"... In PAGE 9: ...Table1... ..."

"... In PAGE 30: ... Measurements were first taken from the prelevel surface to isolate the improvement of the overlay course. Table4 -1. Southbound Profilograph Summary Lane WheelPath Prelevel PRI [in/mi(mm/km)] Overlay PRI [in/mi(mm/km)] Improvementin PRI [in/mi(mm/km)] When Paved 1 Inside 4.... In PAGE 30: ...0(79) -0.8(13) D Table4 -2. Northbound Profilograph Summary Lane WheelPath Prelevel PR [in/mi(mm/km)] Overlay PRI [in/mi(mm/km)] Improvement inPRI [in/mi(mm/km)] When Paved 1 Inside 11.... In PAGE 35: ...erspective. When Markey et al. (1994) studied the initial impact of the WSDOT quality assurance (QA) specification, they included three QA projects. In Table4 -3, the statistical parameters for density from those jobs are compared to those from the mainline paving for the I-405 project. The I-405 project compares quite well.... In PAGE 35: ...aving for the I-405 project. The I-405 project compares quite well. Its mean average density is exceeded by only one of the other three projects (3522), and all but one of the other projects (3587) have greater variability. Table4 -3. Comparison of I-405 Average Rice Density Percentage Parameters to EarlyQA Projects from Markey et al.... In PAGE 36: ... Notwithstanding differences between measurement methods, the I-405 project variability was found to be distinctly less than those reported from the several sources included in Table 4-4. Table4 -4. Comparison with Reported Standard Deviation of Asphalt Concrete Air Voidsfor Roadway Compacted Mixtures (adapted from Hughes 1996) Source Year Method AV% I-405 1997 Nuclear 0.... In PAGE 36: ...roject was 6.8, which suggests a satisfactory period of service from the overlay. GRADATION Areas of quality performance that were explicitly specified in addition to density were the aggregates gradation and the asphalt cement content. Table4 -5 shows how favorably the mix of aggregate and asphalt cement fractions for this job compared to the job mix formula. For each aggregate size and for the asphalt cement content, job gradation fell well within the specified range limits.... In PAGE 37: ... Table4 -5. Gradation Summary for I-405 Project Item JMF% Job Average% Standard Deviation% One StandardDeviation% Specified Range Limits% 3/4 (19 mm) 100.... In PAGE 37: ...8 - 5.8 Table4 -6 helps to put the gradation variability into perspective. Aggregate gradation variability data published by Hughes (1996) is shown here for direct comparison to the I-405 gradation results.... In PAGE 38: ... Table4 -6. Comparison with Typical Asphalt Concrete Aggregate GradationVariability from Extraction Tests (adapted from Hughes 1996) Percent Passing Standard Deviation Size I-405 Washington1993 Arkansas*1993 Pennsylvania1982 Virginia1968 3/4 or 1/2 (19 mm or 12.... In PAGE 38: ... The asphalt cement content variability can also be compared with some typical standard deviations. Table4 -7 shows how the variability from the I-405 project compares to data previously published from several sources and condensed by Hughes (1996). Only data from the last ten years are presented.... ..."

"... In PAGE 10: ... Results shown for this subspace were typical. Table5 contains the identified model structures for and DL m C,C, C for this inference subspace. Based on the data, the identification algorithm determined that no sideslip angle dependence was needed for the longitudinal coefficients models in subspace 16, so the final models did not include sideslip angle.... ..."