wim #40 – us 52, mp 126.8 south saint paul february … · 98,000 pounds, 12 were class 9’s and...

WIM #40 – US 52, MP 126.8 SOUTH SAINT PAUL FEBRUARY 2010 MONTHLY REPORT

In order to understand the vehicle classes and groupings the Mn/DOT “Vehicle Classification Scheme” and the “Vehicle Class Groupings for Forecasting” are shown on the WIM Reports home page at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/traffic/data/html/wim_reports.html VOLUME For WIM #40 on US 52 at mile post 126.8 in South St. Paul, there were 1,470,016 vehicles that passed the site for the month of February. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and Heavy Commercial Average Daily Traffic (HCADT) for February 2010 was 52,501 and 3,327, respectively. Of the heavy commercial vehicles, the top two in volume were the Class 9’s and 5’s. Figure 1 shows the average number of vehicles, broken down by direction, versus day of the week. The average numbers of vehicles for northbound (NB) and southbound (SB) both peaked on Fridays and were only slightly lower on Thursdays and Wednesdays and were lowest on Sundays. Figure 2 shows the total vehicles, passenger vehicles (Class 1, 2, and 3), and heavy commercial vehicles (Class 4 to 13) versus hour of day. For February the total vehicles and passenger vehicles had a smaller peak between 5 am and 6 am and a larger peak between noon and 4 pm. The heavy commercial vehicles peak starting at 6 am and extended to 1 pm. The heavy commercial vehicles were reviewed for directional volume differences and it appears that there were no differences. The heavy commercial volume is within 0.5% when comparing the directional split. VEHICLE CLASSIFICATION The traffic volume consisted of 1,376,869 passenger vehicles (93.7%) and 93,147 heavy commercial vehicles (6.3%). Table 1 summarizes vehicle class volumes and percentages; and overweight vehicles and the percentages as compared to total overweight vehicles. OVERWEIGHT VEHICLES In the area of WIM #40 the Winter Load Increases (WLI) went into effect on December 18, 2009. The WLI allows a 10% across the board increase in axle and gross vehicle weights (GVW) without a permit on US and state routes. A permit is required to operate on the interstate at the WLI levels. The WLI means that the maximum allowable weight for a single axle is 22,000 pounds; tandem axles, spaced 8’ or less, can be up to 37,400 pounds; tridem axles, spaced 9’ or less, can be up to 47,300 pounds; quad axles, spaced 13’ or less, can be up to 56,100 pounds; and the maximum GVW is 88,000 pounds. The tables and graphs were analyzed with these limits. The total volume and total heavy commercial volume for February 2010 was 1,470,016 and 93,147, respectively. The total number of vehicles that were overweight was 8,452 or 0.6% of the total traffic or 9.1% of the heavy commercial vehicle. Figure 1 shows the average number of overweight vehicles, broken down by direction, versus day of the week. The average numbers of overweight vehicles for NB peaked on Thursdays for SB they peaked on Fridays and were lowest on Sundays in both directions. The average numbers of overweight vehicles were about 1.5 times higher for NB as compared to SB. The top two overweight violators by class were the Class 9’s and the Class 10’s. Overweight vehicles by class versus hour of the day are shown in Figure 3.

