NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIDE QUALITY SPECIFICATION AND CASE STUDIES

Similar documents
North Dakota Department of Transportation. Certification Renewal Program Flexible Pavement Smoothness Tolerance

(PLANT MIXED ASPHALT PAVEMENT (MSCR)). REVISED 02/03/17 DO NOT REMOVE THIS. IT NEEDS TO STAY IN FOR THE CONTRACTORS.

Item 585 Ride Quality for Pavement Surfaces

Driving Indiana s Economic Growth

S.R. 3009, Section A20 South Park & Logan Road Intersection Improvement Project

An Overview of Mn/DOT s Pavement Condition Rating Procedures and Indices (September 2015)

State of Nevada Department of Transportation Materials Division

III. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS... 8 A. Alternatives Analysis Narrative... 8

APPENDIX L: COST ESTIMATING TOOLS

General Notes. Project No /15/2018 Page 1 of 1

An Overview of Mn/DOT s Pavement Condition Rating Procedures and Indices (March 27, 2003)

Performance of Ultra-Thin Bounded Wearing Course (UTBWC) Surface Treatment on US-169 Princeton, Minnesota. Transportation Research

Appendix B Existing ADOT Data Parameters

NJTPA DRAFT Transportation Improvement Program Fiscal Years

PERFORMANCE ACTIVITY 405 LIMB MANAGEMENT

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Secondary Road Program

MNDOT PAVEMENT DESIGN MANUAL

Driveway Design Criteria

General References Definitions. (1) Design Guidance. (2) Supporting Information

Tack Coat Effect on Field Performance. February 3rd, 2015 NCAUPG/ICT Joint Meeting

Non-State Federal Aid Highways. Pavement Condition Ratings. H e r k i m e r a n d O n e i d a C o u n t i e s

City of West Des Moines PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Summary of Findings Concerning Longitudinal Cracking on 16' Wide Ramps

Illini Union Champaign, IL. February 24, Paul Lorton, P.E. Safety Programs Unit Chief IDOT, Division of Highways, Bureau of Safety Engineering

WYDOT DESIGN GUIDES. Guide for. Non-NHS State Highways

General Notes. Project No /15/2018 Page 1 of 1

Use of Performance Metrics on The Pennsylvania Turnpike. Pamela Hatalowich, Penn Turnpike Commission Paul Wilke, Applied Research Associates, Inc.

PENNDOT HPMS DATA COLLECTION GUIDE. Bureau of Planning and Research Transportation Planning Division April 2016 (Updated March 2018)

land transport road assets

PENNDOT HPMS DATA COLLECTION GUIDE

Real-Time Smoothness Measurements on Concrete Pavements During Construction

FY 2006 TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL PROGRAM

WYDOT DESIGN GUIDES. Guide for. NHS Arterial (Non-Interstate)

Alleviate Traffic Congestion and Improve Operational Reliability of the Route 17 Corridor

Five Years Later. Illinois Asphalt Pavement Association Annual Meeting March 9, William J. Pine, P.E. Emulsicoat, Inc. / Heritage Research

ATT-59, Part I. ATT-59/99, SMOOTHNESS OF PAVEMENTS Part I, Manual Profilograph. b) Determining the Profile Index from profilograms

DISTRIBUTION: Electronic Recipients List TRANSMITTAL LETTER NO. (13-01) MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. MANUAL: Road Design English Manual

Pavement Management Program

Act 47 Exception Application Process (Permitting Bicycle Travel on Freeways)

Work Zone Traffic Safety

Smoothing Out the Bumpy Road Ahead

ACCELERATED CONSTRUCTION STRATEGIES. Selection and Impact

October 2004 REVISIONS (2) SUPERELEVATION DEVELOPMENT 11.3(2)

SECTION 1A NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE GEOMETRIC DESIGN

PM2 Pavement SOP Overview. RPUG 2017 Denver, CO November 15, 2017

land transport road assets

BASIC FREEWAY CAPACITY STUDIES Definitions

Sponsored by the Office of Traffic and Safety of the Iowa Department of Transportation NOVEMBER 2001 CTRE

PERFORMANCE ACTIVITY 613 IMPACT ATTENUATOR WORK DESCRIPTION 3

PROJECT NO. 093 MA 199 H C. FEDERAL NO. xxxx WIKIEUP-WICKENBURG-PHOENIX HIGHWAY TEGNER STREET, ALTERNATIVE 10 PROJECT IMPROVEMENT

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACES SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS ON PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ROUTES:

New Jersey Department of Transportation. Safety Impact Teams. May 22, 2007 Patricia Ott, P. E. Director, Traffic Engineering & Safety

1 2 I N T R O D U C T I O 6 G E N E R A L I N F O R M A T I O N. Across. 6. Knowledge communicated in a brief overview

Highway Capacity and LOS. Reading Assignment: pgs

Florida Department of TRANSPORTATION. Asphalt Update. Howie Moseley State Bituminous Materials Engineer

PERFORMANCE ACTIVITY 306 DRAINAGE PIPE WORK DESCRIPTION 4

CHAPTER 1 STANDARD PRACTICES

1. SCOPE 2. REFERENCED DOCUMENTS. 2.1 SC Test Methods SC-T Forms SCDOT Electronic Forms SUMMARY OF TEST METHOD

MASER ASSOCIATES. Engineers Planners Surveyors TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY SEA GULL VILLAGE TOWNSHIP OF COLTS NECK

Off-Road Facilities Part 1: Shared Use Path Design

City of Roseville Section 13 Design Standards. _Bikeways January 2016 SECTION 13 BIKEWAYS

Bluffdale/ UDOT South High-T Intersection Project Type Operations

50 Year Roads: Don't Accept Anything Less

ADA Retrofits Triggered by Paving: What, When, and Why

Kalamazoo County Weekly Project Updates from the Cities of Portage, Kalamazoo and the Kalamazoo County Road Commission

Field guide for Accessible Public Rights-of-Way Edition

ADA PRESENTATION (CURB RAMPS)

(This page left intentionally blank)

Gerald P. Oliveto, P.E. George Franz NJDOT

CTH M HIGHWAY PROJECT CTH Q to STH 113

Dr. M.L. King, Jr. Street North Complete Streets Resurfacing Opportunities HOUSING, LAND USE, AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MARCH 22, 2018

Overview. Illinois Bike Summit IDOT Complete Streets Policy Presentation. What is a Complete Street? And why build them? And why build them?

Paul Huston, P.E., Design-Build Coordinator Chuck Gonderinger, HDR Engineering. Minnesota Department of Transportation (the Department)

HIR on Oklahoma Turnpikes

Transportation and General Civil Engineering Projects

Roadway Design Manual

ODOT construction cost is $51,000,000. State assumes and bears 100 percent of the cost of improvement.

TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR LOW VOLUME ROADS

Kentucky Transportation Center

FY STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM New Jersey Department of Transportation Projects

Parks Highway: MP Lucus Road to Big Lake Road

Troutbeck Farm Development

Emerging Concrete Pavement Solutions Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC)

6.0 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES 6.1 INTRODUCTION 6.2 BICYCLE DEMAND AND SUITABILITY Bicycle Demand

Keeping good roads good

SPECIAL SPECIFICATION 7581 Performance Based Vegetation Management

CITY OF WEST LAKE HILLS. Forest View Neighborhood Traffic Calming Study

Truck Climbing Lane Traffic Justification Report

Chapter 4 On-Road Bikeways

IMPLEMENTATION WORKBOOK

Technical Memorandum TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. RIDLEY ROAD CONVENIENCE STORE Southampton County, VA. Prepared for: Mr. David Williams.

2017 Temporary traffic control guidelines for pedestrians. v.2

Pavement and Asset Management from a City s Perspective Mike Rief, PE, DBIA and Andrea Azary, EIT. February 12, 2015

BARRIER OFFSET 0" A 6" 6" A 12" 12" A 26" A 26" 3A OR 4A L OR S * ** L OR S L OR S

RURAL HIGHWAY SHOULDERS THAT ACCOMMODATE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN USE (TxDOT Project ) June 7, Presented by: Karen Dixon, Ph.D., P.E.

Traffic Control Inspection Checklist Segment:

BID SUMMARY SHEET. S. Brothers Inc. CONTRACTOR'S NAME CONTRACT QUANTITY & UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

2014 Street and Utility Improvement Project. Feasibility Report January 28, 2014

Paul Vraney Bureau of Project Development 02/11/2016

Transcription:

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIDE QUALITY SPECIFICATION AND CASE STUDIES BY NARINDER S. KOHLI, P.E. PRINCIPAL ENGINEER PAVEMENT DESIGN, NJDOT (609) 530 8140 NARINDER.KOHLI@DOT.STATE.NJ.US

RIDE QUALITY SPECIFICATION AND CASE STUDIES PAY ADJUSTMENT EQUATIONS WHAT FACTORS INFLUENCE TARGET IRI? CASE STUDY EXCLUSIONS HOW DO WE CALCULATE EXCLUSIONS? CASE STUDY EXAMPLES

NJDOT RIDE QUALITY SPECIFICATIONS IRI (INTERNATIONAL ROUGHNESS INDEX) TO MEASURE SMOOTHNESS UNIT OF IRI- INCH/MILE IRI SCALE STARTS AT ZERO FOR A ROAD WITH NO ROUGHNESS AND COVERS POSITIVE NUBERS THAT INCREASE IN PROPORTIONAL TO ROUGHNESS. OTHER INDEXES FOR SMOOTHNESS-RIDE NUMBER (RN), RIDE QUALITY INDEX (RQI), PROFILOGRAPH INDEX (PrI)

WHY PAVEMENT SMOOTHNESS SPECIFICATIONS? USER CALL GOOD OR BAD PAVEMENT BASED ON SMOOTHNESS SMOOTHER ROADS LAST LONGER SMOOTHER ROADS STAY SMOOTHER LONGER SMOOTHER ROAD ARE SAFER SMOOTHER ROADS SAVE MONEY

HOW ARE RIDE QUALITY REQUIREMENTS DEFINED IN THE NJDOT PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS?

RIDE QUALITY REQUIREMENTS Route from MP._ to MP._ Table 401.03.03-7 Pay Equations for Ride Quality Excluded Lots Lane 1-5 Lane 2-10 EXCLUSIONS ARE NOT NUMBER OF METALS IN A LANE. THESE ARE NUMBER OF LOTS TO BE EXCLUDED Pay Equation(s) PA on lots of 0.01 mile length IRI < 40 PA = $50 40 IRI < 60 PA = $150 ($2.50 IRI) 60 IRI 70 PA = $0 70 < IRI 140 PA = (IRI 70) x ( $7.1429) IRI > 140 Remove & Replace TARGET IRI IS (60+70)/2 = 65 Inch/Mile LOTS WITH HIGHEST RECORDED IRI NUMBERS WILL BE EXCLUDED.

RIDE QUALITY REQUIREMENTS Route Ramps and Shoulders Overlaid Bridge Decks on Route Between MP._ and MP._ Table 401.03.03-7 Pay Equations for Ride Quality Excluded Lots None None Pay Equation(s) PA on lots of 0.01 mile length IRI < 120 PA = $0 120< IRI 170 PA = (IRI 120 ) x ( $5.00) IRI > 170 Remove & Replace PA on lots of 0.005 mile length IRI < 120 PA = $0 120< IRI 170 PA = (IRI 120 ) x ( $5.00) IRI > 170 Remove & Replace

PAY ADJUSTMENT EQUATIONS

TARGET IRI IS ADJUSTED AVERAGE DESIRABLE IRI

TARGET IRI ALL FEATURES IN THE PAVEMENT DEEMED BY THE DESIGNER TO BE POTENTIAL IMPEDIMENTS TO ACHIEVING A SMOOTH RIDE QUALITY ARE EXCLUDED.

