Safety Edge Demonstration Project – Menominee County, Wisconsin

Next

Safety Edge_SM Demonstration Project

Menominee County, Wisconsin

Field Report
May 4, 2011

Foreword

The purpose of this field report is to provide a summary of observations made during the hot mix asphalt (HMA) Safety Edge_SM project located in Menominee County Wisconsin. These observations and data are to be used with similar information from other Safety Edge_SM projects to facilitate the development of standards and guidance for Safety Edge_SM construction and long term performance.

All field and laboratory test results, HMA mixture design information and data, observations made during paving, and comments provided by construction personnel are included in the Field Evaluation Form that is provided as a separate document to this field report. This field report is a summary of the observations made on September 15, 2010 and field data measured during construction to evaluate the use of three edge devices, compare Safety Edge_SM and non-Safety Edge_SM portions along the project, determine the slope of the Safety Edge_SM, recommend adjustments to the Safety Edge_SM design if found to be needed, and identify benefits and complications with the use of the Safety Edge_SM devices.

Technical Report Documentation Page
1. Report No.	2. Government Accession No.			3. Recipient’s Catalog No.
4. Title and Subtitle Safety EdgeSM Project, Seaford, Delaware				5. Report Date May 4. 2011
				6. Performing Organization Code
7. Author(s) Paul Littleton and Jagannath Mallela				8. Performing Organization Report No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address Applied Research Associates, Inc. 100 Trade Centre Drive, Suite 200 Champaign, IL 61820				10. Work Unit No.
				11. Contract or Grant No.
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Office of Bridge Technology, HIBT-10 Federal Highway Administration 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, VA 22101-2296				13. Type of Report and Period Covered September 2010–May 2011
				14. Sponsoring Agency Code
15. Supplementary Notes Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative: Byron Lord and Mary Huie Contracting Officer’s Technical Manager: Andy Mergenmeier
16. Abstract: In a coordinated effort with highway authorities and industry leaders, the Every Day Counts initiative serves as a catalyst to identify and promote cost effective innovations to bring about rapid change to increase safety of our nations highway system, decrease project delivery time, and protect our environment. The Safety EdgeSM concept is an example of one such initiative in which the edge of the road is beveled during construction for the purpose of helping drivers who migrate off the roadways to more easily return to the road without over correcting and running into the path of oncoming traffic or running off the other side of the roadway. This field report documents the observations made on the construction of Safety EdgeSM on a two lane highway hot mix asphalt (HMA) overlay project in Menominee County, Wisconsin. Safety EdgeSM paving devices from two manufacturers were demonstrated during this project. Details regarding the performance of each device along with the shape and physical properties of the finished Safety EdgeSM are presented for the purpose of understanding what processes and techniques were most successful in forming the Safety EdgeSM. The findings from this overlay project and other similar ongoing projects form the basis for understanding the construction process and material performance necessary to bring this innovation into common highway practice and make our Nation’s highways safer.
17. Key Words Safety EdgeSM, Slope, HMA, TransTech Shoulder Wedge Maker			18. Distribution Statement No restriction.
19. Security Classif. (of this report) Unclassified		20. Security Classif. (of this page) Unclassified			21. No. of Pages 25	22. Price

SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS

APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS
Symbol	When You Know		Multiply By		To Find		Symbol
LENGTH
in	inches		25.4		millimeters		mm
ft	feet		0.305		meters		m
yd	yards		0.914		meters		m
mi	miles		1.61		kilometers		km
AREA
in2	square inches		645.2		square millimeters		mm2
ft2	square feet		0.093		square meters		m2
yd2	square yard		0.836		square meters		m2
ac	acres		0.405		hectares		ha
mi2	square miles		2.59		square kilometers		km2
VOLUME
fl oz	fluid ounces		29.57		milliliters		mL
gal	gallons		3.785		liters		L
ft3	cubic feet		0.028		cubic meters		m3
yd3	cubic yards		0.765		cubic meters		m3
NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3
MASS
oz	ounces		28.35		grams		g
lb	pounds		0.454		kilograms		kg
T	short tons (2000 lb)		0.907		megagrams (or "metric ton")		Mg (or "t")
TEMPERATURE (exact degrees)
°F	Fahrenheit		5 (F-32)/9		Celsius		°C
			or (F-32)/1.8
ILLUMINATION
fc	foot-candles		10.76		lux		lx
fl	foot-Lamberts		3.426		candela/m2		cd/m2
FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS
lbf	poundforce		4.45		newtons		N
lbf/in2	poundforce per square inch		6.89		kilopascals		kPa
APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS
Symbol	When You Know	Multiply By		To Find		Symbol
LENGTH
mm	millimeters	0.039		inches		in
m	meters	3.28		feet		ft
m	meters	1.09		yards		yd
km	kilometers	0.621		miles		mi
AREA
mm2	square millimeters	0.0016		square inches		in2
m2	square meters	10.764		square feet		ft2
m2	square meters	1.195		square yards		yd2
ha	hectares	2.47		acres		ac
km2	square kilometers	0.386		square miles		mi2
VOLUME
mL	milliliters	0.034		fluid ounces		fl oz
L	liters	0.264		gallons		gal
m3	cubic meters	35.314		cubic feet		ft3
m3	cubic meters	1.307		cubic yards		yd3
MASS
g	grams	0.035		ounces		oz
kg	kilograms	2.202		pounds		lb
Mg (or "t")	megagrams (or "metric ton")	1.103		short tons (2000 lb)		T
TEMPERATURE (exact degrees)
°C	Celsius	1.8C+32		Fahrenheit		°F
ILLUMINATION
lx	lux	0.0929		foot-candles		fc
cd/m2	candela/m2	0.2919		foot-Lamberts		fl
FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS
N	newtons	0.225		poundforce		lbf
kPa	kilopascals	0.145		poundforce per square inch		lbf/in2

*SI is the symbol for the International System of Units. Appropriate rounding should be made to comply with Section 4 of ASTM E380.
(Revised March 2003)

---

Table of Contents

• SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS
  • Overall Opinion of the Safety Edge_SM
  • Slope of the Safety Edge_SM
  • Placement
  • Compaction
  • Shoulder Construction
  • HMA Mixture and Safety Edge_SM
• FIELD EVALUATION OF HMA OVERLAY WITH SAFETY EDGE_SM
  • INTRODUCTION
  • PAVEMENT STRUCTURE AND PROJECT CONDITIONS
  • FIELD EVALUATION
    • Slope Measurements
    • Cores
    • Nuclear Density Results
  • OBSERVATIONS MADE DURING PAVING WITH SAFETY EDGE_SM
    • Placement/Paving Operations
    • Compaction Operations
  • FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
• APPENDIX A DATA TABLES