Using Existing Pavement in Place and Achieving Long Life (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2014 www.TRB.org RepoRt S2-R23-RR-1 The Second S T R A T E G I C H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M Using Existing Pavement in Place and Achieving Long Life NewtoN JacksoN aNd JasoN PucciNelli Nichols Consulting Engineers, Chtd. Joe MahoNey University of Washington, Seattle, Washington

Subscriber Categories Construction Highways Maintenance and Preservation Pavements

SHRP 2 Reports Available by subscription and through the TRB online bookstore: www.TRB.org/bookstore Contact the TRB Business Office: 202-334-3213 More information about SHRP 2: www.TRB.org/SHRP2 SHRP 2 Report S2-R23-RR-1 ISBN: 978-0-309-12962-6 Library of Congress Control Number: 2014933826 © 2014 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Copyright Information Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copy- right to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. The second Strategic Highway Research Program grants permission to repro- duce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, or FHWA endorsement of a particular prod- uct, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing material in this document for educational and not-for-profit purposes will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from SHRP 2. Note: SHRP 2 report numbers convey the program, focus area, project number, and publication format. Report numbers ending in “w” are published as web documents only. Notice The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the second Strategic Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical committee and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the second Strategic Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. The Second Strategic Highway Research Program America’s highway system is critical to meeting the mobility and economic needs of local communities, regions, and the nation. Developments in research and technology—such as advanced materials, communications technology, new data collection tech- nologies, and human factors science—offer a new opportunity to improve the safety and reliability of this important national resource. Breakthrough resolution of significant transportation problems, however, requires concentrated resources over a short time frame. Reflecting this need, the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2) has an intense, large-scale focus, integrates multiple fields of research and technology, and is fundamentally different from the broad, mission-oriented, discipline-based research programs that have been the mainstay of the highway research industry for half a century. The need for SHRP 2 was identified in TRB Special Report 260: Strategic Highway Research: Saving Lives, Reducing Congestion, Improving Quality of Life, published in 2001 and based on a study sponsored by Congress through the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). SHRP 2, modeled after the first Strategic Highway Research Program, is a focused, time- constrained, management-driven program designed to comple- ment existing highway research programs. SHRP 2 focuses on applied research in four areas: Safety, to prevent or reduce the severity of highway crashes by understanding driver behavior; Renewal, to address the aging infrastructure through rapid design and construction methods that cause minimal disruptions and produce lasting facilities; Reliability, to reduce congestion through incident reduction, management, response, and mitigation; and Capacity, to integrate mobility, economic, environmental, and community needs in the planning and designing of new transpor- tation capacity. SHRP 2 was authorized in August 2005 as part of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The program is managed by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) on behalf of the National Research Council (NRC). SHRP 2 is conducted under a memorandum of understanding among the American Associa- tion of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the National Academy of Sciences, parent organization of TRB and NRC. The program provides for competitive, merit-based selection of research contractors; independent research project oversight; and dissemination of research results.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achieve- ments of engineers. Dr. C. D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisci- plinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transporta- tion, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration in cooperation with the American Asso- ciation of State Highway and Transportation Officials. It was conducted in the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. The project was managed by James Bryant, Senior Program Officer for SHRP 2 Renewal. The research team comprised Newton Jackson and Jason Puccinelli, Nichols Consulting Engineers, Chtd.; Dr. Joe Mahoney and Dr. Steve Muench, University of Washington; Dr. Karim Chatti and Dr. Neeraj Buch, Michigan State University; Dr. Dan Zollinger and Dr. Tom Scullion, Texas A&M; George White, Pavia; Dr. Julie Vandenbossche, University of Pittsburgh; Dr. E. B. Lee, University of California, Berkeley; and Dr. Katie Hall, ARA. Of particular importance to the outcome of this project were the contributions from a number of individuals who helped coordinate meetings and who provided comments and recommendations throughout the project: Gregory Stukel, Illinois Tollway Authority; Mike Eacker, Michigan Depart- ment of Transportation; Dr. Shongtao Dai, Minnesota Department of Transportation; John Donahue and Bill Stone, Missouri Department of Transportation; Dr. Magdy Mikhail, Texas Department of Transportation; Trenton Clark and Alex Teklu, Virginia Department of Transportation; Jeff Uhlmeyer, Washington State Department of Transportation; Larry Scofield, American Concrete Paving Associa- tion; and Dr. Dave Newcomb, National Asphalt Paving Association. SHRP 2 STAFF Ann M. Brach, Director Stephen J. Andrle, Deputy Director Neil J. Pedersen, Deputy Director, Implementation and Communications Cynthia Allen, Editor Kenneth Campbell, Chief Program Officer, Safety JoAnn Coleman, Senior Program Assistant, Capacity and Reliability Eduardo Cusicanqui, Financial Officer Richard Deering, Special Consultant, Safety Data Phase 1 Planning Shantia Douglas, Senior Financial Assistant Charles Fay, Senior Program Officer, Safety Carol Ford, Senior Program Assistant, Renewal and Safety Jo Allen Gause, Senior Program Officer, Capacity James Hedlund, Special Consultant, Safety Coordination Alyssa Hernandez, Reports Coordinator Ralph Hessian, Special Consultant, Capacity and Reliability Andy Horosko, Special Consultant, Safety Field Data Collection William Hyman, Senior Program Officer, Reliability Linda Mason, Communications Officer Reena Mathews, Senior Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability Matthew Miller, Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability Michael Miller, Senior Program Assistant, Capacity and Reliability David Plazak, Senior Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability Rachel Taylor, Senior Editorial Assistant Dean Trackman, Managing Editor Connie Woldu, Administrative Coordinator

