The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 83-146

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 83... ... 83 A P P E N D I X C Individual Survey Responses This appendix contains individual responses for the 34 "rock slope" DOTs that responded that they have sufficient experience to complete the full questionnaire. Responses are sorted alphabetically by state abbreviation. Read the entire page →
From page 84... ... 84 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management State: AK, Agency: Alaska DOT&PF. Title: Regional Engineering Geologist Road Miles: 12,000: Rock Slope Count Estimate: 1,500 and basis of estimate: Partial Inventory Part C, Q4: Rock Slope Condition Percentages No Maintenance: 60; Periodic Maintenance: 30; With rockfall mitigation and good function: 9; With rockfall mitigation and poor function: 0; Reconstructed: 1; New Construction: 0 Part C, Q5: Designer percentages of new rock cut slopes. Read the entire page →
From page 85... ... Individual Survey Responses 85 Part E, Q5 and Q6: Relative importance for risk considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Consequence of minor slope failure 2 2 Consequence of major slope failure Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Maintenance frequency and costs 3 3 Risk reduction through visual monitoring Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Risk reduction through instrumentation Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Fiscal impacts of poor performance 4 4 Liability concerns 4 3 Risk acknowledgment Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Part E, Q7, Q8, and Q9: Design tool use between new cut slopes with exposed rock, minimally or not exposed rock, and for rockfall mitigation. Read the entire page →
From page 86... ... 86 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management In-House: 0; Consultants: 90; Construction contractor: 10; Manufacturer: 0 Part D, Q1: Adoption of minimum design standards: Yes, standards have been developed but not documented as formal department policy. Part D, Q2: Do standards vary between new cuts and rockfall mitigation? Read the entire page →
From page 87... ... Individual Survey Responses 87 Part E, Q7, Q8, and Q9: Design tool use between new cut slopes with exposed rock, minimally or not exposed rock, and for rockfall mitigation. Design Tool Exposed Rock Unexposed Rock Rockfall Surface reconnaissance 100 100 100 Rope-based reconnaissance 0 0 0 Geotechnical drilling 100 100 50 Geotechnical instrumentation 0 2 0 Geophysical methods 5 5 0 Specialized rock laboratory testing 25 25 50 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 0 0 0 Rock mass characterization methods 100 100 100 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 10 0 50 Deterministic slope stability models 0 25 0 Probabilistic slope stability models 0 0 0 Point cloud analysis 5 0 25 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 100 100 50 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Read the entire page →
From page 88... ... 88 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part D, Q5: What year were standards adopted? N/A Part D, Q6 and Q7: Design standards for classification. Read the entire page →
From page 89... ... Individual Survey Responses 89 Geophysical methods 100 100 100 Specialized rock laboratory testing 90 100 50 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 0 0 0 Rock mass characterization methods 100 100 100 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 90 100 90 Deterministic slope stability models 90 90 90 Probabilistic slope stability models 90 90 90 Point cloud analysis 10 10 0 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 100 100 100 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 10 10 0 Design guides and containment % 100 100 100 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →
From page 90... ... 90 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Target scoring Frequency of rocks reaching road Maintenance activity frequency Probabilistic measures Part E, Q1 and Q2: Relative importance for technical considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Project delivery method Least Important: 5 4 Constructability Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Funding source 3 3 Long-term maintenance Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Asset management 4 4 Aesthetics 2 2 Life-cycle costs 2 2 Resilience initiatives Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Risk management plans 4 3 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: 90%–100%. Read the entire page →
From page 91... ... Individual Survey Responses 91 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 75 0 75 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 20 0 20 Design guides and containment % 100 100 100 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? No Part F, Q2: Do you regularly engage in performance data collection efforts? Read the entire page →
From page 92... ... 92 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Constructability Most Important: 1 3 Funding source 2 Most Important: 1 Long-term maintenance 2 2 Asset management 2 Most Important: 1 Aesthetics 4 Least Important: 5 Life-cycle costs 3 2 Resilience initiatives 2 2 Risk management plans 2 2 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: 50%–75%. Techniques used: Staining of steel products. Read the entire page →
From page 93... ... Individual Survey Responses 93 Part F, Q2: Do you regularly engage in performance data collection efforts? Read the entire page →
From page 94... ... 94 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Aesthetics 2 3 Life-cycle costs 2 2 Resilience initiatives 3 2 Risk management plans 3 3 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: 75%–90%. Techniques used: Staining of steel products. Read the entire page →
From page 95... ... Individual Survey Responses 95 State: CT, Agency: Connecticut DOT. Title: Transportation Supervising Engineer Road Miles: 3,719: Rock Slope Count Estimate: 1,000 and basis of estimate: Experience Part C, Q4: Rock Slope Condition Percentages No Maintenance: 75; Periodic Maintenance: 10; With rockfall mitigation and good function: 5; With rockfall mitigation and poor function: 0; Reconstructed: 5; New Construction: 5 Part C, Q5: Designer percentages of new rock cut slopes. Read the entire page →
From page 96... ... 96 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: . Techniques used: . Read the entire page →
From page 97... ... Individual Survey Responses 97 In-House: ; Consultants: ; Construction contractor: ; Manufacturer: Part C, Q6: Designer percentages of rockfall mitigation. In-House: ; Consultants: ; Construction contractor: ; Manufacturer: Part D, Q1: Adoption of minimum design standards: Part D, Q2: Do standards vary between new cuts and rockfall mitigation? Read the entire page →
From page 98... ... 98 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part E, Q7, Q8, and Q9: Design tool use between new cut slopes with exposed rock, minimally or not exposed rock, and for rockfall mitigation. Design Tool Exposed Rock Unexposed Rock Rockfall Surface reconnaissance Rope-based reconnaissance Geotechnical drilling Geotechnical instrumentation Geophysical methods Specialized rock laboratory testing Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring Rock mass characterization methods Stereonet and kinematic analyses Deterministic slope stability models Probabilistic slope stability models Point cloud analysis 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % Design guides and containment % Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Read the entire page →
From page 99... ... Individual Survey Responses 99 Part D, Q6 and Q7: Design standards for classification. Note: Blank when not entered by respondent. Read the entire page →
From page 100... ... 100 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Specialized rock laboratory testing 100 100 50 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 0 0 0 Rock mass characterization methods 100 100 50 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 0 0 0 Deterministic slope stability models 0 0 0 Probabilistic slope stability models 0 0 0 Point cloud analysis 0 0 0 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 0 0 0 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? No Part F, Q2: Do you regularly engage in performance data collection efforts? Read the entire page →
From page 101... ... Individual Survey Responses 101 Frequency of rocks reaching road Maintenance activity frequency Probabilistic measures Part E, Q1 and Q2: Relative importance for technical considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Project delivery method Most Important: 1 Least Important: 5 Constructability 2 Most Important: 1 Funding source Least Important: 5 Most Important: 1 Long-term maintenance 4 3 Asset management Least Important: 5 3 Aesthetics 4 4 Life-cycle costs Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Resilience initiatives Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Risk management plans Least Important: 5 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: Less than 25%. Read the entire page →
From page 102... ... 102 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 Design guides and containment % 40 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →
From page 103... ... Individual Survey Responses 103 Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Project delivery method Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Constructability Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Funding source 3 3 Long-term maintenance 2 2 Asset management Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Aesthetics Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Life-cycle costs 2 2 Resilience initiatives Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Risk management plans Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: Not applicable. Techniques used: Part E, Q5 and Q6: Relative importance for risk considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Read the entire page →
From page 104... ... 104 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part F, Q3: Would your DOT be interested in participating as a case history? No State: MA, Agency: MassDOT Title: Geotechncial Engineer Road Miles: 36,000: Rock Slope Count Estimate: 50 and basis of estimate: Experience Part C, Q4: Rock Slope Condition Percentages No Maintenance: ; Periodic Maintenance: ; With rockfall mitigation and good function: ; With rockfall mitigation and poor function: ; Reconstructed: ; New Construction: Part C, Q5: Designer percentages of new rock cut slopes. Read the entire page →
From page 105... ... Individual Survey Responses 105 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: Not applicable. Techniques used: Other: Not aware of aesthetics considerations. Read the entire page →
From page 106... ... 106 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management In-House: 10; Consultants: 85; Construction contractor: 5; Manufacturer: 0 Part C, Q6: Designer percentages of rockfall mitigation. In-House: 10; Consultants: 80; Construction contractor: 0; Manufacturer: 10 Part D, Q1: Adoption of minimum design standards: No, we have no design standards, but we use consistent approaches to develop rock slope and rockfall mitigation designs. Read the entire page →
