GeoMEast 2017: Materials for Sustainable Infrastructure pp 1-15 | Cite as
Evaluation of Non-nuclear Alternatives to Replace the Nuclear Density Gauge During Compaction Quality Control of Unbound Pavement Layers
Abstract
Pavement performance is highly dependent on several factors that include: structural adequacy, material properties, traffic loading, and construction quality. The quality of subgrade or base/subbase compaction also significantly affects the performance of pavements; predominantly flexible pavements. In particular, the majority of the distresses in flexible pavements are mainly attributed to the compaction defect in these layers. In current practice, the compaction quality of these layers is usually quantified using the nuclear density gauge (NDG). However, several concerns arise due to the use of the NDG. This study was initiated with the aim of evaluating the sensitivity of the parameters measured using non-nuclear methods/devices to moisture content, compaction effort, testing time after compaction, and aggregate type. To fulfill this objective, a laboratory procedure for compacting large samples was developed. This procedure facilitated testing using three non-nuclear devices: Briaud compaction device (BCD), light weight falling deflectometer (LWD), and dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP). Four types of aggregates, two subgrade soils, one dense graded aggregate, and one recycled concrete aggregates, were selected to comprehensively cover a wide range of subgrade and base/subbase materials. Each device was evaluated for accuracy and repeatability. The sensitivity of the results measured from each device to moisture content, compaction effort applied, and testing time was also evaluated. Based on testing results, it was concluded that the DCP was most sensitive to detecting changes in the measured parameters. In addition, precision of the DCP was similar to other non-nuclear devices.
Notes
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the New Jersey Department of Transportation for funding the study presented in this paper. The findings reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented. The contents do not reflect the official views or policies of the New Jersey Department of Transportation. This paper does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
References
- Abu-Farsakh, M., Nazzal, M., Alshibli, K., Seyman, E.: Application of DCP in pavement construction control. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1913, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., pp. 53–61 (2005)Google Scholar
- Alshibli, K., Abu-Farsakh, M., Seyman, E.: Laboratory evaluation of the Geogauge and light falling weight deflectometer as a construction control tool. ASCE J. Mater. Civil Eng. 17(5), 560–569 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Briaud, J.-L., Rhee, K., Saez, D.: The BCD: a new instrument for compaction control. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington D.C. (2009)Google Scholar
- Chan, E.E., Champion, F.C., Chang, J.C., Hannon, J.B., Forsyth, R.A.: Improved performance criteria for use in nuclear gage specifications. California Department of Transportation (1975)Google Scholar
- Hearth, A., Mohammad, L., Gaspard, K., Gudishala, R., Abu-Farsakh, M.: The use of dynamic cone penetrometer to predict resilient modulus of subgrade soils. Report No. FHWA-LAW-417, FHWA, Washington, DC (2007)Google Scholar
- Kim, J., Kang, H., Kim, D., Park, D., Kim, W.: Evaluation of in situ modulus of compacted subgrades using portable falling weight deflectometer and plate-bearing load test. J. Mater. Civil Eng. 19(6), 492–499 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lenke, L., McKeen, R., Grush, M.: Laboratory evaluation of Geogauge for compaction control. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of Transportation Research Board, No. 1849, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., pp. 20–30 (2003)Google Scholar
- Nazarian, S., Mazari, M., Abdallah, I., Puppala, A.J., Mohammad, L.N., Abu-Farsakh, M.Y.: Modulus-based construction specification for compaction of earthwork and unbound aggregates. NCHRP Report 10–84. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 10–84, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2014)Google Scholar
- Nazzal, M., Abu-Farsakh, M., Alshibli, K., Mohammad, N.: Evaluation the LFWD device for in situ measurement of elastic modulus of pavement layers. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2016, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washing D.C., pp. 13–22 (2007)Google Scholar
- New Jersey Department of Transportation. Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. New Jersey (2007). www.state.nj.us/transportation/eng/specs/2007/Division.shtml. Accessed 1 May 2015
- Weidinger, D.A.: Laboratory evaluation of the briaud compaction device. J. Geotechn. Geoenviron. Eng. 135(10), 1543–1546 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar