SOLICITATION NOTICE
A -- Nondestructive Testing to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration
- Notice Date
- 7/29/2008
- Notice Type
- Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
- NAICS
- 541712
— Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
- Contracting Office
- The National Academies, Transportation Research Board, Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2), 500 Fifth Street NW, Washington, District of Columbia, 20001
- ZIP Code
- 20001
- Solicitation Number
- SHRP2R06A
- Archive Date
- 9/24/2008
- Point of Contact
- Monica A. Starnes,, Phone: 202-334-1894, Linda Mason,, Phone: 202-334-3241
- E-Mail Address
-
mstarnes@nas.edu, lmason@nas.edu
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- SHRP 2 Request for Proposals Focus Area: Renewal Project Number: R06-A Project Title: Nondestructive Testing to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration Date Posted: July 29, 2008 SHRP 2 Background To address the challenges of moving people and goods efficiently and safely on the nation's highways, Congress has created the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2). SHRP 2 is a targeted, short-term research program carried out through competitively awarded contracts to qualified researchers in the academic, private, and public sectors. SHRP 2 addresses four strategic focus areas: the role of human behavior in highway safety (Safety); rapid highway renewal (Renewal); congestion reduction through improved travel time reliability (Reliability); and transportation planning that better integrates community, economic, and environmental considerations into new highway capacity (Capacity). Under current legislative provisions, SHRP 2 will receive approximately $150 million with total program duration of 7 years. Renewal Focus Area The overall goal of the SHRP 2 Renewal program is to develop a consistent, systematic approach to performing highway renewal that is rapid, causes minimum disruption, and produces long-lasting facilities. The renewal scope applies to all classes of roads. Project Background In a TRB millennium paper, Chase and Laman (1999) stated, "the largest problem identified for the NHS [National Highway System] bridges is bridge decks, which are either in poor structural condition or too narrow. It is estimated that over $1 billion is spent on bridge decks each year. Over 88 percent of all bridge deck area (2.8 billion square feet) is concrete, and about half of those bridge decks have a wearing surface over the concrete...There is a need to develop network-level bridge deck evaluation methods that can provide an accurate assessment of bridge deck condition for decks with wearing surfaces... In addition, cost overruns are very common on bridge deck replacement projects, resulting in a need for improved project-level deck evaluation technologies." The issues presented in this paper are still considered to be valid. Highway agencies need to evaluate bridge deck condition in order to optimize the effective timing of preventive maintenance, prioritize bridge deck repair and rehabilitation, determine the scope of the required repairs, and make repair/replace decisions. Timing and repair strategies based on nondestructive testing (NDT) results to classify deck condition provide the potential for significant operational improvements. The problem is that deck deterioration frequently takes place below the surface, and cannot be readily evaluated by visual means. Most older decks now have asphalt concrete (AC) or Portland cement concrete (PCC) overlays, making subsurface deterioration conditions even more difficult to detect. Traditional deck inspection methods, such as chain drag, half-cell potentials, and chloride content are slow, require closures, and are not necessarily effective. Over the past 10 years new higher speed technologies such as ground penetrating radar (GPR), infrared thermography, and scanning impact-echo have been developed and implemented to some extent by highway agencies to meet their needs for bridge deck condition assessment. These technologies, however, have not been widely adapted or accepted. Agencies are not fully aware of the capabilities and limitations of these methods, or how they should best be used. Some have had less than positive experiences, possibly due to unrealistic expectations and improper use. Objectives The objectives of this project are: • to identify and characterize rapid NDT technologies for concrete deck deterioration; • to evaluate the strengths and limitations of applicable NDT technologies from the perspective of speed, accuracy, precision, and ease of use; • to validate the promising technologies; • to recommend test procedures and protocols for the most effective application of the bridge deck NDT methods evaluated, and; • to develop a repository for practitioners. Tasks Task descriptions are intended to provide a framework for conducting the research. SHRP 2 is seeking the insights of proposers on how best to achieve the research objectives. Proposers are expected to describe research plans that can realistically be accomplished within the constraints of available funds and contract time. Proposals must present the proposers' current thinking in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the issues and the soundness of their approach to meeting the research objectives Phase I Task 1: Conduct an international literature search to identify applicable NDT technologies and techniques for different concrete deck types (i.e. slab, voided slab, and deck/girder with and without AC or PCC overlays) and concrete deterioration including delaminations arising from chloride-induced rebar corrosion, cracking caused by alkali silica reaction (ASR), cracking caused by overloading, etc. The literature search should also include technologies used in other industries (such as aerospace, geophysical, etc.) that have potential application in the detection of various types of concrete bridge deck deterioration. Task 2: From the literature search, categorize and rank the most promising techniques from the perspective of speed, accuracy, precision, and ease of use. Task 3: Propose validation test beds (existing and/or to be constructed) for independent evaluation of the NDT techniques for each deck deterioration issue under investigation. (See Special Note 1) Task 4: Propose for SHRP 2 approval an independent panel of experts to review and prioritize the practicality and applicability (speed, accuracy, precision, and ease of use, etc.) for successful implementation of the promising NDT techniques. A minimum of 5 volunteers is suggested for this independent panel, which should include bridge and inspection experts from transportation agencies and (civil) engineering consulting firms. Upon SHRP 2 approval of panel membership, conduct a working session with the independent panel to prioritize the techniques and establish the practical values of speed, accuracy, precision, etc. needed from the technologies. Task 5: Recommend the technologies to be evaluated in subsequent tasks and prepare a work plan for Phase II. The work plan needs to include the strategy for inviting vendors and ensuring wide participation during the validation tests in Phase II. Task 6: Prepare a Phase I Report documenting Tasks 1 through 5. Wait for SHRP 2 approval before proceeding to Phase II. Phase II After approval of the Phase I Report, and on receipt of direction to proceed, conduct the following tasks: Task 7: Conduct validation tests to evaluate the recommended technologies for each deterioration condition. Task 8: Based on the results from Task 7, document the generic features for all NDT technologies tested. Task 9: For each deck deterioration condition, recommend the most appropriate NDT technology, equipment specifications, and inspection procedures and protocols that would yield optimum results (based on the desired accuracy, precision, speed, and ease of use as established in Phase I). Task 10: Develop an electronic repository (tool-box) of NDT techniques for identification of bridge deck deterioration that could be incorporated into transportation agencies' inspection manuals and/or management systems. The repository should include documentation for test procedures, protocols, photos, sample data output, equipment features (cost, availability, specifications, etc.), advantages, and limitations. Task 11: Prepare and submit a Final Report documenting Tasks 1 through 10. The final report should also include suggestions on equipment modifications and/or future research needed to develop promising technologies that could meet any gaps found on the current technologies. Deliverables • Phase I Report at the end of Task 6 • Final Report • Electronic repository of NDT techniques developed in Task 10 • Quarterly progress reports • Three (3) interim meetings with SHRP 2 staff: One (1) in Washington, DC and two (2) at the contractor's facility • Telephone conference calls, as needed • One (1) interim meeting with the Renewal Technical Coordinating Committee in Washington DC; Irvine, CA; or Woods Hole, MA. Funds Available: Not to exceed $750,000 for the entire project. Contract Period: Thirty (30) months for the entire project Responsible Staff: Dr. Monica A. Starnes, mstarnes@nas.edu, 202-334-1894 Authorization to Begin Work: January 2009, anticipated Proposals (20 single-bound copies) are due not later than 4:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) on September 9, 2008 This is a firm deadline, and extensions simply are not granted. In order to be considered, all 20 copies of the agency's proposal accompanied by the executed, unmodified Liability Statement must be in our offices not later than the deadline shown, or they will be rejected. References