COMPARISON OF NEW TECHNOLOGY FOR MEASURING RIDE QUALITY Except where reference is made to the work of others, the work described in this thesis is my own or was done in collaboration with my advisory committee. This thesis does not include proprietary or classified information. _________________________________ Joshua D. Hays Certificate of Approval: _____________________________ ______________________________ David H. Timm Mary Stroup-Gardiner, Chair Assistant Professor Associate Professor Civil Engineering Civil Engineering _____________________________ ______________________________ Brian L. Bowman Stephen L. McFarland Professor Acting Dean Civil Engineering Graduate School COMPARISON OF NEW TECHNOLOGY FOR MEASURING RIDE QUALITY Joshua D. Hays A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Auburn, Alabama December 15, 2006 iii COMPARISON OF NEW TECHNOLOGY FOR MEASURING RIDE QUALITY Joshua D. Hays Permission is granted to Auburn University to make copies of this thesis at its discretion, upon the request of individuals or institutions and at their expense. The author reserves all publication rights. ______________________________ Signature of Author ______________________________ Date of Graduation iv THESIS ABSTRACT COMPARISON OF NEW TECHNOLOGY FOR MEASURING RIDE QUALITY Joshua D. Hays Master of Science, December 15, 2006 (B.S., Auburn University, 2002) 157 Typed Pages Directed by Mary Stroup-Gardiner Ride quality of a pavement is quantified by a statistical index. The statistical index and the profile device used to assess the index are major variables in pavement smoothness. Due to the wide range of these variables across the United States, a nationwide review of the current ride quality specifications was conducted. A major effort in the industry for acceptance testing is the concept of specifying ride quality based on a percent improvement in ride quality of the layer immediately below the new surface. In order to determine the least variable method of profiling pavement surfaces, three different profile devices were used to collect longitudinal profiles at the National v Center for Asphalt Technology Test Track. Profiles were collected on the existing lanes and the reconstructed lanes. The profiles collected made it possible to determine repeatability precision for the profile devices. This information also provided insight in determining if and how ride quality improves with increasing pavement layers. The findings of this research indicate that the type of surface profiled have an affect on the repeatability of the profile device. Also, the length of the test section profiled affect repeatability. Through the placement of each structural layer in the pavement section, the final surface smoothness was improved. However, bumps located in the initial layer profiled were reflected in the final surface. This indicates that every effort should be made to ensure the smoothest possible initial layer. vi Computer software used Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, ProScan System, Australian Road Research Board Walking Profiler System, ProVal 2.5 vii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES...............................................................................................................x LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... xi CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION OBJECTIVES..........................................................................................................2 CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................3 OBJECTIVES OF LITERATURE REVIEW..........................................................4 SCOPE .....................................................................................................................5 BACKGROUND .....................................................................................................5 ROAD PROFILE MEASUREMENT DEVICES........................................5 WALKING PROFILOGRAPH (HAND OPERATED) ..............................6 INCLINOMETERS (HAND OPERATED) ................................................7 INERTIAL PROFILERS (LOW TO HIGH SPEED)..................................8 PROFILE INDICES...............................................................................................11 PROFILE INDEX (PI)...............................................................................11 INTERNATIONAL ROUGHNESS INDEX (IRI)....................................12 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PI AND IRI ............................................13 viii STATE OF THE PRACTICE............................................................................................15 SPECIFICATIONS....................................................................................15 ACCEPTANCE LIMITS...........................................................................18 PAY FACTORS.........................................................................................20 CURRENT ALABAMA SPECIFICATIONS...........................................22 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................23 CHAPTER III: RESEARCH PROGRAM INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................26 SCOPE ...................................................................................................................27 DATA COLLECTION ..........................................................................................29 MCCRACKEN CALIFORNIA STYLE PROFILOGRAPH DATA ........31 ARRB WALKING PROFILER DATA.....................................................33 ARAN VAN DATA ..................................................................................34 CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS REPEATABILITY OF WALKING PROFILERS ................................................36 MCCRACKEN CALIFORNIA STYLE PROFILOGRAPH ....................36 ARRB WALKING PROFILER.................................................................38 REPEATABILITY OF INERTIAL PROFILER...................................................45 ARAN VAN...............................................................................................45 ARRB AND ARAN PROFILE TRACE COMPARISON ....................................51 EVALUATION OF SMOOTHNESS ON RECONSTRUCTED LANES............55 CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL CONCLUSIONS................................................................................59 ix RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................61 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................63 APPENDIX A ....................................................................................................................66 APPENDIX B ..................................................................................................................108 APPENDIX C ..................................................................................................................113 APPENDIX D ..................................................................................................................135 APPENDIX E ..................................................................................................................138 x LIST OF TABLES TABLE DESCRIPTION PAGE 2-1 100% Pay Acceptance Limits for Flexible Pavements Using Inertial Profiler..............................................................20 2-2 Current Alabama Ride Quality Specifications...........................................23 3-1 Number of Replicate Measurements with Each Device on Each Layer....29 4-1 Profile Index obtained with McCracken Profilograph...............................33 4-2 Analysis of Profile Index Obtained With McCracken Profilograph..........37 4-3 McCracken Profiler PI Statistics for each Layer Type ..............................37 4-4 Analysis of Profile Index Obtained With ARRB Profiler .........................38 4-5 ARRB Profiler PI Statistics for each Layer Type......................................39 4-6 Analysis of IRI Obtained With ARRB Profiler .........................................41 4-7 Analysis of IRI Obtained With ARAN Van at 45 mi/hr............................45 4-8 Analysis of IRI Obtained With ARAN Van at 15 mi/hr............................45 4-9 Smoothness Indices for the Reconstructed Lanes......................................56 xi LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE DESCRIPTION PAGE 2-1 McCracken Model California Profilograph.................................................7 2-2 ARRB Walking Profiler...............................................................................8 2-3 ICC Lightweight Inertial Profiler...............................................................10 2-4 Automatic Road Analyzer ? ARAN ..........................................................10 2-5 Sample PI Calculation................................................................................12 2-6 Quarter Car Model .....................................................................................13 2-7 Profilograph Type Used on Flexible Pavement.........................................16 2-8 Pay Factors Used for Flexible Pavement ..................................................17 2-9 Profilograph Type Used on Rigid Pavement .............................................17 2-10 Pay Factors Used for Rigid Pavement .......................................................18 2-11 Profile Index Ranges for California Profilograph on Flexible Pavement..19 2-12 Profile Index Ranges for California Profilograph on Rigid Pavement......19 2-13 Range of Incentives Specified for Flexible Pavement...............................21 2-14 Range of Disincentives Specified for Flexible Pavement..........................21 3-1 Typical Section of Reconstructed Lane on North Tangent........................28 3-2 McCracken Model Profilograph with guide ..............................................30 3-3 ARRB Walking Profiler with guide...........................................................30 xii 4-1 Average PI for Different Devices and Layer Types ..................................39 4-2 PI Standard Deviations for Different Devices and Layer Types ...............40 4-3 ARRB Profile Traces of Inside Lane North Tangent.................................43 4-4 Variance in ARRB Profile Traces of Inside Lanes....................................44 4-5 Variance in ARRB Profile Traces of Reconstructed Lane ........................44 4-6 ARAN North Tangent Profile Trace at 45 mi/hr .......................................47 4-7 ARAN South Tangent Profile Trace at 45 mi/hr .......................................48 4-8 ARAN North Tangent Profile Trace at 15 mi/hr .......................................48 4-9 ARAN South Tangent Profile Trace at 15 mi/hr .......................................49 4-10 Variance in ARAN Profile Traces of Inside Lanes at 45 mi/hr.................49 4-11 Variance in ARAN Profile Traces of Inside Lanes at 15 mi/hr.................50 4-12 ARRB and ARAN (45 mi/hr) Average Profile Trace of North Tangent...51 4-13 ARRB and ARAN (45 mi/hr) Average Profile Trace of South Tangent...52 4-14 North Tangent ARRB vs. ARAN (45 mi/hr) Average IRI ........................52 4-15 North Tangent ARRB vs. ARAN (15 mi/hr) Average IRI ........................53 4-16 South Tangent ARRB vs. ARAN (45 mi/hr) Average IRI ........................53 4-17 South Tangent ARRB vs. ARAN (15 mi/hr) Average IRI ........................54 4-18 Average Profile Height vs. Distance for Unbound Layers ........................57 4-19 Average Profile Height vs. Distance for Reconstructed Layers (400 ft) ...57 1 CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION Pavement smoothness is an important element of pavement construction. Smooth pavements provide comfort and safe passage to the driving public and prevent increases in travel cost. Rough (i. e. lack of smoothness) roads increase travel costs by causing vehicle damage and increasing fuel consumption. There is much concern from state highway agencies about pavement smoothness because it is primarily how the public perceives pavement quality. Additionally, the contractors responsible for constructing pavements are concerned with pavement smoothness since it affects them financially by pay adjustment factors (incentives, disincentives) used by state agencies to ensure pavement smoothness. The pay factors used to ensure ride quality vary widely across the United States. One major variable is the ride quality (statistical index) used to quantify pavement smoothness. Another variable is the type of devices that can be used to assess the index. The selection of indices and profiling devices used significantly affect the quantification of the ride quality and deserve serious investigation. Also, it is important to research the correlations of these parameters to their effect on the quantification of pavement smoothness. A major effort in the pavement industry for acceptance testing is the concept of specifying ride quality for mill and overlay based on a percent improvement in ride quality of the layer immediately below the new surface. Therefore, research is needed to 2 investigate the process of measuring smoothness on different structural layers of the pavement. OBJECTIVES The objectives of the thesis were to: ? Review Literature on the topic of road profile measurement devices, profile indices, and existing research of correlating profile indices. ? Assess and summarize the current methods of specifying ride quality in the United States. ? Evaluate if and how ride quality improves with increasing layers. ? Determine the most realistic and least variable method of profiling various types of surfaces for assessing the improvement in ride quality as each layer is added to the pavement structure. 3 CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW INTRODUCTION Pavement smoothness has evolved into an important aspect of pavement construction. Smooth pavements provide comfort and safe passage to the driving public and prevent increases in traveling cost while rough roads increase vehicle repair costs, fuel consumption, and unsafe driving conditions. State agencies use statistically based ride quality indices such as the Profile Index (PI) and International Roughness Index (IRI) to quantify the driving public?s perception of an acceptable road. From a contractor?s perspective, the initial smoothness of the pavement is very important because in most states ride quality specifications determine incentives and disincentives for contractor pay adjustments. The smoothness of a pavement is not only used in specifications, but it is also used for an overall evaluation of the condition of the pavement over the life of the facility. It is not unusual for the initial ride quality statistic to be different from the one used to monitor pavement condition during the life of the pavement. While a number of statistical methods have been used to represent a user perception of ride quality, the most common quantitive expressions of ride quality today are the PI and IRI. The PI is a mechanical filter based index that measures the roughness of a profilograph trace (1). IRI is defined as the reference average rectified slope 4 (RARS 80 ) of a standard quarter-car simulation at a traveling speed of 50 mi/hr (80 km/hr) measured in units of length/length (in/mile or m/km) (1). Regardless of the quantitive measurement used, all expressions of ride quality are based on the longitudinal profile of the surface. There are a number of devices available for documenting surface profiles. These devices range from very simple hand operated units to complicated devices that involve today?s advanced technology. Objectives of Literature Review The objectives of the literature review were to: ? Investigate how road profile measurement devices are used to obtain longitudinal profiles. ? Define how longitudinal profiles from each device are used to indicate ride quality. ? Investigate how state agencies across the United States use these devices and the ride quality associated with each device for acceptance testing. The objectives of the literature review were researched in order to select the types of devices included in the Research Program. The types of devices used to document the longitudinal profile of the roadway, as