Design and construction recommendations for thin overlays in Texas.
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

Design and construction recommendations for thin overlays in Texas.

Filetype[PDF-17.82 MB]


Select the Download button to view the document
This document is over 5mb in size and cannot be previewed
English

Details:

  • Creators:
  • Corporate Creators:
  • Corporate Contributors:
  • Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Publication/ Report Number:
  • Resource Type:
  • Geographical Coverage:
  • Corporate Publisher:
  • NTL Classification:
    NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Pavement Management and Performance;NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Design;
  • Abstract:
    Thin HMA overlays, laid at 1.0 inch or thinner, are cost-effective surface maintenance options. The primary focus of this research was

    to develop specifications for three such mixes: fine dense-graded mix (fine DGM), fine-graded stone matrix asphalt (fine SMA), and

    fine-graded permeable friction course (fine PFC). A number of slurry overlay systems were also evaluated, but to a lesser extent.

    Draft specifications for the three mix types were first developed based on the results of a literature/information search and a

    field investigation of 11 existing projects. The specifications included minimum material quality levels, laboratory performance

    criteria, and construction recommendations. To evaluate the design recommendations, extensive laboratory testing was performed on

    each of the three thin overlay mixes with five different aggregates. Of the 15 mixes attempted, 12 had acceptable designs in terms of

    the specified performance tests. For the most part, the draft specifications appeared to function well with minor alterations

    recommended. Testing also included two supplementary studies on the effects of screening type in fine SMA and the effects of

    recycled materials on both the fine SMA and fine PFC. Compaction of the fine SMAs was highly influenced by packing

    characteristics of the coarse and fine aggregates. Screening quality did not affect fine SMA rutting resistance, but did affect cracking

    resistance. Using recycled aggregates reduced rutting problems but increased cracking susceptibility; however, most mixes performed

    well suggesting that quality, well-engineered mixes can still have good performance when recycled materials are used in limited

    amounts.

    Concerning laboratory testing of slurry overlays, the applicability of the overlay tester/procedures and the three-wheel

    polishing device in testing should be further studied. In particular, a tie-in with actual field performance should be identified, perhaps

    with the Accelerated Pavement Test program.

    Six thin overlay projects, comprising 10 unique mix designs, were constructed and evaluated. Most projects were constructed

    without problems, though some encountered issues with over- and under-compaction. Initial performance has been very good,

    although, since all the sections are less than two years old, the long-term performance is still undetermined.

    The researchers recommend adapting the specifications accompanying this report, which require using high quality materials

    and passing strict laboratory performance tests on both the lab design and trial batch materials. They do not recommend incorporating

    recycled materials in these mixes, though preliminary results are promising. Guidelines for pavement evaluation and mix selection

    were also prepared, which recommend the use of certain thin overlay or slurry overlay options given the pavement, traffic, and climate

    conditions.

  • Format:
  • Funding:
  • Collection(s):
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

Supporting Files

  • No Additional Files
More +

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov