Automated Pavement Distress Collection Techniques (2004)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

59 1. PMG-1, Pavement Management Guide, American Asso- ciation of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., Nov. 2001. 2. Steven, J.C., A.W. Maner, and T.E. Shelburne, “Pave- ment Performance Correlated with Soil Areas,” Proceed- ings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual Meeting of the Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1949, pp. 445–466. 3. Hicks, R.G. and J.P. Mahoney, NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 76: Collection and Use of Pavement Condition Data, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1981, 74 pp. 4. Epps, J.A. and C.L. Monismith, NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 126: Equipment for Obtaining Pave- ment Condition and Traffic Loading Data, Transporta- tion Research Board, National Research Council, Wash- ington, D.C., 1986, 118 pp. 5. Highway Performance Monitoring System, Field Man- ual: Appendix E, Measuring Pavement Roughness, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., Dec. 2000. 6. Gramling, W.L., NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 203: Current Practices in Determining Pavement Condi- tion, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1994, 57 pp. 7. Gillespie, T.D., M.W. Sayers, and L. Segel, NCHRP Report 228: Calibration of Response-Type Road Rough- ness Measuring Systems, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1986, 81 pp. 8. Sayers, M.W., T.D. Gillespie, and C.A.V. Queiroz, World Bank Technical Paper Number 45: The International Road Roughness Equipment, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank, Washing- ton, D.C., 1986. 9. Perera, R.W., S.D. Kohn, and G.R. Rada, LTPP Manual for Profile Measurements: Operational Field Guideline, Version 3.1, Federal Highway Administration, Wash- ington, D.C., Jan. 1999. 10. LTPP Profile Variability, FHWA-RD-00-113, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., Sep. 2000. 11. Distress Identification Manual for the Long-Term Pave- ment Performance Project, Strategic Highway Research Program, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993, 147 pp. 12. AASHTO Provisional Standards, Interim Edition, Amer- ican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., Apr. 2001. 13. Study of LTPP Distress Data Variability, Volume I, FHWA-RD-99-074, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., Sep. 1999. 14. Key Findings from LTPP Distress Data, TechBrief, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., Nov. 2001. 15. Wang, K.C.P. and R.P. Elliot, Investigation of Image Archiving for Pavement Surface Distress Survey, A Final Report, Mack–Blackwell Transportation Center, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, 1999. 16. Standard Guide for Classification of Automated Pave- ment Condition Survey Equipment, ASTM Designation E 1654-94, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, Pa., 2000. 17. Standard Practice for Quantifying Cracks in Asphalt Pavement Surface, AASHTO Designation PP44-01, American Association of State Highway and Trans- portation Officials, Washington, D.C., Apr. 2001. 18. Distress Identification Manual for the Long-Term Pave- ment Performance Studies, Report No. SHRP-LTPP/ FR-90-001, Strategic Highway Research Program, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1990, 84 pp. 19. Shahin, M.Y., Pavement Management for Airports, Roads, and Parking Lots, Chapman and Hall, New York, 1994. 20. Wang, K.C.P., Transportation Research Circular: Auto- mated Imaging Technologies for Pavement Distress Sur- vey, Committee A2B06, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., draft, June 22, 2003. 21. Gramling, W.L. and J.E. Hunt, Photographic Pavement Distress Record Collection and Transverse Profile Analy- sis, Report SHRP-P-660, Strategic Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993. 22. Distress Surveys, CGH Pavement Engineering, Inc., Mechanicsburg, Pa., 2002 [Online]. Available: http:// www.cgh-pavement.com. 23. Wang, K.C.P. and X. Li, “Use of Digital Camera for Pavement Surface Distress Survey,” Transportation Research Record 1675, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1999, pp. 91–97. 24. Digital Imaging Tutorial, Cornell University Library/ Research Department, Ithaca, N.Y., 2003 [Online]. Avail- able: http://www.library.cornell.edu/preservation/tutorial/ intro/intro-01.html. 25. Digital Imaging and Linescan Imaging, International Cybernetics Corporation, Largo, Fla., 2002 [Online]. Available: http://www.internationalcybernetics.com. 26. Mandli’s Pavement System, Mandli Communications, Inc., Oregon, Wis., 2002 [Online]. Available: http:// www.mandli.com. 27. National Highway User Survey, National Quality Initia- tive, Washington, D.C., 1995. 28. Standard Practice for Determination of International Roughness Index (IRI) to Quantify Roughness of Pave- REFERENCES

