Alternate Design Methods to Renew Lightly Traveled Paved Roads

Minnesota’s local highway agencies are tasked with maintaining their low-volume road networks with available financial resources, prompting increased interest in lower-cost pavement rehabilitation alternatives. In-place cold recycling technologies, such as cold in-place recycling (CIR) and full-depth reclamation (FDR), provide lower-cost opportunities to renew deteriorated roads than traditional rehabilitation methods, particularly if surfaced with a thin surface treatment such as a chip seal (seal coat) or microsurfacing rather than hot-mix asphalt. However, the resulting road surface may not meet some road users’ expectations. This study investigated the performance and economics of four pavement rehabilitation alternatives involving recycling technologies. The alternatives included CIR and FDR treatments with either an asphalt overlay or thin surface treatment. Fifteen case study sections in Minnesota and neighboring states were selected for performance evaluation and life cycle cost analysis (LCCA). Pavement condition surveys were performed to evaluate the study sections’ pavement distresses and roughness. The results indicated satisfactory performance for fourteen sections, while a CIR section with a chip seal surface using quartzite as cover aggregate had extensive transverse cracking. The cause of the distress is not clear. The LCCA results indicate a 14% to 42% lower life cycle cost for CIR and FDR treatments with chip seal surfaces. Costs savings may be achieved if asphalt overlay thicknesses are reduced, though chip seal surfaces may be rougher and nosier and require more maintenance than asphalt overlays. A decision tree was developed to aid local agencies during the treatment selection process.

[1]  Charles T. Jahren,et al.  Long-Term Performance of Cold In-Place Recycled Asphalt Roads , 2005 .

[2]  Samuel H Carpenter,et al.  Cold In-Place Recycling and Full Depth Recycling with Asphalt Products (CIR&FDRwAP) , 2009 .

[3]  H Jones,et al.  Roadroid continuous road condition monitoring with smart phones , 2014 .

[4]  David E Newcomb,et al.  COLD IN-PLACE RECYCLING LITERATURE REVIEW AND PRELIMINARY MIXTURE DESIGN PROCEDURE , 2000 .

[5]  Thomas J Wood,et al.  Minnesota Seal Coat Handbook 2006 , 2006 .

[6]  Cliff Alex Plymesser Thin Maintenance Surfaces for Municipalities , 2005 .

[7]  Baoshan Huang,et al.  Optimizing Pavement Preventive Maintenance Treatment Applications in Tennessee (Phase I) , 2009 .

[8]  Charles Øverby A guide to the use of Otta Seals , 1999 .

[9]  Charles T. Jahren,et al.  Development of Holding Strategies for Deteriorated Low-Volume Roads , 2015 .

[10]  Brian K Diefenderfer,et al.  Time-Dependent Structural Response of Full-Depth Reclamation , 2011 .

[11]  Zheng Wu,et al.  Performance Evaluation of Various Rehabilitation and Preservation Treatments , 2010 .

[12]  Brian K Diefenderfer,et al.  Analysis of Full-Depth Reclamation Trial Sections in Virginia , 2011 .

[13]  Davor Cvek Cold in-place recycling with fly ash , 2013 .

[14]  Michael Maher,et al.  Context Sensitive Roadway Surfacing Selection Guide , 2005 .

[15]  Linda M Pierce,et al.  Bituminous Surface Treatment Protocol , 2007 .

[16]  Todd Shields,et al.  Pavement Structural Evaluation and Design of Full-Depth Reclamation (FDR) Pavement , 2011 .

[17]  Sohila Bemanian,et al.  Alternative Strategies for Rehabilitation of Low-Volume Roads in Nevada , 2007 .

[18]  J A Epps COLD-RECYCLED BITUMINOUS CONCRETE USING BITUMINOUS MATERIALS , 1990 .

[19]  Hosin Lee,et al.  Development of a Mix Design Process for Cold-In-Place Rehabilitation Using Foamed Asphalt , 2003 .

[20]  Stephen A Cross,et al.  EVALUATION OF COLD IN-PLACE RECYCLING IN KANSAS , 1995 .

[21]  Charles T. Jahren,et al.  REVIEW OF COLD IN-PLACE ASPHALT RECYCLING IN IOWA , 1998 .