Calibration Accuracy of Manual and Ground-Speed-Controlled Salters

295 Pages·2008·1.68 MB·English

research for winter highway maintenance
CCCaaallliiibbbrrraaatttiiiooonnn AAAccccccuuurrraaacccyyy ooofff MMMaaannnuuuaaalll aaannnddd
GGGrrrooouuunnnddd---SSSpppeeeeeeddd---CCCooonnntttrrrooolllllleeeddd SSSaaalllttteeerrrsss
Blackburn and Associates
PPPrrrooojjjeeecccttt CCCRRR222000000555---000222
FFFeeebbbrrruuuaaarrryyy 222000000888
PPPoooooollleeeddd FFFuuunnnddd ###TTTPPPFFF---555(((000999222)))
wwwwwwwww...cccllleeeaaarrrrrroooaaadddsss...ooorrrggg
NOTICE
This research was funded by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) and the
United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) under pooled fund #TPF-5(092) and
WisDOT Project #0092-06-21. The information reported is the result of research done under the
auspices of the Department and the Clear Roads pooled funded research program. This Program
is an ongoing, cooperative, and comprehensive research activity that focuses on field testing and
evaluationofmaterials, methods, andequipment usedinhighwaywinter maintenance.
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in
the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for
its contents or use thereof. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or
regulation.
The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade and
manufacturer names appear in this report solely because they are considered essential to the
objective of this document.
DISCLAIMER
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and
accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or the
policies of the Clear Roads member states or of the Federal HighwayAdministration. This report
does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation.Trade and manufacturer names appear
herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Neither the
authors nor the Clear Roads member states endorse the products or manufacturers identified in
this report. No attempt was made in the study to compare the performance of one controller
against another, nor should such a comparison be made from the information and data reported
herein.
ii
Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No 3. Recipient’s Catalog No
CR2005-02 / 0092-06-21
4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date
Calibration Accuracy of Manual and Ground-Speed-Controlled Salters February 2008
6. Performing Organization Code

7. Authors 8. Performing Organization Report No.
Robert R. Blackburn, Edward J. Fleege, and Duane E. Amsler
9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
Blackburn and Associates
16545 East Fairfax Drive 11. Contract or Grant No.
Fountain Hills, AZ 85268-2806 405857
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Clear Roads Pooled Fund #TPF-5(092) Final Report, 10/05 – 01/08
Lead state: Wisconsin Department of Transportation
4802 Sheboygan Avenue 14. Sponsoring Agency Code
Madison, WI 53707
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstract
Automatic control of material application rates is achieved with ground-speed-oriented controllers. This type of controller
has been used in Europe since the 70’s. Some state DOT’s were using versions of ground-speed controllers on dry material
spreaders as early as the 80’s. However, it was not until the SHRP and FHWA anti-icing studies in the 90’s that highway
winter maintenance agencies became interested in ground-speed controllers and the controller/spreader manufacturers
responded to the need. There are a wide variety of controllers manufactured as demonstrated by the spectrum used by the
Clear Roads state DOT’s.

In order for ground-speed controllers to optimally discharge salt and prewetted material, their calibration settings need to be
accurate. The aim of this study was to determine if ground-speed-controller units accurately control the spreader discharge
of salt and other material, and if they provide the savings expected when compared to manually controlled units.

The overall objective of the study was to document the accuracy of calibrated ground-speed-controller units along with the
performance of these units as compared to manual spreader controls. Actual salt, abrasive, and prewetting liquid chemical
dispensing rates from spreader trucks with various types of manual and ground-speed-controller units were investigated and
documented from both a yard study and in simulated field settings that would be used during winter storm events. Testing of
up to eight spreader/controller combinations was conducted. The actual discharge quantities (solid and liquid materials)
were compared against theoretical discharges. Manufacturers’ calibration procedures were reviewed and calibration
verification tests were developed to ensure proper calibration.
