Accelerated Loading Evaluation of Base & Sub-base Layers

Similar documents
Evaluating Structural Performance of Base/Subbase Materials at the Louisiana Accelerated Pavement Research Facility

Evaluating Structural Performance of Base/Subbase Materials at the Louisiana Accelerated Pavement Research Facility

Field Rutting Performance of Various Base/Subbase Materials under Two Types of Loading

Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide: A User s Perspective. Brian D. Prowell, Ph.D., P.E.

Mechanistic Pavement Design

2015 North Dakota Asphalt Conference

Development and Validation of Mechanistic-Empirical Design Method for Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavement

Performance-Based Mix Design

Flexible Pavement Design

Evaluation of Rutting Depth in Flexible Pavements by Using Finite Element Analysis and Local Empirical Model

Implementation of M-E PDG in Kansas

Unbound Pavement Applications of Excess Foundry System Sands: Subbase/Base Material

FROST HEAVE. GROUND FREEZING and FROST HEAVE

INTRODUCTION TO PAVEMENT STRUCTURES

Permeable Pavement Overview

Comparison of Backcalculated Moduli from Falling Weight Deflectometer and Truck Loading

Mn/DOT Flexible Pavement Design Mechanistic-Empirical Method

Application of DCP in Prediction of Resilient Modulus of Subgrade Soils

Impact of Existing Pavement on Jointed Plain Concrete Overlay Design and Performance

Calibration of Mechanistic-Empirical Fatigue Models Using the PaveLab Heavy Vehicle Simulator

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SPONSORSHIP

Aggregates. AAPA training

2002 Design Guide Preparing for Implementation

FULL-DEPTH HMA PAVEMENT DESIGN

Mechanistic Investigation of Granular Base and Subbase Materials A Saskatchewan Case Study

Pavement Design Where are We? By Dr. Mofreh F. Saleh

2008 SEAUPG CONFERENCE-BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA

MECHANISTIC-EMPIRICAL LOAD EQUIVALENCIES USING WEIGH IN MOTION

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SPONSORSHIP

Lecture 3: Stresses in Rigid Pavements

The Role of Subbase Support in Concrete Pavement Sustainability

2002 Pavement Design

ALACPA-ICAO Seminar on PMS. Lima Peru, November 2003

Base Design Considerations for Jointed Concrete. Dan G. Zollinger, Ph.D., P.E. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

NJDOT RESEARCH PROJECT MANAGER: Mr. Anthony Chmiel

Impact of Water on the Structural Performance of Pavements

COARSE VERSUS FINE-GRADED SUPERPAVE MIXTURES: COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF RESISTANCE TO RUTTING

Effect of tire type on strains occurring in asphalt concrete layers

NOTTINGHAM DESIGN METHOD

Performance Characteristics of Asphalt Mixtures Incorporating Treated Ground Tire Rubber Added During the Mixing Process

Flexible Pavement Stress Analysis

Verification of the dissipated energy based fatigue model using field data

Effect of Moisture on Full Scale Pavement Distress

Chapter 2. The Ideal Aggregate. Aggregates

Stress Rotations Due to Moving Wheel Loads and Their Effects on Pavement Materials Characterization

Analysis of Non-Linear Dynamic Behaviours in Asphalt Concrete Pavements Under Temperature Variations

Nevels, et al 1 KAY COUNTY SHALE SUBGRADE STABILIZATION REVISITED

Artificial Neural Network Models For Assessing Remaining Life of Flexible Pavements

MECHANISTIC CHARACTERIZATION OF RESILIENT MODULI FOR UNBOUND PAVEMENT LAYER MATERIALS

Subject Index. STP1026-EB/Nov. 1989

20. Security Classif. (of this page) Unclassified

Rheological Properties and Fatigue Resistance of Crumb Rubber Modified Bitumen

SELECTION OF SUBGRADE MODULUS FOR PAVEMENT OVERLAY DESIGN PROCEDURES

Field & Laboratory Evaluation of the Portable Falling Weight Deflectometer (PFWD) NETC Project No. 00-4

Determination of Resilient Modulus Model for Road-Base Material

ACET 406 Mid-Term Exam B

2007 SEAUPG CONFERENCE-SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

Effect of Mixture Design on Densification

Lecture 7 Constitutive Behavior of Asphalt Concrete

V. Mandapaka, I. Basheer, K. Sahasi & P. Vacura CalTrans, Sacramento, CA B.W. Tsai, C. L. Monismith, J. Harvey & P. Ullidtz UCPRC, UC-Davis, CA

APPENDIX B DISTRESSES

Effect on Pavement Performance of a Subbase Layer Composed by Natural Aggregate and RAP

Study on How to Determine Repair Thickness of Damaged Layers for Porous Asphalt

TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD PAGE

Development of Laboratory to Field Shift Factors for Hot-Mix Asphalt Resilient Modulus. Samer W. Katicha. Masters Of Science.

Clay Robinson, PhD, CPSS, PG copyright 2009

Dynamic Resilient Modulus and the Fatigue Properties of Superpave HMA Mixes used in the Base Layer of Kansas Flexible Pavements

Project Number: MQP RBM 0905

PROJECT REVIEW REPORT

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF BASIC AND APPLIED SCIENCES. Evaluating the Impact of Aggregate Gradations on Permanent Deformation of SMA Mixture

APPENDIX A PROGRAM FLOW CHARTS

Modulus of Rubblized Concrete from Surface Wave Testing

Lecture 2: Stresses in Pavements

Analysis of in-service PCC pavement responses from Denver International Airport

Structural Design of Pavements

Impact of coarse aggregate type and angularity on permanent deformation of asphalt concrete

GEOSYNTHETICS ENGINEERING: IN THEORY AND PRACTICE

A Study on Suitability of Crusher Dust Stabilized Red Earth and Gravel as Subgrade and Sub Base Material

GeoShanghai 2010 International Conference Paving Materials and Pavement Analysis

STRUCTURAL ADEQUACY OF RUBBLIZED PCC PAVEMENT

Creep Compliance Analysis Technique for the Flattened Indirect Tension Test of Asphalt Concrete

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF EARLY AGE AND LONG TERM RESPONSE OF PCC PAVEMENT

Calibration of CalME models using WesTrack Performance Data

LRRB INV 828 Local Road Material Properties and Calibration for MnPAVE

Of course the importance of these three problematics is affected by the local environmental conditions.

Role of Binders in Pavement Performance

Design of Overlay for Flexible Pavement

Workshop 4PBB First Steps for the perpetual pavement design: through the analysis of the fatigue life

Background PG G* sinδ

NCHRP. Project No. NCHRP 9-44 A. Validating an Endurance Limit for Hot-Mix Asphalt (HMA) Pavements: Laboratory Experiment and Algorithm Development

METHODS FOR EVALUATING RESILIENT MODULI OF PAVING MATERIALS

Development of resilient modulus prediction models for base and subgrade pavement layers from in situ devices test results

ARC Update - Binder Fatigue

Investigation of Thermal-Induced Strains in Flexible Pavements

Design of Flexible Pavements

Asphalt Mix Designer. Module 2 Physical Properties of Aggregate. Specification Year: July Release 4, July

Testing a pavement on thawing, frost-susceptible subgrade with the heavy vehicle simulator. Tielaitos 31/2000

Phenomenological models for binder rutting and fatigue. University of Wisconsin Research Team

Evaluation of the dynamic modulus of asphalt mixture incorporating reclaimed asphalt pavement

Technical Report Documentation Page 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 1. Report No. TX-98/3923-1

Transcription:

Accelerated Loading Evaluation of Base & Sub-base Layers Zhong Wu, Ph.D., P.E. Louisiana Transportation Research Center (LTRC) April 2006

What is Accelerated Loading? Accelerated loading refers to Accelerated Pavement Testing (APT). It represents an outdoors, full-scale pavement test A specialized wheel loading device applies repeated heavy loads on pavements. Pavement structure fails in a fraction of the time required under normal traffic.

Why Use APT? The average gross weight of trucks increased over time Pavement life shortened due to Heavier axle loads Increased tire pressures Laboratory material tests do not contain Full-scale paving technologies Repeated heavy loads APT is an advance research tool

APT Programs in U.S. Reported as early as 1909 a test track built in Detroit. Currently, about 15 APT test facilities national wide.

Major APT Loading Devices (a) Heavy Vehicle Simulator (HVS) (b) Texas MLS

Louisiana Accelerated Loading Facility (ALF) Approximately 100-ft long and 55-ton One half of a single axle Load adjustable from 9,750 lbs ~ 18,950 lbs Simulate traffic wander Speed - 10.5 mile per hour Operated by Pavement Research Facility (PRF) in Port Allen Total Load = 9,750 lbs Tire Pressure = 105 psi

LTRC Project No. 03-2GT Accelerated Loading Evaluation of A Subbase Layer on Pavement Performance State Project No. 736-99-1124

Objectives For Base Layers: to assess field performance of Blended Calcium Sulfate (BCS) materials stabilized with fly ash and furnace slag. to evaluate field performance of foamed asphalt treated materials.

Objectives For Subbase Layer to prove that a cement treated subbase layer will provide a working table for pavement construction; also provide a layer that contributes to the pavement s overall structural bearing capacity.

Pavement Structures 2 in. 19 mm Superpave Mixture 19 mm Superpave Mixture 19 mm Superpave Mixture 2 in. 8.5 in. BCS/Slag Base BCS/Flyash Base Foamed Asphalt Base I 8.5 in. 12 in. Lime-treated Soil Subbase Lime-treated Soil Subbase Cement-treated Soil Subbase 12 in. Section 4-1A Section 4-2A Section 4-3A 2 in. 19 mm Superpave Mixture 19 mm Superpave Mixture 19 mm Superpave Mixture 2 in. 8.5 in. Crushed Stone Base Crushed Stone Base Foamed Asphalt Base II 8.5 in. 12 in. Lime-treated Soil Subbase Cement-treated Soil Subbase Cement-treated Soil Subbase 12 in. Section 4-1B Section 4-2B Section 4-3B

Pavement Structures

Factors in Experimental Design Pavement Structure and Materials Loading and Sequence Failure Criteria e.g. for asphalt pavements, rutting and fatigue cracking Performance Data Collection Surface Distress Survey Field Non Destructive Test (NDT) Instrumentation

Loading and Failure Criteria Loading consideration Two phase testing Phase-I- A sections: 4-1A, 4-2A and 4-3A Phase-II- B sections: 4-1B, 4-2B and 4-3B 9,750-lb load for first 175,000 passes Use 7.5 wander function Move the device at every 25,000 passes Failure Criteria Rut depth >= 0.75 in Fatigue cracks in 50% loading area >= 5 ft /ft 2

Pavement Materials Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) mixture Stabilized BCS materials Foamed asphalt stabilized materials Lime or cement treated soil materials Subgrade soils

HMA Mixture 19-mm Superpave Level II mixture Polymer-modified PG 76-22 Supplied by Marathon Optimum binder content: 4.4% Aggregate blend 45.4% #67 coarse granite aggregate, 17.1% #11 crushed siliceous limestone, 10.3% coarse sand, 12.9% crushed gravel, and 14.3% reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP).

Stabilized BCS Base Materials BCS material is Short for Blended Calcium Sulfate by-product from hydrogen fluoride production. Major engineering concern water susceptibility. BCS stabilized with the grade 120 granulated ground blast furnace slag (GGBFS) Section 4-1A 10 percent by volume BCS stabilized with flyash (15% by volume) Section 4-1B Field performance: UNKNOWN

Foamed Asphalt Base Foamed asphalt (FA) process When cold water injected into the hot asphalt, it turns to steam: contains thousands of tiny asphalt bubbles causes the asphalt expands many times in volume decreases the binder viscosity. Section 4-3A is a FA stabilized base Components 2.8% PG 58-22 asphalt binder 3% water 48.6% RAP, and 48.6% recycled soil cement

Subbase and Subgrade Subbase Materials: in-place lime treated soils (10 % by volume) Sections 4-1A, 4-1B & 4-2A in-place cement treated soils (8 % by volume) Sections 4-2B, 4-3A & 4-3B Soil Properties Passing # 200 (%) Clay (%) Silt (%) LL(%) PI W opt (%) γ d (kn/m 3 ) USCS Classification AASHTO 91 23.5 60.3 31 10 18.5 17.1 CL-ML A-6

Surface Distress Survey Rut Measure Device A Frame Crack Mapping Profiler Moving profiler 1ft 1ft

Field NDT Tests Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) Test Dynatest 8002 model DYNAFLECT Test

Field Instrumentation Layout 107.5 ft 0+52.5 0+57.0 Plan View 2 HMA 8.5 Base 12 Subbase Base Pressure Cell Subbase Pressure Cell D6 D5 D4 D3 D2 D1 Multi Depth Deflectometer Vertical View

Earth Pressure Cell Geokon model 3500 Hydraulic type 9 in. diameter 5 lbs designed to measure total pressure in earth fills up to 100psi

Multi-Depth Deflectometer (MDD) Snap MDD Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc. Illinois Measure compressively elastic & plastic deformations up to seven depths Installation bore hole 5-in in diameter 10-ft deep

Current Test Sections Current testing on Section 4-1A Section 4-2A Section 4-3A 4-1A 4-2A 4-3A 2 HMA 8.5 BCS/Slag Base 12 Lime treated soil (10%) 2 HMA 8.5 BCS/Flyash Base 12 Lime treated soil (10%) 2 HMA 8.5 Foamed Asphalt Base (50%SC+50%RAP) 12 Cement treated soil (8%)

Covered: Discussion of Test Results 125,000 ALF load repetitions three test sections: 4-1A, 4-2A, and 4-3A. Includes: Instrumentation Results NDT Test Results Surface distress survey

Instrumentation Results

Typical MDD Potentiometer Readings

MDD Test Results MDD Displacements, mm -0.1 23.8 23.9 24.0 24.1 24.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 Time, seconds D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 Plastic Deformation (in. 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Plastic Deformation (Potentiometer D1) 0 25000 50000 75000 100000 125000 No. Passes Section 4-1A Section 4-2A Section 4-3A

Earth Pressure Examples Cell Results P=9,000lb p=100psi P=9,000lb p=100psi 2 in. 8.5 in. HMA E=450ksi BASE E=800ksi σ v =7.3psi 2 in. 8.5 in. HMA E=450ksi BASE E=80ksi σ v =20psi 12 in. Subbase E=40ksi σ v =2.4psi 12 in. Subbase E=40ksi σ v =4.3psi Subgrade E=15ksi P=9,000lb p=100psi Subgrade E=15ksi 2 in. 8.5 in. HMA E=450ksi BASE E=80ksi σ v =34.5psi 12 in. Subbase E=400ksi σ v =2.2psi Subgrade E=15ksi

Measured Vertical Stresses 4-1A 4-2A 4-3A HMA BCS/ Slag σ v1 =0.9psi HMA BCS/ Flyash σ v1 =5.2psi HMA Foam Asphalt σ v1 =9.5psi Lime Soil σ v2 =0.5psi Lime Soil σ v2 =1.8psi Cement Soil σ v2 =0.6psi Subgrade Subgrade Subgrade

NDT Test Results Dynatest 8002 model (a) FWD (b) Dynaflect

Average Measured Center FWD Deflection Results FWD Load 8 4 6 6 12 12 12 12 d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 25 Center Deflection (m ils) 20 15 10 5 0K (86/74F) 25K (94/81F) 50K (71/68F) 75K (65/60F) 100K (88/71F) 125K (89/78F) 0 4-1A 4-2A 4-3A

DYNAFLECT Results Pavement structure number (SN) is defined as SN=a 1 *H 1 +a 2 *H 2 +a 3 *H 3 SN determined from center deflection deflection basin parameter Structure Number 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 3.9 4.9 4.8 3.3 3.7 3.2 0 50K 100K 3.6 3.8 3.7 2.5 4-1A 4-2A 4-3A Ave. Structure Number

Cracking Surface Distress Survey 1ft Rutting 1ft

Cracking Only Section 4-2A developed some hairline-type cracks not severe No visual cracks found on either Section 4-1A or 4-3A

Rutting Rutting on "A" Sections Average Rut depth (in.) 0.25 4-1A 0.2 4-2A 0.15 4-3A 0.1 0.05 0 0 25K 50K 75K 100K 125K 4-1A 0 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.11 4-2A 0 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.14 0.16 4-3A 0 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.09 0.13 ALF Passes (K=1,000)

Summary and Conclusions 1. BCS/Slag Base perform better than BCS/Flyash Base 2. Evidenced by Surface distresses FWD center deflections Dynaflect Structure Number Measured vertical stresses, and Measured MDD deformations. Cement-treated Soil Subbase superior than Lime-treated Soil Subbase Evidenced by Measured vertical stresses

APT Research to Implementation Local and international technology Industry innovation Performance history APT Practice Research assessment Acceptable confidence Performance Construction quality control Reduce risk Increase expertise Build confidence Specifications Guideline documents Material and pavement design

Questions?