include digital images relating to
the locate operation), and/or any information relating thereto, in
essentially real time and/or within a specified amount of time,
such as within one day, from the ticket being closed. In some
embodiments discussed in further detail below, closed tickets may
be reviewed by automatically interrogating received data associated
with a locate operation against various metrics, such as time to
complete work, cost to complete work, conditions at the work site,
time the work was performed (proper or improper time), efficiency
with which the work was performed, and/or any other suitable
metric.
[0139] It should also be appreciated that, in some embodiments,
quality assessment methods, apparatus and systems according to the
present invention need not necessarily acquire information
describing an actual performance of a locate operation to assess
the quality of a requested locate operation. For example, a locate
technician may receive a ticket or some other instruction (e.g., an
oral instruction) pursuant to which a locate operation is to be
performed, and in some instances the locate technician may not
actually perform the requested locate operation for any of a
variety of reasons (e.g., the locate technician, rather than going
to the work site at which the locate operation was requested, may
instead go to their favorite eating establishment for lunch and
disregard the instruction/ticket). In yet other instances, a locate
technician may not perform a requested locate operation, but
nonetheless provide a false confirmation (e.g., complete a false
manifest) indicating that they performed the locate operation when
in fact they did not. In any event, information about one or more
actions of the technician following the issuance of a locate
request instruction, irrespective of whether nor not the locate
operation was actually performed, may be analyzed in some
embodiments to assess a quality of the requested locate
operation.
[0140] For example, if the technician is equipped with some type of
location tracking device (e.g., on the person of the technician,
carried by the technician, in the technician's vehicle, in the
technician's on-board computer or other hand-held device, etc.),
the location of the technician following issuance of an instruction
for a locate operation may be monitored and received by the quality
assessment application 1200 shown in FIG. 14 (e.g., other
electronic records or information 1295). As discussed further below
in connection with FIGS. 16 and 17, in one exemplary embodiment the
quality assessment application 1200 may compare the whereabouts of
the technician to the work site at which the locate operation was
requested, and if the technician's location does not coincide
(e.g., within some buffer distance) with the location of the work
site, the quality assessment application 1200 may provide one or
more indications reflecting a suspect or unsatisfactory response to
the instruction (e.g., an automated quality assessment of
UNSATISFACTORY may be made if the technician does not even show up
to the work site pursuant to the instruction). In yet another
example, if the technician does not appropriately power-up or
disables a locate tracking device such that there is no technician
location information available to the quality assessment
application 1200, a default automated quality assessment reflecting
a suspect or unsatisfactory response may be provided.
[0141] In some embodiments, information processing component 1210
of automated quality assessment application 1200 may be, for
example, a rules-based software component for analyzing the
contents of any information that is available in data sources 1216
and then automatically performing an assessment with respect to the
quality of a locate operation that is performed in the field. For
each locate operation that is assessed, information processing
component 1210 may automatically generate a quality assessment
outcome 1212 that corresponds to the results of the automatic
quality assessment.
[0142] Any suitable type of outcome may be generated. For example,
in some embodiments, the outcome generated may be a categorization
of the locate operation into one of a plurality of quality
categories (also referred to herein as "scoring" categories or
"grading" categories). For example, based on the automatic quality
assessment, a locate operation may be categorized as: [0143]
APPROVED--the locate operation is approved, no further action
needed; [0144] SATISFACTORY--the locate operation is approved, but
the locate technician needs coaching or training; [0145]
UNSATISFACTORY--the locate operation is not approved, the ticket
needs QC action; or [0146] PROMPT--an aspect of the locate
operation assessment may be suitable for transmitting a real-time
prompt to the locate technician with respect to, for example,
performing a substantially immediate verification and/or corrective
action.
[0147] Other examples of possible outcomes generated by automated
ticket application 1200 include, but are not limited to, a
numerical score (e.g., a score of 0-100%), a grade (e.g., a grade
of A-F), or other graduated indicator, based on some range, scale
and/or resolution (granularity), that is indicative of the quality
of the assessed locate operation.
[0148] Feedback component 1214 of automated quality assessment
application 1200 generates the real-time prompts. For example, once
the nature of the real-time prompt is determined, feedback
component 1214 queries the ticket information in order to ensure
that the prompt is directed to the proper originating locate
technician. Additional details of the operation of automated
quality assessment application 1200 are described with reference to
the method of FIG. 15.
[0149] Examples of data sources 1216 that may be processed by
information processing component 1210 of automated quality
assessment application 100 may include, but are not limited to, one
or more tickets 1220, a virtual white lines (VWL) application 130,
a ticket assessment application 1240, locating equipment data 1250,
an electronic manifest (EM) application 1260, a collection of
facilities maps 1280, an archive of historical tickets 1290, and
any other electronic information and/or records 1295. In
implementation, the various data sources 1216 may be supplied by
multiple entities (not shown) and accessible to automated quality
assessment application 1200 via, for example, a networked computing
system for supporting locate operations, an example of which is
described with reference to FIGS. 14 and 15.
[0150] It should be appreciated that the data sources 1216
discussed above and shown in FIG. 14 are merely illustrative of the
types of data sources that may be used to provide information to
the automated quality assessment application and that the invention
is not limited to use with these particular data sources, as other
data sources may be used that provide data that may be useful in
assessing the quality of a locate operation. Examples of other data
that may be supplied to automated quality assessment application
include, but are not limited to, environmental data obtained during
the locate operation (e.g., light, temperature, humidity, and other
environmental information) and information about the presence
and/or location of environmental landmarks (e.g., fire hydrants,
other manmade structures, or other environmental landmarks).
[0151] Tickets 1220 of data sources 1216 are locate request tickets
that may be submitted by excavators and processed by one-call
centers. Tickets 1220 may include textual ticket information 1222
that comprises instructions with respect to performing a locate
operation, such as, but not limited to, a ticket and/or work order
number, date information, geographic location information (e.g.,
address information), excavation information, excavator
information, site information (e.g., a description of the dig
area), locate operations instructions information, caller
information, remarks information, task information, and any
combinations thereof.
[0152] Textual descriptions of dig areas included in tickets may,
in some instances, be very imprecise as to exact physical locations
at which digging is planned. Therefore, when a locate request is
submitted by an excavator, it may be beneficial for the excavator
to supplement the locate request with a visit to the site of the
dig area for the purpose of indicating the particular geographic
location of the proposed excavation. For example, marks (e.g.,
white paint) on the ground at the location at which digging is
planned may be used to physically indicate a dig area in order to
communicate to a locate technician the extent of the boundaries
where digging is planned. These marks may be chalk marks or paint
that is applied to the surface of the ground, and are generally
known as "white lines."
[0153] VWL application 1230 of data sources 1216 is a computer
software application that provides an electronic drawing tool that
may be used by excavators for electronically marking up, for
example, a digital aerial image of the dig area, such that, instead
of (or in addition to) physically visiting the site of the dig area
and marking white lines on the ground at that site, an excavator
may electronically draw markings (e.g., white lines) on an aerial
image of the site, indicating where digging is planned. These
marked up digital images may be saved as, for example, VWL images
1232, which may be associated with, for example, tickets 1220 and
transmitted to locate companies.
[0154] VWL application 1230 may be implemented, for example, as
described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/366,853 filed Feb.
6, 2009, entitled "Virtual white lines for delimiting planned
excavation sites;" U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/475,905
filed Jun. 1, 2009, entitled "Virtual white lines for delimiting
planned excavation sites of staged excavation projects;" U.S.
patent application Ser. No. 12/422,364 filed Apr. 13, 2009,
entitled "Virtual white lines (VWL) application for indicating a
planned excavation or locate path." Each of these patent
applications is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its
entirety.
[0155] In one example, the virtual white lines may include
two-dimensional (2D) drawing shapes, shades, points, symbols,
coordinates, data sets, or other indicators to indicate on a
digital image the dig area in which excavation is to occur. To
generate the electronic image having virtual white lines, an image
(e.g., an aerial image) of the site may be sent to an excavator via
a network, and, in response, a marked-up version of the image may
be received from the excavator via the network that includes one or
more virtual white lines added to the image that indicate a dig
area in which excavation is planned.
[0156] Ticket assessment application 1240 of data sources 1216 is a
computer software application that provides a mechanism that
allows, for example, a workforce management tool of locate
companies to assess tickets for the purpose of assigning tickets
and dispatching locate technicians into the field in a more
effective manner. Ticket assessment application 1240 may be used to
assess tickets with respect to, for example, complexity of the
locate operation, duration of the locate operation, risk of the
locate operation, value of the locate operation, and skill
requirements of the locate technician. Ticket assessment outcomes
1242 of ticket assessment application 1240 may include an estimated
measurement, ranking, score, and/or requirement with respect to,
for example, complexity, duration, risk, value, and skill. In some
embodiments, each ticket assessment outcome 1242 may include the
following, with respect to a locate an marking operation pursuant
to the ticket: [0157] a. an estimated complexity ranking of, for
example, 1 to 100. 1 being least complex and 100 being most
complex; [0158] b. an estimated duration time in hours and/or
minutes, [0159] c. an estimated risk ranking of, for example, 1 to
100. 1 being lowest risk and 100 being highest risk; [0160] d. an
estimated monetary value in dollars and cents; and [0161] e. a
required locate technician skill level. For example, locate
technicians may be certified to locate one or more types of
facilities (e.g., gas-certified, electric-certified,
telecommunications-certified, CATV-certified, water-certified,
sewer-certified, and the like), which is accompanied by a skill
level ranking of, for example, 1 to 10. 1 being least skilled and
10 being most skilled.
[0162] Additional details of ticket assessment application 1240 may
be found in U.S. provisional application Ser. No. 61/220,491, filed
Jun. 25, 2009, and entitled "Systems and Methods for Assessing
Field Service Operation Tickets."
[0163] With respect to locating equipment data 1250, as noted
above, a locate technician may use locating equipment, such as a
locate receiver device and a marking device, in order to perform a
locate operation. A locate receiver device is an instrument for
detecting facilities that are concealed in some manner, such as
cables and pipes that are located underground based on
electromagnetic radiation emitted by these cables or pipes. This
electromagnetic radiation may, in some instances, be generated by a
locate transmitter device that is attached to the cables or pipes
at a point at which the cable or pipe emerges from the ground.
[0164] Once the presence or absence of a facility is detected, a
marking device may be used to dispense a marking material on, for
example, the surface of the ground at the location of the facility
in order to communicate the presence or absence of a facility or
facilities to an excavator. Locating equipment data 1250 of data
sources 1216 may be any information that is returned from any type
of locating equipment that is equipped with components that are
capable of collecting electronic information and/or creating
electronic records about locate operations that are performed in
the field.
[0165] In one example, marking device data 1252 of locating
equipment data 1250 may be electronic information and/or one or
more electronic records of data that is provided by electronic
marking devices and/or marking systems. Examples of electronic
marking devices and/or marking systems that may provide marking
device data 1252 may include, but are not limited, to those
described in reference to U.S. patent application Ser. No.
11/696,606, filed Apr. 4, 2007 and published Oct. 9, 2008, entitled
"Marking system and method;" U.S. patent application Ser. No.
11/685,602, filed Mar. 13, 2007 and published Sep. 18, 2008,
entitled "Marking system and method;" U.S. Provisional Patent
Application Ser. No. 61/102,151 filed Oct. 2, 2008, entitled "Data
acquisition system for and methods of analyzing locate activities
based on marking device actuations;" and U.S. Provisional Patent
Application Ser. No. 61/151,574 filed Feb. 11, 2009, entitled
"Marking device that has enhanced features for underground facility
locate applications." Each of these applications is incorporated
herein by reference in its entirety.
[0166] Table 1 shows an example of a sample of marking device data
1252 of locating equipment data 1250 that may be captured as the
result of, for example, an actuation of a marking device.
TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Example marking device data 1252 of locating
equipment data 1250 Service provider ID 0482 Locate technician ID
4815 Marking Device ID 7362 Timestamp data 12-Jul-2008; 09:35:15.2
Geo-location data N35.degree. 43.57518, W078.degree. 49.78314 (deg.
and dec. min.) Marking material data Color = Red, Brand = ABC
Temperature data 73 degrees F. Humidity data 30% Light data 4.3
volts Compass data 213 degrees Inclinometer data -40 Accelerometer
data 0.275 g Battery strength data 73%
[0167] With regard to the marking material color information that
may be included in marking device data 1252, Table 2 shows an
example of the correlation of marking material color to the type of
facility to be marked.
TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Correlation of color to facility type
Marking material color Facility Type White Proposed excavation Pink
Temporary survey markings Red Electric power lines, cables or
conduits, and lighting cables Yellow Gas, oil, steam, petroleum, or
other hazardous liquid or gaseous materials Orange Communications,
cable TV, alarm or signal lines, cables, or conduits Blue Water,
irrigation, and slurry lines Purple Reclaimed water, irrigation and
slurry lines Green Sewers, storm sewer facilities, or other drain
lines Black Mark-out for errant lines
[0168] In another example, locate receiver data 1254 of locating
equipment data 1250 may be electronic information and/or electronic
records of data that is provided by electronic locate receiver
devices and/or systems. An example of a locate receiver device that
may provide locate receiver data 1254 is described in U.S.
Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/151,578, entitled
"Locating equipment that has enhanced features for increased
automation in underground facility locate applications," which is
hereby incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
[0169] Table 3 below shows an example of a sample of locate
receiver data 1254 of locating equipment data 1250 that may be
captured, for example, at a certain programmed interval of a locate
receiver. Different models of locate receivers and transmitters are
available from a variety of manufacturers and have different
features; accordingly, it should be appreciated that the
information content and type provided in Table 3 is exemplary of
possible information relating to locate receivers on which a
quality assessment of a locate operation may be based, and that
other types and values for information are possible. With respect
to information potentially provided by a given locate receiver as
shown in Table 3 below, the "gain" is typically a measure of the
degree of sensitivity of a locate receiver antenna that is picking
up a signal emanating from along an underground facility
(alternatively, "gain" may be viewed as a degree of amplification
being applied to a received signal). Gain may be expressed in terms
of any scale (e.g., 0-100), as a numeric value or percentage.
"Signal strength" refers to the strength of a received signal at a
given gain value; signal strength similarly may be expressed in
terms of any scale, as a numeric value or percentage. Generally
speaking, higher signal strengths at lower gains typically indicate
more reliable information from a locate receiver, but this may not
necessarily be the case for all locate operations.
TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Example locate receiver data 1254 of
locating equipment data 1250 Service provider ID 0482 Locate
technician ID 4815 Locate Device ID 7345 Timestamp data
12-Jul-2008; 09:35:15.2 Geo-location data N35.degree. 43.57518,
W078.degree. 49.78314 (deg. and dec. min.) Locate mode Mode =
PASSIVE Gain 35 (on a scale of 1-100) Sig. strength 85% (on a scale
of 0-100%) Signal frequency 60 Hz Facility depth 3.4 feet
Temperature data 73 degrees F. Humidity data 30% Light data 4.3
volts Compass data 213 degrees Inclinometer data -40 Accelerometer
data 0.275 g Battery strength data 85%
[0170] Electronics Manifest (EM) application 1260 of data sources
1216 is a computer software application that may be used to create
an electronic manifest of a locate operation. As discussed above,
an electronic manifest may include a digital aerial image of the
dig area and its surroundings, upon which one or more "electronic
locate marks" have been placed for indicating corresponding
physical locate marks that have been dispensed at the site, thereby
indicating the geo-locations and types of facilities present. In
one example, the starting images to be marked up using EM
application 1260 may be VWL images 1232 that are associated with
tickets 1220. The marked up digital images may be saved as, for
example, EM images 1262, which may be associated with, for example,
tickets 1220 and may be used by locate companies to support proof
of work compliance. In some embodiments, EM application 1260 may
implemented as described in U.S. patent application Ser. No.
12/369,232, filed Feb. 11, 2009 entitled "Searchable records of
underground facility locate marking operations," which is
incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
[0171] Facilities maps 1280 of data sources 1216 are any physical,
electronic, or other representation of the geographic location,
type, number, and/or other attributes of a facility or facilities.
Facilities maps 1280 may be supplied by the various facility owners
and may indicate the geographic location of the facility lines
(e.g., pipes, cables, and the like) owned and/or operated by the
facility owner. For example, facilities maps 1280 may be supplied
by the owner of the gas facilities, power facilities,
telecommunications facilities, water and sewer facilities, and so
on. In process of performing the automatic quality assessment,
information processing component 1210 may aggregate the information
that is contained in multiple facilities maps 1280 in order to
determine all the facilities that are present at a certain dig
area.
[0172] Historical tickets 1290 of data sources 1216 may include any
records of locate request tickets performed in the past for the
same work site/dig area specified in the present ticket 1220
subject to quality assessment. In the process of performing the
automatic quality assessment of closed ticket 1220, information
processing component 1210 may aggregate the information that is
contained in one or more historical tickets 1290 relating to the
same work site/dig area in order to determine the facilities that
have been located and/or marked during past locate operations at
that site.
[0173] Other electronic information and/or records 1295 of data
sources 1216 may be any other electronic information and/or records
that contain information about locate operations and that may be
useful to automated quality assessment application 1200 of the
present disclosure. For example, as noted above, one example of
other electronic information and/or records 1295 may include
geographic information regarding a geographic location of a
field-service technician (e.g., one or more signals from a GPS
transmitter on the person or in the vicinity of the technician,
which may or may not be available from other data sources). In
another example, other electronic information and/or records 1295
may include one or more signals, or the absence of one or more
signals, indicating the unavailability of such geographic
information or other information relating to the technician
following the issuance of an instruction or ticket for a locate
operation. In yet another example, electronic information and/or
records 1295 may include information about other aspects of the
technician assigned to perform a locate operation, such as skill
level, specific certifications or lack thereof, availability or
schedule, past performance history, and the like.
[0174] Additional details of the use of tickets 1220, VWL
application 1230, ticket assessment application 1240, locating
equipment data 1250, EM application 1260, facilities maps 180,
historical tickets 1390, any other electronic information and/or
records 1295, and any combinations thereof in methods and apparatus
for automatically assessing quality of underground facility locate
operations are described with reference to FIG. 15.
[0175] FIG. 15 shows a flow diagram of an exemplary process 1300
for performing a quality assessment of an underground facility
locate operation, as implemented by automated quality assessment
application 1200. While the example provided in FIG. 15 describes
an automated quality assessment based on a completed or closed
ticket for which it is presumed that a locate operation was
actually performed by a technician, it should be appreciated that
the concepts generally outlined in the process 1300 may be applied
to various types of available information relating to a requested
locate operation, irrespective of actual performance of the locate
operation, so as to assess the quality of the requested
operation.
[0176] Process 1300 begins at act 1310, where a completed (i.e.,
closed) ticket is received and associated information to be used in
assessing the quality of the locate operation performed in
connection with the ticket is collected by automated quality
assessment application 1200. The associated ticket information may
include, for example, the originating ticket information (e.g.,
textual ticket information 1222 of a certain ticket 1220), and one
or more of the VWL images (e.g., a VWL image 1232 of a certain
ticket 1220), the originating ticket assessment (e.g., a ticket
assessment outcome 1242 of a certain ticket 1220), the locating
equipment data (e.g., marking device data 1252 and/or locate
receiver data 1254 of a certain ticket 1220), the EM images (e.g.,
a EM image 1262 of a certain ticket 1220), and any other
information (e.g., from other electronic information and/or records
1295).
[0177] The process then continues to act 1312, where the received
information is used to automatically assess the quality of the
locate operation. In the example of FIG. 15, a locate operation is
categorized as either (a) APPROVED--the locate operation is
approved, no further action needed; (b) SATISFACTORY--the locate
operation is approved, but the locate technician needs coaching or
training; (c) UNSATISFACTORY--the locate operation is not approved,
the ticket needs QC action; or (d) PROMPT--an aspect of the locate
operation assessment may be suitable for transmitting a real-time
prompt to the locate technician with respect to, for example,
performing a substantially immediate verification and/or corrective
action. However, the invention is not limited in this respect, as
any suitable indication of quality may be provided as a result of
an automatic quality assessment, such as, a numerical score (e.g.,
a score from 0-100%), a letter grade, another type of graduated
indictor based on some scale or range, or any other indication of
quality. Additional details and examples of how quality may be
automatically assessed at act 1312 and an indication (e.g., a
categorization) of quality may be automatically generated at act
1314 are discussed below. It should be appreciated that the
invention is not limited to these particular examples, and that
such examples are provided primarily for the purposes of
illustration.
A. Automatic Quality Assessment Based on Geo-Location
[0178] The inventors have appreciated that the quality of a locate
operation is correlated to the probability that an excavator will
damage an underground facility when digging at the site at which
the locate operation was performed. The inventors have also
recognized that damage to an underground facility is most likely to
occur in instances in which the locate technician assigned to
perform a locate operation at a particular work site/dig area did
not go to the site indicated on the ticket and did not perform a
locate operation at that site. This may occur, for example, because
the locate technician unintentionally performed the locate
operation at the wrong address or location, because the locate
technician chose not to perform the locate operation believing that
there are no underground facilities at the site (e.g., based on
past experiences at the site), or for some other reason. In some of
these circumstances, there may be no "closed" or completed ticket,
and/or available information relating to performance of the locate
operation, as there may be in fact no performance of the
operation.
[0179] Thus, the inventors have appreciated that one technique for
automatically assessing quality, at least as a potentially
important threshold issue, is to automatically verify whether or
not the technician proceeded to the geographic location
("geo-location") for the work site/dig area indicated on the ticket
or another instruction for the locate operation.
[0180] In some embodiments, an automatic quality assessment based
on a geo-location of the work site and/or dig area may be
accomplished by comparing geographic location data (i.e., latitude
and longitude) associated with the technician's whereabouts (e.g.,
from a location tracking device on the person or in the vicinity of
the technician) to the geographic location data of the site
specified in the ticket, and determining whether these geographic
locations are within some predetermined distance (i.e., a
"threshold distance") of each other. A variety of values for the
threshold distance may be used as a metric for such a quality
assessment; for example, in various embodiments, the threshold
distance may be on the order of tens of feet, hundreds of feet,
thousands of feet, etc. (e.g., two thousand feet). According to
various aspects of this embodiment, the geographic location data
associated with the technician's whereabouts and the geographic
location data of the site specified in the ticket may each be
obtained in a variety of manners.
[0181] For example, in some embodiments, data corresponding to
three different geographic locations may be obtained, and each may
be compared to the other two to verify that they are all within the
threshold distance of each other. In one embodiments, these three
different geographic locations are: (1) the work site at which the
locate operation was requested to be performed; (2) the geographic
location at which the locate technician completed an electronic
manifest of the locate operation (e.g., using EM application 1260);
(3) the centroid of the aerial image obtained by EM application
1260 for creating an electronic manifest.
[0182] These three geographic locations may be useful in verifying
that the technician performed the locate operation at the
appropriate site, as they may be used to verify that the technician
started and completed the electronic manifest at the work site
specified in the ticket, and not some other location.
[0183] In some embodiments, the first data for the geographic
location of the work site at which the locate operation was
requested to be performed may be obtained directly from the ticket
for the locate operation. The format of and extent of information
included in a ticket may vary depending on the state in which the
ticket is generated. Some tickets may include geographic location
data (e.g., latitude and longitude coordinates) indicative of the
site at which the locate operation is to be performed. When this
information is provided in the ticket, it may be obtained directly
from the ticket as first data for use in assessing the quality of
the locate operation. Some tickets may not include latitude and
longitude information, but may include a street address (e.g., 123
Main St., Anywhere, USA) at which the locate operation is requested
to be performed. For such tickets, the latitude and longitude
coordinates may be obtained by geo-coding the address provided in
the ticket. Such geo-coding may be performed in any suitable way by
any suitable entity. For example, the address may be geo-coded by
the automatic quality assessment application or may be geo-coded by
some other entity, such that the latitude and longitude coordinates
are provided to the automatic quality assessment application
without this application having to perform the geo-coding.
[0184] Second data for the geographic location at which the locate
technician completed the electronic manifest may be obtained in any
suitable way. In some embodiments, the locate technician may be
provided with a tablet computer, laptop computer, or other handheld
or portable computing device that executes EM application 1260. As
discussed above, EM application 1260 may be used by the locate
technician to create an electronic manifest of the locate
operation. The device that executes EM application 1260 may be
equipped or may have access to a global navigation satellite system
(GNSS) receiver (e.g., a global positioning system (GPS) receiver).
When the location technician completes the electronic manifest, EM
application 1260 may obtain data representing the current
geographic location (e.g., latitude and longitude coordinates) from
the GNSS receiver, and may include this information in the
electronic manifest. Thus, in such embodiments, automated quality
assessment application 1200 may obtain the second data representing
the geographic location at which the locate technician completed
the electronic manifest from the electronic manifest itself (e.g.,
EM images 1262).
[0185] In some embodiments, automated quality assessment
application 1200 may also obtain from EM application 1260 third
geographic location data representing the centroid of the aerial
image used by EM application 1260 for creating an electronic
manifest or EM image 1262. For example, when a locate technician
accesses EM application 1260 to begin creation of an electronic
manifest, EM application 1260 may determine the current location
from the GNSS receiver, and may automatically obtain an aerial
image of the current location. The data (latitude and longitude
coordinates) representing the geographic location of the centroid
of this image may be recorded as part of the electronic
manifest.
