PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of Ratings■ It's time to stop planning to plan and creating documents that end up sitting on the shelf, and starting acting to resolve theproblem. $200K would be better spent elsewhere.Item #85:E-07Quantifying Long-Term Performance of Draped andFlexible Fence Rockfall Protection Systems(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 1 2 5 6 3RAC 2 7 7 11 10 6 6Standing Committee on Research■ Potentially significant safety issues involved.■ Recommend this as a Synthesis. Considerable savings could be realized by reducing duplication of already establisheddesigns and construction methodologies.■ Recommend consider a pooled fund for the states affected.■ F-07 would be a preferred study but it does not address maintenance and durability issues. These two can be combinedfor a more comprehensive project.■ The objective appears to be no more than collecting and summarizing existing information through inspections, surveys,a literature search and soliciting manufacturer information. It is doubtful that any maintenance data about wire meshtreatment would be applicable from site to site since each site tends to be unique. Potential Synthesis topic.■ [Rating: 4]Research Advisory Committee■ This project should be combined with 2011-F-07.■ This is a critical need. The consequences of failure in terms of safety and mobility. Should be combined with Problem F-07.■ Combine with F-07■ This Department does not have a need for the majority of these products. The condition/performance of these productswould seem to be easily discerned by visual inspection or experience of those installed. It would seem that the true longtermperformance should be something established by the manufacturers of these products.■ MSDOT does not have this issue in our stateOther■ [Rating: 3]Item #86:C-12MEPDG Inputs for Warm Mix Asphalts(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 2 3 5 3 2 2RAC 1 7 7 8 8 9 9Standing Committee on Research■ While I think the work is needed, I see several obstacles. In part, some of the characterization and comparison inproperties has/will occur during 09-43 and 09-47A. While the information is absolutely needed, I don't know that anational study will be able to capture the variations that individual states will demand be accounted for - work forproviding HMA inputs has generally been occuring on a regional or state project basis due to the differences in mixtureproperties related to source materials, state specifications, etc. This project would be excellent for focusing ondetermining if the models used for HMA are applicable for WMA, but to provide mixture- and technology-specific inputsmay be overly ambitious and not succeed in meeting the expectations of the users.IV-62
PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of Ratings■ The University of California Pavement Research Center (UCPRC) is currently testing various warm-mix asphalts(WMA) and confirming the lab results with heavy vehicle simulator (HVS) testing.■ This study, while important, may be better addressed on a local level much like ongoing MEPDG implementation efforts.Many states may only see 2 or 3 technologies used by contractors, and will need to evaluate performance characteristicson their local mixtures regardless of outcomes from a national study.■ Each State DOT or Region will need to perform this research/testing on their own. In addition, warm mix technology isstill evolving in this country, which may change any conclusions deemed from this research.■ [Rating: 1] A national research project to develop typical WMA input parameters for pavement design is not warranted.Owner agencies or their contractors/consultants should conduct the required testing for the materials they use.Research Advisory Committee■ Each state should develop inputs for their materials■ Yes, need information for inputs■ Funding level appears insufficient to do this project.■ should examine WMA with RAP as well■ WMA should be tested and evaluated for performance, no altering the design methods to account for 15+ types of warmmix systems that may or may not work correctly. Not sure MEPDG inputs will be consistent with the WMA mode offailure■ There is much research being performed on the field performance and potential moisture issue with Warm Mix Asphalts.This study will determine the input parameters to be used in the new MEPDG that would be beneficial to all.■ Hold off on funding this study until the DARWin-ME is available and more program bugs are resolvedOther■ [Rating: 3]Item #87:C-15Quantification of Benefits of Including SubsurfaceDrainage in Flexible and Rigid Pavements(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 1 2 6 4 4RAC 1 3 9 11 10 13 2Standing Committee on Research■ Project would assist DOT's with choosing the proper locations for including subsurface drainage. A number of forensicinvestigations have revealed the drainage issue being the primary factor in the pavement failure. So it is appropriate toconduct a research study to quantify the benefit of a subsurface drainage system. The construction detailing and ensuringproper drainage may sometime become primary factor in the success of a subsurface drainage system. These may bementioned in the problem statement/ research objective and research outcome should extend to develop arecommendation to ensure proper drainage in a pavement system. Researchers may be allowed to propose more optionsto verify benefit of drainage system in the phase three.■ This research topic has already been sufficiently studied.■ Most states that currently use sub-drains are satisfied with their performance and are unlikely to stop using sub-drainsregardless of the outcome of this potential research.■ We believe the benefits of this research would be low. Potential Synthesis topic.■ Decrease in overall maintenance/rehabilitation cost to offset the initial cost of constructing the subsurface drainageIV-63
Page 1 and 2:
PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12: PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
Page 61: PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
show all

PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?