The analysis of variability of pavement indicators: MPD, SMTD and IRI. A case study of Portugal roads

References

• ASTM E867, 2006. Standard terminology relating to vehicle-pavement systems. West Conshohocken, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials.
   Google Scholar
• Bianchini, A., Bandini, P., and Smith, D., 2010. Interrater reliability of manual pavement distress evaluations. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 136 (2), 165–172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardinal, R., 2004. ANOVA in practice, and complex ANOVA designs. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Descornet, G., Berlemont, B., and Martin, J-M., 2001. Study of precision of transverse evenness measurements in FILTER experiment: forum of european national highway research laboratories investigation on longitudinal and transverse evenness of roads experiment. Transportation Research Record, 1764, 210–220.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, A., et al., 2011. Selection of pavement performance models for use in the Portuguese PMS. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 12 (1), 87–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, F. and Prozzi, J., 2010. Roughness model accounting for heterogeneity based on in-service pavement performance data. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 136 (3), 205–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humplick, F., 1992. Highway pavement distress evaluation: modeling measurement error. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 26 (2), 135–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISO 13473-1. 1997. Characterization of pavement texture by use of surface profiles – Part 1: Determination of mean profile depth. Genève, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
   Google Scholar
• JCGM 200. 2008. International vocabulary of metrology – Basic and general concepts and associated terms (VIM). Available from: http://www.bipm.org/utils/common/documents/jcgm/JCGM_200_2008.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Karamihas, S., 2002. Development of cross correlation for objective comparison of profiles. International Journal of Vehicle Design, 36 (2–3), 173–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kazerouni, A., 2009. Design and analysis of gauge R&R studies: making decisions based on ANOVA method. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 52, 31–35.
   Google Scholar
• Kobayashi, K., Kaito, K., and Lethanh, N., 2012. A statistical deterioration forecasting method using hidden Markov model for infrastructure management. Transportation Research Part B, 46, 544–561.
   Google Scholar
• Lethanh, N. and Adey, B., 2012. Use of exponential hidden Markov models for modelling pavement deterioration. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, iFirst article, 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Losa, M. and Leandri, P., 2010. The reliability of tests and data processing procedures for pavement macrotexture evaluation. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 12 (1), 59–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madanat, S., 1993. Optimal infrastructure management decisions under uncertainty. Transportation Research Part C, 1 (1), 77–88.
   Google Scholar
• NCHRP 401. 2009. Quality management of pavement condition data collection. A synthesis of highway practice. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, J.W. and Overbay, A., 2004. The power of outliers (and why researchers should always check for them). Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 9, 6. Available from: http://www.PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v = 9&n = 6 [Accessed 9 January 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Park, E., et al., 2008. A Bayesian approach for improved pavement performance prediction. Journal of Applied Statistics, 35 (11), 1219–1238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruotoistenmäki, A., Seppälä, T., and Kanto, A., 2006. Comparison of modeling and measurement accuracy of road condition data. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 132 (9), 715–721.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayers, M., 1995. On the calculation of international roughness index from longitudinal road profile. Transportation Research Record, 1501, 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Sayers, M., Gillespie, D., and Paterson, W., 1986. Guidelines for conducting and calibrating road roughness measurements. World Bank Technical Paper Number 46, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, B., 2001. Even project-experiment to compare and harmonize methods for assessment of longitudinal and transverse evenness of pavement. Transportation Research Record, 1764, 221–231.
   Google Scholar
• Sjögren, L., 2008. Longitudinal unevenness, state of progress of standardization. Evaluation of pavement surface characteristics, proceedings of the seminar, Universidade do Minho, Guimarães, Portugal, 3–8.
   Google Scholar
• Sjögren, L., Lundberg, T., and Wiklund, M., 2008. Acceptance testing for road surface monitoring vehicles in Finland. VTI report 622A, Finland.
   Google Scholar
• Vilaça, J., et al., 2010. 3D surface profile equipment for the characterization of the pavement texture – TexScan. Mechatronics, 20 (6), 674–685.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viner, H., et al., 2006. Surface texture measurement on local roads. Published Project Report PPR148, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, D., 1995. Increasing the power of nonparametric tests by detecting and downweighting outliers. Journal of Experimental Education, 64 (1), 71–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar