Laboratory Study of Structural Behavior of Alternative Dowel Bars, April 2006

Load transfer across transverse joints has always been a factor contributing to the useful life of concrete pavements. For many years, round steel dowels have been the conventional load transfer mechanism. Many problems have been associated with the round steel dowels. The most detrimental effect of the steel dowel is corrosion. Repeated loading over time also damages joints. When a dowel is repeatedly loaded over a long period of time, the high bearing stresses found at the top and bottom edge of a bar erode the surrounding concrete. This oblonging creates multiple problems in the joint. Over the past decade, Iowa State University has performed extensive research on new dowel shapes and materials to mitigate the effects of oblonging and corrosion. This report evaluates the bearing stress performance of six different dowel bar types subjected to two different shear load laboratory test methods. The first load test is the AASHTO T253 method. The second procedure is an experimental cantilevered dowel test. The major objective was to investigate and improve the current AASHTO T253 test method for determining the modulus of dowel support, k0. The modified AASHTO test procedure was examined alongside an experimental cantilever dowel test. The modified AASHTO specimens were also subjected to a small-scale fatigue test in order to simulate long-term dowel behavior with respect to concrete joint damage. Loss on ignition tests were also performed on the GFRP dowel specimens to determine the resin content percentage. The study concluded that all of the tested dowel bar shapes and materials were adequate with respect to performance under shear loading. The modified AASHTO method yielded more desirable results than the ones obtained from the cantilever test. The investigators determined that the experimental cantilever test was not a satisfactory test method to replace or verify the AASHTO T253 method.

Sieve Analysis of Combined Aggregate Samples by Different Test Methods, MLR-84-05, 1982

This past winter the sieve analysis of combined aggregate was investigated. This study was given No. 26 by the Central Laboratory. The purpose of this work was to try and develop a sieve analysis procedure for combined aggregate which is less time consuming and has the same accuracy as the method described in I.M. 304. In an attempt to use a variety of aggregates for this investigation, a request was made to each District Materials Office to obtain at least 3 different combined aggregate samples in their respective districts. At the same time it was also requested that the field technician test these samples, prior to submitting them to the Central Laboratory. The field technician was instructed to test each sample as described in method I.M. 304 and also by a modified AASHTO T27 method which will be identified in the report as Method A. The modified AASHTO Method A was identical to T27 with the exception that a smaller sample is used for testing. The field technicians submitted the samples, test results and also comments regarding the modified AASHTO procedure. The general comments of the modified AASHTO procedure were: The method was much simpler to follow; however, it took about the same amount of time so there was no real advantage. After reviewing AASHTO T27, T164, I.M. 304 and Report No. FHWA-RD-77-53 another test method was purposed. Report No. FHWA-RD-77-53 is a report prepared by FHWA from data they gathered concerning control practices and shortcut or alternative test methods for aggregate gradation. A second test method was developed which also was very similar to AASHTO T27, The test procedure for this method is attached and is identified as Method B. The following is a summary of test results submitted by the Field Technicians and obtained by the aggregate section of the Central Laboratory.

Reflective Crack Mitigation Guide for Flexible Pavements, TR-641, 2015

Reflective cracks form in pavements when hot-mix asphalt (HMA) overlays are placed over jointed and/or severely cracked rigid and flexible pavements. In the first part of the research, survival analysis was conducted to identify the most appropriate rehabilitation method for composite pavements and to evaluate the influence of different factors on reflective crack development. Four rehabilitation methods, including mill and fill, overlay, heater scarification (SCR), and rubblization, were analyzed using three performance indicators: reflective cracking, international roughness index (IRI), and pavement condition index (PCI). It was found that rubblization can significantly retard reflective cracking development compared to the other three methods. No significant difference for PCI was seen among the four rehabilitation methods. Heater scarification showed the lowest survival probability for both reflective cracking and IRI, while an overlay resulted in the poorest overall pavement condition based on PCI. In addition, traffic level was found not to be a significant factor for reflective cracking development. An increase in overlay thickness can significantly delay the propagation of reflective cracking for all four treatments. Soil types in rubblization pavement sites were assessed, and no close relationship was found between rubblized pavement performance and subgrade soil condition. In the second part of the research, the study objective was to evaluate the modulus and performance of four reflective cracking treatments: full rubblization, modified rubblization, crack and seat, and rock interlayer. A total of 16 pavement sites were tested by the surface wave method (SWM), and in the first four sites both falling weight deflectometer (FWD) and SWM were conducted for a preliminary analysis. The SWM gave close concrete layer moduli compared to the FWD moduli on a conventional composite pavement. However, the SWM provided higher moduli for the rubblized concrete layer. After the preliminary analysis, another 12 pavement sites were tested by the SWM. The results showed that the crack and seat method provided the highest moduli, followed by the modified rubblization method. The full rubblization and the rock interlayer methods gave similar, but lower, moduli. Pavement performance surveys were also conducted during the field study. In general, none of the pavement sites had rutting problems. The conventional composite pavement site had the largest amount of reflective cracking. A moderate amount of reflective cracking was observed for the two pavement sites with full rubblization. Pavements with the rock interlayer and modified rubblization treatments had much less reflective cracking. It is recommended that use of the modified rubblization and rock interlayer treatments for reflective cracking mitigation are best.

Evaluation of the SHRP Modified Georgia Digital Faultmeter, MLR-93-01, 1993

The SHRP Modified Georgia Digital Faultmeter was loaned to the Iowa Department of Transportation in January 1993 for evaluation. A study was undertaken comparing the faultmeter to Iowa's current method of fault measurement. The following conclusions were made after comparing the faultmeter to Iowa's gauge: The faultmeter was lighter and easier to maneuver and position. The faultmeter's direct readout was quicker to read. The faultmeter has increased precision. The faultmeter gave consistently lower fault readings than the Iowa gauge.