TM 5-826-6/AFR 93-5
APPENDIX A
AIRFIELD PAVEMENT DISTRESS IDENTIFICATION
A-1. Scope. This appendix provides pavement inspectors with a standardized reference for airfield pavement distress
identification. The distress information presented herein is to be used in conjunction with the procedures described in the
main text of this manual to determine pavement condition and maintenance and repair requirements.
A-2. Use of this appendix.
a. The types of airfield pavement distress are listed alphabetically under the major categories of flexible pavements
and jointed rigid pavements. Names, descriptions, severity levels, photographs, and measurement or count criteria
presented for each distress were established based on the effect of the pavement's structural integrity, operational
condition, and maintenance and repair requirements.
b. It is very important that the pavement inspector be able to identify all distress types and their severity levels. The
inspector should study this manual prior to performing an inspection and should carry a copy for reference during the
inspection.
c. It should be emphasized that pavement inspectors must follow the distress descriptions in this appendix in order to
arrive at meaningful and consistent PCI values.
d. Several items that are commonly encountered are outlined in table A-1 for emphasis, and the rater should be
aware of these frequently occurring items before starting the condition survey. A summary of distress types and
respective identification numbers are listed in Table A-2 for ready reference.
e. On some airfields an open-graded asphalt concrete mixture is used to obtain porous friction surfaces (PFS). The
mix allows water to seep through the pore structure, thus increasing the skid resistance and reducing hydroplaning
potential. The PFS are not load-carrying layers and are normally placed in thicknesses ranging from 5/8 to 7/8 inches.
Separate distress criteria for PFS is used because the USAFE command pavement engineer noted that the calculated PCI
for surface distress on PFS pavements using existing criteria was higher than would be expected from experienced
engineers.
A-1
Previous Page
