Current Advancements from MnROAD and NCATfor Local Agencies

Benjamin Worel, P.E. (MnROAD Operations Engineer)

Dr. R. Buzz Powell, P.E. (NCAT Assistant Director)

NACE - April 25, 2018

Presentation Outline

2

• MnROAD – NCAT partnership• Northern Experiment• Southern Experiment• Future Opportunities

First of All

Thank you!

Investment into Pavement Research

Minnesota Highway System

Investment into Pavement Research

Minnesota Highway System

MnROAD Background

• MnROAD Owned and Operated by Minnesota DOT• 23-Years of Long Term Customer Service

• Minnesota Department of Transportation• Minnesota Local Road Research Board• SHRP II / NCHRP / FHWA• Pooled Funds Efforts (States) / Industry• National Road Research Alliance

• HMA and PCC Pavements• Major Experiments

• Phase I (1994-2006)• Phase II (2007-2016)• Phase III (2017 - )

Technology TransferShort Term Research

SRF Consulting

NRRA Team Topic

Flexible Tack Coats

Longitudinal Joint Construction Performance

Rigid Design and Performance of Concrete Unbonded Overlays

Repair of Joint Associated Distress Pavements

Geotechnical Larger Subbase Materials

Subgrade Design for New and Reconstructed Roadways

Pavement Maintenance

Surface Characteristics of Diamond Ground PCC Surfaces

Pavement Preservation Approaches for Lightly Surface Roadways

Long Term ResearchFlexible Team

Rigid Team

Team Project Contractor

Flexible

HMA Overlay of PC and Methods of Enhancing Compaction

University of New Hampshire

Cold Central Plant RecyclingAmerican Engineering

and Testing

Rigid

Fiber Reinforced ConcreteUniversity of

Minnesota Duluth

Early Opening Strength to TrafficUniversity of

Pittsburg

Optimizing Concrete Mix Components Iowa State

Long Term ResearchGeotechnical Team

Pavement Maintenance Team

Team Project Contractor

GeotechnicalRecycled Aggregates

Iowa StateLarge Stone Subbase

Pavement Maintenance

Maintaining Poor Pavements SRF Consulting

Partial Depth Repair Braun Intertec

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/mnroad/nrra/index.html

NRRA Conference – May 23-24, 2018Monticello and St Paul, Minnesota

MnROAD Finding - Importance of Sealing

PCC Lane / HMA Shoulder Sealing

Cell 7 Control

Cell 8 Sealed

Similar results for HMA Pavements

Mn/DOT: Ruth Roberson

Roger Olson

Chad Millner

Cell 8Cell 7

Results

* 89% reduction between cells

•86% reduction within Cell-8

Asphalt–Deterioration asphalt–Increased roughness (ride)

Concrete –ML Observations (high traffic)

• None - PASB used• Some - Class-5 / well sealed joints / edge drain• High amount - Class-5 / no edge drains

–LVR Observations (low traffic)• If sealed class-5 is not as destructive• If not-sealed class-5 can develop joint damage

Benefits–Importance of drainable bases / sealing–Effect on ride

MnROAD Finding - Importance of Drainage

Optimal Timing of Preventive Maintenance Addressing Environmental Aging

TPF-5(153) Pooled Fund• Asphalt Institute• MnROAD test cells and other sections• Lab aging study with coring of roadways

treated yearly

Observations • The optimal timing to prevent aging of the

asphalt is 1 year after HMA placement• Surface Treatments are benefit to our

roadways

MnROAD Finding - Chip Seal Details

• CRS-2P on pavement markings• 0.36 gal/sy of CRS-2P emulsion• 18 lbs/sy of -3/8” granite chip• 3 roller passes• Fog seal CSS-1H diluted 1:1 (+shoulders)• 0.12 gal/sy and 1’ lap at centerline

High Speed Chip Video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ol5R7n8zGoc

Fog Sealed

MnROAD Finding - MicroSurfacing

LVR ~ 1999• Flexible MicroSurfacing

Mainline ~2000• Multiple Treatments Best• Double Micro• Micro with Crack Sealing• Micro with Transverse Crack Micro

Mainline ~ 2004 (HiMA)• PG 49-34 base AC (vs. 64-22)• Kraton SBS polymer D0243, at 6%• Scratch 12 lbs/sy• Surface course 15 lbs/sy• 16% emulsion (vs. 13% typical)

MnROAD & NCAT Background

15

• Development

– Informal in the past

– June 2014 @ MnROAD

– October 2014 @ NCAT

– FP2 / NCPP Participation

• Partnership Benefits

– Individual Strengths of Each Other

– Operations / Data Sharing / Analysis

– North/South Environmental Zones

– Greater National Appeal

October 2014 @ NCAT

Common Activates

Common Performance Monitoring• Dedicated Pathways Van

• Cracking/Rutting/Ride

• Deflection (FWD), …..

