U.S. Constitution Power Point Project Roobina Najarian Katherine Nazarian Period 2 December 2009.
Project TX 0-5566 Strategies to Improve and Preserve Flexible Pavement at Intersections UTEP -...
-
Upload
dominik-corney -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
0
Transcript of Project TX 0-5566 Strategies to Improve and Preserve Flexible Pavement at Intersections UTEP -...
Project TX 0-5566
Strategies to Improve and Preserve Flexible Pavement
at IntersectionsUTEP
- Soheil Nazarian- Imad Abdallah
Project Duration September 08 – August 10
1
ProblemRural intersections are failing early Damage to small vehicles Motorists lose control of their vehicles
2
Causes for these failures
High traffic volumes Heavy truck traffic Heat generated from vehicles waiting in
queue Repeated vehicle turning movements
and hard stops
3
Ranked Rural Issues Raised by TxDOT District Staff
4
REF: Jolanda Prozzi, Robert Harrison, Jorge A. Prozzi, (2005), “Defining and Measuring Rural Truck Traffic Needs in Texas,”Center for Transportation Research, The University of Texas at Austin, Research Report 0-4169-2
Distresses (Example 2)
6
originalprofile
weak subgrade or underlying layer
asphalt layer
subgradedeformation
Intersections are designed as a part of the roadway but are not subjected to the same conditions
7
Bottom Line
1. Information Search
2. Understanding and Documenting
Extent of Problems and
Solutions in Texas
3. Selection of Candidate Sites
for In-Depth Evaluation
4. Thorough Forensic Study of
Candidate Sites
5. Preliminary Guideline Based on Results from
Tasks 2 through 4
6. Develop Final Design and
Construction Guideline
• A comprehensive Literature Review
• Surveying Districts• Reviewing Forensic Reports• Interviewing District Personnel and site visits• Interviewing CST Personnel
• An in depth statistical and trend analysis of results from Task 2 to categorize typical problems
• Structural and Functional evaluation of sites • Coring and Sampling • Laboratory tests of Pavement Materials • Recommending solutions • Conducting thorough structural design of the existing and recommended Solutions• Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Solutions
• Develop a Comprehensive Decision tree- to guide TXDOT personnel through the
process of field and Laboratory evaluation intersections
- to select the most appropriate rehabilitation solutions
• Incorporate the outcome of Task 5, the remaining outcome of field work and feedback from PMC in a final guideline
• A document of practices for mitigating rutting at intersections worldwide• A matrix of solutions, when they are effective, their advantages and disadvantages, their economical feasibility
• A document of typical intersections with problem• A catalog of sources of problems• A catalog of effective and ineffective solutions • A comparison of TxDOT solutions with those from other states and countries
• At least twelve sites that cover the inference space of the problems, pavement types, environmental conditions, subgrade types etc. for in depth field and laboratory evaluation
• A catalog of solutions based on the type of the problem, and the field and laboratory testing results
• A flow chart that will lead TXDOT personnel through steps necessary for selecting best rehabilitation solutions for a given intersection
• A document that can be used as a guideline by TxDOTpersonnel• An electronic version of the document with hyperlinks that provide additional information to TxDOT personnel
Task Activity Highlights Work Product
7. Develop an Expert System
• Incorporate the outcome of Task 5 and 6 in an expert system shell to readily guide TxDOTpersonnel in determining the best solution
• A software that will ask a series of simple if-then questions from users to guide them through the process of selecting the best solution, determining the most appropriate mix or mineral, and suggestions for reconstruction of the sections
8. Recommend changes to
TxDOT Policies
• Based on the outcome of all tasks, recommend changes to the TxDOT 2004 Specifications
9. Submit Reports
• a technical memorandum at the end of each task• A final report documenting all work performed, method used, and results achieved.• A Project Summary Report (PSR)
8
Revision Date:
Estimated % of Total
Project Budget
Note: A Tech Memo will be submitted to the PD & RTI at the end of each non-deliverable task.
FY 2009 FY 2010
Task 9 Submit Reports 4%
Task 6
Task 7
Task 8
Develop Final Design and Construction Guideline
Undestanding and Documenting Extent of P roblems and Solutions in Texas
7%
Selection of Candidiate Sites for In-depth Evaluation
Original Schedule
Work CompletedRevised Schedule
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
Research Activity
Task 5
Task 4
11%
Information Search 5%
Recommend Changes to TxDOT P olicies
7%
Thorough Forensic Study of Candidate Sites
28%
P reliminary Guideline Based on Results from Task 2 through 4
4%
14%
Develop an Expert System 20%
Schedule
9
Outline
Problem, Schedule, Final Product Background (Review of Literature) Goal (Problem Statement) Objective Methodology Tasks
Asphalt Pavement AllianceMaryland Asphalt Association National Asphalt Pavement AssociationNational Center for Asphalt Technology Colorado Department of Transportation CanadaSouth AfricaNew ZealandIllinois DOTNevada DOTOregon DOTKansas DOT
Review of Literature (Task 1)
Common Types of Distress
Remediation
Action Plan
Remediation Strategies
•Mill and Overlay with Asphalt Concrete •Rut Filling Using Spray Patching, Micro-
Surfacing •Grinding and Precision Milling •Whitetopping (Conventional and Concrete
Inlay) •Ultra-Thin Whitetopping •Thin Composite Whitetopping (TCW)•Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC)•Hot in Place Recycling (HIR)•Cold in Place Recycling (CIR)
Action Plan1. Evaluate pavement performance problems
and determine the cause of major distress.2. Ensure the pavement is structurally
adequate.3. Select and implement a cost-effective,
technically sound pavement mitigation approach with appropriate materials selection and mix designs.
4. Practice proper construction techniques with quality assurance.
Other Examples
Surface Coursedesigned toSuperpaveSpecifications
Heavy DutyBinder Course
Larger StoneBinder Course
Permeable Frictionless Coarse (PFC)
Coarse Matrix High Binder (CMHB) 18
Goal To provide solutions that can be
readily and economically carried out considering: location of the project construction practices type of potential or actual damage
at intersections.
20
Methodology(Expert System)
21
Inference Engine(Draw Conclusions)
User Interface
Facts
Expertise
Explanation (Advice and Reasoning)
Knowledge Base (Facts and Rules)
1. Information Search
2. Understanding and Documenting
Extent of Problems and
Solutions in Texas
3. Selection of Candidate Sites
for In-Depth Evaluation
4. Thorough Forensic Study of
Candidate Sites
5. Preliminary Guideline Based on Results from
Tasks 2 through 4
6. Develop Final Design and
Construction Guideline
• A comprehensive Literature Review
• Surveying Districts• Reviewing Forensic Reports• Interviewing District Personnel and site visits• Interviewing CST Personnel
• An in depth statistical and trend analysis of results from Task 2 to categorize typical problems
• Structural and Functional evaluation of sites • Coring and Sampling • Laboratory tests of Pavement Materials • Recommending solutions • Conducting thorough structural design of the existing and recommended Solutions• Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Solutions
• Develop a Comprehensive Decision tree- to guide TXDOT personnel through the
process of field and Laboratory evaluation intersections
- to select the most appropriate rehabilitation solutions
• Incorporate the outcome of Task 5, the remaining outcome of field work and feedback from PMC in a final guideline
• A document of practices for mitigating rutting at intersections worldwide• A matrix of solutions, when they are effective, their advantages and disadvantages, their economical feasibility
• A document of typical intersections with problem• A catalog of sources of problems• A catalog of effective and ineffective solutions • A comparison of TxDOT solutions with those from other states and countries
• At least twelve sites that cover the inference space of the problems, pavement types, environmental conditions, subgrade types etc. for in depth field and laboratory evaluation
• A catalog of solutions based on the type of the problem, and the field and laboratory testing results
• A flow chart that will lead TXDOT personnel through steps necessary for selecting best rehabilita tion solutions for a given intersection
• A document that can be used as a guideline by TxDOTpersonnel• An electronic version of the document with hyperlinks that provide additional information to TxDOT personnel
Task Activity Highlights Work Product
7. Develop an Expert System
• Incorporate the outcome of Task 5 and 6 in an expert system shell to readily guide TxDOTpersonnel in determining the best solution
• A software that will ask a series of simple if-then questions from users to guide them through the process of selecting the best solution, determining the most appropriate mix or mineral, and suggestions for reconstruction of the sections
8. Recommend changes to
TxDOT Policies
• Based on the outcome of all tasks, recommend changes to the TxDOT 2004 Specifications
9. Submit Reports
• a technical memorandum at the end of each task• A final report documenting all work performed, method used, and results achieved.• A Project Summary Report (PSR)
22
1. Information Search
2. Understanding and Documenting
Extent of Problems and
Solutions in Texas
3. Selection of Candidate Sites
for In-Depth Evaluation
4. Thorough Forensic Study of
Candidate Sites
5. Preliminary Guideline Based on Results from
Tasks 2 through 4
6. Develop Final Design and
Construction Guideline
• A comprehensive Literature Review
• Surveying Districts• Reviewing Forensic Reports• Interviewing District Personnel and site visits• Interviewing CST Personnel
• An in depth statistical and trend analysis of results from Task 2 to categorize typical problems
• Structural and Functional evaluation of sites • Coring and Sampling • Laboratory tests of Pavement Materials • Recommending solutions • Conducting thorough structural design of the existing and recommended Solutions• Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Solutions
• Develop a Comprehensive Decision tree- to guide TXDOT personnel through the
process of field and Laboratory evaluation intersections
- to select the most appropriate rehabilitation solutions
• Incorporate the outcome of Task 5, the remaining outcome of field work and feedback from PMC in a final guideline
• A document of practices for mitigating rutting at intersections worldwide• A matrix of solutions, when they are effective, their advantages and disadvantages, their economical feasibility
• A document of typical intersections with problem• A catalog of sources of problems• A catalog of effective and ineffective solutions • A comparison of TxDOT solutions with those from other states and countries
• At least twelve sites that cover the inference space of the problems, pavement types, environmental conditions, subgrade types etc. for in depth field and laboratory evaluation
• A catalog of solutions based on the type of the problem, and the field and laboratory testing results
• A flow chart that will lead TXDOT personnel through steps necessary for selecting best rehabilita tion solutions for a given intersection
• A document that can be used as a guideline by TxDOTpersonnel• An electronic version of the document with hyperlinks that provide additional information to TxDOT personnel
Task Activity Highlights Work Product
7. Develop an Expert System
• Incorporate the outcome of Task 5 and 6 in an expert system shell to readily guide TxDOTpersonnel in determining the best solution
• A software that will ask a series of simple if-then questions from users to guide them through the process of selecting the best solution, determining the most appropriate mix or mineral, and suggestions for reconstruction of the sections
8. Recommend changes to
TxDOT Policies
• Based on the outcome of all tasks, recommend changes to the TxDOT 2004 Specifications
9. Submit Reports
• a technical memorandum at the end of each task• A final report documenting all work performed, method used, and results achieved.• A Project Summary Report (PSR)
Tasks
Task 2. Understanding and Documenting Extent of Problems and Solutions in Texas
Surveying TxDOT Districts Reviewing Forensic Reports Interviewing district personnel
and site visits Interviewing CST personnel
23
Beaumont
Odessa
Lubbock
Amarillo
Childress
Abilene
San Angelo
Laredo
San Antonio
Austin
Pharr
Corpus Christi
Wichita Falls
Brownwood
Fort Worth
Waco
Dallas
Paris
Atlanta
Tyler
Bryan
Lufkin
El Paso
Houston
Yoakum
Texas’ Districts MapShowing Districts with Answer
Districts with high distresses at intersections
Districts with minor distresses at intersections
District: Date: Contact Person: Austin April 13th, 2009 Mike Arillano Bryan April 14th, 2009 Catherine Hejl Houston April 15th, 2009 Mike Alford Atlanta April 20th, 2009 Miles Garrison Paris April 22nd, 2009 Mykol Woodruff Lubbock April 27th, 2009 Tracy Crumby Abilene April 28th, 2009 Brian Crawford Laredo April 29th, 2009 Jo Ann Garcia
District Interviews
Task 3. Selection of Candidate Sites
A least twelve sites that cover following criteria: Type of distress observed (instability rutting vs. structural
rutting) Type of subgrade (clayey vs. sandy) Pavement structure (two-course surface treatment vs. with HMA) Traffic volume (rural vs. urban) Environmental condition (east Texas vs. west Texas)
Preference will be given to sites that are scheduled for maintenance, rehabilitation or reconstruction.
25
Beaumont
Odessa
Lubbock
Amarillo
Childress
Abilene
San Angelo
Laredo
San Antonio
Austin
Pharr
Corpus Christi
Wichita Falls
Brownwood
Fort Worth
Waco
Dallas
Paris
Atlanta
Tyler
Bryan
Lufkin
El Paso
Houston
Yoakum
Texas’ Districts MapShowing Districts with Answer
Districts with high distresses at intersections
Districts with minor distresses at intersections
Site Visited
Atlanta fm 497 – fm 155 fm 149 – fm 315 US 259
Laredo fm 1472 US 83
Forensic investigation Structural strength Aggregate structure Correct Asphalt Binder grade Good construction practices
27
Task 4. Forensic Study
Visited five sites and performed a thorough Investigations
Site Survey, FWD, GPR, DCP, Coring, Lab Testing
Sites Visited and Investigated
Atlanta fm 497 – fm 155 fm 149 – fm 315 US 259
Laredo fm 1472 US 83
28
Task 5. Preliminary Guidelines Based on Results
Develop a Comprehensive Decision Tree
To guide TxDOT personnel through process of field and laboratory evaluation intersections
To select most appropriate rehabilitation solutions
29
Mic
ros
urf
ac
ing
Fo
g S
ea
l
Cra
ck
Sea
l
Sa
nd
Sea
l *
Slu
rry
Se
al
*
Ult
ra T
hin
We
arin
g
Co
ars
e
Ch
ip S
ea
ls
Su
rfa
ce
Tre
atm
ent
Ho
t in
Pla
ce
Re
cyc
lin
g
Co
ld in
Pla
ce
R
ecy
cli
ng
HM
A &
RA
P O
ve
rla
y
Ho
t M
ix O
ve
rla
y
HM
A &
Rec
yc
led
A
sph
alt
Sh
ing
les
(R
AS
) O
verl
ay
PC
C O
ve
rla
y (
Th
ick)
Ult
ra-T
hin
W
hit
eto
pp
ing
*
Fu
ll D
ep
th
Rec
lam
ati
on
Sta
bil
iza
tio
n
Mo
istu
te C
on
tro
l
< 3 / 8 in
3 / 8 - 1 in
> 1 in
Low
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
High
Moisture Intrusion
Structural Rutting
MaintenanceRehabilitation
As
ph
alt
La
yer
Su
b-
gra
de
Structural Rutting
HMA Surfacing PCC
Flexible Pavement Treatment Selection Matrix
Deep Repairs
Ba
se
Shoving
Surface Rutting
Instability Rutting
Fatigue Cracking
Distress
Treatment
You might find 2 locations in the whole state for this one.
This one is brand new, we don't have a spec for it yet. There is a company that wants to show us a test strip in the near future, it'll be very good to
Remediation Alternatives
30
Task 6. Develop Final Design and Construction Guidelines
A document that can be used as a guideline by TxDOT personnel
An electronic version of document with hyperlinks that provide additional information to TxDOT personnel
31
Task 7. Develop an Expert System
Incorporate an expert system shell.
With simple If-Then questions.
Guide through process of selecting best solution.
32
Use of the Expert System
33
Intersection Condition
Traffic Condition
Remediation Strategies
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Best Cost Effective
Alternative
Other Consideration
Task 8. Recommend Changes to TxDOT Policies
Based on the outcome of all tasks, recommend changes to TxDOT 2004 Specifications, if necessary.
40