Resin Modified Pavement Demonstration Project.pdf

More documents

Recommendations

Info

of 72 or lower should be considered for rehabilitation. This means the Ultra-ThinWhitetopping test section was inadequate from the time of construction.Approximately two years into the project (2003), several Ultra- Thin Whitetoppingpanels began to crack and break apart. Broken panels were removed and replaced withconcrete containing a product called STRUX 90/40 fibers provided by GraceConstruction. STRUX 90/40 is a high performance synthetic structural fiber specificallyengineered to impart tight crack control as well as plastic shrinkage control. In 2007,MDOT maintenance crews informed us of their intentions to remove and replace theentire Ultra-Thin Whitetopping test section due to excessive failures. An example ofthese failures is shown in Figure C11 of Appendix C. It should be noted that some of thepanels replaced in 2003 experienced failure as well, meaning the added STRUX 90/40fibers did not make a significant difference. This can be seen in Figure C12 of AppendixC.Resin Modified PavementLong term data for the Resin Modified Pavement test sections is provided in Tables F30and F31 of Appendix F.Early skid resistance was noted as a problem for the Resin Modified Pavement testsections. This problem improved within a few months, however by the fourth year (2005)skid values again fell near 30, a value well below MDOT’s recommended acceptablevalue of 35.A review of the long term Resin Modified Pavement data provided one significant result.There was no rutting observed in either test section throughout the duration of the project.Overall, the PCR values for the Resin Modified Pavement sections were acceptable. Thelone exception was the inside lane of Cass Street. This is most likely attributed to the IRIvalues for that lane being substantially higher than the other lanes in the test sections. Thehigher IRI values can most likely be attributed to improper care during construction toinsure smoothness of the pavement.It should be noted that Resin Modified Pavement is not a specific pavement category foruse in the deduct curves used by MDOT in PCR calculations. After consideration, it wasdecided that a Resin Modified Pavement behaved most like a continuously reinforcedconcrete pavement and therefore CRCP deduct curves were used for the PCR calculationsof the Resin Modified Pavement sections.Performance Graded 82-22 AsphaltLong term data for the PG 82-22 test section can be found in Table H17 of Appendix H.Skid resistance values for the PG 82-22 test section were adequate for the first few yearsof the study, but deteriorated by the fourth year (2005). At 28.1 and 28.5 for the insideand outside lane respectively, the values are well below the recommended value of 35.34
These values are of greater concern due to the test section being located at an intersectionwhere frequent braking occurs.Rut values for the PG 82-22 performed much the same as the skid resistance over time.Initially the values were good, however in year four (2005), the higher trafficked outsidelane showed an average rut value of 0.25 inches. It should be noted that those are averagerut measurements over the entire section. Visual observations showed that the ruts wereminimal at the beginning of the section and significantly worse closer to the intersection.The PG 82-22 mix provided a smooth surface as noted in the IRI values. This smoothsurface combined with few distresses allowed for a satisfactory PCR value throughout theduration of the project.35
Page 1: Construction, Testing and Performan
Page 4 and 5: ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe study reported h
Page 6 and 7: LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLESFigurePag
Page 8 and 9: LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES (Continu
Page 10 and 11: Figure 3 - Plan view intersection o
Page 12 and 13: Figure 5 - Intersection of US 72 an
Page 14 and 15: Chapter 2 - Construction of Ultra-T
Page 16 and 17: After the white pigmented concrete
Page 18 and 19: Figure 12 - Whitetopping is given a
Page 20 and 21: Chapter 3 - Construction of Resin M
Page 22 and 23: Using 2” grout cube molds, six gr
Page 24 and 25: cubic yards remaining in the last t
Page 26 and 27: Figure 16 - APAC Corinth “drum”
Page 28 and 29: Figure 20 - B & B Concrete Corinth
Page 30 and 31: Figure 24 - 2” mortar cubes are m
Page 32 and 33: Figure 28 - “Working the grout”
Page 34 and 35: Figure 32 - Entire mat did not get
Page 36 and 37: Attached in Appendix H is a complet
Page 38 and 39: Figure 37 - Finish rolling30
Page 40 and 41: were also utilized in the 75’ fai
Page 44 and 45: Chapter 7 - ConclusionsUsing constr
Page 46 and 47: APPENDIX ATRAFFIC DATA
Page 48 and 49: Figure A2 - Yearly Itemized Project
Page 50 and 51: Figure A4 - Year 2020 Projected 24
Page 52 and 53: Figure A6 - Year 2020 Projected 24
Page 54 and 55: Table B1 - Preconstruction Rut Data
Page 56 and 57: Table B3 - Preconstruction Friction
Page 58 and 59: Figure C1 - Ultra-Thin Whitetopping
Page 60 and 61: Truck No 24 hour break 48 hour brea
Page 62 and 63: Table C7 - UTW Smoothness Data coll
Page 64 and 65: Table C10- Long Term Data for Ultra
Page 66 and 67: APPENDIX DMDOT UTW STANDARD SPECIFI
Page 68 and 69: design. Documentation presented mus
Page 70 and 71: Payment will be made under:907-501-
Page 72 and 73: Figure E1 - UTW 24 hour test report
Page 74 and 75: Figure E5 - UTW 48 hour test report
Page 76 and 77: Figure E9 - UTW 7 day test report (
Page 78 and 79: Figure E12 - UTW 28 day test report
Page 82 and 83: Figure E17 - UTW 24 hour test repor
Page 84 and 85: Figure E21 - UTW 48 hour test repor
Page 92 and 93:
Table F1 - Gradations, AC Contents
Page 94 and 95:
Figure F4 - Aggregate Gradation Cha
Page 96 and 97:
Table F7 - RMP Open Graded Mix Mat
Page 98 and 99:
Table F11 - Air Voids in Mat @ Cass
Page 100 and 101:
Table F15 - Thickness of Resin Modi
Page 102 and 103:
Table F17 - Thickness of Resin Modi
Page 104 and 105:
Table F19 - RMP grout design chartF
Page 106 and 107:
Table F22 - RMP Grout Construction
Page 108 and 109:
Table F28 - RMP Friction Data Colle
Page 110 and 111:
APPENDIX GUSER’S GUIDE: RESIN MOD
Page 112 and 113:
G - 2
Page 114 and 115:
Technology Components and Sources..
Page 116 and 117:
1 Executive SummaryDescriptionResin
Page 118 and 119:
stances, the RMP also provides cost
Page 120 and 121:
2 PreacquisitionDescription of Resi
Page 122 and 123:
In 1987, the U.S. Army Corps of Eng
Page 124 and 125:
Table 1RMP Project Locations in the
Page 126 and 127:
Table 2Open-Graded Mixture Aggregat
Page 128 and 129:
The slurry grout mix design is cond
Page 130 and 131:
Resin modified groutThe resin modif
Page 132 and 133:
Table 4Slurry Grout Viscosity Requi
Page 134 and 135:
G - 24
Page 136 and 137:
G - 26
Page 138 and 139:
CostsThe initial construction costs
Page 140 and 141:
A quick comparison of the construct
Page 142 and 143:
equired to support logistical opera
Page 144 and 145:
Procurement SchedulingNormal constr
Page 146 and 147:
PersonnelThe personnel normally req
Page 148 and 149:
ReferencesAhlrich, R. C., and Ander
Page 150 and 151:
APPENDIX HPG 82-22 HMA DATA
Page 152 and 153:
Table H2 - PG 82-22 Designs with di
Page 154 and 155:
Table H4 - PG 82-22 Gradation Chart
Page 156 and 157:
Table H6 - PG 82-22 Inspectors Dail
Page 158 and 159:
Figure H8 - PG 82-22 Quality Contro
Page 160 and 161:
Figure H10 - PG 82-22 Truck Tickets
Page 162 and 163:
Table H13 PG 82-22 Rut Measurements
Page 164 and 165:
Table H15 - PG 82-22 Smoothness Dat
Page 166 and 167:
APPENDIX ICOST DATA
Page 168 and 169:
Table I2 - Resin Modified Pavement
show all

Resin Modified Pavement Demonstration Project.pdf

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

Delete template?

Save as template?