detours – selection and design highways & engineering conference march 2, 2006

87
Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Upload: maximilian-parsons

Post on 23-Dec-2015

216 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Detours – Selection and DesignDetours – Selection and Design

Highways & Engineering ConferenceMarch 2, 2006

Page 2: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 3: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 4: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Presenters:Presenters:

Paul Ferry, Highways Engineer Lesly Tribelhorn, Highways Design Engineer

Page 5: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

ObjectivesObjectives

Know which types of detours are appropriate Apply proper design criteria Consider safety and costs Think about environmental, other site constraints Know where to look for information

Page 6: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Types of DetoursTypes of Detours

Page 7: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Types of DetoursTypes of Detours

Detour traffic onto an existing route Temporary detour Median crossovers (divided highways) Lane closures Part-width construction

Page 8: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway

Page 9: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway Median crossovers – design considerations

GuardrailBridge widthsInterchange proximity and accessReview distance between crossoversLocation (topography, geometrics, distance between)DrainageFuture projects

Page 10: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway

Median crossovers – safety+ Ingress/egress controlled+ Interstate standards met– Two-way traffic– Cross over of traffic– No passing

Page 11: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway Median crossovers – cost considerations

Construct & remove crossoverTraffic control (length, maintenance)Guardrail revisions

Median crossovers – site constraintsTopography considerations for crossover locationNo environmentalNo R/W

Page 12: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 13: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 14: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 15: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 16: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 17: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 18: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 19: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 20: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 21: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 22: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 23: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 24: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 25: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 26: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 27: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 28: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 29: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 30: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 31: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 32: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 33: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 34: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 35: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 36: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 37: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 38: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 39: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 40: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway

Lane closure – design considerationsBridge widthsTemporary barrier rail– Length of area to be protected– Barrier deflection– Taper rates– End treatment

Page 41: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway

Lane closure – safety+ Directional traffic separated+ Interstate standards met+ Access controlled– Excavation located next to travel lane– Bridge work – extended duration– No passing

Page 42: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway

Lane closure – cost considerationsTraffic control

Lane closure – site constraintsInterchange locations

Page 43: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway

Temporary detours – design considerationsUsually for culvert replacement in high fillMay need temporary widening, barrier railJack and bore instead (≤48” diameter)?Need temporary access control fence?Proximity of interchanges

Page 44: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway

Temporary detours – safety+ Short length– Driver expectations violated

Temporary detours – cost considerationsConstruction & removal of detourTraffic control minimized

Page 45: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway

Temporary detours – site constraintsEnvironmental involvement possibleR/W, access fence possible

Page 46: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway

Detour traffic onto an existing routeBridge widths, structural capacity, clearanceRoad surfacing and structureRoadway widthSafety issues (mixing traffic, accesses, standards)Clear zoneLength and duration of detourCosts - traffic control and surfacing improvement

Page 47: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Interstate/FreewayInterstate/Freeway

Page 48: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Two-lane rural routesTwo-lane rural routes

Page 49: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Two-lane rural routesTwo-lane rural routes

Detour onto an existing route - designCost of temporary detour excessive?Bridge widths and capacityAdequate clearanceRoadway widths and structural capacityClear zoneWork with construction and maintenance

Page 50: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Two-lane rural routesTwo-lane rural routes

Detour onto an existing routeSafety depends on route selectedCosts minimal – traffic control, route maintenanceSite constraints should be minimal

Page 51: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Two-lane rural routesTwo-lane rural routes

Temporary detours

Page 52: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 53: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Two-lane rural routesTwo-lane rural routes

Temporary detours Replacement of drainage structuresExcavation leaves insufficient room for traffic

Page 54: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 55: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Design Criteria – temporary detoursDesign Criteria – temporary detours

Page 56: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

AlignmentAlignment

Design speedRoute design speed – 10 mphLocationDurationSight distance

Page 57: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

AlignmentAlignment

LocationTopography – which side most economicalUtility impactsR/W issuesEnvironmental impactsImpacts to adjacent developmentsAccesses

Page 58: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

AlignmentAlignment

Request adequate survey for proper design Offset and detour length Normal crown horizontal curves Adequate cover over culverts Bridge freeboard Downstream location preferred

Page 59: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

SurfacingSurfacing

Traffic loading Detour duration

Page 60: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Duration of Detour Operation Current

