Preservation Approaches for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways (2011) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix C - Summary of Preservation Questionnaire Responses
Appendix C - Summary of Preservation Questionnaire Responses
Pages 121-164
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 121... ...
Range in Years of Experience Number of Respondents <5 7 6 to 10 7 11 to 15 3 16 to 20 4 >20 7 2.0 Questions Question 1 Please provide details of the typical average daily traffic (ADT) values associated with the traffic classifications of low, medium, and high traffic volume for rural and urban roadways in your agency.
|
From page 122... ...
Question 2 There are a variety of factors that influence the selection of a preventive maintenance treatment. Please rank the following 18 factors in terms of the level of importance that your agency places on each factor when selecting the most appropriate preventive maintenance treatment.
|
From page 123... ...
Summary of Factors Influencing Agency Selection of Preventive Maintenance Treatment Not Important Low Priority Medium Priority High Priority Number of Factor % Response % Response % Response % Response Respondents Agency experience with treatment 2 5 40 53 58 Material availability 2 7 48 43 58 Previous treatment failure 0 7 41 52 58 Alternate route availability 26 40 28 7 58 Safety concerns 0 3 21 76 58 Perception 2 36 50 12 58 Noise 19 39 40 2 57 Work zone 2 22 59 17 58 Treatment cost 0 0 26 74 58 Traffic volume 0 7 40 53 57 Experienced contractor availability 5 14 60 21 58 Bias against treatment 12 32 45 11 56 Traffic control requirements 2 24 55 19 58 Closure time 2 17 57 24 58 Liability concerns 4 21 42 33 57 Durability/expected treatment life 0 2 35 63 57 Production rates 9 29 52 10 58 Time before trafficking 3 21 55 21 58 Risk associated with treatment failure 2 5 57 36 58 Climate 7 28 44 21 57
|
From page 124... ...
– Low Traffic Medium Traffic High Traffic Not Used Number of Surfaced Pavements % Response % Response % Response % Response Respondents Crack fill 74 74 74 19 58 Crack seal 83 88 86 9 58 Cape seal 9 14 9 79 58 Fog seal 45 26 14 48 58 Scrub seal 14 16 2 83 58 Slurry seal 35 25 11 54 57 Rejuvenators 16 18 11 77 57 Single-course microsurfacing 42 60 54 26 57 Multiple-course microsurfacing 31 51 44 42 55 Single-course chip seal 88 62 24 12 58 Multiple-course chip seal 55 43 11 39 56 Chip seals with polymer-modified asphalt binder 64 57 31 22 58 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course (e.g., NovaChip) 16 33 48 48 58 Thin HMA overlay (<40 mm [<1.5 in.]
|
From page 125... ...
Summary of Preventive Maintenance Treatments Used on PCC RURAL Roadways Distinguished by Traffic Volume Classifications Defined in Question 1 Treatments for Portland Cement Low Traffic Medium Traffic High Traffic Not Used Number of Concrete (PCC) Pavements % Response % Response % Response % Response Respondents Concrete joint resealing 39 55 73 25 56 Concrete crack sealing 42 56 71 24 55 Diamond grinding 27 48 77 25 56 Diamond grooving 5 12 34 66 56 Partial-depth concrete pavement patching 36 51 69 29 55 Full-depth concrete pavement patching 38 62 84 16 56 Dowel bar retrofit (load-transfer restoration)
|
From page 126... ...
– Low Traffic Medium Traffic High Traffic Not Used Number of Surfaced Pavements % Response % Response % Response % Response Respondents Crack fill 71 71 75 18 56 Crack seal 84 88 88 7 56 Cape seal 9 11 5 84 57 Fog seal 28 19 11 65 57 Scrub seal 14 9 2 84 57 Slurry seal 25 25 16 58 57 Rejuvenators 14 16 12 80 56 Single-course microsurfacing 53 58 46 28 57 Multiple-course microsurfacing 36 47 42 44 55 Single-course chip seal 69 38 13 31 55 Multiple-course chip seal 43 30 4 57 54 Chip seals with polymer-modified asphalt binder 60 37 18 37 57 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course (e.g., NovaChip) 18 40 47 49 57 Thin HMA overlay (<40 mm [<1.5 in.]
|
From page 127... ...
