pervious concrete overlay design, construction and performance
TRANSCRIPT
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
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
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.
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
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
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)
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
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