Maintenance Quality Assurance Field Inspection Practices (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 17-32
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 17... ...
15 CHAPTER THREE STATE OF THE PRACTICE the methodology used to collect the information. The following are asset categories and features included in the survey: – Drainage, including culverts, flumes, curbs and gutters, sidewalks, ditches or slopes, drop inlets, and underdrains/edgedrains.
|
From page 18... ...
16 FIGURE 9 Time frame that agencies without an MQA program will be developing or implementing a program. Among the 28 state DOTs with an MQA program in place, eight states refer to the program as an MQA Program while five refer to it as a Maintenance Management Program, as shown in Figure 10.
|
From page 19... ...
17 original program was developed and the other indicated that parts of the program were developed by a consultant while other parts were developed in house. FIGURE 13 Method used to develop the MQA program.
|
From page 20... ...
18 damage for drop inlets. For the other assets listed, more varied approaches are used.
|
From page 21... ...
19 The condition attributes collected for roadside assets are summarized in Table 7. As shown in the table, most states monitor the length of damaged or missing fence, grass height, visual obstructions from brush, litter volume, and percent area of noxious weeds.
|
From page 22... ...
20 important contributors to the safety of the highway system. Therefore, as shown in Figure 18, the majority of states with MQA programs in place either has established inventories for most of these assets or is in the process of developing their inventories.
|
From page 23... ...
21 TABLE 8 SURVEY METHODS USED FOR PAVEMENTS Method of Collection Frequency of Survey Asset Manual Walking Manual Windshield Automated Annual Every Other Year More Than Once/Year Paved Shoulders 11 4 2 11 1 3 Unpaved Shoulders 14 3 1 9 2 4 Paved Roadways 8 5 8 9 7 2 TABLE 9 CONDITION ATTRIBUTES COLLECTED FOR PAVEMENTS Asset Attribute States Other Paved Shoulders Drop-off 14 Structural distress 12 Functional distress 10 Rumble strip not functioning 2 Travel way and shoulder separation 9 Shoulder maintenance 7 Other 2 General surface condition; cracking, potholes/raveling Unpaved Shoulders Drop-off 17 Adequacy of gravel 6 Other 6 Build-up; cross-slope, general surface condition, distortion and vegetation growth; build-up (high shoulder) ; high shoulder and low shoulder; two measures for adequacy of gravel: cross-slope and erosion Paved Roadway We use Pavement Management survey results 12 Structural distress HMA 14 Structural distress PCC 13 Functional distress HMA 9 Functional distress PCC 8 Cracking/crack sealing HMA 16 Cracking/crack sealing PCC 16 Faulting PCC 11 Roughness HMA or PCC 12 Rutting HMA 15 Pavement patching HMA 10 Pavement patching PCC 8 Other 2 HMA -- rolldown at joints; we also use profilometer data from Materials Program TABLE 10 SURVEY METHODS USED FOR BRIDGES Method of Collection Frequency of Survey Asset Manual Walking Manual Windshield Annual Every Other Year More Than Once/Year Bridge 12 2 1 13 1
|
From page 24... ...
22 For the most part, condition assessment surveys on traffic assets are conducted using manual walking methods, with the notable exception of signs, which are more typically conducted using a windshield survey (see Table 12)
|
From page 25... ...
23 process of establishing, inventories for their rest areas (see Figure 19)
|
From page 26... ...
24 some agencies monitor rest areas more frequently. Other agencies collect the information only every other year, but that cycle appears to be less common.
|
From page 27... ...
25 use a pass/fail approach and only three state DOTs use a graded approach exclusively. Two states report using some other approach.
|
From page 28... ...
26 person-months per year and an additional five state DOTs spend 4 to 5 person-months collecting data annually. The remaining responses range from less than 1 person-month to up to 6 person-months per year.
|
From page 29... ...
27 USE OF MAINTENANCE QUALITY ASSURANCE DATA Although the focus of this synthesis is field inspection processes, the survey included questions to learn more about how MQA data are used to support agency decisions. A total of 21 of the 28 state DOTs with MQA programs use the field inspection results to establish LOS in accordance with the scale shown in Figure 30.
|
From page 30... ...
28 question: 11 state DOTs have established these links and eight are in the process of establishing them. The state DOTs that indicated they use performance data to determine the level of funding needed to meet LOS targets were asked whether they apply weights to any category of assets to place more of a priority to some assets over others during the budgeting process.
|
From page 31... ...
29 program (Figure 36)
|
From page 32... ...
30 of the 28 states report that the MQA results have been used to establish and address maintenance priorities on a statewide basis. Figure 40 presents the results of a question that asked the 28 state DOTs with MQA programs to describe their agency's level of success with the MQA program.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.