TxDOT Chip Seal Over Geotextile Fabric. Research Project

Similar documents
Micro-Surface Premature Distress SH 19 Hopkins County, Paris District

UNDERSTANDING PMIS: RIDE, PATCHING, AND OTHER FACTORS. Darlene C. Goehl, P.E. Dist. Pavement-Materials Engr. TxDOT - BRY

Austin District s New PM Overlay Program

Guidelines on Design and Construction of High Performance Thin HMA Overlays

Performance of Interstate 35 Owatonna, MN January 27, 2003

Texas A&M Transportation Institute Texas Department of Transportation

Pavement Preservation and Thin Lift Asphalt NCAUPG and Illinois Bituminous Paving Conference February 3, 2015

Comparative Analysis of Emulsion and Hot Asphalt Cement Chip Seal Performance. Douglas D. Gransberg, P.E., C.C.E. University of Oklahoma

Austin District Perspective

Rehabilitation Recommendations for FM 97 in Gonzales County

THINLAY ASPHALT FOR PAVEMENT PRESERVATION

Mitigation Strategies for Reflective Cracking in Pavements. Mostafa Elseifi Nirmal Dhakal

Flexible Pavement of Ohio

JOINTED PCC PAVEMENTS

Thin Hot Mix Asphalt Overlays

Pavement Management Systems PMS PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS OVERVIEW. Dr. Nick Vitillo

Scoping & Design Project Level. By Robert J. Blight Principal Engineer Pavement Management & Technology

Article Construction, Section E. Production Operations, Section 2. Mixing and Discharge of Materials Where We Are Now

Construction and Materials Tips

PAVEMENT DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

RECLAIMED GLASS AGGREGATE DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

Pennsylvania s Experience with Thin Asphalt Overlays

Asphalt Rubber Surface Treatment & SAMIs in Pavement Preservation

Integrating the Rolling Wheel Deflectometer (RWD) into Pavement Management to Support an Effective Pavement Preservation Program

PROJECT SUMMARY REPORT

Pavement Management Systems

Warranties for Pavement Preservation Treatments. Top Reasons to use a Warranty. Second: What Warranties are not 52 ANNUAL IDAHO ASPHALT CONFERENCE

What s New in Pavement Preservation? Tom Wood Pavement Specialist

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Background of Existing Facility 3. Proposed Work 4

Kevin King TXI 2002 Current, TXI Highway Sales/Marketing Manager; Lightweight i Aggregate Division TxAPA Seal Coat Committee Chairman 2003-C

Optimizing Use of Highway M&R Funds by Integrating RWD Data into PMS Decision Making

Ohio Asphalt Paving Conference

Pavement Preservation: Theory and Treatments. APWA Norcal Conference Presented by: Telfer Pavement Technologies,LLC Cesar Lara

SECTION 14 - RESTORATION OF SURFACES TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents PERMIAN BASIN MPO TIP 2

VDOT MECHANSTIC EMPIRICAL PAVEMENT DESIGN (MEPDG) IMPLEMENTATION

Pavement Maintenance Best Practices. Thomas J. Wood

PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM. Rater s Manual FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010 APR. 2009

SOM August 2009 Alaska

Future Trends. Asphalt Rubber. Gregory S. Cleveland, P.E. TxDOT Construction Division. f HMA. f 1

2012 NCAT Pavement Test Track Pavement Preservation Study. NE Pavement Preservation Partnership April 7, 2014 Burlington, VT Mary Robbins

The problem: Pavement preservation and the multiple criteria considered in the decision making process A helpful tool: The Analytic Hierarchy Process

BEST PRACTICES FOR EDGE CRACKING

Kane County Pavement Management System Update Maintenance and Rehabilitation Plan. ARA Project No

Using Chip Seals & Fog Seals in Pavement Maintenance. Thomas J. Wood Research Project Supervisor MnDOT s Office of Materials & Road Research

Scrub Seals. Doug Olsen. Western Emulsions is committed to Sustainable Solutions for Pavement Preservation and Recycling

Metropolitan Planning Organization Safety Performance Measures Fact Sheet

August 5, Roy D. Rissky P.E.

