draft pavement evaluation report – thornton road widening ... pavement eval report آ  draft...

Download Draft Pavement Evaluation Report – Thornton Road Widening ... Pavement Eval Report آ  DRAFT PAVEMENT

Post on 03-Aug-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • Draft Pavement Evaluation Report – Thornton Road Widening Project STA 23+00 to STA 105+50

    City of Stockton Department of Public Works – County of San Joaquin, CA

    Submitted by: Stantec Consulting Inc.

    February 1, 2008

  • DRAFT PAVEMENT EVALUATION REPORT – THORNTON ROAD WIDENING PROJECT

    cw w:\active\1841stockton\phase\report\rpt_thorton_rd_020108_dft.doc i

    Executive Summary

    The City of Stockton utilized the services of Stantec Consulting to conduct a comprehensive pavement evaluation of the Thornton Road pavement structure from station 23+00 to station 105+50. Thornton Road is located in the City of Stockton which is situated in the County of San Joaquin, California. Portions of Thornton Road consisted of both two and four lanes. Cores were extracted from each lane and direction to determine the condition of the asphalt concrete and to verify pavement layer types and thicknesses. A distress survey was also completed for each direction.

    Deflection tests were performed in general at 250 ft intervals following the California Test Method (CT) 356 - Deflection Testing protocol. The pavement deflections measured with the FWD were used to determine the in-situ structural conditions of the pavement sections, including the subgrade soil conditions through a process known as “backcalculation.” The backcalculation analysis was performed according to the 1993 AASHTO Design Guide to calculate the in-situ pavement structural capacity and subgrade resilient modulus. In addition, the Caltrans Hot Mix Asphalt Pavement Rehabilitation Design Code was also used for analysis.

    All field operations were conducted between November 12th and November 14th, 2007. The pavement structures consisted of an asphalt concrete surface layer underlain by a granular base. This pavement evaluation report presents the pavement evaluation results, analysis, and recommendations for Thornton Road. The evaluation, analysis, and recommendation details are provided in the main text of this report.

    The pavement structures along all lanes of Thornton Road were in poor to fair condition with extensive areas of distress such as wheel and non-wheel path longitudinal cracking, transverse cracks, fatigue cracks, and patching. The pavement evaluation and FWD analysis showed that the existing pavement structural capacity is adequate to carry the future traffic loadings over the expected design period. However, due to the amount of surface distress, the potential for reflective cracking is apparent.

    Consequently, a number of pavement rehabilitation strategies are recommended for Thornton Road which consist of an asphalt overlay with fabric or Stress Absorbing Membrane Interlayer (SAMI) and mill and overlay options.

  • DRAFT PAVEMENT EVALUATION REPORT – THORNTON ROAD WIDENING PROJECT

    cw w:\active\1841stockton\phase\report\rpt_thorton_rd_020108_dft.doc i

    Table of Contents

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY E.1

    1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................1.1

    2.0 PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION...........................................................................................2.1 2.1 FALLING WEIGHT DEFLECTOMETER (FWD) .................................................................2.1 2.2 GROUND PENETRATING RADAR (GPR).........................................................................2.2 2.3 CORING 2.2 2.4 CONDITION ASSESSMENT ..............................................................................................2.3

    3.0 FWD ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................3.1 3.1 AASHTO 1993 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY ....................................................................3.1

    3.1.1 Maximum Normalized Deflection .........................................................................3.1 3.1.2 Backcalculation & Evaluation of the In-situ Pavement Conditions.......................3.1

    3.2 CALTRANS PAVEMENT DESIGN METHODOLOGY........................................................3.2 3.2.1 Mean and 80th Percentile Deflections ..................................................................3.2 3.2.2 Tolerable Deflection at the Surface (TDS) ...........................................................3.2

    4.0 PAVEMENT EVALUATION AND RESULTS .....................................................................4.1 4.1 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS .........................................4.1

    4.1.1 Thornton Road - Northbound ...............................................................................4.1 4.1.2 Thornton Road - Southbound ..............................................................................4.2

    4.2 CURB AND DRAINAGE .....................................................................................................4.3 4.3 GROUND PENETRATING RADAR AND PAVEMENT LAYER DATA ...............................4.3 4.4 PAVEMENTS......................................................................................................................4.6 4.5 FWD ANALYSIS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION................................................................4.7

    4.5.1 Normalized FWD Deflections...............................................................................4.7 4.5.2 INSITU Pavement Conditions ............................................................................4.10

    5.0 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION ANALYSIS .....................................................................5.1 5.1.1 Future Traffic Estimation......................................................................................5.1 5.1.2 Feasibility of Overlay as Rehabilitation Option ....................................................5.6 5.1.3 Rehabilitation Options..........................................................................................5.6

    6.0 CLOSURE ..........................................................................................................................6.1

  • DRAFT PAVEMENT EVALUATION REPORT – THORNTON ROAD WIDENING PROJECT Table of Contents February 1, 2008

    cw w:\active\1841stockton\phase\report\rpt_thorton_rd_020108_dft.doc ii

    List of Tables Table 2.1: FWD Sensor Configuration ......................................................................................................2.2 Table 4.1: Summary of GPR Layer Statistics ............................................................................................4.3 Table 4.2: Existing Northbound Lane Pavement Structure.......................................................................4.6 Table 4.3: Existing Southbound Lane Pavement Structure ......................................................................4.6 Table 4.4: Summary of Normalized Deflections........................................................................................4.7 Table 4.5: Summary of FWD Testing and Analysis Results ...................................................................4.18 Table 4.6: Average and 75th Percentile of FWD Results .......................................................................4.18 Table 5.8: Required AC Overlay Thickness Based on AASHTO 1993 Procedure...................................5.2 Table 5.9: Overlay Thicknesses based on Caltrans Design Method........................................................5.3 Table 5.10: Overlay Thicknesses based on Caltrans Design Method (cont’)...........................................5.5 List of Figures Figure 1.1: Approximate Project Limits and Testing Directions ................................................................1.1 Figure 2.1: CT-356 Method A ...................................................................................................................2.1 Figure 4.1: Fatigue Cracking (left) and Rutting and Bleeding (right) ........................................................4.1 Figure 4.2: Non Wheel Path Longitudinal Cracking (left) and Fatigue Cracking (right)............................4.2 Figure 4.3: Non-Wheel Path Longitudinal Cracking (left) and Raveling (right).........................................4.2 Figure 4.4: Non Wheel Path Longitudinal Cracking (left) and Fatigue Cracking (right)............................4.3 Figure 4.6: Thornton Road Northbound Lane 2 GPR Layer Profile..........................................................4.4 Figure 4.7: Thornton Road Southbound Lane 1 GPR Layer Profile .........................................................4.5 Figure 4.8: Thornton Road Northbound Lane 2 GPR Layer Profile..........................................................4.5 Figure 4.9: Maximum Normalized Deflection along the Northbound Direction (Lane 1) ..........................4.8 Figure 4.10: Maximum Normalized Deflection along the Northbound Direction (Lane 2) ........................4.9 Figure 4.11: Maximum Normalized Deflection along the Southbound Direction (Lane 1)........................4.9 Figure 4.12: Maximum Normalized Deflection along the South Bound Direction (Lane 2) ....................4.10 Figure 4.13: Subgrade Resilient Modulus along the Northbound Direction (Lane 1) .............................4.11 Figure 4.14: Subgrade Resilient Modulus along the Northbound Direction (Lane 2) .............................4.11 Figure 4.15: Subgrade Resilient Modulus along the Southbound Direction (Lane 1).............................4.12 Figure 4.16: Subgrade Resilient Modulus along the South

Recommended

View more >