Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
Similaire à Pavement Asset Management
Similaire à Pavement Asset Management (20)
Plus de Jill Reeves
Plus de Jill Reeves (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Pavement Asset Management
- 1. Pavement Asset Management January 23, 2019 Mark Osborn Roadway Asset Management Engineer
- 2. 2 Nebraska’s Asset Management Objectives 1. Maintain pavement and bridges in a state of good repair 2. Optimize budget expenditures 3. Meet or increase the expected life-span of the major assets 2
- 3. 3 LIFE CYCLE Design Construction *Inspection *Decision MakingMaintenance Rehabilitation Disposal 3
- 4. 4 Pavement Management at NDOT Collect Data Measure Performance Analyze System Prioritize Treatments SET PERFORMANCE TARGETS
- 5. 5 Pavement Management at NDOT Collect Data Measure Performance Analyze System Prioritize Treatments
- 7. 7 Pavement Condition Automated Data Collection (Rutting, Faulting, IRI, 3D Surface, Photos, & GPS data) Manual Visual Ratings (Cracking Distress) *Collect all 10,000 Miles each year
- 8. 8 3D Surface and Photos Pavement Condition – Distress Detection
- 9. 9 Summary of Data Collection • Inventory Data is collected from Construction and As-built plans • For each pavement section • Pavement structure, base, subgrade • Number of lanes, lane widths, shoulder widths, surfaced shoulder widths, etc. • Condition Data is collected in two ways • Profiler Vans • IRI, Rutting, Faulting, 1/10th mile • Manual Distress Ratings • Severity and extent of surface distresses every mile
- 10. 10 Pavement Management at NDOT Collect Data Measure Performance Analyze System Prioritize Treatments
- 11. 11 Performance Measures 2 Key Measures for Network Level Performance: IRI NSI
- 12. 12 Performance Measures - IRI •Why IRI? • This is how the general public evaluates our roads • Smoother roads are safer • Lowers vehicle operating cost • More enjoyable to drive on
- 13. 13 International Roughness Index IRI Rating Scale Asset Type Performance Measure Target Pavement % of NHS segments smoothness rated “good” based on IRI ≥65%
- 14. 14 Performance Measure 65% of NHS with IRI < 95 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Percent of "Smooth" Miles on the NHS (IRI<95) Interstate Goal for Nebraska NHS National NHS Nebraska NHS
- 15. 15 Performance Measures 2 Key Measures for Network Level Performance: IRI NSI
- 16. 16 Pavement Condition Rating – Nebraska Serviceability Index (NSI) Alligator Cracking Longitudinal Cracking Transverse Cracking Failures Rutting Asphalt NSI Concrete NSI Panel Cracking Panel/Joint Spalls Panel/Joint Repairs Pattern Cracking (ASR) Faulting 16
- 17. 17 NSI Rating Scale Nebraska Serviceability Index Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor 17
- 18. 18 Performance Measure 80-85% of Highways Rated Good Based on NSI 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Percent of Highway Miles Rated at Least "Good" (NSI ≥ 70) Interstate Total Highways Non-Interstate Goal for Total Highways
- 21. 21 Historical Performance Measure Targets • State Wide Highway System - Average NSI of 84.7 • Based on historical pavement condition and funding levels • National Highway System - 65% rated good based on IRI 21 500 Miles/Year 10,000 Miles 20 Year Cycle
- 22. 22 TAMP - Transportation Asset Management Plan • The Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP) came about through requirements established by MAP-21 and FAST Legislation • Requirement for states to develop a risk-based asset management plan for the National Highway System (NHS) to improve or preserve asset condition and system performances • Final Rules were established May 20, 2017 22
- 23. 23 NHS - National Highway System • Essential roads for United States mobility, economy and defense • Goal is to optimize State use of Federal money, plan for risks 23
- 24. 24 New State Performance Targets Asset Type Performance Measure Target Pavement Weighted average NSI for the interstate system ≥86 Weighted average NSI for the non- interstate NHS system ≥80 24
- 25. 25 MAP-21 Pavement Condition Ratings 25 • All 3 “Good” = Good • If 2 or more “Poor” = Poor • Anything Else = Fair
- 26. 26 New National Pavement Performance Targets Asset Type Performance Measure Target Pavement % of pavements on the interstate system in good condition ≥ 50 % of pavements on the interstate system in poor condition ≤ 5 % of pavements on the non- interstate National Highway System in good condition ≥ 40 % of pavements on the non- interstate National Highway System in poor condition ≤ 10 26
