Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Presentation Outline
CRCP Technical Considerations (10 min)
Shiraz Tayabji, Fugro Consultants, Inc.
What is CRCP?
Continuous
Longitudinal
Steel
Wide Cracking
(Design/construction
related)
Punchouts (Traffic related)
between 3 and 6 ft
Crack width is
recommended to be very
narrow (typically ~0.020-in. at
the top of the slab)
Cracks MUST be tight for a
high crack load transfer
effectiveness (need >90%)
Structural section
Base/subbase
Drainage
Slab thickness (Not the only design feature)
Widened lane/shoulder type
Steel amount, placement, layout
Terminal treatment
Concrete properties - strength & durability
8
Anchor lugs
Restrains end
movement
9
CRCP Concrete
Strength
Flexural: 600 to 650 psi (each 50 to 60 psi ~ 1 in.)
Compressive: ~4,000 psi
Modulus, E: ~4,000,000 psi
Durability - Free of Materials Related Distress (eg.,
ASR, D-cracking, etc.)
Thickness: 6 to 14 in.
Base type: Granular, ATB, CTB; stabilized
permeable bases not recommended
Reinforcement:
0.65 to 0.8 %, typically single layer
Placed on transverse steel
Need to manage design/construction compatibility
Design concrete strength & thickness matched with
design steel amount
If actual thickness is larger or concrete strength is
higher, crack spacing/width may be affected
Summary
12
THANK YOU!
Outline
Primary Distress Types in Texas CRCP
Specification Efforts to Prevent or Mitigate
Distress
Summary
III: Mid-Slab
Cracking
Associated with
New
Initiatives
High CoTE/MoE Coarse Aggregates or
Slab(in
support
rarersystem
instances) Low k-value
ME design procedures
Bridge terminal systems
CoTE requirement
Summary
Excellent CRCP performance
Majority of punchout distress in Texas related to
construction/materials
Initiatives to further improve CRCP performance:
Improved header design and construction
CoTE testing and specification requirements
oMaximum CoTE requirement
o2 CRCP standards: low CoTE and regular CoTE
MoE testing
Better site-specific k-value design input
Concrete Requirements
for CRCP
PAUL TIKALSKY, UNIVERSITY OF UTAH
Development
Low Thermal Expansion
Blended Cement to resist
ASR, etc
Low Diffusion Concrete
Moderate Strength
3500 to 4000 psi minimum 28-day compressive
strength
Higher strength concrete develops higher modulus and
stiffness (restraint)
Lower strength concrete creeps more
Lower strength concrete has lower amounts of paste
Low Shrinkage
Less than 500
PCA, Kosmatka'
10-6 / F
Reduces thermal stresses; thereby reduces cracking.
Reduces diurnal and other cyclic strains
Blended Cements
Reasons for Blending
Cost savings
Increased production
Energy savings
Reduce carbon footprint
Type IS
25-70% granulated blast
furnace slag
Silicates and aluminosilicates with calcium
Other Factors
Type IP
15-40% fly ash or natural
pozzolan
Silicates and aluminosilicates with calcium
Sulfate resistant
ASR resistant
Lower heat
Low permeability
Pozzolans
Low Calcium Fly
Ash; Class F
or 120
Natural Pozzolans
Tikalsky University of Utah
O2 & Moisture
Local Cathode
eMicro-Cell Action
Anode
}
e-
Macro-Cell Action
Cathode
THANK
YOU!
CRCP Construction
Michael Plei, Commercial Metals Company, Inc.
June 1, 2011
CRCP Layers
CRC Pavement
CRC Pavement
Separation Layer
Separation Layer
Aggregate Base
Subgrade
Subgrade
Base/Subbase/Subgrade
CRCP performance
depends on
Support should be
uniform
Friction between base or
separation layer and slab:
friction forces develop due
to restraint of pavement slab
expansion/contraction
Steel Reinforcement
Materials
Support
Placement
Splicing/Lapping
Longitudinal Bars
Carry tensile stress that is transferred from concrete
Vertical placement affects performance: load transfer, crack width,
crack spacing, resistance to corrosion
Quantity of bars based on ratio of steel/concrete area, shown as %
Industry targets range from 0.60 to 0.80%
With these percentages stress in bars kept below of yield
strength
12 slab with #6 (Metric #19) bars at 5 o.c. = 28 bars = 0.73%
steel
8 slab with #5 (Metric #13) bars at 6 o.c. = 25 bars = 0.65% steel
Check for minimum Bond Area of 0.030 sq in. per cubic in. of
concrete. Source: FHWA "Technical Advisory Continuously Reinforced
Concrete Pavement T5040.14, June 5, 1990
Longitudinal Bars
Standard mill lengths are 60
Brought to jobsite in bundles
Bars should not have kinks or bends that may prevent
proper assembly, placement or performance
Transverse Bars
Most often placed first to support longitudinal
bars
Used as tie bars in multi-lane paving
Provide some restraint if longitudinal cracks
develop
Bar Placement
Manual Method:
seat bars on bar
supports prior to
concrete slip-forming
Common work-rate =
1000 lbs/manhour
Work-rate with TBAs
= 1300 lbs/manhour,
according to AHT
Mechanical Method
(out of favor): vibrate
into concrete during
concrete slip-forming
Bar Supports
Arrangement & spacing of supports is such that
bars are supported in proper position without
permanent deflections or displacement occurring
during paving (in excess of allowed tolerances)
Should have sufficient bearing at base to prevent
overturning & to avoid penetration into base
Should not impede placing & consolidation of
concrete
Welding of individual supports to transverse bars is
permitted
Bar Placement
Size
#4
40
#5
63
#6, shown
90
#7
123
Bar Placement
Typical horizontal
placement
tolerances +/-
Bar Placement
Longitudinal secured
by wire ties or clips
Welding longitudinal
bars to transverse
bars is not permitted
Concrete Delivery
Concrete Delivery
Concrete Placement
Concrete Vibrating
Concrete Consolidating
Concrete Finishing
Concrete Finishing
Concrete Texturing
Concrete Curing
Joint Sawing
CS = crack spacing
Crack at 2 days
Edge, 12 CRCP
Construction Wrap-Up
Familiarization with unique CRCP aspects
Refer to Project specifications, special provisions,
Pavement Manual, Standard Drawings
Most important: bar placement, concrete
consolidation, curing
Transverse construction joint & end terminal
details
Recognition of effects of changes in ambient
conditions
Permanent Patching
Partial- and Full-Depth Repairs
Punchout
Transverse crack deterioration
Moderate/high severity cracks
Spalling along cracks
Rebar corrosion, steel overstress/yielding
Localized distress: construction & terminals joint
Longitudinal and horizontal cracking
Plastic shrinkage cracks
Blowup
D-cracking & ASR
Existing patch repair deterioration
Longitudinal Cracking
Crack paralleling sawed centerline joint:
Caused by late sawing or loading slab before sawing
Horizontal Cracking
Punchout-like distress
with Y- & X-shaped
cracks forming
fishheads
Delamination occurring
at level of reinforcing
steel when at mid-slab
High reinforcement
amounts, difficulty in
consolidation
Shear stress in slabs has
parabolic distribution,
with highest stress at
mid-slab
oPunchouts
oDeteriorated transverse/longitudinal cracks
oLocalized distress
oBlow-ups
oD-cracking
oDeteriorated repairs
Prevent further deterioration of CRCP
Prepare for eventual resurfacing
Source:
NHI, 2001
Partial-Depth Repair
Repair for localized distress
that exist in upper 1/3 of slab
or surface
Retard future deterioration
Identify repair dimensions
Locate unsound concrete; area
extends beyond visible distress
Repairs are square or
rectangular
Min. dimensions of 100 x 300
mm (4 x 12 in.)
Asphalt overlay
Concrete overlays of CRCP
Unbonded CRCP overlays
Patch length
Min 4.5ft (tied steel) and 3.0ft (welded)
18 inches from transverse crack
IDOT Study
CRCP Patch Performance
Conventional CRCP patch provided best
performance with:
Transverse reinforcement @ 12-in c-c
Class A Patch
Source: IDOT
Class A Patch
Source: IDOT
Class A Patch
Source: IDOT
Class A Patch
Source: IDOT
Rehabilitation/Resurfacing
Rehabilitate to increase structural and functional
capacity
Rehabilitation when number of failures (i.e.
punchouts) exceed:
10 to 20 PO per mile (IDOT)
10 PO per mile (M-E PDG)
24 ft.
12 PCC
SHOULDERS
12 UNBONDED
CRCP OVERLAY
BITUMINOUS
SHOULDER
8 CRCP
4 Asphalt BASE
6 ft.
12 PCC
SHOULD.
Bibliography
Zollinger, D. G. and E. J. Barenberg, Continuously Reinforced Pavements:
Punchouts and other Distresses and Implications for Design, University of
Illinois and Illinois Department of Transportation, Report No. FHWA-IL-UI-227,
1990.
Hall, K. T., M. I. Darter, and W. M. Rexroad, Performance of Bare and Resurface
JRCP and CRCP on the Illinois Interstate Highway System-1991 Update,
University of Illinois and Illinois Department of Transportation, Report No.
FHWA-IL-UI-244, 1993.
Darter, M. I., T. L. Barnett, and D. J. Morrill, Repair and Preventative
Maintenance Procedures for Continuously Reinforced Concret Pavement,
University of Illinois and Illinois Department of Transportation, Report No.
FHWA-IL-UI-191, 1982.
Construction Handbook on PCC Pavement Rehabilitation, Federal Highway
Administration, US Department of Transportation, January 1984.
Resurfacing of D-cracked CRC Pavements, Construction Memorandum No. 9559, Bureau of Materials and Physical Research, Illinois Department of
Transportation, January, 1995.
Talley, A., The Dan Ryan Expressway: A look back (and forward) at the CRCP
that works, Long Life Concrete Pavements Conference, 2006.
Bibliography (Cont.)
Pava, J. D., Performance Monitoring of Mechanistically-Designed
Pavements, , Bureau of Materials and Physical Research, Illinois
Department of Transportation, Report No. FHWA-IL-PRR-159, 2011.
Jenkins, P. F., Design, Construction, and Analysis of CRCP Patching
Techniques, , Bureau of Materials and Physical Research, Illinois
Department of Transportation, Report No. FHWA-IL-PRR-124, 1998.
Tayabji, S., Jointed Full-depth Repair Of Continuously Reinforced Concrete
Pavements, FHWA ACPT Techbrief.
"Unbonded Concrete Overlay - Pavement Interactive." Welcome to
Pavement Interactive! - Pavement Interactive. 30 May 2011
<http://pavementinteractive.org/index.php?title=Unbonded_Concrete_O
verlay>.
Lenz, R. W., Pavement Design Guide, Texas Department of
Transportation, 2011.
Edward , R. Harrington, William E. Uffner, and Richard T. Janicki.
"Chemically Modified High Oil Asphalt - Owens-Corning Fiberglas
Corporation." Patent Searching and Invention Patenting Information. Web.
30 May 2011. <http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4485145.html>.