Report No. FHWA-KS-8-5 Final REPORT Control of Pavement Smoothness in Kansas William H. Parcells, Jr., P.E. Kansas Department of Transportation Topeka, Kansas May 29 KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Division of Operations Bureau of Materials and Research
Report No. FHWA-KS-8-5 2 Government Accession No. 3 Recipient Catalog No. 4 Title and Subtitle Control of Pavement Smoothness in Kansas 7 Author(s) William H. Parcells, Jr., P.E. 5 Report Date May 29 6 Performing Organization Code 8 Performing Organization Report No. 9 Performing Organization Name and Address Kansas Department of Transportation Bureau of Materials and Research 7 SW Harrison Street Topeka, Kansas 6663-3745 2 Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Kansas Department of Transportation Bureau of Materials and Research 7 SW Harrison Street Topeka, Kansas 6663-3745 Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Contract or Grant No. 3 Type of Report and Period Covered Final Report 4 Sponsoring Agency Code RE-259-5 Supplementary Notes For more information write to address in block 9. 6 Abstract Pavement smoothness is a major factor affecting the performance of the highway surface and the safety and satisfaction of the traveling public. Smooth pavement results in better gas mileage, less vehicle wear, and less driver stress and fatigue. Pavement smoothness is the single most important indicator of pavement condition as viewed by the traveling public. Many state highway agencies, including the Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT), have adopted specifications that set forth a goal of minimal levels of roughness for newly built pavements. Some specifications also include significant incentive/disincentive provisions to encourage contractors to concentrate their efforts on building smooth pavements. This report highlights the development of the smoothness specification for Portland Cement Concrete Pavement (PCCP) beginning in 985 and for Asphalt Concrete Pavement (ACP) beginning in 99. The early specifications used the.2 inch Blanking Band while evaluating the traces generated using the manual California type profilograph. In 986, incentive/disincentive clauses allowed bonus payment for PCCP constructed with less than 4 in/mile of surface roughness and penalty (reduced payment) for over 2 in/mile using the.2 inch Blanking Band. The implementation of the smoothness specification resulted in dramatic improvement in PCCP smoothness. In 99 the stage was set for change. The initial projects requiring the use of the profilograph with the.2 inch Blanking Band to measure smoothness of ACP provided a high percentage (64%) of bonus level sections thus indicating the need for a modification to the existing specification. Similarly, the PCCP projects built in 99 also had a high percentage (63%) of bonus level sections while using the.2 inch Blanking Band. However, there was one PCCP reconstruction project that had achieved about 47% bonus sections but produced a high frequency vibration in the vehicle when driving at normal speed. A review of the original profilograph traces revealed a short length sine wave roughness that was slightly less than.2 inches in amplitude and thus was almost completely covered by the.2 inch Blanking Band. 7 Key Words Portland Cement Concrete Pavement, PCCP, pavement smoothness, Asphalt Control Pavement, ACP, 8 Distribution Statement No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 226 9 Security Classification (of this report) Unclassified 2 Security Classification (of this page) Unclassified 2 No. of pages 35 22 Price Form DOT F 7.7 (8-72)
Control of Pavement Smoothness in Kansas Final Report Prepared by William H. Parcells Jr., P.E. Kansas Department of Transportation A Report on Research Sponsored By THE KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TOPEKA, KANSAS May 29 Copyright 29, Kansas Department of Transportation
PREFACE This research study was funded by the Kansas Department of Transportation through the Research Unit of the Bureau of Materials and Research. The Research Unit conducts an ongoing, cooperative and comprehensive research program addressing transportation needs of the State of Kansas utilizing research resources from the Kansas Department of Transportation. The projects included in the research study were located throughout the state and include both Asphalt Concrete Pavement (ACP) and Portland Cement Concrete Pavement (PCCP). NOTICE The authors and the state of Kansas do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade and manufacturers names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. This information is available in alternative accessible formats. To obtain an alternative format, contact the Office of Transportation Information, Kansas Department of Transportation, 7 SW Harrison Street, Topeka, Kansas 6663-3745 or phone (785) 296-3585 (Voice) (TDD). DISCLAIMER The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or the policies of the state of Kansas. This report does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. ii
ABSTRACT Pavement smoothness is a major factor affecting the performance of the highway surface and the safety and satisfaction of the traveling public. Smooth pavement results in better gas mileage, less vehicle wear, and less driver stress and fatigue. Pavement smoothness is the single most important indicator of pavement condition as viewed by the traveling public. Many state highway agencies, including the Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT), have adopted specifications that set forth a goal of minimal levels of roughness for newly built pavements. Some specifications also include significant incentive/disincentive provisions to encourage contractors to concentrate their efforts on building smooth pavements. This report highlights the development of the smoothness specification for Portland Cement Concrete Pavement (PCCP) beginning in 985 and for Asphalt Concrete Pavement (ACP) beginning in 99. The early specifications used the.2 inch Blanking Band while evaluating the traces generated using the manual California type profilograph. In 986, incentive/disincentive clauses allowed bonus payment for PCCP constructed with less than 4 in/mile of surface roughness and penalty (reduced payment) for over 2 in/mile. using the.2 inch Blanking Band. The implementation of the smoothness specification resulted in dramatic improvement in PCCP smoothness. In 99 the stage was set for change. The initial projects requiring the use of the profilograph with the.2 inch Blanking Band to measure smoothness of ACP provided a high percentage (64%) of bonus level sections thus indicating the need for a modification to the existing specification. Similarly, the PCCP projects built in 99 also had a high percentage (63%) of bonus iii
level sections while using the.2 inch Blanking Band. However, there was one PCCP reconstruction project that had achieved about 47% bonus sections but produced a high frequency vibration in the vehicle when driving at normal speed. A review of the original profilograph traces revealed a short length sine wave roughness that was slightly less than.2 inches in amplitude and thus was almost completely covered by the.2 inch Blanking Band. After further analysis of all profilograph traces from the projects constructed in 99, the decision was made to use a Zero Blanking Band. Special Provisions were created in 99 for future projects requiring the use of the Zero Blanking Band. The use of the Zero Blanking Band has significantly improved the ability of the profilograph to serve as a construction control tool to measure surface roughness within hours after the pavement is placed and to detect a significant amount of roughness that was being covered by the.2 inch Blanking Band. The incentive/disincentive clauses have encouraged the contractors to Build It Smooth to earn the bonus and avoid the cost of correcting the roughness. As a result, there has been a noticeable improvement in the smoothness of Kansas highways both at the time of construction and over the long term. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT... iii Table of Contents... v THE BEGINNING OF PAVEMENT SMOOTHNESS MEASUREMENT... EVOLUTION OF THE ZERO BLANKING BAND ON PCCP... 4 URBAN PROJECTS USING PCC PAVEMENT... 3 EVOLUTION OF THE ZERO BLANKING BAND ON ACP... 4 Conclusions... 6 APPENDIX A - SUMMARY OF PCCP SMOOTHNESS SPEC.... 9 APPENDIX B - SUMMARY OF ACP SMOOTHNESS SPEC.... 23 v
LIST OF TABLES Table : Schedule for Adjusted Payment for PCC Pavement Using the.2 Inch Blanking Band (99 Specification 52.6)... 3 Table 2: Distribution of Profilograph Results on PCC Pavement... 8 Table 3: Distribution of Smoothness Results Using 9P--R Limits on PCC Pavement with >45 mph posted speed... Table 4: Distribution of Smoothness Results Using 9P--R Limits on PCC Pavement with 45 mph or less posted speed... Table 5: Distribution of Smoothness Results Using 9P--R3 Limits on PCC Pavement with >45 mph posted speed... 2 Table 6: Schedule for Adjusted Payment on PCC Pavement (9P-225-R3)... 4 Table 7: Distribution of Profilograph Results on AC Pavement... 6 vi
LIST OF FIGURES Figure : Percent Bonus Sections on PCC Pavements < 5 in/mile.... 9 Figure 2: Percent Bonus Sections on PCC Pavements < 8in/mile.... 3 Figure 3: Percent Bonus Sections on AC Pavements < in/mile.... 7 vii
viii
THE BEGINNING OF PAVEMENT SMOOTHNESS MEASUREMENT The traveling public is demanding a higher quality transportation system. In the highway arena, pavement smoothness is the primary measure of pavement quality as perceived by the public. Most states are attempting to achieve smooth pavements by using smoothness specifications during construction. The profilograph is currently the most common tool to quantify pavement smoothness at the time of construction. In the early 98 s, smoothness of Portland Cement Concrete Pavement (PCCP) became a topic of interest. The KDOT Research Unit began investigating methods of measuring the smoothness (lack of roughness) of PCCP on new construction. The California type profilograph, using the.2 inch Blanking Band for evaluation of the profilograph trace, was selected as the method of recording and measuring the surface smoothness. The policy adopted by KDOT early in the development of pavement roughness testing specified that the contractor would own and operate the profilograph and would be responsible for evaluating the trace and providing the results to the local inspector. Certification training was provided to contractor and KDOT personnel on how to operate the profilograph and how to evaluate the traces. The first three projects with a smoothness requirement were constructed in 985.
US-73 in Atchison County was constructed as a two lane facility with both lanes poured in a single pass. The profile data presented is the average of four traces, one in each wheel path, for each. mile section. There were 8 sections recorded with the following results: 24 sections (3%) in the bonus range of to 4 inches per mile, 5 sections (64%) in the full pay range of 4. to 2 inches per mile, 5 sections (6%) in the penalty range of greater than 2 inches per mile. US-5 in Finney County was constructed as a two lane facility with each lane poured separately. The profile data presented is the average of two traces, one in each wheel path, for each. mile section. There were 22 sections recorded with the following results: 28 sections (63%) in the bonus range of to 4 inches per mile, 54 sections (27%) in the full pay range of 4. to 2 inches per mile, 2 sections (%) in the penalty range of greater than 2 inches per mile. Interstate 7 in Dickinson County was reconstructed by removing the PCCP and improving the subgrade. The new PCCP was placed in the west bound lanes in 985 with both lanes poured in a single pass. The profile data presented is the average of four traces, one in each wheel path for each. mile section. There were 94 sections recorded with the following results: 5 sections (5%) in the bonus range of to 4 inches per mile 43 sections (46%) in the full pay range of 4. to 2 inches per mile 46 sections (49%) in the penalty range of greater than 2 inches per mile. 2
The east bound lanes of I-7 were reconstructed in the same manner and by the same contractor in 986. The profile data presented is the average of four traces, one in each wheel path for each. mile section. There were 84 sections recorded with the following results which show a significant improvement: 4 sections (49%) in the bonus range of to 4 inches per mile 4 sections (49%) in the full pay range of 4. to 2 inches per mile 2 sections (2%) in the penalty range of greater than 2 inches per mile. The as-constructed smoothness of PCCP continued to improve from 985 to 99. It was also found that the pavement initially constructed smoother stayed smoother as it aged based on the data gathered to support the Pavement Management System using the Mays Meter. As a result of the significant improvement in PCCP smoothness, the Special Provision was incorporated in the 99 Standard Specification book. The smoothness ranges are presented in the following table: Table : Schedule for Adjusted Payment for PCC Pavement Using the.2 Inch Blanking Band (99 Specification 52.6) 3. or less 3. to 4. 4. to.. to 2. 2. to 4. 4. to 5. 5. or more Profile Index Inches per Mile per. Mile Section Price Adjustment Percent of Contract Unit Bid Price 6 3 96 92 9 88 (Corrective work required or replace) 3
EVOLUTION OF THE ZERO BLANKING BAND ON PCCP In 99, there were two PCCP reconstruction projects that involved removing the existing pavement, modifying the subgrade, and placing new PCC pavement. The profilograph results, using the.2 inch Blanking Band, were quite acceptable as shown: I-7 Geary County 32 Sections: 62 sections (47%) in the bonus range 47 sections (36%) in the full pay range 23 sections (7%) in the penalty range I-47 Shawnee County 77 sections: 5 sections (65%) in the bonus range 26 sections (34%) in the full pay range section (%) in the penalty range However, there was a noticeable high frequency vibration when riding on the I-7 pavement that was not present on the I-47 pavement. A visual review of the profilograph traces was conducted to see if an explanation could be found for the difference in ride on sections with similar inches per mile of roughness. On the I-7 project there was a significantly consistent sine wave cyclic oscillation with about 8 foot spacing and about.2 inch amplitude. Most of this was being covered up by the.2 inch Blanking Band. On the I-47 project there was a much longer wave cyclic oscillation with about 3 foot spacing and about.2 inch amplitude. Again, most of the deflections were covered by the.2 inch Blanking Band. In an effort to quantify these apparent visual differences, it was decided to try reducing the original traces from these two projects using a Zero Blanking Band. A Zero 4
Blanking Band is a.2 inch Blanking Band with the opaque stripe removed and a dashed reference line added in the center of the space. The placement of the Zero Blanking Band is the same as the original.2 inch Blanking Band. There may be a slight increase in the occurrence of multiple scallops (more than one peak or valley without crossing the reference line). However, the decision was made to continue to count only the highest peak or lowest valley. The entire procedure for evaluating a profilograph trace using the Zero Blanking Band is presented in KT-46, Kansas DOT Test Method for operation of a profilograph. The results from the I-7 project and the I-47 project using the Zero Blanking Band were as follows: I-7 Geary County 32 Sections: sections (%) in the potential bonus range of to 5 inches per mile 9 sections (69%) in the potential full pay range of 5. to 4 inches per mile 4 sections (3%) in the potential penalty range of over 4 inches per mile I-47 Shawnee County 77 sections: 5 sections (6%) in the potential bonus range of to 5 inches per mile 72 sections (94%) in the potential full pay range of 5. to 4 inches per mile sections (%) in the potential penalty range of over 4 inches per mile After reviewing this significant difference in profilograph results, the decision was made to expand the study to include all PCC Pavement projects on which the 5
profilograph had been used in 99. Eight projects yielding 74 sections were evaluated with the following results: Using the.2 inch Blanking Band: 469 sections (63%) in the bonus range of to 4 inches per mile 97 sections (27%) in the full pay range of 4. to inches per mile 74 sections (%) in the penalty range of over inches per mile Using the Zero Blanking Band: sections (5%) in the potential bonus range of to 5 inches per mile 555 sections (75%) in the potential full pay range of 5. to 4 inches per mile 74 sections (%) in the potential penalty range of over 4 inches per mile The wider distribution of results and the movement of the data points away from the zero inches per mile limit indicate an improvement in the ability of the profilograph to measure pavement smoothness quality with no increased demand or hardship on the contractor or the inspector if the Zero Blanking Band is used in place of the.2 inch Blanking Band. 6
To provide additional support for the move to the Zero Blanking Band, all available profilograph traces from PCC pavement construction in 99 were collected and re-reduced using the Zero Blanking Band. Although there were not as many sections of pavement constructed in 99 as there had been in 99, the distribution was very similar for the 29 sections evaluated. Using the.2 inch Blanking Band: 95 sections (67%) in the bonus range of to 4 inches per mile 58 sections (2%) in the full pay range of 4. to inches per mile 37 sections (3%) in the penalty range of over inches per mile Using the Zero Blanking Band: 55 sections (9%) in the potential bonus range of to 5 inches per mile 23 sections (7%) in the potential full pay range of 5. to 4 inches per mile 32 sections (%) in the potential penalty range of over 4 inches per mile Based on two years of profilograph data using the Zero Blanking Band, KDOT issued a Special Provision to override the 99 Specification book by requiring the use of the Zero Blanking Band. The initial ranges for PCCP in the 99 Special Provision were as follows: Bonus Range Full Pay Range Full Pay but Grind to <4 Range Penalty of 5% and Grind to <4 Range to 5 inches per mile 5. to 4 inches per mile 4. to 6 inches per mile >6 inches per mile 7
