G - Airfield Pavement Condition Index Survey report.pdf

ARA-TR-22-G10015.00000.00011.00000

AIRFIELD PAVEMENT CONDITION

INDEX SURVEY REPORT

LAUGHLIN AIR FORCE BASE, TX

February 2023

Prepared by:

Applied Research Associates, Inc.

Mid-Atlantic Division 119 Monument Place Vicksburg, MS 39180

April 2024

Final Report

Distribution limitation applied as of report date. Other requests for this document must be referred to the Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC/COAP), 139 Barnes Drive, Suite 1, Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida 32403-5319.

Prepared for: Air Force Civil Engineer Center 139 Barnes Drive, Suite 1

Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida 32403-5319

Contract Number FA8051-12-F-0042

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

PREFACE ................................................................................................................... vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

1.2 DESCRIPTION OF TASKS PERFORMED

1.2.1 PCI Survey

1.2.2 Validation of Real Property Pavement Inventory

1.2.3 CAD/GIS Mapping

1.2.4 PAVER Implementation

1.2.5 Development of PAVER Work Plans

1.2.6 Written Report

1.2.7 Photographs

1.3 LOCATION

1.3.1 Design and Construction History

1.3.2 Current Traffic Data

1.3.3 Previous Reports

1.4 SYNOPSIS OF MAJOR PROJECTS SINCE LAST EVALUATION

2 PCI RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 PCI SURVEY PROCEDURE

2.1.1 PCI Survey Process

2.1.2 PAVER Implementation

2.2 OVERVIEW OF PCI SURVEY RESULTS

2.2.1 PCI Results by Branch Use and Surface Type

2.2.2 Pavement Issues

2.3 DETAILED PCI DESCRIPTION

2.3.1 Aprons

2.3.2 Overruns

2.3.3 Runways

2.3.4 Shoulders

2.3.5 Taxiways

2.3.6 Projected PCI

3 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT PROCESS AND CRITERIA

3.1 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT RATING DESCRIPTION

3.1.1 Area-Weighted Average PCI

3.1.2 FOD Index and Potential

3.1.3 Structural Index

3.1.4 Friction Index

3.2 EA RATINGS

4 MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR BUDGET SCENARIOS

4.1 PAVER ANALYSIS

4.1.1 Sections excluded from PAVER work plans

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

Chapter Page

4 4.1.2 Condition Stabilization

4.1.3 Major M&R Backlog Elimination over Ten Years

4.1.4 Stopgap M&R Only (safety issues)

4.1.5 Recommended Budget

4.1.6 Recommended Localized Preventive and Stopgap Maintenance Plan

4.1.7 Recommended Global Maintenance Plan

Appendix Page

A AIRFIELD MAPS .................................................................................................... A-1

B PAVEMENT INVENTORY AND CONDITION INFORMATION ........................B-1

B.1 REAL PROPERTY PAVEMENT INVENTORY .........................................B-2 B.2 PAVER/RPAD COMPARSON .....................................................................B-4 B.3 BRANCH USE INVENTORY ......................................................................B-6 B.4 PAVEMENT TYPE .......................................................................................B-6

B.5 INSPECTION DATA SUMMARY BY AGE GROUP ................................B-6

B.6 INSPECTION DATA SUMMARY BY PAVEMENT RANK .....................B-7

B.7 SECTIONS NOT INSPECTED AND EXCLUDED FROM

CONDITION ANALYSIS AND WORK PLANS ........................................B-8

C PCI DETERIORATION RATE SUMMARY ...........................................................C-1 C.1 BRANCH AND SECTION PCI COMPARISONS .......................................C-2

D RESERVED ........................................................................................................... D-1

E PAVER WORK HISTORY REPORT....................................................................... E-1

F PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX RESULTS ....................................................... F-1

F.1 STANDARD PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX ...................................... F-2

G FOD POTENTIAL INFORMATION ....................................................................... G-1 G.1 FOD INDEX AND FOD POTENTIAL ....................................................... G-2

H STRUCTURAL RESULTS ...................................................................................... H-1 H.1 STRUCTURAL INDEX ............................................................................... H-2

I FRICTION CHARACTERISTIC RESULTS............................................................. I-1 I.1 FRICTION INDEX ......................................................................................... I-2

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONCLUDED)

Appendix Page

J ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT SUMMARY TABLES ......................................... J-1

J.1 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT RATING DESCRIPTION ........................ J-2

K BUDGET DETAILS ................................................................................................. K-1

K.1 PAVEMENT PRIORITIZATION AND CRITICAL PCI ............................ K-2

K.2 MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR POLICIES .............................................. K-2 K.3 PRIORITIZATION OF M&R POLICIES .................................................... K-3 K.4 PRIORITIZATION OF PAVEMENT .......................................................... K-4 K.5 M&R POLICY TABLES .............................................................................. K-4 K.6 M&R COSTS ................................................................................................ K-8

K.6.1 Cost-by-Work Type M&R Costs ...................................................... K-8 K.6.2 Cost-by-Condition M&R Work Plans and Costs ........................... K-10

L FAMILY MODELS FOR CONDITION DETERIORATION PREDICTION ......... L-1

L.1 FAMILY CURVES ....................................................................................... L-2

M REFERENCES AND DISTRIBUTION LIST ......................................................... M-1

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

ES.1 Comparison of Area-Weighted Average PCI for 2018 and 2023 ES.2 Pavement Condition Index (7-color by section)

2.1 Systematic Random Selection of Sample Units to Survey

2.2 Pavement Life Cycle Showing the Effects of M&R

2.3 Current Condition by Surface Type

2.4 PCI by Pavement Type for 2018 and 2023 PCI surveys

4.1 Summary of Budget Scenarios

4.2 Summary of Funding Required for Budget Scenarios

4.3 Summary of Backlog Remaining for Budget Scenarios

4.4 Funded M&R Costs to Maintain Current Condition

4.5 Funded M&R Costs to Eliminate the Major M&R Backlog

4.6 Funded M&R Costs for the Localized Stopgap Budget

A.1 Facility Identification ............................................................................................. A-2 A.2 Pavement Branch ................................................................................................... A-3 A.3 Pavement Ranking ................................................................................................. A-4

LIST OF FIGURES (CONCLUDED)

Figure Page

A.4 Pavement Condition ............................................................................................... A-5 A.5 FOD Potential ........................................................................................................ A-6 A.6 Structural Index ...................................................................................................... A-7 A.7 Reserved ................................................................................................................. A-8 A.8 Engineering Assessment ........................................................................................ A-9 A.9 Sample Layout ..................................................................................................... A-10 G.1 FOD Potential Categories ...................................................................................... G-2 H.1 Structural Index Rating Criteria.........................................................................….H-2 K.1 Significant Drop in Pavement Condition Near End of Pavement Life

Cycle…… ............................................................................................................ K-11 K.2 AC M&R Cost-by-Condition ............................................................................... K-12 K.3 PCC M&R Cost-by-Condition ............................................................................. K-12 L.1 Predicting Pavement Condition .............................................................................. L-2 L.2 Family Plot for Primary AC Pavement (1.65 PCI pts/yr) ....................................... L-3 L.3 Family Plot for Primary AC Runway Pavement (1.80 PCI pts/yr)......................... L-4 L.4 Family Plot for Primary AC Taxiway Pavement (1.51 PCI pts/yr) ........................ L-4 L.5 Family Plot for Secondary AC Taxiway Pavement (1.35 PCI pts/yr) .................... L-5 L.6 Family Plot for Secondary and Tertiary AC Apron Pavement (1.64 PCI pts/yr) ...................................................................................................................... L-5 L.7 Family Tertiary AC Overrun Pavement (2.66 PCI pts/yr) ...................................... L-6 L.8 Family Plot for Primary PCC Apron Pavement (0.74 PCI pts/yr) .......................... L-6 L.9 Family Plot for Primary PCC Runway Pavement (0.25 PCI pts/yr) ...................... L-7 L.10 Family Plot for Primary PCC Taxiway Pavement (0.25 PCI pts/yr) ...................... L-7 L.11 Family Plot for Secondary PCC Apron and Taxiway Pavement (0.44 PCI pts/yr) ...................................................................................................................... L-8 L.12 Family Plot for Tertiary PCC Apron Pavement (0.90 PCI pts/yr) .......................... L-8

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

ES.1 Current Condition Summary ES.2 PAVER Recommended Budget Summary

1.1 Major M&R by Branch and Section

2.1 Definition and Distribution of PCI Ratings

2.2 Current Condition Summary

2.3 Apron Pavement Area and Sections by PCI Range

2.4 Overrun Pavement Area and Sections by PCI Range

2.5 Runway Pavement Area and Sections by PCI range

LIST OF TABLES (CONCLUDED)

Table Page

2.6 Shoulder Pavement Area and Sections by PCI range

2.7 Taxiway Pavement Area and Sections by PCI range

2.8 Ten-Year Projected PCI

3.1 EA Rating Criteria

3.2 EA Ratings by Section

4.1 Summary of PAVER Work Plan Results

4.2 Recommended Major M&R by Year

4.3 Recommended Localized Preventive and Stopgap M&R

B.1 Real Property Inventory .............................................................................................B-2 B.2 Header Acronyms ......................................................................................................B-4 B.3 PAVER/RPAD Comparison ......................................................................................B-4 B.4 Branch Use Information .............................................................................................B-6 B.5 Pavement Surface Type Information .........................................................................B-6 B.6 Inspection Data Summary by Age .............................................................................B-6 B.7 Inspection Data Summary by Rank ...........................................................................B-7 B.8 Excluded Sections ......................................................................................................B-8 C.1 Comparison of PCI Results ........................................................................................C-3 F.1 Definition of PCI Ratings .......................................................................................... F-2 G.1 FOD Index Criteria ................................................................................................... G-2 G.2 FOD Producing Distresses and Probable Cause ....................................................... G-3 G.3 FOD Potential and Rating by Section ....................................................................... G-3 H.1 Structural Index by Section ...................................................................................... H-2 I.1 Runway 13C/31C Friction Values .............................................................................. I-2 I.2 Runway 13L/31R Friction Values .............................................................................. I-2 I.3 Runway 13R/31L Friction Values .............................................................................. I-3 J.1 EA Rating Criteria ...................................................................................................... J-2 J.2 EA Ratings by Section ................................................................................................ J-2 K.1 PAVER Funding Priority .......................................................................................... K-3 K.2 Pavement Priority Matrix .......................................................................................... K-4 K.3 AC Stopgap M&R Policies ....................................................................................... K-4 K.4 PCC Stopgap M&R Policies ..................................................................................... K-5 K.5 AC Preventive M&R Policies ................................................................................... K-6 K.6 PCC Preventive M&R policies ................................................................................. K-7 K.7 Sample M&R Item Unit Cost Calculation (Full-Depth PCC patching) ................... K-9 K.8 M&R Cost by Treatment .......................................................................................... K-9

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS

Photograph Page

1.1 GPS Coordinates on Photographs

2.1 Main Apron, Section A18B, Low-Severity Large Patch

2.2 Main Apron, Section A25B, High-Severity Shattered Slab

2.3 Sterile Area, Section A42B, Low-Severity Small Patch

2.4 T-38 Hangar Access, Section A17C2, Low-Severity Linear Crack

2.5 T-6 Weather Shelter Access Apron, Section A40C, Low-Severity ASR

2.6 Vehicle Refueling Apron, Section A55, High-Severity Joint Seal Damage

2.7 Vehicle Refueling Apron, Section A59, Medium-Severity Joint Spall

2.8 West Apron, Section A05B, Medium-Severity Linear Crack

2.9 Overrun Runway 13C/31C, Section O09C, Overview

2.10 Overrun Runway 13L/31R, Section O02C, High-Severity L&T Cracking

2.11 Runway 13C/31C, Section R11A1, Medium-Severity L&T Cracking

2.12 Runway 13C/31C, Section R15C2, Overview

2.13 Runway13L/31R, Section R06C2, Medium-Severity L&T Cracking

2.14 Runway 13L/31R, Section R08A2, Low-Severity Corner Spall

2.15 Runway 13R/31L, Section R26A, Low-Severity Block Cracking

2.16 Runway 13R/31L, Section R27C, Low-Severity L&T Cracking

2.17 Runway 13L/31R, Section S01, Overview

2.18 Center Runway Access, Section T16A, Medium-Severity L&T Cracking

2.19 Taxiway B, Section T08C, High-Severity Weathering

2.20 Taxiway B, Section T43A, Overview

2.21 Taxiway D, Section T20C, Low-Severity Raveling and Medium-Severity Weathering

2.22 Taxiway E, Section T21A, Medium-Severity Weathering

2.23 Taxiway J, Section T07C, Medium-Severity Alligator Cracking

PREFACE

This report documents a February 2023 assessment of the pavement condition of the airfield pavements network at Laughlin AFB, TX performed by Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA). This report provides information for:

Planning and programming for pavement maintenance, repairs, and rehabilitation

Prioritization of pavement facilities for maintenance and rehabilitation (M&R) and construction projects

Allocation of funds for annual M&R

The validation of the Real Property pavement inventory

This report meets the requirements for pavement condition inspection established in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 32-1041, “Air Force Pavement Evaluation Program.”

Mr. Shaun Moya, Headquarters Air Force Civil Engineer Center HQ AFCEC/COAP, was the technical contact. The prime contractor was Applied Research Associates, Inc., under Contract No. FA8051-12-F-4004.

Michael McComas, Contractor, 47th Civil Engineer on-site, provided valuable support and information for the survey.

The field survey team consisted of Nicklas Harvey, Sean Smithson, Brody Moody and Nathan Starks. Geographic Information System (GIS) drawings were provided by Grady Holley.

Joshua Turner, Paul Rohrer, Daniela Montenegro-Robayo, Kaitlyn Speir and Russell Knieriem prepared this report.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) performed a pavement condition survey for the airfield network at Laughlin AFB, TX in February 2023, and updated the airfield pavement PAVER database. The goals of the assessment were to:

Determine the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), between zero (failed) and 100 (no distresses), of both Portland cement concrete (PCC) and asphalt concrete (AC) airfield pavements

Update a PAVER pavement management system (PMS) to identify maintenance and rehabilitation (M&R) requirements and conduct cost planning

Validate the Real Property pavement inventory

The objectives of the pavement condition survey were to:

Acquire pertinent data to determine the current condition of the airfield pavements

Provide the Base Civil Engineer (BCE) with the PAVER database for use in making pavement management decisions

Develop 10-year work plans for M&R cost planning for the airfield pavements

PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX

ARA used the PAVER pavement management software to perform PCI calculations and analyses. Table ES.1 summarizes the condition survey results by branch use, and Figure ES.1 graphically compares the 2018 and 2023 PCI survey results by branch use. Figure ES.2 is the 7-color PCI by section map of the airfield network

Table ES.1. Current Condition Summary.

Branch Use Area-Weighted Average Condition

Category

Pavement

2018 PCI 2018 Age 2023 PCI 2023 Age Area (ft²) Area (%) Sections

Apron 85 23 82 28 Good 3,750,467 38 53

Overrun 60 14 52 19 Poor 438,704 5 9

Runway 70 14 67 19 Fair 3,514,898 36 35

Shoulder ND ND 74 21 Good 229,701 2 9

Taxiway 88 19 85 23 Good 1,810,016 19 39

Overall Airfield 79 19 76 23 Good 9,743,786 100 145

Laughlin AFB 1

Figure ES.1. Comparison of area-weighted average PCI for 2018 and 2023.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The airfield consisted of 46% AC pavement and 54% PCC pavement. At the conclusion of the inspection, 40 sections had a PCI below its respective critical value and requires maintenance. The predominant AC distresses were L&T cracking and weathering. Nearly half of the L&T cracking is medium-severity and would benefit from localized crack seal to extend the life of the pavement. Joint spalling, joint seal damage, and small patch were the predominant distresses in the PCC pavements. Significant localized M&R is needed such as patching, crack seal, joint seal replacement, and selective slab replacement. Very little structural distresses were observed.

RECOMMENDED BUDGET SCENARIO

All work plans were assumed to start at the beginning of fiscal year (FY) 2024 and extend through FY 2033. The backlog elimination budget was chosen as the recommended budget because it repaired all pavements below their critical PCI value and left no unfunded Major M&R. This budget costs $29,437,122 over the ten-year plan. Table ES.2 shows the yearly costs of the recommended budget. A full project list is included in Chapter 4. Shoulder pavements and closed pavements were excluded from budgetary planning.

Table ES.2. PAVER Recommended Budget Summary.

Plan

FY

M&R Policy Type Total Funded

Backlog of Unfunded Major

M&R

PCI

Stopgap Preventive Global Major Before After 2024 $469,553 $1,085,871 $64,080 $1,674,920 $3,294,424 $7,464,163 75 79 2025 $605,841 $827,989 $0 $1,854,549 $3,288,378 $8,228,802 77 82 2026 $714,034 $790,000 $0 $1,777,044 $3,281,078 $7,763,122 80 84 2027 $863,875 $830,856 $0 $1,588,948 $3,283,679 $6,854,507 83 86 2028 $483,862 $833,879 $0 $1,973,930 $3,291,671 $5,752,401 85 87 2029 $199,558 $881,355 $20,444 $2,179,296 $3,280,652 $4,260,378 86 88 2030 $73,488 $901,251 $0 $2,291,141 $3,265,880 $2,618,948 87 89 2031 $16,079 $921,352 $0 $2,341,706 $3,279,138 $708,774 88 91 2032 $0 $977,592 $0 $727,475 $1,705,067 $0 89 90 2033 $0 $961,758 $0 $505,397 $1,467,156 $0 89 89

Total $3,426,289 $9,011,904 $84,524 $16,914,406 $29,437,122 75 89

Apron Overrrun Runway Shoulder Taxiway Overall

A re a- W ei gh te d

A ve ra ge

P

C I

Branch Use

2018 2023

Laughlin AFB 2

LEGEND

GOOD

FAIR

VERY POOR

NOT RATED

SATISFACTORY

POOR

SERIOUS

FAILED

SECTION

DESIGNATION

(SEE NOTE 1)

TYPE OF SECTION

R - RUNWAY

T - TAXIWAY

A - APRON

O - OVERRUN

S - SHOULDER

TYPE TRAFFIC AREA (SEE NOTE 2)

A - A TYPE TRAFFIC

B - B TYPE TRAFFIC

C - C TYPE TRAFFIC

CHANGE IN SECTION

BOUNDARY

AC - ASPHALT CONCRETE

PCC - PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE

PAVEMENT TYPE

SECTION #

PAVEMENT

400 800

TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE, FLORIDA

CIVIL ENGINEER CENTER

AIR FORCE

7-COLOR PCI RATING

2/19/2023

ES.2HOLLEY

TURNER

LAUGHLIN AFB

Applied Research Associates 119 Monument Place Vicksburg, MS

Laughlin AFB 3

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

This report describes the condition of the airfield pavement network at Laughlin AFB as determined from the February 2023 PCI survey and subsequent update of a PAVER-based PMS.

The scope of this assessment included the road and parking lot pavements. The PAVER PMS provides the means to identify and prioritize pavement M&R requirements. The overall goals of this survey were to determine the PCI of both rigid and flexible pavements, update the existing PAVER PMS to identify M&R requirements, estimate the cost of recommended M&R, and validate the Real Property pavement inventory.

The following tasks support the project goals:

Interview airfield personnel, and review as-built drawings, construction records, and aerial photography

Update the pavement network and divide it into branches and sections Conduct a condition survey of the airfield pavements in accordance with "Standard

Test Methods for Airport Pavement Condition Index Surveys," American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D5340 and UFC 3-260-16

Enter condition survey information into PAVER 7.0 Compute PCI values for each pavement section Develop ten-year M&R work plans for the pavement network using PAVER Prepare a CADD map of the airfield branches, sections, and sample units Prepare a geographic information system (GIS) dataset of the airfield sections Report the findings of the study to installation pavement engineer, the BCE, and

AFCEC

1.2 DESCRIPTION OF TASKS PERFORMED

1.2.1 PCI Survey

The PCI survey is a visual inspection of pavements to determine their present surface condition. The condition survey consists of inspecting the pavement surfaces for specific types of distresses, determining the severity level of each distress, and measuring the quantity of each distress. These distresses are combined to determine the PCI value of the pavement, a number between zero (failed) and 100 (no distresses) that reflects the current condition. ASTM D5340 defines distress types and severities, as well as survey methods and calculations to determine the

PCI.

1.2.2 Validation of Real Property Pavement Inventory

During the field survey, meticulous care is taken to document all airfield pavements at the installation. Real Property attributes such as the Facility ID, RPUID, and CATCODE are populated in the PAVER database. This enables a detailed inventory of the pavement to be developed and compared against the Real Property records after the conclusion of the field

Laughlin AFB 4 survey. Inconsistencies between the Real Property records, AFI 32-1041, and the PWS are identified in Appendix B.

1.2.3 CADD/GIS Mapping

Prior to the field investigation, a pavement network map was developed using available aerial photography and the common installation plan (CIP) provided by base personnel. The map was divided into branches, sections, and sample units. It is provided in AutoDesk drawing (.dwg) format. As surveyors inspect the pavement, they are mindful to ensure that the pre-survey airfield map depicts the actual pavement, otherwise known as a “ground-truth” survey.

Noticeable differences between what was present at the installation and what was displayed on the maps provided by the base were adjusted by a CADD technician. Small systematic errors in the digitization of the installation by base personnel may not have been detectable by inspectors and therefore not amended in the maps provided by ARA. The maps are geo-referenced to be compatible with existing datasets such as GeoBase. A section-level map that is linked to PAVER is provided. This map is also provided in ESRI Shapefile format and is suitable for linking to an existing geodatabase.

1.2.4 PAVER Implementation

The network definition, construction history, Real Property information, and data from the condition survey were entered into PAVER.

After the data were entered and the PCI determined, family curves were developed to model the change in pavement condition over time. These curves are used by PAVER to estimate future pavement condition. Several curves are typically developed, with separate curves defined for different combinations of pavement usage, e.g., apron, overrun, runway, or taxiway;

surface type, e.g., AC or PCC; and pavement rank, e.g., primary, secondary, or tertiary.

Engineering judgment is used to determine the number and types of deterioration curves that are appropriate for a particular installation.

The database "Laughlin_Air_2023_Draft," which contains the construction history, survey data, deterioration curves, M&R policies, and budgets, is provided in PAVER 7.0 (32 byte) format on the accompanying CD-ROM. Specific PAVER operating details are in "The PAVER User's Guide" under the “Help” tab.

1.2.5 Development of PAVER Work Plans

After the data were entered and the deterioration curves were created, the following work plan analyses were performed using standardized Air Force M&R policies and costs:

Cost per year to eliminate the Major M&R backlog over 10 years Cost per year to maintain the current area-weighted average PCI for 10 years Cost for M&R to only deal with flight safety issues over 10 years

These analyses were then used to determine the M&R needs and optimum funding levels over a ten-year analysis period. PAVER determines Major M&R needs by using the concept of “Critical PCI.” The critical PCI is the PCI value at which Major M&R is to be considered for the section. Primary airfield pavements are assigned a critical PCI of 70, while secondary and tertiary pavements are assigned a value of 55.

Laughlin AFB 5

1.2.6 Written Report

The following report includes background information on the airfield, PCI results and recommendations, and M&R budget scenarios. In this report, Appendix A contains the airfield maps. Appendix B contains the real property summary, PAVER/RPAD comparison, and pavement inventory. Appendix C contains PCI deterioration rate summary. Appendix D is reserved. Appendix E contains a work history report. Appendix F contains PAVER reports.

Appendix G, H, I contain respectively the FOD Potential, Structural Index, and Friction Index values. Appendix J contains the Engineering Assessment (EA). Appendix K contains the budget details for the work plans. Appendix L contains the family models for condition deterioration prediction. Appendix M contains the references and distribution list.

1.2.7 Photographs

Photographs depicting typical pavement condition and distress types observed are included throughout Chapter 2 of this report. Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates of each photograph are recorded in the lower right corner of the photograph. Photograph 1.1 is a sample image of the GPS tagged photographs. Additional photographs may be found on the CD- ROM distributed with the final report.

Photograph 1.1. GPS Coordinates on Photographs.

1.3 CLIMATE AND LOCATION

Laughlin AFB is located six miles east of Del Rio, Texas and about nine miles from the international bridge to Ciudad Acuna, in Coahuila, Mexico. The base experiences semiarid climate conditions with generally high humidity. The annual average high and low temperatures are approximately 82℉ and 60℉. June to August are usually the warmest months experiencing mean maximum temperatures above 95℉. December to February are the coolest months with mean minimum temperatures below 60℉.

Laughlin AFB 6

1.3.1 Design and Construction History

Laughlin AFB is the largest pilot training base in the US Air Force, is home to the 47th Flying Training Wing of the Air Education and Training Command and the 96th Flying Training Squadron of the Air Force Reserve Command. Runway 13R/31L and 13C/31 C was constructed as an AC pavement in 1943 with major additions in 1952-1953 and reconstructed in 1996 and 2004. Runway 13L/31R was constructed as an AC pavement in 1953 and reconstructed in 1997.

Details construction history for all airfield pavement sections can be found in Appendix E.

1.3.2 Current Traffic Data

The primary aircraft operation at the base are T-6A, Texan II, the T-38C Talon and T-1A Jayhawk. On weekdays, the airfield sees more takeoffs and landings than any other airport in the country.

1.3.3 Previous Reports

All 2018 condition values were obtained from the 2018 PAVER database provided by AFCEC or from the previous report pertaining to the airfield pavement listed below.

Airfield Pavement Condition Index Survey Report, Laughlin Air Force Base, July 2018, WestEast Design Group, LLC, San Antonio, TX.

1.4 SYNOPSIS OF MAJOR PROJECTS SINCE LAST EVALUATION

Table 1.1 lists known major M&R that has been performed since the January 2018 inspection. A list of work can be found in the complete Work History Report in Appendix E.

Table 1.1. Major M&R Since Last Evaluation.

Branch ID Section

ID

Work Year

Laughlin AFB

TWB T43A New Construction - Initial 2020

SHTWH S09 Complete Reconstruction - PCC 2019

Laughlin AFB 7

CHAPTER 2

PCI RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 PCI SURVEY PROCEDURE

The PCI survey was performed in accordance with ASTM and Air Force guidelines. The following paragraphs outline the procedures used to evaluate the pavement, the implementation of a PMS, and information about the life cycle of pavement.

2.1.1 PCI Survey Process

The pavement network to be surveyed was defined and divided into branches, sections, and sample units. A branch is defined as a complete unit of the airfield that is used for a particular type of operation. Branches are typically named pieces of pavement, e.g., Runway 13R/31L, Taxiway G, or Power Check Apron. After branches are defined, they are divided into sections based on pavement type, structure, and usage. Branch and section identifications used in this report are in general agreement with and correspond to feature designations in the February 2017 AFCEC Airfield Pavement Evaluation.

Sections are divided into sample units as prescribed by ASTM D5340. A sample unit is a subdivision of a section used exclusively to aid in the inspection process and reduce the effort needed to determine distress quantities and the PCI. The specified sample unit size for an AC pavement is 5,000 ft² ± 2,000 ft². Sample units on PCC pavements contain 20 ± 8 slabs. A small number of sample units did not meet the size criteria due to odd-size sections.

Inspecting all the sample units within a section may consume considerable resources;

therefore, ARA uses a statistical sampling technique to determine the number of sample units to be inspected. Sample units are inspected in accordance with ASTM D5340 to provide a 95% confidence level, with an acceptable error of ± 5 PCI points. Figure 2.1 presents an example of the sampling method employed by ARA. Sample units with grey shading represent sample units to be surveyed. A pavement surveyor visually inspects the required sample units of each section.

Distresses are identified, counted, measured, and recorded.

Figure 2.1. Systematic Random Selection of Sample Units to Survey.

Laughlin AFB 8

Figure 2.2. Pavement Life Cycle Showing the Effects of M&R.

2.1.2 PAVER Implementation

A PMS is an organized method of data management combined with predictive techniques to assist decision makers in finding optimum strategies for providing and maintaining pavements in a serviceable condition over a given period. The function of a PMS is to improve the efficiency of decision-making, provide feedback on the consequences of decisions, facilitate the coordination of activities, and ensure the consistency of decisions.

PAVER is a management system that has the capability of

Being updated and/or modified as new information and better models become available, Considering alternative strategies, Identifying the optimum alternative, Basing decisions on a rational procedure with quantified attributes, criteria, and constraints, Making predictions of pavement deterioration, Selecting appropriate maintenance and repair methods to maximize performance, and

Using feedback information regarding the consequences of decisions.

PAVER is a menu-driven computer program that provides the user a practical approach for identifying cost-effective maintenance strategies. It includes such features as data storage and retrieval, pavement network identification, PCI rating, determination of needs for maintenance and repair, performance of economic analyses, and budget planning.

The PAVER database storage capability includes historical construction data, pavement structure and materials information, condition ratings (stores previous and current condition data), and non-destructive testing results (e.g., falling weight deflectometer deflection data). Data from the current survey has been input into PAVER 7.0 and provided on the accompanying CD-ROM.

After the conclusion of the pavement assessment, the PCI distress data were input in the PAVER database. PAVER was used to perform PCI calculations, develop pavement deterioration curves, and generate pavement work plans.

Laughlin AFB 9

2.2 OVERVIEW OF PCI SURVEY RESULTS

A total of 9,743,786 ft² of pavement was surveyed as part of this assessment. The airfield pavements consisted of 54% PCC pavement and 46% AC pavement. The area-weighted average PCI for all pavements surveyed was 76-Good. A total of 48 out of 145 surveyed sections had a PCI greater than 70 for a total of 55% of the overall area. Of the 66 pavement sections below 70, 41 sections of pavement are at or below their respective critical PCI value. Appendix A provides the airfield network layouts showing the pavement sections and color-coded results of the survey.

Table 2.1 provides a definition of PCI rating and pavement distribution.

Table 2.1. Definition of PCI Ratings and Pavement Distribution.

Simplified PCI Rating

PCI

Rating

PCI

Range

Definition Pavement Area (ft²)

Pavement Area (%)

Good

Good 86-100 GOOD: Pavement has minor or no distresses and will require only routine maintenance.

3,624,448 37

Satisfactory 71-85 SATISFACTORY: Pavement has scattered low-severity distresses that need only routine maintenance.

1,706,420 18

Fair Fair 56-70 FAIR: Pavement has a combination of generally low- and medium-severity distresses. M&R needs are routine to major in the near future.

3,999,962 41

Poor Poor 41-55

POOR: Pavement has low-, medium-, and high-severity distresses that probably cause some operational problems. Near-term maintenance and repair needs may range from routine up to a requirement for reconstruction.

265,481 3

Poor < 40

Very Poor 26-40

VERY POOR: Pavement has predominantly medium- and high-severity distresses that cause considerable maintenance and operational problems. Near-time maintenance and repair needs will be intensive in nature.

118,750 1

Serious 11-25 SERIOUS: Pavement has mainly high-severity distresses that cause operational restrictions;

immediate repairs are needed.

28,725 < 1

Failed 0-10 FAILED: Pavement deterioration has progressed to the point that safe operations are no longer possible; complete reconstruction is required.

2.2.1 PCI Results by Branch Use and Pavement Surface Type

Table 2.2 summarizes the PCI survey results by branch use and pavement surface type.

Figure 2.3 shows a PCI distribution graph comparing the 2018 and 2023 surveys by pavement surface type.

Laughlin AFB 10

Table 2.2. Current Condition Summary.

Branch Use Surface Type Pavement Area (ft²)

Pavement Area (%)

Area-Weighted Average PCI

Apron

AC 166,399 2 63

PCC 3,584,068 37 83

Overrun

AC 438,704 5 52

PCC -- -- --

Runway

AC 3,121,956 32 63

PCC 392,942 4 96

Shoulder

AC 209,820 2 78

PCC 19,881 < 1 37

Taxiway

AC 542,609 6 65

PCC 1,267,407 13 93

Overall

AC 4,479,488 46 63

PCC 5,264,298 54 86

ALL 9,743,786 100 76

Figure 2.3. Current Condition by Surface Type.

AC 46%

PCI = 63

PCC 54%

PCI = 86

Laughlin AFB 11

Figure 2.4. PCI by Surface Type for 2018 and 2023 PCI Surveys.

2.2.2 Pavement Issues

Most of the AC distresses recorded were climate related. The predominant AC distresses were L&T cracking and weathering. Alligator cracking was recorded in 15 AC sections sections.

Nearly half of the L&T cracking is low-severity and could benefit from localized crack seal to extend the life of the pavement. All AC pavements on all three runways are near or below their critical PCI and are recommended for mill and overlays within the next three years. Joint spalling, joint seal damage, and small patching were the predominant distresses in the PCC pavements.

Shattered slab and linear cracks had the highest deducts throughout the airfield.

