Skip to content
CEGR 493
Investigation
Week 2
general
Site Investigation Lab
Not graded — practice
Capstone II dashboard

This deliverable is not counted toward your grade

Project Start and Technical Implementation (site, data and investigation) pages are required practice but are not counted toward your final grade. Your engineering grade comes from Chapter 4 and Chapter 5.

Data Inventory

Students compile a catalogued inventory of all existing data sources with age, format, and reliability assessed for each.

Section progress

0% of the workflow complete

Field & Laboratory · Plan, execute and document field and laboratory data collection to a defensible quality standard.

Deliverable: Data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis.

How to complete this section

0 words saved

Do this next: Read the Data Inventory lecture and the worked example so you know what "Data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis." has to contain.

Not sure how to start or how much depth is expected? Read the fully written model example for this deliverable first — it shows the structure, tables and level of justification your advisor grades against.

Site Investigation Lab — what this workspace teaches

Plan, execute and document field and laboratory data collection to a defensible quality standard.

  • Planning a subsurface, structural or traffic field investigation
  • Instrumentation selection, resolution, accuracy and calibration records
  • GPS/GNSS positioning: datums, projections, RTK vs. handheld accuracy
  • GIS data capture, attribute schemas and coordinate metadata
  • Land surveying: traverses, levelling, closure and error adjustment
  • Sampling strategy: representative sampling, spacing, depth intervals, replicates
  • ASTM/AASHTO laboratory testing procedures and reporting requirements
  • Chain of custody, sample labelling and preservation
  • QA/QC: duplicates, blanks, repeatability and data validation rules

End-of-term milestones

  • Tuesday, November 17, 2026 — Poster printed and ready. 36 in × 48 in poster finalized and printed one week before the November 24 showcase.
  • Wednesday, November 18, 2026 — Final document package uploaded for scoring. Chapters 4–5, calculation package, drawings and appendices uploaded in the app for advisor scoring.
  • Wednesday, November 18, 2026 — Poster presentation to faculty and industry. Wednesday poster session — printed 36 in × 48 in poster presented in person; industry reviewers score communication and impact.
  • Wednesday, November 25, 2026 — Oral presentation and defense (scored). Scored oral presentation and defense held on Wednesday, November 25.
Week 2
general

Data Inventory

Students compile a catalogued inventory of all existing data sources with age, format, and reliability assessed for each.

Section B

Engineering story

A real project situation that frames this module

A civil engineering practice team hits data inventory in week 2, with the project record already promised to the owner. Students compile a catalogued inventory of all existing data sources with age, format, and reliability assessed for each. The reviewer starts at the end and works backwards, and the chain breaks at records search hierarchy.

Inventorying a record without confirming which horizontal or vertical datum it uses. Because data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's last known disturbance, the error does not stay local: it is carried into the data foundation every later calculation silently depends on, and every downstream product inherits it before anyone notices.

The owner, the reviewing agency and the engineer of record carry the consequence. On this module specifically, the exposure runs through metadata capture, and the cost of correction rises every week the project record moves closer to issue.

Decisions the engineer must make

  • What record establishes records search hierarchy, and is that record in the project data inventory?
  • Does ASTM E1527 (2021), Sec. 8, govern here — and is that the edition adopted by the jurisdiction?
  • What is the acceptance criterion for data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's last known disturbance, and was it written before the result was known?
  • Is the documented procedure valid for the conditions this project actually presents?
  • If the check fails, does the team revise the project record or raise a change request against the locked baseline?
Three engineers in hard hats and safety vests reviewing drawings on a truck tailgate.

Photo 1. Field review: the conversation in which a scope, a constraint or a decision is actually settled.

Capstone Studio instructional photograph

Section C

Why this matters

Professional

A licensed engineer defending data inventory cites ASTM E1527 (2021), Sec. 8, and shows the record behind each input. Your data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis. is reviewed the same way — traceability is assessed before arithmetic.

Technical

Records search hierarchy controls the numbers this module hands forward. Data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's last known disturbance determines whether those numbers remain valid once conditions change.

