ASTM D7585/D7585M-10(2015)
(Practice)Standard Practice for Evaluating Retroreflective Pavement Markings Using Portable Hand-Operated Instruments
Standard Practice for Evaluating Retroreflective Pavement Markings Using Portable Hand-Operated Instruments
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice provides procedures for the determination of the retroreflective performance of pavement markings. This practice does not set the minimum retroreflectance values for pavement markings, it describes sampling criteria for determining the retroreflective properties of pavement markings, which then can be used to determine compliance with a specification. It is the responsibility of the agency having jurisdiction to set the acceptable retroreflectivity values within their own specifications.
5.2 This practice does not purport to address all the concerns regarding contamination of the markings, but the following may be helpful. It is very important that the markings being evaluated are clean and dry. If the evaluation is being used relative to a measure of the performance of a contractor, it is imperative that the parties agree beforehand on the definition of clean and dry. There are many forms of contamination on a roadway that will lower the retroreflectivity readings of a marking, but not all of them can be removed. Asphalt oil and rubber skid marks are examples. Loose dirt can be removed by pressure washing, perhaps using soap, brushing or high-pressure air, however, these techniques are usually insufficient to remove dirt that is packed into the marking surface. Care should be taken to select areas that are typical of the marking section, avoiding areas of paint tracking or contamination, for example. It may be useful to take photographs using a digital camera and a good macro lens to be able to see the contamination on or between the glass beads.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes several field techniques to evaluate the retroreflective properties of pavement markings containing retroreflecting optics (for example, centerlines and edgelines) and applied to the road surface. The techniques described in this practice contain sampling criteria such as the length of test sections and the number of measurements needed. The practice is based on retroreflective measurements made with portable hand-operated instruments in compliance with Test Method E1710.
1.2 The data obtained from this practice can be used to determine the acceptance or rejection of a project based on specified levels of retroreflectivity established by the agency having jurisdiction.
1.3 This practice can be used for the evaluation of newly installed or existing pavement markings. When testing newly applied pavement markings, it is recommended that the evaluation be done no sooner than 48 hours after application but before 30 days after application so that excess retroreflective optics, such as glass spheres, are no longer present.
1.4 The assessment techniques in this practice are based on best practices and designed to provide three levels of confidence in terms of quantifying the retroreflective performance of markings. Each technique represents a tradeoff between the number of measurements and the confidence of the retroreflective performance of the markings under study.
1.5 This practice can be used by agencies as is or may be customized to meet an agency’s specific needs. Where applicable, the practice describes areas where different assumptions could be made, which would impact the sampling needs and the confidence levels of the results. When deviations from this practice are made, they shall be documented in the test report.
Note 1: When measuring newly installed pavement markings, there are several factors that contribute to erroneous values for measurements made within a short time after application, such as excess retroreflective optics, top-coatings on tape, incomplete curing of the binder, and coatings on the retroreflective optics. Retroreflective measurements taken within 48 h after application may be useful to quickly gauge the application quality but are not intended to be used with this practice.
Note 2: When measuring existing or in-service pavement markings, care should be...
General Information
Buy Standard
Standards Content (Sample)
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
Designation: D7585/D7585M −10 (Reapproved 2015)
Standard Practice for
Evaluating Retroreflective Pavement Markings Using
Portable Hand-Operated Instruments
This standard is issued under the fixed designation D7585/D7585M; the number immediately following the designation indicates the
year of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last
reapproval. A superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
are several factors that contribute to erroneous values for measurements
1. Scope
made within a short time after application, such as excess retroreflective
1.1 This practice describes several field techniques to evalu-
optics, top-coatings on tape, incomplete curing of the binder, and coatings
ate the retroreflective properties of pavement markings con- ontheretroreflectiveoptics.Retroreflectivemeasurementstakenwithin48
h after application may be useful to quickly gauge the application quality
taining retroreflecting optics (for example, centerlines and
but are not intended to be used with this practice.
edgelines) and applied to the road surface. The techniques
NOTE 2—When measuring existing or in-service pavement markings,
described in this practice contain sampling criteria such as the
care should be taken so that representative sections of pavement markings
length of test sections and the number of measurements
are measured. There are particular conditions where excessive pavement
needed. The practice is based on retroreflective measurements marking wear can be associated with a specific cause such as vehicle
tracking along horizontal curves, access points to gravel pits, and high
made with portable hand-operated instruments in compliance
weave areas. Pavement markings can also collect dirt, grime, and debris.
with Test Method E1710.
1.6 This practice replaces Test Method D6359 with a
1.2 The data obtained from this practice can be used to
multi-level strategy for evaluating the retroreflectance of pave-
determine the acceptance or rejection of a project based on
ment marking materials. This change was desired to provide
specified levels of retroreflectivity established by the agency
agencies with options for project acceptance and monitoring of
having jurisdiction.
pavement markings during service.
1.3 This practice can be used for the evaluation of newly
1.7 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units
installed or existing pavement markings. When testing newly
are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in
applied pavement markings, it is recommended that the evalu-
each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each
ation be done no sooner than 48 hours after application but
system shall be used independently of the other. Combining
before 30 days after application so that excess retroreflective
values from the two systems may result in non-conformance
optics, such as glass spheres, are no longer present.
with the standard.
1.4 The assessment techniques in this practice are based on
1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the
best practices and designed to provide three levels of confi-
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
dence in terms of quantifying the retroreflective performance
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
of markings. Each technique represents a tradeoff between the
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
number of measurements and the confidence of the retroreflec-
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.
tive performance of the markings under study.
1.5 This practice can be used by agencies as is or may be
2. Referenced Documents
customized to meet an agency’s specific needs. Where 2
2.1 ASTM Standards:
applicable, the practice describes areas where different as-
D4061 Test Method for Retroreflectance of Horizontal Coat-
sumptions could be made, which would impact the sampling
ings
needs and the confidence levels of the results.When deviations
D6359 Specification for Minimum Retroreflectance of
from this practice are made, they shall be documented in the
Newly Applied Pavement Marking Using Portable Hand-
test report.
Operated Instruments (Withdrawn 2006)
NOTE 1—When measuring newly installed pavement markings, there E284 Terminology of Appearance
1 2
This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D04 on Road and For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
Paving Materials and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D04.38 on contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
Highway Traffic Control Materials. Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
Current edition approved Dec. 1, 2015. Published February 2016. Originally the ASTM website.
approved in 2010. Last previous edition approved in 2010 as D7585/D7585M – 10. The last approved version of this historical standard is referenced on
DOI: 10.1520/D7585_D7585M-10R15. www.astm.org.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
D7585/D7585M − 10 (2015)
E808 Practice for Describing Retroreflection require a minimum number of measurements while maintain-
E1710 Test Method for Measurement of Retroreflective ing confidence with the results.
Pavement Marking Materials with CEN-Prescribed Ge-
4.2.3 Amorerigorousevaluationprotocol,whichprovidesa
ometry Using a Portable Retroreflectometer
higherlevelofassurancethattheretroreflectivitydatacollected
with hand-held devices is representative of the marking being
3. Terminology
evaluated. This protocol requires an intensive measurement
3.1 The terms and definitions in Terminology E284 and
protocol and should be used as the referee method to resolve
Practice E808 are applicable to this specification.
disputes regarding the status of a marking.
3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
4.3 The three assessment techniques described in 4.2 were
3.2.1 acceptable quality level, AQL, n—the maximum per-
designed so that they could be used independently of one
cent defective that, for purposes of sampling inspection, can be
another. In other words, an agency can specify the use of a
considered satisfactory as a process average (that is, the
specific assessment technique, a combination, or all three.
percent defective that can be tolerated without impairing
Furthermore, they are not meant to be used sequentially for all
performance).
evaluations, but that is certainly an option.
3.2.1.1 Discussion—Thisisthemaximumallowablepropor-
tion of pavement marking readings with values below specifi-
5. Significance and Use
cation.
5.1 This practice provides procedures for the determination
3.2.2 evaluation section—the specific area of the pavement
of the retroreflective performance of pavement markings. This
marking along which measurements will be made.
practice does not set the minimum retroreflectance values for
3.2.3 limit quality, LQ, n—limit of the AQL that is
pavement markings, it describes sampling criteria for deter-
acceptable, providing a specified limited quality for protection.
mining the retroreflective properties of pavement markings,
3.2.3.1 Discussion—This is the proportion of pavement
which then can be used to determine compliance with a
marking readings with values below the acceptable level,
specification. It is the responsibility of the agency having
which in the worst case, would be allowed.
jurisdiction to set the acceptable retroreflectivity values within
their own specifications.
3.2.4 producer’s risk—the risk the producer of the marking
takes that the marking will fail the requirement specified when
5.2 This practice does not purport to address all the con-
the marking is actually acceptable.
cerns regarding contamination of the markings, but the follow-
3.2.4.1 Discussion—Ifthepopulationoftheentirepavement
ingmaybehelpful.Itisveryimportantthatthemarkingsbeing
marking fulfills the specification, there is still the probability
evaluated are clean and dry. If the evaluation is being used
that the sampling of the marking will fall below the required
relative to a measure of the performance of a contractor, it is
level as specified. This is designated the α risk (alpha risk).
imperativethatthepartiesagreebeforehandonthedefinitionof
3.2.5 user’s risk—the risk the owner of the marking takes
clean and dry. There are many forms of contamination on a
that the marking will meet the requirement specified when the
roadway that will lower the retroreflectivity readings of a
marking retroreflectivity is actually substandard.
marking, but not all of them can be removed. Asphalt oil and
3.2.5.1 Discussion—Ifthepopulationoftheentirepavement
rubber skid marks are examples. Loose dirt can be removed by
marking fails the specification, there is still the probability that
pressure washing, perhaps using soap, brushing or high-
the sampling of the marking will equal or exceed the required
pressure air, however, these techniques are usually insufficient
level as specified. This is designated the β risk (beta risk).
to remove dirt that is packed into the marking surface. Care
should be taken to select areas that are typical of the marking
4. Summary of Practice
section, avoiding areas of paint tracking or contamination, for
4.1 This practice does not set the minimum retroreflectance
example. It may be useful to take photographs using a digital
values for newly installed pavement markings or minimum
camera and a good macro lens to be able to see the contami-
maintenance levels of pavement markings. It is the responsi-
nation on or between the glass beads.
bility of the agency having jurisdiction to set the acceptable
retroreflectivity values within their specifications.
6. Procedure
4.2 This practice describes assessment techniques (includ-
6.1 Standardization of Portable Hand-Operated Retrore-
ing sampling criteria) to evaluate the retroreflective perfor-
flective Measurement Instruments:
mance of pavement markings, which can then be used to
6.1.1 Before taking measurements, the retroreflectometer(s)
determine compliance to a referenced specification. More
shall be standardized with an instrument standard as defined in
specifically, this practice includes:
Test Method D4061.
4.2.1 A nighttime visual inspection protocol to inspect the
6.1.2 When more than one instrument is used, the instru-
appearance of the markings and identify sections that appear to
ments should be compared to a known standard in order to
have inadequate retroreflectivity levels.
determine the characteristics of the specific instrument. These
4.2.2 A standard evaluation protocol, which provides a
characteristics should be noted and taken into account when
reasonable measure of assurance that the retroreflectivity data
recording values.
collected with hand-held devices is representative of the
markings being evaluated. The protocol was designed to 6.2 Nighttime Visual Inspection Protocol:
D7585/D7585M − 10 (2015)
6.2.1 This technique may be used to assess newly installed marking of interest is less than 2 miles [3 km], in which case
markings, and to assess the performance of in-service mark- a minimum of one evaluation section is needed). For pavement
ings. This technique may be used to assess all types of markinglineslongerthan10miles[16km],theagencyhaving
pavement markings. jurisdiction may elect to specify more than three evaluation
sections (such as three evaluation sections per 10 miles [16
6.2.2 Schedule a night to conduct the visual inspection of
the project so that the pavement markings are dry and the km]). Measurements should be taken at regular intervals
throughout the evaluation section. For lane lines and broken
ambient weather conditions are free of rain, fog, or other types
of precipitation. centerlines, two measurements should be taken on each skip
line.
6.2.3 A representative automobile or light passenger truck
shall be used for the inspection. The headlamps shall be in
6.3.5 Once safe conditions are provided, portable hand-
good working condition and aimed correctly.
operated retroreflective measurements can be taken for each
6.2.4 The inspection shall be conducted in full nighttime evaluation section. The intent is to take enough measurements
conditions (after civil twilight) with the vehicle headlamps on
to be confident that the mean of the measurements are close to
low beam. the true mean retroreflectivity of the measurement section
6.2.5 Inspect all the markings visually through the wind- while minimizing the number of measurements needed. The
shield while driving at the posted speed. recommended number of measurements is 16 per section, as
6.2.6 Look for areas that appear to lack the luminance described in Annex A1.
expected based on the specified retroreflectivity or lack the
6.3.6 Once the measurements are recorded, calculate the
expected uniformity. Look for inconsistent areas where the
average to determine a single retroreflectivity value represen-
luminance is below what could be expected for the pavement
tative for the evaluation section. This average value represents
marking system being inspected. The use of an inspection
the retroreflectivity of the pavement marking and can be used
panel with a known retroreflective level, which provides a
to determine compliance with the appropriate specification. On
known luminance level under given observation conditions,
the centerline of undivided roadways, the owner shall specify
may be useful to identify inadequate sections. When conduct-
if the directional measurements will be averaged together to
ing inspections of in-service markings (not newly applied
determine compliance with the appropriate specification or if
markings), it is helpful to use multiple inspectors with exper-
they will be kept separate to determine compliance as a
tise in pavement marking retroreflectivity.
function of direction of travel.
6.2.7 If suspect areas are identified, note the locations.
6.4 Referee Evaluation Protocol:
During a subsequent daytime inspection, ensure that the
6.4.1 This technique may be used to assess newly installed
markingsarerepresentativeandwithoutexcessivewearcaused
markings, and to assess the performance of in-service mark-
by such factors as a nearby gravel pit or in proximity to a high
ings.Thistechniquecanbeusedtoassessalltypesofpavement
weave area. Evaluate the suspect areas in accordance with 6.3
markings. The basis of this protocol is described in further
Standard Evaluation Protocol or 6.4 Referee Evaluation Pro-
detail in Annex A2.
tocol to determine compliance to the required specification.
6.4.2 All measurements are to be made in the d
...
This document is not an ASTM standard and is intended only to provide the user of an ASTM standard an indication of what changes have been made to the previous version. Because
it may not be technically possible to adequately depict all changes accurately, ASTM recommends that users consult prior editions as appropriate. In all cases only the current version
of the standard as published by ASTM is to be considered the official document.
Designation: D7585/D7585M − 10 D7585/D7585M − 10 (Reapproved 2015)
Standard Practice for
Evaluating Retroreflective Pavement Markings Using
Portable Hand-Operated Instruments
This standard is issued under the fixed designation D7585/D7585M; the number immediately following the designation indicates the
year of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last
reapproval. A superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope
1.1 This practice describes several field techniques to evaluate the retroreflective properties of pavement markings containing
retroreflecting optics (for example, centerlines and edgelines) and applied to the road surface. The techniques described in this
practice contain sampling criteria such as the length of test sections and the number of measurements needed. The practice is based
on retroreflective measurements made with portable hand-operated instruments in compliance with Test Method E1710.
1.2 The data obtained from this practice can be used to determine the acceptance or rejection of a project based on specified
levels of retroreflectivity established by the agency having jurisdiction.
1.3 This practice can be used for the evaluation of newly installed or existing pavement markings. When testing newly applied
pavement markings, it is recommended that the evaluation be done no sooner than 48 hours after application but before 30 days
after application so that excess retroreflective optics, such as glass spheres, are no longer present.
1.4 The assessment techniques in this practice are based on best practices and designed to provide three levels of confidence
in terms of quantifying the retroreflective performance of markings. Each technique represents a tradeoff between the number of
measurements and the confidence of the retroreflective performance of the markings under study.
1.5 This practice can be used by agencies as is or may be customized to meet an agency’s specific needs. Where applicable,
the practice describes areas where different assumptions could be made, which would impact the sampling needs and the
confidence levels of the results. When deviations from this practice are made, they shall be documented in the test report.
NOTE 1—When measuring newly installed pavement markings, there are several factors that contribute to erroneous values for measurements made
within a short time after application, such as excess retroreflective optics, top-coatings on tape, incomplete curing of the binder, and coatings on the
retroreflective optics. Retroreflective measurements taken within 48 h after application may be useful to quickly gauge the application quality but are not
intended to be used with this practice.
NOTE 2—When measuring existing or in-service pavement markings, care should be taken so that representative sections of pavement markings are
measured. There are particular conditions where excessive pavement marking wear can be associated with a specific cause such as vehicle tracking along
horizontal curves, access points to gravel pits, and high weave areas. Pavement markings can also collect dirt, grime, and debris.
1.6 This practice replaces Test Method D6359 with a multi-level strategy for evaluating the retroreflectance of pavement
marking materials. This change was desired to provide agencies with options for project acceptance and monitoring of pavement
markings during service.
1.7 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each
system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the
two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.
1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility
of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory
limitations prior to use.
2. Referenced Documents
2.1 ASTM Standards:
D4061 Test Method for Retroreflectance of Horizontal Coatings
This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D04 on Road and Paving Materials and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D04.38 on Highway
Traffic Control Materials.
Current edition approved Aug. 1, 2010Dec. 1, 2015. Published August 2010February 2016. Originally approved in 2010. Last previous edition approved in 2010 as
D7585/D7585M – 10. DOI: 10.1520/D7585–10.10.1520/D7585_D7585M-10R15.
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM Standards
volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on the ASTM website.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
D7585/D7585M − 10 (2015)
D6359 Specification for Minimum Retroreflectance of Newly Applied Pavement Marking Using Portable Hand-Operated
Instruments (Withdrawn 2006)
E284 Terminology of Appearance
E808 Practice for Describing Retroreflection
E1710 Test Method for Measurement of Retroreflective Pavement Marking Materials with CEN-Prescribed Geometry Using a
Portable Retroreflectometer
3. Terminology
3.1 The terms and definitions in Terminology E284 and Practice E808 are applicable to this specification.
3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
3.2.1 acceptable quality level, AQL, n—the maximum percent defective that, for purposes of sampling inspection, can be
considered satisfactory as a process average (that is, the percent defective that can be tolerated without impairing performance).
The last approved version of this historical standard is referenced on www.astm.org.
3.2.1.1 Discussion—
This is the maximum allowable proportion of pavement marking readings with values below specification.
3.2.2 evaluation section—the specific area of the pavement marking along which measurements will be made.
3.2.3 limit quality, LQ, n—limit of the AQL that is acceptable, providing a specified limited quality for protection.
3.2.3.1 Discussion—
This is the proportion of pavement marking readings with values below the acceptable level, which in the worst case, would be
allowed.
3.2.4 producer’s risk—the risk the producer of the marking takes that the marking will fail the requirement specified when the
marking is actually acceptable.
3.2.4.1 Discussion—
If the population of the entire pavement marking fulfills the specification, there is still the probability that the sampling of the
marking will fall below the required level as specified. This is designated the α risk (alpha risk).
3.2.5 user’s risk—the risk the owner of the marking takes that the marking will meet the requirement specified when the
marking retroreflectivity is actually substandard.
3.2.5.1 Discussion—
If the population of the entire pavement marking fails the specification, there is still the probability that the sampling of the marking
will equal or exceed the required level as specified. This is designated the β risk (beta risk).
4. Summary of Practice
4.1 This practice does not set the minimum retroreflectance values for newly installed pavement markings or minimum
maintenance levels of pavement markings. It is the responsibility of the agency having jurisdiction to set the acceptable
retroreflectivity values within their specifications.
4.2 This practice describes assessment techniques (including sampling criteria) to evaluate the retroreflective performance of
pavement markings, which can then be used to determine compliance to a referenced specification. More specifically, this practice
includes:
4.2.1 A nighttime visual inspection protocol to inspect the appearance of the markings and identify sections that appear to have
inadequate retroreflectivity levels.
4.2.2 A standard evaluation protocol, which provides a reasonable measure of assurance that the retroreflectivity data collected
with hand-held devices is representative of the markings being evaluated. The protocol was designed to require a minimum number
of measurements while maintaining confidence with the results.
4.2.3 A more rigorous evaluation protocol, which provides a higher level of assurance that the retroreflectivity data collected
with hand-held devices is representative of the marking being evaluated. This protocol requires an intensive measurement protocol
and should be used as the referee method to resolve disputes regarding the status of a marking.
D7585/D7585M − 10 (2015)
4.3 The three assessment techniques described in 4.2 were designed so that they could be used independently of one another.
In other words, an agency can specify the use of a specific assessment technique, a combination, or all three. Furthermore, they
are not meant to be used sequentially for all evaluations, but that is certainly an option.
5. Significance and Use
5.1 This practice provides procedures for the determination of the retroreflective performance of pavement markings. This
practice does not set the minimum retroreflectance values for pavement markings, it describes sampling criteria for determining
the retroreflective properties of pavement markings, which then can be used to determine compliance with a specification. It is the
responsibility of the agency having jurisdiction to set the acceptable retroreflectivity values within their own specifications.
5.2 This practice does not purport to address all the concerns regarding contamination of the markings, but the following may
be helpful. It is very important that the markings being evaluated are clean and dry. If the evaluation is being used relative to a
measure of the performance of a contractor, it is imperative that the parties agree beforehand on the definition of clean and dry.
There are many forms of contamination on a roadway that will lower the retroreflectivity readings of a marking, but not all of them
can be removed. Asphalt oil and rubber skid marks are examples. Loose dirt can be removed by pressure washing, perhaps using
soap, brushing or high-pressure air, however, these techniques are usually insufficient to remove dirt that is packed into the marking
surface. Care should be taken to select areas that are typical of the marking section, avoiding areas of paint tracking or
contamination, for example. It may be useful to take photographs using a digital camera and a good macro lens to be able to see
the contamination on or between the glass beads.
6. Procedure
6.1 Standardization of Portable Hand-Operated Retroreflective Measurement Instruments:
6.1.1 Before taking measurements, the retroreflectometer(s) shall be standardized with an instrument standard as defined in Test
Method D4061.
6.1.2 When more than one instrument is used, the instruments should be compared to a known standard in order to determine
the characteristics of the specific instrument. These characteristics should be noted and taken into account when recording values.
6.2 Nighttime Visual Inspection Protocol:
6.2.1 This technique may be used to assess newly installed markings, and to assess the performance of in-service markings. This
technique may be used to assess all types of pavement markings.
6.2.2 Schedule a night to conduct the visual inspection of the project so that the pavement markings are dry and the ambient
weather conditions are free of rain, fog, or other types of precipitation.
6.2.3 A representative automobile or light passenger truck shall be used for the inspection. The headlamps shall be in good
working condition and aimed correctly.
6.2.4 The inspection shall be conducted in full nighttime conditions (after civil twilight) with the vehicle headlamps on low
beam.
6.2.5 Inspect all the markings visually through the windshield while driving at the posted speed.
6.2.6 Look for areas that appear to lack the luminance expected based on the specified retroreflectivity or lack the expected
uniformity. Look for inconsistent areas where the luminance is below what could be expected for the pavement marking system
being inspected. The use of an inspection panel with a known retroreflective level, which provides a known luminance level under
given observation conditions, may be useful to identify inadequate sections. When conducting inspections of in-service markings
(not newly applied markings), it is helpful to use multiple inspectors with expertise in pavement marking retroreflectivity.
6.2.7 If suspect areas are identified, note the locations. During a subsequent daytime inspection, ensure that the markings are
representative and without excessive wear caused by such factors as a nearby gravel pit or in proximity to a high weave area.
Evaluate the suspect areas in accordance with 6.3 Standard Evaluation Protocol or 6.4 Referee Evaluation Protocol to determine
compliance to the required specification.
6.2.8 If no suspect areas are identified, record a minimum of four measurements and calculate the average. The averaged
retroreflectivity level shall be used to determine compliance with the appropriate specification.
6.3 Standard Evaluation Protocol:
6.3.1 This technique is intended for longitudinal markings such as edgelines, lane lines, and centerlines. It is not intended to
be used for pavement marking symbols, intersection markings, crosswalks, or other non-longitudinal pavement markings. Use 6.2
or 6.4 to evaluate the retroreflectivity of non-longitudinal pavement markings.
6.3.2 All measurements shall be made in the direction of travel. On the centerline of undivided highways, measurements shall
be made in both directions unless otherwise specified by the agency having jurisdiction.
6.3.3 The evaluation sections can be obtained through the Nighttime Visual Inspection Protocol described in 6.2 (areas identified
as being suspect). The evaluation sections can also be defined by the agency having jurisdiction, particularly if the Nighttime Visual
Inspection Protocol described in 6.2 is not used.
6.3.4 The evaluation sections should be at least 400 ft [125 m] and clearly identified. There should be at least 3 evaluation
sections per pavement marking of interest (unless the pavement marking of interest is less than 2 miles [3 km], in which case a
minimum of one evaluation section is needed). For pavement marking lines longer than 10 miles [16 km] , the agency
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.