42 resultados para Turtle chart
Resumo:
Capacity is affected by construction type and its intensity on adjacent open traffic lanes. The effect on capacity is a function of vehicles moving in and out of the closed lanes of the work zone, and the presence of heavy construction vehicles. Construction activity and its intensity, however, are not commonly considered in estimating capacity of a highway lane. The main purpose of this project was to attempt to quantify the effects of construction type and intensity (e.g. maintenance, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and milling) on work zone capacity. The objective of this project is to quantify the effects of construction type and its intensity on work zone capacity and to develop guidelines for MoDOT to estimate the specific operation type and intensity that will improve the traffic flow by reducing the traffic flow and queue length commonly associated with work zones. Despite the effort put into field data collection, the data collected did not show a full speed-flow chart therefore extracting a reliable capacity value was difficult. A statistical comparison between the capacity values found in this study using either methodologies indicates that there is an effect of construction activity on the values work zone capacity. It was found that the heavy construction activity reduces the capacity. It is very beneficial to conduct similar studies on the capacity of work zone with different lane closure barriers, which is also directly related to the type of work zone being short-term or long-term work zones. Also, the effect of different geometric and environmental characteristics of the roadway should be considered in future studies.
Resumo:
The objective of this project was to assess the predictive accuracy of flood frequency estimation for small Iowa streams based on the Rational Method, the NRCS curve number approach, and the Iowa Runoff Chart. The evaluation was based on comparisons of flood frequency estimates at sites with sufficiently long streamgage records in the Midwest, and selected urban sites throughout the United States. The predictive accuracy and systematic biases (under- or over-estimation) of the approaches was evaluated based on forty-six Midwest sites and twenty-one urban sites. The sensitivity of several watershed characteristics such as soil properties, slope, and land use classification was also explored. Recommendations on needed changes or refinements for applications to Iowa streams are made.
Resumo:
Traditionally, the Iowa Department of Transportation has used the Iowa Runoff Chart and single-variable regional-regression equations (RREs) from a U.S. Geological Survey report (published in 1987) as the primary methods to estimate annual exceedance-probability discharge (AEPD) for small (20 square miles or less) drainage basins in Iowa. With the publication of new multi- and single-variable RREs by the U.S. Geological Survey (published in 2013), the Iowa Department of Transportation needs to determine which methods of AEPD estimation provide the best accuracy and the least bias for small drainage basins in Iowa. Twenty five streamgages with drainage areas less than 2 square miles (mi2) and 55 streamgages with drainage areas between 2 and 20 mi2 were selected for the comparisons that used two evaluation metrics. Estimates of AEPDs calculated for the streamgages using the expected moments algorithm/multiple Grubbs-Beck test analysis method were compared to estimates of AEPDs calculated from the 2013 multivariable RREs; the 2013 single-variable RREs; the 1987 single-variable RREs; the TR-55 rainfall-runoff model; and the Iowa Runoff Chart. For the 25 streamgages with drainage areas less than 2 mi2, results of the comparisons seem to indicate the best overall accuracy and the least bias may be achieved by using the TR-55 method for flood regions 1 and 3 (published in 2013) and by using the 1987 single-variable RREs for flood region 2 (published in 2013). For drainage basins with areas between 2 and 20 mi2, results of the comparisons seem to indicate the best overall accuracy and the least bias may be achieved by using the 1987 single-variable RREs for the Southern Iowa Drift Plain landform region and for flood region 3 (published in 2013), by using the 2013 multivariable RREs for the Iowan Surface landform region, and by using the 2013 or 1987 single-variable RREs for flood region 2 (published in 2013). For all other landform or flood regions in Iowa, use of the 2013 single-variable RREs may provide the best overall accuracy and the least bias. An examination was conducted to understand why the 1987 single-variable RREs seem to provide better accuracy and less bias than either of the 2013 multi- or single-variable RREs. A comparison of 1-percent annual exceedance-probability regression lines for hydrologic regions 1–4 from the 1987 single-variable RREs and for flood regions 1–3 from the 2013 single-variable RREs indicates that the 1987 single-variable regional-regression lines generally have steeper slopes and lower discharges when compared to 2013 single-variable regional-regression lines for corresponding areas of Iowa. The combination of the definition of hydrologic regions, the lower discharges, and the steeper slopes of regression lines associated with the 1987 single-variable RREs seem to provide better accuracy and less bias when compared to the 2013 multi- or single-variable RREs; better accuracy and less bias was determined particularly for drainage areas less than 2 mi2, and also for some drainage areas between 2 and 20 mi2. The 2013 multi- and single-variable RREs are considered to provide better accuracy and less bias for larger drainage areas. Results of this study indicate that additional research is needed to address the curvilinear relation between drainage area and AEPDs for areas of Iowa.