Table 2 shows the distribution of profilograph results using the Zero Blanking Band on PCCP for all sections measured each year regardless of speed limit. The roughness limits from the original Special Provision 9P- established in 99 for highways with a posted speed limit of >45 miles per hour have been used in this table to allow comparison of the data collected from 99 through 27. Table 2: Distribution of Profilograph Results on PCC Pavement Year Const. Total Sections Percent Bonus to 5in/mile. Percent Full Pay 5. to 4in/mile. 99 74 5 75 99 29 9 7 992 682 8 7 993 643 75 994 73 9 82 995 63 44 47 996 254 5 46 997 227 5 45 998 28 44 52 999 22 27 7 2 3 44 52 2 732 38 6 22 63 27 7 23 36 29 7 24 2963 26 72 25 8 4 58 26 52 64 35 27 64 66 34 Percent Penalty over 4in/mile. 4 9 9 3 4 4 2 4 2 2 2 Figure shows the percentage of bonus sections of PCC pavement for the years 99 to 27 using the Zero Blanking Band and the bonus range from to 5 in/mile. as required in Special Provision 9P-. 8
Percentage 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 Percent Bonus Sections on PCC Pavements < 5 in/mile 27 26 25 24 23 22 2 2 999 998 997 996 995 994 993 992 99 99 Year Figure : Percent Bonus Sections on PCC Pavements < 5 in/mile. There have been revisions providing minor adjustments to the 9P- Special Provision during the 7 years since KDOT began using the Zero blanking band. These included: Raising the bonus level to 8 inches per mile, Lowering the full pay level to 3 inches per mile, Adjusting the Full Pay but Grind level to 3. to 4 inches per mile, Lowering the Penalty and Grind Range to >4 inches per mile, Providing a higher set of ranges for sites with speed limit 45mph or less 9
The original bonus and penalty amounts were based on a percentage of the bid price for the mainline pavement. In 996 the amounts for bonus and penalty were changed to fixed dollar levels for each range. The detailed listing of the 4 versions of Special Provision from 986 to the present is provided in Appendix A. Tables 3 and 4 show the results of applying the 9P--R limits to the 992 through 27 data from PCC pavement. Table 3: Distribution of Smoothness Results Using 9P--R Limits on PCC Pavement with >45 mph posted speed Year Const. Total Sections Percent Bonus to 5in/mile. Percent Full Pay 5. to 3.in/mile. Percent Full Pay/Grind 3. to 5.in/mile. Percent Penalty More than 5.in/mile. 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 2 2 22 23 24 25 26 27 529 5 69 494 9 26 92 274 3 68 63 36 2963 8 52 64 24 4 54 53 56 48 27 44 39 27 29 26 4 64 66 53 64 67 39 4 4 49 65 46 55 67 65 64 54 34 34 2 9 2 7 6 2 3 7 8 5 5 5 9 5 2 2 3 2
Table 4: Distribution of Smoothness Results Using 9P--R Limits on PCC Pavement with 45 mph or less posted speed Percent Bonus Year Total to Const Sections 25in/mile. Percent Full Pay 25. to 45.in/mile. Percent Full Pay/Grind 45. to 65.in/mile. Percent Penalty More than 65.in/mile. 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 2 2 22 23 24 25 26 27 53 42 22 37 35 6 27 52 49 23 2 3 3 53 9 4 37 9 49 63 6 5 48 35 64 6 56 77 47 4 8 2 22 2 7 25 7 4 4 In 994, an additional bonus range of 5 in/mile to 8 in/mile. was included in the 9P--R3 version of the Special Provision. Using the 992 through 27 data for PCCP sections with a posted speed of greater than 45 mph, Table 5 shows the comparison when applying the 9P--R3 pay adjustment limits.
Table 5: Distribution of Smoothness Results Using 9P--R3 Limits on PCC Pavement with >45 mph posted speed Year Const 99 99 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 2 2 22 23 24 25 26 27 Total Sections 74 29 529 5 69 494 9 26 92 274 3 68 63 36 2963 8 52 64 Percent Bonus to 8in/mile. 27 33 33 3 23 68 65 74 66 46 58 62 5 5 43 56 8 82 Percent Full Pay 8. to 3.in/mile 4 4 44 47 54 25 28 23 3 46 32 32 44 44 47 39 8 8 Percent Full Pay/Grind 3. to 45.in/mile. 27 22 9 6 2 6 6 2 3 7 8 5 4 5 9 5 2 Percent Penalty More than 45.in/mile. 5 5 4 6 2 2 Figure 2 shows the percentage of bonus sections of PCC pavement for the years 992 to 27 using the Zero Blanking Band and the bonus range from to 8 in/mile. as required in Special Provision 9P--R3. In 996 the method of calculating the bonus or penalty was changed from a percent of bid price to a set dollar amount for each. mile section per lane. The rigid pavement Special Provisions were further revised in 997 through the addition of a low roughness bonus category of <6 in/mile. as an added incentive. If corrective grinding is needed, it must include the full lane width and be started and stopped normal to the long axis of the highway. The grinding limit was also altered by requiring that if a. mile section of pavement had an initial roughness of >3 in/mile., the surface must be 2
ground to a roughness of <25 in./mile. on sections with a posted speed limit of >45 mph. as an additional disincentive. The use of a.3 inch bump template for PCCP was initiated in the fall of 998, replacing the.4 inch template. URBAN PROJECTS USING PCC PAVEMENT The Special Provisions for PCC pavement in urban projects (9P-225-R3) was established in 996 to be used when appropriate in projects which may include numerous driveways and intersections, frequent areas requiring hand finishing, and limited production due to short sections of pavement. The smoothness limits are similar to the other special provisions for rigid pavement, but the amount of bonus and penalty is higher and the corrective grinding limit is higher as shown in Table 6. Percentage 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 Percent Bonus Sections on PCC Pavement < 8 In/Mile 27 26 25 24 23 22 2 2 999 998 997 996 995 994 993 992 99 99 Year Figure 2: Percent Bonus Sections on PCC Pavements < 8in/mile. 3
Table 6: Schedule for Adjusted Payment on PCC Pavement (9P-225-R3) Average Profile Index Average Profile Index Inches per mile per Inches per mile per. mile Section. mile Section (>45 mph) (45 mph or less & ramps). or less 5. or less. to 5. 5. to 8. 8. to 3. 3. to 45. 45. or more 5. to 25. 25. to 45. 45. to 65. 65. or more Contract Price Adjustment Per. mile section Per lane +$69. +$26. +$ 84. +$ 63... * - $6. * * Diamond Grind to 3. in/mile. (45. in/mile. for 45 mph or less & ramps) EVOLUTION OF THE ZERO BLANKING BAND ON ACP The 99 Specification book did not have a smoothness requirement for AC pavement. Based on two years of profilograph data from as-built AC pavement projects using a no-penalty specification and using the Zero Blanking Band, KDOT issued a Special Provision requiring the use of the Zero Blanking Band. The initial ranges for ACP in the 99 Special Provision (9P-39) were as follows: Bonus Range Full Pay Range Full Pay but Grind to <25 Range Penalty of $23 and Grind to <25 Range to inches per mile. to 3 inches per mile 3. to 4 inches per mile >4 inches per mile 4
There have been 9 revisions providing minor adjustments to the 9P-39 Special Provision during the 7 years since KDOT began using the Zero Blanking Band. These included: Eliminate the Tack & Blot after grinding, Delay Profiling the Last 5 Sections Option, Raise the After Grind Limit to 3 in./mile., Add Dip Correction and Use ProScan, The original bonus and penalty amounts were based on a fixed dollar level for each range. The monetary incentive/disincentive clauses are applied only to AC projects where the total working depth is 4 inches or greater and which involve at least two passes of paving equipment such as, two lifts of hot mix asphalt, or one lift of cold or hot recycled asphalt plus an overlay of HMA. Asphalt paving projects not incorporating the 4 inches total depth or not including two paving operations, may be profiled to locate areas needing correction, but the monetary incentive/disincentive clause is not applied. The detailed listing of the versions of Special Provision from 99 to the present is provided in Appendix B. Table 7 shows the distribution of profilograph results using the Zero Blanking Band on AC Pavement for all sections measured each year. The roughness limits from the first revision of Special Provision 9P-39 established in 99 have been used in this table to allow comparison of the data collected from 99 through 27. These limits have not been changed since 99. 5
Table 7: Distribution of Profilograph Results on AC Pavement Year Const. Total Sections Percent Bonus to in/mile. Percent Full Pay. to 4in/mile. 99 842 8 9 99 89 3 95 992 5866 25 74 993 539 7 82 994 557 8 8 995 677 26 73 996 673 22 77 997 4633 2 79 998 796 32 68 999 5775 36 64 2 7942 38 62 2 286 55 45 22 7647 44 55 23 379 37 62 24 582 36 63 25 985 46 54 26 36 52 48 27 568 75 25 Percent Penalty over 4in/mile. 2 2 Figure 3 shows the percentage of bonus sections of AC pavement for the years 99 to 27 using the Zero Blanking Band and the bonus range from to in/mile. as required in Special Provision 9P-39-R. Conclusions The 27 data for PCC pavement was smoother than all previous years with 66 percent of the sections in the original bonus range of to 5 inches per mile. The additional bonus range up to 8 in/mile. also showed a significant increase to 82 percent. The 8 in/mile limit has resulted in over 5 percent of all sections achieving bonus in out of the past 3 years. The 27 data for AC pavement was smoother than all previous years with 75 percent of the sections in the bonus range of to inches per mile. During each of the 6
last 6 years, at least 99 percent of the sections of asphalt pavement have been in the bonus or full pay range of smoothness. Percent Bonus Sections on AC Pavements < in/mile 9 8 7 Percentage 6 5 4 3 2 27 26 25 24 23 22 2 2 999 998 997 996 995 994 993 992 99 99 Year Figure 3: Percent Bonus Sections on AC Pavements < in/mile. 7
The transition to the Zero Blanking Band has proceeded smoothly and has improved the usefulness of the profilograph as a tool to measure pavement smoothness. Some adjustments continue to be made to the Special Provisions as the measure of pavement smoothness evolves. Bureau of Materials and Research Research Unit Prepared by: William H. Parcells, Jr., P.E. Pavement Surface Research Engineer Date: November 28 8
APPENDIX A - SUMMARY OF PCCP SMOOTHNESS SPEC. Date Spec No. Blank Band Bump Ht. Range Bonus/Penalty 2-86 8P-232.2in..4in. 4in/mile. 5% (day total) 4 2 2 3 98 3 4 96 4 5 92 >5 Grind -87 8P-232-R Same Definitions 99 Spec Book.2in..4in. 3 6% (.mile. section) 3 4 3 4 2 96 2 4 92 4 5 9 >5 88% & Grind 7-9 9P-.in..4in. >45mph 45mph or less or less 5 or less 6% 5 5 25 3 5 4 25 5 4 6 5 7 Grind<4 >6 >7 95 Grind<4-92 9P--R.in..4in. >45mph 45mph or less or less 5 or less 8% 5 5 25 4 5 3 25 45 3 5 45 65 Grind<3 >5 >65 95 Grind<3-94 9P--R2 Same Pay line item 4-94 9P--R3.in..4in >45mph 45mph or less or less 5 or less 8% 5 6 9
Date Spec No. Blank Band Bump Ht. Range Bonus/Penalty Grind<3 Grind<3 5 25 4 5 8 3 8 3 25 45 3 45 45 65 >45 >65 95 8-96 9P--R4.in..4in. >45mph 45mph or less Use ProScan or less 5 or less $845 / (.mile.) 5 63 5 25 42 5 8 35 8 3 25 45 3 45 45 65 Grind<3 >45 >65-53Grind<3-96 9P--R5.in..4in. >45mph 45mph or less or less 5 or less $995 5 745 5 25 495 5 8 37 8 3 25 45 3 4 45 65 Grind<3 >4 >65-625Grind<3 3-97 9P--R6.in..4in. >45mph 45mph or less 6 or less $2 6 5 or less 5 75 5 25 5 5 8 37 8 3 25 45 3 4 45 65 Grind* >4 >65-75 Grind* *Grind to 25.in/mile.(45.in/mile. for 45mph or less & ramps) -97 9P--R7 Same Grind lane width 2-97 9P--R8 Same ft. Straight edge to check bump grind 2
6-98 9P--R9.in..3in. Same 2-9P--R Same ProScan with motorized paper transport. 2-7 7 Spec Book.in..3in. >45mph 45mph or less Section 53 6 or less $2 6 5 or less 67 5 25 5 25 83 5 8 62 8 3 25 45 3 4 45 65 Grind* >4 >65-25 Grind* *Grind to 25.in/mile. (45.in/mile. for 45mph or less & ramps) 2
22
APPENDIX B - SUMMARY OF ACP SMOOTHNESS SPEC. Date Spec No. Blank Band Bump Ht. Range Bonus/Penalty 2-9 9P-39.2in..4in. 2 or less in/mile. $52 / (.mile.) 2 3 76 3 9 9-2 3-23 3 5-254 >5-35 Grind to 9 7-9 9P-39-R.in..4in. 7 or less $52 7 76 3 3 4 Grind to 25 >4-23 Grind to 25-9 9P-39-R2 Same Remove Tack & Blot after grind. 5-92 9P-39-R3 Same Delay last 5 sections option. -93 9P-39-R4 Same Raise After Grind limit to 3in./mile. -94 9P-39-R5 Same Pay item title for bonus. -96 9P-39-R6 Same Add dips and use ProScan. 9-97 9P-39-R7 Same Grind full lane width. 2-97 9P-39-R8 Same ft. Straight edge to check bump grind. 2-9P-39-R9 Same ProScan with motorized paper transport. 2-7 7 Spec Book.in..4in. 7 or less in/mile. $52 Section 63 7 $76 3 3 4 Grind * >4 -$23 Grind * * Correct to 3.in/mile. (4.in/mile. Accel/Decel lanes & ramps) 23
PARTMEN E D. RTATION PO F TRANS O T KANSAS.