evaluation of asphalt mix permeability · one test on each binder course came out to 15.24 ft/day,...
Post on 06-Feb-2020
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
EVALUATION OFASPHALT MIX PERMEABILITY
FINAL REPORTFOR
MLR-90-2
AUGUST 1992.
Highway Division
I:'. Iowa Department'" of Transportation
Evaluation ofAsphalt Mix Permeability
Final Reportfor
MLR-90-2
ByRoderick W. MonroeBituminous Engineer
515-239-1003
Iowa Department of TransportationHighway Division
Office of MaterialsAmes, Iowa 50010
August 1992
TECHNICAL REPORT TITLE PAGE
l. REPORT NO. 2. REPORT DATE
MLR-90-2 - April 1992
3. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 4. TYPE OF REPORT &PERIOD COVERED
Evaluation of Asphalt Mix Fi na1 ReportPermeabil ity April 1992
5. AUTHOR(S) 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION ADDRESS
Roderick W. Monroe Iowa Department of TransportationBituminous Engineer Materials Department
800 Lincoln WayAmes, Iowa 50010
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COOPERATING ORGANIZATIONS
8. ABSTRACT
Efforts to eliminate rutting on the Interstate system have resulted in3/4" aggregate mixes, with 75 blow Marshall, 85% crushed aggregate mixdesigns. On a few of these projects paved in 1988-1989, water hasappeared on the surfaces. Some conclusions have been reached by visualon-sight investigations that the water is coming from surface water,rain and melting snow gaining entry into the surface asphalt mixture,then coming back out in selected areas. Cores were taken from severalInterstate projects and tested for permeabil ity to investigate thesurface water theory that supposedly happens with only the 3/4"mixtures. All cores were of asphalt overlays over portland cementconcrete, except for the Clarke County project which is full depth AC.
The testing consisted-of densities, permeabilities, voids by highpressure airmeter (HPAM), extraction, gradations, A.C. content and filmthicknesses. Resilient modulus, indirect tensile and retainedstrengths after freeze/thaw were also done. All of the test resultsare about as expected. Permeabilities, the main reason for testing,ranged from 0.00 to 2.67 ft. per day and averages less than 1/2 ft. perday if the following two tests are disregarded.
One test on each binder course came out to 15.24 ft/day, and a surfacecourse at 13.78 ft/day but are not out of supposedly problem projects.
9. KEY WORDS
Rutting, Permeability, Voids
10. NO. OF PAGES
36
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1
Obj ectiva .,; '. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1
Procedure ' .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2
Results / Observations.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5
Conclusions and Recommendations............................ 9
Acknowledgements.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10
References '. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 11
Table Titles
Table I - Core Permeabilities, Densities, and Voids .... 13Table II - Summary of Resilient Modulus, Indirect ...••. 15
Tensile, and Retained Strength AveragesTable III - Extracted Gradations, Asphalt Cement and ••• 16
A.C. FilmsTable IV - Aggregate Types and Percent in Each Mixture. 17
Appendices
Appendix A - Individual Core Test Results ....•••••....• 18Appendix B - Test Formulas and Explanations ....•.•..... 27Appendix C - Additional Project Information........•... 34
DISCLAIMER
The contents of this report reflectthe views of the author and do notnecessarily reflect the officialviews of the Iowa Department ofTransportation. This report doesnot constitute any standard, specification or regulation.
Page 1
INTRODUCTION
Efforts to eliminate rutting on heavy traffic asphalt pavements
have resulted in 75 blow Marshall mix designs with 3/4 inch
coarse gradations of 85% crushed materials on Interstate acc
resurfacing projects. On three of these projects paved in 1988
and 1989, water has been observed exiting through the recently
paved surface. on-site investigations consisting of coring,
trenching through the shoulder at the pavement edge, and visual
observation gave some small indication that the water may be
surface water that has penetrated the pavement through voids in
the asphalt mix and has gravitated through the pavement voids
until the right conditions of pressure, permeability, and surface
cracks exist to allow the water to exit through the pavement
surface.
The possibility of any highly permeable asphalt pavement layers
is prompting concern about future performance problems related to
asphalt stripping and/or damage due to freeze/thaw action when
these layers are saturated with water.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study is to evaluate the permeability of
cores taken from Interstate paving projects which have eXhibited
surface water as well as investigate several projects which do
not exhibit this action. Evaluation of voids, extractions,'
Page 2
gradations, indirect tensile strength, resilient modulus, and
physical changes from freeze/thaw action will be conducted.
PROCEDURE
Four-inch diameter cores, through the entire thickness of asphalt
paving, were removed from the following projects.
county Project No. Milepost Station Direction Lane
Clarke IR-35-2(216)33--12-20 38.0-43.0 500 . S DRDecatur IR-35-1(54)00--12-27 0.0-7.3 125 S DRHarrison IR-29-5(58)77--12-43 75.7-90.5 1620 N DRMills IR-29-2(32)34--12-65 38.6-43.6 745 N DRPolk IR-35-4(59)92--12-77 92.5-98.7 415 S DRWoodbury IR-29-6(87)126--12-97 128.1-141.4 1200 N DR
Ten cores were taken from each project in the outside wheel path
of the driving lane at 50 ft. intervals.
The cores were divided by sawing to separate surface and binder
layers. The following tests were performed on the specimens
taken from each project.
specimens Tested Per Project
Surface Binder
Density All AllPermeability 3 3Voids (HPAM) 3 3Resilient Modulus (MR) & Indirect Tension (TI) 3 3Condition by Freeze/Thaw 3 3TI & MR After Freeze/Thaw 3 3Extraction & Gradation 1 1
page 3
Three additional cores were obtained from .the centerline on
Decatur and Clarke County projects to be tested for voids and
density.
Specific procedures for freeze/thaw and permeability testing were
developed.
A falling head permeameter was built by machining parts out of
heavy, clear plastic components. A simple schematic of this
device is shown in Appendix "B". The sides of the cores had to
be sealed to stop any water from escaping and going out the sides
or edges of the cores. Colored water was used. A plastic paint
called "noryde" was used to seal the sides of the cores. The
paint did not penetrate the cores filling any voids.
Experimenting was done on cores other than the ones included in
this research.
Each core was left in the permeability machine for 120 minutes.
The water temperature and testing temperatures were done at 77°F.
The amount of water that permeated the cores was then calculated
according to the formulas found in the procedure in Appendix B.
Resilient modulus testing w~s conducted on six cores from each
layer of each project. Data and test parameters is included in
Appendix "A". A summary of the data is included in Table II.
Three of the cores tested for each mix were also subjected to 50
Page 4
cycles of freeze and thaw and retested. The data also is
included in Table II and Appendix "A".
Indirect tensile testing was done on three cores from each layer
of each project. The formula for indirect tensile strength was
calculated as per the formula shown in Appendix B.
Some cores on which resilient modulus testing was conducted were
also used for indirect tensile. The resilient modulus is
considered a nondestructive test. This is the reason for using
some of the cores for resilient modulus, then also for indirect
tensile testing and then were further used for extraction and
gradation analysis.
The cores tested for indirect tensile were extracted and the
aggregate gradation and asphalt content was determined. The
gradations, AC content and calculated film thicknesses are shown
in Tables I and III.
The aggregate type and percent of each aggregate in each layer
for each project is shown in Table IV.
Table I shows core densities, AC contents, permeabilities and
high pressure air meter voids for specific cores for each
project and layer.
Page 5
RESULTS/OBSERVATIONS
There appears to be no obvious visual correlation of air voids
and permeability. A California study and also a Georgia study
both concluded that permeability of mixes increases drastically
at 8% of voids in the California study and 10% of voids in the
Georgia study. At this void level, the water permeability in the
California voids study allowed 200 MM/min. to 1.3 MM/min. in the
Georgia voids study.
Only in a few cases were high pressure air meter voids measured
on the same cores that were tested for permeability. For Clarke
County, binder Table I showed 15.24 ft/day permeability with 8.7%
voids (core 10). Core 6 had 8.6% voids with a permeability of
only 0.41 ft/day. There is no sound explanation for this except
there may have been some aggregate size segregation in core 10
that is not visible that contained interconnected voids which
allowed more water to pass through. Perhaps this research shows
that asphalt cement concrete, properly mixed and placed, is not
waterproof like most people believe.
The. summary showing resilient modulus and indirect tensile
averages are shown in Table II. Test data for individual cores
is shown in Appendix A.
No obvious visual correlations are evident in respect to the
resilient modulus on anyone mix in respect to being tested at 50
Page 6
or 75 lbs. Even the Harrison county project, the test results,
after 50 cycles of freeze/thaw, were not consistently more or
less than the tests before the freeze/thaw on the same cores.
The resilient modulus was quite high on the Mills County binder
course mixture. In this mix, the high pressure air meter voids
were the lowest of any of the mixtures. This indicates that the
lower the voids the higher the resilient modulus and indirect
tensile, which consistently may not be the case.
The same cores could not be used for indirect tensile testing
before and after the 50 cycles of freeze/thaw due to destruction
of the cores in the indirect tensile test.
The percent of retained strength for each particular mixture
(layer) ranged from 70.1% lowest to 86.1% the highest,
disregarding the Decatur binder which was 40.2%. There seems to
be no explanation for this low retained result which is based on
the tests of three cores in Table II.
Extraction and gradation was done on the cores after the indirect
tensile tests. The gradations, AC contents and the AC film
thicknesses were calculated. Th& results are shown in Tables I
and III. Generally, the film thicknesses calculate lower than
shown in the assurance samples due to the gradation changes.
Page 7
The aggregate in a mix generally breaks down and becomes finer as
it is being handled and mixed. For example, the aggregate will
break down from handling before going through the plant. The
plant mixing will usually further generate more minus #50, #100,
#200 materials. The compaction process also breaks the aggregate
down a small amount more, as shown by research done by Lowell
Zearly in 1982 "Effect of Compaction on the Aggregate Gradation
of Asphalt Concrete." This research studied field roller and
also laboratory compaction effects on gradation. Laboratory
compaction breakdown was again illustrated in MI..R-86-7, "Effect
of Compaction on the Aggregate Fracturing of Asphalt Concrete" by
R. W. Monroe.
The extractions and gradations in this research were done on
cored samples. The results shown in Table III reflect the
gradations from the plant mix breakdown, compaction breakdown,
and cutting of particles in the coring process which all reflect
in finer gradations on the larger aggregate to the #200 material.
All of the breakdown causes more aggregate surface area,
resulting in lower calculated film thicknesses. This must be
kept in mind when using gradations from cored samples for referee
or verification tests.
Filler bitumen ratios on the data here in Table III in Decatur
surface 7.9/4.3 = 1.84 which is quite high and is not indicative
of the project mixture. The filler bitumen for the Woodbury
Page 8
binder, for example, 4.6 + 4.3 = 1.07, which is quite a variance
between these two mixtures. Filler bitumen ratio specifications
are based on cold feed gradations and tank stick A.C.
measurements.
Following are some observations and information as to the source
of water on the surfaces that prompted this investigation. Water
appeared on the surfaces of the Decatur and Clarke County
projects. No explanation is given for the Clarke County project.
The Clarke County project is a full depth asphalt project, but
still has longitudinal centerline and transverse temperature
related cracks which can allow water to come up from the subbase.
The Decatur County project was investigated to a much larger
extent. Originally, cores were drilled when water started
appearing on the new asphalt surface near centerline. A report
of the findings was made at the time the first six cores were
taken by F. E. Neff on September 6, 1989, copy included in
Appendix C. Mr. Neff stated that core #5 taken at a 1/4 point,
station 230+00 southbound lane, was cut through the 8" pcc and
through the 2 1/2" of acc base under the pcc. Water seeped into
the core hole from beneath the pcc. Core #6 was cut at the same
station, but on centerline.
Mr. Neff's observations here which he describes in more detail in
the report in the appendix indicates that in core hole #6 water
Page 9
came in from beneath the pcc and in 10 minutes filled the core
hole to a 12" depth. The core hole was cleaned of water several
times and the water kept coming in. Side shoulder underdrains
were in place, but no water was running out, although the drain
were wet.
This Decatur County project ultimately showed severe longitudinal
segregation in very narrow strips on the bottom of the surface
course. These narrow strips would allow some water to migrate
longitudinally, but not transversely to any degree.
During May of 1990 (approximate time) maintenance forces cut
seven transverse joints in the overlay in an attempt to drain the
trapped water from the mat. The joint configuration used is
similar to Detail "A" on Road Standard RH-50, copy is in
Appendix C. The depth of cut extended through the acc down to
the top of the pcc. The joints were cut from shoulder to
shoulder at stations 220, 225, 230, 235, 240,245, and 250. I
have observed some of these joints from time to time when in the
area, but have not seen any water. There have been no other
reports that I know of that these joints are draining any water
away.
CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS
This investigation has been worth the effort due to the large
amount of data collected. Data from test results on samples out
Page 10
of constructed projects most often times does not correlate well
with design parameters due to small inherent differences in the
product that develops between design and placement in the
aggregate gradations, voids, A.C. contents and densities.
There is little correlation from one project or layer to the
other in respect to resilient modulus, indirect tensile,
permeability, filler bitumen ratios, calculated film thicknesses,
percent retained strengths after freeze/thaw to draw any absolute
conclusions except that the water is coming up from beneath the
portland cement concrete pavement in the case of the Decatur
county project and from beneath the full depth asphalt pavement
in the case of the Clarke County project.
These projects are all quite successful considering the truck
traffic they are carrying, without rutting. Rutting was a
problem before we went to these coarse, harsh 3/4" mixtures.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Appreciation is extended to the efforts put forth by Willard
Oppedal, Mike Coles, Steve Mccauley, Dan Seward and Dennis Walker
of the Central Materials Lab Bituminous section for performing
the largest part of the lab work. Appreciation is also extended
to the District 1 Bituminous Lab personnel for performing the
high pressure air meter voids on the cores. The work of Mike
Lauzon can be commended for the excellent job in machining the
Page 11
permeameter. The work of Kathy Davis is also appreciated for
final preparation of this report.
REFERENCES
1. V. Marks, R. Monroe, and J. Adam. The Effects of Crushed
Particles in Asphalt Mixtures. MLR-88-16 and HR-311.
2. V. Marks, R. Monroe, and J. Adam. Relating Creep Testing
to Rutting of Asphalt Concrete Mixes. HR-311.
3. L. Zearley. Effect of Compaction on the Aggregate Gradation
of Asphalt Concrete. June 1982.
4. R. Monroe. Effect of Compaction on the Aggregate Fracturing
of Asphalt Concrete. MLR-86-7, June 1986.
Table Titles
I. Core permeabilities, Densities, and Voids
II. Summary of Resilient Modulus, Indirect Tensile, andRetained Strength Averages
III. Extracted Gradations, Asphalt Cement and A.C. Films
IV. Aggregate Types and Percent in Each Mixture
Page 12
Page 15
Table IIsummary of
Resilient Modulus, Indirect Tensile,and Retained Strength Averages
Resilient Modulus
50 lbs. 75 lbs.
Indirect TensilesBefore After %F & T F & T Ret.
Clarke CountyBinderSurface
Decatur CountyBinderSurface
Harrison countyBinderAfter F & T
SurfaceAfter F & T
Mills CountyBinderSurface
Polk CountyBinderSurface
Woodbury countyBinderSurface
240,000280,000
280,000570,000
330,000340,000
350,000360,000
1,160,000510,000
300,000380,000
380,000370,000
220,000270,000
240,000570,000
280,000350,000
370,000340,000
1,070,000530,000
280,000490,000
340,000350,000
107.5125.4
121.8167.8
176.9
159.4
291. 6154.3
120.1157.1
195.2182.6
83.190.7
49.0126.9
139.7
135.6
246.8127.8
103.4110.1
140.0134.3
77.372.3
40.275.6
79.0
85.1
84.682.9
86.170.1
71.773.5
Table IIIExtracted Gradations, Asphalt Cement
and A.C. Films
Page 16
A.C.Film
Percent Passing % Mic.~ 3/4" iza; 3/8" #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200 A.C. Cores
Clarke Co.Binder 100 93 74 43 29 22 17 12 9.0 7.8 4.8 6.8Surface 100 93 78 51 31 23 18 12 9.6 8.1 5.1 7.3
Decatur Co.Binder 100 99 93 75 43 28 21 15 9.9 7.7 7.0 4.3 7.0Surface 100 87 61 41 30 23 18 12 9.4 7.9 4.3 5.7
Harrison Co.Binder 100 95 77 49 35 26 20 12 8.2 6.4 4.3 7.0Surface 100 92 79 54 34 25 19 12 7.7 5.7 4.4 6.2
Mills Co.Binder 100 96 65 51 41 31 18 9.4 6.8 4.4 5.7Surface 100 95 80 61 41 28 20 11 8.0 6.4 4.7 7.3
Pol k Co.Binder 100 95 75 45 30 22 17 11 7.6 6.4 4.4 7.0Surface 100 93 74 44 29 22 16 11 7.5 6.2 3.9 6.8
Woodbury Co.Binder 100 98 93 84 52 33 25 20 13 7.5 4.6 4.3 8.0Surface 100 91 74 58 43 32 24 15 8.6 5.5 4.4 7.2
Table IVAggregate Types and Percent
in Each Mixture
Page 17
Clark Co.BinderSurface
Decatur Co.BinderSurface
Harrison Co.BinderSurface
Mills Co.BinderSurface
15% RAP 76% Limestone 9% Sand85% Limestone 15% Sand
85% Limestone 15% Sand33% Quartzite 52% Limestone 15% Sand
30% RAP 64% Limestone 6% Sand38% RAP 58% Quartzite 4% Sand
85% Limestone 15% Sand25% Granite 60% Limestone 15% Cone. Sand
Polk Co.BinderSurface
15% RAP30% Quartzite
74.5% Limestone55% Limestone
10.5% Sand15% Sand
woodbury Co •. Binder
Surface15% RAP 32% Quartzite32% Cr. 53% Quartzite
Gravel
53% Limestone15% Sand
Appendix A
Page 18
Individual Core Density,Indirect Tensile and Data
CLARKE COUNTY
Page 19
Core Average Density~ Mainline £L Core
Indirect TensilePSI
AverageIndirect Tensile PSI
After F &Tof 3 Cores
Binder
Surface
58
11
Avg.
