Bentley OpenRoad Culvert workflow
Something so simple
Bentley OpenRoads is a nice change of pace for me. I am not as versed in the B-team’s history, but I learned exciting tidbits by researching it to expand my understanding of the history behind Bentley.
An OS/2 version of MicroStation was also developed, primarily at the request of a Midwestern DOT. According to Keith the company spent more money on development with less return in revenue than on any other project. It is not clear if this DOT ever used the OS/2 version of the software. (from Keith Bentley interview noted in CADHistory)
The Product Manager is screaming in pain! Ouch. Talk about lack of viability…
Bentley OpenRoads appears to have started the process in 2016 to retire many legacy acquisitions (acquired Geopack in 2001, MX in 2003, and InRoads in 2001) and consolidate them on a single platform. From the Engineeing.com announcement -
Simply put, OpenRoads will replace all three of Bentley’s current civil products. As a new product, OpenRoads will combine the best parts of each into a single product featuring:
A new user interface based on Microsoft Ribbon interface.
Performance and modeling gains due to a new 64-bit architecture…
Integrated hydraulic storm water modeling, design and analysis.
The last element is what I am interested in. From the Haestad acquisition of 2004 - OpenRoads hydraulic modeling is replacing the older legacy GeoPak Drainage and Inroads Storm and Sanitary Analysis (SSA) in the new platform. (I am highly unaware of the Infrasoft MOSS software package that became MX Series that Bentley acquired as I never encountered it during my trips to State DOTs - so if they had any drainage component, it is news to me)
OpenRoads Drainage and Utilities
I am impressed with a small rehab workflow for culverts. For example, the job might include expanding a roadway with a culvert. The most common problem for a DOT is dealing with this situation—replacing the entire culvert or modifying the existing culvert for the new improvements.
As typical as it is, this workflow was discussed in many product meetings, but the concept never took off. If modifications are called for, how does one model extend and bend a culvert to meet the new modifications? It would be nice to see a well-thought-out process to show existing conditions, the proposed conditions (10’ extension and new headwalls), and the hydraulic performance shown.
HY-8 does a relatively good job with the concept of broken-back culverts.
How might one model that?
Good question. While writing this post, I have tried to find a similar workflow in the DOTs that are using OpenRoads. As of this post, I am writing from my experience with the TxDOT workflow, but I have looked at Ohio, Florida, and Iowa’s workflows, which are all a bit different.
With OpenRoads - the concept is reasonably straightforward. In the existing model - draw your existing culvert. Reference the existing culvert file in the proposed - draw the new from the end.
For this scenario, your “Existing” model will be a 3D model of the “to-remain” part.
In the design scenario, you reference the “Existing” and snap the new to the end. Sheets like the FHWA sample plan are relatively easy to put together. Unfortunately, the sample plan calls for removing the entire existing culvert.
https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/design/plan-prep/cfl/sample/box-culvert
Albeit, until OpenRoads can suck in HY-8 calc and build the proposed model - I won’t be happy.