60 ments, AASHTO Designation PP37-00, American Asso- ciation of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 2000. 29. Standard Test Method for Measuring the Longitudinal Profile of Traveled Surfaces with an Accelerometer Established Inertial Profiling Reference, ASTM Stan- dard E 950 (98), American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, Pa., 2000. 30. Laser Tutorial, Fraunhofer ILT, Aachen, Germany, 2003 [Online]. Available: http://www.ilt.fraunhofer.de/ ilt/php/default.php?id=100000&lan=eng&dat=2. 31. Pastorius, W. and U. Flemstrom, Road Inspection with LMI Selcom Sensors, LMI Technologies, Inc., Vancou- ver, B.C., Canada, 2002. 32. The Source for Infrastructure Information, Roadware Group, Inc., Paris, Ont., Canada, 2002 [Online]. Avail- able: http://www.roadware.com. 33. Road Surface Profiler, Dynatest Consulting, Inc., Ven- tura, Calif., 2002 [Online]. Available: http://www. dynatest.com. 34. Standard Practice for Computing International Rough- ness Index of Roads from Longitudinal Profile Mea- surements, ASTM Standard E1926 (98), American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, Pa., 2000. 35. Simpson, A.L., Characterization of Transverse Profiles, FHWA-RD-01-024, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., Apr. 2001, 303 pp. 36. Standard Practice for Determining Maximum Rut Depth in Asphalt Pavements, Designation PP38-00, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Offi- cials, Washington, D.C., 2000. 37. Adequacy of Rut Bar Data Collection, FHWA TechBrief RD-01-027, Federal Highway Administration, Washing- ton, D.C., 2001. 38. Simpson, A.L., “Measurement of a Rut,” Preprint No. 1607, Presented at the 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 12–16, 2003. 39. Newsletter, Winter 2001/2002, Roadware Group, Inc., Paris, Ont., Canada, 2001. 40. INO, Sainte-Foy Québec, Canada, 2002 [Online]. Avail- able: http://www.ino.ca. 41. Digilog Pavement Systems, Mandli Communications, Inc., Oregon, Wis., 2002 [Online]. Available: http:// www. mandli.com. 42. “Georgia Faultmeter Receives Positive Review,” FHWA FOCUS, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., Jan. 1996. 43. Standard Practice for Evaluating Faulting of Concrete Pavements, Designation PP39-00, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washing- ton, D.C., 2000. 44. Gunaratne, M., A. Mraz, I. Sokolic, and A. Nazef, Development of Florida’s Comprehensive Pavement Evaluation Vehicle, Presented at the 82nd Annual Meet- ing of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 2003. 45. Sokolic, I., M. Gunaratne, A. Mraz, and A. Nazef, Evalu- ation of Pavement Distress Imaging Systems, Presented at the 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 2004. 46. A Guide to Evaluating Pavement Distress Through the Use of Video Images, Maintenance Division, Virginia Depart- ment of Transportation, Richmond, Va., Mar. 1998. 47. Pathway Services, Inc., Tulsa, Okla., 2002 [Online]. Available: http://www.pathwayservices.com. 48. Miller, R.W., M. Raman, M. Hossain, G. Cumberledge, and J. Reigle, Comparison of Automated Distress Survey Results with the Manual Distress Surveys, Presented at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 12–16, 2003. 49. Groeger, J.L., P. Stephanos, P. Dorsey, and M. Chapman, “Implementation of Automated Network-Level Crack Detection Processes in Maryland,” Transportation Re- search Record 1860, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 109–116. 50. Wang, K.C.P., W. Gong, X. Li, R.P. Elliott, and J. Daleiden, “Data Analysis of Real-Time System for Automated Distress Survey,” Transportation Research Record 1806, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2002, pp. 101–109. 51. Paterson, W.D., “Proposal of Universal Cracking Indica- tor for Pavements,” Transportation Research Record 1455, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1994, pp. 69–74. 52. Pavement Management Information System Rater’s Manual (for Fiscal Year 1999), Texas Department of Transportation, Austin. 53. Wang, K.C.P., C. Nunn, C. Mackey, W. Gong, D. Wilson, M. Evans, and J. Daleiden, Network Level Crack Survey with the Automated Real-Time Distress Analyzer, Presented at the 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 2003. 54. GIE Technologies, Montreal, Que., Canada, 2002 [Online]. Available: http://www.gietech.com. 55. IMS-Terracon, Arlington Heights, Va., 2003 [Online]. Available: http://www.IMS-Terracon.com. 56. “Trident 3-D Technology Selected for New Mexico Road Features Inventory,” Press Release, Geo-3D, Inc., Quebec, Que., Canada, 2001. 57. Metadata Primer—A “How to” Guide on Metadata Implementation, National States Geographic Informa- tion Council, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2003 [Online]. Available: http://www.lic.wisc.edu/metadata/ metaprim.htm. 58. Contract for Special Services Project No. 736-99- 1132, Statewide Pavement Condition/Inventory Survey, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Develop- ment, Baton Rouge, Oct. 2001. 59. Terms of Reference, Pavement Roughness Measurements, Materials Engineering and Research Office, Ministry of Transportation, Downsview, Ont., Canada, Apr. 2001.

