Bituminous Stabilized Materials Guideline RPF Feedback : K Jenkins May 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Concrete Test Section RPF 8 May Objectives Design details Material properties Instrumentation Traffic Construction Conclusion Outline.
Advertisements

ROAD PAVEMENT FORUM MAY 2007 Technical Guideline: The use of Modified Bituminous Binders in Road Construction TG1: 2 nd Edition – May 2007.
Product Properties, Classification, Selection and Application
Research | consulting | technology safety and efficiency in transport through knowledge TT1825 Mix design and field evaluation.
Aspects of Current MLS APT Activities in southern Africa Fred Hugo Road Pavement Forum 7 November 2006.
HMA permanent deformation study: Progress report to the RPF 7 May 2008 Erik Denneman.
ROAD PAVEMENT FORUM GUIDELINES ON MODIFIED BINDERS FOR USE IN HOT- MIX ASPHALT AND SURFACING SEAL APPLICATIONS.
Module 4-2 : Joint Sealing
HRVATSKO ASFALTERSKO DRUŠTVO COLD IN SITU RECYCLING AND VERY THIN ASPHALT CONCRETE - FRENCH TECHNOLOGY JP MICHAUT SEMINAR ASFALTNI KOLNICI 2015 OPATIJA,
High Modulus Asphalt (HiMA) Technology Transfer (T 2 ) November 2010 Progress report Prepared for presentation at the 20 th meeting of the Roads Pavements.
Properties of Asphalt Important properties of asphalt include: Adhesion Consistency Specific Gravity Durability Rate of curing Ductility Aging and.
Recycling….the re-use of sealed roads Andrew Silvestri, Account Manager ResourceCo Roads & Works Conference – August 2012.
PART 8 BITUMINOUS MATERIALS
Full-Depth Reclamation Using a Cement Slurry Spreader Attached to a Ready Mixed Concrete Truck W. Spencer Guthrie, Ph.D., Associate Professor Charles A.
Pavement design and construction technique using high strength stone interlocked cemented aggregate low fines matrix. Gerhard van Blerk June 2014 In the.
Binder Distributors Task Team Feedback. Progress since May Resolution #7 –To review the process of binder distributor certification as fit for purpose.
Pavement Design Terms and Concepts
RPF Binder Distributor Task Team Feedback 21 May 2003 Pietermaritzburg.
California Asphalt Rubber Case Studies – Reduced Thickness Jack Van Kirk Basic Resources.
TRB AFK10 Committee on General Issues in Asphalt Technology Update on NCAT Test Track and Other Research Results April 24-26, 2006.
Bituminous Stabilized Materials Guideline: Inception Study Project Funded By: Gautrans Sabita.
Bituminous Stabilized Materials Guideline Project Initiated By: Gautrans Sabita.
Interim Guidelines: The Design and Use of Foamed Bitumen Treated Bases Fenella Long Road Pavements Forum November 2001.
Success with Alternatives to Paving Mr. Chuck Fromelt Day County Highway Superintendent Webster, South Dakota.
Ultra Thin Continuously Reinforced Concrete - Modelling &Testing under APT Louw Kannemeyer (SANRAL) Bryan Perrie (C&CI) Pieter Strauss (Consultant) Louw.
Pavement Maintenance II
Revision of the South African Pavement Design Method Louw Kannemeyer.
Status Report on Standard Specifications and Codes of Practice Department of Transport RPF November 2004.
Bituminous Products Guidelines & Documents Trevor Distin RPF May 2008.
COTO Road Materials Committee (RMC) Towards National Specifications Road Pavement Forum 07 November 2006 Elzbieta Sadzik.
World of Asphalt Pavements Feedback Sydney Stephen Emery.
1 International Focus Group at TRL January 2002 by Robert Petts Rural Road Surfacing Investigations Intech Associates © Intech Associates. Extracts may.
ROAD PAVEMENT RESEARCH ADVISORY COMMITTEE BMJA Verhaeghe 12 MAY 2005 NINTH MEETING OF THE ROAD PAVEMENTS FORUM (RPF)
Road Pavements Forum Structural Design Working Group Revision of the South African Flexible Pavement Design Method 7 November 2006 Pretoria H L Theyse.
Technical Recommendations for Highways No 12 TRH 12
Kim Jenkins SANRAL Chair in Pavement Eng
RSA Design Guidelines for hot-mix asphalt TRH3/HMA Workshop June 2001.
A Protocol for the establishment and operations of LTPP sections Prepared for Gautrans by CSIR, Transportek.
Cement stabilization of road pavement materials. OBJECTIVE T o investigate the impact of the new range of cements manufactured under the SABS EN
DR O.S ABIOLA DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, ABEOKUTA CVE 409 HIGHWAY ENGINEERING.
In Situ Stabilization of Pavement Base Courses Roads Pavement Forum Thursday, May 17, 2001.
X:\Presentations\FBworking groupRPFnov02.ppt DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT & PUBLIC WORKS FOAMED BITUMEN WORKING GROUP Road Pavement Forum- Nov 2002 E. SADZIK.
Interim Guidelines: The Design and Use of Foamed Bitumen Treated Materials Kim Jenkins, Dave Collings Hechter Theyse, Fenella Long Road Pavements Forum.
G AUTRANS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT, ROADS & WORKS 1 GAUTRANS APT ELZBIETA SADZIK MAY 2002.
PROGRESS OVERVIEW: COLTO STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS TMH AND TRH DOCUMENTS OTHER DOCUMENTS.
Status of the first experiment at the PaveLab Fabricio Leiva-Villacorta, PhD Jose Aguiar-Moya, PhD Luis Loria-Salazar, PhD August 31 st, 2015.
Bases, Subbases, & Low Cost Surfaces Dr. TALEB M. AL-ROUSAN.
GAUTRANS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT, ROADS & WORKS APT STEERING COMMITTEE ROAD PAVEMENT FORUM 26 November 2003 Elzbieta Sadzik.
REPORT to RPF May 2007 TMH1 Revision Dave Wright.
Asphalt Academy Feedback to RPF 23 November 2005.
Pavement Research Advisory Committee (PRAC) 13 th Meeting of the RPF 8 May 2007.
R52 Rustenburg-Koster Road
Foamed Asphalt Working Group Road Pavements Forum 13 November 2001.
Grand Palm Hotel and Casino Gaborone, Botswana 15th to 19th Sept 2007 CAPSA 07.
Road Pavement Forum May 2006 Technical Guideline: The use of Modified Bituminous Binders in Road Construction (TG 1: 2001)
Road Pavement Forum 11 May 2006 Elzbieta Sadzik APT Steering Committee.
Presented to: FAA Airport Pavement Working Group Meeting By: David R. Brill, P.E., Ph.D. Date: April 24, 2012 Federal Aviation Administration Update on.
Road Pavement Forum May 2006 REVISION Technical Guideline: The use of Modified Bituminous Binders in Road Construction (TG 1: 2001)
3rd International Road Surface Friction Conference
Rongzong Wu, David Jones and John T. Harvey
Barriers to Implementation of In-Place Recycling
Phase I Experiment 4 Different pavement structures, 8 sections Compare
TT1825 Mix design and field evaluation of foamed bitumen stabilised pavements December Advancing safety and efficiency in transport.
Construction of the future
PAVEMENTS CEE 320 Steve Muench.
Paramix mid-term meeting in Barcelona November 13, 2002
Introduction to Pavement Design
2018 Pavement Workshop May 23-24, 2018
Pavement Structural Analysis
OLD CONCRETE MAKES WAY FOR NEW ASPHALT A Laatz, N Cocks, N Burger
Presentation transcript:

Bituminous Stabilized Materials Guideline RPF Feedback : K Jenkins May 2006

Background South Africa’s road network is ageing Many designs use crushed stone –But, difficult to open new quarries –Increasingly inappropriate solution Need to rehabilitate with available materials Use of foam and emulsion are appropriate solutions for many cases

Guidelines Emulsion materials  Sabita Manual 14 (1993)  Sabita Manual 21 (1999) Foamed bitumen materials  TG2 Interim Guideline (2002) Guidelines widely used, but need to Modernize Improve Place foam and emulsion on equal footing Create a single, combined guideline

Current Project Initiated and funded by Gautrans and SABITA Update and produce a new, combined guideline document Objectives –Improved mix and structural design –Use of real field data and HVS data to develop design method –Construction guidelines

Project Structure Phase 3: Guideline Compilation & Review Selection Criteria Mix Design Guidelines Structural Design Issues Construction Issues Guideline Finalization & Review Mix Design (K Jenkins) Structural Design (F Long) Phase 1: Inception Study Mix Design (K Jenkins) Structural Design (F Jooste) Phase 2: Development of Design Guidelines

Inception Study Results Investigated aspects of mix design that need development, and planned these development activities Proposed a structural design method Investigated the type and quality of data from field pavements that can be used to develop design method

Mix Design Best tests to capture material properties –Durability test –Shear properties through triaxial test Curing Standardization –Specimen preparation Mixing Compaction Curing –Testing –Interpretation

Purpose of flexibility/fatigue tests Flexibility increases with increasing binder content Cement/binder ratio Flexibility Strength

Strain at Break comparison

Fatigue Strain

Flexibility vs Durability

Recent curing protocols 24 hours in mould and 72 hours at 40°C (unsealed)  Six months in road (Loudons, 1994) 24 hours in mould and 72 hours at 40°C (sealed)  Six months in road (TG2, 2003) 24 hrs at ambient (unsealed) + 48 hours at 40°C (sealed) + several hours cooling at ambient (unsealed)  Medium cure (Wirtgen, 2004) 24 hours at ambient (unsealed) and 48 hours at 40°C (sealed)  Medium cure (Houston, 2004) 20 hours at 30°C (unsealed) and 2x24 hours at 40°C & change bag (sealed)  Med cure (Univ Stell, 2004)

Possible Curing Approach Foam Emulsion Active filler Inactive/ no filler Active filler Inactive/ no filler

Approaches to Structural Design MDD RSD LAB DCP Visuals Test Pits FWD INFORMATION BEHAVIOURPERFORMANCE NfNf Emod1 Emod2 Emod3 Class B Class A Field Performance 3-10 Mesa Options Elastic TheoryLong Term Field Performance

Design Matrix

Key Aspects of the Method Focus on materials investigation –Some results to come from mix design Specific guidelines for materials classification Directly linked to observed field performance Limited intermediary analysis steps Yes / no system, limited scope to manipulate or misinterpret Suitable for all levels of practitioners

LTPP Sections Emulsion (13) N1 Section 1 (Kraaifontein) N1 Sections 13 and 14 (Springfontein and Trompsburg) N2 Section 16 (Kwelera, East London) N3 Section 4 (near Mooi River) N4 Section 1 (Scientia to Pienaars River) N4 Section 5X (2 sections) (Wonderfontein to Crossroads) N7 Section 7 (near Kammieskroon) N12 Section 19 (Exp 1&2) (near Daveyton) MR27 (near Stellenbosch) P23/1 (Kroonstad to Steynsrus) D2388 (Cullinan) Foamed bitumen (7) P24/1 (near Vereeniging) MR504 (A, B, C) (near Shongweni) Same-Himo (1, 2, 3) (Tanzania)

HVS Sections N3 near Pietermaritzburg (4 ETB) N2-16 near East London (1 ETB) P9/3 near Heilbron (6 ETB) D2388 near Cullinan (4 ETB) P243/1 near Vereeniging (2 ETB, 2 FTB) N7 (TR11/1) near Cape Town (2 FTB) N12-19 near Daveyton (1 ETB)

Synthesis of observed performance

Crushed stone CTB Natural gravel ETB Cemented crushed stone Recycled BTB Crushed stone Natural gravel SUBBASE PARENT MATERIAL Section Age Years MESA Accommodated to Date N12-19 (1) N12-19 (2) N1-13&14 N N N N7-7 P23/1 13 D N4-5X (20-25) 8 8 N4-5X (27-30) N4/1 6 MR27 17 MR 504 (1) P24/1 MR 504 (2) MR 504 (3) Same-Himo (1) Same-Himo (2) Same-Himo (3) LTPP

Section MESA Accommodated Age Years Surfacing 200 ETB 150 Lime stabilized base N3 HVS (1) 0 N3 HVS (2) 0 N3 HVS (3) 0 N3 HVS (5) 0 N2-16 (322A2) 8 P9/3 (372A3) 0 P9/3 (373A3) 0 P9/3 (374A3A) 0 P9/3 (374A3B) 0 P9/3 (375A3) 0 P9/3 (376A3) 0 D2388 (397A4) 0 D2388 (403A4) 1 D2388 (407A4) 2 D2388 (408A4) 3 P243/1 (409A4) 0 P243/1 (410A4) 0 P243/1 (411A4) 1 N7 (415A5) 0 P243/1 (412A4) 1 N7 (416A5) 0 N12-19 (415A5) 30 Crushed stone CTB Natural gravel LTB Cemented crushed stone / natural gravel Recycled BTB Crushed stone Natural gravel SUBBASE PARENT MATERIAL HVS

Key Trends: Support & Thickness Subbase –Majority ETB sections have cemented subbase –Majority foam sections have gravel subbase Base thickness: majority mm thick –> 3 MESA even on thin bases Subbase thickness: majority  150 mm –In TRH4, no sections for 3 to 10 MESA have subbases < 200 mm. Significant savings possible?

Key Trends: Traffic accommodated Traffic accommodated exceeds expectations Emulsion example: N1 Section 13 & mm Surfacing 160 mm ETB 150 mm ETB TRH mm Surfacing 150 mm G1 250 mm C3 Section Traffic (MESA) Pavement Structure

Key Trends: Traffic accommodated Foam example: Section Traffic (MESA) Pavement Structure MR 504 (1) Slurry 125 mm FTB 150 mm G6 TG2 0.1 – 0.3 Seal 125 mm FB2 150 mm G6 TG AC 125 mm FB2 200 mm C4

Tasks for Next Phase Mix Design –Develop triaxial test and classification limits Includes standardizing testing protocols –Develop durability test and classification limits –Standardize specimen preparation, particularly curing and compaction Structural Design –Expand LTPP database –Develop and calibrate material classification method and design matrix

Where are we now? Submitted proposals for Phase 2 –Final approval pending Thereafter we will be forging ahead with further investigation (test methods and protocols) and materials classification

We hope to find a good marriage between cold materials and performance… Thank you