Significant Findings from Full-Scale Accelerated Pavement Testing (2012)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

206 APPENDIX D Response Analysis Copy of Summary Report—June 5, 2011 Survey: NCHRP Synthesis 42-08 Full-Scale Accelerated Pavement Testing My organization (or I in my personal capacity) is interested in taking part in this questionnaire based on our interest and/or involvement with full-scale APT. Value Count Percent Yes—this option will take you to the next section and lead you through the various questions based on your level of interest and involvement. 75 92.6% No—this option will take you to the last page and will not require from you to answer any of the questions. 6 7.4% Statistics Total Responses 81 How do you view the importance of full-scale APT? Value Count Percent High 56 77.8% Medium 13 18.1% Low 3 4.2% Statistics Total Responses 72 What do you see as the roles of full-scale APT? Please indicate all the relevant roles. Value Count Percent Basic materials (pavement layer) research 61 84.7% Pavement structure work 65 90.3% Rehabilitation option selection 51 70.8% Fundamental research (long-term) 46 63.9% Parameter research (temperature, moisture, etc.) 44 61.1% Traffic loading 53 73.6% Development of guidelines 46 63.9% Academic research 40 55.6% Evaluate specific application issues 49 68.1% Commercial evaluations 28 38.9% Other 8 11.1% Statistics Total Responses 72

207 What do you see as the future of APT? Please indicate all relevant options. Value Count Percent Normal part of operation when required 41 56.9% Growing 35 48.6% Simulations and advanced computer analyses should be used 20 27.8% Other 10 13.9% Statistics Total Responses 72 What do you view as the benefits of full-scale APT? Please indicate all relevant options. Value Count Percent Improved structural design methods 64 88.9% Improved material design methods 62 86.1% Evaluation of novel materials and structures 60 83.3% Development of performance-related specifications 54 75% Material databases 35 48.6% Improved performance modeling 58 80.6% Improved pavement management 31 43.1% Better understanding of variability 35 48.6% Warranty contracts 14 19.4% Weather databases 9 12.5% Other 8 11.1% Statistics Total Responses 72 What are the main opportunities to disseminate full-scale APT research information? Please indicate all relevant options. Value Count Percent General engineering conferences 22 30.6% Focused transportation conferences 33 45.8% Focused pavement engineering conferences 64 88.9% Focused APT conferences 53 73.6% General engineering journals 16 22.2% Focused transportation journals 32 44.4% Focused pavement engineering journals 58 80.6% Focused APT journals 39 54.2%

208 Electronic journals 21 29.2% Meetings such as TRB 49 68.1% Other 14 19.4% Statistics Total Responses 72 What is your perception of the way that APT has/should change the pavement engineering world? Please indicate all relevant options. Value Count Percent Academic benefits 27 37.5% Internal organizational training and education 13 18.1% Fundamental understanding of pavement structures 64 88.9% Development of new materials 48 66.7% Proving new techniques and materials 65 90.3% Specific examples in your area 15 20.8% Other 5 6.9% Statistics Total Responses 72 In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column. TRB AFD40. Count Response 1 Attend/member 1 Attended 1 Co-chair, presenter, review panel 1 Committee member 1 Emeritus member. Chaired A2B52, A2B09 (now AFD40) 1994–2002 1 Involved in the start of this committee 2 Member 1 Member since 2010 1 Member since inception 1 Myself—attend when I can—others at the state are active members 1 Participate 2 Participate in meetings 1 Participate through active members.

209 Count Response 1 TRB, but not necessarily this committee 1 Active, current friend, past member (8 years) 1 Ex not at present 1 Guest 4 Member 1 Occasionally attended committee meeting 1 Participate 1 Committee member 1 yes In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column). COST Count Response 1 1-year testing/evaluation of different rehabilitation techniques 1 347 1 Ad hoc 1 COST 347 1 Chair 1 Invited speaker and participated in meetings on several occasions 1 Ad hoc, not for over a decade 1 Participate 1 COST 333 on pavement design models; COST 347 on APT; member of COST technical domain of transport and urban development In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column. HVSIA Count Response 1 Ad hoc 1 Attended 1 Member since inception 1 Participate 2 Participate in meetings 1 Ex-member 1 Member and part of the EXCO 1 Member early on

210 Count Response 1 Participate 1 Regular permanent member since 1990s In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column. MLS user group Count Response 1 Participant 1 Active 1 Attend TRB user group meeting when possible 1 Ex-member 1 In future 1 Two years, user In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column. South African APT advisory committee Count Response 1 Ad hoc 1 Attended 1 Ex-member 1 Member, co-author of the strategic 5-year plan In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column. NCAT Count Response 1 Close friends—someone in our office is on the technical advisory group 1 Florida has funded test sections 1 Funded test section 1 Member state 1 Member of research Project Advisory Committees 1 Member, ex sponsor 1 Monitor research and results 1 NCAT Test Track Pooled Fund 1 Participate in meetings, Florida has funded two sections 1 Participated on advisory panels 1 Read publications

211 Count Response 1 Test track sponsor since inception 1 Instrumentation support (2000–2006) 1 Past employee 1 Project manager since 1999 In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column. CAPT Count Response 1 Active member 1 Lead state chair. Involved since inception 1 Member since inception 1 Participate 2 Participate in meetings 1 pooled fund member 1 one of participation states In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column. FEHRL Count Response 1 From member organization 1 Member 1 Monitor research and results 1 Research coordinator 1 Working with to develop relationship with 1 Yes, but not in specific APT forum 1 Participate 1 Participated in SPENS project (FP6) and TITaM (Marie Curie) 1 Yes In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column. Midwest States Accelerated Pavement Testing Pooled Fund Program (states of Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, and Missouri) Count Response 1 Chairman of pooled fund effort 1 Iowa participates as a pooled fund state

212 Count Response 1 Missouri tech rep 1 Pooled fund tech rep for Missouri In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc) in the additional details column. APT conferences Count Response 1 Active 1 Attend when I can. Co-authored papers 1 Attend. Host and Committee Co-Chair for APT 2012 1 Attend/present 1 Attended 1 Attended last one, ARRB has attended all three 1 Have been in the past 1 Occasionally 2 Participant 1 Participate 1 Participate 1 Participated/wrote/presented papers 1 Presentation of papers at the 1st and 3rd International APT Conference 1 Served in first two USA-based APT conferences 1 USACE—sponsor 1 Various papers on various APT Conferences 1 Was co-chair with Jon Epps for the 1st APT Conference in Reno, NV 1 Attended conference; reviewed papers for conference 1 Attended all, papers accepted 1 Member of TPF-5(070) 1 Occasional participant 1 Papers, presentations 1 Part of technical review committee 1 Participant 1 Participate 1 Presentation in 2008 1 2004 conference 1 yes

213 In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column. TERRA Count Response 1 Friend 2 Member In which local/international APT forums are you active? Indicate those forums and please provide more details on the forums that you are active in next to the section [level of involvement, duration of involvement (history), role in program, permanent or ad hoc] in the additional details column. Other Count Response 1 China 1 China 1 FHWA ETGs 1 FWD User’s Group 1 I’ve never taken part in relevant local or international APT forums 1 Korean Society of Road Engineers 14 N/A or none 1 SPTC (with TxDOT, MnDOT, and Caltrans, with COE and NCAT) and FDOT 1 Transportation Association of Canada Pavement Standing Committee 1 U.S./French governments’ Memorandum of Understanding for airport pavements 1 Collaborative studies with both Indiana APT and Florida HVS 1 CEDR—Conference of European Directors of Roads: from member organization; Nordic Road Association: from member organization What do you view as the most significant finding of full-scale APT in the last decade (since 2000)? Please respond in terms of your own program as well as your perception of international programs. Also indicate your perception of any significant future findings required (holy grails). Most significant finding—own full-scale APT program Count Response 1 Project-specific and some commercial in confidence 1 AC in long-life applications, approving WMA and R-WMA products 1 B/C ratios and COST results (see Du Plessis et al. papers) 1 Behavior (response and performance) of thin pavement structure 1 Bottom Ash Performance Evaluation 1 Confirmed rutting resistance of 4.75 mm 1 Construction impacts 1 Determination of structural coefficient for Full Depth Reclamation of HMA pavement 1 Dowel Bar Retrofit study with Caltrans 1 Evaluate rehab options

214 Count Response 1 Evaluation of polymer modified binder due to cost savings 1 Evaluation of polymer modified binder due to cost savings 1 Improved asphalt pavement structure and materials design at the high temperature 1 Improved materials selection and design methods 1 Improved performance 1 Long-term rutting potential of our HMA mixes compared to others 1 Measured pavement response due to traffic loading → guidelines 1 Minimum Flexible Pavement Criteria 1 Modified binder research implemented into Florida design specifications 1 Moisture effects on pavement structures 1 Performance of materials 1 Quantifying the benefits of asphalt rubber in overlays 1 RAP and PFC performance 1 Reduced costs for pavement rehab 1 Saving time and funds on pavement structure or material comparison and verifying area 1 South African mechanistic design method update 1 To improve performance modeling 1 Understanding of the materials and structural responses 1 Validate lab material characterization and development of performance models 1 Validate lab material characterization and development of performance models 1 Validation of the use of rubberized asphalt concrete, calibration of ME models, WMA 1 Evaluation of warm-mix asphalt, verification of perpetual pavement design 1 Evaluation to specified pavement structure 1 Practical use of porous asphalt concrete 1 Program has not been active 1 Revised AASHTO layer coefficients 1 Subgrade performance 1 Understanding pavement behavior and deterioration models 1 Determination of new alpha factor for six-wheel landing gears in flexible airport pavement design and recalibration of rigid airport pavement failure model for design 1 Helped in development of New Pavement Design procedure, failure model update, developed new Alpha factors for 6-wheel gears for ICAO 1 Poor correlation of performance of unbound granular materials in RLT testing with field performance 2 Confirmation of the qualitative benefit of polymer-modified asphalts. Also, the durability of thin whitetopping 1 Calibration of the South African Concrete Pavement Mechanistic Design Method CnCPAVE, Bearing capacitydetermination of old structures 1 Quick comparison of competing materials and verification of materials used or design methodologies

215 Count Response 1 The effect of the environment on pavement performance rather than the traditional load related deterioration 1 Evaluation of new structural concepts such as modular pavement structures and new types of “silent joints” between bridge and abutment 1 In the asphalt pavement, the main distortion under high temperature happens in 7 cm position under the pavement surface, not in the surface of the pavement. 1 Analysis of fine particles in pavements: MLS as a tool to distinguish between the emissions due to abrasion and resuspension of PM10 from road surfaces 1 Importance of long life pavement design and construction through proper selection of materials, use of analytically based methods for layer selection and proper construction practices 1 The NCAT Test Track facility has allowed MDOT to do rapid, full-scale testing of Mississippi-specific asphalt mixtures. Results from previous test track cycles have resulted in specification changes and implementation of new (special) mixture types. 1 Recalibration of AASHTO pavement structural coefficient, validation of MEPDG, validating high RAP content mixes What do you view as the most significant finding of full-scale APT in the last decade (since 2000)? Please respond in terms of your own program as well as your perception of international programs. Also indicate your perception of any significant future findings required (holy grails). Most significant finding—international full-scale APT program. Count Response 1 Calibration of MEPDG 1 Calibration of mechanistic models 1 Classifying benefits of asphalt modifiers 1 Databases established from WesTrack and the HVS program 1 Development of design methods and instrumentation methods and tools 1 HMA cracking models 1 Huge cost savings in terms of implemented HVS verified innovative designs 1 Input for MEPDG 1 Interchange of information to expedite improved pavement design and rehabilitation 1 MEPDG 2 Materials/designs/construction 1 New pavement systems 1 Pavement modeling 1 Performance models 1 Role of geosynthetic reinforcement 1 The South African Mechanistic Design Method 1 Too many to select one single one 1 Top-down cracking research on Florida sections at NCAT—these are important for Florida 1 Validation of response and performance models 1 Verification of critical strain limit for HMA

216 Count Response 1 Better performance models 1 Effects of compactions on bases and pavements 1 Performance of pavement structures 1 Structural performance models 1 Variability of mix responses and sensitivities 1 In a broad sense, full-scale testing of pavements yields quick indication of actual field performance. 1 Impact on various Caltrans research projects on concrete as well as asphalt pavements (see UC–Irvine research output). 1 Impossible to mention just one finding. I believe that many APT projects are extremely important to the understanding of pavements behavior. I would mention: the early works at Nottingham University (Brown & Pell), FORCE (OCDE) Project in France in the late 1980s; CAL-APT Program in the 1990s; MnROAD; the non- uniformity of stress distribution by SA researchers. 1 Databases of well documented performance data to assist with validation of design, theory, and to understand in situ failure mechanisms. WesTrack and the HVS program have been particularly good. 1 Shift factors for fatigue equations; layer equivalency between rubber-HMA and conventional HMA; performance of WMA vs. HMA; subgrade soil characterization/deformation/modeling CRREL 1 Difference in material performance index between the lab and the field, validation to design principle and design method 1 Relative long-term performance, obtained in a limited period of time, of potential long-life pavement structures. 1 The relationship between the performance of pavement and the traffic or temperature or moisture, and so on What do you view as the most significant finding of full-scale APT in the last decade (since 2000)? Please respond in terms of your own program as well as your perception of international programs. Also indicate your perception of any significant future findings required (holy grails). Future significant findings required Count Response 1 Performance-related specification and verification. 2. Vehicle–pavement interaction 1 Aging/top-down cracking evaluation 1 An understanding of fatigue in asphalt mixes 1 Clearly understand and measure shear stresses near the surface of pavements 1 Developing much more method or instrument for environment stimulation for APT 1 Effect of aging/top-down cracking 1 Expanded use of RAP 1 Fully validated pavement performance model (you did say grail!) 1 How can we test pavement fatigue in the APT? 1 Improvement of response and performance models 1 Long lasting pavement materials and structures 1 Modeling, validate MEPDG, evaluate mixes with high % RAP 1 More MEPDG validation, inertial profiler certification 1 Qualification of WMA technologies

217 Count Response 1 Sustainable pavement research 1 Test new materials before introducing them to common practice 1 To make more reliable performance modeling 1 Verification of materials performance 1 Weather and environmental aspects simulation 1 Bitumen alternatives 1 Develop damage models for new materials and construction techniques 1 Durability of open-graded mixes 1 Environmental issues, climate change consequences 1 Improved design methods for changing climate and traffic loading 1 New asphalt binder replacement materials 1 Relation of APT results and actual pavement performance 1 Structural performance models including rehabilitation 1 Full-scale testing is providing and will provide data to mathematically model anticipated performance as it relates to the selected materials. 1 Evaluation of new pavement concepts or problematic existing structures (e.g., orthotropic steel deck bridges) as an intermediate step between laboratory testing and/or computer simulations and field application. 1 Relationship between rigid airport pavement life and concrete strength, models for reflection cracking in airport pavements. 1 Most tests to date by Florida have been rutting based; future tests should focus on crack development. Mostpavements in Florida fail due to excessive cracking. 1 Validation of lab materials’ characterization; development of performance prediction models, performance-based specs; QC/QA procedures, preservation treatment life, warranty issues... 1 Verification of cheaper more cost-effective designs, testing of nontraditional binders & materials 1 HMA aging (effect of the environment on design)—Construction variability (how to reduce so thinner designs can be done)—verification of new non-traditional designs 1 We need to establish assigned quantitative benefit of geogrids and/or fabrics for base course reduction. Also, I am curious to see if APT can show any performance issues for warm-mix asphalt, especially relating to moisture- induced stripping. 1 Continued development of new materials, improved analyses for their utilization, effects of environment particularly combinations of aging, moisture and traffic Do you own a full-scale APT device? Value Count Percent Yes 32 44.4% No 40 55.6% Statistics Total Responses 72

218 Do you have access to a full-scale APT device (and therefore APT data that you can analyze)? Value Count Percent Yes (Continue to Question 12) 37 51.3% No (Questionnaire completed—go to end) 35 48.6% Statistics Total Responses 72 Describe the type of access that you have to a full-scale APT device. Value Count Percent Own 22 71% Rental 2 6.5% Share 2 6.5% Part of consortium 2 6.5% Other 9 29% Statistics Total Responses 31 Provide details of the full-scale APT device that you own/use. Description according to selection of specific options. Please provide a website link to your full-scale APT device homepage where more detail are available (including official photos). Selection Additional information Total Mobile/fixed 70.5%31 29.5% 13 100% 44 Linear/non-linear (circular, elliptical) 90.9%30 9.1% 3 100% 33 Uni/bi-directional loading 90.9%30 9.1% 3 100% 33 Number of axles 85.7%30 14.3% 5 100% 35 Own power (diesel/electric/other)/shore power 83.3%30 16.7% 6 100% 36 Field site/fixed site 88.2%30 11.8% 4 100% 34 Roads/airfields 96.8%30 3.2% 1 100% 31 Fixed device/trucks (automated or manually driven) 93.8%30 6.3% 2 100% 32 Load range (range in kN indicate full load for all tires as well as range per tire) 81.1%30 18.9% 7 100% 37