well as brief explanations of the mathematical approaches used to quantify profile characteristics are summarized in the following sections. The state of the practice review (Appendix A) documents how each state is currently measuring ride quality and the 5 state?s ride quality specifications. A thorough investigation of the current ride quality specifications for the state of Alabama is also included in the report. Scope The literature review was conducted to identify publications providing information on current specifications enforced by state agencies within the United States as of 2003. The majority of the specifications were found on state agency web sites. In order to find the most current specifications, contacts were made to the state agencies that did not display the specifications on their web site. Publications providing information on indices and equipment used to measure pavement smoothness were also reviewed. BACKGROUND Road Profile Measurement Devices Profiles are used to examine the smoothness or, conversely, the roughness of a pavement surface. Roughness, typically defined as the lack of smoothness, occurs when there is a variation in surface elevation that induces vibrations in traversing vehicles, and it is defined over an interval of profile (2). Sayers et al. describe vibrations as follows: (2) ?There are many kinds of vibration, ranging from sickening heaves due to long wavelengths, to the rapid teeth-jarring impacts and irritating noises caused by short wavelengths.? The definition of a profile is a two-dimensional slice of the road surface, taken along an imaginary line (2). For the purpose of measuring a pavement surface, an imaginary line is usually considered in both the left and right wheel paths. Longitudinal 6 and transverse profiles are the two types of roadway profiles. Longitudinal profiles can be used to show the design grade, roughness, and texture of the pavement surface while transverse profiles are used to measure rut depth (2). However, rutting can contribute to the level of roughness of a pavement because over time rutting results in a reduction of pavement section and premature cracking will occur which will increase roughness of a pavement. In terms of measurement, if the depth of rutting along the measured longitudinal profile is not consistent then rutting will affect ride quality. The collection, profile analysis, and use of ride quality statistics are the main focus of this literature review. There are a number of profile measuring devices designed to be hand operated, operated at low speeds, or operated at highway speeds. The hand-operated units include rolling straightedges, walking profilographs, and inclinometers. Inertial profilers, while originally designed to be operated at highway speeds (typically 40 to 55 mph), now have smaller versions, referred to as lightweight profilers, that can be operated at slower speeds (i.e., 10 to 20 mph). Walking Profilograph (Hand Operated) The California Profilograph (Figure 2-1) was developed by Francis N. Hveem while at the California Division of Highways in the 1940s (3). There are a number of manufacturers that supply this type of profilograph; the profilograph shown in Figure 2-1 was manufactured by McCracken. The profilograph records the profile by the deviations of the center bicycle wheel. A cable connects the center wheel to a pen on a printer that records the profile trace as the machine is pushed along the pavement. The printer drum is connected to the center wheel with chains and gears which allows the printer to feed paper to the recording pen. The Profile Index (PI) can be calculated from a profilograph trace. The PI and its calculation will be discussed later. Figure 2-1. McCracken Model California Profilograph. Inclinometers (Hand Operated) Inclinometer-based profilers use a small straightedge beam up to 12 inches in length to measure profile. The beam is placed on the pavement surface and its inclination is measured and recorded. The beam is then moved its length along the pavement surface and the same measurements are repeated (4). One type of inclinometer is the Australian Road Research Board (ARRB) walking profiler (Figure 2-2). The ARRB walking profiler uses a 9.5 inch beam. The process of moving the beam along the pavement surface is called a step. After each step the distance and elevation is recorded. The profiler uses these measurements to create a profile and calculate the IRI. The IRI is an index that is used to measure roughness of the pavement and will be discussed later. 7 Figure 2-2. ARRB Walking Profiler (5). Inertial Profilers (Low to High Speed) Inertial profilers determine the profile by using a combination of non-contact height sensors, an accelerometer, and a distance measuring instrument. The height sensors measure the distance from the vehicle chassis to the ground. Height sensor types include laser, optical, infrared, and ultrasonic sensors, but the most common sensor today is the laser height sensor (6). The accelerometer is usually located on top of the height sensor to measure vertical acceleration (6). The accelerometer measures the force of the up and down movement of the vehicle chassis during a data run and uses the data to compensate the height measurements made by the laser (6). The distance measuring instrument simply measures the longitudinal distance of the section being profiled (6). Inertial profilers are separated into two groups: lightweight and full-size. The lightweight profilers (Figure 2-3) are generally operated at low speeds between 10-20 mi/hr and are used by the contractor immediately after the Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) mat 8 9 is placed. Testing is completed before the pavement is opened to traffic. Many contractors have implemented the use of the lightweight profiler for measuring pavement smoothness because of its maneuverability and speed compared to the California-style profilograph. In addition, since the lightweight profilers weigh less than the full size profilers some state agencies allow their use on green (i.e., not fully cured) Portland Cement Concrete (PCC). Most lightweight profilers produce a trace from which the PI and IRI can be calculated. In fact, the PI and IRI values are produced along with the trace by an onboard computer. The full-size profilers (Figure 2-4) are generally operated at speeds between 45 and 55 mph, although they can be used at speeds as low as 22 mph. These units are used to evaluate the ride quality of pavement that has already been opened to traffic. The inertial profiler system is usually mounted to a multi-passenger van. The Roadware ARAN van (Figure 2-4) is one example of a full size inertial profiler that can obtain pavement profiles at highway speeds. This allows state agencies to evaluate pavements on a network level. The ARAN van software is capable of producing smoothness indices in PI and IRI. Most full size inertial profilers are employed for acceptance or performance evaluation. Figure 2-3. ICC Lightweight Inertial Profiler (7). Figure 2-4. Automatic Road Analyzer ? ARAN (8). 10 11 Profile Indices Among the many statistics used to quantify ride quality from a longitudinal profile, the two used in state specifications today are PI and IRI. Therefore, this thesis will focus on these indices. Twenty five state agencies use PI to report pavement smoothness, but some of these agencies are planning to make a transition from PI to IRI at some future date. Profile Index (PI) The profile index is a mechanical filter based index which measures the roughness of a profilograph trace, generally from the California style-profilograph. In order to calculate the PI, a blanking band must be applied optimally between the highs and lows of the profile trace depicting at least 100 ft (30 m). The blanking band used is chosen by the state agency and it can be 0.2, 0.1, or 0.0 in (5 mm, 2.5 mm, or 0.0 mm). The PI is calculated by summing the excursions that are outside the applied blanking band and dividing by the length of the test section (9). The purpose of a blanking band is to allow small deflections in the profile trace to be nulled out of the measurements to compensate for equipment vibrations and other minor movements. The amount of deflection to be nulled out is determined by the specification of a blanking band. Therefore, only deflections occurring outside of the blanking band are recorded as deviations from a smooth surface. Figure 2-5 shows a sample calculation of PI. In Figure 2-5, the solid black line is the best fit linear line which is used as a reference to measure the excursions. This best fit line is a major difference in the two methods of reducing a profilograph trace. The manual method involves a template centered on the trace which represents the best fit linear line. The automated method involves a scanner used to digitize the trace and perform a least-square error analysis to determine the best fit linear line from which to measure the excursions. Prior research has shown that the automated method is more reliable and faster than the manual method, and the automated method reduces the influence of the experience and subjectivity of the individual performing the manual reduction method (10). 12 H = 0.4 in H = 0.2 in H = 0.2 in 0.2 in blanking band Length of test section = 0.1 mile PI = (0.4 + 0.2 + 0.2) in / 0.1 mile = 8 in/mile Figure 2-5. Sample PI Calculation. International Roughness Index (IRI) The IRI is calculated for one longitudinal profile and is defined as the reference average rectified slope (RARS 80 ) of a standard quarter-car simulation at a traveling speed of 50 mi/hr (80 km/hr) measured in units of length/length (in/mile or m/km) (2). The profile is filtered with a 250 mm moving average to smooth the profile or weaken the small wavelengths. The profile is then filtered with a quarter car simulation (Figure 2-6) with standardized parameters of a sprung mass, unsprung mass, suspension spring rate, tire spring rate, and suspension linear damping (10). These parameters are standardized to allow the model to simulate response properties typical of most highway vehicles. The output of the filter is the relative displacement of the sprung mass and unsprung mass (or suspension motion) at a speed of 50 mph (80 km/hr) (10). The absolute value of the suspension motion is accumulated and divided by the profile length to obtain IRI in units of in/mile or m/km. Sprung Mass Unsprung Mass Figure 2-6. Quarter Car Model (1). Correlations Between PI and IRI With the advance of technology, many state agencies are trying to advance the ride quality specifications for pavements. Most specifications are listed in terms of PI, but some are transitioning into IRI. Many studies have been performed to relate PI and IRI in order to do this. In a recent study involving the relationship of smoothness index values, several researchers from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) analyzed the profile data from the Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) database (11). The profile data 13 14 extracted from LTPP included PI and IRI values for flexible and rigid pavements using the 0.0 in, 0.1 in, and 0.2 in blanking bands (11). The purpose of the study was to provide recommendations for smoothness specification acceptance limits for new and rehabilitated flexible and rigid pavements, based upon IRI and PI (11). In other words, the study was conducted to recommend how agencies make the switch from current PI- based specifications to IRI specifications, and to show what levels of IRI would be comparable or equivalent to current PI levels. The results of the study provided numerous figures and tables which can be found in reference 11. The results show that a reasonable correlation can be developed between IRI and PI (11). For example, the following equation represents a model that can be used to relate IRI to PI using a 0.0 in blanking band on flexible pavement (11): IRI = 2.66543 * PI + 213.009 R 2 = 0.89482 where IRI = mm/km PI = mm/km with zero blanking band Other results show that correlations between PI values using the zero blanking band and PI values using the 0.1 in and 0.2 in blanking bands can be developed (11). If a state agency wanted to improve its specifications without converting to IRI, then this study provides the agency with equations to calculate PI with a reduced blanking band width. Pavement types evaluated in this study included Asphaltic Concrete (AC), AC/AC, and AC/Portland Cement Concrete (PCC), and the climatic regions analyzed were dry-freeze, dry-nonfreeze, wet-freeze, and wet-nonfreeze (11). Although the conclusions of this study stated that pavement type and climate are significant factors in the correlation 15 between IRI and PI, there were no clear trends regarding the effect of climate and pavement type on the IRI-PI relationship (11). However, climatic conditions have the effect of increasing the slope of the IRI-PI relationship for AC/AC pavements in dryer climatic regions (11). It was recommended to agencies which plan to use the IRI-PI relationship equations to evaluate the validity of the research based on that agencies conditions and experiences. State of the Practice Specifications Each of the fifty United States? smoothness specifications were reviewed and recorded as a part of this study. The information collected include the method of measurement, ride quality statistic to be used, test section length, time of testing, and the acceptance limits including full pay and incentives/disincentives if applied for both flexible and rigid pavements. The specifications are summarized in Appendix A. Figure 2-7 summarizes the prevalence of the various types of equipment used across the United States. The California-style profilograph is used by 25 states for acceptance of the ride quality of flexible pavements, and 17 states use inertial profilers such as the ARAN inertial profiler, General Motors Profilometer, or Lightweight inertial profiler. Seven states use devices other than the California-style profilograph and inertial profiler. These other devices include the straightedge, Mays Ride Meter, or South Dakota Profiler. The type of device used for four states were undetermined. Out of the 50 state specifications reviewed, 43 have flexible pavement smoothness specifications (Table A- 2). The remaining 7 states do not have smoothness specifications, or no information was able to be obtained for these states. Figure 2-7. Flexible Pavement 25 17 7 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 California Inertial Other Profilograph Type Used N u m b er o f S t at es Of the 43 states enforcing specifications, 29 have both pay incentives and disincentives, 14 use no incentives, 5 use incentives only, and 2 use disincentives only (Figure 2-8). The states that do not have disincentives require corrective action to the pavement if the smoothness index exceeds the full pay range. Some states do not require corrective action if the smoothness index has exceeded full pay range; however, a penalty or price adjustment is usually enforced. 16 Figure 2-8. Flexible Pavement Pay Factors Used 5 2 29 14 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Incentives only Disincentives only Both None Pay Factors N u mber of S t at es Figure 2-9. Profilographs Used for Rigid Pavement 39 44 0 10 20 30 40 50 California Inertial Other Profilograph Type Used N u m b er o f S t a t es Smoothness specifications are enforced by 44 out of 50 states for newly constructed rigid pavements (Table A-3). Within the 44 states, 24 apply both incentives and disincentives, 13 have no pay factors, 7 apply incentives only, and 6 apply disincentives only (Figure 2-10). The California profilograph is used by 39 states for 17 acceptance of the ride quality of rigid pavements, and 4 states use an inertial profiler (Figure 2-9). The remaining states use devices such as the straightedge, or Mays Ride Meter. Acceptance Limits Acceptance limits for pavements vary a great deal within the United States. For instance, the ranges of Profile Index in in/mile representing 100 percent pay are plotted in Figure 2-11. There are nineteen ranges of Profile Index for 100 percent pay, and only three ranges include more than one state (Figure 2-11). The PI ranges vary from 0 in/mile to 18.1 in/mile for a lower limit and 3 in/mile to 30 in/mile for an upper limit (Figure 2- 11). It can be determined from Figure 2-11 that state agencies do not agree on one particular range of PI values to assign 100 percent pay to the contractor for flexible pavements. The same follows for the specifications written for rigid pavements. It can be seen from Figure 2-12 that state agencies are inconsistent in assigning PI values to award 100 percent pay to the contractor for rigid pavements. 