Researchers developed sophisticated models for high-density asphalt pavement mixtures. After calibrating the model to experimental data available from 5 percent air void asphalt mixtures, the research team conducted tests on three Minnesota mixtures to further refine the model. A Phase II study will develop multiple high-density mix designs for Minnesota applications.Continue reading High-Density Asphalt Pavement Mixtures Viable with local Aggregates
In a newly completed study, researchers found that stabilized full-depth reclamation has produced stronger roads for commercial loads in Minnesota, and the method shows promise for uses in rural agricultural areas. How much greater the strength gained with each stabilizing agent is better understood, though not conclusively.
What Was the Need?
With stabilized full-depth reclamation (SFDR), roadway builders pulverize and mix old (hot-mix or bituminous) pavement and on-site base aggregate with asphalt to create a new, thick layer of partially bound base over the remaining aggregate base of the former roadbed. The process eliminates the cost of hauling away old pavement and hauling in new, expensive aggregate, which is in limited supply.
Cracking and other damage in older pavements usually reflect through new asphalt and concrete overlays. SFDR roads, on the other hand, tend to avoid reflective cracking while meeting the increasing load demands of an aging roadway system in reduced funding environments.
To make a road stronger and more resistant to damage from heavy loads, most rehabilitation approaches require a thicker and wider roadway. SFDR may offer a way to build stronger roads without widening the road and without transporting old material from the road site and hauling new aggregate to the location.
In 2016, performance requirements of SFDR edged MnDOT and the Local Road Research Board (LRRB) closer to design standards for the technique by establishing testing, modeling and analytical methods for evaluating SFDR mixtures. Minnesota designers lack a method for giving SFDR designs structural design ratings to quantify how well the mixture will meet the needs of a new roadway. How much strength is gained by mixing in a stabilizer and laying the reclaimed road as a thick asphalt pavement base before adding the overlay remains unquantified.
What Was Our Goal?
Most replacement roadways need to be capable of bearing heavier commercial and agricultural loads than the original roads. Researchers sought to determine the structural value of SFDR in mixtures employing various stabilizing agents to help designers better accommodate rehabilitation and increased loading needs with SFDR.
“We’re really big on recycling, and we’ve been using SFDR and FDR for quite some time. We have increased confidence in SFDR. We just don’t know how high that confidence should be,” said Guy Kohlnhofer, County Engineer, Dodge County.
What Did We Do?
Researchers visited 19 Minnesota road sites to look at 24 pavement sections and surveyed pavement conditions, cracking and potholing for each segment. The team conducted stability testing with a dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) at each section and removed three pavement cores from each for laboratory testing.
SFDR pavement can be difficult to properly core, and most specimens failed before laboratory testing. Researchers conducted tests of dynamic modulus in a way that simulated high and low vehicle speeds in the lab on the surviving 14 samples. The tests simulated the movement of wheels over pavement surface and examined the resiliency of the pavements in springing back from these rolling loads.
Based on these results, researchers plotted the laboratory test results in mathematical curves. They then analyzed their findings while referencing flexible pavement design procedures using the concept of granular equivalents (GEs) that is familiar to many avement designers in Minnesota. Finally, they estimated the structural difference between stabilized and unstabilized reclaimed materials and identified how the structural value varies with selected stabilization agents.
What Did We Learn?
Field surveys found roads performing well. Few of the pavement surfaces showed noticeable distress, and more recent surface coating treatments showed almost no distress over pavements in which distresses would quickly present themselves. DCP testing suggested that asphaltic stabilizers—asphalt, asphalt plus cement and modified asphalt—offered greater stiffness than fly ash and cement stabilization.
“We confirmed that what local engineers are doing has value, even if we weren’t able to generate more optimistic numbers,” said Charles Jahren, Professor, Iowa State University Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering.
Lab testing suggested that while SFDR mixtures offer less stiffness compared to regular hot-mix asphalt (HMA) layers, their stiffness diminishes less in comparison to HMA for slow-moving heavy loads like seasonal agricultural equipment. SFDR is worthy of additional consideration as a base layer, in such loading environments.
The most critical goal for this study was to quantify the granular equivalency of SFDR mixtures with various additives to standard aggregate bases. Foamed asphalt and engineered emulsion proved the most structurally beneficial stabilizers; SFDR mixtures with these materials offered GE values of 1.46 to 1.55, confirming the general MnDOT approach that SFDR can be used for a GE of 1.5. If road builders pulverize 4 inches of asphalt roadway with 4 inches of base aggregate and add foamed asphalt or emulsion stabilizer, the 8-inch asphalt base offers the strength of a 12-inch aggregate base. A pavement of HMA or portland cement concrete can follow to create a roadway section with greater strength than a roadway section with the same thickness of nonstabilized base.
SFDR performs well in the field and shows particular promise for use on rural roadways subject to seasonal, heavy agricultural loads. Researchers confirmed current GE inputs for SFDR and documented the performance of specific stabilizer options employed in Minnesota. Continued monitoring of SFDR road performance and additional testing and analysis would add more detail to design procedures and provide designers with greater confidence.
This post pertains to LRRB-produced Report 2018-33, “Field Investigation of Stabilized Full-Depth Reclamation (SFDR),” published November 2018. For more information, visit MnDOT’s Office of Research & Innovation project page.
In a recently completed study, Minnesota researchers compare the performance and cost-benefit of the clean-and-seal versus rout-and-seal techniques for repairing asphalt pavement cracks.
Survey results, construction data and field evaluation of new repairs and their performance over two years gave rout-and-seal repairs a slight cost–benefit edge over clean-and-seal repairs. At an average performance index level, rout-and-seal offered about four years of service before failure; clean-and-seal offered about three years. The study also recommends rout-and-seal for use over clay and silt subgrades in most conditions. Decision trees were developed to help planners and repair crews select an appropriate repair method.
Preserving asphalt pavements so they maintain performance for decades requires a variety of repairs, including sealing cracks. Cracks allow water to seep into pavement structures, leading to damage from freeze-thaw expansion, stripping of the asphalt’s bond from the underlying structure, potholes and crack expansion.
For most crack repairs, road crews clean the crack and apply an asphaltic filler or sealant. MnDOT uses two approaches to repair cracks and create a smooth ride for passing vehicles: clean-and-seal and rout-and-seal. Both treatments force traffic closures.
With clean-and-seal, compressed air is used to remove debris from the crack before a sealant is applied. With rout-and-seal, a saw or router is used to grind a shallow trench or reservoir over the crack. The routed seam is then filled with an asphaltic sealant.
Rout-and-seal requires more time and, in many cases, slightly more sealant, making it more expensive than clean-and-seal. Some agencies favor clean-and-seal because it is less expensive, reduces the time crews are on the road and frees more time to maintain other cracks.
What Was Our Goal?
Researchers sought to determine which of the two repair methods offers the better value over time. If rout-and-seal delivers a longer-lasting repair, it may be more cost-effective than clean-and-seal in terms of life-cycle cost. The research team also needed to develop guidelines for selecting the most suitable repair method for the damaged pavement.
What Did We Do?
Researchers conducted a literature search to see how agencies around the country approach asphalt crack repair. The research team then surveyed Minnesota road agencies to see which repair method agencies prefer and how long repairs typically last.
To review performance of crack sealing, researchers evaluated the MnDOT construction logs of old repair sites and visited 11 new repair sites. These locations were revisited two, six, eight, 12 and 18 months following the repair. To calculate a performance index rating, researchers recorded data about site conditions that included sealant age, traffic level, subgrade soil type and crack sealing performance. Two sites were removed from the analysis when local crews applied chip seals to the pavements.
Investigators calculated performance index levels for each repair method at each site. They gathered cost data where available from bid-letting paperwork and determined life-cycle costs. Finally, the research team created decision trees that planners and maintenance crews can use to help select crack repair methods.
What Did We Learn?
“This study provided very useful information. The rout-and-seal has a better cost–benefit over the life of the pavement than the clean-and-seal, however, they are relatively close. Agencies will need to decide if they have the manpower or resources to perform one over the other.”—Dan Knapek, Assistant County Engineer, Sherburne County Public Works
Limited research was identified that compared clean-and-seal and rout-and-seal treatments. Most studies of asphalt crack sealing compared unsealed and sealed pavement performance and have established that sealing does extend pavement life. None compared cost–benefits of the two methods.
Of 47 survey respondents, 68 percent use rout-and-seal and 32 percent use clean-and-seal. Responses identified no clear trends in life expectancies for the two methods, with predictions for service until failure falling predominantly in two to 10 years for clean-and-seal and two to 15 years for rout-and-seal. The most common criteria for choosing a method were crack or pavement condition (46 percent of respondents) and predetermined maintenance schedules (24 percent).
Analysis of MnDOT construction data found no statistically significant difference in life expectancies for the two methods, with service lives of 6.4 years for rout-and-seal and 6 years for clean-and-seal. A similarly slight advantage for service lives of both treatments was identified for low-volume roads over higher-volume roads.
After one year of service, the new seal sites delivered strong performance index figures. Short-term performance on rural roads was identical for the two methods. After the severe 2018-2019 winter, however, performance dropped significantly; spalling damage was frequently observed at rout-and-seal sites.
Analysis of old and new seal projects showed that at an average performance index level, rout-and-seal repairs last about four years and clean-and-seal about three. Life-cycle cost analysis found rout-and-seal slightly more effective. Because the difference is slight, factors such as treatment cost, life expectancy, ease of operation, traffic level and crew manager opinion may guide selection of sealing strategies.
Researchers developed two decision trees for selecting a repair method: one for pavement management and another for maintenance crews. Rout-and-seal is recommended for pavements over clay and silt subgrades.
Research that extends monitoring of the new crack seal sites for up to five years would provide useful data on performance and comparison of the effectiveness of the two methods.
“To help select an appropriate crack repair method, we developed two decision trees: a detailed one and a simple one with only three variables—crack size, traffic level and the number of times a crack has been sealed.”—Manik Barman, Assistant Professor, University of Minnesota Duluth Department of Civil Engineering
This Technical Summary pertains to Report 2019-26, “Cost/Benefit Analysis of the Effectiveness of Crack Sealing Techniques,” published June 2019. Visit the MnDOT research project page for more information.
Improved modeling of geogrid for use with MnDOT’s pavement design software, MnPAVE Flexible, will allow pavement designers to simulate field tests of stiffness and resiliency in pavements over bases with and without geogrid. MnDOT is using modeling results from a recent study to develop a design input that quantifies the benefit of geogrid in terms of pavement service life and aggregate thickness.
“This innovative study will be especially beneficial for designs in areas with poor subgrade. We worked closely with the geogrid manufacturer to develop codes that accurately simulate geogrid behavior in a pavement,” said Bruce Tanquist, Pavement Computer Applications Engineer, MnDOT Office of Pavement Design.
What Was the Need?
Many highways in Minnesota are built upon soft subgrades. These weak subgrades lower the roadway pavement life. In the past, timber and cement have been used to stiffen pavement foundations with mixed success. However, for the last 20 years, geogrids have been shown to be a beneficial and cost-effective method to stiffen the existing pavement structure.
Geogrid is a stiff polymer webbing with apertures that interlock with aggregate in the base. The material is placed within the new or reclaimed aggregate base, usually two-thirds the distance from the top of the base. After the remaining aggregate is placed, the road is paved with either asphalt or concrete.
Geogrid increases the stiffness of the aggregate base layer by locking aggregate in place for improved resilience. Though the benefit of geogrid has been observed in the past, it was not quantified for pavement design purposes, and designers were not able to include the properties in their calculations when designing a pavement. Geogrid was sometimes seen as an extra expense with no calculated benefit.
A 2016 study was also tasked to quantify the benefits of geogrid in mechanistic design, but deflection testing results were inconclusive and did not support a reliable design factor for geogrid use in aggregate base.
What Was Our Goal?
MnDOT pavement designers requested a model to show how using geogrid in the roadway base impacted pavement life. Researchers used new software to evaluate geogrid behavior in different design permutations and to quantify its benefit to pavement performance using MnDOT’s pavement design software, MnPAVE Flexible.
What Did We Do?
The updated software was used to expand the geogrid modeling capability and test modeled nonreinforced and geogrid-reinforced bases. Research began by identifying geogrid parameters useful in modeling and as inputs to MnPAVE. Investigators worked with a geogrid manufacturer to specify and code the physical characteristics and properties of triaxial geogrid (with triangular-shaped apertures) used in the field for modeling.
Researchers then worked closely with a software developer to refine modeling capabilities, expanding on previous work that focused on biaxial geogrid (with rectangular-shaped apertures) to include triaxial geogrid, and to model behavior of geogrids in variable parameters for geogrid and aggregate.
