Tables
Create a tables and use them in your posts
- Recycled HMA
- Dense-Graded
- ACI Mix Design -4
- Viscosity Grading -1
- ACI Mix Design -5
- Viscosity Grading -2
- ACI Mix Design -6
- Superpave Performance Grading
- Asphalt Production and Oil Refining
- Flexible Pavement ESAL Equation -1
- Asphalt Modifiers
- Flexible Pavement ESAL Equation -2
- Penetration Grading -1
- Penetration Grading -2
- Subgrade -1
- Subgrade -2
- Durability and Soundness -1
- Durability and Soundness -3
- Flexible Pavement ESAL Equation -3
- Durability and Soundness -2
- Gradation and Size -2
- Gradation and Size -1
- Hveem Mix Design
- Shrinking and Swelling Soils
- Rigid Pavement Response -1
- Component Analysis – Asphalt Institute -1
- Fine Aggregate Angularity -1
- Fine Aggregate Angularity -2
- Component Analysis – Asphalt Institute -2
- Rigid Pavement Response -2
- Flat and Elongated Particles -1
- Component Analysis – Asphalt Institute -3
- Rigid Pavement Response -3
- Flat and Elongated Particles -2
- Component Analysis – Asphalt Institute -4
- Rigid Pavement Response -4
- Los Angeles Abrasion -1
- Component Analysis – Asphalt Institute -5
- Los Angeles Abrasion -2
- Modified Berggren Formula -1
- Sand Equivalent -1
- Modified Berggren Formula -2
- Sand Equivalent -2
- Coarse Aggregate Angularity -1
- Job Mix Formula
- Coarse Aggregate Angularity -2
- Coarse Aggregate Angularity -3
- Marshall Mix Design
- Limiting Deflection – Asphalt Institute -1
- Limiting Deflection – Asphalt Institute -2
- Thin Whitetopping -1
- AASHO Road Test -1
- AASHO Road Test -2
- AASHO Road Test -3
- AASHO Road Test -4
- FWD AREA Parameter -1
- FWD AREA Parameter -2
- Factors Affecting Compaction -1
- Factors Affecting Compaction -2
- ACI Mix Design Example -1
- Roughness -1
- Superpave Mix Design -1
- Superpave Mix Design -2
- ACI Mix Design Example -2
- Roughness -2
- Superpave Mix Design -3
- Superpave Mix Design -4
- ACI Mix Design Example -3
- Skid Resistance -1
- Superpave Mix Design -5
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -1
- Superpave Mix Design -6
- Superpave Mix Design -7
- ACI Mix Design Example -4
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -2
- Superpave Mix Design -8
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -3
- Rolling Thin-Film Oven -1
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -4
- Rigid Pavement Truck Types -1
- ACI Mix Design Example -5
- PCC Admixtures -1
- ACI Mix Design Example -6
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -5
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -6
- Rigid Pavement Empirical Design Example -1
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -7
- Rigid Pavement Empirical Design Example -2
- ACI Mix Design Example -7
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -8
- Rigid Pavement Empirical Design Example -3
- ACI Mix Design Example -8
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -9
- PCC Truck Mixer -1
- ACI Mix Design Example -9
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -10
- ACI Mix Design Example -10
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -11
- Reinforcing Steel Design -1
- Poisson’s Ratio
- Deflection Based Nondestructive Pavement Analyses -12
- Superpave Shear Tester -1
- HMA Weight-Volume Terms and Relationships -1
- Sweet Emulsion – How Asphalt and Water Combine
- HMA Weight-Volume Terms and Relationships -2
- Superpave Shear Tester -2
- The Nitty-Gritty of Soils in Roadway Design
- PPRC -1
- PPRC -2
- PPRC -3
- Flexible Pavement Empirical Design Example -1
- Flexible Pavement Empirical Design Example -2
- Flexible Pavement Empirical Design Example -3
- Flexible Pavement Empirical Design Example -4
- Flexible Pavement Empirical Design Example -5
- Flexible Pavement Empirical Design Example -6
- Flexible Pavement Empirical Design Example -7
- Flexible Pavement Empirical Design Example -8
- When to Use Slurry Seals and Micro Surfacing
- Gradation Test -1
- 1993 AASHTO Rigid Pavement Structural Design -1
- 1993 AASHTO Rigid Pavement Structural Design -2
- 1993 AASHTO Rigid Pavement Structural Design -3
- Backcalculation -1
- Backcalculation -1
- Joint Design -2
- Compaction -1
- Loads
- Surface Preparation -1
- Superpave Gradation Requirements -1
- Existing Surface Preparation for Overlays -1
- Superpave Gradation Requirements -2
- Trucks and Buses -1
- Superpave Gradation Requirements -3
- Trucks and Buses -2
- Superpave Gradation Requirements -4
- Superpave Gradation Requirements -5
- Trucks and Buses -3
- Joint Design -1
- AASHTO Vehicle Definitions -1
- HMA Weight-Volume Terms and Relationships -1
- Compaction Equipment -1
- Compaction Equipment -2
- Laboratory vs. Field Conditions -1
- Fundamentals -1
- Calculation of Frost Depth -1
- Calculation of Frost Depth -2
- Calculation of Frost Depth -3
- Calculation of Frost Depth -4
- Calculation of Frost Depth -5
- Calculation of Frost Depth -6
- Calculation of Frost Depth -7
- Calculation of Frost Depth -8
- Calculation of Frost Depth -9
- Calculation of Frost Depth -10
- Calculation of Frost Depth -11
- Calculation of Frost Depth -12
- Calculation of Frost Depth -13
- Passenger Cars
- Pavement Noise -1
- The Feel of the Road
- Flexible Pavement Mechanistic Models
- Key Pollution Concepts -1
- Staying Connected With Dowel Bars
- Flexible M-E Failure Criteria -1
- Construction Noise -1
- Flexible M-E Failure Criteria -2
- Construction Noise -2
- Construction Noise -3
- Flexible Pavement Response -1
- Construction Noise -4
- Flexible Pavement Response -2
- Construction Noise -5
- Flexible Pavement Response -3
- Construction Noise -6
- Flexible Pavement Response -4
- Construction Noise -7
- Flexible Pavement Response -5
- Construction Noise -8
- The AASHTO Reliability Concept
- Aggregate Weight-Volume Relationships and Terms
- HMA Transport -1
- Aggregate -1
- Binder Content
- Frost Action Mitigation -1
- HMA Performance Tests -3
- Equivalent Single Axle Load -1
- Moisture Susceptibility
- A Binder test
- Direct Tension Tester
- Pressure Aging Vessel
- Rotational Viscometer
- Portland Cement Compressive Strength
- Portland Cement -1
- Portland Cement -2
- Portland Cement Setting Time -1
- Equivalent Single Axle Load -2
- 1993 AASHTO Flexible Pavement Structural Design -1
- Los Angeles Abrasion -steps
- Marshall Mix Design -1
- Tack Coat
- Mix Selection Guidance
- Typical Values -1
- Dynamic Shear Rheometer -1
- Performance Specifications
- ACI Mix Design -1
- ACI Mix Design -2
- California Bearing Ratio
- ACI Mix Design -3
RAP Percentage | Recommended Virgin Asphalt Binder Grade |
---|---|
Less than 15 | No change from basic Superpave PG binder requirements. |
15 - 25 | Select virgin binder one grade softer than normal (e.g., select at PG 58-22 if a PG 64-22 would normally be used). |
Greater than 25 | Follow recommendations from blending charts. |
Mixture Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size | Coarse-Graded Mix | Fine-Graded Mix |
---|---|---|
37.5 mm (1.5 inches) | less than 35% passing the 4.75 mm (No. 4 Sieve) | > 35% passing the 4.75 mm (No. 4 Sieve) |
25.0 mm (1.0 inch) | less than 40% passing the 4.75 mm (No. 4 Sieve) | > 40% passing the 4.75 mm (No. 4 Sieve) |
19.0 mm (0.75 inches) | less than 35% passing the 2.36 mm (No. 8 Sieve) | > 35% passing the 2.36 mm (No. 8 Sieve) |
12.5 mm (0.5 inches) | less than 40% passing the 2.36 mm (No. 8 Sieve) | 40% passing the 2.36 mm (No. 8 Sieve) |
9.5 mm (0.375 inches) | less than 45% passing the 2.36 mm (No. 8 Sieve) | > 45% passing the 2.36 mm (No. 8 Sieve) |
28-Day Compressive Strength in MPa (psi) | Water-cement ratio by weight | |
Non-Air-Entrained | Air-Entrained | |
41.4 (6000) | 0.41 | – |
34.5 (5000) | 0.48 | 0.40 |
27.6 (4000) | 0.57 | 0.48 |
20.7 (3000) | 0.68 | 0.59 |
13.8 (2000) | 0.82 | 0.74 |
Advantages | Disadvantages |
---|---|
Unlike penetration depth, viscosity is a fundamental engineering parameter. | The principal grading (done at 25° C (77° F)) may not accurately reflect low-temperature asphalt binder rheology. |
Test temperatures correlate well with: - 25° C (77° F) – average pavement temp. - 60° C (140° F) – high pavement temp. - 135° C (275° F) – HMA mixing temp. |
When using the AC grading system, thin film oven test residue viscosities can vary greatly with the same AC grade. Therefore, although asphalt binders are of the same AC grade they may behave differently after construction. |
Temperature susceptibility (the change in asphalt binder rheology with temperature) can be somewhat determined because viscosity is measured at three different temperatures (penetration only is measured at 25° C (77° F)). | The testing is more expensive and takes longer than the penetration test. |
Testing equipment and standards are widely available. |
Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size | Fine Aggregate Fineness Modulus | |||
2.40 | 2.60 | 2.80 | 3.00 | |
9.5 mm (0.375 inches) | 0.50 | 0.48 | 0.46 | 0.44 |
12.5 mm (0.5 inches) | 0.59 | 0.57 | 0.55 | 0.53 |
19 mm (0.75 inches) | 0.66 | 0.64 | 0.62 | 0.60 |
25 mm (1 inches) | 0.71 | 0.69 | 0.67 | 0.65 |
37.5 mm (1.5 inches) | 0.75 | 0.73 | 0.71 | 0.69 |
50 mm (2 inches) | 0.78 | 0.76 | 0.74 | 0.72 |
Notes:
|
Standard | Grading based on Original Asphalt (AC) | Grading based on Aged Residue (AR) | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AASHTO M 226 | AC-2.5 | AC-5 | AC-10 | AC-20 | AC-30 | AC-40 | AR-10 | AR-20 | AR-40 | AR-80 | AR-160 |
ASTM D 3381 | AC-2.5 | AC-5 | AC-10 | AC-20 | AC-30 | AC-40 | AR-1000 | AR-2000 | AR-4000 | AR-8000 | AR-16000 |
Unit volume (1 m3 or yd3) | |
---|---|
– | Volume of mixing water |
– | Volume of air |
– | Volume of portland cement |
– | Volume of coarse aggregate |
equals | Volume of fine aggregate |
Limitations of Penetration, AC and AR Grading Systems | Superpave Binder Testing and Specification Features that Address Prior Limitations |
---|---|
Penetration and ductility tests are empirical and not directly related to HMA pavement performance. | The physical properties measured are directly related to field performance by engineering principles. |
Tests are conducted at one standard temperature without regard to the climate in which the asphalt binder will be used. | Test criteria remain constant, however, the temperature at which the criteria must be met changes in consideration of the binder grade selected for the prevalent climatic conditions. |
The range of pavement temperatures at any one site is not adequately covered. For example, there is no test method for asphalt binder stiffness at low temperatures to control thermal cracking. | The entire range of pavement temperatures experienced at a particular site is covered. |
Test methods only consider short-term asphalt binder aging (thin film oven test) although long-term aging is a significant factor in fatigue cracking and low temperature cracking. | Three critical binder ages are simulated and tested: |
1. Original asphalt binder prior to mixingwith aggregate. | 1. Original asphalt binder prior to mixingwith aggregate. |
2. Aged asphalt binder after HMAproduction and construction. | 2. Aged asphalt binder after HMAproduction and construction. |
3. Long-term aged binder. | 3. Long-term aged binder. |
Asphalt binders can have significantly different characteristics within the same grading category. | Grading is more precise and there is less overlap between grades. |
Modified asphalt binders are not suited for these grading systems. | Tests and specifications are intended for asphalt “binders” to include both modified and unmodified asphalt cements. |
Under 90 degrees F | Butane and lighter |
---|---|
90-220 degrees F | Gasoline |
220-315 degrees F | Naphtha |
315-450 degrees F | Kerosene |
450-800 degrees F | Gas oil |
800 degrees F and up | Residuum (including asphalt) |
Where: | W | equals | axle applications inverse of equivalency factors (where W18 = number of 18,000 lb (80 kN) single axle loads) |
Lx | equals | axle load being evaluated (kips) | |
L18 | equals | 18 (standard axle load in kips) | |
L2 | equals | code for axle configuration 1 = single axle 2 = tandem axle 3 = triple axle (added in the 1986 AASHTO Guide) x = axle load equivalency factor being evaluated s = code for standard axle = 1 (single axle) |
|
G | equals | a function of the ratio of loss in serviceability at time, t, to the potential loss taken at a point where pt = 1.5 | |
Pt | equals | "terminal" serviceability index (point at which the pavement is considered to be at the end of its useful life) | |
b | equals | function which determines the relationship between serviceability and axle load applications | |
SN | equals | structural number |
Type | General Purpose or Use | Generic Examples |
---|---|---|
Filler | Fill voids and therefore reduce optimum asphalt content Meet aggregate gradation specifications Increase stability Improve the asphalt cement-aggregate bond |
Mineral filler crusher fines lime portland cement fly ash Carbon black |
Extender | Substituted for a portion of asphalt cement (typically between 20 – 35 % by weight of total asphalt binder) to decrease the amount of asphalt cement required | Sulfur Lignin |
Rubber | Increase HMA stiffness at high service temperatures Increase HMA elasticity at medium service temperatures to resist fatigue cracking Decrease HMA stiffness at low temperatures to resist thermal cracking (see Figure 2) |
Natural latex Synthetic latex (e.g., Polychloroprene latex) Block copolymer (e.g., Styrene-butadiene-styrene (SBS)) Reclaimed rubber (e.g., crumb rubber from old tires) |
Plastic | Polyethylene/polypropylene Ethylene acrylate copolymer Ethyl-vinyl-acetate (EVA) Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) Ethylene propylene or EPDM Polyolefins |
|
Rubber-Plastic Combinations | Blends of rubber and plastic | |
Fiber | Natural: Asbestos Rock wool Manufactured: Polypropylene Polyester Fiberglass Mineral Cellulose |
|
Oxidant | Increase HMA stiffness after the HMA is placed. | Manganese salts |
Antioxidant | Increase the durability of HMA mixtures by retarding their oxidation | Lead compounds Carbon Calcium salts |
Hydrocarbon | Restore aged asphalt cements to current specifications Increase HMA stiffness in general |
Recycling and rejuvenating oils Hard and natural asphalts |
Antistripping Agents | Minimize stripping of asphalt cement from aggregates | Amines Lime |
Waste Materials | Replace aggregate or asphalt volume with a cheaper waste product | Roofing shingles Recycled tires Glass |
where : | W18 | equals | predicted number of 18,000 lb (80 kN) single axle load applications |
W30 | equals | predicted number of 30,000 lb (133 kN) single axle load applications | |
Lx | equals | L30 = 30 | |
L2x | equals | 1 (single axle) | |
G | equals | serviceability loss factor | |
equals | |||
b30 | equals | curve slope factor | |
equals | |||
and | G/b30 | equals | -0.2009/4.388 = -0.04578 |
b18 | equals | ||
G/b18 | equals | -0.2009/1.2204 = -0.1646 | |
Thus | |||
and | |||
Finally | LEF | equals | (same as contained in 1993 AASHTO Guide, Appendix D) |
Advantages | Disadvantages |
---|---|
The test is done at 25° C (77° F), which is reasonably close to a typical pavement average temperature. | The test is empirical and does not measure any fundamental engineering parameter such as viscosity. |
May also provide a better correlation with low-temperature asphalt binder properties than the viscosity test, which is performed at 60° C (140° F). | Shear rate is variable and high during the test. Since asphalt binders typically behave as a non-Newtonian fluid at 25° C (77° F), this will affect test results. |
Temperature susceptibility (the change in asphalt binder rheology with temperature) can be determined by conducting the test at temperatures other than 25° C (77° F). | Temperature susceptibility (the change in asphalt binder rheology with temperature) cannot be determined by a single test at 25° C (77° F). |
The test is quick and inexpensive. Therefore, it can easily be used in the field. | The test does not provide information with which to establish mixing and compaction temperatures. |
Penetration Grade | Comments |
---|---|
40 – 50 | Hardest grade. |
60 - 70 | Typical grades used in the U.S. |
85 - 100 | |
120 – 150 | |
200 – 300 | Softest grade. Used for cold climates such as northern Canada (Roberts et al., 1996[1]) |
Material (USC given where appropriate) | CBR | R-Value | Elastic or Resilient Modulus (psi) |
---|---|---|---|
Diamond | – | – | 170,000,000 |
Steel | – | – | 30,000,000 |
Aluminum | – | – | 10,000,000 |
Wood | – | – | 1 – 2,000,000 |
Crushed Stone (GW, GP, GM) | 20 – 100 | 30 – 50 | 20,000 – 40,000 |
Sandy Soils (SW, SP, SM, SC) | 5 – 40 | 7 – 40 | 7,000 – 30,000 |
Silty Soils (ML, MH) | 3 – 15 | 5 – 25 | 5,000 – 20,000 |
Clay Soils (CL, CH) | 3 – 10 | 5 – 20 | 5,000 – 15,000 |
Organic Soils (OH, OL, PT) | 1 – 5 | Less than 7 | Less than 5,000 |
Equation | Origin | Limitations |
---|---|---|
MR = (1500)(CBR) | Heukelom & Klomp (1962) | Only for fine-grained non-expansive soils with a soaked CBR of 10 or less. |
MR = 1,000 + (555)(R-value) | 1993 AASHTO Guide | Only for fine-grained non-expansive soils with R-values of 20 or less. |
MR= 2555 x CBR0.64 | AASHTO 2002 Design Guide | A fair conversion over a wide range of values. |
Sieve Size | Minimum Mass of Specimen | |
U.S. | Metric (mm) | |
2 inches | 50 mm | 3000 g |
1.5 inches | 37.5 mm | 2000 g |
1.0 inches | 25.0 mm | 1000 g |
0.75 inches | 19.0 mm | 500 g |
0.5 inches | 12.5 mm | 670 g |
0.375 inches | 9.5 mm | 330 g |
No. 4 | 4.75 mm | 300 g |
Material | Value | Specification | HMA Distress of Concern |
---|---|---|---|
Aggregate | % Loss | Varies1 | Deformation, rutting |
where : | L40 | equals | 40 (tandem axle) |
L18 | equals | 18 (single axle) | |
L2x | equals | 2 (tandem axle) | |
L2s | equals | 1 (single axle) | |
G | equals | serviceability loss factor | |
equals | |||
b40 | equals | curve slope factor | |
equals | |||
and | G/b40 | equals | -0.2009/0.53824 = -0.37325 |
b18 | equals | ||
G/b18 | equals | -0.2009/0.50006 = -0.40175 | |
Thus | |||
Finally | LEF | equals | (same as contained in 1993 AASHTO Guide nbsp;Appendix D) |
Aggregate Size | Sieve Used | ||
U.S. | Metric | U.S. | Metric |
≥ 1.5 inches | ≥ 37.5 mm | 1.25 inches | 31.5 mm |
1.5 to 0.75 inches | 37.5 to 19.0 mm | 5/8 inch | 16.0 mm |
0.75 to 0.375 inches | 19.0 to 9.5 mm | 5/16 inch | 8.0 mm |
0.375 inches to No. 4 | 9.5 to 4.75 mm | No. 5 | 4.0 mm |
Percent Passing | ||||
Sieve Size | Subbase Course (Grading A) |
Base Course (Grading B) |
Surface Course (Grading F) |
|
63 mm | 2.5-inch | – | 100 | – |
50 mm | 2-inch | 100 | 97 – 100 | – |
37.5 mm | 1.5-inch | 97 – 100 | – | – |
25.0 mm | 1-inch | – | – | 100 |
19.0 mm | 0.75-inch | – | – | 97 – 100 |
12.5 mm | 0.5-inch | – | 40 – 60 (8) | – |
4.75 mm | No. 4 | 40 – 60 (8) | – | 41 – 71 (7) |
0.425 mm | No. 40 | – | 9 – 17 (4) | 12 – 28 (5) |
0.075 mm | No. 200 | 0 – 12 (4) | 4 – 8 (3) | 5 – 16 (4) |
Particle Size (mm) | % Passing |
---|---|
19.0 | |
12.5 | |
9.5 | |
2.00 | |
0.300 | |
0.075 |
Mix Criteria | Light Traffic (Less than 104 ESALs) |
Medium Traffic (104 - 106 ESALs) |
Heavy Traffic (Greater than 106 ESALs) |
---|---|---|---|
Stabilometer Value | 30 | 35 | 37 |
Air Voids | Approximately 4 percent |
Degree of Expansion | Probable Expansion (as a percent of the total volume change)1 |
Colloidal Content (percent less than 1μm) | Plasticity Index | Shrinkage Limit |
---|---|---|---|---|
Very High | Greater than 30 | Greater than 28 | Greater than 35 | Less than 11 |
High | 20 - 30 | 20 - 31 | 25 - 41 | 7 - 12 |
Medium | 10 - 20 | 13 - 23 | 15 - 28 | 10 - 16 |
Low | Less than 15 | Less than 15 | Less than 18 | Greater than 15 |
where: | st | equals | slab edge warping stress |
C | equals | coefficient which is a function of slab length and the radius of relative stiffness (shown in Figure 2) | |
E | equals | modulus of elasticity of PCC | |
e | equals | thermal coefficient of PCC (» 0.000005/°F) | |
Δ T | equals | temperature differential between the top and bottom of the slab |
Design ESALs | Design Subgrade Percentile Value (%) |
---|---|
≤10,000 | 60 |
10,000 to 1,000,000 | 75 |
> 1,000,000 | 87.5 |
Material of Concern | Value | Specification | HMA Distress |
---|---|---|---|
Fine aggregate | Uncompacted void content | See Table 2 | Deformation, rutting |
20-yr ESALs1 (millions) | Depth from Surface | |
≤ 100 mm (4 inches) | > 100 mm (4 inches) | |
< 0.3 | – | – |
0.3 to < 3 | 40 | 40 |
3 to < 10 | 45 | 40 |
10 to < 30 | 45 | 40 |
≥ 30 | 45 | 45 |
Description of Layer Material | Conversion Factor* |
---|---|
Native subgrade | 0.0 |
Improved subgrade - predominantly granular material | 0.0 |
Lime modified subgrade of high PI soils | |
Granular subbase or base CBR not less than 20 | 0.1 - 0.3 |
Cement modified subbases and bases constructed from low PI soils | |
Cement or lime-fly ash bases with pattern cracking | 0.3 - 0.5 |
Emulsified or cutback asphalt surfaces and bases with extensive cracking, rutting, etc. | |
PCC pavement broken into small pieces | |
Asphalt concrete surface and base that exhibit extensive cracking | 0.5 - 0.7 |
Asphalt concrete generally uncracked | 0.9 - 1.0 |
PCC pavement stable, undersealed and generally uncracked pavement | |
*Equivalent thickness of new asphalt concrete |
where: | st | equals | slab interior warping stress |
E | equals | modulus of elasticity of PCC | |
e | equals | thermal coefficient of PCC (» 0.000005/°F) | |
Δ T | equals | temperature differential between the top and bottom of the slab | |
C1 | equals | coefficient in direction of calculated stress | |
C2 | equals | coefficient in direction perpendicular to C1 | |
m | equals | Poisson’s ratio for PCC (» 0.15) |
Material of Concern | Value | Specification | HMA Distress |
---|---|---|---|
Coarse Aggregate | Flat & elongated particle fraction | See Table 2 | Compaction, instability, rutting |
Type of Street or Highway Estimated | 18,000 lb (80 kN) ESALs |
---|---|
Parking lots, light traffic residential streets and farm roads | 5,000 |
Residential streets, rural farm and residential roads | 10,000 |
Urban and rural minor collectors | 100,000 |
Urban minor arterials, light industrial streets, rural major collectors and rural minor arterial highways | 1,000,000 |
Urban/rural freeways and other principal arterial highways | 3,000,000 |
Some interstate highways and industrial roads | 10,000,000 |
where: | st | equals | slab interior warping stress |
E | equals | modulus of elasticity of PCC | |
e | equals | thermal coefficient of PCC (» 0.000005/°F) | |
Δ T | equals | temperature differential between the top and bottom of the slab | |
m | equals | Poisson’s ratio for PCC (» 0.15) | |
a | equals | radius of wheel load distribution for corner loading | |
l | equals | radius of relative stiffness |
20-yr ESALs1 (millions) | Maximum Flat & Elongated (%) |
---|---|
< 0.3 | – |
0.3 to < 3 | 10 |
3 to < 10 | 10 |
10 to < 30 | 10 |
≥ 30 | 10 |
Vehicle Types | Truck Factors | ||||
Rural Highways | Urban Highways | Combined | |||
Interstate | Other | All | |||
1. Single-units | |||||
(a) 2-axle, 4-tire | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | |
(b) 2-axle, 6-tire | 0.19 | 0.21 | 0.20 | 0.26 | |
(c) 3-axles or more | 0.56 | 0.73 | 0.67 | 1.03 | |
(d) All single-units | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.09 | |
2. Tractor semi-trailers | |||||
(a) 3-axle | 0.51 | 0.47 | 0.48 | 0.47 | |
(b) 4-axle | 0.62 | 0.83 | 0.70 | 0.89 | |
(c) 5-axles or more | 0.94 | 0.98 | 0.95 | 1.02 | |
(d) All multiple units | 0.93 | 0.97 | 0.94 | 1.00 | |
3. All trucks | 0.49 | 0.31 | 0.42 | 0.30 |
where: | l | equals | radius of relative stiffness |
E | equals | modulus of elasticity of PCC | |
h | equals | slab thickness | |
k | equals | modulus of subgrade reaction | |
m | equals | Poisson’s ratio for PCC (» 0.15) |
Material | Value | Specification | HMA Distress of Concern |
---|---|---|---|
Coarse Aggregate | % Loss | Varies1 | Deformation, skid resistance |
Layer Thickness (inches) | Conversion Factor (Table 2) | Effective Thickness (inches) |
---|---|---|
75 mm (3 in.) | 0.5 | 37.5 mm (1.5 in.) |
200 mm (8 in.) | 0.2 | 40.0 mm (1.6 in.) |
Total Te equals | 77.5 mm (3.1 in.) |
Rock Type | L.A. Abrasion Loss (by percent weight) |
---|---|
General Values | |
Hard, igneous rocks | 10 |
Soft limestones and sandstones | 60 |
Ranges for specific rocks | |
Basalt | 10 – 17 |
Dolomite | 18 – 30 |
Gneiss | 33 – 57 |
Granite | 27 – 49 |
Limestone | 19 – 30 |
Quartzite | 20 – 35 |
where: | x | equals | depth of freeze or thaw, (ft)) | |
λ | equals | dimensionless coefficient which takes into consideration the effect of temperature changes in the soil mass (i.e., a fudge factor). Corrects the Stefan formula for the neglected effects of volumetric heats (accounts for "sensible heat" changes) | ||
kavg | equals | thermal conductivity of soil, average of frozen and unfrozen (BTU/hr • ft • °F) |
||
n | equals | conversion factor for air freezing (or thawing) index to surface freezing (or thawing) index | ||
FI | equals | air freezing index (°F • days) | ||
TI | equals | air thawing index (°F • days) | ||
L | equals | latent heat (BTU/ft3) |
Material of Concern | Value | Specification | HMA Distress |
---|---|---|---|
Fine Aggregate | Sand Equivalent | See Table 2 | Stripping |
λ | equals | f (FI (or TI), mean annual air or ground temperature, thermal properties of soil) |
equals | f(m,a) and can be read from Figure 1 | |
μ | equals | fusion parameter |
C | equals | average volumetric heat capacity of a soil (BTU/ft3 • °F) |
L | equals | latent heat (BTU/ft3) |
equals | surface freezing (or thawing) index, nFI (or nTI) divided by length of freezing (or thawing) season. Represents temperature differential between average surface temperature and 32 °F taken over the entire freeze (or thaw) season. | |
equals | ||
d | equals | length of freezing or thawing duration. For example, if the winter freezing season is December through February, then the duration of freezing (d) equals about 90 days. |
Tf | equals | 32 °F |
Ts | equals | average surface temperature for the freezing (or thawing) period |
α | equals | thermal ratio |
T | equals | average annual air or ground temperature |
|T - Tf| | equals | represents the amount that the mean annual temperature exceeds (or is less than) the freezing point of the soil moisture (assumed to be 32 °F). |
20-yr ESALs1 (millions) | Minimum Sand Equivalent (%) |
---|---|
< 0.3 | 40 |
0.3 to < 3 | 40 |
3 to < 10 | 45 |
10 to <30 | 45 |
≥ 30 | 50 |
Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size | Minimum Sample Mass, g | |
U.S. | Metric | |
3.5 inches | 90.0 mm | 90000 |
3.0 inches | 75.0 mm | 60000 |
2.5 inches | 63.0 mm | 30000 |
2.0 inches | 50.0 mm | 15000 |
1.5 inches | 37.5 mm | 7500 |
1.0 inch | 25.0 mm | 3000 |
0.75 inches | 19.0 mm | 1500 |
0.5 inches | 12.5 mm | 500 |
0.375 inches | 9.5 mm | 200 |
Sieve (metric) | 19.0 mm | 12.5 mm | 9.5 mm | 2.36 mm | 0.075 mm |
Sieve Size (U.S. units) | 3/4 inch | 1/2 inch | 3/8 inch | No. 8 | No. 200 |
Gradation Control Points | 100 min. | 90 - 100 | 90 max. | 28 - 58 | 2.0 - 7.0 |
Job Mix Formula (JMF) | 100 | 96 | 75 | 29 | 4.5 |
Tolerance | 99 - 100 | +/- 6% | +/- 6% | +/- 4% | +/- 2.0% |
Tolerance Limits | 99 - 100 | 90 - 100 | 69 - 81 | 25 - 33 | 2.5 - 6.5 |
Material | Value | Specification | HMA Distress of Concern |
---|---|---|---|
Coarse aggregate | Flat & elongated particle fraction | See Table 3 | Compaction, rutting, shoving |
20-yr ESALs1 (millions) | Depth from Surface2 | |
≤ 100 mm (4 inches) | > 100 mm (4 inches) | |
Less than 0.3 | 55/- | -/- |
0.3 to < 3 | 75/- | 50/- |
3 to < 10 | 85/80 | 60/- |
10 to < 30 | 95/90 | 80/75 |
≥30 | 100/100 | 100/100 |
Nominal Maximum Particle Size | Minimum VMA (percent) | |
(mm) | (U.S.) | |
63 | 2.5 inch | 11 |
50 | 2.0 inch | 11.5 |
37.5 | 1.5 inch | 12 |
25.0 | 1.0 inch | 13 |
19.0 | 0.75 inch | 14 |
12.5 | 0.5 inch | 15 |
9.5 | 0.375 inch | 16 |
4.75 | No. 4 sieve | 18 |
2.36 | No. 8 sieve | 21 |
1.18 | No. 16 sieve | 23.5 |
where: | RRD | equals | representative rebound deflection (inches) |
x | equals | mean of the individual deflections (inches) | |
s | equals | standard deviation of the deflections (in) | |
f | equals | temperature adjustment factor | |
c | equals | critical period adjustment factor (where c = 1 if deflection tests made during the most critical period (highest pavement deflections)). |
Time Period When Deflection Data Obtained | Deflection Data Adjustment Factor (c) |
---|---|
January - March | 1.00 |
April - June | 1.25 |
July - September | 1.50 |
October - December | 1.25 |
Trucks per Day per Lane | Design Life (Years) | |||||
5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
Less than = 200 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
250 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
300 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
350 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
400 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
450 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 |
500 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
600 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
700 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
800 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 7 |
900 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 | n/a |
1,000 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 | n/a | n/a |
Average Mean Temperature (July) | 24.5°C (76°F) |
Average Mean Temperature (January) | -2.8°C (27°F) |
Annual Average Rainfall | 837 mm (34 inches) |
Average Depth of Frost (for fine-grained soil) | 711 mm (28 inches) |
Sieve | Surface Course Gradation Limits | Binder Course Gradation Limits |
---|---|---|
1 in. | – | 100 |
3/4 in. | 100 | 88-100 |
1/2 in. | 86-100 | 55-86 |
3/8 in. | 70-90 | 45-72 |
No. 4 | 45-70 | 31-50 |
No. 10 | 30-52 | 19-35 |
No. 20 | 22-40 | 12-26 |
No. 40 | 16-30 | 7-20 |
No. 80 | 9-19 | 4-12 |
No. 200 | 3-7 | 0-6 |
Sieve | Specification Range Percent Passing | Actual Mean Percent Passing |
---|---|---|
1-1/2 in. | 010 | 100 |
1 in. | 80-100 | 90 |
3/4 in. | 70-90 | 81 |
1/2 in. | 60-80 | 68 |
No. 4 | 40-60 | 48 |
No. 10 | 28-46 | 35 |
No. 40 | 16-33 | 20 |
No. 100 | 7-20 | 13.5 |
No. 200 | 3-12 | 10 |
Sieve | Specification Range Percent Passing | Actual Mean Percent Passing |
---|---|---|
1-1/2 in. | 100 | 100 |
1 in. | 95-100 | 100 |
3/4 in. | 90-100 | 96 |
1/2 in. | 80-100 | 90 |
No. 4 | 55-100 | 71 |
No. 10 | 40-80 | 52 |
No. 40 | 10-30 | 25 |
No. 200 | 5-9 | 6.5 |
where: | AREA | equals | the FWD AREA Parameter. Expressed in units of length (usually inches or mm). |
D0 | equals | surface deflection at the test load center | |
D1 | equals | surface deflection at 12 inches from the test load center | |
D2 | equals | surface deflection at 24 inches from the test load center | |
D3 | equals | surface deflection at 36 inches from the test load center |
Pavement | AREA Value | |
inches | mm | |
Rigid pavement | 24 – 33 | 610 – 840 |
Thick flexible pavement >= 100 mm (4 inches) | 21 – 30 | 530 – 760 |
Thin flexible pavement < 100 mm (4 inches) | 16 – 21 | 410 – 530 |
BST | 15 – 17 | 380 – 430 |
Weak BST | 12 – 15 | 300 – 380 |
Environmental Factors | Mix Property Factors | Construction Factors |
---|---|---|
Temperature Ground temperature Air temperature Wind speed Solar flux |
Aggregate Gradation Size Shape Fractured faces Volume |
Rollers Type Number Speed and timing Number of passes Lift thickness |
Asphalt binder Chemical properties Physical properties Amount |
Other HMA production temperature Haul distance Haul time Foundation support |
Mat Thickness | Mix Temperature | Base Temperature | Approximate Time to Cool to 79 °C (175 °F) |
---|---|---|---|
25 mm (1 inch) |
149 °C (300 °F) |
16 °C (60 °F) |
9 minutes |
25 mm (1 inch) |
149 °C (300 °F) |
-4 °C (25 °F) |
7 minutes |
50 mm (2 inches) |
121 °C (250 °F) |
16 °C (60 °F) |
16 minutes |
50 mm (2 inches) |
121 °C (250 °F) |
-4 °C (25 °F) |
12 minutes |
105 mm (4.2 inches) |
121 °C (250 °F) |
16 °C (60 °F) |
54 minutes |
105 mm (4.2 inches) |
121 °C (250 °F) |
-4 °C (25 °F) |
39 minutes |
where: | equals | compressive strength |
Equipment / Technique | Complexity |
---|---|
Rod and level survey | most simple |
Dipstick profiler | simple |
Profilographs | simple |
Response type road roughness meters (RTRRMs) | complex |
Profiling devices | more complex |
20-yr Traffic Loading (in millions of ESALs) |
Depth from Surface | |
≤ 100 mm (4 inches) | > 100 mm (4 inches) | |
< 0.3 | 55/- | -/- |
0.3 to < 3 | 75/- | 50/- |
3 to < 10 | 85/80 | 60/- |
10 to < 30 | 95/90 | 80/75 |
≥ 30 | 100/100 | 100/100 |
Note: The first number is a minimum requirement for one or more fractured faces and the second number is a minimum requirement for two or more fractured faces. |
20-yr Traffic Loading (in millions of ESALs) |
Depth from Surface | |
≤ 100 mm (4 inches) | > 100 mm (4 inches) | |
< 0.3 | – | – |
0.3 to < 3 | 40 | 40 |
3 to < 10 | 45 | |
10 to < 30 | ||
≥ 30 | 45 | |
Numbers shown represent the minimum uncompacted void content as a percentage of the total sample volume. |
(Metric) | (English) |
---|---|
Roughness Data Collection Device | Principle of Measurement | Relative Initial Cost | Relative Data Collection Cost (Network) | Relative Degree of Accuracy | Approximate Decade of Development | Extent of Current Use | Projected Extent of Use |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dipstick | Direct Differential Measurement | Low | Impractical | Very High | 1980s | Limited, Used for Calibration | Same as Current Use |
Profilographs | Direct Profile Recordation | Low | Impractical | Medium | 1960s | Extensive for Const. Acceptance | Same as Current Use |
BPR Roughometer | Device Response | Low | Low | Medium | 1940s | Limited | None |
Mays Meter | Vehicle Response | Low | Low | Medium | 1960s | Extensive | Decreasing Continuously |
South Dakota Road Profiler | Direct Profile Recordation | Medium | Low | High | 1980s | Growing | Rapidly Increasing |
Contact Profiling Device | Direct Profile Recordation | High | Medium | Very High | 1970s | Limited | Decreasing |
Non-Contact Profiling Device | Direct Profile Recordation | High | Medium | Very High | 1980s | Medium | Increasing Continuously |
20-yr Traffic Loading (in millions of ESALs) |
Maximum Percentage of Particles with h/Thickness > 5 |
---|---|
Less than 0.3 | - |
0.3 to < 3 | 10 |
3 to < 10 | |
10 to < 30 | |
≥ 30 |
20-yr Traffic Loading (in millions of ESALs) |
Minimum Sand Equivalent (%) |
---|---|
Less than 0.3 | 40 |
0.3 to < 3 | |
3 to < 10 | 45 |
10 to < 30 | |
≥ 30 | 50 |
(Metric) | (English) |
---|---|
Skid Number | Comments |
---|---|
Less than 30 | Take measures to correct |
≥30 | Acceptable for low volume roads |
31 – 34 | Monitor pavement frequently |
≥35 | Acceptable for heavily traveled roads |
Original Grade | Grade for Slow Transient Loads (increase 1 grade) | Grade for Stationary Loads (increase 2 grades) | 20-yr ESALs > 30 million (increase 1 grade) |
---|---|---|---|
PG 58-22 | PG 64-22 | PG 70-22 | PG 64-22 |
PG 70-22* | PG 76-22 | PG 82-22 | PG 76-22 |
*the highest possible pavement temperature in North America is about 70°C but two more high temperature grades were necessary to accommodate transient and stationary loads. |
Parameter | Formula | Measuring Device |
---|---|---|
Maximum deflection | D0 | Benkelman Beam, Lacroux deflectometer, FWD |
Radius of curvature | R = r2/2 D0(D0/Dr – 1); r = 5″ | Curvaturemeter |
Spreadability | S = + D1 + D2 + D3/5100/D0; D1 … D3 spaced 12″ apart | Dynaflect |
Area | A = 6[1 + 2 (D1/D0) + 2 (D2/ D0) + D3/D0); with sensors located at 0, 1, 2, 3 ft | FWD |
Shape factors | F1 = (D0 -D2) / D1 and F2 = (D1 -D3) / D2 | FWD |
Surface curvature index | SCI = D0 – Dr, where r = 12″ or r = 20″ | Benkelman Beam, Road Rater, FWD |
Base curvature index | BCI = D24″ – D36″ | Road Rater |
Base damage index | BDI = D12″ – D24″ | Road Rater |
Deflection ratio | Qr = Dr/D0, where Dr ≈ D0/2 | FWD |
Bending index | BI = D/a, where a = Deflection basin | Benkelman Beam |
Slope of deflection | SD = tan-1 (D0 – Dr )/r where r = 24 in. | Benkelman Beam |
20-yr Traffic Loading (in millions of ESALs) |
Number of Gyrations | ||
Ninitial | Ndesign | Nmax | |
Less than 0.3 | 6 | 50 | 75 |
0.3 to < 3 | 7 | 75 | 115 |
3 to < 10* | 8 (7) | 100 (75) | 160 (115) |
10 to < 30 | 8 | 100 | 160 |
≥ 30 | 9 | 125 | 205 |
* When the estimated 20-year design traffic loading is between 3 and < 10 million ESALs, the agency may, at its discretion, specify Ninitial = 7, Ndesign = 75 and Nmax = 115. |
20-yr Traffic Loading (in millions of ESALs) |
Required Density (as a percentage of TMD) | ||
Ninitial | Ndesign | Nmax | |
Less than 0.3 | ≤ 91.5 | 96.0 | ≤ 98.0 |
0.3 to < 3 | ≤ 90.5 | ||
3 to < 10 | ≤ 89.0 | ||
10 to < 30 | |||
≥ 30 |
(Metric) | (English) |
---|---|
Load, P, lb (kN) | Surface Thickness, hAC, in. (mm) | Surface Modulus, EAC, psi (MPa) | Subgrade Modulus, ESG, psi (MPa) |
---|---|---|---|
5,000 (22) | 2 (50) | 2,000,000 (13800) | 50,000 (345) |
10,000 (44) | 6 (150) | 500,000 (3450) | 30,000 (207) |
15,000 (67) | 12 (300) | 100,000 (690) | 10,000 (69) |
18 (450) | 5,000 (35) | ||
2,500 (17) |
20-yr Traffic Loading (in millions of ESALs) |
Minimum VMA (percent) | VFA Range (percent) | ||||
9.5 mm (0.375 inch) | 12.5 mm (0.5 inch) | 19.0 mm (0.75 inch) | 25.0 mm (1 inch) | 37.5 mm (1.5 inch) | ||
Less than 0.3 | 15.0 | 14.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 11.0 | 70 – 80 |
0.3 to < 3 | 65 – 78 | |||||
3 to < 10 | 65 – 75 | |||||
10 to < 30 | ||||||
≥ 30 |
Load, P, lb (kN) | Surface Thickness, hAC, in. (mm) | Base Thickness, hB, in (mm) | Surface Modulus, EAC, psi (MPa) | Base Modulus, EB, psi (MPa) | Subgrade Modulus, ESG, psi (MPa) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
5,000 (22) | 2 (50) | 4 (100) | 2,000,000 (13800) | 100,000 (690) | 50,000 (345) |
10,000 (44) | 6 (150) | 10 (250) | 500,000 (3450) | 50,000 (345) | 30,000 (207) |
15,000 (67) | 12 (300) | 18 (450) | 100,000 (690) | 30,000 (207) | 10,000 (69) |
10,000 (69) | 5,000 (35) | ||||
2,500 (17) |
Material | Value | Specification | Property of Concern |
---|---|---|---|
Unaged binder | Mass loss1 | ≤ 1.0% | None |
Climate Condition | ||||
Dry | Wet – No Freeze | Wet - Freeze | ||
Frozen | Unfrozen | |||
Material | psi (MPa) | psi (MPa) | psi (MPa) | psi (MPa) |
Clay | 15,000 (103) | 6,000 (41) | 6,000 (41) | 50,000 (345) |
Silt | 15,000 (103) | 10,000 (69) | 5,000 (34) | 50,000 (345) |
Silty or Clayey Sand | 20,000 (138) | 10,000 (69) | 5,000 (34) | 50,000 (345) |
Sand | 25,000 (172) | 25,000 (172) | 25,000 (172) | 50,000 (345) |
Silty or Clayey Gravel | 40,000 (276) | 30,000 (207) | 20,000 (138) | 50,000 (345) |
Gravel | 50,000 (345) | 50,000 (345) | 40,000 (276) | 50,000 (345) |
Parameter | Maximum Permissible Difference in Results of Tests Taken from Two Locations in the PCC Batch | |
Metric | English | |
Weight per unit volume calculated to an air-free basis | 16 kg/m3 | 1 lb/ft3 |
Air content | 1.0 % | 1.0 % |
Slump | ||
If average slump < 102 mm (4 inches) | 25 mm | 1.0 inch |
If average slump is 102 – 152 mm (4 – 6 inches) | 38 mm | 1.5 inches |
Coarse aggregate content (percent by weight retained on the 4.75 mm (No. 4) sieve) | 6.0 % | 6.0 % |
Unit weight of air-free mortar (based on an average of all comparative samples tested) | 1.6 % | 1.6 % |
Average 7-day compressive strength for each sample (based on an average of all comparative test specimens) | 7.5 % | 7.5 % |
(Metric) | (English) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Unit volume (1 m3 or yd3) | 1.000 m3 | 27.00 ft3 | ||
- | Volume of mixing water | - | 0.148 m3 | 4.00 ft3 |
- | Volume of air | - | 0.055 m3 | 1.49 ft3 |
- | Volume of portland cement | - | 0.121 m3 | 3.26 ft3 |
- | Volume of coarse aggregate | - | 0.424 m3 | 11.46 ft3 |
equals | Volume of fine aggregate | equals | 0.252 m3 | 6.79 ft3 |
Type | Desired Effect | Material |
---|---|---|
Accelerators |
|
|
Air detrainers |
|
|
Air-entraining |
|
|
Alkali-reactivity reducers |
|
|
Bonding |
|
|
Corrosion inhibitors |
|
|
Damp proofing |
|
|
Cementitious Minerals |
|
|
Natural pozzolans |
|
|
Inert minerals |
|
|
Permeability reducers |
|
|
Pumping aids |
|
|
Retarders |
|
|
Superplasticizers (high-range water reducers) |
|
|
Water reducer |
|
|
Workability agents |
|
|
(Metric) | (English) |
---|---|
Pavement Cases | Pavement Surface Deflections, inches | Area | ||||
D0 | D1 | D2 | D3 | in. | (mm) | |
Standard Pavement (HMA @ 500,000 psi, base course @ 25,000 psi, and subgrade @ 7,500 psi) | ||||||
Section A (thin) | 0.048 | 0.026 | 0.014 | 0.009 | 17.1 | (434) |
Section B (med) | 0.027 | 0.020 | 0.014 | 0.010 | 23.3 | (592) |
Section C (thick) | 0.018 | 0.015 | 0.012 | 0.009 | 27.0 | (686) |
Stabilize Subgrade (upper 6 in. of subgrade increased from 7,500 to 50,000 psi) | ||||||
Section A (thin) | 0.036 | 0.020 | 0.013 | 0.009 | 18.5 | (470) |
Section B (med) | 0.023 | 0.017 | 0.012 | 0.009 | 23.5 | (597) |
Section C (thick) | 0.016 | 0.013 | 0.011 | 0.009 | 27.4 | (696) |
Asphalt Treated Base (increase base course modulus from 25,000 to 500,000 psi) | ||||||
Section A (thin) | 0.021 | 0.018 | 0.013 | 0.010 | 26.6 | (676) |
Section B (med) | 0.014 | 0.012 | 0.010 | 0.009 | 28.7 | (729) |
Section C (thick) | 0.012 | 0.011 | 0.009 | 0.008 | 30.0 | (762) |
Moisture Sensitivity (decrease HMA modulus from 500,000 to 200,000 psi) | ||||||
Section A (thin) | 0.053 | 0.026 | 0.014 | 0.009 | 16.1 | (409) |
Section B (med) | 0.033 | 0.022 | 0.014 | 0.009 | 20.7 | (526) |
Section C (thick) | 0.024 | 0.018 | 0.013 | 0.010 | 24.0 | (610) |
FWD Based Parameter | Generalized Conclusions* | |
Area | Maximum Surface Deflection (D0) | |
Low | Low | Weak structure, strong subgrade |
Low | High | Weak structure, weak subgrade |
High | Low | Strong structure, strong subgrade |
High | High | Strong structure, weak subgrade |
Pavement location | Urban |
---|---|
Pavement functional classification | Interstate |
Number of lanes | 3 lanes in each direction |
Traffic distribution | Assume 80% of the loading occurs in the design lane |
Annual growth rate | Assume 2% |
Design period | Investigate 20, 30 and 40 year design periods |
Construction Materials | PCC Ec = 31,026 MPa (4,500,000 psi) PCC S’c = 5.17 MPa (750 psi) |
Load Transfer | Use dowel bars and assume J = 3.2 |
Overall serviceability loss | po – pt = 4.5 – 3.0 = 1.5 |
Reliability | Investigate three levels: R = 90%, R = 95%, R = 99%. This represents a typical range of reliability levels encountered for Interstate highways. |
o | 0.40 |
Drainage coefficient (Cd) | 1.0 (usually assumed if no better data exist) |
Loss of support | 1.0 |
Traffic count | Single unit trucks (assume 0.34 ESALs per truck) = 1872/day Double unit trucks (assume 1.00 ESALs per truck) = 1762/day Truck trains – trucks with more than 2 units (assume 2.60 ESALs per truck) = 247/day |
Pavement | Area | |
in. | (mm) | |
PCCP | 24-33 | (610-840) |
“Sound” PCC* | 29-32 | (740-810) |
BST flexible pavement (relatively thin structure) | 15-17 | (380-430) |
Thick ACP (≥ 4.2 in. HMA) | 21-30 | (530-760) |
Weak BST | 12-15 | (300-380) |
Thin ACP (< 4.2 in. HMA) | 16-21 | (410-530) |
Month | MR | Subbase MR | Composite k | Relative Damage (ur) |
---|---|---|---|---|
January | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 950 | 95 |
February | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 950 | 95 |
March | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 950 | 95 |
April | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 1,000 | 92 |
May | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 1,000 | 92 |
June | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 1,000 | 92 |
July | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 1,000 | 92 |
August | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 1,000 | 92 |
September | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 1,000 | 92 |
October | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 950 | 92 |
November | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 950 | 95 |
December | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi) | 950 | 95 |
(Metric) | (English) | |
---|---|---|
Coarse aggregate: | 1136 x 1.01 = 1147 kg/m3 | 1917 x 1.01 = 1936 lb/yd3 |
Fine aggregate: | 665 x 1.05 = 698 kg/m3 | 1119 x 1.05 = 1175 lb/yd3 |
nd | Deflections (mils) | |
Measured | Calculated | |
1 (0″) | 5.07 | 4.90 |
2 (8″) | 4.32 | 3.94 |
3 (12″) | 3.67 | 3.50 |
4 (18″) | 2.99 | 3.06 |
5 (24″) | 2.40 | 2.62 |
6 (36″) | 1.69 | 1.86 |
7 (60″) | 1.01 | 0.95 |
Design Period | Design Period ESALs | Pavement Layer | Layer Thickness | ||
Reliability = 90% | Reliability = 95% | Reliability = 99% | |||
20 years | 22,000,000 | PCC Surface Course | 280 mm (11 inches) |
305 mm (12 inches) |
330 mm (13 inches) |
HMA Base Course | 100 mm (4 inches) |
100 mm (4 inches) |
100 mm (4 inches) |
||
Crushed Stone Subbase Course | 135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
||
30 years | 36,000,000 | PCC Surface Course | 305 mm (12 inches) |
320 mm (12.5 inches) |
355 mm (14 inches) |
HMA Base Course | 100 mm (4 inches) |
100 mm (4 inches) |
100 mm (4 inches) |
||
Crushed Stone Subbase Course | 135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
||
40 years | 54,000,000 | PCC Surface Course | 330 mm (13 inches) |
345 mm (13.5 inches) |
380 mm (15 inches) |
HMA Base Course | 100 mm (4 inches) |
100 mm (4 inches) |
100 mm (4 inches) |
||
Crushed Stone Subbase Course | 135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
(Metric) | (English) | |
---|---|---|
Coarse aggregate: | 1136 x (0.01 - 0.005) = 5.7 kg/m3 | 1917 x (0.01 - 0.005) = 10 lb/yd3 |
Fine aggregate: | 665 x (0.05 - 0.007) = 28.6 kg/m3 | 1119 x (0.05 - 0.007) = 48 lb/yd3 |
Load Level | Deflections (mils) | ||||||
D0 | D8 | D12 | D18 | D24 | D36 | D60 | |
9,512 lb | 5.07 | 4.32 | 3.67 | 2.99 | 2.40 | 1.69 | 1.01 |
9,000 lb (normalized) | 4.76 | 4.04 | 3.44 | 2.80 | 2.26 | 1.59 | 0.95 |
6,534 lb | 3.28 | 2.69 | 2.33 | 1.88 | 1.56 | 1.09 | 0.68 |
Parameter | Maximum Permissible Difference in Results of Tests Taken from Two Locations in the PCC Batch | |
Metric | English | |
Weight per unit volume calculated to an air-free basis | 16 kg/m3 | 1 lb/ft3 |
Air content | 1.0 % | 1.0 % |
Slump If average slump < 102 mm (4 inches) If average slump is 102 – 152 mm (4 – 6 inches) |
25 mm 1.0 inch |
38 mm 1.5 inches |
Coarse aggregate content (percent by weight retained on the 4.75 mm (No. 4) sieve) | 6.0 % | 6.0 % |
Unit weight of air-free mortar (based on an average of all comparative samples tested) | 1.6 % | 1.6 % |
Average 7-day compressive strength for each sample (based on an average of all comparative test specimens) | 7.5 % | 7.5 % |
148 kg - 5.7 kg - 28.6 kg | equals | 113.7 kg |
250 lb - 10 lb - 48 lb | equals | 192 lb |
Dr (mils) | r | 1/r(1/ft) |
---|---|---|
4.76 | 0″ | — |
4.04 | 8″ | 1.50 |
3.44 | 12″ | 1.00 |
2.80 | 18″ | 0.67 |
2.26 | 24″ | 0.50 |
1.59 | 36″ | 0.33 |
0.95 | 60″ | 0.20 |
(Metric) | English) | |
---|---|---|
Mixing water | 114 kg | 192 lb |
Portland cement | 380 kg | 641 lb |
Coarse aggregate | 1147 kg | 1936 lb |
Fine aggregate | 698 kg | 1175 lb |
Time of Day (a.m. or p.m.) | Tensile Strain Bottom of HMA (x 10-6) | ||
Backcalculated* | Measured | % Difference | |
a.m. | 119 | 123 | -3 |
a.m. | 119 | 122 | -2 |
a.m. | 74 | 64.9 | +14 |
a.m. | 60 | 64.7 | -8 |
p.m. | 284 | 292 | -3 |
p.m. | 284 | 283 | ~0 |
p.m. | 167 | 159 | +5 |
p.m. | 167 | 158 | +6 |
p.m. | 87 | 84.8 | +2 |
p.m. | 81 | 84.2 | -4 |
Type of Material Beneath the Slab | Friction Factor (F) |
---|---|
Surface Treatment | 2.2 |
Lime Stabilization | 1.8 |
Asphalt Stabilization | 1.8 |
Cement Stabilization | 1.8 |
River Gravel | 1.5 |
Crushed Stone | 1.5 |
Sandstone | 1.2 |
Natural Subgrade | 0.9 |
Material | Poisson’s Ratio |
---|---|
Steel | 0.25 – 0.30 |
Aluminum | 0.33 |
PCC | 0.15 – 0.20* |
Flexible Pavement | |
Asphalt Concrete | 0.35 (±) |
Crushed Stone | 0.40 (±) |
Soils (fine-grained) | 0.45 (±) |
Time of Day (a.m. or p.m.) | Tensile Strain Bottom of AC (x 10-6) | ||
Backcalculated* | Measured | % Difference | |
a.m. | 66 | 69.5 | -6 |
a.m. | 71 | 69.0 | +3 |
a.m. | 68 | 68.7 | -1 |
a.m. | 38 | 34.7 | +9 |
a.m. | 127 | 130 | -2 |
a.m. | 119 | 130 | -8 |
p.m. | 178 | 185 | -4 |
p.m. | 182 | 183 | -1 |
p.m. | 104 | 95.9 | +8 |
p.m. | 51 | 48.0 | +6 |
p.m. | 56 | 48.5 | +14 |
Frequency | Number of Cycles |
---|---|
10 | 50 |
5 | 50 |
2 | 20 |
1 | 20 |
0.5 | 7 |
0.2 | 7 |
0.1 | 7 |
0.05 | 4 |
0.02 | 4 |
0.01 | 4 |
where | x: | b | equals | binder |
s | equals | stone (i.e., aggregate) | ||
m | equals | mixture | ||
y: | b | equals | bulk | |
e | equals | effective | ||
a | equals | apparent | ||
m | equals | maximum |
Anionic Emulsions | Cationic Emulsions |
---|---|
RS-1 | CRS-1 |
RS-2 | CRS-2 |
MS-1 | -- |
MS-2 | CMS-2 |
MS-2h | CMS-2h |
HFMS-1 | -- |
HFMS-2 | -- |
HFMS-2h | -- |
HFMS-2s | -- |
SS-1 | CSS-1 |
SS-1h | CSS-1h |
VT | equals | Total volume of the compacted specimen | WT | equals | Total weight of the compacted specimen |
Va | equals | Volume of air voids | WD | equals | Dry weight |
Vb | equals | Volume of asphalt binder | WSSD | equals | Saturated surface dry (SSD) weight |
Vbe | equals | Volume of effective asphalt binder | Wsub | equals | Weight submerged in water |
Vba | equals | Volume of absorbed asphalt binder | Wb | equals | Weight of the asphalt binder |
Vagg | equals | Volume of aggregate | Wbe | equals | Weight of effective asphalt binder |
Veff | equals | Effective volume of aggregate = (VT – VAC) | Wba | equals | Weight of absorbed asphalt binder |
Wagg | equals | Weight of aggregate | |||
Gsa | equals | Apparent specific gravity of the aggregate | |||
Gb | equals | Asphalt binder specific gravity | Pb | equals | Asphalt content by weight of mix (percent) |
Gsb | equals | Bulk specific gravity of the aggregate | Ps | equals | Aggregate content by weight of mix (percent) |
Gse | equals | Effective specific gravity of the aggregate | Pa | equals | Percent air voids |
Gmb | equals | Bulk specific gravity of the compacted mixture | |||
Gmm | equals | Maximum theoretical specific gravity of the mixture | γW | equals | Unit weight of water |
Temperature | Shear Stress |
---|---|
39°F (4°C) | 50 psi (345 kPa) |
68°F (20°C) | 15 psi (105 kPa) |
104°F (40°C) | 5 psi (35 kPa) |
Major Divisions | Group Symbol | Typical Description | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Coarse-Grained Soils More than 50% retained on the No. 200 sieve |
Gravels 50% or more of coarse fraction retained on the No. 4 sieve |
Clean Gravels | GW | Well-graded gravels and gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines |
GP | Poorly graded gravels and gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines | |||
Gravels with Fines | GM | Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures | ||
GC | Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures | |||
Sands 50% or more of coarse fraction passes the No. 4 sieve |
Clean Sands | SW | Well-graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no fines | |
SP | Poorly graded sands and gravelly sands, little or no fines | |||
Sands with Fines | SM | Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures | ||
SC | Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures | |||
Fine-Grained Soils More than 50% passes the No. 200 sieve |
Silts and Clays Liquid Limit 50% or less |
ML | Inorganic silts, very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands | |
CL | Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly/sandy/silty/lean clays | |||
OL | Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity | |||
Silts and Clays Liquid Limit greater than 50% |
MH | Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sands or silts, elastic silts | ||
CH | Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays | |||
OH | Organic clays of medium to high plasticity | |||
Highly Organic Soils | PT | Peat, muck, and other highly organic soils |
Title | Caltrans Tech Lead | PPRC Project Manager | Purpose & Objectives |
---|---|---|---|
2.1 Development of Partnered Research Program | N.Burmas | J.Harvey C.Monismith N.Coetzee | Develop a partnered research program1. Monitor technical literature2. Attend conferences and meetings3. Serve on technical committees4. Meet with potential partners5. Monitor/update program |
2.2 Pavement Research Database | N.Burmas | L.Popescu | Capture all data from PPRC activities into relational databases for future use1. Develop structures for new data2. Organize all data produced3. Develop improved access and analysis procedures4. Maintain library and database. Reports and HVS database |
2.3 Provide Pavement Advice | N.Burmas | J.Harvey C.Monismith Others | Distribute pavement information to Caltrans1. Participate in meetings, discussions and presentations2. Technology scanning outside California3. Technology transfer to Caltrans, contractors and others4. Advice on “corporate” or “overhead” operational issues. |
2.4 Special Forensic Studies (several separate projects) | Various | Various | 2.4.1 Longitudinal Joint Compaction2.4.2 US-395: “Pulverization” — Deep in-situ recycling (DISR)2.4.3 SR-20 (Cancelled)2.4.4 SR-138 (Moved to 4.16) |
Title | Caltrans Tech Lead | PPRC Project Manager | Purpose & Objectives |
---|---|---|---|
3.1 First set of implementation studies (several separate projects) | Various | Various | 3.1.1 Calibration of HiperPav for California Conditions 3.1.2 Evaluation of Concrete Maturity Meters 3.1.3 Use of the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) for maintenance, rehabilitation and reconstruction site evaluation 3.1.4 Quality Assurance Laboratory Testing for AC Long Life pavement mix designs (I-710) 3.1.5 Development of new asphalt concrete QC/QA pay factor tables |
3.2 Second set of implementation studies (several separate projects) | Various | Various | 3.2.1 Calibration Sites for Falling Weight Deflectometers (FWD), Profilers, and Skid Resistance Devices (Cancelled) 3.2.2 Evaluation of Profilers and Automated Distress Data Collection Equipment (Moved to 3.3) 3.2.3 Process for Evaluating Recycling Strategies for Pavement Materials, with first case study “Recycling of PCC Grindings Slurry” (Cancelled) 3.2.4 Development of Integrated Databases to Make Pavement Preservation Decisions (GPR Study) 3.2.5 Documentation of pavement performance data for pavement preservation strategies and evaluation of cost-effectiveness of such strategies 3.2.6 Development of Improved Patching Procedures for OGAC Overlays 3.2.7 Pilot Projects for Compaction Specifications for Aggregate Base and Aggregate Subbase/Use of the Rapid Compaction Control Device (RCCD) 3.2.8 Pilot Projects for Chip Seal Specifications based on South African Design Practice 3.2.9 Development of Guidelines for Effective Maintenance Treatment Evaluation Test Sections 3.2.10 Mix design Procedure for Asphalt Concrete Base for Rigid Pavements (Cancelled) 3.2.11 I-710 phase 2 support 3.2.12 PG Binder Asphalt Specifications |
3.3 Studies to Support Implementation of Enterprise Pavement Management System (PMS) | P.Vacura | J.Harvey B.Steven |
Support Implementation of a Caltrans Pavement Management System1. Develop PMS Database 2. Evaluation of pavement structure inventory for entire road network 3. Evaluation of pavement surface condition inventory for entire road network. 4. Predictive models 5. Long-term Technology Sharing and Development |
3.4 Implementation of Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Rehabilitation | W.Farnbach | J.Signore V.Kannekanti P.Ullidtz |
Implementation of findings from research goal 4.11. Develop a library of typical material properties 2. Perform case studies using CalME and MEPDG 3. Evaluate rehabilitation procedures in MEPDG 4. Perform Comparisons between MEPDG flexible module and CalME |
Title | Caltrans Tech Lead | PPRC Project Manager | Purpose & Objectives |
---|---|---|---|
4.1 Development of the First Version of a Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Rehabilitation, Reconstruction and New Pavement Design Procedure for Rigid and Flexible Pavements (pre-Calibration of MEPDG) | W.Farnbach | V.Kannekanti J.Signore P.Ullidtz J.Lea E.Kohler BW.Tsai I.Guada |
Improve Caltrans pavement performance by implementation of mechanistic design, integration of structure, materials, construction 1. Evaluate ME-PDG (bench testing of JPCP, CRCP & flexible designs) 2. Instrument and test sites for seasonal deflection curve development 3. Create climate databases 4. Develop truck traffic database from WIM 5. Develop library of typical CT materials mechanistic properties 6. Verify design systems (CalME and RadiCal) 7. Calibrate design systems (CalME, RadiCAL, & MEPDG) |
4.2 Evaluation of Rigid Pavement Long-Life Pavement Rehabilitation Strategies | W.Farnbach | E.Kohler L.duPlessis |
Evaluate design options to increase the performance and reliability of freeway rehabilitation and reconstruction projects 1. Evaluate adequacy of structural design options with respect to joint distress, fatigue cracking, and corner cracking 2. Assess concrete durability for ASR, sulfate attack, fatigue, and strength gain 3. Measure effects of construction, mix design on durability, and structural performance |
4.3 Performance of Drained & Undrained Flexible Structures Under Wet Conditions | W.Farnbach | J.Harvey | Complete evaluation of drained vs. undrained flexible structures 1. Results from HVS testing under wet conditions 2. Measurement of flow rates and monitoring of water content changes 3. Lab testing on typical aggregate bases used by the Department 4. Development of improved constitutive relations for granular pavement materials 5. Recommendations regarding use of ATPB layer in flexible pavements |
4.4 Development of Asphalt Concrete Rutting Performance Tests and Analysis Procedures | T.Bressette | J.Signore C.Monismith I.Guada |
Develop improved AC models, use to improve mix design and test methods 1. Finalize work on constitutive relation for AC at elevated temperatures 2. Develop procedure for analysis of test data to predict AC rutting performance 3. Goal 9 Specimens (linked with 4.10) 4. Determine relation between specimen size, sample size, and test variability for AC at high temperatures (RVE-128 cores) 5. Develop prototype device based upon simple shear tester |
4.5 Calibration of Mechanistic-Empirical Design Models | W.Farnbach | J.Harvey | 1. Evaluate the Department’s Pavement Management System (PMS) data for models for various distresses 2. Evaluate Arizona & Washington State DOT PMS databases for compatibility with the Department’s database and for models 3. List all known field test sections in the State and organize with respect to different pavement deterioration issues 4. Lab testing of material samples 5. Calibrate empirical-mechanistic models for key distresses using lab and field performance data and data from the PMS |
4.6 Development of Rehabilitation Construction Productivity Analysis Products | C.Suszko | EB.Lee | Portion A. Develop tools that will permit reduction of construction duration and cost and traffic delay through better planning, design & specifications Portion B. Develop work zone traffic estimation models |
4.7 Verification of Asphalt Concrete Long-Life Pavement Strategies | W.Farnbach | J.Harvey C.Monismith |
Develop performance estimates for Long Life AC Strategies Lab tests, Heavy Vehicle Simulator (HVS) tests, and analysis for: 1. crack, seat, and overlay, include reflective cracking and rutting study 2. full depth reconstruction. |
4.8 Dowel Bar Retrofit of Rigid Pavements | W.Farnbach, METS rigid | E.Kohler | Evaluate the Dowel Bar Retrofit Strategy and best options for its implementation 1. Field Accelerated Pavement Testing with the HVS; to collect full scale data quickly, although with heavier loads than normally occur under real traffic. Includes measurement of LTE and other pavement properties with the FWD. 2. Field Live Traffic Testing. Approx. 2 years. 3. Laboratory testing of materials. Permits evaluation of additional variables that can’t be included in HVS testing. Also used to characterize materials used in HVS test sections. 4. Modeling i. Finite element analysis of doweled concrete pavement joint: allows for performance prediction of other options without testing; permits extrapolation of HVS results. ii. Compilation of performance data from existing DBR projects throughout the USA: allows for calibration of HVS and analysis results to field project results. iii. Life-Cycle-Cost-Analyses |
4.9 Investigation of Asphalt Concrete Moisture Damage | T.Bressette | J.Signore | Evaluate the extent and causes and risk of AC moisture damage in California and investigate measures to mitigate risk. 1. Statewide field investigation – Collection of field samples – cores. State-wide field investigation of extent, contributing factors, develop risk matrix. Develop moisture damage identification tools 2. Permeability measurement in field 3. Laboratory investigation of risks and mitigation measures – Percentage of stripped area, moisture content, Rice, BSG, HWTD, TSR 4. Reporting – Production of a final report – Analysis of risk factors; extent; lab test evaluation, recommend mitigation 5. Review by Caltrans and formal in-person presentation to Caltrans |
4.10 Development of Improved Rehabilitation Designs for Reflection Cracking | T.Bressette W.Farnbach |
D.Jones | Investigate mechanisms of reflection cracking, develop improved methods of design 1. Construct a uniform test road with six experimental sections using conventional Caltrans design and fail the sections by fatigue cracking with the HFS. One failed, six sections will be overlaid with DGAC, AR-G and MB 2. Compare the performance of the overlays under HVS trafficking and controlled conditions. 3. Analyze the effect of the overlay thickness on the performance of the MB overlays 4. Validate existing deflection-based Caltrans thickness design procedures for DGAC and AR-G with respect to reflective cracking and rutting. 5. Quantify the effective elastic moduli of the various pavement layers. 6. Determine the failure mechanisms at moderate temperatures. 7. Determine the permanent deformation behavior in all the layers at moderate temperatures. 8. Evaluate the influence of binder properties on the laboratory fatigue and field reflective cracking performance. 9. Evaluate the rutting performance of the overlaid test pavements in terms of short and long term performance 10. Prepare recommendation on the use of MB overlays for Caltrans. |
4.11 Evaluation of Hydraulic Cement Concrete Mix Design for Pavements | (Cancelled) | ||
4.12 Development of Mix and Structural Design and Construction Guidelines for Deep In-Situ Recycling (DISR) of Cracked Asphalt Concrete as Stabilized or Unstabilized Bases | T.Bressette | D.Jones J.Harvey |
Evaluate DISR Foamed Asphalt, develop improved mix design and structural design practice Revised workplan accepted by PST 11/22/05. HVS testing still to be decided 1. Literature survey 2. Mechanistic sensitivity analysis 3. Assessment of constructed projects (including HVS test on SR89) 4. Assessment of planned projects (potentially also HVS testing) 5. Laboratory testing 6. Project selection guidelines 7. Structural design recommendations 8. Construction recommendations |
4.13 Validation of Asphalt Concrete QC/QA Pay Factors | (Cancelled) | ||
4.14 A Framework for Implementing Innovative Contracting Methods For Transportation Infrastructure Rehabilitation/Reconstruction | C.Suszko S.Shatnawi |
EB.Lee | Portion A1. Analysis framework to help determine optimal contracting methods for specific projects; evaluate impacts of implementation; determine best practices for warranty method 2. Evaluation of implementation issues by using analysis framework on case studies 3. Software program or other tool implementing analysis framework 4. Case Study: Evaluate warranties for asphalt rubber chip seal project in Dist 11Portion B Develop guidelines towards effective use of schedule based I/D provisions and devise decision supporting computer model that determines the most economic I/D dollar amounts & optimal contract completion times. 1. Gather and summarize information through extensive review of pertinent literature review 2. Compare projects with conventional contracting projects 3. Evaluate effectiveness of schedule-based I/D provisions 4. Develop a computer model |
4.15 Development of Integrated Pavement Strategy Decision Support System (incl. Life Cycle Cost Analysis) | W.Farnbach | EB.Lee | 1. Develop project-level analysis system that models and optimizes a pavement rehabilitation/reconstruction project’s life cycle cash flow and financing (i.) to develop a decision-supporting tool or guidelines that can help determine ranges of appropriate inputs for a project-level life-cycle cost analysis using FHWA RealCost; (ii.) to provide a training tool and/or trainings for the project-level life-cycle cost analysis; and (iii.) to estimate cost overrun for long life projects based on cost data from several current projects. 2. Analysis framework that can help determine the optimal investment stream at the corridor and network level, maximizing total net benefits under budgetary constraints. (i.) Multi-year investment analysis procedure that determines the proper allocation of funding among programs for roadway preservation. (ii.) Develop a prototype working model based on CT data and practice 3. Re-analyze long-life pavement criteria |
4.16 Investigation of Improved Open Graded Mix Designs (incl. Quiet Pavement-AC) | W.Farnbach | E.Kohler | Develop open-graded mix designs with improved durability and long-lasting permeability and noise absorption performance. Results will be achieved through a combination of field and laboratory measurements of sound, friction, permeability, and condition over time, studying appropriate changes. 1. Literature Survey: Survey practice and research in other states and Europe on the lifetime performance of their open-graded mix types with respect to sound, intensity, durability, friction, and permeability. 2. PPRC Testing Capability: Develop capability to measure field sound intensity, lab noise, impedance and field surface friction. 3. Create Database Structure for data collected in research. 4. Field Data collection a. Field Sections in California- Data collected on surfaces, test measurements and trends over time. b. Field and Lab Data Outside California- Data on mixes and report on trends with data summarized annually. c. Data into Database- Database will eventually be populated with lifetime performance trends to identify best practice for CA open graded and rubberized mixes will be completed. 5. Performance Trends and Statistical Analysis: Summarize information on laboratory tests that correlate with pavement performance from the standpoint of noise and permeability, and gather information on mix design methods, identifying best practices that can potentially be brought to CA. 6. Two-Year Summary Repor |
4.17 HVS testing pre-cast PCC panels in District 8 | N.Burmas | E.Kohler | HVS test of pre-cast panels in District 8 1. Prepare test plan 2. Short-term, high load test 3. Long-term crack test ( section 1 dry, wet + section 2 dry, wet + forensic) 4. Comprehensive analysis and reporting |
4.18 Warm Mix Asphalt (WMA) Performance Under Heavy Vehicle Simulator Loading | T.Bressette | D.Jones | Determine whether the addition of additives to reduce the production and construction temperatures of asphalt concrete influences performance 1. Prepare workplan (preliminary planning was done under SPE 2.3 of the PPRC Strategic Plan) 2. Monitor construction of HVS test track 3. Sample mix and mix components 4. HVS testing to assess rutting, moisture sensitivity, and fatigue performance 5. Traffic in-service sections to assess early-opening performance 6. Lab tests to identify comparable laboratory performance measures |
4.19 Third Year Field Evaluation of Tire/Pavement Noise on Flexible Pavements | W.Farnbach | E.Kohler | The goal is to recognize flexible pavement types that are the most durable, smooth, and quiet 1. Perform third year of noise, smoothness, and condition survey monitoring of sections from project 4.16. 2. Conduct noise, smoothness, and condition survey monitoring on new field sections 3. Develop pavement temperature correction for OBSI data and upgrades to the instrumented noise car 4. Analyze results, model where applicable 5. Develop preliminary table of expected lives for flexible pavement surfaces |
Pavement location: | Urban |
Pavement functional classification: | Interstate |
Number of lanes: | 3 lanes in each direction |
Traffic distribution: | Assume 80% of the loading occurs in the design lane |
Annual growth rate: | Assume 2% |
Design period: | Investigate 20, 30 and 40 year design periods |
Construction Materials: | Surface course: 12.5 mm (0.5 inch) Superpave with E = 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi)Binder course: Dense-graded HMA mix with a nominal maximum aggregate sizeof 25 mm (1 inch). Use E = 3,447 MPa (500,000 psi)Base course: Crushed aggregate with MR= 193 MPa (28,000 psi)Subbase course: None used |
Subgrade: | MR = 103 MPa (15,000 psi) in the dry months of May through October MR = 86 MPa (12,500 psi) in the wet months of November through April |
Overall serviceability loss: | po – pt = 4.5 – 3.0 = 1.5 |
Reliability: | Investigate three levels: R = 90%, R = 95%, R = 99%. This represents a typical range of reliability levels encountered for Interstate highways. |
So: | 0.50 |
Traffic count: | Single unit trucks (assume 0.40 ESALs per truck) = 1872/day |
Double unit trucks (assume 1.00 ESALs per truck) = 1762/day | Double unit trucks (assume 1.00 ESALs per truck) = 1762/day |
Truck trains – trucks with more than 2 units (assume 1.75 ESALs per truck) = 247/day | Truck trains – trucks with more than 2 units (assume 1.75 ESALs per truck) = 247/day |
Singles: | (1872/day) (0.8) (365) (0.40) | equals | 218,650 ESALs/yr |
Doubles: | (762/day) (0.8) (365) (1.00) | equals | 514,504 ESALs/yr |
Trains: | (247/day) (0.8) (365) (1.75) | equals | 126,217 ESALs/yr |
Total | equals | 859,371 ESALs/yr | |
Rounded total | equals | 860,000 ESALs/yr |
20 year design life: | |
30 year design life: | |
40 year design life: |
where: | uf | equals | relative damage factor |
MR | equals | resilient modulus in psi |
Month | MR | uf |
January | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 0.037 |
February | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 0.037 |
March | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 0.037 |
April | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 0.037 |
May | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 0.024 |
June | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 0.024 |
July | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 0.024 |
August | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 0.024 |
September | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 0.024 |
October | 103 MPa (15,000 psi) | 0.037 |
November | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 0.037 |
December | 86 MPa (12,500 psi) | 0.037 |
average relative damage | equals |
Rearrange the relative damage equation and get |
Design Period | Design Period ESALs | Pavement Layer | Layer Thickness | ||
Reliability = 90% | Reliability = 95% | Reliability = 99% | |||
20 years | <21,000,000 | HMA Surface Course | 105 mm (4.2 inches) |
105 mm (4.2 inches) |
105 mm (4.2 inches) |
HMA Binder Course | 130 mm (5.1 inches) |
150 mm (5.8 inches) |
180 mm (7.21 inches) |
||
Base Course | 135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
||
SN | 4.79 | 5.10 | 5.70 | ||
<30 years | <35,000,000 | HMA Surface Course | 105 mm (4.2 inches) |
105 mm (4.2 inches) |
105 mm (4.2 inches) |
HMA Binder Course | 150 mm (6.0 inches) |
170 mm (6.7 inches) |
205 mm (8.1 inches) |
||
Base Course | 135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
||
SN | 5.17 | 5.49 | 6.11 | ||
<40 years | <52,000,000 | HMA Surface Course | 105 mm (4.2 inches) |
105 mm (4.2 inches) |
105 mm (4.2 inches) |
HMA Binder Course | 170 mm (6.6 inches) |
190 mm (7.4 inches) |
225 mm (8.8 inches) |
||
Base Course | 135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
135 mm (5.4 inches) |
||
SN | 5.47 | 5.80 | 6.44 | ||
Layer coefficients used were 0.44 for HMA and 0.13 for crushed stone | |||||
Frost design requirements must be checked if subgrade soil frost susceptible |
M&R Treatment Selection Guidelines | ||||||||||
Treatment | L&T/Block Cracking (<3/16 in) | Raveling (M to H Severity) | Surface Wear (M to H Severity) | |||||||
% Area | % Area | % Area | ||||||||
10 | 10-25 | >25 | 10 | |||||||
Slurry Seal | R | R | R | R | R | R | R | R | ||
Microsurfacing | R | R | R | R | R | R | R | R |
Sieve Size | 37.5 mm (1.5 inch) | 25.0 mm (1.0 inch) | 19.0 mm (0.75 inch) | 12.5 mm (0.5 inch) | 9.5 mm (1.375 inch) | ||||||
Metric | U.S. | Min. | Max. | Min. | Max. | Min. | Max. | Min. | Max. | Min. | Max. |
50.0 mm | 2.0 inch | 100 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
37.5 mm | 1.5 inch | 90 | 100 | 100 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
25.0 mm | 1.0 inch | - | 90 | 90 | 100 | 100 | - | - | - | - | - |
19.0 mm | 0.75 inch | - | - | - | 90 | 90 | 100 | 100 | - | - | - |
12.5 mm | 0.5 inch | - | - | - | - | - | 90 | 90 | 100 | 100 | - |
9.5 mm | 0.375 inch | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 90 | 90 | 100 |
4.75 mm | No. 4 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 90 |
2.36 mm | No. 8 | 15 | 41 | 19 | 45 | 23 | 49 | 28 | 58 | 32 | 67 |
0.075 mm | No. 200 | 0 | 6 | 1 | 7 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 10 | 2 | 10 |
where: | W18 | equals | predicted number of 80 kN (18,000 lb.) ESALs |
ZR | equals | standard normal deviate | |
So | equals | combined standard error of the traffic prediction and performance prediction | |
D | equals | slab depth (inches) | |
pt | equals | terminal serviceability index | |
ΔPSI | equals | difference between the initial design serviceability index, po, and the design terminal serviceability index, pt | |
equals | modulus of rupture of PCC (flexural strength) | ||
Cd | equals | drainage coefficient | |
J | equals | load transfer coefficient (value depends upon the load transfer efficiency) | |
Ec | equals | Elastic modulus of PCC | |
k | equals | modulus of subgrade reaction |
where: | Ec | equals | PCC elastic modulus |
equals | PCC compressive strength |
Condition | J Factor |
Undoweled PCC on crushed aggregate surfacing | 3.8 |
Doweled PCC on crushed aggregate surfacing | 3.2 |
Doweled PCC on HMA (without widened outside lane) and tied PCC shoulders | 2.7 |
CRCP with HMA shoulders | 2.9 – 3.2 |
CRCP with tied PCC shoulders | 2.3 – 2.9 |
where: | nd | equals | total number of deflection sensors used |
dci | equals | calculated pavement surface deflection at sensor i | |
dmi | equals | measured pavement surface deflection at sensor i |
Deflection Sensor | Distance from Load Center | Deflection (mils) | |
Measured | Calculated | ||
1 | 0 mm (0 inches) | 5.07 | 4.90 |
2 | 200 mm (8 inches) | 4.32 | 3.94 |
3 | 300 mm (12 inches) | 3.67 | 3.50 |
4 | 450 mm (18 inches) | 2.99 | 3.06 |
5 | 600 mm (24 inches) | 2.40 | 2.62 |
6 | 900 mm (36 inches) | 1.69 | 1.86 |
7 | 1500 mm (60 inches) | 1.01 | 0.95 |
where: | W | equals | required joint width |
ΔL | equals | estimated joint opening | |
S | equals | allowable sealant strain (dependent upon the sealant type) | |
equals | 0.15 to 0.50 for rubberized asphalt (width:depth shape factor of 1:1) | ||
equals | 0.30 to 0.50 for silicone sealant (width:depth shape factor of 2:1) |
Environmental Factors | Mix Property Factors | Construction Factors |
---|---|---|
Temperature | Aggregate | Rollers |
*Ground temperature | *Gradation | *Type |
*Air temperature | *Size | *Number |
*Wind speed | *Shape | *Speed and timing |
*Solar flux | *Fractured faces | *Number of passes |
*Volume | *Lift thickness | |
Asphalt Binder | Other | |
*Chemical properties | *HMA production temperature | |
*Physical properties | *Haul distance | |
*Amount | *Haul time | |
Foundation support |
Load | Number of ESALs |
---|---|
18,000 lb. single axle | 1.000 |
2,000 lb. single axle | 0.0003 |
30,000 lb. single axle | 7.9 |
18,000 lb. tandem axle | 0.109 |
40,000 lb. tandem axle | 2.06 |
Specification | Typical Range | Comments |
---|---|---|
Cut Width | 1.5 inches to 8 feet (although narrower and wider drums are available) | Drums come in specific widths. Varying widths can be made with multiple passes. |
Cut Depth | up to 10 inches per pass | It may be easier to make several shallow passes than one deep pass. |
Production Rate | 100 to 200 tons/hr for large machines | Depends on machine and pavement conditions. |
Material Size After Milling | 95% passing the 2-inch sieve | Typical size. |
Sieve Size | Restricted Zone | Control Points | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
(mm) | (U.S.) | Lower | Upper | Lower | Upper |
50 | 2 inch | 100 | – | – | – |
37.5 | 1.5 inch | 90 | 100 | – | – |
25 | 1 inch | – | 90 | – | – |
19 | 3/4 inch | – | – | – | – |
12.5 | 1/2 inch | – | – | – | – |
9.5 | 3/8 inch | – | – | – | – |
4.75 | No. 4 | – | – | 34.7 | 34.7 |
2.36 | No. 8 | 15 | 41 | 23.3 | 27.3 |
1.18 | No. 16 | – | – | 15.5 | 21.5 |
0.60 | No. 30 | – | – | 11.7 | 15.7 |
0.30 | No. 50 | – | – | 10.0 | 10.0 |
0.15 | No. 100 | – | – | – | – |
0.075 | No. 200 | 0 | 6 | – | – |
Specification | Typical Range | Comments |
---|---|---|
Cut Width | 75 mm (3 inches) to 4.5 m (14 feet) | Drums come in specific widths. Varying widths can be made with multiple passes. |
Cut Depth | up to 250 mm(10 inches) per pass | It is easier to make several shallow passes than one deep pass. |
Production Rate | 100 to 200 tons/hr for large machines | Depends on machine and pavement conditions. |
Material Size after Milling | 95% passing the 50 mm (2-inch) sieve | Typical size. |
Sieve Size | Restricted Zone | Control Points | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
(mm) | (U.S.) | Lower | Upper | Lower | Upper |
37.5 | 1.5 inch | 100 | – | – | – |
25 | 1 inch | 90 | 100 | – | – |
19 | 3/4 inch | – | 90 | – | – |
12.5 | 1/2 inch | – | – | – | – |
9.5 | 3/8 inch | – | – | – | – |
4.75 | No. 4 | – | – | 39.5 | 39.5 |
2.36 | No. 8 | 19 | 45 | 26.8 | 30.8 |
1.18 | No. 16 | – | – | 18.1 | 24.1 |
0.60 | No. 30 | – | – | 13.6 | 17.6 |
0.30 | No. 50 | – | – | 11.4 | 11.4 |
0.15 | No. 100 | – | – | – | – |
0.075 | No. 200 | 1 | 7 | – | – |
Category | Class | GVWR2 | Representative Vehicles |
---|---|---|---|
Light | 1 | 0 – 27 kN 0 – 6,000 lbs. |
pickup trucks, ambulances, parcel delivery |
2 | 27 – 45 kN (6,001 – 10,000 lbs.) |
||
3 | 45 – 62 kN (10,001 – 14,000 lbs.) |
||
Medium | 4 | 62 – 71 kN (14,001 – 16,000 lbs.) |
city cargo van, beverage delivery truck, wrecker, school bus |
5 | 71 – 87 kN (16,001 – 19,500 lbs.) |
||
6 | 87 – 116 kN (19,501 – 26,000 lbs.) |
||
7 | 116 – 147 kN (26,001 to 33,000 lbs.) |
||
Heavy | 8 | 147 kN and over (33,000 lbs. and over) |
truck tractor, concrete mixer, dump truck, fire truck, city transit bus |
Sieve Size | Restricted Zone | Control Points | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
(mm) | (U.S.) | Lower | Upper | Lower | Upper |
25 | 1 inch | 100 | – | – | – |
19 | 3/4 inch | 90 | 100 | – | – |
12.5 | 1/2 inch | – | 90 | – | – |
9.5 | 3/8 inch | – | – | – | – |
4.75 | No. 4 | – | – | – | – |
2.36 | No. 8 | 23 | 49 | 34.6 | 34.6 |
1.18 | No. 16 | – | – | 22.3 | 28.3 |
0.60 | No. 30 | – | – | 16.7 | 20.7 |
0.30 | No. 50 | – | – | 13.7 | 13.7 |
0.15 | No. 100 | – | – | – | – |
0.075 | No. 200 | 2 | 8 | – | – |
Class | Type | Description | Typical ESALs per Vehicle2 |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Motorcycles | All two- or three-wheeled motorized vehicles. Typical vehicles in this category have saddle type seats and are steered by handle bars rather than wheels. This category includes motorcycles, motor scooters, mopeds, motor-powered bicycles, and three-wheel motorcycles. This vehicle type may be reported at the option of the State. | negligible |
2 | Passenger Cars | All sedans, coupes, and station wagons manufactured primarily for the purpose of carrying passengers and including those passenger cars pulling recreational or other light trailers. | negligible |
3 | Other Two-Axle, | All two-axle, four tire, vehicles, other than passenger cars. Included in this classification are pickups, panels, vans, and other vehicles such as campers, motor homes, ambulances, hearses, and carryalls. Other two-axle, four-tire single unit vehicles pulling recreational or other light trailers are included in this classification. | Other Two-Axle, |
4 | Buses | All vehicles manufactured as traditional passenger-carrying buses with two axles and six tires or three or more axles. This category includes only traditional buses (including school buses) functioning as passenger-carrying vehicles. All two-axle, four-tire single unit vehicles. Modified buses should be considered to be a truck and be appropriately classified. | 0.57 |
5 | Two-Axle, Six-Tire, Single Unit Trucks | All vehicles on a single frame including trucks, camping and recreational vehicles, motor homes, etc., having two axles and dual rear wheels. | 0.26 |
6 | Three-Axle Single Unit Trucks | All vehicles on a single frame including trucks, camping and recreational vehicles, motor homes, etc., having three axles. | 0.42 |
7 | Four or More Axle Single Unit Trucks | All trucks on a single frame with four or more axles. | 0.42 |
8 | Four or Less Axle Single Trailer Trucks | All vehicles with four or less axles consisting of two units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit. | 0.30 |
9 | Five-Axle Single Trailer Trucks | All five-axle vehicles consisting of two units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit. | 1.20 |
10 | Six or More Axle Single Trailer Trucks | All vehicles with six or more axles consisting of two units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit. | 0.93 |
11 | Five or Less Axle Multi-Trailer Trucks | All vehicles with five or less axles consisting of three or more units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit. | 0.82 |
12 | Six-Axle Multi-Trailer Trucks | All six-axle vehicles consisting of three or more units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit. | 1.06 |
13 | Seven or More Axle Multi-Trailer Trucks | All vehicles with seven or more axles consisting of three or more units, one of which is a tractor or straight truck power unit. | 1.39 |
Sieve Size | Restricted Zone | Control Points | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
(mm) | (U.S.) | Lower | Upper | Lower | Upper |
19 | 3/4 inch | 100 | – | – | – |
12.5 | 1/2 inch | 90 | 100 | – | – |
9.5 | 3/8 inch | – | 90 | – | – |
4.75 | No. 4 | – | – | – | – |
2.36 | No. 8 | 28 | 58 | 39.1 | 39.1 |
1.18 | No. 16 | – | – | 25.6 | 31.6 |
0.60 | No. 30 | – | – | 19.1 | 23.1 |
0.30 | No. 50 | – | – | 15.5 | 15.5 |
0.15 | No. 100 | – | – | – | – |
0.075 | No. 200 | 2 | 10 | – | – |
Sieve Size | Restricted Zone | Control Points | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
(mm) | (U.S.) | Lower | Upper | Lower | Upper |
12.5 | 1/2 inch | 100 | – | – | |
9.5 | 3/8 inch | 90 | 100 | – | – |
4.75 | No. 4 | – | 90 | – | – |
2.36 | No. 8 | 32 | 67 | 47.2 | 47.2 |
1.18 | No. 16 | – | – | 31.6 | 37.6 |
0.60 | No. 30 | – | – | 23.5 | 27.5 |
0.30 | No. 50 | – | – | 18.7 | 18.7 |
0.15 | No. 100 | – | – | – | – |
0.075 | No. 200 | 2 | 10 | – | – |
Bus | ESALs/Bus | Bus | ESALs/Bus |
---|---|---|---|
AM General Diesel • Empty • 50% Full • 100% Full • 130% Full |
1.14 1.67 2.34 2.85 |
MAN 60‘ • Empty • 50% Full • 100% Full • 130% Full |
0.84 1.42 2.20 2.87 |
AM General Trolley • Empty • 50% Full • 100% Full • 130% Full |
0.80 1.22 1.78 2.19 |
Flexible Diesel • Empty • 50% Full • 100% Full • 130% Full |
0.57 0.94 1.50 1.92 |
Flyer • Empty • 50% Full • 100% Full • 130% Full |
0.96 1.45 2.11 2.61 |
GM Diesel • Empty • 50% Full • 100% Full • 130% Full |
0.58 0.95 1.46 1.84 |
Flyer Diesel • Empty • 50% Full • 100% Full • 130% Full |
0.85 1.21 1.67 2.02 |
Breda 60‘ • Empty • 50% Full • 100% Full • 130% Full |
2.53 3.63 5.11 6.17 |
MAN 40‘ • Empty • 50% Full • 100% Full • 130% Full |
1.27 1.80 2.67 3.29 |
Slab Thickness | k = 27 MPa/m (100 pci) | k = 216 MPa/m (800 pci) | k = 54 MPa/m (200 pci) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
l | L | l | L | l | L | |
225 mm (9 inches) | 1067 mm (42.0 inches) | 5.3 m (17.5 ft.) | 897 mm (35.3 inches) | 4.5 m (14.7 ft.) | 635 mm (25.0 inches) | 3.2 m (10.4 ft.) |
325 mm (13 inches) | 1405 mm (55.3 inches) | 7.0 m (23.0 ft.) | 1181 mm (46.5 inches) | 5.9 m (19.4 ft.) | 836 mm (32.9 inches) | 4.2 m (13.7 ft.) |
Axle | The common axis of rotation of one or more wheels whether power-driven or freely rotating, and whether in one or more segments, and regardless of the number of wheels carried thereon. |
Axle Group | An assemblage of two or more consecutive axles considered together in determining their combined load effect on a bridge or pavement structure. |
Automobile Transporter | Any vehicles or combination designed and used exclusively for the transport of assembled highway vehicles. |
Bus | A motor vehicle designed primarily for the transportation of persons rather than property and having a passenger-carrying capacity of 10 or more persons, other than a taxicab constructed and designed for transporting persons for commercial purposes. |
Cargo | The items or freight to be moved; including items placed on or in a vehicle, towed by a vehicle, or a vehicle itself. |
Connecting Mechanism | An arrangement of parts interconnecting two or more consecutive axles to the frame of a vehicle in such a manner as to equalize the load between axles. |
Dromedary Unit | A load carrying compartment on a truck-tractor located between the cab and the fifth wheel. |
Gross Weight | The weight of a vehicle and/or combination of vehicles plus the weight of any load thereon. |
Height | The total vertical dimension of a vehicle above the ground surface including any load and load-holding device thereon. |
Length | The total longitudinal dimension of a single vehicle, a trailer, or a semi trailer. Length of a trailer or semi trailer is measured from the front of the cargo-carrying unit to its rear, exclusive of all overhang, safety or energy efficiency devices, including air conditioning units, air compressors, flexible fender extensions, splash and spray suppressant devices, bolsters, mechanical fastening devices, and hydraulic lift gates. |
Load | A weight or quantity of anything resting upon something else regarded as its support. |
Motor Vehicle | A vehicle which is self-propelled or propelled by electric power obtained from overhead trolley wires, but not operating upon rails. |
Operator | Every person who drives or is in actual physical control of a motor vehicle upon a highway or who is exercising control over or steering a vehicle being towed by a motor vehicle. |
Owner | A person, other than a lien-holder, having the property in or title to a vehicle, including a person entitled to the use and possession of a vehicle subject to a security interest in another person, but excluding a lessee under a lease not intended as security. |
Pavement Structure | The combination of subbase, base course, and surface course placed on an earth subgrade to support the traffic load and distribute it to the roadbed. |
Quadrum Axle | Any four consecutive axles whose extreme centers are not more than 192 inches (16 ft or 4.9 m) apart and are individually attached to or articulated from, or both, a common attachment to the vehicle including a connecting mechanism designed to equalize the load between the axles. |
Regular Operation | The movement over highways of vehicles, vehicle combinations, and loads thereon, subject to the recommended limitations contained in this guide governing maximum weights and dimensions for motor vehicles and loads thereon. |
Scale Tolerance | An allowable variation in the static weight of an axle load in accordance with, but not exceeding the precision of the scale involved. |
Semi trailer | Every single vehicle without motive power designed for carrying property and so designed in conjunction and used with a motor vehicle that some part of its own weight and that of its load rests or is carried by another vehicle and having one or more load-carrying axles. |
Single Axle | An assembly of two or more wheels whose centers are in one transverse vertical plane or may be included between two parallel transverse planes 40 inches (3.3 ft or 1.0 m) apart extending across the full width of the vehicle. |
Special Permit | A written authorization to move or operate on a highway a vehicle or vehicles with or without a load of size and/or weight exceeding the limits prescribed for vehicles in regular operation. |
Special Permit Applicant | An individual, firm, partnership, corporation, or association making application for a special permit to transport a vehicle, vehicles, and/or load which is oversize or overweight and under whose authority and responsibility such vehicle or load is transported. |
Steering Axle | The axle or axles of a motor vehicle or combination of vehicles by which the same is guided or steered. |
Stinger-Steered Automobile Transporter | A truck-tractor semi trailer combination where the fifth wheel is located on a drop frame behind and below the drive axle of the power unit. In this configuration, vehicles are carried behind or both behind and above the cab of the power unit, as well as on the semi trailer. |
Tandem Axle | Any two axles whose centers are more than 40 inches (3.3 ft or 1.0 m) but not more than 96 inches (8 ft or 2.4 m) apart and are individually attached to or articulated from, or both, a common attachment to the vehicle including a connecting mechanism designed to equalize the load between axles. |
Tire, Pneumatic | A tire of rubber or other resilient material which depends upon compressed air for support of a load. |
Trailer | Every single vehicle without motive power designed for carrying property wholly on its own structure, drawn by a motor vehicle which carries no part of the weight and load of the trailer on its own wheels and having two or more load carrying axles. |
Traveled Way | The portion of the roadway for the movement of vehicles, exclusive of shoulders and auxiliary lanes. |
Tridum Axle | Any three consecutive axles whose extreme centers are not more than 144 inches (12 ft or 3.7 m) apart, and are individually attached to or articulated from, or both, a common attachment to the vehicle including a connecting mechanism designed to equalize the load between axles. |
Triple Saddle Mount | A combination of four truck-tractors where the front axle of second truck-tractor is mounted on the fifth wheel of the lead truck-tractor, the front axle of the third truck-tractor is mounted on the fifth wheel of the second truck-tractor, and the front axle of the fourth truck-tractor is mounted on the fifth wheel of the third truck-tractor; and with the rear wheels of the second, third, and fourth truck-tractors trailing on the ground behind the operating motor unit. |
Truck | A single unit motor vehicle used primarily for the transportation of property. |
Truck Tractor | A motor vehicle used primarily for drawing other vehicles and not so constructed as to carry a load other than a part of the weight of the vehicle and load so drawn. |
Turning Path | The path of a designated point on a vehicle making a specified turn. |
Turning Track Width | The radial distance between the turning paths of the outside of the outer front tire and the outside of the rear tire which is nearest the center of the turn. |
Variable Load Suspension Axles | Axles which can be regulated by the driver of the vehicle. These axles are controlled by hydraulic and air suspension systems, mechanically, or by a combination of these methods. |
Vehicle | A device in, upon, or by which any person or property may be transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices moved by human power or used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks. |
Vehicle Combination | An assembly of two or more vehicles coupled together for travel upon a highway. |
Width | The total outside transverse dimension of a vehicle including any load or load-holding devices thereon, but excluding approved safety devices and tire bulge due to load. |
where | x: | b | equals | binder |
s | equals | stone (i.e., aggregate) | ||
m | equals | mixture | ||
y: | b | equals | bulk | |
e | equals | effective | ||
a | equals | apparent | ||
m | equals | maximum |
Parameter | Typical Values | Effect of Dynamic Force |
---|---|---|
Frequency | 1,600 to 3,600 vibrations per minute | Frequency ∝ (Dynamic Force)2 |
Amplitude | 0.25 to 1.02 mm (0.01 to 0.04 inches) | Amplitude ∝ Dynamic Force |
HMA/Mat Characteristic | Frequency | Amplitude |
---|---|---|
Thin Lifts (less than about 30mm (1.25 inches)) | Operate in static mode. Under vibratory mode, as the pavement increases in density the drums may begin to bounce, which may cause the HMA to shove and become less dense. Also, some of the aggregates may be crushed. | |
Lifts between 30 mm and 65 mm (1.25 and 2.5 inches) | High Frequency | Low Amplitude |
Lifts beyond 65 mm (2.5 inches) | High Frequency | Low Amplitude |
Stiff (more viscous) HMA | High Frequency | Low Amplitude |
Laboratory Conditions | Field Conditions |
---|---|
Asphalt Binder | |
Aging is simulated using the TFO, RTFO or PAV. All of these methods are only rough simulations of actual asphalt binder aging. | Aging is much more complex – especially after construction when it is highly dependent upon construction quality and the environment. |
After mixing, the loose mix is generally aged to allow for asphalt binder absorption and an increase in viscosity. | After mixing the loose mix can be immediately transported to the construction site or can be placed in storage silos for up to a week. |
Aggregate | |
Gradation is carefully measured and controlled. | During the manufacturing process aggregate gradation will change slightly as it passes through the cold feed bins, aggregate dryer and drum mixer/pugmill. |
Aggregate used is completely dry. | Even after drying, aggregates typically contains between 0.1 – 0.5 percent by weight moisture. |
Oven heating of the aggregate usually results in uniform heating of the coarse and fine aggregate. | In a drum plant there is often a distinct temperature difference between the coarse and fine aggregate. |
Fines are retained during the mixing process. | Some fines are collected in the mix plant baghouse. If all of these fines are not put back into the mix (practically, they cannot be because baghouse efficiencies are less than 100%) the aggregate gradation will change slightly. |
If RAP is used, it is heated to the same uniform temperature as the virgin aggregate. | If RAP is used its degree of heating may be different than the virgin aggregate. |
Mixing Process | |
The mixing process occurs on essentially unaged asphalt binder for the Hveem and Marshall methods. The Superpave method roughly simulates short-term aging using the RTFO. | The mixing process can substantially age the asphalt binder. A mixing time of 45 seconds can increase asphalt binder viscosity by up to 4 times. |
Compaction | |
Compaction uses a laboratory device and a small cylindrical sample of HMA. This combination attempts to simulate the particle orientation achieved by field compaction with rollers. | Particle orientation and compactive effort can vary widely depending upon roller variables and the environment (e.g., temperature, wind speed). |
Compaction is relatively quick (< 5 minutes) and thus occurs at an almost constant temperature. | Compaction can take a significant amount of time (30 minutes or more in some cases) and thus occurs over a wide range of mix temperatures. |
Compaction occurs against a solid foundation. | Foundation rigidity will affect compaction. Compaction can occur against a range of foundations: some can be quite stiff (like old pavement) while some can be quite soft (like a clay subgrade). |
Sieve (metric) | 19.0 mm | 12.5 mm | 9.5 mm | 2.36 mm | 0.075 mm |
Sieve Size (U.S. units) | 3/4 inch | 1/2 inch | 3/8 inch | No. 8 | No. 200 |
Gradation Control Points | 100 min. | 90 – 100 | 90 max. | 28 – 58 | 2.0 – 7.0 |
Job Mix Formula (JMF) | 100 | 96 | 75 | 29 | 4.5 |
Tolerance | 99 – 100 | +/- 6% | +/- 6% | +/- 4% | +/- 2.0% |
Tolerance Limits | 99 – 100 | 90 – 100 | 69 – 81 | 25 – 33 | 2.5 – 6.5 |
Soil | γd (lb/ft3) |
---|---|
Gravel and sand | 120 – 140 |
Silts and clays | 90 – 100 |
Peat | ˜ 20 |
Material | γd (lb/ft3) |
---|---|
Gravel | 2 – 10 |
Sands | 5 – 15 |
Silts | 5 – 40 |
Clays | 10 – 50 or more |
Organic (Peat) | > 50 |
Day | Maximum | Minimum | Average | Cumulative Degree Days |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 29 | 1 | 15 | -17 |
2 | 9 | -11 | -1 | -33 |
3 | 10 | -8 | 1 | -31 |
4 | 15 | -1 | 7 | -25 |
5 | 30 | 16 | 23 | -9 |
6 | 38 | 30 | 34 | +2 |
7 | 30 | 18 | 24 | -8 |
Surface Type | “n” |
---|---|
Snow | 1.0 |
Pavements free of snow and ice | 0.9 |
Sand and gravel | 0.9 |
Turf | 0.5 |
Surface Type | “n” |
---|---|
Sand and gravel | 2.0 |
Turf | 1.0 |
Station | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-day) | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-days) | |||||||||||
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||
Aberdeen | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 24 |
Anacortes | 30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 37 |
Battle Ground | 45 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 53 |
Bellingham | 59 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 83 |
Bellingham Airport | 67 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 97 |
Bickleton | 231 | 68 | 18 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 42 | 120 |
Blaine | 68 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 100 |
Bremerton | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 28 |
Buckly | 40 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 65 |
Cedar Lake | 85 | 26 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 140 | 70 |
Centralia | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 37 |
Chelan | 262 | 110 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 149 | 560 |
Chewelah | 339 | 150 | 35 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 62 | 216 | 802 |
Chief Joseph Dam | 293 | 136 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 34 | 175 | 655 |
Clearbrook | 103 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 39 | 161 |
Station | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-day) | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-days) | |||||||||||
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||
Clearwater | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 28 |
Cle Elum | 268 | 94 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 48 | 151 | 583 |
Colfax | 226 | 45 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 99 | 408 |
Colville | 321 | 119 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 75 | 221 | 765 |
Concrete | 57 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 84 |
Coulee Dam | 284 | 107 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 155 | 595 |
Coupeville | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 39 |
Dallesport Airport | 179 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 52 | 253 |
Davenport | 315 | 133 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 66 | 198 | 737 |
Dayton | 206 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 61 | 315 |
Diablo Dam | 126 | 23 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 54 | 222 |
Electron Headworks | 78 | 20 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 40 | 154 |
Elma | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 29 |
Elwha Rngr Station | 47 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 67 |
Ephrata Airport | 285 | 98 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 41 | 167 | 596 |
Station | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-day) | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-days) | |||||||||||
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||
Everett | 35 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 46 |
Forks | 22 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 37 |
Glenoma | 47 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 73 |
Grapeview | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 24 |
Hatton | 266 | 54 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 43 | 124 | 487 |
Hoquiam | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 24 |
Kennewick | 202 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 54 | 300 |
Kent | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 36 |
Kid Valley | 43 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 67 |
Lacrosse | 248 | 42 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 103 | 423 |
Landsburg | 48 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 71 |
Laurier | 350 | 121 | 35 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 238 | 826 |
Lind | 266 | 62 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 43 | 126 | 497 |
Longview | 36 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 42 |
Millin Reservoir | 42 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 61 |
Station | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-day) | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-days) | |||||||||||
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||
Monroe | 38 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 52 |
Moses Lake | 292 | 92 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 50 | 153 | 587 |
Mt. Adams Rngr Sta. | 197 | 48 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 90 | 388 |
Moxee City | 263 | 63 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 134 | 491 |
Mud Mtn. Dam | 56 | 15 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 97 |
Newhalem | 88 | 18 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 39 | 158 |
Newport | 306 | 112 | 49 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 73 | 199 | 739 |
Northport | 275 | 94 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 46 | 174 | 608 |
Oakville | 35 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 45 |
Odessa | 273 | 82 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 41 | 144 | 549 |
Olga | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 40 |
Olympia | 31 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 51 |
Omak | 344 | 175 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 67 | 234 | 848 |
Othello | 276 | 64 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 125 | 500 |
Palmer | 58 | 14 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 102 |
Station | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-day) | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-days) | |||||||||||
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||
Pomeroy | 201 | 32 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 66 | 328 |
Port Angeles | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 20 |
Prosser | 240 | 46 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 84 | 392 |
Pullman | 243 | 77 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 38 | 118 | 476 |
Puyallup | 30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 41 |
Quilcene | 39 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 58 |
Quillayute | 22 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 36 |
Quincy | 303 | 106 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 51 | 189 | 658 |
Paradise | 254 | 161 | 161 | 85 | 27 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 19 | 103 | 219 | 1047 |
Republic | 408 | 170 | 73 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 117 | 304 | 1072 |
Richland | 199 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 54 | 294 |
Ritzville | 281 | 94 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 42 | 143 | 570 |
Rosalia | 269 | 94 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 49 | 142 | 576 |
Seattle | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 17 |
Sea-Tac | 24 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 39 |
Station | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-day) | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-days) | |||||||||||
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||
Sea U.W. | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 20 |
Sedro Wooley | 46 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 67 |
Sequim | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 28 |
Shelton | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 29 |
Snqlm. Falls | 44 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 70 |
Spokane | 299 | 108 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 58 | 178 | 667 |
Sprague | 287 | 94 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 48 | 148 | 591 |
Stampede Pass | 283 | 150 | 116 | 48 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 105 | 213 | 937 |
Startup | 38 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 58 |
Stehekin | 195 | 70 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 44 | 127 | 448 |
Sunnyside | 216 | 35 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 73 | 340 |
Tacoma City Hall | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 24 |
Vancouver | 57 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 65 |
Walla-Walla Airport | 192 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 59 | 293 |
Walla-Walla | 188 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 50 | 272 |
Station | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-day) | Mean Annual Freezing Index (°F-days) | |||||||||||
Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | ||
Wapato | 214 | 36 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 80 | 348 |
Waterville | 349 | 152 | 51 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 84 | 246 | 882 |
Wenatchee | 233 | 83 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 128 | 466 |
Wilbur | 306 | 126 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 53 | 189 | 694 |
Willapa Harbor | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 |
Wilson Creek | 276 | 79 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 42 | 163 | 566 |
Winthrop | 451 | 206 | 65 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 108 | 342 | 1172 |
Yakima | 258 | 63 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 123 | 475 |
Agency | Use of Frost Protection in Thickness Design |
---|---|
Alaska DOT | More than 50 percent but not full |
Maine DOT | More than 50 percent but not full |
Montana DOT | Frost protection not included in design |
North Dakota DOT | Frost protection not included in design |
Oregon DOT | More than 50 percent but not full |
Washington DOT | Depth > 50 percent |
Passenger Cars | Trucks | |
Single-Unit | Combination | |
$11 to $15per hour | $19 to $23per hour | $24 to $28per hour |
Activity | Noise Level (dBA) |
---|---|
Threshold of pain | 140 |
Jet flyover at 1000 feet | 110 |
Gas Lawnmover at three feet | 100 |
Loud shout | 90 |
Diesel truck at 50 feet | 90 |
Motocycle passing at 50 feet | 85 |
Blender at three feet | 85 |
Car traveling 60 mph passing at 50 feet | 80 |
Heavy traffic at 300 feet | 60 |
Normal conversation | 60 |
Quiet living room | 40 |
Average tine spacing | 13 mm (½ in.) | 26 mm (1 in.) |
---|---|---|
Example illustration | ||
Recommended actual spacing intervals (in mm) | 10/14/16/11/10/13/15/16/11/10/21/13/10 | 24/27/23/31/21/34 |
Location | Response | Reason for Use |
---|---|---|
Pavement Surface | Deflection | Used in imposing load restrictions during spring thaw and overlay design (for example) |
Bottom of HMA layer | Horizontal Tensile Strain | Used to predict fatigue failure in the HMA |
Top of Intermediate Layer (Base or Subbase) | Vertical Compressive Strain | Used to predict rutting failure in the base or subbase |
Top of Subgrade | Vertical Compressive Strain | Used to predict rutting failure in the subgrade |
Measurement | Ozone (µg/m3) | NO2 (µg/m3) | SO2(µg/m3) |
---|---|---|---|
Various sampling periods | 100 (8-hour mean) | 40 (annual mean) | 20 (24 hour mean) |
— | 200 (1 hour mean) | 500 (10 minute mean) |
Solid stainless steel |
Stainless steel clad |
Stainless steel sleeve, epoxy-coated insert |
High chromium steel |
Zinc clad |
Epoxy-coated steel |
Plain, uncoated steel |
where: | W2.5 | equals | number of applications of axle load L1 sustained by the pavement to a terminal serviceability index of 2.5 |
---|---|---|---|
L1 | equals | single axle load (kips) | |
dsn | equals | Benkelman Beam springtime measured pavement surface deflection (0.001 in.) measured at the AASHO Road Test (Spring 1959) after “disappearance of frost.” |
Source of Sound/Noise | Approximate Sound Pressure in µPa |
---|---|
Launching of the Space Shuttle | 2,000,000,000 |
Full Symphony Orchestra | 2,000,000 |
Diesel Freight Train at High Speed at 25 m | 200,000 |
Normal Conversation | 20,000 |
Soft Whispering at 2 m in Library | 2,000 |
Unoccupied Broadcast Studio | 200 |
Softest Sound Human can Hear | 20 |
Source: Environmental Protection Department, Government of Hong Kong. |
Loads to Failure | Limiting "Spring" Deflection (in.) | |
AASHO Road Test | RTAC | |
10,000 | 0.148 | 0.100 |
100,000 | 0.072 | 0.080 |
1,000,000 | 0.036 | 0.040 |
10,000,000 | 0.018 | 0.020 |
Source | dB |
---|---|
Threshold of hearing | 0 |
Rustling leaves | 20 |
Quiet whisper at 3 ft. | 30 |
Quiet street | 50 |
Inside car | 70 |
Diesel truck | 100 |
Jet at 100 ft. | 130 |
Allowed to be unprotected | Allowed to be unprotected | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Up to 8 hours | 90 decibels | |||
Up to 4 hours | 95 decibels | |||
Up to 1 hour | 105 decibels |
Layer | Elastic Modulus | Poisson’s Ratio | |
psi | MPa | ||
Asphalt Concrete | 500,000 | 3450 | 0.35 |
Crushed Stone Base | 25,000 | 172 | 0.40 |
Fine-grained Subgrade | 7,500 | 52 | 0.45 |
Equipment | Decibels | Equipment | Decibels |
---|---|---|---|
Pneumatic chip hammer | 103-113 | Earth Tamper | 90-96 |
Jackhammer | 102-111 | Crane | 90-96 |
Concrete joint cutter | 99-102 | Hammer | 87-95 |
Portable saw | 88-102 | Earthmover | 87-94 |
Stud welder | 101 | Front-end loader | 86-94 |
Bulldozer | 93-96 | Backhoe | 84-93 |
See videos, below. |
Section | AC Thickness | Base Thickness | ||
in | mm | in | mm | |
A | 2 | 50 | 6 | 150 |
B | 5 | 125 | 8 | 200 |
C | 9 | 230 | 6 | 150 |
Category | Result (dBA) |
---|---|
Average full-shift noise level | 81.4 |
Average length of work shifts | 8 hr 26 min |
% of full-shift average levels over 85 dBA | 34% |
% of full-shift average levels over 90 dBA | 10% |
% of work shifts with any noise over 115 dBA | 52% |
Average % time hearing protectors used above 85 dBA | 39% |
Average % time hearing protectors used above 115 dBA | 34% |
Note: Based on one minute samples of Leq |
Thin Pavement: z = 2 in (50 mm) |
Medium Pavement: z = 5 in (125 mm) |
Thick Pavement: z = 9 in (230 mm) |
Trade | NRR (dBA) |
---|---|
Sheet metal worker | 12 |
Insulation worker | 12 |
Electrician | 12 |
Tile setter | 12 |
Carpenter | 14 |
Cement Mason | 14 |
Ironworker | 18 |
Bricklayer | 22 |
Laborer | 24 |
Operating Engineer | 24 |
Masonry restoration worker | 26 |
Thin Pavement: z = 8 in (200 mm) |
Medium Pavement: z = 13 in (330 mm) |
Thick Pavement: z = 15 in (380 mm) |
District of Sound Source | District of Receiving Property | ||
Residential | Commercial | Industrial | |
Residential | 55 | 57 | 60 |
Commercial | 57 | 60 | 65 |
Industrial | 60 | 65 | 70 |
Pavement Response Parameter | Standard Pavement | Low Tire Load | High Tire Pressure | Stabilized Subgrade | Asphalt Treated Base | Moisture Sensitive | ||||||
inches | mm | inches | mm | inches | mm | inches | mm | inches | mm | inches | mm | |
1. Surface deflection top of AC | ||||||||||||
1.1 Section A (thin) | 0.048 | 1.219 | 0.006 | 0.152 | 0.052 | 1.321 | 0.036 | 0.914 | 0.021 | 0.533 | 0.053 | 1.346 |
1.2 Section B (med) | 0.027 | 0.686 | 0.003 | 0.076 | 0.028 | 0.711 | 0.023 | 0.584 | 0.014 | 0.356 | 0.033 | 0.838 |
1.3 Section C (thick) | 0.018 | 0.457 | 0.002 | 0.051 | 0.019 | 0.483 | 0.016 | 0.406 | 0.012 | 0.305 | 0.024 | 0.610 |
2. Horizontal tensile strain bottom of AC or ATB (x 10-6) | ||||||||||||
2.1 Section A (thin) | 469 | 121 | 735 | 369 | 193 | 482 | ||||||
2.2 Section B (med) | 279 | 44 | 352 | 246 | 88 | 433 | ||||||
2.3 Section C (thick) | 145 | 17 | 17 | 128 | 161 | 258 | 128 | 67 | 258 | |||
3. Vertical compressive strain top of subgrade (x 10-6) | ||||||||||||
3.1 Section A (thin) | -2,239 | -284 | -2,554 | -956 | -508 | -2,604 | ||||||
3.2 Section B (med) | -755 | -79 | -790 | -431 | -222 | -1,037 | ||||||
3.3 Section C (thick) | -371 | -371 | -38 | -375 | -375 | -245 | -245 | -169 | -169 | -608 | -608 |
District of Sound Source | District of Receiving Property | ||
Residential | Commercial | Industrial | |
Residential | 45 | 57 | 60 |
Commercial | 47 | 60 | 65 |
Industrial | 50 | 65 | 70 |
Functional Classification | Recommended Level of Reliability | |
Urban | Rural | |
Interstate and Other Freeways | 85 – 99.9 | 80 – 99.9 |
Principal Arterials | 80 – 99 | 75 – 95 |
Collectors | 80 – 95 | 75 – 95 |
Local | 50 – 80 | 50 – 80 |
Gsa | equals | Apparent specific gravity of the aggregate | Ws | equals | Oven-dry weight of aggregate | |
Gb | equals | Asphalt binder specific gravity | VS | equals | volume of the solids | |
Gsb | equals | Bulk specific gravity of the aggregate | Vpp | equals | volume of water permeable pores | |
Gse | equals | Effective specific gravity of the aggregate | Vap | equals | volume of pores absorbing asphalt | |
Gmb | equals | Bulk specific gravity of the compacted mixture | Pb | equals | Asphalt content by weight of mix (percent) | |
Gmm | equals | Maximum theoretical specific gravity of the HMA mixture | Ps | equals | Aggregate content by weight of mix (percent) | |
G1 | equals | Coarse aggregate specific gravity (retained on the 4.75 mm (No. 4) sieve) | P1 | equals | Coarse aggregate fraction (retained on the 4.75 mm (No. 4) sieve) | |
G2 | equals | Fine aggregate specific gravity (between the 4.75 mm (No. 4) and 0.075 mm (No. 200) sieve) | P2 | equals | Fine aggregate fraction (between the 4.75 mm (No. 4) and 0.075 mm (No. 200) sieve) | |
G3 | equals | Mineral filler specific gravity (passing the 0.075 mm (No. 200) sieve) | P3 | equals | Mineral filler fraction (passing the 0.075 mm (No. 200) sieve) | |
γW | equals | Unit weight of water | Vpp – Vap | equals | volume of water permeable pores not absorbing asphalt |
Situation | Possible Truck Type | Reason |
---|---|---|
Paving on congested city streets | End Dump | Better maneuverability because it has no trailer and is smaller than a bottom dump or live bottom truck. |
Paving using a mix highly vulnerable to segregation | Live Bottom | Live bottom trucks deliver the HMA by conveyor, which minimizes segregation. |
Paving on rural highways | Bottom Dump | Usually has a larger capacity than end dump trucks (therefore fewer trucks are needed) but requires space and equipment for windrows. |
Rock Type | Hardness, Toughness | Resistance to Stripping1,2 | Surface Texture | Crushed Shape |
---|---|---|---|---|
Igneous | ||||
Granite | Fair | Fair | Fair | Fair |
Syenite | Good | Fair | Fair | Fair |
Diorite | Good | Fair | Fair | Good |
Basalt (trap rock) | Good | Good | Good | Good |
Diabase (trap rock) | Good | Good | Good | Good |
Gabbro (trap rock) | Good | Good | Good | Good |
Sedimentary | ||||
Limestone | Poor | Good | Good | Fair |
Sandstone | Fair | Good | Good | Good |
Chert | Good | Fair | Poor | Good |
Shale | Poor | Poor | Fair | Fair |
Metamorphic | ||||
Gneiss | Fair | Fair | Good | Good |
Schist | Fair | Fair | Good | Fair |
Slate | Good | Fair | Fair | Fair |
Quartzite | Good | Fair | Good | Good |
Marble | Poor | Good | Fair | Fair |
Serpentine | Good | Fair | Fair | Fair |
Notes:
|
Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size | Minimum Sample Mass, g | |
U.S. | Metric | |
1.5 inches | 37.5 mm | 4000 |
1.0 inches | 25.0 mm | 3000 |
0.75 inches | 19.0 mm | 2000 |
0.5 inches | 12.5 mm | 1500 |
.375 inches | 9.5 mm | 1200 |
No. 4 | 4.75 mm | 1200 |
State | Use of Frost Protection in Thickness Design |
---|---|
Alaska | Pavement structure > 50 percent of freeze depth |
Maine | Pavement structure > 50 percent of freeze depth |
Oregon | Pavement structure > 50 percent of freeze depth |
Washington | Pavement structure > 50 percent of freeze depth |
Ohio | Remove and replace frost susceptible materials |
Utah | Remove and replace frost susceptible materials |
Idaho | Capillary break / rock cap |
Material | Resilient Modulus (MR) | |
MPa | psi | |
HMA at 32°F (0 °C) | 14,000 | 2,000,000 |
HMA at 70°F (21 °C) | 3,500 | 500,000 |
HMA at 120°F (49 °C) | 150 | 20,000 |
Axle Type (lbs) | Axle Load | Load Equivalency Factor (from AASHTO, 1993) | ||
(kN) | (lbs) | Flexible | Rigid | |
Single axle | 8.9 44.5 62.3 80.0 89.0 133.4 |
2,000 10,000 14,000 18,000 20,000 30,000 |
0.0003 0.118 0.399 1.000 1.4 7.9 |
0.0002 0.082 0.341 1.000 1.57 8.28 |
Tandem axle | 8.9 44.5 62.3 80.0 89.0 133.4 151.2 177.9 222.4 |
2,000 10,000 14,000 18,000 20,000 30,000 34,000 40,000 50,000 |
0.0001 0.011 0.042 0.109 0.162 0.703 1.11 2.06 5.03 |
0.0001 0.013 0.048 0.133 0.206 1.14 1.92 3.74 9.07 |
Material | Value | Specification | HMA Distress of Concern |
---|---|---|---|
HMA | Tensile strength ratio | ≥ 0.80 | Moisture damage, stripping |
Material of concern | Value | Specification | HMA Distress |
---|---|---|---|
PAV residue | Creep stiffness at 60 s | ≤ 300 MPa (43.5 psi) | Low temperature cracking |
PAV residue | m-value at 60 s | ≥ 0.300 | Low temperature cracking |
Material of Concern | Value | Specification | HMA Distress |
---|---|---|---|
PAV residue | Failure strain | ≥ 1.0% at 1.0 mm/min (0.039 inch/min) | Low temperature cracking |
Temperature | Simulation |
---|---|
194°F (90°C) | cold climate |
212°F (100°C) | moderate climate |
230°F (110°C) | hot climate |
Material | Value | Specification | Property of Concern |
---|---|---|---|
Unaged binder | Dynamic viscosity | ≤ 3 Pa•s | Pumping, mixing and workability |
Curing Time | Portland Cement Type | |||||||
I | IA | II | IIA | III | IIIA | IV | V | |
1 day | - | - | - | - | 12.4 (1800) |
10.0 (1450) |
- | - |
3 days | 12.4 (1800) |
10.0 (1450) |
10.3 (1500) |
8.3 (1200) |
24.1 (3500) |
19.3 (2800) |
- | 8.3 (1200) |
7 days | 19.3 (2800) |
15.5 (2250) |
17.2 (2500) |
13.8 (2000) |
- | - | 6.9 (1000) |
15.2 (2200) |
28 days | - | - | - | - | - | - | 17.2 (2500) |
20.7 (3000) |
Note: Type II and IIA requirements can be lowered if either an optional heat of hydration or chemical limit on the sum of C3S and C3A is specified |
Chemical Name | Chemical Formula | Shorthand Notation | Percent by Weight |
---|---|---|---|
Tricalcium Silicate | 3CaO×SiO2 | C3S | 50 |
Dicalcium Silicate | 2CaO×SiO2 | C2S | 25 |
Tricalcium Aluminate | 3CaO×Al2O3 | C3A | 12 |
Tetracalcium Aluminoferrite | 4CaO×Al2O3×Fe2O3 | C4AF | 8 |
Gypsum | CaSO4×H2O | CSH2 | 3.5 |
Type | Name | Purpose |
---|---|---|
I | Normal | General-purpose cement suitable for most purposes. |
IA | Normal-Air Entraining | An air-entraining modification of Type I. |
II | Moderate Sulfate Resistance | Used as a precaution against moderate sulfate attack. It will usually generate less heat at a slower rate than Type I cement. |
IIA | Moderate Sulfate Resistance-Air Entraining | An air-entraining modification of Type II. |
III | High Early Strength | Used when high early strength is needed. It is has more C3S than Type I cement and has been ground finer to provide a higher surface-to-volume ratio, both of which speed hydration. Strength gain is double that of Type I cement in the first 24 hours. |
IIIA | High Early Strength-Air Entraining | An air-entraining modification of Type III. |
IV | Low Heat of Hydration | Used when hydration heat must be minimized in large volume applications such as gravity dams. Contains about half the C3S and C3A and double the C2S of Type I cement. |
V | High Sulfate Resistance | Used as a precaution against severe sulfate action – principally where soils or groundwaters have a high sulfate content. It gains strength at a slower rate than Type I cement. High sulfate resistance is attributable to low C3A content. |
Test Method | Set Type | Time Specification |
---|---|---|
Vicat | Initial | ≥ 45 minutes |
Final | ≤ 375 minutes | |
Gillmore | Initial | ≥ 60 minutes |
Final | ≤ 600 minutes |
Steering axle @ 14,000 lb | equals | 0.47 ESAL |
Drive axle @ 34,000 lb | equals | 1.15 ESAL |
Pole axle @ 30,000 lb | equals | 0.79 ESAL |
Total | equals | 2.41 ESAL |
where: | W18 | equals | predicted number of 80 kN (18,000 lb.) ESALs |
ZR | equals | standard normal deviate | |
So | equals | combined standard error of the traffic prediction and performance prediction | |
SN | equals | Structural Number (an index that is indicative of the total pavement thickness required) | |
equals | a1D1 + a2D2m2 + a3D3m3+…ai = ithlayer coefficientDi = ithlayer thickness (inches)mi = ith layer drainage coefficient | ||
ΔPSI | equals | difference between the initial design serviceability index, po, and the design terminal serviceability index, pt | |
MR | equals | subgrade resilient modulus (in psi) |
Reducing a sample to testing size | 5 – 10 minutes |
Washing the sample | 5 – 10 minutes |
Drying to a constant mass | 8 – 12 hours (overnight) |
Time in rotating drum | 15 minutes |
Sieving and rewashing | 30 minutes |
Drying to a constant mass | 8 – 12 hours (overnight) |
Final weighing | 5 – 10 minutes |
Mix Criteria | Light Traffic (less than 104ESALs) | Medium Traffic (104 – 106ESALs) | Heavy Traffic (greater than 106ESALs) | |||
Min. | Max. | Min. | Max. | Min. | Max. | |
Compaction (number of blows on each end of the sample) | 35 | 50 | 75 | |||
Stability (minimum) | 2224 N (500 lbs.) | 3336 N (750 lbs.) | 6672 N (1500 lbs.) | |||
Flow (0.25 mm (0.01 inch)) | 8 | 20 | 8 | 18 | 8 | 16 |
Percent Air Voids | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 |
Existing Pavement Condition | Application Rate in liters/m2 (gallons/yd2) | Residual Undiluted | Diluted 1:1 with Water |
---|---|---|---|
New HMA | 0.14 - 0.18 (0.03 - 0.04) |
0.23 - 0.32 (0.05 - 0.07) |
0.45 - 0.59 (0.10 - 0.13) |
Oxidized HMA | 0.18 - 0.27 (0.04 - 0.06) |
0.32 - 0.45 (0.07 - 0.10) |
0.59 - 0.91 (0.13 - 0.20) |
Milled HMA | 0.27 - 0.36 (0.06 - 0.08) |
0.45 - 0.59 (0.10 - 0.13) |
0.91 - 1.22 (0.20 - 0.27) |
Milled PCC | 0.27 - 0.36 (0.06 - 0.08) |
0.45 - 0.59 (0.10 - 0.13) |
0.91 - 1.22 (0.20 - 0.27) |
PCC | 0.18 - 0.27 (0.04 - 0.06) |
0.32 - 0.45 (0.07 - 0.10) |
0.59 - 0.91 (0.13 - 0.20) |
Note: Before deciding to use ATPB, the Pavement Research Center’s research results should be carefully considered.
Low Traffic | Medium Traffic | High Traffic | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
< 300,000 ESALs | 300,000 - 10 million ESALs | > 10 million ESALs | ||||||||||
Course | Dense | SMA | OGFC | ATPB | Dense | SMA | OGFC | ATPB | Dense | SMA | OGFC | ATPB |
Surface | ||||||||||||
Intermediate | ||||||||||||
Base | ||||||||||||
= Appropriate | ||||||||||||
= Moderately Appropriate | ||||||||||||
empty | = Not Appropriate |
Material | Elastic Modulus | |
MPa | psi | |
Diamond | 1,200,000 | 170,000,000 |
Steel | 200,000 | 30,000,000 |
Glass Fibers | 71,000 | 10,600,000 |
Aluminum | 70,000 | 10,000,000 |
Wood | 7,000 - 14,000 | 1,000,000 - 2,000,000 |
Crushed Stone | 150-300 | 20,000 - 40,000 |
Silty Soils | 35 - 150 | 5,000 - 20,000 |
Clay Soils | 35 - 100 | 5,000 - 15,000 |
Rubber | 7 | 1,000 |
Material | Value | Specification | HMA Distress of Concern |
---|---|---|---|
Unaged binder | G*/sinδ | ≥ 1.0 kPa (0.145 psi) | Rutting |
RTFO residue | G*/sinδ | ≥ 2.2 kPa (0.319 psi) | Rutting |
PAV residue | G*sinδ | ≤ 5000 kPa (725 psi) | Fatigue cracking |
Parameter | Threshold Value (contractor must take action above this value) |
---|---|
IRI | 2.1 m/km (133 inches/mile) |
Rut depth | 9 mm (0.375 inches) |
Surface Friction | average of 35 but no single section < 25 |
Transverse Cracking | Severity 2 (as defined by the Indiana DOT) |
Longitudinal Cracking | 5.5 m (18 ft.) per 152.5 m (500 ft.) section |
Type of Construction | Slump | |
(mm) | (inches) | |
Reinforced foundation walls and footings | 25 – 75 | 1 – 3 |
Plain footings, caissons and substructure walls | 25 – 75 | 1 – 3 |
Beams and reinforced walls | 25 – 100 | 1 – 4 |
Building columns | 25 – 100 | 1 – 4 |
Pavements and slabs | 25 – 75 | 1 – 3 |
Mass concrete | 25 – 50 | 1 – 2 |
Specifications | Fixed Form | Slip Form | ||
(mm) | (inches) | (mm) | (inches) | |
Typical | 25 – 75 | 1 – 3 | 0 – 75 | 0 – 3 |
Extremes | as low as 25 as high as 175 |
as low as 1 as high as 7 |
as low as 0 as high as 125 |
as low as 0 as high as 5 |
General Soil Type | USC Soil Type | CBR Range |
---|---|---|
Coarse-grained soils | GW | 40 - 80 |
GP | 30 - 60 | |
GM | 20 - 60 | |
GC | 20 - 40 | |
SW | 20 - 40 | |
SP | 10 - 40 | |
SM | 10 - 40 | |
SC | 5 - 20 | |
Fine-grained soils | ML | 15 or less |
CL LL < 50% | 15 or less | |
OL | 5 or less | |
MH | 10 or less | |
CH LL > 50% | 15 or less | |
OH | 5 or less |
Slump | Mixing Water Quantity in kg/m3 (lb/yd3) for the listed Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size | |||||||
9.5 mm (0.375 in.) |
12.5 mm (0.5 in.) |
19 mm (0.75 in.) |
25 mm (1 in.) |
37.5 mm (1.5 in.) |
50 mm (2 in.) |
75 mm (3 in.) |
100 mm (4 in.) |
|
Non-Air-Entrained PCC | ||||||||
25 – 50 (1 – 2) |
207 (350) |
199 (335) |
190 (315) |
179 (300) |
166 (275) |
154 (260) |
130 (220) |
113 (190) |
75 – 100 (3 – 4) |
228 (385) |
216 (365) |
205 (340) |
193 (325) |
181 (300) |
169 (285) |
145 (245) |
124 (210) |
150 – 175 (6 – 7) |
243 (410) |
228 (385) |
216 (360) |
202 (340) |
190 (315) |
178 (300) |
160 (270) |
- |
Typical entrapped air (percent) | 3 | 2.5 | 2 | 1.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.2 |
Air-Entrained PCC | ||||||||
25 – 50 (1 – 2) |
181 (305) |
175 (295) |
168 (280) |
160 (270) |
148 (250) |
142 (240) |
122 (205) |
107 (180) |
150 – 175 (6 – 7) |
216 (365) |
205 (345) |
197 (325) |
184 (310) |
174 (290) |
166 (280) |
154 (260) |
- |
Recommended Air Content (percent) | ||||||||
Mild Exposure | 4.5 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 1.0 |
Moderate Exposure | 6.0 | 5.5 | 5.0 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 3.0 |
Severe Exposure | 7.5 | 7.0 | 6.0 | 6.0 | 5.5 | 5.0 | 4.5 | 4.0 |