219 Tire details (size, type, inflation pressure range, other) 76.3% 29 23.7% 9 100% 38 Tire wander options 83.3% 30 16.7% 6 100% 36 Suspension (present or not, types possible, permanent or not, etc.) 87.9% 29 12.1% 4 100% 33 Temperature control options 78.4% 29 21.6% 8 100% 37 Speed range 87.9% 29 12.1% 4 100% 33 Dedicated operational data collection on full-scale APT device during operation (i.e., applied speed, load, location, etc.)? 90.6% 29 9.4% 3 100% 32 APT webpage link 87.9% 29 12.1% 4 100% 33 Other 90.3% 28 9.7% 3 100% 31 Provide details of the instrumentation that you typically use during full-scale APT tests by completing the table. Please provide additional information on the following aspects where appropriate, which new parameters are measured (not listed in the table), which parameters that you view as important are not measured and why (i.e., lack of instruments?). Provide links to documents/specifications used for selection, installation, calibration and use of instruments (if it exists). Provide information on documents used to guide forensic analysis of the pavement distress observed through the various instruments (documents only). Please provide full details on sensors (i.e., names, supplier etc.). Instrument used Details—background on instrument, commercial or in-house developed (add links to documents here) Permanent surface deformation 69.2% 27 30.8% 12 100% 39 Permanent surface strain 81.3% 13 18.8% 3 100% 16 Permanent in-depth deformation 66.7% 22 33.3% 11 100% 33 Permanent in-depth strain 77.3% 17 22.7% 5 100% 22 Elastic surface deflection 74.1% 20 25.9% 7 100% 27 Elastic surface strain 73.7% 14 26.3% 5 100% 19 Elastic in-depth deflection 75.0% 18 25.0% 6 100% 24 Elastic in-depth strain 75.0% 21 25.0% 7 100% 28 Density 75.0% 21 25.0% 7 100% 28 Temperature 71.4% 25 28.6% 10 100% 35 Moisture 82.6% 17.4% 100% 19 4 23 Total

220 Stiffness 78.9% 15 21.1% 4 100% 19 New parameter (list) 66.7% 6 33.3% 3 100% 9 Important but not measured (list) 88.9% 8 11.1% 1 100% 9 Other—please provide details 64.7% 11 35.3% 6 100% 17 Provide a description of the nature or purpose of your APT program (select all that may be applicable in the first column and indicate the primary nature in the second column). All applicable Primary nature Total National research program 66.7% 12 33.3% 6 100% 18 State DOT research program or roads agency 63.0% 17 37.0% 10 100% 27 Academic research plan 81.8% 9 18.2% 2 100% 11 Commercial research plan 68.8% 11 31.3% 5 100% 16 Partnership program 72.7% 8 27.3% 3 100% 11 International cooperative program 66.7% 8 33.3% 4 100% 12 Ad hoc use of device—no specific program 63.6% 7 36.4% 4 100% 11 Local research needs 72.7% 8 27.3% 3 100% 11 Other 66.7% 2 33.3% 1 100% 3 Provide an indication of main expected research areas. Indicate if no medium term plans are made, indicate whether this is part of an agency wide plan or just for this facility. Add links to possible planning documents with more information. Count Response 1 Airfield research for DOD (Department of Defense—mainly Air Force). 1 Currently developing a 10-year research plan 1 Depends on research approved by committee 1 Funding is getting scarce so long-term plans are on hold. 1 Geogrids, concrete (RCC, whitetopping, etc.) 1 No medium research plan 1 Practical use of FWD and RWD

221 Count Response 1 Recycled materials, full-depth recycling, partial depth recycling 1 Two projects. One for concrete pavement saw cutting guidelines and one for warm-mix asphalt 1 Under progress 1 Rehabilitation and secondary materials 1 The development of new materials 1 Always looking for ideas and partners. TERRA is one area that is helping develop these new partnerships along with other contacts our staff has. Five main research themes are innovative construction, green roads, preservation/rapid renewal, surface characteristics, and non-pavement research. Our 5-year plan includes finishing many pooled fund studies that were initiated during our phase two construction that took place in 2007–2010. 1 Future research plan is dependent on each research group. Now I don’t know other group’s plan. My main expected research areas include the verification to design parameters and indexes. 1 Currently establishing plan. Interlayers, RAP, high-performance aggregate and sub-bases and full-depth reclamation are ranked high. 1 Validation of pavement performance models, determination of pavement structural substance/residual lifetime, validation of methods for evaluation of the structural substance, testing and evaluation of new/innovative pavement structures 1 Plan to rebuild for next research cycle in 2012 with expected focus on pavement preservation, PFC durability, GTR binders, and high recycle content mixes 1 No detailed plan beyond two to three years. See above for projects over the next two to three years. After that expect to be running tests on full-depth (perpetual-type) asphalt pavements and to investigate reflective cracking failure mechanisms in asphalt overlays on deteriorated concrete pavements. 1 The following plan of action is proposed for the HVS Program, completion of the investigation into the structural strength and performance of Ultra-Thin Reinforced Concrete Pavements (UTRCP) for use on low-volume urban township roads, and the launching of a new study by which this technology will be adapted for use on provincial roads (inclusive of a study on the likely impacts of vehicle overloading on the performance of UITRCP). Drafting of guidelines and specifications on the design, construction and maintenance of UTRCP for use on low-volume urban township roads and, on completion of its development, also for use on provincial roads; launching of a new study to investigate the construction (by means of labor-intensive construction methods) and performance of roller- compacted concrete; launching of a capacity building, mentorship and technical support program dedicated to departmental staff that would include the following: Dedicated training courses (tendering and contract administration; geometric road design; structural design of pavements (new and rehabilitation); design of road pavement materials; construction; maintenance; quality control/assurance; and asset management); structured as well as ad-hoc (hot-line) technical support program in aspects such as short-, medium-, and long-term road maintenance planning; financing of roads; asset management (pavements/bridges/drainage structures); geometric design; pavement and bridge design; infrastructure performance predictions; road construction materials design; stabilization of slopes and maintenance/protection of retaining structures; road classification; contract management (technical specifications as well as design reviews); tender prizing (reasonability thereof); quality control/ assurance; revision of departmental documentation (i.e., guidelines, standards, and specifications); evaluation of non-standard products for road construction and maintenance (assessment of fitness-for-purpose of unconventional products and provision of technical advice to department); launching of a new study into the stabilization of (marginal) materials with polymers, which can potentially be used for various pavement applications, including the stabilization of unsealed (gravel) roads, as well as for base and sub-base stabilization; enhanced focus on sustainable development and the environment; to evaluate the suitability and performance of warm and half-warm mixes; to develop alternative, non-bituminous binders; and to investigate the use of waste materials and by-products for road construction; HVS testing in support of the development of a new South African Pavement Design Method (SAPDM), including the simulation of traffic loading/stresses and creating a better understanding of the effects thereof on pavement performance (in association with SANRAL); construction and testing of High Modulus Asphalt (HiMA) to develop and validate mix design and structural design protocols, and to develop appropriate specifications for South Africa (in association with Sabita); Assessment of the fatigue resistance of hot-mix asphalt in support of the development of national guidelines for the design of hot-mix asphalt (in association with SANRAL and Sabita). The 2010–2015 strategic agenda for the HVS Program is fully aligned with the overall objectives of the Gauteng Government and supports the development of appropriate pavement engineering solutions aimed at generating significant savings in road building and rehabilitation, and augmenting the use of labor in these activities.

