The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 90-112

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 90... ... 90 Responding State Highway Agencies A P P E N D I X B Agency Survey Responses Response Agencies No. of Agencies No Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, DC, Washington State, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming 44 Yes California, Florida, New Hampshire, and Puerto Rico 4 No. Read the entire page →
From page 91... ... Agency Survey Responses 91 – Florida: Modified to include statistical validation when comparing field verification site data. A statistical evaluation is performed to verify data collection of vehicle-measured rut depth, percent cracking, and fault depth. Read the entire page →
From page 92... ... 92 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting 4. Pavement condition data analysis/processing is conducted by: Response Agencies No. Read the entire page →
From page 93... ... Agency Survey Responses 93 7. Pavement condition survey storage requirements. Read the entire page →
From page 94... ... 94 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting Reporting Results 9. Determined performance measures or indices include (select all that apply) Read the entire page →
From page 95... ... Agency Survey Responses 95 Comments: – Alaska: Planning on developing patching and raveling indices. – California: Multiple cracked slabs for JPCP. Read the entire page →
From page 96... ... 96 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting 10. To comply with MAP-21/FAST Act reporting, my agency (select all that apply) Read the entire page →
From page 97... ... Agency Survey Responses 97 Comments: – Arizona: All data collection and management is done with GIS. – Florida: Annual rater training for manual cracking for verification of HPMS and pavement data collection needs. Read the entire page →
From page 98... ... 98 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting Response Agencies No. of Agencies No reporting challenges Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, DC, and Washington State 23 Determining percent cracking California, Colorado, Florida, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Vermont 15 Reporting percent cracking Colorado, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, New Mexico, and Vermont 6 Reporting faulting Connecticut, Michigan, Minnesota, and New York 4 Reporting IRI New Mexico and New York 2 Determining PSR (if applicable) Read the entire page →
From page 99... ... Agency Survey Responses 99 Response Agencies No. of Agencies Upper Management Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, DC, Washington State, Wisconsin, and Wyoming 39 Asset Management Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey (HPMS) Read the entire page →
From page 100... ... 100 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting Response Agencies No. of Agencies Yes (can provide a link or file) Read the entire page →
From page 101... ... Agency Survey Responses 101 Automated Pavement Condition Surveys 15. Number of years agency has been conducting automated pavement condition surveys: Response (years) Read the entire page →
From page 102... ... 102 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting Agency No. Vehicles Agency No. Read the entire page →
From page 103... ... Agency Survey Responses 103 Response Agencies No. of Agencies Coordination of data collection activities Florida, Hawaii, Iowa, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Washington, DC 14 Validation/ verification of data quality Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey (non-HPMS) Read the entire page →
From page 104... ... 104 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting Response Agencies No. of Agencies Correct crack detection Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wisconsin, and Wyoming 27 Adjusting algorithms to meet requirements Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Montana, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin 17 Cracking data collection and reporting Alabama, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, New York, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin 17 Missing data California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey (non-HPMS) Read the entire page →
From page 105... ... Agency Survey Responses 105 Comments: – Alaska: Per the DQMP, "typical" IRI values and left/right IRI values do not differ by more than 50. There are many locations, for example, due to unstable permafrost/poor curb/ gutter, and this leads to time being spent investigating the reasons they are outliers. Read the entire page →
From page 106... ... 106 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting Response Agencies No. of Agencies Direct correlation with historical data Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, New Jersey (non-HPMS) Read the entire page →
From page 107... ... Agency Survey Responses 107 Comments: – Idaho: Staff training and retention. – Mississippi: Changing vendors and software. Read the entire page →
From page 108... ... 108 Automated Data Collection and Quality Management for Pavement Condition Reporting In Closing 22. Do you have any other suggestions or comments related to automated pavement condition survey technology, data quality management, or reporting requirements? Read the entire page →
From page 109... ... Agency Survey Responses 109 23. The synthesis will also include case examples highlighting agency practices related to pavement condition data collection technology, data quality management, and reporting requirements. Read the entire page →
From page 111... ... Abbreviations and acronyms used without denitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAST Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (2015) FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration GHSA Governors Highway Safety Association HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) Read the entire page →
From page 112... ... Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ISBN 978-0-309-68721-8 9 7 8 0 3 0 9 6 8 7 2 1 8 9 0 0 0 0 Read the entire page →

From page 90...

... 90 Responding State Highway Agencies A P P E N D I X B Agency Survey Responses Response Agencies No. of Agencies No Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, DC, Washington State, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming 44 Yes California, Florida, New Hampshire, and Puerto Rico 4 No.