TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD. Pavement Management Practices in the US and Canada. Monday, July 17, :00-2:30 PM ET

Transcription

1 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD Pavement Management Practices in the US and Canada Monday, July 17, :00-2:30 PM ET

2 The Transportation Research Board has met the standards and requirements of the Registered Continuing Education Providers Program. Credit earned on completion of this program will be reported to RCEP. A certificate of completion will be issued to participants that have registered and attended the entire session. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by RCEP.

3 Purpose Discuss NCHRP Synthesis 501: Pavement Management Systems: Putting Data to Work. Learning Objectives At the end of this webinar, you will be able to: Describe how pavement management systems are being used to support transportation decisions at the state and provincial levels Identify trends in pavement management practices in the US and Canada Identify factors that enabled several states to use their pavement management data for innovative applications List research and development areas that are needed to further improve the use of pavement management data in transportation agencies

4 Pavement Management Systems: Putting Data to Work NCHRP Synthesis 501 Presented by: Katie Zimmerman, P.E. Applied Pavement Technology, Inc. (APTech)

5 Technical Panel Anita Bush, Nevada DOT Judith Corley-Lay, North Carolina DOT (Retired) Leo Fontaine, Connecticut DOT Tom Kazmierowski, Golder Associates Jenny Li, Texas DOT Roger Olson, Minnesota DOT (Retired) James Tsai, Georgia Tech Nadarajah Siva Sivaneswaran, FHWA Thomas Van, FHWA Amir Hanna, NCHRP Stephen Maher, TRB Jo Allen Gause, TRB

6 Project Tasks Literature Review Survey of Practice State DOTs Canadian Ministries of Transportation Interviews With Selected Agencies Synthesis Development

7 Project Schedule Project Initiated October 2015 Survey Conducted February 2016 First Draft Submitted June 2016 Final Draft Submitted October 2016

8 Synthesis Focus Document the state-of-the-practice in using pavement management data and analyses to support decision making and program development The focus was NOT on data collection procedures since information on state DOT practices was available through FHWA

9 FHWA Summary of State Practices Information obtained during Quality Management Regional Workshops

10 FHWA Summary of State Practices

11 Responding Agencies 40 states (80%) plus Puerto Rico 8 Ministries of Transportation (80%)

12 State Inventory & Condition Information

13 Type of Software Used

14 Database Content

15 Performance Prediction Approaches

16 Data Used to Predict Condition

17 Factors Used to Select Feasible Treatments

18 Analysis Capabilities

19 Analysis Types Used

20 Match With Funded Projects Lack of Match Due To: Political Influence, local conditions, lack of funding, district independence

21 Documentation in Place

22 Information Provided

23 Planned Enhancements

24 Case Examples Kansas DOT Improve Data Quality North Carolina DOT Evaluate Treatment Effectiveness Maryland DOT Conduct a Safety Analysis Washington State DOT Improve Agency Performance Measures Texas DOT Establish Performance Measures for Highway Concession Agreements

25 Download the Synthesis NCHRP Synthesis RP/Blurbs/ aspx

26 Case Study Maryland DOT State Highway Administration PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN THE US AND CANADA NATE MOORE, PE ASSISTANT DIVISION CHIEF FOR PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PAVEMENT AND GEOTECHNICAL DIVISION

27 Maryland Pavement Management Teams Current Challenges Network Level Decision Support CASE: Speed Limit Review CASE: Safety Analysis Project Level Decision Support CASE: Engineering A Paving Project Key Factors for Innovation

28 Pavement Management Teams Data Processing Team Data Warehouse Team Data Analysis Team Decision Making ARAN Post- Processing Ride Quality Rutting Cracking Curvature Construction Cost Data Management Standardizing Procedures Automating Data Flow Condition QA Reporting Federal State Analysis Optimization Re-Processing Old ARAN Data Customers Condition Data External Data (In-House) ARAN Friction Construction District Feedback Linear Referencing Materials Crash Complaints Traffic + WIM

29 Current Challenges

30 Technology Transitions The current state of pavement management is in a high level of change. Old Source Data New Protocols New Measures New Expectations New Partnerships New Treatments New Opportunities Continuous Improvement

