CA FTNP SEKI 13(2) Mineral King Pavement Report Final Signed.pdf

MINERAL KING ROAD

TULARE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

CA FTNP SEKI 13(2)

PAVEMENT AND MATERIALS REPORT

AUGUST 2024

Report prepared by:

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

Central Federal Lands Highway Division Lakewood, Colorado http://www.google.com/imgres?sa=X&biw=1280&bih=819&tbm=isch&tbnid=gtpyJEKxSQX6SM:&imgrefurl=http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/press/press_releases_media_advisories/2010/HUDNo.10-242&docid=0hzyuk4oobnONM&imgurl=http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/images/hudimg?id=dot_logo_41193.jpg&w=520&h=528&ei=uGw7Uoy6Ksjk4AOC_IDQBw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=567&vpy=131&dur=635&hovh=226&hovw=223&tx=151&ty=150&page=1&tbnh=154&tbnw=162&start=0&ndsp=30&ved=1t:429,r:26,s:0,i:171

CA FTNP SEKI 13(2) Mineral King Road ii

Written by: ________________________________________________________ Robert Norick, Staff Pavements & Materials Engineer

Reviewed by: ________________________________________________________ Mike Voth, Supervisory Materials Engineer

Approved for distribution by:

Mike Voth, Supervisory & Materials Engineer

Electronic Distribution:

Construction Project Development Project Management Technical Services iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION

II. CLIMATE

III. EXPLORATION

IV. EXISTING PAVEMENT & SOILS

V. PAVEMENT DESIGN INPUTS

VI. PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS & DISCUSSION

VII. MATERIALS RECOMMENDATIONS

APPENDICES

A – Vicinity and Boring Maps B – Boring Log and Lab Report C – Site Investigation Photos D – Pavement Calculations with Traffic Counts E – Asphalt Binder and Climate Data F – Pipe Selection Criteria G – Project Specific SCRs

I. INTRODUCTION

This report documents the pavement conditions and recommendations for the planned CA FTNP SEKI 13(2) Mineral King Road project within Sequoia National Park, Tulare County, California. The project proposes to rehabilitate the eastern/upper 15.3 miles of Mineral King Road that lies within the national park. The western/lower 9.6 miles of the road lies outside of the park within Tulare County and is beyond the scope of this report.

Mineral King Road intersects State Route 198 two miles east of the town of Three Rivers and two miles west of the park’s Ash Mountain Entrance. The city of Visalia is located 31 miles west of Three Rivers along State Route 198. Besides access to the national park, the road also provides access to the small community of Silver City located within the park boundaries. See Appendix A for vicinity and boring maps.

II. CLIMATE

Climate data was obtained from the Western Regional Climate Center for the Lodgepole, California weather station in Sequoia National Park (elevation 6,750 feet). The data is summarized in Table 1 below and provided in Appendix E. The average precipitation for this area is approximately 45.79 inches. The project is located at an elevation that receives both snow and rain, dependent upon the time of year. The project ranges in elevation from ≈3,400 feet to ≈7,800 feet.

Table 1. Weather Data

Month Average

HIGH

Record

HIGH

Average

LOW

Record

LOW

Average

PRECIP.

January 38.4 65 16.1 -10 9.37 February 40.9 62 17.1 -12 8.55

March 44.2 66 21.1 -2 7.08 April 49.0 72 24.9 -1 3.42 May 58.1 85 32.1 9 1.30 June 67.8 86 38.7 23 0.56 July 75.4 91 44.5 28 0.54

August 75.2 89 43.4 28 0.27 September 68.8 86 38.1 19 1.19

October 57.9 81 30.2 1 2.06 November 45.6 67 22.7 -3 4.29 December 37.7 59 16.5 -16 7.15

Temperatures are in °F and precipitations are in inches.

III. EXPLORATION

From November 5-7, 2018, a pavement and subgrade investigation was conducted for the project consisting of 50 shallow borings (up to 5-foot depth) and 2 deep borings (up to

20-foot depth). Boring depths less than 5-feet reflect borings that encountered refusal (boulders or bedrock). The road was drilled at approximately 0.30 mile increments. CFL personnel logged the findings including depth of boring, visual soil classification, pavement and aggregate base thicknesses, areas of distress, and road width. During the site visit, fifteen samples were collected. These samples were submitted to the CFLHD lab for testing to determine the subgrade engineering properties. The boring log and lab report are provided in Appendix B. Photos from the pavement investigation are provide in Appendix C. Milepost 0 (Station 99+00) is located at the cattle guard west of Mineral King’s Lookout Point Entrance as designated by the Road Inventory Program (RIP).

IV. EXISTING PAVEMENT & SOILS

The roadbed was constructed in the 1870’s and later improved for automobiles by the Civilian Conservation Corps during the Great Depression. The road was paved in sections (probably by the County) during the 1960’s and 1970’s. In approximately 2007, NPS paved a 1.7-mile section of the roadway between Mileposts 8.0 and 9.7. Of the 15.3 miles, 1.2 miles is unpaved without gravel surfacing. The majority of the pavement is asphalt concrete pavement, 1” to 4” thick, without aggregate base. There are localized sections of chip seal, macadam, and thicker asphalt patches. Pavement widths vary between 11 and 30 feet. With the road being paved in sections, the thickness of the existing pavement varies along the length of the roadway as shown in Table 2 below.

Table 2. Mineral King Road Average Asphalt Thicknesses

MP 0.0

to 0.7

MP 0.7

to 1.2

MP 1.2

to 2.3

MP 2.3

to 5.3

MP 5.3

to 10.3

MP 10.3

to 10.7

MP 10.7

to 11.7

MP 11.7

to 12.5

MP 12.5

to 15.3

4.0” 1.5” 3.5” 1.5” 2.8” None 3.7” None 2.8”

The existing pavement is in poor condition with alligator, block, and edge cracking, as well as, many potholes and patches. Pavement reconstruction is necessary for the road’s entire length. For the road’s west/lower 9 miles, the subgrade soils are predominantly silty clayey sands. For the east/upper 6.3 miles, the soils are generally silty sands.

V. PAVEMENT DESIGN INPUTS

The pavement design for Mineral King Road utilized design criteria established in the Federal Lands Highway Project Development Design Manual (PDDM) and the 1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (AGDPS). The criteria shown in Table 2 below were selected based on the project’s scope and traffic levels.

Table 3. Design Criteria Design Performance Period (3R) 20 years Initial Serviceability 4.2 Terminal Serviceability 2.0 Design Reliability Level 75% Overall Standard Deviation 0.49 Annual Traffic Volume Growth Rate 2.0% Directional Distribution (dead end road) 50%

Traffic

Mineral King Road is used primarily for recreational purposes and by Silver City residents. The vast majority of vehicles that use this route are passenger vehicles, pickups, and SUVs; 96% of the ADT based upon site visit observations. In fact, a sign near Mineral King Road’s Lookout Point Entrance indicates “No RVs or Trailers”. Single vehicles greater than 40-foot-long, as well as, tractor trailer combinations greater than 50-foot-long are prohibited on the road. The National Park website provides traffic counts for the vehicles entering the Lookout Point Entrance (eastbound traffic); 15,500 vehicles in 2017. This equates to a two-way ADT of 85 vehicles per day. The road is typically closed to public vehicles during the winter months (November through May). There are occasional Class 5-6 delivery trucks, propane trucks, septic trucks, garbage trucks, and dump trucks that service Silver City and the park ranger station (4% of ADT).

Accurate traffic load estimates expressed as 18-kip equivalent single axle loads (ESALs) are critical for the pavement design. Load estimates are based on vehicle counts, classifications, and a 20-year 2% growth factor. Standard load equivalency truck factors are used to convert the various vehicle axle loads to 18-kip ESALs. The following truck factors were assumed for the aforementioned vehicle classifications in accordance with PDDM Exhibit 11.2-A: 0.002 for Class 2-3 cars, pickups, and SUVs and 0.7 for Class 5- 6 single unit trucks. Based upon the design criteria and assumptions shown above and the 1993 AASHTO pavement design procedure, the project’s 20-year-18-kip ESALs are estimated to be 12,000 (see Appendix D). According to PDDM Section 11.2.1.2, a minimum of 50,000 ESALs shall be used for the design of paved roads.

Subgrade Soil Resilient Modulus

Nine soil samples were submitted to the CFLHD laboratory to determine the R-Values (resistance values on a scale of 0 to 100 per AASHTO T 190). For the west/lower 9 miles of the roadway, the subgrade soils are predominantly silty clayey sands with an average R-Value of 42. For the east/upper 6.3 miles, the soils are generally silty sands with a much higher R-Values averaging 75. The R-Value of 42 was conservatively used for the project’s pavement design. For sands and gravels, the subgrade Resilient Modulus (MR) is calculated from the R-Value using the following correlation equation. Based upon the R-Value of 42, the equation indicates a Resilient Modulus value of 10,000 psi for the pavement design.

Resilient Modulus, MR (psi) = 10[ ( S

+ 18.72 ) / 6.24 ] where the S1 factor = [(R-Value – 5) / 11.29] + 3

Structural Number Calculations

The 1993 AASHTO pavement design procedure is used to determine the required pavement structural numbers (SN) for the project. Based upon the ESALs, the subgrade Resilient Modulus, and the aforementioned design criteria, the following required 20-year pavement design structural number is calculated (See Appendix D).

Required SN for Mineral King Road = 1.69 inches

Structural Layer Coefficients

Standard CFLHD structural layer coefficients were selected for asphalt concrete pavement (0.44), aggregate base course (0.12), full depth reclamation (0.10), and full depth reclamation with cement (0.15) in accordance with Exhibit 11.2-C of the PDDM.

A drainage coefficient of 1.0 was utilized for all proposed layers.

VI. PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS & DISCUSSION

In accordance with the 1993 AASHTO design procedure, a 20-year pavement design requires a Structural Number (SN) of 1.69. The existing pavement sections vary along the length of the roadway. The majority of the existing pavement is asphalt, 1” to 4” thick, without aggregate base. The road has been subdivided into nine segments based upon the existing pavement thicknesses (see previous Table 2). Additionally, the project includes the paving of five parking lots adjacent to the road.

After evaluating alternatives, three pavement structural sections are proposed based upon the existing pavement conditions (i.e. asphalt and base thicknesses). A pavement structural section is recommended for each road segment and parking lot. The use of three pavement sections provides cost savings in excess of $2,000,000 as compared to the use of one structural section for the entire project (3” asphalt over full depth reclamation (FDR) of existing asphalt with 3” of crushed aggregate base). The three pavement sections are:

Pavement Section A (existing asphalt is at least 2” thick or there is existing base)

3 inches of Asphalt Concrete Pavement (SN = 3” x 0.44 = 1.32”) 4 inch FDR of Existing Asphalt & Base (SN = 4” x 0.10 = 0.40”)

Pavement Section B (existing asphalt is less than 2” thick)

4 inch FDR with cement (SN = 4” x 0.15 = 0.60”)

Pavement Section C (gravel road segments)

4 inches of Crushed Aggregate Base (SN = 4” x 0.12 = 0.48”)

The FDR with cement does have challenges: water source, curing, timing (require asphalt placement within 14 days of FDR), and road widening (1 inch minus AASHTO A-1 or A-2-4 soil required for the top foot of the widened area). A cement content of 5% by dry mass of the 4 inch FDR depth is recommended for cost estimating purposes.

There are two alternatives to Pavement Section B. The FDR cement can be replaced with 3 inches of crushed aggregate base (pulverized with existing asphalt) with $500,000 of additional cost and an additional 3 inches of grade raise or the existing asphalt and subgrade material can be removed and replaced with 3 inches of asphalt over 4 inches of crushed aggregate base (CAB) with $1,000,000 of additional cost. Additionally, Pavement Section B can be constructed in lieu of Pavement Section C for areas that are not currently paved.

The recommended pavement section for each road segment and parking lot follows. The estimated cost for this pavement design (FDR, base, & asphalt) is $10,500,000.

Station 100+00 to 136+25 – Pavement Section A (3” ACP on 4” FDR) Station 136+25 to 162+30 – Pavement Section B (3” ACP on 4” FDR with cement) Station 162+30 to 220+75 – Pavement Section A (3” ACP on 4” FDR) Station 220+75 to 380+04 – Pavement Section B (3” ACP on 4” FDR with cement) Station 380+04 to 639+00 – Pavement Section A (3” ACP on 4” FDR) Station 639+00 to 662+68 – Pavement Section C (3” ACP on 4” CAB) Station 662+68 to 713+57 – Pavement Section A (3” ACP on 4” FDR) Station 713+57 to 761+11 – Pavement Section C (3” ACP on 4” CAB) Station 761+11 to 902+81 – Pavement Section A (3” ACP on 4” FDR) Ranger Station Parking Lot – Pavement Section A (3” ACP on 4” FDR) Tar Gap & Picnic Lots – Pavement Section B (3” ACP on 4” FDR with cement) Sawtooth & Disney Parking Lots – Pavement Section C (3” ACP on 4” CAB)

There is a significant quantity of paved and gravel pullouts along the road. Paved pullouts are to be rehabilitated with the same pavement section as the adjacent roadway. Gravel pullouts are to be rehabilitated with 3 inches of crushed aggregate base (CAB) on a reconditioned subgrade. Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement may be used along the road and within the parking areas and shall be placed on a 4-inch depth of CAB or FDR material. The recommended PCC pavement thickness is 6-inches for parking areas and 8-inches for Mineral King Road.

