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 823 Guidelines for Certification and Management of Flexible Rockfall Protection Systems Ben Arndt Brett Arpin Yeh and associates, inc. Denver, CO Jerry D. Higgins Golden, CO Paul Thompson Bellevue, WA Subscriber Categories Geotechnology ⢠Maintenance and Preservation TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2016 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 is the most effective way to solve 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 results in increasingly complex problems of wide inter- est to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 ini- tiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniquesâthe National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was requested by AASHTO to administer the research program because of TRBâs recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. TRB is uniquely suited for this purpose for many reasons: TRB maintains an extensive com- mittee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; TRB possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state, and local governmental agencies, univer- sities, and industry; TRBâs relationship to the Academies is an insurance of objectivity; and TRB maintains a full-time staff of specialists in high- way transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators and other staff of the highway and transporta- tion departments and by committees of AASHTO. Topics of the highest merit are selected by the AASHTO Standing Committee on Research (SCOR), and each year SCORâs recommendations are proposed to the AASHTO Board of Directors and the Academies. Research projects to address these topics are defined by NCHRP, and qualified research agencies are selected from submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the Acad- emies and TRB. The needs for highway research are many, and NCHRP can make significant contributions to solving 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 by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 823 Project 24-35 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 978-0-309-37541-2 Library of Congress Control Number 2016938329 © 2016 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, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC 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 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 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 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 Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; 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.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied committees, task forces, and panels 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 individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.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 would like to thank the NCHRP Project 24-35 panel for providing valuable comments and insight during the performance of this research. CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 823 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Christopher Hedges, Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program David Reynaud, Senior Program Officer Danna Powell, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Kami Cabral, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 24-35 PANEL Field of Soils and GeologyâArea of Mechanics and Foundations David A. Stanley, DA Stanley Consulting, Bellingham, WA (Chair) Thomas C. Badger, Washington State DOT, Olympia, WA Vanessa C. Bateman, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Nashville, TN Brent A. Black, Landslide Technology, Portland, OR Thomas D. Eliassen, Vikra Geological Services, Montpelier, VT Peter C. Ingraham, Golder Associates, Inc., Manchester, NH Ty Ortiz, Colorado DOT, Denver, CO A. Keith Turner, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO Scott A. Anderson, FHWA Liaison G. P. Jayaprakash, TRB Liaison
F O R E W O R D This report provides guidelines to assist transportation agencies to obtain the data nec- essary to evaluate the results of rockfall fence systems tested using the procedure recom- mended for acceptance. Guidelines for asset management for rockfall fence systems were developed and are presented to assist transportation agencies in incorporating these systems into existing transportation asset management plans. This report will be of interest to main- tenance and asset management personnel. Rockfall fence systems have been in service along roadways in Europe and the United States for more than 40 years. However, before 2003, there was no widely accepted means for testing and acceptance of these systems. That year, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program produced âRecommended Procedures for the Testing of Rock-Fall Barri- ers,â which recommended acceptance of the Swiss testing standard and certification process. In 2008, the European Union developed a standardized testing and certification of rock- fall fences program known as European Technical Approval Guideline (ETAG) 27. Most European manufacturers are currently certifying their products in accordance with ETAG 27 guidelines. Currently U.S. transportation agencies do not have testing standards and certification procedures for flexible rockfall fence systems. Under NCHRP Project 24-35, âGuidelines for Certification and Management of Flexible Rockfall Protection Systems,â Yeh and Associates is suggesting that the ETAG 27 test procedure is appropriate for use within the United States, and would eliminate the need for manufacturers to perform additional testing. Agencies would also be able to request manufacturerâs data collected during an ETAG test to verify that the product meets their standards. In addition, the long term performance and maintenance issues of these systems are a growing concern. Asset management offers a framework for monitoring performance of these systems and understanding the condition/deterioration timeline so that agencies can make informed life-cycle cost-based decisions about these assets. By David Reynaud Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
C O N T E N T S Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may 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. 1 Summary 2 Chapter 1 Background 2 1.1 Problem Statement 2 1.2 Research Objectives 4 Chapter 2 European ETAG 27 Testing Standards 7 Chapter 3 Proposed ETAG 27 Acceptance Procedures for Agencies 7 3.1 Discussion of Acceptance Conditions for Agencies 7 3.2 Proposed Data Request Form for ETAG 27 Tested Systems 10 Chapter 4 Proposed Inventory and Condition Assessment of Rockfall Fence Systems for Agencies 10 4.1 Condition Rating of Rockfall System Elements 10 4.2 Rockfall System Performance Rating 10 4.3 Rockfall System Condition and Performance Weighting Factors 13 4.4 Rockfall System Inventory and Assessment Data Reliability Rating 13 4.5 Rockfall System Failure Consequence Rating 13 4.6 Rockfall System Condition Rating 13 4.7 Proposed Rockfall System Inventory Form 13 4.8 Proposed Rockfall System Condition Assessment Form 16 Chapter 5 Discussion of Management of Rockfall Fence Systems After Inventory and Condition Assessment 16 5.1 Pavement Asset Management Concept 16 5.2 Rockfall Fence Asset Management Concept 18 5.3 Rockfall Fence Asset Management Practice 19 5.4 Discussion of Maintenance and Repair of Rockfall Fence Systems 20 Chapter 6 Proposed Performance-Based Special Provision for Rockfall Fence Systems 23 References