PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of Ratings■ Increasing the privatization and safety of rest areas is an important issue.■ A very good topic, but some of the proposed tasks are hard to complete.■ [Rating: 2] While this research would be desirable to support decisions to maintain or close rest areas, the likelihood ofbeing able to quantify the safety impacts is low.Research Advisory Committee■ Rest areas are touted as needed for safety, but I'm not sure because unlike the 1950's, there are now many commercialopportunities for motorists to rest, eat, etc. Rest areas cost many millions per year ($14 million just in janitorial). Itwould be good to know to what extent safety is still a factor.■ There has not been studies showing before and after safety experience in safety rest areas. Therefore this research couldbe very valuable in comparing investments in these facilities versus other safety countermeasures. It would help prioritizeinvestments for maintenance and new construction.■ Decision makers and the public are making decisions about rest area closures without the benefit of knowing theexpected impact on crash risk. The advent of these facilities was to support driver safety as well as comfort. Thecommercial vehicle safety concerns should not be underestimated. (Design)Other■ [Rating: 4]Item #96:D-03Improved Test Methods for Construction QualityControl(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 2 2 5 5 3RAC 5 11 10 8 11 4Standing Committee on Research■ see SHRP 2 research program for activities that will address this need. It's resistance to application (largelyinstitutional/industry) more so than a need to improve test methods that's the problem here. There are advances in thetechnology which should be used to effectively monitor construction quality control. The problem statement is too broadand general. It should be focused on a specific area of construction quality control for example: moisture content or soilstiffness, and develop a problem statement specific to it. The high variability mentioned in the problem statement forASTM D698 is more of the method than moisture content measurement itself. Moreover, there are other problemstatements considered by NCHRP which deals with specific area of measurement (ex. Stiffness using LWD, NCHRP2011-E-04).■ California already has QA/QC test methods.■ A definite long term need, but will probably not achieve for 1.5 million. In our industry, once new testing equipment ismarket-ready, it is evaluated quite quickly. Would be surprised if there is market-ready test equipment that we are notaware of.■ [Rating: 4] There has been a need for better construction quality control and acceptance tests for a long time. Manytechnologies and ideas for improvements have been proposed but have come up short with respect to beingimplemented. SBIR and IDEA programs continue to fund test method development, and FHWA and state highwayagencies (through the SP&R program) have also made some progress in this area.Research Advisory Committee■ ODOT has in initiative to improve our project delivery and this should speed up processes.■ The concept of uniform test methods is one of extreme promise. Not aware of a nationwide quality issue directly relatedto erratic inspection tied to training.IV-70
PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of Ratings■ Good concept, but problem statement and proposed method of attack is weak■ I agree with the panel of specialists drawn from the AASHTO Highway Subcommittee on Materials in that this is a lowpriority research need. I also agree that the problem statement does not provide a clear objective or scope of the proposedresearch. What quality control measurements do they intend to improve with new technologies. ASTM D 698 ismentioned as a case in point, but what other test measurements need to be revised or replaced with new methods? Theproblem statement is vague.■ Not a good proposal - There is not a defined outcome to the research. The Subcommitte on Materials rated it VERYLOW and had concerns over the proposed outcomes of the research.Other■ [Rating: 3] This could be a very good study but it is not well conveyed in the problem statement. A synthesis of thissubject should be conducted first. Shopping or wishing for technologies is a good way to expend funds. Should start outtargeted from the beginning which a synthesis should be able to help do.■ [Rating: 1] The problem statement does not provide a clear objective or scope of the proposed research. However, itappears to aim at developing test methods for construction quality control of embankments/earthwork.- Extensive work on the subject has been done in the past; precise tests already exist for many of the quality indicators forconstruction materials.- Unwarranted large expenditures are proposed.■ SHRP 2 has three projects related to NDT techniques for construction QC: (1) R06B Evaluating Field SpectroscopyDevices for QC of construciton materials, (2) R06C Using IR and High Speed GPR for Uniformity Measurements ofNew HMA Layers, and (3) R06E Real-Time Smoothness Measurements on PCC Pavements during ConstructionItem #97:G-26Assessing the Influences of Roadway and RoadsideAttributes on Driver Behavior, Speed, and Safety withOnline-Deliverable Casewise Visual Evaluation (CAVE)Methodology(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 2 2 6 4 2 1RAC 5 8 14 10 9 3Standing Committee on Research■ Interesting topic. A concern is how we know collected behavioral data correctly reflect actual behaviors on the ground.Not a high likelihood of implementation.■ This is becoming a more important issue for many DOTs as functional design opportunities become less successful ormore expensive to implement.■ [Rating: 2] The research objective of this problem statement does not indicate the immediate payoff in terms of new orupdated methodologies. It also seems to be very focused on Casewise Visual Evaluation (CAVE) Methodology and maylimit / preclude other alternative research / evaluation methods.Research Advisory Committee■ Proposal is too subjective. No data is obtained for considereation, and the budget is too small to get it anyway.■ This is a good approach to advancing the use of CSD in project development process. It offer potential for a greater levelof understanding on driver behavior. Funding may be a little low.■ High priority...Very interested in this one! Performance based design guidance would be welcome. "Environmentalfeedback" to influence [driver] behavior is not a new concept; however, while anecdotal evidence is available, research islacking. (Design)■ I don't see much payoff from this research.IV-71
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:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20: PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
Page 69: PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
show all

PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?