## 7 Results and Discussion  
The early-age cracking behavior of CRCP without the active crack control method is categorized as the randomly occurring crack pattern [12; 13; 20; 44]. The key factor affecting the development of early-age cracking in CRCP is the resistance to the change in length of the concrete slab [59]. The performance of CRCP is largely determined by the early-age cracking development [10; 11; 13; 44]. It has been reported that about 90% of punch-out distress on CRCP sections was triggered by clusters of randomly occurring cracks [60]. The thorough saw-cut across the full width of pavement and automated tape insertion illustrate some drawbacks, such as issues related to concrete surface spalling [11; 12; 14]. The behavior of ARCP is dependent on the effectiveness of the crack induction strategy in inducing cracks at the desired locations where the partial length steel bars are originally intended to replace the continuous longitudinal steel bars. Two major shortcomings of passive crack control CRCP (without any active crack control method), that is, the high initial construction cost and non-uniform crack patterns, are discussed to be resolved with the concept of ARCP by using automated tape insertion as a crack induction strategy [37]. As discussed above, this strategy has already been applied to CRCP as an active crack control method and its associated demerits have also been discussed. Regarding the performance of active crack control CRCP using partial surface saw-cuts, as discussed above in Section 3, only one shortcoming of CRCP, that is, the high initial construction cost, is left to be resolved by using partial length steel bars in place of continuous longitudinal steel bars. Based on this fact, the fundamental behavior of ARCP is basically equivalent to that of CRCP. Therefore, in the present study, the early-age cracking behavior of ARCP with partial surface saw-cuts is evaluated with respect to the amount of continuous steel and compared with that of CRCP. The crack induction from the tips of saw-cuts in ARCP-1 and ARCP-2, shown in Figures 18 and 19, illustrates that ARCP behaves exactly as CRCP, as discussed in the Section 5. The predicted crack patterns of ARCP-1 and ARCP-2 depicted in Figures 20 and 21 are also basically the same as those exhibited by CRCP depicted in Figure 12 and as indicated by field observations illustrated in Figure 5. This finding indicates that the transverse crack pattern with desirable crack spacing (1.2 m) could be effectively induced in ARCP by using partial surface saw-cuts. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline
**Steel Design** & **CRCP** & **ARCP-1** & **ARCP-2** \\ \hline Diameter of continuous steel bar (mm) & 20 & 20 & 20 \\ Length of continuous steel bar (mm) & 2400 & 2400 & 2400 \\ Rows of continuous steel bars & 11 & 6 & 4 \\ Continuous steel ratio (\%) & 0.767 & 0.418 & 0.279 \\ Diameter of partial steel bar (mm) & - & 20 & 20 \\ Length of partial steel bar (mm) & - & 600 & 600 \\ Rows of partial steel bars & - & 5 & 7 \\ Steel ratio at crack inducer (\%) & 0.767 & 0.767 & 0.767 \\ Relative continuous steel amount to & 100 & 54.54 & 36.36 \\ CRCP (\%) & & & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Comparison of reinforcement layout of CRCP and advanced reinforced concrete pavement (ARCP). Figure 19: Crack initiation in ARCP-2 from the saw-cuts. Figure 18: Crack initiation in ARCP-1 from the saw-cuts. Figure 20: The predicted transverse crack pattern of ARCP-1. Moreover, the development of crack strain with respect to time over the saw-cut tips demonstrated in Figure 22 illustrates no prominent difference between CRCP and ARCP. Based on the field observations of cracking developments discussed above, it may justify the lesser amount of continuous steel bars in the active crack control ARCP segment in between the saw-cuts to hold the passively formed cracks tightly between the actively induced cracks.