See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/339956819

Effect PCC Slab Curling and Warping on Pavement Roughness

Conference Paper · August 2020

DOI: 10.33593/88enhr0e

CITATIONS READS
2 138

4 authors:

Hyung Suk Lee Syed Waqar Haider

Applied Research Associates, Inc. Michigan State University
62 PUBLICATIONS 339 CITATIONS 105 PUBLICATIONS 674 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Karim Chatti Neeraj Buch

Michigan State University Michigan State University
127 PUBLICATIONS 1,788 CITATIONS 81 PUBLICATIONS 626 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Hyung Suk Lee on 29 April 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Effect PCC Slab Curling and Warping on Pavement Roughness

By

Hyung S. Lee1, Syed W. Haider2, Karim Chatti2, and Neeraj Buch2

(1)
Applied Research Associates, Inc.
100 Trade Centre Drive, Suite 200, Champaign, IL 61820, U.S.A.
Phone: (217) 356-4500
Fax: (217) 356-3088
E-mail: hlee@ara.com
(2)
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Michigan State University
3546 Engineering Building, East Lansing, MI-48824
E-mail: syedwaqa@egr.msu.edu
E-mail: chatti@egr.msu.edu
E-mail: buch@egr.msu.edu
ABSTRACT

Longitudinal profile measurements are vital for assessing the functional performance in
terms of smoothness for new and existing pavements. However, the longitudinal profiles of
Jointed Concrete Pavements (JCP) are significantly affected by temporal and diurnal changes
that influence curling and warping of the concrete slabs. Therefore, consideration of such
effect is essential for accurate assessment of pavement smoothness.

The longitudinal profile measurements are commonly summarized by the International

Roughness Index (IRI) that reduces the thousands of elevation values into a single value.
However, no matter which index is calculated from a longitudinal profile, the quality of the
information is only as good as the profile measurement. Thus, there is a need to evaluate the
impacts of temporal (seasonal temperature/moisture and daily temperature) variations on
longitudinal profile measurements, especially for JCPs.

In this study, a new method is proposed for separating the curvature related IRI (i.e., due to
curling and warping) from the non-curvature related IRI (i.e., due to other distresses such as
spalling, faulting, etc). The level of curling and warping within each profile was summarized
in terms of the Pseudo Strain Gradient (PSG). Examples from a couple of JCP sections
indicated that temporal variations during a single day could have significant impacts on IRI.
Results show that diurnal variations in PSG explained many of the changes in roughness over
time. Such influence of seasonal and daily IRI variations can influence current practices—
how highway agencies collect surface roughness for pavement management purposes and
perform smoothness measurements for construction quality control.
INTRODUCTION

The functional performance of a new pavement surface and its smoothness/roughness

characteristics over time are assessed by longitudinal profile measurements. Smoothness
measurements are vital in evaluating the functional performance of existing pavements both
at project and network levels. However, the longitudinal profile measurements are influenced
by daily and seasonal temperature and moisture variations, especially for Jointed Concrete
Pavements (JCP) due to curling and warping of slabs.

Typical pavement management activities include measurement of the longitudinal profile for
assessing surface roughness. The longitudinal road profile measurements are generally
summarized by an index that reduces the thousands of elevation values into a single value,
such as the International Roughness Index (IRI). However, no matter which index is
calculated from a longitudinal profile, the quality of the information is only as good as the
profile measurement (Karamihas et al., 1999).

The Long-Term Pavement Performance Program (LTPP) Seasonal Monitoring Program

(SMP) was designed to evaluate the influence of temporal changes in pavement structural
and functional characteristics due to daily and seasonal variations in temperature and
moisture. Under the SMP program, LTPP has collected daily and seasonal longitudinal
profile data on JCP test sections. The results and findings of published studies on LTPP data
analyses showed that on some JCP test sections, temporal variations during a single day
could have significant impacts on IRI computed from longitudinal pavement profile
measurements (Karamihas et al., 1999; Karamihas and Senn, 2012; Wiser, 2013). Such
influence of seasonal and daily IRI variations can influence current practices—how highway
agencies perform smoothness measurements for pavement management purposes as well as
for construction quality control and determining construction-related pay factors.

Concerns for measuring longitudinal profiles related to the environmental variables (i.e.,
temperature and moisture), as documented by Karamihas et al., (1999), include several
aspects of the pavement surface shape that confound profile measurements such as:

• Transverse, daily, and seasonal variations in profile all combine to make an individual
measurement a merged sample of the road shape.
• The lateral position of the measurement has a strong influence on the longitudinal
profile because the pavement surface shape changes across the lane.
• In JCP pavements, roughness variations of 10 percent are common over a 24-hour
cycle.

Another study conducted by Karamihas and Senn (2012) examined the roughness and
roughness progression of 21 rigid pavement test sections on the LTPP SPS-2 sites in Arizona
over the first 16 years of the experiment (2). The sites included 12 test sections from the
standard experiment and 9 supplemental test sections selected by the Arizona Department of
Transportation. The findings of this study showed that:

3
 • Traditional profile analyses revealed roughness is caused by transverse and
longitudinal cracking on some test sections and some localized roughness caused by
built-in defects.
• Detailed profile analyses showed that curl and warp contributed significantly to the
roughness on many of the test sections.
• Surface roughness did not increase steadily with time because of diurnal and seasonal
changes in slab curl and warp.

In addition to the above findings, Karamihas and Senn (2012) proposed an objective profile
analysis method for quantifying the level of curl and warp on each section, namely the
Second Generation Curvature Index (2GCI) method. In the 2GCI method, the level of curling
and warping within each JCP slab was characterized in terms of a pseudo strain gradient
(PSG) value, which is an estimate of the gross strain gradient needed to deform the slab into
the shape present in the measured profile. For JCP test sections, variations in average PSG
over time explained many of the changes in roughness over time, including the diurnal
variations in slab curl (2). The overall level of curl and warp increased throughout the life of
the pavement, with corresponding increases in roughness (2, 4, 5).

Although the 2GCI method used by Karamihas and Senn (2012) showed great potential, one
drawback of this procedure is that the regression equation between IRI and PSG must be
established by surveying the same pavement section multiple times when the slabs are
subjected to different thermal gradients. This is a limitation especially for project-level
analysis, as the practitioners may not have the resources to collect the profile data at different
times of the day (or season) for pavement management, acceptance, and pay factor
determination.

OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

The primary objective of this study is to build on the existing 2GCI analysis procedure that is
capable of separating the curvature related roughness (due to curling and warping) from the
overall roughness even from a single profile. In the following sections of the paper, the
existing and the newly developed 2GCI procedures are briefly described. In addition,
preliminary results obtained from two LTPP SMP sections using the new 2GCI method are
provided for demonstration.

REVIEW OF EXISTING 2GCI METHOD

Temperature related curling and moisture-related warping are well-known phenomena of JCP
pavements that significantly affect the ride quality. In recognition of such effect on JCP
pavement smoothness/roughness, Karamihas and Senn (2012) and Chang et al., (2010)
introduced the 2GCI method which was derived based on Westergaard’s curling equation
shown below (Westergaard, 1926, 1927).

2 cos  cosh 
z ( x ) = − z0  A ( x ) + B ( x )  (1)
sin 2 + sinh 2 

4
Where z is the elevation of the slab, x is the horizontal distance from the origin located at the
center of the slab, and the functions A(x) and B(x) are given as the following.

x x
A ( x ) = ( − tan  + tanh  ) cos cosh (2)
l 2 l 2
x x
B ( x ) = ( tan  + tanh  ) sin sinh (3)
l 2 l 2

In the above equations, l is the radius of relative stiffness, and the non-dimensional parameter
 and the displacement at the edge of the slab, z0, are defined as:

b
= (4)
l 8

z0 =
(1 +  ) T l 2 (5)
h

where ,  b and h are the coefficient of thermal expansion, Poisson’s ratio, length and
thickness of the Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) slab, respectively, and T is the linear
thermal gradient within the concrete slab simply defined in terms of the temperatures at the
top (TTop) and at the bottom (TBottom) of the slab as:

T = TTop − TBottom (6)

Equations (1) through (6) represent the original curling equation developed by Westergaard
(1927), which only accounts for the curling due to a linear temperature gradient. In the 2GCI
method, the PSG is defined to include not only the effect of temperature gradient but also
other factors (e.g., moisture gradient) that contribute to curling/warping of the PCC slabs
(Karamihas and Senn, 2012). Mathematically, the PSG is written as:

PSG =
(T +  m ) (7)
h

where m is the additional strain gradient within the PCC slab due to moisture gradient and
other factors. With the PSG defined as the above, the displacement at the edge of the slab
(i.e., z0 in Equation (5)) can be rewritten as the following:

z0 = PSG  (1 +  ) l 2 (8)

The above PSG needs to be determined in an empirical manner by fitting the curling formula
in Equation (1) to the shape of each PCC slab obtained from the longitudinal pavement
profile.

5
The 2GCI procedure is schematically shown in Figure 1 and generally involves the
following:

1. Collect the profile data from a given JCP section multiple times during the day (or at
different seasons) in order to capture the variability in IRI due to the change in slab
curvature.
2. For each pavement profile, identify the joint locations for a given JCP pavement
section.
a. Filter the profile using a high-pass, anti-smoothing moving average filter with
a base length of 0.82 ft.
b. Normalize the filtered profile by its standard deviation.
c. Identify potential joint locations from the normalized profile. This is done by
identifying the locations of negative spikes whose value is less than a
threshold (e.g., -2.5).
d. Finalize the joint locations based on noise elimination, data aggregation and
sorting. Additional details regarding this step can be found in Karamihas and
Senn (2012) and Chang et. al. (2010).
3. Perform 2GCI fitting to each JCP pavement profile.
a. Extract the pavement profile for each PCC slab.
b. Remove the pavement grade within each slab. This is done by fitting a linear
regression line through the slab profile and subtracting it from the original
profile.
c. Determine the PSG value in Equation (8) by fitting the curling formula in
Equation (1) to the slab profile obtained from the previous step.
d. Repeat the above steps (a through c) until the 2GCI fitting is completed for all
the PCC slabs.
4. Repeat Steps 2 and 3 for all available profiles from the JCP section to establish the
relationship between IRI and PSG through linear regression.
5. Estimate curvature related and non-curvature related IRI values based on the slope of
the regression equation obtained in the previous step.

As shown in Figure 1 and described above, the key elements of the existing 2GCI method are
the linear relationship between PSG and IRI, of which the slope becomes the basis of
separating the curvature related and non-curvature related IRI. Defining such a relationship
requires that the JCP pavement profile be obtained multiple times when the slabs are
subjected to different levels of curvature. Furthermore, as shown by Karamihas and Senn
(2012), the slope of the linear regression varies from one section to another, meaning that the
methodology cannot be generalized for any pavement sections (i.e., the 2GCI method cannot
be used for JCP sections having insufficient profile data to establish the linear relationship
between PSG and IRI). These limitations provide additional challenges if the 2GCI method
is to be used with new JCP pavements, especially for the purpose of construction quality
control and/or for determining the construction-related pay factors.

6
Figure 1. Schematic procedure for the existing 2GCI method.

7
PROPOSED 2GCI METHOD

In recognition of the limitation of the existing 2GCI method, a new 2GCI procedure has been
developed in this study. The overall procedure of the new 2GCI method is schematically shown
in Figure 2 and further described in the following paragraphs.