17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement
Ground-speed controller, closed-loop, open-loop,
spreader/controller, calibration, prewetting, solid material No restriction. This document is available to the public
discharge through the National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield VA 22161
18. Security Classif.(of this report) 19. Security Classif. (of this page) 20. No. of Pages 21. Price
Unclassified Unclassified 294
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The research reported herein was funded by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation
(WisDOT) and the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) under pooled fund
project #TPF-5(092) and WisDOT Project #0092-06-21. The authors of this final report were
Robert R. Blackburn, the Principal Investigator and Overall Project Manager; Edward J. Fleege,
P.E.; and Duane E. Amsler, P.E. They were assisted in the statistical analysis of test data by
RonaldG.Tolleson.
The authors thank all those state DOTs who responded to the Snow Belt States’ stakeholder
survey.
The authors would like to expresses their appreciation to all the maintenance personnel in the
following state DOTs for their technical assistance and maintenance support in conducting the
various yard testing and simulated field testing: Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and
Wisconsin. The support of the NYSDOT is also acknowledged. The support provided by the
various teams of state field maintenance personnel was invaluable and without their dedication,
this studywouldnot havebeenpossible.
The authors would like to thank the following representatives of the controller equipment
manufacturers who participated in the yard testing and simulated field testing. In addition, they
took their valuable time to review the findings of the tests and made suggestions concerning this
study:
Mr.MikevanMeeteren ofCirus Controls
Mr.Myles Hart ofComponent Technology
Mr.BruceCox andMark LundeenofDickey-john
Mr.SteveChlebeckof FORCEAmerica
Mr.TerryCragoofMunciePowerProducts
Mr.Jim Borowski ofPengwyn
The authors would also like to thank the Clear Roads Technical Advisory Committee members,
including Tom Martinelli (past chair) (Wisconsin DOT), Dennis Burkheimer (present chair)
(Iowa DOT), Dennis W. Belter (Indiana DOT), Diana Clonch (Ohio DOT), Linda K. Taylor
(Minnesota DOT), Tim Jackson (Missouri DOT), Tim Croze (Michigan DOT), Adam Padilla
(Colorado DOT), Shane Larson (Illinois DOT), Lynn Bernhard (Utah DOT), Cliff Spoonemore
(Wyoming DOT), and Michael H. Lashmet II (New York DOT), who provided guidance in the
directionandcontent of the study.Theirinterest inthecalibration accuracyof spreader/controller
systems, plus the funding they provided through the Clear Roads pooled fund process, made this
studypossible.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NOTICE................................................................................................................... ii
DISCLAIMER......................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................................1
SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH APPROACH..................5
1.1ResearchProblem Statement .............................................................................................5
1.2Research Objective andScope...........................................................................................6
1.3Research Approach............................................................................................................6
1.4Organizationofthis Report................................................................................................8
SECTION 2 - RESULTS OBTAINED FROM PHASE 1–LITERATURE
SEARCH AND SURVEY.............................................................10
2.1Results ofthe LiteratureSearch.......................................................................................10
2.2SurveyoftheSnow –Belt States......................................................................................11
2.3Contacts withManufacturers ofSpreaderControl Equipment........................................13
2.4ReviewofSpreader/ControllerCalibrationProcedures...................................................13
2.5Recommendations from Phase1......................................................................................13
SECTION 3 - DESCRIPTIONS OF SPREADER/CONTROLLER
COMBINATIONS TESTED DURING PHASE 2-YARD OR
BENCH STUDY............................................................................14
3.1Cirus Controls SpreadSmart RDS....................................................................................14
3.2Component TechnologyGl-400......................................................................................15
3.3Dickey-johnModels.........................................................................................................15
3.3.1Model ICS2000...................................................................................................15
3.3.2Control Point.......................................................................................................16
3.4FORCEAmericaModels.................................................................................................16
3.4.1FORCEAmerica Model 2100 ............................................................................16
3.4.2FORCEAmerica Model 5100............................................................................17
3.5MunciePowerProducts MESP402D...............................................................................17
3.6PengwynModel 485........................................................................................................18
3.7YardStudyPreparations andTest Protocol.....................................................................18
3.7.1Test Preparation/AssistanceNeededfrom ClearRoads States...........................19
3.7.2Test Protocol.......................................................................................................20
SECTION 4 - METHODOLOGY USED IN ANALYSIS OF YARD TEST
DATA..............................................................................................23
4.1TabulationandPlotting(QuantitativeAnalysis)Approach.............................................23
4.1.1SummaryTabulations ofSolidand LiquidDischargeRates..............................24
4.1.2Determinationof MissingSummaryDischargeRates........................................25
4.1.3Tabulations ofPercent ofDifferencebetweenActual andDial-InSolidand
LiquidApplicationRates ...................................................................................26
4.1.4Various Types ofPlots........................................................................................27
4.1.5 InvestigationintoTheoretical vs. Actual Discharge Amounts...........................31
4.2Statistical Analysis Approach..........................................................................................33
v
SECTION 5 - DISCUSSION OF THE YARD STUDY DATA ANALYSIS
RESULTS.......................................................................................35
5.1QuantitativeAnalysis Results..........................................................................................35
5.1.1Cirus Controls SpreadSmart RDS.......................................................................35
5.1.2Component TechnologyGL-400........................................................................39
5.1.3Dickey-johnModels.............................................................................. 42
5.1.4FORCEAmerica Models....................................................................................48
5.1.5MunciePowerProducts MESP402D..................................................................54
5.1.6PengwynModel 485...........................................................................................58
5.2Statistical Analysis Results forSpreader/ControllersTested ..........................................61
5.2.1.Bias, Accuracy,andPrecisionofDry,SolidMaterial Controllers....................61
5.2.2Bias, Accuracy,andPrecisionofPrewettingControllers...................................62
5.2.3ANOVAResultsforSolidandPrewettingMaterial Controllers........................63
SECTION 6 - SUMMARY OF YARD TEST FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDED DIRECTION OF PHASE 3-FIELD
STUDY...........................................................................................65
6.1SummaryofYardTest Findings......................................................................................65
6.2RecommendedDirectionofPhase3-FieldStudy............................................................67
SECTION 7 - SIMULATED FIELD STUDY.....................................................73
7.1PreparationforSimulatedFieldStudy.............................................................................73
7.2SimulatedFieldTests.......................................................................................................77
7.2.1TestingInvolvingClosed-loopandOpen-loopModes ofOperation.................78
7.2.2Comparison TestingBetweenGround-SpeedControlledandManual Modes
ofOperations.......................................................................................................79
SECTION 8 - RESULTS FROM SIMULATED FIELD TESTS
INVOLVING CLOSED-LOOP AND OPEN-LOOP MODES
OF OPERATION..........................................................................82
8.1Cirus Controls SpreadSmart RDS....................................................................................83
8.2Component TechnologyGL-400.....................................................................................84
8.3Dickey-johnControl Point...............................................................................................85
8.4FORCEAmericaModel 2100.........................................................................................85
8.5FORCEAmericaModel 5100.........................................................................................85
8.6MunciePowerProducts MESP402D...............................................................................86
8.7PengwynModel 485........................................................................................................87
SECTION 9 - RESULTS FROM COMPARISON TESTING OF
SPREADER/CONTROLLER COMBINATIONS
OPERATED IN BOTH GROUND-SPEED-CONTROLLED
AND MANUAL MODES OF OPERATION .............................88
9.1 IowaComparison TestingResults...................................................................................88
9.2Missouri Comparison TestingResults.............................................................................90
9.3OhioComparison TestingResults...................................................................................91
vi
SECTION 10 - CALIBRATION FACTORS AND CALIBRATION
VERIFICATION PROCEDURES FOR GROUND-SPEED
CONTROLLERS........................................................................92
10.1General CalibrationItems andthosePertainingtoSolidMaterial Spreaders...............92
10.1.1SpeedometerCalibration/check........................................................................92
10.1.2TruckandSpreaderHydraulicSystem.............................................................92
10.1.3Recommended Loadlevel inTruck Box orHopper Box.................................93
10.1.4Box PositionforTailgateSpreaders.................................................................93
10.1.5Material tobeTested........................................................................................93
10.1.6RecommendedAmount ofSolidMaterial Discharged.....................................93
10.1.7RecommendedTimeDurationofDischarge....................................................93
10.1.8RecommendedNumberofTests orOtherPrecisionRequirements.................93
10.1.9Does theUnit Allowfor,orRequire,“Fine Tuning”tomeet Customer
Expectation? .....................................................................................................94
10.1.10RecommendedFrequencyofCalibration.......................................................94
10.1.11Recommendations forCreatingandMaintainingRepair andCalibration
Records...........................................................................................................94
10.2Calibration Items AssociatedwithPrewettingSystem..................................................94
10.2.1CalibrationorFineTuningofthePrewettingSystem......................................94
10.2.2Control Functions that NeedtobeEngagedDuringLiquidCalibration..........94
10.2.3Does SolidMaterial Needtobe Discharged DuringLiquidCalibration?........94
10.2.4AreNozzles tobeleft inthe LiquidDischarge LineDuringCalibration?.......95
10.2.5TypeofPumpUsedwithPrewettingSystem...................................................95
10.2.6CanWaterbeUsedDuringCalibrationinPlaceof a LiquidChemcial?.........95
10.2.7RecommendedAmount of LiquidDischarge DuringCalibration....................95
10.2.8RecommendedNumberofTests orOtherPrecisionRequirements.................95
10.2.9RecommendedFrequencyofCalibration.........................................................95
10.3CalibrationVerificationTests........................................................................................95
10.4PossibleWayofCheckingtheFunctioningofGround-SpeedControllers Operated
inClosed-loopMode......................................................................................................99
SECTION 11 - RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROPER CALIBRATION
OF SPREADER/CONTROLLER COMBINATIONS .........101
11.1CalibrationofGround-Speed-ControllerSalters.........................................................101
11.1.1Closed-loopModeofOperations....................................................................101
11.1.2Open-loopMode ofOperations......................................................................103
11.2ManuallyControlledSalters........................................................................................103
SECTION 12 - CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND
SUGGESTED RESEARCH.....................................................105
12.1Conclusions..................................................................................................................105
12.2Recommendations........................................................................................................106
12.3SuggestedResearch.....................................................................................................107
REFERENCES.....................................................................................................108
APPENDIX A - Instruments Used in the Survey of the Snow-Belt States.....109
vii
APPENDIX B- Summary Results from the Survey of the Snow-Belt
States.........................................................................................115
APPENDIX C - Variables Associated with the Calibration and Use of
Solid and Liquid Distribution and Prewetting Systems......132
APPENDIX D - Background of Project and Assistance Needed from
Clear Roads States for Yard and Field Studies ...................138
APPENDIX E- Procedure for Computing Theoretical Solid and Liquid
Discharge Amounts..................................................................142
APPENDIX F- Test Results for Cirus SpreadSmart RDS..............................149
APPENDIXG - Test Results for Component Technology GL-400................167
APPENDIX H - Test Results for DICKEY-john ISC2000 and
Control Point...........................................................................183
APPENDIX I- Test Results for FORCE America 2100.................................203
APPENDIX J - Test Results for FORCE America Model 5100......................211
APPENDIX K - Test Results for Muncie Power MESP402D Spreader
Controller.................................................................................226
APPENDIX L - Test Results for Pengwyn Model 485....................................243
APPENDIX M - Background Information and Procedures for Conducting
Phase 3 Tests............................................................................258
APPENDIX N - Testing Protocols and Forms Used in Iowa...........................272
APPENDIX O - Manufacturer's Recommendations for Calibration.............280
viii
List of Figures
Figure4-1.ComputerizedTabulationoftheReplicateYardTests..............................................24
Figure4-2. Actual DischargeRates forVarious Dial-InApplicationRates at 20mph...............28
Figure4-3. Actual DischargeRates forVarious Dial-InApplicationRates at 30mph...............28
Figure4-4. ActualandEstimatedSolid DischargeRates as a FunctionofTruckSpeedfor
Dial-InApplicationRates of100,200,and300lbs/mile..........................................29
Figure4-5. ActualandEstimatedSolid DischargeRates as a FunctionofTruckSpeedfor
Dial-InApplicationRates of400,500,and600lbs/mile..........................................29
Figure4-6.Percent ofDifferencebetweenActualandEstimatedSolidDischarge Rateand
Dial-InApplicationRate as aFunctionofTruckSpeedfor Dial-InApplication
Rates of100,200, and300lbs/mile ..........................................................................30
Figure4-7.Percent ofDifferencebetweenActualandEstimatedSolidDischarge Rateand
Dial-inApplicationRate as aFunctionofTruckSpeedfor Dial-InApplication
Rates of400,500,and600lbs/mile ..........................................................................30
Figure4-8. Theoretical andActual SolidDischargeRatesinPounds perSecondversus Test
Set Number................................................................................................................32
Figure4-9. Theoretical andActual LiquidSalt BrineDischargeRatesinOunces perSecond
versus Test Set Number.............................................................................................32
Figure7-1.RevolutionCounter....................................................................................................79
Figure7-2.RevolutionCounter....................................................................................................80
ix
List of Tables
Table3-1.Values ofTruckSpeed-SolidDischargeforeachTest Set Number...........................21
Table3-2.Values ofTruckSpeed,SolidDischarge,andPrewettingforeachTest Set...............21
Table4-1.Actual SolidDischargeRatesfor Various Dial-InApplication Rates andTruck
Speeds ........................................................................................................................26
Table4-2.Actual DischargePrewettingRates for Various Dial-In ApplicationRates and
TruckSpeeds...............................................................................................................25
Table4-3.Actual andEstimatedSolid DischargeRates forVarious Dial-In ApplicationRates
as aFunctionof TruckSpeed......................................................................................26
Table4-4.Actual andEstimatedPrewetting Rates forVarious Dial-In ApplicationRates as a
Functionof TruckSpeed.............................................................................................26
Table4-5.Percent ofDifferencebetween ActualandEstimatedSolidDischarge Rates and
Dial-In ApplicationRates as aFunctionofTruck Speed............................................27
Table4-6.Percent ofDifferencebetween ActualandEstimatedPrewetting Rates andDial-In
PrewettingApplicationRates as a FunctionofTruckSpeed.......................................27
Table5-1.Percent ofDifferencebetween Actual andEstimatedSolidDischargeRates and
.
Dial-In SolidApplicationRates as a FunctionofTruck Speed…………………….. 36
Table5-2.Percent ofDifferencebetween ActualandEstimatedPrewetting Rates andDial-In
PrewettingApplicationRates as a FunctionofTruckSpeed......................................37
Table5-3.Percent ofDifferencebetween ActualandEstimatedSolid DischargeRates and
Dial-In ApplicationRates as aFunctionofTruck Speed............................................40
Table5-4.Percent ofDifferencebetween ActualandEstimatedPrewetting Rates andDial-In
PrewettingApplicationRates as a FunctionofTruckSpeed......................................46
Table5-5.Percent ofDifferencebetween ActualandEstimatedSolidDischarge Rates and
Dial-In ApplicationRates as aFunctionofTruck Speed............................................46
Table5-6.Percent ofDifferencebetween ActualandEstimatedSolidDischargeRates and
Dial-In ApplicationRates as aFunctionofTruck Speed............................................46
Table5-7.Percent ofDifferencebetween Actual Prewetting Rates andDial-InPrewetting
ApplicationRates as a FunctionofTruckSpeed........................................................46
Table5-8.Percent ofDifferencebetween Actual andEstimatedSolidDischarge Rates and
Dial-InApplicationRates as aFunctionofTruck Speed............................................49
Table5-9.Percent ofDifferencebetween Actual andEstimatedSolidDischargeRates and
Dial-InApplicationRates as aFunctionofTruck Speed............................................52
Table5-10.Percent ofDifferencebetweenActual andEstimatedPrewettingRates and
Dial-InApplicationRates as aFunctionofTruck Speed.........................................53
Table5-11.Percent ofDifferencebetweenActual andEstimatedSolidDischargeRates and
Dial-InApplicationRates as aFunctionofTruck Speed..........................................56
Table5-12.Percent ofDifferencebetweenActual andEstimatedPrewettingRates and
Dial-InPrewettingApplicationRates as a FunctionofTruck ..................................56
Table5-13.Percent ofDifferencebetweenActual andEstimatedSolidDischargeRates and
Dial-InApplicationRates as aFunctionofTruck Speed..........................................59
Table5-14.Percent ofDifferencebetweenActual andEstimatedPrewettingRates and
Dial-InPrewettingApplicationRates as a FunctionofTruck ..................................59
Table5-15.Summaryof Bias, Accuracy,andPrecisionofEight Spreader/ControllerSystems
inDistributingSolidMaterial....................................................................................62
x