Capability-Based Benchmarking and Upgrade Pathways for Highway Engineering Testing and Inspection Equipment

Existing evaluations of highway engineering testing and inspection equipment often overemphasize nominal parameters, directly compare non-equivalent indicators, and lack clear criteria for equipment upgrades. Based on a targeted synthesis of publicly available technical specifications, standards and procedures, and the peer-reviewed literature, this study develops a documentary benchmarking and decision framework for nine categories of testing and inspection technologies across five application scenarios: pavement condition, structural performance, internal quality, construction processes, and material testing. The framework evaluates the available evidence in terms of parameter comparability, explicit performance, system integration, data reliability, and data verifiability. Published manufacturer specifications give maximum testing speeds of 120 km/h for the selected ZOYON-LDD and 80 km/h for Greenwood TSD, but these values do not establish equivalent measurement accuracy or repeatability under matched conditions. In contrast, an FHWA-reported 32-laboratory evaluation of AIMS2 aggregate-morphology testing provided independently assessed angularity coefficients of variation of 2.9% within and 4.3% between laboratories for aggregate sizes excluding 0.075 mm. Public evidence remains insufficient for assessing metrological traceability, raw-data access, and algorithm performance in several other categories. A tiered upgrade pathway prioritizes modular improvements where feasible, complemented by complete equipment replacement when justified. Proposed acceptance criteria emphasize raw-data accessibility, independent verification, and separately reported AI detection and measurement errors, shifting attention from nominal parameters toward reproducible and traceable capabilities.