top of page

Build it up

You are kindly requested to revise your manuscript and submit the updated version to PFDM 2025 before 15-06-2025.

 

Below, you will find all relevant review comments from:

​

  • Scientific Committee,

  • Track Leaders,

  • The Editorial Team
     

Please consider these carefully in preparing your revised manuscript.Once your revisions are complete, you may submit the updated version using the submission link provided at the bottom of this page.We appreciate your contributions and look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Reliability of road surface analysis for asphalt pavement adhesion by means of Laser 3D techniques

Reviewer's feedback:

"This paper discusses the using 3D laser technology to characterize pavement texture. The study uses a parameter Vmp to characterize the texture. Comments are below: 

1. Language of the manuscript need to be improved significantly. Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors and overall flow of the article needs improvement. 


2. It would be better if function related volume parameters were explained. It is difficult to follow. 


3. Description of material ratio is confusing. 


4. Please include the explanation for choosing Vmp out of all volume parameters. 


5. Manuscript does not emphasize on the significance of using Vmp instead of traditional CAT parameter. " "


1. It seems to be not the asphalt adhesion but the tire adhesion to the asphalt that you are investigating. Therefore, a better title could be: Reliability .. for tire adhesion to asphalt pavements by means of ... A similar reformulation is advised for the objectives etc. 


2. Abbreviating Tangential Adhesion Coefficient to CAT instead of to TAC is somewhat confusing. Is that an Italian abbreviation? If so, please reformulate (small effort). 


3. in Results, I don't see that when the CAT value is between 0.45 and 0.55, most values are on or below the trend line, especially not in the right wheel track figure 4b. Also not above the trend line for CAT >0.55. Are you really referring to figure 4a and 4b? 4) It would be helpful to include a figure in figure 5 where alle four regions of CAT (15% tot 70%) are connected, maybe as a better figure 


4. There seems to be a discontinuity at 35% and at 45% whan comparing the first three graphs in figure 5. 


5) The table on the last page is somewhat surprising, considering the valus of the slope ranging from .0002x to .0007x back down to .0003x and up to .0009x again. What is the explanation of this scatter in the slope value?


 6. The data are worthwhile but the analysis is arguable. No discussion on the part of the data in the CAT>0.55 figure 5 that is far below the regression line. Is that the cause of the high value of 0.0009x as compared to the 0.0003x in the -.45

Editorial Decision for Conference Proceedings:

It is recommended that authors follow the template, as it already provides a clear structure. Suitable for conference publication.

Track Leader’s Comments (if any):

Please note that some of the track leader’s comments are intended as feedback for future improvements

  • This study aims to propose a novel method to comprehensively characterize the asphalt pavement texture using 3D technology.

  • The indicator "Vmp" should be written in .full in the abstract since it is the first time it is mentioned.

  • Some spelling mistakes should be corrected e.g. "Rresults" in the abstract.

  • The full term for abbreviations such as SCRIM should be mentioned the first time they are used in the paper.

  • In the Results section, the author mentions "The R2 of the right and left wheel tracks are 0.6585 and 0.6275". I am not sure whether this can be considered "a high correlation". Has the author conducted additional statistical analyses to support the statement? Or does the author mean that it is high in comparison to previous studies? The author may be questioned on this at the conference.

  • Overall, this is a very well written paper with some interesting results. It may generate some good discussion at the conference.

  • I suggest that the Conclusions section be a separate one. Also, the author is advised to (1) add a "take home message" i.e. what is it that the author wants the reader to remember from this paper?, and (2) add what the next possible steps are for this research and implementation of the results.

  • The paper could be considered for the journal if the author adequately addresses the above points.

bottom of page