Safety Aspects of Wet Asphalt Pavement
Surfaces Through Field and Numerical
Modeling Investigations
S.K. Srirangam, K. Anupam, A. Scarpas, C. Kasbergen, and M. Kane
Good pavement macrotexture has a direct influence on vehicle safety
during wet weather conditions by improving vehicle traction and brak-
ing ability. Apart from the macrotexture, several other factors, such as
environmental, tire, and pavement-related characteristics, affect the wet
friction. Most experimental studies had a limited scope of reusability as
soon as there was a change in any of the other factors. In recent years,
the development of powerful finite element tools has made it possible to
simulate complex wet tirepavement interaction as close as possible to
the actual field conditions. However, to the best of the authors knowl-
edge, none of the past analytical and numerical studies were able to
include the actual pavement surface texture in their analysis. This paper
describes an approach to study the effect of actual surface morphologies
of asphalt pavements on the wet friction coefficient by using the finite
element method. Asphalt surface morphologies representative of open-
graded mix to close-graded mix were used in the finite element analysis.
The finite element model was duly calibrated with the field investiga-
tions conducted with state-of-the-art field equipment. The extreme loss
of wet friction, which ultimately led to the risk of hydroplaning, was also
studied. The analyses were performed for two water film thicknesses,
two tread patterns, and two tire slip ratios. The results from the current
study can be used as safety indicators of in-service asphalt pavements
under wet and flooded conditions.
It is well known that a vehicles controllability decreases with speed,
and under certain circumstances, a critical speed exists above which
braking and steering capability are completely lost and accidents may
occur. In general, it is attributed to the result of the loss of skid resis-
tance or hydroplaning, particularly during high-speed travel in wet
weather (1). The factors related to tire, pavement, and environment
have a definite influence on the friction under wet pavement condi-
tions. However, the road macrotexture and the tire tread are the only
components to channel away the water entrapped in the tire contact
patch (2). Hence, it is generally agreed that the surface texture is the
most important factor in controlling the wet friction and hydroplaning
propensity of a flooded pavement.
S.K. Srirangam, K. Anupam, A. Scarpas, and C. Kasbergen, Faculty of Civil Engi-
neering and Geosciences, Delft University of Technology, Stevinweg 1, 2628 CN,
Delft, Netherlands. M. Kane, Institut Franais des Sciences et Technologiques
des Transports, de lAmnagement, et des Rseaux (IFSTTAR) [French Institute
of Science and Technology for Transport, Development, and Networks], Centre de
Nantes, Route de Bouaye CS4, 44341 Bouguenais CEDEX, France. Corresponding
author: S.K. Srirangam, S.K.Srirangam@tudelft.nl.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board,
No. 2446, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington,
D.C., 2014, pp. 3751.
DOI: 10.3141/2446-05
37
Many experimental, analytical, and numerical studies were con-
ducted in the past to quantify the effect of different factors on the
wet friction. The first major experimental study performed by NASA
had identified that the pavement parameters, specifically the surface
texture and its drainage properties, have a huge influence on the wet
friction (3). A pavement with higher macrotexture allows more water
to escape from under the tire, which results in higher friction and
delayed onset of hydroplaning, particularly at higher ground speeds
(4, 5). Cooley and James (5) and Maycock (6) conducted field experi-
ments to determine the effect of pavement texture, in the form of
pavement grooving, on the skid resistance. Hill and Henry proposed
an empirical relationship for wet friction in the form of skid resistance
as a function of vehicle speed and macrotexture depth (7). Recently,
TYROSAFE conducted an extensive experimental program to assess
the influence of tireroad interaction parameters on the wet friction
of pavement surfaces (8). However, the experimental studies have a
limited scope of reusability as soon as there is a change in one or the
other aforementioned factors.
The analytical treatment of the ultimate loss of wet friction was
performed by many researchers, such as Martin (9), Moore (10),
Eshel (11), and Tsakonas et al. (12). The major limitation of their
models was the use of a two-dimensional (2-D) approach for the
analysis of the tire footprint region, which failed to capture the
actual field conditions. Daughaday and Tung were the first to intro-
duce a three-dimensional (3-D) tire surface model to capture the
flooded condition of a pavement with a two-region approach (13).
Anderson et al. developed a mathematical model to determine the
critical water depth on different asphalt surface pavements at which
the ultimate loss of skid resistance may occur (14). But the skid-
ding losses were computed solely according to the water depth.
However, it is very difficult to obtain the closed form solutions for
fluidstructure interaction problems under rolling conditions with
analytical methods. Numerical models developed by researchers
such as Tanner (15), Davis (16), Johnson et al. (17), and Han (18)
typically focus on the simulation of dry tirepavement interaction
of rolling and sliding tires on smooth pavement surfaces. Cho et al.
proposed a method to estimate the frictional energy loss of a pas-
senger car tire rolling on a flooded smooth pavement; the method is
based on a numericalanalytical approach (19). The drawback of this
model is the use of a smooth pavement surface. Ong and Fwa devel-
oped a 3-D skid resistance model based on the finite element (FE)
approach, which considers the effect of grooved pavements (2023).
The drawback of their model was the use of a nonrotating tire with an
artificial pavement.
From the above literature survey, it is apparent that although
there have been many experimental, analytical, and numerical
38 Transportation Research Record 2446

TABLE 1 Asphalt Pavement Mix Compositions for AC-10, SMA, UTS,

andPA by Composition (%)

