Estimating Remaining Service Life of Concrete Pavements

10/31/2014
Robert Rodden, P.E.

www.robertrodden.com
Evaluation of Concrete Pavements
Estimating
Remaining
Service Life
10/31/2014
Estimating Remaining Service Life
Network-Level
Impact
10/31/2014
Some Perspective
on Asset Management
Strategic asset allocation is a well established theory that is most notably
applied in personal portfolio management
This method adheres to the base policy mix principle, in which a combination
of asset classes exists and the combined return is based on a proportionate
combination of each asset
For example, for an investment portfolio:
% of
Portfolio
Stocks
75
Bonds
25
Combined
100
Annual
Rate of
Return
10%
5%
8.75%
Return
7.5
1.25
8.75
Application of strategic asset allocation to a

pavement system allows the system to
maintain the network in the highest overall
condition possible at the lowest constant
level of dollar flow into the pavement
network
Such a system is inherently dynamic, so

reallocation is necessary at regular intervals
to deliver a continuously optimized system
Thus, the asset allocation mix will reflect the

strategic goals for the system at any given
time
10/31/2014
The Pavement Asset

Management Cycle
The Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA) publication A Quick Check of
Your Highway Network Health says:
By viewing the network in this manner

[with each pavement as an asset in a
collected network], there is a certain
comfort derived from the ability to match
pavement actions with their
physical/functional needs. However, by
only focusing on projects, opportunities for
strategically managing entire road
networks and asset needs are
overlooked.
This approach might conflict with the

traditionally used worst first approach
10/31/2014
Network Health
It is critical to know if a proposed action

(e.g., preservation or reconstruction) will
produce a net improvement of the overall
condition of the roadway network
The framework presented in this FHWA

document assumes that a remaining service
life (in years) is estimated for every section in
the roadway network
Note that the remaining service life (RSL)

may not be the point of ultimate failure of
the roadway but, possibly, a pre-determined
trigger at which preservation or some other
activity will be considered
10/31/2014
Remaining Service Life Approach

to a Network Level PMS
10/31/2014
Current Network Condition
The % of the
network with 0
years remaining will
begin to increase
with time
The total pavement

life lost each year is
the # of lane mi
(km) in network x 1
year to keep
system at the
current condition,
you have to add
that much life to the
system each year!
10/31/2014
Network Condition in 1 Year

if Nothing is Done
The traditional approach has been to do something about the

pavement sections with 0 years of service life remaining
When a pavement has 0 years of service life remaining,

reconstruction likely is necessary; reconstruction is the most
expensive approach to add significant service life to a section
When reconstructed, the % of roadways with 0 years of service life

remaining will have a new service life that might originally be inline with the intended design life
10/31/2014
The Worst-First Approach
Consider a simple, hypothetical network of 3,000 mi (km)

1/3 of network requires reconstruction NOW!
1/3 of network requires work in 5 years
1/3 of network requires work in 10 years
Current average remaining service life (RSL) of the network =

(1,000 * 0 yrs + 1,000 * 5 yrs + 1,000 * 10 yrs)/3,000 = 5 yrs
The options for reconstruction are:

Long-Term = 30 year service life
Short-Term = 15 year service life
10/31/2014
Impact of New Construction Service

Life on the Network RSL
10
mi (km) of
Network
1,000
1,000
1,000
Years to
Next Fix
5 (1000 x 5) 5,000 yr-mi (yr-km)

10,000 yr-mi (yr-km)
10
15
Total = 30,000 yr-mi (yr-km)
Average Remaining Service Life for Network

= 30,000/3,000 = 10 yr
mi (km) of
Network
1,000
1,000
1,000
10/31/2014
Years of Service
in Segments
Years to
Next Fix
Years of Service
in Segments
5 (1000 x 5) 5,000 yr-mi (yr-km)

10
30
Total = 45,000 yr-mi (yr-km)
Average Remaining Service Life for Network

= 45,000/3,000 = 15 yr
LONG-TERM
SHORT-TERM
Hypothetical Network Results
11
Evaluation of an existing PMS and consideration of

alternative new construction options is relatively
simple once the PMS is developed
Making the decision on what pavement

preservation activity is most appropriate and at
what time and location on a specific project is
much more significant to the success of an
effective pavement allocation program
Remaining Service Life (RSL) is the tool we need

to apply.
10/31/2014
Deciding What, When, Where
12
The primary problem with RSL on a network level is that it focuses

exclusively on performance, thus ignoring the cost impacts
In the U.S., attempts are being made now to try and tie RSL and $
together in PMS to develop metrics like $ / lane mi (km) / yr this
will server as a much more pure metric of the cost effectiveness of
both new construction and preservation alternatives
10/31/2014
Looking into the Future
13
10/31/2014
Estimating Remaining Service Life
Project-Level
Estimation
14
Some of the many things that might impact how long a

pavement will be serviceable:

Rounding in design
Over- or underbuilding pavement layer thicknesses during construction
In-place strength of materials
Construction defects
Poor traffic projections (e.g., if 50% of the design traffic is realized in the
first 5 years the pavement is in service, 50% of the cracking fatigue
capacity should be expected to remain, regardless of what other
performance metrics like FWD at joints or surface profile [IRI] might
indicate)
10/31/2014
RSL Design Life Years of Service
15
Predicted performance is compared

to actual on a regular basis to
improve predictive models in the
future
Continuous revisiting of models is

crucial because designs, materials,
construction practices, etc. all
change with time and new design,
material, and preservation methods
come out all the time!
10/31/2014
Accuracy Improves as
PMS Builds Upon Itself
16
Could use an available performance prediction model on as-built

pavement sections and compare to in-service conditions to
estimate remaining capacity or life (step 3 below) this static
approach provides a relatively low reliability in the prediction
To have a reliable prediction of RSL, the process requires:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Deciding performance triggers

Setting performance threshold limits
Selecting/developing performance prediction curves
Developing data collection protocols
Establishing a process for strategy selection
Performing regular field measurements and updates
10/31/2014
Estimation of RSL of an
Existing Pavement
17
FREE Engineering software that can determine and report the

health of pavement networks in terms of RSL based on IRI and
various pavement distresses
Uses pavement performance models developed by FHWA

Simplified versions of the complex models used in the AASHTO MEPDG/
DARWin-ME/Pavement ME
Uses FHWAs National Pavement Cost Models (NAPCOM)
Pavement health can be assessed for different pavement types

and under various environmental and administrative conditions
Can be utilized on a single corridor or applied across a broad

network such as a district, state, or even country
RSL can be expressed in years or number of load applications
10/31/2014
FHWAs Pavement Health

Track (PHT) Software
18
10/31/2014
FHWAs PHT
Software
FREE at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/healthtrack/
19
Necessary data includes:

Pavement distress data

Material properties
Climate
Loading
Of course, performance metrics and thresholds must be defined

by the owner of the network
Provides standardized charts and reports and GIS mapping of

data (with groupings) and allows for report customization
Modular design allows expansion (e.g., bridges, new techniques)
10/31/2014
FHWAs Pavement Health

Track (PHT) Software
20
10/31/2014
FHWAs Pavement Health Track (PHT)

Software Default Terminal Values
21
FHWAs PHT Software:

Prediction Examples
22
10/31/2014
10/31/2014
FHWAs PHT
Software
23
10/31/2014
Robert Rodden, P.E.

www.robertrodden.com
Questions?
24
Measureable pavement performance conditions that can be

used to trigger a need for corrective action
Might be network-level:
Leverages automated data collection efforts
Metrics like IRI, faulting, cracking, friction, etc.
Might be project-level:
Requires more subject interpretation and detailed field surveys
Metrics like material-related distress, lane-to-should separation, lane-tolane opening, etc.
Might be a combination of network-level and project-level
10/31/2014
Step 1: Deciding
Performance Triggers
25
Consider the various thresholds we discussed for the different

structural and functional distresses but local thresholds are
needed and might be different for different roadway
classifications, for example:
Tolerable roughness of the pavement varies from country to country
and for low-speed versus high-speed roadways
Faulting, once initiated, typically will develop more quickly on
roadways with larger numbers of heavy trucks
Friction loss might occur more quickly in an area where aggregates are
more prone to polishing
10/31/2014
Step 2: Setting Performance

Threshold Limits
26
Ideally, these performance prediction curves are developed

locally for the metrics employed and using past field
measurements of distress development
If such historic performance data is not available locally, wellsupported existing performance prediction models might be used
as a starting point in the system, to then be updated in the future
Because active preservation is intended as part of a

comprehensive system, models are also necessary on
preservation activities themselves (e.g., dowel bar retrofit, fulldepth path, joint resealing, etc.)
10/31/2014
Step 3: Selecting/Developing
Performance Prediction Curves
27
These data collection protocols need to be developed to provide

the metrics being considered as performance triggers
The data collected will be used to:

Provide a point-in-time to assess a single road section
Validate and update models
Identify trends in measurement variability, testing frequency and
sampling interval deficiencies, etc.
10/31/2014
Step 4: Developing Data

Collection Protocols
28
The proper preservation activity (or consideration of

reconstruction) requires many different variables to be
considered, including the pavement condition and available $
Life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) is used to help balance various

alternate actions, future considerations, and cost
On the network level, the process for strategy selection is used

more to characterize the overall state of the network and to
identify section that require action so that.
On the project level, the process for strategy selection is used to

support decisions on the corrective action necessary on individual
projects
10/31/2014
Step 5: Establishing a Process for

Strategy Selection
29
A programmatic approach is necessary to schedule regular

automated condition surveying both to identify sections that
require action and to build a performance database to improve
performance predictions in future cycles
The process itself should be reviewed periodically as well to

incorporate new advancements in pavement distress
measurements, modeling of performance predictions, and other
considerations
10/31/2014
Step 6: Performing Regular Field

Measurements and Updates
30
Role
of
RSL
31
10/31/2014
Role
of
RSL
32
10/31/2014

Estimating Remaining Service Life of Concrete Pavements

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Estimating Remaining Service Life of Concrete Pavements

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

10/31/2014

Robert Rodden, P.E.

Evaluation of Concrete Pavements