[0186] Using the above-identified first, second, and third data
respectively representing three geographic locations, the automated
quality assessment application may automatically assess the quality
of a locate operation. FIG. 16 shows an illustrative process 2000
that the automated quality assessment application may perform to
use this information to automatically assess the quality of a
locate operation. The process begins at act 2001, where the
automated quality assessment application receives the
above-discussed first, second, and third data. The process next
continues to act 2003, where the automated quality assessment
application compares the first data indicative of the geographic
location of the work site at which the locate operation was
requested to be performed may be compared to the second date
indicative of the geographic location at which the locate
technician completed an electronic manifest of the locate operation
and determines whether these two geographic locations are within
the threshold distance of each other. If, at act 2003, the quality
assessment application determines that these two geographic
locations are not within the threshold distance of each other, the
process continues to act 2009, where the ticket is automatically
categorized as unsatisfactory. Thus, for example, after act 1314,
the process of FIG. 15 may continue to act 1324. If, at act 2003,
the quality assessment application determines that these two
geographic locations are within the threshold distance of each
other, the process continues to act 2005.
[0187] At act 2005, the automated quality assessment application
compares the first data indicative of the geographic location of
the work site at which the locate operation was requested to be
performed may be compared to the third data indicative of the
geographic location of the centroid of the aerial image obtained by
EM application 1260 for creating an electronic manifest, and
determines whether these two geographic locations are within the
threshold distance of each other. If, at act 2005, the quality
assessment application determines that these two geographic
locations are not within the threshold distance of each other, the
process continues to act 2009, where the ticket is automatically
categorized as unsatisfactory. Thus, for example, after act 1314,
the process of FIG. 15 may continue to act 1324. If, at act 2005,
the quality assessment application determines that these two
geographic locations are within the threshold distance of each
other, the process continues to act 2007.
[0188] At act 2007, the second data indicative of the geographic
location at which the locate technician completed an electronic
manifest of the locate operation may be compared to the third data
indicative of the geographic location of the centroid of the aerial
image obtained by EM application 1260 for creating an electronic
manifest and may determine whether these two geographic locations
are within the threshold distance of each other. If, at act 2007,
the quality assessment application determines that these two
geographic locations are not within the threshold distance of each
other, the process continues to act 2009, where the ticket is
automatically categorized as unsatisfactory. Thus, for example,
after act 1314, the process of FIG. 15 may continue to act 1324.
If, at act 2007, the quality assessment application determines that
these two geographic locations are within the threshold distance of
each other, the process continues to act 2011, where the automated
quality assessment application automatically approves the ticket.
For example, in FIG. 15, after act 1314, the process may continue
to act 1316, where the ticket process approval is completed.
[0189] In the example of FIG. 16, if it is determined that the two
geographic locations compared in each of the three comparisons
(i.e., the comparisons at acts 2003, 2005, and 2007) are within the
threshold distance of each other, then the ticket may be
automatically approved, and if the any one of these comparisons
fails (i.e., the two geographic locations are not within the
threshold distance of each other), the ticket is automatically
categorized as unsatisfactory.
[0190] However, this is only one example of how a ticket may be
categorized. For example, in some embodiments, if it is determined
that the two geographic locations compared in at least two of the
three comparisons are within the threshold distance of each other,
then the ticket may be automatically approved. In other
embodiments, the ticket may be automatically categorized as
unsatisfactory and warranting QC action only if the locate
operation failed all three comparisons (i.e., none of the three
geographic locations were within the threshold distance of each
other).
[0191] In some instances, geographic location information for the
work site at which the locate operation was requested to be
performed and/or for the centroid of the aerial image obtained by
EM application 1260 may be unavailable. This may occur if, for
example, the GNSS receiver from which EM application 1260 obtains
geographic location data is unable to obtain geographic location
coordinates (e.g., the GNSS receiver is broken or malfunctioning or
a suitable satellite signal cannot be obtained due to, for example,
surrounding buildings or tree cover). In such instances, automated
quality assessment application may take any suitable action, as the
invention is not limited in this respect. For example, in some
embodiments, the automated quality assessment application may
categorize such tickets as unsatisfactory and warranting QC action
and may provide a note in the QC referral indicating that the
reason for the QC referral is that geographic location information
from the GNSS receiver was unavailable. In other embodiments, the
automated quality assessment application may designate the ticket
as one warranting manual review before being categorized.
[0192] In the example above, geographic location information
obtained via EM application 1260 served as geographic location
information obtained during the performance of the locate
operation. However, in some embodiments, other geographic location
information obtained during the performance of the locate operation
may be used instead of or in addition to the geographic location
obtained via EM application 1260. For example, as discussed above
in connection with Tables 1 and 3, geographic location data may
also be obtained from the marking wand and/or the locate receiver
to determine the geographic location of these devices when they
were in use. In some embodiments, this information may be
automatically compared to the geographic location of the work site
at which the locate operation was requested to be performed to
assess the quality of the locate operation.
[0193] In some embodiments, automated quality assessment
application 1200 may provide an indication to a human reviewer of
the quality assessment determined and output by the automated
quality assessment application. This may be done in any suitable
way, as the invention is not limited in this respect. For example,
in some embodiments, automated quality assessment application 1200
may provide a graphical user interface similar to that of quality
assessment application 130, in which managers, human approvers,
and/or QC approvers may review tickets that have been automatically
processed and assessed for quality by automated quality assessment
application 1200. In some embodiments, a GUI similar to GUI 400 may
be provided, but rather than having icons 412, 414, 416, and 418
(which are used by a human reviewer to assess quality), the GUI 400
may indicate the quality assessment assigned to the ticket by
automated quality assessment application 1200.
[0194] For example, FIG. 17 shows an example of a graphical user
interface (GUI) 2100 that may be presented to a human reviewer when
the reviewer selects a ticket to review for which an automated
quality assessment has been performed by automated quality
assessment application 1200. GUI 2100 includes an area 2101 for
displaying one or more images associated with the locate operation,
such as, an aerial image of the work site/dig area used in
generating an electronic manifest, and/or one or more digital
photographs of the work site/dig area captured by the technician.
As discussed above, the aerial image may, in some instances, be
marked up with electronic markings indicative of underground
facilities corresponding to the underground facilities located
and/or marked by the technician during the locate and marking
operation.
[0195] In the example of FIG. 17, the locate technician did not
mark any facilities. Thus, the image in area 2101 does not include
any electronic marks indicative of such facilities. GUI 2100 also
includes an area 2103 that includes ticket information such as, for
example, a ticket number, an identification number of the
technician that completed the ticket, a date that the ticket was
completed, and PlaceStamp indicative of the location (i.e. latitude
and longitude coordinates) at which the ticket was complete. GUI
2100 may also include an area 2107 in which the facilities marked
by the technician may be listed. Because, in the example of FIG.
17, the technician did not mark any facilities, this area lists
that no facilities are located in the work site. GUI 2100 may also
include an area 2109 that shows the technician's signature,
certifying the electronic manifest.
[0196] GUI 2100 may also include an area 2105 in which automated
quality assessment application may output its assessment of the
quality of the ticket and/or provide any information relevant to
the quality.
[0197] More specifically, in some embodiments, area 2105 may be
given a particular shade or color based on the quality assessment
of the ticket. For example, if quality assessment application
determines that one or more of the comparisons performed at acts
2003, 2005, and 2007 failed (i.e., the geographic locations
compared in one of these comparisons are not within the threshold
distance of each other), the area 2105 may be colored red. If
quality assessment application determines that one or more of the
comparisons performed at acts 2003, 2005, and 2007 were successful
(i.e., the two geographic locations compared in each comparison are
within the threshold distance of each other), the area 2105 may be
colored white. If the second and third geo-location data was not
available (e.g., due to a malfunctioning GNSS device), such that
quality assessment application was unable to assess the quality of
the locate operation, the area 2105 may be colored orange.
[0198] In some embodiments, area 2105 may include information
(e.g., text) explaining the reasons that quality assessment
application 1200 assigned the ticket that particular quality
assessment. For example, if area 2105 is colored red, text may be
included explaining which comparison(s) (e.g., of comparisons 2003,
2005, and 2007) failed. If area 2106 is colored orange, text may be
included explaining that GPS data was unavailable.
[0199] It should be appreciated that GUI 2100 is one example of GUI
that may be displayed by quality assessment application 1200 to
display the output of an automated quality assessment to a human
reviewer. Various other GUIs are possible, and any other suitable
GUI may be used.
B. Score or Grade Generation
[0200] In some embodiments, automated quality assessment
application 1220 may automatically generate a score, grade, or
other graduated indicator that is indicative of the quality
assessment of the locate operation using various information from
data sources 1216.
[0201] For example in one implementation, the score may be either
PASS or FAIL; alternatively, or additionally in other
implementations, the score may include a number, letter, character,
symbol, or other indication representative of the quality
assessment of location operation (e.g. a score on a scale of
0-100%).
[0202] Table 4 shows an example of PASS/FAIL criteria that may be
automatically applied by automated quality assessment application
1200. In Table 4, several exemplary criteria for assessing a locate
operation are listed in the left most column, providing several
"row elements" of the table. For each criterion, the table includes
one or more expected or reference values or ranges for the
criterion, also referred to as "metrics," against which information
about the locate operation is measured/compared. In Table 4, the
metrics are divided into two "scoring categories," namely,
value(s)/condition(s) that, if met, result in a score of PASS, and
value(s)/condition(s) that, if met, result in a score of FAIL.
[0203] In some embodiments, if a locate operation fails any one or
more of the criteria shown below in Table 4, the locate operation
may be given a score of FAIL. If, on the other hand, the locate
operation passes each of the criteria in Table 4, other aspects of
the locate operation may be evaluated to assign the locate
operation a numerical score or other graduated indicator.
TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Example of certain PASS/FAIL criteria of
scoring criteria Expected value or range (metrics) Unacceptable
Criterion Preferred (score = PASS) (score = FAIL) Response for each
Yes (Marked or Cleared) No (No response received Member Code? for
one or more member codes on ticket) Locate Done within Yes (Locate
done on time) No (Work performed after Time Requirements? due date)
Adequate time spent at Yes (within 50% more or No (50% more or less
time job site? less the amount of time spent than was projected on
projected for the ticket) the ticket) Operation performed at Yes
(technician was at No (technician was not at correct job site?
correct job site when correct job site when starting and/or
completing the starting and/or completing the electronic manifest)
electronic manifest)
[0204] While four assessment criteria and two scoring categories
for each criterion are shown in the example of Table 4, it should
be appreciated that the invention is not limited in this respect,
and that methods and apparatus according to various embodiments of
the present disclosure may evaluate information about a completed
locate and marking application based on any number of assessment
criteria, various numbers of scoring categories (i.e., different
resolutions of graduated indicators) and a variety of metrics for
each scoring category.
[0205] In some embodiments, automated quality assessment
application 1200 may automatically determine a numerical score or
other graduated indicator for a locate operation using a set of
assessment criteria. For each criterion in the set, automated
quality assessment application may compare an actual value obtained
during the performance of the locate operation (referred to herein
as ACTUAL DATA) to an expected or reference value for the one or
more scoring categories for the criterion (referred to herein as
EXPECT DATA) and may generate a score for that criterion based on a
comparison of the ACTUAL DATA to the EXPECT DATA (e.g., so as to
determine in what scoring category the ACTUAL DATA falls). The
score for each criterion in the set may be combined to generate an
overall score for the locate operation. For purposes of the
discussion that follows, although examples based on numeric scores
are provided, the term "score" as used herein is intended to more
generally denote any of a variety of graduated indicators for a
quality assessment (which in turn may be based on a variety of
ranges, scales and resolutions/granularity for the indicators).
[0206] In some embodiments, there may be a dynamic aspect of the
assessment criteria that relies on specific information associated
with the current ticket for which an assessment is being made. For
example, at least some of the assessment criteria that are used in
evaluating a locate operation may depend on what information is
included in ticket 1220. Further, in some embodiments there may be
other dynamic aspects of the assessment criteria that rely on other
information. For example, at least some of the criteria that are
used may depend on the available information associated with the
locate operation. Dynamic aspects of criteria, scoring categories,
and metrics are discussed in greater detail below.
[0207] In some embodiments, automated quality assessment
application 1200 may perform the following steps to generate a
score for a locate operation: [0208] a. reading in ticket
information (e.g., textual ticket information 1222) and/or VWL
information from VWL images 1232, in order to determine, for
example, the geographic location, scope, and timing (e.g., due
date) of the requested locate operation, expected type of
facilities and the like; [0209] b. reading in other information
that may be relevant to the current ticket (e.g., from other data
sources, such as ticket assessment outcomes, facilities maps,
historical tickets, etc.) in order to determine, for example, the
expected types and locations of facilities to be marked, expected
complexity, expected total time of the locate operation, and the
like; [0210] c. for the current ticket, generating one or more
assessment criteria, and/or one or more elements of EXPECT DATA,
based at least in part on ticket-specific information; [0211] d.
reading in and parsing one or more samples of ACTUAL DATA
associated with performance of the location operation; and [0212]
e. comparing the ACTUAL DATA to the EXPECT DATA for each scoring
category to generate a locate operation quality assessment
score.
[0213] Table 5 below shows an example set of assessment criteria
that may be used in generating a score, scoring categories for each
criterion, and exemplary metrics (EXPECT DATA) for each scoring
category for a given criterion. It should be appreciated that some
criterion may be assessed individually, while other criteria may be
assessed in tandem (e.g., locate receiver gain and signal strength
generally would be assessed in tandem).
TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Example expected data values or ranges
Expected value or range (metrics) Criterion Preferred Marginal
Unacceptable Dig area geo-location Location on ticket Location on
ticket Location on ticket .ltoreq.0.2 miles >0.2 to .ltoreq.0.5
miles >0.5 miles Locate Date Before due date On due date on Past
date on ticket on ticket ticket Elapsed time Projected time on
Projected time Projected time ticket or less .+-.25-50% .+-.>50%
Type = Electric power RED color data n/a RED color data (when
expected)* present absent Type = Electric power RED color data n/a
RED color data (when not expected)* absent present Type = Gas, oil
YELLOW color n/a YELLOW color (when expected)* data present data
absent Type = Gas, oil YELLOW color n/a YELLOW color (when not
expected)* data absent data present Type = Com, CATV ORANGE color
n/a ORANGE color (when expected)* data present data absent Type =
Com, CATV ORANGE color n/a ORANGE color (when not expected)* data
absent data present Type = Water BLUE color data n/a BLUE color
data (when expected)* present absent Type = Water BLUE color data
n/a BLUE color data (when not expected)* absent present Type =
Sewer GREEN color data n/a GREEN color data (when expected)*
present absent Type = Sewer GREEN color data n/a GREEN color data
(when not expected)* absent present Type = Irrigation PURPLE color
n/a PURPLE color data (when expected)* data present absent Type =
Irrigation PURPLE color n/a PURPLE color data (when not expected)*
data absent present Gain 0-45 (on a scale of >45-70 >70-100
0-100) Sig. strength 100-85% <85% Any Temperature data (.degree.
F.) 50-80 20-<50, >80-110 <20, >110 Humidity data 0-40%
>40-90% >90-100% Light data 4.0 to 5.0 volts 2.0 to <4.0
volts <2.0 volts Inclinometer data -30 to 30 degrees <-30 to
-60 <-60 to -90 degrees degrees or >30 to or >60 to 90 60
degrees degrees Accelerometer data 0.2 g to 1.0 g >1.0 g to 1.5
g >1.5 g Battery strength data 100-85% <85-50% <50%
[0214] For each criterion (or criteria viewed in tandem), a point
value may be assigned based on the scoring category into which the
ACTUAL DATA corresponding to the criterion falls. Additionally, a
weight factor may be assigned to each criterion on the relative
importance of that criterion. Table 6 below shows an example of
assessment criteria that have point values assigned to respective
scoring categories for all criteria, and weight factors assigned to
each criterion, which may be used by automated quality assessment
application when determining a locate operations quality assessment
score.
TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Example of scoring criteria that has point
values and weight factors Expected value or range Preferred
Marginal Unacceptable Weight Criterion (score = 2) (score = 1)
(score = 0) Factor Locate Date Before due date On due date Past
date on x2 on ticket on ticket ticket Elapsed time Projected time
Projected Projected time x2 on ticket time on ticket on ticket
.+-.25-50% .+-.>50% Type = Electric power RED color data n/a RED
color x5 (when expected)* present data absent Type = Electric power
RED color data n/a RED color x5 (when not expected)* absent data
present Type = Gas, oil YELLOW color n/a YELLOW x5 (when expected)*
data present color data absent Type = Gas, oil YELLOW color n/a
YELLOW x5 (when not expected)* data absent color data present Type
= Com, CATV ORANGE color n/a ORANGE x5 (when expected)* data
present color data absent Type = Com, CATV ORANGE color n/a ORANGE
x5 (when not expected)* data absent color data present Type = Water
BLUE color data n/a BLUE color x5 (when expected)* present data
absent Type = Water BLUE color data n/a BLUE color x5 (when not
expected)* absent data present Type = Sewer GREEN color n/a GREEN
color x5 (when expected)* data present data absent Type = Sewer
GREEN color n/a GREEN color x5 (when not expected)* data absent
data present Type = Irrigation PURPLE color n/a PURPLE x5 (when
expected)* data present color data absent Type = Irrigation PURPLE
color n/a PURPLE x5 (when not expected)* data absent color data
present Gain 0-45 >45-70 >70-100 x1 Sig. strength 100-85%
<85% Any x1 Temperature data (.degree. F.) 50-80 20-<50,
>80-110 <20, >110 x2 Humidity data 0-40% >40-90%
>90-100% x2 Light data 4.0 to 5.0 volts 2.0 to <4.0 <2.0
volts x2 volts Inclinometer data -30 to 30 <-30 to -60 <-60
to -90 x1 degrees degrees or degrees or >30 to 60 >60 to 90
degrees degrees Accelerometer data 0.2 g to 1.0 g >1.0 g to 1.5
g >1.5 g x1 Battery strength data 100-85% <85-50% <50%
x5
[0215] Referring to FIG. 18, a flow diagram of a method 1400 for
determining a locate operations quality assessment score is
presented. Method 1400 may begin at act 1410, where ticket
information for the current ticket, such as textual ticket
information 1222, is read into the automated quality assessment
application. In some embodiments, a VWL image for the current
ticket may be read in from VWL images 1232. Certain information may
be extracted from the ticket information and/or VWL image, such as,
but not limited to, location information (e.g., address and/or one
or more geo-coordinates) of the work site and/or dig area, the
scope of the locate operation (e.g., expected types of facilities
and/or landmarks), the timing of the requested locate operation
(e.g., a "complete on" date, a "complete by" date, etc), and the
like.
[0216] The process then continues to act 1412, where other
information with respect to the current ticket is read into the
automated quality assessment application. For example, information
about the geographic location of the current ticket may be read in
from EM images 1262 provided by EM application 1260, facilities
maps 1280, or other data sources, and historical information of
past locate operations may be read in from historical tickets
1290.
[0217] The process then continues to act 1414, where using the
information obtained at act 1410 and/or 1412, the ticket-specific
quality assessment criteria and metrics for assessment criteria are
generated. In particular, certain EXPECT DATA, which is used for
generating the locate operations quality assessment score for the
current ticket, may be generated for each of these assessment
criterion. For example, this information may be parsed into the
expected geo-location of the dig area, the expected locate
operation date, the expected types and locations of facilities to
be marked, and the expected total locate operation time.
[0218] In one example, the information from a ticket for a
particular locate operation may include a requested dig
area/work-site address of "1600 Center St, Apex, N.C.," which
converts to geo-location data of N35.degree.43.57518,
W078.degree.49.78314, and a "locate on" date of Feb. 5, 2009.
Information from the ticket, and/or facilities maps information
1280 and/or historical tickets 1290 for this location, may indicate
that the expected types of facilities to be present are electric
power and water and the expected types of facilities to be absent
are gas, communications, sewer, and irrigation. Further,
information from the ticket, ticket assessment outcomes 1242,
and/or historical data for this location may indicate that the
expected amount of time to perform the locate operation is about 20
to 40 minutes.
[0219] For this example, Table 7 below shows an example of the
ticket-specific portion of the assessment criteria and associated
metrics for each criterion. In Table 7, for each expected type of
facility to be located, the corresponding expected geo-location
data and signal strength is included in the EXPECT DATA.
TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Example expected data values or ranges
Expected value or range (metrics) Criterion Preferred Marginal
Unacceptable Dig area geo-location N35.degree. 43.57518,
N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, W078.degree. 49.78314
W078.degree. 49.78314 W078.degree. 49.78314 .ltoreq.0.2 miles
>0.2 to .ltoreq.0.5 miles >0.5 miles Locate Date Before
05FEB09 On 05FEB09 After 05FEB09 Elapsed time 40 mins 40 mins .+-.
10-20 mins 40 mins .+-. >20 mins Type = Electric power RED color
data n/a RED color data (expected)* present absent geo-location
N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518,
W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. W078.degree.
49.78314 .+-. 0 to 0.1 mi >0.1 to <0.2 mi >0.2 mi Gain
0-45 >45-70 >70-100 Sig. strength 100-85% <85% Any Type =
Gas, oil YELLOW color n/a YELLOW color (not expected)* data absent
data present Type = Com, CATV ORANGE color n/a ORANGE color (not
expected)* data absent data present Type = Water BLUE color data
n/a BLUE color data (expected)* present absent geo-location data
N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518,
W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. W078.degree.
49.78314 .+-. 0 to 0.1 mi >0.1 to <0.2 mi >0.2 mi Gain
0-45 >45-70 >70-100 Sig. strength 100-85% <85% Any Type =
Sewer GREEN color data n/a GREEN color data (not expected)* absent
present Type = Irrigation PURPLE color n/a PURPLE color data (not
expected)* data absent present
[0220] The process next continues to act 1416, where additional
assessment criteria and associated metrics are generated based on
other information. Continuing the example of Table 7, in addition
to the ticket-specific content of the assessment criteria, the
continuation of Table 7 below shows another portion of the
assessment criteria that corresponds to the locating equipment data
1250 obtained from the input devices that are present in the
locating equipment used during the location operation.
TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 7 (continued) Example expected data values or
ranges Expected value or range (metrics) Criterion Preferred
Marginal Unacceptable Dig area geo-location N35.degree. 43.57518,
N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, W078.degree. 49.78314
W078.degree. 49.78314 W078.degree. 49.78314 .ltoreq.0.2 miles
>0.2 to .ltoreq.0.5 miles >0.5 miles Locate Date Before
05FEB09 On 05FEB09 After 05FEB09 Elapsed time 40 mins 40 mins .+-.
10-20 mins 40 mins .+-. >20 mins Type = Electric power RED color
data n/a RED color data (expected)* present absent geo-location
data N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree.
43.57518, W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-.
W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. 0 to 0.1 mi >0.1 to <0.2 mi
>0.2 mi Gain 0-45 >45-70 >70-100 Sig. strength 100-85%
<85% Any Type = Gas, oil YELLOW color n/a YELLOW color (not
expected)* data absent data present Type = Com, CATV ORANGE color
n/a ORANGE color (not expected)* data absent data present Type =
Water BLUE color data n/a BLUE color data (expected)* present
absent geo-location data N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree.
43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-.
W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. 0 to 0.1 mi
>0.1 to <0.2 mi >0.2 mi Gain 0-45 >45-70 >70-100
Sig. strength 100-85% <85% Any Type = Sewer GREEN color data n/a
GREEN color data (not expected)* absent present Type = Irrigation
PURPLE color n/a PURPLE color data (not expected)* data absent
present Locate technician ID Lookup table n/a Not found Marking
Device ID Lookup table n/a Not found Locate Device ID Lookup table
n/a Not found Temperature data (.degree. F.) 50-80 20-<50,
>80-110 <20, >110 Humidity data 0-40% >40-90%
>90-100% Light data 4.0 to 5.0 volts 2.0 to <4.0 volts
<2.0 volts Inclinometer data -30 to 30 degrees <-30 to -60
<-60 to -90 degrees degrees or >30 to or >60 to 90 60
degrees degrees Accelerometer data 0.2 g to 1.0 g >1.0 g to 1.5
g >1.5 g Battery strength data 100-85% <85-50% <50%
[0221] The assessment criteria generated at acts 1414 and 1416 that
are used in evaluating the quality of a locate operation may be
generated in a variety of ways. In some embodiments, these
assessment criteria may be generated based on what information is
available in the ticket-specific information and/or what
information is available in the information obtained from the
performance of the locate operation (e.g., information from the
locate equipment). For example, in some embodiments, if light data
about the ambient light level during performance of the locate
operation is available from one or more light sensors in the locate
equipment, the "light data" may be included as one of the
assessment criteria, whereas if light data is not available, then
"light data" may not be included as one of the assessment
criteria.
[0222] The EXPECT DATA for each scoring category in each assessment
criterion and the weighting factor for each assessment criterion
may also be selected in a variety ways. For example, in some
embodiments, the EXPECT DATA for each scoring category for each
criterion and the weighting factor for each assessment criterion
may be predefined values or ranges of values for a given
assessment. In other embodiments, some or all of the EXPECT DATA
and/or weighting factors may be dynamically generated based on
information associated with the ticket and/or information obtained
regarding the performance of the locate operation.
