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-02-082
Date: August 2006

Alternative Text

Previous | Table of Contents

Figure 1. Overall view of Winnemucca, Nevada, test site.

This photograph shows the test site, which consists of a divided highway’s eastbound lane, which passes under an overpass.

Figure 2. Winnemucca, Nevada, test section layout.

The figure shows a drawing of the test site on Interstate 80 in Humboldt County, Nevada, East of Winnemucca, Nevada,on Mile Post 16.45 to 16.80 in the eastbound truck lane. The test section layout shows five slabs shown per section. The first section, in the direction of traffic, is Control Section 3 parenthesis C 3 end parenthesis. This is followed by Lithium Section 2 parenthesis L 2 end parenthesis, Silane Section 2 parenthesis S 2 end parenthesis, Methacrylate Section 2 parenthesis M 2 end parenthesis, 20 intervening slabs, Silane number 2 Section 1 parenthesis S A 1 end parenthesis, Linseed Oil Section 1 parenthesis L O 1 end parenthesis, five intervening slabs, Control Section 2 parenthesis C 2 end parenthesis, Silane Section 1 parenthesis S 1 end parenthesis, Lithium Section 1 parenthesis L 1 end parenthesis, Control Section 1 parenthesis C 1 end parenthesis, two intervening slabs, and finally Methacrylate Section 1 parenthesis M 1 end parenthesis.

Figure 3. Joint distress of high severity, Winnemucca, Nevada.

This photograph shows high severity distress in two slabs of concrete. There are large cracks and multiple popouts throughout the slabs.

Figure 4. Joint distress of medium severity,Winnemucca, Nevada.

This photograph shows medium severity distress in two slabs of concrete. There are several long strands of cracks running throughout the slabs and many popouts, although fewer popouts than in figure 3.

Figure 5. Joint distress for all sections of Winnemucca test site, 1994.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1994 transverse joint spalling. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. The graph shows high, medium, and low severity distress. Sections L 2, S 2, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had only low severity distress and joint lengths of about 9, 14, 21, 22, 23, 22, and 17 meters, respectively. Sections C 3, M 2, S A 1, and L O 1 had 13, 6, 16, and 17 meters of low level distress; and 3, 2, 4, and 4 meters of medium severity distress.

Figure 6. Joint distress for all sections of Winnemucca test site, 1995.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1995 transverse joint spalling. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. The graph shows high, medium, and low severity distress. Section L2 had only low severity distress and a joint length of 9 meters. Sections C 3, L 2, M 2, S A 1, C 2 and M 1 had low severity distress with lengths of about 13, 7, 2, 6, 4, and 6 meters; and medium severity distress with lengths of about 3, 5, 5, 14, 11, and 5, respectively. Section M2 had 2 meters of high severity distress. Sections L O 1, S 1, L 1, and C 1 had no low severity distress and medium severity distress with lengths of about 20, 15, 17, and 19 meters, respectively. Sections S 1 and L 1 had high severity distress with lengths of about 4 meters each.

Figure 7. Joint distress for all sections of Winnemucca test site, 1996.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1996 transverse joint spalling. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. The graph shows high, medium, and low severity distress. Sections C 3, L 2, S 2, M 2, S A 1, and C 2 had low level distress with lengths of about 9, 6, 7, 2, 3, and 3 meters; medium distress with lengths of 4, 6, 5, 10, 14, and 16 meters; and high distress with length of 3, 6, 4, 4, 4, and 0 meters, respectively. Sections L O 1, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had no low level distress; medium levels with lengths of about 6, 2, 1, 20, and 11; and high levels with lengths of 15, 19, 9, 0, and 4 meters, respectively.

Figure 8. Joint distress for all sections of Winnemucca test site, 1997.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1997 transverse joint spalling. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. The graph shows high, medium, and low severity distress. Sections C 3, L 2, S 2, and M 2 had low level distress with lengths of about 2, 6, 7, and 2 meters; medium distress with lengths of 11, 6, 5, and 3 meters; and high distress with lengths of 3, 6, 4, and 11 meters, respectively. Sections S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had no low level distress; medium levels with lengths of about 22, 7, 7, 4, 11, 22, and 11 meters; and high levels with lengths of about 0, 15, 15, 18, 11, 0, and 7 meters, respectively.

Figure 9. Joint distress for all sections of Winnemucca test site, 1998.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1998 transverse joint spalling. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. The graph shows high, medium, and low severity distress. Section S2 had low level distress with a length of 2 meters, medium level distress of 3 meters, and high level distress of 12 meters. Sections C 3, L 2, M 2, S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had no low level distress; medium levels with lengths of about 18, 11, 7, 18, 4, 0, 0, 0, 4, and 4 meters; and high levels with lengths of about 0, 10, 12, 11, 4, 17, 22, 22, 22, 17 and 17 meters, respectively.

Figure 10. Actual joint lengths of each severity level for each section, Winnemucca, Nevada, 1998).

The figure consists of a bar graph of true joint length at a given severity level in 1998. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. Sections C 3, L 2, S 2, M 2, S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had low level severity joint lengths of 10, 11, 11, 9, 9, 6, 6, 5, 9, 9, and 6; medium level lengths of 5, 7, 4, 6, 10, 10, 10, 6, 8, 10, and 7; and high level lengths of 4, 2, 1, 2, 1, 4, 5, 9, 4, 3, and 7 meters, respectively.

Figure 11. Photograph showing widespread map cracking in shoulder area of Winnemucca test site.

The figure consists of a photograph of the shoulder area of a portland cement concrete parenthesis P C C end parenthesis pavement with widespread map cracking.

Figure 12. Close-up of map cracking with efflorescence, Winnemucca, Nevada.

The figure consists of a photograph of a PCC pavement with map cracking and efflorescence.

Figure 13. Number of areas of severe map cracking in each section from 1995 through 1998, Winnemucca, Nevada.

The figure consists of a bar graph of the number of areas of severe map cracking. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and number of areas on the vertical axis. The years 1995 through 1998 are graphed. Sections C 3, L 2, S 2, M 2, S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had the following amount of map cracking, respectively: in 1995 there were 3, 3, 3, 5, 6, 8, 3, 14, 6, 3, and 12 areas; in 1996 there were 5, 7, 4, 8, 8. 10, 11, 15, 9, 4, and 13; in 1997 there were 8, 7, 5, 9, 9, 13, 13, 16, 9, 9, and 15; and in 1998 there were 11, 8, 9, 9, 10, 13, 13, 18, 13, 11, and 16.

Figure 14. Total area of severe map cracking in each section for 1995 through 1998, Winnemucca, Nevada.

The figure consists of a bar graph summarizing map cracking. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and total area in square meters in on the vertical axis. The dates graphed were December 12, 1995; December 5, 1996, October 9, 1997, and October 28, 1998. Sections C 3, L 2, S 2, M 2, S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had approximately the following amount of map cracking, respectively: in 1995 there were 1, 1, 1, 2, 4, 3, 1, 12, 4, 1, and 9 square meters; in 1996 there were 1, 3, 2, 4, 4, 4, 3, 8, 4, 1, and 8; in 1997 there were 2, 3, 4, 5, 4, 11, 9, 15, 4, 5, and 13; and in 1998 there were 6, 4, 6, 7, 7, 11, 9, 16, 6, 6, and 15.

Figure 15. Full-width transverse cracking in test section, Winnemucca, Nevada.

The figure consists of a photograph showing cracking on a P C C pavement that extends the full width of the pavement slab, from the pavement line separating lanes to the pavement line designating the shoulder.

Figure 16. Transverse cracking with intersecting longitudinal crack, Winnemucca, Nevada.

The figure consists of a photograph of a P C C pavement with a transverse crack that intersects a longitudinal crack.

Figure 17. Amount and severity of transverse cracking for all sections, Winnemucca, Nevada, 1994.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1994 transverse cracking. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of transverse crack in meters is on the vertical axis. High, medium, and low severity cracking are graphed. Sections C 3, L 2, S 2, M 2, S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had about 6, 0, 1, 6, 5, 2, 4, 1, 8, 3, and 4 meters of low severity cracking, respectively; and 9, 5, 5, 0, 3, 0, 0, 6, 0, 7, and 2 meters of medium severity cracking.

Figure 18. Amount and severity of transverse cracking for all sections, Winnemucca, Nevada, 1995.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1995 transverse cracking. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of transverse crack in meters is on the vertical axis. High, medium, and low severity cracking are graphed. Sections C 3, L 2, S 2, M 2, S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had about 7, 0, 0, 5, 9, 4, 1, 1, 6, 4, and 2 meters of low severity cracking, respectively; and 9, 5, 7, 1, 2, 0, 4, 6, 0, 8, and 4 meters of medium severity cracking.

Figure 19. Amount and severity of transverse cracking for all sections, Winnemucca, Nevada, 1996.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1996 transverse cracking. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of transverse crack in meters is on the vertical axis. High, medium, and low severity cracking are graphed. Sections C 3, L 2, S 2, M 2, S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had about 8, 0, 0, 1, 8, 3, 1, 2, 6, 3, and 4 meters of low severity cracking, respectively; and 5, 4, 6, 6, 3, 0, 4, 6, 3, 8, and 5 meters of medium severity cracking. C 3 had 5 meters and L 2 had 2 meters of high severity cracking.

Figure 20. Amount and severity of transverse cracking for all sections, Winnemucca, Nevada, 1997.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1997 transverse cracking. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of transverse crack in meters is on the vertical axis. High, medium, and low severity cracking are graphed. Sections C 3, L 2, S 2, M 2, S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had about 8, 1, 0, 2, 4, 1, 1, 2, 5, 3, and 2 meters of low severity cracking, respectively; and 0, 6, 7, 6, 4, 3, 4, 7, 5, 1, and 3 meters of medium severity cracking. Section C 3 had 10, S A 1 had 2, and C 1 had 7 meters of high severity cracking.

Figure 21. Amount and severity of transverse cracking for all sections, Winnemucca, Nevada, 1998.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1998 transverse cracking. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of transverse crack in meters is on the vertical axis. High, medium, and low severity cracking are graphed. Sections C 3, L 2, S 2, M 2, S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1 had about 6, 0, 0, 3, 4, 1, 1, 0, 5, 3, and 2 meters of low severity cracking, respectively; and 3, 2, 7, 6, 6, 5, 4, 5, 7, 2, and 4 meters of medium severity cracking. Section C 3 had 10, L 2 had 5, and S A 1 had 2 meters of high severity cracking.

Figure 22. North and south views of the Newark, Deleware, site.

The figure consists of two photographs; one shows the site looking north, the other looking south. The site is a concrete pavement on the shoulder of the highway.

Figure 23. Typical longitudinal cracking Newark, Deleware.

The figure consists of a photograph of a concrete pavement showing longitudinal cracking.

Figure 24. Typical longitudinal cracking and example of asphalt patching along joint between shoulder and travel lane, Newark, Delaware.

The figure consists of a photograph of a concrete pavement showing examples of asphalt patching along a joint.

Figure 25. Area of each slab affected by map cracking over the 5 years of the study, Newark, Delaware.

