Transcript TEN YEAR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF THE LETHBRIDGE …

Western Canadian Experience with
New and Innovative Pavement Surfaces
Art Johnston
Canadian User Producer Group for Asphalt
Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island
November, 2006
MANITOBA INFRASTRUCTURE & TRANSPORTATION
RECENT EXPERIENCE
2005-06 – Using PG 58-34 for all New Construction
• Waived Elastic Recovery Requirement in 2006
2002-06 – Incremental Increase in Micro-surfacing Program
• Other than some bleeding in 2003 Projects, Good Performance
ISSUES
Initially limited Contractor Capability for Micro-surfacing, now better
Suitable Aggregates for Micro-surfacing has been a problem
(resulting in increased cost)
FUTURE INIATIVES
Planning for CIR & Surface Treatment for low volume road
applications in 2007
CITY OF WINNIPEG
RECENT EXPERIENCE
Two Pilot Projects completed with ARA (Anti-Rutting Additive)
Incorporation of clean 5mm minus Limestone Chips to Improve
Rutting Performance at intersections
• Good Performance after Three Years
Incorporating 10% RAP in Mixes for Residential Renewal
Projects
• Performing equal to or better than Standard Mix
ISSUES
Increased Material and Labour
Costs (20% - 30% in 2006)
BRITISH COLUMBIA MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION
RECENT EXPERIENCE
2006 – Superpave Coarse Grading w/ PG 70-22
• High Traffic Border Crossing
2004 – Asphalt Rubber Project (CTAA 2005)
• Significant Cost Premium
2003 – Small SMA Demonstration Project (Victoria Region)
• Draindown / Temperature Problems (No Fiber)
-2006 - Several OGFC Projects (CTAA 2001)
• Over 10 Years of Experience, Positive Results
Several Micro-Surfacing Projects (CTAA 2005)
• Good Performance
Seal Coat w/ Polymer Modified Emulsion Project
• Mixed Reviews, Some Bleeding
BRITISH COLUMBIA MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION
ISSUES
Superpave Mixes now specified for 30% of Projects
• Coarse Graded only, not interested in Fine Graded
• Quality Aggregate in Lower Mainland (No Cost Premium)
• PGAC on only a few projects
FUTURE INIATIVES
OGFC Surfacing will be used on the entire Sea-To-Sky Highway
(including bridge decks)
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF DELTA
RECENT EXPERIENCE
2003 – Open Graded Friction Course
One Superpave Coarse Graded mix for Truck Route
• Good Performance, Improved Safety
ISSUES
Storage for Specialty Binders and Issue for Contractors
Increased Costs for Small Quantities of Specialty Mix (up to
60% Premium)
CITY OF VANCOUVER
RECENT EXPERIENCE
2004-05 – Use of PG 76-22 Modified Binder
ISSUES
Use of RAP
* Western Canadian User-Producer Exchange, Issue No. 1, Novemeber 2005
CITY OF KELOWNA
RECENT EXPERIENCE
2004 – Superpave Fine Graded w/ PG 76-28 used on two
Highway 97 Intersections
• Very Good Performance, Minimal Rutting
2006 – Continued Use of Superpave Fine w/ 80-100 A
ISSUES
In Some Cases Contractor Capability for Superpave
Suitable Aggregates and Binders have been available, but
Increasing Costs are a Concern
FUTURE INIATIVES
Interested in Warm Mix Asphalt
SASKCHEWAN HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORTATION
RECENT EXPERIENCE
2005 – 20km Asphalt Rubber Project
• Positive, Reduced Reflective Cracking
2005-06 – Thin Lift HMA Overlays on High Volume Roadways
• Generally Good
2006 – 1st Washed Chip Seal w/ CRS Emulsion
• Early Indications Positive
ISSUES
Asphalt Rubber Blending Capability Now in Province
Increased Use of Manufactured Aggregates
FUTURE INIATIVES
Asphalt Rubber R & D (Various Thicknesses)
CITY OF SASKATOON
RECENT EXPERIENCE
2004 - Thin Lift Overlays (20mm) using PMA
Extensive use of Micro-surfacing since 1998
High Stability Mixes w/ various PGAC (including PMA) for
Arterial Streets
PMA Bridge Mastic Mixes
* Western Canadian User-Producer Exchange, Issue No. 1, Novemeber 2005
CITY OF REGINA
RECENT EXPERIENCE
Using Modified Binders on Major Roadways for past 8 years with
Aggregates meeting Superpave Requirements
• Initial Performance Positive, Reduced Reflective Cracking
Using 100-120 mm Replacement Depth for Intersection Treatments
ISSUES
Difficulties with Hand Work using Superpave Mixes and
Compaction needs to be completed quickly
Fumes Identified as an Issue on Hot / Calm Days
FUTURE INIATIVES
Considering Crumb Rubber Mix
Pilot Project
ALBERTA INFRASTRUCTURE & TRANSPORTATION
RECENT EXPERIENCE
Modified Binders PG 54-34, 58-37, 70-28, 76-31
• Generally Positive Experience (CTAA 2006)
2002-06 Asphalt Rubber Gap Graded
• Very Expensive and No Improved Performance
• Two 2004 Projects Failed (raveling) requiring M & I
Chip Seal with Polymer Modified Emulsion
• Positive
Micro-surfacing Rut Filling & Surface Treatment
• Surface Treatment (Service Period 4-6 years)
Superpave Mixes discontinued in 2001 (CTAA 2006)
ALBERTA INFRASTRUCTURE & TRANSPORTATION
ISSUES
Asphalt Availability an Issue in 2006
Contractor Capability & Aggregate Availability seen as issues
for mixes such as SMA
Cost of Modified Binders makes it difficult to justify based on
LCCA
FUTURE INIATIVES
Continue to Explore Options
•Including SMA for Intersections
CITY OF LETHBRIDGE
RECENT EXPERIENCE
2006 – Superpave Fine Graded w/ PG 64-28
2002 – Asphalt Rubber w/ 150/200 A
• Poor Initial Performance (Raveling)
2002-05 – Terminal Blend Rubber Modified Binder
• Good Performance
2002 & 2005 – SMA w/ PG 70-28
• Very Good Performance
Superpave Coarse Graded and
Fine Graded (PG 70-28, 150/200)
• Specified for All New
Major Road Construction
CITY OF LETHBRIDGE
ISSUES
Non-PMA Binders Being Used to Reduce Cost Premium
Partnering & Shared Risk Approach used for Implementing
Specialty Mixes (e.g. SMA)
FUTURE INITIATIVES
Examine Appropriateness of Superpave Moisture
Susceptibility Criteria
Examine Reduced Design Gyrations (75 for < 5 Million ESALs)
CITY OF CALGARY
RECENT EXPERIENCE
SMA, Superpave Coarse & Fine Graded, Asphalt Rubber (Wet & Dry
Process, Sulphur Extended Asphalt Modifier, Manufactured Shingle
Modifier, Warm Mix Asphalt (CTAA 2006)
• Good Rutting Performance with SMA
• Good Overall Performance with Asphalt Rubber discontinuation
of subsidy could effect future)
• Good Performance with PG 70 & 76, but more use of PG 64-31
(lower cost premium) Superpave Fine (PG 64-31) designed with 75
Gyrations has worked well
• Superpave Fine designed to 100 gyrations have been inconsistent
in performance (low AC, raveling)
• Concern with emissions with SEAM,
no advantages evident
(still can smell 2 years later)
CITY OF CALGARY
ISSUES
Cost Premium with Premium Mixes (performance experience
justifies cost)
Contractor Capability Typically not an Issue (inconsistent
performance once or twice a year)
Cost Escalation and Lack of Bidding Contractors
FUTURE INITIATIVES
Goal is to work towards a long term strategy for regular and
premium mix applications
CITY OF EDMONTON
RECENT EXPERIENCE
Superpave w/ PG 54-34 & PMA I
• Poor Rutting Performance with PMA I
Asphalt Rubber w/ 150/200 A & 80/100 A
• Poor Performance Initial 2 Years (Raveling)
• Recent years may be better
• Some Constructability Issues / Placement Temperature
SMA w/ PG 70-28 & PG 76-28 (CTAA 2004)
• Excellent Performance on High Traffic Applications
(Yellowhead Trail,
Whitemud Dr.
and Intersections)
CITY OF EDMONTON
ISSUES
Aggregate Quality is an issue in Edmonton
• Aggregate Cost Premium for Specialty Mixes
• Quarried SMA Aggregate Imported
PMA Binder Cost, and in some cases availability, a issue
Contractor Capability an issue with new products until comfort
level gained – May have caused some past problems
FUTURE INIATIVES
Currently looking at Warm Mix Asphalt as a
potential new process
Leonnie Kavanagh – Manitoba Highways
Darwin Kupskay – City of Winnepeg
Magdy Beshara – Saskatchewan Highways & Transportation
Harlan Ritchie – City of Regina
Mike Oliver – BC Ministry of Transporation
Bill Mahoney – City of Kelowna
Harold Fograscher – Corporation of the City of Delta
Chuck McMillan – Alberta Infrastructure & Transportation
Ken Yeung – City of Calgary
Hugh Donovan – City of Edmonton
THANK YOU
Leonnie Kavanagh – Manitoba Highways
Darwin Kupskay – City of Winnepeg
Magdy Beshara – Saskatchewan Highways & Transportation
Harlan Ritchie – City of Regina
Mike Oliver – BC Ministry of Transporation
Bill Mahoney – City of Kelowna
Harold Fograscher – Corporation of the City of Delta
Chuck McMillan – Alberta Infrastructure & Transportation
Ken Yeung – City of Calgary
Hugh Donovan – City of Edmonton