Click for next page ( 31

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 30
31 Needs Considerations Pavement preservation needs Financial considerations Mandatory projects Budget constraints Prioritized preservation needs Budget development Economy of scale Packaging of projects Other airfield needs Scheduling Operational considerations System expansion Prioritization Impact on airport operations Safety and other improvements Safety of operations Underground utilities, etc, Importance of facility Budget formulation and reporting Budget evaluation FIGURE 21 Programming and budgeting activities. pavement preservation and the resulting condition of the pave- different strengths and weaknesses. Because MicroPAVER ment network. It also attempts to quantify the adequacy of the was publicly developed and is publicly supported, the follow- budget in meeting pavement preservation needs. Budget eval- ing list of advantages and disadvantages of MicroPAVER is uation tools include the following: provided only as an example and guidance to the characteris- tics that can be used to evaluate and select APMS software. Monitoring pavement performance trends. An example Advantages of MicroPAVER include: of monitoring pavement condition in terms of PCI is shown in Figure 8 in chapter three. Long-term support by the FAA and other agencies, and Monitoring of expenditures. For example, some road ongoing enhancements. agencies monitor yearly expenditures on pavement pre- Relatively inexpensive. servation in terms of dollars per square yard of pavement. Incorporates ASTM PCI evaluation methodology. Tracking the dollar value of unfunded pavement preser- Highly scalable; used by small and large airports. vation needs, if any, and yearly changes in unfunded Integrated with GIS platform; for example, enables needs. graphical representation of pavement condition. Evaluation of the consequences of different budget lev- Dependable pavement performance prediction based on els on the future condition of the pavement network. "family" curves. The future pavement condition is typically measured in Enables generation of customized reports and exporting terms of PCI. data to other software applications. Customized maintenance policy (for stop-gap, preven- tive, and global). COMPUTATIONAL SUPPORT Estimates pavement life extension resulting from main- tenance treatments. Software Evaluation of different budget alternatives (unlimited Management of the pavement database and the identification budget, maintain current condition, constrained annual and prioritization of M&R projects requires extensive data budget, eliminate backlog). processing using specialized computer software. Many prac- titioners view APMS as computer-based decision support systems. There are several pavement management software 60 Percent of respondents products that can be purchased and customized by airport agencies. 40 According to the survey, all airport agencies that have an 20 operational APMS use a software application. About 53% of airports reported using MicroPAVER, whereas 13% of airports 0 used other commercial software (Figure 22). MicroPAVER is MicroPAVER Other In-house a public use PMS application. commercial software software Type of APMS software Pavement administrators and engineers select the APMS software based on individual needs, as each PMS package has FIGURE 22 Use of APMS software.

OCR for page 30
32 Disadvantages of MicroPAVER include: Percent of respondents 60 Cost of M&R treatments on the network level is based 40 on PCI range and not on specific M&R treatments that 20 address root causes of pavement distress. Limited optimization features on network level; opti- 0 mization is based on PCI value and facility types with- In-house In-house and Mainly out considering costs and benefits of the individual staff outside staff consultants M&R treatments. Operation of APMS Lack of user customization may require longer imple- FIGURE 23 Operation of APMS. mentation. Based on the survey, 47% of APMS software was oper- William J. Hughes Technical Center is intended to be a repos- ated by in-house staff with outside support (Figure 23). itory for PMS data from PAVEAIR on airport projects funded Thirty-three percent of APMS software was operated by in- under AIP; this will allow the FAA to monitor the perfor- house staff, and 20% of agencies use outside consultants to mance of AIP projects and gain needed information on vari- operate their APMS. ables and materials that impact pavement performance. New FAA Software PAVEAIR software will be available to users as a free download and the software will initially be similar to The FAA is developing airport pavement management soft- MicroPAVER in application and operational features. Exist- ware called PAVEAIR to be distributed to airports and airport ing MicroPAVER databases (Micro Paver e60 files and engineers for implementation on commercial and general avi- Micro Paver MDB files) can be imported into PAVEAIR so ation airports. PAVEAIR will be a web-based application for that current MicroPAVER users will not lose any existing easy dissemination of information and will allow data for data. The first release of PAVEAIR will have the functional- multiple airports to be made available on a single server con- ity of MicroPAVER Version 5.3. The release of PAVEAIR nected to the web. The FAA server installed at the FAA is planned for late 2010.