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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
014155	None	Control section
010502	Minimum	51 mm RAP* overlay
010503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
010504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
010505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
010506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
010507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
010508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
010509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
010563	Intensive	51 mm milling and inlay with virgin mix
010564	Intensive	51 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:			7.68				Construction Date:		12/20/91
Subgrade Type:			Coarse				Climatic Zone:		Wet–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			NA				Automated Vehicle Class:		None
Construction Problems:			Some milling without water. Mix too cool at lay down.				Weigh–In–Motion:		None
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
4155	0			0		97	700	Soil Agg
502	51		RAP*	0		97	700	Soil Agg
503	127		RAP	0		97	700	Soil Agg
504	127		Virgin	0		97	700	Soil Agg
505	51		Virgin	0		97	700	Soil Agg
506	51		Virgin	51		97	700	Soil Agg
507	127		Virgin	51		97	700	Soil Agg
508	127		RAP	51		97	700	Soil Agg
509	51		RAP	51		97	700	Soil Agg
563	51 Inlay		Virgin	51		97	700	Soil Agg
564	51 Inlay		RAP	51		97	700	Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
4155	6	5	4	5	5	4	2	1
502	4	4	4	2	3	2	0	1
503	4	4	4	2	3	2	0	1
504	4	4	4	2	3	2	0	1
505	4	4	4	2	3	2	0	1
506	4	3	4	2	3	2	0	1
507	4	4	4	2	3	2	0	1
508	4	4	4	2	3	2	0	1
509	5	4	4	2	3	2	0	1
563	2	2	4	2	3	1	0	1
564	2	2	4	2	4	1	0	1
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
4155	12/12/90	8/24/92	6/20/91	4/1/92	6/10/90	4/1/92
502	7/8/91	4/1/92	9/18/91	4/1/93	—	4/1/92
503	7/9/91	4/2/92	9/18/91	4/1/93	—	4/1/92
504	7/8/91	4/1/92	9/18/91	4/1/93	—	4/1/92
505	7/8/91	4/1/92	9/18/91	4/1/93	—	4/1/92
506	7/8/91	4/1/92	9/18/91	4/1/93	—	4/1/92
507	7/8/91	4/1/92	9/18/91	4/1/93	—	4/1/92
508	7/8/91	4/2/92	9/18/91	4/1/93	—	4/1/92
509	7/8/91	4/2/92	9/18/91	4/1/93	—	4/1/92
563	—	8/10/94	9/18/91	4/1/93	—	3/21/94
564	—	8/10/94	9/18/91	4/1/93	—	3/21/94

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 Analysis	3	9	100.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	9	100.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	9	100.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	3	100.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	4	100.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	12	100.0
	Permeability	0	0	0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	3	9	100.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	9	100.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	9	22.2
	Resilient Modulus	3	2	100.0
	Permeability	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	12	100.0
Bound Base:	Classification	0	0	0.0
Asphalt Surface:	Core Examination	28	15	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	3	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	12	0.0
Alabama SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	6	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	0	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
040501	None	Control section
040502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
040503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
040504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
040505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
040506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
040507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
040508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
040509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
040559	Intensive	51 mm milling and inlay with recycled mix
040560	Intensive	51 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
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	6	83.3
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	6	83.3
	Atterberg Limits	3	6	83.3
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	6	83.3
	Resilient Modulus	3	6	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	0	76.9
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	3	5	100.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	7	100.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	6	100.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	3	5	100.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	16	100.0
Bound Base:	Classification	0	0.0	0.0
Asphalt Surface:	Core Examination	26	28	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	8	100.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	2	100.0
	Asphalt Content	3	5	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	3	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	100.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	5	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	0	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	5	80.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	5	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	5	100.0
Arizona SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	32	40	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	32	39	100.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	6	100.0
	Asphalt Content	6	6	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	3	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	9	6	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	9	6	100.0
	Aggregate Gradation	9	6	100.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	9	6	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	12	6	100.0
	Specific Gravity	12	6	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	12	6	100.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
060501	None	Control section, 51 mm recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) overlay
060502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
060503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
060504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
060505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
060506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
060507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
060508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
060509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
060559	Intensive	9.5 mm chip seal on 51 mm virgin overlay
060560	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay on pavement reinforcing fabric (PFR)
060561	Intensive	51 mm rubberized overlay on PFR
060562	Intensive	51 mm rubberized overlay
060563	Intensive	51 mm rubberized overlay on SAMI
060564	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay on SAMI
060565	Intensive	19 mm open–graded AC on SAMI on 51 mm virgin overlay
060566	Intensive	19 mm open–graded AC on 51 mm virgin overlay
060567	Intensive	100 mm virgin overlay
060568	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay on 100 mm virgin AC base with 38 mm max. agg.
060569	Intensive	51 mm stone mastic asphalt (Vestoplast) overlay
060570	Intensive	51 mm stone mastic asphalt (Modified) overlay
060571	Intensive	Stone 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:			7.33				Construction Date:		4/24/92
Subgrade Type:			Fine/Coarse				Climatic Zone:		Dry–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			17 Years				Automated 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:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	45.7		0		109	127	CTB*	422	Soil Agg
502	51	76.2	RAP	0		112	140	CTB	437	Soil Agg
503	127	165.1	RAP	0		112	140	CTB	526	Soil Agg
504	127	144.8	Virgin	0		114	124	CTB	538	Soil Agg
505	51	91.4	Virgin	0		119	132	CTB	508	Soil Agg
506	51	109.2	Virgin	51		122	135	CTB	505	Soil Agg
507	127	170.2	Virgin	51		130	137	CTB	493	Soil Agg
508	127	167.6	RAP	51		137	142	CTB	485	Soil Agg
509	51	111.8	RAP	51		137	135	CTB	495	Soil Agg
559	51	203.2	Virgin	51		114	147	CTB	500	Soil Agg
560	51	109.2	Virgin	51		114	147	CTB	493	Soil Agg
561	51	106.7	Rubber AC	51		122	142	CTB	508	Soil Agg
562	51	111.8	Rubber AC	51		127	104	CTB	566	Soil Agg
563	51	101.6	Rubber AC	51		130	97	CTB	582	Soil Agg
564	51	109.2	Virgin	51		130	112	CTB	582	Soil Agg
565	51	109.2	Virgin	51		127	119	CTB	544	Soil Agg
566	51	109.2	Virgin	51		117	142	CTB	508	Soil Agg
567	100	101.6	Virgin	51		119	140	CTB	503	Soil Agg
568	51	152.4	Virgin	51		119	127	CTB	498	Soil Agg
569	51	182.9	Stone Mastic	51		137	135	CTB	485	Soil Agg
570	51	182.9	Stone Mastic	51		122	140	CTB	500	Soil Agg
571	51	246.4	Stone Mastic	51		109	135	CTB	513	Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	8	6	5	3	8	1	1	3
502	8	6	5	3	8	1	1	3
503	8	7	5	3	8	1	1	3
504	8	8	5	3	8	1	1	3
505	8	7	5	3	8	1	1	3
506	8	7	5	3	8	1	1	3
507	8	7	5	3	8	1	1	3
508	8	7	5	3	8	1	1	3
509	8	7	5	3	8	1	1	3
559	7	5	4	2	4	1	1	3
560	6	5	4	2	5	1	1	3
561	6	7	5	2	6	1	1	3
562	7	6	5	2	6	1	1	3
563	8	7	4	2	5	1	1	3
564	7	5	5	2	5	1	1	3
565	8	6	5	2	5	1	1	3
566	8	6	5	2	4	1	1	3
567	8	5	4	2	4	1	1	3
568	8	5	4	2	4	1	1	3
569	6	5	4	2	5	0	1	3
570	6	6	4	2	5	0	1	3
571	6	5	4	2	5	0	1	3
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	2/11/92	2/2/93	11/13/89	9/24/92	2/9/92	9/23/92
502	2/11/92	2/2/93	11/13/89	9/24/92	2/9/92	9/23/92
503	2/11/92	2/2/93	11/13/89	9/24/92	2/9/92	9/24/92
504	2/11/92	2/2/93	11/13/89	9/24/92	2/9/92	9/24/92
505	2/11/92	2/2/93	11/13/89	9/24/92	2/9/92	9/24/92
506	2/11/92	2/2/93	11/13/89	9/24/92	2/9/92;	9/24/92
507	2/11/92	2/2/93	11/13/89	9/24/92	2/9/92	9/24/92
508	2/11/92	2/2/93	11/13/89	9/24/92	2/9/92	9/24/92
509	2/11/92	2/2/93	11/13/89	9/24/92	2/9/92	9/24/92
559	2/6/91	2/2/93	—	9/25/92	—	4/7/95
560	2/14/92	2/2/93	—	9/25/92	—	9/25/92
561	2/14/92	2/2/93	—	9/25/92	—	9/25/92
562	2/14/92	2/2/93	—	9/25/92	—	9/25/92
563	2/14/92	2/2/93	—	9/25/92	—	10/28/94
564	2/14/92	2/2/93	—	9/25/92	—	10/28/94
565	2/14/92	2/2/93	—	9/25/92	—	10/28/94
566	2/14/92	2/2/93	—	9/25/92	—	10/28/94
567	2/14/92	2/2/93	—	9/25/92	—	4/7/95
568	2/5/90	2/2/93	—	9/25/92	—	4/7/95
569	2/11/92	2/2/93	—	11/2/92	—	10/25/94
570	2/11/92	2/2/93	—	11/2/92	—	10/26/94
571	2/11/92	2/2/93	—	11/2/92	—	10/27/94