15
11
Avg.
2.293
2.336
2.285
2.331
109.199.3
114.1
107.5
115.9129.8130.5
125.4
83.1
90.7
DECATUR COUNTY
Binder 5 134.36 103.0
11 128.1
Avg. 2.329 2.289 121.8 49.0
Surface 4 154.75 194.88 154.0
Avg. 2.439 2.302 167.8 126.9
HARRISON COUNTY
Binder 4 164.56 189.17 177.0
Avg. 2.362 176.9 139.7
Surface 3 161.08 165.6
10 151.6
Avg. 2.324 159.4 135.6
Individual Core Density,Indirect Tensile and Data
MILLS COUNTY
Page 20
Core Average Density~ Mainline ~L Core
Indirect TensilePSI
AverageIndirect Tensile PSI
After F &Tof 3 Cores
Binder
Surface
36
10
Avg.
578
Avg.
2.378
2.322
301.8284.7288.3
291.6
151.3153.5158.1
154.3
246.8
127.8
POLK COUNTY
Binder 3 159.27 148.79 52.3
Avg. 2.367 120.1 103.4
Surface 5 168.98 165.59 136.8
Avg. 2.396 157.1 no.i
WOODBURY COUNTY
Binder 5 175.38 183.2
10 227.0
Avg. 2.398 195.2 140.0
Surface 4 197.78 180.29 169.B
Avg. 2.372 182.6 134.3
Page 21
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
CLARKE COUNTYBinder
Resilient ModulusCore 50 1bs. 75 lbs ,
.1.ill.:...- Density PSI HDEF PSI HDEF
B-1 2.327 0.21E6 127.4 0.20E6 198.12 2.2673 2.287 0.28E6 87.3 0.26E6 146.24 2.323 0.24E6 89.6 0.25E6 134.65 2.238 0.21E6 141.8 0.20E6 224.56 2.279 0.25E6 115.3 0.22E6 192.97 2.2718 2.2299 2.354 0.22E6 106.6 0.21E6 163.1
10 2.26111 2.29212* 2.28113* 2.299
Avg. 2.285 0.24E6 111.3 0.22E6 176.6
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
CLARKE COUNTYSurface
Resil ient ModulusCore 50 1bs. 75 1bs.
.1.ill.:...- Density PSI HDEF PSI HDEF
s-i 2.3152 2.3663 2.338 0.26E6 54.7 0.25E6 86.84 2.336 0.28E6 46.2 0.24E6 78.35 2.3406 2.328 0.28E6 52.3 0.29E6 77.87 2.351 0.29E6 47.5 0.30E6 71.48 2.3179 2.350 0.31E6 44.5 0.28E6 71.9
10 2.309 0.28E6 . 50.8 0.23E6 91. 711 2.34312* 2.35613* 2.305
Avg. 2.335 0.28E6 49.3 0.27E6
*Centerline Cores
0.31E6 52.3 0.26E6 92.10.28E6 52.6 0.23E6 95.80.34E6 43.4 0.28E6 79.10.32E6 48.9 0.28E6 86.60.30E6 45.9 0.26E6 83.7o.13E6 126.6 0.l1E6 219.6
Core~ Density
B-1 2.3562 2.3373 2.3474 2.3365 2.3096 2.2067 2.3458 2.3559 2.351
10 2.33011 2.35212 2.25013 2.327
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
DECATUR COUNTYBinder
Resil ient50 1bs.
PSI HDEF
Page 22
Modulus75 lbs.
PSI HDEF
Avg. 2.323 0.28E6 61.6Core B-12 and B-13 are centerline cores
0.24E6 109.5
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
DECATUR COUNTYSurface
Res il i ent ModulusCore 50 1bs. 75 1bs.~ Density PSI HDEF PSI HDEF
S-l 2.367 0.47E6 33.1 0.46E6 45.52 2.357 0.51E6 29.2 0.51E6 45.73 2.366 0.66E6 22.5 0.66E6 34.24 2.3365 2.3576 2.2837 2.374, 0.60E6 24.0 0.59E6 37.28 2.3369 2.356 0.58E6 24.7 0.58E6 37.1
10 2.377 0.61E6 24.0 0.62E6 36.011 2.32712 2.26813 2.31814 2.319
Avg. 2.339 0.57E6 26.3 0.57E6 39.3
Cores S-12 thru S-14 are centerline cores
Page 23
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
HARRISON COUNTYBinder
Resilient Modulus Resilient ModulusResil ient Resilient After 50 Cycles After 50 CyclesModulus Modulus of Freeze &Thaw of Freeze &Thaw
Core 50 1bs. 75 lbs. 50 lbs. 75 1bs,....NiL..- Density PSI HDEF PSI HDEF PSI HDEF PSI HDEF
B-1 2.327 0.27E6 117.7 0.25E6 200.1B-2 2.383 0.31E6 115.6 0.31E6 180.9 0.32E6 117.2 0.33E6 172 .1B-3 2.365 0.31E6 74.8 0.31E6 115.7B-4 2.360 0.46E6 56.9 0.42E6 96.0B-5 2.364 0.26E6 96.1 0.23E6 163.3 0.28E6 92.6 0.28E6 137.6B-6 2.352B-7 2.386B-8 2.355 0.39E6 73.4 o.18E6 108.7 0.43E6 68.5 0.43E6 101.8
Avg. 2.362 0.33E6 71.4 0.28E6 144.1 0.34E6 92.8 0.35E6 137.1
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
HARRISON COUNTYSurface
Resilient Modulus Resilient ModulusResil ient Resil ient After 50 Cycles After 50 CyclesModulus Modulus of Freeze &Thaw of Freeze &Thaw
Core 50 1bs. 75 1bs. 50 1bs. 75 1bs.....NiL..- Density PSI HDEF PSI HDEF PSI HDEF PSI HDEF
S-l 2.316 0.34E6 50.1 0.36E6 68.1 0.32E6 52.6 0.29E6 83.1S-2 2.321S-3 2.316 0.32E6 51.5 0.32E6 74.1S-4 2.326 0.35E6 45.8 0.39E6 66.4 0.39E6 40.9 0.36E6 66.1S-5 2.312S-6 2.342 0.34E6 50.2 0.36E6 72.5S-7 2.336 0.36E6 40.7 0.42E6 54.4 0.37E6 39.4 0.36E6 60.4S-8 2.334 0.36E6 45.4 0.36E6 69.5S-9 2.324 Cracked CoreS-10 2.313
Avg. 2.324 0.35E6 47.3 0.37E6 67.5 0.36E6 44.3 0.34E6 69.9
All RIM answers are an average of two readings per core (20 cycles)
Page 24
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
MILLS COUNTYBinder
Resilient ModulusCore 50 lbs. 751 bs.~ Density PSI HDEF PSI HDEF
B-12 2.381 1.07E6 26.9 0.99E6 44.1
2.350 1. 42E6 24.1 1.36E6 37.64 2.395 1.07E6 26.5 0.90E6 49.05 2.381 1.08E6 28.6 1.22E6 38.36 2.386 1.27E6 25.1 0.97E6 49.47 2.3888 2.3729 2.391 1. IOE6 29.8 1.00E6 51.5
10 2.354
Avg. 2.378 1. 16E6 26.8 I.07E6 45.0
*Note high indirect tensile results compared to all others
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
MILLS COUNTYSurface
Resil ient ModulusCore 50 I bs. 75 Ibs.~ Density PSI HDEF PSI HDEF
S-1 2.3092 2.300 0.46E6 38.5 0.54E6 50.43 2.325 0.49E6 40.9 0.51E6 59.84 2.333 0.51E6 34.5 0.53E6 51.55 2.333 0.54E6 37.8 0.57E6 55.86 2.333 0.58E6 33.6 0.57E6 53.07 2.3268 2.3239 2.311 0.47E6 39.2 0.46E6 62.8
10 2:324
Avg. 2.322 0.51E6 37.4 0.53E6 55.6
Core~ Density
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
POLK COUNTYBinder
Resil ient50 1bs.
