Abstract

Like all test devices, a British pendulum tester has to be calibrated to ensure that its measurements are correct and accurate within acceptable limits. The ASTM E303 and BS EN 13036-4 standards present two established and widely followed calibration procedures for the British pendulum tester. Though similar in most aspects, there are some differences in the two calibration procedures. This study examines the impacts on British pendulum test (BPT) results of the calibration requirements of the two standards by means of a finite element BPT simulation model developed based on theories of mechanics. The simulation model is applied to analyze the range of variations in the test values of BPT devices with different operating parameter values within the allowable limits of the two standard procedures. It is found that two BPT devices both satisfying the ASTM E303 calibration requirements could produce measurements with a difference of more than 60 % of their mean test value, and for BS EN 13036-4 it is more than 25 %. It means that different BPT devices, all meeting necessary calibration and precision requirements of either of the two standards, could give different test values that might lead to different skid resistance assessments of the pavement tested. This is unsatisfactory for practical applications in skid resistance evaluation of pavements. Based on analyses of the simulation model, this study proposed revised calibration limits to achieve more acceptable magnitudes of differences between the measurements made by different BPT devices.

References

1.
Standard Test Method for Measuring Surface Frictional Properties Using the British Pendulum Tester
, ASTM E303-93 (2018) (
West Conshohocken, PA
:
ASTM International
, approved May 1,
2018
), https://doi.org/10.1520/E0303-93R18
2.
Road and Airfield Surface Characteristics—Test Methods—Method for Measurement of Slip/Skid Resistance of a Surface: The Pendulum Test
, BS EN 13036-4 (
London
:
British Standards Institute
,
2011
).
3.
Dravitzki
V. K.
,
Wood
C. W. B.
,
Ball
G. F. A.
, and
Patrick
J. E.
,
Assessing Road Surface Friction with the British Pendulum Tester, in New Zealand, Transfund New Zealand Research Report 73
(
Wellington, New Zealand
:
Transfund New Zealand
,
1997
).
4.
Ahammed
M. A.
and
Tighe
S. L.
, “
Effect of Short-Term and Long-Term Weather on Pavement Surface Friction
,”
International Journal of Pavement Research & Technology
3
, no. 
6
(November
2010
):
295
302
, https://doi.org/10.6135/ijprt.org.tw/2010.3(6).295
5.
Austroads
Guidance for the Development of Policy to Manage Skid Resistance, Report AP-R374/11
(
Sydney, Australia
:
Austroads
,
2011
).
6.
Chu
L.
,
Cui
X.
,
Zhang
K.
,
Fwa
T. F.
, and
Han
S.
, “
Directional Skid Resistance Characteristics of Road Pavement: Implications for Friction Measurements by British Pendulum Tester and Dynamic Friction Tester
,”
Transportation Research Record
2673
, no. 
10
(October
2019
):
793
803
, https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119851453
7.
Henry
J. J.
,
Evaluation of Pavement Friction Characteristics, NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 291
(
Washington, DC
:
Transportation Research Board
,
2000
).
8.
Kulakowski
B. T.
,
Henry
J. J.
, and
Lin
C.
, “A Closed-Loop Calibration Procedure for a British Pendulum Tester,” in
Surface Characteristics of Roadways: International Research and Technologies
, ed.
Meyer
W.
and
Reichert
J.
(
West Conshohocken, PA
:
ASTM International
,
1990
),
103
112
, https://doi.org/10.1520/STP23356S
9.
Hiti
M.
and
Ducman
V.
, “
Analysis of the Slider Force Calibration Procedure for the British Pendulum Skid Resistance Tester
,”
Measurement Science and Technology
25
, no. 
2
(January
2014
): 025013, https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/25/2/025013
10.
Liu
Y.
,
Fwa
T. F.
, and
Choo
Y. S.
, “
Finite-Element Modeling of Skid Resistance Test
,”
Journal of Transportation Engineering
129
, no. 
3
(May
2003
):
316
321
, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2003)129:3(316)
11.
Chu
L.
,
Guo
W.
, and
Fwa
T. F.
, “
Theoretical and Practical Engineering Significance of British Pendulum Test
,”
International Journal of Pavement Engineering
. Published ahead of print, February 17,
2020
, https://doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2020.1726351
12.
Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen
ABAQUS/Explicit User’s Manual, Version 2018
(
Pawtucket, RI
:
Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen
,
2018
).
13.
Sabey
B. E.
and
Lupton
G. N.
, “
Friction on Wet Surfaces of Tire-Tread-Type Vulcanizates
,”
Rubber Chemistry and Technology
37
, no. 
4
(
1964
):
878
893
, https://doi.org/10.5254/1.3540385
14.
Gandhi
P. M
,
Colucci
B.
, and
Gandhi
S. P.
, “
Polishing of Aggregates and Wet-Weather Accident Rates for Flexible Pavements
,”
Transportation Research Record
1300
(
1991
):
71
79
.
15.
Serigos
P. A.
,
Smit
A. D. F.
, and
Prozzi
J. A.
, “
Incorporating Surface Microtexture in the Prediction of Skid Resistance of Flexible Pavements
,”
Transportation Research Record
2457
, no. 
1
(January
2014
):
105
113
, https://doi.org/10.3141/2457-11
16.
Pagola
M.
and
Giovanon
O.
, “
Aggregate Polish Value and Its Consideration in Skid Prediction Models Developed in Argentina
,” in
Eighth International Conference on Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Pavements
(
Singapore
:
Research Publishing Services
,
2016
), 108.
17.
Siriphun
S.
,
Horpibulsuk
S.
,
Chotisakul
S.
,
Suddeepong
A.
,
Chinkulkijniwat
A.
, and
Arulrajah
A.
, “
Effect of Cumulative Traffic and Statistical Predictive Modelling of Field Skid Resistance
,”
Road Materials and Pavement Design
20
, no. 
2
(
2019
):
426
439
, https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2017.1385511
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.