Talk:Road surface

Untitled

I see that the British use of the word 'pavement' has been pushed down into it's own page entitled 'Pavement (British English)'. When there are regional variations such as this, please consider making any 'disambiguation' consistent. IE, please consider renaming this article 'Pavement (US English)'. Hopefully, do this would avoid causing offence unnecessarily.

Glad someone moved the British English reference to the top of the article. MARussellPESE 17:36, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

The A-Road Dual Carriageway Pavement Campign

My campaign is for a pavement to be put along all A-Road dual carriageways inb Britain to make it safer for pedestrains.

How is this comment encyclopedic? Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 22:21, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Stress

I modified the title of this section to "Pavement deterioration" and added discussion of the design process. This was added to clarify the recent behind-the-scenes controversy over pavement damage due to truck traffic. Trucks are, in point of fact, almost entirely responsible for long-term pavement distress. This is not a controversy to civil engineers.

I added reference to the new FHwA standards for completeness.

MARussellPESE 17:36, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

There are some non-load related pavement distresses - thermal cracking in AC is probably the most common. Now, thermal cracking is addressed by proper binder selection, not the pavement structural design. Oxidation/raveling also has an environmental cause, in fact traffic appears to inhibit oxidation. On very low volume roads oxidation can be the predominant distress, otherwise it's rare. Frost heaves are another non-load related distress, although traffic loading can turn a minor frost heave problem into a major one during the spring thaw.

The main point is that while traffic loading is almost always the cause of pavement failure, pavement materials are very sensitive to environmental effects. The stiffness of subgrade materials is very sensitive to moisture content, and that of asphalt materials is sensitive to temperature. PCC slabs are sensitve to temperature gradients - curl and warp causes loss of support (coefficient of thermal expansion and built-in curl and warp of concrete slabs is currently a very active area of research). So, if you build identical pavement sections in Arizona and Maine and subject them to identical loading, you should still expect that the service life and failure mechanisims will be different. So saying that "Trucks are, in point of fact, almost entirely responsible for long-term pavement distress" is the truth but not the whole truth.

I removed the link the FHWA DGIT page. The design guide in question was developed under National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) project 1-37A for AASHTO usage, although it hasn't been adopted by AASHTO yet. FHWA is just helping state DOTs implement it. If you want to include a link, http://www.trb.org/mepdg/ or http://www4.nationalacademies.org/trb/crp.nsf/All+Projects/NCHRP+1-37A would be better. Toiyabe 01:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Metalling

This is not the American term for these kinds of roads that I can tell. These are typically called macadam here, or formally: "Stabilized." Regional usage varies widely even here. I recommend modifying the title to "Stabilized" (Yes, with a "z" as this is the American pavement article. :) ) but expand the reference to include metalling, macadam, gravel, etc. I would also recommend discussing the various ways that these are stabilized: sand-clay, calcium-chloride, portland cement, bitumen, etc. Opinions are invited. MARussellPESE 17:36, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard the terms "metalling" or "road metal", must be strictly Commonwealth-ese. I would suggest we move that content to a History section that deals with macadam, tarmac (misusage of these terms is a pet peeve of mine), brick, cobble, plank. Could also throw in telford and corduroy. Yes, a few such pavements still exist and some might even be still built, but the overall milage is tiny even on a world-wide scale. Gravel or unbound roads should get their own section.

A separate stabilization section would also be a good idea. Should include Lime (calcium oxide or hydroxide, not ag lime), portland cement, flyash, asphalt. Tar is rare in the US (I would expect to only see it in the rust-belt), but maybe not elsewhere. Calcium chloride, other chlorides and the assorted polymers are really dust palatives, though they are sometimes promoted as stabilization agents for gravel roads. There's also the term "mechanical stabilization" which referes to improving a subgrade or existing base by mixing in aggregate. Macadam and tarmac are not stabilization methods as they are intended to be the surface layer. Toiyabe 02:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Why is the emphasis on American road paving stated above??? Do we need to start a Worldpedia? eg. calling Roman water channels French Drain after an 1800s American is just so jingoist that I choke! Please be more factual and less parochial American. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strider22 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Definition

As an American, pavement refers to the material which cars, bicycles, and pedestrians may travel on, and not so much to the actual roadways, bicycle paths, and sidewalks themselves. Am I alone here?

