Figure 12-1. Pavement management components (Zimmerman et al. 2011). Benefits of Using Pavement Management The benefits of pavement management include (AASHTO 2001, FHWA 2010b): An objective basis for developing strategies to improve pavement performance. The ability to justify funding needs for pavement maintenance and rehabilitation activities. Improved access to road network information. A more systematic approach to identifying current and future road conditions and needs. The availability of data to communicate agency decision impacts on pavement condition. Improved response to queries from internal and external stakeholders. More cost-effective maintenance and rehabilitation decisions. A better understanding of pavement performance. Improved decisions based on sound technical data.
PSI = 5.03 – log(1 + SV) – 1.38 (RD)2 – 0.01(C + P)1/2 (12-1) where: PSI = Present Serviceability Index SV = Slope variance over section from CHLOE profilometer RD = Mean rut depth (in.) C = Cracking (ft/1000 ft2) (asphalt pavements) P = Patching (ft2/1000 ft2) Table 12-2. Distress included in the FHWA Distress Identification Manual (). Asphalt Pavements Jointed Plain Concrete (JPC) Continuously Reinforced Concrete (CRC) Cracking Fatigue Block Edge Longitudinal Reflection Transverse Patching and Potholes Patch/patch deterioration Potholes Surface Deformation Rutting Shoving Surface Defects Bleeding Polished aggregate Raveling Miscellaneous Distresses Lane-to-shoulder drop-off Water bleeding and pumping Cracking Corner breaks Durability (“D”) Longitudinal Transverse Joint Deficiencies Joint seal damage Spalling of longitudinal joints Spalling of transverse joints Surface Defects Map cracking and scaling Polished aggregate Popouts Miscellaneous Distresses Blowups Faulting of transverse joints and cracks Lane-to-shoulder drop-off Lane-to-shoulder separation Patch/patch deterioration Bleeding and pumping Cracking Durability (“D”) Longitudinal Transverse Surface Defects Map cracking and scaling Polished aggregate Popouts Miscellaneous Distresses Blowups Transverse construction joint deterioration Lane-to-shoulder drop-off Lane-to-shoulder separation Patch/patch deterioration Punchouts Spalling of longitudinal joints Bleeding and pumping Longitudinal joint seal damage Table 12-3. Pavement distresses identified in ASTM D6433 (ASTM 2009). Asphalt Pavements Jointed Concrete Pavements Alligator (fatigue) cracking Bleeding Block cracking Blowup/buckling Corner break Divided slab
Bumps and sags Corrugation Depression Edge cracking Joint reflection cracking Lane/shoulder drop-off Longitudinal and transverse cracking Patching and utility cut patching Polished aggregate Potholes Railroad crossing Rutting Shoving Slippage cracking Swell Weathering and raveling Durability (“D”) cracking Faulting Joint seal damage Lane/shoulder drop-off Linear cracking Large patching and utility cuts Small patching Polished aggregate Popouts Pumping Punchout Railroad crossing Shrinkage cracks Scaling, map cracking, and crazing Corner spalling Joint spalling Pavement Condition Surveys Pavement condition data is typically collected using two primary methods: manual and automated. In addition, with automated data collection, data is analyzed using either or semi-automated procedures (Zimmerman et al. 2011). Manual surveys—include personnel either walking or driving at slow speeds to visually assess the pavement condition. Manual surveys do not require specialized equipment and are capable of providing very detailed distress type, severity, and quantity information; however, data collection is slow and fairly labor intensive. Manual surveys, due to the slow speed of data collection, can increase the potential for safety hazards to both the data collection team and the traveling public. Raters for manual surveys need to be trained to assure adequate data quality. Some agencies require certification. Automated surveys—include automated equipment that uses imaging and/or noncontact sensors for quantifying pavement distress (i.e., surface cracking, surface texture characteristics, roughness, rutting, and faulting). Automated surveys can be conducted at or near traffic speeds reducing the exposure of the data collection team and minimizing the impact to the traveling public. Fully automated processing—distress identification (type, severity, and extent) that requires no human intervention and uses software to interpret differences in grayscale for identifying cracks and other surface irregularities. Semi-automated processing—distress identification (type and severity) that requires human intervention for quantifying distress type and severity. Analysis is conducted using specialized software and computer workstations. Factors Influencing Pavement Condition Surveys The following provides a brief summary of current and/or upcoming changes that may influence the way agencies are conducting or analyzing pavement condition surveys (Zimmerman et al. 2011). Preventive maintenance treatments—most pavement condition surveys do not incorporate the types of distress that normally trigger preventive maintenance treatments,