*CTB = cement–treated base

Table 50. California SPS–5 materials testing summary.

California SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	3	0.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	3	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	3	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	3	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	3	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	0	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	0	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	0	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	0	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	0	0	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	3	0	0.0
Asphalt Surface:	Core Examination	26	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	3	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
California SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	6	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
080501	None	Control section, 33 mm rut level–up course
080502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
080503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
080504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
080505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
080506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
080507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
080508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
080509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
080559	None	51 mm HMAC overlay on 108 mm HMAC overlay
080560	None	51 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:			7.88				Construction Date:		10/8/91
Subgrade Type:			Coarse				Climatic Zone:		Dry–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			23 years				Automated Vehicle Class:		1064 Days
Construction Problems:			Rut level–up on control.				Weigh–In–Motion:		338 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	33.0		0		170	91	ATB*
502	51	96.5	RAP	0		137	69	ATB
503	127	137.2	RAP	0		127	53	ATB
504	127	147.3	Virgin	0		114	89	ATB
505	51	81.3	Virgin	0		163	76	ATB
506	51	111.8	Virgin	51		165	86	ATB
507	127	172.7	Virgin	51		147	25	ATB
508	127	200.7	RAP	51		127	51	ATB
509	51	106.7	RAP	51		130	69	ATB
559	159	167.6	Virgin	0		163	99	ATB
560	159	154.9	Modified	0		145	64	ATB
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	9	6	5	2	6	1	5	4
502	9	6	5	2	6	1	4	4
503	9	6	5	2	6	1	4	4
504	9	6	5	2	6	1	4	4
505	9	6	5	2	6	1	4	4
506	9	7	5	2	6	1	4	4
507	9	6	5	2	6	1	4	4
508	9	6	5	2	6	1	4	4
509	9	6	5	2	6	1	4	4
559	9	6	5	2	3	1	4	4
560	9	5	5	2	3	1	4	4
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/3/91	7/12/94	8/19/91	2/27/92
502	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/1/91	7/12/94	8/19/91	2/27/92
503	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/2/91	7/12/94	8/19/91	2/27/92
504	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/3/91	7/12/94	8/19/91	2/27/92
505	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/3/91	7/12/94	8/19/91	2/27/92
506	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/3/91	7/12/94	8/19/91	2/27/92
507	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/3/91	7/12/94	8/19/91	2/27/92
508	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/2/91	7/12/94	8/19/91	2/27/92
509	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/1/91	7/12/94	8/19/91	2/27/92
559	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/3/91	7/12/94	5/3/91	4/25/96
560	5/28/91	11/13/91	5/3/91	7/12/94	5/3/91	4/25/96

*Asphalt–treated base

Table 53. Colorado SPS–5 materials testing summary.

Colorado SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	3	100.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	6	100.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	6	100.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	3	100.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	3	100.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	5	100.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	0	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	0	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	0	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	0	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	0	0	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	3	3	100.0
Asphalt Surface:	Core Examination	26	26	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	7	100.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	3	100.0
	Asphalt Content	3	3	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	3	100.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	3	100.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	3	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	3	100.0
Colorado SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	62	74.2
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	40	100.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	4	100.0
	Asphalt Content	6	4	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	4	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	4	100.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	4	100.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	4	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	4	100.0
	Specific Gravity	6	4	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	4	100.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
121030	None	Control section
120502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
120503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
120504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
120505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
120506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
120507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
120508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
120509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
120561	—	89 mm RAP overlay
120562	—	89 mm virgin overlay
120563	—	Mill/inlay (virgin)
120564	—	Mill/inlay (RAP)
120565	—	Mill/inlay, 89 mm RAP overlay
120566	—	Mill/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:			4.32				Construction Date:		4/5/95
Subgrade Type:			Coarse				Climatic Zone:		WNF
Climatic Data Availability:			27 Years				Automated Vehicle Class:		None
Construction Problems:			Milling on 120502. Segregation in RAP.				Weigh–In–Motion:		None
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	NA	—	0	0	—	—	—	–	–
502	51	63.5	RAP	0	0	79	269	DGAB*	292	Soil Agg
503	127	127.0	RAP	0	0	66	269	DGAB	292	Soil Agg
504	127	129.5	Virgin	0	0	71	213	DGAB	406	Soil Agg
505	51	50.8	Virgin	0	0	71	224	DGAB	457	Soil Agg
506	51	76.2	Virgin	51	35.1	76	213	DGAB	406	Soil Agg
507	127	165.1	Virgin	51	55.5	71	213	DGAB	406	Soil Agg
508	127	177.8	RAP	51	66.6	71	269	DGAB	292	Soil Agg
509	51	106.8	RAP	51	42.1	81	213	DGAB	406	Soil Agg
560	—	—	Virgin	0		—	—	—	—	—
561	89	—	RAP	0	0	76	269	DGAB	292	Soil Agg
562	89	—	Virgin	0	0	66	224	DGAB	457	Soil Agg
563	—	—	Virgin	0	0	79	224	DGAB	457	Soil Agg
564	—	—	RAP	0	0	76	224	DGAB	457	Soil Agg
565	89	—	RAP	0	0	—	—	DGAB	—	—
566	89	—	Virgin	0	0	—	—	DGAB	—	—
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
502	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
503	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
504	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
505	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
506	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
507	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
508	4	4	4	1	3	2	0	2
509	3	0	4	1	3	2	0	2
560	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
561	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
562	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
563	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
564	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
565	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
566	3	2	4	1	3	2	0	2
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
502	5/25/94	11/1/95	9/26/94	1/21/96	—	1/21/96
503	5/25/94	11/1/95	9/26/94	1/21/96	—	1/21/96
504	5/25/94	11/2/95	9/28/94	1/22/96	—	1/21/96
505	5/25/94	11/2/95	9/29/94	1/22/96	—	1/21/96
506	5/25/94	11/2/95	9/28/94	1/21/96	—	1/21/96
507	5/25/94	11/2/95	9/28/94	1/22/96	—	1/21/96
508	5/25/94	11/1/95	9/27/94	1/21/96	—	1/21/96
509	5/25/94	11/2/95	9/28/94	1/21/96	—	1/21/96
560	—	—	—	—	—	—
561	5/25/94	11/1/95	—	1/21/96	—	1/21/96
562	5/25/94	11/2/95	—	9/29/94	—	1/21/96
563	5/26/94	11/2/95	—	9/29/94	—	1/21/96
564	5/26/94	11/2/95	—	9/29/94	—	1/21/96
565	5/25/94	11/2/95	—	9/28/94	—	1/21/96
566	5/25/94	11/2/95	—	9/28/94	—	1/21/96

* DGAB = dense–graded asphalt base

Table 56. Florida SPS–5 materials testing summary.

Florida SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	1	0.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	1	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	1	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	1	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	1	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	3	66.7
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	3	2	50.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	2	50.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	1	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	3	66.7
Bound Base:	Classification	0	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	34	74.7
	Bulk Specific Gravity	12	7	71.4
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	3	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	4	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
Florida SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	61	65	63.1
	Bulk Specific Gravity	61	64	62.5
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	18	50.0
	Asphalt Content	6	18	50.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	17	47.1
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	18	50.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	17	47.1
	Aggregate Gradation	6	18	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	50.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	18	50.0
	Specific Gravity	6	18	50.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	18	50.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
130501	None	Control section
130502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
130503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
130504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
130505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
130506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
130507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
130508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
130509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
130560	—	Planned treatment
130561	—	89 mm RAP overlay
130562	—	89 mm virgin overlay
130563	Mill 51 mm	Inlay 51 mm virgin AC
130564	Mill 51 mm	Inlay 51 mm RAP
130565	Mill 89 mm	Inlay 89 mm RAP overlay
130566	Mill 89 mm	Inlay 89 mm overlay (virgin AC)
130567	Intensive	Control 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:			6.17				Construction Date:		6/18/93
Subgrade Type:			Coarse				Climatic Zone:		Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			19 Years				Automated Vehicle Class:		None
Construction Problems:			Supplemental sections on different subgrade. Surface anomalies on 130502.				Weigh–In–Motion:		None
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	NA		0		46	279	HMAC*	330	Soil Agg
502	51	40.6	RAP	0		46	279	HMAC	330	Soil Agg
503	127	129.5	RAP	0		51	290	HMAC	330	Soil Agg
504	127	134.6	Virgin	0		56	287	HMAC	330	Soil Agg
505	51	50.8	Virgin	0		61	287	HMAC	330	Soil Agg
506	51	106.7	Virgin	51		56	290	HMAC	330	Soil Agg
507	127	160.0	Virgin	51		61	295	HMAC	330	Soil Agg
508	127	170.2	RAP	51		41	290	HMAC	330	Soil Agg
509	51	96.5	RAP	51		46	284	HMAC	330	Soil Agg
560	—	55.9	–	0		41	386	HMAC	983	Soil Agg
561	89	73.7	RAP	0		46	396	HMAC	983	Soil Agg
562	89	88.9	Virgin	0		46	386	HMAC	394	Soil Agg
563	51	55.9	Virgin	51		56	384	HMAC	394	Soil Agg
564	51	58.4	RAP	51		41	386	HMAC	983	Soil Agg
565	89	127.0	RAP	89		51	396	HMAC	983	Soil Agg
566	89	137.2	Virgin	89		41	366	HMAC	394	Soil Agg
567	0	0	–	0		51	373	HMAC	394	Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	0	1	0	1	1	4	0	2
502	3	4	4	2	3	4	0	2
503	3	4	4	2	3	4	0	2
504	3	4	4	2	3	4	0	2
505	3	4	4	2	3	3	0	2
506	3	4	4	2	3	4	0	2
507	3	4	4	2	3	4	0	2
508	3	5	4	2	3	4	0	2
509	3	5	4	2	3	4	0	2
560	3	4	4	2	3	4	0	2
561	3	4	3	2	3	4	0	2
562	3	4	3	2	3	4	0	2
563	3	5	3	2	3	4	0	2
564	3	5	4	2	3	4	0	2
565	3	5	3	2	3	4	0	2
566	3	5	3	2	3	4	0	2
567	1	1	0	1	1	4	0	2
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	—	—	—	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
502	3/1/93	5/7/96	2/24/93	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
503	3/1/93	5/7/96	2/23/93	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
504	3/1/93	5/6/96	2/22/93	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
505	3/1/93	5/6/96	2/22/93	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
506	3/1/93	5/6/96	2/22/93	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
507	3/1/93	5/6/96	2/22/93	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
508	3/1/93	5/7/96	2/23/93	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
509	3/1/93	5/7/96	2/23/93	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
560	3/8/93	5/8/96	3/1/93	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
561	3/8/93	5/8/96	—	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
562	3/1/93	5/8/96	—	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
563	3/1/93	5/8/96	—	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
564	3/8/93	5/8/96	3/1/93	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
565	3/8/93	5/8/96	—	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
566	3/1/93	5/8/96	—	4/7/94	—	4/7/94
567	3/1/93	5/8/96	—	4/7/94	—	4/7/94

*Hot–mix asphalt concrete

Table 59. Georgia SPS–5 materials testing summary.

Georgia SPS—5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	4	2	100.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	4	2	100.0
	Atterberg Limits	4	2	100.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	4	2	100.0
	Resilient Modulus	4	3	66.7
	Natural Moisture Content	4	6	100.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	0	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	0	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	0	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	0	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	0	0	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	4	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	44	42	50.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	12	42	50.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	4	4	0.0
	Asphalt Content	4	3	66.7
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	4	3	66.7
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	4	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	4	3	66.7
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	4	3	66.7
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	4	3	66.7
Georgia SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	68	66	75.8
	Bulk Specific Gravity	68	52	69.2
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	6	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
230501	None	Control section
230502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
230503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
230504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
230505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
230506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
230507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
230508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
230509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
230559	Intensive	32 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:			4.13				Construction Date:		6/27/95
Subgrade Type:			Coarse				Climatic Zone:		Wet–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			25 Years				Automated Vehicle Class:		None
Construction Problems:			Minimal preparation sections not pretreated in accordance with guidelines.				Weigh–In–Motion:		None
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	0	–	0	0	211	112	DGAB	229	Gravel
502	51	91.4	RAP	0	0	213	112	DGAB	229	Gravel
503	127	139.7	RAP	0	0	218	112	DGAB	229	Gravel
504	127	144.8	Virgin	0	0	201	112	DGAB	229	Gravel
505	51	68.6	Virgin	0	0	201	112	DGAB	229	Gravel
506	51	104.1	Virgin	51	50.3	201	112	DGAB	229	Gravel
507	127	198.1	Virgin	51	57.2	211	112	DGAB	229	Gravel
508	127	172.7	RAP	51	52.0	221	112	DGAB	229	Gravel
509	51	96.5	RAP	51	43.4	203	112	DGAB	229	Gravel
559	51	—	Virgin	0	0	211	112	DGAB	229	Gravel
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	4	3	4	1	4	3	0	3
502	4	3	4	1	4	3	0	3
503	4	3	4	1	4	3	0	3
504	3	3	4	1	4	3	0	3
505	3	3	4	1	4	3	0	3
506	3	3	4	1	4	3	0	3
507	4	3	4	1	4	3	0	3
508	3	3	4	1	4	3	0	3
509	3	3	4	1	4	3	0	3
559	3	3	4	1	4	3	0	3
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	4/21/95	8/15/95	4/26/95	10/3/95	4/26/95	10/3/95
502	4/21/95	8/15/95	4/26/95	10/3/95	4/26/95	10/3/95
503	4/21/95	8/15/95	4/26/95	10/3/95	4/24/95	10/3/95
504	4/21/95	8/25/97	4/26/95	10/3/95	4/25/95	10/3/95
505	4/20/95	8/25/97	4/26/95	10/4/95	4/25/95	10/4/95
506	4/20/95	8/25/97	4/26/95	10/5/95	4/25/95	10/5/95
507	4/21/95	8/15/97	4/26/95	10/5/95	4/25/95	10/5/95
508	4/20/95	8/25/97	4/26/95	10/5/95	4/25/95	10/5/95
509	4/20/95	8/25/97	4/26/95	10/5/95	4/25/95	10/5/95
559	4/20/95	8/25/97	4/26/95	10/5/95	4/25/95	10/5/95

Table 62. Maine SPS–5 materials testing summary.

Maine SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	2	2	50.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	2	6	83.3
	Atterberg Limits	2	2	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	2	2	50.0
	Resilient Modulus	2	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	4	8	87.5
	Permeability	0	0	0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	2	8	87.5
	Atterberg Limits	2	2	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	2	2	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	2	0	0.0
	Permeability	2	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	4	8	87.5
Bound Base:	Classification	0	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	35	35	82.9
	Bulk Specific Gravity	35	35	82.9
	Maximum Specific Gravity	4	7	100.0
	Asphalt Content	4	7	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	4	7	85.7
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	4	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	4	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	4	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	4	0	0.0
Maine SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	51	51	86.3
	Bulk Specific Gravity	51	44	97.7
	Maximum Specific Gravity	13	6	100.0
	Asphalt Content	13	6	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	13	6	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	5	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	5	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	13	6	33.3
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	13	6	66.7
	Aggregate Gradation	13	6	100.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	13	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	13	6	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	13	5	100.0
	Specific Gravity	13	7	85.7
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	13	6	100.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
240501	None	Control section
240502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
240503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
240504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
240505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
240506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
240507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
240508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
240509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
240559	Agency preparation	51 mm of agency mix design
240560	Agency preparation	64 mm of stone matrix asphalt, A (Arbocel)
240561	Agency preparation	64 mm of stone matrix asphalt, B (Vestoplast)
240562	Minimum (2 patches)	64 mm of stone matrix asphalt, B (Styrelf)
240563	Agency preparation	64 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:			7.22				Construction Date:		6/1/92
Subgrade Type:			Fine				Climatic Zone:		Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			NA				Automated Vehicle Class:		218 Days
Construction Problems:			None noted.				Weigh–In–Motion:		2 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	NA	–	0	0	91	107	CTB*	147	DGAB
502	81	53.3	RAP	0	0	81	107	CTB	150	DGAB
503	91	134.6	RAP	0	0	91	99	CTB	150	DGAB
504	127	134.6	Virgin	0	0	102	104	CTB	130	DGAB
505	51	53.3	Virgin	0	0	89	91	CTB	150	DGAB
506	51	91.4	Virgin	51	0	97	107	CTB	130	DGAB
507	127	190.5	Virgin	51	–	94	107	CTB	130	DGAB
508	127	167.6	RAP	51	44.9	94	107	CTB	130	DGAB
509	51	96.5	RAP	51	–	109	79	CTB	165	DGAB
559	51	–	Virgin	–	–	102	91	CTB	152	DGAB
560	64	–	Stone Mastic	–	–	76	104	CTB	147	DGAB
561	64	–	Stone Mastic	–	–	91	109	CTB	137	DGAB
562	64	–	Stone Mastic	–	–	91	109	CTB	147	DGAB
563	64	–	Stone Mastic	–	–	84	94	CTB	147	DGAB
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	10	5	5	2	8	4	0	4
502	8	6	6	2	9	3	3	4
503	10	6	6	2	9	3	3	4
504	9	6	6	2	8	23	3	4
505	9	5	5	2	8	3	3	4
506	10	5	5	2	8	3	3	4
507	10	5	5	2	8	3	3	4
508	8	6	6	2	9	3	3	4
509	8	5	5	2	8	3	3	4
559	8	5	4	2	6	4	3	4
560	6	5	4	2	8	3	3	4
561	5	5	4	2	7	3	3	4
562	5	4	4	2	5	3	3	4
563	6	4	4	2	5	3	3	4
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	1/24/92	6/11/92	2/19/92	10/5/92	2/19/92	10/5/92
502	1/24/92	6/11/92	2/20/92	10/5/92	2/20/92	10/5/92
503	1/24/92	6/11/92	2/20/92	10/5/92	2/20/92	10/5/92
504	8/9/91	6/11/92	2/20/92	10/5/92	2/20/92	10/5/92
505	1/24/92	6/11/92	2/20/92	10/5/92	2/20/92	10/5/92
506	1/24/92	6/11/92	2/21/92	10/5/92	2/21/92	10/5/92
507	1/24/92	6/11/92	2/20/92	10/5/92	2/20/92	10/5/92
508	8/8/91	6/11/92	2/21/92	10/5/92	2/21/92	10/5/92
509	8/8/91	6/11/92	2/21/92	10/5/92	2/21/92	10/5/92
559	8/8/91	6/11/92	2/21/92	10/5/92	2/21/92	10/5/92
560	8/8/91	6/11/92	2/21/92	10/5/92	3/18/92	10/5/92
561	8/8/91	6/11/92	2/21/92	10/5/92	2/21/92	10/5/92
562	—	6/12/92	5/6/92	10/5/92	—	10/5/92
563	—	6/11/92	5/6/92	10/5/92	—	10/5/92

*Cement–treated base

Table 65. Maryland SPS–5 materials testing summary.

Maryland SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	13	53.8
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	0	9	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	0	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	0	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	0	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	0	0	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	6	12	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	26	40	41.7
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	40	65.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	13	65.0
	Asphalt Content	3	13	69.2
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	69.2
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	26	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	13	26.9
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	12	66.7
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	12	66.7
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	13	0.0
Maryland SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	76	105	53.3
	Bulk Specific Gravity	76	88	45.5
	Maximum Specific Gravity	12	10	30.0
	Asphalt Content	12	10	30.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	12	3	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	28	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	28	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	12	5	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	12	5	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	12	10	30.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	12	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	5	9	33.3
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	5	8	12.5
	Specific Gravity	5	8	37.5
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	5	8	25.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
270501	None	Control section
270502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
270503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
270504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
270505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
270506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
270507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
270508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
270509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
270559	Minimum	38 mm AC overlay.
270560	Intensive	Milling of transverse cracks only and 38 mm AC overlay.
270561	Minimum	Overlay 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:			NA				Construction Date:		9/15/90
Subgrade Type:			Fine				Climatic Zone:		Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			28 Years				Automated Vehicle Class:		717 Days
Construction Problems:			Small town located within project limits.				Weigh–In–Motion:		702 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	NA	–	0		157	127	DGAB	325	Gravel
502	51	61.0	RAP	0		175	127	DGAB	325	Gravel
503	127	NA	RAP	0		165	127	DGAB	325	Gravel
504	127	NA	Virgin	0		170	132	DGAB	305	Gravel
505	51	48.3	Virgin	0		170	119	DGAB	320	Gravel
506	51	NA	Virgin	51		188	127	DGAB	318	Gravel
507	127	142.2	Virgin	51		175	132	DGAB	320	Gravel
508	127	NA	RAP	51		155	130	DGAB	315	Gravel
509	51	NA	RAP	51		190	127	DGAB	320	Gravel
559	38	NA	Virgin	0		175	137	DGAB	320	Gravel
560	38	NA	Virgin	0		188	137	DGAB	320	Gravel
561	–	NA	Virgin	0		213	137	DGAB	320	Gravel
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	7	6	6	3	6	0	3	3
502	7	6	6	3	7	0	3	3
503	7	6	5	3	6	0	3	3
504	7	6	7	3	9	0	3	3
505	7	6	6	2	9	0	3	3
506	6	6	7	3	9	0	3	3
507	7	6	7	3	9	0	3	3
508	7	6	7	3	5	0	3	3
509	7	6	6	3	7	0	3	3
559	7	7	6	2	6	0	3	3
560	7	6	6	2	7	0	3	3
561	7	6	6	2	8	0	3	3
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	5/24/90	7/13/91	5/29/90	11/5/90	–	6/16/92
502	7/13/91	10/31/92	5/29/90	11/9/90	–	11/9/90
503	7/13/91	10/31/92	5/29/90	11/9/90	–	11/9/90
504	7/13/91	10/31/92	5/29/90	11/6/90	–	11/6/90
505	7/13/91	10/31/92	5/29/90	11/6/90	–	11/6/90
506	7/13/91	10/31/92	5/29/90	11/6/90	–	11/6/90
507	7/13/91	10/31/92	5/29/90	11/5/90	–	6/16/92
508	7/13/91	10/31/92	5/29/90	11/5/90	–	11/9/90
509	7/13/91	10/31/92	5/29/90	11/6/90	–	11/6/90
559	7/13/91	10/31/92	—	11/5/90	–	6/16/92
560	7/13/91	10/31/92	—	11/5/90	–	6/16/92
561	7/13/91	10/31/92	—	11/5/90	–	6/16/92

Table 68. Minnesota SPS–5 materials testing summary.

Minnesota SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	4	0.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	4	100.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	4	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	3	4	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	4	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	4	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	0	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	0	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	26	3	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	3	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	4	0.0
	Asphalt Content	3	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
Minnesota SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	9	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	12	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	6	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
280501	None	Control section
280502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
280503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
280504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
280505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
280506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
280507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
280508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
280509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
270560	38 mm milling	76 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:			8.92				Construction Date:		9/25/90
Subgrade Type:			Fine				Climatic Zone:		Wet–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			26 Years				Automated Vehicle Class:		91 Days
Construction Problems:			Mix plant breakdown				Weigh–In–Motion:		89 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	NA		0		104	193	HMAC	152	LTS*
502	51	50.8	RAP	0		109	180	HMAC	84	LTS
503	127	116.8	RAP	0		109	180	HMAC	84	LTS
504	127	124.5	Virgin	0		107	218	HMAC	152	LTS
505	51	50.8	Virgin	0		107	198	HMAC	114	LTS
506	51	NA	Virgin	51		107	198	HMAC	114	LTS
507	127	NA	Virgin	51		86	185	HMAC	234	LTS
508	127	NA	RAP	51		91	196	HMAC	0	LTS
509	51	NA	RAP	51		109	193	HMAC	102	LTS
560	76	NA	Virgin	38		91	203	HMAC	152	LTS
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	6	6	4	3	5	0	1	3
502	6	6	4	3	5	0	1	3
503	6	6	4	3	5	0	1	3
504	6	6	3	3	4	0	1	3
505	6	6	3	3	5	0	1	3
506	6	7	3	3	5	0	1	3
507	6	6	3	3	5	0	1	3
508	6	6	3	3	5	0	1	3
509	6	7	3	3	5	0	1	3
560	4	6	3	2	2	0	1	3
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	5/2/90	11/14/90	6/1/89	12/27/90	6/11/90	12/27/90
502	5/3/90	11/14/90	6/1/89	12/27/90	6/11/90	12/27/90
503	5/3/90	11/14/90	6/1/89	12/27/90	6/11/90	12/27/90
504	5/3/90	11/14/90	6/1/89	3/21/93	6/11/90	4/13/92
505	5/3/90	11/14/90	6/1/89	3/21/93	6/11/90	12/27/90
506	5/3/90	11/14/90	6/1/89	3/21/93	6/11/90	12/27/90
507	5/3/90	11/14/90	6/1/89	3/21/93	6/11/90	12/27/90
508	5/3/90	11/14/90	6/1/89	3/21/93	6/11/90	12/27/90
509	5/3/90	11/14/90	6/1/89	3/21/93	6/11/90	12/27/90
560	–	11/14/90	—	3/21/93	–	3/21/93

*Lime–treated subgrade

Table 71. Mississippi SPS7–5 materials testing summary.

Mississippi SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	9	88.9
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	9	88.9
	Atterberg Limits	3	9	88.9
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	9	88.9
	Resilient Modulus	3	10	90.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	7	85.7
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	0	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	0	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	0	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	0	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	0	0	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	3	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	26	28	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	3	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
Mississippi SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	29	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	6	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0

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:			0.93				Construction Date:		8/27/98
Subgrade Type:			NA				Climatic Zone:		NA
Climatic Data Availability:			NA				Automated Vehicle Class:		None
Construction Problems:							Weigh–In–Motion:		None
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0		—	0
502	51		RAP	0
503	127		RAP	0
504	127		Virgin	0
505	51		Virgin	0
506	51		Virgin	51
507	127		Virgin	51
508	127		RAP	51
509	51		RAP	51
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	0	1	2	0	2	0	0	0
502	0	1	2	0	2	0	0	0
503	0	1	2	0	2	0	0	0
504	0	2	2	0	2	0	0	0
505	0	2	2	0	2	0	0	0
506	0	2	2	0	2	0	0	0
507	0	1	2	0	2	0	0	0
508	0	1	2	0	2	0	0	0
509	0	1	2	0	1	0	0	0
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	—	—	7/22/98	12/17/98	7/22/98	12/17/98
502	—	—	7/23/98	12/17/98	7/23/98	12/17/98
503	—	—	7/23/98	1/20/99	7/23/98	1/20/99
504	—	—	6/10/98	12/16/98	6/10/98	12/6/98
505	—	—	6/10/98	12/16/98	6/6/98	12/6/98
506	—	—	6/10/98	12/16/98	6/10/98	12/6/98
507	—	—	7/22/98	1/19/99	7/22/98	1/19/99
508	—	—	7/22/98	12/15/98	7/22/98	12/15/98
509	—	—	7/22/98	1/16/99	7/22/98	–

Table 73. Missouri SPS–5 materials testing summary.

Missouri SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	0	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	3	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	26	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	3	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
Missouri SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	6	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
307066	None	Control section
300502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
300503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
300504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
300505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
300506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
300507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
300508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
300509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
300561	Mill open friction course	127 mm milling and inlay with Polybuilt additive in the mix
300560	Mill open friction course	51 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:			7.95				Construction Date:		9/12/91
Subgrade Type:			Coarse				Climatic Zone:		Dry–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			17 Years				Automated 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:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
7066	0	NA	–	0		124	76	Soil Agg	404	Soil Agg
502	51	66.0	RAP	0		112	71	Soil Agg	366	Soil Agg
503	127	116.8	RAP	0		119	109	Soil Agg	368	Soil Agg
504	127	142.2	Virgin	0		130	89	Soil Agg	396	Soil Agg
505	51	50.8	Virgin	0		122	71	Soil Agg	389	Soil Agg;
506	51	106.7	Virgin	51		119	71	Soil Agg	389	Soil Agg
507	127	182.9	Virgin	51		112	89	Soil Agg	396	Soil Agg
508	127	180.3	RAP	51		112	109	Soil Agg	376	Soil Agg
509	51	114.3	RAP	51		119	97	Soil Agg	381	Soil Agg
560	127	NA	Modified	19		117	91	Soil Agg	366	Soil Agg
561	51	NA	Modified	19		117	91	Soil Agg	366	Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
7066	11	6	4	4	7	2	5	3
502	11	5	4	2	6	2	5	3
503	11	5	4	2	6	2	5	3
504	11	5	4	2	6	2	5	3
505	11	5	4	2	6	2	5	3
506	11	5	4	2	6	2	5	3
507	11	5	5	2	6	2	5	3
508	11	5	4	2	6	2	5	3
509	11	5	4	2	6	2	5	3
560	10	4	3	2	3	2	5	3
561	11	4	4	2	4	2	5	3
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
7066	5/25/91	11/9/91	7/29/91	8/18/93	5/16/91	6/8/96
502	5/25/91	11/9/91	5/16/91	8/18/93	5/16/91	6/8/96
503	5/25/91	11/9/91	5/17/91	8/18/93	5/17/91	6/8/96
504	5/25/91	11/9/91	5/17/91	8/18/93	5/17/91	6/8/96
505	5/25/91	11/9/91	5/16/91	8/18/93	5/16/91	6/8/96
506	5/25/91	11/9/91	5/16/91	8/18/93	5/16/91	6/8/96
507	5/25/91	11/9/91	5/17/91	8/18/93	5/17/91	6/8/96
508	5/25/91	11/9/91	7/17/91	8/18/93	5/17/91	6/8/96
509	5/25/91	11/9/91	5/16/91	8/18/93	5/16/91	6/8/96
560	5/25/91	11/9/91	5/18/91	8/18/93	—	6/8/96
561	5/25/91	11/9/91	5/18/91	8/18/93	—	6/8/96

Table 76. Montana SPS—5 materials testing summary.

Montana SPS—5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	7	85.7
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	5	80.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	5	80.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	5	80.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	1	100.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	15	80.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	3	5	80.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	4	75.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	4	75.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	8	62.5
Bound Base:	Classification	0	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	26	49	81.6
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	17	82.4
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	5	80.0
	Asphalt Content	3	5	80.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	5	80.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	2	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	3	66.7
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	3	66.7
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	3	66.7
Montana SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	66	78.8
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	28	100.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	8	100.0
	Asphalt Content	6	8	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	5	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	6	100.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	8	100.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	6	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	6	100.0
	Specific Gravity	6	6	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	6	100.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
340501	None	Control section
340502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
340503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
340504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
340505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
340506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
340507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
340508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
340509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
340559	Intensive	51 mm milling with 51 mm RAP overlay above 64 mm virgin mix binder
340560	Intensive	51 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:			7.00				Construction Date:		12/20/91
Subgrade Type:			Coarse				Climatic Zone:		Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			29 Years				Automated 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:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	NA	—	0	NA	241	254	Gravel	1676	Soil Agg
502	51	48.3	RAP	0	NA	226	264	Gravel	1042	Soil Agg
503	127	119.4	RAP	0	NA	229	287	Gravel	559	Soil Agg
504	127	119.4	Virgin	0	NA	216	272	Gravel	553	Soil Agg
505	51	45.7	Virgin	0	NA	229	254	Gravel	508	Soil Agg
506	51	106.7	Virgin	51	53.8	241	254	Gravel	0	Soil Agg
507	127	198.1	Virgin	51	55.7	213	254	Gravel	1372	Soil Agg
508	127	198.1	RAP	51	55.3	231	287	Gravel	559	Soil Agg
509	51	109.2	RAP	51	63.7	241	287	Gravel	559	Soil Agg
560	115	NA	RAP	51	NA	218	267	Gravel	762	Soil Agg
561	89	NA	RAP	51	NA	216	267	Gravel	102	Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	7	4	3	2	6	2	6	4
502	6	5	3	2	6	2	6	4
503	6	7	4	2	7	2	6	4
504	7	4	3	2	6	2	5	4
505	7	5	3	2	6	2	5	4
506	5	5	3	2	6	2	5	4
507	6	6	4	2	7	2	5	4
508	7	5	4	2	7	2	5	4
509	7	5	3	2	6	2	5	4
559	5	4	3	2	5	2	5	4
560	3	5	3	2	5	2	5	4
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93
502	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93
503	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93
504	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93
505	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93
506	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93
507	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93
508	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93
509	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93
559	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93
560	1/25/92	10/30/92	4/2/92	2/24/93	4/6/92	2/24/93

Table 79. New Jersey SPS–5 materials testing summary.

New Jersey SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	2	50.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	4	75.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	4	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	4	75.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	2	100.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	3	2	100.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	4	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	4	75.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	9	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	0	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	26	46	69.6
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	19	73.7
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	3	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
New Jersey SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	178	56.2
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	78	61.5
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	9	66.7
	Asphalt Content	6	9	66.7
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	9	66.7
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	9	44.5
	Aggregate Gradation	6	9
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	3	66.7
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	3	33.3
	Specific Gravity	6	3	66.7
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	3	66.7

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
350501	None	Control section, 51mm milling and 51mm inlay
350502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
350503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
350504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
350505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
350506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
350507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
350508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
350509	Intensive	51 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:			2.89				Construction Date:		9/17/96
Subgrade Type:			Coarse				Climatic Zone:		Dry–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			26 Years				Automated Vehicle Class:		None
Construction Problems:			Control section was milled and overlaid				Weigh–In–Motion:		None
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	NA	–	0	51
502	51	NA	RAP	0	0
503	127	NA	RAP	0	0
504	127	NA	Virgin	0	0
505	51	NA	Virgin	0	0
506	51	NA	Virgin	51	54.2
507	127	NA	Virgin	51	55.7
508	127	NA	RAP	51	55.8
509	51	NA	RAP	51	52.8
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	2	2	2	0	2	0	0	1
502	1	2	2	0	2	0	0	1
503	1	3	2	0	2	0	0	1
504	1	2	2	0	2	0	0	1
505	2	2	0	0	2	0	0	1
506	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	1
507	1	2	2	0	2	0	0	1
508	1	2	2	0	2	0	0	1
509	1	2	2	0	2	0	0	1
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	8/31/96	3/9/97	5/30/96	1/6/99	5/30/96	1/6/99
502	—	3/9/97	5/30/96	1/6/99	5/30/96	3/19/99
503	—	3/9/97	5/30/96	1/6/99	5/30/96	1/6/99
504	—	3/9/97	5/30/96	1/6/99	5/30/96	1/6/99
505	8/31/96	3/9/97	5/30/96	1/6/99	5/30/96	1/6/99
506	8/31/96	3/9/97	5/30/96	1/6/99	5/30/96	4/1/92
507	—	3/9/97	5/30/96	1/6/99	5/30/96	1/6/99
508	—	3/9/97	5/30/96	1/6/99	5/30/96	1/6/99
509	—	3/9/97	5/30/96	1/6/99	5/30/96	3/19/99

Table 82. New Mexico SPS–5 material testing summary.

New Jersey SPS—5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	0	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	0	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	0	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	26	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	12	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	7	100.0
	Asphalt Content	3	7	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	13	100.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	6	100.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	6	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	6	100.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	6	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	6	100.0
New Jersey SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	6	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	12	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	16	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
400501	None	Control section
400502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
400503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
400504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
400505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
400506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
400507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
400508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
400509	Intensive	51 mm RAP overlay with milling
400560	Mill/inlay	89 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:			2.06				Construction Date:		7/16/97
Subgrade Type:			Fine				Climatic Zone:		Wet–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			24 Years				Automated Vehicle Class:		None
Construction Problems:							Weigh–In–Motion:		None
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0		–	0
502	51		RAP	0
503	127		RAP	0
504	127		Virgin	0
505	51		Virgin	0
506	51		Virgin	51
507	127		Virgin	51
508	127		RAP	51
509	51		RAP	51
560	89		NA	51
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	2	3	2	0	1	1	0	1
502	2	3	2	0	1	1	0	1
503	2	3	2	0	1	1	0	1
504	2	3	2	0	1	1	0	1
505	2	3	2	0	1	1	0	1
506	2	3	2	0	1	1	0	1
507	2	3	2	0	1	1	0	1
508	2	3	2	0	1	1	0	1
509	2	3	2	0	1	1	0	1
560	1	3	2	0	0	1	0	1
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	6/4/97	1/14/98	6/16/97	7/22/97	6/16/97	—
502	6/4/97	1/14/98	6/16/97	7/22/97	6/16/97	—
503	6/4/97	1/14/98	6/16/97	7/22/97	6/17/97	—
504	6/4/97	1/14/98	6/16/97	7/23/97	6/17/97	—
505	6/4/97	1/14/98	6/16/97	7/23/97	6/17/97	—
506	6/4/97	1/14/98	6/16/97	7/23/97	6/17/97	—
507	6/4/97	1/14/98	6/16/97	7/23/97	6/17/97	—
508	6/4/97	1/14/98	6/16/97	7/23/97	6/17/97	—
509	—	1/14/98	6/16/97	7/23/97	—	—

Table 85. Oklahoma SPS—5 materials testing summary.

Oklahoma SPS—5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	3	0	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	0	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	0	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	0	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	0	0	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	0	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	28	31	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	12	2	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	7	100.0
	Asphalt Content	3	7	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	7	100.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	6	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	7	100.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	7	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	7	100.0
Oklahoma SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	44	38	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	44	11	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	3	100.0
	Asphalt Content	6	10	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	6	100.0
	Resilient Modulus	12	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	16	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	6	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	6	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	6	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	6	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	0	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	5	0.0
	Specific Gravity	6	6	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	6	0.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
481069	None	Control section
48A502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
48A503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
48A504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
48A505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
48A506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
48A507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
48A508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
48A509	Intensive	51 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:			7.84				Construction Date:		10/21/91
Subgrade Type:			Fine				Climatic Zone:		Wet–No–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			20 Years				Automated Vehicle Class:		385 Days
Construction Problems:			Weather and production plant delays.				Weigh–In–Motion:		7 Days
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
1069	0	0	–	0	0	241	386	LTB*	165	LTS
A502	51	55.4	RAP	0	0	231	376	LTB	203	LTS
A503	127	134.6	RAP	0	0	239	254	LTB	203	LTS
A504	127	134.6	Virgin	0	0	221	269	LTB	203	LTS
A505	51	50.8	Virgin	0	0	244	224	LTB	147	LTS
A506	51	99.1	Virgin	51	56.5	229	224	LTB	147	LTS
A507	127	17.8	Virgin	51	55.3	229	224	LTB	147	LTS
A508	127	185.4	RAP	51	52.6	244	356	LTB	203	LTS
A509	51	109.2	RAP	51	46.9	226	376	LTB	203	LTS
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
1069	5	4	6	6	9	7	8	5
A502	5	6	3	2	5	5	7	5
A503	5	5	3	2	5	4	7	5
A504	5	5	3	2	5	4	7	5
A505	5	5	3	2	5	4	7	5
A506	5	5	3	2	5	4	7	5
A507	5	5	3	2	5	4	7	5
A508	5	5	3	2	5	4	7	5
A509	5	6	3	2	5	4	7	5
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
1069	3/18/91	2/11/93	7/17/91	1/28/92	7/17/91	1/28/92
A502	3/19/91	1/20/92	—	3/3/93	3/10/91	1/28/92
A503	3/19/91	1/21/92	—	3/3/93	3/10/91	1/28/92
A504	3/19/91	1/21/92	—	3/3/93	3/10/91	1/28/92
A505	3/20/91	1/22/92	—	3/3/93	3/10/91	1/28/92
A506	3/19/91	1/21/92	—	3/3/93	3/10/91	1/28/92
A507	3/19/91	1/21/92	—	3/3/93	3/10/91	1/28/92
A508	3/19/91	1/20/92	—	3/3/93	3/10/91	1/28/92
A509	3/19/91	1/20/92	—	3/3/93	3/10/91	1/28/92

* LTB—lime–treated base

Table 88. Texas SPS–5 materials testing summary.

Texas SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	5	100.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	5	100.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	5	100.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	5	100.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	3	100.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	6	100.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	0	5	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	0	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	0	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	0	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	0	0	100.0
Bound Base:	Classification	3	4	100.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	31	54	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	14	100.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	5	100.0
	Asphalt Content	3	5	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	100.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	5	100.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	2	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	3	100.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	3	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	3	100.0
Texas SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	36	37	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	36	34	100.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	3	100.0
	Asphalt Content	6	3	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	0	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	6	100.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	6	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	3	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	3	100.0
	Specific Gravity	6	3	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	3	100.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
810501	None	Control section
810502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
810503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
810504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
810505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
810506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
810507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
810508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
810509	Intensive	51 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:			8.88				Construction Date:		10/10/90
Subgrade Type:			Coarse				Climatic Zone:		Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			57 Years				Automated Vehicle Class:		None
Construction Problems:			Tack coat bubbling through surface course lift on 810502.				Weigh–In–Motion:		None
Site Key Information Summary:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	0	–	0		160	74	ATB	295	Soil Agg
502	51	53.3	RAP	0		132	0	ATB	381	Soil Agg
503	127	127.0	RAP	0		157	76	ATB	328	Soil Agg
504	127	121.9	Virgin	0		160	30	ATB	279	Soil Agg
505	51	NA	Virgin	0		152	64	ATB	295	Soil Agg
506	51	94.0	Virgin	51		152	46	ATB	330	Soil Agg
507	127	162.6	Virgin	51		157	41	ATB	330	Soil Agg
508	127	177.8	RAP	51		163	0	ATB	378	Soil Agg
509	51	83.8	RAP	51		175	0	ATB	343	Soil Agg
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	10	5	5	3	5	2	0	3
502	10	4	5	3	5	2	0	3
503	10	5	5	3	5	2	0	3
504	10	5	5	3	5	2	0	3
505	10	5	5	3	5	2	0	3
506	10	5	5	3	5	2	0	3
507	10	5	5	3	5	2	0	3
508	10	5	5	3	5	2	0	3
509	10	6	5	3	5	2	0	3
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	5/12/90	10/15/90	5/17/90	5/7/91	—	6/26/91
502	5/12/90	10/15/90	5/17/90	5/8/91	—	6/26/91
503	5/12/90	10/15/90	5/17/90	5/8/91	—	6/26/91
504	5/12/90	10/15/90	5/17/90	5/8/91	—	6/26/91
505	5/12/90	10/15/90	5/17/90	5/7/91	—	6/26/91
506	5/12/90	10/15/90	5/17/90	5/7/91	—	6/26/91
507	5/12/90	10/15/90	5/17/90	5/7/91	—	6/26/91
508	5/12/90	10/15/90	5/17/90	5/8/91	—	6/26/91
509	5/12/90	10/15/90	5/17/90	5/8/91	—	6/26/91

Table 91. Alberta SPS—5 materials testing summary.

Alberta SPS—5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	3	100.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	3	100.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	3	100.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	3	100.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	2	100.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	7	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	100.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	0	9	0.0
	Atterberg Limits	0	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	0	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	0	0	0.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	0	0	0.0
Bound Base:	Classification	3	0	100.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	26	26	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	9	100.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	3	100.0
	Asphalt Content	3	3	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	3	100.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	0	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	3	100.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	3	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	3	100.0
Alberta SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	40	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	40	100.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	6	100.0
	Asphalt Content	6	6	100.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	6	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	6	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	6	100.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	6	100.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	6	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	6	100.0
	Specific Gravity	6	6	100.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	6	100.0

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 PREPARATION	OVERLAY MATERIAL THICKNESS
810069	None	Control section, 51 mm recycled asphalt pavement (rap) overlay
810502	Minimum	51 mm RAP overlay
810503	Minimum	127 mm RAP overlay
810504	Minimum	127 mm virgin overlay
810505	Minimum	51 mm virgin overlay
810506	Intensive	51 mm virgin overlay with milling
810507	Intensive	127 mm virgin overlay with milling
810508	Intensive	127 mm RAP overlay with milling
810509	Intensive	51 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:			9.96				Construction Date:		9/13/89
Subgrade Type:			Fine–Coarse				Climatic Zone:		Wet–Freeze
Climatic Data Availability:			26 Years				Automated 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:
ID	Overlay Thickness, mm		Material	Milled		Original Pavement Structure
	Design	Actual		Design	Actual	Surface Thickness, mm	Base Thickness, mm	Base Type	Subbase Thickness, mm	Subbase Type
501	0	0	–	0		119	130	Gravel	127	Gravel
502	51	68.6	RAP	0		107	127	Gravel	102	Gravel
503	127	124.5	RAP	0		107	178	Gravel	127	Gravel
504	127	142.2	Virgin	0		97	130	Gravel	127	Gravel
505	51	78.7	Virgin	0		122	130	Gravel	127	Gravel
506	51	81.3	Virgin	51		137	89	Gravel	254	Gravel
507	127	165.1	Virgin	51		119	89	Gravel	254	Gravel
508	127	165.1	RAP	51		102	175	Gravel	127	Gravel
509	51	94.0	RAP	51		132	175	Gravel	127	Gravel
Key monitoring data availability summary—Number of tests recorded in IMS to date
ID	IRI	FWD	Distress		Transverse Profile	Friction	Traffic	Adequacy Code
			Manual	Photographic
501	8	7	6	3	5	4	1	2
502	9	7	6	3	6	4	1	2
503	9	7	6	3	6	4	0	2
504	9	7	6	3	6	4	0	2
505	9	7	6	3	5	4	0	2
506	9	7	7	3	6	4	0	2
507	8	7	5	3	5	4	0	2
508	9	7	6	3	6	4	0	2
509	10	7	6	3	5	4	0	2
ID	IRI		Distress		Transverse
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
501	—	10/18/89	5/19/89	5/25/90	—	7/12/92
502	—	10/19/89	5/19/89	5/25/90	—	7/21/92
503	—	10/19/89	5/19/89	5/25/90	—	7/21/92
504	—	10/20/89	5/19/89	5/25/90	—	7/21/92
505	—	10/20/89	5/19/89	5/25/90	—	7/21/92
506	—	10/19/89	8/22/89	5/25/90	—	7/21/92
507	—	10/20/89	8/22/89	5/25/90	—	7/21/92
508	—	10/19/89	8/22/89	5/25/90	—	7/21/92
509	—	10/19/89	8/22/89	5/25/90	—	7/21/92

Table 94. Manitoba SPS–5 materials testing summary.

Manitoba SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary—Preconstruction
Test		Minimum No. Per Layer	Number Conducted	Percent at Level E
Subgrade:	Sieve Analysis	3	5	80.0
	Hydrometer Analysis	3	5	100.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	0	0.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	5	100.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	5	80.0
	Permeability	0	0	0.0
Unbound Base:	Sieve Analysis	3	5	100.0
	Atterberg Limits	3	5	100.0
	Moisture–Density Relations	3	6	100.0
	Resilient Modulus	3	0	0.0
	Permeability	3	0	0.0
	Natural Moisture Content	3	5	100.0
Bound Base:	Classification	0	0	0.0
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	26	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	9	0	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	3	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	3	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	0	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Aggregate	0	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	3	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	3	2	100.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	3	0	0.0
Manitoba SPS–5 Materials Testing Summary–Postconstruction
Asphalt Concrete:	Core Examination	40	52	100.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity	40	52	0.0
	Maximum Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Asphalt Content	6	0	0.0
	Moisture Susceptibility	6	0	0.0
	Resilient Modulus	6	0	0.0
	Tensile Strength	18	0	0.0
Extracted Aggregate:	Bulk Specific Gravity Fine Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Bulk Specific Gravity Coarse Aggregate	6	0	0.0
	Aggregate Gradation	6	0	0.0
	NAA Test for Fine Aggregate Particle Shape	6	0	0.0
Asphalt Cement:	Abson Recovery	6	0	0.0
	Penetration of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0
	Specific Gravity	6	0	0.0
	Viscosity of Asphalt Cement	6	0	0.0