Implementation Manual — 3D Engineered Models for Highway Construction: The Iowa Experience; RB33-014, 2015

3D engineered modeling is a relatively new and developing technology that can provide numerous benefits to owners, engineers, contractors, and the general public. This manual is for highway agencies that are considering or are in the process of switching from 2D plan sets to 3D engineered models in their highway construction projects. It will discuss some of the benefits, applications, limitations, and implementation considerations for 3D engineered models used for survey, design, and construction. Note that is not intended to cover all eventualities in all states regarding the deployment of 3D engineered models for highway construction. Rather, it describes how one state—Iowa—uses 3D engineered models for construction of highway projects, from planning and surveying through design and construction.

Implementation of the Federal Highway Administration Final Rule on Work Zone Safety and Mobility, 2007

The Federal Highway Administration published the final rule updating 23 CFR 630 Subpart J in September 2004. The revised rule requires agencies using federal funding to address both safety and mobility in planning and construction of roadway improvements. The Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) requested the assistance of the Center for Transportation and Research in developing guidance for a policy and procedures to comply with the final rule. This report describes an in-depth examination of current Iowa DOT project development processes for all types of improvements, including maintenance, as well as a detailed characterization of work zone impact considerations throughout project completion. To comply with both the letter and perceived intent of the final rule on safety and mobility, the report features a suggested work zone policy statement and suggested revisions in the Iowa DOT project development processes, including a definition of the key element: significant projects.

Review of Automated Vehicle Technology: Policy and Implementation Implications; Version 1.0; RB28-015, 2016

This report provides recommendations for the state of Iowa over the next five years in regards to automated vehicle policy development. These administrative, planning, legal, and community strategy recommendations for government agencies include: • Encouraging automation by preparing government agencies, infrastructure, leveraging procurement, and advocating for safety mandates • Adjusting long range planning processes by identifying and incorporating a wide range of new automation scenarios • Beginning to analyze and, as necessary, clarify existing law as it apples to automated driving • Auditing existing law • Enforcing existing laws • Ensuring vehicle owners and operators bear the true cost of driving • Embracing flexibility by giving agencies the statutory authority to achieve regulatory goals through different means, allowing them to make small-scale exemptions to statutory regimes and clarifying their enforcement discretion • Thinking locally and preparing publicly • Sharing the steps being taken to promote (as well as to anticipate and regulate) automated driving • Instituting public education about automated vehicle technologies.

Embankment Quality and Assessment of Moisture Control Implementation, TR-677, 2016

A specification for contractor moisture quality control (QC) in roadway embankment construction has been in use for approximately 10 years in Iowa on about 190 projects. The use of this QC specification and the development of the soils certification program for the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) originated from Iowa Highway Research Board (IHRB) embankment quality research projects. Since this research, the Iowa DOT has applied compaction with moisture control on most embankment work under pavements. This study set out to independently evaluate the actual quality of compaction using the current specifications. Results show that Proctor tests conducted by Iowa State University (ISU) using representative material obtained from each test section where field testing was conducted had optimum moisture contents and maximum dry densities that are different from what was selected by the Iowa DOT for QC/quality assurance (QA) testing. Comparisons between the measured and selected values showed a standard error of 2.9 lb/ft3 for maximum dry density and 2.1% for optimum moisture content. The difference in optimum moisture content was as high as 4% and the difference in maximum dry density was as high as 6.5 lb/ft3 . The difference at most test locations, however, were within the allowable variation suggested in AASHTO T 99 for test results between different laboratories. The ISU testing results showed higher rates of data outside of the target limits specified based on the available contractor QC data for cohesive materials. Also, during construction observations, wet fill materials were often observed. Several test points indicated that materials were placed and accepted at wet of the target moisture contents. The statistical analysis results indicate that the results obtained from this study showed improvements over results from previous embankment quality research projects (TR-401 Phases I through III and TR-492) in terms of the percentage of data that fell within the specification limits. Although there was evidence of improvement, QC/QA results are not consistently meeting the target limits/values. Recommendations are provided in this report for Iowa DOT consideration with three proposed options for improvements to the current specifications. Option 1 provides enhancements to current specifications in terms of material-dependent control limits, training, sampling, and process control. Option 2 addresses development of alternative specifications that incorporate dynamic cone penetrometer or light weight deflectometer testing into QC/QA. Option 3 addresses incorporating calibrated intelligent compaction measurements into QC/QA.