VII. MATERIALS RECOMMENDATIONS, SCRs, AND

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

Selection of Asphalt Binder

The LTPPBind software and CALTRANS binder selection criteria were utilized for the selection of the asphalt binder for the project (See Appendix E). LTPPBind indicates a PG 46-22 binder for the project site, however, this binder is not readily produced. The CALTRANS binder selection criteria identifies the site as being located in California’s High Mountain Region with a typical PG 64-28 M asphalt binder grade. Based on these considerations, a PG 64-28 M binder is recommended for the project. This binder grade is used by CALTRANS and is available from several suppliers in the area.

Warm Mix Asphalt

Mineral King Road is a narrow, steep, and winding road. With 15 mph speeds for the length of the road, project haul times may exceed 2 hours. As such, warm mix asphalt technology and additives should be considered for the project’s asphalt paving.

Pavement Roughness

It is recommended that pavement roughness be evaluated as Type III-B in accordance with FP-14 Section 401.16(d) and Table 401-5.

Prime and Tack Coats, Fog Seal, and Blotter

For this project, a Prime Coat and Blotter applied to the base prior to asphalt placement, a Tack Coat applied between asphalt lifts, and a Fog Seal applied to the final pavement surface are recommended.

Materials for Culvert Pipe / Cement

The pH and resistivity of the project soils do not show a need to specify special culvert materials in accordance with the pipe selection criteria in Appendix F (i.e. non corrosive).

SCRs and Construction Concerns

CFLHD standard SCRs related to pavements are expected to be used with the exception of a 702 SCR for CALTRANS’ PG 64-28 M binder. This SCR is provided in Appendix G. Additional SCRs may be developed as needed.

Drainage

Currently, the road is lacking functioning ditches for much of its 15.3-mile length. To prevent stormwater from saturating the roadbed and undermining the pavement structural section, regrading, reconditioning, and wideing of ditches will be needed. Additionally, storm culvert replacement is a necessary design elements for the project.

Bid Items

Suggested FP-14 pay items for the proposed structural section are shown in Table 3.

Table 4: Recommended Pay Items Item

Number Item Description Unit Remarks

30202-2000 Roadway Aggregate, Method 2 TON 30303-1000 Roadbed reconditioning SQYD 30402-5200 Full Depth Reclamation, Method 2, 4-Inch Depth SQYD 30502-0400 Full Depth Reclamation with Cement, 4-Inch Depth SQYD 30510-0000 Cementitious Material TON

40101-5600 Asphalt Concrete Pavement, Gyratory Mix, 1/2-Inch or 3/4-Inch NMAS, 0.3 To <3 Million ESAL TON

40105-3000 Antistrip Additive, Type 3 TON 40601-0000 Fog Seal TON 41102-1000 Prime Coat, Method 1 SQYD 41105-0000 Blotter TON 41201-0000 Tack Coat TON 50101-0600 Minor Concrete Pavement, Reinforced, 6-Inch Depth SQYD 50101-0800 Minor Concrete Pavement, Reinforced, 8-Inch Depth SQYD

APPENDICES

A – Vicinity and Boring Maps

B – Boring Log and Lab Report

C – Site Investigation Photos

D – Pavement Calculations with Traffic Counts

E – Asphalt Binder and Climate Data

F – Pipe Selection Criteria

G – Project Specific SCRs

APPENDIX A – Vicinity and Boring Maps

VI

CI

N

IT

Y M

AP

VI

CI

N

IT

Y M

AP

m ile s km s km s km s km s km

APPENDIX B – Boring Log and Lab Report

Sample

Number

Station

(Milepost) Location

Date

Sampled

Depth of

Bore Sample Type Testing

0 to 1.5"

1.5" to 3' 5 gallon bucket Classification & R‐Value 3' to 5'

0 to 7.5"

7.5" to 5' 0 to 4"

4" to 2'

2' to 3.5'

3.5' to 5'

0 to 1.5" Classification, R‐Value, 1.5" to 5' 5 gallon bucket pH, & Resistivity 0 to 6"

6" to 5' 0 to 4"

4" to 5' 5 gallon bucket Classification 0 to 1"

1" to 5' 0 to 3"

3" to 5' 0 to 1.5"

1.5" to 5' 0 to 2"

2" to 5'

0 to 1"

1" to 5'

0 to 1.5" Classification, 1.5" to 5' 5 gallon bucket pH, & Resistivity 0 to 1"

1" to 5'

0 to 2"

2" to 14"

14"

0 to 1"

1" to 5'

0 to 2"

2" to 5' 5 gallon bucket Classification & R‐Value 0 to 1"

1" to 5'

0 to 1"

1" to 10' SPT baggy sample Classification 10' to 20' SPT baggy sample Classification 20'

0 to 2.5"

2.5" to 3'

3' to 5'

0 to 3"

3" to 3'

3' to 5'

0 to 3"

3" to 5'

5' to 10' SPT baggy sample Classification 10'

0 to 2.5"

2.5" to 5'

0 to 3"

3" to 3'

3' to 5'

0 to 3"

3" to 2'

2' to 5'

0 to 4.5"

4.5" to 5'

0 to 3"

3" to 2.5'

2.5'

0 to 2" Classification, R‐Value, 2" to 5' 5 gallon bucket pH, & Resistivity 0 to 2.5"

2.5" to 5.5"

5.5" to 5'

0 to 5.5"

5.5" to 5'

0 to 2.5"

2.5" to 5.5"

5.5" to 5'

Boring Observations (grey = sample depth )

B‐28 Sta 533+87

(MP 8.40)

Center EB

Lane 11/6/2018 5' asphalt tan aggregate base golden tan silty sand asphalt brown silty sand tan silty sand asphalt tan silty sand golden tan silty sand

11/6/2018 10' asphalt golden tan silty sand tan silty sand refusal asphalt tan aggregate base golden tan silty sand asphalt tan silty sand asphalt golden brown silty, clayey sand golden tan silty, clayey sand

11/6/2018 2.5' asphalt brown silty sand

B‐51 Sta 392+44

(MP 5.70)

B‐19 Sta 388+00

(MP 5.60)

B‐27 Sta 520+35

(MP 8.15)

Center

WB Lane 11/6/2018 5'

Center EB

Lane

B‐26 Sta 501+51

(MP 7.80)

Center

WB Lane 11/6/2018 5'

Center EB

Lane

B‐20

B‐21 Sta 417+65

(MP 6.20)

Center EB

Lane 11/6/2018 5'

B‐22 Sta 433+96

(MP 6.55)

B‐52 Sta 366+34

(MP 5.20)

Center EB

Lane 11/6/2018 20' asphalt

Sta 376+58

(MP 5.35)

Center

WB Lane 11/6/2018 5' asphalt tan silty sand golden tan silty sand tan silty sand refusal asphalt golden tan silty sand

B‐18

Sta 405+03

(MP 5.90)

Center

WB Lane 11/6/2018 5'

B‐16 Sta 339+00

(MP 4.65)

Center

WB Lane 11/7/2018 5'

