2

Skid resistance
of road pavements
and influential factors
 Skid resistance measurements
of pavements and their
interpretation in France
Michel GOTHIÉ
Laboratoire régional des Ponts et Chaussées de Lyon

53

UTILITY FROM A SOLID KNOWLEDGE OF SKID RESISTANCE

Road accidents in France, despite their very significant drop in number over the recent past, still
remain too frequent. Several organizations have been seeking to develop remedial approaches to
each of the three factors contributing to this accident rate, i.e. driver, vehicle and road. The Public
Works Ministry naturally focuses its efforts primarily on infrastructure aspects. Various studies con-
ducted in France and across the world have shown that a strong correlation tends to exist between
the accident risk on a wet pavement and the set of measured parameters that enable assessing the
skid resistance characteristics of pavement surfacing [1-3].
The skid resistance of a pavement corresponds to its capacity to mobilize the friction forces between
the tire of a vehicle and the surface area of the surfacing submitted to the effect of loadings induced
by the particular driving behavior: acceleration, braking, direction change, etc. Moreover, it enables:
¾ maintaining the desired trajectory at all times, especially during turns;
¾ reducing braking distances; and
¾ facilitating avoidance or trajectory-recovery maneuvers.
Two types of skid resistance features correspond to these various conditions encountered: transverse
skid resistance, as evaluated by means of a side force coefficient (case of skidding and turning in a
curve); and longitudinal skid resistance, evaluated via a breaking force coefficient (case of braking).
In order to obtain an adequate level of skid resistance, a permanent state of contact must be devel-
oped between the tire and the pavement, in avoiding the presence of any bulk water within the tire/
pavement contact area. The drainage of such bulk water is first performed by the tire treads and the
macrotexture of pavement surfacing. After this initial drainage, a residual film of water a few

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 microns thick remains and causes the surfacing to become slippery; only the microtexture is capable
at this point of breaking through the water film*.

An adequate level of skid resistance is obtained when associating effective macrotexture (drainage
of the surface water) with effective microtexture (rupture of the residual water film).

For highway engineers, knowledge of the skid resistance characteristics of the various types of road
surfacing, their evolution over time and the influence of the primary factors capable of modifying
this skid resistance necessitate designing measurement devices and then conducting a wide range of
testing under actual road conditions. Such tests would thus enable:

¾ preventing against certain kinds of accidents through the detection of points on the road network
exhibiting a weak level of skid resistance;

¾ developing greater technical knowledge of the potential offered by the various types of surfacing
materials and their evolution when submitted to traffic loads;

¾ obtaining a better correspondence between the techniques intended to improve skid resistance
and those aimed at the other road characteristics (whether geometric or not); and

¾ comprehending the physical makeup of the entire road network and its evolution over time.

CONVENTIONAL SKID RESISTANCE MEASUREMENT PRINCIPLES

In order to assess the primary parameters characterizing skid resistance of a pavement surface, a
wide array of evaluation methods are available that make use of the special devices described in the
following sections; these are based either on measuring a friction coefficient at different sliding
speeds or on combining friction and macrotexture measurements. Other methods, although not yet
54 operational, allow for a direct measurement of microtexture. The evaluation of this factor is currently
performed by means of an indirect measurement that introduces friction at a low sliding speed. The
various measurement principles applied herein will be presented below.

Side force coefficient (SFC)

This measurement principle calls for introducing driven an angle between the line the tire is steer and
the axle of the vehicle at a constant translation speed (see Fig. 1). A measurement is then taken of the
transverse reaction T, caused by the tire-pavement skid resistance, which tends to bring the wheel
back in line with the displacement direction.

R
‡ Figure 1
Definition of the transverse
friction coefficient (CFT) CFT = T / R
θ
V

V : constant speed
θ : tire cornering angle (angle)
T : transverse skid resistance force
R : vertical reaction of the pavement

* See the articles by Minh-Tan Do and Joël Foucard in this special issue.

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
The side friction coefficient (SFC) is equal to the ratio of this transverse reaction T to the reaction R
normal to the ground generated by the load on the wheel. In Figure 3, which in particular displays
the variation in transverse friction coefficient vs. the sliding percentage or sliding rate (defined fur-
ther below), it may be observed that SFC is maximized for a sliding rate near 0% and lies at a very
low level for a sliding rate of 100%. Given that the skid resistance characterized by this coefficient is
used for directing the vehicle, the effect of braking with locked wheels (i.e. 100% sliding rate) in a
curve gets manifested by a loss of vehicle control.

The sliding rate G is defined as the ratio of the tire/ground sliding speed to the vehicle speed:

κ expressed as a percentage.

where:

¾ ω: angular speed of the wheel;

¾ Re: "effective" rolling radius;
¾ V: vehicle speed.

Breaking force coefficient (BFC)

A wheel spinning at constant angular speed (see Fig. 2) is drawn at a constant translation speed V
(with V being contained within the wheel's vertical plane of symmetry). Braking is then applied to
the wheel and the force F that develops in the tire-pavement contact area is measured; this force
tends to reposition the wheel at an angular speed corresponding to V/Re (with Re = wheel radius).

The breaking force coefficient (BFC) is the ratio between the force F and the reaction R normal to the 55
ground due to loading placed upon the wheel.

Longitudinal friction coefficient measurements may be carried out using either a locked wheel or a
sliding wheel. Tire skid resistance differs depending on the sliding percentage of the wheel. In
Figure 3, it may be observed that the longitudinal skid resistance exhibits a maximum between a 10%
and 20% sliding rate depending on the surfaces encountered and the tires used [4].

R
ω BFC = F / R

V : vehicle speed
ω : wheel rotation speed
F : longitudinal skid resistance force
V R : vertical reaction of the pavement
R
If ω = V / Re BFC, rolling condition
If ω = 0 BFC, locked wheel
If 0 < ω < V / Re BFC, sliding wheel

‡ Figure 2
Definition of the longitudinal friction coefficient (BFC)

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 Skid resistance coefficient

Unstable zone
µmax
Longitudinal

µlock

Transverse

Unconstrained wheel % sliding Locked wheel

0% sliding 100% sliding

‡ Figure 3
Variation in the longitudinal and transverse friction coefficients vs. longitudinal sliding rate

Stopping distance measurements

56 It is possible, on the basis of stopping distance measurements conducted under well-controlled con-
ditions, to define the value of a friction coefficient that characterizes the skid resistance encountered
by tires during braking. Under the same test conditions (notably, wetting and type of tire), no major
difference exists between the BFC measurement and the stopping distance measurement. The appar-
ent advantage of the stopping distance measurement over the friction coefficient measurement lies
in the fact that stopping distance incorporates both the level of friction coefficient and its variation
vs. speed during braking. In contrast, this measurement only applies to a specific point in time and,
under no circumstances, is capable of indicating the weak points in the road network. It gets used
more often by tire manufacturers than by highway engineers.
Up until relatively recently, stopping distance measurements had been performed on locked wheels
with various systems that enable preserving the guidance capacities of the vehicle during braking
(braking of either the front wheels or, better yet, two diagonally-opposite wheels). With the advent
of antilock systems, it has become possible to conduct stopping distance or slowing distance mea-
surements much more easily by perfectly controlling the vehicle trajectory during braking. This mea-
surement serves to determine skid resistance of the pavement surfacing by means of the following
equations [4]:

with:
¾ d: braking distance,
¾ V1: speed at beginning of braking,
¾ V2: speed at end of braking,
¾ M: total vehicle mass,
¾ Fz: vertical load borne by each wheel,

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
¾ Frl: slowing force of the vehicle with freely-rotating wheels,

A and B have been deduced from the previous equation based on natural deceleration testing with
freely-rotating wheels.

MEASUREMENT DEVICES AND METHODS

Friction coefficient measurement (BFC or SFC)

Remark: The notations in upper case BFC, SFC, etc. correspond to friction coefficients measured on
various pavement surfaces with so-called "conventional" experimental instruments. When seeking
to evaluate tire performance, the notations µx (longitudinal) and µy (transverse) will be used.

Just those devices employed in France will be succinctly presented herein. The instruments used dur-
ing the 1990's throughout the world, along with those in Europe over the period since 2000 and for
airfield landing strips have been included in publications elsewhere [5-8].

Measurements using the SRT pendulum

The SRT (for "Skid Resistance Tester") pendulum designed by the TRL ("Transport Research Labora-
tory" in England) is a static device (see Fig. 4); it contains, at the end of its articulated arm, a rubber 57
sliding pad that rubs during the test period on the target surface. As frictional movement takes place,
a spring applies the sliding pad onto this surface with a given known force. By adjustment the friction
length is kept within predetermined limits. The maximum height of the pendulum rise is identified
by a needle positioned in front of a dial directly graduated to show readings of "friction coefficients
measured by the pendulum" (see Standard NF EN 13036-4 [9]).

‡ Figure 4
The SRT (Skid Resistance Tester)
pendulum

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 The levels derived from the SRT pendulum correspond to the quantity of energy dissipated during
the frictional sequence in comparison with the initial energy present upon pendulum release. The
resultant forces at the time of sliding pad friction on the pavement surface then enable establishing
an estimation formula for a coefficient µsrt. The sliding rate for this device stands at 100%.
This set-up is primarily used in France for the purpose of characterizing the skid resistance of road
markings as well as for special types of experimental campaigns, e.g. to evaluate the microtexture of
a limited surface. Moreover, this SRT device is employed with a unique sliding pad in the test that
serves to determine the polished stone value (PSV) of gravel used for wearing courses.

Measurements using the "Grip Tester" device

The "Grip Tester" (see Fig. 5), manufactured in Scotland by the company Findlay Irvine, is imported
in France by VECTRA. This equipment measures the longitudinal friction forces between the pave-
ment surfacing and a small smooth tire, according to the principle of a wheel braking with a constant
sliding rate, on the order of 15%.
The device takes the form of a small autonomous trailer capable of performing measurements,
recordings and pavement wetting; it may be pushed either by hand or drawn by a low- or medium-
speed car, whose chassis contains very basic suspension. The dimensions lie in the neighborhood of
1 m long, 0.8 m wide and 0.5 m high; the mass of this set-up comes to 85 kg and the measurement tire
has a size of 10 × 4-5 (diameter × width, with values expressed in inches), in compliance with
Standard ASTM E 1844-96 [10].

‡ Figure 5
The "Grip Tester" device

58

Wetting in front of the measurement wheel is performed by means of a valve set at a low flow rate,
connected to two small tanks placed on the device when pushed in the manual mode. The flow rate
used is roughly 0.6 l/min at a speed of 5 km/hr and 4 l/min at 30 km/hr.
The sliding rate (15%), which serves to generate the skid resistance force, is obtained by mechanical
actuation between two load-bearing wheels and the small measurement wheel carrying a load of
approximately 19 daN. The measurement is conducted on a continuous basis over a trace that
remains as rectilinear as possible.
The measurement wheel axis is equipped with a stress gauge system that enables measuring both the
vertical force Fv and horizontal force Fh. The BFC measurement derived by the Grip Tester, also
called the "Grip Number" (GN), is equal to the Fh/Fv ratio.
This instrument gets implemented for localized measurements that most often serve as part of road
safety studies undertaken using the VANI test set-up [11]. The Grip Tester is not well-adapted either
to high-output measurements or to speeds in excess of 40 km/hr; it may be employed however for
evaluating the skid resistance of road markings, pedestrian routes and cycling paths.

Measurements using the ADHERA device

The "Standard ADHERA" model
This particular device [12], developed and built in France by the Rouen-based CECP technical facil-
ity, has been utilized within the various Ponts et Chaussées departments since 1968 (see Fig. 6). It has
been improved over time, while maintaining the same measurement principle: a locked-wheel BFC
measurement (100% sliding rate) (Fig. 2).

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 ‡ Figure 6
The ADHERA device

This set-up is composed of a single-wheel trailer, towed by a vehicle appropreately chosen in order to
reach a speed of 120 km/hr. Measurements are typically performed during normal traffic flow. The
sequence of operations required to conduct the test (pavement wetting, wheel locking, measurement
recording) is processed automatically; measurements are taken very quickly (within a few seconds).
The trailer wheel, loaded at 250 daN and equipped with a 165 × 65R15 smooth tire (the PIARC
smooth tire [13]), is drawn at constant speed by the vehicle used to wet the surface. The wheel is
locked over a 20-m length in the test zone; average torque is then measured for the forces that tend
to redirect the wheel (see Standard NF P 98-220-2 [14]).
The repeatability and reproducibility on a homogeneous test strip have been evaluated at 4% and 5%,
respectively.
This instrument is relied upon for special studies (high-risk accident zones, assessment of new tech-
niques, etc.) and is not adapted to high-output measurement campaigns.
Three such ADHERA devices are currently utilized in France by the regional Ponts et Chaussées Lab-
oratories (LRPC) located in Lille, Bordeaux and Lyon.
59
The "ADHERA research" model
A new version of the ADHERA device, called "ADHERA research", has recently been developed. Its
configuration entails the same trailer and traction vehicle as standard ADHERA equipment; only the
measurement system has been modified. This version makes it possible, during a gradual braking
maneuver, to measure the BFC variation curve point by point as a function of sliding rate. The mea-
surement is thus performed with a sliding rate that varies between 0% and 100% over the test period.

Measurements using the IMAG device

This device was developed by the Airbase Technical Division (now called the Civil Aviation Techni-
cal Division); it consists of both a traction vehicle and measurement trailer (see Fig. 7). The test tire is
the PIARC smooth standard used with the ADHERA equipment. The wheel load is 150 daN and the
BFC measurement is carried out with a 15% sliding rate.

‡ Figure 7
The IMAG test device developed by
the STBA organization

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 Measurements are most often taken under natural wetting conditions so as to provide pilots with the
actual level of skid resistance on the strip used for their landing maneuver. Nonetheless, an autono-
mous pavement-wetting mechanism, capable of generating a water height of approximately 1 mm,
is also available. Measurements may be conducted at speeds reaching 140 km/hr. Several such
devices are used at France's main airports.

Measurements using the SCRIM device

The SCRIM device [15], designed by TRL and built by the British company WDM (see Fig. 8), mea-
sures SFC continuously (see Fig. 1 and Standards NF P 98-220-3 [16] and NF P 98-220-4 [17]).

‡ Figure 8
The SCRIM (Sideway force Coefficient
Routine Investigation Machine) equipment

60

The SCRIM equipment consists of a truck equipped with a 6,000-l cistern that carries a measurement
wheel on the right side (see Fig. 9). Measurements are conducted in traffic flow, on the roadway's
right-hand lane, which happens to be the most heavily-trafficked section of pavement. The presence
of a test equipment driver and operator is necessary for performing these measurements. The mea-
surement wheel is oriented at an angle of 20° with the vehicle speed direction. The sliding rate used
herein is given by the formula: G = sin 20° = 0.34, or 34%. The test tire is of the smooth type 76 × 508
(width × diameter, values expressed in mm) with standardized hardness and resilience.

The SCRIM truck is loaded by a 200-kg mass capable of being vertically displaced independently of
vehicle movements. The water is distributed right in front of the measurement wheel. The water
height being spread in this manner corresponds to approximately 0.5 mm. Under standard test con-
ditions, the maximum autonomy amounts to 100 km. This device is primarily used for high-output
measurement campaigns (in particular network monitoring).

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 ‡ Figure 9
Test tire for use with the SCRIM device

The repeatability of measurements taken by the SCRIM device depends on the level of skid resistance
encountered and has been evaluated at 5% over the course of many repetitions performed on differ-
ent surfaces using the LRPC-Lyon device.
Measurement reproducibility has been established in the United Kingdom by means of a newly-
retuned SCRIM equipment; it lies between +/–0.03 and +/–0.05 (with 95% confidence) for a surface 61
that exhibits a BFC level of 0.50.
Since June 2004, three SCRIM devices are operational in France, one managed by the company VEC-
TRA and two by LRPC-Lyon.

Texture measurements
Microtexture
Microtexture characterizes the presence of irregularities in the pavement surface layer, whose
dimensional range is less than 0.2 mm vertically and 0.5 mm horizontally; it also plays a key role in
dislocating the water film (by a few tenths of a millimeter) found between the tire and the surface of
pavement asperities. This dislocation process must be made feasible regardless of speed, and the tire
is not capable of completing such a procedure on its own. A good level of microtexture thus proves
a vital parameter for any pavement surface. No high-output operating method exists for the purpose
of direct microtexture measurement; rather, it is considered that an adequate evaluation stems from
measuring friction coefficients at low sliding speeds.

Macrotexture
Macrotexture serves to characterize the presence of surface irregularities, whose dimensional range
is situated at 0.2-10 mm vertically and 0.5-50 mm horizontally. Its role is critical in helping drain the
water bulk (one at several mm) located at the tire/pavement interface. The importance of this drain-
age increases with speed; moreover, the tire, by virtue of its treads, is able to accomplish a major por-
tion of such drainage on its own.
Macrotexture is evaluated by means of two distinct methods:
¾ a volumetric, so-called "patch based" method, which yields an average depth of surface asperities.
The index produced is the "mean texture depth", or MTD. This method is static (see Standard
NF EN 13036-1 [18]) (Fig. 10); and

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 ¾ a profilometric method, which enables computing the mean depth of surface asperities. This
method, on the other hand, is dynamic (with speeds ranging between 30 and 100 km/hr). The index
produced here is the "mean profile depth", or MPD (see Standard NF EN ISO 13473-1 [19]).
The formulae employed for determining international indices allow using either of these methods.
For the second method, RUGO (a designated "mlpc"-branded piece of equipment) is used by the LPC
research network. The device encompasses a laser ray emitter (see Fig. 11) and an optical potentiom-
eter. The ray emitted strikes the ground surface and then reflects on the potentiometer. Depending
on the position of the illuminated point on this potentiometer, the height of the ground reflection
point may be deduced. The measurement is performed on a continuous basis during traffic flow, at
a speed capable of reaching 100 km/hr.
This set-up is affixed at a distance of 30 cm from the ground and the measurement range lies within
6 cm with respect to a neutral pavement point.
A PC serves to guide the test device and receives, at a frequency of approximately 16,000 Hz, a suc-
cession of relative heights of pavement points on a line parallel to the vehicle's progress. The

‡ Figure 10
So-called "task-based"
62 volumetric measurement

‡ Figure 11
Laser sensor on the RUGO device

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
measurement cycle is to be repeated every 25 cm. On these 25 cm, 100 extractions are divided uni-
formly over a 100-mm distance. The 100 extractions are then processed so as to yield a characteristic
value of the surfacing macrotexture. Every 40 cycles for a 10-m step or every 80 cycles for a 20-m step,
the system calculates and records the average of the previous unit values.
During the measurement phase, the system continuously records the speed and distance traversed;
also, it enables positioning measurements along a given itinerary. This information is then combined
in order to constitute a results file that gets instantaneously archived onto the PC hard disk.
The measurement results have been presented graphically. The strong correlation existing between
the MPD and MTD values (formerly the true sand STD surface texture depth), which is a notion quite
familiar to highway engineers, allows providing the result directly in terms of ETD (equivalent tex-
ture depth, formerly the calculated sand height HSc). The standard proposes the following reference
law: ETD = 0.8 × MTD + 0.2. It also becomes possible to use the informative law: ETD estimated tex-
ture depth = MPD. The repeatability with respect to APD lies on the order of 3%, with a
5% reproducibility.
The Protex (or TM2) instrument enables deriving the same macrotexture indicator (MPD) as RUGO,
in accordance with Standard NF EN ISO 13473-1 [19]. This equipment is manually pushed at a speed
of around 5 km/hr, built by the English company WDM and marketed in France by VECTRA; more-
over, it has been advised for point-specific measurements, yet remains ill-adapted for continuous
measurements (i.e. network monitoring).

COMPARISON BETWEEN THE VALUES GIVEN BY

THE VARIOUS FRICTION MEASUREMENT DEVICES

Similarities and differences between test devices

Measurements conducted on a given surface using the devices cited above, even under standard 63
operating conditions, do not necessarily yield similar values; the differences can obviously be attrib-
uted to the measurement principles adopted, but a number of other reasons also enter into play, as
discussed below:

Nature of the tire rubber

Tire rubber constituents exert influence on energy losses by means of hysteresis [3] during the fric-
tion process and, consequently, on the friction coefficient value. This factor proves highly influential,
as observed in 1998 during fabrication of the PIARC smooth tire by a new supplier*.

Tire and contact area dimensions

Tire dimensions differ significantly depending on the chosen device: Grip Tester, SCRIM, ADHERA
and IMAG. Loads may at times be substantially different: Grip Tester (19 daN), ADHERA (250 daN),
IMAG (150 daN) and SCRIM (200 daN). As a result, "frictional" surfaces may also exhibit significant
differences, which primarily act upon the hydrodynamic aspect of friction.

Sliding speed
The sliding speed (see Fig. 12) is equal to the product of measurement speed V of the device times
the sliding rate used, i.e.: Vg = V.G. This sliding speed is thus equal to:
¾ V × 100% for the SRT pendulum, i.e. 10 km/hr;
¾ V × 15% for the Grip Tester, i.e. approximately 1 km/hr (manually-pushed version at 6 km/hr) or
4.5 km/hr (traction version at 30 km/hr);
¾ V × 34% for SCRIM, i.e. 20.4 km/hr (test speed of 60 km/hr and G = sin 20°);
¾ V × 15% for IMAG;
¾ V × 100% for ADHERA.

* See the appendix of the article by Yves Brosseaud in this issue.

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 As sliding speed declines, the friction coefficient measurement is more highly sensitive to
microtexture.

(mm)
10

MICRO-
TEXTURE MACROTEXTURE

0.2
1 0.5 mm 50 mm
Grip Tester 4.5
10
SRT Pendulum
20.4
SCRIM
40
60
ADHERA 90
120

Sliding speed (km/hr)

‡ Figure 12
Sliding speeds for the various devices

64
Contribution from international studies
International efforts in the area of comparison and harmonization of test devices have shown that it
is indeed possible to determine, for each device and despite the differences cited, a common index.

The 1992 PIARC study

This study represented a very important experimental work for which the test devices were selected
from among a set of over thirty devices. The final report [5] introduced the "International Friction
Index" (IFI) as the common measure capable of being calculated for all devices included in the exper-
iment. The approach employed was founded upon:
¾ a sliding speed correction factor based on the "Penn State" model;
¾ an empirical macrotexture correction dependent on both the friction measurement device and the
macrotexture measurement device; and
¾ a reference sliding speed equal to 60 km/hr.
The calculation formula adopted is the following:
IFI = F60 = A + (B × FR60) + CxTx

G (or κ)

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
with:

¾ ω: rotational speed of the wheel (rad/sec);

¾ Re: radius of the loaded measurement wheel (m);

¾ V: longitudinal speed (m/sec);

¾ FR60: friction coefficient value at 60 km/hr;

¾ FRS: friction coefficient value at speed S (km/hr);

¾ TX: measured texture index; the values "a" and "b" depend on this macrotexture index as well as
on the instrument or method used to perform the measurement. Two indices can be selected: mean
texture depth (MTD), or mean profile depth (MPD).