222 Count Response 1 We will keep on working with WMA until the end of 2012. We haven’t still defined the research plan from 2013 on. 1 Research cycles are typically 1 year and are planned starting in the fall (Sept.–Oct.) based on FDOT needs. 1 General focus of last five years, and next three or so is on using APT to validate (or improve) laboratory assessment techniques. 1 Continued research into special, high performance asphalt mixtures (SMA/OGFC), high RAP mixtures, preventative maintenance asphalt mixtures, and warm-mix asphalt. 1 Typically plan research projects one year in advance. Planning is coordinated with state materials office, district materials engineers, construction office, and pavement management/design office. Research projects are divided into APT, field or laboratory (in-house), and contracted research efforts. 1 Future research is dependent on customer needs. As a private company there is no specific 5-year testing plan for the APT. Which of the following full-scale APT types of tests are you conducting? Often Infrequently Never Total Dedicated constructed test sections (normal construction) 65.4% 17 19.2% 5 15.4% 4 100% 26 Dedicated constructed test sections (test pit) 41.7% 10 37.5% 9 20.8% 5 100% 24 In-service field test sections 25.0% 6 37.5% 9 37.5% 9 100% 24 Rehabilitation option comparison 41.7% 10 37.5% 9 20.8% 5 100% 24 Other 40.0% 4 40.0% 4 20.0% 2 100% 10 Provide information on your funding model and levels [if more than one source, indicate percentage per funding agency (sponsor) type in percentage]. Model used Funding levels (annual budget—US$ 2010) Total Funding agency (sponsor) 56.3% 9 43.8% 7 100% 16 Local/state government 55.0% 11 45.0% 9 100% 20 National government 58.8% 10 41.2% 7 100% 17 International 55.6% 5 44.4% 4 100% 9 Consortium 66.7% 4 33.3% 2 100% 6 Commercial 56.3% 9 43.8% 7 100% 16

223 Academic 50.0% 3 50.0% 3 100% 6 Other 42.9% 3 57.1% 4 100% 7 Short-term (project-linked) 66.7% 4 33.3% 2 100% 6 Long-term (program-linked) 60.0% 3 40.0% 2 100% 5 Intermittent/ad hoc 66.7% 2 33.3% 1 100% 3 Is funding guaranteed? 84.6% 11 15.4% 2 100% 13 Links to reference documents 50.0% 1 50.0% 1 100% 2 Provide an indication of any planned new developments on your device (updates to device, new instruments, new initiatives, etc.). Count Response 1 Additional load modules were added recently; always working on improving control systems. 1 Always looking at new ways of instrumenting experiments 1 Implementation of a new APT device (MLS 10) 1 Load monitoring system 1 New HVS Mark 6 arriving in April 2012 1 New version of HVS software just installed. New computers planned. 1 No planned new developments 1 Upgrade data acquisition system, develop new device for in-depth deflection measurement 1 http://rebar.ecn.purdue.edu/APT/Pages/newfacility.htm 1 Improve the ability to collect the dynamic rutting information 1 Rebuild test oval in 2012 and traffic with same heavy triple trailer trains 1 Wireless technology, moisture sensors, pressure sensors 1 The traffic simulator has just been updated. An automate driven system for moving from one test section to other has been added. 1 Investigation into fiber optic sensors, other surface mounted sensors (temp, strain), new monitoring systems/tools 1 Recently installed camera system to identify/measure surface cracks and other surface damage. Will continue to improve this system (http://www.dot.state.fl.us/statematerialsoffice/pavement/research/apt/documents/instrumentation.pdf). In the process of extending test tracks—extension consists of six 13-ft-wide lanes, 300 ft long. 1 Regenerative braking. New hydraulic load control components such as digital servo valves and digital controllers. Added four new load modules two years ago. Currently commissioning a dedicated materials testing laboratory. 1 Minor refinements to control system to better trap potential systems faults (we run largely unattended, so the system needs to be smart enough to halt trafficking if any issue occurs).

224 Provide information on the way in which you combine full-scale APT, laboratory testing, field testing, and long-term pavement performance (LTPP) in your program (LTPP refers to both SHRP LTPP sections as well as local LTPP sections that are not part of the SHRP LTPP sections). Select all applicable options. Value Count Percent APT and laboratory 20 80% APT and LTPP 4 16% APT and field 12 48% APT, laboratory, and LTPP 3 12% APT, laboratory, and field 12 48% APT, laboratory, field, and LTPP 2 8% Other 1 4% Links to reference documents 1 4% Statistics Total Responses 25 Provide information on the major specific tests that were conducted during the last decade. These are your major/ significant achievements. What was the effect of these programs on your department/research group/commercial activities etc. (objective, materials/structure, type of funding, type of outputs, etc.)? Count Response 1 All published reports may be found at: http://www.ltrc.lsu.edu/publications.html 1 Commonly built Swedish pavement structures have been tested. 1 Minimum Asphalt Thickness—Air Force 1 Porous asphalt concrete durability test 1 See summary reports on www.ucprc.ucdavis.edu 1 http://rebar.ecn.purdue.edu/APT/Pages/research.htm 1 Validation of 4th power law for unbound granular pavements with tin bituminous surfacings. Poor ranking of RLTT performance of crushed rocks (not characterization) to APT results—now considering shifting lab performance assessment to wheel tracking (have seen similar results, and similar use of wheel tracking, for asphalt a little over a decade ago). Improved understanding of the effect of tire type (mainly width) on rutting of crushed rock pavements. 1 Threshold effects/high modulus layers/grids/buried pipes/access covers etc. Reports specific to client. 1 AASHTO layer coefficient recalibration, fine gradations perform as well as coarse, reducing design gyrations, field performance prediction, increasing aggregate availability, implementation of SMA and PFC surfaces, identification of polishing aggregates, expanded use of 100% gravel mixes, PG67 in high RAP mixes, full-depth high RAP pavements, high-performance screenings mixes, and rehabilitation of failed pavements with high polymer inlays all resulted in changes to state DOT specifications. 1 Use MnROAD data to calibrate local and national design models, demonstrate material use for construction and performance, support the development of new tools to develop specification, provide training to partners, and provide a forum for discussion/demonstrations. These are the top areas but we have many more. 1 Full-scale traffic tests to failure on rigid and flexible pavements with 4-, 6-, and 10-wheel loading. Results incorporated in the FAA’s airport pavement thickness design computer program, FAARFIELD, which is required for design by the FAA’s Advisory Circular AC 150/5320-6E when pavement construction is funded from the Airport Improvement Program. Full-scale traffic tests on conventional flexible pavements with 4- and 6-wheel loading. Results used to revise the numerical values of empirical factors in the failure model of the CBR method of airport pavement thickness design. The revised factor values were adopted by ICAO in its ACN-PCN standard for airport pavement evaluation. The revised factors were also incorporated in the FAA’s computer program for airport pavement evaluation, COMFAA.

225 Count Response 1 Full-scale loading of the following asphalt mixture types: High Traffic, Gravel, Dense Graded Superpave Mixtures. Thin (3/4 in.) 4.75 mm gravel/limestone asphalt mixture; 45% High RAP, gravel/limestone mixture gravel/ limestone SMA with an all gravel OGFC wearing surface. 1 Superpave and Marshall mix design parameters, material type, and thickness. Cold in-place recycling. Rigid pavement load transfer devices. Calibration of SHA’s mixes for MEPDG. Geo-cell for surfaced and unsurfaced pavements. Rehabilitation of concrete and hot-mix asphalt surfaces. Experiments verified our specifications, caused us to use certain types of materials, verified design procedures. Either saved us funds that might have been used on an unsuccessful product or verified that funds were being properly used. 1 1. Study the effect of 6-wheel landing gear on the performance of flexible and rigid pavements and update 6-wheel Alpha factor for ICAO. 2. Develop advanced pavement design procedure for airport pavements (both flexible and rigid). 3. Study performance of HMA overlay over rubblized PCC pavements under heavy aircraft loads. 4. Study the effect of high aircraft tire pressure on flexible pavement performance. 1 Rutting in asphalt pavements (together with triaxial testing on asphalt mixes) and into different asphalt pavement rehabilitation techniques: no direct effect. Wearing courses on orthotropic steel deck bridges: together with computer simulations implemented in practice. Structural evaluation of modular pavement structures and silent joints between bridge and abutment: APT played major role in selection of alternative(s) applied or to be applied in practice. 1 Tests on WMA allowed field sections to be built. Currently testing R-WMA for field applications at $1.5M/year. 1 Suitability of recycled materials as base course materials. Pavement response measurements in different pavement structures due to heavy vehicle loading. Accelerated pavement testing of different pavement structures with impulse generator loading. Achievements: Equivalency of different types of pavement structures; classification of different pavement construction classes; comparison of measured and calculated response data; determination of pavement performance until failure under repeated impulse loading. 1 1. Evaluation of Superpave mixtures with and without modified binder. Specifications changed to show that modified binders should be used only in top surface lift for high volume roadways. APT showed that using modified binder in entire asphalt structure was not significantly better than using in top lift only. 2. Evaluation of Coarse and Fine-Graded Superpave Mixtures. APT showed that fine-graded mixtures performed just as good as or better than coarse graded mixtures. Specifications changed to allow fine-graded mixtures. 3. Assessment of wide- base tires. Compared performance of new wide-base tires with standard dual tires. Recommended use of the 455- mm-wide base tire in Florida. 4. Evaluation of Strain Gauge Repeatability. Provided confidence in instrumentation. As a result, use instrumentation more often than in the past. 1 Evaluation on innovative road building technology. Research and roll-out of UTCRCP, UTRCP, calibration of CNCPave, characterization of the load transfer efficiency in plain jointed concrete pavements through aggregate interlock. 1 Please, read our paper at the 3rd International Conference on APT (“Twelve years of accelerated pavement testing in Southern Brazil: achievements, lessons learned and challenges”). The available information is there. 1 In 2010, Tongji University conducted APT testing with MLS66 on a highway test track in the Congming Island. The purpose of MLS66 trafficking was to understand the permanent deformation characteristic and long-term performance of asphalt pavement with fine sand subgrade. There were two test tracks, low-filling subgrade (1.5-m thickness) and high-filling subgrade (3-m thickness) with the same asphalt pavement. The pavement included three asphalt layers (total thickness 20 cm) and two cement-treated aggregate layers (total thickness 54 cm). The low- subgrade test track was subject to one million two-wheel load repetitions with controlled temperature and the high- subgrade test track has 1.2 million loading in air temperature. The researcher collected the information of strain gauges, moisture sensors, and thermal couples. Other equipment such as PSPA, FWD, and profilometer also were used to monitor the performance before and during MLS66 trafficking. Core samples were obtained to compare material change. After MLS66 trafficking, test pits were cut to investigate the pavement structure. 1 Evaluation of polymer modified binder (changed design guide/specs to allow use of binder and specify which layer). Evaluation of coarse and fine-graded Superpave mixtures (changed specifications to allow fine-graded mixtures). Repeatability of strain gauges (determined strain gauges were repeatable, increased confidence in use). Evaluation of wide-base tires (recommended use of wide-base tires in Florida, specifically the 455-mm tire). Evaluation of a gradation-based performance evaluation method (validated a method developed by the University of Florida/FDOT, currently evaluating methods to implement). Evaluation of PCC slab replacement requirements (recommended temperature ranges and PCC strength to resist cracking) These reports can be found here: http://www.dot.state.fl.us/statematerialsoffice/pavement/research/reports/experimentalprojects.shtm

226 Provide an indication of the standard way in which full-scale APT information from your program is being disseminated into industry (provide information for academic dissemination, commercial dissemination and industry dissemination). Please provide official links to information (official website/database with reference lists and downloadable papers/reports if available) in the text boxes. Value Count Percent Academic dissemination (i.e., dissertations and theses) 17 65.4% Commercial dissemination (i.e., reports, websites, news releases, etc.) 8 30.8% Funding agency (sponsor) dissemination (reports, other) 17 65.4% Industry dissemination (i.e., reports, websites, news releases, etc.) 8 30.8% Conferences, meetings and journals 21 80.8% Other (i.e., organization database, organization website, wikis, etc.) 8 30.8% Statistics Total Responses 26 What do you perceive as the major influence that your full-scale APT program had on academia/industry over the last 5 to 10 years? Did it make a measureable difference? Count Response 1 Contribution in the National Transport Administration guidelines and recommendations 1 Development of specs for materials. Comparative performance of systems and products 1 Numerous graduate degrees. Faster implementation of new technologies 1 The program is still in progress and the influence is not clear. 1 Mainly on government normative 1 Participation by academia through the FAA’s Center of Excellence program and the FAA’s Grants program. Ph.D. and Master's dissertations as well as support for faculty and post-doctoral workers. The effect has been significant at those institutions specializing in airport work. 1 In Brazil, thanks to APT researches, the knowledge of pavement materials, design, and performance has been highly improved. We must intensely work to enhance data interpretation. Traffic simulators accelerate pavement distress by applying high axle loads at high loading frequency. The effects of high axle-load are generally computed using loading factors, as those derived from the results of AASHO Road Test. However, linear traffic simulators apply loads to pavements at very low speeds (generally lower than 10 km/h) and this also accelerates pavements degradation, especially when they include thick asphalt mixes. Loading speed has a strong effect on asphalt layers strains, and therefore on asphalt mixes fatigue life. In order to apply APT results to real pavements on which trucks apply loads at speeds many times higher than linear traffic simulators do, we will have to advance in the field of visco-elastic behavior of asphalt binders and mixes. Meanwhile, we propose a simplified approach in another paper [25] addressed to this Conference. It is highly desirable to more thoroughly integrate climate effects in the analysis of pavements performances under accelerated traffic. We already know the influence of soil suction in the resilient modulus of our APT facility subgrade and have succeeded to model temperature propagation across the thickness of asphalt layers. But we still have to develop a reliable model for correcting deflections according to pavements temperatures. We still make assumptions that we know are not completely true. In spite of the efforts carried out by our colleagues from South Africa and California, we still assume that wheel loads are uniformly distributed on circular surfaces. We need to improve pavement instrumentation and develop software to overcome gaps like that. More than anything else we have to strive to make TT more than a meaningless abbreviation.

227 Count Response We sadly admit that many Brazilian pavement engineers and roads authorities still see APT as a worthless sophistication. Notwithstanding, in recent years two mobile traffic simulators were designed and built, based in our old good traffic simulator. One of them has continuously tested in-service pavements in Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo states since 2003. In National Conferences on Pavements held in the last twelve years, new results of APT researches have been reported. The idea that APT is essential when developing innovative pavement materials, such as high modulus asphalt mixes [26] is growing. We must think of technologic transfer as a mantra we should recite at every moment. If we succeed in shortening the distance between APT results and paving practices, more than improving the interactivity between researchers and practitioners, we will bring new partners to support our facility, to provide funds to graduate students and to help us advertise what such a facility could make for better pavements. As anticipated in the beginning of this paper we have intentionally defied the principles of scientific publication to let the reader know how happy we are for having a history, perhaps neither long nor bright, to tell; a history of concerns and hopes of people who dared trying to follow in the steps of notable pavements engineers and researchers of the most developed countries. 1 Tremendous influence on the evolution of specifications in the southeastern US over the last 10 years 1 A measurable difference for the Ministry of Transport, Public Works, and Water Management in the evaluation of new structures. 1 Had a huge impact on academia by providing funding for continued research and funds for graduate programs. Influenced the paving industries based on materials used. 1 Yes, development of the labor-intensive guideline document for road building materials, calibration of the South African Mechanistic Design Method, calibration of CnCPave, successful roll-out of UTCRCP and UTRCP road building technology. 1 Assessment of empirical standards on the basis of measured response. First validation of analytical design methods. 1 People attach importance to the high temperature stability to the other asphalt layers, not only to the course layer as before. 1 Full-scale rapid loading of pavements has allowed state DOTs to modify mixture design procedures and construction specifications in a very timely manner as opposed to waiting for performance distresses to occur on existing state highway facilities. 1 Two examples, see brochure: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/mnroad/pdfs/MnROAD%20Brochure%20_Aug%202010_.pdf APT Paper: http://www.cedex.es/apt2008/html/docs/TS07/Economic_Benefits_Resulting_from_Road.pdf 1 The results obtained from research at NAPTF have widely accepted nationally and internationally. 1. Developed a new airport pavement design procedure (FAARFIELD), which is the current FAA standard and an Advisory Circular. 2. New Alpha-factors were adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). 3. ICAO is in the process of modifying tire pressure requirements under ACN-PCN methodology. 1 1. Evaluation of Superpave mixtures with and without modified binder. Specifications changed to show that modified binders should be used only in top surface lift for high volume roadways. APT showed that using modified binder in entire asphalt structure was not significantly better than using in top lift only. 2. Evaluation of Coarse and Fine-Graded Superpave Mixtures. APT showed that fine-graded mixtures performed just as good as or better than coarse graded mixtures. Specifications changed to allow fine-graded mixtures. 3. Assessment of Wide- Base Tires. Compared performance of new wide-base tires with standard dual tires. Recommended use of the 455-mm-wide-base tire in Florida. 1 The target is the industry. It makes a very significant difference in the performance of the pavement, especially HMA. How do you measure/evaluate the benefit of your program in industry benefit/cost studies, economic analyses, seminar feedback, others)? Provide indications of calculated parameters (i.e., benefit cost ratios) where applicable, or links to reports with this information.

228 Count Response 1 Benefit/cost investigation on the success of the APT program 1 I don’t know 1 Improved knowledge, understanding and skill 1 No benefit/cost ratios have been calculated yet. 1 Now it’s not available. 1 Value of research and benefit/cost ratio 1 Economic analysis or benefit cost analysis has not been conducted. 1 http://www.ltrc.lsu.edu/pdf/2007/riu_347.pdf 1 Not calculated 1 Cost benefit analyses. Feedback from client and industry. Monitor rate of implementation of recommendations. 1 Our sponsoring organization has adopted tests results and incorporated them in standards documents. Significant amount of non-financial support from industry (Boeing and Airbus) and from foreign governments. Cannot calculate benefit-cost ratios to any degree of accuracy because our test results are not disseminated commercially. Most of the monetary benefit is in cost avoidance and by this measure the benefit-cost ratio has been estimated to be in excess of 100. Documentation of this result has not been published. 1 A benefit/cost study has not been performed. In general, the benefit is the accelerated evaluation of methods and materials of interest to our districts and Pavement and Construction offices. Implementation of successful research is accelerated and unsuccessful materials/methods are not allowed. 1 Benefit/cost. Can calculate cost of making incorrect decision on one time or multiple time basis. Can show cost saving because one action is less than another and more effective or longer performance. Each experiment has a calculated B/C ratio. 1 We measure our success through feedback during interaction with state DOTs and industry, but more benefit/cost studies are needed 1 Any cost benefit analysis would have been small elements of the work (or done separately outside of the APT project) and would need to review past repeats to extract this information. benefits 1 This is a need that we have not been able to do in a lot of ways. We have good feedback from customers both paying and non-paying. Some of the small “just using the facility” people also have found benefit. The lessons learned cover some of these success stories. Mistakes are also benefits but we have a hard time quantifying them. What is your estimate of the return on investment (cost benefit ratio) for your facility for the testing performed? Please add references to supporting literature where available. Value Count Percent 1 to 5 6 40% 6 to 10 4 26.7% 11 to 20 2 13.3% 31 and up 3 20% Statistics Total Responses 15 Sum 145.0 Average 9.7 Std. Dev. 11.18 Max 31.0

229 Why are you currently continuing with your APT program? Count Response 1 APT owned by company. Program specific to customer requirements. 1 Continued interest and financial support from local government 1 Mainly to support the Department of Defense and to protect our military. 1 Pursuing increased knowledge 1 Still have active customers and funding required to keep moving forward. 1 To rapidly monitor/measure the performance of pavement mixtures. 1 I think it is an important and effective approach to research the performance of pavement. 1 Public and private demands 1 Respond to market needs 1 Pavement materials and technologies evolve every day. We have to utilize the greatest materials and technologies available, but their performance should be tested first. Policies in pavement design and materials are changing very often. To write better policies (specifications, manuals, etc.) they have to be based on data-driven decision. APT can give us the “data driven decision.” 1 The APT program is one part of FDOT’s research program. It is performed in coordination with contracted and other in-house research efforts. These efforts answer problems faced by our districts and pavement/construction offices. 1 Hoping that someday the government will understand what are the uses of APT. I was the first Brazilian to fall in love with APT. Merci les amis du LCPC/Nantes. 1 Cost-effective means of evaluating new technologies. Peace of mind for road authorities to implement new technologies. 1 It answers questions that we could not get unless we placed the experiments on the road. The road is the wrong place for experiments to go bad. 1 Further support and development of the FAA’s airport pavement design and evaluation standards. Particularly new materials, changing aircraft operating specifications and landing gear configurations, and changing airport pavement maintenance activities. 1 Further validation of pavement response and performance models. Face challenges like significant increase of road transport volume, shortage of resources (e.g., bitumen), climate change. 1 1. To constantly improve design procedures, study failure mechanisms, advanced material characterization. 2. Provide support to the aviation community. 1 The Florida program is an essential part of our research effort. The goal is to implement the findings when feasible. 1 Currently no program; it will be very difficult to maintain the APT facility in the (near) future because of lack of funding/research program. Provide information on the type of database or storage method that is used to store data in your APT program (only relevant to owners of APT devices).

230 1 EXCEL files (amongst others) 1 Excel and Access 1 Hard drive 1 Hard drive and DVD 1 MS access, XLS-based 1 Microsoft Access database 1 No single database. Project specific data. Electronic. 1 No special database 1 No standard database or storage is being used. 1 PostgreSQL database on a server, with raw data in CSV format. 1 Project-based computer database (CD-ROMS, etc.) 1 Sequel Server database. 1 Very basic: computer files, sheets, and the resulting papers 1 Data QC via spreadsheet, permanent storage in Access database 1 Microsoft SQL Server database posted online. Raw data are archived on hard disks, DVDs, and magnetic tape. 1 We have a web-based database where all APT information is stored (reports, photographs, instrumentation data, HVS maintenance files, etc.). Typically, information is stored here after a project is complete. APT information is also stored on a network drive that is backed up nightly. This network is primarily used for active projects. 1 A dedicated database is used to store all APT-related data. We also have a dedicated network drive that we store all current files on. This drive is backed up nightly. 1 Oracle Database along with auxiliary data (pictures, video, some raw data not entered into the Database)—one TB data http://www.dot.state.mn.us/mnroad/data/pdfs/databaseguide.pdf. Working to get data onto the web in the next 2 years—data product 1.0 currently is being developed in-house and used by internal staff. Do you make data from your APT program available to other researchers (not directly linked to your APT program) for analysis? What processes are followed to enable such researchers to obtain access to this data? (Only relevant to owners of APT devices.) Value Count Percent Data available to non-APT owners 14 82.4% Data shared with other APT programs 11 64.7% Process used 9 52.9% Links to reference documents 5 29.4% Statistics Total Responses 17 Count Response 1 Data bases are established for each experiment. Take the form of tables, graphs, and charts. Where do the data that you use in your research originate from? Value Count Percent Focused research program—own organization 21 75% Focused research program—other organization 7 25%

231 Full-scale APT database—own organization 17 60.7% Full-scale APT database—other organization 5 17.9% Other 2 7.1% Statistics Total Responses 28 Do you only use data from individual sections in your research or a combination of selected sections or a whole research program? Value Count Percent Individual sections 10 35.7% Combinations 23 82.1% Others 1 3.6% Statistics Total Responses 28 Who is your typical client (select all applicable)? Value Count Percent Funding agency (sponsor) 7 25.9% State DOT/roads agency 15 55.6% Academic institution 3 11.1% External clients (commercial) 1 3.7% Other 1 3.7% Statistics Total Responses 27 How do you combine full-scale APT, laboratory, field, and LTPP data in your research? Count Response 1 Already answered 1 Combined research projects covering all different aspects 1 Compare different results and try to establish their relationship 1 Completely depends on the specific research project but LTPP data are rarely involved 1 Depends on the study—each has its strengths and weaknesses 1 Evaluate field and test results of same materials

232 Count Response 1 They are organized and managed by one office, one section, and one manager. 1 We do combine full-scale APT and laboratory data, but very rarely field and LTPP data. 1 We use laboratory and field, APT and LTPP together to improve our understanding of pavement performance. 1 Only APT and Lab fundamental testing 1 Phase II Track studies are typically designed based on Phase I laboratory studies with modeled prediction of various research alternatives. Stockpiles, binders, bases, and subgrades are long hauled from remote locations to build track sections that are representative of open roadways in various states throughout the U.S. Replicate sections are also built on open local roadways for comparison purposes. 1 With skill and dexterity! All aspects are combined to present the whole picture. We use APT as a tool, not as the whole answer. 1 Laboratory data are often used to corroborate APT data. We have full-scale laboratories that characterize the materials used in the APT research and also conduct performance tests. When possible, field data are also used to corroborate APT data. 1 Laboratory tests are commonly conducted to reinforce or corroborate APT findings. FDOT has fully equipped asphalt, soils, and concrete labs. Field experimental projects are sometimes constructed to evaluate materials/ methods. These projects are longer term, but the performance may be used in conjunction with APT if available. LTPP data have not been used in FDOT’s APT program. 1 During my research work, I combine the three factors through modifying the test methods, modifying design methods, and so on. 1 Depends on research program but could be APT only, APT plus Lab, APT plus Field, or APT plus Field plus Lab. 1 Full-scale APT testing is very focused on specific asphalt mixture types. Field performance and laboratory testing are analyzed to make changes to existing state specifications. 1 Measure the characteristic of the properties used in the full-scale test. Compare full-scale measurements with field performance. Value Count Percent All projects 5 21.7% Selected projects 10 43.5% Only ad hoc 8 34.8% Statistics Total Responses 23 Completed Current Links to theses Total Masters 60.0% 15 32.0% 8 8.0% 2 100% 25 Doctorate 33.3% 9 100% 27 3 Other 33.3% 0.0% 100% How often are full-scale APT data used in conducting graduate studies (masters or doctorate level)? How many masters and doctorate degrees were completed based on (partly or fully) full-scale APT data between 2000 and 2010 (provide links to copies of theses)? 55.6% 15 11.1% 3 2 1 0 66.7%

233 What is the importance of economi c analyses of the investigated technology in your research program? Value Count Percent Conducted during test planning as motivation 4 18.2% Conducted afterwards as standard step 2 9.1% Conducted afterwards as ad hoc activity 8 36.4% Not done 9 40.9% Statistics Total Responses 22 Which techniques do you use to conduct these economic analyses Count Response 1 According to experience and cost analysis 1 B/C 1 Modified CSIR/Jooste approach 1 None 1 Not formalized method — see APT 2008 report 1 Practical analysis periods and basic present value methodology using conservative costs 1 See Bennett and Rose TRB paper. 1 Value of research and benefit/cost ratio 1 Various 1 B ibliometrics, l ife - c ycle c ost analyses, c ost/benefit analysis 1 L if e - cycle cost What is the basis of the selection of full - scale APT test sections in your program? Value Count Percent Official research program 20 74.1% Ad hoc test selection 7 25.9% Academic interest 4 14.8% Other 1 3.7% Statistics Total Response s 27

234 Value Count Percent Unpaved 7 24.1% Seal / b itumen surface treatment 8 27.6% Hot - mix asphalt 29 100% Warm - mix asphalt 10 34.5% Cold - mix asphalt 5 17.2% Conc rete (all thick concrete pavement layers) 16 55.2% Ultra - thin reinforced concrete 3 10.3% Ultra-thin white-topping 6 20.7% Composites 8 27.6% Other 8 27.6% Statistics Total Responses 29 Indicate the type of pavement base layers that you evaluated u sing full - scale APT. Value Count Percent Indicate the type of surfacing pavement layers that you evaluated using full-scale APT. Sand 4 14.8% Clay 4 14.8% Granular 24 88.9% Cement stabilized 15 55.6% Emulsion stabilized 7 25.9% Other stabilized (define) 3 11.1% Asphaltic 16 59.3% Composite 5 18.5% Recycled 13 48.1% Other 4 14.8% Statistics Total Responses 27 Indicate the type of pavement subbase and subgrade layers that you evaluated using full - scale APT. Value Count Percent Sand 12 44.4% Clay 17 63% Granular 20 74.1%

235 Emulsion stabilized 3 11.1% Other stabilized 1 3.7% Statistics Total Responses 27 Which are the structural distress types typically evaluated for a sphalt surfacing layers in your full - scale APT program [ please add failure threshold if available ( i.e., 20 mm rut) ] ? Value Count Percent Raveling 6 21.4% Bleeding 6 21.4% Cracking 21 75% Rutting 28 100% Fatigue 19 67.9% Low temperature cracking 3 10.7% Moisture damage / stripping 5 17.9% Aging 5 17.9% Aggregate loss 4 14.3% Other 6 21.4% Statistics Total Responses 28 Sum 167.8 Average 13.9 Std . Dev . 8.37 Max 30.0 Which are the structural distress types typically evaluated for c oncrete surfacings in your full - scale APT program [ please add failure threshold if available ( i.e., 20 mm rut) ] ? Value Count Percent Crackin g 18 90% Stress ratio 5 25% Joint failure 10 50% Faulting 8 40% Punchouts 3 15% Erosion of support 4 20% Fatigue 8 40% Cement stabilized 10 37%

236 Curling and warping 8 40% Load transfer failure 9 45% Spalling 5 25% Steel rupture 1 5% Debonding 3 15% Other 3 15% Statistics Total Responses 20 Sum 3.0 Average 3.0 Max 3.0 Which are the structural distress types typically evaluated for base and subbase layers in your full-scale APT program [please add failure threshold if available (i.e., 20 mm rut)]? Value Count Percent Permanent deformation 20 87% Shear 8 34.8% Cracking (define type?) 7 30.4% Frost/thaw damage 2 8.7% Collapsing 2 8.7% Crushing 6 26.1% Carbonation 1 4.3% Swelling 3 13% Other 3 13% Statistics Total Responses 23 Which are the functional distress types typically evaluated in your full-scale APT program? Value Count Percent Safety 6 26.1% Environment 3 13% User cost 3 13% Roughness 13 56.5% Functional distress not deemed applicable to full-scale APT 10 43.5% Other 3 13%

237 Statistics Total Responses 23 Which functional safety aspects were evaluated? Value Count Percent Rutting 25 92.6% Skid resistance 10 37% Punchouts 3 11.1% Delamination 4 14.8% Roughness 11 40.7% Spalling 3 11.1% Functional aspects not deemed applicable to full-scale APT 1 3.7% Other 2 7.4% Statistics Total Responses 27 Which environmental aspects are typically evaluated during full-scale APT? Value Count Percent Noise 5 20.8% Dust pollution 2 8.3% Not deemed applicable to full-scale APT 16 66.7% Other 4 16.7% Statistics Total Responses 24 To which of the following load characteristics do you relate full-scale APT data? Value Count Percent Applied wheel load 25 96.2% Tire inflation pressure 20 76.9% Tire contact stress 13 50% Tire type 16 61.5% Load configuration 17 65.4% Suspension system 3 11.5% Vehicle-pavement interaction/dynamics 9 34.6%

238 Channelized/wandering traffic 20 76.9% Speed 16 61.5% Rest periods 5 19.2% Overloading 17 65.4% Pavement roughness 6 23.1% Statistics Total Responses 26 To which of the following environmental data do you relate full-scale APT data? Value Count Percent Ambient air temperature 20 76.9% Pavement temperature 25 96.2% Rainfall 8 30.8% Relative humidity 6 23.1% Aging 7 26.9% Water table 12 46.2% Drainage 7 26.9% Depth to bedrock 3 11.5% Other 2 7.7% Statistics Total Responses 26 Which of the following environmental parameters are controlled during your full-scale APT tests? Please provide typical ranges for applicable parameters in the textbox. Value Count Percent Ambient air temperature (temperature ranges) 11 52.4% Pavement temperature (temperature ranges) 18 85.7% Water application (method) 8 38.1% Aging (method) 3 14.3% Subgrade moisture 9 42.9% Drainage 3 14.3% Other 1 4.8% Statistics Total Responses 21 Sum 133.0

239 Average 26.6 Std . Dev . 18.98 Max 58.0 Which of the following bituminous - based materials have been tested? Value Count Percent HMA c ontinuously graded 24 92.3% HMA o pen graded 11 42.3% HMA s emi - ga p graded 5 19.2% HMA g ap graded 7 26.9% HMA l arge stone 6 23.1% SMA 13 50% HMA p orous 8 30.8% HMA RAP 7 26.9% Gussasphalt 3 11.5% HMA s and 3 11.5% Warm - mix asphalt —A dd process description 9 34.6% Cold - mix asphalt —Add process description 3 11.5% S urfacing seals —Single 6 23.1% Surfacing seals —Double 5 19.2% Surfacing seals —Cape 1 3.8% Surfacing seals —Other 2 7.7% Composite with concrete —Description 3 11.5% Other 2 7.7% Statistics Total Responses 26 Sum 11.8 Average 5.9 Std . Dev . 1.13 Max 7.0 Which of the following cement - based materials have been tested? Value Count Percent JCP 11 55% CRCP 2 10%

240 Concrete blocks 5 25% Doweled 8 40% Other combinations 2 10% Whitetopping—Description 4 20% Ultra-thin reinforced concrete 2 10% Composite with asphalt—Description 5 25% Other 7 35% Statistics Total Responses 20 Sum 106.0 Average 35.3 Std. Dev. 45.73 Max 100.0 Which of the following material properties have been related to full-scale APT performance? Value Count Percent Stiffness 20 80% Poisson’s ratio 4 16% Density 18 72% Gradation 21 84% Strength (concrete) 14 56% Erodibility 2 8% Atterberg limits 5 20% Volumetric properties 13 52% Binder type 22 88% Binder content 13 52% Film thickness 5 20% Moisture content 10 40% Visco-elastic properties 12 48% Aging index 6 24% Tensile strength 10 40% Compressive strength 13 52% Flexural strength 10 40% Stiffness modulus 17 68% Other 2 8%

241 Statistics Total Responses 25 Which of the following laboratory tests are used in conjunction with your full-scale APT program? Value Count Percent Standard asphalt tests 25 100% Standard bitumen tests 19 76% Standard concrete tests 13 52% Standard granular/soil tests 19 76% Standard stabilized layer tests 13 52% Wheel tracking 11 44% PTF 1 4% MMLS3 2 8% French rut tester 1 4% Hamburg tester 10 40% Asphalt Pavement Analyzer 11 44% Direct tensile 5 20% Indirect tensile 15 60% Bending beam fatigue 11 44% Strain at break 5 20% Cantilever fatigue 2 8% Semi-circular bending 5 20% Triaxial 15 60% Dynamic creep 9 36% Static creep 8 32% Gyratory 14 56% Vibratory 4 16% Kango hammer 2 8% Other 3 12% Statistics Total Responses 25 Which of the following field tests are used in conjunction with your full-scale APT program? Value Count Percent Penetration tests (i.e., DCP) 15 57.7% Density/moisture 24 92.3%

242 Benkelman beam (or modified) 7 26.9% Rolling dynamic deflectometer 2 7.7% Plate load 8 30.8% Seismic (i.e., PSPA) 13 50% Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) 11 42.3% FWD 24 92.3% Light FWD (LFWD) 14 53.8% Permeability 8 30.8% In situ strength/cores 19 73.1% Relative crack/joint movement 10 38.5% Scaled trafficking 1 3.8% Other 2 7.7% Statistics Total Responses 26 Which of the following pavement/materials modeling aspects do you relate to full-scale APT data? Model type used—Back-calculation Value Count Percent Elastic layer 14 87.5% Visco-elastic layer 5 31.3% Elasto-plastic 4 25% Finite element 7 43.8% Iterative 5 31.3% Statistical 4 25% Statistics Total Responses 16 Model type used—Deflection Value Count Percent Elastic layer 16 84.2% Visco-elastic layer 5 26.3% Elasto-plastic 3 15.8%

243 Finite element 12 63.2% Iterative 4 21.1% Statistical 5 26.3% Statistics Total Responses 19 Model type used—Deformation Value Count Percent Elastic layer 12 80% Visco-elastic layer 8 53.3% Elasto-plastic 7 46.7% Finite element 10 66.7% Iterative 2 13.3% Statistical 6 40% Statistics Total Responses 15 Model type used—Fatigue Value Count Percent Elastic layer 8 80% Visco-elastic layer 3 30% Elasto-plastic 2 20% Finite element 6 60% Iterative 1 10% Statistical 5 50% Statistics Total Responses 10 Model type used—Load equivalence Value Count Percent Elastic layer 4 66.7% Visco-elastic layer 1 16.7% Elasto-plastic 1 16.7%

244 Finite element 2 33.3% Iterative 1 16.7% Statistical 4 66.7% Statistics Total Responses 6 Model type used — O ther Value Count Percent Elastic layer 2 100% Finite element 1 50% Statistics Total R esponses 2 Model type used — Pavement serviceability Value Count Percent Elastic layer 1 50% Finite element 1 50% Statistics Total Responses 2 Model type used — Stress/strain Value Count Percent Elastic layer 18 90% Visco - elastic layer 8 40% E lasto - plastic 6 30% Finite element 18 90% Iterative 2 10% Statistical 5 25% Statistics Total Responses 20

245 Value Count Percent Unconventional materials 15 65.2% Gradients 3 13% Joints 4 17.4% Slippage 1 4.3% Buried pipes and culverts 4 17.4% Bridge deck joints 2 8.7% Road markings 3 13% Durability 6 26.1% Traffic accommodation 3 13% Compaction 13 56.5% Patching 4 17.4% Reinforcement 5 21.7% Preventative maintenance 4 17.4% Quality a ssurance / q uality c ontrol 4 17.4% Surface texture 8 34.8% Surface tolerance 2 8.7% Surface drainage 1 4.3% Subsurface drainage 2 8.7% Other 1 4.3% Statistics Total Responses 23 Sum 60.0 Average 60.0 Max 60.0 Agency/Organization Count Response 1 ARRB Group 1 Alabama Department of Transportation 1 Alaska DOT&PF 1 Arkansas Highway and Transportation Dep ar t ment 1 CEDEX Transport Research Center 1 CSIR 1 CSIR Built Environment Which aspects of pavement engineering did you evaluate that may enhance construction and rehabilitation of pavements? Please provide details w here applicable.

246 Count Response 1 CTR 1 Caltrans 1 China Merchants Chongqing Communications Research & Design Institute Co., Ltd. 1 Chongqing Communications Research & Design Institute 1 Colorado Department of Transportation 1 ConnDOT 1 Dan ish Road Directorate, Danish Road Institute 1 Delaware DOT 1 Delft University of Technology 1 Dynatest Consulting Inc . 1 ESJ Pavement Consulting Engineers 2 Empa 1 Expressway & Transportation Research Institute 1 Federal Aviation Administration 1 F ederal Highway Research Institute (BASt) 1 Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul 3 Florida Department of Transportation 1 Georgia DOT 1 Icelandic Road Administration 1 Ida h o Transportation Dep ar t ment 1 Illinois DOT 1 Indiana Department of Transpor tation 1 Iowa DOT 1 Kansas DOT 1 Kansas Department of Transportation 1 Kentucky Transportation Cabinet 1 Liaoning Province Communication Research Institute 1 Louisiana Transportation Research Center 1 MT Dep ar t ment of Transportation 1 Maryland SHA 1 MassDOT — Highway Division 1 Michigan Department of Transportation 1 Minnesota Department of Transportation 1 Mississippi Department of Transportation 2 Missouri DOT

247 Count Response 1 NCAT Pavement Test Track 1 NCE 1 NDDOT 1 NYSDOT 2 National Laboratory of Mater ials and Structural Models of the University of Costa Rica 1 Nevada DOT 1 New Hampshire Department of Transportation 1 New Mexico Dep ar t ment of Transportation 1 Norwegian Public Roads Administration 1 ODOT 1 Ohio Department of Transportation 1 Publi c Works Research Institute 1 South Carolina Department of Transportation 1 South Dakota DOT 1 TRL 1 Tennessee Department of Transportation 1 The Highway Institute — Belgrade 1 The University of Texas 1 Tongji University 1 TxDOT 1 U . S . Army Corps of Engineers, ERDC 1 U . S . Army Corps of Engineers , CRREL 1 U . S . DOT, Federal Aviation Administration 1 University of California Pavement Research Center 1 University of California, Berkeley 2 University of Nottingham 1 University of Washington 1 Univers ity of Waterloo — Civil and Environmental Engineering 1 Utah Department of Transportation 1 VTI — The Swedish Road and Transport Research Institute 1 Vermont Agency of Transportation 1 WSDOT 1 Wyoming DOT

248 Count Country Response 1 Australia 1 Brazil 1 Canada 1 China 2 Costa Rica 1 Denmark 1 Germany 1 Iceland 1 Japan 1 Korea 1 Norway 2 P.R. China 1 Pulaski 1 RSA 1 Serbia 3 South Africa 1 Spain 1 Sweden 2 Switzerland 52 United States 3 United Kingdom 1 the Netherlands

Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications: AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005) TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998) TRB Transportation Research Board TSA Transportation Security Administration U.S.DOT United States Department of Transportation