Skip to contentUnited States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration FHWA Home
Research Home   |   Pavements Home
Report
This report is an archived publication and may contain dated technical, contact, and link information
Publication Number: FHWA-RD-01-168
Date: July 2006

Rehabilitation of Asphalt Concrete Pavements: Initial Evaluation of The SPS-5 Experiment-Final Report

Appendix A. Project Summaries

Appendix A includes an overview and summary, as of the time of this report, of each SPS–5 project relative to the experiment plan. Each overview includes a general description of the project’s location and specific values for the key factors of the experiment factorial (table 1). Deviations from the initial project nomination and difficulties reported during construction are identified and briefly discussed. In addition, a summary of the materials data that are available is provided. As stated in chapter 2, the number of tests required for each project varies with the number of supplemental sections built within each project.

A summary of the data completeness for each project is presented in tabular format for construction and monitoring data elements. Data completeness and any project deviations are used in determining an adequacy code that is assigned to each project. This code represents a numerical scale from 0 to 5 and provides an overall rating of the project in regard to fulfillment of the original experimental objectives and expectations. This numerical scale is:

0 = The project will be unable to meet the experimental objectives and expectations or the project has been recently constructed and has only limited data at this time.
1= The project has major limitations in the data. There are significant data deficiencies/missing data that will have a significant detrimental impact on meeting the experimental objectives and expectations.
2= The project has missing data that will have an impact on the reliability of the results for achieving the experimental objectives and expectations.
3= The project has some missing data and deficiencies. However, assumptions combined with the existing data can be used to meet the experimental objectives and expectations.
4= The project has minor limitations, missing data, or data deficiencies that will have little impact on meeting the experimental objectives and expectations.
5= The project has adequate data to meet the experimental objectives and expectations.

ALABAMA

The Alabama project is located on U.S. 84 highway in the eastbound direction, between Do than and Enterprise. The original pavement was constructed on borderline fine/coarse loamy soil, and had about 700 mm of a predominantly coarse soil aggregate mixture base, and about 97 mm of an HMA surface.

Alabama elected to extend its SPS–5 project by adding two supplemental test sections to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest; these are identified in table 42. All test sections had been monitored and the data collected were available to the Department of Transportation (DOT) for evaluation.

Table 42. Alabama SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
014155NoneControl section
010502Minimum51 mm RAP* overlay
010503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
010504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
010505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
010506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
010507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
010508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
010509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
010563Intensive51 mm milling and inlay with virgin mix
010564Intensive51 mm milling and inlay with RAP mix
Notes: SHRP Sections (010501–09; 014155 is a General Pavement Studies (GPS) section that corresponds to 010501)
Alabama DOT Sections (010563–64)

* RAP = Recycled asphalt pavement.

Preconstruction Monitoring

Pavement surface distress was collected on each section of the project before overlay construction. Each test section was manually surveyed. Low–severity longitudinal cracking was the predominant distress.

Surface profile was also conducted on the project, utilizing the SHRP/LTPP profilometer. Deflection measurements were obtained with the FWD for the evaluation of the structural capacity of each test section. Material samples were obtained in accordance with the LTPP criteria.

Construction Difficulties

Milling operations used a drum width of 2.2 m, which required the contractor to make two passes per lane. On the first day of construction, the pump to be used to transfer water from the tanker was inoperable. Milling continued without the benefit of water as a cooling agent. Milling with water as a coolant was used the next day.

On the third day of construction on section 010507, a temperature of 119 °C was observed before laydown and 104 °C after laydown, which was below allowable limits. On the sixth day of construction, it was noticed during the milling operations that the sections located between Stations 365+00 and 395+00 exhibited some fatigue–like longitudinal cracking in both wheel paths following the milling operation. In addition, the surface layer (about 25 mm thick) appeared to be lifting in sheets due to delamination. The milling machine pulled up large chunks of asphalt concrete about 150 mm by 90 mm in size. Consequently, the contractor was required to use more material from the U.S. 84 highway to compensate for the large particles that would have been screened out when preparing for the recycled mix at the plant.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Following construction, automated pavement distress surveys were to be obtained for all the test sections. Rod–and–level measurements were taken on the surface of all sections. In addition, the surface was profiled with the high–speed profilometer. Transverse profiles were taken using the automated method.

Structural capacity was evaluated using FWD measurements. Improvement in the structural capacity was noted in the overlaid sections, with the highest improvement in the sections with thicker overlays.

Coring was performed; 102–mm cores were obtained 15 m from approach and leave ends of each section following the outline in the material sampling plan.

Data Completeness

As shown in table 43, no thickness data were available from the L05B testing table. Thickness data from the SPS5_LAYER table were available, but were not reported here because L05B results are determinant values for the layer thickness.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was performed 6 months before overlaying, 6 months, and every 2 years after construction on all the sections except the control section, 014155.

FWD data were collected 6 months before and after construction on sections 014155 through 010503 and 010505. All other sections failed to meet either the preconstruction or the postconstruction monitoring requirements. Not all sections met the long–term requirements.

Distress monitoring was conducted 6 months before construction on all sections except section 010502. Only the control section was monitored for distress within 6 month after construction. The long–term monitoring requirement for distress was met for all sections after treatment.

Transverse profile monitoring was performed within 6 months after construction for all sections. Transverse profile was not measured on any section 6 months before construction. The long–term monitoring requirements for transverse cracking were met for all sections after treatment application.

No friction data were collected on any of the sections within 6 months before overlay. All core sections were monitored for friction data within 6 months after construction except the control, 014155, and the supplemental sections, 010563 and 010564. The long–term monitoring requirement was met for all sections after treatment.

No traffic data were available for this project except for the control section, which had 47 days of WIM and 2 years worth of monitored traffic data. There was one year with more than 45 days of AVC per year.

Table 44 summarizes the project testing data. It can be seen that only a small number of tests still needed to be conducted for the unbound base layers. However, almost no tests had been completed on the AC surface layers. Most of the available data were at Level E in the IMS database. No testing had been conducted on the overlay materials placed on this project.

Table 43. Key project information for the Alabama SPS–5.
ALABAMA SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:7.68Construction Date: 12/20/91
Subgrade Type:CoarseClimatic Zone: Wet–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:NAAutomated Vehicle Class: None
Construction Problems:Some milling without water. Mix too cool at lay down.Weigh–In–Motion: None
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
41550  0  97700Soil Agg  
50251 RAP*0  97700Soil Agg  
503127 RAP0  97700Soil Agg  
504127 Virgin0  97700Soil Agg  
50551 Virgin0  97700Soil Agg  
50651 Virgin51  97700Soil Agg  
507127 Virgin51  97700Soil Agg  
508127 RAP51  97700Soil Agg  
50951 RAP51  97700Soil Agg  
56351 Inlay Virgin51  97700Soil Agg  
56451 Inlay RAP51  97700Soil Agg  
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
41556545 5421  
5024442 3201  
5034442 3201  
5044442 3201  
5054442 3201  
5064342 3201  
5074442 3201  
5084442 3201  
5095442 3201  
5632242 3101  
5642242 4101  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
415512/12/908/24/926/20/914/1/926/10/904/1/92 
5027/8/914/1/929/18/914/1/934/1/92 
5037/9/914/2/929/18/914/1/934/1/92 
5047/8/914/1/929/18/914/1/934/1/92 
5057/8/914/1/929/18/914/1/934/1/92 
5067/8/914/1/929/18/914/1/934/1/92 
5077/8/914/1/929/18/914/1/934/1/92 
5087/8/914/2/929/18/914/1/934/1/92 
5097/8/914/2/929/18/914/1/934/1/92 
5638/10/949/18/914/1/933/21/94 
5648/10/949/18/914/1/933/21/94 
Table 44. Alabama SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Alabama SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test Minimum No.
Per Layer
Number
Conducted
Percent at
Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis39100.0
Hydrometer Analysis39100.0
Atterberg Limits39100.0
Moisture–Density Relations33100.0
Resilient Modulus34100.0
Natural Moisture Content312100.0
Permeability000
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis39100.0
Atterberg Limits39100.0
Moisture–Density Relations3922.2
Resilient Modulus32100.0
Permeability300.0
Natural Moisture Content312100.0
Bound Base:Classification000.0
Asphalt Surface:Core Examination2815100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity900.0
Maximum Specific Gravity300.0
Asphalt Content300.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation300.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape300.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement300.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement3120.0
Alabama SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 40 0 0.0
Bulk Specific Gravity40 0 0.0
Maximum Specific Gravity6 0 0.0
Asphalt Content6 0 0.0
Moisture Susceptibility6 0 0.0
Resilient Modulus00 0.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate600.0
Aggregate Gradation600.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery600.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement600.0
Specific Gravity600.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement600.0

ARIZONA

The Arizona SPS–5 project is in the dry–no–freeze environmental zone. It is located on Interstate 8, approximately 27 km west of Casa Grande, AZ. The original pavement was placed on a silty gravel with sand subgrade, had 361 mm to 447 mm of a granular base of soil aggregate mixture predominantly coarse, and 107 mm to 140 mm of HMA surface.

Arizona elected to extend its SPS–5 project by adding two supplemental test sections to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest. Each of these treatments is identified in table 45. All of these test sections had been monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation. However, these supplemental sections were not included in this investigation.

Table 45. Arizona SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
040501NoneControl section
040502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
040503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
040504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
040505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
040506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
040507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
040508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
040509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
040559Intensive51 mm milling and inlay with recycled mix
040560Intensive51 mm milling and inlay with Asphalt Rubber Asphalt Concrete (AR–AC) mix
Notes:SHRP Sections (040501–09)
Arizona DOT Sections (040559–60)

Preconstruction Monitoring

Monitoring data on rutting, roughness, and fatigue cracking were gathered on the sections before the application of overlays. At the time of construction, fatigue cracking was about 20 percent.

Surface profiling was conducted on the project utilizing the SHRP/LTPP profilometer. Deflection measurements were obtained with the FWD for the evaluation of the structural capacity of each test section. Material samples were obtained in accordance with the LTPP criteria.

Construction Difficulties

When paving the first of three lifts, the average temperature behind the paver was 107 °C, causing concern. There was some confusion about the calibration of the nuclear density for taking readings from the second lift of the overlays. An 80–kg/m3 correction was added to the density gauge. Later, the correction factor was determined to be 32 kg/m3. The compliance calculations were determined using 32 kg/m3 and subtracting the 80 kg/m3 only where data sheets noted that it had been added in.

Low stability was evidenced in the asphalt rubber concrete mix. The mix used in construction had a stability value of 49 kN. Milling on the minimum restoration sections was as high as 25 mm in some cases.

A 1.8–m milling width in one pass was used. This caused re–milling in several areas. Compacted density problems were encountered on the left lanes of sections 040507 and 040504.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Samples of the asphalt mix, granulated rubber, and reacted asphalt rubber binder material were taken. The AC–10 material was also sampled and sent to Central Materials for testing.

Data Completeness

As shown in table 46, thickness data were available from the L05B testing table. Thickness data from the SPS5_LAYER table were available, but were not reported here because the L05B results are the determinant values for layer thicknesses. It can be seen that the thicknesses were generally thicker than what was designed, especially with section 040506. This section’s thickness data were not yet at Level E in the IMS database.

Longitudinal profile data were collected within 6 months before and after overlaying on all the sections. The long–term monitoring requirement was not met except for section 040501.

FWD data were collected within 6 months before construction on all the sections. However, the requirements for postconstruction and long–term monitoring were not met for any of the sections.

Distress monitoring was conducted within 6 months before construction except for sections 040503, 040559, and 040560. Distress monitoring was not conducted within 6 months after construction. The long–term monitoring requirement for distress was met for all sections after treatment.

Transverse profile was not measured on any section within 6 months before or after construction. The long–term monitoring requirements for transverse cracking were not met for any section after treatment application.

No friction data were collected on any of the sections within 6 months before or after overlay. All core sections were monitored for friction data every 2 years after construction.

Approximately 5 years of traffic data and 290 days of WIM data were available for all sections. There were 4 years with more than 45 days of AVC per year.

Table 47 summarizes the testing data of the project. It can be seen that most of the required tests have been completed on this project. Most of the testing data are currently at Level E in the IMS database.

Table 47. Arizona SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Arizona SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis3683.3
Hydrometer Analysis3683.3
Atterberg Limits3683.3
Moisture–Density Relations3683.3
Resilient Modulus360.0
Natural Moisture Content3076.9
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis35100.0
Atterberg Limits37100.0
Moisture–Density Relations36100.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Permeability35100.0
Natural Moisture Content316100.0
Bound Base:Classification00.00.0
Asphalt Surface:Core Examination2628100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity98100.0
Maximum Specific Gravity32100.0
Asphalt Content350.0
Moisture Susceptibility300.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate00100.0
Aggregate Gradation350.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape000.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement3580.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement35100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement35100.0
Arizona SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 32 40 100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity32 39 100.0
Maximum Specific Gravity6 6 100.0
Asphalt Content6 6 100.0
Moisture Susceptibility6 0 0.0
Resilient Modulus30 0.0
Tensile Strength300.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate96100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate96100.0
Aggregate Gradation96100.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery96100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement126100.0
Specific Gravity126100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement126100.0

CALIFORNIA

The California SPS–5 project is in a dry–no–freeze environmental zone. It is located on Interstate 40 in San Bernardino County. The original pavement was constructed on poorly graded soil with silt, had 406 mm to 584 mm of predominantly coarse soil aggregate mixture subbase, 100 to 150 mm of cement aggregate mixture base, and 126 to 150 mm of AC surface.

