1 / 16

Supporting North Dakota’s STIP Development Using Asset Management

Supporting North Dakota’s STIP Development Using Asset Management. Jack Smith P.E. North Dakota Department of Transportation Assistant Planning/Asset Management Engineer. Overview. Factors That Influence STIP Development North Dakota STIP Development Cycle

chelsa
Télécharger la présentation

Supporting North Dakota’s STIP Development Using Asset Management

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. Supporting North Dakota’s STIP Development Using Asset Management Jack Smith P.E.North Dakota Department of Transportation Assistant Planning/Asset Management Engineer

  2. Overview • Factors That Influence STIP Development • North Dakota STIP Development Cycle • Expectations and Limitations of our Asset Management Tools • The Future

  3. External Factors Geographical: • Short Construction Season (Approximately 120 Days) • Behavior of expansive soils during spring thaw and load restrictions.

  4. External Factors Project Delivery: • Preliminary Project Concepts to Delivery of Bid Documents 18 to 12 months. • Many projects are not controversial from an environmental standpoint.

  5. North Dakota STIP Development Cycle • Data Collection • Draft STIP • Highway Performance Classification System Report • Final STIP • District Priorities

  6. Data Collection • Ride, rut, and distress data are collected in Summer and Fall. • The collected data is analyzed in the winter and early spring.

  7. Example Pavement Management Analysis • Summary • The projected average network IRI resulting from the 2011-2014 Final STIP is comparable to the dTIMS optimized analysis projection. • Average Network IRI is projected to improve slightly from the current condition of 88 (Good) to 86 (Good) at the end of year 2014. • The projected percent miles meeting guidelines (Excel/Good) resulting from the 2011-2014 Final STIP is slightly less than the dTIMS optimized analysis. • Miles meeting guidelines is projected to remain steady at the current level of 77% between now and the end of year 2014. (The current network goal is 85%.) • The projected Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) meeting guidelines resulting from the 2011-2014 Draft STIP is on average about 6 percentage points lower than the dTIMS optimized analysis results. • VMT meeting guidelines is projected to remain steady at the current level of 85% between now and the end of year 2014. • A comparison of the dTIMS optimized project recommendations to the projects in the 2011-2014 Final STIP indicates the following approximate correlation by year: • 2011 66% 2013 62% • 2012 78% 2014 54%

  8. Draft STIP • Compiled from previous year’s submitted priorities. • Takes into account an estimated budget. • dTIMS CT – List of Generated Projects • Presented to Executive Management and Districts for Comment • Submitted for public comment.

  9. FINAL STIP • Updated pavement data • Constrained Budget dTIMS Predictions are compared with the STIP • (Hopefully) Clearer Federal Funding Picture • Responses to Public Comment

  10. District Priorities • Submitted at the end of the year. • dTIMS suggested projects are compared with submitted priorities for District Engineer’s use. • Main input for next year’s Draft STIP.

  11. Programming Constraints • Politics • Work Type Distribution • Geographical Distribution of Work • Funding Types • Level of Funding • Etc…

  12. Expectations and Limitations • Straight Line Deterioration Curves • Traffic Projections • Quality of Construction and Maintenance • Environmental

  13. Expectations and Limitations • Our asset management systems will not be “black box” systems. • Our asset management systems will not prescribe projects, but rather recommend projects. • The better we can make our recommendations, the more seriously people will take them.

  14. The Future • Further Development of Asset Management Business Practices • Cross Asset Tradeoff Analysis • Bridges • Maintenance

  15. The Future • Continual Improvement of our Pavement and Bridge Management Systems • Development of a Maintenance Management System • Investigation of future assets for Asset Management Development.

  16. Thank You

More Related