31 Technology Transitions Same Location. Same Day. Different Images

32 Incorporating Outside Data Materials Management Construction Management Planning Motor Carrier Safety Field Explorations Structures Project Managers Aggregate Asphalt Concrete Markings Soil Inspectors Daily Reports Materials Used Qualities Placed Expenditures Linear Referencing Traffic Volumes Truck Classification Truck Weights Truck Routes Crash Locations Signal Locations Deflection Tests Pavement Cores Soil borings Bridge Deck Locations Project Locations Schedules Budgets Planned Treatments Competence Communication Diligence

33 Network Level Decision Support EXAMPLES BEYOND ANNUAL FUNDING OPTIMIZATION

34 Case: Speed Limit Review May 2015: Law Passed raising Max Speed Limit from 65 to 70 Pending Engineering Review Legislature Requested Evaluation of IS 68 and IS 70 Review Required by the Office of Highway Development 167 Miles of evaluation Effective Date was October 1, 2015

35 Case: Speed Limit Review Maryland Highway Safety Plan Infrastructure Emphasis Area Team Created Awareness of Curvature Data In 2014 Office of Highway Development (OHD) Evaluated Protocol Settings

36 Case: Speed Limit Review Curvature Data for all 167 miles Provided, including ramps OHD Imported into Microstation for Analysis Some Portions Unsuitable for 70 MPH 5 Miles of IS 70 8 Miles of IS 68 Speed Limit Raised On October 1, 2015 for Remainder

37 Case: Safety Analysis 30% Percentage of Wet Surface Crashes by Friction Number 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Total Crash Distribution % Crashes on Wet Surface - Overall Average % Crashes on Wet Surface by Friction Number Friction Number (FN40R)

38 Case: Safety Analysis Annual Wet Accident List Developed by Office of Traffic and Safety (Customer) 0.5 Mile Long Segments At least 5 Wet Weather Crashes in the Past Year More than 40% of crashes on a wet surface Pavement Management Analysis 5-Year Average Friction Number On the Same Surface Provided to District Traffic Engineers (Customers) Category 1 Areas Prioritized Addressed within 12 months

39 Case: Safety Analysis GIS-Based Protocol Enhancement Currently in Development Incorporate Curvature and Cross Slope Accident Locations per GPS from Police Include Screening for High Friction Surface Treatment Candidates

40 Project Level Decision Support

41 Case: Engineering Support Every Project (>300 per year) Design Engineers forecast conditions Pavement Data Warehouse Construction History Records Ride Quality (1984), Rutting (1995), Cracking (2008), Friction (1984) Identify the Worst (Controlling) Measure Predict Performance Years Determine Benefit/Cost Each Treatment Option Collaborate with District Design for Project Need Track Lane-Mile-Years

42 Key Factors For Innovation THE INTRODUCTION OF SOMETHING NEW

43 Key Factors for Innovation Ride the change wave Evaluate New Condition Metrics Ground Truth Relate Old Data if Possible Use New Opportunities Quality: From People who Care Communicate with Customers Continuous Data Cleanup of Current and Historic data Understand your data and its limitations Detailed Construction Data Cost Materials Thickness Location Continuous Improvement

44 Thank You!

45 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS TXDOT Magdy Y Mikhail, Ph.D., P.E. Director Pavement Asset Management Section Footer Text

46 Table of Contents 1 Monitor Statewide Pavement Condition Project Selection Impact of Funding Levels Wet Surface Crash Reduction Program Pavement Performance Measures Questions Footer Text 2

47 Monitor Statewide Condition of the Highway Network Footer Text 3

48 Statewide Pavement Condition 89 Percentage of Lane Miles in Good or Better Condition Fiscal Year Footer Text 4

49 Project Selection Preventive Maintenance Cycles Ranking Equation Benefit Cost Analysis / Optimization Footer Text 5

50 Scenario Settings Scenario Number System Assigned Number Scenario name any user defined name Year of Condition data label used to assign years to output Analysis Length - number of years to run Save Details Whether it records all predictions made during analysis to a separate table Decision Tree set selects which decision trees to apply during analysis Footer Text 6

51 Setting up a Scenario Analysis objective and constraints Basic scenario parameters Inflation and discount settings Output requirement AgileAssets 7 Footer Text

52 Impact of Funding Levels Footer Text 8

53 Impact of Funding Levels No Budget Needs Estimate Funds to achieve targets Four Pavement Management Plans Footer Text 9