California elected to extend its SPS–5 project by adding 13 supplemental test sections to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest; these treatments are identified in table 48. It should be noted that the control section, which was to receive no treatment, was also overlaid. All test sections had been monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation.

Preconstruction Monitoring

Preconstruction monitoring was performed on the above sections except two of the supplemental sections that were added before construction of the SPS–5 main sections. The preconstruction monitoring consisted of distress surveys, profile measurements, deflection measurements, and material sampling.

Distress surveys were performed using mostly automated surveys. Manual surveys were used when it was not possible to use automated surveys. Profile measurements were performed using a high–speed profilometer. Averaging the measurements over a moving 0.3–m interval provided the longitudinal profile of the travel lane for each section. Pavement deflections were measured using FWD. Two passes were applied: at mid–lane, and at the outer wheel path.

Sampling of materials was done by extracting 102–, 152–, and 305–mm diameter pavement cores; 152–mm auger probes; 305–mm bore holes, and 1.8–m by 1.2–m test pits to a depth of 305 mm below the top of the untreated subgrade.

Construction Difficulties

Overall, construction was not problematic, but some problems were encountered. There was segregation of the first lift and mat checking in the overlays that could be attributed to frequent starts and stops by the paver. There were also some problems during compaction of several sections. Several inconsistencies and incomplete work were encountered in the milling operations on sections 060502, 060503, and 060509. Slipping of the paver occurred on supplemental sections 060560 and 060561 resulting in torn pavement reinforcing fabric, which in some areas was removed, but not replaced.

Postconstruction Monitoring

The postconstruction monitoring performed on the California SPS–5 site consisted of a distress survey, profile measurements, deflection measurements, and 102–mm core sampling of the overlay material. The cores were taken 6 m from the beginning and end of each section.

Table 48. California SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
060501NoneControl section, 51 mm recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) overlay
060502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
060503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
060504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
060505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
060506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
060507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
060508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
060509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
060559Intensive9.5 mm chip seal on 51 mm virgin overlay
060560Intensive51 mm virgin overlay on pavement reinforcing fabric (PFR)
060561Intensive51 mm rubberized overlay on PFR
060562Intensive51 mm rubberized overlay
060563Intensive51 mm rubberized overlay on SAMI
060564Intensive51 mm virgin overlay on SAMI
060565Intensive19 mm open–graded AC on SAMI on 51 mm virgin overlay
060566Intensive19 mm open–graded AC on 51 mm virgin overlay
060567Intensive100 mm virgin overlay
060568Intensive51 mm virgin overlay on 100 mm virgin AC base with 38 mm max. agg.
060569Intensive51 mm stone mastic asphalt (Vestoplast) overlay
060570Intensive51 mm stone mastic asphalt (Modified) overlay
060571IntensiveStone mastic asphalt control section, 51 mm dense grade overlay
Notes:SHRP sections (060501–09)
CALTRANS sections (060559–71)
SAMI = stress absorbing membrane interlayer
The 38 mm max. agg. in section 060568 is also known as "Monster Rock"

Data Completeness

Table 49 shows the summary data pertaining to the California SPS–5 project in the IMS database, where it can be seen that the actual thicknesses for the core SPS–5 sections in California were substantially higher that the design values. It is also evident that the control section was overlaid. The construction report notes that a 58– to 71–mm recycle mix overlay was applied to the control section.

Longitudinal profile data were collected within 6 months before construction. However, even though the construction report mentions that the data were collected within 6 months after construction, the data in the IMS database do not show that. The frequency of the longitudinal profile data collection met the long–term monitoring frequency requirement.

FWD data were collected within 6 months before construction except for sections 060501, 060559, and 060564 through 060569. There were no data recorded within 6 months after construction. The data collection met the long–term monitoring requirement except for sections 060559, 060567, 060568, and 060571.

Distress surveys were conducted every 2 years after construction except for section 060560; however, no data were recorded for distress surveys within 6 months before and after construction.

Transverse profile data were collected within 6 months before construction and every 2 years after construction; however, there were no data within 6 months after construction.

The frequency of the friction data collection did not meet any preconstruction, postconstruction, or long–term requirements.

Only 1 year of traffic data was available, which includes 32 days of WIM and less than 45 days of AVC.

Table 50 summarizes the availability of materials testing data for the California SPS–5 project. It can be seen that there was a serious deficiency in the testing data for both the preconstruction and postconstruction data. In addition, none of the tests conducted were at Level E in the IMS database.

Table 49. Key project information for the California SPS–.
CALIFORNIA SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:7.33Construction Date: 4/24/92
Subgrade Type:Fine/CoarseClimatic Zone: Dry–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:17 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class: 32 Days
Construction Problems:Segregation in first lift. Tearing of reinforcing fabric. Incomplete milling on three sections.Weigh–In–Motion: 32 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
501045.7 0  109127CTB*422Soil Agg
5025176.2RAP0  112140CTB437Soil Agg
503127165.1RAP0  112140CTB526Soil Agg
504127144.8Virgin0  114124CTB538Soil Agg
5055191.4Virgin0  119132CTB508Soil Agg
50651109.2Virgin51  122135CTB505Soil Agg
507127170.2Virgin51  130137CTB493Soil Agg
508127167.6RAP51  137142CTB485Soil Agg
50951111.8RAP51  137135CTB495Soil Agg
55951203.2Virgin51  114147CTB500Soil Agg
56051109.2Virgin51  114147CTB493Soil Agg
56151106.7Rubber AC51  122142CTB508Soil Agg
56251111.8Rubber AC51  127104CTB566Soil Agg
56351101.6Rubber AC51  13097CTB582Soil Agg
56451109.2Virgin51  130112CTB582Soil Agg
56551109.2Virgin51  127119CTB544Soil Agg
56651109.2Virgin51  117142CTB508Soil Agg
567100101.6Virgin51  119140CTB503Soil Agg
56851152.4Virgin51  119127CTB498Soil Agg
56951182.9Stone Mastic51  137135CTB485Soil Agg
57051182.9Stone Mastic51  122140CTB500Soil Agg
57151246.4Stone Mastic51  109135CTB513Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
5018653 8113  
5028653 8113  
5038753 8113  
5048853 8113  
5058753 8113  
5068753 8113  
5078753 8113  
5088753 8113  
5098753 8113  
5597542 4113  
5606542 5113  
5616752 6113  
5627652 6113  
5638742 5113  
5647552 5113  
5658652 5113  
5668652 4113  
5678542 4113  
5688542 4113  
5696542 5013  
5706642 5013  
5716542 5013  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5012/11/922/2/9311/13/899/24/922/9/929/23/92 
5022/11/922/2/9311/13/899/24/922/9/929/23/92 
5032/11/922/2/9311/13/899/24/922/9/929/24/92 
5042/11/922/2/9311/13/899/24/922/9/929/24/92 
5052/11/922/2/9311/13/899/24/922/9/929/24/92 
5062/11/922/2/9311/13/899/24/922/9/92;9/24/92 
5072/11/922/2/9311/13/899/24/922/9/929/24/92 
5082/11/922/2/9311/13/899/24/922/9/929/24/92 
5092/11/922/2/9311/13/899/24/922/9/929/24/92 
5592/6/912/2/939/25/924/7/95 
5602/14/922/2/939/25/929/25/92 
5612/14/922/2/939/25/929/25/92 
5622/14/922/2/939/25/929/25/92 
5632/14/922/2/939/25/9210/28/94 
5642/14/922/2/939/25/9210/28/94 
5652/14/922/2/939/25/9210/28/94 
5662/14/922/2/939/25/9210/28/94 
5672/14/922/2/939/25/924/7/95 
5682/5/902/2/939/25/924/7/95 
5692/11/922/2/9311/2/9210/25/94 
5702/11/922/2/9311/2/9210/26/94 
5712/11/922/2/9311/2/9210/27/94 

*CTB = cement–treated base

Table 50. California SPS–5 materials testing summary.
California SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis330.0
Hydrometer Analysis330.0
Atterberg Limits330.0
Moisture–Density Relations330.0
Resilient Modulus330.0
Natural Moisture Content300.0
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis000.0
Atterberg Limits000.0
Moisture–Density Relations000.0
Resilient Modulus000.0
Permeability000.0
Natural Moisture Content000.0
Bound Base:Classification300.0
Asphalt Surface:Core Examination2600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity900.0
Maximum Specific Gravity300.0
Asphalt Content300.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation300.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape300.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement300.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement300.0
California SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 40 0 0.0
Bulk Specific Gravity40 0 0.0
Maximum Specific Gravity6 0 0.0
Asphalt Content6 0 0.0
Moisture Susceptibility6 0 0.0
Resilient Modulus60 0.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate600.0
Aggregate Gradation600.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery600.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement600.0
Specific Gravity600.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement600.0

COLORADO

The Colorado SPS–5 project is in the dry–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on Interstate 70 in Lincoln County. The original pavement rested on clayey soil mixed with coarse material ranging from sand to gravel. The original pavement had an AC surface thickness that ranged from 55 mm to 170 mm. The AC surface thickness rests on a 25 mm to 99 mm dense graded, hot laid, emulsion mixture treated base.

Colorado extended its SPS–5 project by adding two supplemental test sections to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest. Each of these treatments is identified in table 51. The SPS–5 control section also received a rut level–up course, although it was to receive no treatment. All of these test sections had been monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation.

Table 51. Colorado SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
080501NoneControl section, 33 mm rut level–up course
080502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
080503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
080504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
080505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
080506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
080507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
080508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
080509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
080559None51 mm HMAC overlay on 108 mm HMAC overlay
080560None51 mm polymer–modified overlay on 108 mm virgin overlay
Notes:SHRP Sections (080501–09)
Colorado Department of Highways sections (080559, 080560)

Preconstruction Monitoring

Samples were collected according to the testing plan. The sampling was done outside the 152–m test sections. A distress survey, deflection, and profile measurements were done 3 months before rehabilitation.

Construction Difficulties

While treatment was not scheduled for the control section, the severity of its rutting caused a hydroplane concern; therefore, a rut level–up was placed on that section. No other construction difficulties were reported for the Colorado SPS–5 project.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Cores 162 mm in diameter were taken in the approach and leave areas around each test section after construction. The drilling locations were different because of weather conditions. Twenty additional 102–mm cores were taken at section 080504 for additional study at Pennsylvania State University. Profile, deflection, and distress survey measurements were performed less than one year after construction.

Data Completeness

Table 52 shows a summary of the key elements for the Colorado SPS–5 project. Layer thicknesses reported in the IMS were substantially larger than the design values. In addition to the overlay, a rut level–up layer of 33 mm was placed on the minimum surface preparation sections.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was performed within 6 months before and after treatment, and then at 2–year intervals after construction, thus meeting the data–collection requirements.

Deflection data were collected within 6 months before and after construction, and at a frequency of every 2 years afterwards.

Distress surveys for the Colorado SPS–5 project were collected within 6 months before and every 2 years after the construction of the overlays. However, surveys were not taken within 6 months after the placement of the treatments.

Transverse profile data were collected within 6 months before and after the application of treatments; however, the long–term frequency requirements were not met.

Friction data were collected at a 2–year interval after the placement of the treatments, but not within 6 months before or after overlays were placed.

For the control section, there were 1,181 days of WIM and 4 out of the 5 years’ worth of monitored traffic data had more than 45 days of AVC per year. For the treated sections, there were 1,058 days of WIM data. Among the 4 years of traffic data available for this project, 3 had more than 45 days of AVC per year.

Table 53 shows a summary of the testing material data collected on the Colorado SPS–5 project. It can be seen that most of the preconstruction testing had been completed. In addition, all of the available data were at Level E in the IMS. A similar observation can be made about the postconstruction testing. Only a few tests still needed to be done on the overlay AC and extracted aggregate, with the majority of the available data at Level E.

Table 52. Key project information for the Colorado SPS–5.
COLORADO SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:7.88Construction Date: 10/8/91
Subgrade Type:CoarseClimatic Zone: Dry–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:23 yearsAutomated Vehicle Class: 1064 Days
Construction Problems:Rut level–up on control.Weigh–In–Motion: 338 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
501033.0 0  17091ATB*  
5025196.5RAP0  13769ATB  
503127137.2RAP0  12753ATB  
504127147.3Virgin0  11489ATB  
5055181.3Virgin0  16376ATB  
50651111.8Virgin51  16586ATB  
507127172.7Virgin51  14725ATB  
508127200.7RAP51  12751ATB  
50951106.7RAP51  13069ATB  
559159167.6Virgin0  16399ATB  
560159154.9Modified0  14564ATB  
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
5019652 6154  
5029652 6144  
5039652 6144  
5049652 6144  
5059652 6144  
5069752 6144  
5079652 6144  
5089652 6144  
5099652 6144  
5599652 3144  
5609552 3144  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5015/28/9111/13/915/3/917/12/948/19/912/27/92 
5025/28/9111/13/915/1/917/12/948/19/912/27/92 
5035/28/9111/13/915/2/917/12/948/19/912/27/92 
5045/28/9111/13/915/3/917/12/948/19/912/27/92 
5055/28/9111/13/915/3/917/12/948/19/912/27/92 
5065/28/9111/13/915/3/917/12/948/19/912/27/92 
5075/28/9111/13/915/3/917/12/948/19/912/27/92 
5085/28/9111/13/915/2/917/12/948/19/912/27/92 
5095/28/9111/13/915/1/917/12/948/19/912/27/92 
5595/28/9111/13/915/3/917/12/945/3/914/25/96 
5605/28/9111/13/915/3/917/12/945/3/914/25/96 

*Asphalt–treated base

Table 53. Colorado SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Colorado SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis33100.0
Hydrometer Analysis36100.0
Atterberg Limits36100.0
Moisture–Density Relations33100.0
Resilient Modulus33100.0
Natural Moisture Content35100.0
Permeability00 0.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis000.0
Atterberg Limits000.0
Moisture–Density Relations000.0
Resilient Modulus000.0
Permeability000.0
Natural Moisture Content000.0
Bound Base:Classification33100.0
Asphalt Surface:Core Examination 26 26100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity97100.0
Maximum Specific Gravity33100.0
Asphalt Content33100.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation33100.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape300.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement33100.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement33100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement33100.0
Colorado SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 40 62 74.2
Bulk Specific Gravity40 40 100.0
Maximum Specific Gravity6 4 100.0
Asphalt Content6 4 100.0
Moisture Susceptibility6 0 0.0
Resilient Modulus60 0.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate64100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate64100.0
Aggregate Gradation64100.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery64100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement64100.0
Specific Gravity64100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement64100.0

FLORIDA

The Florida SPS—5 is located in the wet–no–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on highway U.S. 1 in the southbound direction, about 70 km north of West Palm Beach. The original pavement was constructed on sand subgrade with approximately 305 mm of predominantly coarse soil aggregate mixture subbase, 203 mm of lime rock/caliche base, and about 89 mm of AC surface.

Florida elected to extend its SPS—5 project by adding six supplemental test sections to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest. Each of these treatments is identified in table 54. All of these test sections had been monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation.

Table 54. Florida SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
121030NoneControl section
120502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
120503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
120504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
120505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
120506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
120507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
120508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
120509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
12056189 mm RAP overlay
12056289 mm virgin overlay
120563Mill/inlay (virgin)
120564Mill/inlay (RAP)
120565Mill/inlay, 89 mm RAP overlay
120566Mill/inlay, 89 mm virgin overlay
Notes:SHRP Sections (120501–09; 121030 is a GPS section that corresponds to section 120501)
Florida DOT Sections (120561—66)

Preconstruction Monitoring

Each section was manually surveyed for distress before rehabilitation. The predominant distress for all the test sections was medium severity fatigue cracking. Surface profile measurements also were conducted before rehabilitation, along with FWD testing and materials sampling.

Construction Difficulties

The first 15 m of section 120502 received milling even though no milling was scheduled according to the experiment design. There was some evidence of segregation in the recycled mix placed during construction. There was a 460–mm swath of mix throughout the 120508 section that was not sufficiently tacked because the spray nozzles of the tack applicator were stuck.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Following construction, surface profile and deflection measurements were taken. In addition, materials sampling was performed 15 m from the approach and leave ends of each test section. Cores were taken as well as rod and level measurements for layer thickness information.

Data Completeness

Table 55 shows a summary of the key elements for the Florida SPS–5 project. It can be seen that layer thicknesses reported in the IMS were substantially larger than the design values for sections 120506 through 120509.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was conducted every 2 years after the placement of overlay on all sections except the control section. However, longitudinal profile data collection was not performed within 6 months before or after construction.

Deflection data were not collected within 6 months before and after construction, but they were collected at a frequency of every 2 years afterwards except for the control section.

Distress surveys for the Florida SPS–5 project were collected every 2 years after the construction of the overlays except for section 120501. However, no surveys were taken within 6 months before or after the placement of the treatments.

Transverse profile data were not collected within 6 months before or after the application of treatments; however, the long–term monitoring requirements were met for all sections with the exception of section 120501.

Friction data were collected at a 2–year interval after the placement of the treatments, and within 6 months before overlays were placed except for the control section. No friction data were collected within 6 months after construction of the overlays. No traffic data were available for the Florida project.

Table 55. Key project information for the Florida SPS–5.
Florida SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:4.32Construction Date: 4/5/95
Subgrade Type:CoarseClimatic Zone: WNF
Climatic Data Availability:27 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class: None
Construction Problems:Milling on 120502. Segregation in RAP.Weigh–In–Motion: None
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
5010NA0 0
5025163.5RAP0 079269DGAB*292Soil Agg
503127127.0RAP0 066269DGAB292Soil Agg
504127129.5Virgin0 071213DGAB406Soil Agg
5055150.8Virgin0 071224DGAB457Soil Agg
5065176.2Virgin51 35.176213DGAB406Soil Agg
507127165.1Virgin51 55.571213DGAB406Soil Agg
508127177.8RAP51 66.671269DGAB292Soil Agg
50951106.8RAP51 42.181213DGAB406Soil Agg
560Virgin0  
56189RAP0 076269DGAB292Soil Agg
56289Virgin0 066224DGAB457Soil Agg
563Virgin0 079224DGAB457Soil Agg
564RAP0 076224DGAB457Soil Agg
56589RAP0 0DGAB
56689Virgin0 0DGAB
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
5010000 0002  
5023241 3202  
5033241 3202  
5043241 3202  
5053241 3202  
5063241 3202  
5073241 3202  
5084441 3202  
5093041 3202  
5600000 0002  
5613241 3202  
5623241 3202  
5633241 3202  
5643241 3202  
5653241 3202  
5663241 3202  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5025/25/9411/1/959/26/941/21/961/21/96 
5035/25/9411/1/959/26/941/21/961/21/96 
5045/25/9411/2/959/28/941/22/961/21/96 
5055/25/9411/2/959/29/941/22/961/21/96 
5065/25/9411/2/959/28/941/21/961/21/96 
5075/25/9411/2/959/28/941/22/961/21/96 
5085/25/9411/1/959/27/941/21/961/21/96 
5095/25/9411/2/959/28/941/21/961/21/96 
560 
5615/25/9411/1/951/21/961/21/96 
5625/25/9411/2/959/29/941/21/96 
5635/26/9411/2/959/29/941/21/96 
5645/26/9411/2/959/29/941/21/96 
5655/25/9411/2/959/28/941/21/96 
5665/25/9411/2/959/28/941/21/96 

* DGAB = dense–graded asphalt base

Table 56. Florida SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Florida SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis310.0
Hydrometer Analysis310.0
Atterberg Limits310.0
Moisture–Density Relations310.0
Resilient Modulus310.0
Natural Moisture Content3366.7
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis3250.0
Atterberg Limits3250.0
Moisture–Density Relations310.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Permeability300.0
Natural Moisture Content3366.7
Bound Base:Classification000.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination403474.7
Bulk Specific Gravity12771.4
Maximum Specific Gravity300.0
Asphalt Content300.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation400.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape300.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement300.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Florida SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination616563.1
Bulk Specific Gravity61 64 62.5
Maximum Specific Gravity6 18 50.0
Asphalt Content6 18 50.0
Moisture Susceptibility6 17 47.1
Resilient Modulus60 0.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate61850.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate61747.1
Aggregate Gradation6180.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape6050.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery600.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement61850.0
Specific Gravity61850.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement61850.0

GEORGIA

The Georgia SPS–5 is located in the wet–no–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on Interstate Highway (IH) 75 in the northbound direction, about 96 km northwest of Atlanta. The original pavement was constructed on silty sand soil with approximately 356 mm of predominantly fine soil aggregate mixture subbase under 229 mm of asphalt–treated base (ATB), and about 147 mm of AC surface.

Georgia elected to extend its SPS–5 project by adding eight supplemental test sections to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest. Each of these treatments is identified in table 57. All test sections had been monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation.

Table 57. Georgia SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
130501NoneControl section
130502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
130503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
130504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
130505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
130506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
130507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
130508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
130509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
130560Planned treatment
13056189 mm RAP overlay
13056289 mm virgin overlay
130563Mill 51 mmInlay 51 mm virgin AC
130564Mill 51 mmInlay 51 mm RAP
130565Mill 89 mmInlay 89 mm RAP overlay
130566Mill 89 mmInlay 89 mm overlay (virgin AC)
130567IntensiveControl No. 2
Notes:SHRP Sections (130501–09)
Georgia DOT Sections (130560–67)

Preconstruction Monitoring

Pavement surface distress surveys were taken on all sections before construction of overlays. The predominant distress was low–severity longitudinal cracking in both wheel paths. Surface profile measurements were also performed with a profilometer. Transverse profiles were obtained manually using the Face Dipstick.

Deflection measurements were performed in conjunction with materials sampling. The deflection measurements were obtained using the FWD to evaluate the structural capacity of each test section.

Construction Difficulties

The preconstruction material sampling efforts revealed that the subgrade on the south end of the project yielded a subgrade material that is inconsistent with the subgrade material sampled on the north end of the project. The south end material was constructed with crushed gravel, while the north end was constructed with red sandy silt. Therefore, all the core sections were grouped on the north end while the supplemental sections were grouped on the south end.

Construction on section 130502 was delayed by approximately 45 minutes. This produced several surface anomalies could not be removed by the compaction process. Some surface anomalies also were observed on section 130562 that could not be removed by compaction.

Postconstruction Monitoring

After construction, all sections were profiled and rod and level measurements were taken. Transverse profile measurements were collected and deflection measurements were performed using FWD. Postconstruction materials sampling was performed in accordance with the SHRP guidelines.

Data Completeness

Table 58 shows a summary of the key elements for the Georgia SPS–5 project. It can be seen that layer thicknesses reported in the IMS were substantially larger than the design values for sections 130506 through 130509.

Longitudinal profile data were not available for the control section. For the treated sections, the monitoring of the longitudinal profile was performed 6 months before and every 2 years following the placement of overlay. However, collection of longitudinal profile was not completed within 6 months after construction.

Deflection data were collected within 6 months before and after construction, and the data were collected at a frequency of every 2 years afterwards. The exceptions were section 130501, which only met the requirement for within 6 months after construction, and section 130567, which did not meet the long–term monitoring requirement.

Distress surveys for the Georgia SPS–5 project were not collected within 6 months before the placement of the treatments for sections 130501, 130561 through 130563, and 130565 through 130567. Data were collected every 2 years after the construction of the overlays except for sections 130501 and 130567. However, no surveys were taken within 6 months after the placement of the treatments.

Transverse profile data were not collected within 6 months before or after the application of treatments, and the data were not collected at the required long–term frequency application of the treatments.

Friction data were collected at a 2–year interval after the placement of the treatments, but not within 6 months before or after overlays were placed. No traffic data were currently available for the Georgia project.

Table 59 shows a summary of the testing material data collected on the Georgia SPS–5 project. It can be seen that approximately half of the preconstruction testing was completed. More than half of the preconstruction available data were at Level E in the IMS. Very little of the postconstruction testing had been completed. Of the completed testing, approximately 70 percent of the data were at Level E in the IMS.

Table 58. Key project information for the Georgia SPS–5.
GEORGIA SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:6.17Construction Date: 6/18/93
Subgrade Type:CoarseClimatic Zone: Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:19 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class: None
Construction Problems:Supplemental sections on different subgrade. Surface anomalies on 130502.Weigh–In–Motion: None
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
5010NA 0  46279HMAC*330Soil Agg
5025140.6RAP0  46279HMAC330Soil Agg
503127129.5RAP0  51290HMAC330Soil Agg
504127134.6Virgin0  56287HMAC330Soil Agg
5055150.8Virgin0  61287HMAC330Soil Agg
50651106.7Virgin51  56290HMAC330Soil Agg
507127160.0Virgin51  61295HMAC330Soil Agg
508127170.2RAP51  41290HMAC330Soil Agg
5095196.5RAP51  46284HMAC330Soil Agg
56055.90  41386HMAC983Soil Agg
5618973.7RAP0  46396HMAC983Soil Agg
5628988.9Virgin0  46386HMAC394Soil Agg
5635155.9Virgin51  56384HMAC394Soil Agg
5645158.4RAP51  41386HMAC983Soil Agg
56589127.0RAP89  51396HMAC983Soil Agg
56689137.2Virgin89  41366HMAC394Soil Agg
567000  51373HMAC394Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
5010101 1402  
5023442 3402  
5033442 3402  
5043442 3402  
5053442 3302  
5063442 3402  
5073442 3402  
5083542 3402  
5093542 3402  
5603442 3402  
5613432 3402  
5623432 3402  
5633532 3402  
5643542 3402  
5653532 3402  
5663532 3402  
5671101 1402  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5014/7/944/7/94 
5023/1/935/7/962/24/934/7/944/7/94 
5033/1/935/7/962/23/934/7/944/7/94 
5043/1/935/6/962/22/934/7/944/7/94 
5053/1/935/6/962/22/934/7/944/7/94 
5063/1/935/6/962/22/934/7/944/7/94 
5073/1/935/6/962/22/934/7/944/7/94 
5083/1/935/7/962/23/934/7/944/7/94 
5093/1/935/7/962/23/934/7/944/7/94 
5603/8/935/8/963/1/934/7/944/7/94 
5613/8/935/8/964/7/944/7/94 
5623/1/935/8/964/7/944/7/94 
5633/1/935/8/964/7/944/7/94 
5643/8/935/8/963/1/934/7/944/7/94 
5653/8/935/8/964/7/944/7/94 
5663/1/935/8/964/7/944/7/94 
5673/1/935/8/964/7/944/7/94 

*Hot–mix asphalt concrete

Table 59. Georgia SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Georgia SPS—5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis42100.0
Hydrometer Analysis42100.0
Atterberg Limits42100.0
Moisture–Density Relations42100.0
Resilient Modulus4366.7
Natural Moisture Content46100.0
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis000.0
Atterberg Limits000.0
Moisture–Density Relations000.0
Resilient Modulus000.0
Permeability000.0
Natural Moisture Content000.0
Bound Base:Classification400.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination444250.0
Bulk Specific Gravity124250.0
Maximum Specific Gravity440.0
Asphalt Content4366.7
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation4366.7
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape400.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement4366.7
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement4366.7
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement4366.7
Georgia SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 68 66 75.8
Bulk Specific Gravity68 52 69.2
Maximum Specific Gravity6 0 0.0
Asphalt Content6 0 0.0
Moisture Susceptibility6 0 0.0
Resilient Modulus60 0.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate600.0
Aggregate Gradation600.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery600.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement600.0
Specific Gravity600.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement600.0

MAINE

The Maine SPS–5 is located in the wet–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on IH– 95 in the northbound direction, between Bangor and Howland. The original pavement had 216 mm to 241 mm of AC surface above 102 mm of gravel aggregate base course on a high fill of uncrushed gravel subbase layer.

Maine elected to extend its SPS–5 project by adding one supplemental test section to study the performance of another rehabilitation treatment of interest. This treatment is identified in table 60. This section was monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation.

Table 60. Maine SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
230501NoneControl section
230502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
230503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
230504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
230505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
230506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
230507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
230508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
230509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
230559Intensive32 mm virgin mix on 19 mm virgin shim AC layer
Notes:SHRP Sections (230501-09)
Maine DOT Section (230559)

Preconstruction Monitoring

Sampling for material testing was done before construction. In addition, longitudinal profile measurements using a profilometer also were taken. Deflection measurements using FWD were obtained as were manual distress surveys including Dipstick measurements of the transverse profile. The main distresses were high severity longitudinal cracks and high severity transverse cracks. The other major distresses observed were rutting and bleeding in the wheel paths.

Construction Difficulties

No leveling course was placed on the minimum preparation sections. In addition, cracks that were more than 19.1 mm wide were not repaired with patches. In some locations, the overlay thickness was adjusted to correct the cross–slope and remedy some of the rutting problem. Therefore, the overlay thickness was slightly thicker than stipulated by the experiment design. This difference in thickness was less than 10 mm, but still was larger than allowed by the construction requirements.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Longitudinal profile measurements were performed after construction of treatments using a profilometer. In addition, manual distress surveys were performed, including Dipstick measurements of the transverse profile. Deflection measurements also were obtained.

Data Completion

Table 61 shows a summary of the key elements for the Maine SPS–5 project. It can be seen that layer thicknesses reported in the IMS were substantially larger than the design values.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was performed within 6 months before and after overlay as well as at 2–year intervals after construction except for sections 230504 through 230506, 230508, and 230509. These sections did not meet the postconstruction requirement.

Deflection data, distress surveys, and transverse profile data were collected within 6 months before and after construction and at a frequency of every 2 years afterwards, thus meeting the data–collection requirements.

Friction data were collected at a 2–year interval after the placement of the treatments and within 6 months after construction. However, the friction data were not collected within 6 months before overlays were placed.

No traffic data were available for the Maine project.

Table 62 shows a summary of the testing material data collected on the Maine SPS–5 project. It can be seen that about 50 percent of the preconstruction testing had been completed. In addition, most of the available data were at Level E in the IMS. The vast majority of the postconstruction testing had been completed. Only a few tests still needed to be done, with the majority of the available data at Level E.

Table 61. Key project information for the Maine SPS–5.
MAINE SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:4.13Construction Date: 6/27/95
Subgrade Type:CoarseClimatic Zone: Wet–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:25 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class: None
Construction Problems:Minimal preparation sections not pretreated in accordance with guidelines.Weigh–In–Motion: None
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
501000 0211112DGAB229Gravel
5025191.4RAP0 0213112DGAB229Gravel
503127139.7RAP0 0218112DGAB229Gravel
504127144.8Virgin0 0201112DGAB229Gravel
5055168.6Virgin0 0201112DGAB229Gravel
50651104.1Virgin51 50.3201112DGAB229Gravel
507127198.1Virgin51 57.2211112DGAB229Gravel
508127172.7RAP51 52.0221112DGAB229Gravel
5095196.5RAP51 43.4203112DGAB229Gravel
55951Virgin0 0211112DGAB229Gravel
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
5014341 4303  
5024341 4303  
5034341 4303  
5043341 4303  
5053341 4303  
5063341 4303  
5074341 4303  
5083341 4303  
5093341 4303  
5593341 4303  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5014/21/958/15/954/26/9510/3/954/26/9510/3/95 
5024/21/958/15/954/26/9510/3/954/26/9510/3/95 
5034/21/958/15/954/26/9510/3/954/24/9510/3/95 
5044/21/958/25/974/26/9510/3/954/25/9510/3/95 
5054/20/958/25/974/26/9510/4/954/25/9510/4/95 
5064/20/958/25/974/26/9510/5/954/25/9510/5/95 
5074/21/958/15/974/26/9510/5/954/25/9510/5/95 
5084/20/958/25/974/26/9510/5/954/25/9510/5/95 
5094/20/958/25/974/26/9510/5/954/25/9510/5/95 
5594/20/958/25/974/26/9510/5/954/25/9510/5/95 
Table 62. Maine SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Maine SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis 2250.0
Hydrometer Analysis26 83.3
Atterberg Limits220.0
Moisture–Density Relations2 250.0
Resilient Modulus200.0
Natural Moisture Content4 887.5
Permeability000
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis 2887.5
Atterberg Limits220.0
Moisture–Density Relations2 20.0
Resilient Modulus200.0
Permeability200.0
Natural Moisture Content4 887.5
Bound Base:Classification0 00.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 353582.9
Bulk Specific Gravity35 3582.9
Maximum Specific Gravity4 7100.0
Asphalt Content47 100.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation47 85.7
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape400.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement400.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement400.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement4 00.0
Maine SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 51 51 86.3
Bulk Specific Gravity51 44 97.7
Maximum Specific Gravity13 6 100.0
Asphalt Content13 6 100.0
Moisture Susceptibility13 6 0.0
Resilient Modulus50 0.0
Tensile Strength500.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate 13633.3
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate13 666.7
Aggregate Gradation136 100.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape1300.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery 136100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement13 5100.0
Specific Gravity137 85.7
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement13 6100.0

MARYLAND

The Maryland SPS–5 is located in the wet–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on U.S. 15 in the northbound direction, about 16 km south of Frederick, MD. The original pavement had a 114 mm AC surface resting on 102 mm of cement–treated base (CTB) over 152 mm of dense–graded aggregate subbase. The subbase lay above 152 mm of cement–modified subgrade. The original subgrade was silt.

Maryland elected to extend its SPS–5 project by adding five supplemental test sections to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest. Each of these treatments is identified in table 63. All of these test sections had been monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation.

Table 63. Maryland SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
240501NoneControl section
240502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
240503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
240504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
240505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
240506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
240507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
240508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
240509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
240559Agency preparation51 mm of agency mix design
240560Agency preparation64 mm of stone matrix asphalt, A (Arbocel)
240561Agency preparation64 mm of stone matrix asphalt, B (Vestoplast)
240562Minimum (2 patches)64 mm of stone matrix asphalt, B (Styrelf)
240563Agency preparation64 mm of stone matrix asphalt, A (Styrelf and Arbocel)
Notes:SHRP Sections (240501–09)
Maryland DOT Sections (240559–63)

Preconstruction Monitoring

Preconstruction materials sampling and testing were performed on the test sections. There was no documentation of other preconstruction monitoring in the construction report.

Construction Difficulties

No difficulties were documented in the construction report.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Postconstruction materials sampling and testing were performed on the test sections. In addition, initial inspection of the project after 4 months of traffic showed some flushing and rutting in the wheel paths in all of the recycled asphalt mixes.

Data Completeness

Table 64 shows a summary of the key elements for the Maryland SPS–5 project. It can be seen that layer thicknesses reported in the IMS were substantially larger than the design values for sections 240506 through 240509.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was completed 2 years after the placement of overlay except for section 240502. Longitudinal profile data were obtained and monitoring was done within 6 months after construction for all sections; however, collection of longitudinal profile data was not performed within 6 months before construction for sections 240504, 240508, and 240509.

Deflection data were collected within 6 months before and after construction, and at a frequency of every 2 years afterwards with the exception of two test sections. For sections 240562 and 240563, the deflection data were not taken within 6 months before construction.

Distress surveys for the Maryland SPS–5 project were collected 6 months before construction for all the sections except 240562. The distress data were collected within 6 months after construction only for sections 240503, 240559, 240562, and 240563. The distress data were not collected in accordance with the long–term monitoring requirements on any of the Maryland SPS–5 test sections.

Transverse profile data were collected within 6 months before construction. These data were collected within 6 months after construction only for section 240503. The transverse profile data were not collected every 2 years after construction on any section of the Maryland SPS–5 project.

Friction data were collected at a 2–year interval after the placement of the treatments. However, these data were only collected within 6 months before or after overlays were placed for section 240503, which collected data within 6 months after the overlay.

Traffic data were not available for the control section. For the treated sections, there were 155 days of WIM and 3 years worth of monitored traffic data. There were only 2 years with more than 45 days of AVC per year.

Table 65 summarizes the testing material data collected on the Maryland SPS–5 project. The vast majority of the preconstruction testing on the asphalt surface had been completed. However, the majority of the subgrade materials testing had not yet been completed. In addition, most available preconstruction data were at Level E in the IMS. The postconstruction testing data were almost complete. Less than 50 percent of the postconstruction data were at Level E.

Table 64. Key project information for the Maryland SPS–5.
MARYLAND SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:7.22Construction Date: 6/1/92
Subgrade Type:FineClimatic Zone: Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:NAAutomated Vehicle Class: 218 Days
Construction Problems:None noted.Weigh–In–Motion: 2 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
5010NA0 091107CTB*147DGAB
5028153.3RAP0 081107CTB150DGAB
50391134.6RAP0 09199CTB150DGAB
504127134.6Virgin0 0102104CTB130DGAB
5055153.3Virgin0 08991CTB150DGAB
5065191.4Virgin51 097107CTB130DGAB
507127190.5Virgin51 94107CTB130DGAB
508127167.6RAP51 44.994107CTB130DGAB
5095196.5RAP51 10979CTB165DGAB
55951Virgin 10291CTB152DGAB
56064Stone Mastic 76104CTB147DGAB
56164Stone Mastic 91109CTB137DGAB
56264Stone Mastic 91109CTB147DGAB
56364Stone Mastic 8494CTB147DGAB
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
501105528404  
5028662 9334  
50310662 9334  
5049662 82334  
5059552 8334  
50610552 8334  
50710552 8334  
5088662 9334  
5098552 8334  
5598542 6434  
5606542 8334  
5615542 7334  
5625442 5334  
5636442 5334  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5011/24/926/11/922/19/9210/5/922/19/9210/5/92 
5021/24/926/11/922/20/9210/5/922/20/9210/5/92 
5031/24/926/11/922/20/9210/5/922/20/9210/5/92 
5048/9/916/11/922/20/9210/5/922/20/9210/5/92 
5051/24/926/11/922/20/9210/5/922/20/9210/5/92 
5061/24/926/11/922/21/9210/5/922/21/9210/5/92 
5071/24/926/11/922/20/9210/5/922/20/9210/5/92 
5088/8/916/11/922/21/9210/5/922/21/9210/5/92 
5098/8/916/11/922/21/9210/5/922/21/9210/5/92 
5598/8/916/11/922/21/9210/5/922/21/9210/5/92 
5608/8/916/11/922/21/9210/5/923/18/9210/5/92 
5618/8/916/11/922/21/9210/5/922/21/9210/5/92 
5626/12/925/6/9210/5/9210/5/92 
5636/11/925/6/9210/5/9210/5/92 

*Cement–treated base

Table 65. Maryland SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Maryland SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis300.0
Hydrometer Analysis300.0
Atterberg Limits300.0
Moisture–Density Relations300.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Natural Moisture Content31353.8
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis090.0
Atterberg Limits000.0
Moisture–Density Relations000.0
Resilient Modulus000.0
Permeability000.0
Natural Moisture Content000.0
Bound Base:Classification6120.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination264041.7
Bulk Specific Gravity94065.0
Maximum Specific Gravity31365.0
Asphalt Content31369.2
Moisture Susceptibility0069.2
Specific Gravity of Aggregate0260.0
Aggregate Gradation31326.9
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape300.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement31266.7
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement31266.7
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement3130.0
Maryland SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 76 105 53.3
Bulk Specific Gravity76 88 45.5
Maximum Specific Gravity12 10 30.0
Asphalt Content12 10 30.0
Moisture Susceptibility12 3 0.0
Resilient Modulus280 0.0
Tensile Strength2800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate125100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate1250.0
Aggregate Gradation121030.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape1200.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery5933.3
Penetration of Asphalt Cement5812.5
Specific Gravity5837.5
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement5825.0

MINNESOTA

The Minnesota SPS––5 is in the wet–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on U.S. 2 approximately 24 km west of Bemidji. According to the materials testing data, the original pavement had a surface course of 163 mm to 213 mm plant mix bituminous asphaltic concrete layer with a 305 mm to 325 mm crushed gravel subbase and a 119 mm to 137 mm uncrushed gravel base, resting on a subgrade of clayey soil material that varied from sandy clay to silty clay.

The SPS–5 project in Minnesota was constructed in 1990. Minnesota elected to extend its SPS–5 project by adding three supplemental test sections to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest. Each of these treatments is identified in table 66.

Table 66. Minnesota SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
270501NoneControl section
270502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
270503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
270504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
270505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
270506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
270507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
270508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
270509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
270559Minimum38 mm AC overlay.
270560IntensiveMilling of transverse cracks only and 38 mm AC overlay.
270561MinimumOverlay consisting of two lifts; a type 41 mix on top of a type 31 mix.
Notes: SHRP Sections (270501–09)
MN/DOT Sections (270559–61)

All of these test sections had been monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation.

Preconstruction Monitoring

There was no recording of preconstruction monitoring in the construction report of the Minnesota SPS–5 project with the exception of the materials sampling and testing.

Construction Difficulties

Parts of the test sections were on fine–grained soils, while other parts were on coarse–grained soils. The materials sampled for pre– and postconstruction data were tested by the Minnesota Department of Transportation due to the delay of the SPS–5 guidelines. The project was located on either side of a small town along U.S. 2; four of the test sections were located east and the rest of the project was located west of the town. It was believed that this split between the test sections would cause no impact on the results because no change was anticipated in the traffic pattern.

Postconstruction Monitoring

There was no recording of postconstruction monitoring in the construction report of the Minnesota SPS–5 project except for the materials sampling and testing.

Data Completeness

Table 67 shows a summary of the key elements for the Minnesota SPS–5 project. It can be seen that layer thicknesses reported in the IMS are only available for three sections, 270502, 270505, and 270507.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was completed within 6 months before construction with the exception of section 270506. No longitudinal profile data were taken within 6 months after construction. The longitudinal profile data were collected every other year for all the sections after the placement of overlays.

Deflection data were collected in accordance with all of the monitoring requirements.

Distress surveys for the Minnesota SPS–5 project were collected within 6 months before construction except for sections 270501 (the control section), 270505, and 270559 through 270561. The distress data were obtained within 6 months after construction and every 2 years afterwards except for the control section.

Transverse profile data were not collected within 6 months before and after the application of treatments. However, the transverse profile data for the Minnesota SPS––5 section were collected in accordance with long–term monitoring requirements.

No friction data were in the IMS database for the Minnesota SPS–5 project.

There were 702 days of WIM and 3 years’ worth of monitored traffic data. There were only 2 years with more than 45 days of AVC per year.

Table 68 shows a summary of the testing material data collected on the Minnesota SPS7–5 project. It can be seen that the vast majority of the preconstruction and postconstruction testing had not been completed. In addition, none of the available data were at Level E in the IMS.

Table 67. Key project information for the Minnesota SPS–5.
MINNESOTA SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:NAConstruction Date: 9/15/90
Subgrade Type:FineClimatic Zone: Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:28 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class: 717 Days
Construction Problems:Small town located within project limits.Weigh–In–Motion: 702 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
5010NA0  157127DGAB325Gravel
5025161.0RAP0  175127DGAB325Gravel
503127NARAP0  165127DGAB325Gravel
504127NAVirgin0  170132DGAB305Gravel
5055148.3Virgin0  170119DGAB320Gravel
50651NAVirgin51  188127DGAB318Gravel
507127142.2Virgin51  175132DGAB320Gravel
508127NARAP51  155130DGAB315Gravel
50951NARAP51  190127DGAB320Gravel
55938NAVirgin0  175137DGAB320Gravel
56038NAVirgin0  188137DGAB320Gravel
561NAVirgin0  213137DGAB320Gravel
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
5017663 6033  
5027663 7033  
5037653 6033  
5047673 9033  
5057662 9033  
5066673 9033  
5077673 9033  
5087673 5033  
5097663 7033  
5597762 6033  
5607662 7033  
5617662 8033  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5015/24/907/13/915/29/9011/5/906/16/92 
5027/13/9110/31/925/29/9011/9/9011/9/90 
5037/13/9110/31/925/29/9011/9/9011/9/90 
5047/13/9110/31/925/29/9011/6/9011/6/90 
5057/13/9110/31/925/29/9011/6/9011/6/90 
5067/13/9110/31/925/29/9011/6/9011/6/90 
5077/13/9110/31/925/29/9011/5/906/16/92 
5087/13/9110/31/925/29/9011/5/9011/9/90 
5097/13/9110/31/925/29/9011/6/9011/6/90 
5597/13/9110/31/9211/5/906/16/92 
5607/13/9110/31/9211/5/906/16/92 
5617/13/9110/31/9211/5/906/16/92 
Table 68. Minnesota SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Minnesota SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis340.0
Hydrometer Analysis300.0
Atterberg Limits34100.0
Moisture–Density Relations340.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Natural Moisture Content300.0
Permeability00 0.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis340.0
Atterberg Limits340.0
Moisture–Density Relations340.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Permeability300.0
Natural Moisture Content300.0
Bound Base:Classification000.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 26 30.0
Bulk Specific Gravity930.0
Maximum Specific Gravity340.0
Asphalt Content300.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation300.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape300.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement300.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Minnesota SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 40 9 0.0
Bulk Specific Gravity40 12 0.0
Maximum Specific Gravity6 0 0.0
Asphalt Content6 0 0.0
Moisture Susceptibility6 0 0.0
Resilient Modulus60 0.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate600.0
Aggregate Gradation600.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery600.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement600.0
Specific Gravity600.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement600.0

MISSISSIPPI

The Mississippi SPS–5 is in the wet–no–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on IH– 55 in the northbound direction, north of Canton, MS. The original pavement was constructed on fine subgrade soil and consisted of approximately 216 mm of plant mix bituminous base over lime–treated subgrade soil in place.

Mississippi elected to extend its SPS–5 project by adding one supplemental test section to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest. This treatment is identified in table 69. This test section had been monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation.

Table 69. Mississippi SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
280501NoneControl section
280502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
280503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
280504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
280505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
280506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
280507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
280508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
280509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
27056038 mm milling76 mm virgin mix overlay with fabric underseal and slurry seal.
Notes: SHRP Sections (280501–09)
Mississippi section (280560)

Preconstruction Monitoring

Pavement surface distress levels were taken by the photographic distress method. Profile data were obtained with the profilometer, showing IRI values that varied significantly among the different sections. Structural capacity was evaluated using FWD deflection data, which were taken 10 months before construction instead of the 6 months required. Material sampling activities at the project were completed.

Construction Difficulties

Construction occurred over a long period primarily because of problems associated with the asphalt concrete production plant, which had numerous breakdowns and had problems maintaining a consistent mix production.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Observations of pavement surface distress were obtained manually after construction for the Mississippi SPS–5 project. The profile measurements were collected using a profilometer. The FWD was used to collect deflection data to evaluate the pavement structural capacity. Materials sampling and testing were completed in accordance with the postconstruction sampling plan.

Data Completeness

Table 70 shows a summary of the key elements for the Mississippi SPS–5 project. It can be seen that layer thicknesses reported in the IMS were missing for sections 280506–9 as well as for section 280560.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was not completed in accordance with the long–term monitoring requirements for any of the Minnesota SPS–5 sections. However, monitoring of the longitudinal profile was performed within 6 months before and after construction for all sections.

Deflection data were not collected within 6 months before construction, but the data were collected within 6 months after construction and at a frequency of every 2 years afterwards.

Distress surveys for the Mississippi SPS–5 project were not taken within 6 months before construction. They were taken within 6 months after construction only for sections 280501, 280502, and 280503. The surveys were taken every 2 years after construction on all the sections.

Transverse profile data were collected within 6 months before the application of treatments. The data were not collected within 6 months after construction, but were collected every other year thereafter.

No friction data were in the IMS for the Mississippi SPS–5 project.

There were 89 days of WIM and 1 year of monitored traffic data. There were more than 45 days of AVC for that year.

Table 71 shows a summary of the testing material data collected on the Mississippi SPS–5 project. Preconstruction testing for the subgrade had been completed. However, the tests for the other layers had not been done. The majority of the completed preconstruction testing data were available at Level E in the IMS. Except for the core examinations, none of the postconstruction testing data had been completed.

Table 70. Key project information for the Mississippi SPS–5.
MISSISSIPPI SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:8.92Construction Date: 9/25/90
Subgrade Type:FineClimatic Zone: Wet–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:26 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class: 91 Days
Construction Problems:Mix plant breakdownWeigh–In–Motion: 89 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
5010NA 0  104193HMAC152LTS*
5025150.8RAP0  109180HMAC84LTS
503127116.8RAP0  109180HMAC84LTS
504127124.5Virgin0  107218HMAC152LTS
5055150.8Virgin0  107198HMAC114LTS
50651NAVirgin51  107198HMAC114LTS
507127NAVirgin51  86185HMAC234LTS
508127NARAP51  91196HMAC0LTS
50951NARAP51  109193HMAC102LTS
56076NAVirgin38  91203HMAC152LTS
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
5016643 5013  
5026643 5013  
5036643 5013  
5046633 4013  
5056633 5013  
5066733 5013  
507663 3 5013  
5086633 5013  
5096733 5013  
5604632 2013  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5015/2/9011/14/906/1/8912/27/906/11/9012/27/90 
5025/3/9011/14/906/1/8912/27/906/11/9012/27/90 
5035/3/9011/14/906/1/8912/27/906/11/9012/27/90 
5045/3/9011/14/906/1/893/21/936/11/904/13/92 
5055/3/9011/14/906/1/893/21/936/11/9012/27/90 
5065/3/9011/14/906/1/893/21/936/11/9012/27/90 
5075/3/9011/14/906/1/893/21/936/11/9012/27/90 
5085/3/9011/14/906/1/893/21/936/11/9012/27/90 
5095/3/9011/14/906/1/893/21/936/11/9012/27/90 
56011/14/903/21/933/21/93 

*Lime–treated subgrade

Table 71. Mississippi SPS7–5 materials testing summary.
Mississippi SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis3988.9
Hydrometer Analysis3988.9
Atterberg Limits3988.9
Moisture–Density Relations3988.9
Resilient Modulus31090.0
Natural Moisture Content3785.7
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis000.0
Atterberg Limits000.0
Moisture–Density Relations000.0
Resilient Modulus000.0
Permeability000.0
Natural Moisture Content000.0
Bound Base:Classification300.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 26 28100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity900.0
Maximum Specific Gravity300.0
Asphalt Content300.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation300.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape300.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement300.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Mississippi SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 40 29 100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity40 0 0.0
Maximum Specific Gravity6 0 0.0
Asphalt Content6 0 0.0
Moisture Susceptibility6 0 0.0
Resilient Modulus60 0.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate600.0
Aggregate Gradation600.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery600.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement600.0
Specific Gravity600.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement600.0

MISSOURI

Preconstruction Monitoring

The construction report was not available for review.

Construction Difficulties

The data in the IMS suggested that construction had not been completed.

Postconstruction Monitoring

The data in the IMS suggested that construction had not been completed.

Data Completeness

Table 72 shows a summary of the key elements for the Missouri SPS–5 project; very little information was available. Some data were available for FWD and manual distress. These data were taken before construction. No data were recorded for after construction, which suggests that construction had not been performed.

Table 73 shows a summary of the testing material data for the Missouri SPS–5 project. No data were available for either the preconstruction and postconstruction testing.

Table 72. Key project information for the Missouri SPS–5.
Missouri SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:0.93Construction Date: 8/27/98
Subgrade Type:NAClimatic Zone: NA
Climatic Data Availability:NAAutomated Vehicle Class: None
Construction Problems: Weigh–In–Motion: None
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
5010 0       
50251 RAP0       
503127 RAP0       
504127 Virgin0       
50551 Virgin0       
50651 Virgin51       
507127 Virgin51       
508127 RAP51       
50951 RAP51       
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
5010120 2000  
5020120 2000  
5030120 2000  
5040220 2000  
5050220 2000  
5060220 2000  
5070120 2000  
5080120 2000  
5090120 1000  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5017/22/9812/17/987/22/9812/17/98 
5027/23/9812/17/987/23/9812/17/98 
5037/23/981/20/997/23/981/20/99 
5046/10/9812/16/986/10/9812/6/98 
5056/10/9812/16/986/6/9812/6/98 
5066/10/9812/16/986/10/9812/6/98 
5077/22/981/19/997/22/981/19/99 
5087/22/9812/15/987/22/9812/15/98 
5097/22/981/16/997/22/98 
Table 73. Missouri SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Missouri SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis300.0
Hydrometer Analysis300.0
Atterberg Limits300.0
Moisture–Density Relations300.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Natural Moisture Content300.0
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis300.0
Atterberg Limits300.0
Moisture–Density Relations300.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Permeability300.0
Natural Moisture Content300.0
Bound Base:Classification 3 0 0.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination2600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity900.0
Maximum Specific Gravity300.0
Asphalt Content300.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation300.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape300.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement300.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Missouri SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 40 0 0.0
Bulk Specific Gravity40 0 0.0
Maximum Specific Gravity6 0 0.0
Asphalt Content6 0 0.0
Moisture Susceptibility6 0 0.0
Resilient Modulus 6 0 0.0
Tensile Strength 18 00.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate600.0
Aggregate Gradation600.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery600.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement600.0
Specific Gravity600.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement600.0

MONTANA

The Montana SPS–5 is in the dry–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on IH–90 in the westbound direction, west of Big Timber, MT. The original pavement was constructed on clayey gravel subgrade and had about 70 mm of predominantly fine soil aggregate mixture base, approximately 430 mm of predominantly fine soil aggregate mixture subbase, and 200 mm of AC surface.

Montana elected to extend its SPS–5 project by adding two supplemental test sections to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest. Each of these treatments is identified in table 74. All of these test sections had been monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation.

Table 74. Montana SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
307066NoneControl section
300502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
300503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
300504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
300505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
300506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
300507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
300508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
300509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
300561Mill open friction course127 mm milling and inlay with Polybuilt additive in the mix
300560Mill open friction course51 mm milling and inlay with Kraton modified asphalt in the mix.
Notes:SHRP Sections (300501–09; 307066 is a GPS section that is a substitute for section 300501)
Montana DOT Sections (300561–7–60)

Preconstruction Monitoring

The construction report lists the preconstruction requirements without confirming whether they were actually performed.

Construction Difficulties

Due to the deteriorating condition of the proposed 300501 control section, the Montana DOT proposed using the neighboring 307066 GPS section as a control. However, this GPS section was rehabilitated by removing the open–graded friction course (OGFC) and laying a 50–mm lift of HMA during the same period that the SPS sections were constructed. Therefore, a control section no longer existed.

Postconstruction Monitoring

The construction report lists the postconstruction requirements without confirming whether they were actually performed.

Data Completeness

Table 75 shows a summary of the key elements for the Montana SPS7–5 project. It can be seen that layer thicknesses reported in the IMS were substantially larger than the design values for sections 300504 and 300506 through 300509.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was completed within 6 months before and after the application of treatments and every other year after the placement of overlay.

Deflection data were collected within 6 months before construction. The deflection data were collected within 6 months after construction for all the sections except section 300506. Deflection data were not collected at the required 2–year minimum frequency on any section after the application of treatment.

Distress surveys for the Montana SPS–5 project were collected within 6 months before construction and every 2 years after the construction of the overlays. The distress data were not collected within 6 months after construction.

Transverse profile data were collected within 6 months before the application of treatments. However, this monitoring was not performed within 6 months after or at the required long–term frequency after the treatments were applied.

Friction data were collected at a 2–year interval after the placement of the treatments. No friction data were collected within 6 months before construction of the overlays except for section 300506. No friction data were collected 6 months after construction.

There were zero days of WIM and 5 years of monitored traffic data. There were 3 years with more than 45 days of AVC per year, except for section 300501, which had 4 years with more than 45 days of AVC per year.

Table 76 shows a summary of the testing material data collected on the Montana SPS–5 project. It can be seen that the majority of the preconstruction testing had been completed. In addition, most of the available preconstruction data were at Level E in the IMS. The postconstruction testing data were almost complete with few exceptions. More than 90 percent of the available postconstruction data were at Level E.

Table 75. Key project information for the Montana SPS–5.
Montana SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:7.95Construction Date: 9/12/91
Subgrade Type:CoarseClimatic Zone: Dry–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:17 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class: 930 Days
Construction Problems:Control section overlaid. Paver hopper overloaded during placement of top lift. Malfunction of electronic grade control.Weigh–In–Motion: None
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
70660NA0  12476Soil Agg404Soil Agg
5025166.0RAP0  11271Soil Agg366Soil Agg
503127116.8RAP0  119109Soil Agg368Soil Agg
504127142.2Virgin0  13089Soil Agg396Soil Agg
5055150.8Virgin0  12271Soil Agg389Soil Agg;
50651106.7Virgin51  11971Soil Agg389Soil Agg
507127182.9Virgin51  11289Soil Agg396Soil Agg
508127180.3RAP51  112109Soil Agg376Soil Agg
50951114.3RAP51  11997Soil Agg381Soil Agg
560127NAModified19  11791Soil Agg366Soil Agg
56151NAModified19  11791Soil Agg366Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTrafficAdequacy Code  
Manual Photographic
706611644 7253  
50211542 6253  
50311542 6253  
50411542 6253  
50511542 6253  
50611542 6253  
50711552 6253  
50811542 6253  
50911542 6253  
56010432 3253  
56111442 42 53  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
70665/25/9111/9/917/29/918/18/935/16/916/8/96 
5025/25/9111/9/915/16/918/18/935/16/916/8/96 
5035/25/9111/9/915/17/918/18/935/17/916/8/96 
5045/25/9111/9/915/17/918/18/935/17/916/8/96 
5055/25/9111/9/915/16/918/18/935/16/916/8/96 
5065/25/9111/9/915/16/918/18/935/16/916/8/96 
5075/25/9111/9/915/17/918/18/935/17/916/8/96 
5085/25/9111/9/917/17/918/18/935/17/916/8/96 
5095/25/9111/9/915/16/918/18/935/16/916/8/96 
5605/25/9111/9/915/18/918/18/936/8/96 
5615/25/9111/9/915/18/918/18/936/8/96 
Table 76. Montana SPS—5 materials testing summary.
Montana SPS—5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis3785.7
Hydrometer Analysis3580.0
Atterberg Limits3580.0
Moisture–Density Relations3580.0
Resilient Modulus31100.0
Natural Moisture Content31580.0
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis3580.0
Atterberg Limits3475.0
Moisture–Density Relations3475.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Permeability300.0
Natural Moisture Content3862.5
Bound Base:Classification000.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 26 4981.6
Bulk Specific Gravity91782.4
Maximum Specific Gravity3580.0
Asphalt Content3580.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation3580.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape32100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement33 66.7
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement3366.7
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement3366.7
Montana SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 406678.8
Bulk Specific Gravity4028100.0
Maximum Specific Gravity68100.0
Asphalt Content68100.0
Moisture Susceptibility600.0
Resilient Modulus600.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate65100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate66100.0
Aggregate Gradation68100.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery66100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement66100.0
Specific Gravity66100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement66100.0

NEW JERSEY

The New Jersey SPS–5 is in the wet–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on IH–194 in the westbound direction, east of Trenton, NJ. The original pavement was constructed on silty to clayey sand soil, and had about 267 mm of uncrushed gravel base above a variable–depth soil aggregate mixture subbase, and about 216 mm of AC surface.

New Jersey elected to extend its SPS–5 project by adding two supplemental test sections to study the performance of other rehabilitation treatments of interest. Each of these treatments is identified in table 77. All of these test sections had been monitored, and the data collected were available to the DOT for evaluation.

Table 77. New Jersey SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
340501NoneControl section
340502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
340503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
340504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
340505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
340506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
340507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
340508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
340509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
340559Intensive51 mm milling with 51 mm RAP overlay above 64 mm virgin mix binder
340560Intensive51 mm milling with 25 mm rubblized wearing course above a 64 mm virgin mix overlay
Notes:SHRP Sections (340501–09)
New Jersey DOT Sections (340559–60)

Preconstruction Monitoring

Materials sampling and testing were performed before construction.

Construction Difficulties

The original outside shoulder of section 340559 consisted of 51 mm of bituminous stabilized base course over a pit run gravel base. The 51–mm milling exposed some gravel areas (about 25 percent of the surface area). The milling of the driving lane extended 0.02 m into the outside shoulder. Therefore, the pavement’s outside lane milled depths could not be measured. The milling machine also cut 51 to 102 mm into the passing lane’s replacement layer. The milled pavement had a fine macro texture, whereas the milled shoulder had a coarse macro texture due to the large aggregate of the bituminous stabilized base course.

Aggregate fracturing was observed at the center longitudinal joint and the shoulder joint on both the binder course and the surface course overlay paving. This was caused by the overlap of the vibratory roller.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Quality control and data collection were performed on the same day the overlay was placed and then at two weeks after construction on either side of each test section.

Data Completeness

Table 78 shows a summary of the key elements for the New Jersey SPS–5 project. The layer thicknesses for sections 340502 through 340505 were smaller than the design values, whereas the layer thicknesses were substantially larger than the design values for sections 340506 through 340509.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was performed within 6 months after the overlay construction on all test sections. However, data for the first five sections were not collected within 6 months before construction. Longitudinal profile data had been collected in accordance with long–term frequency requirements with the exception of test section 340506.

Deflection data were collected within 6 months before the overlay construction on all test sections. With the exception of sections 340503 and 340507, no sections met either the postconstruction or the long–term data collection frequency requirements.

Both the distress survey and transverse profile data were collected within 6 months prior and every other year after construction, but no data were collected within 6 months after construction.

Friction data were collected within 6 months after and every other year after construction, but no data were collected within 6 months before construction.

There were 1,466 days of WIM and 5 years of monitored traffic data except for the first 3 sections, which had 1,491 days of WIM and 6 years of monitored traffic data. All sections had 5 years with more than 45 days of AVC data per year.

Table 79 summarizes the testing material data collected on the New Jersey SPS–5 project. The majority of the preconstruction testing had not been completed. Most of the available preconstruction data were at Level E in the IMS. Most of the postconstruction testing had been completed, and about 60 percent of the data were at Level E.

Table 78. Key project information for the New Jersey SPS–5.
New Jersey SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:7.00Construction Date:12/20/91
Subgrade Type:CoarseClimatic Zone:Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:29 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class:1395 Days
Construction Problems:Some areas of HMAC completely milled off. Aggregate fracture observed along center longitudinal joint.Weigh–In–Motion:1491 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
5010NA0 NA241254Gravel1676Soil Agg
5025148.3RAP0 NA226264Gravel1042Soil Agg
503127119.4RAP0 NA229287Gravel559Soil Agg
504127119.4Virgin0 NA216272Gravel553Soil Agg
5055145.7Virgin0 NA229254Gravel508Soil Agg
50651106.7Virgin51 53.8241254Gravel0Soil Agg
507127198.1Virgin51 55.7213254Gravel1372Soil Agg
508127198.1RAP51 55.3231287Gravel559Soil Agg
50951109.2RAP51 63.7241287Gravel559Soil Agg
560115NARAP51 NA218267Gravel762Soil Agg
56189NARAP51 NA216267Gravel102Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTraffic Adequacy Code   
Manual Photographic
5017432 6264  
5026532 6264  
5036742 7264  
5047432 6254  
5057532 6254  
5065532 6254  
5076642 7254  
5087542 7254  
5097532 6254  
5595432 5254  
5603532 5254  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5011/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
5021/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
5031/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
5041/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
5051/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
5061/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
5071/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
5081/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
5091/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
5591/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
5601/25/9210/30/924/2/922/24/934/6/922/24/93 
Table 79. New Jersey SPS–5 materials testing summary.
New Jersey SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis3250.0
Hydrometer Analysis3475.0
Atterberg Limits340.0
Moisture–Density Relations3475.0
Resilient Modulus3 2 100.0
Natural Moisture Content300.0
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis32100.0
Atterberg Limits340.0
Moisture–Density Relations3475.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Permeability300.0
Natural Moisture Content390.0
Bound Base:Classification000.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 26 4669.6
Bulk Specific Gravity91973.7
Maximum Specific Gravity300.0
Asphalt Content300.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation300.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape300.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement300.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement300.0
New Jersey SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 4017856.2
Bulk Specific Gravity407861.5
Maximum Specific Gravity6966.7
Asphalt Content6966.7
Moisture Susceptibility600.0
Resilient Modulus600.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate6966.7
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate6944.5
Aggregate Gradation69 
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape6 0 0.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery6 3 66.7
Penetration of Asphalt Cement6333.3
Specific Gravity6366.7
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement6366.7

NEW MEXICO

The New Mexico SPS–5 is in the dry–no–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on IH–10 in the eastbound direction, between Lordsburg and Deming, NM. The original pavement was constructed on silty sand subgrade and had about 305 mm of sand granular base with approximately 241 mm of AC surface. Each of the New Mexico SPS–5 treatments is identified in table 80.

Table 80. New Mexico SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
350501NoneControl section, 51mm milling and 51mm inlay
350502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
350503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
350504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
350505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
350506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
350507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
350508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
350509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling

Preconstruction Monitoring

Before rehabilitation, a manual surface distress survey was performed on each test section. The predominant distress found was low severity longitudinal cracking outside the wheel path. Deflection measurements were performed using the FWD. Materials sampling and testing were performed.

Construction Difficulties

There were some high air voids in the RAP mix, and oil was boosted to reduce this problem in time for the RAP overlay of sections 350508 and 350509. Section 350501 received a 51–mm cold mill and a 51–mm inlay; this section was supposed to be the control section with no treatments applied.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Postconstruction sampling and testing were performed the day after construction of each section. Coring was obtained from the approach and leave end of each test section, and sampling was conducted by the State’s subcontracted laboratory.

Data Completeness

Table 81 shows a summary of the key elements for the New Mexico SPS–5 project. It can be seen that layer thicknesses were not available in the IMS from the testing data.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was not performed 6 months before construction except for sections 350501, 350505, and 350506.

Deflection data were collected within 6 months before and after construction, and at a frequency of every 2 years afterwards.

Distress surveys for the New Mexico SPS–5 project were collected within 6 months before and every 2 years after the construction of the overlays. However, no surveys were taken within 6 months after the placement of the treatments.

Transverse profile data were not collected within 6 months before or after the application of treatments. However, these data were collected in accordance with long–term monitoring requirements.

The friction and the traffic data were unavailable for the New Mexico SPS–5 project.

Table 82 shows a summary of the testing material data collected on the New Mexico SPS–5 project. A majority of the preconstruction testing had not been completed. The available preconstruction data were all at Level E in the IMS. The postconstruction testing data were not available.

Table 81. Key project information for the New Mexico SPS–5.
New Mexico SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:2.89Construction Date:9/17/96
Subgrade Type:CoarseClimatic Zone:Dry–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:26 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class:None
Construction Problems:Control section was milled and overlaidWeigh–In–Motion:None
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
5010NA0 51     
50251NARAP0 0     
503127NARAP0 0     
504127NAVirgin0 0     
50551NAVirgin0 0     
50651NAVirgin51 54.2     
507127NAVirgin51 55.7     
508127NARAP51 55.8     
50951NARAP51 52.8     
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTraffic Adequacy Code   
Manual Photographic
5012220 2001  
5021220 2001  
5031320 2001  
5041220 2001  
5052200 2001  
5062222 2001  
5071220 2001  
5081220 2001  
5091220 2001  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5018/31/963/9/975/30/961/6/995/30/961/6/99 
5023/9/975/30/961/6/995/30/963/19/99 
5033/9/975/30/961/6/995/30/961/6/99 
5043/9/975/30/961/6/995/30/961/6/99 
5058/31/963/9/975/30/961/6/995/30/961/6/99 
5068/31/963/9/975/30/961/6/995/30/964/1/92 
5073/9/975/30/961/6/995/30/961/6/99 
5083/9/975/30/961/6/995/30/961/6/99 
5093/9/975/30/961/6/995/30/963/19/99 
Table 82. New Mexico SPS–5 material testing summary.
New Jersey SPS—5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis300.0
Hydrometer Analysis300.0
Atterberg Limits300.0
Moisture–Density Relations3 0 0.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Natural Moisture Content300.0
Permeability000
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis000.0
Atterberg Limits300.0
Moisture–Density Relations300.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Permeability300.0
Natural Moisture Content300.0
Bound Base:Classification000.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination2600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity1200.0
Maximum Specific Gravity37100.0
Asphalt Content37100.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate013100.0
Aggregate Gradation36100.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape36100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement36100.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement36100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement36100.0
New Jersey SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 4000.0
Bulk Specific Gravity4000.0
Maximum Specific Gravity600.0
Asphalt Content600.0
Moisture Susceptibility600.0
Resilient Modulus1200.0
Tensile Strength1600.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate600.0
Aggregate Gradation600.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery600.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement600.0
Specific Gravity600.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement600.0

OKLAHOMA

The Oklahoma SPS–5 is in the wet–no–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on U.S. 62 in the westbound direction, near Lawton, OK. The original pavement was constructed on sandy clay subgrade, and had about 203 mm of HMAC base and about 114 mm of AC surface. The treatment sections are detailed in table 83. The State agency opted to incorporate one supplemental section.

Table 83. Oklahoma SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
400501NoneControl section
400502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
400503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
400504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
400505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
400506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
400507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
400508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
400509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling
400560Mill/inlay89 mm virgin overlay

Preconstruction Monitoring

Before rehabilitation, a manual distress survey was performed on each test section. The predominant distresses found were bleeding in the wheel paths and moderate severity transverse cracking. Deflection measurements were performed using the FWD to evaluate structural capacity. Profilometer measurements were taken both inside and outside wheel paths. Materials sampling also was performed.

Construction Difficulties

No major problems were encountered during construction, except that the initial batch of recycled mix laid on the test strip contained too much asphalt cement.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Following the completion of construction, monitoring activities similar to those performed before construction were initiated.

Data Completeness

Table 84 shows a summary of the key elements for the Oklahoma SPS–5 project. The layer thicknesses were not available in the IMS from the testing data.

Monitoring data collection was required within 6 months before and after construction, and then the data were to be collected every other year.

The longitudinal and transverse profile data collection did not meet the postconstruction requirement.

Both the FWD and distress data were collected and met the frequency requirements.

The friction data collection did not meet the preconstruction requirement.

Table 85 summarizes the material testing performed on the Oklahoma SPS–5 project. The majority of both the preconstruction and postconstruction testing had not been completed. All the available testing data were at Level E.

Table 84. Key project information for the Oklahoma SPS–5.
Oklahoma SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:2.06Construction Date:7/16/97
Subgrade Type:FineClimatic Zone:Wet–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:24 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class:None
Construction Problems: Weigh–In–Motion:None
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
5010 0       
50251 RAP0       
503127 RAP0       
504127 Virgin0       
50551 Virgin0       
50651 Virgin51       
507127 Virgin51       
508127 RAP51       
50951 RAP51       
56089 NA51       
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTraffic Adequacy Code   
Manual Photographic
5012320 1101  
5022320 1101  
5032320 1101  
5042320 1101  
5052320 1101  
5062320 1101  
5072320 1101  
5082320 1101  
5092320 1101  
5601320 0101  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5016/4/971/14/986/16/977/22/976/16/97 
5026/4/971/14/986/16/977/22/976/16/97 
5036/4/971/14/986/16/977/22/976/17/97 
5046/4/971/14/986/16/977/23/976/17/97 
5056/4/971/14/986/16/977/23/976/17/97 
5066/4/971/14/986/16/977/23/976/17/97 
5076/4/971/14/986/16/977/23/976/17/97 
5086/4/971/14/986/16/977/23/976/17/97 
5091/14/986/16/977/23/97 
Table 85. Oklahoma SPS—5 materials testing summary.
Oklahoma SPS—5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis300.0
Hydrometer Analysis30 0.0
Atterberg Limits300.0
Moisture–Density Relations300.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Natural Moisture Content300.0
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis300.0
Atterberg Limits000.0
Moisture–Density Relations000.0
Resilient Modulus000.0
Permeability000.0
Natural Moisture Content000.0
Bound Base:Classification000.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 28 310.0
Bulk Specific Gravity1220.0
Maximum Specific Gravity37100.0
Asphalt Content37100.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation37100.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape36100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement37100.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement37100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement37100.0
Oklahoma SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 44380.0
Bulk Specific Gravity44110.0
Maximum Specific Gravity63100.0
Asphalt Content6100.0
Moisture Susceptibility66100.0
Resilient Modulus1200.0
Tensile Strength1600.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate660.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate660.0
Aggregate Gradation660.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape660.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery000.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement650.0
Specific Gravity660.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement660.0

TEXAS

The Texas SPS–5 project is in the wet–no–freeze environmental zone, but is only about 20 miles east of IH–35, which is the boundary established between the dry–no–freeze and wet–no–freeze environmental zones. This project is located on U.S. 175 in Kaufman County. The original pavement was placed on a fat clay subgrade, had 152 mm to 203 mm of lime–treated subgrade as a subbase, and 203 mm to 356 mm of crushed stone treated with 3 percent of lime, and 218 mm to 244 mm of AC. The treated base "set up" sufficiently that it could be cored; therefore, it represents a relatively stiff base course.

There are two nearby control sections for this project. One is the GPS–1 test section 481069 and the other is the control section for the Maintenance Effectiveness Study (SPS–3), 48B340. As these are adjacent to the SPS–5 project, no specific test section was designated as 48A501. GPS– 1 test sections can have specific maintenance treatments under certain circumstances, while an SPS–3 project control section can have none, so there is some additional contrast available from the two control sections. The treatment sections for the SPS–5 sections in Texas are shown in table 86.

Table 86. Texas SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
481069NoneControl section
48A502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
48A503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
48A504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
48A505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
48A506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
48A507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
48A508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
48A509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling

Note: Section 481069 is a substitute for 48A501.

Preconstruction Monitoring

Before rehabilitation, pavement surface distress was collected by a photographic distress survey. The predominant distresses found were longitudinal and transverse cracking. Deflection measurements were performed using the FWD to evaluate structural capacity. Profilometer measurements were taken at 150–mm increments on the travel lane for each section. Materials sampling and testing also were performed.

Construction Difficulties

The overlay construction was delayed due to a combination of rain, mix design problems, and delays in the receipt of plant parts.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Postconstruction monitoring activities were identical to those conducted before the treatment applications. These activities include pavement surface distress survey, surface profile, structural capacity, and materials sampling and testing.

Data Completeness

Table 87 shows a summary of the key elements for the Texas SPS–5 project. The layer thicknesses reported in the IMS were substantially larger than the design values for sections 48A506 through 48A509.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was performed every other year after construction on all test sections. Sections 48A502 through 48A505 did not meet the preconstruction requirement. Control section 481069 did not meet either the preconstruction or the postconstruction requirement.

Deflection data were collected within 6 months before construction on all sections except the control section. For the postconstruction requirement, deflection data were collected only on test sections 48A502 through 48A505. Only the control section had met the long–term collection requirement.

No distress data were collected within 6 months before construction on all sections. Data were collected only on the control section within 6 months after construction. The long–term data collection requirement was met for all test sections.

Transverse profile data were collected within 6 months before construction on sections 48A506 through 48A509 only. Data were collected within 6 months after construction on all sections except sections 48A508 and 48A509. The long–term data–collection requirement was not met for all test sections.

None of the friction data collection requirements were met for all test sections except the control section, for which data were collected within 6 months after construction.

There were 7 days of WIM and 7 years’ worth of monitored traffic data except for the control section, which had 8 years’ worth of monitored data. There were 6 years with more than 45 days of AVC per year for all sections except the control section, which had 1 more year than the other sections.

Table 88 shows a summary of the materials testing data collected for the Texas SPS–5 project. All of the preconstruction testing had been completed and the data were all at Level E in the IMS. About 50 percent of the postconstruction testing had been completed and the data were at Level E.

Table 87. Key project information for the Texas SPS–5.
Texas SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:7.84Construction Date:10/21/91
Subgrade Type:FineClimatic Zone:Wet–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:20 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class:385 Days
Construction Problems:Weather and production plant delays.Weigh–In–Motion:7 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
1069000 0241386LTB*165LTS
A5025155.4RAP0 0231376LTB203LTS
A503127134.6RAP0 0239254LTB203LTS
A504127134.6Virgin0 0221269LTB203LTS
A5055150.8Virgin0 0244224LTB147LTS
A5065199.1Virgin51 56.5229224LTB147LTS
A50712717.8Virgin51 55.3229224LTB147LTS
A508127185.4RAP51 52.6244356LTB203LTS
A50951109.2RAP51 46.9226376LTB203LTS
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTraffic Adequacy Code   
Manual Photographic
10695466 9785  
A5025632 5575  
A5035532 5475  
A5045532 5475  
A5055532 5475  
A5065532 5475  
A5075532 5475  
A5085532 5475  
A5095632 5475  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
10693/18/912/11/937/17/911/28/927/17/911/28/92 
A5023/19/911/20/923/3/933/10/911/28/92 
A5033/19/911/21/923/3/933/10/911/28/92 
A5043/19/911/21/923/3/933/10/911/28/92 
A5053/20/911/22/923/3/933/10/911/28/92 
A5063/19/911/21/923/3/933/10/911/28/92 
A5073/19/911/21/923/3/933/10/911/28/92 
A5083/19/911/20/923/3/933/10/911/28/92 
A5093/19/911/20/923/3/933/10/911/28/92 

* LTB—lime–treated base

Table 88. Texas SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Texas SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis35100.0
Hydrometer Analysis35100.0
Atterberg Limits35100.0
Moisture–Density Relations35100.0
Resilient Modulus33100.0
Natural Moisture Content36100.0
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis050.0
Atterberg Limits000.0
Moisture–Density Relations000.0
Resilient Modulus000.0
Permeability000.0
Natural Moisture Content00100.0
Bound Base:Classification34100.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination3154100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity914100.0
Maximum Specific Gravity35100.0
Asphalt Content350.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate00100.0
Aggregate Gradation35100.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape32100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement33100.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement33100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement33100.0
Texas SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 3637100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity3634100.0
Maximum Specific Gravity63100.0
Asphalt Content63100.0
Moisture Susceptibility600.0
Resilient Modulus600.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate60100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate66100.0
Aggregate Gradation660.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery63100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement63100.0
Specific Gravity63100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement63100.0

ALBERTA

The Alberta SPS–5 is in the wet–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on Trans– Canada Highway 16 in the westbound direction, near Edson, Alberta. The original pavement was constructed on sandy clay subgrade and had about 152 mm of gravel subbase, about 89 mm of crushed stone base, and approximately 200 mm of AC surface. The treatment sections are shown in table 89.

Table 89. Alberta SPS–5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
810501NoneControl section
810502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
810503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
810504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
810505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
810506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
810507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
810508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
810509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling

Preconstruction Monitoring

Before rehabilitation, materials sampling and testing were performed.

Construction Difficulties

Overall, the construction was completed without any major problems. A few minor problems were noted. Some problems with tack coat bubbling through surface course lift on the SHRP lane was encountered on section 810502. Near the middle of section 810505 on the SHRP lane, one of the pneumatic rollers spun its wheels, leaving a slight depression. On the SHRP lane of section 810509, the inlay that overlaps the shoulder had a 4.6–m crack that was 25 mm wide, centered at station 0+25.

Postconstruction Monitoring

Material sampling and testing were performed after construction. In addition, a distress survey was performed 7 months after construction.

Data Completeness

Table 90 summarizes the key elements for the Alberta SPS–5 project. The layer thicknesses reported in the IMS were substantially larger than the design values for sections 810506 through 810509. The layer thickness for section 810505 was not available.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was completed within 6 months before and after construction, and then every other year after construction on all test sections.

Deflection data were collected within 6 months before and after construction and then every other year after construction on all test sections except section 810502, which did not meet the postconstruction requirement.

Distress data were collected within 6 months before construction and then every other year on all test sections. However, no data were collected within 6 months after construction on all sections.

Transverse profile data collection did not meet any of the frequency requirements.

None of the friction data collection requirements was met for all test sections except the control section, which had data collected every other year after construction.

Traffic data were not available for the Alberta SPS–5 project.

Table 91 summarizes the testing material data collected for the Alberta SPS–5 project. Most of the preconstruction testing had been completed, and almost all the data were at Level E in the IMS. The majority of the postconstruction testing had been completed, and the data were at Level E.

Table 90. Key project information for the Alberta SPS–5.
Alberta SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:8.88Construction Date:10/10/90
Subgrade Type:CoarseClimatic Zone:Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:57 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class:None
Construction Problems:Tack coat bubbling through surface course lift on 810502.Weigh–In–Motion:None
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
501000  16074ATB295Soil Agg
5025153.3RAP0  1320ATB381Soil Agg
503127127.0RAP0  15776ATB328Soil Agg
504127121.9Virgin0  16030ATB279Soil Agg
50551NAVirgin0  15264ATB295Soil Agg
5065194.0Virgin51  15246ATB330Soil Agg
507127162.6Virgin51  15741ATB330Soil Agg
508127177.8RAP51  1630ATB378Soil Agg
5095183.8RAP51  1750ATB343Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTraffic Adequacy Code   
Manual Photographic
50110553 5203  
50210453 5203  
50310553 5203  
50410553 5203  
50510553 5203  
50610553 5203  
50710553 5203  
50810553 5203  
50910653 5203  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
5015/12/9010/15/905/17/905/7/916/26/91 
5025/12/9010/15/905/17/905/8/916/26/91 
5035/12/9010/15/905/17/905/8/916/26/91 
5045/12/9010/15/905/17/905/8/916/26/91 
5055/12/9010/15/905/17/905/7/916/26/91 
5065/12/9010/15/905/17/905/7/916/26/91 
5075/12/9010/15/905/17/905/7/916/26/91 
5085/12/9010/15/905/17/905/8/916/26/91 
5095/12/9010/15/905/17/905/8/916/26/91 
Table 91. Alberta SPS—5 materials testing summary.
Alberta SPS—5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis33100.0
Hydrometer Analysis33100.0
Atterberg Limits33100.0
Moisture–Density Relations33100.0
Resilient Modulus32 100.0
Natural Moisture Content370.0
Permeability00100.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis090.0
Atterberg Limits000.0
Moisture–Density Relations000.0
Resilient Modulus000.0
Permeability000.0
Natural Moisture Content 0 00.0
Bound Base:Classification3 0 100.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination26 26 100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity99100.0
Maximum Specific Gravity33100.0
Asphalt Content33100.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation33100.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape000.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement33100.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement33100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement33100.0
Alberta SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 4040100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity4040100.0
Maximum Specific Gravity66100.0
Asphalt Content66100.0
Moisture Susceptibility660.0
Resilient Modulus600.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate66100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate66100.0
Aggregate Gradation66100.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery66100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement66100.0
Specific Gravity66100.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement66100.0

MANITOBA

The Manitoba SPS–5 is in the wet–freeze environmental zone. The project is located on Trans– Canada Highway 1 in the westbound direction, 80 km east of Winnipeg. The original pavement was constructed on sandy silt subgrade and had about 229 mm of crushed stone subbase, about 102 mm of crushed stone base, and about 102 mm of AC surface. The details of the structure are shown in table 92.

Table 92. Manitoba SPS—5 test section layout.
SECTION NO.SURFACE PREPARATIONOVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
810069NoneControl section, 51 mm recycled asphalt pavement (rap) overlay
810502Minimum51 mm RAP overlay
810503Minimum127 mm RAP overlay
810504Minimum127 mm virgin overlay
810505Minimum51 mm virgin overlay
810506Intensive51 mm virgin overlay with milling
810507Intensive127 mm virgin overlay with milling
810508Intensive127 mm RAP overlay with milling
810509Intensive51 mm RAP overlay with milling

Preconstruction Monitoring

Before rehabilitation, measurements for the FWD, profile, and distress were taken. Materials sampling and testing were also performed.

Construction Difficulties

The project contractor did not have any recycling experience.

The guidelines were still being developed during construction, causing significant construction deviations. The field sampling data were not collected in accordance with the updated guidelines.

The Manitoba SPS–5 project was nominated as a fine–grained subgrade classification. Laboratory test results suggested a coarse–grained soil instead.

The addition of a centerline crown and the milling operation may have caused the overlay thicknesses to vary by more than 25 mm on some test sections. Additional full–depth cores were taken by personnel from Manitoba Highways and Transportation to document the possible variation, but these did not answer all the questions on the asphalt thickness.

Postconstruction Monitoring

The same monitoring activities as those conducted during the preconstruction monitoring were performed. Material sampling and testing were performed after construction.

Data Completeness

Table 93 summarizes the key elements for the Manitoba SPS–5 project. The layer thicknesses reported in the IMS were substantially larger than the design values for sections 830506 through 830509. The layer thickness for section 830505 was not available.

Longitudinal profile monitoring was not performed within 6 months before construction, but data were collected within 6 months and then every other year after construction on all test sections.

Deflection data were collected within 6 months before and after construction and then every other year after construction on all test sections.

Distress data were collected within 6 months before construction and then every other year on all test sections. However, no data were collected within 6 months after construction on all sections.

Transverse profile data collection was not completed within 6 months before or after construction. Data were collected every other year after construction except for the control section.

Friction data collection was performed within 6 months before construction except for section 830509. Data were not collected within 6 months after construction, but data were collected every other year after construction.

Traffic data were available for all sections of this project. There were 0 days of WIM and 1 year of monitored traffic data with more than 45 days of AVC per year.

Table 94 summarizes the materials testing data collected for the Manitoba SPS–5 project. A majority of the preconstruction testing and almost all of the postconstruction testing was incomplete. Most of the available data were at Level E in the IMS.

Table 93. Key project information for the Manitoba SPS–5.
Manitoba SPS–5 PROJECT SUMMARY
Age as of Aug 1999:9.96Construction Date:9/13/89
Subgrade Type:Fine–CoarseClimatic Zone:Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:26 YearsAutomated Vehicle Class:None
Construction Problems:Entrance to gravel mining operation located in the middle of the project.Weigh–In–Motion:None
Site Key Information Summary:
IDOverlay Thickness, mmMaterialMilledOriginal Pavement Structure
DesignActualDesignActualSurface Thickness, mmBase Thickness, mmBase TypeSubbase Thickness, mmSubbase Type
501000  119130Gravel127Gravel
5025168.6RAP0  107127Gravel102Gravel
503127124.5RAP0  107178Gravel127Gravel
504127142.2Virgin0  97130Gravel127Gravel
5055178.7Virgin0  122130Gravel127Gravel
5065181.3Virgin51  13789Gravel254Gravel
507127165.1Virgin51  11989Gravel254Gravel
508127165.1RAP51  102175Gravel127Gravel
5095194.0RAP51  132175Gravel127Gravel
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
IDIRIFWDDistressTransverse ProfileFrictionTraffic Adequacy Code   
Manual Photographic
5018763 5412  
5029763 6412  
5039763 6402  
5049763 6402  
5059763 5402  
5069773 6402  
5078753 5402  
5089763 6402  
50910763 5402  
IDIRIDistress Transverse 
PrePostPrePostPrePost
50110/18/895/19/895/25/907/12/92 
50210/19/895/19/895/25/907/21/92 
50310/19/895/19/895/25/907/21/92 
50410/20/895/19/895/25/907/21/92 
50510/20/895/19/895/25/907/21/92 
50610/19/898/22/895/25/907/21/92 
50710/20/898/22/895/25/907/21/92 
50810/19/898/22/895/25/907/21/92 
50910/19/898/22/895/25/907/21/92 
Table 94. Manitoba SPS–5 materials testing summary.
Manitoba SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
TestMinimum No. Per LayerNumber ConductedPercent at Level E
Subgrade:Sieve Analysis3580.0
Hydrometer Analysis35100.0
Atterberg Limits300.0
Moisture–Density Relations35100.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Natural Moisture Content3580.0
Permeability000.0
Unbound Base:Sieve Analysis35100.0
Atterberg Limits35100.0
Moisture–Density Relations36100.0
Resilient Modulus300.0
Permeability300.0
Natural Moisture Content35100.0
Bound Base:Classification000.0
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination2600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity900.0
Maximum Specific Gravity300.0
Asphalt Content300.0
Moisture Susceptibility000.0
Specific Gravity of Aggregate000.0
Aggregate Gradation300.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape32100.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement300.0
Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement300.0
Manitoba SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:Core Examination 4052100.0
Bulk Specific Gravity40520.0
Maximum Specific Gravity600.0
Asphalt Content600.0
Moisture Susceptibility600.0
Resilient Modulus600.0
Tensile Strength1800.0
Extracted Aggregate:Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate600.0
Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate600.0
Aggregate Gradation600.0
NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape600.0
Asphalt Cement:Abson Recovery600.0
Penetration of Asphalt Cement600.0
Specific Gravity600.0
Viscosity of Asphalt Cement600.0

 


The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is a part of the U.S. Department of Transportation and is headquartered in Washington, D.C., with field offices across the United States. is a major agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is a part of the U.S. Department of Transportation and is headquartered in Washington, D.C., with field offices across the United States. is a major agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). Provide leadership and technology for the delivery of long life pavements that meet our customers needs and are safe, cost effective, and can be effectively maintained. Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) R&T Web site portal, which provides access to or information about the Agency’s R&T program, projects, partnerships, publications, and results.
FHWA
United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration