Elias Rmeili, P.E. Brownwood District Director of TP&D Darlene Goehl, P.E. Bryan District Pavement/Materials Engineer Miguel Arellano, P.E.

Transcription

1 Elias Rmeili, P.E. Brownwood District Director of TP&D Darlene Goehl, P.E. Bryan District Pavement/Materials Engineer Miguel Arellano, P.E. Austin District Pavement/Materials Engineer

2 4 year Plan Background Information Project Selection Basic Procedure we all follow Rural District perspective (Brownwood) Urban District perspective (Bryan) Metro District perspective (Austin)

3 TxDOT s Goal: Ensure that 90 percent of Texas roads will be in good or better condition within 10 years. TxDOT set this goal in 2001.

4 Started in FY2010 Construction (P6) PM projects Rehabilitation Projects Maintenance (Pavement Management Program) Contracted In-house Other Projects Bridge Safety Widening, etc.

5 PMIS is an automated system for storing information to help with the pavement-related decision-making processes.

6 Rutting Failure Patching Alligator Cracking Longitudinal Cracking

7 Failure Failed Joint and Cracks Longitudinal Cracking Shattered Slab Patching

8 Spalling Punchout Asphalt Patch Concrete Patch

9

10 Combines Distress and Ride Quality for a Section. Measure 100% of roadbeds annually. (exception under construction) Ride Quality and rutting are measured with an automated system. Visual distress are measured by an independent contractor and audited by TxDOT.

11 A candidate project request is sent to the Area Offices and Maintenance Offices. Pavement Engineer develops PMIS maps and summaries for district staff. District Staff and Pavement Engineer rides the candidate projects and ranks the projects. District Staff and Pavement Engineer evaluates the 4 year plan, adjust project letting dates and adds new projects.

12 Major Corridor Evaluation IH 45 US 290 SH 6 Evaluate projects in other funding categories. Improve pavement condition score.

13 The Development of the Four-Year Maintenance Plan: Brownwood District Perspective

14 Improve our projected decline in Pavement Condition. 100 Good or Better Score (%) Measured Performance Predicted Performance Year

15 Contains: Construction Projects Maintenance Projects (strategy 144) Maintenance work (strategy 105)

16 Good PM Program Good Rehab Program

17 Seal as many roads as possible Category 1 PM Strategy 144 (Functional Class 6 Roads) Seal Shoulders every other cycle Use grade 4 instead of grade 3

18 Select Rehabilitation projects Standard project selection (Category 1) Pavement committee (Strategy 144)

19 Good PM Program Good Rehab Program Right project - right fix Communication TP&D and Operations areas Transparency

20 The Development of the Four-Year Maintenance Plan:

21 Austin District Roadbed Mileage: ADT (< 5000): 1940 miles ADT ( ,000): 642 miles ADT (>10,000): 788 miles IH-35 = ADT > 100,000 A lot of data to get your arms around Developed some easy, automated methods to analyze pavement performance data

22 Three Step Approach IDENTIFY: Network Level Analysis of PMIS data Preliminary Critical Project List SCOPE & RANK: Project Level Pavement Evaluation Develop scope of PM or Rehab treatment Prioritize and rank project based on performance indexing PLAN: Assign prioritized projects to appropriate funding category and year to make the biggest impact

23

24

25 In the past, we manually plotted & identified potential, as seen below

26 Developed an application to identify and rank the most critical pavement sections in the District network Automatically downloads two year of PMIS data Section Information (HWY, TRM) Raw Distress Data Two Years of Condition & Distress Scores & Calculated Deterioration Rates FISCAL_YEA COUNTY SIGNED_HIGHWBEG_REF_MBEG_REFEND_REFEND_REFACP_RUT_A ACP_RUT_A ACP_PATCHACP_FAILURACP_BLOCK ACP_ALLIGAACP_LONGITACP_TRANS RIDE_SCORE PMIS_DS_2011 PMIS_CS_2011 PMIS_DS_2010 PMIS_CS_2010 DS CS FM0812 K FM0812 K FM0812 K FM0812 K FM0812 K

27 Network Level Project Screening Tool: Identifies critical 0.5 mile sections based on Condition Scores and deterioration rate criteria and rule sets Stitches multiple critical 0.5 mile sections in series on a roadway to create potential P&R projects Identifies and classifies single 0.5 mile section as potential routine maintenance projects Network Level Project Screening Tool DATA INPUT CS Category Input 1. District Austin Good > County Bastrop Fair 3. Pavement type All Flexible Bad < Year 2011 CS Drop Category Input Slow > -5 Medium Fast < -15

28 Preliminary Weighted Performance Ranking based on Condition Score & Drop Score Rank by CS Roadway BRM Disp ERM Disp Condition Score (CS) Drop Condition Score ( CS) CS<30 30 CS<50 50 CS<70 70 CS -10 CS -20 CS< CS<-20 CS -30 Total CS Total Drop CS Total Score 1 SL0150 K FM0696 K FM3000 K SH0021 R US0290 K SH0021 L FM0812 K FM0020 K (0 0.4)+(75 0.3)+(25 0.2)+(0 0.1)= FM1100 K SL0109 K (50 0.1)+(50 0.2)+(0 0.3)+(0 0.4)=15 ( )+(15 0.5)=21.25

29 Network Level Project Screening Tool uses PMIS data to: Consolidates a preliminary candidate list of critical projects for further project level evaluation Use Network Level Raw Visual Distress Data for initial guess of whether a project is PM or Rehab Rank by CS Roadway Beginning Reference Marker Disp Ending Reference Marker Disp Condition Score (CS) Drop Condition Score ( CS) CS< CS< CS< CS - 10 CSD - 20 CSD < CSD <-20 CSD - 30 Total CS Total Drop CS Total Score ACP_RUT_ AUTO_SH ALLOW_A VG_PCT ACP_RUT_ AUTO_DE EP_AVG_P CT Visual Distress Summation ACP_PATC ACP_FAIL HING_PCT URE_QTY ACP_BLO CK_CRACK ING_PCT ACP_ALLI GATOR_C RACKING_ PCT ACP_LON GITUDE_C RACKING_ PCT ACP_TRA NSVERSE_ CRACKING _QTY 1 SL0150 K FM0696 K FM0812 K US0290 K FM1100 K

30

31 Project Level Evaluation Process Step1: Meet with Area/Main. Offices to compare notes on project list (observed vs. measured performance) Step 2: Project evaluation of distress (District, Area & Maintenance Office Personnel) Perform Project Level Distress Rating to verify and clarify network level visual distress data Consensus on distress mechanisms Step 3: Non-destructive testing for potential rehabilitation projects Step 4: Collaborate on the required PM or rehab treatment based on all data available & develop estimate Analyze treatment history as a part of the decision matrix

32 Project Level Evaluation Process Step1: Meet with Area/Main. Offices to compare notes on project list (observe vs. measured performance. Step 2: Project evaluation of distress (Dist. & Area/Maint. Personnel) Eyes on the Road Perform Project Level Distress Rating to verify and clarify network level visual distress data Automated Project Level Distress Survey Form Consensus on distress mechanisms Step 3: Non-destructive testing for potential rehabilitation projects Step 4: Collaborate on the required PM or rehab treatment based on all data available & develop estimate Analyze treatment history as a part of the decision matrix

33 Data collection at project level Distress rating from site visit- density Digital photos- severity Comments- severity It can be classified more specifically 1 to 5 level for density 1 to 5 level for severity Helps differentiate similar but different distresses like edge and longitudinal cracks (environmental vs. structural distress). Provide weighting factor to each distress type Helps develop scope PM vs. Rehab. The scores (grades) can be adjusted FUNCTIONAL DISTRESS STRUCTURAL DISTRESS Weighting factor Distress DENSITY SEVERITY type <10% 10-50% >50% LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts BLOCK MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts JNT CRK MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts FLUSH MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts RAVEL MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts EDG. CRK MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts FAT. CRK MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts RUTTING MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts SHEAR MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts LONG. CRK MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts PATCHING MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts LOW 1 pts 3 pts 5 pts FAILURE MEDIUM 3 pts 5 pts 7 pts HIGH 5 pts 7 pts 10 pts Both density and severity can be recorded with just one click

34 Project Level Evaluation Process Step1: Meet with Area/Main. Offices to compare notes on project list (observe vs. measured performance. Step 2: Project evaluation of distress (District, Area & Maintenance Office Personnel) Perform Project Level Distress Rating to verify and clarify network level visual distress data Consensus on distress mechanisms Step 3: Non-destructive testing for potential rehabilitation projects Step 4: Collaborate on the required PM or rehab treatment based on all data available & develop estimate Analyze treatment history as a part of the decision matrix

35 Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) Determine existing pavement section and underlying anomalies (water, stripping, etc..) Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) Structural capacity and stress analysis Coring and Sampling Quality of existing materials and subgrade conditions

36 Determine existing pavement section Subsurface anomalies (water, stripping, voids, etc..)

37 Determine underlying pavement support Determine depth of failure shear plane for edge failures

38 PMIS data is not a direct means to assess the structural adequacy of a pavement Use network and project level FWD testing to calculate the Structural Condition Index (SCI) to determine structural sufficiency and the extent and degree of rehabilitation SCI is the ratio of existing SN and required SN SCI = SN eff / SN req SN eff = f (total thickness, FWD deflections) SN req = f (20-year ESALs, subgrade Mr)

39

40 Project Level Evaluation Process Step1: Meet with Area/Main. Offices to compare notes on project list (observe vs. measured performance. Step 2: Project evaluation of distress (District, Area & Maintenance Office Personnel) Perform Project Level Distress Rating to verify and clarify network level visual distress data Consensus on distress mechanisms Step 3: Non-destructive testing for potential rehabilitation projects Step 4: Collaborate on the required PM or rehab treatment based on all data available & develop estimate Analyze treatment history as a part of the decision matrix

41 Analysis Treatment History to help prescribe the appropriate P&R treatment Collect treatment history from DCIS, Site Manager, and District databases Use 10 yr. PMIS scores to estimate: Last P&R treatment (years) Analysis Distress & Ride scores before and after treatments success or failure of last treatment

42 About 4 yr About 3 yr HWY_ID BRM DISP FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K FM0141 K Expected Treatment year In 2002, 2001&2006, all segments were treated w/ level up and seal coat. Was it the right decision to treat all segments with this treatment? Maybe may be not

43 Final projects transferred and ranked in the Master 4 yr plan application With all data, Pavement Preservation Evaluation Index (PPEI) is calculate for each project. PPEI = f(adt, % truck, L prj, SCI, CS, CS, t last_trt, etc ) Final 4 yr Plan project lists will be ranked based on PPEI.

44

45 Master 4 yr. Plan application: Assign funding category (CAT 1, 144, 105, etc ) Sets funding percentages for different treatment category (PM, LR, MR, HR, Safety, Seal Coats ) Input the anticipated annual funding for each year/ category Automatically backfills the highest ranked projects into earliest funding year and category Estimates the potential impact to network scores Under development

46 Project not selected in one fiscal year will automatically be pushed to the next fiscal year with an apply inflation rate Unfunded projects are placed into a backlog list Safety projects and annual seal coat projects will be removed from the top first Re-analyze each year and modified as necessary List can be modified manually based on engineering judgment

47 Goal of the Austin District Pavement Preservation Program: Identify most critical pavement sections for PM or rehabilitation (both scores & rate of deterioration) Prescribe the appropriate P&R for each critical section Select projects based on performance indexing; not inventory Narrow the degree and scope of P&R to optimize funding Biggest Bang for the Buck!