REFERENCES. Ajdukiewicz A., Kilszczewicz Alina, Influence of recycled aggregates on mechanical properties of HS/HPC Cement Composites

Transcription

1 REFERENCES Ajdukiewicz A., Kilszczewicz Alina, Influence of recycled aggregates on mechanical properties of HS/HPC Cement Composites Chesner, W. H. White Paper and Specification for Reclaimed Concrete Aggregate for Unbound Soil Aggregate Base Course. Recycled Materials Resource Center, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, Chini, A. R., and F. Monteiro. Use of Crushed concrete material as a Base Course. In Proceedings of the Associated School of Construction, San Luis Obispo, CA, Accessed April 15, Concrete Paving Technology: Recycling Concrete Pavement. Publication TB-014P. American Concrete Pavement Association, Skokie, IL, Das, B. M. Principles of Geotechnical Engineering, Fifth Edition. Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove, CA, European Commission Report. Construction and demolition waste management practices and their impacts, Federal Highway Administration (1998) Life-Cycle Cost Analysis in Pavement Design- Interim Technical Bulletin, Publication No. FHWA-SA Griffiths, C. T., and J. M. Krstulovich, Jr. Utilization of Recycled Materials in Illinois Highway Construction. Publication IL-PRR-142. Illinois Department of Transportation, Springfield, IL, May Accessed April 15,

2 Guthrie, W. S., S. Sebesta, and T. Scullion. Modulus Matters for Cement-Treated Materials. In Proceedings of the Texas Section Spring Meeting, American Society of Civil Engineers, Arlington, TX, 2002, pp Guthrie, W. S., and T. Scullion. Assessing Aggregate Strength and Frost Susceptibility Characteristics with the Tube Suction Test. In Proceedings of the Texas Section, American Society of Civil Engineers, Fall Meeting, El Paso, TX, 2000, pp Hansen, T. C. Recycling of Demolished Concrete and Masonry. RILEM Report 6, E & FN Spon, London, England, Hendriks Ch.F, Pietersen H.S., RILEM Report 22- Sustainable Raw Materials - Construction and Demolition Waste, RILEM Publications, Cedex, France, Hillel, D. Environmental Soil Physics. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, Independence Recycling, Inc., Valley View, OH. Accessed April 15, Little, D. N. Handbook for Stabilization of Pavement Subgrades and Base Courses with Lime. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, IA, Livneh, M., I. Ishai, and N. A. Livneh. Effect of Vertical Confinement on Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Strength Values in Pavement and Subgrade Evaluation. In Transportation Research Record 1473, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1995, pp Mallick, R. B., P. S. Kandhal, E. R. Brown, R. L. Bradbury, and E. J. Kearney. Development of Rational and Practical Mix Design System for Full Depth Reclaimed (FDR) Mixes. Recycled Materials Resource Center, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH,

3 Mindess, S., J. F. Young, and D. Darwin. Concete, Second Edition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Petrarca, R. W., and V. A. Galdiero. Summary of Testing of Recycled Crushed Concrete. In Transportation Research Record 989, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1984, pp Poon C.S, Azhar, S. An investigation on the scope and applications of recycled aggregates in the Hong Kong construction industry, (2000), pp Quality Control for Recycled Concrete as a Structural Fill Material. Recycling Technology Assistance Partnership, Seattle, WA. January Accessed October 15, Reclaimed Concrete Aggregate for Unbound Soil-Aggregate Base Course. AASHTO M American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Standard Specifications, Washington, DC., Reclaimed Concrete Material. Turner-Fairbanks Highway Research Center, Federal Highway Administration, McLean, VA. Undated. Accessed April, 2005 Recycling Concrete and Masonry. Publication EV 22. Environmental Council of Concrete Organizations, Skokie, IL, Accessed April 15, Robinson, J. W. Undergraduate Instrumental Analysis. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, NY,

4 Saarenketo, T., T. Scullion, and P. Kolisoja. Moisture Susceptibility and Electrical Properties of Base Course Aggregates. In Fifth International Conference on the Bearing Capasity of Roads and Airfields, Trondheim, Norway, 1998, pp Scullion, T., and T. Saarenketo. Using Suction and Dielectric Measurements as Performance Indicators for Aggregate Base Materials. In Transportation Research Record 1577, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1997, pp Standard Specification for Construction Material of Roads and Bridges, ICTAD, October 2005 Troxler Model 3440 Roadreader. Troxler Electronic Laboratories, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, April Accessed June 15, Yrjanson, W. A. Recycling of Portland Cement Concrete Pavements. National Cooperative Highway Research Program Synthesis of Highway Practice 154, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, December

5 APPENDIX A AASHTO Flexible Pavement Design Charts 75

6 76

7 APPENDIX B TRRL RN31 Design Charts 77

8 78

9 79

10 80

11 81

12 82

13 APPENDIX C Plate load test reading DGAB 4" Distance Plate load deflection readings Edge of plate Edge of plate 17mm 38mm 43mm 45mm 53mm 70mm Load DGAB 6" Distance Edge of plate Edge of plate 17mm 38mm 43mm 45mm 53mm 70mm Load

14 DGAB 8" Distance Edge of plate Edge of plate 17mm 38mm 43mm 45mm 53mm 70mm Load CCM 6" Distance Edge of plate Edge of plate 17mm 38mm 43mm 45mm 53mm 70mm Load CCM 8" Distance Edge of plate Edge of plate 17mm 38mm 43mm 45mm 53mm 70mm Load

15 CCM 10" Distance Edge of plate Edge of plate 17mm 38mm 43mm 45mm 53mm 70mm Load CCM 12.5" Distance Edge of plate Edge of plate 17mm 38mm 43mm 45mm 53mm 70mm Load

16 APPENDIX D Deflection readings for 90 cm & 100 cm indicate inferred values from deflection basin Distance (cm) Settlement (mm) ABC 4" ABC 6" ABC 8" CCM 6" Settlement with different layer thickness for 10 kn static plate load Distance (cm) Settlement(m m) ABC 4" ABC 6" ABC 8" CCM 6" Settlement with different layer thickness for 20 kn static plate load 86

17 Distance (cm) Settlement( mm) ABC 4" ABC 6" ABC 8" CCM 6" Settlement with different layer thickness for 30 kn static plate load Distance (cm) Settlement( mm) ABC 4" ABC 6" ABC 8" CCM 6" Settlement with different layer thickness for 40 kn static plate load 87

18 APPENDIX E Back calculation Results Back-Calculation by Evercalc - Detail Output Route: Base Layer Plate Radius (in): 6 No. of Layers: 3 No of Sensors: 6 Stiff Layer: Offsets (in) P-Ratio: Station: No of Drops: 4 Average RMS Error (%): 2.26 Thickness (in): 6.00 Pavement Temperature (F): 77.0 Material No: DGAB 4 Load (lbf): No of Iterations: 5 Convergence: Modulus Tolerance Satisfied RMS Error (%): 1.24 Sensor No: Measured Deflection (microns): Calculated Deflection (microns): Difference (%): Layer No: (adj) Seed Moduli (MPa): N/A Calculated Moduli (MPa): Layer No: Radial Distance (in): Position Bottom Middle Top Vertical Stress (psi): Radial Stress (psi): Bulk Stress (psi): Deviator Stress (psi): Vertical Strain (10-6 ): Radial Strain (10-6 ): Material No: DGAB 6 Load (lbf): No of Iterations: 5 Convergence: Modulus Tolerance Satisfied RMS Error (%): 1.23 Sensor No: Measured Deflection (microns): Calculated Deflection (microns): Difference (%): Layer No: (adj) Seed Moduli (MPa): N/A Calculated Moduli (MPa): Layer No: Radial Distance (in): Position Bottom Middle Top Vertical Stress (psi): Radial Stress (psi):

19 Bulk Stress (psi): Deviator Stress (psi): Vertical Strain (10-6 ): Radial Strain (10-6 ): Material No: DGAB 8 Load (lbf): No of Iterations: 5 Convergence: Modulus Tolerance Satisfied RMS Error (%): 2.93 Sensor No: Measured Deflection (microns): Calculated Deflection (microns): Difference (%): Layer No: (adj) Seed Moduli (MPa): N/A Calculated Moduli (MPa): Layer No: Radial Distance (in): Position Bottom Middle Top Vertical Stress (psi): Radial Stress (psi): Bulk Stress (psi): Deviator Stress (psi): Vertical Strain (10-6 ): Radial Strain (10-6 ): Material No: CCM 6 Load (lbf): No of Iterations: 5 Convergence: Modulus Tolerance Satisfied RMS Error (%): 2.70 Sensor No: Measured Deflection (microns): Calculated Deflection (microns): Difference (%): Layer No: (adj) Seed Moduli (MPa): N/A Calculated Moduli (MPa): Layer No: Radial Distance (in): Position Bottom Middle Top Vertical Stress (psi): Radial Stress (psi): Bulk Stress (psi): Deviator Stress (psi): Vertical Strain (10-6 ): Radial Strain (10-6 ):

20 Material No: CCM 8 Load (lbf): No of Iterations: 5 Convergence: Modulus Tolerance Satisfied RMS Error (%): 2.51 Sensor No: Measured Deflection (microns): Calculated Deflection (microns): Difference (%): Layer No: (adj) Seed Moduli (MPa): N/A Calculated Moduli (MPa): Layer No: Radial Distance (in): Position Bottom Middle Top Vertical Stress (psi): Radial Stress (psi): Bulk Stress (psi): Deviator Stress (psi): Vertical Strain (10-6 ): Radial Strain (10-6 ): Material No: CCM 10 Load (lbf): No of Iterations: 5 Convergence: Modulus Tolerance Satisfied RMS Error (%): 2.85 Sensor No: Measured Deflection (microns): Calculated Deflection (microns): Difference (%): Layer No: (adj) Seed Moduli (MPa): N/A Calculated Moduli (MPa): Layer No: Radial Distance (in): Position Bottom Middle Top Vertical Stress (psi): Radial Stress (psi): Bulk Stress (psi): Deviator Stress (psi): Vertical Strain (10-6 ): Radial Strain (10-6 ): Material No: CCM 12.5 Load (lbf): No of Iterations: 5 Convergence: Modulus Tolerance Satisfied RMS Error (%): 2.34 Sensor No: Measured Deflection (microns): Calculated Deflection (microns):

21 Difference (%): Layer No: (adj) Seed Moduli (MPa): N/A Calculated Moduli (MPa): Layer No: Radial Distance (in): Position Bottom Middle Top Vertical Stress (psi): Radial Stress (psi): Bulk Stress (psi): Deviator Stress (psi): Vertical Strain (10-6 ): Radial Strain (10-6 ): Layer No: (adj) Mean Moduli (MPa): Normalized Moduli (MPa): K1 (MPa): N/A N/A K2: N/A N/A R-Squared: N/A N/A Soil Type: N/A Coarse Fine N/A 91

22 Back-calculation by Evercalc- Summary Output Route: Base Layer Plate Radius (in): 6 No. of Layers: 3 No of Sensors: 6 Stiff Layer: Offsets (in) P-Ratio: Station Load(lbf) E(1)(ksi) E(2)(ksi) E(3)(ksi) E(4)(ksi) Eadj(ksi) RMS Error DGAB material (4" thick) DGAB material (6" thick) DGAB material (8" thick) CCM (6" thick) CCM (8" thick) CCM (10" thick) CCM (12" thick)

23 APPENDIX F Test result for subgrade soil Determine optimum Moisture content and optimum dry density in subgrade soil moisture content set1 moisture content set 2 trial no mass of mould mass of mould + soil (g) can no mass of wet soil+can (g) mass of dry soil+can (g) mass of can (g) mc 1% can no mass of wet soil + can (g) mass of dry soil +can (g) mass of can (g) mc 2 % Av.mc buli density (kg/m3) dry density (kg/m3)

24 Test result for soil type I Determine optimum Moisture content and optimum dry density in soil type I 94

25 Determine achieved compaction in soil type I Sand cone test for soil type I Determination of density of sand Mass of bottle (kg) Mass of bottle filled with sand (kg) mass of bottle and sand after inverting on a flat surface mass of bottle and sand after filling the hole (kg) 7.12 volume of bottle (m3) bulk deasity of sand (kg/m3) Determine of bulk density of soil mass of wet soil + pan (kg) mass of pan (kg) mass of wet soil (kg) volume of hole (m3) bulk density of soil kg/m Moisture content determination can no weight of + can (g) weight of dry soil + can (g) weight of can + wet soil (g) weight of dry soil (g) weight fo water (g) moisture content % dry density kg/m max dry density kg/m3 relative compaction % =

26 Atterberg limit test for soil type I 96

27 CBR value in soil type I N/in i (i ) 0.1 penetration - 0.6/6.3*100 = 9.52% 10% 0.2 penetration 1.08/10.3*100 = 10.4% 10% Therefore 0.2 penetration consider as a CBR result of 10% 97

28 DGAB Requirements Based on SSCM APPENDIX G Table E1 : Aggregate grading, binder content and thickness requirements Mix Classification No. Nominal Maximum Size of Aggregate in mm Course Dense Graded Open Graded Dense Graded Open Graded Thickness mm Max. Min Sieve Size Total % of Weight Passing mm µm Percent binder content by total weight of mix

29 Table E2 : Strength Layer Coefficients Layer Structural Coefficient Single surface dressing 0.10 Sand seal, hot bitumen application (*) Double surface dressing 0.20 Asphalt concrete (high stability) 0.40 Hot rolled asphalt (surfacing) Flexible bituminous surfacing 0.30 Bitumen macadam road base 0.30 Bitumen bound base, asphalt treated base 0.30 Penetration macadam 0.20 (*) Dense graded crushed stone base (CBR 110) 0.14 Water bound and dry bound macadam 0.14 Single sized aggregate base (*) Granular base (CBR 80) 0.12 Cem. Or Lime stab. base ( MPa) Cem. Or Lime stab. base ( MPa) Cem. Or Lime stab. Base (CBR 80) 0.12 (*) Cem. Or Lime stab. Subbase ( MPa) 0.11 Granular subbase (CBR 30) 0.11 Granular subbase (CBR 20) Capping layer (CBR 15) 0.09 Granular subbase/ capping layer (CBR 8) 0.07 (*) Inferred value Based on the indications given by the AASHTO guide for design of pavement structures, 1986, as well as by the HDM III Model (The Highway Design and Maintenance Standards Model, 1987), the following structural layer coefficient may be adopted in Sri Lanka for the different materials considered in the design of pavements. 99