[0223] For example, in some embodiments, the EXPECT DATA for the
geo-location assessment criteria (e.g., in Table 7, dig area
geo-location and the geo-location data for each facility marked)
may be generated from information in the ticket and/or information
associated with the ticket, such as a VWL image. In some instances,
the ticket may include a geo-location (e.g., latitude or longitude)
for a work site or an address for the work site that may be
geo-coded into a geo-location. In such instances, this geo-location
from the ticket may serve as the EXPECT DATA, and tolerances from
this geo-location may be used for each scoring category. For
instance, in the example of Table 7, the ticket may include a
geo-location of "N35.degree.43.57518, W078.degree.49.78314," for
the work site. This information may serve as a reference point to
which location data obtained during the performance of the locate
operation is compared for each criterion that relates to location,
and distance tolerances may be selected for each scoring category.
In the example of Table 7, for the assessment criterion "Dig area
geo-location," the distance tolerance for the "Preferred" scoring
category is less than or equal to 0.2 miles from the reference
point; the distance tolerance for the "Marginal" scoring category
is greater than 0.2 miles from the reference point, but less than
or equal to 0.5 miles from the reference point; and the distance
tolerance for the "Unacceptable" scoring category is greater than
0.5 miles. In addition, in the example of Table 7, for the
"geo-location data" assessment criterion for each facility that was
marked, the distance tolerance for the "Preferred" scoring category
is less than or equal to 0.1 miles from the reference point; the
distance tolerance for the "Marginal" scoring category is greater
than 0.1 miles from the reference point, but less than or equal to
0.2 miles from the reference point; and the distance tolerance for
the "Unacceptable" scoring category is greater than 0.2 miles. In
such embodiments, the distance tolerances for each scoring category
may be selected in a variety ways. For example, one or more
predefined distance tolerances may be used, or the distance
tolerances may be dynamically generated based on information
associated with the ticket or information obtained during the
locate operation.
[0224] In some instances, the ticket may include coordinates (e.g.,
latitude and longitude coordinates) of the vertices of a polygon of
a geographic area that includes the work site, or the automated
quality assessment engine may receive a VWL image that defines a
polygon around (i.e., that delimits) the dig area itself in which
excavation is planned. In some embodiments, this information may be
used to generate the EXPECT DATA for the geo-location assessment
criteria. For example, the centroid of such a polygon may be
determined and the geo-location of the centroid may be used as the
reference point for the EXPECT DATA. Distance tolerances may be
selected for each scoring category in a variety of ways. For
example, the distance from the geo-location of the centroid of the
polygon to the vertex of the polygon that is farthest from the
centroid may be determined, and this distance plus or minus one or
more buffer distances may be used as the tolerances for respective
scoring categories.
[0225] In some embodiments, some EXPECT DATA may be generated based
on the complexity of the ticket. For example, the automated quality
assessment application may receive, with the ticket for a locate
operation, an indication of the complexity of the ticket, which may
be generated, for example, using techniques described in
provisional application Ser. No. 61/220,491 filed Jun. 25, 2009,
and entitled "Systems and Methods for Assessing Field Service
Operation Tickets."
[0226] In some embodiments, the EXPECT DATA and/or weighting
factors for one or more assessment criteria may be selected based
on the level of complexity of the ticket. For example, if a ticket
is deemed to be highly complex, the weighting factors for certain
of the assessment criteria may be increased and/or decreased,
and/or the acceptable values/ranges for the scoring categories may
be made more or less stringent.
[0227] In one possible exemplary implementation, the received
complexity information may identify a ticket as complex because the
work site has rough terrain, the work site is in an area in which
damage to underground facilities by excavators has occurred in the
past, the facilities map(s) for the area that includes the work
site indicates a complex layout of one or more underground
facilities, and/or one or more high risk gas lines (e.g., based on
the diameter of the pipes, the material of the pipes, the volume,
the pressure, or some other characteristic of the pipes) or
multiple gas lines in the area of the work site (e.g., according to
facilities maps or previous locate operations in the area). If any
one or more of the reasons for complexity are present, the EXPECT
DATA for peak signal strength may be modified such that a minimum
acceptable value for the "Preferred" scoring category is 95%
(rather than 85% shown in Tables 7 and 8) and the minimum
acceptable value for the "Marginal" scoring category is 85% (rather
than 65% shown in Tables 7 and 8). As another example, the EXPECT
DATA for the accelerometer reading from the locate equipment may be
modified such that the maximum acceptable value for the "Preferred"
scoring category is 0.5 g (rather than 1.0 g, as shown in Tables 7
and 8), and the maximum acceptable value for the "Marginal" scoring
category is 11.0 g (rather than 1.5 g, as shown in Tables 7 and
8).
[0228] As another possible exemplary implementation, the quality
assessment criteria, EXPECT DATA, and/or weighting factors may be
selected based on the level of skill and/or the past performance of
the technician to which the locate operation is assigned. For
example, information 1295 in data sources 1216 may include
information regarding the experience level of the technician, the
quality of one or more past locate operations performed by the
technician, and/or other information about the skill or experience
of the technician, and one or more quality assessment criteria,
EXPECT DATA, and/or weighting factors may be adjusted based on this
information.
[0229] After act 1416, the process next continues to act 1418,
where the contents of the assessment criteria that have been
developed for the current ticket is compiled into an EXPECT DATA
vs. ACTUAL DATA table to be used when automatically generating a
locate operations quality assessment score for the current ticket.
Continuing in the example scoring criteria discussed above in
connection with Table 7, Table 8 shows an example of the resulting
EXPECT DATA vs. ACTUAL DATA scoring table for these scoring
criteria.
TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 8 Example EXPECT DATA vs. ACTUAL DATA scoring
table Expected value or range (metrics) Preferred Marginal
Unacceptable Weight Weighted Criterion (score = 2) (score = 1)
(score = 0) Factor Score EXP: Dig N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree.
43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, -- -- area geo- W078.degree.
49.78314 W078.degree. 49.78314 W078.degree. 49.78314 location
.ltoreq.0.2 miles >0.2 to .ltoreq.0.5 >0.5 miles miles ACT:
Geo- P/F location data EXP: Locate Before 05FEB09 On 05FEB09 After
05FEB09 -- -- Date ACT: x2 Timestamp data EXP: 40 mins 40 mins .+-.
10-20 mins 40 mins .+-. >20 mins -- -- Elapsed time ACT: x2
Timestamp data EXP: RED color data n/a RED color data -- -- Type =
Electric present absent power ACT: Color x5 data EXP: Geo-
N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518,
-- -- location W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. W078.degree. 49.78314
.+-. W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. 0 to 0.1 mi >0.1 to <0.2 mi
>0.2 mi ACT: Geo- x2 location data EXP: Gain 0-45 >45-70
>70-100 ACT: Gain x1 EXP: Sig. 100-85% <85% Any -- --
strength ACT: Signal X1 data EXP: YELLOW color n/a YELLOW color --
-- Type = Gas, data absent data present oil ACT: Color X5 data EXP:
ORANGE color n/a ORANGE color -- -- Type = Com, data absent data
present CATV ACT: Color x5 data EXP: BLUE color data n/a BLUE color
-- -- Type = Water present data absent ACT: Color X5 data EXP: Geo-
N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518,
-- -- location W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. W078.degree. 49.78314
.+-. W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. 0 to 0.1 mi >0.1 to <0.2 mi
>0.2 mi ACT: Geo- X2 location data EXP: Gain 0-45 >45-70
>70-100 ACT: Gain X1 EXP: Peak 100-85% <85-65% <65% -- --
Sig. strength ACT: Signal X1 data EXP: GREEN color n/a GREEN color
-- -- Type = Sewer data absent data present ACT: Color X5 data EXP:
PURPLE color n/a PURPLE color -- -- Type = Irrigation data absent
data present ACT: Color x5 data EXP: Locate Lookup table n/a Not
found technician ID ACT: Locate P/F technician ID EXP: Lookup table
n/a Not found Marking Device ID ACT: P/F Marking Device ID EXP:
Locate Lookup table n/a Not found Device ID ACT: Locate P/F Device
ID EXP: Temp 50-80 20-<50, >80-110 <20, >110 -- --
(.degree. F.) ACT: Temp x2 data EXP: 0-40% >40-90% >90-100%
-- -- Humidity ACT: x2 Humidity data EXP: Light 4.0 to 5.0 volts
2.0 to <4.0 volts <2.0 volts -- -- ACT: Light x2 data EXP:
-30 to 30 degrees <-30 to -60 <-60 to -90 -- -- Inclinometer
degrees or >30 degrees or >60 to 60 degrees to 90 degrees
ACT: x1 Inclinometer data EXP: 0.2 g to 1.0 g >1.0 g to 1.5 g
>1.5 g -- -- Accelerometer data ACT: x1 EXP: Battery 100-85%
<85-50% <50% -- -- strength data ACT: Battery x5 strength
data
[0230] The process next continues to act 1420, where the ACTUAL
DATA from the locate operation is read into the scoring table and
each ACTUAL DATA item is compared to its corresponding EXPECT DATA
and assigned a score. Continuing the example from above, Table 9
below shows and example of scores (e.g., weighted scores) that are
assigned to each item based on the EXPECT DATA vs. ACTUAL DATA
comparison.
[0231] The ACTUAL DATA may be obtained from various sources in a
variety of ways and the invention is not limited to obtaining the
ACTUAL DATA from any particular source or in any particular
way.
[0232] For example, in the example of Table 9 below, in some
embodiments, the ACTUAL DATA for the dig area geo-location may be
obtained from a GPS device in the field service technician's
vehicle, an electronic manifest created by the field service
technician, from a GPS device in the locate equipment used by the
field service technician, or in some other way.
[0233] The ACTUAL DATA for the date and time at which the locate
operation was performed may be obtained from one or more of the GPS
devices described above, from an internal clock in the locate
equipment or in a handheld computer used or carried by the
technician, or in some other way.
[0234] The ACTUAL DATA for the elapsed time for the locate
operation may be determined, for example, by determining the time
elapsed between when the locate technician arrived at the work site
and when the locate technician left the work site. This information
may be determined from a GPS device in the vehicle used by the
technician, which can provide a time at which the vehicle arrived
at the work site and a time of departure from the work site. Of
course, this is merely one example of a way in which the time
elapsed may be determined. Various other ways are possible, and any
of these ways may be used.
[0235] In addition, for each facility marked, ACTUAL DATA may be
obtained identifying the color of marking material used and the
location at which the marking material was dispensed on the ground
from the marking device. In addition, the PEAK and NULL signal
strength at the location at which the facility was marked or not
marked may be obtained from the locate receiver. In the example of
Table 9, one sample of data per facility marked from the marking
device and the locate receiver is used in the score computation
(i.e., one geographic location and color data from the marking
device and one peak and null signal value from the locate receiver,
per facility). The sample of geo-location data that is selected for
use in the score computation may be selected in a variety ways. For
example, the sample of data that is used may be based on some
characteristic of the sample (e.g., the sample with the largest or
smallest latitude, the sample with the largest or smallest
longitude, the sample obtained the earliest in time, the sample
obtained the latest in time, etc.) or in some other way.
[0236] However, the invention is not limited in this respect, as in
some embodiments, multiple samples of data per facility may be
used. In embodiments in which multiple samples of data per facility
are used, various techniques may be employed for determining a
score using these multiple samples. For example, two samples of
data indicating a location at which the marking material was put on
the ground (per facility) may be used, and a point value may be
assigned for each sample and included in the score computation. The
samples that are selected may be selected in any of the ways
discussed above or in some other way.
[0237] The ACTUAL DATA for environmental conditions (e.g.,
temperature, humidity, light) and for locate equipment conditions
(e.g., inclinometer data, accelerometer data, battery strength
data) may be obtained from sensors in the marking wand and/or
locate receiver. In the example of Table 9, for each of these
assessment criteria, only one sample of ACTUAL DATA from the locate
equipment is used in the score computation. In embodiments in which
only one sample of data is used, the sample that is selected may be
chosen in a variety of ways. For example, the sample with the
maximum value may be selected, the sample with the minimum value
may be selected, the sample with average (e.g., median or mean)
value may be selected, or the sample that is used may be selected
in some other way. As an example, for the assessment criterion
"Light," the average light value of all data samples obtained
during the locate operation may be used, and this average value may
be used as the ACTUAL DATA for the assessment criterion
"Light."
TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 9 Example EXPECT DATA vs. ACTUAL DATA scoring
table Expected value or range Preferred Marginal Unacceptable
Weight Weighted Criterion (score = 2) (score = 1) (score = 0)
Factor Score EXP: Dig N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518,
N35.degree. 43.57518, -- -- area geo- W078.degree. 49.78314
W078.degree. 49.78314 W078.degree. 49.78314 location .ltoreq.0.2
miles >0.2 to .ltoreq.0.5 >0.5 miles miles ACT: Geo-
N35.degree. 43.57518, P/F P location W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-.
data 0.04 mi EXP: Before 05FEB09 On 05FEB09 After 05FEB09 -- --
Locate Date ACT: 04FEB09; x2 4 Timestamp 09:35:15.2 data EXP: 40
mins 40 mins .+-. 10-20 mins 40 mins .+-. >20 mins -- -- Elapsed
time ACT: 54 mins x2 2 Timestamp data EXP: RED color data n/a RED
color data -- -- Type = Electric present absent power ACT: Color
RED present x5 10 data EXP: Geo- N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree.
43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, -- -- location W078.degree.
49.78314 .+-. W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-.
0 to 0.1 mi >0.1 to <0.2 mi >0.2 mi ACT: Geo- N35.degree.
43.57518, x2 4 location W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. data 0.04 mi
EXP: Gain 0-45 >45-70 >70-100 ACT: Gain 35 X1 2 EXP: Sig.
100-85% <85-65% <65% -- -- strength ACT: 83% x1 1 Signal data
EXP: YELLOW color n/a YELLOW color -- -- Type = Gas, data absent
data present oil ACT: Color YELLOW absent x5 10 data EXP: ORANGE
color n/a ORANGE color -- -- Type = Com, data absent data present
CATV ACT: Color ORANGE absent x5 10 data EXP: BLUE color data n/a
BLUE color -- -- Type = Water present data absent ACT: Color BLUE
present x5 10 data EXP: Geo- N35.degree. 43.57518, N35.degree.
43.57518, N35.degree. 43.57518, -- -- location W078.degree.
49.78314 .+-. W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-.
0 to 0.1 mi >0.1 to <0.2 mi >0.2 mi ACT: Geo- N35.degree.
43.57518, x2 2 location W078.degree. 49.78314 .+-. data 0.14 mi
EXP: Gain 0-45 >45-70 >70-100 ACT: Gain 35 X1 2 EXP: Sig.
100-85% <85-65% <65% -- -- strength ACT: 87% x1 2 Signal data
EXP: GREEN color n/a GREEN color -- -- Type = Sewer data absent
data present ACT: Color GREEN absent x5 10 data EXP: PURPLE color
n/a PURPLE color -- -- Type = Irrigation data absent data present
ACT: Color PURPLE absent x5 10 data EXP: Lookup table n/a Not found
Locate technician ID ACT: 4815 P/F P Locate technician ID EXP:
Lookup table n/a Not found Marking Device ID ACT: 7362 P/F P
Marking Device ID EXP: Lookup table n/a Not found Locate Device ID
ACT: 7345 P/F P Locate Device ID EXP: Temp 50-80 20-<50,
>80-110 <20, >110 -- (.degree. F.) ACT: Temp 73 F x2 4
data EXP: 0-40% >40-90% >90-100% -- -- Humidity ACT: 52% x2 2
Humidity data EXP: Light 4.0 to 5.0 volts 2.0 to <4.0 volts
<2.0 volts -- -- ACT: Light 4.3 volts x2 4 data EXP: -30 to 30
degrees <-30 to -60 <-60 to -90 -- -- Inclinometer degrees or
>30 degrees or >60 to 60 degrees to 90 degrees ACT: -17 x1 2
Inclinometer data EXP: 0.2 g to 1.0 g >1.0 g to 1.5 g >1.5 g
-- -- Accelerometer data ACT: 0.375 g x1 2 EXP: 100-85% <85-50%
<50% -- -- Battery strength data ACT: 93% x5 10 Battery strength
data Total points earned out of a possible 110 = 103 Percent Score
= 93.6%
[0238] The process next continues to act 1422, where the automated
quality assessment application determines whether there is an
absolute fail condition using, for example, the PASS/FAIL criteria
described above in connection with Table 4. In some embodiments,
the ACTUAL DATA may be compared to the PASS/FAIL criteria to
determine if a PASS/FAIL condition is present. For example, data
from the electronic manifest (e.g., EM images 1262) for the marking
operation may be used to determine whether each member code in the
ticket (i.e., each facility) has been marked or cleared.
Additionally, the time of completion of the electronic manifest may
be used to determine whether the locate operation was completed by
the due date specified in the ticket. If an absolute fail condition
is present, process 1400 continues to act 1424. If no absolute fail
condition is present, process 1400 continues to act 1426.
[0239] At act 1424, the automated quality assessment application
generates a failing locate operations quality assessment score
(e.g., locate operation score=FAIL) and may optionally discontinue
any further analysis with respect to generating a locate operations
quality assessment score. Quality assessment application 1200 may
indicate a failing score to a human operator. For example, in some
embodiments, quality assessment application may provided a GUI
similar to that of quality assessment application 130 via which a
human reviewer may review tickets assessed by ticket approval
application 1200. When a human reviewer reviews a ticket that
quality assessment application has give a score of FAIL, the score
of FAIL may be displayed on the ticket. In some embodiments, when a
score of FAIL is given, the ticket may be forward to a human QC
reviewer using the techniques described above (e.g., at act 1322 of
FIG. 15).
[0240] At act 1426, the automated quality assessment application
automatically generates an objective locate operations quality
assessment score. For example, the automated quality assessment
application calculates an overall locate operations quality
assessment score based on the comparison of ACTUAL DATA to EXPECT
DATA discussed above in connection with FIG. 9. In particular, the
automated quality assessment application may first determine the
maximum number of points possible for the locate operation by first
determining the sum of all weight factors and then multiplying this
sum by the point value of the "Preferred" result. The automated
quality assessment application may then determine the sum of the
points earned for the current locate operation. The automated
quality assessment application may then calculate, for example, a
percent score for the current locate operation.
[0241] For example and referring to Table 9, the sum of the weight
factors is 55 and the point value of the "Preferred" result is 2.
Therefore, in this example the maximum number of points possible
for the locate operation is 55.times.2, which is 110. The automated
quality assessment application may then determine the sum of the
points earned for the current locate operation, which in Table 9 is
103. The automated quality assessment application then calculates,
for example, the percent score for the current locate operation,
which in this example is 103/110.times.100=93.6%.
[0242] In some embodiments, a range of percent scores may be
converted to letter scores, so that automated quality assessment
application may assign, to a locate operation, a letter score
indicative of its quality. For example, a percent score of 100-90%
may be converted to a letter score of A, 89-80% may be converted to
a letter score of B, 79-70% may be converted to a letter score of
C, 69-60% may be converted to a letter score of D, and <60% may
be converted to a letter score of F. In yet another example, a
range of percent scores may be converted to a simple PASS/FAIL
score. For example, a percent score of 100-60% may be converted to
a score of PASS and a percent score of <60% may be converted to
a score of FAIL.
[0243] In other embodiments, the numerical quality assessment score
may be used to automatically categorize a locate operation as
either APPROVED, SATISFACTORY, or UNSATISFACTORY. In one example,
using the numeric scoring system of 0 to 100%, a score of 60% or
below may automatically render an assessment of UNSATISFACTORY, in
which case, after act 1314 of FIG. 15, the process continues to act
1322. A score of >60% to 80% may automatically render an
assessment of SATISFACTORY, in which case the process continues to
act 1318, and a score of >80% to 100% may automatically render a
ticket assessment of APPROVED, and the process may continue to act
1316.
[0244] Referring to Tables 5 through 9 techniques for calculating a
locate operation quality assessment score as described above are
not limited to using the three scoring categories per assessment
criterion--e.g., unacceptable, marginal, and preferred, providing a
scoring range of 0-2 for each element of the scoring criteria. This
is exemplary only. In other embodiments, the scoring categories may
be as broad or granular as desired. For example, there may be ten
scoring categories, which provide a scoring range of 0-9 for each
assessment criterion; there may be five scoring categories, which
provide a scoring range of 0-4 for each assessment criterion; and
so on.
C. Other Examples
[0245] A number of examples of ways that information from data
sources 1216 may be used to automatically assess the quality of a
locate operation are discussed below (e.g., at acts 1312 and 1314
of FIG. 15). Many of these examples have been discussed to some
extent in the previous section It should be appreciated that the
invention is not limited to any of these examples, and that these
examples are provided primarily for purposes of illustration.
[0246] With respect to tickets 1220, information processing
component 1210 may analyze information that is provided about the
locate operation (e.g., from locating equipment data 1250 or EM
application 1260) with respect to the contents of textual ticket
information 1222 of the ticket 1220 in response to which a locate
operation was performed. In one example, information processing
component 1210 may analyze the actual types of facilities located
or cleared against the requested types of facilities to be located
or cleared according, for example, to the originating ticket
1220.
[0247] With respect to VWL application 1230, information processing
component 1210 may analyze information that is provided about the
locate operation (e.g., from locating equipment data 1250 or EM
application 1260) with respect to the contents of the VWL image
1232 of the ticket 1220 of interest. In one example, information
processing component 1210 may analyze the actual geo-locations of
the facilities located or cleared against the expected geo-location
of the dig area as indicated in the VWL image 1232 of the ticket
1220 of interest (e.g., based on geo-coordinates for a polygon
delimiting the dig area).
[0248] With respect to ticket assessment application 1240,
information processing component 1210 may analyze information that
is provided about the locate operation (e.g., from locating
equipment data 1250 or EM application 1260) with respect to the
contents of the ticket assessment outcome 1242 of the ticket 1220
of interest. In one example, information processing component 1210
may analyze the actual duration of the locate operation against the
expected duration as indicated in the ticket assessment outcome
1242 of the ticket 1220 of interest. In another example,
information processing component 1210 may query the risk and/or
complexity information in the ticket assessment outcome 1242, which
may cause information processing component 1210 to place higher or
lesser importance on certain aspects of the locate operation.
[0249] With respect to locating equipment data 1250, information
processing component 1210 may analyze information that is provided
about the locate operation via the locating equipment data 1250
with respect to determining the actual work performed for the
ticket 1220 of interest. In one example, information processing
component 1210 may analyze the color and geo-location(s) of marking
material that has been dispensed by a marking device and/or the
strength and geo-location of signals detected by a locate receiver
device and generate an electronic representation of the locate
operation, which may be compared against the expected locate
operation activities according, for example, to the ticket 1220 of
interest.
[0250] With respect to EM application 1260, information processing
component 1210 may analyze information that is provided about the
locate operation via the contents of the EM image 1262 of the
ticket 1220 of interest. Because each EM image 1262 may include
metadata that may be analyzed and/or may be saved in a
self-describing format, such as Extensible Markup Language (XML)
format, the attributes of each mark and/or shape therein may be
analyzed by information processing component 1210, where
collectively the marks and/or shapes may represent the actual types
and geo-locations of the facilities located or cleared during
locate operations of the ticket 1220 of interest. As a result,
information processing component 1210 may analyze the actual types
and geo-locations of the facilities located or cleared, as
indicated in the EM image 1262, against the expected types and
geo-locations of the facilities according to the ticket 1220 of
interest.
[0251] With respect to facilities maps 1280, information processing
component 1210 may analyze information that is provided about the
locate operation with respect to the contents of facilities maps
1280 associated with the ticket 1220 of interest. In one example,
information processing component 1210 may analyze the actual types
and geo-locations of the facilities located or cleared for the
ticket 1220 of interest against the expected types and
geo-locations of the facilities according to the corresponding
facilities maps 1280.
[0252] With respect to historical tickets 1290, information
processing component 1210 may analyze information that is returned
about the locate operation with respect to the contents of
historical tickets 1290 associated with the ticket 1220 of
interest. In one example, information processing component 1210 may
analyze the actual types and geo-locations of the facilities
located or cleared for the ticket 1220 of interest against the
expected types and geo-locations of the facilities according to the
corresponding historical tickets 1290.
[0253] Referring to FIG. 15, at decision step 1314, based on the
automatic ticket assessment of step 1312, if information processing
component 1210 of automated quality assessment application 1200
determines that substantially all aspects of the locate operation
of the ticket 1220 of interest are satisfactory, information
processing component 1210 may automatically categorize the locate
operation as APPROVED and process 1300 proceeds to step 1316. In
one example, if the information in locating equipment data 1250
and/or the EM image 1262 of interest satisfactorily match the
expected work to be performed according to one or more of textual
ticket information 1222, the VWL image 1232 of the ticket 1220 of
interest, facilities maps 1280, and/or historical tickets 1290, for
example, the quality assessment outcome 1212 indicates "APPROVED"
and process 1300 proceeds to step 1316. In some embodiments, an
indication that the a ticket has been approved may be provided via
a GUI of quality assessment application 1200 via which a human
reviewer may review tickets that have been assessed by application
1200. When a human reviewer accesses a ticket that has been
approved by application 1200, the GUI may display an indication
that the ticket has been approved.
[0254] However, if information processing component 1210 of
automated quality assessment application 1200 determines that the
locate operation itself is satisfactory, but certain aspects of the
information provided about the locate operation indicate that the
locate technician needs coaching and/or additional training,
information processing component 1210 may automatically categorize
the locate operation as SATISFACTORY and method 1300 proceeds to
step 1318, wherein a coaching referral is processed. In one
example, if the information in locating equipment data 1250 and/or
the EM image 1262 match the expected work to be performed according
to, for example, one or more of textual ticket information 1222 and
the VWL image 1232, but certain aspects of the information provided
about the locate operation indicate that the locate technician
needs coaching and/or additional training, the quality assessment
outcome 1212 indicates "SATISFACTORY," a coaching referral is
generated, and process 1300 proceeds to step 1318.
[0255] Further, if information processing component 1210 of
automated quality assessment application 1200 determines that
important aspects of the locate operation are unsatisfactory, the
locate operation is automatically categorized as UNSATISFACTORY, a
QC referral is generated, and method 1300 proceeds to step 1322. In
one example, if the information in locating equipment data 1250
and/or the EM image 1262 satisfactorily match the expected work to
be performed according to, for example, one or more of textual
ticket information 1222 and the VWL image 1232 of the ticket 1220
of interest, but certain aspects of the information provided about
the locate operation indicate that aspects of the locate operation
are unsatisfactory, the quality assessment outcome 1212 indicates
"UNSATISFACTORY" and method 1300 proceeds to step 1322.
[0256] Additionally, if information processing component 1210 of
automated quality assessment application 1200 determines that it
may be beneficial to address certain aspects of the locate
operation in real time (i.e., while the locate technician is still
on site), the locate operation may be automatically categorized as
PROMPT and method 1300 proceeds to step 1328. For example, if the
information in locating equipment data 1250 and/or the EM image
1262 indicate that certain aspects of the locate operation may be
addressed in real time in order to render a satisfactory match with
the expected work to be performed according to, for example,
textual ticket information 1222 and/or the VWL image 1232 of the
ticket 1220 of interest, the quality assessment outcome 1212
indicates "PROMPT" and method 1300 proceeds to act 1328.
[0257] In generating quality assessment outcomes 1212 at act 1314,
automated quality assessment application 1200 may use tickets 1220,
VWL application 1230, ticket assessment application 1240, locating
equipment data 1250, EM application 1260, facilities maps 1280,
historical tickets 1290, any other electronic information and/or
records 1295, and any combinations thereof. Further, the contents
of any one or more data sources 1216 may be used by automated
quality assessment application 1200 to weight and/or otherwise
influence the interpretation (fully or in part) of any other data
sources 1216 in the process of generating quality assessment
outcomes 1212.
[0258] At act 1316, the quality assessment process is completed.
The information that is associated with approved tickets may be
stored with the appropriate ticket(s) as a part of an archival
process. The numerical count of approved tickets for the system may
be updated and stored.
[0259] At act 1318, the coaching referral that is generated at act
1314 because the quality assessment outcome 1312 indicates
"SATISFACTORY" is routed to coaching personnel. For example, the
coaching referral may be directed to any locate operations
supervisor, a quality control supervisor, and/or any other
management personnel of the locate company. The content of the
coaching referral may include, for example, the name of the locate
technician who is to be the subject of the locate operations
coaching activity, the ticket number that generated the coaching
referral, the suggested subject area or topic of the coaching
activity, and the suggested timeframe in which to conduct the
coaching activity.
[0260] At act 1320, coaching personnel performs the coaching
activity with the locate technician. For example, the locate
operations supervisor performs coaching activities with the locate
technician according to the contents of the coaching referral. In
one example, information processing component 1210 may determine
that the duration of the locate operation is less than or greater
than expected and, thus, the locate technician needs coaching with
respect to working effectively. In another example, information
processing component 1210 may determine that the environmental
conditions of the locate operation are less than ideal and, thus,
the locate technician needs coaching with respect to protocols for
performing work in various environmental conditions.
[0261] At act 1322, the ticket that is the subject of QC referral
because the quality assessment outcome 1212 indicates
"UNSATISFACTORY" at act 1314 is routed to, for example, a certain
QC personnel for review and a course of action is determined. For
example, a certain QC supervisor receives the QC referral and
reviews the contents of the quality assessment outcome 1212 for the
ticket 1220 of interest and any supporting information that is
associated with the ticket 1220 of interest, such as, but not
limited to, the textual ticket information 1222, the VWL image
1232, the locating equipment data 150 that was collected during the
locate operation, the EM image 1262, and any facilities maps 1280
and/or historical tickets 1290 that correspond to the dig area of
the ticket. Subsequently, the QC supervisor may determine a course
of action. In one example, it may be determined that one or more
types of facilities were not marked or cleared according to the
instructions (e.g., textual ticket information 1222) of the ticket
1220 of interest. In another example, it may be determined that the
geographic location of the work performed does not match the
location information of the ticket 1220 of interest. In yet another
example, it may be determined that the date of the work performed
does not match the locate request date information of the ticket
1220 of interest.
[0262] At act 1324, QC personnel routes the ticket to a QC
technician for execution. For example, the QC supervisor routes the
QC request to a QC technician and/or to the original locate
technician who returns to the dig area to perform the required
tasks. In the example in which it is determined that the QC request
was generated because one or more types of facilities were not
marked or cleared according to the instructions (e.g., textual
ticket information 1222) of the ticket 1220 of interest, the QC
technician and/or the original locate technician returns to the dig
area to perform a locate operation on the facilities in question.
In the example in which it is determined that the geographic
location of the work performed does not match the location
information of the ticket 1220 of interest, the QC technician
and/or the original locate technician returns to the correct dig
area location to perform the locate operation.
[0263] At act 1326, the QC technician and/or the original locate
technician completes the ticket and provides updated ticket
information (e.g., the technician revisiting the dig area in order
to perform the tasks that are necessary to satisfy the QC
referral). Upon completion of the QC operation, updated ticket
information, such as, but not limited to, updated locating
equipment data 1250 that is collected during the QC operation and
the updated EM image 126 is accessible to automated quality
assessment application 1200.
[0264] At act 1328, using feedback component 1214 of automated
quality assessment application 1200, a real-time prompt is routed
to the originating locate technician who, preferably, is still
onsite at the dig area. The real-time prompt is generated because
the quality assessment outcome 1212 indicates "PROMPT" at act
1314.
[0265] At act 1330, the originating locate technician processes the
real-time prompt, completes the ticket, and provides updated ticket
information. In one example, it may be determined that one or more
types of facilities were not marked or cleared according to the
instructions (e.g., textual ticket information 1222) of the ticket
1220 of interest. In this example, the locate technician may be
prompted to double check the ticket information and perform a
locate operation on the facilities in question. In another example,
it may be determined that the geographic locations of locate marks
for one or more types of facilities are outside a certain tolerance
of the expected geographic locations of the facilities. In this
example, the locate technician may be prompted to perform the
locate operation a second time for verification. Upon completion of
the tasks as instructed in the real-time prompt, updated ticket
information, such as, but not limited to, updated locating
equipment data 1250 that is collected during the locate operation
and the updated EM image 1262, is accessible to automated quality
assessment application 1200.
[0266] Process 1300 is not limited to the operations that are
described in FIG. 15. Other operations may occur, such as tracking
the status of QC referrals, flagging delinquent QC referrals,
tracking the status of coaching referrals, flagging delinquent
coaching referrals, tracking the total ticket numbers across the
entire service provider, and dashboard reporting. Additional
details of a system that includes automated quality assessment
application 1200 of the present disclosure and that is suitable to
facilitate process 1300 of FIG. 15 are described with reference to
FIGS. 15 and 16, respectively.
[0267] Referring to FIG. 19, a functional block diagram of an
example of an automated quality assessment system 1500 that
includes automated quality assessment application 1200 for
automatically performing quality control in underground facility
locate applications is presented. It should be appreciated that the
various elements shown in FIG. 19 are for the purposes of
illustration, and that not all elements depicted are necessarily
required in various exemplary implementations. Automated quality
assessment system 1500 may include a work management server 1510,
which is maintained and operated by, for example, a locate company
(not shown). Work management server 1510 may be any local or
centralized computing device that is capable of hosting an
application. In one implementation, work management server 1510 may
be a networked application server and/or web server that is
connected to a network 1540. Personnel (not shown) that are
associated with automated quality assessment system 1500 may
include, but are not limited to, locate operations supervisors, QC
supervisors, and/or any other management personnel of the locate
company, QC technicians, and locate technicians, such as locate
technicians 1512.
[0268] Residing on work management server 1510 may be automated
quality assessment application 1200 of the present disclosure,
which is referenced in FIG. 14. Work management server 1510 may
further include a workforce management application 1514, which may
be business software for assigning locate request tickets and
dispatching personnel into the field. Additionally, ticket
assessment application 1240 may reside on work management server
1510 for assessing tickets 1220 and the associated VWL images 1232,
as referenced in FIG. 14.
[0269] In one implementation, work management server 1510 is
accessible to any other entities of automated quality assessment
system 1500 that are connected to network 1540. Network 1540 may
be, for example, any local area network (LAN) and/or wide area
network (WAN) for connecting to the Internet. Network 1540 provides
the communication link between any and/or all entities of automated
quality assessment system 1500. For example, network 1540 provides
the communication network by which information may be exchanged
between work management server 1510, one or more onsite computers
1516 and/or locating equipment 1518 that are used by locate
technicians 1512 in the field, an application server 1526, an image
server 1528, and one or more one-call centers 1532.
[0270] In order to connect to network 340, each entity of automated
quality assessment system 1500 includes a communication interface
(not shown). For example, the respective communication interfaces
of work management server 1510, onsite computers 1516, locating
equipment 1518, application server 1526, image server 1528, and
one-call centers 1532 may be any wired and/or wireless
communication interface by which information may be exchanged
between any entities of automated quality assessment system 1500.
Examples of wired communication interfaces may include, but are not
limited to, USB ports, RS232 connectors, RJ45 connectors, Ethernet,
and any combinations thereof. Examples of wireless communication
interfaces may include, but are not limited to, an Intranet
connection, Internet, Bluetooth.RTM. technology, Wi-Fi, Wi-Max,
IEEE 802.11 technology, radio frequency (RF), Infrared Data
Association (IrDA) compatible protocols, Local Area Networks (LAN),
Wide Area Networks (WAN), Shared Wireless Access Protocol (SWAP),
any combinations thereof, and other types of wireless networking
protocols. Additionally, the wireless interface may be capable of
capturing signals that reflect a user's intent. Further, the
wireless interface may interact with a device that monitors a
condition or biological state of the user, such as eye movement,
brain activity, heart rate, and/or other subtle signals.
[0271] Onsite computers 1516 may be any computing devices that are
capable of processing and executing program instructions. Onsite
computers 1516 may be used by locate technicians 1512 that are
performing locate operations in the field. For example, each onsite
computer 1516 may be a portable computer, a personal computer, a
tablet device, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a cellular
radiotelephone, a mobile computing device, a touch-screen device, a
touchpad device, or generally any device including, or connected
to, a processor and a user interface. Preferably, each onsite
computer 1516 is a portable computing device, such as laptop
computer or tablet device. Onsite computers 1516 may be used by
locate technicians 1512 to process locating equipment data 1250
that may be returned from locating equipment 1518 during locate
operations. Additionally, EM application 1260, which is referenced
in FIG. 14, may reside on each onsite computer 1516 for use by
locate technicians 1512 to document locate operations while at the
work site.
[0272] Locating equipment 1518 may be any locating equipment that
is used by locate technicians 1512 in the field to perform locate
operations and that is capable of providing locating equipment data
1250, which is referenced in FIG. 14. The locating equipment data
1250 may be passed from locating equipment 1518 directly to network
1540 and/or managed by onsite computers 1516 that are connected to
network 1540. In one example, locating equipment 1518 may include a
marking device 1520 having a housing, a locate receiver 1522, a
locate transmitter 1524, and any combinations thereof.
[0273] Application server 1526 of automated quality assessment
system 1500 may be any application server, such as a web
application server and/or web portal, by which one or more
excavators 1536 may access VWL application 1230, which is
referenced in FIG. 14, with respect to generating VWL images 1232
for indicating the dig area. Excavators 1536 may be any personnel
associated with excavation companies (not shown), such as, but not
limited to, individuals who are requesting and/or performing
excavation activities. Excavators 1536 may access application
server 1526 for generating VWL images 1232 and for submitting
tickets 1220 to one-call centers 1532.
[0274] Image server 1528 may be any computer device for storing and
providing input images 1530, such as, but not limited to, vertical
aerial images, oblique aerial images, and/or any images of
geographic locations. Input images 1530 may be accessed by VWL
application 1230 of application server 1526 and marked up with
virtual white lines by excavators 1536 in order to create VWL
images 1232. In this way, input images 1530 may be the source
images for VWL application 1230.
[0275] Similarly, input images 1530 may be accessed by EM
application 1260 of onsite computers 1516 and marked up by locate
technicians 1512 in order to create EM images 1262. In this way,
input images 1530 may be the source images for EM application 1260
on each onsite computer 1516. Additionally, VWL images 1232 that
are associated with tickets 1220 may be the source images for EM
application 1260 of onsite computers 1516.
[0276] As noted above, automated quality assessment system 1500 is
not limited to the types and numbers of entities that are shown in
FIG. 19. Any types and numbers of entities that may be useful in
underground facilities locate applications may be included in
automated quality assessment system 1500. More details of the
operation of automated quality assessment system 1500 for
automatically performing quality control in underground facility
locate applications are described with reference to FIG. 20. Also,
it should be appreciated that while the automatic quality
assessment application 1200 is shown as part of a workforce
management server in the exemplary system of FIG. 19, in other
embodiments an apparatus for executing the automatic quality
assessment application 1200, such as the apparatus 1800 shown in
FIG. 12, may reside within a housing of one or more pieces of
locating equipment, such as within the housing of marking device
1520.
[0277] Referring to FIG. 20, a flow diagram of an example of a
method 1700 of using automated quality assessment system 1500 that
includes automated quality assessment application 1200 of the
present disclosure is presented. Method 1700 may include, but is
not limited to, the following steps, which may be implemented in
any order.
[0278] At act 1710, excavators may generate VWL images and submit
locate request tickets. For example, excavators 1536 may generate
VWL images 1232 to indicate the planned excavation by accessing VWL
application 1230 of application server 1526. A certain input image
1530 may be retrieved from image server 1528 via network 1540. This
input image 1530 may be the image that is marked up with virtual
white lines using VWL application 1230. Excavators 1536 may then
submit locate requests using any submission process, such as the
submission process provided by one-call centers 1532.
[0279] At act 1712, the tickets are transmitted to locate companies
and processed. For example, tickets 1220 with the associated VWL
images 1232 are transmitted via network 1540 from one-call centers
1532 to work management server 1510, which is associated with a
certain locate company. Tickets 1220 with the associated VWL images
1232 are assigned to locate technicians 1512 who are dispatched
into the field to perform locate operations. In particular, tickets
1220 with the associated VWL images 1232 are transmitted via
network 1540 from work management server 1510 to onsite computers
1516 of locate technicians 1512 who are in the field.
[0280] At act 1714, the locate technicians in the field receive the
tickets and perform locate operations accordingly. For example,
locate technicians 1512 in the field receive tickets 1220 with the
associated VWL images 1232 at onsite computers 1516, review the
information of the ticket 1220 and VWL images 1232 of interest, and
perform locate operations using locating equipment 1518, such as
marking device 1520, locate receiver 1522, locate transmitter 1524,
and/or any combinations thereof.
[0281] At act 1716, during locate operations, information about the
locate operations is collected onsite. For example, while locate
technicians 1512 are performing locate operations, marking device
data from marking device 1520 and/or locate receiver data from
locate receiver 1522 is collected and stored as locating equipment
data 1250 at onsite computers 1516. Additionally, locate
technicians 1512 may use EM application 1260 at onsite computers
1516 to create EM images 1262 that reflect work performed during
the locate operation associated with the ticket 1220 of interest.
In one example, the VWL image 1232 of the originating ticket 1220
may be the starting image to be marked up using EM application
1260. Alternatively, a certain input image 1530 may be retrieved
from image server 1528 via network 1540. This input image 1530 may
then be the starting image for EM application 1260. When the locate
operations are completed, all information that is collected,
entered, or otherwise processed when performing locate operations
is saved in completed tickets 1534 at onsite computers 1516. For
example, completed tickets 1534 may include associated EM images
1262 and locating equipment data 1250. Completed tickets 1534 also
maintain any original ticket information, such as any textual
ticket information 1222 of the original tickets 1220.
[0282] At act 1718, completed tickets that include a collection of
information about the locate operations are transmitted to
automated quality assessment application for processing. For
example, completed tickets 1534 that may include EM images 1262
and/or locating equipment data 1250 are transmitted via network
1540 from onsite computers 1516 to automated quality assessment
application 1200 at work management server 1510 for processing.
[0283] At act 1720, the quality assessment process is automatically
performing on completed tickets 1534 using, for example, one or
more of the automated quality assessment techniques describe
above.
[0284] At act 1722, completed tickets 1534, quality assessment
outcomes 1212, and any other associated information are stored at
work management server 1510. The outcomes may be displayed via a
GUI provided by application 1200 such that a human reviewer may
review that outcomes generated by application 1200. Additionally,
quality assessment outcomes 1212 may be aggregated over time and
may themselves become a component of data sources 1216 in the form
of, for example, historical quality assessment outcomes. Further,
the aggregated quality assessment outcomes 1212 may be used for any
data analysis purposes.
[0285] Referring again to FIGS. 15 and 16, while automated quality
assessment application 1200 is shown installed and executing on
work management server 1510 of automated quality assessment system
1500, this is exemplary only. The functionality of automated
quality assessment application 1200 may reside fully or in part at
any one or more entities of automated quality assessment system
1500, as long as the one or more entities have suitable processing
capability and access to at least some of the data sources 1216.
For example, the functionality of automated quality assessment
application 1200 may be installed and executing fully or in part on
one or more onsite computers 1516, one or more devices of locating
equipment 1518, application server 1526, image server 1528, one or
more one-call centers 1532, and so on.
[0286] Additionally, while the automated quality assessment system
and methods described above have been presented in the context of
oversight and quality control of locate operations, the system and
methods of the present disclosure are not limited to locate
operations involving underground facilities only. The system and
methods of the present disclosure are suitable for performing
quality control of locate operations, activities to detect or infer
the presence or absence of aboveground facilities, and any
combination thereof. Additionally, the system and methods of the
present disclosure can be used in other industries and practices
such as, for example, used in the inspection practices of the
building and construction fields.
[0287] Furthermore, while the automated quality assessment system
and methods described herein have been presented in the context of
oversight and quality control of locate operations, the system and
methods of the present disclosure may be useful in location
operations training environments and/or other location operations
simulation environments.
[0288] While various inventive embodiments have been described and
illustrated herein, those of ordinary skill in the art will readily
envision a variety of other means and/or structures for performing
the function and/or obtaining the results and/or one or more of the
advantages described herein, and each of such variations and/or
modifications is deemed to be within the scope of the inventive
embodiments described herein. More generally, those skilled in the
art will readily appreciate that all parameters, dimensions,
materials, and configurations described herein are meant to be
exemplary and that the actual parameters, dimensions, materials,
and/or configurations will depend upon the specific application or
applications for which the inventive teachings is/are used. Those
skilled in the art will recognize, or be able to ascertain using no
more than routine experimentation, many equivalents to the specific
inventive embodiments described herein. It is, therefore, to be
understood that the foregoing embodiments are presented by way of
example only and that, within the scope of the appended claims and
equivalents thereto, inventive embodiments may be practiced
otherwise than as specifically described and claimed. Inventive
embodiments of the present disclosure are directed to each
individual feature, system, article, material, kit, and/or method
described herein. In addition, any combination of two or more such
features, systems, articles, materials, kits, and/or methods, if
such features, systems, articles, materials, kits, and/or methods
are not mutually inconsistent, is included within the inventive
scope of the present disclosure.
[0289] The above-described embodiments can be implemented in any of
numerous ways. For example, the embodiments may be implemented
using hardware, software or a combination thereof. When implemented
in software, the software code can be executed on any suitable
processor or collection of processors, whether provided in a single
computer or distributed among multiple computers.
[0290] The various methods or processes outlined herein may be
coded as software that is executable on one or more processors that
employ any one of a variety of operating systems or platforms.
Additionally, such software may be written using any of a number of
suitable programming languages and/or programming or scripting
tools, and also may be compiled as executable machine language code
or intermediate code that is executed on a framework or virtual
machine.
[0291] In this respect, various inventive concepts may be embodied
as a computer readable storage medium (or multiple computer
readable storage media) (e.g., a computer memory, one or more
floppy discs, compact discs, optical discs, magnetic tapes, flash
memories, circuit configurations in Field Programmable Gate Arrays
or other semiconductor devices, or other tangible computer storage
medium) encoded with one or more programs that, when executed on
one or more computers or other processors, perform methods that
implement the various embodiments of the invention discussed above.
The computer readable medium or media can be transportable, such
that the program or programs stored thereon can be loaded onto one
or more different computers or other processors to implement
various aspects of the present invention as discussed above.
[0292] The terms "program" or "software" are used herein in a
generic sense to refer to any type of computer code or set of
computer-executable instructions that can be employed to program a
computer or other processor to implement various aspects of
embodiments as discussed above. Additionally, it should be
appreciated that according to one aspect, one or more computer
programs that when executed perform methods of the present
invention need not reside on a single computer or processor, but
may be distributed in a modular fashion amongst a number of
different computers or processors to implement various aspects of
the present invention.
[0293] Computer-executable instructions may be in many forms, such
as program modules, executed by one or more computers or other
devices. Generally, program modules include routines, programs,
objects, components, data structures, etc. that perform particular
tasks or implement particular abstract data types. Typically the
functionality of the program modules may be combined or distributed
as desired in various embodiments.
[0294] Also, data structures may be stored in computer-readable
media in any suitable form. For simplicity of illustration, data
structures may be shown to have fields that are related through
location in the data structure. Such relationships may likewise be
achieved by assigning storage for the fields with locations in a
computer-readable medium that conveys relationship between the
fields. However, any suitable mechanism may be used to establish a
relationship between information in fields of a data structure,
including through the use of pointers, tags or other mechanisms
that establish relationship between data elements.
[0295] Also, various inventive concepts may be embodied as one or
more methods, of which an example has been provided. The acts
performed as part of the method may be ordered in any suitable way.
Accordingly, embodiments may be constructed in which acts are
performed in an order different than illustrated, which may include
performing some acts simultaneously, even though shown as
sequential acts in illustrative embodiments.
[0296] All definitions, as defined and used herein, should be
understood to control over dictionary definitions, definitions in
documents incorporated by reference, and/or ordinary meanings of
the defined terms.
[0297] The indefinite articles "a" and "an," as used herein in the
specification and in the claims, unless clearly indicated to the
contrary, should be understood to mean "at least one."
[0298] The phrase "and/or," as used herein in the specification and
in the claims, should be understood to mean "either or both" of the
elements so conjoined, i.e., elements that are conjunctively
present in some cases and disjunctively present in other cases.
Multiple elements listed with "and/or" should be construed in the
same fashion, i.e., "one or more" of the elements so conjoined.
Other elements may optionally be present other than the elements
specifically identified by the "and/or" clause, whether related or
unrelated to those elements specifically identified. Thus, as a
non-limiting example, a reference to "A and/or B", when used in
conjunction with open-ended language such as "comprising" can
refer, in one embodiment, to A only (optionally including elements
other than B); in another embodiment, to B only (optionally
including elements other than A); in yet another embodiment, to
both A and B (optionally including other elements); etc.
[0299] As used herein in the specification and in the claims, "or"
should be understood to have the same meaning as "and/or" as
defined above. For example, when separating items in a list, "or"
or "and/or" shall be interpreted as being inclusive, i.e., the
inclusion of at least one, but also including more than one, of a
number or list of elements, and, optionally, additional unlisted
items. Only terms clearly indicated to the contrary, such as "only
one of" or "exactly one of," or, when used in the claims,
"consisting of," will refer to the inclusion of exactly one element
of a number or list of elements. In general, the term "or" as used
herein shall only be interpreted as indicating exclusive
alternatives (i.e. "one or the other but not both") when preceded
by terms of exclusivity, such as "either," "one of," "only one of,"
or "exactly one of." "Consisting essentially of," when used in the
claims, shall have its ordinary meaning as used in the field of
patent law.
[0300] As used herein in the specification and in the claims, the
phrase "at least one," in reference to a list of one or more
elements, should be understood to mean at least one element
selected from any one or more of the elements in the list of
elements, but not necessarily including at least one of each and
every element specifically listed within the list of elements and
not excluding any combinations of elements in the list of elements.
This definition also allows that elements may optionally be present
other than the elements specifically identified within the list of
elements to which the phrase "at least one" refers, whether related
or unrelated to those elements specifically identified. Thus, as a
non-limiting example, "at least one of A and B" (or, equivalently,
"at least one of A or B," or, equivalently "at least one of A
and/or B") can refer, in one embodiment, to at least one,
optionally including more than one, A, with no B present (and
optionally including elements other than B); in another embodiment,
to at least one, optionally including more than one, B, with no A
present (and optionally including elements other than A); in yet
another embodiment, to at least one, optionally including more than
one, A, and at least one, optionally including more than one, B
(and optionally including other elements); etc.
[0301] In the claims, as well as in the specification above, all
transitional phrases such as "comprising," "including," "carrying,"
"having," "containing," "involving," "holding," "composed of," and
the like are to be understood to be open-ended, i.e., to mean
including but not limited to. Only the transitional phrases
"consisting of" and "consisting essentially of" shall be closed or
semi-closed transitional phrases, respectively, as set forth in the
United States Patent Office Manual of Patent Examining Procedures,
Section 2111.03.
* * * * *