61 73. Jackson, N. and R. Deighton, A Discussion Regarding Pavement Distress Surveys in South Dakota, Deighton Associates, Ltd., Bowmanville, S.D., June 1994. 74. Perera, R.W. and S.D. Kohn, “Profiling Errors and How to Avoid Them,” Prepared for the Pavement Evaluation 2002 Conference, Roanoke, Va., Oct. 21–25, 2002. 75. LTPP Manual for Profile Measurements, Operational Field Guidelines, Version 4, Federal Highway Adminis- tration, Washington, D.C., Sep. 2002. 76. Terms of Reference, Pavement Rut Depth, Roughness, GPS, Calibration, and Verification Sites, Alberta Depart- ment of Transportation, Edmonton, Alb., Canada, Apr. 2002. 77. Standard MRB7-09, Standard Test Method for Auto- mated Pavement Surface Condition Survey, Manitoba Transportation and Government Services, Winnipeg, Man., Canada, Mar. 1998. 78. Agreement for Pavement Management System Data Col- lection Survey, Oklahoma Department of Transporta- tion, Oklahoma City, Aug. 2001. 79. Groeger, J.L., P. Stephanos, and P. Dorsey, “Evaluation of AASHTO Cracking Protocol: Quantifying Distress in Asphalt Pavement Surfaces,” Presented at the 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 12–16, 2003. 80. A Report Card on the Conditions and Use of Louisiana’s Roads and Bridges, The Road Information Program, Washington, D.C., May 2002. 81. Louisiana Cracking and Patching Protocol for Asphalt Surface Pavements, Louisiana Department of Trans- portation and Development, Baton Rouge, 2001. 82. Louisiana Cracking and Patching Protocol for Concrete Pavements, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, Baton Rouge, 2001. 83. Pavement Management at MDOT, Mississippi Depart- ment of Transportation, Jackson, July 2003 [Online]. Available: http://www.mdot.state.ms.us. 84. Contract for Pavement Data Collection, Mississippi Department of Transportation, Jackson, 2001. 85. Pavement Management Practices, MDOT Research Divi- sion, Mississippi Department of Transportation, Jackson, Jan. 2001. 86. Inertial Profile Data for PCC Pavement Performance Evaluation, Project Summary, Concrete Pavement Tech- nology Program, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Aug. 2002. 87. Wang, K.C.P., W. Gong, D. Wilson, A. Meadors, and M. Evans, “Automated Network Level Cracking Survey Based on the AASHTO Interim Protocol,” Presented at the 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 2004. 60. Analyse de la fissuration des chaussées à l’aide d’im- ages video, Quebec Ministry of Transport, Quebec City, Ont., Canada, Apr. 2002. 61. Pavement Data Collection Contract #0984202, Vermont Agency of Transportation, Montpelier, Vt., June 2000. 62. Transportation Research Circular E-C010: Glossary of Highway Quality Assurance Terms, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washing- ton, D.C., July 1999, 29 pp. 63. Standard Terminology for Relating to Quality and Sta- tistics, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 14.02, Designation E 456-96, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, Pa., 2000. 64. Statistics—Vocabulary and Symbols—Part 2, Statistical Quality Control, ISO 3534-2:1993, International Organi- zation for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1993. 65. Larson, C.D., N. Sami, and D.R. Luhr, “Structured Approach to Managing the Quality of Pavement Distress Data: Virginia Department of Transportation Experi- ence,” Transportation Research Record 1699, Trans- portation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp. 72–80. 66. Morian, D., S. Stoeffels, and D.J. Firth, “Quality Man- agement of Pavement Performance Data,” 2002 Pave- ment Evaluation Conference, Roanoke, Va., Oct. 21–25, 2002. 67. Stoeffels, S., D. Morian, D.J. Firth, and C.D. Larson, “Quality Analysis Methods for Pavement Distress Data,” Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 2001. 68. Standard Practice for Use of the Terms Precision and Bias in ASTM Test Methods, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 14.02, Designation E 177-90a, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, Pa., 1998. 69. Landers, S., M. Robson, and L. Cowe-Falls, “Develop- ment of Quality Assurance and Control Procedures for Network Level Contract Pavement Surface Condition Surveys,” British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Highways, Presented at the 2002 Pavement Evalua- tion Conference, Roanoke, Va., Oct. 21–25, 2002. 70. Network Level Automated Pavement Surface Condition Surveys, Request for Expressions of Interest MOT0002, British Columbia Ministry of Transportation, Victoria, B.C., Canada, Nov. 2001. 71. Pavement Management Practices, MDOT Research Divi- sion, Mississippi Department of Transportation, Jackson, Jan. 2001. 72. Visual Distress Survey Manual, South Dakota Depart- ment of Transportation, Pierre, Nov. 2001.