From page 107... ... Individual Survey Responses 107 Fiscal impacts of poor performance 3 2 Liability concerns 2 2 Risk acknowledgment 3 4 Part E, Q7, Q8, and Q9: Design tool use between new cut slopes with exposed rock, minimally or not exposed rock, and for rockfall mitigation. Design Tool Exposed Rock Unexposed Rock Rockfall Surface reconnaissance 100 100 100 Rope-based reconnaissance 90 90 95 Geotechnical drilling 100 100 100 Geotechnical instrumentation 75 50 45 Geophysical methods 95 95 95 Specialized rock laboratory testing 95 95 95 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 80 60 50 Rock mass characterization methods 100 100 100 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 80 50 50 Deterministic slope stability models 100 100 100 Probabilistic slope stability models 100 100 100 Point cloud analysis 75 50 60 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 100 100 100 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 20 20 20 Design guides and containment % 100 100 100 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Read the entire page →
From page 108... ... 108 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part D, Q3: Do standards vary between roadway classification or other particulars? No, rock slope design standards are consistent across roadway classifications. Read the entire page →
From page 109... ... Individual Survey Responses 109 Design Tool Exposed Rock Unexposed Rock Rockfall Surface reconnaissance 100 100 100 Rope-based reconnaissance 15 5 15 Geotechnical drilling 100 100 10 Geotechnical instrumentation 5 5 5 Geophysical methods 25 100 5 Specialized rock laboratory testing 80 100 5 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 20 20 5 Rock mass characterization methods 100 100 10 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 10 10 5 Deterministic slope stability models 10 10 5 Probabilistic slope stability models 10 10 5 Point cloud analysis 80 25 85 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 100 100 100 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 5 5 5 Design guides and containment % 100 100 100 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →
From page 110... ... 110 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Item Interstate Primary Highway Percentage of ditch containment 95–98 92–95 Percentage of impact 0 99 Percentage of reduction Roadside ditch width Target scoring RHRS, incidents, and maintenance RHRS, incidents, and maintenance Frequency of rocks reaching road Few Few to some Maintenance activity frequency Probabilistic measures Part E, Q1 and Q2: Relative importance for technical considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Project delivery method 4 4 Constructability 3 3 Funding source 2 2 Long-term maintenance Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Asset management 3 2 Aesthetics Least Important: 5 3 Life-cycle costs 2 2 Resilience initiatives 4 3 Risk management plans 3 3 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: 25%–50%. Read the entire page →
From page 111... ... Individual Survey Responses 111 Rock mass characterization methods 60 80 30 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 80 20 50 Deterministic slope stability models 20 Probabilistic slope stability models 20 Point cloud analysis 10 10 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 90 50 100 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 10 Design guides and containment % 90 90 90 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →
From page 112... ... 112 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Percentage of reduction 90 0 Roadside ditch width Adopted roadway template is 10'. Not a specific function of Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 113... ... Individual Survey Responses 113 Design Tool Exposed Rock Unexposed Rock Rockfall Surface reconnaissance 100 100 100 Rope-based reconnaissance 10 0 30 Geotechnical drilling 50 75 0 Geotechnical instrumentation 0 0 5 Geophysical methods 5 5 0 Specialized rock laboratory testing 10 10 0 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 5 5 0 Rock mass characterization methods 75 50 20 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 75 25 90 Deterministic slope stability models 50 75 50 Probabilistic slope stability models 0 0 0 Point cloud analysis 5 0 20 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 25 10 50 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 50 50 0 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →
From page 114... ... 114 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Item Percentage of ditch containment Percentage of impact Percentage of reduction Roadside ditch width Target scoring Frequency of rocks reaching road Maintenance activity frequency Probabilistic measures Part E, Q1 and Q2: Relative importance for technical considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Project delivery method 3 3 Constructability Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Funding source Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Long-term maintenance 2 2 Asset management 2 2 Aesthetics 2 2 Life-cycle costs 2 2 Resilience initiatives 3 2 Risk management plans 2 2 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: Less than 25%. Read the entire page →
From page 115... ... Individual Survey Responses 115 Rock mass characterization methods 50 80 50 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 100 80 100 Deterministic slope stability models 80 80 50 Probabilistic slope stability models 80 80 50 Point cloud analysis 90 0 100 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 90 5 50 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 90 5 50 Design guides and containment % 100 100 100 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Part F, Q2: Do you regularly engage in performance data collection efforts? Read the entire page →
From page 116... ... 116 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part E, Q1 and Q2: Relative importance for technical considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Project delivery method 2 2 Constructability 2 2 Funding source 2 2 Long-term maintenance Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Asset management Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Aesthetics Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Life-cycle costs 2 2 Resilience initiatives 3 3 Risk management plans Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: 90%–100%. Read the entire page →
From page 117... ... Individual Survey Responses 117 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →
From page 118... ... 118 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Aesthetics Life-cycle costs Resilience initiatives Risk management plans Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: Less than 25%. Techniques used: Contouring of wire mesh/nets to the slope. Read the entire page →
From page 119... ... Individual Survey Responses 119 Road Miles: 50,000: Rock Slope Count Estimate: 3,218 and basis of estimate: Comprehensive inventory Part C, Q4: Rock Slope Condition Percentages No Maintenance: 80; Periodic Maintenance: 13; With rockfall mitigation and good function: 2; With rockfall mitigation and poor function: 1; Reconstructed: 2; New Construction: 2 Part C, Q5: Designer percentages of new rock cut slopes. In-House: 100; Consultants: 0; Construction contractor: 0; Manufacturer: 0 Part C, Q6: Designer percentages of rockfall mitigation. Read the entire page →
From page 120... ... 120 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part E, Q5 and Q6: Relative importance for risk considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Consequence of minor slope failure 2 2 Consequence of major slope failure Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Maintenance frequency and costs 3 3 Risk reduction through visual monitoring 4 2 Risk reduction through instrumentation 4 4 Fiscal impacts of poor performance 2 2 Liability concerns 2 2 Risk acknowledgment Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Part E, Q7, Q8, and Q9: Design tool use between new cut slopes with exposed rock, minimally or not exposed rock, and for rockfall mitigation. Read the entire page →
From page 121... ... Individual Survey Responses 121 Part C, Q6: Designer percentages of rockfall mitigation. In-House: 50; Consultants: 40; Construction contractor: 7; Manufacturer: 3 Part D, Q1: Adoption of minimum design standards: Yes, formal standards have been developed and documented. Read the entire page →
From page 122... ... 122 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Risk reduction through instrumentation Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Fiscal impacts of poor performance 2 2 Liability concerns 3 2 Risk acknowledgment 3 3 Part E, Q7, Q8, and Q9: Design tool use between new cut slopes with exposed rock, minimally or not exposed rock, and for rockfall mitigation. Design Tool Exposed Rock Unexposed Rock Rockfall Surface reconnaissance 100 100 100 Rope-based reconnaissance 2 0 5 Geotechnical drilling 90 100 60 Geotechnical instrumentation 0 0 0 Geophysical methods 0 0 0 Specialized rock laboratory testing 50 90 50 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 5 5 3 Rock mass characterization methods 100 100 70 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 0 0 0 Deterministic slope stability models 10 20 5 Probabilistic slope stability models 0 0 0 Point cloud analysis 70 50 70 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 70 70 70 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 100 100 70 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Read the entire page →
From page 123... ... Individual Survey Responses 123 Part D, Q1: Adoption of minimum design standards: Yes, formal standards have been developed and documented. Part D, Q2: Do standards vary between new cuts and rockfall mitigation? Read the entire page →
From page 124... ... 124 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part E, Q7, Q8, and Q9: Design tool use between new cut slopes with exposed rock, minimally or not exposed rock, and for rockfall mitigation. Design Tool Exposed Rock Unexposed Rock Rockfall Surface reconnaissance 100 100 100 Rope-based reconnaissance 25 0 33 Geotechnical drilling 75 100 25 Geotechnical instrumentation 75 100 25 Geophysical methods 25 25 5 Specialized rock laboratory testing 50 25 20 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 10 15 0 Rock mass characterization methods 100 100 75 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 95 75 75 Deterministic slope stability models 100 100 75 Probabilistic slope stability models 100 100 75 Point cloud analysis 50 25 5 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 100 100 100 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 100 100 100 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Read the entire page →
From page 125... ... Individual Survey Responses 125 Part D, Q4: Standards applicable to appurtenant facilities? No Part D, Q5: What year were standards adopted? Read the entire page →
From page 126... ... 126 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Geotechnical instrumentation 5 0 10 Geophysical methods 0 0 0 Specialized rock laboratory testing 5 80 80 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 5 10 0 Rock mass characterization methods 100 100 100 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 50 60 50 Deterministic slope stability models Probabilistic slope stability models Point cloud analysis 5 0 10 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 30 30 50 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 80 80 80 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →
From page 127... ... Individual Survey Responses 127 Roadside ditch width Target scoring Frequency of rocks reaching road Maintenance activity frequency Probabilistic measures Part E, Q1 and Q2: Relative importance for technical considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Project delivery method 3 2 Constructability 2 2 Funding source 4 3 Long-term maintenance Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Asset management 4 Aesthetics 3 2 Life-cycle costs 4 3 Resilience initiatives 4 3 Risk management plans 3 2 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: 75%–90%. Read the entire page →
From page 128... ... 128 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 0 0 0 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? No Part F, Q2: Do you regularly engage in performance data collection efforts? Read the entire page →
From page 129... ... Individual Survey Responses 129 Constructability 3 3 Funding source 3 Most Important: 1 Long-term maintenance 2 3 Asset management 3 2 Aesthetics 4 4 Life-cycle costs 2 3 Resilience initiatives 3 3 Risk management plans 3 3 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: Less than 25%. Techniques used: Staining of steel products. Read the entire page →
From page 130... ... 130 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management State: UT, Agency: Utah DOT. Title: Geological Engineer Road Miles: ; Rock Slope Count Estimate: 2,600 and basis of estimate: Comprehensive inventory Part C, Q4: Rock Slope Condition Percentages No Maintenance: 10; Periodic Maintenance: 80; With rockfall mitigation and good function: 6; With rockfall mitigation and poor function: 2; Reconstructed: 1; New Construction: 1 Part C, Q5: Designer percentages of new rock cut slopes. Read the entire page →
From page 131... ... Individual Survey Responses 131 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: 75%–90%. Techniques used: Other: Choosing the least visible option. Read the entire page →
From page 132... ... 132 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management In-House: 0; Consultants: 0; Construction contractor: 100; Manufacturer: 0 Part C, Q6: Designer percentages of rockfall mitigation. In-House: 50; Consultants: 50; Construction contractor: 0; Manufacturer: 0 Part D, Q1: Adoption of minimum design standards: Yes, formal standards have been developed and documented. Read the entire page →
From page 133... ... Individual Survey Responses 133 Fiscal impacts of poor performance 2 2 Liability concerns Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Risk acknowledgment Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Part E, Q7, Q8, and Q9: Design tool use between new cut slopes with exposed rock, minimally or not exposed rock, and for rockfall mitigation. Design Tool Exposed Rock Unexposed Rock Rockfall Surface reconnaissance 100 90 100 Rope-based reconnaissance 0 0 0 Geotechnical drilling 0 0 0 Geotechnical instrumentation 0 0 0 Geophysical methods 0 10 0 Specialized rock laboratory testing 0 0 0 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 0 0 0 Rock mass characterization methods 0 0 0 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 90 0 90 Deterministic slope stability models 0 0 0 Probabilistic slope stability models 0 0 0 Point cloud analysis 0 10 0 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 90 0 90 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 90 90 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Read the entire page →
From page 134... ... 134 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part D, Q3: Do standards vary between roadway classification or other particulars? Yes, separated by highway functional classification (interstate, major arterial, minor collector, etc.) Read the entire page →
From page 135... ... Individual Survey Responses 135 Surface reconnaissance 100 10 100 Rope-based reconnaissance 10 5 10 Geotechnical drilling 100 100 0 Geotechnical instrumentation 5 5 0 Geophysical methods 50 10 0 Specialized rock laboratory testing 5 5 5 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 1 5 0 Rock mass characterization methods 100 100 100 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 100 100 100 Deterministic slope stability models 100 100 100 Probabilistic slope stability models 100 100 100 Point cloud analysis 5 5 5 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 100 100 100 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 100 100 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →
From page 136... ... 136 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Percentage of ditch containment Percentage of impact Percentage of reduction Roadside ditch width Target scoring Frequency of rocks reaching road Maintenance activity frequency Probabilistic measures Part E, Q1 and Q2: Relative importance for technical considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Project delivery method 3 3 Constructability Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Funding source Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Long-term maintenance Most Important: 1 2 Asset management 2 2 Aesthetics 3 3 Life-cycle costs 2 2 Resilience initiatives 2 2 Risk management plans 2 2 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: 25%–50%. Read the entire page →
