January 2007
Guideline: UCPRC- GL- 2005- 02
Pavementt Prreserrvattiion Sttudiies
Techniicall Adviisorry Guiide::
Summarry
Author: D. Jones
Partnered Pavement Research Program ( PPRC) Contract Strategic Plan Element 3.2.9:
Development of Guidelines for Effective Maintenance Treatment Evaluation Test
Sections
PREPARED FOR:
California Department of Transportation
Division of Research and Innovation
Office of Roadway Research
PREPARED BY:
University of California
Pavement Research Center
UC Davis, UC Berkeley
GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide i
DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL PAGE Guideline No: UCPRC- GL- 2005- 02
Title: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide: Summary
Author: D. Jones
Prepared for:
Caltrans
FHWA No:
S/ CA/ RI- 2006/ 25b
Date:
January 2007
Strategic Plan No:
3.2.9
Client Reference No:
SPE 3.2.9
Status:
Final
Abstract:
This document provides guidelines for the establishment, monitoring and reporting of pavement
preservation experiments in California. Information is provided in chapters covering:
• Management and responsibilities
• Project fundamentals
• Experiment work plan
• Site selection
• Experiment construction
• Experiment monitoring
• Forensic investigations
• Laboratory testing
• Data analysis, reports and implementation
• Data management and documentation
• Example experiment work plans, checklists and forms
The document aims to assist with achieving successful completion of experiments and implementation of
the findings.
Keywords:
Pavement preservation, experiment evaluation
Proposals for implementation:
Follow protocol in all future pavement preservation and innovative product experiments. Update
as required.
Related documents:
Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide ( UCPRC- GL- 2005- 01)
Signatures:
D. Jones
1st Author
J. Harvey
Technical
Review
D. Spinner
Editor
J. Harvey
Principal
Investigator
M. Samadian
Caltrans Contract
Manager
ii GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide iii
DISCLAIMER
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and
accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views
or policies of the State of California or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not
constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
DOCUMENT REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION STATUS
This document has been reviewed within the University of California Pavement Research
Center, by the Caltrans Division of Research and Innovation, and by the Caltrans Division of
Maintenance, Office of Pavement Preservation and its appointed reviewers.
The document can be used as a guide for the design, construction and assessment of pavement
preservation experiments. The document is released as a draft for implementation for a period
of 12 months, ending December 2007. Any comments or recommendations to improve the
document, based on use during implementation, should be forwarded to the Chief of the Office
of Pavement Preservation. A revised document, incorporating comments received, will be
released in January 2008.
iv GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The objective of this project is to improve the quality of data and analyses obtained from
Pavement Preservation and Innovative Product Experiments in California, and promote
statewide implementation of the findings of successful studies.
This objective will be met after completion of three tasks:
1. Prepare and discuss a draft table of contents for a detailed guideline on undertaking
pavement preservation and innovative product experiments.
2. Prepare a detailed guideline.
3. Prepare a summarized “ glove- box” version of the detailed guideline.
This document addresses Task No. 3.
GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... ........ vi
LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................................ .............. vi
PURPOSE OF THIS GUIDELINE............................................................................................................... vii
1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... .......... 1
1.1. Background..................................................................................................................... .... 1
1.2. Pavement Preservation Definitions...................................................................................... 2
1.3. Key Activities..................................................................................................................... .. 3
1.4. Typical Pavement Preservation Activities............................................................................ 3
1.5. Quality Management............................................................................................................ 5
1.6. Using this Summary Guideline ............................................................................................ 5
2. MANAGEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES.................................................................................... 7
3. PROJECT FUNDAMENTALS ......................................................................................................... 9
4. EXPERIMENT WORK PLAN......................................................................................................... 13
5. SITE SELECTION...................................................................................................................... ... 15
6. EXPERIMENT CONSTRUCTION.................................................................................................. 19
7. EXPERIMENT MONITORING ....................................................................................................... 23
8. FORENSIC INVESTIGATIONS ..................................................................................................... 31
9. LABORATORY TESTING ............................................................................................................. 33
10. DATA ANALYSIS, REPORTS AND IMPLEMENTATION............................................................ 35
11. DATA MANAGEMENT AND DOCUMENTATION........................................................................ 37
12. BIBLIOGRAPHY................................................................................................................... ........ 39
APPENDIX A: CHECKLISTS .................................................................................................................... 41
APPENDIX B: DATA COLLECTION FORMS........................................................................................... 57
vi GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: Pavement preservation purpose ................................................................................................. 3
Table 1.2: Typical pavement preservation activities .................................................................................... 5
Table 7.1: General description of extent classifications ............................................................................. 25
Table 7.2: Examples of physical measurements........................................................................................ 29
Table 8.1: Guide for forensic investigations ............................................................................................... 31
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Components of pavement preservation ..................................................................................... 1
Figure 1.2: Flowchart of key activities .......................................................................................................... 4
Figure 3.1: Flowchart for project approval.................................................................................................. 10
Figure 4.1: Flowchart for development of an experiment work plan .......................................................... 13
Figure 5.1: Flowchart for site selection....................................................................................................... 16
Figure 6.1: Flowchart for experiment construction ..................................................................................... 20
Figure 7.1: Flowchart for experiment monitoring........................................................................................ 23
Figure 7.2: Flow diagram – five- point classification system....................................................................... 25
Figure 7.3: Diagrammatical illustration of extent ........................................................................................ 26
Figure 8.1: Flowchart for forensic investigations........................................................................................ 32
Guideline purpose vii
PURPOSE OF THIS GUIDELINE
This guideline has been written to assist Caltrans staff with establishing and monitoring pavement
preservation experiments. Experience has shown that, although numerous such experiments have been
built in the past, very little useful information that can be used to make informed decisions about
implementing the treatment, technology, procedure, or product state- wide results. There are a number of
reasons for this including movement and turnover of staff, inappropriate experimental designs, insufficient
data collection and/ or loss of interest over time ( i. e., experiment is never completed). Considerable time
and expense are incurred during the establishment of experiments. Failure to complete an experiment
invariably means that it will be repeated by someone else, somewhere else at a later date. The same
applies to experiments that although completed, are not coordinated at state level.
This summary guideline, which should be read in conjunction with the detailed guideline, provides
direction on the following:
• Establishing a study team and assigning responsibilities
• Justification for doing an experiment
• Developing an experiment work plan
• Locating, marking out and establishing the site
• Construction of the experiment
• Monitoring the experiment
• Data analysis
• Reporting and implementation
• Data management
By applying the principles discussed in the guideline, the following can be achieved:
• Statistically valid, scientifically correct and defendable answers obtained within a determined time
period
• Results from every experiment established, regardless of the movement of individuals within and
out of the organization
• Findings that are applicable state- wide and useable by individuals outside the study
• Justification for expenses incurred
• Justification for statewide implementation
• Justification for changes to specifications and practices
• Accountability of individuals involved
• Prevention of duplication of effort
viii GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
1. Introduction 1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Pavement preservation represents a proactive approach in maintaining highways.
It enables State Departments of Transportation ( DoTs) to reduce costly, time-consuming
rehabilitation and reconstruction projects and the associated traffic
disruptions. With timely preservation the traveling public can be provided with
improved safety and mobility, reduced congestion, and smoother, longer lasting
pavements.
A Pavement Preservation program consists primarily of three components
( Figure 1.1):
• Preventive maintenance
• Minor rehabilitation ( non- structural)
• Routine maintenance activities
Figure 1.1: Components of pavement preservation
Caltrans invests millions of dollars each year in pavement preservation activities.
Documented performance of the pavement preservation practices during these
activities is important so that Caltrans can determine which alternatives are most
appropriate under particular circumstances. Many factors contribute to this
decision. To establish the most appropriate pavement preservation practice or to
assess the performance and effectiveness of new materials or equipment,
experiments are usually constructed and monitored. Provided that an appropriate
experimental design is followed, the experiment is monitored regularly and
objectively and the data is suitably interpreted, these experiments can contribute
significantly to the understanding of pavement preservation and the state- wide
implementation/ adoption of the most appropriate and cost- effective practices.
MTAG
Crack seal
Shoulder fog seal
Diamond grinding
Pavement
preservation
Minor
rehabilitation
Preventive
maintenance
Routine
maintenance
2 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
However, in many instances, the purpose of the experiment is not clearly defined,
accepted monitoring standards are not adhered to, data are not effectively
captured, and the experiment is not completed with a result on which a decision
can be made with regard to state- wide implementation. Alternatively, the
originator of the experiment moves and his/ her successor may not be aware or
may not be willing to sustain the exercise. Consequently, inconclusive results are
often obtained and the new procedure or practice is not adopted. Invariably, the
experiment is repeated elsewhere by another individual, often with the same
inconclusive result.
The purpose of this document is to provide Caltrans personnel with guidelines for
the consistent design, construction and monitoring of experimental sections,
capturing and storing data and interpreting and documenting the results. This
guideline supplements the “ Maintenance Technical Advisory Guide ( MTAG)” and
the “ Guide to the Investigation and Remediation of Distress in Flexible
Pavements” and uses information from those documents as well as past test
section project evaluations located throughout the State of California.
The document is presented in two parts:
• A comprehensive document providing detailed information on establishing
and monitoring pavement preservation test sections.
• A summary guide in the form of brief descriptions and checklists on key
components of establishing and monitoring pavement preservation test
sections ( this document).
1.2. Pavement Preservation Definitions
The distinctive characteristics of pavement preservation activities compared to
construction, rehabilitation and emergency maintenance are that they restore the
function of the existing roadway system and extend its service life, but do not
increase capacity or strength ( Table 1.1). Different pavement preservation
terminology is often used by local and State DoTs. This can cause inconsistency
relating to how preservation programs are applied and their effectiveness
measured. To overcome these inconsistencies, the Federal Highway
Administration ( FHWA) has proposed a number of definitions ( FHWA
Memorandum on Pavement Preservation Definitions, 09/ 12/ 05).
The purpose of this document is to
provide Caltrans personnel with
guidelines for the consistent
design, construction, and
monitoring of experimental
sections, capturing and storing
data, and interpreting and
documenting the results.
1. Introduction 3
Table 1.1: Pavement preservation purpose
Purpose
Category Activity
Increase
capacity
Increase
strength
Reduce
aging
Restore
serviceability
Construction New construction
Reconstruction