Resumo:
Chart of common communicable disease, stating incubation, transmission, control measures, and public health response produced by Iowa Department of Public Health.
Resumo:
To supplement other environmental monitoring programs and to protect the health of people consuming fish from waters within this state, the state of Iowa conducts fish tissue monitoring. Since 1980, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region VII (U.S. EPA), and the State Hygienic Laboratory (SHL) have cooperatively conducted annual statewide collections and analyses of fish for toxic contaminants. From 1983 to 2014, this monitoring effort was known as the Regional Ambient Fish Tissue Monitoring Program (RAFT). Beginning in 2015, the only statewide fish contaminant-monitoring program in Iowa was changed to the Iowa Fish Tissue Monitoring Program (IFTMP). The IFTMP is administered by IDNR and the tissue analyses are completed at the SHL. Historically, the data generated from the IFTMP have enabled IDNR to document temporal changes in contaminant levels and to identify Iowa lakes and rivers where high levels of contaminants in fish potentially threaten the health of fish-consuming Iowans (see IDNR 2006). The IFTMP incorporates five different types of monitoring sites: 1) status, 2) follow-up, 3) trend, 4) turtle, and 5) random.
Resumo:
To supplement other environmental monitoring programs and to protect the health of people consuming fish from waters within this state, the state of Iowa conducts fish tissue monitoring. Since 1980, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region VII (U.S. EPA), and the State Hygienic Laboratory (SHL) have cooperatively conducted annual statewide collections and analyses of fish for toxic contaminants. From 1983 to 2014, this monitoring effort was known as the Regional Ambient Fish Tissue Monitoring Program (RAFT). Beginning in 2015, the only statewide fish contaminant-monitoring program in Iowa was changed to the Iowa Fish Tissue Monitoring Program (IFTMP). The IFTMP is administered by IDNR and the analyses are completed at the SHL. Historically, the data generated from the IFTMP have enabled IDNR to document temporal changes in contaminant levels and to identify Iowa lakes and rivers where high levels of contaminants in fish potentially threaten the health of fish-consuming Iowans (see IDNR 2006). The IFTMP incorporates five different types of monitoring sites: 1) status, 2) follow-up, 3) trend, 4) turtle, and 5) random.
Resumo:
To supplement other environmental monitoring programs and to protect the health of people consuming fish from waters within this state, the state of Iowa conducts fish tissue monitoring. Since 1980, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region VII (U.S. EPA), and the State Hygienic Laboratory (SHL) have cooperatively conducted annual statewide collections and analyses of fish for toxic contaminants. Beginning in 1983, this monitoring effort became known as the Regional Ambient Fish Tissue Monitoring Program (RAFT). Currently, the RAFT program is the only statewide fish contaminant-monitoring program in Iowa. Historically, the data generated from the RAFT program have enabled IDNR to document temporal changes in contaminant levels and to identify Iowa lakes and rivers where high levels of contaminants in fish potentially threaten the health of fish-consuming Iowans (see IDNR 2006). The Iowa RAFT monitoring program incorporates five different types of monitoring sites: 1) status, 2) follow-up, 3) trend, 4) turtle, and 5) random.
Resumo:
To supplement other environmental monitoring programs and to protect the health of people consuming fish from waters within this state, the state of Iowa conducts fish tissue monitoring. Since 1980, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region VII (U.S. EPA), and the State Hygienic Laboratory (SHL) have cooperatively conducted annual statewide collections and analyses of fish for toxic contaminants. Beginning in 1983, this monitoring effort became known as the Regional Ambient Fish Tissue Monitoring Program (RAFT). Currently, the RAFT program is the only statewide fish contaminant-monitoring program in Iowa. Historically, the data generated from the RAFT program have enabled IDNR to document temporal changes in contaminant levels and to identify Iowa lakes and rivers where high levels of contaminants in fish potentially threaten the health of fish-consuming Iowans (see IDNR 2006). The Iowa RAFT monitoring program incorporates five different types of monitoring sites: 1) status, 2) follow-up, 3) trend, 4) turtle, and 5) random.
Resumo:
To supplement other environmental monitoring programs and to protect the health of people consuming fish from waters within this state, the state of Iowa conducts fish tissue monitoring. Since 1980, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region VII (U.S. EPA), and the State Hygienic Laboratory (SHL) have cooperatively conducted annual statewide collections and analyses of fish for toxic contaminants. Beginning in 1983, this monitoring effort became known as the Regional Ambient Fish Tissue Monitoring Program (RAFT). Currently, the RAFT program is the only statewide fish contaminant-monitoring program in Iowa. Historically, the data generated from the RAFT program have enabled IDNR to document temporal changes in contaminant levels and to identify Iowa lakes and rivers where high levels of contaminants in fish potentially threaten the health of fish-consuming Iowans (see IDNR 2006). The Iowa RAFT monitoring program incorporates five different types of monitoring sites: 1) status, 2) trend, 3) follow-up, 4) turtle, and 5) random.
Resumo:
To supplement other environmental monitoring programs and to protect the health of people consuming fish from waters within this state, the state of Iowa conducts fish tissue monitoring. Since 1980, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region VII (U.S. EPA), and the State Hygienic Laboratory (SHL) have cooperatively conducted annual statewide collections and analyses of fish for toxic contaminants. Beginning in 1983, this monitoring effort became known as the Regional Ambient Fish Tissue Monitoring Program (RAFT). Currently, the RAFT program is the only statewide fish contaminant-monitoring program in Iowa. Historically, the data generated from the RAFT program have enabled IDNR to document temporal changes in contaminant levels and to identify Iowa lakes and rivers where high levels of contaminants in fish potentially threaten the health of fish-consuming Iowans (see IDNR 2006). The Iowa RAFT monitoring program incorporates five different types of monitoring sites: 1) status, 2) trend, 3) random, 4) follow-up and 5) turtle.
Resumo:
To supplement other environmental monitoring programs and to protect the health of people consuming fish from waters within this state, the state of Iowa conducts fish tissue monitoring. Since 1980, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region VII (U.S. EPA), and the University of Iowa Hygienic Laboratory (UHL) have cooperatively conducted annual statewide collections and analyses of fish for toxic contaminants. Beginning in 1983, this monitoring effort became known as the Regional Ambient Fish Tissue Monitoring Program (RAFT). Currently, the RAFT program is the only statewide fish contaminant-monitoring program in Iowa. Historically, the data generated from the RAFT program have enabled IDNR to document temporal changes in contaminant levels and to identify Iowa lakes and rivers where high levels of contaminants in fish potentially threaten the health of fish-consuming Iowans (see IDNR 2006). The Iowa RAFT monitoring program incorporates four different types of monitoring sites: 1) status, 2) trend, 3) random and 4) follow-up. New for 2009 was the one-time inclusion of snapping turtle tissue as part of the Iowa RAFT sampling program.
Resumo:
This report proposes, that for certain types of highway construction projects undertaken by the Iowa Department of Transportation, a scheduling technique commonly referred to as linear scheduling may be more effective than the Critical Path Method scheduling technique that is currently being used. The types of projects that appear to be good candidates for the technique are those projects that have a strong linear orientation. Like a bar chart, this technique shows when an activity is scheduled to occur and like a CPM schedule it shows the sequence in which activities are expected to occur. During the 1992 construction season, the authors worked with an inlay project on Interstate 29 to demonstrate the linear scheduling technique to the Construction Office. The as-planned schedule was developed from the CPM schedule that the contractor had developed for the project. Therefore, this schedule represents what a linear representation of a CPM schedule would look like, and not necessarily what a true linear schedule would look like if it had been the only scheduling technique applied to the project. There is a need to expand the current repertoire of scheduling techniques to address those projects for which the bar chart and CPM may not be appropriate either because of the lack of control information or due to overly complex process for the actual project characteristics. The scheduling approaches used today on transportation projects have many shortcomings for properly modeling the real world constraints and conditions which are encountered. Linear project's predilection for activities with variable production rates, a concept very difficult to handle with the CPM, is easily handled and visualized with the linear technique. It is recommended that work proceed with the refinement of the method of linear scheduling described above and the development of a microcomputer based system for use by the Iowa Department of Transportation and contractors for its implementation. The system will be designed to provide the information needed to adjust schedules in a rational understandable method for monitoring progress on the projects and alerting Iowa Department of Transportation personnel when the contractor is deviating from the plan.