Flagstaff 1-40 Asphalt Rubber Overlay Project

Nine Years of Success

Paper Presented to
Transportation Research Board
78th Annual Meeting

by

George B. Way, P.E.

Arizona Department of Transportation
1221 N. 21st Ave.
Phoenix, Arizona 85009
Phone: 602-712-8085
Fax: 602-712-8138
Email: gway@dot.state.az.us

August 16,1999
Way 2

Flagstaff 1-40 Asphalt Rubber Overlay Project Nine Years of Success

George, B. Way, P.E.

Arizona Department of Transportation

1221 N. 21st Ave.

Phoenix, Arizona 85009

Phone: 602-712-8085

Fax: 602-712-8138

Email: gway@dot.state.az.us

August 16, 1999

Way 3

Flagstaff 1-40 Asphalt Rubber Overlay Project

Nine Years of Success

Abstract: In 1990, the Arizona Department of Transportation designed and constructed a

large scale Asphalt Rubber (AR) test project in Flagstaff, Arizona on the very heavily traffiked

Interstate 40. The purpose of the test project was to detennine whether a relatively thin overlay

with AR could reduce reflective cracking. Asphalt Rubber is a mixture of 80% hot paving grade

asphalt and 20% ground tire rubber. This mixture is also commonly referred to as the asphalt

rubber wet process or McDonald process. The overlay project was built on top of a very badly

cracked concrete pavement, which was in need of reconstruction. The asphalt rubber overlay has

perfonned beyond the original expectation. After nine years of service the overlay is still

virtually crack free, with good ride, virtually no rutting or maintenance and good skid resistance.

The benefits of using asphalt rubber on this project represents about $18 million dollars in

construction savings and four years less construction time. Strategic Highway Research Program

SPS-6 test sections built in conjunction with the project further illustrate the very good

perfonnance of the asphalt rubber. Results of this project have led to widespread use of asphalt

rubber hot mixes throughout Arizona. Based upon this work over 3,333km (2,000 miles) of

successfully perfonning asphalt rubber pavements have built since 1990.

Way 4

KEYWORDS

Asphalt rubber, overlay, pavement performance, success of asphalt rubber.

INTRODUCTION

The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) maintains about 12,333km (7,400 centerline

miles) of highways, of which approximately 500km (300 miles) are Portland Cement Concrete.

A twenty year old, 16.7km (ten mile) section of concrete pavement on Interstate 40 near

Flagstaff, Arizona suffered severe deterioration warranting reconstruction (Figure 1). Flagstaff is

a mountainous area of 2134m (7,000 foot) elevation with an Alpine like climate. High

temperatures in the summer are a pleasant 27C (80F) with winter time lows of -31C (_23 F).

Overall rainfall is 0.7m (28 inches) per year and winter snows average over 2,500mm (100

inches) per year. Interstate 40 cuts through this mountainous area and is built on soils and rock

of generally poor engineering quality. The current traffic is over 20,000 vehicles per day. The

traffic loading has rapidly increased over the years and is quite heavy, with presently over 35

percent large trucks.

Way 5

SELECTION OF REHABILITATION STRATEGY

The Flagstaff.Interstate 40 concrete pavement to be rehabilitated is located between the Flagstaff

Interchange (Mile Post Marker 195) and the Walnut Canyon Interchange (Mile Post Marker 205).

The concrete pavement originally built in 1969 (I) consisted of two 3.65m (twelve foot)

eastbound and westbound lanes of 200mm (8 inch) thickness with 25mm (3 inch) thick hot mix

asphalt (HMA) shoulders. The total width of the pavement surface is 11.6m (38 feet). The

concrete pavement is non-reinforced except for reinforcing steel that tie the two concrete lanes

together longitudinally. The concrete pavement had sawed and skewed joints that were randomly

spaced 4.6m (15 feet) apart. Joints originally were not sealed. Underneath the concrete

pavement is a 175mm (7 inches) cement treated base (CTB), built out of a frost susceptible

limestone aggregate. Beneath the CTB is an unbound subbase, 175mm (7 inches) thick

composed of the same limestone. Underlying the subbase is a clayey cinder material

representative of the natural ground. The supporting base layers are the same under the shoulders

except that 100mm (four inches) of cinder base was placed between the asphaltic concrete and

the CTB.

The concrete pavement began to fail in 1974, just five years after construction. The failure began

as large comer cracks and progressed to transverse cracks and severe spalling at the transverse

joints. Maintenance sealed the cracks and patched spalls as best as possible and in the process

expended considerable funds averaging over $80,000 per year.

Way 6

As the pavement deteriorated the cracking continued to increase. From 1980 to 1989 the percent

cracking increased from one percent to nine percent (Figure I). The ride quality also suffered,

even though maintenance repaired the worst locations. In 1980 the ride was 1500mm!km (100

inches/mile) and by 1989 it had increased to 1980mm/km (132 inches/mile). A value of

2220mmlkm (148 inches/mile) is considered objectionable. Twenty percent of the project miles

exceeded the objectionable ride level before overlaying. In general the performance of the

concrete pavement was very poor. In addition the traffic loadings over the course of time

increased dramatically. In 1969 the annual 80kn (18 kip equivalent single axle loads (ESAL's))

was about 120,000. In 1990 it was 1,600,000 and by 1999 it is presently 2,500,000 which is

about 21 times as great as 1969.

Design began in 1988 and reconstruction was very strongly considered. The adjacent 6.7km

(four mile) section of 1-40 (MP 191-195) had experienced the same type and degree of failure

and had been reconstructed. The reconstruction (2) involved the building of detours and closing

the interstate in one direction for one year. Thus two reconstruction projects were built over a

two year period in the years of 1985 and 1986. The reconstructed sections were composed of

200-275mm (8-11 inches) of HMA on top of 150mm (6 inches) of permeable asphalt bound base

and 100-175mm (5-7 inches) of drainable aggregate base. The pavement structural section was

placed on top of a geotextile separation fabric to keep the wet clay from pumping into the

aggregate base. A complete edge drain system with slotted pipe was also installed. The total
Way 7

cost of construction of the two projects was about $15 million. In order to reconstruct the

Flagstaff 1-40 (MP 195-205) project it would have been necessary to build the project in four

phases, since detours of more that 8.3km (five miles) were not allowed. In addition the

construction would have taken four years to complete, however it was strongly questioned

whether maintenance could maintain the pavement for that long, given its very poor condition

(Figure I). The overall cost of reconstruction was estimated to be at least $30 million.

It was finally concluded that the project could not be reconstructed. In addition, due to money

and time constraints the project would have to be overlaid within a tight budget and work

completed in one construction season of about six months. Various overlay strategies were

considered including many different overlay thicknesses, use of a fabric interlayer, asphalt rubber

interlayer, various mixes, edge drains and cracking and seating. Each alternative was discussed

and reviewed at both the central office and the district office. In addition the project was also

selected (3) as a Strategic Highway Research Project (SHRP) Specific Pavement Studies (SPS-6)

to test various overlay and rehabilitation strategies on concrete pavement. With an asphalt rubber

binder the selected project design strategy represented a test of whether a relatively thin

pavement overlay could control reflective cracking. Although the design was for ten years

virtually everyone involved in the project considered this to be at best a six year design given the

thin overlay design section and the very poor condition of the concrete. After much internal

discussion and debate the final pavement design section included edge drains, crack and seat of
Way 8

the concrete pavement, a l25mm (five inch) overlay composed of a 75rnm (3 inch) conventional

dense hot mix asphalt (HMA) and 50rnm (2 inch gap graded) asphalt rubber mix (AR-AC). An

asphalt rubber open graded friction course (AR-OGFC) l2.5mm (one-half inch) thick was placed

as the final wearing surface on the two travel lanes (Figure 2). The asphalt rubber used on the

project was specified to be 80%, AC-lO asphalt binder, hot reacted with 20% ground tire rubber.

No other additives or modifiers were used.

The overlay thickness and layer placement was discussed right up to the final days before the bid

advertisement. The discussion centered around whether the AR-AC or the HMA should be

placed directly on top of the broken concrete. Previous experience with asphalt rubber

interlayers indicated that the AR-AC should be placed on top of the cracked surface before

overlay. The other position of placing the AC on top of the broken concrete seemed more in

keeping with its role as a leveling and structural layer which would probably crack very soon

after construction (first winter). The top overlay of AR-AC and AR-OGFC would then perform

not only as the leveling and structural layer but also as the final flexible layer capable of resisting

reflection cracking. The project was designed in this manner, however, a test section was built

with the 50rnm (two inch) AR-AC on top of the broken concrete pavement and a 50rnm (two

inch) HMA placed on top as the final overlay.

The use of the AR-OGFC as the final wearing course had been previously tried on a concrete

pavement in Tucson, Arizona. Its performance in Tucson on Interstate 19 has been very good

and it was always considered as the most appropriate wearing course. Typically in 1990 OGFC's
Way 9

in Arizona were placed with conventional AC-20 (PG-64-16) at a six percent ,maximum binder

content which is normally the maximum the rock can hold before an excess drains off.

Asphalt rubber is over ten times more viscous than AC-20 (PG-64-16) at hot mlXlng

temperatures of 177C (350F) and thus can be applied to an OGFC rock gradation at a rate of

nine to ten percent by weight of the mix. This extra coating thickness increases durability and

slows down aging. In addition the thick rubbery coating helps to retard reflection cracking.

In addition to the material related design issues, constructability issues were addressed in the

design by meeting with district construction personnel. It was agreed early on that the project

construction phasing should be such that the project could be completed in one summer paving

season. To do this the specifications required the contractor to begin with the edge drain. After

sufficient edge drain was completed the crack and seat would start. Crack and seat operations

had to be done at night to avoid interfering with the edge drain installation and to be in sync with

the overlay operation. The crack and seat drop height and spacing was checked by deflection

testing and cores to verifY the quality of the work. In addition an incentive of$15,000 per day to

finish paving the overlay ahead of schedule was included. The maximum incentive was set at

$450,000 with a due date of October I, 1990. With all the numerous design issues described in

plans and special provision specifications the project was bid in April, 1990.
Way - 10

CONSTRUCTION

The project was awarded in May 1990. The low bid was $10,783,486 which was $190,000

(17%) lower than the state estimate. The quantity of asphalt rubber binder was 3.9Mkg (4,316

tons) the largest amount ever bid by ADOT in a single contract at that time. The unit cost of the

asphalt rubber mix was $0.05/kg($45 per ton) and the HMA was $0.025/kg ($23 per ton).

Construction began in June, 1990 with the installation of the edge drain and paving of some of

the ramps and crossroads with HMA. In late June the crack and seat night operation began.

Cracking of the pavement was accomplished with a guillotine hammer. Several drop heights

from 0.6m (two feet) to 1.2m (four feet) were tried. It originally appeared from cores that 1m

(40 inch) drop height was adequate although ultimately a l.2m (four feet) drop height was

adopted to be certain that the slab was cracked full depth. A 0.6m (two feet) spacing was

originally set and later reduced to 0.5m (18 inches). Seating was accomplished with a 45,359kg

(50 ton) rubber tired roller. Generally one to two roller passes was adequate to seat the concrete.

Paving of each nights crack and seat followed the next day.

The 75mm (three inch) HMA overlay consisted of a dense graded HMA with 4.6 percent asphalt

by weight of mix of an AC-20 grade (Table I). No paving problems occurred, although later

after traffic was applied about a dozen small areas failed. Each area was dug out and replaced

with new HMA. During removal it was noted that the concrete had been previously in very poor

condition. Apparently the crack and seat operation totally destroyed the concrete pavements

structural load carrying capacity at these few spots.

Way 11

After the HMA overlay was placed and opened to traffic some minor roughness was noticed.

This roughness appeared to be related to the seating process, since as more traffic was applied the

pavement became noticeably smoother. Following the overlay the 50mm (two inch) AR-AC was

placed. AR-AC was a slightly finer gap graded mix with the largest retained aggregate of 9.4mm

(3/8 inch) (Table I), whereas the AC overlay was 19mm (3/4 inch) mix. For the AR-AC mineral

aggregate the minimum required sand equivalent was 55 percent and the crushed faces 70

percent. Both of these values are higher than typically required for AC mineral aggregate. The

AR-AC contained 6.5 percent asphalt rubber by weight of mix. The asphalt rubber consisted of

about 20 percent vulcanized ground rubber sized from 100 percent pass the 2.00mm (number 10

sieve), to no more than five percent passing the 75!lm (200 sieve). The rubber was mixed and

reacted with an AC-l0 asphalt binder and kept at a 177C (350F) temperature for one hour, such

that the mixture viscosity was between 1.5-4.0 pascal seconds (1,500 to 4,000 centipoise). The

resultant asphalt rubber was pumped into the drum mixer hot plant at about 177C (350F). The

AR-AC mix in the field had to be at least 135C (275F) at time of compacting. Compaction

was achieved with steel rollers. Rolling was not allowed after the mix cooled to 104C (220F).

No placement problems occurred although at such elevated temperatures some smoke does

occur. Asphalt rubber content was checked with a nuclear asphalt content gauge. After some

cooling the pavement was opened to traffic. No bleeding or rutting occurred.

Way 12

Following the AR-AC placement, an AR-OGFC was applied as the final wearing course on the

two travel lanes. The aggregate grading for the AR-OGFC (Table 1) is very similar to the

standard OGFC with 100 percent passing the 9.4mm (3/8 inch) sieve and no more than 9 percent

passing the 2.36mm (number 8) sieve (Table 1). A maximum of only 2.5 percent could pass the

751lm (200 sieve). The aggregate properties had to conform to the same quality criteria as the

AR-AC. The asphalt rubber was the same as for the AR-AC. The percent asphalt rubber was 9.0

percent by weight of the mix, typically an OGFC has only 6.0 percent binder. The AR-OGFC

was mixed, placed and compacted in the same manner as the AR-AC except compaction effort

ceased at 93C (200F) instead of 104C (220F). After cooling the AR-OGFC was opened to

traffic with no problems. Virtually all the paving was completed by the end of September. By

working Saturday and Sunday as well as 10 and 12 hour shifts the contractor was able to finish

early enough to receive an incentive payment of well over $400,000. In general the construction

was rushed and hectic, however, the final product appeared to be of very good quality. In

addition to the routine project work, 4.6km (2.76 miles) of SHRP experimental sections and a

weight-in-motion site were constructed on Interstate 40 (4). In addition a one-mile concrete

section of Interstate l7 was overlayed with 37.5m (l.5 inches) of AR-AC.

PERFORMANCE

Since paving was completed in October 1990 nine years of very good service have occurred, far

more than expected. Each year data for each mile was recorded by the ADOT Pavement

Management Section (PMS). In addition this section also retrieves the traffic loading data and
Way 13

the pavement surface maintenance data from other computer files. Table 2 shows the average

yearly summary of pavement performance data for the 33.3km (20 miles) of pavement. In

addition the data is also shown representative of the pavement condition before overlay. As can

be seen virtually no reflective cracking has occurred since construction. The ride is expressed in

inches per mile units and is indicative of a very smooth riding surface. The rut depth is virtually

not existent. Skid resistance as measured by the Mu meter is good. Maintenance costs have been

low throughout the life of the overlay.

For comparative purposes the adjoining section of Interstate 40 referred to as the Riordan project

(milepost marker 191 to 195) was reconstructed in 1985 and 1986 under two separate

construction projects. The old very badly cracked concrete pavement was removed and crushed

for aggregate base. The existing cement treated base had turned to a mushy poor quality material

and was wasted. The wet clay sub grade was regraded and an edge drain system constructed. A

geotextile separation layer was placed followed by 100-175mm (four to seven inches) of

aggregate base. The aggregate base was then covered with 150mm (six inches) of a asphalt

permeable base. The final HMA was 200-275mm (eight to eleven inches) in thickness (Figure

3). All of the HMA was built with an AC-20 binder. The two construction projects required

detours and two years of construction. The total cost for about four miles of new pavement was

$14 million. For comparative purposes Table 3 shows the distress history of these two Riordan

reconstruction projects as measured by the ADOT PMS. Cracking of the 200-275mm (eight to

eleven inch) pavements began in the second year and proceeded to a degree requiring
VVay 14

rehabilitation by the tenth year. Other pavement performance measures indicated that the

pavement was performing very poorly.

Another comparison of how well the ADOT AR section have performed can be seen from

reviewing Strategic Highway Research Project test sections built as part of the Flagstaff overlay

project. The Flagstaff project was selected as an SPS-6 concrete rehabilitation test project.

Table 4 shows the layout of the test sections. ADOT decided to build several of its own test

section to be included in the study. The test section are all located in the east bound direction of

Interstate 40 from mile post marker 202.16 to 204.26. SHRP test section 040608 is a 200mm

(eight inch) overlay of the concrete pavement. Test section 040607, 040606 and 040659 are all

100mm (four inch) overlays of the concrete pavement. The 200mm & 100mm (eight and four

inch) overlay test sections were all built using the ADOT HMA base mix with 4.6% asphalt with

AC-20 binder. Test section 040661 was an ADOT test section composed of a two inch overlay

of ADOT HMA base mix followed by a 50mm (two inch) overlay with the AR gap graded mix

with 6.5% binder. Table 4 shows the cracking by year in lineal feet of cracking (5). These crack

measurements were estimated from the LTPP file and from the crack maps and/or ADOT photos

and field reviews. Again this table shows how well the AR sections are performing compared to

the other conventional overlays. Figure 4 shows a photo taken from 19.8m (65 feet) above the

test section by using an ADOT cherry picker (high boom) truck. It clearly shows the degree of

cracking in the 100mm (four inch) overlay and the lack of cracking in the AR test section.
Way 15

CONCLUSION

Based upon the outstanding performance of this project as well as many others, ADOT routinely

uses AR gap graded and open graded mixes throughout the state. Over 3,333km (2,000 miles) of

AR projects have been built since 1990. Figure 5 is a map showing those ADOT system miles

paved with AR. In addition the performance of all AR projects has been tracked through the

ADOT PMS, Figure 6 shows the percent cracking for those overlay projects built with and

without AR since 1988 (6). As shown the percent cracking is much less over time than for

conventional overlays without AR. In addition Figure 7 shows less routine maintenance for AR

projects than for conventional overlays. It should also be noted that the average thickness of the

AR projects is 42.5mm (1.7 inches) and for conventional mixes it is 137.5mm (5.5 inches). Thus

even though AR mixes cost about twice as much per ton, they are generally placed half as thick

and crack at a rate less than one fourth than that of conventional mix. The overall AR

performance seems to be in agreement with findings in 1977 (7) that AR in cold weather can

withstand about five times the strain before rupture than can asphalt.

The Arizona Department of Transportation in cooperation with The Federal Highway

Administration and the Strategic Highway Research Program have designed and constructed an

extremely valuable research project. Field performance in nine years of service is providing

experience indicating the effectiveness of a thin flexible overlay and wearing course composed of

asphalt rubber. Results of this work are being incorporated into paving projects, throughout the
Way 16

state. Continued field performance measurements provide the data necessary to develop rational

cost effective designs.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author is indebted to the good work of Jackie Hostetler in typing the paper. Also, Ali Zareh

and Doug Carlson were of immense help in preparing the figures.

REFERENCES

1. Way, George "FlagstaffI-40 Overlay Project", De., 11-13, 1991 4R Conference & Road

Show, Cincinnati, Ohio.

2. Lawson, John "Subsurface Drainage System in Flagstaff, Arizona", 13th Southwest

Geotechnical Engineers Conference, April 25-29, 1988 Oklahoma City.

3. SHRP, Strategic Highway Research Program. "Specific Pavement Studies Experimental

Design and Research Plan for experiment SPS-6: Rehabilitation of Jointed Portland

Cement Concrete Pavements, Washing, D.C., 1989.

 ~~

-;.
Way 17

4. Austin Research Engineers, "SPS-6: Rehabilitation of Jointed Portland, Cement Concrete

Pavements; Construction Report", Nov., 1992, ADOT Report Number FHWA-AZ92-

379-11.

5. ATRC Research Notes, "Concrete Pavement Rehabilitation Update", ADOT, Dec., 1994,

SPS-6 Note.

6. Way, George "Asphalt Rubber - The Arizona Experience", Feb., 3,1999 Asphalt Rubber

1999: A Global Summary of Practices, Rubber Pavements Association International

Symposium, Tempe, Arizona.

7. Green, E. L., Tolonen, William J., "The Chemical and Physical Properties of Asphalt

Rubber Mixtures", July 1977, ADOT Report ADOT-RS-14(l62).

Way _ 18

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE I. Pictures of concrete pavement before overlay.

FIGURE 2. Flagstaff 1-40 pavement overlay cross section

FIGURE 3. Riordan 1-40 pavement reconstruction cross section.

FIGURE 4. Overhead cherry picker view of overlay with and without asphalt rubber.

FIGURE 5. Arizona State Highway Map showing asphalt rubber overlays built since 1988.

FIGURE 6. Percent cracking over a ten year period with and without asphalt rubber.

FIGURE 7. Maintenance costs with and without asphalt rubber.

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE I. 1990 mix design, HMA, AR gap graded and AR open graded.

TABLE 2. FlagstaffI-40 pavement performance.

TABLE 3. Riordan 1-40 pavement performance.

TABLE 4. LTPP test section pavement performance.

VVay 19

FIGURE 1. Pictures of coucrete pavement before overlay.

Way 20

FIGURE 2. Flagstaff 1-40 pavement overlay cross section.

Typical Sectioll
1-40 Flagstaffproject

38' ..

1-40 ED MP 195. 73 - 205.20

* Tlrefog coat shall (Jver~ap the new AR-OGFC 6"

Way 21

FIGURE 3. Riordan 1-40 pavement reconstruction cross section.

Typical Section
1- 40 RIORDAN Project

38' 20'

16' ......
I 22'

Centerline ----..f

Drain

Tack Coats
3" AC (3/4")

~~~~!=-~3~" AC (3/4")
t 3" AC ( 3 /4 " )

6" BTB

Prime Coat
4" AB
Engineering
Fabric Subgrade
Way - 22

FIGURE 4. Overhead cherry picker view of overlay with and withont asphalt rubber.

1-40 SHRP test sections 4" conventional AC (left) and 2" Asphalt-Rubber Hot Mix placed in

1990. Photos taken in 1998

Way 23

FIGURE 5. Arizona State Highway Map showing asphalt rubber overlays built ~ince 1988.

iLSPR\LTRt .11BER PROJECT MAP

!'I! tI,'..\RL:."J PS s,R12C',)\l,', DEPA tiTM::--;T ()f 11V-;] !'ll/ :t'f'~l
DECE.\tHfit [9;;::'~

tlJf,ij
!JTAfE flltk>fiIiINi ;'{STf?.t
d

MUlIJ/I",
Way 24

FIGURE 6. Percent cracking over a ten year period with and withont asphalt rubber.

Arizona DOT, Materials Group, Overlay Performance

14

12

10
""
=
0

"..
0:;
8
U
~

~~
.
~
I'.
6

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Years

-0- Overlays/Inlays Neat Asphalt -s-- Asphalt-Rubber

Way 25

FIGURE 7. Maintenance costs with and without asphalt rubber.

Arizoua DOT, Materials Group, Maiutenauce Cost, Dollars Per

Lane Mile
1600

1400

1200

.: 1000
~
=
...l
~

..'"
..!!
800

'0
Q 600

400

200

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Years
-o-Overlays/lulays Neat Asphalt - 0 - AR-ACFC
 ~ ~

Way " 26

TABLE 1. 1990 MIX DESIGN

Basalt Aggregate Flagstaff 1-40

Asphalt Asphalt
Base Mix Rubber Rubber
HMA Gap Open
AC-20 Graded Graded
Sieve % Pass % Pass % Pass
1" 100 100 100
3/4" 95 100 100
1/2" 78 100 100
3/8" 66 89 100
1/4" 55 57 67
#4 50 45 38
#8 40 27 10
#10 39 23 9
#16 33 15 6
#30 24 10 4
#40 18 9 4
#50 10 7 3
#100 6 5 3
#200 4.1 3.5 2.6
% Asphalt 4.6 6.6 9
% Lime 1.50 I 1
Bulk Density 150.4 151.6 133.9
VMA% 14.5 18.1 23.5
Effective Air Voids % 5.4 4.9 15.9
Maximum Thea. Density 159 159.4 159.2
Marshall Stability (Lb) 4879 2331
Flow 12 18
Agg. Combined Sp. Grav. 2.073 2.784 2.717
Agg. Water Abs. % 1.517 1.72 1.77
Agg. Asphalt Abs. % 0.79 1.00 1.00
Sand Equivalent 65 95 83
Crushed Faces % 92 91 88
Immersion Camp. Wet Strength 542
% Retained Wet Strength 86
Way 27

TABLE 2. FLAGSTAFF 1-40 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE

Flagstaff 1-40 Mile Post Marker 195-205

Before Percent Ride Rut Skid Maintenance Traffic
Overlay Cracking IRI inches Mu Meter Dollars 18 Kip
inch/mile Number Per Mile ESAL's
per year
PCCP
1989 9 132 NA 41 6227 1,500,000
After
Overlay
1990 0 42 0.50 69 0 1,600,000
1991 0 42 0.12 64 146 1,700,000
1992 0 48 0.14 69 121 1,800,000
1993 0 56 0.13 60 173 1,900,000,
1994 0 44 0.12 66 274 2,000,000
1995 0 51 0.11 248 2,100,000
1996 0 53 0.11 623 2,300,000
1997 0 49 0.10 58 575 2,400,000
1998 0 53 0.11 65 872 2,500,000

TABLE 3. RIORDAN 1-40 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE

Riordan HMA Mile Post 191-195

PCCP Percent Ride Rut Skid Maintenance Traffic 18
Before Cracking IRI Depth Inch MuMeter Dollars Kip ESAL's
Reconstruction Inch/Mile Number Per Mile per year
1986 16 143 NA 63 7969 1,200,000
After
Reconstruction
.09 55 0 1,300,000
1987
1988 I 48
48 .20 546 1,400,000
1989 1 45 .16 56 321 1,500,000
1990 4 63 .20 648 1,600,000
1991 7 54 .17 2138 1,700,000
1992 7 54 .18 53 1079 1,800,000
1993 7 70 .17 46 3548 1,900,000
1994 7 72 .26 46 935 2,000,000
1995 2 76 .25 48 1268 2,100,000
1996 11 82 .25 617 2,300,000
1997 Rehab.
w~ 28

TABLE 4. L TPP TEST SECTION PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE

1-40 SHRP L TPP SPS-6

Test Section Begin Mile End Mile Test Section Linear Feet Cracking Test Section Description
# Post Post Type 1994 1999
040660* 202.16 202.25 STATE 91 784 8" HMA Overlay, Rubberized Concrete
040663 202.29 202.38 STATE 10" PCC Overlay, 2" HMA Overlay, C&S
040608* 202.43 202.53 SHRP 259 658 8" HMA Overlay, Crack & Seat (C&S)
040607* 202.58 202.68 SHRP 617 990 4" HMA Overlay, C&S
040606* 202.72 202.82 SHRP 726 934 4" HMA Overlay, Max., Restoration PCC
040659* 202.88 202.99 STATE 521 1198 2" HMA Overlay, Fabric, 2" HMA, C&S
040661* 203.02 203.10 STATE 30 291 2" ARAC Surface, 2" HMA, C&S
040604* 203.13 203.23 SHRP 504 554 4" HMA Overlay with Saw & Seal
040662* 203.32 203.42 STATE 546 1171 2" HMA Surface, 2" ARAC, C&S
040603* 203.54 203.64 SHRP 770 1339 4" HMA, Minimum Restoration PCC
040605 203.68 203.87 SHRP Out of Service PCC Section
040602 204.02 204.13 SHRP Out of Service PCC Section
040601 204.16 204.26 SHRP Out of Service PCC Section

* A 0.50" open graded (ACFC) surface placed after overlay to improve skid resistance. An AC-20 binder was used, as the binder.

Note some sections have a dual number. TS #040659 was 040610, TS #040660 was 040609, TS #040661 was 040611 and TS

#040662 was 040612.