Upload
jemima-peters
View
220
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CSS Compliance Testing Project
Presented by Chris Walker
CSS
18 May 2005
Introduction
• TRL national survey of reinstatement compliance monitoring and testing
• Analysis of responses
• The Scottish RAUC coring programme
• Recommendations for future action
Context
• Asset management• Improving highway asset life • Risk management• Service levels
• Best Value• Network safety, serviceability and sustainability• Gershon• “Living Streets”
• TM Act• Customer service• Quality management
TRL Survey
• Obtain a National picture of Utility reinstatement compliance testing
• Review existing advice on detailed testing (coring)
• Questionnaire sent to 184 LHA’ in England and Wales and posted on HAUC (UK) and RAUC(S) websites. Also distributed via NJUG
• 63 Responses• 52 Highway Authorities• 11 Utilities / Contractors
Works Notices
1015 137N =
UtilityAuthority
Wo
rks
No
tice
s
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
Actual & Estimated
Actual
Estimated
Median Values Authority (Actual) = 10,248
Authority (Estimated) = 7,500
Extrapolating to English HA’s
• Approximately 10,248 works per authority, per annum
• In the region of 1.5 million works in England per annum
Definitions
• Visual• Sample inspections, in accordance with the Code of
Practice for Inspections, that include the measurement of defects that an inspector could be reasonably expected to undertake, using basic tools.
• Detailed• Any inspections involving testing over and above the basic
levels used for a sample inspection. Typical examples of detailed testing include coring and detailed profile measurement.
Compliance Testing
92% of Authorities indicated that theyundertook compliance testing
Street authorities, Yes, 48, 92%
Street authorities, No, 4, 8%
Notes:11 out of 11 (100%) undertakers indicatedthat they carried out compliance testing
Extent of detailed compliance testing by Street Authorities
28 out of 46 Authorities indicated that they undertook no detailed compliance testing in 2003/4
all visual (28/46)
less than 5% detailed (13/46)
between 5 and 10% detailed (1/46)
between 10% and 20% detailed (2/46)
between 20% and 30% detailed (1/46)
all detailed (1/46)
Compliance Rates
• Visual• Survey indicated high level of compliance (on average)
• Detailed - Limited and variable data
• Compliance rates for detailed testing are generally lower than for visual inspections
Detailed testing
• Perceived by authorities to improve performance when undertaken
• Joint and Undertaker-led testing programmes generally favoured.
• Mainly based on coring
• Coring best suited to bound materials• Is further research on compliance required for unbound
materials in a street works environment?
Q5 Detailed Physical Test Methods
No of responses (out of 63) Typical Cost range
Rolling straight edge 1 £350
Sand patch test 3 £350
Profile measurement 11 £5-£30 Average £18
Coring (layer thickness) 25
£18-£140
Average £57 Coring (voids content) 11
Penetrometer 3 £5-£140 Average £73
Clegg Impact Tester 3 £5
Falling Weight Deflectometer 0 N/A
Density measurement 1 N/A
Q9 Protocols used for detailed testing
National Regional Local/own
Authority 18/52 13/52 4/52
Utility 6/11 1/11 3/11
Notes:Large number of non repliesSome respondents used National & Regional protocols
Q11 and Q12
Willing to be approached for
further information
Prepared to take part in future
national surveys?
Yes 36 (57%) 43 (68%)
No 27 (43%) 6 (10%)
(No response) 0 (0%) 14 (22%)
Total 63 (100%) 63 (100%)
Summary
• 92% of authority respondents carried out a compliance test regime
• Currently, compliance primarily based on a visual sample inspection regime
• Sample inspections achieved, on average, high compliance
• Indication that detailed testing (coring) identifies greater levels of non-compliance
• Detailed testing perceived to raise standards when introduced (RAUC)
• Joint and Undertaker-led coring programmes generally favoured.
• General willingness to participate in a national programme
Benefits of compliance testing
• Overall reinstatement performance and trends can be monitored
• Effect of improvement plans can be assessed
• Skills training can be targeted
• Performance-related incentives can be introduced
• Reduced costs of remedial works through less intervention
• Reduced disruption to road users
• Contributes to improved asset management
Recommendations
• Develop a national reinstatement compliance monitoring programme
• Produce nationally agreed protocols for compliance testing implemented through an Advice Note and / or Codes of Practice
• Develop a Quality Management approach to reinstatements
• Further research (unbound layers)
Next steps
• CSS and HAUC to review recommendations:• HAUC Specification Working Party• HAUC Inspection Working Party
• Determine how a national compliance monitoring programme is managed
• Commission further research on test methods for unbound materials
Compliance Testing
Presented by Chris Walker
CSS