https://epg.modot.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Training&feedformat=atomEngineering_Policy_Guide - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T09:18:50ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.33.1https://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Category_talk:Better_Roads,_Brighter_Future&diff=19166Category talk:Better Roads, Brighter Future2008-12-01T19:19:08Z<p>Training: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Vertical Clearance and Depth Transitions ==<br />
<br />
In this section it states, "Maintain a standard vertical clearance under bridges with standard vertical clearances." The link that this goes to is for bridge vertical clearances for new construction. Since the Better/Brighter projects are resurfacing I do not believe that this is the clearance that we want to use. It has always been my understanding that the minimum vertical clearance for new construction had built in extra clearance to provide for future resurfacing projects but I can't find where it states this number. On several bridges I have looked at it is possible to overlay the road and not require a height restriction sign but it reduces the clearance below the minimum vertical clearnce identified for new construction. Or is this section simply saying maintain the existing clearance in which case we need to coldmill under the bridge or replace the pavement.<br />
<br />
[[User:Tschid|Dan Tschirgi:]] The existing clearance must be maintained whether currently substandard or standard. Discussion is underway that may lead to clarification of this guidance in the near future.<br />
<br />
== Vertical Clearance and Depth Transitions ==<br />
<br />
The note "Use 1 in. in 50 ft. [Pavement Depth Transition]" The link for the pavement depth transition is to the Special Sheets. Currently, there are no special sheets showing this drawing at this location. Further below under the PLANS DEVELOPMENT section, "Widening and Resurfacing" is linked to figure D71. This drawing shows the depth transition as 1 to 1200 (1"=100'). This can be misleading as to what needs to be used.<br />
<br />
[[User:Tschid|Dan Tschirgi:]] A 1 in. in 50 ft. (1:600) depth transition is used for Better Roads, Brighter Future projects, so the link to the special sheets has been removed and the link in the Plans Development section to the D71 sheet has been changed to the Vertical Clearance and Depth Transition section of the article. Thanks for pointing out the discrepancy.</div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=18538Talk:Main Page2008-09-11T16:27:05Z<p>Training: test</p>
<hr />
<div>Why do we have 2 people on the front page that no longer work for MoDOT? Melissa left MoDOT for the City of Olathe and should not be featured on the front page. I can't remember the other guys name, but he has been retired for a couple of years. Can we get a picture with some current employees?<br />
<br />
[[USER:smithk|Keith L. Smith:]] Good question. Actually, as time passes, there will probably be several people pictured in the EPG that will have been part of our history. We are interested in portraying aspects of MoDOT (especially people at their work) in interesting, higher quality photos. Thus, the work portrayed is usually of much more importance than the people involved. It will probably not be necessary or desirable to erase photos from past employees. Thank you for your input!<br />
<br />
== Main Purpose of "Logging In" to EPG ==<br />
<br />
I can use the EPG without logging in to the application. I just logged in for the first time and I see that I can participate in a Discussion Thread. Is this where we would point out spelling errors in the EPG, if we should find them? What is the "vision" for this Discussion Thread?<br />
<br />
[[User:Tschid|Dan Tschirgi:]] The discussion capabilities of the EPG are available for users to give comments and suggestions on the content of the guidance. We are also appreciative for anyone pointing out errors and omissions. Members of the Engineering Policy Group watch the articles for specific comments made. The discussions can also take place between any users of the EPG.<br />
<br />
== Change Order Approval Rules ==<br />
<br />
I do have a suggestion. We could use clarification of the Construction Manual/EPG for the change order approval rules in Section 137.2. Here is the excerpt from the EPG Section 137.2 for a Major Change Order: "5. Any change in a major item greater than 25%. 6. Any change of a contract amount greater than 25%." <br />
<br />
It would be clearer if it said percentage of what number. For example, is #5 saying "any change in a major item greater than 25% of the line item or is it 25% of the original contract's Total Dollar Amount for the entire project. It would be helpful to many, I think because this reads as being a little vague in my view.<br />
<br />
[[USER:smithk|Keith L. Smith:]] This very item had recently been discussed, but your input helped get the article updated a little more quickly. Thank you for your input. The EPG 137.2 portion of the article now states: 5. Any change in a major line item greater than 25% from the original contract amount for that line item (in dollars). 6. Any change of the contract amount greater than 25% of the original contract bid amount (also in dollars).<br />
