National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 3 Conclusions
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25321.
×
Page 39
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25321.
×
Page 40
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25321.
×
Page 41
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25321.
×
Page 42
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25321.
×
Page 43
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25321.
×
Page 44
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25321.
×
Page 45
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25321.
×
Page 46

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.

39 References Abbreviations: AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ATRI American Transportation Research Institute DOC U.S. Department of Commerce FHWA Federal Highway Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration GAO U.S. Government Accountability Office NTC National Transport Commission (Australia) NYSDOT New York State Department of Transportation RTAC Roads and Transportation Association of Canada TRB Transportation Research Board USDOT U.S. Department of Transportation AASHTO. (2017). AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 8th Edition. Washington, D.C. Abate, M., et al. (2018). A disaggregate stochastic freight transport model for Sweden. Trans- portation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116­018­9856­9. Abate, M., & de Jong, G. (2014). The optimal shipment size and truck size choice—the al­ location of trucks across hauls. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 59, Jan. 262–277. Ahmed, A., Agbelie, B. R., Lavrenz, S., Keefer, M., Labi, S., & Sinha, K. C. (2013). Costs and Revenues Associated with Overweight Trucks in Indiana. Al­Qadi, I., Loulizi, A., Janajreh, I., & Freeman, T. (2002). Pavement response to dual tires and new wide­base tires at same tire pressure. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board (1806), 38–47. Al­Qadi, I., Ouyang, Y., Meidani, H., Gungor, O. E., Petit, A., Qiu, J., Wang, H., & Zhao, J. (2017). Development of a Proposed Overweight Vehicle Permit Fee Structure in Illinois. No. FHWA­ICT­17­004. Illinois Center for Transportation.

40 EVALUATION OF TRUCK SIZE AND WEIGHT REGULATIONS ATRI. (2018). ATRI Board Approves 2018 Top Research Priorities. Press Release. April. http:// atri­online.org/2018/04/02/atri­board­approves­2018­top­research­priorities. Bektas, B., & Albughdadi, A. (2018). Characteristics of Decommissioned Bridges. NCHRP. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/docs/NCHRP20­07(397)_FR.pdf. Blauwens, G., Vandaele, N., Van de Voorde, E., Vernimmen, B., & Wiltox, F. (2006). Towards a modal shift in freight transport?: A business logistics analysis of some policy measures. Transport Reviews, 26(2), 239–251. Braver, E., et al. (1997). Tractor­trailer crashes in Indiana: A case­control study of the role of truck configuration. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 29(I), 79–96. Brown, D. 2004. Cost­benefit analysis in criminal law. 92 California Law Review 323. http:// scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/californialawreview/vol92/iss2/1. Chatti, K., & El Mohtar, C. (2004). Effect of different axle configurations on fatigue life of asphalt concrete mixture. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board (1891), 121–130. Chiang, Y., Roberts, P. O., & Akiva, M. B. (1981). Development of a Policy Sensitive Model for Forecasting Freight Demand. Cambridge, MA: Center for Transportation Studies. Christensen Associates. (2009). A Study of Competition in the U.S. Freight Railroad Industry and Analysis of Proposals That Might Enhance Competition: Volume 2: Analysis of Com- petition, Capacity, and Service Quality. Prepared for the Surface Transportation Board. Laurits R. Christensen Associates, Inc., Madison, WI. November. https://www.stb.gov/stb/ elibrary/CompetitionStudy.html. Clark, C., et al. (2005). A Survey of the Freight Transportation Demand Literature and a Comparison of Elasticity Estimates. Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. January 1. Darab, M., et al. (2011). A thermo­viscoelastic–viscoplastic–viscodamage constitutive model for asphaltic materials. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 48, 191–207. Darter, M., et al. (2001). Development and Calibration of a Mechanistic Design Procedure for Jointed Plain Concrete Pavements. Presented at the 7th International Conference on Concrete Pavements, Orlando, Florida, September 9–13. de Jong, G., & Baak, J. (2016). Method report—Logistics Model in the Swedish National Freight Model System. March. https://www.trafikverket.se/samgods. DOC. (1964). Maximum Desirable Dimensions and Weights of Vehicles Operated on the Federal-aid Systems. FHWA. (2011). Intermodal Transportation and Inventory Cost Model State Tool (ITIC­ST). FHWA. (2012a). Maine and Vermont Interstate Highway Heavy Truck Pilot Program 6-Month Report. February 28. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/reports/me_vt_pilot_2012/ rptcongress/index.htm. FHWA. (2012b). Vermont Pilot Program Report. February 28. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/ freight/sw/reports/vt_pilot_2012/vt_pilot.pdf. FHWA. (2015a). Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study: Modal Shift Compara- tive Analysis Technical Report. June. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tswstudy/ technical_rpts/index.htm. FHWA. (2015b). Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study: Volume I: Technical Re- ports Summary. June. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tswstudy/technical_rpts/ index.htm. FHWA. (2015c). Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study: Pavement Comparative Analysis Technical Report. June. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tswstudy/ technical_rpts/index.htm. FHWA. (2015d). Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study: Highway Safety and Truck Crash Comparative Analysis Technical Report. June. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/ freight/sw/map21tswstudy/technical_rpts/index.htm.

