A Multi-asset Transportation Infrastructure Asset Management Framework and Modeling for Local Governments

CTEDD 017-03Local governments (LGs) in the United States are managing 3/4 of 4 billion miles of roadway and more than 1/2 of nearly 600,000 bridges, which are critical transportation infrastructure assets that support the mobility, economy, and homeland security on both the local and national levels. To maintain the aging infrastructure in a state of good repair under shrinking budgets, LGs must adopt a systematic approach to conduct cost-effective maintenance, rehabilitation, and reconstruction (MR&R) instead of relying on subjective individual knowledge and experience. As a result, benefit from the scarce transportation budget could be maximized; and accountability could be demonstrated to the stakeholders

Phase 2 Comprehensive Acquisition Plan (CAP)- Georgia Department of Transportation: Safe Trips in a Connected Transportation Network ITS4US Deployment Project [Title from Cover]

693JJ32250011The Georgia Department of Transportation ITS4US Deployment project, Safe Trips in a Connected Transportation Network (ST-CTN), is leveraging innovative solutions, existing deployments, and collaboration to make a positive impact using transportation technology to support safety, mobility, sustainability, and accessibility. The ST-CTN concept is comprised of an integrated set of advanced transportation technology solutions (connected vehicle, transit signal priority, machine learning, predictive analytics) to support safe and complete trips, with a focus on accessibility for those with disabilities, older adults, and those with limited English proficiency

Phase 2 Outreach Plan: Georgia DOT ITS4US Deployment Project- Safe Trips in a Connected Transportation Network

693JJ32250011The Georgia Department of Transportation ITS4US Deployment project, Safe Trips in a Connected Transportation Network (ST-CTN), is leveraging innovative solutions, existing deployments, and collaboration to make a positive impact using transportation technology to support safety, mobility, sustainability, and accessibility. The ST-CTN concept is comprised of an integrated set of advanced transportation technology solutions (connected vehicle, transit signal priority, machine learning, predictive analytics) to support safe and complete trips, with a focus on accessibility for those with disabilities, older adults, and those with limited English proficiency. This document serves as the Outreach Plan for the deployment project. The Outreach Plan consists of the public relations and media strategy for communicating information about the project. It also defines the Outreach Site Lead for coordinating requests and the Site Outreach Spokesperson who will speak for the project. The Outreach activities described in this plan will be consistent with the Complete Trip Integration Plan being prepared for this project

Calibration for Roadmeters

DOT-FH-11-9398 Task Order 6The research project was conducted to evaluate the performance of an inexpensive non-contact roughness measuring device, Roughness Surveyor, as well as the potential use of this device as a calibration reference for Response-Type Road Roughness Measuring (RTRRM) systems. A correlation was also conducted between RTRRM systems from three different States (Georgia, Florida, and Minnesota) against the Roughness Surveyor, the inertial profilometer owned by the Ohio DOT, and the profilometer designed and operated by the South Dakota DOT. A total of sixteen test sites were selected for the correlation and calibration study with a total of 52 individual test sections encompassing a variety of roughness levels and pavement surface types. The results of the roughness testing showed an excellent correlation between all the devices. The standard error of estimate, however, was rather large for some of the linear regression equations. The units from Florida, Ohio, and South Dakota provided serviceability index ratings. An analysis of these ratings indicated that different values were obtained between the units on the same test sections. The evaluation of the Roughness Surveyor indicated that the roughness results obtained were insensitive to speed variations. Problems were encountered with obtaining valid roughness readings on extremely rough textured surfaces, such as surface treatment. The testing repeatability of the Roughness Surveyor was not as good as that obtained with the Ohio Profilometer and slightly better than two of the three RTRRM systems. The day-to-day variability was much higher for the Roughness Surveyor than for the Ohio Profilometer and the RTRRM systems