ADJUSTED AVERAGE IRI DEPENDS ON FOLLOWING SITE SPECIFIC FACTORS: FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION BASE IRI EXISTING IRI NUMBER OF OPERATIONS TYPE OF PAVEMENT

FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION FREEWAY OR LIMITED ACCESS HIGHWAYS HIGHWAYS OTHER THAN FREEWAY/LIMITED ACCESS HIGHWAYS

ADJUSTED AVERAGE IRI DEPENDS ON FOLLOWING SITE SPECIFIC FACTORS: FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION BASE IRI EXISTING IRI NUMBER OF OPERATIONS TYPE OF PAVEMENT

BASE IRI (IRI Desirable) BASED ON HISTORICAL DATA OF IRI DELIVERED (from 2006 to 2010), BASE IRI WAS ESTABILISHED AS BELOW: (AFTER EXCLUDING ALL IMPEDIMENTS) FREEWAY OR LIMITED ACCESS HIGHWAYS 45 INCH/MILE HIGHWAYS OTHER THAN FREEWAY/LIMITED ACCESS HIGHWAYS 55 INCH/MILE WE INCREASE BASE IRI FOR LOW SPEED HIGHWAY.

PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN BASE IRI FOR DIFFERENT SPEED LIMITS SPEED (MPH) PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN BASE IRI 35 40% 40 30% 45 20% 50 10% 55 of above None THESE FACTORS PRIMARILY DEPENDS ON LEVEL OF ROUGHNESS FELT BT THE VEHICLE OCCUPANTS ON DIFFERENT SPEED LIMITS.

ADJUSTED AVERAGE IRI DEPENDS ON FOLLOWING SITE SPECIFIC FACTORS: FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION BASE IRI EXISTING IRI NUMBER OF OPERATIONS SPEED LIMIT TYPE OF PAVEMENT

EXISTING IRI AVERAGE IRI OF LATEST AVAILABLE IRI DATA OF THE RIGHT MOST THROUGH LANE (FROM THE PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT UNIT). OF EXISTING PAVEMENT IN EACH DIRECTION

EXISTING IRI IRI DATA USED FOR CALCULATING AVERAGE IRI IS PRESENTED IN SECTION 102.04 OF SPECIAL PROVISIONS 102.04 EXAMINATION OF CONTRACT AND PROJECT LIMITS 1. Evaluation of Subsurface and Surface Conditions. International Roughness Index (IRI) values of the existing roadway Test Date: 5/14/2012 Route Direction Mile Post From Mile Post To Average IRI 027 N 12.60 12.70 88 027 N 12.70 12.80 166 027 N 12.80 12.90 144 027 N 12.90 13.00 120 027 N 13.00 13.10 225 027 N 13.10 13.20 233 027 N 13.20 13.30 147 027 N 13.30 13.40 136 027 N 13.40 13.50 152 027 N 13.50 13.60 103 027 N 13.60 13.70 140 027 N 13.70 13.80 129

ADJUSTED AVERAGE IRI DEPENDS ON FOLLOWING SITE SPECIFIC FACTORS: FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION BASE IRI EXISTING IRI NUMBER OF OPERATIONS TYPE OF PAVEMENT

NUMBER OF OPERATIONS NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE FOR IMPROVEMENT OF RIDE QUALITY MILLING ONE OPPORTUNITY PAVING-EACH LIFT IS ONE OPPORTUNITY EXAMPLE MILL 4 AND PAVE WITH 2 SURFACE COURSE OVER 2 INTERMEDIATE COURSE = 3 OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO IMPROVE RIDE QUALITY OF FINAL RIDING SURFACE.

NUMBER OF OPERATIONS LIFT WITH THICKNESS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 1-INCH IS NOT CONSIDERED AS A LIFT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING PAY EQUATIONS. FOR EXAMPLE: MILL 3 AND PAVE WITH 2-INCH HMA + 1-INCH BOTTOM RICH INTERMEDIATE COURSE (BRIC) TWO OPERATIONS

FACTORS FOR EXISTING CONDITION AND NUMBER OF OPERATIONS INITIAL IRI # OF OPERATIONS 1 2 3 4 < 60 1 1 1 1 60 TO < 95 1.05 1 1 1 95 TO < 170 1.1 1.05 1 1 170 TO < 200 1.15 1.1 1.05 1 200 TO < 285 1.2 1.15 1.1 1 >285 1.25 1.2 1.15 1.05

ADJUSTED AVERAGE IRI DEPENDS ON FOLLOWING SITE SPECIFIC FACTORS: FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION BASE IRI EXISTING IRI NUMBER OF OPERATIONS TYPE OF PAVEMENT

TYPES OF PAVEMENT FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT HMA/ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT CONCRETE JOINT COMPOSITE PAVEMENT HMA/ASPHALT CONCRETE

COMPOSITE PAVEMENT FACTOR FOR COMPOSITE PAVEMENT = 1.05 (5% INCREASE IN BASE IRI)

COMPOSITE PAVEMENT HMA/ASPHALT CONCRETE IS THIS THICKNESS MORE THAN 8 FOR COMPOSITE PAVEMENT HAVING 8 OR MORE HMA THICKNESS, COMPOSITE FACTOR IS 1.0.

