Chapter 7 - High Performance Concrete Pavements: Project Summary - Concrete - Pavements

High Performance Concrete Pavements
Project Summary

CHAPTER 7. ILLINOIS 3 (US 67, Jacksonville)

Introduction

The Illinois Department of Transportation's (IDOT's) second TE-30 project, and their third evaluating alternative dowel bar materials, is located on the two westbound lanes of US Route 67, west of Jacksonville (see Figure 20). This project was constructed in 1999.

Figure 20. Location of IL 3 project.

Study Objectives

This project continues IDOT's investigation of alternative dowel bar materials and joint sealing effectiveness (Gawedzinski 2000). Several additional fiber composite dowel bars are evaluated in this study that were not included in previous studies, and these comparisons are all done using IDOT's now standard all-doweled jointed plain concrete pavement (JPCP) design. In addition, an unsealed section is included to further investigate the performance of unsealed joints.

Project Design and Layout

Constructed in 1999, the basic pavement design for each section is a 250-mm (10-in.) thick JPCP placed on a 100-mm (4-in.) cement aggregate mixture (CAM) base course (Gawedzinski 2000). The existing subgrade was stabilized to a depth of 300 mm (11.8 in.) with lime (Gawedzinski 2000). Transverse joints are spaced at 4.6-m (15-ft) intervals and tied concrete shoulders are incorporated as part of the construction project.

The project consists of seven test sections for evaluating alternative dowel bar materials and unsealed joints. The following load transfer devices are included in the study (Gawedzinski 2000):

38-mm (1.5-in.) diameter polyester and type E fiberglass dowel bars, manufactured by RJD Industries.
38-mm (1.5-in.) diameter vinyl ester and type E fiberglass dowel bars, manufactured by Strongwell (Morrison Molded Fiber Glass Company).
38-mm (1.5-in.) diameter vinyl ester and type E fiberglass dowel bars, manufactured by Creative Pultrusions, Inc.
Fiber-Con™ dowel bar, manufactured by Concrete Systems, Inc. and consisting of a fibrillated type E fiberglass and polyester resin tube filled with hydraulic cement.
38-mm (1.5-in.) diameter carbon steel rods clad with grade 316 stainless steel, manufactured by Stelax Industries Inc.
Conventional 38-mm (1.5-in.) diameter epoxy-coated steel dowel bars conforming to ASTM M227.

All but one of the sections was sealed with a hot-poured joint sealant conforming to ASTM D 3405. One section was left unsealed to compare the performance of pavements with unsealed joints to that of sealed joints.

The layout of the sections is presented in Figure 21. This figure summarizes the main features included in each of the sections. The experimental design matrix for this project is shown in Table 10.

Figure 21. Layout of IL 3 project.

Table 10. Experimental Design Matrix for IL 3
	250-MM (10-IN.) JPCP 4.6-M (15-FT) JOINT SPACING
	SEALED JOINTS (ASTM D3405)	UNSEALED JOINTS
38-mm (1.5-in.) diameter polyester and type E fiberglass dowel bars (RJD Industries)	Section 1 (150 ft long, 10 joints)
38-mm (1.5-in.) diameter vinyl ester and type E fiberglass dowel bars (Morrison Molded Fiber Glass Company)	Section 2 (150 ft long, 10 joints)
38-mm (1.5-in.) diameter vinyl ester and type E fiberglass dowel bars (Creative Pultrusions, Inc.)	Section 3 (150 ft long, 11 joints)
Fiber-ConT dowel bar, consisting of a fibrillated type E fiberglass and polyester resin tube filled with hydraulic cement (Concrete Systems, Inc.)	Section 4 (150 ft long, 10 joints)
38-mm (1.5-in.) diameter carbon steel rods clad with grade 316 stainless steel (Stelax Industries Inc.)	Section 5 (150 ft long, 10 joints)
38-mm (1.5-in.) diameter epoxy-coated steel dowel bars	Section 7 (150 ft long, 10 joints)	Section 6 (150 ft long, 10 joints)

State Monitoring Activities

IDOT installed an automatic traffic recording station at the project site in February 2000. Traffic data are recorded using a Peek series 3000 ADR traffic classifier (Gawedzinski 2000). No traffic data are currently available. Before the pavement was opened to traffic, IDOT conducted FWD testing on the experimental sections in June 1999. Results from the FWD testing program are plotted in Figures 22 and 23 (Gawedzinski 2000). Figure 22 shows the average load transfer for the seven experimental sections in both the driving and passing lanes, whereas Figure 23 shows the average maximum joint deflection measured for each of the seven experimental sections in both the driving and passing lanes. Although the joint deflections are low, the load transfer efficiencies (typically between 80 and 90 percent) are not as high as might be expected for a new concrete pavement. These initial FWD results will serve as a baseline for comparison with future testing values.

Figure 22. Load transfer efficiency on IL 3 (Gawedzinski 2000).

Load transfer efficiency on IL 3 (Gawedzinski 2000). Efficiencies for the seven sections for driving (D) and passing (P) lanes are shown. The highest percentages, 90 and 91 percent, are shown for Sections 4D, 5D, and 6D. The lowest, at 80 percent, is Section 1P, with Sections 2P and 3P also not reaching 85 percent.

Figure 23. Maximum joint deflections on IL 3 (Gawedzinski 2000).

Maximum joint deflections on IL 3 (Gawedzinski 2000). Deflections for the seven sections for driving (D) and passing (P) are shown in mm. They range between about 3.40 (7P) and 5.50 (4D). Sections 2D, 3D, and 4D have the highest deflections; Sections 1P, 6P, and 7P the lowest.

Preliminary Results/Findings

This pavement is performing well after 1 year of service. None of the joints are exhibiting any signs of distress. IDOT will continue monitoring the project to assess the relative performance of the different dowel bar types and of the sealed/unsealed joints.

Interim Project Status, Results, and Findings

FWD tests are conducted semi-annually along with periodic visual observations of joint performance. Traffic data are collected using an ADR 3000, manufactured by Peek Traffic. The data are periodically polled and converted to ESALs using standard IDOT conversion factors. A summary of the cumulative ESALs is provided in Table 11.

Table 11. Current Traffic for Driving and Passing Lanes (Gawedzinski 2004)
DATE	CUMULATIVE ESALS DRIVING LANE	PASSING LANE
6/23/1999	0	0
6/27/2000	68,604	9,742
10/10/2000	95,413	13,764
4/18/2001	160,805	22,940
10/11/2001	240,558	34,305
4/18/2002	310,034	43,193
10/1/2002	372,800	48,871
4/16/2003	442,221	54,892
10/21/2003	493,053	59,488
11/25/2003	504,163

Joints are also periodically observed, to look for signs of joint deterioration or distress. Joints were formed using a thin saw cut and sealed with an ASTM D 6690 (formerly ASTM D 3405) hot-pour joint seal material. Problems affecting ride quality became apparent, due to several of the joints being overfilled with the 3405 joint seal material. Subsequent evaluations noted failure of the 3405 joint seal material to maintain a bond with either side of the pavement at the joint.

Current Observations (Gawedzinski 2004)

Several joints were observed where the joint seal material was either missing from the wheelpaths or had been pushed deeper in the joint and was debonded from both sides of the pavement joint. Small rocks were also compressed into the joint seal material at the joint surface. As with the other Illinois sites, no obvious signs of joint distress were apparent during the visual observations.

Similar behavior as observed at the older two sites (IL 1 and IL 2) is shown in the following figures. The control set (38.1-mm [1.5-in.] diameter epoxy-coated steel), unsealed epoxy-coated steel bars, stainless steel clad carbon steel bars, and fibrillated wound fiber composite bars exhibit better LTE and lower joint deflections than the pultruded fiber composite bars, but do not show excessive joint deflection indicating failure of the joints. The pavement at Jacksonville (IL 3) was constructed on a cement aggregate mixture subbase (CAM 2 with a minimum of 200 lbs of cement per cubic yard) rather than a granular subbase as in Naperville (IL 2) or a bituminous aggregate mixture subbase (BAM) at Williamsville (IL 1).

An additional FWD test was performed on the driving lane of US 67 in November of 2003 to evaluate the joint deflections that had occurred earlier that year. Testing was not conducted in the passing lanes due to traffic control problems at the time of the November tests. The large shift in average joint deflection vales between the April and October tests necessitated the November retest. More frequent testing is scheduled for 2004.

Deflection data are presented in Figures 24 through 26. It is observed that the FRP bars are approaching (or exceeding) the critical LTE value of 70 percent, calling into question the capability of these load transfer mechanisms to provide long-term performance.

Figure 24. Driving lane load transfer efficiency vs. ESALs (Gawedzinski 2004).

Figure 25. Passing lane load transfer efficiency vs. ESALs (Gawedzinski 2004).

Figure 26. Average load transfer efficiency vs. average pavement temperature (Gawedzinski 2004).

Average load transfer efficiency vs. average pavement temperature (Gawedzinski 2004). Efficiencies are shown for the driving lane at average pavement temperatures at a 5-in. depth. The unsealed, control, Stelax, and Concrete Systems sections maintaining higher efficiencies.