CE 517 Transportation Asset Management

Fall 2022

The Evaluation of Remaining Service Life of Flexible Pavements Using Traffic Speed
Deflectometer

Report Prepared By:

Duncan Rioba Oteki
Prepared for: Dr. Daba Gedafa, Ph.D., P.E., ENV SP, F. ASCE

1
 Date Submitted: 11 December 2022

Table of Contents

Abstract......................................................................................................................................2
Introduction................................................................................................................................3
Problem Statement.....................................................................................................................4
Literature Review.......................................................................................................................5
History of TSD........................................................................................................................5
TSD Measuring Principles.....................................................................................................6
Structural Parameters and Deflection Indices.......................................................................8
Comparison between FWD and TSD data.............................................................................8
i. Approach.....................................................................................................................8
ii. Results.........................................................................................................................9
Summary and Conclusions.......................................................................................................11
Recommendations....................................................................................................................11
References..............................................................................................................................................12

Abstract
The structural condition of an asphalt pavement is an important indicator of its remaining

service life (RSL). Data collected from the falling weight deflectometer (FWD) can be used

to estimate the RSL of measured sections. However, the FWD is a stationary device meaning

that its application is limited to project-level applications. The traffic speed deflectometer

(TSD) is a novel device that can collect data at traffic speed, making it a desirable option for

determining RSL at the network-level. This paper presents studies that compared the

structural parameters derived from FWD data with those obtained from the TSD data. The

results showed that there was a close similarity when structural parameters such SNeff,

SCI300, and D0 from FWD and TSD data were compared. It was concluded that the

thresholds used to determine the RSL of asphalt pavements from FWD data can be used in

TSD data if these structural parameters are closely matched.

2
Introduction

The structural condition of an asphalt pavement is a critical indicator of its remaining

service life (RSL). RSL is the projected time in years a pavement is expected to remain in

acceptable condition while accumulating functional or structural distress in prevailing

conditions with only routine maintenance (Baladi, 1991). Therefore, the RSL of a pavement

can be used as a tool for determining appropriate maintenance and rehabilitation activities in

the pavement management system (PMS).

The falling weight deflectometer (FWD) is the most common device for evaluating

pavement structural conditions (Shrestha et al., 2022). During measurements, the FWD

subjects the pavement surface to an impulse load and the pavement response is measured

using sensors (geophones) placed at intervals from the applied load. Studies have shown that

data collected from the FWD can be used to estimate the RSL of measured sections (Gedafa

et al., 2010). However, the FWD is a stationary device that requires the disruption of traffic

while taking measurements, meaning that its application is often limited to project-level

applications.

The traffic speed deflectometer (TSD) is a novel device that can measure data for a

distance exceeding 200 mi in a single day at traffic speed, making it a desirable option for

conducting network-level testing (Shrestha et al., 2022). The prospect of applying TSD data

for determining RSL can offer pavement asset managers a useful tool for budgeting and

timing their maintenance and rehabilitation actions at the network level. However, since the

use of TSD data is not as well established as that of FWD data there is a need to compare the

output of these devices before adopting the TSD for estimating the RSL of asphalt

pavements.

3
Problem Statement

The TSD offers an opportunity for assessing and quantifying the pavement structural

condition at the network level without the limitations of the FWD. However, highway

agencies need methodologies for interpreting the TSD data before incorporating them into the

network-level PMS. The ability to use TSD data to estimate the RSL of asphalt pavements

requires a thorough understanding of how closely it matches the structural performance

output derived from FWD data.

Literature Review

Since 1980, highway agencies have used the FWD for assessing pavement structural

bearing capacity and it is commonly recommended as a suitable non-destructive testing

(NDT) device for overlay design and determining RSL (Manoharan et al., 2018). The FWD is

not suitable for the network level, leading to the innovation of traffic speed deflection devices

(TSDDs) like the rolling wheel deflectometer (RWD), rapid pavement tester (RAPTOR), and

TSD. In the United States, the TSD is the only commercially available TSDD (Shrestha et al.,

2022).

It is important to first describe the technology behind TSD in order to understand the

data collection process and data interpretation. Additionally, research conducted around the

world offers an opportunity to establish the state of the art in terms of TSD technology and

any limitations in its application. This paper reviews the literature available on this subject

and draws its conclusion on how TSD can be used to determine RSL, which will aid

pavement asset managers in decision-making at the network level.

History of TSD

The TSD was developed through a joint effort by Greenwood Engineering and the

Danish Road Directorate (DRD) at the beginning of the 2000s (Ferne et al., 2015). The TSD
4
is a segmented truck having a rear-axle load that can fluctuate from 13.4 kips to 29.2 kips

using sealed lead loads. Fig. 1 shows doppler lasers that are installed on a rigid servo-

hydraulic beam to measure the deflection velocity of a loaded pavement. Earlier versions of

the TSD had six doppler lasers, currently, this number has increased to 12 Doppler lasers

(Shrestha et al., 2022).

Fig. 1. Typical loading configurations in the TSD device (Shrestha et al., 2022).

During measurement, the lasers are maintained at a constant height from the

pavement surface by the vertical movement of the rigid beam in the opposite direction to the

trailer. Temperature is maintained at a 68°F (20°C) to prevent thermal distortion on the steel

measurement beam. TSDs are capable of collecting data at speeds approaching 60 mph (96

km/h) at a sampling rate of 1 kHz (Shrestha et al., 2022).

TSD Measuring Principles

The TSD measures the deflection slope of the pavement based on deflection velocity

as opposed to the actual surface deflection (Manoharan et al., 2018). Fig 2. shows that the

Doppler laser is installed at a 2-degree angle, where the emitted signal is reflected from the

moving pavement with a changed wavelength giving the vertical deflection speed. The

5
horizontal vehicle speed is also registered by the sensors. The deflection slope is thus

obtained by Eq. (1)

α =V V /V h (1)

where α = deflection slope (µm/m); V V = deflection velocity (m/s); V h = driving velocity m/s.

Fig. 2. Calculation of slope of deflection bowl (Manoharan et al., 2018).

Fig. 3 illustrates the pavement deflection velocity vectors under a rolling wheel and the

deflection velocity with the corresponding deflection basin where the deflection slopes

(tangents) are shown.

Fig. 3. Left: Pavement deflection velocity under rolling load; Right: Pavement deflection

velocity and deflection basin with deflection slopes (tangents) (Manoharan et al., 2018).

6
Since the slope is a derivative of the displacement, the deflection slope can be obtained

through integration. Therefore, a pavement’s bearing capacity characteristics such as the

Structural Curvature Index 300 (SCI300) can be obtained as shown by Eq. (2).

300
SCI 300= ∫ s ( x ) dx =D300−D 0 (2)
0

where s ( x )=¿slope at location x; dx = deflection at location; D300 = deflection measured at

300 mm in front of the rear axle of the TSD; and D0 = deflection measured at 0 mm from the

rear axle of the TSD (Manoharan et al., 2018).

Structural Parameters and Deflection Indices

The FWD makes static measurements, while the TSD makes dynamic measurements;

therefore, their deflection basins differ. However, deflection bowl indices, effective structural

number (SNeff), and back-calculated layer moduli are structural parameters that are common

in both measuring techniques and have been identified for evaluating pavement structural

conditions and determining the RSL of asphalt pavements at the network level (Shrestha et

al., 2022). Structural parameters obtained from FWD measurements are well understood and

applied by most highway agencies, comparing them with parameters obtained from TSD

measurements is a crucial step before adopting them in everyday practice.

Comparison between FWD and TSD data

Studies have been conducted to compare the relationships between structural

parameters obtained from FWD and TSD data to adopt them for network-level PMS.

i. Approach

Shrestha et al. (2022) compared FWD and TSD data from interstate roads to obtain

the ratio of structurally weak sections identified by both methods. The study focused on

7
asphalt pavements, where FWD structural condition data and pavement layer thickness were

retrieved from the Virginia Department of Transportation’s (VDOT) PMS. The TSD data

were collected using a TSDD on 4,021 mi of road. The structural condition indices used were

the SCI300 as shown in Eq. (2), and the SNeff given in Eqs. (3) and (4)

k2 k3
SN eff =k 1 SIP H P (3)

where H P = total pavement thickness (mm); and SIP = structural index of the pavement

computed in Eq. (4). The coefficients k 1, k 2, and k 3 were 0.4369. -0.4768, and 0.8182 for

TSD deflections as suggested by (Nasimifar et al., 2022)

SIP=D 0−D1.5 H P
(4)

where D1.5 H = deflection at a distance 1.5 times the pavement depth, H P .

P

The formula proposed by Nasimifar et al. (2022) was used to conduct temperature correction

since the magnitude of pavement deflection is significantly affected by temperature.

ii. Results

Fig. 4 presents cumulative distribution comparisons from the FWD and TSD

measurements for SNeff, SCI300, and D0. Since there is a close similarity between FWD and

TSD cumulative SNeff as observed in Fig. 4(a), Shrestha et al. (2022) suggested that the

threshold used to identify weak sections from FWD cumulative SNeff curves can be applied

to TSD data. VDOT uses a threshold of 6 for FWD, which translates to 30 percent of the

section being structurally weak, a corresponding threshold of 14 for TSD measurements was

found to correspond to the same percentage of weak sections. Meaning a SNeff threshold of 6

and 14 for FWD and TSD respectively will result in the same percentage of weak sections.

Similarly, Figs. 4 (b and c) could use the same principle to determine weak sections since the

FWD cumulative curves for SCI300 and D0 match those of TSD measurements.

8
 Fig. 4. Cumulative distributions on interstate roads: (a) TSD and FWD SNeff; (b) TSD

and FWD SCI300; and (c) TSD and FWD D0 (Shrestha et al., 2022).

Similar results were achieved by Xiao et al. (2021) who found a good agreement

between TSD and FWD measurements when they compared their SCI300 parameter as

shown in Fig. 5. They concluded that TSDs can be used for pavement structural evaluation

and form a basis for initiating pavement treatments. However, they noted that TSD

measurements were significantly affected by the TSD speed and suggested further

investigations.

Manoharan et al. (2018) compared D0 from TSD measurements with corresponding

FWD measurements and obtained a good coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.71. The

9
authors developed a structural number band that could help pavement managers to initiate

treatments for flexible pavements with a spray-sealed or thin asphalt surface.

Fig. 5. Comparison of SCI300 from TSD and FWD (Xiao et al., 2021)

Summary and Conclusions

TSDDs provide an opportunity for evaluating pavement structural conditions at the

network level. Since TSD data and FWD data are collected differently, there is a need for

comparison before incorporating TSD data into PMS. The studies presented in this paper

show that:

i. In the case of the VDOT study, the cumulative SNeff from FWD data was similar to

that of the TSD data, meaning that the pavement condition can be obtained with the

TSD thus providing asset managers with a decision-making tool for initiating

treatments.

ii. Thresholds used to indicate weak sections from FWD data can be applied to TSD data

as long as the structural parameters such as SNeff, SCI300, and D0 from both devices

are closely matched. This can form a basis for determining the RSL of an asphalt

pavement.

10
Recommendations

Promising results were obtained by comparing FWD structural parameters with those

from TSD, and therefore it was concluded that the implementation of TSD is feasible at the

network level. However, other states need to conduct independent studies to ascertain these

results. Additionally, the effects of TSD speed on measurements should be closely

investigated since it has been shown to significantly affect TSD data.

References

Baladi, G. (1991). Analysis of pavement distress data, pavement distress indices and

remaining service life: An advanced course in pavement management systems.

FHWA.

Ferne, B. w, Drusin, S., Langdale, B., & Meitei, B. (2015). UK Trial to compare 1st and 2nd

generation traffic speed deflectometers. The International Symposium on

Nondestructive Testing in Civil Engineering,.

Gedafa, D. S., Hossain, M., Miller, R., & Van, T. (2010). Estimation of Remaining Service

Life of Flexible Pavements from Surface Deflections. Journal of Transportation

Engineering, 136(4), 342–352. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-

5436.0000094

Manoharan, S., Chai, G., Chowdhury, S., & Golding, A. (2018). A study of the structural

pperformance of flexible pavements using traffic speed deflectometer. Journal of

Testing and Evaluation, 46(3), 20160189. https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE20160189

Nasimifar, M., Kamalizadeh, R., & Heidary, B. (2022). The available approaches for using

traffic speed Deflectometer data at network level pavement management system.

Measurement, 202, 111901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2022.111901

11
Shrestha, S., Katicha, S. W., Flintsch, G. W., & Diefenderfer, B. K. (2022). Implementing

traffic speed deflection measurements for network level pavement management in

Virginia. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part B: Pavements, 148(2),

04022021. https://doi.org/10.1061/JPEODX.0000371

Xiao, F., Xiang, Q., Hou, X., & Amirkhanian, S. N. (2021). Utilization of traffic speed

deflectometer for pavement structural evaluations. Measurement, 178, 109326.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2021.109326

12