Safety

The failure mode this module guards against is a decision made without a traceable basis. It reaches people through gap analysis between inventoried data and the data-needs matrix from the investigation overview, which is why the safety check is recorded explicitly here rather than inferred from a passing strength or performance check.

Economic

The data foundation every later calculation silently depends on is priced from this work. Quantities, unit costs and schedule float all trace to records search hierarchy; a late correction here is paid for as a change order, not a redline.

Environmental

Environmentally, this module fixes material use, land disturbance and the waste stream generated by rework. Choosing conservatively without justification is not free — the excess shows up as material, energy and land that the project consumes for no measurable gain.

Community

The residents and agencies who inherit the completed work inherit whatever this module decides — performance, accessibility, cost of ownership and resilience are set here, not at the ribbon-cutting.

Section D

Learning objectives

By the end of this module you will be able to:

  1. 1.Apply records search hierarchy, using this project's own conditions rather than a textbook case.
  2. 2.Analyze data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's last known disturbance, using this project's own conditions rather than a textbook case.
  3. 3.Analyze metadata capture, using this project's own conditions rather than a textbook case.
  4. 4.Explain gap analysis between inventoried data and the data-needs matrix from the investigation overview, using this project's own conditions rather than a textbook case.
  5. 5.Apply ASTM E1527 (2021), Sec. 8, and cite the section that governs your acceptance decision.
  6. 6.Produce data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis. at a standard the advisor of record would accept without a second revision cycle.

Section E

Instructional content

Full lecture notes with figures and governing equations

Data Inventory: from proposal statement to engineering product

Students compile a catalogued inventory of all existing data sources with age, format, and reliability assessed for each. That single sentence hides the substance of the module: records search hierarchy, and data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's last known disturbance. Both must be established from project evidence before anything downstream is credible.

In civil engineering practice, this work is the input to the project record. Metadata capture — which is why this page asks you to record the source of every quantity, not just its value. The data foundation every later calculation silently depends on depends on it.

  • Records search hierarchy: agency archives, utility owner records, prior geotechnical reports, aerial imagery
  • Data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's last known disturbance
  • Metadata capture: source, date, coordinate datum, vertical datum, accuracy statement
  • Gap analysis between inventoried data and the data-needs matrix from the investigation overview
FIGURE 1SourceDate1Source2Date3Format4Datum5Reliability6Gap flag
Figure 1. Data Inventory — annotated engineering schematic showing the governing quantities carried through this module.Read this figure alongside the theory block: every labelled quantity must appear in your calculation package with a unit and a source.
Three engineers in hard hats and safety vests reviewing drawings on a truck tailgate.

Photo 1. Data Inventory: from proposal statement to engineering product in practice — Field review: the conversation in which a scope, a constraint or a decision is actually settled.

Capstone Studio instructional photograph

Decision logic: the procedure that replaces a closed-form solution

Data Inventory is governed by a documented procedure rather than a single expression, so the decision logic is the deliverable: what you accept, what you reject, and on what evidence. Records search hierarchy.

Write the acceptance criterion before you look at the result. Data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's last known disturbance — recording the criterion afterwards lets it be shaped to fit the number you happened to get.

Three engineers in hard hats and safety vests reviewing drawings on a truck tailgate.

Photo 2. Decision logic: the procedure that replaces a closed-form solution in practice — Field review: the conversation in which a scope, a constraint or a decision is actually settled.

Capstone Studio instructional photograph

Constraints, adopted standards and the safety case for data inventory

ASTM E1527 (2021), Sec. 8, governs this module: Records review requirements applicable to environmental data inventory USACE EM 1110-1-1804 (2001), Ch. 2, adds the second constraint: Guidance on geotechnical records review procedures

The safety case is explicit here. The failure mode is a decision made without a traceable basis; the people exposed are the owner, the reviewing agency and the engineer of record; the control that prevents it is gap analysis between inventoried data and the data-needs matrix from the investigation overview together with an independent check by someone who did not perform the work.

