The driving public’s attitude toward acceptable levels of road roughness is explored using empirical data collected on urban highways. Individual driver acceptability levels are matched with international roughness index (IRI) levels to examine the existence of potential user acceptability thresholds. In particular, the observed trends are compared with the federal IRI guideline of 170 in./mi (2.7 m/km) for acceptable ride quality recommended by FHWA in its 1998 strategic plan for the National Highway System. The research reported on appears to provide empirical support for the federal IRI guidelines that are already in existence. This study also found that IRI levels provided a very good indication of driver acceptability, which agrees with past research based on antiquated present serviceability ratings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Elway Research, Inc. Transportation Agencies Performance Audit: Citizen Input Survey. Washington State Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC), Sept.1997.
2.
Cambridge Systematics. Department of Transportation Highways and Rail Programs Performance Audit. JLARC Report 98-2. 1998. Available online at http://jlarc.leg.wa.gov/Reports/98-2HwyRails.PDF. Accessed Aug. 1, 2002.
KeeverD. B., WeissK. E., and QuarlesR. C.. Moving Ahead: The American Public Speaks on Roadways and Transportation in Communities. Report FHWA-OP-01-017. FHWA, U. S. Department of Transportation, Feb.2001. Available online at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/movingahead.pdf. Accessed Aug. 1, 2002.
5.
Coopers and Lybrand, L.L.P.National Quality Initiative (NQI) National Highway User Survey (NHUS). FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1995. Available online at http://ntl.bts.gov/data/nqinhus.pdf. Accessed Aug. 1, 2002.
6.
BoegerR., and CroweR. J.. It’s the Ride That Counts. Public Roads, Vol. 65, No. 4, Jan.-Feb.2002, pp. 17–19. Available online at http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/janfeb02/maricopa.htm. Accessed Aug. 1, 2002.
7.
SayersM. W., GillespieT. D., and QueirozC. A. V.. The International Road Roughness Experiment: A Basis for Establishing a Standard Scale for Road Roughness Measurements. In Transportation Research Record 1084, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1986, pp. 76–85.
8.
1999 Status of the Nation’s Highways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions and Performance, Report to Congress. Report FHWA-PL-08-017. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, May2001. Available online at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/1999cpr/index.htm. Accessed Aug. 1, 2002.
9.
CareyW. N.Jr., and IrickP. E.. The Pavement-Serviceability Concept. Bulletin 250. HRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1960, pp. 40–58.
10.
AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., June1993.
NakamuraV. F., and MichaelH. L.. Serviceability Ratings of Highway Pavements. In Highway Research Record 40, HRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1963, pp. 21–36.
13.
ScrivnerF. H., and HudsonW. R.. A Modification of the AASHO Road Test Serviceability Index Formula. In Highway Research Record 46, HRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1963, pp. 71–87.
14.
KaranM. A., KobiD. H., BaumanC. B., and HassR. C. G.. Subjective and Mechanical Estimations of Pavement Serviceability for Rural-Urban Road Networks. In Transportation Research Record 715, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1979, pp. 31–36.
15.
MooreR. K., ClarkG. N., and PlumbG. N.. Present Serviceability–Roughness Correlations Using Rating Panel Data. In Transportation Research Record 1117, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1987, pp. 152–158.
16.
ArterburnS., and SuprenantB.. Public Perception of Pavement Rideability. Report CDOH-UCB-R-90-10. Colorado Department of Highways, Denver, July1990.
17.
WardD. R., KercherK. J., and GulenS.. Correlation of IRI to Public Perception of Pavement Roughness: Final Report. Indiana Department of Transportation, Division of Research, West Lafayette, Ind., May1993.
18.
ShafizadehK., ManneringF., and PierceL.. A Statistical Analysis of Factors Associated with Driver-Perceived Road Roughness on Urban Highways. Research Report WA-RD 583.1. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, June2002.
19.
NairS. K., HudsonW. R., and LeeC. E.. Realistic Pavement Serviceability Equations Using the 690D Surface Dynamics Profilometer. Research Report 354-1F. Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas, Austin, Aug.1985.
20.
KuemmelD. A., RobinsonR. K., GriffinR. J., SonntagR. C., and GieseJ. K.. Public Perceptions of the Midwest’s Pavements—Executive Summary—Iowa. Report CHTE 2001-02. Highway Research Study 94-07. Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Jan.2001. Available online at http://www.trc.marquette.edu/public_perception/. Accessed Aug. 1, 2002.
21.
KuemmelD. A., RobinsonR. K., GriffinR. J., SonntagR. C., and GieseJ. K.. Public Perceptions of the Midwest’s Pavements—Executive Summary—Minnesota. Report CHTE 2001-02. Highway Research Study 94-07. Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Feb.2001. Available online at http://www.trc.marquette.edu/public_perception/. Accessed Aug. 1, 2002.
22.
KuemmelD. A., RobinsonR. K., GriffinR. J., SonntagR. C., and GieseJ. K.. Public Perceptions of the Midwest’s Pavements—Executive Summary—Wisconsin. Report WI/SPR-01-01. Highway Research Study 94-07. Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Jan.2001. Available on-line at http://www.trc.marquette.edu/public_perception/. Accessed Aug. 1, 2002.
23.
KhattakA., SchoferJ., and KoppelmanF.. Commuters’ Enroute Diversion and Return Decisions: Analysis and Implications for Advanced Traveler Information Systems. Transportation Research, Vol. 27A, No. 2, 1993, pp. 101–111.
24.
NgL., BarfieldW., and ManneringF.. A Survey-Based Methodology to Determine Information Requirements for Advanced Traveler Information Systems. Transportation Research, Vol. 3C, No. 2, 1995, pp. 113–127.