Rehabilitation Major rehabilitation
Structural overlay






Pavement
Preservation
Minor rehabilitation
Preventive
maintenance
Routine
maintenance





Maintenance Reactive
maintenance
Catastrophic
maintenance


1.3. Key Activities
The design, construction, monitoring and reporting of experimental sections can be
divided into a number of key activities, all of which are equally important in
ensuring that relevant data are captured and interpreted in such away that an
informed decision can be taken on the implementation of the findings of an
experiment. These activities include:
• Delegating responsibility
• Preparing an experimental design
• Selecting and establishing a suitable site
• Construction
• Monitoring
• Forensic studies
• Laboratory testing
• Data management
• Reporting and implementation
A flow chart of the process is provided in Figure 1.2. Each activity is discussed in
the following chapters.
1.4. Typical Pavement Preservation Activities
Various pavement preservation activities are performed on highways. Certain
activities are preventive in that they are performed before any significant distress
has occurred. Others are remedial and are carried out to repair distresses in the
pavement.
Reconstruction
Rehabilitation
Preventive maintenance
Routine maintenance
Reactive maintenance
Catastrophic maintenance
4 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
Figure 1.2: Flowchart of key activities
Many routine activities are unlikely to be assessed in research experiments and will
not be covered in any detail in this document. Typical activities that may well be
researched are listed in Table 1.2. The list is not exhaustive and only provides an
example of activities commonly investigated in pavement preservation
experiments. The list does include issues such as drainage, pavement markings,
barriers, water crossings and vegetation control, although investigations can be
undertaken on these with a view to improving techniques or assessing new
products. Throughout this document, where appropriate, activities will be referred
to as ‘ total’ and ‘ selective’ treatments as detailed in the table.
Dowel bar retrofit
Chip sealing
Microsurfacings
Slurry sealing
Establish team
Identify need for
experiment
Prepare experiment workplan
Laboratory testing
Prepare proposal
Select and establish site
Construct experiment
Forensic Monitor experiment investigation
Analyze data
Prepare reports
Prepare implementation plan
Implement
1. Introduction 5
Table 1.2: Typical pavement preservation activities
Activity* Area treated Preventive Remedial
Thin overlays
Ultra- thin overlays
Bonded wearing course
Microsurfacings
Chip seals
Slurry seals
Fog seals
Total













-
Crack seal
Crack fill
Joint seal
Patching
Partial- depth concrete repair
Full- depth concrete repair
Edge repair
Diamond grinding
Dowel bar retrofit
Selective
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-









-
* Activities may include the use of mechanical improvements such as
geotextiles or geogrids
1.5. Quality Management
The Caltrans Project Delivery Quality Management Plan ( QM) was established to
implement and document a fully integrated project delivery " Quality System" for all
transportation projects regardless of funding source, sponsorship, or who performs
the work. This plan focuses on the delivery of Quality Transportation Projects,
emphasizing accountability and utilizing continuous improvements, to assist the
Department in achieving its mission to " Improve mobility across California”. In
terms of pavement preservation experiments, quality management will aim to
ensure consistently designed and tested experiments that provide good quality
data that can be used with confidence to develop and implement procedures to
improve delivery of infrastructure in California.
1.6. Using this Summary Guideline
As the name implies, this document is a summary of a significantly more
comprehensive guide on the design, construction, monitoring, and analysis of
pavement preservation experiments. This summary guide provides an introduction
to each chapter discussed in the more comprehensive guide, and highlights key
points. More detail is provided on the site selection, construction and monitoring
phases, where it is anticipated that the summary guide will be most used. The
evaluator is, however, encouraged to regularly refer to the comprehensive guide
6 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
for more detailed information and discussion during each phase of an experiment,
specifically with regard to quality management.
This summary guide includes the example checklists and forms contained in the
comprehensive guide.
2. Management and Responsibilities 7
2. MANAGEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES
A team of suitably qualified and experienced personnel is required to manage,
establish and evaluate pavement preservation experiments in close liaison with
other units who have responsibility for the road. This team will be accountable
for optimizing the establishment and evaluation of pavement preservation
experiments and presentation of the highest quality data possible in a format
that is useable by other Divisions within Caltrans. The establishment and
evaluation of experiments is expensive. Outcomes may result in state- wide
changes to current practice and specifications and implementation might be
scrutinized by many individuals within the state, as well as nationally and
internationally. Roles and responsibilities thus need to be clearly defined and
monitored by means of appropriate job descriptions, key- result areas, and
performance evaluation.
Typical staffing requirements associated with pavement preservation
experiments include the following. Roles and responsibilities for each are
explained in the detailed guideline.
• Project Champion
• Project Engineer/ Project Manager
• Database Manager
• Instrumentation Technician
• Evaluation Team
Typical staff organization chart for pavement preservation experiments
Project Champion
Project Engineer Database Manager
Instrument Technician Evaluation team
8 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
3. Project Fundamentals 9
3. PROJECT FUNDAMENTALS
Project fundamentals revolve around the need to do the experiment and the
implications of implementing the findings. Pavement preservation experiments
are built for a variety of reasons, primarily to understand the behavior,
performance, and potential benefits of doing something new or differently.
However, experience has shown that in many instances, the objectives for
constructing an experiment are often not fully thought out, insufficient
background study is carried out, inappropriate data is collected, monitoring
programs and protocols are not adhered to, the results are not written up, and
the findings are not implemented. Therefore, it is imperative that the reason for
initiating the experiment is fully understood and that a comprehensive
experimental design is prepared in order to ensure that the objectives are met
and, if successful, the procedure being evaluated can be adopted as standard
practice, where appropriate, with confidence.
In the detailed guideline, this chapter explains:
• Study proposals ( Checklists 1 and 2, Appendix A)
• Background studies
• Introduction to experimental designs ( Checklist 3, Appendix A)
A flow chart depicting the processes covered in this chapter is provided in
Figure 3.1.
Study proposals for experiments are considered in two phases by Caltrans —
pre- proposal and full proposal. A summary of the process proposed by Caltrans
Division of Maintenance, Office of Pavement Preservation is provided in the
detailed guide. Further information can be obtained from the Chief of the Office
of Pavement Preservation.
Background studies check what work has already been done on the topic and
help to decide whether the experiment is required. Information can be sought
on similar experiments and the key parameters that need to be assessed. A
brief state- of- the- art report should be prepared on completion of the background
study summarizing:
• Overview of why the study is being undertaken and the potential benefits
to Caltrans
10 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
Figure 3.1: Flowchart for project approval
• Findings of the literature review
• Results from the preliminary laboratory study if undertaken
• Applicability of the findings to California
• Justification to continue or discontinue the study
• Proposed experimental design
A full proposal should be prepared after completion of the background study.
This proposal should include the content from the pre- proposal and background
information documents, as well as:
• Potential partners ( those who have a vested interest in the results and
who could make technical, financial or “ in- kind” contributions)
Problem identification
Accept?
Yes
Yes
No
No
Preliminary study proposal
Continue?
Background study
Record of decision
Experiment Work Plan
Experimental design
Record of decision
Terminate study
Prelim experimental design
Yes
No
Accept?
Detailed study proposal
3. Project Fundamentals 11
• Project logistics
• Proposed work plan ( see Chapter 4) and timetable
• Estimated study budget
• Definition of success, including the performance and cost criteria that will
define success compared to current Caltrans practice.
• Details on how the findings would be implemented including expected
deliverables, who would lead the implementation process and probable
timetable and cost
• Signed commitment by the project team to complete the study
**********
Pavement preservation experiments can take many forms, including but not
limited to one or a combination of the following:
• Assessing a new strategy/ treatment/ technology ( i. e., does this
technology “ work”?)
• Comparing one strategy/ treatment/ technology with another ( i. e., which is
the “ best” treatment?)
• Refining a strategy/ treatment/ technology ( i. e., what is the “ best way” to
do this treatment?)
• Understanding a treatment/ technology ( i. e., “ how” does this technology
work?)
Replicate studies are important in many types of experiment, especially where
variables ( construction, material variability, weather) can influence performance
of the treatment being assessed. The inclusion of replicates will improve the
reliability of the findings. Two types of replicate need to be considered:
• Replications within the same test section, typically used to deal with
construction, material, and/ or pavement variability within the test section.
• Replications between other regions, materials, pavement types, climates
and/ or traffic, etc. in the state to identify boundaries to implementation, if
these are not already being considered as factors in the experimental
design.
Key evaluation criteria, on which the success of the treatment will be decided,
need to be established for each experiment. These should be linked to the
experiment objective. For example, if two modified binders are being compared
in a chip seal experiment, the key evaluation criteria will probably be
Heavy Vehicle Simulator
experiment - “ how does this
technology work”
Rut evaluation
12 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
raveling/ stone loss over time. Evaluation criteria are discussed in more detail in
Chapter 7.
In any experiment, it is important to establish and understand what the failure
criteria for any experiment are and what action needs to be taken when failure
occurs. Examples of failure criteria include rut depth, stone loss, and length or
area of cracking.
The criteria for deciding when an experiment is completed should also be
determined in the experimental design. This will be the point at which sufficient
data has been collected such that an informed decision can be made on
whether to adopt/ proceed with implementation or reject the strategy/
treatment/ technology. It could be time ( e. g., level of performance after a period
of elapsed time) or performance based ( e. g., no improvement over control in
terms of performance indicators).
Failure criteria - bleeding
4. Experiment Work Plan 13
4. EXPERIMENT WORK PLAN
The Experiment Work Plan is a comprehensive document detailing the
objectives of the experiment, the experimental design, the control, evaluation
procedures and responsible persons. It should be considered a “ live”
document in that changes during the course of the experiment are often
necessitated. An Experiment Work Plan must be prepared for every
experiment once the decision to proceed with an experiment is made by the
Project Champion and Pavement Preservation Task Group Chair after
completion and review of the background study and detailed proposals.
The procedure for preparing an experiment work plan, the work plan content
and format and revisions to the work plan are discussed step- by- step in the
detailed guide. Checklists 4 to 6 in Appendix A are relevant to procedures in
this chapter. A flow chart summarizing the process is provided below
( Figure 4.1).
Figure 4.1: Flowchart for development of an experiment work plan
Add experimental spec number
Discussion workshop following
set agenda
Incorporate changes
Schedule experiment
Approve
Write draft experimental spec
Yes
Accept?
Distribute to working group
Experiment work plan
No
14 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
5. Site Selection 15
5. SITE SELECTION
Site selection is critical. The site needs to be representative of roads, traffic
and environment where the pavement preservation strategy might be used if
proved successful in the proposed experiment. If feasible, experiments can
be combined to optimize monitoring schedules and comparisons between
ongoing performances of the different studies. All experiments should include
a control section and replicates. Control sections are typically the standard
pavement preservation strategy that would have been used. For example, if a
new chip seal design is being assessed, the experiment should include a
section constructed using the existing chip seal design so that a direct
comparison of performance can be made. Replicates are typically included to
assess variability at each site and the influence of, for example, climate and
traffic between sites.
In the detailed guide, this chapter discusses the following components of site
selection. A flow chart depicting the processes covered is provided in
Figure 5.1.
• Site selection procedure ( Checklists 7 and 8 in Appendix A)
• Experiment numbering
• Layout and marking ( Checklist 9 in Appendix A)
• Instrument installation
The identification and selection of experiment sections will depend on the
specific criteria and objectives of the study. The following general issues
should, however, be considered when selecting sections:
• Sections should be representative of the issue being investigated and
results obtained from these sections should be representative of other
roads with similar conditions.
• Where possible experiments should be conveniently located for
monitoring and or demonstration purposes.
• Individual sections within the experiment, including the control, should
be similar in terms of alignment, structure, traffic, and condition. Side-by-
side sections should not be used for direct comparison.
• The establishment of the section should not pose a safety hazard to
road users, or be positioned so that the safety of the persons monitoring
the section is jeopardized.
Road is curved, sight distance is
limited, and structure is
inconsistent.
Road is straight, safe, and
consistent.
FWD
16 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
• The road on which the section is being located should not be maintained,
rehabilitated or resealed within the planned monitoring period, unless
assessment of that intervention is part of the monitoring program and
prior warning is given to the Project Engineer.
• Sections should be located as close as possible to traffic counting/ weigh-in-
motion stations, unless a station is incorporated into the section.
• Sections should be selected such that testing to ” failure” of certain
sections can be completed and then repaired without significant impacts
to the road user.
Figure 5.1: Flowchart for site selection
The site selection procedure involves three main stages:
• Desktop study
• Site visit
o Experimental design considerations
o Safety considerations
o Environmental considerations
• Site report and approval
Consistent cracking
Consistent bleeding/ stone loss
Inconsistent rutting and cracking
Inconsistent concrete surface
Environmentally sensitive
Site visit
Layout and mark
Assign experiment number
Desktop study
Yes
Meet
requirements?
Site selection
No
Select uniform sections
Schedule construction
Install instruments
5. Site Selection 17
Each experiment, and section within the experiment if applicable, should be
assigned a unique experiment number for management purposes. A number
should be obtained from the Chief of the Office of Pavement Preservation. This
number will be linked to the proposal and experiment specification registers
described in the previous chapter.
Once selected the test sections should be labeled, marked and instrumented
according to the requirements of the Experiment Work Plan. Suitable signs
should be erected at either end of the experiment with experiment details and a
contact number or website where Caltrans staff can obtain additional information
and notify the Project Engineer of any observations or interventions that may be
necessary. The length of the experiment will be detailed in the Experiment
Work Plan and will vary depending on the treatment being assessed. Typical
sections lengths are:
• Total surface — 200 m ( 600ft)
• Selective surface — sufficient length to have at least 12 replicates with
the same treatment ( i. e., 12 cracks, 12 potholes, 12 joints)
PPTS/ 3/ 05/ 1/ 1
Example experiment section
number
Experiment number sign
18 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
6. Experiment Construction 19
6. EXPERIMENT CONSTRUCTION
The performance of any road is directly related to the quality of construction. It
is therefore imperative that the construction process is closely observed so
later performance can be related back to it. Since pavement preservation
strategies are being evaluated, it is also very important that the road is
comprehensively evaluated before any work is undertaken in order to
determine the level of success of the strategy.
When undertaking any assessments, observations or measurements, it should
always be kept in mind that the data will ultimately be used in an analysis to
determine the effectiveness of the technique and/ or product being assessed.
Careful consideration should thus be given to the manner in which the
assessments are recorded such that quality analysis can be undertaken and
valid conclusions drawn.
In the detailed guide, this chapter discusses the following components of
experiment construction. A flow chart depicting the processes covered is
provided in Figure 6.1.
• Pre- construction assessment ( Checklist 10 in Appendix A)
• Construction assessment ( Checklist 11 in Appendix A)
• Material sampling
• Instrument installation
Typical issues to consider in the pre- construction assessment are listed on
Checklist 10 in Appendix A.
Every aspect of the construction process, from preparation of the surface
through cleaning up excess materials ( e. g., brooming after chip seal
application) can influence later performance of the treatment. The entire
process thus needs to be observed and systematically documented so later
performance can be linked to the construction process where applicable.
Examples of critical areas requiring observation include, but are not limited to:
• Calibration of the spray and stone application rate on fog seals and chip
seals
• Brooming of excess stone after chip seal application
