Pavement for Truck Traffic: Durability Choices

Pavement to be run over by trucks: durability choices
A comparison of damaged and correctly implemented pedestrian pavement. On the left are the wrong materials: thin decorative tiles are extensively cracked, loose, and sunken after repeated rolling by trucks and cleaning vehicles. The joint sand has eroded, and local areas are crudely repaired with asphalt, completely different in color from the surroundings. On the right is the correct approach: the same location uses granite slabs eight centimeters thick, larger in size, with a concrete base layer instead of a sand base, and joints filled solid with mortar. After similar use, there is only surface wear and slight color variation, with no cracking or sinking. The pavement colors and patterns on both sides are the same; the difference lies in thickness and construction method. Avoid: making the two look similar, eliminating damage and repair marks on the left, depicting the right side as brand new and unworn, changing the pattern design on both sides.

Translated from Chinese by AI.

一段徒步區鋪面的損壞與正確做法對照。左側是選錯的材料:薄的裝飾磚在貨車與清潔車反覆輾壓後大量破裂、鬆動、下陷,接縫處的填縫砂流失,局部以柏油草率修補,顏色與周邊完全不同。右側是正確的做法:同樣位置使用厚度達八公分的花崗岩板,尺寸較大、基底是混凝土基層而非砂基,接縫以砂漿填實;經過同樣的使用後只有表面的磨損與輕微的色差,沒有破裂與下陷。兩側的鋪面顏色與圖案相同,差別在厚度與工法。避免:讓兩者看起來相似、消除左側的破損與修補痕跡、在右側畫成全新無磨損、改變兩側的圖案設計。