1 / 21

Acoustic Perception in Pavement Rating

Acoustic Perception in Pavement Rating. Bernard Izevbekhai, P.E. Research Operations Engineer MnDOT Office of Materials & Roads Research. OBJECTIVES. Demystify Acoustic Version of this Puzzle Ascertain if Acoustic Perception explained residuals or anomalies in 2010 Pavement Rating.

meli
Download Presentation

Acoustic Perception in Pavement Rating

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Acoustic Perception in Pavement Rating Bernard Izevbekhai, P.E. Research Operations Engineer MnDOT Office of Materials & Roads Research

  2. OBJECTIVES • Demystify Acoustic Version of this Puzzle • Ascertain if Acoustic Perception explained residuals or anomalies in 2010 Pavement Rating

  3. RAISON D’ETRE We are Subject to the whims of Frequency Domains irrespective Domain (Tactile, Spatial, Time) of Interest

  4. RAISON D’ETRE • Some Important Reasons why people ask for noise walls: • We cannot be Left out. • We do not want to see the vehicles ( Out of sight is out of Hearing) • We are tax payers Phycoacoustics have always with us.

  5. TIRE PAVEMENT NOISE FUNDAMENTALS Macrotexture Pavement Smoothness IRI (Mega texture) Direction Orientation (Spikiness) Asperity Interval Microtexture NOISE TEXTURE PAVEMENT SMOOTHNESS AND TIRE PAVEMENT INTERACTION NOISE (TPIN) ARE FUNDAMENTAL TO TIRE PAVEMENT INTERACTION

  6. LAYOUT OF 31 CONTIGUOUS TEST SECTIONS Note The order For Later Discussion

  7. ESTABLISHED PHENOMENOLOGICAL MODEL FORM OF PROPOSED MODEL OBSI=A+B*((293-T)/T)+ C*(IRI/IRIT)+ [(ASPT/ASP)*(D*DIR +E)]+ F*(SP) PROPOSED MODEL OBSI = 99.023+20.164((293-T)/T)+[(ASPT/ASP)(1.513 DIR+0.098)]+ 5.849(IRI/IRIT)+1.684 SP Significant Variables P-value needs to be < 0.05. It is noted that p-values for the variables in model are in the range 0<=p<0.0002 Izevbekhai, Khazanovich and Voller (2011)

  8. STRATEGY • 44 Volunteers Equitable Gender and Age Distribution • No State Employee, No Pavement expert • 2010 Chevrolet Malibu New • Many Runs Rating from 0-10 (Scaled 0-5) • DIV Measured IRI behind the Rating Panels • Preliminary Analysis Reveals anomaly in IRI MPR Correlation

  9. RESULTS FROM 31 CONTIGUOUS TEST SECTIONS

  10. ANALYTICAL PATH RATING PANEL IRI OBSI MPR IRI/ RN

  11. Measurement of Tire Pavement Noise On Board Sound Intensity SI level (dB(A))= 10 * log10 ∑ 10 {SI 1/SIo} ) Where SIi (i=1, 2 , 3, …, 12) are sound intensities in dB at each the 3rd octave frequencies. SI0 = SI at threshold of human hearing = 10-12 Watts/m2

  12. MPR Vs OBSI Compare to Izevbekhai et al (2011) There may be influential data (AKA outliers

  13. OBSI VS RESIDUALS NO CORRELATION WITH RESIDUALS

  14. Investigate Sequencing

  15. Investigate Sequencing Anomalies in Sections 6 and 28 Accentuated

  16. DUE DILIGENCE: What of RN? Anomalies in Sections 6 and 28 Accentuated

  17. DUE DILIGENCE: RN

  18. Conclusion and Recommendation • This study examined MPR, IRI, and OBSI of 31contiguous sections • to ascertain the possibility of pavement noise influencing anomalous rating. • Based on the analysis conducted, no tenable statistically significant evidence that OBSI explains anomalies in MPR. • Sequencing may have affected some ratings

  19. Conclusion and Recommendation • Reversed Runs recommended with raters Hood winked (Complete Lane Closure) • Populate a data base of MPR and OBSI. • No individual study is all encompssing. Continuing studies Recommended. • Results do not negate the likelihood of Noise influencing rating in a larger population but in this study it was not significant.

  20. QUESTIONS I THANK THEE

More Related