CONCRETE PAVEMENT PROGRESS 14 WWW.ACPA.ORG job-specific designs. An example is work done by the Impactful Resilient Infrastructure Science and Engineering (IRISE) Consortium, established through the University of Pittsburgh. IRISE helped one project team in Pennsylvania lower the initial cost of concrete by eliminating a high early strength concrete mix and testing and using, instead, a maturity method for determining the concrete’s strength gain. Starting a Competitive Paving Program Implementing a competitive paving program in an agency needs to be done at both the “programmatic level” and at the “project level.” At the programmatic level, planning and communication are the first steps because they indicate that the agency is committed to a program that will foster competition. Next, when the team identifies projects in which concrete or asphalt could each provide a viable solution, it should make a deliberate decision to go with the less dominant material to create a competitive market. Similarly, the agency should look for cement-based solutions in multiple applications (e.g., interstates, state highways, rural roads, intersections, roundabouts, ramps, etc.) so opportunities for contractors of all sizes are developed. Next, the agency should let a given number of concrete projects each year, just as they do asphalt, and develop a project pipeline that covers several years. Finally, technical task forces will be needed to address issues with specifications, design procedures and other issues that arise. Pavement Treatments For individual pavement projects, helpful strategies for achieving value include optimizing concrete designs to avoid over-design, looking at multiple solutions (e.g., new concrete pavement, concrete overlays, RCC, etc.–see table); performing life cycle cost analysis (which quantifies the total cost of ownership over a pavement life) and using alternate pavement bidding (a bidding process where two equivalent pavement designs are developed for a given project and the contractor then chooses which pavement to submit for his bid). To implement an alternate pavement bidding program, agencies should follow the process outlined by FHWA in their Guidance on Alternate Pavement Bidding (see https://www. fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/t504039.cfm). continued from page 13 Several states have a successful history of creating project pipelines that include both asphalt and concrete, and their practices can serve as models. Some states use a strategy of designating a target number for concrete installations. For its new roads, the Florida DOT targets approximately 40 miles of concrete pavement per year. Similarly, Texas DOT has an established practice of bidding approximately five million square yards of concrete every year, which represents approximately 26% of their projects. Other states programmatically balance the market based on a defined metric such as volume. Wisconsin and Michigan provide examples of this; both attempt to balance the tonnage of asphalt in a given year to the square yards of concrete pavement that is placed. The advantage of this system is both industries participate in times when funding is plentiful, and both take similar reductions when funding levels are lower. Another approach is to use traffic or road classifications to designate specific markets for each product. In the past, Minnesota DOT-based product decisions on equivalent single axle load (ESAL) values, with projects under one million ESALs being constructed of asphalt, projects over seven million ESALs being constructed of concrete and projects between one and seven million ESALs going through a lifecycle cost analysis to determine the most appropriate material. The research shows—and the experiences of multiple states bear out—it is a myth that there’s no way to lower the unit cost of a pavement. Encouraging competition between paving materials is a clear strategy that would cause costs for all materials to go down. BID ENVIRONMENTS
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Nzc3ODM=