Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting (2022)

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.

85   A P P E N D I X A Survey Questionnaire Dear Agency Representative, The Transportation Research Board (TRB), through the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), under the sponsorship of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is preparing a synthesis report on a Summary of Practice for Use of Pavement Condition Data Collection Technology for Quality Management and Reporting. The purpose of this questionnaire is to identify and summarize the procedures and practices used by highway agencies related to automated pavement condition surveys and state and national reporting requirements. The results of the questionnaire will be incorporated into a synthesis of highway agency practice, with the intent of helping agencies evaluate and improve their current practices. This questionnaire is being sent to the state highway agency Pavement Management Engineer for each state highway agency representative. If you are not the appropriate person at your agency to complete this questionnaire, please forward this request to the correct person. A PDF of the questionnaire is attached to the email so you may pre-review all of the questions. Please complete and submit this questionnaire by March 15, 2021. We estimate that it should take no more than 30 minutes to complete. If you have any questions or problems with operation or access to the questionnaire, please contact our principal investigator Dr. Linda Pierce. Questionnaire Tips • If you are unable to complete the questionnaire, you can return to the questionnaire at any time by reentering through the questionnaire link as long as you access the questionnaire through the same computer. Reentering the questionnaire will return you to the last completed question. • Questionnaire navigation is conducted by selecting the “prev” (previous) or “next” button at the bottom of each page. Thank you for your time and expertise in completing this important questionnaire. 1. Contact information Name Organization Phone Number E-mail Address

86 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting General Information 2. Have you significantly modified your pavement condition data quality management plan since receiving initial FHWA approval? No Yes (please describe) 3. Method for identifying pavement distress (excluding profile-based measures, i.e., IRI, faulting, rutting)? Manual Semi-automated Fully automated Fully and semi-automated Manual and semi-automated Manual and fully automated Other (please specify) 4. Pavement condition data collection is conducted by: Vendor Agency Both vendor and agency Other (please specify) 5. Pavement condition data analysis/processing is conducted by: Vendor Agency Both vendor and agency Other (please specify) 6. On average, how many roadway lane miles does your agency survey each year? 7. Please provide the estimated annual costs for the pavement condition survey (i.e., start-up to integration of results into the pavement management system). Agency anonymity will be maintained when reporting results. 8. Pavement condition survey storage requirements: Data storage Other (please specify) Cloud storage 9. Please provide annual data storage requirements (TB). 10. Acceptance sampling rate: _________% of annual lane miles collected. 11. Estimated time to conduct data acceptance: _________ annual personnel hours. Reporting Results 12. Determined performance measures or indices include (select all that apply): Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Present Serviceability Rating (PSR) Agency-specific combined index Non-load-related distress index Faulting index Average faulting (inch) International Roughness Index (IRI) JPCP cracking (% slabs) Remaining service life or interval Modified PCI Agency-specific cracking index Percent cracking Load-related distress index Rutting index Average rut depth (inch) Asphalt pavement cracking (% area) CRCP cracking (% area) Other (please specify)

Survey Questionnaire 87   13. To comply with MAP-21/FAST Act reporting, my agency (select all that apply): Changed distress definitions Added indices for MAP-21/FAST Act Changed indices calculation Developed a rater training program Developed a DQMP Implemented automated pavement Developed a rater certification program condition surveys Established a process for data collection equipment calibration and certification Developed data quality control requirements and procedures Established data acceptance requirements and procedures Established control, verification, and/or blind site sections Added MAP-21/FAST Act definitions No modifications were required Other (please specify) 14. Did your agency experience any challenges with MAP-21/FAST Act reporting requirements? Establishing SHA performance targets Determining baseline condition New interstate requirements Needing to adjust targets Meeting targets Extenuating circumstances Insufficient data No challenges Establishing MPO performance targets Other (please specify) 15. Did your agency have any challenges with HPMS reporting requirements? Reporting IRI Determining percent cracking Reporting faulting Determining PSR (if applicable) Reporting percent cracking No reporting challenges Reporting rutting Other (please specify) 16. Pavement condition survey results are provided to the following offices (select all that apply): Pavement Design Asset Management Maintenance Budget Transportation Planning Materials Construction Districts Upper Management Other (please specify) 17. Does your agency develop a pavement condition status report? Yes (can provide a file) Yes (unavailable) Yes (can provide a link) No 18. Please choose file. 19. Please copy and paste link. Automated Pavement Condition Surveys 20. Number of years agency has been conducting automated pavement condition surveys: 21. Number of data collection vehicles used for the annual pavement condition survey. Unknown, vendor conducts survey Number of vehicles

88 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting 22. Implementation of automated pavement surveys required my agency to (select all that apply): Modify distress definitions Add distress definitions Modify index/rating calculations Add index/rating calculations Modify historical manual surveys Develop correlation with manual surveys Modify decision trees Add decision trees (branches) Assess data quality issues No modifications needed 23. Challenges while transitioning to automated condition surveys (select all that apply): Coordination of data collection activities Integrating results into the pavement management system Significant difference compared to manual surveys Training staff on data collection Consistency of results Reduced data quality Training staff on data analysis No challenges Other (please specify) 24. Challenges with data and image quality control and acceptance (select all that apply): Missing data Poor pavement image quality Incorrect location Correct condition data by surface type Correct format Adjusting algorithms to meet Correct crack detection requirements IRI data collection and reporting Rutting data collection and reporting Faulting data collection and reporting Cracking data collection and reporting Meeting random sample requirements Meeting control and verification site requirements No challenges Other (please specify) 25. Advantages of automated pavement condition surveys (select all that apply): Increased rater safety Improved accuracy of distress 100% roadway coverage identification Enhanced timeliness of data collection Well-defined data collection methods Ability to collect sensor and distress with a single device Enhanced timeliness of data processing Ability to collect data compatible with HPMS and MAP-21 Access to ancillary data collection Other (please specify) Ability to easily track, review, and reproduce historical data and images 26. Disadvantages of automated pavement condition surveys (select all that apply): Direct correlation with historical data Difficulties with operational changes Increased collection costs Increased processing costs Breakdowns and long repair delays Dependence on a single vendor Year-to-year variability of results Technology evolution, forcing early Additional costs and personnel equipment replacement associated with equipment or vendor Additional costs and personnel for procurement calibration, validation, and verification Additional costs for modifying distress Additional costs for modifying distress ratings manual

Survey Questionnaire 89   Additional costs for modifying decision trees Additional costs for modifying performance models Additional costs for modifying pavement management software Other (please specify) In Closing 27. Do you have any other suggestions or comments related to automated pavement condition survey technology, data quality management, or reporting requirements? Yes (please specify) No 28. The synthesis will also include case examples highlighting agency practices related to pavement condition data collection technology, data quality management, and reporting requirements. Agencies will be provided the opportunity to review the case example write-up for accuracy. Would your agency be interested in participating in a case example? Yes No 29. If available, please include any additional documentation (internal or available via the web) related to implementation of automated pavement condition surveys and reporting of results (e.g., agency, FHWA HPMS). Yes (can provide a file) Yes (can provide a link) No Follow-up Questions The following provides a preliminary list of potential follow-up questions. Follow-up questions may be modified based on the response received from the web-based agency questionnaire. 1. Challenges when transitioning from manual to automated pavement condition surveys. 2. Challenges with reporting requirements for MAP-21/FAST Act. 3. Changes to distress definitions when moving from manual to automated distress surveys. 4. Changes to distress definition for MAP-21/FAST Act reporting. 5. Modification of index calculations when moving from manual to automated distress surveys. 6. Modification of index calculations for MAP-21/FAST Act reporting. 7. Details on pavement condition survey results provided to other internal agency offices and how the information is being used. 8. Did changing from manual to automated pavement condition surveys change the decision-making process regarding future pavement actions at the network and project level?