Parameters A, B and C are constants and depend on the device used for the friction measurement.

Remark: Coefficient C is equal to 0 (zero) for those devices operating with a smooth tire.

The IFI (F60) value enables estimating the friction coefficient values at various speeds:

It is thus necessary to associate a macrotexture measurement with any friction measurement carried
out using a device to generate data that allow comparing the information provided by each device.

The Belgian RRC (Road Research Center) study 65

In this study [6], another index, which may be calculated by all devices, has been proposed. It looks
like an IFI30 value and is called EFI for "European Friction Index" (or SRI for "Skid Resistance Index").
This index displays three primary differences with the IFI, i.e.:

¾ use of a reference sliding speed equal to 30 km/hr instead of 60 km/hr;

¾ use of two unique laws for calculating Sp; and
¾ loss of distinction between smooth tires and grooved tires.

The calculation formula here is as follows:

with:

Sp = 57 + 56 × PMP

ou Sp = 43 + 70 × PMT

whereby:

¾ MPD is the mean profile depth measured using a laser profilometer (Standard EN ISO 13473-1);
¾ MTD is the mean texture depth measured by a volumetric method (Standard EN 13036-1).

This study serves to confirm the need to associate a macrotexture data element with all friction mea-
surements involved in calculating EFI.

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 HERMES European study
Applying calculation procedures to derive a common index has revealed sizeable discrepancies,
which prove unacceptable for pursuing the objective of European harmonization. The HERMES
study was requested by the FEHRL (Forum of European national Highway Research Laboratories)
organization; it has been conducted on the basis of a large measurement sample (fifteen devices for
skid resistance, nine for macrotexture, and nine distinct measurement campaigns) and was aimed at
reducing the magnitude of these discrepancies [7]. Various models, developed in order to analyze
the influence of sliding speed and to calculate the value of the macrotexture-dependent correction
factor to be introduced, were also tested*. A set of specifications for a new reference device has been
drafted following a survey conducted among the FEHRL component laboratories. Preliminary
research has also been undertaken for the purpose of defining the reference surface characteristics.
This study however did not give rise to any really significant improvement in the level of discrepan-
cies due, in particular, to an absence in preliminary metrological control of those instruments
selected to participate in the cross-referencing tests. A second study entitled "HERMES 2" should
undoubtedly be getting underway shortly and its focus will incorporate elements highlighted during
this initial study.

Consequences on the comparison of devices used in France

The studies mentioned above have revealed the limitations in comparisons that may be drawn
between the Grip Tester, SCRIM and ADHERA devices.
By carrying out measurement campaigns periodically using the Grip Tester and SCRIM devices, a
BFCGN value conversion law has been proposed by LRPC-Lyon, yet the level of uncertainty on this
value remains quite high. The transformation of ADHERA measurements into a BFCADHERA value
proves a more delicate operation, and this for two reasons:
¾ the different sensitivities of the two devices to speed, and
¾ the differing "sensitivity" of the two devices to the presence of water.
66
Figure 12 serves to recall the differences in sliding speeds for devices used within the work con-
ducted by LRPC. A sliding speed correction, which relies upon the 1992 PIARC model [5] or the
HERMES models (DWW or LCPC [7]), is not sufficient to perform an accurate comparison. Conse-
quently, in the event a clear conclusion cannot be drawn, the result of a numerical measurement must
always be associated with the device employed to perform the measurement.

INTERPRETATION OF SKID RESISTANCE MEASUREMENTS

Interpretation of the evolution in a measurement result must be undertaken with caution. In pro-
ceeding, the following must be kept in mind:
¾ the repeatability of instrument use may cause sizeable variations (4% on BFC with ADHERA,
5% on SFC with SCRIM and on BFC with Grip Tester);
¾ the transverse heterogeneity of the surfacing (highly-variable depending on type, age of surfacing
and traffic load being borne) can cause 20% variations in the friction coefficient;
¾ seasonal variations exist (maximum skid resistance during March-April and minimum in Septem-
ber-October for France), with variations capable of reaching 30% on SFC; see Fig. 13).
Given the interpretations commonly ascribed to SCRIM measurements, the following special precau-
tions were taken by LRPC-Lyon:
¾ limitation of linear measurement distance to 500 km for all test tires;
¾ generation of 10 km of friction prior to measurement startup for new tires;
¾ a wetting rate held constant over the given speed interval and independent of the quantity of
water contained in the tank;
¾ measurements during the same period of the year when performing the network monitoring func-
tion or special techniques depending on weather or traffic loads borne.

* A detailed presentation of this work is not one of this article's aims.

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 SFC
1

0.8

0.6

0.4

uar
y ril Jul
y er uary April y r y
Jul ctobe nuar Apr
il
Jul
y er ry ril Jul
y er
Ap tob tob anua Ap tob
Jan Oc Jan O Ja Oc J Oc

‡ Figure 13
Seasonal variation in the side force coefficient.

APPLICATION OF SKID RESISTANCE

MEASUREMENTS AND TEXTURE

LCPC Test Method No. 50, Module M1 67

This test method [20] conforms to Circular No. 2002-39, dated May 16, 2002 [21]; it pertains to the
skid resistance of new wearing courses as well as to macrotexture control*. For this field of applica-
tion, the method sets forth the measurement and analysis conditions for texture measurement indi-
cators by means of the task-based approach, the profilometric method and friction using the
ADHERA device.

Skid resistance characterization of road pavement surfacing

These measurements have been conducted with ADHERA devices since 1970 by LRPC facilities in
Bordeaux, Lille and Lyon on a variety of selected test sections; they have been recorded within a
shared national database file named "CARAT"** [22]. The BFC variation curves vs. speed have been
referenced within a given range for all surfacing types combined; these data have been established
from thousands of measurements performed on an array of French road surfaces. The upper curve
is that of the 9th decile, i.e. approximately 10% of France's road surfacing displays a skid resistance
above this level; the lower curve is that of the 1st decile, below which 10% of the nation's surfacing
lies**.

Network monitoring
This effort entails the primary applications of SCRIM equipped with a RUGO system and is used in
particular for computing the National Network Quality Index (NNQI).

* See the article by Alain Bauduin and Pierre Dupont in this special issue.
** See the article by Yves Brosseaud in this issue.

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
 Expertise in hazardous zones,
where accident frequency has been observed on the rise
Conventional devices serve to both characterize surfacing on-site and determine whether perfor-
mance is positioned at an adequate level, in comparison with the average obtained for similar sites.
These measurements do not directly translate the skid resistance conditions encountered by users in
the presence of significant differences between the tires used for standard tests and commercial-
grade tires*, and due to the particular wetting condition applied.

Application to upcoming research work

Wearing course skid resistance is a chief safety concern. This importance has justified research work
aimed at:
¾ establishing ties between skid resistance and surfacing component materials;
¾ identifying trends in skid resistance/accident correlations as a function of geometric factors per-
taining to road conditions and use.

CONCLUSION
France, like many other countries around the world, has developed and implemented friction and
texture measurement devices. The French devices entirely fulfill the needs of road infrastructure
managers. Special note should be made of the care given to the metrological quality of instruments,
along with the impetus to limit operational uncertainties to the greatest extent possible and sharpen
the measurement context.
It has been clearly determined that the resultant indications are vital to defining a maintenance strat-
egy and evaluating road technique-related performance.
68 Within the current European context however, the multiplicity and differences between devices from
one country to the next act to restrain data and information exchanges of considerable potential ben-
efit to each individual country.
Comparative studies of devices have highlighted the need to utilize the same instruments not only
to provide for European harmonization, but also to ensure that our exchanges, based on comparable
data, remain pertinent.

REFERENCES

[1] GOTHIÉ M., Influence de l’adhérence sur la sécurité routière, Bulletin de liaison des Laboratoires des Ponts et
Chaussées, 185, mai-juin 1993, pp. 27 à 32.
[2] DELANNE Y., TRAVERT P., Accident rates and road surface skidding properties : a literature survey, ISATA
Paper 97SAF005, Florence, June 1997.
[3] WALLMAN C.-G., ASTROM H., Friction measurement methods and the correlation between road friction
and traffic safety, Report VTI meddelande 911A, 2001, 47 pages.
[4] Société MICHELIN, Le pneu – L’adhérence, Société de Technologie Michelin, septembre 2000, 92 pages.
[5] WAMBOLD J.C., ANTLE C.E., HENRY J.J., RADO Z., DESCORNET G., SANDBERG U., GOTHIÉ M.,
HUSCHEK S., « Expérience internationale AIPCR pour comparer et harmoniser les mesures de frottement
et de texture » (« International PIARC Experiment to Compare and Harmonize Skid Resistance and Tex-
ture Measurements »), Publication AIPCR 01.04.T, Paris, 1995, 423 pages.
[6] DESCORNET G., Proposal for a European standard in relation with the skid resistance of road surfacings, Final
report, Research contract SSTC NO/C3/004, Belgian Road Research Centre, Brussels, 1998.
[7] DESCORNET G., SCHMIDT B., BOULET M., GOTHIÉ M., DO M-T., FAFIÉ J., VAN DEN BOL M.,
ALONSO M., ROE P., FOREST R., VINER-HERMES H., Final Report – FEHRL, Report 2004/1, 358 pages.
[8] WAMBOLD J.C., ANDRESEN A., YAGER T., MAZUR A., International Runway Friction Index IRFI,
SURF 2000, Nantes, juin 2000, pp. 99-107.

* See the article by Yves Delanne in this issue.

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69
[9] AFNOR, Norme NF EN 13036-4, Caractéristiques de surface des chaussées routières et aéroportuaires – Méthode
d’essais – Partie 4 : Méthode pour mesurer l’adhérence d’une surface : l’essai au Pendule, CEN/TC 227/WG 5, août
2003, 20 pages.
[10] Norme ASTM E 1844-96, Standard Specification for a size 10 ¥ 4-5 Smooth-Tread Friction Test Tyre, ASTM
Committee E-17, février 1997, 4 pages.
[11] GRATIA G., Appareil VANI (véhicule d’analyse d’itinéraires) : un appareil multifonction pour les études
de sécurité, Bulletin de liaison des Laboratoires des Ponts et Chaussées, Spécial XVII, juin 1995, pp. 69-74.
[12] HO JC., LOIR G., DELCOURT C., GOTHIÉ M., DELMULLE J.-P., LABOIS G., Mode opératoire : Mesure d’un
coefficient de frottement longitudinal avec l’appareil ADHERA 2, juin 2001, 51 pages.
[13] GOTHIÉ M., AIPCR Comité C1 : Spécifications d’un pneu standard pour la mesure d’un coefficient de
frottement d’une surface de chaussée : le pneu lisse, novembre 2004, 10 pages. http://www.piarc.org/en/
publications/tech-report/.
[14] AFNOR, Norme NF P 98-220-2 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées – Essais liés à l’adhérence – Partie 2 : Méthode per-
mettant d’obtenir un coefficient de frottement longitudinal (adhérence longitudinale), novembre 1994, 7 pages.
[15] GORAND J.-L., GOTHIÉ M., Mode opératoire : Mesure d’un coefficient de frottement transversal avec l’appareil
SCRIM, octobre 1999, 40 pages.
[16] AFNOR, Norme NF P 98-220-3, Essais relatifs aux chaussées – Essais liés à l’adhérence – Partie 3 : Méthode per-
mettant de mesurer le coefficient de frottement transversal entre un pneumatique de véhicule et la chaussée
(adhérence transversale), juillet 1995, 6 pages.
[17] AFNOR, Norme NF P 98-220-4, Essais relatifs aux chaussées – Essais liés à l’adhérence – Partie 4 : Méthode per-
mettant d’obtenir un coefficient de frottement transversal avec un appareil SCRIM, décembre 1996, 6 pages.
[18] AFNOR, Norme NF EN 13036-1, Caractéristiques de surface des chaussées routières et aéroportuaires – Méthode
d’essais – Partie 1 : Méthode volumétrique à la tache pour mesurer la macrotexture d’une surface de chaussée, CEN/
TC 227/WG 5, janvier 2002, 20 pages.
[19] AFNOR, Norme NF EN ISO 13473-1, Caractérisation de la texture d’un revêtement de chaussée à partir de relevés
de profils – Partie 1 : détermination de la profondeur moyenne du profil, AFNOR – ISO TC 43/SC 1/WG 39 et
CEN/TC 227/WG 5, octobre 2004, 22 pages.
[20] LCPC, Mesure de l’adhérence des chaussées routières et aéronautiques, ME 50, septembre 2002, 28 pages.
[21] Ministère de l’Équipement des Transports et du Logement, du Tourisme et de la Mer, Direction des routes,
Circulaire n° 2002-39 du 16 mai 2002 relative à l’adhérence des couches de roulement neuves et au contrôle de la
macrotexture.
[22] STASSE G., Caractérisation d’adhérence de revêtement de chaussées routières, Études et Recherches des Labo- 69
ratoires des Ponts et Chaussées, LCPC, CR 25, mars 2000, 199 pages.

BULLETIN DES LABORATOIRES DES PONTS ET CHAUSSÉES - 255

APRIL-MAY-JUNE 2005 - REF. 4565 - PP. 53-69