Final Scope
In recent years, petroleum and aggregate economics and supply have increased the need for high quality, cost effective alternatives to virgin paving mixtures. Transportation professionals are asking for methods that optimize the value of in-place materials while minimizing traffic congestion and the environmental impact of paving operations. Current pavement recycling and reclamation methods answer all of these needs, in particular-
· Hot In-Place Recycling (HIR)
· Cold In-Place Recycling (CIR) and
· Full-Depth Reclamation (FDR)
These techniques provide economical and sustainable solutions that reduce demand on raw materials, energy consumption, and production of GHG, while maintaining functionality and performance.
Key issues to be addressed include the need for specific in-place recycling and reclamation strategies and a discussion of how they might be used within the planned life-cycle of a pavement. Information to be collected for this study includes:
· Project selection criteria
o Pavement condition, traffic, geometric and environmental considerations
o In-place material testing and evaluation, including recyclability of existing materials
o Criteria used for selection of strategies
· Extent of annual construction program
· For each of the three strategies (including rationale for use)
o Types of liquids or stabilizers used to condition the RAP
o Mixture design methods
o Structural design considerations
o Processing methods and equipment
o Inspection and quality assurance
o Wearing course considerations
· Barriers to implementation, including
o lack of engineering design standards
o lack of evidence that it will work
o lack of local, experienced contractors
o tried it and it failed
o opposition from competing industries
· Data on documented performance, costs, and benefits
· Quantification of environmental benefits
The report will clearly differentiate between the three strategies, and the rationale for choosing one over the other. Case studies will be incorporated to illustrate best practices. Gaps in knowledge and research needs will be identified. The report will gather and summarize currently-used structural coefficients, with the caveat that these may need validation and further research.
Information will be gathered through a review of U.S. and international literature, survey of practitioners including the AASHTO SC on Materials and installation contractors (through ARRA), and selected interviews.
Information Sources (partial list):
Asphalt Recycling and Reclaiming Association- Wirtgen manuals
Caltrans report- Viability of Hot In-Place Recycling as a Pavement Preservation Strategy
National Asphalt Paving Association
Ontario papers (Tom Kazmierowski)
FHWA Survey- Jason Harrington
AASHTO Task Force 38
TRR 2005 paper on Nevada case
Utah Western conference presentations
Asphalt Institute
South Africa- CSIR
Australia- ARRB
University of New Hampshire Recycled Materials Resource Center
Equipment manufacturers
TRB Committee AFK10, General Issues in Asphalt Technology
France- Colas
Topic Panel
Sohila Bemanian, Parsons Transportation Group Inc.
Thomas J. Kazmierowski, Ontario Ministry of Transportation
Brian Luce, Maine DOT
Don Matthews, Pavement Recycling Systems, Inc.
Rebecca S. McDaniel, Purdue University
Joseph W. Schroer, Missouri DOT
Shakir R. Shatnawi, California DOT
Michael Voth, Federal Highway Administration
Eric Weaver, Federal Highway Administration
Frederick Hejl, Transportation Research Board
Consultant
R. Gary Hicks, California Pavement Preservation Center
Mary Stroup-Gardiner, California State University
TRB Staff
Jon M. Williams
phone 202/334-3245
fax 202/334-2081
email jwilliams@nas.edu
