The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 33-88

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 33... ... 33 The following provides a brief overview of the data collected and analyzed for each selected BCOA project (individual project portfolios are provided in Appendix C) Read the entire page →
From page 34... ... 34 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements Figure 16. Data collection vehicle for automated pavement condition survey. Read the entire page →
From page 35... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 35 Figure 17. Example of automated pavement condition survey. Read the entire page →
From page 36... ... 36 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements 714 722 316 0 300 600 900 1200 Low Moderate High N o. of Se gm en ts Traffic Volume Figure 19. Read the entire page →
From page 37... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 37 Overall Condition Good Fair Poor IRI (in./mi) ≤95 95–170 ≥170 Transverse Cracking (% area) Read the entire page →
From page 38... ... 38 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements The IL SR-53 northbound segments (4- × 4-ft slabs) had higher than average total cracking, faulting, and IRI; further investigation indicated that the BCOA layers were underdesigned for this project. Read the entire page →
From page 39... ... Project ID Slab Size Length (mi) Region Age (years) Read the entire page →
From page 41... ... 1385 185 173 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 ≤ 5 5-10 ≥ 15 N o. o f S eg m en ts Total Cracking (%) Read the entire page →
From page 42... ... 42 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements Statistical analyses were used to determine the difference in performance between inter section and nonintersection locations. The performance parameters analyzed were IRI, faulting, and total cracking (corner, longitudinal, and transverse) Read the entire page →
From page 43... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 43 that about 38% of the projects showed a statistical difference in pavement performance between intersections and nonintersections for a given project (Table 23) Read the entire page →
From page 44... ... 44 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements from the statistical analysis. In general, the eect on sample size when using the entire data set has a low to medium eect, meaning the results from ANOVA and t-test can be accepted. Read the entire page →
From page 45... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 45 0 20 40 60 80 100 CO SH -1 21 B N B CO SH -1 21 B SB CO SH -1 21 A N B CO SH -1 21 A SB CO SH -8 3A N B CO SH -8 3A S B CO SH -8 3B N B CO SH -8 3B SB CO U S 6 EB CO U S 6 W B IL S R 53 N B IL S R 53 S B LA U S 16 7 N B LA U S 16 7 SB M O U S 60 E B M O U S 60 W B PA S R 11 9 N B PA S R 11 9 SB Av er ag e Project ID All To ta lC ra ck in g (% ) Intersection Non-Intersection NOTE: Error bars indicate ±1 standard deviation. Read the entire page →
From page 46... ... 46 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements A vehicle equipped with an electronic distance-measuring instrument mounted to the rear wheel provided synchronous distance data for GPR testing locations (Figure 31) Read the entire page →
From page 47... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 47 where t = time (nanoseconds) , and εa = relative dielectric permittivity or "dielectric constant" of the pavement layer. Read the entire page →
From page 48... ... NOTE: EB = eastbound; NB = northbound; SB = southbound; WB = westbound. a As reported by agency; NA = not available, that is, thickness is unknown. Read the entire page →
From page 49... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 49 Core GPR NOTE: Error bars indicate ±1 standard deviation. Read the entire page →
From page 50... ... 50 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements and were significantly thicker than those from the GPR measurement, which ranged from 6 to 7 in. Core measurements of asphalt layer thickness on several projects, namely IL SR-53, KS I-70, and LA US-167, also varied significantly, with a difference between minimum and maximum thickness greater than 7 in. Read the entire page →
From page 51... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 51 to determine current conditions (e.g., cracking, spalling, corner breaks) , as well as to identify other common distress types specific to BCOAs, including slab migration. Read the entire page →
From page 52... ... 52 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements Each good, fair, and poor segment was tested with a faultmeter (Figure 39) Read the entire page →
From page 53... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 53 MN TH-30 26 12- x 12-ft Good 45 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.01 Fair 34 −0.07 0.30 0.07 0.07 Poor 49 0.06 0.24 0.13 0.05 MO US-60 20 4- x 4-ft Good 15 0.00 0.12 0.02 0.03 Fair 15 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.02 Poor 15 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 MT SR-16 18 4- x 4-ft Good NA a Fair NA a Poor NA a PA SR-119 9 6- x 6-ft Good NA b Fair NA b Poor NA b NOTE: NA = not available. a Testing not conducted because of traffic control restrictions. Read the entire page →
From page 54... ... 54 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements on the 6- × 6-ft slabs had faulting less than 0.20 in., and most of the measurements (80%) on the 12- × 12-ft slabs had faulting less than 0.12 in. Read the entire page →
From page 55... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 55 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 IR I ( in /m i) In-Service Age (years) Read the entire page →
From page 56... ... 56 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Fa ul tin g (in ch ) In-Service Age (years) Read the entire page →
From page 57... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 57 Statistical Analysis of Automated and Visual Distress Surveys and Faultmeter Testing A statistical analysis was conducted to compare the results of the automated pavement condition surveys and the visual distress surveys. Automated condition survey results for the 0.10-mi good, fair, and poor locations were extracted for direct comparison with the visual distress survey results for faulting, corner breaks, longitudinal cracking, transverse cracking, and total cracking (Figures 46 through 50) Read the entire page →
From page 58... ... R² = 0.5952 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Au to m at ed C on di tio n Su rv ey (% sl ab s) Visual Distress Survey (% slabs) Read the entire page →
From page 59... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 59 The paired t-test was the statistical analysis used to evaluate the difference between the means of the automated and manual distress survey results. The t-test results indicated that a statistical difference in data set means exists between the data collection methods, except for longitudinal cracking (Table 31) Read the entire page →
From page 60... ... 60 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements for corner breaks, longitudinal cracking, and transverse cracking and is not statistically different for faulting and total cracking. Although the methods are statistically different, a linear correlation does exist. Read the entire page →
From page 61... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 61 • Longitudinal joint spalling: The factors showing an effect were in-service age, synthetic macro fibers, and the interaction of BCOA–asphalt layer thickness. As in-service age increases, increased spalling is observed. Read the entire page →
From page 62... ... 62 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements and synthetic macrofibers on BCOA performance under uncontrolled conditions. To assess and quantify the effectiveness of joint sealing and synthetic macrofibers, more extensive and controlled research is needed. Read the entire page →
From page 63... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 63 The reflected shear wave amplitude and shear wave velocity at a particular location are displayed in the output on the left side of the image (the x and z coordinates can be ignored) Read the entire page →
From page 64... ... 64 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements A goodness of fit between the ultrasonic tomography and core results is shown in Figure 53. Only the ultrasonic tomography results near the core locations were used in this analysis. Read the entire page →
From page 65... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 65 performance was based on two-dimensional finite element modeling using a procedure developed by King and Roesler (2014b) Read the entire page →
From page 66... ... 66 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements The LTE, calculated as the ratio of the deflection of the unloaded slab (approach slab) to the loaded slab (leave slab) Read the entire page →
From page 67... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 67 Project ID Segment Age (years) Surface Temp. Read the entire page →
From page 68... ... 68 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements A comparison of as-cored bond condition with calculated condition based on effective thickness is illustrated in Figure 56. If the effective thickness is approximately equal to or less than the BCOA thickness, it suggests the interface bond has deteriorated. Read the entire page →
From page 69... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 69 Two of the four cores were extracted at the slab center, one was bridging a transverse joint in the wheelpath, and the last was centered 9 in. away from the transverse joint in the right wheelpath. Read the entire page →
From page 70... ... Center of slab Right wheelpath Not to scale Core (6 in) - center of slab Core (6 in) Read the entire page →
From page 71... ... Right wheelpath Not to scale MIRA + Core (6 in) - center of slab MIRA + Core (6 in) Read the entire page →
From page 72... ... 72 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements LA US-167 BCOA 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 0.0 4.8 a 4.8 4.1 4.6 0.4 Asphalt na na na na na na 8.7 a 8.7 9.3 8.9 0.3 Unbound Compacted clay Compacted clay LA US-425 BCOA 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.5 0.1 3.9 3.9 3.7 3.7 3.8 0.1 Asphalt 9.5 3.9 2.0 a 5.1 3.9 10.1 3.5 1.4 1.3 4.1 4.2 Unbound Soil cement layer over clayey silt Soil cement layer over clayey silt MN CSAH-7 BCOA 6.5 6.7 6.5 6.7 6.6 0.1 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 0.0 Asphalt 6.7 a a 6.7 6.7 0.0 a 8.1 a a 8.1 na Unbound Coarse sand Coarse sand MN CSAH-22 BCOA 6.5 6.7 6.7 6.5 6.6 0.1 7.3 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 0.1 Asphalt 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.2 0.1 6.7 6.7 6.3 6.5 6.6 0.2 Unbound Rocky sand Rocky sand MN I-35 BCOA 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 0.0 6.3 a a a na na Asphalt 14.0 a a a na na 10.0 a a a na na Unbound Black rocky sand soil MN TH-30 BCOA 6.1 5.9 6.1 5.9 6.0 0.1 6.7 6.7 6.3 6.5 6.5 0.2 Asphalt a a 5.7 a na na 5.5 5.5 a a 5.5 0.0 Soil cement a a 5.7 a na na 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unbound Clayey soil Clayey soil MO US-60 BCOA 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.5 0.1 4.3 4.1 4.3 4.4 4.3 0.1 Asphalt 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.5 4.7 0.1 5.6 5.4 5.4 5.6 5.5 0.1 Unbound Limestone aggregate base Limestone aggregate base MT SR-16 BCOA 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.5 0.1 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.1 4.3 0.1 Asphalt 3.5 3.7 3.9 3.5 3.7 0.2 2.8 3.0 2.6 3.0 2.8 0.2 Unbound Fill Fill PA SR-119 BCOA 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 0.0 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 0.0 Asphalt 9.1 a a a na na 8.3 a a a na na Unbound Aggregate base (possibly several ft deep) Asphalt-treated base (permeable) Read the entire page →
From page 73... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 73 Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests were conducted on all extracted field cores and unbound material samples. Laboratory testing encompassed AASHTO soil classification, Atterberg limits, and gradation; concrete compressive and split tensile strength; concrete coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) Read the entire page →
From page 74... ... 74 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements Project ID Segment Layer AASHTO Soil Class Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index CO I-70 Good Subgrade A-2-7 43 30 13 Poor Subgrade A-2-6 34 22 12 CO SH-83A Good Subgrade A-2-4 29 22 7 Poor Subgrade A-1-b 33 29 5 CO SH-83B Good Subgrade A-3 Nonplastic na na Poor Subgrade A-1-b Nonplastic na na CO SH-121A Poor Aggregate base A-1-b Nonplastic na na Good Subgrade A-1-a Nonplastic na na CO SH-121B Good Aggregate base A-1-a Nonplastic na na Poor Aggregate base A-1-a 20 19 1 Good Subgrade A-2-4 37 27 10 Poor Subgrade A-2-6 38 27 11 CO US-6 Good Subgrade A-1-b 18 17 1 Poor Subgrade A-1-b Nonplastic na na IA US-71 Good Aggregate base A-1-b Nonplastic na na IL CH-27 Good Subgrade A-1-a 18 15 2 Poor Subgrade A-1-a Nonplastic na na IL SR-53 Good Subgrade A-2-4 20 17 2 Poor Subgrade A-2-7 43 27 16 KS I-70 Good Subgrade A-2-4 32 23 9 Poor Subgrade A-2-7 43 25 17 LA US-167 Good Subgrade A-3 Nonplastic na na Subgrade A-2-4 28 27 1 Poor Subgrade A-2-4 24 21 3 LA US-425 Good Subgrade A-2-4 41 34 7 Poor Subgrade A-1-b 24 24 0 MN CSAH-7 Good Subgrade A-1-b Nonplastic na na Poor Subgrade A-1-b Nonplastic na na MN CSAH-22 Good Subgrade A-1-b Nonplastic na na Poor Subgrade A-1-b Nonplastic na na MN I-35 Good Subgrade A-3 Nonplastic na na Poor Subgrade A-4 Nonplastic na na MN TH-30 Good Subgrade A-1-b Nonplastic na na Poor Subgrade A-1-b Nonplastic na na MO US-60 Good Aggregate base A-1-a Nonplastic na na MT SR-16 Good Aggregate base A-1-a Nonplastic na na Poor Aggregate base A-1-b Nonplastic na na PA SR-119 Good Subgrade A-1-a Nonplastic na na NOTE: na = not applicable. Table 42. Read the entire page →
From page 75... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 75 (MN I-35) was classified as a silty material, with more than 35% passing the No. Read the entire page →
From page 76... ... 76 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements Project ID Segment Core No. Required Min. Read the entire page →
From page 77... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 77 y = 5.8249x R² = 0.3189 – 200 400 600 800 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 f_ sp t ( lb /i n2 ) sqrt(f'c) Read the entire page →
From page 78... ... 78 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements MN I-35 Good 1 334 2 348 Poor 5 319 MN TH-30 Good 1 435 4 479 Poor 5 319 6 363 MT SR-16 Good 2 609 Poor 5 580 6 537 PA SR-119 Good 1 682 4 812 4,105 4,351 3,844 5,903 6,730 3,756 4,670 9,805 8,862 7,963 11,400 14,504 Project ID Segment Core No. Split Tensile (psi) Read the entire page →
From page 79... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 79 This formula was derived from first principles of solid mechanics and verified using Core 1 from the LA US-167 project (where a 7-in. cylinder could be extracted) Read the entire page →
From page 80... ... 80 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements Project ID Segment Core No. Read the entire page →
From page 81... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 81 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 CO I-7 0 (C 1) Read the entire page →
From page 82... ... 82 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements Asphalt Bulk-Specific Gravity Bulk-specific gravity is an important characteristic for determining the optimum asphalt binder content in an asphalt mixture. To estimate a performance measure for the underlying asphalt layer, the asphalt bulk-specific gravity was determined on extracted cores. Read the entire page →
From page 83... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 83 (a) Read the entire page →
From page 84... ... 84 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements Statistical Analysis of Laboratory Testing Results and BCOA Performance A screening effect test was conducted to determine the effect of laboratory testing results on BCOA performance. The results of the statistical evaluation, as summarized in Table 48, yielded the following conclusions: • Corner breaks: Subgrade liquid limit and plasticity index (PI) Read the entire page →
From page 85... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 85 IRI of 95 in./mi or less, 44% of segments had an IRI between 95 and 170 in./mi, and 9% of segments had an IRI 170 in./mi or greater. Most all segments had faulting 0.10 in. Read the entire page →
From page 86... ... 86 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements slabs) Read the entire page →
From page 87... ... Field Performance of Selected Projects 87 extensive testing (i.e., numerous testing locations) Read the entire page →
From page 88... ... 88 Evaluation of Bonded Concrete Overlays on Asphalt Pavements To quantify the influence of the asphalt layer, Hamburg wheel testing (AASHTO T 324) was conducted on 25 asphalt samples representing 11 projects. Read the entire page →

From page 33...

... 33 The following provides a brief overview of the data collected and analyzed for each selected BCOA project (individual project portfolios are provided in Appendix C)