REFERENCES 41 FHWA. (2015e). Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study: Compliance Compara- tive Analysis Technical Report. June. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tswstudy/ technical_rpts/index.htm. FHWA. (2015f). Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study: Bridge Structure Com- parative Analysis Technical Report. June. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tsw­ study/technical_rpts/index.htm. FHWA. (2016a). Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study: Report to Congress. April. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tswstudy/index.htm. FHWA. (2016b). Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study: Comparison of Results Report: Final Draft. April. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tswstudy/index. htm. FHWA. (2016c). Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study: Data Acquisition and Technical Analysis Plan: Final Report. April. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/ map21tswstudy/index.htm. FHWA. (2017a). Highway Statistics 2016. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/ statistics/2016. FHWA. (2017b). Vehicle Travel Information System (VTRIS). Updated June 30. https://www. fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/ohimvtis.cfm. FHWA. (2018). Guardrail Resources: In­Service Performance Evaluation (ISPE) Informa­ tion. https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/countermeasures/reduce_crash_severity/ guardrail_ispe.cfm. Fiorillo, G., & Ghosn, M. (2016). Minimizing illegal overweight truck frequencies through strategically planned truck inspection operations. ASCE Journal of Transportation Engi- neering, 142(9), September. FRA. (2005). Intermodal Transportation and Inventory Cost Model: Highway to Rail Intermodal. Fu, G., et al. (2003). Effect of Truck Weight on Bridge Network Costs. NCHRP Report 495. TRB. Gamez, A., et al. (2018). Development of domain analysis for determining potential pavement damage. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part B: Pavements, 144(3). GAO. (1994). Longer Combination Trucks: Potential Infrastructure Impacts, Productivity Benefits, and Safety Concerns. August. GAO. (2000). Highway Infrastructure: FHWA’s Model for Estimating Highway Needs Is Generally Reasonable, Despite Limitations. June. Ghosn, M., Fiorillo, G., Gayovyy, V., Getso, T., Ahmed, S., & Parker, N. (2015). Effects of overweight vehicles on NYSDOT infrastructure. No. C­08­13. Glennon, J. (1981). Matched Pair Analysis. Consolidated Freightways Corporation. v. Larson et al., 81­1230, U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania, August 12. Gucinski, N., et al. (2013). Nondestructive Testing to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterio- ration. SHRP­2 Report S2­R06A­RR­1. TRB. Gungor, O., et al. (2018). Detect and charge: Machine Learning Based Fully Data­Driven Frame­ work for Computing Overweight Vehicle Fee for Bridges. Automation in Construction, 96, 200–210. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0926580518303716. Harris, F. (1915). Operations and Costs. Chicago, IL: A.W. Shaw. Hearn, G. (2014). State Bridge Load Posting Processes and Practices. NCHRP Synthesis 453. TRB. Hoedemaeker, M. (2018). Enabling Safe Multi­Brand Platooning for Europe. Nederlandse Organisatie voor Toegepast Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek. https://platooning ensemble.eu/library. Holguín­Veras, J. (2002). Revealed preference analysis of commercial vehicle choice process. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 128(4), 336.

42 EVALUATION OF TRUCK SIZE AND WEIGHT REGULATIONS Holguín­Veras, J., Lawson, C., Wang, C., Jaller, M., González­Calderón, C., Campbell, S., Kalahashti, L., Wojtowicz, J., & Ramirez­Rios, D. (2017). Using Commodity Flow Survey Microdata to Estimate the Generation of Freight, Freight Trip Generation, and Service Trips: Guidebook. NCFRP Report 37. TRB. Holguín­Veras, J., et al. (Forthcoming). Impacts of Policy-Induced Freight Modal Shifts. NCFRP 44. TRB. Honefanger, J., Strawhorn, J., Athey, R., Carson, J., Conner, G., Jones, D., Kearney, T., Nicholas, J., Thurber, P., & Woolley, R. (2007). Commercial Motor Vehicle Size and Weight Enforcement in Europe. FHWA, International Technology Scanning Program. July. https://international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl07002/vsw_eu07.pdf. Interstate Commerce Commission. (1941). Federal Regulation of the Sizes and Weights of Motor Vehicles. Jansson, J. (1994). Accident Externality Charges. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 28(1), 31–34. Kim, K., et al. (2009). Approximate cost estimating model for PSC Beam bridge based on quantity of standard work. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 13(6), 377–388. KLS Engineering and Wilbur Smith Associates. (2011). District-wide Truck Safety Enforce- ment Plan: Infrastructure Impacts of Overweight Trucks: Final Report. District of Columbia Department of Transportation. March. https://comp.ddot.dc.gov/Documents/ Truck%20Safety%20Enforcement%20Plan%20Executive%20Summary.pdf. Kulicki, J., et al. (2007). Updating the Calibration Report for AASHTO LRFD Code: Fi- nal Report. NCHRP Project 20­07 Task 186. TRB. January. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/ onlinepubs/archive/NotesDocs/20­07(186)_FR.pdf. Leachman, R. C. (2008). Port and modal allocation of waterborne containerized imports from Asia to the United States. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 44(2), 313–331. Leachman, R. C., Prince, T., Brown, T. R., & Fetty, G. R. (2005). Port and Modal Elasticity Study, Southern California Association of Governments. Lee, G., O’Connor, J., Qi, J., & Wang, Z. (2008). Development of a Bridge Failure Database. Fourth U.S.­Taiwan Bridge Engineering Workshop, Princeton, New Jersey, August 4–5, 2008. http://www.mceer.buffalo.edu/publications/workshop/09­0011/15­Lee­paper.pdf. Liu, W. (2010). LiDAR Based Bridge Evaluation. University of North Carolina­Charlotte. https://www.ugpti.org/smartse/research/citations/downloads/Liu­LiDAR_Based_Bridge_ Evaluation­2010.pdf. Liu, W., Chen, S., & Hauser, E. (2011). LiDAR­Based Bridge Structure Defect Detection. Experimental Techniques. Nov.–Dec., 27–34. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ epdf/10.1111/j.1747­1567.2010.00644.x. Lin, Z., Zhao, J., & Tabatabai, H. (2012). Impact of Overweight Vehicles (with Heavy Axle Loads) on Bridge Deck Deterioration. CFIRE 04­06. Department of Civil and Environ­ mental Engineering, University of Wisconsin–Madison. March. Lou, P., et al. (2016). Effect of overweight trucks on bridge deck deterioration based on weigh­ in­motion data. Transportation Research Record (2592), 86–97. Lou, P., et al. (2017). Impact of overweight trucks on the service life of bridge girders. Trans- portation Research Record (2642), 103–117. Manski, C. (1973). The Analysis of Qualitative Choice, MIT. Manski, C. (1977). The structure of random utility models. Theory and Decision, 8, 229–254. McCullough, G. (2013). Long­Run Diversion Effects of Changes in Truck Size and Weight (TS&W) Restrictions: An Update of the 1980 Friedlaender Spady Analysis. Staff Paper, Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota. April. McFadden, D., Winston, C., & Boersch­Supan, A. (1986). Joint Estimation of Freight Trans­ portation Decisions Under Non­Random Sampling. Discussion Paper, Harvard University.