Pavements % Response % Response % Response % Response Respondents Concrete joint resealing 45 64 78 20 55 Concrete crack sealing 47 62 73 22 55 Diamond grinding 29 51 75 25 55 Diamond grooving 8 12 31 69 52 Partial-depth concrete pavement patching 38 53 62 35 55 Full-depth concrete pavement patching 44 64 82 18 55 Dowel bar retrofit (load-transfer restoration) 18 31 55 42 55 Thin PCC overlays 4 9 11 85 55 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course 11 18 21 71 56 (e.g., HMA < 25 mm [1 in.]
|
From page 128... ...
–Surfaced Pavements % Checked Crack fill 6 Crack seal 6 Cape seal 70 Fog seal 51 Scrub seal 54 Slurry seal 51 Rejuvenators 34 Single-course microsurfacing 20 Multiple-course microsurfacing 20 Single-course chip seal 83 Multiple-course chip seal 80 Chip seals with polymer-modified asphalt binder 71 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course (e.g., NovaChip) 26 Thin HMA overlay (<40 mm [<1.5 in.]
|
From page 129... ...
Pavements % Checked Concrete joint resealing 8 Concrete crack sealing 8 Diamond grinding 4 Diamond grooving 33 Partial-depth concrete pavement patching 17 Full-depth concrete pavement patching 8 Dowel bar retrofit (load-transfer restoration) 21 Thin PCC overlays 62 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course (e.g., HMA < 25 mm [1 in.]
|
From page 130... ...
Summary of Preventive Maintenance Treatments Considered Not Applicable for PCC URBAN Roadways Not Applicable Treatments for Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Pavements % Checked Concrete joint resealing 5 Concrete crack sealing 5 Diamond grinding 5 Diamond grooving 23 Partial-depth concrete pavement patching 14 Full-depth concrete pavement patching 5 Dowel bar retrofit (load-transfer restoration)
|
From page 131... ...
Summary of Comparative Use of Preventive Maintenance Treatment for High-Traffic-Volume HMA Roads with High Truck Traffic Compared with Those with Low Truck Traffic Treatments for Hot-Mix Asphalt (HMA) – More Likely No Difference Less Likely Not Used Number of Surfaced Pavements % Response % Response % Response % Response Respondents Crack fill 2 80 0 18 56 Crack seal 2 91 0 7 56 Cape seal 0 16 5 79 57 Fog seal 0 28 11 61 57 Scrub seal 0 16 5 79 57 Slurry seal 0 19 21 60 57 Rejuvenators 0 19 5 75 57 Single-course microsurfacing 7 50 16 27 56 Multiple-course microsurfacing 14 45 5 36 56 Single-course chip seal 0 38 32 30 56 Multiple-course chip seal 4 27 23 46 56 Chip seals with polymer-modified asphalt binder 19 30 16 35 57 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course (e.g., NovaChip)
|
From page 132... ...
Pavements % Response % Response % Response % Response Respondents Concrete joint resealing 7 75 0 18 55 Concrete crack sealing 5 73 2 20 55 Diamond grinding 13 65 0 22 55 Diamond grooving 6 39 2 54 54 Partial-depth concrete pavement patching 4 67 4 25 55 Full-depth concrete pavement patching 11 73 2 15 55 Dowel bar retrofit (load-transfer restoration) 24 40 2 35 55 Thin PCC overlays 0 22 9 69 55 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course 2 29 5 64 55 (e.g., HMA < 25 mm [1 in.]
|
From page 133... ...
Whitetopping seldom used due to high cost. Not considered preventive maintenance but rather major rehab.
|
From page 134... ...
Diamond grinding seldom used. Have recently applied OGFC (3⁄4in.)
|
From page 135... ...
Tables C.15 and C.16 present the 57 agency responses and include summary statistics associated with the answers. Individual agency comments associated with this question are also included.
|
From page 136... ...
Question 11 Please list the three MOST successful pavement preservation treatment types used on your RURAL high-traffic-volume roadways, starting with the most successful, and briefly explain why each treatment is successful for your agency. Treatment 1 • Crack seal.
|
From page 137... ...
The one course mill and resurfaces and concrete pavement repairs are "high end" fixes for CPM and work well with more distressed pavements. Surface sealing (crack seals, chip seals, micro, ultra-thin HMA)
|
From page 138... ...
Surface sealing (crack seals, chip seals, micro, ultra-thin HMA) are successful at sealing the pavement and extending service life.
|
From page 139... ...
The one course mill and resurfaces and concrete pavement repairs are "high end" fixes for CPM and work well with more distressed pavements. Surface sealing (crack seals, chip seals, micro, ultra-thin HMA)
|
From page 140... ...
Best value for surface sealing. • Crack sealing and crack filling.
|
From page 141... ...
Extends the life of our old jointed plain concrete pavements. • Mill and HMA overlay.
|
From page 142... ...
