CLOSEOUT REPORT Submitted by the AASHTO TIG Lead States Team for the following technology: Construction Analysis Software Tools (CAST) Lead State Team Members, Participants, and Agencies: Michael Samadian, Chair, California DOT Eul-Bum (EB) Lee, University of California - Berkeley Philip Fordyce, Washington DOT Bill Farnbach, California DOT Doug I. Anderson, Utah DOT Mario Velado, California DOT Jacqui Ghezzi, California DOT David Lim, California DOT Jim Sorenson, Federal Highway Administration Kenneth Jacoby, Federal Highway Administration Nadarajah (Siva) Sivaneswaran, Federal Highway Administration Date: October 27, 2009 DISCLAIMER The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view or policies of the American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) or any individual member organization of AASHTO. Where the names of products or manufacturers appear herein, their inclusion is considered essential to the objectives of this report. AASHTO does not endorse products or manufacturers. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 4 Marketing Activities ........................................................................................................... 5 List of Hosted Demonstration Workshops ...................................................................... 5 List of Presentations at Conferences and Meetings ........................................................ 5 List of Publications ......................................................................................................... 6 Performance Measurement ................................................................................................. 7 Lessons Learned.................................................................................................................. 8 Effective Tools and Methods .......................................................................................... 8 Unique Tools and Methods ............................................................................................. 8 Ineffective Tools and Methods ....................................................................................... 8 Transition Plan .................................................................................................................... 9 Technology Transfer ....................................................................................................... 9 Primary On-going Implementation Responsibility ......................................................... 9 Specific Future Actions Recommended.......................................................................... 9 On the Web ................................................................................................................... 10 Final Expenditure Information .......................................................................................... 11 Total Expenses .............................................................................................................. 11 Appendix A: Demonstration Workshop Information ....................................................... 12 Appendix B: Marketing Media ......................................................................................... 22 Appendix C: Survey Results ............................................................................................. 31 3 CLOSEOUT REPORT Submitted by the AASHTO TIG Lead States Team for the following technology: Construction Analysis Software Tools (CAST) Introduction The American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Technology Implementation Group (TIG) selected Construction Analysis Software Tools (CAST) as a TIG Focus Technology in June 2006 by combining two similar technology submissions; 1) Construction Analysis for Pavement Rehab Strategies from California and 2) User Impacts of Fast-Track Construction from Utah. The goal of the CAST Lead States Team (LST) is to promote the use and adoption of the analysis tools in the AASHTO member states and other agencies. The analysis tools provide the following advantages: Improve work-zone safety and mobility, Optimize construction staging with the most cost effective solution, and Improve public perception and satisfaction. To achieve the goal, the LST has provided member states with information on the CAST products. This closeout report summarizes LST activities and observations. The report is divided into the following five sections: Marketing Activities, Performance Measurement, Lessons Learned, Transition Plan, and Final Expenditure Information. 4 Marketing Activities The LST conducted outreach through technical meetings, webinars, presentations at conferences and workshops, and distributing marketing materials and publications. List of Hosted Demonstration Workshops The team has hosted four demonstration workshops. Two video conferences and one webinar were delivered through the WASHTO-X program. An on-site technical workshop was held in Sacramento, California in March 2007. The attendee list and workshop notes are located in the Appendix A. Date Total Workshop Title Location (in chronological order) Attendance Video Conference: December 8, 2006 Construction Analysis for WASHTO-X 12 States Pavement Rehabilitation Optimizing Traffic Management and March 20-21, 2007 Sacramento, CA 50 Construction Work Zone Analysis Video Conference: September 18, 2007 Construction Analysis for WASHTO-X 15 States Pavement Rehabilitation Webinar: Construction Analysis for Pavement January 8, 2008 WASHTO-X 10 States Rehabilitation Strategies (CA4PRS) List of Presentations at Conferences and Meetings The team has made presentations at a number of national/ international technical conferences including TRB and AASHTO Sub-Committee annual meetings. Conference or Presenter TIG Written Date Meeting Name, Name, Presentation Title CAST paper? Location Organization Booth (Y/N) October, AASHTO Annual 2006 Meeting, Portland, OR Richard Land TIG: CAST Project N N January, TRB Annual Meeting, EB Lee, UC 2008 Washington, DC Berkeley - Y Y 5 AASHTO Nadarajah (Siva) Subcommittee on Sivaneswaran, Maintenance/Standing Y Federal Highway June 2008 Committee on - N Administration/E Environment/A B Lee, UC Management Berkeley Monterey CA November, ITS World Congress, EB Lee, UC Traffic Monitoring Studies 2008 New York, NY Berkeley with Surveillance Systems ? Y Nadarajah (Siva) Transportation Sivaneswaran, CA4PRS: A Decision- February, Construction Federal Highway Support Tool for Rapid Y 2009 Management, Administration/E Y Highway Renewal Projects Orlando, FL B Lee, UC Berkeley I-15 Ontario Project: EB Lee, UC Concrete Pavement Technology Berkeley / April, 2009 Technology Program, Implementation for Y Y Jonathan Hartog, St. Louis, MO Accelerated Concrete Caltrans Pavement Rehabilitation AASHTO Traffic/System Ops. EB Lee, UC June 14, Sub-Committee Berkeley / Jacqui - N N 2009 Meeting, Manchester, Ghezzy, Caltrans NH AASHTO Design Sub- July 19, Richard Land, Committee Meeting, - N N 2009 Caltrans Indianapolis, IN AASHTO Construction August 2, EB Lee, UC Sub-Committee - N N 2009 Berkeley Meeting, Chicago, IL AASHTO Value Michael August 31, Engineering Samadian, CA4PRS N 2009 Conference, San Caltrans/EB Lee, Y Diego, CA UC Berkeley List of Publications The CAST brochure is included in the Appendix B. Total Number Recipients and Distribution Date Produced Publication Type Produced Method December, Distributed at Conferences CAST Brochure 2007 and Workshops 6 Performance Measurement The team conducted a fact-finding survey at the initial stage of this project. The survey requested information about member state’s practices related to construction management and work zone traffic management. Also determined was their usage and interests in construction analysis software tools. Detailed survey results are shown in the Appendix C. Survey Information 2007 Survey 2009 Survey # of agencies responding to survey 34 37 # of agencies that have at least tried a CAST technology or similar software tools for traffic 22 - management during construction # of agencies interested in trying a new or improved CAST technology on an upcoming 33 - project # of agencies currently using at least one - 29 CAST technology on a routine basis # of agencies that have tried at least one of the CAST technologies but have not broadly - 6 implemented at this time. Software use breakdown: AIMSUN - 1 CA4PRS - 5 CORSIM - 21 FREQ - 3 HCS (Highway Capacity Software) 3 - IDAS - 1 PARAMICS - 4 PRIMAVERA - 30 TRANSMODELER - 1 QUICKZONE 6 - QUEWZ 4 - VISSIM 3 - Others (Excel, Syncro, etc.) 6 - 7 Lessons Learned Effective Tools and Methods (From the viewpoint of your lead states team, which were the most effective marketing tools and methods they used, and why were they believed to be the most effective.) Webinar: as the number of webinars increased, the number of participates increased. Caltrans upper management support (Larry Orcutt and Randy Iwasaki) who partnered with FHWA to allow the transfer of knowledge and technology to all state DOT’s. A FHWA champion (Jim) who acquired the license for all state DOT’s overcame two barriers: propriety issues and financial constrains. This pushed the technology to be implemented at the state level. The second component was the communication to FHWA Division offices. This was the key for the success of this project. Need strong marketing materials (brochure, one-page white paper). One-on-one training was an extremely effective tool. The timeliness of this technology in reference to the issues and problems with construction constrains that every DOT was dealing with. Major reason for success: this technology was needed now by DOT’s. Unique Tools and Methods (List any particularly creative or unique elements or methods used by your lead states team that other lead states teams should consider using.) FHWA purchased the licenses for all DOT’s. Ineffective Tools and Methods (From the viewpoint of your lead states team, which tools and methods were much less productive than desired, and provide your team’s recommendations concerning future use of these methods or activities.) Some initial webinars failed to engage DOT upper management. A team must get upper management buy in before getting middle management/users of technology involved. It is difficult to get traction within other DOT’s without this type of movement. Must find the correct level of entry to get DOT’s to implement. 8 General Comments (Provide any lessons learned not included above.) TIG should solicit and rate submissions based on the national issues/concerns. Need champion with ability to drive implementation activity. Some vendors did not show the same interest level providing information or participation. Perhaps vendors did not see the value in participating in the projects. Transition Plan Technology Transfer Office Name, Contact Phone Email Location Office of Asset Kenneth Jacoby Management, 202-366-6503 [email protected] Washington, DC Primary On-going Implementation Responsibility Committee Name, Contact Phone Email Organization Office of Asset Kenneth Jacoby Management, 202-366-6503 [email protected] Washington, DC Specific Future Actions Recommended Recommended Future Activity Time Frame Organization to Perform Send letter, which includes final report and Upon brochure to AASHTO Three subcommittees completion of AASHTO (Traffic, Design, Construction) final report Upon Send letter to SCOH members concerning completion of AASHTO the license availability final report Publish case studies for various CAST Tools 2010-2011 FHWA Continued meeting outreach efforts (eg 2010-2011 FHWA presentations) 9 On the Web Information will remain on the AASHTO TIG web site until such time that FHWA may be able to incorporate this information into their web site. 10