Performance of Exposed Aggregate Surface of Composite Pavements at MnROAD. Bernard Izevbekhai Alexandra Akkari Minnesota Department of Transportation. International Symposium on Pavement Performance Trends A dvances and Challenges ASTM Committee E17 on Vehicle Pavement Systems - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Aggregate Aggregate Surface of Composite Surface of Composite Pavements Pavements at MnROAD at MnROAD Bernard Izevbekhai Bernard Izevbekhai Alexandra Akkari Alexandra Akkari Minnesota Department of Transportation Minnesota Department of Transportation International Symposium on Pavement Performance International Symposium on Pavement Performance Trends Advances and Challenges Trends Advances and Challenges ASTM Committee E17 on Vehicle Pavement Systems ASTM Committee E17 on Vehicle Pavement Systems Tampa Florida Tampa Florida December 5 2011 December 5 2011
Transcript
Performance of Exposed Performance of Exposed AggregateAggregateSurface of Composite PavementsSurface of Composite Pavements at MnROAD at MnROAD
Bernard IzevbekhaiBernard IzevbekhaiAlexandra AkkariAlexandra AkkariMinnesota Department of TransportationMinnesota Department of Transportation
International Symposium on Pavement Performance Trends Advances and International Symposium on Pavement Performance Trends Advances and ChallengesChallenges
ASTM Committee E17 on Vehicle Pavement SystemsASTM Committee E17 on Vehicle Pavement SystemsTampa FloridaTampa Florida
• Interstate 94 Westbound Live Traffic• 28,000 AADT• Mainline • Passing Lane Vs. Driving Lane 50-50 Traffic; 80-20
ESALs• Total Truck Volume 15% approx.
Introduction• Targets of EA Surface• Quiet pavement surface• Increased durability• Increased friction
• Objective of Composite Pavement• Minimize cost with high
quality EA surface layer over low cost (relaxed gradation) layer
• Sustainability• Investigate Cost
effectiveness of 2-lift Concrete
Cell 70 Cell 71 Cell 72Innovative Diamond
Grind
Traditional Diamond
Grind
Exposed
Aggregate
3" HMA 3" EAC 3" EAC
6" RAC 6" RAC 6" CHP
8" Class 5 8" Class 6 8" Class 7
Clay Clay Clay
Composite CellsCompare EAC to cells 70 and 71 to evaluate performance
Mix DesignFly Ash 15%
Water (lbs/cy) 283
Cement (lbs/cy)(Type I/II) (SG=3.15) 616
Fly Ash (lbs/cy)(Class C/F) (SG = 2.5) 109
W/CM 0.39
C. Sand (OD lbs/cy)(SG = 2.63) (Abs= 0.90%) 843
CA1 (OD lbs/cy) (1/2” W. Chips, SG=2.72, Abs= 0.40%) 1133
CA2 (OD lbs/cy) (3/8” W. Chips, SG= 2.72, Abs= 0.40%) 843
Max Slump (in) 3% Air 7
Multi-Air 25 (oz/cy) 2 - 15
Adm 686 (oz/cwt) 1 - 5
Adm 3 (oz/cwt)(as needed for slump retentions) 0-5
98% Passing 3/8”
Performance Evaluation
On Board Sound Intensity AASHTP TP 76-09
Friction ASTM E-247
International Roughness IndexASTM E-950
Profile DepthASTM E-2157
Sound Absorption ASTM E-1050
Ride Quality
Anomalous laser-induced IRI was not observed in EAC.
Pavement Noise
Sound Absorption
Friction
Surface Profile
TextureOrientation
SPIKINESS CONCEPT & QUANTIFICATION
dx
SKU =
Conclusions• EAC does not provide significant noise reduction• higher OBSI than both the HMA and traditional diamond grind.
• Innovative diamond grinding of composite pavements may be beneficial for noise reduction• lower OBSI than the HMA, EAC, traditional DG surfaces, and higher sound absorption than EAC.
• EAC can provide more than adequate friction for driver safety, but does not show any improvement from typical HMA or DG.
• Anomalous laser-induced IRI was not observed in EAC.
Going Forward• Changing the quality and type of aggregate in EAC could lead to a
change in texture orientation / spikiness and improve surface performance.
• Need to examine Elongation, flatness etc in mix design to minimize spikiness.
