<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Research in Progress (RIP)</title>
    <link>https://rip.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://rip.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>US Domestic Scan Program -- Business Plan. Planning and Executing the NCHRP U.S. Domestic Scan Program</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2410391</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) U.S. Domestic Scan Program accelerates innovation among state departments of transportation (DOTs) by encouraging the spread of new ideas and effective technology transfers among and within agencies. Initiated in 2007 as NCHRP Project 20-68, the program helps DOT staff learn from peers about innovative practices beneficial to other agencies. Participants are expected to apply insights gained within their own agencies and present what they have learned to others, further disseminating new practices.

Each scan is conducted by a small team of knowledgeable professionals—typically state transportation agency staff supported by a subject-matter expert (SME)—who exchange information with peers and develop a report on leading practices. Since the program’s inception, 54 scans have been completed or are ongoing. Completed scan team reports are available on the project web page (https://www.trb.org/NCHRP/USDomesticScanProgram.aspx). The scan process, from topic selection to report completion, takes approximately 3 years.

The program includes three types of scans. Type 1 scans involve visits by a team of eight to 10 participants to host sites with innovative practices. Each scan might require one or two trips of about 1 week. Type 2 scans bring representatives from innovator agencies to central locations to meet with the scan team, reducing travel time. Type 3 scans supplement a desk scan with a symposium or workshop, bringing together practitioner innovators and the scan team to discuss relevant experiences. The NCHRP Project 20-68 panel specifies the appropriate scan type for each topic.

A scan entails four key steps: (1) identifying useful innovations, (2) assessing the experience of early adopters to evaluate potential benefits and obstacles, (3) documenting the results to share with others, and (4) progressive diffusion of information through dissemination activities tailored for each scan, which can accelerate innovation at DOTs and may include support for scan participants to advise peers on adopting new ideas.

Scan team participants are identified by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in cooperation with NCHRP’s scan contractor. Each scan team, supported by the contractor, produces a report and other materials to disseminate scan results. The contractor engages an SME to prepare a “desk scan” that surveys where innovative practices are being applied and provides a basis for planning the scan team’s activities. The SME typically prepares draft and scan reports using materials from scan team members. The contractor organizes and executes all scan activities, monitors the program’s accomplishments, and reports periodically on its status and plans. Scan team members are expected to encourage dissemination and adoption of good ideas, with contractor support, even after the scan report is completed.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this project is to plan and manage the execution of scans under the NCHRP U.S. Domestic Scan Program. Achieving this requires understanding various scan topics, how state transportation agencies develop and adopt advances in practice, the practical challenges of forming and supporting scan teams, preparing high-quality reports and documentation, and supporting participants in disseminating what they have learned. ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2024 17:41:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2410391</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Support for AASHTO Committees and Councils</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1675092</link>
      <description><![CDATA[NCHRP Project 20-123 makes funding available to any American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) committee or council that require support for advancing and implementing the vision, mission, and strategic goals of the committee or council. Consistent with 23 USC § 505, these funds are intended for activities or tasks within the innovation life-cycle leading to technology development related to highway, public transportation, and intermodal transportation systems.
 
AASHTO committees or councils may apply for National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) 20-123 funds provided that the task scope meets the task selection criteria. Requests will be reviewed periodically by an officially appointed NCHRP 20-123 Oversight Panel composed of members of committees and/or councils. Oversight Panelists appointed to the panel will be responsible for reviewing and approving task applications, program administration, and selecting a short list of consultants that may conduct the approved individual tasks and activities.
 
Individual tasks that have been approved by the Oversight Panel will be sequentially numbered and assigned to an NCHRP Senior Program Officer charged with project oversight. Task Panelists will be selected by the responsible staff officer to provide technical oversight of the consultants’ work.
 
Project Solicitation and Submission:

Research topics are proposed by AASHTO  committees and councils  using the online form and will be reviewed and approved by the oversight panel. Proposals may include research-related needs identified by an AASHTO committee and council and may include, but not limited to, tasks such as: (1) development or updating a research roadmaps or prioritized lists of specific research needs; (2) updating committee or council strategic plans that include a research component; (3) research scoping studies for narrow research topics; (4) research and development activities to update specifications and manuals maintained by a committee or council, using previously conducted research and/or convening experts to arrive at a consensus; and (5) convening Peer Exchanges.
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Dec 2019 19:38:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1675092</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Moving Research into Practice. NCHRP Comprehensive Communications Plan</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1641375</link>
      <description><![CDATA[NCHRP's consultant has produced a communications strategy that will serve as a guiding document for all future communications activities undertaken by NCHRP. The strategy will (1) help NCHRP to inform our stakeholders and audiences about the program and its constituent parts; (2) provide guidance on developing relevant communications products to meet the specific needs of our stakeholders and audiences; and (3) promote, manage and expand NCHRP’s profile within relevant audiences.
 
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jul 2019 09:09:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1641375</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Moving Research Into Practice. Quantitative and Qualitative Methods for Capturing the Impacts and Value of NCHRP Research</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1563508</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Estimating the value of NCHRP research products is challenging. A research product can have multiple outcomes, which in turn can lead to multiple impacts. Significant time can pass between when the research product is developed, when it is put into practice, and when the impacts of that practice are realized; this affects the timing of any evaluation activities. The nature of research products is wide-ranging; some research products are geared towards improving existing practices, while others are useful for informing policy decisions. A variety of techniques may be used to measure the impacts themselves, influenced by what measures would be most useful, how easy performance data are to collect, monitor, and replicate. Finally, attributing impacts to a research product, when the research product is used as part of a portfolio of other research products, needs to be considered. Estimating the value of NCHRP research will likely require approaches that are sensitive to the context of the research and the perspective of the stakeholders trying to understand its benefits.
The research team developed such a process for research impact assessment based on theory and practice in research evaluation from multiple disciplines. Research impact assessment is a complex and multidimensional process, particularly in the case of NCHRP, which is broad-based in term of topics covered and national implementation scope. While a narrowly quantitative, one-size fits-all approach to impact evaluation would be desirable, for NCHRP such an approach cannot recognize the nature of the research program and the broad set of values it is expected to produce.
The final report of the project is available here. The report includes the following chapters: 
(1) Literature Review
(2) Synthesis of Stakeholder Interviews
(3) Research Impact Assessment Framework
(4) Guidelines for Effective NCHRP Impacts Assessment
(5) Methodological challenges in assessing the impacts of NCHRP Research
(6) Changes to NCHRP Process to Facilitate RIA
(7) Conclusions and Recommendations for Evaluating NCHRP Research.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2018 19:52:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1563508</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Research for AASHTO Standing Committee on Highways. Task 423. Planning for a Comprehensive Update and Restructuring of AASHTO's A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (8th Edition)</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1488672</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In 2016, the AASHTO Standing Committee on Highways passed a resolution that the Green Book should provide guidance to state DOTs and other users regarding flexibility in design. The resolution (Direction on Flexibility in Design Standards) also directed the guidance to address designing for a multi-modal transportation system and that changes should be coordinated with other AASHTO publications. The resolution recognized that both short-term and long-term steps would be needed to meet the goals of the resolution. 

AASHTO recently published the 7th Edition of A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (the Green Book). The basic format, structure, and design philosophy are essentially unchanged since the 1984 edition which combined AASHTO’s rural and urban design policies (the Blue Book and Red Book, respectively). It does include some major changes in the Foreword and Chapter 1 that address issues raised in the AASHTO resolution (e.g., separate design approach for new vs. existing alignment, performance-based design, new land use context zones). Some key references for these changes are NCHRP Reports 785, 839, and 855.

This project developed a detailed roadmap to develop and implement the 8th Edition of the Green Book that supports a flexible, multimodal, performance-based, and context-sensitive design process. A key element of this work was to identify and engage a diverse set of stakeholders to vet the recommendations in the report, better identify the challenges that will be faced in development and implementation, explore solutions to those challenges, and build support for this radical change. These stakeholders included AASHTO committees dealing with related topics and external stakeholders, including professional societies, such as ITE, AMPO, and NACTO. . 



]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Nov 2017 19:08:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1488672</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Cyclic Performance Characterization of Large Diameter Steel Reinforcing Bars and Mechanical Couplers</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1441846</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The large strain cyclic response characteristics of large diameter bars, such as size #18, and of the various mechanical splices used with them remains largely unknown. Large strain cyclic load testing of large diameter bars and of mechanical splices for these bars has proven difficult, and questions about the use of these bars in the construction of bridge piers remain unanswered. Large-diameter bars continuous or mechanically coupled, have been rarely used as longitudinal reinforcement in large-diameter bridge reinforced concrete piers in modern times in our state. California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) has expressed interest in increasing the use of large diameter bars in the construction of bridge piers as one of many incentives to accelerate bridge construction in the State. More recently National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) 698 has stated an urgent need to characterize large bars and their mechanical couplers under reverse cyclic loading. When using precast concrete construction or construction techniques aimed at accelerating the construction process, the mechanical splicing of these large diameter bars could be advantageous in some particular cases. The lack of knowledge about their cyclic load response, and in particular, of the fatigue life of the bars and of the various mechanical splices available continues to hamper widespread use of these large diameter bars.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2017 10:54:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1441846</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Anchorage Zone Reinforcement of Post-Tensioned Box Girder Bridges</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1440834</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Adequate anchorage zone performance is critical to the proper performance of post-tensioned bridges.  Sufficient reinforcement is important to distribute the forces in the anchorage zone region. The last substantial experimental research on post-tensioned concrete anchorage zones was the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) 10-29 in 1994. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has implemented a design procedure in Memo to Designers 11-25 for anchorage zone design.  However, experience on recent construction projects has shown that current detailing methods can lead to highly congested reinforcement in anchorage zones.  The objective of this project is to develop and validate an efficient, yet safe design procedure for anchorage zones. The proposal is a combination of analytical work that will focus on the 3-dimensional (3D) spreading that occurs in box girder bridge anchorage zones and experimental work. The experimental work will include both large-scale tests of the anchorage zone in the laboratory and four field instrumentation sites.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2016 11:39:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1440834</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Accelerating the Application of NCHRP Research Results</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1359609</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In an applied research program like the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), application of results is the most important measure of success. The NCHRP has been successful by this measure; results of NCHRP research are used by American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) committees and member departments, but there is a need to continually look for ways to do better. This project is to focus on improved methods of delivering research findings and promoting their use. The following activities are examples of areas that could benefit from greater attention. These activities are currently carried out by NCHRP staff, but the level of effort is limited by the demands of other duties associated with initiation and execution of research projects: a) validating research products (e.g., testing NCHRP-developed computer software before widespread distribution); b) using innovative dissemination media to supplement or even replace the written report; c) working with AASHTO committees and other code-writing groups to facilitate adoption of NCHRP recommendations; d) providing financial support for NCHRP researchers or other champions to assist potential users of NCHRP products; e) tracking and documenting applications of NCHRP research; and f) in general, taking advantage of unanticipated opportunities to further the delivery of research results and products.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2015 02:46:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1359609</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Research for the AASHTO Standing Committee on Planning.  Task 29. Development of a Multimodal Tradeoffs Methodology for Use in Statewide Transportation Planning: Applications of the Framework</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346932</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of this task is to apply the framework in real-world situations, using data from state departments of transportation (DOTs).  An initial case study will be carried out with Washington DOT to test the concept.  This task is intended to initiate the first of several case studies applying the methodology in different context settings.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2015 01:02:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346932</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Research for the AASHTO Standing Committee on Planning. Task 37. A Retrospective on the Conditions and Performance Report</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346922</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this task is the development of a series of papers in review followed by an invitation only conference of principal participants to assess past work and define future requirements.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2015 01:02:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346922</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Research for the AASHTO Standing Committee on Planning. Task 38. Supplemental Evaluation in Support of NCHRP 25-17</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346921</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of this task is to re-evaluate the conclusions of the Final Report developed under National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 25-17 based on new emission factor models, new rules, and impending implementation guidance that were not available during the original research effort. The emissions and air quality modeling results will be re-evaluated based on the new MOBILE6 and EMission FACtor (EMFAC) models that were not available in time to be incorporated into the Project 25-17 efforts. The effects of new rules, such as the Heavy Duty/Low Sulfur Diesel Rule, that were not in place when the previous analysis was performed will also be included. In may also be important to factor in our current understanding of emerging rules (e.g., Clear Skies Initiative, Non-Road Engine Rules, etc.). The implications of the new models and new rules on SIP development and future conformity determinations will be determined. Ultimately, the conclusions of Project 25-17 will be confirmed or revised accordingly.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2015 01:02:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346921</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Research for the AASHTO Standing Committee on Planning. Task 39. Forecasting Travel Time, Delay, and Reliability</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346920</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This research will attempt to identify a variety of ways to provide agencies with more cost-effective measures of travel time variation, delay, and individual reliability.  New planning procedures, modeling techniques and decision-making algorithms may be necessary.  This research will attempt to identify analytical methods to improve agencies' ability to forecast future values of highway travel time under varying degrees of congestion.  From this, better estimates of delay (both vehicle and aggregate person-delay) can be generated.  A second part of the research will identify improved yet not overly complex methods of estimating variation in travel time and delay under different future scenarios.  The end product would be user-friendly guidance on how to improve urban and statewide travel models' ability to generate future speed, travel time, and variability data.  It might also identify alternatives to the traditional four-step models that could provide this same data, such as simulation models (more costly and complex) or sketch-planning tools (less so.)]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2015 01:01:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346920</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Research for the AASHTO Standing Committee on Planning. Task 40. National Site Visits on Transportation and Growth</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346919</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this task is to conduct several visits of successful real world sustainable development projects.  The purpose is to provide technology transfer opportunities between policy officials, technical staff, land use developers, and finance professionals.  With several transportation-supported smart growth projects reaching fruition, host sponsors in these areas will share their success stories with representatives from other areas embarking on or contemplating similar initiatives.  Video, digital and written logs coupled with the use of a professional scribe will provide the basis for unique technology transfer to interested policy officials and professionals beyond those participating in the site visits.  Information sharing and technology transfer will focus particularly on project drivers, before-and-after conditions, performance measures, partnerships and community-building.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2015 01:01:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346919</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Research for the AASHTO Standing Committee on Planning. Task 42. MPO Redefinition and Evolving Roles</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346917</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The 2000 Census has identified many new urbanized areas where metropolitan planning organizations will be formed, many adjacent to urbanized areas where Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) currently exist.  This task will examine the evolving role of MPOs in the context of metropolitan-level transportation planning and decision making, with special focus on new MPOs.  What has been learned in a region where more than one MPO has planning responsibilities?  What strategies for coordinating regional investment among different MPOs have been successful?  Given that the decision making environment for transportation planning is very different from the mid-1970s when MPOs were first designated, what types of roles are MPOs now best suited to perform in transportation planning and decision making? How can state DOTs work more effectively with MPOs? It is expected that the results of this study will identify best case examples of multi-MPO regional decision making, and provide state department of transportations (DOTs) with guidance on strategies that can be used to work more effectively with MPO officials.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2015 01:01:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346917</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Research for the AASHTO Standing Committee on Planning. Task 43.  Return on Investment on Freight Rail Capacity Improvement</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346916</link>
      <description><![CDATA[There is a growing perception that inadequate transportation capacity in particular corridors or urban bottlenecks may be having an inordinate impact on regional productivity and, perhaps, national competitiveness. The difficulty some states are experiencing in adding urban freeway capacity in critical freight corridors is leading them to consider the cost effectiveness of additional freight rail capacity as a supplement to highway expansion plans. Concurrently, there is a concern the rail industry has only enough business and profit to operate but not to replenish its capital stock sufficiently to keep up with forecast demand (e.g., modal share), let alone assume a greater burden in relief of the highway system.
In combination these issues have led a variety of transportation interest groups (e.g., AASHTO, AAR, Freight Stakeholders Coalition) to propose a number of ways to increase public investment in freight rail infrastructure. These include: (1) expanded capital resources for rail passenger service improvements, which coincidently could improve rail freight service; (2) legitimizing certain railroad improvements for federal-aid highway funding under CMAQ or an expanded borders and corridors program; (3) increased funding for the Section 130 highway rail grade crossing program; (4) expansion and alteration of the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program; and (5) allowing railroads to finance infrastructure investment through the issuance of tax-exempt indebtedness.

There are a number of issues Congress will consider in evaluating the need for and the means of increasing public investment in rail freight capacity. The one on which this task is to be focused is how to demonstrate what the public obtains in terms of benefits from its investment in rail capacity improvement(s). Even with a strongly made case that the railroad industry will need strategic public investments in order to perform the economic role required of it, Congress may still require a clear means of demonstrating of how these investments will generate the public benefits for which they were intended.

As envisioned here, there are three basic approaches, which may be more or less appropriate depending on the programmatic source of the federal/state revenue. These are: (1) Benefit/cost or cost effectiveness - This is a traditional methodology adaptable to the program objective (e.g., minimize highway investment, reduce grade crossing accidents and delay, increased passenger service speeds or service levels).
(2) Return on investment (ROI) - Standard business analysis a railroad would undertake to internally justify a capital investment. (3) Capital plan - A planned series of improvements, which could be multi-modal or public/private, designed to achieve a set of outcomes (e.g., reduced train delays, greater yard capacity, faster running times). This approach could incorporate aspects of the previous two.
This task is to investigate these and, perhaps, other methods of analyzing public investments in freight rail capacity from the perspectives of (a) different likely revenue sources, (b) practicality, and (c) likely policy implications.

The contractor's final report was sent to AASHTO and is posted at https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/docs/NCHRP08-36(43)_FR.pdf

]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2015 01:01:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1346916</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>