1.1 本规程描述了几种现场技术，用于评估包含反光光学元件（例如，中心线和边缘线）并应用于路面的路面标线的反光特性。本规程中描述的技术包含采样标准，例如测试段的长度和所需的测量数量。该实践基于使用符合试验方法的便携式手动仪器进行的反光测量 E1710 . 1.2 从本实践中获得的数据可用于根据具有管辖权的机构确定的特定反射率水平确定项目的验收或拒收。 1.3 本规程可用于评估新安装或现有路面标线。当测试新应用的路面标线时，建议在48小时之前进行评估 h涂抹后但涂抹后30天之前，以便不再存在多余的反光光学元件，如玻璃球。 1.4 本实践中的评估技术基于最佳实践，旨在提供量化标记反光性能的三个置信水平。 每种技术都代表了测量次数和所研究标记反光性能置信度之间的权衡。 1.5 这种做法可以由机构按现状使用，也可以根据机构的具体需要进行定制。在适用的情况下，实践描述了可以做出不同假设的领域，这些假设将影响采样需求和结果的置信水平。当偏离本规程时，应将其记录在试验报告中。 注1: 在测量新安装的路面标线时，有几个因素会导致在施涂后短时间内进行的测量值出现错误，例如过度的反光光学元件、胶带上的顶部涂层、粘合剂的不完全固化以及反光光学元件上的涂层。在48小时内进行的反光测量 h施涂后可能有助于快速测量施涂质量，但不适用于本实践。 注2: 当测量现有或- 使用路面标线时，应注意测量路面标线的代表部分。在某些特殊情况下，过度的路面标线磨损可能与特定原因有关，例如车辆沿水平曲线行驶、进入砾石坑的入口和高编织区域。路面标线也会收集污垢、污垢和碎屑。 1.6 本规程取代规范 D6359 采用多级策略评估路面标线材料的反射比。 该变更旨在为机构提供项目验收和服务期间路面标线监测的选项。 1.7 以国际单位制或英寸-磅单位表示的数值应单独视为标准值。每个系统中规定的值可能不是精确的等效值；因此，每个系统应相互独立使用。将两个系统的值合并可能会导致不符合标准。 1.8 本标准并非旨在解决与其使用相关的所有安全问题（如有）。 本标准的用户有责任在使用前制定适当的安全、健康和环境实践，并确定监管限制的适用性。 1.9 本国际标准是根据世界贸易组织技术性贸易壁垒（TBT）委员会发布的《关于制定国际标准、指南和建议的原则的决定》中确立的国际公认标准化原则制定的。 ====意义和用途====== 5.1 本规程提供了确定路面标线反光性能的程序。本规程未设定路面标线的最小反光值；它描述了确定路面标线反光特性的抽样标准，然后可用于确定是否符合规范。具有管辖权的机构有责任在其自身规范内设置可接受的反射率值。 5.2 本规程并非旨在解决所有关于标记污染的问题，但以下内容可能会有所帮助。非常重要的是，要评估的标记是 清洁干燥 . 如果评估是相对于承包商绩效的衡量标准使用的，则双方必须事先就以下定义达成一致: 清洁干燥 . 道路上有多种形式的污染会降低标记的反光读数，但并非所有污染都可以消除。 例如沥青油和橡胶滑痕。松散的污垢可以通过压力清洗去除，可能使用肥皂、刷牙或高压空气；然而，这些技术通常不足以清除填充在标记表面的污垢。应注意选择以下区域: 典型的 例如，避免油漆跟踪或污染区域。使用数码相机和良好的微距镜头拍照可能很有用，以便能够看到玻璃珠上或之间的污染。

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 h 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 Specification 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 nonconformance 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, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 1.9 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. ====== 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.