• International Journal of Highway Engineering
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.1-13
• /
• 2008

This study presents a case study of condition evaluation of various asphalt pavement sections to estimate performance lives. The pavement surface conditions including cracking and rutting are first evaluated using a automatic pavement analyzer, ARAN. HPCI(Highway Pavement Condition Index) values are estimated using the pavement surface distress data. It is observed from the pavement distress survey that the major distress type of the sections is top-down cracking. The modulus value of each pavement layer is back-calculated from the defection data obtained from a FWD(Falling Weight Deflectometer) and compared with the laboratory measured dynamic modulus values. Remaining lives of the various pavement sections are estimated based on a mechanistic-empirical approach and AAHTO 1993 design guide. The structural capacities of the all pavement sections based on the two approaches are strong enough to maintain the pavement sections for the rest of design life. Since the major distress type is top-down cracking, the remaining lives of the pavement sections are estimated based on HPCI and existing performance database of highway pavements. To evaluate the causes of premature pavement distress, various material properties, such as air void, asphalt binder content, aggregate gradation, dynamic modulus and fatigue resistance, are measured from the field cores. It is impossible to accurately estimate the binder contents of field samples using the ignition method. It is concluded from the laboratory tests that the premature top down cracking is mainly due to insufficient compaction and inadequate aggregate gradation.

• Proceedings of the KOR-KST Conference
• /
• 1996.02a
• /
• pp.59-86
• /
• 1996

Current methods for evaluating unsignalized intersections, and estimating level-of-service (LOS) is determined from efficiency-based criteria such as little or no delay to very long delays. At present, similar procedures to evaluate intersections using safety-based criteria do not exist. The improvement of sight distances at intersections is the most effective way of improving intersection safety. However, a set of procedures is necessary to account for the limitations in current methodology. Such an approach would build upon such methods, but also account for: deficiencies in the current deterministic solution for the determination of intersection sight distances; opportunity for an accident and severity of an accident; and cost-effectiveness of attaining various levels of sight distances. In this research, a model that estimates the degree of safety at two-way stop-controlled intersections is described. Only crossing maneuvers are considered in this study because accidents caused by the crossing maneuvers are the dominate type among intersection accidents. Monte Carlo methods are used to estimate the hazard at an intersection as a function of roadway features and traffic conditions. Driver`s minimum gap acceptance in the crossing vehicles and headway distribution on the major road are used in the crossing vehicles and headway distribution on the major road are used in the model to simulate the real intersectional maneuvers. Other random variables addressed in the model are: traffic speeds; preception-reaction times of both drivers in the crossing vehicles and drivers in oncoming vehicles on the major road; and vehicles on the major roads. The developed model produces the total number of conflicts per year per vehicle and total potential kinetic energy per year per vehicle dissipated during conflicts as measurements of safety at intersections. Based on the results from the developed simulation model, desirable sight distances for various speeds were determined as 350 feet, 450 feet and 550 feet for 40 mph, 50 mph and 60 mph prevailing speed on the major road, respectively. These values are seven to eight percent less than those values recommended by AASHTO. A safety based level-of-service (LOS) is also developed using the results of the simulation model. When the total number of conflicts per vehicle is less than 0.05 at an intersection, the LOS of the intersection is `A' and when the total number of conflicts per vehicle is larger than 0.25 at an intersection, the LOS is `F'. Similarly, when the total hazard per vehicle is less than 350, 000 1b-ft2/sec2, the LOS is `F'. Once evaluation of the current safety at the intersection is complete, a sensitivity analysis can be done by changing one or more input parameters. This will estimate the benefit in terms of time and budget of hazard reduction based upon improving geometric and traffic characteristics at the intersection. This method will also enable traffic engineers in local governments to generate a priority list of intersection improvement projects.