The Class 9 overweight vehicles peaked between 6 am and noon. The overweight vehicles were also reviewed to determine if there is a NB and SB difference. Figure 4 shows the total, NB, and SB overweight vehicles versus hour of the day. Figure 4 shows that for February 2010, more of the overweight vehicles were in the NB direction. Figure 5 shows the gross vehicle weight for Class 9’s and 10’s in both the NB and SB direction. From Figure 5 it is apparent that the Class 9’s had more empty than full in both directions. The Class 10’s had more full vehicles than empty vehicles in both directions. For weight enforcement the WIMs are a screening tool. Currently, piezo-quartz WIM systems are considered to be accurate within 5% to 10% on Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW). With the 10% WLI and accuracy of about 10% anything over a GVW of 96,800 pounds is overweight. These may still be permitted loads. For the most efficient use of personnel and equipment, these are the vehicles that should be weighed on static scales and reviewed for permits. We are currently working with Mn/DOT Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) to determine the number of permit loads that pass by each WIM on a monthly basis. In the NB direction there were 24 vehicles over 98,000 pounds, 12 were Class 9’s and 5 were Class 10’s. In the SB direction there were 16 vehicles over 98,000 pounds, 7 were Class 9’s and 6 were Class 10’s. Table 2 summarizes the Top 10 Gross Vehicle Weight for Class 9 and Class 10 vehicles for the month of February 2010. SPEED The speed limit on US 52 at the WIM site is 55 mph. For February 2010, WIM #40 recorded an average speed of 59 mph, the median speed was 60 mph, and the 85th percentile speed was 65 mph. Figure 6 shows the speed versus the normalized percentage of passenger vehicles and heavy commercial vehicles in both the NB and SB direction. Both the NB and SB heavy commercial vehicles were going slightly slower that the passenger vehicles. Figure 7 shows the speed versus the day of the week with the volumes normalized. It looks like for February 2010, Mondays were slightly slower and Wednesdays and Saturdays were slightly faster. Figure 8 shows the speed versus the hour of the day with the volumes normalized. It appears that the traffic tends to move a little faster during the early part of the day, 3 am to 4 pm. As can be seen in the figures there are slight differences in speeds based on vehicle class, day of the week, and hour of the day. BRIDGE The Lafayette Bridge No.9800 is approximately 3.9 miles north of WIM #40, and Bridge No. 19016 on the NB side and Bridge No. 19015 on the SB side are 0.7 miles south of WIM #40. For the month of February 2010, WIM #40 saw 1,470,016 vehicles with a total weight of 8,737,900 kips (1 kip = 1,000 pounds). Figure 9 summarizes the total GVW by lane and class and Figure 10 summarizes the percentages each class contributes to the total GVW. Table 3 provides details on the class breakdowns versus lane for GVW.

MATERIALS For February 2010 a total of 57,940 ESALs passed over the pavement at WIM #40. Approximately 80.6% of the ESALs were in the driving lane, 45.2% NB and 35.4% SB. Figure 11 graphically depicts the total ESALs by class and lane. Figure 12 summarizes the percentages that each vehicle class contributes to the total ESALs. It is interesting to note that the Class 9’s provide 60.9% of the ESALs while they are only 23.6% of the total gross vehicle weight. Table 4 provides details on the class breakdowns versus lane for ESALs. Table 4 also provides the flexible ESAL factors for each vehicle class using a terminal serviceability of 2.5 and a structural number of 5. For February 2010 there were 264 Class 9 trucks and 341 Class 10 trucks over 88,000 pounds. These 605 vehicles generated 1,957 ESALs. If all of these trucks weighed just 88,000 pounds they would have generated 1,711 ESALs, 246 ESALs lower. If you take the February 2010 monthly ESALs of 57,936 and multiply it by 12 to calculate an annual ESAL number and then multiply it by 20 to get a 20-year BESAL you get 13,905,000. If you go through the same process but start with a monthly value of 57,690, i.e. subtracting out all of the overweight Class 9 and 10 vehicles, you come up with 13,846,000 20-year BESALs. If you take the 20-year BESAL with all Class 9’s and 10’s weighing 88,000 pounds or less and divide that by 57,936, the BESALs with the overweight Class 9’s and 10’s you get 239, or the overweight Class 9’s and 10’s cause the pavement to reach its 20-year design life 1 month earlier or this is decreasing the pavement design life by 0.4%. This is a quick, back of the book calculation, this only looks at Class 9’s and 10’s, not the other 8 heavy commercial classes. As part of a technical implementation research project we are looking at developing a report function that will perform this calculation for all heavy commercial classes. Because the heavy commercial haulers are looking to move that weight of freight we will add additional legal-weight trucks so that the total weight being shipped stays the same. CALIBRATION This is the first attempt to document Mn/DOT’s current WIM calibration process. This will change. The current plan is to try to calibrate the systems twice a year, once with the frost in the ground and once when the frost is out of the ground. WIM #40 was calibrated during initial construction this fall, so this was just a quick check after the test truck had already calibrated WIM #36 in Lake Elmo. WIM #40 was checked on February 10, 2010. The test truck is a Class 9 that weighed 79,700 pounds with an air suspension system on the two drive axles and leaf springs on the three other axles. The static weight of the test truck along with the individual weights of each axle was provided to WIM personnel. The current goal of the calibration is to first have the GVW correspond with the static weight to plus or minus 5% and then secondly to have each individual axle correspond with the static weight to plus or minus 9%. The test truck just performed two passes on each lane to confirm that the system was working within tolerances. The GVW for Lane 1 varied from 3.76% to 4.02% with an average of 3.89%. For Lane 1 the individual axles varied from -2.46% to 10.06% with an average of 3.76%. The GVW for Lane 2 varied from 0.13% to 1.25% with an average of 0.69%. For Lane 2 the individual axles varied from -5.06% to 5.66% with an average of 0.98%. The GVW for Lane 3 varied from 2.76% to 3.14% with an average of 2.95%. For Lane 3 the individual axles

varied from -6.74% to 11.95% with an average of 3.17%. The GVW for Lane 4 varied from -3.89% to 2.38% with an average of -0.75%. For Lane 4 the individual axles varied from -10.06% to 6.51% with an average of -0.63%. The GVW is within tolerance for all four lanes. The average of all axles’ weights for each lane is within tolerance for all four lanes but several of the individual passes were out of tolerance for Lanes 1, 3, and 4. It was felt that adjusting for individual axles would possibly throw off the GVW so no further adjustments were performed at this time. The calibration results are summarized in Table 6. As part of the on-going monitoring to assure the performance between calibrations, front axle weights of Class 2’s, 3’s, and 9’s will be monitored on a monthly basis. Review of current literature and data will be used to develop acceptable ranges for these three Classes. Table 5 summarizes the front axle weight of the Class 2’s, 3’s, and 9’s by lane. Currently, all Class 2’s and 3’s are included in this data. In the future, the goal would be to only monitor the Class 2’s and 3’s that are not pulling trailers. SUMMARY For February 2010 the average volumes peaked on Fridays in both directions and were only slightly lower on Wednesdays and Thursdays and were lowest on Sundays. The overweight vehicles peaked on Thursdays in the NB direction and on Friday in the SB direction and were lowest on the weekends. The average numbers of overweight vehicles were approximately 1.5 times higher for NB than SB. The overweight vehicles peaked from 7 am to 2 pm. For February 2010, for the Class 9’s, 13.2% of them were overweight and for the Class 10’s, 47.9% of them were overweight. The speed of the traffic varies slightly based on vehicle class, day of the week, and hour of the day. The GVW was a little higher in the NB direction 4,436,000 kips versus 4,302,000 kips SB. This agrees with the ESALs. The NB ESALs were higher 32,650 versus 25,290 SB. For February 2010, the overweight Class 9’s and 10’s are shortening the 20-year BESAL design life by 1 month or by 0.4%. Attach: Table 1 – Vehicle Classification Data Table 2 – Top 10 Gross Vehicle Weight for Class 9’s and Class 10’s Table 3 – Gross Vehicle Weight by Class and Lane Table 4 – Total ESALs by Class and Lane and Flexible ESAL Factor Table 5 –Front Axle Weight by Class and Lane Table 6 – Calibration Results Figure 1 – Average Volume and Average Overweight Volume vs. Day of the Week Figure 2 – Total Vehicles, Passenger Vehicles, and Heavy Commercial Vehicles vs. Hour of the Day Figure 3 – Overweight Vehicles by Class vs. Hour of the Day Figure 4 – Overweight Vehicles by Direction vs. Hour of the Day Figure 5 – Class 9’s and 10’s by Direction vs. Gross Vehicle Weight Figure 6 – Speed vs. Vehicle Type and Direction of Travel Figure 7 – Speed vs. Day of the Week

Figure 8 – Speed vs. Hour of the Day Figure 9 – Total Gross Vehicle Weight by Class and Lane Figure 10 – Total Gross Vehicle Weight by Class Figure 11 – Total ESALs by Class and Lane Figure 12 – ESALs by Class

MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLYAVERAGE MONTHLY TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL

VEHICLE DAILY TOTAL VOLUME OVERWEIGHT OVERWEIGHTCLASS VOLUME VOLUME PERCENTAGE VEHICLES PERCENTAGE

C1 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0%C2 40,691 1,139,342 77.5% 0 0.0%C3 8,483 237,527 16.2% 0 0.0%C4 33 928 0.1% 113 1.3%C5 1,050 29,395 2.0% 281 3.3%C6 308 8,635 0.6% 534 6.3%C7 19 540 0.0% 316 3.7%C8 245 6,862 0.5% 200 2.4%C9 1,553 43,480 3.0% 5,726 67.7%C10 77 2,169 0.1% 1,040 12.3%C11 31 878 0.1% 19 0.2%C12 7 208 0.0% 35 0.4%C13 2 52 0.0% 188 2.2%

TOTAL = 52,501 1,470,016 100.0% 8,452 100.0%

DAY OF VEHICLE GVWDATE WEEK TIME CLASS DIRECTION LANE (lbs)2/17/10 Wednesday 5:36:55 9 Northbound 1 142,0002/19/10 Friday 11:07:10 10 Northbound 1 142,0002/22/10 Monday 5:31:32 10 Southbound 4 139,0002/6/10 Saturday 6:31:42 9 Northbound 1 133,0002/10/10 Wednesday 5:23:18 9 Northbound 2 132,0002/11/10 Thursday 12:00:50 10 Northbound 1 128,0002/13/10 Saturday 7:06:09 9 Northbound 1 125,0002/17/10 Wednesday 15:18:39 10 Southbound 4 123,0002/20/10 Saturday 9:46:03 9 Northbound 1 121,0002/16/10 Tuesday 10:44:11 9 Northbound 1 113,000

February 2010

TABLE 2 - TOP 10 GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT, CLASS 9 AND CLASS 10

TABLE 1 - VEHICLE CLASSIFICATION DATAWIM #40 - SOUTH ST. PAUL

February 2010

WIM #40 - SOUTH ST. PAUL

NB NB SB SBDRIVING PASSING PASSING DRIVING

VEHICLE LANE LANE LANE LANE TOTALCLASS (Kips) (Kips) (Kips) (Kips) (Kips) PERCENTAGE

C1 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%C2 1,345,953 708,929 693,128 1,394,674 4,142,684 47.4%C3 440,692 214,953 230,816 462,502 1,348,964 15.4%C4 12,508 3,283 2,890 12,124 30,805 0.4%C5 183,132 40,221 39,975 194,779 458,107 5.2%C6 101,043 23,227 26,806 94,974 246,051 2.8%C7 12,675 5,725 2,748 9,993 31,142 0.4%C8 93,399 13,033 12,216 88,800 207,448 2.4%C9 845,471 259,356 226,162 729,503 2,060,491 23.6%C10 85,536 17,146 13,465 39,039 155,186 1.8%C11 17,595 4,343 4,556 17,243 43,737 0.5%C12 6,283 895 357 4,121 11,656 0.1%C13 460 168 277 704 1,608 0.0%

TOTAL = 3,144,748 1,291,278 1,253,395 3,048,457 8,737,879 100.0%

NB NB SB SB FLEXIBLEVEHICLE DRIVING PASSING PASSING DRIVING ESAL

CLASS LANE LANE LANE LANE TOTAL PERCENTAGE FACTORC1 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% --C2 230 109 108 233 680 1.2% 0.0006C3 190 81 93 198 560 1.0% 0.0025C4 311 72 67 340 790 1.4% 1.07C5 3,006 428 467 3,244 7,145 12.3% 0.26C6 1,799 320 490 1,922 4,530 7.8% 0.57C7 392 151 65 248 857 1.5% 1.79C8 1,885 206 264 1,591 3,946 6.8% 0.63C9 16,136 4,750 2,858 11,534 35,278 60.9% 0.87C10 1,691 269 266 703 2,929 5.1% 1.45C11 399 74 106 380 959 1.7% 1.20C12 131 15 5 85 236 0.4% 1.33C13 6 3 4 15 27 0.0% 0.99

TOTAL = 26,175 6,477 4,792 20,493 57,936 100.0%ESALS/LANE = 45.2% 11.2% 8.3% 35.4%

ESALS/DIRECTION = 56.4% 43.6%

TABLE 3 - GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT BY CLASS AND LANEWIM #40 - SOUTH ST. PAUL

February 2010

TABLE 4 - ESALs BY CLASS AND LANE AND FLEXIBLE ESAL FACTORWIM #40 - SOUTH ST. PAUL

February 2010

VEHICLE LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 LANE 4MONTH CLASS (Kips) (Kips) (Kips) (Kips)February C2 2.28 2.16 2.15 2.25February C3 3.18 3.16 3.11 3.11February C9 10.49 10.42 10.41 10.41

TABLE 5 - FRONT AXLE WEIGHT BY CLASS AND LANEWIM #40 - SOUTH ST. PAUL

February 2010

WIM # 40SITE: South St. Paul

DATE: 2/10/10

GVW Steer 2nd Axle 3rd Axle 4th Axle 5th AxleTest Vehicle 79.7 12.2 16.9 16.8 15.9 17.8

LANE: 1

Pass Speed GVW Steer 2nd Axle 3rd Axle 4th Axle 5th Axle1 52 82.9 12.0 17.1 18.1 17.5 18.32 62 82.7 11.9 16.9 18.2 17.2 18.4

GVW Steer 2nd Axle 3rd Axle 4th Axle 5th AxlePass ± 5% ± 9% ± 9% ± 9% ± 9% ± 9%

1 4.02% -1.64% 1.18% 7.74% 10.06% 2.81%2 3.76% -2.46% 0.00% 8.33% 8.18% 3.37%

Average = 3.89% 3.76% All AxlesMinimum = 3.76% -2.46% All AxlesMaximum = 4.02% 10.06% All Axles

COMMENT:

LANE: 2



1 0.13% 2.46% 0.00% -1.19% 5.66% -4.49%2 1.25% 0.82% 2.37% 4.17% 5.03% -5.06%


COMMENT:

TABLE 6 - CALIBRATION RESULTS

Static Weight

WIM Weight

WIM Weight

WIM # 40SITE: South St. Paul

DATE: 2/10/10

TABLE 6 - CALIBRATION RESULTS

LANE: 3



1 2.76% -0.82% 4.14% 5.95% 11.95% -6.18%2 3.14% 0.82% 8.28% 2.98% 11.32% -6.74%


COMMENT:

LANE: 4



1 2.38% 1.64% 6.51% 2.98% 4.40% -2.81%2 -3.89% -4.10% -10.06% 1.79% 0.63% -7.30%

Average = -0.75% -0.63% All AxlesMinimum = -3.89% -10.06% All AxlesMaximum = 2.38% 6.51% All Axles

COMMENT:

WIM Weight

WIM Weight

200

250

300

350

400

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

mbe

r of O

verw

eigh

t Veh

icles

e Num

ber o

f Veh

icles

Figure 1 ‐ Average Volume and Average Overweight Volumevs. Day of the Week

NB Vehicles

SB Vehicles

NB Overweight Vehicles

SB Overweight Vehicles

0

50

100

150

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

Average

Num

Average

Day of the Week

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

vy Com

mercial Veh

icles

and Pa

ssen

ger Veh

icles

Figure 2 ‐ Total Vehicles, Passenger Vehicles, and Heavy Commercial Vehicles vs. Hour of the Day

