PURPOSES : The purpose of this study is to establish a scientific and rational structure pavement maintenance technique and management standard through field investigation and analysis method development for measuring damage to structure pavement such that fundamental quality improvement can be promoted and the life of pavement prolonged. METHODS : In this study, the crack, plastic deformation, IRI, and SPI values measured using the existing RoadScanner of a corresponding section, as well as the relative dielectric constant values of a lower deck measured using a ground penetrating radar are reduced. The results of a small impact load test are verified by comparing the modulus of elasticity measured. RESULTS : In the Hongjecheon Overpass, when comparing the suspicion points of deterioration between the center of the lane and the 25 measurement data points of the wheel pass section based on the elastic modulus of the light falling weight deflectometer (LFWD), it is discovered that the lane comprises four centers (16%) and 18 wheelpaths (72%). The percentage of suspected deterioration points in the center is higher than that in the wheelpath. In addition, in the case of the Seoho Bridge, by comparing the suspicious points of deterioration for 11 measurement data points in the middle of the lane and the wheelpath section based on the elastic modulus of the LFWD, it is discovered that five points (45%) in both the middle of the lane and the wheel pass are similar. CONCLUSIONS : In this study, a comparative analysis of the LFWD elastic modulus and SPI factors (crack rate, plastic deformation, and IRI) of the Hongjecheon Overpass and Seoho Bridge is conducted to confirm the factors of pavement breakage. Among them, it is confirmed that it affects the pavement condition the most; however, to consider the LFWD elastic modulus as an evaluation criterion for future structure pavement, the data points must be verified via additional experiments to ensure high reliability.

ABSTRACT
1. 서론
    1.1. 논문개요
2. 교면포장의 상태평가
    2.1. 평가방법
    2.2. 상태평가 수행과정
    2.3. PMS 및 상대유전율 조사결과와 비교평가
3. 결론
REFERENCES