• Cold milling and HMA overlay 1.5 in. • Crack sealing.
|
From page 143... ...
• Thin HMA overlays. • Crack filling/sealing.
|
From page 144... ...
• Thin HMA overlays, which add structural value to road, improving drainage profile, rideability, and moisture penetration. • Thin overlays.
|
From page 145... ...
• Crack sealing on PCC pavements with basic asphalt based sealants. High labor costs with little increase in pavement life.
|
From page 146... ...
• Crack sealing using cold pour materials does not last more than one season. Seems to help prevent spalling at the crack but does not provide lasting seal to moisture infiltration.
|
From page 147... ...
• Unable to rate unsuccessful treatments as our efforts focus toward successful treatments. • Ultra-thin PCC overlays.
|
From page 148... ...
• Thin HMA overlays over PCCP. They don't last very long and have a tendency to debond and spall out in the winter.
|
From page 149... ...
Please use the following to indicate under which of the following available closure time scenarios you consider using the listed treatments on RURAL roadways. Tables C.17 and C.18 present the agency responses and include summary statistics associated with the answers.
|
From page 150... ...
) 85 21 21 39 Ultra-thin HMA overlay (<20 mm [<0.75 in.]
|
From page 151... ...
Tables C.19 and C.20 present the agency responses and include summary statistics associated with the answers. Individual agency comments associated with this question are also included.
|
From page 152... ...
Summary of Closure Time Scenarios Considered When Using a Preventive Maintenance Treatment for URBAN High-Traffic-Volume HMA Roads Overnight OR HMA-Surfaced Pavement Treatments for Single Shift Weekend Longer Number of High-Traffic-Volume Roadways % Response % Response % Response Respondents Crack fill 95 21 12 42 Crack seal 96 23 11 47 Cape seal 87 20 7 15 Fog seal 85 20 10 20 Scrub seal 79 21 7 14 Slurry seal 78 26 9 23 Rejuvenators 82 24 6 17 Single-course microsurfacing 87 36 15 39 Multiple-course microsurfacing 84 34 16 32 Single-course chip seal 90 20 10 30 Multiple-course chip seal 85 22 7 27 Chip seals with polymer-modified asphalt binder 90 17 10 29 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course (e.g., NovaChip) 94 27 15 33 Thin HMA overlay (<40 mm [<1.5 in.]
|
From page 153... ...
Summary of Closure Time Scenarios Considered When Using a Preventive Maintenance Treatment for URBAN High-Traffic-Volume PCC Roads Overnight OR Single Shift Weekend Longer Number of PCC Pavement Treatments for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways % Response % Response % Response Respondents Concrete joint resealing 92 30 12 40 Concrete crack sealing 92 32 15 40 Diamond grinding 95 36 13 39 Diamond grooving 91 30 4 23 Partial-depth concrete pavement patching 68 49 30 37 Full-depth concrete pavement patching 67 50 38 42 Dowel bar retrofit (load-transfer restoration) 65 44 44 34 Thin PCC overlays 39 30 57 23 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course (e.g., HMA < 25 mm [1 in.]
|
From page 154... ...
Summary of Contracting Mechanisms Used to Ensure Quality for a Preventive Maintenance Treatment for High-Traffic-Volume HMA Roads Contracting Mechanisms Used HMA-Surfaced Pavement Treatments for Performance Contract Number of High-Traffic-Volume Roadways QC/QA Specifications Warranties Maintenance Respondents Crack fill 50 41 9 44 34 Crack seal 51 41 13 46 39 Cape seal 70 30 20 50 10 Fog seal 47 20 0 53 15 Scrub seal 55 18 0 55 11 Slurry seal 74 32 11 47 19 Rejuvenators 54 38 0 46 13 Single-course microsurfacing 57 38 27 38 37 Multiple-course microsurfacing 67 26 26 33 27 Single-course chip seal 67 42 21 45 33 Multiple-course chip seal 64 43 18 39 28 Chip seals with polymer-modified asphalt binder 60 40 13 40 30 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course (e.g., NovaChip) 67 39 12 30 33 Thin HMA overlay (<40 mm [<1.5 in.]
|
From page 155... ...
Summary of Contracting Mechanisms Used to Ensure Quality for a Preventive Maintenance Treatment for High-Traffic-Volume PCC Roads Contracting Mechanisms Used Performance Contract Number of PCC Pavement Treatments for High-Traffic-Volume Roadways QC/QA Specifications Warranties Maintenance Respondents Concrete joint resealing 56 31 6 39 36 Concrete crack sealing 56 31 6 42 36 Diamond grinding 59 38 6 35 34 Diamond grooving 55 40 5 30 20 Partial-depth concrete pavement patching 59 22 6 44 32 Full-depth concrete pavement patching 58 29 8 39 38 Dowel bar retrofit (load-transfer restoration) 58 32 6 35 31 Thin PCC overlays 56 38 0 38 16 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course (e.g., HMA < 25 mm [1 in.]
|
From page 156... ...
• HMA overlays. Question 19 If you indicated that your agency has implemented performance-related specifications for preventive-maintenance treatments, briefly describe your experience with these specifications.
|
From page 157... ...
• We have written performance based specs for crack sealing/crack filling, but they have not been used to date. • I would like to review other states' warranties and see if it is something we can implement.
|
From page 158... ...
Please check all that apply. Tables C.23 and C.24 present the agency responses and include summary statistics associated with the answers.
|
From page 159... ...
• Crack fill and crack seal. Prevent water intrusion; ultra-thin whitetopping (major rehabilitation)
|
From page 160... ...
of Roadways Raveling Oxidation Bleeding Ride Quality Friction Noise Distress Distress Distress Responses Concrete joint resealing 5 0 0 27 0 14 91 36 9 22 Concrete crack sealing 0 0 0 14 0 11 96 46 4 28 Diamond grinding 3 0 0 82 58 37 24 32 5 38 Diamond grooving 0 0 0 56 94 25 12 12 6 16 Partial-depth concrete pavement patching 3 0 0 35 0 6 53 79 38 34 Full-depth concrete pavement patching 0 0 0 34 2 5 22 73 80 41 Dowel bar retrofit (load-transfer restoration) 0 0 0 55 3 6 24 42 36 33 Thin PCC overlays 0 0 0 45 18 9 36 64 64 11 Ultra-thin bonded wearing course 8 0 0 69 54 15 23 23 0 13 (e.g., HMA < 25 mm [1 in.]
|
From page 161... ...
Tables C.25 and C.26 present the agency responses and include summary statistics associated with the answers. Individual agency comments associated with this question are also included.
|
From page 162... ...
Table C.25. Summary of Preventive Maintenance Treatments Used to Address URBAN HMA Pavement Performance Issues Percent Responses HMA-Surfaced Pavement Treatments Light Moderate Heavy for URBAN High-Traffic-Volume Smoothness/ Surface Surface Surface Number of Roadways Raveling Oxidation Bleeding Ride Quality Friction Noise Distress Distress Distress Responses Crack fill 0 0 0 6 0 3 81 56 12 32 Crack seal 0 0 0 8 0 5 86 62 16 37 Cape seal 100 100 0 0 0 0 67 67 0 3 Fog seal 56 81 0 0 0 0 19 6 0 16 Scrub seal 60 60 0 0 0 0 60 20 0 5 Slurry seal 67 87 7 7 20 0 80 20 0 15 Rejuvenators 33 83 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 6 Single-course microsurfacing 67 60 27 33 50 7 83 40 0 30 Multiple-course microsurfacing 69 65 35 46 50 8 73 73 15 26 Single-course chip seal 33 53 0 0 67 0 80 47 0 15 Multiple-course chip seal 38 54 0 0 46 0 62 69 15 13 Chip seals with polymer-modified 47 60 7 7 53 0 93 67 13 15 asphalt binder Ultra-thin bonded wearing course 50 64 36 55 73 32 86 41 9 22 (e.g., NovaChip)
|
From page 163... ...
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Treatments (Table C.26) : • Concrete joint resealing, concrete crack sealing, and drainage preservation -- prevent water intrusion; thin PCC overlays (major rehabilitation)
|
From page 164... ...
Summary of Additional Guidance Needed for the Successful Implementation of Pavement Preservation Strategies on High-Traffic-Volume Roadways No Guidance Some Guidance Significant Guidance Needed Needed Needed Number of % % % Respondents Other agency experience with treatment 17 61 22 54 Experienced contractor availability list 34 45 21 53 Availability of suitable materials 38 45 17 53 Typical traffic control requirements 57 40 4 53 Typical closure time information 52 42 6 52 Durability/expected treatment life 11 33 56 54 Typical noise associated with treatment 45 47 8 53 Treatment production rates 34 38 8 53 Time needed before trafficking 31 48 21 52 Typical treatment costs by region 19 57 25 53 Applicable traffic volumes 24 35 41 54 Appropriate climatic regions for treatments 25 36 40 53
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.