1 / 81

Research & Innovation Implementation Program

Research & Innovation Implementation Program. Building on Success for PennDOT. PennDOT’s Research & Innovation Implementation Program. Where We Were… What We Did: Developed the Research & Innovation Implementation Program Expanded capacity to serve customers throughout PennDOT and beyond

sinjin
Download Presentation

Research & Innovation Implementation Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Research & Innovation Implementation Program Building on Success for PennDOT

  2. PennDOT’s Research & Innovation Implementation Program Where We Were… What We Did: • Developed the Research & Innovation Implementation Program • Expanded capacity to serve customers throughout PennDOT and beyond • Advanced implementation to more than just completed research project findings Where We Are Going: • Building on successes • Serving current and future customers • Helping PennDOT achieve key strategic goals and objectives

  3. Research & Innovation Implementation Program Timeline Built Infrastructure Strengthened and Extended Application of System Broadened Awareness, Use and Impact Evolution of a System

  4. Early Years… • Implementation Program Goals The Research & Innovation Implementation Program was created to: • Maximize PennDOT’s return on investments in research • Communicate & deploy research project findings • Communicate & deploy “successful practices” from the field • Advance PennDOT’s strategic goals and objectives

  5. Early Years… Building the Infrastructure Built Infrastructure Met goal to build innovation and implementation infrastructure IdentifyWorked to identify successful research projects for widespread application Innovations and research results: From concept to reality ShareDeveloped communication and training vehicles to share knowledge and experiences EngageTeamed with District QC’s and fostered innovation Successful Field Practices Implementation Program Manager FHWA, AASHTO, and Other Sources Completed Research Projects Ready to Implement? ? More Work Needed Provide Feedback Not Yet No Yes Implement & Evaluate! Develop Transfer Package

  6. Early Years… Building the Infrastructure Innovations and research results: From concept to reality Developed a Checklist to determine “Winning Innovations”

  7. Early Years… Building the Infrastructure Transfer Packages Innovations and research results: From concept to reality

  8. Administration Deputate Aviation Deputate As Our Program Developed… Highway Administration Deputate BOMO Design BHSTE • Through BPR, more organizations “joined the team” including: 11 Engineering Districts Planning Deputate BPRBureau of Planning & Research Safety Administration Deputate Local/Area Deputate The Implementation Consultant Team

  9. Middle Years… Increasing Awareness, Use & Impact Broadened implementation projects and processes Developed wider engagement across the Department Value added: increased effectiveness and implementation of higher impact research results Became a resource to “get things done”

  10. Middle Years… Innovations Implemented Some of the 30+ innovations implemented in 2007-2008: • Bridge Maintenance Academy • Challenge Exam Study Guide • Defensive Driving Course • Safer Driver Actions at Stop Signs • Snow Academy • Winter Leadership Presentations

  11. Recent Years… Strengthening and Extending Implementation Initiatives with Greater Scope, Impact, & Value Strategic Focus Winter Services Strategic Plan Planning Workforce Development Pavement Academy Maintenance Executive Development Program Safety Special Point Examination Productivity

  12. Innovations Implemented Some of the innovations implemented in 2009-2010: • Driver Sanctioning: Special Point Exam • Maintenance Executive Development Program (MEDP) Case Studies • Motorcycle Rider Self-assessment of Risk • Pavement Academy • Pavement Marking Handbook • Winter Services Strategic Plan

  13. Looking Ahead… 2011-2012 • In addition to communicating and deploying research results, PennDOT plans to: • Continue to grow and expand successful Implementation system • Continue to foster technology transfer and statewide communication • Implementation of key initiatives like WSSP • Develop performance metrics for process improvement • Look for new ways to support strategic thinking with actionable plans

  14. Contact Information Michael Bonini PennDOT Research Program Manager (717) 772-4664 mbonini@state.pa.us http://www.vancerenz.com/researchimplementation THANK YOU!

  15. Deploying Research in the Region II States Successful Methods to Implement Results Tuesday July 27, 2010 Moy Biswas North Carolina

  16. Front End Implementation • Only upon repeated insistence(i.e., 2x4) of customers, should a project be started • Research Projects are Selected Rigorously Based on Need and Urgency • Primary user serves as the Chair of the project Steering & Implementation Committee (StIC) • Supporting users serve as Members • Senior Manager Champions serve as Friends • FHWA & other agency people are included

  17. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RECALIBRATION OF THE ASPHALT LAYER COEFFICIENT DAVID TIMM, PHD, P.E. KENDRA P. DAVIS

  18. Main Objectives Using 1993 AASHTO method for flexible pavement design:Determine the sensitivity of the layer coefficient on the resulting HMA thickness. Recalibrate the layer coefficient for newer HMA mixes, and compare that value to the currently used layer coefficient of 0.44.

  19. 2003 and 2006 Test Data from the NCAT Test Track Structural Study used to achieve the objectives

  20. It was determined that the layer coefficient be recalculated to provide the greatest potential savings in HMA thickness using advance construction methods, gradation requirements, paving materials, and the results from the AASHTO Road Test . Instead of 0.44, the calculated layer coefficient was 0.54. The 0.54 layer coefficient results in a 18% layer thickness reduction.

  21. Implementations of Results August 11, 2009 - ALDOT requests approval from FHWA DA to use the 0.54 layer coefficient on binder and wearing layer designs September 10, 2009 - FHWA DA granted approval to use 0.54 as layer coefficient on binder and wearing layer designs with the exception of OGFC layers September 17, 2009 - ALDOT Directive sent to all Division Engineers to use 0.54 as layer coefficient on binder and wearing layer designs, starting January 2010 with the exception of OGFC layers

  22. Estimated ALDOT Projects Cost Savings Estimated HMA tonnage that would have been awarded in projects to date, if the 0.44 layer coefficient was used: 2,064,508 Tons Actual total HMA tonnage awarded in projects to date using the 0.54 layer coefficient : 1,749, 583 Tons Estimated reduction in HMA tonnage as a result of using the 0.54 layer coefficient: 314,925 Tons Estimated cost savings to date : $ 22,740,734

  23. Technical Contact (PI) – David Timm, PHD, P. E. (334) 844 – 6282 timms@auburn.edu ALDOT Contact – Jeffrey W. Brown (334) 353- 6940 brownje@dot.state.al.us

  24. North Carolina DOTPavement PreservationChip Seal Research Projects Aggregates (2004) – Optimizing Gradations Rolling (2006) – Quantifying the Benefits of Improved Rolling Emulsion (2007) – Analysis of Polymer Modified Emulsions Completed Ongoing • Mix Design (2008) – New Chip Seal Mix Design Method • FieldQC Test (2009) – Field Testing System for Chip Seal • Fog Seal (2010) – Fog Seal Effectiveness for Chip Seal • High Volume Application(2011) Use of Chip Seals to High Volume Roads by Using Polymer-Modified Emulsions

  25. Chip Seal Specimen Fabrication Using Mini-scale Chip Seal Spreader

  26. Third Scale Model Mobile Loading Simulator (MMLS3)

  27. Laser, PATTI, Digital Imaging

  28. Key Implementation Points Aggregate Rolling • Use of Pneumatic tire roller and combination rollers • Optimal number of rolling coverages of three • No rolling required for the bottom layer of triple seal • Recommended Rolling Protocols: • Two roller case: Two combination rollers side-by-side • Three roller case: Two pneumatic tire rollers side-by-side followed by one combination roller Importance of uniform gradation Fine content less than 1.5%

  29. Combination Roller

  30. Key Implementation Points – Cont’d Emulsion Use of polymer modified emulsion (PME) strongly Excellent aggregate retention, bleeding, and rutting performance of PME chip seals Excellent aggregate retention performance of PME chip seals at low temperatures Life Cycle Cost Analysis shows PME to be cost effective on condition that the service life of the PME is two years longer than that of an unmodified chip seal.

