Abstract

Pavement smoothness is a key factor in determining highway user satisfaction. Because of technical limitations of traditional equipment and measurement procedures, the adequacy of a straightedge in characterizing roughness and having it relate to user response has come to question. One barrier to more widespread implementation of a new smoothness standard is the lack of objective, verifiable correlation methods for use in establishing specification limits. The purpose of this study was to (1) develop statistical approaches to harmonize two different measurement devices, i.e., a 3-m straightedge and an inertial profiler; and (2) determine the specification for flexible pavements. The device harmonization requires the development of procedures for statistically testing through comparisons to reference measurements. Data collected from 85 pavement sections on newly constructed and resurfaced highways were examined to demonstrate the device's ability to measure specific smoothness properties. Smoothness data are shown to be normally distributed according to the chi-squared test. Test results obtained from straightedge are found to be significantly different from those from profiler. Smoothness specifications applied for straightedge cannot be directly used to those for profiler. A conversion equation is developed to help contractors convert smoothness measurements between these two devices based on the same acceptance level. The International Roughness Index (IRI) obtained from the profiler appears to provide better measures of smoothness and better correlation with user response. Four following ranges are proposed for the smoothness specification according to the acceptance smoothness level: bonus, full pay, penalty, and correction. As the acceptance probability sets at 20%, the bonus threshold value should be less than 1.20 mm and 2.55 m/km for straightedge and profiler, respectively. The acceptance level is found to be below 2.60 mm and 3.60 m/km for straightedge and profiler, respectively. The demarcation line between penalty and correction is drawn at 95% of the acceptance probability with corresponding values of 3.35 mm and 4.10 m/km for straightedge and profiler, respectively. This research effort has developed a series of relationships between IRI and straightedge that can assist highway agencies in transitioning to IRI smoothness specification for pavements.

References

1.
Smith
,
J. T.
and
Tighe
,
S. L.
, “
Assessment of Overlay Roughness in Long-Term Pavement Performance Test Sites—Canadian Case Study
,”
Transp. Res. Rec.
 0361-1981 
1869
,
2004
, pp.
126
-
135
.
2.
Wambold
,
J. C.
,
Defrain
,
L. E.
,
Hegmon
,
R. R.
,
Mcghee
,
K.
,
Reichert
,
J.
, and
Spangler
,
E. B.
, “
State of the Art Measurement and Analysis of Road Roughness
,”
Transp. Res. Rec.
 0361-1981 
836
,
1981
, pp.
21
-
29
.
3.
Smith
,
K. D.
,
Hoerner
,
T. E.
, and
Darter
,
M. I.
, “
Effect of Initial Pavement Smoothness on Future Smoothness and Pavement Life
,”
Transp. Res. Rec.
 0361-1981 
1570
,
1997
, pp.
60
-
69
.
4.
Liu
,
C.
and
Gazis
,
D.
, “
Surface Roughness Effect on Dynamic Response of Pavements
,”
J. Transp. Eng.
 0733-947X https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1999)125:4(332), ASCE, Vol.
125
,
1999
, pp.
332
-
337
.
5.
Fernano
,
E. G.
and
Bertrand
,
C.
, “
Application of Profile Data to Detect Localized Roughness
,”
Transp. Res. Rec.
 0361-1981 
1813
,
2002
, pp.
55
-
61
.
6.
Sun
,
L.
,
Zhang
,
Z.
, and
Ruth
,
J.
, “
Modeling Indirect Statistics of Surface Roughness
,”
J. Transp. Eng.
 0733-947X https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2001)127:2(105), ASCE, Vol.
127
,
2001
, pp.
105
-
111
.
7.
Perera
,
R. W.
and
Kohn
,
S. D.
,
Issues in Pavement Smoothness: A Summary Report, NCHRP Web Document
42,
National Research Council
,
2002
, Washington, DC.
8.
Jackson
,
N. M.
,
Jubran
,
A.
,
Hill
,
R. E.
, and
Head
,
G. D.
,
The Road to Smooth Pavements in Tennessee
, ASTM STP 1433,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
2002
, pp.
31
-
48
.
9.
Hearne
,
T. M.
,
Barbee
,
C. L.
, and
Helms
,
L. N.
, “
Asphalt Rideability: Construction with a Straightedge
,”
Transp. Res. Rec.
 0361-1981 
1543
,
1996
, pp.
81
-
88
.
10.
Smith
,
K. L.
,
Titus-Glover
,
L.
, and
Evans
,
L. D.
,
Pavement Smoothness Index Relationships
. FHWA-RD-02-057,
2002
,
Federal Highway Administration
,
Virginia
.
11.
Kottegoda
,
N. T.
and
Rosso
,
R.
,
Statistics, Probability and Reliability for Civil and Environmental Engineering
,
McGraw-Hill
,
New York
,
1997
.
12.
Benjamin
,
J. R.
and
Cornell
,
C. A.
,
Probability, Statistics and Precision for Civil Engineering
,
McGraw-Hill
,
New York
,
1997
.
13.
Ang
,
A.
and
Tang
,
W. H.
,
Probability Concepts in Engineering Planning and Design, Volume I-Basic Principles
,
John Wiley & Sons
,
New York
,
1975
.
14.
Haldar
,
A.
and
Mahadevan
,
S.
,
Probability, Reliability and Statistical Methods in Engineering Design
,
John Wiley & Sons
,
New York
,
2000
.
15.
Koch
,
R.
,
The 80/20 Principle: The Secret to Success by Achieving More with Less
,
Currency Doubleday
,
New York
,
1998
.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.