Pervious Concrete Overlay Design, Construction and Performance

10/6/2011:1

Pervious Concrete Overlay Design,

Construction and Performance

Vernon R. Schaefer, Iowa State University

John T. Kevern, University of Missouri-Kansas City

Kejin Wang, Iowa State University

TERRA Innovation Series:

MnROAD Research Conference

October 4, 2011

10/6/2011:2

This study was sponsored by the National Concrete

Pavement Technology Center at Iowa State University

through the Sponsored Research Fund by Federal

Highway Administration and the RMC Research and

Education Foundation.

The support of the following is greatly appreciated

Paul Wiegand, Bin Tong and Heath Cutler at ISU

Bernard Izevbekhai, Ben Woral, Jack Herndon,

Leonard Palek, Tim Clyne, Douglas Lindenfelser, and

Tom Burnham at MnROAD.

Acknowledgements

Why a Pervious Concrete Overlay?

• Noise reduction

• Increased skid resistance

• Improved splash and spray

• Improved friction as a surface wearing

course

Project Overview

• Noise Generation

• Project Background

• Construction

• Site Observations and Testing

• Results

10/6/2011:4 Modi-slab, The Netherlands

Pavement Noise Distribution

10/6/2011:5

Components of Quiet Pavements

10/6/2011:6

• Consistent concrete (proportions, water, workability)

• Consistent tine spacing

• Depth (negative texture)

Key Aspects for Pervious as a Roadway

• Adequate strength for long-term durability using,

• Highly durable aggregate for resistance to

polishing and freeze-thaw issues,

• Sufficient porosity (around 20 to 25%) to maximize

noise reduction and minimize maintenance,

• High workability for ease of placement and uniform

porosity across the pavement thickness and,

• Ability to maintain voids when compaction is

applied by the paver for uniform surface porosity.

Overlay Design Procedures & Development

• Areas evaluated include: aggregate type,

aggregate gradation, fine aggregate content,

binder content, cementitious components,

water content, fiber type, fiber dosage rate,

and admixtures.

• Key mixture design results: workability and

strength, overlay bond strength

Workability and Strength Performance

Range of Workability Values

Workability (WEI)

Behavior Range

Highly Workable > 640

Acceptable Workability 640>WEI>600

Poor Workability WEI<600

Compactibility (CDI)

Explanation Range

Self-Consolidating CDI<50

Normal Compaction Effort Required 50<CDI<450

Considerable Additional Compaction Effort Required CDI>450

Workability and Strength Performance

Results

Workability and Strength Performance

Results

Overlay Bond Strength

1. Clean and dry concrete surface

2. Polymer additive applied as a

tack coat and topped with fresh

pervious concrete when sticky

3. Standard mortar surface grout

4. Polymer mortar surface grout.

Lab bond tests

10/6/2011:13

Selected Mixture

10/6/2011:14

Material Amount

Coarse Aggregate (3/8” granite) 2245 pcy (1334 kgm/m3)

Fine Aggregate (concrete sand) 225 pcy (134 kg/m3)

Portland Cement 296 pcy (176 kg/m3)

Class C Fly Ash 89 pcy (53 kg/m3)

Blast Furnace Slag 207 pcy (123 kg/m3)

Water-to-cement (0.29) 20.6 gallons (adjusted at the time of

batching for actual moisture)

Cellulose Fibers 1.5 pcy (0.9 kg/m3)

Polypropylene Fibers 1.5 pcy (0.9 kg/m3)

Polycarboxylate HRWR 4 oz/cwt (754 ml)

Air entraining agent 2 oz/cwt (355 ml)

Hydration Stabilizer 12 oz/cwt (2100 ml)

Latex-polymer Additive 12 oz/cwt (2100 ml)

B/A of 24%, w/c of 0.29, FA-to-CA of 10%, short graded polypropylene and

cellulose micro fibers, 35% slag and 15% fly ash replacing Portland cement.

MnROAD - Built 1990-1993

- 2.5 mi low volume

- 3.5 mi high volume

test sections

- 40 cells ~500ft long

10/6/2011:15

Existing Section and Placement

• Two 12 ft lanes, 500 ft long, 20 ft x 12 ft panels

• Existing PCC, 6.5 inches PCC, transverse

tining, skewed joints,

• 4-inch PCPC overlay

• PCPC construction, “pizza cutter”, con-film,

white plastic, power roller-screed.

• First section October 1, 2008

• Temperature low 40’s to mid-40’s with 15 mph

winds

• Second section Oct 10,cooler

10/6/2011:16

Construction

10/6/2011:17

Construction

10/6/2011:18

Construction

10/6/2011:19

Construction

10/6/2011:20

Construction

10/6/2011:21

Construction

10/6/2011:22

Construction

10/6/2011:23

Construction

10/6/2011:24

Construction

10/6/2011:25

Field Condition Surveys

• May 21, 2009

• June 16, 2010

• June 2, 2011

10/6/2011:26

Field Condition Survey

May 21, 2009

• Built in October, below freezing

temperatures from mid-November to

March

• 67 days of loading, 3,092 passes with 80

kip vehicle

• 6-inch cores, field permeability, condition

survey

10/6/2011:27

Field Bonding

10/6/2011:28

Bonding of core samples

Core Voids (%) Percent Bonded (%)

Panel 6 South Lane (Env) 26 24

Panel 6 North Lane (Drive) 29 23

Panel 16 South Lane (Env) 19 22

Panel 16 North Lane (Drive) 37 38

Distresses

• Joint deterioration

• Stretch marks

10/6/2011:29

• Surface sealing

• Debonding

2009

10/6/2011:30

2011

10/6/2011:31

Good Looking Joint

10/6/2011:32

Joint Deterioration

10/6/2011:33

June 18, 2010

10/6/2011:34

Permeability • NCAT falling head device

10/6/2011:35

10/6/2011:36

Infiltration and permeability of pervious concrete overlay 2011

Sample Location

Porosity

(%)

Field Infiltration Core Sample

Laboratory

Permeability

in./hr (cm/s)

NCAT

in./hr (cm/s)

ATSM C1701

in./hr (cm/s)

Panel 12 South Lane (Env) 910 (0.64) 122 (0.09)

Panel 6 South Lane (Env) 24.8 750 (0.53) 266 (0.19) 640 (0.45)

Panel 6 North Lane (Drive) 23.6 1200 (0.85) 456 (32) 1320 (0.93)

Panel 16 South Lane (Env) 21.1 330 (0.23) 37 (0.03) 210 (0.15)

Panel 16 North Lane (Drive) 35.2 7330 (5.20) 1940 (1.40) 4020 (2.83)

Infiltration of pervious concrete overlay 2010

Sample Location

NCAT

Field Infiltration

in./hr (cm/s)

ASTM C1701

Field Infiltration

in./hr (cm/s)

Panel 12 South Lane (Env) 1260 (0.89) 338 (0.24)

Panel 6 South Lane (Env) 1000 (0.70) 280 (0.20)

Panel 6 North Lane (Drive) 1860 (1.31) 600 (0.42)

Panel 16 South Lane (Env) 43 (0.03) 66 (0.05)

Panel 16 North Lane (Drive) 3680 (2.60) 1080 (0.76)

Infiltration and permeability of pervious concrete overlay 2009

Sample Location

Porosity

(%)

Field Infiltration

n./hr (cm/s)

Core Sample

Laboratory

Permeability

in./hr (cm/s)

Panel 12 South Lane (Env) 1200 (0.85)

Panel 6 South Lane (Env) 26.2 1100 (0.78) 290 (0.20)

Panel 6 North Lane (Drive) 28.9 2150 (1.52) 590 (0.42)

Panel 16 South Lane (Env) 19 230 (0.16) 10 (0.007)

Panel 16 North Lane (Drive) 37.3 3000 (2.11) 1600 (1.13)

Clogging

10/6/2011:37

Noise

10/6/2011:38 60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

400 500 630 800 1000 1250 1600 2000 2500 3150 4000 5000

Inte

nsit

y,

dB

A

Frequency, Hz

Sound Intensity, 1/3 Octave Bands

Cell 39; Run 1, Outside Lane Cell 39; Run 2, Outside LaneCell 39; Run 3, Outside Lane Cell 39; Run 1, Inside LaneCell 39, Run 2, Inside Lane Cell 39, Run 3, Inside Lane

Noise

10/6/2011:39

OBSI test results

Agency Date Noise Level (dBA)

MN DOT March 2009 98

MN DOT July 2009 96

CPSCP 2009 98.1

CPSCP July 2010 98.5

10/6/2011:40

Conclusions

• Construction was good, but would have

been more consistent had mechanized

placement been used

• Four localized pavement distresses

detected

• Permeability is high

• Noise is very low

• Overall the section is in good condition

10/6/2011:41

More Information

• An Integrated Study of Pervious Concrete

Mixture Design for Wearing Course

Applications

• www.cptechcenter.org

• http://www.intrans.iastate.edu/reports/FHWA

-Pervious_Overlay_w_cvr2.pdf

• http://www.cptechcenter.org/projects/detail.c

fm?projectid=330195915

10/6/2011:42

10/6/2011:43

This study was sponsored by the National Concrete

Pavement Technology Center at Iowa State University

through the Sponsored Research Fund by Federal

Highway Administration and the RMC Research and

Education Foundation.

The support of the following is greatly appreciated

Paul Wiegand, Bin Tong and Heath Cutler at ISU

Bernard Izevbekhai, Ben Woral, Jack Herndon,

Leonard Palek, Tim Clyne, Douglas Lindenfelser, and

Tom Burnham at MnROAD.

Acknowledgements