PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of RatingsItem #120:D-05Tire-Pavement Noise as a Construction Quality Indicator(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 2 3 7 3 2RAC 1 7 11 12 12 5 1Standing Committee on Research■ Intersting proposed application of OBSI measurement, but this is really a uniformity-of-workmanship issue (I supportanything motivated to improve uniformity). A more appropriate surface-oriented tool might be texture measurement, orperhaps profile and ride quality already cover this.■ Suggest the research also tie into bridge decks.■ Pavement type and type of finish for PCC have the biggest impact on tire noise. Typical tire noise level ranges areknown for the various pavement types and PCC finishes. Don't see a major benefit being derived from this researchunless there are many agencies that don't care to have a say in pavement type or PCC finish.■ [Rating: 1] Currently the FHWA is investigating the development of an integrated texture-noise model using pavementprofiles as a surrogate parameter for tire-pavement noise which could than be used for assessing construction quality. Ifthese algorithms can be verified than the SHRP 2 project to control pavement smoothness during construction couldpotentially serve as a surrogate to controlling the noise-generating pavement characteristics during construction.Research Advisory Committee■ Relevant work maybe a bit premature due to the infancy of OBSI.■ Noise continues to be the #1 source of environment-related citizen complaints for state DOT's. If noise pavements can beimproved the potential exists to eliminate noise walls. This research in combination with a new transportation noisemodel has potential to reduce noise mitigation costs.■ Noise as a construction quality indicator? I didn't know FHWA was officially allowing different pavement types as noisemitigation. How is tire noise related to long-term performance?■ Correlating noise to quality or pav't performance would be difficult at best. Good indicators of pavement quality alreadyexist.■ In contrast to the opinions of the panel of specialists drawn from the AASHTO Highway Subcommittee on Materials, Ibelieve tire-pavement noise can be correlated to the overall pavement quality and its long-term performance. However,the scope of the proposed research needs to be revised to look specifically at the variation in the tire-pavement noise –not just simply the intensity of the noise itself. The proposed research does not mention variation. The variation in tirepavementnoise may provide a measure of pavement uniformity. Along with being smooth and dense, hot-mix asphalt(HMA) should also be uniform – these are the three desirable traits HMA pavement should have. Note: portland cementconcrete pavements should be uniform as well. We measure how smooth a pavement is with the International RoughnessIndex (IRI). We measure how dense a pavement is with laboratory tests on cores, and/or nuclear density tests. Why notinvestigate how uniform a pavement is with tire-pavement noise? While indicators of pavement quality are readilyavailable, a good indicator of uniformity is needed.Other■ [Rating: 1] It does not appear that tire-pavement noise can be easily correlated to the overall pavement quality or its longtermperformance. In addition, good indicators of pavement quality are readily available; developing a different indicatoris unnecessary.- No clear pay off is anticipated from the proposed research.IV-88
PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of RatingsItem #121:SP-03Develop Technologies for Unmanned Aircraft for StateDepartments of Transportation(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 1 2 4 7 1 2RAC 1 8 7 16 8 7 2Standing Committee on Research■ UAVs have been shown to have potential in several of the aplications mentioned in the proposal but have always hadnegative aspects that made them impractical for actual use. It is unclear what has changed to make this an appropriateproject now.■ Strongly support the development of the technology and applications to the transportation system. There are as many as44 companies and organizations currently developing Unmanned Aircraft (UAV) for use, the volume of informationavailable might suggest a Synthesis.■ existing in consultant community■ [Rating: 3] To summarize, while UAVs offer some benefits, human interaction would lessen the potential for errors andproblems with regards to the use UAVs.Research Advisory Committee■ It is already known that UAV's can be used for remote sensing. The military does it daily. Identifying the potentialroadblocks to actually implement a UAV in a state DOT would be useful. Additionally, identifying a COTS(Commercial Off The Shelf) UAV that could carry the necessary payload (medium format digital camera, GPS/INS, etc)would give a good indication of the feasibility before attempting to design and build a UAV from scratch. The conceptof a UAV for remote sensing within the DOT could be a reasonable alternative to traditional data collection usingmanned aircraft.■ WSDOT has explored the use of unmanned aircraft for avalanche control and is seeking funding for new research in thearea of rural traffic surveillance and accident investigation.■ Without cost comparisons with other similar data collection strategies, and an overall cost-benefit analysis, no need isseen■ There are many policy questions that should be addressed before serious consideration of funding for this project inapproved. These include: 1) In states with large amounts of tall growth vegetation (trees), the usefulness of this projectis doubtful; 2) In urban areas, the noise, takeoff/landing areas and airspace restrictions may make the project resultsunworkable; 3) What data is so time-constrained that is must be acquired in this method and not via satellite or aerialphotography; and 4) The public may think this is government peering into their backyards and private lives - anotherpublic relations issue for the all-pervasive DOT. This project should be held until these overarching questions can beaddressed.Other■ [Rating: 2]Item #122:G-11Countdown Pedestrian Signals: Is the Flashing HandNecessary?(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 3 6 3 1 4RAC 7 10 11 13 8Standing Committee on Research■ Should be scaled down, simplified and considered for the TCD pool fund research. This effort has relevance particularlyas localities are upgrading pedestrian signal heads to provide countdowns. The costs associated with this project seemhigh.■ Suggest that Problem Statements G-11, G-17, G-24, G-33 and G-36 be combined.IV-89
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:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38: PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
Page 87: PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-
show all

PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?