1 / 54

SAFETEA-LU

SAFETEA-LU. Next Steps May 19, 2009. Download ACPA 051909 at: http://xfer.concrete-pipe.org/ password SAFETEALU. Housekeeping. Mute phones. Minimize external noise. Don’t put this call on hold. If you have a question, jot it down and ask it at the end.

eirma
Télécharger la présentation

SAFETEA-LU

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. SAFETEA-LU Next Steps May 19, 2009 Download ACPA 051909 at: http://xfer.concrete-pipe.org/ password SAFETEALU

  2. Housekeeping • Mute phones. • Minimize external noise. • Don’t put this call on hold. • If you have a question, jot it down and ask it at the end. • Or, you can type the question in the chat box and we will answer questions at the end.

  3. Current status of FHWA Compliance ReportState ActivitiesOur ObjectiveResourcesNext Steps Section 5514 “Compliance Report”

  4. SAFETEA-LU • On August 10, 2005, President George W. Bush signed the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). SAFETEA-LU authorizes the Federal surface transportation programs for highways, highway safety, and transit for the 5-year period 2005-2009

  5. November 2006 Memo • States should be considering all available pipe products that are judged to be of satisfactory quality and equally acceptable on the basis of engineering and economic analyses. Where such products appear to be equal, alternative bidding practices must be used as required by 23 CFR 635.411(b). Where alternative products are determined to have different engineering and economic properties, contracting agencies may select a specific material or product based on the required engineering properties and/or life cycle cost criteria. In such cases, the State DOT should document its material selection decision on a project or program basis as appropriate.

  6. July 2007 Memo • Historically, we have encouraged systematic implementation plans and measures approaches…we promoted this approach to avoid failures resulting from inappropriate use, inexperience, and/or improper construction techniques. • Division offices should be mindful of the State’s need to gain the needed experience, but this need should not be used to delay the implementation for unreasonably prolonged periods of time.

  7. December 2008 Memo • …we suggested that a reasonable implementation schedule should be developed for States where material selection policy revisions are necessary to comply with Section 5514. We further noted that the implementation schedule should not be based on protracted evaluation periods. • In order that we have a national summary of compliance with section 5514, please provide John Huyer in my office with an email summary of your State’s Section 5514 implementation status by December 12, 2008.

  8. 8 Current Status FHWA is currently drafting a “Compliance Report” executive summary and position statement. • Our objective is to ensure States stay objective and not succumb to pressure. • ACPA RRT and State Associations are mobilizing to accomplish this. • ACPA is working on Highway Bill with key legislators and incorporating lobbyists in this effort.

  9. Our Objective Fair Specifications

  10. Determine what the DOT specification says. • Know if DOT is reviewing specification in response to SAFETEA-LU. • Reinforce the need for an engineering and economic analysis. • New alternates that don’t have AASHTO approved design methods (such as TWPP and SRHDPE) should not be approved by DOT. • Convince DOT to require post-installation inspection for flexible pipe. • Convince DOT to add a non-performance penalty clause to the specifications.

  11. Provide Resources. N Y Convince Need For Analysis. Favorable to Concrete (no alternates including TWPP and SRHDPE)? 1 Y N Laser Video 2 Continue to Monitor. 5% Remove, Actual Diameter Non-Performance Penalty. DOT Pipe Specification Under Review?

  12. 12 Identify Target States • State specifications are in constant flux. • 21 states “admittedly” reviewing specifications now. • Which States would the competition target?

  13. ME VT WA MT ND MN NH NY OR WI MA ID MI RI SD WY CT PA IA OH NJ NE IN IL DE MD WV VA UT CO NV MO CA KS KY NC TN OK AR SC AZ NM MS GA AL AK LA TX FL 13

  14. 14 Resources Item 1- This Presentation. Item 2 - Draft Horne Memo. Item 3 - State Restrictions Paper. 3rd Party Reports. Item 4 – UTA Report. Item 5 – KY OH Report. Item 6 – WJE Report Item 7 - AASHTO LRFD Section 30. Links - Example State Specifications. Item 8 - CALTRANS Article.

  15. 15 Resources Item 9 - Stoneburg Texas. SRHDPE Information. Item 10 – SRHDPE Pictures. Item 11 - AASHTO SOM Minutes 2008. Item 12 - AFCLC Minutes 2009. Items 13 and 14 - Utah State Hydraulic Studies. Previous FHWA Memos. Item 15 - November 06, Analysis / States Can Choose. Item 16 - July 07, Don’t Delay. Item 17 - December 08, Hurry Up / Report. Link - ACPA Tool Kit.

  16. “Inspection is Critical” • FHWA Memo, July 9th 2007 • Third-Party Reports • WJE Report • Evaluation of HDPE Pipe Performance on Kentucky DOT and Ohio DOT Construction Projects • Evaluation of HDPE Pipelines Structural Performance • Manuals/Papers • Buried Pipe Design by A.P. Moser • Thermoplastic Drainage Pipe Design and Testing • AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications

  17. What Diameter Is It? • 5% Base = 8.2% Actual(for this example) • Different Manufacturers Vary

  18. UTA Laser Video Program • University of Texas at Arlington • Study released in seven states • Texas, North Carolina, Virginia, Minnesota, Missouri, Kansas, and California • Pending States • Florida, Ontario, Colorado

  19. Kansas Minnesota Missouri Virginia N. Carolina California Texas • North Carolina: • 6 Sites • 11 Pipes • Virginia: • 8 Sites • 21 Pipes • Minnesota: • 9 Sites • 31 Pipes • Texas: • 9 Sites • 22 Pipes • Kansas: • 3 Sites • 10 Pipes • Missouri: • 4 Sites • 13 Pipes • California: • 2 Sites • 29 Pipes Total of 137 pipes over 41 sites

  20. Excessive Deformation • Change in pipe diameter calculated from Variance of expected diameter. • Maximum of X Deformation, Y Deformation and Ovality is considered as the maximum deformation. • Limit of 5% deformation adopted for excessive deformation definition. • Some pipelines showed as much as 21.8% deformation.

  21. Excessive Deformation X Diameter Deformation = 11.7% Y Diameter Deformation = -15.8% X Diameter Deformation = 10.5% Y Diameter Deformation = -16.1% (Texas) (Virginia)

  22. Example of Deformation Graph (Texas) Maximum Deformation of the pipeline =19.5% a) b)

  23. Summary of Observed Failures

  24. 28 Results so far… • 137 pipelines. • 41 sites in seven states. • 20,700 feet of pipe. • 100% suffered from one or more failure modes. • 67% suffered from excessive deflection.

  25. ME VT WA MT ND MN NH NY OR WI MA ID MI RI SD WY CT PA IA OH NJ NE IN IL DE MD WV VA UT CO NV MO CA KS KY NC TN OK AR SC AZ NM MS GA AL AK LA TX FL

  26. Good State Specifications • Florida - http://www.dot.state.fl.us/specificationsoffice/Implemented/WorkBooks/Julworkbook2008/Files/SS4300000.pdf • Ohio -http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/ConstructionMgt/Specification%20Files/802_10202008%20for%202008.pdf • Virginia -http://www.virginiadot.org/business/resources/Materials/bu-mat-VTMs.pdf (Go to VTM 123) • Kentucky -http://transportation.ky.gov/construction/spec/supp/supp082908.pdf • http://transportation.ky.gov/materials/download/kymethods/km11408.pdf

  27. Good State Specifications • Arizona - http://www.azdot.gov/highways/Roadway_Engineering/Roadway_Design//Special_Provisions/Docs/RSP_HDPEP_MA1010HDPEP.doc • Nebraska - http://www.nebraskatransportation.org/ref-man/specbook-2007.pdf (Go to Section 719) • Tennessee - http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/construction/Supplemental%20Specs%202006/SS600.pdf • South Carolina - http://www.scdot.org/doing/sup_tech_specs.shtml (Go to M-714)

  28. Payment in Kentucky “Provide Structural Analysis as indicated above. Based on the structural analysis, pipe may be allowed to remain in place at the reduced unit price”.

  29. State culvert inspectors work to get ahead of sinkhole disasters • Two Caltrans inspectors have been working since 2005 to address a hidden menace -- the thousands of aging drainpipes and culverts across the Inland area that, without intervention, could fail, causing dangerous and costly sinkholes. • The failing 30-year-old pipe contributed to a sinkhole last month and had to be replaced, prompting a dayslong freeway closure. So far, the incident has cost $1.9 million in repairs.

  30. Sarah Burge / The Press-EnterpriseCaltrans culvert inspector Brandi Means guides a remote-control vehicle equipped with a video-camera out of a drainpipe along Interstate 215 at Scott Road. In February, a sinkhole caused by an aging drainpipe closed the freeway down for days.

  31. Independent Viewpoint • Joseph Perrin, a professor in the civil engineering department at the University of Utah, said that culvert failures are a growing problem nationwide and there are no systematic plans for replacing them. • "We pretty much put Band-aids on them as we go," Perrin said.

  32. Independent Viewpoint • Perrin said he advocates using only reinforced concrete pipes under freeways and major arteries because they have a longer life expectancy and are less prone to catastrophic failure than corrugated metal pipes like the one Caltrans just replaced on I-215. • Perrin would also like to see a federal organization create a national database to track culvert failures, which he expects to increase "exponentially."

  33. Flammability – Stoneburg Texas • STONEBURG FIRE – APRIL 14th • Wildfires ignite triple run of 48” HDPE Culvert • Road collapses under resident vehicles escaping the flames. • Driver injured and vehicle was totaled. • Emergency response truck damaged by hitting open ditch while responding to the fire…disabling vehicle. • Road closure continued awaiting replacement of damaged pipe and roadway repair.

  34. Flammability – Stoneburg Texas APRIL 14, 2009: STONEBURG FIRE Fire destroys the culvert on FM 1806 collapsing roadway-- damaging emergency response vehicles—injuring one FM 1806 Road Closure to replace flammable culverts Vehicle destroyed by failed culvert.

  35. Steel Reinforced Polyethylene (SRHDPE) • Material Specification – ASTM F 2562. • No Recognized Design Method. • AASHTO Subcommittee on Materials has delayed approving a materials specification until the Subcommittee on Bridges approves a design method. • Research → Proposal → AFCLC → T13… • HDB rated resin.

  36. Claimed Approvals Approved – Mississippi and New Mexico. In process – Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Oregon. Under review – Washington. Municipalities – SeaTac, Boise, Kennewick, Oxford, Phoenix, and Yavapai County.

  37. Triple Wall Polyproylene (TWPP) • Not seen yet. • More to come, but our position should be consistent with SRPE.

  38. What can we provide? Download ACPA 051909 at: http://xfer.concrete-pipe.org/, password SAFETEALU Use the 17 resources to back up your particular situation. Give presentation on the importance of post installation inspection. Provide printed copy of the UTA Report - http://www.uta.edu/ce/aareports2.php.

More Related