Reconstructing Pavements Using Full- Depth Reclamation. Matthew Singel

2018 MnROAD Research Efforts Spring NCAT Test Track Conference - March 2018 Ben Worel MnROAD Operations Engineer

HPTO High Performance Thin Overlay Rocky Mountain Asphalt Conf. Denver, CO Feb. 20, 2009 Frank Fee NuStar Asphalt Refining

Thinlay Asphalt for Pavement Preservation

Federal Highway Administration Concrete Overlays Program. Sam Tyson, Office of Pavement Technology AASHTO Subcommittee on Construction August 2009

HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION HIGHWAYS DIVISION PAVEMENT PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES JUNE 2003

Section 505. CHIP SEALS

Form DOT F (8-72) Technical Report Documentation Page 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 1. Report No.

Pavement Design Support IAC Cost savings from Corridor Studies in the Odessa District

INTERSTATE CORRIDOR PLANNING

Enhanced Durability Through Increased In-Place Pavement Density. FHWA and Asphalt Institute Workshop

Analysis of Paved Shoulder Width Requirements

Conditions of Paved Roads in Carbon County, Wyoming

INDOT Pavement Management

Checklist Series. 2 Chip. !Pavement Preservation. Seal Application

STRUCTURAL EVALUATION & TREATMENT SELECTION FOR LOCAL ROADS. Nick Jones Local Technical Assistance Program Utah State University

What s MnDOT s Working. Thomas Wood MnDOT Office of Materials & Road Research

PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT 2011

CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS

Lehigh Valley Transportation Study

Optimizing Highway Funds by Integrating RWD Data into Pavement Management Decision Making

Performance Evaluation of Asphalt Pavement Preservation Activities

Pavement Preservation ODOT Leading the Way

Performance of Aggregate Base Course Pavements in North Carolina

ATTACHMENT 50-1: PERFORMANCE AND MEASUREMENT TABLE

PUBLIC HEARING LOOP 9

Pay Schedule for Ride Quality

Cold In-Place Recycling In Sonoma County

Report Number: CP2C

The Texas Experience With Crumb Rubber. Dale A. Rand, P.E.

Pavement Management Systems. Tool for Keeping Pavement Networks in a State of Good Repair. Dr. Nick Vitillo

Hot Applied Chip Seal Design and Construction. NWPMA Vancouver, WA 2017

COLD IN-PLACE RECYCLING TRAIN TEMESCAL VALLEY KNABE ROAD (FALL 2012) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT

Material Transfer Device Effect on Pavement Smoothness Widening Joint Design & Construction

Georgia DOT Micro-milling and Thin Overlay

COLD IN PLACE RECYCLING

The Role of PMS in the DOTD Decision Making Process

2008 Michigan Seminar on Maintenance of Asphalt Pavements. Mount Pleasant, Michigan. January 8 th & 9 th, 2008

Cuyahoga County Constructs a Perpetual Pavement

DRAFT. Draft Carbon Monoxide (CO) Traffic Air Quality Analysis

Preventive Maintenance Project & Treatment Selection

Chip Seal Best Practices Chip Seal Introduction AT-TC3PP T1-JA02. Chip Seal Application Checklist

Nova Scotia 2009 Pavement Preservation. Jim Chisholm Highway Construction Services

County and Local Road Infrastructure Needs Assessment and Asset Inventory Toolkit Development

Thin Asphalt Overlays for Pavement Preservation

Asphalt Pavement Forensics: Understanding the Problem to Better Determine the Solution

610 - DOUBLE ASPHALT SURFACE TREATMENT SECTION 610 DOUBLE ASPHALT SURFACE TREATMENT

54 th Annual Concrete Paving Workshop March 13, 2015

Cold Foam In-Place Recycling (CIR)

Geosynthetic-Reinforced Double Chip Seal Tames Troubled Streets

MICRO-SURFACING - OPSS 336

Each year, TxDOT uses:

Transcription:

TxDOT Chip Seal Over Geotextile Fabric Research Project

Project Background FHWA Pavement Preservation International Scanning Tour Identified potential use of Treatment in the U.S. TxDOT agrees to conduct a research project to evaluate the performance of Chip Seals over Geotextile Fabrics Project initiated by Mr. Zane Webb, P.E. Director, TxDOT Maintenance Division Project based on the work performed in Australia and the County of San Diego, California

Australian Experience

Australian Experience

Australian Experience

Australian Experience

County of San Diego, CA.

County of San Diego, CA.

County of San Diego, CA.

County of San Diego, CA.

TxDOT Background Information TxDOT has a $250 million per year dedicated Preventive Maintenance Program. There are approximately 41,000 centerline miles of Farm to Market roads in Texas. 90 % of these Farm to Market roads are paved with chip seals. 10% of these roads are seal coated every year.

Texas Roadway System State Highways ON - SYSTEM ONLY FOR DATA YEAR 2002 Arterial Bus. Routes Farm to Mkt US Highways I H Streets ALL State Loops Ranch to Mkt US Alternates Interstate Recreation Frontage State Spurs Roads US Spurs Highways & Park Rds Roads Total Miles 16,182.555 40,990.173 12,108.520 3,233.446 336.426 6,662.307 79,513.427 Centerline 40,868.567 84,276.279 34,855.072 14,988.483 730.047 13,565.199 189,283.647 Lane 107,332,874 64,803,757 111,104,769 140,118,081 721,996 18,129,841 442,211,318 Daily Vehicle

TxDOT Project Scope Construct six test sites in TxDOT s Waco District. Each test site has a control section. TxDOT Materials and Pavements Section developed testing plan and will perform analysis Use various combinations of asphalt binders and aggregate sources. Evaluate performance of treatment under various traffic volumes and existing pavement conditions. Compare performance of test sites vs. control sections.

Test Sites Typical Section Chip Seal

Objective and Benefits Project Objective: Assess the performance of using non-woven geotextile fabric material underneath chip seal surface treatment Expected benefits: Reduction in reflective cracking Improved moisture barrier benefits Reduction of crack-sealing operations Improved overall pavement life-cycle costs Possible benefits: Increase in pavement structural stability Improvement in ride quality

Pre-Assessment Measurements Automated Pavement Condition Survey (TxDOT and Fugro-BRE) Manual Condition Surveys (FHWA using LTPP-DIM) Video (roadway and right-of-way) Rutting and Ride Quality measurements Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)

Pavement Condition at Test Sites

Pavement Condition at Test Sites

Pavement Condition at Test Sites

Description of Materials Non-woven polypropylene fabric (AMOCO Petromat ). Each role is 300 x 12 Liquid asphalt for tack coat (fabric): PG 64-22 and CRS-2P Liquid asphalt for seal coat (chips): AC20-5TR and CRS-2P Three pre-coated Aggregates Sources (including a lightweight aggregate) LTPP will keep samples of aggregate and asphalt material.

Test Sites Information Controlling CSJ Project Description Length (ft) County ADT Location Typical Section Fabric Location Tack Coat 0055-02-021 November 2003 Letting Hamilton Seal Coat Binder Aggregate Source Project CSJ 0049-01-080 SH 6 From FM 1860 in Riesel To.5 mi West 2640 McLennan 2700 East of IH 35 1835-02-048 FM 1741 From FM 93 To.5mi. North 2640 Bell 31000 East of IH 35 Divided Highway with Two 12-ft lanes with inside and outside shoulders Four 12-ft lanes with 16-ft continuous left turn lane (C&G section) (67-ft total width) Northbound Lanes only Entire Roadway Width PG 64-22 PG 64-22 AC20-5TR AC20-5TR Martin Marrietta Capitol Aggregates 0232-02-017 SH 53 From Bell/Fall CL To.5 mi East 2640 Falls 1300 East of IH 35 Two 12-ft lanes with 6-ft shoulders Both Travel Lanes PG 64-22 AC20-5TR Martin Marrietta 0413-04-031 SH 164 From 200' east of Navasota River Bridge To 3/4 mi. East 3960 Limestone 2200 East of IH 35 Two 12-ft lanes with 10-ft shoulders Both Travel Lanes PG 64-22 AC20-5TR TXI Lightweight Controlling CSJ Project Description Length (ft) County ADT Location Typical Section Fabric Location Tack Coat 1187-01-024 December 2003 Letting Coryell Project CSJ Seal Coat Binder Aggregate Source 0386-04-012 FM 1991 From SH 22 South 3/4 mile 3960 Bosque 330 West of IH 35 Two 10-ft lanes NO shoulders Both Travel Lanes CRS-2P CRS-2P Capitol Aggregates 1187-01-024 FM 929 From SH 36 To 0.5 mi. East 2640 Coryell 2100 West of IH 35 Two 12-ft lanes with 10-ft shoulders (C&G roadway) Mainlanes and Shoulders PG 64-22 CRS-2P Capitol Aggregates

SH-164 Construction AC20-5TR was used as tack coat and seal coat binder. Tack Coat: 0.10 to 0.15 gal./sq.yd. Seal Coat: 0.36 to 0.42 gal./sq.yd. The fabric laydown rate was 16 rolls/hour. TXI Lightweight aggregate @ 1/120 cu.yd./sq.yd.

Laydown Process 1. Repair localized structural damage 2. Power broom pavement surface and remove RPMs 3. Spread tack coat 4. Place Geotextile fabric 5. Set fabric with pneumatic tire rollers 6. Place temporary RPMs 7. Spread seal coat binder 8. Spread chips 9. Set chips with pneumatic tire roller 10. Power broom chip seal surface to remove excess/loose chips

Laydown Process

Laydown Process

Laydown Process

Laydown Process

Laydown Process

Laydown Process

Final Surface

Final Surface

Treatment Cost Chip Seal Without Fabric With Fabric In-Place Cost $0.80 - $0.90/sq. yd. ~ $ 1.00/sq. yd.

Assessing Performance SH6 Pe rcent Crack ing w ith Age (L2 - Left Lane) 30 IRI (in/mile) Percent Cracking (0.1 mile) 25 20 15 10 5 Fatigue Cracking. ANY PMIS Distress Fabric Section 14% less cracking after 1 year Control Section 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Distance (fe et) Pre-data 3 months 6 months 1 year

TxDOT Action Items Measurements will be taken at 3, 6, and 12 months from construction date and then at 1-year intervals Roadway cross-sectional information needed from the district to properly analyze data Cores Permeability test Skid test Markings of test section and control section on ROW line Maintenance Supervisor to inform CSTM&P of changes to roadway sections. Written reports

FHWA Action Items Produce a permanent record of pavement condition, material test results, construction records, TxDOT research reports. Monitor the condition of Test Sites Annually for five years Write Annual Status Reports Prepare a Final Report Conduct similar Research Project in other States (NC, CA, etc.) Educate transportation organizations through workshops, presentations, Internet site and field test participation.

Acknowledgment Mr. Zane Webb TxDOT Director Maintenance Division Mr. Gregory Cleveland TxDOT Materials and Pavements Section TxDOT Waco District Mr. Antonio Nieves- P&M TST- LTPP Fugro-BRE

For More Information Luis Rodriguez - FHWA P&M TST Phone: 404-562-3681 Email: luis.rodriguez@fhwa.dot.gov Gregory Cleveland - TxDOT Phone: 512-506-5830 Email: gclevela@dot.state.tx.us