Y COMMISSION

CENTRAL LABORATORY

FINAL REPORT

R-250 and .H R-152

EASUREMENT OF PAVEMENT

SURFACE VARIATIONS

...

JULY, 1 9 7 4

IOWA STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION

MATERIALS DEPARTMENT SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS SECTION

Final Report of R-250

INVESTIGATING PAVEMENT SURFACE VARIATIONS

July, 1974

Materials Laboratory

Ronald D. Less Assistant Special Investigations Engineer

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paqe No.

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Objective

3.0 Purpose

4.0 Scope A. Development B. Evaluation

5.0 Summary

6.0 Recommendation

R-250

INVESTIGATING PAVEMENT SURFACE VARIATIONS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The measurement of pavement roughness has been t h e concern

of highway engineers f o r more than 70 years. This roughness

is re fe r red t o a s " r id ing qua l i ty" by the t rave l ing public.

Pavement roughness evaluat ing devices have attempted t o

place e i t h e r a graphical o r numerical value on t h e pub l i c ' s

r id ing comfort o r discomfort.

Early graphical roughness recorders had many d i f f e r e n t

designs. In 1900 an instrument ca l l ed t h e "Viagraph" was

developed by an I r i s h engineer.' The "Viagraph" consisted

of a twelve foot board with graphical recorder drawn over

t h e pavement. The "Profilometer" b u i l t in I l l i n o i s i n 1922

was much more impressive. ' The instrument 's recorder was

mounted on a frame supported by 32 bicycle wheels mounted

in tandem. Many o ther va r i a t i ons of profi lometers with

recorders were b u i l t but most were d i f f i c u l t t o handle and

could not secure uniformly reproducible r e su l t s .

The Bureau of Public Roads (BPR) Road Roughness Indicator

b u i l t in 1941 is t h e most widely used numerical roughness

recorder.' The BPR Road Roughness Indicator cons i s t s of a

t r a i l e r u n i t with ca re fu l l y se lec ted springs, means of

dampening, and balanced wheel.

BPR Road Roughness ~ n d i c a t o r

The 1962 AASHO Road Test produced a t e s t i n g instrument

ca l l ed the AASHO Profilometer. This profilometer would

produce a pavement r a t i ng which was cor re la ted with a subject ive

r a t i ng assigned by experts i n the highway f i e l d a s well a s

t h e general motoring public. A s imi la r device, the CHLOE

profilometer was produced which was l e s s cos t l y and simplier

in operation. The bas ic p r inc ip le of both the AASHO and CHLOE

profilometers is t o measure the slope variance, which is by

de f in i t i on the variance of a s e t of s lopes about a mean

slope. The slope variance of a pavement sec t ion is d i r e c t l y

r e l a t ed t o t h e present s e rv i ceab i l i t y index of t h a t pavement2.

CHLOE Profilometer

Unfortunately, a l l devices which measure t h e slope

variance, and/or the present s e rv i ceab i l i t y index of a

pavement, a r e e i t h e r ( a ) towed by or , (b) incorporated

in to a highway vehicle.

When used t o measure the surface var ia t ion of a port land

cement concrete pavement, these devices cannot be u t i l i z e d

u n t i l such time a s t h e concrete has a t t a ined s u f f i c i e n t

s t reng th t o assure no damage w i l l occur. A period of seven

days is normally spec i f i ed t o assure s u f f i c i e n t s t rength . 3

For t h i s reason, the normal slope measuring devices a r e

inappropriate f o r construct ion control of port land cement

concrete paving pro jec t s .

Several s t a t e s have adopted a spec i f i ca t i on fo r surface

smoothness requir ing the pavement surface t o be t e s t ed by

placing a s t ra ightedge on the surface, p a r a l l e l t o the

cen te r l ine . Most agencies l i m i t t he surface deviat ions

t o 1/8" i n a 10 foot span. Some agencies, Mississippi a s

an example, have adopted various o ther lengths up t o 50

f e e t spans with 3/8" surface devia t ion l i m i t s . 4

Presently t h e Iowa spea i f i ca t ion fo r

surface to lerance is 1/8" in 10, fee t . This spec i f i ca t ion is

no longer adequate t o determine r i d e a b i l i t y of newly

constructed pavements. Higher t r a f f i c speeds and the need

fo r s a f e ty and comfort of the t rave l ing public necess i t a te

a t e s t i n g machine which w i l l d e t ec t the longer p r o f i l e

undulations.

2.0 OBJECTIVE

The long range object ive of research on measurement of

pavement surface var ia t ions is t o provide a s a f e r , smoother

r id ing pavement fo r the t rave l ing public .

3.0 PURPOSE

The purpose of t h i s research p ro jec t is t o determine the

f e a s i b i l i t y and adv i sab i l i t y of u t i l i z i n g a mechanical

device o r o ther means t o measure t h e surface deviat ions, in

e i t h e r a 2 5 foot o r 50 foot span on a rout ine t e s t i n g bas i s .

4.0 SCOPE

The projec t s h a l l be concerned with:

A. DEVELOPMENT - Developing a prototype device

capable-of detec t ing surface devia t ions g rea te r

than 1/4 inch in a 25 foot span o r g r e a t e r than

1/2 inch i n a 50 foot span, i n e i t h e r a continuous

o r s t a t i c mode in l i e u of the 50 foo t s t r i n g l i n e

and

B. EVALUATION - Evaluating the profilograph se lec ted

in the development s tage a s a b a s i s of construc-

t i on con t ro l .

A. DEVELOPMENT

Many a l t e rna t i ve s were considered f o r use a s a device t o

record and evaluate pavement roughness. Two commercially

ava i lab le 25 foot profi lometers were evaluated f o r mobil i ty,

ease of assembly, maintenance, type of record produced, and

the p o s s i b i l i t y of adding extensions t o the profi lometer t o

extend the length t o 50 fee t . The two considered were:

Rainhart Prof i lograph

The Rainhart Catalog No. 860 Profilograph is designed,

manufactured, and d i s t r i b u t e d by the Rainhart Company of

Austin, Texas. The machine i s 26 f e e t 10 inches long and

weighs approximately 470 pounds.

Rainhart Profilograph

The s t ruc tu re is supported by 12-10 inch averaging wheels

when in t h e t e s t i n g posi t ion . The measuring wheel is located

in the center below the recorder and is approximately 20

inches in diameter.

The machines averaging wheels e s t a b l i s h a reference plane

44 inches wide and 24.75 f e e t long. The center measuring

wheel draws the p r o f i l e f u l l s ca l e v e r t i c a l l y and e i t h e r

10 f t . = 1 in. o r 25 f t . = 1 in. hor izonta l ly .

The Rainhart Profilograph was not se lec ted f o r use because

of i ts l imi ted use across the nat ion and the d i f f i c u l t y of

adding extensions t o extend the length t o 50 feet . A t the

time of se lec t ion , only one other s t a t e agency was found who

used t h i s p a r t i c u l a r device.

25 Foot Cal i fornia Cox Profilometer

The Ca l i fo rn ia Cox Profilometer is manufactured and

d i s t r i b u t e d by James Cox and Sons, Inc. of Colfax, Cal i fornia .

The profi lometer cons i s t s of a l ightweight aluminum t ru s s .

tubed s t ructure . The s t ruc tu re divides e a s i l y i n to th ree

segments by the use of four quick ac t ing clamps. These three

segments w i l l f i t in to a 1 /2 ton pickup and require l e s s than

t e n minutes assembly time.

Cal i fornia Cox Profilometer

The s t ruc tu re is supported a t t h e end points , 25 f t . apar t ,

by a s e r i e s of s i x averaging wheels. The wheels a r e c a s t

aluminum hubs with cushioned rubber t i r e s . The f ron t wheels

a re s tee rab le from the cen t r a l s t ee r ing wheel on the machine.

The r ea r wheels can be manually adjusted t o prevent r e a r end

crabbing.

The measuring wheel is e i t h e r a 24 o r 26 inch diameter

b icycle wheel depending on when the machine was b u i l t . This

wheel measures v e r t i c a l p r o f i l e changes based on a s t r a i g h t

l i n e between the two end points . A metal cable connects

the b icycle wheel frame t o the recorder.

The p r o f i l e is recorded on t h e recorder on a s ca l e of

one inch equal t o 25 f e e t longi tudinal ly and one inch equal

t o one inch, o r f u l l sca le , ve r t i c a l l y . The recorder a l so

includes an event marker t o note s ta t ion ing f o r record

keeping purposes.

Cal i fornia Cox Profilometer Recorder

The Cox profilometer was se lec ted f o r use because of i ts

wide use, ease of mobility, and the ease of extending the

frame t o a 50 f t . length. Upon our order , James Cox and Sons,

Inc. de l ivered the profilometer in the summer of 1970.

50 Foot Profilometer

The Cal i fornia Cox profilometer was extended t o a 50 foot

length i n ~pri .1, 1971. I t was f e l t t h a t object ionable pave-

ment swales could be b e t t e r detected with a 50 foot span

versus t h e 25 foot length.

50 ~ o o t Profilometer

To make the comparison between the 25 f t . length and the

50 f t . length, a sec t ion of U.S. 30 west of Boone, well

known f o r i ts object ionable r id ing q u a l i t i e s , was se lec ted .

When evaluating and comparing the two graphs, the assumption

t h a t a 1/2 inch var ia t ion in 50 f e e t would be t h e con t ro l l ing

f ac to r t o determine an acceptable pavement was made. It was

found t h a t 81 percent of the locat ions wi th in 2 20 f t . t h a t

exceeded t h e 1/2 inch var ia t ion in 50 f t . would a l so exceed

a 0.30 inch var ia t ion in a 25 foot span.

The 50 f t . profilometer was qu i t e cumbersome t o operate.

A minimum of 2 persons t o manuever the machine, assemble and

disassemble, and tu rn the machine around f o r measurements in

t h e o ther lane was necessary.

Several o ther methods t o de t ec t surface devia t ions were

studied. Among those considered were:

Laserplane System

The laserplane i s a system f o r es tab l i sh ing a plane of

l a s e r l i g h t over an area. This plane is used t o indicate

e levat ions of points below it. P rac t i ca l uses fo r t h i s

system have been found in the f i e l d s of surveying and

construct ion f o r sewer pipes, tunnel boring, e a r th grading,

f i e l d t i l e , e t c .

The l a s e r plane system did not o f f e r a continuous method

of t e s t o r a graphical t r a c e of t h e p r o f i l e . The high

expense of t h e system was another reason t h e laserplane

system was not selected.

Mercury Pressure System

The mercury pressure system measured di f ferences in

e levat ions by placing pressure modules a t two po in t s and

reading the e levat ion di f ference . The system was l imi ted

by the length of tubing between t h e two po in t s .

Again the system did not o f f e r a continuous method of

t e s t o r a graphical t r a c e of the p ro f i l e . Also e levat ion

di f ferences would not measure deviat ions from the average

p ro f i l e .

Stretched Wire Straightedge

The use of a 25 f t . piano wire s t re tched between two

po in t s was considered f o r use a s a reference plane.

Elevations would then be read a t various points along the

wire, A p lo t of various p r o f i l e points would ind ica te the

p r o f i l e changes.

This method proved t o be slow and time consuming a s

d i f f e r e n t p r o f i l e s were p lot ted . Also a continuous

reference plane was not maintained. For these reasons

the "s t re tched wire" method was not se lec ted .

B . EVALUATION

~ u r i n g the 1972 and 1973 construct ion season, an e f f o r t

was made t o t e s t a l l new paving by each con t r ac to r . i n Iowa.

In 1972 t h e 25 f t . profilometer t e s t ed a 1 / 2 mile sec t ion

i n both lanes f o r every 5 miles of p ro jec t lengkh. In 1973

t h e profilometer was operated more c lose ly with each

con t rac to r and h i s paving operation. Each previous day ' s -

paving was evaluated by s ta t ion ing . Methods t o improve t h e

operat ion from a smoothness standpoint were incorporated

i n to the next day ' s paving operat ion.

The profilometer r e s u l t s were evaluated per Materials

I .M. 341, "Method of Evaluation of Pavement Prof i l es . " This

December 1972 1 . M is included a s Appendix A. The l a t e s t

proposed spec i f i ca t ion applying t o profilometer work is

shown a s Appendix B.

A summary of the 1972 and 1973 r e s u l t s a r e shown in

Appendix C. The summary is divided i n to t h e port land

cement concrete ca tegor ies of primary and secondary work.

These ca tegor ies a re fu r ther broken down by large and small

amounts of paving d i f f i c u l t y based on pavement geometry,

urban versus ru ra l , and s l i p form versus f ixed form. The

adjustment bands r e f e r t o the mileage t e s t e d in each band

based on t h e proposed speci f ica t ion.

A summary of each p r o j e c t ' s p r o f i l e index by 0.1 mile

sec t ions was sen t t o t h e contractor . He was t o use t h i s

information t o determine reasons f o r t h e high p r o f i l e index

values, develop methods t o improve the smoothness of h i s

paving operation, and t o study how the proposed spec i f i ca t ion

would a f f e c t him.

5.0 SUMMARY

The 25 foo t Cal i fornia Cox Profilometer proved t o be t h e

most r e l i a b l e and productive from a t e s t i n g standpoint of

a l l the d i f f e r e n t t e s t i n g methods considered. It offered

a continuous, graphical p r o f i l e of t h e surface var ia t ions .

Ease of mobility, shor t assembly time, and low maintenance

were o ther reasons the Cox Profilometer was se lec ted in t h e

development s tage.

The evaluation of new paving during t h e 1972 and 1973

construct ion season showed p r o f i l e index values ranging from

a 2 inches/mile on a spha l t i c concrete pavement t o 57 inches/

mile on portland cement concrete. Most work was in the 10

t o 20 inch/mile range.

, By working with the paving contrac tor and showing him

the p r o f i l e graph from t h e previous day ' s work, t h e

contrac tor was able t o reduce the p r o f i l e index value.

By improving h i s headers, t ightening h i s s t r i n g l i n e , and

avoiding frequent s tops and s t a r t s , t h e p r o f i l e was much

smoother.

The proposed spec i f i ca t ion fo r 25 foot profi lometer work

(Appendix B ) was t o be applied t o a few p a r t i c u l a r p ro jec t s

in 1974. However, due t o both budget and personnel shortages

a t t h e D i s t r i c t Materials l eve l , the profi lometer has been

scheduled f o r routine, information t e s t i n g only in 1974,

s imi l a r t o 1972 and 1973 t e s t i n g .

The proposed spec i f i ca t ion would not cause paving con t rac t

b ids t o increase once each contrac tor rea l i zed h i s capab i l i t y

of paving smooth pavement. Once t h e contrac tor es tab l i shes

h i s capab i l i t y of paving, h i s b i d would r e f l e c t h i s a b i l i t y

t o meet the spec i f i ca t i on requirements. Competitive contractor

bidding plus penalty reimbursement t o the s t a t e should make

t h e proposed spec i f i ca t ion have l i t t l e e f f e c t on con t rac t

p r ice . Eventually only contrac tors capable of paving low

penalty pavement would be able t o af ford t o b id low contrac t

pr ices . Therefore, the long range ob jec t ive of providing

a s a f e r , smoother r id ing pavement would be the ac tua l

benef i t of adopting t h e proposed spec i f i ca t ion .

Having worked with the Cal i fornia Cox Profilometer fo r

approximately four years, we r e a l i z e t h e c a p a b i l i t i e s and

advantages of the use of the machine. Knowing these we

recommend t h e adoption of the 25 f t . profilometer a s the

bas i s fo r determining pavement surface var ia t ions .

Secondly we recommend adopting the proposed spec i f i ca t ion

a s a ba s i s f o r detec t ing unsat is fac tory pavement. Modifica-

t i ons t o t h e spec i f i ca t ion , such a s changing the penalty

ranges o r applying the requirements t o only c e r t a i n types

of pavement, may be necessary t o meet fu tu re requirements.

This spec i f i ca t ion would provide the backbone fo r obtaining

our object ive - t o provide a s a f e r , smoother r id ing pavement

fo r the t r ave l ing public.

REFERENCES

(1) Hveem, F. N. "Devices fo r Recording and Evaluating

Pavement Roughness", HRB Bul le t in 264.

( 2 ) Highway Research Board, "The AASHO Road Test, Report

5 - Pavement Research", HRB Special. Report 61E.

( 3 ) Iowa S ta te Highway Commission, "Standard Speci f ica t ions" ,

Ser ies of 1972.

( 4 ) Mississippi S t a t e Highway Department, "Standard Specif i-

ca t ions fo r Road and Bridge Construction", Ser ies of

1967, p. 305.

APPENDIX A

December 1972 Matls. I.M. 341 (Page 1 of 6 )

IOWA STATE HIGHMAY COMMISSION

Materials Department Instructional Memorandum

METHOD OF EVALUATION OF PAVEMENT PROFILES

scope :

This method describes the procedure used for determining the Pro- file Index from profilograms of pavements made with the California type Profilograph and also describes the procedure used to locate individual bumps when their reduction is required by specification.

The profilogram is recorded on a scale of one-inch equal to 25 ft. longitudinally and one-inch equal to one-inch, or full scale, verti- cally. The determination of the Prbfile Index involves measuring "scallops" that appear outside a "blanking" band. The determination of individual bumps involves the use of a special template.

Determination of the Profile Index

Procedure

A. Equipment

The only special equipment needed to determine the Profile Index is a plastic scale 1.70 inches wide and 21.12 inches long representing a pavement length of 528 feet or one-tenth of a mile at a scale of 1" = 25'. Near the center of the scale is an opaque band 0.2 inch wide extending the entire length of 21.12 inches. On either side of this band are scribed lines 0.1 inch apart, parallel to the opaque band. These lines serve as a convenient scale to measure devia- tions or excursions of the graph above or below the blank- ing band. These are called "scallops".

B. Method of Counting

Place the plastic scale over the profile in such a way as to "blank out" as much of the profile as possible. When this is done, scallops above and below the blanking band usually will be approximately balanced. See Figure I.

The profile trace will move from a generally horizontal position when going around superelevated curves making it impossible to blank out the central portion of the trace without shifting the scale. When such conditions occur the profile should be broken into short sections and the blanking band repositioned on each section while counting as shown in the upper part of Figure 11.

Starting at the right end of the scale, measure and total the height of all the scallops appearing both above and below the blanking band, measuring each scallop to the nearest 0.05 inch (half a tenth). Write this total on the

Matls. I.M. 341 (Page 2 of 6 )

December 197 2

profile sheet near the left end of the scale together with a small mark to align the scale when moving to the next section. Short portions of the profile line may be visible outside the blanking band, but unless they project 0.03 inch or more and extend longitudinally for two feet (0.08" on the profilogram) or more, they are not included in the count. (See Figure I for illustration of these special conditions).

When scallops occurring in the first 0.1 mile are totaled, slide the scale to the left, aligning the right end of the scale with the small mark previously made, and proceed with the counting in the same manner. The last section counted may or may not be an even 0.1 mile. If not, its length should be scaled to determine its length in miles. An example follows:

Section lenqth - Miles

0.10

Total 0.376

Counts, tenth of an inch

5.0

The Profile Index is determined as "inches per mile in excess of the 0.2 inch blanking band" but is simply called the Profile Index. The procedure for converting counts of Profile Index is as follows:

Using the figures from the above example:

Length = 0.376 miles, total count = 14.5' tenths of an inch.

1 mile X total count Index = Length of profiles in inches in miles

PrI = X 1.45 = 3.9 0.376

(Note that the formula uses the count in inches rather than tenths of an inch and is obtained by dividing the count by ten.)

The Profile Index is thus determined for the profile of any line called for in the specifications. Profile In- dexes may be averaged for t.wo or more profiles of the same section of road if the profiles are the same length.

December Matls. I.M. 341 (Page 3 of 6)

Example : Section Counts, tenths of an inch lenqth, Left wheel Right wheel miies track track

Total 0.376 14.5 14.0

PrI (by formula) 3.9 3.7

Average = 3.9 c 3.7 = 3 e * 2

The Profile Index will be computed at the midpoint of each driving lane unless this profile is not represen- tative of the entire lane width.

C. Limitations of Count in 0.1 Mile Sections

When the specification limits the amount of roughness in successive 1/10 mile lots, the scale is moved along the profile in successive 1/10 mile sections and counts are made to determine specification compliance. The limits of the sections are ncted on the profile and can be later located on the pavement if corrections are needed.

D. Limits of Counts - Joints When counting profiles, a day's paving is considered to include the last portion of the previous day's work which includes the daily joint. The last 15 to 30 feet of a day's paving cannot usually be obtained until the follow- ing day. In general the paving contractor is responsible for the smoothness of joints if he places the concrete pavement on both sides of the joint. On the other hand, the contractor is responsible only for the pavement placed by him if the work abuts a bridge or a pavement placed under another contract. Profilograph readings when approaching such joints should be taken in conformance with current specifications.

E. Average Profile Index For the Whole Job

When averaging Profile Indexes to obtain an average for the job, the average for each day must be "weighted" according to its length. This is most easily done by totaling the counts for the 0.1 mile sections of a given line or lines and using the total length of the line in computation for the determining the Profile Index.

Matls. I.M. 341 (Page 4 of 6)

December 1972

Determination of Bumps in Excess of the Specification

Procedure

A. Equipment

The only special equipment needed is a plastic template having a line one-inch long scribed on one face with a small hole or scribed mark at either end, and a slot a distance equal to the maximum bump specified, from and parallel to the scribed line. See Figure 11. (The one-inch line corresponds to a horizontal distance of 25 feet on the horizontal scale of the profilogram.)

B. Locating Bumps in Excess of the Specification

At each prominent bump or high point on the profile trace, place the template so that the small holes or scribe marks at each end of the scribed line intersect the profile trace to form a chord across the base of the peak or indi- cated bump. The line on the template need not be horizontal. With a sharp pencil draw a line using the narrow slot in the template as a guide. Any portion of the trace extend- ing above this line will indicate the approximate length and height of the bump in excess of the specification.

There may be instances where the distance between easily recognizable low points is less than one-inch (25 feet). In such cases a shorter chord length shall be used in making the scribed line on the template tangent to the trace at the low points. It is the intent however, of this requirement that the baseline for measuring the height of bumps will be as nearly 25 feet (1-inch) as possible, but in no case to exceed this value. When the distance between prominent low points is greater than 25 feet (1-inch) make the ends of the scribed line inter- sect the profile trace when the template is in a nearly horizontal position. A few examples of the procedure are shown in the lower portion of Figure 11.

ME

THO

D

OF

CO

UN

TIN

G

WH

EN

P

OS

ITIO

N

OF

PR

OF

ILE

S

HIF

TS

A

S

IT

MA

Y

WH

EN

R

OU

ND

ING

SH

OR

T R

AD

IUS

C

UR

VE

S

WIT

H

SU

PE

RE

LEV

AT

ION

, .

.*

--

ME

THO

D

OF

PLA

CIN

G T

EM

PLA

TE

W

HE

N

LOC

AT

ING

B

UM

PS

TO

B

E

RE

DU

CE

D

A d

lsB

n~

e

Sen

bad

Li

ne

e.a

~a

1to

tnc

Bas

elin

e o

pp

rox.

B

asel

ine

less

H

eig

ht

of

pea

k IS

25 i

ee

t th

an 2

5 f

ee

t le

ss t

han

s

pe

ctf

ica

lio

n

BU

MP

T

EM

PLA

TE

B

asel

ine

mor

e th

an

25

'

FIG

UR

E I1

APPENDIX B

PROPOSED 25' PROFILOMETER SPECIFICATION

1. Apply t o r u r a l primary and i n t e r s t a t e p ro jec t s on which

mainline pavement exceeds 14,000 sq. yds.

2. Adjust the contrac t p r ice paid fo r 1/10 mile pavement

l o t s according t o the following schedule:

P ro f i l e Index Price Adjustment Percent of Unit (Inches/Mile ) - Band (% Downward) Contract Price Allowed

15 o r l e s s I R No Adjustment 100

18 t o 15.01 2 R 2 98

2 1 t o 18.01 3 R 5 9 5

24 t o 21.01 4R 10 90

Above 24.01 5R Correct Roughness

The contrac tor may e l e c t t o cor rec t any roughness in l i e u

of the above pr ice adjustments.

3 . Bumps exceeding 0.5 inches high measured with t h e 25 '

profilometer w i l l not be permitted.

AP

PE

ND

IX

C

SUM

MARY

O

F 1972 A

ND

1

97

3 P

RO

FIL

OM

ET

ER

TESTIN

G

Tab

le

Type

of

co

nstr

uc

tio

n

I A

P

C

Pri

mary

-Sli

p

For

m

(Jo

bs w

ith

a

sm

all

am

ount

of d

iffic

ult

y)

IB

P

C

Pri

mary

(J

ob

s w

ith

a

larg

e a

mount

of

dif

fic

ult

y)

I I

A

PC

seco

nd

ary

-Sli

p

For

m

(Jo

bs w

ith

a

sm

all

am

ount

of

dif

fic

ult

y)

II

B

PC

S

eco

nd

ary

(J

ob

s w

ith

a la

rg

e a

mount

of

dif

fic

ult

y)

I11

AC

P

avem

ent

a a,

kc)

ma, *H

* * N

rdm~--="="=~ ------- - - - - - - - cn rl

ri N

f ffico Mri

cu 0 ONOO 0 N 0 M rl NdNM N 3 N

0 . 00 .,. 0 .oo .O.

k 0 o 0 rd k k a, oum d oa omo UGIU<~~UUU~~~W~~OZZH

m a d rd

2 c) $

a,

offin dNri

10 "'70~~ OO~~OOOOO~ o

N co m m .rlyr)wCUrim M . 00 .rl+ .O

OcoM f--~10~Ocndrif--C-- mcoinN~LninocomcococooNN

2ffiin . .ma. rid ri c; ri . .rlGLA&Adddddd

rl .d X

k c

rl ;I- in O\COoCO i H a , r l b b r i C O m d C U ; t C O C O r i o a i o l . . o . . , - l o \

. i o . O N . O r i t - 4 . 1 4 H C - r i c O r l r l C O r i r l r l r i C O o \

;f a, 10

m CU ri

a 0) m

.d a,

m 47

0 rl

0 in m l n l n i o rl ln rr) rl

m r l c u i o i o i n m o c - ; f m w r l m r l C O r l i n C O . m o o . . r l d r l O O \ . x E - I m r - i G u i N r i r i r l d . C O G

4 ti

W cri m 8 z 0 pi; LL

m $2

2 0 r* pi; 0 E-1

3 E-1 % 0 U!

COW. 069. 469. C-io om Sd C-

pi; N 069. 069. mCU Nin w69. gE

Wl . N 0 "* . M

00

TABLE

IB

PC

PRIM

AR

Y -

JOB

S W

ITH

A

L

AR

GE

A

MO

UN

T O

F D

IFF

ICU

LT

Y

Pro

jec

t N

umb

e r

Cod

e

29

30

31

32

Co

ntr

acto

r L

ett

er

Cod

e M

iles

T

este

d

1.92

0

1.0

04

0.51

4

2.15

3

0.75

7

3.83

0

1.2

91

1.44

.2

2.60

9

Pro

file

In

dex

31.1

7

35.3

8

36.9

0

48.3

7

31.0

4

49.5

0

17

.82

56.5

4

24.0

7

Adj

ustm

ent

Ban

ds

1R

2R

3

3

15

-

15-1

8 18

-21

0

o .0

60

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

.loo

.2

00

.01

5

-20

0

.20

0

.36

3

.628

.l

oo

0

0

0

.459

.3

00

.2 6

1

Yea

r B

uil

t

1972

""

11

It

9if

fic

ult

y

Fix

ed F

orm

Fix

ed F

orm

Fix

ed F

orm

Fix

ed F

orm

Urb

an F

ixed

For

n

Urb

an

F

ixed

For

c

Urb

an

Fix

ed F

orm

Inte

rse

cti

on

C

urve

s e

tc.

Fix

ed F

orm

Urb

an

Pa

rt i

n 2

to

wns

H

illy

Urb

an

f2 rl .x N

ffi * *

a, rl .d X Gi a,

Oa kc PIH

0 m in

N

CON om a%* r- rl

cn

L(; rl

CU

in CU

Pro

jec

t N

umbe

r C

od

e

44.

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

TA

BL

E

II

A

PC

SEC

ON

DA

RY

S

LIP

FO

RM

- JO

BS

W

ITS

SM

ALL

P3

OU

NT

O

F D

IFF

ICU

LT

Y

Co

ntr

acto

r L

ett

er

Cod

e

B

B

A

A

E

E

E

E

J

J

F

B

C C

K

K

Mil

es

Te

ste

d

3.17

9

2.05

1

2.07

5

2.1

10

2.85

9

3.09

2

2.17

2

2.13

4

1.95

7

2.07

0

2.08

0

1.92

1

5.10

3

6.34

0

18.3

24

12.4

24

Pro

file

In

dex

11.7

2

16

.28

7.2

3

5.47

10.1

6

5.87

10.7

0

5.69

6.52

8.14

5.53

5.9

3

12.7

6

8.9

8

6.59

8.4

7

Adj

ustm

ent

Ba

lds

1R

2R

3R

1

5

-

15-1

8 18

-21

2.65

5 .3

00

.lo

o

.841

.2

67

.600

1.95

4 ,1

21

0

2.1

10

0

0

2.31

9 .2

00

.l

o0

2.99

2 .l

o0

0

1.70

0 .3

00

.lo

0

1.93

4 .2

00

0

1.75

7 .l

o0

0

1.75

1 .l

o0

.l

o0

1.98

0 o

.loo

1.9

21

0

0

3.70

3 .6

00

.3oo

5.20

1 .5

00

.300

18.0

61

.loo

.l

oo

11.4

80

.20

0

.332

Pe

ar

Tes

ted

1972

**

tt

It

11

It

I1

I1

It

It

It

It

It

1973

It

It

It

Pro

jec

t N

umber

Code

TA

BL

E

II

A

PC SEC

ON

DA

RY

S

LIP

FORM

- JO

BS

WIT

H

SMA

LL A

MO

UN

T O

F D

IFFIC

UL

TY

(C

on

t.)

Co

ntra

cto

r L

ette

r M

iles

Code

Te

ste

d

Ad

justm

en

t B

ands

Pro

file

1R

2R

3

R

Ind

ex

1

5 -

15-18 1

8-2

1

*&R

&

5R

Year

21

T

este

d

.77

9

19

73

1.8

65

II

0

11

.50

0

I1

*In

form

atio

n n

ot

av

aila

ble

fo

r P

.I. 2

1.0

1

to 2

4.0

0

**In

1

97

2 o

nly

ran

dom

po

rtion

s o

f p

roje

cts

were

tes

ted

***L

ess d

iffic

ulty

in p

ortio

n

tes

ted

r l R OR OR cuR OR OR ox bcn OLn om mcu ocu 0;f O L n cu d %I . C-ri W d d . W R

0 0 0

OR wx r-R 069 OR OR 00 =3rl d R w O r l O i n O* rlrl r i d N M

R Lnri N N d ri GI 00 - d 3 rd H H

W 4 m r l w AR 2 w* om wR wcn rf?R L n R ;tR

w69. cnr- j Or- om om wcu wr- m i n 310 . L n w . r - .r- om .cn . m CO w '5 51 4 m rl m ri co cu G

ffi b

ffi in

rt ;IN

ffi ;t

'a% t-0 am

a m w aC-' rim .d w XH

w t- cn

TABLE I11

AC

PA

VE

ME

ET

Co

ntr

acto

r L

ett

er

Cod

e

Ad

just

men

t B

an

ds

Pro

file

1

R

2R

3R

*&R

&

53.

Ind

ex

15

15

-18

18

-21

2

1

-RY -

9.9

3

2.3

15

.3

00

.2

00

0

-- Yea

r 3

uil

t

1972

**

ll

I

Pro

Jec

t N

umbe

r C

ode

6 5

66

Mil

es

Tes

ted

2.0

9

8.4

7

1.6

9

.3o

o

o SE

CO

ND

AR

Y

1. 0

85

9

.03

1

.08

5

o o

*In

form

atio

n n

ot

av

ail

ab

le f

or

?.I

. 2

1.0

1

to 2

4.00

**

In

19

72

on

ly r

ando

m p

ort

ion

s of

p

roje

cts

wer

e te

ste

d