11/6/2018 5' grey tan sand asphalt

Sta 161+76

(MP 1.20)

Center EB

Lane 11/7/2018 5'

B‐8 Sta 210+42

(MP 2.15)

Center

WB Lane 11/7/2018 5'

B‐6 Sta 179+31

(MP 1.55)

Center

WB Lane 11/7/2018 5'

B‐7 Sta 194+00

(MP 1.85)

Center EB

Lane 11/7/2018 5' asphalt refusal on boulder asphalt tan silty sand golden tan silty, clayey sand asphalt tan silty sand asphalt golden tan silty, clayey sand tan silty sand asphalt tan silty, clayey sand asphalt tan silty, clayey sand tan silty sand tan sand

B‐11 Sta 258+70

(MP 3.10)

Center EB

Lane 11/7/2018 5' asphalt golden tan silty, clayey sand asphalt 11/7/2018 5'

B‐10 Sta 245+61

(MP 2.85)

11/7/2018 tan silty sand

Center

WB Lane 5'

B‐9 Sta 227+21

(MP 2.50)

Center EB

Lane asphalt tan silty, clayey sand asphalt golden tan silty, clayey sand

Sta 99+00

(MP 0.00)

B‐1 5' asphalt tan silty, clayey sand

11/7/2018

B‐2 Sta 115+07

(MP 0.30)

Center

WB Lane 11/7/2018 5'

5'11/7/2018 Center

WB Lane

Sta 146+00

(MP 0.90)

B‐4

B‐5

EB

Shoulder

5'B‐3

Sta 275+00

(MP 3.40)

Center

Road golden tan silty sand brown silty sand

B‐15 Sta 323+75

(MP 4.35)

B‐14

Center EB

Lane 11/7/2018 5' asphalt

11/7/2018 5' asphalt golden tan silty sand

Center

WB Lane 11/7/2018 14"

Sta 311+00

(MP 4.10)

B‐25 Sta 487+13

(MP 7.50)

Center EB

Lane 11/6/2018 5' asphalt tan silty, clayey sand

B‐23 Sta 455+27

(MP 6.90)

Center EB

Lane 11/6/2018 5' asphalt golden silty, clayey sand

B‐24 Sta 471+00

(MP 7.20)

Center

WB Lane refusal

Center

WB Lane 11/6/2018 5' asphalt golden tan silty sand grey tan sand

CA FTNP SEKI 13(2) MINERAL KING ROAD BORING LOG (November 5‐7,2018)

Sta 130+85

(MP 0.60)

Center

WB Lane 11/7/2018

B‐17 Sta 356+00

(MP 5.00)

Center

Road 11/7/2018 5' asphalt asphalt tan silty sand B‐13

Sta 291+55

(MP 3.75)

Center EB

Lane 11/7/2018 5'

B‐12

Sample

Number

Station or

Location Location

Date

Sampled

Depth of

Bore Sample Type Testing

0 to 2"

2" to 5"

5" to 5'

0 to 2.5"

2.5" to 5"

5" to 5' 5 gallon bucket Classification & R‐Value 0 to 1.5"

1.5" to 4"

4" to 5'

0 to 3"

3" to 1'

1' to 2'

2'

0 to 3"

3" to 5'

0 to 2" Classification, R‐Value, 2" to 5' 5 gallon bucket pH, & Resistivity 0 to 6"

6" to 5'

0 to 6"

6" to 3'

3' to 5'

0 to 5"

5" to 9"

9" to 5'

0 to 4"

4" to 8"

8" to 5'

0 to 2"

2" to 5'

0 to 1'

1' to 5'

0 to 2.5'

2.5' to 5' 5 gallon bucket Classification & R‐Value 0 to 6"

6" to 1'

1'

0 to 2"

2" to 6"

6" to 5' 5 gallon bucket Classification & R‐Value 0 to 3"

3" to 7"

7" to 1.5'

1.5'

0 to 3.5"

3.5" to 8"

8" to 2.5'

2.5'

0 to 2.5"

2.5" to 3' 5 gallon bucket Classification & R‐Value 3'

0 to 2.5"

2.5" to 8'

8" to 2'

2'

0 to 4"

4" to 8"

8" to 2'

2'

0 to 1"

1" to 3' 5 gallon bucket Classification 3'

0 to 4"

4" to 7"

7" to 1'

1'

B‐49 Sta 865+53

(MP 14.80)

Center

WB Lane 11/5/2018 3' asphalt brown silty gravel with sand refusal

B‐48 Sta 849+08

(MP 14.50)

Center

Road 11/5/2018 2' asphalt tan sand with gravel brown silty gravel with sand refusal

B‐47 Sta 836+54

(MP 14.20)

Center

WB Lane 11/5/2018 2' asphalt tan sand golden gravel refusal

B‐46 Sta 815+10

(MP 13.80)

Center

WB Lane 11/5/2018 3' asphalt brown silty sand refusal

B‐45 Sta 799+52

(MP 13.50)

Center

Road 11/5/2018 2.5' asphalt brown sand brown silty gravel with sand refusal

B‐44 Sta 783+52

(MP 13.20)

Center

Road 11/5/2018 1.5' asphalt brown sand brown silty gravel with sand refusal

B‐41 Sta 736+30

(MP 12.30)

Center

WB Lane 11/5/2018 5' brown silty sand dark brown silty sand

B‐43 Sta 771+20

(MP 12.90)

Center EB

Lane 11/5/2018 5' asphalt brown sand tan silty sand

B‐42 Sta 752+00

(MP 12.48)

Center

Road 11/5/2018 1' tan silty sand brown silty gravel with sand refusal

B‐39 Sta 705+74

(MP 11.68)

Center EB

Lane 11/5/2018 5' asphalt brown sand

B‐40 Sta 721+07

(MP 12.00)

Center

WB Lane 11/5/2018 5' brown silty sand dark brown silty sand

B‐37 Sta 674+30

(MP 11.00)

Center

Road 11/5/2018 5' asphalt tan sand brown silty sand

B‐38 Sta 689+56

(MP 11.35)

Center

WB Lane 11/5/2018 5' asphalt tan sand brown silty sand

B‐35 Sta 642+91

(MP 10.50)

Center

Road 11/5/2018 5' tan silty sand brown silty sand

B‐36 Sta 659+31

(MP 10.68)

Center

Road 11/5/2018 5' tan silty sand brown silty sand tan silty sand

B‐33 Sta 612+82

(MP 9.90)

Center EB

Lane 11/5/2018 5' asphalt golden brown silty sand

B‐34 Sta 627+66

(MP 10.20)

Center

WB Lane 11/5/2018 5' asphalt golden brown silty sand

B‐32 Sta 597+00

(MP 9.60)

Center

WB Lane 11/5/2018 2' asphalt tan sand grey sand refusal

B‐31 Sta 579+00

(MP 9.30)

Center

Road 11/6/2018 5' asphalt tan aggregate base tan silty sand

B‐30 Sta 564+44

(MP 9.00)

Center

WB Lane 11/6/2018 5' asphalt brown aggregate base golden brown silty, clayey sand

B‐29 Sta 548+89

(MP 8.70)

Center

WB Lane 11/6/2018 5' asphalt tan aggregate base golden tan silty, clayey sand asphalt brown silty gravel with sand

Boring Observations (grey = sample depth )

CA FTNP SEKI 13(2) MINERAL KING ROAD BORING LOG (November 5‐7,2018)

B‐50 Sta 881+36

(MP 15.10)

Center

Road 11/5/2018 1' refusal brown sand

APPENDIX C – Site Investigation Photos

MP 0.6, BH-3, Looking Back, 4” Asphalt without Base, Fatigue Cracking

MP 0.90, BH-4, Looking Ahead, 1.5” Asphalt without Base, Fatigue Cracking

MP 1.20, BH-5, Looking Ahead, 24’ Wide Asphalt, Fatigue Cracking

MP 1.20, BH-5, 6” Asphalt on Silty Clayey Sand without Base, Fatigue Cracking

MP 2.15, BH-8, Looking Back, 3” Asphalt without Base, Fatigue Cracks and Rutting

MP 2.50, BH-9, Looking Back, 1.5” Asphalt without Base, Fatigue Cracking

MP 2.85, BH-10, 2” Asphalt on Silty Sand without Base, Fatigue Cracking

MP 2.85, BH-10, Looking Ahead, 2” Asphalt without Base, Fatigue Cracking

MP 3.10, BH-11, Looking Ahead, 1” Asphalt without Base, Fatigue Cracking

MP 3.75, BH-13, Looking Back, 1” Asphalt without Base, Fatigue Cracking

MP 4.35, BH-15, Looking Back, 1” Asphalt on Silty Clayey Sand without Base

MP 5.20, BH-52, Looking Back, 1” Asphalt on Silty Sand without Base, Fatigue Cracks

MP 5.70, BH-51, Erosion of Decomposed Granite (Silty Sand) at Culvert Outlet

MP 5.90, BH-20, 2.5” Asphalt on Silty Sand without Base

MP 6.90, BH-23, 4.5” Asphalt on Silty Clayey Sand without Base

MP 7.80, BH-26, 2.5” Asphalt on 3” Base over Silty Sand, Fatigue Cracks & Shoving

MP 9.90, BH-33, 3” Asphalt on Silty Sand without Base

MP 10.20, BH-34, 2” Asphalt on Silty Sand without Base, Fatigue Cracking

MP 10.68, BH-36, Silty Sand Dirt Road without Base

MP 12.30, BH-41, Silty Sand Dirt Road without Base

MP 12.90, BH-43, 2” Asphalt on 4” of Sand over Silty Sand

MP 15.10, BH-50, 4” Asphalt on 3” of Sand over Sandy Gravel

APPENDIX D – Pavement Calculations with Traffic Counts

ESAL Calculations

Project: CA FTNP SEKI 13(1) Mineral King Road Date: 1/22/2019

Location: Tulare County, California

Performance Period (years) 20

Two-Way Traffic (ADT) 85

Number of Lanes in Design Direction 1

Percent of Trucks in Design Lane 100%

Percent of Trucks in Design Direction 50%

Accumulated

Average Initial 18-kip ESALs for

Vehicle Percent Annual % Growth Truck Factor Performance

Class of ADT Growth Factor (ESALs/Truck) Period

2-3 96% 2% 24.30 0.004 1,447

5-6 4% 2% 24.30 0.7 10,554

Total 12,001

Design ESALs 50,000

A

S H

T O

F L

E X

IB

L

E P

A V

E M

E N

T D

E S

IG

N

S N

D e te rm in a ti o n

D e s ig n I n p u ts

W

,0

E

S A

L s A p p lic a ti o n s O v e r D e s ig n P e ri o d

Ty p.

R an ge

0k to m ill io n

R

R e lia b ili ty

Ty p.

R an ge to

5%

S o

0.

S ta n d a rd

D e v ia ti o n A

A S

H

TO

S ta nd ar d

M R

,0 p si

S u b g ra d e R e s ili e n t M o d u lu s Ty p.

R an ge to p si

P i

4.

In it ia l S e rv ic e a b ili ty

Ty p.

R an ge

.2 to

.4

P t

T e rm in a l S e rv ic e a b ili ty

Ty p.

R an ge

.0 to

.0

D E

S

IG

N S

N

.6

NPS Traffic Count Data

APPENDIX E – Asphalt Binder and Climate Data

LTPPBind Data

Note: Markers indicate County/Route/Post Mile of

State Hwys. at region boundaries. When there is no marker, the region follows a county boundary.

<----------------------- SITE

Table 2.0 – ASPHALT BINDER GRADE

Binder

Climatic Region

Conventional Asphalt Rubberized Asphalt

Dense Graded Open Graded Gap

Graded Open

GradedTypical Special

PG PG

PG

Polymer Modified

PG

PG

Polymer Modified2

PG PG

South Coast Central Coast Inland Valleys

64-10 70-10 64-28PM 64-10 58-34PM 64-16 64-16

North Coast 64-16 N/A 64-28PM 64-16 58-34PM 64-16 64-16

Low Mountain South Mountain 64-16 N/A 64-28PM 64-16 58-34PM 64-16 64-16

High Mountain High Desert 64-28 N/A 58-34PM 64-28 58-34PM 58-22 58-22

Desert 70-10 N/A 64-28PM 70-10 58-34PM 64-16 64-16

Notes:

1. For asphalt concrete dikes use PG 70-10. For tack coats use either 64-10 or 64-16.

special location identified by DME.

For conventional Dense Graded Asphalt concrete, values are given for typical and special conditions. Special conditions are defined as those roadways or portion of roadways which meet any of the following criteria:

Scales etc.)

It should be noted that special binder grades may help to meet the requirements for the above criteria. However, there are other provisions that may also be necessary to address the above special conditions. The District Materials Engineer should be consulted for additional recommendations for these locations. Final decision as to whether a roadway meets the criteria for special conditions rests with the District.

For more detailed information on PG binder selection, refer to technical guides available on pavement web site at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/pavement/guidance.htm.

3.0 COST ESTIMATING

The use of PG binder should not affect the unit price for asphalt concrete for projects that have not been advertised. Asphalt concrete binders that use PBA binders are typically 20 to 30% more expensive than conventional binders like PG or AR.

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/pavement/guidance.htm

SECTION 92 ASPHALT BINDERS

PG Asphalt Binders

Quality characteristic Test method

Requirement

PG

58-22a

PG

58-16

PG

64-10

PG

64-16

PG

64-28

PG

70-10 Original Binder

Flash point (min, °C) AASHTO T 48

230 230 230 230 230 230

Solubilityb (min, %) AASHTO T 44

99 99 99 99 99 99

Viscosity at 135 °Cc

(max, Pa•s)

AASHTO

T 316

3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Dynamic shear:

Test temperature at 10 rad/s (°C) G*/sin(delta) (min, kPa) G*/sin(delta) (max, kPa)

AASHTO

T 315

1.00 2.00

1.00 2.00

1.00 2.00

1.00 2.00

1.00 2.00

1.00 2.00

RTFOf teste mass loss (max, %)

AASHTO

T 240 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 RTFOf Test Aged Binder

Dynamic shear:

Test temperature at 10 rad/s (°C) G*/sin(delta) (min, kPa)

AASHTO

T 315

2.20

2.20

2.20

2.20

2.20

2.20 Ductility at 25 °C (min, cm) AASHTO

T 51 75 75 75 75 75 75

PAVg

Test temperature (°C)

AASHTO

R 28 100 100 100 100 100 110 RTFOf Test and PAVg Aged Binder

Dynamic shear:

Test temperature at 10 rad/s (°C) G*sin(delta) (max, kPa)

AASHTO

T 315

22d

5,000

25d

5,000

31d

5,000

28d

5,000

22d

5,000

34d

5,000 Creep stiffness:

Test temperature, °C S-value (max, MPa) M-value (min)

AASHTO

T 313

-12

0.300

-6

0.300

0.300

-6

0.300

-18

0.300

0.300 aUse as asphalt rubber base stock for high mountain and high desert area.

bThe Engineer waives solubility requirements if the supplier is an authorized material source as defined by the Department's Certification Program for Suppliers of Asphalt.

cThe Engineer waives this specification if the supplier provides written certification the asphalt binder can be adequately pumped and mixed at temperatures meeting applicable safety standards.

dTest the sample at 3 °C higher if it fails at the specified test temperature. G*sin(delta) remains 5,000 kPa maximum.

eThe residue from mass change determination may be used for other tests.

fRTFO means rolling thin film oven.

gPAV means Pressure Aging Vessel.

PG modified asphalt binder must comply with the requirements shown in the following table:

SECTION 92 ASPHALT BINDERS

PG Modified Asphalt Binders

Quality characteristic Test method Requirement

PG

58-34 M

PG

64-28 M

PG

76-22 M

Original Binder Flash point (min, °C) AASHTO T 48 230 230 230 Solubility (min, %) AASHTO T 44a 97.5 97.5 97.5b

Viscosity at 135 °Cc

(max, Pa•s)

AASHTO T 316

3.0 3.0 3.0 Dynamic shear, Test temperature at 10 rad/s (°C) G*/sin(delta) (min, kPa)

AASHTO T 315

1.00

1.00

1.00 RTFOg testd, Mass loss (max, %)

AASHTO T 240

1.00 1.00 1.00 RTFOg Test Aged Binder

Dynamic shear, Test temperature at 10 rad/s (°C) G*/sin(delta) (min, kPa)

AASHTO T 315

2.20

2.20

2.20 Dynamic shear, Test temperature at 10 rad/s, °C Delta (max, degree)

AASHTO T 315

80e 80e 80e

Elastic recoveryf, Test temperature (°C) Recovery (min, %)

AASHTO T 301 25

PAVh, Temperature (°C)

AASHTO R 28

100 100 110

RTFOg Test and PAVh Aged Binder Dynamic shear, Test temperature at 10 rad/s (°C) G*sin(delta) (max, kPa)

AASHTO T 315

5,000

5,000

5,000 Creep stiffness, Test temperature (°C) S-value (max, Mpa) M-value (min)

AASHTO T 313

-24

0.300

-18

0.300

-12

0.300 aThe Department allows ASTM D5546 or ASTM D7553 instead of AASHTO T 44. Particles recovered from ASTM D5546 or ASTM D7553 or AASHTO T 44 must be less than 250 μm.

bReport only for spray application.

cThe Engineer waives the viscosity requirements if the supplier provides written certification the asphalt binder can be adequately pumped and mixed at temperatures meeting applicable safety standards.

dThe residue from mass change determination may be used for other tests.

eTest temperature is the temperature at which G*/sin(delta) is 2.2 kPa. A graph of log G*/sin(delta) plotted against temperature may be used to determine the test temperature when G*/sin(delta) is 2.2 kPa. A graph of (delta) versus temperature may be used to determine delta at the temperature when G*/sin(delta) is 2.2 kPa. The graph must have at least 2 points that envelope G*/sin(delta) of 2.2 kPa, and the test temperature must not be more than 6 °C apart.

The Engineer also accepts direct measurement of delta at the temperature when G*/sin(delta) is 2.2 kPa.

fTests without a force ductility clamp may be performed.

gRTFO means rolling thin film oven.

hPAV means Pressure Aging Vessel.

Do not modify PG modified asphalt binder using polyphosphoric acid.

APPENDIX F – Pipe Selection Criteria

Hydrology and Hydraulics December 2012

7-48 Roadway Hydraulics

7.3.5.5 Recommended Methods

Design and evaluate the performance of energy dissipators according to the methods presented in HEC 14. HEC 14 also contains procedures for estimating scour hole dimensions at pipe outlets.

7.3.5.6 Reporting

The design of outlet protection for culvert, ditch, or storm drain outlets should be supported by documentation containing, at a minimum, the following information:

● Project identification

● Location of proposed installation

● Hydraulic design calculations

7.3.5.7 Plans

For the location and design of riprap outlet protection, prepare plans showing all details necessary to construct the improvements according to the hydraulic design, including the following:

● Location

● Dimensions and extent of riprap

● Gradation

● Bedding and Filter Material or Geotextile

● Grading or slope details

7.3.6 ALTERNATIVE PIPE MATERIALS

It is Federal Lands Highway policy to specify alternative drainage pipe materials on all projects where feasible and to comply with the provisions of 23 CFR 635.411. All suitable pipe materials, including reinforced concrete, steel, aluminum, and plastic will be considered as alternatives for all new cross culverts and storm drain pipes on Federal Lands Highway projects.

Not all pipe materials are appropriate or applicable for all storm drain applications. The design of alternative drainage pipe materials should consider functionally equivalent performance in three areas: structural capacity, durability and service life, and hydraulic capacity. The service life and hydraulic capacity issues are addressed in this section.

7.3.6.1 References

The following references provide source information for the development of the standards, criteria, and guidance of this subsection (most recent editions apply):

1. 23 CFR 635.411 Title 23 CFR 635.411 in 23 CFR 635D, General Material Requirements

Roadway Hydraulics 7-49

2. FHWA-FLP-91-006 FHWA, Durability of Special Coatings for Corrugated Steel Pipe, FHWA FLP-91-006

3. FHWA-RD-97-140 FHWA, Durability Analysis of Aluminized Type 2 Corrugated Metal Pipe, FHWA RD-97-140, 2000.

4. AASHTO HDG

Vol. IV

AASHTO Highway Drainage Guidelines, Volume IV – Hydraulic Design of Culverts

5. AASHTO HDG

Vol. XIV

AASHTO Highway Drainage Guidelines, Volume XIV – Culvert Inspection and Rehabilitation

6. Caltrans Chapter

California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual, Chapter 850 – Physical Standards

7.3.6.2 Design Standards

7.3.6.2.1 Service Life

Design cross culvert and storm drain pipes with a minimum maintenance-free service life of 50-years, regardless of pipe material selection. A shorter service life may be used for temporary installations, and a longer service life may be considered in unusual situations.

7.3.6.2.2 Minimum Pipe Classification

Use Class II as the minimum for all reinforced concrete pipes. Determine appropriate pipe class from FLH fill height FLH Standard Drawings.

Use a minimum wall thickness of 0.0625” [1.63 mm] for all steel and aluminum pipes. The appropriate minimum structural metal thickness will be determined from approved FLH fill height tables.

7.3.6.3 Design Guidance

7.3.6.3.1 Service Life

The durability and service life of a storm drain pipe is directly related to the environmental conditions encountered at the site and the type of materials and coatings from which the pipe was fabricated. The two primary causes of early failure in drainage pipe materials are corrosion and abrasion.

Corrosion gradually wears away at the pipe walls by chemical action, and can occur from both the soil and water sides of the pipe. Abrasion wears away at the interior pipe wall by friction from suspended or bed-load sediment.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/infrastructure/hydraulics/97140/97140.pdf http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/infrastructure/hydraulics/97140/97140.pdf http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/hdm/pdf/chp0850.pdf

7-50 Roadway Hydraulics

7.3.6.3.2 Data Collection

Corrosion

Representative pH and resistivity determinations are required in order to specify pipe materials capable of providing a maintenance-free service life. Samples are taken in accordance with the procedures described in AASHTO T 288 and T 289. Samples should be taken from both the soil and water side environments to ensure that the most severe environmental conditions are selected for determining the service life of the drainage pipe. Soil samples should be representative of backfill material anticipated at the drainage site. Avoid taking water samples during flood flows or for two days following flood flows to ensure more typical readings. In locations where streams are dry much of the year, water samples may not be possible or necessary. In areas of known uniform pH and resistivity readings, a random sampling plan may be developed to obtain the needed information.

In corrosive soil conditions where water side corrosion is not a factor, consider specifying less corrosive backfill material to modify the soil side environment. The mitigating effect of the specified backfill should be taken into account in making alternative pipe materials selections in situations where the soil side conditions control the design.

Abrasion

An estimate of the potential for abrasion is required in order to determine the need for invert protection. Four levels of abrasion are referred to in this guidance and the following guidelines are established for each level:

● Level 1. Nonabrasive conditions exist in areas of no bed load and very low velocities.

This is the condition assumed for the soil side of drainage pipes.

● Level 2. Low abrasive conditions exist in areas of minor bed loads of sand and velocities of 5 ft/s [1.5 m/s] or less.

● Level 3. Moderate abrasive conditions exist in areas of moderate bed loads of sand and gravel and velocities between 5 ft/s and 15 ft/s [1.5 m/s and 4.5 m/s].

● Level 4. Severe abrasive conditions exist in areas of heavy bed loads of sand, gravel, and rock and velocities exceeding 15 ft/s [4.5 m/s].

Abrasion levels are intended as guidance to help the engineer consider the impacts of bed-load wear on the invert of pipe materials. Sampling of the streambed materials is not required, but visual examination and documentation of the size of the materials in the stream bed and the average slope of the channel will give the designer guidance on the expected level of abrasion.

Where existing culverts are in place in the same drainage, the conditions of inverts should also be used as guidance. The expected stream velocity should be based upon a typical flow (i.e., 2-year flow and less) and not a 10-or 50-year design flood.

Roadway Hydraulics 7-51

7.3.6.3.3 Reinforced Concrete Pipe

Reinforced concrete pipe (AASHTO M 170M) is typically specified as an alternative whenever environmental conditions permit. The appropriate pipe class is determined from approved FLH fill height FLH Standard Drawings. If the following guidance on corrosion and abrasion limitations is used, reinforced concrete pipe can be assumed to have a minimum service life of 50 years.

Corrosion

Reinforced concrete pipe should not be specified for extremely corrosive conditions where the pH is less than 3.0 and the resistivity is less than 300 Ω-cm. Where the pH is less than 4.0, or the pipe is exposed to wetting and drying in a salt or brackish water environment, protective coatings (e.g., epoxy resin mortars, poly vinyl chloride sheets) should be used. When the sulfate concentration is greater than 0.2% in the soil or 2,000 parts per million in the water, Type V cement should be specified. When the sulfate concentration is greater than 1.5% in the soil or 15,000 parts per million in the water, Type V cement should be used with a sulfate resistant pozzolan. A higher cement ratio may also be used (e.g., AASHTO Class V pipe design).

Abrasion

On installations in severe abrasive environments, consider using seven or eight sack concrete or increasing the cover over the reinforcing steel.

7.3.6.3.4 Steel Pipe with Metallic Coatings

Steel pipe will typically be specified as an alternative when the environmental conditions permit.

The appropriate minimum structural metal thickness is determined from approved FLH fill height tables. Federal Lands Highway design policy assumes that steel pipe will provide a useful, maintenance-free service life for a period of time beyond the point of first perforation. This assumes an acceptable risk for most Federal Lands Highway projects, but at locations with erodible soils, large traffic volumes, or high fills where replacement or repair would be unusually difficult or expensive, consider increasing the steel plate by one standard thickness. In unusual situations where very high fills and severe abrasion are combined, or where other environmental concerns would make replacement of a pipe culvert very costly or impractical, consider using a pipe one size larger in diameter to permit re-lining in the future by insertion of another pipe.

The following types of steel pipe with metallic coatings are considered as alternatives on Federal Lands Highway projects:

● Galvanized steel (AASHTO M 218)

● Aluminum coated steel (Type 2) (AASHTO M 274)

Corrosion

Under non-abrasive and low-abrasive conditions, the service life of steel pipe with metallic coatings may be determined based upon corrosion (i.e., pH and resistivity) factors determined from Exhibit 7.3-B, which shows the relationship between service life and corrosion for plain

7-52 Roadway Hydraulics galvanized steel pipe. It has been adapted from the California Department of Transportation “Method for Estimating the Service Life of Steel Culverts,” California Test 643. The curves have been modified to show the expected average service life of pipe with a steel thickness of 0.0625” [1.63 mm] assuming a useful, maintenance-free service life 25 percent longer than the number of years to first perforation. Under moderate and severe abrasive conditions, abrasion protection must also be considered.

Under nonabrasive and low abrasive conditions, the metal thickness of galvanized and aluminum coated steel (Type 2) alternatives should be determined from Exhibit 7.3-B based on the resistivity and pH of the site. The minimum metal thickness of steel pipe, as determined from FLH standard fill height tables, may have to be increased, or the additional life of a protective coating may have to be added, in order to provide a 50-year service life. The results included in FHWA-FLP-91-006 indicate that within the environmental range of 5.0 through

9.0 pH and resistivity equal to or greater than 1500 Ω-cm, aluminum coated steel (Type 2) can be expected to give a service life of twice that of plain galvanized pipe.

Exhibit 7.3-B can be used to determine various combinations of increased thicknesses, aluminum coated steel (Type 2), and protective coatings to achieve a 50-year service life, but in no case may the metal thickness specified by the structural requirements be reduced.

Abrasion

Under nonabrasive and low abrasive conditions, the metal thickness of the galvanized, galvalume, and aluminum coated steel alternatives, as determined from Exhibit 7.3-B, should be used.

On installations in moderate abrasive environments where protective coatings are not required for corrosion protection, the thickness of the metal should be increased by one standard metal pipe thickness determined from the diagram for average service life of plain galvanized culverts (see Exhibit 7.3-B) or invert protection should be provided. Invert protection may consist of bituminous coating with invert paving with bituminous concrete, Portland cement concrete lining, installation of metal plates or rails, or velocity reduction structures.

On installations in severe abrasive environments where protective coatings are not required for corrosion protection, the thickness of the metal should be increased by one standard metal pipe thickness determined from the diagram for average service life of plain galvanized culverts (see Exhibit 7.3-B) and invert protection should be provided. Invert protection may consist of installation of metal plates or rails, or velocity reduction structures.

Protective coatings are not suitable for corrosion protection in moderate-abrasive and severe abrasive locations. Metal pipes should not be specified in moderate and severe abrasive environments where coatings are required to protect against water-side corrosion.

Roadway Hydraulics 7-53

Exhibit 7.3-B ESTIMATING STEEL PIPE SERVICES LIFE F

E D

E R

A L

L A

N D

S H

IG

H

W A

Y M

O D

IF

IE

D C

A L

IF

O

R N

IA

M

E T

H O

D C

H A

R T

F O

R

E S

T

IM

A T

IN

G

S E

R V

IC

E

L

IF

E O

F P

L A

IN

G

A L

V A

N

IZ

E D

S T

E E

L C

U L

V E

R T er vi ce L ife E st im at io n C ha rt fo r A ve ra ge S er vi ce L ife o f P la in G al va ni ze d C ul ve rts

N

TE

S

1.

Th e cu rv es in th is

C ha rt ar e ba se d on th e da ta in

F H

W A

-F

LP

-9 1-w hi ch u se s th e fa ct or s in C al ifo rn ia

T es t 6

M et ho d fo r E st im at in g th e

S er vi ce

L ife o f S te el

C ul ve rts

T he se fa ct or s in cr ea se d th e es tim at ed s er vi ce li fe b y a fte r f irs t p er fo ra tio n.

2.

Th

C ha rt ha s al so b ee n m od ifi ed to re fle ct a m in im um m et al th ic kn es s of

.0 in ch o r 1 ga ge [1

.6 m m

3.

U nd er c on di tio ns w ith p H b et w ee n an d

9, a nd a bo ve

R

0, th e av er ag e se rv ic e lif e de te rm in ed fo r p la in g al va ni ze d cu lv er ts s ho ul d be m ul tip lie d by

.0 fo r A lu m in um c oa te d st ee l, (T yp e 2)

T H

IC

K

N E

S S

F A

C T

O

.1

.2

N o te

M u lt ip ly t h e a v e ra g e S e rv ic e L if e b y t h ic k n e s s F a c to r

.1

.5

.1

.7

.7

.0

.3

.8

H

IC

K

N E

S S in c

G

G E

H

IC

K

N E

S S

F

C T

7-54 Roadway Hydraulics

7.3.6.3.5 Non-Metallic Protective Coatings for Steel Pipe

Protective coatings may be used to provide additional protection from corrosion or abrasion resulting in an extended service life. Coatings to protect against corrosion may only be used in non-abrasive and low abrasive environments.

The additional service life noted below in bold for each type of protective coating, for corrosion protection, are from Part V of FHWA-FLP-91-006. The added service is applicable only to non-abrasive and moderate abrasive conditions. All of the following types of steel pipe with non-metallic coatings are considered as alternatives on Federal Lands Highway projects:

Bituminous coating

Bituminous coatings (AASHTO M 190) can be expected to add 10 years of service to the water side and 25 years life to the soil side service life of pipe as determined from Exhibit 7.3-B.

Bituminous-coated pipe should not be used in low abrasive environments.

Bituminous paving and coating

Bituminous paved invert with bituminous coatings (AASHTO M 190) can be expected to add 25 years life to water side locations. Under moderate abrasive conditions, bituminous paved pipe may be used for invert protection where corrosion protection is not required.

Concrete lining

Concrete lining (ASTM A 849) can be expected to add 25 years of service life. Due to the natural cracking of concrete, the concrete lining should be applied over an asphalt coating if corrosion protection is needed. Under moderate abrasive conditions, concrete lined pipe may be used for invert protection where corrosion protection is not required.

Polymer coating

Ethylene Acrylic Acid Film coatings (AASHTO M245 and M246) should provide an additional 30 years service life with a 0.009” [0.25 mm] thickness.

Aramid fiber bonded coating

Only limited data is available for the service life of aramid fiber bonded coated (ASTM A 885) and epoxy coated pipes. No additional service life is currently credited with this policy.

7.3.6.3.6 Aluminum Alloy Pipe

Aluminum alloy pipe (AASHTO M 196M) will typically be specified as an alternative when environmental conditions permit. The appropriate minimum structural metal thickness is determined from approved FLH fill height tables. Within the following limits of corrosion and abrasion, aluminum alloy pipe can be assumed to have a service life of 50 years. Additional service life may be achieved where required by abrasion with the addition of protective coatings or additional metal thickness as discussed below:

Roadway Hydraulics 7-55

Corrosion

An aluminum alloy should be allowed if the pH is between four and nine and the resistivity is greater than 500 Ω-cm. An aluminum alloy alternative can also be considered for use in salt and brackish environments when embedded in granular, free draining material.

Abrasion

On installations in non-abrasive and low-abrasive environments, abrasion protection is not required.

On installations in moderately abrasive environments, the thickness should be increased by one standard metal thickness or invert protection should be used. Invert protection may consist of bituminous coating and invert paving with bituminous concrete or Portland cement concrete, installation of metal plates or rails, or velocity reduction structures.

On installations in severe abrasive environments, the thickness of the metal should be increased by one standard metal pipe thickness from that determined for low-abrasive conditions and invert protection should be provided. Invert protection may consist of installation of metal plates or rails or velocity reduction structures.

7.3.6.3.7 Plastic Pipe

Polyethylene and polyvinyl chloride plastic pipe may be specified as alternatives for pipe diameters and minimum resin cell classifications shown in the…