Texas Department of Transportation logo

Preserve our Assets

Note: The visual graphs found within this site are interactive in nature. Hover over and click into the visuals for additional details and exploration.

Percentage of Lane Miles in Good or Better Condition

Description: Measurement of pavement quality on Texas roadways.

What is the trend?: (FY 2017 to FY 2018 compare)

  • Statewide: Performance Improving green arrow going up

How it is measured: Percentage of lane miles in good or better condition is the ratio of pavement lane miles on Texas roadways that scored above 70 to the total analyzed lane miles, categorized in five highway classifications:

  1. Statewide (All Highway Types)
  2. National Highway System (NHS) interstate (IH)
  3. NHS non-IH
  4. Non-NHS
  5. Energy Sector (Individual View* of Texas roadways that fall into the "Energy Sector")

Pavement condition score is a combined index of ride quality and pavement surface distress, adjusted for traffic and speed. Ride quality is calculated from pavement roughness. Pavement distress is calculated from measuring rut data and surface deterioration such as cracking, patching and failures.

Data is collected once a year to determine the surface distresses and ride quality of the pavement on Texas roadways. The data from surface defects and ride quality is then combined to provide an overall score ranging from 1 (worst condition) to 100 (best condition) per lane mile.

*The "Energy Sector" is defined as counties that have primary corridors used by industry and connect active energy areas with energy service providers. Those counties are currently as follows: Callahan, Howard, Mitchell, Shackelford, Borden, Scurry, Kent, Hemphill, Roberts, Lipscomb, Ochiltree, Panola, Harrison, Lampasas, San Saba, McCulloch, Mills, Brown, Coleman, Comanche, Eastland, Stephens, Burleson, Washington, Dickens, Motley, Wheeler, Bee, Live Oak, Goliad, Karnes, Denton, Presidio, Culberson, Erath, Hood, Tarrant, Parker, Palo Pinto, Wise, Jack, Johnson, Duval, Webb, La Salle, Dimmit, Maverick, Zavala, Val Verde, Gaines, Dawson, Yoakum, Terry, Lynn, Garza, Hockley, Cochran, Lubbock, Crosby, Floyd, Angelina, San Augustine, Nacogdoches, Shelby, Pecos, Crane, Ward, Upton, Reeves, Loving, Midland, Ector, Winkler, Andrews, Martin, Edwards, Sutton, Crockett, Schleicher, Irion, Reagan, Sterling, Glasscock, McMullen, Frio, Atascosa, Wilson, Gregg, Rusk, Coryell, Hamilton, Bosque, Hill, Young, Throckmorton, Baylor, Archer, Clay, De Witt, Gonzales and Fayette.

Why this matters: Tracking pavement quality helps us identify roads in need of repair and plan funding for their maintenance and rehabilitation. To protect our investments in capital assets – part of TxDOT's Strategic Goal: Preserve our Assets – keeping Texas roads in good repair and preventing their deterioration is crucial.

Bridge Condition Score

Description: Measurement of bridge condition on Texas roadways.

What is the trend?: (FY 2017 to FY 2018 compare)

  • Statewide: Performance Stable yellow flat line

How it is measured: Bridge condition score is based on the most severe primary component condition rating. The primary bridge components are deck, superstructure and substructure. The component rating is assigned a value between 9 (excellent) and 0 (failed) based on the overall condition of the component. A combined score for all bridges on Texas roadways is calculated as the average of each individual bridge’s numeric score, weighted by deck area, categorized into four highway classifications:

  1. Statewide (All Highway Types)
  2. National Highway System (NHS) interstate (IH)
  3. NHS non-IH
  4. Non-NHS

The deck area is calculated as a bridge’s length multiplied by its width. Bridge conditions are typically discussed as a function of primary bridge components. For span-type structures, there are three components that receive condition ratings: deck, superstructure and substructure. Culverts are drainage structures that, if twenty feet in length or longer, are considered bridges. Culverts receive a single condition rating. For both types of structures (span bridges and culverts), the lowest scoring component determines the individual bridge condition score. A corresponding numeric score is then assigned to the bridge.

Example: Bridge A is inspected and given 8 for substructure, 7 for superstructure and 6 for deck. The individual bridge condition score is 6, with a numeric score of 85.

Why this matters: Tracking overall bridge asset condition allows us to forecast network performance and determine trends given various funding scenarios for bridge maintenance, repair and replacement. To protect TxDOT’s investments in capital assets – part of TxDOT’s Strategic Goal: Preserve our Assets – preventing decline in condition of our bridge assets is crucial.

Preserve our Assets

Deliver preventive maintenance for TxDOT’s system and capital assets to protect our investments.

Objectives for goal:

  • Maintain and preserve system infrastructure to achieve a state of good repair and avoid asset deterioration.
  • Procure, secure, and maintain equipment, technology, and buildings to achieve a state of good repair and prolong life cycle and utilization.

Performance measures for goal:

© 2018 Texas Department of Transportation • All Rights Reserved