18 Figure 2-10. Pay Factors Used for Rigid Pavements 7 6 24 13 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Incentives only Disincentives only Both None Pay Factors Nu m b er of S t ates Figure 2-11. Profile Index Ranges for California Profilograph on Flexible Pavement 0 1 2 3 4 5 0- 3 0 -5 0 -7 3- 5 . 9 3. 1- 5 3 . 1 -7 4. 0 -7 4. 1- 5 4 .0 -1 0 5 . 0 -7 5. 0 - 1 0 7. 0 -1 0 8 -1 0 . 0 1 0 .0 - 2 0 1 0 . 1- 3 0 13 .7 -17 . 3 14 .1 - 16 1 5 .1 - 2 0 1 8 . 1- 2 5 PI Range for 100% Pay, in/mile Number of States Figure 2-12. Profile Index Ranges for California Profilograph on Rigid Pavements 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0- 4 0- 5 0- 6 0- 7 0- 8 0- 10 3- 5 3- 5. 9 3. 1- 7 3. 9- 6. 3 4- 6 4. 1- 5 4. 1- 7 4. 1- 10 4. 26- 10 4. 6- 5. 1 5- 6 5- 7 5- 10 5. 1- 7 5. 1- 12 6. 1- 10 8- 10 10- 12 14. 1- 16 15. 1- 20 18. 1- 25 18. 1- 30 25. 1- 35 25. 4- 44. 3 PI Range for 100% Pay, in/mile Num b er of states The data in Table 2-1 show acceptance limits for 100 percent pay on flexible pavements for the states listed using an inertial profiler. The index used by these states in Table 2-1 is the IRI. The data show that no two states agree on a particular range. 19 20 However, some states do agree on lower limits alone and upper limits alone. Connecticut and Washington agree on an approximate IRI = 60 in/mile for a lower limit; Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Wyoming agree on and IRI = 70 in/mile as an upper limit for 100 percent pay (Table 2-1). Table 2-1. 100% Pay Acceptance Limits for Flexible Pavements using Inertial Profiler Acceptance Limits International Roughness Index, in/mile State Type of Inertial Profiler Lower Limit Upper Limit Connecticut ARAN A 60 80 Georgia Laser Profiler 0 47.5 Maine Inertial Profiler 36 60 Massachusetts Inertial Profiler 0 95 Montana Laser Profiler 46 65 Pennsylvania Lightweight 0 70 South Dakota Inertial Profiler 55.1 70 Vermont Inertial Profiler 54 65 Washington Lightweight 60.1 95 Wyoming Inertial Profiler 55 70 A = Automatic Road Analyzer Pay Factors State agencies apply pay factors such as incentives and disincentives to promote quality construction by the contractor. As discussed previously, the number of states applying incentives and disincentives are expressed in Figures 2-8 and 2-10. Table A-1 in Appendix A lists the range of incentives and disincentives used across the nation; Figures 2-13 and 2-14 summarize this information based on the number of states that use similar incentives or disincentives. This information is presented in terms as a percent of the pavement unit bid price. From Figure 2-13 it can be seen that the incentive range of 0-5% is the most common among the specifications, and Figure 2-14 shows that the disincentive range of 0-10% is the most commonly used penalty. Figures 2-13 and 2-14 list a column titled ?Other? which means the state agency uses a method other than percent of pavement unit bid price. The other methods used for incentives/disincentives include equations which are a function of PI or IRI, price increase/decrease per square yard, and price increase/decrease per lot. Figure 2-13. Range of Incentives Specified for Flexible Pavement 3 8 111 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 0-3 0-5 0-7 0-15 0-25 Other Bonus Method Range of Incentives, % of pavement unit bid price N u m b er o f st at es Figur 2-14. Range of Disincentives Specified for Flexible Pavement 111 2 5 1 3 1 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0-4 0-5 0-7 0-8 0-10 0-15 0-20 0-25 Other Penalty Method Range of Disincentives, % of pavement unit bid price Nu m b er o f states 21 22 Current Alabama Specifications Table 2-2 lists the current specifications for flexible and rigid pavements in the state of Alabama. Table 2-2 specifies that a California-style profilograph is suitable for measuring flexible and rigid pavement. The section length for testing is 0.1 miles for both types of pavement. The specifications are listed in PI with corresponding price adjustments in percent of pavement unit bid price. Recent research shows that there are disadvantages to the current ride quality specifications in Alabama. An analysis by the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) indicates that more than three-quarters of all the 0.1 mile sections tested since the implementation of the specification have fallen in the 5 % bonus range without an improvement in pavement ride quality (10). One disadvantage of the older Alabama specifications is that a 0.2 inch (5 mm) blanking band is specified in manually analyzing the profilograph trace (10). Studies have indicated that using a wide blanking band, such as the one specified by Alabama, allow minor defects in the pavement to go unnoticed, and these defects affect ride quality but are not measured because they fall inside the blanking band (10). It was recommended by Bowman et al. to change the blanking band width to 0.0. This recommendation was subsequently adopted by ALDOT. Another disadvantage of the specifications noted by Bowman et al. was the fact that a step function with 5% increments is used. It was stated that the large increments between payment levels results in the potential for a large payment difference between two borderline segments (10). Bowman et al. suggested that a combination step function/continuous linear relationship function be used to determine pay factors. The suggested pay function (10) is as follows: 23 Bonus: Percent Pay = (-1.667 * PI) + 124.5 Penalty: Percent Pay = (-1.667 * PI) + 133.33 where, PI = Profile Index, in/mile. Table 2-2. Current Alabama Ride Quality Specifications Price Adjustments Pavement Type Equipment Section Length Time of Testing Profile Index, mm/km 0.2 in Blanking Band Profile Index, in/mile 0.2 in Blanking Band Contract Price Adjustment, % of pavement unit bid price Under 47.3 Under 3.0 105 47.3 to < 94.6 3.0 to < 6.0 100 94.6 to < 126.2 6.0 to < 8.0 95 126.2 - 157.7 8.0 - 10.0 90 Flexible California profilograph 0.1 mile same day over 157.7 over 10.0 Corrective work required Under 45 Under 3.0 105 45 to < 95 3.0 to < 6.0 100 95 to < 125 6.0 to < 8.0 95 125 to 160 8.0 to 10.0 90 Rigid California profilograph 0.1 mile immediately after curing over 160 Over 10.0 Corrective work required SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Pavement smoothness has become and will remain an essential element of the construction industry. There are numerous technical papers dealing with pavement smoothness, and each author has a different idea of how to achieve or specify pavement 24 smoothness. Through research of the literature and current state specifications it can be determined that PI is still the main index used, and the California-style profilograph is still the predominant measuring device used. However, many states are currently in the process of transitioning to other means of measuring pavement smoothness such as inertial profilers. Alabama is one of the states that are beginning to investigate the possibility of phasing out the use of the California ? style profilograph in favor of an inertial profiler. Therefore, the devices of concern in this thesis are the California ? style Profilograph and the Automatic Road Analyzer (ARAN) high-speed inertial profiler. A third hand operated inclinometer style profiler, the Australian Road Research Board (ARRB), was added to the research program for several reasons: Some states are currently evaluating specifying a percent ride quality improvement rather than fixed upper and lower ride statistics. This means that the profile of the existing surface is needed in order to calculate the percent change. In the case of mill and fill overlay projects, this means that the milled profile would need to be obtained. In Alabama, this means that the profile needs to be collected between the milling and the paving operation as the constructions process moves down the road. This will require the use of a hand- operated unit that can be operated over short distances and move with the stop and start processes associated with a number of paving projects. A second reason, also associated with exploring the extent of the percent improvement due to the addition of the layer in the pavement structure, is that an easily movable hand-operated unit is needed when trying to profile cut areas in pavement construction and/or unbound surface materials. The third reason for including the ARRB unit is that Roadware is starting to market the ARRB along with the ARAN van for possible establishment of a reference profile for 25 field verification of profile measurements. For these reasons, it was deemed important to include an evaluation of this unit in this study. An investigation of transitioning current specifications from PI to IRI must be performed. The first step in achieving this transition is the development and comparison of the precision and correlation of both methods. This is the focus of this research project. 26 CHAPTER III: RESEARCH PROGRAM INTRODUCTION This research program was designed to: ? Determine McCracken California profilograph repeatability precision for recording longitudinal pavement profiles so that statistical differences between the new methods for obtaining pavement profiles could be established. ? Determine ARRB repeatability precision for recording longitudinal pavement profiles. ? Determine ARAN repeatability precision for recording longitudinal pavement profiles. ? Compare profile traces of the ARRB and the ARAN van. ? Evaluate the influence of subsequent pavement layers, starting with the subgrade profile, on the smoothness of the final HMA surface. The ARAN van was used to evaluate smoothness of HMA pavement layers only due to the fact that this equipment is not made for measuring pavement layers such as the subgrade and granular base layers. 27 SCOPE The Auburn University National Center for Asphalt Technology (AU-NCAT) test track was used for this research. This test track is a 1.76 mile closed loop two lane roadway. A total of 46 test sections were constructed around the loop with 13 sections in each of the North and South tangents and 10 sections in each of the east and west curves. Tangents were constructed with a cross slope of 2% and varied between 2% and 15% in the curves. The inside lane was essentially untrafficked, except for occasional passenger vehicles and for a safety lane for the truckers. This lane was used for estimating the repeatability of longitudinal profiles (tangents only) of the McCracken profilograph, ARRB profiler, and ARAN van, so that differences in the profiles due to traffic would be minimized. The outside lane was used to evaluate the longitudinal profiles of each layer of pavement during reconstruction of the test track. The reconstruction of the North tangent was used to assess the repeatability of longitudinal profiles obtained with the McCracken profilograph and ARRB on subgrade and granular base course surfaces. These profiles in conjunction with the inside lane tangent were used to determine the ability of the ARRB profiler to accurately reproduce a profile over extended lengths (approximately 600 meters) and a range of surface types. The McCracken profilograph traces were analyzed using the ProScan device to achieve the profile index (PI) with a 0.2 in blanking band. The ProScan device is an automated profilogram reduction system which is used by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and ALDOT to reduce profilograph traces. The ARAN van was used to produce IRI of the inside lane at 45 mi/hr and 15 mi/hr. 28 The McCracken profilograph was physically pushed around the track three times in order to receive three sample profiles for the inside lane on the North tangent and the South tangent. Samples of the subgrade, granular base course, HMA layer 2, HMA layer 1, and wearing course were profiled during reconstruction of the outside lane on the North tangent. Figure 3-1 shows the typical section of the reconstruction of the outside lane on the North tangent. Table 3-1 summarizes the number of samples tested for each layer using the McCracken profilograph. Logistics was a factor in determining the amount of samples taken for each layer. Each layer was profiled as much as logistically possible; however, some samples were interrupted by the paving train. Each layer profiled with the McCracken profilograph produced a profile trace which was reduced by the ProScan device which will be discussed later. The process for the ARRB walking profiler was similar to the process for the McCracken profilograph. Table 3-1 summarizes the number of samples tested for each layer using the ARRB walking profiler. The ARAN van was used to profile the inside lanes of the North and South tangents at speeds of 15 mi/hr and 45 mi/hr. Three samples were obtained for each tangent at 15 mi/hr and 45 mi/hr. Table 3-1 summarizes the number of samples tested for each layer using the ARAN van. Figure 3-1. Typical Section of Reconstructed Lane on North Tangent. Table 3-1. Number of Replicate Measurements with Each Device on Each Layer. North Tangent Reconstructed Lane North Tangent Inside Lane South Tangent Inside Lane Unit Subgrade Granular Base HMA Base Layer 2 HMA Base Layer 1 Wearing HMA HMA McCracken 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 ARRB 1 3 3 3 2 3 3 ARAN N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 3 DATA COLLECTION Data collection for this research involved measuring longitudinal profiles with the McCracken model California profilograph, ARRB walking profiler, and the ARAN van. The inside (untrafficked) lane was measured using all three of the measuring devices mentioned above. A homemade guide was placed on the McCracken model California profilograph and the ARRB walking profiler to line up with a reference point in order to approximately measure the same tract with each device (Figures 3-2, 3-3). The test path 29 chosen was in between the inside wheel path and outside wheel path due to destructive testing in each wheel path of the existing pavement. Three replicates of the inside (untrafficked) lane were measured with the McCracken profilograph and ARRB profiler. There were six replicates measured with the ARAN van. Three replicates were measured at a speed of 45 mi/hr, and three replicates were measured at a speed of 15 mi/hr. Figure 3-2. McCracken Model Profilograph with guide. 30 Figure 3-3. ARRB Walking Profiler with guide. McCracken California Style Profilograph Data The McCracken Profilograph was used to obtain the Profile Index for the North tangent and South tangent of the NCAT test track. Also, during the reconstruction of the North tangent outside lane, measurements were taken with the McCracken profilograph to obtain the Profile Index. The pavement layers profiled include the following: 1. Subgrade, 2. Granular base layer, 3. HMA base layers, and 4. HMA wearing course. Only the inside wheel path was profiled for each layer of reconstruction. Due to reconstruction logistics some layer test section lengths were shorter than others, and each layer could not be profiled three times for three complete samples. 31 32 The ProScan device was used to reduce the profile traces produced by the McCracken profilograph. This device digitizes the profile trace in order to perform a least-square error analysis to determine the best fit line and locates the deviations from this line. The deviations are summed and divided by the length of pavement being evaluated resulting in the Profile Index in in/mile. The ProScan device is capable of reducing a profile trace quickly, and is able to produce roughness indices for 0.0 in blanking band, 0.1 in blanking band, and 0.2 in blanking band. The ProScan device used for this research was on loan from the FHWA, but due to the limited availability only the profile index using a 0.2 in blanking band was reported. The layers profiled which are defined as follows: North Tangent: Untrafficked lane on the North tangent. South Tangent: Untrafficked lane on the South Tangent. Wearing: Wearing course on the reconstructed lane of the North tangent. HMA Base Layer 1: Base course on the reconstructed lane of the North tangent. HMA Base Layer 2: Base course on the reconstructed lane of the North tangent. Granular Base: Granular base course on the reconstructed lane of the North tangent. Subgrade: Subgrade on the reconstructed lane of the North tangent. Figure 3-1 shows the typical section of the reconstructed lane on the North tangent. This figure also indicates how the layers are labeled. 33 ARRB Walking Profiler Data The ARRB Walking Profiler was used to obtain the PI and IRI for the untrafficked lanes of the North tangent and South tangent of the NCAT test track. Also, during the reconstruction of the North tangent outside lane, measurements were taken with the ARRB to obtain the PI and IRI. The pavement layers profiled during reconstruction include the following: 1. Subgrade, 2. Granular base layer, 3. HMA base layer 2, 4. HMA base layer 1, and 5. Wearing. The inside wheel path was profiled for each layer of reconstruction using the ARRB. Due to reconstruction logistics some layer test section lengths were shorter than others, and some layers could not be profiled three times for three complete samples. The information collected with the ARRB profiler consists of profile height and distance every 9.5 inches. The raw data collected with ARRB walking profiler are listed in Appendix B. Due to the large amount of surface profiled and the extensive number of measurements (i.e., one every 9.5 inches), the first 9.5 feet of the raw data is shown in the tables of Appendix B as an example of the data collected. The ARRB data was processed with the Profile Viewing and Analysis 2.5 (ProVal 2.5) software to produce IRI values using 25 ft., 52.8 ft., and 528 ft. intervals and PI values using 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 blanking bands (12). The ProVal 2.5 software simulates a California profilograph when processing 34 PI values and reports PI of each 0.1 mile (528 ft) segment. The processed IRI and PI data are listed in Appendix C. ARAN Van Data The ARAN van was used to obtain the IRI for the untrafficked lanes of the North tangent and South tangent of the NCAT test track. Six samples of the North and South tangent were profiled. Three samples were profiled at 15 mi/hr and three samples were profiled at 45 mi/hr. The ARAN View software provides an engineering research development (ERD) file which lists profile height and distance of the longitudinal profiles. The profile height and distance is then used to create a profile trace. The tables in Appendix D list the profile height and distance for the longitudinal profiles created with the ARAN van. Due to the large amount of surface profiled and the minute measuring increments only the first 3.7114 feet of the raw data is listed in the tables of Appendix D. The ProVal 2.5 software uses the ERD file to calculate ride statistics at intervals such as IRI using a base length of 52.8 ft and 528 ft. The IRI data obtained with the ARAN van are shown in Appendix E. The base length of 25 ft was not calculated for the ARAN data due to errors in the ProVal 2.5 software. ProVal 2.5 is software that is updated as researchers and those in the industry use it. During the IRI calculations using ProVal 2.5 it was found that it could not calculate the IRI using a base length of 25 ft. The engineer that wrote the program for ProVal 2.5 was contacted about this problem and further investigation showed that there was a programming error with the latest version of ProVal 2.5. The error was corrected and the engineer explained that the error was directly 35 related to the base length of 25 ft, and the results using the base lengths of 52.8 ft and 528 ft are correct. 36 CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS REPEATABILITY OF WALKING PROFILERS McCracken California Style Profilograph Table 4-1 shows the Profile Index (PI) for each of the replicate profiles. In order to establish estimates of repeatability for the McCracken Profilograph, the average PI and standard deviation for each set of replicate values for each of the sections tested were calculated for the 0.2 inch blanking band. Multiple segments were treated as additional replicates for a given pavement layer. Table 4-2 lists the average PI and standard deviation for each of the inside (untrafficked) lanes and the reconstructed lanes (outside lane), North tangent. Table 4-3 presents the statistics for each layer type. The average PI for the unbound layers is at least 10 times larger than either of the HMA base or surface layers. The PI of the HMA base layers is slightly lower than that of the HMA surface mix; the HMA base PI values are significantly less variable than those obtained for the HMA surface. These results suggest that the compaction effort used to obtain density in the surface layers may actually be increasing both the roughness and variability in roughness of the finished surface. 37 Table 4-1. Profile Index obtained with McCracken Profilograph 0.2 in. Blanking Band Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Layer Profiled Segment Profile Index, in/mile Segment Profile Index, in/mile Segment Profile Index, in/mile 1 6.1 1 5.4 1 6.2 2 9.8 2 10.2 2 9.1 3 3.5 3 5.3 3 3.3 4 6.6 4 7.2 4 6.7 North Tangent 5 18.0 5 25.2 5 22.6 1 6.0 1 6.3 1 6.2 2 10.4 2 12.5 2 12.1 3 6.2 3 4.6 3 3.0 4 9.0 4 9.2 4 7.3 South Tangent 5 2.7 5 3.5 5 5.2 1 1.4 1 1.7 1 N/A 2 6.2 2 5.6 2 N/A Wearing 3 0.9 3 0.6 3 N/A 1 3.6 1 4.0 1 4.0 HMA Base Layer 1 2 4.2 2 3.9 2 4.0 HMA Base Layer 2 1 4.1 1 5.5 1 3.6 1 46.9 1 53.5 1 38.2 2 46.1 2 46.3 2 46.5 3 24.0 3 40.4 3 14.9 Granular Base 4 48.9 4 N/A 4 102.5 1 39.7 1 63.7 1 N/A 2 61.4 2 62.3 2 N/A 3 74.5 3 61.7 3 N/A Subgrade 4 70.6 4 160.0 4 N/A *Segment = 0.1 mile interval (528 ft) N/A = not able to obtain measurement 38 Table 4-2. Analysis of Profile Index Obtained With McCracken Profilograph. PI Information, in/mile (0.2 Blanking Band) Layer Profiled n Avg Std Dev Subgrade 8 74.24 28.20 Granular Base 12 48.66 20.30 HMA Surface North Tangent 15 9.68 7.15 HMA Surface South Tangent 15 6.95 3.19 HMA Surface New Wear 6 2.73 2.77 HMA Base 2 3 4.40 0.98 HMA Base 1 6 3.95 0.12 Table 4-3. McCracken Profiler PI Statistics for each Layer Type. PI Repeatability, in/mile (0.2 Blanking Band) Layer Type Average Variance Standard Deviation Coefficient of Variation Unbound Layers 61.45 588.06 24.25 39.47 HMA Base Layers 4.18 0.30 0.55 13.21 HMA Surfaces 6.45 19.10 4.37 67.72 ARRB Walking Profiler In order to establish preliminary estimates of repeatability for the ARRB walking profiler the average PI, average IRI, and the associated standard deviations for the test sections were calculated. Table 4-4 lists the average PI and standard deviation for the inside (untrafficked) lanes and the reconstructed outside North tangent lanes. Figure 4-1 compares the average values for each of the three layer types. The average PI values for the ARRB decrease with increasing size of blanking band, as expected. The average PI values (0.2 blanking band) are similar for both devices. Table 4-5 lists the statistics for each layer type using the ARRB profiler, and Figure 4-2 compares the standard deviations for the different types of layers. On the unbound layers, the standard deviations obtained with the McCracken profilograph are approximately five 39 times greater than the standard deviations obtained with the ARRB. This is most likely a function of the ease of use of the different equipment on unpaved surfaces. That is, it is easier to maneuver the small ARRB unit compared to the 25 ft McCracken truss-like structure. Table 4-4. Analysis of Profile Index Obtained With ARRB Profiler. Profile Index, in/mile 0.0 in. Blanking Band 0.1 in. Blanking Band 0.2 in. Blanking Band Layer Profiled *n Average Standard Deviation *n Average Standard Deviation *n Average Standard Deviation North Tangent 15 30.57 4.84 15 17.95 4.91 15 9.71 4.85 South Tangent 15 25.73 3.72 15 13.78 4.40 15 7.33 4.39 Wearing 3 19.98 1.88 3 8.09 1.48 3 2.38 1.08 HMA Base Layer 1 9 26.67 1.63 9 14.73 2.72 9 6.38 3.00 HMA Base Layer 2 6 27.28 4.22 6 15.32 3.14 6 8.60 3.88 Granular Base 9 81.10 2.38 9 67.39 4.19 9 51.66 5.08 Subgrade 3 102.80 11.40 3 89.92 8.93 3 73.82 5.81 *n = number of 0.1 mile intervals (528 ft) Table 4-5. ARRB Profiler PI Statistics for each Layer Type. PI Repeatability, in/mile Blanking Band Size Layer Type Average Variance Standard Deviation Coefficient of Variation HMA Surfaces 25.43 12.11 3.48 13.68 Base Layers 26.98 8.58 2.93 10.86 0.0 Blanking Band Unbound 91.95 47.47 6.89 7.49 HMA Surfaces 13.27 12.96 3.60 27.13 Base Layers 15.03 8.58 2.93 19.49 0.1 Blanking Band Unbound 78.66 43.03 6.56 8.34 HMA Surfaces 6.47 11.83 3.44 53.17 Base Layers 7.49 11.83 3.44 45.93 0.2 Blanking Band Unbound 62.74 29.70 5.45 8.69 91.95 4.18 61.45 25.43 26.98 13.27 15.03 78.66 6.47 62.74 7.49 6.45 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 HMA Surfaces HMA Base Layers Unbound A ver ag e Pr o f i l e I n d ex, i n / m i ARRB 0.0 ARRB 0.1 ARRB 0.2 McCracken 0.2 Figure 4-1. Average PI for Different Devices and Layer Types. 6.89 3.6 2.93 3.44 5.45 4.37 0.55 24.25 3.48 2.93 6.56 3.44 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 HMA Surfaces HMA Base Layers Unbound P r of ile Inde x S t a nda rd De v i a t ion, in/m i ARRB 0.0 ARRB 0.1 ARRB 0.2 McCracken 0.2 Figure 4-2. PI Standard Deviations for Different Devices and Layer Types. 40 41 Table 4-6 shows the average IRI and standard deviation for the inside (untrafficked) lanes and the reconstructed lanes calculated from the same ARRB profile used for the PI calculations. The standard deviations of IRI are greater in the layers which are not paved with HMAC compared to the standard deviations of the layers which are paved with HMAC. The variability is expected to be higher for the underlying layers due to the difficulty of testing these layers versus the bound layers. The underlying layers are more difficult to test because they consist of loose material or are not compacted as well as a bound material such as HMAC. Table 4-6. Analysis of IRI Obtained With ARRB Profiler. IRI, in/mile 25 ft Interval 52.8 ft Interval 528 ft Interval Layer Profiled *n Average Standard Deviation *n Average Standard Deviation *n Average Standard Deviation North Tangent 102 77.05 49.04 49 78.99 47.10 5 79.40 25.59 South Tangent 101 69.70 40.85 49 82.76 94.76 5 78.94 18.99 Wearing 16 62.52 38.26 8 66.69 38.24 1 62.10 1.45 HMA Base Layer 1 63 84.81 101.96 30 80.59 50.44 3 73.21 5.59 HMA Base Layer 2 32 88.51 72.65 15 76.84 30.17 2 89.58 24.02 Granular Base 54 206.57 200.25 27 246.32 277.01 3 616.13 625.88 Subgrade 63 288.31 302.12 30 279.74 192.84 3 276.27 15.51 *n = number of intervals The large IRI value and standard deviation for the longer 528 foot interval was unexpected. Longer intervals are expected to provide a smoother estimate of ride quality. In order to further investigate the repeatability of the ARRB profile traces, the inside (untrafficked) lane in the tangents were plotted and statistically analyzed. Each tangent 42 consists of thirteen 200-foot test sections for a total longitudinal profile length of approximately 2600 feet. Longitudinal profiles were not collected for the curves since the inclinometer-based units have a limitation of 5 o or less for sideways tilt of the unit. Figure 4-3 shows the three profiles obtained for the North tangent. There is very close agreement between the profiles at the start of the testing. However, as the distance increases, the profiles show progressively more difference. In order to explore the significance of this difference, the variance between the three profiles for each of the 13 test sections in both tangents was calculated. Figure 4-4 shows these calculated variances for each test section in the two tangents. There is a trend of increasing variance between the three profiles with increasing distance for the North tangent from 200 ft to 1000 ft and from 1400 ft to 2600 ft, and much less of a tendency for the variance to increase for the South tangent profiles. One possible reason for this difference is that the outside lane of the North tangent was under construction at the time the testing was conducted. The right lane had already been removed down to the subgrade, leaving a steep, uneven edge along the centerline. Since the centerline was used as the profile reference, it is possible that it was more difficult to accurately track this portion of the pavement. The South tangent, which has a much more consistent variance over the length of the tangent, was not under construction. There is, however a slight tendency for the variance to increase with increasing length of the profile. For the North tangent data the statistics indicate that a standard deviation of 0.92 inches is reasonable for profile measurements obtained over 200 foot longitudinal distances. Also, for the South tangent and granular base data the statistics indicate a reasonable standard deviation of 0.41 inches and 0.67, respectively. The increasing variability with increasing distance agrees with the findings presented by Fernando (13). Figure 4-5 shows that the average variance also increases with distance for the granular base, HMA Layer 1, and HMA Layer 2. The variance of the wearing layer was inconclusive due to the length of the sample which was approximately 400 feet. The general magnitude of the variance on the granular base is similar to that for the North tangent profiles. While it was anticipated that the base profiles would be more variable, it was actually easier to track the same profile on the granular base since the ARRB unit left small foot prints in the surface which acted as a marked line for the replicate measurements. -18.0000 -16.0000 -14.0000 -12.0000 -10.0000 -8.0000 -6.0000 -4.0000 -2.0000 0.0000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 Distance, ft Pr o f il e H e ig h t , i n Sample 1 Sample 3 Sample 2 Figure 4-3. ARRB Profile Traces of Inside Lane North Tangent. 43 2.5000 South Tangent North Tangent 2.0000 1. 1. A verage Var i anc e , in 5000 2 0000 0.5000 0.0000 0 200 400 600 2200 2400 2600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2800 Distance, ft Figure 4-4. Variance in ARRB Profile Traces of Inside Lanes. 1.4000 Granular Base 44 Figure 4-5. Variance in ARRB Profile Traces of Reconstructed Lane. 0.0000 0.2000 0.4000 0.6000 0.8000 1.0000 1.2000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Distance, ft A verage Var i anc e , in 2 HMA Layer 2 HMA Layer 1 Wearing 45 REPEATABILITY OF INERTIAL PROFILER ARAN Van In order to estimate repeatability for the ARAN van, the average IRI and standard deviation were determined for the HMA surface courses used in the previous analyses. Table 4-7 lists the average IRI and standard deviation for the inside (untrafficked) lanes at 45 mi/hr, and Table 4-8 lists the average IRI and standard deviation at 15 mi/hr. The standard deviations of the inside (untrafficked) lanes using two different speeds are similar, while the average IRI values are slightly higher using the speed of 15 mi/hr. The standard deviations are approximately two to three times greater when using the shorter interval of 52.8 ft. This is as expected because the IRI is averaged over a shorter distance (2). Table 4-7. Analysis of IRI Obtained With ARAN Van at 45 mi/hr. IRI, in/mile 52.8 ft Interval 528 ft Interval Layer Profiled *n Average Standard Deviation *n Average Standard Deviation North Tangent 50 70.25 33.65 5 70.24 19.14 South Tangent 50 61.67 36.23 5 61.57 11.79 *n=number of intervals Table 4-8. Analysis of IRI Obtained With ARAN Van at 15 mi/hr. IRI, in/mile 52.8 ft Interval 528 ft Interval Layer Profiled *n Average Standard Deviation *n Average Standard Deviation North Tangent 50 79.24 24.47 5 79.55 19.59 South Tangent 50 73.74 36.96 5 73.73 14.92 *n=number of intervals 46 The ARAN van profile traces for the inside (untrafficked) lane in the tangents were plotted and statistically analyzed. Longitudinal profiles were not collected for the reconstructed lanes because the ARAN van is not made for measuring granular base or subgrade. The ARAN could not be used on the HMA base layers of the reconstructed lane due to logistics of the paving schedule. Figures 4-6 and 4-7 show the three profiles obtained for the North tangent at 45 mi/hr and South tangent at 45 mi/hr respectively. Figures 4-8 and 4-9 show the three profiles obtained for the North tangent at 15 mi/hr and South tangent at 15 mi/hr respectively. There is very close agreement between the profiles measured at 45 mi/hr, but the profiles measured at 15 mi/hr are visibly more variable. One reason for this difference is the horizontal shift of the starting point for the 15 mi/hr test. In order to obtain repeatable ride quality statistics, the longitudinal profiles need to be shifted horizontally until the starting points and the large scale profile features of each longitudinal profile match. Programs such as ProVal now have an option for cross correlation which will automatically horizontally shift the profiles until the best match of large scale profile features is obtained. Other possible reasons for the difference in profile height are the difficulty to track the same path at slow speeds and susceptibility to wind influence (2). In order to explore the significance of this difference, the variance between three profiles for each of the 13 test sections in both tangents was calculated for each speed. Figure 4-10 shows the calculated variances for the North tangent and South tangent at 45 mi/hr. Figure 4-11 shows the calculated variances for the North tangent and South tangent at 15 mi/hr. These figures show that the calculated variances for the inside lanes recorded at 15 mi/hr are much higher than those recorded at 45 mi/hr. For the North 47 tangent data recorded at 45 mi/hr the statistics indicate that a standard deviation of 0.11 inches is reasonable for profile measurements obtained over 200 foot longitudinal distances. The statistics indicate that a standard deviation of 0.08 inches is reasonable for the South tangent data recorded at 45 mi/hr. For the North tangent data recorded at 15 mi/hr the statistics indicate that a standard deviation of 0.84 inches is reasonable for profile measurements obtained over 200 foot longitudinal distances. The statistics indicate that a standard deviation of 1.12 inches is reasonable for the South tangent data recorded at 15 mi/hr. The differences in variability for 45 mi/hr and 15 mi/hr are important because the results of a 15 mi/hr test would influence pay adjustments if specifications were developed for 45 mi/hr and the tests were run at 15 mi/hr. The device can be used at 15 mi/hr, but the user should expect the ride quality statistics to be more variable. The 15 mi/hr test speed is good for process control but not for determining pay adjustments. -1.5000 -1.0000 -0.5000 0.0000 0.5000 1.0000 1.5000 2.0000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Distance, ft Pr of ile Heig ht, in Figure 4-6. ARAN North Tangent Profile Trace at 45 mi/hr. -2.0000 -1.5000 -1.0000 -0.5000 0.0000 0.5000 1.0000 1.5000 2.0000 2.5000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 Distance, ft P r ofile Heigh t , in Figure 4-7. ARAN South Tangent Profile Trace at 45 mi/hr. 48 -5.0000 -4.0000 -3.0000 -2.0000 -1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 2.0000 3.0000 4.0000 5.0000 6.0000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 Distance, ft P r o f ile Height , in Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 1 Figure 4-8. ARAN North Tangent Profile Trace at 15 mi/hr. -8.0000 -6.0000 -4.0000 -2.0000 0.0000 2.0000 4.0000 6.0000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Distance, ft P r o f ile Height , in Sample 2 Sample 1 Sample 3 Figure 4-9. ARAN South Tangent Profile Trace at 15 mi/hr. 49 1.0000 South Tangent 45 MPH North Tangent 45 MPH 0.9000 0.8000 0.7000 0.6000 0.5000 0.4000 A v erage Var i anc e , in 2 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 0 200 400 600 2200 2400 2600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2800 Distance, ft Figure 4-10. Variance in ARAN Profile Traces of Inside Lanes at 45 mi/hr. 1.0000 North Tangent 15 MPH South Tangent 15 MPH 0.9000 0.8000 0.7000 0 0 0 A verage Var i anc e , in .6000 2 .5000 .4000 0.3000 0.2000 0.1000 0.0000 0 200 400 600 2200 2400 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2600 2800 Distance, ft Figure 4-11. Variance in ARAN Profile Traces of Inside Lanes at 15 mi/hr. 50 51 ARRB AND ARAN PROFILE TRACE COMPARISON The profile traces obtained with the ARRB and the ARAN were plotted for each device on the North tangent inside (untrafficked) lane and South tangent inside (untrafficked) lane. Figure 4-12 shows the complete North tangent obtained with the ARRB and ARAN devices. The full profile of the South tangent is shown in Figure 4-13. These two figures highlight one of the problems with trying to replicate profiles, especially with different devices. Note on Figure 4-12 the two sets of arrows indicating the points in each profile that have the same shape characteristics. This shows that there is a slight horizontal offset between the two profiles. Figure 4-13 shows that the offset is considerably more for the South tangent. Figures 4-12 and 4-13 show that the vertical elevations are different between the ARRB and ARAN. This is because the ARAN and ARRB do not use the same reference elevation. The ARAN uses a moving inertial reference therefore it does not obtain rod and level survey information. The ARRB evaluates elevation changes and uses its starting point as a reference elevation. The average IRI statistic was calculated for each of the profile traces. Figure 4-14 shows the calculated average IRI obtained with the ARRB using an interval of 52.8 feet for the North tangent on the x-axis and the calculated average IRI obtained with the ARAN (at a speed of 45 mi/hr) using an interval of 52.8 feet for the North tangent on the y-axis. Figures 4-15 through 4-17 show the same comparison for the North tangent at 15 mi/hr, the South tangent at 45 mi/hr, and the South tangent at 15 mi/hr, respectively. The large horizontal offset in the 45 mi/hr profiles, particularly in the South tangent (Figure 4- 13), is seen in the IRI data as a very poor correlation between the two devices. The profiles at 15 mi/hr and the ARRB matched much better, hence the better correlation between the devices. -16.0000 -14.0000 -12.0000 -10.0000 -8.0000 -6.0000 -4.0000 -2.0000 0.0000 2.0000 4.0000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 Distance, ft A v e r a g e Pr o f il e H e ig h t , i n ARAN (45) ARRB 1a 1b 2a 2b Figure 4-12. ARRB and ARAN (45 mi/hr) Average Profile Trace of North Tangent. 52 -20.0000 -15.0000 -10.0000 -5.0000 0.0000 5.0000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 Distance, ft A v e r a g e Pr o f il e H e ig h t , i n ARAN (45) ARRB 1a 1b 2a 2b Figure 4-13. ARRB and ARAN (45 mi/hr) Average Profile Trace of South Tangent. y = 0.7642x + 11.009 R 2 = 0.5157 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 ARRB Average IRI 52.8 ft Interval A R A N ( 4 5) Av era g e IR I 52 .8 f t In t e rva l Figure 4-14. North Tangent ARRB vs. ARAN (45 mi/hr) Average IRI. 53 y = 0.6299x + 30.815 R 2 = 0.6546 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 ARRB Average IRI 52.8 ft Interval AR AN (1 5) Av er ag e IR I 5 2 .8 ft I n te rv al Figure 4-15. North Tangent ARRB vs. ARAN (15 mi/hr) Average IRI. y = 0.1321x + 52.345 R 2 = 0.0137 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 ARRB Average IRI 52.8 ft Interval AR A N ( 45) A ver ag e IR I 5 2 .8 ft Inte rv al Figure 4-16. South Tangent ARRB vs. ARAN (45 mi/hr) Average IRI. 54 y = 0.7715x + 20.31 R 2 = 0.4445 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 ARRB Average IRI 52.8 ft Interval AR AN ( 1 5) Av er ag e I R I 5 2 . 8 ft I n t e rv al Figure 4-17. South Tangent ARRB vs. ARAN (15 mi/hr) Average IRI. EVALUATION OF SMOOTHNESS ON RECONSTRUCTED LANES The average profile height and distance was plotted to get the profile trace on the reconstructed lanes through the placement of structural layers using the data from the ARRB device. Figure 4-18 shows the entire North tangent profiles for the subgrade and the granular base layer. The ?bumps? occur at the same longitudinal position, but the heights of the vertical displacements were reduced by the placement of the base on top of the subgrade. The large drop in the vertical distance in the base layer is due to the reduction in the base thickness for the structural design study. Figure 4-19 shows the typical reduction in vertical displacements due to the placement of subsequent layers for the first 400 ft of the North tangent, which is just after 55 56 the change in base thickness. The incremental decrease in vertical displacement, which indicates an incremental increase in smoothness with each additional layer, can be seen in the peaks at about 175 and 225 ft. Table 4-9 shows the PI calculated for the reconstructed lanes using the McCracken profilograph and the PI and IRI for the reconstructed lanes using the ARRB profiler. The table shows that the pavement does become smoother in terms of PI and IRI using both devices. The wearing is 96% smoother than the subgrade when calculated using the PI obtained with the McCracken Profilograph with a 0.2 inch blanking band. The wearing is 97% smoother than the subgrade when calculated using the PI obtained with the ARRB with a 0.2 inch blanking band. The wearing is 76% smoother than the subgrade when calculated using the IRI obtained with the ARRB with a 52.8 foot interval. 20.0000 10.0000 58 Figure 4-18. Average Profile Height vs. Distance for Unbound Layers. -8.0000 -7.0000 -6.0000 -5.0000 -4.0000 -3.0000 -2.0000 -1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Distance, ft Av e r a g e P r o f ile He igh t , i n Granular Base HMA Base Layer 1 Subgrade HMA Base Layer 2 Wearing Figure 4-19. Average Profile Height vs. Distance for Reconstructed Layers (400 ft). -50.0000 -40.0000 -30.0000 -20. -10. Average Prof ile Heig ht , in 0.0000 Subgrade 0000 Change in GB thickness 0000 Granular Base 0 200 400 1400 1600 600 800 1000 1200 1800 Distance, ft 59 CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon the completion of the field work at the AU NCAT test track and a complete review of data collected the following conclusions and recommendations were determined. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 1. The analysis of the PI obtained with the McCracken Profilograph suggests that the McCracken is more repeatable on paved surfaces such as HMAC versus surfaces which are not paved such as a granular base or subgrade. However, if the improvement of profile with subsequent layers is needed (from the subgrade up), this style of profile can be used to obtain reasonable information. This profiler is not useful on surfaces with horizontal curves due to the difficulty in rolling the device in a straight line. 2. The analysis of the PI ride quality statistic calculated from the profile obtained with the ARRB Walking Profiler suggests that the ARRB is more repeatable on paved surfaces such as HMAC versus surfaces which are not paved such as a granular base or subgrade. This device would also be acceptable for determining the relative improvement of each layer on the smoothness of the next layer. The 60 main limiting consideration for this device is that over longer horizontal distances, there is progressively more difference between replicate profiles. This device would be useful for profiling shorter distances associated with obtaining profiles during milling operations where the profiler is positioned between the miller and the paver, and the profiling operations can be intermittently stopped and started. 3. The profile obtained with the ARRB Walking Profiler can also be used to calculate the IRI ride quality statistic. Again, the data indicate that the ARRB is more repeatable when used to profile shorter distances. 4. Because of the impact of increasing longitudinal distance on the repeatability of replicate profiles obtained with the ARRB walking profiler, the variability in the ride quality statistics increases as the distance increases. 5. An additional evaluation of the ARAN van for use during construction processes for acceptance testing was added to the study. In order to use an inertial profiler within a traffic-controlled construction work zone, the van needs to be operated at slower speeds, such as 15 mi/hr. The standard deviations of the IRI obtained with the ARAN Van inside (untrafficked) lanes using speeds of 45 mi/hr (standard speed) and 15 mi/hr (construction speeds) are similar. Shortening the interval over which the ride quality statistics are calculated influences the standard deviations of the IRI obtained at 45 mi/hr and 15 mi/hr. The average IRI values obtained at 15 mi/hr are slightly higher than average IRI values obtained at 45 mi/hr. The variability approximately doubles from 14.92 in/mile to 36.96 in/mile when the sample interval is decreased from 528 ft to 52.8 ft. 61 6. The ability to obtain repeatable, well correlated ride quality statistics depends on the ability to match the starting point for the horizontal distance. If a poor correlation is obtained between either replicate testing with a given device, or between different devices, the raw profiles should be examined to make sure that the ?bump? characteristics are shifted horizontally until the characteristics occur at the same distance. It is important to match large scale profile features before analyzing replicate profiles. This can be done by manually identifying the starting point on each profile or by using newer profiling analysis software packages that include an option for cross correlation. 7. Bumps recorded in the profile trace of subgrade were reflected in the profile trace of the lifts following the subgrade such as the granular base layers and HMAC layers. However, through the placement of the layers following the subgrade, the bumps became less severe. 8. In terms of PI and IRI using both the McCracken profilograph and the ARRB profiler the reconstructed lane does become smoother, or less rough, through the placement of granular base, HMAC base courses, and HMAC wearing course. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. In the event that a specification is to be written on percent improvement from unbound base layers to HMAC surfaces, it is important to note that the McCracken Profilograph and ARRB walking profiler are less repeatable on unbound layers. 62 2. The initial starting point of each replicate data set should be confirmed by evaluating the raw data profile vertical displacement characteristics. 3. Since bumps in the subgrade will be carried through to the wearing course, every effort should be made to ensure the smoothest possible subgrade. 4. If the ARRB device is to be used for collecting longitudinal profiles, the length of the profile section should be kept to a minimum due to the increasing variability with distance. Incremental profiles can be stitched together at the outset of the ride quality analysis. 63 REFERENCES 1. Smith, K.L., Smith, K.D., Evans, L.D., Hoerner, T.E., Darter, M.I., Woodstrom, J.H., ?Smoothness Specifications for Pavements,? National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, NCHRP-1-31 Final Report, Washington, D.C. March 1997. 2. Sayers, M.W., Steven M. Karimihas, ?The Little Book of Profiling: Basic Information about Measuring and Interpreting Road Profiles,? The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, Ann Arbor, MI, October 1997. 3. Wagner, C. T., ?A Study of Asphalt Concrete Mix Design, Construction Procedures, and Their Associated Affects on Pavement Smoothness.? Thesis. Auburn University, 2001. 4. Wagner, C. T., ?A comparison of Devices Used to Measure Smoothness of Newly Constructed HMA Pavements,? Constructing Smooth Hot Mix Asphalts (HMA) Pavements, ASTM Special Technical Publication 1433, M. S. Gardiner, Ed., ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2003. 5. ARRB Group Ltd. Homepage. Walking Profiler, Undated, www.arrb.com.au/equip/wp.htm. Accessed July, 16, 2003. 64 6. Bennett, G. M., Corbitt, C. P., and Meadors, A., ?Evaluation of Non-Contact Lightweight Profilers,? Paper presented at the 82 nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, D.C. January 2003. 7. International Cybernetics Corporation Homepage. Lightweight Profiler, Undated, www.internationalcybernetics.com/ltprofile.htm. Accessed July, 16, 2003. 8. Roadware Group Inc. Homepage. ARAN Van, Undated, www.roadware.com/aran.htm. Accessed July, 16, 2003. 9. ASTM E 1274-88, ?Standard Test Method for Measuring Pavement Roughness Using a Profilograph.? (Reapproved 1993). 10. Bowman, B., Ellen, B.P., III, and Stroup Gardiner, M., ?Evaluation of Pavement Smoothness and Pay Factor Determination for the Alabama Department of Transportation,? Constructing Smooth Hot Mix Asphalts (HMA) Pavements, ASTM Special Technical Publication 1433, M. S. Gardiner, Ed., ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2003. 11. Evans, L. D., Smith, K.L., Swanlund, M. E., Titus-Glover, L., and Bukowski, J. R., ?Smoothness Index Relationships for HMA Pavements,? Constructing Smooth Hot Mix Asphalts (HMA) Pavements, ASTM Special Technical Publication 1433, M. S. Gardiner, Ed., ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2003. 12. Profile Viewing and Analysis 2.5 (ProVal 2.5), The Transtec Group, Inc., U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, www.roadprofile.com. 65 13. Fernando, E.G., ?Evaluation of Accuracy of Surface Profilers,? In Transportation Research Record 1699, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp. 127-133. 66 APPENDIX A 108 APPENDIX B 109 Table B-1. Raw Data collected with ARRB Profiler North Tangent Inside Lane Sample 1 2 3 Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) 0.7917 -0.0413 0.7917 -0.0764 0.7917 -0.0572 1.5833 -0.0711 1.5833 -0.0935 1.5833 -0.0991 2.3750 -0.1352 2.3750 -0.1735 2.3750 -0.1689 3.1667 -0.1907 3.1667 -0.2439 3.1667 -0.2183 3.9583 -0.1961 3.9583 -0.2662 3.9583 -0.2383 4.7500 -0.1951 4.7500 -0.2729 4.7500 -0.2443 5.5417 -0.2019 5.5417 -0.2922 5.5417 -0.2596 6.3333 -0.2322 6.3333 -0.3302 6.3333 -0.2935 7.1250 -0.2750 7.1250 -0.3792 7.1250 -0.3393 7.9167 -0.3215 7.9167 -0.4318 7.9167 -0.3882 8.7083 -0.3572 8.7083 -0.4692 8.7083 -0.4290 9.5000 -0.3781 9.5000 -0.4962 9.5000 -0.4526 Table B-2. Raw Data collected with ARRB Profiler South Tangent Inside Lane Sample 1 2 3 Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) 0.7917 -0.1074 0.7917 -0.0878 0.7917 -0.0941 1.5833 -0.2057 1.5833 -0.0297 1.5833 -0.1165 2.3750 -0.1319 2.3750 -0.0317 2.3750 -0.1054 3.1667 -0.1357 3.1667 -0.0703 3.1667 -0.1260 3.9583 -0.1820 3.9583 -0.1148 3.9583 -0.1468 4.7500 -0.2313 4.7500 -0.1095 4.7500 -0.1999 5.5417 -0.1467 5.5417 -0.1390 5.5417 -0.2019 6.3333 -0.1714 6.3333 -0.1657 6.3333 -0.2329 7.1250 -0.2083 7.1250 -0.1996 7.1250 -0.2671 7.9167 -0.2432 7.9167 -0.2357 7.9167 -0.3041 8.7083 -0.2746 8.7083 -0.2676 8.7083 -0.3408 9.5000 -0.2984 9.5000 -0.2906 9.5000 -0.3787 110 Table B-3. Raw Data collected with ARRB Profiler North Tangent, Reconstructed Lane: Subgrade Sample 1 2 3 Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) 0.7917 0.0276 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.5833 -0.0173 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.3750 -0.0016 N/A N/A N/A N/A 3.1667 -0.0243 N/A N/A N/A N/A 3.9583 -0.0368 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4.7500 -0.0849 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.5417 -0.0789 N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.3333 -0.0569 N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.1250 0.0159 N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.9167 -0.0015 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.7083 0.0756 N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.5000 0.0528 N/A N/A N/A N/A Table B-4. Raw Data collected with ARRB Profiler North Tangent, Reconstructed Lane: Granular Base Sample 1 2 3 Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) 0.7917 -0.0756 0.7917 -0.0860 0.7917 -0.0769 1.5833 -0.1650 1.5833 -0.1553 1.5833 -0.1579 2.3750 -0.2278 2.3750 -0.2619 2.3750 -0.2685 3.1667 -0.2624 3.1667 -0.2922 3.1667 -0.3167 3.9583 -0.2687 3.9583 -0.2624 3.9583 -0.3392 4.7500 -0.2931 4.7500 -0.2621 4.7500 -0.3509 5.5417 -0.3581 5.5417 -0.2995 5.5417 -0.4224 6.3333 -0.3991 6.3333 -0.3240 6.3333 -0.4675 7.1250 -0.4309 7.1250 -0.3709 7.1250 -0.4928 7.9167 -0.4493 7.9167 -0.3691 7.9167 -0.5061 8.7083 -0.4804 8.7083 -0.4207 8.7083 -0.5488 9.5000 -0.4992 9.5000 -0.4520 9.5000 -0.5792 111 Table B-5. Raw Data collected with ARRB Profiler North Tangent, Reconstructed Lane: HMA Layer 2 Sample 1 2 3 Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) 0.7917 -0.0437 0.7917 -0.0384 0.7917 -0.0378 1.5833 -0.0686 1.5833 -0.0565 1.5833 -0.0595 2.3750 -0.1032 2.3750 -0.0853 2.3750 -0.0876 3.1667 -0.1469 3.1667 -0.1333 3.1667 -0.1313 3.9583 -0.1950 3.9583 -0.1856 3.9583 -0.1767 4.7500 -0.2432 4.7500 -0.2357 4.7500 -0.2224 5.5417 -0.3034 5.5417 -0.2897 5.5417 -0.2856 6.3333 -0.3433 6.3333 -0.3339 6.3333 -0.3265 7.1250 -0.3916 7.1250 -0.3820 7.1250 -0.3709 7.9167 -0.4521 7.9167 -0.4402 7.9167 -0.4126 8.7083 -0.5027 8.7083 -0.4925 8.7083 -0.4689 9.5000 -0.5667 9.5000 -0.5442 9.5000 -0.5284 Table B-6. Raw Data collected with ARRB Profiler North Tangent, Reconstructed Lane: HMA Layer 1 Sample 1 2 3 Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) 0.7917 -0.0367 0.7917 -0.0261 0.7917 -0.0379 1.5833 -0.0600 1.5833 -0.0548 1.5833 -0.0632 2.3750 -0.0985 2.3750 -0.0953 2.3750 -0.0926 3.1667 -0.1350 3.1667 -0.1387 3.1667 -0.1232 3.9583 -0.1686 3.9583 -0.1789 3.9583 -0.1546 4.7500 -0.2015 4.7500 -0.2121 4.7500 -0.1894 5.5417 -0.2356 5.5417 -0.2463 5.5417 -0.2241 6.3333 -0.2656 6.3333 -0.2811 6.3333 -0.2454 7.1250 -0.3088 7.1250 -0.3321 7.1250 -0.3009 7.9167 -0.3588 7.9167 -0.3796 7.9167 -0.3550 8.7083 -0.3972 8.7083 -0.4186 8.7083 -0.4008 9.5000 -0.4415 9.5000 -0.4693 9.5000 -0.4486 112 Table B-7. Raw Data collected with ARRB Profiler North Tangent, Reconstructed Lane: Wearing Sample 1 2 3 Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) Distance (ft) Profile Height (in) 0.7917 -0.0383 0.7917 -0.0292 0.7917 -0.0403 1.5833 -0.0727 1.5833 -0.0795 1.5833 -0.0785 2.3750 -0.1166 2.3750 -0.1189 2.3750 -0.1222 3.1667 -0.1626 3.1667 -0.1685 3.1667 -0.1601 3.9583 -0.1964 3.9583 -0.2033 3.9583 -0.1984 4.7500 -0.2395 4.7500 -0.2455 4.7500 -0.2425 5.5417 -0.2850 5.5417 -0.2926 5.5417 -0.2841 6.3333 -0.3224 6.3333 -0.3339 6.3333 -0.3261 7.1250 -0.3726 7.1250 -0.3763 7.1250 -0.3769 7.9167 -0.4240 7.9167 -0.4307 7.9167 -0.4266 8.7083 -0.4796 8.7083 -0.4852 8.7083 -0.4817 9.5000 -0.5470 9.5000 -0.5511 9.5000 -0.5520 113 APPENDIX C 114 Table C-1. IRI obtained using ARRB with 25 ft interval North Tangent Inside Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 25 107.00 25 98.70 25 114.50 50 87.90 50 102.50 50 98.10 75 58.60 75 85.30 75 80.00 100 45.30 100 47.70 100 48.70 125 48.90 125 68.00 125 72.20 150 66.90 150 45.30 150 28.50 175 58.00 175 64.40 175 57.50 200 67.10 200 85.60 200 75.70 225 178.10 225 181.50 225 164.10 250 137.50 250 138.80 250 111.90 275 87.40 275 90.80 275 80.40 300 50.80 300 52.00 300 45.10 325 20.20 325 27.80 325 37.60 350 58.70 350 59.60 350 44.50 375 47.00 375 43.10 375 38.10 400 55.70 400 83.00 400 55.40 425 119.70 425 84.40 425 107.80 450 31.50 450 53.50 450 37.20 475 80.80 475 44.70 475 77.70 500 26.20 500 41.00 500 41.40 525 30.00 525 49.70 525 39.30 550 27.10 550 36.90 550 43.80 575 41.30 575 33.40 575 35.00 600 98.10 600 110.70 600 90.70 625 101.50 625 65.30 625 81.30 650 38.80 650 46.20 650 27.60 675 37.40 675 59.50 675 48.20 700 46.10 700 62.30 700 33.00 725 21.30 725 41.20 725 23.30 750 27.10 750 47.20 750 30.80 775 37.10 775 53.10 775 37.90 800 74.70 800 94.10 800 68.70 825 103.60 825 68.20 825 73.40 850 90.10 850 38.60 850 67.90 875 44.00 875 62.30 875 47.50 900 40.60 900 51.10 900 38.00 925 26.10 925 33.80 925 27.40 950 36.40 950 36.90 950 24.20 975 34.20 975 104.30 975 30.30 1000 101.90 1000 161.00 1000 107.10 1025 165.70 1025 117.50 1025 166.00 1050 130.80 1050 87.90 1050 108.60 115 1075 96.20 1075 51.50 1075 94.30 1100 81.00 1100 54.80 1100 45.60 1125 50.20 1125 57.80 1125 37.80 1150 51.20 1150 95.40 1150 31.30 1175 47.70 1175 314.70 1175 36.90 1200 98.90 1200 67.30 1200 105.10 1225 89.00 1225 36.60 1225 115.90 1250 29.90 1250 55.00 1250 45.60 1275 60.50 1275 42.20 1275 52.30 1300 53.20 1300 45.70 1300 84.30 1325 47.60 1325 38.40 1325 105.90 1350 50.20 1350 45.70 1350 50.40 1375 49.40 1375 70.70 1375 44.10 1400 85.00 1400 113.90 1400 80.80 1425 84.30 1425 104.90 1425 95.40 1450 108.30 1450 52.50 1450 91.30 1475 83.50 1475 63.10 1475 57.30 1500 64.90 1500 39.10 1500 85.60 1525 52.40 1525 39.40 1525 43.60 1550 140.20 1550 62.90 1550 38.50 1575 92.00 1575 98.20 1575 63.70 1600 109.40 1600 135.90 1600 100.50 1625 99.30 1625 76.90 1625 72.80 1650 49.60 1650 62.90 1650 74.80 1675 59.50 1675 39.30 1675 63.20 1700 44.70 1700 42.90 1700 46.20 1725 43.60 1725 32.20 1725 35.80 1750 54.20 1750 46.60 1750 52.30 1775 54.40 1775 119.70 1775 36.90 1800 124.60 1800 51.40 1800 128.30 1825 60.40 1825 81.00 1825 52.70 1850 66.60 1850 60.20 1850 62.80 1875 57.30 1875 60.10 1875 77.50 1900 34.00 1900 54.00 1900 42.40 1925 39.10 1925 45.00 1925 38.00 1950 35.20 1950 50.80 1950 45.20 1975 44.70 1975 142.00 1975 34.90 2000 136.80 2000 95.90 2000 127.90 2025 117.50 2025 70.30 2025 93.80 2050 75.20 2050 53.00 2050 82.60 2075 56.40 2075 88.80 2075 49.00 2100 54.80 2100 55.00 2100 55.90 2125 73.40 2125 197.70 2125 46.10 2150 206.20 2150 97.10 2150 156.00 2175 115.80 2175 143.70 2175 112.50 2200 121.50 2200 117.60 2200 156.70 2225 140.40 2225 54.30 2225 121.90 116 2250 73.80 2250 46.00 2250 54.20 2275 51.10 2275 56.60 2275 56.20 2300 65.00 2300 73.70 2300 53.60 2325 101.60 2325 57.30 2325 59.30 2350 111.20 2350 76.40 2350 60.40 2375 135.30 2375 176.70 2375 82.50 2400 151.10 2400 186.20 2400 180.80 2425 194.30 2425 133.60 2425 176.30 2450 124.90 2450 55.80 2450 129.30 2475 63.40 2475 91.90 2475 56.30 2500 68.60 2500 56.20 2500 60.70 2525 35.00 2525 55.00 2525 45.10 2561 72.20 2538 1208.90 2546 41.20 Table C-2. IRI obtained using ARRB with 25 ft interval South Tangent Inside Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 25 102.00 25 111.70 25 94.80 50 93.10 50 85.70 50 92.50 75 66.90 75 57.00 75 70.30 100 53.40 100 60.10 100 53.70 125 72.40 125 80.90 125 74.90 150 30.80 150 33.20 150 35.60 175 32.50 175 32.40 175 40.70 200 122.80 200 106.70 200 109.70 225 139.60 225 142.20 225 142.40 250 97.90 250 77.00 250 100.50 275 41.60 275 41.90 275 29.60 300 34.70 300 34.40 300 63.30 325 56.90 325 48.40 325 60.50 350 33.00 350 65.70 350 67.70 375 57.20 375 49.70 375 62.50 400 96.30 400 75.70 400 70.20 425 52.40 425 68.80 425 63.70 450 57.20 450 55.30 450 47.50 475 42.20 475 32.50 475 29.60 500 40.80 500 39.50 500 39.40 525 39.90 525 39.10 525 33.20 550 41.00 550 30.60 550 34.70 575 63.00 575 34.20 575 33.60 600 128.50 600 125.30 600 113.80 625 41.20 625 65.00 625 72.10 650 35.80 650 38.90 650 34.90 675 28.10 675 34.50 675 18.90 117 700 25.40 700 25.80 700 30.50 725 40.60 725 29.00 725 30.30 750 49.70 750 34.70 750 20.10 775 45.80 775 41.10 775 33.70 800 170.40 800 133.50 800 110.80 825 73.90 825 95.10 825 106.50 850 135.80 850 127.90 850 130.30 875 66.20 875 131.40 875 121.90 900 43.10 900 63.60 900 85.60 925 35.10 925 30.80 925 57.00 950 24.00 950 35.50 950 20.20 975 85.30 975 65.70 975 61.70 1000 250.20 1000 271.90 1000 242.20 1025 120.00 1025 87.60 1025 103.20 1050 121.70 1050 131.00 1050 138.60 1075 56.50 1075 59.90 1075 96.70 1100 87.20 1100 67.00 1100 87.40 1125 66.80 1125 29.10 1125 40.10 1150 74.90 1150 58.60 1150 64.90 1175 117.30 1175 79.20 1175 55.80 1200 89.40 1200 106.60 1200 114.00 1225 57.30 1225 96.50 1225 80.00 1250 47.20 1250 46.30 1250 24.30 1275 39.30 1275 44.70 1275 38.00 1300 33.50 1300 22.00 1300 28.30 1325 31.80 1325 32.60 1325 23.00 1350 83.10 1350 56.20 1350 48.20 1375 165.20 1375 107.40 1375 88.90 1400 85.30 1400 117.50 1400 139.10 1425 58.10 1425 82.10 1425 78.20 1450 49.90 1450 68.20 1450 43.30 1475 39.70 1475 53.00 1475 38.80 1500 36.40 1500 25.00 1500 25.60 1525 51.20 1525 47.00 1525 47.90 1550 29.40 1550 29.60 1550 36.10 1575 241.30 1575 116.60 1575 40.50 1600 61.00 1600 196.00 1600 224.10 1625 34.90 1625 50.40 1625 58.80 1650 51.50 1650 33.90 1650 52.80 1675 42.40 1675 27.00 1675 23.60 1700 64.60 1700 38.40 1700 42.90 1725 49.00 1725 30.60 1725 42.00 1750 90.20 1750 32.40 1750 22.60 1775 199.60 1775 114.20 1775 61.30 1800 96.60 1800 154.70 1800 175.70 1825 37.20 1825 94.20 1825 87.80 1850 34.20 1850 37.70 1850 35.50 118 1875 38.80 1875 28.40 1875 28.20 1900 33.40 1900 31.20 1900 26.90 1925 31.70 1925 36.10 1925 17.20 1950 125.30 1950 28.50 1950 31.30 1975 239.10 1975 132.10 1975 109.40 2000 163.30 2000 214.20 2000 228.50 2025 96.10 2025 151.50 2025 128.60 2050 69.10 2050 105.40 2050 80.70 2075 37.20 2075 31.90 2075 47.80 2100 34.10 2100 46.60 2100 43.60 2125 55.20 2125 43.60 2125 33.50 2150 60.90 2150 40.10 2150 37.20 2175 64.60 2175 70.80 2175 61.30 2200 73.80 2200 41.20 2200 58.10 2225 27.70 2225 47.00 2225 38.80 2250 51.40 2250 77.70 2250 73.90 2275 57.00 2275 73.60 2275 42.90 2300 43.90 2300 62.30 2300 68.60 2325 52.50 2325 66.40 2325 57.40 2350 100.40 2350 47.00 2350 48.50 2375 89.90 2375 69.80 2375 92.40 2400 101.80 2400 100.20 2400 113.80 2425 84.60 2425 112.10 2425 113.10 2450 64.20 2450 109.20 2450 90.20 2475 46.50 2475 77.60 2475 76.10 2500 26.50 2500 52.40 2500 48.90 2536 40.30 2529 20.20 2535 32.00 Table C-3. IRI obtained using ARRB with 25 ft interval North Tangent Subgrade Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 25 263.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 50 125.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 75 162.60 N/A N/A N/A N/A 100 140.40 N/A N/A N/A N/A 125 260.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 150 399.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 175 248.20 N/A N/A N/A N/A 200 133.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 225 97.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 250 97.10 N/A N/A N/A N/A 275 237.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 300 153.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 325 200.60 N/A N/A N/A N/A 119 350 255.40 N/A N/A N/A N/A 375 1944.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 400 491.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 425 315.10 N/A N/A N/A N/A 450 207.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 475 158.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 500 97.40 N/A N/A N/A N/A 525 152.40 N/A N/A N/A N/A 550 156.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 575 91.80 N/A N/A N/A N/A 600 112.70 N/A N/A N/A N/A 625 165.20 N/A N/A N/A N/A 650 177.40 N/A N/A N/A N/A 675 164.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 700 201.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 725 218.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 750 1311.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 775 307.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 800 190.60 N/A N/A N/A N/A 825 328.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 850 245.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 875 379.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 900 271.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 925 279.10 N/A N/A N/A N/A 950 230.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 975 261.20 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1000 184.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1025 175.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1050 268.10 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1075 148.70 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1100 86.70 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1125 264.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1150 234.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1175 181.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1200 362.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1225 146.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1250 142.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1275 435.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1300 172.10 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1325 152.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1350 225.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1375 275.60 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1400 371.70 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1425 245.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1450 127.70 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1475 162.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1500 360.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 120 1525 375.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1550 457.