Barry Paye, P.E. Wisconsin DOT Materials Lab

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

SPECIAL HAULING PERMITS

HMA Thin Lifts for Pavement Preservation in Tennessee

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

Louisiana s Experience

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

I.D.O.T. Update Version -

Darwin-ME Status and Implementation Efforts_IAC09

SEAUPG 2009 CONFERENCE-HILTON HEAD ISLAND, SOUTH CAROLINA

Use of New High Performance Thin Overlays (HPTO)

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

Innovative Warm Mix Asphalt Projects: The Contractor s Perspective

Superpave Asphalt Binder Specification

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

- New Superpave Performance Graded Specification. Asphalt Cements

Ultra-thin Bonded Wearing Course Performance Update, Minnesota

Structural Considerations in Moving Mega Loads on Idaho Highways

New Tools from EN Standards for high performances mixes

Load Rating for SHVs and EVs

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

If it ain t broke, don t t fix it. HMA Thin Lifts for Pavement Preservation in Tennessee 2008 SEAUPG CONFERENCE-BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA

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

Long Life Asphalt Performance Testing January 17, 2018

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

s Contact the Area Construction Engineer at for RAP sample location. Page 2 of 10

Topics. Hauling, Laydown and Compaction. Optional Release Agent Hauling Vehicles. Delivery 7/6/2010

Pavement Thickness Design Parameter Impacts

STATE ND PROJECT NO. CP 0883 (14) & CP 1152 (14) SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS 9 31 SIGN NUMBER SIGN SIZE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT REQUIRED UNITS PER AMOUNT UNITS

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

Page 1 of KA

Developing Affordable GTR Asphalt Mixes for Local Roadways

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

MUNICIPALITY OF MONROEVILLE

WARM MIX ASPHALT TECHNOLOGY

2016 NJDOT Research Showcase 10/26/16

High Friction Surfaces In Missouri

MEMORANDUM FPN: State Road: 91 County: Osceola (92)

EXISTING PAVEMENT EVALUATION Howell Ferry Road Duluth, Gwinnett County, Georgia. WILLMER ENGINEERING INC. Willmer Project No

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

Developing Affordable GTR Asphalt Mixes for Local Roadways

S T A T E O F M I N N E S O T A D E P A R T M E N T O F T R A N S P O R T A T I O N DATE : 02/27/06 PAGE : 1 TABULATION OF BIDS

UNDERSTANDING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF AXLE VERSUS LENGTH CLASSIFICATION ON AXLE FACTORS AND THE EFFECT ON AADT TO ENSURE RELIABLE TRAFFIC DATA

ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DATE : 06/14/13 PAGE : VENDOR RANKING

Created by: St. Louis County

STH 60 Northern Reliever Route Feasibility Study Report

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

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

2017 Local Roads Workshop Local Agency HMA Acceptance Specification

2018 NACE Conference Wisconsin Dells, WI. Joseph Cheung P.E. FHWA Office of Safety

Overview of Warm-Mix Asphalt for Virgin and Reclaimed Asphalt Mixes

RE: S.P (T.H. 210) in Crow Wing County Located on T.H. 210 from Brainerd (R.P ) to Ironton (R.P )

STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - TABULATION OF BIDS. District(s): 8 30=047 Start Dt: 05/01/17 Comp. Dt:

Developing Affordable GTR Asphalt Mixes for Local Roadways

CITY OF TORRANCE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION INFRASTRUCTURE UPDATE

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

Design Vehicles Over-Length Configurations

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

Western ND Meeting. February 19, 2014 Grant Levi, NDDOT Director

Bella Vista Bypass Benefit Cost Analysis

Effectiveness of Median Cable Barriers and Rumble Strips

Public Information Workshop

IMPACTS OF ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ON TEXAS ROADS

Impact of Environment-Friendly Tires on Pavement Damage

Fixing America s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act

BARRETT ROAD (C.R. 178) ROADWAY RESURFACING FROM LEWIS ROAD TO SPAFFORD ROAD IN OLMSTED TOWNSHIP, OHIO ITEMIZED UNIT PRICE BID ROADWAY

Transportation accomplishments

EFFECT OF SUPERPAVE DEFINED RESTRICTED ZONE ON HOT MIX ASPHALT PERFORMANCE

US 67 WIDENING PROJECT

Median Barriers in North Carolina

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

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

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

Roadway Impacts of Industrial Silica Sand (Frac Sand) Mining

Preserving and Protecting Rural Roads:

2015 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE SECTION 15-PVMTC-05-GM

Project # & Name: # CDBG - Pugh Street Streetscape - East College Ave to East Beaver Ave & East Beaver Ave/Locust Lane Improvements

National Center for Asphalt Technology Pavement Test Track

High Friction Surfaces and Other Innovative Pavement Surface Treatments for Reduced Highway Noise

EXPERIMENTAL PROJECTS

Reduction of vehicle noise at lower speeds due to a porous open-graded asphalt pavement

Better roads for Van Buren s future

Evaluation tool TARVA for estimating current safety and safety effects of road improvements Harri Peltola Principal Scientist

SonneWarmix Addtives A Warm Mix Asphalt Technology

What Is and Is Not High Friction Surfacing

North Whitfield County Roadway Corridor Study

NCAT/MnROAD Cracking Group Update. March 29, 2018

Fuel Resistant. Punishing Conditions. Supreme Production.

S T A T E O F M I N N E S O T A D E P A R T M E N T O F T R A N S P O R T A T I O N DATE : 02/26/00 PAGE : 1 TABULATION OF BIDS

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

Benefit Cost Analysis

SUMMARY 3-0 BRADFORD ALBANY TOWNSHIP. 1 OF 1 P:\8417\ Bridge A\AT\Albany A.MDB 7/21/2014 7:32:31 AM REVISION NO COUNTY

Mix Design: Changing the Recipe Book

Profiler Certification Process at the Virginia Smart Road

system performance I-820 East Loop FM 156 TxDOT is working to expand its busiest metropolitan corridors.

Alternatives Analysis Findings Report

Open House. Highway212. Meetings. Corridor Access Management, Safety & Phasing Plan. 5:30 to 6:30 p.m. - Southwest Corridor Transportation Coalition

Technical Report Documentation Page

April 27, FHWA/FTA Approval of an Amendment to the Kansas STIP to include WAMPO s April 14, 2009 TIP Amendment 6

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

Development of long life structural asphalt

Transcription:

Barry Paye, P.E. Wisconsin DOT Materials Lab

When 2017 Standard Specification Available by STSP in February 2016 Why Streamline the bidding and estimating processes Aid design/development staff in preparing estimates Simplify the choice of PG Binders for the marketplace

Combined Bid will take the asphalt binder (PG) and mix type (ESALs, gradation/nmas, etc) and combine them into a single bid item This allows for WisDOT to provide a shortlist of approved mix types to be bid

Steps: Sub Sandwich Pavement Selection Step 1: Aggregate Gradation (Nmax) (Bread) Step 2: Traffic Category (Meat) Step 3: PG Binder (Veggies) Step 4: PG Binder Traffic Designation (Cheese) Result Mix from the list LUNCH!!!

Know what layer you are designing Old SS 460 12.5mm Upper Layer 19mm Lower Layer

New System 1 37.5 mm 2 25.0 mm 3 19.0 mm 4 12.5 mm 5 9.5 mm 6 4.75 mm Upper Layer Options 4-12.5 mm 5 9.5 mm 6 4.75 mm Lower Layer Options 2 25.0 mm 3 19.0 mm 4 12.5 mm

New System 1 37.5 mm 2 25.0 mm 3 19.0 mm 4 12.5 mm 5 9.5 mm 6 4.75 mm Upper Layer Options 4-12.5 mm 5 9.5 mm 6 4.75 mm Lower Layer Options 2 25.0 mm 3 19.0 mm 4 12.5 mm

Existing New Load Category E0.3 <300,000 E1 E3 E10 E30 ESALs 300,000 to < 1 million 1 million to <3 million 3 million to <10 million 10 million to <30 million Category LT MT HT ESALs < 2 million 2 million to <8 million >8 million E30X >30 million SMA Not Rated SMA consider for >5 million

Existing New Load Category E0.3 <300,000 E1 E3 E10 E30 E30X ESALs 300,000 to < 1 million 1 million to <3 million 3 million to <10 million 10 million to <30 million >30 million Category LT MT HT ESALs < 2 million 2 million to <8 million >8 million SMA Not Rated SMA consider for >5 million Reduces 7 mix categories to 4 Fewer mix designs!

Existing New Load Category E0.3 <300,000 E1 E3 E10 E30 E30X ESALs 300,000 to < 1 million 1 million to <3 million 3 million to <10 million 10 million to <30 million >30 million Category LT MT HT ESALs < 2 million 2 million to <8 million >8 million SMA Not Rated SMA consider for >5 million 2 Categories Most common for local work

Remember Where am I? Northern or Southern Zone Layer Lower or Upper

Northern Zone New construction, reconstruction or pavement replacement Upper Layers: PG 58-34 Lower Layers: PG 58-28 Other projects (Overlay, etc.) All Layers: PG 58-28

Southern Zone All Layers, All types of construction (replacement & overlay) PG 58-28

Based on Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR) testing at the climatic high temperature at the design location (AASHTO M332 Testing) Grade bumping to be adjusted using MSCR designation, not E mix or PG Grade Ex: Moving from an E1 to an E3 Ex: Moving from a PG 58-28 to a PG 64-28

Binder grades to be based on expected traffic level: S Standard Normal projects H Heavy Higher truck movements, roundabouts, turn lanes V Very Heavy Extreme traffic, stopping & starting E Extremely Heavy Toll Booths, Port Facilities (Not included) Example (old to new): PG 64-28P PG 58-28 H H, V & E replaces the P Grades

-Binder grades to be based on expected traffic level: S Standard Normal projects H Heavy Higher truck movements, roundabouts, turn lanes V Very Heavy Extreme traffic, stopping & starting E Extremely Heavy Toll Booths, Port Facilities (Not included) -Example (old to new): PG 64-28P PG 58-28 H

Old System New System 58-28 58-28 S 64-28 58-28 H 70-28 58-28 V 58-34 58-34 S 64-34 58-34 H 70-34 58-34 V

Old System New System 58-28 58-28 S 64-28 58-28 H 70-28 58-28 V 58-34 58-34 S 64-34 58-34 H 70-34 58-34 V

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Gradations (Nmas) Traffic Level Asphalt Binder Designation Level 1 37.5 mm LT Low Traffic Vol. (40 gyrations) 58 34 S Standard 2 25.0 mm MT Medium Traffic Vol. (75 gyrations) 58 28 H Heavy 3 19.0 mm HT High Traffic Vol. (100 gyrations) V Very Heavy 4 12.5 mm E Extremely Heavy 5 9.5 mm 6 4.75 mm

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Gradations (Nmas) Traffic Level Asphalt Binder Designation Level 1 37.5 mm LT Low Traffic Vol. (40 gyrations) 58 34 S Standard 2 25.0 mm MT Medium Traffic Vol. (75 gyrations) 58 28 H Heavy 3 19.0 mm HT High Traffic Vol. (100 gyrations) V Very Heavy 4 12.5 mm E Extremely Heavy 5 9.5 mm 6 4.75 mm

4 LT 58-34 S Gradation Traffic Level So, for this example: Gradation = 12.5 mm Traffic Level = < 2 mil ESALs Binder Grade = 58-34 Binder Designation = Standard Binder Grade Binder Designation

< 2 Mil ESALs 2 to <8 Mil ESALs >8 Mil ESALs >5 Mil ESALs Low Volume Med Volume High Volume SMA 3 LT 58 34 S 2 MT 58 34 S 2 HT 58 34 S 4 SMA 58 34 H 4 LT 58 34 S 3 MT 58 34 S 3 HT 58 34 S 5 SMA 58 34 H 5 LT 58 34 S 4 MT 58 34 S 4 HT 58 34 S 4 SMA 58 28 H 3 LT 58 28 S 5 MT 58 34 S 5 HT 58 34 S 5 SMA 58 28 H 4 LT 58 28 S 2 MT 58 28 S 2 HT 58 28 S 4 SMA 58 34 V 5 LT 58 28 S 3 MT 58 28 S 3 HT 58 28 S 5 SMA 58 34 V 4 MT 58 28 S 4 HT 58 28 S 4 SMA 58 28 V 5 MT 58 28 S 5 HT 58 28 S 5 SMA 58 28 V 4 MT 58 34 H 2 HT 58 34 H 5 MT 58 34 H 3 HT 58 34 H 4 MT 58 28 H 4 HT 58 34 H 5 MT 58 28 H 5 HT 58 34 H 2 HT 58 28 H 3 HT 58 28 H 4 HT 58 28 H 5 HT 58 28 H 4 HT 58 34 V 5 HT 58 34 V 4 HT 58 28 V 5 HT 58 28 V Total of 46 bid combinations. System easily amendable as changes are needed.

< 2 Mil ESALs 2 to <8 Mil ESALs >8 Mil ESALs >5 Mil ESALs Low Volume Med Volume High Volume SMA 3 LT 58 34 S 2 MT 58 34 S 2 HT 58 34 S 4 SMA 58 34 H 4 LT 58 34 S 3 MT 58 34 S 3 HT 58 34 S 5 SMA 58 34 H 5 LT 58 34 S 4 MT 58 34 S 4 HT 58 34 S 4 SMA 58 28 H 3 LT 58 28 S 5 MT 58 34 S 5 HT 58 34 S 5 SMA 58 28 H 4 LT 58 28 S 2 MT 58 28 S 2 HT 58 28 S 4 SMA 58 34 V 5 LT 58 28 S 3 MT 58 28 S 3 HT 58 28 S 5 SMA 58 34 V 4 MT 58 28 S 4 HT 58 28 S 4 SMA 58 28 V 5 MT 58 28 S 5 HT 58 28 S 5 SMA 58 28 V 4 MT 58 34 H 2 HT 58 34 H 5 MT 58 34 H 3 HT 58 34 H 4 MT 58 28 H 4 HT 58 34 H 5 MT 58 28 H 5 HT 58 34 H 2 HT 58 28 H 3 HT 58 28 H 4 HT 58 28 H 5 HT 58 28 H 4 HT 58 34 V 5 HT 58 34 V 4 HT 58 28 V 5 HT 58 28 V Locals: Total of 16 most likely bid combinations.

< 2 Mil ESALs 2 to <8 Mil ESALs >8 Mil ESALs >5 Mil ESALs Low Volume Med Volume High Volume SMA 3 LT 58 34 S 2 MT 58 34 S 2 HT 58 34 S 4 SMA 58 34 H 4 LT 58 34 S 3 MT 58 34 S 3 HT 58 34 S 5 SMA 58 34 H 5 LT 58 34 S 4 MT 58 34 S 4 HT 58 34 S 4 SMA 58 28 H 3 LT 58 28 S 5 MT 58 34 S 5 HT 58 34 S 5 SMA 58 28 H 4 LT 58 28 S 2 MT 58 28 S 2 HT 58 28 S 4 SMA 58 34 V 5 LT 58 28 S 3 MT 58 28 S 3 HT 58 28 S 5 SMA 58 34 V 4 MT 58 28 S 4 HT 58 28 S 4 SMA 58 28 V 5 MT 58 28 S 5 HT 58 28 S 5 SMA 58 28 V 4 MT 58 34 H 2 HT 58 34 H 5 MT 58 34 H 3 HT 58 34 H 4 MT 58 28 H 4 HT 58 34 H 5 MT 58 28 H 5 HT 58 34 H Locals: 6 Dominant mix types! 2 HT 58 28 H 3 HT 58 28 H 4 HT 58 28 H 5 HT 58 28 H 4 HT 58 34 V 5 HT 58 34 V 4 HT 58 28 V 5 HT 58 28 V

FDM Chapter 14-10.5 Updated to provide guidance Step through the process Examples to be inserted in Pavement Design Manual (WisPAVE Manual) WAPA Handout Guide Website Selection Tool www.wispave.org

9 New Construction 2 4 HT 58-34 S 7 3 HT 58-28 S

Design Information: County trunk highway in Ashland County 1.4 million design ESAL s 2 Mill & Overlay project No major traffic generator Not a major log hauling route Choices: A: 3 LT 58-28 S B: 4 MT 58-34 H C: 4 LT 58-28 S D: 2 HT 58-34 S

Design Information: County trunk highway in Ashland County 1.4 million design ESAL s 2 Mill & Overlay project No major traffic generator Not a major log hauling route Choices: A: 3 LT 58-28 S B: 4 MT 58-34 H C: 4 LT 58-28 S 12.5mm, Low Traffic, Standard PG Grade & Traffic D: 2 HT 58-34 S

Design Information: County trunk highway in Dane County 2.4 million design ESAL s 5 Roundabout new construction Pavement Designer has chosen a 2 12.5mm upper and 3 19mm lower layer Choices: A: Up: 2 4 MT 58-28 S Lower: 3 3 MT 58-34 S B: Up: 2 4 LT 58-34 S Lower: 3 3 LT 58-28 S C: Up: 2 4 MT 58-28 H Lower: 3 3 MT 58-28 S

Design Information: County trunk highway in Dane County 2.4 million design ESAL s 5 Roundabout new construction Pavement Designer has chosen a 2 12.5mm upper and 3 19mm lower layer Choices: A: Up: 2 4 MT 58-28 S Lower: 3 3 MT 58-34 S B: Up: 2 4 LT 58-34 S Lower: 3 3 LT 58-28 S C: Up: 2 4 MT 58-28 H Lower: 3 3 MT 58-28 S

Barry Paye Barry.paye@dot.wi.gov 608-246-7945 Russ Frank Russel.frank@dot.wi.gov 608-246-7930 Jeff Anderson Jeffrey.anderson@dot.wi.gov 608-246-5456 WAPA www.wispave.org 608-255-3114 Brandon Strand strand@wispave.org Deb Schwerman deb@wispave.org