<br />
== Blue Book for Rental Rates ==<br />
<br />
I was wondering why the Blue Book isn't linked to the EPG. There is discussion about the rental rates in section 137.3.2 Form C-FA2. Is it possible to link it? We have a shortcut on our desktops for it, but it could be helpful as part of EPG, perhaps.<br />
<br />
[[USER:smithk|Keith L. Smith:]] Thank you for an interesting suggestion - one that has not been presented to us until now. Please forward the link you use and we will discuss if and where to place it in the EPG. This sounds potentially useful!<br />
<br />
'''Sam Masters''': Currently there is no web address for the ''The Rental Rate Blue Book for Construction Equipment'' (referred to as the "Blue Book") so we cannot link it to the EPG at this time. However, we understand there may be a web address for this information in a few months. We will stay on top of this effort and will make the link once it is available.<br />
<br />
We are also working with Construction and Materials to add additional clarifying information to the EPG concerning specification [http://www.modot.mo.gov/business/standards_and_specs/081001/Sec0109.pdf 109.5.4 Equipment] and how it is to be applied to MoDOT operations.<br />
<br />
== External Civil Rights Resource Manual Link - Section 135.6 ==<br />
<br />
http://www.modot.mo.gov/business/contractor_resources/External_Civil_Rights/documents/ResourceManual-2007.pdf<br />
<br />
I think I posted this subject in the wrong place. I noticed an older version of the Resource Manual was linked in the External Civil Right Section 135.6 instead of the January 2007 version that is linked above. There has been significant changes to it. I hope the link above works.<br />
<br />
'''Sam Masters''': I have made the suggested revision. The 2007 version of the Resource Manual is now available in 135.6.<br />
<br />
== Force Account Forms ==<br />
<br />
C-FA3 is linked to the EPG as a blank form, but I haven't found a link to a blank C-FA1 form or C-FA2 form in section 137 or the Forms section. There are examples of them, but not a blank form unless I have overlooked it. Can they be linked in the EPG like C-FA3 is?<br />
<br />
'''Sam Masters''': I can provide a link to "blank" versions of C-FA1 and C-FA2, after I receive a Word file copy of each one. These "versions" were not provided with the material we used to add the orginal article to the ''EPG''.<br />
<br />
'''Sam Masters''': After contacting the Construction and Materials Division, I received the "Force Account Worksheet". This worksheet has replaced Forms C-FA1, C-FA2 and C-FA3. Article 137 has been revised to reflect this change.<br />
<br />
== test ==<br />
<br />
test</div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Category_talk:450_Bituminous_Pavement_Design&diff=18288Category talk:450 Bituminous Pavement Design2008-07-08T15:37:05Z<p>Training: Removing all content from page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Category_talk:450_Bituminous_Pavement_Design&diff=18287Category talk:450 Bituminous Pavement Design2008-07-08T15:36:49Z<p>Training: New page: sdfsdf</p>
<hr />
<div>sdfsdf</div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Talk:620.1_General_(MUTCD_Chapter_3A)&diff=17329Talk:620.1 General (MUTCD Chapter 3A)2008-03-06T16:47:20Z<p>Training: Test</p>
<hr />
<div>===D10 is looking at the new, yellow box "2008 Roadway Visibility Direction" at the top of EPG 620.1.===<br />
Which pay item is to be used for major roads where we are painting rumble strips? Is it the high build acrylic waterborn, the wet reflective high build or the white (or yellow) acrylic?<br />
<br />
===D10 looked at the JSP and EPG language===<br />
D10 looked at the JSP and EPG language and thought the new directive would cause the high build acrylic waterborn to go away. It can be confusing. <br />
<br />
Also, D10 recommends some new way to phrase a statement under "Materials" in the new directive.<br />
<br />
Major Roads<br />
• Type 2 tape to be installed inside the edgelines on major divided highways<br />
<br />
This seems to indicate that tape is only for the lane lines. Is this correct?<br />
<br />
:1. Rumble strips on major roads (and minor roads) get acrylic waterborne. This is the "second generation" paint we just removed from specs and bid items last fall and now will be put back into the standards.<br />
<br />
:There are too many terms, here is a key:<br />
<br />
:Second generation paint = (ye olde) acrylic waterborne = standard paint<br />
<br />
:Fourth generation paint = high build acrylic waterborne (All of the high build used under the current policy will be used with the "wet reflective" bid items.)<br />
<br />
:2. Type 2 tape is for lane lines but also for storage lines for turn lanes and exit/entrance lanes.<br />
<br />
== Test ==<br />
<br />
This is nice</div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Talk:620.1_General_(MUTCD_Chapter_3A)&diff=17281Talk:620.1 General (MUTCD Chapter 3A)2008-03-05T14:13:51Z<p>Training: </p>
<hr />
<div>===D10 is looking at the new, yellow box "2008 Roadway Visibility Direction" at the top of EPG 620.1.===<br />
Which pay item is to be used for major roads where we are painting rumble strips? Is it the high build acrylic waterborn, the wet reflective high build or the white (or yellow) acrylic?<br />
<br />
===D10 looked at the JSP and EPG language===<br />
D10 looked at the JSP and EPG language and thought the new directive would cause the high build acrylic waterborn to go away. It can be confusing. <br />
<br />
Also, D10 recommends some new way to phrase a statement under "Materials" in the new directive.<br />
<br />
Major Roads<br />
• Type 2 tape to be installed inside the edgelines on major divided highways<br />
<br />
This seems to indicate that tape is only for the lane lines. Is this correct?<br />
<br />
:1. Rumble strips on major roads (and minor roads) get acrylic waterborne. This is the "second generation" paint we just removed from specs and bid items last fall and now will be put back into the standards.<br />
<br />
:There are too many terms, here is a key:<br />
<br />
:Second generation paint = (ye olde) acrylic waterborne = standard paint<br />
<br />
:Fourth generation paint = high build acrylic waterborne (All of the high build used under the current policy will be used with the "wet reflective" bid items.)<br />
<br />
:2. Type 2 tape is for lane lines but also for storage lines for turn lanes and exit/entrance lanes.</div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Talk:620.1_General_(MUTCD_Chapter_3A)&diff=17280Talk:620.1 General (MUTCD Chapter 3A)2008-03-05T14:09:51Z<p>Training: /* This test is Good! */</p>
<hr />
<div>D10 is looking at the new, yellow box "2008 Roadway Visibility Direction" at the top of EPG 620.1. Which pay item is to be used for major roads where we are painting rumble strips? Is it the high build acrylic waterborn, the wet reflective high build or the white (or yellow) acrylic?<br />
<br />
D10 looked at the JSP and EPG language and thought the new directive would cause the high build acrylic waterborn to go away. It can be confusing. <br />
<br />
Also, D10 recommends some new way to phrase a statement under "Materials" in the new directive.<br />
<br />
Major Roads<br />
• Type 2 tape to be installed inside the edgelines on major divided highways<br />
<br />
This seems to indicate that tape is only for the lane lines. Is this correct?<br />
<br />
:1. Rumble strips on major roads (and minor roads) get acrylic waterborne. This is the "second generation" paint we just removed from specs and bid items last fall and now will be put back into the standards.<br />
<br />
:There are too many terms, here is a key:<br />
<br />
:Second generation paint = (ye olde) acrylic waterborne = standard paint<br />
<br />
:Fourth generation paint = high build acrylic waterborne (All of the high build used under the current policy will be used with the "wet reflective" bid items.)<br />
<br />
:2. Type 2 tape is for lane lines but also for storage lines for turn lanes and exit/entrance lanes.</div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Category_talk:700_STRUCTURES_AND_HYDRAULICS&diff=17237Category talk:700 STRUCTURES AND HYDRAULICS2008-03-03T22:12:40Z<p>Training: Removing all content from page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Category_talk:700_STRUCTURES_AND_HYDRAULICS&diff=17236Category talk:700 STRUCTURES AND HYDRAULICS2008-03-03T22:12:36Z<p>Training: New page: Test</p>
<hr />
<div>Test</div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Talk:620.1_General_(MUTCD_Chapter_3A)&diff=17234Talk:620.1 General (MUTCD Chapter 3A)2008-03-03T20:21:51Z<p>Training: </p>
<hr />
<div>D10 is looking at the new, yellow box "2008 Roadway Visibility Direction" at the top of EPG 620.1. Which pay item is to be used for major roads where we are painting rumble strips? Is it the high build acrylic waterborn, the wet reflective high build or the white (or yellow) acrylic?<br />
<br />
D10 looked at the JSP and EPG language and thought the new directive would cause the high build acrylic waterborn to go away. It can be confusing. <br />
<br />
Also, D10 recommends some new way to phrase a statement under "Materials" in the new directive.<br />
<br />
Major Roads<br />
• Type 2 tape to be installed inside the edgelines on major divided highways<br />
<br />
This seems to indicate that tape is only for the lane lines. Is this correct?<br />
<br />
:1. Rumble strips on major roads (and minor roads) get acrylic waterborne. This is the "second generation" paint we just removed from specs and bid items last fall and now will be put back into the standards.<br />
<br />
:There are too many terms, here is a key:<br />
<br />
:Second generation paint = (ye olde) acrylic waterborne = standard paint<br />
<br />
:Fourth generation paint = high build acrylic waterborne (All of the high build used under the current policy will be used with the "wet reflective" bid items.)<br />
<br />
:2. Type 2 tape is for lane lines but also for storage lines for turn lanes and exit/entrance lanes.<br />
<br />
== This test is Good! ==<br />
<br />
Dan, <br />
I am seeing your delima......(BKW)</div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Talk:620.1_General_(MUTCD_Chapter_3A)&diff=17233Talk:620.1 General (MUTCD Chapter 3A)2008-03-03T20:21:35Z<p>Training: /* This test is Good! */</p>
<hr />
<div>D10 is looking at the new, yellow box "2008 Roadway Visibility Direction" at the top of EPG 620.1. Which pay item is to be used for major roads where we are painting rumble strips? Is it the high build acrylic waterborn, the wet reflective high build or the white (or yellow) acrylic?<br />
<br />
D10 looked at the JSP and EPG language and thought the new directive would cause the high build acrylic waterborn to go away. It can be confusing. <br />
<br />
Also, D10 recommends some new way to phrase a statement under "Materials" in the new directive.<br />
<br />
Major Roads<br />
• Type 2 tape to be installed inside the edgelines on major divided highways<br />
<br />
This seems to indicate that tape is only for the lane lines. Is this correct?<br />
<br />
:1. Rumble strips on major roads (and minor roads) get acrylic waterborne. This is the "second generation" paint we just removed from specs and bid items last fall and now will be put back into the standards.<br />
<br />
:There are too many terms, here is a key:<br />
<br />
:Second generation paint = (ye olde) acrylic waterborne = standard paint<br />
<br />
:Fourth generation paint = high build acrylic waterborne (All of the high build used under the current policy will be used with the "wet reflective" bid items.)<br />
<br />
:2. Type 2 tape is for lane lines but also for storage lines for turn lanes and exit/entrance lanes.</div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Talk:620.1_General_(MUTCD_Chapter_3A)&diff=17232Talk:620.1 General (MUTCD Chapter 3A)2008-03-03T20:21:04Z<p>Training: This test is Good!</p>
<hr />
<div>D10 is looking at the new, yellow box "2008 Roadway Visibility Direction" at the top of EPG 620.1. Which pay item is to be used for major roads where we are painting rumble strips? Is it the high build acrylic waterborn, the wet reflective high build or the white (or yellow) acrylic?<br />
<br />
D10 looked at the JSP and EPG language and thought the new directive would cause the high build acrylic waterborn to go away. It can be confusing. <br />
<br />
Also, D10 recommends some new way to phrase a statement under "Materials" in the new directive.<br />
<br />
Major Roads<br />
• Type 2 tape to be installed inside the edgelines on major divided highways<br />
<br />
This seems to indicate that tape is only for the lane lines. Is this correct?<br />
<br />
:1. Rumble strips on major roads (and minor roads) get acrylic waterborne. This is the "second generation" paint we just removed from specs and bid items last fall and now will be put back into the standards.<br />
<br />
:There are too many terms, here is a key:<br />
<br />
:Second generation paint = (ye olde) acrylic waterborne = standard paint<br />
<br />
:Fourth generation paint = high build acrylic waterborne (All of the high build used under the current policy will be used with the "wet reflective" bid items.)<br />
<br />
:2. Type 2 tape is for lane lines but also for storage lines for turn lanes and exit/entrance lanes.<br />
<br />
== This test is Good! ==<br />
<br />
Dan, <br />
I am seeing your delima......(BKW)</div>Traininghttps://epg.modot.org/index.php?title=Talk:620.1_General_(MUTCD_Chapter_3A)&diff=17230Talk:620.1 General (MUTCD Chapter 3A)2008-03-03T20:07:38Z<p>Training: </p>
<hr />
<div>D10 is looking at the new, yellow box "2008 Roadway Visibility Direction" at the top of EPG 620.1. Which pay item is to be used for major roads where we are painting rumble strips? Is it the high build acrylic waterborn, the wet reflective high build or the white (or yellow) acrylic?<br />
<br />
D10 looked at the JSP and EPG language and thought the new directive would cause the high build acrylic waterborn to go away. It can be confusing. <br />
<br />
Also, D10 recommends some new way to phrase a statement under "Materials" in the new directive.<br />
<br />
Major Roads<br />
• Type 2 tape to be installed inside the edgelines on major divided highways<br />
<br />
This seems to indicate that tape is only for the lane lines. Is this correct?<br />
<br />
:1. Rumble strips on major roads (and minor roads) get acrylic waterborne. This is the "second generation" paint we just removed from specs and bid items last fall and now will be put back into the standards.<br />
<br />
:There are too many terms, here is a key:<br />
<br />
:Second generation paint = (ye olde) acrylic waterborne = standard paint<br />
<br />
:Fourth generation paint = high build acrylic waterborne (All of the high build used under the current policy will be used with the "wet reflective" bid items.)<br />
<br />
:2. Type 2 tape is for lane lines but also for storage lines for turn lanes and exit/entrance lanes.</div>Training