HotHot--Mix Asphalt (HMA)Mix Asphalt (HMA)Balancing Risk &Balancing Risk &Balancing Risk &Balancing Risk &
Assuring PerformanceAssuring PerformanceNorthNorth--East State Materials Engineers AssociationEast State Materials Engineers Association
Atlantic City, New JerseyAtlantic City, New JerseyOctober 8October 8thth 20082008October 8October 8 20082008
Thomas HarmanThomas HarmanThomas HarmanThomas HarmanTeam Leader – Senior Pavement Engineer
Federal Highway Administration - Resource CenterP t & M t i l TST
1
Pavement & Materials TST
ChangeChange
The dogmas of the quiet pastThe dogmas of the quiet pastThe dogmas of the quiet past The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy are inadequate to the stormy present… as our case is new, sopresent… as our case is new, sowe must think anew and actwe must think anew and actwe must think anew and actwe must think anew and act
anew.anew.
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 2
Our VisitOur Visit• Our Nation’s Transportation System• Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance
Need– Need– Structural Design & Analysis
•• Pavement Type Selection, RealCost™Pavement Type Selection, RealCost™– Materials Characterization & Designg
•• Superpave PGx, AMPT, Mix Type Selection Guide, NAPA/FHWASuperpave PGx, AMPT, Mix Type Selection Guide, NAPA/FHWA– Quality Assurance Systems
•• 6+ Building Blocks6+ Building BlocksP d ti & Pl t– Production & Placement
•• Automation, Innovation, & BasicsAutomation, Innovation, & Basics– Monitoring & Preservation
•• Thinking about tomorrow to drive today’s decisionsThinking about tomorrow to drive today’s decisionsThinking about tomorrow to drive today s decisions Thinking about tomorrow to drive today s decisions
• GOAL: Provide you with resources!
3NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Freight Freight
Two Words AboutTwo Words AboutTwo Words About Two Words About Our Nation’s Transportation SystemOur Nation’s Transportation System
4
National Statistics: National Statistics: 3,963,262 miles of Roads 590,000 Bridges3,963,262 miles of Roads 590,000 Bridges2.7 trillion vehicle2.7 trillion vehicle--miles / yearmiles / year
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 5
National Statistics: National Statistics: 3,963,262 miles of Roads3,963,262 miles of Roads
6State
Highway AgencyCounty Town (ship)
MunicipalOther
Jurisdiction FederalAgency
Damage vs. Axle WeightDamage vs. Axle Weight
80%
90%
100%
80%
90%
100%
Cumulative damage
60%
70%
80%
ffic,
%
60%
70%
80%
mag
e, %
gRemaining traffic
40%
50%
60%
inin
g tr
af
40%
50%
60%
ativ
e da
m
20%
30%
40%
Rem
a
20%
30%
40%
Cum
ula
< 5% of traffic58% of total damage
0%
10%
20%
0%
10%
20%
9
0%14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80
Tandem axle load, kips
0%
Damage vs. Axle WeightDamage vs. Axle Weight5% of traffic causes almost 60% of damage5% of traffic causes almost 60% of damage
34k to 40k7%
> 40k5%
34k7% < 34k25%
> 40k58%
< 34k88%
34k to 40k17%
88%
Traffic distribution Damage distribution
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 10
TonnageTonnageIn the US, an average 53 million tons of freight was moved each day in 2002…y
of T
ons
Mill
ion
o
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 142002 2006 2035
KeyKeyWhyWhy
• An efficient freight transportation system can also improve a State or Region’s ability to attract p g yand retain businesses
Economic Vitality and Economic Vitality and CompetitivenessCompetitiveness
The EnvironmentThe Environment
Safety and QualitySafety and Quality--ofof--LifeLife
National SecurityNational Security
ChangesChanges
• Congestion and Freight are driving factorsI d t ffi d l di• Increased traffic and loadings
• Environmental Concerns (sustainability)– ex Use of bag-houses at production facilities increase inex. Use of bag houses at production facilities, increase in
recycled materials
• Supply sources (asphalt, polymers, aggregates)E l ti t i l t– Escalating materials costs
• Production changes– ex. Drum plants vs. batch plantsp p
• Staff reductions• Shifting roles
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 16
• Personnel experience & shortages
Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance
• Risk– Risk is the likelihood of a bad or unwanted outcome –
such as poor pavement performance or low profit margin (or crap dice)
– All systems have some inherent Risk, and
– Changes within a system will either increase, decrease, and/or shift Risk between parties,
•• ex Owner Agency & Contractorex Owner Agency & Contractorex. Owner Agency & Contractorex. Owner Agency & Contractor
17NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance
• Risk - Law of Unexpected Consequences…
“Sometimes in getting what you ask for you loose what you truly wanted.”y y
18NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance
Innovation
• New materials, testing tools, and production equipment and procedures offer the potential for q p p peven greater pavement performance!
NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance
Risk and Innovation
• In developing systems that reduce overall Risk, we can create an environment that does not foster or reward innovation.
NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance
System Approach StructuralStructural
Get InStructuralStructural
Stay In
Get Out
Stay OutMaterialsMaterials ConstructionConstruction
21NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Evolution of Pavement DesignEvolution of Pavement Design
StateState--ofof--PracticePractice StateState--ofof--ArtArt
AnalyticalAnalytical MLETMLET 2D FEM2D FEM 3D FEM3D FEM
Past PracticesPast Practices
22NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Evolution of Pavement DesignEvolution of Pavement Design
Empirical Mechanistic• SpringsSprings• Dashpotsy = 114.32x-0.4766
R2 = 0.934
80
100
120
140
Par
amet
er
0
20
40
60
Per
form
ance
Get a lot of data
00 5 10
Load Applications (thousands)
P
• Get a lot of data• Find a Trend (Hope for)
23NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Evolution of Pavement DesignEvolution of Pavement Design
• Mechanistic-Empirical– Combines mechanistically based models (equations)– Combines mechanistically based models (equations)
with empirically derived models (equations)
y = 114.32x-0.4766R2 = 0.934
80
100
120
140
e P
aram
eter+ 0
20
40
60
0 5 10
Load Applications (thousands)
Per
form
ance+
24NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Previous Previous AASHTO Pavement Design GuideAASHTO Pavement Design GuideAASHTO Pavement Design GuideAASHTO Pavement Design Guide
• Empirical design methodology AASHO
Interim Guide
for the Design
f based on AASHO Road Test in the late 1950’s
of
Pavement Structures
* * *
i i
FOREWORD
• Several editions:1961 I t i G id
AASHO Committee on DesignThis interim guide for the design of pavement structures is based on data from the AASHO Road Test at Ottawa Illinois. In those areas not
– 1961 Interim Guide… April 1962covered by the Road Test, theoretical analysis and experience have been utilized.
It is essential that the user of the guide understand its limitations, which are: …
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 25
New AASHTO MNew AASHTO M--E Pavement Design GuideE Pavement Design Guide
EN
VIR
ON
ME
NT
C SS
PERFORMANCECRITERIA
MODELS
THICKNESS
27NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
New MNew M--E Pavement Design GuideE Pavement Design Guide
28NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
LifeLife--Cycle Cost Analysis Software Cycle Cost Analysis Software RealCost™RealCost™
Probabilistic Life-Cycle Cost Analysishttp://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/asstmgmt/lcca.cfm
29NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Pavement Design ResourcesPavement Design Resources
• FHWA:– http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/p g p
• NCHRP, 1-37A: Free software download– http://www.trb.org/mepdg/p g p g
• National Asphalt Pavement Association– http://www.hotmix.org/
• Asphalt Pavement Alliance (APA)– http://www.asphaltalliance.com/index.asp
• APA: Perpetual Pavements– http://www.asphaltalliance.com/library.asp?MENU=519
30NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance
StructuralStructuralStructuralStructural
MaterialsMaterials ConstructionConstruction
31NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Why SHRP?Why SHRP?
• In the 1980’s procedures and practices could not
2 W k Old !2 W k Old !a d p ac ces cou d oassure performance. 2 Weeks Old !2 Weeks Old !
• Unacceptable Risk
• Distress…Rutting– Rutting
– Fatigue cracking– Low-temperature cracking
33
– Low-temperature cracking
Major Steps in Superpave Mix DesignMajor Steps in Superpave Mix Design1. Selection of Materials,
2. Selection of a Design Aggregate Structure,
3. Selection of the Design Binder Content,
4. Evaluation of Moisture Sensitivityof the Design Mixture and
SP
of the Design Mixture, and
5 Performance CharacterizationBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance 34
5. Performance Characterization.
ONGOING ONGOING R fi tR fi t
• Understanding Modifiers PGx
RefinementRefinement
Understanding Modifiers, PGx• Asphalt Mix Performance Tester• Equipment Calibrationq p• Understanding acid• Improved moisture test
• Construction Quality• Link to Pavement Design• Link to Pavement Design• Communication!
36NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Paul MackPaul MackN Y k St tN Y k St t R ti dR ti dNew York State New York State -- RetiredRetired
f h ld Imperfection should never stall implementation.
You can still drink from a chipped cup.chipped cup.
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 37
ChallengesChallenges
A hi i VMAA hi i VMA•• Achieving VMAAchieving VMA•• Suitability Suitability of Gyratory Compaction Levelsof Gyratory Compaction Levels
I f D bilit & Bi d t tI f D bilit & Bi d t t•• Issues of Durability & Binder contentIssues of Durability & Binder content•• Need for a Moisture Sensitivity TestNeed for a Moisture Sensitivity Test•• Deployment of a Performance/Strength TestDeployment of a Performance/Strength Test•• Deployment of a Performance/Strength TestDeployment of a Performance/Strength Test
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 38NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
NCHRP 9 NCHRP 9 –– Bituminous MaterialsBituminous Materials
•• RAP Characterization, 9RAP Characterization, 9--1212•• Gyratory Level, 9Gyratory Level, 9--9, 99, 9--16, 916, 9--1919Gyratory Level, 9Gyratory Level, 9 9, 99, 9 16, 916, 9 1919•• Volumetric Requirements, 9Volumetric Requirements, 9--25, 925, 9--3131
Performance Testing 9Performance Testing 9 19 919 9 2929•• Performance Testing, 9Performance Testing, 9--19, 919, 9--2929•• Mixture Design Manual, 9Mixture Design Manual, 9--3333
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 39NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
New Asphalt Mix Performance TesterNew Asphalt Mix Performance TesterAMPTAMPTAMPTAMPT
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 40
AMPT AMPT –– Pooled Fund StudyPooled Fund Study• POC: Dr. Audrey Copeland, FHWA
– [email protected] p @ g
41NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
SHRP Asphalt SHRP Asphalt P C di tP C di tProgram CoordinatorProgram Coordinator
“One of the principal goals ofOne of the principal goals of the SHRP asphalt program is to
reduce or eliminate thereduce or eliminate the proliferation of asphalt binder
specifications.”
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 42Dr. Thomas Kennedy
Growing Trend from 2002 to 2005Growing Trend from 2002 to 2005• 34 States with Plus Specs (67%)
13 St t St i ht M 320• 13 States Straight M 320
• 21 Different Pluses35
• 4 Duel / Hybrid20253035
f St
ates
• The Winner! –M 320 with 13 Pluses+++++++++++++ 5
101520
Num
ber
of20022005
+++++++++++++05N
As is M320 Plus Spec.'sPG Grade Specifications
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 43NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
New Superpave Tool… PGx (Table 3)New Superpave Tool… PGx (Table 3)
• Original Spec was based on Modulus, G* is Stress / StrainG is Stress / Strain
C li J i St i / St• Compliance, JNR is Strain / Stress– x: Standard, Heavy, Very Heavy
– Eliminates grade-bumping– Accounts for traffic level through Jnr criteria
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 47
Materials ResourcesMaterials Resources
• FHWA:– http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/p g p
• NCHRP, 9-series – http://www.trb.org/mepdg/p g p g
• National Asphalt Pavement Association– http://www.hotmix.org/
• Asphalt Pavement Alliance (APA)– http://www.asphaltalliance.com/index.asp
• Asphalt Institute– http://www.asphaltinstitute.org/
48NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance
StructuralStructuralStructuralStructural
MaterialsMaterials ConstructionConstruction
49NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
ConstructionConstructionConstructionConstruction• Contacting MechanismsContacting Mechanisms
– Design Standards (ex. Superpave) to Performance Specifications to Warranties to Public-Private-Partnership
• Quality Assurance SystemsQuality Assurance Systems– Ex. Percent Within Limits (PWL)
• Compaction & Intelligent Construction Systems (ICS)L it di l J i t A t t d Pl t IC R ll I f d– Longitudinal Joints, Automated Plants, IC Rolls, Infrared Cameras, Real time project information…
• Warm Mix Asphalt Technologies• HIGH RAP Materials
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 50NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
FHWAFHWA
Quality Assurance Quality Assurance AssessmentAssessmentAssessmentAssessment
FY 2008FY 2008008008
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 51
What it is What it is NOTNOT and what it and what it ISIS……• The Assessment is NOT…
– A “Gotcha”– A way to compare States– A indication of pavement performance
Perfect– Perfect
• The Assessment isThe Assessment is…– A tool to identify potential areas of RISK– A tool to identify “successful practices”– A tool to prioritize training– A tool to guide specification refinement
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 52
Driving FactorsDriving Factors• Quality Assurance Reviews (HIPT)
– State Agency Compliance with CFR
• National Review Program: Quality Assurance in Materials & Construction (Division Office (Assessment of Risk)– Kevin McLaury (MT), Team Leader, Max Grogg (IA),
Mike Praul (ME), Brad Neitzke (WFL), Ken Jacoby ( ), ( ), y(HIAM), Pete Kulyk (HPC), & Tamiko Burnell (HSA)
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 53
National Review Program: Quality National Review Program: Quality Assurance in Materials & ConstructionAssurance in Materials & Construction
Six Building Blocks…1 Contractor Quality Control1. Contractor Quality Control2. Agency Acceptance3 Independent Assurance3. Independent Assurance4. Dispute Resolution5 Laboratory Accreditation and Qualification5. Laboratory Accreditation and Qualification6. Personnel Qualification/Certification, and7 RISK7. RISK
AA
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 54DR QC
IA
LA/Q
PQ/C
AA
RiskRisk--based Processbased Process
Risk-basedAssessment
T l
Benchmark Report
Tool
Prioritize Areas of Risk
IdentifyAction Plan
Successful PracticesConduct
Training / RoundtablesgRefine
QA Specifications
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 55
Division Office Interview Division Office Interview (Mike/Lee/Dennis)(Mike/Lee/Dennis)
Assessment of RISK Assessment of RISK (QA System)(QA System)• 18 Questions…
– Covers the Six Building Blocksg– Questions Weighted – 1, 2, 3, 5, & 7
• Frequency52 i FY 2008– 52 in FY 2008
– Updated… TBD
AA
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 56DR QC
IA
LA/Q
PQ/C
AA
Two desired outcomes…Two desired outcomes…• We get what we pay for… Balanced, low-risk system
• Create a culture of Trust
AA
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 57DR QC
IA
LA/Q
PQ/C
AA
DefinitionsDefinitions• Advanced States
– Those States that have highly developed QA programs that demonstrate their capability for measuring the quality of their p y g q yconstruction and materials programs. An advance QA program includes highly developed Contractor Quality Control, Agency Acceptance, Dispute Resolution, Independent Assurance, Technician Certification or Qualification, and Laboratory yCertification programs.
• Intermediate States– Those States that have substantially demonstrated an effective
QA program for meas ring q alit and incl des most of the QAQA program for measuring quality and includes most of the QA elements of an advanced QA program.
• Opportunity States– Those States that have a demonstrated a weakness in their– Those States that have a demonstrated a weakness in their
construction and materials programs to measure quality or have a weakness in their program that could lead to fraud.
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 58
NPM NPM –– A low rating is A low rating is notnot a compliance issue with a compliance issue with 23 CFR 637.23 CFR 637.
34
Quality Assurance System - Overall Rating (52 Responces)
2426283032
1618202224
er o
f Sta
tes
810121416
Num
be
0246
Ad d I t di t O t it
59
Advanced Intermediate OpportunityLevel
Distribution of RatingDistribution of Rating
11
12
Histogram of QA System Rating - FY 2008
9
10
11
s
6
7
8
of A
genc
ies
3
4
5
Num
ber
0
1
2
3
60
010% 25% 40% 55% 70% 85% 100%
QA System Rating
% of Agencies Needing Advancement% of Agencies Needing AdvancementFALCON 5 - Gap AnalysisQA Assessment of RISK
Weighting Factors: Yellow-7, Orange-5, Green-3, Blue-2, Brown-1
13 W ti
6. Bridge Quality Char.
7. Lot Size
10. PWL Risk Analysis
12. NTPEP
13. Warranties Incre
8. PWL/PD
11. Continuous Equations
14. Limited use of visual acceptance
4. HMA Quality Char.
5. PCC Quality Char.
easing
16. Formal Dispute Resolution
18. Personnel Qualification.
15. System IA with 90% tech checked.
17. Project Field Labs Approval
1. Materials Management System
g RIS
K
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
2. Control of Random Sampling Location
3. Immed. State Possession of Verf. Tests
9. Use of F&t
p
K
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 62
Percent of Agencies Requiring Improvement
x Weighting Factor x Weighting Factor FALCON 5 - Gap Analysis
QA Assessment of RISK using Weighting Factors
Weighting Factors: Yellow-7, Orange-5, Green-3, Blue-2, Brown-1
6. Bridge Quality Char.
7. Lot Size
10. PWL Risk Analysis
12. NTPEP
13. Warranties Incre
8 PWL/PD
11. Continuous Equations
14. Limited use of visual acceptance
4. HMA Quality Char.
5. PCC Quality Char.
easing
18. Personnel Qualification.
15. System IA with 90% tech checked.
17. Project Field Labs Approval
1. Materials Management System
8. PWL/PD
g RIS
K
2. Control of Random Sampling Location
3. Immed. State Possession of Verf. Tests
9. Use of F&t
16. Formal Dispute Resolution
K
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 63
- 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0
Percent of Agencies Requiring Improvement x Weighting Factor
National Performance Measure (SIP)National Performance Measure (SIP)
FALCON 5 - QA National Performance MeasureQA Assessment of RISK
90%
95%
100%
75%
80%
85%
all R
atin
g
NPMGOAL
65%
70%
75%
Ove
ra GOAL
55%
60%
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 64
Fiscal Year
Gaps for Average Division OfficeGaps for Average Division OfficeFALCON 5 - Gap AnalysisQA Assessment of RISK
Weighting Factors: Yellow-7, Orange-5, Green-3, Blue-2, Brown-1
13. Warranties
General Risk AreasGeneral Risk Areas5 PCC Quality Char
6. Bridge Quality Char.
7. Lot Size
10. PWL Risk Analysis
12. NTPEP
Moderate Risk AreasModerate Risk Areas8. PWL/PD
11. Continuous Equations
14. Limited use of visual acceptance
4. HMA Quality Char.
5. PCC Quality Char.
Hi h Ri k AHi h Ri k A16 Formal Dispute Resolution
18. Personnel Qualification.
15. System IA with 90% tech checked.
17. Project Field Labs Approval
1. Materials Management System
Higher Risk AreasHigher Risk Areas
0% 100%
2. Control of Random Sampling Location
3. Immed. State Possession of Verf. Tests
9. Use of F&t
16. Formal Dispute Resolution
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 65
% %
Individual Agency - Gap Analysis
Activities to Address GapsActivities to Address GapsRisk Areas Identified
Q-7 (Lot Size)
Products & Services
PWL Workshop
Q-8 (PWL/PD)
Q-9 (F & t tests)
PWL Workshop
SpecRisk WorkshopQ 9 (F & t tests)
Q-10 (Risk Analysis)
Q 11 (C ti P E ti )
Topical web-based manual on Quality Assurance
Q lit A f Fi ldQ-11 (Continuous Pay Equations)
Q-15 (System AI 90% tech checked)
Quality Assurance for Field Engineers training course
Provide Examples ofQ-16 (Formal Dispute Resolution)
Provide Examples of SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 66
RiskRisk--based Processbased Process
Risk-basedAssessment
T l
Benchmark Report
Tool
Prioritize Areas of Risk
IdentifyAction Plan
Successful PracticesConduct
Training / RoundtablesgRefine
QA Specifications
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 67
Intelligent Construction SystemsIntelligent Construction SystemsIntelligent Construction SystemsIntelligent Construction Systems
Reducing Risk100% Sampling
Link to PMS
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 68
Intelligent CompactorsIntelligent Compactors( k S t R ll )( k S t R ll )(aka Smart Rollers)(aka Smart Rollers)
• Soils and Asphalt• Intelligent
– Measures a parameter that relates to performance (density/stiffness)p ( y )
– Adjusts compaction effort based on measure response
– Provides real-time graphical informationProvides real time graphical information– Records response tied to location (GPS)
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 69
HMA CompactionHMA Compaction
Good Performing LongitudinalGood Performing LongitudinalGood Performing Longitudinal Good Performing Longitudinal Joints are not an “Accident!”Joints are not an “Accident!”
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 706 year old pavement® Courtesy of A Heritage Group Company
Low Density JointLow Density Joint
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 711 year old pavement® Courtesy of A Heritage Group Company
Day after a hard rain –Trapped Moisture
Low Density JointLow Density Joint
Premature Joint FailureJoint Life = Pavement Life
(i e 10 yrs vs 15 yrs)(i.e. 10 yrs vs. 15 yrs)
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 7210 year old pavement® Courtesy of A Heritage Group Company
National RAP Expert Task GroupNational RAP Expert Task Group
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 73
HMA Asphalt Pavement Recycling Expert Task Group
Advance the use of RAP in asphalt paving applications by providing highwayapplications by providing highway agencies with critical information regarding the use of RAP, technical guidance on high-RAP projects, and direction on research activities.
The members consist of representatives from highway agencies, industry, and academia.
Website: www.ncat.us/rap/rap
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 74
RAP ResourcesRAP Resources• New Expert Task Group on High RAP• FHWAFHWA
– www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/recycling• Recycled Materials Resource CenterRecycled Materials Resource Center
– www.rmrc.unh.edu• Green Highways Partnershipg y p
– www.greenhighways.org• FHWA R&D
– http://www.tfhrc.gov/hnr20/recycle/waste/index.htm
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 75
The Pavement Preservation ConceptThe Pavement Preservation ConceptThinking about tomorrow to drive today’s decisions Thinking about tomorrow to drive today’s decisions
Very
OriginalPavement
VeryGood
G dGood
Fair
PoorRehabilitation Trigger
VeryPoor
76Time (Years)
Acceptance & Construction ResourcesAcceptance & Construction Resources
• FHWA: Asset Management– http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/asstmgmt/index.
htm• National Asphalt Pavement Association
http://www hotmix org/– http://www.hotmix.org/• Asphalt Pavement Alliance (APA)
– http://www.asphaltalliance.com/index.asphttp://www.asphaltalliance.com/index.asp• Asphalt Institute
– http://www.asphaltinstitute.org/• Foundation for Pavement Preservation
– http://fp2.org/
77NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Balancing Risk & Assuring PerformanceBalancing Risk & Assuring Performance
StructuralStructuralStructuralStructural
MaterialsMaterials ConstructionConstruction
78NeedNeed StructureStructure MaterialsMaterials AcceptanceAcceptance ConstructionConstruction PreservationPreservation
Risk and InnovationRisk and Innovation• Systems like Superpave reduces the Risk of
poor pavement performance, andp p p
• Are adapting to address innovative materials p gand other evolving technologies.
Balancing Risk & Assuring Performance 79
Top Related