150 likes | 255 Views
GAUTRANS APT. ELZBIETA SADZIK MAY 2002. SPECIFICATIONS FOR HVS MARK III AND MARK IV. COST BENEFIT: HVS III vs HVS IV. 57% Decrease in total production cost 50 % Increase in production 19% Decrease in Fuel consumption 56% Decrease in down time. Comparative Cost: HVS III vs HVS IV.
E N D
GAUTRANS APT ELZBIETA SADZIK MAY 2002
COST BENEFIT: HVS III vs HVS IV • 57% Decrease in total production cost • 50 % Increase in production • 19% Decrease in Fuel consumption • 56% Decrease in down time
Comparative Cost: HVS III vs HVS IV • HVS Mk III: 80 cents/load repetition • HVS Mk IV+: 50 cents/load repetition
HVS accompanied tests • Laboratory • Standard laboratory • Grading, Atterberg, OMC/MDD (untreated) • CBR, UCS, ITS • Advanced laboratory • Flexural beam test (FBT) • Static and dynamic triaxial (STT and DTT) • Durability • Permeability • Wheel-tracking erosion (WTE) and mechanical brush (MBT)
HVS accompanied tests • Field • HVS • Material characterisation • Field moisture and density, environmental data • Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) • Deflection, permanent deformation and rut • LTPP • Visual evaluation • Deflections • Traffic survey
HVS management Steering Committee Scope Prioritisation Needs Technical management Guidelines Proposals Reports Technical panel Review Pool
Issues discussed • Unanimous agreement on historical benefit of HVS research for pavement engineering in South Africa and a need to continue • Needs identified: • Long-term research objective • Ad hoc needs (proof testing)
“Steering Committee” identified needs • Cold-mix recycling • Rut-resistant solutions • Ultra-thin & thin concrete layers • Appropriate asphalt overlays & seals • New cement / high UCS layers
“Steering Committee” identified needs • Composite pavements • Cost-effective solutions for low-volume roads • Risk assessment & management • Vehicle-pavement interaction
Proposal • It is proposed that an APT Steering Committee be established as a sub-committee of the RPF