SPENS - D11 - V13 - Guidelines of A Complex Methodology For Nondestructive Pavement Measuring Techniques

EUROPEAN COMMISSION
DG RESEARCH
SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

Sustainable Surface Transport
Sustainable Pavements for European New Member States
Guidelines of a complex methodology for non-

destructive pavement measuring techniques
Deliverable no. D11

Dissemination level PU
Work Package WP2 Task 2
Main author Roland Spielhofer (arsenal),
Contributors Analysis Skid resistance
Roland Spielhofer, arsenal research, Austria
Gáspár László, KTI, Hungary
Bencze Zsolt, KTI, Hungary
Analysis Longitudinal Evenness

Thomas Lundberg, VTI, Sweden
Leif Sjögren, VTI, Sweden
Peter Andrén, VTI, Sweden
Analysis Bearing Capacity

Josef Stryk, CDV, Czech Republic
Slavoljub Erjavec, CDV, Czech Republic
Status (F: final, D: draft) Date Draft _v13 Date Februar 17th, 2009
File Name SPENS-D11_V13.doc
Project Contract No. Contract No. 031467 (STREP, Priority 1.6.2)
Project Start Date and Duration 01 September 2006, 36 months
Guidelines of a complex methodology
for non-destructive pavement measuring techniques
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 9
1.1 Overview 9
1.2 Non destructive pavement measuring techniques 10
1.3 State-of-the Art 10
2 Harmonisation of measurement methods 12
2.1 The need for harmonisation 12
2.2 Advantages of harmonisation 12
2.3 Predecessing activities on harmonisation 13

2.3.1 Skid resistance 13
2.3.2 Longitudinal evenness - FILTER 13
2.3.3 Bearing capacity - COST 336 14
3 Harmonisation test in Vienna 14
3.1 Test design 14

3.1.1 Skid resistance 14
3.1.2 Longitudinal evenness 16
3.1.3 Bearing capacity 17
3.2 Participants 17
3.2.1 Overview per country – skid resistance 18
3.2.2 Overview per country – longitudinal evenness 19
3.2.3 Overview per country – bearing capacity 20
3.3 Organization 21
4 Skid resistance analysis 22
4.1 SRI calculation 22
4.2 Cross-correlations 26
4.3 Repeatability and reproducibility 27
4.4 Conclusions 29
4.4.1 Speed independence 29
4.4.2 Scale 29
4.4.3 Order 29
4.4.4 Repeatability and reproducibility 30
4.4.5 Trueness of results 30
5 Longitudinal Evenness analysis 32
5.1 Reference measurement 32
SPENS D11 V13.doc 2

5.2 The analysis 35

5.2.1 IRI 35
5.2.2 Longitudinal profile 39
5.2.3 Power Spectrum Density (PSD) – analysis 39
5.3 Conclusions 40
6 Bearing Capacity Analysis 41
6.1 Objective 41
6.2 Participating equipments 41
6.3 Selection of test stations 42
6.4 Reproducibility 44
6.4.1 Pavement temperature 44
6.4.2 Mean normalised deflections 44
6.4.3 Deviation ratio and Eligibility 45
6.4.4 Reference deflection bowl 47
6.4.5 Harmonisation factor 48
6.4.6 Apparent difference between two types of devices 53
6.5 Conclusive remarks 54
6.6 Repeatability 55
6.6.1 Protocol requests 55
6.6.2 Repeatability verification 56
6.7 Abbreviations 58
7 Guidelines for non-destructive pavement measuring techniques 59
7.1 Bearing capacity 60
7.2 Longitudinal evenness 60
7.3 Skid resistance 60
7.4 Accreditation 61
7.5 Quality assurance 61
8 References 62
9 APPENDIX 63
9.1 Test surfaces 63

9.1.1 Test sections for skid resistance tests 63
9.1.2 Longitudinal Evenness 70
9.1.3 Bearing Capacity 76
9.2 Skid resistance analysis 80
9.2.1 Participating Devices (alphabetical order of countries) 80
SPENS D11 V13.doc 3

9.2.2 SRI calculations 83

9.2.3 Exponential curve fitting on F vs. S 107
9.2.4 Calculated SRI-values for all runs on Surface S1 – S6 110
9.2.5 Comparison of F60 vs. SRI for all devices 114
9.3 Longitudinal eveness analysis 117
9.3.1 Participating vehicles and companies in alphabetic order 117
9.3.2 Longitudinal profiles, a graphical comparison 118
9.3.3 Diagrams of PSD and RMS calculations of the longitudinal profiles 121
9.3.4 Diagrams of the PSD-fraction. 134
9.4 Bearing capcity analyis 140
9.5 Invitation letter 145
FIGURES
Figure 1: Position of Tasks in Pavement life cycle................................................................... 9
Figure 2: Reference measurements with VTI Primal in Vienna ............................................. 17
Figure 3: Range of SRI values calculated for all devices on all surfaces. ............................. 31
Figure 4: The reference, Primal, measuring one of the sections in Vienna. .......................... 33
Figure 5: Measuring principles of the Primal. ........................................................................ 34
Figure 6: The longitudinal “true” profiles measured by the reference instrument Primal. ...... 34
Figure 7: Average of delivered IRI from section 1 to 5........................................................... 35
Figure 8: Average of delivered IRI from section 1 to 6........................................................... 36
Figure 9: Average of delivered IRI at different speeds from section 1 to 6. ........................... 36
Figure 10: Average of IRI per section and equipment. .......................................................... 37
Figure 11: Average of three measurements per section. ....................................................... 37
Figure 12: FWD KUAB (Hungarian Roads Management Company and Slovak Road
Administration)................................................................................................................ 42
Figure 13: FWD Dynatest (DDC-Slovenia, IBDiM-Poland, Technical University of Vienna,
TPA-Hungary)................................................................................................................. 42
Figure 14: FWD Carl Bro (IMOS – Czech Republic) ............................................................. 42
Figure 15: Standard deviation of deviations from weighted mean deflection per deflection
sensor and FWD “sDjm” (all test stations-asphalt and concrete pavements)................. 46
Figure 16: Standard deviation of deviations from weighted mean deflection per deflection
sensor and FWD “sDjm” (only asphalt pavements) ........................................................ 47
Figure 17: Standard deviation of deflection sensor harmonisation factors sRjm (all test
stations-asphalt and concrete pavements) ..................................................................... 51
Figure 18: Standard deviation of deflection sensor harmonisation factors sRjm (only asphalt
pavements)..................................................................................................................... 51
SPENS D11 V13.doc 4

Figure 19: In-situ FWD harmonization factors Rm (all test stations-asphalt and concrete
pavements)..................................................................................................................... 52
Figure 20: In-situ FWD harmonization factors Rm (only asphalt pavements)......................... 53
Figure 21: Deflection bowl-illustration of difference between two types of FWD, test station
B4-2: asphalt pavement.................................................................................................. 53
Figure 22: Deflection bowl-illustration of difference in deflection bowl between two types of
FWD, test station B3-1: asphalt pavement ..................................................................... 54
Figure 23: Standard deviation ratios in deflection repeatability test, section B4-2................. 56
TABLES
Table 1: Devices used for skid resistance measurements......................................................11
Table 2: Devices used for longitudinal evenness measurements. ..........................................11
Table 3: Devices used for bearing capacity measurements. ..................................................11
Table 4: Skid resistance participants in alphabetical order (countries). ................................. 18
Table 5: Longitudinal Evenness participants in alphabetical order (countries). ..................... 19
Table 6: Bearing Capacity participants in alphabetical order (countries). .............................. 20
Table 7: Timetable of harmonisation test ............................................................................... 21
Table 8: Correlation coefficient of the regression of lnF vs. S................................................ 23
Table 9: Speed parameter determined from the regression of lnF vs. S................................ 24
Table 10: Standard deviation of S0 with respect to the regression of lnF vs. S...................... 24
Table 11: Weight applied in the regression of S0 vs. MPD..................................................... 24
Table 12: Number m of valid measurements. ........................................................................ 24
Table 13: Calculated SRI values for Surface S1.................................................................... 24
Table 19: Summary of calibration results............................................................................... 26
Table 20: Cross correlations for all devices and all speeds. .................................................. 26
SPENS D11 V13.doc 5

Table 21: Average R² of correlations, ordered by R²descending. .......................................... 27

Table 22: Form B – collation of the arithmetic means............................................................ 27
Table 23: Form B – collation of the measures of spread within cells ..................................... 28
Table 24: Calculation of sr and sR per surface. Devices 103 and 106 have been omitted as
they are outliers. ............................................................................................................. 28
Table 25: sr and sR for all surfaces......................................................................................... 28
Table 26: sr and sR for all surfaces......................................................................................... 29
Table 27: Order of surfaces regarding to <SRI> .................................................................... 30
Table 28: Order of surfaces regarding to F60 ........................................................................ 30
Table 29: Comparison of test surfaces based on national motorway rating schemes for
devices 102 and 104. ..................................................................................................... 31
Table 30: Regression and correlation between the Primal and the tested vehicles for IRI.... 38
Table 31: Number of percent within control limits as used in Sweden................................... 38
Table 32: The repeatability expressed as standard deviation. ............................................... 39
Table 33: Test sections .......................................................................................................... 43
Table 34: Mechanical characteristics of pavement and subgrade ......................................... 43
Table 35: Surface temperatures............................................................................................. 44
Table 36 Standard deviation of deviations from weighted mean deflection per deflection
sensor and FWD “sDjm” (all test stations-asphalt and concrete pavements)................. 45
Table 37: Standard deviation of deviations from weighted mean deflection per deflection
sensor and FWD “sDjm” (only asphalt pavements) ........................................................ 46
Table 38: Reference deflection bowls and deduced pavement mechanical parameters ....... 48
Table 39: In situ deflection sensor harmonization factors Rjm (all test stations-asphalt and
concrete pavements) ...................................................................................................... 49
Table 40: In situ deflection sensor harmonization factors Rjm (only asphalt pavements) ..... 49
Table 41: Standard deviation of deflection sensor harmonization factors sRjm, (all test
stations-asphalt and concrete pavements) ..................................................................... 50
Table 42: Standard deviation of deflection sensor harmonization factors sRjm (only asphalt
pavements)..................................................................................................................... 50
Table 43 In-situ FWD harmonization factors Rm ................................................................... 52
SPENS D11 V13.doc 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Effective and efficient road maintenance becomes more and more important. As the budget
focus shifts from building new roads to maintaining existing roads, an appropriate mainte-
nance strategy is vital. This strategy must rely on objective fundamentals that are partly pro-
vided by non destructive measurements. This report focuses on harmonisation of measure-
ment methods to investigate the parameters skid resistance, longitudinal evenness and bear-
ing capacity. These parameters are of major importance as input parameters for pavement
management systems.
For the mentioned parameters, different measurement methods and different devices are
used. Results of different devices – and even of devices of the same kind – are not always
directly comparable. This is the reason for harmonisation test. In the scope of SPENS
WT2.2, a harmonisation test has been carried out in Vienna. Results of this test are de-
scribed below.
Before starting the test, an inventory of devices for measuring skid resistance, evenness and
bearing capacity currently in use in the New Member States was created. It turned out, that
for skid resistance there is a large variation of measurement devices and principles through-
out the New Member States. For bearing capacity, the Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) is
very common, although the Deflectograph Lacroix is also used in some countries comple-
menting the FWD. For longitudinal evenness, the variation of devices is great, but the princi-
ples are very similar: laser sensor based, some in combination with accelerometers for high
speed measurements, Profilograph or straight edge for static/slow moving measurements.
For the harmonisation test, 21 companies and organisations have been invited. Finally, 22
different devices from eight countries showed up in Vienna in the test week from May 5th to
May 8th 2008.
Harmonisation Test Skid resistance

The skid resistance harmonisation test was designed after draft EN13036-X “Surface Char-
acteristics of road and airfield pavements; Test Method – Part X; Assessment of the skid re-
sistance of a road pavement surface by the use of dynamic measurement systems”. Nine
devices (with six devices of the New Member States among them) took part in the test. Eight
devices were bases on the longitudinal friction measurement principle, while one device op-
erated with transverse friction measurement. four devices measured in the right wheel track,
two in the left wheel track and three in the middle. Six surfaces with skid resistance ranging
from very low to very high were chosen as test surfaces. These surfaces were measured with
three different speeds (30, 60 and 90 km/h) at least three times at each speed.
Additionally, macro texture measurements were taken on all surfaces.
The analysis of the raw values started with the calculation of SRI values (speed independent
friction index). From these SRI values, cross correlations for all devices were calculated. The
resulting averaged R² range between 0.95 and 0.86.
From the SRI values, repeatability and reproducibility according to ISO 5752 were calculated
and resulted in r of 0.05 and R of 0.24. This is marginally better than the values found in the
HERMES project. Unfortunately, there is up to now no accepted reference device for skid re-
sistance measurements, so the trueness of result could not be determined any further than
using the grand average of all devices. The comparison of the rating schemes of two coun-
tries regarding the test surfaces showed little agreement.
SPENS D11 V13.doc 7

Harmonisation Test Bearing capacity

Other than skid resistance, the measurement principle of all participating devices was the
same, namely Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD).
The FWD harmonization test was realized according to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 “In-
situ FWD Harmonisation Procedure”. In total seven FWDs participated at the test. Six test
stations with asphalt pavement and six test stations with cement concrete pavements were
selected. The analysis was done both, including all gathered data and only with the data ob-
tained on asphalt pavements. Reference deflection bowls were calculated according to Pro-
tocol C5-1999 of COST 336. The analysis showed differences between the two build types
KUAB and Dynatest. KUAB FWDs tend to produce higher values of stiffness on asphalt
pavements. For the central deflections, the differences go up to 10 %. On concrete pave-
ments, these deviations were not observed. In general it can be concluded that all FWDs ful-
filled the requirements of Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336.
Additionally, the short time repeatability was analysed at three test stations. The objective of
the short-term repeatability test was to verify whether the FWDs under the test are capable of
producing consistent results. Any FWD passes the repeatability criteria if full compliance with
load and deflection requirements is achieved for at least two of the three test stations. All
FWD devices passed the test.
Harmonisation Test Longitudinal Evenness
For longitudinal evenness harmonisation, a reference device (VTI Primal) was available. Six
measurement devices took part at the test. Test design was done according to the prede-
cessing FILTER/EVEN harmonisation test with six surfaces with IRI values ranging from ~1.0
mm/m (very good) up to 10 mm/m (very poor). The measurements were done with 30 and 60
km/h, for one test section on a motorway, additional measurements with 90 km/h have been
done. For five of these sections, reference measurements were taken.
Analysis was done for IRI values (all six devices) and longitudinal profile (only three devices).
Apart from a visual comparison, RMS-values and PSD of the derived profiles have been ana-
lysed. The results show good correspondence for the wavelength interval 0.5 – 5 m but
poorer correspondence at higher wavelengths. For IRI, the correlation of the devices to the
reference device and the correlation of the devices to the average of all results were calcu-
lated. The coefficients range from r=0.97 to r=0.8 for the reference device correlations and
from r=0.98 to r=0.89 for the average correlation. A criterion from Sweden was used to as-
sess the accuracy of the measurements compared to the reference device. Depending on
level of IRI, 75 to 80 % of IRI values must not have higher differences than 0.25 mm/m com-
pared to the reference IRI value. Here, the results were significantly lower, ranging from 0 up
to 45 %. The rather low percentage within the interval indicates that the measurement condi-
tions were very difficult.
Concluding the harmonisation test results, there is still room for improvement. With regard to
the test results, further research needs are pointed out. Finally, guidelines for non-destructive
testing methods were laid out.
SPENS D11 V13.doc 8

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview
The EC funded project SPENS (Sustainable pavements for European New Member States)
aims to generate a more rapid rise in the standard of the road infrastructure in the New
Member states by developing appropriate tools and procedures for the long-lasting and more
cost-effective improvement of roads.
The Work package 2 – called “Road assessment and monitoring” – aims to contribute signifi-
cantly to enhancing the long-term quality levels of road related decisions mainly in the New
Member States.
Task 2.1 tries to find appropriate traffic load equivalency factors for the road networks in the
New member states. Having the whole life-cycle of a road in mind, this work aims at the de-
sign and planning stage.
Task 2.2 aims – same as task 2.3 – at the maintenance phase of the pavement life cycle. In
the present situation in the New Member states, there is a shift of budget from building of
new roads to the maintenance and upgrading of existing infrastructure.
The work package focuses on the first part of the life cycle of a pavement. Task 2.1 improves
the design of new pavements. After the pavement has been built, maintenance starts. This is
the connecting point of Task 2.2 that deals with gathering data on the pavement surface and
structure. The outcome of Task 2.2 is the input for the decision making methodology covered
in Task 2.3. The decision making process leads to a list of rehabilitation actions. The type of
measures to be taken is investigated in the work packages 3 and 4.
For a successful maintenance strategy, deep knowledge about the existing infrastructure is
of vital importance. Pavement management systems are widely used in Europe to ensure the
optimal allocation of resources. These pavement management systems rely on objective
data of the pavement surface and underlying layers. Effective forecasting and lifecycle as-
sessment is possible only with regularly updated data of pavement surface and structure.
Furthermore, the traffic load and age of the pavements is of interest.
Figure 1: Position of Tasks in Pavement life cycle
SPENS D11 V13.doc 9

1.2 Non destructive pavement measuring techniques

The budget for road infrastructure shifted over the last thirty years in the Western Europe.
During the 70s and 80s, the largest parts of the budgets were used for new constructions
(roads, bridges and tunnels). After the high level networks were almost completed in the 90s,
only the closing of existing gaps remained for new constructions. The maintenance and up-
grading of the existing networks became more and more important. At this time, pavement
management systems were introduced to allow a cost-efficient and sustainable management
of road infrastructure. Input parameters for pavement management systems are:
• traffic volume
• materials used
• layer composition
• surface properties
etc.
Due to environmental influences and increasing traffic, the surface and material properties
change over time. This change has to be monitored to ensure optimal decision making in
pavement management systems. As the monitoring itself should not affect the durability of
pavements, non-destructive pavement measuring techniques have been introduced for rou-
tine monitoring. These techniques allow a regular monitoring of complete networks at rea-
sonable time and costs.
Monitoring devices date back to the 1930s, where first skid resistance measurement devices
were developed, although mainly for research purposes at that time. In the 1950s, dedicated
routine measurement devices (like the SCRIM (Sideway Coefficient Routine Investigation
Machine) were introduced and improved since then. For evenness measurements, contact
less systems with ultrasonic and laser sensors were introduced in the 1980s. These devices
operate at traffic speed in fluent traffic and allow for more than 200 km of measured roads
per day.
1.3 State-of-the Art

Due to increasing traffic on the roads, today’s measurement systems operate at traffic speed
(usually 60 – 100 km/h) during measurement. Therefore, no closing of roads or certain lanes
is necessary. Static or quasi-static measurements have lost their importance over the last
years. Their area of application remains the field of acceptance tests on newly built roads be-
fore road opening. Nevertheless, even for this purpose high speed measurements are used
today and in the near future, static measurement systems will become obsolete for pavement
management purposes.
During the SPENS project, a questionnaire was sent out to the partner countries to collect
the different methods and devices that are used for non-destructive testing in the New Mem-
ber states today. Table 1 to Table 3 show the results of this survey. Included in this compila-
tion are the results from Austria, although it is no New Member State.
SPENS D11 V13.doc 10

Table 1: Devices used for skid resistance measurements.

Country Devices
BG Skid Resistance Tester (SRT)
CZ SCRIM, TRT
HU SCRIM, Skid Resistance Tester (SRT)
PL Skid Resistance Tester (SRT)
SI SCRIM, British pendulum (SRT)
SK Skiddometer BV 11
AT RoadSTAR, Griptester, British Pendulum (SRT)
Table 2: Devices used for longitudinal evenness measurements.

Country Devices
BG Profilograph, 4 m Straight Edge, APL
CZ ARAN, ARGUS
HU Profilograph, 4 m Straight Edge (occasionally), RST Road Survey Tester
PL Profilograph, APL
SI Profilometer, 4 m Straight Edge
SK Profilograph
AT Profilometer, Profilograph, 4 m Straight Edge
Table 3: Devices used for bearing capacity measurements.

Country Devices
BG Deflectometer FWD, Deflectograph Lacroix
CZ Deflectometer FWD
HU Deflectometer FWD, Deflectograph Lacroix (occasionally)
PL Deflectometer FWD
SI Deflectometer FWD, Deflectograph Lacroix
SK Deflectometer FWD – KUAB
AT Deflectometer FWD
The variety of methods and devices used is great for skid resistance measurements. In
many countries, the Pendulum test is used. It is at the moment the only internationally stan-
dardized procedure (see EN 13036-4).

For longitudinal evenness, different kinds of profilometers are used. These are usually con-
tact less, laser sensor and/or accelerometer based devices. The 4 m-straight edge and the
profilograph are also widely used.
For bearing capacity, every country uses Falling weight Deflectometers from different manu-
facturers, mainly Dynatest and KUAB. The Deflectograph Lacroix is also used in some coun-
tries.
It can be seen from these tables that the widest variety of devices is given by skid resistance
measuring. This may come from the fact that skid resistance can only be measured indirectly
by its effects on tyres. Therefore, different approaches have been introduced. Furthermore,
the different countries have had their own traditions in measuring skid resistance that are
closely connected to the importance these countries attach to skid resistance itself.
2 Harmonisation of measurement methods
2.1 The need for harmonisation

There are many good reasons for carrying out harmonisation trials. Everyone involved in
data acquisition is familiar with the fact that even to identical constructed devices do not
measure exactly the same values. As today’s routine measurement machines are more or
less complex systems that involve heavy computing, sensor techniques, all the single parts
can be sufficiently specified, and nonetheless two systems do not measure the same. These
issues gain even more importance when different systems like laser based and accelerome-
ter based ones are used. For skid resistance measurements, different approaches like side-
way friction, longitudinal friction with slip conditions or blocked wheels exist.
Additional problems arise when different devices should feed in the same database.
There are different possibilities to deal with the problem of different devices. One possibility
is to ignore the problem and use the values as they are. This is done when different devices
have different purposes. For example, one device is dedicated for high volume/motorway
networks, the other device is for low volume/urban networks. Then both devices coexist and
don’t interfere. If two or more different devices serve for the same network, then a harmoni-
sation is inevitable. This can be done with a reference device that delivers the “true” value
and relations are established to convert values for other devices. This reference value can
also be determined from the averaged values of all devices. A more difficult way is to estab-
lish correlations to convert values from each device to all others and vice versa. Depending
on the number of involved devices and the degree of difference between them, this can
range from easy to impossible.
2.2 Advantages of harmonisation

For the road operator, a well working harmonisation of measurement techniques brings more
choice of tenderers and the assurance that results of different tenderers are comparable.
Furthermore, harmonised measurement techniques are usually well documented and na-
tional or international standards possibly exist.
For the operator of a measurement device, having a harmonised device offers more possibili-
ties and a larger market. He has an advantage over another operator with a non-harmonised
device. On the other hand, this leads to more competition.

2.3 Predecessing activities on harmonisation
2.3.1 Skid resistance

Skid resistance is a safety relevant parameter of the road. Where other safety relevant pa-
rameters of the road (like ruts) are easy to observe, high and low skid resistance surfaces
cannot be distinguished with the naked eye. As skid resistance has a main influence on brak-
ing distances, it is of great importance to ensure an adequate and homogenous level of skid
resistance on the whole road network. This can only be achieved by regular monitoring.
For skid resistance measurements, different devices were developed in different countries
over the years. As the friction coefficient cannot be measured directly, all this devices follow
different operation principles. Three main principles can be distinguished:
• static devices (Pendulum, SRT)
• longitudinal friction coefficient (RoadSTAR, TRT, GripTester and many others)
• sideways friction coefficient (SCRIM and derivates)
Only for the pendulum test there is a European standard (EN 13036-4), for various other
measurement devices, CEN technical specification exists.
As these principles work completely different, it is obvious that results from different devices
are not easily comparable. Efforts to harmonise the different devices have been made for
about 20 years now, but still there exists no commonly agreed method.
PIARC experiment
Beginning in 1989, a first attempt to harmonise skid resistance devices was made on interna-
tional level with the “PIARC experiment”. More than 30 different devices participated at
measurements in two countries (Belgium, Spain). Texture measurements were carried out as
well from different devices. All in all, 54 test sections were measured over a time span of al-
most two month. These measurements took place in 1992.
Starting point for the following analysis was the “Pennsylvania State Model” that defines the
friction as a function of the slip speed. Several improvements were added to this model. The
final model derived was then called “International Friction Index (IFI)”. There was a proposal
for harmonisation of different devices as well. However, there were concerns that the IFI
scale was not sufficiently precise to be of effective practical value in Europe, where so many
different devices were used.
HERMES
Hermes (Harmonisation of European Routine and Research Measuring Equipment for Skid
Resistance) was a FEHRL project aiming at overcoming the shortcomings of the PIARC ex-
periment. Measurements took place in the years 2001 and 2002; the final report was pub-
lished in 2006. Output was a new model called “EFI” (European Friction Index).
2.3.2 Longitudinal evenness - FILTER

The most common parameter to describe longitudinal evenness on roads is the International
Roughness Index (IRI). The IRI can be derived directly during the measurement or calculated

from a measured profile. Measurements are usually done contact less with laser sensors and
accelerometers or a combination of both. After filtering the raw sensor data, a so-called “true
profile” is calculated, that serves as basis for any further analysis.
Goal of the actual harmonisation exercise was not only to compare the derived IRI values,
but also to compare the calculated profiles itself.
FILTER (FEHRL investigation on Longitudinal and Transverses Evenness of Roads) was a
FEHRL harmonisation action that started 1998. The final report was published 2002. It was
the European contribution to the international “EVEN” Project conducted by PIARC in 1998.
FILTER focused both on transversal and longitudinal evenness.
Beside a round robin test of more than 20 devices measuring longitudinal evenness, an in-
ventory of measurement techniques as well as of used longitudinal evenness indices was
compiled. For the round robin test, the VTI Primal was used as a reference device beside
others. FILTER set the base for the ongoing harmonisation process of evenness measure-
ment and calculation in Europe.
2.3.3 Bearing capacity - COST 336

For bearing capacity, round robin test in different countries have taken place. The main activ-
ity of harmonisation was started in 1993 as FEHRL group “Falling weight deflectometer”. This
group was transformed into COST 336 in 1996. 22 participating countries worked on a com-
mon methodology of calibration and harmonisation of Falling Weight Deflectometers. The fi-
nal report of the COST action comprises different calibration protocols, starting with calibra-
tion instructions for the devices itself, the mounted geophones and repeatability of measure-
ments. Harmonisations of different devices or even groups of devices are also covered in the
final report. This final report was published in the year 2001.
Even though there has not been any attempt to bring these calibration and harmonisation
procedures into a formal European standard, they are very common throughout Europe and
used in different countries. For this reason it was decided to make use of these procedures
also in the SPENS project.
In several countries (The Netherlands, Great Britain, Czech Republic …) national harmonisa-
tion exercises have been carried out for FWD harmonisation. Many of them follow the COST
336 procedures as well.
3 Harmonisation test in Vienna
3.1 Test design
3.1.1 Skid resistance

For skid resistance, the test design followed a draft EN specification that was developed on
base of HERMES results. Six different pavements were chosen for the test runs, covering the

whole range of different skid resistance levels from very high to very low. One of the six sur-
faces was concrete (exposed aggregate concrete), four surfaces were asphalt while one sur-
face (the low-µ) was artificial – a painted surfaces with Inatol, leading to a very slippery sur-
face when wet (comparable to black ice). These surfaces also presented different levels of
macrotexture, expressed by Mean Profile Depth (MPD).
Requirements for the test tracks:
• straight and even, no slope
• Homogeneous in texture and skid resistance, no crossing, no visible deterioration like
cracks, potholes
• easy to reach from Vienna
• Nearby space to park and for measurement preparation
• space after the test track to turn easily
• long enough starting length to reach desired speed
• low traffic if on in-service road
To find appropriate sections, arsenal research carried out extensive measurements in the
surroundings of Vienna. On all sections identified, skid resistance and macrotexture meas-
urements were done before the test to ensure that the necessary range of skid resistance
and MPD-values were covered.
The length of each section was 100 m, except for the low-µ-surface, that was 50 m long.
For each surface, measurements were done with three different speeds (30 km/h, 60 km/h
and 90 km/h).
For each speed, at least three runs were made. This sums up to a minimum of 9 runs per
device per surface. The surfaces were located on in-service roads except for the low-µ sur-
face that was located at a driving test centre in the south of Vienna. In Appendix A, maps and
photos of the test tracks are shown. To avoid too many time consuming turns, the test tracks
were arranged in loops.
All test sections were marked with paint at the beginning and the end. The proposed track of
the test wheel was also marked with yellow guidelines to ensure that every participant would
measure in the same track.
For all test sections, macrotexture measurements were carried out by arsenal research.
A problem appearing during the tests was that not every participant measured in the right
wheel path. One participant measured the middle of the track between left and right wheel
track, while two other participants measured in the left wheel track.
For surface 5 and 6 this was no problem, as the roads were broad enough so that every par-
ticipant could measure the same wheel path regardless if the measuring wheel was mounted
left or right. For the other four test sections, it showed that the left and right wheel path were
comparable.
All participating devices have their own wetting units for wetting the road for the actual meas-
urement. Water film thickness was set to 0.5 mm. To avoid standing water on the test track, a
sufficient time span was set between two consecutive runs. Water for skid resistance meas-
urements was provided by arsenal research.

One skid resistance test section (S6) and one longitudinal evenness test section (L6) were
located on a motorway. To ensure safe operation at a low speed of 30 km/h, safeguarding
from the local motorway maintenance stuff was requested. As the other test sections were on
rather quiet roads, no special safety measures had to be taken.
All measurements were carried out in good weather conditions with air temperatures around
20 °C and dry roads.
3.1.2 Longitudinal evenness

For longitudinal evenness, the test design followed the one used in FILTER but was limited
due to time and budget constraints. Different to skid resistance and bearing capacity, in the
longitudinal evenness harmonisation exercise a reference device could be used (see below).
Six different pavements were chosen with IRI values ranging from ~1 m/km up to 10 m/km.
The aim was to cover the whole variety of IRI levels present in today’s roads. The section
length was set to 500 m. For section L6, the measurements were done with speeds of
30 km/h, 60 km/h and 90 km/h, for the other five sections, 30 km/h and 60 km/h were used
due to traffic regulations. For all speeds on all surfaces, at least 3 repetitions were made
leading to at least 39 runs on all 6 surfaces. One surface was concrete, the other 5 surfaces
were asphalt.
All test sections were marked with paint at the beginning and the end. The proposed track of
the laser sensors or wheel was also marked with paint to ensure that every participant would
measure in the same track except for section L6 (on motorway) However, L6 being the sec-
tion with the lowest IRI value (0.9 – 1 m/km) the missing painted line did not affect the com-
parability of the results. The more uneven a section is, the more important is that every de-
vice measures the same line.
Dry surface is a prerequisite for the laser measurements. Thanks to the stable weather situa-
tion, all measurements could be carried out in time.
The VTI Primal was used as reference device. It is a quasi-static measurement system with
very high accuracy. It was used also in EVEN/FILTER project as reference system and
serves as reference system in Sweden for several years. As the measurement of one test
section of 500 m length takes almost one day, these measurements were carried out one
week after the actual harmonisation exercise on combination with rod and level measure-
ments. The Primal measurements were carried out on sections L1 – L5. L6 could not be
measured, as it was not possible to get a lane closing for a whole day on the motorway.
Figure 2 shows the Primal measurements.

Figure 2: Reference measurements with VTI Primal in Vienna
3.1.3 Bearing capacity

For comparison of Falling Weight Deflectometers (FWDs), COST action 336 developed a
methodology for both calibration and harmonisation. The whole procedure is limited to the
actual measurement. The procedure following the measurement – namely calculating E-
Modules for the different layers is not covered in the COST action and could not be investi-
gated in this exercise either.
3.2 Participants
A formal invitation letter was written and is shown in Appendix E.
21 operators of skid resistance, longitudinal evenness or bearing capacity measuring devices
were invited to participate in the harmonisation exercise. The goal was to have at least one
participant from every country of the WP2 contractors. This goal was reached, as in the end
22 different devices participated from eight different countries.

3.2.1 Overview per country – skid resistance
Table 4: Skid resistance participants in alphabetical order (countries).

Nr. Company Device Name Country
1 arsenal research RoadSTAR AT
2 TU Vienna, Institute for Road Construction and Maintenance GripTester AT
3 Měření PVV TRT device CZ
4 CONSULTEST s.r.o. GripTester CZ
5 Colas Hungaria Ltd. ASFT friction tester HU
6 Pon Equipement AS TWO NO
7 IBDiM SRT-3 PL
8 ZAG SCRIMTEX SI
9 Slovak Road Administration Skiddometer BV 11 SK

3.2.2 Overview per country – longitudinal evenness
Table 5: Longitudinal Evenness participants in alphabetical order (countries).

3 Colas Hungaria Ltd. RST Portable System HU
4 Ramböll RST RST22 S
5 ZAG ZAG VP SI
6 Slovak Road Administration Profilograph GE SK

3.2.3 Overview per country – bearing capacity
Table 6: Bearing Capacity participants in alphabetical order (countries).
1 TU Vienna, Institute for Road Construction and Maintenance FWD Dynatest AT
2 IMOS Brno FWD Carl Bro 2100 CZ
3 TPA Hungary FWD Dynatest HU
4 Hung. Roads Management Company KUAB FWD HU
5 IBDiM FWD Dynatest PL
6 DDC FWD Dynatest SI
7 Slovak Road Administration FWD KUAB SK
From all partner countries involved in WP2, one or more devices participated in each har-
monisation exercise.

3.3 Organization
The actual harmonisation test started on May 5th 2008 in the afternoon with a briefing for all
participants. The test layout and the timetable were presented. Maps with the test sections
and how to get there were provided from arsenal research.
On Tuesday, May 6th, the actual tests started. As some participants measured two surface
properties with the same device or with the same personnel, these participants had to move
more or less unguided between the test sections. The skid resistance and evenness tests
started on the motorway section, where safeguarding was provided by local motorway main-
tenance stuff for the low speed measurements. All measurements on the motorway were fin-
ished during the afternoon on Tuesday. From that time on, the other test sections were on
low trafficked local roads where no additional safety measures were necessary. A second
fixed time for the skid resistance participants was on Thursday morning, May 8th 2008, where
the last section (low-µ) on the driving technique centre of ÖAMTC in Teesdorf was measured.
This was at the same time the closing of the harmonisation test.
In the following week, the reference measurements for longitudinal evenness were carried
out by VTI and arsenal research. These measurements ran from Monday, May 12th to Thurs-
day, May 15th. Table 7 shows a timetable of the harmonisation test.
Table 7: Timetable of harmonisation test
Time Action
Autumn 2007 – Spring 2008 Test design
January 2008 Addresses of device owners collected
February 2008 Invitation letters sent out
March – April 2008 Preparation for harmonisation test

• Selection of test sites
• Measurements
• Organisation
May 5th 2008 Briefing for participants at arsenal research
May 6th – May 8th 2008 Parallel harmonisation test for skid resistance, longitudinal
evenness and bearing capacity devices
May 12th – May 15th 2008 Reference measurements longitudinal evenness
August 8th 2008 Received last measurement result from participants
August 2008 Analysis started
February 2009 Analysis finished

4 Skid resistance analysis
The analysis of the skid resistance harmonisation test was done according to CEN/TC
227/WG5 N 202 E Rev. 4.
For all devices, the linear regression of S vs. ln F was calculated. The corresponding coeffi-
cients of determination R² were calculated as well and are shown in the table below. Meas-
urement series with R² lower than 0.5 were discarded. This was the case for device 107.
Nevertheless, the whole SRI calculation procedure was done for the first four surfaces of de-
vice 107 as well. The derived SRI values for these surfaces do not follow the overall trend
observed from the other devices and stay almost the same. For surface S5 and S6, the SRI
values for 107 are in the same range as the others.
Unfortunately, device 108 had a technical defect (blowout) and could only measure the sec-
tions S1 and S6. Therefore, no further calculations were possible and the device had to be
excluded.
Device 109 had to leave the test earlier and could not measure section S5.
4.1 SRI calculation

For all remaining devices, the SRI-values were calculated. The SRI (Skid resistance index) is
a speed independent index that is equivalent to EFI (European friction index) developed in
HERMES project. The calculation is described in Draft prENV 13036 – X “SURFACE CHAR-
ACTERISTICS OF ROAD AND AIRFIELD PAVEMENTS Assessment of the skid resistance of
a road pavement surface by the use of dynamic measuring systems”.
The procedure is as follows:
First, a linear regression of lnF vs. S is calculated:
ln F = ln F0 − S / S0
with
F… Measured friction value at speed S
F0 … Regression line intercept at speed zero
S… Slip speed
S0… Speed parameter
Then, the standard deviation σSo of S0 is calculated by means of the following formula:
r (Σ 02 + Σ11 / S 0 − Σ 01 ln F0 )
σ So = S 02
(
(r − 2) rΣ 20 − Σ102 )
with
r … number of runs in the considered series and
k =r
Σ μν = ∑ S μ (ln F )ν
k =1
k k
For each device, the weighted linear regression of ln S0 vs. ln MPD was calculated:

w ln S0 = w ln a + wb ln MPD
with
MPD … Mean Profile Depth
using the following weighting coefficient:
w = (S 0 / σ So )
2
The result of that calculation is assigning a set of specific parameters (a, b) to each device.
With these two parameters, for each run the SRI value was calculated:
SRI = BFe [( S −30 ) / S 0 ]

with
S0 = aMPD b
For each surface, an average <SRI> was calculated for each device.
As no reference device was available, the “Grand Average” <<SRI>> was calculated from all
devices except 103 and 106 as they were obvious outliers.
Then, for each device the linear regression of <<SRI>> versus <SRI> with zero intercept was
computed:
<< SRI >>= β i < SRI >
New “B”-values were computed by the following formula:

Bi , new = β i Bi ,old
As there were no “old” B-values, Bi,old was set to 1 for each device.
The detailed calculations for all devices are shown in chapter 9.2.2 of the Annex. The tables
below follow the ones of the example in the draft standard and show only the summarized
results of the calculations.
Table 8: Correlation coefficient of the regression of lnF vs. S

R2 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109
S1 0,951 0,896 0,986 0,933 0,950 0,910 0,285 0,773 0,882
S2 0,749 0,813 0,967 0,785 0,968 0,985 0,108 0,914
S3 0,910 0,910 0,985 0,670 0,929 0,976 0,315 0,992
S4 0,805 0,962 0,994 0,857 0,988 0,958 0,437 0,726
S5 0,876 0,829 0,983 0,790 0,873 0,789 0,978
S6 0,975 0,898 0,996 0,929 0,987 0,905 0,713 0,944 0,830

Table 9: Speed parameter determined from the regression of lnF vs. S.
S0 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109

S1 66 60 157 77 38 31 x 35 59
S2 109 61 207 174 44 17 x 45
S3 46 108 124 106 41 8 x 30
S4 95 52 133 54 54 13 x 79
S5 26 17 74 30 11 9 12
S6 68 72 184 121 56 41 149 9 151
Table 10: Standard deviation of S0 with respect to the regression of lnF vs. S.
σ 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109
S1 5,65 7,72 6,97 7,86 3,32 3,69 x 3,55 8,15
S2 23,88 11,12 14,49 34,35 3,00 0,80 x 5,23
S3 5,52 12,83 5,83 28,17 4,24 0,47 x 0,99
S4 17,65 3,90 3,77 8,35 2,25 1,06 x 18,34
S5 3,76 2,94 3,71 5,88 1,62 1,72 0,66
S6 4,13 9,26 4,58 12,66 2,39 5,08 35,65 2,20 25,85
Table 11: Weight applied in the regression of S0 vs. MPD.

w 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109
S1 137 60 508 97 133 71 x 24 52
S2 21 31 204 26 213 470 x 75
S3 70 71 452 14 92 285 x 898
S4 29 179 1247 42 569 159 x 19
S5 49 34 400 26 48 26 313
S6 272 61 1615 92 553 66 17 119 34
Table 12: Number m of valid measurements.

m 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109
S1 9 9 9 9 9 9 x 9 9
S2 9 9 9 9 9 9 x 9
S3 9 9 9 9 9 9 x 9
S4 9 9 9 9 9 9 x 9
S5 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
S6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
Table 13: Calculated SRI values for Surface S1.

SRI Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Run 5 Run 6 Run 7 Run 8 Run 9 <SRI> std
101 0,49 0,49 0,49 0,50 0,50 0,48 0,48 0,48 0,48 0,487 0,009
102 0,58 0,59 0,60 0,55 0,55 0,55 0,59 0,55 0,56 0,569 0,018
103 0,59 0,56 0,57 1,50 1,49 1,45 3,88 4,04 3,91 1,998 1,510
104 0,63 0,65 0,64 0,58 0,59 0,64 0,58 0,59 0,61 0,614 0,026
105 0,39 0,39 0,39 0,39 0,38 0,40 0,35 0,33 0,34 0,375 0,026
106 0,13 0,13 0,12 0,13 0,14 0,14 0,16 0,17 0,17 0,141 0,017
107 0,65 0,68 0,67 0,65 0,65 0,63 0,64 0,65 0,68 0,654 0,020
108
109 0,42 0,41 0,40 0,40 0,41 0,39 0,43 0,43 0,44 0,413 0,015


101 0,40 0,40 0,41 0,39 0,41 0,42 0,43 0,42 0,41 0,411 0,012
102 0,45 0,43 0,42 0,40 0,41 0,40 0,43 0,43 0,40 0,420 0,017
103 0,44 0,45 0,44 1,23 1,18 1,17 3,46 3,32 3,45 1,681 1,336
104 0,36 0,35 0,39 0,37 0,38 0,37 0,40 0,40 0,39 0,381 0,017
105 0,26 0,26 0,25 0,24 0,24 0,25 0,25 0,23 0,24 0,245 0,011
106 0,08 0,09 0,09 0,08 0,08 0,08 0,09 0,08 0,09 0,085 0,003
107 0,59 0,58 0,57 0,54 0,53 0,53 0,58 0,50 0,63 0,563 0,037
108
109 0,32 0,32 0,31 0,31 0,30 0,30 0,32 0,32 0,32 0,315 0,010

101 0,38 0,38 0,37 0,35 0,34 0,34 0,37 0,35 0,35 0,360 0,014
102 0,32 0,33 0,32 0,33 0,34 0,34 0,35 0,35 0,36 0,339 0,013
103 0,45 0,45 0,45 1,34 1,31 1,33 3,65 3,95 4,02 1,882 1,543
104 0,35 0,34 0,35 0,32 0,31 0,31 0,36 0,36 0,36 0,342 0,021
105 0,17 0,16 0,16 0,15 0,15 0,16 0,16 0,15 0,15 0,157 0,008
106 0,06 0,06 0,06 0,05 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,046 0,010
107 0,56 0,51 0,51 0,52 0,54 0,54 0,53 0,54 0,52 0,530 0,015
108
109 0,21 0,21 0,21 0,20 0,20 0,20 0,20 0,20 0,20 0,202 0,004

101 0,50 0,50 0,48 0,49 0,51 0,52 0,50 0,52 0,53 0,504 0,016
102 0,52 0,53 0,53 0,53 0,53 0,50 0,51 0,51 0,50 0,518 0,012
103 0,64 0,65 0,65 1,86 1,86 1,91 5,49 5,70 5,51 2,696 2,220
104 0,65 0,65 0,64 0,54 0,53 0,53 0,59 0,57 0,53 0,580 0,054
105 0,37 0,38 0,37 0,37 0,38 0,38 0,38 0,38 0,39 0,375 0,007
106 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,09 0,10 0,09 0,10 0,10 0,09 0,096 0,006
107 0,69 0,68 0,69 0,66 0,68 0,70 0,71 0,68 0,68 0,684 0,014
108
109 0,35 0,36 0,36 0,38 0,35 0,38 0,43 0,42 0,43 0,383 0,034

101 0,11 0,10 0,10 0,09 0,09 0,09 0,10 0,09 0,10 0,098 0,006
102 0,08 0,08 0,07 0,06 0,06 0,06 0,08 0,07 0,06 0,069 0,009
103 0,21 0,19 0,19 1,37 1,36 1,40 6,51 6,44 6,72 2,709 2,929
104 0,12 0,11 0,11 0,08 0,09 0,08 0,11 0,09 0,09 0,098 0,016
105 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,017 0,005
106 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,002 0,001
107 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,04 0,038 0,002
108
109


101 0,51 0,50 0,51 0,52 0,52 0,52 0,52 0,51 0,53 0,516 0,007
102 0,55 0,58 0,59 0,57 0,59 0,60 0,60 0,61 0,59 0,587 0,017
103 0,61 0,61 0,62 2,05 2,03 2,01 6,75 6,75 6,90 3,147 2,808
104 0,62 0,63 0,61 0,63 0,63 0,62 0,68 0,69 0,67 0,642 0,027
105 0,39 0,38 0,39 0,38 0,39 0,39 0,41 0,41 0,41 0,393 0,012
106 0,09 0,10 0,10 0,13 0,12 0,12 0,16 0,16 0,16 0,129 0,027
107 0,69 0,70 0,69 0,69 0,71 0,70 0,68 0,70 0,71 0,695 0,009
108
109 0,36 0,36 0,37 0,41 0,42 0,40 0,48 0,48 0,48 0,418 0,053
Table 19: Summary of calibration results.

Device 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109
Ref. No No No No No No No No No
B old 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0
β 0,831 0,777 0,729 1,191 3,633 0,608 1,082 1,082
B new 0,831 0,777 0,729 1,191 3,633 0,608 1,082 1,082
σ SRI 0,041 0,016 0,017 0,049 0,254 0,037 0,032
M 54 54 54 54 54 54 18 18 45
a 74,81 73,98 25,39 99,95 56,40 16,17 259,99 43,34
b 0,41 0,55 0,29 0,41 0,40 0,45 1,35 0,74
In Table X above, the standard deviation of the regression of <<SRI>> vs. <SRI> is shown
(σSRI), which is a measure of the precision of the calibration.
4.2 Cross-correlations
For all devices, cross correlations have been calculated based on SRI values. Results are
shown below.
Table 20: Cross correlations for all devices and all speeds.
R2 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 109 R² per
avg(R²)
km/h 30 60 90 30 60 90 30 60 90 30 60 90 30 60 90 30 60 90 30 60 90 30 60 90 speed
30 0,99 0,99 0,95 0,97 0,97 0,95 0,27 0,07 0,88 0,91 0,93 0,91 0,89 0,90 0,91 0,82 0,73 0,99 0,99 0,99 0,94 0,96 0,94 0,92
101 60 0,99 1,00 0,97 0,99 0,98 0,95 0,30 0,05 0,91 0,93 0,94 0,94 0,93 0,94 0,92 0,86 0,77 0,98 0,97 0,98 0,96 0,98 0,97 0,94 0,93
90 0,99 1,00 0,95 0,97 0,96 0,95 0,30 0,05 0,89 0,91 0,92 0,92 0,91 0,93 0,90 0,82 0,73 0,98 0,98 0,98 0,94 0,97 0,96 0,92
30 0,95 0,97 0,95 0,99 0,99 0,90 0,28 0,04 0,92 0,97 0,96 0,98 0,97 0,94 0,97 0,95 0,88 0,92 0,91 0,91 0,98 1,00 0,98 0,95
102 60 0,97 0,99 0,97 0,99 1,00 0,94 0,34 0,02 0,93 0,98 0,98 0,97 0,96 0,95 0,93 0,91 0,85 0,94 0,94 0,94 0,95 0,99 0,98 0,95 0,95
90 0,97 0,98 0,96 0,99 1,00 0,92 0,32 0,03 0,91 0,97 0,98 0,95 0,95 0,94 0,93 0,92 0,87 0,93 0,93 0,93 0,95 0,99 0,98 0,95
30 0,95 0,95 0,95 0,90 0,94 0,92 0,44 0,01 0,95 0,91 0,93 0,91 0,91 0,94 0,84 0,76 0,68 0,91 0,93 0,92 0,86 0,91 0,92
103 60 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,44 0,47 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
90 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,01 0,47 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
30 0,88 0,91 0,89 0,92 0,93 0,91 0,95 0,47 0 0,99 0,94 0,96 0,97 0,95 0,88 0,85 0,80 0,82 0,83 0,83 0,86 0,91 0,93 0,89
104 60 0,91 0,93 0,91 0,97 0,98 0,97 0,91 0,41 0 0,96 0,99 0,97 0,98 0,96 0,91 0,94 0,91 0,85 0,86 0,85 0,91 0,96 0,97 0,93 0,92
90 0,93 0,94 0,92 0,96 0,98 0,98 0,93 0,45 0 0,94 0,99 0,95 0,95 0,96 0,87 0,90 0,88 0,87 0,89 0,88 0,88 0,95 0,97 0,93
30 0,91 0,93 0,93 0,98 0,96 0,94 0,91 0,41 0,00 0,96 0,98 0,96 1,00 0,97 0,94 0,94 0,88 0,85 0,85 0,85 0,94 0,98 0,98 0,93
105 60 0,91 0,93 0,93 0,98 0,96 0,94 0,91 0,41 0,00 0,96 0,98 0,96 1,00 0,98 0,92 0,93 0,88 0,83 0,83 0,83 0,92 0,96 0,98 0,92 0,92
90 0,91 0,93 0,93 0,98 0,96 0,94 0,91 0,41 0,00 0,96 0,98 0,96 0,97 0,98 0,85 0,87 0,83 0,84 0,85 0,85 0,88 0,95 0,98 0,91
30 0,91 0,92 0,90 0,97 0,93 0,93 0,84 0,16 0,11 0,88 0,91 0,87 0,94 0,92 0,85 0,93 0,83 0,89 0,86 0,88 0,98 0,95 0,91 0,91
106 60 0,82 0,86 0,82 0,95 0,91 0,92 0,76 0,25 0,02 0,85 0,94 0,90 0,94 0,93 0,87 0,93 0,98 0,77 0,75 0,76 0,91 0,94 0,92 0,88 0,86
90 0,73 0,77 0,73 0,88 0,85 0,87 0,68 0,31 0,00 0,80 0,91 0,88 0,88 0,88 0,83 0,83 0,98 0,66 0,65 0,65 0,82 0,87 0,87 0,81
30 0,99 0,98 0,98 0,92 0,94 0,93 0,91 0,20 0,11 0,82 0,85 0,87 0,85 0,83 0,84 0,89 0,77 0,66 0,99 1,00 0,93 0,93 0,89 0,88
107 60 0,99 0,97 0,98 0,91 0,94 0,93 0,93 0,25 0,01 0,83 0,86 0,89 0,85 0,83 0,85 0,86 0,75 0,65 0,99 1,00 0,90 0,91 0,89 0,88 0,88
90 0,99 0,98 0,98 0,91 0,94 0,93 0,92 0,22 0,10 0,83 0,85 0,88 0,85 0,83 0,85 0,88 0,76 0,65 1,00 1,00 0,92 0,92 0,89 0,88
30 0,94 0,96 0,94 0,98 0,95 0,95 0,86 0,18 0,11 0,86 0,91 0,88 0,94 0,92 0,88 0,98 0,91 0,82 0,93 0,90 0,92 0,98 0,94 0,92
109 60 0,96 0,98 0,97 1,00 0,99 0,99 0,91 0,29 0,04 0,91 0,96 0,95 0,98 0,96 0,95 0,95 0,94 0,87 0,93 0,91 0,92 0,98 0,99 0,95 0,94
90 0,94 0,97 0,96 0,98 0,98 0,98 0,92 0,38 0,01 0,93 0,97 0,97 0,98 0,98 0,98 0,91 0,92 0,87 0,89 0,89 0,89 0,94 0,99 0,94

Colour code:
Colour R²
< 0.85
0.85 – 090
0.90 – 0.95
> 0.95
Correlations of device 103 are marked in orange.
As there were obvious problems with the SRI calculations of device 103, it was excluded
from further calculations. The average R² for every device at every speed was calculated.
From that, an overall average R² per device was calculated. The table below shows the order
of R² per device descending.
Table 21: Average R² of correlations, ordered by R²descending.

Device avg(R²)
102 0,950
109 0,938
101 0,928
105 0,922
104 0,916
107 0,879
106 0,864
4.3 Repeatability and reproducibility

For determining repeatability and reproducibility, calculations according to ISO 5257 were
done.
Below, the calculations according ISO 5257-2 are shown.
Form A is omitted, as the tables of SRI values have been already presented above.
Table 22: Form B – collation of the arithmetic means
_yij 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 <<SRI>>
S1 0,49 0,57 0,61 0,38 0,14 0,41 0,49
S2 0,41 0,42 0,38 0,25 0,09 0,31 0,35
S3 0,36 0,34 0,34 0,16 0,05 0,20 0,28
S4 0,50 0,52 0,58 0,37 0,10 0,38 0,47
S5 0,10 0,07 0,10 0,02 0,00 0,04 0,05
S6 0,52 0,59 0,64 0,39 0,13 0,70 0,42 0,54

Table 23: Form B – collation of the measures of spread within cells
sij 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109
S1 0,009 0,018 0,026 0,026 0,017 0,020 0,015
S2 0,012 0,017 0,017 0,011 0,003 0,037 0,010
S3 0,014 0,013 0,021 0,008 0,010 0,015 0,004
S4 0,016 0,012 0,054 0,007 0,006 0,014 0,034
S5 0,006 0,009 0,016 0,005 0,001 0,002 0,000
S6 0,007 0,017 0,027 0,012 0,027 0,009 0,053
Table 24: Calculation of sr and sR per surface. Devices 103 and 106 have been omitted
as they are outliers.
2 2 2
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 sr sL sR m sr sR
S1 22,136 11,254 45 405 0,0157 0,00039 0,010118 0,011 0,4919 0,020 0,103
S2 15,953 5,852 45 405 0,0074 0,00018 0,005429 0,006 0,35451 0,014 0,075
S3 12,595 3,839 45 405 0,0071 0,00018 0,008689 0,009 0,27988 0,013 0,094
S4 21,241 10,317 45 405 0,0358 0,00089 0,007972 0,009 0,47202 0,030 0,094
S5 2,532 0,217 45 405 0,0032 8,1E-05 0,002072 0,002 0,05626 0,009 0,046
S6 23,003 12,169 45 405 0,032 0,0008 0,011316 0,012 0,51118 0,028 0,110
Overall standard deviations were calculated by averaging the single standard deviations of
every surface. R and r were calculated by multiplying sr and sR by 2.8.
Results:
(Overall) Repeatability standard deviation: sr = 0.019
(Overall) Reproducibility standard deviation: sR = 0.087
Repeatability limit r = 0.05
Reproducibility limit R = 0.24
Table 25: sr and sR for all surfaces

Surface sr sR
S1 0,020 0,103
S2 0,014 0,075
S3 0,013 0,094
S4 0,030 0,094
S5 0,009 0,046
S6 0,028 0,110

4.4 Conclusions
4.4.1 Speed independence

The SRI calculation performs rather well in making skid resistance values speed independ-
ent. Comparing the SRI-graphs in chapter 9.2.4 with the F vs. S-graphs in chapter 9.2.3, it is
obvious that the SRI-graphs show more or less straight lines, although all speeds from 30 to
90 km/h are shown. Only for one device (103), the results were unfeasible. The reason for
this behaviour is unknown. Table 26 below shows the standard deviations of the calculated
SRI values per device and surface. Minimum, maximum and average standard deviations are
listed below.
min(stdSRI) = 0.010
max(stdSRI) = 0.054
avg(stdSRI) = 0.016
Table 26: sr and sR for all surfaces
stdSRI S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6
101 0,009 0,012 0,014 0,016 0,006 0,007
102 0,018 0,017 0,013 0,012 0,009 0,017
104 0,026 0,017 0,021 0,054 0,016 0,027
105 0,026 0,011 0,008 0,007 0,005 0,012
106 0,017 0,003 0,010 0,006 0,001 0,027
107 0,020 0,037 0,015 0,014 0,002 0,009
108
109 0,015 0,010 0,004 0,034 0,053
4.4.2 Scale
When working with SRI values, one must be aware that the scale is compressed. For S6,
skid resistance values (F) up to µ=0.9 were reported by some devices, where the highest SRI
values are around 0.7. The SRI values of different devices spread largely on almost all sur-
faces. Only on surface S5 (artificial low-µ), the SRI values are close together.
4.4.3 Order
The relative order of the surface was investigated for all devices, both for SRI and F. For F,
the speed of 60 km/h was chosen.
SRI
Surface S5 is rated worst by all devices, S3 is second worst, S2 third worst. From 3rd place
on, things start to vary. 8 of 9 rate S6 as the best, the majority rates S1 for 2nd best, but S1
has two 3rd places, four 2nd places and one 1st place.
F
Surface S5 is rated worst by all devices and S1 is rated best. S4 is on 2nd place by 5 of 8 de-
vices, S3 is second worst and S3 3rd worst by 7 out of 8. S1 is on 3rd place by 5 of 8 devices.
Comparing the SRI and F60 ranking, the rating gives almost the same results.

Table 27: Order of surfaces regarding to <SRI>

Surface worst best
101 S5 S3 S2 S1 S4 S6
102 S5 S3 S2 S4 S1 S6
104 S5 S3 S2 S4 S1 S6
105 S5 S3 S2 S4 S1 S6
106 S5 S3 S2 S4 S6 S1
107 S5 S3 S2 S1 S4 S6
109 S3 S2 S4 S1 S6
Table 28: Order of surfaces regarding to F60

Surface worst best
101 S5 S3 S2 S1 S4 S6
102 S5 S3 S2 S1 S4 S6
104 S5 S3 S2 S4 S1 S6
105 S5 S3 S2 S1 S4 S6
106 S5 S3 S2 S4 S1 S6
107 S5 S2 S3 S1 S4 S6
109 S3 S2 S1 S4 S6
4.4.4 Repeatability and reproducibility

Compared to HERMES, repeatability and reproducibility are a bit better. However, an R of
0.24 is almost a third of the whole SRI scale. This seems to be unsatisfactorily.
4.4.5 Trueness of results

Both calculations (prEN13036-x and ISO 5725) do not provide information on the trueness of
the results – i.e. the closeness of the result to an accepted reference value (definition taken
from ISO 5725). The problem here lies in the fact that until now there is no accepted refer-
ence value for any surface as there is no accepted reference device to measure with. An of-
ten used resort is to average the obtained results and treat this as accepted reference value.
This concept works well if all measurement devices work strictly by the same principle, the
same parts, etc. When looking at the SRI results for each surface, a large variation between
the devices is obvious. For five surfaces the difference between highest and lowest reported
SRI value is about 0.3, which is almost half the scale of the SRI (see Figure 3 below). An im-
portant goal for the future is to reach an agreement on an accepted reference value and also
on a reference device. This raises the question what the “true” skid resistance of a road sur-
face might be. A possible solution could be a correlation of the SRI value derived from the
reference device to the braking deceleration of passenger cars. This would reflect the princi-
ple of longitudinal skid resistance measurement and would also link to a practical measure
on the road.
Another approach is to compare the rating of a surface in the scope of pavement manage-
ment. A common practice is to divide the scale into five classes ranging from “very poor” to
“very good”. For SRI values, no such rating exists at the moment, so rating schemes for the
friction values itself had to be used. This was done with two devices (102 and 104). For both
devices, a rating scheme for motorways is available. The rating shows only two compliances
(S5 and S6).

0,8
0,7
101
0,6 102
104
0,5
105
SRI
0,4 106
107
0,3
109
0,2 AVG
0,1
0,0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Surface Num ber
Figure 3: Range of SRI values calculated for all devices on all surfaces.
Table 29: Comparison of test surfaces based on national motorway rating schemes for
devices 102 and 104.
Surface Rating 102 Rating 104
S1 2 (good) 1 (very good)
S2 3 (average) 4 (poor)
S3 3 (average) 5 (very poor)
S4 2 (good) 1 (very good)
S5 5 (very poor) 5 (very poor)
S6 1 (very good) 1 (very good)

5 Longitudinal Evenness analysis
Within the SPENS project, WP2.2, one of the tasks was to compare the longitudinal profiles
from the participating measurement vehicles and a reference device. The comparative
measurements were arranged by Arsenal Research, Austria. The test was carried out be-
tween May 6th and May 8th 2008, in Vienna. The reference measurement was done one week
later. There were six measurement vehicle participating and six sections to be measured.
The main goal of the exercise was to compare the longitudinal profiles and IRI from the
measurement devices with the reference.
To minimize the influence of the driver’s behaviour a dotted line (guide line) was marked on
the road to support how to laterally place the vehicle. The drivers were instructed to follow
the guide line with the measurement sensor that collects the longitudinal profile in the right
wheel track1. Later, the reference profile (measured with VTI Primal) was collected along this
guide line.
The experiment was done according to the following schedule:
• Three measurements at the speed 30 km/h on all sections
• Three measurements at the speed 60 km/h on all sections2
• Three measurements at a speed of 90 km/h only at section 6.

A list of the participating vehicles and companies are shown in chapter 9.3 in alphabetic or-
der. The analysis presented in this report will not connect the different participants with the
results/diagrams.
5.1 Reference measurement

The reference in this test was the VTI Primal. The Primal was also the reference in the Filter
test and has been used in Sweden several times in similar tests. The Primal measured the
sections 1 to 5. The sixth section was a motorway and excluded because the heavy traffic
flow that made it impossible to close for measurements.
1 One of the participating vehicles had the measurement gauge in the left wheel track.
2 One of the participating companies did not deliver data at 60 km/h for section 3.

Figure 4: The reference, Primal, measuring one of the sections in Vienna.

The Primal is an accurate but time consuming measurement technique. In good circum-
stances about 800 metres of a longitudinal profile can be measured in one day. The longitu-
dinal reference profile is measured according the following steps:
• The lateral position of the profile should be chosen and marked at the road (in this
case the guide line)
• A height measurement is done every 10 metres with a total station (rod and level).
(Arranged by arsenal research at this test.)
• The longitudinal profiles are measured by the Primal between the points for the height
measurement mentioned above. The 10 m segments get a reading every 4 cm along
the section. The reference measurement starts 40 metres before the actual section
start in order to give the IRI algorithm a possibility to tune in.
• The height measurement and the Primal profiles are combined to build up a continu-
ous “true” profile with a reading every 4 cm.
• The reference profiles are used to calculate different indices such as IRI.

Longitudinal profile measuring with PRIMAL
Wireless data transmission
Transmitter
Trolley
with receiver
10 meter
Figure 5: Measuring principles of the Primal.

The figures below show the characteristics of the five sections measured by the Primal.
SPENS section 1 to 5 measured by the Primal and total station
Sect.1 Sect.2 Sect.3 Sect.4 Sect.5
4.5
3.5
3
Profile [m]
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
-40 60 160 260 360 460
Dist [m]
Figure 6: The longitudinal “true” profiles measured by the reference instrument Pri-
mal.
The characteristics of the five sections show a good variation. Section one and two are rather
smooth and the third section is very rough and the remaining, four and five, are in-between.

5.2 The analysis

The goal of the comparison is to harmonize the longitudinal profiles and IRI from the partici-
pating measurement vehicles with the reference Primal as the link. The analysis will be di-
vided into three different parts, comparison of the IRI, comparison of the longitudinal profile
(filtered with a low pass cut of wavelength 50 m) and the power of the profile will be com-
pared on the filtered profile with a PSD analysis (Power Spectrum Density). The PSD analy-
sis will be divided into two categories - medium wavelength and short wavelength. The quo-
tient of the PSD analysis for the tested vehicles and the Primal reference will also be shown.
RMS-values will be calculated and compared for the two wavelength categories. With these
comparisons any differences can easily be detected between the different devices.
5.2.1 International Roughness Index - IRI

The lateral position of the vehicle when measuring has a big influence of the results in this
test. Therefore the IRI level can and will vary along the section. The lengths of which data will
be compared are 50 m average values.
The figure below shows the overall average of delivered IRI for all devices for the sections 1
to 5.
Average of delivered IRI from sections 1 to 5*
* section 3 speed 60 km/h excluded

6.00
5.00
4.00
IRI [mm/m]
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Prim E201 E202 E203 E204 E205 E206
Average IRI 2.67 4.89 2.94 2.80 2.94 2.46 2.61
Figure 7: Average of delivered IRI from section 1 to 5.

Average of delivered IRI from sections 1 to 6*
* section 3 speed 60 km/h excluded

4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
IRI [mm/m]
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
E201 E202 E203 E204 E205 E206
Average IRI 4.07 2.49 2.39 2.48 2.15 2.22
Figure 8: Average of delivered IRI from section 1 to 6.

The average of IRI at different speeds for the sections 1 to 6 (section 3 excluded) are shown
in the figure below.
Average of delivered IRI, different speeds
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
IRI [mm/m]
30 km/h
2.00
60 km/h
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
E201 E202 E203 E204 E205 E206
30 km/h 3.52 2.24 2.06 1.98 1.94 2.05
60 km/h 3.46 2.23 2.26 2.21 1.99 2.13
Figure 9: Average of delivered IRI at different speeds from section 1 to 6.

The average value of IRI per section and device are shown in the figure below.
Average of IRI for section 1 to 6 per equipment
14.00
12.00
10.00
Prim
E201
IRI [mm/m]
8.00 E202
E203
6.00 E204
E205
E206
4.00
2.00
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6
Prim 0.94 1.84 6.30 2.88 3.20
E201 1.90 3.44 12.13 5.32 5.04 1.61
E202 1.26 2.31 6.30 3.13 3.37 1.12
E203 1.19 2.14 6.52 3.03 3.34 1.16
E204 1.31 1.88 7.66 3.05 3.22 1.10
E205 1.06 1.35 5.48 3.17 3.04 1.23
E206 1.35 2.22 4.66 2.93 2.93 1.04
Section
Figure 10: Average of IRI per section and equipment.

The next figure shows how IRI is varying along the sections with 50 metres average values.
Average of three measurements of IRI
20
18
16
14
Prim
12
E201
IRI [mm/m]
E202
10 E203
E204
8 E205
E206
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
SECTION 1 SECTION 2 SECTION 3 SECTION
Section [m]4 SECTION 5 SECTION 6
Figure 11: Average of three measurements per section.
The regression and correlation for IRI50 between the Primal and the tested vehicles can be
seen in the two left columns in the table below and the regression and correlation between

the average of the four middle devices (the highest and lowest values are excluded) and the
tested vehicle can be seen in the two right columns. The regression and correlation are
based on 50 metre average values.
Table 30: Regression and correlation between the Primal and the tested vehicles for
IRI.
Regression Correlation Regression Correlation
Primal/Vehicle Primal/Vehicle Average(Vehicles)/Vehicle Average(Vehicles)/Vehicle
U201=1.52×Prim+0.95 r=0.89 U201=1.61×AVG+0.08 r=0.93
U202=0.93×Prim+0.45 r=0.95 U202=0.92×AVG+0.16 r=0.93
U203=1.02×Prim+0.16 r=0.97 U203=1.01×AVG-0.11 r=0.98
U204=1.04×Prim+0.28 r=0.90 U204=1.09×AVG-0.2 r=0.95
U205=0.62×Prim+0.95 r=0.80 U205=0.68×AVG+0.53 r=0.89
U206=0.54×Prim+1.18 r=0.93 U206=0.66×AVG+0.6 r=0.94
The analysis of IRI shows good correspondence between the Primal and some of the tested
equipments. One of the equipments gives constantly higher values than the rest and two
equipments gives slightly lower values than the three remaining.
In Sweden, the Primal has been used as a reference instrument when the Swedish Road
Administration (SRA) and VTI have been testing measuring vehicles in a procurement proc-
ess. In these tests IRI is one of the parameters tested. To be accepted as a contractor of
measurement for SRA the validity limits has to be passed. The limits are based on 20 m av-
erage values and divided into two groups, low and high IRI values.
IRI ≤ 2 mm/m 80% of the difference between the Primal and the tested vehicle
shall be within ± 0.25 mm/m
IRI > 2 mm/m 75% of the difference between the Primal and the tested vehicle
shall be within ± (0.25+(PrimalIRI-2)×5%) mm/m
The vehicles have been tested according to these test criteria with the difference that 50 m
values are used instead of 20 m values as used in Sweden. The results can be shown in the
table below.
Table 31: Number of percent within control limits as used in Sweden.

Device No. Percentage
201 0%
202 40 %
203 45 %
204 45 %
205 37 %
206 34 %

The rather low percentage within the interval indicates that the measurement conditions were
very difficult. Normally in Sweden the results is somewhere between 70 and 90 %.
The repeatability of the results from the vehicles is also analysed. The table below shows the
overall standard deviation of all measurements per participating vehicle. The standard devia-
tion is calculated for each 50 m section and averaged over the whole section. Finally the
overall average is calculated for all sections. This table shows rather large differences be-
tween the participating vehicles. The main reason is probably the lateral position when
measuring. At procurement tests in Sweden (as described earlier in this chapter) the stan-
dard deviation is checked. The comparable results are Sweden for the standard deviation is
normally under 0.12 mm/m. The level of standard deviation is of course dependent on the
roads included in the test, the rougher roads (higher IRI values) the higher standard deviation
but the level of the standard deviation in this test indicates the difficulty to make repeatable
runs.
Table 32: The repeatability expressed as standard deviation.

Device Standard
No. deviation [mm/m]
201 0.73
202 0.17
203 0.45
204 0.60
205 0.41
206 0.27
5.2.2 Longitudinal profile

Three companies delivered the longitudinal profiles. One profile per run and speed at the six
sections was delivered. A graphic comparison between the companies that delivered longitu-
dinal profiles and the Primal has been done. The profiles are filtered with a low-pass Butter-
worth filter of the fourth order with 50 m cut off wavelength. Chapter 9.3.2 shows the graphi-
cal results. The first six figures show the longitudinal profiles when measuring in 30 km/h and
the following six at the speed 60 km/h and the last figure shows the profile at 90 km/h.
The comparison shows some differences that depend on lack of synchronisation, probably
both lateral and longitudinal. There are also differences that can not be explained by the po-
sitioning of the measurement vehicle.
5.2.3 Power Spectrum Density (PSD) – analysis

The power of the longitudinal profiles are analysed with the PSD-technique. A PSD-diagram
describes the amount of energy in the profile at different wavelengths. A 100 metre window
with a 95 % overlap has been used in the PSD calculations. The result shows good corre-
spondence for the wavelength interval 0.5 – 5 m but poorer correspondence at higher wave-
lengths. The results can be seen in chapter 9.3.3. It should be mentioned that the wave-
lengths influencing IRI are especially important between 0.5 and 30 metres, and the dia-
grams in chapter 9.3.3 shows the best results within these wavelengths. In chapter 9.3.3, the
RMS-values are also presented. The RMS values can easily be described as the area under

the PSD curve for an interval. There are two categories of RMS-values calculated, RMS for
wavelengths between 0.5 and 5 metres and between 5 and 50 metres.
The last analysis is shown in chapter 9.3.4 where the PSD quotient (fraction) is shown. The
diagrams show the results from the PSD analysis for each tested vehicle and speed divided
with a mean of the three vehicles that delivered the longitudinal profile. There are also dia-
grams describing the fraction between the tested vehicles and the Primal. The results should
be close to 1 if a perfect agreement is achieved. This type of analysis is very sensitive to if
the vehicle and the reference have had different lateral and longitudinal position.
5.3 Conclusions
The results in this test are overall not as good as expected. The main source of error is
probably the lateral and longitudinal position of the measurement, which on inhomogeneous
section has a great impact on the results. This can be seen in the results. There are also lar-
ger differences between the participating equipments than expected.
There were also some good results. The mean values of IRI from the participating vehicles
are rather close to the reference and the results for short wavelengths 0.5 – 5 metres was
rather good. One important result of this study is the overall average values calculated. Even
if the overall average value is only based upon approximately 18 km of measurements the
result indicates that it’s possible to compare IRI between different countries participating in
this test. It would be necessary to make a larger number of measurements in order to get a
better harmonisation function.
It has been shown in evaluations like this that the different measurement vehicles are techni-
cally very similar. The main source of error lies in the hand of the human factor. To get a high
quality and a repeated and reproduced measurement the education and continuity of the
personnel is very important. In addition, the quality program, where the calibration, daily
check-up, data processing and things like that are described, is very important.

6 Bearing Capacity Analysis
6.1 Objective
The most common device for deflection testing of pavements is the Falling Weight Deflecto-
meter (FWD). The harmonization test and the determination of repeatability and reproducibil-
ity among seven FWDs from European countries, especially New Member States, is subject
of this chapter. The test programme was based on the COST 336 Protocol C5-1999 “In-situ
FWD Harmonisation Procedure”.
Reproducibility is one of the main principles of the scientific method and refers to the ability
of the test method to be accurately reproduced by someone else working independently. Re-
producibility relates to the agreement of test results with different operations, devices etc.
The measure of reproducibility is the standard deviation.
Deflection results are defined as being repeatable when a single FWD, operated by one
crew, is capable of reproducing the deflection bowl collected in a sequence of multiple drops
at a specific test site without lifting the loading plate.
This chapter presents a description of the test programme, the participating FWD equip-
ments, conditions during the days of testing and provides a summary of test results.
6.2 Participating equipments

In total seven FWDs participated at the FWD harmonisation test. The measurements were
arranged and led by Arsenal Research, Austria, and the test was carried out the 6th of May
and the 7th of May 2008 in Vienna and its suburbs. A description and photos of the test sec-
tions can be found in chapter 9.1.3.
This chapter presents brief information on the participating organisations and their equip-
ment. All devices were operated by two or three-man crews.
According to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 each participating FWD used a loading plate
with a diameter of 300 mm and was equipped as in routine operation for that device. The
mentioned protocol requires at least five deflection sensors, at intervals of 300 mm from the
load centre, starting at the load centre. There were some deviations from the general rec-
ommendation:
− Device 301-FWD KUAB omits the offset 1800 mm although it has seven sensors,
− Device 305-FWD KUAB omits the offset 1500 mm and offset 1800 mm although it has
seven sensors,
− Device 307 measured only at the first day on four test stations.

All the equipments types are shown in Figure 11 to Figure 14.
Figure 12: FWD KUAB (Hungarian Roads Management Company and Slovak Road
Administration)
Figure 13: FWD Dynatest (DDC-Slovenia, IBDiM-Poland, Technical University of Vi-

enna, TPA-Hungary)
Figure 14: FWD Carl Bro (IMOS – Czech Republic)
6.3 Selection of test stations

According to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 at least twelve test stations, all with asphalt
wearing course or seal coat, should be selected prior to the day of testing in order to test
FWD response on various combinations of pavement structure and subgrade support. Sub-

grade stiffness should range from weak to stiff, whereas thickness of asphalt layer and base
course should range from thin to thick. At least nine test stations must be selected for the re-
producibility test. These test stations must be visited twice during testing. At least three test
stations must be selected for the repeatability test. These stations must be visited only once.
For this harmonisation test six test stations with asphalt pavement and six test stations with
cement concrete pavements were selected in Vienna and its suburbs. Three of the concrete
pavements had very low deflections, double lower then suggested for such analysis by FWD
producers. The analysis was done both, including all gathered data and only with the data
obtained on asphalt pavements. In second case, statistical condition (at least nine test sta-
tions must be selected for the reproducibility test) has not been fully satisfied.
The choice of the test stations was based on requests of safety, uniformity of road surface,
absence of sun/shadow effects, with pavement surface without of cracking identified at the
pavement surface 5 m at either side of each test station. In addition, the cross-fall and the
gradient of each test station did not exceed four percent.
Table 33 presents a rough qualification of pavement structure and subgrade bearing capacity.
It is based on mechanical characteristics, which are presented at Table 34.
There were not any asphalt sections with weak subgrade bearing capacity which is an omis-
sion regarding to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 “In-situ FWD Harmonisation Procedure”.
Table 33: Test sections

Pavement No. of Average central de-
Date Pavement Type
Number Stations flection [μm]
B1 1 6.5.2008 Asphalt pavement 206
Cement concrete
B2 3 6.5.2008 42
pavement
Cement concrete
B5 3 7.5.2008 263
pavement
Table 34: Mechanical characteristics of pavement and subgrade

Pavement
Upper courses Base courses Subgrade
Number
Average subgrade bearing

B1 High stiffness of asphalt layers
capacity
B2 Strong concrete, high thickness Strong subgrade
Average subgrade bearing

B3 Not clear to define without coring
capacity
High stiffness and thick- Probably base course

B4 Strong subgrade bearing
ness of asphalt layers with hydraulic binder
Obscure thickness and characteristics of cement con-

B5 Weak subgrade
crete course and base course

6.4 Reproducibility
Deflection results are defined as being reproducible when various types of FWD, operated by
various crews, produce similar deflection bowls for a specific test station under identical test-
ing conditions.
Verification of reproducibility can be achieved only when a reference system has been de-
fined. Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 defines how to calculate the “reference deflection
bowl” from participating FWDs (paragraphs 7.8 and 7.9).
Although, there are two clear sets of deflection bowls – the first one measured by FWD-
Dynatest and a second one measured by FWD-KUAB – it was decided to act according to
the protocol and calculate only one reference deflection bowl per each test station.
6.4.1 Pavement temperature

According to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336, pavement temperature should not vary more
than 3 °C over the period of testing at a specific test site. If variation exceeds this limit, then
the centre deflection should not be submitted for analysis.
Table 35 shows that temperature varied hardly during the measurement, which was carried
out by device labelled FWD 302 and device labelled FWD 306. High temperature differences
during the measurements that were carried out on cement-concrete pavement did not have
significant influence on results; therefore, those data have not been excluded from the analy-
sis (position with green shading in Table 35). On the other hand, high temperature difference
measured during the deflection measurements that were carried out on asphalt pavements
had important influence on results. Therefore, these centre deflections were omitted from the
analysis (positions with orange shading in Table 35).
Table 35: Surface temperatures

301 302 303 304 305 306 307
Pavement
Number Time [°C] Time [°C] Time [°C] Time [°C] Time [°C] Time [°C] Time [°C]
B1 10:00 15 15 10:30 16 10:17 15,8 17:39 25,9 10:49 16
B2 13:04 19 24 14:04 18 14:36 19,5 18:15 23 15:04 19
B3 10:30 18 20 10:20 18 10:32 18,7 13:43 34,6 - -
B4 11:10 20 22 11:00 18 11:13 20,4 11:24 35 - -
B5 12:00 22 28 12:15 19 12:27 21,8 12:36 28 - -
6.4.2 Mean normalised deflections

All deflections were normalised with the use of linear interpolation techniques to the target
load level of 50 kN. The mean normalised deflection of each deflection sensor per FWD, per
test station for the set of four drops was determined. The calculation is shown in Excel file3,
which is a part of this report.
3 CDV Analysis of FWD Harmonisation test SPENS WP2.xls

6.4.3 Deviation ratio and Eligibility

The calculation of deviation of normalized deflection from the weighted mean deflection for
each measured deflection at each test station was carried out according to Protocol C5-1999
of COST 336 (Djkm – Eq. 9.6). Subsequently the calculation of standard deviation of devia-
tions from weighted mean deflection per deflection sensor and FWD was realized (sDjm – Eq.
9.7). The results are presented in table 4 and table 5 and graphically in figure 4 and figure 5.
Table 36 is related to test stations on both asphalt and cement concrete pavements, while
Table 37 is related to test stations only on asphalt pavements.
According to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 the threshold level for eligible FWD is
“sDjm” ≤ 0,090 of all its deflection sensors. All FWDs (their deflection sensors) fulfilled
the COST 336 protocol criterion and were included into list of eligible FWDs.
Calculation of “Djkm”, “sDjm” is shown in Excel file1, which is a part of this report.
Table 36 Standard deviation of deviations from weighted mean deflection per deflec-
tion sensor and FWD “sDjm” (all test stations-asphalt and concrete pavements)
Deflection Sensors
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800
D1 D3 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9
301 0,027 0,046 0,057 0,054 0,059 0,058
302 0,034 0,070 0,047 0,035 0,021 0,028 0,052
303 0,016 0,023 0,022 0,021 0,024 0,017 0,015

FWD label
304 0,037 0,037 0,028 0,030 0,030 0,031 0,023
305 0,058 0,046 0,038 0,049 0,084
306 0,024 0,047 0,022 0,024 0,017 0,026 0,017
307* 0,054 0,038 0,058 0,057 0,054 0,032 0,027
no data
only deflections measured at concrete pavements are included in analysis
307* only one section with asphalt pavement and three sections with concrete pave-
ment have been measured by device labelled FWD 307

Table 37: Standard deviation of deviations from weighted mean deflection per deflec-
tion sensor and FWD “sDjm” (only asphalt pavements)
Deflection Sensors
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800
D1 D3 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9
301 0,018 0,019 0,026 0,034 0,041 0,051
302 0,021 0,020 0,036 0,023 0,025 0,024 0,020
303 0,021 0,019 0,017 0,021 0,023 0,016 0,014

FWD label
304 0,015 0,016 0,020 0,021 0,028 0,028 0,028
305 0,031 0,018 0,041 0,047 0,051
306 0,041 0,020 0,018 0,015 0,016 0,011
307*
no data
deflection excluded because of high pavement surface temperature
307* only one section with asphalt pavement and three sections with concrete pavement
have been measured by device labelled FWD 307
Figure 15: Standard deviation of deviations from weighted mean deflection per deflec-
tion sensor and FWD “sDjm” (all test stations-asphalt and concrete pavements)

Figure 16: Standard deviation of deviations from weighted mean deflection per deflec-
tion sensor and FWD “sDjm” (only asphalt pavements)
6.4.4 Reference deflection bowl

As stated before, the determination of the reference deflection bowl for each test station was
performed according to the procedures specified in Protocol C5-1999. All FWDs were con-
sidered as eligible ones and all of them were used for calculation of reference deflec-
tion bowls.

Table 38: Reference deflection bowls and deduced pavement mechanical parameters
Sensors Mechanical Parameters
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 d0-d300 d300-d600 Subgrade4
D1 D3 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 (Mr)
B1 206 151 98 66 47 36 28 55 53 235
B 2-1 45 40 34 29 25 22 19 5 6 466
B 2-2 41 38 33 29 26 23 20 3 5 448
Pavement and Test Station
B 2-3 40 37 32 29 25 23 19 3 5 466
B 3-2 404 239 123 77 56 43 35 165 116 202
Number
B 3-2 390 258 157 99 67 49 38 132 101 157

B 3-3 413 241 130 85 60 45 35 172 111 183
B 4-1 148 118 84 58 41 30 23 30 34 268
B 4-2 143 120 91 67 48 35 26 23 29 232
B 5-1 252 228 194 156 124 97 74 24 34 94
B 5-2 287 263 221 182 143 106 81 24 42 81
B 5-3 251 234 204 170 136 108 78 17 30 86
d0-d300 - Surface Curvature Index (SCI)
Subgrade modulus (calculation is based on reference)
Calculation of reference deflection bowls and deduced pavement mechanical parameters are
shown in Excel file1, which is part of this report. Table 6 shows results of the calculation.
Mechanical parameters calculated from FWD measurements were used for confirmation that
the request of wide variation in bearing capacity of pavement and subgrade were achieved.
There were not any asphalt sections with weak subgrade bearing capacity and that is omis-
sion regarding to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 “In-situ FWD Harmonisation Procedure”.
6.4.5 Harmonisation factor

FWD in-situ harmonization factor was calculated for all eligible FWDs and fulfilment of re-
quirements defined by Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 was controlled.
At first the calculation of ratio of reference deflection to measured deflection per deflection
sensor, per FWD and test station was carried out (Rjkm – Eq. 9.9). Subsequently the average
of Rjkm from all test sections per each deflection sensor and FWD was calculated. This factor
is called In-situ deflection sensor harmonization factor (Rjm – Eq. 9.10). Table 39 and Table
40 show the results of the calculation. Table 39 is related to test stations on both asphalt and
cement concrete pavements, while Table 40 is related to test stations only on asphalt pave-
ments.
According to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 in-situ deflection sensor harmonization fac-
tor of all deflection sensors should be within limit 0.80 < “Rjm” < 1.20. All FWDs (their
deflection sensors) met this requirement.
4Subgrade modulus is based on equation which is a part of „REVISED AASHTO OVERLAY DESIGN
PROCEDURE (1993)“

Table 39: In situ deflection sensor harmonization factors Rjm (all test stations-asphalt
and concrete pavements)
Deflection Sensors
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800
D1 D3 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9
301 1,07 1,06 1,05 1,06 1,07 1,05
302 1,01 1,00 1,07 1,03 1,02 1,04 1,04
303 0,98 0,99 0,98 0,99 0,98 0,98 0,97

FWD label
304 0,99 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,01 1,01
305 0,99 0,99 0,99 0,98 1,01
306 0,96 0,96 0,96 0,97 0,99 0,99
307 1,03 1,04 1,04 1,02 1,01 0,96 0,98
no data
deflection excluded from the analysis
Table 40: In situ deflection sensor harmonization factors Rjm (only asphalt pavements)
Deflection Sensors
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800
D1 D3 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9
301 1,08 1,10 1,09 1,10 1,10 1,06
302 0,99 1,03 1,06 1,04 1,01 1,03 1,04
303 0,98 0,98 0,99 0,99 0,98 0,99 0,98

FWD label
304 0,96 0,97 0,98 0,98 0,99 1,00 1,00
305 1,04 1,03 1,00 1,01 1,01
306 0,93 0,95 0,95 0,97 0,98 0,99
307 0,97 0,98 0,97 0,95 0,93 0,92 0,93
no data
The standard deviation of deflection sensor harmonization factors was calculated (sRjm –
Eq.9.11). The results are presented in Table 41 and Table 42 and graphically in Figure 17
and Figure 18. Table 39 is related to test stations on both asphalt and cement concrete pave-
ments, while Table 40 is related to test stations only on asphalt pavements.
According to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 the threshold level for eligible FWD is “sRjm”
≤ 0,090 of all its deflection sensors. FWD labelled 305 did not fulfil the COST 336, pro-
tocol 5 criterion.

Table 41: Standard deviation of deflection sensor harmonization factors sRjm, (all test
stations-asphalt and concrete pavements)
Deflection Sensors
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800
D1 D3 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9
301 0,032 0,049 0,061 0,062 0,066 0,060
302 0,033 0,063 0,055 0,035 0,022 0,032 0,052
303 0,016 0,024 0,023 0,021 0,022 0,019 0,014

FWD label
304 0,036 0,039 0,028 0,030 0,032 0,039 0,030
305 0,058 0,044 0,038 0,048 0,098
306 0,023 0,045 0,021 0,025 0,018 0,032 0,021
307 0,062 0,039 0,058 0,052 0,062 0,030 0,039
no data
only deflections measured at concrete pavements are included in analysis
FWD 305 did not fulfil the COST 336, protocol 5 criteria
Table 42: Standard deviation of deflection sensor harmonization factors sRjm (only
asphalt pavements)
Deflection Sensors
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800
D1 D3 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9
301 0,021 0,022 0,030 0,040 0,054 0,060
302 0,022 0,021 0,042 0,025 0,025 0,026 0,022
303 0,020 0,018 0,018 0,022 0,021 0,011 0,014

FWD label
304 0,014 0,016 0,020 0,024 0,024 0,034 0,028
305 0,033 0,019 0,040 0,047 0,057
306 0,036 0,016 0,020 0,012 0,018 0,016
307
no data
FWD labelled 305 recorded unexpected deflection by sensor D7 (offset 1200mm) on con-
crete test station B5-3. Unfortunately, there weren’t sensors D8 and D9 (offset 1500mm and
1800mm) presented during the measurement, therefore it is not clear if it is a random error or
not.

If the deflection on that sensor will be excluded from the calculation of sRjm for all test sta-
tions, the sRjm for that sensor would be similar to the standard deviation of the same sensor
calculated only from asphalt pavement measurements. However, there is a need for further
investigation because of both, high standard deviation on sensor 5 (offset 1200mm) and ab-
sence of last two sensors (offset 1500mm and 1800mm).
Figure 17: Standard deviation of deflection sensor harmonisation factors sRjm (all test
stations-asphalt and concrete pavements)
Figure 18: Standard deviation of deflection sensor harmonisation factors sRjm (only
asphalt pavements)
The mean value of Rjm per each FWD was calculated. This factor is termed In-situ FWD har-
monization factor (Rm – Eq. 9.12). Table 43 shows results of the calculation for both cases all
test stations (asphalt and cement concrete pavements) and only for stations with asphalt
pavement. The results are presented graphically in Figure 19 and Figure 20.

In-situ FWD harmonization factor within limit 0.995 < “Rm” < 1.005 is considered to be
equivalent to 1.000. In other words, no adjustment is required.
Only FWD labelled 304 fulfils this limit in case of calculation carried out for all test stations
(asphalt and cement concrete pavements).
Table 43 In-situ FWD harmonization factors Rm

FWD Number: 301 302 303 304 305 306 307*
FWD type: KUAB Dynatest Dynatest Dynatest KUAB Dynatest Carl Bro
all test stations

(concrete and 1,058 1,030 0,982 1,002 0,992 0,974 1,011
asphalt)
only asphalt test

1,090 1,029 0,981 0,981 1,018 0,962 0,950
stations
central deflection at asphalt test sections were excluded because of high

pavement surface temperature
307* only one section with asphalt pavement and three sections with concrete
pavement have been measured by device labelled FWD 307
Figure 19: In-situ FWD harmonization factors Rm (all test stations-asphalt and concrete
pavements)

Figure 20: In-situ FWD harmonization factors Rm (only asphalt pavements)

In-situ FWD harmonization factors computed for FWD 301 were higher compared to other
FWDs. High values of In situ deflection sensor harmonization factors Rjm for all its sensors
might be due to an inaccurate load cell. Closer investigation of the load cell and the deflec-
tion sensors is recommended.
6.4.6 Apparent difference between two types of devices

Apparent difference in deflection can be observed between two types of devices FWD KUAB
and FWD Dynatest that participated at the harmonisation test. Figure 21 and Figure 22 show
mentioned difference.
Figure 21: Deflection bowl-illustration of difference between two types of FWD, test
station B4-2: asphalt pavement

Figure 22: Deflection bowl-illustration of difference in deflection bowl between two

types of FWD, test station B3-1: asphalt pavement
6.4.7 Conclusive remarks

The FWD harmonization test was realized according to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 “In-
situ FWD Harmonisation Procedure”. In total 7 FWDs participated at the test. Six test stations
with asphalt pavement and six test stations with cement concrete pavements were selected.
The analysis was done both, including all gathered data and only with the data obtained on
asphalt pavements.
Measurements with device labelled 306 were carried out during higher temperature. Although
the centre deflection was excluded from the analysis, according to Protocol C5-1999 of
COST 336, suspicion is still remaining that the high temperature has a strong influence on
other sensors (until offset 600mm).
FWD labelled 305 recorded unexpected deflection by sensor D7 (offset 1200mm) on con-
crete test station B5-3, see Appendix D. Unfortunately, there weren’t sensors D8 and D9 (off-
set 1500mm and 1800mm) presented during the measurement, therefore it is not clear if it is
a random error or not. If the deflection on that sensor will be excluded from the calculation of
standard deviation of in-situ deflection sensor harmonisation factor of FWD sRjm for all test
stations, the sRjm value for that sensor would be similar to the standard deviation of the same
sensor calculated only from asphalt pavement measurements. However, there is a need for
further investigation because of both, high standard deviation on sensor 5 (offset 1200mm)
and absence of last two sensors (offset 1500mm and 1800mm).
Device labelled 302 shows apparent error on cement concrete pavement. It was repeated on
three test stations at the same section (B2-1, B2-2 and B2-3), see chapter 9.4. Sensor de-
flections were on very low level at this section, under suggested level of acceptance (less
than 50 μm). Closer investigation of reasons of this error is recommended.
Apparent difference in deflections can be observed between two types of devices FWD
KUAB and FWD Dynatest that participated at the harmonisation test. In case of FWD

Carl Bro it is not possible to make such conclusion. The graphs on Figure 21 and Figure 22
clearly illustrate the tendency of KUAB FWDs to provide higher values of stiffness on asphalt
pavements. For central deflection this difference reaches 10%. Similar difference is not evi-
dent in case of measurements on concrete pavements.
When comparing deflection bowls recorded by device FWD 305 with reference deflection
bowls, the FWD 305 deflection values are higher for measurements realized on cement con-
crete pavements and lower for measurements carried out on asphalt pavements, see Appen-
dix D. Therefore, In-situ FWD harmonisation factor is closer to 1.0 (Rm = 0.992) in case of all
test stations (on both asphalt and cement concrete pavements) which are different from only
asphalt pavement situation (Rm = 1.018). Harmonisation factors show difference between de-
flection bowls measured on cement concrete pavements and asphalt pavements.
Results of determination of reproducibility of FWD measurements according to Proto-

col C5-1999 of COST 336:
All FWDs (their deflection sensors) were included into list of eligible FWDs. Threshold level
for eligible FWD is that Standard deviation of deviations from weighted mean deflection per
deflection sensor and FWD should be within limit “sDjm” ≤ 0,090 of all its deflection sensors.
All FWDs were used for calculation of reference deflection bowls.
All FWDs (their deflection sensors) met the requirement that in-situ deflection sensor har-
monization factor of all deflection sensors should be within limit 0.80 < “Rjm” < 1.20.
FWD labelled 305 did not meet the requirement that “sRjm” ≤ 0,090 of all its deflection sen-
sors. The reason was an unexpected deflection of one sensor at one test station with con-
crete pavement. It was probably caused by a singular reason which was not repeated in
other cases. All other FWDs fulfilled the requirement.
In-situ FWD harmonization factor within limit 0.995 < “Rm” < 1.005 is considered to be equiva-
lent to 1.000. In other words, no adjustment is required. Only FWD labelled 304 fulfils this
limit in case of calculation carried out for all test stations (asphalt and cement concrete
pavements). The final results are presented in figure 8 and figure 9.
The results are influenced by selection of reference FWDs and difference between FWD Dy-
natest and FWD KUAB.
In general it can be concluded that all FWDs fulfilled the requirements of Protocol
C5-1999 of COST 336.
6.5 Repeatability
The objective of the short-term repeatability test was to verify whether the FWDs under the
test are capable of producing consistent results on a series of three test stations. In this pro-
cedure the short-term repeatability of FWD is verified by using a series of twelve successive
drops per test station without lifting the loading plate. The first two drops are omitted from
analysis. The deflections are all normalised to the mean of the load imparted. The standard
deviation of the load and normalised deflections should agree with the specified limits.
6.5.1 Protocol requests

According to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336 “In-situ FWD Harmonisation Procedure” the
standard deviation of the load recorded in the series of ten drops shall be less than, or
equal to 2 percent of the mean of the recorded values. If the actual standard deviation ex-

ceeds the specified value, the load variation acceptance criterion is not complied with. The
standard deviation of the normalised deflections, recorded in the series of ten drops
shall be less than, or equal to 2 µm in case the mean of normalised deflections is less
than, or equal to 40 µm. The standard deviation of the normalised deflections, recorded in
the series of ten drops shall be less than, or equal to the sum of 1.5 µm and 1.25 percent
of the mean of the recorded normalised values, in case this mean is greater than 40 µm. If
the actual standard deviation of one or more deflectors exceeds the specified values, then
the deflection variation acceptance criterion is not complied with.
Figure 23: Standard deviation ratios in deflection repeatability test, section B4-2
6.5.2 Repeatability verification

Any FWD passes the repeatability criteria if full compliance with load and deflection require-
ments is achieved for at least two of the three test stations. All FWD devices passed the
test.
Figure 23, Figure 24, Figure 25 give an overview of the principal results of the repeatability
experiment concerning deflection. The graphs show the standard deviation ratios for deflec-
tion repeatability test (ratio between standard deviation of normalized deflections and its limit
according to Protocol C5-1999 of COST 336).


6.6 Abbreviations
i drop label
j deflection sensor label
k test station label
m FWD label
Djkm deviation of normalized deflection of weighted mean deflection per deflection sensor,
per FWD and test station
sDjm standard deviation of deviations from weighted mean deflection per deflection sensor
and FWD
Rjkm ratio of reference deflection to measured deflection per deflection sensor, per FWD
and test station
Rjm in-situ deflection sensor harmonisation factor of FWD
sRjm standard deviation of Rjm

Rm in-situ FWD harmonisation factor
Remaining abbreviations and the way of their calculation is mentioned in COST 336 Protocol
C5-1999 “In-situ FWD Harmonisation Procedure”.

7 Guidelines for non-destructive pavement measuring techniques
Non-destructive pavement measuring techniques have several advantages:
• Tests are performed in-situ.
• Tests are normally done in fluent traffic, no road/lane closing is necessary. This in-
creases the traffic fluency and the safety for device operators and road users as well.
• Tests can be done in a economically efficient way – due to high speed measurements
sections of several kilometres lengths can be measured per day.
• Pavements are not weakened or influenced by the measurement itself. Other than
meas-urements were samples (like cores) have to be taken from the pavement, there
is no hazard of producing weak points that reduce pavement life from the start.
A possible disadvantage of high speed measurements is a lower precision compared to static
or quasi-static measurements. This disadvantage is becoming smaller as sensor technique
improves.
Non-destructive pavement measuring techniques have several tasks to perform. One task is
quality assurance. Acceptance tests for various pavement properties on newly built roads are
compulsory in many countries today. After a certain warranty period, there is a warranty test
to be done. For local problems, e.g. accident hot spots, investigations of safety relevant sur-
face parameters are carried out. These mentioned application areas can be summarized as
measurements on project level.
On network level, the main purpose of non-destructive pavement measurement techniques is
to provide input data for pavement management systems. Where for acceptance tests the
absolute values of the limits have to be checked, at network level usually a classification
scheme is used. The measured raw data is usually delivered for 50 or 100 m long sections.
Some pavement management systems apply a homogenization algorithm on these data to
get longer section lengths.
As the survey of current non-destructive pavement measuring techniques used in the Euro-
pean member states showed, there is a variety of apparatus in use today. There are five sur-
face parameters that are of major importance for efficient pavement management systems
that can be measured by non-destructive pavement measurement techniques:
• transversal evenness (not covered in this report)
• longitudinal evenness
• bearing capacity
• skid resistance (in combination with macro texture)
• surface defects
These guidelines are divided into sub chapters for the mentioned parameters.

7.1 Bearing capacity

For measuring bearing capacity, usually Falling Weight Deflectometers are used. These de-
vices are well-established for some time now, so to ensure consistent results is not too diffi-
cult. With COST 336 there is a well established calibration procedure for the FWD device it-
self and its parts, as well as for harmonisation of different devices. Interestingly, there seem
to be no attempts to establish a formal European standard or even International Standard for
FWD measurements, even though there are more than 300 FWDs in use worldwide (as at
2001). As shown in the harmonisation exercise in SPENS, the results of the measurements
itself are well comparable. The calculation of E-modulus was not part of the harmonisation
and is not part of COST 336. Here, different results are possible. Due to Upgrading, rein-
forcement and rehabilitation of existing roads, there is often a lack of information about the
layer thicknesses. As this is decisive for the bearing capacity calculations, FWD measure-
ments can be supported by Ground Penetrating Radar measurements.
One drawback of the FWD method is that is gives just a point information. Due to its static
measurement, some kind of safeguarding is required. On highly trafficked roads, measure-
ments have to be done in the off-peak hours, possibly at night which increases costs. For
network analysis, Traffic Speed Deflectometers have been introduced in Denmark and Great
Britain. Continuous deflection profiles are derived from the measurement. The devices oper-
ate at speeds up to 80 km/h. These devices offer possible improvements over the use of
FWD and may be considered for network wide measurements in the future.
7.2 Longitudinal evenness

The straight edge as static and the Profilograph as quasi-static measurement device are
widely used for acceptance tests on newly built roads throughout Europe. Unfortunately,
evenness defects of longer wavelengths cannot be detected by these devices. This is even
more problematic, as these longer wavelengths affect the traffic more the higher speed is
driven at. The high speed measurement devices use laser sensors and/or accelerometers to
record a true profile. From this profile, different indices can be calculated, with the IRI as the
most popular among them. Spectral analysis can also be done only on a profile of a certain
length. Harmonisation here can rely on the use of a reference device that makes the judge-
ment of how good a device operates rather easy. VTI Primal, ARRB Walking Profile and
FACE Rolling Dipstick are well established reference devices – the VTI Primal has also been
used in the SPENS harmonisation test.
For the accreditation for network monitoring, not only the measurement device itself should
be investigated. Equally important is the computation of the indexes from the measurement
results. For IRI there exists a reference implementation by UMTRI
(http://www.umtri.umich.edu/content/IRIMain.f).
7.3 Skid resistance

Apart from measurement principles, there are some general guidelines for skid resistance
measurements: Measurements should be done in the wheel track, not between the wheel
tracks. The nearside wheel track should be chosen, which is the right wheel track in coun-
tries with right-hand traffic. The reason for this is that the wear is much heavier in the wheel
track than in between. Speed correction and correction of seasonal and temperature influ-
ences may be necessary.
Reasonable intervals for network monitoring are 3 to 5 years, depending on the financial and
legal situation.

As skid resistance is measured indirectly, quality management and calibration procedures for
all involved parts are necessary, namely tyre, force transducer, wheel load etc.
Skid resistance is a speed dependent value, so exact speed recording while measuring is
important. As the measurement speed may have to be adapted due to traffic, a proven corre-
lation for converting results to a default speed is necessary.
7.4 Accreditation
Usually, the service pavement monitoring is done placed via a tendering process. To assure
the contractors meet the technical requirements, accreditation exercises are recommended.
These can be organised similar to the harmonisation exercise done in SPENS. A declared
reference device makes a accreditation exercise easier.
7.5 Quality assurance

For all the mentioned techniques, quality assurance and trained and experienced personnel
are of vital importance. Measurement procedures should be defined in work instructions.
Reference sections for routine quality checks and calibration should be visited regularly.

8 References
ASTM F 1469 – 99 (Reapproved 2004) Standard Guide for Conducting a Repeatability and
Reproducibility Study on Test Equipment for Non-destructive Testing.
CEN/TC 227/WG5 N 202 E Rev. 4 – Surface Characteristics of road and airfield pavements;
Test Method – Part X; Assessment of the skid resistance of a road pavement surface by the
use of dynamic measurement systems; CEN 2007
COST 336 Falling Weight Deflectometer - Final report of the Action, COST Office, Brussels,
1998
DESCORNET G. – FILTER Final report; FEHRL Report 2002/1, Brussels 2002
DESCORNET G., SCHMIDT B., BOULET M., GOTHIE M., DO M-T., FAFIE J., ALONSO M.,
ROE P., FOREST R., VINER H. – Harmonisation of European Routine and Research Meas-
uring Equipment for Skid Resistance; FEHRL Report 2006/01, Brussels, 2006
DUCROS D.-M., PETKOVIC L., DESCORNET G., BERLEMEONT B., ALONSO M.,
YANGUAS S., JENDRYKA W., ANDREN P. – FILTER Experiment – Longitudinal Analysis ;
Final report 2001/1; Brussels 2001
FWD Comparative Day 2007. Report D08-01. CROW, Ede, 2007.
ISO 5721-1:1994-12-15, Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and
results – Part 1: General principles and definitions
ISO 5721-2:1994-12-15, Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and
results – Part 2: Basic method for the determination of repeatability and reproducibility of a
standard measurement method
ISO 8608 Mechanical vibration – Road surface profiles – Reporting of measured data.
1st edition 1995-09-01, International Organization for Standardization, Switzerland
PPR 261 2/462_056 Highways Agency 2007 National Falling Weight Deflectometer Correla-
tion Trials. S. Nell and P. Langdale – published project report, TRL, 2007.
prEN 13036-5 Surface Characteristics of Road and Airfield Pavements. Test methods – Part
5: Determination of Longitudinal Unevenness Indices. 2006/03
SAYERS M. W., GILLESPIE T. D. and QUEIRIOZ C.A.: The International Road Roughness
Experiment, Establishing Correlation and a Calibration Standard for Measurements, World
Bank Technical Paper Nr. 45, Washington, USA; 1986
SAYERS M.W. and KARAMIHAS S.M.: The Little Book Of Profiling, University of Michi-
gan,1998
WAMBOLD J.C., ANTLE C.E., HENRY J.J., RADO Z., DESCORNET G., SANDBERG U.,
GOTHIE M., HUSCHEK S. – International PIARC Experiment to Compare and Harmonize
Skid resistance and Texture Measurements; PIARC Publication n°01.04.T, Paris, 1995

9 APPENDIX
9.1 Test surfaces
9.1.1 Test sections for skid resistance tests

Location of Sections S1 – S4
Location of Sections S6, B2, L6

Section S1; L8; Wagram – Eckartsau; km 7.3 – km 7.4
Section length 100 m

Curvature straight
Crossfall [%] 2.5
Slope [%] ~0
µRoadSTAR [-] 0.7
Surface asphalt concrete

Section S2; B3 Pframa – Wagram km 10.2 – km10.3

Curvature long left bend
Crossfall [%] -2.5
Slope [%] ~0
µRoadSTAR [-] 0.5

Section S3; B3 Probstdorf – Wittau km 23.7 – km 23.8

Curvature straight
Crossfall [%] -2.5
Slope [%] ~0
µRoadSTAR [-] 0.4

Section S4; L9; Orth – Breitstetten; km1.7 – km 1.8

Curvature straight
Crossfall [%] 2.5
Slope [%] ~0
µRoadSTAR [-] 0.7

Section S5; Teesdorf Test track

Curvature straight
Crossfall [%] 2.5
Slope [%] ~0
µRoadSTAR [-] 0.1
Surface artificial painting

Section S6; A22 RFB Wien km 19.1 – km 19.0

Curvature slight bend
Crossfall [%] 2.5
Slope [%] ~0
µRoadSTAR [-] 0.8
Surface Exposed aggregate concrete

9.1.2 Longitudinal Evenness
Location of section L1 – L5
L6 is shown on map on page 63.

Sections L1, L2 – Johann Kutschera-Gasse

Curvature straight
Crossfall 2.5 %
Slope ~0%
IRI ~ 1.5 m/km

Section L3; Schafflerhofstraße

Curvature straight
Crossfall [%] 2.5
Slope [%] ~0
IRI [m/km] 4-10
Surface asphalt concrete, many defects

Section L4; Niklas-Eslarn-Straße

Curvature straight
Crossfall [%] 2.5
Slope [%] ~0
IRI [m/km] 3-4

Section L5; Wolfgang-Mühlwagner-Straße

Curvature straight
Crossfall [%] 2.5
Slope [%] ~0
IRI [m/km] 3-4

Section L6; A22 RFB Stockerau km 16.5 – 17.0

Curvature long right bend
Crossfall [%] 2.5
Slope [%] ~0
IRI [m/km] ~ 1.0
Surface exposed aggregate concrete

9.1.3 Bearing Capacity
Section B2 is shown on map on page 63

Section B1, Vienna, Paukerwerkstraße/Richard-Neutra-Gasse

Surface Asphalt concrete
Section B2; A22 RFB Wien, km 19.3

Surface Exposed aggregate concrete

Section B3; B3 km 16.4 Orth/Donau, Wienerstraße 26

Section B4; L9 Orth/Donau, Bahnstraße/Feuerrayonweg


Section B5; L3007 – Pframa 29

Surface Weak concrete

9.2 Skid resistance analysis
9.2.1 Participating Devices (alphabetical order of countries)

TU Vienna, Institute for Road Construction

2 GripTester AT
and Maintenance

4 CONSULTEST s.r.o. GripTester CZ
5 Colas Hungaria Ltd. ASFT friction tester HU
6 Pon Equipement AS TWO NO

7 IBDiM SRT-3 PL
8 ZAG SCRIMTEX SI
9 Slovak Road Administration Skiddometer BV 11 SK

9.2.2 SRI calculations

SRI calculation – Device 101
101 S1 Number of Runs = 9 MPD= 1,08 mm
Slip ratio = 0,17 Bold = 1,00
V [km/h] S [km/h] F [-] ln F Σ02 Σ11 Σ01 Σ20 Σ10

30 5,1 0,680 -0,386 0,149 -1,967 -0,386 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,680 -0,386 0,149 -1,967 -0,386 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,670 -0,400 0,160 -2,042 -0,400 26,01 5,1
60 10,2 0,640 -0,446 0,199 -4,552 -0,446 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,650 -0,431 0,186 -4,394 -0,431 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,620 -0,478 0,229 -4,876 -0,478 104,04 10,2
90 15,3 0,580 -0,545 0,297 -8,334 -0,545 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,580 -0,545 0,297 -8,334 -0,545 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,580 -0,545 0,297 -8,334 -0,545 234,09 15,3
Sum 1,961 -44,801 -4,161 1092,420 91,800
R² = 0,951 OK
-0,308 = ln(F0) 0,73 = F0 δS0 = 5,65
-0,015 = -1/S0 66 = S0


30 5,1 0,560 -0,580 0,336 -2,957 -0,580 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,550 -0,598 0,357 -3,049 -0,598 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,570 -0,562 0,316 -2,867 -0,562 26,01 5,1
60 10,2 0,510 -0,673 0,453 -6,868 -0,673 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,530 -0,635 0,403 -6,476 -0,635 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,550 -0,598 0,357 -6,098 -0,598 104,04 10,2
90 15,3 0,520 -0,654 0,428 -10,005 -0,654 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,510 -0,673 0,453 -10,302 -0,673 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,500 -0,693 0,480 -10,605 -0,693 234,09 15,3
Sum 3,585 -59,227 -5,666 1092,420 91,800
R² = 0,749 OK
-0,536 = ln(F0) 0,59 = F0 δS0 = 23,88
-0,009 = -1/S0 109 = S0



30 5,1 0,560 -0,580 0,336 -2,957 -0,580 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,560 -0,580 0,336 -2,957 -0,580 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,550 -0,598 0,357 -3,049 -0,598 26,01 5,1
60 10,2 0,480 -0,734 0,539 -7,486 -0,734 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,470 -0,755 0,570 -7,701 -0,755 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,470 -0,755 0,570 -7,701 -0,755 104,04 10,2
90 15,3 0,460 -0,777 0,603 -11,881 -0,777 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -12,561 -0,821 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -12,561 -0,821 234,09 15,3
Sum 4,660 -68,855 -6,420 1092,420 91,800
R² = 0,910 OK
-0,493 = ln(F0) 0,61 = F0 δS0 = 5,52
-0,022 = -1/S0 46 = S0


30 5,1 0,730 -0,315 0,099 -1,605 -0,315 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,730 -0,315 0,099 -1,605 -0,315 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,700 -0,357 0,127 -1,819 -0,357 26,01 5,1
60 10,2 0,660 -0,416 0,173 -4,238 -0,416 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,690 -0,371 0,138 -3,785 -0,371 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,700 -0,357 0,127 -3,638 -0,357 104,04 10,2
90 15,3 0,630 -0,462 0,213 -7,069 -0,462 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,650 -0,431 0,186 -6,591 -0,431 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,660 -0,416 0,173 -6,357 -0,416 234,09 15,3
Sum 1,335 -36,708 -3,438 1092,420 91,800
R² = 0,805 OK
-0,275 = ln(F0) 0,76 = F0 δS0 = 17,65
-0,011 = -1/S0 95 = S0



30 5,1 0,250 -1,386 1,922 -7,070 -1,386 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,240 -1,427 2,037 -7,278 -1,427 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,230 -1,470 2,160 -7,495 -1,470 26,01 5,1
60 10,2 0,180 -1,715 2,941 -17,491 -1,715 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,180 -1,715 2,941 -17,491 -1,715 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,180 -1,715 2,941 -17,491 -1,715 104,04 10,2
90 15,3 0,170 -1,772 3,140 -27,111 -1,772 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,150 -1,897 3,599 -29,026 -1,897 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,170 -1,772 3,140 -27,111 -1,772 234,09 15,3
Sum 24,819 -157,564 -14,869 1092,420 91,800
R² = 0,876 OK
-1,266 = ln(F0) 0,28 = F0 δS0 = 3,76
-0,038 = -1/S0 26 = S0


30 5,1 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -1,333 -0,261 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,760 -0,274 0,075 -1,400 -0,274 26,01 5,1
30 5,1 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -1,333 -0,261 26,01 5,1
60 10,2 0,720 -0,329 0,108 -3,351 -0,329 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,720 -0,329 0,108 -3,351 -0,329 104,04 10,2
60 10,2 0,720 -0,329 0,108 -3,351 -0,329 104,04 10,2
90 15,3 0,660 -0,416 0,173 -6,357 -0,416 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,650 -0,431 0,186 -6,591 -0,431 234,09 15,3
90 15,3 0,670 -0,400 0,160 -6,127 -0,400 234,09 15,3
Sum 1,054 -33,193 -3,029 1092,420 91,800
R² = 0,975 OK
-0,187 = ln(F0) 0,83 = F0 δS0 = 4,13
-0,015 = -1/S0 68 = S0
δS0 MPD S0 w w.lnMPD 1 lnMPD lnS0 S0 <SRI>

S01 5,65 1,08 66 137 10,6 1 0,077 4,192 77,191 0,487
S02 23,88 1,05 109 21 1,0 1 0,049 4,692 76,312 0,411
S03 5,52 0,68 46 70 -27,2 1 -0,386 3,835 63,957 0,360
S04 17,65 0,71 95 29 -9,9 1 -0,342 4,553 65,090 0,504
S05 3,76 0,10 26 49 -113,9 1 -2,303 3,274 29,340 0,098
S06 4,13 0,60 68 272 -138,7 1 -0,511 4,220 60,785 0,516
4,314995 a= 74,81
0,406515 b= 0,41


102 S1 Number of Runs = 9,00 MPD= 1,08 mm

30 5,40 0,80 -0,22 0,05 -1,20 -0,22 29,16 5,40
30 5,40 0,81 -0,21 0,04 -1,14 -0,21 29,16 5,40
30 5,40 0,82 -0,20 0,04 -1,07 -0,20 29,16 5,40
60 10,80 0,71 -0,34 0,12 -3,70 -0,34 116,64 10,80
60 10,80 0,71 -0,34 0,12 -3,70 -0,34 116,64 10,80
60 10,80 0,71 -0,34 0,12 -3,70 -0,34 116,64 10,80
90 16,20 0,70 -0,36 0,13 -5,78 -0,36 262,44 16,20
90 16,20 0,66 -0,42 0,17 -6,73 -0,42 262,44 16,20
90 16,20 0,67 -0,40 0,16 -6,49 -0,40 262,44 16,20
Sum 0,946 -33,508 -2,832 1224,720 97,200
R² = 0,896 OK
-0,135 = ln(F0) 0,87 = F0 δS0 = 7,72
-0,017 = -1/S0 60 = S0


30 5,40 0,620 -0,478 0,229 -2,581 -0,478 29,16 5,4
30 5,40 0,600 -0,511 0,261 -2,758 -0,511 29,16 5,4
30 5,40 0,580 -0,545 0,297 -2,942 -0,545 29,16 5,4
60 10,80 0,520 -0,654 0,428 -7,062 -0,654 116,64 10,8
60 10,80 0,530 -0,635 0,403 -6,857 -0,635 116,64 10,8
60 10,80 0,520 -0,654 0,428 -7,062 -0,654 116,64 10,8
90 16,20 0,510 -0,673 0,453 -10,908 -0,673 262,44 16,2
90 16,20 0,520 -0,654 0,428 -10,594 -0,654 262,44 16,2
90 16,20 0,480 -0,734 0,539 -11,890 -0,734 262,44 16,2
Sum 3,464 -62,655 -5,538 1224,720 97,200
R² = 0,813 OK
-0,439 = ln(F0) 0,64 = F0 δS0 = 11,12
-0,016 = -1/S0 61 = S0



30 5,40 0,490 -0,713 0,509 -3,852 -0,713 29,16 5,4
30 5,40 0,500 -0,693 0,480 -3,743 -0,693 29,16 5,4
30 5,40 0,480 -0,734 0,539 -3,963 -0,734 29,16 5,4
60 10,80 0,460 -0,777 0,603 -8,387 -0,777 116,64 10,8
60 10,80 0,470 -0,755 0,570 -8,154 -0,755 116,64 10,8
60 10,80 0,470 -0,755 0,570 -8,154 -0,755 116,64 10,8
90 16,20 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -13,300 -0,821 262,44 16,2
90 16,20 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -13,300 -0,821 262,44 16,2
90 16,20 0,450 -0,799 0,638 -12,936 -0,799 262,44 16,2
Sum 5,257 -75,789 -6,868 1224,720 97,200
R² = 0,910 OK
-0,663 = ln(F0) 0,52 = F0 δS0 = 12,83
-0,009 = -1/S0 108 = S0


30 5,40 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -1,411 -0,261 29,16 5,4
30 5,40 0,790 -0,236 0,056 -1,273 -0,236 29,16 5,4
30 5,40 0,790 -0,236 0,056 -1,273 -0,236 29,16 5,4
60 10,80 0,730 -0,315 0,099 -3,399 -0,315 116,64 10,8
60 10,80 0,720 -0,329 0,108 -3,548 -0,329 116,64 10,8
60 10,80 0,690 -0,371 0,138 -4,007 -0,371 116,64 10,8
90 16,20 0,640 -0,446 0,199 -7,230 -0,446 262,44 16,2
90 16,20 0,640 -0,446 0,199 -7,230 -0,446 262,44 16,2
90 16,20 0,630 -0,462 0,213 -7,485 -0,462 262,44 16,2
Sum 1,136 -36,856 -3,102 1224,720 97,200
R² = 0,962 OK
-0,137 = ln(F0) 0,87 = F0 δS0 = 3,90
-0,019 = -1/S0 52 = S0



30 5,40 0,270 -1,309 1,714 -7,070 -1,309 29,16 5,4
30 5,40 0,250 -1,386 1,922 -7,486 -1,386 29,16 5,4
30 5,40 0,230 -1,470 2,160 -7,936 -1,470 29,16 5,4
60 10,80 0,150 -1,897 3,599 -20,489 -1,897 116,64 10,8
60 10,80 0,160 -1,833 3,358 -19,792 -1,833 116,64 10,8
60 10,80 0,140 -1,966 3,866 -21,234 -1,966 116,64 10,8
90 16,20 0,150 -1,897 3,599 -30,733 -1,897 262,44 16,2
90 16,20 0,130 -2,040 4,163 -33,052 -2,040 262,44 16,2
90 16,20 0,120 -2,120 4,496 -34,348 -2,120 262,44 16,2
Sum 28,876 -182,141 -15,919 1224,720 97,200
R² = 0,829 OK
-1,138 = ln(F0) 0,32 = F0 δS0 = 2,94
-0,058 = -1/S0 17 = S0


30 5,40 0,860 -0,151 0,023 -0,814 -0,151 29,16 5,4
30 5,40 0,900 -0,105 0,011 -0,569 -0,105 29,16 5,4
30 5,40 0,910 -0,094 0,009 -0,509 -0,094 29,16 5,4
60 10,80 0,810 -0,211 0,044 -2,276 -0,211 116,64 10,8
60 10,80 0,830 -0,186 0,035 -2,012 -0,186 116,64 10,8
60 10,80 0,850 -0,163 0,026 -1,755 -0,163 116,64 10,8
90 16,20 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -4,234 -0,261 262,44 16,2
90 16,20 0,780 -0,248 0,062 -4,025 -0,248 262,44 16,2
90 16,20 0,750 -0,288 0,083 -4,660 -0,288 262,44 16,2
Sum 0,361 -20,856 -1,708 1224,720 97,200
R² = 0,898 OK
-0,041 = ln(F0) 0,96 = F0 δS0 = 9,26
-0,014 = -1/S0 72 = S0

S01 7,72 1,08 60 60 4,6 1 0,077 4,094 77,167 0,569
S02 11,12 1,05 61 31 1,5 1 0,049 4,117 75,985 0,420
S03 12,83 0,68 108 71 -27,3 1 -0,386 4,682 59,889 0,339
S04 3,90 0,71 52 179 -61,3 1 -0,342 3,953 61,322 0,518
S05 2,94 0,10 17 34 -78,1 1 -2,303 2,840 20,951 0,069
S06 9,26 0,60 72 61 -31,3 1 -0,511 4,283 55,920 0,587
4,303802 a= 73,98
0,547913 b= 0,55



30 30 0,587 -0,533 0,284 -15,982 -0,533 900 30
30 30 0,561 -0,578 0,334 -17,341 -0,578 900 30
30 30 0,567 -0,567 0,322 -17,022 -0,567 900 30
60 60 0,472 -0,751 0,564 -45,047 -0,751 3600 60
60 60 0,470 -0,755 0,570 -45,301 -0,755 3600 60
60 60 0,457 -0,783 0,613 -46,984 -0,783 3600 60
90 90 0,384 -0,957 0,916 -86,140 -0,957 8100 90
90 90 0,400 -0,916 0,840 -82,466 -0,916 8100 90
90 90 0,387 -0,949 0,901 -85,440 -0,949 8100 90
Sum 5,344 -441,723 -6,790 37800,000 540,000
R² = 0,986 OK
-0,373 = ln(F0) 0,69 = F0 δS0 = 6,97
-0,006 = -1/S0 157 = S0


30 30 0,442 -0,816 0,667 -24,493 -0,816 900 30
30 30 0,448 -0,803 0,645 -24,089 -0,803 900 30
30 30 0,438 -0,826 0,682 -24,766 -0,826 900 30
60 60 0,383 -0,960 0,921 -57,583 -0,960 3600 60
60 60 0,369 -0,997 0,994 -59,818 -0,997 3600 60
60 60 0,364 -1,011 1,021 -60,636 -1,011 3600 60
90 90 0,336 -1,091 1,190 -98,158 -1,091 8100 90
90 90 0,323 -1,130 1,277 -101,709 -1,130 8100 90
90 90 0,335 -1,094 1,196 -98,426 -1,094 8100 90
Sum 8,592 -549,679 -8,727 37800,000 540,000
R² = 0,967 OK
-0,680 = ln(F0) 0,51 = F0 δS0 = 14,49
-0,005 = -1/S0 207 = S0



30 30 0,450 -0,799 0,638 -23,955 -0,799 900 30
30 30 0,448 -0,803 0,645 -24,089 -0,803 900 30
30 30 0,448 -0,803 0,645 -24,089 -0,803 900 30
60 60 0,358 -1,027 1,055 -61,633 -1,027 3600 60
60 60 0,350 -1,050 1,102 -62,989 -1,050 3600 60
60 60 0,355 -1,036 1,073 -62,138 -1,036 3600 60
90 90 0,261 -1,343 1,804 -120,891 -1,343 8100 90
90 90 0,282 -1,266 1,602 -113,926 -1,266 8100 90
90 90 0,287 -1,248 1,558 -112,345 -1,248 8100 90
Sum 10,122 -606,056 -9,374 37800,000 540,000
R² = 0,985 OK
-0,557 = ln(F0) 0,57 = F0 δS0 = 5,83
-0,008 = -1/S0 124 = S0


30 30 0,640 -0,446 0,199 -13,389 -0,446 900 30
30 30 0,648 -0,434 0,188 -13,016 -0,434 900 30
30 30 0,647 -0,435 0,190 -13,062 -0,435 900 30
60 60 0,504 -0,685 0,469 -41,111 -0,685 3600 60
60 60 0,505 -0,683 0,467 -40,992 -0,683 3600 60
60 60 0,518 -0,658 0,433 -39,467 -0,658 3600 60
90 90 0,405 -0,904 0,817 -81,348 -0,904 8100 90
90 90 0,421 -0,865 0,748 -77,861 -0,865 8100 90
90 90 0,407 -0,899 0,808 -80,905 -0,899 8100 90
Sum 4,319 -401,150 -6,010 37800,000 540,000
R² = 0,994 OK
-0,217 = ln(F0) 0,80 = F0 δS0 = 3,77
-0,008 = -1/S0 133 = S0



30 30 0,209 -1,565 2,451 -46,963 -1,565 900 30
30 30 0,192 -1,650 2,723 -49,508 -1,650 900 30
30 30 0,192 -1,650 2,723 -49,508 -1,650 900 30
60 60 0,140 -1,966 3,866 -117,967 -1,966 3600 60
60 60 0,139 -1,973 3,894 -118,397 -1,973 3600 60
60 60 0,143 -1,945 3,783 -116,695 -1,945 3600 60
86 86 0,092 -2,386 5,693 -205,193 -2,386 7396 86
86 86 0,091 -2,397 5,745 -206,133 -2,397 7396 86
86 86 0,095 -2,354 5,541 -202,434 -2,354 7396 86
Sum 36,418 -1112,796 -17,887 35688,000 528,000
R² = 0,983 OK
-1,198 = ln(F0) 0,30 = F0 δS0 = 3,71
-0,013 = -1/S0 74 = S0


30 30 0,606 -0,501 0,251 -15,026 -0,501 900 30
30 30 0,613 -0,489 0,240 -14,682 -0,489 900 30
30 30 0,615 -0,486 0,236 -14,584 -0,486 900 30
60 60 0,522 -0,650 0,423 -39,005 -0,650 3600 60
60 60 0,517 -0,660 0,435 -39,583 -0,660 3600 60
60 60 0,512 -0,669 0,448 -40,166 -0,669 3600 60
90 90 0,438 -0,826 0,682 -74,298 -0,826 8100 90
90 90 0,438 -0,826 0,682 -74,298 -0,826 8100 90
90 90 0,448 -0,803 0,645 -72,267 -0,803 8100 90
Sum 4,040 -383,909 -5,910 37800,000 540,000
R² = 0,996 OK
-0,331 = ln(F0) 0,72 = F0 δS0 = 4,58
-0,005 = -1/S0 184 = S0

S01 6,97 1,08 157 508 39,1 1 0,077 5,058 25,951 1,998
S02 14,49 1,05 207 204 10,0 1 0,049 5,333 25,743 1,681
S03 5,83 0,68 124 452 -174,2 1 -0,386 4,819 22,738 1,882
S04 3,77 0,71 133 1247 -427,0 1 -0,342 4,891 23,020 2,696
S05 3,71 0,10 74 400 -920,9 1 -2,303 4,308 13,149 2,709
S06 4,58 0,60 184 1615 -825,0 1 -0,511 0,000 21,940 3,147
3,234232 a= 25,39
0,285701 b= 0,29


Yaw angle = 20,00 Bold = 1,00

30 10,3 0,76 -0,274 0,075 -2,816 -0,274 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,79 -0,236 0,056 -2,419 -0,236 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,77 -0,261 0,068 -2,682 -0,261 105,280001 10,2606
60 20,5 0,64 -0,446 0,199 -9,158 -0,446 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,65 -0,431 0,186 -8,840 -0,431 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,7 -0,357 0,127 -7,319 -0,357 421,120002 20,52121
90 30,8 0,58 -0,545 0,297 -16,768 -0,545 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,59 -0,528 0,278 -16,241 -0,528 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,61 -0,494 0,244 -15,215 -0,494 947,520005 30,78181
Sum 1,531 -81,459 -3,572 4421,760 184,691
R² = 0,933 OK
-0,132 = ln(F0) 0,88 = F0 δS0 = 7,86
-0,013 = -1/S0 77 = S0


30 10,3 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -8,424 -0,821 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,430 -0,844 0,712 -8,660 -0,844 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,470 -0,755 0,570 -7,747 -0,755 105,280001 10,2606
60 20,5 0,410 -0,892 0,795 -18,297 -0,892 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,420 -0,868 0,753 -17,802 -0,868 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,410 -0,892 0,795 -18,297 -0,892 421,120002 20,52121
90 30,8 0,400 -0,916 0,840 -28,205 -0,916 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,400 -0,916 0,840 -28,205 -0,916 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,390 -0,942 0,887 -28,984 -0,942 947,520005 30,78181
Sum 6,865 -164,620 -7,845 4421,760 184,691
R² = 0,785 OK
-0,754 = ln(F0) 0,47 = F0 δS0 = 34,35
-0,006 = -1/S0 174 = S0



30 10,3 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -8,424 -0,821 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,430 -0,844 0,712 -8,660 -0,844 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -8,424 -0,821 105,280001 10,2606
60 20,5 0,360 -1,022 1,044 -20,966 -1,022 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,350 -1,050 1,102 -21,544 -1,050 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,350 -1,050 1,102 -21,544 -1,050 421,120002 20,52121
90 30,8 0,360 -1,022 1,044 -31,448 -1,022 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,360 -1,022 1,044 -31,448 -1,022 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,360 -1,022 1,044 -31,448 -1,022 947,520005 30,78181
Sum 8,440 -183,905 -8,672 4421,760 184,691
R² = 0,670 OK
-0,771 = ln(F0) 0,46 = F0 δS0 = 28,17
-0,009 = -1/S0 106 = S0


30 10,3 0,820 -0,198 0,039 -2,036 -0,198 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,820 -0,198 0,039 -2,036 -0,198 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,800 -0,223 0,050 -2,290 -0,223 105,280001 10,2606
60 20,5 0,600 -0,511 0,261 -10,483 -0,511 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,590 -0,528 0,278 -10,828 -0,528 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,590 -0,528 0,278 -10,828 -0,528 421,120002 20,52121
90 30,8 0,580 -0,545 0,297 -16,768 -0,545 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,560 -0,580 0,336 -17,848 -0,580 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,530 -0,635 0,403 -19,543 -0,635 947,520005 30,78181
Sum 1,982 -92,658 -3,946 4421,760 184,691
R² = 0,857 OK
-0,059 = ln(F0) 0,94 = F0 δS0 = 8,35
-0,019 = -1/S0 54 = S0



30 10,3 0,200 -1,609 2,590 -16,514 -1,609 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,190 -1,661 2,758 -17,040 -1,661 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,180 -1,715 2,941 -17,595 -1,715 105,280001 10,2606
60 20,5 0,100 -2,303 5,302 -47,252 -2,303 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,110 -2,207 4,872 -45,296 -2,207 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,100 -2,303 5,302 -47,252 -2,303 421,120002 20,52121
90 30,8 0,110 -2,207 4,872 -67,944 -2,207 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,090 -2,408 5,798 -74,121 -2,408 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,090 -2,408 5,798 -74,121 -2,408 947,520005 30,78181
Sum 40,233 -407,134 -18,821 4421,760 184,691
R² = 0,790 OK
-1,412 = ln(F0) 0,24 = F0 δS0 = 5,88
-0,033 = -1/S0 30 = S0


30 10,3 0,790 -0,236 0,056 -2,419 -0,236 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,810 -0,211 0,044 -2,162 -0,211 105,280001 10,2606
30 10,3 0,780 -0,248 0,062 -2,549 -0,248 105,280001 10,2606
60 20,5 0,710 -0,342 0,117 -7,028 -0,342 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,710 -0,342 0,117 -7,028 -0,342 421,120002 20,52121
60 20,5 0,700 -0,357 0,127 -7,319 -0,357 421,120002 20,52121
90 30,8 0,670 -0,400 0,160 -12,327 -0,400 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,680 -0,386 0,149 -11,871 -0,386 947,520005 30,78181
90 30,8 0,660 -0,416 0,173 -12,790 -0,416 947,520005 30,78181
Sum 1,005 -65,495 -2,938 4421,760 184,691
R² = 0,929 OK
-0,158 = ln(F0) 0,85 = F0 δS0 = 12,66
-0,008 = -1/S0 121 = S0

S01 7,86 1,08 77 97 7,5 1 0,077 4,349 103,172 0,614
S02 34,35 1,05 174 26 1,2 1 0,049 5,158 101,980 0,381
S03 28,17 0,68 106 14 -5,5 1 -0,386 4,666 85,246 0,342
S04 8,35 0,71 54 42 -14,3 1 -0,342 3,990 86,778 0,580
S05 5,88 0,10 30 26 -60,8 1 -2,303 3,408 38,656 0,098
S06 12,66 0,60 121 92 -47,0 1 -0,511 4,800 80,956 0,642
4,6046 a = 99,95
0,4126 b = 0,41



30 7,5 0,57 -0,562 0,316 -4,216 -0,562 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,58 -0,545 0,297 -4,085 -0,545 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,58 -0,545 0,297 -4,085 -0,545 56,25 7,5
60 15 0,51 -0,673 0,453 -10,100 -0,673 225 15
60 15 0,49 -0,713 0,509 -10,700 -0,713 225 15
60 15 0,52 -0,654 0,428 -9,809 -0,654 225 15
90 22,5 0,40 -0,916 0,840 -20,617 -0,916 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,38 -0,968 0,936 -21,771 -0,968 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,39 -0,942 0,887 -21,186 -0,942 506,25 22,5
Sum 4,962 -106,569 -6,518 2362,500 135,000
R² = 0,950 OK
-0,333 = ln(F0) 0,72 = F0 δS0 = 3,32
-0,026 = -1/S0 38 = S0


30 7,5 0,390 -0,942 0,887 -7,062 -0,942 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,380 -0,968 0,936 -7,257 -0,968 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,370 -0,994 0,989 -7,457 -0,994 56,25 7,5
60 15 0,310 -1,171 1,372 -17,568 -1,171 225 15
60 15 0,310 -1,171 1,372 -17,568 -1,171 225 15
60 15 0,320 -1,139 1,298 -17,092 -1,139 225 15
90 22,5 0,280 -1,273 1,620 -28,642 -1,273 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,260 -1,347 1,815 -30,309 -1,347 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,270 -1,309 1,714 -29,460 -1,309 506,25 22,5
Sum 12,002 -162,414 -10,315 2362,500 135,000
R² = 0,968 OK
-0,804 = ln(F0) 0,45 = F0 δS0 = 3,00
-0,023 = -1/S0 44 = S0



30 7,5 0,270 -1,309 1,714 -9,820 -1,309 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,250 -1,386 1,922 -10,397 -1,386 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,260 -1,347 1,815 -10,103 -1,347 56,25 7,5
60 15 0,210 -1,561 2,436 -23,410 -1,561 225 15
60 15 0,200 -1,609 2,590 -24,142 -1,609 225 15
60 15 0,220 -1,514 2,293 -22,712 -1,514 225 15
90 22,5 0,190 -1,661 2,758 -37,366 -1,661 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,180 -1,715 2,941 -38,583 -1,715 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,170 -1,772 3,140 -39,869 -1,772 506,25 22,5
Sum 21,608 -216,402 -13,874 2362,500 135,000
R² = 0,929 OK
-1,173 = ln(F0) 0,31 = F0 δS0 = 4,24
-0,025 = -1/S0 41 = S0


30 7,5 0,580 -0,545 0,297 -4,085 -0,545 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,600 -0,511 0,261 -3,831 -0,511 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,580 -0,545 0,297 -4,085 -0,545 56,25 7,5
60 15,0 0,500 -0,693 0,480 -10,397 -0,693 225 15
60 15,0 0,510 -0,673 0,453 -10,100 -0,673 225 15
60 15,0 0,510 -0,673 0,453 -10,100 -0,673 225 15
90 22,5 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -18,472 -0,821 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -18,472 -0,821 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,450 -0,799 0,638 -17,966 -0,799 506,25 22,5
Sum 4,227 -97,510 -6,081 2362,500 135,000
R² = 0,988 OK
-0,396 = ln(F0) 0,67 = F0 δS0 = 2,25
-0,019 = -1/S0 54 = S0



30 7,5 0,060 -2,813 7,915 -21,101 -2,813 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,060 -2,813 7,915 -21,101 -2,813 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,060 -2,813 7,915 -21,101 -2,813 56,25 7,5
60 15,0 0,040 -3,219 10,361 -48,283 -3,219 225 15
60 15,0 0,030 -3,507 12,296 -52,598 -3,507 225 15
60 15,0 0,030 -3,507 12,296 -52,598 -3,507 225 15
90 22,5 0,020 -3,912 15,304 -88,021 -3,912 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,020 -3,912 15,304 -88,021 -3,912 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,010 -4,605 21,208 -103,616 -4,605 506,25 22,5
Sum 110,514 -496,439 -31,101 2362,500 135,000
R² = 0,873 OK
-2,126 = ln(F0) 0,12 = F0 δS0 = 1,62
-0,089 = -1/S0 11 = S0


30 7,5 0,630 -0,462 0,213 -3,465 -0,462 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,620 -0,478 0,229 -3,585 -0,478 56,25 7,5
30 7,5 0,630 -0,462 0,213 -3,465 -0,462 56,25 7,5
60 15,0 0,530 -0,635 0,403 -9,523 -0,635 225,0 15
60 15,0 0,540 -0,616 0,380 -9,243 -0,616 225,0 15
60 15,0 0,540 -0,616 0,380 -9,243 -0,616 225,0 15
90 22,5 0,480 -0,734 0,539 -16,514 -0,734 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,480 -0,734 0,539 -16,514 -0,734 506,25 22,5
90 22,5 0,480 -0,734 0,539 -16,514 -0,734 506,25 22,5
Sum 3,434 -88,067 -5,471 2362,500 135,000
R² = 0,987 OK
-0,341 = ln(F0) 0,71 = F0 δS0 = 2,39
-0,018 = -1/S0 56 = S0

S01 3,32 1,08 38 133 10,3 1 0,077 3,646 58,184 0,375
S02 3,00 1,05 44 213 10,4 1 0,049 3,781 57,526 0,245
S03 4,24 0,68 41 92 -35,5 1 -0,386 3,707 48,268 0,157
S04 2,25 0,71 54 569 -194,7 1 -0,342 3,981 49,117 0,375
S05 1,62 0,10 11 48 -111,1 1 -2,303 2,423 22,255 0,017
S06 2,39 0,60 56 553 -282,5 1 -0,511 4,030 45,889 0,393
4,03253 a= 56,40
0,40388 b= 0,40



30 4,5 0,597 -0,516 0,266 -2,321 -0,516 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,575 -0,553 0,306 -2,490 -0,553 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,569 -0,564 0,318 -2,537 -0,564 20,25 4,5
60 9 0,459 -0,779 0,606 -7,008 -0,779 81 9
60 9 0,482 -0,730 0,533 -6,568 -0,730 81 9
60 9 0,478 -0,738 0,545 -6,643 -0,738 81 9
90 13,5 0,417 -0,875 0,765 -11,808 -0,875 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,443 -0,814 0,663 -10,992 -0,814 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,444 -0,812 0,659 -10,961 -0,812 182,25 13,5
Sum 4,661 -61,329 -6,381 850,500 81,000
R² = 0,910 OK
-0,420 = ln(F0) 0,66 = F0 δS0 = 3,69
-0,032 = -1/S0 31 = S0


30 4,5 0,377 -0,976 0,952 -4,390 -0,976 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,405 -0,904 0,817 -4,067 -0,904 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,407 -0,899 0,808 -4,045 -0,899 20,25 4,5
60 9 0,300 -1,204 1,450 -10,836 -1,204 81 9
60 9 0,298 -1,211 1,466 -10,896 -1,211 81 9
60 9 0,298 -1,211 1,466 -10,896 -1,211 81 9
90 13,5 0,239 -1,431 2,049 -19,322 -1,431 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,230 -1,470 2,160 -19,841 -1,470 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,240 -1,427 2,037 -19,266 -1,427 182,25 13,5
Sum 13,203 -103,559 -10,732 850,500 81,000
R² = 0,985 OK
-0,676 = ln(F0) 0,51 = F0 δS0 = 0,80
-0,057 = -1/S0 17 = S0



30 4,5 0,397 -0,924 0,853 -4,157 -0,924 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,377 -0,976 0,952 -4,390 -0,976 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,389 -0,944 0,891 -4,249 -0,944 20,25 4,5
60 9 0,214 -1,542 2,377 -13,876 -1,542 81 9
60 9 0,183 -1,698 2,884 -15,284 -1,698 81 9
60 9 0,192 -1,650 2,723 -14,852 -1,650 81 9
90 13,5 0,120 -2,120 4,496 -28,624 -2,120 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,129 -2,048 4,194 -27,647 -2,048 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,129 -2,048 4,194 -27,647 -2,048 182,25 13,5
Sum 23,565 -140,727 -13,950 850,500 81,000
R² = 0,976 OK
-0,426 = ln(F0) 0,65 = F0 δS0 = 0,47
-0,125 = -1/S0 8 = S0


30 4,5 0,611 -0,493 0,243 -2,217 -0,493 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,633 -0,457 0,209 -2,058 -0,457 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,639 -0,448 0,201 -2,015 -0,448 20,25 4,5
60 9 0,403 -0,909 0,826 -8,179 -0,909 81 9
60 9 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -7,389 -0,821 81 9
60 9 0,404 -0,906 0,821 -8,157 -0,906 81 9
90 13,5 0,342 -1,073 1,151 -14,485 -1,073 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,326 -1,121 1,256 -15,132 -1,121 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,293 -1,228 1,507 -16,572 -1,228 182,25 13,5
Sum 6,888 -76,204 -7,455 850,500 81,000
R² = 0,958 OK
-0,154 = ln(F0) 0,86 = F0 δS0 = 1,06
-0,075 = -1/S0 13 = S0



30 4,5 0,118 -2,140 4,582 -9,632 -2,140 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,117 -2,146 4,604 -9,655 -2,146 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,107 -2,239 5,012 -10,074 -2,239 20,25 4,5
60 9 0,044 -3,128 9,785 -28,153 -3,128 81 9
60 9 0,043 -3,156 9,960 -28,403 -3,156 81 9
60 9 0,044 -3,133 9,814 -28,194 -3,133 81 9
90 13,5 0,040 -3,209 10,297 -43,320 -3,209 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,040 -3,209 10,297 -43,320 -3,209 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,042 -3,170 10,049 -42,796 -3,170 182,25 13,5
Sum 74,399 -243,549 -25,529 850,500 81,000
R² = 0,789 OK
-1,816 = ln(F0) 0,16 = F0 δS0 = 1,72
-0,113 = -1/S0 9 = S0


30 4,5 0,678 -0,389 0,151 -1,749 -0,389 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,730 -0,315 0,099 -1,416 -0,315 20,25 4,5
30 4,5 0,759 -0,276 0,076 -1,241 -0,276 20,25 4,5
60 9 0,644 -0,440 0,194 -3,961 -0,440 81,0 9
60 9 0,637 -0,451 0,203 -4,059 -0,451 81,0 9
60 9 0,635 -0,454 0,206 -4,087 -0,454 81,0 9
90 13,5 0,581 -0,543 0,295 -7,331 -0,543 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,572 -0,559 0,312 -7,541 -0,559 182,25 13,5
90 13,5 0,589 -0,529 0,280 -7,146 -0,529 182,25 13,5
Sum 1,816 -38,530 -3,955 850,500 81,000
R² = 0,905 OK
-0,222 = ln(F0) 0,80 = F0 δS0 = 5,08
-0,024 = -1/S0 41 = S0

S01 3,69 1,08 31 71 5,5 1 0,077 3,438 16,738 0,141
S02 0,80 1,05 17 470 22,9 1 0,049 2,858 16,529 0,085
S03 0,47 0,68 8 285 -109,9 1 -0,386 2,080 13,611 0,046
S04 1,06 0,71 13 159 -54,4 1 -0,342 2,591 13,876 0,096
S05 1,72 0,10 9 26 -60,2 1 -2,303 2,176 5,777 0,002
S06 5,08 0,60 41 66 -33,9 1 -0,511 3,724 12,870 0,129
2,7833 a = 16,172
0,447 b= 0,447



30 3,6 0,71 -0,342 0,117 -1,233 -0,342 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,75 -0,288 0,083 -1,036 -0,288 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,73 -0,315 0,099 -1,133 -0,315 12,96 3,6
60 7,2 0,70 -0,357 0,127 -2,568 -0,357 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,70 -0,357 0,127 -2,568 -0,357 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,68 -0,386 0,149 -2,777 -0,386 51,84 7,2
90 10,8 0,68 -0,386 0,149 -4,165 -0,386 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,69 -0,371 0,138 -4,007 -0,371 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,73 -0,315 0,099 -3,399 -0,315 116,64 10,8
Sum 1,088 -22,886 -3,115 544,320 64,800
R² = 0,285 NOT OK!

-0,304 = ln(F0) 0,74 = F0 δS0 = 102,24
-0,006 = -1/S0 171 = S0


30 3,6 0,650 -0,431 0,186 -1,551 -0,431 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,640 -0,446 0,199 -1,607 -0,446 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,630 -0,462 0,213 -1,663 -0,462 12,96 3,6
60 7,2 0,590 -0,528 0,278 -3,799 -0,528 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,580 -0,545 0,297 -3,922 -0,545 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,580 -0,545 0,297 -3,922 -0,545 51,84 7,2
90 10,8 0,620 -0,478 0,229 -5,163 -0,478 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,540 -0,616 0,380 -6,655 -0,616 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,670 -0,400 0,160 -4,325 -0,400 116,64 10,8
Sum 2,239 -32,607 -4,451 544,320 64,800
R² = 0,108 NOT OK!

-0,443 = ln(F0) 0,64 = F0 δS0 = 151,11
-0,007 = -1/S0 139 = S0



30 3,6 0,660 -0,416 0,173 -1,496 -0,416 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,610 -0,494 0,244 -1,779 -0,494 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,610 -0,494 0,244 -1,779 -0,494 12,96 3,6
60 7,2 0,600 -0,511 0,261 -3,678 -0,511 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,630 -0,462 0,213 -3,327 -0,462 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,620 -0,478 0,229 -3,442 -0,478 51,84 7,2
90 10,8 0,600 -0,511 0,261 -5,517 -0,511 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,610 -0,494 0,244 -5,338 -0,494 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,590 -0,528 0,278 -5,698 -0,528 116,64 10,8
Sum 2,148 -32,055 -4,388 544,320 64,800
R² = 0,315 NOT OK!

-0,445 = ln(F0) 0,64 = F0 δS0 = 93,59
-0,006 = -1/S0 168 = S0


30 3,6 0,810 -0,211 0,044 -0,759 -0,211 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,800 -0,223 0,050 -0,803 -0,223 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,810 -0,211 0,044 -0,759 -0,211 12,96 3,6
60 7,2 0,760 -0,274 0,075 -1,976 -0,274 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,780 -0,248 0,062 -1,789 -0,248 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,800 -0,223 0,050 -1,607 -0,223 51,84 7,2
90 10,8 0,800 -0,223 0,050 -2,410 -0,223 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,760 -0,274 0,075 -2,964 -0,274 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,760 -0,274 0,075 -2,964 -0,274 116,64 10,8
Sum 0,526 -16,030 -2,163 544,320 64,800
R² = 0,437 NOT OK!

-0,198 = ln(F0) 0,82 = F0 δS0 = 72,74
-0,006 = -1/S0 170 = S0



30 3,6 0,370 -0,994 0,989 -3,579 -0,994 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,370 -0,994 0,989 -3,579 -0,994 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,370 -0,994 0,989 -3,579 -0,994 12,96 3,6
60 7,2 0,260 -1,347 1,815 -9,699 -1,347 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,250 -1,386 1,922 -9,981 -1,386 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,260 -1,347 1,815 -9,699 -1,347 51,84 7,2
90 10,8 0,190 -1,661 2,758 -17,936 -1,661 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,200 -1,609 2,590 -17,382 -1,609 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,210 -1,561 2,436 -16,855 -1,561 116,64 10,8
Sum 16,301 -92,290 -11,894 544,320 64,800
R² = 0,978 OK
-0,706 = ln(F0) 0,49 = F0 δS0 = 0,66
-0,086 = -1/S0 12 = S0


30 3,6 0,840 -0,174 0,030 -0,628 -0,174 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,860 -0,151 0,023 -0,543 -0,151 12,96 3,6
30 3,6 0,840 -0,174 0,030 -0,628 -0,174 12,96 3,6
60 7,2 0,820 -0,198 0,039 -1,429 -0,198 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,840 -0,174 0,030 -1,255 -0,174 51,84 7,2
60 7,2 0,830 -0,186 0,035 -1,342 -0,186 51,84 7,2
90 10,8 0,790 -0,236 0,056 -2,546 -0,236 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,810 -0,211 0,044 -2,276 -0,211 116,64 10,8
90 10,8 0,820 -0,198 0,039 -2,143 -0,198 116,64 10,8
Sum 0,327 -12,789 -1,704 544,320 64,800
R² = 0,713 OK
-0,141 = ln(F0) 0,87 = F0 δS0 = 35,65
-0,007 = -1/S0 149 = S0

S01 102,24 1,08 171 3 0,2 1 0,077 5,140 288,378 0,654
S02 151,11 1,05 139 1 0,0 1 0,049 4,933 277,645 0,563
S03 93,59 0,68 168 3 -1,2 1 -0,386 5,123 154,689 0,530
S04 72,74 0,71 170 5 -1,9 1 -0,342 5,133 163,947 0,684
S05 0,66 0,10 12 313 -720,4 1 -2,303 2,459 11,711 0,038
S06 35,65 0,60 149 17 -8,9 1 -0,511 5,001 130,700 0,695
5,5607 a = 259,9932
1,3464 b = 1,346354

109 S1 Number of Runs = 9 MPD = 1,08 mm


30 5,4 0,72 -0,329 0,108 -1,760 -0,329 28,708164 5,358
30 5,4 0,70 -0,357 0,127 -1,911 -0,357 28,708164 5,358
30 5,4 0,68 -0,386 0,149 -2,066 -0,386 28,708164 5,358
60 10,7 0,61 -0,494 0,244 -5,297 -0,494 114,832656 10,716
60 10,7 0,62 -0,478 0,229 -5,123 -0,478 114,832656 10,716
60 10,7 0,60 -0,511 0,261 -5,474 -0,511 114,832656 10,716
90 16,1 0,58 -0,545 0,297 -8,756 -0,545 258,373476 16,074
90 16,1 0,58 -0,545 0,297 -8,756 -0,545 258,373476 16,074
90 16,1 0,59 -0,528 0,278 -8,481 -0,528 258,373476 16,074
Sum 1,990 -47,624 -4,171 1205,743 96,444
R² = 0,882 OK
-0,281 = ln(F0) 0,75 = F0 δS0 = 8,15
-0,017 = -1/S0 59 = S0


30 5,4 0,56 -0,580 0,336 -3,107 -0,580 28,708164 5,358
30 5,4 0,56 -0,580 0,336 -3,107 -0,580 28,708164 5,358
30 5,4 0,54 -0,616 0,380 -3,302 -0,616 28,708164 5,358
60 10,7 0,48 -0,734 0,539 -7,865 -0,734 114,832656 10,716
60 10,7 0,46 -0,777 0,603 -8,321 -0,777 114,832656 10,716
60 10,7 0,46 -0,777 0,603 -8,321 -0,777 114,832656 10,716
90 16,1 0,44 -0,821 0,674 -13,196 -0,821 258,373476 16,074
90 16,1 0,44 -0,821 0,674 -13,196 -0,821 258,373476 16,074
90 16,1 0,43 -0,844 0,712 -13,566 -0,844 258,373476 16,074
Sum 4,857 -73,981 -6,549 1205,743 96,444
R² = 0,914 OK
-0,491 = ln(F0) 0,61 = F0 δS0 = 5,23
-0,022 = -1/S0 45 = S0

109 S3 umber of Runs = 9 MPD = 0,68 mm

V [km/h] S [km/h] F [-] ln F Σ02 Σ11 Σ01 Σ20 Σ10 SRI

30 5,4 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -4,399 -0,821 28,708164 5,358 0,207
30 5,4 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -4,399 -0,821 28,708164 5,358 0,207
30 5,4 0,440 -0,821 0,674 -4,399 -0,821 28,708164 5,358 0,207
60 10,7 0,360 -1,022 1,044 -10,948 -1,022 114,83266 10,716 0,199
60 10,7 0,360 -1,022 1,044 -10,948 -1,022 114,83266 10,716 0,199
60 10,7 0,360 -1,022 1,044 -10,948 -1,022 114,83266 10,716 0,199
90 16,1 0,300 -1,204 1,450 -19,353 -1,204 258,37348 16,074 0,196
90 16,1 0,310 -1,171 1,372 -18,826 -1,171 258,37348 16,074 0,202
90 16,1 0,310 -1,171 1,372 -18,826 -1,171 258,37348 16,074 0,202
Sum 9,346 -103,044 -9,074 1205,743 96,444 0,202
R² = 0,992 OK
-0,647 = ln(F0) 0,52 = F0 δS0 = 0,99
-0,034 = -1/S0 30 = S0
109 S4 umber of Runs = 9 MPD = 0,71 mm

V [km/h] S [km/h] F [-] ln F Σ02 Σ11 Σ01 Σ20 Σ10 SRI

30 5,4 0,730 -0,315 0,099 -1,686 -0,315 28,708164 5,358 0,351
30 5,4 0,740 -0,301 0,091 -1,613 -0,301 28,708164 5,358 0,356
30 5,4 0,740 -0,301 0,091 -1,613 -0,301 28,708164 5,358 0,356
60 10,7 0,670 -0,400 0,160 -4,292 -0,400 114,83266 10,716 0,378
60 10,7 0,620 -0,478 0,229 -5,123 -0,478 114,83266 10,716 0,350
60 10,7 0,670 -0,400 0,160 -4,292 -0,400 114,83266 10,716 0,378
90 16,1 0,650 -0,431 0,186 -6,924 -0,431 258,37348 16,074 0,430
90 16,1 0,630 -0,462 0,213 -7,427 -0,462 258,37348 16,074 0,417
90 16,1 0,650 -0,431 0,186 -6,924 -0,431 258,37348 16,074 0,430
Sum 1,414 -39,894 -3,520 1205,743 96,444 0,383
R² = 0,726 OK
-0,255 = ln(F0) 0,77 = F0 δS0 = 18,34
-0,013 = -1/S0 79 = S0



30 5,4 0,820 -0,198 0,039 -1,063 -0,198 28,708164 5,358
30 5,4 0,820 -0,198 0,039 -1,063 -0,198 28,708164 5,358
30 5,4 0,840 -0,174 0,030 -0,934 -0,174 28,708164 5,358
60 10,7 0,790 -0,236 0,056 -2,526 -0,236 114,832656 10,716
60 10,7 0,800 -0,223 0,050 -2,391 -0,223 114,832656 10,716
60 10,7 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -2,801 -0,261 114,832656 10,716
90 16,1 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -4,201 -0,261 258,373476 16,074
90 16,1 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -4,201 -0,261 258,373476 16,074
90 16,1 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -4,201 -0,261 258,373476 16,074
Sum 0,488 -23,382 -2,076 1205,743 96,444
R² = 0,830 OK
-0,160 = ln(F0) 0,85 = F0 δS0 = 25,85
-0,007 = -1/S0 151 = S0


30 5,4 0,820 -0,198 0,039 -1,063 -0,198 28,708164 5,358
30 5,4 0,820 -0,198 0,039 -1,063 -0,198 28,708164 5,358
30 5,4 0,840 -0,174 0,030 -0,934 -0,174 28,708164 5,358
60 10,7 0,790 -0,236 0,056 -2,526 -0,236 114,832656 10,716
60 10,7 0,800 -0,223 0,050 -2,391 -0,223 114,832656 10,716
60 10,7 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -2,801 -0,261 114,832656 10,716
90 16,1 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -4,201 -0,261 258,373476 16,074
90 16,1 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -4,201 -0,261 258,373476 16,074
90 16,1 0,770 -0,261 0,068 -4,201 -0,261 258,373476 16,074
Sum 0,488 -23,382 -2,076 1205,743 96,444
R² = 0,830 OK
-0,160 = ln(F0) 0,85 = F0 δS0 = 25,85
-0,007 = -1/S0 151 = S0

S01 8,15 1,08 59 52 4,0 1 0,077 4,075 45,876 0,413
S02 5,23 1,05 45 75 3,7 1 0,049 3,813 44,933 0,315
S03 0,99 0,68 30 898 -346,3 1 -0,386 3,390 32,616 0,202
S04 18,34 0,71 79 19 -6,4 1 -0,342 4,370 33,671 0,383
S06 25,85 0,60 151 34 -17,4 1 -0,511 5,018 29,740 0,418
3,769 a = 43,3448
0,737 b = 0,73742

9.2.3 Exponential curve fitting on F vs. S
S1 - F vs. S
1,0
0,9
101
102
0,8
103
104
0,7 105
106
0,6 107
108
109
F [-]
0,5
Exponentiell (108)
Exponentiell (107)
0,4 Exponentiell (105)
Exponentiell (109)
Exponentiell (102)
Exponentiell (104)
0,2
Exponentiell (106)
Exponentiell (101)
0,1
0,0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
S [km/h]
S2 - F vs. S
1,0
0,9
101
0,8
102
103
0,7 104
105
0,6 106
107
109
F [-]
0,5
Exponentiell (107)
Exponentiell (105)
Exponentiell (103)
Exponentiell (104)
Exponentiell (106)
0,2
Exponentiell (101)
0,1
0,0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
S [km/h]

S3 - F vs. S
1,0
0,9
101
102
0,8
103
104
0,7 105
106
0,6 107
108
109
F [-]
0,5
Exponentiell (108)
Exponentiell (107)
Exponentiell (109)
Exponentiell (102)
Exponentiell (104)
0,2
Exponentiell (106)
Exponentiell (101)
0,1
0,0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
S [km/h]
S4 - F vs. S
1,0
0,9
101
0,8
102
103
0,7 104
105
0,6 106
107
109
F [-]
0,5
Exponentiell (107)
Exponentiell (105)
Exponentiell (103)
Exponentiell (104)
Exponentiell (106)
0,2
Exponentiell (101)
0,1
0,0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
S [km/h]

S5 - F vs. S
1,0
0,9
0,8
101
102
0,7 103
104
0,6 105
106
107
F [-]
0,5
Exponentiell (107)
Exponentiell (105)
Exponentiell (102)
Exponentiell (106)
Exponentiell (101)
0,2
0,1
0,0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
S [km/h]
S6 - F vs. S
1,0
0,9
101
102
0,8
103
104
0,7 105
106
0,6 107
108
109
F [-]
0,5
Exponentiell (108)
Exponentiell (107)
Exponentiell (103)
Exponentiell (104)
Exponentiell (106)
0,2
Exponentiell (101)
Exponentiell (109)
0,1
0,0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
S [km/h]

9.2.4 Calculated SRI-values for all runs on Surface S1 – S6
Run 1-3: 30 km/h

Run 4-6: 60 km/h
Run 7-9: 90 km/h
1,0
S1 SRI
0,9
0,8
0,7
101
0,6 102
0,5 103
104
0,4
105
0,3 106
107
0,2
109
0,1
0,0
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Run 5 Run 6 Run 7 Run 8 Run 9
1,0
S2 SRI
0,9
0,8
101
0,7
102
0,6 103
104
0,5
105
0,4 106
107
0,3
109
0,2
0,1
0,0

1,0
S3 SRI
0,9
0,8
101
0,7
102
0,6 103
104
0,5
105
0,4 106
107
0,3
109
0,2
0,1
0,0
1,0 S4 SRI
0,9
101
0,8 102
0,7 103
104
0,6
105
0,5 106
107
0,4
109
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,0
1,0
S5 SRI
0,9
0,8
101
0,7 102
0,6 103
104
0,5 105
0,4 106
107
0,3
109
0,2
0,1
0,0

1,0
S6 SRI
0,9
0,8
101
0,7
102
0,6 103
104
0,5
105
0,4 106
107
0,3
109
0,2
0,1
0,0
Calibration lines for the determination of ß for devices 101 – 109
1,0 y = 0,9468x 101 <SRI> vs. <<SRI>>

0,9 R2 = 0,9372
0,8
0,7
0,6
<<SRI>>
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
<SRI>
1,0 y = 0,884x 102 <SRI> vs. <<SRI>>

0,9 R2 = 0,9904
0,8
0,7
0,6
<<SRI>>
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
<SRI>

1,0 y = 0,8297x 104 <SRI> vs. <<SRI>>

0,9 R2 = 0,9835
0,8
0,7
0,6
<<SRI>>
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
<SRI>
1,0 y = 1,3559x 105 <SRI> vs. <<SRI>>

0,9 R2 = 0,9534
0,8
0,7
0,6
<<SRI>>
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
<SRI>
1,0 y = 4,1312x 106 <SRI> vs. <<SRI>>

0,9 R2 = 0,8531
0,8
0,7
0,6
<<SRI>>
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
<SRI>

1,0 y = 0,6931x 107 <SRI> vs. <<SRI>>

0,9 R2 = 0,9095
0,8
0,7
0,6
<<SRI>>
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
<SRI>
1,0 y = 1,2319x 109 <SRI> vs. <<SRI>>

0,9 R2 = 0,9336
0,8
0,7
0,6
<<SRI>>
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0
<SRI>
9.2.5 Comparison of F60 vs. SRI for all devices
101
1,0 F60
<SRI>
0,8
0,6
µ/SRI
0,4
0,2
0,0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Surface Nr.

102
F60
1,0
<SRI>
0,8
0,6
µ/SRI
0,4
0,2
0,0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Surface Nr.
104
1,0 F60
<SRI>
0,8
0,6
µ/SRI
0,4
0,2
0,0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Surface Nr.
105
1,0 F60
<SRI>
0,8
0,6
µ/SRI
0,4
0,2
0,0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Surface Nr.

106
1,0 F60
<SRI>
0,8
0,6
µ/SRI
0,4
0,2
0,0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Surface Nr.
107
1,0
0,8
0,6
µ/SRI
0,4
0,2 F60
<SRI>
0,0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Surface Nr.
109
1,0
0,8
0,6
µ/SRI
0,4
0,2 F60
<SRI>
0,0
1 2 3 4 5
Surface Nr.

9.3 Longitudinal eveness analysis
9.3.1 Participating vehicles and companies in alphabetic order
Slovak Road Administration, Slovakia, IRI
Ramböll, Sweden/Hungary, IRI and longitudinal profile
ZAG, Slovenia, IRI and longitudinal profile
Arsenal research, Austria, IRI and longitudinal profile
Mereni PVV, Czech Republic, IRI

Colas HungairaHungary, IRI (no results for

section 3, 60 km/h)
9.3.2 Longitudinal profiles, a graphical comparison
Filtered longitudinal profiles from test site L1 measured at 30 km/h.

10
5
PRIMAL
Height [mm]
0
E 202
-5 E 203
E 204
-10
-15
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

60
40
PRIMAL
Height [mm]
E 202
20
E 203
E 204
0
-20
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

100
50
PRIMAL
Height [mm]
E 202
0
E 203
E 204
-50
-100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]


20
10
PRIMAL
Height [mm]
0
E 202
-10 E 203
E 204
-20
-30
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

50
0 PRIMAL
Height [mm]
E 202
E 203
-50 E 204
-100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

20
10
Height [mm]
E 202
0 E 203
E 204
-10
-20
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

20
10
PRIMAL
Height [mm]
E 202
0
E 203
E 204
-10
-20
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

60
40
PRIMAL
Height [mm]
20
E 202
0 E 203
E 204
-20
-40
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]


100
50
PRIMAL
Height [mm]
E 202
0
E 203
E 204
-50
-100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

50
PRIMAL
Height [mm]
E 202
0
E 203
E 204
-50
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

50
0 PRIMAL
Height [mm]
E 202
E 203
-50 E 204
-100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

20
10
Height [mm]
E 202
0 E 203
E 204
-10
-20
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]
Filtered longitudinal profiles from test site L6 measured at free speed.

40
20
Height [mm]
E 202
0 E 203
E 204
-20
-40
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

9.3.3 Diagrams of PSD and RMS calculations of the longitudinal profiles
8
PSD profiles from test site L1 measured at 30 km/h.
10
PRIMAL
10
7 E 202
E 203
6 E 204
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]
RMS in the 0.5m to 5m interval from test site L1 measured at 30 km/h.

1.5
1 PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
E 203
0.5 E 204
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]
RMS in the 5m to 50m interval from test site L1 measured at 30 km/h.

8
6
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
4
E 203
E 204
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]


8
10
PRIMAL
7
10 E 202
E 203
6 E 204
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

10
8
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
6
E 202
4 E 203
E 204
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

20
15
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
10
E 203
E 204
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]


8
10
PRIMAL
10
7 E 202
E 203
6 E 204
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

8
6
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
4
E 203
E 204
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

50
40
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
30
E 202
20 E 203
E 204
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]


8
10
PRIMAL
10
7 E 202
E 203
6 E 204
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

8
6
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
4
E 203
E 204
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]


20
15
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
10
E 203
E 204
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]
8
10
PRIMAL
10
7 E 202
E 203
6 E 204
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


10
8
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
6
E 202
4 E 203
E 204
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

25
20
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
15
E 202
10 E 203
E 204
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

8
10
E 202
10
7 E 203
E 204
6
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


2
1.5
RMS [mm]
E 202
1 E 203
E 204
0.5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

8
6
RMS [mm]
E 202
4 E 203
E 204
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

8
10
PRIMAL
10
7 E 202
E 203
6 E 204
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


1.5
1 PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
E 203
0.5 E 204
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

10
8
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
6
E 202
4 E 203
E 204
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

8
10
PRIMAL
10
7 E 202
E 203
6 E 204
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


10
8
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
6
E 202
4 E 203
E 204
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

40
30
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
20
E 203
E 204
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

8
10
PRIMAL
10
7 E 202
E 203
6 E 204
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


8
6
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
4
E 203
E 204
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

60
40 PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
E 203
20 E 204
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

8
10
PRIMAL
10
7 E 202
E 203
6 E 204
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


15
10 PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
E 203
5 E 204
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

40
30
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
20
E 203
E 204
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

8
10
PRIMAL
10
7 E 202
E 203
6 E 204
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


15
10 PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
E 203
5 E 204
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

20
15
PRIMAL
RMS [mm]
E 202
10
E 203
E 204
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

8
10
E 202
10
7 E 203
E 204
6
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


0.8
0.6
RMS [mm]
E 202
0.4 E 203
E 204
0.2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]

15
10
RMS [mm]
E 202
E 203
5 E 204
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]
PSD profiles from test site L6 measured at free speed.

8
10
E 202
10
7 E 203
E 204
6
10
5
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
Power [mm3]
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

RMS in the 0.5m to 5m interval from test site L6 measured free speed.
1
0.8
RMS [mm]
0.6 E 202
E 203
0.4 E 204
0.2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]
RMS in the 5m to 50m interval from test site L6 measured at free speed.
20
15
RMS [mm]
E 202
10 E 203
E 204
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance [m]
9.3.4 Diagrams of the PSD-fraction.
PSD mean-value-fraction profiles from test site L1 measured at 30 km/h.

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]
PSD mean-value-fraction profiles from test site L6 measured at free speed.

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]
PSD PRIMAL-fraction profiles from test site L1 measured at 30 km/h.

6
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
4 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


6
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
4 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

4
E 202
3 E 203
PSD fraction
E 204
2
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

15
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
10 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

4
E 202
3 E 203
PSD fraction
E 204
2
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


8
E 202
6 E 203
PSD fraction
E 204
4
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

3
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
2 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

6
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
4 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]

8
E 202
6 E 203
PSD fraction
E 204
4
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]


15
E 202
E 203
PSD fraction
10 E 204
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.2
Wavelength [m]
9.4 Bearing capcity analyis

Measured deflection bowls





9.5 Invitation letter

The invitation letter was sent out to 21 companies and organisations.

Competitive and Sustainable Growth (GROWTH) Programme
Sustainable Pavements for European New Member States
INVITATION
to
Harmonisation Test
Document: SPENS_Invitation Harmonisation Test.doc Date 15/02/2008
SPENS_Invitation Harmonisation Test_final.doc.doc

INVITATION
to SPENS Harmonisation Test
regarding
Skid resistance
Longitudinal and Evenness
Bearing Capacity
We kindly invite you to the harmonisation test for non-destructive pavement testing methods
– a part of the SPENS project.
Place: The tests will take place in Vienna, Austria

Date: Week from Monday, May 5th to Friday, May 9th 2008
For the participation at the Harmonisation Test, no costs will be charged – beside hotel and
food. Every participant will get a copy of the results and the report of the harmonisation test.
Skid resistance
The test will include measurements on six different surfaces with different µ-levels and
different MPDs. Required MPD measurements will be done by Arsenal research and any
other participating device capable of MPD measurements.
The tests will be held in accordance with prENV 13036-2 (Surface characteristics of road
and airfield pavements – Assessment of the skid resistance of a road pavement surface by the
use of dynamic measuring systems) which is in draft status at the moment.
Section length: 100 m

Test speeds: 30 km/h, 90 km/h and standard operation speed of each measurement device.
Number of runs: 3 runs on each surface and each speed (= 9 runs per surface)
Analysis and evaluation of test results will be done according to prENV 13036-2.
Longitudinal evenness
The tests will include longitudinal evenness measurements on six test sections with a length
of 500 m (low, medium and high IRI). The reference measurements will be done by VTI’s
Primal.
Investigated parameters are: True profile and IRI
Bearing capacity
As there is no dedicated reference device known for falling weight measurements, a common
round robin test will be carried out. The proposed approach for harmonising bearing capacity
(FWD) measurements is to use the calibration procedures that were worked out during COST
336. The harmonisation will start with a Dynamic Reference Calibration (Protocol C1). After
that, an in-situ harmonisation will be made.
Number of test sections: 5
SPENS_Invitation Harmonisation Test_final.doc.doc page 2

Preliminary Time schedule
Date Morning Afternoon

th
Monday, May 5 Arrival of participants and briefing
Tuesday, May 6th Measurements Measurements
Wednesday, May 7th Measurements Measurements
Thursday May 8th Measurements Final meeting
Friday May 9th Departure of participants
This timetable above indicates the maximum time! Depending on the weather, we will
try to finish earlier!
Generalities
• Parking space for vehicles is provided on the site of arsenal research.

• Hotel booking information will follow asap.
• Water for skid resistance measurements is provided by arsenal research.
• Arsenal research has a small workshop if repair is necessary during the test.
• A detailed map on how to reach us and information on the test sections will be send to
you after your response.
We ask all interested parties to reply to this invitation by March 3rd 2008 the latest.
Contact
arsenal research
Roland Spielhofer
Giefinggasse 2
1210 Vienna
roland.spielhofer@arsenal.ac.at
Phone: +43 50 550/6284
Fax: +43 50 550/6599
Mobile: +43 664 815 79 72
See you in Vienna!
Roland Spielhofer László Gáspár

arsenal research, Austria KTI, Hungary Leader WP2 SPENS
SPENS_Invitation Harmonisation Test_final.doc.doc page 3

SPENS - D11 - V13 - Guidelines of A Complex Methodology For Nondestructive Pavement Measuring Techniques

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

SPENS - D11 - V13 - Guidelines of A Complex Methodology For Nondestructive Pavement Measuring Techniques

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

Sustainable Pavements for European New Member States

Guidelines of a complex methodology for non-

Deliverable no. D11

Analysis Longitudinal Evenness

Analysis Bearing Capacity

1.2 Non destructive pavement measuring techniques 10

1.3 State-of-the Art 10

2 Harmonisation of measurement methods 12

2.1 The need for harmonisation 12

2.2 Advantages of harmonisation 12

2.3 Predecessing activities on harmonisation 13

3.1 Test design 14

4 Skid resistance analysis 22

4.1 SRI calculation 22

4.3 Repeatability and reproducibility 27

5.1 Reference measurement 32

SPENS D11 V13.doc 2

5.2 The analysis 35

6 Bearing Capacity Analysis 41

6.2 Participating equipments 41

6.3 Selection of test stations 42

7 Guidelines for non-destructive pavement measuring techniques 59

7.1 Bearing capacity 60

7.2 Longitudinal evenness 60

7.3 Skid resistance 60

7.5 Quality assurance 61

9.1 Test surfaces 63

SPENS D11 V13.doc 3

9.2.2 SRI calculations 83

9.5 Invitation letter 145

SPENS D11 V13.doc 4

SPENS D11 V13.doc 5

Table 21: Average R² of correlations, ordered by R²descending. .......................................... 27

SPENS D11 V13.doc 6

Harmonisation Test Skid resistance

SPENS D11 V13.doc 7

Harmonisation Test Bearing capacity

SPENS D11 V13.doc 8

Figure 1: Position of Tasks in Pavement life cycle

SPENS D11 V13.doc 9

1.2 Non destructive pavement measuring techniques

1.3 State-of-the Art

SPENS D11 V13.doc 10

Table 1: Devices used for skid resistance measurements.

BG Skid Resistance Tester (SRT)

HU SCRIM, Skid Resistance Tester (SRT)

PL Skid Resistance Tester (SRT)

SI SCRIM, British pendulum (SRT)

AT RoadSTAR, Griptester, British Pendulum (SRT)

Table 2: Devices used for longitudinal evenness measurements.

BG Profilograph, 4 m Straight Edge, APL

HU Profilograph, 4 m Straight Edge (occasionally), RST Road Survey Tester

SI Profilometer, 4 m Straight Edge

AT Profilometer, Profilograph, 4 m Straight Edge

Table 3: Devices used for bearing capacity measurements.

BG Deflectometer FWD, Deflectograph Lacroix

HU Deflectometer FWD, Deflectograph Lacroix (occasionally)

SI Deflectometer FWD, Deflectograph Lacroix

SK Deflectometer FWD – KUAB

SPENS D11 V13.doc 11

2 Harmonisation of measurement methods