Exploring Time -Dependent Relationship between Polishing and Friction behaviour of Pavement in the Lab and in the Field on Ohio

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Exploring Time -Dependent Relationship between Polishing and Friction behaviour of Pavement in the Lab and in the Field on Ohio"

Jewel Francis
5 years ago
Views:

1 Exploring Time -Dependent Relationship between Polishing and Friction behaviour of Pavement in the Lab and in the Field on Ohio By Omid Ghaemi Staff Geotechnical Engineer, MSCE,MBA GEOTECH ENGINEERING, INC. OTEC 2015 Columbus, Ohio October 27th,

2 1. Statement of the Problem. 2. Objectives of the Research. 3. Accelerated Polishing Device for HMA surface 4. The long term field study between SN and BPN. 5. explore the time-dependent relationships between lab data and field data 2

3 3

4 UA Accelerated Polishing Device for HMA surface and 4

5 1. Test small-size HMA specimens 6 cylindrical gyratory compacted and 18 roller compacted slab specimens. 2. It is fast, comfortable, repeatable, efficient 3. Show trend polishing behavior anticipated time. 4. Simulate polishing and abrasion behavior of HMA in the field for screening polishing and friction properties. 5

6 6

7 7

8 British Pendulum Tester(BPN) British Pendulum Tester 8

9 ASTM E-965 volumetric test mean texture depth 9

10 Friction and Texture Measurements (Slab Specimen)

11 Polished Surface 11

12 Job Mix Formulas(JMF) 12

13 BPN BPN vs. Time y = x x R² = Time (min.) Time-dependent curve fitting equations for BPN in the lab 13

14 MTD MTD vs. Time y = 1E-06x x R² = Time (min.) Time-dependent curve fitting equations for BPN in the lab 14

15 Coefficient of Predictive Time-dependent BPN vs Time curve fitting Equation for each section pavement y= a x 2 +b x+ c Section Pavements a b c Huron,Route Lucas,Route Huron,Route Washigton, Route Harrison,Route Harrison,Route Wood,Route Lake,Route

16 Coefficient of Predictive Time-dependent MTD vs Time curve fitting equation for each section pavement y= a x2 +b x+ c Section Pavements a b c Huron,Route Lucas,Route Huron,Route Washigton, Route Harrison,Route Harrison,Route Wood,Route Lake,Route

17 The long term field study 1. SN(64)R 2. DFT64 3. DFT20, and 4. MPD 5. BPN 6. RUT SPSS for windows 17

18 Existing Pavement Sections. New Pavement Sections. 18

19 Polish Susceptibility Possible High Polish (Gravel) Possible Medium Polish (Limestone) Possible Medium Polish (Dolomite) Possible Low Polish (Gravel) Possible Medium Polish (Limestone) Possible Low Polish (Gravel) Possible Medium Polish (Dolomite) Low Polish (Trap Rock) 110 SN(64)R data points. 110 BPN data points. HMA Pavement sections identification Aggregate Source District Existing Pavement Sections Stockport Sandusky Parkertown Maumee Martin Apple Grove Sandusky Parkertown Stocker Sand & Gnadenhutten Maumee Ontario Trap London 110DFT64 and DFT20 data points. Location: Route (Section) No. of Measurement s ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) MPD data points. 19

20 SKID DRIVE ALONG.mpg 20

21 ASTM : E-1911 Measure friction in different speed in lab and field 21

22 ASTM : E-1911 Mean Profile Depth (MPD) 22

23 Rout Section 2010 LWST CTM DFT PBTester SN MPD DFT10 DFT20 DFT64 BPN RUT, mm 250 East East East East East West West West West West Mean Standard Deviation

24 Simple Linear Regression between SN(64)R and BPN in different years Correlation Between Model R 2 (%) R 2 a (%) F ANOVA P-value 2008 SN(64)R vs. BPN SN(64)R = BPN SN(64)R vs. BPN SN(64)R = BPN SN(64)R vs. BPN SN(64)R = BPN Combination between 2008&2009and 2010 SN(64)R vs. BPN SN(64)R = BPN Significant at the p-value smaller than

25 Correlation Between SN(64)R vs,dft20,dft64 and MPD SN(64)R Model R 2 (%) DFT20+2.8DFT MPD 2009 R 2 a (%) F ANOVA P-value vs,dft20,dft64 and MPD SN(64)R=11.2 SN(64)R= DFT20+2.8DFT MPD SN(64)R vs,dft20,dft64 and MPD SN(64)R= DFT20+2.8DFT MPD Combination between 2008&2009and 2010 SN(64)R vs,dft20,dft64 and MPD SN(64)R= DFT20+2.8DFT MPD

26 Predictive Method by using the Lab Equation and Traffic Condition in Pavement Section Initial Initial BPN field Minimum BPN lab Minimum Polishing Time Polishing Time 26

27 Section Pavements a b c Huron,Route Lucas,Route Huron,Route Washigton, Route Harrison,Route Harrison,Route Wood,Route

Route Section District Traffic(Total AADT) Huron,Route-162 14.00 19.00 3 494.44 2.54 Lucas,Route-64 8.90 12.40 2 550.00 2.05 Huron,Route-250 3.55 5.11 3 465.00 2.25 Washigton, Route-07 37.3 39.

28 Route Section District Traffic(Total AADT) Huron,Route Lucas,Route Huron,Route Washigton, Route Harrison,Route Harrison,Route Wood,Route

29 Conclusions 1. A predictive method is recommended for new pavement sections by using the lab equation and traffic conditions.this method is designed based on the initial value and minimum value in the lab and in the field 2. Time-dependent curve fitting to develop predictive equations in each pavement section with specific Job Mix Formulas. 3. SN(64)R and BPN have high correlation because of both devices are sensitive to micro-texture. 29

30 30

Presented by: Robert Y. Liang The University of Akron April 22, Questions To:

Long Term Validation of an Accelerated Polishing Test Procedure for HMA Pavement SJN: 134413 Presented by: Robert Y. Liang The University of Akron April 22, 2013 Email Questions To: Research@dot.state.oh.us