2004046

7/28/2019 2004046

1/15

Spatial Analysis Applications forPavement Management

Flintsch, G.W.The Via Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityBlacksburg, VA 24061-0105

SYNOPSIS

Pavement Management Systems have become standard tools in most highway agencies, and there is atrend towards developing other management systems and integrating the decisions support tools incomprehensive Asset Management systems. These management systems are supported by collecting andretaining a tremendous amount of data from a variety of sources, such as historical records, surveys, andautomated data collection vehicles. Agencies must integrate and organize the data for supporting decisions,such as pavement and asset management. Consequently, there is a demand for efficient tools forintegrating, managing, and analyzing information. Because of the inherit geographic nature of roadway

networks, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and other spatial data management and analysistechnologies are particularly appropriate for integrating highway data and enhancing the use andpresentation of these data for highway management and operations.

This paper presents the main findings of an NCHRP Synthesis that documents both the state-of-the-practiceand the knowledge of pavement management applications using GIS and other spatial technologies. Itincludes information from a compilation of sources, including a critical literature review, an electronic surveyof state practices, and follow-up telephone interviews with a selected number of state agencies. Anelectronic survey was sent to all of the states, as well as some Canadian provinces. A total of 73 responsesfrom 48 states and 4 Canadian provinces were received. The synthesis introduces PMS, GIS, and spatialanalysis, and it discusses how the technologies have been combined to enhance the highway managementprocess. This paper discusses the main issues related to PMS data collection, integration, management,and dissemination; applications of spatial technologies for map generation and PMS spatial analysis; and the

implementation thereof. This paper also identifies best practices, potential future applications, and spatialanalysis features that are needed to develop more powerful and effective PMS applications.

INTRODUCTION

Pavement management is a business process that allows DOT personnel to make cost-effective decisionsregarding the pavements under their jurisdiction. Pavement management systems (PMS) are supported bycollecting and retaining a large amount of information that is normally available in a wide variety of formats,referencing systems, and media. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and other spatial datamanagement and analysis technologies are particularly appropriate for integrating, managing, analyzing, andpresenting these data.

Survey of State Practice

One of the key components in the preparation of the synthesis was an electronic survey of state practices,followed by telephone interviews with a select number of state agencies (Flintsch et al. 2004). The surveywas conducted electronically using an interactive web-based survey developed by the Kansas DOT. A linkto the electronic survey was sent to the Pavement Management contacts and GIS-T (GIS for Transportation)representatives in all the states as well as some Canadian provinces. The surveyed individuals were askedto go to a web page where an electronic questionnaire was displayed. This questionnaire was dynamic, andthe questions displayed were dependent upon the previous responses. Once the user pressed the submitbutton, the survey was automatically saved in a database and a special link was emailed to the respondent.This link allowed the respondent to come back to the response where he or she could review, complement,or modify the submitted information. After the survey stop date, Kansas DOT PMS personnel imported theresponses into an MS Excel spreadsheet and sent the results to the consultants.

The electronic survey was very effective. A total of 73 responses from 48 states and 4 Canadian provinces

were received. Many respondents indicated that the web-based format made it very easy to respond andsubmit the questionnaire. For the purpose of the statistical analysis, and to avoid double counting, only oneresponse per state was considered. In a few cases, the responses from the PMS and GIS-T representatives

6th International Conference on Managing Pavements (2004)

TRB Committee AFD10 on Pavement Management Systems is pro viding the information contained herein for use by individual practitionersin state and local transportation agencies, researchers in academic inst itutions, and other members of the transportation researchcommuni ty. The inform ation in this paper was taken directly from the submis sion of the author(s).

7/28/2019 2004046

2/15

did not agree. These inconsistencies showed that, in several DOTs, the GIS-related activities are perceiveddifferently by the two groups, and there is a possible communication problem between the PMS and GISunits. The differences were resolved though follow-up telephone interviews. The PMS contact responsewas used when available, except for the sections that deal with system integration and software use.

Spatial AnalysisSpatial analysis technologies provide effective alternatives for developing PMS tools. Spatial analysis is

broadly defined as a "set of methods useful when the data are spatial" (Goodchild and Longley 1999). Itconsists of a series of transformations, manipulations, and other techniques and methods that can be appliedto spatial data to add value to them, to support decisions, and to reveal patterns and anomalies that may ormay not be immediately obvious. Spatial data consist of geographically referenced features that aredescribed by geographic positions and attributes in an analog and/or computer-readable (digital) form(OMB, 2003). Spatial analysis allows users to create, query, map, and analyze cell-based raster data; toperform integrated raster/vector analysis; to derive new information from existing data; to query informationacross multiple data layers; and to fully integrate cell-based raster data with traditional vector data sources.

Thanks to the introduction of relatively inexpensive and relatively easy-to-use GIS, the field of spatialanalysis has grown significantly in recent years. More recently, other spatially-savvy databases and softwarecomponents (middleware) have been developed specifically for highway management. These softwarecomponents, ormiddleware, sit between the database that resides on a servercomputer and the end-user

applications, and they provide many of the functions and procedures that an end-user application requires.Thus, such middleware may provide savings in both coding and the total cost and effort of building end-userapplications in DOTs, with respect to the traditional from the ground up approach used in the 1960s and1970s.

GIS can be defined as a system of computer hardware, software, personnel, organizations, and businessprocesses designed to support the capture, management, manipulation, analysis, modeling, and display ofspatially-referenced data for solving complex planning and management problems (Antenucci et al. 1991;Lewis and Sutton 1993). Since any definition of GIS represents a simplistic view of a complex system, thepreceding definition is provided only to illustrate the capabilities of the system. In this paper, the concept ofGIS is discussed as a process for integrating spatial data into the decision-making process, rather thanbeing described as specific GIS technologies or software packages.

GIS link geographic (or spatial) information displayed on maps (e.g., roadway alignment) with attribute (ortabular) information (e.g., pavement structure, condition, and age) (Figure 1). Although many of the currentapplications are limited to map generation, a major strength of GIS is its ability to utilize topology (i.e., spatialrelationships among features) to support decision making for specific projects and/or limited geographicareas. A branch of geometrical mathematics, topology deals with spatial relationships that exist betweenspatial entities. Topology is concerned with the connectedness, enclosure, adjacency, nestedness, andcertain other properties of objects that may not change when the geometry of objects change (NHI 1997).

A

B

C

Route: I-xx

Section: A-B

Pav. type: Flexible

PSI: 3.9 PCI: 87

ADT: 5000

A

B

C

A

B

C

Route: I-xx

Section: A-B

Pav. type: Flexible

PSI: 3.9 PCI: 87

ADT: 5000

Figure 1. GIS Functional Scheme.

GIS can assist in the analysis of many planning and operational problems, such as pavement managementthat varies by scale, time, and format, while allowing the enhancement of measurement, mapping,monitoring, and modeling of spatial phenomena. GIS have been used in Civil Engineering applications fordata handling, modeling spatially resident engineering phenomena, and result interpretation and presentation

(Miles and Ho 1999). Moreover, the ability to efficiently integrate, store, and query spatially referenced datais probably the most compelling reason for using GIS. Other PMS applications focus on the presentation ofanalysis results in map form, or they take advantage of the spatial operations that are included in current GISsoftware to support many pertinent decision processes.



7/28/2019 2004046

3/15

PMS APPLICATIONSEnhanced spatial capabilities for data storage, management, and analysis augment many of the PMSfunctions and tools. For example, GIS and other spatial tools can facilitate the following PMS problems:

Output presentation: The user can easily generate color-coded maps and graphical displaysdepicting road conditions, coverage of evaluation campaigns, and maintenance and rehabilitationschedules, among many other applications. GIS can also facilitate the computation of statistics byareas or regions (e.g., the average condition of the roads by county). These maps are an integral

part of condition reports and work programs usually generated by the DOTs. Data collection and processing: GIS and GPS could allow for the collection of data using a

coordinate-based method, and the information could be related to the base highway network. Thedisplay of inventory and condition data on colored maps may also facilitate data cleaning and gapdetection. The maps can highlight contradictory or reluctant information, as well as sections withmissing data.

Data integration: The use of database management tools that can handle spatial data can facilitatethe integration of the data used for supporting PMS decisions (inventory, pavement condition, trafficand maintenance history), which will be collected or stored in different DOT units.

Incorporation of spatial data into the PMS analysis: Spatial GIS tools allow users to efficientlyoverlay point and area data, which is not route specific, with the linear road network for PMSmodeling. Examples include the use of weather or regional information in the development of

pavement-performance models, the computation of average treatment cost by district or region, orthe use of land use and regional development models for enhancing traffic predictions. Spatialanalysis tools can also facilitate the grouping of projects based upon geographic proximity or othercriteria to obtain economies of scale or reducing traffic disturbances.

It is for these reasons that many agencies have used, or are actively pursuing the use of, GIS and otherspatial technologies for developing PMS applications. According to the survey of practice conducted for thepreparation of this synthesis, 60% of the DOTs are currently using spatial applications for PMS. Anadditional 13% provided conflicting information. While the PMS respondent indicated that the PMS did notuse spatial tools or that he/ she did not know, the GIS representative indicated that the PMS did used spatialtools. The discrepancies were resolved though follow-up telephone calls, which indicated that, although GISis not used to support PMS decisions, GIS is used to prepare maps and displays. Furthermore, 50% of theagencies that are not currently using spatial applications for PMS indicated that they have plans for their use

(Flintsch et al. 2004).

Current and planned uses of GIS and other spatial applications are summarized in Figure 2. Almost allDOTs currently using these technologies use them to prepare maps, and approximately half use spatialdatabase management tools to help them with data integration. Only a very limited number of respondentsindicated that they are using some of the spatial analysis capabilities. However, the planned activities showa trend toward the use of the more advanced capabilities (e.g., data integration and spatial analysis). Themain uses of spatial tools for map generation, data collection, data integration, and spatial analysis arediscussed in the following sections.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Map Generation Data Integration Spatial Analysis

NumberofRespondents

Current

Planned

Figure 2. Current and Planned PMS Applications of GIS and

Other Spatial Technologies.



7/28/2019 2004046

4/15

Map GenerationAt its most simple level of use, a GIS is a powerful and efficient tool for generating colored maps andgraphical displays that may, for example, depict road conditions, work programs, and maintenanceschedules, among many other applications. One of the first applications for GIS was the development of aGIS for display and analysis of the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) by the FederalHighway Administration (Pretzold and Freund 1990).

This type of application is very valuable, but it can also be performed by other automated mapping tools thatcan only conduct analyses using a linear referencing system (LRS) and do not use the enhanced topologicaland spatial data handling capabilities of a GIS (Lee and Deighton, 1995). Computer-assisteddesign/mapping tools (CAD/CAM) can generate similar maps and are generally easier to use. However,they cannot link the attribute data to the geographical representations. Thus, the coloring and highlighting ofroads with a particular attribute (e.g., scheduled projects or substandard sections) has to be done manually(AASHTO 2001).

Once the base maps are generated and the attribute data are linked to the geographical objects, it is easy toproduce a variety of visual aids by classifying and symbolizing according to specific attributes. These visualscan be of great help for presenting the problems and projected solutions to executive decision makers,planners, and the public in general, using different scales and degree of details. The major types of mapscurrently used or planned by the agencies surveyed are presented in Figure 3. Figure 4 shows an example

of GIS-generated map; it shows the roadway sections that are above, near, or below a condition thresholdestablished by the Texas DOT for one district. Several agencies share maps displaying pavement conditionand scheduled construction projects through the Internet. For example, Kansas DOT currently producesmore than 30 PMS maps per year using GIS, and many of those are available on the Web (KDOT 2003).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Pavement

Condition

Work

Program

Needs

Analysis

Inventory Data

Collection

Locations

Performance

Prediction

Public

Information

Impacts

Analysis

NumberofRes

pondents

Current

Planned

Figure 3. GIS-Based Maps Currently Used or Planned.

Data CollectionAlthough the approaches used by agencies differ, the foundation of all PMS is a database that includes fourgeneral types of data: (1) Inventory (including pavement structure, geometrics, and environment, amongothers); (2) Road usage (traffic volume and loading, usually measured in Equivalent Single Axle Loads[ESALs]); (3) Pavement condition (ride quality, surface distresses, friction, and/or structural capacity); and (4)Pavement construction, maintenance, and rehabilitation history. Figure 5 shows the percentage of theresponding states and provinces that collected or used each of these specific data elements.

Traditionally, DOTs have collected asset inventory and condition information using a route name and

milepost, reference point/ offset, or link/ node location referencing method. Distance measuring instruments(DMI) have been used to determine the route's length and the location of physical features along the route.With improvements in GPS technology, DOTs have begun to complement their linear references bycollecting data points with GPS.



7/28/2019 2004046

5/15

Figure 4. Pavement Condition Score Classes for one District of the Texas DOT.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Road

Inventory

Pavement

Condition

Traffic

Volume

ESALs M&R

History

PercentofRespondents

Figure 5. Types of Pavement Management Data Collected.



7/28/2019 2004046

6/15

The reference orindexingsystem used by a PMS impacts the utility of the system. The data used for PMSare located and stored according to two main methods: (1) using management units (e.g., link/node), or (2)based upon a location referencing system. In the first method, the limits of the management units orsections are identified prior to data collection and the information is stored by section. This method is simple,but it has problems when section limits change. In addition, it is not very practical when automatic datacollection is used. The second method consists of collecting data using the referencing method mostappropriate for the data being collected (e.g., reference point/ offset measured using DMI for automaticpavement evaluation vehicles). This method facilitates automatic data collection, but the data has to belinked to a specific management unit or section through some additional processing using a locationreferencing system (AASHTO 2001).

Location Referencing System: A location referencing system consists of techniques for collecting, storing,maintaining, and retrieving location information (NHI 2003). Highway applications typically use a linearreferencing system, which consists of set of procedures and methods for specifying a location as a distance,or offset, along a linear feature from a point with known location (NHI 1997). Thus, a linear referencingsystem includes three components: (1) a transportation network composed of lines, (2) a location referencingmethod, and (3) a datum. The location reference method refers to how to identify a single location in thefield. The main domains of location referencing methods include administrative (e.g., county), linear,geodetic/ geographic, and public lands survey. Common linear location referencing methods include route/milepost, link-node, reference point/offset, and street address (NHI 2003).

Location Referencing Methods: Traditionally, PMS data collection has used linear location referencingmethods, such as route name and milepost/ logpoint (AASHTO 2001). In the route name and milepostreferencing method, each roadway is given a unique name and/or number, and the distance along the routefrom a specific origin is used to locate points along the route. The distance units are usually marked withsigns placed along the route (e.g., mileposts) to determine the position of linear or point events or data-collection points in the field. One of the problems associated with this method is that the locations of thesigns do not always agree with the actual location of the mile referenced when measuring using a distancemeasuring device (DMI). All of the agencies surveyed (100%) indicated that they are using a linearreferencing system. Fifty agencies (96%) use route/logpoint method and eight agencies (15%) indicated thatthey use landmarks for referencing.

Because of the increased use of GIS, automatic data-collection equipment and GPS coordinate-based

referencing methods are becoming popular. The main advantages of using GPS for PMS data collectioninclude the possibility of determining the location accurately, as well as using standard coordinate systemsand reference datum. This makes it easy to import the information into a GIS and may reduce data-collection costs, processing costs, and digitizing errors. The main disadvantages include the need forspecific equipment; potential problems with the signal due to buildings or heavy foliage trees attenuating,reflecting, and/or blocking satellite signals; and potential compatibility problems with existing attribute dataand maps.

Data integrationOne of the main challenges that highway agencies currently face is the integration of the informationnecessary for managing highway networks into a central database or a distributed, but connected databases.Pavement management data integration is necessary because, in many cases, the information needed tosupport PMS decision making is available in different units or sections of the DOT. Enterprise-wide

integration is very important as agencies move toward more global asset management approaches formanaging different types of transportation assets. Data integration has been the subject of a primerprepared by the FHWA (2001). Additional information can be found in the FHWAs Demonstration Project113 Integrated Transportation Information Systems (FHWA 1997).

PMS Data Integration: Pavement management decisions require information (e.g., pavement inventory,condition, usage, treatments, policies, and history) from a variety of sources. This information has generallybeen kept in separate databases, which are often managed by different sections within the DOT. Since allthe PMS data can be related by its spatial location, spatial tools, such as GIS, are particularly appropriate fortheir integration. However, issues such as the use of different referencing systems and data formats havepresented difficulties for many agencies. The enterprise-wide data integration applications among differentmanagement and operation systems are discussed further in the following section. Since the information inthe GIS is used to support other areas and functions within the DOT, the development, implementation, and

management of the GIS is generally handled by a central office that supports many groups and interestswithin the agency. In many agencies, PMS has been one of the first applications of this technology becauseit is one of the main --if not the main-- core business process of the DOT. Often, the tools and technologiesused in these early applications were not mature and could not provide all the functionality required by the



7/28/2019 2004046

7/15

PMS. However, current spatial software provides most of the functions needed for PMS data integration anddecision support.

Enterprise-wide Data Integration: Since current DOT practices are shifting their business processestowards the use of integrated asset management systems (FHWA 1999), there is an increasing demand formeans to integrate the great variety of data collected and used by transportation agencies. According toFHWA (2001), the integration alternatives include two main possible approaches: a fused database andinteroperable databases. Database fusion involves a one-time operation to combine data from multiplesources into a single database. Interoperable or federated databases relate data residing in differentdatabases through multi-database queries. One of the problems with federated databases is the difficulty ofmaintaining an integrated global model. Although database integration has associated costs and otherburdens on an agency, these negative aspects may be outweighed by the long-term benefits. Some of thesebenefits include the availability and accessibility of the data; enhanced data accuracy integrity;completeness, consistency, and clarity; reduced duplication; faster processing and turnaround time; lowerdata acquisition and storage costs; and integrated decision-making (FHWA 2001).

Given the geographic distribution of the transportation assets, GIS is one of the technologies of choice forfacilitating this process. Many agencies and organizations have supported these developments. Forexample, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) has also sponsored a series ofresearch projects to define the basic structure of a GIS for transportation (GIS-T) (Vonderohe et al. 1993,

1997 and 1998; Adams et al. 2001). Several of the functional requirements identified in these projects areimportant for pavement management. For example, it is important that a roadway segment be presented asa centerline or as a two- or three-dimensional spatial object, depending upon the scale being used.Similarly, the road segment may be more appropriately represented by a node, link, or polygon for modelingpurposes, depending upon the application being used. The ability to handle different referencing methods isneeded to integrate data collected using different referencing methods. Spatial considerations are importantwhen considering performance trends, work programming, and lifecycle cost analysis, among otherapplications.

Examples: Due to increased demands for better and timelier information for asset management, dataintegration efforts, and the possibilities offered by the significant information technology advances in the pastdecade, many agencies are reengineering their databases. Many agencies are migrating from databasesystems formerly used (such as hierarchical, usually unrelated, mainframe databases) to more flexible,

integrated or interoperable client-server database architectures. In general, these new architectures includespatial and temporal data. To illustrate this trend, two examples of data integration efforts among DOTs arepresented.

The Tennessee Department of Transportation developed a GIS that has been used to generate decisionmaps and related planning information since 1990. Centerline data collected using GPS was linked to theexisting Tennessee Road Information Management System (TRIMS) mainframe database files and wasimported into the agencys GIS. Voice activated data-collection equipment and software were used toupdate the TRIMS inventory databases (Lewis et al 1996). The system was later enhanced to supportpavement and project data (Goodwin and Porter 2002). However, several other forms of highwaymanagement data resided in other unsynchronized databases. The data is currently being centralized by anenterprise relational data warehouse that handles both spatial and attributes data using a spatially-enableddatabase and middleware software. The system supports GIS clients for internal use and web tools for

external users (Harper and Yadlowsky 2002).

The Virginia Department of Transportation uses a comprehensive statewide highway mainframe hierarchicaldatabase called the Highway Traffic Records Information System (HTRIS) (Martin 1992). This databasecontains the official inventory information, which has been corrected over the years. The information inHTRIS is annually imported by the PMS, which also updates the pavement condition. Recently, the DOThas also been developing a GIS-based inventory, condition, and assessment system (ICAS). Road datawere captured using mobile mapping vans equipped with stereo imaging, GPS, and inertial hardware.Centerlines were developed with statewide horizontal accuracy within 2.7 m (Hovey 2002). Centerlineinformation (roads layer) was obtained from orthophotos, manual GPS-supported data collection, and GPS-based photologing at 0.01mile intervals. The data is being integrated with right-of-way information for all thehighway network, as well as traffic accidents, pavement condition, and photologs in a central enterprise-wideGIS-enabled database. The system uses a spatially-enabled database and middleware software, and it is

also capable of conducting dynamic segmentation and locating events and objects by coordinates or routeand milepost referencing. The milepost is being added as a third dimension, and some centerlines still needto be digitized on the road layer. There are some issues related to incompatible linear referencing systemsused at the state and county levels that are being resolved using transformation equations. The GIS



7/28/2019 2004046

8/15

information is currently available on VDOTs intranet (Figure 6) only, but it will be partially available to thepublic in the near future. Once the database is complete, the PMS will be one of the users of the spatialinformation. Pavement management systems will be able to dynamically pull spatial data from the centraldatabase and periodically update the pavement related data.

Figure 6. Example of Web-enabled GIS Application Displaying the Location of Right-of-way ImagesSuperimposed with the Roads and Orthophotos Layers.

Integration efforts are also underway in other states such as Illinois (Hall et al. 2000), Iowa (Schuman 1999),and Ohio (Hausman and Blackstone 2002), and some DOTs are also collaborating with other agencies. Forexample, the Arizona Department of Transportation is working with the State Cartographers Office and theArizona Geographic Information Council (AGIC) to update and further develop the GIS framework databaseof Arizonas surface transportation work. The best available network databases, as contributed by the localdata owners, are amalgamated by the DOT into a single statewide coverage (Breyer 2002).

Spatial AnalysisAlthough the areas discussed --data collection, data integration, and map generation-- have been a fertileground for the development of GIS-based PMS applications, the maximum pay-off for the use of thetechnology may be obtained by taking advantage of its spatial-analysis capabilities. Figure 7 shows thenumber of agencies that use and are planning to use spatial analysis to support the different pavementmanagement functions.

Only a very limited number of states are currently using spatial analysis tools as part of the PMS decisionmaking process. Spatial tools are mostly being used for inventory and condition assessment, and, to alesser degree, for need analysis and optimization or prioritization of projects. However, there are asignificant number of states that are developing or planning PMS tools that use spatial analysis. The mainapplications include condition assessment, inventory, performance prediction, need analysis, work program

preparation, and project prioritization.



7/28/2019 2004046

9/15

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Inventory ConditionAssessment PerformancePrediction NeedsAnalysis Optimization/Prioritization Work ProgramPreparation ImpactAnalysis Public Info

NumberofRespondents

Current

Planned

Figure 7. Number of Agencies that Use and are Planning to Use Spatial Analysis to

Support the Different Pavement Management Functions.

CASE STUDIES

One of the first reported experiences of using GIS for PMS was a FHWA demonstration project conducted bythe Wisconsin Department of Transportation in which two ongoing efforts to develop a GIS and a PMS werecombined. The result was a prototype GIS-based PMS for one of the maintenance districts, which allowedthe user to define homogenous sections, assess pavement performance, identify problems based upon thatassessment, and recommend pavement improvements for correcting these problems. GIS functions were

used to provide dynamic segmentation capabilities to overlap cross sections, performance and improvementsections, and automatic map generation (Fletcher and Krueger 1991). The system determines the problemsassociated with each pavement section (nominal 1.6 km [1 mi] in length) and suggests a range of treatmentsfor repairing all of the problems noted using a rule-based expert system. The pavement sections are thenaggregated into improvement (homogenous) sections, and the final treatment selected is based upon fivefactors: improvement in ride, improvement in distress rating, user inconvenience, initial cost, and life cyclecost. The projects are then prioritized, and a six-year improvement program and a three-year maintenanceprogram are recommended (DeCabooter et al. 1994).

Several other prototype PMS were developed in the mid 1990s. For example, Johnson and Demetsky(1994) developed a prototype GIS database for pavement management for two counties in Virginia andprovided a framework for using a similar approach for other management systems. Osman and Hayashy(1994) developed a prototype PMS coupled with a GIS composed of (1) a spatial data base, (2) an attribute

data base, (3) an analysis module, and (4) an output generation module. Jia and Sarasua (1996) developeda client/server enterprise-wide GIS, integrated with a Knowledge-Based Expert System (KBES) via acomputer network, and they demonstrated its use for PMS.

Internationally, highway agencies are following similar paths. The Ministry of Transportation of Spaindeveloped a GIS for highway management that can handle different types of data and different scales. Thesystem allows grouping of different types of data, depending upon the study to be performed, andpresentation of the data in graphics and maps (Crespo 1997). Similarly, the Portuguese highway authorityhas implemented a PMS that uses GIS for generation some of the input maps (Golabi and Pereira 2003).

With a few exceptions, the applications reported in the literature used the GIS capabilities for map generationonly and, in a few cases, for database integration. However, state DOTs have started to take advantage ofenhanced spatial-analysis capabilities to develop more advanced PMS applications. For example, the Ohio

Department of Transportation used GIS to determine whether pavement performance differences existamong the 12 districts. Deterioration trends were developed by transforming existing data into a probabilisticdeterioration model using GIS and relational database software (Tack and Chou 2001).



7/28/2019 2004046

10/15

The Georgia Department of Transportation has developed and implemented a client/server and GIS-basedpavement management module that seamlessly integrates with the central database where the pavementcondition survey data resides. Pavement condition data surveyed by field engineers is uploaded to thecentral database. The developed system allows managers to visualize statewide pavement conditions inreal time and perform spatial analyses by aggregating information with linear features into differentjurisdictions, such as working districts. The implementation of the GIS module has enhanced pavementmanagement capabilities by generating data that had previously been unavailable and by allowing fasteraccess to the data (Tsai and Gratton 2002).

The Kansas Department of Transportation has developed several spatial PMS applications. For example, aGIS was used to relate weather data available from point source to their highway network to evaluate theimpacts of weather on pavement performance. The weather information from NOAA was given for pointstations. The information available for the NOAA point stations was assigned an effective radius of 20 miles,and the resulting data was overlaid with the counties. This procedure permitted applying point data (such asnumber of freeze-thaw cycles at a station) to a county and the highways within that county, and it allowed thestudy of the effect of weather (e.g., rainfall, cold, heat, or freeze-thaw cycles) and pavement performancehistory. Other examples include: (1) using GIS to identify redundant profile data to asses the variability ofthe data collection procedure, (2) assessing the feasibility of using FWD in network level analyzing byvisualizing the coverage and distribution of FWD tests conducted over a period of four, (3) identifying sampleroutes to evaluate provisional standards for pavement surface data collection, and (4) displaying remaining

service life estimations using PMS data at the network level to support the identification of reconstructionproject locations.

Another interesting application of spatial technologies for supporting PMS is the "georeferencing engine" thatthe Kansas Department of Transportation is developing to automatically support field data-collectionactivities. This system integrates several years of GPS data points to determine roadway location in a 3Dspace by developing a complete highway spatial model with a level of fidelity that approaches that of designplans. This engine, combined with county boundaries, permits associating GPS with county milepost (LRS)on a route and expanding PMS data collection capabilities to enhance the agencies geometric database(Young 2003).

At the local level, counties and cities have developed many GIS-based applications for PMS andinfrastructure management systems. One important feature for local applications is that GIS can help

coordinate works among assets (Cunningham 1999). A large number of examples are available in theliterature; selected examples include the following:

1. Lee at al. (1996) developed a GIS-based PMS software to enhance pavement management for SaltLake City, Utah. The program reads pavement conditions, recommends appropriate maintenancestrategies, and displays those strategies on a digital map.

2. Medina et al. (1999) combined a Road Surface Management System with a GIS to develop a PMSfor the town of Fountain Hills, Arizona.

3. Ollerman and Varma (1998) used GIS and CAD technologies in an airport pavement managementsystem.

IMPLEMENTATION

There are different approaches for developing spatial tools for PMS. The spatial applications that have beendeveloped to support PMS range from simple interfaces for the input and output of data to and from a GIS, tosophisticated models that take advantage of advanced spatial analysis capabilities. The implementation ofthe spatial or GIS-based tools could be approached as an individual effort of the PMS group or as anagency-wide cooperative effort. Each approach has its advantages and disadvantages. However, AASHTO(2001) indicates that, in general, the use of PMS alone does not justify the use of a GIS because of thesignificant effort required for its development. The main issues to be considered for the development andimplementation of spatially supported PMS tools include selecting appropriate spatial tools, developing abase map, linking the attributes PMS data to the spatial and cartographic information, and developing thePMS tools.

Spatial Technologies UsedThere are a series of spatial and mapping technologies and/or tools available to support the development

and enhancement of pavement management systems. These include automatic mapping tools, GISpackages in the traditional sense, data management systems with enabled spatial capabilities, andmiddleware applications developed to support highway and asset management.



7/28/2019 2004046

11/15

The main GIS packages currently in use by DOTs are the ESRI family of products (20 agencies, or 74% ofthe agencies using GIS) and the Intergraph products (9 agencies or 33% of the agencies using GIS), withsome DOTs using both product lines. Only three states indicated that they use other spatial packages: thefirst agency indicated that they use Deighton's dTIMS software, the second agency indicated that they havedeveloped their own software, and the third agency did not specify the software used. Overall, PMS usersare neutral or satisfied with both product lines.

Table 5 presents a summary of the GIS implementation approaches that are followed by the agencies thatresponded to the survey. The table also indicates the percentage of respondents that would recommendthat approach. It is clear from the responses that there is no one-size-fits-all option. Approximately half ofthe agencies that use GIS to support PMS (15 agencies) approached the GIS implementation as an agency-wide effort, and most of them would recommend that approach. On the other hand, nine agenciesdeveloped GIS-based tools as an individual PMS effort, and less than half of these agencies indicated thatthey would recommend this approach. This disparity seems to indicate that the agency-wide approachappears to be more effective, which is consistent with AASHTO recommendations (2001).

Table 5. GIS Implementation Approaches Followed by DOTs

ImplementationApproach

Number of DOTs that Used theApproach

Number of DOT that Used andRecommended the Approach

Individual PMS Effort 9 28% 4 44%

Agency-Wide Effort 15 47% 12 80%

Other 2 6% - -

Don't Know 6 19% - -

Cost-effectivenessOne of the main questions about the implementation of spatial tools for PMS is whether the benefits willoutweigh the costs of developing the tools and implementing the GIS database. Costs associated with GISdevelopment include hardware and software purchasing, maintenance, and labor (including training) for

designing, developing, and maintaining the databases and applications. The main cost is data;approximately 80% of the costs of developing a GIS are data, and 80% of these data collection costs are fordata items that will typically be shared across applications (e.g., road network file). Thus, the development ofthe spatial tools is, in general, a large enterprise-wide effort. The DOTs that have developed spatial tools forPMS generally agree that it is cost-effective. Seventeen (55%) DOTs indicated that they agree or stronglyagree with the following statement: based upon my experience, the use of spatial technologies fordeveloping PMS applications is cost-effective. Five DOTs (19%) were neutral, six (23%) did not know, andonly one of the respondents (3%) disagreed with the statement.

