Skip to main content

An Asset-Management Framework for the Interstate Highway System (2009) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:


Pages 66-71

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 66...
... Once data were obtained, the research team performed a series of analyses to characterize existing conditions of each corridor, and predicted future conditions under different funding and risk scenarios. These analyses are described in Section B.3 and are considered typical of that required to develop an Interstate Asset Management Plan.
Read the entire page →
From page 67...
... Other Structures Limited data available Roadside Assets Signs/pavement markings for one-third of the participants Facilities Two participants had basic inventory and cost data for rest areas Other All participants had crash data All participants had project data All participants have (or will soon have) travel demand model data, but none were in a position to define risk scenarios to analyze using travel demand data One participant had some level of risk-related data – details on structure vulnerabilities of different types, with scores
Read the entire page →
From page 68...
... However, none of the participants had identified risk scenarios that could be used in conjunction with their travel demand models for quantifying potential consequences of different risks. B.3 Analyses Performed Using the data described in the previous section, a set of analyses was performed for each of the pilot corridors.
Read the entire page →
From page 69...
... , a $1M annual budget results in having 31 percent functioning as intended at the end of the period, and a $0.5M annual budget results in approximately 16 percent functioning as intended. Where other agency systems and data were available, such as the SCDOT IIMS and data associated with the Caltrans SHOPP update process, the research team reviewed this information, but did not integrate these data sources into the analysis process except as otherwise noted.
Read the entire page →
From page 70...
... AssetManager NT is a network-level tool that combines analysis results generated through other systems, displaying predicted conditions for a range of different performance measures and budget assumptions. The system is well-suited for applications such as supporting development of an Interstate Asset Management Plan, where results from different systems are combined with the goal of providing an integrated view of predicted conditions.
Read the entire page →
From page 71...
... IHS owners have limited data available on other structures besides bridges, as well as on roadside assets. Further, IHS owners typically lack at least some of the data required to support the risk analysis approach recommended as part of the Interstate Asset Management Framework.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • asset management
  • percent functioning
  • travel demand
  • demand model
  • safety improvement

  • analysis results
  • interstate asset
  • additional data
  • structure data
  • pilot corridor

  • california dot
  • ihs owner
  • pontis database
  • pontis bms
  • analytical tools

  • future conditions
  • inventory data
  • crash data
  • state highway
  • ihs owners

  • nchrp project
  • nbi data
  • tical tools
  • level tool
  • maintenance budgeting

  • ulate future
  • lytical tools
  • demand models


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.