TECHNICAL FIELD
[0001] The present invention relates to a method of working a blacktop road surface to a
target microroughness and target macroroughness.
BACKGROUND ART
[0002] Vehicle tyre performance depends largely on the characteristics (typically micro-
and macroroughness) of the road surface on which the tyres roll, so, to accurately
compare the findings of tyre tests conducted at different times and/or on different
test tracks, the test road surfaces must have the same characteristics (i.e. same
micro- and macroroughness).
[0003] Consequently, when asphalting (i.e. blacktopping) a new test area, the micro- and
macroroughness of the road surface required for correct tyre testing are established
beforehand. Once the new asphalt is laid, it is allowed to mature, and the new test
area allowed to rest, for at least 2-4 weeks. At the end of the maturation period,
the road surface has a more or less thick surface layer of bitumen 'concealing' the
aggregate underneath, and so normally has a very high microroughness and a very low
macroroughness. At the end of the maturation period, the road surface must therefore
be worked to the required micro- and macroroughness.
[0004] Correctly 'calibrating' the road surface micro- and macroroughness-altering work,
however, is extremely complicated, on account of the effectiveness of the work depending
significantly on numerous partly or totally uncontrollable factors. For example, the
effectiveness of the work is strongly affected by sunlight and ambient temperature
and humidity, not only when laying the asphalt but also during the maturation period.
For example, asphalt laid in summer is normally harder and more compact than asphalt
laid in winter, and is therefore normally less responsive to the road surface micro-
or macroroughness-altering work.
[0005] Road surface micro- and macroroughness-altering work is currently 'calibrated' solely
on the basis of experience, but is very often 'calibrated' wrongly, with the result
that it has to be redone (best case scenario) or the asphalt has to be removed and
re-laid (worst case scenario).
[0006] Patent US7850395B1 describes a road surface roughness analysis system, in which a wheel-mounted vehicle
is run parallel to the road, and is equipped with an optical profilograph directed
onto and for continuously measuring the roughness of the road surface. On the basis
of the profilograph measurements, the road surface may be worked further, e.g. smoothed,
to bring it up to specifications.
DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
[0007] It is an object of the present invention to provide a method of working a blacktop
road surface to a target microroughness and target macroroughness, designed to eliminate
the above drawbacks, and which in particular is cheap and easy to implement.
[0008] According to the present invention, there is provided a method of working a blacktop
road surface to a target microroughness and target macroroughness, as claimed in the
accompanying Claims.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0009] A non-limiting embodiment of the present invention will be described by way of example
with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which:
Figure 1 shows a schematic of a blacktop road surface worked using the method according
to the present invention;
Figure 2 shows a schematic front view of a device for measuring the micro- and macroroughness
of the Figure 1 road surface;
Figures 3 and 4 show roughness test result graphs of the Figure 1 road surface;
Figure 5 shows a graph of macroroughness mathematical processing in accordance with
the method of the present invention;
Figure 6 shows a schematic front view of a first processing device for processing
the Figure 1 road surface and which substantially works on macroroughness;
Figure 7 shows a graph of microroughness mathematical processing in accordance with
the method of the present invention;
Figure 8 shows a schematic plan view of a second processing device for processing
the Figure 1 road surface and which substantially works on microroughness;
Figure 9 shows a schematic side view of the second processing device in Figure 8.
PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION
[0010] Number 1 in Figure 1 indicates as a whole a tyre test area, which is in the form
of a strip (roughly 1.5-3 metres wide and 20-50 metres long) and comprises an asphalted
road surface 2, i.e. made of a bituminous conglomerate of aggregate (substantially
pebbles), which forms the solid skeleton, and bitumen, which binds (i.e. 'glues')
the aggregate together.
[0011] The main characteristics of road surface 2 are microroughness or microtexture, which
relates to roughness with a horizontal wavelength λ of below 0.5 mm; and macroroughness
or macrotexture, which relates to roughness with a horizontal wavelength λ of 0.5
to 50 mm.