Traffic MonitoringSensor MonitoringDatabase

• Utilize the MnROAD common database with NCAT

Communication• Joint Planning Meeting with Sponsor's• Website• Reporting• National Presentations

Data Collection Frequency

4/26/2017 17

ParameterNCATTrack

LeeRoad 159 US-280

MnROADSite

US-169CSAH-8

Roughness Weekly Weekly Weekly 2X Month 2X Month

Rutting Weekly Weekly Weekly 2X Month 2X Month

Macrotexture Weekly Weekly Weekly 2X Month 2X Month

Crack Mapping Weekly Monthly+ Monthly+ 2X Year+ 2X Year+

FWD Weekly Monthly Quarterly 3X Year 3X Year

Surface Friction Monthly Monthly Monthly 2X Year 2X Year

Permeability Quarterly - Quarterly

Noise Quarterly - Quarterly 2X Year 2X Year

Minnesota ~April to December

Partnership Vision for Nationwide Impact

4/26/2017 18

To facilitate high value pavement research that addresses national needs using full-scale pavement testing facilities in both warm and cold climates on flexible, rigid, and composite pavement structures

National Research Initiatives

4/26/2017 19

National Pavement Preservation Study

Development of a National Cracking Test

2015 HMA Performance TestResearch Sponsors

4/26/2017 20

Washington

Oregon

California

Nevada

Idaho

Montana

Wyoming

ColoradoUtah

New MexicoArizona

Texas

Oklahoma

Kansas

Nebraska

South Dakota

North DakotaMinnesota

Wisconsin

Illinois

Iowa

Missouri

Arkansas

Louisiana

Alabama(DOT &

DEM)

Tennessee

Michigan

Pennsylvania

New York

Vermont

Georgia

Florida

Mississippi

Kentucky

South Carolina

North Carolina

MarylandOhioDelaware

Indiana West Virginia

New Jersey

Connecticut

Massachusetts

Maine

Rhode Island

Virginia

New HampshireMichigan(upper pennisula)

Washington

Oregon

California

Nevada

Idaho

Montana

Wyoming

ColoradoUtah

New MexicoArizona

Texas

Oklahoma

Kansas

Nebraska

South Dakota

North DakotaMinnesota

Wisconsin

Illinois

Iowa

Missouri

Arkansas

Louisiana

Alabama(DOT &

DEM)

Tennessee

Michigan

Pennsylvania

New York

Vermont

Georgia

Florida

Mississippi

Kentucky

South Carolina

North Carolina

MarylandOhioDelaware

Indiana West Virginia

New Jersey

Connecticut

Massachusetts

Maine

Rhode Island

Virginia

New HampshireMichigan(upper pennisula)

National HMA Cracking Performance Test

21

Partnerships• Utilize both MnROAD / NCAT Test Tracks

• Top Down / Reflection / LTC cracking Efforts• Range of cracking potential mixes • Battery of testing of many different existing tests Nationally

Goals• We need tests and criteria that relate to performance.• We need tests that are practical for both mix design verification

and quality control testing purposes.• We need tests that accommodate recycled materials, new and

future additives, and combinations.

OT

16

17

23

22

21

20

19

18

2016 MnROAD Mix DesignsHMA Performance Test Experiment

22

22

MIX DESCRIPTION RAP RAS CELL BINDERAggregate

SizePOLY

CRACKPOTENTIAL

High Temp Mix ~30 5 16 PG 64S-22 12.5mm No High

High Temp Mix <20 3 17 PG 64S-22 12.5mm No High

High Temp Mix <20 0 18 PG 64S-22 12.5mm No Med/High

High Temp Mix + regressed voids

(3.0)<20 0 19 PG 64S-22 12.5mm No Med/High

Soft Binder Mix >30 0 20 PG 52S-34 12.5mm No MedTypical Low-Temp

Mix<20 0 21 PG 58H-34 12.5mm Yes Low

Typical Low-Temp Mix + limestone

<20 0 22 PG 58H-34 12.5mm Yes Low/Med

HiMA Mix <15 0 23 PG 64E-34 12.5mm Yes Low

2015 Pavement Preservation Research Sponsors

23

Washington

Oregon

California

Nevada

Idaho

Montana

Wyoming

ColoradoUtah

New MexicoArizona

Texas

Oklahoma

Kansas

Nebraska

South Dakota

North DakotaMinnesota

Wisconsin

Illinois

Iowa

Missouri

Arkansas

Louisiana

Alabama(DOT &

DEM)

Tennessee

Michigan

Pennsylvania

New York

Vermont

Georgia

Florida

Mississippi

Kentucky

South Carolina

North Carolina

MarylandOhioDelaware

Indiana West Virginia

New Jersey

Connecticut

Massachusetts

Maine

Rhode Island

Virginia

New HampshireMichigan(upper pennisula)

FP2

Preservation Group Study Goals

Develop independent life-extending benefit curves for a range of pavement preservation treatments under varying

traffic levels and climates

Washington

Oregon

California

Nevada

Idaho

Montana

Wyoming

ColoradoUtah

New MexicoArizona

Texas

Oklahoma

Kansas

Nebraska

South Dakota

North DakotaMinnesota

Wisconsin

Illinois

Iowa

Missouri

Arkansas

Louisiana

Alabama

Tennessee

Michigan

Pennsylvania

New York

Vermont

Georgia

Florida

Mississippi

Kentucky

South Carolina

North Carolina

MarylandOhio Delaware

Indiana West Virginia

New Jersey

Connecticut

Massachusetts

Maine

Rhode Island

Virginia

New Hampshire

Michigan(upper pennisula)

Hot, wet, no-freeze

Cold, wet, freeze

MnROAD / NCAT Partnership History

Summer/Fall 2012Lee Road 159

(Alabama)

2012 20172015

Summer 2016US – 169CSAH – 8

(Minnesota)

Summer 2015US – 280

(Alabama)

20182013 2014 2016

2015NCAT – MnROAD

Partnership

Northern Pavement Preservation

26

County Road 146RP 185.3

Rum River BridgeRP 189.9

US-169High Volume

Road4 mile section

County Road 8Low Volume Road2.5 mile section

Mille Lac County

Thank YouContractors and Material Suppliers

27

• Vance Brothers• East Alabama

Paving• Brock White• Crafco• Colas• Etnyre

• Hardrives• Roadtec• Astech Corp• Martin Marietta Materials• Collaborative Aggregates• Asphalt Materials

Northern Layout of US-169/CSAH-8

28

28 Control

27 Thinlay Overlay (ABR over Chip Seal (FA 2.5))

26 Thinlay Overlay (ABR)

25 Thinlay Overlay (HiMA)

24 Ultra Thin Bonded Wearing Coarse N23 Thinlay Overlay (Virgin)

22 Thinlay Overlay (ABR with Delta S)starts 1/2 mile from US-169

CSAH - 8 (WB) 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22

CSAH - 8 (EB) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

21 Control

20 Control - Low IRI

19 Convensional Fog Seal

18 Control

17 Rejuvenating Fog Seal

16 Control

15 Control

14 Control

13 Scrub Seal (FA 2.5)

12 Microsurfacing (Type II) over Scrub Seal (FA 2.5)

11 Microsurfacing (Type II) over Fibermat Chip Seal (FA 2.5)

10 Fibermat Chip Seal (FA 2.5)

9 Double Microsurfacing (Type II over Type II)

8 Microsurfacing (Type II w ith fibers))

7

6 Microsurfacing (Type-II) over Single Chip Seal (FA 2.5)

5 Triple Chip Seal (FA 2 over FA 2.5 over CA-50/70)

4 Double Chip Seal (FA 2 over FA 2.5)

3 Single Chip Seal (FA 2.5)

2 Construcited - 2010 Construcited - 2010

1 Crack Seal / Transverse Mastic Treatments - August 2016 Treatments - August 2016

0 Control - High IRI ABR - Asphalt Binderr Replacement

Passin

g

Drivin

g

City

of M

ilaca -

-->

(4 m

iles N

ort

h)

Rejo

ven

atin

g F

og

Seal w

ith b

lack d

iam

on

d d

ust

Co

nven

tion

al F

og

Seal w

ith b

lack d

iam

on

d d

ust

Mic

rosu

rfacin

g (T

yp

e II) o

ver c

rack s

eal a

nd

Tra

nsvers

e M

astic

Mic

rosu

rfacin

g (T

yp

e III) o

ver S

cru

b S

eal (F

A 2

.5)

Mic

rosu

rfacin

g (T

yp

e III) o

ver F

iberm

at C

hip

Seal (F

A 2

.5)

US-169

Northbound

CSAH-8

Op

en

MP 185.3

MP 186

MP 187D

ou

ble

Ch

ip S

eal (F

A 2

over F

A 2

.5)

City

of P

ease

Mic

rosu

rfacin

g (T

yp

e-III) o

ver S

ing

le C

hip

Seal (F

A 2

.5)

Sin

gle

Ch

ip S

eal (F

A2.5

) over C

rack S

eal / T

ran

svers

e M

astic

Trip

le C

hip

Seal (F

A 2

over F

A 2

.5 o

ver C

A-7

0)

MP 188

Single Chip Seal (FA2.5) over Crack Seal / Transverse Mastic

Microsurfacing (Type II) over Crack Seal / Transverse Mastic

1/10 mille Test Sections

TrafficLayers

7.5" HMA

PG58-28

12"

Granular

Base

Clay

Subgrade

400 ADT

Do

ub

le M

icro

su

rfacin

g (T

yp

e II o

ver T

yp

e II)

Fib

erm

at C

hip

Seal (F

A 2

.5)

Scru

b S

eal (F

A2.5

)

Sin

gle

Ch

ip S

eal (F

A 2

.5)

Cra

ck S

eal / T

ran

svers

e M

astic

US-169Not to Scale

Each Section

528 feet long

Section Numbering

169000

169001

so on

8001

8002

so on

Co

ntr

ol

Ult

ra T

hin

Bo

nd

ed

Weari

ng

Co

ars

e

Th

inla

y O

verl

ay (

4.7

5 m

m w

ith

RA

P a

nd

RA

S)

Delt

a S

Co

ntr

ol

Co

ntr

ol

Co

ntr

ol

Mic

rosu

rfacin

g (T

yp

e II)

Layers Traffic

Clay

Subgrade

7.5" HMA

PG58-28

12"

Granular

Base

1800 ADT

Co

ntro

l

National Pavement Preservation Study (Northern Test Sections)

Minnesota DOT Road Research Project (MnROAD)

National Center for Asphalt Technology (NCAT)

US-169 NB Lane

CSAH-8 EB and WB Lanes

5 miles South of Milaca - Just East of Pease - Mille Lacs County

Co

ntro

l

Co

ntro

l

Th

inla

y O

verl

ay (

4.7

5 m

m w

ith

RA

P a

nd

RA

S)

Th

inla

y O

verl

ay (

4.7

5 m

m)

Co

ntr

ol

Th

inla

y O

verla

y (A

BR

over C

hip

Seal (F

A 2

.5))

Th

inla

y O

verla

y (A

BR

over S

cru

b S

eal (F

A 2

.5))

Th

inla

y O

verla

y (A

BR

over fib

erm

at (F

A 2

.5))

NorthernHigh Traffic

Preservationon US-169

NorthernLow Traffic

PreservationCSAH-8

Pre-Treatment Condition

4/26/2017 29

US-169Northbound Lanes

Pre-Treatment Condition

4/26/2017 30

County State Aid Highway(CSAH-8)

EB and WB Lanes

Treatment Condition (February 2017)

31

Construction Related

Open Graded Friction Coarse “OGFC”

32

OGFC/PCC conventional tack OGFC/PCC ultrafuse tack

OGFC/HMA ultrafuse tack OGFC/HMA conventional tack

August 2016 – Hardrives Contractor

MnROAD – Low Volume Road

NCAT Pavement Test Track

Preservation Treatments/Combinations

Pavement Preservation Benefits/Analysis

ConditionImprovingBenefit

Life ExtendingBenefit

Test Section Layout - Assessment

Test Sub-Sections

Test Sub-Sections

Good: < 5%

Fair: 5 - 20%

Poor: > 20%

Utilizing FHWA Performance Measures

Test Sub-Section Analysis(low severity data)

Test Sub-Section Analysis(fair severity data)

Test Sub-Section Analysis(poor severity data)

Test Sub-Section Example

“Fair”

Condition

Improving

Benefit at

End of

Year 5

“Fair” Life Extending Benefit Not Yet

Defined

Lee Road 159 Control Section

Benefit of Crack Sealing

Track Thinlay

US-280 Conventional vs FiberMat Cape

US-280 Scrub Cape True Healing

Balanced Design RAP+RAS Thinlay

RAP+RAS Thinlay Production

RAP+RAS Thinlay on Cold Recycle Mix

CCPR

CIR

No Rutting

No CrackingFoam Emulsion

Cracking Group (CG) Study

Cracking Group (CG) Study

Cracking Group (CG) Study

Cracking Group (CG) Study

Alabama Study Observations• Lee Road – 159 Initial Analysis Starting Place

• Developing the MAP-21 related benefit methodology• Curve development and expanding to all south, north locations

• Route and Seal – Good as a stand alone treatment• Overbanding – Good with Treatment Combinations• 3X Chips (High Vol) – Bleeding tendency• Thinlays good performance

Minnesota Study Observations

• Early – only 2 winters• Thermal Cracking Observations• Snow Plow Damage

QC/QA Preservation Testing

58

http://www.omnicrete.com.au/road-safety-surfacing/

High Friction Surface Treatments

2018 Pavement Research Partnership• $100k/year for Cracking Group (CG)

– Alabama DOT Lead

– Traffic continuation at MnROAD8 and NCAT8

– Design, QC, unaged, aged array of test results

– Support for implementation of suitable test(s)

• $50k/year for Preservation Group (PG)– Minnesota DOT Lead

– Data collection, management, analysis

– Life extending & condition improving benefits

– Specifications, best practices, testing protocols

Thank You