From page 137... ... Individual Survey Responses 137 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 100 100 100 Deterministic slope stability models 100 100 100 Probabilistic slope stability models 100 100 100 Point cloud analysis 50 0 80 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 100 100 100 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 100 100 100 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →
From page 138... ... 138 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part E, Q1 and Q2: Relative importance for technical considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Consideration New Cut Slopes Rockfall Mitigation Project delivery method Least Important: 5 Least Important: 5 Constructability Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Funding source Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Long-term maintenance 2 2 Asset management 2 2 Aesthetics 2 2 Life-cycle costs 2 2 Resilience initiatives 2 2 Risk management plans 2 2 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: 25%–50%. Read the entire page →
From page 139... ... Individual Survey Responses 139 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →
From page 140... ... 140 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Constructability Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Funding source 2 2 Long-term maintenance 2 Most Important: 1 Asset management 3 3 Aesthetics Most Important: 1 Life-cycle costs 4 2 Resilience initiatives 3 2 Risk management plans Most Important: 1 2 Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: 75%–90%. Techniques used: Staining of steel products. Read the entire page →
From page 141... ... Individual Survey Responses 141 State: WI, Agency: Wisconsin DOT. Title: Geologist Road Miles: ; Rock Slope Count Estimate: 300 and basis of estimate: Experience Part C, Q4: Rock Slope Condition Percentages No Maintenance: 20; Periodic Maintenance: 80; With rockfall mitigation and good function: 0; With rockfall mitigation and poor function: 0; Reconstructed: ; New Construction: Part C, Q5: Designer percentages of new rock cut slopes. Read the entire page →
From page 142... ... 142 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Part E, Q3 and Q4: Aesthetics: Percentage of projects where aesthetics are considered: Not applicable. Techniques used: Part E, Q5 and Q6: Relative importance for risk considerations, 1 = Most Important, 5 = Least Important. Read the entire page →
From page 143... ... Individual Survey Responses 143 In-House: 10; Consultants: 65; Construction contractor: 25; Manufacturer: 0 Part C, Q6: Designer percentages of rockfall mitigation. In-House: 25; Consultants: 10; Construction contractor: 65; Manufacturer: 0 Part D, Q1: Adoption of minimum design standards: Yes, formal standards have been developed and documented. Read the entire page →
From page 144... ... 144 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Fiscal impacts of poor performance 2 2 Liability concerns Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Risk acknowledgment Most Important: 1 Most Important: 1 Part E, Q7, Q8, and Q9: Design tool use between new cut slopes with exposed rock, minimally or not exposed rock, and for rockfall mitigation. Design Tool Exposed Rock Unexposed Rock Rockfall Surface reconnaissance 100 100 100 Rope-based reconnaissance 0 0 5 Geotechnical drilling 75 95 25 Geotechnical instrumentation 0 0 0 Geophysical methods 5 5 0 Specialized rock laboratory testing 75 90 25 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 0 0 0 Rock mass characterization methods 80 100 50 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 10 10 20 Deterministic slope stability models 0 0 20 Probabilistic slope stability models 0 0 0 Point cloud analysis 5 10 10 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 25 33 80 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 10 Design guides and containment % 90 90 100 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Read the entire page →
From page 145... ... Individual Survey Responses 145 Part D, Q3: Do standards vary between roadway classification or other particulars? No, rock slope design standards are consistent across roadway classifications. Read the entire page →
From page 146... ... 146 Design Practices for Rock Slopes and Rockfall Management Design Tool Exposed Rock Unexposed Rock Rockfall Surface reconnaissance 100 0 100 Rope-based reconnaissance 20 0 30 Geotechnical drilling 50 50 10 Geotechnical instrumentation 0 0 0 Geophysical methods 20 50 0 Specialized rock laboratory testing 50 50 10 Oriented borehole imagery or oriented coring 0 0 0 Rock mass characterization methods 100 50 100 Stereonet and kinematic analyses 100 100 100 Deterministic slope stability models 0 0 0 Probabilistic slope stability models 0 0 0 Point cloud analysis 50 50 50 2-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 100 100 100 3-D Rockfall modeling and containment % 0 0 0 Design guides and containment % 100 100 100 Part F, Q1: Do you have performance measures specific to rock slopes? Yes, informally tracked by our geotechnical group. Read the entire page →

From page 83...

... 83 A P P E N D I X C Individual Survey Responses This appendix contains individual responses for the 34 "rock slope" DOTs that responded that they have sufficient experience to complete the full questionnaire. Responses are sorted alphabetically by state abbreviation.