No, that is the American engineers' usage. MARussellPESE 17:59, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

The tarmac picture

does not show a new road being laid next to the old surface... the old surface has been stripped away.

History

It would be interesting to learn more about the history of paving technology, and the reasons why it has changed. -- Beland 00:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes... I came here trying to find info to date an old photo. When did most small towns in US and other areas go from dirt roads to paved? What about larger cities? --GregU 23:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The answer is simple. Paved roads offer better performance in a wide variety of weather conditions, especially when they are more intensely trafficked. Even so the US still has many kilometres of earth roads, far more per capita than in Europe for example. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 22:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Jointed plain vs HMA?

The section on concrete states "Today, a majority of the U.S. state agencies build jointed plain pavements." At least in the Northeastern US, HMA is the favored material. Should this be "Today, a majority of the U.S. state agencies that construct concrete pavement build jointed plain pavements."

Triskele Jim 20:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Page moved

The page Pavement (material) was moved to Road surface by Parable1991 at 14:03, 5 May 2007. This appears to be a unilateral move without prior discussion. I believe it was done against standard practice, and by someone who has a history of engaging in such acts (see past warning and user edit history). I'm going to request the page be moved back and that the user be blocked. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 22:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

There actually is a strong case to be made for this move. We don't switch from one English variety to another unless we have a good reason to, but the ability to eliminate parenthetical disambiguation (which we generally attempt to avoid using whenever possible) is such a reason. Just as we moved Check (finance) to Cheque, it would make sense to move this article from Pavement (material) to Road surface. For the record, I'm American. —David Levy 01:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

AIPCR - PIARC

There is an OECD sponsored organization AIPCR - PIARC that has worked hard to standardize terminology in the road construction field. Its recommendations are apparently ignored in this article, which so far seems to be largely drawn from US sources. Road construction is an empirical kind of activity and it is difficult if not impossible to extrapolate from one particular geographical area of expertise to another. Nonetheless a standardized English for road construction does exist as does a standardized French, German, Dutch, Spanish, Italian and Russian. The standardized glossary is available from PIARC for a small sum. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 22:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Examples

I don't have any problem with examples of the various road surface types, however they need to be worded appropriately.

A line I removed was, "The Operation Division of the Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure in Saskatchewan has the responsibility of maintaining 6,102 kilometres (3,791.6 mi) of thin membrane surface"

If an example of Thin Membrane Surface is provided, it should read "There are 6,102 kilometres (3,791.6 mi) of thin membrane surface roadways in Saskatchewan"

The original phrase draws more attention on the 'responsibility of maintenance' of that road surface, and not a clear example of the road surface itself.

The same applies to the previous line under the "Granular" heading. I removed "Besides the 4,929 kilometres (3,062.7 mi) of granular pavements maintained in Saskatchewan, over 90% of New Zealand roads are unbound granular pavement structures."

I don't see the relevance of specifically mentioning roads "maintained" in Saskatchewan. I think the example written as "90% of New Zealand roads are unbound granular pavement structures" is fine, however if there's a need to cite Saskatchewan roads as well, it should focus on the example of the material and not emphasize "maintenance" of the roadways.

I think it would be more appropriate to state: "Over 90% of New Zealand roads are unbound granular pavement structures, and 4,929 kilometres (3,062.7 mi) of roads in Saskatchewan." Lowrydr310 (talk) 18:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Surface deterioration

This section lacks adequate references and contains partially substantiated material. A subject-matter expert should review the classes of deterioration systematically and provide documented sections for each. Some examples include the omission of frost-heave damage and thaw weakening, and that snow tires wear surfaces rather than cause rutting by deforming the surface. --User:HopsonRoad 23:23, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Pavement deterioration would be a better title, since cracks tend to propagate upwards from the bottom of the pavement, not down from the surface. Also, it seems to concentrate on pavement failure, when subbase and subgrade failures often contribute. Enough research has been done to fill an article of it's own, though I don't know if there would be sufficient interest outside of the civil engineering community. Reference should be made to the FHWA Distress Identification Manual (http://www.tfhrc.gov/pavement/ltpp/reports/03031/index.htm). --Triskele Jim (talk) 16:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion, Jim. As to the title, there appears to be a difference in usage between the British, who appear to have initiated the article, and us Yanks. Your main point is that failure is more systemic than just that which is visible at the surface. Perhaps an English subject-matter expert can suggest a title that works on both sides of the Atlantic! --User:HopsonRoad 18:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Some definitions?

Unimproved road redirects to here... but there isn't any explanation or definition of what that term means. Can anyone gather together some road surface terms and give their meanings? Please include the meaning sof "unimproved" and "improved". Thanks 125.215.150.94 (talk) 04:44, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Concrete repair

Concrete pavement preservation (CPP) and concrete pavement restoration (CPR) are techniques used to manage the rate of pavement deterioration on concrete streets, highways and airports. Without changing concrete grade, this non-overlay method is used to repair isolated areas of distress. CPP and CPR techniques include slab stabilization, full- and partial-depth repair, dowel bar retrofit, cross stitching longitudinal cracks or joints, diamond grinding and joint and crack resealing. CPR methods, developed over the last 40 years, are utilized in lieu of short-lived asphalt overlays and bituminous patches to repair roads. These methods are often less expensive than an asphalt overlay but last three times longer and provide a greener solution.

CPR techniques can be used to address specific problems or bring a pavement back to its original quality. When repairing a road, design data, construction data, traffic data, environmental data, previous CPR activities and pavement condition, must all be taken into account. Pavements repaired using CPR methods usually last 15 years. The methods are described below.

• Slab stabilization restores support to concrete slabs by filling small voids that develop underneath the concrete slab at joints, cracks or the pavement edge.
• Full-depth repairs fixes cracked slabs and joint deterioration by removing at least a portion of the existing slab and replacing it with new concrete.
• Partial-depth repairs corrects surface distress and joint-crack deterioration in the upper third of the concrete slab. Placing a partial-depth repair involves removing the deteriorated concrete, cleaning the patch area and placing new concrete.
• Dowel bar retrofit consists of cutting slots in the pavement across the joint or crack, cleaning the slots, placing the dowel bars and backfilling the slots with new concrete. Dowel bar retrofits link slabs together at transverse cracks and joints so that the load is evenly distributed across the crack or joint.
• Cross-stitching longitudinal cracks or joints repairs low-severity longitudinal cracks. This method adds reinforcing steel to hold the crack together tightly.
• Diamond grinding, by removing faulting, slab warping, studded tire wear and unevenness resulting from patches, diamond grinding creates a smooth, uniform pavement profile. Diamond grinding reduces road noise by providing a longitudinal texture, which is quieter than transverse textures. The longitudinal texture also enhances surface texture and skid resistance in polished pavements.
• Joint and crack sealing minimizes the infiltration of surface water and incompressible material into the joint system. Minimizing water entering the joint reduces sub-grade softening, slows pumping and erosion of the sub-base fines and may limit dowel-bar corrosion caused by de-icing chemicals.

This section is all about concrete pavements, not concrete in general - I have moved it here in case any is useful.Imgaril (talk) 17:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

References

Design life of roads and frequency of repair by type or nation?

Any leads on that? I figured it would be here in this article but the subject is beyond me to research on my own. 216.183.185.138 (talk) 15:14, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: article not moved Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{WrestleMania XXVIII} _{The Undertaker 20–0} 06:36, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

---

Road surface → Paving materials – This article started out in 2003 at pavement (or some such) and somehow wound up at this name. Ignoring the UK v. US English issues, the current name is simply wrong since it includes sidewalks which are not roads. Paving materials is mentioned in that first version and might be a better name. It also avoids the problem with surfaces for vehicles versus people in the title. One other question to consider is, is a cinder track, or a tartan track pavement? If they are, it could influence the decision here. I'm raising this following comments at CfD over Category:Pavements. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:41, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

"the current name is simply wrong since it includes sidewalks which are not roads". I don't understand that - how does the name "road surface" include sidewalks - or "pavements" as they are called in the UK? "Road surface" specifically refers to the surface of a road. Or by "it" do you mean the article? Richerman (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I think I understand now - "it" refers to the article. The problem is that the lead paragraph briefly mentions "an area intended to sustain vehicular or foot traffic" and "walkways" but the rest of the article seems to be all about roads for vehicular traffic. It would make more sense to remove those two mentions and create a seperate article on walkways. I'll even be magnanimous and suggest it should be called "Sidewalk", with "or Pavement (British English)" in the first line :-) Unfortunately "paving materials" would refer only to paving stones and blocks in the UK and not materials like poured concrete or asphalt so the proposed move would create a disambiguation problem. (see comment in the "page move" section above). Richerman (talk) 22:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

If this were split, then you would need to explain why the paving materials used for roads and sidewalks and driveways and buildings are different. I don't believe that is the case. While concrete may be different when used in a road as opposed to a sidewalk, that is due to the weight that it carries rather then the actual use. Likewise, concrete is different for a narrow one lane back road then the concrete used on a multilane high speed truck road. Concrete is also, I believe different when used on the equator rather then in permafrost areas. Also road surfaces are to some extent determined by the underlying soils. If you are creating a road over what is a drained swamp, you probably want a more flexible material where as a firmer soil can use a stiffer material. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:19, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

The fact that paving materials used for roads can also be used for lightweight applications such as sidewalks and driveways can be easily noted in a single sentence. There are, however, paving materials such as decorative lightweight concrete paving slabs that are sold for laying driveways and patios but would not be suitable for roadbuilding. Richerman (talk) 07:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, so some materials are not appropriate for roads. That still leaves the vast majority useable for roads and other surfaces. Leaving us with a badly named article. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:51, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

The techniques, strength, chemical composition, and design/thickness is completely different for sidewalk concrete and road concrete, and likewise for asphalt cycleways and roads. We don't need a separate article for the paving surface of footpaths or sidewalks, but the footpath and sidewalk articles could certainly do well with an expansion on the materials used to make them... but this article is not the place for it. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 16:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

That's a pretty good point. Now I don't know what to think. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

• Support Per Vegaswikian's points made in the above discussion. I've been trying to think of the most appropriate name, and keep coming back to paving materials. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to abstain for a while. Good opposition rationale is landing, and it's one of those finnickety topics. I still don't know what to think. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:47, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

• Support While not all materials can be used on road surfaces, pedestrian areas (including walkways) and driveways, this article doesn't just focus on road surface. Bidgee (talk) 03:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose This article is about the surface and not about the granular materials themselves, which each have their own articles. The information on footpaths or sidewalks should be moved to the articles on footpaths or sidewalks, rather than trying to make this a catch-all for all paved surfaces. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 16:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose; not all road surfaces are paved. Powers ^T 17:57, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose instead rename to Road surfacing. In my experience, much the same materials are used for what I call the pavement and Americans call the sidewalk. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:37, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose I've just realised I haven't actually !voted yet. I tend to agree that there is maybe no need for a seperate article on sidewalks (to use a generic term, even though I would call them pavements) but As there are already articles for sidewalks and footpaths this article should just say that some of these materials may also be used for footpaths and sidewalks but the composition and strength would be different. I would, however, support the change to Road surfacing. Richerman (talk) 09:51, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Wear and tear of users

I don't see anything specifically noted within the article. It is my strong impression that concrete considerably decreases the useful life of rubber tyres. This was shown some decades ago when a new chord of the Paris metro had a concrete trough to maintain the trains' horizontal stability. Or is that water under the bridge, so to speak? Unbuttered parsnip (talk) mytime= Fri 17:55, wikitime= 09:55, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Road maintenance planning

Please consider using material from this draft to improve this article. ~Kvng (talk) 16:09, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Vitrified brick

I see no mention here of vitrified brick, but it was at least a serious contender for road surfacing in the 1910s. See the ads at File:The Town Crier, v.12, no.15, Apr. 14, 1917 - DPLA - 48ac799d82f3c2c43eb64fba36ec96bf (page 9).jpg, File:The Town Crier, v.12, no.16, Apr. 21, 1917 - DPLA - b26a6dc6a104ee766677caae989d2a8a (page 9).jpg, and File:The Town Crier, v.12, no.25, Jun. 23, 1917 - DPLA - 173f6e6da127deb34dda1776503b2847 (page_9).jpg. - Jmabel | Talk 02:32, 16 March 2023 (UTC)