Jahren, C T; Ellsworth, B J and Bergeson, K (1999) Constructability test for cold in-place asphalt recycling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 125(5), pp. 325-329. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Unstable subgrades are a major constructability problem for cold in-place asphalt recycling. The recycling operation is often performed by a train of equipment that mills, screens, crushes, and mixes the recycled material. This train is supported by the remaining pavement after the top has been milled off for recycling. Because the remaining pavement may be as little as 1 or 2 in. thick, good subgrade stability is required to support the train. A test is developed to assess subgrade stability using a dynamic cone penetrometer. The testing instrument is inexpensive and portable, and the initial testing program can be carried out for a typical project in 1 or 2 days. Guidelines are developed using data from a project that developed varying levels of subgrade instability during construction. The guidelines were corroborated by testing on other projects. The test may be used on projects having glacial till derived soil subgrades and in which equipment is supported by 1 or 2 in. of remaining pavement plus a soil-aggregate base. Additional research is recommended to develop test guidelines for different types of soils and different base support conditions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | recycling, constructability, program, testing, stability, aggregate |
| Subjects: | construction integration, software systems, professional practice, waste management, materials science, structural engineering |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here