No abstract

No abstract

whose timely financial help made it possible for him to come to Purdue University. Acknowledgement is made of the help rendered in the course of the research by Messrs. Gale Orem, Glen Luetkemier, and Steve Smith, and thanks are extended to Mr. Joe Austin for his comments on the statistical analysis.

SYNOPSIS

Concepts underlying the comprehensive evaluation system. 2.Method of setting up the condition survey.3.Method of making the evaluation survey. 4.Use of the results of the surveys for establishing a maintenance research project for CRCP.Some of the significant findings of the study are included. The complete system encompasses all of the steps defined above and permits an evaluation of maintenance priorities concurrently with the determination of the reasons for pavement defects. Figure 1 shows the sequence that is followed in the comprehensive pavement evaluation system. This is a six-step process as outlined on the flow diagram.The evaluation process can be stopped during any one of the phases depending upon the needs of the highway department.For completeness, however, it is necessary to follow all of the phases sequentially.Each of the phases of the survey are self-explanatory but each, in turn, has one or two important parts that must be observed if maximum information is to be obtained with minimum effort.The condition survey, as envisioned in Figure 1 For most combinations of methods of paving and steel fabrication, depressed steel performed better than preset steel on chairs.3.All other factors being constant, loose bars showed good performance compared to the use of bar mats and wire f abri c. 4.Concrete slump had a significant effect on pavement performance; the optimum slump range was between 2.0 and 2.5 in.Slump values of 1.5 in. and greater showed generally good results. 5.Pavements that were sideformed, performed the same as those that were slipformed.6.Distress of CRC pavements is associated with traffic.7.The primary mode of pumping of CRC pavements is edge pumping.The results of the condition survey indicated that pavements with gravel subbases were more susceptible to pumping. Pavements with crushed-stone and bituminousstabilized subbases showed some indication of pumping, while pavements with slag subbases did not pump.