Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 119


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 118
118 Part 13: FWD Program Administration--Part 2 of 2 Question 81: Does your agency have an FWD Quality Control and/or Quality Assurance plan(s) in effect for your entire FWD program (e.g., data collection, data analysis, data storage, maintenance, etc.)? FIGURE B70 Survey response to Question 81: `Does your agency have an FWD Quality Control and/or Quality Assurance plan(s) in effect for your entire FWD program (e.g., data collection, data analysis, data storage, maintenance, etc.)?" Question 82: What is the average annual operating budget--including labor, materials, travel, etc.--for your FWD testing program? FIGURE B71 Survey response to Question 82: "What is the average annual operating budget--including labor, materials, travel, etc.--for your FWD testing program?"

OCR for page 118
119 Question 83: What fraction of your FWD program budget is applied to in-house activities? To outsourced activities? FIGURE B72 Survey response to Question 83: "What fraction of your FWD program budget is applied to in-house activities? To outsourced activities?" Question 84: If outsourced, what are the contract requirements for personnel training, equipment calibration, data quality, and other deliverables? TABLE B21 Survey question 84: "If outsourced, what are the contract requirements for personnel training, equipment calibration, data quality, and other deliverables?" Responding State Contract Requirements Alaska Outsourced activities involve using the state's FWDs and personnel to collect data off state property (e.g., for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). California Current outsourced services are for manufacturer maintenance, parts, repairs, and calibration. Florida Follow FDOT procedures including training, equipment used, calibration, data quality checks, and deliverables as described in FDOT handbook. Nebraska The repairs and calibration is outsourced to KUAB. Oregon Proof of yearly calibration, deliverable of hard and electronic copy of the data in FWD format. Texas Calibration certification by LTPP contractor.

OCR for page 118
120 Question 85: What percentage of your FWD program budget is dedicated to each of the following levels? TABLE B22 Survey question 85: "What percentage of your FWD program budget is dedicated to each of the following levels?" Average Median Mode Level (%) (%) (%) Project Level (including forensics) 63.7 79.5 90.0 Network Level 11.3 0 0 Research Level 22.4 10.0 10.0 Other (detailed in Question 86) 2.6 0 0 Question 86: If you answered other above, please describe. TABLE B23 Survey question 86: "What percentage of your FWD program budget is dedicated to each of the following levels?" "If you answered other above, please describe" Responding State Description of Other Activities California Most work is done for project-level testing. Research work involves pavement performance data collection. North Dakota FWD deflections and calculated moduli are used to help determine when to remove spring load restrictions. Question 87: Approximately what lane-distance does your FWD program test annually? FIGURE B73 Survey response to Question 87: "Approximately what lane-distance does your FWD program test annually?"

OCR for page 118
121 Question 88: Please provide any additional comments on the advantages of FWD use in your agency. TABLE B24 Survey question 88: "Please provide any additional comments on the advantages of FWD use in your agency" Responding State FWD Program Comments California Versatility in the testing, both loading and in sensor configuration, has been the biggest advantage of the FWD. Additional FWD features have also been added for future data analysis. Connecticut We have not yet implemented an FWD program. Florida FWD complements our other nondestructive equipment (e.g., GPR, ADCP, Plate Bearing). Illinois Used primarily for structural monitoring of in-service pavements and research test sites. Not regularly used as a design tool. Indiana A decision-making tool that can save a lot of money. Iowa We are actually just getting into a network-level testing process. We are awaiting the arrival of a second testing unit to start this process. Currently, we are only doing FWD testing by request and for research purposes. We are also participants in the ongoing federal calibration protocol/calibration center pooled-fund study. Our in-house analysis is primarily a cooperative effort with Iowa State University and the algorithms are developed in a research effort. Louisiana It is a valuable tool for pavement assessment and we rely on it and the Dynaflect to make decisions about pave- ment performance. Missouri Network- and new project-level questions were not answered here since we routinely test neither with the FWD. Our FWD usage is sporadic; it is almost entirely reactive to district requests for existing pavement evaluations and early pavement failures. Montana We believe that this equipment is a tool that aids us in the design of our rehabilitation strategies, which in turn saves tax payer money. Nevada The FWD takes the guesswork out of the "how thick of an overlay is warranted" question. It shows us the benefit of the before-and-after repair strategy. New York FWD is essential equipment in determining subbase, subgrade moduli, and PCC load transfer efficiencies. Ohio FWD is currently used to test research sections. We plan to use the FWD to provide data for overlay design on four-lane and Interstate pavements in the near future. Oregon Used to establish equipment pattern for rubblization during construction by taking deflections after various energy adjustments to rubblization device. Rhode Island Our FWD is used almost exclusively for an ongoing research project. We have not yet implemented a pavement evaluation program utilizing the FWD. South Carolina Used for the project level only. Texas We have the same manufacturer for all of the FWDs, so we don't need to maintain parts for different manufactur- ers. Also, repairing them is the same. Utah Network-level testing program currently under review for usefulness of data. Wisconsin FWD usage is limited in our state. With mechanistic-empirical design, may see increased usage.

OCR for page 118

OCR for page 118

OCR for page 118

OCR for page 118
Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications: AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACINA Airports Council InternationalNorth America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA Air Transport Association ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005) TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998) TRB Transportation Research Board TSA Transportation Security Administration U.S.DOT United States Department of Transportation

OCR for page 118
Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Address Service Requested