REFERENCES 43 McGee, H., & Morganstein, D. (1986). Development of a Large Truck Safety Data Needs Study Plan: Volume II. Technical Report: Final Report. FHWA, Report No. FHWA­ RD­88­137. February. Minnesota Department of Transportation. (2018). Bridge Construction Time and Costs. http://dotapp7.dot.state.mn.us/projectPages/pages/projectDetails.jsf?id=17868&type =CONTRACT. Moore, B., et al. (2014). Compliance Mechanisms for Higher Productivity Vehicles. 13th International Symposium on Heavy Vehicle Transport Technology, San Luis, Argentina, 27–31. http://road­transport­technology.org/conferenceproceedings/2014­hvtt13. Moses, F. (2001). Calibration of Load Factors for LRFR Bridge Evaluation. NCHRP Report 454. TRB. Nassif, H., Ozbay, K., Wang, H., Noland, R., Lou, P., Demiroluk, S., Su, D., Na, C., Zhao, J., & Beltran, M. (2015). Impact of Freight on Highway Infrastructure in New Jersey. September. New Jersey Department of Transportation. No. FHWA­NJ­2016­004. National Heavy Vehicle Regulator. (2018). Performance-Based Standards: Australia’s PBS Fleet. May. https://www.nhvr.gov.au/road­access/performance­based­standards. Noorvand, H., Karnati, G., & Underwood, B. S. (2017). Autonomous vehicles: Assessment of the implications of truck positioning on flexible pavement performance and design. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board (2640), 21–28. NTC. (2008). Performance-Based Standards Scheme—the Standards and Vehicle Assessment Rules. https://www.nhvr.gov.au/files/0020­pbsstdsvehassrules.pdf. NYSDOT. (2003). Bridge Safety Assurance Hydraulic Vulnerability Manual. Revised February. https://www.dot.ny.gov/divisions/engineering/structures/manuals/hydraulics?nd=nysdot. Proske, D. (2018). Bridge Collapse Frequencies Versus Failure Probabilities. Springer. Prozzi, J., Murphy, M., Loftus­Otway, L., Banerjee, A., Kim, M., Wu, H., Prozzi, J. P., Hutchinson, R., Harrison, R., Walton, C. M., Weismann, A., & Weismann, J. (2012). Oversize/overweight vehicle permit fee study. No. FHWA/TX­13/0­6736­2. RTAC. (1986). Vehicle Weights and Dimensions Study: Technical Steering Committee Report. https://comt.ca/english/programs/trucking/Reports.htm. Salama, H. K., Chatti, K., & Lyles, R. W. (2006). Effect of heavy multiple axle trucks on flexible pavement damage using in­service pavement performance data. Journal of Trans- portation Engineering, 132(10), 763–770. Samuelson, R. D. (1977). Modeling the Freight Rate Structure. Cambridge, MA: Center for Transportation Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Selesneva, O., et al. (2004). Development of a mechanistic–empirical structural design proce­ dure for continuously reinforced concrete pavements. Transportation Research Record (1896), 46–56. Sheffi, Y. (1985). Carrier/shipper interactions in the transportation market: An analytical framework. Journal of Business Logistics, 7(1), 1–27. Sivakumar, B., et al. (2011). Protocols for Collecting and Using Traffic Data in Bridge Design. NCHRP Report 683. TRB. Small, K. A., Winston, C., & Evans, C. (1989). Road Work: A New Highway Pricing and Investment Policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Stein, H., & Jones, I. (1988). Crash involvement of large trucks by configuration: A case­ control study. American Journal of Public Health, 78, 491–498. Strathman, J., & Theisen, G. (2002). Weight Enforcement and Evasion: Oregon Case Study. Oregon Department of Transportation. March. https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Programs/ ResearchDocuments/WTEnforcment.pdf.

