Stacy G. Williams, Ph.D., P.E. University of Arkansas, Dept. of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

stacy g williams ph d p e university of arkansas dept of
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Stacy G. Williams, Ph.D., P.E. University of Arkansas, Dept. of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Stacy G. Williams, Ph.D., P.E. University of Arkansas, Dept. of Civil Engineering NCAUPG Technical Conference February 2012 1 - 5% lower than mat density Cold Lane Hot Lane Low Density Permeability Gradation What should we


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Stacy G. Williams, Ph.D., P.E. University of Arkansas, Dept. of Civil Engineering

NCAUPG Technical Conference February 2012

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Cold Lane Hot Lane

1 - 5% lower than mat density

slide-3
SLIDE 3
slide-4
SLIDE 4
slide-5
SLIDE 5

Low Density Permeability Gradation What should

we measure?

slide-6
SLIDE 6

3 Projects

12” 12” 6” 6”

“Good” “Bad” “Ugly”

slide-7
SLIDE 7
slide-8
SLIDE 8

80 85 90 95 100

12C 6C J 6H 12H 12C 6C J 6H 12H 12C 6C J 6H 12H Project 1 Project 2 Project 3

Nuclear Density (% of TMD)

Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4

slide-9
SLIDE 9

80 85 90 95 100

12C 6C J 6H 12H 12C 6C J 6H 12H 12C 6C J 6H 12H Project 1 Project 2 Project 3

Core Density by SSD (% of TMD)

Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4

slide-10
SLIDE 10

80 85 90 95 100

12C 6C J 6H 12H 12C 6C J 6H 12H 12C 6C J 6H 12H Project 1 Project 2 Project 3

Core Density - CoreLok (% TMD)

Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4

slide-11
SLIDE 11

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5

12C 6C J 6H 12H 12C 6C J 6H 12H 12C 6C J 6H 12H Project 1 Project 2 Project 3

Infiltration (cm/hr)

Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Discrimination

Density – all methods significant

▪ CoreLok provided greater discrimination than SSD

Permeability – significant

▪ Joint ≠ away from joint, successfully separated projects

Accuracy

Density – most ranked correctly

▪ CoreLok and SSD best ▪ Nuclear – trouble consistently identifying marginal quality

Permeability - 2/3 ranked correctly Gradation – approx. ½ ranked correctly

slide-13
SLIDE 13

2 Jobs 3 testing locations at each section Joint Construction Techniques 8 methods (sections) on each job Testing Density (field and laboratory) Field Permeability / Infiltration

slide-14
SLIDE 14
slide-15
SLIDE 15
slide-16
SLIDE 16
slide-17
SLIDE 17

Overlap Safety Edge Aggregate

Interlock

www.transtechsys.com

slide-18
SLIDE 18
slide-19
SLIDE 19

Bond cold and hot side of joint Reduce permeability

slide-20
SLIDE 20
slide-21
SLIDE 21

Polymerized

emulsion

Penetrates

surface

Stabilizes joint

slide-22
SLIDE 22
slide-23
SLIDE 23
slide-24
SLIDE 24
slide-25
SLIDE 25
slide-26
SLIDE 26

Same as used for mainline paving operations

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Cold Lane Hot Lane

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Cold Lane Hot Lane

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Cold Lane Hot Lane

slide-30
SLIDE 30

2 Projects 500 ft sections for each of 8 methods 3 locations in each section

12” 12” 6” 6”

12C 12H 6H J 6C M

5’

slide-31
SLIDE 31

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 CF CR HO HP JB JH NW TC Density, %

Nuclear Density

12C 6C J 6H 12H

slide-32
SLIDE 32

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 CF CR HO HP JB JH NW TC T166 Density, %

Core Density -T166

6C J 6H

slide-33
SLIDE 33

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 CF CR HO HP JB JH NW TC T331 Density, %

Core Density -T331

6C J 6H

slide-34
SLIDE 34

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 CF CR HO HP JB JH NW TC Absorption, %

Core Absorption

6C J 6H

slide-35
SLIDE 35

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 CF CR HO HP JB JH NW TC k, cm/s x 10-5

Field Permeability

6C J 6H

slide-36
SLIDE 36

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 CF CR HO HP JB JH NW TC Infiltration, cm/hr

Infiltration

6C J 6H

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Construction method – significant Distance from joint – significant Interaction – significant Permeability / Infiltration

▪ JB and JH – Low permeability at and away from the joint ▪ Others – High permeability at joint, lower values away from the joint

slide-38
SLIDE 38

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95

Infiltration (cm/hr) Nuclear Density (%)

Nuclear Density vs. Infiltration

good poor fair

4% abs 2% abs

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Joint Heater Joint Bond Notched Wedge Rolling Patterns Tack Coat Crafco

Best Performers Not as successful Unsuccessful

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Zone of protection by CF

Permeable area near joint

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Use Density as measure of quality Already used for QC/QA efforts Joint Requirements 89 percent minimum density 4 percent maximum absorption Allow contractor to make informed decision

regarding specific joint construction method

Emphasize the importance of good construction

techniques

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Leela Bhupathiraju Alex Lueders Annette Porter Alan Nguyen Mark Greenwood Delta Asphalt of Arkansas, Inc. APAC-Arkansas, McClinton-Anchor Division Heat Design Equipment, Inc. TransTech Systems, Inc. Southern Star Materials, Inc. Pavement Technologies, Inc.

slide-43
SLIDE 43