1 / 16

Manitoba M-E Asphalt Overlay Design Study

Presentation Outline. Introduce Manitoba Pavement SituationNetwork LocationPavement Structural TypesTruck Loading ConfigurationsManitoba Asphalt Overlay Design IssuesDARWin vs. Manitoba DesignsSummary. Network. Population: Manitoba = 1,000,000Winnipeg Area = 700,000Distances Lynn Lake to

perrin
Download Presentation

Manitoba M-E Asphalt Overlay Design Study

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. Manitoba M-E Asphalt Overlay Design Study

    2. Presentation Outline Introduce Manitoba Pavement Situation Network Location Pavement Structural Types Truck Loading Configurations Manitoba Asphalt Overlay Design Issues DARWin vs. Manitoba Designs Summary

    3. Network Population: Manitoba = 1,000,000 Winnipeg Area = 700,000 Distances Lynn Lake to Winnipeg 660 mi. approximately 300 mi. wide Major Routes PTH 1, 16, 75 Weight Classifications B1, A1, RTAC

    4. Network Pavement Structures

    5. Truck Loading Configurations

    6. Truck Loading Configurations Maximum allowable RTAC length = 75 feet 5-axle tractor/trailers typically haul lighter, “bulked-out” loads, 0.23 ESAL / payload-ton @ RTAC maximum load 30% of truck stream

    7. Manitoba Asphalt Overlay Design Issues Traditional method is empirically based on Benkelman Beam Rebound testing Was not developed using today’s ESAL levels A move to Mechanistic-Empirical (M-E) design is desired DARWin 3.0 AASHTO 2002 Design Manual on the horizon However, want to compare DARWin 3.0 to traditional method is DARWin accurate? overly conservative, not conservative enough, ...? Is DARWin precise? Do pre- and post-rehabilitation designs agree on the same thickness required?

    8. FWD Data Collection TROW Consulting Eng. SHRP Reference calibration required SHRP P-661 protocol Exceptions sensors @0, 200, 300, 450, 600, 900, 1200 mm 2 drops @25, 40, 60, 70 kN Tests @100m intervals of selected km

    9. Backcalculation using DARWin 3.0 Traffic loading used was in ESAL units layer thickness obtained from inventory default values of Poisson’s Ratio, seed moduli, and moduli ranges contained in DARWin 3.0 used

    11. DARWin vs. Manitoba Design

    13. Subgrade Improvement: PTH 16

    14. Summary DARWin vs. Manitoba Overlay Design Method Neither method was consistently thicker than the other for various structures and traffic levels Comparison of pre- and post-rehabilitation design thickness was better in DARWin DARWin detected increase in subgrade support and reduced its design to account for it DARWin offers a host of features such as library of costs, seasonal variation calculation, backcalculation routine, numerous rehabilitation options, and graphing capabilities

    15. Summary Manitoba faces challenge of providing a very low population density province with a highway network supporting large heavy trucks Current annual asphalt overlay budget $35M USA (90% of paving operations) Maximizing efficiency and effectiveness in pavement design is the prime objective Goal is to developing expertise in M-E design in advance of AASHTO 2002 Design Manual

    16. 2 Excellent Reasons for Sustaining Manitoba Highways

More Related