1995 Ndli Modelling Road Deterioration PDF

INTERNATIONAL STUDY OF HIGHW AY DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT TOOLS
MODELLING ROAD DETERIORATION AND

MAINTENANCE EFFECTS
IN HDM-4
RETA 5549-REG Highway Development and Management Research
Final Report
Prepared for
Asian Development Bank
by
N.D. Lea International Ltd.
October 1995
The ISOHDM Study i
THE INTERNATIONAL STUDY OF HIGHWAY

DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT TOOLS
ISOHDM
Background to Study
The World Banks Highway Design and Maintenance Standards Model (HDM) is widely
used by consultants, lending agencies and government departments to investigate the
economic consequences of investments in the road infrastructure. The current version of
the model (HDM-III) was released in 1987 and the model, or its elements, have been used
in projects identified in 98 different countries (see Annex A).
HDM-III contains relationships for predicting the performance of pavements over time and
under traffic and for the effect of maintenance activities on road characteristics,
particularly pavement condition. It also contains relationships which predict the effect of
road characteristics on vehicle operating costs (VOC). By considering the total transport
costs, defined as those due to construction, maintenance and VOC, one can establish the
economic implications of different investment options and establish the investment
strategy which minimises the total transport costs.
The fundamental relationships contained in HDM-III are based on research conducted in

several countries. For VOC, HDM-III contains four sets of relationships from primary
studies conducted in Kenya (1971-75), the Caribbean (1977-82), India (1977-83) and
Brazil (1975-84). The data for developing the relationships were collected both through
controlled experiments and from user cost surveys. The road deterioration and
maintenance effects (RDME) relationships were developed from long-term performance
studies conducted primarily in Brazil and widely verified on independent field studies from
several different countries. The development of HDM is illustrated in Figure 1.
It has been recognised that there are limitations to both the VOC and RDME models in
HDM-III. For example:
the vehicle and tyre technology in the VOC studies are different to those of modern
vehicles;
some cost components are modelled in a simplistic manner;
HDM-III does not consider congestion, environmental effects or traffic safety;
the RDME models do not encompass all of the pavement types or maintenance
treatments commonly found in developing or developed countries;
the RDME do not cover rigid pavements;
HDM-III does not consider pavement texture effects.
An international collaborative study was therefore initiated in 1993 to update the

relationships and the HDM software.
ii Modelling Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
World Bank
M.I.T.
CONCEPTS
Winfrey
de Weille
VOC
Highway Cost Model 1971
AASHO Road Test

RDME
Kenya TRL Study

VOC
RDME
TRL RTIM Model

1975
Carribean Study
India Study Highway Design and
VOC Maintenance
Standards Model
1981
HDM-II
Brazil Study
VOC
RDME
IBRD TRL RTIM2 Model

HDMS Study 1982
Highway Design and

Maintenance
Standards Model
1987
HDM-III
TRL RTIM3 Model HDM-VOC HDM-MGR

1993 1995 1993
RODEMAN HDM-PC
1992 1989
HDM-PRD HDM-Q
1995 1995
International Study of Highway Development

Highway Development and Management
and Management Model 1996
Tools - ISOHDM HDM-4
1993-96 DRAFT - 1996
Figure 1: Development of HDM

The ISOHDM Study iii
The ISOHDM Study

The International Study of Highway Development and Management Tools (ISOHDM) is a
multi-national collaborative study funded by four principal sponsors:
the Asian Development Bank (ADB);

the Overseas Development Administration (ODA) of the United Kingdom;
the Swedish National Roads Administration (SNRA) of Sweden;
the World Bank (IBRD).
The objective of the study is to produce improved tools for the development of economic
and technical strategies in the road sector. These will be used for the planning,
budgeting, monitoring and management of road systems either within the framework
provided by existing road management systems or as independent analytical tools to
assist institutional management of road systems throughout the world.
The study is comprised of a number of research teams based in several countries. These
are supported by various organisations and individuals. The principal teams are:
the Highway Development and Management Technical Relationships Study (HTRS),

based in Malaysia investigating road user effects along with road deterioration and
maintenance effects for flexible pavements;
the Software Development Team, based at the University of Birmingham in the United
Kingdom;
the Swedish Team, primarily based at the Swedish Road and Transport Research
Institute addressing elements of road user effects and pavement deterioration;
the South American team based in Chile investigating rigid pavements under the
sponsorship of FICEM (the Cement and Concrete Association).
The Steering Committee, chaired by the World Bank, has responsibility for the overall
direction and guidance of the various related projects, under supervision of the ISOHDM
sponsors. The ISOHDM project Secretariat, established at the University of Birmingham
(UofB), facilitates the coordination and communication between projects and with the
international audience. Figure 2 shows the organisation of the ISOHDM study. The
representatives of the ISOHDM sponsors are listed in Table 1. Table 2 lists the members
of the Steering Committee.
Table 11
ISOHDM Sponsors Representatives
Name Affiliation Country

Mr. C. Melhuish The Asian Development Bank Philippines
Mr. C. Ellis The Overseas Development Administration United Kingdom
Mr. L. Bergfalk Swedish National Roads Administration Sweden
Dr. W.D.O. Paterson The World Bank United States
Notes: 1/ As at 31 October 1995

iv Modelling Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
Sponsors
Asian Development Bank (ADB)
Overseas Development Administration (ODA)
Swedish National Road Administration (SNRA)
The World Bank (IBRD)
Steering Committee
Other Contributors Technical Advisors
Secretariat
The University of Birmingham
ADB ODA SNRA FICEM

N.D. Lea International The University of SweRoad ICH (Chile)
IKRAM Birmingham VTI Catholic University
Figure 2: ISOHDM Study Organisation
Table 2
Membership of ISOHDM Steering Committee1
Name Affiliation Country

Dr. C.J. Hoban (Chairman) The World Bank United States
Dr. C.R. Bennett N.D. Lea International Ltd. Canada
Dr. J.P. Covarrubias Cement and Concrete Association Chile
Mr. R. Taipo Finnish National Roads Administration Finland
Mr. P. Joubert SETRA France
Dr. M. Csicsely-Tarpay Ministry of Transportation Hungary
Mr. J. Hutabarat Directorate General of Highways Indonesia
Mr. C. Melhuish The Asian Development Bank Philippines
Mr. O. Andersson Swedish National Roads Administration Sweden
Mr. K.O. Hedman Swedish National Road and Traffic Institute Sweden
Dr. A.D. Chesher The University of Bristol United Kingdom
Dr. H. Kerali The University of Birmingham United Kingdom
Dr. J. Rolt Transport Research Laboratory United Kingdom
Dr. M. Snaith The University of Birmingham United Kingdom
Mr. S.J. Vincent Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick Ltd. United Kingdom
Mr. H. Caldwell Federal Highways Administration United States
Notes: 1/ As at 31 October 1995
In October 1993, an Inception Workshop was organised at the University of Birmingham.

The objectives of this workshop were:
to assist the project teams in defining the scope of the project;

to identify technical relationships to be applied in the new model;
to allocate priorities for resource allocation to the research tasks.
The Workshop was attended by 44 delegates from around the world and proceedings
were published by the Secretariat (ISOHDM, 1993).
The ISOHDM Study v
The SNRA organised a Cold Climate Workshop which addressed issues pertinent to
applying HDM in freeze-thaw climates (ISOHDM, 1994a). In addition, the SNRA
sponsored various specialists to prepare papers on aspects of pavement and VOC
modelling.
In 1994, the ADB established a Regional Technical Assistance project, RETA No. 5549:
Highway Development and Management Research. This project was to address the
fundamental research for the new HDM (referred to as HDM-4). N.D. Lea International
(N.Z.) Ltd. (NDLI) were awarded the contract. The research was hosted by, and
conducted with the help of, the Institut Kerja Raya Malaysia (IKRAM) located in Kajang,
south of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Under this project, the International Workshop on HDM-4 was held in Kuala Lumpur in
November 1994. It was attended by 125 delegates from 25 countries representing
consultants, academics, government employees as well as representatives of the Asian
Development Bank, the U.K. Overseas Development Administration, and the World Bank.
A number of delegates from around Asia were sponsored to attend by the Asian
Development Bank. The workshop addressed various issues pertaining to ISOHDM.
The papers and summary of discussions (2 volumes, 800 pages) were published and are
available through the ISOHDM Secretariat in Birmingham (ISOHDM, 1995a).
In addition to the four main study teams, there have been other teams addressing specific
topics:
PADECO Ltd. of Japan was sponsored by the World Bank to address the issue of
effects of modelling non-motorised traffic in HDM-4;
the Finnish National Roads Administration (FNRA) sponsored research into
optimisation techniques;
SETRA of France sponsored research into calibration of the RDME model.
The time scale and funding of the ISOHDM study meant that it was not practical to
undertake new research. Instead, the study teams relied primarily on reviewing and/or
adapting previous research, or re-analysing available databases.
The output from the ISOHDM study is in three key areas:
the study upgrades and extends the predictive relationships in HDM-III for VOC and
RDME, in light of present knowledge and international experience;
there is a rationalisation of, and improvements to, the present procedures for road
planning, programming, budgeting and project analysis;
a new software package will be produced which will apply the results of the study.
Acknowledgements vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The International Study of Highway Development and Management Tools (ISOHDM) has
relied on the support and contributions of many individuals and organisations. This
support has been in the form of funding, providing staff to research certain tasks,
reviewing reports and providing data. The advances made with HDM-4 would not have
been possible without this assistance.
The HDM Technical Relationships Study (HTRS) was based in Malaysia. The study was
hosted by the Institut Kerja Raya Malaysia (IKRAM) which provided office facilities, staff,
and also conducted various field surveys and provided data for analysis. The HTRS team
members were:
Team Member Affiliation Project Role Country

Dr. Christopher R. Bennett N.D. Lea International Team Leader Canada
Mr. David G. Peshkin N.D. Lea International Researcher Roads Canada
Ms. Jenny Low N.D. Lea International Office Manager Canada
Mr. Ian D. Greenwood Works Consultancy Researcher Traffic New Zealand
Services
Mr. Sukomal Chakrabarti RITES Researcher Roads India
Mr. Louw. Kannemeyer Department of Transport Researcher Roads South Africa
Mr. Michael J. Riley Riley Partnership Researcher Roads United
Kingdom
Ir. Zulakmal bin Sufian IKRAM Asst. Researcher Roads Malaysia
Ir. Abd Rahman Shamsuddin IKRAM Asst. Researcher Traffic Malaysia
Mrs. Rosida Bt. Ishak IKRAM Data Entry Malaysia
Elements of the work presented in this report were undertaken by the following individuals
in collaboration with the HTRS team either in Malaysia or through work in their home
country:
Collaborator Affiliation Country

Mr. Paul Robinson Snowy Mountain Engineering Corp. Australia
Mr. Peter D. Cenek Works Consultancy Central Laboratories New Zealand
Mr. Roger C.M. Dunn University of Auckland New Zealand
Dr. Alex T. Visser University of Pretoria South Africa
Mr. Gerrie van Zyl Roads and Transport Technology South Africa
Dr. Gustav Rohde Africon Engineering International South Africa
Dr. Andrew D. Chesher University of Bristol United Kingdom
Dr. Mike Cundill Consultant United Kingdom
Dr. Tom Van Dam Michigan Technological University United States
The team would also like to acknowledge the contributions of the following individuals
through the provision of reports, data and for commenting on the preliminary draft
research reports issued during the study:
Contributor Affiliation Country

viii Modelling Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
Mr. John B. Cox ARRB Transport Research Australia

Mr. Henry Hide Cole Sherman Canada
Mr. Jeff Zavitski Deighton Associates Canada
Mr. David Biggs Sypher:Mueller Canada
Dr. John Morrall University of Calgary Canada
Dr. Juan-Pablo Covarrubias Instituto Chileno del Hormigon Chile
Dr. P.K. Nanda Central Road Research Institute India
Mr. V.K. Sood Central Road Research Institute India
Mr. Richard Wyatt Louis Berger International Indonesia
Ir. Mohamed Shafii Mustafa Institut Kerja Raya Malaysia Malaysia
Mr. Ian Melsom Transit New Zealand New Zealand
Mr. Bryan Pidwerbesky University of Canterbury New Zealand
Mr. Yu Li Pan Ministry of Communications Peoples Republic of China
Mr. Charles Melhuish The Asian Development Bank Philippines
Dr. Piet J. Jordaan African Consulting Engineers South Africa
Dr. Harold Bofinger Roads and Transport Technology South Africa
Dr. Christo J. Bester Van Niekerk, Kleyn & Edwards South Africa
Mr. Olle Andersson National Roads Administration Sweden
Mr. Ulf Hammerstrom Swedish Road and Traffic Institute Sweden
Mr. Clive Daniels Consultant United Kingdom
Mr. Peter Arlidge Consultant United Kingdom
Mr. Colin Ellis Overseas Development Administration United Kingdom
Mr. Stephen J. Vincent Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick United Kingdom
Mr. Bob Smith Technecon United Kingdom
Dr. John Rolt Transport Research Laboratory United Kingdom
Mr. John Hine Transport Research Laboratory United Kingdom
Dr. Henry Kerali University of Birmingham United Kingdom
Mr. Larry Scofield Arizona Department of Transportation United States
Mr. Kurt Smith ERES Consultants United States
Mr. Monty Wade ERES Consultants United States
Mr. Harry Caldwell Federal Highway Administration United States
Ms. Margie Sheriff Federal Highway Administration United States
Mr. Miguel Morales National Academy of Sciences United States
Dr. Christopher J. Hoban The World Bank United States
Dr. William D.O. Paterson The World Bank United States
Mr. Rodrigo Archondo-Callao The World Bank United States
Lastly, the HTRS team would like to express its appreciation to the various firms who
made available staff, reports and resources to the project:
Organisation Country
ARRB Transport Research Australia
Queensland Department of Transport Australia
Snowy Mountain Engineering Corp. Australia
N.D. Lea International Canada
Kampsax A/S Denmark
Transroute France
PADECO Japan
Works Consultancy Services New Zealand
Department of Transport South Africa
Africon Engineering International South Africa
Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick United Kingdom
Transport Research Laboratory United Kingdom
Acknowledgements vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The International Study of Highway Development and Management Tools (ISOHDM) has
relied on the support and contributions of many individuals and organisations. This
support has been in the form of funding, providing staff to research certain tasks,
reviewing reports and providing data. The advances made with HDM-4 would not have
been possible without this assistance.
The HDM Technical Relationships Study (HTRS) was based in Malaysia. The study was
hosted by the Institut Kerja Raya Malaysia (IKRAM) which provided office facilities, staff,
and also conducted various field surveys and provided data for analysis. The HTRS team
members were:
Team Member Affiliation Project Role Country

Dr. Christopher R. Bennett N.D. Lea International Team Leader Canada
Mr. David G. Peshkin N.D. Lea International Researcher Roads Canada
Ms. Jenny Low N.D. Lea International Office Manager Canada
Mr. Ian D. Greenwood Works Consultancy Researcher Traffic New Zealand
Services
Mr. Sukomal Chakrabarti RITES Researcher Roads India
Mr. Louw. Kannemeyer Department of Transport Researcher Roads South Africa
Mr. Michael J. Riley Riley Partnership Researcher Roads United
Kingdom
Ir. Zulakmal bin Sufian IKRAM Asst. Researcher Roads Malaysia
Ir. Abd Rahman Shamsuddin IKRAM Asst. Researcher Traffic Malaysia
Mrs. Rosida Bt. Ishak IKRAM Data Entry Malaysia
Elements of the work presented in this report were undertaken by the following individuals
in collaboration with the HTRS team either in Malaysia or through work in their home
country:
Collaborator Affiliation Country

Mr. Paul Robinson Snowy Mountain Engineering Corp. Australia
Mr. Peter D. Cenek Works Consultancy Central Laboratories New Zealand
Mr. Roger C.M. Dunn University of Auckland New Zealand
Dr. Alex T. Visser University of Pretoria South Africa
Mr. Gerrie van Zyl Roads and Transport Technology South Africa
Dr. Gustav Rohde Africon Engineering International South Africa
Dr. Andrew D. Chesher University of Bristol United Kingdom
Dr. Mike Cundill Consultant United Kingdom
Dr. Tom Van Dam Michigan Technological University United States
The team would also like to acknowledge the contributions of the following individuals
through the provision of reports, data and for commenting on the preliminary draft
research reports issued during the study:
Contributor Affiliation Country

viii Modelling Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
Mr. John B. Cox ARRB Transport Research Australia

Mr. Henry Hide Cole Sherman Canada
Mr. Jeff Zavitski Deighton Associates Canada
Mr. David Biggs Sypher:Mueller Canada
Dr. John Morrall University of Calgary Canada
Dr. Juan-Pablo Covarrubias Instituto Chileno del Hormigon Chile
Dr. P.K. Nanda Central Road Research Institute India
Mr. V.K. Sood Central Road Research Institute India
Mr. Richard Wyatt Louis Berger International Indonesia
Ir. Mohamed Shafii Mustafa Institut Kerja Raya Malaysia Malaysia
Mr. Ian Melsom Transit New Zealand New Zealand
Mr. Bryan Pidwerbesky University of Canterbury New Zealand
Mr. Yu Li Pan Ministry of Communications Peoples Republic of China
Mr. Charles Melhuish The Asian Development Bank Philippines
Dr. Piet J. Jordaan African Consulting Engineers South Africa
Dr. Harold Bofinger Roads and Transport Technology South Africa
Dr. Christo J. Bester Van Niekerk, Kleyn & Edwards South Africa
Mr. Olle Andersson National Roads Administration Sweden
Mr. Ulf Hammerstrom Swedish Road and Traffic Institute Sweden
Mr. Clive Daniels Consultant United Kingdom
Mr. Peter Arlidge Consultant United Kingdom
Mr. Colin Ellis Overseas Development Administration United Kingdom
Mr. Stephen J. Vincent Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick United Kingdom
Mr. Bob Smith Technecon United Kingdom
Dr. John Rolt Transport Research Laboratory United Kingdom
Mr. John Hine Transport Research Laboratory United Kingdom
Dr. Henry Kerali University of Birmingham United Kingdom
Mr. Larry Scofield Arizona Department of Transportation United States
Mr. Kurt Smith ERES Consultants United States
Mr. Monty Wade ERES Consultants United States
Mr. Harry Caldwell Federal Highway Administration United States
Ms. Margie Sheriff Federal Highway Administration United States
Mr. Miguel Morales National Academy of Sciences United States
Dr. Christopher J. Hoban The World Bank United States
Dr. William D.O. Paterson The World Bank United States
Mr. Rodrigo Archondo-Callao The World Bank United States
Lastly, the HTRS team would like to express its appreciation to the various firms who
made available staff, reports and resources to the project:
Organisation Country
ARRB Transport Research Australia
Queensland Department of Transport Australia
Snowy Mountain Engineering Corp. Australia
N.D. Lea International Canada
Kampsax A/S Denmark
Transroute France
PADECO Japan
Works Consultancy Services New Zealand
Department of Transport South Africa
Africon Engineering International South Africa
Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick United Kingdom
Transport Research Laboratory United Kingdom
Introduction 1-1
1. INTRODUCTION
This is Volume II of a two-volume set presenting the results of the Highway Development
and Management Technical Relationships Study (HTRS). Volume I covers road user
effects (RUE): vehicle operating costs, traffic safety and noise emissions; this volume
covers road deterioration and maintenance effects (RDME).
For the purpose of modelling in HDM-4, highway pavements have been classified into four
broad groups: bituminous, concrete, block and unsealed. This report presents models for
predicting deterioration and maintenance effects for the bituminous and block pavements.
Prediction models for concrete and unsealed pavements are the subject of separate
studies as part of the ISOHDM project.
This volume commences with an overview of RDME: what it is how it is modelled. In

Chapter 3 the structural characterisation of pavements is discussed. Chapters 4 to 8
each deal with the modelling of an individual distress: cracking, rutting, ravelling,
potholing/delamination/edge break, and roughness. Surface texture and skid resistance
are discussed in Chapter 9. Chapter 10 addresses the modelling of maintenance effects.
Block pavements are discussed in Chapter 11. Chapter 12 discusses incorporating FWD
measurements into HDM-4.
Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4 2-1
2. ROAD DETERIORATION AND MAINTENANCE EFFECTS IN

HDM-4
2.1 Introduction
HDM-III contained relationships for predicting road deterioration and maintenance effects
(RDME) as a function of pavement characteristics, traffic and the environment
(Watanatada, et al., 1987). Although RDME models have been around for many years,
for example those derived from the AASHO Road test conducted in Illinois during 1958-
1960, the HDM-III model was the outcome of two pioneering studies conducted in tropical
countries.
The first such study was the Kenya study which was conducted during the period 1971-
1975. The results of this study formed the basis of the relationships in HDM-II. A second,
and larger study was carried out in Brazil between 1975-1984. Table 2.1 summarises the
scope of these two studies.
Table 2.1
Scope of Kenya and Brazil Studies
Pavement Performance
Characteristic Study
Kenya Brazil
1971-74 1977-82
Annual Average Rainfall (mm/year) 400-2000 1200-2000
Period of Observation (years) 4 5
Number of Observations N/A 500000
Total Number of Sections 49 116
No. of Granular Base Sections 10 74
No. of Cemented-Base Sections 39 11
No. of Overlaid Sections 0 33
Length of Sections (m) 1,000 720
Traffic Volume (veh/day) 323-1618 73-5700
No. of Equivalent Axle (million/lane/year) 0.012-3.6 0.0003-1.7
No. of Equivalent Axle per Heavy Vehicle 0.2-40 0.08-14
No. of Equivalent Axle (million) 0.004-3.3 0.003-18
Pavement Age (year) 0-14 0-24
Modified Structural Number 2.5-5.1 1.5-7.0
Benkelman Beam Deflection (mm) 0.18-1.12 0.20-2.02
Pavement Surface Roughness (IRI m/km) 2.9-6.0 1.8-10.2
Change of Roughness (IRI m/km) 0.3-1.7 0-4.9
The Brazil relationships formed the basis of the RDME models in HDM-III (Paterson,
1987). However, although the HDM-III relationships were based largely on the Brazil
study data, as described by Paterson (1987) they were validated using data from a
number of different studies over a range of climates. Since its release the model has
been applied in projects identified in almost 100 countries and the basic structure and
predictions of the relationships have been confirmed (Bennett, 1995; Chakrabarti and
2-2 Modelling Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
Bennett, 1994). Thus, the model should not be viewed as limited only to tropical
countries.
This chapter describes the background to the RDME modelling in HDM-4. It provides
essential material to the chapters which follow and it is vital that the principles explained
here be understood by the reader.
2.2 Pavement Classification

In HDM-III the RDME modelling was limited to original construction of asphaltic concrete
and surface treated pavements on granular, cement stabilised or bituminous bases, with
subsequent maintenance surfacings of cold and hot mix asphalts, surface treatments and
slurry seals. However, the scope of pavements to be considered in HDM-4 has been
significantly expanded from this so it was necessary to develop a systematic pavement
classification system. The system formulated uses broad definitions of surfacing and
base types as the basis for classifying the pavement.
Surface Category divides all pavements into two groups paved and unpaved.
These categories are intended only for reporting of network
statistics and will not be modelling parameters.
Surface Class subdivides the paved category into bituminous, concrete and block
surfaces. Together with the unsealed category there are thus four
classes which are used to define the family of distress models
used for performance modelling.
Pavement Type integrates surface and base types with 10 types for bituminous, 4
types for concrete, 4 types for block and 4 types for unsealed.
Each type is designated by a four character code, combining the
surface and base type codes in the case of the bituminous surface
types.
Surface Type divides the many types of bituminous surfacings into two broad
groups asphaltic mix (AM) and surface treatment (ST). Four
types of concrete surfacings, two types of block and four types of
unsealed surfacings are also used.
Surface Material defines more specific asphalt mixes or surfacings. These are user
definable.
Base Type there are eight generic types, some of which are the same as
surface types, to allow for overlays of asphalt on concrete and vice
versa.
Base Material allows the user to specify more detailed characteristics of base
types.
Table 2.2 shows the structure of the HDM-4 pavement classification system and the
codes used for different surface and base types.
Table 2.2
HDM-4 Pavement Classification System
Surface Category PAVED UNPAVED
Surface Class Bituminous Concrete Block Unsealed
Pavement Type AMGB AMAB AMAP AMSB AMCP STGB STAB STAP STSB STCP JPCP JRCP CRCP RCCP CBSG CBLC GRUP SSUP EAUP SAUP
Surface Type AM ST JP JR CR RC CB BR GR SS EA SA
Surface Material AC SBST
HRA DBST
DBM PM
etc. etc.
Base Type GB AB AP SB CP GB AB AP SB CP GB SB EB AB SG LC
Base Material WBM AC CS JPCP WBM AC CS JPCP
WM HRA LS JRCP WM HRA LS JRCP
etc. DBM etc. CRCP etc. DBM etc. CRCP
etc. etc. etc. etc.
Notes: Surface Type Base Type

AM Asphalt Mix GB Granular Base
ST Surface Treatment AB Asphalt Base
JP Jointed Plain AP Asphalt Pavement
JR Jointed Reinforced SB Stabilized Base
CR Continuous Reinforced CP Concrete Pavement
RC Roller Compacted EB Emulsified Base
CB Concrete Block SG Sand/Gravel
BR Brick LC Lean Concrete
GR Gravel
SS Set Stone
EA Earth
SA Sand
2-4 Modelling Road Deterioration in HDM-4
The application of the classification system depends upon the type of analysis being
undertaken. As described in Section 2.5, network level analyses are generally based on
coarse data. In these instances the minimum requirement for analysis would be the
definition of surface class and pavement type. Default materials and distress model
parameters would then be applied in the modelling.
Project level analyses require a much greater level of detail. Here, surface and/or base
materials may be specified together with user defined distress model parameters. It
should be noted that the surface class and pavement type may change during an analysis
period, depending on the types of works applied to the pavement. For example, the initial
pavement type for a section may be AMGB (asphaltic mix surface on granular base); if an
asphaltic overlay is applied the pavement type will change to AMAP (asphaltic mix surface
on asphalt pavement) and different model parameters will apply. If the same initial
pavement is given a surface treatment it will change to STAP (surface treatment on
asphalt pavement).
2.3 The HDM Modelling Approach

2.3.1 Structured Empirical Models
For modelling RDME there are two general classes of models: mechanistic and empirical.
Mechanistic models use fundamental theories of pavement behaviour for their modelling;
empirical models on the other hand are usually based on statistical analyses of observed
deterioration trends.
There are advantages and disadvantages with each approach. While mechanistic models
have a strong theoretical basis, they are usually very data intensive and rely on
parameters which are difficult to quantify in the field. Empirical analyses, on the other
hand, often lead to localised relationships which cannot be applied outside of the specific
conditions upon which they are based.
Paterson (1987) minimised these problems by adopting a structured empirical approach

for developing the HDM-III RDME model. This was based on identifying the functional
form and primary variables from external sources and then using various statistical
techniques to quantify their impacts.
The HDM relationships were therefore formulated based on mechanistic concepts of

material properties and behaviour under traffic loading and climatic factors, and the
results of experimental research (Paterson, 1987). This had the advantage that the
resulting models combined both the theoretical and experimental bases of mechanistic
models with the behaviour observed in empirical studies. The success of this approach
can be seen in the flexibility of the resulting models and their successful application in
predicting pavement performance in a wide range of countries (Chakrabarti and Bennett,
1994).
2.3.2 Incremental Models
There are two types of models which can be used for predictive purposes: absolute
models and incremental models. These models can be represented as:
Condition = f(a0, a1, a2, ...) Absolute
Change in condition = f(a0, a1, a2, ...) Incremental
With an absolute model the independent variables give the condition as a function of
these variables. Incremental models give the change in condition from an initial state as
a function of the independent variables. Absolute models have the disadvantage that
they are usually confined to the specific conditions upon which they are based and thus
cannot be readily applied under different conditions. Incremental models can, on the
other hand, be applied to a variety of different initial conditions and offer much more
flexibility than absolute models.
Because of their advantages, incremental models were adopted as the basis for
pavement deterioration in HDM. The models work in terms of the change of distress over
a period, which is either time or the passage of traffic.
2.3.3 Modelling Pavement Distresses
Pavement deterioration can be expressed in terms of a damage function or as the

development and progression of the actual distresses. As described by Paterson (1987),
a damage function expresses the performance of the pavement in relation to two
standards, the quality of the original construction or initial condition and the terminal level
of distress at which maintenance or rehabilitation is necessary. Thus, damage functions
rely upon prescribed standards which vary (often significantly) between countries, and
even areas within the same country.
The alternative approach predicts the development of the key distresses and expresses
this development in the same manner as the distress is quantified; for example, rut
depths are expressed in mm; cracks in length per unit area or percentage area;
roughness in m/km. This not only offers great versatility but it also facilitates
understanding what is happening to the pavement. HDM operates on the development
and progression of the actual distresses. The flexible pavement distresses modelled in
HDM-III were:
crack initiation and progression;

ravelling initiation and progression;
rut depth progression;
pothole initiation and progression;
roughness progression.
There is an interaction between these distresses since they develop and progress from
minor to major distresses. Figure 2.1 shows their interactions. This includes
delamination, shoulder deterioration and edge break which were not modelled in HDM-III
but are to be included in HDM-4.
As shown in Figure 2.1 cracking, ravelling and potholing/delamination have two stages in
their predictions. The first stage consists of predicting the initiation period of the distress,
i.e., the time until the distress first occurs. The second consists of the distress
progression. The progression typically follows a sigmoidal curve as illustrated in Figure
2.2.
Rutting
Crack Crack
Initiation Progression
Pavement
Structure
Pavement Pothole Pothole

Condition Delamination Delamination Roughness
& Age Initiation Progression
Traffic
Ravelling Ravelling
Deformation
Shoulder Shoulder Use on Narrow Roads

Deterioration
Edge
Break
Figure 2.1: Interaction of HDM-III Distress Modes
100
90
80
Initiation Period Progression Period
70
Percentage of Total Area
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Time in years
Figure 2.2: HDM-III Initiation and Progression Modelling

2.4 RDME Modelling in HDM-4
The RDME modelling in HDM-4 is an evolution of the HDM-III approach. The resources
of the HTRS did not allow for significant research or the development of new models.
Indeed, in spite of concerned attempts by the HTRS team to procure data for developing
models most researchers and organisations were unwilling or unable to make data
available to the ISOHDM study.
The objective of the HTRS was therefore to address those areas of the HDM-III RDME
model which were identified as requiring attention or refinement and to do this with the
available resources. To focus the resources it was considered that it was only
necessary to model distress modes that can be translated into the functional parameters
that are used in the road user effect models or which may dictate certain maintenance
treatments. The flow chart in Figure 2.3 shows the logical process of establishing which
distress modes were relevant to HDM-4 and, following from this, the data requirements.
Pavement
Class
Bituminous
Concrete
Block
Unselaed
Modelling Parameters
Road User Cost Road Road Road Road Pavement Road

Models Functional Condition Inventory Traffic Distress Data
Parameters Models Requirements
Travel time Traffic volume Cracking Curvature Volumes Crack initiation

Standing costs Alignment Ravelling Gradient Vehicle Crack progression
Running costs Effective width Potholing Carr. width Characteristics Ravel initiation
Accident costs Eff roughness Patching Shldr. width Ravel progression
Surf. texture Texture Surf type Pothole initiation
Trans. profile Friction Surf thick Pothole progression
Deformation Base type Rut depth
Roughness Base thick Surf texture
Edge step MSN Friction
Edge break Earthworks Edge break
Shldr condition Drainage etc.
Drain condition
Figure 2.3: Decision Process for Pavement Modelling Needs
As with pavement classification, modes of pavement distress follow a hierarchical

structure. Three broad types of condition are proposed for reporting on network statistics.
These are subdivided into distress modes and types as shown in Table 2.3 which also
tentatively identifies the pavement types and distress modes for bituminous and block
pavements for which models could ultimately be needed. This table also shows those
distresses that will be modelled in HDM-4 either through the provision of new models or
through the HDM-III models, with different parameter values to extend them to different
surfaces.
Table 2.3
HDM-4 Pavement Distress Models - Bituminous and Block Surface Classes
Condition Distress Bituminous Block

AM ST
Mode Type Code Unit GB AB AP SB CP GB AB AP SB CP CB BR
Structural Initiation ICX year
Progression ACX %
Cracking Thermal Progression ACT m/km
Reflection Initiation ICR year
Surface Progression ACR %
Distress Ravelling Initiation IRV year
Progression ARV %
Delamination Initiation IDL year
Disintegration Progression NDL no/km
Potholing Initiation IPT year
Progression NPT no/km
Edge Break VEB m3/km
Transverse Rutting - Mean RDM mm
Profile Rutting - Std. Dev RDS mm
Travel Crossfall CFA %
Long. Profile Roughness IRI m/km
Friction Macro Texture TD mm
Micro Texture SFC
Notes: HDM-III - adapted by HTRS New in HDM-4 Not applicable to this pavement type
2.5 HDM-4 Road Data Requirements

The issues of data needs and accuracy were addressed by Paterson and Scullion (1990).
They proposed a four-level Information Quality Level (IQL) approach which would reflect
the varying data needs depending upon the analysis approach, as shown in Table 2.4.
Table 2.4
Classification of Information Quality and Detail
Level Amount of Detail

I Most comprehensive level of detail, such as would be used as a reference
benchmark for other measurement methods and in fundamental research.
Would also be used in detailed field investigations for an in-depth diagnosis
of problems, and for high-class project design. Normally used at project-
level in special cases, and unlikely to be used for network monitoring.
Requires high level of staff skills and institutional resources to support and
utilise collection methods.
II A level of detail sufficient for comprehensive programming models and for
standard design methods. For planning, would be used only on a sample
coverage. Sufficient to distinguish the performance and economic returns
of different technical options with practical differences in dimensions or
materials. Standard acquisition methods for project-level data collection.
Would usually require automated acquisition methods for network surveys
and be used for network-level programming. Requires reliable institutional
support and resources.
III Sufficient detail for planning models and standard programming models for
full network coverage. For project design, would suit elementary methods
such as catalog-type with meager data needs, and low-volume road/bridge
design methods. Able to be collected in network surveys by semi-
automated methods or combined automated and manual methods.
IV The basic summary statistics of inventory, performance and utilisation, of
interest to providers and users. Suitable for the simplest planning and
programming models, but for projects is suitable only for standardised
designs of very low-volume roads. The simplest, most basic collection
methods, either entirely manual or entirely semi-automated, provide direct
but approximate measures, and suit small or resource-poor agencies.
Alternatively, the statistics may be computed from more detailed data.
Source: Paterson and Scullion (1990)
The key point from Table 2.4 is that there is a hierarchy of data needs as well as
collection/analysis methods and that the two should be considered in tandem. It is not
cost effective to adopt a sophisticated data collection method when all that is required are
general network level statistics. Similarly, when undertaking primary research, such as
into pavement deterioration models, it is imperative that extremely accurate measurement
methods be used.
The HDM-4 software has been designed to allow the user to input data in aggregate level
(i.e., less detailed) form while modelling is performed on more detailed parameters.
HDM-4 is thus required to contain sets of default values for all detailed parameters. While
these will be user definable, a sensible set of initial defaults must be supplied with the
program.
Riley (1995) proposed a set of default values and how they should be calculated. Based
on the comments received on this report, and other subsequent work, the values
recommended in Annex 2.1 were established.
2.6 Summary
The HDM-III RDME model was developed using the structured empirical approach. This
used mechanistic theory to formulate the structure of the models which were then
quantified using empirical data. The model form was incremental as opposed to absolute
so the model predicts the change in distress from a previous state as opposed to
predicting the state directly.
For HDM-4 a multi-level pavement classification system was established. The types of
pavement distresses were established by pavement type and a matrix of the required
models was determined. The HDM-4 HTRS study focused on establishing models for
this matrix based on available data and resources. The models were often refinements
of HDM-III, although some new models were developed.
The data requirements of HDM-4 are based on the Paterson and Scullion (1990)
information quality concepts. A series of default values for use with HDM-4 were
established around these concepts.
Characterisation of Pavement Structure, Environment, and Traffic 3-1
3. CHARACTERISATION OF PAVEMENT STRUCTURE,

ENVIRONMENT, AND TRAFFIC
3.1 Introduction
This chapter introduces several issues that relate to the general performance of
bituminous pavements, but are not specific to a model of deterioration or performance. It
includes the following topics:
characterising pavement structure;

climatic and environmental effects on pavement deterioration;
traffic characterisation.
Most of these topics are addressed in greater detail in subsequent chapters where they
are used. Similar topics that relate to block pavements are addressed separately in
Chapter 11.
3.2 Pavement Structure

3.2.1 Introduction
There are several different material and layer measures that are used to characterise a
pavement structure. The most laborious and expensive approach to obtaining the
necessary information is to sample individual layer materials and report measured values
of strength, gradation, content, and other parameters of interest. For modelling pavement
performance this approach is usually impractical, and suitable measures are estimated by
more accessible methods.
Characteristics of pavement structure that are used in HDM modelling include the
pavements strength, layer characteristics, and selected material and layer properties.
These are discussed below.
3.2.2 Pavement Strength
Modified Structural Number SNC
The modified structural number, SNC, is a means by which a pavements structural

capacity may be quantified. This method builds upon AASHTOs structural number
concept, in which pavement layers are assigned a structural layer coefficient that is meant
to represent the layers contribution to pavement performance.1 The contribution of an

individual layer to the pavements overall performance is given by the product of the
layers coefficient and its thickness:
SNi = ai hi (3.1)
where SNi is the structural number of the ith layer

ai is the layer coefficient of the ith layer, with examples shown in Table 3.1
hi is the thickness of the ith layer, in inches
The overall load carrying capacity of a given pavement structure is then determined from
the following:
nlayer
SN = ai hi (3.2)
i
where nlayer is the number of pavement layers above the subgrade
While in the AASHTO design procedure the subgrades contribution to performance is

considered through its resilient modulus, in HDM the subgrade contribution is
incorporated in the SNC by considering its contribution to the SN. Thus the pavement SN
becomes the SNC, modified to consider the subgrade:
nlayer
SNC = 0.0394 ai hi + SNSG (3.3)
i
SNSG = 3.51 log10 CBR 0.85 (log10 CBR)2 143

. , for CBR 3
(3.4)
0 for CBR 3
where SNC is the modified structural number

CBR is the California Bearing Ratio, in per cent
SNSG is the subgrade strength contribution
Although Paterson (1987) and others state that SNC is derived from pavement layers up
to a total thickness of 700 mm (suggesting that layers beyond a depth of 700 mm are not
counted), the range of SNC in the Brazil-UNDP study (Paterson, 1987) goes up to nearly
8, while the maximum asphalt thickness was only 100 mm. This suggests that the
contribution to the SNC of layers below 700 mm was, in some cases, included in the SNC
estimation. In light of this anomaly and in the absence of additional research to support
1
Layer coefficients are frequently referred to as strength coefficients or measures of a pavements strength,
and indeed the relationships given by AASHTO for determining layer coefficients are primarily based on
measures of strength. However, layer coefficients actually measure the materials contribution to
serviceability, or change in Present Serviceability Index (PSI), which for flexible pavements is based
primarily on roughness and rutting. This explains why seemingly stronger materials may have a lower ai
and why layer coefficients for similar materials vary depending on where in the pavement structure they are
used. In applying the AASHTO methodology, users are encouraged to backcalculate layer coefficients for
their own paving materials based on their pavements performance.
an alternative, it is recommended that engineering judgment be applied to the calculation

of an SNC when the structure exceeds 700 mm thick.
While there are other methods of characterising pavement strength, the SNC is
particularly useful because it is a single measure that is readily estimated from commonly
available data. In that sense it is more appropriate than deflection-based methods, for
example, which require extensive testing and data manipulation to provide useful results.
However, calculation of the SNC does require some material properties (thickness and
layer coefficients), and there are cases where it may be desirable to estimate the SNC
based on deflections instead. Such relationships exist for several commonly available
deflection measuring devices. Paterson (1987) provides relationships between
Benkelman beam deflections and SNC for pavements on granular and cemented bases,
based on Brazil data, and these are provided in Equation 3.5 and Equation 3.6.
Relationships are also provided between SNC and Dynaflect-measured deflections, but
these require additional pavement information and are not repeated here.
For granular base pavements
SNC = 3.2 DEF 0.63 (3.5)
For cemented base pavements
SNC = 2.2 DEF 0.63 (3.6)
where DEF is the Benkelman Beam representative rebound deflection
In Chapter 12, procedures for calculating the SNC from falling weight deflectometer
(FWD) deflections are described. The usefulness of such procedures stems from the
ability of the FWD to accurately and rapidly test pavements exhibiting a wide range of
structural characteristics and to better represent contributions to the structure of non-
surface layers.
California Bearing Ratio CBR
The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) is a comparative measure of the strength of a non-
stabilised material, including the subgrade and granular bases and subbases.
Table 3.1
Structural Number Strength Coefficients from Different Studies
Layer Strength Coefficient ai

Cenek
and
TRL AASHTO Paterson CRRI Patrick
Pavement Layer (1975) (1993) (1987) (1993b) (1994)
Surface Courses
Surface Treatment (ST) 0.20 - 0.40 0.300
Surface Dressing (SSD/DSD) 0.100
Premix Carpet (PMC) 0.180
Semi-Dense Carpet (SDC), 25mm 0.250
Asphalt Mixture 0.200 0.200 0.200
(cold/hot premix of low stability)
Asphalt Concrete (AC), 25 mm 0.180
Asphalt Concrete (AC), 40/ 25 mm 0.300
AC, MR30 = 1500 MPa 0.300 0.300
AC, MR30 = 2500 MPa 0.400 0.400
AC, MR30 = 4000 MPa 0.500 0.450
Elastic Mod. at 68F, E = 100,000 psi 0.200
Base Courses
GB, CBR = 30% 0.070 0.095 0.00-0.07
GB, CBR = 50% 0.100 0.110 0.00-0.10
GB, CBR = 70% 0.120 0.125 0.10-0.12
CBR = 90% 0.135 0.130 0.12-0.13
CBR = 110% 0.140 0.140 0.140
Water Bound Macadam (WBM) 0.140 0.140
CB, UCS = 0.7 MPa 0.100 0.100 0.100
CB, UCS = 2.0 MPa 0.150 0.140 0.150
CB, UCS = 3.5 MPa 0.200 0.175 0.200
CB, UCS = 5.0 MPa 0.245 0.205 0.240
Bituminous Base Material 0.320
Dense Bituminous Macadam/ 0.200
Built-Up Spray Grout (BUSG) 0.160
Thin Bituminous Layer, BT 0.140
AB, Marshall Stability, 200 lb 0.120
Sub-base Courses
GB, CBR = 5% 0.055 0.040 0.060
GB, CBR = 15% 0.085 0.090 0.090
GB, CBR = 25% 0.100 0.100 0.100
GB, CBR = 50% 0.120 0.130 0.120
GB, CBR = 100% 0.140 0.140 0.140
Water Bound Macadam, Oversized 0.140
Brick Soling 0.120
Brick Ballast/ Aggregates 0.120
Local Gravel/ Kankar 0.100
Cemented Materials, 0.140
Source: Chakrabarti and Bennett (1994)

A mainstay of many pavement design procedures in the past, the CBR is slowly being
replaced by measures of a soils resilient behaviour.
The CBR is the percentage of the resistance to penetration of the material of interest, by
a standard piston at a standard rate, to that of a compacted crushed stone. CBR tests
typically specify that the material of interest be tested after a 96-hour soak, meant to be
representative of the structures lowest strength (which occurs when the pavement
structure is saturated). In HDM, the CBR used in the SNC model is based on the testing
of a subgrade at in situ moisture content. The Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) has
proved to be a valuable tool for the rapid measurement of existing pavement strength
properties, including the CBR (TRL, 1993). There are many relationships between DCP
readings and CBR, some of which are presented in Chapter 12.
In addition to its use as a measure of subgrade support, the CBR can be used to estimate
layer coefficients. Paterson (1987) provides relationships for estimating ai of both base
and subbase granular materials from CBR, and AASHTO (1993) has similar relationships.
Several of these relationships are provided in Table 3.1. It should be noted that the CBR
should not be used to characterise stabilised materials that would have a CBR greater
than 100.
Other Measures
Table 3.1 provides relationships between various other measures of pavement strength
and layer coefficients. These include the resilient modulus (MR) of bituminous layers and
the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of cemented materials. The strength of
bound layers is also often reported as an elastic modulus, E. Alternative measures of
distress prediction that are based on mechanistic responses of materials to load require a
much broader range of inputs, as discussed in the appropriate chapters.
3.2.3 Proposed Changes to Structural Characterisation in HDM-4
A proposed modification to the SNC is recommended that considers the effects of

drainage and provides a rational and comprehensive means of addressing drainage in
HDM analyses. Drainage coefficients were introduced in the 1986 revisions to the
AASHTO Design Guide and their use is maintained in the most recent version of the
Guide (AASHTO, 1993). In AASHTO, the drainage coefficients, di, are used to modify
every non-stabilised layer above the subgrade in a bituminous pavement, as shown in
Equation 3.7:1
SN = a1H1 + a2 H2 d2 + a3 H3 d3 +...an Hn dn (3.7)
where ai is the layer coefficient of the ith layer

Hi is the thickness of the ith layer, in inches
di is the drainage coefficient of the ith layer
nlayer is the number of layers above the subgrade
Note that the first layer, which is assumed to be bituminous, is not modified by a drainage
coefficient. Nor would any subsequent layers that include bound or stabilised materials.
1
AASHTOs bituminous pavement drainage coefficients are designated mi; to avoid confusion with HDMs
environmental coefficient, di is used in HDM-4.
The drainage coefficients are determined by considering the quality of drainage and the
per cent time that the pavement is exposed to moisture levels approaching saturation.
Table 3.2 presents guidelines on rating the quality of drainage (AASHTO, 1993).
Table 3.2
AASHTO Relationship Between Layers Drainability
and Subjective Drainage Quality Rating
Quality of Drainage Water Removed From Layer Within

Excellent 2 hours
Good 1 day
Fair 1 week
Poor 1 month
Very Poor water will not drain
Source: AASHTO (1993)
The quality of drainage is in turn a function of the permeability of the subsurface

materials, the crossfall and longitudinal slopes, the drainage distance (the length that
subsurface moisture must travel in order to exit the pavement structure), and the type of
drainage structures. The saturation of the pavement is affected by both the drainability of
the pavement structure and the rainfall. Table 3.3 shows recommended ranges of
drainage coefficients for a variety of drainage qualities and saturation times (AASHTO,
1993). It is noted that a drainage coefficient of 1.0 has no effect on the SN calculation;
drainage coefficients greater than 1.0 imply that the material has better resistance to
moisture effects and a drainage coefficient less than 1.0 means that the material is
susceptible to moisture damage.
Table 3.3
Recommended di Values for Modifying Structural Layer Coefficients
of Untreated Base and Subbase Materials in Flexible Pavements
Per cent of Time Pavement Structure is Exposed to

Quality of Moisture Levels Approaching Saturation
Drainage < 1% 1 to 5% 5 to 25% > 25%
Excellent 1.40 - 1.35 1.35 - 1.30 1.30 - 1.20 1.20
Good 1.35 - 1.25 1.25 - 1.15 1.15 - 1.00 1.00
Fair 1.25 - 1.15 1.15 - 1.05 1.00 - 0.80 0.80
Poor 1.15 - 1.05 1.05 - 0.80 0.80 - 0.60 0.60
Very Poor 1.05 - 0.95 0.95 - 0.75 0.75 - 0.40 0.40
Source: AASHTO (1993)
It is suggested that this same methodology is easily applied in HDM-4 through a revised
SNC equation. The revised equation is shown below, where again di for any bituminous
or stabilised layer is fixed at 1.0:
nlayer
SNC = 0.0396 i i + SNSG
aidH (3.8)
n =1
Implementation of this revised equation addresses some of the major limitations of the
HDM-III approach. In adjusting the layer coefficients of individual layers for their
resistance to moisture-related deterioration, a means of incorporating the benefits of
improving drainage features is available. The actual effect of improved drainage will be a
higher SNC, which will in turn reduce cracking, rutting, and roughness progression. This
impact will be recognised independently of the effect of moisture on potholing and rutting,
which is important as moisture will adversely affect pavement performance long before
cracking or potholing appear. The SNC can now be adjusted on an annual basis to
reflect either improvements to, or deterioration of, road elements that affect pavement
drainage.
For modelling pavements that experience significant seasonal strength changes, there
are two approaches. If deterioration is also modelled by season, then a seasonal SNC
should be calculated. It can reasonably be assumed that the subgrade CBR will remain
relatively stable throughout the year (see Annex 3.1); therefore, a seasonal SNC is
calculated by selecting appropriate layer coefficients and drainage coefficients
accordingly to previously presented guidelines.
If deterioration is modelled on an annual basis, the calculation of weighted seasonal

SNCs is somewhat problematic. The significance of the SNC in different distress models
can be represented by the exponent that is applied to it, as shown in the following generic
model form:
1
DIS (3.9)
SNC a0
where DIS is the change in a given distress

a0 is the applicable exponent
Table 3.4 gives values for the exponent a0 in Equation 3.9. For the weighting of seasonal
SNCs to obtain an annual mean, it is recommended that the fifth power (a = 5) be used,
as described in Watanatada, et al. (1987). This is because roughness progression has
the greatest effect on road user costs and hence total transport cost comparisons.
Table 3.4
SNC Exponents Used by HDM-4 Models
Model a0
Crack Initiation 2
Crack Progression 2.27 to 3.23
Rutting Progression 0.402
Roughness Progression 5
3.2.4 Layer Properties
Layer thickness
Layer thickness is an input in many of the HDM models as well as in the calculation of the
SNC when deflections are not used. The characterisation of most maintenance
applications requires the specification of a layer thickness as well. The thickness of the
surface layer is designated HS, which for modelling purposes includes the total thickness
of all bituminous layers. Base thickness is designated as HB, and the sum of the
surfacing thickness and the base is referred to as HP. In a pavement structure, the
subgrade is the only layer assumed to be infinite in thickness.
Compaction Index of Pavement COMP
Pavement compaction is an explanatory variable in the rut depth models. The actual
variable is COMP, which is defined as the compaction index of the pavement relative to a
standard, expressed as a percentage. The COMP equation is shown below
(Watanatada, et al., 1987):
nlayer Hi
COMP = RCi (3.10)
i=2 i=2, n Hi
where COMP is the relative compaction of the pavement

RCi is the ratio of the compaction measured in the field to the
nominal compaction; RCi = min [1, Ci/Cnom, i]
Ci is the compaction of layer i, defined as DDi/MDDi
Hi is the layer thickness, in mm
DDi is the in situ dry density of layer i
MDDi is the maximum dry density of material in layer i, as
determined in the laboratory to the relevant compaction
standard
Cnom, i is the nominal compaction to be achieved in layer i, defined
as 1.02 - 0.14 zi
zi is the depth at the bottom of layer i, in m, where z1
3.2.5 Bituminous Material Properties
Binder Content
Binder content is an explanatory variable in several of the secondary cracking models

(Paterson, 1987), but it was not used in the final HDM-III models. It is expressed as the
per cent binder, by mass, of the total mix. Typical values range between 5 and 7.5 per
cent for wearing courses and slightly lower values (4.5 to 6.0 per cent) for bituminous
bases. Bituminous mixtures with binder contents at or in excess of the high end will have
a greater tendency to rut, bleed, and shove. Mixes at the lower end of the range will be
more stable (i.e., resistant to deformation), but more difficult to compact and more likely to
age prematurely. They may also be more susceptible to cracking.
Asphalt Viscosity
Viscosity is a measure of a fundamental property of asphalt, and many asphalts are

graded by their viscosity. A direct measure of viscosity is made with a capillary tube
viscometer with the asphalt at 60 C and provides an indication of the materials flow
properties at a common maximum pavement temperature. As such, it is an indication of
how the material will perform under loading when subjected to elevated temperatures.
Asphalt viscosity is measured in Pascal-seconds, and is given the variable name AVIS.
A second indication of an asphalts behaviour at elevated temperatures may be obtained

from the ring and ball softening point test. The test is typically performed on air-blown
asphalts and is reported as the temperature at which the asphalt softens. Its units are C
and it is given the variable name SP in HDM-4.
Aggregate Properties and Texture
Pavement texture is an important measure in assessing a pavements skid resistance.

Characteristics of both the individual aggregate and the overall surface layer affect skid
resistance. With the aggregate, the properties of most interest are its resistance to
abrasion, as measured, for example, by the Aggregate Abrasion Value (AAV) and its
resistance to polishing, as measured by the Polished Stone Value (PSV). This topic is
addressed in detail in Chapter 9.
3.2.6 Surface Material Types
The preceding sections describe some of the material properties that are variables in the
HDM modelling process. However, it is readily acknowledged that materials, mix designs
and philosophies, and nomenclature vary widely, often even within countries, and that
there is no common set of terminology used to describe these products. While it is not
possible to consider all of the types of surfacing materials and cross-reference them with
descriptions that are commonly found in HDM, a list of basic surface types is presented in
Table 3.5. Table 3.6 provides more detailed descriptions of the ranges of common
properties of these surfacing materials.
3.2.7 Base and Subbase Material Types
Very little attention is commonly paid to base and subbase materials despite the fact that
they often are an important factor in pavement deterioration. As described in Chapter 2,
generic base materials allowed for in HDM-4 include the following: granular base (GB),
asphalt-stabilised base (AB), and cement-stabilised base (SB). In addition to these base
types, when pavements are overlaid they in effect become bases for modelling purposes.
This adds the following base types: asphalt pavement (AP) and concrete pavement (CP).
Table 3.5
Alternative Terminology and Typical Applications for HDM-4 Bituminous Materials
Surface Common Alternate HDM-4

Material Applications Terminology Designation
Asphaltic Surface layer of bituminous Hot-Mix Asphalt, bituminous AC
concrete pavement, binder layer, surfacing, bitumen
macadam
Hot rolled Wearing course or surface layer Hot-Rolled Sheet HRA
asphalt
Dense Applications requiring a high DBM
Bitumen strength load carrying layer that
macadam will be covered with a surface
treatment
Stone mastic High stability mix used where Stone matrix asphalt SMA
asphalt rutting is a concern
Porous Reduce surface water on high Pervious macadam, PAC
asphalt volume/high speed pavements drainable asphalt concrete
concrete subjected to frequent rainfall
Surface Restore skid resistance, seal Single surface dressing, SBST,
treatment surface that is beginning to crack chip seal DBST
Slurry seal Thin surface treatment placed over SL
fairly sound bituminous layer in
order to reduce wear
Penetration Primarily used in labour intensive Penmac PM
macadam construction
In bituminous pavements, bases and subbases serve the very important function of
distributing loads applied to relatively thin but strong layers over a wider area in order to
minimise the detrimental impact to the subgrade. Secondary functions of base and
subbase layers include facilitating drainage and elevating freeze-thaw susceptible
materials above the subgrade. In pavements consisting of thin surfacings over stiff
layers, the base layer may also provide most of the pavements load carrying capability.
The materials used in base and subbase construction are far more varied than are
surfacing materials. The primary differentiation between base and subbase is one of
quality (rather than materials) and thus even more variation is introduced. Variations in
load-carrying capacity arise from differences in gradation, number of crushed faces,
source of the granular material, additives, degree of compaction, per cent and nature of
the fines, and so on. Some broad characteristics of the generic HDM-4 base types are
shown in Table 3.7.
3.2.8 Construction Quality
The initiation (and in some cases progression) of certain distresses can be more
accurately attributed to problems in material handling, preparation, or construction than to
structural weakness in the pavement. To address this in HDM-III, a construction quality
code (CQ) was used in the models for crack initiation for surface treatment on granular
base and all ravelling models. Construction quality was defined as 0 if there were no
identifiable surfacing construction defects and 1 if certain defects were known to exist.
Table 3.6
Selected Characteristics of HDM-4 Bituminous Surface Materials
HDM-4 Binder type Binder Typical Aggregate Aggregate Typical Layer Layer
Designation Quantity1 Additives2 gradation top size, mm Thickness, mm coefficient
AC asphalt cement 3 to 8 % None Uniform 20 to 50 25 to 100 0.30 to 0.45
HRA asphalt cement 5 to 9 % None Gap-graded 14 to 20 25 to 50 0.20 to 0.30
DBM asphalt cement 3 to 8 % None Well-graded 20 to 40 25 to 100 0.30 to 0.45
SMA asphalt cement 6 to 8 % Fibers, Somewhat 20 to 50 25 to 75 0.30 to 0.45
Elastomers, open graded
Polymers
PAC asphalt cement 3.5 to 6 % polymer Gap-graded 9 to 12.5 10 to 14 0.20 to 0.30
2
ST cement/emulsion/ 1.6 to 2.0 L/m None Single 6 to 20 10 to 20 0.20 to 0.30
cutback 4 to 8 %
2
SL emulsion 5.5 to >8 kg/m cement Well-graded 6 3 to 10 0.2 to 0.25
2
PM emulsion/cutback 2.5 kg/m none Gap-graded 25 to 40 30 to 45 0.15 o 0.30
Notes: 1/
Typical ranges provided for information only. Actual values highly dependent upon job mix formula for AM and aggregate
size for ST.
2/
Not including anti-stripping agent.
Table 3.7
Characteristics of Generic Base and Subbases
Material Types of Aggregate Types of Additives

Granular base (GB) Crushed stone, dense graded None
Gravel, dense graded
Sands (subbase only)
Crushed stone, open-graded
Asphalt-stabilised Crushed stone Asphalt emulsion,
base (AB) Gravel cutback, or cement
Cement-stabilised Crushed stone Portland cement
base (SB) Gravel Lime
Lime-fly ash
Cement-fly ash
Other Crushed slag
Recycled products
In the models where CQ was applied, a zero value had no effect on the model prediction
while a CQ of 1 reduced the ravelling initiation period to approximately half. In the crack
initiation model, the effect of a CQ value of 1 was most marked at high traffic volumes.
In HDM-4, it is proposed to extend the concept of an indicator for construction defects by

use of parameters that are continuous variables from 0 (indicating no defects to 2 (a
combination of defects). Three indicators are introduced in later chapters:
CDR construction defects indicator for ravelling;

CDD construction defects indicator for delamination;
CDB construction defects indicator for the base, applied in the potholing models.
The assignment of appropriate values to the above indicators is described in the relevant
chapters of this report.
3.2.9 Pavement History
Pavement history refers to pavement ages and previous levels of distress. These are
variables that are used in projecting future condition in HDM-4. While nominally a
pavements age may be considered as the number of years since construction or opening
to traffic, other ages are more important for modelling purposes. When future
deterioration is based solely on a treatments characteristics, as is the case with an AC
overlay, the age of that treatment is important. Some treatments, such as routine
maintenance, have no effect on surfacing age, as it implies no change in structure.
Pavement ages of significance in HDM-4 include preventive treatment age, surfacing age,
and construction age, and these are defined in Annex 2.1.
Similarly, distress levels also have a history component. The quantity of distress before
treatment may remain the same after treatment or be reset to some other lower value. In
reflection cracking calculations, the future amount of cracking is based on the previous
amount of cracks that were present. Default values for these parameters are provided in
Annex 2.1.
3.3 Climatic and Environmental Effects

It is well-recognised that climatic factors have a large effect on pavement performance.

Consider the following examples:
susceptible base, subbase, or subgrade materials that are exposed to freeze-thaw

cycling will deteriorate and cause surface deterioration;
exposure to solar radiation ages bituminous surfaces, contributing to embrittlement,
ravelling, and block cracking;
excessive subsurface moisture in pavement layers contributes to failures through a
number of mechanisms, including loss of support, decrease in material shear
strength, and stripping among others;
both reinforced and non-reinforced concrete pavements may be susceptible to a
number of climatic effects, including pumping, loss of support, faulting (stepping), and
corrosion.
Environmental Coefficient m
Seasonal effects were both directly and indirectly considered in HDM-III. The direct
effects of moisture were considered in the calculation of the SNC, the environmental
coefficient m, that is applied to the roughness model, and the mean monthly precipitation
(MMP) used in both the pothole enlargement calculation and the mean rut depth and rut
depth standard deviation models. Indirectly, the effects of moisture were considered in
the empirical nature of the models and in the calibration coefficients, although the range
of conditions under which these were developed was fairly limited. The recommended
environmental coefficients are shown in Table 3.8; the default coefficient is 0.023. This
value is representative of prevailing conditions at the Brazil test sections.
Table 3.8
Recommended Values of Environmental Coefficient, m, in Roughness
Progression Model for Various Classes of Climate (Paterson, 1987)
Temperature Classification
Moisture Moisture Tropical Subtropical Temperate
classification index nonfreezing nonfreezing freezing
Arid -100 to +61 0.005 0.010 0.025
Semiarid -60 to -21 0.010 0.016 0.035
Subhumid -20 to +19 0.023 0.030 0.050
Humid 20 to 100 0.030 0.040 0.070 +
Source: Paterson (1987)

Notes: 1/
After Thornthwaite (1955).
2/
Definition of these classes is noted to be uncertain in HDM-III: tropical
means warm temperatures 15 to 40 C and small range; subtropical includes
warm, high range (5 to 60 C) and cool, moderate range (-10 to 30 C)
temperatures; temperate freezing includes climates with annual pavement
freezing index (this last class may require either subdivision or reformulation
of the model).
Discussion
Annex 3.1 discusses the effects of moisture on pavement strength. It shows the effect of
the environmental coefficient on the HDM-III roughness progression model, along with the
3-14 Modelling Road Detioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
effect of the rainfall parameter on the pothole number calculation (NPT) and rutting. As
far as potholing is concerned, however, if the modelling includes a policy of annually
patching 100 per cent of the potholes, the term NPT will always be zero at the beginning
of the year and the rainfall parameter will have no effect on either the predicted potholing
or patching.
Rainfall has an effect on the rutting model, but only when there is cracking present. Thus
increased rutting due to rainfall will not be modelled until the area of cracking is greater
than zero.
While environmental effects, and particularly the effects of moisture, were considered in
HDM-III, there are several shortcomings to how they are addressed. First and foremost,
there is no mechanism for incorporating the benefits of improving drainage. There are
many ways to mitigate the harmful effects of moisture on pavements, including:
crossfall restoration;
incorporation of drainage layers;
use of materials that are more resistant to moisture effects;
provision of positive drainage features (such as edge drains, outlets, etc.);
ditch cleaning and widening;
shoulder restoration.
Depending upon local conditions, incorporating any of these features into design or
rehabilitation may improve the performance of the pavement.
Also, the MMP only considers rainfall, and thus does not take into account moisture-
related deterioration that occurs in arid conditions on poorly drained pavements. Even
single rainfalls can contribute to widespread damage if there is no means of removing the
water from the pavement structure.
The rutting and potholing models only begin to consider the effects of moisture once the
pavement is cracked. However, as described in Annex 3.1, moisture entering a pavement
structure through a cracked surface is only one means of ingress. A high water table or
seepage are additional sources of moisture ingress that can contribute to structural
deterioration.
Freezing Index FI
The freezing index (FI) expresses the cumulative effect of the intensity and duration of
subfreezing (< 0 C) air temperatures. The FI is expressed in degree-days and represents
the difference between the highest and lowest points on a curve of cumulative degree-
days versus time for one freezing season. The degree-days for any one day equals the
difference between the average daily air temperature and 0 C and are expressed as
positive when the average daily temperature is below freezing. The magnitude of the FI
is an indication of to what depth in a pavement structure subfreezing temperatures can be
expected. The effect of the FI on pavement performance, particularly cracking, is
discussed in greater detail in Annex 4.1.
Moisture Index MI
The moisture index (MI), also referred to as the Thornthwaite moisture index, is an
indication of the net availability of moisture in a given location. It can be expressed as
the sum of the available moisture such as from rainfall, relative humidity, and snow
less the amount of moisture that is driven off by evapo-transpiration. Positive numbers
indicate that the location experiences an annual net gain in moisture.
Annual Precipitation
The annual precipitation is the average annual precipitation and can be readily obtained
by multiplying the mean monthly precipitation by 12. Where it appears as a variable in
this report it is referred to as ANNPRE.
Climatic Zones
Four climatic zones are identified in the Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP)
models:
Wet-freeze: High potential for the presence of moisture in the pavement structure
throughout the year, in combination with freezing winters in which there is frost
penetration into the subgrade;
Wet-non freeze: High potential for the presence of moisture, but freezing
temperatures are not a problem;
Dry-freeze: Very little available moisture in the pavement structure throughout the
year, but freezing temperatures during winter in which there is frost penetration into
the subgrade;
Dry-non freeze: Very little available moisture and freezing temperatures are not a
problem.
While these are clearly very general classifications, they do serve as an adequate means
of differentiating climatic effects in a network which is comprised of several different
climates. It should be noted from the descriptions of these zones that the MI and FI play
a part in their definition. Areas with a positive MI will generally be classified as in a wet
zone, and areas with a positive FI will generally be classified as in a freeze zone.
3.4 Traffic Characterisation

The characterisation of traffic, specifically the combined effect on a pavement structure of
a stream of different vehicle types, loads, and axle and tyre configurations, is of
importance in every analytical assessment of pavement condition. In theory, the passage
of each tyre on a pavement causes a minute amount of damage. It is the accumulated
damage, caused by vehicles with different loads and axle configurations, tyres and tyre
pressures, imparted to pavements at different loading intervals and in different states of
strength (due to temperature and rainfall), that is seen as pavement deterioration.
However, the incremental damage caused by each load is impossible to observe and for
all practical purposes is just as difficult to model. The most widely used method of
3-16 Modelling Road Detioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
aggregating the effects of a non-homogeneous traffic flow is through application of the

equivalent standard axle (ESA) concept.
The concept of ESAs is based on research carried out at the AASHO Road Test, where
the loading and thus the effects of different vehicle types were isolated and bi-weekly
records of deterioration were recorded. An ESA was defined as the ratio of the number of
loads of a standard axle that caused a given loss in serviceability to the number of axles
of n load that caused the same damage, where n is the axle load of interest. The
standard axle at AASHO was an 80 kN dual-tyre single axle.
The results of this study showed the following relationship:
Ns P
= ( )n (3.11)
Np Ps
where Ns is the number of applications of a standard axle load

Np is the number of applications of the load of interest
P is the load of interest
Ps is the standard load
n is 4 (hence the fourth power relationship)
In reality, not all damage is caused by load alone. Some damage can be attributed to
wear independent of load, such as polishing; other damage can be attributed to the force
of traffic, in which load plays a role, but not as strongly as with other distresses. An
example of this is ravelling or delamination. Still other types of damage, such as
structural cracking, can be directly attributed to load.
At the AASHO Road Test the load equivalency factors were based on pavement structure
(SN) and serviceability; an exponent of 4 is a simplification of the actual values that were
found. Paterson (1987) considered this topic extensively, and showed how the actual
exponent varied by pavement design, season, and distress of interest, among other
factors, but concluded that an exponent of 4 gave the best relationships, especially for
rutting, roughness, crack initiation in asphalt surfaced pavements. An exponent of 2 gave
the best fit for crack initiation for these pavements, and for crack initiation and
progression in ST pavements. Watanatada, et al. (1987) correctly note that given the
much greater inaccuracies usually associated with traffic volume forecasting, the high
variability of pavement behavior, and the variety of approaches possible for deriving a
value from performance data, such an average value [of 4] is highly appropriate....
In the road deterioration models of HDM-4, two measures of traffic are considered, the
flow of all vehicle axles (YAX) and the flow of 80 kN ESAs (YE4). These are expressed in
units of millions per lane per year (millions/lane/year). For crack initiation Paterson (1987)
defines YE4 as NE4(8)/8, where NE4(8) is the cumulative traffic loading until a surfacing
age of 8 years.
Other traffic characteristics that may be of interest include the annual average daily two-
way traffic (AADT), the per cent trucks, and secondary elements such as the per cent
vehicles in each direction and per cent vehicles in each lane of multi-lane facilities. Gross
calculations of YE4 and YAX can be made if the average number of axles per vehicle and
the weighted average of the truck factor is known, but these are not encouraged. The
following formula is provided as the means of calculating the ESA from HDM-4 traffic
data:
n
ESA = (AADTi VDFi ) DD 365/ELANES)10 6 (3.12)
i =1
where n is the number of vehicle classes for which data are available
AADTi is the annual average two-way daily traffic of vehicle class i,
in vehicles per day
VDFi is the vehicle damage factor for vehicle class i
DD is the fraction of vehicles travelling in the direction of interest
(usually assumed to be a 50/50 split)
ELANES is the effective number of lanes, either user-specified or
determined from the following:
1.0, if CW < 4.5
1.5, if 4.5 < CW < 6.0
2.0, if 6.0 < CW < 8.0
3.0, if 8.0 < CW < 11.0
4.0, if 11.0 < CW
CW is carriageway width, in m
The calculation of the ESA generally becomes more accurate the more vehicle classes
there are. While the ESA can be calculated from an average damage factor that
represents all vehicles in the traffic flow, or from the per cent trucks and an average truck
damage factor, such an approach does not give very accurate results and is not useful for
HDM analyses. HDM-4 sets 2 as the minimum number of vehicle classes; the actual
number of vehicle classes used should be representative of the number of classes for
which accurate load data are available.
3.5 Summary
This chapter discusses the characterisation of pavement properties, environment, and
traffic as they relate to modelling. Topics covered include material properties that are
used to represent the load-carrying properties of the pavement, the significant measures
of climate and environment that are used in HDM-4, and the manner in which vehicle
loadings are considered. More detailed information on the effects of the environment on
pavement performance is presented in Annex 3.1; Chapter 12 provides a detailed
procedure for characterising the SNC from FWD data.
Cracking in Bituminous Pavements 4-1
4. CRACKING IN BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTS1
4.1 Introduction
Cracking is perhaps the most important distress in bituminous pavements. The
development of cracking is directly considered in most, if not all, mechanistic-empirical
design procedures and indirectly in most empirical procedures. Thus, it can be said that a
primary bituminous pavement design objective is to minimise cracking. Cracking also
often triggers the application of maintenance treatments, with the amount of cracking
indicating whether crack sealing is appropriate or whether a more costly surface
treatment or resurfacing is needed. Finally, the amount of cracking can be the decisive
factor in determining which among several rehabilitation options is the most appropriate.
Cracking is a distress that is readily identifiable and universally acknowledged as a sign of

pavement deterioration. However, the modelling of cracking is quite complex. There are
many factors that can affect the development of cracks and, once present, the
proliferation of cracking may be affected by the same factors, a host of entirely different
ones, or a combination of both.
There are many different approaches to analysing and understanding bituminous

cracking. Cracks may be defined by their shape (e.g., crocodile, block, linear), by their
primary causative action (e.g., fatigue, reflection, thermal), and by their location on the
pavement (e.g., edge, wheelpath). Cracks are even described by the manner in which
they develop (e.g., top-down or bottom-up) and when in the life of the pavement the
cracks develop. These categorisations are not mutually exclusive and the distinctions
among them blur as more and more cracks appear at the pavement surface. For
example, moisture entering a pavement through thermal (transverse) cracks may weaken
underlying layers and thereby contribute to fatigue cracking. Nonetheless, such
differentiation is important because cracks attributed to different causes will commonly
have different implications for rehabilitation and long-term performance.
Cracking played a key role in the modelling of bituminous pavements in HDM-III, based
on the logic that a cracked pavement is susceptible to moisture ingress which accelerates
pavement deterioration. In the HDM-III models, cracking contributed to the pothole
progression and roughness progression models. Considered together, the direct and
indirect contributions of cracking are significant.
This chapter presents the proposed procedures for modelling cracking in HDM-4. This is
accomplished by an examination of crack measurement (both quantity and quality), a
discussion of cracking mechanisms, and a presentation of how cracking is addressed
both in HDM-III and by others. The chapter ends with a presentation of the revised HDM-
4 models. In the development of revised models, an emphasis has been placed on the
analysis of Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) Long-Term Pavement
Performance (LTPP) data.
4.2 Overview of Cracking
1
The HTRS team would like to acknowledge the major contribution of Dr. Tom Van Dam of Michigan
Technological University to the work in this chapter, including the analysis of the LTPP data.
4-2 Modelling Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects
4.2.1 Introduction
The analysis of cracking in bituminous pavements is extremely complex. While

distresses such as rutting, ravelling, and potholing may have more than one cause, they
generally have a single definition and are fairly easily identified and quantified.
Performance measures such as roughness or serviceability, in contrast, are recognised
amalgamations of different causative agents, in which the magnitudes or even the
presence of individual distresses may not be considered important. The modelling of
cracking lies somewhere between these extremes. There are many different causes of
cracking and many different ways of defining it. The cause which may indicate a
material problem, a susceptibility to heavy loadings, or a combination of the two affects
how the pavement can be expected to perform. The importance of a common
terminology, providing as complete a description as possible for the many different
circumstances in which cracking is evaluated, is readily seen.
This section discusses definitions of bituminous pavement cracking, cracking

mechanisms, and methods of measurement.
4.2.2 Definitions of Cracking
When a fracture in a bituminous pavement appears on the pavement surface, it is

identified as a crack within the context of distress identification and pavement
management. This is an important distinction, as in some cases, by the time cracking
becomes evident, significant damage to the pavement has already occurred. As with
other types of pavement distress, cracking is commonly characterised as having an
initiation phase and a progression phase. An illustration of these two phases is provided
by Paterson (1987) as shown in Figure 4.1.
The initiation phase is considered a discrete event in time defined as the point when a
crack first appears on the pavement surface. The progression phase is characterised by
increasing extent and severity of cracking over time until the entire pavement surface is
affected. In HDM-III, cracking progression was modelled using a sigmoidal function.
Cracking can initiate at the surface and progress downward, begin at the bottom or at an
intermediate depth of the bituminous layer and progress upward, or begin in an
underlying layer and ultimately propagate upward through the entire thickness of the
bituminous surface. The point at which a crack initiates is closely related to its causative
factor(s), which can broadly be categorised as fatigue-related or aging-related. This
categorisation of cracks is an oversimplification, as considerable interaction exists
between the two factors, yet it is useful in identifying different types of cracking as well as
in selecting appropriate treatments that address the cause of the distress.
The specific cause of cracking also influences crack location on the pavement surface.
For example, fatigue cracking would only be expected to occur in areas subjected to
traffic loading. Thus, it is most often found in wheelpaths, where channelised traffic flow
subjects the pavement structure to repeated loading. Cracking that is primarily a result of
bituminous aging will be more evenly distributed over the pavement surface, although in
many instances it will be less prevalent where repeated traffic loadings knead the surface,
thereby mitigating some of the aging effects.
Figure 4.1: Cracking Initiation and Progression (Paterson,

1987).
Cracking is also defined by the pattern in which it appears. Paterson (1987) identified
three broad classifications of cracking patterns: network cracking, line cracking, and
irregular cracking. Implied in this classification is the probable cause of the cracking, with
network cracking primarily related to fatigue and line cracking most often resulting from
temperature/aging phenomena.
Thus, in defining cracking it is impossible to separate the identification of cracking from

the causative relationship. As such, a basic understanding of cracking mechanisms is
required to understand the initiation and progression of cracking, and effectively specify
treatments once cracking occurs.
4.2.3 Cracking Mechanisms
There are many factors which contribute to cracking of a bituminous pavement layer.
Fatigue and aging have already been identified as the major factors, but others also exist.
Additionally, neither fatigue nor aging act alone in the initiation of cracking. Once
cracking occurs, this interaction becomes even more important in the progression phase,
as the ingress of water can significantly weaken non-stabilised pavement layers and
embrittlement resulting from aging may result in an increased rate of crack propagation.
There are many available sources of information on bituminous cracking mechanisms.

Paterson (1987) provides an excellent description of cracking mechanisms and
interactions. Another excellent description of this process is found in the NCHRP 1-26
study, which compiled a vast amount of information on bituminous pavement mechanistic
distress models including cracking mechanisms (Thompson, et al., 1990; Thompson, et
al., 1992). A more detailed discussion is also provided in Annex 4.1 of this report.
4.2.4 Cracking Measurement
Highway engineers have long recognised the importance of pavement cracking and
routinely collect cracking data in some form. The procedures used for measuring and
recording cracking data have been frequently modified, reflecting the improved
understanding of cracking mechanisms and the individual data needs of each agency. As
a result, there are numerous crack measurement procedures used world-wide and no
accepted standard for measuring and reporting cracking data. The need to develop a
unified approach for the measurement and reporting of cracking is becoming increasingly
important as attempts are made to standardise automated data collection equipment and
predictive models for world-wide use.
Paterson (1994) defines the following five attributes used to characterise cracking:
Extent: The area of the pavement covered by cracking, defined by the perimeter
bounding all of the area covered by a set of cracks. Expressed in units of either area
or as a percentage of the total pavement area;
Severity: A measure of the crack width. It is either defined as the average width of
the crack (e.g., mm) or as a class of crack (e.g., high/low or wide/narrow);
Intensity: The length of cracks per unit area (e.g., m/m2). Sometimes expressed as
crack spacing;
Pattern: This identifies the crack type through the orientation and interconnectedness
of the cracks. Typical cracking patterns include crocodile, block and transverse;
Location: This defines the part of the pavement which is cracked. It includes such
identifiers as wheelpath, between wheelpath, edge, and random.
The most common cracking attributes considered are type, extent, and severity. These
three attributes are found in many standardised distress identification procedures,
including the World Banks HDM model (Paterson, 1987), the pavement condition index
(PCI) procedure (Shahin, et al., 1977), and the SHRP LTPP Distress Identification Manual
(SHRP, 1993). Paterson (1994) makes a strong argument for a universal cracking
indicator, a single cracking numeric that considers cracking extent, intensity, and severity
(through the mean crack width) with the inclusion of modifiers to identify type and
location.
4.2.5 AASHO/World Bank Method
One early method employed to standardise crack measurements was used at the AASHO
road test conducted near Ottawa, Illinois from 1958-1960 (HRB, 1962). This classification
was later used by the Texas DOT as part of their Flexible Pavement Design System
(Lytton, et al., 1982) and modified for use in the Brazil-UNDP road cost study (Queiroz,
1981). Paterson (1987) used it as the basis of the formulation of the HDM-III cracking
models. This method identifies cracking by type, severity (class), and extent (area) as
summarised in Table 4.1 (Paterson, 1987):
Table 4.1
Crack Classification Scheme Used in HDM-III
Crack Qualifier Description

Severity Class 1: cracks 1 mm wide
Class 2: cracks 1 to 3 mm wide
Class 3: cracks > 3 mm wide without spalling
Class 4: spalled cracks
2
Area The sum of rectangular cracked areas, in m , reported as a percentage of the total
section surface area. Linear crack lengths were converted to area by multiplying by a
standard width of 0.5 m.
Type The following crack types were identified: crocodile, irregular, block, transverse,
longitudinal
The World Bank (Watanatada, et al., 1987) indexed cracking to normalise the sum of the
various AASHO Class cracks, weighting wider cracks more heavily to reflect their greater
ability to allow for water ingress into the pavement structure. Equation 4.1 defines the
cracking index.
n
ACX = ( ACRi ) / i (4.1)
i =1
where ACX is indexed cracking area, in per cent total surface area
ACRi is total area of i width cracking
i is crack width designator (i.e., Class 1, Class 2, etc.)
To reduce the number of basic cracking numerics needed to two, Paterson (1987)
estimated ACX using the Brazil-UNDP data as shown in Equation 4.2.
ACX = 0.62 ACRA + 0.39 ACRW (4.2)
where ACRA is total area of all cracking, in per cent of the total
carriageway area.
ACRW is total area of wide cracking (Class 3 and 4), in per cent of
the total carriageway area.
It is worth noting that this system was developed and then modified for application in
research studies. This has led to some practical problems in utilisation, most notably that
it is difficult to observe Class 1 cracks and to easily differentiate between cracks of
different severities. It is also important to realise that aging had little effect on the
pavements at the AASHO road test, which were only observed for 2 years as part of that
experiment. As a result, the cracking investigated was primarily load related (crocodile)
with little thermally induced line cracking present. The lack of line cracking is consistent
with the Brazil-UNDP data, but is not typical of many pavements, particularly those
located in temperate or colder climates.
This approach to crack measurement and combination has been most useful in network-
level analyses, where pavement performance data are used to assess and project
pavement condition with respect to future maintenance and budgeting needs.
4.2.6 SHRP-LTPP Method
As part of the SHRP LTPP program, a unified approach to crack identification was
developed (SHRP, 1993). As with the AASHO scheme, the LTPP crack identification
methodology was primarily formulated for experimental use, yet the researchers explicitly
state that it also provides a common language for describing cracks in all applications. It
also has international relevance as in addition to the United States 15 other countries are
participating in this research effort.
The SHRP LTPP cracking data collection scheme is based on three crack attributes: type,
severity (low, moderate, or high), and extent (linear or area) as summarised in Table 4.2
(SHRP, 1993). The guidelines presented in the identification manual are quite detailed,
providing drawings and pictures of typical cracking types and severities. The manual also
provides examples of survey forms to be used in the inspection process. No attempt is
made to combine or aggregate cracking into a single index. It is stated by the authors
that this system will improve inter- and intra-agency communication and lead to more
uniform evaluations of pavement performance. The level of detail in the cracking data
provided in the SHRP LTPP method is such that it lends itself to project-level analyses of
pavement performance or specific research studies. It may be considered too rigorous
for a network-level data collection effort, but with increased dependence on automated
data collection and analysis routines, it may prove more useful in this application in the
future.
Table 4.2
Crack Classification Scheme Used by SHRP-LTPP
Crack Qualifier Description

Severity Primarily dependent upon crack width, although crack spacing influences the severity
level assigned to fatigue cracking, and the amount of breakup controls severity level for
edge cracking. For block, longitudinal, and transverse cracking, the following applies:
Low: Cracks with mean width < 6 mm or sealed cracks with sealant
material in good condition.
Moderate: Cracks with mean width > 6 mm and < 19 mm; or any crack with a
mean width < 19 mm and adjacent low severity random cracking.
High: Cracks with a mean width > 19 mm; or any crack with a mean width
< 19 mm and adjacent moderate to high severity random cracking.
Extent Extent can be either linear or areal, depending on the type of cracking. Fatigue and
block cracking are recorded in meters squared of affected area while edge, longitudinal,
and transverse cracking are recorded in lineal meters.
Type Fatigue, block, edge, wheel path longitudinal, non-wheel path longitudinal, transverse
reflection, longitudinal reflection, transverse
4.2.7 Universal Cracking Indicator
Paterson (1994) proposed the use of a single, universal cracking indicator (CI) to unify the
reporting of cracking world-wide. Patersons CI is a dimensionless parameter that is the
product of the cracked surface area, intensity, and width. The formulation is illustrated in
Equation 4.3.
CI = extent intensity crack width (4.3)
where CI is the cracking indicator (dimensionless)

extent is the area of cracked pavement defined within a sample

area, which may be the perimeter bounding a set of cracks,
expressed as a percentage of total pavement area
intensity is total length of cracks within the area defining the extent
(expressed in m/m2)
crack width is mean width of crack opening at the surface of a set of
cracks (expressed in mm)
Use of the overall CI would be more applicable at the network level and for economic
analyses. Paterson discusses the use of modifiers to the numeric which note crack type
and location, allowing the cracking data to be presented in a manner of interest to
researchers and for project-level studies. While this type of aggregation has not yet been
implemented, its potential to serve as an objective, repeatable measure may make it
attractive in the future, especially as the use of automated crack survey equipment
becomes more widespread and the need to standardise becomes stronger.
Some potential difficulties in implementing the CI are: 1) that it requires a measure of

mean width for all cracking, and 2) that it requires the total length of cracks within an
affected area. The first limitation is encountered when it is realised that the most
commonly used crack measuring methods do not record the actual crack width, but
simply assign it to a class or level (HRB, 1962; Shahin, et al., 1977; SHRP, 1993). In
these methods, it is possible to judge the range in the size of the crack, but not the width
of the crack itself. Further, from a practical sense, crack width varies considerably over
the length of a crack. A longitudinal crack may be hairline at the crack tips, but have a
width in excess of 19 mm at its maximum. To classify a crack as low, moderate, or high
severity is difficult enough, but to then assign a specific mean crack width in an efficient
manner may be nearly impossible using current techniques.
The second potential limitation is that in many crack measuring systems (HRB, 1962;
Shahin, et al., 1977; SHRP, 1993), the extent of certain types of cracks are recorded in
areal, not linear, dimensions. Specifically, this is true in the measure of fatigue and block
cracking. To calculate CI, it would be necessary to measure the length of the individual
cracks making up the crocodile pattern. This task would be labor intensive but may be
practical in the future, using automated data collection and crack analysis routines.
4.3 Modelling Cracking in HDM-III

4.3.1 Data Collection for HDM-III Models
The data from which the HDM-III models were developed were collected over the period
1977 to 1982 during the Brazil-UNDP study. The procedure used to collect cracking data
was described previously. Clearly, model development based on this scheme has the
potential to be very complicated, with various models developed for the different severities
and types. In fact, the data collection proved impractical as far as Class 1 cracking was
concerned due to the problems in seeing these cracks under some conditions. However,
this was not judged to be an important shortcoming as cracks this narrow (1 mm or less)
were not expected to affect performance.
For model development, cracking was separated into narrow cracks (Class 2) and wide
cracks (Class 4). This distinction is maintained in some of the predictive models,
although other models use indexed cracking index (CRX) as defined by Equation 4.1. An
empirical estimate of CRX, shown in Equation 4.2, was developed by Paterson (1987)
based on Class 2 and Class 4 cracking. This greatly simplifies the complexity of cracking
measurement and it is this cracking index that is used in the HDM-III incremental
roughness calculation.
4.3.2 Modelling Cracking
As with other distresses in HDM-III, cracking was modelled as having two distinct phases:
the time to the development of the distress (the initiation phase) and the progression
phase. This two phase approach offers useful information for pavement management
purposes, particularly in the situation where the initiation of one distress contributes to
initiation or progression of others. Modelling distresses in two distinct phases also has
the advantage that there are essentially two opportunities to calibrate the model. Once
cracking has initiated one proceeds directly to the progression model, in effect resetting
the prediction to zero rather than compounding any errors.
The HDM-III cracking models were developed from data for the pavement types shown in
Table 4.3. Greater detail is provided on the specific characteristics of those pavements
by Paterson (1987).
Table 4.3
Selected Characteristics of Sections Used in Cracking Model Development
Pavement Type Number Range of Range of Total Cumulative Traffic

of Surfacing Surfacing Traffic Loading, Volume,
Sections Age, years Thickness, mm MESA veh/day
AC on granular base 30 1.6 - 2.0 20 - 103 0.0001 - 4.7 70 - 4800
Chip seal (DBST) on 46 2.7 - 21.0 20 - 50 0.005 - 5.16 100 - 2300
granular base
Bituminous surface 11 1.6 - 19.4 10 - 40 0.09 - 1.94 300 - 2600
on cemented base
Bituminous overlay 23 0.2 - 15.0 37 - 187 0.03 - 7.14 360 - 6000
on granular base
Reseal (chip) on 7 0 - 4.0 43 - 75 0.016 - 0.75 450 - 4500
granular base
Reseal (slurry) 32 0 - 13.2 20 - 236 0.001 - 1.16 320 - 4500
It is interesting to note that crocodile cracking was the primary type of cracking observed
on the Brazil sections. This type of cracking is a common distress in relatively thin
pavement structures subjected to heavy loadings. Longitudinal and transverse cracking
were rarely observed in the Brazil sections, with the exception of the cemented base
sections; when these cracks were present they were added to the area of cracking by
multiplying their length by a standard width of 0.5 m. Block cracking, indicative of aging,
was also observed. However, in its early stages, block cracking is indistinguishable from
crocodile cracking, so classifications occasionally changed from one survey to the next as
the nature of the cracking became apparent.
4.3.3 Cracking Initiation
As noted above, bituminous cracking in HDM-III is modelled in two phases, crack initiation
and crack progression. Crack initiation is said to occur when 0.5 per cent of the surface
area is cracked. The cracking initiation prediction has a probabilistic form in which the
predicted value represents an average and the actual values are distributed about the
mean.
Paterson noted that the time to crack initiation was largely affected by aging, traffic
loading, and pavement stiffness. The explanatory variables that emerged from the
analysis of the cracking data were traffic (YE4) and modified structural number (SNC).
For surface treatments constructed over cracked surfaces, the time to crack initiation was
very short and was modelled as a function of thickness or given as a constant. Other
explanatory factors that were found to be significant included surface thickness, per cent
binder, and binder film thickness. Models were developed based on these other
predictive variables; however, the predictive models based on SNC and YE4 were the
ones used in HDM-III. They not only explained the performance of the Brazil sections
better, they were the easiest to use in a broad range of applications.
Strictly speaking, the cracking initiation models were further modified by two factors, a
user-specified crack initiation factor, Kci (for which the default value was 1) and the
occurrence distribution factor, Fc, which was used to break a section into three
subsections categorised as weak, medium, and strong (Watanatada, et al., 1987). The
default in HDM-III was for sections of medium distress, represented by a Fc of
approximately 1.0. The crack initiation models further provided the ability to extend the
initiation time by taking into consideration the application of appropriate maintenance.
This was done with the crack retardation time factor, CRT. Its default value was zero.
The application of these additional factors in the cracking models follows the form that is
shown in Equation 4.4.
I CX =Kci (Fc CRK M O DL + CRT) (4.4)
where ICX is the time to crack initiation, years

CRKMODL is the appropriate cracking initiation model
Kci is the crack initiation factor, default = 1.0
Fc is the occurrence distribution factor, default = 1.0
CRT is the crack retardation factor, default = 0
The model used in HDM-III for original AC on GB is shown in Equation 4.5:
ICX = 4.21 exp (0.14 SNC 17.1 YE4 / SNC 2 ) (4.5)
The model for predicting the initiation of wide cracking, TYCRW, was based on the
initiation of narrow cracking and had the following form:
TYCRW = a0 + a1 I CX (4.6)
The coefficients a0 and a1 were defined for the different surfacing types in Table 5.8 of
Paterson (1987).
4.3.4 Cracking Progression
The data on cracking progression were more limited than the cracking initiation data due
to restrictions that were placed on the inclusion of the cracked sections used for the
analysis (three or more observations were required and they needed to have per cent
area cracked in the range of 5 to 95). Both time-based and traffic-based models were
developed. Although the traffic model was generally superior it was not applicable for all
surface types and it was the time-based models that were incorporated into HDM-III. This
approach is more generally appropriate where specific performance data that would
support a different mode of cracking progression is not available.
After considering a number of different forms of the model, it was decided to model the
progression of cracking as a sigmoidal (s-shaped) function (Paterson, 1987):
[ ]
1/ a1
ACX = (1 z) 50 + z z a0 a1 TCI + z 0.5 a1 + (1 z)
a1
(4.7)
where ACX is the area of cracking at time t

z is 1, if TCI t50, otherwise z = -1
a0 and a1 are defined in Table 4.4
TCI is the time since crack initiation, in years, for the time-based
models and the increment of traffic loadings, in MESA, for
traffic-based models.
t50 is (50a1 - 0.5a1)/(a0 a1)
Table 4.4 (Paterson, 1987) provides values for a0 and a1, as well as model statistics.
Calibration Factors for Cracking Progression
The model presented by Watanatada, et al. (1987) also incorporated calibration factors.
These include Kcp, which was a user-specified deterioration factor for cracking
progression (default of 1.0), and CRP, which was the retardation of cracking progression
due to preventive treatment (defined as 1 - 0.12 CRT). These influenced the incremental
area of cracking during the specified time period.
4.3.5 Validation of the HDM-III Cracking Model
Paterson assessed the validity of the models using published fatigue cracking data and
data from field studies in Arizona, Texas, Illinois, England, Kenya, and Tunisia. Results
predicted by the HDM-III cracking models were compared with results predicted from
several design methods.
The models were found to be generally applicable for a wide range of conditions, with the
exception of freezing climates and (possibly) under accelerated trafficking (Paterson,
1987). It was recommended that both the initiation and progression models be calibrated
for each use to account for differences in materials and climates.
Table 4.4
Model estimates for time-base models for predicting
cracking progression (after Paterson, 1987).
1
Model Estimates Period (years) between 0.5%
Cracking class Model Statistics cracking and areas of
2
and surfacing a0 a1 CV (%) r 30% 95%
All Cracking
Asphalt Concrete 1.84 0.45 (9.0) 54 0.314 4.7 12.2
Surface Treatment 1.76 0.32 (10.) 58 0.400 3.9 9.6
Cemented Base 2.13 0.36 (6.6) 48 0.304 3.4 8.6
Asphalt Overlays 1.07 0.28 (8.8) 78 0.408 509 14.4
Reseals and Slurry Seals 2.41 0.34 (11.) 38 0.421 209 5.0
Wide Cracking
Asphalt Concrete 2.94 0.56 (4.2) 53 0.164 3.7 10.0
Surface Treatment 2.50 0.25 (5.2) 48 0.342 2.4 5.8
Cemented Base 3.67 0.38 (5.0) 35 0.321 2.0 5.2
Asphalt Overlays 2.58 0.45 (4.9) 52 0.380 3.3 8.8
Reseals and Slurry Seals 3.4 0.35 (4.0) 37 0.160 2.1 5.3
Source: after Paterson (1987)

Notes: 1/ ( ) is the t-statistic of the a0 estimate.
2/ The 15th and 85th percentile confidence intervals are about 0.6 and 1.6 times the predicted value.
4.3.6 Shortcomings of Cracking Modelling
While the cracking models have been used in many HDM applications around the world,
an examination of their development and their use highlight several drawbacks. These
include limitations associated with the performance of the sections from which the
models are developed and limitations associated with the measurement/reporting of
cracking. These are discussed below.
Cracking Types in the Database
One potential shortcoming of the Brazil cracking models is that they were developed from
a database that contained a severely limited number of cracking types. As noted earlier,
crocodile or fatigue cracking was the primary cracking distress on the pavements in the
Brazil study. Paterson states, the models apply to crocodile cracking only, which is the
traffic-associated cracking having the most important economic consequences in
nonfreezing climates. (Paterson, 1987, p. 383)
Crocodile cracking is a load-related distress that develops when the strains in a pavement
layer are greater than its strength. This can occur as a result of under-constructed
layer(s) or overburdened loads. An examination of the range of surfacing thicknesses in
Table 4.3 suggests that these designs may have been particularly susceptible to fatigue
cracking. While these designs may be typical of those found in many parts of the world, it
is also true that pavements can be built which will rarely exhibit this type of deterioration.
For example, many of the bituminous pavements in South Africa use a semi-gap graded
asphalt which is very resistant to fatigue cracking (Kannemeyer and Visser, 1994).
Similarly, most high volume bituminous pavements in North America are designed to be
thick enough to resist failure in fatigue. This was observed by Paterson when the crack
models were validated using deterioration data from pavements located in the States of
Illinois and Texas (Paterson, 1987). Cracking models that are developed from pavements
that exhibit fatigue cracking will not necessarily be appropriate as predictors of cracking in
pavements in which a different type of crack or a range of crack types predominates.
Environments in the Database
Similarly, the range of environments in which the Brazil sections are found is rather
limited. The overall climate is classified as wet non-freeze, with a range in annual
average rainfall between 1,200 and 2,000 mm/year. Thermal cracks and transverse
cracks, which typically develop when there are large variations in temperature, are a
typical distress of bituminous pavements located in non-tropical climates. HDM users in
such areas could reasonably expect that the existing HDM models would be poor
predictors of cracking on their pavements.
Method of Crack Measurement
As noted earlier, the AASHO approach to crack classification is not ideally suited to
evaluation or modelling applications in which there are many different kinds of cracks. At
the modelling level, an approach such as that used by SHRP is more typical, in which
crack predictions are divided into temperature-related cracks and load- (fatigue) related
cracks. While other crack types are recorded for pavement management purposes, they
are not commonly modelled. This is because they are a result of construction or mix
design problems that are best addressed at their root cause.
Another problem with the use of the current HDM cracking models is that the narrow and
wide cracking distinctions are difficult to apply. Narrow cracks are difficult to observe
under some conditions, and especially in large-scale and automated surveys. Even the
distinction between the various classes is difficult to identify. The need to distinguish
between 1 mm and 3 mm wide cracks makes the use of this system problematic.
Effect of Section Length
Because the crack initiation models are probabilistically based, they are sensitive to the
length of the experimental pavement sections used in their development. Patersons use
of the Brazil-UNDP data, which was collected on 320-m long pavement sections, means
that the expected time to first crack is only valid for this length of section. If the section of
interest were longer and all other factors were held constant, cracking initiation would be
expected to occur sooner. Conversely, shorter sections would be expected to crack at a
later time than that predicted by Patersons models. A method to address this limitation is
described in Annex 4.2 and HDM-4 users are urged to consider the implications of section
length in their data collection efforts.
The Treatment of Traffic
Although traffic is time dependent as reflected in growth rates that vary from section to
section, Paterson treated it as a constant in the formulation of his cracking initiation
models. Eight years was chosen as broadly representative of the surfacing age at
cracking initiation as reflected in his definition of YE4 shown in Equation 4.8 (Paterson,
1987).
YE4 =NE4(8)/8 (4.8)
where YE4 is the indicative annual traffic loading, in millions of ESA4 per
lane per year
NE4 is the cumulative traffic loading until a surfacing age of 8
years, in millions of ESA4 per lane.
Chesher (1995) believes that this may impact the shape parameter in the model,
potentially influencing the predicted outcome of the innate failure mechanism through time
dependence in the explanatory variable. This point requires further investigation.
Consideration of Reflection Cracking
HDM-III did not satisfactorily address reflection cracking, as only time to initiation was
reduced and progression was not affected. Failure to consider factors that affect the
progression of reflection cracking would have a tendency to act as a disincentive to
implementing measures that retard the onset of reflection cracks.
4.3.7 Experience Using the HDM-III Cracking Model
Typically when HDM models are used, a process of calibration should be conducted in
which initiation and progression coefficients for the pavement deterioration models are
selected so that the predicted responses more accurately conform to local experiences.
Experience with HDM-III cracking models in 24 countries (including data from 27 reports)
was examined and is summarised in Table 4.5 for those cases where non-default values
were used. This consisted of 13 countries.
In cases where calibration was attempted, the coefficients for cracking initiation ranged
from 0.33 on hot-mix surfaces in Chile to 2.5 in Jordan. The range of cracking
progression coefficients was from 0.1 in South Africa to 2.0 in high rainfall areas of
Eastern India. Note that a higher crack initiation coefficient indicates that the pavement
will take longer to begin cracking, while a higher progression coefficient means that the
pavement is cracking at a faster rate.
Table 4.5
Summary of Experience Using HDM-III Cracking Models
Country Cracking Cracking Primary Pavement Type Other Information

Kci Kcp
Bangladesh 0.5 2.0 ST on water bound Typical cracks are due to
macadam, HBB, brick soling, aging and overheating during
and SG construction.
Botswana 0.67 Low volume surface dressed
0.8 1.2 roads
Brazil 1.0 1.0
Chile 0.33 1.20 Hot-mix surface
0.44 0.76 Cold-mix surfaces
Guinea-Bissau 1.0 1.0 Adopted HDM-III defaults
Hungary 0.9 1.2 Primarily asphalt concrete Based on Croatian
and asphalt macadam experience
India (CES) 1.0 1.25 Resealed and overlaid < 600 mm/year rainfall
1.50 pavements with ST and AM 600 mm < rainfall < 1600 mm
2.0 surfaces in eastern India > 1600 mm/year rainfall
(JB&Partners) 1.0 1.5 Southern India medium rainfall
(RITES) 1.5 1.5
(NDLI) 1.0 1.0 ST and AM pavements medium rainfall
Indonesia 3 years 3 years Penetration Macadam
Jordan 2.5 1.0 126 mm AC (existing 12 years old
0.5 1.0 pavement)
New Pavement
Lesotho 0.8 0.7
Malaysia 0.7 to 0.8 1.2 to 1.4
Morocco 1.0 1.0
Mozambique 1.0 1.0 ST on SB
Nepal 1.0 1.0
Nigeria 1.0 1.0 Federal Trunk Roads
Peru 1.0 1.0 13 % ST; rest are cold mix or Possibly heavy rainfall
AC
South Africa 1.0 to 1.5 0.1 to 0.3 Original surfacings
0.4 to 0.8 0.3 to 0.7 Overlays and reseals

Spain 1.0 1.0 Four AC and one ST
Sri Lanka 0.1 0.15 Hand-built with large stones
followed by smaller stones
followed with binder and
blinded with sand.
Tanzania 0.5 to 0.5 to 1.65 ST on SB 29 mm DBST has SNC of
1.30 3.0; 14 mm SST has SNC of
2.3 or 2.5
Thailand 1.0 1.0 Used the time based model
for cracking progression
Transvaal 0.8 0.1
Tunisia 1.0 1.0

4.4 Modelling Cracking Initiation Using LTPP Data

4.4.1 Introduction
The Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) program was initiated in 1987. Its
objectives are as follows (Rowshan and Harris, 1993):
evaluate existing design methods;

develop improved design methods and strategies for the rehabilitation of existing
pavements;
develop improved design equations for new and reconstructed pavements;
determine the effects on pavement distress and performance of loading, environment,
material properties and variability, construction quality, and maintenance levels;
determine the effects of specific design features on pavement performance;
establish a national long-term pavement data base to support SHRP objectives and
future needs.
LTPP is currently in the eighth year of its 20-year life, and considerable data have been
collected on pavement construction, maintenance, and rehabilitation. The data are stored
in the LTPP Information Management System (IMS), which maintains information on 723
pavement sections contained in the General Pavement Studies data base. The types of
data available for each section include design and construction inventory, environmental
factors, material testing, pavement monitoring (e.g., deflection, distress, skid, and so on),
traffic, maintenance, and rehabilitation activities. As of July 1, 1995, data from only the
United States and Canada were included in the LTPP IMS, but 15 countries, representing
all continents have participated to some degree in the LTPP study. Data from
international participants will be available in the LTPP IMS sometime in the future.
In this study, data obtained from the LTPP IMS (as of July 1, 1995) were used to try to
extend the cracking initiation models developed by Paterson for HDM-III (Paterson, 1987)
over a wider range of conditions. As previously noted, those models were developed
from a data base that was limited in the types of pavements and climates it represented,
and it was hoped that the LTPP data base, with its broad range of pavement types and
environmental regions, could be used to both validate and expand upon the usefulness of
those models. The following sections describe the LTPP IMS, how a data set was
obtained, how the data set was analysed, and the results of the analysis.
4.4.2 LTPP Data Description
The LTPP IMS is divided into two programs, the General Pavement Studies (GPS) and
the Specific Pavement Studies (SPS). The GPS program includes pavement sections
that were in-service at the time of selection, either in their original design phase or their
first overlay phase. The SPS program includes pavement sections specifically selected to
investigate and quantify the effects of pavement deterioration and performance factors.
For this study, only sections in the GPS program were evaluated.
The GPS program is divided into 10 separate experiments that include bituminous and
concrete pavements and various overlay configurations. The data from the two
bituminous pavement experiments, designated as GPS-1 and GPS-2, were used in this
study to model crack initiation in original construction. GPS-1 contains data on

conventional bituminous pavements which consist of a bituminous surface on a granular
base. GPS-2 includes bituminous sections constructed with a bound base (bituminous- or
cement-based), including full-depth bituminous pavements and those built on lean
concrete or cement aggregate mixtures.
The LTPP IMS used in this study was obtained at the beginning of July 1995. This is
important in that the data base is continually updated as more information becomes
available. It is also worth noting that because of the stringent data verification procedures
used by LTPP, there is a considerable delay between the date data are collected and
their appearance in the data base. For example, the most recent traffic information in the
July 1995 data set was from 1991.
The LTPP IMS exists as a series of tables residing under eight general classifications as
listed below:
General Information;
Environmental;
Inventory;
Maintenance;
Monitoring;
Rehabilitation;
Traffic;
Testing (Materials).
A total of 171 individual tables are listed in the Data Users Guide (Rowshan and Harris,
1993), but the actual number of tables available varies slightly. Because the size of the
LTPP IMS may pose a significant deterrent to its use, LTPP has developed a computer
program called the LTPP Data Sampler and Data Request Program to assist in the order
process (Mohseni, 1995). The use of this program substantially reduces the effort
required to obtain the desired elements of the LTPP IMS through generation of an order
form based on a series of queries.
The LTPP data are typically provided as a group of tables in ASCII format. A three-
variable combination uniquely identifies each section and is used to relate the data in the
various tables. In this project, four relational data bases were established to store the
LTPP data, make required transformations, and conduct queries as required. In total,
data from 392 sections were obtained from the LTPP IMS GPS-1 and GPS-2
experiments. The process that was followed to ready the data for analysis is described in
Annex 4.3.
4.4.3 Statistical Methodology1
The statistical analysis of the LTPP data was predominately based on the probabilistic
failure-time models described in detail by Paterson (1987) in Appendix B of his report.
This methodology is not reproduced here, except where changes in the approach have
been implemented in the analysis of the LTPP data. In Patersons work, an analysis
routine written under SAS was used. Since that time, a standard SAS procedure
(LIFEREG) has been developed that performs a similar analysis. This procedure was
employed in the current work to develop probabilistic crack initiation models based on the
LTPP data.
Consistent with Patersons approach, this study assumed that the failure time model
followed a Weibull distribution. Because the analysis proceeds in the context of a
complete specification of the probability distribution of the time to failure (i.e., first crack) it
was possible to include not only sections where actual cracking was observed during an
inspection, but also sections that had cracked prior to the first inspection, between
inspections, or had yet to crack at the last inspection. In instances where cracking
initiation is not actually observed, the data is considered to be censored. Sections that
cracked prior to the first inspection are considered left censored and those that had yet to
crack at the last inspection are considered right censored. One departure in the current
analysis was the use of interval censoring, in which sections that cracked between
inspections were censored as well. Interval censoring was not used by Paterson.
Instead, the inspection date at which cracking was first observed was assumed to be the
date of crack initiation. This had little impact on Patersons work as the time span
between inspections in the Brazil-UNDP study was relatively short. But interval censoring
was required with the LTPP data as more than a year may have passed between
inspections.
Other departures from Patersons analysis and a more detailed description of the analysis
itself are presented in Annex 4.2.
4.4.4 LTPP Models
Seven cracking initiation models were fitted to the LTPP data using the SAS PROC
LIFEREG routine, using an analysis program written by Prof. Andrew Chesher of the
University of Bristol. Each model included the variables listed below in a linear function
representing variables as described previously.
Model 1: SNC and YE4/(SNC)2;

Model 2: YE4/(SNC)2;
Model 3: HS, HS2, SNC, and YE40.5;
Model 4: YE4 and SNC;
Model 5: YE4, SNC, and HS;
Model 6: YE4, SNC, HS, and HS/HP
Model 7: HS, HS2, SNC, YE40.5, and HS/HP
1
This section was prepared in collaboration with Dr. Andrew D. Chesher, Professor of Econometrics at the
University of Bristol, UK, who provided the theoretical framework and programming of the model.
Recall that SNC is the modified structural number, YE4 is defined as the indicative annual
traffic loading (in millions of ESA/lane), HS is the thickness of the bituminous layers (in
mm), and HS/HP is the ratio of bituminous surfacing thickness to total pavement
thickness.
Models 1, 2, and 3 are configured identically to Patersons (1987) models presented in

equations 5.21, 5.22, and 5.23 in his report. The remaining four models were examined
to consider other potential predictors of cracking initiation. Climatic factors were
considered through a separate analysis that included the addition to each model of the
freezing index (FI) and moisture index (MI).
As discussed previously, each model was fit to various configurations of pavement

structure and surface type. Only three classifications of cracking type are considered in
the following discussion: all combined cracking, climate/aging related cracking, and
fatigue related cracking. As the data analysed related only to original construction,
reflection cracking was not relevant. Model significance, as reflected by the chi-squared
term for each parameter estimate, was set initially at 95 per cent. Because of lack of fit at
this level of significance, model fits for 90 per cent significance are also presented as
noted. Additional model statistics described by Paterson (1987), including the average
log likelihood (ALL), the semi-interquartile factor (SIQF), the average confidence interval
(CI), and , a parameter estimating the stochastic variation of failure times for nominally
identical pavements, are provided directly beneath each model.
Models for Combined Cracking
The cracking initiation analysis was conducted using the combined cracking data (all
types of cracking) for the 7 models and 16 pavement configurations, with and without
climatic effects. Of the total 224 combinations (7 x 16 x 2), only 5 were found to have
significance in all model parameters. Of those 5, none produced reasonable estimates
of pavement life, as indicated by the 95 per cent confidence interval. Part of the problem
was that the majority of the sections in the LTPP data base were left censored, meaning
that cracking had already occurred prior to the first inspection.
Nonetheless, it must be concluded that the model forms proposed by Paterson do not
adequately explain all cracking mechanisms, especially those that affect bituminous
pavements in temperate or cold regions, which typified the sections in the LTPP data
base. This is not surprising, as his models were developed almost exclusively for fatigue
cracking and from data obtained in warmer climates, whereas much of the cracking
recorded in the LTPP IMS is not fatigue related, but instead more closely related to aging
and climatic effects. The previous discussion on aging/climatic cracking shows very
clearly that most types of linear cracking are not related to traffic; instead mixture
characteristics and climatic factors play a predominant role.
Models for Aging/Temperature Cracking
Another cracking initiation analysis was conducted, similar to that described above, using
only cracking data considered to be aging/temperature related. As before, a total of 224
model fits were analysed. The results of the analysis found that when climatic factors are
not considered, only a single model had significance in all independent variables. This
model, presented in Equation 4.9, is based on conventional bituminous pavements with a
surface thickness less than 100 mm. Recall that ICX is the expected (mean) age in years
of the surfacing at cracking initiation.
Bituminous Thickness 100 mm or Less, Bituminous Concrete Surface (n = 16)
I CX = 246.07 exp (3.5506 YE4 1.1434 SNC + 0.0360 HS) (4.9)
Significance Based on Chi Squared Model Statistics

Intercept YE4 SNC HS ALL SIQF CI
99.2% 98.5% 96.8% 99.9% -0.99812 0.2989 10.58 0.3784
The model statistics are shown directly beneath Equation 4.9. The chi squared estimates
are indicative of the predictive ability of each estimate. In all cases, greater than 95 per
cent significance was obtained. The average log likelihood (ALL), semi-interquartile
factor (SIQF), average confidence interval (CI), and scaling parameter () are all based
on definitions provided by Paterson (1987). The 95 per cent confidence interval is
relatively wide, indicating that although the variables are significant, the predictive ability
of the model is not very good. Also, the scaling parameter is very low.
The model is based on data from only 16 sections, which may explain some of the lack of
predictability. Also, only three sections were interval censored (cracking initiation
observed during the survey period); nine were left censored (cracking initiation occurred
prior to the start of the surveys) and four were right censored (cracking initiation has not
occurred). As a result, this model cannot be considered to be a reliable predictor of
aging/temperature cracking initiation.
All other models in which all the independent variables were significant for estimated age
at aging/temperature crack initiation included the freezing index (FI) and moisture index
(MI). But the scaling factor was so low as to call into question the validity of any of these
models. Attempts to use these analysis techniques to model aging/temperature crack
initiation for other independent variables met with no success. From this analysis of LTPP
IMS data, it is apparent that that climatic factors play a role in cracking initiation, but that
the models put forward by Paterson do not adequately capture the explanatory variables
even when FI and MI are included.
Models for Fatigue Cracking
The analysis for fatigue cracking initiation was conducted similarly to that presented for all
combined cracking and aging/temperature cracking. In total, 224 model fits were
conducted using the 7 models and 16 pavement configurations with and without climatic
considerations. The results of this analysis are more promising than those observed for
all cracking and temperature cracking, reflecting the fatigue related basis of the model
forms derived by Paterson (1987). Equations 4.10 and 4.11 show the model forms; the
model constants and the model statistics are provided in Table 4.6 and Table 4.7.
ICX = a0 exp( a1 YE4 + a2 SNC) (4.10)

YE4
ICX = a3 exp ( a4 ) (4.11)
SNC2
It is interesting to note that not a single model that included climatic parameters was
found to be significant. Also, most of the significant models were based on Equation
4.10. This is consistent with Patersons report which noted that although Equation 4.5
was chosen as the HDM-III model, Equation 4.10 is a reasonable alternative that could
prove to be more readily transferable to other regimes.
On a cautionary note, once again relatively low values are observed for the scaling
parameter. This is discussed in greater detail in below. The fact that it is significantly
different than the scaling parameters observed by Paterson indicates that the hazard
function has a very different shape. In the worst case, this may call into question the
applicability of the Weibull distribution to the LTPP data.
4.4.5 Summary of LTPP Analysis
To examine the ability of the derived models to predict the expected (mean) age at crack
initiation, a prediction of ICX was made for each data point in the applicable data set. The
results of this analyses showed that for the most part the results from Equation 4.10 and
4.11 were reasonable. Furthermore, each model responded as expected to changes in
the independent variables. For example, if the SNC was increased and other variables
held constant, an increase in age at crack initiation was observed. Similarly, an increase
in YE4 led to decreases in expected age at crack initiation. Overall, the expected age at
cracking was relatively high, but this is consistent with both the design methods
commonly used in North America and with the shorter sections used in the study. When
the LTPP sections were adjusted for section length to make them comparable to the
Brazil-UNDP (i.e., 1/ ln (320m/152.4m)), the resulting decrease in the intercept reduced
the expected age at cracking.
The basic forms of the cracking initiation models used in HDM-III appear to consider
some of the contributing factors for pavement structural cracking, but they could not be
easily applied to data obtained from the LTPP IMS. Although some aspects of this
analysis were promising, overall the results are inconclusive and a more in-depth analysis
of the models needs to be conducted.
4.5 Crack Modelling in HDM-4

4.5.1 Introduction
As was shown in previous sections and the discussion of the LTPP analysis, the
development of a single cracking model that predicts the initiation and progression of
cracking caused by different mechanisms is questionable. The primary mechanisms that
cause different crack types to occur and progress are themselves so different that
combining the prediction of all crack types into a single model is rarely attempted and has
never truly been successful.
Table 4.6
Constants of Equation 4.10 Tested Using LTPP Data
Type of Number of a0 a1 a2
Pavement Sections
All structures and all surface 100 13.627 -0.6417 0.1840
types
AC, HS > 100 mm, all 48 8.6896 -0.8158 0.3078
surface types
Table 4.7
Statistics of the Model for Equation 4.10
Significance of Estimate Based on Chi Squared Model Statistics

Type of Pavement Intercept YE4, SNC, ALL SIQF CI
% % %
All structures and all 99.99 95.32 94.01 -1.227 0.559 6.517 0.681
surface types
AC, HS > 100 mm, all 95.48 96.73 90.44 -1.070 0.5186 13.511 0.577
surface types
Table 4.8
Constants of Equation 4.11 Tested Using LTPP Data
Type of Number of a3 a4
Pavement Sections
Conventional bituminous pavement, 41 39.246 -16.765
HS > 100, all surfaces types
Hot-mix bituminous pavement, HS > 48 46.298 -20.527
100 mm, all surface types
All bituminous pavement, HS > 100 54 51.353 -23.603
mm, all surface types
Bituminous surface on SB, all 18 29.703 -41.770
surface types
Table 4.9
Statistics of the Model for Equation 4.11
Significance of Estimate Based on Chi Squared Model Statistics

2
Type of Pavement YE4/SNC , % ALL SIQF CI
Conventional bituminous pavement, 89.01 -1.232 0.502 5.526 0.551
HS > 100, all surfaces types
Hot-mix bituminous pavement, HS > 95.53 -1.101 0.490 6.137 0.535
100 mm, all surface types
All bituminous pavement, HS > 100 98.53 -1.134 0.479 5.883 0.522
mm, all surface types
Bituminous surface on SB, all 91.04 -0.753 0.567 13.93 0.870
surface types
The solution for the prediction of bituminous pavement cracking is to provide separate
models for the different types of cracking of interest. Three major cracking mechanisms
have been identified structural, thermal, and reflection cracking and separate
models are presented for each. These are all modelled as a function of the factors that
are known to contribute to their development and progression. Because there is little
overlap between their causative mechanisms, there is no reason why they should be
predicted using the same model. This is the approach that is proposed for HDM-4, and is
described in the following sections.
4.5.2 Structural Cracking
Structural cracking is a term that encompasses cracking distresses that are caused by
load. By far the most common type of structural cracking is crocodile cracking (also
referred to as alligator cracking and by the generic term of fatigue cracking), but there are
other load-associated crack deterioration mechanisms, such as longitudinal wheelpath
cracking in thin surfacings, that may be attributed to shear failure rather than fatigue.
In HDM-4, structural cracking is measured by per cent of paved area that is cracked. The
crack numeric (ACX) is the same as HDM-IIIs indexed cracking, which was a weighted
measure of the extent of different crack severities.
Structural Crack Initiation ICX
Section 4.4 discussed modelling crack initiation using the HDM-III crack initiation models
and LTPP data. The purpose of this analysis was to assess the applicability of the
existing models to a data base containing pavement sections of very different designs
and environmental loadings than were in the Brazil data base. It was found that the
existing model forms were not good predictors of cracking initiation that consisted of
combined cracking measures or that were based on thermal cracking.
It was found that models that appeared to provide a reasonable estimate of structural
cracking were available, based on Equation 4.11. This equation predicts the surfacing
age at the initiation of all cracking and has as its independent variables YE4 and SNC.
This model is proposed for the HDM-4 cracking initiation, as shown in Equation 4.12:
ICX = a0 exp( a1 YE4 / SNC 2 ) (4.12)
where ICX is the time to structural cracking initiation, in years

a0 and a1 are calibration parameters, for which default values are
shown in Table 4.10
Table 4.10
Default Parameters for Structural Cracking Initiation
Model by HDM-4 Pavement Type
Pavement Type a0 a1
AMGB, AMAB, AMAP, 8.61 -24.4
AMSB, STAB, STAP
STGB, STSB 13.2 -20.7
AMCP, STCP Not Applicable
Structural Crack Progression ACX
In HDM-III, crack progression or propagation models were developed using sections for
which there were at least three observations of crack progression with values in the range
from 5 to 95 per cent. With these limitations, it was not possible to test those models
using the currently available LTPP data base.
Recall that structural cracking is by definition related to the application of loads. Because
HDM-4 uses separate cracking models for distinct modes of cracking, it is possible to use
Patersons (1987) traffic-based models for indexed cracking progression. They relate
indexed (or structural) cracking to load applications and thus are appropriate for use in
HDM-4. The proposed form of the structural crack progression model is shown in
Equation 4.13.
CRX t =(1 z) 50 + z [ z a0 a1NEci + z 0.5 a1 + (1 z) a1 ] 1/ a1 (4.13)
where CRXt is the incremental area of cracking at time t

z is 1, if TCI < t50; otherwise z = -1
a0 and a1 are calibration parameters, with default values in Table 4.11
TCI is the time since cracking initiation, in years
NEci is the cumulative ESAs since cracking initiation
t50 is 50a1 - 0.5a1/a0 a1; i.e., time to 50 per cent area cracked
The correct model must be selected for each of the 10 HDM-4 pavement types. Table
4.11 shows the relationship between the pavement types and the models. There are two
noteworthy implications of this table. One is that it suggests that structural cracking does
not progress on asphaltic layers placed over concrete pavement (hence a0 and a1 are set
at 0, as is the case for crack initiation). This is a reasonable supposition because the
presence of a layer of comparatively high stiffness beneath the surface will effectively end
up carrying the applied loads. The asphaltic layer will not deflect appreciably and thus it
will not accumulate structural cracking.
The other implication of this table is that the surface treatment model is only appropriate
for STGB and STSB pavements. The reasoning is that when considering structural
deterioration, a surface treatment placed over an asphalt-treated base or another asphalt
pavement will perform structurally more like an AM pavement than an ST pavement.
Thus, for these pavement types it is appropriate to model their structural deterioration
using the AM-based model. The structural deterioration of the pavement with a surface
treatment on a cemented base is also modelled as an ST because after a period of time
the cemented base can be expected to carbonate and lose its cementing action. On low
volume roads in particular, with a crack initiation period of upward of 10 years, it could
reasonably be expected that once cracks start to initiate the base will be weak enough to
contribute to structural cracking. Figure 4.2 shows the predicted area of structural
cracking progression for asphalt surfaced pavements of varying strengths and
Figure 4.3 shows the same for surface treated pavements.
Table 4.11
Applicability of Structural Cracking Progression
Model by HDM-4 Pavement Type
Pavement Type a0 a1
-4.25
AMGB, AMAB, AMAP, 3330 SNC 0.25
1
AMSB, STAB, STAP (Table 5.11, Model 18)
-2.51
STGB, STSB 1530 SNC 0.41
(Table 5.11, derived from
Model 20, based on DEF =
-1.6 1
6.5 SNC )
AMCP, STCP 0 0
Notes: 1/ Paterson (1987)
4.5.3 Longitudinal Cracking
The modelling of longitudinal cracking is highly problematic. At least three cases occur
and must be considered: longitudinal cracking that is actually counted as structural
cracking, longitudinal cracking that has reflected through from an underlying crack, and
longitudinal cracking that is caused by a construction defect.
Longitudinal cracking may occur at either the pavement edge or in the wheel path.
Longitudinal cracking at the pavement edge, if not associated with reflection cracking, is
more appropriately modelled as edge cracking, and is discussed in Chapter 7 as part of
the discussion of edge break. Crocodile or fatigue cracking may initiate as a longitudinal
crack but, if caused by loading, will quickly progress into the interconnected cracking that
is typical of crocodile cracking. Thus, it too is more accurately modelled as structural
cracking, even though it may be recorded in a given survey as longitudinal cracking.
Longitudinal cracking may develop as a result of a construction defect during paving.

This includes poor longitudinal joint construction (e.g., improper overlap of adjacent pulls
or poor compaction) and aligning rather than staggering longitudinal joints when paving in
multiple lifts. Longitudinal cracking may also develop as a result of uneven support, which
in turn may be cause by many different factors. In any case, this type of longitudinal
cracking can not be predicted as a function of the pavement attributes proposed for HDM-
4.
100
90
80
SNC = 4
70
Area of Indexed Cracking (%)
60
SNC = 5
50
40
SNC = 6
30
20
SNC = 7
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Traffic Loading Since Crack Initiation (million ESA)
Figure 4.2: Indexed Cracking Progression for Asphalt Surfaced Pavements
100
90 SNC = 3 SNC = 4 SNC = 5 SNC = 6
80
70
Area of indexed Cracking (%)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Traffic Loading Since Crack Initiation (million ESA)
Figure 4.3: Indexed Cracking Progression for Surface Treated Pavements

Finally, longitudinal cracking may occur as a result of reflection cracking. If a bituminous

layer is constructed over a cemented base, including soil-cement and cement-treated
bases, the bituminous layer can be expected to crack due to reflection cracking.
Reflection cracking also occurs when a bituminous surfacing is constructed over a
previously longitudinally cracked pavement without repairs. As reflection cracking also
includes transverse and fatigue cracking, it is best addressed separately. Therefore, in
HDM-4 there is no separate count of longitudinal cracks: they are either construction
defects, that are not modelled, or are counted in other crack types.
4.5.4 Thermal Cracking
Transverse or thermal cracking, like longitudinal cracking, has two primary causes that
must be considered in modelling. Transverse cracking can consist of reflection cracks, in
which case it must be modelled as reflection cracking. Alternatively, transverse cracking
can consist of thermal cracks. These can be modelled, and a procedure is presented for
predicting the occurrence of thermal cracking. Other causes of transverse cracking, such
as construction defects and subsurface failures, cannot be predicted and are not
considered further.
The measuring and reporting unit of thermal cracks is linear metres of crack per kilometre
of road (m/km), and the variable name for thermal cracking is ACT. Thermal cracking is
primarily a function of material and environmental factors and they initiate immediately
after construction. Therefore, only the progression of thermal cracking is modelled.
Modelling Transverse Thermal Cracks ACT
There is a large body of research devoted to the development of thermal cracking

models. While most of the research is being carried out on the mechanistic modelling of
thermal cracking, regression models have been developed based on an early analysis of
AC pavements in the LTPP database. It is proposed that the model form shown in
Equation 4.14 be adopted as the HDM-4 thermal cracking model, with regional
calibrations as provided by Simpson, et al. (1994). This regression equation is modified
in order to give a result in SI units as follows:
CRKSPACE = 0.305 AGE2 a010 a1 (4.14)
where CRKSPACE is the spacing between transverse (thermal) cracks, in m

AGE2 is pavement surface age, in years
a0 is defined in Table 4.12
a1 is defined in Table 4.13
The coefficients a0 and a1 are defined for four climatic zones, based on the coefficients
proposed by Simpson, et al. (1994). There are two changes that are made in the
application of this model. First, the explanatory variables are converted to SI units,
leaving the original regression coefficients unchanged where possible. Secondly, several
of the variables that were in the original models have been omitted. These omissions,
while undesirable, were made of expediency. Variables that do not appear in these
models are omitted because they would be both difficult to obtain in the typical HDM
application and in the LTPP analysis they were found to be comparatively insignificant.
These include:
air voids in AC;

per cent aggregate passing the 4.75 mm sieve;
asphalt content;
base compaction;
per cent subgrade material passing the 0.75 mm sieve;
annual freeze-thaw cycles;
daily temperature range.
Table 4.12
Value of A in Equation 4.14 for Different Climatic Zones
Climatic Zone Value of a0

Dry-No Freeze -0.241 - 0.147 [log (HB + 25.4) - 1.405]
Wet-No Freeze -1.12
We-Freeze -0.106 - 0.000187 HS - 0.0540 AND
Dry-Freeze -0.425
Table 4.13
Value of B in Equation 4.14 for Different Climatic Zones
Climatic Zone Value of B

Dry-No Freeze -0.00155 - 0.00111 HS + 1.89 [log (ANNPRE) - 1.405]
Wet-No Freeze 0.0131 + 0.733 [log (FI) + 1] + 0.534 [log (ANNPRE) - 1.405] + 0.0109
[(HS/25.4) (log (AVIS) + 1)]
We-Freeze -0.0201 + 1.84 [log (ANNPRE) - 1.405] - 0.000626 [HB (log (ANNPRE) -
1.405)] + 0.00240 [(HB/25.4) (AND)]
Dry-Freeze 0.0468 + 0.854 [log (YE4) + 3] - 0.000336 HB + 0.00013 FI + 6.17E-6 (HS
HB) + 6.46E-6 (HS/25.4) (AVIS)
The predicted crack spacing is shown in Figure 4.4 for the set of parameters shown in
Table 4.14, and it shows that the model gives reasonable results. Crack spacings in the
non-freeze climatic regions approach 15 m toward the end of the pavements life and in
the dry-freeze region spacings approach 3 m. It is only in the wet-freeze region where the
model does not predict a reasonable crack spacing and it is suggested that the model for
this reason be limited to a minimum crack spacing that would default at 6 m, as shown by
Equation 4.15.
CRKSPACEWF = max (0.305 AGE2 a010 a1, 6) (4.15)
where CRKSPACEWF is crack spacing in a wet-freeze region, in m

100
90 wet-no freeze
wet-freeze
80
dry-no-freeze
dry-freeze
70
60
CRKSPACE, m
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20
Pavement Age, years
Figure 4.4: Predicted Thermal Crack Spacing for Four Climatic Regions
Table 4.14
Independent Variables Used in Figure 4.4
Independent Wet- Wet-Non Dry- Dry-Non

Variable Units Freeze Freeze Freeze Freeze
Surfacing Thickness mm 150 150 150 150
Annual Precipitation mm 1500 1500 --- 200
Annual Number of Number 150 --- --- ---
Days > 32 C
Freezing Index Degree Days --- 200 2000 ---
Asphalt Viscosity Pascal Seconds --- 200 200 ---
Base Thickness mm 300 --- 300 300
Annual Traffic MESA --- --- 0.09 ---
Based on the performance of their pavements users may find that the prediction for the
dry-no freeze region is also unreasonable. In such a case, Equation 4.15 should be
modified so that a non-zero lower crack spacing limit is set that reflects their experience.
Equations 4.14 and 4.15 predict the spacing of transverse cracks CW m long, where CW
is the full paved width of the pavement. HDM-4 will express thermal cracking in linear m
per km, and ACT is used to express this, as is shown in Equation 4.16:
CW 1000
ACT = (4.16)
CRKSPACE
where ACT is the linear m of transverse cracks per 1000 m

CRKSPACE is the spacing between thermal cracks, in m
CW is the width of the paved area, in m
4.5.5 Reflection Cracking
As suggested by its name, reflection cracking is the development of cracks in a surface

layer that have reflected through the pavement from underlying layers. Any bituminous
surfacing can develop reflection cracking, depending on the condition of the underlying
surface. Both fatigue cracks and transverse cracks will, over time, reflect through a new
surface. While longitudinal cracking in the original surfacing is not modelled, these
cracks, if present, will also reflect. The rate of reflection cracking has been found to be
largely a factor of surfacing thickness and climatic variables; it is fairly independent of
loading. Reflection cracking can be retarded through the use of crack relief layers or
geomembranes, but no satisfactory method of eliminating it completely has yet been
found, short of complete removal of the cracked layer prior to resurfacing.
No existing models for the prediction of reflection cracking have been identified, but there
are a number of studies in which methods of reducing reflection cracking are explored.
Reflection cracking data from a study by Gulden (1984) of overlays on concrete
pavements is shown in Figure 4.5 for three different overlay thicknesses. These are
representative of the typical pattern of reflection cracking, which follows the same
initiation and progression process as fatigue cracking, but where the time to initiation is
primarily a function of surfacing thickness. It is interesting to note that these data support
the generally accepted notion that the initiation of reflection cracking is delayed
approximately 1 year for every 20 to 50 mm of surfacing.
Research in Malaysia supports Guldens findings for the thin surfacings (Hameed and
Malek, 1994). Based on a study of 40 mm asphaltic concrete overlays of previously
cracked pavements, it was concluded that the onset of reflection cracking was rapid,
almost instantaneous in fact, and was a function of the pavements previous condition, its
strength, and the applied loads. It seems reasonable to conclude from these two studies
that overlays of up to 50 mm placed over previously cracked pavements will begin to
show reflection cracking within one year.
The progression of reflection cracking is also linked to surfacing thickness, with thicker
overlays slowing down the reflection cracking rate. An examination of the reflection
cracking trends suggests that this deterioration can be modelled by a two-phase model in
which cracking initiation is related to thickness and other factors as specified, and
progression, which is modelled linearly, is also related to thickness.
The proposed model forms for reflection crack initiation and progression are shown in
Equation 4.17 and Equation 4.18. Because there can never be more than 100 per cent of
the previous cracks that are reflected through to the surface, Equation 4.18 constrains the
ultimate area of reflection cracking to always be less than the previous per cent cracked
area, PACA. An application of the model for 50, 100, and 150 mm overlays is shown in
Figure 4.6.
100
90
80
70
Per Cent Reflected Crack Length
60
50
40
30
50 mm
20
100 mm
10 150 mm
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Age of Overlay, years
Figure 4.5: Per Cent Reflected Crack Length Over Time (from Gulden, 1984)
ICR = a0 + a1 HNEW (4.17)
where ICR is the reflection cracking initiation period, in years

HNEW is the thickness of the new surfacing, in mm (< 200 mm)
a0 and a1 are calibration parameters
a2
ACR = x100 t (4.18)
max(HNEW, 25) + a3
where ACR is the change in per cent area reflection cracking during
period t and ACR < PACA
t is the time between reflection cracking observations, in years
a2 and a3 are calibration parameters
PACA is the pre-overlay per cent cracked area,
= PACX + 0.05 PACT/CW + PACR
PACX is the pre-overlay per cent area of structural cracking
PACT is the pre-overlay thermal cracks, in m/km
PACR is the pre-overlay per cent area of reflection cracking
Table 4.15 shows default values for the calibration parameters, based on an interpretation
of data from the Georgia and Malaysia (Gulden, 1984; Hameed and Malek, 1994).
Table 4.15
Default Parameters for Reflection Cracking and Their Effects
Constant Default Value Used to Adjust Effect of Increase

a0 0.5 Crack initiation delay Increases initiation
period
a1 0.02 Crack initiation delay Increases initiation
a2 25 Rate of crack Increases rate
progression
a3 0 Use of reflection crack Decreases rate
retarding methods
The reflection cracking model is applicable for the pavement types shown in Table 4.16.
This table is based on the fact that reflection cracking is not a distress on either granular
materials or asphalt-stabilised bases, but can be expected on bituminous surfaces over
either concrete pavements or previous bituminous pavements.
Table 4.16
Applicability of Reflection Cracking Model by HDM-4 Pavement Type
Pavement Type ACR

AMGB No
AMAB No
AMAP Yes
AMSB Yes
AMCP Yes
STGB No
STAB No
STAP Yes
STSB Yes
STCP Yes
4.5.6 Combining Crack Measures
Where analysis requires the quantity of all cracks on the pavement surface, the structural
cracks, thermal cracks, and reflection cracks must be added. Both structural and
reflection cracks can be directly added, as they are expressed in per cent areas, but
thermal cracks must be converted to a measure of area. Equation 4.19 is used to
determine the per cent area of all cracks, ACA. Caution should be used in the application
of this model, however. A test of reasonableness should be applied to the individual
components of the calculation of ACA as the output from the model will only be as
realistic as are the three inputs.
50
ACA = ACX + ACR + (4.19)
CRKSPACE
100
90
PACA = 90
80
70
Per Cent Reflection Cracking .
60
PACA = 60
50
40
30
PACA = 30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Years After Surfacing
Figure 4.6: Reflection Cracking Trend for Different PACA, 50 mm Overlay
100
90
80
70
Per Cent Reflection Cracking .
60
50 mm Overlay
PACA = 50
50
40
100 mm Overlay
30
20
150 mm Overlay
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Years After Surfacing
Figure 4.7: Reflection Cracking Initiation and Progression

Figure 4.8 shows a plot of the combination of the three types of cracking over time. It is
based on the placement of a 100 mm overlay on a pavement which previously had 30 per
cent of its surface area cracked. The example is from the dry-freeze region and is based
on a YE4 of 0.2. Pavement sections of four different strengths were used from Figure
4.2. It can be seen that initially reflection cracking will control the cracking behaviour of
this section, followed by structural cracking. Thermal cracking contributes comparatively
little to the overall per cent area of cracking, as is expected from an ultimate thermal
crack spacing of approximately 20 m.
100.0
90.0 SNC = 4
80.0
70.0
Per Cent Area of All Cracks
60.0
SNC = 5
50.0
SNC = 6
40.0
SNC = 7
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
Age of Surfacing, Years
Figure 4.8: Combined Area of Structural, Thermal, and Reflective Cracking
4.6 Summary
Cracking is likely the most frequently modelled bituminous pavement deterioration mode,
as shown by the number of different models that have been presented. While most
researchers present different models for the different types of cracking, HDM-III grouped
cracks by size rather than causative agent.
An analysis of the HDM-III models using the LTPP data shows that these models are
satisfactory for the prediction of structural cracking, but are not adequate for addressing
the development of thermal cracks. Consequently, traffic-based HDM-III models are
proposed for the prediction of structural cracking, based on an indexed cracking measure.
A separate procedure for predicting thermal cracks is presented, based on models
developed from an analysis of LTPP data. A model for reflection cracks is also proposed,
so that the cracking of resurfaced pavements can be assessed more accurately. For
cases where a measure of all cracking is required, these cracks can easily be combined.
These suggested changes should extend the crack prediction capabilities of the HDM-4
model.
Rutting 5-1
5. RUTTING OF PAVED SURFACES1
5.1 Introduction
Rutting is defined as the permanent or unrecoverable traffic-associated deformation
within pavement layers which, if channelised into wheelpaths, accumulates over time and
becomes manifested as a rut (Paterson, 1987). Rutting may arise because of material
weakness, surface wear or structural inadequacy. Furthermore, the monitoring and
control of rutting also has important performance implications because of its influence on
vehicle operation (affecting vehicle tracking), safety (hydroplaning on ponded water), and
dynamic loading (through surface profile variations).
HDM-III included models for the prediction of rut depth over the life of a pavement. For
HDM-4 it is proposed to extend the applicability of the HDM-III rut depth models to:
cold climates where there is abrasive wear due to studded tyres;

high standard pavements with thick bituminous materials which suffer from plastic
deformation within the bituminous materials under extreme load and temperature
conditions;
review the interaction of cracking and rainfall with rutting, and the need for the
standard deviation of rut depth; and
address the differences in rut depth measures throughout the world, both in the base
length used for static measures and in the various modern automated technologies
which make frequent and full transverse profile measurements possible.
This chapter begins with an overview of the mechanisms of rutting, followed by a

description of existing rut models. It closes with a description of the HDM-4 rut models.
5.2 Mechanisms of Rutting

Traffic associated permanent deformation, and rutting in particular, results from a rather
complex combination of densification and plastic flow mechanisms. Densification,
according to Paterson (1987), is the change in the volume of material as a result of the
tighter packing of the material particles and sometimes also the degradation of particles
into smaller sizes. Rutting due to densification is usually fairly wide and uniform in the
longitudinal direction with heaving on the surface rarely occurring, as illustrated in Figure
5.1. The degree of densification depends greatly on the compaction specifications during
construction. The density specification should be selected in accordance with the
expected loadings and pavement type. Failure to reach the specified compaction during
construction will result in an increase in densification under traffic, most of which occurs
early in the life of the pavement. It is important to note that for similar rut depth values,
the deformation within the pavement may be located within a single weak layer, or more
evenly distributed through the depth of the pavement, as illustrated in Figure 5.1.
1
This chapter was written by Mr. Louw Kannemeyer who was seconded to the ISOHDM project by the
Department of Transport, South Africa.
Densification distributed Densification within

through pavem ent single pavem ent
structure layer
Surface layer
P avem ent Layer 1
Pavem ent Layer 2
Subgrade
Figure 5.1: Typical Rut Profile as a Result of Densification
Plastic flow essentially involves no volume changes, and gives rise to shear
displacements in which both depression and heave are usually manifested. Plastic flow
occurs when the shear stresses imposed by traffic exceed the inherent strength of the
pavement layers (Paterson, 1987). The rutting in this case is usually characterised by
heaving on the surface alongside the wheelpaths, as illustrated Figure 5.2. The flow is
controlled through the structural and material design specifications, which are normally
based on a measure of the shear strength of the materials used (for example, the
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) for soils, and Marshall and Hveem stability for bituminous
materials).
5.3 Factors Influencing the Generalised Phases of Rutting

5.3.1 Introduction
The resistance of pavement structures to rutting is dependent on a number of factors

which either relate to applied loads (traffic type and traffic volume), the environment
(temperature, rainfall), the pavement structure (materials used and their composition), the
construction process, or to a combination of the above. In general, this resistance to
permanent deformation of pavement materials may be divided into the following three
phases:
Rutting 5-3
Heaving alongside Depression within

wheelpath wheelpath
Asphalt layer
Pavem ent layer 1
Pavem ent layer 2
S ubgrade
Figure 5.2: Typical Rut Profile as Result of Plastic Flow (Shoving)
Initial consolidation: This phase, also referred to as bedding in or post

construction compaction, describes the relatively rapid initial increase in rutting on a
newly constructed pavement once it is opened to traffic. The phase is characterised by a
decreasing deformation (strain) rate, and the amount of initial consolidation is mainly
influenced by the compaction achieved during construction, material type, pavement
strength and traffic load.
Constant rate of deformation: During this phase the rate of deformation (strain) tends to
stabilise, resulting in a constant rate of increase in deformation over time or traffic load.
The rate of deformation is mainly influenced by traffic loading, pavement strength,
material type and environmental influences.
Accelerating deformation: This is the third and final phase in the development of
deformation, and it is characterised by an increased rate of deformation (strain). The
increased rate of deformation is mainly influenced by traffic loading, pavement strength,
material type and environmental influences.
The factors influencing the above mentioned phases are discussed in more detail for the
flexible pavement types included in HDM-4. These pavement types defined in terms of
base course material are granular base (GB), cement-treated base (SB) and asphalt
base (AB) pavements.
5.3.2 Granular Base Pavements

The general trends in deformation of granular base pavements are illustrated in Figure
5.3. The factors influencing the magnitude and duration of various phases are:
W ater ingress stopped

Deformation
Poor quality m aterial

Ingress of water
Ingress of water
Stable phase
Initial phase
High quality m aterial
Traffic Loading
Figure 5.3: Relative Behaviour of Granular Materials (after Freeme, 1983)
Construction compaction: The amount of early deformation, also referred to as

post-construction compaction, depends on the densification achieved during the
construction of the pavement layers and the quality of the pavement layers. The higher
the quality of the layer, the higher the specified level of compaction, and thus the lower
the expected initial densification, as seen in Figure 5.3.
Material quality: The rate of increase in deformation during the stable

phase also depends on the initial quality of the material. Where the initial quality of the
material is very poor and has low densities, high traffic loadings may result in quick shear
failure, typical of untreated pavement layers, and the stable phase may be non-existent or
very brief, as seen in Figure 5.3. For relatively high quality materials the performance
under traffic is much better, and the susceptibility to water ingress is much lower.
Moisture content: Over time the pavement surface may crack. The
increased moisture content due to ingress of water through a cracked surface layer will
result in a decrease in shear strength of granular pavement layers which, when over-
stressed by traffic, will result in the shear failure of the layers and thus the increased
deformation observed in the final phase. The rate of increase is once again dependent on
material quality (high quality materials are less susceptible to ingress of water), the
amount of water ingress (rainfall), and traffic loading.
Traffic loading: The traffic loading is a combination of the magnitude and volume of
the loads; these are combined into the number of standard loads through the fourth
power law. Traffic loading is one of the most important factors contributing to rutting.
Rutting 5-5
Traffic induces stresses within the pavement structure that have to be withstood, and thus
determines the quality of materials required, as well as the behaviour of the pavement in
various phases. It is important to note that a few excessive loads or tyre pressures for
which the pavement was not designed may cause stresses exceeding the shear strength
of the material, and thus plastic flow, resulting in the premature failure of the layer.
5.3.3 Cement-treated Base Pavements
The general deformation trends of cement-treated base pavements are illustrated in

Figure 5.4. For these pavements, the expected initial increase in deformation due to post-
construction compaction is much lower and even negligible in most instances. This is
followed by a stable phase during which little or no deformation occurs, and finally a
phase during which the rate of deformation increases. This final phase often only occurs
after moisture ingress is allowed through secondary cracking. Under the action of traffic,
fines are pumped out from under the cement-treated base and furthermore, in the
presence of air and water carbonation occurs (as observed in South Africa) and the effect
of the cement is greatly reduced with the material reverting to its natural properties. With
the cemented material reverting to its natural properties it is possible to observe a
difference in behaviour between high and poor quality materials (i.e. high plasticity index
(PI)) during this phase.
Deformation
P oor quality m aterial
W ater ingress stopped
Ingress of water
High quality
Traffic Loading
Figure 5.4: Relative Behaviour of Cement-treated Materials (after Freeme, 1983)
In general, the resistance to deformation of cement-treated base pavements is similar to,

or even better than, the deformations expected from very high quality (crushed stone)
granular materials. Furthermore, the susceptibility to moisture of the cement-treated
material is also less than that of the granular material used to construct the cement-
treated layer. The factors influencing the magnitude and duration of various phases are
similar to those discussed for granular materials. It is important to note that for cement-
treated base pavements, most of the relative strength of the pavement is usually
concentrated within these layers, and construction quality has a considerable influence on
the performance of the layer.
5.3.4 Asphalt Base Pavements
The general deformation of asphalt base pavements is illustrated in Figure 5.5. The
behaviour during the various phases is similar to that of granular base pavements. The
main difference in behaviour between asphalt layers and granular layers occurs in the
final phase, where asphalt layers are far more water-resistant than granular layers, but as
a result of their visco-elastic behaviour they are more temperature susceptible. The
factors influencing the magnitude and duration of various phases are construction
compaction, material quality (which, for asphalt layers, refers to the mix properties of
binder content, air voids and aggregate type), and traffic loading. As a result of the
nature of asphalt layers, the influence of moisture content is replaced by that of
temperature. The influence of the asphalts characteristics is discussed below
(Verhaeghe, 1993):
P oor m ix design
Poor creep resistant m ix

Deformation
Decrease in tem perature

of asphalt m aterial
Increase in tem perature

of asphalt m aterial
G ood creep resistant m ix
Traffic Loading
Figure 5.5: Relative Behaviour of Asphalt Materials (Freeme, 1983)
Binder content: The selection of a suitable binder content for a given

grading of aggregate is one of the main problems in the design of a bituminous mixture.
From the point of view of deformation, asphalt mixes should contain just enough binder to
give cohesion and to enable adequate compaction to be achieved, without undue risk to
plastic deformation under the prevailing conditions of traffic and temperature. Too much
binder will lubricate the mix to such an extent that the mixture will lack internal friction and
become unstable.
Rutting 5-7
Air voids content: The per cent of air voids within an asphalt mix also
influences the behaviour of the mix. The higher the per cent of air voids, the more
resistant the mix is to deformation. But due to the increased permeability to air, an
increased rate of hardening of the binder will occur, reducing the fatigue life of the
asphalt. If the air voids content is too low, the asphalt mix will become unstable, resulting
in plastic flow of the layer under heavy trafficking, slow moving loads or high maximum
temperature. According to Road Note 31 (TRL, 1993), numerous studies indicate that the
minimum air voids after heavy trafficking should always exceed 3 per cent to avoid
potential plastic flow, but should be less than 5 per cent to keep hardening of the binder
(under tropical conditions) to a minimum.
Aggregate type and quantity: The resistance to permanent deformation of certain

asphalt mixes (asphalt concrete and bitumen macadam) is dependent upon the
interaction between particles of the coarse aggregate to form a mechanical interlocking
structure; the higher the particle to particle contact within the mix, the more resistant the
mix will be to deformation. Thus both the shape and texture of coarse aggregate is of
importance. It also has been found that the higher the stone content the lower the
deformation, but the more difficult it is to achieve the required compaction.
Temperature: The dependence of the flow properties of bituminous

mixtures on temperature is due to changes in the rheological properties of the binder, the
dominant factor being the great dependence of viscosity on temperature. From simulation
tests and general experience it is well known that the resistance to deformation of
bituminous materials decreases rapidly as temperature increases, especially if the
ambient temperature approaches or exceeds the softening points of the binders used in
such mixes.
5.3.5 Discussion
It is important to note that accelerating deformation (phase 3) tends to occur in discrete

phases and may not be continuous, for example when cracking, rainfall and loading are
simultaneously present the pavement foundation may become saturated resulting in an
increased rate of deformation, which tends to decline to levels similar to the original rate
of deformation before saturation. It may also be seasonal, as with high summer
temperatures accompanied with high loading (slow moving heavy loads) on viscoelastic
materials and studded tyre wear during winter seasons. These conditions may be
repaired or modified in practice with road maintenance, for example crack sealing limiting
moisture ingress, and it is of utmost importance that the prediction model be responsive
to these alterations.
Various models are available to quantify these observed trends and phases. These
models are either mechanistic, based on laboratory material characterisation and
theoretical structural analysis of the stresses and strains induced in each layer under
traffic loading, or empirical, based on correlations between field data of rut depth trends
and explanatory parameters representing the pavement and loading. The original HDM-III
models, which were based on the performance results of in service pavements, are
classified as structural empirical.
5.4 Existing Approaches to Modelling Rutting

5.4.1 HDM-III Rut Depth Models
The structural empirical models included in HDM-III were derived from a sample of 2,546
pavement sections of which 1215 were surface treatment and 797 were asphalt concrete
and the composition of the remaining 534 unclear. For the asphalt sections the range of
surface thickness was 20-100 mm with a mean of 52 mm, and it can be assumed that the
stability was relatively high. It should be noted that 95 per cent of the rut depth values
were less than 8 mm and that the model derived gave a poor prediction of the highest rut
depths recorded in the study, those over 10 mm (Paterson, 1987)
The models were the first empirical models to incorporate both the mechanisms of traffic-
associated permanent deformation discussed previously. Two separate models, one for
the mean rut depth and one for the rut depth standard deviation were developed by
Paterson (1987). The mean rut depth was found to be a non-linear function and the rut
depth standard deviation was expected to depend on the uniformity of the pavement,
e.g., either the variation in stiffness (deflection) or in compaction. A satisfactory
relationship could not, however, be identified from the data available.
Since the rut depth standard deviation was identified as one component of the roughness
prediction model, a model was then identified to be a strong function of the mean rut
depth, not surprisingly, plus a few other explanatory variables which were expected to
represent non-uniformity in the pavement. The generalised expressions developed by
Paterson (1987) were modified in HDM-III to convert the absolute rut depth model to an
incremental one in order to be compatible with the recursive, incremental model structure
throughout the Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects modelling of HDM-III
(Paterson, 1995). The models in HDM-III were (Watanatada et al., 1987):
Mean rut depth at end of first year (rut depth at start of first year is zero):
RDM = Krp [39800 SNC-0.502 COMP-2.30 (YE4 106)ERM ] (5.1)
ERM = 0.09 + 0.0384DEF - 0.0009RH + 0.00158 MMP CRX (5.2)
Subsequent annual incremental increase in mean rut depth as a result of road

deterioration:
RDM = Krp [((0.256 -0.0009RH + 0.0384DEF + 0.00158 MMP CRX)/AGE3
+ 0.0219 MMP CRX ln(MAX(1, AGE3 YE4)))RDM] (5.3)

where RDM is the predicted change in mean rut depth during the
analysis year due to road deterioration in mm
RDM is the mean rut depth in mm
Krp is a user specified factor for rut depth progression (default =
1)
SNC is the modified structural number of pavement
Rutting 5-9
COMP is the average relative compaction weighted by layer

thickness in the base, subbase and selected subgrade
layers, as percentage
YE4 is the number of equivalent standard axle loads in
millions/lane for the analysis year, based on an axle load
equivalency exponent of 4
DEF is the mean Benkelman Beam rebound deflection in mm, of
the surfacing in both wheelpaths under an 80 kN standard
axle load, 520 kPa tyre pressure, and 30 C average asphalt
temperature
RH is the rehabilitation indicator, where RH = 1 for surface types
asphalt concrete overlay (OVSA) or open-graded cold-mix
(OCMS) overlays; RH = 0 otherwise
MMP is the mean monthly precipitation in m/month
CRX is the area of indexed cracking at beginning of the analysis
year, as percentage of total carriageway area
AGE3 is the construction age, defined as the time since latest
overlay, reconstruction or new construction activity, in years.
CRX is the predicted change in the area of indexed cracking due
to road deterioration in the analysis year, in percentage of
carriageway area
Rut depth standard deviation at end of first year:
RDS = Krp [4390 RDM0.532 SNC-0.422 COMP-1.66 (YE4 106)ERS] (5.4)
ERS = -0.0086 RH + 0.00115 MMP CRX (5.5)
Subsequent annual incremental increase in rut depth standard deviation as result of road
deterioration:
RDS = Krp[ 0.532 RDM/RDM + ERS/AGE3
+ 0.0159 MMP CRX ln(MAX(1, AGE3 YE4)))RDS] (5.6)
where RDS is the predicted change in mean rut depth during the
analysis year due to road deterioration, in mm
The prediction of first-year mean rut depth by the HDM-III model in terms of parameters
included in the model is illustrated in Figure 5.6, and first-year rut depth standard
deviation is shown in Figure 5.7.
12
Traffic in M ES AL
FIRST YEAR MEAN RUT DEPTH (mm)
10 0.1
0.5
1.0
8 85%
85%
Relative Com paction
6
85%
90%
4 95%
100 %
0
2 3 4 5 6
M O DIFIED STRUCTURAL NUM BER (SNC)
Figure 5.6: First Year Mean Rut Depth (RDM) Prediction
12
Traffic in M ES AL
0.1
FIRST YEAR RDS DEVIATION (mm)
10
0.5
1.0
6
Relative Com paction
85%
85%
4 85%
90%
95%
100 %
2
0
2 3 4 5 6
M O DIFIE D STRUCTURAL NUM BER (SNC)
Figure 5.7: First Year Rut Depth Standard (RDS) Deviation Prediction
From Figure 5.6 it is evident that the expression for first-year mean rut depth
development is the most sensitive to pavement strength (at lower strengths), and to a
lesser degree to compaction, with virtually no sensitivity to axle loading. The sensitivity to
the other terms within the expression, namely rainfall and cracking, was assumed to be
Rutting 5-11
negligible in this example since the pavement was new and assumed to be uncracked.
As seen in Figure 5.7, the same applies to first-year rut depth standard deviation, except
that the magnitude of the predicted values is far lower than those of mean rut depth.
The prediction of mean rut depth development and subsequent progression over the life
of a pavement are illustrated in Figure 5.8 for various structural strengths, and Figure 5.9
for various pavement base types (SNC = 2 for all) and rainfall. No maintenance was
allowed over the life of the pavement, allowing the evaluation of the HDM-III rut-models
under extreme conditions. In Figure 5.8, the influence of the modified structural number
(lines SNC2, SNC4 and SNC6) on the initiation and progression of rut depth on a
granular base course with cracking and a rainfall of 3600 mm/year under an annual
directional traffic load of 1 million ESA is evident. It is also interesting to note the
influence that cracking has on the development of rutting by observing the difference
between the lines SNC4 and SNC4-No crack, where both have an annual traffic load of 1
million ESA (per direction) and a rainfall of 3600 mm/year.
35
PREDICTED MEAN RUT DEPTH IN (mm)
30
25
SNC 2
20
SNC 4
SNC 6
SNC 4-N o Crack
15 SNC 4-0,1M ESA
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
P AV EM ENT AG E (YE ARS)
Figure 5.8: Mean Rut Depth Progression for Various Pavement Strengths
This difference illustrates that rut depth progression within the existing HDM-III equation
is based on the cracking of the surface layer and the subsequent ingress of water,
resulting in a decrease of pavement strength and shear failure of layers when over-
stressed. If the traffic load is not sufficient to induce critical stresses within the pavement
layers, but only stresses within the elastic range of the material, the cracking and
subsequent weakening of the pavement through water ingress would not have a severe
influence on rut depth progression. This is illustrated in Figure 5.8 by line SNC4-
0,1MESA for an annual traffic loading of 0.1 million ESA (per direction), where the rut
depth tends towards an ultimate value determined largely by the amount of densification
and the pavement strength.
40
S NC = 2 for all
35
PREDICTED MEAN RUT DEPTH IN (mm)
pavem ents
30
AM G B-3600
25
AM SB-3600
AM AB-3600
STG B-3600
20 AM G B-360
AM SB-360
AM AB-360
15 STG B-360
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
PAVEM E NT AG E (YE ARS )
Figure 5.9: Mean Rut Depth Progression for Various Base Types and Rainfall
As seen from Figure 5.9, there is no difference between the initiation and progression of
rut depth for an asphalt mix on granular (AMGB-360) or asphalt base course layers
(AMAB-360), or a surface treatment on a granular base course (STGB-360) under an
annual rainfall of 360 mm per year and traffic loading of 1 million ESA (per direction). The
same is applicable for the first 10 years for asphalt mix under an annual rainfall of 3600
mm per year, after which the mean rut depth tends to progress to a slightly higher level
for the asphalt base (AMAB-3600). The rut depth on the surface treatment (STGB-3600)
tends to develop faster, but not to levels as high as that observed for the asphalt mix.
There is no model for a surface treatment on an asphalt base.
The above differences between the various pavement types, as well as the anomaly
observed for the models under high rainfall (3600 mm/year), where the rut depth
decreases at a certain age and then progresses again at a constant rate, are the result of
the influence of the area of cracking in the HDM-III rut model. The reduction in rut depth
occurs when the area of cracking is decreased to allow for the initiation and progression
of other surface defects. Since the maximum area of damage for a pavement surface
can only be 100 per cent, the area cracked has been decreased to allow for potholes.
The maximum area allowed for potholing is 30 per cent, resulting in cracking being held
at a constant 70 per cent leading to the constant rate of rut depth increase after the
apparent drop. Thus the cause of the apparent anomaly observed is purely mathematical
due to the ceiling placed on area of cracking. It is also important to note that within the
examples used this apparent anomaly is highly exaggerated by the evaluation of the
models at extreme conditions seldom occurring in practice.
Rutting 5-13
The performance of pavements with cement-treated bases compared to those with

bituminous and granular base course layers are in line with the generalised trends
previously discussed. This difference in predicted rut depth agrees more or less with the
ratio between the different coefficients used for granular and cemented base pavements
to endogenously compute the deflection from the modified structural number. The
relationships used were:
Granular Base: DEF = 6.5 SNC -1.6

Cemented Base: DEF = 3.5 SNC-1.6
The strong relation between mean rut depth (RDM) and rut depth standard deviation
(RDS) discussed previously and observed when comparing Figure 5.10 with Figure 5.8 is
only true if predictions are made from scratch for a new pavement. Should the initial
values come from field surveys, the RDS will be an actually observed value and thereafter
predictions would be incremental from that real value, resulting in a different relationship
between RDM and RDS.
40
RUT DEPTH STANDARD DEVIATION (mm)
35
30
25
SNC 2
SNC 4
20 SNC 6
SNC 4-N o Crack
SNC 4-0,1M ESA
15
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
P AV EM ENT AG E (YE ARS )
Figure 5.10: RDS Progression for Various Pavement Strengths
When considering alterations to variables of the HDM-III models, the influence of these
changes should be quantified by evaluating the influence of that change on the final
RDME results of HDM. Recalling the worst scenario in Figure 5.10, the largest change in
rut depth standard deviation during a year is about 2 mm. When multiplied by the
coefficient of 0.114 used for rut depth standard deviation in HDM-III, this results in an
increase of roughness of 0.2 IRI, which is not a significant change. Despite the small
contribution of the rut depth standard deviation to roughness in the HDM-III model, the
prediction of rutting in HDM-4 is of even greater importance, especially with the
anticipated inclusion of rut depth as an intervention criterion. Although the effect of rut
depth on vehicle operating costs may be small, its effect on user costs through accidents
could be substantial. For these reasons it is important that the existing rut models be
improved, not only to address the various limitations identified during the use of the
models over the past years, but also to incorporate the latest international research
findings.
Figure 5.8 and Figure 5.9 show that the HDM-III rut depth models are capable of
predicting the generally observed phases of rutting discussed previously, to a certain
extent, allowing for material, traffic and environmental influences. But despite the
acceptable representation of the development and progress of rutting in flexible
pavements similar to the range of materials and thickness in Brazil, the applicability of
HDM-III rut models are limited by the following:
the use of a single set of coefficients in the model to quantify the various phases of rut
depth development results in the initial consolidation and stable phases
overshadowing the increased deformation phase. Thus instead of a sharp transition
between uncracked and cracked phases as observed for pavements, the current
coefficients and model averages the cracking effect over the pavement life. This could
contribute to the under-prediction of rut depth observed for some pavements. Also, the
anomaly observed when area cracking decreases due to initiation of potholes needs to
be reconsidered;
the plastic flow incorporated in the rut models is only based on the plastic flow
resulting from the shear failure of pavement layers when over-stressed, and does not
represent the plastic flow (shoving) of asphalt layers (soft asphalt at high road
temperatures) or long-term plastic deformation (creep) of thick asphalt (> 150 mm)
pavements. This limitation was identified by Paterson (1987) during the initial
validation of the rut models on rut data obtained on thick asphalt pavements, and
results in the under prediction of rutting for these pavement type;
another limitation identified by Paterson (1987) during validation studies is the
influence of seasonal effects in wet-nonfreezing and wet-freezing climates, also
resulting in under-prediction of rutting for pavements under these environmental
conditions;
the models do not address mechanical wear, which occurs in countries where winter
snow and ice on roads necessitates the use of snow chains or studded tyres on
vehicles;
in addition to the above-mentioned limitations, the following general factors are also
believed to contribute to the differences observed between predicted and observed rut
depths:
the straight-edge length used during manual measurements, or during calculations

of rut depth from the transverse profile. This length is important, since HDM-III
models were developed from rut measurements under a 1.2 m straight-edge, a
factor not always considered by users;
the algorithm used for calculating the rut depth from the measured transverse
profile obtained from high speed profilometer;
the sampling interval used during measurement of rutting and the subsequent
aggregation of the data into different interval lengths. This is especially important
with data measured with high-speed profilometers.
Rutting 5-15
5.4.2 Other Rut Depth Models
Being a primary concern of most pavement structural design procedures, various models
are available for relating rut depth limits to various measures of material and traffic
properties. Despite this existence of numerous studies on rutting, the number of models
available to the study team for evaluation was severely limited by the following:
Failure limit models: Most of the models available are used in pavement design
procedures and limit the deformation to below a specified failure limit. These models
are not useful for performance modelling because of the need to predict not the limit, but
the trend of rutting during the life of the pavement (Paterson, 1987).
Mechanistic principles: A large number of the models or transfer functions developed

within recent years rely on the prediction of stresses and strains within the pavement
layers under the applied traffic loading using, for example, linear elastic theory. To
successfully use these models, relatively accurate data on layer moduli and layer
thickness are required. Although the HDM-4 study recognises that the availability of FWD
data, including inferred layer moduli and layer thickness data (from automated GPR-type
devices), are becoming prevalent and are likely to become more so in the near future
(see Chapter 12), it was decided not to introduce a mechanistic rut depth model into
HDM-4. The reasons are:
the complexity of material characterisation needed: i.e. backcalculation of E-moduli,

layer thickness, etc.;
identifying which strain parameter to use (if it is not to be one for every layer, which
raises the complexity of model inputs);
the model would only address the load-related components of rut prediction and not
the consolidation or wear components, and
uncertainty whether the additional refinement yields adequate extra validity.
Specialised equipment: Some of the models or transfer functions developed are based
on output from tests conducted with specialised equipment with limited availability. Since
the aim is to develop a universally applicable model, these models or transfer functions
are not further evaluated.
Models that were excluded because of the above are, however, still referred to if
something could be gained by this study, such as a form of the model, method of
quantifying some parameter, etc.
5.4.3 Models from the SHRP/LTPP Studies
As part of the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP), there are two separate
areas in which bituminous research was undertaken - the Asphalt program area and the
Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) program area. In the LTPP research, rutting
is included as one on of the distress types on which research should be performed.
Various preliminary draft reports on the initial evaluation of SHRP LTPP data have been
published, with the more recent report on the Sensitivity Analyses for Selected Pavement
Distress (Simpson, et al., 1994), being the most comprehensive. The research
conducted for this report was the first to use the National Pavement Data Base (later
renamed the National Information Management System (NIMS)). The analyses were,
however, constrained by the following limitations of the NIMS database (Simpson, et al.,
1994):
equivalent single axle loads (ESA) were simply estimates and not believed to be very
accurate;
limited data availability, some sections having no data, and if data were available,
generally only one value available with an additional value based on estimated initial
values. Two values are generally not enough to explain the curvature in a relationship,
and
relatively low levels of distress observed at this early stage of the 20 year study.
Despite these limitations the researchers were still able to identify the statistically
significant variables affecting rutting in hot mix asphalt concrete (HMAC) on:
granular base;
full depth HMAC; and
portland cement-treated base pavements.
These variables are listed in Table 5.1 in terms of decreasing significance for all base
types and environmental zones. The significance of the variables are also indicated for
the entire data set of a specific base type (1 indicating strongest impact on occurrence of
rutting).
Since the aim of the study was to conduct successful sensitivity analyses, it was
necessary to develop equations that were both statistically linear and contained a
minimum of collinearity. This was necessary since according to the knowledge of the
authors, no existing procedure for conducting sensitivity analyses on non-linear models
existed. Based on this requirement the following general regression equation was
developed after thorough statistical analysis of the data:
RDM = YE4B 10C (5.7)
where B = b0 + b1x1 + b2x2 + ... + bnxn

C = c0 + c1x1 + c2x2 + ... + cnxn
Table 5.1
Significance Variables Affecting Rutting in HMAC
Variable Granular data set HMAC full depth Portland cement-

data set treated data set
Equivalent standard axle loading 1 1 1
1
(ESA)
Air Voids in HMAC 2 3 2
Rutting 5-17
HMAC thickness 3 6 6
Base Thickness 5 3
Subgrade <#200 sieve 7 2 x
Days with Temperature > 32 C x x x
HMAC Aggregate < 4.5 mm Sieve 4 x 4
Asphalt Viscosity x x 5
Annual Precipitation x 5 x
Freeze Index 6 x x
1
Base Compaction x x x
Average Annual Min Temp x x 7
Daily Temp Range x 4 x
Asphalt Content x x x
Annual Freeze-Thaw Cycles x x x
Notes: 1/ These variables are already included in the existing HDM-III model.
x/ These variables were identified as significant for the individual environmental zones within
each subset, but when selected for entire subset they were not significant.
Typical predictions by the above equation are illustrated in Figure 5.11 for the various
base types evaluated.
20
Predicted Rut Depth (mm)
15
Granular Base
10 HMAC Full depth
Cement-Treated Base
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
ESAL's x 1000
Figure 5.11: Predicted SHRP Rutting vs. ESAL for HMAC on Various Base Types
Although the results obtained at this stage are very promising and the sensitivity analyses
provide a useful insight, the adoption of the model is limited by the following factors:
limitations within the database as mentioned previously;

the general good condition of the pavement sections included, resulting in, for
example, the interactive effects of water seeping through cracks and expediting
deterioration in the lower layers not being represented. This is evident in the low rut
depths predicted and the limited traffic load range for which the models were
developed (as illustrated in
Figure 5.11); and

no structural parameters in terms of pavement strength were included in the models
due to lack of availability of layer moduli.
The result of the sensitivity analyses do, however, provide considerable insight into the
variables influencing rutting within thick asphalt pavements, one of the major limitations
identified within the existing HDM-III models.
5.4.4 Models From Studies by TRL
The most basic model studied was based on unpublished research in England by TRL for
use in the assessment of future costs associated with different construction and
maintenance options. The following rut development model was employed to predict the
expected rut depth:
RDM = a0 + a1 YE4 (5.8)
where a0 and a1 are parameters whose values depend on the base type
The coefficients for the various base types are summarised in Table 5.2. Unfortunately,
no indication is given of the range of pavement strengths included within the development
of the models. These coefficients have been determined from the analysis of the
performance of TRL full-scale experimental pavements. The a0 parameter represents
the rut depth assumed for new surfaces at the time of construction and a1 is the
expected linear increase in rut depth with traffic until the next resurfacing (excluding
surface dressing) or strengthening treatment, as illustrated in Figure 5.12.
Table 5.2
Parameters for TRL Rut Model
Base Type Parameters

a0 a1
Dense Bitumen Macadam 1.95 0.46
Hot Rolled Asphalt 2.21 0.38
Cemented 2.19 0.31
Granular 2.66 0.84
Source: TRL (1993)
Rutting 5-19
45
40
35
Predicted Rut Depth (mm)
30
25 DBM
HRA
Cem
20 G ra
15
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
C um ulative Traffic Loading (M E SA)
Figure 5.12: Prediction of TRL Rut Depth Model
As shown in Figure 5.12, rutting is assumed to change linearly with the traffic carried, and
the same equation is applied each time maintenance or rehabilitation is conducted. This
linear behaviour is in line with the stable phase discussed for the various pavement
materials. The use of a constant linear increase was justified by the TRL, by assuming
that the weaker pavement areas experiencing rapid increase in rut depth as the
pavement approaches failure would be repaired through structural patching, thus allowing
the use of the model beyond the stable phase. Also, the relative behaviour observed for
the various materials, with cement base pavements having lower rutting than the others,
is in line with the experience described earlier in this chapter. It is important to note,
however, that these initial rut depths and the subsequent rates of increase are based on
pavement materials, designs and construction standards practiced in England; they may
not be appropriate under conditions.
To avoid the prediction of unacceptable increases in rut depth at high traffic loads,
resulting in an unacceptable number of resurfacing needed, it was recommended by TRL
(1993) that the deterioration rate within the model be amended to allow for improvements
in mix design and materials used.
At this stage no other models for possible incorporation into HDM-4 have been identified.
Other detailed models were evaluated and while the prediction capabilities, and thus the
general acceptability, of the HDM-4 rut depth models would be improved by incorporating
such detailed models, the detail required to utilise these models will generally make them
impractical for most typical applications.
5.4.5 Models for the Wear of Surfaces

Two models were identified for predicting rutting as a result of studded tyre wear. Ullidtz
(1987a) quantified surface wear (SW) as follows:
CS
RDW = EF YE4a1 (5.9)
a0
where RDW is the surface wear in mm

EF is an environmental factor which depends on the season
CS is the contact stress, which is the tyre pressure
a0 and a1 are coefficients depending on the type of aggregate
Djarf (1995) developed the following model based on data from Sweden:
RDW = 2.48 10-5 PASS1.02 CW -0.46 S1.22 SALT0.32 (5.10)
where PASS is the number of vehicles with studded tyres in one direction
expressed as thousands
S is the vehicle speed in km/h
SALT is a variable for salted or unsalted roads (2 = salted; 1 =
unsalted)
5.4.6 Summary of Rut Models
Despite the many attempts by researchers and highway agencies during the last two
decades to develop models that could predict the deterioration of a pavement over time,
no additional models could be identified within the literature that would improve on the
prediction capabilities and the logic of the HDM-III models.
Some models were identified that address certain limitations of the current HDM-III
models and it is believed that the incorporation of these models or their principles in
HDM-4 will result in improved prediction capabilities of the rut models.
5.5 Proposed Rut Depth Model for HDM-4

5.5.1 Introduction
From previous discussions it can be concluded that a comprehensive rut model should
contain three components representing:
densification and shear in granular and cemented layers;

plastic deformation (densification and flow) in asphalt wearing and binder courses; and
surface abrasion.
The HDM-III model only partly represented the first of the above; thus the HDM-4 model
should attempt to include, in its structure, all model components even if insufficient data is
currently available to validate the coefficients and exponents in the model.
It appears that rutting for most pavement types occurs in the following three phases:
Rutting 5-21
an initial densification/consolidation phase of the new pavement layers under traffic;

a stable phase where there is a relatively small increase in rut depth with time or
traffic; and
a final phase of accelerated deterioration when the surface cracks, allowing water
ingress into the pavement which results in the weakening of the granular or cemented
pavement layers. For asphalt layers this final phase is a complex function of the
asphalt mix properties, temperature and magnitude and duration of loading.
The existing HDM-III model already represents to a certain degree of success the above
three phases for pavements with granular (AMGB) and cemented (AMSB) base layers.
Thus to incorporate these existing models and the new models required, it was decided to
make use of the following component model for the HDM-4 mean rut model:
RDM = RD0 + RDST + RDPD + RDW (5.11)
where RDM is the mean rut depth, in mm.

RD0 is the initial densification/consolidation, in mm
RDST is the contribution as a result of structural deterioration,
which includes densification and shear within the granular or
cemented layers of the pavement, in mm
RDPD is the contribution of plastic deformation within the asphalt
layers of the pavement, in mm
RDW is the predicted contribution of surface wear of the pavement
from studded tyres, in mm
5.5.2 Initial Densification - RD0
Since no other models could be identified that would improve on the prediction
capabilities of the HDM-III model, the existing model should be retained with the following
modifications:
Relative compaction: The original HDM-III model included among its explanatory
variables the average relative compaction, weighted by layer thickness up to a pavement
depth of 1 m. The inclusion of relative compaction caused concerns in the past, since it is
a subjective input that, no matter the guidance given to the user, will still be difficult to
estimate. This resulted in its removal in the HDM Manager as an optional input value.
Despite this, construction compaction still remains one of the parameters identified
throughout the world as having an important influence on initial densification, and thus rut
depth.
It is therefore recommended that relative compaction be retained in HDM-4, as an

optional input value, with additional assistance supplied as shown in Table 5.3.
Table 5.3
Proposed Default Values for Compaction
Classification of construction supervision, Proposed default

quality control and effectiveness of construction relative compaction
specifications COMP
(per cent)
Excellent 100
Good 95
Fair 90
Poor 85
Straight-edge length: As described in Annex 5.1, for HDM-4 a standard straight-edge

length of 2.0 m has been adopted. Since the HDM-III models were developed from data
with a 1.2 m straight-edge, the models need to be adjusted. This is done using the
transformation function presented in Annex 5.1:
RDM2.0 = 1.3 RDM1.2 (5.12)
where RDM2.0 is the rut depth under a 2.0 m straight-edge

RDM1.2 is the rut depth under a 1.2 m straight-edge
The HDM-4 model for initial densification of new pavements is:
RD0 = Kid a0 (YE4 106) (a1 + a2DEF + a3 MMP ACX)

SNCa4 COMPa5 (5.13)
where Kid is the initial densification calibration factor (default = 1)

a0 to a5 are coefficients depending on pavement type
Since no significant changes have been proposed to the existing HDM-III model, virtually
no re-validation of the model is needed. Validations will, however, be needed for the
pavement types not included within the original development of the prediction model. The
default coefficients available at this stage are shown in Table 5.4; as seen these are the
same as the ones used in the HDM-III model.
5.5.3 Structural Deterioration - RDST
As with the initial consolidation models it was decided to retain the existing HDM-III
models for the continuation phase of rutting in granular and cemented base pavements.
These existing models incorporate both the stable phase and the increased deformation
phase as previously discussed, into a single model. Although incorporating most of the
factors identified as affecting rutting in granular and cemented materials, the coefficients
within the model need to be re-estimated to allow for:
Straight-edge length: The models need to be adjusted for the change from 1.2 m to 2.0
m as in Equation 5.12.
Table 5.4
Default coefficients for initial densification
Pave Surface Base HDM-4 Coefficients for Initial Densification

Type a0 a1 a2 a3 a4 a5
AMGB AC GB 51740 0.09 0.0384 0.0016 -0.502 -2.3
AMSB AC SB 51740 0.09 0.0384 0.0016 -0.502 -2.3
Rutting 5-23
AMAB AC DBM 51740 0.09 0.0384 0.0016 -0.502 -2.3

AMAP AC AC x x x x x x
AMCP AC JR x x x x x x
STGB SD GB 51740 0.09 0.0384 0.0016 -0.502 -2.3
STSB SD SB 51740 0.09 0.0384 0.0016 -0.502 -2.3
STAB SD DBM 51740 0.09 0.0384 0.0016 -0.502 -2.3
STAP SD AC x x x x x x
STCP SD JR x x x x x x
Notes: x/ No coefficients included for these models within HDM-III
Cracking/Moisture sensitivity: Two options were considered to increase the sensitivity

of the original model to cracking and especially the subsequent moisture ingress. The
first option was a re-estimation of the coefficients within the HDM-III by evaluating the
uncracked and cracked phases separately. The second option was to model the change
in pavement strength (SNC) with variation in moisture content separately, with no
alterations to the HDM-4 coefficients except for straight-edge length. The former was
adopted.
The model to be used in HDM-4 is:
RDST = Krst [(a0 + a1 DEF + a2 MMP ACX)/AGE3
+ a3 MMP ACX ln(max(1, AGE3 YE4)) RDMa T] (5.14)
where ACX is the predicted change in the area of structural cracking due
to road deterioration in the analysis year, in percentage of
carriageway area
ACX is max(ACX, 0)
Krst is the progression factor for structural deformation
T is the fraction of the year or season being modeled
RDMa is the rut depth at the start of the year
Since no data were available to re-evaluate the models, the coefficients shown in Table
5.5 are exactly the same as the current ones in HDM-III.
At present only the effect of the alterations made for the cracking parameter could be
illustrated. The influence of the alterations to the area of cracking on the predicted rut
depth are illustrated in Figure 5.13 where the HDM-III and HDM-4 predictions are both
standardised to the same straight-edge base length. As is seen, the anomaly previously
observed within the predictions is no longer present. For the pavement section used in
the example this alteration results in a increase of 70 per cent to the predicted mean rut
depth value after 20 years. It must be noted that in the illustration the models were used
at extreme conditions which seldomly occur in practice, (i.e. no maintenance, 1 MESA per
annum etc.).
Table 5.5
Default Coefficients for Structural Deformation
Pavement Surface Base HDM-4 Structural Deformation Coefficients

Type Material Material a0 a1 a2 a3
AMGB AC GB 0.333 0.0494 0.0021 0.0285
AMSB AC SB 0.333 0.0494 0.0021 0.0285
AMAB AC DBM 0.333 0.0494 0.0021 0.0285
AMAP AC AC 0.333 0.0494 0.0021 0.0285
AMCP AC JR x x x x
STGB SD GB 0.333 0.0494 0.0021 0.0285
STSB SD SB 0.333 0.0494 0.0021 0.0285
STAB SD DBM 0.333 0.0494 0.0021 0.0285
STAP SD AC 0.333 0.0494 0.0021 0.0285
STCP SD JR x x x x
20
18
16
Mean Rut Depth in mm
14
12
O riginal
10
M odified
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Pavem ent Age (Years)
Figure 5.13: Influence of Change in Cracking on Model Predictions
5.5.4 Plastic Deformation in Asphalt Layers - RDPD
As mentioned earlier, long-term plastic deformation (creep) of thick asphalt pavements or

plastic flow (shoving) of asphalt layers (soft asphalt at high road temperatures) are not
represented by the HDM-III rut models. Numerous studies have shown that this limitation
of the original models results in an under prediction of the rutting on certain asphalt
pavements by up to 200 per cent.
According to Road Note 31 (TRL, 1993) severe conditions will typically consist of a
combination of two or more of the following:
high maximum temperatures;

very heavy axle loads;
channellised traffic; and
Rutting 5-25
stopping or slow moving traffic.
It should be remembered, however, that the occurrence of a combination of any of the

above mentioned factors does not necessarily result in plastic deformation or flow, since
the asphalt mix could have been designed to withstand such conditions. Thus, any
attempt to predict the occurrence of plastic deformation or plastic flow should not only
include the influence of the above mentioned factors, but also consider the properties of
the asphalt layer. It is a difficult task to take into consideration the number of mix
properties affecting the performance of an asphalt layer. The inclusion of all these
properties will result in a data intensive model not suitable for most typical applications.
To ensure that only the necessary properties are included in a plastic deformation model,
the following criteria were used to select the asphalt mix properties:
be able to quantify changes in performance;

be easy to obtain without specialised equipment;
be available in a typical application; and
should be familiar to the users.
After the evaluation of the test results of numerous studies conducted around the world,
the following two asphalt mix properties were selected for inclusion into the plastic
deformation model binder viscosity and air voids.
Binder viscosity: Binder viscosity was identified as a factor with a strong influence on
the stability of an asphalt mix at high road temperatures when most of the deformation
takes place. As it is not convenient to measure viscosity directly, the Ring and Ball
Softening Point Test could be used as an indication of equi-viscous conditions close to
that temperature range (Szatkowski, 1979). Softening Point (SP) is defined as the
temperature at which the bitumen attains a particular degree of softness or a particular
consistency. Softening point was selected because it is a simple and well documented
test, conducted routinely for every binder and, most important of all, it gives a good
indication of the equi-viscous condition of the binder at high road temperatures, in other
words the deformability of the asphalt mix.
Before incorporating softening point (SP) into a model, the change (increase) in softening
point of the binder in an asphalt mix over time needs to be considered. The main factors
influencing this increase in softening point are:
Mixing and placement: It is usual for bitumens to harden by up to one grade during
mixing and placement (Daines, 1992). This results in a typical increase in softening
point of about 4C, but is dependent on the mixing temperature;
Voids in mix: It is generally known that the higher the void content of an asphalt mix,
the more permeable the mix is to air and thus susceptible to age hardening, a factor
evident from various long term studies (Daines, 1992). This hardening of the binder,
results in an increase in its softening point over time, the amount of increase
apparently a linear function of the voids within the mix;
Pavement Temperature: It is believed that, in combination with the voids, the
pavement temperature will also affect the rate of hardening of the bitumen within the
mix. The higher the pavement temperature, the higher the temperature of air within
the voids, and thus the evaporation of volatiles from the bitumen.
To quantify this expected increase in the softening point (hardening) of the binder within
an asphalt mix the following models were derived from data obtained from long term
performance studies in England (Daines, 1992) and Malaysia (Harun and Morosiuk,
1995):
SP = SPi + SPm + SP (5.15)
SP = a0 VIMa PTa1 (5.16)
where SP is the softening point of binder within the mix at the end of
analysis period, in C
SPi is the initial softening point of the binder (C), as determined
with Ring and Ball test
SPm is the increase in softening point of binder due to mixing and
placement in C
SP is the incremental increase in softening point during analysis
year, in C
VIMa is the voids in the mix, as percentage, at the start of the
analysis year
PT is the pavement temperature in C at depth of 20 mm below
surface, during analysis year
a0 and a1 are variables of the equation, default values in Table 5.6.
Table 5.6
Default Parameters for Softening Point Model
Parameter Default Value

a0 0.017
a1 0.076
Source: HTRS team estimates
Typical changes in the softening point predicted by the model are illustrated in Figure
5.14. This shows that the softening point increases sharply during mixing and placement,
followed by a relatively high increase due to the high voids (VIM) content early in the life
of the asphalt mix. As the road ages the voids in mix tend to decrease with load applied,
and thus also increases the softening point. This can be explained by the fact that as the
voids decrease the asphalt mix becomes more impermeable to air, and thus the binder to
hardening. Preliminary results indicate that once the VIM is less than 4 per cent, in-situ
hardening of the binder is negligible (Daines, 1992). At this stage preliminary analysis of
data indicate an increase in softening point within the range 0.5 C to 4C with an
increase in mixing temperature from 140C to 170C. The increase over time seems to be
within the range of 0.1 C to 2.9C per year for a voids in the mix range from 2.4 to 9 per
cent. Only the first 10 years are illustrated because after 10 years the change is
negligible and most asphalt layers will be overlaid by that point.
Rutting 5-27
80
70
60
Softening point (C)
50
40/50-140C-VIM<4,0%
40/50-140C-VIM>8%
40 40/50-170C-VIM>8C
150/200-140C-VIM<4%
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Pavement Age (Years)
Figure 5.14: Expected Increase in Softening Point Over Time
Air Voids (VIM): The second mix property included is the voids in the mix, which is
calculated as the difference between the bulk volume of the mix and the sum of the
volumes of the aggregate and the effective bitumen, and expressed as a percentage of
the total volume of constituents. In mathematical terms voids in mix is:
VIM = 100 - (Va + Vb) (5.17)
where VIM is the voids in mix as a percentage

Va is the volume of aggregate as a percentage
Vb is the volume of effective binder in mix as a percentage
Voids in the mix was selected because of various international studies confirming that
once the VIM drops below 3 per cent (2 per cent for less severe conditions, i.e., higher
speeds, lower temperatures etc.), the mix becomes unstable and plastic flow occurs for
the severe conditions previously discussed. Furthermore, VIM was selected instead of
voids in mineral aggregate (VMA) because VIM includes both the effective volume of
binder and the volume of aggregate, thus also allowing the quantification of the influence
of excess binder within the mix. As with softening point the VIM also changes (decreases)
over time. The factors influencing this change in voids are:
Axle loads and average speed of heavy vehicles: Since deformation is a load
related distress, it can be expected that the axle loads will have an influence on the
plastic deformation. The influence is not, however, only dependent on the magnitude
of the axle loads but also on the duration of the load application, and thus the speed of
the heavy vehicles. A typical example of this is the difference in behaviour of the same
asphalt mix on a relatively flat section of road compared with a section on a climbing
lane.
Ratio between pavement temperature and softening point of the binder: The
influence of pavement temperature on the rheological properties of the asphalt mix,
especially the viscosity, is well studied and documented, and as such would have an
influence on the change in voids of the mix over time.
To quantify the expected decrease of voids within the mix (VIM) the following proposed
models were derived from data obtained from long term performance studies in Malaysia
(Harun and Morosiuk, 1995):
The decrease in the mix voides during the first year is given by:
a2
a1 PT
VIM = a0 YE4 Sh (5.18)
SP
Subsequent incremental decrease in VIM during an analysis year is:
a5
PT
VIM = a3 YE4 Sha4 (5.19)
SP
where VIM is the decrease in voids during an analysis year, in per cent
Sh is the speed of heavy vehicles in km/h
PT is the pavement temperature in C at a depth of 20 mm
below the surface, during analysis year
a0 to a5 are calibration parameters
The variables for the first year and the subsequent annual decrease are not the same.
The reason for this is that preliminary analyses indicate that there is a sharp initial
decrease in VIM in the first year. This decrease seems not to be influenced by the initial
void content after construction or the compaction effort applied during construction. After
the first year the change in VIM is much lower for the same conditions. A typical change
in VIM as would be predicted by the model is illustrated Figure 5.15. This shows that
there is a sharp initial decrease, preliminary results indicate in the range of 2 to 3 per
cent, followed by a more or less constant but much lower rate of decrease over time.
Tentative parameters for the model are given in Table 5.7.
Rutting 5-29
70 10
65
8
Softening Point 7
Softening Point of Binder (oC)
60
Voids in Mix (%)

55 5
Voids in Mix 4
50
YE4 = 1 3
Sh = 20 km/h
PT = 35
2
45
40 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Pavement Age (years)
Figure 5.15: Expected Decrease of the Voids in Mix Over Time
Table 5.7
Parameter Values for Air Voids Model
Parameter Default
Value
a0 43.558
a1 -0.616
a2 2.231
a3 5.27
a4 -0.716
a5 3.225
With the mix properties and their change over time quantified it was possible to derive the
following proposed model for predicting the plastic deformation within asphalt layers:
a3
PT
RDPD = Krpd a0 YE4 Sha1 HSa2 VIMa4 T (5.20)
SP
where RDPD is the predicted contribution of plastic deformation within the
asphalt layers of the pavement to the mean rut depth, in
mm
Krpd is the user specified factor for progression of plastic
deformation (default = 1)
HS is the thickness of the bituminous layer, in mm
The first part of the model is for predicting the creep within asphalt layers, and if VIM are
sufficient that will be all that is predicted by the model. Thus creep within the layer will be
a relatively constant annual increase within the layer as a function of the traffic load,
speed of heavy vehicles, temperature and thickness (preliminary). The voids would not
have a substantial influence on the creep. However, should the voids decrease below the
critical values, the model will respond with an increased rate of deformation as illustrated
in Figure 5.16.
Predicted plastic deformation (mm)
VIM>3%
VIM<3%
Pavement age (Years)
Figure 5.16: Typical Prediction of Plastic Deformation (Creep and Flow)
At present only the results of a study from a single experiment in Malaysia are available.
Since only a single average heavy vehicle speed and pavement temperature is
represented by the data, no substantial validation of the model could be performed. An
experiment to obtain additional data is currently in progress within South Africa. Tentative
values for rut depth plastic deformation model parameters are given in Table 5.8.
Table 5.8
Parameter Values for Plastic Deformation Model
Parameter Default
Value
a0 2.46
a1 -0.78
a2 0.71
a3 1.34
a4 -1.26
Rutting 5-31
5.5.5 Surface Wear - RDW
The HDM-4 model for surface wear is the model proposed by Djarf (1995):
RDW = 2.48 10-5 PASS1.02 CW -0.46 S1.22 SALT0.32 (5.21)
where RDW is the rut depth due to studded tyres in mm

PASS is the number of vehicles with studded tyres in one direction
expressed as thousands
S is the vehicle speed in km/h
SALT is a variable for salted or unsalted roads (2 = salted; 1 = unsalted)
The predictions of this model are given in Figure 5.17.
35.0
30.0
Salted
25.0
Speed = 80 km/h
Rut Depth (mm)
20.0
Unsalted
15.0 Salted
Speed = 40 km/h
10.0
Unsalted
5.0
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Vehicle Passes with Studded Tyres (million)
Figure 5.17: Swedish Surface Wear Model

5.6 Rut Depth Standard Deviation
As discussed earlier, only the rut depth standard deviation, calculated as a function of the
mean rut depth, is incorporated within the roughness model of HDM-III.
Although the standard deviation of rut depth can be readily quantified by taking frequent
samples along a pavement, many HDM-III users reported difficulties in estimating this
parameter. It was therefore decided to evaluate whether a simple relationship between
mean rut depth and rut depth standard deviation could be optionally used instead of the
current model, which incorporates all the variables used within the mean rut depth model.
Annex 5.2 section presents the results of the evaluation into the relationship between the
mean rut depth and rut depth standard deviation. It was found that depending upon the
phase of life for a road section there are different distributions of rut depths. During the
early years the data follow an exponential distribution. As ruts begin to manifest
themselves it transitions to a lognormal distribution. During the latter stages of life the
data are normally distributed.
Since the central limit theorem upon which the normal distribution is based does not
extend to the standard deviation, it is therefore important to know what rut depth
distribution applies to the pavement before calculating the standard deviation. If this is
not done, the resulting value will not be correct.
For situations where the actual standard deviation of the rut depth have not been
calculated, the following generic model is proposed for predicting rut depth standard
deviation within HDM-4:
RDS = a0 RDM (5.22)
where RDS is the predicted rut depth standard deviation at start of an

analysis period.
a0 is a coefficient which is dependent on the mean rut depth of
the uniform road section.
RDM is the mean rut depth at start of a analysis period.
Table 5.9 gives the values recommended for the coefficient a0 based on an analysis of the
available data. Additional validation of this model against other databases is required.
Table 5.9
Typical Coefficients for Determining RDS from RDM
Range of mean rut depth (mm) a0

0-5 0.8
5-15 0.5
>15 0.3
5.7 Summary
This chapter addressed the subject of rutting. The rut depth progression models in HDM-
III was derived from a study of bituminous pavements with, mainly, thin surfacings and
rutting was modelled as densification in the unbound pavement layers.
For HDM-4 a more comprehensive rut depth model has been developed containing three
components:
densification of the unbound layers;

Rutting 5-33
plastic flow in the bituminous layers;

surface wear.
The component for densification follows the HDM-III model with three phases of distress:
an initial compaction phase, a slow increase in rut depth under traffic and a final phase
when the pavement is cracked and water enters the unbound layers.
The plastic flow model predicts rutting as a function of asphalt viscosity, air voids, traffic
loading, speed of heavy vehicles , layer thickness and age. Tentative calibration
parameters for this model have been based on research in Malaysia and South Africa.
The surface wear model is derived from experience in Sweden and predicts wear as a
function of the passage of studded tyres, vehicle speed, pavement width and salting.
While further validation of the plastic flow model is desirable, the new rut depth model
presents an advance on the HDM-III version which only considered one rut component
Rutting 1
Ravelling of Bituminous Pavements 6-1
6. RAVELLING OF BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTS
6.1 Introduction
Ravelling is the loss of surface aggregate particles from the bitumen-aggregate matrix.
The occurrence of ravelling varies considerably between regions and from country to
country according to construction methods, specifications, available materials, and local
practice. Ravelling is a common distress in poorly constructed, thin bituminous layers,
such as surface treatments, but is rarely seen in high quality, hot-mix asphalt.
Ravelling is one of a number of bituminous pavement deterioration modes that is grouped

under the general heading of disintegration. Also included in this category are potholing
and edge breaking. Ravelling is typically limited to the pavements surface, and as such
contributes to a reduction in the functional rather than the structural performance of a
pavement. However, in severe cases, ravelling of a thin surface treatment may contribute
to potholing, which does affect the structural performance of the pavement.
In this chapter, the modelling of surface ravelling in HDM-4 is introduced. This is

accomplished by first examining how ravelling was modelled in HDM-III and by others.
This is followed by a discussion of proposed modifications to the HDM-III ravelling models
to be used in HDM-4.
6.2 Overview of Ravelling

6.2.1 Introduction
In broad terms, ravelling can be defined as the progressive loss of surface material by
weathering and/or traffic abrasion (Asphalt Institute, 1989). While surface material loss
occurs as a result of a number of causes, the two primary causes of ravelling are
mechanical fracture of the binder film and loss of adhesion between binder and stone
(Paterson, 1987). Thus the preceding definition is preferable to one that is more
restrictive, such as that used in the Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) program
(SHRP, 1993): wearing away of the pavement surface in high-quality hot mix asphalt
concrete. This latter definition over-emphasises hot mix pavements and only addresses
one of the several possible causes of ravelling.
6.2.2 Ravelling Mechanisms
Bituminous layers are meant to be resilient and resistant to the applied stresses of
environment and load. Mechanical fracture of the binder film occurs when the bitumen
loses its resilience and resistance to applied stresses, and is a natural part of the aging of
bituminous pavements. There are two types of aging that take place, short-term aging
and long-term aging. Short-term aging occurs in the processing of hot-mix asphalt (at the
plant) or during construction operations (in the field). The hardening that occurs during
this process is a result of the loss of the volatile portions of the bitumen. Long-term aging
typically occurs as a result of exposure to ambient temperatures and ultraviolet light. It is
primarily caused by oxidation and the formation of oxidative products. Factors that affect
long-term aging include: the type of bitumen and additives, the type of aggregate, per
cent air voids content, amount of solar (ultraviolet) radiation, and ambient temperatures.
When long-term aging is the dominant aging mechanism, the resultant ravelling is often
linked as a joint distress with weathering, as in the Asphalt Institute definition above, since
they are part of the same process.
In either case, as the viscosity of the binder increases, the likelihood of mechanical
fracture also increases. The process of mechanical fracture is then actually caused by
the action of vehicle tyres passing over the pavement surface: the lateral force of tyres on
the aggregate helps to dislodge the aggregate that rests in a brittle matrix.
Loss of adhesion between the binder and aggregate also occurs when the bond between
binder and aggregate is broken (or may not even develop) due to the presence in the
aggregate of an excess of deleterious materials such as fine-grained (<0.425 mm)
particles. When an excess of fines is present, and especially when the larger aggregate
particles are coated with fines, the bitumen coats the fines rather than the coarse
aggregate. There may thus be insufficient binder to form the bitumen-aggregate matrix or
the aggregate may never actually get coated with a film of bitumen. The deterioration that
occurs in this form of ravelling can develop quite rapidly.
6.2.3 Distresses Similar to Ravelling
When adhesion loss between the binder and aggregate develops in the presence of
water, a process occurs that visually resembles ravelling. More properly termed
stripping, this phenomenon requires a stripping-susceptible (hydrophilic) aggregate and
water. With susceptible aggregates, stripping occurs when water remains in contact with
the bituminous layer for some time; traffic loadings are also necessary to provide a
suction force to drive the stripping action. Stripping generally starts at the bottom of
bituminous layers and works up toward the surface, so that by the time it is visible on the
surface as ravelling the entire pavement may be reduced to rubble. The development
time for stripping is typically between that of ravelling due to contamination and ravelling
due to aging, and is highly dependent on the properties of the aggregate, the amount of
water available, and the traffic loading. As an example, stripping observed in South
Carolina was observed most frequently in pavements that were about 6 to 10 years old
(Yapp, et al., 1993). Other factors that appear to contribute to the development of
stripping include the air void content and the use of open-graded friction courses.
Other deterioration mechanisms that are sometimes characterised as ravelling include:

delamination, in which an entire section or fragment of a surfacing is lost; segregation, in
which the coarse- and fine-grained particles are not evenly distributed in the AC matrix;
and stone loss through lack (or loss) of binder. These problems are more properly
attributed to problems in mix design, material handling and preparation, or construction
problems, rather than to the accelerated or normal aging of the pavements surface.
6.2.4 Summary of Ravelling
From the preceding discussion, it may be noted that ravelling follows one of two distinct
courses. Ravelling as a result of long-term aging is a more or less normal result of
bituminous pavement deterioration that develops over time. This phenomenon is more
common in bituminous pavements in tropical climates, where there are higher
temperatures and greater exposure to ultraviolet light (Millard, 1993). Ravelling as a
result of contamination can be considered a material selection or construction problem
and, if it is present, it will likely have developed early in the life of the pavement. This
second type of ravelling can be considered a premature failure mode.
As noted in Paterson (1987), ravelling has negligible effect on roughness, has serious
structural implications only when the surfacing is thin and thus liable to potholing, but may
increase road noise and flying stone hazards. It thus usually triggers maintenance
(patching or resurfacing) mainly as a preventive measure against consequent, more
serious types of distress. Notwithstanding the occasional shattered windshield that
results from kicked up loose chippings, it is safe to say that the impact of ravelling on the
driver is minimal. Layers most prone to ravelling are thin surfacings that are placed over
aged or rough, but structurally sound, underlying layers. In HDM-III, ravelling did not
directly contribute to roughness progression, instead entering the pothole progression
model as one of three variables; the pothole progression term was then one of several
variables in the roughness progression model.
6.3 Existing approaches to modelling ravelling

6.3.1 Ravelling in HDM-III
The development of the ravelling model in HDM-III was based on data collected during
the Brazil-UNDP paved road deterioration study. A summary of the types of pavements
included in that data base and some key characteristics are shown in Table 6.1 and Table
6.2.
Three types of surfaced roads were included in the data base for the development of the
ravelling model: slurry seals; chip seals; and open-graded, cold-mixed asphalt. The slurry
seal was characterised by a 5 mm maximum size graded aggregate applied to either
asphalt concrete or double surface treatments. Of the 96 sections of slurry seal, only 15
were observed to ravel, and of those most of the distress was delamination. The chip
seals usually consisted of a top layer of 10 mm stone placed on top of a lower layer of 16
or 19 mm stone (a double surface treatment). Most of the ravelling in the chip seals often
consisted of the loss of the top layer (10 mm) aggregate in the two-layer applications. No
additional information could be found concerning design characteristics of the cold-mixed
asphalt. It should be noted that ravelling was not found in any of the asphalt concrete-
surfaced pavements in the Brazil study so they were not included in the data base for the
ravelling models.
Table 6.1
Pavement Sections Used to Develop HDM-III Ravelling Models
Surface Type Number of Sections

Double Surface Treatment 116
Slurry Seal Reseal 96
Open-Graded Cold Mix 16
Table 6.2
Characteristics of Pavements Used to Develop HDM-III Ravelling Models
Parameter Minimum Maximum Mean

Traffic, vehicles per day 100 4,500 1,700
Equivalent Axle Loads, MESA/lane/yr 0.007 2.810 0.194
Construction Quality, CDR 0 (191) 1 (37) 0.162
(0 = no faults, 1 = faulty)
Deflection, mm 0.26 2.02 0.79
Modified Structural Number, SNC 2.71 7.72 3.86
The sum of areas of ravelling on the test sections, expressed as a percentage of total
surface area, was recorded during the regular visual condition surveys (every 4 to 6
months). Ravelling was said to have initiated when more than 0.5 per cent of the surface
area was showing stone loss. In the distress surveys no attempt was made to
differentiate among the various causes of ravelling, so it is not possible from these data to
model ravelling deterioration due to specific causes. Furthermore, during data collection
ravelling was not differentiated by severity, so severity does not enter into the model as a
variable.
The general trend of ravelling is suggested by Paterson (1987) to be similar to the other
time-based deterioration models. That is, ravelling deterioration is divided into two
phases: an initiation period, defined as the time from opening of the pavement to the first
development of ravelling, and the progression period, which is the increase in the per cent
ravelled area over time once the distress has appeared. These are described in greater
detail below.
Initiation of Ravelling
Initiation of ravelling was said to occur when 0.5 per cent of a test sections area was
classified as ravelled. In examining the explanatory variables, it was found that traffic
volume had a significant effect when sections were differentiated by pavement type.
Therefore, a model for the initiation period was developed that predicted the mean time to
the onset of ravelling (for the three different types of pavements that exhibited ravelling)
based on the annual vehicle loadings. Factors that were found not to have an effect on
the initiation of ravelling included base type (although cemented bases were excluded
from the study) and pavement strength (Paterson, 1987).
During the data collection, it was clear that a significant portion of the ravelling could be
attributed to poor quality work during the surface layer application or construction phase.
Consequently, a construction defect (CDR) code was introduced in which inconsistent
application of bitumen or 100 per cent loss of stone within 1 to 3 years due to loss of
adhesion called for a CDR rating of 1.0, and no construction defects required a CDR = 0.
The final model for the initiation of ravelling in HDM-III is shown in Equation 6.1:
IRV = Kvi a0 exp(-0.655 CQ - 0.156 YAX) (6.1)
where IRV is the predicted age of surface treatments at the initiation of

ravelling
Kvi is the user-specified ravelling initiation factor (default =1)
a0 is a constant related to surfacing type;
for surface treatment, a0 = 10.5,
slurry seal, a0 = 14.1
cold mix, a0 = 8.0
CQ is the construction quality factor (0 if no faults, 1 if faulty)
YAX is the annual flow of all vehicle axles, millions/lane/year
This model is illustrated Figure 6.1 in which the relationship between mean time to
ravelling and applied traffic is plotted for the three different types of pavements available
in the Brazil data base and the two values of CQ. It is noted that ravelling initiation is
quite sensitive to CQ, somewhat less sensitive to surface type, and fairly insensitive to
applied traffic.
Progression of Ravelling
Data on the progression of ravelling was obtained by recording the ravelled area as a
percentage of the total pavement area. The rate of ravelling progression was then
computed as the difference in areas of ravelling on successive surveys divided by the
period of time between surveys.
The integrated model for the prediction of the area of ravelling at a time, t, since initiation
is expressed by Equation 6.2:
ARVt = (1 z) 50 + z[z a0 a1 t + z 0.5 a1 + (1 z)a1]1/a1 (6.2)
where ARVt is the per cent area of ravelling at time t

z is 1, if t < Tc; otherwise z = -1
a0 is a regression coefficient, 4.42
a1 is a regression coefficient, equal to 0.352
t is the time since ravelling initiation, in years
Tc is (50a1 - 0.5a1)/(a0 a1), the time to 50 per cent ravelling
14
Slurry Seal, CQ=0
Chip Seal, CQ=0
Cold Mix, CQ=0
12
Slurry Seal, CQ=1
Chip Seal, CQ=1
Cold Mix, CQ=1
10
Time to Ravelling, Years
0
0.1 0.6 1.1 1.6 2.1 2.6 3.1 3.6
Vehicle Axles/Lane/Year, Millions (YAX)
Figure 6.1: HDM-III Time to Ravelling Initiation
As only 27 of the 338 observations were on slurry seals or cold mix surfaces, the data for
all of the sections were pooled and one progression model was developed for all surface
types.
The time required to reach a given per cent area of ravelling is shown in Figure 6.2, based
on Equation 6.2. The model predicts that, on average, 100 per cent of the surface area is
ravelled 4.1 years after initiation. However, as with the initiation model, there is a good
deal of scatter in the data, suggesting that much of the ravelling phenomenon is not
explained by the single variable in this model, time. The effects of other variables, such
as traffic (AADT or ESA) and pavement strength parameters, were not found to be
significant.
Validation of the HDM-III Ravelling Model
No direct validation of the ravelling models was performed (Paterson, 1987) due to the
unavailability of independent data sets. An indirect analysis of the models was made by
comparing the predicted time to 50 per cent ravelling with typical observed intervals
between reseals or resurfacings for the pavement types that were addressed in the
models. The results were deemed reasonable.
100
90
80
70
60
% Area Ravelling
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.01 1 2 3 4
Time, years
Figure 6.2: HDM-III Ravelling Progression for all Pavements
Shortcomings of Ravelling Modelling
Paterson (1987) notes two potential shortcomings of the model: that progression was only
related to time and not traffic or loading (in fact, at low traffic volumes traffic was found to
have a beneficial effect), and that insufficient data were available to maintain the
differentiation among the various surface types so that all data were pooled in the final
progression model.
From an examination of the models, a number of other shortcomings are suggested:
different pavement types are not considered. While it is noted that pavement type,
design, and specifications play a large role in a pavements tendency to ravel, the
models were developed from only three general types of pavements, of which only
one showed significant ravelling. As seen in Table 2.2, HDM-4 has more generic
pavement types. These can be expected to have different ravelling behaviour and
should be modelled as such;
there is not a clear differentiation among mechanisms grouped as ravelling. There
are many different modes of deterioration in which the aggregate and binder can
separate. These need to be clearly distinguished if true ravelling is to be modelled;
there is a lack of differentiation between construction problems and performance
problems;
ravelling progression follows the same path under all conditions. However, when CDR
is poor, ravelling progression should probably increase.
6.3.2 Other Ravelling Models
Ravelling is a mode of deterioration that is not well represented in available models. This
is observed from a review of Appendix A of Paterson (1987), Summary of Distress
Prediction Models from Selected Major Studies, which reviews major studies that
produced distress models; none of the five other studies mentioned had ravelling models.
One explanation for this absence is that, unlike cracking and rutting, ravelling can not be
directly attributed to structural deterioration and thus does not lend itself well to modelling
in which accumulated loadings or material mechanical properties are variables; there is
quite simply little or no relationship between ravelling and deflections or strength. Also, as
discussed previously, ravelling is primarily a problem not of excessive loading or some
other structural response, but of materials and construction. For many forms of ravelling,
the process of deterioration is fairly rapid, which makes empirical modelling problematic
as well, due to the difficulties of observing the course of deterioration. When ravelling
occurs naturally, after many years of service, there tends to be more serious distresses
present that trigger rehabilitation. While the factors that contribute to ravelling have been
widely studied, the objective in these studies was more to identify those undesirable
aspects that contribute to poor performance than to develop prediction models.
With the exception of models developed within the framework of HDM-III, only a few other
examples of ravelling models could be identified. One example of a ravelling model that
is based on the HDM-III approach is shown in Equation 6.3 (Pidwerbesky, et al., 1990):
IRV = 10.5 K exp(-0.156 YAX) (6.3)
where K equals Kspeed Kaxle Kpasses

Kspeed is a measure of the average vehicle speed on the surface
during the first 48 hours
Kaxle is 1 - exp-(%AXLE*YAX)
%AXLE is the proportion of normal traffic (AXLE) using the road
during the first 48 hours
Kpasses is the number of roller passes applied after sealing
As can be seen, with two minor exceptions this model is simply the HDM-III ravelling
initiation model for surface treatments, with the stated conditions that the aggregate is
clean and dry and that the binder passes specification. In the HDM context these
assumptions are analogous to setting CDR equal to 0. The other difference is that this
model introduces a factor to address the detrimental effects of early trafficking and
insufficient aggregate embedment through the use of the K factor, which is analogous to
the ravelling initiation (Kvi) factor in HDM-III. In this model, early trafficking on a
pavement that is not well compacted contributes to a decrease in the time before the
surface treatment begins to ravel.
CRRI also developed ravelling models, based on a study of premix carpet (PMC), semi-
dense carpet (SDC), and AC pavements in India (CRRI, 1993). The resultant ravelling
initiation and progression models have similar explanatory variables to the HDM-III
models, but a different form. These are shown in Equation 6.4 and 6.5.
IRV = 3.18 YAX-0.38 (CQ + 1)-0.38 (6.4)
0.32
ARVt = 3.94 YAX SRAVt0.46 (6.5)
where SRAVt is the sigmoidal function of raveling area, ARVt, at time t

= min (ARVt, 100 - ARVt)
CRRI (1993) reported that it was only possible to develop initiation and progression
models for the PMC: there was insufficient ravelling in the other pavement types from
which to draw valid conclusions.
Ravelling is indirectly considered in roughness-based performance models, including

VESYS (Kenis, et al., 1982) and AASHTO (1993). However, in VESYS ravelling only
appears as part of the roughness equation, which itself is based primarily on variations in
rut depth and perhaps deflection. AASHTO indirectly incorporates ravelling in the
serviceability model, which is a function of rut depth, slope variance, cracking, and
patching. In the AASHTO serviceability equation, the performance measure, PSI, is
dominated by the roughness term, to which ravelling makes a very minor contribution.
Consideration of Ravelling in SHRP
As part of the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP), there were two separate
areas in which bituminous research was undertaken the Asphalt program area and the
Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) program area. In the LTPP research,
ravelling was one of the distress types that was identified (Simpson, et al. 1994) on which
sensitivity analyses would be performed. The complete list of distresses was:
crocodile (alligator) cracking;

transverse cracking;
rutting;
roughness;
friction loss;
ravelling/weathering.
While it appears that the original intent in the reported research was to develop suitable
model forms for all of the above list of distresses, in the end only transverse cracking,
rutting and roughness were considered. Simpson, et al. (1994) do, however, indicate
which data elements are believed to be important for the prediction of
ravelling/weathering. They are:
pavement age;
cumulative ESA;
asphalt content;
per cent air voids;
environmental type;
average monthly minimum temperature;
number of days minimum temperature below freezing;
number of air freeze-thaw cycles;
annual precipitation.
Guidance proffered for the analysis of ravelling/weathering is that all of the different types
of hot-mix and full-depth AC test sections in the LTPP database are to be combined, as
the phenomenon of ravelling/weathering is primarily a function of the surface
characteristics.
Unfortunately, a shortcoming of the LTPP database suggests that the eventual analysis of
these data may not be as helpful as would be hoped. As materials information for the thin
surfacings (surface treatments) is not available, these test sections will be omitted from
studies of this distress (Simpson et al., 1994). Thus the surface types most prone to
ravelling are omitted from study and, apart from the list of those values which researchers
believe could be of significance in ravelling development, no additional insight into
ravelling is available from LTPP.
In the Asphalt program, distress modelling is based on fundamental material and mix
properties and deterioration is divided into load-related and non-load-related causes
(Lytton, et al., 1993). The load-related distresses that are considered include fatigue
cracking and rutting. The non-load-related distress that is modelled is thermal cracking.
Taken together, these models form the basis for the SHRP asphalt design software,
Superpave. Aging was also studied, but the intent appears to have been to collect data in
conjunction with the modelling of thermal cracking. Thus, no guidance on ravelling
emerges from the SHRP Asphalt program.
6.3.3 Discussion
It is apparent that there is not an abundance of alternative ravelling models whose use in
HDM-4, either directly or modified, can be considered. This is likely because of the way
that ravelling is considered by pavement engineers; more as a construction or materials
defect than as a performance problem.
As was found during the modelling of ravelling from the Brazil data, ravelling is not
typically a problem on hot-mix asphalt surfaced pavements. Bituminous layers thicker
than the thickness of surface treatments tend to have a number of properties that reduce
the probability of ravelling. Ravelling is a more common mode of premature deterioration
in surface treatments because of several factors:
the materials used in these surfacings may be of a lower quality than those used in
AM mixes. Surface treatments are, by their nature, a lower cost means of restoring
desirable surface properties, including friction and impermeability. As they are not
designed to increase the load carrying ability of the pavement they are usually
constructed in as economical a manner as possible;
the limits on the per cent binder (to reduce flushing/bleeding) are such that small
miscalculations will result in performance problems. Typical binder percentages are
between 4 and 8; the actual amount is usually dependent on the type of design, the
specified binder, the use of other additives, and the size, shape, and quality of the
aggregate. With insufficient binder the mix will ravel, but this will typically occur
shortly after construction. Insufficient binder through miscalculation can also
contribute to inadequate aggregate embedment, which will also contribute to ravelling.
Binder film thickness, which is directly related to binder application rates, also has an
impact. Thicker films contribute to better performance in that they retain aggregate
better initially as well as oxidise more slowly;
because of their thinness, a greater percentage of the layer is exposed to oxidation
and solar radiation. As noted earlier, one of the mechanisms of ravelling is the
fracture of the binder/aggregate matrix as a result of the increase in binder viscosity.
The higher the ratio of surface area to layer volume (i.e., the thinner the layer), the
more the binder is exposed to aging elements. Thus thinner layers tend to harden
quicker than thick layers. Furthermore, the aggregates are not really in a matrix in the
sense that they are in thicker layers (for example, the thickness of most chip seals is
about the size of the aggregate);
surface treatments are more susceptible to adverse environmental conditions at the
time of their construction (e.g., high/low temperature, rain, high wind, and so on) than
are conventional AM mixes.
When ravelling does develop in an asphalt surface, it comes after many years of
exposure to temperature cycling and solar radiation. Because of the amount of time that
this process requires, ravelling is quite often preceded by other distresses such as
cracking and rutting. Thus, much of the literature related to the evaluation of asphalt
surfaces does not even mention ravelling as a distress.
6.3.4 Experience Using the HDM-III Ravelling Model
The preceding sections of this chapter provide background on the HDM-III ravelling model
and the few attempts to model ravelling by others that could be identified. This section
summarises the experience of many HDM-III users in adapting or applying the ravelling
model in a wide range of conditions.
The application of the HDM-III ravelling models in 27 countries (including data from 32
reports covering 38 applications) is given in Table 6.3 (summarised from Chakrabarti and
Bennett, 1994). When HDM models are used, a process of calibration should be
conducted in which initiation and progression coefficients for the pavement deterioration
models are selected so that the predicted responses mirror local conditions. The ravelling
coefficient, Kvi, is a user-specified value that may be used to adjust the time to ravelling
based on local experience. The coefficients used in application of the ravelling initiation
model range from 0.035 in Sri Lanka to 2.0 in Jordan. Assuming that the Sri Lanka model
uses the constant for a cold mix surfacing, this represents a range in predicted times to
ravelling of about 3 months to almost 30 years. This is not unrealistic, however, in that
poorly constructed surface treatments will start to ravel almost immediately after opening
to traffic and well constructed hot mix layers will practically never ravel.
In 19 of the 38 applications, the default coefficient of 1.0 was used for the ravelling
initiation model. Where known, Table 6.3 also provides the primary pavement type and
design/construction/performance background regarding these pavements. It is not known
how many of these coefficients are based on actual observations of performance or
whether the appropriate pavement type constant (a0) was selected in each case as well.
From a review of the individual studies in which the use of these models is reported, it is
likely that in some cases the default coefficient is used out of convenience.
A general observation from these data is that surface treatments in general, and
specifically any surface that is manually constructed, are more prone to ravelling than
higher quality, machine-laid, bituminous concrete layers. The results suggest that both
pavement type and construction quality are extremely important in the initiation and
development of ravelling.
Table 6.3
Summary of Experience Using HDM-III Ravelling Models
Country Ravelling Primary Pavement Type Other Information

Initiation
Kvi
Australia 1.0 Used default for lack of better information
(Queensland) on following surface treatments: 5 mm, 10
1.3 mm, and rubberised.
Residential mix, gap graded.
Bangladesh 0.1 Seal Coat/Bituminous
Carpetting on water bound
macadam, HBB, brick soling,
and SG
Barbados Used time to initiation as 2 years and from
initiation to 100% coverage as 8 years
Botswana 0.67 Surface on either natural Pavements ranged from 12 to 14 years
gravel or stabilised base old; ADT range 117 to 1254; SN was
either 1.4 or 1.5; CBR range is 10 to 53.
0.59 Overlay, surface treatment, Range in age from 0 to 15 years, surface
slurry, fog seal, sand, B/R thicknesses from 10 to 60 mm, SNC from
over NEAT, STAB, or CRUSH 1.60 to 4.82
Brazil 1.0
Burma Penetration Macadam Used an initiation period of 3 years and
multiplied the annual progression by factor
of 2
Chile 1.0 Surface Treatments
1.2 Cold Mixes
Germany 0.9 Average precipitation of 0.10 m/ month,
SNC ranged from 2.4 to 9.8, surface
thicknesses range from 20 to 120 mm.
Guatemala 1.0
Guinea-Bissau 1.0
Hungary 0.9 Based on Germany experience. Average
precipitation of 0.05 m/ month; surface age
from 11 to 20 years; surface thickness
from 36 to 73 mm.
India (CES) 0.7 < 600 mm/year rainfall
0.6 600 mm < rainfall < 1600 mm
0.5 > 1600 mm/year rainfall
(JB&Partners) 0.6 medium rainfall
(RITES) 1.0 medium rainfall
(NDLI) 1.0 Premix Carpet (PMC)
Indonesia PenMac Used initiation period of 3 years and total
life of 5 years.
Another study used a ravelling initiation
period of 0 for average quality and 6 years
for good quality with a time to 100%
ravelling 15 years in either case.
... continued
Table 6.3
Summary of Experience Using HDM-III Ravelling Models (continued)
Country Ravelling Primary Pavement Type Other Information

Initiation,
Kvi
Jordan 1.5 126 mm AC (existing 12 years old
2.0 pavement)
1.0 New Pavement 0.025 m/month rainfall, SNC of 3.2, 10-
100 mm AC year old surface
Lesotho 0.90 Seal or bitumen-surfaced Age ranged from 2 to 13 yrs, loading from
3000 to 230,000 ESA/lane/year, thickness
from 15 to 50 mm, SNC from 1.41 to 4.25.
Malaysia 1.0
Morocco 1.0
Mozambique 1.0 ST on SB
Nigeria 1.0
Pakistan 1.0
Peru 1.0 13 % ST; rest are cold mix or Possibly heavy rainfall
AC
South Africa 36 sections, 3 traffic levels, surface age
(Transvaal) 1.2 SBST, DBST and Cape Seal from 1 to 27 years, SNC from 1.22 to 6.07,
on GB surface thickness from 10 to 100 mm
(Eastern Cape No change 1 to 25 years old, 20,000 to 160,000

Region) (1.0) ESA/lane/year, thickness 10 to 50 mm.
Spain 1.0
Sri Lanka 0.035 Hand-built with large stones
followed by smaller stones
followed with binder and
blinded with sand.
Tanzania 1.0 DBST on SL and SBST on SB 29 mm DBST has SNC of 3.0; 14 mm
SBST has SNC of 2.3 or 2.5
Thailand 1.0 Had 3 DBST 15 mm thick and 1 SBST 10
mm thick. Default didnt predict well.
Tunisia 1.0
6.4 Modelling Ravelling in HDM-4

6.4.1 Introduction
The use of HDM requires the selection of the appropriate pavement models and model
coefficients so that the predicted distresses are representative of local conditions. Often,
for lack of more appropriate alternatives or additional guidance, the default coefficients
are selected. This can lead to predictions that are quite unrealistic. In the ravelling
initiation models, the construction defect factor (CDR) must also be selected, which is
another form of calibration.
Based on an examination of the results from previous experience using the ravelling
models and the previously stated observations about the initiation of ravelling, it is
proposed that the HDM-III ravelling initiation and progression models be retained with the
following modifications:
provide guidance on the determination of the CDR factor;

include a method of considering the effect on ravelling of design/environment

parameters;
quantify the propensity of different surface types to ravel.
This section presents the approach that is proposed to address these aspects of ravelling.
In particular, various conditions that are known to affect the initiation and progression of
ravelling are identified and a means of considering their effects is proposed.
6.4.2 Ravelling Initiation Model
The final ravelling initiation model for HDM-4 is as follows:
IRV = Kvi (a0 exp(-a1 CDR -a2 YAX)) (6.6)
where CDR is the construction defects factor for ravelling

a0 to a2 are parameters which depend upon pavement type
The ravelling construction defects factor is based on two considerations: the construction
quality (CDRc) and the design/environment (CDRde). While they separately and
independently affect ravelling, they are combined as the construction defect factor in the
ravelling initiation model through Equation 6.7:
CDR = CDRc + CDRde (6.7)
where CDRc is the largest defect factor due to construction defects

CDRde is the largest defect factor due to design and environmental
conditions
As an example of the applicability of multiple factors, one could have a double surface
treatments placed by hand with poor construction quality (CDRc = 1.2) during a rainfall
(CDCde = 1).
Within each factor there may be several factors influencing either CDRc or CDRde.
Consequently, the total surface construction surface defect factor is sum of their
maximums:
CDR = max(CDRci) + max(CDRdei) (6.8)
A detailed description of the construction defect factors is given in the following section.
The pavement type parameters are used to reflect the property that different types of
surfaces perform differently. This was implicit in the analysis of the Brazil ravelling data,
where AC and overlay surfaces did not ravel at all, slurry seals ravelled more slowly than
surface treatments, and surface treatments ravelled more slowly than cold mix surfaces.
The comparative performance of different surface types was addressed in HDM-III by the
surfacing type constant in the ravelling initiation model. However, constants were
provided for only three or four types of pavements.
Table 6.4 gives the proposed surfacing constants for pavements in HDM-4. The
surfacing constants are based on grouping together like treatments with a treatment
already assigned a constant in HDM-III.
Table 6.4
Proposed Constants for Selected Pavement Types
Surface Type Surface Material a0 a1 a2

AC (hot-mix asphalt concrete) 100 0.655 0.156
HRA (hot rolled asphalt) 100 0.655 0.156
AM MAC (modified asphalt cement) 100 0.655 0.156
RAC (rubberised asphalt cement) 100 0.655 0.156
SMA (stone mastic asphalt) 100 0.655 0.156
DAC (full-depth asphalt concrete) 100 0.655 0.156
SBST (single surface treatment) 10.5 0.655 0.156
DBST (double surface treatment) 10.5 0.655 0.156
ST CAPE (cape seal) 13.65 0.655 0.156
SL (slurry seal) 14.1 0.655 0.156
PAC (porous asphalt concrete) 12.7 0.655 0.156
The default value for Kvi is 1.0. Ideally the calibration of the model will be achieved by
adopting different values for the model parameter a0.
6.4.3 Construction Defect Factors
Many of the factors that affect the initiation of ravelling are simply an indication of
conditions present when the surface is constructed. These include construction quality
factors and the effect of surfacing mix designs and environmental conditions. Guidance
on the selection of the appropriate values for CDRc and CDRde is presented in the
following sections.
Construction Quality - CDRc
Construction quality (CQ) as considered in HDM-III1 was a subjective evaluation of the

presence and severity of construction factors that affect the performance of the
pavement. A CQ of 0 indicated that there were not any construction faults and a CQ of
1.0 indicated faulty construction. Watanatada, et al. (1987) suggested that this factor
could be used to evaluate the value of quality control and effectiveness of construction
specifications. The effect of faulty construction, described as faulty binder distribution,
contaminated stone, stripping of the binder, was a 50 per cent reduction in the predicted
time to ravelling initiation. This was shown in Figure 6.1, where the plots of ravelling
initiation with a CQ of 1.0 were half those of the CQ = 0 plots.
It is proposed that the CDRc factor be made a continuous function ranging from 0 to 2.0;
values above 1.0 would represent particularly poor construction practices. This change
1
In HDM-III the terminology CQ was used for construction defects. This has been replaced with CD in HDM-
4.
facilitates the consideration of a broader range of construction defects and permits users
to fine-tune the application of the ravelling model.
The effect of variables that are affected by construction practices is discussed below.
The proposed use of these factors is shown in Table 6.5. While for every parameter the
default value of CDRc is 0, users should be cautioned that application of the default value
gives average results. It would be a rare case in which not even one of the conditions
applies, and it is more likely that several apply at the same time. In the event that several
of the conditions apply, the highest CDRc should be used as it will control performance.
Table 6.5
Proposed Variations in CDRc Factor Based on Several Construction Parameters
Parameter Rating Proposed CDRc

Compaction Adequate 0
Poor 0.5
Aggregate Cleanliness Clean, free from dust, vegetation, clay, and clay coating 0
on coarse particles
Dusty, dirty, otherwise contaminated with deleterious 1.5
materials
Aggregate Soundness Low abrasion loss 0
High abrasion loss 1.0
Variation in Binder Binder uniformly applied 0
Preparation Bitumen properly mixed and stored 0
Bitumen overheated 1.0
Percentage Uneven application: areas where there is little or no 1.2
binder
Construction Method Placed using heavy equipment (pavers, rollers, etc.) 0
Placed completely by hand 1.2
Compaction
Adequate compaction is an important component of the construction of any bitumen

bound layer. While it is critical to the good long-term performance of hot-mix AC,
compaction also is necessary if surface treatments are to perform as intended. From the
perspective of ravelling, adequate compaction reduces the amount of air voids in the layer
and thus helps to minimise the oxidation of the asphalt. Compaction requirements the
number, type, rolling pattern, and timing of an AM layer must be determined for
specific mixes and paving conditions.
The purpose of compaction of ST layers is to seat the aggregate in the binder. This is
most often done with a pneumatic-tyred roller, as steel-wheeled rollers tend to ride on the
larger stone and bridge the gap over depressed areas, or crush softer aggregate.
Pneumatic rollers apply pressure uniformly. While excessive compaction has no effect on
AC, on ST layers excessive compaction will dislodge the aggregate and actually
contribute to ravelling.
Aggregate Cleanliness
The aggregate must be clean to bond well with the bitumen. Aggregate should be free
from contaminants that will inhibit good aggregate-binder adhesion, which includes dust,
clay, shale, and vegetation. Aggregate used in surface treatment should also be dry.
Aggregate Soundness
Soundness refers to the hardness or resistance to break up of the aggregate. Hard

aggregates are preferred at the pavement surface in order to resist the wear and break
down by traffic.
Preparation
Overheating the binder during the construction process is one of the most common
causes of early ravelling. The maximum recommended temperatures for hot-mix AC is
177 C for dense-graded mixes and about 120 C for open-graded mixes. Maximum
spraying temperatures of surface treatments are lower and depend upon the binder type.
Some broad guidelines are provided below; details for the specific application should be
identified before any project is undertaken (Asphalt Institute, 1989):
asphalt cement 130 to 150 C

emulsified asphalt 60 to 85 C
cutback asphalt 20 to 110 C
Variation in Binder Percentage
In surface treatments that are applied in layers (e.g., the SBST, DBST, Cape Seal), the
binder is either applied by hand spray or by bitumen distributor. A properly functioning
distributor applies an even layer of the correct amount of bitumen; streaky or bare spots
means that there are areas where aggregate will be applied but there will not be any
adhesive agent.
Construction Method
Specialised equipment has been developed to apply all of the various bituminous
surfacings, from hot-mix AC to slurry seals. Such equipment, in good working order and
properly used, helps to ensure that the layer performs well, including minimising ravelling
potential. Materials that are placed manually, including both aggregates and binders, will
increase the probability of early ravelling.
Design/Environment Factor- CDRde
There are several design and environmental factors that affect ravelling that, for the sake
of simplicity, can also be considered under construction defects. The CDRde factor is
used to account for the effect on performance of these factors. The default value of
CDRde is 0.
Where multiple design/environmental factors could be applied, the highest of the

applicable CDRde should be applied. Proposed factors are shown in Table 6.6.
Table 6.6
Proposed Variations in CDRde Based on Design and Environmental Parameters
Parameter Rating Effect on CDRde

Mix Density Dense-graded 0
Open graded 0.4
Normal UV exposure 0
Ultraviolet (UV) Light High UV exposure (tropical, high altitude) 0.3
No rain during surfacing 0
Rainfall Exposure to rains during surface construction 1.0
Layer Thickness Thick 0
Thin 0.2
Mix Density
The effect of a mixs air voids content on ravelling was discussed above, in conjunction
with compaction. If a surface layer is designed as an open-graded mix, no matter how it
is compacted, it will have a higher tendency to ravel because of the greater exposure of
bitumen to air. This will cause the bitumen to oxidise, which raises the viscosity of the
binder.
Exposure to Solar Radiation
The exposure to solar radiation (ultraviolet or UV) light speeds up the aging process of
bitumen. UV exposure is more severe in the tropics and at high altitudes.
Weather During Construction
While the weather at the time of paving has a minimal effect on the performance of AC
layers, it can be the difference between good and bad performance in an ST. Typical
requirements for placement of an ST are that the air temperature be above 10 C and that
the pavements surface temperature be above 20 C (Asphalt Institute, 1989). Surface
treatments should not be applied when the existing surface is wet or when it is threatening
to rain; these conditions can contribute to the immediate ravelling of the new surface.
Layer Thickness
There are at least two aspects of thickness that have a bearing on ravelling layer
thickness and film thickness. If the thickness of the layer is greater than twice the
maximum aggregate size, it can be assumed that the layer is sufficiently thick to resist
premature oxidation. Likewise, if the binder film is thin or coating is uneven, it is more
likely to harden and lose its ability to retain aggregate. Thickness of binder film is affected
by binder application rates, uniformity, and absorptivity of the aggregate.
6.4.4 Ravelling Progression Model
The modelling of ravelling progression is characterised by Equation 6.2, as noted earlier,

in which the area of ravelling at a time, t, since initiation is projected. The incremental
change in the ravelled area can be calculated using the following equation:
ARV =(Kvp) 1 zr {[zr a0 a1 TRV + SRV a1]1/a1 SRV} (6.9)
where ARV is the change in ravelled area in the analysis year, in per
cent
Kvp is the ravelling progression factor, default = 1
zr is 1, if ARVa < 50; else zr = -1
a0 is a constant, default = 4.42
a1 is a constant, default = 0.352
TRV is 0, if AGE2 < IRV and ARVa = 0
is (AGE2 - IRV), if AGE2 - 1 < IRV AGE2 and ARVa = 0
is 1, if IRV AGE2 - 1 or ARVa > 0
SRV is min (ARV, 100 - ARV)
Key elements of this model are that:
it is only time-based and does not have a traffic component;

the time to 50 per cent ravelling is fixed at about 2 years.
Because of the lack of new data with which the ravelling progression model could be
evaluated, it is not possible to address the first two items. In order to evaluate the
contribution of traffic to ravelling progression it would be necessary to have accurate
traffic and distress data from different pavement types in which ravelling progression was
measured. Such data were not available to the HTRS team. Furthermore, the effect of
traffic on ravelling behaviour is quite complex. In addition to providing the force that
dislodges aggregate from the binder, rubber-tyred traffic actually imparts at least three
recognised benefits to bituminous pavements:
early in the life of the surfacing, traffic contributes to the final compaction of the layer.
This raises the material density somewhat and seals off the surface to the effects of
oxidation. This is why shoulders, which receive less traffic, tend to weather/ravel more
than the mainline pavement;
traffic also kneads the surface, improving the embedment of the aggregate in surface
treatments. Initial aggregate embedment is often around 50 per cent, while the
desired final embedment is around 70 per cent. Thus traffic is actually needed to
reach the design objectives;
over time, the kneading action of vehicle tyres helps to draw asphalt up to the
pavement surface. This keeps trafficked areas from oxidising or becoming brittle.
The effect of the ravelling progression factor is simply to contract or expand the amount of
time that ravelling takes to proceed to 100 per cent once it has initiated. This is shown in
Figure 6.3 where the per cent of area ravelled is plotted over time for different Kvp.
100
90
80
70
Area Ravelled, percent .
60
50
40 Kvp = 0.8
30
Kvp = 1.0
Kvp = 1.25
20
Kvp = 1.5
10
Kvp = 2.0
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time, years
Figure 6.3: Per Cent Area Ravelled Over Time for Different Kvp
It is proposed that the default ravelling progression factor, Kvp, be 1.0. Values less than
or greater than 1.0 can be selected based on construction quality and type of mix, along
the lines of the discussion on ravelling initiation. However, separate CDR factors are not
needed for ravelling progression. The effect of different progression factors on the time
to reach 100 per cent ravelling is shown in Table 6.7.
Table 6.7
Ravelling Progression Coefficients for Selected Typical Conditions
Kvp Per Cent Ravelling at Time t After Initiation, Years Typical

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Conditions
0.8 3 7 16 29 48 67 82 91 97 100 CDR 0.2
1.0 4 11 25 48 71 87 100 100 0.2 <CDR 0.5
1.25 5 17 41 71 90 100 0.5 <CDR 0.8
1.5 7 25 61 87 100 0.8 <CDR 1.2
2.0 11 48 87 100 CDR > 1.2
6.5 Summary
Cracking and rutting are the two most commonly modelled distresses of bituminous
pavements and, in conjunction with potholing, contribute the most to the progression of
roughness in the HDM models. Ravelling, while contributing to overall roughness through
the pothole term, is generally not considered a structural problem. Kannemeyer and
Visser (1994) note that in HDM-III ravelling only begins to have an effect when the area of
on ravelling exceeds 30 per cent, and that the influence of ravelling on roughness... is
negligible. However, the presence of ravelling is important as a trigger for resurfacing
intervention and must be considered when determining the need for and selecting the
appropriate maintenance treatment.
The HDM ravelling models are applied in a wide range of circumstances and to
pavements that exhibit a range of characteristics from thin to thick, from hand constructed
to machine laid, and from poor to excellent construction quality. Ravelling is also
modelled on pavements exhibiting a range of different designs, from hot-mix asphalt
concrete surfaces, which tend not to ravel at all, to surface treatments, which can ravel
after a very brief exposure to traffic. While generally speaking, a high quality (CDR = 0)
bituminous pavement should not ravel, it is still important to have available a model that
will appropriately consider the development and progression of ravelling under a range of
actual conditions. The proposed modifications and additional explanations offered for the
HDM-4 ravelling models are intended to assist HDM users in achieving the following
objectives:
extend the range of applicability of the model;

guide users to selecting the appropriate values;
result in more accurate predictions of ravelling.
Potholing, Delamination and Edge Break 7-1
7. POTHOLING, DELAMINATION AND EDGE BREAK
7.1 Introduction
This chapter addresses the subject of major loss of material from bituminous pavements
which has an immediate effect on road users, consisting of potholing, delamination and
edge break.
HDM-III contained models to predict the occurrence of potholes on surfaces where

cracking and/or ravelling is prevalent through a mechanism of gradual material loss under
traffic. It did not address the sudden loss of an area of wearing course due to cracking
and lack of bond to the underlying layer, commonly known as delamination. It is
proposed to model this latter effect in HDM-4.
The loss of material from the pavement edge is a widespread defect in countries that
have narrow roads with unsealed shoulders. This distress mode was not modelled in
HDM-III but is proposed for inclusion in HDM-4.
7.2 Overview
This section describes the definition, methods of measurement and occurrence
mechanisms of the three types of surface disintegrationpotholing, delamination and
edge break.
7.2.1 Potholing
Definition
Paterson (1987) defined a pothole as a cavity in the road surface which is 150 mm or
more in average diameter and 25 mm or more in depth in order to distinguish between
potholing and ravelling. A diameter of 150 mm is considered to be excessive, given the
mechanism of pothole formation from cracks or ravelled areas. The majority of highway
agencies would patch the defect before it attained such a size and only in countries with
low levels of routine maintenance would one find any significant number of potholes with a
diameter exceeding 150 mm.
An alternative definition is local loss of material from the pavement which penetrates
through the asphalt layers into the unbound layers. Loss of surface material from
pavements with two or more asphalt courses and which does not penetrate to the base
can be defined as delamination. These are the definitions proposed for HDM-4.
Measurement
Most methods of recording surface defects include potholing as a distress mode. The
expression of extent and severity takes many forms but, in general, uses combinations of
the following:
Extent:
total potholed area (e.g. m2) per unit length of road;

number of potholes per unit length of road;
per cent of the pavement area that is potholed.
Severity:
average depth;
average area of individual potholes;
combination of depth and area, for example small and shallow, large and deep.
In the Brazil study (GEIPOT, 1982) potholing was recorded as volume per unit length.
This was converted to per cent area by applying a standard depth of 80 mm in the HDM
model (Paterson, 1987). The use of volume as a unit of measurement had the virtue that
it related to maintenance needs (m3 of asphalt for patching) and was highly correlated
with simulations of IRI effects.
The unit of measurement of any distress mode should take into account the ease and
accuracy of recording under field conditions. The use of per cent area invariably leads to
over-estimation of potholing by an observer. For example, when this method is used it is
not uncommon for values of 10 per cent or more to be applied in HDM-III analyses even
though the roughness of the roads is specified as relatively low. If 10 per cent of a
pavement area is potholed it can be considered as almost totally destroyed and driving
conditions will be difficult and hazardous. Recording area in m2 also leads to over-
estimation.
It is therefore proposed that in HDM-4 the extent of potholing will be expressed as the
number of standard sized potholes per lane-km. The standard size proposed is 300 mm
diameter (0.07 m2) and can be adequately estimated by reference to a persons foot.
Mechanisms
Potholes develop in a surface that is either cracked, ravelled, or both. In the case of
cracking, the crack width increases to the point where material spalls from the edge of the
crack under the action of traffic and environment. Ravelling, most common in surface
treatments, exposes the unbound base; material loss continues downwards to form
potholes. In both cases, the development/enlargement of the pothole is dependent on the
ability of the materials to resist disintegration as wheels hit the edge of the pothole or
spalled crack. Thus, thick asphalt surfacings will pothole more slowly than thin surfacings
and cemented bases will be more resistant than granular bases.
The presence of water accelerates pothole formation both through a general weakening
of the pavement structure and lowering the resistance of the surface and base materials
to disintegration.
7.2.2 Delamination
Definition
As defined above, delamination is an intermediate level of surface disintegration, falling

between ravelling and potholing. It occurs most frequently in multi-layer asphalt surfacings
or asphalt overlays on concrete pavements. It is defined as the loss of an area of
surface material which does not penetrate into the unbound layers.
Measurement
The unit of measurement proposed for expressing delamination is the same as for
potholing an equivalent number of standard sized (300 mm diameter) occurrences per
unit length.
Mechanisms
The mechanism of delamination is similar to the way that potholing develops from
cracking. Delamination usually denotes a poor bond between the wearing course and the
previous asphalt layer and may be considered as a construction defect in the same way
as ravelling (see Chapter 6). As with potholing, the presence of water accelerates the
process, in this case by assisting in breaking the bond between the layers.
7.2.3 Edge Break
Definition
Edge break is the loss of surface, and possibly base materials from the edge of the
pavement, commonly arising on narrow roads with unsealed shoulders.
Measurement
Ideally, three parameters are needed to define edge break:
the length of the occurrence;

the width of the lost material;
the depth of the lost material.
To record the data in this way for both sides of the road is arduous and a single unit of
measurement is desirable. Average width of edge break is often used in pavement
surveys but this omits the depth of lost material and, hence, the volume of material
needed for repair. It is therefore proposed that HDM-4 will express edge break in volume
per unit length m3/km.
Mechanisms
Loss of material at the pavement edge can be caused by two mechanisms, shear failure
and attrition. Shear failure occurs in the upper layers due to vertical wheel loads at, or
close to, an edge that is lacking lateral support from the shoulder. Parameters governing
this mechanism are the drop-off from pavement to shoulder, the strength of the pavement
material and the number of wheel loads that pass close to or over the pavement edge.
Attrition occurs when wheels travel on and off the pavement edge, as happens when
vehicles pass on narrow roads (pavement width less than 4 - 5 m) or when parking on the
shoulder. As with shear failure, the extent of material loss is a function of wheel passes,
edge step and, possibly, the speed of the vehicles.
7.2.4 Summary
Three types of major surface disintegration of asphalt pavements have been identified.
Of these, potholing and delamination have similar mechanisms and explanatory variables.
Edge break can occur quite independently of the other two forms and has different
explanatory variables.
Potholing was included in the HDM-III model but not delamination or edge break. It is
proposed that in HDM-4 the unit of measurement of potholing be changed from per cent
area to number of equivalent standard sized potholes per unit length. Delamination will
use the same measurement unit as potholing while edge break will be quantified in
volume of lost material per unit length.
7.3 Existing Approaches to Modelling Potholing and

Delamination
7.3.1 Potholing in HDM-III
Introduction
The HDM-III pothole model was derived from studies in Brazil, St. Vincent, Ghana and
Kenya and predicts the initiation and progression potholing resulting from wide cracking or
ravelling (Paterson, 1987). As with other distress modes (cracking, ravelling) the model
first defines an initiation period (the delay between the onset of wide cracking or ravelling
and the start of potholing) followed by the annual occurrence of new potholes. It also
models the enlargement of existing potholes if no patching is carried out.
Initiation of Potholing
HDM-III defined a period (IPT) between the initiation of either wide cracking or ravelling
and the occurrence of the first pothole. This period was a function of traffic and thickness
of asphaltic layers and is given by:
IPT = max(2 + 0.04 HS - 0.5 YAX, 2) if base is not cemented (7.1)

IPT = max(6 - YAX, 2) if base is cemented (7.2)
where IPT is the time to initiation of potholing in years

HS is the total thickness of bituminous surfacing
YAX is annual vehicle axles in millions per lane per year
The time IPT is further constrained by the cumulative area of wide cracking and ravelling;
pothole initiation cannot take place before wide cracked area exceeds 20 per cent or
ravelled area exceeds 30 per cent.
Figure 7.1 shows the pothole initiation period for different traffic volumes and asphalt
thicknesses.
100 Asphalt thickness (mm)
5
Time to Pothole Initiation (years)
50
25
Cemented base
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Traffic Volume (million axles/lane/year)
Figure 7.1: Predicted Minimum Time for Pothole Initiation
Occurrence of Potholing
The annual occurrence of new potholes, after the expiry of the initiation period, is
expressed as a function of the area of wide cracking, ravelling, traffic, asphalt thickness,
pavement strength and construction quality:
( 2 ACRW + 0.4 ARV ) (1 + CQ) YAX ELANES

APOT = Kpp (7.3)
0.8 CW HS SNC
where APOT is occurrence of new potholes in per cent area/year
ACRW is wide cracking in per cent area
ARV is ravelling in per cent area
CQ is the construction quality indicator: 1 = faulty construction,
0 = no faults
SNC is the modified structural number for the pavement
Kpp is user specified progression factor (default = 1.0)
CW is carriageway width in m
ELANES is the effective number of lanes
Figure 7.2 shows the result of this expression for 40 per cent wide cracking, with potholing
expressed in standard size (300 mm diameter) number per km. The figure shows that for
the same strength, thin surfaced pavements (20 mm) experience significantly higher
pothole progression than thick surfaced (100 mm) pavements.
1000
900 HS = 20 mm
SNC = 3 4 5
800 SNC = 3
700
4
Potholing (no./km)
600
500 5
400 HS = 100 mm
300
200
100
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Traffic (million axles/lane/year)
Figure 7.2: Annual Occurrence of Potholes at 40 per cent Wide Cracking
Enlargement of Potholing
If existing potholes were not patched, enlargement was predicted as a function of the
potholed area, traffic, base type, rainfall and asphalt thickness:
EPOT = APOT Kbase YAX (MMP + 0.1) (7.4)
Kbase = max(2 - 0.02 HS, 0.3) granular base (7.5)

= 0.6 cemented base
= 0.3 bituminous base
where APOT is the potholed area in per cent
EPOT is the enlargement of existing potholes in per cent area/ per
year
MMP is the average rainfall in m/month
Figure 7.3 illustrates this expression, with pothole enlargement expressed as a

percentage of the existing potholed area and traffic in AADT (assumed to be 2-axle
vehicles).
250
MMP = 0.2 m/month

Granular Base
HS = 20 mm
200
Pothole Enlargement (% of existing potholes)
150
HS = 50 mm
100
50 HS = 100 mm
0
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000
AADT
Figure 7.3: Pothole Enlargement with Zero Maintenance
Validation of the HDM-III Potholing Model
There was a very limited amount of potholing data from the Brazil study and any rigorous
validation of the above models was not possible. Paterson (1987) gives observed data for
14 roads in Ghana allowing a rough comparison of these observations with HDM-III
predictions. Figure 7.4 shows this comparison, the assumption being made that heavy
vehicles comprise 30 per cent of total motorised traffic.
0.80
0.70
0.60
Predicted Data (per cent area)
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80
Observed Data (per cent area)
Figure 7.4: Comparison of Observed Potholed Areas in Ghana with HDM-III

Predictions (Paterson, 1987)
Other attempts at calibrating the HDM-III potholing models have suffered from lack of
good quality data and only the Indian Pavement Performance Study, described below,
has provided a reliable attempt at calibration.
Experience Using The HDM-III Potholing Model
Although many studies have been identified that applied the HDM-III pavement
deterioration models (Chakrabarti and Bennett, 1994), only in six cases does there
appear to have been any calibration of the potholing models, with adjustment of the
pothole progression factor Kpp. These are shown in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1
Calibrations of the HDM-III Pothole Progression Model
Country Reference Kpp Comment

Bangladesh Transroute (1992) 10.0 Adjusted in conjunction with ravelling initiation
India CES (1989) 1.25 - 2.0 Depending on rainfall
India Burrow (1990) 1.5
India RITES (1994) 1.5
Jordan Sammour (1992) 2.0
Mozambique RITES (1992) 1.5

The above adjustments to Kpp are not believed to have been based on detailed studies
except in Bangladesh.
Shortcomings of the HDM-III Potholing Model
The HDM-III model was derived from fragmentary data and based largely on intuition.
Paterson (1987) states that potholing is perhaps the least predictable form of distress ..
and that calibration to local conditions is advisable whenever reliable representative data
exist.
The HDM models express the extent of potholes in per cent area and this tends to
obscure any tendency to over-prediction; 0.1 per cent area may appear to be quite a low
value but, when converted to number of standard size potholes, it equates to an average
spacing of one pothole per 10 m along the road. To a road user, such a frequency would
seem excessive and would almost certainly result in reduced speeds and present a cause
of accidents. Figure 7.2 showed the HDM-III pothole progression model in terms of
number of standard potholes and it is seen that it can generate values of over 1,000 per
year. Seen in this light, it appears that the default coefficients in the progression model
should be reduced.
There are apparent inconsistencies between the occurrence and enlargement models.
The former uses modified structural number (SNC) as a surrogate for the quality of the
materials while the latter uses different expressions for granular, cemented and
bituminous bases. It would be expected that bound or cemented bases would offer more
resistance to both occurrence and enlargement of potholes than unbound, granular
bases, even though a pavement with a granular base might have a high SNC. The
enlargement model also contains rainfall as a variable while this is not included in the
occurrence model. A general observation in countries with thin surfacings and distinct
wet and dry seasons is that most potholing occurs during the wet season. It is implicit in
the model that the pavement is either heavily cracked or ravelled before pothole initiation
and thus ingress of water to the base layer will cause weakening of the base and assist
the development of potholing.
7.3.2 Other Potholing Models
The Indian Pavement Performance Study
The Indian Pavement Performance Study, (CRRI, 1993), developed models for pothole
initiation and progression for three surface types (premix carpet (PMC), semi dense
carpet (SDC) and asphaltic concrete). The models for pothole initiation period are shown
in Table 7.2.
The CRRI models above yield initiation periods in the range 0.2 - 1.0 years, considerably
shorter than the HDM-III model predictions. For premix carpet this appears reasonable,
as this is a hand mixed and laid surfacing material and poor performance would be
expected. However, the model for asphaltic concrete also gives much shorter pothole
initiation periods than HDM-III.
Table 7.2
CRRI Pothole Initiation Models
Pavement Type Pothole Initiation Model

PMC IPT = 0.14 HS0.36 exp(-0.08 YAX)
SDC IPT = 0.29 HS0.35 exp(-0.22 YAX)
AC IPT = 0.12 HS0.48 exp(-0.11 YAX)
Source: CRRI (1993)
The CRRI models for pothole occurrence have the same structure as the HDM-III model,
with different coefficients related to surface material type. The form of the model is:
APOT = (a0 ACRA + a1 ARV) (1 + CQ) YAX HS-1 SNC-1 (7.6)
where ACRA is the total cracked area in percent
If a standard pavement width of 6 m is applied to the HDM-III model, the coefficients for
cracking and ravelling derived pothole occurrence can be compared with the CRRI
models, as shown in Table 7.3.
Table 7.3
Comparison of HDM-III and Indian Coefficients for Pothole Occurrence
Study Surface Coefficient

Cracking Ravelling
a0 a1
HDM-III All 0.74 0.15
Premix Carpet 1.49 3.47
India Semi Dense Carpet 5.24 0.84
Asphaltic Concrete 1.23 N/A
Table 7.3 shows consistently higher coefficients for pothole occurrence in India than the
HDM-III default relationship, even for asphaltic concrete surfacing, which is probably the
most meaningful comparison. In both cases the quality control indicator CQ has been set
to zero so the higher Indian coefficients cannot be attributed to poor construction quality,
although that must undoubtedly be a factor in hand-laid surfaces such as PMC.
The form of the CRRI model for pothole enlargement is simpler than the HDM-III model,
omitting the terms for rainfall and surface thickness:
APOT = a3 APOT AXLEYR (7.7)
The vales for a3 range from 0.78 (SDC) to 3.60 (PMC). By comparison, for rainfall in the
range 0 to 0.3 m/month, the HDM-III coefficient range is 0.03 to 0.80. As with occurrence,
the Indian pothole model appears to predict higher rates of progression than HDM-III.
Indonesian Study of Penetration Macadam Performance
In 1994/94 a study was undertaken of local roads in Indonesia constructed with

penetration macadam surfacings. These roads are known to be poorly constructed, using
labour intensive methods with insufficient and poorly distributed bitumen in the surfacing.
The study covered 1 - 2 km sections in several regions of the country and included most
proposed HDM-4 distress modes. Early potholing is a frequent occurrence and the failure
mechanism has been tentatively linked to ravelling (Hoff & Overgaard, 1994). A
preliminary analysis of the study data by the HTRS team examined the relationship
between cumulative traffic since construction and the following recorded distresses:
combined area of patching and potholing (m2/km);

area of potholing (m2/km);
volume of potholing (m3/km).
Converted to standard number of potholes per km, the distribution of the Indonesian data
was as shown in Table 7.4. No correlation with traffic was found and it was concluded
that the main determinant in both pothole initiation and progression on these roads was
construction quality, which is known to differ widely between construction and
maintenance contractors.
Table 7.4
Distribution of Standard Potholes in Indonesian Survey
Potholes Per cent

No/km/year Distribution
0 42
0 - 20 18
20 - 50 10
50 - 100 9
100 - 200 7
> 200 14
Table 7.4 shows that, even with the particularly poor construction methods used for the
Indonesian roads included in the survey, the actual number of standard potholes was
generally low. This adds weight to the view that a model that predicts values of over 1,000
occurrences of potholes per year is likely overestimating.
7.3.3 Discussion
In a developed and well maintained highway network, potholing is a rare occurrence and,
if a pothole appears, it is normally patched almost immediately. Significant amounts of
potholing are only found in countries or agencies which have poor quality construction and
low levels of maintenance. Unfortunately, it is difficult to obtain meaningful data in areas
such as these since road agencies that are poorly organised to control construction
quality and perform routine maintenance rarely collect reliable road condition data.
Although a few attempts have been made to calibrate the pothole progression factor
(Kpp), it is suspected that these have been intuitive rather than derived from rigorous
analysis of large data sets and, in all cases shown in Table 7.1, the pothole progression
factor Kpp was increased from the default of 1.0, never reduced. The models derived
from the Indian PPS showed that the HDM-III models tend to over predict the pothole
initiation period, and under predict the rate of progression. This could be due to the
nature of the pavements studied. Although the explanatory variables applied in the HDM-
III model appear entirely plausible, no correlation could be obtained with recent data from
Indonesia.
7.4 Existing Approaches to Modelling Edge Break

7.4.1 Introduction
Many countries, especially in Asia, have a significant length of narrow, often single lane,
roads where traffic volumes have grown at a high rate in the last 20 years. On such
roads, edge break is a serious problem but little research data is available with which to
produce validated models which relate edge break to traffic volume, road geometry and
condition. Edge break was not predicted in HDM-III.
7.4.2 Conceptual Models
Hoban (1987) provided an approach to modelling edge break which was subsequently
adapted and modified for use in Indonesia (Hoff & Overgaard, 1994). The original and
modified version are described below.
The model proposed by Hoban (1987) derived an expression for edge crossings on
narrow pavements due to vehicles meeting and overtaking:
ERATE = 26.5 PSH AADT2 / S (7.8)
PSH = max(min(2.65 - 0.425 CW, 1), 0) (7.9)
where ERATE is number of edge crossing per km per year

PSH is the proportion of shoulder use time due to width
S is the average traffic speed in km/h
CW is the carriageway width in m
AADT is the average annual daily traffic in veh/day
Hoban (1987) used data from Hide and Keith (1979) for annual patching quantities in St.
Vincent to estimate edge repair needs and tentatively concluded that it represented 30 m3
per million edge crossings to give the following:
VEB = 0.0008 PSH AADT2 S-1 (7.10)
where VEB is the loss of edge material in m3 per km per year
Figure 7.5 shows the predictions of this model for a pavement width of 3.5 m and traffic
speeds of 50 km/h and 100 km/h.
70
60 Pavement Width = 3.5 m
50
Average Speed = 50 km/h
Edge Break (m3/km/year)
40
30
100 km/h
20
10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
AADT
Figure 7.5: Edge Break Derived from Hoban (1987)
The relationship shown in Figure 7.5 is, in some ways, counter-intuitive, being inversely
related to vehicle speed. The speed effect is due to the number of inter-actions per unit
of time and length: at higher speeds there are fewer vehicle inter-actions. It might be
expected that vehicles passing between the pavement and the shoulder would cause
greater damage at higher speeds with the impact of the tyres on the edge of the asphalt,
however, there is no research to substantiate this.
Hoff & Overgaard (1994) proposed some refinement of the Hoban (1987) model by
incorporating edge step and the damaging effects of vehicle speed. It was assumed that,
with no edge step, edge break would not occur and that the roads studied in St. Vincent
had an average edge step of 80 mm. The damaging effect of speed was represented by
the square root of speed and the average speed in St. Vincent was assumed to be 50
km/h. This resulted in the following model:
VEB = 0.7 PSH AADT2 ESTEP S-0.5 10-6 (7.11)
PSH = MAX(-3.41 + 14.51/CW + 0.0295 CW 2, 0) (7.12)
The above model is illustrated in Figure 7.6 for a pavement width of 3.5 m and average
speed of 50 km/h.
45
40
35
Edge Step = 100 mm

30
25
20 50 mm
15
10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
AADT
Figure 7.6: Edge Break Derived from Hoff & Overgaard (1994)
Neither the model presented by Hoban (1987) nor the modification proposed by Hoff &
Overgaard (1994) include a rainfall term. It would be expected that there would be a
strong effect from moisture as it will weaken both the shoulder material that provides
support to the edge of the surfacing and the base of the pavement. This topic will be
addressed later when considering model forms for HDM-4.
7.4.3 Model Validation
Both the models presented by Hoban (1987) and Hoff & Overgaard (1994) are conceptual
and, apart from very tenuous data from the Caribbean study, lack any validation. As with
potholing, the regions where edge break is a significant mode of pavement distress are
those that also lack reliable road condition data.
In 1995 a survey was made of selected rural roads in Indonesia, the data including
various forms of distress, traffic and pavement history. The database (Hoff & Overgaard,
1995) contained the following data relevant to determination of edge break:
AADT;
pavement width (m);
edge break, left and right (m2);
edge step, left and right (mm);
terrain (flat, hilly).
A preliminary analysis of this database was made by the HTRS team, using bands of
pavement width. For width less than 4.0 m (PSH = 1 based on Hoban, 1987) the
assumption was made that vehicle speeds were 30 km/h in hilly terrain and 50 km/h in flat
terrain. The following expression was obtained for this pavement width band:
VEB = 30 ESTEP AADT2 S-1 10-6 (7.13)
Figure 7.7 compares the observed and predicted values of edge break obtained using this
relationship.
50
45
Pavement Width < 4.0 m
2
R = 0.63
40
Predicted Edge Break (m3/km/year)
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Observed Edge break (m3/km/year)
Figure 7.7: Observed and Predicted Edge Break from Indonesia
For width bands above 4.0 m very little edge break was recorded which suggests that
shoulder use is minimal. On rural roads in Indonesia heavy vehicles are rare: trucks are 2
- 3 tonne capacity and buses typically have 10 - 20 seats. Speeds are also low and
vehicles can generally pass each other on a 4.5 m wide pavement without passing onto
the shoulders.
7.5 Modelling Potholing and Delamination in HDM-4

7.5.1 Introduction
As previously noted, potholing is a distress mode that is, normally, only found in countries
or road networks which have a low level of construction quality and/or routine and periodic
maintenance. Thus, the prediction of potholing in HDM-4 will only be of interest for such
countries or networks and it is reasonable to base the models on data from such
countries. The HDM-III models were mainly derived from low quality roads in the
Caribbean and Ghana which seems appropriate. However, subsequent research in India
(which also has, in the main, poor quality roads and maintenance practices) showed that
significant adjustment should be made to the prediction of both initiation period and
progression.
It is clear than any pothole model will require local calibration, especially where labour
intensive construction and maintenance is widely used. In HDM-III, the only calibration
coefficient was the factor Kpp which controlled the occurrence of potholes: the
expressions for initiation period and enlargement did not allow the user to provide local
calibration. The Indian Pavement Performance Study (CRRI, 1993) showed pothole
initiation periods to be much shorter than HDM-III predictions but such values could not be
incorporated into an HDM-III analysis without modifying the source code. For HDM-4 a
greater ability to adjust the models is needed.
The available evidence supports the explanatory variables used by HDM-III to predict
pothole initiation and progression. These were:
cracking extent and severity;

ravelling extent;
thickness of asphaltic layers;
surface material type;
base material type;
rainfall;
construction quality;
traffic volume.
It is therefore recommended that, in HDM-4, the same parameters are used but with more
flexible model forms that will allow the user to adjust the predictions for different materials
types based on local observations. The new model also introduces a construction defect
indicator for the base (CDB) and surface defects that affect delamination (CDD) which are
continuous variables as described in Chapter 3.
7.5.2 Initiation of Potholing and Delamination
Potholing
HDM-III used a single expression to predict the delay between the initiation of wide
cracking or ravelling and the occurrence of potholes. It is probable that, given the
different mechanisms at work, the time taken for a wide crack to develop into a pothole
will not be the same as for a ravelled area to form a pothole. It is thus proposed that
pothole initiation and progression are modelled separately for crack derived and ravelling
derived forms.
The modelling will be done separately by predicting the time to pothole initiation from
cracking and the time from ravelling. The progression of each of these will be modelled
separately as well. The total number of potholes will therefore be the number of potholes
due to cracking and the number due to ravelling.
The parameters used in the HDM-III expression for pothole initiation were asphalt
thickness and annual number of axles (granular bases) and axles only for cemented
bases. It did not include rainfall, construction quality or surface material type. For HDM-4
it is proposed that more variables be included with coefficients that can be provided for
different materials types. The following model form is proposed for HDM-4:
a1 + a2 HS
IPT = Kpi a0 (7.14)
( a3 + CDB) ( a4 + YAX ) ( a5 + MMP)
where IPT is the time between cracking or ravelling and the initiation of
potholes in years
HS is the asphalt thickness in mm
CDB is the construction defects indicator for the base
YAX is the annual number of axles in millions per lane
MMP is average rainfall in m/month
Kpi is the pothole initiation factor (default = 1)
The proposed default values for a0 - a5 are shown in Table 7.5. Figure 7.8 shows the
application of the model form and default values for granular base. The values are given
for granular and cemented bases and are provided for cracking and ravelling induced
potholes separately. Owing to the lack of available data the cracking and ravelling values
are currently identical.
Table 7.5
Proposed Default parameters for Pothole Initiation Model
Base Type
Parameter Granular Cemented
Cracking Ravelling Cracking Ravelling
a0 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
a1 20 20 50 50
a2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
a3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
a4 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
a5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Table 7.6 offers guidance in the selection of the construction defects indicator for the
base layer (CDB). Three defects are identified, each having an incremental effect on the
performance of the layer. The coefficients are additive: if all three defects are prevalent,
then the value for CDB is 1.5.
It is proposed that HDM-4 retain the conditions imposed by HDM-III for minimum extent of
wide cracking and ravelling for pothole initiation. These are 20 per cent and 30 per cent
respectively.
9.0
8.0
7.0
Time to Pothole Initiation (years)
6.0
HS = 150 mm
5.0
4.0 100 mm
3.0
50 mm
2.0
1.0 25 mm
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Figure 7.8: Proposed Model for Pothole Initiation Period - Granular Bases, CDB = 0
Table 7.6
Selection of Construction Defects Indicator for Base
Construction Defect CDB

Poor gradation of material 0.5
Poor aggregate shape 0.5
Poor compaction 0.5
Delamination
In the absence of any validated models for delamination, it is proposed that the model
form for initiation of this distress is similar to that for potholing with the following
differences:
the construction defects indicator used is specific to this distress mode;

the model is only applied where the pavement type implies an overlay on an original
surface, i.e. ASAP or ASCP;
the initiation period will only be with respect to cracking as delamination is not triggered
by ravelling;
delamination will not occur if the overlay thickness is greater than 80 mm.
The delamination model will thus be:
when HNEW <= 80 mm

a1 + a2 HNEW
IDL = Kdi a0 (7.15)
( a3 + CDD) ( a4 + YAX) ( a5 + MMP )
otherwise
IDL = 100
where HNEW is the thickness of the top asphalt layer in mm

IDL is the time between initiation of cracking and delamination in
years
CDD is the construction defects indicator for delamination
Kdi is the delamination initiation factor (default = 1)
The default values for this model are shown in Table 7.7. The value for CDD is related to
ability of the new surfacing to bond to the old: where the prevalent construction practice is
to use little or no tack coat prior to the overlay, CDD would be set to 1, otherwise 0.
Figure 7.9 illustrates the model for CDD of 1.0 and rainfall of 0.2 m/month.
Table 7.7
Proposed Default parameters for Delamination Model
Parameter Value
a0 0.02
a1 20
a2 2.0
a3 0
a4 2.0
a5 0.1
7.5.3 Progression of Potholing and Delamination
Potholing
HDM-III separately models the occurrence of new potholes and the enlargement of
existing potholes if they are not patched. This distinction should be retained in order to
reflect adequately the effect of routine maintenance. The same model forms may be
used for occurrence as a result of:
cracking;
ravelling; and
enlargement.
6
CDD = 1
5
Time to Delamination Initiation (years)
4 HNEW = 75 mm
3
50 mm
2
25 mm
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Figure 7.9: Proposed Model for Delamination Initiation Period
Model parameters will be different for the three modes. The proposed form of model is:
( a3 + CDB) ( a4 + YAX ) ( a5 + MMP)

NPTi = Kpp a0 ADISi (7.16)
a1 + a2 HS
3
NPT = NPOTi (7.17)
i =1
where NPTi is the additional number of potholes per km deriving from the
distress type i
ADISi is the per cent area of indexed cracking or the per cent area
of ravelling or the number of existing potholes per km
CDB is the construction defects indicator for the base
Kpp is the pothole progression factor (default = 1)
HS is the total thickness of the bitumen surface in mm
The default parameters proposed are shown in Table 7.8.
Figure 7.10 shows the application of the model and default parameters to a pavement
with 40 per cent cracking, rainfall of 0.1 m/month and the construction quality indicator set
to zero. Figure 7.11 shows the pothole enlargement component of the model with
enlargement expressed as a percentage of existing potholes.
Table 7.8
Default Parameters for the Pothole Progression Model
Potholing Caused by
Parameter Cracking Ravelling Enlargement
GB CB GB CB GB CB
a0 500 250 100 50 10 5
a1 0 0 0 0 0 0
a2 1 1 1 1 1 1
a3 1 1 1 1 1 1
a4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
a5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

Notes: GB is granular base
CB is cemented or bituminous base
1000
900
HS = 25 mm
800
50 mm
700
Potholing (no/km/year)
600
100 mm
500
400
300 ACRW = 40%

MMP = 0.1 m/month
CQb = 0
200
100
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Figure 7.10: Proposed Pothole Progression Model - Cracking Derived Component,

Granular Base
Delamination
The progression model proposed for delamination has the same form as that for potholing
except that:
only the cracking and enlargement components will apply;

the construction defects indicator will be specific to delamination;
the model will only apply to asphalt overlays on existing surfaces;
the model parameters will be independent of base material type.
100
90
80
HS = 25 mm
Pothole Enlargement (% existing potholes)
70
60
50 mm
50
40
100 mm
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Figure 7.11: Proposed Pothole Progression Model - Enlargement Component,

Granular Base
The form of the model is:
( a3 + CDD) ( a4 + YAX ) ( a5 + MMP)

NDLi = Kdp a0 ADISi (7.18)
a1 + a2 HNEW
2
NDL = NDLi (7.19)
i=1
where NDLi is the number of delaminations per km deriving from the

distress type i
ADISi is the per cent area of all cracking or the number of existing
delaminations per km
CDD is the construction defects indicator for delamination
Kdp is the delamination progression factor (default = 1)
The default parameters proposed are given in Table 7.9.

Table 7.9
Default Parameters for the Delamination Progression Model
Parameter Cracking Delamination

a0 500 10
a1 0 0
a2 1 1
a3 1 1
a4 0.1 0.1
a5 0.2 0.2
7.6 Modelling Edge Break in HDM-4

7.6.1 Introduction
The conceptual model presented by Hoban (1987) provides a useful starting point in the
development of an edge break model for HDM-4. As noted earlier, the Hoban model
omits two possible explanatory variables edge step and rainfall and analysis of the
data from Hoff & Overgaard (1995) showed that edge step seemed to be well correlated
with volume of edge break. It has not been possible, with the data to hand, to quantify
rainfall effects. However, it is considered that this parameter should be included in the
model to allow for later calibration by users.
7.6.2 Edge Break Model
Based on the work presented earlier, the following conceptual edge break model is
proposed for use in HDM-4.
VEB = Keb a0 PSH AADT2 ESTEP Sa1 (a2 + MMP) (7.20)
[
PSH = max min ( a3 a4 CW,1), 0 ] (7.21)
where VEB is the annual loss of edge material in m3/km

PSH is the proportion of time using shoulder
AADT is the annual average daily traffic
ESTEP is the elevation difference from pavement to shoulder in mm
MMP is the mean rainfall in m/month
S is the average traffic speed in km/h
Keb is the edge break progression factor (default = 1)
Default parameters for the model are shown in Table 7.10 and the model is illustrated in
Figure 7.12 for three pavement widths and granular base with surface treatment.
Table 7.10
Default Parameters for the HDM-4 Edge Break Model
Base Type
Parameter Granular Cemented
AM ST AM ST
a0 50 75 25 50
a1 -1 -1 -1 -1
a2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
a3 2.65 2.65 2.65 2.65
a4 0.425 0.425 0.425 0.425
120
Edge Step = 50 mm
100 Average Speed = 50 km/h
Rainfall = 0.2 m/month Pavement width = 3.5 m
80
4.5 m
60
40
5.5 m
20
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
AADT
Figure 7.12: Proposed HDM-4 Edge Break Model - Granular Base with ST
7.7 Summary
The subjects of potholing, delamination and pavement edge break are poorly researched.
These distress modes generally occur in countries with poor construction and
maintenance practices where reliable research data is commensurate with the standard of
the roads. This chapter has attempted to identify the mechanisms of the formation of
these defects and the explanatory variables and model forms. The meagre amount of
available data has then been applied to produce a set of default parameters for each
model form.
It is apparent that the occurrence of potholing, delamination and edge break is related to
construction quality and local calibration on these models is essential if meaningful results
are to be obtained from HDM-4.
Roughness 8-1
8. ROUGHNESS
8.1 Introduction
Road roughness is irregularities in the pavement surface and it is the form of pavement
distress that gives most concern to road users. Roughness can arise from a number of
causes, some of which are predictable (such as pavement distress) and others (such as
utility cuts) which are independent of pavement performance. This chapter examines how
roughness is defined, the mechanisms of roughness development, and the roughness
models proposed for HDM-4.
8.2 Defining Road Roughness

8.2.1 Background
Because it is a measure of how road users perceive a road, roughness has long been
measured by highway agencies in one form or another. Early measures were subjective
and expressed on a scale of, typically, 0 - 10 with 10 being a perfect surface and lower
values indicating lower ride qualities. Since subjective ratings vary with the expectations
of the observer, many mechanical methods of assessing roughness developed. Most of
these methods used their own measurement scale, often relating to the particular type of
equipment and/or the vehicle in which the equipment was mounted.
The need for a common internationally recognised scale was addressed in the
International Roughness Experiment in Brazil in 1984 (Sayers, et al., 1986), where a
number of different types of equipment and measurement units for recording roughness
were applied to the same test sections which were also accurately profiled. The result of
the Experiment was the recommendation of an international index - the International
Roughness Index or IRI.
Since its introduction the IRI has become increasingly adopted around the world,
encouraged by international lending agencies in developing countries and by the FHWA
in the USA. In parallel, methods of accurately recording roughness have developed with
the application of accelerometers and laser devices replacing the older mechanical
instruments in many regions.
8.2.2 International Roughness Index
Paterson (1986) defines IRI as:
The IRI mathematically summarises the longitudinal surface profile of the

road in a wheeltrack, representing the vibrations induced in a typical
passenger car by road roughness. it is defined by the reference average
rectified slope (RARS80, the ratio of the accumulated suspension motion to the
distance travelled) of a standard quarter-car simulation for a travelling speed
of 80 km/h. It is computed from surface elevation data collected by either
topographical survey or mechanical profilometer.
Sayers (1995) expanded on this definition:

IRI is computed from a single longitudinal profile. The sample interval should be no
larger than 300 mm for accurate calculations. The required resolution depends on the
roughness level, with finer resolution needed for smooth roads;
the profile is assumed to have a constant slope between sampled elevation points;
the profile is smoothed with a moving average whose baselength is 250 mm;
the smoothed profile is filtered using a quarter-car simulation, with specific parameter
values (Golden Car), at a simulated speed of 80 km/h;
the simulated suspension motion is linearly accumulated and divided by the length of
the profile to yield IRI. Thus, IRI has units of slope (usually m/km).
The underlying IRI model is a series of differential equations which relate the motions of a
simulated quarter-car to the road profile. Figure 8.1 illustrates the quarter-car model used
and the parameters adopted (Sayers, 1995).
Sprung
Mass: ms z
Golden Car
Parameters ks cs
mu/ms = 0.15
ks/ms = 63.3
cs/ms = 6.0 x
kt/ms = 653
Unsprung
Mass: mu
kt
B=250 mm
Figure 8.1: IRI Quarter-car Model
The IRI is the accumulation of the motion between the sprung and unsprung masses in
the quarter-car model, normalised by the length of the profile. Mathematically this is
expressed as:
1
LP / S . .
IRI = zs zu dt (8.1)
LP 0
where IRI is the roughness in IRI m/km

LP is the length of the profile in km
S is the simulated speed (80 km/h)
.
zs is the time derivative of the height of the sprung mass
Roughness 8-3
.
zu is the time derivative of the height of the unsprung mass
The algorithm used to calculate the IRI is described in Sayers, et al. (1986) and
elaborated on in Sayers (1995). Both references provide a computer listing for calculating
the IRI; Sayers, et al. (1986) in BASIC and Sayers (1995) in FORTRAN.
In order to calculate the IRI the following steps must be taken:
determine the elevation profile of each wheelpath;

using the profile data, run a quarter-car simulation for the reference vehicle over each
wheelpath and calculate the wheelpath IRI;
establish the average IRI for both wheelpaths.
8.2.3 Roughness Measurement
Compared with some other types of pavement distress, roughness is relatively easy to
measure. A wide range of instruments are commercially available for this purpose
ranging from the sophisticated (lasers) to the basic (purely mechanical). The simpler
equipment needs calibration against known IRI derived from measured wheelpath
profiles. This is done by establishing a relationship between the IRI from the measured
wheelpath profiles and the output from the roughness instrument. Many of the systems
using lasers or accelerometers claim to be self calibrating in that they measure a
continuous profile of the road surface which is then converted to IRI using the quarter-car
simulation.
When applying the results of proprietary roughness measuring systems or when

calibrating roughness meters the distinction between quarter-car and half-car RARS
should be noted. A system that records profile by means of centrally mounted
accelerometers is returning a half-car index which will always be less than a quarter-car
index (Sayers, et al., 1986). In such cases, a factor of 1.3 can be applied to the results1
to give IRI (Sayer, et al., 1986). When calibrating roughness meters that are attached to
the centre of a rigid axle, both wheelpaths should be profiled and the mean value of IRI
used in the regression to obtain a relationship between meter reading and IRI.
8.3 The HDM-III Roughness Prediction Model

8.3.1 Conceptual Model
Roughness is a function of structural deformation and surface irregularities. Surface

irregularities can have many causes, ranging from the inherent minor undulations in a
new asphalt surface (no surface is ever perfect and, in practice, there is no zero on the
IRI scale) to large potholes. The model described in Paterson (1987) and used in HDM-III
predicted the development of several components of road roughness: structural
deformation, rutting, cracking, potholing and environmental effects. This approach,
known as the component incremental model, is illustrated in Figure 8.2. It should be noted
1
It should be noted that the factor may vary depending upon the pavement type and the properties of
roughness.
that Figure 8.2 includes shoulder use, edge break and delamination which were not
modelled in HDM-III but will be modelled in HDM-4.
Rutting
Crack Crack
Pavement
Structure
Pavement Pothole Pothole

Condition Delamination Delamination Roughness
& Age Initiation Progression
Traffic
Ravelling Ravelling
Deformation
Shoulder Shoulder Use on Narrow Roads

Deterioration
Edge
Break
Figure 8.2: HDM Component Incremental Roughness Model
The HDM-III roughness model is expressed in the following relationship:
IRI = 134 em t SNCK-5 YE4 + 0.114 RDS + 0.0066 CRX
+ 0.42 POT + m IRI (8.2)
where IRI is the annual increment in IRI in m/km

m is an environmental coefficient
SNCK is the modified structural number for the pavement, reduced
for the effect of cracking in the asphalt layers
YE4 is the annual axle loading in million ESA per lane
RDS is the annual increment in standard deviation of rut depth in
mm under a 1.2 m straight-edge
CRX is the annual increment in indexed cracking in per cent area
POT is the annual increment in potholing in per cent area
t is the number of years since last major treatment
IRI is the roughness at the year start in m/km
Paterson (1987) proposed values for the environmental coefficient based on climatic
variables shown in Table 8.1.
Roughness 8-5
Table 8.1
Values of HDM-III Roughness Model Environmental Coefficient
Temperature Classification
Moisture Tropical Sub-tropical Temperate
Classification Non-freezing Non-freezing Freezing
Arid 0.005 0.010 0.025
Semi-arid 0.010 0.016 0.035
Sub-humid 0.020 0.030 0.065
Humid, wet 0.025 0.040 0.10 - 0.23
The pavement strength parameter, SNCK, was originally proposed by Paterson (1987)
as:
SNCK = 1 + SNC - 0.0000758 HS CRX (8.3)
where HS is the thickness of surfacing in mm

CRX is per cent area of indexed cracking
In the HDM-III model, this was modified to include cracking in older asphalt layers and
became (Watanatada, et al., 1987):
SNCK = 1 + SNC - 0.0000758 (CRX HNEW + ECR HOLD) (8.4)
where CRX is min(63, CRX)

ECR is max(min(CRX - PCRX, 40), 0)
PCRX is the per cent area of indexed cracking in the old layer
HNEW is the thickness of last asphalt layer in mm
HOLD is the thickness of old asphalt layers in mm
Indexed cracking, CRX, was an index weighted by extent and severity of cracking which,
by analysis of the Brazil data, was given by:
CRX = 0.62 CRA + 0.39 CRW (8.5)
where CRA is per cent area of all cracks

CRW is per cent area of wide cracks (> 3 mm)
The HDM-III roughness model contained two user definable parameters (default = 1.0)
which could be used for calibration. The first, Kgp, is a coefficient applied to all
components except the environmental term. The second, Kge (default = 1.0), is applied
to the environmental coefficient, m, which has a default value of 0.023. This led to the
following revised model (Watanatada, et al., 1987):
IRI = Kgp [134 eKge m t SNCK-5 YE4 + 0.114 RDS + 0.0066 CRX
+ 0.42 POT] + Kge m IRI (8.6)
8.3.2 Model Validation Studies
The component increment model was derived from data in Brazil and Paterson (1987)
validated the model using data from Arizona, Kenya, Texas, Illinois and Colorado.
Subsequently, validation studies of this model have been made in a number of countries,
notably New Zealand, Australia and South Africa.
New Zealand
Cenek and Patrick (1991) reported a study of 82 road sections in New Zealand with
annual roughness data covering a period of 7 years. The model calibrated was the
aggregate level model given in Paterson (1987) and derived from the same Brazil data as
the component aggregate model:
RIt = [ RI0 + 725 (1 + SNC)-4.99 NE4 t ] e 0.0153 t (8.7)
where RIt is the roughness in year t

RI0 is the roughness in year 0
NE4 is the cumulative number of equivalent standard axles
Although the roughness data was converted from NAASRA counts/km to IRI m/km using
an uncertain relationship, the study found a high correlation between predicted and
observed roughness.
Australia
Martin (1994) used data from 105 road samples from all Australian states to calibrate the
ARRB pavement model and, at the same time, compared the observed data with
predictions given by the aggregate levels model from Paterson (1987) given above. It
was found that the aggregate level model over-predicted roughness progression but a
much better correlation was found with a later aggregate level model (Paterson and Attoh-
Okine, 1992) which had been derived from predictions made using the HDM-III
component incremental model. This is:
RIt = [ RI0 + 263 (1 + SNC)-5 NE4 t ]e 0.023 t (8.8)
The above model was found to over-predict roughness on all roads except urban arterials,
but no attempt was made to adjust the environmental coefficient to reflect different
climatic regimes in the country. It is likely that, with this adjustment, the study would,
indirectly, have validated the HDM-III component incremental model.
South Africa
Roughness 8-7
Kannemeyer and Visser (1994) validated the HDM-III roughness progression model using
data from 65 road sections in different climatic zones in South Africa. Roughness data
covered the period 1985 - 1992. After adjustment of the environmental coefficients in the
model for the three zones semi-arid, sub-humid and humid a high correlation
between predicted and observed values was obtained (R2 = 0.90 for 492 observations). It
was concluded that the HDM-III models are capable of very accurately predicting the
observed deterioration on South African national roads and a Kgp value of 1.0 is
recommended for all moisture regimes.
8.3.3 Application and Calibration of the Model
As mentioned above, HDM-II has two adjustment parameters in the roughness

progression model, the environmental coefficient1, m, and a more general coefficient,
Kgp. Table 8.2 shows applications of HDM-III where either the environmental coefficient
or the roughness progression coefficient have been modified from the default values
(Chakrabarti and Bennett, 1994).
Table 8.2
Parameters Adopted in Application of HDM-III Roughness Progression Model
Country Reference Kgp m Comment

Bangladesh Transroute (1992) 1.1 0.03
Canada Cox (1992) 1.0 0.035 - 0.050 depending on climate in
Saskatchewan
Chile Gaeto (1991) 1.0 0.010 - 0.040 depending on climatic region
Solminihac(1989)
India CES (1989) 1.0 - 1.3 0.023 - 0.046 depending on rainfall
Burrow (1990) 1.5 0.034 medium rainfall area
RITES (1994) 1.5 0.023 medium rainfall area
NDLI (1994b) 1.0 0.016 low/medium rainfall
Jordan Sammour (1992) 0.5 0.023 original pavements only
Malaysia JKR (1991) 1.0 - 1.3 0.023
Mozambique RITES (1992) 1.5 0.034
New Zealand Cenek and Patrick 1.0 0.018
(1991)
South Africa Kannemeyer and 1.0 Kge values half Paterson
Visser (1994) (1987) values
Most of the applications in Table 8.2 adjusted the environmental coefficient in line with the
recommendations in Paterson (1987) for different climatic regions. The exception was
South Africa where a reduction of 50 per cent of the values in Paterson (1987) was
proposed for the same climatic regions, the reason being attributed to thicker pavements,
better quality control, drainage and maintenance practices in South Africa relative to
Brazil.
Where the factor Kgp has been modified there seems to have been little validation for the
value used.
1
Calibration is made through varying Kge which adjusts the value of m. It is conventional to report only in
terms of the m coefficient so this has been adopted here.
8.3.4 Discussion
Although some of the studies identified in Table 8.2 adjusted the calibration factor Kgp in
the HDM-III roughness model (upwards) the more rigorous pavement study in South
Africa showed that, with correct use of the environmental coefficient, the model will
adequately predict roughness progression. The results from the New Zealand study are
anomalous in that they validated an aggregate level model that was subsequently found
to be incompatible with the HDM-III component incremental model. This may have been
due to an incorrect conversion from NAASRA to IRI units of roughness measurement.
The results of the South African and Australian studies, added to original validation of the
model described in Paterson (1987), provide convincing evidence that when correctly
applied the model has widespread validity.
8.4 HDM-4 Roughness Model

8.4.1 Components of the Model
Given the validation of the HDM-III component incremental roughness progression model
in a number of locations world-wide, the HDM-III roughness model was retained in a
largely unchanged form for use in HDM-4. The following sections examine the different
components to verify that the model coefficients and exponents as used in HDM-III were
appropriate and, where not, propose alternative default values. Two additions to the
HDM-III model form are also proposed:
roughness derived from ravelling;

the increment of roughness derived from shoulder usage on narrow roads.
The HDM-4 roughness progression model structure will be as follows:
IRI = k0 (k1 IRIs + k2 IRIc + k3 IRIv + k4 IRIr + k5 IRIt + k6 IRId
+ k7 IRIh + k8 IRIe) (8.9)
where IRI is the total increment in IRI in m/km during the year or
season
IRIs is the structural component of the IRI increment
IRIc is the cracking component of the IRI increment
IRIv is the ravelling component of the IRI increment
IRIr is the rutting component of the IRI increment
IRIt is the potholing component of the IRI increment
IRId is the delamination component of the IRI increment
IRIh is the patching component of the IRI increment
IRIe is the environmental component of the IRI increment
k0 to k8 are calibration factors (defaults = 1.0)
The following sections describe how each of these components are quantified.
Roughness 8-9
8.4.2 Structural Component
The structural component of the roughness progression model is given by:
IRIs = 134 em AGE2 SNCK-5 YE4 (8.10)
SNCK = 1 + SNC - 0.0000758 (ACX HNEW + ECR HOLD) (8.11)
where IRIs is the annual structural increment in IRI in m/km

m is an environmental coefficient
SNCK is the modified structural number for the pavement, reduced
for the effect of cracking in the asphalt layers
YE4 is the annual axle loading in million ESA per lane
ACX is min(63, ACX)
ECR is max(min(ACX - PACX, 40), 0)
ACX is the per cent area of structural cracking
PACX is the per cent area of structural cracking in the old layer
HNEW is the thickness of last asphalt layer in mm
HOLD is the thickness of old asphalt layers in mm
AGE2 is the years since the last resurfacing
The values for the environmental coefficient, m, remain as given in Paterson (1987) and
shown in Table 8.1 of this report.
The form of the above model is predicated on the modified structural number, SNC, being
derived from layer thickness and strength coefficients. If SNC is derived from field
measurements (typically deflection methods) of a cracked asphalt pavement, the
reduction in strength due to the asphalt cracking is already inherent in the derived value of
SNC. HDM-III would then decrement the SNC again for estimation of roughness
progression (but not for other distress predictions) and the results would be distorted by
double counting of the cracking effects. On thin surfacings this distortion is not significant
but, when using the model to evaluate strategies for existing pavements where the
asphalt layers make a major contribution to the total strength, it could lead to anomalous
results.
In HDM-4 it is proposed that two alternative methods of entering SNC be provided:
the user can enter SNC as in HDM-III with the assumption that the full strength of the
asphalt layers is included in the value (i.e. not reduced for cracking);
the value of SNCK can be entered where any reduction for cracking is allowed for.
The latter would be used where SNC is derived from field testing.
Where SNCK is entered, further annual reduction due to asphalt cracking needs to be
incremental and the following expression has been derived from the HDM-III model form:
SNCK = 0.0000758 {max(min(63 - ACX, ACX), 0) HNEW

+ min[ACX, max(min(PACX + 40, 100) - ACX, 0),
max(ACX + ACX - PACX, 0)] HOLD} (8.12)
where SNCK is the reduction in SNCK due to incremental cracking

ACX is the change in structural cracking in per cent area
8.4.3 Cracking and Ravelling
The cracking component of the model is given by:
IRIc = 0.0066 ACA (8.13)
where ACA is the increment in all cracking in per cent area
Ravelling was not included in the HDM-III roughness model and no research data have
been found that provide a relationship between ravelled area and roughness. It is
conservatively estimated that the effect of ravelling will be half that of cracking and the
default model will thus be:
IRIv = 0.0033 ARV (8.14)
where ARV is the increment in ravelling in per cent area
8.4.4 Rutting Effects
In the development of the HDM-III roughness model from the Brazil study data, the
relationship between standard deviation of rut depth showed the highest correlation of the
various model components. It should thus be retained for HDM-4, with adjustment for the
changes in definition of mean rut depth from deviation under a 1.2 m straight-edge to a
2.0 m straight-edge (see Chapter 5). The following is the resulting model:
IRIr = 0.088 RDS (8.15)
where RDS is the increment in standard deviation of rut depth in mm

8.4.5 Potholing, Delamination and Patching Effects
Potholing and delamination are pavement defects that normally receive almost immediate
attention from a road maintenance organisation. Although in extreme circumstances
potholes may remain unpatched for months or even years, it would be more normal for
patching to be performed within a few days. This section therefore considers first, the
effect of potholes and delaminations on incremental roughness before patching, then the
effects of patches on incremental roughness and, finally, the annual roughness effect of a
specified patching cycle.
Potholing
Roughness 8-11
Potholes are the most visible pavement defect and are highly damaging to vehicles as
well as causing discomfort to road users. As mentioned in the previous chapter, the
countries where potholing is a significant defect are, generally, those which lack reliable
highway condition data and the effects of potholing on roughness have therefore been
difficult to quantify.
Paterson (1987) used the IRI model to simulate the effects of different sizes and
frequency of potholes on roughness and obtained the highly correlated relationship:
IRIt = 6.0 Vpot (8.16)
where Vpot is the volume of potholes in m3/km
These simulations were based on the vehicle hitting all potholes and the limited field data
available suggested that the actual relationship between the volume of potholing and IRI
was much lower since drivers will try to avoid potholes as far as road and traffic conditions
allow. The coefficient finally adopted in the HDM-III model was 0.16, a reduction by a
factor of about 35 on the computer simulations.
The effect of potholes on a vehicle is complex, being a function of the occurrence and
size of potholes and the freedom of manoeuvre of the vehicle to take avoiding action. If
all potholes were in the wheelpaths and the vehicle had no freedom of manoeuvre (either
because the road width is the same as vehicle width or because of traffic congestion) 100
per cent pothole hits would be achieved. At the other extreme, with a few isolated
potholes on a two lane road with no other traffic, the vehicle would probably avoid most if
not all potholes.
The spatial occurrence of potholes may be considered as random, both longitudinally and
laterally. Although potholes may initially occur in the wheelpaths, as vehicles take
avoiding action new wheelpaths and pothole formation will occur. If pothole development
continues unchecked the point will be reached where it is impossible to avoid all potholes
even with complete freedom of manoeuvre. However, even when large numbers of
potholes are present, a vehicle will still not achieve 100 per cent hits due to the lateral
distribution. It is clear that linear relationships do not exist between number of potholes
and the effect on vehicles in terms of received impacts. It is postulated that the
percentage of potholes hit, and thus the resulting roughness effect, will follow a pattern as
shown in Figure 8.3 for different levels of freedom to manoeuvre.
Freedom to Manoeuvre - Low Medium High

Roughness Effect
Extent of Potholing
Figure 8.3: Conceptual Model of Pothole Effect on Roughness
A simple linear model is postulated for a freedom of manoeuvre index with a scale of 0 - 1
based on the following premises:
with a pavement width of 7 m and no traffic, a driver will have complete freedom to
avoid potholes;
with a pavement width of 3 m or traffic volume of 5,000 AADT the driver will have no
freedom of manoeuvre.
From this the following linear model has been derived:
FM = max(min(0.25(CW - 3), 1), 0) max(1 - AADT/5000, 0) (8.17)
where FM is freedom of manoeuvre index

CW is the total pavement width in m
AADT is the two way traffic volume in veh/day
Figure 8.4 shows the predictions of this relationship.
The FM index can then be applied to a roughness effects model of the form:
IRIt = min(a0 (a1 - FM) NPTa2, a3) (8.18)

Roughness 8-13
where IRIt is the total roughness component due to potholing

NPT is the number of standard size potholes per km
0.9
Pavement Width = 7 m
0.8
0.7
Freedom to Manoeuvre Index
0.6 6m
0.5
0.4 5m
0.3
4m
0.2
0.1
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
AADT
Figure 8.4: Proposed Definition of Freedom to Manoeuvre Index
If the HDM-III relationship is converted from per cent area to the new measure of number
of standard potholes per km, it implies that the roughness effect of 1,000 potholes per
lane-km would be approximately 0.84 m/km IRI. This seems patently low and it is
postulated that at this level of potholing the incremental roughness would be 10 m/km if
there were total freedom of manoeuvre and 20 if there were no freedom of manoeuvre.
Based on this, the default parameters for the roughness incremental model are:
a0 = 0.000125
a1 = 2
a2 = 1.5
a3 = 20
This model is illustrated in Figure 8.5.
Delamination
The roughness effects of delamination are similar to that of potholing; however, two
differences may be postulated:
25.0
20.0
Roughness Effect (IRI m/km)
15.0
FM = 0 FM = 1
10.0
5.0
0.0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Potholing (no/km)
Figure 8.5: Proposed Model for Roughness Effect from Potholing
delamination normally occurs with thin surfacings and the depth of the delamination will
give a smaller roughness effect than a pothole of the same size;
because of the lower roughness effect, drivers will make less attempt to avoid
delaminations than they will in the case of potholes.
Based on these premises, the model proposed for the effect of delamination on
roughness follows the same structure as that for potholing but contains a term for
surfacing thickness and reduces the influence of the freedom to manoeuvre index. The
model form is:
IRId = min(a0 (a1 - FM) (HNEW/80) NDLa2, a3) (8.19)
where IRId is the total roughness component due to delamination

NDL is the number of standard size delaminations per km
HNEW is the last surfacing thickness in mm
The default parameters for the roughness delamination incremental model are:
a0 = 0.000125
a1 = 1.5
a2 = 1.5
a3 = 20
The predictions of this model are illustrated in Figure 8.6.

Roughness 8-15
25.0
20.0
HNEW = 80 mm
Roughness Effect (IRI m/km)
15.0
50 mm
10.0
20 mm
5.0
0.0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Delamination (no./km)
Figure 8.6: Effect of Delamination on Roughness
Patching
Unlike potholing and delamination, it has not been observed that road users consciously
attempt to avoid patches. Therefore, the roughness reduction effect of patching is not a
simple decrement of the potholing and delamination effects given in equations 8.18 and
8.19. The model form proposed for HDM-4 is quite simple:
IRIh = a0 NPH (8.20)
where IRIh is the incremental roughness component due to patching

NPH is the increase in the number of standard sized (300 mm
dia.) patches
a0 is a calibration coefficient
The recommended default value for a0 is 0.0005.
Combined Cycle of Potholing/Delamination and Patching
To determine the long-term effects of pothole patching or wide crack repair on roughness,
first consider the treatment of patching in HDM-III. In HDM-III the patching treatment
allowed the user to specify the percentage of potholes or wide cracking to be patched
each year. In the case of pothole patching, the simulation of a policy of less than 100 per
cent patching led to an unrealistic scenario where, in any period after the short term, the
patching costs were actually greater than if all potholes were patched (unless the
enlargement component of pothole progression was zero). This is illustrated in Figure

8.7, in which the ratio of the costs of patching 50 per cent of potholes to the costs of
patching 100 per cent of the potholes is plotted over time.
2.5
60% Enlargement
2.0
Patching Cost Ratio Relative to 100% Policy
1.5 30% Enlargement
No Enlargement
1.0
0.5
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Years
Figure 8.7: Effect of Patching 50 Per Cent of Potholes to Total Patching Policy
It is clear from Figure 8.7 that any amount of patching less than 100 per cent will, over an
analysis period, result in both higher agency costs than a total patching policy and higher
road user costs (due to the residual unpatched potholes remaining each year). Thus
HDM-4 should only apply no patching or 100 per cent patching as a policy option.
HDM-III considered all maintenance as being performed at the end of an analysis year. In
the case of patching, the potholed area and roughness were reset at the end of the year
and the average roughness used for VOC modelling was the mean of start and end of
year values. With a total patching policy, the effects of open potholes were never
experienced in the VOC model. A more realistic scenario is that there is a delay between
pothole occurrence and patching: in a number of networks this delay can be several
months, although more typically it would be measured in days. In HDM-4 it is proposed
that when a patching treatment is specified it include the delay, expressed in days, until
the distress is patched. This delay would then be applied to the prediction of the
potholing/patching component of roughness.
HDM-III modelled the residual roughness after pothole patching as 10 per cent of the
incremental roughness due to potholing. In HDM-4 this should be a user-defined variable
to allow calibration for different levels of patching quality. Figure 8.8 illustrates the effects
on road users of a patching policy where the patching cycle is one month and residual
roughness after patching is 10 per cent.
Roughness 8-17
Incremental IRI from Potholing and Patching
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Month
Figure 8.8: Effect on Road Users of Potholing and Patching Cycle
The average roughness effects of potholing and patching resulting from a patching cycle
with a delay period can be obtained from Equations 8.18 and 8.19 using:
NPT = NPTa Tpat / 730 (8.21)
NDL = NDLa Tpat / 730 (8.22)
where NPTa is the annual predicted occurrence of potholes

NDLa is the annual predicted occurrence of delamination
Tpat is the delay between occurrence and patching in days
Figure 8.9 shows the result of applying this model to different periods of delay (Tpat)
between pothole occurrence and patching.
Incremental Roughness
The models presented so far predict the absolute contribution to roughness of potholing,
delamination and patching strategies. It is more convenient, in pavement modelling, to
express the progression of distress parameters in annual (as in HDM-III) or seasonal
increments. Two cases are considered: zero maintenance when all pothole occurrence or
enlargement remain unpatched and a routine maintenance scenario.
1.00
0.90 Freedom to Manoeuvre = 0
0.80
Roughness Component due to Potholing (m/km)
0.70
Patching cycle = 6 months
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30 3 months
0.20 2 months
0.10 1 month
0.00
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Annual Pothole Occurence (no/km)
Figure 8.9: Effect on Pothole Roughness Component of Different Patching Cycles
Zero Maintenance
In this case, a differential form of Equations 8.18 and 8.19 can be used thus:
IRIt = a0 (a1 - FM) (NPT + NPT/2)a2 NPT (8.23)
IRId = a0 (a1 - FM) (HNEW/80)(NDL + NDL/2)a2 NDL (8.24)
where IRIt is the incremental roughness due to incremental potholing

IRId is the incremental roughness due to incremental
delamination
NPT is the extent of potholing at the start of the period
NPT is the increase in potholing during the period
NDL is the extent of delamination at the start of the period
NDL is the increase in delamination during the period
The default values for the calibration parameters a0 to a2 are shown in Table 8.3.
Table 8.3
Parameters for Incremental Roughness Effects of Potholing and Delamination
Roughness 8-19
Parameter Potholing Delamination

a0 0.00019 0.00019
a1 2.0 1.5
a2 0.5 0.5
Figure 8.10 shows the effect of the incremental model for potholing using the default
parameters in Table 8.3.
2.0
1.8
1.6
Existing potholing = 500 no/km

1.4
Incremental Roughness (m/km)
1.2
200 no/km
1.0
0.8
0.6 No existing potholing
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Incremental Potholing (no/km)
Figure 8.10: Incremental Model for Roughness Effects of Potholing
With Maintenance Patching
When a policy of patching potholes or delaminations is applied, with a delay between

occurrence and patching, the incremental form of the model becomes:
a2
NPTa Tpat NPTa Tpat
IRIt = a0 (a1 - FM) (8.25)
730 730
a2
HNEW NPTa Tpat NPTa Tpat
IRId = a0 (a1 - FM) (8.26)
80 730 730
where a0, a1, a2 are as shown in Table 8.3

The predictions of this model are shown in Figure 8.11.
0.16
Annual Increment in Pothole Occurence = 100 per year

0.14
Annual Roughness Increment due to Potholing(m/km)
Patching cycle = 6 months

0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
3 months
0.04
2 months
0.02
1 month
0.00
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Annual Pothole Occurence (no/km)
Figure 8.11: Annual Roughness Increment from Potholing and Patching Cycle
8.4.6 Environmental Component
The validation studies of the HDM-III roughness model have shown that the
environmental coefficients proposed in Paterson (1987) are appropriate for a wide range
of climatic regions and no change is needed in HDM-4 either to the form of the
environmental component of the model or the recommended coefficients.
IRIe = m IRI T
where IRIe is the roughness increment due to environmental effects

T is the length of the season as a fraction of a year
8.4.7 Shoulder Use and Effective Roughness
On narrow pavements vehicles are forced to make partial use of the shoulders when
meeting oncoming traffic or when overtaking. If the shoulders are unsealed they will
normally have a higher roughness than the pavement itself and the effective roughness
experienced by a vehicle will also be higher. Effective roughness is a function of
pavement and shoulder roughness and the time spent using the shoulder which is a
function of traffic volume.
The following relationships have been derived from Hoban (1987):

IRIEFF = IRI + (IRISH - IRI) STIME/2 (8.19)
STIME = 58 PSH AADT 10-6 (8.20)

Roughness 8-21
PSH = max(min(2.65 - 0.425 CW, 1), 0) (8.21)
where IRIEFF is the effective roughness resulting from shoulder use in

m/km
IRI is the roughness of the pavement in m/km
IRISH is the roughness of the shoulder in m/km
STIME is the proportion of time using the shoulder due to both width
and traffic volume
PSH is the proportion of shoulder time due to width
CW is the pavement width in m
AADT is the daily two way traffic volume in veh/day
Figure 8.12 illustrates the effective roughness model using the parameters given above
with values of 5.0 IRI for the pavement roughness and 15.0 IRI for the shoulder
roughness.
In applying this model in HDM-4, two possibilities exist for providing the shoulder
roughness. If the shoulder is modelled as a separate lane using unsealed road
deterioration models, the shoulder roughness will be predicted by the model.
Alternatively, shoulder roughness can be user input and remain a constant over the
evaluation period.
0.60
0.50
Pavement Width = 3.5 m
Roughness Increment due to Shoulder Use (m/km)
0.40
4.5 m
0.30
0.20
5.5 m
0.10
0.00
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
AADT
Figure 8.12: Additional Roughness from Shoulder Use

8.5 Summary
The component incremental roughness model first proposed in Paterson (1987) and later
adopted for use in HDM-III has proved to be transferable to a variety of climatic regions
and types of pavement. Given the extensive validation of the model, little change to most
of the model components is needed for HDM-4.
It is recommended that the model is enhanced by the inclusion of terms for ravelling and
patching and a major change is proposed to the way roughness is derived from
potholing/delamination effects. The definition of routine maintenance patching policies
has been changed with respect to HDM-III and used to predict annual average roughness
experienced by road users as a function of the delay between the occurrence of
potholes/delaminations and patching
Additional roughness prediction models have been developed to predict the incremental
roughness arising from shoulder use on narrow pavements
Prediction of Pavement Texture 9-1
9. PREDICTION OF PAVEMENT TEXTURE1
9.1 Introduction
From a pavement management perspective, skid resistance can represent a very
important factor in ranking road sections to establish maintenance and reconstruction
priorities since it provides valuable information about the level of pavement safety. In
general, microtexture determines the maximum skid resistance afforded by a dry
pavement, while macrotexture determines the drainage ability and therefore how effective
the microtexture will be when the pavement is wet. Most skidding related accidents occur
on wet pavements. The changes in macrotexture due to wear and compaction resulting
from traffic have important safety as well as economic consequences since rolling
resistance is a function of texture.
This chapter presents suggested models for estimating macrotexture progression of

bituminous pavements, the terminal skid resistance of both sealed and unsealed
pavements, and the application of these models to evaluate accident risk and assess
materials for use as wearing courses.
9.2 Properties of Pavement Texture

Perhaps the most important single variable which determines the magnitude of longitudinal
and lateral forces at the tyre-road interface is pavement texture. A road surface exhibits two
types of texture classified as macrotexture and microtexture, dependent on the scale
involved.
The individual asperities or aggregate particles in a road surface constitute the

macrotexture, and they range from about 6-20 mm in size. Macrotexture is therefore
associated with the coarseness of the road surface that affects water drainage from the tyre
print, tyre tread rubber deformations and skid resistance at high speed, and the friction-
speed gradient. Coarser textures have a flatter friction-speed gradient. Macrotexture is
considered optimal for skid resistance purposes if its height is within the range 0.7-1.2 mm
and the average distance between the aggregate particle peaks ranges within 6.5 and
12 mm (Babkov, 1985). In the case of concrete pavements, macrotexture is achieved either
by coarse brushing or grooving of the surface as soon as the concrete has been laid and is
still wet, or by removing the surface mortar and exposing the aggregates.
The main user costs influenced by macrotexture are rolling resistance (affecting fuel and oil
costs), accidents (in the medium to high speed range, i.e. 70 km/h and above, and as
affected by spray-impaired visibility) and tyre/road noise.
Microtexture is the degree of roughness of the surface of individual aggregate particles

exposed at the road surface, and has an amplitude ranging typically from 10-100 microns.
It is known to be a function of aggregate particle mineralogy and petrology and is affected
by climate/weather effects and traffic action. Also under this classification must be included
the texture of bituminous and cement mortars, which may occupy major portions of the
1
This chapter was written by Mr. Peter D. Cenek and Mr. John E. Patrick, W orks Central Laboratories, New
Zealand.
surface of asphalt mix and cement concrete surfacings between any exposed coarse
aggregate particles.
The presence of hard gritty grains such as silica, sand or quartzite on road surfaces ensures
a continuous gouging and abrasive action under the squirming action of tread rubber in
rolling, and this is most effective in preserving a satisfactory microtexture.
The microtexture of the road surface affects the level of skid resistance at all speeds for dry
and wet conditions. Surfaces with sharp microtexture projections have a high wet road skid
resistance at low speeds but, without macrotexture, show a steep decline in friction as
speed rises. Sharp microtexture projections are, however, associated with a high rate of
tyre wear, and consequently the action of traffic polishes the surface, reducing its
microtexture.
In absence of specific pavement texture data, required values of texture depth (TD) and
SFC can be interpolated from Figure 9.1. In this figure surfacings A and B are SBST or
DBST pavements while C and D are either AC or slurry seal.
Figure 9.1: Description of Surface Texture

Safe, skid resistant street and highway pavement surfaces are expected by the travelling
public. The models presented, although still in the developmental stage, are intended to
assist engineers responsible for design and maintenance of pavements to meet that
expectation.
9.3 Macrotexture Progression

9.3.1 Overview of Deterioration Mechanisms
The macrotexture of a road surface wears as a result of both seasonal effects and the
overall exposure to traffic. Since wear is the product of normal tyre pressure, coefficient of
sliding friction and scuffing velocity, it is clear that it exhibits a maximum at regions of
greatest pressure on a given aggregate particle. There is therefore a tendency to flatten
rounded or pointed asperities so that a distinct reduction in mean void spacing between
tread and texture occurs due to traffic. On the other hand, initially flat aggregate
experiences edge wear because of the tendency of tread rubber to drape about the
flattened edges, and the higher edge pressures produce a gradual rounding effect. In this
case there is a small increase in mean void spacing with progressive wear. A gradual
change from centre to edge wear occurs over prolonged periods of time, and the cycle of
events repeats continuously.
Superimposed on the centre/edge wear mechanism described above are seasonal

variations due to temperature, rainfall and debris or dust deposits. Lower temperatures
prevalent in winter increase the coefficient of sliding friction so that additional wear can be
anticipated. In severe winter climates, frost and brittleness increase the mean texture depth
of a road surface by a localised fracture mechanism. The presence of surface grit during
the dry summer months produces a polishing action under traffic conditions, and this
perhaps inhibits the overall rate of wear while destroying microtexture.
The ability of an aggregate to withstand wear or abrasion can be determined in the

laboratory using the British Standards Institution (BSI) Aggregate Abrasion Value (AAV) test
(BS 812, 1984). An aggregate with a poor abrasion resistance (indicated by a high AAV)
under traffic will be quickly worn with consequent loss of macrotexture. Recommended
levels of AAV for different levels of heavy commercial traffic are given in Table 9.1.
Table 9.1
AAV of Aggregate Necessary to Achieve Adequate Abrasion
Resistance Under Different Traffic Conditions
Traffic in Commercial Vehicles per Lane Under Up to Up to Up to Up to Over