1. Identify the joint locations for a given JCP pavement profile, in the same way as the
existing 2GCI method.
2. Perform 2GCI fitting to the curled shape of pavement profile.
a. Extract the pavement profile for each PCC slab.
b. Remove the pavement grade within each slab, in the same manner as the existing
2GCI method. In other words, fit a linear regression line through the slab profile and
subtract it from the original slab profile.
c. Determine the PSG value in Equation (8) by fitting the curling formula in Equation (1)
to the slab profile obtained from the previous step.
d. Add the pavement grade that was removed before PSG determination back to the fitted
curling formula. This results in the curled shape of the slab with corresponding
pavement grade.
e. Repeat the above steps (a through d) until the 2GCI fitting is completed for all the
PCC slabs.
f. Construct the 2GCI pavement profile, which only includes the curled shape of the
slabs.
3. Calculate the overall IRI as well as curvature related and non-curvature related IRI.
a. Calculate the overall IRI from the original pavement profile.
b. Calculate the curvature related IRI from the 2GCI pavement profile (i.e., curvature
only profile) obtained from Step 2.
c. Subtract the 2GCI pavement profile from the original profile, which results in the
pavement profile without pavement curvature. The non-curvature IRI is calculated
from this subtracted profile.

It should be noted that since the non-curvature profile is obtained by subtracting the 2GCI
pavement profile (which only consists of the curled shape of the slabs) from the original profile,
the curvature related and non-curvature related IRI values can be calculated directly for each
given pavement profile. In other words, the new 2GCI method eliminates the need for
establishing the relationship between PSG and IRI from multiple pavement profiles before
estimating the effect of curling on IRI.

The new 2GCI method will be demonstrated in the following sections of the paper. Since these
demonstrations are based only on the new method, the “2GCI method” in the remaining sections
will be used to refer to the new method, unless otherwise noted.

8
Separation of Profile and IRI Calculation

Raw Profile IRI Curvature Related IRI Non-Curvature Related IRI

− =
Raw Profile 2GCI (Curvature Only) Profile Curvature Removed Profile

2GCI Fitting

High Pass Filtering for Potential Joints Re-Apply Slab Grade Perform 2GCI Fitting

Finalize Joint Locations Extract Raw Profile Data for Each Slab Remove Slab Grade

Figure 2. Schematic procedure for the proposed 2GCI method.

9
PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS USING THE NEW 2GCI METHOD

To demonstrate the use of the new 2GCI method, two SMP sections were randomly chosen from
the LTPP database. These sections are 04-0215 in Arizona and 27-4040 in Minnesota. Table 1
summarizes the general information about these sections.

Table 1. General LTPP section information for the 2GCI analysis

Section No. 04-0215 27-4040
State Arizona Minnesota
Climate zone Dry, Non-Freeze Wet, Freeze
LTPP experiment SPS-2 GPS-4
Year constructed 1993 1979
Year included in LTPP 1993 1987
LTPP monitoring status Active Inactive (Since 9/1/2009)
Joint spacing (ft) 15 27
PCC thickness (in) 11 8.1
Base type Crushed Gravel Uncrushed Gravel
Base thickness (in) 6.3 6.0

Both the above sections were free of any transverse cracking and corner breaks during the entire
LTPP monitoring period. The only distresses observed in these sections were faulting and joint
spalling whose time series plots are provided in Figure 3. The figure clearly shows that the
Arizona section (04-0215) is performing well with minimal faulting and spalling. On the other
hand, the Minnesota section performed relatively well until year 2003 (pavement age = 24 years)
but almost all joints were spalled by the year 2008 (pavement age = 29 years).

0.25 100 0.25 100

Faulting, in 90 Faulting 90
0.2 80 0.2 80
Percent Joints Spalled

Percent Joints Spalled

% Joints Spalled % Joints Spalled
70 70
Faulting (in)

Faulting (in)

0.15 60 0.15 60
50 50
0.1 40 0.1 40
30 30
0.05 20 0.05 20
10 10
0 0 0 0
0 5 10 15 20 10 15 20 25 30
Pavement Age (Years) Pavement Age (Years)

(a) (b)
Figure 3. Faulting and joint spalling of LTPP Sections (a) 04-0215 and (b) 27-4040

Arizona Section 04-0215

The 2GCI analysis results will be presented first for the Arizona section (04-0215) where the
distresses were minimal and hence, the variability of the overall IRI is anticipated to be due to
the slab curvature. To facilitate this analysis, the available raw profile data collected from 1997

10
to 2012 (corresponding to pavement ages 4 and 19 years, respectively) were extracted from the
LTPP database and analyzed.

As an example of the 2GCI profile fitting, Figure 4 shows the raw profile for the left wheel path
of section 04-0215 collected on September 20, 2008, along with the corresponding 2GCI profile
and the non-curvature related profile. As seen from this figure, all the slabs within this section
were curled upwards (equivalent to negative thermal gradient). The upward curling was also
observed in all other profiles collected from this section, suggesting that the slabs may have
built-in curling.

Figure 5 shows all three IRI values (overall, curvature related, and non-curvature related) plotted
against pavement age as well as the PSG values averaged across all slabs within the section.
Figure 5(a) shows that the overall IRI showed an increasing trend over the years. Nonetheless,
the figure also shows that this is mainly due to the curvature IRI which follows a very similar
trend as the overall IRI. On the other hand, the non-curvature IRI remained relatively constant
near 80 inch/mile, regardless of the pavement age. This is in agreement with the findings of the
original 2GCI developers (Karamihas and Senn, 2012).

It is believed that such a flat trend in the non-curvature IRI is due to the minimal surface
distresses observed from this section [see Figure 3(a)]. Figure 5(b) also confirms that the overall
IRI and the curvature IRI are strongly correlated to the strain gradient (i.e., PSG), whereas the
non-curvature IRI is independent of the strain gradient.

It is also noted that the primary advantage of the new 2GCI method is the construction of the
curvature related profile [Figure 4(b)] and calculation of the corresponding IRI. The original
2GCI method bypassed this process required that the linear relationship between the overall IRI
and the PSG [Figure 5(b)] be established first, and the slope of this relationship be used for
assessing the effect of slab curvature on IRI. By eliminating the need for a linear relationship
between PSG and IRI and by reconstructing the pavement profile corresponding only to the slab
curvature, the new 2GCI method allows for calculating the curvature related and non-curvature
related IRI from a single JCP profile, without requiring any prior knowledge or data from the
given JCP pavement section.

11
 0.20

0.10

0.00

Elevation (in)
-0.10

-0.20

-0.30

-0.40

-0.50
0 100 200 300 400 500
Longitudinal Distance (ft)

(a)
0.20

0.10

0.00
Elevation (in)

-0.10

-0.20

-0.30

-0.40

-0.50
0 100 200 300 400 500
Longitudinal Distance (ft)

(b)
0.20

0.10

0.00
Elevation (in)

-0.10

-0.20

-0.30

-0.40

-0.50
0 100 200 300 400 500
Longitudinal Distance (ft)

(c)
Figure 4. (a) Raw pavement profile, (b) 2GCI profile, and (c) non-curvature profile from LTPP
section 04-0215 (profile date 9/20/2008)

12
 160

140

120

IRI (in/mi)
100

80

60
Raw Profile IRI
40 Curvature IRI
Non-Curvature IRI
20
0 5 10 15 20
Pavement Age (Years)

(a)
160

140

120

100
IRI (in/mi)

80

60

40 Raw Profile IRI

Curvature IRI
20
Non-Curvature IRI
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
2GCI Curvature Magnitude (PSG, ·106/in)

(b)
Figure 5. Pavement IRI plotted against (a) pavement age and (b) curvature index for LTPP
section 04-0215

In order to assess the seasonal variation of curling/warping, the IRI values and the strain
gradients obtained from the year 1998 are plotted in Figure 6. This particular year was selected
because the largest number of profile data were available from this year. Figure 6 clearly shows
that the overall IRI, curvature IRI, and the strain gradient are following a similar trend that varies
with season and within a day, while the non-curvature IRI stayed relatively stable (as expected).
Figure 6(b) also illustrates the range of daily and seasonal variations of the strain gradient that
have affected the overall IRI, which indicates that the seasonal variation was significantly greater
than the daily variation (at least based on the available data).

13
 120

110

100

90

IRI (in/mi)
80

70

60 Raw Profile IRI

Curvature IRI
50
Non-Curvature IRI
40
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Month

(a)

Daily Variation

Seasonal Variation

(b)
Figure 6. Pavement IRI plotted against (a) pavement age and (b) curvature index for LTPP
section 04-0215 (Based on profiles collected in 1998)

Minnesota Section 27-4040

As previously shown in Figure 3, the Minnesota section (27-4040) showed a significant increase
in spalling between 24 and 29 years of pavement age. As such, it is anticipated that the non-
curvature IRI from this section would be somewhat different from those previously demonstrated
for the Arizona section (04-0215). As such, the available profiles for this section were
downloaded and analyzed using the new 2GCI method. The LTPP profiles were available from
1997 (pavement age = 18 years) to 2004 (pavement age = 25 years).

An example of the 2GCI profile fitting to the raw profile for the left wheel path of section 27-
4040 collected on June 7, 1999, is shown in Figure 7. Unlike the Arizona section, this section
showed downward curling (equivalent to positive thermal gradient) in all available profiles. This
suggests that the downward curling may be built into the slabs within this section.

14
 0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

Elevation (in)
0.00

-0.20

-0.40

-0.60

-0.80

-1.00
0 100 200 300 400 500
Longitudinal Distance (ft)

(a)
0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20
Elevation (in)

0.00

-0.20

-0.40

-0.60

-0.80

-1.00
0 100 200 300 400 500
Longitudinal Distance (ft)

(b)
0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20
Elevation (in)

0.00

-0.20

-0.40

-0.60

-0.80

-1.00
0 100 200 300 400 500
Longitudinal Distance (ft)

(c)
Figure 7. Raw pavement profile, (b) 2GCI profile, and (c) non-curvature profile from LTPP
section 27-4040 (profile date 6/7/1999)

Figure 8 shows the IRI values from section 27-4040 plotted against pavement age and PSG.
Figure 8(a) clearly shows that the slab curvature still had a significant effect on the overall IRI,

15
evidenced by the similar trend seen between the overall IRI and the curvature IRI. However, this
figure also shows that the non-curvature IRI is showing an increasing trend with pavement age,
which is believed to be the effect of spalled joints. On the other hand, Figure 8(b) shows that the
non-curvature IRI is still independent of the slab curvature. This is a preliminary indication of
the non-curvature IRI being separated from the curvature IRI in an adequate manner.

200

180

160
IRI (in/mi)

140

120

100
Raw Profile IRI
Curvature IRI
80
Non-Curvature IRI
60
15 17 19 21 23 25 27
Pavement Age (Years)

(a)
200

180

160
IRI (in/mi)

140

120

100
Raw Profile IRI

80 Curvature IRI
Non-Curvature IRI
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
2GCI Curvature Magnitude (PSG, ·106/in)

(b)
Figure 8. Pavement IRI plotted against (a) pavement age and (b) curvature index for LTPP
section 27-4040

In order to assess the seasonal and daily variation of slab curling/warping from section 27-4040,
the IRI values and the strain gradients obtained from the year 1997 are plotted in Figure 9.
Again, this particular year was selected due to the number of profiles available. The figure shows
that the overall IRI, curvature IRI, and the strain gradient are following a similar trend that varies
with season and within a day. Conversely, the non-curvature IRI stayed relatively stable, which
is expected because spalling was not major distress in this particular year.

