Latest Contributions by ThomasHamill

I've developed a USACE Wetland Determination Form in Survey123 for the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (PDF Version 2.0) and I'm looking for folks to beta test it, suggest improvements for how the implementation can be refined such that it makes use of the most sophisticated aspects of Survey123 functionality as possible (within the limitations of the USACE WDF survey design).  I've attached the PDF I followed to draft the S123 design. The Survey123 form can be accessed through this link. I plan to draft a Survey123 Feature Report template next so the results can be exported from the S123 feature service into the format of the PDF. ... View more

@CanJM, I recommend the following for a simple approach: 1) add a new field (integer or short field type) to Poles--in fact, add one for every variable/factor you want to populate upon Poles.  You could name them something like "RiskScore_FromManhole," "RiskScore_FromPond," etc. 2) Run a select by location  to find the subset of Poles that either intersects or is within a distance (that you find reasonable/meaningful) of each of your factor layers.  Add a value of 1 in the Pole field for the respective risk scores--any Pole that doesn't touch a factor (or its distance buffer) should be given a value of 0 for that "RiskScore_FactorLayer" field. 3) After you've populated each factor-based risk score field in the Poles attribute table, add a new field called something like "RiskScore_Total" and set that equal to the sum of each of the individual factor risk scores.  The higher the value, the more at risk (in theory) the pole is based on the combination of the factors/variables it intersects or is near. ... View more

@PatrickFilyer, you can always check the ArcGIS Online Health Dashboard to see if it is experiencing any hiccups:  https://status.arcgis.com/  ... View more

@CanJM,  are you working in the United States?  If you are, I'd recommend the FEMA NFHL, USFWS NWI, and the USGS NHD (or any combinations of the three) for measuring likelihood of failure for your assets based on spatial coincidence or proximity.  Two or more of these base datasets could be synthesized together using a simple multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) exercise, i.e., if an asset is within 5m or less of all three (flood zone, wetlands, and hydrography) at once then it is ranked with a risk value of 3, if an asset is within 5m of two layers then it is coded with a risk value of 2 and so on... the higher the risk value, the greater the likelihood of failure and incentive to monitor, replace, relocate, etc. ... View more

@DavisBuckley, I can share with you that I've similarly run into the same challenges throughout my time (past ten years) doing work for clients and colleagues at engineering firms when working with all type of data, especially utility network data.  There are some good solutions from Esri, like the Local Government Model (utilities geodatabase schema) and others.  At one point the LGM seemed to be growing in its adoption by municipal utilities, but I've found that the design often still had to be adapted and changed based on client needs and other requirements.  You might overtime come to refine your own special set of standardized geodatabase schemas complete with the effective domain names and descriptions that make it through the various trials of application and reliability. The unfortunate reality is that data will almost always require some amount of development, processing, and management in order to get it into a condition that is more organized, useful, and robust than the condition it was in when received. I recall hearing a saying once like "when one sees a map, you're seeing a product in which 5% of the effort/time was spent creating the map/cartographic representation (at the very end).  The other 95% of the effort/time was spent on data development." ... View more

Hi @sanio, I have a template in which I use the date format calculation to produce a timestamp that I can use as an ID. When the date is auto-populated, it still shows up in the live form as something like "Thursday, July 29, 2021," but when the observation is submitted, another field records  the full and reformatted dateTime as "20210729044923."  You can see this in my screenshot under the read-only "Feature Timestamp" field. Apologies, I'm not exactly sure how to adjust the appearance of the date in the form view unless you do something like I did by printing a read only field just below with the dateTime reformatted as you want it to appear.   ... View more

@BillBlythe, you simply had an expression with a single if statement instead of the "nested" if statement.  The latter treats answers of "yes," "no," and blank differently whereas the single if statement does not.  I included a little bit more detail about the differences in this previous response.  I hope this is helpful! 🙂 ... View more

@BillBlythe, can you post your Survey123 .xls file? ... View more

@BillBlythe, try using the following expression in the Calculation column for the text field you named Compliancebcp: if(selected(${ClearSpaceOverlap},'yes'),'Not Compliant',if(selected(${ClearSpaceOverlap},'no'),'Compliant',")) This way, the Compliancebcp text field will remain empty if the user doesn't select either 'yes' or 'no.'  In other words, if the user skips the first question about the ClearSpaceOverlap or leaves it blank, the compliance status indicator will show neither "Compliant" nor "Not Compliant," but will remain blank.  I don't think you need anything in the relevant box for Compliancebcp, unless you want this question to appear only for a "yes" answer of ClearSpaceProvided. Is that how you wanted it to be configured? ... View more

@BillBlythe, the if expressions vary slightly in how they print a result in the secondary "Compliance Status" text field if the user skips or leaves blank the initial select_one yes_no question. Using the following expression from @AllisonHollier, the secondary "Compliance Status" text field will be populated with 'Compliant' even if the initial select_one yes_no question is left blank. if(selected(${ClearSpaceOverlap},'yes'),'Not Compliant','Compliant')) Using the following "nested if" expression, the Compliance text field remains empty (see ending else argument of '' empty single quote) if the user doesn't select either 'yes' or 'no' for the first question (skips or leaves it blank). if(selected(${ClearSpaceOverlap},'yes'),'Not Compliant',if(selected(${ClearSpaceOverlap},'no'),'Compliant',")) So you have a couple options there for choosing how the Compliance Status field is treated. ... View more

Try checking the case sensitivity of your 'Yes' and 'No.'  I think these should match between the Choices sheet and the Calculation in your Survey sheet. I had changed mine from the default lowercase 'yes' and 'no' under the choices sheet, so you may either have to change them there or in your calculation cell such that they match.   ... View more

Hi @sanio you'll need to add some code under the 'Calculation' column to have the date reformatted.  This thread is a great resource for information about formatting the date and time in Survey123: https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-survey123-blog/dates-and-time-in-survey123/ba-p/895528 ... View more

@BillBlythe you could also put a calculation in a secondary text entry field named something like "Compliance" or "Compliance Status," as shown in the images attached below.  You could even make this read only or hidden when it populates Compliance/Not Compliant based on the first yes/no answer. There's more detailed info on this Survey123 Blog Post called, "The art of hiding:" https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-survey123-blog/the-art-of-hiding/ba-p/898454     ... View more