  • Controlling criterion for this module: records search hierarchy.
  • Adopted reference: ASTM E1527 (2021) — cite Sec. 8 by number.
  • Failure mode guarded: a decision made without a traceable basis.
  • Evidence produced: Data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis..
FIGURE 2Confirm inputs and sourcesSelect governing standardAnalyze / designCheck units and equilibriumIndependent checkAccept or revise
Figure 2. Data Inventory — professional workflow from inputs through acceptance.The revise loop is normal. Reviewers expect to see it in your version history.
Truck-mounted drill rig taking a soil boring beside a bridge, with sample jars in the foreground.

Photo 3. Constraints, adopted standards and the safety case for data inventory in practice — Subsurface investigation: SPT samples and the boring log that every geotechnical number traces back to.

Capstone Studio instructional photograph

Where this method stops being valid

Every method has a domain of validity. State the range of geometry, loading, material behaviour or flow regime over which your approach holds, and state what you would do instead beyond it.

For this project, the boundary you are most likely to push is gap analysis between inventoried data and the data-needs matrix from the investigation overview. If you cross it, say so in writing, bound the error, and carry the limitation into your results chapter. A disclosed limitation is professional practice; a silent extrapolation is not.

Concrete cylinder under axial load in a compression testing machine.

Photo 4. Where this method stops being valid in practice — Compression test on a concrete cylinder: the measurement behind every f′c used in design.

Wikimedia Commons, public domain

Section F

Engineering workflow

Steps

  1. 1. Assemble the inputs this module needs — records search hierarchy; data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's… — each with a unit and a source record.
  2. 2. Confirm ASTM E1527 (2021) is the adopted edition and locate Sec. 8.
  3. 3. State the assumptions and the acceptance criterion for records search hierarchy.
  4. 4. Execute the documented procedure, recording each judgement and the evidence behind it.
  5. 5. Test the result against metadata capture.
  6. 6. Audit units and run an order-of-magnitude check by hand before the number leaves your desk.
  7. 7. Obtain an independent check from a teammate who did not perform the work, and record their name and date.
  8. 8. Assemble data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis. and submit it to the advisor of record for review.

Decision points

  • Is every input behind records search hierarchy traceable? If not — stop and collect the record.
  • Does the result satisfy data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's last known disturbance? If not — revise the work, never the criterion.
  • Would the correction change the data foundation every later calculation silently depends on? If yes — raise a change-control request before proceeding.
  • Have you ruled out the most common error on this module — inventorying a record without confirming which horizontal or vertical datum it uses?

Quality checklist

  • Documented: records search hierarchy
  • Documented: data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's last known…
  • Documented: metadata capture
  • ASTM E1527 Sec. 8 cited by section number
  • Procedure steps recorded in order with evidence
  • Acceptance criterion recorded before the result
  • Independent check signed and dated
  • Data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis. attached and named per the course convention

Section H

Interactive visualization

Data Inventory — step-through

Advance one frame at a time. Each frame adds one engineering decision to the previous state.

Stepwise reveal

Step 1 of 6

Search agency, utility, and prior consultant archives for the project site.

Section I

Applicable codes and standards

ASTM E1527

2021 · Sec. 8

Adopted design/analysis reference governing this module.

Relevance: Records review requirements applicable to environmental data inventory

Reference the section number and edition in your calculation package. Do not reproduce code text.

USACE EM 1110-1-1804

2001 · Ch. 2

Adopted design/analysis reference governing this module.

Relevance: Guidance on geotechnical records review procedures

Reference the section number and edition in your calculation package. Do not reproduce code text.

Section J

Worked examples

Full engineering solution format

Section K

Common mistakes and how to avoid them

  • Inventorying a record without confirming which horizontal or vertical datum it uses.
  • Treating an undated aerial photo as current without independent verification.
  • Treating records search hierarchy as a given instead of establishing it from a project record.
  • Producing data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis. without showing how data currency assessment — flagging records older than the site's last known… was satisfied.
  • Recording the outcome of this module without recording the judgement and evidence that produced it.
  • Missing gap analysis between inventoried data and the data-needs matrix from the investigation overview, which is exactly the path to a decision made without a traceable basis.
  • Collecting data before defining what decision the data has to support.
  • Accepting a laboratory or field value without its method, date, operator and uncertainty.
  • Citing the wrong edition of a standard, or citing a standard that does not govern the jurisdiction.
  • Leaving boundary conditions undefined so the model is not reproducible by an independent checker.
  • Using inputs that no field record, laboratory report, or published source supports.

Section L

Industry case study

Documented failure related to data inventory

A constructed civil works project where this module's decision was made incorrectly or skipped.

Official findings

  • Published investigation identified a breakdown between analysis assumption and constructed condition.

Field observations

  • The controlling assumption was documented nowhere in the design record.
  • No independent check existed at the stage where the error entered the work.

Engineering interpretation

  • Interpretation below is student analysis for instructional purposes, not an official finding.
  • Map the failure to a step in your own workflow and state where your process would have caught it.

Lessons learned

  • Document the assumption, then have someone else check it before it becomes construction.

Source: Summarize the published investigation; cite it in your reference list. Do not reproduce copyrighted report text.

Section M

FE Civil exam connection

Handbook FE Reference Handbook — civil engineering practice section (record the section number from your handbook edition).

Exam topics

Engineering documentation and records management

Handbook formulas

    Weak results here feed your FE Civil Academy weak-area queue for targeted practice.

    Question 1 of 2

    Score: 0/2

    In data inventory, which item must be established BEFORE the analysis is run?

    Section N

    Apply it to your project — Data Inventory

    Complete this using your own capstone project data. Every field is saved to your project record and routed to your advisor with this module's submission.

    Inputs and sources

    Every value needs a traceable source.

    QuantityValueUnitSource / record

    Assumptions and consequences

    AssumptionBasisConsequence if wrong

    Self-check before submission

    Section O

    Design challenge

    Consulting challenge — Data Inventory

    Your firm has been retained to deliver the data inventory scope for a municipal client on a compressed schedule. Produce the technical position your firm would defend at a public meeting.

    Client request: The client wants a defensible recommendation, the basis of design, and an honest statement of what remains unresolved.

    Constraints

    • Adopted local code edition governs; no exceptions without written variance.
    • Budget and schedule are fixed; scope changes require change control.
    • Public safety and accessibility requirements are non-negotiable.

    Deliverables

    • One-page basis of design
    • Supporting calculation extract
    • Risk and limitation statement

    Evaluation

    • Technical correctness
    • Standard compliance
    • Clarity of engineering judgment
    • Honest treatment of uncertainty

    Section P

    Documentation workspace

    Write the report section for this module in the academic editor

    Loading editor…
    0 words

    Section Q

    File uploads

    Accepted: PDF, DOCX, XLSX, CSV, PNG, JPG, ZIP, SHP

    No files uploaded yet.

    Section R

    Deliverable and advisor review

    Data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis.

    Data quality
    Safety
    Documentation
    Professionalism

    Submissions route to your assigned faculty advisor and are scored independently by faculty and administrator rubrics.

    Reflection

    What was the hardest engineering judgment in this module, and how did you resolve it?

    Section S

    ABET outcome mapping

    SO 2
    CE-PC1
    reinforced

    Data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis. with advisor review and dual scoring.

    Assessment: Faculty rubric score and administrator rubric score on this module's submission.

    Rubric: Data quality · Target: 70% of students at or above 'meets expectations'.

    Section T

    References and further study

    standard

    ASTM E1527 (2021)

    Adopted reference — cite section numbers, do not reproduce text.

    standard

    USACE EM 1110-1-1804 (2001)

    Adopted reference — cite section numbers, do not reproduce text.

    template

    Data Inventory — instructor design procedure

    Course template for the calculation package format expected in the final report appendix.

    manual

    NCEES FE Reference Handbook

    Locate the equations used here and note the handbook section for exam recall.

    template

    Advisor meeting agenda item

    Bring the unresolved decision from this module to your next weekly advisor meeting.

    Week 2 · Data inventory spreadsheet with metadata and gap analysis.
    © 2026 Dr. Steve Efe. Civil Engineering Capstone Studio. All rights reserved.