F O R EWO R D James W. Bryant, Jr., PhD, PE, SHRP 2 Senior Program Officer, Renewal On roadways that have acceptable geometric features, renewal can be greatly accelerated and costs reduced if the existing pavement can be incorporated into the new pavement struc- ture. Transportation agencies need reliable procedures that allow them to identify when an existing pavement can successfully be used in place and how to incorporate it into the new pavement structure to achieve long life. This report and the accompanying guide and web tool provide guidance for selecting, designing, and constructing long-life pavements by using existing pavement structure. The goal of this project was to develop reliable procedures and guidelines for identifying when existing pavements can be used in place and the methods necessary to incorporate the original material into the new pavement structure while achieving long life. “Long life” was defined as 50 years or longer from the time the pavement was renewed or rehabilitated until the next major rehabilitation. (This report does not provide guidance on the use of routine overlays designed for maintenance and preservation, which is included in the report and guide for SHRP 2 Renewal Project R26, Preservation Approaches for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways.) The report and guide encourage longer-lasting renewed pavement designs; provide real- istic, easy-to-use pavement thickness scoping assessments; and guide users through the data- gathering process needed for input into designing and constructing a long-life pavement by using the existing pavement structure. The guide includes the following: project assessment manual; best practices for rehabilitation of flexible pavements and rigid pavements; guide speci- fications; life-cycle cost analysis; and emerging pavement technology. All the guidance has been incorporated into the web-based pavement design scoping tool, which is meant to comple- ment, not replace, a transportation agency’s normal processes for design and pavement-type selection. The guide and web tool were developed with the support of several transportation agencies, including the Illinois Tollway Authority, Michigan DOT, Minnesota DOT, Missouri DOT, Texas DOT, Virginia DOT, and Washington DOT. As a result of outreach to transportation agencies, a set of enhancements is currently under way and will be included as a future addendum to the report and guide. Those enhancements will include providing guidance on pavement thickness for 30 to 50 years of rehabilitated design life and updating the guidance and design table to incorporate precast concrete pave- ments and composite pavement as options for the rehabilitation strategy.

C O N T E N T S 1 Executive Summary 1 Project Development Guidelines 4 Implementation and Recommended Research 5 CHAPTER 1 Background 5 Project Objectives 6 Scope of Work 6 Report Organization 7 CHAPTER 2 Research Approach 7 Introduction 7 Phased Research Approach 11 CHAPTER 3 Findings and Applications 11 Introduction 11 Long-Life Definitions 12 Background on Existing Renewal Approaches 18 LTPP Analyses 19 Assessment of Renewal Approaches 21 Design Guides 31 Resource Knowledge Base 35 Interactive Application 38 CHAPTER 4 Conclusions and Suggested Research 38 Suggested Research 39 Implementation 40 References 41 Appendix A. Literature Review 65 Appendix B. Synthesis of Data on Long-Term Pavement Performance 103 Appendix C. Development of Rigid and Flexible Renewal Decision Matrices 109 Appendix D. Development of Rigid and Flexible Renewal Thickness Design Tables