Requests
Closed
RESEARCH PROBLEM
STATEMENT:
The
intent of this project is twofold: (1) The research team must
evaluate and perform a comparative analysis of "off-the-shelf"
pavement smoothness measurement equipment, technology and indices;
and (2) The research team must define an appropriate target for
smoothness that can be used for the acceptance of construction
and/or rehabilitation of airfield concrete pavement. The study
is limited to Portland cement concrete pavements.
There
are a number of technologies and measurement devices currently
being used for the acceptance of highway construction that measure
the relative smoothness of new pavement. These technologies include
the traditional straight edge, the California Profil-o-graph,
the rolling straightedge, the lightweight profiler, etc. Because
of the availability of the technology, a variety of smoothness
requirements are being specified for airfield pavement construction
in the absence of necessary supporting data. The concern is that
to achieve a level of smoothness beyond what is necessary to support
the using traffic (i.e., aircraft), unnecessary additional cost(s)
may be incurred in the construction.
Additionally,
research must be available that can be used in support of the
selection of smoothness criteria if a technique other than the
traditional straightedge is to be adopted. There must be documentation
for the adoption of a specified value for smoothness if new technology
is to be incorporated into acceptance criteria.
There
is a need for a document that provides the design agent, the owner,
and the contractor information on the requirements for airfield
pavement smoothness and the measurement precision that can be
expected when using the measurement devices that are available.
The document must also describe a measurement technique that could
be used to identify the traditional "bird-bath" or unacceptable
elevation control for constructed pavements.
Elements
that should be considered by the research team include, but are
not limited to:
- What
constitutes roughness as measured by smoothness devices
- What
or who is affected by roughness
- What
smoothness values can be routinely attained by the industry
using conventional paving techniques and practices
- What
are the variables and the sensitivity of those variables in
the output of measurement devices
- Equipment
and or measured surface sensitivity to temperature change
- Pavement
age
- Repeatability
of smoothness measurements
OBJECTIVES:
As
a minimum, the researcher will:
- Determine
the availability of "off the shelf" types of smoothness measurement
and analysis systems being used and, for each system, define
the advantages, difficulties, application limitations, reliability,
and the repeatability for each system.
- Determine
if the professional designer includes smoothness criteria in
specifications to improve pavement system quality, to reduce
labor involved in using straight edge technology, or to adopt
criteria because the technology to make measurements is conveniently
available.
- Collect
roughness data by measurement and by extraction from existing
data bases from recently constructed airport pavements that
were constructed using one or more of the different measurement
systems (new construction and or recent overlay pavement should
be used).
-
Measure the smoothness of at least three pavements (with less
than three years of traffic) using each of the measurement techniques.
Determine if there is a correlation between smoothness measured
after traffic and directly after construction, where possible.
- Compare
the relative effectiveness of each measurement system used in
the study.
- Make
recommendations for smoothness criteria that could be adopted
for each of the different pavement features (i.e., runways,
taxiways, and aprons) using each of the measurement systems
available.
- Identify
construction practices that result in smoothness (as measured)
that actually impact adversely the pavement durability (i.e.,
excessive working of surface, excess sand in concrete mix, etc.)
Identify good construction practice, that usually results in
smoother pavement construction without an adverse impact on
durability.
- Identify
topics related to smoothness that would be subjects for further
research.
PRODUCTS:
The
investigator should develop sub-tasks that, when completed, will
result in completion of the project within the time and budget
available. It is not necessary that the proposal reflect the exact
budget or the planned performance time. However, any deviation
from the designated resources must be justified and clearly explained
in the proposal. The following are the minimum tasks considered
necessary to complete the project:
Task
1 - Literature and Equipment Review. Review existing literature.
Identify measurement systems (typical specifications that use
smoothness criteria) and review research reports on the use and
implementation of smoothness requirements for both highways and
airports. Determine from literature reviews the variables that
demonstrate the difference between adequate smoothness and unacceptable
roughness related to the use of smoothness criteria for the construction
of rigid pavement.
Task
2 - Airport Pavement Project List. Identify airport pavement
recently constructed that could be used to establish a baseline
for smoothness criteria for pavement acceptance criteria. Pavements
should include a variety of pavement features such as runways,
taxiways and aprons. The list should include a recommendation
by the investigator as to why specific pavements are included
for a detailed study and what information will be gleaned. When
possible, existing field measurements from new pavement construction
should be included. The data base used may also include roughness
measurements of pavements from historical information where information
is available and applicable. Historical information on pavement
roughness measurements of existing pavements can be introduced.
The list of pavements will be presented to the IPRF for review
and approval. The purpose of the review is to provide the Technical
Panel assurance that field evaluations can be accomplished within
the resources available and that only pertinent data will be collected.
It will also assure the research group that there is agreement
between the IPRF and the research team about the scope of work
and the limits of information that can be developed from the field
study.
IMPORTANT:
The investigator will not determine the locations of potential
pavement studies by conducting a written survey. A survey is
defined as the random distribution of a standard list of questions
that seeks trends or forecasting information. The use of such
surveys must receive approval through the IPRF from the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB). That process requires a minimum
of 90 days from the date of application for the survey approval.
The 90- day approval period is not included in the time designated
as the performance period. The investigator is encouraged to
use a means other than "survey" to identify the candidate airport
projects.
Task
3 - Document a Research Plan. Develop a plan for gathering
data from the project list. Develop a research plan that will
be used to develop the data-gathering for the evaluation of measurement
devices and technology. The research plan must identify what will
be used as a baseline, or standard of performance, in the comparison
of the smoothness measuring devices and/or techniques. The baseline
may be in the form of a hypothesis to be validated as a part of
the research. The results of the literature search, the airport
list and the research plan will be submitted for an on-board review.
A
20% on-board review will be accomplished. The investigator
will not proceed to Task 4 without the written approval of the
IPRF. An on-board review must be scheduled at least 30 days
prior to the actual meeting. Documents that are prepared for
Technical Panel review must be provided at least 30 days prior
to the meeting. The location of the meeting will be coordinated
with the IPRF. The investigator is responsible for documenting
the comments of IPRF technical panel members and the disposition
of each comment.
Task
4 -Pavement Interviews. Conduct interviews with the stakeholders
and consolidate data using the research plan developed in Task
3. The research group will attempt to ascertain the construction
differences that account for the difference between rough and
smooth pavements. Bumps that are the result of constructed changes
in grade, either by design or by error, shall be included if roughness
is an operational factor. The research team should attempt to
ascertain at what point does airport pavement roughness induced
by construction techniques or process become unacceptable. Similarly,
the research should attempt to ascertain what the industry can
reasonably be expected to provide using conventional airfield
pavement construction techniques and equipment.
Task
5 - Field Testing and Data Analysis. The research team will
accomplish field measurements at locations that were included
in the research plan and approved by the IPRF. The field measurements
will be accomplished using the measurement devices identified
in the research plan. Upon completion of the measurements, the
data will be reduced and reported in a format that easily provides
a comparison of the variables to each measurement technology used.
For the purpose of accomplishing this Task, the FAA has non-contact
inertial profiling equipment that may be incorporated into the
research plan. If desired, measurements will be made by the FAA
with this equipment according to the research plan without cost
to the research contractor.
Task
6 - Advanced Draft Report. The 60% document shall be in a
form that for all intent is complete with the exception of final
comments made by the technical panel.
A
60% on-board review will be accomplished. The review will
be a meeting between the investigator and the IPRF Technical
Panel. The draft report will be developed as a design guide(s)
and it will be provided to the Technical Panel at least 30 days
prior to the meeting. The location of the meeting will be coordinated
with the IPRF. The investigator is responsible for documenting
the comments of IPRF Technical Panel members and the disposition
of each comment.
Task
7 - Draft Final Report. Make corrections to the 60% document
and submit the final documents to the IPRF. The final report will
describe the nature of the research, the results, and a description
of the smoothness measurement system for each technology included
in the study. Target smoothness limits shall be established for
each technique based upon the requirements of the using traffic.
The report will be an educational guide summarizing the techniques,
correct applications, and limits of smoothness measuring devices
and technology. The document is intended to be used by airport
owners/operators, airfield pavement designers, and contractors.
The guide shall identify factors that have an effect on the final
surface smoothness of the pavement and which stage of construction
most significantly impacts the smoothness as measured (if any).
The primary purpose of the document is as an educational text
to provide information to the owner, designer and the contractor.
The Draft Final Report will be reviewd by the Technical
Panel and their comments will be provided as part of the Final
Report.
The
investigator will provide two originals of the Final Report
in a camera ready format including any artwork, graphics or photos.
There will also be a submittal in an electronic format compatible
with off-the-shelf desktop computer publication software. The
investigator will not be responsible for the reproduction and
printing of the final document(s) but will assist with minor editing
requirements generated by the printing and reproduction process.
SUBMITTAL
REQUIREMENTS
| 1. |
There
will be an on-board review at what is defined as the 20%
level. The research team will provide the results of the
literature study and equipment survey, the proposed list
of airport pavements to be studied, and the research plan.
|
| 2. |
There
will be an on-board review of the Draft Report at what is
defined as the 60% level. The review will look at the Draft
Report which presents the results of the interviews and
the field studies. The research team is expected to identify
critical issues for the purpose of defining the context
and content of the Draft Final Report. |
| 3.
|
The
Draft Final Report will be reviewed by the Technical
Panel. The requirement for an on-board review will be determined
by the Technical Panel subsequent to a review of the Draft
Final Report. This review will be considered to be the
90% level. |
PRODUCTS SUMMARY
| 1. |
A
report which summarizes the results of the literature review,
equipment review, and a proposed research plan. Submit
8 copies. This is defined as the 20% level of completion.
The project list and the proposed methods on obtaining information
will be reviewed at an on-board meeting at a location to
be determined. The investigator will host the meeting. Location
will be determined in coordination with the IPRF. |
| 2. |
The
60% on-board review will be accomplished approximately 30
days after submittal of a Draft Report. The Draft
Report (8 copies) will include a summary of data
collected and recommended discussion items. The investigator
will host the meeting. Location will be determined in coordination
with the IPRF. |
| 3.
|
Draft
Final Report submittal (8 copies) and 90% review.
The investigator will host the meeting. Location will be
determined in coordination with the IPRF. |
| 4. |
The
Final Report, in the form of an information handbook
(an IPRF Report), will be complete with all artwork, graphics,
tables, pictures, documentation, etc. ready for reproduction
and distribution. The report will be in two hard copies
and one electronic version. |
Other Considerations and Requirements.
| 1. |
The
investigator will be responsible for the preparation of
quarterly reports that describe the progress of the research
effort. Reports are due in the offices of the IPRF on the
last day of the fiscal-year quarter. The reports will be
limited to two pages in a format specified by the IPRF.
The first page will be a word document describing the progress
of the work. The second page will provide a summary of the
estimated costs versus the costs incurred to the report
date. |
| 2. |
Due
to limited resources, it is not possible to have an exhaustive
list of pavements to study. Therefore, in proposing candidate
pavement for study, the investigator should consider thermal
regimes (sub-tropical, central, and northern tier), pavement
features (taxiways, intersections, runways, and aprons),
and projects that involve rehabilitation and construction.
|
| 3.
|
The
investigator will initiate contact with the airports that
are selected for detailed study and documentation of projects
through the IPRF. The investigator will provide a draft
letter. The IPRF will edit the letter of introduction to
the airports and may include an endorsement of the letter
by the FAA. This is intended to encourage participation
by the airports and their sponsors. |
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:
After
the technical panel completes the evaluation of proposals, each
of the proposals will be rank ordered. The organization, group,
or individual that is ranked as the first and second choice for
the recommendation to award may be asked to make a presentation
to the project technical panel. The Principal Investigator, and
one other person, representing the entity ranked first and second
choice by the technical panel may be asked to participate in an
interview to discuss the project details, goals, and objectives.
The IPRF will reimburse the expenses (up to 2 people) to make
this presentation at a location yet to be determined. The interview
will occur within a 45-day window subsequent to the proposal submittal
deadline.
IPRF PROCEDURAL
GUIDANCE:
IPRF
procedural guidance documents are available on the web at http://www.iprf.org/
in the section titled "Airfields Research." Persons preparing
proposals are urged to review the following documents to be sure
that there is a full understanding of IPRF procedures and requirements.
Proposals must be prepared in the format specified in the instruction
documents. The proposal will be submitted as one (1) original
and 8 copies.
The
documents required as an aide to the preparation of the proposal
include:
PDF files require Acrobat Reader to view.
FUNDS
AVAILABLE: Not to Exceed $205,000
CONTRACT
TIME: Not to exceed 15 Months
PROJECT
DIRECTOR: Jim Lafrenz, P.E., (202) 842-1131, jlafrenz@pavement.com
ESTIMATED
NOTICE TO PROCEED DATE: November 15, 2003
PROPOSAL
DUE DATE: September 17, 2003 not later than 4:00 P.M. (Eastern
Time)
DELIVERY
INSTRUCTIONS:
Proposals
will be delivered to:
Innovative
Pavement Research Foundation
Cooperative Programs Office
1010 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Suite 200
Washington DC 20001
(202) 842-1131
FAX: (202) 842-2022