Eleven family curves were developed to project future conditions. The average deterioration rate of all AC pavements is 1.72 PCI pts/year. The average deterioration rate of PCC pavements is 0.57 PCI pts/year. The deterioration rate for primary AC pavements is 1.65 PCI pts/year. The deterioration rate of primary AC runways and taxiways is 1.80 PCI pts/year and

1.51 pts/year respectively. The deterioration rate for secondary AC taxiways is 1.35 PCI pts/year.

The deterioration rate for secondary and tertiary AC aprons is 1.64 PCI pts/year. The deterioration rate for tertiary AC overruns is 2.66 PCI pts/year. The deterioration rate of primary PCC aprons, runways and taxiways is 0.71 PCI pts/year, 0.25 PCI pts/year, and 0.27 PCI pts/year respectively.

The deterioration rate of secondary PCC aprons and taxiways is 0.44 PCI pts/year, and the deterioration rate for tertiary PCC aprons is 0.90 PCI pts/year. A more detailed analysis showing plots and containing further explanations may be found in Appendix L.

Sections with unusually high deterioration rates since construction or the 2018 inspection and unexplained increases in PCI since the last inspection are discussed individually in DETAILED PCI DESCRIPTION and Table C.1 in Appendix C.

2.3 DETAILED PCI DESCRIPTION

In the following paragraphs, the pavements are discussed by branch and further broken into sections in some instances. The recommended major M&R actions for each branch and section may differ from the PAVER recommended actions based on engineering judgment.

These recommendations are based on the PCI and pavement type as well as the type, severity, and quantity of the distresses present. Preventive and stopgap repairs are IAW the policies provided by AFCEC. An overview of requirements is presented in the paragraphs and are discussed in further detail by distress in Table 4.3. AC sections with weather related distresses on aprons, overruns, and taxiways may have recommended fog seals to mitigate surface deterioration.

AC PCC Overall

A re a- W ei gh te d

A ve ra ge

P C

I

Pavement Surface Type 2018 2023

Laughlin AFB 12

2.3.1 Aprons

The aprons consisted of 22 branches containing 53 sections of PCC and AC pavement.

The total area of apron pavements was 3,750,467 ft² and had an area-weighted average PCI of 82- Good. A total of 9 sections are currently below their respective critical PCI. Aggressive localized repairs could delay the need for many major M&R needs on apron pavements. These branches will be discussed more in the following paragraphs. The distribution of pavement area and sections by PCI range are shown in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3. Apron Pavement Area and Sections by PCI Range.

PCI Range Rating Number of Sections Pavement Area (ft²) Pavement Area (%)

86-100 Good

19 1,967,218 52

71-85 14 1,059,335 28

56-70 Fair 14 667,097 18

0-55 Poor 6 56,817 2

Total 53 3,750,467 100

2.3.1.1 Compass Alignment Apron

Compass Alignment Apron consisted of 2 sections. The area-weighted average PCI of the 49,147 ft² branch was 65-Fair.

Section A28B had an area of 46,754 ft² and a PCI of 64-Fair. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium and low-severity L&T cracking and medium-severity weathering. The only localized preventive maintenance recommended is a crack seal. The PAVER backlog elimination scenario recommends a mill and overlay in FY 2031. Performing localized maintenance IAW the preventive policy and the application of a surface treatment should increase the PCI enough to delay the need for major M&R beyond the 10-year scenario.

Section A41B had an area of 2,393 ft² and a PCI of 75-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium-severity weathering and low and medium-severity L&T cracking. The only localized preventive maintenance recommended is a crack seal. The PAVER backlog elimination scenario recommends a global fog seal in FY 2024 and again in FY 2029 to slow deterioration from climatic distresses.

2.3.1.2 Corrosion Control Hgr Access

Corrosion Control Hgr Access consisted of one section. Section A08C had an area of 1,438 ft² and a PCI of 48-Poor. The distresses with the highest deducts were low-severity shattered slab, high-severity joint seal damage, and low-severity joint spalling. The PAVER backlog elimination scenario recommends selective slab replacement in FY 2028.

2.3.1.3 Excess Parking Apron

Excess Parking Apron consisted of 5 sections. The area-weighted average PCI of the 203,317 ft² branch was 96-Good.

Section A26B had an area of 27,507 ft² and a PCI of 87-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium and low-severity joint seal damage and medium-severity linear cracking. Localized preventive maintenance recommendations include a crack seal, joint seal replacement, and partial-depth PCC patching.

Laughlin AFB 13

Section A27B had an area of 81,233 ft² and a PCI of 99-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were low-severity joint seal damage, low-severity linear cracking, and low-severity corner break. The only localized preventive maintenance recommended is a crack seal.

Section A37B had an area of 38,872 ft² and a PCI of 91-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium and low-severity joint seal damage and medium-severity corner break.

Localized preventive maintenance recommendations include a crack seal, full-depth PCC patching, joint seal replacement, and partial-depth PCC patching.

Section T32C had an area of 30,131 ft² and a PCI of 98-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were low-severity joint seal damage, low-severity joint spalling, and low-severity small patch.

Section T33C had an area of 25,574 ft² and a PCI of 98-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were low-severity joint seal damage and low-severity joint spalling.

2.3.1.4 Fuel System Hangar Apron

Fuel System Hangar Apron consisted of 2 sections. The area-weighted average PCI of the 4,770 ft² branch was 86-Good.

Section A10C had an area of 2,071 ft² and a PCI of 88-Good. The distress with the highest deduct was high-severity joint seal damage. The only localized preventive maintenance recommended is joint seal replacement.

Section A52C had an area of 2,699 ft² and a PCI of 84-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were low-severity corner break and low-severity linear cracking. This section experienced an unusually high deterioration rate since construction due to the development of low-severity corner breaks and linear cracks. The only localized preventive maintenance recommended is a crack seal.

