1 / 30

In Situ Stabilization of Pavement Base Courses

In Situ Stabilization of Pavement Base Courses. Roads Pavement Forum Thursday, May 17, 2001. Introduction. Clients Gautrans C&CI SANRAL Laboratory and Heavy Vehicle Simulator results from R243/1 One building block in a long-term process

sofia
Download Presentation

In Situ Stabilization of Pavement Base Courses

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. In Situ Stabilization of Pavement Base Courses Roads Pavement Forum Thursday, May 17, 2001

  2. Introduction • Clients • Gautrans • C&CI • SANRAL • Laboratory and Heavy Vehicle Simulator results from R243/1 • One building block in a long-term process • Focus on mechanical properties and structural bearing capacity

  3. Layout of presentation • Purpose of the study • Materials • Experimental plan • Results for each laboratory test • Conclusions

  4. Purpose • Assess the benefits of in situ stabilization in terms of improvements in the mechanical properties and structural bearing capacity of the treated material • Mechanical properties • Resilient modulus • Compressive and tensile strength • Flexibility • Shear strength • Bearing capacity • Effective fatigue • Permanent deformation

  5. Materials • Basic material • Ferricrete milled from HVS test site, including existing surfacing and upper portion of subbase • Treatment processes • Cement (Laboratory) • 2 % cement • Foam and cement (Laboratory and HVS) • 2 % cement, 1.8 % residual binder • Emulsion and cement (Laboratory and HVS) • 2 % cement, 1.8 % residual binder

  6. Materials: Untreated • Nominal maximum aggregate size 37.5 mm

  7. Materials: Untreated • Classification • Grading G4 • Atterberg limits G5 • CBR G7

  8. UCS, ITS, Flexural Beam Test • Treated materials only • Foam and emulsion tested at 2 binder contents • 1.8% residual binder content + 2% cement • 3.0% residual binder content + 2% cement

  9. Flexural beam test • Strain at crack initiation • Indication of flexibility

  10. Triaxial Tests • Untreated and treated materials • 1.8% residual binder content, 2 % cement • Variables • Density • Saturation • Confining pressure • Stress ratio

  11. Triaxial tests • Static triaxial tests • Shear strength parameters • Dynamic triaxial tests • Resilient modulus • Permanent deformation response

  12. Compressive strength:UCS Results • Cement-treated ferricrete has highest UCS • Addition of binder reduces the UCS

  13. Tensile strength:ITS Results • Cement-treated ferricrete has highest ITS • Addition of binder reduces the ITS

  14. Tensile strength:ITS Results • Samples dried to equilibrium MC at ambient temp • 72 h in oven at 40º C

  15. Flexibility:Flexural beam test • Flexibility only increases at higher binder content

  16. Elastic stiffness (Mr):Dynamic triaxial tests • Estimation of stiffness values • Use regression model for untreated ferricrete • Use ranges for treated materials

  17. Comparative results:Average strain-at-break

  18. Comparative results: Effective fatigue life • SAMDM transfer functions • Working strain of 125  • b–values from flexural beam test

  19. Comparative results:Cohesion

  20. Comparative results:Friction angle

  21. Comparative results:Shear strength at 3 = 50 kPa

  22. Comparative results:Bearing capacity (9 % PD)

  23. HVS tests:Pavement structure • 30 mm Asphalt • 250 mm FTG / ETG - 1,8 % residual bitumen - 2 % cement • In situ material • In situ subgrade

  24. Foam-treated Emulsion-treated HVS tests:Materials

  25. HVS tests:Programme • 2 x 100 m long experimental sections • Foam-treated • Emulsion-treated • 1st Phase of HVS testing • 80/100 kN tests (350 000/150 000 repetitions) • Completed • 2nd Phase of HVS testing • 40 kN tests (750 00000 repetitions) • In process

  26. HVS tests:Deflection result

  27. Conclusions:UCS, ITS and Flexibility • Complex relationship between UCS, ITS and • Percentage binder • Cementation • Curing procedure • Flexibility • No increase in flexibility at low binder content • Increase in flexibility and effective fatigue life at higher binder content • Strain-at-break slightly higher for foam-treatment at higher binder content • Effective fatigue life models to be validated with HVS results

  28. Conclusions:Resilient modulus • Increase in resilient modulus with treatment • Untreated ferricrete • Resilient modulus influenced by • Relative density and saturation • Stress state • Treated ferricrete • Resilient modulus dictated by the stabilizing agent and largely insensitive to the above parameters • No significant difference between stabilizing agents • Resilient modulus values to be validated by HVS back-calculation results

  29. Conclusions:Shear strength and plastic strain • Shear strength increases with treatment • Vastly improved bearing capacity in terms of permanent deformation • Cement-treatment shows highest benefit • No significant difference between foam- and emulsion-treatment • Models need to be calibrated with HVS results

  30. Conclusions:General • Only considered mechanical properties • Other properties to investigate • Permeability and erodibility • Workability • Shrinkage cracking • Time to opening the road – early strength • Improved understanding of mechanical properties and behaviour • Properties of stabilized material significantly different from untreated material even at low binder content • First structural design models for these types of materials

More Related