Comparison of Roughness Calibration Equipment - with a Viewto Increased Confidence in Network Level Data

摘要

With the advent of key performance indicators and performance specified maintenancerncontracts (PSMC), both in New Zealand and abroad, the accuracy, repeatability andrnreproducibility of roughness data is coming under increased scrutiny. Continuity of thernservice provider and their equipment has proven to assist in obtaining repeatable results.rnHowever, in some circumstances a change in the service provider has lead to a significantrnchange in the average overall network figures, which appears largely unsubstantiated to thernroad controlling authority (RCA).rnRoughness is measured in network surveys using either profilometers or response type roadrnroughness measuring systems (RTRRMS). Responsibility for calibration of the equipmentrnresides with the service provider. Checks are often performed throughout the duration of thernsurvey to ensure the vehicle stays within accepted bounds, specifically for RTRRMS. It isrnusual to have the vehicle run over the same section of road and compare the results withrnthose obtained from previous runs. This provides the road controlling authority with somernassurance of data repeatability, but does not provide assurance that the machine wasrncorrectly calibrated to begin with.rnFor calibration it is necessary to provide a reference roughness. This provides the roadrncontrolling authority with confidence that the equipment is calibrated correctly prior to thernroughness survey being undertaken on their network. There are a variety of instrumentsrnavailable for calibration level surveys, each with different levels of accuracy and precision.rnThis research assesses and evaluates the accuracy of these different instruments, which rangernfrom low to high cost methods, for establishing the reference roughness on selectedrncalibration sites.