the phase one i 710 freeway rehabilitation project i
play

The Phase One I - 710 Freeway Rehabilitation Project: I nitial - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The Phase One I - 710 Freeway Rehabilitation Project: I nitial Design to Perf ormance Af ter Six Years of Traf f ic Meeting with AAPA Study Tour Group UCPRC, CA 8/ 10/ 2010 Richmond Field Station, UC Berkeley I - 710 Project - Partnered


  1. The Phase One I - 710 Freeway Rehabilitation Project: I nitial Design to Perf ormance Af ter Six Years of Traf f ic Meeting with AAPA Study Tour Group UCPRC, CA 8/ 10/ 2010 Richmond Field Station, UC Berkeley

  2. I - 710 Project - Partnered Ef f ort (most recent participants) • Caltrans § T. Bressette, W. Farnbach, C. Suszko • I ndustry § J. St. Martin, • University of Calif ornia PRC § C. Monismith

  3. I - 710 Project - Partnered Ef f ort (some earlier participants) • Caltrans § K. Herritt, R. Doty, J. Dobrowolski, S. Shatnawi • I ndustry § L. Nawrocki, J. Copley, R. Smith, D. Chapman • University § J. Harvey, F. Long

  4. Presentation • Mix designs • Structural section designs § f ull- depth AC § overlay on cracked and seated PCC • Aspects of construction • Some lessons learned • Phase I I structures

  5. I-710 March 2003

  6. Rehabilitation of I nterstate - 710 • Full- Depth Asphalt Concrete § replacement under overpasses • Overlay of PCC (cracked- seated)

  7. Design & Analysis Trial cross section Conditioning (Aging & Water) Trial mix design Perf ormance Tests Analysis Perf ormance Prediction Unacceptable Acceptable Final mix design & structural section

  8. Long- Lif e Asphalt Pavement • QC/ QA specif ications • Polymer modif ied binders • I mproved aggregate requirements • Modif ied mix design method

  9. Trial Mix Design • San Gabriel aggregate • Binders § Conventional: AR- 8000 § Polymer modif ied: PBA- 6a* • Hveem Stabilometer- to establish range of binder contents

  10. Trial Mix Design • Range of binder contents § 4. 2 - 5. 7% (by wt of aggregate) • Conventional dense- graded mix, Caltrans specs. • All crushed materials

  11. Final Mix Design - Rutting I nput N supply N demand Perf ormance test Traf f ic ≥ No N supply = M x N demand Yes

  12. Shear Test

  13. N demand - (PBA- 6A) • Design ESALs - f irst f ive years § 30 x 10 6 ESALs • N demand = 660, 000 M x Design ESALs x TCF x SF § M = 5 § TCF = 0. 116 § SF = 0. 04

  14. Design Binder Content 10,000,000 Temperature = 50 C PBA 6A AR 8000 1,000,000 N @ γ p = 5 % 660,000 repetitions 146,000 repetitions 100,000 10,000 1,000 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 Asphalt content (percent by weight of aggregate)

  15. HVS Rutting Study

  16. Rutting Study Layout 25 m section 33 tonnes AC 4 m 150 mm 3 m K- barrier on Placed on jointed PCC one side of section

  17. Mix Perf ormance Evaluation 30 38-mm ARHM-GG 25 62-mm ARHM-GG 75-mm DGAC AR-4000 76-mm PBA-6A 20 Rut Depth, mm 15 ½ inch rut depth 10 5 0 - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 < 20,000 reps ~ 170,000 reps HVS Load Applications

  18. Thickness Design - Fatigue Analysis I nput N supply N demand Perf ormance test Traf f ic No ≥ N supply M x N demand Yes

  19. Design Considerations • Fatigue in asphalt concrete • Def ormation in unbound layers • Subsequently, design checked by CalME

  20. Design Considerations Asphalt Concrete ε t ε v Base Subgrade

  21. I nput • Structural section (f ull- depth) • Traf f ic (200 million ESALs) • Environment (T = 20° C) • Trial mixes & pavement section

  22. I nput • Reliability (M=5) • f (traf f ic estimate & testing variability) • Perf ormance criterion § wheel path cracking ≤ 10%

  23. Trial Pavement Sections PBA- 6A* AR- 8000 AR- 8000 (rich bottom) subgrade

  24. Fatigue

  25. Fatigue Test Results 1.E+08 1.E+07 1.E+06 Nf 1.E+05 AR-8000, 4.7% AC, 6% AV AR-8000, 5.2% AC, 3% AV 1.E+04 PBA-6A, 4.7% AC, 6% AV PBA-6A, 5.2% AC, 3% AV 1.E+03 1.00E-04 1.00E-03 Mean Strain

  26. Fatigue N supply ≥ M × N demand ? Che heck vert i t ical subgrade st ra rain ! ! ! ! ! ! (co cont r t rolle lled t o t ot a t al l t hi t hick ckness)

  27. Final Design AR-OGFC 25 mm 6% air voids PBA-6A (4.7%) 75 6% AR-8000 (4.7%) 150 3% AR-8000 (5.2%) 75 (rich bottom) subgrade

  28. Overlays Asphalt Concrete 150 – 250 mm Fabric 30 mm Leveling Course 200 mm Jointed PCC Cement treated Base 150 mm Subgrade

  29. Calculated Conf iguration Traf f ic loads applied statically symmetrical boundaries 250 mm p =725 kPa AC Cracks @ 1 m

  30. Finite Element Mesh ~ 12,000 elements, NIKE2D

  31. Bending Strains in Mix just above Fabric 160 5"@900, 4"@150 ksi 120 3"@900, 5"@150 ksi BENDING STRAIN (us) 3"@900, 3"@150 ksi 80 40 0 -40 -80 -120 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 DISTANCE FROM CENTER (ft)

  32. Composite Overlay Final overlay thickness 25 mm OGFC 75 mm PBA-6A 225 mm 125 mm AR-8000 Broken and seated PCC Fabric

  33. Full- Depth AC Comparisons • The Asphalt I nstitute • United Kingdom • Australia • Asphalt Pavement Alliance- U. S.

  34. Perpetual Pavement Design Concepts 1.5 - 3” SMA, OGFC or Superpave } 4” Zone to Of High High Modulus 6” Compression Rut Resistant Material 4.5 - 6” Flexible Fatigue Resistant Max Tensile Strain Material 3 - 4” Pavem ent Foundation

  35. Construction Specif ications • Perf ormance requirements based on shear and f atigue testing • More stringent compaction requirements • Tack coat between layers § Asphalt cement (AR- 4000)

  36. Construction • Six stages • Stages 1 and 2 preliminary to rehab. of traf f icked sections • Stages 3- 6 - rehab. of traf f icked sections in 8 - 55 hr. weekend closures (vs. 10 originally planned) • Use of CA4PRS (construction management program)

  37. Construction • Stages 3 - 6 § Traf f ic closure § Crack, seat, and overlay (CSOL) § Full depth AC construction (FDAC) § Traf f ic opening

  38. Contractor Staging Plan N N N N N N st st nd nd rd and 4 rd and 4 th th ) ) Stage 3A (1 Stage 3A (1 ) ) Stage 4A (2 Stage 4A (2 ) ) Stage 4B and 4C (3 Stage 4B and 4C (3 FDAC: 406m FDAC: 406m FDAC: 840m FDAC: 840m FDAC: 362m FDAC: 362m CSOL: 480m CSOL: 480m CSOL: 1,035m CSOL: 1,035m CSOL: 1,259m CSOL: 1,259m th th Stage 6A (8 Stage 6A (8 th th ) ) Stage 5C (7 Stage 5C (7 ) ) Stage 5A and 5B (5 Stage 5A and 5B (5 th and 6 th and 6 th th ) ) FDAC: 342m FDAC: 342m FDAC: 321m FDAC: 321m FDAC: 840m FDAC: 840m CSOL: 760m CSOL: 760m CSOL: 959m CSOL: 959m CSOL: 1,160m CSOL: 1,160m Crack, Seat, and Overlay (CSOL) = 2.8 centerline Crack, Seat, and Overlay (CSOL) = 2.8 centerline - - km km Full Full - - Depth AC Replacement (FDAC) = 1.6 centerline Depth AC Replacement (FDAC) = 1.6 centerline - - km km

  39. Placement of Leveling Course

  40. I nst allat ion of Pavement Fabric

  41. Placement of PBA- 6A* Mix

  42. Digout and Placement of Aggregate Base – Working Platf orm

  43. Rich Bottom Layer Construction

  44. Monday, March 3 0 , 2 0 0 3 0 5 :0 0 am

  45. Some Lessons Learned • Pre- bid conf erence mandatory f or all potential bidders • For projects of this importance a “partnering” meeting at the outset is mandatory § Partnering on the technical aspects extremely important!

  46. Some Lessons Learned (cont. ) • For new test procedures included in Special Provisions insure that all involved groups perf orm tests and analyze resulting data the same way: § equipment calibration essential § preliminary testing of comparable specimens

  47. Some Lessons Learned (cont. ) • I mproved specif ication requirements based on statistical considerations desirable • For QC/ QA activities adequate staf f ing imperative (large quantities of materials, up to 15, 000 tonnes per weekend)

  48. Some Lessons Learned (cont. ) • Timely QA results required • Human resources – 3 to 5 weekend closures in a row maximum; if more required, allow 1 to 2 weekend interval

  49. Some Lessons Learned (cont. ) • I n digout areas (FDAC) : § Exploratory testing imperative § Exact location of underground utilities

  50. Some Lessons Learned (cont. ) • Contingency plan important § Digout areas - working platf orm; materials easily accessible § Standby HMA plant(s) • Meteorologist f or contractor (construction in digout areas)

  51. Perf ormance Evaluation • FWD Def lection testing (2003 through 2008) • Back calculation of layer moduli and strains in HMA layers using MLEA • Condition surveys • Longitudinal and transverse prof ile measurements • Noise measurements • Laboratory testing of cores (RSST- CH) and slabs (Fatigue)

  52. Perf ormance Evaluation • Non- destructive HWD tests § 11/ 03, NB and SB § 9/ 04, NB; 2/ 5, SB § 12/ 05, NB; 2/ 06, SB

  53. Deflections – SB Lane 3 CENTER DEFLECTIONS LANE 3 I-710 SOUTHBOUND (ADJUSTED TO 19C) 800 PCH 405 Section 1(FD) Section 2(CSOL) Section 3(FD) Section 4(CSOL) Section 5(FD) 700 600 03 2003 DEFLECTION (MICRONS) 500 03 2004 05 2005 400 X 08 2008 300 200 100 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 LOCATION

  54. CENTER DEFLECTIONS LANE 3 I-710 NORTHBOUND Deflections – NB Lane 3 (ADJUSTED TO 19C) 1000 PCH 405 900 Section 1(FD) Section 2(CSOL) Section 3(FD) Section 4(CSOL) Section 5(FD) 800 2003 03 700 DEFLECTION (MICRONS) 2004 03 600 2006 05 500 X 08 2008 400 300 200 100 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 LOCATION

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend