You are on page 1of 6

Pavements: Past, Present, and Future

by Thomas J. Pasko, Jr.


s designers planning for the future, we must continually look back to where we have been for both the mistakes made and the lessons learned. But it is amazing how often we have appeared to reinvent the wheel or have duplicated previous experiences. Duplication, however, is not without value because it provides verification to support the logic of our design philosophy.

The Past
Most of the important basic research and development on pavements predates the age of computerization. The valuable experimental works and writings of Friberg, Teller, Bradbury, Westergaard, Childs, VanBreeman, etc., are rarely mentioned in todays technical papers. These works are described in more detail in ACI Monograph No. 7, Better Concrete Pavement Serviceability, by Finney.1 Many believe that the history of concrete pavement began in 1894 with the placement in Bellefontaine, Ohio. That pavement is still in use and the American Concrete Pavement Association memorialized its builder, George Bartholomew, on the pavements centennial. But, according to Blanchards American Highway Engineers Handbook of 1919, In 1879, North stated that in Scotland a concrete has been used with portland cement for binding. The surface was

put on and rolled with a steam roller. After this was done, instead of putting on a binding material and rolling that in as usual, portland cement grout, one of sand to one of cement, mixed to the consistence of cream was carefully poured in so as to fill all the voids between the broken stone and form a solid matrix to hold each stone firmly in position, The stone was thoroughly wet just before pouring in the grout. One barrel of cement was used to each 8.7 yd2 (7.3 m2) of pavement. After the mortar had set for 24 hours, sand was thrown over the surface and water was sprinkled upon it and all travel was kept off it for 9 days. This has been down for 8 months and already shows that the size of stone used was too small The cost of this pavement was $1.00/yd2 ($1.20/m2 ). In 1913, McClintock testified concerning this work, in the case of the Hassam Paving Co. versus the Consolidated Contract Co., as follows: The piece of pavement laid developed irregular temperature cracks It was some 2-1/2 years after the pavement was laid ... that it was deemed wise by the city authorities to cover the new portion of the roadway with asphalt. I see no reason to try to correct history. We can be content knowing that the Bellefontaine pavement was the first long-lasting PCC pavement and we can let the asphalt promoters revel in the Rochester pavement being the first overlay of PCC pavement in 1896!

Fig. 1 A view of the Pittsburg, Calif. Test Road. 4

very good; but when the road commenced to break, it went to pieces very fast.2 Additionally, Blanchard goes on: The first portland cement concrete (PCC) pavements in the United States are usually referred to as being laid in Bellefontaine, Ohio, in 1894, but as a matter of fact, the year before, J. Y. McClintock, county engineer of Monroe County, N.Y., put down on South Fitzhugh St., Rochester, a section of Portland cement grouted macadam. This was a forerunner of the modern concrete pavement of the Hassam type. An excerpt from McClintocks 1894 report is as follows: The surface of an existing macadam pavement was picked off and a layer of trap rock 6 in. (150 mm) thick in the middle and 2 in. (51 mm) thick at edge of paved gutters was
May1998

The first slabs were about 6 in. of uniform thickness usually about 6 to 8 ft 2 (0.6 to 0.7 m2 ), or of dimensions that were compatible with the mixer capacity. As better concrete construction equipment developed, slabs got longer and wider. Because joint edges became chipped and faulted, they were soon minimized to create ribbons of unjointed concrete which then cracked transversely. As the width increased to handle two lanes of traffic, longitudinal cracking became prevalent. Soon thickened centerline, or keel section, pavement was being tried. By 1909, almost 600,000 yd2 (500,000 m2 ) of pavement had been placed. In 1909, a test of various materials brick, granite, wood blocks, and concrete was conducted in Wayne County,
47

Table 1 Plate bearing test data on New York roadway10


Variables A. Subbase tests Granular (Item 3) Granular (Item 3X) B. Base course tests Granular (Item 4) Bituminous-stabilized (Item 59WX) Soil-cement (Item 59YS) C. Pavement tests Slab length, 20 ft Slab length, 60 ft 10 in. Base type, granular Base type, bituminous-stabilized Base type, soil-cement 1120 1164 1075 1153 1186 1187 1249 293 1240 257 57 33 24 54 12 652 979 920 264 373 994 24 12 54 530 830 246 888 12 63 _ x, pci Modulus 1 , pci n

Michigan, using a circular track with a Paving Determinator, which consisted of an iron-rimmed wheel on one end of a 20 ft (6 m) pole and steel horseshoes on the other end. The test resulted in the construction of the first mile of rural pavement for autos. The Report of the 1914 National Conference on Concrete Roadbuilding contained over 260 pages of guidelines on all aspects of concrete pavement design and construction.2 About 1917, dowels were used for the first time in Virginia.3 This led to the evolution of many different configurations of slab cross sections, jointing, and reinforcement schemes. In 1921-22, the Pittsburg, Calif. road test was conducted.4 Surplus army trucks (solid tires) were used to traverse the instrumented slabs of various configurations and reinforcement schemes. See Fig. 1. In 1922-23, the Bates Road Test in Illinois subjected 78 different pavement sections to truck traffic. 5 The benefit of thickened edges and longitudinal centerline joints in reducing the amount of slab cracking was revealed. Additionally, the superiority of concrete in performance over brick and asphalt pavements was demonstrated and the tests led to the first thickness equation for concrete slabs. The results of the Pittsburg, Calif. and the Bates road tests showed the advantages of using wire mesh, which held cracks together as the slabs were tested to destruction. Eventually, this reasoning was used to justify a 1 to 2 in. (25 to 51 mm) decrease in concrete thickness for adequately reinforced slabs.6 (I must add that this justification was for low speed roadways, which were still passable upon failure as the slabs remained articulated.) Over the years from the Bates road test to the late 1950s, the Bureau of Public Roads conducted many detailed measurements of pavement slab properties (moisture and thermal gradients, slab deflections under load, impact, load transfer devices, subgrade friction, etc.) that were published. These studies were integrated by Westergaard and others to form our early slab design procedures. In 1950-51, the Bureau of Public Roads (now FHWA) with the Highway Research Board (now TRB), several states, and truck manufacturers and other highway-related

industries conducted Road Test One-MD, just south of Washington, D.C. 7 An existing 1.1 mi (1.8 km) section of two-lane highway was carefully inventoried and instrumented, then traversed by 1000 trucks per day. The results showed the value of good load transfer between slabs, the effects of speed and axle weights (it produced the first dynamic wheel equivalence factors), and the problems caused by pumping. By the mid-1950s, continuously reinforced concrete pavements (CRCP) started to gain in popularity because the design offered the benefit of eliminating joint distress. The cost of the steel was high; so to be competitive, CRCP was built 1 to 2 in. thinner which led to premature distress. (The justifications perpetuated for using thinner structural slabs are many, but primarily relate to comparisons of deflections with jointed pavements that had poor load transfer between slabs.) Also in the 1950s, the slipform paver came into use. It reduced paving trains from 100 workers down to about 25. Also the economics changed in that materials became cheap and labor was more expensive. Hence, this led to a return to uniform thicknesses which could be easily placed by the early slipforms. By the mid-60s, all states had dropped thickened edge pavements.8 The AASHO (American Association of State Highway Officials) Road Test was conducted at Ottawa, just south of Chicago from 1958 to 1960. Six loops of pavement were traversed by controlled truck traffic as part of a statistical factorial design. This $27 million experiment provided some of the best information ever developed on pavements,9 yielding the AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) Pavement Design Procedures based on pavement serviceability and performance concepts. The demonstrated value of correctly graded granular subbases and properly doweled joints were among the many findings. Construction control at the AASHO Road Test was a demonstration of all that had been learned about reducing the variabilities inherent in concrete production and pavement construction: Cement pretested and protected in silos Fine aggregate was only 1/3 of the total aggregate Coarse aggregate [up to 2.5 in. (64 mm)] kept in 3 piles All materials/mixtures pretested Mixed on grade (on site) with a 34E dual drum Concrete contained 6 sacks of cement and produced 3650 psi (25 MPa) at 7 days Water used at 5.3 gal/sack ([20 L/sack], 0.47 w/c) for 1.5 in. (40 mm) slump with 4 percent air Curing with 2 layers of wet burlap for the first day, followed by 3 days wet straw or until 550 psi (4 MPa) beam strength For control, 458 w/c determinations were made; with 863 air tests and 160 cores Unfortunately, the road test construction techniques used in 1958 were already being made obsolete! The interstate construction era began in 1956 and gave great impetus to slipform paving technology. Emphasis shifted to speed of construction which led to good concreting technology being subsequently compromised: Maximum aggregate size reduced Fine aggregate quantities increased Only one stockpile of coarse aggregate used Cement went directly from mill to mixer

48

ConcreteInternational

More fluidity was needed, so more air and water were added Because of increased water, more cement was added Various admixtures used Spray cure membranes became the preferred one-pass method Fast track operations required more strength for early opening to traffic High cementitious content increased the early temperatures, and often caused subsequent cracking

The Present
Considerable research continues on rigid pavements. Much of it consists of developing better data for input to pavement management systems, comparing performance of alternative designs under dynamic loads, finding solutions to durability problems, and developing more economical ways of recycling/reconstructing old pavements. I believe that on the technology side, we are approaching the possibility of conducting an AASHO road test by computer. On the data input and theory side, we still have a need to improve many of the basic relationships that we use. We also need to be aware of the tolerances with which we measure or quantify the data. Over time, details on measurement methods and variability are lost and the results are generalized to the point where only averages are considered. Some examples of variability that confound our experimental results follow: Foundations Bryden (of the New York Department of Transportation) measured the subgrade reaction k values repeatedly on the Catskill-Cairo Test Road.10 It is a 7.5 mi (12 km) long, 4 lane divided highway. He stated, Measured modulus values range from 100 to over 2500 pci (27 to 680 kPa/mm). In his Table 12 for plate bearing test on the granular subbase (his item 3X) the average k was 830 pci (225 kPa/mm) with a standard deviation of 888 pci (242 kPa/mm), based on 63 tests. (See Table 1.) Other data items show just as much variability. Bryden concluded: Several factors probably contribute to the wide scattering of values obtained from the test, the most obvious being nonuniformity and discontinuities in the subgrade. The lower variation in modulus values of the subgrade cut sections supports this hypothesis. Another factor is vari-

ation in groundwater level and soil moisture content. Since only 3 to 6 tests are run each day, these could vary considerably during the entire test cycle, changing the modulus values. Also, warping and curling effects may be important for values measured on the pavement surface. The preceding information is noteworthy because many agencies do not conduct plate loading tests they assume values and few people have conducted as many tests as Bryden has. Even if the plate test is not the best measurement to represent the foundation support, the variability exhibited along the route in a repetitive series of seasonal tests would probably exist in any other test method. Concrete strength Modulus of rupture Many pavement designers believe that pavements fail in flexure and that the true measure of strength is the modulus of rupture (MR). Unfortunately, MR is not a unique number; the outcome depends on the method of the test. PCA published a chart that showed the relationships between modulus of rupture test methods.11 (See Fig. 2.) The cantilever loading produced a value of 870 psi (6.0 MPa) for 30 in. (760 mm) spans; the center loading produced 780 psi (5.4 MPa); and 1/3 point loading, 700 psi (5 MPa). These comparative results are based on uniform conditions of moisture and temperature which do not occur in nature. Furthermore, the results are dependent on span length. This begs the question: What is the strength (MR) of a 3dimensional slab that is continuously supported (as contrasted to 1/3 point support), with both moisture and thermal gradients (as contrasted to uniformly conditioned), and with infinite 2-dimensionality (as contrasted to a 30 in. long beam)? In fact, Friberg proved that a slab-on-grade had a moisture gradient (wet bottom) that produced a compression in the bottom, and a distance, away from the slab ends, produced a residual compression of about 250 psi (2 MPa) or more. 12 (See Fig. 3.) This means that a wheel load placed on the surface must first overcome the residual compression before the concrete goes into tension! This is significant if one considers a pavement concrete might have a realistic value of MR (1/3 point) of 700 psi or so. Hence the 250 psi residual provides a significant increase in resistance to loading that otherwise might produce cracking. Fatigue It is well-documented that with durable concrete pavement distress is caused by the magnitude and frequency of vehicle loads. But, what is the fatigue strength of concrete? As discussed, it is difficult to quantify the flexural strength of the concrete in a 3-di-

Fig. 2 Relationships between modulus of rupture test methods. 11 May1998

Fig. 3 Stress distributions from top to bottom for full restraint of warping, based on unit deformations observed in the field slabs.12 49

mensional slab. This difficulty is further compounded by the problems associated with determining how many loads will cause fatigue failure. Ballinger gives some perspective on the subject.13 He tested air dry specimens of various lengths up to 64 in. (1.6 m) with 1/3 point loading and used a multiple correlation analysis to obtain a regression equation. His basic study had 32 static tests and 80 fatigue tests, plus another 28 special fatigue tests. His conclusion was the accuracy of the S/N curve is very dependent on the accuracy of the predicted static strength of the specimens tested in fatigue.13 In summary, one must ask: How much stress does a heavy load actually cause in a concrete beam, and what is the flexural strength of the concrete beam (slab) when it is loaded so that we can calculate the percent of ultimate strength consumed? If these questions can be answered, Ballinger found that the Miner hypothesis appears to represent the cumulative damage effects from variations in fatigue loading in a reasonable manner. Concrete properties Some pavement designers assume average concrete properties in their calculations without any information about what aggregates, cement, pozzolans, or mixture proportions the contractor will use later on the job. Concrete properties of particular importance to pavement design are: E (modulus of elasticity), strength, thermal expansion, shrinkage, creep, heat generation, and durability (physical and chemical reactivity). A good pavement designer should also be a concrete expert. Some facts to be kept in mind are: In the United States, there are 118 cement plants, each producing a variety of unique products under broad specifications. From personal experience on a research project, five Type I cements were available in central Pennsylvania from different brands/plants. The 28 day strengths ranged from 2738 to 4975 psi (19 to 34 MPa). In the United States, there are 420 coal burning plants; 28 percent of their fly ash is acceptable for use in concrete in accordance with ASTM C 618. These products react differently with various cements and the result is dependent on the quantities used. This is particularly important with respect to alkali aggregate reaction and sulfate resistance (and, possibly delayed ettringite formation). Thousands of aggregate sources are available for use. Unfortunately, aggregate is not an inert filling. In addition to some aggregates reacting with the cementitious materials, there are other characteristics which can cause problems. A recent study by Alexander looked at 23 aggregates and found:14 Relative shrinkage ranged from 0.6 to 1.7 E ranged from 4.5 to 7.7 x 106 psi (31 to 53 GPa) Relative creep ranged from 0.7 to 1.4 It is important to recognize that these properties also vary with the strength of the concrete. The variables are so great that it is imperative that the job mix be pretested to verify properties and to measure its durability. On the other hand, there is great risk in letting the contractor switch cement sources (or other ingredients) without verifying the new properties. Pavement failure What constitutes pavement failure? Is it a structural crack, or a series of cracks and quantifiable distress measures? Or, is

Pumping at transverse joints in maximum number by month for single axle

Rainfall in inches

Fig. 4 The effect of excessive rain on a poorly drained pavement at MD Road Test. 7