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1575 1369.70 N/A N/A N/A N/A Table C-4. IRI obtained using ARRB with 25 ft interval North Tangent Granular Base Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 25 95.50 25 121.10 25 126.70 50 80.50 50 89.70 50 100.20 75 127.00 75 142.60 75 167.60 100 167.30 100 171.30 100 208.40 125 162.30 125 140.20 125 133.00 150 107.60 150 113.30 150 118.60 175 63.40 175 57.00 175 60.80 200 88.60 200 97.60 200 109.00 225 144.30 225 115.20 225 119.50 250 105.60 250 93.80 250 100.70 275 105.50 275 93.30 275 100.60 300 79.10 300 79.10 300 65.90 325 138.90 325 171.30 325 130.90 350 436.10 350 4842.10 350 8415.10 375 18706.50 375 14795.00 375 11524.40 400 3776.70 400 3961.40 400 3893.60 425 1352.70 425 1312.40 425 1305.80 450 639.90 450 714.20 450 701.00 475 572.10 475 403.90 475 465.30 500 322.30 500 362.10 500 282.80 525 202.00 525 142.80 525 166.00 550 174.10 550 167.50 550 165.70 575 126.60 575 134.90 575 93.40 600 127.60 600 83.00 600 120.00 625 131.20 625 149.20 625 141.10 650 122.80 650 124.30 650 120.80 675 189.90 675 174.70 675 219.20 700 122.80 700 113.20 700 128.80 725 201.90 725 197.20 725 192.20 750 1436.40 750 1516.50 750 1569.60 775 603.00 775 450.20 775 525.10 800 424.90 800 344.90 800 286.70 825 154.00 825 166.00 825 234.40 850 266.60 850 250.70 850 204.60 875 253.90 875 270.50 875 250.80 121 900 185.20 900 161.60 900 198.40 925 177.90 925 204.80 925 209.10 950 232.20 950 217.80 950 192.00 975 307.40 975 256.30 975 278.10 1000 243.10 1000 220.90 1000 153.80 1025 107.30 1025 136.40 1025 129.80 1050 179.70 1050 286.20 1050 240.20 1075 257.50 1075 148.80 1075 143.70 1100 176.40 1100 173.80 1100 204.50 1125 165.90 1125 145.90 1125 155.70 1150 223.40 1150 211.20 1150 173.50 1175 221.20 1175 215.20 1175 216.50 1200 97.50 1200 119.80 1200 117.20 1225 144.60 1225 173.20 1225 181.20 1250 289.00 1250 306.20 1250 294.30 1275 234.20 1275 233.30 1275 189.00 1300 169.90 1300 179.10 1300 142.10 1325 154.40 1325 128.70 1325 191.60 1350 252.50 1350 171.10 1350 163.60 1375 181.60 1375 158.50 1375 135.70 1400 179.20 1400 181.50 1400 122.10 1425 173.90 1425 130.50 1425 59.80 1450 114.90 1450 150.60 1450 204.50 1475 179.70 1475 140.30 1475 257.20 1500 250.90 1500 168.10 1500 129.10 1525 134.60 1525 187.10 1525 146.10 1545 319.70 1542 541.80 1559 840.00 Table C-5. IRI obtained using ARRB with 25 ft interval North Tangent HMA Layer 2 Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 25 65.20 25 70.10 25 64.50 50 68.40 50 57.70 50 63.80 75 78.40 75 59.40 75 77.50 100 57.40 100 58.50 100 75.60 125 62.70 125 68.90 125 75.00 150 62.30 150 52.80 150 63.20 175 89.30 175 76.90 175 83.70 200 82.10 200 77.70 200 67.50 225 98.70 225 94.10 225 99.70 250 54.50 250 47.90 250 81.00 275 77.60 275 76.50 275 69.00 300 42.40 300 92.70 300 51.50 325 37.20 325 43.80 325 38.00 122 350 84.50 350 104.80 350 103.40 375 65.60 375 84.80 375 81.00 400 47.50 400 58.10 400 51.60 425 112.80 425 133.20 425 134.20 450 82.20 450 82.10 450 83.10 475 65.00 475 62.30 475 62.30 500 36.30 500 28.80 500 24.20 525 87.60 525 110.00 525 122.00 550 132.60 550 154.80 550 195.80 575 220.80 575 218.00 575 177.50 600 121.70 600 111.30 600 114.90 625 45.90 625 53.80 625 36.80 650 36.50 650 39.50 650 39.80 675 42.50 675 35.90 675 37.70 700 53.00 700 54.40 700 58.60 725 54.60 725 52.80 725 58.10 750 87.70 750 87.30 750 72.40 775 74.60 775 64.60 775 67.60 792 405.10 792 321.80 788 598.40 Table C-6. IRI obtained using ARRB with 25 ft interval North Tangent HMA Layer 1 Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 25 32.00 25 54.90 25 44.60 50 49.60 50 35.00 50 54.80 75 60.60 75 52.50 75 54.40 100 53.10 100 86.30 100 40.30 125 37.10 125 57.10 125 37.90 150 57.90 150 52.10 150 51.50 175 128.40 175 117.90 175 118.40 200 101.80 200 89.10 200 102.20 225 133.40 225 132.80 225 130.20 250 86.40 250 72.10 250 75.70 275 74.30 275 74.80 275 70.20 300 63.70 300 71.70 300 67.20 325 66.10 325 60.60 325 49.80 350 55.40 350 48.70 350 54.70 375 79.20 375 62.50 375 65.60 400 47.50 400 41.70 400 55.90 425 45.10 425 53.50 425 60.30 450 67.70 450 66.80 450 65.30 475 64.10 475 76.60 475 73.30 500 46.00 500 45.20 500 36.90 525 69.80 525 88.80 525 44.90 123 550 50.20 550 63.60 550 37.50 575 144.70 575 140.90 575 134.30 600 131.10 600 103.00 600 135.90 625 61.10 625 47.10 625 53.10 650 63.00 650 37.60 650 39.50 675 50.30 675 57.40 675 47.90 700 35.70 700 28.20 700 34.00 725 29.10 725 33.00 725 37.70 750 50.20 750 37.90 750 48.50 775 64.60 775 71.70 775 68.00 800 77.60 800 68.30 800 57.30 825 48.20 825 52.50 825 41.90 850 68.40 850 53.80 850 58.10 875 72.40 875 71.10 875 75.70 900 73.10 900 87.30 900 72.00 925 60.20 925 78.90 925 60.80 950 114.50 950 130.40 950 124.50 975 154.90 975 145.30 975 162.00 1000 113.00 1000 107.30 1000 115.20 1025 67.10 1025 102.70 1025 72.80 1050 57.80 1050 60.70 1050 54.60 1075 67.50 1075 64.00 1075 57.00 1100 78.90 1100 63.40 1100 84.70 1125 69.90 1125 72.30 1125 66.50 1150 83.00 1150 61.70 1150 56.30 1175 61.20 1175 57.20 1175 96.90 1200 114.70 1200 126.40 1200 101.00 1225 111.60 1225 115.30 1225 89.00 1250 61.00 1250 68.30 1250 80.80 1275 83.90 1275 91.50 1275 95.70 1300 64.20 1300 81.00 1300 105.10 1325 78.60 1325 86.10 1325 109.60 1350 101.50 1350 102.60 1350 101.10 1375 71.10 1375 74.80 1375 68.40 1400 48.30 1400 48.00 1400 37.50 1425 65.40 1425 42.90 1425 80.50 1450 79.10 1450 58.40 1450 75.20 1475 39.10 1475 67.60 1475 58.00 1500 59.00 1500 36.40 1500 73.40 1525 95.00 1525 82.80 1525 79.80 1550 65.70 1550 56.60 1550 64.10 1564 817.20 1564 793.80 1564 970.80 124 Table C-7. IRI obtained using ARRB with 25 ft interval North Tangent Wearing Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 25 53.00 25 55.00 25 39.90 50 37.30 50 37.40 50 35.50 75 70.70 75 76.20 75 77.30 100 53.20 100 52.00 100 61.00 125 31.50 125 37.20 125 36.70 150 26.90 150 28.80 150 41.20 175 69.00 175 70.70 175 70.00 200 56.80 200 73.10 200 49.80 225 68.50 225 75.00 225 75.40 250 57.90 250 63.80 250 48.10 275 47.00 275 38.30 275 50.30 300 63.00 300 67.90 300 76.30 325 44.90 325 56.50 325 43.50 350 39.70 350 25.80 350 46.40 375 67.10 375 52.50 375 64.10 398 192.60 398 190.00 398 206.00 Table C-8. IRI obtained using ARRB with 52.8 ft interval North Tangent Inside Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 52.8 94.60 52.8 100.10 52.8 105.70 105.6 54.30 105.6 66.00 105.6 65.40 158.4 55.80 158.4 56.00 158.4 44.20 211.2 88.40 211.2 91.10 211.2 94.70 264.0 131.40 264.0 144.10 264.0 115.00 316.8 56.50 316.8 57.20 316.8 53.10 369.6 44.00 369.6 46.70 369.6 39.80 422.4 84.70 422.4 82.50 422.4 74.30 475.2 57.60 475.2 50.30 475.2 61.70 528.0 31.20 528.0 44.10 528.0 41.10 580.8 33.20 580.8 34.60 580.8 38.10 633.6 96.20 633.6 86.70 633.6 83.20 686.4 43.60 686.4 57.20 686.4 38.20 739.2 28.30 739.2 49.10 739.2 27.80 792.0 36.40 792.0 61.40 792.0 37.00 844.8 108.60 844.8 65.10 844.8 82.10 897.6 46.00 897.6 52.60 897.6 42.80 950.4 28.50 950.4 35.40 950.4 28.80 1003.2 61.00 1003.2 118.50 1003.2 58.60 125 1056.0 148.00 1056.0 111.60 1056.0 139.00 1108.8 87.00 1108.8 51.50 1108.8 69.60 1161.6 50.70 1161.6 78.50 1161.6 33.60 1214.4 75.00 1214.4 183.50 1214.4 84.10 1267.2 56.40 1267.2 47.00 1267.2 68.70 1320.0 53.80 1320.0 40.80 1320.0 89.60 1372.8 49.20 1372.8 39.50 1372.8 52.30 1425.6 75.90 1425.6 100.90 1425.6 70.20 1478.4 94.30 1478.4 75.70 1478.4 85.10 1531.2 69.00 1531.2 43.20 1531.2 64.60 1584.0 107.30 1584.0 72.00 1584.0 50.50 1636.8 98.30 1636.8 110.40 1636.8 86.40 1689.6 61.90 1689.6 50.60 1689.6 68.40 1742.4 44.20 1742.4 39.90 1742.4 40.10 1795.2 70.40 1795.2 80.70 1795.2 52.00 1848.0 81.20 1848.0 68.90 1848.0 88.80 1900.8 50.20 1900.8 57.60 1900.8 66.60 1953.6 37.00 1953.6 46.70 1953.6 38.10 2006.4 71.20 2006.4 111.20 2006.4 60.50 2059.2 109.90 2059.2 66.50 2059.2 99.30 2112.0 54.70 2112.0 71.50 2112.0 55.20 2164.8 119.90 2164.8 136.50 2164.8 91.30 2217.6 126.60 2217.6 132.60 2217.6 138.80 2270.4 109.50 2270.4 51.10 2270.4 86.60 2323.2 60.40 2323.2 62.30 2323.2 54.90 2376.0 110.90 2376.0 92.10 2376.0 61.60 2428.8 161.20 2428.8 160.40 2428.8 133.60 2481.6 120.80 2481.6 93.00 2481.6 146.00 2534.4 61.40 2534.4 65.50 2534.4 52.80 2582.7 311.60 2559.7 648.90 2593.8 53.80 Table C-9. IRI obtained using ARRB with 52.8 ft interval South Tangent Inside Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 52.8 96.10 52.8 97.00 52.8 93.40 105.6 64.90 105.6 66.50 105.6 67.00 158.4 43.10 158.4 44.30 158.4 47.00 211.2 110.50 211.2 96.90 211.2 101.20 264.0 81.40 264.0 81.60 264.0 90.20 316.8 46.40 316.8 41.10 316.8 56.50 369.6 45.00 369.6 53.60 369.6 58.40 422.4 74.10 422.4 77.10 422.4 71.60 475.2 47.10 475.2 41.50 475.2 38.50 528.0 40.80 528.0 38.80 528.0 35.30 126 580.8 52.30 580.8 32.90 580.8 34.90 633.6 83.20 633.6 90.80 633.6 89.10 686.4 30.20 686.4 37.70 686.4 30.00 739.2 32.80 739.2 26.70 739.2 26.30 792.0 85.50 792.0 38.50 792.0 27.70 844.8 105.90 844.8 134.70 844.8 125.30 897.6 79.30 897.6 111.60 897.6 111.10 950.4 28.60 950.4 36.00 950.4 57.40 1003.2 157.50 1003.2 129.90 1003.2 111.60 1056.0 116.60 1056.0 131.30 1056.0 148.30 1108.8 73.40 1108.8 70.50 1108.8 91.80 1161.6 70.00 1161.6 44.20 1161.6 51.60 1214.4 104.20 1214.4 95.40 1214.4 87.20 1267.2 47.10 1267.2 68.00 1267.2 46.10 1320.0 33.00 1320.0 31.00 1320.0 34.00 1372.8 77.40 1372.8 53.50 1372.8 44.60 1425.6 112.10 1425.6 111.60 1425.6 117.00 1478.4 49.00 1478.4 62.70 1478.4 39.50 1531.2 42.40 1531.2 40.60 1531.2 44.40 1584.0 119.30 1584.0 37.30 1584.0 32.50 1636.8 58.70 1636.8 154.90 1636.8 139.80 1689.6 45.90 1689.6 29.90 1689.6 38.70 1742.4 55.40 1742.4 35.10 1742.4 41.20 1795.2 146.80 1795.2 93.80 1795.2 64.30 1848.0 58.70 1848.0 97.10 1848.0 107.60 1900.8 37.10 1900.8 33.90 1900.8 26.70 1953.6 37.90 1953.6 32.20 1953.6 22.10 2006.4 198.50 2006.4 147.50 2006.4 132.20 2059.2 111.90 2059.2 128.10 2059.2 129.80 2112.0 34.90 2112.0 54.10 2112.0 50.30 2164.8 54.00 2164.8 40.60 2164.8 34.90 2217.6 70.80 2217.6 55.30 2217.6 56.60 2270.4 42.90 2270.4 60.60 2270.4 56.90 2323.2 51.20 2323.2 70.30 2323.2 57.20 2376.0 77.90 2376.0 57.50 2376.0 50.20 2428.8 86.40 2428.8 91.70 2428.8 105.90 2481.6 73.10 2481.6 105.50 2481.6 96.90 2534.4 38.10 2534.4 47.50 2534.4 55.90 2557.4 1028.50 2575.6 549.10 2581.9 523.70 127 Table C-10. IRI obtained using ARRB with 52.8 ft interval North Tangent Subgrade Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 52.8 194.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 105.6 144.80 N/A N/A N/A N/A 158.4 348.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 211.2 157.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 264.0 144.70 N/A N/A N/A N/A 316.8 183.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 369.6 959.70 N/A N/A N/A N/A 422.4 475.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 475.2 191.60 N/A N/A N/A N/A 528.0 131.10 N/A N/A N/A N/A 580.8 121.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 633.6 138.60 N/A N/A N/A N/A 686.4 168.60 N/A N/A N/A N/A 739.2 286.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 792.0 704.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 844.8 282.20 N/A N/A N/A N/A 897.6 291.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 950.4 291.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1003.2 224.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1056.0 204.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1108.8 131.10 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1161.6 244.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1214.4 271.70 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1267.2 132.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1320.0 307.40 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1372.8 221.10 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1425.6 325.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1478.4 135.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1531.2 303.40 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1588.2 674.10 N/A N/A N/A N/A Table C-11. IRI obtained using ARRB with 52.8 ft interval North Tangent Granular Base Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 52.8 91.30 52.8 108.60 52.8 113.70 105.6 153.80 105.6 161.70 105.6 198.20 158.4 117.40 158.4 110.50 158.4 103.90 211.2 81.50 211.2 93.60 211.2 109.20 264.0 128.00 264.0 95.70 264.0 93.50 128 316.8 90.70 316.8 100.90 316.8 91.90 369.6 8371.10 369.6 8967.80 369.6 9208.20 422.4 3052.90 422.4 2789.80 422.4 2677.30 475.2 727.20 475.2 679.00 475.2 661.30 528.0 305.90 528.0 269.70 528.0 255.60 580.8 146.20 580.8 149.90 580.8 126.30 633.6 130.70 633.6 113.90 633.6 136.60 686.4 147.00 686.4 152.30 686.4 168.20 739.2 173.10 739.2 235.60 739.2 295.10 792.0 1036.50 792.0 935.70 792.0 902.40 844.8 271.00 844.8 216.60 844.8 247.10 897.6 225.10 897.6 224.40 897.6 210.30 950.4 192.60 950.4 202.40 950.4 207.10 1003.2 285.80 1003.2 253.80 1003.2 226.10 1056.0 129.40 1056.0 163.90 1056.0 178.30 1108.8 226.20 1108.8 195.30 1108.8 164.80 1161.6 189.80 1161.6 176.60 1161.6 166.00 1214.4 155.70 1214.4 170.50 1214.4 176.00 1267.2 222.40 1267.2 237.40 1267.2 237.20 1320.0 189.30 1320.0 187.70 1320.0 156.50 1372.8 196.50 1372.8 154.50 1372.8 170.90 1425.6 204.80 1425.6 181.70 1425.6 111.50 1478.4 153.10 1478.4 136.90 1478.4 194.20 1531.2 181.90 1531.2 163.40 1531.2 147.70 1583.5 1248.50 1580.3 1311.10 1572.4 1585.30 Table C-12. IRI obtained using ARRB with 52.8 ft interval North Tangent HMA Layer 2 Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 52.8 71.10 52.8 69.80 52.8 69.00 105.6 61.60 105.6 51.70 105.6 70.50 158.4 72.20 158.4 69.60 158.4 75.10 211.2 75.10 211.2 66.00 211.2 67.80 264.0 79.40 264.0 73.50 264.0 90.60 316.8 53.80 316.8 82.50 316.8 56.60 369.6 67.90 369.6 87.20 369.6 86.10 422.4 67.60 422.4 80.00 422.4 74.90 475.2 81.50 475.2 83.60 475.2 83.90 528.0 64.60 528.0 69.90 528.0 75.10 580.8 172.60 580.8 183.30 580.8 181.40 633.6 79.30 633.6 78.60 633.6 72.50 686.4 41.30 686.4 39.00 686.4 40.40 739.2 61.60 739.2 60.70 739.2 61.30 798.6 73.30 798.6 69.10 794.6 65.40 129 Table C-13. IRI obtained using ARRB with 52.8 ft interval North Tangent HMA Layer 1 Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 52.8 41.70 52.8 44.60 52.8 50.30 105.6 54.40 105.6 70.30 105.6 45.60 158.4 51.80 158.4 57.40 158.4 49.70 211.2 114.60 211.2 106.90 211.2 112.30 264.0 111.10 264.0 94.60 264.0 99.80 316.8 63.30 316.8 74.20 316.8 61.40 369.6 70.10 369.6 54.70 369.6 60.50 422.4 45.90 422.4 44.60 422.4 55.00 475.2 67.20 475.2 72.70 475.2 71.20 528.0 55.30 528.0 65.50 528.0 40.50 580.8 96.30 580.8 101.20 580.8 84.00 633.6 94.50 633.6 72.40 633.6 90.20 686.4 54.10 686.4 48.00 686.4 45.80 739.2 37.50 739.2 30.90 739.2 37.50 792.0 60.90 792.0 61.10 792.0 61.80 844.8 62.90 844.8 58.60 844.8 49.10 897.6 69.50 897.6 73.30 897.6 70.00 950.4 51.40 950.4 74.10 950.4 51.80 1003.2 167.70 1003.2 151.80 1003.2 174.10 1056.0 62.90 1056.0 79.00 1056.0 66.10 1108.8 73.00 1108.8 67.00 1108.8 68.30 1161.6 77.00 1161.6 65.80 1161.6 62.20 1214.4 91.90 1214.4 100.10 1214.4 99.20 1267.2 86.00 1267.2 93.70 1267.2 93.00 1320.0 64.30 1320.0 73.60 1320.0 97.50 1372.8 92.70 1372.8 91.30 1372.8 94.30 1425.6 51.90 1425.6 56.20 1425.6 63.50 1478.4 70.80 1478.4 62.50 1478.4 65.00 1531.2 73.60 1531.2 58.00 1531.2 77.60 1577.9 300.90 1577.9 289.40 1577.9 347.50 Table C-14. IRI obtained using ARRB with 52.8 ft interval North Tangent Wearing Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 52.8 45.30 52.8 46.10 52.8 38.2 105.6 59.00 105.6 64.50 105.6 67.9 158.4 39.30 158.4 39.50 158.4 46.5 211.2 51.40 211.2 61.00 211.2 51.6 264.0 64.40 264.0 70.60 264.0 63 130 316.8 60.30 316.8 60.30 316.8 63 369.6 44.60 369.6 38.80 369.6 50.3 401.3 159.50 401.3 149.10 402.1 166.3 Table C-15. IRI obtained using ARRB with 528 ft interval North Tangent Inside Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 528 70.10 528 73.90 528 69.70 1056 62.20 1056 67.20 1056 57.00 1584 72.80 1584 73.10 1584 67.30 2112 67.40 2112 70.70 2112 65.50 2594 128.70 2571 129.60 2605 115.80 Table C-16. IRI obtained using ARRB with 528 ft interval South Tangent Inside Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 528 65 528 63.90 528 66.00 1056 76.7 1056 76.70 1056 76.20 1584 66.1 1584 62.10 1584 59.20 2112 86.4 2112 80.50 2112 75.20 2569 111.4 2587 108.60 2594 110.10 Table C-17. IRI obtained using ARRB with 528 ft interval North Tangent Subgrade Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 528 294.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1056 269.60 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1595 265.20 N/A N/A N/A N/A Table C-18. IRI obtained using ARRB with 528 ft interval North Tangent Granular Base Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 528 1316.90 528 1342.60 528 1356.50 1056 273.70 1056 264.50 1056 267.30 1591 223.70 1587 214.20 1579 285.80 131 Table C-19. IRI obtained using ARRB with 528 ft interval North Tangent HMA Layer 2 Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 528 69.70 528 73.30 528 74.80 802 106.40 802 102.00 798 111.30 Table C-20. IRI obtained using ARRB with 528 ft interval North Tangent HMA Layer 1 Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 528 67.50 528 68.50 528 64.90 1056 76.30 1056 75.40 1056 73.00 1585 76.10 1585 74.70 1585 82.50 Table C-21. IRI obtained using ARRB with 528 ft interval North Tangent Wearing Reconstructed Lane Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) Distance (ft) IRI (in/mi) 403 60.70 403 62.00 404 63.60 132 Table C-22. Profile Index obtained with ARRB Profiler 0.0 in. Blanking Band Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Layer Profiled *Segment ProfiIe Index, in/mile *Segment ProfiIe Index, in/mile *Segment ProfiIe Index, in/mile 1 27.92 1 29.47 1 27.92 2 26.54 2 28.04 2 27.04 3 26.54 3 31.54 3 28.54 4 28.04 4 31.54 4 28.04 North Tangent 5 44.24 5 38.78 5 34.34 1 25.33 1 24.82 1 22.23 2 28.04 2 28.54 2 25.54 3 27.04 3 27.54 3 21.53 4 32.05 4 34.55 4 26.04 South Tangent 5 19.79 5 20.73 5 22.16 Wearing 1 17.85 1 21.42 1 20.66 1 24.30 1 24.30 1 25.85 2 29.04 2 28.54 2 26.04 HMA Base Layer 1 3 26.29 3 27.32 3 28.35 1 23.27 1 25.33 1 24.30 HMA Base Layer 2 2 31.81 2 26.68 2 32.31 1 471.52 1 483.93 1 493.75 2 84.12 2 83.12 2 81.12 Granular Base 3 82.09 3 75.93 3 80.24 1 115.29 1 N/A 1 N/A 2 100.14 2 N/A 2 N/A Subgrade 3 92.97 3 N/A 3 N/A *Segment = 0.1 mile interval (528 ft) 133 Table C-23. Profile Index obtained with ARRB Profiler 0.1 in. Blanking Band Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Layer Profiled *Segment ProfiIe Index, in/mile *Segment ProfiIe Index, in/mile *Segment ProfiIe Index, in/mile 1 14.99 1 14.48 1 15.51 2 17.52 2 18.53 2 16.52 3 13.52 3 19.03 3 11.52 4 15.02 4 18.03 4 15.02 North Tangent 5 30.63 5 25.06 5 23.82 1 12.41 1 11.37 1 14.48 2 16.02 2 19.03 2 20.03 3 12.02 3 11.52 3 8.01 4 17.52 4 20.03 4 17.52 South Tangent 5 7.80 5 9.22 5 9.66 Wearing 1 6.43 1 8.57 1 9.26 1 12.93 1 14.99 1 10.86 2 18.53 2 18.53 2 16.52 HMA Base Layer 1 3 12.37 3 12.37 3 15.46 1 12.93 1 14.48 1 11.89 HMA Base Layer 2 2 16.42 2 17.44 2 18.76 1 458.59 1 466.35 1 477.72 2 67.10 2 66.09 2 60.09 Granular Base 3 70.37 3 66.18 3 74.51 1 99.78 1 N/A 1 N/A 2 87.62 2 N/A 2 N/A Subgrade 3 82.36 3 N/A 3 N/A *Segment = 0.1 mile interval (528 ft) 134 Table C-24. Profile Index obtained with ARRB Profiler 0.2 in. Blanking Band Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Layer Profiled *Segment ProfiIe Index, in/mile *Segment ProfiIe Index, in/mile *Segment ProfiIe Index, in/mile 1 6.72 1 7.24 1 7.24 2 10.51 2 9.51 2 8.51 3 5.01 3 10.51 3 3.50 4 7.51 4 8.51 4 6.51 North Tangent 5 22.12 5 17.30 5 14.96 1 5.69 1 5.17 1 5.69 2 10.51 2 12.02 2 12.02 3 4.51 3 4.01 3 4.01 4 12.52 4 13.02 4 12.02 South Tangent 5 3.00 5 2.88 5 2.84 Wearing 1 1.43 1 2.14 1 3.56 1 4.65 1 5.17 1 3.62 2 10.01 2 10.01 2 9.51 HMA Base Layer 1 3 3.61 3 4.64 3 6.19 1 4.65 1 5.69 1 7.24 HMA Base Layer 2 2 10.26 2 12.31 2 11.46 1 449.29 1 453.42 1 459.11 2 49.57 2 51.07 2 43.56 Granular Base 3 55.58 3 52.84 3 57.32 1 80.14 1 N/A 1 N/A 2 72.60 2 N/A 2 N/A Subgrade 3 68.72 3 N/A 3 N/A *Segment = 0.1 mile interval (528 ft) 135 APPENDIX D 136 Table D-1. Raw Data Collected with ARAN Van North Tangent 45 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance Profile Height Distance Profile Height Distance Profile Height ft in ft in ft in 0.0000 -0.3350 0.0000 -0.2429 0.0000 -0.0421 0.3374 -0.3445 0.3374 -0.2508 0.3374 -0.0508 0.6748 -0.3535 0.6748 -0.2610 0.6748 -0.0587 1.0122 -0.3634 1.0122 -0.2713 1.0122 -0.0665 1.3496 -0.3713 1.3496 -0.2831 1.3496 -0.0744 1.6870 -0.3787 1.6870 -0.2898 1.6870 -0.0807 2.0244 -0.3925 2.0244 -0.2914 2.0244 -0.0878 2.3618 -0.3965 2.3618 -0.2925 2.3618 -0.0870 2.6992 -0.3925 2.6992 -0.2925 2.6992 -0.0843 3.0366 -0.3976 3.0366 -0.2945 3.0366 -0.0854 3.3740 -0.4063 3.3740 -0.2976 3.3740 -0.0890 3.7114 -0.4161 3.7114 -0.2996 3.7114 -0.1008 Table D-2. Raw Data Collected with ARAN Van South Tangent 45 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance Profile Height Distance Profile Height Distance Profile Height ft in ft in ft in 0.0000 -0.3095 0.0000 -0.3095 0.0000 -0.3004 0.3374 -0.3150 0.3374 -0.3063 0.3374 -0.3225 0.6748 -0.3201 0.6748 -0.3059 0.6748 -0.3402 1.0122 -0.3209 1.0122 -0.3158 1.0122 -0.3394 1.3496 -0.3197 1.3496 -0.3256 1.3496 -0.3315 1.6870 -0.3252 1.6870 -0.3299 1.6870 -0.3339 2.0244 -0.3362 2.0244 -0.3339 2.0244 -0.3449 2.3618 -0.3378 2.3618 -0.3433 2.3618 -0.3622 2.6992 -0.3394 2.6992 -0.3461 2.6992 -0.3673 3.0366 -0.3520 3.0366 -0.3457 3.0366 -0.3662 3.3740 -0.3579 3.3740 -0.3504 3.3740 -0.3776 3.7114 -0.3488 3.7114 -0.3508 3.7114 -0.3862 137 Table D-3. Raw Data Collected with ARAN Van North Tangent 15 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance Profile Height Distance Profile Height Distance Profile Height ft in ft in ft in 0.0000 -1.58584 0.0000 -0.15277 0.0000 0.67952 0.3374 -1.58269 0.3374 -0.15001 0.3374 0.67243 0.6748 -1.58623 0.6748 -0.14450 0.6748 0.66495 1.0122 -1.58938 1.0122 -0.13702 1.0122 0.65904 1.3496 -1.58899 1.3496 -0.13663 1.3496 0.65156 1.6870 -1.58820 1.6870 -0.14292 1.6870 0.64172 2.0244 -1.59175 2.0244 -0.14450 2.0244 0.63345 2.3618 -1.59647 2.3618 -0.14135 2.3618 0.62834 2.6992 -1.59726 2.6992 -0.14096 2.6992 0.62440 3.0366 -1.59411 3.0366 -0.14332 3.0366 0.62046 3.3740 -1.59253 3.3740 -0.14804 3.3740 0.61613 3.7114 -1.59214 3.7114 -0.15395 3.7114 0.61180 Table D-4. Raw Data Collected with ARAN Van South Tangent 15 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance Profile Height Distance Profile Height Distance Profile Height ft in ft in ft in 0.0000 0.83345 0.0000 0.22597 0.0000 0.93267 0.3374 0.83621 0.3374 0.21416 0.3374 0.91810 0.6748 0.83424 0.6748 0.21967 0.6748 0.92401 1.0122 0.83385 1.0122 0.23778 1.0122 0.91613 1.3496 0.80904 1.3496 0.24999 1.3496 0.87597 1.6870 0.77597 1.6870 0.25668 1.6870 0.83385 2.0244 0.77282 2.0244 0.26416 2.0244 0.80314 2.3618 0.77991 2.3618 0.27361 2.3618 0.78149 2.6992 0.76259 2.6992 0.28148 2.6992 0.77991 3.0366 0.72322 3.0366 0.28896 3.0366 0.77440 3.3740 0.68660 3.3740 0.29959 3.3740 0.74960 3.7114 0.65668 3.7114 0.30786 3.7114 0.73306 138 APPENDIX E 139 Table E-1. IRI Obtained with ARAN Van with 52.8 ft Interval North Tangent @ 45 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance IRI Distance IRI Distance IRI ft. in/mile ft. in/mile ft. in/mile 52.8 67.40 52.8 75.40 52.8 67.20 105.6 51.90 105.6 58.30 105.6 58.50 158.4 57.40 158.4 60.70 158.4 62.70 211.2 145.20 211.2 140.50 211.2 144.00 264.0 72.50 264.0 73.50 264.0 66.10 316.8 40.60 316.8 40.00 316.8 37.00 369.6 60.40 369.6 59.40 369.6 56.50 422.4 73.30 422.4 71.80 422.4 65.90 475.2 49.10 475.2 43.20 475.2 47.60 528.0 30.50 528.0 26.20 528.0 36.00 580.8 82.70 580.8 78.20 580.8 75.60 633.6 42.30 633.6 46.00 633.6 44.20 686.4 36.90 686.4 34.80 686.4 29.10 739.2 40.90 739.2 35.60 739.2 29.50 792.0 79.90 792.0 81.80 792.0 79.60 844.8 79.00 844.8 72.60 844.8 69.70 897.6 37.60 897.6 36.50 897.6 36.60 950.4 34.50 950.4 30.90 950.4 30.50 1003.2 130.40 1003.2 125.20 1003.2 133.90 1056.0 94.30 1056.0 97.40 1056.0 94.10 1108.8 50.00 1108.8 47.60 1108.8 46.50 1161.6 40.30 1161.6 38.30 1161.6 38.20 1214.4 88.40 1214.4 86.10 1214.4 90.00 1267.2 46.30 1267.2 45.40 1267.2 50.30 1320.0 39.30 1320.0 37.90 1320.0 38.90 1372.8 55.30 1372.8 47.20 1372.8 56.10 1425.6 89.60 1425.6 79.90 1425.6 92.80 1478.4 57.50 1478.4 52.30 1478.4 60.70 1531.2 36.00 1531.2 34.00 1531.2 36.10 1584.0 73.50 1584.0 69.80 1584.0 70.10 1636.8 73.70 1636.8 77.00 1636.8 75.90 1689.6 49.70 1689.6 51.80 1689.6 54.90 1742.4 39.80 1742.4 42.70 1742.4 46.20 1795.2 79.60 1795.2 76.10 1795.2 83.10 1848.0 61.30 1848.0 62.30 1848.0 63.30 1900.8 38.90 1900.8 34.90 1900.8 35.30 1953.6 34.50 1953.6 44.20 1953.6 48.00 2006.4 105.90 2006.4 102.40 2006.4 105.70 2059.2 68.90 2059.2 73.70 2059.2 70.10 2112.0 53.40 2112.0 52.90 2112.0 56.90 2164.8 138.20 2164.8 135.00 2164.8 135.30 140 2217.6 133.00 2217.6 130.70 2217.6 132.90 2270.4 48.30 2270.4 45.80 2270.4 59.10 2323.2 61.10 2323.2 63.60 2323.2 66.90 2376.0 80.90 2376.0 78.10 2376.0 82.00 2428.8 153.70 2428.8 156.20 2428.8 160.40 2481.6 86.70 2481.6 85.20 2481.6 89.60 2534.4 44.50 2534.4 51.80 2534.4 47.90 2587.2 128.00 2587.2 130.60 2587.2 131.20 2640.0 153.80 2640.0 156.00 2640.0 154.70 Table E-2. IRI Obtained with ARAN Van with 52.8 ft Interval North Tangent @ 15 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance IRI Distance IRI Distance IRI ft. in/mile ft. in/mile ft. in/mile 52.8 68.70 52.8 112.60 52.8 66.00 105.6 65.60 105.6 76.90 105.6 54.40 158.4 112.10 158.4 37.70 158.4 62.40 211.2 77.70 211.2 59.80 211.2 148.60 264.0 61.70 264.0 141.10 264.0 74.00 316.8 61.00 316.8 66.80 316.8 46.60 369.6 94.50 369.6 34.60 369.6 62.00 422.4 97.80 422.4 53.90 422.4 70.10 475.2 81.50 475.2 69.80 475.2 60.50 528.0 60.60 528.0 43.90 528.0 49.80 580.8 126.20 580.8 25.90 580.8 81.50 633.6 72.50 633.6 79.30 633.6 48.20 686.4 90.30 686.4 51.00 686.4 28.90 739.2 75.90 739.2 52.90 739.2 37.80 792.0 81.30 792.0 40.50 792.0 80.70 844.8 60.90 844.8 83.40 844.8 88.50 897.6 63.90 897.6 75.80 897.6 32.30 950.4 50.90 950.4 35.20 950.4 26.80 1003.2 136.80 1003.2 38.10 1003.2 133.50 1056.0 67.00 1056.0 138.00 1056.0 97.70 1108.8 55.00 1108.8 100.90 1108.8 44.90 1161.6 75.50 1161.6 49.60 1161.6 46.60 1214.4 71.40 1214.4 42.60 1214.4 94.60 1267.2 63.30 1267.2 91.40 1267.2 51.00 1320.0 58.30 1320.0 49.40 1320.0 35.90 1372.8 77.80 1372.8 38.50 1372.8 59.00 1425.6 70.20 1425.6 52.70 1425.6 90.40 1478.4 61.60 1478.4 87.90 1478.4 57.70 1531.2 67.10 1531.2 56.30 1531.2 32.20 1584.0 100.30 1584.0 41.40 1584.0 90.90 141 1636.8 89.40 1636.8 101.40 1636.8 75.30 1689.6 76.40 1689.6 75.50 1689.6 51.30 1742.4 83.80 1742.4 53.20 1742.4 46.60 1795.2 118.20 1795.2 45.80 1795.2 82.30 1848.0 81.50 1848.0 87.40 1848.0 73.50 1900.8 63.60 1900.8 60.20 1900.8 39.00 1953.6 60.40 1953.6 36.70 1953.6 46.80 2006.4 173.40 2006.4 37.80 2006.4 122.20 2059.2 88.60 2059.2 130.00 2059.2 76.90 2112.0 85.50 2112.0 79.40 2112.0 69.20 2164.8 163.30 2164.8 54.50 2164.8 137.60 2217.6 127.70 2217.6 134.80 2217.6 152.20 2270.4 92.50 2270.4 131.00 2270.4 66.30 2323.2 96.20 2323.2 52.60 2323.2 77.10 2376.0 154.50 2376.0 67.70 2376.0 64.60 2428.8 147.40 2428.8 103.30 2428.8 173.90 2481.6 98.10 2481.6 153.40 2481.6 97.30 2534.4 107.30 2534.4 93.70 2534.4 65.10 2587.2 138.60 2587.2 62.10 2587.2 141.50 2640.0 128.50 2640.0 142.10 2640.0 161.30 Table E-3. IRI Obtained with ARAN Van with 52.8 ft Interval South Tangent @ 45 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance IRI Distance IRI Distance IRI ft. in/mile ft. in/mile ft. in/mile 52.8 35.60 52.8 38.50 52.8 45.40 105.6 45.60 105.6 35.20 105.6 33.20 158.4 76.40 158.4 73.90 158.4 80.10 211.2 40.60 211.2 45.00 211.2 47.40 264.0 27.00 264.0 29.60 264.0 30.40 316.8 31.90 316.8 27.60 316.8 28.80 369.6 104.10 369.6 79.20 369.6 78.50 422.4 31.90 422.4 57.40 422.4 58.00 475.2 24.40 475.2 24.20 475.2 36.10 528.0 18.90 528.0 21.20 528.0 18.40 580.8 89.70 580.8 92.90 580.8 88.20 633.6 112.90 633.6 116.70 633.6 105.00 686.4 42.50 686.4 45.20 686.4 42.60 739.2 38.90 739.2 32.70 739.2 35.90 792.0 170.00 792.0 157.70 792.0 147.50 844.8 88.30 844.8 98.30 844.8 100.80 897.6 58.10 897.6 56.70 897.6 54.20 950.4 72.40 950.4 61.30 950.4 61.10 1003.2 69.10 1003.2 67.00 1003.2 76.30 142 1056.0 40.80 1056.0 39.70 1056.0 40.00 1108.8 25.00 1108.8 21.10 1108.8 15.30 1161.6 119.10 1161.6 111.20 1161.6 100.20 1214.4 59.70 1214.4 73.70 1214.4 68.50 1267.2 39.70 1267.2 35.10 1267.2 40.80 1320.0 35.30 1320.0 35.50 1320.0 37.10 1372.8 154.80 1372.8 151.90 1372.8 150.10 1425.6 60.40 1425.6 48.80 1425.6 47.90 1478.4 27.60 1478.4 29.80 1478.4 30.00 1531.2 28.00 1531.2 28.10 1531.2 27.80 1584.0 132.00 1584.0 114.80 1584.0 109.30 1636.8 42.70 1636.8 53.10 1636.8 57.80 1689.6 23.70 1689.6 27.30 1689.6 19.90 1742.4 42.50 1742.4 39.80 1742.4 33.30 1795.2 192.90 1795.2 189.20 1795.2 178.00 1848.0 81.20 1848.0 93.10 1848.0 94.00 1900.8 31.90 1900.8 37.00 1900.8 36.50 1953.6 51.90 1953.6 45.00 1953.6 43.90 2006.4 48.90 2006.4 43.00 2006.4 56.90 2059.2 28.20 2059.2 34.90 2059.2 41.10 2112.0 51.80 2112.0 36.00 2112.0 47.10 2164.8 64.20 2164.8 64.70 2164.8 62.10 2217.6 93.50 2217.6 84.00 2217.6 87.80 2270.4 82.40 2270.4 80.80 2270.4 78.30 2323.2 46.00 2323.2 41.70 2323.2 43.10 2376.0 64.10 2376.0 46.50 2376.0 43.60 2428.8 58.50 2428.8 58.20 2428.8 63.90 2481.6 64.70 2481.6 62.10 2481.6 61.60 2534.4 43.60 2534.4 38.30 2534.4 45.20 2587.2 90.70 2587.2 87.80 2587.2 91.10 2640.0 35.20 2640.0 40.20 2640.0 37.80 Table E-4. IRI Obtained with ARAN Van with 52.8 ft Interval South Tangent @ 15 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance IRI Distance IRI Distance IRI ft. in/mile ft. in/mile ft. in/mile 52.8 96.70 52.8 138.30 52.8 107.70 105.6 49.10 105.6 84.50 105.6 58.00 158.4 58.10 158.4 55.00 158.4 50.00 211.2 93.80 211.2 60.00 211.2 73.90 264.0 99.10 264.0 82.60 264.0 98.10 316.8 53.40 316.8 30.60 316.8 25.90 369.6 62.30 369.6 37.00 369.6 38.70 422.4 107.50 422.4 72.50 422.4 71.10 143 475.2 50.80 475.2 46.20 475.2 37.50 528.0 55.70 528.0 31.40 528.0 27.80 580.8 49.40 580.8 29.50 580.8 31.90 633.6 98.50 633.6 82.50 633.6 89.70 686.4 65.50 686.4 53.50 686.4 43.80 739.2 54.30 739.2 31.30 739.2 26.00 792.0 45.20 792.0 27.30 792.0 21.00 844.8 121.80 844.8 87.60 844.8 90.50 897.6 49.10 897.6 112.50 897.6 110.90 950.4 56.00 950.4 44.80 950.4 38.90 1003.2 51.30 1003.2 33.00 1003.2 37.50 1056.0 159.60 1056.0 173.70 1056.0 182.80 1108.8 65.40 1108.8 108.10 1108.8 80.60 1161.6 70.90 1161.6 61.50 1161.6 51.20 1214.4 116.10 1214.4 70.00 1214.4 72.50 1267.2 108.70 1267.2 81.80 1267.2 62.60 1320.0 59.00 1320.0 51.00 1320.0 31.90 1372.8 55.00 1372.8 36.90 1372.8 30.80 1425.6 156.90 1425.6 118.80 1425.6 115.50 1478.4 75.90 1478.4 78.50 1478.4 64.00 1531.2 59.10 1531.2 66.70 1531.2 30.90 1584.0 58.10 1584.0 57.10 1584.0 30.50 1636.8 232.70 1636.8 159.60 1636.8 147.90 1689.6 60.90 1689.6 54.60 1689.6 56.70 1742.4 119.80 1742.4 48.80 1742.4 32.00 1795.2 105.10 1795.2 49.40 1795.2 36.20 1848.0 272.10 1848.0 112.50 1848.0 163.10 1900.8 56.00 1900.8 79.80 1900.8 46.90 1953.6 46.80 1953.6 79.40 1953.6 27.50 2006.4 172.10 2006.4 56.70 2006.4 48.10 2059.2 127.10 2059.2 188.10 2059.2 195.10 2112.0 47.90 2112.0 94.90 2112.0 79.70 2164.8 46.30 2164.8 33.60 2164.8 34.70 2217.6 104.60 2217.6 55.30 2217.6 52.60 2270.4 67.30 2270.4 53.40 2270.4 47.40 2323.2 58.90 2323.2 47.00 2323.2 37.30 2376.0 64.30 2376.0 61.10 2376.0 47.30 2428.8 103.70 2428.8 69.70 2428.8 55.00 2481.6 64.50 2481.6 99.90 2481.6 93.10 2534.4 53.00 2534.4 83.50 2534.4 80.50 2587.2 51.30 2587.2 61.90 2587.2 31.80 2640.0 98.40 2640.0 76.40 2640.0 51.40 144 Table E-5. IRI Obtained with ARAN Van with 528 ft Interval North Tangent @ 45 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance IRI Distance IRI Distance IRI ft. in/mile ft. in/mile ft. in/mile 528 64.70 528 64.70 528 64.10 1056 65.80 1056 63.80 1056 62.10 1584 57.80 1584 54.10 1584 58.10 2112 60.60 2112 61.70 2112 64.00 2640 102.60 2640 103.40 2640 106.10 Table E-6. IRI Obtained with ARAN Van with 528 ft Interval North Tangent @ 15 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance IRI Distance IRI Distance IRI ft. in/mile ft. in/mile ft. in/mile 528 78.00 528 69.50 528 69.30 1056 82.70 1056 62.40 1056 65.60 1584 70.40 1584 61.10 1584 61.10 2112 93.80 2112 70.90 2112 67.80 2640 123.30 2640 103.00 2640 114.30 Table E-7. IRI Obtained with ARAN Van with 528 ft Interval South Tangent @ 45 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance IRI Distance IRI Distance IRI ft. in/mile ft. in/mile ft. in/mile 528 43.50 528 43.20 528 45.60 1056 78.10 1056 76.50 1056 74.90 1584 68.60 1584 66.30 1584 64.20 2112 59.30 2112 59.10 2112 59.90 2640 63.80 2640 59.80 2640 60.70 145 Table E-8. IRI Obtained with ARAN Van with 528 ft Interval South Tangent @ 15 MPH Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Distance IRI Distance IRI Distance IRI ft. in/mile ft. in/mile ft. in/mile 528 72.60 528 63.70 528 58.90 1056 74.90 1056 68.10 1056 68.20 1584 82.50 1584 72.40 1584 56.00 2112 123.60 2112 92.60 2112 83.20 2640 71.60 2640 64.70 2640 53.00