ADT

< 5 Days 5 - 30 Days 31 Days – 3 Months

> 3 Months

< 500 gravel gravel dust palliative dust palliative

500 - 1499 gravel dust palliative dust palliative PMS

1500 - 6000 dust palliative dust palliative PMS PMS

> 6000 dust palliative PMS PMS PMS

GUIDELINES FOR SELECTION OF DETOUR SURFACING

Figure 15.3G

Page 61: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Roadway WidthRoadway Width

24’ adequate for most ADT < 400, consider narrower lanes

10’ – 11’Two-way, one lane

Page 62: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Grading/side slopesGrading/side slopes

Typically 3:1Traffic volumesDetour durationTemporary barrierGeotech involvement!Detour embankment part of roadway?

Page 63: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

DrainageDrainage

Size provided by Hydraulics Address sequencing for flowing streams

Page 64: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Safety and costsSafety and costs

Safety level variesDesignTrafficDriver expectations

Costs can be significantConstruction and removalR/W, utility movesTraffic control and maintenance

Page 65: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Environmental considerationsEnvironmental considerations

Page 66: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 67: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Environmental considerationsEnvironmental considerations

Coordinate with district biologist Special construction methods for streams Wetland, historic, archaeological site avoidance

Page 68: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Part-width constructionPart-width construction

Design considerations:Low speed environment?Wide enough for oversize loads?Bridges impacted?Practical locations available for temp. detour?Can temporary barrier rail reduce widening?

Page 69: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Part-width constructionPart-width construction

Safety can be compromisedDriver expectation – sudden speed reduction?Design may be necessaryOffset by short construction time

Cost savings can be significant Evaluate environmental, R/W involvement

Page 70: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006
Page 71: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Lane closuresLane closures

Special case for two-lane highwayCosts or construction issues for other detour typesSafety compromised - very short duration only24-hour flaggers for safetyShort length preferred (sight distance, safety)Costs low – traffic control onlyEnvironmental, other impacts minimal

Page 72: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Two-lane rural routesTwo-lane rural routes

Page 73: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Other options?Other options?

Page 74: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Other options?Other options?

Offset alignment and use PTWDetours for drainage installation not neededMore efficient construction operationEnhanced safety

Jack and bore Road closures

Page 75: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Urban constructionUrban construction

Page 76: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Urban constructionUrban construction

Pedestrian/ADA access Utility considerations Emergency vehicle access Impacts to businesses Public relations Worker safety

Page 77: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Urban constructionUrban construction

Costs and safety comparisons Depend on work, location Specific to project

Page 78: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Urban constructionUrban construction

Detour traffic onto an existing routeClose one block at a timeSequencing and coordination

Page 79: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Urban constructionUrban construction

Existing route detour considerations:Additional traffic loads on adjacent streetsSurfacing improvements necessary?Pedestrian/ADA accommodationBusiness access – signing criticalHospital, residences, school access

Page 80: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Urban constructionUrban construction

Lane closuresRoom to accommodate traffic and construction workNeed positive separation for utility work in trenches?Access to businesses - may need detourPedestrian/ADA access on both sides of street

Page 81: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Urban constructionUrban construction

Temporary detour & median crossoversUsually impracticalCostsAdequate room

Page 82: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

Safety features compromiseSafety features compromise

Detour traffic onto an existing route Temporary detour Median crossovers (divided highways) Lane closures Part-width construction

Page 83: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

General questions to addressGeneral questions to address

Page 84: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

General questions to addressGeneral questions to address

ADT and truck traffic; emergency vehicle use Site considerations Can the road be closed to through traffic? Are there adjacent projects? Are there other projects that may be affected?

Detour onto another construction projectWide loads

Page 85: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

SummarySummary

Types of detours Types of highway Considerations:

Design issuesCost comparisonsSafety compromisesEnvironmental impacts; other site constraints

Page 86: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

ResourcesResources

MDT Road Design Manual; 2006Chapter 15

AASHTO: A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (Green Book); 2004

AASHTO: Guidelines for Geometric Design of Very Low-Volume Local Roads (ADT < 400); 2001

Page 87: Detours – Selection and Design Highways & Engineering Conference March 2, 2006

ResourcesResources

Paul Ferry(406) [email protected]

Lesly Tribelhorn(406) [email protected]