Skip to contentUnited States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration FHWA Home
Research Home   |   Pavements Home
REPORT
This report is an archived publication and may contain dated technical, contact, and link information
Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-10-066
Date: October 2011

 

Impact of Design Features on Pavement Response and Performance in Rehabilitated Flexible and Rigid Pavements

Appendix A. Summary Statistical Analysis

Flexible Pavements -SPS-5

The tables in this section describe the statistical results from the ANOVA performed in each site of the SPS-5 experiment. The number found after the State names represents the State code in the LTPP database. If statistical differences were found, they are described as "Y" in the statistical difference column, and the corresponding p-value is shown. If no statistical differences were found, they are described as "N."

Table 93. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Alabama (1).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

Thin

 

N

   

N

   

Rutting

N

Thin

Thin

N

 

Virgin

N

 

No mill

Fatigue

N

Thick

Thick

N

Virgin

Virgin

N

Mill

Mill

Transverse

Y
(p = 0.015)

Thick

Thick

N

 

Virgin

Y
(p = 0.00002)

Mill

Mill

Longitudinal

Y
(p = 0.003)

 

Thin

N

Virgin

Virgin

Y
(p = 0.013)

Mill

Mill

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 94. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Arizona (4).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

Y
(p = 0)

Thick

Thick

Y
(p = 0)

 

Virgin

N

Mill

Mill

Rutting

Y
(p = 0.004)

Thin

Thick

Y
(p = 0.0004)

Virgin

Virgin

N

No mill

 

Fatigue

N

Thick

Thick

N

   

Y
(p = 0.005)

Mill

Mill

Transverse

N

   

N

Virgin

Virgin

N

   

Longitudinal

N

 

Thin

Y
(p = 0.01)

Virgin

Virgin

N

   

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 95. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in California (6).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

   

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

Y
(p = 0.00001)

Thick

Thick

Y
(p = 0.0499)

Virgin

Virgin

N

Mill

Mill

Rutting

Y
(p = 0.0025)

 

Thick

N

   

N

   

Fatigue

Y
(p = 0.036)

Thick

 

N

Virgin

Virgin

Y
(p = 0.031)

Mill

Mill

Transverse

N

 

Thick

Y
(p = 0.0036)

Virgin

Virgin

N

   

Longitudinal

N

   

N

   

Y
(p = 0.011)

No mill

No mill

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 96. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Colorado (8).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

 

Thick

Y
(p = 0.027)

 

RAP

N

N

 

Rutting

Y
(p = 0.034)

 

Thick

Y
(p = 0)

 

RAP

N

Y
(p = 0.034)

 

Fatigue

N

 

Thick

N

 

RAP

N

N

 

Transverse

Y
(p = 0.01)

 

Thick

N

RAP

 

N

Y
(p = 0.01)

 

Longitudinal

N

 

Thick

N

 

RAP

N

N

 

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 97. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Florida (12).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

Thin

Thin

N

Virgin

Virgin

Y
( p = 0.031)

Mill

Mill

Rutting

N

Thin

Thin

N

Virgin

Virgin

Y
(p = 0.02)

Mill

Mill

Fatigue

N

 

Thin

N

 

Virgin

N

 

Mill

Transverse

N

   

N

   

N

   

Longitudinal

N

 

Thick

N

   

Y
(p = 0.021)

 

No mill

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 98. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Georgia (13).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

   

N

Virgin

Virgin

N

   

Rutting

N

   

N

   

N

   

Fatigue

N

   

N

   

N

   

Transverse

                 

Longitudinal

N

 

Thin

N

   

N

   

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 99. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Maine (23).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

 

Thin

N

   

N

No mill

No mill

Rutting

N

   

N

   

Y
(p = 0.005)

No mill

No mill

Fatigue

                 

Transverse

                 

Longitudinal

N

   

N

   

Y
(p = 0.02)

 

mill

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 100. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Maryland (24).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

Thick

x

N

Virgin

x

Y
(p = 0.0196)

Mill

x

Rutting

Y
(p = 0.0045)

Thin

x

Y
(p = 0)

Virgin

x

N

 

x

Fatigue

                 

Transverse

                 

Longitudinal

                 

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 101. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Minnesota (27).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

Y
(p = 0.00045)

Thick

 

N

   

N

Mill

Mill

Rutting

N

   

Y
(p = 0.0095)

Virgin

 

N

   

Fatigue

                 

Transverse

N

   

N

 

RAP

N

 

No mill

Longitudinal

N

   

N

   

N

   

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 102. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Mississipi (28).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

Thick

Thick

N

Virgin

Virgin

N

Mill

Mill

Rutting

Y
(p = 0.0006)

Thin

Thin

N

   

N

   

Fatigue

Y
(p = 0.0217)

Thick

Thick

Y
(p = 0.0066)

Virgin

Virgin

N

   

Transverse

N

   

Y
(p = 0.0028)

 

Virgin

N

   

Longitudinal

Y
(p = 0.0396)

Thin

Thick

N

Virgin

Virgin

N

   

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 103. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Missouri (29).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

Thick

 

N

RAP

 

N

No mill

 

Rutting

N

 

Thin

Y
(p = 0)

 

Virgin

N

 

Mill

Fatigue

N

 

Thin

N

 

RAP

N

 

No mill

Transverse

N

   

N

   

N

   

Longitudinal

N

   

N

   

N

 

Mill

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 104. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Montana (30).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

Y
(p = 0)

 

Thick

Y
(p = 0.0359)

 

Virgin

N

 

Mill

Rutting

N

Thick

Thick

N

 

RAP

N

   

Fatigue

N

 

Thick

N

Virgin

Virgin

N

   

Transverse

N

Thick

Thick

N

RAP

RAP

N

Mill

Mill

Longitudinal

N

Thick

Thick

N

RAP

RAP

N

Mill

Mill

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 105. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in New Jersey (34).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

Thick

Thick

N

   

Y
(p = 0.00097)

Mill

Mill

Rutting

N

Thick

Thick

N

Virgin

Virgin

N

   

Fatigue

Y
(p = 0.0093)

 

Thick

Y
(p = 0.00034)

 

Virgin

N

   

Transverse

N

Thick

Thick

Y
(p = 0.0081)

 

Virgin

Y
(p = 0.019)

Mill

Mill

Longitudinal

N

   

N

Virgin

Virgin

Y
(p = 0.0198)

Mill

 

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 106. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in New Mexico (35).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

   

N

   

N

   

Rutting

Y
(p = 0.025)

 

Thin

N

   

N

No mill

No mill

Fatigue

N

   

Y
(p = 0.003)

 

RAP

N

 

No mill

Transverse

N

 

Thick

N

   

Y
(p = 0.00011)

Mill

Mill

Longitudinal

N

   

Y
(p = 0.00014)

Virgin

Virgin

N

   

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 107. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Oklahoma (40).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

Y
(p = 0.014)

Thick

Thick

N

 

Virgin

N

Mill

Mill

Rutting

N

   

Y
(p = 0)

 

RAP

N

   

Fatigue

N

   

N

   

N

   

Transverse

Y
(p = 0.028)

Thick

Thick

N

   

N

Mill

Mill

Longitudinal

N

   

N

   

N

 

Mill

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 108. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Texas (48).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

Thick

Thick

N

RAP

RAP

N

 

Mill

Rutting

N

   

N

 

RAP

N

   

Fatigue

N

   

Y
(p = 0.024)

 

Virgin

N

 

No mill

Transverse

Y
(p = 0.0016)

Thick

Thick

Y
(p = 0)

 

Virgin

N

Mill

Mill

Longitudinal

Y
(p = 0.001)

Thick

Thick

Y
(p = 0)

Virgin

Virgin

N

Mill

Mill

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 109. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Alberta (81).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

Short

Long

Roughness

N

   

N

   

N

   

Rutting

N

   

N

 

Virgin

N

   

Fatigue

Y
(p = 0.003)

Thick

Thick

Y
(p = 0.033)

Virgin

Virgin

N

Mill

Mill

Transverse

N

Thick

 

Y
(p = 0.0098)

RAP

RAP

N

Mill

Mill

Longitudinal

N

Thin

Thin

N

Virgin

Virgin

N

   

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

Table 110. Summary of individual statistical analysis results for SPS-5 site in Manitoba (83).

Distress

Overlay Thickness

Mix Type

Milling

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Statistical Difference

Best Performance

Short

Long

Short

Long

 

Short

Long

Roughness

Y
(p = 0)

Thick

Thick

N

 

RAP

Y
(p = 0.01)

 

Mill

Rutting

N

   

N

   

N

 

No mill

Fatigue

Y
(p = 0.0197)

 

Thick

N

 

Virgin

N

   

Transverse

Y
(p = 0.0107)

 

Thin

N

   

N

   

Longitudinal

N

   

N

  

N

Mill

 

Note: Blank cells indicate no difference between design factors.

The following tables provide the WD calculations used in the consolidated analysis with the Friedman test.

Table 111. Long-term average WD-IRI values for SPS-5 sites.

Section

Experimental Design

Sites (State Codes)/Average WD-IRI values (m/km)

Mill

Mix

Thickness (mm)

1

4

6

8

12

13

23

24

27

28

29

30

34

35

40

48

81

83

0501

No

None

   

80

108

70

   

92

97

193

88

130

 

134

39

113

 

127

98

0502

No

RAP

51

55

134

130

65

49

40

42

80

90

96

72

74

70

44

86

82

93

104

0503

No

RAP

127

53

77

75

50

49

40

54

71

87

114

62

62

45

33

66

76

89

69

0504

No

Virgin

127

57

82

74

56

42

40

56

86

95

87

71

48

51

37

70

93

101

71

0505

No

Virgin

51

58

92

102

55

36

40

45

90

101

110

69

57

57

39

64

95

83

107

0506

Yes

Virgin

51

48

71

81

87

32

36

52

59

92

101

69

56

51

37

66

90

72

117

0507

Yes

Virgin

127

56

88

73

65

37

39

55

63

72

83

83

61

52

42

62

83

93

59

0508

Yes

RAP

127

65

64

64

52

46

49

48

53

80

92

62

48

48

35

61

74

78

63

0509

Yes

RAP

51

55

115

142

62

37

40

60

76

87

108

84

62

49

37

64

78

94

84

1 ft = 0.305 m
1 mi = 1.61 km
1 inch = 25.4 mm
Note: Higher WD values indicate rougher pavement over time. Blank cells indicate data are not available.

Table 112. Long-term average WD-rutting values for SPS-5 sites.

Section

Experimental Design

Sites (State Codes)/Average WD-Rutting Values (mm)

Mill

Mix

Thickness (mm)

1

4

6

8

12

13

23

24

27

28

29

30

34

35

40

48

81

83

0501

No

None

   

0.36

0.15

0.33

   

0.56

0.36

0.27

0.55

0.33

 

0.31

0.14

0.41

 

0.36

0.36

0502

No

RAP

51

0.10

0.19

0.16

0.13

0.16

0.13

0.27

0.17

0.10

0.36

0.14

0.17

0.11

0.12

0.11

0.23

0.25

0.14

0503

No

RAP

127

0.13

0.15

0.10

0.11

0.17

0.13

0.27

0.25

0.08

0.43

0.19

0.12

0.09

0.15

0.17

0.16

0.33

0.17

0504

No

Virgin

127

0.14

0.11

0.16

0.09

0.15

0.14

0.31

0.21

0.07

0.60

0.12

0.17

0.11

0.15

0.12

0.21

0.28

0.13

0505

No

Virgin

51

0.12

0.12

0.15

0.12

0.13

0.12

0.25

0.15

0.09

0.33

0.12

0.13

0.10

0.12

0.16

0.18

0.18

0.16

0506

Yes

Virgin

51

0.09

0.11

0.12

0.14

0.11

0.12

0.35

0.12

0.09

0.36

0.12

0.20

0.13

0.15

0.15

0.25

0.25

0.18

0507

Yes

Virgin

127

0.13

0.21

0.20

0.17

0.14

0.13

0.33

0.22

0.09

0.59

0.08

0.17

0.12

0.18

0.15

0.25

0.22

0.21

0508

Yes

RAP

127

0.21

0.14

0.11

0.13

0.16

0.12

0.32

0.19

0.08

0.56

0.17

0.11

0.10

0.16

0.11

0.18

0.23

0.22

0509

Yes

RAP

51

0.13

0.16

0.13

0.09

0.13

0.13

0.30

0.43

0.11

0.33

0.11

0.17

0.13

0.15

0.09

0.16

0.26

0.15

1 inch = 25.4 mm
Note: Higher WD values indicate increased rutting in pavement over time. Blank cells indicate data are not available.

Table 113. Long-term average WD-fatigue cracking values for SPS-5 sites.

Section

Experimental Design

Sites (State Codes)/Average WD-Fatigue Cracking Values (m2)

Mill

Mix

Thickness (mm)

1

4

6

8

12

13

23

24

27

28

29

30

34

35

40

48

81

83

0501

No

None

 

2,305

692

   

13

810

1

51

1,927

 

2,475

11

0

 

46

377

2,305

692

0502

No

RAP

51

2,566

966

38

0

0

25

0

458

0

1,263

463

1

1

3

1,480

916

2,566

966

0503

No

RAP

127

513

137

1

0

0

5

0

46

0

993

151

0

10

8

1,052

734

513

137

0504

No

Virgin

127

475

111

0

0

0

96

0

4

2

0

178

2

1

0

384

544

475

111

0505

No

Virgin

51

1,467

674

1

0

0

183

0

94

0

16

165

1

4

0

700

681

1,467

674

0506

Yes

Virgin

51

474

1,261

0

0

0

9

0

198

3

1

7

6

1

0

765

822

474

1,261

0507

Yes

Virgin

127

528

840

0

1

0

0

0

0

108

0

45

4

1

5

273

489

528

840

0508

Yes

RAP

127

85

180

0

0

0

84

0

258

0

725

47

0

1

8

399

498

85

180

0509

Yes

RAP

51

2,204

16

0

1

0

0

0

705

2

1,511

650

2

0

29

1,272

1,068

2,204

16

1 ft2 = 0.093 m2
1 inch = 25.4 mm
Note: Higher WD values indicate increased pavement cracking over time. Blank cells indicate data are not available.

Table 114. Long-term average WD-transverse cracking values for SPS-5 sites.

Section

Experimental Design

Sites (State Codes)/Average WD-Transverse Cracking Values (m)

Mill

Mix

Thickness (mm)

1

4

6

8

12

13

23

24

27

28

29

30

34

35

40

48

81

83

0501

No

None

   

0

154

63

   

38

140

245

201

32

 

270

33

91

 

30

32

0502

No

RAP

51

110

87

153

69

5

0

0

134

262

96

0

26

199

47

62

220

96

188

0503

No

RAP

127

4

339

194

11

0

0

0

54

196

136

0

14

69

44

24

98

88

151

0504

No

Virgin

127

0

40

83

43

0

0

0

32

200

3

0

35

50

3

5

4

61

250

0505

No

Virgin

51

54

216

197

64

8

0

0

152

327

50

0

57

155

56

52

186

288

81

0506

Yes

Virgin

51

1

50

152

90

2

0

0

129

294

65

1

51

9

2

33

4

130

39

0507

Yes

Virgin

127

1

2

100

10

0

0

0

4

149

1

4

10

11

0

0

2

143

208

0508

Yes

RAP

127

1

207

257

9

0

0

0

59

217

80

0

10

51

2

0

73

54

225

0509

Yes

RAP

51

13

339

209

40

0

0

0

5

230

32

1

0

47

9

30

155

19

110

1 ft = 0.305 m
1 inch = 25.4 mm
Note: Higher WD values indicate increased pavement cracking over time. Blank cells indicate data are not available.

Table 115. Long-term average WD-longitudinal cracking values for SPS-5 sites.

Section

Experimental Design

Sites (State Codes)/Average WD-Longitudinal Cracking Values (m)

Mill

Mix

Thickness (mm)

1

4

6

8

12

13

23

24

27

28

29

30

34

35

40

48

81

83

0501

No

None

   

0

364

842

   

1,039

939

894

239

563

 

670

380

53

 

170

250

0502

No

RAP

51

95

47

268

722

2

304

277

795

843

209

52

377

862

405

252

797

575

741

0503

No

RAP

127

143

337

430

552

2

209

292

624

549

101

96

186

949

508

113

646

579

848

0504

No

Virgin

127

86

26

362

715

9

132

302

429

677

52

33

176

827

103

83

80

704

669

0505

No

Virgin

51

92

130

342

996

27

293

277

486

894

47

465

270

585

268

28

797

319

932

0506

Yes

Virgin

51

0

78

485

673

0

144

214

627

737

52

88

205

599

158

36

337

84

574

0507

Yes

Virgin

127

19

3

459

410

0

129

277

651

649

17

74

89

753

60

65

19

456

578

0508

Yes

RAP

127

69

285

497

152

73

135

218

745

369

170

116

266

926

559

0

631

578

921

0509

Yes

RAP

51

100

329

492

152

8

206

138

99

572

146

54

322

826

411

48

639

544

392

1 ft = 0.305 m
1 inch = 25.4 mm
Note: Higher WD values indicate increased pavement cracking over time. Blank cells indicate data were not available.

 


The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is a part of the U.S. Department of Transportation and is headquartered in Washington, D.C., with field offices across the United States. is a major agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is a part of the U.S. Department of Transportation and is headquartered in Washington, D.C., with field offices across the United States. is a major agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). Provide leadership and technology for the delivery of long life pavements that meet our customers needs and are safe, cost effective, and can be effectively maintained. Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) R&T Web site portal, which provides access to or information about the Agency’s R&T program, projects, partnerships, publications, and results.
FHWA
United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration