+ All Categories
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:
Upload: trinhquynh
View: 249 times
Download: 7 times
Share this document with a friend
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
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 Nation’s Transportation System• Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance

Need– Need– Structural Design & Analysis

•• Pavement Type Selection, RealCost™Pavement 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 today’s decisionsThinking about tomorrow to drive today’s 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 Nation’s Transportation SystemOur Nation’s 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 2002…y

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 Region’s 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+ 0

20

40

60

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 1950’s

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 RealCost™RealCost™

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 1980’s 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

• Distress…Rutting– 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 Blocks…1 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 outcomes…Two 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/PD

11. 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 Resolution

18. 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 today’s decisions Thinking about tomorrow to drive today’s 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


Recommended