An example of quantifiable benefits is reported by Gharaibeh et al. (1999). Benefits of developing aprototype GIS-based methodology for integrating highway infrastructure management activities were listed infour major areas: integrated computerized system, network-level integration, project-level integration, andmultiple performance measures. The project-level integration included a spatial application for identifying

adjacent improvement projects from various infrastructure components that can be implementedsimultaneously to reduce traffic disruptions. The application of the integrated system approach to fiveinfrastructure components (pavements, bridges, culverts, intersections, and signs) of the state highwaysystem in an Illinois county showed that coordinating project implementation may reduce disruption to normaltraffic flow caused by rehabilitation and reconstruction activities in a five-year program by 20%.

The effectiveness of using GIS is more evident when it is approached as an agency-wide effort. Forexample, Table 6 presents estimated cost and benefits of implementing GIS-T in the Florida Department ofTransportation during a five-year period (NHI 1997). Costs include application development, software,hardware, network, end user training, retention of information technology support staff, additional GIS staff,and other contracts. Benefits include cost savings in data collection, storage, analysis, and output; incomegenerated; and cost reductions because of productivity enhancement, data integration, and reducedredundancy, among others. While the costs exceed the benefits in the first few years, the benefits are

significantly higher than the costs in the long term.



7/28/2019 2004046

12/15

Table 6. Example of Cost and Benefits of Implementing GIS-T (NHI 1997).

Year Costs Benefits Net Benefit

1996-97 (1) $625-1900K $0-200K $(625)-(1700)

1997-98 (2) $850-2300K $100-400K $(750)-(1900)

1998-99 (3) $1050-2250K $650-2000 $(400)-(250)

1999-00 (4) $800-1750K $1050-3,000K $250-1,250

2000-01 (5) $750-1700K $1,700-4,500K $950-2,800

Hall (2000) presented an investigation of the costs and benefits of implementing an enterprise-wide GIS inthe Illinois Department of Transportation. The study approached the implementation process with anexecutive focus on costs and benefits. Fourteen major GIS projects were identified based uponmanagement priority, ease of implementation, and user commitment. A comprehensive Cost/Benefit analysiswas developed. PMS was one of the projects identified. The greatest portion of costs over a ten-year periodwas for personnel (67%) and consultant services (19%). Although the total estimated cost of the ten-yeareffort was almost 12 million dollars, staring on the seventh year, the estimated efficiency and effectivenessbenefits clearly outweighed the cost. The net present value of the project using a 3% discount rate was $24

million, and the internal rate of return was 99.8%. The researchers estimated a benefit of $4.8 millionannually because of more effective pavement management decisions alone (Hall et al. 2000).

Identified ProblemsThe main problems identified with the development and use of spatial (e.g., GIS based) PMS applicationsare related to the use of different referencing methods, the level of effort required to develop and maintainthe spatial-enabled databases, and the handling of temporal issues. Other problems reported includedifferences among users in the level of detail required to describe the network, accuracy of GPS-collecteddata when real-time differential correction is not available, excessive user expectations, and the steeplearning curve for users to be able to understand and use the GIS software and procedures. Many of theproblems identified relate more to database design and connectivity and PMS application development thanto the spatial technologies used. States have invested significant resources to develop applications over thelast two or three decades, and, in many cases, the states have not been able to keep up with the very fast

technological advances.

Recommended GIS EnhancementsMany commercial GIS and spatial analysis middleware providers are continuously improving their productsand adapting to the needs of the various users. However, many of the packages currently in use do notinclude all the functions that are required for pavement management. The main improvements that wererecommended for using GIS and other spatial techniques to develop PMS tools include: (1) better automatictechniques and procedures to facilitate the integration and resolution of data collected and stored usingdifferent linear referencing methods; (2) enhanced map-matching techniques; and (3) incorporation oftemporal dimensions to handle changes in the roadway geometry and alignment, pavement condition andstructure capacity, and maintenance treatments and costs. Enhanced dynamic segmentation capabilities(i.e., the ability to track multiple and overlapping linear objects, events, or conditions) and databasemanagement capabilities to facilitate system integration are also important. These enhancements will notonly improve PMS but will also help advance data quality and accessibility throughout the organization and,will therefore streamline the work processes.

CONCLUSIONSPavement and asset management systems are supported by collecting and retaining a tremendous amountof information, which is normally available in a wide variety of formats, referencing systems, and media.Geographic Information Systems and other spatial data management and analysis technologies areparticularly appropriate for integrating, managing, and analyzing these data. Therefore, many agencies havebeen actively pursuing the use of GIS and other spatial technologies for developing PMS applications.Furthermore, there is a significant body of knowledge on the application of spatial tools for transportationand, in particular, for enhancing pavement management processes, as shown by the literature reviewed.

The main findings concerning the state-of-the-practice and knowledge of pavement managementapplications using GIS and other spatial technologies in North America include the following:

1. Most DOTs are either currently using or are planning to use GIS or other spatial technologies tosupport pavement management activities. Sixty percent of the agencies surveyed indicated that



7/28/2019 2004046

13/15

they are currently using spatial applications. Several of the remaining agencies indicated that,although GIS is not used to support PMS decisions, it is used to prepare maps and displays. Manyapplications have been reported in the literature.

2. The current major application of GIS is for preparing maps. Approximately half of the DOTs also usespatial database management tools to help them with data integration among various departments.Only a very limited number of respondents indicated that they are using some of the spatial analysiscapabilities. However, the planned activities show a trend toward use of more advanced GIS

capabilities, such as supporting data collection, data integration, and spatial analysis.

3. All of the agencies surveyed are using a linear referencing system for their PMS data collection andstorage. However, because of the increased use of GIS, automatic data-collection equipment, andGPS, coordinate-based referencing methods are also becoming popular. Although the use of GPShas many potential advantages in terms of location accuracy and data-integration potential, it alsocreates a significant challenge regarding compatibility with historical data and interoperability withexisting systems.

4. Data integration is very important as agencies move toward more global asset managementapproaches. However, the number of agencies that have actually completed or are close tocompleting a full integration of the systems is limited. Most respondents to the survey (79%)indicated that they agree or strongly agree that spatial applications may facilitate integrating PMSwith wider asset management initiatives, a fact that is also supported by the literature reviewed.