54 No Funding for Pavement M&R This Analysis shows how the network condition changes by time Footer Text 10

55 Needs Estimate Needs Analysis. This analysis shows what are all the M&R needs of our network assuming we have unlimited budget. Footer Text 11

56 Pavement Management Plan Objective Pavement Management Plan Develop a comprehensive and uniform pavement management plan which is roadway specific to the greatest extent possible, and is fiscally constrained. Generate Pavement Condition Projections based on a financially constrained plan, which can be used to assess the impact of the appropriated funding. Assure maintenance resources are directed towards pavement operations and roadway related work. Footer Text 12

57 Pavement Management Plan Objective Pavement Management Plan Provide a reporting mechanism for District Engineers, Administration and Commission to utilize in briefing elected officials. Allow districts and regions to appropriately allocate resources through long term planning in order to accomplish the plan. Footer Text 13

58 Four Year Pavement Management Plan Construction Funds Maintenance Funds Construction Projects Maintenance Projects Pavement Management System Master Work Plan Optimization & Analysis Performance Predication Footer Text 14

59 Total Lane Miles Treated 35,000 Treated Lane Miles 30,000 25,000 Lane Miles 20,000 15,000 10,000 5, Year PM LR MR HR Footer Text 15

60 Treatment Costs Treatment Cost $2,000,000,000 $1,800,000,000 $1,600,000,000 $1,400,000,000 $1,200,000,000 $1,000,000,000 $800,000,000 $600,000,000 $400,000,000 $200,000,000 $ Year ACP-PM ACP-LR ACP-MR ACP-HR CRCP-PM CRCP-LR CRCP-MR CRCP-HR JCP-PM JCP-LR JCP-MR JCP-HR Footer Text 16

61 Performance Prediction 100% % Lane Miles Good or Better-Statewide 95% 90% 85% % Lane Miles 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% Year Footer Text 17

62 Wet Surface Crash Reduction Program Footer Text 18

63 Skid Data Collection Locked wheel Skid Truck ASTM E-274 SN50S Sample Size 50 percent of the interstate 25 percent of all other systems Footer Text 19

64 Benefits A managed program for wet surface crash reduction program Adequate Skid Resistance for the System Ability to analyze pavement types Ability to analyze aggregate sources Ability to analyze surface types (dense graded vs SMA vs PFC etc.) Footer Text

65 Pavement Performance Standards Footer Text 21

66 Pavement Performance Standards Footer Text 22

67 Pavement Performance Standards Inspection and Measurement Method Rut Measurements Measurement Record Percentage of wheel path length with ruts greater than ¼ in depth in each Auditable Section: Mainlanes 3% Frontage roads 10% Target Nill Ride Quality Depth of rut at any location greater than ½ IRI measured throughout 98% of Auditable Section of less than or equal to: Mainlanes, 95 inches per mile Frontage roads 120 inches per mile Nill 100% 100% Footer Text 23

68 Footer Text 24

69 Suggestions For Further Research Develop guidance for using pavement management data to support decisions Agencies currently demonstrate impacts, estimate funding needs, and prioritize recommendations Few agencies use data to set targets, evaluate cost-effectiveness, consider risk, analyze needs across assets, evaluate structural condition

70 Suggestions For Further Research Develop a framework for using data to support life cycle planning and other capabilities needed to support a TAMP Develop electronic templates to allow agencies to document treatment rules, performance models, roles/responsibilities Conduct outreach activities showcasing nontraditional uses Establish guidance for using data on warranty and public/private contracts

71 Thank You!

72 Today s Participants Edgardo Block, Connecticut Department of Transportation, Edgardo.Block@ct.gov Katie Zimmerman, Applied Pavement Technology, Inc., kzimmerman@appliedpave ment.com Nathan Moore, Maryland Department of Transportation, NMoore@sha.state.md.us Magdy Mikhail, Texas Department of Transportation, magdy.mikhail@txdot.gov

73 Get Involved with TRB Getting involved is free! Join a Standing Committee ( Become a Friend of a Committee ( Networking opportunities May provide a path to become a Standing Committee member For more information: Create your account Update your profile 97 th TRB Annual Meeting: January 7-11, 2018

74 Get involved with NCHRP Suggest NCHRP research topics Volunteer to serve on NCHRP panels Lead pilot projects and other implementation efforts at your agency For more information: