U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000
Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology
Coordinating, Developing, and Delivering Highway Transportation Innovations
 |
| This report is an archived publication and may contain dated technical, contact, and link information |
|
Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-05-073
Date: October 2005 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Roadway Safety Hardware Asset Management Systems Case StudiesPDF Version (1.17 MB)
PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader® FOREWORDSince the early 1990s, the term "asset management" has grown to embrace a broad array of tasks and activities aimed at identifying, assessing, prioritizing, evaluating, maintaining, rehabilitating, renewing, preserving, improving, and managing assets. This report addresses asset management of roadway safety hardware in the United States. Increasingly refined and complex tools such as modern bridge and pavement inventory management systems have been developed and adopted by many State departments of transportation (DOTs), as well as some of the larger departments of county and municipal governments. Many of these management systems have been developed cooperatively by pooling funds and in other ways, such as assistance from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Through maintenance and enhancement efforts, these software systems are growing in their robustness and capability to deal effectively with complex, real-world issues and conditions. One software management area that has not advanced as rapidly is roadway safety hardware inventory, which includes an array of signs, signals, roadway lighting luminaries, support structures for signs, guardrails, pavement markings, and deployed detecting devices—all vital to safe, efficient highway operations. This study provides information to State DOTs on roadway safety hardware management systems that would help increase their use of state-of-the-practice techniques. This report was developed for State DOT personnel, particularly chief engineers and other top management, involved with the planning, funding, and execution of roadway safety hardware management systems. Gary L. Henderson Director, Office of Infrastructure Research and Development Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the
U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The
U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document. The
U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers' names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document. Quality Assurance Statement The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement. Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72)
SI* (Modern Metric) Conversion FactorsTABLE OF CONTENTSCHAPTER 2. CASE STUDIES OF STATE DOT ROADWAY SAFETY HARDWARE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Approach To Selection Criteria States Selected For Case Studies APPENDIX A. FHWA LETTER TO DIVISION OFFICES APPENDIX B. QUESTIONNAIRE TO STATE DOTS APPENDIX C. SUMMARY OF AASHTO SURVEY RESULTS APPENDIX D. LIST OF STATE DOT CONTACTS LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Photo. Data collection van Figure 2. Screen Capture. Sample image in the New Mexico RFI application Figure 4. Screen capture. Sample RFI image showing roadside guardrail Figure 5. Photo. Sample RFI image showing interstate sign Figure 6. Screen capture. Sample RFI application screen with thumbnail image Figure 7. Screen capture. Sample New Mexico RFI spatial map with assets identified Figure 8. Chart. Sample flowchart of RFI QA/QC checks Figure 9. Screen capture. Georgia DOT HSMS sample data screen Figure 10. Map. Geographic map showing States that responded to AASHTO survey Figure 11. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #1: Do you inventory? Figure 12. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #2: Percentage of assets in inventory Figure 13. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #3: Does inventory track location? Figure 14. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #4: Inventory cycle Figure 15. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #5 (part 1): Method used for original inventory Figure 16. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #5 (part 2): Method used for inventory updates Figure 17. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #6: Funding allocated on inventory Figure 18. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #7: Budget line item for maintenance Figure 19. Graph. AASHTO survey results to questions #8 and 8b: Monitor condition Figure 20. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #9: Coverage of condition monitored Figure 21. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #10: Frequency of condition surveys Figure 22. Graph. AASHTO survey results to question #11: Methods of monitoring condition Figure 23. Graph. AASHTO Survey Results to question #13: Funding allocated on condition. LIST OF TABLES Table 1. New Mexico RFI data collected Table 2. New Mexico RFI asset types Table 3. The 31 RFI assets and their definitions Table 4. New Mexico HMMS data collected Table 5. Virginia ICAS data collected Table 6. Virginia RCA data collected Table 7. California IMMS data collected Table 8. Florida RCI data collected Table 9. Georgia HSMS data collected Table 10. Maryland GIS Roadway Route System data collected Table 11. Maryland TSIIM data collected Table 12. Minnesota AFMS data collected Table 13. TDOT TRIMS data collected |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
