ASTM D7585 D7585M-2010(2015) 2112 Standard Practice for Evaluating Retroreflective Pavement Markings Using Portable Hand-Operated Instruments《用便携式手动操作仪评估反光路标的标准实施规程》.pdf

《ASTM D7585 D7585M-2010(2015) 2112 Standard Practice for Evaluating Retroreflective Pavement Markings Using Portable Hand-Operated Instruments《用便携式手动操作仪评估反光路标的标准实施规程》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ASTM D7585 D7585M-2010(2015) 2112 Standard Practice for Evaluating Retroreflective Pavement Markings Using Portable Hand-Operated Instruments《用便携式手动操作仪评估反光路标的标准实施规程》.pdf（6页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Designation: D7585/D7585M 10 (Reapproved 2015)Standard Practice forEvaluating Retroreflective Pavement Markings UsingPortable Hand-Operated Instruments1This standard is issued under the fixed designation D7585/D7585M; the number immediately following the designation indicates theyear of original ado

2、ption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of lastreapproval. A superscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This practice describes several field techniques to evalu-ate the retro

3、reflective properties of pavement markings con-taining retroreflecting optics (for example, centerlines andedgelines) and applied to the road surface. The techniquesdescribed in this practice contain sampling criteria such as thelength of test sections and the number of measurementsneeded. The pract

4、ice is based on retroreflective measurementsmade with portable hand-operated instruments in compliancewith Test Method E1710.1.2 The data obtained from this practice can be used todetermine the acceptance or rejection of a project based onspecified levels of retroreflectivity established by the agen

5、cyhaving jurisdiction.1.3 This practice can be used for the evaluation of newlyinstalled or existing pavement markings. When testing newlyapplied pavement markings, it is recommended that the evalu-ation be done no sooner than 48 hours after application butbefore 30 days after application so that ex

6、cess retroreflectiveoptics, such as glass spheres, are no longer present.1.4 The assessment techniques in this practice are based onbest practices and designed to provide three levels of confi-dence in terms of quantifying the retroreflective performanceof markings. Each technique represents a trade

7、off between thenumber of measurements and the confidence of the retroreflec-tive performance of the markings under study.1.5 This practice can be used by agencies as is or may becustomized to meet an agencys specific needs. Whereapplicable, the practice describes areas where different as-sumptions c

8、ould be made, which would impact the samplingneeds and the confidence levels of the results. When deviationsfrom this practice are made, they shall be documented in thetest report.NOTE 1When measuring newly installed pavement markings, thereare several factors that contribute to erroneous values for

9、 measurementsmade within a short time after application, such as excess retroreflectiveoptics, top-coatings on tape, incomplete curing of the binder, and coatingson the retroreflective optics. Retroreflective measurements taken within 48h after application may be useful to quickly gauge the applicat

10、ion qualitybut are not intended to be used with this practice.NOTE 2When measuring existing or in-service pavement markings,care should be taken so that representative sections of pavement markingsare measured. There are particular conditions where excessive pavementmarking wear can be associated wi

11、th a specific cause such as vehicletracking along horizontal curves, access points to gravel pits, and highweave areas. Pavement markings can also collect dirt, grime, and debris.1.6 This practice replaces Test Method D6359 with amulti-level strategy for evaluating the retroreflectance of pave-ment

12、marking materials. This change was desired to provideagencies with options for project acceptance and monitoring ofpavement markings during service.1.7 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound unitsare to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated ineach system may not be exact

13、equivalents; therefore, eachsystem shall be used independently of the other. Combiningvalues from the two systems may result in non-conformancewith the standard.1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of the us

14、er of this standard to establish appro-priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2D4061 Test Method for Retroreflectance of Horizontal Coat-ingsD6359 Specification for Minimum Retroreflectance

15、ofNewly Applied Pavement Marking Using Portable Hand-Operated Instruments (Withdrawn 2006)3E284 Terminology of Appearance1This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D04 on Road andPaving Materials and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D04.38 onHighway Traffic Control Materi

16、als.Current edition approved Dec. 1, 2015. Published February 2016. Originallyapproved in 2010. Last previous edition approved in 2010 as D7585/D7585M 10.DOI: 10.1520/D7585_D7585M-10R15.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, orcontact ASTM Customer Service at serviceas

17、tm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page onthe ASTM website.3The last approved version of this historical standard is referenced onwww.astm.org.Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 194

18、28-2959. United States1E808 Practice for Describing RetroreflectionE1710 Test Method for Measurement of RetroreflectivePavement Marking Materials with CEN-Prescribed Ge-ometry Using a Portable Retroreflectometer3. Terminology3.1 The terms and definitions in Terminology E284 andPractice E808 are appl

19、icable to this specification.3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:3.2.1 acceptable quality level, AQL, nthe maximum per-cent defective that, for purposes of sampling inspection, can beconsidered satisfactory as a process average (that is, thepercent defective that can be tolerated with

20、out impairingperformance).3.2.1.1 DiscussionThis is the maximum allowable propor-tion of pavement marking readings with values below specifi-cation.3.2.2 evaluation sectionthe specific area of the pavementmarking along which measurements will be made.3.2.3 limit quality, LQ, nlimit of the AQL that i

21、sacceptable, providing a specified limited quality for protection.3.2.3.1 DiscussionThis is the proportion of pavementmarking readings with values below the acceptable level,which in the worst case, would be allowed.3.2.4 producers riskthe risk the producer of the markingtakes that the marking will

22、fail the requirement specified whenthe marking is actually acceptable.3.2.4.1 DiscussionIf the population of the entire pavementmarking fulfills the specification, there is still the probabilitythat the sampling of the marking will fall below the requiredlevel as specified. This is designated the ri

23、sk (alpha risk).3.2.5 users riskthe risk the owner of the marking takesthat the marking will meet the requirement specified when themarking retroreflectivity is actually substandard.3.2.5.1 DiscussionIf the population of the entire pavementmarking fails the specification, there is still the probabil

24、ity thatthe sampling of the marking will equal or exceed the requiredlevel as specified. This is designated the risk (beta risk).4. Summary of Practice4.1 This practice does not set the minimum retroreflectancevalues for newly installed pavement markings or minimummaintenance levels of pavement mark

25、ings. It is the responsi-bility of the agency having jurisdiction to set the acceptableretroreflectivity values within their specifications.4.2 This practice describes assessment techniques (includ-ing sampling criteria) to evaluate the retroreflective perfor-mance of pavement markings, which can th

26、en be used todetermine compliance to a referenced specification. Morespecifically, this practice includes:4.2.1 A nighttime visual inspection protocol to inspect theappearance of the markings and identify sections that appear tohave inadequate retroreflectivity levels.4.2.2 A standard evaluation pro

27、tocol, which provides areasonable measure of assurance that the retroreflectivity datacollected with hand-held devices is representative of themarkings being evaluated. The protocol was designed torequire a minimum number of measurements while maintain-ing confidence with the results.4.2.3 Amore rig

28、orous evaluation protocol, which provides ahigher level of assurance that the retroreflectivity data collectedwith hand-held devices is representative of the marking beingevaluated. This protocol requires an intensive measurementprotocol and should be used as the referee method to resolvedisputes re

29、garding the status of a marking.4.3 The three assessment techniques described in 4.2 weredesigned so that they could be used independently of oneanother. In other words, an agency can specify the use of aspecific assessment technique, a combination, or all three.Furthermore, they are not meant to be

30、 used sequentially for allevaluations, but that is certainly an option.5. Significance and Use5.1 This practice provides procedures for the determinationof the retroreflective performance of pavement markings. Thispractice does not set the minimum retroreflectance values forpavement markings, it des

31、cribes sampling criteria for deter-mining the retroreflective properties of pavement markings,which then can be used to determine compliance with aspecification. It is the responsibility of the agency havingjurisdiction to set the acceptable retroreflectivity values withintheir own specifications.5.

32、2 This practice does not purport to address all the con-cerns regarding contamination of the markings, but the follow-ing may be helpful. It is very important that the markings beingevaluated are clean and dry. If the evaluation is being usedrelative to a measure of the performance of a contractor,

33、it isimperative that the parties agree beforehand on the definition ofclean and dry. There are many forms of contamination on aroadway that will lower the retroreflectivity readings of amarking, but not all of them can be removed. Asphalt oil andrubber skid marks are examples. Loose dirt can be remo

34、ved bypressure washing, perhaps using soap, brushing or high-pressure air, however, these techniques are usually insufficientto remove dirt that is packed into the marking surface. Careshould be taken to select areas that are typical of the markingsection, avoiding areas of paint tracking or contami

35、nation, forexample. It may be useful to take photographs using a digitalcamera and a good macro lens to be able to see the contami-nation on or between the glass beads.6. Procedure6.1 Standardization of Portable Hand-Operated Retrore-flective Measurement Instruments:6.1.1 Before taking measurements,

36、 the retroreflectometer(s)shall be standardized with an instrument standard as defined inTest Method D4061.6.1.2 When more than one instrument is used, the instru-ments should be compared to a known standard in order todetermine the characteristics of the specific instrument. Thesecharacteristics sh

37、ould be noted and taken into account whenrecording values.6.2 Nighttime Visual Inspection Protocol:D7585/D7585M 10 (2015)26.2.1 This technique may be used to assess newly installedmarkings, and to assess the performance of in-service mark-ings. This technique may be used to assess all types ofpaveme

38、nt markings.6.2.2 Schedule a night to conduct the visual inspection ofthe project so that the pavement markings are dry and theambient weather conditions are free of rain, fog, or other typesof precipitation.6.2.3 A representative automobile or light passenger truckshall be used for the inspection.

39、The headlamps shall be ingood working condition and aimed correctly.6.2.4 The inspection shall be conducted in full nighttimeconditions (after civil twilight) with the vehicle headlamps onlow beam.6.2.5 Inspect all the markings visually through the wind-shield while driving at the posted speed.6.2.6

40、 Look for areas that appear to lack the luminanceexpected based on the specified retroreflectivity or lack theexpected uniformity. Look for inconsistent areas where theluminance is below what could be expected for the pavementmarking system being inspected. The use of an inspectionpanel with a known

41、 retroreflective level, which provides aknown luminance level under given observation conditions,may be useful to identify inadequate sections. When conduct-ing inspections of in-service markings (not newly appliedmarkings), it is helpful to use multiple inspectors with exper-tise in pavement markin

42、g retroreflectivity.6.2.7 If suspect areas are identified, note the locations.During a subsequent daytime inspection, ensure that themarkings are representative and without excessive wear causedby such factors as a nearby gravel pit or in proximity to a highweave area. Evaluate the suspect areas in

43、accordance with 6.3Standard Evaluation Protocol or 6.4 Referee Evaluation Pro-tocol to determine compliance to the required specification.6.2.8 If no suspect areas are identified, record a minimum offour measurements and calculate the average. The averagedretroreflectivity level shall be used to det

44、ermine compliancewith the appropriate specification.6.3 Standard Evaluation Protocol:6.3.1 This technique is intended for longitudinal markingssuch as edgelines, lane lines, and centerlines. It is not intendedto be used for pavement marking symbols, intersectionmarkings, crosswalks, or other non-lon

45、gitudinal pavementmarkings. Use 6.2 or 6.4 to evaluate the retroreflectivity ofnon-longitudinal pavement markings.6.3.2 All measurements shall be made in the direction oftravel. On the centerline of undivided highways, measurementsshall be made in both directions unless otherwise specified bythe age

46、ncy having jurisdiction.6.3.3 The evaluation sections can be obtained through theNighttime Visual Inspection Protocol described in 6.2 (areasidentified as being suspect). The evaluation sections can alsobe defined by the agency having jurisdiction, particularly if theNighttime Visual Inspection Prot

47、ocol described in 6.2 is notused.6.3.4 The evaluation sections should be at least 400 ft 125m and clearly identified. There should be at least 3 evaluationsections per pavement marking of interest (unless the pavementmarking of interest is less than 2 miles 3 km, in which casea minimum of one evalua

48、tion section is needed). For pavementmarking lines longer than 10 miles 16 km , the agency havingjurisdiction may elect to specify more than three evaluationsections (such as three evaluation sections per 10 miles 16km). Measurements should be taken at regular intervalsthroughout the evaluation sect

49、ion. For lane lines and brokencenterlines, two measurements should be taken on each skipline.6.3.5 Once safe conditions are provided, portable hand-operated retroreflective measurements can be taken for eachevaluation section. The intent is to take enough measurementsto be confident that the mean of the measurements are close tothe true mean retroreflectivity of the measurement sectionwhile minimizing the number of measurements needed. Therecommended number of measurements is 16 per section, asdescribed in Annex A1.6.3.6 Once the measurements are recorded,