Abstract Manager

Pavement condition data is a vital component of any pavement management system. The choice of an appropriate pavement condition indicator varies based on the agency's objectives. Across Canada, various provinces and territories utilize different condition indicators—ranging from well-known indices to simpler, localized measures. For instance, municipalities in B.C. frequently use the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) based on ASTM D6433, whereas Ontario municipalities and the Yukon Government employ a localized PCI derived from the Distress Manifestation Index (DMI). Furthermore, Alberta's Ministry of Transportation (MOT) and certain agencies adopt a localized Visual Condition Index (VCI) for reporting surface conditions.

Additionally, transitioning from manual surveys to automated pavement distress data collection introduces challenges, especially in achieving repeatability and accuracy of the condition indicator. Regions may face unique obstacles due to the diversity of road types and environmental conditions.

This study begins by comparing the ASTM D6433 PCI framework with other pavement indices to identify best practices and methodologies for condition reporting. The ASTM PCI was found to provide a more precise depiction of pavement conditions than other indices. Another goal of the study is to determine the causes of ASTM PCI repeatability issues faced by some agencies when using the Laser Crack Measurement System (LCMS) for distress detection. It further investigates which distress types or severities impact PCI values and their repeatability for municipalities. Identified challenges include classifying wheel longitudinal cracking as low-severity fatigue cracking, rut measurement on specific roads, and reporting low percentages of moderate to high severity distress near objects or along shoulders. Finally, the study proposes adjustments to ASTM standards for automated data collection, considering road classifications and environmental variations, particularly in northern and colder regions.