City of Coquitlam. Pavement Management Technology. Profile/GPS/Videolog Vehicle. Pavement Management System. SUBSURFACE PROFILING - Road Radar

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "City of Coquitlam. Pavement Management Technology. Profile/GPS/Videolog Vehicle. Pavement Management System. SUBSURFACE PROFILING - Road Radar"

Randell Hamilton
5 years ago
Views:

City of Coquitlam System Road Condition Analysis Parameters % Cracking Structural (Deflection)

minimum performance criteria; This method ignores user costs Minimize Total Transportation Cost (TTC)

traveling public Worst First - it assumes sufficient funds are available to reactively rehabilitate roads

Technology A Pavement Inventory Measuring Pavement Condition Location Referencing, Analysis tools

1 City of Coquitlam System Road Condition Analysis Parameters % Cracking Structural (Deflection) Rideability (Roughness) Rutting Traffic Volumes % Trucks Different Policy Models Min Cost - based on a minimum performance criteria; This method ignores user costs Minimize Total Transportation Cost (TTC) (Road User Cost Savings) (Project Life Cycle Cost); this maximizes the return on investment to the traveling public Worst First - it assumes sufficient funds are available to reactively rehabilitate roads once they have become in obviously poor condition. Technology A Pavement Inventory Measuring Pavement Condition Location Referencing, Analysis tools Predicting the Future A framework to identify needs Set priorities for Pavement Treatment Profile/GPS/Videolog Vehicle Profile/Rutting/Cracking - Condition data SUBSURFACE PROFILING - Road Radar

63% 13% 14% 4% 6% 23% 45% 22% 3% 7% DYNAMIC STRENGTH Dynatest Model

in this assessment) Pavement Condition Data Network Pavement

1998 To Predict PCN - $Existing Program PCN in 3 = 78 Condition

= 82) -85 63% -85 % 84-8 13% 79-14% 39- % 59-4% 69-6% 39-59- 69-79-

2 63% 13% 14% 4% 6% 23% 45% 22% 3% 7% DYNAMIC STRENGTH Dynatest Model 8E Falling Weight Deflectometers Community Corridor Roads (included in this assessment) Pavement Condition Data Network Pavement Condition 1992 vs To Predict PCN - $Existing Program PCN in 3 = 78 Condition Distribution PCN 92 (ave. = 85) PCN 98 (ave. = 82) % -85 % % 79-14% 39- % 59-4% 69-6% % 79-19% 39-1% 59-5% 69-7% V. Poor Poor Fair Good Excellent PCN 92 (ave.= 85) PCN (ave.= 81) PCN (ave.= 81) PCN 92 (ave.= 85)

31% 8% 9% MUNDY ST MARINER WAY L JOHNSON ST 1 L NELSON ST OZADA AV 31% 8% 9% 2 Network Condition = 79 fair PCN 2 (ave.= 79) 2 Network Condition = 79 PCN 2 (ave.= 79) PCN 2 (ave.= 79) PCN 2 (ave.= 79) V.

3 31% 8% 9% MUNDY ST MARINER WAY L JOHNSON ST 1 L NELSON ST OZADA AV 31% 8% 9% 2 Network Condition = 79 fair PCN 2 (ave.= 79) 2 Network Condition = 79 PCN 2 (ave.= 79) PCN 2 (ave.= 79) PCN 2 (ave.= 79) V. Poor Poor Fair Good Excellent V. Poor Poor Fair Good Excellent 2 PCI = 79 Cracking = 12% $25/m 2 Mill, Deep Patch and Inlay Blue Mountain Street Preventative Maintenance Crack Seal In 1992 PCI = 85 Cracking = 1% $2/m 2 In 1998 PCI = 82 Cracking = 5% $12/m 2 Replace surface 7 PCI = 72 Cracking = % $45/m 2 Loss of Strength begins Mill and Inlay CHAPMAN AV CLARKE RD L SMITH AV FALCON DRV AUSTIN AV R LINTON ST ROBINSON ST Crack % BLUE MOUNTAIN S EDGAR AV ALDERSON AV PORTER STR MARMONT ST BRUNETTE AV COMO LAKE AV R FOSTER AVENUE WINSLOW AV LOUGHEED 1 L AUSTIN AV RAUSTIN AV L DAVID AV 2 THERMAL DR PANORAMA DR LANSDOWNE DR BARNET HW Y L COMO LAKE AV L HICKEY DR DURANT DR PARKWAY BLVD GUILDFORD WAY L DEWDNEY TRUNK CHILKO DR INLET ST DELAHAYE DR VICTORIA-N.HALF SPURAWAY AV DAVID AV 1 DUNKIRK AV LOUGHEED 2 L PIPELINE RD 2 GLEN DR POIRIER ST WESTWOOD ST R ROBSON DR INLET ST HILLCREST ST SEGUIN DR SHAUGHNESSY ST COAST MERIDIAN VICTORIA-N.HALF VICTORIA DR AADT Traffic Volumes GLEN DR UNITED BLVD 1 R UNITED BLVD 3 R

4 2 Network Condition Neighborhood Road Program (not included in this assessment) Arterial & Collector Road Restoration Collector Roads 132 lane km Arterial Roads 211 lane km In 1998 Coquitlam used the dtims life-cycle cost and budget planning tools Specialized database tools provide location referencing

5 Asset Management of Municipal Infrastructure Emergency Maintenance Treatment Emergency situation (shoulder washout, repair a severe pothole) Holding Maintenance Treatment Temporary (delay of more permanent or substantial rehab due to lack of funds) Rehab. Treatment restore initial pavement serviceability (overlay, recycle) Bridges Pavements System Pavement Condition & Inventory Modified to accommodate a timely identification of preventive maintenance treatments (if required) Other Assets Pavement Preservation Treatments Corrective Maintenance Treatment Encompass all types of For safety maintenance & rehab. treatments ( filling potholes, etc) Preventive Maintenance Treatment (Routing & Sealing Thin O/L) Reconstruction Preventive Maintenance Performance Prediction Identification of Candidate Treatments Other Maintenance Rehabilitation/ Reconstruction Priorization of Treatments Monitoring and Assessment Without Preventive Maintenance With Preventive Maintenance Assume: 1Km long section, Costs are : sealing $1, resealing $1, Rehabilitation (resurfacing) $,

Pavement Management Program

Pavement Management Program Public Works Department January 5, 2016 Chad Butzow, P.E. Deputy Director Field Operation Services Public Works Department Brian Martineau Pavement Manager Public Works Department