AASHTO National Transportation Product Evaluation Program

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "AASHTO National Transportation Product Evaluation Program"

Magnus Hunter
5 years ago
Views:

1 An Industry Perspective of the AASHTO National Transportation Product Evaluation Program Jim Goddard Chief Engineer Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc.

2 Traffic Safety Information and test results on the traffic safety products evaluated through NTPEP, such as: pavement marking materials, sign sheeting materials, raised pavement markers and temporary traffic control devices. Construction Information and test results on the construction materials evaluated through NTPEP, such as: geotextiles, erosion control products, plastic pipe, concrete curing compounds and admixtures. Maintenance Information and test results on the maintenance materials evaluated through NTPEP, such as: structural steel coatings, rapid set concrete patching materials and hot mix asphalt crack fillers.

3 Concrete Curing Compounds Geosynthetic Soil Reinforcement Geotextiles Hot-Mix Asphalt Crack Sealant and PCC Joint sealants Pavement Marking Materials Polymer Modified Concrete Bridge Deck Overlays Portable Changeable Message Signs & Flashing Arrow Panels Raised Pavement Markers Rapid Set Concrete Patching Materials Reinforced Steel Bar (Rebar) Rolled Erosion Control Products Sign Sheeting Material Snow-Plowable Raised Pavement Markers Structural Steel Coatings Temporary Traffic Control Devices Thermoplastic Pipe Truncated Domes

4 Why should or would a manufacturing company participate in the AASHTO NTPEP? 1. Broader acceptance; 2. Proven quality control/quality assurance; 3. Uniform testing program (not different requirements for each State); 4. Level playing field for competitors.

5 What are the downsides to participation in the AASHTO NTPEP? 1. The program is expensive; 2. There is not as broad acceptance of the program and its reported data as there should be (too few States); 3. Not used as a criteria for acceptance by enough States.

6 What are the advantages of using the NTPEP for both the States and Industry? 1. Cost Savings a. No State can do all of the tests required in the Thermoplastic Program within their own lab, and setting up to do them would be cost prohibitive to the State. b. If multiple State DOTs accept NTPEP testing there is a savings to Industry because they can avoid doing different test programs for each State or agency.

7 2. Quality Assurance: a. From an industry perspective, required participation in the NTPEP assures equal and fair competition. b. It permits side-by-side comparison of manufacturers products; provides the States a good comparison of products and permits manufacturers to see how they are doing relative to the industry.

8 2. c. Some programs have adopted requirements for submission and acceptance of the manufacturer s QA/QC plan, assuring comparable programs for all competitors. d. Because the NTPEP contracted lab(s) repeat these tests many times, the repeatability of the test results tend to be better than if multiple labs are doing the tests, but only occasionally.

9 AASHTO Pipe Standards AASHTO Standard Concrete Pipe Corrugated Metal Pipe Polyethylene Pipe PVC Pipe Subcommittee on Materials AASHTO M 86 AASHTO M 170 AASHTO M 36 AASHTO M 167 AASHTO M 252 AASHTO M 278 AASHTO M 175 AASHTO M 176 AASHTO M 206 AASHTO M 207 AASHTO M 242 AASHTO M 190 AASHTO M 196 AASHTO M 197 AASHTO M 218 AASHTO M 219 AASHTO M 245 AASHTO M 246 AASHTO M 274 AASHTO M 289 AASHTO M 294 AASHTO M 304 Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures Design AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications Section 12 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications Section 12 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications Section 12 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications Section 12 Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures Construction AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications Section 27 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications Section 26 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications Section 30 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications Section 30 National transportation Product Evaluation Program None None NTPEP for Thermoplastic Pipe None

10 From a Thermoplastic Pipe Manufacturer s Perspective 1. The current NTPEP product evaluations are more extensive than any State DOT can do in-house. 2. If 30 or more States were to use the NTPEP test results as the foundation for their Quality Assurance and product acceptance, the Program would be costeffective for the manufacturers. 3. If 30 or more States required NTPEP participation as a prerequisite for selling/providing pipe to Department funded projects more manufacturers would participate. 4. In time, the AASHTO NTPEP should expand to include other pipe types. 5. The NTPEP should include plant quality audits when samples are taken for testing.

11 Current Thermoplastic Pipe Testing Requirements: 1. A total of 14 or more tests conducted per size per inspection: a. 6 tests are conducted on the resin going into the extruder; b. a minimum of 8 tests are conducted on the manufactured pipe, with tests on the perforations or the watertightness of the of the joint, if required.

12 Joint Integrity Tested according to ASTM D3212. Filled with water to 10.8 psi (25 head) Bell & Spigot with gasket per ASTM F477

13 Current Thermoplastic NTPEP Status (6/06) 1. A total of 7 pipe manufacturers participating in the program; (1/1/2007) 2. A total of 56 test reports currently posted on the NTPEP website;(1/1/2007) different diameters included, through 60.

14 Thermoplastic Pipe Report Report Includes: 1. Manufacturer & Plant Location 2. Contact Personnel 3. Pipe Diameter & Type 4. Resin Tests: a. Density b. Melt Index c. Flexural Modulus d. Tensile Strength e. ESCR f. Thermal Stability (OITemp) 5. Pipe Tests a. Inside Diameter b. Wall Thickness c. Pipe Stiffness d. Flattening (Buckling % Deflection) e. Pipe ESCR f. Brittleness (Impact) g. Carbon black % h. Joint Tests i. Workmanship

15 What is the future of the AASHTO NTPEP? 1. Growth in products included. 2. Growth in the number of manufacturers participating in each program. 3. Improvement of all programs (to include requiring QA/QC plans, plant audits, etc.). 4. Broader use of the program by non-dot agencies, cities, & counties.

16 Questions

2015 Sub Committee on Maintenance Des Moines, Iowa

2015 Sub Committee on Maintenance Des Moines, Iowa Traffic Safety Evaluations Pavement Marking Materials (PMM) Portable Changeable Message Signs & Flashing Arrow Panels (PCMS/FAP) Raised Pavement Markers/Snowplowable Raised Pavement Markers (RPM/SRPM)