Onsite Use of Recycled Asphalt Pavement Materials and Geocells to ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Disclaimer The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. xiii
Abstract Asphalt pavements deteriorate with traffic (especially heavy trucks) and time. Maintenance and overlaying may solve minor to medium pavement distress problems. When the condition of a pavement becomes badly deteriorated, reconstruction of the pavement may become an economic and feasible solution. Reconstruction of a pavement requires removal of pavement surfaces. On-site use of recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) materials has obvious benefits from economic, environmental, and sustainability points of view. One attractive option is to use recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) materials as base courses with a thin new overlay. However, RAP has its limitations. For example, it creeps under a sustained load due to the presence of asphalt binder. Our previous study showed that the use of geocell to confine RAP minimized creep of RAP under a sustained load. However, the performance of geocell-reinforced RAP as a base course overlaid with an asphalt surface is unknown. In this research, the behavior of hot mix asphalt (HMA) pavements constructed over unreinforced and geocell-reinforced RAP bases under cyclic loading was studied in the geotechnical testing box at the University of Kansas, Lawrence. Pavement sections consisting of subgrade, RAP base, and HMA surface were constructed in the geotechnical testing box and tested under cyclic loading. The subgrade was composed of a mixture of 75% Kansas river sand and 25% kaolin at 10.4% optimum moisture content, which corresponded to 5% CBR. The RAP base was constructed without or with geocell at 6.6% optimum moisture content to achieve the density requirement. The base thicknesses varied from 15 to 30 cm. The HMA surface above the base was 5 cm thick. Extensive QC/QA tests and instrumentation were included. The test sections were evaluated by vane shear test, light weight deflectometer test, and dynamic cone penetration test for consistency. Earth pressure cells were placed at the interface between the xiv
Page 1 and 2: Report # MATC-KU: 462 Final Report
Page 3 and 4: Technical Report Documentation Page
Page 5 and 6: 4.3.4 15 cm Thick Geocell-Reinforce
Page 7 and 8: Figure 4.11 Profiles of the HMA sur
Page 9 and 10: Figure 4.48 The permanent deformati
Page 11 and 12: List of Tables Table 2.1 Percentage
Page 13: Acknowledgements This research was
Page 17 and 18: 1.1 Background Chapter 1 Introducti
Page 19 and 20: On-site use of RAP materials has re
Page 21 and 22: Chapter 2 Literature Review Recycle
Page 23 and 24: Protection. Geosynthetics are somet
Page 25 and 26: wet weather conditions. Webster and
Page 27 and 28: subgrade can be improved in terms o
Page 29 and 30: annually in the early 1990s (FHWA-H
Page 31 and 32: Figure 2.2 Usage and potential of v
Page 33 and 34: Table 2.1 Percentage of use of RAP
Page 35 and 36: Type of Property Physical Propertie
Page 37 and 38: permeability values. The addition o
Page 39 and 40: Chapter 3 Material Properties and E
Page 41 and 42: Table 3.1 Properties of the RAP bas
Page 43 and 44: 3.3 Asphalt Concrete Figure 3.4 Sta
Page 45 and 46: Table 3.2 Basic Properties of NPA g
Page 47 and 48: Earth pressure cells were installed
Page 49 and 50: central pocket, and one at the top
Page 51 and 52: plate on one end was buried at the
Page 53 and 54: loading plate to simulate the rubbe
Page 55 and 56: 3.6.7 Dynamic Cone Penetration Test
Page 57 and 58: Figure 3.15 Light weight deflectome
Page 59 and 60: Chapter 4 Experimental Data Analysi
Page 61 and 62: The quantity of RAP placed in each
Page 63 and 64: Geocell infilled with RAP Geocell i
Page 65 and 66:
Figure 4.4 Prime coat on the RAP ba
Page 67 and 68:
4.2 Cyclic Plate Load Tests Figure
Page 69 and 70:
dynamic deformation moduli from LWD
Page 71 and 72:
Depth (cm.) 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 2
Page 73 and 74:
Depth (cm.) 10 14 18 22 26 Before t
Page 75 and 76:
surface at the center was under ten
Page 77 and 78:
4.3.3 15 cm Thick Geocell-Reinforce
Page 79 and 80:
Depth (cm.) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 5
Page 81 and 82:
The permanent deformation was obtai
Page 83 and 84:
Strain on geocell (%) Figure 4.23 T
Page 85 and 86:
Stress distribution angle (°) 50 4
Page 87 and 88:
Figure 4.28 The calculated dynamic
Page 89 and 90:
Elastic deformation (mm.) 3 2.5 2 1
Page 91 and 92:
Strain (%) 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 -0.05 -0
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
The profiles of the HMA surfaces as
Page 97 and 98:
Figure 4.41 shows the measured maxi
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 4.43 The vertical stress at
Page 101 and 102:
Table 4.5 The average CBR values of
Page 103 and 104:
at the distances of 25 and 50 cm aw
Page 105 and 106:
Strain (%) 0.014 0.012 0.01 0.008 0
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
The profiles of the HMA surfaces as
Page 111 and 112:
Figures 4.58 and 4.59 show the meas
Page 113 and 114:
Strain (%) 0.04 0.02 0 -0.02 -0.04
Page 115 and 116:
4.4 Analysis of Test Data Six cycli
Page 117 and 118:
Table 4.7 Average CBR values of tes
Page 119 and 120:
The percentages of air void of the
Page 121 and 122:
Table 4.10 Number of loading cycles
Page 123 and 124:
Table 4.11 Elastic deformation and
Page 125 and 126:
HMA surface compression (mm.) Base
Page 127 and 128:
strain was higher for the geocell a
Page 129 and 130:
Vertical stress (kPa) 250 200 150 1
Page 131 and 132:
Stress distribution angle ( ̊) 80
Page 133 and 134:
6. The subgrade contributed to most
Page 135 and 136:
Berthelot, C., R. Haichert, D. Podb
Page 137:
Pokharel, S. K., J. Han, D. Leshchi
show all

Onsite Use of Recycled Asphalt Pavement Materials and Geocells to ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?