[0012] As shown in Figure 2, the micro- and macroroughness of road surface 2 are measured
using an optical measuring device 3, which comprises a gantry supporting frame 4 spanning
road surface 2; and a laser distance meter 5, which is fitted to supporting frame
4, is positioned vertically a small distance from road surface 2, and is aimed vertically
downwards to 'observe' road surface 2. An electric motor 6 moves laser distance meter
5 along supporting frame 4 and across road surface 2, and the position of laser distance
meter 5 along supporting frame 4 is recorded by a position sensor 7 (more specifically,
a high-resolution encoder). Finally, measuring device 3 comprises a processing unit
8 for processing the readings of laser distance meter 5 and position sensor 7.
[0013] In actual use, processing unit 8 (by controlling electric motor 6) moves laser distance
meter 5 across road surface 2 on supporting frame 4, and, at the same time, records
the readings of laser distance meter 5 and position sensor 7 at given (typically constant)
measuring intervals. In other words, for each measuring point, processing unit 8 records
the distance D recorded by laser distance meter 5, and the corresponding position
X of laser distance meter 5 along supporting frame 4. Once recorded, the succession
of distance D measurements as a function of positions X is processed mathematically
(to ISO Standards) to give a synthetic indication of the roughness (divided into micro-
and macroroughness) of road surface 2. Mathematical processing typically comprises
a Fourier transform in the length domain to determine the spectrum of wavelengths
λ in the recorded profile of road surface 2.
[0014] For example, Figure 3 shows a so-called 'height histogram', i.e. the distribution
of wavelengths λ in the recorded profile : the x axis shows wavelength λ, and the
y axis the presence percentage. Figure 4 shows a so-called 'PSD - Power Spectral Density'
graph : the x axis shows (in logarithmic scale) the inverse of wavelength λ (i.e.
the 'spatial frequency'), and the y axis shows PSD (in logarithmic scale). From the
Figure 4 graph, it is possible to estimate the macroroughness MR corresponding to
the highest PSD value (at a high wavelength λ, i.e. low 'spatial frequency'), and
the microroughness µR corresponding to the lowest PSD value (at a low wavelength λ,
i.e. high 'spatial frequency').
[0015] Once the asphalt of road surface 2 of test area 1 is laid, it is allowed to mature,
and test area 1 to rest, for at least 2-4 weeks. At the end of the maturation period,
the target microroughness µR
TARGET and target macroroughness MR
TARGET of road surface 2 required for correct tyre testing are established beforehand. At
first (i.e. at the end of the maturation period), road surface 2 has a more or less
thick surface layer of bitumen 'concealing' the aggregate underneath, so its actual
microroughness is normally very high (i.e. much higher than target microroughness
µR
TARGET), and its macroroughness is normally very low (i.e. much lower than target macroroughness
MR
TARGET) At the end of the maturation period, road surface 2 must therefore be worked to
reduce its microroughness to target microroughness µR
TARGET, and increase its macroroughness to target macroroughness MR
TARGET.
[0016] Firstly, the initial macroroughness MR
START of road surface 2 is measured using measuring device 3 described above. A limited
calibration portion 9 of road surface 2 (Figure 1) of test area 1 is then defined.
Calibration portion 9 is roughly one metre long, and typically located at one end
of test area 1. A number of first jobs, differing from one another by at least one
work parameter V, are performed on different sections 10 of calibration portion 9.
In other words, a first job, with a first work parameter V, is performed on a first
section 10 of calibration portion 9 of road surface 2; a first job, with a second
work parameter V different from first work parameter V, is performed on a second section
10 of calibration portion 9 of road surface 2; a first job, with a third work parameter
V different from the first and second work parameters V, is performed on a third section
10 of calibration portion 9 of road surface 2, and so on (roughly four to eight first
jobs, with respective different work parameters V, are performed on respective sections
10 of calibration portion 9).
[0017] The first jobs have a significant effect on the macroroughness of road surface 2,
and only a limited (substantially negligible) effect on the microroughness of road
surface 2.
[0018] The final macroroughness MR
END of road surface 2 is measured after each first job performed on calibration portion
9 of road surface 2 (i.e. on each section 10 of calibration portion 9). And the Figure
5 work parameter V/macroroughness MR graph can be constructed by plotting the test
points corresponding to the first jobs performed on sections 10 of calibration portion
9. Using amply documented mathematical techniques, the best work parameter V
TARGET to achieve target macroroughness MR
TARGET can be extrapolated from the test points in the Figure 5 graph as a function of the
final macroroughness MR
END measurements of the first jobs. For example, as shown in Figure 5, a curve is drawn
approximating the test points (i.e. measurements) of the first jobs in the work parameter
V/macroroughness MR plane, and is subsequently used to determine the best work parameter
V
TARGET as a function of target macroroughness MR
TARGET.
[0019] Once the best work parameter V
TARGET is determined, the first job is performed over the whole of road surface 2 using
the best work parameter V
TARGET. After the first job, the whole of road surface 2 (except for calibration portion
9, which is no longer used) therefore has a final macroroughness MR
END substantially equal to target macroroughness MR
TARGET.
[0020] As shown in Figure 6, each first job comprises dry blasting road surface 2 using
a dry blasting device 11. Dry blasting device 11 comprises a gantry frame 12 resting
on opposite sides of and spanning road surface 2; and a dry blasting head 13 facing
road surface 2, fitted movably to gantry frame 12, and moved across road surface 2
by an electric motor 14. Gantry frame 12 is preferably movable along road surface
2 on two rails 15 parallel to and on opposite sides of road surface 2. In actual use,
dry blasting head 13 is moved along gantry frame 12, across road surface 2, to dry
blast a strip of road surface 2 (of a longitudinal dimension of a few centimetres);
and, once one 'sweep' of road surface 2 is completed, gantry frame 12 is moved longitudinally
along rails 15 to 'sweep' another strip of road surface 2.
[0021] In a preferred embodiment, work parameter V is the travelling speed (crosswise) of
dry blasting head 13. As shown clearly in Figure 5, the higher work parameter V is
(i.e. the faster dry blasting head 13 travels), the lower macroroughness MR is. In
other words, increasing the travelling speed of dry blasting head 13 reduces the amount
of bitumen it removes, thus producing a 'smoother' road surface 2 (i.e. with a lower
macroroughness MR). In a preferred embodiment, the first jobs only differ by work
parameter V, i.e. only work parameter V differs from one first job to another, and
all the other parameters (e.g. dry blasting pressure, dry blasting material type and
size, and distance between dry blasting head 13 and road surface 2 ...) remain unchanged,
thus making the calibration process much simpler and more effective (i.e. in obtaining
a more accurate, more repeatable target macroroughness MR
TARGET).
[0022] In a different embodiment not shown, the first job, as opposed to dry blasting, comprises
directing a high-pressure water jet onto road surface 2. By way of a further alternative,
the first job, as opposed to dry blasting, may comprise applying road surface 2 with
chemical solvents (e.g. petrol or diesel fuel), the action of which, however, is much
more difficult to control.
[0023] After the first job is completed over the whole of road surface 2, the initial microroughness
µR
START of road surface 2 is measured using device 3. A limited calibration portion 16 of
road surface 2 (Figure 1) of test area 1 is then defined. Calibration portion 16 is
roughly one metre long, is typically located at one end of test area 1, and differs
from and is located alongside calibration portion 9 (which at this stage is ignored).
A number of second jobs, differing from one another by at least one work parameter
P, are performed on calibration portion 16. In other words, a second job with different
work parameters P is performed on calibration portion 16 of road surface 2 (roughly
four to eight second jobs with respective different work parameters P are performed).
[0024] The second jobs have a significant effect on the microroughness of road surface 2,
and only a limited (substantially negligible) effect on the macroroughness of road
surface 2.
[0025] The final microroughness µR
END of road surface 2 is measured after each second job performed on calibration portion
16 of road surface 2. And the Figure 7 work parameter P/microroughness µR graph can
be constructed by plotting the test points corresponding to the second jobs performed
on calibration portion 16. Using amply documented mathematical techniques, the best
work parameter P
TARGET to achieve target microroughness µR
TARGET can be extrapolated from the test points in the Figure 7 graph as a function of the
final microroughness µR
END measurements of the second jobs. For example, as shown in Figure 7, a curve is drawn
approximating the test points (i.e. measurements) of the second jobs in the work parameter
P/microroughness µR plane, and is subsequently used to determine the best work parameter
P
TARGET as a function of target microroughness µR
TARGET.
[0026] Once the best work parameter P
TARGET is determined, the second job is performed over the whole of road surface 2 using
the best work parameter P
TARGET. After the second job, the whole of road surface 2 (except for calibration portions
9 and 16, which are no longer used) therefore has a final microroughness µR
END substantially equal to target microroughness µR
TARGET (as well as a final macroroughness MR
END substantially equal to target macroroughness MR
TARGET).
[0027] As shown in Figures 8 and 9, each second job comprises drawing along road surface
2 (at a speed of roughly 1-15 cm/sec) a truck 17 mounted on rubber-tyred wheels 18,
which are locked to slide along road surface 2. Truck 17 preferably comprises at least
two separate axles 19, each of which supports a respective number of wheels 18, and
is locked by a releasable lock to prevent wheels 18 from rotating. Wheels 18 on the
two axles 19 are staggered, so that the footprint of each wheel 18 is complementary
to and does not overlap those of the other wheels 18. In a preferred embodiment, each
second job comprises wetting road surface 2 with water prior to passage of truck 17,
to prevent the tyres of wheels 18 from leaving large amounts of rubber on road surface
2 (i.e. to prevent 'rubber coating' road surface 2).
[0028] In a preferred embodiment, work parameter P is the number of passes of truck 17 along
road surface 2. For example, truck 17 is drawn 30 times along the whole of calibration
portion 16 with wheels 18 locked, and final microroughness µR
END after 30 passes is measured; truck 17 is then drawn another 30 times along the whole
of calibration portion 16 with wheels 18 locked, and final microroughness µR
END after 60 passes is measured; truck 17 is then drawn another 30 times along the whole
of calibration portion 16 with wheels 18 locked, and final microroughness µR
END after 90 passes is measured, and so on.
[0029] As shown clearly in Figure 7, the higher work parameter P is (i.e. the greater the
number of passes of truck 17), the lower microroughness µR is. In other words, increasing
the number of passes of truck 17 increases the 'smoothing' effect, thus producing
a 'smoother' road surface 2 (i.e. with a lower microroughness µR). In a preferred
embodiment, the second jobs only differ from one another by work parameter P, i.e.
only work parameter P differs from one second job to another, and all the other parameters
(i.e. tyre inflation pressure, the total mass of truck 17, the draw speed of truck
17 ...) remain unchanged, thus making the calibration process much simpler and more
effective (i.e. in obtaining a more accurate, more repeatable target microroughness
µR
TARGET).
[0030] In a different embodiment not shown, as opposed to a truck 17 with locked wheels
18, the second job comprises smoothing or abrading road surface 2 mechanically with
a smoothing tool.
[0031] In one possible embodiment, target macroroughness MR
TARGET is increased slightly (by roughly 5-10%) to allow for the effect of the second job
on the macroroughness of road surface 2 when extrapolating the best work parameter
V
TARGET. In other words, albeit limited, the second job performed over the whole of road
surface 2 to achieve target microroughness µR
TARGET of road surface 2 still has some effect on (i.e. slightly reduces) the macroroughness
of the road surface. The effect of the second job on the macroroughness of the road
surface may either be ignored, or taken into account by slightly increasing target
macroroughness MR
TARGET when extrapolating the best work parameter V
TARGET (i.e. after the first job, macroroughness is slightly higher than target macroroughness
MR
TARGET, and, after the second job, substantially equals target macroroughness MR
TARGET).
[0032] The method described of working road surface 2 has numerous advantages.
[0033] Firstly, it provides for accurately achieving both the target macroroughness MR
TARGET and target microroughness µR
TARGET of road surface 2 of test area 1. This is made possible by the preliminary calibration
work carried out on calibration portions 9 and 16, which provides for accurately determining
the best work parameters V
T and P
T, taking into account all the possible variables more or less affecting the characteristics
of road surface 2.
