Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP REPORT 750 Strategic Issues Facing Transportation Volume 3: Expediting Future Technologies for Enhancing Transportation System Performance Steven W. Popper Nidhi Kalra Richard Silberglitt Edmundo Molina-Perez Youngbok Ryu Michael Scarpati RAND TRANspoRTATioN, spAce, AND TechNology pRogRAm Santa Monica, CA Subscriber Categories Freight Transportation â¢ Planning and Forecasting â¢ Terminals and Facilities TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2013 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Boardâs recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 750, VOLUME 3 Project 20-83(2) ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 978-0-309-28360-1 Library of Congress Control Number 2013932452 Â© 2013 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. Front cover, image used in third circle from the top: Â© Washington State Department of Transportation. Used under Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0).
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors are grateful for the insights received from Elizabeth Deakin and Karen Frick of the Univer- sity of California, Berkeley Transportation Research Center, on the obstacles to adoption of new technolo- gies faced by transportation agencies. We would also like to thank Steven Shladover and James Misener of Partners for Advanced Transportation TecHnology (PATH), also at the University of California, Berkeley, in collaboration with Caltrans, for the benefit of their experience at the leading edge of transportation technology developments. The authors also benefitted considerably from interviews with many associated with state departments of transportation, municipal planning organizations, various offices within the U.S. Department of Trans- portation as well as TRB and AASHTO. We would particularly like to thank the staff members of the Minnesota Department of Transportation who allowed us to conduct a STREAM workshop based on their expertise, as well as those who invited us to interact on the basic STREAM design at the Nevada Depart- ment of Transportation and Caltrans. Scott Hiromoto provided excellent support in designing and developing the software tool for perform- ing the quantitative analysis required by the STREAM Compare step. Last but not least we would like to thank RAND colleagues Martin Wachs, Johanna Zmud, and Paul Sorensen for their help and advice along the way. Any remaining inaccuracies are the sole responsibility of the authors. CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 750, Volume 3 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs B. Ray Derr, Senior Program Officer AndreÃ¡ Parker, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Hilary Freer, Senior Editor NCHRP PROJECT 20-83(2) PANEL Area of Special Projects Theodore âTedâ Trepanier, Inrix, Inc., Kirkland, WA (Chair) Patricia S. Hu, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Washington, DC Mark F. Muriello, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, New York, NY Marco Ruano, California DOT, Los Angeles, CA Richard Schuman, Inrix, Apopka, FL Zhong Wang, Seattle DOT, Seattle, WA Linda S. Watson, Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Austin, TX James L. âJimâ Wright, AASHTO, Washington, DC Lawrence F. Yermack, Wendover Consult, Berkeley, CA Valerie Briggs, RITA Liaison Santiago Navarro, RITA Liaison Joe I. Peters, FHWA Liaison Richard Pain, TRB Liaison
F O R E W O R D New technologies continually arise that could be useful to DOTs and MPOs. This report presents a process (Systematic Technology Reconnaissance, Evaluation, and Adoption Methodology or STREAM) to compare these technologies to alternatives on the basis of their likely effects on agency goals, including consideration of barriers to implementation. STREAMâs use is illustrated in three case studies. This report will be useful to research units within state DOTs and other units responsible for evaluating new technologies. Major trends affecting the future of the United States and the world will dramatically reshape transportation priorities and needs. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials established the NCHRP Project 20-83 research series to exam- ine global and domestic long-range strategic issues and their implications for departments of transportation (DOTs) to help prepare the DOTs for the challenges and benefits cre- ated by these trends. NCHRP Report 750: Strategic Issues Facing Transportation, Volume 3: Expediting Future Technologies for Enhancing Transportation System Performance is the third report in this series. Transportation agencies may use various options to capitalize on technology to improve transportation system performance. For instance, information and communication tech- nology allows for enhanced traveler information, instant re-routing and mode choice, and facilitating pricing-based strategies. Future technologies offer even greater potential to improve safety, reliability, and mobility. Furthermore, this subject area can involve not only adoption of technologies by transportation agencies, but ways in which transportation agencies can anticipate and help shape research and development of various technologies that can affect transportation system performance. Technology often changes faster than agencies can react. In particular, the results of research can be slow to be implemented into practice. Many transportation agencies do not have the business processes and organizational structures in place that allow rapid adoption and deployment of relevant technologies. Furthermore, many barriers outside the con- trol of transportation agencies affect the ability to advance technologies from research to deployment. Partnerships with the private sector and opportunities for knowledge transfer from other industries may help the transportation sector more effectively adapt in this dynamic environment. Under NCHRP Project 20-83(02), the RAND Corporation developed a process that transportation agencies can use to identify, assess, shape, and adopt new and emerging tech- nologies to achieve long-term system performance objectives. The process reflects relevant trends in technologies and their applications and helps transportation agencies anticipate, adapt to, and shape the future. By B. Ray Derr Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
The research team identified and assessed trends in technologies applicable to the mis- sion of state DOTs and barriers to implementation of these technologies. The research team then assessed typical performance objectives adopted by state DOTs that such technolo- gies could be expected to aid in meeting. These insights were instrumental in developing STREAM which was then evaluated using several case studies, including meeting with the Minnesota DOT to discuss how STREAM could be applied to bridge deck evaluation. Case studies were also conducted for driver information and snow removal/ice control to assess STREAMâs practicality across the range of state DOT functions. The STREAM process has five steps. The final step, deciding whether to adopt the tech- nology, must always take into consideration an agencyâs specific objectives and context; however, earlier steps in the process can be done jointly with other agencies. This approach will reduce costs and staff time and speed the implementation of beneficial technologies.
C O N T E N T S 1 Chapter 1 Introduction 3 Chapter 2 Foundations of STREAM 3 Broad Technology Assessment, Adoption, and Implementation Barriers 5 Potential Shortcomings of Current Technology Assessment Studies 5 Few Studies Provide Guidance on Technology Decision Making 5 A Consistent Approach to Guidance on Decision Making Seems Lacking 6 Agencies Perform Duplicate Studies in Order to Make Technology Decisions 6 Guidance and Individual DOT Studies May Have Methodological Shortcomings 6 These Factors May Slow the Adoption of Beneficial Technologies 7 Principles for Better Technology Assessment 7 Principle 1: Assess and Compare Technologies in Relation to Agency Goals 7 Principle 2: Derive Transportation Agency Technology Needs on the Basis of Specific Functions That Require Support 8 Principle 3: Use Multiple Metrics to Assess and Compare Technologies with Respect to the Full Range of Agency Goals 8 Principle 4: Identify and Compare Existing and Prospective Technologies by Effect on Functional Performance Rather Than by Technology Type 9 Principle 5: Include Current Knowledge About Existing and Prospective Technologies Within a Common Framework for Assessment, Tracking, and Decision 10 Principle 6: Make the Assessment Process Less Disruptive to and More Integral with Regular Agency Functions 10 Principle 7: Provide Sufficient Information to Understand the Degree of Uncertainty and Enable Flexible Operation Under Evolving Circumstances 10 The Virtue of Simplicity 11 Chapter 3 STREAM: A Systematic Technology Reconnaissance, Evaluation, and Adoption Method 12 Step 1: FRAME the Problem and Specify Goals 13 Step 2: IDENTIFY Potentially Appropriate Technology Applications 13 Step 3: CHARACTERIZE Alternative Technology Applications 13 Characterizing Effects on Agency Missions 14 Characterizing Barriers to Successful Implementation 15 Characterizing Costs 16 Step 4: COMPARE Technology Alternatives and Tradeoffs 17 Step 5: DECIDE: Adopt, Shape, Monitor, Research
18 Chapter 4 STREAM in Application: Bridge Deck Evaluation 18 Step 1. Framing Bridge Deck Evaluation for STREAM 18 Motivating the Use of STREAM for Bridge Deck Evaluation 19 Definition of Metrics for Bridge Deck Evaluation 20 Step 2. Identify Technology Applications for Bridge Deck Evaluation 20 Current State of Practice 20 Current and Prospective Technology Alternatives 22 Step 3. Characterize 22 Illustration of Analytical Characterization 23 Illustration of Survey-Based Characterization 23 Characterization of Costs for Alternatives 24 Weighing Indirect Effects 25 Step 4. Compare 28 Step 5. Decide 28 Other Applications of STREAM 29 Chapter 5 Implementation of STREAM 29 Cooperative Technology Board/Panel Approach 31 Agency-led Approach 33 Appendix A Technology Assessment, Adoption, and Implementation by Transportation Agencies 45 Appendix B STREAM Applied to Snow Removal and Ice Control Technology 71 Appendix C STREAM Applied to Driver Information Systems 94 Appendix D Materials Supporting Bridge Deck NDE STREAM Example 101 Appendix E Supporting Information for STREAM Application Case Studies 103 References Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the Web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.
AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ABP Agricultural-based Products AI Artificial Intelligence AMPO Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations ARROWS Automated Real-Time Road Weather System ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers AVL Automatic Vehicle Location CAA Clean Air Act CACS Comprehensive Automobile Control System CaCl2 Calcium Chloride CAD Computer-Assisted Drawing CMA Calcium Magnesium Acetate CRn Concentration Ratio CSS Context-sensitive solution design CV Commercial Vehicle On-Board DIC Digital Image Correlation DO Dissolved Oxygen DOR Department of Roads DOT Department of transportation (generic) DOT Department of Transportation DRIVE Dedicated Road Infrastructure for Vehicle Safety in Europe EC Electronic Credentialing ER Emergency Response Center ES Electronic Screening EV Emergency Vehicle On-Board FAST Fixed Automated Spray Technology FBG Fiber Bragg Grating FCC Federal Communications Commission FHWA Federal Highway Administration FM Fleet Management Center FOS Fiber optics sensor FP Fabry-Perot FTA Federal Transit Administration GHG Greenhouse Gas GIS Geographic information system GPR Ground penetrating radar GPS Global positioning system HHI Herfindahl-Hirschman Index HMCV Highway Maintenance Concept Vehicle IAPA Illinois Asphalt Pavement Association A C R O N Y M S , A B B R E V I A T I O N S , A N D I N I T I A L I S M S
ISP Information Service Provider ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 IT Information Technology ITS Intelligent transportation system IVHS Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems KAc Potassium Acetate Kform Potassium Formate LOS Level of Service LPR Linear Polarization Resistance MDSS Maintenance Decision Support System MgCl2 Magnesium Chloride MnDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation MPO Metropolitan planning organization NaAc Sodium Acetate NaCl Sodium Chloride NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NDE Nondestructive evaluation NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NSSRG National Salt Spreading Research Group O&M Operations and Maintenance OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer OIM Office of Investment Management PD Personal Device PDA Personal Digital Assistant PM Parking Management PNS Pacific Northwest Snowfighters POSI Probability of Successful Implementation PSIC Pavement Snow and Ice Condition RFID Radio Frequency Identification RM Remote Location RMS Resource Management System RS-C Roadside Control RS-D Roadside Detection RS-TC Roadside Telecommunications RWIS Road Weather Information System SDDOT South Dakota Department of Transportation SEI Structural Engineering Institute SHM Structural health monitoring SICOP Snow and Ice Pooled Fund Cooperative Program SIE Safety Information Exchange TA Toll Administration TIG AASHTO Technology Implementation Group TM Transportation Management Center TMB Tsing Ma Bridge TMIP Travel Model Improvement Program TP Toll Plaza TPF Taxes/Penalties/Fees TR Transit Management Center TRANSIMS Transportation Analysis Simulation System TRB Transportation Research Board
TRL Transportation Research Laboratory TTI Texas Transportation Institute TV Transit Vehicle On-Board USDOT United States Department of Transportation UV Ultraviolet VERITAS Vehicle Road and Traffic Intelligence Society VM Vehicle Miles VS Vehicle On-Board V2I Vehicle-to-Infrastructure V2V Vehicle-to-Vehicle WMA Warm-mix Asphalt WMS Work Management System