Brad W. Rister

Investigation of the Extended Use of Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) for Measuring In-Situ Material Quality Characteristics

This project tests the application of Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) as a nondestructive tool for highway infrastructure assessment. Multiple antennas with different frequency ranges were used on a variety of highway infrastructure projects. This report highlights the pros and cons of using GPR on highway projects and what results may be anticipated for each application.

Pavement Evaluation of the Concrete Tie-bars and Dowel Baskets on Irvin Cobb Drive, US 60, McCracken County, KY

A 1500 Mhz. ground coupled, ground penetrating radar antenna was used to identify both the horizontal alignment and the vertical displacement of the concrete tie-bars and the transverse joint dowel bar assembles on a Portland-Cement-Concrete-Pavement (PCCP) on US 60 in McCracken County, Kentucky. Approximately 5 lanes miles of PCCP were evaluated using the 1500 Mhz. ground coupled antenna. Results indicate that only one transverse dowel basket out of an approximate total of 1,760 were within 4.17 inches of the pavement surface. Seven transverse dowel baskets were misaligned four inches or greater from the location of the sawed joint. These areas represent 0.45 percent of the total transverse joints on the project. The ground penetrating radar results also indicated there were no areas along the longitudinal joint where the tie-bars were either too close to the pavement surface or missing.

Pavement Settlement Issues and Hydro-Geochemical Water Testing Results for the Cumberland Gap Tunnel

Both Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) surveys and Hydro-Geochemical Water Testing (HGWT) have been performed at the Cumberland Gap Tunnel to determine why the reinforced concrete pavement has settled in various areas throughout both tunnels. To date, approximately 7,300 total square feet of pavement surface has voids beneath it that range from 0.05 to 40 in. in depth. Both GPR and HGWT results indicate that approximately 0.75 to 1.5 cu yd of limestone subbase material leaves the tunnel in solution form on a monthly basis. Furthermore, HGWT results indicate that the groundwater beneath the tunnels is calcium deficient, thus allowing the water to dissolve the limestone subbase. Approximately 500,000 to 1 million gal of water flows through the tunnel’s groundwater collection system on a daily basis. Attempts to fix/shore-up the settled pavement areas were performed in 2002, 2007, and 2008. In 2002, UreTek foam was placed beneath approximately 2000 sq ft of settled pavement for shoring purposes. In 2007, approximately 150 lineal ft of both pavement and backfill were removed and replaced with inert granite backfill material and a new reinforced concrete pavement. In 2008, approximately 51 cu yd of cement grout material was placed beneath approximately 7,400 total sq ft of settled pavement for shoring purposes. There are several strategies outlined in this report to address both short-term and long-term remediation. However, there are certain strategies that may prevail over others. It is proposed that grout material should be placed beneath the pavement structure, at an estimated cost of

Rideability Issues for Asphalt and Concrete Specification Modifications

50,000 to

Development of ESAL Forecasting Procedures for Superpave Pavement Design

100,000/year, as a short term assurance measure. It is proposed that approximately 2,800 lineal ft of pavement and backfill material be removed in both tunnels and replaced with an inert granite backfill and a new 10 in. reinforced concrete pavement be installed for a long-term remediation (estimated costs

Pavement Evaluation of the Concrete Tie-Bars and Dowel Baskets on the Springfield Bypass, KY 55 Washington County, Kentucky

10,000,000).

Forensic Pavement Evaluation for US 31 W, Jefferson County, Kentucky Using Ground Penetrating Radar

Concerns have been raised regarding the differences between the incentive/disincentive determination procedures as well as the pay adjustments for rideability between asphalt and concrete projects. This report will attempt to do the following: (1) Address the differences between concrete and asphalt rideability specifications by looking at Kentucky’s historical rideability specifications and the specifications of peer states. (2) Review the necessity to revise current specifications based on historical rideability data, peer states rideability specifications, technological advancements in placement of roadway materials, and technological advancements in measuring rideability after construction. (3) Evaluate the monetary impact of a revised rideability specification on the latest year’s data. Through this analysis some of the concerns regarding the differences between concrete and asphalt rideability will be addressed. In addition, the necessity to revise current specification changes will be evaluated based on the research results and recommendations offered as appropriate.

Economic Impact of Heavy Loads On the Highway Infrastructure

The contents of this report reflect the views ofthe authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the University of Kentucky, the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, nor the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The inclusion of manufacturer names and trade names are for identification purposes and are not to be considered as endorsements.

Evaluations of Wall Structures in Kentucky (KYSPR-85-107)

A 1500 Mhz ground coupled, ground penetrating radar antenna was used to identify both the horizontal alignment and the vertical displacement of the concrete tie-bars and the transverse joint dowel bar assembles on a portland-cement-concrete-pavement (PCC{) on KY55 in Washington County, KY. Approximately six lanes miles of PCCP was evaluated using the 1500 Mhz, ground coupled antenna. Results indicate that only four transverse dowel baskets out of an approximate total of 2,112 were within three inches of the pavement surface. Three transverse dowel baskets were misaligned greater than four inches from the location of the sawed joint. These areas represent 0.33 percent of the total transverse joints on the project. The ground penetrating radar results also indicated there were no areas along the longitudinal joint where the tie-bars were either too close to the pavement surface or missing.