5. There are a series of spatial and mapping technologies and tools available to support thedevelopment and enhancement of PMS. These include automatic mapping tools, GIS packages inthe traditional sense, data-management systems with enabled spatial capabilities, and middlewareapplications developed to support highway and asset management. In general, users are satisfiedor neutral with respect to the user friendliness, learning curve, technical support, flexibility, andfunctionality of these packages.

6. Implementation of the spatial or GIS-based tools has been approached as an individual effort by thePMS group or as an agency-wide cooperative effort. Approximately half of the state DOTsapproached the GIS implementation as an agency-wide effort, and most of them recommended thatapproach. On the other hand, nine agencies developed GIS-based tools as an individual PMS effort,and less than half of these agencies indicated that they would recommend this approach. Thisdisparity seems to indicate that the agency-wide approach appears to be more effective, which is

consistent with the literature reviewed. In general the agencies that have used spatial technologiesfor developing PMS applications agree that it is cost-effective

Based upon the survey conducted and the literature reviewed, it can be concluded that GIS and other spatialanalysis tools provide effective alternatives for developing PMS tools. Current state-of-the-practice includesthe use of GIS and other spatial tools for map generation and database integration. GIS can be useful forpreparing colored maps and graphic displays of information. Spatial database management systems, suchas those included in GIS and other tools, are very useful for facilitating the integration of data with graphicinformation and with different data sets.

Spatial analysis tools and technologies may allow for more advanced analysis. Examples includeperformance prediction by jurisdiction, geographic integration of sections into projects, and resourceallocation among districts or regions. Many GIS packages and highway management spatial tools haveincorporated the spatial modeling capabilities and functionality necessary for conducting these types ofanalyses. Only a very limited number of states are currently using spatial analysis tools as part of the PMSdecision-making process.

REFERENCESAASHTO, 2001, Pavement Management Guide, American Association of State Highway and Transportation

Officials. Washington, DC.Adams, T.M., N.A. Koncz, and A.P. Vonderohe, 2001, NCHRP Report 460: Guidelines for the

Implementation of Multimodal Transportation Location Referencing Systems, Transportation ResearchBoard, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 88 pp.

Antenucci, J.C., K. Brown, P.L. Croswell, M. J. Kevany, and H. Archer, 1991, Geographic InformationSystems: A Guide to the Technology, Van Nostrand, Reinhold, NY.

Breyer, J., 2000, Arizona GIS Partnership for a Composite Roadway Framework. GIS for TransportationSymposium, Minneapolis, MN.



7/28/2019 2004046

14/15

Crespo del Rio, R., P.A. Perez de Madrid, and E.G. Herrero, 1997, Geographic Information System Appliedto Pavement Evaluation by Video-Laser Road Surface Tester Multifunction Device, TransportationResearch Record 1592, pp. 134-143.

Cunningham, J., 1999, Computer System Helps Prevent Unnecessary Right-of-Way Excavation, APWAReporter, Vol. 66, No. 6, pp. 12-13.

DeCabooter, P., K. Weiss, S. Shober, and B. Duckert, 1994, Wisconsins Pavement Management DecisionSupport System, Transportation Research Record 1455, pp. 76-81.

FHWA, 1997, Demonstration Project 113 Workshop on the Integration of Transportation Information, Officeof Technology Applications, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC.

FHWA, 1999, Asset Management Primer, Office of Asset Management, Federal Highway Administration,Washington, DC.

FHWA, 2001, Data Integration Primer, Office of Asset Management, Federal Highway Administration, USDepartment of Transportation, Washington, DC.

Fletcher D.A. and M. Krueger, 1991, "Pavement Management Decision Support Using a GeographicInformation System," Advance Pavement Management, Federal Highway Administration, Washington,DC.

Flintsch, G.W., Dymond, R., Collura, J., and Kuttesch J., 2004, Review of State Practices on the Use of GISfor Pavement Management Applications, 83

rdAnnual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board,

Washington, DC.Gharaibeh, N.G., M.I. Darter, and D.R. Uzarski, 1999, Development of Prototype Highway Asset

Management System, Journal of Infrastructure Systems, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 61-68.Golabi, K. and Pereira, P., 2003, Innovative Pavement Management and Planning System for RoadNetwork of Portugal, Journal of Infrastructure Systems, volume 9, number 2, American Society of CivilEngineers, New York, NY.

Goodchild M.F. and P.A. Longley, 1999, The future of GIS and spatial analysis, in Geographical InformationSystems: Principles, Techniques, Management and Applications, P.A. Longley, M.F. Goodchild, D.J.Maguire, and D.W. Rhind, Eds., John Wiley, New York, pp. 567-580.

Hall, J.P., 2000, Cost/Benefit Analysis of GIS Implementation: Case of the Illinois Department ofTransportation, GIS for Transportation Symposium, Minneapolis MN.

Hall, J.P., J. Wright, and M.A. Paulis, 2000, System Design of GIS for the Illinois Department ofTransportation: An Enterprise-Wide Approach, GIS for Transportation Symposium, Minneapolis, MN.

Hall, J.P., Kim, T.S., and Darter, M.I., 2000, Cost/Benefit Analysis of GIS Implementation: IllinoisDepartment of Transportation, Transportation Research Record 1719, pp. 219-232.

Harper , J.D., and P. Yadlowsky, 2002, Interagency Enterprise GIS with Oracle Spatial, GIS forTransportation Symposium, Atlanta, GA.Hausman, J. and D. Blackstone, 2002, Ohios Base Transportation Referencing System (BTRS), Bringing

Enterprise GIS to the Ohio Department of Transportation, GIS for Transportation Symposium, Atlanta,GA.

Hovey, S., 2002, Producing and Using Virginia DOT Statewide Road Centerline Data, GIS forTransportation Symposium, Atlanta, GA.

Jia, X. and W. Sarasua, 1996, A Client/Server-Based Intelligent GIS for Transportation, 9th

Symposium onGeographic Information System for Transportation, Kansas City, MO, pp. 190-213.

Johnson, B.H. and M.J. Demetsky, 1994, Geographic Information System Environment for TransportationManagement Systems, Transportation Research Record 1429, pp. 67-73.

KDOT, 2003, http://kdot1.ksdot.org/public/kdot/matreslab/pmis/reports.html, Kansa Department ofTransportation, accessed Sept. 30, 2003.

Lee, H., and R. Deighton, R., 1995, "Developing Infrastructure Management Systems for Small PublicAgency," Journal of Infrastructure Systems, volume 1, number 4, American Society of Civil Engineers,New York, NY.

Lee, H.N., S. Jitprasithsiri, H. Lee, and R.G. Sordic, 1996, Development of a Geographic InformationSystem-Based Pavement Management for Salt Lake City," Transportation Research Record 1524, pp.16-24.

Lewis, B., M. Lewis, and F. Cooper, 1996, GPS Data Collection System Upgrades, Report TN-RES1050,Tennessee Department of Transportation, p. 30.

Lewis, S. and Sutton, J., 1993, Demonstration Project No. 85; GIS/ Video Imagery Applications , FederalHighway Administration, Washington, DC.

Martin, M.R., 1992, Microcomputers in Transportation. Geographic Information Systems for Highway/SignMaintenance, Proceedings of the 4

thInternational Conference on Microcomputers in Transportation,

Baltimore, MD, pp. 72-82.

Medina, A., G.W. Flintsch, and J.P. Zaniewski, 1999, Geographic Information Systems-Based PavementManagement System: A Case Study, Transportation Research Record 1652, pp. 151-157.

Miles, S.B. and C.L. Ho, 1999, Applications and Issues of GIS as Tool for Civil Engineering Modeling,Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering,Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 144-152.



7/28/2019 2004046

15/15

NHI, 1997, Course 151029: Application of Geographic Information Systems for Transportation, NationalHighway Institute, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC.

NHI, 2003, Course 151039: Applying Spatial Data Technologies to Transportation Planning, NationalHighway Institute, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC.

Ollerman, F.A. and Varma, A., 1998, Development and Visualization of Airport Pavement ManagementInformation: Lessons Learned," (preprint) 77

thAnnual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board,

Washington DC.OMB, 2003, Circular A-16, Office of Management and Budget, The Executive Office of the President,

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a016/a016_rev.html, accessed Sept. 30, 2003.Osman, O. and Y. Hayahsi, 1994, Geographic Information Systems as a Platform for Highway Pavement

Management Systems, Transportation Research Record 1442, pp. 19-30.Petzold, R. G. and D.M. Freund, 1990, "Potential for Geographic Information Systems in Transportation

Planning and Highway Management," Transportation Research Record 1261.Schuman, W., 1999, Iowa DOT Statewide Coordinated GIS, GIS for Transportation Symposium, San

Diego, CA.Tack, J.N. and Y.J. Chou, 2001, Pavement Performance Analysis Applying Probabilistic Deterioration

Methods, Transportation Research Record 1769, pp. 20-27.Tosca, S., 2001, Using GIS to Improve Maintenance Planning and Programming, GIS for Transportation

Symposium, VA.Tsai, J. and B. Gratton, 2002, Successful Implementation of a Client/Server-Based GIS Module for

Pavement Management in Georgia, GIS for Transportation Symposium, Atlanta, GA.Vonderohe, A. P., Chou, F. Sun, and T.M. Adams, 1997, Research Results Digest 218, "A Generic Model forLinear Referencing Systems." Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.

Vonderohe, A. P., L. Travis, R.L. Smith, and V. Tsai, 1993, NCHRP Report 359: Adaptation of GeographicInformation Systems for Transportation, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council,Washington, DC, 77 pp.

Vonderohe, A. P., T.M. Adams, Ch. Chou, M.R. Bacon, F. Sun, and R.L. Smith, 1998, Research ResultsDigest 221, "Development of System and Application Architectures for Geographic Information Systemsin Transportation," Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC.

Young, S., 2003, Beyond Base Mapping - Construction and Application of a Complete 3D Model of theKansas Highway Network Applications. GIS for Transportation Symposium, Colorado Springs, CO.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A significant part of the investigation presented in this paper was conducted as part of the preparation of theNCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice: Pavement Management Applications Using Geographic InformationSystems sponsored by TRB. Professors Randy Dymond and John Collura collaborated in the preparation ofthe synthesis. Special thanks are extended to Richard Miller and Chris Beightel for developing andmanaging the web site for the electronic survey. The authors would also like to express their sincereappreciation to Jon Williams of the Transportation Research Board as well as to the topic panel membersRay E. Brown (Auburn University), James Hall (University of Illinois, Springfield), Simon Lewis(Transdecision, Inc.), Susan Massey (Caltrans), Richard Miller (Kansas DOT), Janet Minter (Colorado DOT),Roger G Petzold (Federal Highway Administration), Nadaraja Sivaneswaran (Washington State DOT), BryanStampley (Texas DOT), and Thomas Van (Federal Highway Administration) for their guidance and inputthought the development of the synthesis project. The contribution of Jeff Kuttesch and Tim Bayse ofVirginia Tech in the preparation of the document is also recognized.

BIOGRAPHY OF THE PRESENTING AUTHORDr. Flintsch has 18 years of research, consulting, and teaching experience in the areas of pavement andinfrastructure management and engineering. He is currently an Associate Professorand TransportationProgram Coordinatorwith the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department and a Transportation Fellowwith the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute at Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. Dr. Flintsch holds M.S. andPh.D. degrees from Arizona Sate University, and B.S. and Civil Engineering degrees from the UniversidadMayor del Uruguay. His main areas of expertise include pavement evaluation, performance modeling,design, and management; application of soft computing, geographic information systems and other emergingtechnologies to support infrastructure management and decision-making; non-destructive evaluation; andlife-cycle-cost analysis. Before joining Virginia Tech, Dr. Flintsch worked for the Arizona TransportationResearch Center and the Ministry of Transportation of Uruguay. He has consulted with several national andinternational organizations, including the United Nations, Federal Highway Administration, University ofTexas at El Paso, and Roy Jorgensen Associates Inc., among others. Professor Flintsch is member of

several technical committees, including the ASCE committees on Highway Pavements and InfrastructureManagement and the TRB committees on Pavement Management Systems and Asset Management. Dr.Flintsch has published more than 70 journal articles, conference papers, technical reports, and manuals.


TRB Committee AFD10 on Pavement Management Systems is pro viding the information contained herein for use by individual practitionersin state and local transportation agencies, researchers in academic inst itutions, and other members of the transportation research

2004046

Documents

Transcript of 2004046