Transcript
Page 1: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

Two Lift Concrete PavingTxDOT Perspective

Andy Naranjo, P.E.

Page 2: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

• Use of Manufactured Sands• Use of Coarse Aggregates with High CoTEvalues

Use of Local Materials

Page 3: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

Use of Manufactured Sands

Page 4: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

Manufactured Sands

Natural River Sand Depletion

Page 5: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

TxDOT Spec Limits

• Concrete subject to direct traffic requires the use of fine aggregates or blends to have a A.I. greater than 60%.

• Limits the use of Man. Sands

Page 6: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

Use of High CoTE Concrete

Page 7: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

High CoTEAggregates

Page 8: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

CoTE Data

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

CoTE, m

icrostrain/F

Coarse Aggregate CoTE Values

25% above Limit

Acceptable for use in CRCP

Unacceptable for use in CRCP

Page 9: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

San Antonio ACI June 27, 2012

Spalling in Concrete Pavement

Page 10: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

Classification of TxDOT CRCP Distresses 

0‐6274 Project Level Performance Database for Rigid Pavement in Texas, Phase II 

San Antonio ACI June 27, 2012

Page 11: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

Money Spent to Solve Problem

• Research– Over $2 million for the past 25 years

• Maintenance– The Houston District has spent:

• $41+ million to repair CRCP spalling• $400+ million to place bonded overlays

• Spalling virtually eliminated since the CoTErequirement began use in HOU ~10 years ago–Restricts the use of local aggregates

Page 12: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

Lower CoTE ConcreteOr 

Concrete with Natural Sands

Higher CoTEConcrete

OrConcrete with Man. 

Sands

Page 13: Two-Lift Paving - TxDOT Perspective

Questions


Top Related