Total Vehicles

Passenger Vehicles

Heavy Commercial Vehicles

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

0

20,000

40,000

0 ‐1

1 ‐2

2 ‐3

3 ‐4

4 ‐5

5 ‐6

6 ‐7

7 ‐8

8 ‐9

9 ‐1

0

10 ‐11

11 ‐12

12 ‐13

13 ‐14

14 ‐15

15 ‐16

16 ‐17

17 ‐18

18 ‐19

19 ‐20

20 ‐21

21 ‐22

22 ‐23

23 ‐24

Heav

Total

Hour of the Day

300

400

500

600

700

Overw

eigh

t Veh

icles

Figure 3 ‐ Overweight Vehicles by Class vs. Hour of the Day

C4

C5

C6

C7

C8

C9

C10

C11

C12

C13

0

100

200

0 ‐1

1 ‐2

2 ‐3

3 ‐4

4 ‐5

5 ‐6

6 ‐7

7 ‐8

8 ‐9

9 ‐1

0

10 ‐11

11 ‐12

12 ‐13

13 ‐14

14 ‐15

15 ‐16

16 ‐17

17 ‐18

18 ‐19

19 ‐20

20 ‐21

21 ‐22

22 ‐23

23 ‐24

Hour of the Day

400

500

600

700

800

900

Overw

eigh

t Veh

icles

Figure 4 ‐ Overweight Vehicles by Direction vs. Hour of the Day

Total Overweight VehiclesNBSB

0

100

200

300

0 ‐1

1 ‐2

2 ‐3

3 ‐4

4 ‐5

5 ‐6

6 ‐7

7 ‐8

8 ‐9

9 ‐1

0

10 ‐11

11 ‐12

12 ‐13

13 ‐14

14 ‐15

15 ‐16

16 ‐17

17 ‐18

18 ‐19

19 ‐20

20 ‐21

21 ‐22

22 ‐23

23 ‐24

Hour of the Day

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

Veh

icles

Figure 5 ‐ Class 9's and 10's by Direction vs. Gross Vehicle Weight

NB Class 9

SB Class 9

NB Class 10

SB Class 10

0

200

400

600

800

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

Weight (Kips)

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Percen

tage

Figure 6 ‐ Speed vs. Vehicle Type and Direction of Travel

NB Passenger Vehicles

SB Passenger Vehicles

NB Heavy Commercial Vehicles

SB Heavy Commercial Vehicles

0%

5%

10%

15%

0 ‐4

0

40 ‐45

45 ‐50

50 ‐55

55 ‐60

60 ‐65

65 ‐70

70 ‐75

75 ‐80

80 ‐85

85 ‐100

100+

Speed (mph)

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Percen

tage

Figure 7 ‐ Speed vs. Day of the Week

Sunday

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Saturday

0%

5%

10%

0 ‐4

0

40 ‐45

45 ‐50

50 ‐55

55 ‐60

60 ‐65

65 ‐70

70 ‐75

75 ‐80

80 ‐85

85 ‐100

100+

Speed (mph)

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Percen

tage

Figure 8 ‐ Speed vs. Hour of the Day

0 ‐ 1

1 ‐ 2

2 ‐ 3

3 ‐ 4

4 ‐ 5

5 ‐ 6

6 ‐ 7

7 ‐ 8

8 ‐ 9

9 ‐ 10

10 ‐ 11

11 ‐ 12

12 ‐ 13

13 14

0%

5%

10%

15%

0 ‐4

0

40 ‐45

45 ‐50

50 ‐55

55 ‐60

60 ‐65

65 ‐70

70 ‐75

75 ‐80

80 ‐85

85 ‐100

100 +

Speed (mph)

13 ‐ 14

14 ‐ 15

15 ‐ 16

16 ‐ 17

17 ‐ 18

18 ‐ 19

19 ‐ 20

20 ‐ 21

21 ‐ 22

22 ‐ 23

23 ‐ 24

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

tal G

ross W

eight (Kips)

Figure 9 ‐ Total Gross Vehicle Weight by Class and Lane

NB Driving Lane

NB Passing Lane

SB Driving Lane

SB Passing Lane

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 C13

Tot

Vehicle Class

C10.0%

C247.4%

C82.4%

C923.6%

C101.8%

C110.5%

C120.1%

C130.0%

Figure 10 ‐ Total Gross Vehicle Weight by Class

C315.4%

C40.4%

C55.2%

C62.8%

C70.4%

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

ESALs

Figure 11 ‐ Total ESALs by Class and Lane

NB Driving Lane

NB Passing Lane

SB Driving Lane

SB Passing Lane

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 C13

Vehicle Class

C10.0%

C21.2%

C31.0% C4

1.4%

C512.3%

C67.8%

C71.5%

C105.1%

C111.7%

C120.4%

C130.0%

Figure 12 ‐ ESALs by Class

C86.8%C9

60.9%

wim #40 – us 52, mp 126.8 south saint paul february … · 98,000 pounds, 12 were class 9’s and...

Documents