it a function of rideability (smoothness)? At the AASHO Road Test there were two distinctive failure modes: (1) the very thin pavements failed with continuous edge pumping that caused edge cracking that coalesced into a longitudinal edge crack; and (2) the thicker pavements failed by joint pumping that caused transverse cracking starting particularly in the traffic side of the joints. The data from both were averaged together in the road test analysis to develop a performance equation. Even so, of the 84 pavement test sections greater than 8 in. (200 mm) in thickness (9.5, 11.0 and 12.5 in. [240, 280, and 320 mm]), only 7 sections had a serviceability index of less than 4.0 at the end of the testing. In fact, only 3 sections (of 9.5 in. thick) could actually be considered as failed. Hence, one can conclude that even though the AASHO data are the best that we have, it hardly predicts failure of the thicknesses of pavement that are now being built (greater than 8 in.). Additionally, at the road test there were no punch-throughs (shear failure) such as produced at the Pittsburg Road Test (1922) under steel wheels, nor were there other types of environmentally induced failures such as blow-ups, CRCP punchouts, etc. Another weakness of the data from the road test is that there was no relationship developed between the axle loads and concrete strengths. Strength was incorporated into the design equations by substituting the Spangler stress equation into the road test relationship. The stress equation is based on the elastic relationship up until a crack forms. Unfortunately, the road test equation is a dynamic function of serviceability (rideability) and it can be argued that the two relations are incompatible. One also needs to look at the effects of uncontrolled environmental variables on pavement performance. A good example is the Road Test One-MD where controlled testing during July and August produced negligible damage. July had 2.9 in. (74 mm) of rain; August had 3.4 in. (86 mm). In September, the area experienced a very heavy rainfall of 10.6 in. (270 mm). October and November were back to 2.0 and 1.8 in. (51 and 46 mm), respectively. In August, 8 joints were pumping compared to 20 and 28 in September and Oc-

50

ConcreteInternational

tober, respectively. Edge pumping was 162 ft (50 m) in August, 462 ft (140 m) in September, and 380 ft (116 m) in October after the heavy rain (Fig. 4). In the words of my longtime colleague Stuart Williams, who took measurements at Road Test One, Nothing was happening until it really rained!

The PAST-PIF design procedure


In the preceding section, some questions were raised about the weak assumptions that underlie the models and equations we use to determine pavement thickness. In lieu of placing our emphasis (and our faith) in the accuracy of the equation, we should shift our attention to quality assurance. In 1977, I proposed a design concept called PAST-PIF, which stands for Pick A Slab Thickness Protect It Forever. Each component of this design process has a purpose and a backup: 1.A slab thickness is picked based upon experience in that locality. 2.The slab is isolated from nature with a good, durable stabilizedsubbase. 3.The slab is constructed using long-lasting materials. 4.The slab is protected from excessive traffic loads by proper enforcement of vehicle weight laws. 5.Proper joint lengths, doweled joints, tied lanes, tied shoulders, and end restraints ensure that the assumption of interior slab conditions and environmental restraint are met. 6.Noncorroding hardware is used. 7.Proper sealant systems protect the subbase and expansive space. 8.Proper grading keeps water away from the pavement and properly designed porous media intercept the seepage and discharge it away from the pavement. One basic tenet is that the pavement is built as designed and specified. The concrete is made from pretested materials, brought together in a well-proportioned mixture that was demonstrated to have the same properties the designer assumed. Similarly, if the designer is using a 40 year design life, then he must ensure that the hardware will protect the corners for 40 years. That is, the dowels cannot corrode, disintegrate, lock up, or develop looseness that will render them useless in 10 years. According to Westergaards equation, a 10 in. (254 mm) thick slab that loses its dowels should have been designed as a 16 in. (406 mm) thick slab! The design of all components must be balanced so that they will all last for the assumed design life. Similarly, the concrete must last 40 years without deteriorating from chemical or physical reactions. Hence, much material testing, construction control, and quality assurance is required in the PAST-PIF concept. The Future What challenges face us and what are our research needs? Although many innovations have been proposed over the years, such as self-stressing concrete pavements, prefabricated component pavements, prestressed pavements, etc., few of the ideas have met with marketing success. Therefore, the following points are concerned more with the construction process of our more standard designs. Broadly, they deal with making pavements more economical to construct, speeding up the construction process to reduce traffic delays, and providing more safeguards such that the
May1998

pavements have a better chance of serving their design lives without premature distress. It should be noted this approach is similar to that being proposed by the American Concrete Pavement Association.15 1. On grade ultrasonic mixers In the 1960s, Ohio State University experimented with ultrasonic concrete mixers in which the water thoroughly wetted the aggregate as it moved through a pipeline subjected to ultrasonic frequencies. Such a mixer would not need a rotating drum. The mixer on-grade could pick up the aggregates from a windrow and a slurry could be fed through a hose into the mixer. The mixture could be extruded on the grade. Much faster setting mixtures could be used because of zero haul times. 2. Self-compacting concrete Self-leveling mixtures are already being used for subfloors. Vibrators and their associated problems during construction would be eliminated. 3. Microwave-induced setting An extruded ribbon of concrete could be instantly internally heated to initiate the setting so that finishing, jointing, texturing, and curing could be completed in the trailing forms. There would be no need to come back later for joint sawing, etc. Work is underway at the Advanced Cement Based Materials Center at Northwestern University. 4. Self-curing concrete Most paving mixtures contain adequate mixing water to hydrate the cement if the moisture is not allowed to evaporate. It should be possible to develop an oil, polymer, or other compound that would rise to the finished concrete surface and effectively seal the surface against evaporation. Dhir recently published some test results on self-curing mixtures.16 5. Durable concrete without entrained air Entraining proper air in concrete is difficult and requires an inordinate amount of care, control, and testing. It has been demonstrated that internally sealed (wax bead) concrete, polymer impregnated concrete, and to some extent, latex modified concrete become impermeable to moisture and are inherently durable when subjected to freeze-thaw exposure. If an inexpensive way could be developed using admixtures (oil within coatings, like small capsules that time release their contents) to render hardened concrete impermeable, concrete could be made more durable in a fail-safe manner. Benefits would be: No air tests No loss of strength (3 to 5 percent loss in compressive strength for each 1 percent air) No moisture gradients with associated warping Little or no shrinkage No chemical activity (alkali aggregate, sulfate, corrosion, carbonation) 6. One pass paving The incorporation of the above items into one paving operation could produce a pavement that would meet fast track criteria. The dowels and tiebars would be vibrated in and the joint grooves formed into the extruded concrete. No subsequent operations would be required behind the slipform operation. 7. High-strength concrete High-strength concrete is already being used in rapid cure patches. The high-cement contents cause high temperatures that result in thermal contraction problems. Presently, other than early opening, there are no advantages to using higher

51

strength in pavements. Such concrete is expensive and if higher strength pavements are to be competitive, ways must be found to minimize the amount of the expensive concrete. More economical shapes might also be considered such as slabs cast with internal voids, or beam and slab configurations, although we have no data on deflections, water movement, friction, curling, and warping of unusual slab configurations. Also, jointing technology would be needed. A vigorous research study would be needed to make use of 10,000 psi (69 MPa) concrete in a more efficient structural pavement system. 8. Ultra-high-strength concrete for continuous pavements Just as continuously welded rails are used, it should be possible to construct a continuous ribbon of concrete that would withstand a 100 F (55 C) temperature range. A tensile strength of about 2500 psi (17 MPa) would be needed, which might be possible with a compressive strength of about 25,000 psi (172 MPa) (plus a factor of safety). This could be accomplished with polymer impregnation if a field process could be developed. Alternatively, for comparison, a laboratory strength of about 106,000 psi (731 MPa) has been attained with portland cement. Special concretes are presently being used in the 25,000 psi range based on a reactive powder process. 17 The strength would have to be attained in about 18 hours before the cooling concrete would begin to contract. Of course, such continuous ribbons of ultra-high-strength concretes will experience about 2 in. (51 mm) of movement at the ends, thus making special anchors or joints necessary.

paving is needed with triggered fast-setting concrete that is self-leveling, self-curing, and durable without entrained air so that all paving operations can be completed within the trailing forms. Some thoughts are presented on using highstrength concrete, which, if it is to be economical, may need to use new slab configurations that are untested. Ultra-highstrength concretes (25,000 psi [172 MPa] compression) might be used in an application similar to the continuous steel rails of the railroads.
This paper was prepared for the Sixth International Purdue Conference on Concrete Pavement Design and Materials for High Performance, November 18-21, 1997, and was distributed as a separate to the Proceedings.

References
1. Finney, E. A., Better Concrete Pavement Serviceability, Monograph No. 7, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 1973, 246 pp. 2. Blanchard, A. H., American Highway Engineers Handbook , First Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1919, 1658 pp. 3. Cashell, H. D., Performance of Doweled Joints Under Repetitive Loading, Highway Research Board Bulletin 217, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1958, pp. 8-43 4. Aldrich, L., et al., Report of Highway Research at Pittsburg, California, 1921 and 1922, California State Printing Office, Sacramento, 1923, 146 pp. 5. Ray, G. K., History and Development of Concrete Pavement Design, Journal of the Highway Division, Proceedings of the ASCE, Jan. 1964, pp. 79-101. 6. Bradbury, R. D., Reinforced Concrete Pavements, Wire Reinforcement Institute, Washington, D.C., 1938, 190 pp. 7. Final Report on Road Test One-MD, Highway Research Board Special Report 4, Washington, D.C., 1952, 142 pp. plus Appendix. 8. Cashell, H. D., Trends in Concrete Pavement Design, ACI Journal, April 1968. 9. The AASHO Road Test, Report 5, Pavement Research, Highway Research Board Special Report 61E, NAS-NRC, Washington, D.C., 1962, 352 pp. 10. Bryden, J. E., et al., The Catskill-Cairo Experimental Rigid Pavement: Construction and Materials Testing, Research Report 2, New York Department of Transportation, Albany, N.Y., Dec. 1971, 47 pp. 11. Thickness Design for Concrete Pavements, ISO10.01P, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Ill., 1966, 32 pp. 12. Friberg, B. F., Investigations of Prestressed Concrete for Pavements, Highway Research Board Bulletin 332, Rigid Pavement Design Studies, NAS-NRC, Washington, D.C., 1962, pp. 40-94. 13. Ballinger, C. A., Effect of Load Variations on the Flexural Fatigue Strength of Plain Concrete, Highway Research Record, No. 370, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1971, pp. 48-60. 14. Alexander, M. G., Aggregates and the Deformation Properties of Concrete, ACI Materials Journal, November/ December 1996, pp. 569577. 15. Knutson, M. J., et al., New Dimensions, New Directions for the Concrete Pavement Industry , American Concrete Pavement Association, Skokie, Ill., 1997, 25 pp. 16. Dhir, R. K., et al, Influence of Microstructure on the Physical Properties of Self-Curing Concrete, ACI Materials Journal, September/October 1996, pp. 465-472. 17. Dallaire, E., et al, High-Performance Powder, Civil Engineering, ASCE, Reston, Va., Jan. 1998, pp. 49-51. Selected for reader interest by the editors

Summary
Much of the classic work on the basic properties of slabs and pavements precedes the computer revolution and today one must look hard to find the information. That older experimental work was meticulously done. If one has the opportunity to search the files, you can often find precedents for todays innovations such as variable thicknesses, stainless dowels, beam and slab construction, etc. Information from past studies (such as Road Test OneMD, the AASHO Road Test, and others) give reason to question the results of thickness design procedures. Do we know what the flexural strength is for slabs on grade? How reasonable are the assumptions for evaluating the fatigue strength of slabs on grade? Can we characterize the foundation strength? What mode(s) of failure can be assumed in the design procedures? Are the AASHO axle load equivalencies valid for thick pavements? The PAST-PIF design procedure, introduced 20 years ago, shifts the emphasis from slab thickness to concentrating on seeing that all design assumptions are met, that the pavement is built as the designer intended with long-lasting materials, and that the pavement is protected and maintained to fulfill the design assumptions (no illegal overloads, all joints/drains operational, etc.). Because most premature distress is materials related, the designer must play the role of a materials engineer in pretesting the job materials. Finally, the research needs for the future are looked at, primarily from the materials and construction point of view. If PCC pavement construction is to stay competitive, ways must be found to place concrete more economically, with less traffic delay, and in a way that the pavements provide more assurance of a maintenance-free design life. One pass

ACI Fellow Thomas J. Pasko, Jr. is recently retired as the director of advanced research, Federal Highway Administration. He is a past chairman of ACI Committee 325, Concrete Pavements, a past Member of the Board of Direction and TAC, and has served the Institute in other positions.

52

ConcreteInternational

You might also like