TRB Workshop Implementation of the 2002 Mechanistic Pavement Design Guide in Arizona

Similar documents
- New Superpave Performance Graded Specification. Asphalt Cements

SUPERPAVE BINDER SPECIFICATIONS & SELECTIONS. Superpave Binder Specs & Selections 1

Implementation Process of Pavement ME Design in Maricopa County 2016 Arizona Pavements/Materials Conference November 17, 2016

Darwin-ME Status and Implementation Efforts_IAC09

Superpave Asphalt Binder Specification

Caltrans Implementation of PG Specs. Caltrans. Presentation Overview. HMA in California. Why, When & How? How will if affect YOU?

Structural Considerations in Moving Mega Loads on Idaho Highways

Performance Tests of Asphalt Mixtures

CHARACTERIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF TRUCK LOAD SPECTRA FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE PAVEMENT DESIGN PRACTICES IN LOUISIANA

Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR): New Binder Grade Testing and Terminology

Traffic Data For Mechanistic Pavement Design

Impact of Overweight Traffic on Pavement Life Using WIM Data and Mechanistic- Empirical Pavement Analysis

Use of New High Performance Thin Overlays (HPTO)

Pavement Thickness Design Parameter Impacts

Superpave Asphalt Binders

NCHRP Project Short- and Long-Term Binder Aging Methods to Accurately Reflect Aging in Asphalt Mixtures

Implementation and Thickness Optimization of Perpetual Pavements in Ohio

FHWA Pavements program What s s Happening. John D AngeloD Office of Pavement Technology

Warm Mix Technology. Sasobit. Sasobit. Available WMA Technologies SEAUPG 2005 CONFERENCE - NASHVILLE, TN CONCERNS: Frankfurt Airport

NCAT/MnROAD Cracking Group Update. March 29, 2018

Louisiana s Experience

Impact of Environment-Friendly Tires on Pavement Damage

Subject: Dr. Witczak s letter to AASHTO Subcommittee on Materials and AASHTO Joint Technical Committee on Pavements

Industry/PennDOT Initiative On Performance Testing. AN UPDATE January 22, 2019

There are three different procedures for considering traffic effects in pavement design. These are:

The INDOT Friction Testing Program: Calibration, Testing, Data Management, and Application

SUCCESSFUL PERFORMANCE PAVEMENT PROJECTS 2015 TxAPA Annual Meeting September 23, 2015 Austin District Mike Arellano, P.E. Date

BACKCALCULATION OF LAYER MODULI OF GRANULAR LAYERS FOR BOTH RIGID AND FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS. Ashvini Kumar Thottempudi

EFFECT OF SUPERPAVE DEFINED RESTRICTED ZONE ON HOT MIX ASPHALT PERFORMANCE

Influence of Vehicle Speed on Dynamic Loads and Pavement Response

Update NCHRP Project 9-61 Short- and Long-Term Binder Aging Methods to Accurately Reflect Aging in Asphalt Mixtures

Fuel Resistant. Punishing Conditions. Supreme Production.

20. Security Classif. (of this page) Unclassified Form DOT F (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

What s going on with European Specifications?

Basics of test: Sand cylinder of mix is 10 Hz either in stress or strain a target temperature until specimen fails Test uses a

Developing Affordable GTR Asphalt Mixes for Local Roadways

Equivalent Loading Frequencies to Simulate Asphalt Layer Pavement Responses Under Dynamic Traffic Loading

Developing Affordable GTR Asphalt Mixes for Local Roadways

SMOOTH PAVEMENTS LAST LONGER! Diamond Grinding THE ULTIMATE QUESTION! Rigid Pavement Design Equation. Preventive Maintenance 2 Session 2 2-1

COMPARING RUTTING PERFORMANCE UNDER A HEAVY VEHICLE SIMULATOR TO RUTTING PERFORMANCE AT THE NCAT PAVEMENT TEST TRACK. Dr. R. Buzz Powell, P.E.

APPENDIX C CATEGORIZATION OF TRAFFIC LOADS

Status of the first experiment at the PaveLab

SEAUPG 2009 CONFERENCE-HILTON HEAD ISLAND, SOUTH CAROLINA

Development of Weight-in-Motion Data Analysis Software

Developing Affordable GTR Asphalt Mixes for Local Roadways

PROCEDURES FOR ESTIMATING THE TOTAL LOAD EXPERIENCE OF A HIGHWAY AS CONTRIBUTED BY CARGO VEHICLES

Characterization of LTPP Pavements using Falling Weight Deflectometer

FHWA/IN/JTRP-2000/23. Final Report. Sedat Gulen John Nagle John Weaver Victor Gallivan

Establishment of Statewide Axle Load Spectra Data using Cluster Analysis

Thomas Bennert, Ph.D. Rutgers University Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation (CAIT)

Effect of Different Axle Configurations on Fatigue Life of Asphalt Concrete Mixture

Presentation Outline. TRB MEPDG Workshop. Traffic Data & WIM Program. WIM Program in WIM program (prior to MEPDG) Utilizing WIM data

Barry Paye, P.E. Wisconsin DOT Materials Lab

WIM #41 CSAH 14, MP 14.9 CROOKSTON, MINNESOTA APRIL 2014 MONTHLY REPORT

2016 NJDOT Research Showcase 10/26/16

Southern Windsor County 2016 Traffic Count Program Summary April 2017

Project Title: Using Truck GPS Data for Freight Performance Analysis in the Twin Cities Metro Area Prepared by: Chen-Fu Liao (PI) Task Due: 9/30/2013

Evaluation of Pile Setup using Dynamic Restrike Analysis in Alabama Soils

WARM MIX ASPHALT TECHNOLOGY

Performance Based Lab Tests to Predict Pavement Fatigue

Center for Transportation Research University of Texas at Austin 3208 Red River, Suite 200 Austin, Texas

Rutting of Caltrans Asphalt Concrete and Asphalt-Rubber Hot Mix. Under Different Wheels, Tires and Temperatures Accelerated

Damaging Effect of Static and Moving Armoured Vehicles with Rubber Tires on Flexible Pavement

TRB Webinar: Design and Production of High-Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement Mixes. May 7, 2009, 2:00 PM EDT

METRO Light Rail Update

Demand for soft grades of Binder

Asphalt Technology Guidance Program (ATGP)

A Crack is a Crack Mn/DOT s Perspective on Cracking in Asphalt Pavements

AC Binder Characterization Containing Crumb Tire Rubber

Axle loads; Equivalent Axles or Load Spectrum? Joint Nordic/Baltic Symposium on Pavement Design and Performance Indicators

Assessing Pavement Rolling Resistance by FWD Time History Evaluation

Pavement Performance Prediction Symposium July 17, 2008 University of Wyoming Laramie, Wyoming

Non-Destructive Pavement Testing at IDOT. LaDonna R. Rowden, P.E. Pavement Technology Engineer

All Regional Engineers. Omer M. Osman, P.E. Special Provision for Hot-Mix Asphalt Mixture Design Composition and Volumetric Requirements July 25, 2014

Rehabilitating Crossing Surfaces Effect of Sub-Structure Design on Long-Term Performances of Highway-Railway At-Grade Crossings

New Tools from EN Standards for high performances mixes

Authors: Lorina Popescu, James Signore, John Harvey, Rongzong Wu, Irwin Guada, and Bruce Steven

Using Weigh-in-Motion Data to Calibrate Trade-Derived Estimates of Mexican Trade Truck Volumes in Texas

WIM #40 is located on US 52 near South St. Paul in Dakota county.

I.D.O.T. Update Version -

ARIZONA ALTERNATIVE FUEL CORRIDOR NOMINATION FAST ACT 1423

Seasonal Variations of Pavement Layer Moduli Determined Using In Situ Measurements of Pavement Stress and Strain

WIM #48 is located on CSAH 5 near Storden in Cottonwood county.

Damaging Effect of Armoured Vehicles with Rubber Tires on Flexible Pavement

1 TO 2 2 TO 3 12 TO 1 10 TO TO 12

WIM #29 was operational for the entire month of October Volume was computed using all monthly data.

Minnesota DOT -- RDM Experience. Dr. Kyle Hoegh, MnDOT Dr. Shongtao Dai, MnDOT Dr. Lev Khazanovich, U. of Pittsburgh

North Eastern States Materials Engineers Association (NESMEA) October 18 th 19 th, 2016 Newark, DE

WIM #37 was operational for the entire month of September Volume was computed using all monthly data.

Concrete Airport Pavement Workshop Right Choice, Right Now ACPA SE Chapter Hilton Atlanta Airport November 8, 2012

Effect of Load, Tire Pressure, and Tire Type on Flexible Pavement Response

Improved Performance Evaluation of Road Pavements by Using Measured Tyre Loading. James Maina and Morris De Beer CSIR Built Environment, South Africa

Understanding Freight Vehicle Pavement Impacts: How do Passenger Vehicles and Trucks Compare?

WIM #31 US 2, MP 8.0 EAST GRAND FORKS, MN JANUARY 2015 MONTHLY REPORT

STATE OF OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION GEOTECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROADWAY DESIGN. June 29, 2011

ACC Technology Showcase November 10, 2015 Newport Beach, CA. Ronald Corun Axeon Specialty Products LLC Director - Asphalt Technical Services

Field Investigation of the Effect of Operational Speed and Lateral Wheel Wander on Flexible Pavement Mechanistic Responses

WIM #41 CSAH 14, MP 14.9 CROOKSTON, MINNESOTA MAY 2013 MONTHLY REPORT

Geoscience Testing laboratory (Al Ain)

THE TRES AMIGAS PROJECT

Transcription:

TRB Workshop Implementation of the 2002 Mechanistic Pavement Design Guide in Arizona Matt Witczak, ASU Development of Performance Related Specifications for Asphalt Pavements in the State of Arizona 11 January 2004

ADOT ASU IMPLEMENTATION STUDY Major Tasks Develop Work Plan (Joint Effort with ASU and State) Schedule, Work Time, Budget etc Lab Material Characterization Build Input Files for Typical Materials in AZ Environmental Regions Develop Unique Environmental Regions in State

ADOT ASU IMPLEMENTATION STUDY (Continued) Major Tasks Develop State Route Traffic Files Use the Current state of the Art Available for Immediate Implementation Implementation Methodology Assess Design Guide Performance Predictions Recalibrate (if Necessary) Develop ADOT Performance Related Specifications

Enhanced Integrated Climatic Model Implementation Climatic Data is required by the EICM to calculate: - Temperature Distribution within Pavement System - Thermal Fracture - Fatigue - Permanent Deformation - Changes in Moduli as a Function of Seasonal Variations (Freeze/Thaw/Recovery)

EICM Implementation Specific Weather Station

Active Weather Stations with Hourly Data (NCDC) 14 stations

Active Weather Stations with Hourly Data (AZMET) 23 stations

CLIMATIC REGIONS FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA Basis Physiographic units and highway design requirements Precipitation Topography Heating and cooling requirements

DEVELOPMENT OF UNIQUE TRAFFIC UNITS FOR THE ARIZONA HIGHWAY NETWORK

ROLE OF TRAFFIC DATA A KEY FACTOR IN THE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF PAVEMENT STRUCTURES Expressed as Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESALs) by AASHTO Design Guide since 1972 Expressed as Full axle load spectra by new 2002 Design Guide

ARIZONA HIGHWAY NETWORK SUMMARY Interstate Highway I-8, I-10 I-15, I-17 I-19, I-40 U.S. Highway U-60, U-89T, U-180 U-64, U-93, U-191 U-70, U-95, U-191B U-89, U-160 U-89A, U-163 State Highway S-8B, S-10B, S-10X, S-40B, S-40X, S-51 S-61, S-64 S64S, S-66, S-67, S-68, S-69 S-71, S-72, S-73, S-74, S-75, S-77, S-78 S-79, S-80, S-81, S-82, S-83, S-84, S-85 S-86, S-87, S-88, S-89, S-89A, S-79B S-89L, S-90, S-92, S-95, S-95B, S-95X S-95T, S-96, S-97, S-98, S-99, S-101L S-143, S-153, S-169, S-170, S-177, S-179 S-180A, S-181, S-186, S-187, S-188, S-189 S-202L, S-210, S-238, S-260, S-260S, S-261 S-264, S-266, S-266S, S-273, S-277, S-277S S-280, S-286, S-287, S-288, S-289, S-303L S-347, S-366, S-373, S-377, S-386, S-387 S-389, S-473, S-564, S-587, S-989 Total: 6 Total: 13 Total: 86

DEVELOPMENT OF TRAFFIC UNITS Based on existing ADOT traffic sections (HPMS) and classification stations (VCP stations) Plot detailed AADT as a function of mileposts Regroup the existing class stations into reasonable and homogeneous traffic units according to: traffic volume variations (within 10~15% range)

COMPONENTS OF TRAFFIC INFORMATION IN THE DATABASE Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) Traffic growth rate within a section (r g ) Percent trucks (pt) Vehicle Classification Percentage (VCP)

50 45 40 a b c vcp42 a b I-8 Unique Traffic Units vcp41 vcp15 vcp16 vcp62 c d a b ASU linear prediction ASU compound prediction ADOT linear prediction 35 ADT (x1000) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 (1 23 4 5 6 7 1161 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 29 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 30) 28 20 (HPMS No.) Milepost

40 35 I-8 AADT IN THE YEAR 2002 ASU linear prediction ASU compound prediction ADOT linear prediction 30 AADT (x1000) 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 Milepost 15

I-8 percent trucks in the year 2002 50 45 40 ASU linear method ASU compound method ADOT linear method % Truck 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 16 Milepost

I-8 VCP DISTRIBUTION VS. VEHICLE CLASSIFICATION IN YEAR 2002 Normalized VCP (%) 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 ASU Linear sta. #42 ASU Comp. sta. #42 ADOT Linear sta. #42 5 0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Vehicle Classification (4-13) 17

ADOT AC Binder Characterization Database Project

Binders Tested Serial No. Manufacturer Performance Grading Type 1 Paramount 58-22 Unmodified 2 Paramount 64-16 Unmodified 3 Chevron 64-22 Unmodified 4 Navajo 70-10 Unmodified Western 5 Chevron 76-16 Unmodified 6 Navajo Western 76-16 SBS Modified

Binder Temp. Original RTFO Aged (oc) G*(kPa) δ ( o ) G*/sinδ G*(kPa) δ ( o ) G*/sinδ Paramount 58-22 58 1.4 87 1.4 3.1 83 3.12 Paramount 64-16 64 1.5 89 1.5 3 88 3 Chevron 64-22 64 1.5 86 1.5 2.2 82.5 2.22 Navajo 70-10 70 1.323 89.05 1.32 2.741 87.73 2.74 Chevron 76-16 76 1.3 85.5 1.3 3 82 3.03 Navajo 76-16 76 1.9 51.5 2.43 2.1 57.5 2.49 Binder Temp. PAV100 Aged PAV110 Aged (oc) G*(kPa) δ ( o ) G*sinδ G*(kPa) δ ( o ) G*sinδ Paramount 58-22 58 14 75 13.52 25 71 23.64 Paramount 64-16 64 13 84 12.93 23 81 22.72 Chevron 64-22 64 12 74.5 11.56 20 70.5 18.85 Navajo 70-10 70 10.04 83.64 9.98 16.98 81.4 16.79 Chevron 76-16 76 11 73 10.52 19.5 69 18.2 Navajo 76-16 76 4.5 61.4 3.95 6 64 5.39

A & VTS Values: No. Binder Age A VTS 1 Paramount PG 58-22 2 Paramount PG 64-16 3 Chevron PG 64-22 4 Navajo PG 70-10 5 Chevron PG 76-16 6 Navajo PG 76-16 Original RTFO PAV100 PAV110 Original RTFO PAV100 PAV110 Original RTFO PAV100 PAV110 Original RTFO PAV100 PAV110 Original RTFO PAV100 PAV110 Original RTFO PAV100 PAV110 10.875 10.763 10.732 10.447 11.963 11.611 11.892 11.871 11.510 10.631 11.006 10.659 11.446 11.754 11.298 11.447 10.869 10.642 10.013 10.437 8.4973 8.4811 8.4449 8.7423-3.6588-3.6076-3.5827-3.4701-4.0379-3.9017-3.9918-3.9759-3.8766-3.5518-3.6749-3.5444-3.8418-3.9475-3.7671-3.8191-3.6295-3.5420-3.3005-3.4482-2.7675-2.7527-2.7331-2.8412

ADOT AC Mixtures Advanced Material Characterization Tests

Characterization Tests-Completed on 12+ Typical AC Mixtures Used in AZ Stiffness Dynamic Modulus E* 5 Temperatures 5 Frequencies Permanent Deformation - Repeated Load 3 Temperatures 2 Stress States Low Temp Cracking-IDT Creep & Strength 3 Temperatures Fatigue Cracking Beam 4 Point Loading 3 Temperatures Constant stress/strain Conduct Simple Performance Tests (Fn and Ft)

E* 10 6 psi 10 1 0.1 Master Curve SC-64-22 14 F 40 F 70 F 100 F 130 F Predicted 0.01-8 -4 0 4 8 Log Reduced Time, s

8 Shift Factor Shift Factors for SC-64-22 4 log at 0-4 -8 y = 8E-05x 2-0.0902x + 5.7694 R 2 = 0.995 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Temperature, F

Fitting Parameters and Shift Factors of Mixtures Having Different Binders Parameter SC-64-22 SN-70-10 SC-76-16 δ 3.9237 3.9217 4.1297 α 2.6540 2.6353 2.4356 β -0.5129-0.5300-0.4692 γ 0.9594 1.6714 1.0549 a(14 o F) 4.3868 4.5230 5.6095 a(40 o F) 2.4758 2.7026 1.7015 a(100 o F) -2.8831-2.4258-2.5010 a(130 o F) -4.4960-4.7844-4.4218

ADOT AC Fatigue Database

Test Variables 12 ADOT mixes 2 modes of loading Strain control or Stress control 6-10 strain or stress levels 3 temperatures 100, 70, 40 o F 1 replicates Maximum 720 specimens Minimum 432 specimens

Development of a Resilient Modulus (M R ) Predictive Model for Use in Mechanistic Empirical Pavement Response Models Arizona State University

2002 Design Guide Stress-Dependent M R Model M R = k 1 p a θ p a k 2 τ p oct a 1 + k 3 k 1, k 2, k 3 = Regression parameters θ = Bulk stress τ oct = Octahedral shear stress p a = Atmospheric pressure

M R Moisture Model Coarse-Grained Materials M R - Moisture Model for Coarse-Grained Materials 2.5 2 M R /M Ropt 1.5 1 0.5 Literature Data Predicted 0-70 -60-50 -40-30 -20-10 0 10 20 30 (S - S opt )%

Arizona DOT Materials Material ID ADOT Description Source Function AASHTO Class. Unified Soil Class. PVSG SM/CL Phoenix Metro Area Subgrade A-2-4 SC YSSG SC-SM Yuma Area Subgrade A-1-a GP FCSG CH Flagstaff Area Subgrade A-2-6 SC SCSG - Sun City Subgrade A-2-6 SC GMAB2 AB-2 Grey Mountain Base A-1-a GW SRAB2 AB-2 Salt River Base A-1-a SP GLAB2 AB-2 Globe Base A-1-a SP-SM PRAB2 AB-2 Prescott Base A-1-a SP-SM

Arizona Database of Model Parameters Material ID AASHTO USCS a b k w β k 1 k 2 k 3 w opt std % Phoenix Valley Subgrade A-2-4 SC 0.24 41.88 67.255 0.974 467 0.358-0.686 11.3 Yuma Area Subgrade A-1-a GP 1.00 94.01 82.757 8.714 1,468 0.838-0.888 11.0 Flagstaff Area Subgrade A-2-6 SC 0.31 10.93 74.489 0.722 634 0.187-0.855 19.0 Sun City Subgrade A-2-6 SC 0.13 19.22 53.166 0.360 747 0.224-0.104 11.3 Grey Mountain Base A-1-a GW 0.00 2096.40 2.559-0.539 1,423 0.758-0.288 6.7 Salt River Base A-1-a SP 0.59 2096.41 22.401 2.666 1,170 0.919-0.572 6.9 Globe Area Base A-1-a SP-SM 0.68 2096.44 35.787 2.981 1,032 0.830-0.307 6.7 Precott Area Base A-1-a SP-SM 1.00 2096.45 144.223 8.711 1,092 0.784-0.236 6.3 ADOT A-1-a AB2 Base Materials A-1-a SP-SM 0.60 2096.65 24.221 2.721 1,075 0.841-0.305 6.7 ADOT A-2 Subgrade Materials A-2 SC 0.22 21.79 58.965 0.699 - - - -

IMPLEMENTATION STUDY STATUS AND CONSIDERATIONS 5 Year Study Approx $250 k per Year All Material Testing Nearly Completed Estimated time for initial Material Characterization program to be completed June 2004 Traffic & Climatic Zones Completed Remaining Effort Code Modifications for Local AZ conditions Select AZ Test Sites for Local Calibration Develop Input Database for Calibration Conduct AZ Calibration Finalize Design Guide for ADOT

IMPLEMENTATION STUDY STATUS AND CONSIDERATIONS US Should Develop a Nationally Coordinated Design Guide Materials Characterization Center Standardize Testing Protocols State / Local University / SP Centers Collect / Synthesize / Analyze and SHARE Test Results Basis for Future Precision / Bias Studies Long Term Goal to Minimize Testing Requirements for Guide Implementation Tests E*, Thermal Fracture, Fatigue, Repeated Load Permanent Deformation, Fn(Flow Number) and Ft (Flow Time)