Figure 9(b) illustrates the range of daily and seasonal variations of the strain gradient that have
affected the overall IRI. Surprisingly, this figure shows that the daily variation observed in the
month of April is just as significant as the seasonal variation assessed from this dataset. In
16
addition, these two profiles corresponding to a survey date of April 20, 1997, were collected
within 3 hours from each other (lower gradient obtained at 9:03 AM and higher gradient at 12:09
PM).

200

180

160

IRI (in/mi) 140

120

100

80
Raw Profile IRI
60
Curvature IRI
40 Non-Curvature IRI
20
0 2 4 6 8 10
Month

(a)

Daily Variation Seasonal Variation

(3 hours apart
from each other)

(b)
Figure 9. Pavement IRI plotted against (a) pavement age and (b) curvature index for LTPP
section 04-0215 (Based on profiles collected in 1997)

The observation from section 27-4040 suggests that the PCC slab curvature may change to a
significant degree even within a few hours, which in turn, may affect the pavement profile and
the corresponding IRI.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a new method has been proposed for separating the curvature related IRI (i.e., due
to curling and warping) from the non-curvature related IRI (i.e., due to other distresses such as
spalling, faulting, etc). The new method builds on the existing 2GCI analysis procedure that is
capable of separating the curvature related roughness (due to curling and warping) from the
overall roughness even from a single profile. The new method, however, eliminates the need for
establishing the linear regression between IRI and PSG that had to be obtained by surveying the
17
same pavement section multiple times when the slabs are subjected to different thermal
gradients. Through the introduction of a “curvature only profile,” the new 2GCI method allows
for separating the curvature related and non-curvature related IRI from a single JCP profile,
without requiring any prior knowledge or data from the given JCP pavement section.

Analysis examples from a couple of LTPP JCP sections using the new 2GCI method indicated
that temporal variations during a single day could have significant impacts on IRI. The results
show that diurnal variations in PSG explained many of the changes in roughness over time.
Such influence of seasonal and daily IRI variations can influence current practices. In other
words, if the effect of curling/warping of the PCC slabs is not accounted in an appropriate
manner, the IRI time series data for a given JCP section may fluctuate substantially. Such IRI
fluctuation in pavement management database may affect the agency’s rehabilitation decisions
and may also have a significant impact on the pay factors for newly constructed pavements.

18
 REFERENCES

1. Chang, G. K., S. M. Karamihas, R. O. Rasmussen, D. Merritt, and M. Swanlund,

"Quantifying the Impact of Jointed Concrete Pavement Curling and Warping on Pavement
Unevenness," presented at 6th symposium on pavement surface characteristics (SURF),
Potoroz, Slovenia, 2008, pp.
2. Chang, G., R. Rasmussen, D. Merritt, S. Garber, and S. Karamihas, "Impact of Temperature
Curling and Moisture Warping on Jointed Concrete Pavement Performance," FHWA-HIF-
10-010, 2010.
3. Karamihas, S., T. Gillespie, R. Perera, and S. Kohn, "Guidelines for Longitudinal Pavement
Profile Measurement," NCHRP Report 434, 1999.
4. Karamihas, S. M. and K. Senn, "Curl and Warp Analysis of the LTPP SPS-2 Site in
Arizona," FHWA-HRT-12-068, 2012.
5. Westergaard, H. M., "Computation of stresses in concrete roads," presented at Highway
Research Board Proceedings, 1926, pp. 90-112.
6. Westergaard, H., "Analysis of stresses in concrete pavements due to variations of
temperature," presented at Highway Research Board Proceedings, 1927, pp. 201-215.
7. Wiser, L., "Curl and Warp Analysis of the LTPP SPS-2 Site in Arizona: TechBrief," United
States. Federal Highway Administration 2013.

19

View publication stats