[0034] Secondly, the method described is fast and easy to implement, by simply involving,
with respect to known methods, a few additional jobs (identical to those carried out
over the whole of road surface 2) and a few additional roughness measurements (also
identical to those performed on road surface 2) on very limited calibration portions
9 and 16.
1. A method of working a blacktop road surface (2) to a target microroughness (µR
TARGET) and a target macroroughness (MR
TARGET); the method comprising the steps of:
measuring the initial macroroughness (MRSTART) of the road surface (2);
performing a number of first jobs, differing from one another by at least one first
work parameter (V), on a limited first calibration portion (9) of the road surface
(2);
measuring the final macroroughness (MREND) of the road surface (2) at the end of each first job;
extrapolating the best first work parameter (VTARGET), to achieve the target macroroughness (MRTARGET), as a function of the final macroroughness (MREND) measurements of the first jobs; and
performing the first job, using the best first work parameter (VTARGET), over the
whole road surface (2).
2. A method as claimed in Claim 1, wherein each first job comprises dry blasting the
road surface (2) with a dry blasting device (11).
3. A method as claimed in Claim 2, wherein the dry blasting device (11) comprises :
a gantry frame (12) resting on opposite sides of and extending across the road surface
(2); and
a dry blasting head (13) directed onto the road surface (2) and fitted to the gantry
frame (12) to move across the road surface (2).
4. A method as claimed in Claim 3, wherein the gantry frame (12) is mounted to move along
the road surface (2) on two rails (15) parallel to and on opposite sides of the road
surface (2).
5. A method as claimed in Claim 2, 3 or 4, wherein the first work parameter (V) is the
travelling speed of the dry blasting head (13).
6. A method as claimed in Claim 1, wherein each first job comprises directing a high-pressure
water jet onto the road surface (2).
7. A method as claimed in one of Claims 1 to 6, wherein the first jobs differ from one
another solely by a first work parameter (V).
8. A method as claimed in one of Claims 1 to 7, and comprising, after performing the
first job over the whole road surface (2), the further steps of :
measuring the initial microroughness (µRSTART) of the road surface (2);
performing a number of second jobs, differing from one another by at least one second
work parameter (P), on a limited second calibration portion (16) of the road surface
(2);
measuring the final microroughness (µREND) of the road surface (2) at the end of each second job;
extrapolating the best second work parameter (PTARGET), to achieve the target microroughness (µRTARGET), as a function of the final microroughness (µREND) measurements of the second jobs; and
performing the second job, using the best second work parameter (PTARGET), over the whole road surface (2).
9. A method as claimed in Claim 8, wherein each second job comprises drawing along the
road surface (2) a truck (17) mounted on rubber-tyred wheels (18), which are locked
to skid on the road surface (2).
10. A method as claimed in Claim 9, wherein each second job comprises wetting the road
surface (2) with water prior to passage of the truck (17).
11. A method as claimed in Claim 9, wherein the second work parameter (P) is the number
of passes of the truck (17) along the road surface (2).
12. A method as claimed in Claim 8, 10 or 11, wherein the second jobs differ from one
another solely by a second work parameter (P).
13. A method as claimed in Claim 8, wherein each second job comprises subjecting the road
surface (2) to mechanical smoothing or abrasion using a smoothing tool.
14. A method as claimed in one of Claims 8 to 13, wherein the second calibration portion
(16) differs from the first calibration portion (9).
15. A method as claimed in one of Claims 8 to 14, and comprising the further step of slightly
increasing the target macroroughness (MRTARGET) to extrapolate the best first work parameter (VTARGET), so as to take into account the effect of the second job on the macroroughness of
the road surface (2).
16. A method as claimed in one of Claims 1 to 15, wherein extrapolating the best first/second
work parameter (VTARGET; PTARGET) comprises determining a curve approximating the first/second job measurements in
the work parameter (V; P)/roughness (MR;µR) plane.