Presentation from the FME World Tour in Newark, NJ.

1. So Many Flightplans – So Many Problems
Linas Vebeliunas

2. The Problems with Using Multiple
GIS Systems
● Introduction
● Gas Network Model Build Goal
● Different Results from Different
Systems
● How Could We Solve the Problem
● Our Solution – (It’s a Surprise)
● Added Benefits

3. Introduction
• 491 miles of gas transmission pipe
• 35,265 miles of gas distribution pipelines
serving an area of approximately 9,894
square miles.
• 1,762 Regulators
• Approximately 3.6 million customers across
upstate New York, New York City, Long
Island, Massachusetts and Rhode Island
served by our gas distribution networks.

4. Our Goal – Build Gas Network Models for Pressure Analysis

5. Different Regions – Different Mapping Systems
There are 4 regions in National Grid’s US Territory
And each one has a different mapping system
 Downstate New York
NRG – a Open Architecture System
designed by SamSix
 Upstate New York
Smallworld
 Rhode Island
Smallworld – A different version
 Massachusetts
ESRI - ARCFM

6. Each system required a different Process
.
 Rhode Island
Shape Files → Model Builder → Synergee Model
 Downstate New York
Shape Files → Model Builder → Synergee Model
 Massachusetts
Shape Files → Dataprep → Text Files → Model Builder → Synergee Model
 Upstate New York
Built-in DataPrep → Text Files → Model Builder → Synergee Model

7. Different Processes Give Different Results
The best overall process with only a
problem inserting regulators
System created good models, but
required manual corrections at pipe
connections
Rhode Island Downstate New York

8. The process was designed for the
previous version of model builder,
required specifically formatted shape files
and limited the amount of information that
could be moved into the model.
The text files limited the amount of
information available, minor geometry
errors in the mapping system translated to
mains with lost vertices, and we couldn’t
select the incoming data.
Massachusetts Upstate New York

9. Possible Solutions
● Ignore the Problems
● Consolidate to a Standard GIS
● Hire an Expensive Consultant
● Develop a similar process for each system

10. Any Guesses
on which one?

11. The Initial Goals were Simple
● Standard Inputs to Model Builder
● Some Minor Data validation

12. The first FME script – Downstate NY

13. The strength of FME is that it
is a modular process that
allows you to expand your
process without completely
re-writing the script.
The script grows as our
knowledge and needs
increase.

14. The complexity of the scripts grows over time

15. Connecting other mapping data sources

16. Automatically Split Circular Mains

17. Improve connectivity with snapping

18. Find common mapping problems with the Geometry Validator

19. The solution is still evolving,
but we are now using a
similar process in all regions

20. THANK YOU!
Linas Vebeliunas
Linas.vebeliunas@nationalgrid.com