PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of RatingsOther■ [Rating: 1]■ Related to L10, L10abc, L07, and L09Topic area might be addressed using data from the SHRP 2 NDS in the future,but there is no duplication in the project.Item #98:C-05Structural Design Methods for Alternate Pipe MaterialsBased on Equivalent Risk Factors(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 2 3 6 3 3RAC 2 5 6 15 15 2 4Standing Committee on Research■ It is recommended to wait until NCHRP 15-29 is published before considering this as a higher priority. Properinstallation of any pipe, regardless of its constituitive materials, is as critical as the design. Choice of backfill materialsand proper construction are critical to load distribution and ultimately pipe performance.■ Pipe culverts of this type are rare in California.■ Combine this project with D-12 and broaden the scope to look at criteria for alternate pipe design selection, etc. Totalstudy budget should be limited to $500,000 to address both objectives.■ [Rating: 4] This is an important project, and somewhat related to the D-12 submittal. It might be beneficial to combinestatement C-05 into D-12.Research Advisory Committee■ If this research gets approved, it must address the very real issue of long term risk due to fire damage. In areas of thecountry where wildfires are very common (like Oklahoma), this risk to the various pipe materials must be considered inany legitimate research on the subject.■ Perhaps this research should be tied to D-12. They both address the problems with pipes made of different materials.■ The decision to perform this research should be based on the research finding of the recently completed NCHRP 15-29 “Design Specifications for Live Load Distribution to Buried Structures” research project.■ AASHTO Subcommitte on Bridges ranked this as a LOW priority item. I like the idea of looking into the effect ofbackfill materials on Alternate Pipe performance. However, there is no mention of how these same factors affect rigidpipe which makes up the majority of our existing drainage structures. Additionally, because backfill materials vary sodrastically across the nation, it is entirely possible that the research would not look into potential backfill materials thatwe have locally in Mississippi.Other■ [Rating: 2] Needs more detail in objective to be viable studyItem #99:C-13Development of Guidelines for Consideration ofTemperature Effects in Rigid Pavement DeflectionAnalysis(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 2 2 5 5 2 1RAC 1 9 6 10 12 8 3Standing Committee on Research■ For several years running this was the number one research priority for the VTRC PaveRAC committee. I agree the topicis important, but I'm not sure the proposed work adds to what we already know.■ The research will provide important data which is needed in Caltrans for deflection measuring.■ [Rating: 2] While the research objectives are good and needed in the long term, the need is not urgent. A recentlyIV-72
PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of Ratingscompleted FHWA study addresses the use of FWD data for rigid pavements in the MEPDG design process.Research Advisory Committee■ Ohio would be interested in the results but undertaking this research project before we finalize our move to the fallingweight deflectometer might be premature.■ In comparison to the other problem statements reviewed, this ranks low on the priority list. Furthermore, the reviewersindicated that several studies of this type have already been conducted.■ Beneficial study to those states possessing significant miles of rigid pavement.Other■ [Rating: 3.5] A lack of quantified data to support strict guidelines is needed. This has a profound effect on measuredcorner deflections and LTE. However, budget is too low and will probably not improve the body of knowledge thatalready exists unless expanded.Item #100:G-30Data Fusion for Improved Detection of CongestionOnset and Travel Time Estimation(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 5 5 3 3 1RAC 1 4 12 15 9 5 3Standing Committee on Research■ This is an extremely academic piece of research that would be better funded by NSF.■ Agree with TRB comment. The transferability of results are limited.■ Work will newly apply two seemingly relevant statistical theorems to the problem of congestion prediction. See attachedcomments.■ [Rating: 4] Proprietary data and algorithms are black boxes which one must buy on faith. It is better to use data andalgorithms that one knows the algorithms and methods for. Travel Time Estimation and vehicle classification capabilitiesof sensor are reaching new heights with the techniques developed under NCHRP 3-79a and the development of vehiclesignature sensors by Reno A&E, Eberle Design. and Sensys. In addition, the development of travel time sensors usingBluetooth signals by TRAFFAX corporation.allows an Intellidrive like traffic probe sampling data set to be constructed.The data fusion algorithms and techniques described in this proposal have been and are being successfully used in theDoD environment. The data fusion technologies described in this proposal combined with the 3-79a techniques wouldmake the construction of accurate travel time and congestion measures a “simple” turn of the crank. These approachescould then later be relatively straight forwardly adapted to add Intellidrive to the data fusion.Research Advisory Committee■ Detection and travel times are always a challenge.■ As GDOT provides trip time info already, the results of this research could be very useful to the Navigator system■ Private probe data companies have probably already conducted this analysis or could do it in a short time frame.■ Too mathematical without any real-world applications described■ Suggest instead the NCHRP Reliability IDEA program to address this need.■ Based on emerging technologies, I feel that it is important that we publish travel time/congestion information in a timelymanner. My main concern is this proposal is so complex that I don’t know how the final report will be comprehended.Other■ Generally related to Reliability and Capacity, especially C05 and L03 and L02IV-73
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:
Page 21 and 22: PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
Page 71: PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
show all

PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?