Components

4/10-mm 2/6.3-mm 0/4-mm Limestone

Surface Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Filler Binder

SMA 55.2 13.8 15.9 8.4 6.4

UTS 52.0 13.7 21.7 7.1 5.5
PA 54.9 16.8 19.2 3.8 5.3
AC-10 17.9 33.9 37.7 4.7 5.8

studies performed to quantify the effect of different factors on wet
friction; still, limited research was done to determine the effect
of asphalt macrotexture on wet friction potential. The present
study focuses on the simulation of tirefluidpavement interaction
on different asphalt pavement surfaces to quantify the effect of
macrotexture in the presence of thick water films in reducing the
risk of accidents. Such a study will provide valuable indicators to
highway agencies about the substantial loss of wet friction asso-
ciated with in-service pavement surfaces under adverse weather
conditions.
Objective and Scope
The main objective of the current study is to quantify the effect
of the surface texture of different asphalt pavements on the wet
friction by using a 3-D FE tirefluidpavement texture interaction
model. The model simulates the condition of a pneumatic tire
rolling and sliding over an asphalt pavement surface in the pres-
ence of a water film. Results from the parametric analyses of the
numerical model would enable the development of relationships
between asphalt mix design and safety against vehicle skidding.
The following parameters influencing wet friction are studied in
this paper:
Study Parameters
To simulate the wet frictionhydroplaning phenomena by the pro-
posed 3-D FE model, two types of tires were considered in the pres-
ent analysis: (a) a PIARC 165R15 standard smooth tire, which is
widely used in skid resistance tests, and (b) a Goodyear 185/60 R15
DuraGrip summer tire, which is widely used in commercial pas-
senger cars (24). By using these tires, the effect of tread pattern on
wet friction and hydroplaning was captured. A constant inflation
pressure of 220 kPa and a constant normal load of 4.29 kN were
considered. Two tire slip ratios, 10% and 100%, were considered to
quantify the effect of an ABS in improving the wet friction. Overall,
three water film thicknesses (2.5 mm, 5 mm, and 7.5 mm) were
considered in the present study. The properties of water at 20C
were used, and the density and dynamic viscosity of water at this
temperature were 1,000 kg/m3 and 1.002 103 Ns/m3, respectively
(25). Four types of asphalt pavement surface morphologies were con-
sidered, namely, asphalt concrete-10 (AC-10), stone mastic asphalt
(SMA), ultrathin surface (UTS), and porous asphalt (PA). The com-
position, particle size distribution, and properties of each mix are
shown in Tables 1, 2, and 3.
TABLE 2 Particle Size Distribution for AC-10, SMA, UTS,
andPA by Passing (%)

1. Four types of asphalt pavement surfaces representing open- Sieve Size (mm)
graded asphalt mix design to dense-graded asphalt mix design;
Surface 14 10 6.3 4 2 1 0.063
2. Two tire slip ratios representing full skidding and common
antibraking system (ABS) conditions; SMA 100 90 47 29 25 21 10.1
3. Two tires, a standard smooth test tire and a commercial passen- UTS 100 91 51 33 28 22 8.8
ger car tire with tread; and PA 100 99 47 27 19 14 5.6
4. Two water film thicknesses representing wet and flooded AC-10 100 97 80 51 41 16 7.8
pavement conditions.

TABLE 3 Standard Asphalt Mix Properties for AC-10, SMA, UTS, and PA

Property

Max. Voids at Voids at Texture Bulk

Density 10 Gyrations 50 Gyrations Depth Density
Surface (kg/m3) (%) (%) (mm) (kg/m3) Voids (%)

SMA 2,400 11.9 6.3 1.5 2,294 4.4

UTS 2,429 13.7 6.9 2.1 2,104 13.4
PA 2,582 22.7 8.8 NA 1,975 23.7
AC-10 2,387 6.3 3.5 0.7 2,348 3.7

Note: Max. = maximum; NA = not available.

Srirangam, Anupam, Scarpas, Kasbergen, and Kane 39

Finite Element Mesh of an X-ray computed tomographer (CT). A fan-beam CT scanner

Asphalt Pavement Surface
The AC slabs of four different mixturesAC-10, SMA, UTS, and
PAwere prepared in the laboratory with a sector roller compac-
tor. Specimens of 60 mm in height and 150 mm in diameter were
cored out of the slabs. These asphalt specimens were used for
X-ray scanning to capture their surface morphologies with a laser
profilometer and an X-ray tomographer. The surface texture mea-
surements were performed at a horizontal resolution of 15 m and a
vertical range of 30 mm by using a noncontact laser profilometer.
The output consisted of an 81 cm2 surface with X, Y, and Z scales
of 104 m, 104 m, and 106 m, respectively (see Figure 1a). The
internal structure of the asphalt mixture was determined by means
with a source X-ray intensity of 225 kV was used to scan each
asphalt specimen with a distance in the vertical direction of 0.4 mm
and gray scale images of 1,430 pixels 1,430 pixels in resolution.
Figure 1a also shows the image analysis technique that was used to
distinguish the different phases, such as air voids, aggregates, and
asphalt binder. During the segmentation process, first the noise of
the X-ray CT scan image was removed by applying a linear spatial
filter. After filtering, a threshold segmentation algorithm was used
to transform the gray scale image into binary images corresponding
to each constituent of the asphaltic mix microstructure. Once the
segmentation was completed, FE meshes for the asphalt pave-
ments were obtained by means of Simpleware software (26). The
pavement meshes for PA, UTS, SMA, and AC-10 are shown in
Figure 1b.

Segmentation Mesh
generation

Image Mask
filtering filtering

(a)

PA surface texture mesh UTS texture mesh

SMA texture mesh AC-10 texture mesh

(b)

FIGURE 1 Generation of asphalt surface FE mesh: (a) procedure to obtain asphalt surface morphology and
(b) resulting FE asphalt surface meshes from Simpleware.
(continued on next page)
40
Front side
(c)
FIGURE 1 (continued) Generation of asphalt surface FE mesh: (c) circular track texture
meter.
In general, there are two types of indicators available for the
assessment of pavement surface macrotexture: (a) mean texture
depth (MTD) and (b) mean profile depth (MPD). The MTD method
works on the principle of spreading a known volume of material such
as sand on the pavement surface and measuring the covered area.
Then, the macrotexture depth is obtained by dividing the volume by
the area. The MPD, however, is calculated by dividing the measured
profile into segments of smaller lengths. The slope of each segment
is suppressed by subtracting a linear regression of the segment, pro-
viding a zero mean profile. According to ISO 13473-1, MPD is a
more reliable indicator than MTD for measuring the macrotexture
depth of a porous surface. Therefore, MPD is considered here as the
indicator to quantify pavement macrotexture. In the present study, a
circular track texture meter (CTM), as shown in Figure1c, was used
to measure the macrotexture of asphalt pavement in relation to MPD
at traffic speeds.
Tire
The procedure starts with the development of 2-D FE mesh of the
PIARC tire cross section with three layers of belts and one layer of
ply as the reinforcement layers, along with the rubber components
of tread, sidewall, and innerliner as shown in Figure 2a. The 3-D
mesh of a PIARC tire was then developed by making use of revolving
and reflecting features in the symmetric model generation option in
Abaqus (27). The individual analytical rigid bodies of the rim were
connected with a translational joint. This translational joint was asso-
ciated with a reference node, which represents the axle of the wheel.
The developed FE mesh for the PIARC test tire is shown in Figure 2b.
For the simulation of the FE mesh of the Goodyear patterned tire
(see Figure 2c), the discretization of tread and tire body regions
was carried out separately with different mesh densities. The tire
body mesh with no tread pattern (see Figure 2d) was obtained by
the simple revolution of its 2-D tire section mesh, which is made up
of belt layers, a carcass layer, and bead cords. The tread mesh was
simulated by repeating the tread pitch pattern as shown in Figure 2e.
The tire body and tread meshes do not need to have identical mesh
partitions at the common interface, and both meshes can be assem-
bled by using a surface-to-surface contact tying algorithm. Then, a
multipitch tread pattern mesh was created by incorporating an appro-
priate number of pitches (62 numbers), determined on the basis of
Transportation Research Record 2446
Rear side
the arc length of the tread. The tread groove width, depth, and spacing
are shown in Figure 2, d and e.
Field Measurements of Wet Friction
The effect of pavement surface texture on the wet friction and the
propensity of hydroplaning was investigated through field tests. The
following parameters were investigated in the field wet friction and
hydroplaning tests:
Pavement surface texture: porous AC 0/6 and dense AC 0/10;
Tire type: 185/60 R15 Goodyear DuraGrip summer tire;
Water thickness: 2.5 mm and 5 mm;
Slip ratio: 10% and 100%;
Velocity: 40, 60, 90, and 120 km/h; and
Tire inflation pressure and load: 220 kPa and 4.29 kN.
All field experiments were performed on the IFSTTAR test
tracks. Figure 3, a through d, shows the test vehicle with the nec-
essary components that was used in the field investigation of wet
friction. The test passenger car was equipped with a dynamomet-
ric wheel (Figure 3a) to measure the force and the torque in three
coordinate directions of the test wheel. The wheel was equipped
with state-of-the-art AQUASENS sensors (Figure 3b) to measure
the precise water film thickness ahead of the wheel. A CORREVIT
sensor (Figure 3c) and a numerical wheel encoder (Figure 3d) were
used to measure the longitudinal speed and the wheel speed of the
test vehicle.
The procedure below was followed to measure the wet friction
coefficient:
1. The test vehicle approached the wet or flooded test track with
a predetermined initial velocity (60, 90, or 120 km/h);
2. Once the test vehicle was in the right location, the braking
system with or without ABS was actuated; and
3. Once the car reached the predetermined final velocity (40, 70,
or 100 km/h), the braking system was released.
Figure 3e shows controlled wet and flooded pavement conditions by
the water retention system. Figure 3f shows the test vehicle traversing
on a pavement with a high water thickness.
Srirangam, Anupam, Scarpas, Kasbergen, and Kane 41

Sidewall

Belts Tread

Rim
Ply

Bead

Innerliner

(a) (b)

Tread Belts 6.5 Ply

6.5 5.5 6.5

Sidewall

Innerliner

Bead

(d)
4.2

4.2
3.4
3.4
3.4

3.4
3.4
3.4

(c)

(e)

FIGURE 2 Mesh details of test tires: (a) cross-section view of PIARC smooth tire, (b) 3-D view of PIARC smooth tire mesh,
(c) 3-D view of Goodyear tire mesh, (d) cross-section view of Goodyear tire, and (e) top view of Goodyear tire tread pitch
pattern.
42 Transportation Research Record 2446

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

4,000
AC -10 surface
Horizontal Drag Force (N)

Speed: 120 km/h

3,000 Water depth: 5 mm
Slip ratio: 100%
2,000

1,000
Data
acquisition time
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time
(g)

FIGURE 3 Field testing of wet friction and hydroplaning: (a) dynamometric wheel, (b) water thickness
sensor, (c) CORREVIT sensor, (d) numerical wheel encoder, (e) controlled wetflooded pavement conditions,
(f ) test vehicle traversing pavement with high water thickness, and (g) measured horizontal force.
Srirangam, Anupam, Scarpas, Kasbergen, and Kane 43

The instrument measured the horizontal drag force and the verti- u
cal force on the contact area at fixed intervals of time during the v ( x, t ) = I (0, T ] (5)
t
entire test. The wet friction coefficient was calculated at every
interval of 2 km/h speed decrement from the initial speed to the ijF n Fj = tiF SF (6)
final speed as a ratio of horizontal drag force and vertical force.
When the test vehicle was driven at a constant velocity on the
where
flooded test track, it was observed that the measured horizontal
force decreased continuously with time as shown in Figure 3g. x = displacement;
From this, it can be expected that the vehicle would have expe- T = total time;
rienced the dynamic hydroplaning had it been driven for a longer I and FS = tirewater interface and free surface of water,
time. However, in the present study, the field tests were not con- respectively;
ducted beyond a constant velocity of 120 km/h under locked wheel u = tire deformation;
condition because of safety reasons. Similar observations were also = Cauchy stress at tirewater interface;
made by the current FE tirewet pavement interaction model under nF = outward unit vector normal to flow boundary;
similar test conditions; the dynamic hydroplaning of the tire was tF = traction acting on free surface of water; and
observed when the simulation was run for a longer time under a con- i and j = indexes.
stant higher velocity. This kind of phenomenon can be captured only
When a rolling and slipping tire moves through the water on a
under transient conditions, contrary to past numerical studies, in which
pavement surface, a bow wave forms in front of the tire and splash
the hydroplaning phenomenon was simulated under steady-state
occurs sideways of the tire. These effects can be captured by tracking
conditions (2023).
the free surface of the water at different time steps. This objective can
be accomplished by using the volume of fluid method. In this method,
material is tracked as it flows through the mesh by computing its
Description of Numerical Model
Eulerian volume fraction (EVF) within each element. By definition,
The proposed FE model was derived from the coupled Eulerian if a material completely fills an element, its EVF is 1; if no material
Lagrangian method. The Lagrangian reference domain is used to is present in an element, its EVF is 0. The volume of fluid method is
discretize the pneumatic tire and the asphalt pavement surface, based on the concept of fractional volumes of different materials in a
while the Eulerian domain is used to discretize the fluid. The bound- single cell, proposed by Hirt and Nicholas (29). The volume (V) of a
ary of the Lagrangian domain is typically taken to represent the fluid (k), for example, water, can be represented as
actual interface between the tire and pavement and the fluid. The
interface model uses the velocity of the Lagrangian boundary as a
kinematic constraint in the Eulerian calculation and the stress in the
Vk = k
(V ) dV (7)

Eulerian cell to calculate the resulting surface force on the Lagrangian

where (V) is an indicator function of fluid presence.
domain (28). The coupled EulerianLagrangian method starts with
the conservation of mass, momentum, and energy equations of the
fluid, which can be expressed as 1 if fluid k is present
(V ) = (8)
0 otherwise
D
= i v = 0 (1)
Dt Cells with values between zero and one must then contain a free
surface.
Dv Given V k, the volume faction f is defined as
= i + b (2)
Dt
Vk
f= (9)
DE V
= i ( i v q ) + b i v (3)
Dt
where V = dV; when water volumes fill all space, then k f k = 1.
where The interactions between the tireasphalt surface, tirefluid sur-
face, and fluidasphalt surface and the combined interaction of the
D/Dt = total derivative, tirefluidasphalt surface were handled by the general contact algo-
t = time increment, rithm to transfer the forces between different domains. The fluid-
= density, structure-interaction problem domain consists of nonoverlapping
v = material velocity, water and tire structural (tire or pavement) domains WF and WS, and
= Cauchy stress, they share a common interface G. If uF denotes the displacement
b = body force, field of the fluid and p, its pressure field; S and F, the structure
E = total energy per unit volume, and stress tensor and the fluid viscous stress tensor; , the fluid and
q = heat flux. structure interface boundary (wet boundary of the structure); and
According to Cho et al., the initial and boundary conditions of the n, the normal at a point to , the fluid and structure equations are
fluid model can be expressed as (19) usually coupled by imposing that

v ( x, 0 ) = 0 (4) S i n = pn + F i n on (10)
44 Transportation Research Record 2446

Equation 10 states that the tractions on the wet surface of the
structure are in equilibrium with those on the fluid side of .
uS = uF on (11)
Equation 11 expresses the compatibility between the displacement
fields of the structure (uS) and the fluid (uF) at the fluidstructure
interface. The complete details of the numerical hydroplaning model
can be found in Srirangam et al. (30).
A 3-D FE wet friction and hydroplaning model developed by the
authors was adopted in this study (27). The model was developed
by using the commercial FE software Abaqus (27). The wet fric-
tion and hydroplaning model simulated the skidding and slipping
or hydroplaning of a pneumatic tire rolling on a wet (or flooded)
asphalt pavement surface morphology. Two stages were involved
in this procedure:
1. A steady state implicit analysis of a 3-D tire rolling over a
smooth plane pavement surface was performed. At this stage tire
deformation and footprint analysis, rolling radius analysis, and
steady state braking and rolling analyses were carried out. The his-
tory of stresses, strains, and displacements obtained from this stage
was transferred to the subsequent transient analysis stage.
2. An equivalent translation velocity (v) was applied to water
and asphalt pavement in the longitudinal direction. At the same
time, the angular velocity of the tire (w = v/r) was specified such
that it could simulate a required slip ratio. Here r was the effective
rolling radius of the tire. Because of the above boundary conditions,
the tire skidded or rotated about a fixed axis under all loading
conditions with no forward motion while the pavement and the
water moved toward the tire. Such a procedure would have reduced
the enormous fine Eulerian mesh otherwise required by the fluid
region throughout the length of the pavement to capture the phe-
nomena. Depending on the capability of the pavement surface
texture, the tread pattern to drain water, or both, part of the water
volume could have filled into the tire grooves and pavement macro
texture. At the same time, as a result of the progressive development
of dynamic water pressure against the deformable tire structure, a
lift force developed. The horizontal force could be computed from
energy principles through which wet friction could be obtained.
However, the hydroplaning was assumed to occur at the criti-
cal velocity of water at which there was no (relatively very low)
contact force between the tire and the asphalt pavement surface.
Figure 4 shows the developed FE wet friction and hydroplaning
simulation model.

PIARC 165R15
smooth tire

Rim

Initial void
W layer (blue)

Initial water
layer (red)

Velocity
outlet of water
Asphalt pavement
Velocity inlet mesh
Side outlet
of water
of water

Asphalt pavement
translation

(a)

FIGURE 4 Three-dimensional FE tireasphalt pavement surfacewater interaction model: (a) components of proposed
model.
(continued)
Srirangam, Anupam, Scarpas, Kasbergen, and Kane
(b)
FIGURE 4 (continued) Three-dimensional FE tireasphalt pavement surfacewater interaction
model: (b) wet friction and hydroplaning phenomena with Goodyear and PIARC tires.
Validation
Validation of the developed 3-D wet friction model was made against
the field measurements under identical test conditions:
1. Goodyear patterned tire rolling at 100% slip ratio (full skidding)
on a PA pavement surface,
2. Goodyear patterned tire rolling at ABS slip ratio (10%) on a
PA pavement surface,
3. Goodyear patterned tire rolling at 100% slip ratio on an AC-10
pavement surface, and
4. Goodyear patterned tire rolling at ABS slip ratio on an AC-10
pavement surface.
Four speeds40 km/h, 60 km/h, 90 km/h, and 120 km/hand
two water film thicknesses2.5 mm and 5 mmwere adopted. The
tire was tested at an inflation pressure of 220 kPa and a tire load of
4.29 kN. On the basis of these variables, 32 scenarios (2 pavement
surfaces 4 speeds 2 slip ratios 2 water films) were analyzed to
validate the wet friction results obtained by the FE model against
the field measurements.
Figure 5 summarizes the results of the comparison analysis. Fig-
ure5, a through d, shows the plots of wet friction against speed for
the PA surface; Figure 5, e through h, shows the plots of wet fric-
tion against speed for the AC-10 surface. The numerical differences
between the predicted and measured wet friction coefficient values
are at most 0.106. In fact, only six of the 30 test cases studied have
a difference in the wet friction coefficient larger than 0.05. In regard
to percentage error, except for one case with a 14% error, all of the
remaining 29cases have errors of 11% or less. For all cases tested,
the comparison of the measured and predicted results (Figure5)
shows a very good agreement, considering the unavoidable vari-
ations of field conditions and possible measurement errors. A
deeper examination of the experimental and model predicted results
shows the following:
1. The wet friction is highly dependent on the wheel slip ratio.
The decrease in wet friction is more pronounced for a locked wheel.
45
2. The water thickness has a great effect on the wet friction. In
both ABS and locked wheel cases, wet friction decreases when
the water thickness increases, regardless of pavement surface and
velocity.
3. The locked wheel traveling at 120 km/h on PA and AC-10 sur-
faces with a water depth of 6 mm produced wet friction coefficients
less than 0.1, which shows the propensity of hydroplaning.
Because of safety reasons, the field tests were not conducted until
total hydroplaning occurred. However, the total hydroplaning situation
was simulated by using the developed FE model once it produced the
same results as observed by the experimental data of lowest friction
values under the same test conditions.
Results and Discussion
In this section, the effect of MPD and pavement mix design on the
wet friction coefficient was investigated by using the developed FE
model. Also the effect of water depth, slip ratio, and tread pattern on
the wet friction was investigated.
Effect of MPD and Other Factors
on Wet Friction Coefficient
The laser scans of PA surfaces that are representative of differ-
ent MPD values were obtained. These surface scans were then
converted into FE pavement meshes as explained in the previous
section. Then FE simulation of the tire rolling and skidding over
the FE pavement surface mesh was performed in the presence
of water film, and the coefficient of wet friction was computed.
The computed wet friction coefficients for 196 cases (7 MPD 7
speeds 2 water depths 2 slip ratios) of simulation analyses of
a PIARC smooth tire and a Goodyear patterned tire are presented
in Figure 6. Each graph plots the computed wet friction coeffi-
cients against MPD for different test conditions. To evaluate the
relative effectiveness of the different factors influencing the wet
46 Transportation Research Record 2446

1.2 1.2
Experimental Experimental
1.0 Predicted 1.0 Predicted

Wet Friction Coefficient

Wet Friction Coefficient

0.8 0.8

0.6 PA pavement 0.6

PA pavement
10% slip ratio 10% slip ratio
5 mm water depth 2.5 mm water depth
0.4 0.4
220 kPa inflation pressure 220 kPa inflation pressure
4.29 kN wheel load 4.29 kN wheel load
0.2 0.2 185/60 R15 Goodyear DuraGrip
185/60 R15 Goodyear DuraGrip
summer tire summer tire
0.0 0.0
30 60 90 120 150 180 210 30 60 90 120 150 180 210
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(a) (b)

1.2 PA pavement 1.2

Experimental
100% slip ratio
1.0 1.0 Predicted
Wet Friction Coefficient

Wet Friction Coefficient

5 mm water depth
220 kPa inflation pressure
0.8 4.29 kN wheel load 0.8
185/60 R15 Goodyear
0.6 DuraGrip summer tire 0.6 PA pavement
100% slip ratio
0.4 0.4 2.5 mm water depth
220 kPa inflation pressure
0.2 Experimental 0.2 4.29 kN wheel load
185/60 R15 Goodyear DuraGrip
Predicted
0.0 0.0 summer tire
30 60 90 120 150 180 210 30 60 90 120 150 180 210
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(c) (d)

1.2 1.2
Experimental Experimental
1.0 Predicted 1.0 Predicted
Wet Friction Coefficient

Wet Friction Coefficient

0.8 0.8

0.6 AC-10 pavement 0.6 AC-10 pavement

10% slip ratio 10% slip ratio
0.4 2.5 mm water depth 0.4 5 mm water depth
220 kPa inflation pressure 220 kPa inflation pressure
4.29 kN wheel load 4.29 kN wheel load
0.2 0.2
185/60 R15 Goodyear DuraGrip 185/60 R15 Goodyear DuraGrip
summer tire summer tire
0.0 0.0
30 60 90 120 150 180 210 30 60 90 120 150 180 210
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(e) (f)

1.2 1.2
AC-10 pavement AC-10 pavement
100% slip ratio 10% slip ratio
1.0 2.5 mm water depth 1.0
Wet Friction Coefficient

Wet Friction Coefficient

5 mm water depth
220 kPa inflation pressure 220 kPa inflation pressure
0.8 4.29 kN wheel load 0.8 4.29 kN wheel load
185/60 R15 Goodyear 185/60 R15 Goodyear
0.6 DuraGrip summer tire 0.6 DuraGrip summer tire

0.4 0.4

0.2 Experimental 0.2 Experimental

Predicted Predicted
0.0 0.0
30 60 90 120 150 180 210 30 60 90 120 150 180 210
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(g) (h)

FIGURE 5 Verification of simulation model against experimental data.

Srirangam, Anupam, Scarpas, Kasbergen, and Kane 47

10% slip ratio

1.0 2.5 mm water depth 10% slip ratio
1.0
186 kPa inflation pressure 7.5 mm water depth
4.29 kN wheel load 186 kPa inflation pressure
0.8
Wet Friction Coefficient

0.8 4.29 kN wheel load

Wet Friction Coefficient

185/60 R15 Goodyear
tire 185/60 R15 Goodyear
tire
0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2
Speed in km/h
Speed in km/h
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0.0
0.0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
MPD (mm) MPD (mm)
(a) (b)

1.0 1.0 100% slip ratio

100% slip ratio
7.5 mm water depth
2.5 mm water depth
0.8 0.8 186 kPa inflation pressure
Wet Friction Coefficient

186 kPa inflation pressure Wet Friction Coefficient

4.29 kN wheel load
4.29 kN wheel load
185/60 R15 Goodyear tire
0.6 185/60 R15 Goodyear tire
0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2
Speed in km/h Speed in km/h
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0.0 0.0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
MPD (mm) MPD (mm)
(c) (d)

10% slip ratio

1.0 10% slip ratio
2.5 mm water depth 1.0 7.5 mm water depth
186 kPa inflation pressure
186 kPa inflation pressure
0.8 4.29 kN wheel load
Wet Friction Coefficient

4.29 kN wheel load

Wet Friction Coefficient

PIARC 165R15 0.8

PIARC 165R15
smooth tire
0.6 smooth tire
0.6

0.4
0.4

0.2 0.2
Speed in km/h Speed in km/h
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0.0 0.0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
MPD (mm) MPD (mm)
(e) (f)

FIGURE 6 Wet friction coefficient versus MPD.

(continued on next page)
48 Transportation Research Record 2446

1.0
100% slip ratio
1.0 Speed in km/h
2.5 mm water depth
Wet Friction Coefficient 0.8 186 kPa inflation pressure 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
4.29 kN wheel load 0.8

Wet Friction Coefficient

100% slip ratio
PIARC 165R15
7.5 mm water depth
0.6 smooth tire
0.6 186 kPa inflation pressure
4.29 kN wheel load
PIARC 165R15
0.4
0.4 smooth tire

0.2 0.2
Speed in km/h
0.0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0.0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
MPD (mm) MPD (mm)
(g) (h)

FIGURE 6 (continued) Wet friction coefficient versus MPD.

friction, the analyses listed below are discussed in the paragraphs
that follow:
1. Evaluation of the effect of MPD on the wet friction for a given
slip ratio, water depth, and tread pattern;
2. Assessment of the effect of ABS and locked wheel operating
conditions on the wet friction for a given MPD, water depth, and
tread pattern;
3. Evaluation of the effect of a given tread pattern on wet friction
for a given MPD, water depth, and slip ratio;
4. Evaluation of the effect of water depth on the wet friction for
a given MPD, slip ratio, and water depth; and
5. Combined effect of MPD and tread pattern on the wet friction
for a given water depth and tire slip ratio.
Effect of MPD on Wet Friction
Figure 6 shows the variation in the values of the wet friction coefficient
as MPD increases from 0.2 to 1.4 mm. The figure demonstrates that
the wet friction coefficient increases with MPD at a constant surface
water depth. For example, the wet friction predicted at the MPD value
of 1.4mm is higher than the value at the MPD of 0.2 mm by 0.27 to
0.45 for a patterned tire and 0.01 to 0.42 for a smooth tire, depending
on the surface water depth and the slip ratio. An examination of the sim-
ulation results shows that a deeper MPD, which offers a more effective
channel for water flow, results in higher wet coefficients of friction.
Effect of Slip Ratio on Wet Friction
The simulation model provides a useful tool to evaluate the effect of
the slip ratio on wet friction. Plots in Figure 6 show that the increase
in the value of the slip ratio decreases the value of the wet friction
coefficient. Although a marginal decrease in the wet friction coef-
ficient was observed for slip ratios between 10% and 100% at lower
speeds, the decrement is more pronounced at higher speeds. The
rate of decrease in the wet friction coefficient with speed is more
noticeable for a locked (100% slip ratio) wheel than an ABS (10%)
wheel, for smooth and patterned tires. Lower wet friction coeffi-
cients are observed for a locked wheel condition, which shows the
increased probability of accidents. The average percentage decrease
in the wet friction coefficient between an ABS wheel and a locked
wheel was observed to be 19.8% and 23.2% for a patterned tire and
a smooth tire, respectively.
Effect of Tread Pattern on Wet Friction
The analysis also presents the effect of tread pattern on the wet
friction phenomena. Figure 6 shows that, at all speeds, wet friction
coefficients for a patterned tire are more than the wet friction coef-
ficients of a smooth tire for a given pavement surface. Figure 6 also
shows that smooth tire skidding at higher speed over a pavement
with thick water has registered a negligible wet friction coefficient
and, therefore, it is highly susceptible to hydroplaning. But for the
same speed, water depth, and pavement conditions, a patterned tire
still performs well. This finding supports the common practice of
maintaining proper tread depth, and tread pattern against the loss of
skid resistance particularly on flooded pavement surfaces.
Effect of Water Depth on Wet Friction
Figure 6 also depicts the trends of the variation of wet friction with
water-film thickness. The general falling trend of the wet friction
coefficient with an increase in water-film thickness is observed for
all MPDs. This result is in agreement with the observations made
by past researchers, who found that the loss of wet friction increases
with an increase in the surface water depth. It is observed that the
effect of water depth on wet friction is marginal for tires rolling and
skidding at lower speeds. But the effect of water thickness is more
pronounced for tires rolling and skidding at higher speeds, which
causes an abnormal drop in the value of the wet friction coefficient
and leads to hydroplaning. Also the effect of water depth on the loss
of wet friction is minimal for a tire rolling at a 10% slip ratio on a
pavement with a high MPD, which shows the necessity to maintain
proper pavement macrotexture and to use an ABS system in wet
weather driving.
Srirangam, Anupam, Scarpas, Kasbergen, and Kane 49

Importance of Maintaining Proper Macrotexture
For the case of an asphalt pavement surface with a lower MPD (0.2
mm) and higher speed (140 km/h) with a fully locked Goodyear tire,
the wet coefficient of friction is observed to be very low (<0.1) such
that even a patterned tire with good tread depth can show indications
of hydroplaning under adverse pavement and braking conditions.
This situation is true even for a lower water depth (2.5 mm) (see Fig-
ure 6, c and d). This situation is even worse if the tire is completely
worn (smooth), in which case it experiences hydroplaning even at
normal driving speeds (<90 km/h) of a passenger car (see Figure 6,
g and h). On the contrary, a pavement with good macrotexture depth
can offer adequate wet friction coefficients even for a full skidding
smooth tire under higher water depths (see Figure 6, e and f ).
Effect of Pavement Mix Design
on Wet Friction Coefficient
The surface macrotexture of asphalt pavement varies with the mix
design. An effective pavement mix design brings about a better sur-
face macrotexture, which in turn serves as flow channels to facilitate
the drainage of water entrapped within the tirepavement contact
area. Therefore, care must be taken to select the proper mix design,
which ensures the proper surface texture of asphalt pavement to
enhance the road travel safety against wet weather skidding and
hydroplaning. Therefore, in this analysis, four types of mix designs,
PA, UTS, SMA, and AC-10, were examined for a standard PIARC
smooth tire and a Goodyear summer patterned tire at two slip ratios
(10% and 100%) in the presence of a thick film of water (7.5 mm).
Figure 7 shows the variation of the wet friction coefficient for dif-
ferent asphalt pavements under consideration with speed, slip ratio,
and tread pattern.
For all cases, the value of the wet friction coefficient decreases
with an increase in speed. However, for the same tire, slip ratio, and
surface water depth conditions, a PA pavement surface gives the
highest wet friction coefficient followed by UTS, SMA, and AC-10.
For example, for the case of a Goodyear patterned tire rolling with
a 10% slip ratio at a speed of 100 km/h, the percentage decrease
in the wet skid resistance from PA to UTS was observed to be 4%
and PA to SMA and PA to AC-10 were found to be 9% and 18%,
respectively. This effect is more pronounced for higher speeds and
full skidding cases in which the percentage decrease in wet friction
from PA to UTS, SMA, and AC-10 were found to be 6%, 15%, and
35%, respectively. This scenario shows that the pavement with the
open-graded mix design gives better wet skid resistance than other
mix designs.
Figure 7 also shows that the combination of all asphalt pave-
ment surfaces with the Goodyear patterned tire, even at a 100% skid
ratio, always produces better wet friction coefficients even at high-
way high design speeds. But this scenario is completely opposite in
the case of their combination with the PIARC smooth tire. In that

1.0 1.0
PA pavement
7.5 mm water depth
0.8 0.8 186 kPa inflation
Wet Friction Coefficient

Wet Friction Coefficient

pressure
4.29 kN wheel load
0.6 0.6 PIARC smooth tire
10%
0.4 0.4 10%
PA pavement
7.5 mm water depth
0.2 186 kPa inflation pressure 0.2
100%
4.29 kN wheel load 100%
185/60 R15 Goodyear tire
0.0 0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(a) (b)

1.0 1.0
UTS pavement
7.5 mm water depth
186 kPa inflation pressure
Wet Friction Coefficient

Wet Friction Coefficient

0.8 0.8
4.29 kN wheel load
10% PIARC smooth tire
0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4
UTS pavement 10%
7.5 mm water depth
0.2 186 kPa inflation pressure 0.2
100% 100%
4.29 kN wheel load
185/60 R15 Goodyear tire
0.0 0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(c) (d)

FIGURE 7 Wet friction coefficient versus mix design.

(continued on next page)
50 Transportation Research Record 2446

1.0 1.0
SMA pavement
7.5 mm water depth

Wet Friction Coefficient

Wet Friction Coefficient

0.8 0.8 186 kPa inflation pressure
4.29 kN wheel load
PIARC smooth tire
0.6 0.6
10%
0.4 0.4
SMA pavement 10%
7.5 mm water depth
0.2 186 kPa inflation pressure 0.2
4.29 kN wheel load 100% 100%
0.0 185/60 R15 Goodyear tire 0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(e) (f)

1.0 1.0
AC -10 pavement AC -10 pavement
7.5 mm water depth 7.5 mm water depth
Wet Friction Coefficient

Wet Friction Coefficient

0.8 186 kPa inflation pressure 0.8 186 kPa inflation pressure
4.29 kN wheel load 4.29 kN wheel load
185/60 R15 Goodyear tire PIARC smooth tire
0.6 0.6

0.4 10% 0.4

10%
0.2 0.2

100% 100%
0.0 0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Speed (km/h) Speed (km/h)
(g) (h)

FIGURE 7 (continued) Wet friction coefficient versus mix design.

case, the wet friction coefficient drops to much lower values beyond
100km/h showing the propensity of hydroplaning, except for the
case of PA. Beyond 120 km/h almost all pavement surfaces show
negligible wet friction values with a smooth tire. Therefore, it can
be concluded that although pavement macrotexture and pavement
mix design can alleviate the hydroplaning to a large extent, proper
tire design with proper groove depth should also be considered to
avoid wet weather accidents.
weather accidents. It was also found that an open-graded mix design
surface such as PA results in the highest wet friction coefficient fol-
lowed by UTS, SMA, and AC-10. Results also suggest that the lower
slip ratio, the lower water depth, and the patterned tire would result in
better wet friction coefficients. Overall, the model was found to be a
very effective and efficient tool, capable of computing friction on wet
asphalt pavement surfaces under different operating conditions.

Conclusions
The application of the proposed FE simulation model to study the
effect of pavement macrotexture and mix design on wet friction has
been illustrated in this paper. The proposed FE model simulates the
condition of a pneumatic tire rolling and sliding on an asphalt pave-
ment surface mesh in the presence of a water film. The proposed FE
model was duly validated with the field data from wet friction tests.
The paper has clearly demonstrated the capability of the proposed FE
model to evaluate the effectiveness of MPD and different pavement
surface morphologies to combat the loss of wet friction. The MPDs
examined cover the common macrotextures from highly polished
surfaces (0.2 mm) to a highly textured surface (1.4 mm). Similarly,
PA, UTS, SMA, and AC surfaces were examined to cover asphalt
mixes ranging from open graded to close graded. Analysis has been
presented to examine the effect of the slip ratio, water depth, and tread
on the wet friction. It was found that, in general, a larger MPD would
increase the wet friction coefficient and thus reduce the risk of wet
References
1. Wambold, J.C., J.J. Henry, and R.R. Hegmon. Skid Resistance of Wet-
Pavement Accidents Sites. ASTM, 1986, pp. 4760.
2. Ivey, D.L., L.I. Griffin III, T.M. Newton, R.L. Lytton, and K.C.
Hankins. Predicting Wet Weather Accidents. Accident Analysis and Pre-
vention, Vol. 13, 1981, pp. 8399.
3. Horne, B., and R.C. Dreher. Phenomena of Pneumatic Tire Hydroplan-
ing. NASA, Washington, D.C., 1963.
4. Rose, J.G., and B.M. Gallaway. Water Depth Influence on Pavement
Friction. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 103, No. 4, 1977,
pp. 491506.
5. Cooley, L.J., and R. James. Micro-Deval Testing of Aggregates in the
Southeast. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transpor-
tation Research Board, No. 1837, Transportation Research Board of the
National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 7379.
6. Maycock, G. Studies of the Skidding Resistance of Passenger Car Tires
on Wet Surfaces. Proceedings of Institute of Mechanical Engineers, Vol.
180, 1965, pp. 122141.
7. Hill, B.J., and J.J. Henry. Short-Term, Weather Related Skid Resis-
tance Variation. In Transportation Research Record 836, TRB, National
Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1978, pp. 7681.
Srirangam, Anupam, Scarpas, Kasbergen, and Kane
8. TYROSAFE. Tyre and Road Surface Optimisation for Skid Resistance
and Further Effects. July 23, 2013. http://tyrosafe.fehrl.org.
9. Martin, C.S. Hydrodynamics of Tire Hydroplaning. CR-76018. Georgia
Institute of Technology, Atlanta, 1966.
10. Moore, D.F. Prediction of Skid-Resistance Gradient and Drainage
Characteristics for Pavements. In Highway Research Record 131, HRB,
National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1966, pp. 181203.
11. Eshel, A.A. Study of Tires on a Wet Runway. Report RR67-24. Annex
Corporation, Redwood City, Calif., 1967.
12. Tsakonas, S., C.J. Henry, and W.R. Jacobs. Hydrodynamics of Aircraft
Tire Hydroplaning. NASA CR-1125. NASA, Washington, D.C., 1968.
13. Daughaday, H., and C. Tung. A Mathematical Analysis of Hydroplaning
Phenomena. Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory Technical Report AG-
2495-S-1. Buffalo, N.Y., 1969.
14. Anderson, D.A., R.S. Huebner, J.R. Reed, J.C. Warner, and J.J. Henry.
Improved Surface Drainage of Pavements: Final Report. Pennsylvania
State University, University Park, 1998.
15. Tanner, J.A. Computational Methods for Frictional Contact with Appli-
cations to the Space Shuttle Orbiter Nose-Gear Tire. NASA Technical
Paper No. 3574. NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Va., 1996.
16. Davis, P.A. Quasi-Static and Dynamic Response Characteristics of F-4
Bias-Ply and Radial-Belted Main Gear Tires. NASA Technical Paper
3586. NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Va., 1997.
17. Johnson, A.R., J.A. Tanner, and A.J. Mason. Quasi-Static Viscoelas-
tic Finite Element Model of an Aircraft Tire. NASA/TM-1999-209141.
NASA, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Va., 1999.
18. Han, Y.H. Fatigue Life Prediction for Cord-Rubber Composite Tires
Using a Global-Local Finite Element Method. PhD thesis. University
of Texas at Austin, 2003.
19. Cho, J.R., H.W. Lee, J.S. Sohn, G.J. Kim, and J.S. Woo. Numerical Inves-
tigation of Hydroplaning Characteristics of Three-Dimensional Patterned
Tire. European Journal of Mechanics and Solids, 2006, pp. 914926.
20. Ong, G.P., and T.F. Fwa. Effectiveness of Transverse and Longitudinal
Pavement Grooving in Wet-Skidding Control. In Transportation Research
51
Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2005, Trans-
portation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C.,
2007, pp. 172182.
21. Ong, G.P., and T.F. Fwa. Transverse Pavement Grooving against Hydro-
planing, ISimulation Model. Journal of Transportation Engineering,
Vol. 132, No. 6, 2006, pp. 441448.
22. Ong, G.P., and T.F. Fwa. Transverse Pavement Grooving against
Hydroplaning, IIDesign. Journal of Transportation Engineering,
Vol. 132, No. 6, 2006, pp. 449457.
23. Ong, G.P., and T.F. Fwa. Modeling Skid Resistance of Commercial
Trucks on Highways. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 136,
No. 6, 2010, pp. 510517.
24. P.T.C.1. PIARC. Specification for a Standard Smooth Tyre for Friction
Coefficient Measurement of a Pavement Surface. PIARC Technical
Committee 1 Surfaces Characteristics, 2004.
25. Chemical Rubber Company. Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 69th ed.
CRC Press, Cleveland, Ohio, 1988.
26. Scan IP 32-bit, Version 4.3. +CAD 32-bit, Version 1.3., Simpleware, 2011.
27. Hibbit, Karlson and Sorensen, Inc. Abaqus Users Manual: Version
6.10. Abaqus, Pawtucket, R.I., 2010.
28. Benson, D.J. Computational Methods in Lagrangian and Eulerian
Hydrocodes. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering,
Vol. 99, 1992, pp. 235394.
29. Hirt, C.W., and B.D. Nicholas. Volume of Fluid (VOF) Method for the
Dynamics of Free Boundaries. Journal of Computational Physics, Vol. 39,
No. 1, 1981, pp. 201225.
30. Srirangam, S.K., K. Anupam, A. Scarpas, and C. Kasbergen. Hydroplan-
ing of Rolling Tires under Different Operating Conditions. In Airfield
and Highway Pavement 2013: Sustainable and Efficient Pavements,
ASCE, pp. 561572.
The Characteristics of AsphaltAggregate Combinations to Meet Surface
Requirements Committee peer-reviewed this paper.