Subsurface condition evaluation for asphalt pavement preservation treatments.

Details

• Creators:
  Lee, Jusang ; Hastak, Makarand ; Harris, Dwayne ; Ahn, Hyung Jun
• Corporate Creators:
  Purdue University. Joint Transportation Research Program
• Corporate Contributors:
  Indiana. Dept. of Transportation ; United States. Federal Highway Administration
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Asphalt pavements
  • Preservation
  • Pavement distress
  • Stripping (Pavements)
  • Air voids
  • Tensile strength
  • Ground penetrating radar
  • Image analysis
  • Laboratory tests
  • Test sections
  More +
• Publication/ Report Number:
  FHWA/IN/JTRP-2013/05
• Resource Type:
  Tech Report
• Geographical Coverage:
  Indiana
• Corporate Publisher:
  Purdue University. Joint Transportation Research Program
• Abstract:
  This report presents a case study on the SR‐70 section with microsurface for understanding its performance; a development of a ; methodology for evaluating the asphalt pavement subsurface condition for applying pavement preservation treatments; and a ; development of a tool for identifying and quantifying the subsurface distresses. ; From the case study, it was found that the main distresses on SR‐70 were longitudinal cracks, fatigue cracks, and potholes. The ; longitudinal cracking was the most widely distributed distress with 22% of lane length in the 2‐mile test section among the three distress ; types. Based on the water stripping test results and the core visual observations, it was confirmed that the test section on SR‐70 had the ; water stripping problem. ; In order to have a representative condition indicator for the test section, the conditions were converted into the scores scaled from 0 to ; 100. Layers with closer to a score of 100 have the better subsurface condition. Therefore, the 28% of the test section length with the ; surface distress was detected as the fair subsurface condition with a score of 56. The rest 72% of the length was estimated as the good ; subsurface condition with a score of 78. Similarly, 20.5% of the test section length with the problem locations determined by GPR had the ; fair subsurface condition with a score of 56 and the rest 79.5 % of the length had the good subsurface condition with a score of 76. ; The lab test results showed poor correlations among the water stripping severities, air voids, and tensile strengths. Thus, the air voids or ; tensile strength cannot properly estimate the water stripping severity or vice versa. When the laboratory test results with the surface ; distresses or in the GPR‐based problem locations were compared to that without the surface distresses or in the GPR‐based non‐problem ; locations, in general, average air voids and water stripping severities decrease and average tensile strengths increase. The observation ; confirms that the evaluation processes are applicable for evaluating the subsurface condition. Furthermore, the probability that a ; location determined to be problematic by GPR to be on one of poor conditions based on lab tests was 1.0. The same probability was ; obtained for a GPS‐based problem location. Accordingly, it was concluded that the laboratory tests with the surface distresses survey or ; the GPR measurement were reliable method to evaluate the subsurface condition. The FWD results had a weak correlation with the ; laboratory test results possibly due to fairly long testing interval (i.e., 328 ft). The current FWD test protocol should be improved for ; evaluating the subsurface condition in pavement preservation application. ; Guidelines of subsurface condition evaluation for pavement preservation treatment application was developed utilizing the findings from ; the case study. A concept of hierarchy was used in the guideline by taking project importance and available resources into consideration. ; A tool including guidelines, computer software (e.g., iSub and iMoisture), and its manual was also developed based on the methodology ; as a research product. Based on the guideline, it was concluded that the subsurface condition of the case study section on SR‐70 was ; inadequate for the application of the pavement preservation treatments.
  More +
• Format:
  PDF
• Funding:
  SPR-3507
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/27816/dot_27816_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 12.08 MB]
• Collection(s):
  US Transportation Collection
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha256:98c0cdbde33ce33fdaacc7c5d64fdc92a020b76ef1071a39bb131fc60d74ff67