mt-a0300461_Geotechnical Pavement Recon Report.pdf

GEOTECHNICAL PAVEMENT RECONNAISSANCE

MT BIGHORN 46(1), Warman Loop Road IDIQ Contract No. DFH70-15-D-00007

Task Order No. 69056720F000015 East of Fort Smith, Montana

Project 19-3865G

Submitted by

2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190

Billings, Montana 59108-0910

Prepared for

Robert Peccia & Associates P.O. Box 5653

Helena, Montana 59604

February 28, 2020

February 28, 2020 Project 19-3865G

Mr. Brad Thompson, PE Robert Peccia & Associates P. O. Box 5653 Helena, Montana 59604-5653 Via Email: brad@rpa-hln.com

Dear Mr. Thompson:

Re: Geotechnical Pavement Reconnaissance Report, MT BIGHORN 46(1), Warman Loop Road, IDIQ Contract No. DTFH70-15-D-00007, Task Order No. 69056720F000015

The Geotechnical Pavement Reconnaissance Report for the above-referenced project has been completed.

This report presents the findings of our pavement reconnaissance for the Warman Loop Road project.

Introduction

Project Description. The anticipated project is to either rehabilitate or reconstruct the existing pavement structure along the 4-mile long portion of Warman Loop Road running adjacent to Montana Highway MT 313. It is our understanding the existing asphalt concrete pavement was a cold mix that was placed sometime in the early 1990s, and is therefore about 30 years old. This section of road serves to allow outdoor recreationalists access to the Three Mile Access boat launch along the Bighorn River. According to the Montana Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) Application submitted for the project, the road is also used by school district buses, law enforcement, and emergency first responders. Based on the Statement of Work, the project design for the roadway includes the following:

• Rehabilitate or reconstruct the existing pavement structure to provide a new asphalt concrete pavement (ACP) final surface,

• Replace the existing ACP surface on the Bighorn Canal Bridge and protecting the bridge deck to extend the decking life,

• Hydraulic sizing of culverts, replacing the existing culverts, and/or repairing existing culverts,

• Permanent traffic control devices including signage and striping,

• Guardrail installation, if needed, and

• Staging and temporary traffic control to complete the work.

General Site Topography and Geology. As can be seen on the attached partial Topographic Sketch, the beginning of the Warman Loop Road project is located at its eastern extent where it intersects MT 313.

The project extends about 3 1/4 miles west before turning south and eventually reconnects to MT 313.

We wish to point out that while the Statement of Work characterized Warman Loop Road as a 4-mile project, we observed the project is generally 4.2 miles long from start to finish. A portion of the Geologic

2511 Holman Avenue

P. O. Box 80190 Billings, Montana 59108-0190 p: 406.652.3930; f: 406.652.3944 www.skgeotechnical.com

Robert Peccia & Associates February 28, 2020 Project 19-3865G Page 2

Map of the Lodge Grass 30' by 60' Quadrangle, Montana, Robert N. Bergatino, 2007, is attached. The map indicates the Warman Loop Road project is situated primarily in alluvial terrace deposits associated with the Bighorn River and likely underlain by Thermopolis Shale, Fall River Sandstone, and Mowry Shale Formations.

Engineering Reconnaissance

Fieldwork. Robert Peccia & Associates, Inc. (RPA), was selected by FHWA to assist in the development of this project. SK Geotechnical will also assist in the development of the pavement features of the project. A reconnaissance of the alignment was performed by Mr. Brandon R. Western, EI, and Mr.

Edward K. Coldwell, EI, engineer interns with our firm. The 4.2-mile project was observed paying particular attention to existing pavement surface defects and drainage. At 0.25-mile intervals, pavement conditions were assessed. Photographs and a 360 degree video were also taken of the alignment and returned to our office. Some of these photos have been included with this report, and more photographs and the videos are available upon request.

During our reconnaissance, we observed the Bighorn Canal runs adjacent to Warman Loop Road for the first 2 miles of the project. We observed that the north slope of the canal was relatively steep in places, and appeared to range from 1V:1½H (40 degrees) to 1:¼ (80 degrees). Sloughing of these existing slopes was observed as well. The sloughing was minor and primarily consisted of erosion into the canal sidewalls 1 to 2 feet deep. We also observed that the northern crest of the canal bank is as close as 3 to 4 feet from the edge of pavement in some locations.

Pavement Conditions. It is our opinion the existing pavement is generally in poor to fair condition across the entire length of the project. We observed areas of especially poor pavement from RP 0.0 to

0.75 and RP 3.75 to 4.2. Numerous types of pavement distresses were observed and include the following:

• Fatigue cracking primarily consisting of alligator and block cracking was observed throughout the project, ranging from low to high levels of severity. Moderate to high severity fatigue cracking was frequently observed in the pavement surface from RP 0.0 to 0.75 and RP 3.75 to 4.2. In these extents, fatigue cracking areas 10 to 90 feet long were typically spaced 0.25 to 0.1 miles apart or less. Near RP 3.83, a 125-foot long extent of alligator cracking was occurring in the pavement surface. Low to moderate severity fatigue cracking was also observed intermittently along the entire alignment located in both wheel paths of both lanes.

• Edge cracking was observed throughout the project, generally at a low severity level. Some isolated areas of moderate severity edge cracking were observed, typically near approach entrances to adjacent fields. These moderate severity cracks were likely caused by farm equipment using Warman Loop Road.

• Longitudinal cracking was observed throughout the project, ranging from low to high levels of severity. This pavement distress type was more pronounced in the poorer pavement areas previously described, typically of moderate to high severity. Along the remaining portion of the alignment, the longitudinal cracking was typically of low to moderate severity, with isolated extents of high severity. These longitudinal cracks were primarily located along the centerline, but also in wheel paths. We observed these cracks had not been sealed and were generally

Project 19-3865G Page 3

1/4- to 1/2-inch wide and 10 to 50 feet long. Often the longitudinal cracking would be observed adjacent to other types of pavement distress and random cracking. One longitudinal crack near RP 3.52 had developed into a minor pavement blowout, and several others had lost some of the asphalt surfacing around the edges of the crack, exposing the underlying base course.

• Transverse cracking was observed throughout the project, ranging from moderate to high levels of severity. High severity levels were observed in our previously described areas of poorer condition pavement. However, moderate severity transverse cracking was prevalent along the entire alignment, generally extending across the full width of the pavement. The transverse cracks were generally spaced from 15 to 50 feet apart with crack widths of 1/4-inch or less. The transverse cracks had not been sealed.

• Numerous patches were observed throughout the project, ranging from low to high severity.

Patches of high severity were present in the areas of poorer pavement previously described, but numerous other patches were also observed intermittently along the alignment. These patches varied in size, ranging from small 1/2-foot diameter to 5 feet in diameter. Patches were most commonly observed adjacent to culvert crossings, where the pavement above the culvert often appeared to have settled. Older and newer patches were observed, and cracking was observed around the edges and through these patches.

• Potholes were observed throughout the project, and generally appeared to be of low to moderate severity. We observed these potholes were relatively shallow, generally 1 1/2 inches deep or less.

Typically, the potholes were occurring in the same areas as other types of pavement distress.

• Rutting was observed along the entire alignment of Warman Loop Road. This rutting was more pronounced in the poorer pavement areas near the beginning and end of the project. However, throughout the project we observed that the rutting along both lanes generally ranged from 1/8- to 1/4-inch deep. Isolated areas of deeper rutting were observed along the alignment, particularly near RP 3.20, where the rutting was observed to range between 3/4- to 1-inch deep.

• Areas of polished aggregate were also observed along the alignment, and was typically observed between RP 0.25 to 0.5, RP 1.5 to 1.75, and RP 2.5 to 2.75. However, we generally observed these areas of polishing to be isolated and intermittent.

• Raveling of the pavement surface was also observed along the alignment and was generally most pronounced in the previously described poorer areas of pavement. However, we did observe areas of raveling between RP 1.0 to 1.25, RP 1.75 to 2.0, RP 2.25 to 2.75, and RP 3.0 to 3.25.

These areas of raveling were isolated, but were generally observed along the centerline and inner wheel paths of both lanes. The centerline especially in these areas was observed to have an obvious loss of surface aggregate in large patches 5 to 10 feet.

As can be seen the photographs, none of the fatigue, edge, longitudinal, and transverse cracks have been crack sealed. The lack of sealing has allowed water to seep through these cracks saturating the existing base course and subgrade. This in turn has likely contributed to more pavement destress adjacent to the cracks over time.

Preliminary Geotechnical Analysis and Recommendations

Project 19-3865G Page 4

Pavement Condition. It is our opinion the pavement throughout the alignment is generally in poor to fair condition, with some previously noted areas of very poor pavement, having multiple types of severe pavement distress. It is our opinion the most likely cause of the severe cracking and significant distress observed along Warman Loop Road is primarily an inadequate pavement section. The severity of the fatigue cracking, significant patches, and edge cracking can occur due to structural failure of the existing pavement, i.e., it is just too thin to support the traffic. At some of the potholes and wider longitudinal and transverse cracks, the asphalt pavement thickness was only ½ to 2 inches thick. The lack of crack sealing has also contributed to poor pavement conditions.

The thickness and quality of the underlying base course is unknown, but is most likely quite thin. We should also point out that over time, fine-grained lean clay and fat clay (alluvium) subgrades can contaminate the base course reducing the overall section thickness. This contamination of the bottom 10 to 20 percent of the base course occurs due to frost action and reduced subgrade strength during spring thaw. Subgrades are weakest immediately after thawing and this allows vehicle traffic to drive the base course into the underlying clay subgrade as well as deflection of the pavement surface and subsequent cracking. The above concerns are likely worse during periods when the canal, adjacent to Warman Loop Road, is flowing irrigation water and contributing to saturation of the clay subgrade.

In regards to the specific pavement distresses observed at the culvert crossings, which were typically the full width of the road, these areas of distress could be caused by poor compaction of backfill placed around and above the pipe, which consolidates over time causing the pavement surface to settle and crack.

High volumes of water flowing through these culverts and infiltrating into the soils beneath or beside the culverts might also have exacerbated the settlement and cracking. Frost heave could also be contributing to pavement distress above and adjacent to the culverts.

Pavement Distress Rating Summary. A Pavement Distress Rating Summary table was completed for the project and is attached. The table indicates the location and extent of the type of pavement distress as well as our opinion related to severity. At the bottom is a total length of the low, moderate, and severe pavement extents for comparison purposes. This table is discussed later in this report.

Preliminary Pavement Analysis and Recommendations. At this point in the project, we performed a reconnaissance of the alignment and judged the existing pavement to be in poor to fair condition with numerous distressed areas summarized in a Pavement Distress Rating table attached to this report.

Project specific investigation including soil borings through the existing pavement have yet to be performed. Also, we have not been provided with any existing pavement section information. Therefore, pavement design and analysis related to rehabilitation and preservation is very difficult and would be based almost entirely on assumptions. For budgeting purposes, we therefore have made numerous fairly significant assumptions related to the project, based on observed existing conditions, to provide preliminary pavement section alternatives.

Traffic information was included in the FLAP Application and indicated average daily traffic (ADT) of 625 and 15 percent trucks. In our opinion, this amount of trucks is much too high for a fishing access road having occasional farm trucks and busses. It is our understanding that Big Horn County may not have done traffic counts for Warman Loop Road, and instead may have estimated traffic and trucks based on local agricultural truck traffic during harvest and school bus routes. Therefore, for our preliminary pavement analysis, having already made assumptions related to the subgrade and existing pavement section thickness, it was decided to assume 1 percent trucks. In our opinion, this assumption was more

Project 19-3865G Page 5 reasonable for a low volume road primarily used for residential and fishing access traffic. It is also our opinion that traffic counts should be performed along Warman Loop Road to help adjust our preliminary pavement section thicknesses as described below.

Using the information described above, a simplified traffic analysis was performed with DARWin™ pavement software and indicated 29,788 ESAL's over 20 years. When ESAL's are less than 50,000, the WFLHD Project Development and Design Manual (PDDM) indicates 50,000 ESAL's should be used for design of low volume roads.

Based on the above information, we then assumed the following two existing pavement sections along the project.

Cold Mix Surfacing 2" 1½" Existing Base Course 5" 4" Total Thickness 7" 5½"

The above existing sections were assumed, and the actual existing sections along the roadway could be thicker or thinner. Based on our observations, we believe these two sections are representative of the project.

Using the above assumed sections, we then evaluated two rehabilitation and one preservation approach for each assumed section. We also evaluated two sections for total reconstruction. The following sections were evaluated;

• FDR with Additional CBC Rehabilitation

• FBR with CTB Rehabilitation

• HACP Overlay Preservation

• Total Reconstruction

The preliminary pavement sections are summarized on Table 1 following this page. Each of these approaches is briefly discussed below.

FDR with Additional CBC Rehabilitation. Full depth reclamation (FDR) after adding additional crushed base course (CBC) to the top of the existing pavement is a rehabilitation approach commonly used in Montana. Our analysis for this approach is indicated in Typicals 1 and 4 in Table 1. As can be seen, it would be necessary to add 2 1/2 and 4 inches, respectively, to the assumed existing pavement sections to provide a suitable thickness to meet the structural demands. The advantage of this approach is the existing pavement materials are recycled and then new Hot Asphalt Concrete Pavement (HACP) is then provided along the entire road. One significant disadvantage with this approach is the FDR with new CBC raises the grades along the road 5 to 7 1/2 inches higher than existing grades. When considering the proximity of the roadway to the existing canal, this is undesirable, but unavoidable without total reconstruction.

FDR with CTB Rehabilitation. FDR with cement treated base (CTB) can also be considered as a rehabilitation approach for the roadway. Typicals 2 and 5 contain our preliminary recommendations for this approach. FDR with CTB has been used on a few projects in Montana, including Old Highway 2 for WFLHD. This approach would raise grades about 2 1/2 to 4 1/2 inches along the roadway, and result in new HACP surfacing.

R ob er t P ec ci a

A ss oc ia te s

Fe br ua ry

, 2

Pr oj ec t 1 9-

G

P ag e

Robert Peccia & Associates February 6, 2020 Project 19-3865G Page 7

HACP Overlay Preservation. Another option that can be considered for the project is an HACP overlay pavement preservation approach. Typicals 3 and 6 contain our recommended overlay thicknesses of 3 1/2 and 4 inches, respectively, over the assumed existing pavement thicknesses. For this approach, the distressed pavement areas identified in the attached Pavement Distress Summary table would need to be repaired by dig outs, and then the remaining existing cracks would have to be cleaned out and crack sealed. Then, a 1-inch isolation lift followed by 2 1/2- to 3-inch overlays would then be required to extend the pavement life. A major disadvantage of any pavement overlay preservation approach is the existing cracks will reflect through the new surfacing within 1 to 3 years. In about 3 years, the new HACP surfacing will look very similar to its current appearance. Also, this preservation approach also results in grade raises of 3 1/2 to 4 inches above existing grades.

Total Reconstruction. Total reconstruction by removing the existing cold mix surfacing and base, then cutting into the subgrade can also be considered. Typical 7 is a CBC section and Typical 8 is a subbase section with imported new materials. We recommend providing a nonwoven separation fabric beneath the aggregate for long term separation. We anticipate this approach will be the most costly. Another concern is the strength of the existing subgrade and whether or not it will support heavy rubber-tired construction equipment for the removal and cutting. Distinct advantages of this approach are final grades will match existing grades and improved long term performance.

Conclusion. We presented six possible typical sections that can be considered for rehabilitation and preservation of the roadway as well as two total reconstruction sections. These typicals are based on numerous, fairly significant assumptions for the roadway. Other approaches such as FDR with asphalt stabilization, hot in place recycling (HIR), and cold in place recycling (CIR) can also be considered, although they are not common in Montana and the project is only 4.2 miles long. When considering the goal is to minimize the raise in grade and provide a pavement section that performs for the long term, it is our opinion that FDR with CTB is the best rehabilitation approach. Total reconstruction as outlined in Typical 7 and 8 should also be considered. Geotechnical investigation by performing soil borings at intervals along the roadway and collecting samples for laboratory testing, including a CTB mix design, must be performed to further evaluate the best approach for the project.

Digout Pavement Section The pavement distress summary table attached to this report contains the extent of low to severe distressed pavement areas along the roadway, which should be repaired by installing the digout pavement section. We recommend using the following pavement section for digouts along the project for the extents indicated in the attached table.

Plant Mix Surfacing 3 inches Crushed base course, Type C or D 18 inches Geogrid, Stabilization Yes Separation-stabilization nonwoven geotextile, Class 1, Type C Yes

We wish to emphasize that crushed base course over geogrid is recommended for digout areas. Well graded 2-inch minus or 1-inch minus base is needed to help achieve aggregate interlock with the geogrid for bridging over soft, wet clay subgrades. Select borrow is not recommended. Digouts should be performed with smooth bladed bucket on a backhoe working off the existing surfacing. No rubber-tired equipment should be allowed within the digout areas and especially on the subgrade.

Project 19-3865G Page 8

Preliminary Construction Concerns. As previously discussed, the close proximity of the Bighorn Canal has the potential to create challenges for the project, especially during construction. One potential challenge is the minor sloughing observed of the canal sidewall that may be aggravated during excavations and digouts for the reconstruction of Warman Loop Road. A second challenge is the potential unstable subgrades caused by performing construction during periods of high flow in the Bighorn Canal or spring thaw. During our observations, the water level in the canal was low and we were therefore unable to measure the difference in elevation between the top of the existing road and the high-water mark. However, based off of the thick foliage growing along the sides of the canal, we estimate the elevation difference between the existing top-of-pavement and the high-water level of the canal is likely 6 to 8 feet. If the project is constructed during periods of high flow, water could wick up through the exposed clay subgrade during excavation and digouts for the new road, creating more unstable areas when subjected to heavy rubber-tired construction equipment.

Proposed Geotechnical Drilling and Laboratory Testing Program

To evaluate the existing and required pavement sections for the Warman Loop Road reconstruction, we recommend performing 5-foot deep test borings near the beginning and end of the project, as well as at 1/4-mile intervals along the pavement. The frequency of these borings will provide a better average of existing ACP and base course thicknesses, as well as subgrade material and strength, which are crucial if FDR and CTB rehabilitation options are selected for this project. Two of these borings that are close to existing culverts will be performed to 15 feet to evaluate culvert settlement. To evaluate subgrade strength, we recommend standard penetration tests (SPT) be performed while drilling, from approximately 1 to 2 1/2 feet and 3 1/2 to 5 feet. These borings can be performed with a truck-mounted drill rig, but we anticipate traffic control with flagging could be needed while performing these borings due to local and Three Mile Access traffic requiring a single-lane closure. Preliminary locations for these borings are shown on the attached Proposed Drilling Program Boring Location Sketches, and are summarized in Table 4 below.

Table 4. Proposed Drilling Program Boring Locations.

Boring Number Boring Depth (feet) Latitude Longitude

SB20-01 5 45.347451° -107.803134°

SB20-02 5 45.347127° -107.807146°

SBC20-03 15 45.348186° -107.811993°

SB20-04 5 45.348276° -107.817090°

SB20-05 5 45.347988° -107.821812°

SB20-06 5 45.348751° -107.826899°

SB20-07 5 45.347218° -107.831493°

SB20-08 5 45.345477° -107.836017°

SB20-09 5 45.344180° -107.840634°

SB20-10 5 45.344196° -107.845787°

Project 19-3865G Page 9

Boring Number Boring Depth

(feet) Latitude Longitude

SB20-11 5 45.344143° -107.850961°

SB20-12 5 45.344161° -107.856133°

SB20-13 5 45.344118° -107.861315°

SB20-14 5 45.344131° -107.866388°

SB20-15 5 45.341075° -107.867340°

SBC20-16 15 45.333900° -107.867325°

SB20-17 5 45.332428° -107.867845°

SB=Subgrade Boring SBC=Subgrade and Culvert Boring

The best time to perform this work is in the spring when subgrades are weakest after spring thaw. During the drilling, we also recommend performing in-place dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) tests to estimate in-place strengths of the subgrade.

While drilling, the existing asphalt surfacing and base course thicknesses should be measured to the nearest 1/4-inch and sampled. We recommend SPT samples be performed while drilling to evaluate subgrade strength, therefore, drilling with hallow-stem auger is anticipated. Bulk samples of the underlying subgrade should also be collected. To obtain the required 100 to 150 pounds of material needed for testing, bulk subgrade samples from adjacent borings may be composited, or an additional boring to collect additional sample may be performed. Per the request of WFLHD, we will provide photos of each sample in the SPT spoon with a reference measure, which will be available upon request.

We propose these samples be returned to our laboratory for inventory before being shipped to the WFLHD Vancouver office for laboratory tests to assist in the design of the new pavement section. These tests should include moisture content, classification (sieve analysis and Atterberg Limits), moisture density (Proctor), and R-value tests. Sulfate tests on the existing materials are also critical to confirm excessive sulfate is not present, which can have adverse chemical reaction with Portland cement and other calcium-based products related to chemical rehabilitation. Our preliminary testing recommendations for the borings can be seen on the attached Proposed Laboratory Testing Program sheet.

As previously discussed, we also recommend obtaining traffic information along the corridor. This traffic information will help provide a better pavement section design and assist in determining which rehabilitation, preservation, or total reconstruction approach is best for the project.

General

The preliminary analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon our visual observations performed along the roadway. Often, variations occur along roadway and embankment areas, the nature and extent of which do not become evident until additional exploration (as recommended) or construction is performed. We recommend performing the geotechnical borings recommended in this report to further evaluate the existing pavement and subgrade.

PARTIAL TOPOGRAPHIC SKETCH

MT BIGHORN 46(1)

Warman Loop Road

East of Fort Smith, Montana

Drawn by: MBMG/SK Date 1/17/20

Project: 19-3865G

Scale: None FIGURE

Sheet 1 of 1 1

Reference: Mountain Pocket Creek Quadrangle, Big Horn County, Montana. 7.5-Minute Topo Map, U.S. Geological Survey, North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

North

Beginning of Project RP 0.0

End of Project RP 4.2

PARTIAL GEOLOGIC SKETCH

MT BIGHORN 46(1)

Warman Loop Road

East of Fort Smith, Montana

Drawn by: MBMG/SKGeo Date 1-17-20

Project: 19-3865G

Scale: NTS FIGURE

Sheet 1 of 1 1

Geologic Map of the Lodge Grass 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Montana Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology - S. Vuke, E. Wilde, D. Lopez, R. Bergantino, 2007

Belle Fourche Shale

End of Project RP 4.2

Beginning of Project RP 0.0

Alluvium Alluvial Terrace Deposit

Thermopolis Shale/Fall River Sandstone

Mowry Shale

0.

0, B eg in ni ng o f p ro je ct , t ra ns ve rs e cr ac ki ng a nd lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g.

0.

, P av em en t b lo w ou t t hr ou gh p re vi ou s p av em en t p at ch es

0.

, L on gi tu di na l c ra ck in g al on g ce nt er lin e, p ot ho le a nd p re vi ou s p at ch

0.

, S te ep sl op e w ith si gn s o f s lo pe sl ou gh in g.

' f ro m r oa d ed ge

0.

, L oc al iz ed tr an sv er se c ra ck in g an d se tt le m en t o ve r cu lv er t c ro ss

0.

, F at ig ue c ra ck in g, lo ng itu di na l c ra ck in g, a nd tr an sv er se c ra ck

0.

, F at ig ue c ra ck in g, tr an sv er se c ra ck in g, r av el in g, b le ed in g, a nd o th er pa ve m en t d is tr es se s a cr os s w ha t a pp ea rs to b e a pr ev io us p at

0.

, F at ig ue c ra ck in g

(a lli ga to r cr ac ki ng ) t hr ou gh p os sib le o ld p at

0.

, F at ig ue c ra ck in g, w ith tr an sv er se c ra ck in g an d bl ee di ng o n cu lv er t cr os si ng

1.

1, L on gi tu di na l c ra ck in g al on g ce nt er lin e th ro ug h pr ev io us p at ch w ith tr an sv er se c ra ck s.

1.

, F at ig ue c ra ck in g th ro ug h pr ev io us p at

2.

0, L ow se ve ri ty fa tig ue c ra ck in g in e as tb ou nd la ne w ith tr an sv er se c ra ck s.

3.

0, L ow se ve ri ty fa tig ue c ra ck in g pr im ar ily in e as tb ou nd la ne

3.

, F at ig ue c ra ck in g an d ed ge c ra ck in g th ro ug h ex ist in g pa tc he s.

Bl ee di ng pr es en t.

3.

, L on gi tu di na l/F at ig ue c ra ck d et er io ra te d to e xp os e su bg ra de

T ra ns ve rs e cr ac ki ng a ls o pr es

3.

, F at ig ue c ra ck in g, p re vi ou s p at ch es

, a nd o th er p av em en t d ist re ss

3.

, S ha llo w p ot ho le (1 w ith e xp os ed b as e an d de te ri or at ed p av em

3.

, C lo se u p of fa tig ue c ra ck in g th ro ug h pr ev io us p at ch . B le ed in g ar ou nd ed ge o f p at

3.

, F ul l w id th fa tig ue c ra ck in g, p re vi ou s p at ch es

, a nd p av em en t b lo w ou ts

3.

P ot ho le s a nd tr an sv er se c ra ck in g be tw ee n ab ut m en t a nd r oa d.

Pavement Distress Summary Table

Project Number: 19-3865G Designation: MT Bighorn 46(1)

Length: ~4.2 miles County: Big Horn

Submitted by: Brandon Western Title: Engineering Intern Date: 01/23/20

Low Moderate Severe

0.05 35 10 EB 1 2

0.16 30 6 CL 5 1

0.20 90 9 WB 2 1

0.25 10 9 EB 2 1

0.31 55 6 CL 3 1, 2

0.36 50 9 EB 5 1

0.44 125 12 WB 1

0.53 60 9 WB 1, 3

0.70 40 25 ALL 3 2, 5 1

0.70 60 15 WB 2 1

0.75 100 9 WB 2, 3 1

0.78 45 9 WB 1, 3

0.88 160 12 EB 4

1.11 30 6 CL 3

1.35 20 12 WB 1

1.36 30 9 EB 1, 3

1.40 100 15 EB 4 1, 3

1.45 80 25 ALL 4

1.54 10 9 EB 3 1

1.57 75 25 ALL 1, 3

1.62 15 25 ALL 3 1

1.64 50 25 ALL 4

1.67 75 9 WB 3 1

2.47 60 25 ALL 1, 3

2.76 30 9 WB 1, 3

3.20 80 9 EB 3 1

3.27 32 9 WB 3 1

3.40 30 9 EB 3 1

3.49 5 25 ALL 1, 3

3.52 10 15 WB 1, 5

3.57 210 15 WB 2, 5 1, 3

Pavement Distress Rating RP Width (ft) LaneLength (ft)

Pavement Distress Summary Table

Project Number: 19-3865G Designation: MT Bighorn 46(1)

Length: ~4.2 miles County: Big Horn

Submitted by: Brandon Western Title: Engineering Intern Date: 01/23/20

Low Moderate Severe

Pavement Distress Rating RP Width (ft) LaneLength (ft)

3.73 36 6 CL 2 1, 3

3.74 50 15 EB 1, 3

3.83 125 25 ALL 1, 2, 3

3.92 40 25 ALL 2

3.96 70 25 ALL 5 1, 2

3.99 120 9 EB 1, 3

1 - Fatigue Cracking Length of Low Distress Rating 440 ft 2 - Potholes Length of Moderate Distress Rating 888 ft 3 - Patches Length of Severe Distress Rating 915 ft 4 - Poor Drainage 5 - Wide to Very Wide Cracks

Project: MT BIGHORN 46(1), Warman Loop Road, East of Fort Smith, Montana

PR

O

PO

SE

D D

R

IL

L

IN

G P

R O

G R

A M

B O

R

IN

G L

O C

A T

IO

N

SK

E T

C H

M

T B

IG

H

O R

N

6( 1)

W ar m an L oo p

R oa d E as t o f F or t S m ith , M on ta na

D ra w n by

G oo gl e/

SK

eo at e 1-

-2

Pr oj ec t:

-3

5G

Sc al e:

TS

FI

U

R E

Sh ee t of or

PO

SE

D D

R

IL

L

IN

G P

R O

G R

A M

B O

R

IN

G L

O C

A T

T

B

IG

H

O R

N m an L oo p

R oa d E as t o f F or t S m ith , M on w n by

G oo gl e/

SK

e 1-

-2

Pr oj ec t:

-3

U

R E

Sh ee t

PO

SE

D D

R

IL

L

IN

G P

R O

G R

A M

B O

R

IN

G L

O C

A T

T

B

IG

H

O R

N m an L oo p

R oa d E as t o f F or t S m ith , M on w n by

G oo gl e/

SK

e 1-

-2

Pr oj ec t:

-3

U

R E

Sh ee t

PO

SE

D D

R

IL

L

IN

G P

R O

G R

A M

B O

R

IN

G L

O C

A T

T

B

IG

H

O R

N m an L oo p

R oa d E as t o f F or t S m ith , M on w n by

G oo gl e/

SK

e 1-

-2

Pr oj ec t:

-3

U

R E

Sh ee t

PO

SE

D D

R

IL

L

IN

G P

R O

G R

A M

B O

R

IN

G L

O C

A T

T

B

IG

H

O R

N m an L oo p

R oa d E as t o f F or t S m ith , M on w n by

G oo gl e/

SK

e 1-

-2

Pr oj ec t:

-3

U

R E

Sh ee t r o p o se d L a b o r a to r y

T e st in g

P r o g r a m

M T

B

IG

H O

R N

(1

W a r m a n

L o o p

R o a d

-3

G D a te

/2

/2

L a b o r a to r y

T e st s

T r u c k o u n te d D r il l

R ig

P T

W S u b g r a d e a n d

S u b g r a d e /C u lv e r t

B o r in g s

S B

-0

H o ll o w

-S te m

S

P T

S am p le s, B as e/ C

M S

S am p le

B u lk

S u b g ra d e

S B

-0

H o ll o w

-S te m

S P

T S am p le s, B as e/

C M

S S am p le

S B

C

-0

H o ll o w

-S te m

S

P T

S am p le s, B as e/ C

M S

S am p le

N ea r

C u lv er t

S B

-0

H o ll o w

-S te m

S P

T S am p le s, B as e/

C M

S S am p le

S B

-0

H o ll o w

-S te m

S

P T

S am p le s, B as e/ C

M S

S am p le

B u lk

S u b g ra d e

S B

-0

H o ll o w

-S te m

S P

T S am p le s, B as e/

C M

S S am p le

S B

-0

H o ll o w

-S te m

S

P T

S am p le s, B as e/ C

M S

S am p le

S B

-0

H o ll o w

-S te m

S P

T S am p le s, B as e/

C M

S S am p le

S B

-0

H o ll o w

-S te m

S

P T

S am p le s, B as e/ C

M S

S am p le

B u lk

S u b g ra d e

S B

-1

H o ll o w

-S te m

S P

T S am p le s, B as e/

C M

S S am p le

S B

-1

H o ll o w

-S te m

S

P T

S am p le s, B as e/ C

M S

S am p le

S B

-1

H o ll o w

-S te m

S P

T S am p le s, B as e/

C M

S S am p le

S B

-1

H o ll o w

-S te m

S

P T

S am p le s, B as e/ C

M S

S am p le

B u lk

S u b g ra d e

S B

-1

H o ll o w

-S te m

S P

T S am p le s, B as e/

C M

S S am p le

S B

-1

H o ll o w

-S te m

S

P T

S am p le s, B as e/ C

M S

S am p le

S B

C

-1

H o ll o w

-S te m

S P

T S am p le s, B as e/

C M

S S am p le

N ea r C u lv er t

S B

-1

H o ll o w

-S te m

S

P T

S am p le s, B as e/ C

M S

S am p le

B u lk

S u b g ra d e

C o m p o si te B as e/

C

S

S am p le s

F D

R w it h C

T B

M ix

D es ig n

S h o rt

C u t

M et h o d

S u b to ta l

T O

T A

L

C o m m e n ts B o r in g N u m b e r o f

B o r in g s

B o r in g T y p e

Proctor

R-Value Test

Corrosion

Consolidation

Sieve Analysis

Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

FDR with CTB Mix

Design

A u g e r B o r g e p th

(f t)