Home >Documents >HotHot--Mix Asphalt (HMA)Mix Asphalt (HMA) · HotHot--Mix Asphalt (HMA)Mix Asphalt (HMA) ... AMPT,...

HotHot--Mix Asphalt (HMA)Mix Asphalt (HMA) · HotHot--Mix Asphalt (HMA)Mix Asphalt (HMA) ... AMPT,...

Date post:03-May-2018
Category:
View:227 times
Download:7 times
Share this document with a friend
Transcript:
  • HotHot--Mix Asphalt (HMA)Mix Asphalt (HMA)Balancing Risk &Balancing Risk &Balancing Risk &Balancing Risk &

    Assuring PerformanceAssuring PerformanceNorthNorth--East State Materials Engineers AssociationEast State Materials Engineers Association

    Atlantic City, New JerseyAtlantic City, New JerseyOctober 8October 8thth 20082008October 8October 8 20082008

    Thomas HarmanThomas HarmanThomas HarmanThomas HarmanTeam Leader Senior Pavement Engineer

    Federal Highway Administration - Resource CenterP t & M t i l TST

    1

    Pavement & Materials TST

  • ChangeChange

    The dogmas of the quiet pastThe dogmas of the quiet pastThe dogmas of the quiet past The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy are inadequate to the stormy present as our case is new, sopresent as our case is new, sowe must think anew and actwe must think anew and actwe must think anew and actwe must think anew and act

    anew.anew.

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 2

  • Our VisitOur Visit Our Nations Transportation System Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance

    Need Need Structural Design & Analysis

    Pavement Type Selection, RealCostPavement Type Selection, RealCost Materials Characterization & Designg

    Superpave PGx, AMPT, Mix Type Selection Guide, NAPA/FHWASuperpave PGx, AMPT, Mix Type Selection Guide, NAPA/FHWA Quality Assurance Systems

    6+ Building Blocks6+ Building BlocksP d ti & Pl t Production & Placement

    Automation, Innovation, & BasicsAutomation, Innovation, & Basics Monitoring & Preservation

    Thinking about tomorrow to drive todays decisionsThinking about tomorrow to drive todays decisionsThinking about tomorrow to drive today s decisions Thinking about tomorrow to drive today s decisions

    GOAL: Provide you with resources!

    3NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Freight Freight

    Two Words AboutTwo Words AboutTwo Words About Two Words About Our Nations Transportation SystemOur Nations Transportation System

    4

  • National Statistics: National Statistics: 3,963,262 miles of Roads 590,000 Bridges3,963,262 miles of Roads 590,000 Bridges2.7 trillion vehicle2.7 trillion vehicle--miles / yearmiles / year

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 5

  • National Statistics: National Statistics: 3,963,262 miles of Roads3,963,262 miles of Roads

    6State

    Highway AgencyCounty Town (ship)

    MunicipalOther

    Jurisdiction FederalAgency

  • US Vehicle Population in 2000US Vehicle Population in 2000

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 7

  • Truck DistributionTruck Distribution

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 8

  • Damage vs. Axle WeightDamage vs. Axle Weight

    80%

    90%

    100%

    80%

    90%

    100%

    Cumulative damage

    60%

    70%

    80%

    ffic,

    %

    60%

    70%

    80%

    mag

    e, %

    gRemaining traffic

    40%

    50%

    60%

    inin

    g tr

    af

    40%

    50%

    60%

    ativ

    e da

    m

    20%

    30%

    40%

    Rem

    a

    20%

    30%

    40%

    Cum

    ula

    < 5% of traffic58% of total damage

    0%

    10%

    20%

    0%

    10%

    20%

    9

    0%14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80

    Tandem axle load, kips

    0%

  • Damage vs. Axle WeightDamage vs. Axle Weight5% of traffic causes almost 60% of damage5% of traffic causes almost 60% of damage

    34k to 40k7%

    > 40k5%

    34k7% < 34k25%

    > 40k58%

    < 34k88%

    34k to 40k17%

    88%

    Traffic distribution Damage distribution

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 10

  • Networks IntermodalNetworks Intermodal

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 11

  • National Freight CorridorsNational Freight Corridors

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 12

  • CommerceCommercers

    of D

    olla

    Bill

    ions

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 13

    2002 2006 2035

  • TonnageTonnageIn the US, an average 53 million tons of freight was moved each day in 2002y

    of T

    ons

    Mill

    ion

    o

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 142002 2006 2035

  • KeyKeyWhyWhy An efficient freight transportation system can

    also improve a State or Regions ability to attract p g yand retain businesses

    Economic Vitality and Economic Vitality and CompetitivenessCompetitiveness

    The EnvironmentThe Environment

    Safety and QualitySafety and Quality--ofof--LifeLife

    National SecurityNational Security

  • ChangesChanges

    Congestion and Freight are driving factorsI d t ffi d l di Increased traffic and loadings

    Environmental Concerns (sustainability) ex Use of bag-houses at production facilities increase inex. Use of bag houses at production facilities, increase in

    recycled materials

    Supply sources (asphalt, polymers, aggregates)E l ti t i l t Escalating materials costs

    Production changes ex. Drum plants vs. batch plantsp p

    Staff reductions Shifting roles

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 16

    Personnel experience & shortages

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance

    Risk Risk is the likelihood of a bad or unwanted outcome

    such as poor pavement performance or low profit margin (or crap dice)

    All systems have some inherent Risk, and

    Changes within a system will either increase, decrease, and/or shift Risk between parties,

    ex Owner Agency & Contractorex Owner Agency & Contractorex. Owner Agency & Contractorex. Owner Agency & Contractor

    17NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance

    Risk - Law of Unexpected Consequences

    Sometimes in getting what you ask for you loose what you truly wanted.y y

    18NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance

    Innovation

    New materials, testing tools, and production equipment and procedures offer the potential for q p p peven greater pavement performance!

    NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance

    Risk and Innovation

    In developing systems that reduce overall Risk, we can create an environment that does not foster or reward innovation.

    NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance

    System Approach StructuralStructural

    Get InStructuralStructural

    Stay In

    Get Out

    Stay OutMaterialsMaterials ConstructionConstruction

    21NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Evolution of Pavement DesignEvolution of Pavement Design

    StateState--ofof--PracticePractice StateState--ofof--ArtArt

    AnalyticalAnalytical MLETMLET 2D FEM2D FEM 3D FEM3D FEM

    Past PracticesPast Practices

    22NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Evolution of Pavement DesignEvolution of Pavement Design

    Empirical Mechanistic SpringsSprings Dashpotsy = 114.32x-0.4766

    R2 = 0.934

    80

    100

    120

    140

    Par

    amet

    er

    0

    20

    40

    60

    Per

    form

    ance

    Get a lot of data

    00 5 10

    Load Applications (thousands)

    P

    Get a lot of data Find a Trend (Hope for)

    23NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Evolution of Pavement DesignEvolution of Pavement Design

    Mechanistic-Empirical Combines mechanistically based models (equations) Combines mechanistically based models (equations)

    with empirically derived models (equations)

    y = 114.32x-0.4766R2 = 0.934

    80

    100

    120

    140

    e P

    aram

    eter+ 0204060

    0 5 10

    Load Applications (thousands)

    Per

    form

    ance+

    24NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Previous Previous AASHTO Pavement Design GuideAASHTO Pavement Design GuideAASHTO Pavement Design GuideAASHTO Pavement Design Guide

    Empirical design methodology AASHO

    Interim Guide

    for the Design

    f based on AASHO Road Test in the late 1950s

    of

    Pavement Structures

    * * *

    i i

    FOREWORD

    Several editions:1961 I t i G id

    AASHO Committee on DesignThis interim guide for the design of pavement structures is based on data from the AASHO Road Test at Ottawa Illinois. In those areas not

    1961 Interim Guide April 1962covered by the Road Test, theoretical analysis and experience have been utilized.

    It is essential that the user of the guide understand its limitations, which are:

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 25

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 26

  • New AASHTO MNew AASHTO M--E Pavement Design GuideE Pavement Design Guide

    EN

    VIR

    ON

    ME

    NT

    C SS

    PERFORMANCECRITERIA

    MODELS

    THICKNESS

    27NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • New MNew M--E Pavement Design GuideE Pavement Design Guide

    28NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • LifeLife--Cycle Cost Analysis Software Cycle Cost Analysis Software RealCostRealCost

    Probabilistic Life-Cycle Cost Analysishttp://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/asstmgmt/lcca.cfm

    29NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Pavement Design ResourcesPavement Design Resources

    FHWA: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/p g p

    NCHRP, 1-37A: Free software download http://www.trb.org/mepdg/p g p g

    National Asphalt Pavement Association http://www.hotmix.org/

    Asphalt Pavement Alliance (APA) http://www.asphaltalliance.com/index.asp

    APA: Perpetual Pavements http://www.asphaltalliance.com/library.asp?MENU=519

    30NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance

    StructuralStructuralStructuralStructural

    MaterialsMaterials ConstructionConstruction

    31NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 32

  • Why SHRP?Why SHRP?

    In the 1980s procedures and practices could not

    2 W k Old !2 W k Old !a d p ac ces cou d oassure performance. 2 Weeks Old !2 Weeks Old !

    Unacceptable Risk

    DistressRutting Rutting

    Fatigue cracking Low-temperature cracking

    33

    Low-temperature cracking

  • Major Steps in Superpave Mix DesignMajor Steps in Superpave Mix Design1. Selection of Materials,

    2. Selection of a Design Aggregate Structure,

    3. Selection of the Design Binder Content,

    4. Evaluation of Moisture Sensitivityof the Design Mixture and

    SP

    of the Design Mixture, and

    5 Performance CharacterizationBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance 34

    5. Performance Characterization.

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 35Superpave Gyratory CompactorSuperpave Gyratory Compactor

  • ONGOING ONGOING R fi tR fi t

    Understanding Modifiers PGx

    RefinementRefinement

    Understanding Modifiers, PGx Asphalt Mix Performance Tester Equipment Calibrationq p Understanding acid Improved moisture test

    Construction Quality Link to Pavement Design Link to Pavement Design Communication!

    36NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Paul MackPaul MackN Y k St tN Y k St t R ti dR ti dNew York State New York State -- RetiredRetired

    f h ld Imperfection should never stall implementation.

    You can still drink from a chipped cup.chipped cup.

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 37

  • ChallengesChallenges

    A hi i VMAA hi i VMA Achieving VMAAchieving VMA Suitability Suitability of Gyratory Compaction Levelsof Gyratory Compaction Levels

    I f D bilit & Bi d t tI f D bilit & Bi d t t Issues of Durability & Binder contentIssues of Durability & Binder content Need for a Moisture Sensitivity TestNeed for a Moisture Sensitivity Test Deployment of a Performance/Strength TestDeployment of a Performance/Strength Test Deployment of a Performance/Strength TestDeployment of a Performance/Strength Test

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 38NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • NCHRP 9 NCHRP 9 Bituminous MaterialsBituminous Materials

    RAP Characterization, 9RAP Characterization, 9--1212 Gyratory Level, 9Gyratory Level, 9--9, 99, 9--16, 916, 9--1919Gyratory Level, 9Gyratory Level, 9 9, 99, 9 16, 916, 9 1919 Volumetric Requirements, 9Volumetric Requirements, 9--25, 925, 9--3131

    Performance Testing 9Performance Testing 9 19 919 9 2929 Performance Testing, 9Performance Testing, 9--19, 919, 9--2929 Mixture Design Manual, 9Mixture Design Manual, 9--3333

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 39NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • New Asphalt Mix Performance TesterNew Asphalt Mix Performance TesterAMPTAMPTAMPTAMPT

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 40

  • AMPT AMPT Pooled Fund StudyPooled Fund Study POC: Dr. Audrey Copeland, FHWA

    [email protected] p @ g

    41NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • SHRP Asphalt SHRP Asphalt P C di tP C di tProgram CoordinatorProgram Coordinator

    One of the principal goals ofOne of the principal goals of the SHRP asphalt program is to

    reduce or eliminate thereduce or eliminate the proliferation of asphalt binder

    specifications.

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 42Dr. Thomas Kennedy

  • Growing Trend from 2002 to 2005Growing Trend from 2002 to 2005 34 States with Plus Specs (67%)

    13 St t St i ht M 320 13 States Straight M 320

    21 Different Pluses35

    4 Duel / Hybrid20253035

    f St

    ates

    The Winner! M 320 with 13 Pluses+++++++++++++ 5

    101520

    Num

    ber

    of20022005

    +++++++++++++05N

    As is M320 Plus Spec.'sPG Grade Specifications

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 43NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • SuperpaveSuperpave PlusPlus

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 44

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 45

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 46

  • New Superpave Tool PGx (Table 3)New Superpave Tool PGx (Table 3)

    Original Spec was based on Modulus, G* is Stress / StrainG is Stress / Strain

    C li J i St i / St Compliance, JNR is Strain / Stress x: Standard, Heavy, Very Heavy

    Eliminates grade-bumping Accounts for traffic level through Jnr criteria

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 47

  • Materials ResourcesMaterials Resources

    FHWA: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/p g p

    NCHRP, 9-series http://www.trb.org/mepdg/p g p g

    National Asphalt Pavement Association http://www.hotmix.org/

    Asphalt Pavement Alliance (APA) http://www.asphaltalliance.com/index.asp

    Asphalt Institute http://www.asphaltinstitute.org/

    48NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance

    StructuralStructuralStructuralStructural

    MaterialsMaterials ConstructionConstruction

    49NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • ConstructionConstructionConstructionConstruction Contacting MechanismsContacting Mechanisms

    Design Standards (ex. Superpave) to Performance Specifications to Warranties to Public-Private-Partnership

    Quality Assurance SystemsQuality Assurance Systems Ex. Percent Within Limits (PWL)

    Compaction & Intelligent Construction Systems (ICS)L it di l J i t A t t d Pl t IC R ll I f d Longitudinal Joints, Automated Plants, IC Rolls, Infrared Cameras, Real time project information

    Warm Mix Asphalt Technologies HIGH RAP Materials

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 50NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • FHWAFHWA

    Quality Assurance Quality Assurance AssessmentAssessmentAssessmentAssessment

    FY 2008FY 2008008008

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 51

  • What it is What it is NOTNOT and what it and what it ISIS The Assessment is NOT

    A Gotcha A way to compare States A indication of pavement performance

    Perfect Perfect

    The Assessment isThe Assessment is A tool to identify potential areas of RISK A tool to identify successful practices A tool to prioritize training A tool to guide specification refinement

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 52

  • Driving FactorsDriving Factors Quality Assurance Reviews (HIPT)

    State Agency Compliance with CFR

    National Review Program: Quality Assurance in Materials & Construction (Division Office (Assessment of Risk) Kevin McLaury (MT), Team Leader, Max Grogg (IA),

    Mike Praul (ME), Brad Neitzke (WFL), Ken Jacoby ( ), ( ), y(HIAM), Pete Kulyk (HPC), & Tamiko Burnell (HSA)

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 53

  • National Review Program: Quality National Review Program: Quality Assurance in Materials & ConstructionAssurance in Materials & Construction

    Six Building Blocks1 Contractor Quality Control1. Contractor Quality Control2. Agency Acceptance3 Independent Assurance3. Independent Assurance4. Dispute Resolution5 Laboratory Accreditation and Qualification5. Laboratory Accreditation and Qualification6. Personnel Qualification/Certification, and7 RISK7. RISK

    AA

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 54DR QC

    IA

    LA/Q

    PQ/C

    AA

  • RiskRisk--based Processbased Process

    Risk-basedAssessment

    T l

    Benchmark Report

    Tool

    Prioritize Areas of Risk

    IdentifyAction Plan

    Successful PracticesConduct

    Training / RoundtablesgRefine

    QA Specifications

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 55

  • Division Office Interview Division Office Interview (Mike/Lee/Dennis)(Mike/Lee/Dennis)Assessment of RISK Assessment of RISK (QA System)(QA System) 18 Questions

    Covers the Six Building Blocksg Questions Weighted 1, 2, 3, 5, & 7

    Frequency52 i FY 2008 52 in FY 2008

    Updated TBD

    AA

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 56DR QC

    IA

    LA/Q

    PQ/C

    AA

  • Two desired outcomesTwo desired outcomes We get what we pay for Balanced, low-risk system

    Create a culture of Trust

    AA

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 57DR QC

    IA

    LA/Q

    PQ/C

    AA

  • DefinitionsDefinitions Advanced States

    Those States that have highly developed QA programs that demonstrate their capability for measuring the quality of their p y g q yconstruction and materials programs. An advance QA program includes highly developed Contractor Quality Control, Agency Acceptance, Dispute Resolution, Independent Assurance, Technician Certification or Qualification, and Laboratory yCertification programs.

    Intermediate States Those States that have substantially demonstrated an effective

    QA program for meas ring q alit and incl des most of the QAQA program for measuring quality and includes most of the QA elements of an advanced QA program.

    Opportunity States Those States that have a demonstrated a weakness in their Those States that have a demonstrated a weakness in their

    construction and materials programs to measure quality or have a weakness in their program that could lead to fraud.

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 58

  • NPM NPM A low rating is A low rating is notnot a compliance issue with a compliance issue with 23 CFR 637.23 CFR 637.

    34

    Quality Assurance System - Overall Rating (52 Responces)

    2426283032

    1618202224

    er o

    f Sta

    tes

    810121416

    Num

    be

    0246

    Ad d I t di t O t it

    59

    Advanced Intermediate OpportunityLevel

  • Distribution of RatingDistribution of Rating

    11

    12

    Histogram of QA System Rating - FY 2008

    9

    10

    11

    s

    6

    7

    8

    of A

    genc

    ies

    3

    4

    5

    Num

    ber

    0

    1

    2

    3

    60

    010% 25% 40% 55% 70% 85% 100%

    QA System Rating

  • % of Agencies Needing Advancement% of Agencies Needing AdvancementFALCON 5 - Gap AnalysisQA Assessment of RISK

    Weighting Factors: Yellow-7, Orange-5, Green-3, Blue-2, Brown-1

    13 W ti

    6. Bridge Quality Char.

    7. Lot Size

    10. PWL Risk Analysis

    12. NTPEP

    13. Warranties Incre

    8. PWL/PD

    11. Continuous Equations

    14. Limited use of visual acceptance

    4. HMA Quality Char.

    5. PCC Quality Char.

    easing

    16. Formal Dispute Resolution

    18. Personnel Qualification.

    15. System IA with 90% tech checked.

    17. Project Field Labs Approval

    1. Materials Management System

    g RIS

    K

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

    2. Control of Random Sampling Location

    3. Immed. State Possession of Verf. Tests

    9. Use of F&t

    p

    K

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 62

    Percent of Agencies Requiring Improvement

  • x Weighting Factor x Weighting Factor FALCON 5 - Gap Analysis

    QA Assessment of RISK using Weighting Factors

    Weighting Factors: Yellow-7, Orange-5, Green-3, Blue-2, Brown-1

    6. Bridge Quality Char.

    7. Lot Size

    10. PWL Risk Analysis

    12. NTPEP

    13. Warranties Incre

    8 PWL/PD

    11. Continuous Equations

    14. Limited use of visual acceptance

    4. HMA Quality Char.

    5. PCC Quality Char.

    easing

    18. Personnel Qualification.

    15. System IA with 90% tech checked.

    17. Project Field Labs Approval

    1. Materials Management System

    8. PWL/PD

    g RIS

    K

    2. Control of Random Sampling Location

    3. Immed. State Possession of Verf. Tests

    9. Use of F&t

    16. Formal Dispute Resolution

    K

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 63

    - 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0

    Percent of Agencies Requiring Improvement x Weighting Factor

  • National Performance Measure (SIP)National Performance Measure (SIP)

    FALCON 5 - QA National Performance MeasureQA Assessment of RISK

    90%

    95%

    100%

    75%

    80%

    85%

    all R

    atin

    g

    NPMGOAL

    65%

    70%

    75%

    Ove

    ra GOAL

    55%

    60%

    2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 64

    Fiscal Year

  • Gaps for Average Division OfficeGaps for Average Division OfficeFALCON 5 - Gap AnalysisQA Assessment of RISK

    Weighting Factors: Yellow-7, Orange-5, Green-3, Blue-2, Brown-1

    13. Warranties

    General Risk AreasGeneral Risk Areas5 PCC Quality Char

    6. Bridge Quality Char.

    7. Lot Size

    10. PWL Risk Analysis

    12. NTPEP

    Moderate Risk AreasModerate Risk Areas8. PWL/PD11. Continuous Equations

    14. Limited use of visual acceptance

    4. HMA Quality Char.

    5. PCC Quality Char.

    Hi h Ri k AHi h Ri k A16 Formal Dispute Resolution18. Personnel Qualification.

    15. System IA with 90% tech checked.

    17. Project Field Labs Approval

    1. Materials Management System

    Higher Risk AreasHigher Risk Areas

    0% 100%

    2. Control of Random Sampling Location

    3. Immed. State Possession of Verf. Tests

    9. Use of F&t

    16. Formal Dispute Resolution

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 65

    % %

    Individual Agency - Gap Analysis

  • Activities to Address GapsActivities to Address GapsRisk Areas Identified

    Q-7 (Lot Size)

    Products & Services

    PWL Workshop

    Q-8 (PWL/PD)

    Q-9 (F & t tests)

    PWL Workshop

    SpecRisk WorkshopQ 9 (F & t tests)

    Q-10 (Risk Analysis)

    Q 11 (C ti P E ti )

    Topical web-based manual on Quality Assurance

    Q lit A f Fi ldQ-11 (Continuous Pay Equations)

    Q-15 (System AI 90% tech checked)

    Quality Assurance for Field Engineers training course

    Provide Examples ofQ-16 (Formal Dispute Resolution)

    Provide Examples of SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 66

  • RiskRisk--based Processbased Process

    Risk-basedAssessment

    T l

    Benchmark Report

    Tool

    Prioritize Areas of Risk

    IdentifyAction Plan

    Successful PracticesConduct

    Training / RoundtablesgRefine

    QA Specifications

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 67

  • Intelligent Construction SystemsIntelligent Construction SystemsIntelligent Construction SystemsIntelligent Construction Systems

    Reducing Risk100% Sampling

    Link to PMS

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 68

  • Intelligent CompactorsIntelligent Compactors( k S t R ll )( k S t R ll )(aka Smart Rollers)(aka Smart Rollers)

    Soils and Asphalt Intelligent

    Measures a parameter that relates to performance (density/stiffness)p ( y )

    Adjusts compaction effort based on measure response

    Provides real-time graphical informationProvides real time graphical information Records response tied to location (GPS)

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 69

  • HMA CompactionHMA Compaction

    Good Performing LongitudinalGood Performing LongitudinalGood Performing Longitudinal Good Performing Longitudinal Joints are not an Accident!Joints are not an Accident!

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 706 year old pavement Courtesy of A Heritage Group Company

  • Low Density JointLow Density Joint

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 711 year old pavement Courtesy of A Heritage Group Company

    Day after a hard rain Trapped Moisture

  • Low Density JointLow Density Joint

    Premature Joint FailureJoint Life = Pavement Life

    (i e 10 yrs vs 15 yrs)(i.e. 10 yrs vs. 15 yrs)

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 7210 year old pavement Courtesy of A Heritage Group Company

  • National RAP Expert Task GroupNational RAP Expert Task Group

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 73

  • HMA Asphalt Pavement Recycling Expert Task Group

    Advance the use of RAP in asphalt paving applications by providing highwayapplications by providing highway agencies with critical information regarding the use of RAP, technical guidance on high-RAP projects, and direction on research activities.

    The members consist of representatives from highway agencies, industry, and academia.

    Website: www.ncat.us/rap/rap

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 74

  • RAP ResourcesRAP Resources New Expert Task Group on High RAP FHWAFHWA

    www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/recycling Recycled Materials Resource CenterRecycled Materials Resource Center

    www.rmrc.unh.edu Green Highways Partnershipg y p

    www.greenhighways.org FHWA R&D

    http://www.tfhrc.gov/hnr20/recycle/waste/index.htm

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 75

  • The Pavement Preservation ConceptThe Pavement Preservation ConceptThinking about tomorrow to drive todays decisions Thinking about tomorrow to drive todays decisions

    Very

    OriginalPavement

    VeryGood

    G dGood

    Fair

    PoorRehabilitation Trigger

    VeryPoor

    76Time (Years)

  • Acceptance & Construction ResourcesAcceptance & Construction Resources

    FHWA: Asset Management http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/asstmgmt/index.

    htm National Asphalt Pavement Association

    http://www hotmix org/ http://www.hotmix.org/ Asphalt Pavement Alliance (APA)

    http://www.asphaltalliance.com/index.asphttp://www.asphaltalliance.com/index.asp Asphalt Institute

    http://www.asphaltinstitute.org/ Foundation for Pavement Preservation

    http://fp2.org/

    77NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance

    StructuralStructuralStructuralStructural

    MaterialsMaterials ConstructionConstruction

    78NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation

  • Risk and InnovationRisk and Innovation Systems like Superpave reduces the Risk of

    poor pavement performance, andp p p

    Are adapting to address innovative materials p gand other evolving technologies.

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 79

  • Questions?Questions?

    Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 80

of 79/79
Hot Hot-Mix Asphalt (HMA) Mix Asphalt (HMA) Balancing Risk & Balancing Risk & Balancing Risk & Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance Assuring Performance North North-East State Materials Engineers Association East State Materials Engineers Association Atlantic City, New Jersey Atlantic City, New Jersey October 8 October 8 th th 2008 2008 October 8 October 8 2008 2008 Thomas Harman Thomas Harman Thomas Harman Thomas Harman Team Leader – Senior Pavement Engineer Federal Highway Administration - Resource Center P t&M t il TST 1 Pavement & Materials TST
Embed Size (px)
Recommended