44 EVALUATION OF TRUCK SIZE AND WEIGHT REGULATIONS Taylor, B., Bergan, A., Lindgren, N., & Bertholet, D. (2000). The importance of commercial vehicle weight enforcement in safety and road asset management. Traffic Technology International 2000 Annual Review, 234–237. January. Technical Reports. https://ops. fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tswstudy/index.htm. Teoh, E., et al. (2017). Crash risk factors for interstate large trucks in North Carolina. Journal of Safety Research, 62, 13–21. TRB. (1986). Special Report 211: Twin Trailer Trucks: Effects on Highways and Highway Safety. National Research Council, Washington, DC. TRB. (1989). Special Report 223: Providing Access for Large Trucks. National Research Council, Washington, DC. TRB. (1990a). Special Report 225: Truck Weight Limits: Issues and Options. National Re­ search Council, Washington, DC. TRB. (1990b). Special Report 227: New Trucks for Greater Productivity and Less Road Wear: An Evaluation of the Turner Proposal. National Research Council, Washington, DC. TRB. (1996). Special Report 246: Paying Our Way: Estimating Marginal Social Costs of Freight Transportation. National Research Council, Washington, DC. TRB. (2002). Special Report 267: Regulation of Weights, Lengths, and Widths of Commercial Motor Vehicles. National Research Council, Washington, DC. TRB. (2014). Review of U.S. Department of Transportation Truck Size and Weight Study: First Report: Review of Desk Scans. March 31. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/ TS&WDeskScans.pdf. TRB. (2015). Review of U.S. Department of Transportation Truck Size and Weight Study: Second Report: Review of USDOT Technical Reports. October 5. http://www.trb.org/ Main/Blurbs/173282.aspx. TRB. (2018). Truck Size and Weight Limits Research Plan Committee: First Report: Candidate Research Topics; Framework for Setting Priorities. April 18. http://www.trb.org/Main/ Blurbs/177481.aspx. Trischuk, D., Berthelot, C., & Taylor, B. (2002). Weigh­in­motion applications for intelligent transportation systems­commercial vehicle operations: Evaluation using WESTA. Trans- portation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board (1816), 87–95. Tyworth, J. E., & Zeng, A. Z. (1998). Estimating the effects of carrier transit time performance on logistics costs and service. Transportation Research, 32A(2), 89–97. USDOT. (1968). Economics of the Maximum Limits of Motor Vehicle Dimensions and Weights. USDOT. (1981). An Investigation of Truck Size and Weight Limits: Final Report. August. USDOT. (2000a). The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study: Volume I: Summary Report. August. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/ tswstudy/TSWfinal.htm. USDOT. (2000b). The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study: Volume III: Scenario Analysis. August. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/ tswstudy/TSWfinal.htm. USDOT. (2004). The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Western Uniformity Scenario Analysis: A Regional Truck Size and Weight Scenario Requested by the Western Gover- nors’ Association. April. Walker, D., & Cebon, D. (2011). The metamorphosis of long­term pavement performance traffic data. TRNews, 277, Nov.–Dec., 9–17. Wang, H., & Al­Qadi, I. (2009). Combined effect of moving wheel loading and three­ dimensional contact stresses on perpetual pavement responses. Transportation Research Record (2095), 53–61.

REFERENCES 45 Wassef, W. (2017). Parametric Study and Cost Effects for the USDOT Truck Size and Weight Study Vehicles. Progress Report to AASHTO T­5. Presentation at 2017 AAS­ HTO SCOBS Annual Meeting. June 13. https://bridges.transportation.org/wp­content/ uploads/sites/19/2018/04/NCHRP­20­07­Task­390­Parametric­Study­and­Cost­Effects­ for­te­USDOT­Truck­Size­and­Weight­Study­Vehicles­Wagdy­Wassef.pdf. Wilson, W., & Wolak, F. (2015). Appendix B: Demonstration of Competitive Rate Benchmark­ ing to Identify Unusually High Rates in TRB. Special Report 318: Modernizing Freight Rail Regulation. Pp. 225–259. http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/172736.aspx. Woodrooffe, J., et al. (2010). Review of Canadian Experience with the Regulation of Large Commercial Motor Vehicles. NCHRP Report 671. TRB. https://doi.org/10.17226/14458.

Next: Appendix A: Research Problem Statements »
Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's Truck Size and Weight Limits Research Plan Committee has issued its second and final report, Research to Support Evaluation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations, to the U.S. Department of Transportation. The report presents a research plan to reduce the major sources of uncertainty in projections of the consequences of proposed changes in truck size and weight limits. The report defines a program of 27 coordinated research projects in six areas.

The committee acknowledges that improvements in models for projecting impacts of changes in truck size and weight limits, while necessary, will not guarantee the success of future truck size and weight policy studies. Future studies will be useful as guides for decisions only if policy objectives and practical policy options are clearly defined, the analysis is logically structured to reveal the most promising policies, and uncertainties are properly characterized.

The committee issued its first report in April 2018, which summarized the research recommendations of past truck size and weight limit studies and identified criteria for deciding the priority of topics for inclusion in the research plan.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!