• Repair of distress prior to overlay treatments
Structural assessment prior to
action
Poor drainage may influence
experiment performance
Microsurfacing application
20 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
• Checking binder temperature and compaction techniques
• Cleaning process and effectiveness in crack, joint and pothole repairs
• Reviewing quality control and quality assurance procedures
Figure 6.1: Flowchart for experiment construction
If a proprietary treatment is being assessed, then the manufacturer or supplier
should appoint a technical representative to provide advice on the project.
They should also provide a step- by- step procedure together with checklists that
need to be followed in order to ensure that the experiment is constructed
correctly. The procedure must clearly state situations to avoid and the
consequences if they are not.
The Caltrans Project Engineer must supervise and systematically document the
entire construction process from site preparation through to opening the road
to traffic. If applicable, any deviations from procedures for proprietary products
should be noted. On completion, the Project Engineer must be fully satisfied
that the test section is representative of the Experiment Work Plan and that
sufficient data have been collected from the construction process to adequately
relate later performance to the road prior to treatment, and to construction.
Chip spreader calibration
Brooming excess chip seal
stone
Construction assessment
Report
Instrument installation
Pre- construction assessment
Experiment construction
Material sampling
Schedule monitoring
Yes
Construction
satisfactory?
No
Reject experiment
6. Experiment Construction 21
Typical issues to consider when observing construction include, but are not
limited to ( see Checklist 11 in Appendix A):
• Systematic documentation of the process and deviations from the
procedure provided
• Treatment ( e. g., binder, aggregate, sealant) source and characteristics
• Equipment type and condition
• Calibration procedures
• Surface, crack or pothole preparation
• Compaction
• Establishment, application and demobilization time
• Quality control and quality assurance processes followed
• Uniformity
• Wastage
• Problems encountered and how they were dealt with
• Recommendations to improve the process
All observations should be documented on a Construction Assessment Form.
The contents of the form will depend on the type of treatment. An example of a
form is provided in Appendix B ( Form 1). A checklist, relevant to the pavement
preservation treatment, should be completed to ensure that all aspects of the
construction process have been documented and recorded.
A quantitative measure is always more useful than a subjective observation
when analyzing data collected from an experiment. Where feasible, any
component of the process being assessed that can be measured should be
measured with appropriate calibrated equipment and the data recorded.
Typical parameters that can be measured during construction include, but are
not limited to:
• Haul distances and times
• Time taken for each component including opening and closing times
• Characteristics of the surface before and after treatment:
• Air and surface temperatures and other site weather conditions
• For overlays:
o Asphalt concrete temperature
o Thickness
o Quantity applied per unit surface area
o Compaction procedures
Poor quality construction
Thickness control
Contamination
Segregation
Drainage impairment
Measurement of early rutting
22 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
• For seals:
o Binder temperature
o Spray rate
o Aggregate size, shape and quantity applied per unit area
• For patches:
o Thickness
o Quantity applied per unit surface area
• For cracks
o Sealant temperature
o Sealant applied per linear meter
• Density after compaction
Copies of the Resident Engineer’s and Inspector’s notebooks should be
obtained where possible.
Representative samples of all the materials used in the pavement
preservation treatment should be collected at appropriate times throughout the
construction procedure. Quantities and replicates will depend on the tests
detailed in the Experiment Work Plan. A sample log should be kept and
records of all samples should be noted on the Construction Assessment Form.
All samples should be appropriately labeled. Two types of sample may be
collected, namely for:
• Laboratory testing
• Reference purposes
A construction report should be prepared summarizing the construction
process and detailing any specific issues that may influence performance and
how these should be assessed during later monitoring evaluations. Deviations
from the Experiment Work Plan should be listed. The report should also clearly
state whether procedures were such that a satisfactory experiment has been
constructed and that monitoring should continue. The as- built records should
be included in the report and will serve as a basis for later monitoring. Report
approval signifies that monitoring of the experiment can continue.
Aggregate samples
Density after compaction
Slab sample
Core sample
7. Experiment Monitoring 23
7. EXPERIMENT MONITORING
Experiment monitoring is the phase during which most of the data that will be
used in the analysis is collected. Experience has shown that it is also the
phase when studies lose momentum and are even abandoned as new interests
are followed and/ or staff move on to other activities, positions or employment.
It is thus important to maintain interest in experiments and ensure that the
monitoring program is adhered to. Movement of staff should not affect
successful completion of a study.
In the detailed guide, this chapter discusses ( Figure 7.1):
• Background information on experiment monitoring
• Operational issues ( Checklist 12 in Appendix A)
• Monitoring timetables
• Protocols and criteria
• Visual assessment procedures ( Checklist 13 in Appendix A)
• Measurements and sampling
Figure 7.1: Flowchart for experiment monitoring
Visual assessment of rutting
Accuracy check
Assessment
Preparation and planning
Training/ calibration
Experiment monitoring
Data capture
Yes
Evaluators
calibrated?
No
24 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
The appearance of distress is varied and often extremely complex. The task of
describing this is achieved by recording its main characteristics - the so- called
attributes of distress. The attributes typically used in assessment are type,
degree and extent. Detailed explanations relevant to each type of distress are
described in the Pavement Condition Survey Manual and similar appropriate
visual assessment guides.
Type of Distress - The type of distress evaluated will depend on the purpose of
carrying out the assessment. For example, types assessed on chip seal
overlays will differ from those on joint seal experiments. A number of
assessment parameters are considered essential for any type of evaluation,
while detailed descriptions of particular distress types will be required for
specific pavement preservation treatments. Typical parameters assessed
include, but are not limited to:
• Cracking ( fatigue, block, edge, longitudinal, reflection, transverse, corner,
durability)
• Potholes and/ or existing patching and patch deterioration
• Surface deformation ( rutting, shoving)
• Surface defects ( bleeding, polished aggregate, raveling, map cracking,
scaling, popouts)
• Miscellaneous distresses ( lane- to- shoulder drop- off, lane- to- shoulder
separation, water bleeding and pumping, blowouts)
• Joint deficiencies ( joint seal damage, spalling, faulting)
• Functional performance ( ride quality, skid resistance, spray, noise, etc)
Distresses can be assessed individually or in terms of their interactive effect on
the functional performance of the road together with deflection, material
properties, road profile ( transverse and longitudinal), drainage, etc. An
example of this is the development of potholes, which result in deterioration of
overall functionality, particularly riding quality.
Degree - The degree of a particular type of distress is a measure of its severity.
Because the degree of distress can vary over the pavement section, the degree
to be recorded should, in connection with the extent of occurrence, give the
predominant severity of a particular type of distress. The degree is described
by a number where:
• Degree 1 indicates the first evidence of a particular type of distress
(“ slight”).
Longitudinal crack
Fatigue crack, base failure
Shear crack, base failure
Raveling on chip seal
Pumping through crack
Pumping through patch joint
7. Experiment Monitoring 25
• Degree 3 indicates a warning condition. This would normally indicate
that intervention might be required in order to avoid the distress
deteriorating to a severe condition.
• Degree 5 indicates the worst degree (“ severe”). Urgent attention is
required.
Degree descriptions relate to the possible consequences of each type of
distress and therefore also to the urgency of maintenance or rehabilitation. A
flow diagram illustrating the use of the five- point classification system is shown
in Figure 7.2.
Figure 7.2: Flow diagram – five- point classification system
Extent - The extent of distress is a measure of how widespread the distress is
over the length of the experimental section or panel. The extent is also
indicated on a five- point scale in which the length of road affected by the
distress is estimated as a percentage. The general description of the extent
classifications is given in Table 7.1 and illustrated diagrammatically in
Figure 7.3.
Table 7.1: General description of extent classifications
Extent Description Estimate
(%)
1 Isolated occurrence, not representative of the section or panel
being evaluated.
< 5
2 Between 1 and 3 5 - 20
3 Intermittent occurrence, over most of the section or panel or
extensive occurrence over a limited portion of the section.
20 - 60
4 Between 3 and 5 60 - 80
5 Extensive occurrence. 80 - 100
Degree 1 distress
Degree 3 distress
Degree 5 distress
1 5
Minimal Is the distress Excessive
severity minimal,
excessive or
Average
Is the distress better
or worse than
average?
2 4
Better Worse
Average
3
26 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
Extent = 1: isolated occurrence
+
+
Or
+
++
Extent = 3: scattered occurrence over most of length
+ + + +
+ + + + +
Or extensive occurrence over a limited portion of the length
+ + + + + + +
+ + + + + ++++ +
Extent = 5: extensive occurrence
+ + + + + + + + ++ + + + ++ + ++ + + +
+ + + + + + + + +++ + + + + ++ ++ + + +
Figure 7.3: Diagrammatical illustration of extent
Depending on the study, the maximum severity possible is often of equal or
greater interest than the predominant severity. In terms of pavement
preservation test sections, specific interest will be on those defects that the
treatment was intended to address.
To minimize the element of subjectivity and to ensure good knowledge of the
assessment procedures, it is essential to train and calibrate all evaluators at
regular intervals.
There are numerous operational issues that need to be taken care of prior to
undertaking a monitoring evaluation, including notifications, traffic closures and
equipment preparation. These will differ between Districts and between
experiments and are not covered in detail in this guideline. An example
checklist ( Checklist 12) is provided in Appendix A.
Safety considerations
7. Experiment Monitoring 27
The monitoring timetable will be detailed in the Experiment Work Plan. When
preparing this timetable, it is important to have a balance between collecting
sufficient data and collecting too much. It is also important to identify an
expected end point for the experiment, either linked to:
• Time ( e. g., exceeds expected design life in years),
• Traffic ( e. g., cumulative vehicles passed or exceeds expected design life
in axles), or
• Failure criteria ( e. g., rut depth).
The protocols and criteria that need to be used as a basis for monitoring will
be detailed in the Experiment Work Plan. Visual assessments will typically be
carried out using the Caltrans Visual Condition Survey Manual. If more detail is
required for analysis purposes, the LTPP Distress Identification Manual can be
used. Caltrans or ASTM methods should be followed for measuring functional
parameters such as ride quality, skid resistance, splash and spray, and noise.
It is important to establish and understand what the failure criteria for any
experiment are and what action needs to be taken when failure occurs.
Examples of failure criteria, based on California requirements, that can be used
in assessing pavement preservation experiments include, but are not limited to:
• Chip seals and overlays
o Crack severity and extent [ e. g., > 2.5 m ( 6.5 ft) total length or
2.5 m/ m 2 ( 6.5 ft 2 ) total crack density]
o Rut depth [ e. g., > 12.5 mm ( 0.5 in.)]
o Stone loss ( e. g., > 20% of area)
• Reinforcement materials
o Reflective cracking [ e. g., > 2.5 m/ m 2 ( 6.5 ft) total crack density,
> 3 mm ( 0.1 in.) width]
o Rut depth [ e. g., > 25 mm ( 1.0 in.)]
• Crack and joint sealants
o Spalling [ e. g., > 100 mm ( 4 in.) wide]
o Separation and/ or shrinkage [> 3 mm ( 0.1 in.)]
o Whip off [> 25 mm ( 1.0 in.)]
• Pothole repair materials
o Deformation [ e. g., > 25 mm ( 1.0 in.)]
o Cracking ( e. g., > 10% of area)
o Separation and/ or shrinkage [ e. g., > 3 mm ( 0.1 in.)]
o Punch outs ( any)
FHWA LTPP distress
identification manual
Failed chip seal
(> 20% stone loss)
Patch joint failure
28 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
Depending on the type of experiment, failure could also be determined by
functional properties such as riding quality, skid resistance, spray and noise
( e. g., exceeding specified limits). Once failure has occurred, the experiment
can either be terminated or a maintenance intervention can be carried out and
the monitoring continued if treatment life- cycles are being assessed.
Visual assessments should be carried out on each section or panel according
to the criteria detailed in the Experiment Work Plan and using the protocols
described above. Prior to each evaluation, the previous evaluation forms
should be reviewed in order that the evaluator can familiarize him/ herself, be
able to identify new deterioration, and distinguish between deterioration that
occurred prior to and after the previous monitoring visit. A systematic process
should be followed such that the entire panel or section is covered and all parts
of the evaluation form are completed. The road surface should be viewed from
all angles ( i. e., both ends and both sides) to ensure that the angle of sunlight
and shadows does not influence the rating. The evaluation form should be
completed in full. If a particular distress is not observed, a zero should be
logged to show that it was not overlooked. Digital photographs should also be
taken during each visit and recorded on the evaluation form.
Observations and measurements should be recorded on the standard forms
provided with the Pavement Condition Survey Manual, or a customized form
prepared for the experiment ( see example Forms 2 and 3 in Appendix B). If
customized forms are prepared, the same form must be used for all monitoring
to ensure consistency and to facilitate analysis.
The evaluator should also carry out a first- level check by comparing the
previous evaluation with the current one. This is achieved by comparing forms
and identifying any discrepancies such as decreasing rut depth or the presence
of a specific distress in a previous evaluation and its absence in later
evaluations. All discrepancies should be corrected or justified before
completing the evaluation. If necessary, part of the evaluation may need to be
repeated. A checklist ( Checklist 13 in Appendix A) should be used by the
evaluator as a reminder to ensure that all requirements are met.
Skid resistance and permeability
measurements
Visual assessments
Visual assessment form
7. Experiment Monitoring 29
Quantitative measures are always more useful than subjective observations
when analyzing data collected from an experiment. Where feasible, any
component of the process being assessed that can be physically measured
should be measured with appropriate calibrated equipment and the data
recorded, either on an appropriate form, or electronically depending on the
parameter and the equipment used. Parameters that need to be measured
during the visual assessment will differ depending on the type and objectives of
the experiment. Some examples of physical measurements on different
pavement preservation experiments are listed in Table 7.2.
Table 7.2: Examples of physical measurements
FWD measurement
Profiler
Measurements on experiment
Rut measurements
DCP measurements
Measurement Total
surface
treatment
Selective
treatment
Method
Cracking
• Fatigue
• Block
• Longitudinal
• Reflection
• Transverse
• Corner
• Durability
Crack seal
• Shrinkage







-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

Tape, wheel, digitized photo
Tape, wheel
Tape wheel
Tape, wheel, digitized photo
Tape, wheel
Tape
Tape, wheel
Tape, steel ruler
Surface Deformation
• Rutting
• Shoving
• Potholes
• Patch deterioration
• Patch shrinkage
• Patch deformation



-
-
-
-
-




Straight edge & wedge
Straight edge & wedge
Straight edge & tape
Straight edge & tape
Tape measure, steel ruler
Straight edge & wedge
Surface Defects
• Bleeding
• Raveling/ stone loss
• Scaling
• Popouts






-

Tape, wheel
Tape, wheel
Tape, wheel
Straight edge & tape
Miscellaneous
• Blowouts


Straight edge & tape
Joint Deficiencies
• Seal shrinkage
• Faulting
-



Tape, steel ruler
Tape, steel ruler
Functional
• Longitudinal profile
• Riding quality
• Skid resistance
• Noise
• Spray









-
Laser profilometer
Laser profilometer
Skid or Pendulum tester
Noise tester
Spray tester of photographs
Structural
• Deflection
• In situ strength
• Modulus
• Layer thickness




-
-

-
FWD
DCP
FWD, Seismic
GPR
30 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
If a failure has occurred on a section, the cause should be identified and
documented. A forensic investigation should be considered if the cause cannot
be determined with confidence, for example, excessive stone loss on a chip
seal, or rutting after the application of a fog seal.
The need to collect samples from a section will depend on the type and
objectives of the experiment and will be detailed in the Experiment Work Plan.
Samples should be correctly labeled and a sample log should be kept for any
samples taken. All sample details should be recorded on the Assessment
Form.
Forensic investigation
8. Forensic Investigations 31
8. FORENSIC INVESTIGATIONS
Forensic investigations should be undertaken to confirm the mode of and
reason for failure on any experiment. They should also be considered as a final
opportunity to rigorously study the section, the findings of which could
contribute significantly to understanding how the various treatments performed.
Most forensic evaluations on pavement preservation treatments will simply
involve a close- out evaluation. If the reason for failure cannot be determined
with certainty, a more detailed forensic investigation by means of cores and/ or
test pits may be required.
This chapter in the detailed guide covers ( Figure 8.1):
• Level of detail
• Test pit location
• Coring
• Test pit excavation
• Sample logistics
• Test pit logging
• In- pit testing
• Test pit repair
A guide for the need for forensic evaluations in pavement preservation
experiments is provided in Table 8.1.
Table 8.1: Guide for forensic investigations
Activity* Detailed forensic required? Test
pit +
cores
Cores
only
Thin overlays
Ultra- thin overlays
Bonded wearing course
Microsurfacings
Chip seals
Slurry seals
Fog seals
Yes, if rutting & cracking present
Yes, if rutting & cracking present
Dependent on failure mechanism
No, unless deformation after application
No, unless deformation after application
No, unless deformation after application
No, unless deformation after application



-
-
-
-
-
-





Crack seal
Crack fill
Joint seal
Patching
Partial- depth PCC repair
Full- depth concrete repair
Edge repair
Diamond grinding
Dowel bar retrofit
No
No
No
Dependent on type of failure
No
Dependent on type of failure
No
No
No
-
-
-

-

-
-
-









Test pit and cores
Test pit
Test pit - note variable layer
thickness
Core log
32 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
Figure 8.1: Flowchart for forensic investigations
Saw cutting test pit
In pit density measurements
In pit DCP measurements
Test pit profile, note rutting in
lower AC layer
Test pit profile
Excavate and investigate
Plan investigation
Close- out monitoring
Justify investigation
Forensic investigation
Identify test pit location
Yes
Proceed? No
Repair pit
Data analysis
Experiment report
9. Laboratory Testing 33
9. LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory testing is carried out in order to obtain an understanding of the
material characteristics of the existing road surface or treatment being applied.
In most instances these properties need to be known in order to understand
why the road performed the way it did and to determine a set of criteria that can
be used as a basis for determining where treatments or techniques that are
being assessed can be applied elsewhere on the network.
Laboratory testing should only be carried out when the results will enhance
knowledge of how the pavement performed and the reliability of the findings of
the study in terms of addressing the study objectives. Testing should not be
carried out simply for the sake of testing. The need for testing and the type of
testing will be identified in the Experimental Work Plan.
Testing that might be carried out typically includes characterization of the
properties, durability, and performance of the various materials used in the
experiment, and samples removed during the course of the experiment or after
completion of the experiment
A discussion on laboratory testing falls outside the scope of these guidelines.
However, the following should be considered before testing:
• Care should be taken to fully understand a test, its purpose and its
limitations before selecting it. Most tests are developed for a specific
purpose. When used to test something outside the original scope, the
mechanism and results may not be entirely relevant. Results need to be
interpreted with care and the test may need to be modified to suit the
need.
• An appropriate method may need to be sought to test a particular
parameter. This may not be commonly used within Caltrans and
laboratory staff may need to be trained in its use. Alternatively, a new
test may need to be adopted or developed to address a particular need.
• Test methods should be strictly adhered to, unless modified to suit the
needs of the experiment. If modified, the changes need to be clearly
documented with a justification for doing so. Test methods should not be
changed simply to obtain a satisfactory answer.
Indirect tensile ( ITS) strength
test
34 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
Laboratory testing procedures are fully documented in the California Test
Methods document. Where appropriate, ASTM, AASHTO, and/ or other
organizations’ test methods may be followed. The reasons for using an
alternative test method should be justified.
10. Data Analysis and Reports 35
10. DATA ANALYSIS, REPORTS, AND IMPLEMENTATION
Appropriate data analysis and reporting is a fundamental part of any
experiment. In this phase of the research, the data collected from the visual
assessments and measurements is analyzed to determine whether the
strategy, treatment, technology, procedure and/ or product performed and
behaved in a manner, such that adoption of it would have benefits over existing
practice.
This chapter in the detailed guide covers:
• Data analysis
• Construction, progress, and first- and second- level analysis reports
• Implementation
The focus of data analysis will be the systematic comparison of the behavior
and performance of the strategy, treatment, technology, procedure or product
against that of the control. The criteria that are used for this comparison will
depend on the Experiment Work Plan.
Reports are the means by which experiments, findings and recommendations
are documented. Format and content will depend on the type of experiment.
Five types of report are typically prepared during the course of an experiment:
• Site selection reports
• Construction report
• Progress/ interim reports
• Research reports
o First- level analysis report
o Second- level analysis report
• Implementation report
Implementation reports provide a summary of the experiment and the
findings, together with recommendations on how the findings should be
implemented. The report should be presented to the relevant office chiefs and
disseminated to the district maintenance and materials engineers, and
depending on the outcome, an implementation/ adoption timetable should be
agreed to.
36 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
Implementation of the findings is perhaps the most important, but often most
overlooked, phase of any experiment. By following all the procedures
discussed in these guidelines, valid and quantified justifications for
implementing new or improved technologies and procedures can be developed.
Once defined, these technologies and procedures need to be systematically
implemented. The following implementation process is proposed:
• The project champion should notify relevant head office staff and district
office maintenance and materials engineers about the experiment( s) in
the early stages of the study. This notification can also be seen as an
opportunity to identify potential replicate sections, and to find out about
similar experiments that may have been conducted in the past, but not
documented.
• The project engineer should send brief progress reports and updates via
email to head office staff and district office maintenance and materials
engineers throughout the duration of the study. If early significant
findings are noted, engineers from other districts should be encouraged
to visit the experiment as part of future monitoring exercises.
• On completion of the study, the summary/ implementation report should
be presented to the office chiefs at a Pavement Standards Team
meeting. This exercise should be used to initiate the implementation
plan proposed in the implementation report.
• Depending on the recommendations in the implementation report,
proceed with implementation. This may include:
o Revision of the Maintenance Technical Advisory Guide ( MTAG)
o Revision of standards, guideline documents, specifications and
procedures
o Notifying relevant staff of the revised procedures
o Workshops and demonstration projects to disseminate the findings.
11. Data Management and Documentation 37
11. DATA MANAGEMENT AND DOCUMENTATION
A comprehensive record of data documenting the behavior of the test section
and comparison to a control is critical to the success of any experiment. This
requires a systematic data capture, storage, and retrieval procedure to ensure
accuracy, uniformity and continuity in measurements.
This chapter in the detailed guideline discusses:
• The Project File
• Checklists
• Data collection forms
• Proposal register
• Experiment register
• Progress reports
A project file should be opened for each experiment when a proposal is
prepared. All documentation relevant to the project should be kept in the file.
The Project File “ belongs” to an experiment and not to an individual and the
contents should be accessible to any interested person.
Checklists are an effective way of ensuring that all relevant tasks for a
particular part of a study are completed. They also provide a record to prove
that the tasks were carried out and can also be used to guide the process.
Data collection forms will be the primary source of information in most
experiments. They should be filled in with care and as comprehensively as
possible, remembering that data analysis may be carried out by someone other
than the individual who did the assessment, and may be carried out a number
of years later when recollection of the assessment may be difficult. All data from
the forms should be captured into a spreadsheet or database as soon as
possible after they have been collected. By capturing data on separate sheets
with the same format, first- level data checks can be carried out using
comparative graphs.
Photographs and videos will be invaluable in later analysis. Cross references
and details of when and where the photograph and videos were taken and what
they illustrate must be captured on the evaluation form.
38 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
Photographs should be stored electronically in a series of subdirectories linked
to the monitoring dates. Care must be taken to ensure that the numbers on the
photographs match those on the evaluation forms and that there will be no
confusion when analyzing the data. The date, and if appropriate the time, that
the photograph was take should be included in the file name. Key information
can also be recorded on a data board in the photograph.
Centralized numbering systems provide a simplified means of tracking
experiments statewide, and the documentation prepared from them. Numbers
can be obtained from the Chief of the Office of Pavement Preservation. The
following numbering systems are used:
• Experiment Proposal Register
• Experiment Register
• Report Number Register
The data collected from each evaluation should undergo a first- level data
check by both the Project Engineer and the Database Manager. This will
include, but not be limited to:
• A check that data does not fall outside predetermined minimum and
maximum boundaries ( e. g., a severity cannot exceed 5, percentage
areas cannot exceed 100)
• A comparison with data collected from the previous monitoring exercise
to check inconsistencies ( e. g., rut depth less than previous)
All projects need to be closed. For a pavement preservation experiment,
project closure will usually occur once the final report has been submitted and
an implementation plan has been initiated by the Chief of the Office of
Pavement Preservation.
Data board
EP- PPTS/ 3/ 05/ 1/ ver1
Proposal number
PPTS/ 3/ 05/ 1/ 1
Section number
ES- PPTS/ 05/ 1/ ver1
Work plan number
CR- PPTS/ 05/ 1/ ver1
Construction report
IR- PPTS/ 05/ 1/ ver1
Interim/ progress report
ER- PPTS/ 05/ 1/ ver1
Experiment report
12. Bibliography 39
12. BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. California Department of Transportation Web site -
http:// www. dot. ca. gov.
2. Caltrans Safety Manual. 2000. Sacramento, CA: State of California
Department of Transportation. -
http:// www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ opo/ safety/ safetymanual
3. Construction Manual. 2003. Sacramento, CA: State of California
Department of Transportation.
( http:// www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ construc/ manual2001/
4. Distress Identification Manual for the Long term Pavement
Performance Program ( 4 th Edition). 2003. Washington, DC: Federal
Highway Administration. ( FHWA- RD- 03- 031).
5. www. tfhrc. gov/ pavement/ ltpp/ reports/ 03031/ 03031. pdf
6. Generic Experimental design for Product/ strategy Evaluation -
Crumb Rubber modified Materials. 2005. Sacramento, CA: State of
California Department of Transportation.
( www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ esc/ Translab/ fpmlab/)
7. Guide to the Investigation and Remediation of Distress in Flexible
Pavements.
8. Index of California Test Methods - http:// www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ esc/ ctms/
9. Maintenance Manual. 2000. Sacramento, CA: State of California
Department of Transportation. ( http:// www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ maint/ manual/).
10. Maintenance Technical Advisory Guide ( MTAG). 2003. Sacramento,
CA: State of California Department of Transportation.
( www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ maint/ mtag/)
11. New Product Evaluation Guidelines. 1999. Sacramento, CA: State of
California Department of Transportation.
( www. dot. ca. gov/ hq/ esc/ approved_ products_ list/ NPGuidelines. html)
12. Pavement Condition Survey Manual. 2002. Sacramento, CA: State
of California Department of Transportation.
40 GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide
Appendix A: Checklists 41
APPENDIX A: CHECKLISTS
Examples of the following checklists typically used in pavement preservation
experiments are provided in this Appendix:
• Checklist 1: Justification for Study
• Checklist 2: Proposal for a Pavement Preservation Experiment
• Checklist 3: Project Planning
• Checklist 4: Experiment Work Plan Content
• Checklist 5: Experiment Work Plan Document
• Checklist 6: Experiment Initiation
• Checklist 7: Desktop Study
• Checklist 8: Site Selection
• Checklist 9: Site Layout and Marking
• Checklist 10: Preconstruction Assessment
• Checklist 11: Construction Assessment
• Checklist 12: Monitoring Preparation
• Checklist 13: Monitoring
• Checklist 14: Project Closure
CHECKLIST - JUSTIFICATION FOR STUDY Checklist 1
Issue Yes No Comments
1 Has similar research been done by any
other individual/ organization?
2 Are the findings of previous studies
applicable to Caltrans?
3 Are the findings statistically valid?
4 Will doing a similar study provide additional
useful information to advance knowledge
or enhance implementation by Caltrans?
5 If the study is undertaken, will it be
practical for Caltrans to adopt/ implement
the findings in practice?
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Recommendation
Should the study proceed? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - PROPOSAL FOR A PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT Checklist 2
Issue Yes No Comments
1 Is the purpose of the experiment clear?
2 Was the background study sufficiently
comprehensive to justify that the
experiment is required?
3 Are the reasons for undertaking the
experiment justifiable in terms of potential
benefits to Caltrans?
4 Are details on how the findings would be
implemented by Caltrans adequate?
5 Is the work plan sufficiently comprehensive
such that statistically valid data will be
obtained?
6 Is the study timetable appropriate?
7 Is the budget sufficiently comprehensive
and realistic? Have the cost of traffic
closures been included?
8 If a proprietary additive/ procedure is being
tested, is the background documentation
provided adequate?
9 Have potential partners been identified?
10 Has an individual/ position accepted
responsibility for completing the study in
the proposed time frame?
11 Has an individual/ position accepted
responsibility for implementing the findings
into Caltrans practice?
12 Has the proposal been registered with the
Chief of Office of Pavement Preservation?
13 Has a proposal number been issued?
Recommendation
Is the proposal adequate? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - PROJECT PLANNING MEETING Checklist 3
Issue Yes No Comments
1 Is the objective of the experiment clear?
2 Have the implications of the findings from
the background study been adequately
established?
3 Does the experimental design meet the
test objective?
4 Has a suitable control experiment for
comparative purposes been agreed upon?
5 Has the location of the experiment been
decided?
6 Have all the construction requirements
been identified?
7 Has the instrumentation and equipment
required to provide data for envisaged
outcome been identified?
8 Has a monitoring program been drawn up?
9 Has a monitoring procedure been agreed
to?
10 Have failure and experiment completion
criteria been set?
11 Has an associated laboratory test program
been formulated?
12 Have data collection, validation and
storage protocols been agreed upon?
13 Have report formats and frequency been
defined?
14 Have criteria been set for the
treatment/ technology/ procedure/ product to
be adopted as standard practice?
15 Has a plan for implementing the treatment
if successful been formulated?
16 Has consideration been given to repairing
the road after testing?
17 Has responsibility for each of the above
been delegated and accepted?
Recommendation
Has sufficient information been gathered to prepare an experiment work plan? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - EXPERIMENT WORK PLAN CONTENT Checklist 4
Content Yes No Comments
1 Objective of the test
2 Staffing and contact details
3 Responsibility and reporting matrix
• Report preparation
• Report approval
• Health and safety
• Environment
• Data collection
• Data validation
• Data submission
4 Experimental design, including details on replicates
and controls
5 Section detail
• Section number
• Section details including district, county, route
number, lane number and GPS coordinates
• Test panel position
• Pavement description
• Construction, rehabilitation or maintenance
interventions required before testing can begin
• Checklists
6 Instrumentation
• Inventory of instruments
• Location and/ or depth
• Calibration
• Measurement specifications
• Data collection requirements including number
and location of points and conditions under
which measurements will be recorded
• Checklists
7 Evaluation program
• Evaluation detail
• Protocols/ methods/ criteria to be followed
• Failure criteria definition
• Associated laboratory testing
• Checklists
8 Data collection, validation, and storage
• Start date
• Frequency of data collection
• Data validation ( visual, comparison with
previous measurement, within predefined
parameters)
• Data transfer to Database Manager ( timing,
medium)
• Criteria to be met for experiment completion
• Checklists
9 Reports
10 General notes
Recommendation
Has sufficient information been included in the experiment work plan? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - EXPERIMENT WORK PLAN REPORT Checklist 5
Content Yes No Comments
1 Title page?
2 Approval signature page?
3 Revision notes page?
4 Table of contents?
5 Chapter 1: Objective of the test
6 Chapter 2: Staffing and contact details
7 Chapter 3: Responsibility and reporting matrix
8 Chapter 4: Experimental design
9 Chapter 4: Section detail
10 Chapter 5: Instrumentation
11 Chapter 6: Monitoring program
12 Chapter 7: Data collection, validation, and storage
13 Chapter 8: Reports
14 Chapter 9: General notes
15 Appendices: Checklists and forms
16 Reports
17 General notes
Issue Yes No Comments
1 Does the work plan have a number?
2 Has the work plan been submitted and approved by
the Chief of the Office of Pavement Preservation?
3 Have copies been distributed?
4 Have instructions for revisions been distributed?
Recommendation
Has the experiment work plan phase of the experiment been satisfactorily completed? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Notes
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - EXPERIMENT INITIATION Checklist 6
General issues Yes No Comments
1 Has the Project Champion given written
approval to proceed with the experiment?
2 Has a copy of the approval been added to
the Project File?
3 Has an experiment number been issued by
the Chief of the Office of Pavement
Preservation?
4 Has a project team been assembled?
5 Has the project team accepted
responsibilities as assigned in the
experiment work plan?
6 Have all necessary arrangements been
made to proceed with the experiment?
7
8
9
10
11
12
Recommendation
Can the experiment proceed? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - SITE SELECTION DESKTOP STUDY Checklist 7
General issues Yes No Comments
1 Do the identified roads and sections meet
the requirements of the experiment work
plan?
2 Can the experiment be incorporated into a
planned pavement preservation activity on
the proposed road?
3 If a planned activity, can the planned
treatments be accommodated in the
operation?
4 If a planned activity, can the planned
pavement preservation treatment on the
selected section be used as a control?
5 Is the planned operation long enough to
accommodate the experiments?
6 Is the alignment uniform?
7 Is the planned operation long enough to
accommodate replicate sections?
8 Are there any potential problems
envisaged with later monitoring activities
( e. g., road closures)?
9 Are there constraints outside the
Experiment Work Plan that could influence
the use of the site ( e. g., safety)?
10 Is appropriate construction equipment
available?
11 Are there appropriately trained personnel
to do the treatments?
12 Can the contractual arrangements be
modified to accommodate the experiment?
Recommendation
Does the proposed site meet the requirements of the experiment work plan? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - SITE SELECTION Checklist 8
General issues Yes No Comments
1 Is the proposed section representative of
the issue being investigated?
2 Is the proposed section conveniently
located for monitoring and demonstration
purposes?
3 Will any results obtained from this
proposed section be representative of
other roads with similar conditions?
4 Are individual sections within the proposed
experiment similar in terms of alignment,
structure and condition?
5 Will the establishment of the proposed
section pose a safety hazard to road
users?
6 Will the establishment of the proposed
section pose a safety hazard to persons
undertaking monitoring evaluations?
7 Will the road on which the proposed
section is planned be maintained or
rehabilitated within the monitoring period?
8 Can planned maintenance be included as
part of the evaluation?
9 If planned maintenance is not part of the
evaluation, can steps be taken to ensure
that the experiment is not maintained?
10 Is the proposed section located as close as
possible to a traffic counting/ weigh- in-motion
station?
11 Can the proposed section be tested to
‘ failure’ and then repaired without
significant impacts to the road user?
12
Recommendation
Does the proposed site meet the requirements of the experiment work plan? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - SITE LAYOUT AND MARKING Checklist 9
General issues Yes No Comments
1 Were product suppliers present?
2 Were appropriate criteria used to identify
representative sections?
3 Are the selected sites sufficiently uniform?
4 Are there any attributes that may adversely
influence the performance of the
treatment?
5 Can all necessary safety procedures be
implemented/ followed?
6 Can all necessary environmental
procedures be implemented/ followed?
7 Are the product suppliers satisfied that their
products will be fairly evaluated?
8 Has the section been marked according to
the experiment work plan?
9 Were GPS coordinates taken?
10 Have instruments been installed and
calibrated according to the manufacturer’s
specifications?
11 Have arrangements been made for the
collection of weather data?
12 Has an experiment map been drawn?
13 Has an experiment number been
allocated?
14 Have signs been erected?
15 Has experiment register been updated?
16 Has construction been scheduled?
Recommendation
Does the proposed site meet the requirements of the experiment work plan? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - PRE- CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT Checklist 10
General issues Yes No Comments
1 Were correct safety precautions taken?
2 Was the traffic closure acceptable?
3 Are the selected sites sufficiently uniform?
4 Were product suppliers present?
5 Was a comprehensive visual assessment
undertaken?
6 Was the prescribed form used to capture
data?
7 Was any destructive testing carried out,
and if yes, was the damage appropriately
repaired?
8 Are the experiment signs intact?
9 Is the instrumentation installed during
experiment establishment functioning
correctly?
10 Are there any factors that could negatively
influence the performance of the
experiment?
11 Has the road been adequately prepared?
12 Are product suppliers satisfied that
construction can proceed?
13
14
15
Recommendation
Should construction of the experiment proceed? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT Checklist 11
General issues Yes No Comments
1 Was the entire process systematically
documented?
2 Were all deviations from the planned
process justified and/ or explained?
3 Have the potential influence of the
deviations on the experiment performance
been quantified?
4 Were the binder, aggregate and/ or premix
characteristics documented?
5 Was the equipment inspected and
condition documented?
6 Was the equipment correctly calibrated?
7 Was the area of distress adequately
prepared?
8 Was the surfacing/ patch/ crack seal
adequately compacted?
9 Were establishment, application and
demobilization times recorded?
10 Were appropriate quality control
procedures followed?
11 Was the treatment uniform throughout the
experiment?
12 Was wastage documented?
13 Were any unanticipated problems
encountered and how were they dealt
with?
14 What procedures can be implemented to
improve the process?
15 Were the required measurements taken at
the specified intervals?
16 Were the required samples taken at the
specified intervals?
17 Were instruments installed as specified?
18 Were the product suppliers satisfied with
the experiment?
Recommendation
Was the experiment satisfactorily constructed? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - MONITORING PREPARATION Checklist 12
General issues Yes No Comments
1 Have all notifications been made?
2 Have road closures and traffic control
arrangements been made?
3 Has assessor training and calibration been
completed?
4 Are section maps, previous monitoring
forms, blank forms, visual assessment
guide, and experiment work plan packed?
5 Is equipment packed? ( Camera, geo pick,
straight edge, wedge, tape measure, GPS,
DCP, moisture cans, pick, spade, etc.)
6 Is safety equipment packed? ( Protective
clothing, vests, first- aid, water, etc.)
7 Is the equipment correctly calibrated?
( Nuclear gage, DCP weight and cones,
etc.)
8 Have other equipment been arranged?
( e. g., FWD and profiler, etc.)
9
10
11
12
Recommendation
Can monitoring proceed? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - MONITORING Checklist 13
General issues Yes No Comments
1 Was the experiment monitored according
to the requirements of the experiment work
plan?
2 Was the standard prescribed form used? If
not, has all relevant information been
captured?
3 Were all cells on the form completed?
4 Was the assessment compared to the
previous assessment?
5 Were any significant changes since the
previous monitoring accounted for?
6 Were the required photographs taken?
7 Were the required physical measurements
taken?
8 Were the required samples taken?
9 Were the samples logged?
10 Were the samples delivered and
instructions for testing submitted?
11 Have the data and photographs been
captured in a spreadsheet or database?
12 Have all forms been added to the project
file?
13
14
15
Recommendation
Was the monitoring exercise successfully completed? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to continue.
Name
Signature Date
CHECKLIST - PROJECT CLOSURE Checklist 14
General issues Yes No Comments
1 Has the monitoring been completed in
terms of the requirements of the
experiment work plan?
2 Have the objectives of the experiment been
met?
3 Is termination of the project justified?
4 Have all reports as required in the
experiment work plan been written?
5 Have all the objectives of the experiment
as detailed in the work plan been
addressed?
6 Have all reports had an independent
technical review?
7 Have all reports been logged with the Chief
of the Office of Pavement Preservation and
numbered in the central register?
8 Have the required steps been taken to
have the findings implemented?
9 Have the findings been presented to
relevant Caltrans departments and if
applicable, published?
10 Has all data been captured in the database
and backed up?
11 Has the project file been closed and
archived?
12 Have materials samples been disposed of?
13 Have signs, markings and instrumentation
been removed from the site?
14 Have all registers been updated by the
Chief of the Office of Pavement
Preservation?
15 Have all team members and other
interested and affected parties been
notified?
Recommendation
Was the project successfully completed? Yes No
If no, state why and what needs to be done to complete it.
Name
Signature Date
Appendix B: Data Collection Forms 57
APPENDIX B: DATA COLLECTION FORMS
Examples of the following forms typically used for the monitoring of pavement
preservation experiments are provided in this Appendix:
• Form 1: Visual Assessment Form used for Chip Seal Evaluation
( alternative to Pavement Condition Survey standard form)
• Form 2: Profile Assessment
• Form 3: Construction Assessment form for Chip Seal Application
• Form 4: Materials Inventory
• Form 5: Project Site Report
• Form 6: Section Sketch
• Form 7: Core Log
• Form 8: Test Pit Sketch
• Form 9: Log for Surfacing Layers
• Form 10: Log for Granular and Stabilized Base
• Form 11: Photographs
• Form 12: Density and Moisture Content
• Form 13: DCP
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT FORM Form 1
Section No Location Date Evaluator
Experiment description
Weather conditions
Establishment Dates/ Times Road closure
Road Opening Demobilization
Surface preparation
Distributor
Chip spreader
Haul trucks
Rollers
Broom
Equipment inspections
and calibration
Source/ type
Application rate
Total applied
Temperature
Binder
Samples
Notes
Source/ type
Application rate
Total applied
Temperature
Aggregate
Samples
Notes
Roller
Passes
Compaction
Notes
Brooming
Notes
Notes Photos/ video
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT VISUAL ASSESSMENT FORM Form2( a)
Section No Location Date Evaluator
Surfacing assessment
Surfacing type
Texture Varying Fine F - M Medium M - C Course
Voids Varying None N - F Few F - M Many
Degree Extent
Slight Severe < 5 > 80
Length Width Panels
Mechanical failure 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Other failure 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Bleeding/ flushing 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Narrow Wide Position
Surface cracks 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Binder condition 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Active Stable Position
Aggregate loss 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Structural assessment
Degree Extent
Slight Severe < 5 > 80
Narrow
(% area)
Wide
(% area)
Position Panels
Cracks - block 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Cracks - longitudinal 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Cracks transverse 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Cracks - crocodile 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Cracks - parabolic 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Pumping 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Rutting 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Undulation/ settlement 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Edgebreak 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Number Diameter
Potholes 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Delamination 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Small Medium Large Panels
Patching 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Functional assessment
Degree
Good Poor
Influencing factors
Riding quality 1 2 3 4 5 Potholes Patching Undulation Corrugation Ruts
Skid resistance 1 2 3 4 5 Bleeding Polishing
Surface drainage 1 2 3 4 5
Side drainage  
Notes
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT VISUAL ASSESSMENT FORM Form2( b)
Sample details Photos
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT PROFILE ASSESSMENT FORM Form 3( a)
Section No Panel 1 - 5 Date Evaluator
Panel A
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max rut
Width
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Panel 1
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Panel 2
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Panel 3
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Panel 4
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Panel 5
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Transverse
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Section No Panel 6 - 10 Form 3( b)
Panel B
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Panel 6
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Panel 7
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Panel 8
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Panel 9
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Panel
10
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
RE
Max Rut
Width
Transverse
Lane Center
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
CL
Position 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Outer
Inner
Long Lane center
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT - MATERIALS INVENTORY Form 4
Section No Operator Date
Sample
Number
Sample
location
Sample size Sample type
Material type
and code
Sample
condition
Program of
work
Comments
Responsible person
Sign
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT INVESTIGATION - PROJECT SITE REPORT Form 5
Section No Date
Start time Completion time
Responsibility Crew chief
Head driller Crew size
Traffic control Repair
Weather
Equipment
Description of
work and
comments
Description Shipped to Shipped by Date
Samples
Equipment Traffic Other
Site problems
Forms
Sketch Materials inventory Core log Pit assessment
DCP Density/ moisture List of photographs
Pit reinstated
Site cleaned
Responsible person
sign
Date
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT INVESTIGATION - SKETCH Form 6
Section No Date Evaluator
Experimental section plan and location of test pit( s), core points and testing locations
Centerline
Start
Shoulder
Reference Activity Description and reason
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT INVESTIGATION - CORE LOG Form 7
Section No Date
Evaluator Operator
Core hole No
Equipment
Core size
Coolant
Offset
Sketch
Reason for core
Depth
Core drilled
( mm)
Core
recovered
Sample No Layer thickness and description
Material
code
Comments
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT INVESTIGATION - TEST PIT SKETCH Form 8
Section No: Profiled by: Date:
Zone 5
( IWT to centerline)
Zone 4
( IWT)
Zone 3
( Between tracks)
Zone 2
( OWT)
Zone 1
( Shoulder to OWT)
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT INVESTIGATION - WEARING COURSE LAYERS Form 9
Section No: Profiled by: Date:
Depth
( mm)
Descriptor Zone 1
( Shoulder to OWT)
Zone 2
( OWT)
Zone 3
( Between tracks)
Zone 4
( IWT)
Zone 5
( IWT to centerline)
Sample
No
to
to
to
to
to
to
Interlayer bond
Cracks
Description
Rutting Heaving Bleeding Raveling
Checklist
Interface bond Moisture at interface Layer definition Pumping
Other
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT INVESTIGATION - LOG FOR GRAVEL AND STABILIZED LAYERS Form 10
Section No Profiled by: Date:
Depth
( mm)
Descriptor Moisture Color Consistency Structure Size Other Sample
to
to
to
to
to
to
Surface/ layer bond
Cracks Description
Rutting Pumping Interface bond Moisture at interface Layer definition
Checklist
Carbonation
Other
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT INVESTIGATION - PHOTOGRAPHS Form 11
Section No Date
Evaluator
Photo
number
Location Description
Storage
disc
Draft
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT DENSITY & MOISTURE CONTENT Form 12
Section No Date Evaluator
Calibration Prv Std Std Std Calibrated by
Std MC Calibration date
Std wet density
Probe Input Actual Wet Dry MC Notes
24 200 600
22 200 550
20 200 500
18 200 450
16 200 400
14 200 350
12 200 300
10 200 250
8 200 200
6 150 150
4 100 100
Panel A
2 50 50
24 200 600
22 200 550
20 200 500
18 200 450
16 200 400
14 200 350
12 200 300
10 200 250
8 200 200
6 150 150
4 100 100
Panel B
2 50 50
24 200 600
22 200 550
20 200 500
18 200 450
16 200 400
14 200 350
12 200 300
10 200 250
8 200 200
6 150 150
4 100 100
Panel C
2 50 50
Gravimetric moisture content
Sample
depth
Tin No Moisture
content
Actual dry
density
Notes
Test A
Test B
Test C
Validated by
Signature
PAVEMENT PRESERVATION EXPERIMENT DCP RECORDING SHEET Form 13
Section No Panel Date Operator
Position A Position B Position C
0 0 0
5 205 405 5 205 405 5 205 405
10 210 410 10 210 410 10 210 410
15 215 415 15 215 415 15 215 415
20 220 420 20 220 420 20 220 420
25 225 425 25 225 425 25 225 425
30 230 430 30 230 430 30 230 430
35 235 435 35 235 435 35 235 435
40 240 440 40 240 440 40 240 440
45 245 445 45 245 445 45 245 445
50 250 450 50 250 450 50 250 450
55 255 455 55 255 455 55 255 455
60 260 460 60 260 460 60 260 460
65 265 465 65 265 465 65 265 465
70 270 470 70 270 470 70 270 470
75 275 475 75 275 475 75 275 475
80 280 480 80 280 480 80 280 480
85 285 485 85 285 485 85 285 485
90 290 490 90 290 490 90 290 490
95 295 495 95 295 495 95 295 495
100 300 500 100 300 500 100 300 500
105 305 505 105 305 505 105 305 505
110 310 510 110 310 510 110 310 510
115 315 515 115 315 515 115 315 515
120 320 520 120 320 520 120 320 520
125 325 525 125 325 525 125 325 525
130 330 530 130 330 530 130 330 530
135 335 535 135 335 535 135 335 535
140 340 540 140 340 540 140 340 540
145 345 545 145 345 545 145 345 545
150 350 550 150 350 550 150 350 550
155 355 555 155 355 555 155 355 555
160 360 560 160 360 560 160 360 560
165 365 565 165 365 565 165 365 565
170 370 570 170 370 570 170 370 570
175 375 575 175 375 575 175 375 575
180 380 580 180 380 580 180 380 580
185 385 585 185 385 585 185 385 585
190 390 590 190 390 590 190 390 590
195 395 595 195 395 595 195 395 595
200 400 600 200 400 600 200 400 600
Validated by
Signature
GL- 2005- 02: Pavement Preservation Studies Technical Advisory Guide 73