Pavement Marking Demonstration Projects: State of Alaska and State of Tennessee

APPENDIX A. DURABILITY TEST DECK INFORMATION

Since one of the primary goals of this task was to compare the durability performance of different pavement marking materials measured over time, the markings needed to be subjected to similar traffic conditions. Furthermore, a reasonably high traffic volume was desired to illustrate the differences between materials in the short time available for the study. It was important to consider roadway design features, traffic characteristics, and local environmental conditions when selecting the test deck locations. Together with each State transportation department office, the study sites were carefully selected so that they were representative, similar, and on newly installed pavements that would not need major maintenance during the life of this study. All the test decks were installed on asphalt pavements in good condition. All materials were installed along the edge line and right-most lane line of multilane highways. All test sections were applied along tangent sections.

PAVEMENT MARKING PREPARATION FOR INLAID MARKINGS

The intended goal of the placement of the pavement markings was to place half the length of the marking section on the surface of the road and half in a groove (inlaid). This required that within each test section, half of the section needed the current markings to be eradicated, leaving a clean surface for installation. The second half of the test section needed to be grooved to an adequate depth so that the marking would be inlaid (recessed) below the road surface. The specific parameters of the grooving for the inlaid products were based on providing a consistent difference between the height of the final pavement marking system and the height of the roadway. The goal was to have the pavement marking system, including the optics of the pavement marking system, slightly depressed in the roadway to provide protection from the wintertime plowing and studded tires.

The eradication process was not always consistent and ended up leaving a shallow groove in the road surface. A similar problem occurred when trying to create the groove for the inlaid marking section. The grooving machines would typically go somewhat deeper than specified. To account for these discrepancies in eradication and groove depths, areas where the markings were eradicated were considered to be placed in a shallow groove, and areas where the road was fully grooved (marking system below the road surface) were considered a deep groove. In some cases, markings were also applied over the preexisting markings and were considered a surface application. The various placements of the markings all occurred within the 0.5-mi test section. Markings that only had two placement types were each installed for approximately 0.25 mi.

ANCHORAGE PAVEMENT MARKING TEST DECK AREA

Figure 52. Photo. Glenn Highway (SR 1 in Anchorage, AK)

Figure 53. Screenshot. Proposed pavement marking installation sites (Anchorage, AK)

Figure 54. Photo. Test section 3 (Anchorage, AK)

Figure 55. Photo. Test section 5 (Anchorage, AK)

Figure 56. Photo. Test section 6 (Anchorage, AK)

Figure 57. Photo. Test section 7 (Anchorage, AK)

Figure 58. Photo. Test section 8 (Anchorage, AK)

Figure 59. Photo. Test section 9 (Anchorage, AK)

ANCHORAGE PAVEMENT MARKINGS

Table 69. Initially installed pavement marking in Anchorage, AK.

N/A = Not applicable.
Note: The installation of edge lines and outside lane lines occurred on August 7, 2006. Section 1 AK a was applied with long-line striping equipment; all other sections were hand cart applied.

Table 70. Pavement markings installed after the first winter in Anchorage, AK.

N/A = Not applicable.
Note: Paint and MMA were applied with long-line striping equipment; preformed thermoplastic was hand cart applied.

Table 71. Pavement markings installed after the second winter in Anchorage, AK.

Note: Paint was applied with long-line striping equipment; MMA was hand cart applied.

NASHVILLE PAVEMENT MARKING TEST DECK AREA

Figure 60. Photo. SR 840 (Nashville, TN)⁽¹²⁰⁾

Figure 61. Illustration. Proposed pavement marking installation sites (Nashville, TN)⁽¹²⁰⁾

Figure 62. Illustration. Test sections 1 and 2 (Nashville, TN)⁽¹²⁰⁾

Figure 63. Illustration. Test section 3 (Nashville, TN)⁽¹²⁰⁾

Figure 64. Illustration. Test sections 4 and 5 (Nashville, TN)⁽¹²⁰⁾

NASHVILLE PAVEMENT MARKINGS

Table 72. Pavement markings in Nashville, TN.

N/A = Not applicable.
Note: Edge and lane lines were initially installed on October 16, 2006, with long-line striping equipment.

Table 73. Lead-free thermoplastic pavement markings in Nashville, TN.

Note: All pavement markings were installed on June 5, 2008, with long-line striping equipment.

TUSCULUM PAVEMENT MARKING TEST DECK AREA

Figure 65. Photo. SR 34 (Tusculum, TN)⁽¹²¹⁾

Figure 66. Illustration. Proposed pavement marking installation sites (Tusculum, TN)⁽¹²¹⁾

Figure 67. Illustration. Test section 1 (Tusculum, TN)⁽¹²¹⁾

Figure 68. Illustration. Test section 2 (Tusculum, TN)⁽¹²¹⁾

Figure 69. Illustration. Test sections 3 and 4 (Tusculum, TN)⁽¹²¹⁾

TUSCULUM PAVEMENT MARKINGS

Table 74. Pavement markings in Tusculum, TN.

N/A = Not applicable.
Note: Sections 1 TN-T and 6 TN-T were applied with long-line striping equipment; all other sections were hand cart applied. Edge line and lane lines were initially installed May 14, 2007.