ATP Presentation Series Pavement Materials Selection Presentation Series... · ATP-1 ATP-2 ATP-3 ATP-4…

Embed Size (px)

Text of ATP Presentation Series Pavement Materials Selection Presentation Series... · ATP-1 ATP-2 ATP-3...

ATP Presentation SeriesPavement Materials Selection Process

Cody Brand | Soils Engineer

District 8

6/23/2017

ATP Presentation Series

2

1. MnDOT Statewide Planning

2. Performance Measures & Funding Programs

a) Pavement & Materials Selection Process

3. Project Selection Processes

4. Project Scoping

5. STIP Overview and Approval Process

You are here!

Overview

3

Reconnaissance

Current & Predicted Pavement Conditions

Effects of Pavement Resurfacing

Cost of Pavement Resurfacing

Network Analysis

Project Selection

Reconnaissance

Historic Plans

Technical Information

Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD)

Coring

Past Pavement Condition

Projected Pavement Condition

4

Focus For Today

Pavement Conditions

5

60

.6%

74

.4%

86

.1%

73

.1%

73

.2%

55

.0%

73

.8%

71

.4%

71

.5%

58

.0%

56

.9%

74

.4%

69

.2%

72

.2%

60

.4% 66

.4%

57

.9% 64

.7%

68

.4%

70

.5%

88

.7%

71

.9%

68

.5%

61

.3%

56

.6%

78

.5%

71

.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

ATP-1 ATP-2 ATP-3 ATP-4 ATP-6 ATP-7 ATP-8 Metro Statewide

Pe

rce

nt

of

Ro

adw

ay M

iles

"Good" Ride Quality Index, Non-Interstate NHS System(RQI > 3.0)

Actual 2016 Predicted 2021 (2018-2021 STIP) Predicted 2027 (2022-2027 CHIP)

Pavement Conditions

6

3.8

%

0.8

%

0.7

%

0.8

%

1.9

%

4.4

%

1.7

%

1.6

%

2.0

%

10

.4%

4.1

%

3.0

%

6.4

%

4.8

% 5.5

%

8.0

%

5.0

% 5.9

%

7.9

% 8.8

%

1.5

%

5.2

%

8.8

%

10

.9%

9.6

%

4.8

%

6.8

%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

ATP-1 ATP-2 ATP-3 ATP-4 ATP-6 ATP-7 ATP-8 Metro Statewide

Pe

rce

nt

of

Ro

adw

ay M

iles

"Poor" Ride Quality Index, Non-Interstate NHS System(RQI

Pavement Conditions

7

49

.0%

85

.1%

69

.5%

73

.2%

74

.8%

34

.8%

76

.7%

53

.7%

65

.8%

63

.3%

62

.8%

65

.2%

63

.4%

73

.9%

40

.8%

70

.1%

49

.2%

62

.1%

75

.7%

57

.6%

71

.4%

63

.9%

77

.6%

67

.1%

58

.0%

73

.7%

67

.9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

ATP-1 ATP-2 ATP-3 ATP-4 ATP-6 ATP-7 ATP-8 Metro Statewide

Pe

rce

nt

of

Ro

adw

ay M

iles

"Good" Ride Quality Index, Non-NHS System(RQI > 3.0)

Actual 2016 Predicted 2021 (2018-2021 STIP) Predicted 2027 (2022-2027 CHIP)

Pavement Conditions

8

17

.5%

1.0

%

3.4

%

0.6

%

3.1

%

8.4

%

1.0

%

8.3

%

5.5

%

13

.3%

4.8

%

2.5

%

4.3

%

8.9

%

26

.6%

3.9

%

12

.7%

9.3

%

9.0

%

12

.7%

6.0

% 8.2

%

6.1

%

16

.3%

4.8

%

9.0

%

9.1

%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

ATP-1 ATP-2 ATP-3 ATP-4 ATP-6 ATP-7 ATP-8 Metro Statewide

Pe

rce

nt

of

Ro

adw

ay M

iles

"Poor" Ride Quality Index, Non-NHS System(RQI

Projecting Pavement Conditions

9

Rid

e Q

ual

ity

Ind

ex

Year

Projecting Pavement Conditions

10

Rid

e Q

ual

ity

Ind

ex

Year

Defining Pavement Condition

Measures include:

Ride Quality Index (RQI)

Remaining Service Life (RSL)

Surface Rating (SR)

Crack Counts

11

What the Public Sees

Pavement Distress Identification

12

Effects of Resurfacing

Examine performance of:

Major Rehabilitation

Cold In-place Recycle (CIR)

Medium mill & overlay

Thin Surface Treatments

Ultra-thin Bonded Wearing Course (UTBWC)

Micro-milling

13

Paver

5/8 1.0Thickness

Effects of Resurfacing - CIR

14

Low

Sev

erit

y Tr

ansv

erse

cra

cks

/ 5

00

Year 18 + years

Effects of Resurfacing Medium M&O

15

Low

Sev

erit

y Tr

ansv

erse

cra

cks

/ 5

00

Year 11 years

Cost of Resurfacing

Cold In-place Recycle

$ 250,000 / mile

Detour may be needed

CIR mix design may need to be performed by a consultant

CIR doesnt work well in urban sections

Medium Mill and Overlay

$ 225,000 / mile

Detour not required

16

Cost of Resurfacing

Full Depth Reclamation / Stabilized Full Depth Reclamation

$ 350,000 / mile

Detour required

Ground Penetrating Radar should be performed by consultant

White-topping

$ 300,000 $ 600,000 / mile

Detour required

Ground Penetrating Radar should be performed by consultant

More complex deliverability17

Effects of Resurfacing UTBWC

18

Rid

e Q

ual

ity

Ind

ex

Year Year

No Ultra-Thin Bonded Wearing Course

Ultra-Thin Bonded Wearing Course

Effects of Resurfacing Micro-milling

19

Year 0 RQI Year 1 RQI Year 3 RQI

Micro-mill & Chip Seal 3.3 3.4 3.4

Micro-mill & Micro-Surfacing* 2.3 3.7 3.2

Micro-mill & UTBWC 2.9 3.9 3.5

NRRA micro-milling case study on 3 MN trunk highways between 2013 2016.*Polymer Modified Micro-Surfacing

RQI on traditional mill and overlay projects ranges from 4.2 3.6

Other Thin Surface Treatments to Consider:

Double chip seal

ThinLay

Cost of Resurfacing

Ultra-thin Bonded Wearing Course

$ 100,000 / mile

Potential for snow and ice issues in wind-blown locations

Micro-milling

$ 15,000 / mile (additional cost)

ThinLay

$ 65,000 / mile

20

Benefits of Thin Surface Treatments

21

Program Flexibility

Can be advanced or delayed with minimal impact

No profile raise:

Reduces the cost of shouldering

Reduces the cost of entrances / intersection

Preserves in-slope

Easy deliverability

Design and Inspection

Shorter duration

Network Analysis

Highway Pavement Management Application (HPMA)

Uses a decision tree to determine the appropriate rehabilitation strategy for each segment. Triggers include:

Ride Quality Index

Surface Rating

Transverse Cracking

Alligator Cracking

Fiscal constrains are used to determine the most cost effective projects

22

23

Project Selection

HPMA network analysis is verified or revised by District

Past project performance

Recent regional experience

Research and literature

Projects are selected based on funding targets and performance measures

Process is repeated annually for program development

Also repeated within the fiscal year

24

Thank you!Questions?

Cody Brand

Cody.Brand@state.mn.us

320-214-6366

25