By Jerry Daleiden, Fugro Roadware
Agencies are continually being challenged to “do more with less”. Improvements in pavement management and pavement preservation have aided in this process. In the process of continuous improvement, it has been recognized that many agencies are still struggling with limitations in available technology to capture the network level in-situ pavement structural condition in a non-destructive and practical manner. Currently, the most commonly used device for network level pavement structural evaluation is the falling weight deflectometer (FWD). FWD testing requires traffic control, which is costly and impractical for continuous pavement evaluation. Therefore, FWD testing is focused more on project level evaluations or performed at infrequent sampling intervals, at best.
With the introduction of equipment to fill this void and conduct structural evaluation of a pavement network continuously and non-destructively at reasonably high traffic speeds, concerns have been raised about the analysis of this data, how it compares to other structural capacity data and how to appropriately include such information in existing pavement management practices. Projects have been conducted to assess, evaluate and develop analysis methodologies for structural condition indicators. A pooled fund study is also underway to demonstrate the equipment’s use. With these initiatives the focus is gradually shifting to how to incorporate such information in the pavement management decisions process.
Continued efforts are being pursued to aid in applying the findings from research completed in the US and efforts elsewhere (United Kingdom, Australia, South Africa, Poland, and others) to maintain the momentum of incorporating structural capacity in the pavement management decision process. Few have argued that structural capacity is not needed to enhance PM decisions, but perhaps, for some, the numbers may still need to be evaluated to clearly confirm the value added clearly outweighs the cost. Historically (and practically) speaking though, without conducting network level evaluations utilizing the technology to gain more experience, it is difficult to optimize the data collection process (as has been done with other pavement data collection), developing data collection guidelines and quality control procedures. Only then can we truly evaluate the full potential and value for inclusion of such data in our decision making processes.
For more information, please contact Jerry Daleiden at jdaleiden@fugro.com