  31. Louisiana DOTDComparative Evaluation of Subgrade Resilient Modulus Mr,fromNon-Destructive, In-situ, and LaboratoryMethods LTRC Contact: Mark Morvant / Doc Zhang • Performed field and Laboratory tests • Used four soil types • @ different moisture-dry unit weights • Nine construction projects

  32. Louisiana DOTDField Tests • DCP • CIMCPT • FWD • Dynaflect

  33. Louisiana DOTDOutcome • Incorporate in the LADOTD design manual • Verification through field projects

  34. Kentucky Transportation CabinetBridge Strengthening withPost Installed Shear Studs Contact: Jamie Bewley-Bird • Existing bridge non-composite single span steel girder • Installed Adhesive Anchor shear studs to obtain partial composite action • Minimum traffic disruption • From HS12, Load rating increased to HS33

  35. North Carolina DOTPlacement of Detection Loops on High Speed Approaches to Traffic Signals

  36. Research Objectives • Investigate best practices, theories and trends • Using simulation, model various detection loop placements • Field evaluate alternative vehicle detection loop placements

  37. Best Available Technology Appears to be the D-CS Software Developed by Jim Bonneson at TTI

  38. Existing Controller Cabinet Modified to Incorporate D-CS Software

  39. Results of Field Evaluation of Various Technologies Probabilities of No Vehicles in Dilemma Zones • In addition to reducing incidence of vehicles in the dilemma zone, the D-CS controller reduced the average delay time for opposing traffic all five simulated sites

  40. Implementation • The North Carolina Department of Transportation is currently in discussions with current controller software provider about the price of incorporating D-CS software into the next version of their existing controller software package

  41. Iowa’s Research & Technology Implementation Program • Sandra Q. Larson, Iowa Department of Transportation

  42. Top 10 Ways to Ensure Research Results are Implemented • 1. Include implementers and technical experts in the early concepting of the research project. • 2. Include the implementers and technical experts throughout the research project as members of the Technical Advisory Committee. • 3. Throughout the project develop champions for the research solutions at multiple levels within the agency, and beyond (FHWA and industry).

  43. Top 10 Ways to Ensure Research Results are Implemented Con’d • 4. If money will be needed to implement the research results, determine the funding source early in the research and plan for the actual implementation. • 5. Include critics of the research ideas early in the research project. • 6. Make sure whoever has the responsibility for action items, actually knows that they have that responsibility.

  44. Top 10 Ways to Ensure Research Results are Implemented Con’d • 7. Get upper management support for the research solutions. • 8. Develop technology transfer ideas early and follow through with them. • 9. Keep the greater transportation audience informed about the project’s progress & results, and include throughout the project (esp FHWA and industry). • 10. Communicate, communicate, communicate.

  45. Examples of Successful Research Implementation • Non-Destructive Evaluation of Bridge Decks • Intelligent Compaction of HMA and soils/granular subbases • PCC Pavement Surface Characteristics Pooled Fund • Rumble Strips and Stripes • Triple Plow Blades • Teen Driver Safety

  46. Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) of Bridge Decks • Bridge Office and Research Bureau representation at initial meeting with Rutgers University reps • Bridge Office and Research Bureau (along with Chief Engineer) determined that a project to test several different NDE technologies should be used to evaluate 9 bridge decks, 6 of which had bridge deck construction projects immediately following the evaluation, FHWA concurrence

  47. Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) of Bridge Decks con’d • Bridge Office and Research Bureau worked together throughout the contracting and research project with Rutgers • Champions for the project were in the Bridge Office, Research Bureau, and also included the Chief Engineer • Rutgers gave a project results presentation to DOT and FHWA staff, and also a shorter presentation to upper DOT management

More Related