2.3.1.5 Hangar Access Apron

Hangar Access Apron consisted of one section. Section A36C had an area of 4,720 ft² and a PCI of 86-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium-severity joint seal damage, low-severity corner spalling, and low-severity joint spalling. This section experienced an unusually high deterioration rate since the previous inspection due to the development of medium-severity joint seal damage and low-severity corner spalls. The only localized preventive maintenance recommended is joint seal replacement.

2.3.1.6 Hush House Apron

Hush House Apron consisted of one section. Section A03C had an area of 6,453 ft² and a PCI of 86-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium-severity joint seal damage and medium and low-severity joint spalling. Localized preventive maintenance recommendations include joint seal replacement and partial-depth PCC patching.

2.3.1.7 Main Apron

Main Apron consisted of 10 sections. The area-weighted average PCI of the 2,283,448 ft² branch was 81-Good.

Section A13B had an area of 228,650 ft² and a PCI of 69-Fair. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium and low-severity linear cracking and low-severity corner break. The PAVER backlog elimination scenario recommends selective slab replacement in FY 2028.

Laughlin AFB 14

Performing localized maintenance IAW the preventive policy should increase the PCI above critical and delay the need for major M&R.

Section A14B had an area of 44,743 ft² and a PCI of 58-Fair. The distresses with the highest deducts were low and medium-severity linear cracking and low-severity shattered slab. The only localized stopgap maintenance recommended is full-depth PCC patching. The PAVER backlog elimination scenario recommends selective slab replacement in FY 2028.

Section A18B had an area of 285,425 ft² and a PCI of 88-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were low-severity large patch/utility, medium-severity joint seal damage, and medium-severity linear cracking. Localized preventive maintenance recommendations include a crack seal, full-depth PCC patching, joint seal replacement, and partial-depth PCC patching. Photograph 2.1 shows a low-severity small patch in section A18B.

Photograph 2.1. Main Apron, Section A18B, Low-Severity Small Patch.

Section A19B had an area of 93,613 ft² and a PCI of 76-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were low and medium-severity ASR and low-severity large patch/utility. The only localized preventive maintenance recommended is partial-depth PCC patching. The PAVER backlog elimination scenario recommends selective slab replacement in FY 2033. Performing localized maintenance IAW the preventive policy should increase the PCI enough to delay the need for major M&R beyond the 10-year scenario.

Section A20B had an area of 145,577 ft² and a PCI of 66-Fair. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium and low-severity linear cracking and high-severity joint seal damage.

The PAVER backlog elimination scenario recommends selective slab replacement in FY 2029. Performing localized maintenance IAW the preventive policy should increase the PCI above critical and delay the need for major M&R.

Section A25B had an area of 645,827 ft² and a PCI of 71-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were high-severity shattered slab, low-severity linear cracking, and medium-severity joint seal damage. Localized preventive maintenance recommendations include a crack seal, full-depth PCC patching, joint seal replacement, partial-depth PCC patching, and slab replacement. The PAVER backlog elimination scenario recommends selective slab

Laughlin AFB 15 replacement in FY 2030. Performing localized maintenance IAW the preventive policy should increase the PCI enough to delay the need for major M&R beyond the 10-year scenario. Photograph 2.2 shows a high-severity shattered slab in section A23B.

Photograph 2.2. Main Apron, Section A25B, High-Severity Shattered Slab.

Section A33B had an area of 20,700 ft² and a PCI of 79-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium-severity linear cracking, medium-severity small patch, and low-severity joint seal damage. Localized preventive maintenance recommendations include a crack seal and partial-depth PCC patching.

Section A34B had an area of 348,500 ft² and a PCI of 96-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium-severity linear cracking, low-severity joint seal damage, and medium-severity corner spalling. Localized preventive maintenance recommendations include a crack seal and partial-depth PCC patching.

Section A35B had an area of 67,600 ft² and a PCI of 90-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium and low-severity joint seal damage and medium-severity large patch/utility. Localized preventive maintenance recommendations include joint seal replacement and partial-depth PCC patching.

Section A38B had an area of 402,813 ft² and a PCI of 94-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were low-severity small patch, low-severity joint seal damage, and low-severity large patch/utility. Localized preventive maintenance recommendations include a crack seal and partial-depth PCC patching.

2.3.1.8 NDI Access Apron

NDI Access Apron consisted of 3 sections. The area-weighted average PCI of the 6,492 ft² branch was 62-Fair.

Section A11C had an area of 1,962 ft² and a PCI of 44-Poor. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium-severity linear cracking and high-severity joint seal damage. The PAVER backlog elimination scenario recommends selective slab replacement in FY 2029.

Laughlin AFB 16

Performing localized maintenance IAW the preventive policy should increase the PCI above critical and delay the need for major M&R.

Section A12C had an area of 630 ft² and a PCI of 25-Poor. The distresses with the highest deducts were medium-severity alligator cracking, medium-severity weathering, and low-severity block cracking. The PAVER backlog elimination scenario recommends complete reconstruction in FY 2024. Performing localized maintenance IAW the preventive policy should increase the PCI above critical and delay the need for major M&R.

Section A39C had an area of 3,900 ft² and a PCI of 77-Good. The distresses with the highest deducts were low-severity linear cracking, low-severity joint spalling, and shrinkage cracking.

This section experienced an unusually high deterioration rate since the previous inspection due to an increase in quantity of low-severity linear cracks and the development of low-severity joint seal damage and joint spalls.

2.3.1.9 Power Check Apron

Power Check Apron consisted of one section. Section A02B had an area of 18,050 ft² and a PCI of 46-Poor.