Guidelines for Informing Decisionmaking to Affect Pavement Performance Measures: Final Report

PDF Version (1.17 MB)

FOREWORD

The 2012 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21^st Century Act (MAP-21) required performance measures to be established for the Interstate Highway System (IHS). The succeeding bill, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, maintained support of the performance management elements established under MAP-21. Subsequently, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to establish performance measures to assess the condition of the pavements on the IHS and the National Highway System (NHS) as follows: percentage of pavements on the IHS in good and poor condition and percentage of pavements on the NHS (excluding the IHS) in good and poor condition.

The research study that led to the guidelines contained in this report was intended to validate the proposed pavement performance measures established by the NPRM and to demonstrate their use within asset management. The findings of the validation suggest that the performance measures established by the NPRM and ultimately required by the issuance of the Final Rule by FHWA are appropriate, as all the metrics have an effect on overall condition and performance measures. As a result, guidelines for informing decisionmaking to affect pavement performance measures were developed, and they are presented in this report. The objective of these guidelines is to provide information and guidance to highway agencies on the following key pavement decisionmaking issues: method to identify which condition metric is driving the performance measure, temporal effects on performance measures, and effects of maintenance and rehabilitation treatments on performance measures.

Cheryl A. Richter, Ph.D., P.E.
Director, Office of Infrastructure
Research and Development

SI* (Modern Metric) Conversion Factors

TABLE OF CONTENTS

• CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
  • Background
  • Objective
  • Guidelines Organization
    
    
• CHAPTER 2. Development of Performance Measure Drivers
  • Background
  • Development of Drivers
  • Examples
    
    
• CHAPTER 3. Assessing the Effects of M&R Treatments
  • Background
  • Process Overview
  • Effects of M&R Treatments on Pavement Condition
  • Examples
    
    
• CHAPTER 4. Treatments Affecting Performance Measures
  • Examples
  • Temporal Analysis Considerations
  • Potential M&R Treatments to Improve Overall Condition
    
    
• CHAPTER 5. Summary, Challenges, and Recommendations
  • Summary
  • Challenges and Recommendations
    
    
• REFERENCES

List of Figures

• Figure 1. Flowchart. Guidelines general approach
• Figure 2. Graph. Rutting growth
• Figure 3. Graph. Effect of survey dates on difference in change in condition—2 years between surveys
• Figure 4. Graph. Effect of survey dates on difference in change in condition—1 year between surveys
• Figure 5. Flowchart. Assessing effects of M&R treatments
• Figure 6. Graph. Example of M&R treatment improving condition
• Figure 7. Graph. Example of M&R treatment not affecting condition
• Figure 8. Graph. Example of M&R treatment reducing condition
• Figure 9. Flowchart. Development of treatments that affect performance measures
• Figure 10. Flowchart. Evaluating poor condition improvement type
• Figure 11. Graph. Temporal groupings

List of Tables

• Table 1. Pavement condition rating thresholds
• Table 2. Pavement condition rating thresholds using PSR metric
• Table 3. AC G-G-P grouping metric counts
• Table 4. AC G-G-P grouping metric percentage
• Table 5. AC F-F-P grouping metric counts
• Table 6. AC F-F-P grouping metric percentage
• Table 7. JPCC G-G-F grouping metric counts
• Table 8. JPCC G-G-F grouping metric percentages
• Table 9. JPCC G-P-P/F-P-P groupings metrics count
• Table 10. JPCC G-P-P/F-P-P groupings metrics percentages
• Table 11. Performance measure drivers
• Table 12. AC M&R treatment groupings
• Table 13. JPCC M&R treatment groupings
• Table 14. CRCP M&R treatment groupings
• Table 15. Effect of M&R treatment on AC percent cracking
• Table 16. Percent improvement of metric condition after M&R treatment on AC
• Table 17. Effect on AC overall condition by M&R treatment
• Table 18. Percent improvement of metric condition after M&R treatment on JPCC
• Table 19. Effect on JPCC overall condition by M&R treatment
• Table 20. Percent improvement of metric condition after M&R treatment on CRCP
• Table 21. Effect on CRCP overall condition by M&R treatment
• Table 22. Percentage M&R treatments improve overall condition for AC pavements
• Table 23. Change in condition based on treatment from poor condition
• Table 24. Percentage M&R treatments improve overall condition for JPCC pavements
• Table 25. Percentage M&R treatments improve overall condition for CRCPs
• Table 26. Temporal analysis by treatment and post-treatment trend

List of Abbreviations