Chase, S., and Laman, J., "Dynamics and Field Testing of Bridges," TRB Millenium Paper, TRB A2C05 Committee on Dynamics and Field Testing of Bridges, December, 1999. (available at: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/millennium/00029.pdf ) (1999) Special Note 1: The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Nondestructive (NDE) Center at Turner Fairbanks Highway Research Center may have test beds feasible for use in this research. For more information about the FHWA NDE Center, please contact Mr. Frank Jalinoos at (202) 493-3082 or frank.jalinoos@fhwa.dot.gov. This statement does not imply endorsement by the National Academies or SHRP 2 of this or any specific facility. Liability Statement The signature of an authorized representative of the proposing agency is required on the unaltered statement in order for SHRP 2 to accept the agency's proposal for consideration. Proposals submitted without this executed and unaltered statement by the proposal deadline will be summarily rejected. An executed, unaltered statement indicates the agency's intent and ability to execute a contract that includes the provisions in the statement. The Liability Statement is Figure 1 in the Manual for Conducting Research and Preparing Proposals for SHRP 2 ( http://trb.org/shrp2/SHRPII_Instructions.asp ) (see General Note 4). Here is a printable version of the SHRP 2 Liability Statement ( http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/LiabilityStatement.pdf ). A free copy of the Adobe Acrobat PDF reader is available at http://www.adobe.com. Delivery Address PROPOSAL-SHRP 2 ATTN: Neil F. Hawks Director, Strategic Highway Research Program 2 Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Phone: 202-334-1430 General Notes 1. Proposals will be evaluated by SHRP 2 staff and Expert Task Groups (ETGs) consisting of individuals collectively very knowledgeable in the problem area. Selection of an agency is made by the SHRP 2 Oversight Committee, based on the recommendation from SHRP 2 staff and the ETG. The following factors are considered: (1) the proposer's demonstrated understanding of the problem; (2) the merit of the proposed research approach and experimental design; (3) the experience, qualifications, and objectivity of the research team in the same or closely related problem area; (4) the proposer's plan for participation by disadvantaged business enterprises-small firms owned and controlled by minorities or women; and (5) the adequacy of facilities. 2. Any clarifications regarding this RFP will be posted on the SHRP 2 Web site ( www.TBR.org/SHRP2 ). Announcements of such clarifications will be posted on the front page and, when possible, will be noted in the TRB e-newsletter. Proposers are advised to check the Web site frequently until August 26, 2008, when no further comments will be posted. 3. According to the provisions of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, which relates to nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs, all parties are hereby notified that the contract entered into pursuant to this announcement will be awarded without discrimination on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or disability. 4. The essential features required in a proposal for research are detailed in the Manual for Conducting Research and Preparing Proposals for SHRP 2 ( http://onlinebubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/PreparingSHRP2Reports.pdf ). Proposals must be prepared according to this document, and attention is directed specifically to Section IV for mandatory requirements. Proposals that do not conform to these requirements will be rejected. 5. The total funds available are made known in the project statement and line items of the budget are examined to determine the reasonableness of the allocation of funds to the various tasks. If the proposed total cost exceeds the funds available, the proposal is rejected. 6. All proposals become the property of the Transportation Research Board. Final disposition will be made according to the policies thereof, including the right to reject all proposals. IMPORTANT NOTICE Potential proposers should understand that the research project described herein is tentative. The final content of the program depends on the level of funding made available. Nevertheless, to be prepared to execute research contracts as soon as possible after sponsors' approvals, the Strategic Highway Research Program is assuming that the tentative program will become official in its entirety and is proceeding with requests for proposals and selections of research agencies.
- Web Link
-
FedBizOpps Complete View
(https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=2ecb49df5c62b61a73b4cd91c4000f18&tab=core&_cview=1)
- Record
- SN01626247-W 20080731/080729230458-2ecb49df5c62b61a73b4cd91c4000f18 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |