Michigan Department of Transportation Pavement Demonstration Program Rep. Rick Olson’s 2012 Best Practices Conference on Road and Bridge Maintenance Curtis.

Michigan Department of Michigan Department of TransportationTransportation

Pavement Demonstration Pavement Demonstration ProgramProgram

Rep. Rick Olson’s 2012 Best Practices Rep. Rick Olson’s 2012 Best Practices Conference on Road and Bridge Conference on Road and Bridge

MaintenanceMaintenance

Curtis BleechCurtis BleechPavement Operations EngineerPavement Operations Engineer

August 16, 2012August 16, 2012

Pavement DemonstrationPavement Demonstration

• LCCA LawLCCA Law• Legally Can Not Perform Demonstration Legally Can Not Perform Demonstration

ProjectProject• No Equivalent Pavement DesignNo Equivalent Pavement Design• No Performance DataNo Performance Data• Development of Pavement Development of Pavement

Demonstration LawDemonstration Law• Allows Demonstration Projects Without Allows Demonstration Projects Without

Performing LCCAPerforming LCCA

Pavement Demonstration Pavement Demonstration LawLaw

• Allows four demo projects per year Allows four demo projects per year without having to go through life-cyclewithout having to go through life-cycle

• “…“…to evaluate new construction to evaluate new construction methods, materials, or design”methods, materials, or design”

• ““Each demonstration project shall Each demonstration project shall include measurable goals and objectives include measurable goals and objectives for determining the success of that for determining the success of that project”project”

• “ “The department shall make a final The department shall make a final report for each demonstration project…report for each demonstration project…that assesses the cost-effectiveness and that assesses the cost-effectiveness and performance…”performance…”


• Criteria for selection:Criteria for selection:– Designs intended to increase pavement Designs intended to increase pavement

life expectancylife expectancy– Designs intended to improve Designs intended to improve

performance, including:performance, including:• FrictionFriction• Surface stressSurface stress• Noise reductionNoise reduction• Improved ride qualityImproved ride quality

– Comparisons of performance of various Comparisons of performance of various types of pavementtypes of pavement


• Pavement costs for demo projects Pavement costs for demo projects must balance within 20% between must balance within 20% between the two paving materials over a two the two paving materials over a two year periodyear period

• Director has to provide an annual Director has to provide an annual report on demonstration projects to report on demonstration projects to the State House and Senate the State House and Senate Transportation CommitteesTransportation Committees

Pavement DemonstrationPavement Demonstration

• Examples of Project TypesExamples of Project Types• White-topping (concrete over HMA)White-topping (concrete over HMA)• Thin un-bonded concrete overlay (4”)Thin un-bonded concrete overlay (4”)• Low-volume concrete reconstruct (6”)Low-volume concrete reconstruct (6”)• Perpetual HMA pavement (40 year Perpetual HMA pavement (40 year

design)design)• Perpetual HMA pavement on Perpetual HMA pavement on

rubblized concrete (40 year design)rubblized concrete (40 year design)

Demonstration ProjectsDemonstration Projects

HMA Concrete

2003 I-75 NB North Ogemaw

Ski Park Rd. to Roscommon Cty

Line

low volume unbonded overlay

$1,980,000 11.30

2003 M-84 SB Bay Bay/SaginawPierce Rd. to Delta

Rd.perpetual pavement $700,000 5.34

2004 M-3 Metro WayneSt. Aubin to McClellan

thin unbonded overlay $2,200,000 22.19

2005 M-13 Bay BayMary Dr. to North

St.low volume

concrete $1,200,000 4.36

2005 I-96 WB Metro WayneM-39 to Schaeffer

Rd.perpetual pavement $4,800,000 13.50

2006 M-99 Univ. JacksonVillage of Springport

low volume concrete $100,000 0.29

2008 I-75 NB North Cheboygan

Topinabee Mail Rd. north for 2.37

miles

perpetual pavement over

rubblized concrete $781,000 4.74

2009 M-1 Metro WayneTuxedo to Chandler

thin unbonded overlay $931,000 7.45

Lane Miles

Table 1. Pavement Demonstration Project List

FY Let Route CountyRegion Location Description Pavement Costs


• I-75 near West BranchI-75 near West Branch– 6” unbonded concrete overlay on NB 6” unbonded concrete overlay on NB – Rubblize and HMA resurface on SBRubblize and HMA resurface on SB– Both projects constructed concurrentlyBoth projects constructed concurrently– Several test sections involving Several test sections involving

undoweled and doweled joints, 10’ and undoweled and doweled joints, 10’ and 12’ joint spacing, sealed and unsealed 12’ joint spacing, sealed and unsealed jointsjoints

• Minor longitudinal crackingMinor longitudinal cracking




• M-84 between Saginaw and Bay CityM-84 between Saginaw and Bay City– 40 year HMA perpetual pavement 40 year HMA perpetual pavement

design on SB (existing roadbed) 6.5” design on SB (existing roadbed) 6.5” HMA, 12” agg. base, 14” sand subbaseHMA, 12” agg. base, 14” sand subbase

– Normal 20 year HMA design on NB Normal 20 year HMA design on NB (new roadbed)(new roadbed)• 6.5” HMA, 6”agg. base, 18” sand subbase6.5” HMA, 6”agg. base, 18” sand subbase

– Perpetual pavement HMA polymerizedPerpetual pavement HMA polymerized• Very few distresses on SBVery few distresses on SB



• M-3 (Gratiot Ave.) in DetroitM-3 (Gratiot Ave.) in Detroit– Thin unbonded overlay (4”)Thin unbonded overlay (4”)– Existing composite, HMA milled down Existing composite, HMA milled down

and new 1” separator layer placedand new 1” separator layer placed– Four test sections – two separator Four test sections – two separator

layers and sealed and unsealed jointslayers and sealed and unsealed joints– Joint spacing 5’ to 6’Joint spacing 5’ to 6’– Potential 15 year fixPotential 15 year fix

• Some panels have been replaced due Some panels have been replaced due to crackingto cracking





• M-13 in PinconningM-13 in Pinconning– Low-volume concrete designLow-volume concrete design– Reconstruct with 6” of concrete, 6” of dense-Reconstruct with 6” of concrete, 6” of dense-

graded agg. base, and 12” of sand subbasegraded agg. base, and 12” of sand subbase– 5.5’ joint spacing in both directions5.5’ joint spacing in both directions– No dowel bars at transverse jointsNo dowel bars at transverse joints– Unsealed jointsUnsealed joints– 15 to 20 year expected life15 to 20 year expected life

• Performing very wellPerforming very well• New cracks at approach to structure at New cracks at approach to structure at

Pinconning RiverPinconning River



• I-96 WB in DetroitI-96 WB in Detroit– 40 year perpetual pavement design40 year perpetual pavement design

• 14” HMA, 16” OGDC, 8” sand subbase, 12” 14” HMA, 16” OGDC, 8” sand subbase, 12” lime stabilized subgradelime stabilized subgrade

– Normal 20 year JPCP design on EBNormal 20 year JPCP design on EB– Not a side by side comparisonNot a side by side comparison

• No distresses in the perpetual No distresses in the perpetual pavementpavement


• M-99 in SpringportM-99 in Springport– Low-volume concreteLow-volume concrete– Reconstruct with 6” of concrete, 6” of dense-Reconstruct with 6” of concrete, 6” of dense-

graded agg. base, and 12” of sand subbasegraded agg. base, and 12” of sand subbase– 6’ joint spacing in both directions6’ joint spacing in both directions– No dowel bars at transverse jointsNo dowel bars at transverse joints– Unsealed jointsUnsealed joints– 15 to 20 year expected life15 to 20 year expected life

• Early age cracking (possibly late sawing)Early age cracking (possibly late sawing)



• I-75 NB in Cheboygan CountyI-75 NB in Cheboygan County– 40 year HMA perpetual pavement 40 year HMA perpetual pavement

design on NB over rubblized concrete design on NB over rubblized concrete 8.0” HMA8.0” HMA

– NB also had concrete reconstruct and NB also had concrete reconstruct and unbonded overlayunbonded overlay

– Unbonded overlay on SB the previous Unbonded overlay on SB the previous yearyear

– Not a side by side comparisonNot a side by side comparison


• M-1 (Woodward Ave.) in DetroitM-1 (Woodward Ave.) in Detroit– Thin unbonded overlay (4”)Thin unbonded overlay (4”)– Existing composite, HMA milled down Existing composite, HMA milled down

and new 1” separator layer placedand new 1” separator layer placed– Joint spacing 5’ to 6’ and sealedJoint spacing 5’ to 6’ and sealed

ResultsResults

• Some observations at early agesSome observations at early ages• Sealing of joints appears beneficial to help Sealing of joints appears beneficial to help

prevent water infiltration prevent water infiltration • Perpetual HMA pavement showing less Perpetual HMA pavement showing less

cracking than comparison sectioncracking than comparison section• For thin un-bonded concrete overlays, For thin un-bonded concrete overlays,

drainable HMA interlayer showing less drainable HMA interlayer showing less cracking than dense graded interlayercracking than dense graded interlayer

• Low-volume concrete design has little Low-volume concrete design has little cracking to datecracking to date

Candidate ProcessCandidate Process

• Can be just a portion of a larger projectCan be just a portion of a larger project• Typically get buy-in from industry groupsTypically get buy-in from industry groups• Candidate project is submitted to Candidate project is submitted to

Engineering Operations Committee with a Engineering Operations Committee with a workplanworkplan– Experimental featureExperimental feature– Potential benefitsPotential benefits– Monitoring planMonitoring plan– Reports to be writtenReports to be written

Candidate ProcessCandidate Process

• If EOC approves, it becomes an If EOC approves, it becomes an official Demonstration Projectofficial Demonstration Project

• Candidate projects must be Candidate projects must be submitted before any life-cycle submitted before any life-cycle documents are submitteddocuments are submitted

• Currently no extra funding for Currently no extra funding for demonstration projectsdemonstration projects

Plan For Future Demo’sPlan For Future Demo’s

• Types of projects:Types of projects:– White-topping (regular and ultra-thin)White-topping (regular and ultra-thin)– Thin un-bonded overlayThin un-bonded overlay– Low-volume concrete reconstructionLow-volume concrete reconstruction– Perpetual pavement on rubblized concretePerpetual pavement on rubblized concrete– Long life concrete reconstructionLong life concrete reconstruction– HMA over stabilized baseHMA over stabilized base– Others?Others?

Questions?Questions?

Michigan Department of Transportation Pavement Demonstration Program Rep. Rick Olson’s 2012 Best Practices Conference on Road and Bridge Maintenance Curtis.

Documents

year hma design

demonstration projectthat

year perioddirector

year jpcp design

rubblized concrete

year fixsome panels

demo projects

sbboth projects