PSI HDEF
Modulus75 1bs.
PSI HDEF
Page 25
B-1 2.3952 2.3813 2.3824* *2.2845 2.3906 2.3767 2.3528 2.3819 2.361
10 2.368
Avg. 2.367
*Core #4 has a mud pocket
0.29E6 81.0 0.28E6 122.70.37E6 59.6 0.31E6 120.4
0.35E6 64.6 0.34E6 102.0
0.21E6 101.8 0.21E6 153.00.31E6 77 .1 0.27E6 134.70.29E6 69.5 0.29E6 115.7
0.30E6 75.6 0.28E6 121.8
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
POLK COUNTYSurface
Resil i ent ModulusCore 50 1bs. 75 1bs.~ Density PSI HDEF PSI HDEF
S-l 2.392 0.51E6 30.6 0.57E6 42.02 2.415 0.34E6 48.0 0.40E6 60.63 2.400 0.42E6 38.3 0.54E6 44.04 2.3715 2.4236 2.418 0.44E6 34.2 0.55E6 38.77 2.3748 2.385 0.29E6 56.0 0.45E6 51.09 2.368 0.30E6 60.6 0.27E6 96.1
10 2.412
Avg. 2.396 0.38E6 44.6 0.49E6 55.4
Individual Core Density,Resilient Modulus and Data
WOODBURY COUNTYSurface
Resil ient ModulusCore 50 lbs. 75 1bs.~ Density PSI HDEF PSI HDEF
S-1 2.384 0.56E6 24.2 0.54E6 37.52 2.353 0.35E6 41.0 0.25E6 86.13 2.3624 2.389 0.43E6 30.3 0.36E6 54.15 2.372 0.44E6 31.3 0.41E6 49.16 2.3797 2.3658 2.368 0.36E6 36.6 0.39E6 50.29 2.362 0.50E6 28.3 0.39E6 52.7
10 2.382
Avg. 2.372 0.37E6 32.0 0.35E6 55.0
Appendix B
Page 27
INDIRECT TENSILE STRENGTH
Indirect Tensile strength (St) =~IT td
Where: St = tensile strength (psi)P = maximum load (pounds)t = specimen thickness (inches)d = specimen diameter (inches)
RESILIENT MODULUS
Test Parameters: 77 ± 1°F90° rotation @ 20 cycles ea.Frequency .33 hzLoad Time 0.1 sec.Tested @ 50 lb. & 75 lb.
Page 28
11.4.D
arcy'sL
aw237
11.3.H
YD
RA
ULIC
GR
AD
IENT.
The
drivingforce
which
causesw
aterto
flowm
aybe
representedby
aquantity
known
asthe
hydraulicgradient.
This
isdefined
asthe
dropin
headdivided
bythe
distancein
which
thedrop
occurs.It
may'be
expressedby
therelation
inw
hichQ
isthe
volume
offlow
perunit
oftim
e,such
ascubic
feetper
dayor
cubiccentim
etersper
minute;
Ais
thecross-sectional
areaof
flow
ingw
ater,in
squarefeet
orsquare
centimeters;
andv
isthe
velocityof
flow,in
feetperday
orcentim
etersper
minute.
11
GravitationalW
aterand
Seepage
velocityor
flow,
This
relationshipm
aybe
expressedby
theform
ula
Q=
Au
i=
~
(11-1)
(11-2)
inw
hichiis
thehydraulic
gradient;h
isthe
dropin
head;and
dis
thedis
tancein
which
thedrop
occurs.For
example,
ifan
openchannel
is5000
ftlong
anddrops
50ft
inthat
distance,the
hydraulicgradientis
50/5000or
0.01.
11.4.D
AR
CY
'SLA
W.
The
generalrelationship
between
hydraulicgradient
andthe
characterand
velocityof
flowis
indicatedin
thediagram
ofFig.
ll-l.A
sthe
hydraulicgradient
isincreased
throughzones
Iand
II,the
flowrem
ainslam
inarand
thevelocity
increasesin
linearpropor
tionto
thegradient.
At
theboundary
between
zonesII
andIII
theflow
breaksfrom
laminar
toturbulent
andthe
proportionalrelationship
betw
eenvelocity
andgradientno
longerprevails.
Under
decreasinghydraulic
gradient.the
flowrem
ainsturbulent
throughzones
IIIand
IIand
doesnot
resume
thelam
inarcharacteristic
untilthe
boundarybetw
eenzones
IIand
Iis
reached.H
erethe
relationship
between
velocityand
gradientagain
becomes
linearand
coincidesw
iththat
foran
increasinggradient.
The
gravitationalflow
ofw
aterin
soilis
representedby
thecurve
inzone
Iof
Fig,11-1
andw
em
ayw
ritethe
equation
11.1.N
AT
UR
EO
FG
RA
VIT
AT
ION
AL
FLOW
INS
OIL.
The
nowof
gravitational
water
insoil
iscaused
bythe
actionof
gravityw
hichtends
topull
thew
aterdow
nward
toa
lower
elevation.It
issim
ilarin
many
respectsto
thefree
flowof
water
ina
conduitor
anopen
channelin
thatitis
attributableto
thegravitational
pullw
hichacts
toovercom
ecertain
resistancesto
movem
entor
flowof
thew
ater.Such
resistancesare
duem
ainlyto
frictionor
dragalong
thesurfaces
ofcontact
between
thew
aterand
theconduit
infree
flowand
tofriction
andviscous
dragalong
thesidew
allsof
thepore
spacesin
thecase
offlow
throughsoils.
Inhydrau
lics,gravityflow
ofw
aterm
aybe
eitherlam
inaror
turbulentin
character.its
naturedepending
onthe
velocityof
flowand
onthe
size,shape,
andsm
oothnessof
thesides
ofthe
conduitor
channel.In
thestudy
ofgravi
tationalflow
insoils,
we
areprim
arilyinterested
inthe
laminar
typeof
flow,
sincethe
velocityof
groundw
aterrarely,
ifever,
becomes
highenough
toproduce
turbulencein
thesense
inw
hichitis
usedhere.
II"
ki(11-3)
11.2.C
HA
RA
CTER
ISTICS
OF
LAM
INA
RFLO
W.
Lam
inarflow
issaid
toexist
when
allparticles
ofw
aterm
ovein
parallelpaths
andthe
linesof
floware
notbraided
orintertw
inedas
thew
aterm
ovesforw
ard.T
hequantity
ofw
aterflow
ingpast
afixed
pointin
astated
periodof
time
isequal
tothe
cross-sectionalarea
ofthe
water
multiplied
bythe
average
236
inw
hichk
isaproportionality
constant.B
ysubstituting
thisexpression
forII
inE
q.(H
-I),w
eobtain
therelation
Q=
Aki
(11-4)
This
relationshipis
generaland
may
beapplied
toany
situationin
-o'" <0CDN<D
238
Gra
vita
tion
alW
ater
and
Seep
age
11.7
.C
oeff
icie
nto
fPer
cola
tion
239
whi
chth
efl
owis
lam
inar
inch
arac
ter.
Itis
anex
pres
sion
ofD
arcy
'Sla
wap
plie
dto
the
flow
ofgr
avit
atio
nal
wat
erth
roug
hso
il.A
mor
ege
nera
lst
atem
ent
ofth
eD
arcy
law
isne
cess
ary
inco
nnec
tion
with
the
flow
ofot
her
flui
dsth
roug
hot
her
type
sof
poro
usm
edia
,bu
tth
efo
rego
ing
stat
em
enti
ssu
ffic
ient
for
the
pu
rpo
seof
this
disc
ussi
on.
Let
usas
sum
eth
atw
eha
vea
cond
uit
inw
hich
am
ass
ofs
oil
ispl
aced
insu
cha
man
ner
that
all
of
the
wat
erfl
owin
gth
roug
hth
eco
ndui
tm
ust
flow
thro
ugh
the
soil,
asil
lust
rate
din
Fig.
11-2
.Si
nce
prac
tica
lly
all
the
resi
stan
ceto
flow
inth
isca
seis
caus
edby
the
mas
sof
soil.
the
valu
eof
the
prop
orti
onal
ity
cons
tant
inE
q,(1
14
)de
pend
son
the
char
acte
rist
ics
ofth
eso
ilw
hich
infl
uenc
eth
efl
owof
wat
erth
roug
hits
pore
s.T
heeq
ua
tion
indi
cate
sth
atth
equ
anti
tyof
wat
erfl
owin
gth
roug
ha
give
ncr
ess
sect
iona
lar
eaof
soil
iseq
ual
toa
CO
nsta
ntm
ulti
plie
dby
the
hydr
auli
cgr
adie
nt.
Fig,
II~
I.
Ii;/
lI I
iI
e1
I11
lJ11
1i
I0
I~ 11
I
"I
'"I I I
~
Vel
ocity
,v
Rel
atio
nshi
pbe
twee
nhy
drau
lic
grad
ient
,vel
ocity
,an
dty
peof
flow
.
11
.5.
CO
EFF
ICIE
NT
OF
PE
RM
EA
BIL
ITY
.T
heco
nsta
ntk
inE
q.(1
1-4)
iskn
own
asth
eco
effi
cien
to
fpe
rmea
bili
tyor
.m
ore
rece
ntly
,as
the
coef
fi
cien
to
jhy
drau
lic
cond
ucti
vity
.It
cons
titu
tes
anim
port
ant
prop
erty
ofso
il,an
dits
valu
ede
pend
sla
rgel
yon
the
size
ofth
evo
idsp
aces
,w
hich
intu
rnde
pend
son
the
size
,sha
pe.
and
stat
eof
pack
ing
ofth
eso
ilgr
ains
.A
clay
eyso
ilw
ithve
ryfi
negr
ains
will
have
ave
rym
uch
low
erpe
rmea
bil
ityco
effi
cien
tth
anw
illa
sand
with
rela
tivel
yco
arse
grai
ns.
even
thou
ghth
evo
idra
tio
and
the
dens
ityof
the
two
soils
may
bene
arly
the
sam
e.T
here
ason
isth
egr
eate
rre
sist
ance
offe
red
byth
eve
rym
uch
smal
ler
pore
sor
flow
chan
nels
inth
efi
ne-g
rain
edso
ilth
roug
hw
hich
the
wat
erm
ust
pass
asit
flow
sun
der
the
infl
uenc
eof
ahy
drau
lic
grad
ient
.Fr
omth
isst
andp
oint
.we
may
say
that
the
coef
fici
ent
ofpe
rmea
bili
tyis
inde
pend
ent
ofth
evo
idra
tio
orde
nsity
whe
nw
ear
eco
mpa
ring
soils
ofdi
ffer
ent
tex
tura
lcha
ract
eris
tics
.O
nth
eot
her
hand
.w
hen
we
cons
ider
the
sam
eso
ilin
two
diff
eren
tst
ates
ofde
nsity
.th
epe
rmea
bili
tyis
depe
nden
ton
the
void
rati
o.si
nce
the
soil
grai
nsar
ebr
ough
tin
tocl
oser
cont
act
byth
epr
oces
so
fcom
pact
ion
and
dens
ific
atio
n.T
hepo
resp
aces
are
redu
ced
insi
ze.a
ndre
sist
ance
tofl
owis
incr
ease
d.
11
.6.
VE
LOC
ITY
OF
AP
PR
OA
CH
OF
WA
TE
R.
Att
enti
onis
dire
cted
toth
efa
ctth
at,
inth
eap
plic
atio
nof
the
Dar
cyla
wan
dE
q.(1
l-4
),th
ecr
oss-
sect
iona
lar
eaA
isth
ear
eaof
the
soil
incl
udin
gbo
thso
lids
and
void
spac
es.
Obv
ious
ly.
the
wat
erca
nnot
flow
thro
ugh
the
solid
s,bu
tm
ust
pass
only
thro
ugh
the
void
spac
es.
The
refo
re.
the
velo
city
kiin
Eq.
(1l-
4)
isa
fact
itio
usve
loci
tyat
whi
chth
ew
ater
wou
ldha
veto
flow
thro
ugh
the
who
lear
eaA
inor
der
toyi
eld
the
quan
tity
ofw
ater
Qw
hich
actu
ally
pass
esth
roug
hth
eso
il.T
his
fact
itio
usve
loci
tyis
refe
rred
toas
the
"vel
ocit
yof
appr
oach
"or
the
"sup
erfi
cial
velo
city
"of
the
wat
erju
stbe
fore
ente
ring
,or
afte
rle
avin
g.th
eso
ilm
ass.
Adi
men
sion
alan
alys
isof
Eq.
(11-
4)in
dica
tes
that
the
coef
fici
ent
ofpe
rmea
bili
tyk
has
the
dim
ensi
ons
of
ave
loci
ty,
that
is,
adi
stan
cedi
vide
dby
time.
The
refo
re,
perm
eabi
lity
isso
met
imes
defi
ned
as"t
he
supe
rfic
ial
velo
city
ofw
ater
flow
ing
thro
ugh
soil
unde
run
ithy
drau
lic
grad
ient
...
11
.7.
CO
EFF
ICIE
NT
OF
PE
RC
OLA
TIO
N.
Ifth
eac
tual
velo
city
offl
owth
roug
hth
epo
res
ofth
eso
ilis
cons
ider
ed,
then
the
corr
espo
ndin
gar
eaw
hich
mus
tbe
used
inw
ritin
gth
efl
oweq
uati
onis
the
area
ofth
epo
resp
aces
cut
bya
typi
cal
cros
sse
ctio
nof
the
soil.
The
Dar
cyeq
uati
onfo
rth
isca
seis
Soil
Flo
wI
t~:\~t!4
~!Uj1-
Fig.
B-2
.H
ypot
hetic
alflo
wt-h
roug
hso
il.Q
=A
,k,i
(11-
5)
-o '"(Q (\) w o
240G
raviuuionatW
alerand
Seepage1I.1I.
Test
with
Constant-H
eadP
ermeam
eter241
inw
hichA
vis
thearea
of
porespaces
ina
soilcross
section;an
dk
pis
aproportionality
constant.T
heproduct
kpiinthis
caseis
equalto
theaverage
actualvelocity
ofthe
water
throughthe
soilpores.
Sincethe
areaof
thepores
inany
crosssection
willalw
aysbe
lessthan
thetotal
area,it
isobvious
thatthis
actualvelocity
willalw
aysbe
greaterthan
thevelocity
ofapproach.
The
propertionality
constantk
pis
calledthe
coefficientof
percolation,an
dit
alw
ayshas
agreater
valuethan
thecoefficient
ofperm
eabilityfor
anygiven
soil.
11.9.A
PPLICA
TION
SO
FPER
MEA
BILITY
CH
AR
AC
TERISTIC
SO
FSO
IL.T
hereare
numerous
typeso
fproblem
sin
connectionw
ithengineering
projectsw
hichrequire
knowledge
of
theperm
eabilitycharacteristics
of
thesoil
involved,such
ascom
putationso
fseepage
throughearth
dams
andlevees
andlosses
fromirrigation
ditches.E
stimates
of
pumpage-capacity
requirements
forunw
ateringcofferdam
sor
excavationsbelow
aw
aterta
bleare
familiar
examples
of
suchproblem
s.T
he
spacingand
depthof
underdrainsfor
lowering
thew
atertable
undera
roado
rrunw
ayin
orderto
improve
subgradestability
orfor
drainingw
aterloggedagricultural
landis
anothertype
ofproblem
inw
hichthe
permeability
of
thesoil
isof
11.8.R
ELATIO
NB
ETWEEN
CO
EFFICIEN
TSO
FPER
MEA
BIU
TYA
ND
PER
.C
OLA
TION
.T
he
distinctionbetw
eenthe
two
flowcoefficients
shouldbe
clearlyunderstood
bythe
student.T
he
coefficiento
fpercolation
refersto
-theaverage
actualvelocity
ofw
aterflow
ingthrough
theactual
porearea
of
thesoil;
whereas,
thecoefficient
of
permeability
refersto
afactitious
velocityof
flowthrough
thetotal
areao
fsolids
pluspore
spaces,as
pointedo
ut
inS
ection11.6.
Since.as
arule.
thetotal
areaof
soilis
more
convenientlydeterm
inedin
gravitationalflow
problems,
theperm
eabilitycoefficient
isused
more
oftenthan
thepercolation
coefficient.T
he
areaof
thepore
spacesin
atypical
crosssection
ofsoil
isequal
tothe
totalaream
ultipliedby
theporosity.
Ittherefore
follows
that
theco.
,efficientofperm
eabilityo
fthesoil
isequalto
thecoefficient
of
percolationm
ultipliedby
theporosity.
Thus,A
.=
nA(11-6)
By
substitutingthis
valueo
fA
vin
Eq.
(1l~5)
and
settingthe
resultthus
obtainedequal
tothe
expressionsfor
Qgiven
byB
q.(11-4),we
get
Aki
=n
Ak,i
(11-7)
Fig.11-3.
Constant-head
permeam
eter.
-0
'" <0CDW~
Supply/;/
/(:'
1h
11.11.TEST
WITH
CO
NST
AN
T.H
EA
DPER
MEA
METER
.A
laboratorytest
which
isparticularly
adaptedto
determination
ofthe
coefficiento
fperm
e-
11.10.M
EASU
REM
ENT
OF
PERM
EAB
ILITYC
HA
RA
CTER
ISTICS
OF
SOIL.
Severalm
ethodsof
measuring
permeability
characteristicsof
soilsare
available.Som
em
ethodsinvolve
laboratoryprocedures
ondisturbed
orundisturbed
samples,and
othersare
adaptedto
determination
ofthe
perm
eabilityof
thesoil
inplace
belowa
water
table.E
achof
theseproce
dureshas
advantagesw
hichare
important
indifferent
typesof
problems;
andthe
method
which
ism
ostfeasible
and
appropriatefor
theparticular
problemin
"handshould
bechosen.
Fo
rexam
ple,in
studyingthe
seepagethrough
arolted
earthdam
.itw
ouldbe
appropriateto
make
alaboratory
typeo
fteston
asam
pleo
fthe
soilto
beused
which
would
becom
pactedto
thesam
edensity
asin
theprototype
structure.O
nthe
otherhand,
afield
testo
fthe
soilin
placew
ouldbe
more
appropriatein
the
caseof
studiesrelating
tothe
unwatering
ofan
excavation.In
everycase.
theob
jectiveshould
beto
determine
theperm
eabilityof
thesoil
inits
naturalor
normal
operatingcondition
or
todo
soas
nearlyas
ispossible.
Further
more,
soilsin
natureare
frequentlynonisotroplc
with
respectto
flow;
thatis,the
coefficiento
fperm
eabilityin
thevertical
directionm
aydiffer
considerably
fromth
atin
thehorizontal
direction.If
thiscondition
exists,it
may
benecessary
tom
easurethe
permeability
inboth
directions.
paramount
importance.
Also,
therate
ofsettlem
entof
astructure
restingon
asoil
foundationis
afunction
of
therate
atw
hichw
aterm
ovesthrough
andout
ofth
efoundation
soil.
(11-8)k
=nk
p
fromw
hich
242
Gra
vita
tion
alW
ater
and
Seep
age
11.1
2.T
est
wit
hF
aili
ng-H
ead
Per
mea
met
er24
3
Fig.
11-4
.Fa
lling
-hea
dpe
rmea
met
er.
vari
able
-hea
dpe
rmea
met
eror
falli
ng-h
ead
perm
eam
eter
.A
typi
cal
ar
rang
emen
tof
appa
ratu
sfo
rth
iste
stis
show
nin
Fig.
11
4.
Inth
eco
nduc
tof
the
test
,th
ew
ater
pass
ing
thro
ugh
the
soil
sam
ple
caus
esw
ater
inth
est
andp
ipe
tod
rop
from
h oto
hiin
am
easu
red
peri
odo
ftim
etl
'T
he
head
onth
esa
mpl
eat
any
time
tbe
twee
nth
est
art
and
fini
shof
the
test
ish;
and,
inan
yin
crem
ent
oftim
edt
,th
ere
isa
decr
ease
inhe
adeq
ual
todh
.F
rom
thes
efa
cts,
the
follo
win
gre
lati
onsh
ips
may
bew
ritt
enrt
(A.
)
"I"
c\;
"
a. (6
~z."'~s
,,)
I_S
tan
dp
ipe
area
a
Ih,
t)~
__
dhin
dt
h ____11
Poro
usst
one/'
'
h.
~,
~ , , , , iLU
l'"!
II'll
.n:-
:,
;-
'.'-
,:
-p
-,,
},
~N
\ I , I V
Sub
stit
utin
gth
ese
valu
esin
Eq.
(11
4),
we
obta
in
0.04
8•
0.19
6x
kx
1.37
5
abili
tyo
fre
lativ
ely
coar
se-g
rain
edso
ilsis
one
inw
hich
the
hydr
aulic
grad
ient
ishe
ldco
nsta
ntth
roug
hout
the
test
ing
peri
od.
Aty
pica
lar
ra
ngem
ento
fapp
arat
usfo
rth
iste
st.i
call
eda
cons
tant
-hea
dpe
rmea
met
er,
issh
own
inFi
g.11
-3.
Inth
eco
nduc
toft
hete
st,
aUth
ew
ater
pass
ing
thro
ugh
the
soil
sam
pl
ein
am
easu
red
peri
odof
time
isco
llect
ed,
and
the
quan
tity
ism
ea
sure
d.T
his
quan
tity
ofw
ater
and
the
appr
opri
ate
dim
ensi
ons
ofth
eap
pa
ratu
san
dth
eso
ilsa
mpl
ear
esu
bsti
tute
din
Eq,
(11-
4),
and
ava
lue
ofth
epe
rmea
bili
tyco
effi
cien
tis
obta
ined
.
from
whi
ch
SOLU
TIO
N:
Fro
mth
iste
st,
h""
11in
.an
dd
la8
in.;
and
ia
!!a
1.37
5d
Als
o,A
la28
.27
sqin
.,..
0.19
6sq
ftan
d
766
Q""
£""
..,,
<:c
...O
.048
cfm
EX
AM
PL
E11
.1.
Aso
ilsa
mpl
ein
aco
nsta
nt-h
ead
perm
eam
eter
is6
in.
indi
amet
eran
d8
in.
long
.T
heve
rtic
aldi
stan
cefr
omhe
adw
ater
tota
ilw
ater
is11
in.
Ina
test
run,
766
Ibo
fw
ater
pass
esth
roug
hth
esa
mpl
ein
4hr
15m
in.
Det
erm
ine
the
coef
fici
ent
ofp
erm
eabi
lity
.
tTh
em
inus
sign
inE
q.(1
\·9)
isap
prop
riat
ebe
caus
eth
ehe
adde
crea
ses
with
elap
sed
lime.
EX
AM
PL
E11
.2.
Asa
mpl
eo
fcl
ayso
il,ha
ving
acr
oss-
sect
iona
lar
ea
k•
0.17
8rp
m
Inco
mpu
ting
the
valu
eof
the
perm
eabi
lity
coef
fici
ent
from
data
ob
tain
edin
ate
stof
this
type
,as
inal
lpe
rmea
bili
typr
oble
ms,
itis
impo
rtan
tto
keep
the
com
puta
tion
sdi
men
sion
ally
corr
ect.
Are
lativ
ely
easy
and
sure
way
todo
this
isto
deci
dein
adva
nce
the
unit
sin
whi
chth
eco
effi
ci
ent
of
perm
eabi
lity
isde
sire
d.T
hen
redu
ceth
eva
lues
of
Qan
dA
toth
ose
unit
sbe
fore
mak
ing
the
com
puta
tion
.In
the
prec
edin
gex
ampl
e,Q
and
Aw
ere
redu
ced
tofe
etan
dm
inut
esan
dth
ere
sult
ing
valu
eo
fk
was
expr
esse
din
feet
per
min
ute.
Sinc
eth
ehy
drau
lic
grad
ient
isa
dim
ensi
on
less
quan
tity
,th
eun
its
ofh
an
dd
are
not
impo
rtan
t,pr
ovid
edth
esa
me
units
are
used
for
both
dist
ance
s.
11.1
2.TE
STW
ITH
FALU
NG
-HEA
DPE
RMEA
MET
ER.
Ano
ther
labo
rato
ryte
st,
whi
chis
mor
eap
prop
riat
ein
the
case
of
fine
..gra
ined
soils
,is
calle
da
The
n
from
whi
ch
k!!
A•
-adh
ddt
A1'"
1"dh
k-
dt=
-a-
d0
"0h
adhe
k·
-A
log
'-h
~II
\\.
(11-
9)
(11-
10)
~Zy.,/d
(11-
11)
-0
01 <0 /l)
W N
244G
ravitationalWater
andSeepage
~
11.14.B
ffecto
fVlscosity
ofW
ater245
Fig.11-5.
Correction
factorto
permeability
with
waterat
lO,lO
·C.
varioustem
peraturesm
aybe
determined
onthe
basisof
therelationship
between
temperature
andthe
coefficientofviscosity
forw
ater.T
heunit
ofthe
coefficientofviscosity
inthe
metric
systemis
thedyne-second
persquare
centimeter
andis
calledthe
poise.T
he
coefficientofviscosity
ofw
aterat
20.20·C(68.36"F)
is0.01
poiseor
Icentipoise.
The
curvesin
Fig.11-5
showthe
valuesof
thiscoefficient,in
centlpcises,for
arange
oftem
peratureson
boththe
centigradeand
Fahrenheitscales..
Sincethe
coefficientofperm
eabilityis
inverselyproportional
tothe
viscosityof
theperm
eatingw
aterand
directlyproportional
toits
tempera
ture,thecoefficientof
viscositycan
beused
asa
correctionfactor
byw
hichthe
permeability
determined
atone
temperature
canbe
reducedto
thatat
thebase
temperature
of20.20"e.
"'" <0CDWW
120100
8060
Tem
perature(deg.)
4020
\\
\
\\
\"uhrellhelt
•\Celltrigrade
\\
<,r-,
'"I
<,<
,I'--,
'"..
"~~
.~~
o o. 1.8
0.4
1.4
1.6
j&l.2
I'fl.O
~0.8
]...0.6
<3
tlog
,N-
2.303loglo
N.
11.14.EFFECT
OF
VISC
OSITY
OF
WA
TER.
The
coefficientofperm
eabilityis
primarily
influencedby
thesize
andshape.
ortortuousness.
ofthe
soilpores
andby
theroughness
ofthe
mineral
particlesof
thesoil..H
owever,
itisalso
affectedby
theviscosity
ofthe
permeating
water.
Sincethe
viscosity
ofw
ateris
afunction
ofits
temperature.
itm
aybe
advisablein
some
casesto
correctthe
laboratory-measured
permeability
coefficientfortem
peraturedifference
between
that
ofthe
laboratoryw
aterand
thatof
thew
aterw
hichw
illflowthrough
theprototype
structure.F
or
example,
laboratorym
easurements
ofperm
eabilitym
aybe
made
ata
roomtem
perature
ofsay
80"F.w
hereasit
isknow
nthat
thetem
peratureof
theseepage
water
throughthe
prototypestructure
willbe
inthe
neighborhoodof
50"F.T
hecoefficientdeterm
inedin
thelaboratory
may
betoo
highin
thiscase
becausethe
viscosityof80"
water
isless
thanof
SO"w
ater.A
correctionfactor
forthe
permeability
coefficientw
ithw
aterat
11.13.EFFEC
TO
FA
IRIN
POR
E$.
The
permeability
of
the
soilsam
plein
eitherof
thetw
olaboratory
testsjust
describedm
aybe
affectedappre
ciablyby
pocketedbubbles
ofair
inthe
soilpores.
Attem
ptsshould
bem
adeto
eliminate
entrappedair
fromthe
sample
bypassing
water
throughit
fora
considerableperiod
oftim
ebefore
atest
runis
made.
Also,since
difficultym
aybe
encounteredif
dissolvedair
isreleased
fromthe
permeating
water
andtrapped
inthe
poresas
thew
aterpasses
throughthe
soil.it
isadvisable
touse
air-freeor
distilledw
ateras
theperm
eate.F
urthermore,since
water
tendsto
absorbair
asitcools
andto
releasedis
solvedair
asitw
arms
up,thetem
peratureof
theperm
eatingw
atershould
preferablybe
somew
hathigherthan
thato
fthe
soilsam
ple.T
hisprecau
tionnot
onlyw
illpreventair
frombeing
releasedin
thesoil.
butm
ayas
sistin
removing
entrappedair
inthe
poressince
thew
aterw
illbecooled
asitpasses
throughthe
soilandw
illhavea
tendencyto
absorbair.
of7
8.5
sqem
and
aheighto
f5
em,
isplaced
ina
falling-headperm
eameter
inw
hichthe
areaof
thestandpipe
is0.53
sqem
.In
atest
run,the
headon
thesam
pledrops
from80
emto
38em
inI
hr24
min
18sec.
What
isthe
coefficiento
fpermeability
ofthe
soil?
SOLU
TION
:F
rom
thistest,
a'"
0.53sq
em;
/,....
1hr
24m
in18
sec""
84.3m
in;ho..
80em
;d...5
em;and
A...78.5sq
em.
Substitution
inE
q.(II-II)givesj
k=
0.53x8~
3log,
80=
0.000299em
/min
78.5x
.38
Appendix C
Page 34
To Office: District #5 Office
Attention: Pete Tollenaere
F. E. Neff
Page 35
Date: September 7, 1989
Ref: 435.2402
Office:
Subject:
District #5 Materials
Research Coring on 1-35 Decatur Co.,.
Coring conducted 9-6-89 by F. E. Neff and C. Proper, District #5 Materials,with District #5 Materials core machine. Cores delivered to Pete Tollenaere'soffice 9-7-89. The core holes were left open by direction of Pete Tollenaere.Results of core length, material and presence of water, note below. All corestaken in southbound inside (passing) lane.
u'Core #1: Sta. 239+00+ 14" Lt. of CLThickness 17", 4 3/4" AC surface, 8i" concrete4" asphalt baseNote: Hole checked approximately 5 hours after coring, had filled
about 1/2 full of water.
Core #2: Sta. 239+00+ on 1/4 point 5'+ Lt. of CLThickness 17", 4" AC surface, Si" concrete4t" asphalt base. Little to no water in this hole when checked.
Core #3: Sta. 241+75+ 4" Lt. of CLThickness 16", 5t" AC Surface, 8" concrete2!" asphalt base. Base core unable to remove in tact. No water attime of coring, did not check later.
Core #4: Sta. 241+75+ on 1/4 pointThickness 1"5", 5;\:" AC surface, H" concrete2i" asphalt base. Unable to remove base core but broken throughto determine thickness.
~ Core #5: Sta. 230+00+ on 1/4 pointThickness 16", 5!" AC surface, S" concrete2i" asphalt base. Unable to remove base core but broken out todetermine thickness. After coring, water seeping in slow, unableto tell for sure if between base and concrete or from under base .
.I Core #6: Sta. 230+00+ on CLThi ckness 16", 5F AC surface, S-f' concrete21" asphalt base. Unable to remove base core but broken out todetermine thickness. As concrete core was removed and water removedfrom hole, observed water running into the hole qUite fast. Appearedto be coming from between base and conrete, but could have beencoming up around outside of base core. Removed base, cleaned holeand within ten (10) minutes the hole had 12 or more inches of water.Cleaned hole again and again and water returned qUite fast. Shoulderdrain outlet on right shoulder at this location was found to havesome water in it but not running.
FEN/edcc: T. McDonald
S. Moussa11 i
JOIN
TS
(TR
AN
SVER
SECO
NT.
RACT
ION
.reM~I
I\I'lL
lI\K
LIRO
ADPL
ANRH
-50f~R,
+~~"
,"'M
-;;'
7-;;
""~"
"~--
-'--
-;OM
1'~0
3:-:
_"11
lS',,~
.·!:
"CE
OB
OA
O~
eN".
..Cl"
f."
o~rE
l;~_~
$01
-03-
92~
12i
-~P
"OVE
:O~
OE
p'
HO
'''"C
TO
RO
f....f.~O"M!:"t
""T
E
}~ ,. "j.,
GEN
ERA
lN
OTE
S:
All
mct
erte
lsan
dco
nstr
uctio
nfe
atur
esus
edin
the
cons
truc
tion
ofpa
vem
enf
join
tssh
allc
onfo
rmto
the
requ
irem
ents
ofcu
rren
tSt
anda
rdSp
ecif
icat
ions
.R
efer
toot
her
appr
opri
ate
Stan
dard
Roo
dPl
ansa
ndpr
ojec
tpla
nsfo
radd
ition
alin
form
atio
n,A
ltern
ate
met
hods
for
cons
truc
tion
of[o
irrt
smoy
besu
bmitt
edto
the
Eng
inee
rfo
rcc
naid
ercf
ion.
Dow
els
for
the
'CD
'joi
ntsh
allb
epr
oper
lypo
sitio
ned
byth
eus
eof
anap
prov
edsu
ppor
tas
sem
bly,
Tie
bars
shal
lbe
held
inpl
ace
byap
prov
edde
vice
sor
met
hods
appr
oved
byth
eE
ngin
eer.
Bar
spl
aced
afte
rco
ncre
tesl
abis
pour
edsh
ellb
ein
stal
led
prio
rto
vibr
atio
nof
pave
men
tsl
ob.
Epo
xyco
atal
lbar
s(s
moo
than
dlie
bars
),se
e"P
avem
ent
Rei
nfo
rcem
ent"
inth
ecu
rren
tSt
anda
rdSp
ecif
icat
ions
.
The
join
tsas
deta
iled
here
onsh
elln
otbe
mea
sure
dfo
rpa
ymen
!.T
heco
nstr
uctio
nde
toile
dhe
reon
incl
udin
gth
efu
mis
hing
ofth
edo
wel
s,do
wel
asse
mbl
ies,
and
jain
1fill
erm
cter
tel
shal
lbe
cen-
.sl
dere
din
cide
mal
toPC
Cpa
ving
,unl
ess
note
dol
helW
1se.
SPE
CIA
lNO
TE
S,
G)T
halr
eem
ovin
gen
d.01
dow
el...
wo
rt".
..,m
bly
Wol
lhplo
OO<l
ollo
mot
ely=
=jo
ints
.
oR
efur
lo!l
o,S
lze
Tob
ie.
C!)~h
efSQ
W""
'.ho
lll>
e'Y
3ex
cept
'C'i
oint
ohol
lhe
If.ot
.
@'O
W'J
oint
.hol
lb<
>10
rolO
O·<
>tth
em
idpo
inlb
_..
.fu
tu'e
'C'O
t'e
n'J
eint
s,"'
;tho
lole
""",
eof
±2
feet
.0<
>no
tplo~
at"
I"C(I~en
of0
Iv""
"'C
'0,
'CO
'Jei
n!.
oll<
>",
inT1
<l...
......
....
J"itl
/s.h
oU
bo
pl"c
od$0
th",
nob
o'w
.llb
.<
10$0
'tho
..6"
to0
"(lo
ngih
i<ftE
\OlJ
"lnt
(ce"
"'rt
ine
of"'<
>elln
el.
The
di<
l....c
o10
lhe
fim
bo'f
rom
edge
01pa
vem
ent
""II
va
')'
from
6"to
12"
dope
nd;n
gup
onpo
vem
el'l1
wid
th.
S."l
."d
of
0S,
licc>
r.oJo
inl~ls'
.hol
lbe
um
let
lnte
mo
tsp
ov
em."
',o
nd
ow>
clol
edw
o,l<
.j"
wt
~Ith
tape
.R
ofo'
10th
ocu~nl
5ton
derd
Spw
fico
tlon
on"S
eolln
gJo
lnll;
".
(2)E
dge
with
V4
"leo
l!et
len
glh
olj
oln
tin
dk
ole
dil
form
ed;
edgi
ngn
el'
...."
i,ed
wh
enG
Ilw
ilt>
diom
end
bl"
de
'OW
.R
emov
eh
oo
der
blod
<on
dbo
o,d
whe
nse
«>n<
lslo
bi•
.pcl
lr0d
.T
heio
ln!S
holt
be<:
vton
d."
",le
d0$
show
nIn
O.lo
il'S
·.
oI'l
o<em
onl0
1dow
els
or~e
bo'"
shol
lbe
InO
=t<l
OIlC
Ow
ithIll<
>"'
'''''''S
tond
o'd
SP"<lfi(o~on
on"P
laci
ngR
"ln!
o'c<
lmen
l".
Th"
mo'
hc>
dof
ondl
orin
\lba
rs,n
to<l
>i<l
ing
"""o
men
tsho
llbe
""op
proy
odby
!he
fugl
n••
ro•
..,l
lorl
hin
opp"
,pri
"'.·
Mol
orio
lsIn
,ll'l,
f<lio
nolM
ome"
,ndu
"".
4'Io
wa
Dep
artm
entO
fTra
nspo
rtatIo
n\:
-H
ighw
ayD
ivis
ion
@U
nl".
.o'
heJ'
l'lis
esp
edlle
d,'ro
mve
t$<l
<on
tmcf
ien
ioill
t$In
moi
n!in
ep
m.m
",,'
,;,ai
lbe
'CO
'whe
n@
"gr
ookt
r'"
"'1",,
11<>
8".
'C'w
hen
@i$
Ie>s
It>on
8".
oW
hen
~e,ng
inlO
old
pave
men
t,@
,ept
>:>
senl
.Ihe
dept
h"b
ou
nd
Port
lond
Cem
enl
Cen
<re
1e.
-<8>
.~
BAR
SIZ
ETA
BLE
oi<
8"
~~~l~~
,,-".""-'~-'
_'~"-,,-.-~
DOW
ELu"
SIZE
~Tif
tAR-_
.---,
SIZE
"6'1
0I
-u
SEC
TIO
NA
-A
DET
AIL
"B"
JOin
tSC
Il!e
.-~
M"te
ncl_
_~
%"'~"+\~
DET
AIL
"A"
Top
ofP"
'vem
ent
Jo,n
tSe
"I",
.®.J~.
Mllt
eno!
1;iC
-V~"-w,\t1
r',....B=#
=i-r
,;~'r;k~
-~
'"I,~
l,S
ee
Not
e(!)
TYPI
CA
LBA
RPL
AC
EMEN
Tilp
phe.
.to
oIl
Jom
t,""
less
othe~.,se
;-te
ded.
O~"OT"
I~OO;O(;1
er"fQi)~
\i:~O
v""k
Or
xo
°r\
_'..,0
.kan
tL
1I'
1e-
·I--
·'-'-
'-.
(,
0:-.\:
"~
Now
:M
!ltch
'CD
'or
'C'J
01l1
tlI'
:pl
lvem
ent.
Bot
tom
ofs,
,~C
ut
P,=,
vp.m
ent
Ecl
ge-
P2'
·O",
'l,n.
"",d
"'~d\
IrCf!
'I
cE1','E,'
".'~1"=''''''P''''
iQo~""'"
"~k
r;.
'<~~;~
o".~.;
---·~
..
-=
=t@
(;',
'---
-30
"Lo
ng
II"
Ber
-Se
eN
ote
.\2
;o
t12
"C
ente
rs<1
)'H
T'
HEA
DER
JOIN
T(E
ND
RIG
IOPA
VEM
ENT)
'C'
JOIN
TIN
CURB
f'".e
men
tEd
ge~j
See
Det
llJl"
8"
~'!'~'
':':"
",:'
,e,l
;;'
0"!
~~,
r~<
r>,-
:,<
>"'
-<
'<,
JH
oleO"
,met
e~111
"J
'-1
8"l
on
g:Oo
~el
L<l~
ge,.
then
DOM
elllt
12"C
ente
rs0
See
Not
e®
CD'R
D'
AB
UTT
ING
PAV
EMEN
TJO
INT
Pave
men
tEd
gefrsee
Oet
lld"8
"
i·;:
,fit
;-1J
~-.
'c·C
-,,
,i
Hol
eO
,,,met
<'w
15"
/"-
24"
Lo."'
;;-Tl
C&~
l","ge~
th""
THo
SU
_J
t>t12"Cen\.e~$.
CD'R
T'
See
Not
<!®
®A
BUTT
ING
PAV
EMEN
TJO
INT
RIG
IDT
IE
I'\"'-
"~,,"
,;';
"';
0..
c"''-'
;''''J~
'B'
PLA
INJO
INT
FOR
ABU
TTIN
GPA
VEM
ENT
SLA
BS
See
Now.
<1§)
'C'
CON
TRA
CTIO
NJO
INT
to.,O,~"-a-;,-
;.'.C
.:,"
:
W~l"
",,.
,~
~.~
:.O.
:---±
.
~illf
:,',,"
J;{
~.-.-.
,,-_:-
.'-
.;--.:}'->~
CD::-
0"",>
.;;;~~
"'>'
~'..::.:
:....1
r>.
/Z\
Q,
"-=
.--1
8"Lo
ng[l
o"e
lSe
elk
te.\
.08
'®lit
12"C
em.e
n®
'CD
'DO
WEL
EO
CON
TRA
CTIO
NJO
INT
-So
er:.
.,to:
ll"A
"
jsee
DH~"l
"8"
~,~,;:
:?re_"
&",)~
~"(£
-,1-1
!?'I~
'-3
0"L
on
gTI
SB~
See-
~'ot
e,0.
J\2
.;lit
12"C
ente
rs0
'OW
'D
AY
'SW
ORK
JOIN
T(N
on
-Wo
rkIn
g)
top related