CASE STUDY NAME OF PROJECT ROUTE 9 FROM VICINITY OF SYMMES ROAD/ RYAN ROAD TO NORTH OF PEYSER STREET TOWNSHIPS OF MANALAPAN, MARLBORO, OLD BRIDGE AND WOODBRIDGE, BOROUGH OF SAYREVILLE, CITY OF SOUTH AMBOY- COUNTIES OF MONMOUTH & MIDDLESEX PAVING LENGTH 76.0 LANE MILES FUNTIONAL CLASSIFICATION (FOR RQR) HIGHWAYS OTHER THAN FREEWAY/LIMITED ACCESS HIGHWAYS PROPOSED TREATMENT MILL AND PAVE IN TWO LIFTS

NB MP122.3-129.79 MP129.96-130.93 MP132.72-134.82 IRI (Inch/Mile Average IRI =203 Average IRI =155 Average IRI =170 Mile Post

INITIAL IRI CASE STUDY RT 9 NB GENERALIZED FACTORS MP 122.3 TO MP 129.79 MP129.96 TO MP 130.93 MP 132.72 TO MP 134.82 BASE IRI 55 55 55 FACTOR FOR SPEED 1.00 1.10 1.10 FACTOR FOR EXISTING CONDITION AND # OF OPS FACTOR FOR COMPOSITE TARGET IRI, INCH/MILE IRI=155 1.00 # OF OPERATIONS 1 2 3 4 SPEED 95 (MPH) TO <170 PERCENTAGE 1.1 1.05 1 1 INCREASE IN BASE 170 TO <200 1.15 1.1 1.05 1 IRI 200 TO <285 1.2 1.15 1.1 1 50 10% IRI=203 1.1 IRI=170 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 58 70 67

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 Average IRI =163 Average IRI =268 Average IRI =1983 100 0 116 118 120 122 124 126 128 130 132 134 136 SB MP116.75-129.67 MP130.02-130.93 MP132.72-135.65

GENERALIZED FACTORS CASE STUDY RT 9 SB MP 116.75 TO MP 129.67 MP130.02 TO MP 130.93 MP 132.72 TO MP 135.65 BASE IRI 55 55 55 FACTOR FOR SPEED 1.00 1.10 1.10 FACTOR FOR EXISTING CONDITION AND # OF OPS FACTOR FOR COMPOSITE TARGET IRI, INCH/MILE IRI=163 1.00 # OF OPERATIONS 1 2 3 4 SPEED (MPH) PERCENTAGE 95 TO <170 INCREASE 1.1 IN BASE 1.05 1 1 170 TO <200 IRI 1.15 1.1 1.05 1 INITIAL IRI 50200 TO <285 10% 1.2 1.15 1.1 1 IRI=268 1.1 IRI=198 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 58 70 67

SUMMARY BEGINNING MP ENDING MP DIRECTION BASE IRI SPEED # OF OPS EXISTING IRI PAVEMENT TYPE HMA>8 TARGET 122.3 129.79 NB 55 55 3 155 C No 58 129.96 130.93 NB 55 50 3 203 C No 70 132.72 134.82 NB 55 50 3 170 C No 6770 116.75 129.67 SB 55 55 3 163 C No 58 130.93 130.02 SB 55 50 3 268 C No 70 135.65 132.72 SB 55 50 3 198 C No 6770

OTHER PAY EQUATIONS PAY EQUATIONS FOR REGIONAL MAINTENANCE PROJECTS PAY EQUATIONS FOR THIN OVERLAY OR DIAMOND GRINDING PAY EQUATIONS FOR RECONSTRUCTION

PAY ADJUSTMENT EQUATIONS FOR REGIONAL MAINTENANCE PROJECTS

PAY ADJUSTMENT EQUATIONS FOR REGIONAL MAINTENANCE PROJECTS LANES WILL ONLY BE TESTED IF TOTAL LANE MILES ARE GREATER THAN ONE (1) MILE IN LENGTH, WITH CONTINOUS PAVING SEGMENTS OF OVER HALF (½) MILE TARGET IRI IS BASED ON PERCETANGE IMPROVEMENT (ONE LIFT =49%, TWO LIFTS = 34%) MAXIMUM POSITIVE ADJUSTMENT SAME AS OTHER PA EQUATIONS MAXIMUM NEGATIVE ADJUSTMENT = $100 NEGATIVE TO POSITIVE ADJUSTMENT RATIO -2:1

COMPARISON OF PA Pay Adjustment (Dollar) 70 50 30 10-10 -30-50 -70-90 -110 TARGET IRI = 63 Inch/Mile REGIONAL MAINTENANCE PROJECTS 50 29,$50 50 0 0 0 50 100 150 200-100 IRI (Inch/Mile) 170,-$100 Pay Adjustment (Dollar) 150 50 50 38,$50 50 0 0-50 0 20 40 60-100 80 100 120 140 160-150 -250-350 -450-550 STANDARD SPEC FOR ALL PROJECTS TARGET IRI = 63 Inch/Mile IRI (Inch/Mile) 138,-$500

PA FOR THIN OVERLAY/ DIAMOND GRINDING NO OR MINOR IMPROVEMENT IN EXISTING CONDITION TARGET IRI IS EQUAL OR SLIGHTLY LOWER THAN EXISTING AVERAGE IRI.

NEW CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION BASE IRI AS BELOW: FREEWAY STATE HIGHWAY ABOVE 35 MPH STATE HIGHWAY 35MPH OR BELOW 45 INCH/MILE 60 INCH/MILE 70 INCH/MILE ALL OTHER FACTORS I.E. SPEED, EXISTING CONDITION, TYPE OF PAVEMENT ARE EQUAL TO 1. IMPEDIMENTS WILL BE COUNTED AND EXCLUDED.

EXCLUSIONS IMPEDIMENTS SHORT SECTIONS STRUCTURE DECK OVERLAY

IMPEDIMENTS IMPEDIMENTS INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING METAL IMPEDIMENTS, SUCH AS UTILITY COVERS, MANHOLES, CATCH BASINS AND INLETS, LOCATED IN THE LANE AND IN SHOULDERS, IF SHOULDER PAVED SEPERATELY. THE EXCLUSION LENGTH FOR METAL IMPEDIMENTS IS 20 LF EACH.

IMPEDIMENTS (Contd.) TRANSVERSE JOINTS THAT SEPARATE THE NEW PAVEMENT FROM AN EXISTING PAVEMENT, INTERSECTIONS, RAILROAD CROSSINGS, AND OTHER FEATURES IN THE PAVEMENT DEEMED BY THE DESIGNER TO BE POTENTIAL IMPEDIMENT TO ACHIEVING A SMOOTH RIDE QUALITY.

IMPEDIMENTS

Figure 5

EXCLUSIONS IMPEDIMENTS SHORT SECTIONS STRUCTURE DECK OVERLAY

SHORT SECTIONS ARE ANY SEGMENT WITHIN THE CONTINOUS SECTION OF PAVED LANE THAT ARE EXCLUDED FROM REST OF THE PROJECT DUE TO DIFFICULTIES ASSOCIATED WITH ACHIEVING TARGET IRI.

SHORT SECTIONS FOR EXAMPLE INTERSECTIONS, L-TURN LANES ETC. EXCLUSION THRESHOLD VALUE = LENGTH OF SS + 20

L FIGURE 9 PAVING BOTH DIRECTIONS UNDER THE CONTRACT 1. Do not count L as SS for lane 1 for any width of W L. 2. Count all metals located within left shoulder as IM for Lane 1, if W L 6' ' 3. Count A as IM for Lane 1 of both directions, if W L 6'. 4. Do not Count any metal or manhole A as IM, if W L >6'. PAVING ONE DIRECTION UNDER THE CONTRACT 5. Count L for lane 1, if W L 6'. 6. Count A as IM for Lane 1, if W L 6'. 7. Do not count L for lane 1 as SS, if W L >6'. 8. Do not count any metal located within left shoulder, if W L >6. RIGHT SHOULDER 9. Count SS for lane 2, if W R 6'. 10. Do not Count SS for lane 2, if W R >6'.

FIGURE 10 CROSSING OVER LONGITUDINAL JOINT

FUGURE 11 PAVING U-TURN UNDER THE CONTRACT 1. Do not Count L as SS, if W R ó6' NOT PAVING U-TURN UNDER THE CONTRACT 1. Count L as SS, if W R <6' 2. Do not count L as SS, if W R >6'

FIGURE 8 LENGTH OF L-TURN LANE

EXCLUSIONS IMPEDIMENTS SHORT SECTIONS STRUCTURE DECK OVERLAY

STRUCTURES (SR) SR IS BARE CONCRETE DECK. THRESHOLD LENGTH IS 50 FT. ACTUAL LIMIT OF BRIDGE DECK NOT PAVED WILL BE DETERMINED DURING PAY ADJUSTMENT.

STRUCTURE APPROACH SLABS PAVEMENT BRIDGE DECK C IF APPROACH SLABS ARE PAVED, 50 FT FOR EACH SLAB WILL BE EXCLUDED. PAVEMENT BRIDGE DECK C IF ONE APPROACH SLAB IS PAVED, 50 FT FOR THE PAVED APPROACH SLAB WILL BE EXCLUDED. PAVEMENT BRIDGE DECK C IF PAVING STOP BEFORE APPROACH DUE TO UNPAVED APPROACHES OR DIFFERENT MIX I.E. BDWSC, ADDITIONAL TRANVERSE JOINT WILL BE EXCLUDED I.E. STOP AND GO.

EXCLUSIONS IMPEDIMENTS SHORT SECTIONS STRUCTURE DECK OVERLAY

DECK OVERLAY BRIDGE DECKS, APPROACH SLABS AND TRANSITIONS SLABS ON STRUCTURES WHICH ARE OVERLAID. SEPARATE PAY EQUATIONS WILL BE APPLIED FOR BRIDGE DECK OVERLAY

TRANSEVERSE JOINTS

TRANSVERSE JOINTS EXCLUSION FOR STOP AND GO PAVING ONE LOT (=52.8 FT) FOR TRANSVERSE JOINT AT THE BEGINNING AND END OF THE PROJECT ONE LOT FOR EACH STOP AND RESUMPTION OF PAVING WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS DUE TO STAGING

CASE STUDY-RT 9 EXCLUSIONS

EXCLUSION FOR TRANSVERSE JOINTS ON RT 9

Intersection Rt 9 NB MP 123.12 Inlet LANE 1- SS IS COUNTED WIDE SHOULDER PAVING IN SEPERATION OPERATION Lane 3 SS AND INLET ARE NOT COUNTED

Rt 9 NB MP 123.19 LANE 1 INLET IS COUNTED AS IM INLET

Rt 9 NB MP 123.78 INLET INLET IS NOT COUNTED AS IM FOR LANE 3

Rt 9 NB MP 131.36 UNPAVED APPROACH DECK JOINT NO SR IS COUNTED FOR ANY LANE. DUE TO STOP IN PAVING, ONE LOT IS EXCLUDED AS SS

Rt 9 NB MP 129.78 DUE TO CURVE, THIS SECTION OF RT 9 IS EXCLUDED FROM RQR.

Rt 9 SB MP 129.92 DUE TO CURVE, THIS SECTION OF RT 9 IS EXCLUDED FROM RQR.

Rt 9 MP NB 124.91 Paving U-TURN IS NOT COUNTED AS SS FOR ANY LANE

Rt 9 NB MP 130.09 INLET IS COUNTED AS AN IM FOR LANE 2

SUMMARY OF EXCLUSIONS

SUMMARY SOUTH BOUND

Rt 130 NB at MP 9.04

Rt 130 NB MP 9.27 RAIL ROAD If Rail track, IM for both lanes.

FOR ANY GENERAL RIDE QUALITY RELATED QUESTIONS, SEND EMAIL TO RQSpecSupport@dot.state.nj.us