The figure consists of a line graph of map cracking sections. Date is graphed on the horizontal axis and includes November 29, 1994; November 28, 1995; November 21, 1996; December 9 1997; and October 22, 1998. The area affected by cracking, in meters squared, is on the vertical axis. Control section 1 had a cracking area of 12 meters squared in 1994, 23 meters in 1995, 27 in 1996, 28 in 1997, and 30 in 1998. Test section 1 had 12 meters squared in 1994, 22 meters in 1995, 28 in 1996, 29 in 1997, and 32 in 1998. Test section 2 had 12 meters squared in 1994, 15 meters in 1995, 25 in 1996, 25 in 1997, and 26 in 1998. Control section 2 had 6 meters squared in 1994, 11 meters in 1995, 14 in 1996, 15 in 1997, and 26 in 1998. Control section 3 had 10 meters squared in 1994, 21 meters in 1995, 22 in 1996, 25 in 1997, and 30 in 1998. Control section 4 had 5 meters squared in 1994, 6 meters in 1995, 7 in 1996, and 10 in 1997. Test section 3 had 2 meters squared in 1994, 6 meters in 1995, 7 in 1996, 7 in 1997, and 33 in 1998. Test section 4 had 6 meters squared in 1994, 7 meters in 1995, 14 in 1996, 14 in 1997, and 33 in 1998. Control section 5 had 5 meters squared in 1994, 5 meters in 1995, 16 in 1996, 16 in 1997, and 33 in 1998.

Figure 26. Area of each slab affected by map cracking expressed as a percentage of the total section area, Newark, Delaware.

The figure consists of a bar graph of map cracking summary. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and map cracking area as a percent of the total, on the vertical axis. Control 1 had about 29, 58, 65, 68, and 72 percent cracked area for 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998, respectively; Test 1 had 29, 28, 70, 71, and 75 percent; Test 2 had 20, 52, 62, 62, and 63; Control 2 had 13, 37, 35, 37, and 63; Control 3 had 23, 51, 53, 61, and 73; Control 4 had 13, 15, 19, 22, and no data for 1998; Test 3 had 5, 15, 17, 18, and 82; Test 4 had 15, 20, 33, 33, and 82; Control 5 had 12, 20, 39, 39, and 82.

Figure 27. Asphalt concrete patching along transverse joint in travel lane, Newark, Delaware.

The figure consists of a photograph of asphalt patching on a concrete pavement along a transverse joint in the travel lane.

Figure 28. Asphalt patch in center of section in travel lane, Newark, Delaware.

The figure consists of a photograph of asphalt patching on a concrete pavement in the center of a section in the travel lane.

Figure 29. Length and severity of joint distress for all test sections, Newark, Delaware, 1994.

The figure consists of a bar graph of spalling of transverse joints in 1994. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. High, medium, and low severity was graphed. Control 1, Test 1, Test 2, Control 2, Control 3, Control 4, Test 3, Test 4, and Control 5 had 0, 0, 3.4, 0, 2, 2.5, 0, 0, and 1 meters of joint with low level spalling. None of the sections had high or medium level distress.

Figure 30. Length and severity of joint distress for all test sections, Newark, Delaware, 1995.

The figure consists of a bar graph of spalling of transverse joints in 1995. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. High, medium, and low severity was graphed. Control 1, Test 1, Test 2, Control 2, Control 3, Control 4, Test 3, Test 4, and Control 5 had 0.1, 0, 3.4, 0, 1, 2.5, 0, 0, and 1 meters of joint with low level spalling. None of the sections had high or medium level distress.

Figure 31. Length and severity of joint distress for all test sections, Newark, Delaware, 1996.

The figure consists of a bar graph of spalling of transverse joints in 1996. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. High, medium, and low severity was graphed. Control 1, Test 1, Test 2, Control 2, Control 3, Control 4, Test 3, Test 4, and Control 5 had 1.9, 2.1, 3.3, 1.2, 0.9, 0, 0.3, 0, and 2.9 meters of joint with low level spalling. None of the sections had high level distress, and Control 4 had 2.3 meters of medium level distress.

Figure 32. Length and severity of joint distress for all test sections, Newark, Delaware, 1997.

The figure consists of a bar graph of spalling of transverse joints in 1997. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. High, medium, and low severity was graphed. Control 1, Test 1, Test 2, Control 2, Control 3, Control 4, Test 3, Test 4, and Control 5 had 2, 3.3, 3.3, 2, 1.5, 0, 0.2, 0, and 0.5 meters of joint with low level spalling. None of the sections had high level distress and Control 4 had 2.3 and Control 5 had 2.2 meters of medium level distress.

Figure 33. Length and severity of joint distress for all test sections, Newark, Delaware, 1998.

The figure consists of a bar graph of spalling of transverse joints in 1998. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint in meters is on the vertical axis. High, medium, and low severity was graphed. Control 1, Test 1, Test 2, Control 2, Control 3, Control 4, Test 3, Test 4, and Control 5 had 2, 3.3, 3.3, 2.1, 1.5, 0, 0.2, 0, and 0.6 meters of joint with low level spalling. None of the sections had high level distress and Control 4 had 2.3 and Control 5 had 2.2 meters of medium level distress.

Figure 34. Summary of transverse cracking in each section for the five inspections, Newark, Delaware.

The figure consists of a bar graph summarizing transverse cracking. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of transverse cracking is on the vertical axis. Test 1, Test 2, Control 2, Test 4, and Control 5 had no cracking from 1994 through 1998. Control 1 had 3.4 meters, Control 3 had 2.4 meters, and Control 4 had 3.4 meters for all 4 years. Test 3 had 2.4, 0, 2.7, 3.4, and 3.4 meters for the years 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998, respectively.

Figure 35. Treated section on Boron overhead structure over Route 58 looking east, Boron, California.

The figure consists of a photograph of the treated section of the Boron overhead structure. There are two lanes of traffic and a shoulder.

Figure 36. Photograph showing part of Boron, California, test site, M 2, Station 250.

In the photograph, two lanes and a shoulder are visible and the station designation parenthesis M2 Station 250) is written on the pavement shoulder.

Figure 37. Photograph showing part of Boron, California, test site, M 3, Station 160.

In the photograph, two lanes and the shoulder are visible.

Figure 38. Plan view of Boron, California, test site.

The figure consists of a drawing with traffic direction going from left to right. The left lane is the passing lane and designated number 1. It consists of first Control 2, then Control 3, and then Methacrylate 3. The right lane is the travel lane, number 2 and starts with Control 1, followed by Methacrylate 1, and Methacrylate 2.

Figure 39. Example of high-severity map cracking, Boron, California.

The figure consists of a photograph showing high severity cracking in the travel lane of the test section.

Figure 40. Close-up photograph showing typical map cracking Boron, California.

Figure 41. Map cracking as a percentage for each level of severity, Boron, California, 1995.

The figure consists of a bar graph of map cracking in 1995. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and map cracking (area at severity as a percent) is on the vertical axis. Section C 1 had about 90 percent low level severity, 9 percent medium level, and 1 percent high level cracking. Section M 1 had about 92 percent low level and 8 percent medium level cracking. M 2 had about 95 percent low level and 5 percent medium level cracking. C 3 had 100 percent low level cracking. Section M 3 had about 99 percent low level and 1 percent medium level cracking.

Figure 42. Map cracking as a percentage for each level of severity, Boron, California, 1996.

The figure consists of a bar graph of map cracking in 1996. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and map cracking (area at severity as a percent) is on the vertical axis. Section C 1 had about 80 percent low level severity, 17 percent medium level, and 3 percent high level cracking. Section M1 had about 92 percent low level and 8 percent medium level cracking. M 2 had about 95 percent low level and 5 percent medium level cracking. C 3 had 98 percent low level and 2 percent medium level cracking. Section M 3 had about 99 percent low level and 1 percent medium level cracking.

Figure 43. Map cracking as a percentage for each level of severity, Boron, California, 1997.

The figure consists of a bar graph of map cracking in 1997. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and map cracking (area at severity as a percent) is on the vertical axis. Section C 1 had about 80 percent low level severity, 15 percent medium level, and 5 percent high level cracking. Section M 1 had about 87 percent low level and 13 percent medium level cracking. M 2 had about 90 percent low level and 10 percent medium level cracking. C 3 and M 3 had 95 percent low level and 5 percent medium level cracking.

Figure 44. Map cracking as a percentage for each level of severity, Boron, California, 1998.

The figure consists of a bar graph of map cracking in 1998. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and map cracking (area at severity as a percent) is on the vertical axis. Section C 1 had about 70 percent low level severity, 15 percent medium level, and 15 percent high level cracking. Section M 1 had about 82 percent low level and 8 percent medium level cracking. M 2 and C 3 had about 90 percent low level and 10 percent medium level cracking. M 3 had 95 percent low level and 5 percent medium level cracking.

Figure 45. Photograph showing medium-severity joint distress, Boron, California.

The photograph shows a concrete pavement at a transverse joint with medium-severity distress cracking.

Figure 46. Photograph showing an example of high-severity joint distress, Boron, California.

The photograph shows a concrete pavement at a transverse joint with numerous deep cracks and an actual hole in the pavement caused by cracking. An individual is shown in the photograph holding pieces of he disintegrated pavement from the hole.

Figure 47. Amount and severity of joint distress, Boron, California, 1995.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1995 joint distress using the 10 percent rule. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint spalls in meters is on the vertical axis. Sections C 1, M 1, M 2, C 3, and M 3 had 0, 0, 0, 118, and 5 meters of low level severity distress, respectively; and 112, 118, 62, 0, and 13 meters of medium level distress. C 1 had 8 percent high level distress.

Figure 48. Amount and severity of joint distress, Boron, California, 1996.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1996 joint distress using the 10 percent rule is on the vertical axis. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint spalls in meters. Sections C 1, M 1, M 2, C 3, and M 3 had 0, 0, 12, 70, and 25 meters of low level severity distress, respectively; and 40, 118, 106, 48, and 31 meters of medium level distress. C 1 had 80 percent high level distress.

Figure 49. Amount and severity of joint distress, (Boron, California, 1997.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1997 joint distress using the 10 percent rule. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint spalls in meters is on the vertical axis. Sections C 1, M 1, M 2, C 3, and M 3 had 0, 0, 0, 7, and 3 meters of low level severity distress, respectively; and 60, 110, 118, 111, and 107 meters of medium level distress. C 1 had 60, M 1 had 5, and M 3 had 10 percent high level distress.

Figure 50. Amount and severity of joint distress, Boron, California, 1998.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1998 joint distress using the 10 percent rule. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and length of joint spalls in meters is on the vertical axis. Sections M 3 had only 3 percent low level severity distress. Sections C 1, M 1, M 2, C 3, and M 3 had 17, 87, 113, 118, and 107 meters of medium level severity distress, respectively; and 103, 30, 3, 0, and 10 meters of high level distress.

Figure 51. True length of joint spalls at each level of severity, Boron, California, 1995.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1995 joint distress. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and true length of joint spalls in meters is on the vertical axis. Sections C 1, M 1, M 2, C 3, and M 3 had 60, 40, 18, 118, and 8 meters of low level severity distress, respectively; and 54, 80, 43, 0, and 13 meters of medium level distress. Section C 1 had 4 meters of high level distress.

Figure 52. True length of joint spalls at each level of severity, Boron, California, 1996.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1996 joint distress. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and true length of joint spalls in meters is on the vertical axis. Sections C 1, M 1, M 2, C 3, and M 3 had 36, 63, 81, 100, and 43 meters of low level severity distress, respectively; and 73, 55, 38, 18, and 6 meters of medium level distress. Section C 1 had 10 meters and M 1 had 1 meter of high level distress.

Figure 53. True length of joint spalls at each level of severity, Boron, California, 1997.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1997 joint distress. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and true length of joint spalls in meters is on the vertical axis. Sections C 1, M 1, M 2, C 3, and M 3 had 30, 52, 70, 80, and 82 meters of low level severity distress, respectively; and 83, 62, 43, 37, and 38 meters of medium level distress. Sections C 1, M 1, and M 3 had 8, 2, and 2 meters of high level distress.

Figure 54. True length of joint spalls at each level of severity, Boron, California, 1998.

The figure consists of a bar graph of 1998 joint distress. Section designation is on the horizontal axis and true length of joint spalls in meters is on the vertical axis. Sections C 1, M 1, M 2, C 3, and M 3 had 0, 30, 40, 3, and 82 meters of low level severity distress, respectively; and 100, 81, 78, 105, and 38 meters of medium level distress. Sections C 1, M 1, and M 3 had 11, 4, and 1 meters of high level distress.

Figure 55. New Mexico A S R test section layout. Westbound approach to slabs to Lomas Boulevard parenthesis State Route 352 end parenthesis bridge over Interstate 25.

The figure consists of a diagram showing the test section layout. Traffic flows from left to right. The entire section is 154.78 meters parenthesis 507.8 feet end parenthesis. The Greevey Aggregate Pit is first and is 61.08 meters parenthesis 200.4 feet end parenthesis in length, followed by the Shakespeare Pit Aggregate, which is 93.70 meters parenthesis 307.4 feet end parenthesis in length. The entire test section consists of two lanes with 3.66-meter parenthesis 12-foot end parenthesis widths. The left lane consists of the following sections and lengths, starting with the Grevey Aggregate Pit: Class C Fly Ash—17.68 meters parenthesis 58 feet end parenthesis, 1 percent lithium hydroxide—13.53 meters parenthesis 44.4 feet end parenthesis, Grevey control—16.15 meters parenthesis 53 feet end parenthesis, and Class F Fly Ash—13.72 meters parenthesis 45 feet end parenthesis. The rest of the section is the Shakespeare Pit Aggregate and consists of: Blended C and F Fly Ash—15.45 meters parenthesis 50.7 feet end parenthesis, Shakespeare Control—13.72 meters parentheis 45 feet end parenthesis, Class C Fly Ash—14.17 metrs parenthesis 46.5 feet end parenthesis, Class F Fly Ash—12.89 meters parenthesis 42.3 feet end parenthesis, Lomar at 20 ounces per 100 weight— 13.47 meters parenthesis 44.2 feet end parenthesis, half percent lithium hydroxide—7.53 meters parenthesis 24.7 feet end parenthesis, and 1 percent lithium hydroxide—16.46 meters parenthesis 54 feet end parenthesis. The right lane of the Greevey Aggregate Pit consists of the following numbered sections 11, 10, 9, and 8. The right lane of the Shakespeare Aggregate Pit consists of: 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1.

Figure 56. Lomas Boulevard westbound structure over I-40, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

The figure consists of a photograph of the test section.

Figure 57. Photographs of all sections in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

The figure consists of two sets photographs. The first set consists of six photographs of Shakespeare aggregate. Photograph 6 A shows the 1 percent lithium hydroxide, 6 B shows the 0.5 percent lithium hydroxide, 6 C shows the Lomar, 6 D shows the Class F Ash, 6 E shows the Class C Ash, and 6 F shows the control. The next set consists of five photographs of Grevey Aggregate. Photograph 6 G shows Blended C and F Ash, 6 H shows Class F Ash, 6 I shows the control, 6 J shows the 1 percent lithium hydroxide, and 6 K shows the Class C Ash. Each photograph shows a tape measure for comparison.

Figure 58. Area of map cracking as a percentage of the total area, all sections, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

The figure consists of a bar graph summarizing map cracking. Treatment type is on the horizontal axis and area of map cracking as a percent of total section area is on the vertical axis. Data for the years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. There was no cracking recorded for 1994. For 1995, the Shakespeare aggregate 1 percent lithium hydroxide had 18 percent, the 0.5 percent lithium hydroxide had 21 percent, the Lomar had 0 percent, the Class F Fly Ash had 2 percent, the Class C Fly Ash had 94 percent, the control had 0 percent, and the Blended C and F Fly Ash had 0 percent. For the Grevey Aggregate, Class F Fly Ash had 1 percent, the control had 0 percent, the 1 percent lithium hydroxide had 0 percent, and the Class C Fly Ash had 0 percent. For 1996, the Shakespeare aggregate 1 percent lithium hydroxide had 18 percent, the 0.5 percent lithium hydroxide had 21 percent, the Lomar had 0 percent, the Class F Fly Ash had 2 percent, the Class C Fly Ash had 94 percent, the control had 0 percent, and the Blended C and F Fly Ash had 0 percent. For the Grevey Aggregate, Class F Fly Ash had 8 percent, the control had 0 percent, the 1 percent lithium hydroxide had 1 percent, and the Class C Fly Ash had 8 percent. For 1997, the Shakespeare aggregate 1 percent lithium hydroxide had 53 percent, the 0.5 percent lithium hydroxide had 98 percent, the Lomar had 6 percent, the Class F Fly Ash had 3 percent, the Class C Fly Ash had 94 percent, the control had 26 percent, and the Blended C and F Fly Ash had 33 percent. For the Grevey Aggregate, Class F Fly Ash had 68 percent, the control had 41 percent, the 1 percent lithium hydroxide had 36 percent, and the Class C Fly Ash had 73 percent. For 1998, the Shakespeare aggregate 1 percent lithium hydroxide had 90 percent, the 0.5 percent lithium hydroxide had 92 percent, the Lomar had 4 percent, the Class F Fly Ash had 3 percent, the Class C Fly Ash had 94 percent, the control had 72 percent, and the Blended C and F Fly Ash had 50 percent. For the Grevey Aggregate, Class F Fly Ash had90 percent, the control had 80 percent, the 1 percent lithium hydroxide had 87 percent, and the Class C Fly Ash had 91 percent.

Return to Figure 58

Figure 59. Modulus of elasticity test results for cores in the dry condition, all sections, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

The figure consists of a bar graph of dry elastic modulus. Treatment type is on the horizontal axis and modulus of elasticity in pounds per square inch times 10 to the sixth power. Data for the years 1994 through 1998 were graphed. For the Shakespeare aggregate, the 1 percent lithium hydroxide had a modulus of about 4, 4.5, 5, 4, and 3.9 for the years 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998, respectively; the 0.5 percent lithium hydroxide had a modulus of 4, 4.4., 4.7, 3.5, and 3.6; the Lomar had a modulus of 4.2, 4.9, 4.7, 3.8, and 4.2; the Class F Ash had a modulus of 3.8, 3.9, 3.85, 4.2, and 4.0; the Class C Ash had a modulus of 2.2, 2.9, 2.3, 1.6, and 1.3; the control had 3.5, 4.1, 3.3, 3.5, and 3.4; and the Blended C and F Ash had 3.3, 3.6, 3.6, 3.5, and 3.3. For the Grevey Aggregate, the Class F Ash had 3.5, 4.3, 3.8, 4.0, and 3.3; the control had 3.3, 4, 3.5, 3.3, and 3.6; the 1 percent lithium hydroxide had 3.2, 3.3, 3.2, 3.7, and 3.7; and the Class C Ash had 3.7, 4.4, 3.8, 4.3, and 3.5.

Figure 60. Modulus of elasticity test results for cores in the saturate condition, all sections, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

The figure consists of a bar graph of wet elastic modulus. Treatment type is on the horizontal axis and modulus of elasticity in pounds per square inch times 10 to the sixth power. Data for the years 1994 through 1998 were graphed. For the Shakespeare aggregate, the 1 percent lithium hydroxide had a modulus of about 5, 4.4, 4, and 4 for the years 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998, respectively; the 0.5 percent lithium hydroxide had a modulus of 4, 4, 3.4, and 3.4; the Lomar had a modulus of 5.1, 4.5, 4, and 3.9; the Class F Ash had 4, 4, 4, and 3.3; the Class C Ash had a modulus of 3.2, 2.5, 1.8, and 1.4; the control had 3.9, 3.2, 3.4, and 3.3; and the Blended C and F Ash had 3.8, 3.7, 3.7, and 3.4. For the Grevey Aggregate, the Class F Ash had 4.5, 3.6, 3.8, and 3.6; the control had 4, 3.8, 3.6, and 3.5; the 1 percent lithium hydroxide had 3.3, 3.1, 3.6, and 3.7; and the Class C Ash had 4.4, 4, 3.4, and 3.5.

Figure 61. Falling Weight Deflectometer.

The figure shows an illustration of the deflectometer. At the top are two rectangular masses that are attached on either side of a shaft that is connected to the foot plate. The distance from where the weights start and where they drop down the shaft, onto the foot plate is the drop height. Beneath the foot plate is a rubber buffer that acts as a spring constant, which is attached to the 29.97-centimeter parenthesis 11.8-inch end parenthesis diameter plate. When the weights drop, the plate then strikes the pavement underneath the deflectometer.

Figure 62. Illustration of testing locations.

The figure shows a drawing of a piece of pavement. Traffic is shown flowing from the bottom of the figure to the top. Test location 1, slab center test location, is designated as the center of the rectangular slab. Test location 2, joint test location on the approach side, is shown just inside the top of the slab, to the far right. Location 3, joint test location on the leave side, is shown just outside of the slab, just above location 2. Test location 5, slab edge test location, is shown midway up the slab and to the far right side of the slab.

Figure 63. Static K-values for Nevada test section.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. The station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and the static K-value in pounds per square inch is on the vertical axis. Data from the years 1994 through 1997 are plotted. The K-values for slabs C 3, L 2, S 2, and M 2, station 0 to 300 feet, are between 100 and 175 pounds per square inch. For slabs S A 1 and L O 1, 600 to 800 feet, the values are around 150 to 240. For slabs C 2, S 1, L 1, and C 1, 900 to 1,200 feet, the values are between 75 and 150. For slab M 1, 1,200 to 1,300 feet, the values are around 90 to 200.

Figure 64. Nevada test site—D subscript O from the center slab.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. The station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and the maximum deflection (D subscript O) is on the vertical axis. Data from the years 1994 through 1997 are plotted. For slabs C 3, L, S 2, and M 2, 0 to 300 feet, the majority of deflections range from about 3.75 and 6.0. For slabs S A 1 and L O 1, 600 to 800 feet, the majority of deflections range from 3.0 to 5.0. For slabs C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1, from 900 to 1,300 feet, the majority of deflections range from 4.0 to 6.0.

Figure 65. Nevada test site—E subscript P C C from center slab.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. The station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and backcalculated concrete modulus parenthesis E subscript P C C) is on the vertical axis. Data from the years 1994 to 1997 are plotted. For slabs C 3, L 2, S 2, and M 2, from 0 to 300 feet, the majority of concrete moduli range from 4 million to about 10 million. For slabs S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1, from 600 to 1,300 feet, the majority of moduli range from about 4 million to about 8 million.

Figure 66. Nevada test site—D subscript O from leave side; deflection load transfer efficiencies parenthesis wheelpath end parenthesis.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. The station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and maximum deflection (D subscript O) is on the vertical axis. Data from the years 1994, 1995, 1997, and 1998 are plotted. For slabs C 3, L 2, S 2, and M 2, 0 to 300 feet, have deflections that range from 5.0 to about 21.5. Slabs S A 1, L O 1, C 2, S 1, L 1, C 1, and M 1, from 600 to 1,300 feet, deflection were between 4.0 and about 12.0.

Figure 67. Average load transfer efficiency values for the various treatment sections for the Nevada site.

The figure consists of a bar graph. Section is on the horizontal axis and mean load transfer efficiency as a percent is on the vertical axis. Data for the years 1994, 1995, 1997, and 1998 were graphed. Section C 1 had mean load transfers of about 84, 67, 80, and 60 for the years 1994, 1995, 1997, and 1998, respectively; C 2 had 88, 72, 85, and 0; C 3 had 39, 54, 43, and 58; L 1 had 80, 58, 87, and 73; L 2 had 30, 44, 57, and 48; L O 1 had 82, 50, 73, and 68; M 1 had 84, 83, 78, and 62; M 2 had 59, 43, 51, and 68; S 1 had 80, 83, 70, and 73; S2 had 38, 32, 49, and 59; and SA1 had 77, 44, 71, and 0.

Figure 68. Average temperatures at time of joint testing for the Nevada site.

The figure consists of a bar graph. Section is on the horizontal axis and temperature in degrees Fahrenheit is on the vertical axis. Data for the years 1994, 1995, 1997, and 1998 were graphed. Section C 1 had temperatures of about 97, 40, 57, and 44 for the years 1994, 1995, 1997, and 1998, respectively; C 2 had 96, 36, 48, and no record; C 3 had 60, 30, 40, and 52; L 1 had 100, 40, 56, and 40; L 2 had 64, 30, 40, and 52; L O 1 had 95, 36, 44, and 50; M 1 had 95, 40, 40, and 42; M 2 had 70, 30, 42, and 52; S 1 had 100, 40, 56, and 40; S 2 had 68, 30, 40, and 54; and S A 1 had 95, 34, 40, and no record.

Figure 69. Static K-values for the Delaware site.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station is on the horizontal axis and static K-value is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Sections C 1, T 1, T 2, C 2, C 3, C 4, T 3, T 4, and C 5 had static values that ranged from 80 to 124, 80 to 124, 56 to 100, 76 to 110, 116 to 164, 120 to 150, 130 to 160, 130 to 160, and 120 to 150, respectively.

Figure 70. Delaware test site—D subscript O from center slab test.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station is on the horizontal axis and maximum deflection (D subscript O) is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Sections C 1, T 1, T 2, C 2, C 3, C 4, T 3, T 4, and C 5 had deflection values that ranged from 4.5 to 6, 5 to 6, 6 to 8, 5.5 to 7, 3.5 to 4, 4 to 4.5, 4 to 5, 4 to 4.5, and 4 to 5, respectively.

Figure 71. Delaware test site—E subscript P C C from center slab test.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station is on the horizontal axis and backcalculated concrete modulus parenthesis E subscript P C C end parenthesis is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Sections C 1, T 1, T 2, C 2, C 3, C 4, T 3, T 4, and C 5 had modulus values that ranged from 5 to 6 million, 4 to 5 million, 4 to 5 million, 3.5 to 4.5 million, 7 to 9 million, 6 to 7 million, 5 to 6 million, 5 to 6 million, 5 to 6 million, respectively.

Figure 72. Delaware test site—D subscript O from the leave side.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station is on the horizontal axis and maximum deflection (D subscript O) is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Sections C 1, T 1, T 2, C 2, C 3, C 4, T 3, T 4, and C 5 had deflection values that ranged from 4.5 to 7.5, 5 to 8.5, 6 to 8.5, 4, 4, 4 to 5.5, 3.5 to 5.5, 4 to 8, and 4 to 6, respectively.

Figure 73. Delaware test site—load transfer efficiency.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station is on the horizontal axis and load transfer efficiency is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Sections C 1, T 1, T 2, C 2, C 3, C 4, T 3, T 4, and C 5 had load transfer efficiency values that ranged from 70 to 84, 60 to 84, 70 to 90, 90, 80, 80 to 90, 70 to 84, 55 to 90, and 80 to 88, respectively.

Figure 74. Average temperatures at time of joint testing for the Delaware site.

The figure consists of a bar graph. Section is on the horizontal axis and mean surface temperature in degrees Fahrenheit is on the vertical axis. For sections C1, C4, C5, T1, T2, T3, and T4, temperatures were between 48 and 50 degrees in 1994, around 35 degrees in 1996, at 50 degrees in 1997, and between 53 and 56 degrees in 1998.

Figure 75. Static K-value for California test section.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station is on the horizontal axis and static K-value is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. The control section, from 0 to 200 feet, had K-values ranging from 80 to 210. The methacrylate, 1 coat, from 500 to about 700 feet, had values ranging from 50 to 120. The methacrylate, 2 coats, from 1,000 to 1,300 feet, had values ranging from 60 to 100.

Figure 76. California test site—D subscript O from center slab.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station is on the horizontal axis and maximum deflection is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. The control section, from 0 to 190 feet, had deflection values ranging from 3 to 6 and one point as high as 8. The methacrylate, 1 coat, from 500 to about 700 feet, had values ranging from 5 to 8. The methacrylate, 2 coats, from 1,100 to 1,200 feet, had values ranging from 5.5 to 7.75.

Figure 77. California test site—E subscript P C C from center slab.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and backcalculated P C C modulus in pounds per square inch is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. The control section, from 0 to 100 feet, had modulus values ranging from 2 to 10 million. The methacrylate, 1 coat, from 500 to about 700 feet, had values ranging from 3 to 10 million. The methacrylate, 2 coats, from 1,000 to 1,200 feet, had values ranging from 4 to 7 million.

Figure 78.California test site—D subscript O from leave side.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and maximum deflection is on the vertical axis. The years 1994, 1997, and 1998 are graphed. The control section, from 0 to 200 feet, had deflection values ranging from 7 to 20. The methacrylate, 1 coat, from 500 to about 700 feet, had values ranging from 8 to 23. The methacrylate, 2 coats, from 1,000 to about 1,200 feet, had values ranging from 8 to 14.

Figure 79. California test site—load transfer efficiency.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and load transfer efficiency is on the vertical axis. The years 1994, 1997, and 1998 are graphed. The control section, from 0 to 200 feet, had load transfer efficiencies ranging from 25 to 82. The methacrylate, 1 layer, from 500 to 700 feet had load transfer efficiencies ranging from 50 to 92. Methacrylate, layer 2, from 1,000 to 1,200 feet, had load transfer efficiencies ranging from 60 to 92.

Figure 80. Static K-value for New Mexico test.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and static K-value is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Sections 1 through 11, 0 to 500 feet, had K-values ranging from 150 to 250 for the years 1995, 1997, and 1998; and from 50 to 150 for the year 1994. Sections 1 through 5, 0 to 250 feet, had K-values ranging from 150 to around 200 in 1996. Sections 6 through 11, 250 to 500 feet, had values ranging from 100 to 150 in 1996.

Figure 81. New Mexico test site—D subscript O from center slab.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and maximum deflection parenthesis D subscript O end parenthesis is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Sections 1 through 7, 0 to 350 feet, had deflection values from ranging from 4.5 to 7.25 in 1994 and from 2.5 to 4 for the years from 1995 to 1998. Sections 8 through 11, 350 to 500 feet, had values ranging from 2 to 5 for all 5 years.

Figure 82. New Mexico test site—E subscript P C C from center slab.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and backcalculated concrete modulus parenthesis E subscript P C C end parenthesis in pounds per square inch is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Sections 1 through 11, 0 to 500 feet, had concrete modulus levels that, for the most part, stayed in the range for 4 to 8 million for all 5 years.

Figure 83. New Mexico test site—D subscript O from leave side.

The figure consists of a scatter plot. Station location in feet is on the horizontal axis and maximum deflection parenthesis D subscript O end parenthesis is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Sections 1 through 11 had deflections that ranged from about 4 to 12 for the years 1994 to 1998, except for a number of points from the 1998 data in sections 3, 4, and 5 that go as high as 17.

Figure 84. Temperature variation during Falling Weight Deflectometer testing for the New Mexico site.

The figure consists of a bar graph. Sections 1 through 11 are on the horizontal axis and mean surface temperature in degrees Fahrenheit is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Section 1 had temperatures of about 74, 81, 50, 63, and 62 for the years 1994, 1995, 1997, and 1998, respectively; section 2 had 75, 85, 60, 65, and 61; section 3 had 75, 86, 62, 68, and 61; section 4 had 78, 89, 69, 70, and 61; section 5 had 80, 85, 71, 68, and 61; section 6 had 80, 87, 78, 68, and 77; section 7 had 82, 89, 84, 70, and 74; section 8 had 82, 92, 88, 72, and 78; section 9 had 82, 88, 89, 72, and 78; section 10 had 82, 88, 90, 72, and 80; section 11 had 78, 89, 83, 72, and 78.

Figure 85. New Mexico test site—load transfer efficiency.

The figure consists of a bar graph. Sections 1 through 11 are on the horizontal axis and mean load transfer efficiency as a percent is on the vertical axis. The years 1994 through 1998 are graphed. Section 1 had load transfer efficiencies of about 76, 82, 78, 83, and 94 for the years 1994, 1995, 1997, and 1998, respectively; section 2 had 74, 82, 74, 81, and 89; section 3 had 60, 65, 60, 65, and 72; section 4 had 71, 72, 69, 68, and 84; section 5 had 73, 78, 67, 68, and 83; section 6 had 70, 82, 69, 68, and 78; section 7 had 69, 70, 71, 75, and 74; section 8 had 60, 74, 72, 79, and 88; section 9 had 68, 76, 72, 80, and 88; section 10 had 85, 91, 89, 75, and 70; section 11 had 66, 67, 66, 67, and 78.

Figure A-1. Photographs of typical joint sections for each test section, Winnemucca, Nevada.

The figure consists of 11 photographs of typical joint sections for each test section of the Winnemucca test site. Photograph A-1-A shows control section 3, C 3; photo A-1-B shows the lithium hydroxide section 2, L 2; photo A-1-C shows silane section 2, S 2; photo A-1-D shows methacrylate section 2, M 2; photo A-1-E shows silane number 2, S A 1; photo A-1-F shows linseed oil section 1, L O 1; photo A-1-G shows control section 2, C 2; photo A-1-H shows silane section 1, S 1; photo A-1-I shows lithium hydroxide section 1, L 1; photo A-1-J shows control section 1, C 1; and photo A-1-K shows methacrylate section 1, M 1.

Figure B-1. Photographs of typical area of each section, Newark, Deleware.

The figure consists of 9 photographs of typical areas of each test section of the Newark test site. Photograph B-1-A shows control section 1, C 1; photo B-1-B shows test section 1, T S 1; photo B-1-C shows test section 2, T S 2; photo B-1-D shows control section 2, C 2; photo B-1-E shows control section 3, C 3; photo B-1-F shows control section 4, C 4; photo B-1-G shows test section 3, T S 3; photo B-1-H shows test section 4, T S 4; and photo B-1-I shows control section 5, C 5.

Figure C-1. Photographs showing typical areas of each section, Boron, California.

The figures consist of 10 photographs of typical areas of each test section of the Boron test site. Photograph C-1-A shows two pictures of control section 1, C 1; photo C-1-B shows two photographs of methacrylate section 1, M1; photo C-1-C shows two photographs of methacrylate 2, M 2; photo C-1-D shows two photographs of control section 3, C 3; and photo C-1-E shows two photographs of methacrylate section 3, M 3.

 

Previous | Table of Contents


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