1
per Day 250 1000 1750 2500 3250 3250
Maximum AAV for chippings 14 12 12 10 10 10
Maximum AAV for aggregate in coated 16 16 14 14 12 12

macadam wearing courses
Source: After Salt (1977)

Notes: 1/ For lightly trafficked roads carrying less than 250 commercial vehicles per lane per
day, aggregate of higher AAV may be used where experience has shown that
satisfactory performance is achieved by aggregate from a particular source.
In addition to wear, the macrotexture of bituminous surfacings reduces under the action of
traffic due to penetration of the aggregate into the substrate and, in the case of single and
two coat surface dressings, reorientation of the aggregate particles.
The following model for predicting macrotexture progression has been derived from limited
studies performed in Hungary (Kuna, 1995), New Zealand (Major and Tuohey, 1976;
Houghton and Hallett, 1987), Malaysia (Emby, 1992; Sufian, 1995), and USA (Hasan, et al.,
1991).
9.3.2 Bituminous Surfacing Macrotexture Progression
Regression analysis of the limited macrotexture progression data of New Zealand single
surface treatment (SBST) pavements has shown mean texture depth, as measured by the
volumetric sand patch method, to be strongly correlated to cumulative traffic yielding the
following expression:
TD = ALD (a0 a1 log10 NELV) (9.1)
where TD is the sand patch derived texture depth in mm

ALD is the average least dimension of aggregate particle in mm
NELV is the number of equivalent light vehicle (elv) passes since
sealing date, where one heavy commercial vehicle is
equivalent to 10 light vehicles
a0 and a1 are regression constants
Equation 9.1 shows the rate of change of macrotexture to be a function of aggregate size.
The relationship between common aggregate sizes and ALD is given in Table 9.2.
Table 9.2
ALD of Typical One Size Pavement Aggregate Sizes
Aggregate Size Nominal ALD

(mm) (mm)
20 11
16 9
14 7
10 5.5
7 4
Application of the model form represented by Equation 9.1 to available macrotexture time
histories for a range of SBST road sections and grouped according to region, to account for
different materials and construction practices, resulted in coefficients of determination (R2)
which varied from 0.7 to 0.9.
Equation 9.1 can be generalised to apply to all bituminous surfacing types as follows:
TD = ITD (1 TDT log10 NELV) (9.2)
where ITD is the initial texture depth which is related to aggregate size
or mix type in mm
TDT is the rate of change of texture with traffic and should be
constant for similar surfacing types
Representative values of ITD and TDT for different types of bituminous surfacings are
given in Table 9.3 and are based on the assumption that the aggregate being used has
adequate abrasion resistance for the anticipated heavy commercial vehicle traffic. Based
on the available data, the tabulated values appear to be universally applicable.
Table 9.3
Suggested Macrotexture Model Coefficients for Different Bituminous Mixes
Surfacing Type ITD TDT

Asphaltic Concrete 0.7 0.005
Slurry Seal 0.7 0.006
Single and Double 1.5 (fine)

Bituminous Surface 0.120
Dressings 3.5 (coarse)
With reference to Table 9.3, it will be noted that the macrotexture of surface treatments,
whether single or two coat, decreases at a significantly faster rate than for other bituminous
surfacings. Another important aspect of surface treatments is that irrespective of the size of
the aggregate, the relative rate of change of macrotexture, TDT, remains the same.
In summary, the rate of change of texture for bituminous mixes will be a function of the mix
design. For surface treatments, the rate of change of texture will depend on the viscosity of
the bitumen, the temperature conditions, and the hardness of the substrate. The constants
given in Table 9.3 relate to conditions where the substrate is a sound, hard surface
treatment. If the substrate is soft then the rate of change of texture will be significantly
greater than the TDT constant given in Table 9.3.
9.3.3 Open Graded Asphaltic Friction Courses
With porous asphalt courses, the deep continuous voids do not allow a realistic measure of
macrotexture to be made by methods such as the sand patch or the laser texture meter.
However, as the voids fill with detritus, significant macrotexture is still present. For the
purposes for calculating texture dependent user costs such as rolling resistance, worn
friction course surfaces can be approximated by ITD = 1.5 and TDT = 0.08, i.e. they
display characteristics similar to a fine to moderate surface treatment.
9.3.4 Portland Cement Concrete Pavements
Insufficient data of appropriate quality were available for concrete pavements to allow
reliable derivation of ITD and TDT model coefficients. However, limited macrotexture
measurements reported by Emby (1992) indicate that roller compacted concrete displays
very similar behaviour to that of asphaltic concrete. On the other hand, large decreases in
macrotexture were observed for continuously reinforced concrete pavements with broom
applied texture, and it approached that of single surface treatments. Further research is
therefore needed to better quantify the relationship between concrete finish, mortar quality,
the traffic volumes carried by the pavement, the type of traffic manoeuvres, and
macrotexture changes.
9.4 Modelling the Effect of Microtexture

9.4.1 Relationship Between Microtexture, Skid Resistance and Polished
Stone Value
Microtexture is a measure of the degree of polishing of a pavement surface or of the

aggregate and the surface. The tendency for an aggregate to polish may be assessed in
the laboratory by the BSI Polish Stone Value (PSV) test (BS 812, 1984), in which particles of
aggregate are subjected to simulated trafficking in an accelerated polishing machine. A
high PSV indicates good resistance to polishing.
As discussed earlier, skid resistance of a pavement at low speed (less than 50 km/h)
depends primarily on microtexture. Not unexpectedly, measures of low slip friction testers
such as the British Pendulum Tester, which measures the skid resistance value (SRV), and
the Sideway-Force Coefficient Routine Investigation Machine (SCRIM), which measures
SFC, have been shown to correlate well with microtexture (Sandberg, 1990).
Research performed in the UK by the Transport and Road Research Laboratory (Salt, 1977)
established that for bituminous surfacings the three variables SFC, PSV and traffic were
inter-related, resulting in the following relationship which only applies to straight road
sections:
SFC50 = 0.024 0.663 x 10-4 QCV + 1 x 10-2PSV (9.3)
where SFC50 is the side force coefficient measured at 50 km/h

QCV is the number of commercial vehicles/lane/day
PSV is the polished stone value
The relationship was found to have a highly significant coefficient of determination, i.e.
R2 = 0.83 from 139 sets of observations.
Important points arising from Equation 9.3 are:
a change of 1 unit of PSV corresponds to a change of 0.01 units of SFC at 50 km/h;

for a given commercial vehicle traffic flow, the skid resistance of a pavement reduces
to a steady state in around 1-2 years, referred to as the ultimate state of polish. After
that time, apart from seasonal variation, it maintains that value until the surfacing
deteriorates or the commercial traffic density changes. The effect of traffic on SFC is
therefore not cumulative from year to year, and therefore the concepts used, for
example, in fatigue studies do not apply to skid resistance;
skid resistance varies immensely with the commercial traffic density and, other
conditions being equal, a road with the highest commercial traffic flow will have the
lowest skid resistance.
The derivation of Equation 9.3 has been regarded as a major advancement in the field of
skid resistance as it provides a method of nominating at the design stage the properties of
the aggregate required to provide a given ultimate skidding resistance provided that the
commercial traffic flow can be estimated.
9.4.2 Predictive Models for Skid Resistance of Sealed Pavements
The following two predictive models have been identified from an extensive literature search
and are considered adequate for application in design and maintenance management
systems as they properly account for observed pavement behaviour.
Bituminous Surfacings
Equation 9.3 was modified by Catt (1983) to take into account all factors which directly
affect skid resistance, except one. The factor omitted is that of aggregate type. The
derived equation was:
SFC50 = 0.024 0.663 x 10-4 QCV + 0.01 (PSV + SFA SFB) (9.4)
where SFA is a factor depending on the nominal size of the aggregate

and type of surfacing (see Table 9.4)
SFB is a factor taking braking and turning into account (see Table
9.5)
Table 9.4
Aggregate Factor - SFA
Nominal Size of SFA

Aggregate Surface Treatment Other Bituminous
(mm) Surfaces Surfaces
40 8 3
28 4 1
20 0 0
14 4 1
10 8 4
6 14 5
3 22 8
Table 9.5
Braking and Turning Factor - SFB
Traffic Manoeuvre SFB

Areas where turning and braking occur together 6
Braking only 4
Turning only (bends less than 250 m radius) 3
Pedestrian crossings well clear of bends and junctions 1
Normal sites 0
Equation 9.4 indicates that:

aggregate size is a significant factor; the smaller the aggregate size for a nominal PSV
the greater the skid resistance; and
the degree of braking and turning affects the amount of polishing given to the road
surface.
The SFC at any speed between 50 and 130 km/h is given by:
SFCs = SFC50 (400 (2 min(TD, 2)) (max(50,S) 50))/400 (9.5)
where S is traffic speed in km/h (not less than 50 km/h)
Equation 9.5 shows that the reduction in skid resistance with traffic speed is nil when the
sand patch texture depth is 2 mm, and at 130 km/h reduces linearly to a value of 60 per
cent of SFC50 at zero texture depth. Therefore on heavily trafficked, high speed roads the
provision of high texture depth may be the most economical way of providing the necessary
skid resistance.
Portland Cement Concrete Pavements
Salt (1977) gives the following relation (R2 = 0.71) derived from a multiple regression of skid
resistance measurements made on a heavily trafficked (3400 commercial vehicles/day)
motorway:
SFC50 = 0.45 + 2 x 10-3 PSVF 0.01 AAVF + 3.2 x 10-3 AAVC
1.9 x 10-3 UCS + 0.8 x 10-3 PCTFINES (9.6)
where PSVF is the Polished Stone Value for fine aggregate

AAVF is the Aggregate Abrasion Value for fine aggregate
AAVC is the Aggregate Abrasion Value for coarse aggregate
UCS is the compressive strength of concrete at 28 days in MPa
PCTFINES is the per cent by weight passing a 4.76 mm BS test sieve
Equation 9.6 highlights that many factors affect the skid resistance of portland cement
concrete pavements. Among the most important are the wear characteristics of the
aggregate used, the fine texture (grittiness) of the surface contributed by the fine aggregate
and a low water:cement ratio (0.5 or less).
Seasonal and Weather Effects
The skid resistance of road surfaces changes significantly due to the short and long term
variations of weather conditions (Kennedy, et al., 1990). During periods of dry weather, skid
resistance decreases because the aggregate particles are covered by a traffic film of debris
containing rubber products and lubricants. However, roads fully or partially recover their
frictional characteristics after prolonged periods of rainfall.
The SFC50 values derived from Equations 9.4 and 9.6 pertain to "the mean summer skid
resistance coefficient" (MSSC) where skid resistance is at its lowest. Normalisation
procedures, such as detailed in Kulakowski, et al (1990), are available for accounting for the
effects of seasonal and weather factors. However, the use of MSSC values should ensure
conservative estimates of skid resistance, apart from ice and snow conditions.
The magnitude of seasonal variation of skid resistance depends primarily on how much the
weather changes between seasons at a particular location, and can vary by as much as 50
per cent. Furthermore, changes in skid resistance are much greater and much more
consistent on bituminous pavements than on concrete pavements. Although temperature
has an influence, the proportion of time during which the road is wet appears to be the most
significant factor for these observed variations.
Predictive Model for Skid Resistance of Unpaved Roads
Paige-Green (1990) provides the only detailed investigation of the skid resistance of dry and
wet unpaved roads. In this case skid resistance was quantified by measuring actual vehicle
deceleration under locked wheel skidding. The following model was derived from
regression analysis of results of sections tested in the dry state:
DEC (m/s2) = 7.9 RAIN (0.001 + 0.0001 P75) 0.018 P26
- 0.004 PF + 1.08 DR (9.7)
where DEC is the vehicle deceleration in m/s2

RAIN is the mean annual rainfall in mm
P75 is the percentage material finer than 0.075 mm
P26 is the percentage material finer than 26.5 mm
PF is the plastic factor
DR is the dust ratio (ratio of per cent passing 200- and 40-mesh
sieves)
The model statistics are a coefficient of determination of 0.70 and a standard error of
0.33 m/s2.
The average deceleration on the 45 sections tested in the dry state was 5.9 m/s2, with a
maximum of 8.0 and a minimum of 4.1 m/s2. The six sections tested wet gave an average
value of 5.3 m/s2, with a maximum of 6.2 and a minimum of 4.1 m/s2.
The slipperiness when dry is affected mainly by the plastic factor and increasing percentage
passing the 26.5 mm sieve (i.e. finer material). An increase in the per cent passing
26.5 mm from 50 per cent to 100 per cent results in a decrease of almost 1 m/s2 in the
deceleration. The dust ratio shows a strong correlation with the plasticity, indicative of a
high cohesion increasing the skid resistance in the dry state.
In the dry condition the roads were all adequately skid resistant. The lowest values
measured were on sections constructed of igneous material (granite, basalt, dolerite,
andesite and quartz porphyry) and calcretes (caliches), all of which gave minimum
decelerations of less than 5.0 m/s2. Some of these materials (andesite, dolerite, calcrete)
had extremely high quantities of coarse aggregate, whereas others (granite, quartz
porphyry) had negligible coarse aggregate. Conversely, the sedimentary materials (shale,
sandstone, chert) all gave minimum values in excess of 5.5 m/s2.
Comparison of the decelerations measured on dry unpaved roads showed that the values
are generally less than those measured on a good asphalt surfacing and about the same as
a good surface treatment when wet. This is consistent with New Zealand findings in which
peak dry friction values measured on representative gravel roads with the Norsemeter
ROAR were between 0.6 and 0.7, whereas for asphaltic concrete they were between 0.9
and 1.
It can be concluded from the discussion that large stones are not necessarily required for
good skid resistance, but an adequate cohesion (in terms of plasticity) and percentage
retained on the 26.5 mm sieve should provide an acceptable skid resistance under dry
conditions. The presence of loose material generally reduces the skid resistance, but in a
number of tests the loose material was found to accumulate in front of the skidding tyres
and improve the skid resistance.
Although only six roads were tested wet, the decrease in average deceleration was
generally between 4 and 40 per cent, with a sandy decomposed granite road increasing in
skid resistance by 5 per cent. The highest recorded decreases were for the shale roads
which reduces from initial values of 6.4 to 6.7 m/s2 to between 4.1 and 4.5 m/s2. Free water
was at the surface when the value of 4.1 m/s2 was measured. The roads with the largest
proportion of oversize material (shales) were the most slippery, whereas the granite road
with no stones at all increased in skid resistance, probably because of the rapid infiltration of
water and capillary cohesion of the loose material.
In the absence of more specific information, the South African and New Zealand
experiences suggest that a well constructed and maintained gravel road can be
approximated to a moderate surface dressing, say 14 mm aggregate size, for the purposes
of calculating texture dependent user costs.
9.5 The Relation Between Pavement Texture and Accidents

There seems to be overwhelming evidence from long term research studies that there is a
strong correlation between poor skid resistance and accident occurrence (OECD, 1984;
PIARC, 1991). Although there are one or two discrepancies in the nature of the resulting
accident-skid resistance relationships, there is a tendency towards linear or non-linear
relationships, suggesting no critical threshold or minimum friction value.
These studies confirm that microtexture appears to be the most important texture parameter
in determining wet pavement accident rates, but macrotexture also can have a substantial
influence. An interesting development is a recent British study undertaken by Roe, et al.
(1991). This study showed that for speed limits greater than 64 km/h, both skidding and
non-skidding accidents in both wet and dry conditions are less if the macrotexture is coarse
than if it is fine. This was observed at all levels of underlying skid resistance. Furthermore,
the sand patch texture depth below which accident risk begins to increase was identified to
be about 1 mm.
In another British study, Hosking (1986) attempted to quantify the effect of increasing skid
resistance. A conclusion of the study was that an average increase in SFC50 of 0.10 can be
expected to be accompanied by a reduction in wet road skidding rate of 13.2 and dry road
skidding rate of 5.9, where skidding rate is defined as the number of accidents in which one
or more vehicles are reported to have skidded expressed as a percentage of all accidents.
In conclusion, there is no doubt that a change in the level of microtexture and macrotexture
is likely to influence the number and severity of accidents. However, it is essential that the
chosen surface texture requirements are right for the prevailing conditions and also
achievable within the available funds. Countries with easy access to cheap polish resistant
(high PSV) aggregates will generally be able to provide higher skid resistant surfaces than
countries where these aggregates have to be imported at high cost. In another example,
Nordic countries, where studded tyres are permitted, have major rutting problems but the
studded tyres help to restore microtexture, whilst hot dry climates will suffer from almost
continuous polishing of the surface aggregate where it rarely rains. Macrotexture therefore
is unlikely to be considered as a top priority in either case.
9.6 Application of Models in HDM-4

The macrotexture and skid resistance models presented in this chapter can be used to
calculate expected SFC values for comparison with recommended minimum values of SFC
for various categories of road given in Table 9.6 and taken from Catt (1983).
The ratio of SFC/SFCmin is calculated and input into Equation 9.8 so that the resulting
decrease or increase in personal injury accidents can be calculated using Hosking's
relationship between seasonal wet road skidding rate and skidding resistance ratios.
PIA = SSRB (SSRA 1) ANNACC /100
PIA = SSRB (11 e 2.4( SFC / SFC min) 1) ANNACC / 100 (9.8)
where SSRB is the existing site wet road skidding rate

ANNACC is the annual number of accidents under wet conditions at
site of interest
PIA is the net change in personal injury accidents, (ve =
decrease +ve = increase)
Table 9.6
Suggested Values of Minimum SFC
1
Site Description Minimum SFC
Roundabouts or approaches to rail level crossings, traffic lights,
pedestrian crossings 55
Bends <250 m diameter or gradients >10% and >50 m long 50
Approaches to road junctions or 5-10% gradients >50 m long 45
Undivided carriageways 40
Divided carriageways and motorways 35

Notes: 1/ If there is a high percentage of heavy commercial vehicles in the total traffic
volumes (i.e. per cent HCV > 35 per cent), the above minimum SFCs should
be multiplied by a factor of 1.2 to account for the lower sliding coefficient of
commercial vehicle tyres (Kulakowski et al., 1990).
Note: Equation 9.8 has been derived by normalising Hosking's (1986) relationship between
seasonal wet road skidding rate and skidding resistance ratios with respect to the
study's wet road skidding rate at skid resistance ratio 1. Its validity for skidding
resistance ratios and wet road skidding rates outside the range 0.9 to 1.3 and 20-40
per cent respectively has yet to be proven.
It should be noted that there is some doubt that providing higher skid resistance surfaces
than the minimum in Table 9.6 will result in the expected reduction in the number of
accidents because drivers tend to drive to the limits of available friction. It therefore may be
more appropriate to only consider situations where the predicted SFC is less than SFCmin
and treat the expected resulting increase in the number of accidents as a negative user
benefit in any economic analysis.
To illustrate the application of the above, consider a high speed dual carriageway with an
85th percentile speed of 120 km/h. The other characteristics are:
Traffic 1500 cv/lane/day

Surface 14 mm surface treatment
Texture depth 1.8 mm
Aggregate PSV 45
Junctions None
Bends None
From Table 9.6, SFCmin = 0.35.

From Table 9.4 SFA = 4 and Table 9.5 SFB = 0. From Equation 9.4 this gives SFC50 =
0.415.
From Equation 9.5 SFC120 = 0.965 and SFCmin = 0.4 giving SFC120/SFCmin = 1.143
If the existing wet road skidding rate is 20 per cent and the annual number of injury
accidents under wet conditions is 170, from Equation 9.8, PIA = 9.9, giving a potential
saving of 10 personal injury accidents per year.
9.7 International Friction Index

In 1992 a major international experiment was conducted on a wide selection of public road
sections and airfield runways in Belgium and Spain. All the different friction and texture
measurement devices in use world-wide were invited to participate, and 41 devices took part
in establishing a large database of friction and texture measurements.
From analysis performed in this database, the Permanent International Association of Road
Congresses (PIARC) established a way to harmonise friction measurements from existing
friction measuring devices resulting in the concept of the International Friction Index (IFI).
The index is composed of two numbers: the Friction Number, F60, and the Speed Number,
SP. Both numbers can be readily derived from values of SFC and TD calculated from
Equations 9.4 to 9.6 and Equation 9.1 using relations for SCRIM and volumetric sand patch
method presented in PIARC report 01.04.T "International Experiment to Compare and
Harmonise Skid Resistance and Texture Measurements". This PIARC publication is due to
be available late 1995.
It is expected that in future all accident studies, surveys and resulting specifications will be
reported in terms of IFI.
9.8 Summary
This chapter has introduced the modelling of texture and skid resistance for HDM-4. The
inclusion of these factors represents a major enhancement over HDM-III which did not
model either effect.
However, it needs to be recognised that the skid resistance relationships presented in the
chapter are based on research findings established 20 years ago. This work did not
encompass roads bearing the very high traffic flows that we find today. They also lacked
the data to allow a full study of lower traffic levels. The PSV/SFC relationship needs further
study under present day conditions, including the effect of traffic weights as well as
numbers. So does the general applicability of the proposed relationship between wet road
skidding and skidding resistance ratios.
For highway investment planning purposes the relationships proposed should be adequate
on an interim basis with their application restricted to bituminous surfacings. Further work is
required to validate these relationships and to derive equivalent relationships for concrete
and unpaved roads.
Maintenance and Rehabilitation on Bituminous Pavements 10-1
10. MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION ON BITUMINOUS

PAVEMENTS1
10.1 Introduction
A common shortcoming in the modelling of pavement performance is the manner in which
the effects of maintenance and rehabilitation treatments are considered. While it is by no
means an easy task to model pavement deterioration, modelling the effects of different
treatments on pavement deterioration is even more complex. There are many types of
treatments that are applied to pavements, ranging from routine crack sealing with an
asphalt emulsion to the application of highly specialised modified bituminous surface
treatments. This array of treatments is applied to pavements that exhibit every type of
condition possible: treatments are applied to pavements with no visible distress (highly
pre-emptive treatments) as well as to pavements whose entire surface is distressed (i.e.,
100 per cent failed). Finally, whatever the treatment and the pavement condition when
the treatment is applied, the resultant structures are exposed to varying climatic and
vehicle loadings.
The effects of maintenance and rehabilitation treatments on pavement deterioration, while

difficult to model, are well known in conceptual form (see, for example, Paterson, 1987, p.
123). Nonetheless, a means of explicitly considering maintenance and rehabilitation
effects is required in order to model the life-cycle performance of a pavement.
In this chapter, common bituminous pavement maintenance and rehabilitation practices

are identified. For the sake of simplicity, these practices are grouped under a general
heading of maintenance, even though they may comprise treatments that others refer to
as rehabilitation, resurfacing, or reconstruction. The term works is occasionally used as
a general description of these activities. The conceptual deterioration of flexible
pavements and the influence of selected maintenance actions on that deterioration are
then discussed. The findings are then used to establish:
generic maintenance effects model forms;

coefficients for adapting maintenance effects models to a range of conditions;
guidance on maintenance intervention criteria.
10.2 Common Maintenance Practices

10.2.1 Introduction
Pavement maintenance strategies vary among countries and even among road
authorities in the same country. This is not surprising, as there is no single best
maintenance treatment, nor is there a universal set of strategies that can be applied to
maintenance treatment selection. While in general terms there are undoubtedly
strategies that are more appropriate than others, given specific conditions, the factors that
influence the selection process are varied and complex. Some of the factors that
1
The HTRS team would like to acknowledge the contribution of Professor Alex Visser of the University of
Pretoria and Mr. Gerrie van Zyl of V&V Consulting Engineers (South Africa) in researching this task.
influence the application of specific treatments and the selection of general strategies
include:
previous performance;
material availability;
availability of funds;
traffic;
road classification and adjacent land use;
environment.
Perhaps one of the biggest factors, however, is the ultimate effect that the treatment is
expected to have on the pavements short- and long-term performance and hence its
effect on road users.
The consideration of the effects of maintenance on pavement performance begins with an

examination of commonly applied maintenance treatments. In this chapter a set of
standard treatments is introduced and defined. These are divided into six categories:
routine maintenance;
preventive maintenance;
thin surfacings;
overlays;
rehabilitation;
reconstruction.
Each category is loosely organised by the effect that the treatment has on performance
as well as the time in the pavements life cycle that the treatment is applied. The
presentation of the different treatments in each category is not meant to be exhaustive: it
is well beyond the scope of this report to consider individually all of the different materials
or application techniques that are used, for example, to seal cracks or potholes, or the
many formulations that constitute surface treatments. However, the listing and brief
description of these procedures should serve as a guide to those who apply different
treatments.
Table 10.1 summarises typical pavement maintenance treatment categories and

treatment types. These are presented in a hierarchy according to the effect that they
have on the pavement: routine maintenance treatments are usually applied to correct a
specific distress and are recurrent activities, while at the other end rehabilitation strategies
address almost every distress and are expected to provide the longest lasting benefit.
Some treatments undoubtedly belong in more than one category. An example is a slurry
seal, which could be classified by some as a thin surfacing and by others as a preventive
treatment. For the sake of simplicity, in this table the treatments only appear once.
Table 10.1
Pavement Maintenance Categories and Representative Treatment Types
Works Category Treatment Types Typical Application

Emulsified and cutback bitumens for temporary
repairs; rubber, polymer, or other modified asphalt
Crack Sealing and Filling materials for long-term sealing, especially of
Routine Maintenance moving cracks
Edge Patching Dense-graded hot asphalt plant mix; stockpiled
cold mix of bituminous emulsion
Shoulder Repair and uniform-graded aggregate; proprietary
Pothole Repair cold mixes
2
Light application (0.45 to 0.70 L/m ) of a slow-
Fog Seal setting emulsion, diluted with water or other
bitumen applied at a lower rate
Spray applications of low viscosity bitumens or
Rejuvenating Seal modified bitumens without any aggregate; applied
2
Preventive from 0.3 to 0.9 L/m , depending on dilution and
Maintenance penetration rate
Mixture of well-graded, fine aggregate (3 to 10
mm max top size, mineral filler (usually portland
Slurry Seal cement), emulsified bitumen, and water. When
polymers are added, referred to as
microsurfacing
Sprayed application of bitumen followed
Single Surface Treatment immediately by a single layer of clean aggregate
of approximately uniform size
Sprayed application of bitumen, followed by a
Double Surface Treatment layer of aggregate, another application of
bitumen, and a second layer of smaller aggregate.
Thin Surfacings Also referred to as pervious asphalt. Consists of
Porous Asphalt asphalt surface course with very open gradation,
minimum fines, and 15 to 20 per cent voids
Cape Seal A single surface treatment followed by the
application of a slurry seal
Thin Asphalt Overlays Dense-graded bituminous mixture that is placed
25 to 40 mm thick
Dense or open-graded bituminous mixtures (>40
Thick Asphalt Overlays mm thick) with binder content normally 3 to 7 per
cent
Conventional dense-graded bituminous concrete
Overlays Modified Asphalt mixtures (thick AC overlays) to which a polymer
such as EVA or SBS is added
Rubberised Asphalt Conventional dense-graded bituminous concrete
mixtures to which granulated reclaimed rubber is
added
Removal by milling of part or all of one or more
Rehabilitation Mill and Replace bound layers and their replacement with asphalt
course(s).
Removal of existing pavement to the sub-base
Reconstruction Reconstruction and/or sub-grade, reworking or replacement of
material before laying a new asphalt course.
10.2.2 Routine Maintenance

Routine maintenance may be defined as those treatments that are applied to a pavement,
when needed, in order to keep the pavement functioning properly. As such, routine
maintenance is sometimes referred to as reactive maintenance. This suggests that it is
work that is performed as a reaction to a specific distress.
Routine maintenance is performed on pavements as they begin to show signs of

deterioration, but is generally considered to be a wasted effort on pavements that are
severely distressed. Filling a pothole is an example of a routine maintenance activity: it
cannot be scheduled before the pothole appears and it should not be left unattended once
the pothole has developed. However, if there are too many potholes present, a more
comprehensive repair may be needed. In addition to pothole repair, routine maintenance
treatments applied to pavements include edge patching, crack sealing and filling, and
shoulder repair.
10.2.3 Preventive Maintenance Surfacings
In contrast to routine maintenance treatments, preventive maintenance treatments are

ideally applied on pavements prior to their manifestation of distresses. These treatments
are intended to prolong the life of a pavement by restoring (or maintaining) desirable
properties while such measures are still cost-effective. Perhaps the most common type of
preventive treatments are thin surfacings that are applied to keep a bituminous surface
from weathering and oxidising. These treatments seal the pavement surface with a fresh
film or layer of bitumen and may also be designed so that the bitumen will soak into the
upper part of the existing surface course.
Preventive maintenance treatments are most effective when they are applied to a surface
that is intact (i.e., free from significant cracking or disintegration). Preventive
maintenance treatments often do not contain any aggregate, or will contain an aggregate
with a maximum top size of 10 mm. Examples of preventive maintenance treatments
include fog seals, slurry seals, and rejuvenators. Preventive treatments are not an
effective means of addressing structural deterioration such as rutting and crocodile
cracking.
10.2.4 Thin Surfacings
Thin surfacings can be applied as preventive treatments, but are also used to restore
surface texture and rideability. They are sometimes referred to as functional overlays,
as they are intended to restore or enhance the ability of the roadway to serve its purpose
(function), but do not increase the load-carrying capabilities of the structure. Typical thin
surfacings include surface treatments, thin (< 40 mm) asphalt overlays, and some slurry
seals.
Applications of thin surfacings are commonly made over pavements exhibiting narrow
cracking or ravelling, with minimal potholing and rutting. Rutting alone may be treated
with a rut filling application either as a treatment by itself or followed by a thin surfacing.
10.2.5 Overlays
Overlays are resurfacings whose primary purpose is to impart a structural improvement to

the pavement. A significant structural benefit is realised when the surfacing is placed to a
thickness greater than 25 mm, and it is needed either when the pavement begins to
exhibit structural deterioration (e.g., crocodile cracking, potholing, rutting) or when an
increase in the vehicle loadings beyond the design predictions can be projected due to
changes in usage.
The most common material used in the construction of an overlay is hot mix asphalt of the
same design that would be used for surfacing in new construction. Some agencies have
used portland cement concrete as an overlay material, essentially treating the underlying
bituminous surface as a strong base course. While overlays are often constructed over
pavements exhibiting many signs of deterioration, the performance desired from overlays
is more likely to be achieved when the existing pavement is properly repaired prior to
overlay construction. This includes patching potholes, repairing areas of crocodile
cracking, sealing wide cracks, and filling areas of rutting greater than 10 mm.
10.2.6 Rehabilitation
Bituminous pavement rehabilitation can be defined as a major modification to the

pavement structure. In contrast to overlays, rehabilitation will almost always include
reworking one or more of the existing asphalt layers. Rehabilitation strategies often
include milling, in which the surface and perhaps additional layers are removed and then
replaced with either new or recycled material. As an example, a typical rehabilitation
strategy might consist of milling off the existing bituminous wearing course and
constructing a thick (> 40 mm) overlay.
Rehabilitation is most effective on pavements that are exhibiting signs of structural

deterioration (crocodile cracking and rutting, in particular) but not to such an extent that
complete reconstruction (removal and replacement of the base and/or sub-base) is not
more economical.
10.2.7 Reconstruction
Reconstruction is the removal and replacement of pavement layers down to the subbase
or subgrade. In partial reconstruction, some component of the original pavement is left
unchanged, while full reconstruction would consist of removing all in situ materials,
reworking the subgrade, and then rebuilding a new pavement Reconstruction is
appropriate when the pavement is structurally failed and the subgrade requires
strengthening (including subdrainage construction) in order for the new pavement to
perform properly.
10.2.8 Other Treatments
There are several other treatments that are used in pavement maintenance that are not
easily classified in the preceding scheme. Milling without replacement is occasional used
either to promote surface uniformity or to reduce rutting. Unless it can be shown that the
rutting will not reappear, milling should only be considered as a temporary measure.
Recycling, while not a separate strategy, is often mentioned in conjunction with

rehabilitation. In fact, recycling can be a part of almost every maintenance strategy, as
many bitumens and aggregates can be re-used if properly handled. Recycling is an
effective strategy wherever materials are scarce and it can be demonstrated to be cost
effective.
10.3 Immediate Effects of Maintenance Applications
10.3.1 Introduction
The change in pavement condition after the application of a maintenance treatment

represents the immediate benefit provided to the pavement by the treatment, before the
contributions of climate and vehicles to deterioration reappear. For HDM modelling
purposes, the immediate effect must be established in order to reset pavement condition.
Thus the quantity of each of the distresses and performance indicators immediately after
the treatment is applied needs to be quantified.
In conceptual form, a maintenance treatment could have a number of different effects on

pavement distress:
the treatment could have no effect on a given distress, as might be the case of the
effect of pothole repair on the level of rutting;
the treatment could reset the level of distress to zero, as should happen to the amount
1
of cracking just after a crack sealing operation;
a treatment could reset the distress level to some other, non-zero value, as might
happen to the level of roughness after the application of a thin surfacing without a rut
levelling course.
These possible effects are shown in Figure 10.1, where for each case the truncated end
of the deterioration curve represents the pavement condition immediately after the
maintenance treatment is applied.
10.3.2 Quantification of Pavement Condition Immediately after Maintenance
In practical terms, application of HDM-4 requires a logical framework in which the effects
of maintenance can be considered. In this section, such a framework is presented for the
common maintenance practices described in section 10.2 with one exception: the effects
of maintenance treatments on roughness are covered separately in the next section.
1
Some approaches to crack sealing consider a sealed crack to still be present but at a lower severity level.
In the PCI procedure, for example, sealed cracks are rated as low severity. This approach recognises that
crack sealant may not perform well.
Pothole Crack Surface

Repair Sealing Treatment
Rutting Cracking IRI
Distress
Quantity Time or Traffic
Figure 10.1: Possible Immediate Effects of Maintenance Treatments
Table 10.2 through Table 10.6 show the expected results on specified distresses of the
application of these generic maintenance treatments. Reconstruction is not included in
these tables because its effect is not differentiated from building a new pavement. It
should be noted that these effects are largely independent of factors such as surface
type, prior pavement condition, pavement structure, materials used in the treatment, and
so on. This should not be a surprising result, as almost any treatment applied under
almost any condition will have the immediate effect of correcting, or at least reducing, the
level of distress. Table 10.7 presents the subjective effects of maintenance treatments on
micro and macrotexture (skid resistance). It will be noted that the actual effect is
dependent upon the specific characteristics of the treatment. This was discussed in
greater detail in the Chapter 9.
Table 10.2
Cracking Levels Immediately After Maintenance Treatments
Treatment Immediate effect

Crack seal Reset linear cracks to zero, except in monitoring systems in
which sealed cracks still count. Depending upon treatment,
other cracks may or may not be reset to zero.
Edge Patching No effect
Pothole Patching No effect
Fog Seal Narrow cracks (<1 mm) become zero. No effect on wider
structural, thermal or reflection cracks
Rejuvenating Seal No effect
Slurry Seal No visible cracking, although structurally still cracked
Single Surface Treatment No visible cracking, although structurally still cracked
Double Surface Treatment No visible cracking, although structurally still cracked
Porous AC Surfacing No visible cracking, although structurally still cracked
Cape Seal No visible cracking, although structurally still cracked
Thin AC overlay Cracking reset to zero; underlying cracks still present
Thick AC overlay Cracking reset to zero; underlying cracks still present
Modified AC overlay Cracking reset to zero; underlying cracks still present
Rubberised AC overlay Cracking reset to zero; underlying cracks still present
Mill and Replace Cracking reset to zero; underlying cracks still present
Table 10.3
Ravelling Levels Immediately After Maintenance Treatments

Crack seal No effect
Fog Seal No effect
Slurry Seal Reset to zero
Single Surface Treatment Reset to zero
Double Surface Treatment Reset to zero
Porous AC Surfacing Reset to zero
Cape Seal Reset to zero
Thin AC Overlay Reset to zero
Thick AC Overlay Reset to zero
Modified AC Overlay Reset to zero
Rubberised AC Overlay Reset to zero
Mill and Replace Reset to zero
Table 10.4
Rutting Levels Immediately After Maintenance Treatments

Shoulder Patching No effect
Fog Seal No effect
Slurry Seal No effect
Single Surface Treatment No effect
Double Surface Treatment No effect
Porous AC Surfacing No effect unless levelling course is used: then reset to zero.
Cape Seal No effect
Thin AC Overlay Minimal effect unless levelling course is used: then reset to
zero.
Thick AC Overlay If rutting is less than 5 mm or levelling course is used, reset
to zero. Otherwise, rutting is reduced but not eliminated.
Modified AC Overlay If rutting is less than 5 mm or levelling course is used, reset
to zero. Otherwise, rutting is reduced but not eliminated.
Rubberised AC Overlay If rutting is less than 5 mm or levelling course is used, reset
to zero. otherwise, rutting is reduced but not eliminated.
Table 10.5
Potholing Levels Immediately After Maintenance Treatments

Pothole Patching Reset to zero
Fog Seal No effect
Slurry Seal Reset to zero; pothole patching must be performed
Single Surface Treatment Reset to zero; pothole patching must be performed
Double Surface Treatment Reset to zero; pothole patching must be performed
Porous AC Surfacing Reset to zero; pothole patching must be performed
Cape Seal Reset to zero; pothole patching must be performed
Thin AC Overlay Reset to zero; pothole patching must be performed
Thick AC Overlay Reset to zero; pothole patching must be performed
Modified AC Overlay Reset to zero; pothole patching must be performed
Rubberised AC Overlay Reset to zero; pothole patching must be performed
Table 10.6
Edge Break Levels Immediately After Maintenance Treatments

Edge Patching Reset to zero
Fog Seal No effect
Slurry Seal No effect
Single Surface Treatment No effect
Double Surface Treatment No effect
Porous AC Surfacing No effect
Cape Seal No effect
Thin AC Overlay No effect
Thick AC Overlay Reset to zero
Modified AC Overlay Reset to zero
Rubberised AC Overlay Reset to zero
Table 10.7
Micro or Macrotexture Immediately After Maintenance Treatments

Crack sealing Slight reduction dependent on the position of cracks

Shoulder Repair No effect
Pothole Repair No effect
Fog Seal Slight reduction in skid resistance on coarse-textured surfaces due to
changes in macrotexture and temporary changes in microtexture.
Rejuvenating Seal Slight reduction in skid resistance on coarse-textured surfaces due to
changes in macrotexture and temporary changes in microtexture.
Single Surface Usually an increase in skid resistance if applied on smooth surfacings.
Treatment Application of a small stone seal (6.7 mm) on existing 13.2 mm seals will
reduce the texture depth.
Double Surface Usually an increase in skid resistance if applied on smooth surfacings.
Treatment Application of a small stone seal (6.7 mm) on existing 13.2 mm seals will
reduce the texture depth.
Porous AC In most applications will increase the skid resistance.
Surfacing
Cape Seal Will contribute to an increase in skid resistance unless existing surface is
particularly coarse or slurry fills gaps in surface treatment.
Slurry seal Increase in skid resistance if applied on surfaces with fatty wheel tracks.
Decrease in skid resistance if applied on coarse-textured, noisy surfaces.
The effect of thick and coarse slurries is usually an increase in skid
resistance due to increases in microtexture and rut filling
Thin AC Overlay The change in skid resistance is generally positive and dependent on
overlay mix.
Thick AC OL, The new skid resistance value is totally dependent on the type of mix used
Modified and in the overlay.
Rubberised AC OL
Mill and Replace The new skid resistance value is totally dependent on the type of mix used
in the surfacing.
10.3.3 Roughness Effects
There is inherent roughness in any pavement surfacing: even the highest quality asphalt
will not normally have an IRI below 1 m/km. While in many countries the average IRI for
new construction is in the range between 1 and 2 m/km, it may be as high as 2.5 m/km.
Major maintenance is expected to reduce roughness from the pre-treatment value, but still
will not set it to zero as occurs with such condition parameters as cracking and ravelling.
This section examines models that predict the reduction in roughness for different types
of treatment.
Overlays
HDM-III models the reduction in roughness after overlay as a function of pre-overlay

roughness and overlay thickness: two models are provided, one for a regular paver and
one for an automatic-levelling long-base paver. These models were derived partly from
field observations and partly by means of computer simulations. The two models,
expressed in pre- and post-overlay roughness in IRI are:
Regular Paver
IRIa = 3.85 - [min(HNEW, 80) + min(HNEW, 40)]/52
+ 28 max(IRIb - 3.85)/max(HNEW/28) (10.1)

Automatic-Levelling Long-Base Paver
IRIa = max[(1.5 + 0.22 IRIb - 0.00523 HNEW)
IRIb (1 - 0.008 max(HNEW - 20, 0)) - 1.5)] (10.2)
where IRIa is the roughness after treatment

IRIb is the roughness after patching and before treatment
HNEW is the thickness of overlay in mm
The effects of these models are shown in Figure 10.2 and Figure 10.3.
When considering the roughness reduction effects of overlays, it has been found that the
nature of the roughness of the old surface must be taken into account. If the surface
contains a large amount of short baselength roughness, for example as found in hand-laid
surfacings or due to extensive patching of utility cuts, thin overlays will give a greater
reduction in roughness than predicted by the HDM-III models which were predicated on
longer wavelength deformation of asphalt pavements.
12
10
Overlay thickness in mm 20
8
IRI After Overlay (m/km)
40
6
60
80
4
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
IRI Before Overlay (m/km)
Figure 10.2: HDM-III Model for Roughness Reduction after Overlay - Regular Paver
12
10 Overlay thickness in mm 20
8 40
60
6
80
100
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Figure 10.3: HDM-III Model for Roughness Reduction after Overlay - Automatic
Levelling Long base Paver
A study in Indonesia (C.P. Corne & Associates, 1995) measured roughness before and
after thin (average 35 mm) machine-laid asphalt was applied to penetration macadam
surfaces. The same study found that for multi-layer treatments with a thickness of 80 mm
or more the mean roughness was 2.0 m/km. By interpolation, the following relationship
was developed:
IRIa = 2.0 + 0.0071 max(80 - HNEW, 0) max(IRIb - 2.0, 0) (10.3)
Subsequent studies in Nepal (NDLI, 1993) and Barbados (NDLI, 1994a) showed the
relationship from C.P. Corne & Associates (1995) to be valid for thin overlays on hand-laid
surfaces if the constant was changed to 2.5.
A study in Thailand (NDLI, 1991) examined the effect of 50 mm overlays on existing

asphalt or surface treated surfaces and found the following relationship:
IRIa = 1.87 + 0.25IRIb (10.4)
Data from Djarf (1995) gave the following relationship for change in IRI for overlays in
Sweden in the thickness range from 25 to 60 mm:
IRIa = 0.55 + 0.29IRIb (10.5)

A study in Trinidad (NDLI, 1994c) of the effects of 40 mm overlays showed an almost

completely flat regression line (IRIa = 2.5) with no effects from pre-overlay roughness. It
was postulated that the reason for this was that the high values for the previous
roughness derived mainly from badly patched utility cuts. These contributed to very short
wavelength roughness, which was easily removed with a thin overlay, as also shown in
Indonesia, Nepal and Barbados.
Figure 10.4 compares the models from HDM-III (regular paver), Thailand, Indonesia and
Sweden for an overlay thickness of 50 mm.
5
4 HDM-III
Thailand
Indonesia
Sweden
3
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Figure 10.4: Comparison of Different Models for Effect of 50 mm Overlay
When considering Figure 10.4 it should be borne in mind that the models from HDM-III,
Thailand and Sweden were derived from pre-overlay roughness values up to about 6
m/km: only in Indonesia did observed pre-overlay roughness reach 12 m/km. Comparing
the HDM, Thailand and Sweden models in the range 2 - 6 m/km, the HDM model seems
to lie in between the other two. It is apparent that asphalt finish is much better in Sweden
than in Thailand, with most of the post-overlay values being below 2 m/km. Obviously,
standards of workmanship are an important variable in any model of this nature and thus
local calibration must be made to reflect this.
Given the effect on roughness reduction of the pre-overlay roughness and local standards
of workmanship, the HDM-III models seem unnecessarily complex and it is considered
that a simpler model form will prove easier to calibrate. The following model form is
therefore proposed for HDM-4:
IRIa = a0 + a1 max(IRIb - a0, 0) max(a2 - HNEW, 0) (10.6)

In this model, the constant a0 represents the general standard of workmanship that is
achieved in the country or region on either new construction or after thick overlays; this
value can easily be obtained from roughness surveys of recently completed projects. It
will range between 1, for areas with high standards of asphalt paving (such as Sweden),
to 2.5 where paving standards are average to poor. The constant a2 is the thickness, in
mm, at or above which the value a0 is achieved independently of existing roughness: this
was found to be about 80 mm in Indonesia, which is in line with the HDM-III model for
regular pavers. The coefficient k1 represents the sensitivity of the roughness reduction to
overlay thickness in the range from, say, 20 mm up to 80 mm; it can be varied for
different types of pre-overlay surface. Field measurements of pre- and post-overlay
roughness with different thicknesses are needed to calibrate this coefficient. An HDM-4
default value of 0.01, a little higher than Indonesia, is proposed. Figure 10.5 shows the
effects of this model with the following default parameters:
a0 = 2.0
a1 = 0.01
a2 = 80
7 Overlay thickness mm 20
40
4 60
80
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Figure 10.5: Proposed HDM-4 Overlay Effects Model
Seals and Thin Surfacings
HDM-III provided three models for roughness reduction after thin surfacings: surface
treatment, slurry seal and reseal with shape correction. All three models first reduce the
roughness component for potholes (patching, described below) and before applying the
following relationships:
Single or Double Surface Treatment

IRIa = IRIb + min(0, max(0.3 (5.4 - IRIb), -0.5)) - 0.0066 ACX (10.7)
Slurry Seals and Cape Seals
IRIa = IRIb + min(0, max(0.3 (4.6 - IRIb), -0.09 Hsl)) - 0.0066 ACX (10.8)
Reseal with Shape Correction
IRIa = IRIb + min(0, max(-0.0075 Hscl IRIb, -0.0225 Hsc max(IRIb - 4, 0)))
- 0.0066 ACX (10.9)
where Hsl is the thickness of slurry seal in mm

Hsc is the thickness of reseal including shape
correction layer, in mm Hsc = min(Hsc, 50)
ACX is the per cent area of indexed cracking
The HDM-III models for roughness effects of thin surfacings are illustrated in Figure 10.6
and Figure 10.7.
10
9
Surface treatment
8
7
10 mm slurry seal
IRI After Seal (m/km)
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
IRI Before Seal (m/km)
Figure 10.6: HDM-III Models for Roughness Effects of Surface Treatments and
Slurry Seals
10
8
Thickness including shape correction mm 10
7
30
IRI After Seal (m/km)
6
50
5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
IRI Before Seal (m/km)
Figure 10.7: HDM-III Model for Roughness Effects of Reseal with Shape Correction
The HDM-III model shows a very small reduction in roughness for surface treatments
about 0.5 IRI when the pre-seal roughness is more than 5 m/km. A 5 mm slurry seal
gives roughly the same effect as a surface treatment while a 10 mm slurry is predicted to
give a reduction of about 1.0 IRI when pre-seal roughness is more than 7 m/km. At lower
levels of roughness, as would be found on a well developed highway network, seals are
modelled as having no effect on roughness.
The HDM-III model for reseal with shape correction gives higher roughness reductions if
the thickness is 20 mm or more. It is seen in Figure 10.7 that for a thickness of 50 mm
the model is somewhat anomalous, with the line having a downward slope between pre-
treatment roughness of 4 and 6 m/km. Watanatada, et al. (1987) do not explain what is
meant by a reseal with shape correction: if the total thickness of such a treatment were 50
mm it should surely be considered and modelled as an overlay.
Djarf (1995) presented data from Sweden for the effects on roughness of a single surface
treatment on asphalt surfacing with pre-treatment roughness in a range from 1 to 2.5
m/km. The regression showed a slight increase in roughness (possibly because of the
coarser texture of the surface treatment) and Djarf (1995) concluded that surface
treatments had no effect on roughness.
When evaluating the effects of surface treatments on higher roughness pavements it is

normal that some preparatory patching is carried out; it is this pre-treatment repair, rather
than the seal itself, that often gives the reduction in roughness. It is concluded that seals
give little or no immediate reduction in roughness and the HDM-III models for surface
treatment and slurries should be retained in HDM-4. For reseal with shape correction, it is
recommended that an upper limit of 20 mm be placed on the thickness for modelling
purposes: thicker treatments should be considered as overlays.
Patching
Patching should be a continuous maintenance activity, not a treatment performed at an

interval of several years, as is the case with other maintenance treatments discussed in
this section. Chapter 8 considered the effect of different intervals between the occurrence
of potholes or delamination and maintenance patching on the annual average roughness
experienced by road users and the subject is not treated further here.
10.3.4 Changes in Pavement Materials Types
In order to apply existing deterioration models to maintained pavements, the effect of the
treatment on the surface material and pavement type must be specified. This is required
because in HDM the application of appropriate models is keyed to specific types of
pavements. Chapter 2 of this report presented the 10 types of flexible pavements that, in
HDM-4, will be used to define families of deterioration models. Within a pavement type,
different types of surface and base materials may be user specified: no limit is placed on
the number of material types that may be defined provided model parameters are also
specified.
The application of some treatments, such as those in the routine maintenance category,
will not change either the surface material type or the pavement type. For example, crack
sealing slows down moisture ingress and thus the overall rate of pavement deterioration
and roughness progression, but it does not change the general characteristics of the
pavement. In contrast, the application of a 70 mm AC overlay placed on an existing
surface-treated pavement (ST on GB) not only alters deterioration rates, but also changes
the pavement type and surface material type. The pavement is now more accurately
described as AC over GB, and a different set of deterioration models are required to
predict this pavements subsequent behaviour.
In general terms, the surface material type usually (but not always) governs the pavement
type. Again considering deterioration, when a thin surfacing is placed over a thick AM
structure in sound structural condition, it does not follow that the thin surfacing then
controls the performance of the structure. Table 10.8 shows the change in pavement
type (if any) resulting from different categories of treatment.
Table 10.9 summarises the resulting surface type after the application of typical
maintenance treatments.
Table 10.8
Change in Pavement Type after Maintenance Treatments
Existing Pavement Type

Treatment AMGB AMAB AMAP AMSB AMCP STGB STAB STAP STSB STCP
Preventive AMGB AMAB AMAP AMSB AMCP STGB STAB STAP STSB STCP
Treatment
Thin Surfacing STAP STAP STAP STAP AMCP STGB STAB STAP STSB STCP
Overlay AMAP AMAP AMAP AMAP AMCP AMAB AMAB AMAP AMAB AMCP
Mill and Replace **GB **AB **AP **SB **CP **GB **AB **AP **SB **CP
to Base
Mill and Replace **AM **AM **AM **AM **CP N/A **AB **AP **SB **CP
to Intermediate
Layer
Reconstruction **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****
Notes: ** indicates that this is dependent on the specific treatment

N/A - not applicable
Table 10.9
Effect of Maintenance Applications on Resultant Surface Material Type
Maintenance Category Treatment Type of Pavement Resultant Surface

Applied To Material
Routine Maintenance All routine maintenance Any No change
Preventive Maintenance Fog seal, Rejuvenating seal Any No change
Slurry Any SL
Single surface treatment Any SBST
Thin Surfacings Double surface treatment Any DBST
Porous AC Any PAC
Cape Seal Any CS or SL
Thin AC Overlay Any AC
Thick AC Overlay Any AC
Overlay Modified AC Overlay Any MAC
Rubberised AC Overlay Any RAC
Rehabilitation Mill and Replace Any Top layer material
10.3.5 Effect of Maintenance and Rehabilitation on Structural Capacity
As a pavement ages and is subjected to loading it deteriorates. The deterioration is

predicted by the HDM models and redressed by the application of maintenance and
rehabilitation treatments. In addition to the changes in pavement condition that are the
physical manifestation of deterioration and ageing, the pavements structural capacity, as
measured by the SNC, is also changing. Thus, when a treatment is applied, changes in
the SNC must also be considered.
The changes in SNC are a function of the types of repairs and the thickness and quality of
the material used in resurfacings. The minimum increase in the SNC can be calculated
as the product of the new layers structural coefficient and thickness. Structural layer
coefficients for new materials were presented in Chapter 3 and these coefficients can be
used to calculate the contribution to the SNC of the treatment.
If the value of the SNC is being decremented due to the presence of distress, then the
application of routine and preventive maintenance strategies will also increase the SNC.
Table 10.10 shows suggested layer coefficients for pavements that are experiencing
distress (modified from AASHTO, 1993). Based on the amount and severity of crocodile
cracking and transverse cracking, layer coefficients are reduced by the amount shown in
the last column. An approach that addresses the overall change in SNC due to cracking
and layer thickness (SNCK) was also discussed in Chapter 8.
Table 10.10
Suggested Reduction in ai Based on Surface Condition
Per cent of
Material Surface Condition New Layer
Coefficient, ai
Little or no area cracking 75 to 90
< 3 per cent area cracking and/or < 5 per cent indexed cracking 55 to 75
AC Surface
3 to 5 per cent area cracking and/or > 5 per cent indexed cracking but less 45 to 67
than 15 per cent
> 5 per cent area cracking and/or > 15 per cent indexed cracking 15 to 45
Little or no area cracking 55 to 100
< 3 per cent area cracking and/or < 5 per cent indexed cracking 40 to 70
Stabilised
Base 3 to 5 per cent area cracking and/or > 5 per cent indexed cracking but less 40 to 55
than 15 per cent
> 5 per cent area cracking and/or > 15 per cent indexed cracking 20 to 55
Granular Base No evidence of pumping, degradation, or contamination by fines 70 to 100
or
Subbase Some evidence of pumping, degradation, or contamination by fines 0 to 70
10.3.6 Effect of Maintenance on Pavement History
The ages of different pavement layers are important determinants in many of the
deterioration models used in HDM. Crack initiation and progression are also governed by
the effect of previous cracking before maintenance (reflection cracking). Routine
maintenance operations do not affect pavement history parameters, and reconstruction
will reset all pavement history parameters; in between these two extremes the effect of
maintenance depends upon the treatment and the history parameter. This is discussed in
more detail in Annex 10.1
10.4 Intervention Strategies

A key aspect of maintenance effects modelling is the determination of the appropriate
time to apply maintenance treatments. A set of guidelines that describes the range of
conditions under which the various maintenance treatments are applied can be referred to
as intervention strategies. In this section, the conditions in which maintenance treatments
are applied are examined. Intervention strategies are presented in both a general
framework and guidelines for specific applications.
An agency performing pavement maintenance is likely to have a set of policies that

determine when various maintenance activities should be performed. Comprehensive
maintenance handbooks not only discuss the appropriate timing of these activities, but
also the types of approved materials, the labour and equipment requirements, and the
procedures to follow in the application or construction of the treatment. Such documents
can be quite voluminous and are updated regularly to reflect changes in policies,
priorities, and understanding of distress mechanisms. The development of new materials
and procedures for pavement repair also spurs changes in maintenance practices.
Handbooks on maintenance are commonly developed by an agency to reflect the specific

conditions prevailing in a given location and are unlikely to have broad applicability. It is
neither necessary nor feasible to attempt to reproduce the contents of such a handbook.
Nonetheless, guidance is needed in the context of HDM implementations to address the
application of these maintenance treatments. Useful guidance should include both
specific trigger values for the various maintenance treatments and an indication of which
distresses to consider when deciding which maintenance treatments to apply.
There are at least two aspects of selecting maintenance treatments to apply. In very
broad terms, one part of the problem is identifying appropriate treatments. An example of
this is identifying whether crack sealing is an appropriate treatment for structural cracking;
such determinations are fairly straightforward, although in many cases there will be more
than one treatment that is classified as appropriate for the distress(es) on the pavement.
The second part of the problem is to identify which of the appropriate treatments is the
best treatment. Even putting aside the subjective nature of this concept, there are many
ways of defining best, including most cost-effective, best performance, and longest
lasting. Some agencies might define best as using the least number of mechanised
devices or the most manpower.
Another approach is to use a decision tree (Van Zyl and Visser, 1995). However, using a
decision tree is a rather simplistic approach to selecting treatments. While it may be an
accurate representation of many agencies decision-making process, it is not a
recommended approach for identifying all feasible maintenance treatments or for
choosing the best treatment from among appropriate treatments. For example,
preventive maintenance treatments are most effective when applied before distresses
become apparent. Thus their application must be based on the surfacing age, the
absence of distress, and a determination, that given projected future traffic, a preventive
treatment is more appropriate than some other type of surfacing.
Similarly, age and traffic must be considered in some of the resurfacings. If a pavement
is due to receive a thick overlay or be reconstructed/rehabilitated in the near future, it may
not be cost effective to place a surface treatment during a period 1 to 2 years before.
Thus, not only must the current condition be considered, but the projected actions on the
road must also be planned.
In Table 10.11, maintenance treatments are linked to various condition indicators that
suggest the type of parameter that should be considered in selecting the appropriate
maintenance treatment. These not only include distresses, which are the main feature of
decision trees used for treatment selection, but others as well. Cut-off triggers are
additional distresses or conditions that may be used to determine that the maintenance
treatment is not appropriate. For example, the use of a slurry seal may be indicating by
surface weathering or alternatively, by when the surface reaches a specified age.
However, the slurry seal is an inappropriate treatment if the existing surface is too
cracked or the pavement is subjected to high traffic volumes. A more detailed
examination of relevant aspects of treatment selection is found in Annex 10.1.
Table 10.11
Indicators for Appropriate Maintenance Treatments
Intervention Criteria
Maintenance Treatment Condition Indicator Other Factors Cut-off Triggers
Crack Seal Linear Cracking % Potholing
Edge Patch % Edge Failure Edge step
Shoulder Repair % Edge Failure
Pothole Repair % Potholing
Fog seal/Rejuvenator Weathering Age Skid Resistance
Slurry Seal Weathering Age Cracking, high traffic volumes
Single surface treatment Cracking, IFI High volume/high speed roads
Double surface treatment Cracking, IFI High volume/high speed roads
Porous AC surfacing IFI Wet weather
accidents
Cape Seal Cracking
Thin AC Overlay Area, linear cracking, Traffic Structural capacity
IRI
Thick AC Overlay Cracking, rutting, IRI Traffic Adjacent lanes, kerbs/gutters
Modified AC Overlay Cracking, rutting, IRI Traffic, climate Adjacent lanes, kerbs/gutters
Rubberised AC Overlay Cracking, rutting, IRI Traffic, climate Adjacent lanes, kerbs/gutters
Mill and Replace Cracking, rutting, IRI Traffic Structural capacity
It should be noted that even when all pavement-related characteristics are considered,
including pavement condition, age, future traffic, and so on, there are many other factors
that may impact maintenance decision-making. A partial list includes the following:
road classification and level of service;

available funds;
current and projected future use;
previous performance of treatments;
material and equipment availability;
political issues.
It is often found that these exogenous factors, as opposed to purely technical

considerations, end up controlling the maintenance decision-making process.
10.5 Summary
The effects of maintenance treatments on the immediate condition of a pavement in the
HDM-4 context have been presented. Long-term performance of a pavement after
maintenance is defined by the particular pavement and/or materials type of the pavement
which may be changed by the applied maintenance. A set of standard maintenance
treatments that covers a range of applications from routine or reactive maintenance to
major rehabilitation serves as standard maintenance applications. These are then applied
to pavements and the condition of the pavement immediately after the application is
identified. The immediate effect is typically a user-specified reset to a distress value
based on assumptions that are made about the maintenance treatment. Some categories
of maintenance treatments will also reset the pavement type.
Long-term effects of the treatment applications are best modelled by applying the
appropriate deterioration models, as has been described throughout this volume. Finally,
intervention guidelines are introduced to assist in the selection of maintenance
treatments, although agencies should be cautious about applying these and are
encouraged to develop guidelines that mirror their own policies.
Block Pavement Modelling 11-1
11. BLOCK PAVEMENT MODELLING1
11.1 Introduction
The term block (also known as segmental) paving is used to described the small-element
surfacing mostly used to pave urban areas. The use of this type of surfacing dates back
to medieval times and up to the end of the 19th century surfaces dressed with stone or
hardwood were common for urban streets (Shackel, 1990). The advent of the motor
vehicle combined with the ease of construction, durability and cost of bituminous
surfacing resulted in the less frequent use of block paving. With developments in
concrete technology and improved plant for concrete block manufacturing in the last 30
years, the use of block pavements in the form of concrete blocks has become acceptable
again throughout the world (CCANZ, 1988).
This increased usage of block paving combined with the aim of extending the global
applicability of the HDM-4 pavement performance models, in particular for the urban
environment, necessitated the inclusion of performance models for block paving in HDM-
4. In this chapter the modelling of the life cycle performance of block paving in HDM-4 is
introduced. This is accomplished by first examining the various factors influencing block
pavement performance and how the influence of these factors is modelled by others.
This is followed by a discussion of the models (identified and generic) to be included in
HDM-4.
11.2 Overview of Available Block Paving Models

11.2.1 Introduction
During the last two decades, both researchers and practitioners have made many
attempts to develop models that could predict pavement deterioration. However, these
attempts were mostly directed towards pavements surfaced with bituminous or concrete
layers, with block paving receiving little attention. The main reason for this is that block
paving is rarely used on rural pavements which have been the main focus of research
conducted on pavement performance. This lack of research is evident from the amount
of literature available on block paving compared with bituminous and concrete pavements.
11.2.2 Overview of Block Paving History and Terminology
Historically the following four types of block paving have been used to pave mostly urban
areas (Shackel, 1990):
Stone-sett: Initially, cobblestones were used, typically 100 to 150 mm in

diameter and collected from riverbeds, laid in a layer of coarse sand. The very rough
uneven surface resulted in cobblestones later being replaced by stone setts quarried from
granite, basalt, sandstone and even limestone. Typical thickness of the setts ranged
between 90 and 180 mm.
1
This chapter was written by Mr. Louw Kannemeyer who was seconded to the ISOHDM project by the
Department of Transport, South Africa.
The requirement for carefully dressed stones to maintain narrow joint spacing, which is
crucial for the performance of block pavements (as discussed later), resulted in the
stones being very expensive and time consuming to produce. This resulted in the use of
alternative materials which were cheaper and faster to produce. Today stone setts are
primarily used for architectural purposes.
Wood-blocks: From the early nineteenth century wooden blocks were often
used as an alternative to stone setts, especially where it was desired to reduce the noise
from steel wheels and horses hooves. Generally the blocks were 125 to 250 mm long
and 75 to 100 mm square, laid on end with the grain running vertically, and often bedded
on a 3 mm thick layer of bituminous mastic. These wood-blocks could be constructed for
about 65 per cent of the cost of a stone-sett.
Although they reduced traffic noise, the pavements absorbed horse ordure and became
noisy when wet. Moreover, they proved to be slippery under pneumatic tyres and, with
the advent of motor vehicles, their use was largely abandoned.
Brick-blocks: Because of the lack of local stone in some areas, pavements

were surfaced with bricks. The durability of brick-blocks under traffic, however, was very
low, resulting in frequent overlays with new bricks being required. The widespread
application of brick paving was not achieved until the advent of vitrified bricks fired at high
temperatures. Initially, the use of brick-blocks tended to be restricted to pedestrian areas
whilst stone setts was used to carry the steel-wheeled vehicles common up to the end of
the nineteenth century. With the advent of rubber tyres the use of brick-blocks for
trafficked areas increased because a brick-block surfacing could be constructed for 50 to
60 per cent of the cost of a stone-sett surfacing. The principal problem associated with
these brick pavements was their propensity to surface damage, manifested as cracking
and cobbling of the pavers (blocks). To overcome this problem, high quality paving bricks
were made from clay with a high lime content which was moulded in steel forms under
high pressure and fired at high temperatures. These bricks are still used today, although
mostly for architectural purposes.
Concrete blocks: The first concrete blocks were manufactured at the end of
the nineteenth century and it was soon realised that these blocks provided better
uniformity than stone setts. It was only after World War II, when the need for
reconstruction led to a shortage in bricks, that concrete blocks were reluctantly accepted
as a substitute for bricks. As the industry and equipment developed, manufacturers were
able to manufacture concrete blocks at 40 per cent of the cost of bricks.
Today most block pavements are constructed with concrete blocks of various shapes and
sizes, some of which have little resemblance to the original forms of block paving used.
Since concrete blocks are most often used in modern day block pavements, the various
components of a typical concrete block pavement structure are illustrated in Figure 11.1.
The influence of the various components of the pavement structure on its performance
under traffic are discussed in the rest of this chapter.
Concrete paving block

Joint-filling sand Sand bedding course
Edge
restraint
Basecourse
Sub-base
Subgrade
Figure 11.1: Typical Concrete Block Pavement Structure
11.2.3 Factors Influencing the Performance of Block Pavements
Introduction
The factors influencing the performance of concrete block pavements under traffic are
summarised in Table 11.1. The influence of each of these factors will be discussed in
more detail in the rest of the chapter. These discussions are based on the findings of
laboratory and field observations of limited experiments over the years.
Table 11.1
Factors Affecting Performance of Block Pavements
Pavement Component Factors affecting performance

Paving Blocks Shape
Size
Thickness
Laying Pattern
Bedding Sand Thickness
Grading
Angularity
Moisture Content
Base and sub-base Material type
Thickness
Subgrade Material type
Strength (Bearing Capacity)
Source: Shackel (1990)
Paving Blocks
The factors that influence the performance of concrete block pavers are:
Block shape: Figure 11.2 illustrates the different block shapes available.
Category A
A1 A2 A3
Category B
B1 B2 B3
Category C
C1 C2 C3
Figure 11.2: Classification of Some Common Block Shapes (Shackel, 1990)
At present there seems to be somewhat divergent views on the relevance of block shape
when joint sand is complete, dense and the joints between blocks are uniform in the
range 2 to 4 mm. In New Zealand and England, for example, all shapes are considered
equal for designing road pavements as long as they can satisfy the required laying
pattern. In South Africa and Australia research results indicate that block shape
influences the performance of the pavement as follows:
at first the horizontal creep under traffic of blocks with indented faces has been
observed to be much less than the traditional rectangular blocks. The difference in
performance is illustrated in Figure 11.3.
secondly the development of rutting seems to be less for shaped blocks compared to
rectangular blocks, as illustrated in Figure 11.4.
Based on these observations, the Cement and Concrete Association of Australia and the
Concrete Masonry Association of South Africa have devised the following general
classification to distinguish between the performance of the various block shapes
available:
10
Base Thickness > 200 mm
9
8
Horizontal creep in mm
6
Block A1
5 Block A2
Block C2
0
100 1000 10000
Number of ESA
Figure 11.3: Effect of Block Shape on Horizontal Creep (after Shackel, 1990)
30
25
Mean rut depth in mm
20
A1-S
15 A1-H
C2-S
10
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Number of ESA
Figure 11.4: Effect of Block Shape on Mean Rut Depth (after Shackel, 1979)
Category A: Comprises indented units which key into one another on all four faces and
which, by their plan geometry when keyed together, resist the spread of joints parallel to
both the longitudinal and transverse axes of the joints.
Category B: Comprises indented units which key into one another on two faces only and
which, when keyed together, resist the spread of joints parallel to the longitudinal axes of
the units but rely on their dimensional accuracy of laying to interlock on the other faces.
Category C: Comprises non-indented units which do not key together and which rely on
their dimensional and laying accuracy to develop interlock.
Examples of some of the block shapes available today, following the above classification,
were illustrated in Figure 11.2. In the Australian design method it is assumed that only
Category A blocks are suitable for moderate to heavy traffic intensities in excess of 150
heavy vehicles per day.
Block size: Limited evidence seems to indicate that block size has
limited influence on performance. The unit size should be such that it fits comfortably into
a persons hand: experience has shown that larger units are not suited for hand laying
and may crack in service.
Block thickness: Accelerated pavement testing in Australia, South Africa,

USA and Japan has shown that an increase in block thickness is beneficial to pavement
performance. Typical results are shown in Figure 11.5. Experience has shown that it is
possible to standardise block thickness to 80 mm for road pavements and then to vary
base type and thickness to accommodate the design requirements.
10
Sand bedding thickness = 20 mm
9 Base thickness = 150 mm
8
6
60 mm
5 80 mm
100 mm
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000
Number of ESA
Figure 11.5: Influence of Block Thickness on Mean Rut Depth (after Shackel, 1982)
Laying pattern: Of the various block shapes, some can only be laid in a
stretcher bond. Some of the shapes can, however, be installed in any of the three
patterns illustrated in Figure 11.6. The best performance (smallest deformations) under
traffic are found in pavements laid in herringbone bond, and the worst (largest
deformations) are found in pavements with stretcher bond, particularly when the bond lies
along rather than across the direction of travel. The difference in performance is
illustrated in Figure 11.7.
Stretcher
Direction of Traffic
Herringbone
Basket weave
Figure 11.6: Common Block Laying Patterns

10
Block Thickness = 80 mm
9
8
6
Stretcher
5 Basket Weave
Herringbone
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Number of ESA
Figure 11.7: Influence of Laying Pattern on Mean Rut Depth (after Shackel, 1980)
Bedding and Joint Filling Sand
The bedding sand acts both as a barrier against the propagation of cracks from the base
to the pavement surface and as a construction expedient providing a smooth surface on
which to lay and bed the blocks. It is also the source of sand to fill the lower portions of
the joints. The following properties of this sand layer have been identified as crucial to the
performance of block pavements under traffic:
Thickness of bedding sand: Traditionally, a thickness of 50 mm after compaction was

used, based on European practice. However, accelerated testing in South Africa,
Australia and Japan has shown that early traffic-associated deformations decrease with a
decrease in sand layer thickness. This finding, illustrated Figure 11.8, was subsequently
confirmed in field trials. This resulted in recommendations that the bedding sand layer
should be between 20 to 40 mm after compaction, as included in the design manuals of
South Africa, Australia and New Zealand. It is also recommended that the thickness of
this sand layer should be uniform, since tests have shown that if this layer is allowed to
vary, the density after compaction will also vary, resulting in an uneven deformation under
traffic and thus increased roughness.
Grading of the sand: If the grading of the bedding sand conforms to the limits specified
in CCANZ (1988), the deformations associated with the bedding sand layer tend to be
very small (typically less than 3 mm). However, should an unsuitable sand be used the
performance of the pavement may be adversely affected and, in some cases, a complete
failure may occur under traffic (Shackel, 1980). In particular, the use of sands containing
plastic fines should be strictly avoided. Accelerated trafficking data suggest that the
grading of the jointing sand is not crucial to the performance of a block pavement
(Shackel, 1980).
10
9
8
6
40 mm
5 70 mm
100 mm
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Number of ESA
Figure 11.8: Influence of Bedding Sand Thickness on Mean Rut Depth

(after Shackel, 1980)
Angularity of the sand: It has been found that for similar sand gradings, block
pavements laid on angular sands perform better than pavements laid on rounded sands
(Shackel, 1980). Given a choice of materials, the sand exhibiting the highest angle of
shearing resistance should normally be used as bedding sand. The sands also should be
selected such that they will not degrade under traffic.
In contrast the joint filling sand should be rounded to ensure the complete filling of block
pavement joints, a crucial factor in the performance of block pavements.
Moisture content of bedding sand: The moisture content of the bedding sand is of
special importance during construction: through practical experience a moisture content of
4 to 8 per cent has been found to be suitable (CCANZ, 1988). The variations in moisture
content should be kept as low as possible, since large variations may result in different
behaviour under compaction which could affect the final roughness. The sand used for
joint filling should be as dry as possible to ensure complete joint filling: if not, bridging
within the joints can occur which will prevent complete filling which will adversely affect the
subsequent performance of the pavement.
Base and Subbase

Most of the base and subbase types used for flexible pavements have also been used
successfully for block pavements. As with flexible pavements, the following factors
regarding the base and subbase influence the performance under traffic:
Material type: An important factor to consider, especially during the

selection of the base material, is the probability of water ingress through the block surface
layer. This has resulted in the more frequent use of non-water susceptible bases such as
soil-cements and even asphalt concrete layers in humid areas. The effect of base-course
type on the subsequent performance of block pavements is illustrated in Figure 11.9.
From this illustration it is evident that the performance of block pavements tends to be
similar to that of flexible pavements. It is seen that cement-treated bases seems to
perform better than crushed rock bases which, in turn, perform better than natural
gravels.
10
9 Base Thickness = 225 mm
8
6
3% OPC
5% OPC
5
Crusher run
Slag
4
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000
Number of ESA
Figure 11.9: Influence of Base Type on Mean Rut Depth (after Shackel, 1990)
Thickness: The selection of base or subbase thickness has been

identified as the prime requirement of block pavement design. The effect of alterations in
base-course thickness on the performance of block pavements is illustrated in Figure
11.10. Although a change in block thickness has a more significant effect on pavement
performance than a corresponding change in base thickness, the difference in cost/unit
depth for base and sub-base are normally far less than that of the block layer, making it
more economical to use a thicker base-course than thicker pavers.
10
9 Bedding course = 20 mm
Base type = Crushed Rock
8
75 mm
5 150 mm
225 mm
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000
Number of ESA
Figure 11.10: Effects of Base Thickness on Mean Rut Depth (after Shackel, 1990)
Subgrade
As expected, the subgrade treatment appropriate for block pavement is little different to
that needed for a conventional flexible pavement. It is, however, noticeable that block
pavements tend to be constructed on poorer subgrades, especially in Europe where 80
per cent of block pavements are constructed on subgrades with CBR below 3 per cent
This is possible because of the result of better load spreading capabilities of the block
layer.
Lock-up
Lock-up is a term used to refer to the progressive stiffening of a block pavement layer
under traffic, resulting from the progressive wedging action between the blocks (Shackel,
1979) and the blocks being locked together by the friction of the joint sand between the
blocks (CCANZ, 1988). With an increase in the amount of lock-up, the structural
behaviour of the concrete blocks changes from truly flexible to semi-rigid, allowing the
block layer to act as a solid mat in spreading applied loads. This allows the concrete
blocks to transfer shear through the joints and to provide a degree of interlock resulting in
smaller deflections, and thus a reduction in the rate of accumulation of permanent
deformation. This behaviour is highly dependent on the joints being just wide enough to
let sand in, but narrow enough to allow the joint sand to lock the blocks together during
construction vibration and subsequent trafficking (CCANZ, 1988). It is also dependent on
the degree of base support. The following three base support conditions can be identified
(Kuipers,1992):
Unyielding: This refers to the typical support provided by a high quality crushed stone
and/or heavily stabilised pavement structure. In this instance, the paving blocks merely
acts as a wearing course and the deflections under the wheels range from very small to
zero with the block pavement layer not called upon to spread the load.
Very Weak to Zero: This refers to the situation where virtually no support is provided by
the base and it is the block pavement layer that is required to distribute a heavy load over
a large area. This may well exceed the capacity of the blocks to sustain the subsequent
stresses, shears and rotations. The block pavement layer then fails in the joints, resulting
in deformation and, in severe instances, chipping of the paving blocks.
Balanced: This refers to the situation where the support provided by the base is
approximately matched by the load spreading capability of the block pavement layer,
resulting in the maximum utilisation of the structural capabilities of the block layer.
The above three base support conditions are illustrated in Figure 11.11. It is believed that
a balanced condition will seldom be attained. In general the block pavement layer will be
under utilised, with a few instances in which balance will be exceeded, resulting in the
failure of the pavement. The influence on deformation of the development of lock up
within a block pavement is illustrated in Figure 11.12. As shown, once the pavement has
accumulated sufficient deformation to cause the wedging of the blocks, the loads on the
pavement can be considerably increased without causing any significant further
deformation. This type of behaviour seems to be unique to block pavements.
Joint filling sand Applied load
Paving
blocks
Unyielding
base support
Zero to very
weak base
support
Balanced
base support
Figure 11.11: Illustration of Base Support Conditions (after Kuipers, 1992)

20
18
16
14
12
40 kN
50 kN
10
60 kN
70 kN
8
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000
Number of ESA
Figure 11.12: Influence of Lock-up on Block Pavement Deformation

(after Shackel, 1979)
Water Ingress
Block pavements, particularly in their early life, are not entirely waterproof. Work in the
Netherlands has demonstrated that the infiltration of water through joints in a pavement
can amount to about 45 per cent of the annual rainfall. If suitable preventive measures
(for example, the use of moisture resistant materials to seal the base), are not used, this
infiltration can lead to a significant loss in performance. This water mostly penetrates
through the joints since the blocks themselves can be regarded as being impermeable.
With time, the joints become clogged with detritus, rubber and oil, resulting in such a
decrease in their permeability that the pavement can be considered as substantially
waterproof, provided there is no ponding of water on the surface (Clifford, 1981). To
avoid ponding it is recommended that a crossfall of at least 3 per cent be provided
(CCANZ, 1989).
Compaction
As with flexible pavements, the selection and application of compaction standards is vital
to the subsequent performance of a block pavement. Effective compaction improves
subgrade, subbase, base course and bedding sand bearing capacity and stability,
decreases permeability and reduces long term settlement and rutting. Inadequate
compaction is a common cause of block pavement failures (Shackel, 1990). In all
instances the material used and compaction standards required should comply with the
requirements for flexible pavements in similar conditions.
11.2.4 Existing Approaches to Predicting Block Pavement Performance
Introduction
The amount of research conducted into the performance of concrete block pavements is
far less than for asphalt and concrete pavements. Many models developed from
pavement research are failure limit models used for design and these are inappropriate
for life cycle predictions of pavement performance. A further limitation in the case of
block paving is that most of the research has concentrated on deformation (rutting) with
little study of roughness or surface texture. Some of the available models are described
below.
Dutch Design Method
This design method is based on the analysis of falling weight deflectometer (FWD)
deflections and rutting measurements on various pavement sections within the
Netherlands. According to the research, the development of rutting within the pavement
sections could be described by the following method (Houben et al, 1992):
Rdc = a0 NE3 a1 (11.1)
where Rdc is the characteristic rut depth, being the value used for end
of life condition, equal to 15mm with a 30 per cent
probability of exceeding
NE3 is the cumulative number of equivalent 80 kN standard axle
load repetitions (equivalency exponent of 3) per lane in the
wheel track (channelised traffic)
a0 and a1 are parameters that describe the pavement structure
The pavement parameters were derived from the base and subbase type and thickness,
and the subgrade modulus. The modulus of elasticity (Esg) of the subgrade was
calculated from FWD measurements by means of the following equation:
Log10 Esg = 3.869 - 1.009 log d2 (11.2)
where Esg is the subgrade modulus of elasticity in N/mm2

d2 is the deflection at a distance 2 m from centre of a 50 kN
load in microns
From the analysis of the pavement sections monitored over a period of 4 to 9 years the
coefficients in Table 11.2 where obtained. This research is the most comprehensive
identified on in-service pavements. Typical predictions for some of the pavement types
over their valid traffic range are illustrated in Figure 11.13. The influence of base support,
as previously discussed, is obvious and also the lock-up of the balanced pavements.
Table 11.2
Coefficients for pavement sections (after Houben et al, 1992)
Pavement Base Subbase Subgrade NE3 a0 a1

section Thick/Type Thick/Type modulus per year
2
(mm) (mm) (N/mm )
A2 250/CC 450/SA 30 5730 2.867 0.156
R1+R2 - 900/SA 69 110520 0.176 0.358
R3+R4 300/CC 600/SA 72 110520 0.140 0.314
R5+R6 300/CB 580/SA 75 110520 0.132 0.314
E1 (i-s) - 870/SA 103 324820 1.376 0.181
E1(s-i) - 870/SA 103 138580 0..913 0.196
E2(i-s) 150/CC 720/SA 120 324820 2.646 0.054
E2(s-i) 150/CC 720/SA 120 138580 0.195 0.205
E3(i-s) 300/CC 570/SA 139 324820 1.162 0.142
E3(s-i) 300/CC 570/SA 139 138580 1.913 0.069
E01(i-s) 300/CB 570/SA 155 324820 1.762 0.052
E01(s-i) 300/CB 570/SA 155 138580 1.805 0.037
Notes: CC - Crushed Concrete Base

CB - Crushed Concrete/Crushed Clay Brick Base
SA - Sand Subbase
20
18
16
14
R1+ R2
12
R3 + R4
R5 + R6
10 E1(i-s)
E1(s-i)
E2(i-s)
8
E2(s-i)
0
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000 1400000 1600000 1800000 2000000
Numbers of ESA (n=3)
Figure 11.13: Illustration of Model Predictions over their Valid Range
Denmark
Research in Denmark comprised a series of three annual measurements of skid

resistance and two of roughness on a 1.3 km long climbing lane in which vehicles
travelled up to 90 km/h (Lekso, 1982). The only conclusion made from the results was
that for roughness the bump integrator results indicated that the standards normally
expected for speeds of 90 km/h were not met, and that sections which were uneven after
construction tended to even out under traffic. For the skid measurements, recorded with
a stradograph, there was a major fall in the first year but the levels still remained
satisfactory.
Other models
At this stage no other life cycle performance models could be identified, except for one-
off experiments consisting of one or two measurements of roughness, skid or rutting.
Unfortunately, for most of these measurements, no other data were collected, for example
on traffic levels or rainfall.
11.3 Proposed Block Pavement Models for HDM-4

11.3.1 Introduction
From the evaluation of available literature only a single attempt at predicting the life cycle
performance of a block pavement could be identified, the Dutch rut depth model
described above. After discussions with various leading experts in the field of block
pavement performance it was concluded that block pavement models for HDM-4 should
include the following essential components:
a method of structural characterisation;

prediction of rut depth;
prediction of roughness;
prediction of skid resistance.
Models to predict surface abrasion and chipping would be desirable, but are not
considered essential in the context of HDM-4 modelling.
The lack of existing models meant that new generic models would have to be developed
since only the single attempt in developing a rut model was identified. The generic models
developed should contain the various individual parameters influencing the life cycle
performance of block pavements. This section presents the initial attempt to develop
such generic models for the three distress modes considered essentialrutting,
roughness and skid resistance.
11.3.2 Structural Characterisation of Block Pavements
Modified structural number (SNC) has been used to provide an indicator of total pavement
strength of bituminous surfaced pavements, as described in Chapter 3. Apart from the
top layer, the structure of a block pavement is generally similar to that of a bituminous
pavement and it is considered that SNC is the most appropriate way to characterise the
strength of such pavements.
The estimation of SNC for block pavement is given by:
SNC= SNPL + SNBL (11.3)

where SNC is the modified structural number of the pavement

SNPL is the structural number based on the contribution of the
pavement layers including subgrade, but excluding the block
layer
SNBL is the contribution to the structural strength of the pavement
by the block layer
The base and lower layers of a block pavement are normally constructed using the same
materials types as bituminous surfaced pavements. Thus the methodology for deriving
structural number for these layers, presented in Chapter 3, is equally applicable in this
context.
When considering the contribution of the block layer to the structural number it is
important to consider the factors identified earlier as influencing the performance of the
paving block layer (thus affecting the structural contribution of paving block layer). These
were:
block shape;
block thickness; and
block laying pattern.
It is proposed that the influence of these factors be incorporated within the structural
contribution term of the paving block layer (SNBL) as follow:
SNBL =a0 a1 BTHICK max(YE4, 0) (11.4)
where BTHICK is thickness of the paving block, in mm

NE4 is the cumulative number of equivalent standard axle loads.
It is assumed that lock up occur after the first 0.01 ESA
a0 is a coefficient allowing for the influence of block shape as
shown in Table 11.3
a1 is a coefficient allowing for the influence of the laying pattern
as shown in Figure 11.4
Table 11.3
Coefficient for influence of block shape on SNBL
Paving block shape a0

-6
Indented 2.29 x 10
-6
Rectangular 1.76 x 10
Notes: These coefficients are based on assumptions that:

a) relative strength contribution of dentated and rectangular
paving blocks are 1.3 and 1.0 times respectively that of
an asphalt layer with a strength coefficient of 0.44.
Table 11.4
Coefficient for influence of laying pattern on SNBL
Paving block laying pattern a1

Herringbone 1.0
Basket weave 0.75
Stretcher bond 0.25
Source: Based on results obtained by Shackel (1980).
11.3.3 Rut Depth Prediction
Introduction
The rutting model for block pavements should, as far as is consistent with observed
performance, follow the broad mechanisms and use the model parameters already
described for bituminous surfacings in Chapter 5. Therefore, a model consisting of the
following three phases is proposed:
an initial densification phase (bedding in phase) of the new pavement layers under
traffic until lock-up of the blocks occur;
a stable phase during which there is a relatively small increase in deformation over
time or traffic;
a final phase of accelerated deterioration: at the current state of knowledge there
seems to be no certainty about the exact mechanisms during this final phase.
The following component model, similar to that for flexible pavements is proposed:
RDM = RD0 + RDST (11.5)
where RDM is the predicted mean rut depth, under a 2 m straight-edge,

in mm
RD0 is the predicted initial densification, in mm
RDST is the predicted contribution as a result of structural
deterioration, under traffic to the mean rut depth, in mm
Initial Densification Phase
Only the single model developed in the Netherlands (Houben et al, 1992) is currently
available. Although this model predicts the deterioration observed for the specific test
pavement sections, its applicability to other pavements will be limited by the fact that the
variables influencing the difference in rutting from one location to another (i.e.
environment) are not separately quantified within the model.
To overcome this problem it is proposed that the generic model should incorporate
network level obtainable parameters. Based on the earlier discussions in this chapter and
the models and parameters described elsewhere in this report, it is recommended that the
following parameters be included:
the applied traffic load (although there is an indication that an equivalency exponent
(n) of three should be used, for consistency within the HDM-4 model the fourth power
ESA should also be applied in the models for block paving);
structural strength of the pavement expressed as the modified structural number
(SNC);
relative compaction of the layers achieved during construction (COMP);
environmental parameters (i.e. rainfall) (MMP); and
various block pavement parameters quantifying the difference in performance.
The mechanism of early densification of the lower pavement layers is thought to be

basically the same for any flexible surfacing, whether asphalt or block. Therefore the
form of model already presented in Chapter 5 can be applied:
RD0 = Krp a0 (YE4) (a1 + a2 DEF + a3 MMP ACX )

SNCa4 COMPa5 (11.6)
where Krp is a user specified factor for rut depth progression

(default = 1).
YE4 is the number of equivalent standard axle loads in
millions/lane for the first year after construction
DEF is the maximum surface deflection under a 40 kN load.
MMP is the rainfall in m/month.
SNC is the modified structural number of the pavement
COMP is the average relative compaction weighted by layer
thickness in the base, subbase and selected subgrade
layers, as percentage.
ACX is the cracking in percent area
One difference between the application of this model to bituminous and block surfacings
is the permeability of the surface during the first year after construction. With bituminous
pavements, cracking of the surface at this stage is an abnormal event. By comparison,
block pavements are at their most porous at this stage, as discussed earlier. With age,
the joints become clogged with fine materials and the porosity of the surfacing reduces.
Deflection (DEF) in equation 11.6 can be substituted with SNC using the relationship from
Paterson (1987) for granular bases and it is tentatively suggested that the term ACX can
be quantified as 50 per cent to represent the permeability of the block pavement during its
early life. Thus, equation 11.6 becomes:
RD0 = Krp a0 (YE4) (a1 + a2 SNC ^a3 + a4 MMP ACX )

SNCa5 COMPa6 (11.7)
In the absence of any field validation on this model, the default values for the calibration
parameters have been derived from those for bituminous surfaced pavements, as shown
in Table 11.5.
Table 11.5
Default Parameters for Initial Densification Phase of Rutting
Parameter Default
Value
a0 51740
a1 0.09
a2 0.061
a3 -1.6
a4 0.08
a5 -0.502
a6 -2.3
Structural Deterioration Phase
It is argued by Shackel (1990) that once lock-up occurs within a block pavement,
subsequent performance is independent of traffic, thus allowing the use of similar
principles to those used in the modelling of flexible pavements. The same view is,
however, not shared by other block pavement model experts (Sharp and Armstrong,
1985). Thus, it was considered that the model should contain terms for non-traffic and
traffic related increase in rut depth. The first term allows for a constant/decreasing rate of
deterioration dependent on all the various factors incorporated within SNC (drainage
condition, block shape, block thickness and block laying pattern). The second term allows
for the additional weakening of pavement layers due to moisture ingress over time, and,
thus, the third and final deformation phase which is assumed to be dependent on
weakening of bearing capacity of pavement layers due to moisture ingress.
Based on the foregoing, it has been proposed that the structural phase be predicted by
the following generic model:
a2
RDST = Krp [(a0 + a1SNC )/AGE3 + a3 MMP ln(max(1, AGE3 YE4)) T]
(11.8)
where RDST is the incremental change in rut depth in time T

AGE3 is the construction age, defined as the time since the blocks
were laid or relaid in years
T is the fraction of the year or season being modelled.
In the absence of research to provide calibration parameters for equation 11.8, a model
derived from that applied to bituminous surfacings is proposed for use in HDM-4. This is:
a0 + a1 SNC a 2 + a 3 MMP
RDST = Krp [ ] RDMa T (11.9)
AGE3
where RDMa is the rut depth at the start of the year or season
Table 11.6 gives the recommended default parameters for Equation 11.9.
Table 11.6
Default Parameters for Structural Deterioration Phase of Rutting
Parameter Default
Value
a0 0.333
a1 0.079
a2 -1.6
a3 0.021
The roughness progression model, described below, used the standard deviation of rut
depth as one of the components. As recommended in Chapter 5, the value of STD rut
depth can be related to the mean using:
RDS = 0.8 RDM (11.10)
11.3.4 Roughness Progression
Introduction
No model for predicting roughness on block pavements has been identified. The only
information available seems to be occasional measurements indicating that roughness
levels on block pavements are higher than on flexible pavements. Based on the
incremental recursive nature of the HDM-III and now HDM-4 model it is proposed that a
similar component incremental roughness model be adopted for block pavements in
HDM-4. Since many of the distress types included within the HDM-4 flexible pavement
roughness model are not applicable to block pavements, most of the terms within the
model would have to be omitted. The model, would, however still incorporate the
following modes of distress:
traffic;
pavement age and strength; and
time related environmental mechanisms.
Prediction model
The following incremental roughness model to predict the increase in roughness is

proposed for block pavements:
m AGE3
IRI =Kgp [ a0 e SNCa1 NE4 + a2RDS] + m IRI(t) T (11.11)
where IRI is the incremental change in roughness over analysis period

T, in m/km IRI
Kgp is a user specified deterioration factor for roughness
progression (default = 1)
m is the environmental coefficient
NE4 is the incremental number of axle loads in the analysis
period, T
RDS is the increment in rut depth standard deviation
IRI(t) is the roughness at start of analysis period, in m/km IRI.
The recommended default values for the calibration parameters are shown in Table 11.7.
Table 11.7
Default Calibration Parameters for Roughness Progression Model
Parameter Default
Value
a0 134
a1 -5
a2 0.88
11.3.5 Surface Texture
Chapter 9 of this report introduced the subject of surface texture of highway pavements
and proposed prediction models for use in HDM-4. Texture was considered in two
categories microtexture and macrotexture. The latter is normally an interest on high
speed roads: as block paving is, with rare exceptions, used only in areas where traffic is
moving relatively slowly, it is only microtexture that need be modelled for this pavement
type.
Equation 9.6 presented a model that related sideways force coefficient (SFC) on concrete
pavements to the properties of the concrete aggregates and concrete strength. Although
it is thought that this model may not be directly applicable to concrete block paving, it is
proposed that it is adopted for use in HDM-4 pending further research in this field.
11.4 Summary
This chapter introduced the subject of block pavements and examined available research
that may form the basis for performance prediction models in HDM-4. The basis for such
models is extremely limited, most performance studies of block pavements being limited
to deformation. Tentative model forms have been developed, largely following those for
bituminous surfaced pavements, for structural characterisation, rutting and roughness
progression. In the absence of specific research, it is proposed that microtexture is
predicted using the model for concrete pavements.
Pavement Strength in HDM-4 With FWDs 12-1
12. CHARACTERISING PAVEMENT STRENGTH IN HDM-4 WITH

FALLING WEIGHT DEFLECTOMETERS1
12.1 Introduction
At the ISOHDM Inception Workshop (ISOHDM, 1993) the delegates indicated that it was
important to develop a technique for HDM-4 to characterise pavement strength using non-
destructive testing devices, specifically the falling weight deflectometer (FWD). This view
was reiterated at the International Workshop on HDM-4 which was held in Malaysia in
1994 (ISOHDM, 1995a).
The HTRS commissioned a study to recommend the procedure to include FWD

measured deflections into the HDM-4 model. The purpose of the study was not to
develop a methodology, but to evaluate the available procedures and to recommend the
most appropriate procedures for use in HDM-4. The result of this study (Rohde, 1995)
forms the basis for this chapter.
Since the HDM pavement deterioration models use the modified structural number to
characterise strength (see Chapter 3), the study focused on predicting this value from
FWD measurements. It was found that there were a number of techniques reported in
the literature for calculating structural numbers from surface deflections. This chapter
documents the different approaches and tests them on the same dataset. This dataset is
given in Rohde (1995). Two hundred and forty in-service pavements in Africa and South-
East Asia were used to verify and compare the different techniques. Based on this
analysis three approaches were recommended for inclusion in HDM-4 covering various
levels of complication and data requirements.
12.2 Determining SN and SNC from FWD Deflections

12.2.1 Introduction
As described in Chapter 3, the analysis of the Brazil data in Paterson (1987) led to the
development of relationships to predict the modified structural number (SNC) as a
function of the Benkelman Beam deflection.
In HDM-III (Watanatada, et al., 1987) either the modified structural number or the
Benkelman beam deflection could be used as a pavement strength parameter. While the
SNC was found by Paterson (1987) to be better at predicting pavement performance than
the Benkelman beam deflection, the use of SNC has several disadvantages:
because it is a combined index of pavement strength it cannot be used to identify or

model failures that develop in individual layers;
the parameter does not adequately credit the stiffness provided by good quality granular
bases or stabilized materials;
1
This chapter was written by Dr. Gustav Rohde of Africon Engineering International Ltd., Pretoria, South
Africa.
to determine a pavements SNC requires a test pit and time-consuming and expensive
laboratory testing. Modern non-destructive deflection testing offers a rapid and cost-
effective alternative method to characterize pavement strength.
Because of these disadvantages, several studies have investigated predicting the SN and
SNC from FWD deflections. These studies are summarised in the following sections after
an overview of the Structural Number.
12.2.2 The Structural Number Concept
The structural number was first defined in the AASHO road test (HRB, 1962).
nlayer
SN = ai hi (12.1)
i =1
where SN is the Structural Number of the pavement

hi is the thickness of layer i (in)
ai is the layer coefficient of layer i
nlayer is the number of pavement layers above the subgrade
The layer coefficient is a measure of the relative ability of a unit thickness of a given
material to function as a structural component of the pavement. Layer coefficients were
originally determined in the AASHO road test. In the Kenya Road Transport Cost Study
(Hodges, et al., 1975), the Transport and Road Research Laboratory added a variable,
SNSG to the structural number, to account for variation in subgrade strength. The
modified structural number, SNC, was defined as:
nlayer
SNC = ai hi + SNSG (12.2)
i =1

SNSG is the structural number contribution from the subgrade
The contribution to structural number from the subgrade was derived by Hodges, et al.
(1975). The design charts of Road Note 31 (TRL, 1977) were analysed to examine how
the structural number was influenced by the subgrade strength. The analysis resulted in
the formulation of the SNSG term as:
SNSG = -0.85 (log CBR)2 + 3.51 (log CBR) - 1.43 (12.3)
where CBR is the California Bearing Ratio of the subgrade in per cent
The concept of influencing the traditional structural number (Equation 12.1) with a
subgrade component (Equation 12.2) was subsequently included in the HDM-III
performance database as the indicator of overall pavement strength.
To provide for layer coefficients for material of different strengths, relationships to

translate CBRs into layer coefficients for different granular layer types were also adopted
(Chastain and Schwartz, 1965):
ai = 0.00645 CBR3 - 0.1977 CBR2 + 29.14 CBR (for Base Course) (12.4)
ai = 0.01 + 0.065 log CBR (for Subbase Course) (12.5)
Subsequently, numerous correlations between layer coefficients and material properties,

such as the resilient modulus or the CBR, were developed (AASHTO, 1993). A procedure
to calculate the layer coefficient based on the resilient modulus of each layer was also
derived. The relationship has been documented by Ioannides (1986):
1
Ei 3
ai = ag (12.6)
Eg
where ag is the layer coefficient of standard materials (AASHO road

test) as listed in Table 12.1
Ei is the layer resilient modulus
Eg is the resilient modulus of standard materials (AASHO road
test) as listed in Table 12.1
Table 12.1
Layer Coefficients and Resilient Moduli of Standard Materials in AASHO Road Test
Layer Type Layer Coefficient Resilient Modulus

ag Eg (MPa)
Asphalt concrete surface course 0.44 3100
Untreated and Stabilized Base Course 0.14 207
Granular Subbase Course 0.11 104
Source: Rohde (1995)
12.2.3 1993 AASHTO Design Guide
The 1993 AASHTO design guide (AASHTO, 1993) documents two procedures to determine
the structural number from FWD deflections.
NDT Method I involves the backcalculation of layer elastic moduli based on multilayered
elastic theory. Once the layer moduli are determined, they are related to layer coefficients
using Equation 12.6.
The backcalculated subgrade modulus can be related to subgrade CBR using a relationship
suggested by Emery (1985):
Esg = 41.19 CBR0.385 (12.7)
where Esg is the subgrade modulus in MPa

The modified structural number can be calculated using Equations 12.2 and 12.3, with the
CBR from Equation 12.7 used to calculate SNSG.
NDT Method II involves firstly the calculation of the subgrade modulus from outer sensor
deflections and the subsequent calculation of the structural number from the peak
deflection. The subgrade modulus is derived from:
Esg =
(
P 1 2 ) (0.5 + 0.875) (12.8)
dr rd
where P is the dynamic load of the FWD (lb)

is the subgrade Poissons ratio
dr is the measured deflection at a distance rd from the load
plate centre (in)
rd is the radial distance from plate centre to point measurement
(in)
The structural number formula documented in the AASHTO guide was modified by
Ioannides (1986). He suggested the following relationship:
1.5 P (0.0045 HP )3 1 1
Do = 1- +
(1+ (HP / lr ) )
1/ 2 1/ 2
lr SN
3 2
40000SN2
Es 1 + 2 2/3
lr Esg
(12.9)
where Do is the peak FWD deflection in inches
HP is the pavement layer thickness in inches
lr is the load radius in inches
Esg is the subgrade modulus in psi
The structural number of the pavement can be determined by solving Equation 12.9 for SN.
The subgrade modulus calculated with Equation 12.8 is then related to subgrade CBR
(through Equation 12.7) and subsequently included in the modified structural number
(Equations 12.2 and 12.3).
12.2.4 Developments by Jameson and Howard
Jameson (1993) developed the following relationships for the structural number and
subgrade CBR from mechanistic analysis of a wide range of flexible pavements:
842.8 42.94
SN = 1.69 + + (12.10)
( o 1500 ) D 900
D D
CBR = 3.264 - 1.018 log(D900) (12.11)

where Do is the peak FWD deflection at 700 kPa (microns)
D900 is the deflection 900 mm from centre of loading plate at
700 kPa (microns)
D1500 is the deflection 1500 mm from centre of loading plate at
700 kPa (microns)
Using the results of Equations 12.10 and 12.11, the SN is determined using Equations 12.2
and 12.3
Howard (1993) used a similar approach by adding the nominal pavement thickness and
splitting the regression at a structural number of 2.5:
785.4524 69.9904
SN = 0.971876 + 0.002543 HP+ + (12.12)
(D 0 D1500 ) D 900
If SN < 2.5, then SN is given by:
866.3272 22.6561
SN = 0.884209 + 0.000866 HP + + (12.13)
( 0 1500 )
D D D 900
where HP is the total pavement layer thickness in mm
By adding the nominal pavement thickness (HP), peak deflection (Do) and deflection at a
1500 mm offset, Howard (1993) developed a formula for the subgrade modulus:
Esg = 3036 - 1.661 D1500 + 0.0108 HP - 0.015 D0 - 2607.3 log(D900)
+ 611.3(log(D900))2 (12.14)
12.2.5 Asgari's Formula
Asgari (1992) developed a relationship between the modified structural number and the
deflection due to a FWD load. This was theoretically derived from deflections generated by
the BISAR program. The general form of the equation was:
SNC = a0 (D0)a1 (12.15)
where a0 and a1 are coefficients
The influence of subgrade effects was taken into account by varying the coefficients (a0 and
a1) for different ranges of subgrade modulus. Table 12.2 gives the values for the
coefficients as a function of subgrade modulus.
Table 12.2
Coefficients for use with Asgaris Formula
Subgrade Asgari Formula Coefficients

Modulus
(MPa) a0 a1
20 4.710 -1.828
50 2.738 -1.017
100 2.259 -0.905
200 1.844 -0.900
Source: Asgari (1992)
12.2.6 Rohde's Relationships
Rohde (1994) used the mechanistic analysis of numerous pavement structures and
assumptions regarding the stress distribution of a pavement structure subjected to an FWD
load to develop a relationship between the shape of a FWD deflection basin and structural
number. Based on the stress distribution below a FWD, it can be assumed that the surface
deflection measured at an offset of 1.5 times the thickness of the pavement structure
originates in the subgrade. By comparing this deflection to the peak deflection, an index
associated with the magnitude of deformation that occurs within the pavement structure was
defined:
SIP = D0 - D1.5 HP (12.16)
where SIP is the structural index of the pavement

D1.5 HP is the surface deflection at an offset 1.5 times HP from
loading plate under standard 40 kN FWD load (mm)
Rohde (1994) hypothesised that the structural index of the pavement, SIP, should strongly
correlate with the stiffness of the pavement structure and subsequently with its structural
number. He developed a theoretical relationship between SIP, the SN and HP with the
following format:
SN = a0 SIPa1 HPa2 (12.17)
where a0 to a2 are coefficients as given in Table 12.3.
Table 12.3
Coefficients for SN - SIP Relationship
Surface Type a0 a1 a2
Surface seals 0.1165 -0.3248 0.8241
Asphalt concrete 0.4728 -0.4810 0.7581
Source: Rohde (1994)
The same rationale used to determine SN from surface deflections was used to obtain the
subgrade stiffness. The structural index of the subgrade, associated with the magnitude of
deformation in the top 300 mm of the subgrade, was used for performance prediction
purposes:
SIS = D1.5 HP - D1.5 HP + 450 (12.18)

where SIS is the structural index of the subgrade

D1.5HP+450 is the deflection (microns) measured at an offset
1.5 times HP + 450 (mm) under a 40 kN FWD load
SIS and the total pavement thickness were subsequently related to the subgrade stiffness
using the following relationship:
Esq = 10a3 SISa4 HPa5 (12.19)
where a3 to a5 are coefficients defined in Table 12.4.
Table 12.4
Coefficients for Esg - SIS Relationship
Total Pavement Thickness a3 a4 a5

HP < 380 mm 9.138 -1.236 -1.903
380 mm < HP < 525 mm 8.756 -1.213 -1.780
525 mm < HP 10.655 -1.254 -2.453
From Esg and SN the modified structural number is determined using Equations 12.7, 12.3
and 12.2.
12.3 Data for Verification of Relationships

12.3.1 Introduction
To evaluate the developed relationships a large database of information was collected

from several countries in Africa and South-East Asia1. The database consisted of FWD
data, Dynamic cone penetration profiles and layer thicknesses from test pits. The
detailed data is provided in Rohde (1995). Table 12.5 shows the range of pavements
incorporated.
Table 12.5
Range of Pavement Characteristics in Test Data
Characteristic South Africa Botswana Lesotho Malaysia Philippines

Transvaal Ciskei
Number of Test Points 28 9 47 24 65 67
Number of Pavement Structures 28 9 47 24 13 67
Peak deflection (m)
Minimum 148 345 241 287 109 57
1 049 775 852 1 394 1 374 2 620
1
The HTRS team would like to acknowledge the contributions of the following organisations in providing data
for this analysis: Botswana Roads Department, Lesotho Roads Department, Gautrans (South Africa),
IKRAM (Malaysia), Africon International (South Africa), Snowy Mountain Engineering Corporation
(Australia), Kampsax International A/S (Philippines). Acknowledgments are also made to the following
individuals who made valuable comments on this effort: Dr. Alex Visser, University of Pretoria (South
Africa); Mr. Tom Thomsen, Carl Bro International A/S (Denmark); Mr. Louw Kannemeyer, Department of
Transport (South Africa); Dr. Ian van W ijk, Africon International (South Africa); Mr. Mike Riley, Riley
Partnership (UK), Mr. Jon Roberts, Snowy Mountain Engineering Corporation (Australia).
Maximum
Outer deflection1 (m) 15 8 9 16 15 7
Minimum 51 41 85 50 204 215
Maximum
Pavement Structure (mm) SEAL SEAL SEAL SEAL 50 35
Min Surface Thickness SEAL SEAL 60 SEAL 260 175
Max Surface Thickness 280 270 140 255 195 170
Min Total Pavement Thickness 850 400 470 680 700 650
Max Total Pavement Thickness
Notes: 1/ Normalized to 40 kN
2/ SEAL = surface treatment
The measured deflection data was normalized, temperature correction factors applied,
and the structural numbers calculated as described by the different methods.
12.3.2 Normalisation
Because the actual applied stress during testing and the standard FWD plate pressure,
for which the SN and SNC deflection relationships were derived differ, the field data had
to be corrected accordingly. It was assumed that deflections vary linearly with load level,
that is, if a deflection of 500 microns is measured at a stress of 560 kPa, the deflection
corrected to 700 kPa is 500 x 700/560 = 625 microns. It should be noted that the various
techniques are linked to different standard load levels.
12.3.3 Temperature Correction
Prevailing temperature and moisture conditions influence deflections and thus the
calculated structural numbers. To determine the structural number at standard
temperature, the peak deflection (Do) needs to be corrected. For pavements with thin
asphalt surfaces (< 40 mm), no temperature correction is required.
The temperature adjustment of the peak deflection for pavements with thicker asphalt
surfaces can be summarized as follows (Jameson, 1993):
(i) Obtain the Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (WMAPT) for the
region. That is the pavement temperature at which the damage to the pavement
is the same as damage due to the range of temperatures the pavement actually
experiences.
(ii) Determine the asphalt temperature during deflection measurements at three

different pavement depths, namely:
near the surface;

mid layer; and
bottom of the asphalt layer.
TH = -2.6 + 0.842 (TS + TA) + 1.31 log(HAC) - 0.165 (TS + TA) log(HAC)
(12.20)
where TH is the asphalt temperature during deflection measurements at a

depth HAC in oC
TS is the surface temperature during deflection measurements in oC

TA is the mean air temperature of the month in which the deflections
were measured, average of 5 measurements in oC
HAC is the depth in the asphalt layer at which the temperature is
measured in mm
The average of the temperature at the three depths yields the estimate of the
pavement temperature (TAC) during deflection measurements.
(iii) Determine the temperature adjustment factor (TAF):
WMAPT
TAF = (12.21)
TAC
(iv) Determine the deflection adjustment factor (DAF):
If TAF < 1 then
DAF = 1 + (TAF-1) [-1.312-0.000498 D900 + 1.027 log(HS) + 0.0756 (TAF-1)]

(12.22)
If TAF > 1 then
DAF = 1 + (TAF-1) [-0.897-0.000463 D900 + 0.85 log(HS) - 0.418 (TAF-1)]

(12.23)
where TAF is the temperature adjustment factor

HS is the thickness of the bitumen layers in mm
(v) Adjust the peak deflection Do:
Do (corrected) = Do (measured) x DAF (12.24)
12.4 SN and SNC Results Using Seven Procedures

12.4.1 Method A: Backcalculated Moduli, AASHTO NDT Method I
Method A involved the determination of the layer moduli by backcalculating the measured
deflection bowls. Two backcalculation programs; MODULUS (Rohde and Scullion, 1990)
and ELMOD (Ullitdz, 1987b) were used. The layer moduli were translated into layer
coefficients using Equation 12.6 and, together with the measured layer thicknesses,
substituted in Equation 12.1 to determine the structural number.
The backcalculated subgrade moduli were translated into CBRs with Equation 12.7 and
the structural number of the subgrade determined (Equation 12.3). The summation of SN
and the subgrade structural contribution resulted in SNC (Equation 12.2).
12.4.2 Method B: DCP Analysis
Method B involved the analysis of DCP results. The penetration rate through each
granular pavement layer and the top of the subgrade were used to determine the in situ
CBRs. Although several relationships are available, those developed by Kleyn and
Savage (1982) were adopted for this analysis:
CBR = 410 log DN-1.27 DN > 2mm/blow (12.25)
CBR = 66.66 DN2 - 330 DN + 563 DN < 2 mm/blow (12.26)
where DN is the penetration rate of DCP (mm/blow)
The CBRs were translated into layer coefficients using Equations 12.4 and 12.5. For
surface layers, a coefficient was assumed based on the visual condition. The calculated
layer coefficients and thicknesses were then used to determine the structural number by
The modified structural number was determined from the subgrade CBR and Equations
12.2 and 12.3.
12.4.3 Method C: AASHTO Method II
Method C is the second approach suggested in the AASHTO pavement design guide and
involves purely surface deflections normalized at 566 kPa. The subgrade modulus is
determined with Equation 12.8 and, together with the measured peak deflection and
pavement thickness, used as input to solve for the structural number using Equation 12.9.
The subgrade modulus was translated into CBR with Equation 12.7, after which SNC was
determined with Equations 12.2 and 12.3.
12.4.4 Method D: Jameson's formulae
The structural number and subgrade CBR were determined from surface deflections with
Equations 12.10 and 12.11. Subgrade CBR was translated into SNSG with Equation 12.3
before calculating SNC with Equation 12.2.
12.4.5 Method E: Howard's Formulae
The total measured pavement thickness and measured deflections, normalised at 700
kPa, were substituted in Equations 12.12 and 12.13 to determine the structural number.
The subgrade modulus was determined (Equation 12.14) and translated into a CBR
(Equation 12.7). SNC was determined from Equations 12.2 and 12.3.
12.4.6 Method F: Asgari's Formulae

The subgrade modulus was determined from outer deflections (normalized at 566 kPa)
The appropriate coefficients were selected from Table 12.2 and, together with the peak
deflection (normalized to 700 kPa), substituted in Equation 12.15 to determine the
modified structural number.
12.4.7 Method G: Rohde's Relationships
FWD deflections were normalized to standard 566 kPa. The deflection at two offsets, 1.5
times HP and 1.5 times HP + 450 mm, were determined using the following formula:
(Rx - RB)(Rx - RC) (R x - RA )(Rx - RC) (Rx - RA )(R x - RB)

Dx = DA + DB + DC
(RA - RB)(RA - RC) (RB - RA )(RB - RC) (RC - RA )(RC - RB)
(12.27)
where Dx is the deflection at offset Rx

Di is the deflection at sensor i
Ri is the offset of sensor i
i A, B, C are the three closest sensors to point x
x is the point for which the deflection is determined
The parameters SIP and SIS were determined using Equations 12.16 and 12.18.
SIS, SIP, the total layer thickness and the appropriate coefficients from Table 12.3 and
Table 12.4 were used to determine the structural number and subgrade modulus
(Equations 12.17 and 12.19). The subgrade modulus was translated into CBR with
equation 7, after which SNC was determined with equations 12.2 and 12.3.
12.5 Results of Analysis

12.5.1 Structural Number
The SN results of the different approaches are compared in Figure 12.1. Correlation
coefficients between the different methods are given in Table 12.6.
12.00 12.00
SN-METHOD C (AASHTO NDT II)

9.00 9.00
SN-METHOD B (DCP)
6.00 6.00
3.00 3.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00 0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00
SN-METHOD A (AASHTO NDT I) SN-METHOD A (AASHTO NDT I)
12.00
12.00
SN-METHOD D (JAMESON)
SN-METHOD E (HOWARD)
9.00
9.00
6.00
6.00
3.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00
0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00
SN-METHOD A (AASHTO NDT I) SN-METHOD A (AASHTO NDT I)
12.00
LEGEND
SN-METHOD G (ROHDE)
9.00
- SOUTH AFRICA
- BOTSWANA
6.00
- LESOTHO
- PHILIPPINES
3.00
- MALAYSIA
*
0.00
0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00
SN-METHOD A (AASHTO NDT I)
Figure 12.1: Comparison of SN Calculated by Various Methods to SN Calculated by

AASHTO NDT I Method
Table 12.6
Linear Correlation Between Calculated Structural Numbers
METHOD A METHOD B METHOD C METHOD D METHOD E METHOD G

Method A 1.000 0.925 0.900 0.856 0.905 0.954
Method B 0.925 1.000 0.836 0.776 0.830 0.893
Method C 0.900 0.836 1.000 0.776 0.856 0.945
Method D 0.856 0.776 0.776 1.000 0.816 0.906
Method E 0.905 0.830 0.856 0.816 1.000 0.950
Method G 0.954 0.893 0.945 0.906 0.950 1.000
Method A - Backcalculation of Layer Moduli (AASHTO NDT Method I)

Method B - DCP Results
Method C - AASHTO NDT Method II
Method D - Jameson' s formulae
Method E - Howard's formulae
Method G - Rohde's relationship
In general, all the techniques described lead to predicted structural numbers similar to
those obtained through the backcalculation of layer moduli (Method A) which is assumed
to be the most accurate means of estimating layer moduli. Method G correlates best, as
indicated by the distribution of data points in Figure 12.1, and a correlation of 0.95.
12.5.2 Modified Structural Number
Table 12.7 lists the correlation coefficients between the different methods, while the
calculated SNC results are visually compared in Figure 12.2.
Table 12.7
Linear Correlation Between Calculated Modified Structural Numbers
METHOD METHOD METHOD METHOD METHOD METHOD METHOD

A B C D E F G
Method A 1.000 0.828 0.843 0.844 0.877 0.469 0.901
Method B 0.828 1.000 0.853 0.752 0.825 0.453 0.857
Method C 0.843 0.853 1.000 0.752 0.869 0.493 0.909
Method D 0.844 0.752 0.752 1.000 0.943 0.459 0.867
Method E 0.877 0.825 0.869 0.943 1.000 0.475 0.920
Method F 0.469 0.453 0.493 0.459 0.475 1.000 0.547
Method G 0.901 0.857 0.909 0.867 0.920 0.547 1.000
Method A - Backcalculation of Layer Moduli (AASHTO NDT Method I)

Method B - DCP Results
Method C - AASHTO NDT Method II
Method D - Jameson' s formulae
Method E - Howard' s formulae
Method F - Asgari'
s formula
Method G - Rohde's relationship
As with the SN, Method G provides a SNC that correlates the best with Method A. The
approach suggested by Asgari correlates poorly at only 0.469; the other approaches
produce reasonable correlations.
12.00 12.00
SNC-METHOD C (AASHTO NDT II)

SNC-METHOD B (DCP)
9.00 9.00
6.00 6.00
3.00 3.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00 0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00
SNC-METHOD A (AASHTO NDT I) SNC-METHOD A (AASHTO NDT I)
12.00 12.00
SNC-METHOD D (JAMESON)
SNC-METHOD E (HOWARD)
9.00 9.00
6.00 6.00
3.00 3.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00 0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00
12.00 12.00
SNC-METHOD G (ROHDE)
SNC-METHOD F (ASGARI)
9.00 9.00
6.00 6.00
3.00 3.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00 0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00
LEGEND
- LESOTHO - PHILIPPINES
- BOTSWANA - MALAYSIA
- SOUTH AFRICA
*
Figure 12.2: Comparison of SNC Calculated by Various Methods to SNC Calculated

by AASHTO NDT I Method
12.6 Discussion of Results and Recommendations

Seven approaches to determine a pavement structural number through non-destructive
testing with an FWD have been identified. They depend on different items of information
as summarised in Table 12.8.
Table 12.8
Information Required by Various Approaches
Method Information Required

FWD Data Total Pavement Layer Thickness
Thickness
A: Backcalculation (AASHTO I) Y Y
B: DCP Data Y
C: AASHTO NDT Method II Y Y
D: Jamesons Y
E: Howards Y Y
F: Asgaris Y
G: Rohdes Y Y
From the analysis it is evident that the approaches generally lead to comparable results.
The AASHTO NDT Method I (Method A) requires exact knowledge of layer thicknesses, is
time consuming and relies heavily on backcalculation expertise. DCP data, as used in
approach B, offers a viable alternative to deflections for estimating SNC, but has the
disadvantage that it is time consuming to acquire. Method C (AASHTO NDT Method II)
solves the structural number through an intricate formula that requires a value for the total
pavement thickness. Howard' s formulae (Method E) requires the same amount of input
data, but is less complicated and provides better correlations.
Jameson' s formulae (Method D) are simple and need only deflection data as input, but
produce average correlations. Asgari' s formula (Method F) needs the same amount of
information and calculation effort, but produces less impressive results. Method G
requires the total pavement thickness as an input and provides the best correlations.
Although complex interpolation between deflections is necessary, it can be programmed
into a spreadsheet or program and solved with relative ease.
Based on the analysis, and the preceding discussion, the following is recommended for
the calculation of the modified structural number in HDM-4:
If only FWD data is available: Approach D

If FWD data and total pavement thickness are available: Approach G
Specifications for programming the algorithms are given in Rohde (1995) along with a
worked example.
To incorporate FWD deflections into HDM-4 it is recommended that a method to

determine the modified structural number from surface deflections be included in the
software. For the purpose of flexibility it is recommended that users be allowed four
alternative methods of defining pavement strength. The method selected on a given
project will depend on the available information. The methods are given in Table 12.9.
Table 12.9
Recommended Methods for Defining Pavement Strength in HDM-41
Input Required Analysis Approach Recommended

Preference
FWD Deflection* Method G: Rohde (1994) 1
FWD Sensor Positions
Total Pavement Thickness
FWD Deflection* Method D: Jameson (1993) 2
FWD Sensor Positions
Maximum Benkelman Beam* Deflection As in HDM-III 3
Modified Structural Number User'
s Prerogative
Notes: 1/ In all approaches it is assumed that the peak Benkelman Beam or FWD
deflection has been adjusted to standard design temperature prior to using HDM-4.
12.7 Summary
The use of the FWD to rapidly and economically estimate the in situ material properties of
a pavement is becoming increasingly common. Its widespread use has highlighted the
need for a procedure in HDM-4 that calculates a pavements SNC from FWD deflections.
Results from six available procedures were compared using the same data set to evaluate
their relative abilities. Based on the analysis, three separate procedures, each with
different data requirements, were recommended for determining the SNC.
Conclusions 13-1
13. CONCLUSIONS
The objectives of the RDME component of the HTRS were to extend the applicability of
the HDM-III models to cover a broader range of conditions, including:
additional types of pavements;

additional modes of pavement deterioration;
more climates and environmental effects;
more maintenance and rehabilitation treatments and their effects.
The general approach that was followed was to evaluate the existing models and, where
appropriate, modify or augment them for use in HDM-4. Where existing models were not
available within HDM-III, or where the HDM-III models were found to be deficient, new
model forms were evaluated.
Because this project was more of an implementation study than a research project, it was
originally envisaged that existing databases and models would be used in the project.
However, with few notable exceptions, the HTRS team had great difficulty in obtaining any
recent research data or models from the individuals and organisations known to be active
in the field of pavement research. This meant that in some areas conceptual models
have been presented which, while considered to reflect the mechanisms causing the
development of pavement distress, lack any rigorous validation. It is hoped that, in these
cases, this report will provide a focus for future research.
Despite that paucity of data and validated models, it is considered that the modelling
structure described in the foregoing chapters provides an improved framework for the
economic evaluation of road construction and maintenance strategies when compared
with HDM-III. Table 13.1 identifies areas where the modelling capability in HDM-III has
been significantly enhanced.
Table 13.1
Enhancement of Pavement Modelling Framework with respect to HDM-III
Modelling Area Enhancement

Pavement types Structured definition of pavement types for bituminous, concrete,
block and unsealed surfaces.
Structural characterisation Inclusion of climatic and drainage effects on pavement structural
capability.
Derivation of structural capacity from FWD data.
Cracking Definition and prediction models for thermal and reflection cracking.
Rutting Prediction models for plastic flow and attrition components of rut
depth progression.
Ravelling Extension of the concept of construction defects indicators to
prediction of ravelling.
Surface disintegration Inclusion of delamination and edge break prediction models.
Roughness Modelling of patching policies and their effect on roughness.
Effective roughness from shoulder use.
Surface texture Micro and macro texture prediction models included.
Block pavements Conceptual models for rut depth and roughness progression.
Maintenance effects Comprehensive definition of treatment types, their effects and
intervention criteria.
When the new RDME models are incorporated into the HDM-4 software it is hoped that
they will provide a useful tool in all parts of the world for the prediction of pavement
performance. It must be stressed, however, that calibration to local environment,
materials and construction practices is desirable if not essential for most of the model
groups.
It must also be emphasised that many of the models are conceptual. Although the model
parameters presented in this report give reasonable predictions, it is vital that these
parameters be confirmed or refined through analysis of pavement deterioration data.
References 14-1
14. REFERENCES
AASHTO (1986). Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures, (Volumes I and II)
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
AASHTO (1993). AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures. American

Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
AbWahab, Y., et al. (1993). Evaluation of Asphalt-Aggregate Mixtures by Dynamic

Mechanical Analysis. Transportation Research Record No. 1386. TRB.
Washington, D.C. pp. 22-30.
Africon (1995). Rut Depth Survey on TPA Roads. Internal Report, Africon International
Engineering, Pretoria.
Asgari, M.A. (1992). Validation of Empirical HDM-III Models for Prediction of Asphalt
Deterioration by Means of Mechanistic Analysis. M.Sc. Thesis, Delft Technical
University, Netherlands,
Asphalt Institute (1981). Asphalt Pavement Thickness Design, Information Series No. 1,
Asphalt Institute. College Park, MD.
Asphalt Institute (1989). The Asphalt Handbook. Manual Series No. 4.
Babkov, V.F. (1985). Highway Engineering. MIR Publishers, Moscow.
Bell, C.A., et al. (1991). Investigation of Laboratory Aging Procedures for Asphalt-
Aggregate Mixtures. Transportation Research Record No. 1323. TRB.
Washington, D.C. pp. 32-42.
Bennett, C.R. (1994). A Speed Model Prediction Model for Rural Two-Lane Highways.
Ph.D. Thesis, University of Auckland.
Bennett, C.R. (1995). Review of Experience Adapting the HDM Vehicle Operating Costs
Model. Report to the International Study of Highway Development and
Management Tools, University of Birmingham.
Burrow (1990). Pavement Management Project, ADB/TA 1058-IND. John Burrow and
Partners, U.K.
Button, J.W,. et al. (1993). Evaluation and Development of a Pressure Aging Vessel for
Asphalt Cement. Transportation Research Record No. 1391, TRB, Washington,
D.C. pp. 11-19.
Carpenter, S.H., (1983). Thermal Cracking in Asphalt Pavements: An Examination of

Models and Input Parameters. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Cold Regions Research Engineering Laboratory.
Catt, C.A. (1983). An Alternative View of TRRL's Research into Skidding Resistance.
Asphalt Technology, No. 33, pp. 7-12.
CCANZ (1988). Interlocking Concrete Block Road Pavements. Cement and Concrete
Association of New Zealand, Porirua.
CCANZ (1989). Construction of Concrete Block Pavements. Cement and Concrete

Association of New Zealand, Porirua.
Cenek P.D and Patrick J.E. (1991). Prediction of Road Roughness Progression. Central
Laboratories Report 91-29301. Works Consultancy Services, New Zealand.
Cenek, P.D., Patrick, J.E., McGuire, J.F., Robertson, D.A. (1994). New Zealand
Experience in Comparing Manual and Automatic Pavement Condition Rating
Systems. Third International Conference on Managing Pavements, Volume 2,
Transportation Research Board, San Antonio, Texas.
CES (1989). Vehicle Fleet Modernisation and Road Use Charges Study. Report to
MOST. Consulting Engineering Services (India) Private Limited, New Delhi,
India.
Chakrabarti and Bennett (1994). Review of Experience Adapting the HDM RDME Model.
Report to the International Study of Highway Development and Management
Tools, University of Birmingham.
Chastain, W.E. and Schwartz, D.R. (1964). AASHO Road Test equations applied to the
design of bituminous pavements in Illinois. Highway Research Record 90,
Highway Research Board, Washington D.C.
Chesher, A. (1995). Notes on Crack Initiation Modelling and Analysis. Project

Correspondence. University of Bristol. 19 August.
Clifford, J.M., (1981). Evaluation of Tests to Determine Waterproofing Characteristics of

Segmental Block Pavements. Technical Report TP/39/81, National Institute for
Transport and Road Research. CSIR. South Africa.
Coeffman, B.S., Ilves, G. and Edwards. W. (1968). Theoretical Asphaltic Concrete

Equivalencies, Highway Research Record 239, HRB, National Research Council,
Washington, D.C.
C.P. Corne & Associates (1995). Roughness Reduction from Overlays. Report to
Directorate General of Highways, Indonesia, C.P. Corne and Associates,
Indonesia.
Cox, J. B. (1992) Canadian Experience in Adapting HDM-3 for Road Management

Systems. Proceedings of the 15th ARRB Conference, Part 3.
CRRI (1993). Pavement Performance Study: Study on Existing Pavement Sections.

Volume II. Data Management and Model Development. New Delhi.
Daines, M.R. (1992). The Performance of Hot Rolled Asphalt Containing Crushed Rock
Fines, A303 Mere. Transport Research Laboratory, Research Report 298,
Crowthorne.
Dickinson, E.J. (1984). Bituminous Roads in Australia. Australian Road Research Board.
Melbourne.
References 14-3
Djarf, L. (1995). Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects Models in Cold Climates.
Swedish Road Research Institute, Sweden.
Emby, J. (1992). An Assessment of the Skid Resistance and Macrotexture of Various

Paved Road Surfacings in Malaysia. Penemuan, Research Bulletin of IKRAM,
Vol. 3, No. 1, January 1992, pp. 8-13.
Emery. S.J. (1985). Prediction of Moisture Content for Use in Pavement Design. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
Epps, J., and C.L. Monismith. (1972). Fatigue of Asphalt Concrete Mixtures A
Summary of Existing Information. Fatigue of Compacted Bituminous Aggregate
Mixtures. Report STP 508. American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Finn, F.N., et al. (1986). Development of Pavement Structural Subsystems. NCHRP

Report No. 291. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Freeme, C.R. (1983). Evaluation of Pavement Behaviour for Major Rehabilitation of

Roads. NITRR Technical Report RP/19/83. CSIR. South Africa.
Freeme, C.R., and C.P. Marias. (1973). Thin Bituminous Surfaces: Their Fatigue
Behavior and Prediction. Special Report 140. Highway Research Board.
Washington, D.C. pp. 158 - 179.
Gaeto, R., Echeverria, G., Videla, C. and Gutierrez, P. (1991). Sistema de

Autocalibracion de los Modelos de Deterioro del HDM-III. Proc. Sexto Congreso
Ibero - Latino-Americano del Asfalto, Santiago, Chile.
GEIPOT (1982) Research on the Interrelationships between Costs of Highway

Construction, Maintenance and Utilization (PICR). Final Report, 12 volumes.
Empresa Brasileira de Planejamento de Transportes (GEIPOT), Ministry of
Transport, Brasilia.
Gomez M. and Thompson M.R. (1993). Structural Coefficients and Thickness

Equivalency Ratios. Illinois Cooperative Highway Research Program Series 202,
University of Illinois, Urbana.
Gulden, W. and D. Brown. (1984). Overlays for Plain Concrete Pavements. Georgia
Department of Transportation. Atlanta, Georgia.
Hameed, A.M. and A.F. Malek. (1994). Bituminous Overlays Their Performance in
Malaysia. Proceedings of the International Workshop on HDM-4, Volume 2.
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Harun, M.H. and Morosiuk, G., (1995). A Study of the Performance of Various
Bituminous Surfacings for Use on Climbing Lanes. Proceedings of the 8th
REAAA Conference, Taipei.
Hasan, S., Meyer, A.H. and Fowler, D.W. (1991). Establishment of Acceptance Limits for
Five Cycle MSS and Modified Wet Ball Mill Tests for Aggregates Used in Seal
Coats and HMAC Surfaces. FHWA Research Report 1222-1F, Center for
Transportation Research, The University of Texas, Austin.
Hide, H. and Keith, D. (1979). Effect of Simple Road Improvement Measures on Vehicle
Operating Costs in the Eastern Caribbean. Transportation Research Record
702, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
HMSO. (1952). Soil Mechanics for Road Engineers. London.
Hoban, C.J. (1987). Evaluating Traffic Capacity and Improvements to Road Geometry.
World Bank Technical Paper No. 74, Washington D.C.
Hodges, J.W., Rolt J. and Jones, T.E. (1975). The Kenya Road Transport Cost Study :
Research on Road Deterioration, TRRL Laboratory Report 673, Transport
Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
Hoff & Overgaard. (1994). Kabupaten Road Economic Evaluation Model. Draft Report on
Pavement Models. Jakarta, Indonesia.
Hoff & Overgaard. (1995). Database from Study of Kabupaten Road Pavements.
Jakarta, Indonesia.
Hosking, J.R. (1986). Relationship Between Skidding Resistance and Accident

Frequency, Estimates Based on Seasonal Variation. TRRL Research Report 76.
Crowthorne.
Houben, L.J.M., et al. (1992). First Verification of the Dutch Design Method for Concrete
Block Pavements, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on
Concrete Block Paving, Volume II, University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Houghton, L.D. and Hallett, J.E. (1987). An Analysis of Single Coat Seal Designs. New
Zealand Roading Symposium, Vol. 2. Pavement Design and Maintenance, pp.
249-263.
Howard, K. (1993). Notes on Adaptions to Jameson Procedure. Snowy Mountain

Engineering Corporation, Cooma.
HRB (1962). Special Report SRGIE: The AASHO Road Test. National Research Council.
Washington, D.C.
Ioannides. A. M. (1986). Theoretical Implications of the AASHTO 1986 Nondestructive

Testing Method 2 for Pavement Evaluation. Transportation Research Record
1307, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C.
ISOHDM (1993). Proceedings: Inception Workshop. Report to the International Study of

Highway Development and Management Tools, University of Birmingham.
ISOHDM (1994a). Proceedings: Cold Climate Workshop, Borlange Sweden 16-17 March
1994. Report to the International Study of Highway Development and
References 14-5
ISOHDM (1994b). Highway Development and Management Research Technical

Relationships Study - Inception Report. Report to the Asian Development Bank,
Manila.
ISOHDM (1995a). Proceedings of the International Workshop on HDM-4, Kuala Lumpur,

Malaysia 28 November - 1 December 1994. Report to the International Study of
Highway Development and Management Tools, University of Birmingham.
ISOHDM (1995b). Highway Development and Management Research Technical

Relationships Study - Interim Report. Report to the Asian Development Bank,
Manila.
Jameson, G.W. (1993). Development of procedures to predict structural number and

subgrade strength from falling weight deflectometer deflections.
Jayawickrama, P.W., and R.L. Lytton. (1987). Methodology for Predicting Asphalt
Concrete Overlay Life Against Reflection Cracking. Proceedings: Sixth
International Conference on the Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements.
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
JKR (1991). Axle Load Study Phase 2 (Peninsular Malaysia) - Final Report. Public
Works Department, Kuala Lumpur.
Jones, D.R. (1992). An Asphalt Primer: Understanding How the Origin and Composition
of Paving-Grade Asphalt Cements Affect Their Performance. SHRP Asphalt
Research Program. Technical Memorandum No. 4.
Jordaan, G.J. (1993). Users Manual for the South African Mechanistic Pavement
Rehabilitation Design Method. South African Roads Board, RDAC IR 91/243.
Pretoria.
Kampsax International A/S. (1986). Study of Four Major Roads In Zambia, Soils and
Materials Report. Copenhagen.
Kannemeyer, L., and A.T. Visser. (1994). The Applicability of Published Pavement
Deterioration Models for National Roads. Research Report 93/799. South Africa
Department of Transport. Pretoria.
Kenis, W.J., Sherwood, J.A., and McMahon, T.F. (1982). Verification and Application of
the VESYS Structural Subsystem. Proceedings Fifth International Conference
on Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements. University of Michigan and Delft
University of Technology. Ann Arbor.
Kennedy, C.K., Young, A.E. and Butler, I.C. (1990). Measurement of Skidding
Resistance and Surface Texture and the Use of Results in the United Kingdom.
Surface Characteristics of Roadways: International Research and Technologies,
ASTM STP 1031, W.E. Meyer and J. Reichert, Eds., ASTM, Philadelphia,
87-102.
Kestler, M.A., Milton, E.H., Berg, R.L. and Johnson, D.M. (1994). Spatial Variability of
Falling Weight Deflectometer Data: A Geostatistical Analysis. The Fourth
International Conference on the Bearing Capacity of Roads and Airfields.

University of Minnesota, Minnesota.
Kleyn E.G. and Savage, P.F. (1982). The application of the pavement DCP to determine
the bearing properties and performance of road pavements. Proceedings of the
International Symposium on Bearing Capacity of Roads and Airfields,
Trondheim, Norway, 1982.
Kuipers, G. (1992). The Effect of Concrete Block Lock-Up on Pavement Performance,

Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Concrete Block Paving,
Volume I. University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Kulakowski, B.T., Harwood, D.W., Hiltunen, D.R., Mason Jr, J.M., Meyer, W.E.,
Simoneau, S.L. and Wambold, J.C. (1990). Skid Resistance Manual. FHWA
Report IP-90-013. The Pennsylvania Transportation Institute.
Kuna, E. (1995). Connection Between Surface Treatment Types and Their Lifes.
Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Road and Airfield
Pavement Technology, Vol. 1, 22-29 September 1995, Singapore, pp. 435-442.
Larsen, L.H.J., Schmidt, B., Nielsen, R.R. and Baltzer, S. (1994). The Profilograph: A
Technological Enhancement of BELMAN, the Danish Pavement Management
System. Third International Conference on Managing Pavements, Volume 1,
Transportation Research Board, San Antonio, Texas.
Lau, C.K., et al. (1992). Reaction Rates and Hardening Susceptibilities as Determined
from Pressure Oxygen Vessel Aging of Asphalts. Transportation Research
Record 1342. TRB. Washington, D.C. pp. 50-57.
Lekso, S. (1982). The Use of Concrete Block Pavements for Highways. Proceedings of
the First International Conference on Concrete Block Paving. United Kingdom.
Lytton, R. L., J. Uzan, E. Fernando, R. Roque, D. Hiltunen, and S. Stoffels. (1993).

Development and Validation of Performance Prediction Models and
Specifications for Asphalt Binders and Paving Mixes. SHRP-A-357. Strategic
Highway Research Program. National Research Council. Washington, D.C.
Lytton, R.L., et al. (1982). The Texas Flexible Pavement System. Proceedings, Fifth
International Conference on the Structural Design of Flexible Pavements. Vol. 1.
University of Michigan. Ann Arbor.
Lytton, R.L., et al. (1983). Design of Asphalt Pavements for Thermal Cracking. Report
No. 284-4. Texas Transportation Institute. Texas A&M University. College
Station, Texas.
Major, N.G. and Tuohey, G.J. (1976). Surface Treatments for Asphaltic Concrete for High
Speed Traffic. Proceedings, 8th ARRB Conference, Vol. 8, p. 21.
Martin, T. (1994). Pavement Behaviour Prediction for Life-Cycle Costing. Research

Report ARR 255, ARRB.
References 14-7
Martin, K.L., et al. (1989). Asphalt Aging in Texas Roads and Test Sections.
Transportation Research Record No. 1269. TRB. Washington, D.C. pp. 9-19.
Millard, R. S. (1993). Road Building in the Tropics. Transport Research Laboratory.

State-of-the-Art Review 9. Crown copyright.
Mohseni, A. (1995). LTPP Data Sampler and Request Program. Version 6.0, Developed
for the FHWA. McLean, Virginia.
Monismith, C.L. (1981). TestingField and Laboratory. Workshop on Management

Techniques for the Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Pavements. Volume 3.
University of New South Wales, Sydney, pp. 3-72.
Monismith, C.L and J.A. Deacon (1969). Fatigue of Asphalt Paving Mixtures.
Transportation Engineering Journal, Vol. 95:2. American Society of Civil
Engineers, pp. 317-346.
Monismith, C.L. and M.W. Witzcak (1982). Moderators Report, Session I: Pavement
Design. Volume 2. Proceedings, Fifth International Conference on the Structural
Design of Asphalt Pavements. University of Michigan. Ann Arbor. pp. 2-27.
Moore, D.F. (1975). The Friction of Pneumatic Tyres. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
NDLI (1991). Thailand Road Maintenance Project, Final Report. Report to Department of
Highways, Bangkok. N.D. Lea International, Vancouver.
NDLI (1993). Consultancy Services for Road Maintenance Programme. Report to

Ministry of Works and Transport, Department of Roads, Nepal. N.D. Lea
International, Vancouver.
NDLI (1994a). Road Network Rationalisation Study Draft Final Report. Report to
Public Works Division, Barbados, N.D. Lea International, Vancouver.
NDLI (1994b). Four States Pavement Management Project - Draft Interim Report. Report
to Ministry of Surface Transport (MOST), New Delhi, India. N.D. Lea
International, Vancouver, Canada.
NDLI (1994c). Comprehensive Highway Maintenance Study Phase 1 Final Report.

Report to Ministry of Works and Transport, Trinidad and Tobago, N.D. Lea
International, Vancouver.
OECD (1984). Road Surface Characteristics: Their Interaction and Their Optimisation.
report prepared by an OECD scientific expert group, Paris.
Paige-Green, P. (1990). Some Surface Roughness, Loss and Slipperiness

Characteristics of Unpaved Roads. Surface Characteristics of Roadways:
International Research and Technologies, ASTM STP 1031, W.E. Meyer and
J. Reichert, Eds., ASTM, Philadelphia, 268-291.
Paterson, W.D.O. (1986). International Roughness Index: Relationship to Other

Measures of Roughness and Riding Quality. Transportation Research Record
1084, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Paterson, W.D.O. and Scullion, T. (1990). Information Systems for Road Management:
Draft Guidelines on System Design and Data Issues. World Bank Technical
Paper INU 77, Infrastructure and Urban Development Department, The World
Bank, Washington, D.C.
Paterson W.D.O. and Attoh-Okine B. (1992). Summary Models of Paved Road

Deterioration Based on HDM-III. Transportation Research Board Report 1344
Paterson, W.D.O. (1987). Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects: Models for
Planning and Management. A World Bank Publication. The Johns Hopkins
University Press. Baltimore.
Paterson, W.D.O. (1994). Proposal of Universal Cracking Indicator for Pavements.

Transportation Research Record No. 1455. TRB. Washington, D.C.
Paterson, W.D.O. (1995). Correspondence and Discussions with HTRS Research Team.
IKRAM, Malaysia.
Pell, P.S. (1973). Characterization of Fatigue Behavior. Special Report 140. Highway
Research Board. Washington, D.C. pp. 49-64.
Pell, P.S. and Cooper, K.E. (1975). The Effect of Testing and Mix Variables on the
Fatigue Performance of Bituminous Materials. Proceedings, Association of
Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 44. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, pp.
1-37.
Permanent International Association of Roads Congress (PIARC) (1991). Technical

Committee on Surface Characteristics Report. XIXth World Road Congress,
Marrakesh, 22-28 September 1991, PIARC Publication 19.01.B, Paris.
PIARC (1987). Optimisation of Surface Characteristics. Technical Report, Permanent

International Association of Road Congresses, Paris.
Peterson, J.C., et al. (1993). Effects of Physiochemical Factors on Asphalt Oxidation

Kinetics. Transportation Research Record 1391, TRB, Washington, D.C., pp. 1-
10.
Pidwerbesky, B.D., J.W.P. Hadley, W.E. Hatcher, T.J. Preston, and B.D. Steven. (1990).
Study of the Special Needs of Forestry Roads and Their Management.
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury. Christchurch, New
Zealand.
Powell, W.D., et al. (1984). The Structural Design of Bituminous Pavements. TRRL
Laboratory Report No. 1132. Transportation and Road Research Laboratory.
United Kingdom.
Predoehl, N.H. (1990). Evaluation of Paving Fabric Test Installations in California Final
Report. California Department of Transportation. FHWA/CA/TL-90/02.
Queiroz, C.A.V. (1981). Performance Prediction Models for Pavement Management in

Brazil. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
References 14-9
Queiroz, C.A.V., and A.T. Visser (1978). Uma Investigao dos Modulos de Resilincia de
Revestimentos Betuminosos Brasilieros [An Investigation of Resilient Moduli of
Brazilian Bituminous Surfacings]. Reunio. Associac Brasileira de Pavimentao.
Rio de Janeiro.
Riley, M.J. (1995). Derivation of Default Values from Aggregate Level Data. Preliminary
Draft Report to the International Study of Highway Development and
RITES (1994). Maintenance Planning Study for Gujarat Roads. Report to Government of
Gujarat, India. Rail India Technical and Economic Services Limited, New Delhi,
India.
RITES (1992). Feasibility Study for Rehabilitation and/or Upgrading of Quelimane-

Namacurra Road. Report to DNEP, Maputo, Mozambique. RITES, New Delhi,
India.
Roe, P.G., Webster, D.C. and West, G. (1991). The Relation Between the Surface
Texture of Roads and Accidents. TRRL Research Report 296, Crowthorne.
Rohde G.T. and Scullion. T. (1990). Improvements to the MODULUS Program.

Research Report 1123-3F. Texas Transportation Institute, College Station,
Texas.
Rohde, G.T. (1993). Unpublished data.
Rohde, G.T. (1994). Determining Pavement Structural Number from FWD Testing.
Transport Research Record 1448, Transportation Research Board, Washington,
D.C.
Rohde, G. (1995). The Use of FWD Deflections in HDM-4. Report to the International
Study of Highway Development and Management Tools, University of
Birmingham.
Roughton and Partners (1992). ADB Second Road Improvement Project - Design
Report. Department of Roads, Kathmandu.
Rowshan, S. and S. Harris. (1993). Long-Term Pavement Performance Information

Management System Data Users Guide. FHWA-RD-93-094. Federal Highway
Administration. U.S. Department of Transportation. McLean, Virginia.
Ruth, B.E., et al. (1982). Prediction of Pavement Cracking at Low Temperatures.

Proceedings of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologist. Volume 51.
Salt, G.F. (1977). Research on Skid Resistance at the Transport and Road Research
Laboratory (1927 to 1977). Transportation Research Record 622, pp. 26-38,
Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Sammour, A. (1992). Feasibility Study Report Swaileh - Queen Alia International Airport
Road. Report to the Ministry of Planning, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.
Sandberg, U.S.I. (1990). Relation Between Tyre/Road Friction and Road Texture.
Swedish Road and Traffic Research Institute, Linkoping, Sweden.
SAS. (1992). The SAS Statistical Analysis System. Proprietary Software Release 6.09.
Copyright (c) 1989-1992 by SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.
Sayers, M.W., Gillespie, T.D. and Paterson, W.D.O. (1986). Guidelines for the Conduct
and Calibration of Road Roughness Measurements. World Bank Technical
Paper No. 46, The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Sayers, M.W. (1995). On the Calculation of IRI from Longitudinal Road Profile. TRB
Paper No. 950842, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Shackel, B. (1979). A Pilot Study of the Performance of Block Paving Under Traffic Using
a Heavy Vehicle Simulator. Proceedings of Symposium of Precast Concrete
Paving Units. Johannesburg, South Africa.
Shackel, B. (1980). An Experimental Investigation of the Roles the Bedding and Jointing
Sands in the Performance of Interlocking Concrete Block Pavements.
Concrete/Beton No. 19. Johannesburg, South Africa.
Shackel, B. (1982). An Experimental Investigation of factors Influencing the Design of

Interlocking Concrete Block Pavements for Roads. Proceedings of Australian
Road Research Board, Volume II. Australia.
Shackel, B. (1990). Design and Construction of Interlocking Concrete Block Pavements.

Elsevier Applied Science, England.
Shackel, B. (1992). Computer Based Procedures for the Design and Specification of
Concrete Block Pavements. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference
on Concrete Block Paving, Volume I. University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Shahin, M.Y. and B.F. McCollough (1972). Prediction of Low-Temperature and Thermal-
Fatigue Cracking in Flexible Pavements. Report CFHR 1-8-69-123-14.
University of Texas. Austin, Texas.
Shahin, M.Y., M.I. Darter, and S.D. Kohn. (1977). Development of a Pavement
Maintenance Management System, Volume I: Airfield Pavement Condition
Rating. AFCEC-TR-27 (Air Force Civil Engineering Center).
Sharp, K.G. and Armstrong, P.J. (1985). Interlocking Concrete Block Pavements.
Special Report SR 31. Australian Road Research Board, Victoria.
Shell. (1978). Shell Pavement Design Manual. Shell International Petroleum Company.
London, England.
Shook, J.F., F.N. Finn, M.W. Witczak, and C.L. Monismity (1982). Thickness Design of
Asphalt Pavements The Asphalt Institute Method. Proceedings, 5th
International Conference on the Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements, Vol. 1.,
pp. 180-188.
References 14-11
SHRP (1993). Distress Identification Manual for the Long-Term Pavement Performance
Project. SHRP-P-338. National Research Council. Washington, D.C.
Simpson, A. L., et al. (1994). Sensitivity Analyses for Selected Pavement Distresses.
SHRP-P-393. Strategic Highway Research Program. National Research
Council. Washington, D.C.
Solminihac, H. E., Echeverria and Salgado, J. (1989). Pavement Maintenance

Management Research : The Chilean Experience on Asphalt Pavements. Proc.
11th IRF World Meeting, Seoul, Korea.
Sosnovske, D.A., et al. (1993). Role of Asphalt and Aggregate in the Aging of Bituminous
Mixtures. Transportation Research Record 1386. TRB. Washington, D.C., pp.
10-21.
Sufian, Z. (1995). Microtexture and Macrotexture Trends of Change for Malaysian

Roads. HDM-4 Technical Relationships Study Internal Report. IKRAM,
Malaysia.
Swindall, W. (1990). ARAN Rut Depth Calculation. Technical Report TR019, Roadware
Corporation, Ontario.
Szatkowski, W.S. (1979), Rolled Asphalt Wearing Courses With High Resistance to
Deformation. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
Thompson, M.R. (1987). ILLI-PAVE Based Full-Depth Asphalt Concrete Pavement

Design Procedure. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on the
Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
Michigan.
Thompson, M.R., et al. (1990). NCHRP 1-26: Calibrated Mechanistic Structural Analysis
Procedures for Pavements. Volume II Appendices, Prepared for the National
Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Program,
Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
Thompson, M.R., et al. (1992). NCHRP 1-26: Calibrated Mechanistic Structural Analysis
Procedures for Pavements. Phase 2, Volume II Appendices, Prepared for the
National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research
Program, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council,
Washington, D.C.
Transroute (1992). Road Master Plan Project. Report to the Ministry of Communications
Roads and Highways Dept., Dhaka.
TRL (1977). A Guide to the Structural Design of Bitumen-Surfaced Roads in Tropical and
Sub-Tropical Countries. Overseas Road Note 31, TRL, Crowthorne.
TRL (1993). A Guide to the Structural Design of Bitumen-Surfaced Roads in Tropical and
Sub-Tropical Countries. Overseas Road Note 31, TRL, Crowthorne.
TRL (1994). Estimating Long-Term Costs of Road Pavements, Transport Research

Laboratory, Crowthorne.
Ullidtz, P. (1987a). Pavement Performance Modelling in PERS. Sixth International

Conference on Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements, University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor.
Ullidtz, P. (1987b). Pavement Analysis. Elsivier Press, New York.
Van Zyl. G. and Visser, A.T. (1995). Conceptual Flexible Pavement Deterioration Models
and Intervention Criteria: South African Experience. Report to the International
Study of Highway Development and Management Tools, University of
Birmingham.
Verhaeghe, B.M.J.A., Airey, G.A. and Marais, C.P. (1993). Stability of Mixes at
Intersections. South African Roads Board, RDAC RR 91/153, Pretoria.
Verstraeten, J., et al. (1982). Rational and Practical Designs of Asphalt Pavements to
Avoid Cracking and Rutting. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on
the Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
Michigan.
Watanatada, T., Harral, C.G., Paterson, W.D.O., Dhareswar, A.M., Bhandari, A. and
Tsunokawa, K. (1987). The Highway Design and Maintenance Standards Model.
Volume 1Description of the HDM-III Model. A World Bank Publication. The
Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore.
Yapp, M., A. Durrani, and F. Finn. (1993). Review of State and Industry Reports on
Asphalt Properties and Relationship to Pavement Performance. SHRP-A-623.
Strategic Highway Research Program. National Research Council. Washington,
DC.
LIST OF ANNEXES
Annex A Projects Identified As Having Used The HDM Model Or Its Components
2.1 Derivation of Default Values from Aggregate Data
3.1 The Effects of Moisture on Pavement Performance
4.1 Overview of Bituminous Cracking Mechanisms

4.2 Use of LTPP Data Sets to Analyse HDM Cracking Models
4.3 LTPP Data Analysis
5.1 Processing and Evaluating Rut Depth Data

5.2 Properties of Rut Depth Distributions
10.1 Defining Treatments and Intervention Levels in HDM-4

Annex A A.A- 1
ANNEX A
PROJECTS IDENTIFIED AS HAVING USED THE HDM MODEL

OR ITS COMPONENTS
In order to identify projects which adapted or applied the HDM model, contact was made
to consulting firms and individuals known to have an interest in HDM. The majority of the
names came from the ISOHDM Technical Advisory Groups (TAG), but the scope was not
limited to these. The Asian Development Bank (ADB), World Bank (IBRD), African
Development Bank (AfDB) and Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) were also
asked to supply lists of studies which had used HDM. Names of those who had obtained
copies of HDM or HDM-VOC were obtained from the World Bank and McTrans, the HDM-
III distributor. To these were added other publications where were relevant to the issue of
VOC and their modelling. The list of projects identified as at 31 October 1995 is
presented in Table A.1.
A.A-2 Modelling Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
Table A.1
List of Reports Identified as Having Used HDM or its Relationships
Country Year Affiliation Name

Albania 1994 ITECO Albania Feeder Roads Study
Algeria 1992 DAR National Transport Study
Algeria 1993 CTTP Highway 5 - 2808-AL
Argentina 1993 IMAE Medelos de Deterioro de Pavimentos Flexibles en Argentina Segunda Parte
Armenia 1994 TechEcon Armenia Highway Survey
Australia 1991 ARRB Adapting the HDM-III Vehicle Speed Prediction Models for Australian Rural Highways
Australia 1991 Strategy Study of Main Road 61
Australia 1993 QDOT Economic Maintenance Intervention Standards
Australia 1994 New England Highway Strategy Study
Australia 1994 QDOT/ARRB Economic Maintenance Intervention Standards
Australia 1994 J.B. Cox Models for Predicting Vehicle Operating costs in Urban Conditions
Australia 1994 QDOT Economically Derived Optimum Intervention Levels and Maintenance Strategies
Australia 1994 QDOT Economic Benefits of Pavement Maintenance
Bangladesh 1986 Kampsax Road Sector Development Studies
Bangladesh 1992 Howard Humphreys Road Materials and Standards Study - Development of Geometric design Standards
Bangladesh 1992 Transroute ADB - Road Master Plan, Final Report Vol. II
Bangladesh 1993 Louis Berger Second Road Rehabilitation Project
Bangladesh 1993 Transroute Institutional Support for Road and Road Transport Development
Barbados 1990 Wilbur Smith Road Feasibility Study
Barbados 1991 IITPR National Pavement Management System
Barbados 1994 NDLI Road Network Rationalisation Study
Barbados 1994 PBI Bridgetown Traffic Management Study
Benin 1993 Beller-Consult FS Cotonou-Porto Novo Road Study
Bhutan 1993 Kampsax Eastern Feeder Roads Project Formulation Mission
Bolivia 1993 J. Caraballo World Bank Railroad-Transport Study
Botswana 1993 SWK Road Maintenance Study
Botswana 1994 VWL Pavement Evaluation and Rehaiblitation Design of the Paved Road Network in Botswana - Volume III:
Application of the HDM-III Model to Botswana Conditions
Brazil Depart. De Estradas Deo Rodagem MG Gerencia De Pavimentos - DP
Brazil 1986 CNEC Brazil - State Highway management
Brazil 1994 DNER Seminario Sobre Estrategia De Manutencao E Reabilitacao Da Rede Do Dner
Annex A A.A- 3
Brazil 1994 Enecon S.A. Multimodal Transportation Plan for Minas Gerais state
Brazil 1994 IBRD Brazil Federal Highway Network 1995-2000 Priority Study
Brazil 1995 DHV State Highways Management (Rodoviario - Piaul)
Brazil 1995 Paran DOH An Analysis of Long Time Investments in Road Maintenance in a Brazilian State
Brazil 1995 Roy Jorgenson Brazil State Highway Management II Project - (States of Maranhao, Piaui, and Tocantins)
British Virgin Islands 1992 UWI British Virgin Islands Road Improvement and Maintenance Programme
Burkina Faso 1988 Louis Berger-GITEC Ougadougou Kaya Road
Burkina Faso 1994 DAR Ougadougou Djibo Road
Burundi 1988 IBRD Application due Model HDM a la RN8
Cambodia 1995 Nippon Koi & Feasibility Study on the Mekong River Bridge
PADECO
Cambodia 1995 PADECO Feasibility Study of the Ho Chi Minh - Phnom Penh - Bangkok Road Project
Cameroon 1985 SCET International - Etude des 2400 km des routes bitumes, rapport de synthse
Lavalin CEBTP
Cameroon 1986 DAR National Highway Master Plan
Cameroon 1986 Louis Berger Feasibility Study for a Road Linking Equatorial Guinea and Cameroon
Cameroon 1991 DAR Febadi Ngaoundere Road Feasibility Study
Cameroon 1991 DORSCH Ayos-Bertoua Road Feasibility Study
Canada 1988 NDLI Saskatchewan Highways and Transportation Pavement Management Information System: PMIS Technical
Manual Appendix I - Vehicle Operating Costs
Canada 1989 NDLI Adapting the Brazil/UNDP Cost Research to Canadian Conditions - Phase I: Canadian Needs and Direction
of Research
Canada 1990 P. Bein Review of the HDM-III User Cost Model for Suitability to Canadian Heavy Vehicles
Canada 1992 University of Calgary Effect of Long, Steep Downgrades on Two-Lane Highway Traffic Operations
Canada 1995 NDLI PMS for Surrey City
Central Africa 1988 Louis Berger Feasibility Study from the Transportation Sector
Chile 1986 15th Pan American The Use of the HDM and EBM Computer Models in Road Maintenance Planning
Highway Congress
Chile 1988 Dept. of Conservacion Costos Unitarios Operaciones De Conservacion Entrada de Datos Al Modelo HDM
Chile 1990 A. Caroca An Information System to Administrate Asphalt Pavements
Chile 1990 Universidad de Chile Validacion Y Complementacion de Costos Operationales en Caminos de Chile
Chile 1991 A. Caroca Calibration of Asphalt Pavement Behaviour Models in Chile - Paper to S.A. ATC Conference
Chile 1991 A. Caroca GIMP: A Maintenance Management System for Chile That Includes HDM-III Model
Chile 1991 A. Caroca Auto Calibration System for the HDM-III Deterioration Models
Colombia 1985 J. Caraballo HDM Implementation for Ministry of Transport
Colombia 1991 Minserio de Obras Evaluacion de Proyectos Con El Modelo HDM III
Publicas Y Transporte
Costa Rica 1992 Louis Berger Feasibility Study Rural Roads System
Ecuador 1991 IITPR Road Rehabilitation Projects

Ecuador 1993 IITPR Feasibility Study of Reconstruction and Upgrading of the Puyo-Tena Road
Ecuador 1994 IITPR Road Rehabilitation - Town of Tulcan
El Salvador 1985 Louis Berger National Transportation Master Plan
El Salvador 1989 Louis Berger Infrastructure Sectore Assessment/Roads
El Salvador 1991 Louis Berger Feasibility Study Dv. Acajutla-Usulutan Road
El Salvador 1992 Louis Berger Public Service Improvement Project
El Salvador 1992 Louis Berger Feasibility Study Quitasol-El Poy Road
El Salvador 1994 Louis Berger Technical Assistance in Pavement Maintenance
Equatorial Guinea 1986 Louis Berger Feasibility Study for a Road Linking Equatorial Guinea and Cameroon
Estonia 1994 FNRA Estonian Highway Project
Ethiopia 1993 CowiConsult Gedo-Fincha-Lemlem Bereha Road Project
Ethiopia 1993 SWK Modjo-Awassa Road Project
Ethiopia 1994 Planco Addis Ababa-Jima Road Project
Gabon 1986 Transroute Etude des besoins et do lorganisation de lentretien routier, valuation conomique des stratgies
Gambia 1995 DHV Institutional Support Ministry of Works
Germany 1994 M. Srsen HDM-III Model - Appropriate Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation Programs Under Conditions
Prevailing in Central European Countries
Ghana Rhein-Ruhr Ingenieur FS Tema-Akosombo Road
Gesellschaft
Ghana 1993 Kampsax Accra-Yamoransa Road Rehabilitation Project
Grenada 1995 UWI Grenada Road Improvement and Maintenance Programme
Guatamala 1992 GITEC Estudio de Factibilldad para el Programa de Manten. Vial
Guatamala 1994 J. Caraballo Technical Assistance for Ministry of Highway Planning
Guatamala 1995 DHV RN-14 Feasibility Study
Guinea-Bissau 1988 BCEOM Rede Rodoviaria Avaliacao Economica dos Niveis Alternativos de Investimento do P.R.I.T.
Guinea-Bissau 1991 Fonseca, Queiroz and Economic Appraisal of Guinea-Bissau Roads program using HDM-III and EBM Models.
dos Santos
Gulf 1988 DAR Gulf regional Transport Study
Guyana 1994 Canada Engineering Road Rehabilitation and Maintenance Management Study
Services
Honduras 1991 R. Armijo Implementacion Plan Maestro Vial
Honduras 1994 J. Caraballo Public Expenditure Review
Hong Kong 1994 SMEC Pilot Pavement Management System
Hungary 1995 TSA Presentation of Input Data for HDM-III Run in 1994
India 1989 CES Vehicle Fleet Modernisation and Road User Charges
India 1990 DHV Part of Economic Studies, Pavement Management Project ADB/TA 1058-IND
Annex A A.A- 5
India 1990 John Burrow & Pavement Management Project

Partners
India 1991 - Broad Guidelines for Economic Analysis of Highway Investments in India Under the Proposed Assistance of
the Asian Development Bank
India 1991 Kadiyali Updating of Road User Costs
India 1993 CRRI Pavement Performance Study - Preliminary Report on Model Development
India 1993 IRC Manual on Economic Evaluation of Highway Projects in India
India 1993 J.B. Cox Report on Pavement and Overlay Designs, HKR Road Project, Andhra Pradesh
India 1993 RPT PMS For National Highways - Technical Note 3: Economic Analysis
India 1994 CRRI Pavement Performance Study - Summary Report
India 1994 NDLI/H&O/Kampsax Four States Pavement Management System
India 1994 RITES Gujarat PMS Project
Indonesia 1987 Kampsax Optimizing Pavement Rehabilitation and Maintenance Policies for Rural Roads
Indonesia 1988 INDEC/ Kampsax Five Year Development Plan for National and Provincial Road network - Final Report, Vol 1
Indonesia 1989 CPCA Modifications to HDM-III for Indonesian Conditions - (Draft Report)
Indonesia 1989 CPCA Generalised Roughness Progression Equations for the IRMS Economic Review Model
Indonesia 1989 CPCA Evaluation of the Road Design System using HDM-III
Indonesia 1989 CPCA Comparison of Pavement Performance Assumptions in HDM-III and RDS
Indonesia 1989 Kampsax Technical Support under the ADB Road Improvement Project
Indonesia 1989 NDLI/Bina Technical Advisory Services to Bipran on Planning and Programming: Report on Pavement Models - Main
Karaya/H&O/ Report
CPCA/Kampsax
Indonesia 1993 H&O IRMS Road User Cost Model
Indonesia 1994 H&O Kabupaten Road Economic Evaluation Model
Indonesia 1995 DHV Cirebon-Batang Toll-road Feasibility Study
Jamaica 1990 North Costal Road Study
Jamaica 1995 J. Caraballo Preparation of Pre-feasibility Memorandum
Jordan IBRD Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan Third Transport Project: Results of HDM-III Analysis of Ras El Naqab-Wadi
Yutum Road
Jordan 1985 DAR Zarka-Ghor Haditha Highway
Jordan 1992 A. Sammour Feasibility Study Report Swaileh-Queen Alia International Airport Road
Kenya 1992 Gauff Engineers FS Amala River - Narok Study
Kenya 1994 IBRD Urban Transport Infrastructure Project
Kyrgyzstan 1994 DHV Bishkek-Osh Road Feasibility Study
Laos 1994 ADB Seventh Road Improvement Project
Lebanon 1995 DAR National Road Network Rehabilitation
Lesotho 1994 NDLI dTIMS Calibration for Lesotho
Lesotho 1994 VWL Pavement Maintenance and Management System - Calibration of the HDM-III Pavement Performance
Models
Lesotho 1994 SWK National Transport Study - Final Report
Liberia 1985 Louis Berger Fifth Road Maintenance Program
Malawi 1992 Road Upgrading and Rehabilitation Study 1992 to 2012
Malawi 1992 BCEOM Urban Roads Maintenance and Rehabilitation Study
Malaysia 1991 JKR Axle Load Study - Phase 2
Mauritania 1987 DAR Boghe-Kaedi Road
Mexico 1989 Louis Berger Urban Roads Maintenance Study for the State of Mexico/PMS
Mexico 1990 Louis Berger First Urban Transportation Project
Montserrat 1993 UWI Montserrat Road Improvement and Maintenance Programme
Morocco Transroute Mise disposiiton dexperts en systme de gestion de chaussees, CNER - Direction des Routes et de la
Circulation Routire
Morocco 1989 DAR National Transport Study
Morocco 1990 DAR Kenitra Larache Toll Motorway
Morocco 1990 Louis Berger Experts Services for Equipment Ministry
Morocco 1992 BCEOM Elargissement des Routes Edroites
Morocco 1993 CID 6eme Project Routier complement du Programme Des Routes a Elargir
Morocco 1994 DAR Rabat Fez Toll Motorway
Mozambique Mozambique ROCS Project
Mozambique 1991 Louis Berger Civil Planning Assistance for the Design of the Rehabilitation of Vanduzi-Changara Road
Mozambique 1993 Chissano-Chibuto-Zalzai Road Network Study
Myanmar 1988 NDLI Vehicle Operating Costs in Burma
Myanmar 1990 ITECO Yangon-Pathein Road Project
Myanmar 1992 NDLI The Calibration and Application of HDM-III in the Myanmar Comprehensive Transport Study
Namibia VKE Rundy-Ohangwena Road Study
Nepal UMIST Road Investment Decision Support Systems - A Comparative Study of Software for Use in Developing
Countries
Nepal 1993 ITECO Second Asian Development Bank Road Improvement Project
Nepal 1993 NDLI Nepal Road Maintenance Programme
Nepal 1995 ITECO Arnico Highway Maintenance Project
Netherlands 1992 TU Delft Validation of Empirical HDM-III Models for Prediction of Asphalt Deterioration by Means of Mechanistic
Analysis
New Zealand 1985 University of Auckland A Highway Economic Evaluation Model for New Zealand
New Zealand 1989 C.R. Bennett New Zealand Vehicle Operating Costs Model
New Zealand 1989 University of Auckland A Study of HDM-III and Vehicle Operating Cost Parameters in New Zealand
New Zealand 1991 Works Prediction of Road Roughness Progression
New Zealand 1994 University of Auckland A Speed Prediction Model for Two-Lane Highways
Annex A A.A- 7
Nicaragua 1992 Louis Berger Feasibility Study Leon-Chinandega Road

Nicaragua 1992 Louis Berger Rural Roads Rehabilitation and Improvement Program
Niger 1986 BCEOM Etude Sur Le Cout DExploitation Des Vehicules Au Niger
Niger 1987 BCEOM Setting up of a Highway Management Unit and PMS
Niger 1987 SETEC Plan National de Transport - les Propositions DInvestissem
Nigeria 1985 Kampsax Traffic Count and VOC Update Study
Nigeria 1986 Louis Berger Study for Federal Truck Road Phases I and II
Nigeria 1986 Wilbur Smith Road Feasibility Study
Nigeria 1989 Louis Berger 6th Highway Project Trunk Road Study
Nigeria 1992 TRDF Multi-States Road Project Preparatory Study
Nigeria 1995 DAR Kano State Road Rehabilitation
Nigeria 1995 DHV Institutional Support Osun State
Oman 1986 DAR National Highway Master Plan
P.R. China 1990 FNRA Pavement Evaluation and Strengthening Study Shandong Province, Jining District
P.R. China 1991 Yunnan Adaptation of HDM-III to Yunnan Pavement Management System
P.R. China 1992 RUST PPK Yangtze Economic Zone Transport Study
P.R. China 1992 Tongji University Calibration of Vehicle Operating Cost Model for Pavement Management System
P.R. China 1993 Yunnan Promotion of the use of Pavement Management System
P.R. China 1994 DAR Nanjing Second River Crossing
P.R. China 1994 PBI Highway Operations and Management Improvement Liaoning Province
P.R. China 1994 RUST PPK Jilin Provincial Highway Network Planning Study
P.R. China 1995 RUST PPK Prioritisation of Highway Investments and Improving Feasibility Study Methodologies
P.R. China 1995 Wilbur Smith Technical Assistance to Ministry of Construction
Pakistan 1986 Kampsax National Highway Maintenance Study - Pakistan: Final Report
Pakistan 1989 Kampsax Maintenance backlog Reduction Programme
Pakistan 1993 Kampsax Farm to Market Roads Maintenance Management Study - Phase II
Panama 1993 Louis Berger Urban Transportation Sector Study
Panama 1994 IITPR Road Rehabilitation Urban Component
Panama 1994 J. Caraballo Course on HDM-III
Papua New Guinea 1987 Wilbur Smith Road Feasibility Study
Papua New Guinea 1988 RPT Enga Highway Feasibility Study, Tomba to Wabag Section
Papua New Guinea 1988 Kampsax Provincial Roads Improvement Manual
Papua New Guinea 1990 Kampsax-Beca Provincial Roads and Bridges Investment
Papua New Guinea 1991 ADB Road Transport Sector Profile
Papua New Guinea 1993 RUST PPK Fangalawa - Namatanai Road Feasibility Study
Papua New Guinea 1995 RUST PPK Bogia - Del River Road Feasibility Study
Papua New Guinea 1995 Wilbur Smith Road Maintenance Management Program
Paraguay 1995 Louis Berger Technical Assistance of a Conversion Plan for the National Road Network and the Strengthening of the
Integral Planning Transportation Office
Peru 1987 Louis Berger Alternative Transportation Investment
Peru 1991 CONREVIAL Estudio de Rehabilitacion de Carreteras en el Pais
Peru 1993 J. Caraballo Economic Evaluation of Roads
Peru 1993 MTCC Corral Quemado - Rioja Road Project
Peru 1994 G. Liautaud Recommended Interim Policies and Standards for Road Maintenance and Paving Programs in Peru
Peru 1994 J. Caraballo Economic Evaluation of Feeder Roads
Philippines 1985 Renardet Pavement and Axle Load Study
Philippines 1990 Louis Berger Rural Infrastructure Fund Project
Philippines 1993 SMEC Pavement Management System
Philippines 1994 Kampsax-SMEC Condition Survey, Pavement Design and Economic Evaluation of 2,164 km Roads Constructed Under ADB
Loans
Philippines 1994 SMEC Introduction of Investment Analysis Into Pavement Management Practices in the Philippines
Romania 1994 BCEOM Derivation of Vehicle Fleet Characteristics and Unit Costs
Romania 1995 DHV Road User Charges Project
Russia 1993 Transroute Highway Rehabilitation and Maintenance Project Appraisal Report
Russia 1995 World Bank Highway Rehabilitation and Maintenance Project - Revised Economic Analysis of Priority Sections
Sierra Leone 1994 PBI Third Road Rehabilitation and Maintenance Project
Sierra Leone 1995 UNDP Technical Assistance to Planning Division
Slovak Republic 1994 DORSCH Pre-Investment Study of the Motorway Development Programme in the Slovak Republic
South Africa 1987 CSIR Calibrating the Relationship Between Operating Costs of Buses and Road Roughness on Low-Volume
Roads
South Africa 1987 CSIR The Effects of Road Condition on the Operating Costs of Buses
South Africa 1987 CSIR Report on a Survey of Bus Operating Costs and Road Conditions in Kwazula and Rural Natal
South Africa 1989 CSIR An Investigation of Vehicle Operating Costs Relationships for use in South Africa
South Africa 1989 CSIR A Pilot Study to Determine the Effect of Road Surface Roughness on Vehicle Speeds
South Africa 1990 CSIR A Pilot Study to Determine the Operating Costs of Passenger Cars as Affected by Roughness
South Africa 1990 CSIR Fuel Consumption of Vehicles as Affected by Road-Surface Characteristics
South Africa 1991 CSIR Road Roughness Effects on Vehicle Operating Costs: Southern Africa Relations for Use in Economic
Analyses and in Road Management Systems
South Africa 1991 CSIR Operating Costs of Medium to Heavy Trucks as Affected by Road Roughness
South Africa 1994 University of Pretoria The Applicability of Published Pavement Deterioration Models for National Roads
South Africa 1994 University of Pretoria Calibration of HDM-III Performance Models for use in the pavement management of South African National
Roads
South Africa 1994 VWL Calibration of the HDM-III Pavement Performance Models for use in the Ciskei Region of the Eastern Cape
Province
South Africa 1994 VWL Calibration of the HDM-III Pavement Performance Mdoels for use by the Transvaal Provincial Authority
Annex A A.A- 9
South Korea 1987 BCEOM Highway Maintenance and Management Study

Spain 1993 Estudio HC, S.A. Estudio do Implantacion do los Modelos HDM-III y EBM Para la Preparacion do Programas de
Mantenimiento y Mejora de la Red de Carreteras de la Generalitat de Catalunya
Sri Lanka 1987 Louis Berger National Transportation Sector Study
Sri Lanka 1993 Road User Charges Study
St. Lucia 1990 Halcrow/Crown St. Lucia Road Improvement and Maintenance Programme
Agents
St. Vincent 1993 UWI St. Vincent Road Improvement and Maintenance Programme
Sudan 1988 DAR Khartoum-Wad Medani - Port Sudan Global Study
Swaziland 1994 ACE Cost-benefit Analysis of the Mbabane-Ngwenya Road
Tanzania 1992 ARUP A Maintenance Strategy for the Songea-Makambako Road - 1993-1997
Tanzania 1992 ITECO Morogoro Rural Roads Project
Tanzania 1994 KfW Same-Segera Road Study
Thailand 1986 Kampsax Truck Operating Costs
Thailand 1990 Department of Report on Thailand Road Deterioration Study - Draft
Highways
Thailand 1991 NDLI Performance of Thailand Pavement Test Sections - Preliminary Draft Report
Thailand 1991 NDLI Calibration of Vehicle Operating Costs - Final Report
Thailand 1992 NDLI Thailand Road Maintenance Project
Thailand 1995 PADECO Feasibility Study of the Ho Chi Minh - Phnom Penh - Bangkok Road Project
Togo 1989 Louis Berger Periodic and Routine Maintenance Study for Primary and Secondary Roads
Trinidad 1994 NDLI Trinidad and Tobago Comprehensive Highways Maintenance Study
Trinidad 1994 UWI Pavement Materials Specification - Quality Control Study
Trinidad 1995 NDLI Five Year Programme for Road Rehabilitation and Maintenance
Trinidad 1995 UWI Trinidad and Tobago Southern Roads Development
Tunisia 1983 DGPC Experience Tunisienne du modele HDM
Turkey 1985 DAR Kinali-Adapazari Motorway
Turkey 1987 DAR Cukorova Retional Transport Study
Turkmenistan 1995 TechnEcon Road Improvement and Road User Charges Study
UAE 1993 DAR Dubai Transport Plan
Uganda 1990 Gauff Engineers FS Road Maintenance East Study
Uganda 1990 RPT Transport Policy and Planning Project UGA/90/018: Vehicle Operating Costs Report
UK 1986 TRL Evaluation of the World Banks Highway Design and Maintenance Standards Model on United Kingdom
Highways
USA 1989 De Leuw Cather Improvement Priorities for Iowa State
USA 1991 University of Idaho Cost Effective Road Maintenance Strategies for the USDA Forest Service
USA 1993 University of Idaho Economic Analysis of Maintenance Strategies of Typical Low-Volume Roads in Three U.S. National Forests
USA 1994 University of Idaho An Analysis of Cross-sectional Data from a Low Volume Forest Road
Venezuela 1992 J. Caraballo Technical Assistance to Ministry of Transport

Vietnam 1994 Dessau Highway 1 Rehabilitation Project
Vietnam 1995 PADECO Feasibility Study of the Ho Chi Minh - Phnom Penh - Bangkok Road Project
Vietnam 1995 RUST PPK My Thuan Bridge Feasibility Study
Yemen 1984 DAR National highway Master Plan
Yemen 1986 DAR Bajul-Maabar Road
Yemen 1994 RITES Design of Safir-Hadramout Road
Zaire 1986 Tractional Electrobel Edude de Rehabilitation de la Route Kinshasa-Matadi
Zambia VKE Mongu-Kalabo Road Study
Zambia 1985 Kampsax & Carl Bro Study for the Rehabilitation of Four Major Roads in Zambia
Zambia 1992 Karonga-Mpulungu Road Study
Zambia 1993 Lusaka-Chipata Road Study
Annex A A.A- 11
Abbreviations Used for Affiliations:
ADB Asian Development Bank

ARUP Ove Arup and Partners (UK)
ARRB Australian Road Research Board (Australia)
BCEOM BCEOM Societe Francaise DIngenierie (France)
Carl Bro Carl Bro International A/S (Denmark)
CID Conseil Ingenierie Et Developpement (France)
CPCA Coline Corne & Assoc. (Indonesia)
DAR Dar ul Handasah (UK)
De Leuw Cather De Leuw Cather (USA)
Dessau Dessau Ltd. (Canada)
DGPC Directon Generale des Ponts et Chausees (France)
DHV DHV Burrow-Crocker (UK); DHV Consultants BV (Netherlands)
DORSCH Dorsch Consult Ingenieurgesellschaft mbH (Germany)
H&O Hoff & Overgaard A/S (Denmark)
ITECO Company for International Technical Co-operation and
Development (Switzerland)
IITPR Israel Institute of Transportation Planning and Research (Israel)
Louis Berger Louis Berger International (USA)
Kampsax Kampsax International A/S (Denmark)
KfW Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau (Germany)
NDLI N.D. Lea International Ltd. (Canada)
Nippon Koei Nippon Koei Co. Ltd. (Japan)
PADECO PADECO Co. Ltd. (Japan)
PBI Post Buckley International (USA)
QDOT Queensland Transport (Australia)
RITES RITES (India)
RPT Rendel Palmer & Tritton (UK)
RUST PPK Rust-PPK (Australia)
SMEC Snowy Mountains Engineering Corp. (Australia)
SWK Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick (UK)
TechnEcon TechnEcon Consultants (UK)
Transroute Transroute (France)
TSA Transport Science Association (Hungary)
UMIST University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology
(U.K.)
UWI University of West Indies (Trinidad and Tobago)
VKE Van Niekerk, Kleyn & Edwards (South Africa)
VWL Van Wyk & Louw (South Africa)
Yunnan Yunnan Road, Science and Technology Research Centre
(China)
Annex 2 A.2-1
ANNEX 2.1
DERIVATION OF DEFAULT VALUES FROM AGGREGATE DATA
Riley (1995) presented a recommended set of default values from aggregate data. The
term aggregate pertains to a higher IQL description (see Table 2.4). This is the data
which will often be applied by users in the absence of more detailed data, which have a
lower IQL than the aggregate data. However, for modelling purposes it is generally
necessary to have the detailed data so it is necessary to transform the aggregate data to
detailed values. This annex draws upon the material in Riley (1995) as well as
comments received on the report by technical reviewers to propose a revised set of
default values.
Structural Characterisation
For HDM-4 the aggregate structural strength of the pavement is represented as Weak,
Medium, or Strong, while modelling uses the modified structural number (SNC) and data
on the thickness and characteristics of different pavement layers.
This is perhaps the most complex area to define default detailed parameters. Pavement
design methods primarily relate the required structural strength of a pavement to the
cumulative number of standard axle loads for a given life and thus the definitions of
weak, medium, and strong should be related to the traffic volume on the section. The
defaults presented follow this logic. The methodology for defining the defaults is shown in
Figure A.2.1.
Ve h ic le F le e t M a n a g e r
VD F 's
Ag g re g a te
Le ve l
Da ta
Tra ffic C la ss ified M ES A /

(H ,M ,L ) AA D T ye ar
W idth Nu m be r M ES A L /
(m ) L an es ye ar
Stre n gth
SN C L a ye rs
(W ,M ,S )
De fa u lt P a ve m en t
Stru ctura l C ha ra cte risa tio n
Figure A.2.1: Definition of Default Pavement Structure Parameters

A.2-2 Modelling Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
To allow the logic shown in Figure A.2.1, it is a pre-requisite when first setting up the
model that the fleet manager is first applied to define vehicle types, then default traffic
data is assigned in the form of classified AADT. The default pavement parameters (SNC
and layer characteristics) can then be computed.
Annual ESA
This is given by:
MESA = 0.000365 AADTi VDFi (A.2.1)
where MESA is the axle loading in millions per year (two directions)
AADTi is the Annual Average Daily Traffic for vehicle type i
VDFi is the vehicle damage factor (fourth power) for vehicle type i
ESA per Lane
If lane width is not input, the number of lanes must be derived from the carriageway width
(which is a mandatory input). A standard lane width is taken as 3.7 m (12 ft) to give:
YE4 = MESA 3.7 / CW (A.2.2)
where YE4 is the axle loading in millions per year per lane
CW is the carriageway width in m
Modified Structural Number
Riley (1995) developed a relationship between SNC and annual axle loading from Road
Note 31 (TRL, 1993) applying regression analysis to SNCs derived from recommended
structures for different ranges of axle loading. The required structural strength given by
this method is:
SNC = max (2.2, 1.17 + YE4 0.2) (A.2.3)
This can be generalized into the form:
SNC = K max (a0, a1 + YE4 a2) (A.2.4)
where a0 to a2 are user-defined parameters (default = Equation A.2.3)

K is used to represent weak, medium, and strong pavements
(shown below)
Applying the fifth power relationship in the HDM-III roughness progression equation, the
values of K needed to predict roughness increments 30 per cent above and below the
medium strength case are:
Annex 2 A.2-3
Strength K
Weak 0.95
Medium 1.00
Strong 1.07
Layer Thickness and Strength
To transform a value of SNC into the thickness and strength of different pavement layers,
the following principles have been adopted:
asphalt and base thickness are held constant for a range of SNC, as discussed in
Road Note 31 (TRL, 1993);
subgrade CBR is held constant at 8 per cent for all SNC values;
subbase thickness is varied to yield the exact value of SNC using an expression.
The results are shown in Table A.2.1. Default strength coefficients for the asphalt and
base materials used in Table A.2.1 are 0.35 and 0.15 respectively.
Table A.2.1
Pavement Layer Thickness and Strength Coefficients
SNC Asphalt Thickness Base Thickness Subbase Thickness Subgrade CBR

Range (mm) (mm) (mm) (%)
New Old
<3 20 0 150 250 (SNC - 2.2) 8
3-4 25 25 200 250 (SNC - 2.9) 8
4-5 50 50 200 250 (SNC - 3.6) 8
>5 50 100 250 250 (SNC - 4.6) 8
Although Benkelman beam and FWD deflection data are also optional user inputs at a
detailed level, these data are indirect ways of deriving SNC and defaults are therefore not
needed to relate these types of measurements to SNC.
History
HDM-III defines three pavement ages:
AGE1 preventive treatment age, defined as the number of years since the last
preventive treatment or higher level treatment
AGE2 surfacing age, defined as the number of years since the last seal or higher
level treatment
AGE3 construction age, defined as the number of years since the last overlay or
higher level treatment
The number of years since the placement of the current seal or higher level treatment
(AGE2) is a mandatory input. If preventive treatment is ignored in aggregate level data
analyses, construction age must also be assigned a default value. If the average
surfacing life is taken as 10 years, then 5 years would is a reasonable average
difference between construction and surfacing ages.
History data also includes the surface condition before the last surfacing, notably
cracking. These, plus the age difference, should be user-definable default values; zero is
the recommended value for all types of previous cracks. The default parameters are
shown in Table A.2.2.
Table A.2.2
Pavement History Default Parameters
History Parameter Default Value

Construction Age Surface Age + 10
Previous Crocodile Cracks (PACX) 0
Previous Longitudinal Cracks (PALX) 0
Previous Transverse Cracks (PATX) 0
Ride Quality
Ride quality is modelled in terms of IRI (m/km). Expectations of what is good or poor vary
widely by country and type of road. The default values must therefore be user definable.
Given the sensitivity of the analyses to IRI, four categories of mandatory data should be
available. Suggested defaults are shown in Table A.2.3.
Table A.2.3
Default IRI Values for Ride Quality
Ride Quality IRI (m/km)

Good 3.0
Fair 5.0
Poor 7.0
Bad 11.0
Surface Distress
It is intended that the user will be able to define an index that represents surface
condition. This flexibility is considered necessary given the many indices or ratings used
throughout the world. This makes the formulation complex, as some indices are not
multiplicative linear models. For example, for bituminous surfaces the Present
Serviceability Index (PSI) is given by the following equation (AASHTO, 1993):
PSI = 5.03 - 1.91 log(1 + SV) - 1.38 RD2 - 0.01 (C + P)0.5 (A.2.5)
where SV is the slope variance, measured using the CHLOE moving

straight-edge
RD is the mean rut depth in inches
C is the area of class 2 and 3 cracking in ft2 per 1,000 ft2
P is the area of patching in ft2 per 1,000 ft2
Annex 2 A.2-5
Another example of an indexed representation of pavement condition is the Surface

Distress Index (SDI) used in Indonesia and Canada:
SDI = 1 ACRA + 2 ACRW + 3 APOT + SC + 5 RDM + 3 APAT (A.2.6)
where ACRA is the per cent area of all cracks

ACRW is the per cent area of wide cracks
APOT is the number of potholes per km
SC is the surface condition, 50 if surface ravelled,
0 if fatty or normal
RDM is the mean rut depth in mm
APAT is the per cent area of patching
The SDI scale can, conceivably, extend to over 1,000 for a badly deteriorated road,
although normal measurements are in the range of 0 to 500.
Many other composite indices are in use by highway agencies around the world. Some
(including the SDI) combine surface distresses (such as cracking, rutting, and patching)
with ride quality. As even for aggregate level data HDM-4 will require separate inputs of
surface condition and ride quality, so the use of indices that explicitly combine condition
and roughness (such as the PSI, which contains the dominant slope variance term)
should be avoided. Inevitably, an index that includes cracking, disintegration and
deformation will contain some of the distress modes that contribute to roughness, but
given the widespread use of such indices, their application in HDM-4 should be allowed if
the model is to gain acceptance in North America.
It is clear that all permutations of distress modes and mathematical forms cannot be
accommodated in HDM-4. It is proposed that PSI be permitted as an aggregate-level
input and that other, user-defined, indices be allowed subject to the conditions that they
are defined in terms of standard HDM-4 distress modes and units and are simple linear
models. The user would be offered a table of available distress modes in which weighting
factors for each could be inserted (zero if not part of the index). In addition, the user
would enter values for the percentage that each distress mode makes to the index. Thus,
the user would be able to make transformations in the terms of the distress modes and
units if the proposed index did not match those in HDM-4. For example, if an index
expresses cracking in ft2 per 1,000 ft2 (as in the PSI), the weighting factor would change
from 0.01 to 0.1 for per cent cracking. The model would then derive individual distress
extents from an input value of the index.
Table A.2.4 shows an example of this approach, using the Indonesian SDI.
Table A.2.4
Example of User-Defined Condition Index
Definition of Index Per cent Extent of Distress for Specified SDI

Distress Mode Unit Weight 50 150 250 350
Crocodile cracking per cent 1 20 10 30 50 70
2
Linear cracking m/m 10 2 0 0 1 1
Transverse cracking m/m 10 0 0 0 0 0
Ravelling per cent 1 5 4 11 18 25

Delamination number 3 8 1 4 7 9
Potholing number/km 3 5 1 3 4 6
3
Edge break m /m 0 0 0 0 0 0
Patching per cent 3 10 2 5 8 12
Mean rut depth mm 5 50 5 15 25 35
STD rut depth mm 0 0 0 0 0 0
Crossfall per cent 0 0 0 0 0 0
Surface texture mm 0 0 0 0 0 0
Skid resistance IFI 0 0 0 0 0 0
Surface Texture
The recommended surface texture defaults are given in Chapter 9.
Shoulders
The default shoulder type will be unsealed with a condition rating that is the same as
that of the carriageway. As HDM-4 will model material loss and hence edge step, starting
values for edge step can be related to pavement condition, as shown in Table A.2.5.
Geometry
Detailed road geometry is defined by five parameters for the vertical and horizontal
alignment, together with superelevation and speed limit. Aggregate level input (for a link)
includes terrain, with four classes - plain, rolling, hilly, mountainous.
Table A.2.5
Default Values for Edge Step
Pavement Condition Edge Step (mm)

Good 10
Fair 25
Poor 50
Bad 75
To derive sensible default values for the four terrain classes, horizontal curvature is
defined as a function of more familiar design parameters, such as radius and deviation
angle. These relationships are shown in Table A.2.6 and Table A.2.7. Suggested defaults
for horizontal and vertical alignment parameters are shown in Table A.2.8.
Table A.2.6
Horizontal Curvature (deg/km) as a Function of Curve Radius and
Percentage of Curved Length
Per cent Curve Radius (m)

Annex 2 A.2-7
Curves 5000 3000 1000 500 200 100 50

25 3 5 14 29 72 143 287
50 6 10 29 57 143 287 573
75 9 14 43 86 215 430 860
100 11 19 57 115 287 573 1146
Table A.2.7
Curve Length (m) as a Function of Curve Radius and Deviation Angle
Deviation Curve Radius (m)

Angle 5000 3000 1000 500 200 100 50
10 872 523 174 87 35 17 9
20 1744 1047 349 174 70 35 17
40 3489 2093 698 349 140 70 35
90 7850 4710 1570 785 314 157 79
Table A.2.8
Default Values for Road Geometry
Parameter Terrain Class

Plain Rolling Hilly Mountainous
Rise + Fall (m/km) 1 2 4 6
Number of Rises and Falls (no/km) 1 1 2 3
Avg. Horiz. Curvature (deg/km) 3 10 100 500
Avg. Curve Length (km) 1.5 1.0 0.3 0.1
Avg. Tangent Length (km) 1.0 0.5 0.1 0
Superelevation (%) 2 3 5 7
Allowable Ranges for Default Data

Each user-input parameter should have associated with it an allowable range. In HDM-III
these ranges were hard-coded and caused a warning message or fatal error (the program
crashed) if inputs were out-of-range. In HDM-4, these ranges should be checked for each
value as it is input, with a message being displayed if the user inputs a value outside the
allowable range. Ranges should themselves be user-accessible in a separate input file;
these could be combined with the default values.
A set of allowable ranges for aggregate level data are provided in Table A.2.9 through
Table A.2.12.
Table A.2.9
Pavement Structural Characteristics
Allowable Ranges
Parameter Minimum Maximum

SNC 2.5 9.99
Surface course thickness (mm) 10 150
Surface course strength coefficient 0.10 0.50
Base course thickness (mm) 0 500
Base course strength coefficient 0.05 0.40
Subbase course thickness (mm) 0 1,000
Subbase course strength coefficient 0.05 0.40

Subgrade CBR (%) 1 100
Benkelman beam deflection (mm) 0.1 5.0
Table A.2.10
Allowable Ranges for Pavement History and Ride Quality

Preventive treatment age (years) 0 20
Surfacing age (years) 0 30
Construction age (years) 0 50
Previous cracked area (%) 0 100
IRI (m/km) 1 30
Table A.2.11
Allowable Ranges for Road Geometry

Rise + Fall (m/km) 0 15
Number of rises and falls (no/km) 0 10
Avg. horiz. curvature (deg/km) 0 1,000
Avg. curve length (km) 0 2
Avg. tangent length (km) 0 10
Superelevation (%) 0 12
Speed limit (km/h) 20 150
Table A.2.12
Allowable Ranges for Surface Distress Parameters
Parameter Unit Minimum Maximum

Crocodile cracking per cent 0 100
Linear cracking m/m2 0 10
Transverse cracking m/m 0 10
Ravelling 0 100
Delamination number 0 100
Potholing number/km 0 100
Edge break m3/m 0 0.1
Rutting - mean mm 0 150
Rutting - STD mm 0 1.0 RDM
Crossfall per cent 0 5
Surface texture mm 0
Skid resistance IFI 0
Annex 2 A.2-9
Annex 3 A.3-1
ANNEX 3.1
THE EFFECTS OF MOISTURE ON PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE
Introduction
It is widely accepted by highway engineers that the ingress of water to the pavement
structure of a road is detrimental to its performance. This is readily apparent in regions
that have distinct wet and dry seasons, where it is commonly seen that there is a rapid
deterioration of pavements during the wet period with little or no surface disintegration
during the dry season. As a result, many road maintenance strategies are aimed at
reducing water penetration either through the surface or directly into the lower pavement
layers.
The effect of changing moisture content on the strength and other properties of road
building materials has been the subject of a great deal of research, particularly on
laboratory samples. There appears to have been far less study of the in-situ conditions
that govern the moisture content in different pavement layers and effects on pavement
performance of strength loss in individual layers.
In HDM-III, rainfall was an explanatory variable in some of its performance models (rutting
and potholing) and its roughness progression model contained an environmental
coefficient. However, there is no way to account for the benefits of many common routine
maintenance operations, such as ditch cleaning or reshaping of gravel shoulders, which
are intended to mitigate the effects of water on the performance of the pavement.
This annex summarises how HDM-III addressed the effects of moisture on pavement
performance and conceptually presents the modelling of moisture effects. Then, findings
from data collected at two locations in tropical and sub-tropical wet/dry climates are
presented. The purpose is to illustrate the effects of seasonal moisture changes on
pavement performance and the effects of maintenance operations that may influence the
ingress of water to the pavement structure. Freeze/thaw conditions are not considered.
Moisture Effects in HDM-III and Data Collection

HDM-III Moisture Effects Models
HDM-III included rainfall as an explanatory variable in the models for pothole progression
and rut depth (both mean and standard deviation). In addition, an environmental
parameter was included in the roughness progression model to allow for climatic effects
not explicitly included in the other model components.
Pothole Progression
In the pothole progression model, rainfall was only included in the component for the
enlargement of existing potholes and did not affect their first occurrence, which was a
function of traffic, pavement strength and asphalt surfacing thickness. The enlargement
component was given by:
APOTPd = min{APOTa [KBASE YAX (MMP + 0.1)], 10} (A.3.1)
where APOTPd is enlargement of potholes in per cent area

APOTa is area of potholes at start of year
YAX is annual number of axles in millions per lane
MMP is mean annual rainfall in m/month
KBASE is max(2 - 0.02 HS, 0.3) for granular base
is 0.6 for cement-treated base
is 0.3 for bituminous base
HS is thickness of asphalt surfacing in mm
If the modelling includes annual 100 per cent patching of potholes, the term APOTa will
always be zero at the beginning of the year and the rainfall parameter will therefore not
affect the predicted area of potholing or patching. The effect of rainfall is therefore only of
significance if a minimal maintenance policy is being evaluated.
Rut Depth
The HDM-III rut depth models were derived from data in Brazil on roads with generally
thin surfacings and represents the densification and, possibly, some shear movement in
the base layers. The model contains a rainfall parameter that is associated with the area
of cracking; thus rutting is not affected by rainfall until cracking has initiated. Figure A.3. 1
shows the sensitivity of the HDM-III rut depth model to rainfall. It is seen that with a
typical rainfall of 0.1 m/month (mmp = 0.1), the effect is not pronounced when compared
with zero rainfall. If exceptionally high rainfall is applied to the model, the increase in rut
depth is greatly accelerated.
Roughness Progression
The HDM-III roughness progression model includes components for traffic/strength,

surface distress, rutting and environmental effects. The traffic/strength component uses
the modified structural number (SNC) as the strength indicator and is derived from in situ
strength of the pavement layers. Thus, if the pavement is weakened by water ingress
during the wet season, the contribution of the subgrade to the SN (SNSG) will decrease
and the SNC will be lower for that season. It is recommended that a weighted average
(using the fifth power relationship in the model) be calculated for regions where there is a
high seasonal variation in pavement strength.
The recommended values for the environmental coefficient (m) given in Paterson (1987)
range between 0.005 for arid non-freezing climates to in excess of 0.10 for wet freezing
climates. Figure A.3.2 shows the effect of the environmental coefficient (HDM default =
0.023) on the HDM-III roughness progression model for an annual traffic loading of 1.0
million MESAL and a SNC of 4.0; the cracking, rutting and potholing components of the
model are omitted in this example.
Annex 3 A.3-3
30 100
90
25
80
Cracking R utting
Mean Rut Depth (mm)
70
20 M M P = 0.3
Cracking (%)
60
15 M M P = 0.2 50
M M P = 0.1 40
10 MMP = 0 30
20
5
10
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Y ears S ince C onstruction
Figure A.3. 1: Sensitivity of HDM-III Rut Progression Model to Rainfall
7
m = 0.0 40
6
5
m = 0.02 3
IRI (m/km)
3
m = 0.0 10
2
0
0 5 10 15 20
Y e ars S in ce C o n s tru ctio n
Figure A.3.2: Effect of Environmental Coefficient on

HDM-III Roughness Progression Model
If the modelling is repeated to include the effects of cracking and rutting, the comparison
for arid and very wet climatic regions is shown in Figure A.3.3. From these figures, it is
clear that if the environmental coefficients and rainfall parameters are correctly applied in
HDM-III: moisture conditions can have a large effect on the prediction of roughness, the
modelling parameter which links the pavement performance and road user cost
components of HDM-III.
7
MMP = 0.30
6 m = 0.040
5
IRI (m/km)
MMP = 0.05
3
m = 0.010
2
0
0 5 10 15 20
Years Since Construction
Figure A.3.3: Effect of Environmental Coefficient and Rainfall

on the HDM-III Roughness Progression Model
Seasonal Strength Data
The measurement of in situ strength of pavement materials under different moisture

regimes can be classified into elastic and shear strength methods. The former includes
Benkelman beam and Falling Weight Deflectometer deflections while the latter may use in
situ CBR test or a Dynamic Cone Penetrometer.
Pavement overlay design methods based on Benkelman beam deflection have been
widely used and consequently there have been several studies of the change in deflection
under seasonal changes in climate. The aim of these studies has normally been to
establish a seasonal correction factor for deflections; in many cases the correction is to
the peak wet season value. Such studies do not directly provide information on the
change in properties of individual layers; however, some evidence can be drawn when the
data sets cover roads with a range of terrain, drainage conditions and earthworks. They
also provide evidence of the time lag between the end of a wet season and the recovery
in pavement strength during the following dry season. Data of this type, from non-freeze
regions with distinct seasonal rainfall patterns include Nepal (Roughton and Partners,
1992), Thailand (Department of Highways, unpublished data) and Zambia (Kampsax,
unpublished data).
Annex 3 A.3-5
A more comprehensive assessment of moisture effects on different layers can be

obtained from FWD measurements but, unfortunately, a relatively small amount of
suitable data of this form could be identified. Data from Texas (Rohde, 1993) and South
Africa (Rohde, 1995) has been studied.
In situ CBR measurement is laborious, expensive and damaging to the road and is
consequently rarely carried out. The DCP test has been shown to have a high correlation
with CBR and the test is relatively quick and cheap. Given the increasingly widespread
use of the DCP during the last 10 to 15 years one might expect to find a number of
studies of seasonal variation using the instrument. However, this does not appear to be
the case and the only evidence made available to this study was from Zambia (Kampsax,
1986).
Conceptual Model Development

Moisture/Strength Effects
HDM-III used the modified structural number (SNC) as the main indicator of overall
pavement strength. Material strength in pavement engineering has commonly been
expressed by the CBR, a measure of shear strength which is sensitive to the level of
compaction and moisture content of the material. Watanatada et al. (1987) give a
number of relationships between the CBR and AASHO layer coefficient, used to calculate
structural number. These are:
Base
ai = (29.14 CBR - 0.1977 CBR2 + 0.00045 CBR3) 10-4 Max axle load < 80kN
ai = 0.03 + 0.001 CBR Max axle load > 80kN
and CBR 60
ai = 0 Max axle load > 80kN
and CBR < 60
Subbase
ai = 0.01 + 0.065 log10 CBR
Subgrade
SNSG = 3.51 log10 CBR - 0.85 (log10 CBR)2 - 1.43
Figure A.3.4 and Figure A.3.5 show the effect on SNC of reducing the CBR for base and
subbase below commonly accepted specifications (> 100 per cent and 30 per cent,
respectively).
0
-0.1 Max Axle Load < 80kN
-0.2
Reduction in SNC
-0.3 Smoothed Line

-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
Max Axle Load > 80kN
-0.7
-0.8
-0.9
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
CBR of Base (%)
Figure A.3.4: Reduction in SNC for Base CBR (max axle load > 80 kN)
(150 mm layer)
0.00
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
Reduction in SNC
-0.08
-0.10
-0.12
-0.14
-0.16
-0.18
-0.20
5 10 15 20 25 30
Subbase CBR (%)
Figure A.3.5: Reduction in SNC for Subbase CBR (150 mm layer)

Annex 3 A.3-7
The relationship for granular base layers shows a rapid loss in contribution to SNC as
CBR reduces below 120 per cent, falling to zero at a CBR of 50 to 60 per cent. By
contrast, a reduction in subbase CBR has a less marked effect on the SNC. The
discontinuity in the line for a base at a CBR of 50 per cent is unsatisfactory for modelling
purposes and can conveniently be replaced by:
ai = 0.035 ln(CBR - 50) CBR > 50 per cent

ai = 0 CBR 50 per cent
Figure A.3.6 shows the effect of reducing subgrade CBR from initial design values.
0.00
-0.10
Original CBR
-0.20
25%
Reduction in SNC
-0.30
15%
-0.40
5% 10%
-0.50
7%
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Reduction in CBR from Original (%)
Figure A.3.6: Reduction in SNC for Loss of Subgrade CBR
It is seen that strength loss is more pronounced with the soils that are initially weaker and
it is those soil types (having a high clay content) that are most likely to be affected by a
rising water table and to suffer consequent reduction in CBR as moisture content rises.
With stronger subgrades (CBR > 10 per cent) a reduction in CBR of as much as 50 per
cent will only reduce the SNC by 0.4 to 0.5, which represents 10 to 15 per cent for an
average strength pavement. Only on thin pavements on low volume roads would such a
reduction in SNC be considered significant.
Establishing a relationship between CBR and moisture content for the pavement layers is
problematic, as it depends on the properties of each individual material and the level of
compaction. A well-graded and compacted crushed rock base is relatively impervious to
water penetration and even at total saturation should retain a large part of its strength,
which is why it is widely used in pavement structures. In many cases, however, such
bases are deficient in their gradation, contain uncrushed material such as river gravel,
and have a higher voids content than ideal; under those conditions, severe strength loss
can occur when the base is partially saturated. Some form of construction quality
indicator is therefore needed if moisture effects on base layers are to be modelled.
In the case of subgrades, TRL (1994) gives guidelines for the CBR of different soil types
with different water table depths. These are shown in Table A.3.1.
Table A.3.1
Estimated Subgrade CBR for Different Soil Types
and Water Table Depths
Subgrade strength category
Depth of water Non-plastic Sandy clay Sandy clay Silty clay Heavy clay
table from sand PI = 10 PI = 20 PI = 30 PI > 40
formation level (m)
0.5 8 - 14 8 - 14 3-4 3-4 <3
1 15 - 29 8 - 14 5-7 3-4 <3
2 15 - 29 15 - 29 8 - 14 5-7 3-4
3 > 30 15 - 29 8 - 14 5-7 3-4
Source: TRL (1994)
Figure A.3.7 shows the relationship between moisture content and CBR for a sandy-clay
at a density of 1,500 kg/m3 (TRL, 1994). Quite small changes in moisture content can
result in large changes in CBR and the resultant contribution to SNC. An attempt to
predict subgrade moisture content on the basis of the limited number of parameters
normally available in a highway database could lead to gross errors in the prediction of
pavement strength and performance that is based on strength.
Figure A.3.8 shows the same relationship between moisture content and CBR for a gravel
material of the kind often used for subbases. In this case, although exhibiting large
changes in CBR, the change in contribution to SNC is less significant.
It appears that the pavement layers that are most susceptible to change in strength due to
moisture ingress are the subgrade and base and that the effect on subbases is of less
significance. Of the two sensitive layers, it is probable that the base is subject to more
seasonal variation than the subgrade.
Water Ingress to the Pavement Structure

Water is continually moving into, through and out of a pavement structure throughout its
life. A pavement should be designed and constructed on the premise that water will enter
it in various ways and provision should be made for it to also leave again. Figure A.3.9
shows the principal paths of water movement in a highway pavement (derived from
HMSO, 1952). The following sections discuss some of these movements, their extent
and importance, and ways they can be alleviated to benefit pavement performance.
Annex 3 A.3-9
45 3.00
40
2.50
35
30 2.00
CBR (%)
25
SNSG
CBR 1.50
20
SNSG
15 1.00
10
0.50
5
0 0.00
10 15 20 25
Moisture Content (%)
Figure A.3.7: Relationship between Strength and Moisture Content

for a Sandy-Clay at Density of 1,500 kg/m3
100 0.90
90
80
0.80
70
CBR SN Contribution
60
CBR(%)
50 0.70
40 SN
30
0.60
20
10
0 0.50
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
M oisture Content (%)
Figure A.3.8: Relationship between Strength and Moisture Content

for a Gravel-Sand-Clay at Density of 2,050 kg/m3
Rainfall
Evaporation
through
from
permeable
permeable
surface
surface
From/to verge (suction) From/to verge (suction)
Seepage from
high ground
From water Vapour
table (suction) moverments
Upward movement
of water table
Water table
Figure A.3.9: Water Movement In and Out of a Pavement Structure
Entry of Rainfall Through Pavement Surface
No asphalt is totally impervious and there will always be some movement of surface water
downwards through the surfacing of a pavement. However, for a well constructed mix or
even good quality surface treatments, moisture infiltration is negligible until cracking
occurs in the asphalt. Once cracking has initiated, the amount of flow through the surface
will be a function of the extent and severity of the cracking, rainfall patterns and the
drainage of the surface (crossfall). It is exacerbated by rutting which allows water to pond
on the road surface.
Water entering an aggregate base in this way should be provided with a means of
escape, either by extending the base through the shoulders and verges to a side drain or
by means of subsurface drainage systems. If such provision is not made (often called
bathtub construction) the base will rapidly become saturated and, especially with thin
surfacings, disintegration can be extensive.
It is intuitively suggested that changes in moisture content of a roadbase are governed by

the type and quality of material, the ability of the surface to drain excess water, surface
cracking, quality of sub-surface drainage from the base and rainfall. It is thought unlikely
that there is a linear relationship between moisture content and these parameters. For
example, a quite small amount of cracking will allow surface water to enter the structure
especially if the cracking is concentrated in the outer wheelpaths. The relationship
between water penetration and cracking is probably of the form shown in Figure A.3.10.
Annex 3 A.3-11
Rate of Water Penetration
0 20 40 60 80 100
Cracked Area (%)
Figure A.3.10: Form of Relationship between Cracked Area

and Surface Water Penetration
For crossfall, the suggested form of the relationship is shown in Figure A.3.11. The depth
of water ponding in ruts will also affect penetration; the depth is a function of rut depth
and crossfall.
It is also unlikely that the rate of penetration will be linearly related to average rainfall
(MMP). In tropical climates rainfall is often of high intensity for relatively short durations;
after a short storm, the surface dries out quite quickly. By contrast, rainfall in temperate
climates can be of low intensity but last for long periods and, with lower ambient
temperatures, drying of the surface takes longer. Rainfall intensity and duration should,
ideally, both be considered.
It should also be noted that the pressure head will be greater towards the outer edges of
the pavement as the volume of transverse flow is cumulative from the centre to the
outside (for normal camber, not superelevation). Thus one can expect a greater rate of
moisture penetration towards the pavement edges. Transverse flow within the base layer,
assuming it is drained, will also lead to higher moisture contents towards the outer edges.
This combination should lead to lower strength at the edges than in the centre of the road,
a characteristic normally found with deflection testing during wet conditions.
Rate of Water Penetration
0 2 4 6 8 10
C rossfall (%)
Figure A.3.11: Form of Relationship between Crossfall and

Surface Water Penetration
Seepage from High Ground
This is a common phenomenon in cuttings and during construction a means of cutting-off

such seepage should be provided or herring-bone drains constructed under the
pavement. Often, seepage of this type from a perched water table is not a seasonal
event but will continue through dry periods. Side drains 0.5 to 1.0 m deep will prevent
such seepage from entering the base or even the subbase, but will normally not protect
the subgrade.
Vertical Suction from Water Table
Given a stable water table depth, the subgrade will normally reach an equilibrium moisture
content which depends on the soil type and distance to the water table. Table A.3.1
showed typical values of resulting subgrade CBR for different water table depths and soil
types. Post construction there is little that the engineer can do to reduce subgrade
moisture; deepening side drains will not be effective in most cases. Where it is known
before construction that the water table is near the surface and that the subgrade soils
have a high clay or silt content, alleviation measures can be included in the construction,
including the use of sand blankets and sub-soil drains.
Vapour Movements
Annex 3 A.3-13
The movement of moisture in the form of vapour can only occur if the soils are relatively
dry and is more pronounced in climates with a high daily or seasonal variation in
temperature. It is not thought to be a significant contributor to pavement performance.
The only case where evaporation is of importance is unsealed pavements where a
movement of moisture through a gravel wearing course is often beneficial.
Horizontal Suction from Shoulders and Verges
The horizontal movement of water is likely to be of significance where unsealed shoulders

of poor draining material are constructed adjacent to a crushed rock base. During wet
periods there will be a movement of moisture through the shoulder and into the base. In
dry periods the moisture will transfer in the opposite direction. This will often manifest
itself in the form of lower pavement strength and higher rut depths towards the outer
edges of the pavement. As with water penetration through the surface, this problem is
exacerbated if the base has an inadequate drainage path.
Surface Disintegration
In tropical climates it is observed that thin asphaltic surfacings suffer rapid deterioration
during the wet season, especially when the surface is aged and cracked. The difference
between the wet and dry season disintegration cannot always be explained by the loss of
overall pavement strength and axle loading and it is probable that a major cause is loss of
bond between the surface and base coupled with high local strains in the surfacing under
wheel loads.
If the base becomes saturated with water, the passage of a wheel load will cause high
local pore pressures, probably equal to the contact tyre pressure.
Moisture Effects Examples from Zambia

Background
In 1985 the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA) funded a study of four
major arterial roads in Zambia with a total length of about 2,500 km. The study was
carried out by consultants Kampsax International A/S and Carl Bro International A/S of
Denmark and comprised data collection and feasibility studies for rehabilitation
alternatives for all the roads followed by detailed engineering design of priority sections of
around 700 km. In addition a pavement management system was to be established for
the Road Department.
Pavement strength assessment was based primarily on Benkelman beam deflections,

although a FWD was used as a screening tool. In addition, DCP testing was made for
some weaker sections of pavement. In order to establish seasonal correction factors for
pavement strength for future use in the PMS, it was planned that two cycles of deflection
testing would be carried out; the first during the wet season in the early part of the year
and the second towards the end of the dry season. Figure A.3.12 shows the rainfall
statistics at Ndola Airport for 1985.
350
300
250
Monthly Rainfall (mm)
200
150
100
50
0
May
Nov
Feb
Mar
Sep
Jan
Aug
Dec
Apr
Jul
Jun
Oct
Figure A.3.12: Monthly Rainfall Data for Ndola, Zambia - 1985
Due to delays in shipping equipment to Zambia, the first pavement strength survey did not
start until late March towards the end of the rainy season, and continued into the dry
season of May and June. The second cycle of testing was made during October when
the country had been virtually without rainfall for 6 months.
The roads tested had mostly been reconstructed 15 to 20 years previously with double
surface treatment or thin asphaltic concrete surfacings on, for the most part, cement
stabilised laterite bases. Subbases were natural laterite and subgrades generally of
relatively strong sandy soils. The condition of the drainage system was inadequate, due
to a lack of maintenance, but in general all roads had side drains when not on
embankment. Pavement strength, as represented by dry season deflection, was high for
roads with traffic volumes in the range of 500 to 3,000 vehicles per day. Deflections
generally ranged between 0.25 and 0.75 mm with a mean of 0.48 mm for all tests.
The test sections referred to in this report were within the limits shown in Table A.3.2.
Table A.3.2
Road Sections for Detailed Design and Testing
Annex 3 A.3-15
Code Name From km To km

T1 Kafue - Livingstone 41 395
T2S Lusaka - Kafue 0 41
T2N Lusaka - Kapiri Mposhi 0 68
T2N Kapiri Mposhi - Tanzania Border 236 592
T3 Kapiri Mposhi - Ndola - Chingola 7 157
T4 Lusaka - Chipata 5 464
Seasonal Deflection Data
The testing interval for deflection data was generally 100 m, although a 200-m interval
was used for some sections. Data were aggregated into 43 sections which were
considered homogeneous for pavement strength design purposes.
Figure A.3.13 shows the ratios between the mean values of the first and second cycle
tests for each section in the outer wheel path. Figure A.3.14 shows the same for the inner
wheelpath.
2.00
1.80
Ratio Wet/Dry Mean Deflection
1.60
1.40
1.20
1.00
0.80
March April May June
Figure A.3.13: Ratio of Wet and Dry State Deflections - Outer Wheelpath
1.40
1.30
Ratio Wet/Dry Mean Deflection
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
March April May June
Figure A.3.14: Ratio of Wet and Dry State Deflections - Inner Wheelpath
Figure A.3.15 compares the mean deflections for the outer and inner wheelpaths for the
dry season testing cycle.
1.00
Mean Deflection - Inner Wheelpath (mm)
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Mean Deflection - Outer Wheelpath (mm)
Figure A.3.15: Ratio of Inner and Outer Wheelpath Deflections - Dry State
Annex 3 A.3-17
These graphs show that:
the outer wheelpath was more severely affected by moisture conditions than the inner
wheelpath, the regression showing an average ratio (wet/dry) of 1.5 for the outer and
1.1 for the inner;
the rate of strength recovery in the outer wheelpath was quite slow, requiring 2 to 3
months without rain before the wet/dry ratio reached unity.
The deflection values were converted to SNC using the relationship for cemented bases
given by Paterson (1987). For the sections that were tested during the wet season
(March and April) the loss in SNC for the outer wheelpath ranged form 0.30 to 1.20 with a
mean of 0.80. By comparison, for the same sections the mean loss in SNC for the inner
wheelpath was only 0.13. As it would not be expected that subgrade conditions would
differ greatly over the road cross section, it is concluded that the strength loss in the outer
wheelpath was largely in the upper pavement layers, in particular in the base.
Subbase and Subgrade Strength
A limited amount of DCP testing was made to compare CBRs of subgrades and subbases
under wet and dry conditions. These comparisons are shown in Figure A.3.16 and Figure
A.3.17 for subbase and subgrade respectively.
120
100 CBRw = 0.855 CBRd

CBR - Wet Season
80
60
40
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
CBR - Dry Season
Figure A.3.16: Comparison of Wet and Dry Season CBR - Subbase

140
120 CBRw = 0.830 CBRd
100
CBR - Wet Season
80
60
40
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
CBR - Dry Season
Figure A.3.17: Comparison of Wet and Dry Season CBR - Subgrade
It appears that both subbases and subgrades were of good quality with adequate CBRs
and were not much affected by the change in moisture conditions.
Discussion
The results of the Zambian testing show how well-constructed and relatively strong
pavements can suffer a large strength loss under wet conditions, especially towards the
outer edges of the pavement. On some pavement sections, the wet deflections were
almost twice the dry deflections. Furthermore, while the dry season lasted approximately
6 months, many of the sections appear to have needed more than 6 months to return to
their dry (higher strength) condition. It appears that the loss of strength in subgrade and
subbase was quite small and that the most significantly affected layer must be the cement
stabilised base. As many of the sections tested were also exhibiting extensive surface
disintegration during the wet season this conclusion is not surprising and probably
demonstrates that, with age, cement stabilisation ceases to be fully effective in providing
a high strength roadbase that is not susceptible to the ingress of water.
By contrast with the bases, the natural laterite subbases and sandy-loam subgrades
showed only a small reduction in strength during the wet period. It is unlikely that the
construction age had any effect on the performance of these layers.
It is worth noting that one of the Zambian roads (T3 Kapiri - Chingola) was re-tested in
1990, 5 years after the first series of tests, using the same Benkelman beam method
carried out at approximately the same time of year (June/July). It showed virtually no
change in strength. A surface dressing had been applied to the road during the
intervening period, which may have counteracted any slight strength loss in the base.
Annex 3 A.3-19
Moisture Effects Examples from Thailand

Background
In 1983/84 the Thailand Department of Highways carried out a series of tests to examine
the seasonal variation in subgrade moisture contents and Benkelman beam deflections.
The tests were made in two series 24 sections in the Northeast and 28 sections in
Central Thailand. This data has only recently (1994/5) been analysed, with anomalies in
the data for the central region leading to a concentration on the sections from the
Northeast.
The testing programme included Benkelman beam deflections and moisture content,
made at roughly monthly intervals. Section lengths ranged between 300 and 1,000 m and
in nearly all cases 21 deflection measurements were taken for each section. The number
of moisture content tests per section is not recorded. All the roads were in good condition
with little or no cracking. Surface types were a mixture of asphaltic concrete and surface
treatment and base types were granular and cement stabilised. Earthworks were
recorded as high fill, fill or level ground.
Seasonal Changes in Subgrade Moisture Content
After elimination of apparently anomalous data series, the remainder were grouped by
earthworks type. The seasonal pattern is shown in Figure A.3.18.
25 350
R a in fa ll 300
Moisture Content (%)
Rainfall (mm/month)
20
250
H ig h F ill
200
15
150
L o w F ill
100
10
L e v e l G ro u n d 50
5 0
J F M A M J J A S O N D
M o n th
Figure A.3.18: Seasonal Changes in Subgrade Moisture Content

by Earthworks Type
The following conclusions may be drawn from Figure A.3.18.

fill sections show less seasonal change in moisture content than sections at ground
level, an average of 5 per cent for the former and 10 per cent for the latter;
there is a lag of several months between the start of the wet season and a rise in
moisture content which continues to fall for some time into the wet season;
there is also a time lag of several months between the end of the season and the fall in
moisture content.
It might be expected that the average moisture content for sections at ground level would
be higher than for fill sections but the reverse is the case. No explanation can be offered
for this phenomenon.
Seasonal Changes in Deflection
The monthly deflection data was sorted and averaged by type of earthworks, surfacing
and base as shown in Figure A.3.19 to Figure A.3.21.
0.50
0.45 Fill
Mean Deflection (mm)
0.40
Level
0.35
0.30
0.25
J F M A M J J A S
Month
Figure A.3.19: Average Monthly Deflection by Earthworks Type

Annex 3 A.3-21
0.50
0.45
Asphaltic Concrete
0.40
Surface Treatment
0.35
0.30
0.25
J F M A M J J A S
Month
Figure A.3.20: Average Monthly Deflection by Surfacing Type
0.50
0.45 Crushed Rock

0.40
0.35
Soil Cement
0.30
0.25
J F M A M J J A S
Month
Figure A.3.21: Average Monthly Deflection by Base Type

Discussion
Several conclusions can be drawn from an examination of these data. As shown in

Figure A.3.19, the quality of the earthworks impacts deflection and hence strength.
Deflections were higher on fill sections, especially several months into the rainy season.
This effect is independent of surfacing type, as deflections were not significantly different
for the asphaltic concrete and surface treatment sections. The contribution of the base to
the overall strength of the pavement can be seen in Figure A.3.21, in which sections on
crushed rock base had mean deflections almost 50 per cent higher than those on a soil
cement base. However, the increase in the mean deflections of the soil cement base at
the peak of the rainy season suggest that this material is not as impervious as might be
desired. This is shown in Figure A.3.22, where the change in the SNC for the crushed
rock base was 0.5, while it was 0.7 for the soil cement base.
6.50
6.00
Crushed Rock Base
5.50
dSNC = 0.5
SNC
5.00
4.50
Soil Cement Base dSNC = 0.7
4.00
3.50
J F M A M J J A S
Month
Figure A.3.22: Change in SNC from Dry to Wet Condition
Conclusions
The effects of moisture on pavement performance are well recognised. In HDM-III,
moisture effects are incorporated in the rutting and potholing models, and general climatic
effects were considered in the roughness model. However, in addition to the effect of
moisture on the performance of cracked pavements, there is also a reduction in strength
in susceptible layers that develops from pavements that are exposed to a range of
moisture sources.
Tropical climates are characterised by a rainy season and a dry season, but the
deleterious effects of moisture extend beyond the rainy season. This effect is
Annex 3 A.3-23
undoubtedly accentuated in poorly draining pavements in which moisture accumulates

during periods of rains and then takes several additional months to drain. However, this
effect may also be observed in temperate climates and even in arid climates in which
there are only a few rainfall events. The important factor appears to be more the
drainage conditions of the pavement than the absolute amount of rainfall.
An examination of deflection data, which serves as a suitable proxy for pavement

strength, shows that subsurface pavement moisture can affect the strength of every layer.
As would be expected, the surface is least susceptible to differences in moisture, and the
susceptibility of other layers appears to be related to properties that include gradation,
type of material, and type of earthworks, among others. The results from Zambia showed
that this effect was pronounced in the outer wheel path, where it would be expected that
more moisture would accumulate.
It is clear that the effect of drainage on pavement performance, as shown by a study of

pavement deflection data, is significant. More accurate modelling of pavement
performance would likely be possible through the introduction of a method of quantifying
individual pavement layers susceptibility to moisture effects.
Annex 4 A.4-1
ANNEX 4.1
Overview of Bituminous Cracking Mechanisms
Fatigue Cracking
Fatigue cracking of a bituminous pavement (also referred to as structural, crocodile or
alligator cracking) results from repeated load applications. In its initial phase, fatigue
cracking appears as fine, longitudinal cracks in the wheel path. As it progresses, the
cracks become closely spaced and interconnected, eventually dividing the pavement
surface into many-sided, sharp-angled pieces that are generally less than 0.3 m on the
longest side.
Many researchers have related cracking in bituminous mixtures to the maximum

horizontal tensile strain induced in the bituminous layer under the applied load. One form
of the predictive relationship is presented in Equation A.4.1. This form has been
established by a number of researchers, including Epps and Monismith (1972), Pell
(1973), Powell, et al., (1984), Verstraeten, et al., ( 1982), and Thompson (1987).
Nf = a0( t )
a1
(A.4.1)
where Nf is the number of load repetitions to failure.

t is the maximum horizontal tensile strain.
a0 and a1 are regression constants.
A variant of this relationship features the addition of the bituminous concrete dynamic
modulus. This form, shown in Equation A.4.2, is used in many mechanistic design
procedures, including those developed by the Asphalt Institute and Shell Oil (Pell and
Cooper, 1975; Shell, 1978; Shook, et al., 1982).
N f = a0( t ) (E s ) a2
a1
(A.4.2)
where Es is the dynamic modulus of the bituminous concrete.

a0 to a2 are regression constants.
The common conclusion of the various researchers is that the inverse of horizontal tensile
strain is strongly related to fatigue life of bituminous mixtures. Determination of the
regression constants varies with the loading conditions and material characteristics.
Monismith and Deacon (1969) found that under controlled-strain loading (as commonly
occurs in thin bituminous pavements), the fatigue life is two to three times longer than a
comparable strain level under controlled-stress loading (as commonly occurs in thicker
bituminous pavements). Pavements of intermediate thickness can be represented using
a combination of these two loading conditions.
Table A.4.1 summarises the influence that material characteristics and loading condition
have on fatigue life (Monismith, 1981). As can be seen, the loading condition has a major
impact on the resulting fatigue behavior. For example, increasing the asphalt cement
stiffness results in an increase in the stiffness of the bituminous mixture. Under
controlled-stress loading conditions, this results in an increase in fatigue life. The
opposite is true under controlled-strain conditions, where an increase in mixture stiffness
(due to an increase in asphalt cement stiffness) results in a decrease in fatigue life. This
observation is repeated when aggregate gradation is varied from an open to dense
gradation or when temperature is decreased. Both of these modifications result in stiffer
mixes, yet there is a reversal in observed fatigue life depending on the loading condition.
In contrast, the adjustment of two factors, asphalt content and air void content, result in
increased fatigue life for both controlled-stress and controlled-strain loading conditions as
the bituminous mix stiffness increases.
Table A.4.1
Factors Affecting the Stiffness and Fatigue Life of
Continuously-Graded Bituminous Paving Mixtures
Change in Effect on Fatigue Life Under:

Factor Factor Effect on Stiffness Controlled-Stress Controlled-Strain
Asphalt Viscosity Increase Increase Increase Decrease
1 1 2
Asphalt Content Increase Increase Increase Increase
4
Aggregate Gradation Open to Dense Increase Increase Decrease
4
Air Void Content Decrease Increase Increase Increase
3
Temperature Decrease Increase Increase Decrease
Source: Monismith (1981)
Notes: 1/ Reaches optimum at level above that required for stability considerations.
2/ No significant amount of data; conflicting conditions of increase in stiffness and reduction in
asphalt strain make this speculative.
3/ Approaches limiting value at temperatures below freezing.
4/ No significant amount of data.
The implication that fatigue behavior is not only influenced by material properties but also
by loading mode impacts on the expected behavior of bituminous pavements. The
loading mode experienced by a bituminous layer is directly related to the thickness of that
layer. In thin flexible pavements, the loading mode is typically controlled-strain while in
thick flexible pavements the loading mode becomes controlled-stress. As layer stiffness
increases, a corresponding increase in fatigue life is therefore expected for thicker flexible
pavements. As is shown in Table A.4.1, this will not always be the case with thin
pavements (controlled-strain loading conditions), which at times experience a decrease in
fatigue life as stiffness increased.
Pavement thickness also directly influences the magnitude and location of maximum
tensile stress induced under loading. For thin bituminous layers, it is common for the
maximum tensile strain to be found at the pavement surface and not at the bottom of the
layer as is often assumed. This is illustrated in Figure A.4.1, which is a plot of surface
horizontal strain versus interface horizontal strain (Paterson, 1987). It is observed that
surface strains exceed interface strains for bituminous layer thicknesses of 20 mm and 30
mm. Further, relationships between estimated fatigue life and bituminous layer thickness
and stiffness have found that layer thicknesses between 60 mm and 80 mm have lower
estimated fatigue lives than either thinner or thicker pavements (Queiroz and Visser,
1978). This is illustrated in Figure A.4.2, which also indicates that for thin surfacings,
greater flexibility (lower stiffness) leads to longer fatigue life. The opposite is observed for
Annex 4 A.4-3
thicker pavements, where increasing thickness leads to a corresponding increase in

estimated fatigue life. This is noted by Paterson (1987) who observed that ...research
using layered structure analysis, experimental fatigue relationships, and field experiments
has indicated that thin surfacings of 50 mm or less, when flexible, have a longer fatigue
life than surfacings with a thickness of about 60 to 80 mm due to lower tensile strains
(e.g., Freeme and Marais 1973; Queiroz 1981).... At thicknesses of 100 mm and more,
the structural contribution of the surfacing itself becomes significant in reducing the
induced tensile strains... with the result that the fatigue life increases with increasing
thickness.
Figure A.4.1: Relationship Between Surface and Interface

Strains in Surfacing (from Paterson, 1987, after Queiroz, 1981).
The stiffness of the base also affects the induced tensile strain in the bituminous layer
under loading. Queiroz (1981) analysed 48 paved sections included in the Brazil-UNDP
study using linear elastic layered-analysis, and found that the tensile strain at the
surfacing-base interface increased significantly as the stiffness of the base decreased.
This phenomenon is more critical with thin surfacings, but in all cases, softening of the
base that may develop due to poor quality material, poor compaction, or the ingress of
water will lead to significantly higher tensile strains and a corresponding decrease in
fatigue life.
Figure A.4.2: Relationship of Estimated Fatigue

Life Versus Surfacing Thickness and Stiffness
(from Paterson, 1987, after Queiroz and Visser,
1978).
The estimation of fatigue life in pavement performance models based on induced

maximum horizontal tensile strain is influenced by the defined failure criteria (generally a
given per cent surface area affected by fatigue cracking) and a calibration factor that
relates laboratory results to observed field performance. Common values for failure
criteria assume that between 10 and 45 per cent of the surface area is affected by fatigue
cracking. Thus, these models not only include cracking initiation, but some degree of
propagation as well. Field calibration factors, or shift factors, are quite variable, with
Monismith and Witzcak (1982) reporting a range from 2 to 700. This wide range in values
underscores the considerable uncertainty that exists in material properties, pavement
structural uniformity, traffic characteristics, and climatic and aging factors.
More recently, research conducted under SHRP has applied fracture mechanics concepts
to the problem of fatigue cracking of bituminous pavements (Lytton, et al., 1993). Both
controlled-stress and controlled-strain testing of beams were used to derive models for
cracking initiation and propagation. The cracking initiation model applied a direct energy
balance method to determine material properties that contributed to the microfracture
process. The cracking initiation phase ended with the beginning of the propagation
phase, identified as the point when microcracking coalesced to form a small crack (7.5
mm long) at the bottom of the specimen. An equation was developed relating the number
of applied loading cycles to reach this condition to initial stiffness and Poissons ratio of
the bituminous mixture, the state of stress (including both mean principal stress and
octahedral shear stress at the bottom of the bituminous layer), and the per cent air voids
and bitumen in the mix.
Annex 4 A.4-5
The SHRP fatigue cracking propagation model is based on the number of load repetitions
required to propagate the 7.5 mm microcrack to the surface of the bituminous layer. In
addition to the initial length of the microcrack, other input parameters include the layer
thickness, stress intensity factor, and experimentally derived materials parameters. The
relationship is presented in Equation A.4.3 (Lytton, et al., 1993).
1 h dc 1
Np = = IK II (A.4.3)
a0 a1
c0 k II a0
where Np is the number of load repetitions to propagate a crack of

initial length c0 to the surface (c0 is assumed to be 7.5 mm)
h is the layer thickness
c0 is the initial crack length
kII is the stress intensity factor for mode II loading
a0 and a1 are material properties
IkII is denoted as the crack propagation integral
A rigorous finite element analysis was conducted to estimate the crack intensity factor and
resulting crack propagation integral for a given three-layer pavement structure and value
of a1. The analysis concluded that the relationship between the crack propagation
integral and pavement parameters is complicated, and can not easily be related to a
single parameter (such as radial strain at the bottom of the bituminous layer). Instead a
polynomial regression analysis with a full polynomial of the second order was completed.
The final model found that the crack propagation integral was a function of the thickness
of the bituminous and base layers and the modulus ratios of the bituminous material over
the subgrade and the base material over the subgrade.
Determination of the a0 and a1 parameters in Equation A.4.3 can be complex and

therefore relationships between these parameters and other material properties are
provided (Lytton, et al., 1993). The a1 parameter is related to the slope of the log creep
compliance curve (m); the a0 parameter was also related to the creep compliance of the
material and the tensile strength of the mix.
The laboratory model was calibrated to actual field performance for each of the four
climatic zones (dry-freeze, dry-nonfreeze, wet-freeze, wet-nonfreeze) represented in the
SHRP LTPP data base. The modification to the fatigue model required the adjustment of
the material properties. In the cracking initiation model, a shift factor was added to
correct for the occurrence of microcrack healing. The shift factor was related to the rest
period between application of traffic loads and healing properties of the bituminous
mixture. In the crack progression model, the tensile strength, stiffness, and log slope of
the creep compliance curve were adjusted based on field studies. A pattern search
program was used to determine the required modification of each material parameter for
each climatic zone. In some ways this calibration of the SHRP model is similar to the shift
factors applied in strain-based models, in that laboratory performance does not directly
predict field performance. As additional data are gathered and analysed, the approach
advocated by SHRP may gain greater acceptance and eventually replace strain-based
models.
Aging/Temperature Cracking
The second major cause of bituminous pavement cracking is aging. Aging encompasses
a wide range of material and climatic influences which combine to shrink and stiffen the
bituminous layer, making it more brittle and susceptible to fracture. Aging is commonly
characterised as short-term or long-term. Short-term aging occurs during mixing and
placement of the bituminous mixture. The most influential short-term aging mechanisms
are the loss of volatile components and oxidation that occur due to the high temperatures
associated with bituminous construction. After placement, the bituminous mixture
continues to harden primarily as a result of oxidation. Other factors, including thixotropic
hardening (the formation of a structure within the bitumen over time), can also contribute.
The susceptibility of a given bituminous mixture to aging is largely a matter of the

chemical composition of the bitumen, mixture properties including air voids and film
thickness and the interaction between the bitumen and the aggregate. It is a complex
relationship that is not fully understood, although recently conducted SHRP research has
advanced the understanding of the underlying aging mechanisms. It has been
demonstrated that oxidation of the bitumen, as measured by the increase in oxidation
products, does not adequately explain the stiffening observed (Lau, et al., 1992; Petersen,
et al., 1993). In some cases, one bitumen that oxidises rapidly may not significantly
harden while another bitumen that oxidises at a slower rate suffers significantly higher
increases in stiffness.
The SHRP asphalt model helps explain this apparently contradictory behavior. Jones
(1992) describes that bitumen includes polar and non-polar functional groups of
molecules. Polar molecules form associations through weak bonding that result in the
generation of molecular microstructure. It has been proposed that the formation of these
associations are directly related to bitumen aging, with bitumens containing higher
amounts of reactive polar molecules being more susceptible to oxidative hardening
(Petersen, et al., 1993). These molecules, referred to as amphoterics, contain both polar
and non-polar sites. As oxidation occurs, non-polar sites can act as polar sites, thus
increasing the number of associations that the molecule can make. The higher the
number of associations made within a bitumen, the greater the increase in viscosity. The
majority of the molecules in a bitumen with low amounts of amphoterics will only have one
oxidisable site, and will thus not be as adversely affected by oxidation as a bitumen with
higher amounts of amphoterics.
Although the physiochemical contribution of the bitumen is the largest factor contributing
to oxidative age hardening, bituminous mixture properties also have an influence, most
notably air void content and film thickness. As air void content increases, oxidation also
increases (Dickinson, 1984; Martin, et al., 1989). It has been shown that this oxidation
results in higher rates of mixture stiffening measured by the ratio of the aged over non-
aged resilient moduli of each mixture (Bell, et al., 1991). Another mixture parameter
which is related to air void content is the thickness of the bitumen film covering the
aggregate particles. Mixtures with thinner bitumen films are generally more susceptible to
age hardening, resulting in poorer bituminous mixture durability (Dickinson, 1984; Button,
et al., 1993).
A third factor is the impact of the aggregate type on bitumen aging. Although some
studies find that oxidation of the bitumen (as measured by oxidative products) is
independent of aggregate type (Jones, 1992), others have found that bituminous mixture
hardening is significantly affected by the aggregate type (Sosnovske, et al., 1993;
Annex 4 A.4-7
AbWahab, et al., 1993). The primary factor affecting this behavior appears to be the
adhesion that occurs between the bitumen and the aggregate, with greater adhesion
resulting in less aging susceptibility.
Although the mechanisms leading to bitumen aging are complex, the results on pavement
cracking are readily observed. As discussed above, increased stiffness of the bituminous
layer caused by stiffer bitumen can have a positive effect on fatigue behaviour for thicker
bituminous layers, reducing horizontal tensile strains and extending the time to fatigue
cracking initiation. The opposite is true for thin bituminous pavements where increased
layer stiffness results in more rapid initiation of fatigue cracking. Additionally, as aging is
most severe at the pavement surface, a larger portion of the layer cross-section is
affected in thinner bituminous pavements. Thus, when considering the initiation of fatigue
cracking, oxidative aging of bitumen is of greatest concern with thin and medium
thickness bituminous layers (Paterson, 1987).
Another mode of cracking related to oxidative aging is commonly referred to as map or

block cracking. It is characterized by cracks spaced greater than 0.5 m which form large
irregular polygons or squares that are typically distributed over the entire pavement
surface. Dickinson reported that there is a threshold viscosity at which point the binder is
no longer able to resist the low strain levels incurred due to daily temperature cycling
(Dickinson, 1984). He established thresholds of approximately 5.7 log Pa for temperate
climates and 6.5 log Pa for tropical climates (viscosity of extracted bitumen at 45 oC at a
shear rate of 0.0005 s-1) which, if exceeded, would lead to fracture of the pavement
surface. In some cases, the cracking may be less prevalent and/or severe in trafficked
areas due to the kneading action of moving tyres which mitigates the development of
internal structures within the bitumen. Loss of volatiles and/or continued adsorption of
bitumen by the aggregate may lead to shrinkage of the bituminous mixture, contributing to
the formation of this type of cracking. Annual and daily temperature extremes also
influence the value of the threshold viscosity for a given location.
It is important to note that initially these cracks are often narrow and do not extend
through the depth of the bituminous surface. Thus, although they may be unsightly and
contribute to a rougher ride, they will not provide an effective path for moisture to enter
the pavement structure. Only as they become more severe, propagating throughout the
full depth of the bituminous layer, will they provide a path for water ingress. This will occur
more rapidly in pavements constructed with thin bituminous layers as the length which the
crack must propagate is short.
Similar mechanisms contribute to the formation of most transverse cracking. Transverse

cracking, and to some degree longitudinal cracking, is primarily a result of failure of the
bituminous layer under the cyclic loading applied by daily and seasonal temperature
variations or through the application of extreme cold. The former is referred to as thermal
fatigue cracking and the latter as low-temperature cracking. It is common to combine
these two under the single category of thermal cracking. Paterson (1987) noted that this
type of cracking was uncommon in the Brazil-UNDP study pavements and it was thus not
included in the models used in HDM-III. However, Carpenter (1983) notes that thermal
cracking can occur in any climatic region if the proper combination of temperature and
bituminous mixture properties exist.
Although even non-aged bituminous pavements can suffer thermal cracking,

embrittlement of the bituminous mixture resulting from aging exacerbates the problem.
As the material stiffens, it is less able to accommodate strains resulting from temperature
fluctuations or extreme cold. This results in transverse cracking of the surface at regular
intervals. Over time, as aging continues, the cracks become wider and more closely
spaced. Longitudinal cracking can also result from thermal/aging factors depending on
the width of the pavement, the climatic conditions, and the degree to which embrittlement
has occurred.
Initially, thermal cracking may be narrow and extend only partially through the depth of the
bituminous layer. In this phase, water will not be able to enter into the underlying
structure. But within a relatively short-time, thermal cracks progress through the entire
depth of the bituminous layer. This is even true of thicker layers, where crack spacing is
typically longer leading to similar thermally induced strains. Once full-depth cracking has
occurred, water ingress through the cracks will negatively affect the structural capacity of
underlying granular layers and fine-grained soils.
A number of models have been used to predict thermal cracking in bituminous

pavements. Some of the models consider only low-temperature cracking (Finn, et al.,
1986; Ruth, et al., 1982), while others examine both the effects of low-temperature and
thermal fatigue cracking (Shahin and McCullough, 1972; Lytton, et al., 1983). The input
requirements for these models are extensive and typically include some or all of the
following: pavement structural elements (layer thicknesses, material structural
parameters), pavement layer thermal properties (such as coefficient of thermal
contraction and specific heat), climatic parameters (daily air temperatures, per cent solar
radiation, and so on), and properties of the bituminous mixture (such as split tensile
strength, creep, viscosity of the bitumen, and temperature susceptibility of the bitumen).
Because of the difficulty in obtaining the various inputs, these models are rarely used in
pavement design or management applications.
Recently, a mechanistic thermal cracking prediction model was developed under the
SHRP Asphalt Program (Lytton, et al., 1993). Inputs to the model include: the master
creep compliance curve and failure limits as a function of temperature, pavement
structure, and site specific weather data. The model is complex, consisting of five sub-
models. A mechanistic-based fracture mechanics model is used to calculate crack
progression at a single site having average material properties and a probabilistic model
then calculates the global amount of visible thermal cracking on the pavement surface.
The output is an estimation of the number (or frequency) of thermal cracks per unit length
of pavement. The model was calibrated using data collected from 23 LTPP GPS sites. A
non-linear regression analysis was used to select the best values for the stress intensity
factor used to predict crack propagation and two empirically derived coefficients were
applied to describe the amount of cracking at the surface. Preliminary results using this
model have been good, but its complexity and dependence on the indirect creep and
failure test at low temperatures makes it unlikely that it will be in widespread use in the
immediate future.
As part of the early analysis of the LTPP data, models to predict transverse crack spacing
(generally regarded as thermal cracking) of HMAC pavements on granular bases and full-
depth HMAC pavements were developed (Simpson, et al., 1994). The regression models
have the general form shown in Equation A.4.4.
Crack Spacing (ft)=NA 10B (A.4.4)
where N is age, years

A is a0 + a1x1 + a2x2 + ... + anxn
Annex 4 A.4-9
B is b0 + b1x1 + b2x2 + ... + bnxn
Different independent variables were selected for each of the four climatic zones using a
statistical procedure that minimised a function of the model mean squared error (MSE).
Variable coefficients and diagnostics were obtained by re-running the model only
including the variables selected. A total of 15 independent variables are used in the
models, with three of the variables used in all four models, one in three models, three in
two models, and seven in only one model (Simpson, et al., 1994). The three variables
found to be significant in all models are the pavement age, thickness of the bituminous
layer, and thickness of the base. Traffic, as measured by annual ESA, is significant in
only one case, emphasizing the non-structural nature of this distress. The twelve most
significant variables obtained from the sensitivity analysis in order of significance are age,
annual precipitation, bituminous layer thickness, base thickness, asphalt viscosity at 60
o
C, base compaction, freezing index, days with temperature greater than 32 oC, subgrade
per cent passing the 0.075 mm sieve, annual KESALs, annual freeze-thaw cycles, and
the per cent bituminous aggregate passing the 4.75 mm sieve. It is notable that the per
cent air voids in the bituminous mixture was not found to be a significant variable in the
prediction of transverse cracking.
It has been shown that aging, whether alone or in combination with loading and/or
temperature variations, can lead to cracking of bituminous surfaces. The mechanisms
leading to hardening and embrittlement of the bituminous mixture are complex, yet the
result is almost invariably increased pavement cracking. Aging is more critical for thinner
pavements, where hardening of the binder contributes to a reduction in anticipated fatigue
life, but even for thicker pavements aging contributes to thermally induced cracking which
increases roughness and water ingress.
Other Cracking Mechanisms

Fatigue and aging are the dominant mechanisms that result in cracking of bituminous
pavements, but other mechanisms may also contribute. Three of these mechanisms are
reflection cracking, heaving and settlement cracking, and construction-related cracking.
When a crack on the pavement surface is a direct result of an existing crack in an

underlying layer it is defined as reflection cracking. This type of cracking is commonly
observed on bituminous surfaces constructed over cemented bases, similar to cracking
observed by Paterson (1987) in the Brazil-UNDP data. Cracking in the bases initiates as
the material shrinks. This shrinkage, which is a natural outcome of the hydration process
for cement- or pozzolan-treated materials, almost always leads to fracturing of the base at
fairly regular intervals. A bituminous surface placed on such a base will also crack as
traffic and thermal cycling induce movement in the base across the crack, propagating it
upward from the bottom of the bituminous layer to its surface. These cracks, if unsealed,
will contribute to the ingress of water and weakening of unstabilised subbase and
subgrade layers.
Reflection cracking also frequently occurs in bituminous overlays on bituminous or
portland cement concrete pavements. Each crack or joint in the original surface provides
a potential crack initiation site in the overlay. In situations where significant movement
under loading and/or temperature cycling occurs across an existing crack or joint, rapid
propagation of the reflection crack can occur. The situation is most critical if loading
results in differential vertical movement in the underlying layer, as this significantly
increases the stress at the crack tip resulting in accelerated propagation (Jayawickrama
and Lytton, 1987). A common finding is that thicker overlays delay the onset of reflection
cracking, but do not prevent it (Gulden, 1984; Predoehl, 1990). Paterson (1987)
estimates that the appearance of reflection cracking on the surface of the overlay can be
delayed 1 year for each 20 to 50 mm of surfacing thickness.
Cracking of a bituminous surface may also result if significant heaving or settling is

present. Most commonly, volume changes of this magnitude are caused by moisture
changes in swelling susceptible soils or ice lens formation in frost susceptible soils. In
either case, moisture is an important factor in the swelling process. Through the heaving
and subsequent settlement, the bituminous layer is subjected to high amounts of strain as
the surface attempts to conform to the changing profile. This results in localized areas of
cracking on the pavement surface that are typically diagonal or crescent shaped.
The most common type of construction-related cracking is that which occurs between
adjacent paving lanes. Known as paving lane cracking, it is believed to occur as a result
of inadequate compaction along the longitudinal construction joint. Aging of the
bituminous surface contributes to the formation of this distress.
Annex 4 A.4-11
ANNEX 4.2
LTPP Data Analysis1
The analysis of the LTPP data set was accomplished using the Weibull survivor function
from SAS. The SAS routine differs from that used by Paterson for the analysis of the
Brazil data. This Annex describes the steps that were followed to ensure that the two
procedures would yield consistent results. A detailed description of probabilistic failure-
time modeling and the process followed in this analysis in HDM-III is found in Appendix B
of Patersons (1987) report.
Reconciliation Between SAS and Paterson Parameterisation

In the SAS Parameterisation, the Weibull survivor function used in SASs PROC
LIFEREG (SAS, 1992) takes the form shown in Equation A.4.5.
(
GSAS ( t) = exp e gm t g ) (A.4.5)
This implies a hazard function of the form presented in Equation A.4.6.
hSAS ( t) = e t 1 (A.4.6)
When < 1, the hazard function is decreasing through time, when = 1, it is a constant,
and when > 1, the hazard function is increasing. In the empirical analysis of crack
initiation using the LTPP IMS data, the parameter is replaced by a linear function of
highway, and in some cases, environmental characteristics as shown in Equation A.4.7.
= x b = b 0 + b1 x 1 +...+ b k x k (A.4.7)
Inserting Equation A.4.7 into Equation A.4.6 results in the hazard function presented in
Equation A.4.8.
h SAS ( t) = e ( 0 1 1
+ x +...+ k xk ) 1
t (A.4.8)
The expected time to first crack is shown in Equation A.4.9.
1
This Annex was prepared in collaboration with Dr. Andrew D. Chesher, Professor of Econometrics at the
University of Bristol, UK, who also provided the theoretical framework and programming of the model.

E[ t ] = G SAS ( t )dt
0
( )

= exp e gm t g dt (A.4.9)
0
1 1
= exp (m ) G
g g
Thus, a variable, xi, that assumes a positive coefficient is predicted to result in later
cracking as its value increases. Conversely, a negative coefficient is predicted to result in
earlier cracking as its value decreases.
The hazard function used in Patersons parameterisation (Paterson, 1987) is shown in

Equation A.4.10.
h WP ( t) = t 1 (A.4.10)
The corresponding survivor function is presented in Equation A.4.11.
1
G WP ( t) = exp t (A.4.11)

And it follows that the expected time to first crack is as shown in Equation A.4.12.

E[ t] = G WP ( t)dt
0
1
= exp t dt
0 (A.4.12)
1
1
1
=

In Patersons empirical work, is replaced by the exponential of a linear function of

highway characteristics as shown in Equation A.4.13.
= exp( x ) = exp( 0 + 1 x 1 +...+ k x k ) (A.4.13)
Rewriting the hazard function by inserting Equation A.4.13 into Equation A.4.10 results in
Equation A.4.14.
( )
h WP ( t ) = exp ( 0 + 1 x 1 +...+ k x k ) t 1 (A.4.14)
It is readily observed that the in Equation A.4.8 and the in Equation A.4.14 are
identical, as are SASs 1,... k and Patersons 1,...k. Thus, to reconcile the SAS
parameterisation to that used by Paterson simply requires a reinterpretation of the
intercept terms. Equation A.4.8 can be rewritten as shown in Equation A.4.15.
Annex 4 A.4-13
1
h SAS ( t ) = exp 0 ln( ) + 1x1 +...+ k x k t 1 (A.4.15)

The relationship between the intercept in Patersons work and SAS PROC LIFEREG can
then be written as shown in Equation A.4.16.
1
0 = 0 ln ( ) (A.4.16)

Equation A.4.12 can then be used to reconcile the intercept term produced as a result of
PROC LIFEREG to the parameterisation used by Paterson.
Sections of Different Lengths

Paterson (1987) based his cracking initiation models on the Brazil-UNDP data. This data
was collected on sections which generally had a length of 320 m. Thus, in applying HDM-
III, all crack initiation prediction is based on a standard section length of 320m. An
inherent assumption in this analysis is that lane width is constant or without impact. If
data are collected on longer sections identical in every other detail, the derived
probabilistic crack initiation model would be expected to predict cracking sooner than
Patersons model. Conversely, shorter sections would have longer predicted crack
initiation times. In the LTPP study, the length of each section is 152 m, almost one-half
the length of those analyzed in the Brazil-UNDP study. Thus crack initiation models
based on LTPP observations, or any other experiment that includes sections of non-
standard length (i.e., length other than 320 m), need to be adjusted to make them
consistent with the models derived by Paterson and utilised in the HDM model.
This adjustment can be made in the following manner. Using the SAS parameterisation
previously described, assume that each section is composed of M identical sub-sections
(both in construction and use) which are assumed to be each 1 m long. The time to first
crack on sub-section i (i = 1, 2, ..., M), Ti, is governed by Equation A.4.17.
G( t i )= exp( e t i ) (A.4.17)
Let Z be the time to first crack on any of the M sections. Then Z = min (T1, T2,...TM). If it
is assumed that failure is independent across these M sections, then the probability that
time to first crack on the whole section exceeds some value z is presented in Equation
A.4.18.
P[ Z > z] = P[ T1 > z ...TM > z]

M
= P[ Ti > z]
i =1
= G SAS ( z)
M
(A.4.18)
(
= exp Me z )
1
= exp exp g b 0 ln(M) + b 1 x 1 +...+ b k x k zg
g
This is also a Weibull survivor function, the only difference being in the value of the
intercept term. So, only the intercept is affected by varying the length of the section and
Equation A.4.18 shows how to adjust intercepts for sections of different sizes.
Equation A.4.19 presents Patersons parameterisation.
P[ Z > z] = G WP ( z)
M
1
= exp M z (A.4.19)

1
= exp exp 0 ln(M) + 1 x 1 +...+ k x k z

So, for cases in which Patersons parameterisation is used with section of length MWP
meters and the SAS PROC LIFEREG parameterisation is used with sections of length
MSAS meters, the relationship between the intercept terms is presented in Equation
A.4.20.
1 1 1
0 ln (M W P ) = 0 ln ( ) ln (M S A S ) (A.4.20)

Recall that and are just alternative symbols for the Weibull scale parameter. The left-
hand side of Equation A.4.22 can then be used to adjust the Paterson-derived intercepts
into values suitable for sections having a length different from MWP = 320 m. For
example, if an intercept is required for a section with a length of M*WP = 640 m, then the
Paterson intercept should be reduced by an amount 1/ ln(M*WP/MWP) = 1/ ln(2). This will
result in a predicted age at crack initiation that is earlier than that predicted by Patersons
equations as would be expected for a longer section. Similarly, the right-hand side can be
used to adjust SAS PROC LIFEREG results for sections of other lengths while at the
same time adjusting the intercept to Patersons parameterisation.
If data is to be analysed in which section length varies across observations, the variable
ln(M) should be added as an additional explanatory variable and, if possible, its coefficient
should be constrained to equal -1/. If this constraint cannot be applied, gross departure
of the estimated coefficient on ln(M) from -1/ could be taken to indicate model
misspecification.
Annex 4 A.4-15
If it is believed that cracking initiates at a constant rate across the width of a section, then
M should be taken as the ratio of the area of a section to the area of the standard
sections used in the development of Patersons models. However, if cracking is thought
to be more closely related to section length, as is the case with wheelpath cracking, it
then becomes more sensible to take M as the ratio of length of the section to the length of
the standard section as was done in the example previously cited. In most cases,
variation in width between sections will be small in comparison to potential variation in
length and thus the use of a length-based ratio is the preferable alternative. However,
width should be an issue when multiple carriageway highways are modelled without
separate consideration for each carriageway.
Annex 4 A.4-17
ANNEX 4.3
Use of LTPP Data Sets to Analyse HDM Cracking Models
Selected cracking models were used on the available set of LTPP data to evaluate the
models predictive abilities. This Annex discusses the steps that were followed to conduct
the analysis and the implications of the results.
Data Set Preparation

Although the data provided by LTPP are extensive, they are not in the format required for
analysis using HDM-III models. While the HDM models enjoy worldwide use, they are not
routinely employed within the United States. Thus, some of the primary variables, such
as SNC, are not included, nor are the subgrade and unbound base material CBRs
reported. Structural numbers are not included in the data base nor are structural
coefficients assigned. Furthermore, most of the parameters are in English units, requiring
conversion to equivalent SI units. Considerable effort was required to transform the data
in the LTPP Information Management System (IMS) into variables for use in the HDM-III
models.
Another problem was that although the LTPP IMS data base is extensive, the data it
contains are not necessarily uniform from one section to the next. For example,
information on soil resilient moduli was available for only 107 of the GPS-1 and GPS-2
sections under study. Some, but not all, of these sections also included in situ moisture
contents and soil classification. These types of data gaps were encountered in almost all
of the variables examined and, in combination, severely reduced the number of sections
for which complete data were available. It must be remembered that the LTPP IMS is
continually evolving, and more data is becoming available every day. Thus, some of the
limitations encountered in using the data set have certainly already been eliminated.
Another factor that limited the number of sections available for analysis is the SNC
concept. It is reported that the SNC can only be applied if the total pavement thickness is
700 mm or less (Paterson, 1987). This restriction eliminated a number of sections,
particularly in colder regions where considerable subbase thickness is provided for frost
protection. In the final analysis, sufficient data were available to make reasonable
estimates of the SNC, YE4, cracking, age, and climatic factors for only 100 pavement
sections. The basic methodology used to estimate each variable is presented below.
Pavement Layer Considerations and Estimation of SNC

Five variables were used to capture the effect of the pavement layer configuration on
cracking initiation. The total thickness of the bituminous layers (HS), thickness of the
granular base (HB), and total thickness of the pavement (HP) were obtained directly from
the LTPP IMS. The fourth variable is the ratio of the bituminous layer to granular base
(HS/HB), calculated as the surface thickness over the surface thickness plus the base
thickness (HS/HS+HB). This ratio is 1.0 if no granular base is present as is the case for
full-depth bituminous pavement sections. It becomes smaller as the surface becomes
thinner and/or granular base becomes thicker. The fifth layer configuration variable is
simply the ratio of the bituminous layer thickness over the total pavement thickness.
To estimate SNC, it was necessary to compile all available structural and material data
related to the various pavement sections. Pavement layer thickness and materials were
identified and results from material testing were examined. Layer coefficients were
assigned to each pavement layer based on recommendations presented by Watanatada
(1987). Subgrade CBR was estimated from soil classification, resilient modulus, and/or
soil classification. The SNC was calculated using Equation A.4.21 as described by
Watanatada (1987).
SNC = 0.04 a i h i + SNSG (A.4.21)

ai are material and layer coefficients
hi is layer thickness, mm ( hi < 700 mm)
SNSG is the subgrade contribution to SN
The subgrade contribution, SNSG, was calculated based on the work conducted by
Hodges, et al. (1975). Equation A.4.22 presents the relationship used.
SNSG = 3.51 log10 CBR 0.85(log10 CBR) 2 143

. (A.4.22)
where CBR is the in situ California Bearing Ratio of subgrade
The application of this process to the LTPP IMS data was not without difficulty. All CBR
values for base, subbase, and subgrade had to be estimated from the available data
which included resilient modulus, in situ moisture content, and material classification. It
was not uncommon to have only one of the three parameters available for a given
section. Layer coefficients for other materials were assigned using Watanatadas (1987a)
recommendations.
Many pavement sections have complex structures, consisting not only of structural paving
layers (e.g., bituminous layers, granular layers, and treated bases) but also a variety of
other layers such as soil-aggregate mixtures, lime-treated subgrades, and low-quality
subbases. Although these layers can and do serve a limited structural function, in many
instances they were placed as fill, for frost protection, or to enhance construction. It was
difficult to assign accurate estimations of layer coefficients to these layers and to
determine to what extent these layers added to the total pavement thickness.
Considerable efforts were undertaken to individually evaluate each section to address
these concerns to make the best possible estimation of SNC.
Traffic
The traffic data obtained from the LTPP IMS were in the form of estimated annual
KESALs. In some instances, the data were incomplete. Also, the most recent traffic
information was from 1991 while the most recent distress data were from 1994. Thus, to
obtain consistent estimates of cumulative traffic for each section required extrapolation of
Annex 4 A.4-19
the estimated traffic. In instances where data was missing interpolation was used to
complete the traffic history.
To obtain cumulative traffic, it was necessary in most cases to estimate traffic for the first
year(s) that the pavement section was opened to traffic. In these cases, traffic was
interpolated using growth factors calculated from the next 5 years of available data. These
traffic counts were then pro-rated for the portion of the year in which the section was
opened. A similar approach was used to extrapolate traffic past the last inspection date,
using the growth factor calculated over the last 5 years of recorded traffic. Interpolation
was also conducted using growth factors established for the individual section. In this
way, site specific growth factors were applied to each pavement section. In instances
where only one or two data points existed, a growth factor of 4 per cent was assumed.
Once completed annual traffic counts were estimated, cumulative traffic could be
calculated. This information was used to estimate YE4 as described in Equation 4.8 in
Chapter 4. Specific estimates of cumulative traffic at each inspection date were also
calculated.
Crack Measurement
As described in Chapter 4, cracking measurements made using the LTPP method are not
consistent with those made during the Brazil-UNDP study. LTPP classifies cracks as
either low, moderate, or high severity, and crack widths that define each level vary with
crack type. Low severity line cracking (transverse, longitudinal, and edge) for example,
can have a mean width less than or equal to 6 mm, which is twice the width of a Class 2
crack. It is likely that a Class 4 crack would roughly correspond to a high severity crack in
the LTPP classification, but this would need to be verified through additional studies.
As a result, it is impossible to separate out narrow and wide cracking from the LTPP data
in a manner consistent with HDM-III. In examination of cracking initiation, this study
therefore limited itself to the study of all cracking, as this is easily identified regardless of
the crack measuring method used.
As mentioned, the dominant mode of cracking in the Brazil-UNDP study was fatigue, with
little line cracking recorded. The opposite is true in the LTPP data, where line cracking
(transverse, longitudinal) is the dominant crack type. To be consistent with the approach
taken by Paterson (1987), lengths of line cracking were multiplied by 0.5 m to estimate
the size of the affected area. Fatigue and block cracking are already measured in areal
terms, thus only conversion from English units to metric was necessary.
Patersons models were applied to each individual crack type. Cracking was also
aggregated into the following three categories:
Structural: includes fatigue and longitudinal wheelpath cracking;

Temp: includes all block, edge, transverse, and non-wheelpath longitudinal
cracking;
All: combined areas of all cracking.
Insignificant quantities of block and edge cracking were reported, so analysis of these two
crack types was not pursued past a preliminary stage.
Climatic Variables
Other variables were also included in an attempt to examine the influence of climatic
factors. After examining a number of potential variables (mean monthly precipitation,
monthly average air temperature, number of freeze-thaw cycles, and so on), it was
decided to add the Thornthwaite moisture index (MI) and the Freezing Index (FI) to the
analysis. These two variables roughly define the four major climatic classes used by the
LTPP study and listed below (Simpson, et al., 1994):
dry-no freeze;
dry-freeze;
wet-no freeze;
wet-freeze.
The MI is an estimation of the moisture balance over the course of a year which accounts
for precipitation, humidity, and soil type. The scale ranges from -100 in a very arid region
to 100 in a perhumid region with 0 (zero) dividing wet regions from dry regions. Because
it considers numerous factors influencing soil moisture, the MI is thought to be a more
useful measure of moisture conditions than annual rainfall alone (Paterson, 1987).
The FI is a measure of the severity of frost for a given region, expressed in terms of
degree days. A negative one-degree day is calculated as one day where the mean air
temperature is one-degree below freezing. Conversely, a positive degree day is defined
as one day where the mean air temperature is one-degree above freezing. The FI is
determined by plotting cumulative degree days over a period of one year and finding the
difference between the minimum and maximum points on the curve as it passes from a
non-freezing to a freezing season. If it is a non-freezing climate, where the mean daily
temperature does not drop below freezing, the curve will be monotonic, and therefore, the
FI will be zero. On the other hand, as seasonal changes in a freeze region result in below
freezing mean air temperatures, the accumulation of negative degree days will change
the slope of the curve downward. The FI is the difference in degrees days recorded
between the peak high and the minimum low observed before warmer weather changes
the slope of the cumulative degree days plot positive. Thus, temperate and cold climates
have FIs, whereas warm, non-freezing regions have none.
Final Data Set

The final data set consisted of 236 distress inspections of 100 pavement sections. The
overall data set contains conventional, full-depth, and cement-treated base bituminous
pavements having either hot-mix, surface treatment, or porous friction course (PFC)
surfaces. Table A.4.2 summarizes the values of the various parameters used in the
analysis. These sections were each categorized according to surface type, bituminous
layer thickness, and type of base. A total of three pavement surfaces (lettered A, B, and
C in parentheses) and seven pavement structures (numbered 1 through 7 in parentheses)
were identified as presented in Table A.4.3.
The variability observed in the pavement sections was detrimental to the statistical
analysis, as it further limited the number of available sections having similar
characteristics. It was therefore necessary to combine various sections of pavement
structure and surface type to obtain meaningful relationships. A bare minimum of 15
Annex 4 A.4-21
sections was assumed to be necessary for any given analysis. In consideration of this
minimum value, the following combination of pavement structures and surface types,
using the number and letter designations assigned in Table A.4.3 were analyzed:
Configuration 1: All structures and surface types

Configuration 2: Structures 1 and 2, all surface types
Configuration 3: Structures 3 and 4, all surface types
Configuration 4: Structures 3, 4, and 5, all surface types
Configuration 5: Structures 3 through 6, all surface types
Configuration 6: Structure 7, all surface types
Configuration 7: All structures and surface type A
Configuration 8: Structure 1 and 2, surface type A
Configuration 9: Structures 3 and 4, surface type A
Configuration 10: Structures 3, 4, and 5, surface type A
Configuration 11: Structures 3 through 6, surface type A
Configuration 12: All structures and surface type B
Configuration 13: Structures 3 and 4, surface type B
Configuration 14: Structures 3, 4, and 5, surface type B
Configuration 15: Structures 3 through 6, surface type B
Configuration 16: All Structures and surface type C
Table A.4.2
Summary of Values of Various Parameters for the Analysis of Cracking Initiation
Using LTPP Data
Variable N Mean Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum

Age (Yrs) 100 12.37 5.664 0.69 26.93
YE4 (ESA) 100 0.2686 0.3564 0.0027 1.7129
HS (mm) 100 145.4 95.6 25.4 457.0
HB (mm) 100 220.0 114.4 0 487.7
HP (mm) 100 412.6 122.6 134.6 685.8
HS/HB 100 0.3968 0.2384 0.0769 1.000
HS/(HS+HB) 100 0.3643 0.2315 0.0505 1.000
SNC 100 4.886 1.309 2.524 9.404
FI (degree-day) 100 211.7 315.7 0 1227
MI 100 13 30.8 -40.0 100.0
Table A.4.3
Summary of Pavement Structures and Surface Types Included in Analysis.
Pavement Structure Surface Type Number of Sections

(1) Thin Bituminous (A) Hot-Mix Bituminous 10
(HS < 50 mm) (B) Porous Friction Course 1
(C) Surface Treatment 3
(2) Medium Bituminous (A) Hot-Mix Bituminous 6
(50 mm < HS < 100 mm) (B) Porous Friction Course 3
(3) Thick Bituminous (A) Hot-Mix Bituminous 12
(100 mm < HS < 200 mm) (B) Porous Friction Course 13
(4) Very Thick Bituminous (A) Hot-Mix Bituminous 5
(200 mm < HS) (B) Porous Friction Course 6
(5) Full-Depth Bituminous (A) Hot-Mix Bituminous 5
(B) Porous Friction Course 2
(6) Bituminous-Treated Base (A) Hot-Mix Bituminous 4
(7) Cement-Treated Base (A) Hot-Mix Bituminous 12
Implications of Analysis Results

The results of the analysis of the LTPP data have both positive and negative ramifications
related to the applicability of the HDM-III models. Of greatest concern is the apparent
inability of the Paterson models to predict the expected age of aging/temperature related
cracking initiation. In the LTPP data, this is identified primarily as linear cracking
(transverse and longitudinal) for which Patersons models were not initially derived.
Therefore, it is not surprising that the models currently used in HDM-III were found to be
inappropriate. Of secondary concern is that although Equation 4.14 was one of the
models that was found to be significant, it was not universally acceptable over the range
of pavement structures and surface types. To address this concern, both the
characteristics of the LTPP data set and the model form itself need to be considered.
LTPP Data
As noted previously, the LTPP data is not configured for analysis using HDM-III models.
The LTPP IMS does not include estimates of the modified structural number, nor are
direct estimations of various layer coefficients provided. Thus, it was necessary to
estimate the value of one of the primary independent variables, SNC, based on limited
and diverse material and layer properties.
To establish estimations of YE4 required that early traffic volumes be interpolated and
pro-rated based on early traffic growth patterns and the listed time to opening. YE4 is
particularly sensitive to early traffic volumes as it is based on the average annual ESA of
Annex 4 A.4-23
the first 8 years of a pavements life. It is believed that difficulties in estimating this value
may have led to some of the problems encountered in fitting the models.
A third difficulty encountered was the relatively small number of sections available for the
analysis. Although the LTPP IMS includes over 400 flexible pavement sections, only 100
sections were analysed due to lack of data or because relatively thick pavement sections
had to be eliminated from consideration as they would not meet SNC criteria. These 100
sections were very diverse in structure and in surface type, further reducing the number of
sections of similar characteristics. The sections were also geographically dispersed over
a very large area and subjected to a wide range of climatic conditions. In combination, it
made it difficult to fit the models with confidence.
Finally, the measure of cracking recorded in the LTPP IMS is not completely compatible
with that used in the Brazil-UNDP study, thus complicating efforts to compare the results
obtained from two studies.
HDM-III Model Forms
One of the major concerns related to observed differences between models derived using
LTPP data and those derived by Paterson (1987) is the difference in the scale factors.
Patersons scale factors for the AC surfacing cracking initiation models vary from 1.89 to
2.28, whereas the scale factors based on the LTPP analysis are generally below 1.0.
Values below 1.0 imply that the hazard function is declining as the highway ages. This
may mean that the Weibull assumption is not entirely appropriate and that another model
form may be better suited to this analysis. It is also possible that the highways differ not
just because of variations in the observed explanatory variables but also because of
differences in unobserved variables. This is referred to as "unobserved" or "uncontrolled"
heterogeneity. Considering the selection of pavement sections included in the LTPP data
set, it is possible that sections that are relatively weak start to crack early in their lives
because of this unobserved heterogeneity. As time passes, only relatively strong roads
remain, so that the rate at which cracking initiates slows down. For any group of identical
roads the hazard function can be increasing, but observations made on a group of
heterogeneous roads can lead to an estimate of an "average" hazard function that is
actually decreasing. Heterogeneity in the LTPP data set is a distinct possibility due to the
significant variability present.
It is also possible that some of the observed differences may be due to the different rates
of traffic growth that occurred between the Brazil-UNDP sections and in those included
within the LTPP data set. For example, suppose that the hazard function is similar to that
presented in Equation A.4.23.
h( t)= a0 t z (A.4.23)
where a0 is a constant
t is the time since construction
is the scale factor
z is traffic = z0(t(1+c))
c is the growth factor
If the time path of traffic is not considered, then the hazard function appears as shown in
Equation A.4.24.
h( t)= a0 z0 t ( +1+ c ) (A.4.24)
Suppose that the average growth factor for traffic, c, for the Brazil-UNDP sections is
larger than that for the LTPP IMS pavement sections. In the current analysis, this would
result in a larger scale factor for Patersons models than the LTPP models. The
difference in the scale parameter would have nothing to do with the innate failure
mechanisms, but instead would simply be a result of the time dependence of the traffic
variable. As traffic growth in the Brazil-UNDP study is known to be high, it is possible that
this may explain some of the differences observed in the value of the scale parameter.
Annex 5 A.5-1
ANNEX 5.1
PROCESSING AND EVALUATING RUT DEPTH DATA
Introduction
While the measure of longitudinal surface profile has been standardised as the
International Roughness Index (IRI), no such standard exists for transverse profile or rut
depth. As a result, different algorithms and straight-edge lengths are used around the
world to calculate rut depth from the measured transverse profile. This often means that
rut depth measurements cannot readily be compared from one agency to another.
Traditional manual methods consisted of point measurements based on a straight-edge

and wedge. This necessitated broad longitudinal sampling intervals, which consequently
made it difficult to fully characterise the rutting along a section of road. With automated
surveying, such as through lasers or ultrasonic sensors, their high sampling rates
generate an immense amount of data. In order to reduce this volume to a manageable
level, outputs from automated surveying equipment are reported over interval lengths that
are typically several orders of magnitude longer than the sampling length interval.
This annex presents the results of a study conducted into the evaluation of:
the influence that the algorithm used to calculated the rut depth from a transverse
profile has on the calculated rut depth;
the interval spacing at which transverse profiles are uncorrelated. This will ensure that
no bias is introduced within transformations developed;
the influence of the aggregation of rut depth data on the descriptive statistics and,
more importantly, the subsequent assessment of the condition;
the appropriate straight-edge length to be used in HDM-4 to define rut depth, and a
transfer function to guide users during the transformation of measured rut depth data
to the standard straight-edge length.
Algorithms Used for Rut Depth Calculations

Since each manufacturer of high speed data collection vehicles develops their own
software for the calculation of rut depth from the measured transverse profile, a range of
algorithms are in use internationally. The width of the transverse profile measured ranges
from 1.8 m to 4.0 m between the various vehicles, depending upon the number of
sensors used and their spacing. The various algorithms are, however, based on one of
the following mathematical models:
Wire model: This method simulates a string or wire being stretched transversely across
the road profile following convex curves and overlaying hollows as a straight line, as
illustrated in Figure A.5.1. The rut depth is then calculated as the greatest perpendicular
distance from the simulated wire, W1 and W2 (Swindall, 1990). The advantage of this
method is that it is mathematically easy to use, and it gives very good results for convex
road profiles because it follows the general shape of the transverse profile while still
taking the hollows at the top into consideration (Larsen et al., 1994).
W2
W1
Figure A.5.1: Wire Model Applied to Concave Cross Profile
This model has the disadvantage in that it can give very large rut depths where the mid-
profile is one large basin, as illustrated in Figure A.5.2. Although resulting in larger rut
depths for basins, it might be argued that this method gives a more accurate indication of
the depth of free water for the large basin. Secondly, only the largest rut depth value will
normally be calculated for each cross profile; thus for the large basin in Figure A.5.2, only
the rut depth value W1 would be calculated. Based on these anomalies the rut depth
calculated by the wire model could differ substantially from the rut depth measured under
a straight-edge.
Wire model
W1 S2 { W2
Straight-edge model
Figure A.5.2: Wire/Straight-edge Models Applied to Cross Profile with Large Basin
Straight-edge model: This method simulates a straight line of a given length similar to a
straight-edge being attached to the transverse profile. Various methods exist of attaching
this straight line; some attach it to the outer-most sensor at each end, after ensuring that
the reading at this point is not that of a curb, and then calculate the largest vertical
Annex 5 A.5-3
difference between the transverse profile and the reference line (Larsen et al., 1994).
This results in two rut depth values, of which only S2 is illustrated in Figure A.5.2.
Another method simulates rapidly moving a straight line of a given length over the profile,
performing a large number of calculations to identify the greatest rut depth in each wheel
path. Both methods are able to simulate different straight-edge lengths, and as such allow
the evaluation of the influence of straight-edge length on the calculated rut depth.
Although both analysis models have their advantages, the nature of the data required for
this study favoured the use of rut depth values calculated by the straight-edge model.
Accordingly, in the discussion which follows all values are based on a straight-edge model
as opposed to the wire model.
Interval Spacing and Aggregation of Rut Data
Introduction
The development of high speed data collection vehicles to measure and record surface
characteristics of the pavement in a road network is resulting in a change for many
countries from manual to automated-based equipment. This technology results in a more
direct recording of the pavement surface by allowing very high sampling rates and the
simultaneous measurement of several pavement attributes, such as rutting and
roughness.
For example, laser equipment is able to measure road surface profiles in the entire wave
spectrum from 0.5 mm up to approximately 100 m. By using different algorithms it is then
possible to determine, for example, roughness, cross-fall and rutting. Figure A.5.3
illustrates how the definitions for micro- macro-, megatexture and unevenness cover the
ranges of measured surface texture wavelength (PIARC, 1987 and Larsen et al., 1994).
For transverse profiles (rutting), the data recorded by a high speed surface profilometer
can be divided into the following three distinct levels:
Sampling interval: This refers to the longitudinal interval between successive

transverse profile measurements along a road. The length of the interval is
determined by the speed of the lasers used, the data capture rates, as well as the
speed of the travelling vehicle, and can be as low as 0.5 mm.
Recording interval: As a result of the volume of data generated during the
measurement of the transverse profiles at the sampling interval, most of the high
speed data collection vehicles only store an average transverse profile at longitudinal
intervals of up to 50 times longer than the sampling interval. In most instances the
raw transverse profiles accessible to the user are at the recording interval and not the
truly raw data of the sampling interval.
Reporting interval: To further reduce the amount of data for reporting purposes, the
rut depth characteristics (i.e., mean, standard deviation) of the transverse profiles at
the recording interval are aggregated into average statistics over the larger reporting
interval selected; for example a set of average values every 25 m or for every
homogeneously distressed pavement section identified. These aggregated values are
the ones normally used in pavement performance modelling.
Cross
Wheel Noise Length Profile
Profile
Friction Rutting
Microtexture Macrotexture Megatexture Unevenness Vertical Curves
0,5mm 50mm 0,5m 50m
Texture wavelength
Figure A.5.3: Texture wavelength ranges (after Larsen et al., 1994)
The user of a high speed surface profilometer normally has very little control over the
sampling interval, since this is determined by the capabilities of the equipment. The user
does, however, have more control over the recording interval. Here again there is a limit
created by the hardware capabilities, e.g., disk space on the high speed data collection
system. The user often has full control over the reporting interval, and most often selects
this interval based on existing data reporting intervals or homogeneous pavement
sections within his pavement management system.
Independence Interval of Rut Depth Measurements
To ensure that no bias is introduced into any models or transfer functions developed, the
data used should be uncorrelated, thus allowing the use of conventional statistics to
describe their characteristics. After evaluating various alternatives, it was decided to use
a method based on a principle often used in traffic engineering to calculate headways
between vehicles (Bennett, 1994), and also in mining engineering to estimate ore
reserves.
Geostatistics are used in mining engineering to detect trends with a technique called
variogram analysis (Kestler et al., 1994), with which measurements can be estimated at
locations where no data have been taken. The correlation among residuals constitutes a
key element in the estimates at unsampled locations. For conventional statistics to be
applicable, however, the condition where the residuals are uncorrelated is of interest.
By calculating the difference between consecutive rut depths for a particular interval
spacing one can construct a histogram through which the statistical distribution could be
Annex 5 A.5-5
calculated. By repeating this process for different interval spacings and plotting the
calculated difference for each interval spacing, it is possible to construct a variogram, as
illustrated in Figure A.5.4. The calculated difference obtained for each interval is defined
as the relative rut ratio (RRR), which is a function of the average relative difference
between consecutive rut depths calculated for a specific interval spacing. A RRR of zero
indicates that the two rut measurements are identical. In mathematical terms, the RRR is
defined as follows:
n 1
R i +1
1
i =1 Ri
RRR = (A.5.1)
(n 1)
where RRR is the relative rut ratio, dimensionless, with a value of 0

indicating identical rut depth values.
Ri rut depth in mm of interval i
Ri+1 rut depth in mm of interval i+1
n number of data points for the interval spacing evaluated
Range "A"
Relative Rut Ratio
Sill "C"
Aggregation Interval Length
Figure A.5.4: Typical variogram for relative rut ratio
By plotting each relative rut ratio against its interval spacing, a trend is observed such as
that illustrated in Figure A.5.4, where an increase in RRR occurs with an increase in
spacing between intervals, until it levels off to a constant value C, termed the sill. This
levelling off occurs when the data points are independent. Thus the range A indicates
the interval spacing for which the data points are still correlated; for any interval spacing
beyond the range A the data points would be uncorrelated, and thus conventional
statistics would be applicable and no bias would be introduced within the models.
The process discussed above was used for data available to the HTRS. The shortest
spacing between transverse profiles was 10 m for the 10 sections of data available. As
seen from the results summarised in Figure A.5.5, the relative rut ratio for the various
sections seems to have stabilised even for a spacing of 10 m, indicating that the stored
transverse profiles of the sections at 10 m spacing are uncorrelated. As such, each
transverse profile at 10 m spacing could be treated as an independent sample.
0.7
0.6
0.5
Sec1RRut
Relative Rut Ratio
Sec2RRut
Sec3RRut
0.4 Sec4RRut
Sec5RRut
Sec6RRut
Sec7RRut
0.3 Sec8RRut
Sec9RRut
Sec10RRut
0.2
0.1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Interval Spacing in meters
Figure A.5.5: Relative rut ratio for sections evaluated
This preliminary observation should be validated by additional data since for statistical
analyses the critical spacing at which transverse profiles become independent is
important. Until additional data is available, it is assumed that the available data are
uncorrelated at recording intervals of 10 m or above, and as such can be used in the
development of transfer functions.
Aggregation of Rut Data
In selecting the reporting lengths, that is the interval used to aggregate the observed
profile data, attention must be paid to selecting appropriate reporting lengths that are
constant with both the resolution of the measuring device and the minimum pavement
length that justifies a certain maintenance activity (Cenek et al., 1994). For rutting, such a
typical range would be:
Minimum: The minimum spacing should be sufficient to ensure that the individual rut
depth values are uncorrelated, as previously discussed.
Annex 5 A.5-7
Maximum: This length should be less than or equal to the minimum pavement length
that could be economically maintained during periodic maintenance (rut-fill) or
rehabilitation (mill and replace). This length is a function of both the type of maintenance
and whether it is an urban or a rural road. For rut-fill by means of a coarse slurry, typical
minimum lengths are:
Urban : 20 m
Rural : 50 m
It is important to remember that when data is aggregated, the mean values are not
affected, but as a consequence of the reduction in degree of scatter in the data, the
standard deviation decreases and the minimum and maximum values converge, as
illustrated in Figure A.5.6. The actual values for the pavement section are summarised in
Table A.5.1. An increase in aggregation interval from 10 m to 100 m causes little change
in the mean, but the standard deviation decreases to nearly 50 per cent of the original
value.
25
20
15
10m
50m
10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Chainage in metres
Figure A.5.6: Influence of aggregation on mean rut depth profile
Table A.5.1
Effect of Aggregation on Rutting Statistics
Aggregation Mean Standard Length of section for which

Interval (m) (mm) deviation Mean Rut > 15 mm for a

(mm) minimum length of 10 m
10 11.0 4.0 120
20 11.0 3.0 100
50 10.9 2.8 20
100 10.9 2.4 0
The influence of smoothing on the data is important, since given a certain intervention
level and minimum maintenance length, a pavement section might justify maintenance
under a shorter aggregation interval but not under a longer one (see Table A.5.1).
Based on the data evaluated it is recommended that, where possible, an aggregation

interval of 20 m should be adopted for reporting and storing of rutting in a road database.
This is sufficiently short to allow any type of maintenance that might be used, but still long
enough to avoid the generation of unnecessary data and allow the economical use of
manual measurement methods (straight-edge).
Straight-edge Length
Based on the review of experience with HDM-III in Chakrabarti and Bennett (1994), it is
considered that one of the major reasons for the lack of correlation between rut depth
values predicted by HDM and measured values is the difference between the straight-
edge length used for model predictions and the actual straight-edge used to measure rut
depth.
The existing HDM-III rut depth models are based on a 1.2 m straight-edge and, as such,
predict the expected rut depth under a 1.2 m straight-edge. It is believed that this will
have no significant influence for narrow width rutting, which could occur for plastic flow
(shoving) of asphalt layers where the rut width is less than 1.2 m, as illustrated in Figure
A.5.7. It is obvious from Figure A.5.7 that if the rut width is less than 1.2 m, the rut depth
measured under any straight-edge greater than 1.2 m long would be similar.
As soon as the rut width exceeds 1.2 m one can expect a difference between the rut
depth measured under a 1.2 m straight-edge and longer straight-edges. The reason is
that when the width of the rut exceeds the length of the straight-edge, the straight-edge
will not span the rut profile at its highest points. The result is lower measured rut depth
values, as illustrated in Figure A.5.8.
There is no universal standard method or algorithm for calculating rut depth, and various
straight-edge lengths are in use around the world. To facilitate the international use of
HDM-4 it was decided to adopt the straight edge length most often used internationally.
Table A.5.2 summarises the straight-edge lengths used in different countries as identified
from various publications.
Annex 5 A.5-9
2,0m Straight edge
r1 = r2
1,2m Straight edge
Figure A.5.7: Straight-edge length and narrow rutting
2,0m Straight Edge
r1 r2
1,2m Straight Edge
Figure A.5.8: Straight-edge length and wide rutting
Table A.5.2
Typical Straight-edge Lengths Used in Various Countries
Country Straight-edge length used, in m

Australia 2.0
Denmark 2.0
England 2.0
Malaysia 2.0
New Zealand 2.0
Thailand 2.0
United States of America 1.2 or 1.8
South Africa 2.0
This table shows that the length most often used is 2 m. Based on this it was decided to
adopt a 2 m straight-edge length as the standard for the HDM-4 rut models. To facilitate
the consistent use of rut depth data obtained from straight-edge lengths other than 2 m, a
transfer function was developed to translate rut depths measured under different straight-
edge lengths.
The transfer function was developed by evaluating a total of 300 rut profiles. For each
profile, the rut depth was calculated for a variety of straight-edge lengths. At the same
time, the width of the rut was also identified. From the study the following broad rut width
classification was identified:
narrow (typical of plastic flow and mechanical wear from studded tyres);
wide (typical of densification of the subgrade).
For each of these rut width classifications a transfer function was developed relating the
measured rut depth under a given straight-edge length to the value under a 2.0 m
straight-edge as used in HDM-4. The transfer functions proposed for the various ranges
are:
Narrow rutting:
R2.0 = a0Rm (A.5.2)
Wide rutting:
R2.0 = a0(2.0/SEL)*Rm (A.5.3)
where a0 is the coefficient of the equation (for narrow rutting, a0 = 1)

R2.0 is the equivalent rut depth for 2.0 m straight-edge used in
HDM-4, in mm
Rm is the measured rut depth under straight-edge length (SEL),
in mm
SEL is the straight edge length in m
A survey was conducted in South Africa (Africon, 1995) during which rut depth was
measured both with a 1.2 m and 2.0 m straight-edge at the same position at a 10 m
sampling interval. The results were aggregated into average 50 m values over 36
experimental sections, each 500 m long. After excluding the sections having no rutting
Annex 5 A.5-11
and those with no difference in rutting, as well as two sections with obvious experimental
error, the following strong linear relationship (illustrated in Figure A.5.9) was found (R2 =
0.95; SE = 0.50):
R2.0 = 1.32 R1.2 (A.5.4)
14.0
R Squared = 0,95
Rut depth (mm) under 2,0m straight edge
Std Error = 0,50

12.0
10.0
Line of equality
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
Rut depth (mm) under 1,2m straight edge
Figure A.5.9: Relationship Between 1.2 m and 2.0 m Straight-Edge Rut Depth
Measurements
As can be seen, this data set indicates that on average the rut depth measured under a
2.0 m straight-edge is about 30 per cent higher than the value measured under a 1.2 m
straight-edge. It did not prove possible to obtain data on measurements with other
straight-edge lengths, but it is anticipated that a similar strong correlation will exist.
The existence of such strong relationships shall make it possible to develop a continuous
function between the HDM-4 straight-edge length and that used in calculating or
measuring the data. It is anticipated that such a function would decrease the difference
between HDM-4 predicted rut depth and those observed.
Summary
This annex evaluated various factors related to rut depth data identified in Chapter 5 that
could influence the prediction capabilities of the HDM-4 rut models. No international
standard exists for calculating rut depth; different algorithms and straight-edge lengths
are in use around the world to calculate rut depths from the measured transverse profiles.
For validation, it was decided to use rut depth data obtained using the straight-edge
model, since the use of the wire model for the calculation of rut depth could give
questionable results under certain conditions.
To ensure that no biases were introduced within the models developed it was necessary
to identify at what interval transverse profile measurements were independent. For this
purpose the average relative difference between consecutive rut depths calculated for a
specific interval spacing were defined as the relative rut ratio (RRR). From the data
available, the relative rut ratio indicates that the transverse profiles are uncorrelated at the
minimum interval spacing of 10 m. The influence on the selected aggregation interval of
the descriptive statistics was also shown. From the analysis it was decided to select a
level of aggregation of 20 m. This is sufficiently short to allow for any type of maintenance
that might be used, but still long enough to avoid the generation of unnecessary data and
allow the economical use of manual measurement methods (straight-edge).
The evaluation of the influence of differences in straight-edge lengths indicates that on

average for wide rutting (typical of subgrade densification), the rut depth measured under
a 2.0 m straight-edge is about 30 per cent higher than the value measured under a 1.2 m
straight edge. It was decided that the HDM-4 rut model will be based on 2.0 m straight-
edge length since this is the most common length used in different countries. Thus
rutting in HDM-4 will be the rut depth measured under a 2.0 m straight-edge.
It must be noted that these conclusions are based on limited data; they should be re-
evaluated when additional data become available.
Annex 5 A.5-13
ANNEX 5.2
PROPERTIES OF RUT DEPTH DISTRIBUTIONS
Introduction
Before any evaluation into the correlation between predicted and observed data can be
made, it is necessary to determine the statistical distribution of the data available. This is
important since the distribution will determine the expressions used in calculating the
mean and standard deviation of a pavement section from the raw data profiles, which
would also influence the relation between mean and standard deviation. The pavement
sections were selected on pavement type (combination of wearing and base course) and
construction history. The first and most basic statistical procedure was to prepare
histograms, which allowed the graphical interpretation of the distribution of the rut data.
It was during this phase and the subsequent preliminary analysis of the descriptive
statistics that the following phases (illustrated in Figure A.5.10) were observed for the
road sections analysed:
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Number of observations
Distribution of rut depth
Figure A.5.10: Various Phases of Rut Depth Distribution Over a Pavements Life
PHASE 1- Early life : A typical plot of the rut depth values for one of these pavement
sections is illustrated in Figure A.5.11. The preliminary statistical analysis of pavement
sections within this phase seems to indicate that the data follows an exponential
distribution. This is in contrast with the general assumption of a normal distribution for all
rut depth data.
The effect of the exponential distribution on the descriptive statistics of the rut data can be
summarised as follows. In practice, the mean of the exponential distribution (1/) can be
substituted by the mean calculated for the normal distribution. This is possible because
of the central limit theorem, according to which the normality of a non-normal distribution
is increasing with increase in sample size.
800 100%
700
80%
600
500 60%
Frequency
400 Cumulative %
40%
300
200
20%
100
0 0%
2 4 6 8 10 12
Distribution of mean rut depth (mm)
Figure A.5.11: Typical Distribution of Rut Depth During Phase 1
The central limit theorem does not, however, apply to standard deviation. Thus, it cannot
be assumed that the standard deviation of the non-normal distribution is approached by
that of the normal distribution with increase in sample size. The standard deviation of the
exponential distribution is, however, equal to its mean, which could be replaced by the
mean of the normal distribution. This could explain the results of numerous studies where
the calculated mean and standard deviation for the assumed normal distribution did not
differ much. This preliminary exponential behaviour was mostly observed for newly
constructed pavement sections as well as adequately designed roads with no significant
rutting problems; i.e., pavement sections with mean rut depth values typically below 5
mm.
PHASE 2 - Mid life: A typical plot of the rut depth values for pavement sections during
this phase is illustrated in Figure A.5.12. From the preliminary evaluation of the
descriptive statistics for pavement sections evaluated within this phase it seems that the
distribution is a skewed normal distribution. At this stage the certainty about the type of
distribution is much lower if compared to phase 1. It is considered, however, that the
thorough statistical analysis currently in progress will resolve this uncertainty. The
pavement sections that typically have this skewed distribution seem to be in transition
from the exponential distribution in phase 1 to the normal distribution in phase 3. Thus
the uniform pavement sections identified during this phase seem not to be that
homogeneous in distress. The pavement sections with behaviour typical to phase 2 seem
to be at the midpoint or beyond of their design life, and are typically reaching warning
levels of distress, with mean rut depth values typically between 5 mm and 15 mm.
Annex 5 A.5-15
350 100%
300
80%
250
60%
200 Frequency
Cumulative %
150
40%
100
20%
50
0 0%
2 4 6 8 10 12 14
PHASE 3 - End of life (functional and/or structural): A typical plot of the rut depth
values for pavement sections during this phase is illustrated in Figure A.5.13. From this
illustration it is evident that the data follows a normal, although not symmetrical,
distribution. The preliminary evaluation of the descriptive statistics of pavement sections
within this phase also confirmed the distribution. This behaviour was typical of pavement
sections at the end of their design life, and the pavement sections typically had mean rut
depth values in excess of 15 mm.
This explains the origin of the normal distribution generally assumed. In many countries
rut depth measurements are conducted manually with a straight-edge (straight wooden or
metal beam) and wedge. This method is slow, requires extensive traffic control, and is
extremely hazardous to the persons performing the measurements. This resulted in the
measurement of only a few rut depth profiles, in the visually more affected areas since it
was the maximum rut depth that was of concern for design purposes. Furthermore, these
measurements were mostly conducted on a project level and thus over typical pavement
sections of uniform distress. The small sample size combined with the uniformity of the
pavement section and the application of the central theorem automatically resulted in the
assumed normal distribution. It is only with the advent of automatic recording of rut depth
data that it became economically possible to measure new roads, and to obtain large
enough sample sizes for a thorough analysis of the distribution.
140 100%
120
80%
100
60%
80 Frequency
Cumulative %
60
40%
40
20%
20
0 0%
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Although the different distributions do not affect the mean rut depth, the influence on
standard deviation can be substantial. This is important since it is the rut depth standard
deviation that affects roughness in the HDM-III models.
The influence of surface texture and equipment accuracy also needs to be considered,
especially with the small rut depth values recorded when using these automated systems.
This influence is illustrated by Figure A.5.12, from which at a first glance it seems that the
data follows a log-normal distribution, despite the descriptive statistics indicating an
exponential distribution. As seen in Figure A.5.12 and Figure A.5.13, the only reason for
the appearance of a log-normal distribution is the data within the range 0 to 2 mm. It is
considered that the data within this range could be explained by influence of the diameter
of a laser beam used in combination with the macrotexture of the pavement. The small
diameter of the laser beam makes it possible to record points between individual stones
on the pavement surface. This will result in larger measured rut depths when compared to
traditional equipment or ultrasonics that measure from the top of the surface. Taking into
consideration that typical macro-texture values for hot rolled asphalt are within the range
0.5 to 2 mm and even higher for surface dressings, it is not unreasonable to assume that
the values within this range are due to macrotexture effects.
Another factor is the accuracy of the equipment (which for this data was 1.5 mm). Thus
if the data should be adjusted for the influence of surface texture, it could be argued that
the data in the range 0 to 2 mm represents the negative error of the equipment. This
raised the question of whether rut depth values below 2 mm be considered as rutting
taking into consideration the possible influences of macro-texture and equipment
accuracy.
GLOSSARY
Glossary G-1
GLOSSARY
Term Definition Units

Weibull model parameter
subgrade Poissons ratio
ACA change in area of all cracking per cent
ACR change in area of reflective cracking
ACX change in area of structural cracking per cent
ACX max(ACX, 0) per cent
APOT occurrence of new potholes per cent/year
ARV increment in ravelling in per cent area per cent
CRX predicted change in the area of indexed cracking due to per cent
road deterioration in the analysis year,
EPOT enlargement of existing potholes per cent
IRI increment in IRI during year or season m/km
IRIc cracking component of the IRI increment m/km
IRId delamination component of the IRI increment mm/km
IRIe environmental component of the IRI increment m/km
IRIh patching component of the IRI increment m/km
IRIr rutting component of the IRI increment m/km
IRIs structural component of the IRI increment m/km
IRIt potholing component of the IRI increment m/km
IRIv ravelling component of the IRI increment mm/km
NDL additional number of delaminations number/km
NE4 incremental number of axle loads million/lane
NPT additional number of potholes number/km
PIA change in personal injury accidents accidents/year
POT annual increment in potholes per cent
RDM the predicted change in mean rut depth during the analysis mm
year due to road deterioration.
RDPD the predicted change in rut depth due to plastic mm
deformation
RDS the predicted change in standard deviation of rut depth mm
RDST the predicted change in rut depth due to structural mm
deterioration
SNCK is the reduction in SNCK due to incremental cracking
SP Incremental increase in softening point during analysis C
period
t time between reflection cracking observations years
T fraction of the year or season being modeled.
TDT change in texture depth due to traffic
TRV is 0, if AGE2 < TYRAV and ARAVa = 0
VIM incremental decrease in voids during the analysis period,
in percent.
a0 to a6 calibration parameters
AADT annual average daily traffic veh/day
AAV aggregate abrasion value
AAVC aggregate abrasion value for coarse aggregate
AAVF aggregate abrasion value for fine aggregate
AB Asphalt Base
AC Asphaltic Concrete
ACRA Area of all cracking at beginning of the analysis year per cent
ACRi total area of i width cracking per cent
ACRW total area of wide cracking per cent
ACT linear m of transverse cracks m/1000 m
ACX total area of indexed cracking per cent
ACX min(63, ACX) per cent
ADIS area or number of existing distress

ag layer coefficient of standard materials
G-2 Modelling Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
AGE2 number of years since last surfacing years

AGE3 number of years since latest overlay, reconstruction or new years
construction activity
ai strength coefficient of layer i
ALD average least dimension of aggregate mm
AM Asphalt Mix
AND number of days per year with temperature > 32 C
ANNACC the annual number of accidents under wet conditions number
ANNPRE annual precipitation mm
AP Asphalt Pavement
APOT potholed area per cent
ARV area of ravelling per cent
BR Brick
BTHICK thickness of paving blocks mm
CAPE Cape Seal
CB Concrete Block
CBR California Bearing Ratio of the subgrade per cent
CDB construction defects indicator for base
CDD construction defects indicator for delamination
CDR construction defects for ravelling
CDRc ravelling construction defects due to construction
CDRde ravelling construction defects due to design/environment
CI cracking indicator
COMP average relative compaction weighted by layer thickness in
the base, subbase and selected subgrade layers, as
percentage.
CP Concrete Pavement
CQ construction quality indicator
CR Continuous Reinforced
CRA area of all cracks per cent
CRCP Continually Reinforced Concrete Pavement
CRKMODL appropriate crack initiation model
CRKSPACE spacing between thermal cracks m
CRKSPACEWF spacing between thermal cracks - wet/freeze zone m
CRT crack retardation factor
CRW area of wide cracks (> 3 mm) per cent
CRX area of indexed cracking per cent
CRX is min(63, CRX)
CS contact stress
CW carriageway width m
D1.5 HP is the surface deflection at an offset 1.5 times HP from microns
loading plate under standard 40 kN FWD load (mm)
D1.5HP+450 deflection measured at an offset 1.5 times Hp + 450 (mm) microns
under a 40 kN FWD load
D1500 deflection 1500 mm from centre of loading plate at 700 kPa microns
D2000 deflection 2000 mm from centre of loading plate microns
D900 deflection 900 mm from centre of loading plate at 700 kPa microns
DAC Full-depth Asphalt Concrete
DBM Dense Bitumen Macadam
DBST Double Bitumen Surface Treatment
2
DEC vehicle deceleration m/s
DEF Mean Benkelman Beam rebound deflection mm
Di deflection at sensor i
DN penetration rate of DCP mm/blow
Do peak FWD deflection at 700 kPa microns
DR dust ratio
dr measured deflection at a distance rd from the load plate inches
centre
Dx deflection at offset Rx
EA Earth
EB Emulsified Base
ECR max(min(CRX - PCRX, 40), 0)
EF environmental factor which depends on the season.
Glossary G-3
Eg resilient modulus of standard materials MPa

Ei layer resilient modulus MPa
ELANES effective number of lanes
ELOSS loss of edge material in m3/km/yr
ERATE number of edge crossing per km per year km/year
ESA equivalent standard axles
Esg subgrade modulus MPa
ESTEP elevation difference from pavement to shoulder mm
Fc cccurrence distribution factor
FM freedom of manoeuvre index
GB Granular Base
GR Gravel
HAC depth in asphalt layer (mm) mm
hi thickness of layer i inches
HNEW thickness of the top asphalt layer mm
HOLD thickness of old asphalt layers mm
HP total pavement thickness mm
HRA Hot Rolled Asphalt mm
HS total thickness of bituminous surfacing mm
i coefficients depending on pavement type
ICR time to reflection cracking years
ICX time to crack initiation years
IDL time to the initiation of delamination years
IPT time to the initiation of potholes years
Ir load radius inches
IRI roughness m/km
IRId total roughness component due to delamination m/km
IRIEFF effective roughness resulting from shoulder use m/km
IRIh total roughness component due to patching m/km
IRISH roughness of the shoulder m/km
IRIt total roughness component due to potholing m/km
IRV time to the initiation of ravelling years
ITD initial texture depth mm
JP Jointed Plain
JPCP Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement
JR Jointed Reinforced
JRCP Jointed Reinforced Concrete Pavement
Kci Crack initiation factor
Kdi delamination initiation factor
Kdp delamination progression factor
Keb edge break progression factor
Kge roughness environmental calibration factor
Kgp roughness progression calibration factor
Kpi pothole initiation factor
Kpp pothole progression factor
Krid initial rut densification calibration factor
Krp User specified factor for rut depth progression
Krpd User specified factor for progression of plastic deformation
Krst progression factor for structural deformation
Kvi ravelling initiation factor
Kvp ravelling progression factor
LC Lean Concrete
LP length of the profile km
LTPP SHRP Long-Term Pavement Performance Study
m roughness model environmental coefficient
MAC Modified Asphalt Cement
MESA millions of equivalent standard axles per year

MMP mean monthly precipitation m/month
MSSC mean summer skid resistance coefficient
NDL number of standard size delaminations number/km
NE3 is the cumulative number of equivalent standard axles with million/lane
n=3
NE4 is the cumulative number of equivalent standard axles with million/lane
G-4 Modelling Road Deterioration and Maintenance Effects in HDM-4
n=4
NEci number of equivalent standard axles since crack initiation million/lane
NELV number of equivalent light vehicles
NLANES number of lanes
nlayer number of pavement layers above the subgrade
NPH number of standard size patches number/km
NPT number of standard size potholes number/km
P dynamic load of the FWD lb
P26 material finer than 26.5 mm per cent
P75 material finer than 0.075 mm per cent
PAC Porous Asphalt Concrete
PACX area of previous structural cracking per cent
PASS cumulative number of vehicles with studded tyres in one thousands
direction
PCRX is the area of indexed cracking in the old layer per cent
PCTFINES percentage fines per cent
PF plasticity factor
PM Penetration Macadam
PMC Pre-mix Carpet
PSH proportion of shoulder use time due to width
PSV polished stone value
PSVF polished stone value for fine aggregates
PT Pavement temperature at a depth of 20 mm below the C
surface,
QCV number of commercial vehicles veh/day
RAC Rubberised Asphalt Cement
RAIN annual rainfall mm
RC Roller Compacted
rd radial distance from plate centre to point measurement inches
RD0 predicted initial densification/consolidation mm
RDM predicted mean rut depth mm
RDPD predicted contribution to rut depth of plastic deformation mm
RDS Rut depth standard deviation across both wheelpaths mm
RDST predicted contribution to rut depth as a result of structural mm
deterioration
RDW predicted contribution to rut depth of surface wear of the mm
pavement from studded tires
RH Rehabilitation indicator
Ri offset of sensor i
RI0 roughness in year 0 m/km
RIt roughness in year t m/km
S average traffic speed km/h
SA Sand
SALT variable for whether pavement is salted or unsalted
SB Stabilised Base
SBST Single Bitumen Surface Treatment
SDC semi-dense carpet
SFA skid resistance model parameter
SFB skid resistance model parameter
SFC sideways force coefficient
SFCS side friction coefficient at any speed
SG Sand/Gravel
Sh speed of heavy vehicles km/h
SHRP Strategic Highway Research Programme
SIP structural index of the pavement

SIS structural index of the subgrade
SL Slurry Seal
SMA Stone Mastic Asphalt
SN Structural Number of the pavement
SNBL structural number contribution from paving block layer
SNC modified structural number
SNCK modified structural number for the pavement, reduced for
the effect of cracking in the asphalt layers
Glossary G-5
SNPL structural number contribution from the block paving layers

SNSG structural number contribution from the subgrade
SP softening point of binder within the mix C
SPi Initial softening point of the binder (C), as determined with C
Ring and Ball test.
SPm Increase in softening point of binder due to mixing and C
placement
SRAV sigmoidal ravelling factor
SRV skid resistance value
SS Set Stone
SSRB existing wet road skidding rate
STIME proportion of time using the shoulder due to both width and
traffic volume
SW Surface wear mm
t time years
t50 time to 50 per cent cracking years
TA mean air temperature of the month in which the deflections C
were measured
TAF temperature adjustment factor
TC time to 50 per cent ravelling years
TCI time since crack initiation years
TD texture depth mm
TH asphalt temperature during deflection measurements C
Tpat delay between pothole occurrence and patching days
TS surface temperature during deflection measurements oC
UCS 28 day unconfined compressive strength MPa
Va volume of aggregate. m3
Vb volume of effective binder in mix. m3
VDFi vehicle damage factor for vehicle class I
3
VEB edge loss material m /km/yr
VIM voids in the mix at the start of the analysis period
Vpot volume of potholing m3/km
WBM Water Bound Macadam
WM Wet Mix
x point for which the deflection is determined
YAX annual flow of all vehicle axles, millions/lane/year
YE4 annual axle loading in million ESA per lane
z sigmoidal model parameter
zi depth at the bottom of layer i, in meters
. time derivative of the height of the sprung mass
zs
. time derivative of the height of the unsprung mass
zu

1995 Ndli Modelling Road Deterioration PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

1995 Ndli Modelling Road Deterioration PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

INTERNATIONAL STUDY OF HIGHW AY DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT TOOLS

MODELLING ROAD DETERIORATION AND

RETA 5549-REG Highway Development and Management Research

Asian Development Bank

N.D. Lea International Ltd.

THE INTERNATIONAL STUDY OF HIGHWAY

The fundamental relationships contained in HDM-III are based on research conducted in

An international collaborative study was therefore initiated in 1993 to update the

AASHO Road Test

Kenya TRL Study

TRL RTIM Model

IBRD TRL RTIM2 Model

Highway Design and

TRL RTIM3 Model HDM-VOC HDM-MGR

International Study of Highway Development

Figure 1: Development of HDM

The ISOHDM Study

the Asian Development Bank (ADB);

the Highway Development and Management Technical Relationships Study (HTRS),

Name Affiliation Country

Notes: 1/ As at 31 October 1995

ADB ODA SNRA FICEM

Figure 2: ISOHDM Study Organisation

Name Affiliation Country

Notes: 1/ As at 31 October 1995

In October 1993, an Inception Workshop was organised at the University of Birmingham.

to assist the project teams in defining the scope of the project;

The output from the ISOHDM study is in three key areas:

Team Member Affiliation Project Role Country

Collaborator Affiliation Country

Contributor Affiliation Country

Mr. John B. Cox ARRB Transport Research Australia

Team Member Affiliation Project Role Country

Collaborator Affiliation Country

Contributor Affiliation Country

Mr. John B. Cox ARRB Transport Research Australia

This volume commences with an overview of RDME: what it is how it is modelled. In

2. ROAD DETERIORATION AND MAINTENANCE EFFECTS IN

2.2 Pavement Classification

Notes: Surface Type Base Type

2.3 The HDM Modelling Approach

Paterson (1987) minimised these problems by adopting a structured empirical approach

The HDM relationships were therefore formulated based on mechanistic concepts of

2.3.2 Incremental Models

Change in condition = f(a0, a1, a2, ...) Incremental

2.3.3 Modelling Pavement Distresses

Pavement deterioration can be expressed in terms of a damage function or as the

crack initiation and progression;

Pavement Pothole Pothole

Shoulder Shoulder Use on Narrow Roads

Figure 2.1: Interaction of HDM-III Distress Modes

Figure 2.2: HDM-III Initiation and Progression Modelling

Road User Cost Road Road Road Road Pavement Road

Travel time Traffic volume Cracking Curvature Volumes Crack initiation

Figure 2.3: Decision Process for Pavement Modelling Needs

As with pavement classification, modes of pavement distress follow a hierarchical

Condition Distress Bituminous Block

2.5 HDM-4 Road Data Requirements

Level Amount of Detail

Source: Paterson and Scullion (1990)

3. CHARACTERISATION OF PAVEMENT STRUCTURE,

characterising pavement structure;

3.2 Pavement Structure