Geogrid and aggregate models were tested extensively, adjusting geogrid and aggregate characteristics and simulating dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) and light weight deflectometer (LWD) tests. Researchers collected numerical modeling results on geogridand aggregate performance to use with MnPAVE design software and to develop design factors that quantify the impact of geogrid on pavement performance.
What Did We Learn?
Field testing from previous research was insufficiently detailed because it did not include specific pavement structure and subgrade conditions below each deflection-tested location. Additionally, lab testing, which evaluated geogrids by testing their behavior within 6-inch by 12-inch cylinders, did not correlate well with the dimensions and shapes of field geogrid installations.
Effective modeling aids in quantifying the benefits of geogrids. The modeling developed in this research effectively began to bridge the gap between field and lab examination by testing forces in 1-foot-square models with 4- to 12-inch aggregate thicknesses, which is more appropriate for estimating geogrid and aggregate behavior in the field.
“We were asked to quantify the benefit of geogrid. It is important to keep the aggregate layer thick for benefits like drainage, so it’s important to know that we were getting extra years of life with geogrid-reinforced aggregate base,” John Siekmeier, Research Engineer, MnDOT Office of Materials and Road Research.
New modeling capabilities allow testing of various parameters, including geogrid aperture dimensions and configurations, the thickness and shape of geogrid ribs, aggregate roughness and gradation, and moisture content. Test simulations of geogrid and aggregate configurations run for hours or days, and model a wide range of behaviors to capture reliable data from DCP and LWD tests of stiffness, resilience, and strength of bases with and without geogrids.
Test results showed that depending on moisture content and the time of year, bases reinforced with geogrids offer 1.5 to 2.5 times the resiliency under loading compared to nongeogrid-reinforced bases.
Investigators are working with MnDOT designers to codify a geogrid factor in MnPAVE that determines the improved service life or the aggregate thickness equivalent that geogrid provides to aggregate bases in pavements. The geogrid factor could be incorporated early in 2019.
Further research could include comparing modeling results to LWD and DCP field test results of new pavements with geogrid-reinforced aggregate bases. Such implementation and site testing could continue with new pavement installations to collect data to confirm or calibrate geogrid design factors and geogrid modeling for MnPAVE.
This post pertains to Report 2018-30, “Performance Specification for Geogrid Reinforced Aggregate Base,” published October 2018.
Lab testing has demonstrated that structural synthetic fibers in thin concrete overlays keep cracks tight and help transfer loads across pavement slabs. A recently released research study, co-funded by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Minnesota Local Road Research Board, provides recommendations for selecting fiber types and dosages in pavement design.
What Was the Need?
Concrete pavements usually measure 8 to 15 inches thick. For many of these pavements, designers recommend placing dowel bars at the joints during the pour to assist the transfer of wheel load from heavy commercial and agricultural vehicles across concrete slab joints.
MnDOT has found that dowel bars are not effective in a thin concrete overlay, a 4- to 6-inch layer of concrete over an older pavement. These slabs fracture prematurely around the dowels. Adding structural fibers to concrete offers a potential solution. Used primarily to keep cracks from widening, these fibers consist of pieces of thin synthetic material—polymers, carbon fabric, even steel—mixed into the concrete batch.
Many states do not have formal standards for fiber types or characteristics, dosage rates or other specifications for their use. MnDOT currently uses the approved products list created by Illinois Department of Transportation.
Minnesota road engineers agree that fibers work well in concrete, but how well was unknown. Research was needed to determine the optimal physical characteristics of fibers, the amount that should be mixed in to the concrete, and products currently not on the approved products list that may be effective.
What Was Our Goal?
MnDOT wanted to investigate fiber performance in thin concrete overlays, specifically to help identify fibers that are most appropriate in these overlays and recommend acceptable dosage rates for mixing and placing the thin concrete. MnDOT also needed a test procedure and design recommendations or specifications for using fibers.
“This research looked at fiber performance in terms of load transfer to see if fibers can provide an alternative to dowels in thinner concrete pavements,” Maria Masten, Concrete Engineer, MnDOT Office of Materials and Road Research.
What Did We Do?
Research began with a literature search and a survey of state transportation agencies identified by the American Concrete Pavement Association as leading users of fiber-
reinforced concrete overlays.
Laboratory testing first focused on post-crack performance, relying on ASTM C1609, the nationally recognized testing standard. Investigators tested 10 fibers of various lengths, geometries and stiffness in three dosage levels in concrete, evaluating the impact of fiber properties on post-crack performance.
Testing then turned to joint performance. Researchers used four fibers from the previous lab examination and added a fifth fiber, a synthetic fiber used in MnROAD test cells in 2017, to test load transfer across cracks between sections of fiber-reinforced concrete. Together, the two lab phases tested 11 fibers in 43 concrete mixtures in over 400 samples 10 beams and 10 cylinders each of 30 fiber-reinforced concrete samples for post-crack performance, one plain concrete mix and 12 additional fiber-reinforced mixtures in joint performance testing. Analysis considered post-crack performance, crack width, fiber geometry, dosage, load transfer efficiency and residual strength.
In the final step, researchers analyzed the collected data and developed recommendations for MnDOT.
What Did We Learn?
Results confirmed that fibers help keep cracks and joints tight and improve load transfer across cracks and joints in thin concrete overlays. This research indicated synthetic fibers provide equal or better performance than steel fibers, which are expensive, heavy and difficult to mix. Dosages less than 0.25 percent fiber volume fraction of concrete mixture did not improve post-crack flexural or load transfer efficiency across the joint.
In lab mixing, longer and stiffer fibers tended to ball and mat with greater frequency than shorter fibers, though researchers developed a mixing method that reduces balling and matting. Fiber dosage, stiffness and shape significantly influenced strength. Embossed, twisted and crimped fibers outperformed straight, flat synthetic fibers; longer fibers with larger diameters outperformed shorter, smaller diameter fibers that inhibit workability.
“We studied many varieties of fibers before writing a specification for using fibers in concrete overlays. This is one step forward in understanding fiber’s contribution in concrete pavements or overlays,” Manik Barman, Assistant Professor, University of Minnesota Duluth Department of Civil Engineering.
Fiber shape had moderate influence on load transfer and displacement in joint performance testing. Dosage levels and crack width strongly affected joint performance. Overall, it was found that fibers can increase the load transfer by 30 percent and can reduce the slab displacement by 50 percent.
Researchers suggest designers use trial batches of mixtures, submitting samples to ASTM C1609 testing and selecting fibers based on joint performance results from this study. Graphs and tables from this study correlate fiber properties with post-crack flexural strength and joint performance to help guide selection and dosage.
Researchers recommend fibers with high lateral stiffness and irregular cross sections in lengths between 1.5 to 2.5 inches and at dosage levels no greater than 1 percent fiber volume fraction to avoid balling, matting and unworkability of concrete mixtures. MnDOT will issue fiber requirements so manufacturers can then submit products and test results for evaluation by MnDOT in developing a new approved products list for fibers in concrete pavements.
Future research could focus on validating design recommendations in the field; establishing fresh fiber-reinforced concrete mixture parameters by running slump, air content and other tests of fresh mixes; and analyzing life-cycle costs and benefits.
This post pertains to the MNDOT and LRRB-produced Report 2018-29, “Comparison of
Performances of Structural Fibers and Development of a Specification for Using Them in
Thin Concrete Overlays,” published August 2018.
Transportation planners lack a method to directly compare bridge and road conditions. In a new MnDOT-funded study, University of Minnesota researchers have proposed a Percent Remaining Service Interval (PRSI) measure that can uniformly assess the condition of bridges and pavements, enabling planners to make the most efficient use of preservation and improvement funding.
“Both the MnDOT Bridge Office and the Materials and Road Research Office have very good management systems in place,” says Mihai Marasteanu, a professor in the Department of Civil, Environmental, and Geo- Engineering (CEGE) and the study’s principal investigator. “There is a good potential to develop a new common metric that both offices could use.”
What Did We Do?
To begin developing this new measure, researchers conducted a literature review of current methods used in asset management and life-cycle cost analysis. The review of bridge research focused on performance measures and life expectancy assessment methods, while the study of pavement literature concentrated on performance measures as well as on the use of road service life measures.
Next, the research team, which included civil engineering bridge professor Arturo Schultz, surveyed both bridge management staff and pavement management staff from state transportation agencies. Team members then analyzed the asset management practices of MnDOT’s Office of Bridges and Structures and Office of Materials and Road Research to identify methods for assessing service lives and rehabilitation needs and to highlight the similarities and differences in approaches.
Based on the findings from the survey and analysis, researchers suggested the new method of PRSI that would serve both pavement and bridge needs and offered guidelines for the next steps in developing and implementing a unified PRSI procedure.
“Ultimately, funds for guardrail repairs are drawn from the same purse that pays to fill a pothole or repair a deck joint,” Marasteanu says. “With PRSI, planners could target average values across systems to optimize life-cycle costs and pursue an even distribution of PRSI values to make planning consistent from year to year.”
In the next phase of the project, researchers will work with the pavement office to identify relevant data for calculating PRSI for pavements. “In addition, we plan to identify the time and costs required to reach the evenly distributed configuration of PRSIs necessary for planning consistency, assess how preservation activities impact funding efficiency, and calculate recommended metrics for asset sustainability,” Marasteanu says.
This article originally appeared in the Center for Transportation Studies’ Catalyst Newsletter, October 2018. The full report, published July 2018, can be accessed at “Remaining Service Life Asset Measure, Phase I,” .
Many counties have incomplete roadway inventories, but lack asset management programs, which are often cost-prohibitive and require advanced technical training and staff to maintain. The Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute at North Dakota State University (NDSU), has developed a low-cost asset inventory program called the Geographic Roadway Inventory Tool (GRIT). The program, which is currently available to North Dakota counties, will be offered to all Minnesota counties following further development and testing by the Minnesota Local Road Research Board.
NDSU created the asset inventory program as the first step for asset management to allow local roadway managers to document and understand their existing infrastructure using the latest mobile technology and Geographic Information System technology.
The goal of the research study is to expand the program to include roadway forecasting based on the American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials(AASHTO) 93 model with inventory, pavement condition and traffic forecasting data.
Existing input data from GRIT, such as pavement thickness, roadway structural information and construction planning information, will be spatially combined with current Pathway pavement condition and traffic data from MnDOT to automatically forecast the future condition and age of roadways using the AASHTO 93 model. This forecasting model will then allow roadway managers to use this information with comprehensive GIS web maps to prioritize roadways in construction schedule or multi-year plans.
The additional information contained in the pavement forecast system will allow county roadway managers to prioritize projects that can benefit from lower cost pavement preservation activities and understand how long roadways can last before a high cost reconstruction must take place. The online GIS output maps will also enable the public to see what projects will be conducted on a year-to-year basis.
The research team will work with Beltrami, Pope, Faribault, Pennington, and Becker counties and the city of Moorhead in Minnesota to research, develop, test and implement an additional forecasting function of the existing asset management program. This will be done using the AASHTO 93 empirical model to calculate a future pavement serviceability rating (PSR) based on the existing pavement structure and age, forecasted traffic and the latest pavement condition. While existing pavement structure and age information will come from data entered into the GRIT program by counties, processes and procedures will be researched and developed to automatically access pavement condition and traffic data from MnDOT and geospatially combine it with inventory data.
With pavement forecast information, county roadway managers will be able to better understand which roadways will deteriorate first and which will benefit from more effective, low-cost maintenance programs rather than full-depth reconstructions. The model will not forecast suggested future projects or project costs, but rather just output the future condition of the roadways on a yearly basis. The AASHTO model can be applied for both flexible and rigid pavement sections.
The city of Shoreview, Minnesota was on the right track when it took the unusual step of paving a residential neighborhood with pervious concrete to help control stormwater and pollutant runoff into a nearby lake, according to a recently released seven-year performance study.
Typically used for parking lots and sidewalks, porous paving material allows stormwater to filter through the pavement and an aggregate base into the soil rather than run off the pavement and drain into storm sewers.
Shoreview bucked convention by using pervious concrete in a traffic application — low-volume, low-speed roads in the Woodbridge neighborhood near Lake Owasso. The city thought pervious pavement could help meet community sustainability goals and federal clean water regulations by reducing pollutants in waterways and groundwater while keeping water safely off driving surfaces.
Traditionally, pervious concrete hadn’t been used for roadways because engineers didn’t consider it strong enough for traffic (this and other projects have now demonstrated its application for low-volume roads like neighborhood streets). The impact on ride quality, tire-pavement noise and filtration was also not well understood, particularly in cold climates with freeze-thaw cycles like those in Minnesota.
Pervious concrete also presented a maintenance challenge: Organic debris, sand and other grit can clog the pavement’s pores. Periodic vacuuming is required to maintain the intended flow of water through the pavement. Concerned about how best to maintain the pavement and interested in tire-pavement noise levels and filtering performance, Shoreview, MnDOT and the Local Road Research Board monitored the Woodbridge roadways for seven years.
Installation and Evaluation
Shoreview replaced 9,000-square -feet of asphalt roads with 7 inches of pervious concrete over 18 inches of coarse aggregate base; near the lake, highly drainable sand served as the base. About twice each year for five years, researchers tested sound absorption, water infiltration and ride quality one day after the pavement had been vacuumed. In 2015, they repeated these tests without vacuuming the day before.
The pervious pavement performed well in filtering stormwater. By 2012, at least 1.3 acre-feet of water had filtered through the pavement and ground, and by 2015, nearly 2 acre-feet of water had filtered through the surface—all of which would otherwise have run directly into Lake Owasso.
Water infiltration and sound absorption rates were higher than traditional concrete, although rates declined over time because organic material continued to clog pavement pores despite vacuuming twice a year.
Initial construction of the pervious concrete streets and stormwater filtration system was slightly more costly than construction of comparable asphalt pavement with culverts. Life-cycle costs, including projections of maintenance costs over 15 years, however, showed somewhat lower costs for pervious pavement. While the pervious concrete pavement may require diamond grinding after 10 years, monthly vacuuming could make this unnecessary. Asphalt pavement would typically require a mill-and-overlay at year 15, and culverts would require periodic cleaning.
Additional benefits of the pervious pavement system that were not included in cost calculations—but were clearly significant—included complying with the federal Clean Water Act, recharging groundwater and avoiding direct pollution of Lake Owasso. Shoreview’s investment in pervious concrete has paid off economically and environmentally.
For additional information about this line of research, see these resources:
- Seven-year study final report
- Technical summary of preliminary study of pervious concrete
- Related ongoing study: Permeable Pavement for Road Salt Reduction
Adding graphite nanoplatelets (GNP) to asphalt binders and applying the methodology developed in a new MnDOT study could provide a cost-effective approach to reducing cold-weather cracking and increasing the durability of Minnesota pavements.
“This project gives MnDOT a low-cost way to incorporate the latest nanotechnologies into our asphalt mixtures, reducing cold-weather cracking and increasing the durability of Minnesota pavements,” said Shongtao Dai, Research Operations Engineer, MnDOT Office of Materials and Road Research.
What Was Our Goal?
The objective of this project was to develop a cost-effective method to determine the optimum mix design of GNP-reinforced asphalt binders and mixtures. This method would predict the fracture behavior of these materials using a combination of simple laboratory testing and computer modeling.
What Did We Do?
Researchers developed a method for determining the quantity of GNP to add to an asphalt binder to achieve optimal asphalt mixture performance. The method used a computer model to predict the low-temperature fracture behavior of mixtures based on bending beam rheometer (BBR) tests on fine aggregate mixtures. This test applies a load to the center of a thin, rectangular specimen that has been cooled to a low temperature while its edges rest on two elevated supports, and then measures how the specimen bends over time. The results of this test determine the stiffness of materials and their ability to relax the stresses of contraction.
The BBR test is simpler, less expensive and less labor-intensive than the more accurate semicircular bend (SCB) test, which measures fracture resistance—the way cracks in a material form—by loading a semicircular sample from its apex. However, the SCB test can determine the properties of all the particles within a mixture; the BBR test can only evaluate the mechanical properties of coarse aggregates. To obtain the accuracy of the SCB test without the labor and expense, the computer model developed by researchers in this study uses BBR results as inputs to simulate SCB tests and infer the properties of fine aggregates.
What Did We Learn?
Researchers validated their computer model by comparing its results with those of actual SCB tests. They found that the model was able to predict the results of SCB tests for both conventional and GNP-modified mixtures. By performing only a BBR test on the fine aggregates mixture and inputting the results into the computer model, researchers obtained a reasonable prediction of the fracture response of the final asphalt mixtures.
In turn, the model showed that using GNP in asphalt binders can significantly improve the strength and fracture resistance of a mixture compared to mixtures with unmodified asphalt binders. The model can be used as a design tool to determine what percentage of GNP is needed to achieve the necessary tensile strength for a target value of fracture energy.
Using GNP in asphalt binders, in combination with the methodology developed in this project, could potentially provide MnDOT with a cost-effective approach to improving the cold-weather performance of Minnesota pavements, preventing cracking and increasing pavement durability. MnDOT will continue to evaluate the use of GNP in its asphalt mixes.
This post pertains to Report 2018-02, “A Mechanistic Design Approach for Graphite Nanoplatelet (GNP) Reinforced Asphalt Mixtures for Low-Temperature Applications.” Further GNP research is underway. Find related projects at MnDOT.gov/research.
Researchers have developed a simple design tool for determining the amount of frost-free materials needed for a specific site’s subgrade to prevent frost and freeze-thaw damage to pavements.
“This tool will help us optimize construction to provide the best pavement,” said Steve Henrichs, Assistant Pavement Design Engineer, MnDOT Office of Materials and Road Research
Since 1995, MnDOT has required the use of frost-free materials (FFM) in subgrade depths of 30 to 36 inches for asphalt pavements, based on traffic load requirements. It is not clear that such FFM requirements are effective. In some areas, 30 inches may be excessive and, therefore, unnecessarily expensive; in others, 36 inches of FFM may not be enough, leading to costly pavement failure and repair. MnDOT needed a research-based pavement subgrade design procedure for resisting frost damage in pavements.
“Frost protection has not been studied in depth recently. This research used inputs based on soil type, location and expected frost depth, and didn’t require advanced modeling or expensive laboratory testing,” said Matthew Oman, Principal Engineer, Braun Intertec Corp.
What Was Our Goal?
The goal of this project was to develop a procedure for optimizing subsurface materials and thicknesses based on existing subgrade soils and geographic areas in Minnesota in order to resist pavement damage from frost action.
What Did We Do?
Researchers first reviewed existing literature on frost action and frost susceptibility. They synthesized national and international research and looked at practices and standards for mitigating frost action in states and countries with climates similar to Minnesota’s. Then they reviewed MnDOT’s current and historical policies and practices.
The central effort in this research was to examine existing pavements in Minnesota to characterize pavement performance and winter profiles. Researchers and the Technical Advisory Panel selected 72 pavement sites for study based on soil types (such as glacial till, clay, silt, sand and peat); pavement types (including concrete, asphalt and composite); subsurface materials and thickness; and weather conditions. The team evaluated construction logs, project plans, management data and subsurface investigations, and they augmented Minnesota-specific data with performance and soil data from the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) program. Researchers created winter pavement profiles of most of the sites and compared them with roughness and ride quality data collected the previous summer.
Finally, the team analyzed performance trends and design and construction details to assess the effect of frost heave on ride quality. Using the findings from this effort, the team built a design tool for determining what pavement structures require of subgrades to resist environmental effects based on project location, projected frost depth and soil type.
What Did We Learn?
The initial evaluation did not produce strong correlations between winter ride quality and factors like FFM depth, grading soil depth and region. Winter ride quality measurements were poorer than summer measurements, but the role of FFMs remained unclear. Insufficient data, outliers and other questionable information were culled from the records, which were then amplified with data from other pertinent historical sources. Results from this effort suggested that FFM depth may improve pavement performance by incrementally reducing ride deterioration, particularly at depths of 25 inches or greater.
Review of relevant LTPP data established that shallower FFM depths and greater silt content in subgrades correlate with poor pavement ride quality. Silty soils, which have low permeability and produce high capillary effects, have long been considered susceptible to frost damage.
Researchers avoided thermodynamic modeling and analysis—and kept the design tool simple—by selecting subgrade silt content as a proxy for frost susceptibility. The spreadsheet tool uses project location (latitude and longitude), predicted frost depth and subgrade soil silt content as the key factors in frost susceptibility of pavements. The tool recommends frost treatment ranges from about 30 percent of predicted frost depth for soils with zero silt to over 80 percent of predicted frost depth for soils with 100 percent silt. The spreadsheet requires limited laboratory testing of subgrade soils, is simple and inexpensive to implement, and produces results similar enough to MnDOT’s practices that they will not require dramatic change in construction needs.
Researchers produced four spreadsheets, each employing a different combination of frost depth prediction and soil type characterization. Once MnDOT selects its preferred spreadsheet and determines if additional subsurface tests should be included as inputs, pilot implementation will begin. Additional study to enhance the tool could include investigating MnROAD cells further, collecting more winter ride quality data, developing uniform frost depth prediction methods and tracking more information from new construction.
This post pertains to Report 2018-06, “Designing Base and Subbase to Resist Environmental Effects on Pavements,” published February 2018. The full report can be accessed at mndot.gov/research/reports/2018/201806.pdf.