PHASE II REPORT - Caltrans

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Automated Mixing Test Mix: M5 Agg: Texas Emul: Ergon Trial # Temp°C Cement, % Water, % AMT RESULTS FOR ALL MIXES Liquid Add, %:______ Emulsion, % Aggregate, g Cement, % 1 25 0 9 0 12 300 0 27 0 36 7.2 2:30 5:00 7:30 2 25 0.5 9 0 12 300 1.5 27 0 36 7.5 2:15 4:30 7:30 3 25 0 9 0 10 300 0 27 0 30 8.5 2:30 4:30 6:15 4 25 0.5 9 0 10 300 1.5 27 0 30 8.5 2:30 4:00 6:15 5 25 0 10 0 10 300 0 30 0 30 9 2:30 5:00 7:30 6 25 0.5 10 0 10 300 1.5 30 0 30 9 2:15 4:30 7:30 7 25 0 11 0 8 300 0 33 0 24 8.5 2:15 5:00 7:30 8 25 0.5 11 0 8 300 1.5 33 0 24 8.5 1:45 3:45 6:15 Humidity= 50% 193 Water, % Liquid Add, %:______ Emulsion, % Mix Index: steady state torque Mix Time: time where steady increas of torque begins Spread Time: time where torque reaches 12 N-cm Time when mix has broken
CEL#: 10-17749 1)apply tack coat to disc and break emulsion Project Name: Slurry/Micro Mix Design 2)record weight of specimen after cure, before soaking Aggregate: Type 3 Emulsion: MSE Ralumac 3)cover test specimen with water Source: Table Mountain Source: Sem Materials 4)abrade for 60 sec Emulsion mid-range target: 11.0 5)rinse debris with 1000ml of water M1 Pre-wet water mid-range target: 12.0 6)carefully pat dry with towel Additive mid-range target: 0.0 Additive: cement type 2 7)record weight after test Additive mid-range target: 1.00 Additive: alum.sulf. Additive mid-range target: Additive: CAT RESULTS FOR ALL MIXES Comments: binding between emulsion and rock looks poor Additive mid-range target: Additive: Curing Conditions: Cohes.Abrasion w/wheels % material weights,g Temperature,°C 15 25 35 -- aggregate 1350.0 agg Temperature,°F 59 77 95 0.0 cement / lime 0.0 cement Other: ___________ Humidity, % 50 90 12.0 water 162.0 water 1.0 alum.sulf. 13.5 alum.sulf. Soaking period before testing 1 minute 1 hour 11.0 emulsion (target) 148.5 emulsion Other: ___________ Compaction w/ roller immediately before testing yes no 194 A Cure Start End Rolled @ Soaking Temp Temp B C=A-B Original Time Clock Temp Temp Clock Humidity end of cure Period of SOAK of SOAK Final Loss Wt, g minutes Time °F °C Time yes / no before test water water Wt, g Wt, g 1718.2 0:30 12:45 60 16 13:15 51 NO 1 min 61 16 1058.7 659.5 1716.8 0:30 13:00 60 16 13:30 51 YES 1 min 61 16 1114.5 602.3 1706.4 1:00 9:00 60 16 10:00 48 NO 1 min 61 16 1154.7 551.7 1732.6 1:00 8:30 60 16 9:30 50 YES 1 min 61 16 1291.6 441.0 1723.6 3:00 8:15 60 16 11:15 48 NO 1 min 60 16 1377.1 346.5 1728.1 3:00 8:00 60 16 11:00 51 YES 1 min 60 16 1184.7 543.4 1728.3 5:00 6:30 59 15 11:30 48 NO 1 hour 60 16 1344.6 383.7 1763.0 5:00 6:00 60 16 11:00 48 YES 1 hour 60 16 1549 214.0
Page 1 and 2:
PHASE II REPORT Slurry Seal / Micro
Page 3 and 4:
CALTRANS Fugro Consultants, Inc. Co
Page 5 and 6:
CALTRANS Fugro Consultants, Inc. Co
Page 7 and 8:
For the Phase II work, the research
Page 9 and 10:
2.0 CHAPTER 2 INTRODUCTION 2.1 BACK
Page 11 and 12:
3.0 Findings from the ruggedness te
Page 13 and 14:
START Test Mix Components Accept Ma
Page 15 and 16:
For all the above considerations, t
Page 17 and 18:
Type II and III microsurfacings are
Page 19 and 20:
“M” Refers to an ASSHTO Standar
Page 21 and 22:
Viscosity: A property of the mix th
Page 23 and 24:
3.6.2 The European Mixing Test Base
Page 25 and 26:
Mix Torque kg-cm 70 60 50 40 30 20
Page 27 and 28:
Clamping Pressure 200Kpa Interface
Page 29 and 30:
Samples Holes 0.8 inches (~0.20 mm
Page 31 and 32:
• Abrasion: CAT. This test may be
Page 33 and 34:
3.7.1 Step 1: Materials Selection T
Page 35 and 36:
3.7.6 Step 6: Evaluate the Long Ter
Page 37 and 38:
4.2 LABORATORY TEST METHODS DEVELOP
Page 39 and 40:
Table 4.2.2: TB-113 Results for Mix
Page 41 and 42:
In addition to the “base mixture
Page 43 and 44:
The resulting mix had the following
Page 45 and 46:
Features: Produces a tangential flo
Page 47 and 48:
Mixing Containers type and size: a.
Page 49 and 50:
• 50 rpm mixing speed This config
Page 51 and 52:
The shape of the traces for differe
Page 53 and 54:
Figure 4.10: Mix M4 Trace with Stan
Page 55 and 56:
The recommended mixing procedure fo
Page 57 and 58:
Figure 4.14: AMT Trace for Mix M1,
Page 59 and 60:
Figure 4.16: Automated Cohesion Tes
Page 61 and 62:
As illustrated in Figures 4.17 and
Page 63 and 64:
Note that the ratio of the two aver
Page 65 and 66:
• Dry Loss Method - Two identical
Page 67 and 68:
Loss (%) 35 30 20 15 10 5 0 Effect
Page 69 and 70:
The differences in the samples were
Page 71 and 72:
Both systems were correctly defined
Page 73 and 74:
Time (Min) Wet Loss M1 (g) Table 4.
Page 75 and 76:
observation. For long term abrasion
Page 77 and 78:
4.3.2 Evaluation of Cohesion-Abrasi
Page 79 and 80:
4.4 REVISED MIX DESIGN METHOD (VERS
Page 81 and 82:
Step 5: Evaluate the Cohesion Prope
Page 83 and 84:
5.0 CHAPTER 5 RUGGEDNESS TESTING 5.
Page 85 and 86:
These levels will be far enough apa
Page 87 and 88:
5.3.3 ACT Test For this test, the c
Page 89 and 90:
6.1.2 AGGREGATE Mineral aggregate s
Page 91 and 92:
shall perform the mix design. The p
Page 93 and 94:
6.5.2 TEST STRIP. With the coordina
Page 95 and 96:
6.6.5 MACHINE CALIBRATION. Each uni
Page 97 and 98:
6.7 METHOD OF MEASUREMENT 6.7.1 ARE
Page 99 and 100:
Delays in the progress of the resea
Page 101 and 102:
2.4 IDA Werke EUROSTAR Power contro
Page 103 and 104:
4.3 If the mix does not break, the
Page 105 and 106:
8.0 PROCEDURE 8.1 Maintain the aggr
Page 107 and 108:
11.2.1.1 BT: brown color transfer t
Page 109 and 110:
Note: Closing all other programs ru
Page 111 and 112:
− Eurostar mixer - the parameter
Page 113 and 114:
Figure A.5: Display of Functional U
Page 115 and 116:
To stop the test, select the drop d
Page 117 and 118:
2.3 ISSA TB-100, Test Method for We
Page 119 and 120:
5.4 Suitable specimen casting mold
Page 121 and 122:
8.2 The amounts of material compone
Page 123 and 124:
9.2 Completely cover the specimen w
Page 125 and 126:
APPENDIX C RESULTS OF RUGGEDNESS AM
Page 127 and 128:
Figure C.2: Ruggedness Trials Trial
Page 129 and 130:
Figure C.4: Ruggedness Trials Trial
Page 131 and 132:
CEL#: 10-17749 LAB #: Date Tested:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
CAT: COHESION ABRASION TEST (FRENCH
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148: CEL#: 10-17749 LAB #: Date Tested:
Page 149 and 150: 2.CAT-Cohesion Abrasion Test: Frenc
Page 151 and 152: GRADATION ANALYSIS FOR AGGREGATE A1
Page 161 and 162: Source: Lopke (A2) Aggregate: ISSA
Page 171 and 172: GRADATION ANALYSES FOR AGGREGATE A3
Page 181 and 182: SODIUM SULFATE SOUNDNESS FOR AGGREG
Page 183 and 184: SODIUM SULFATE SOUNDNESS FOR AGGREG
Page 185 and 186: ABRASION LOSS BY AASHTO T-96 FOR AG
Page 187 and 188: SAND EQUIVALENT FOR AGGREGATES A1,
Page 189 and 190: ABRASION LOSS BY ASTM D6928 FOR AGG
Page 191 and 192: CEL# 10-17749 Source: Sem Materials
Page 193 and 194: CEL# 10-17749 Source: VSS Emultech
Page 195 and 196: CEL# 10-17749 Source: Ergon Materia
Page 197: Automated Mixing Test Mix: M3 Agg:
Page 201 and 202: CEL#: 10-17749 1)apply tack coat to
Page 229 and 230: Aggregates: Emulsions: Mixes: CAT R
Page 231 and 232: ACT RESULTS FOR ALL MIXES TEST RESU
Page 233 and 234: ACT RESULTS FOR ALL MIXES 228
Page 247 and 248: not effective if placed on pavement
Page 249 and 250:
Table F.1: Draft Outline for Refere
Page 251 and 252:
David Peshkin will take the lead in
Page 253 and 254:
Ride quality has been shown to impa
Page 255 and 256:
agency will be held prior to constr
Page 257 and 258:
An agency that desires to participa
show all

PHASE II REPORT - Caltrans

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

Delete template?

Save as template?