摘要: |
Surface distress is commonly perceived to be one of the primary indicators of pavement performance. As such, the collection of these data for the Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) program is a significant aspect of this overall effort--so significant in fact that there have been substantial efforts to develop a distress identification manual and guidelines for the measurement and recording of these distresses. Elaborate accreditation procedures also have been implemented to provide for the most uniform and consistent data possible. To further ensure that adequate observations of these data are obtained, two methods of data collection were utilized. The primary method of distress data collection for the LTPP program is from the digital analysis of 35-mm film taken of each test section on a routine basis. As a backup, manual surveys were conducted, as needed. From studies of the distress data collected to date, several observations were made. The first, and probably most significant, observation was that relatively few of these test sections have much distress. Second, some types of the distress occur more commonly than others. A variety of potential reasons for the limited occurrence of these distresses are considered in detail. The third observation is that there are distinct differences in the distress data collected from these two methods of distress data collection. Possible reasons for why these differences exist are discussed in detail. It is important to recognize these differences to ensure that the data are not misinterpreted. These limitations and distinctions are not intended to imply superiority of one methodology over the other. Instead, the studies should serve to document where additional research may be warranted to improve both methodologies. These studies also highlight the importance of not relying too heavily on either method of distress data collection alone. |