- 27. 27 Setting Targets 87% 86% 86% 87% 85% 87% 90% 92% 89% 58% 59% 62% 62% 61% 58% 62% 60% 59% 64% 65% 68% 68% 66% 64% 68% 67% 65% y = 0.0065x + 0.8443 R² = 0.5596 y = 0.001x + 0.5966 R² = 0.0214 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 IRI - % Good (<95 in/mi) NHS - Interstate NHS - Non-Interstate & Off-System NHS - Overall Linear (NHS - Interstate) Linear (NHS - Non-Interstate & Off-System) Linear (NHS - Overall ) 61.0% 2019 2021 60.8% 92.9% 91.6%
- 28. 28 Summary of Performance Measures and Setting Targets • Historical target of 84.7 average NSI will still be used in our pavement management system • State Performance Measure Targets will be presented in our Annual Report to the public • 80-85% of State Highways will be rated Good based on NSI > 70 • 65% of NHS routes will be rated Good based on IRI < 95 in/mi • National Performance Measure Targets for MAP-21 requirements • ≥ 50% of the Interstate pavement in Good condition • ≤ 5% of the Interstate pavement in Poor condition • ≥ 40% of the Non-Interstate pavement on the NHS in Good condition • ≤ 10% of the Non-Interstate pavement on the NHS in Poor condition
- 29. 29 Pavement Management at NDOT Collect Data Measure Performance Analyze System Prioritize Treatments
- 31. 31 Pavement Data
- 32. 32
- 33. 33
- 35. 35 Types of Analysis 1. Users can compute the cost to maintain a selected NSI value over a selected number of years. Answers the question “How much will it cost to maintain my system?” 2. Users can compute the resulting NSI value over a selected number of years, given a specific budget. Answers the question “What will the condition of my system be if I spend X number of dollars?” 35
- 36. 36 Pavement Analysis Factors • Current condition ratings for age, NSI, PSI, cracking, rutting, and faulting • Deterioration rates for NSI, PSI, cracking, rutting, and faulting • Length, strategy types, and cost per mile for each strategy • One year program 36
- 39. 39 Strategies 39
- 41. 41 Outputs 41
- 42. 42 Summary of Data Analysis • Use the Pavement Optimization Program (POP) Life-Cycle Cost Analysis with current condition and inventory • Excludes pavement sections in the one year program • Deteriorates factors every year until an action can be taken • Strategy is selected by the decision trees • Cost is assigned until the funds are exhausted
- 43. 43 Pavement Management at NDOT Collect Data Measure Performance Analyze System Prioritize Treatments
- 47. 47 Identifying Risks – Common Risk Areas Environmental Conditions High-Risk, High-Value Assets Financial Legal or Compliance Demand Information or Decision Operational Hostile Acts, Malfeasance, Accidents 47
- 49. 49 Potential Risks to Nebraska’s NHS Some of the risk’s NDOT identified • Funding – increase or decrease • Deterioration of our maintenance equipment • Lack of qualified personnel • Reduction of staff • Capacity & reliability of computer network • Regulations that increase loading on pavements • Extreme weather
- 50. 50 Selection of Projects for the Program Factors considered in the selection of a project from the candidate list • Risk • Funding • Performance of the system • Environmental • Deliverability • Constructability • Staffing • Stakeholder input
Notes de l'éditeur
- Good morning, I’m Mark Osborn I’ve been with the dept for 34 years, 25 in roadway design, and the last 4 in Roadway Asset Management I’m here to inform you how NDOT manages it’s pavement and sets performance measure targets Please feel free to ask questions at any time
- These pretty much come from the definition of asset management Right strategy at the right time gives the best bang for the buck and extends the life of the asset
- Here is a typical life-cycle for an asset Asset management focuses on inspection and decision making The life-cycle resets (age of 0) at the end of construction (New/Reconstruction, full depth overlays) OPEN TO TRAFFIC A pavement section may go around this cycle many times before we dispose of it (Interstate is a good example) Goal is to make this cycle as long and cheap as possible
- "Pavement Management is a program for improving the quality and performance of pavements and minimizing costs through good management practices“ Why do we have PMP? – Prior to PMP, methods were leading to system failure Had a worst first strategy Allowed good roads to deteriorate
- First step is to collect data
- Foundation for asset management is Inventory and condition For pavements: inventory comes from the construction and as-built plans for projects let through the State Pavement structure and geometrics are loaded into our database The database contains the history of all pavements since they were built The entire highway system is broken into project length pavement sections for management purposes For roadways off the state system, we rely on other agencies to provide inventory data or we do field inspections We have some inventory data on all 97,000 miles of public roads in the state
- We collect the condition of the pavement sections in two ways. With inertial profilers and manual visual inspections. Profiler drives all 10,000 miles and captures data every 1/10th of a mile and collects Manual ratings are taken every mile or where there is a pavement change Manual rating determine the extent and severity of surface distresses
- Also using software out of the van to aid in visual inspections. Slowly integrating More accurate and repeatable
- We have our condition for the current year, that doesn’t tell the whole story, we need to compare that to previous conditions to make it meaningful How are we trending?
- IRI international Roughness Index which is the smoothness NSI Nebraska Serviceability Index which is the Health These are the two pavement performance measures published in NDOT’s annual report
- The first of the key measures is IRI International Roughness Index (IRI) in terms of the number of inches per mile. This value comes directly from the profiler van. The lower the IRI number, the better the ride. A smoother roadway is safer and more satisfying to the users of our highway system.
- 80-150 – I-80 between Lincoln/Omaha We are currently meeting our target value of 65%
- The second key performance measure is NSI or Nebraska Serviceability Index
- The rutting or faulting is combined with the distress factors to generate an NSI value This index is a rating of the overall health of the pavement and is used in all of our life-cycle analysis to manage pavements
- Ideally all highway miles would be fair or above.
- Can anyone tell me what happened in 2008? Our target for NSI is 80-85% rated Good
- Prior to doing any analysis we generate condition maps (IRI, Faulting, rutting) Visualizing the data is a great QC tool Which color of roads should we be scheduling work for? Answer; all of them Dark Green joint/crack seals, fog seals, Light Green armor coats, mill & fills, pavement patching, Yellow/Orange mill & fills or resurfacing
- Here’s were it gets interesting or confusing depending on your point of view
- As shown in the graphs previously The average NSI of 84.7 is what we use in our analysis which is on the high side of our 80-85 range For 2018 we were at 84.77 which is just coincidental but verifies our management system How did we arrive at these targets? Ask yourself What is acceptable to your customers, the public? What can you afford? What is cost effective? Back to the life cycle, longest cheapest Then look at trends, for highways the longer the better 10-20 years And set reasonable targets In the 1990’s, NDOT ……. Don’t want to change often because it takes years to see results
- This legislation required states to not only develop but to implement a risk-based asset management plan I will talk about risk a little later NHS is a subset of the total highway system and may be managed by state, local or other agencies. About 4% of the NHS in Nebraska is owned by local agencies. The NHS is comprised of highways that are classified as major arterials or higher NE’s initial draft has been approved
- NHS – National Highway System – Comprised of the essential roads for nations mobile, economy, and defense Want states to optimize how we use Federal money, and have a plan for risks that could potentially keep us from meeting our targets
- As I mentioned before our historical target was 84.7 Specified separate performance targets for the Interstate and non-Interstate NHS These two targets fall inline with our historical performance measures
- Besides adjusting state performance targets NDOT was required to set national performance targets based on federal criteria. For PCC, pavement sections will be rating based on IRI, cracking, and faulting PSR (present serviceability Rating) is a rating that can be used for roadways under 40 mph NDOT does not use this rating but it can be used for off system NHS routes The one change we needed to make was from a cracking index to cracking percentage in the wheel paths
- These targets are required and again we need a separate targets for the Interstate Targets were set for both good and poor using historical data Nebraska’s Performance Targets submitted with its initial Asset Management Plan Conservative based on new methods for assessing cracking percentage These will be revisited again in 2021
- We set our historical performance measure targets back in the 90’s using funding levels and condition graphs. This has served us well. For our new targets, we used the same methods but were much more conservative. As I mentioned earlier, cracking is measured differently So we were not as comfortable setting targets with limited data for cracking You notice our projections only went out to 2021 when we will get a chance to revisit our targets That will give us more time to collect cracking by the new method
- Next step is to analyze the system
- Now that inventory and condition is in the database/POP, we have measured the performance, we can move to the decision making piece of the life-cycle Two main components, Pavement data, Life-cycle cost analysis For either option, Pick an area, then a system
- Inventory & Condition Each pavement section (2400) History graphs/cross sections Section report Log book help
- Great QC tool
- Notice the maintenance done in 2009, diamond grind, faulting, IRI
- Use the second tab to run life-cycle analysis Used for our state audit, District Allocations,10 year candidate lists, and 20 year needs
- Starts the analysis with the initial values Deteriorates those factors running thru decision trees every year until an action can be taken if there is enough money Any project in the one-year program is excluded
- Time frame for ASR
- Strategy definitions Estimated cost updated yearly Once a section is programmed a specific strategy will be developed
- This example shows how much it would cost District one over ten years to maintain an NSI of 84.7 This is an iterative process adjusting the budget amounts for each year to get a straight line to an NSI of 84.7 in year 10 You can also see how many miles will be improved and the resulting NSI’s
- This example shows what the resulting statewide NSI would be if our annual budget was $200 million
- Now that we have the current condition, measured the performance, compared against our targets, and analyzed each pavement section Next step is to select project candidates to preserve the system and meet performance targets
- Along with the cost benefit analysis, we also have a Priority ranking tool
- Pavement section Rank Priority and C/B Candidate year Cost NSI Program year based on PPM Changes We verify that all of these candidates are valid This list is just one of the tools to select the program
- Environmental – Flooding, Climate Change Issues High-Risk, High Value – High-cost, high-traffic facilities, facilities serving large areas, or high-risk facilities due to age Financial Risks – Accuracy of revenue forecasts due to assumptions of fuel consumption, fuel tax rates, State and Federal Appropriations, inflation, etc. Legal/Compliance – New Environmental Regulations, ADA, water-quality, etc. Demand Risks – Changes in population growth, travel demand, increased demand on pavements due to allowance of heavier truck weights, etc. Information/Decision – Risk due to uncertainty and assumptions of modeling things such as pavement/bridge life-cycle, traffic volumes, financial projections, etc. Operational – Internal procedural breakdowns, staff turnover, loss of staff expertise, down-sizing, reduction of maintenance funding, etc. Hostile Acts, Malfeasance, Accidents – More at program level risk…things like hacking into traffic management system, disgruntled employee sabotaging asset management system, oversize truck crashing into bridges, etc.
- This is showing a 9x6 risk assessment matrix that accounts for positive and negative risk effects. There are 9 degrees of Consequences (from Catastrophic -5 to Major Benefit +3) and 6 degrees of Likelihood (from none 0 to almost certain +5). We used this as a template to score and prioritize risks Our final template was too large to fit on a slide
- Aging fleet Rely more and more on technology, moving to e-construction Legislature has proposed bills the last two years to increase loading on the highways Flooding is our biggest risk, no hurricanes or earthquakes
- What risks are there? Can we cash flow this project Does this help us meet our performance targets Can we get the permits Can we survey, design, buy the ROW What other work is in the area that may be a conflict Do we have the staff to deliver Does this meet stakeholder expectations