UPDATE Implementing the Ultra High

Pressure Water Cutter for Treatment of Flushed Pavements

TxDOT 5-5230

Darlene C. Goehl, P.E. Bryan District

TxDOT

William D. Lawson, P.E., Ph.D. Research Supervisor

TechMRT: Multidisciplinary Research in Transportation Texas Tech University

85th Annual Transportation Short Course Bryan, TX October 11, 2011

The Problem: FLUSHED PAVEMENTS

FM 1472 Webb County (LRD)

FM 2562 Grimes County (BRY)

Photo Courtesy TTI Photos

The Solution: ULTRA HIGH PRESSURE WATER CUTTING

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

Implement the UHP water cutter as an efficient, cost-effective maintenance tool to restore texture on roads surfaced with a seal coat or surface treatment which exhibit minor to severe flushing

Implements findings of 0-5230 UHP water cutter experiences in New Zealand and Australia UHP water cutter demonstration project, Grimes County, TX

(BRY), in March 2010

METHOD

Implementing the Ultra High Pressure Water Cutter for Treatment of Flushed Pavements

WORK PLAN SUMMARY 1. Start date: November 29, 2010 2. Work plan: Treat flushed pavements using UHP process on

14 test sites (Feb-Mar 2011) Pretest and posttest for each site consisting of

skid number, dynamic friction test, sand patch and circular track meter

Follow-up testing at all sites in Jul 2011, Jan 2012, Jul 2012

3. Data analysis: in process 4. Completion date: August 31, 2012

Test Site Locations… Four districts

representing the four FWHA climatic regions in Texas

A total of 14 test sites: BRY… 6 sites LRD… 2 sites BMT… 3 sites AMA… 3 sites

Initial UHP Treatment: Jan 31 – Mar 2

TYPICAL TEST PLAN LAYOUT

½ mile

TIME TRIAL TIME TRIAL 1 2 3 UHP TREATMENT

START END

4 5 6

PRETEST POSTTEST

FM 82 Jasper County (BMT)

SAND PATCH TEST (texture)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

BRY2 BRY4 BRY5 BRY7 BRY9 BMT1 BMT2 BMT3 AMA1 AMA2 AMA3 LRD2 LRD3

San

d P

atch

Mea

n Te

xtur

e D

epth

(mm

)

Pre-Treatment in WP Pre-Treatment BWP Post Treatment in WP Monitoring 1 in WP

SAND PATCH

FM 294 Armstrong County (AMA)

CIRCULAR TRACK METER ASTM E-2157 (texture)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

BRY2 BRY4 BRY5 BRY7 BRY9 BMT1 BMT2 BMT3 AMA1 AMA2 AMA3 LRD2 LRD3

CTM

Mea

n P

rofil

e D

epth

(mm

)

Pre-Treatment in WP Pre-Treatment BWP Post Treatment in WP Monitoring 1 in WP

CTM

TxDOT SKID TRUCK (friction)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

BRY2 BRY4 BRY5 BRY7 BRY9* BMT1 BMT2 BMT3 AMA1 AMA2 AMA3 LRD2 LRD3

Ski

d N

umbe

r

Pre-Treatment in WP Post-Treatment in WP Monitoring 1

SKID NUMBER

IH35 Webb County (LRD)

DYNAMIC FRICTION TESTER (DFT) ASTM E-1911 (friction)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

BRY2 BRY4 BRY5 BRY7 BRY9 BMT1 BMT2 BMT3 AMA1 AMA2 AMA3 LRD2 LRD3

DFT

Fric

tion

Num

ber *

100

Pre-Treatment in WP Post-Treatment in WP Monitoring 1

DFT

WORK PLAN

1. Treat Jan-Mar 2011 A. Pretest B. Posttest

2. Follow-up Jul 2011 3. Follow-up Jan 2012 4. Follow-up Jul 2012

Does it WORK?

Does it LAST?

What’s it COST?

FM 2562 Grimes County (BRY) Photo Courtesy TTI Photos

Q1. DOES IT WORK? (effectiveness)

TEXTURE

FRICTION

SUMMARY

DOES IT WORK? Texture Data SP: +46 to +344

Avg +180% CTM: +38 to +354

Avg +186% Friction Data SN: +0 to +351

Avg +124% DFT: +1 to +348

Avg +119%

YES Initial treatment

showed improvement in

both macrotexture

and microtexture

FM 2562 Grimes County (BRY)

Photo Courtesy TTI Photos Q2. DOES IT LAST? (durability)

344

202

46

7

180

109

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11

% C

hang

e in

San

d Pa

tch

MTD

from

Pre

-Tre

atm

ent

Con

ditio

ns

Month/Year of Testing

High Low Average Linear (Average)

SAND PATCH

354

270

38

-8

186

102

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 % C

hang

e in

CTM

MPD

from

Pre

-Tre

atm

ent C

ondi

tions

Month/Year of Testing

High Low Average Linear (Average)

CTM

SKID NUMBER 351

226

0

-40

124

64

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 % C

hang

e in

Ski

d N

umbe

r fro

m P

re-T

reat

men

t Con

ditio

ns

Month/Year of Testing

High Low Average Linear (Average)

348

183

1 13

119

75

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11

% C

hang

e in

DFT

Fric

tion

Num

ber f

rom

Pre

-Tre

atm

ent

Con

ditio

ns

Month/Year of Testing

High Low Average Linear (Average)

DFT

SUMMARY

DOES IT LAST? Sand Patch +180% to +109%

CTM +186% to +102%

Skid Number +124% to +64%

DFT +119% to +75%

MIXED RESULTS

Promising, still obtaining data;

too early to tell

Q3. WHAT’S IT COST? (affordability)

UHP Treatment Speeds and Production Rates

Site Treatment Speed (mph) Production Rate

(SY/hour) Surface Condition Min Max Avg BRY1 0.5 587 tracked asphalt on concrete BRY2 0.7 821 moderately flushed chip seal BRY4 1.0 1173 lightly flushed chip seal BRY5 0.5 0.7 0.6 739 heavily flushed chip seal BRY7 0.8 1 0.9 1067 moderately flushed chip seal BRY9 0.7 0.8 0.7 845 heavily flushed chip seal LRD 2 0.7 0.7 0.7 856 heavily flushed chip seal LRD 3 0.5 0.7 0.6 716 heavily flushed chip seal BMT 1 1.0 1173 moderately flushed chip seal BMT 2 1.1 2.4 1.6 1865 lightly flushed chip seal BMT 3 1.0 1.1 1.0 1161 heavily flushed chip seal AMA 1 0.8 938 moderately flushed chip seal AMA 2 0.8 1.3 1.1 1255 lightly flushed chip seal AMA 3 0.4 0.7 0.5 622 very heavily flushed chip seal

Speed: 0.5 to 1.6, avg 0.8mph Production: 590 to 1870, avg 990 sy/hr

Unit Costs for Current Treatments (Flushing)

Function Code Function Code Description

Turn-key Maintenance Cost District

Minimum $/SY

District Maximum

$/SY

Statewide Average

$/SY 212 Leveling or Overlay with

Maintainer… $ 3.91 $ 6.61 $ 4.51 214 Leveling or Overlay with

Drag Box… $ 1.71 $ 6.23 $ 2.60 232 Strip or Spot Seal Coat

(Chip Seal)… $ 2.19 $ 3.14 $ 2.58 252 Milling or Planing… $1.37 $ 11.46 $ 2.05 253 Spot Milling… $ 3.19 $ 19.81 $ 6.65

Unit Costs for UHP Water Cutting (Flushing) SUB-CONTRACT

(UHP Water Cutting - No Support Services) MIN: $0.90/SY MAX: $1.15/SY

GENERAL CONTRACT (Turn Key UHP Water Cutting)

MIN: $1.40/SY MAX: $1.65/SY

COSTS REPORTED BY UHP CONTRACTOR

SUMMARY

WHAT’S IT COST? Compare to Strip/Spot

Seals: < $1.05/sy cheaper < 41%

< 25 to 77% compared

to other maintenance functions

CHEAPER than strip seals and

other methods

Interim Conclusion

UHP Water Cutting for treatment of flushed pavement surfaces: Works… treatment is effective Lasts(?)… mixed results, promising,

still under review Costs… less than currently-

available maintenance methods

THANK YOU! TECHMRT Sanjaya Senadheera Andrew Tubb Timothy Wood Michael Leaverton Jake Blessen John Papa Conrad Lovejoy Rod Henderson

RAMPART HYDRO SERVICES

Jeff Parks Bob Beadling Jim Windich

TXDOT Darlene Goehl & many, many more