Geocells. Sundeep Inti Vivek Tandon

Similar documents
SUPPORTING NOTES FOR THE EVALUATION OF UNBOUND ROAD BASE AND SUB-BASE AGGREGATES

Mechanical Stabilisation for Permanent Roads

Emerging Concrete Pavement Solutions Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC)

Case Studies Using Falling Weight Deflectometer Data with Mechanistic Empirical Design and Analysis

DRAFT WSDOT PAVEMENT POLICY

TexSys: Guide for Selecting HMA for Texas Flexible Pavements

TEST FOR STABILOMETER VALUE OF BITUMINOUS MIXTURES

PROPOSAL. PROPOSAL OF, a corporation a

Illinois Center for Transportation

Designing and Benchmarking Mine Roads for Safe and Efficient Haulage. Roger Thompson Alex Visser

Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA , United States.

Performance of Ultra-Thin Bounded Wearing Course (UTBWC) Surface Treatment on US-169 Princeton, Minnesota. Transportation Research

Downloaded from Downloaded from /1

50 Year Roads: Don't Accept Anything Less

East Downtown Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) No. 15 Infrastructure Assessment Study

Pavement Type Selection Not a Black or White Issue. Marvin Traylor

MNDOT PAVEMENT DESIGN MANUAL

SECTION 48 - TRAFFIC STRIPES AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS TABLE OF CONTENTS

Drop Weight Testing on Sandwich Panels with a Novel Thermoplastic Core Material

Use of Roller Compacted Concrete By GDOT. Presented By: Joe W. Sheffield, PE Georgia Department of Transportation District Engineer, Tifton, GA

SPECIFIC FACTORS THAT MAY AFFECT PROFILES

Chapter 37 Tex-241-F, Superpave Gyratory Compacting of Test Specimens of Bituminous Mixtures

Analysis of NAPTF Trafficking Dynamic Response Data For Pavement Deformation Behavior. Center of Excellence for Airport Technology, CEAT

RESISTANCE OF COMPACTED ASPHALT MIXTURE TO MOISTURE INDUCED DAMAGE (Kansas Test Method KT-56)

Update on Performance of Thin Asphalt Overlays

County of Sacramento Standard Construction Specifications January 1, 2008 TECHNICAL PROVISIONS

AEMA-ARRA-ISSA-PPRA Fall Meeting Recycling, Ayrton Senna Highway Brasil, & USA

provides an increased stiffness and strength compared with standard cee studs, resulting in lighter headers which require less labor to install.

Reinstatement of sub-base and base (roadbase) in non-bituminous materials

Free Floating Screed. Screed Weight Forward Motion. Head of Material. Material Stability. Angle of Attack

Florida Method of Test for MEASUREMENT OF WATER PERMEABILITY OF COMPACTED ASPHALT PAVING MIXTURES

Challenges of Tack Coat

BULK SPECIFIC GRAVITY AND UNIT WEIGHT OF COMPACTED HOT MIX ASPHALT (HMA) (Kansas Test Method KT-15)

, Texas State Department of Highways and Pub1 ic Interim - September 1988

SECTION 48 - TRAFFIC STRIPES AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS TABLE OF CONTENTS

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. Condition of Texas Pavements

Kraton Ultra-thin HMA / WMA Overlay Study

Transportation Knowledge

SPECIFICATION FOR REPEATED LOAD TRIAXIAL (RLT) TESTING FOR PAVEMENT MATERIALS

Comparing Measured and Theoretical Depth Deflections Under a Falling Weight Deflectometer Using a Multidepth Deflectometer

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. Condition of Texas Pavements

* Numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end of this paper. 84

Newport 301 Product Data Sheet

Pavement Management Program

SECTION 5: PEER CITY REVIEW

BURIED PIPE RESPONSE SUBJECTED TO TRAFFIC LOAD EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Grading Plan - Drawing No. C-2 - Project Revision 1 dated January 30, 2018.

Tex-616-J, Construction Fabrics

MnROAD Mainline IRI Data and Lane Ride Quality MnROAD Lessons Learned December 2006

I-64 BATTLEFIELD BLVD: PERFORMANCE MEETS EXPECTATION

CENGRS GEOTECHNICA PVT. LTD. Job No Sheet No. 1

6.0 ENGINEERING. Build Anything Better. REPRINTED 2017

CHAPTER 5: VACUUM TEST WITH VERTICAL DRAINS

TABLE OF CONTENTS PRODUCTS & INFORMATION

Presented to: Louisiana Transportation Conference February 26, Presenter: Corey Zollinger, P.E

Calibration and Validation of the Shell Fatigue Model Using AC10 and AC14 Dense Graded Hot Mix Asphalt Fatigue Laboratory Data

Theory of a vertically loaded Suction Pile in CLAY

On Monday, December 12, 2011, you will be briefed on Pavement Markings. The material is attached for your review.

BICYCLE PUBLIC HEARING INTRODUCTION. Kathy Kleinschmidt, P.E. Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator Dallas District

HIR on Oklahoma Turnpikes

Design and Finite Element Analysis of Fabricated Panama chock with 225T capacity

Guide for Assessing Hull-Girder Residual Strength for Tankers. July 1995

ASPHALT PAVING LEVEL 1

CE 535, Spring 2002 Preliminary Design Example 1 / 6

OLIVE AVENUE CLASS 2 BIKE LANES HSIP, CIP PROJECT NO CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARD

Displacement-based calculation method on soil-pile interaction of PHC pipe-piles

Dredging Engineering Short Course Texas A&M University January 2016

Pedestrian Treatments by

City of Dallas Standards and Guidelines for Traffic Control and Safety Treatments at Trail-Road Crossings

BEST PRACTICE FOR COMPACTING WARM AND HOT MIX ASPHALT NEAUPG OCTOBER 7,2009

DISTRIBUTION: Electronic Recipients List TRANSMITTAL LETTER NO. (13-01) MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. MANUAL: Road Design English Manual

REPORT HOLDER: FRAMECAD LICENSING LTD. POST OFFICE BOX 1292 AUCKLAND 1140 NEW ZEALAND EVALUATION SUBJECT: COLD FORMED STEEL C SHAPES AND TRACKS

Lateral Load Analysis Considering Soil-Structure Interaction. ANDREW DAUMUELLER, PE, Ph.D.

Pavement Evaluation of the Nairobi Eastern By-Pass Road

Illini Union Champaign, IL. February 24, Paul Lorton, P.E. Safety Programs Unit Chief IDOT, Division of Highways, Bureau of Safety Engineering

TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING

Full Depth Reclamation ALDOT FDR Requirements Lyndi D. Blackburn, PE

Cotton Belt Corridor PE/EIS

DESIGN AND INSTRUMENTATION OF THE STRUCTURAL PAVEMENT EXPERIMENT AT THE NCAT TEST TRACK

THE EFFECTS OF UTILITY CUT PATCHING ON PAVEMENT LIFE SPAN AND REHABILITATION COSTS

Introduction to Full Depth Asphalt Repairs. Setting Work Processes for a Quality Job Start in time to finish prior to Winter!

Ground Grading Criteria & Summary

Site Visit August 1, Presentation developed by J. Mahoney, University of Washington

REAL WORLD PAVEMENT PRESERVATION SOLUTIONS

Highway Committee MINUTES OF MEETING August 22, 2016

The application of shakedown approach to granular pavement layers

Expansion Joint Filler Evaluation APEL. Nomaflex

CONNECTIVITY PLAN. Adopted December 5, 2017 City of Virginia Beach

TANGIBLE CAPITAL ASSET (TCA) Reporting Guidelines for Land Development Projects

Design Modification of Ladder Chassis Frame

Gillfab 4422 Panel June 2002

Written Closure Plan. Pawnee Station - North CCR Landfill Public Service Company of Colorado Denver Colorado. October 17, 2016

Pressure Plate Drying and Wetting

Automated Design-Based Compaction Criteria for Airport Pavements Using FAARFIELD

in Backcalculation of Pavement Layer Moduli

FACILITY NAME: ASBA TRACK AND FIELD FACILITY AWARDS APPLICATION TRACK PORTION

VEHICLE CROSSING AND PEDESTRIAN CUTDOWN SET OUT

EVALUATION SUBJECT: DIVISION: HEATING, VENTILATING AND AIR CONDITIONING (HVAC) SECTION: HVAC DUCTS AND CASINGS.

La inclusion del HRF como material con fines estructurales en el nuevo Codigo Modelo 2010

INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS

Transcription:

Geocells Sundeep Inti Vivek Tandon

Need for Reinforcement Shortage of Good Quality Material Pavement Thickness Limitations Reduced Financial Resources

Presto Geocells Used Tenex

Laboratory Evaluation Plan (Soils) Two Subgrade Types Good (4.5 ksi) Poor (2.5 ksi) Three Base Types Good (15 ksi) Marginal (12 ksi) Poor (5 ksi)

Laboratory Evaluation Plan (Thickness) Subgrade Thickness 24 in. Base Thickness 10 in. Geocell Height 3, 4, and 6 in. Cover Thickness (7, 6 and 4 in.) Two Loading Plate Types (10 and 12 in.)

Laboratory Evaluation Plan (Box Dimension and Instrumentation) LVDT (vertical deformation) Cover Geocell Strain Gages c Subgrade Pressure Cells Box Size 3 by 4 by 5

Finite Element Modeling Geocell Cover Geocell + infill Load Geocell + infill Subgrade Quarter Model Section view

Typical Laboratory Test Results Stress (psi) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Stress on subgrade (unreinforced section) Loading Rest 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Cycles No Geocell 250 200 150 100 50 Stress (kpa) Stress (psi) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Stress on subgrade (reinforced section) 8.5 psi (reduction) 8 psi (reduction) 0 0 5000 10000 Cycles Geocell Base (9 ksi) Subgrade Base Cover (9 ksi) Geocell Subgrade 4 6 10 Unreinforced compared with 6 Geocell and 4 Cover The stress on subgrade due to unreinforced section is 35% more than reinforced section 250 200 150 100 50 Stress (kpa)

Comparison Between Laboratory and Finite Element Results 50.0 50.0 Stress (psi) 45.0 40.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 Loading 300 250 200 150 Stress (kpa) Stress (psi) 45.0 40.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 8.3 psi (reduction) Loading 300 250 200 150 Stress (kpa) Base (9 ksi) Base Cover (9 ksi) Geocell 6 4 15.0 10.0 5.0 100 50 15.0 10.0 5.0 100 50 Subgra de Subgra de 0.0 0 5 10 15 20 Cycles No Geocell 0 0.0 0 5 10 15 20 Cycles Geocell 0 10 Unreinforced compared with 4 Geocell and 6 Cover

Design Approach Back-calculation of Geocell Reinforced Layer using Stress Analysis Tool of FPS-21. Base (3 ksi) Cover 6 Base (3 ksi) 31.10 psi 20.20 psi Base (3 ksi) Cover 6 Geocell (? Ksi) 4 Base (70 Ksi) 4 Subgrade (4.5 ksi) Subgrade (4.5 ksi) Subgrade (4.5 ksi) Geocell Reinforced Unreinforced Base Equivalent Base Modulus

Design Using Equivalent Modulus - Paris District Lamar County, Paris District (2015 ADT 1450, 2037 ADT 2030) Surface Treatment (200 KSI) 0.5" HMA 500 KSI 3" Surface Treatment (200 KSI) 0.5" Surface Treatment (200 KSI) 0.5" HMA 500 KSI 3" HMA 500 KSI 3" CEMENT STABILIZED BASE (100 KSI) 7" FLEXIBLE BASE 30 KSI 12" FLEXIBLE BASE 30 KSI 6" GEOCELL BASE 48 KSI 4" SUBGRADE 9 KSI SUBGRADE 9 KSI 200" 200" SUBGRADE 9 KSI 196" Current Design Alternative 1 Alternative 2

Design Using Equivalent Modulus -Dallas District Ellis County, Dallas District (2017 ADT 1700, 2037 ADT 2400) HMA 500 KSI 3" HMA 500 KSI 2" FLEXIBLE BASE 40 KSI 8" HMA 500 KSI 2" HMA 500 KSI 2" FLEXIBLE BASE 25 KSI 20" FLEXIBLE BASE 40 KSI 10" FLEXIBLE BASE 40 KSI 12" CEMENT TREATED BASE 35 KSI 10" GEOCELL BASE 48 KSI 4" GEOCELL BASE 48 KSI 4" SUBGRADE 6 KSI 200" SUBGRADE 6 KSI 200" SUBGRADE 6 KSI 196" SUBGRADE 4.5 KSI 196" Current Design Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Design Using Equivalent Modulus -Fort Worth District Tarrant County, Fort Worth District (2010 ADT 22990, 2030 ADT 33220) HMA 500 KSI 4" HMA 500 KSI 4" CEMENT TREATED BASE 120 KSI 6" HMA 500 KSI CEMENT TREATED BASE 120 KSI 4" 6" Cement Treated 120 KSI 15" FLEXIBLE BASE 30 KSI 20" FLEXIBLE BASE 30 KSI 8" GEOCELL BASE 48 KSI 4" SUBGRADE 4.5 KSI SUBGRADE 4.5 KSI SUBGRADE 4.5 KSI 200" 200" 200" Current Design Alternative 1 Alternative 2

Life Cycle Cost Analysis (Paris) Current Design Description Units Unit Price No of Lanes Thickness (in) Width (feet) Length (miles) Quantity (Yd.3 ) Total Cost Surface Treatment (200 ksi) CY 115 2 0.5 12 1 196 $22,489 Hot Mix Asphalt (500 ksi) CY 115 2 3 12 1 1173 $134,933 Cement treated Base (100 ksi) CY 75 2 7 12 1 2738 $205,333 Subgrade (9 ksi) CY 2 2 200 12 1 78222 $156,444 Cost $519,199 Design With Geocell Description Units Unit Price No of Lanes Thickness (in) Width (feet) Length (miles) Quantity (Yd.3 ) Total Cost Surface Treatment (200 ksi) CY 115 2 0.5 12 1 196 $22,489 Hot Mix Asphalt (500 ksi) CY 115 2 3 12 1 1173 $134,934 Flexible Base (30 ksi) CY 52 2 6 12 1 2347 $122,027 Geocell Base CY? 2 4 12 1 1564? Subgrade (9 ksi) CY 2 2 196 12 1 76658 $153,316 Alternative Cost $410,276 Difference Compared with Current Design $108,923 Geocell Cost Per Square Yard $8

Life Cycle Cost Analysis (Dallas) Current Design Description Units Unit Price No of Lanes Thickness (in) Width (feet) Length (miles) Quantity (Yd.3 ) Total Cost Hot Mix Asphalt (500 ksi) CY 115 2 2 11 1 717 $82,459 Flexible Base (40 ksi) CY 56 2 8 11 1 2868 $160,616 Cement treated Base (35 ksi) CY 60 2 10 11 1 3585 $215,111 Subgrade (6 ksi) CY 2 2 200 11 1 71704 $143,407 Cost $601,593 Design With Geocell Description Units Unit Price No of Lanes Thickness (in) Width (feet) Length (miles) Quantity (Yd.3 ) Total Cost Hot Mix Asphalt (500 ksi) CY 115 2 2 11 1 717 $82,459 Flexible Base (30 ksi) CY 52 2 10 11 1 3585 $200,771 Geocell Base CY? 2 4 11 1 1434? Subgrade (4.5 ksi) CY 2 2 196 11 1 70270 $140,359 Alternative Cost $423,769 Difference Compared with Current Design $177,824 Geocell Cost Per Square Yard $14

Site Selected for Implementation -Paris (Texas)

Pavement Sections

Instrumentation Unreinforced Section

Instrumentation Reinforced Section

Soil Removal

Installation Help

Geocell Spreading

Final Geocell Layout

Geocell Infill Process

Unreinforced Section

Reinforced Section

Deflection of Spot 3 0 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7-10 -20 Deflection (mils) -30-40 -50-60 -70-80 Non-Geocell Geocell -90

0 Deflection of Spot 5 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7-10 Deflection (mils) -20-30 -40-50 -60 Non-Geocell Geocell -70

10/11/2018

Conclusions Use of Geocell Reduced Stress on Top of Subgrade Layer Pavement Can be Designed with Lower Quality Base and Subgrade Material and Still Reduce Overall Thickness of Pavement System Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) Suggests Lower Overall Cost of Construction Sustainable Solution to Material Problem

Thanks TxDOT for the Support??????????