Long-Term Pavement Performance Automated Faulting Measurement
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields



Publication Date Range:


Document Data


Document Type:






Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page


Long-Term Pavement Performance Automated Faulting Measurement

Filetype[PDF-1.08 MB]

  • English

  • Details:

    • Publication/ Report Number:
    • Resource Type:
    • Geographical Coverage:
    • NTL Classification:
    • Abstract:
      This study focused on identifying transverse joint locations on jointed plain concrete pavements using an automated joint detection algorithm and computing faulting at these locations using Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) Program profile data collected by the program’s high-speed inertial profilers (HSIP). This study evaluated two existing American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials R 36-12 automated faulting measurement (AFM) models: ProVAL (Method-A) and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) PaveSuite (Method-B). A new LTPP AFM was developed using LTPP profile data. The LTPP AFM is an automated algorithm to identify joint locations where faulting is also computed for each joint identified to replicate the manually collected faulting data using the Georgia Faultmeter (GFM), which has been used on LTPP test sections since the program’s inception. The study compared the LTPP manual faulting measurements collected using the GFM with the ProVAL AFM and the LTPP AFM using LTPP profile data. Similarly, the FDOT GFM measurements were compared with the FDOT PaveSuite AFM and the LTPP AFM using the same FDOT profile data. The initial results for six LTPP test sections show that the LTPP AFM can identify joint locations with a joint detection rate (JDR) ranging from 95 to 100 percent. ProVAL’s JDR range is from 58 to 99 percent for the same six LTPP test sections. Similarly, for the one FDOT test section available, the LTPP AFM’s and FDOT PaveSuite’s JDRs are approximately 96 percent. This study outlines the LTPP AFM algorithm, discusses the comparison of the three AFM results, and recommends future research needs in this area.
    • Format:
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    • No Additional Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov

    Version 3.26