Pavement Report TX FLAP FM709 -final rev 05-16-23_binder revision 8-30-24.pdf

TX FLAP 709(1)

Navarro Mills Lake Access

PAVEMENT AND MATERIALS REPORT

August 2022

Report Prepared By

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

Central Federal Lands Highway Division Lakewood, Colorado

TX FLAP 709(1) Navarro Mills Lake Access ii

Written by: ________________________________________________________ Marty Fey, Pavement and Materials Engineer

Reviewed and approved for distribution by:

Mike Voth, Pavement and Materials Team Lead

Distribution:

Project Development Project Management Construction Materials Pavements Geotech Texas Department of Transportation on behalf of iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION

II. CLIMATE

III. EXPLORATION

IV. EXISTING PAVEMENT & SOILS

V. PAVEMENT DESIGN CALCULATION INPUTS

VI. PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS & DISCUSSION

VII. MATERIALS RECOMMENDATIONS

APPENDICES

A – Location Map B – Laboratory Reports and Boring Logs C – Photographs D – AASHTO ’93 Flexible Pavement Design E – PG LTPPBIND Software F – Preliminary Pavement Recommendation Memo

I. INTRODUCTION

This report is written to provide pavement and materials recommendations for TX FLAP 709(1) Navarro Mills Lake Access. The project is located north of Dawson, Texas in Navarro County. FM 709 runs from the intersection of SH 31 on the south end of the project, 3.8 miles north to the Navarro Mills Marina entrance. The project roadway improvements are anticipated to be recycled aggregate base with cement, shoulder widening, new aggregate base course, and new hot asphalt concrete pavement. See Appendix A for location map.

The Preliminary Pavement Recommendations Memo was issued in July 2021. The memo provided the pavement recommendations as well as the proposed pay items. This memo is found in Appendix F. After numerous discussions between CFL and TXDOT, and considering partner preferences and local construction standards, the pavement recommendations have been finalized and are discussed in Part VI of this report.

II. CLIMATE

Climate data was obtained from noaa.gov. This data is summarized in Table 1 below.

The average annual precipitation for this area is approximately 19.14 inches.

Table 1: Weather Data

Month Average

HIGH (°F)

Average

LOW (°F)

Average

MEAN (°F)

Average

PRECIP. (in)

January 54.8 26.0 40.4 0.58

February 59.3 29.5 44.4 0.86

March 67.4 35.9 51.6 1.11

April 76.3 43.9 60.1 0.90

May 84.7 54.5 69.6 2.30

June 91.1 62.6 76.9 2.96

July 93.1 65.8 79.4 1.83

August 92.0 64.8 78.4 1.73

September 85.1 57.9 71.5 3.19

October 76.2 47.3 61.8 1.93

November 65.0 35.2 50.1 0.93

December 55.4 26.8 41.1 0.82

III. EXPLORATION

On June 22nd, 2021 CFLHD pavement & materials engineer Marty Fey completed a field investigation which included boring and subgrade sampling. Alliance Geotechnical Group was hired to assist with the field investigation. A CME 55 truck-mounted drill rig with an 8” O.D. solid stem auger was used to complete the borings. Pavement borings were logged at 9 locations along FM 709. Subgrade samples were collected and tested in the laboratory. CFL personnel logged the borings; this included depth of boring, visual soil classification, and pavement thickness at the bore hole. Pavement cores were not collected as a part of this investigation. Boring locations, test results, and other information is shown in Appendix B.

IV. EXISTING PAVEMENT & SOILS

The existing roadway was observed to consist of several chip seals on cemented roadbase. Preventative maintenance has been performed regularly. However, the surface is very uneven and the ride is rough. This roadway is a good candidate for recycling.

Pavement thickness was found to be 2 to 2.5 inches in depth at the locations drilled, supported by 7 to 10 inches of cemented road base.

Drilling efforts were relatively easy. The subgrade materials encountered are of poor quality. The subgrade soils encountered consisted primarily of silty and clayey sands and were classified primarily as A-6 and A-7. Subgrade soils exhibited low to moderate plasticity and had R-values of 8 to 57. Resistivity values were found to be low to moderate and follow up chloride and sulfate testing indicate a lower risk of sulfate and chloride attack. See the laboratory reports and boring logs in Appendix B for more information.

V. PAVEMENT DESIGN CALCULATION INPUTS

Design Parameters

Traffic counts and analysis for FM 709 were provided by TXDOT and were used for pavement section recommendations. An average daily traffic (ADT) of 600 and a truck percentage of 4.6% medium duty and 2.5% heavy duty for a 20-year period. The analysis provided by TXDOT as well as related design factors are included in Appendix D.

Design factors used in the ESALs calculations as well as the structural coefficients were taken from the CFLHD Project Development Design Manual (PDDM), Chapter 11.

Roadbed Soil Resilient Modulus

The soil resilient modulus was converted from R-Values, AASHTO T 190, using the following equation:

Resilient Modulus (psi) = 10[ ( S

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

The R-value was found to be low and varies between 8 and 57. An R-value of 10 was selected because it is estimated to represent most of the subgrade soils on the project.

This results in a design resilient modulus of 3,600 psi.

VI. PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS & DISCUSSION

Utilizing AASHTO 93 Flexible Pavement Design (Appendix D), a 20-year pavement design required a Calculated Design Structural Number (SN) of 2.93. After evaluating alternatives, including partner preferences and local standards, the following is the recommended pavement structural section as shown in Table 2 and Figure 1.

Table 2: Recommended Pavement Section Layer Thickness

Hot Asphalt Concrete Pavement 2 inches Aggregate Base Course 8 inches Cement Treated Aggregate Base 6 inches

SN = 2.96

Figure 1: Typical Structural Section

VII. MATERIALS RECOMMENDATIONS

Cement

For the cement treated aggregate base layer, an application rate of 2% cement should be used for design purposes.

Asphalt Pavement

A minimum 50 gyration TXDOT mix will be specified.

Selection of Asphalt Binder

LTPPBind software was utilized to assist in the selection of asphalt binder. The information presented in LTPPBind is shown in Appendix E. A PG 64-22 binder is recommended. Consideration was given to the location of the project as well as TXDOT preference and performance of past projects in similar conditions.

Prime and Tack Coats, Blotter and Fog Seal

Prime Coat and Blotter are recommended for this project. Prime Coat should be applied between the aggregate base and asphalt pavement layers. An MC-70 or MC-30 grade prime coat per AASHTO M 82 will be specified.

Drainage and Subexcavation

During the field investigation, areas of pavement distress were present. However, they appeared to be caused due to fatigue and age. No major water damage or drainage problems pertaining to the existing traveled way were observed. If any drainage issues are encountered, the scope of the project allows for partial reconstruction. A quantity of 100 cubic yards of subexcavation should be included in the contract. This quantity should remain in the Contract in the event that areas in need of repair are encountered.

Bid Items

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

Table 3: Recommended Pay Items

Item Number Item Description Unit

20402-0000 Subexcavation CUYD

30101-0000 Aggregate Base TON

30703-0000 Cement Treated Aggregate Course CUYD

30715-0000 Cement TON

40301-0000 Asphalt Concrete Pavement TON

41102-0000 Prime Coat SQYD

41105-0000 Blotter TON

APPENDICES

A – Location Map

B – Laboratory Reports and Boring Log

C – Photographs

D – AASHTO ’93 Flexible Pavement Design

E – PG LTPPBind Software

F – Preliminary Pavement Recommendation Memo

Appendix A: Location Map

Appendix B: Laboratory Reports and Boring Logs

Project:

Sample Number

Station or Location

Offset from CL

Date Sampled

Depth of Bore

Container Type

Pavement/ABC Thickness R-Value Class

Liquid Limit / Plasticity

Index

Resistivity, ohm.cm pH Sulfate % Chloride %

0 to 2" 2" to 11" 11" to 3' 3' to 5' 0 to 2" 2" to 10" 10" to 5' 0 to 2" 2" to 9" 9" to 5' 0 to 2" 2" to 10" 10" to 2' 2' to 3.5' 3.5' to 5' 0 to 2" 2" to 10" 10" to 2' 2' to 3.5' 3.5' to 5' 0 to 2" 2" to 9" 9" to 1.5' 1.5' to 5' 0 to 2.5" 2.5" to 9.5" 9.5" to 5' 0 to 2" 2" to 9" 9" to 3' 3' to 5'

0 to 2"

2" to 12" SM / A-4 (0) NV / NP 12" to 5'

ABC Composite 6/22/2021 Composite sample of existing aggregate base course from borings P-1 through P-9.

P-2 0.5 Mi N of int SH 31

3.5' LT 6/22/2021 5'

5-gal bucket

Asphalt Classification SPT @ 4' 3 / 5 / 6Aggregate Base Course, Light Brown

SM / A-1-b (0) NV / NP

SC / A-6 (7)

49 SC-SM / A-2-4 (0)

3,050 8.2 0.006 0.0003Aggregate Base Course, Light Brown Sand Silty, Dark Brown, V. Soft, Moist

2" / 7"

57 SM / A-2-4 (0)

2" / 8" 45 SC-SM / A-4 (0) 24 / 7

NV / NP

34 / 22

30 / 15SC / A-6 (2)

22 /4

Sand Clayey, Dark Brown, Moist

Sand Clayey, Brown, Moist Sand Silty, Dark Brown, Moist

Sand Clayey, Dark Brown, Moist

Sand Silty, Brown, Moist

Truck Mounted CME 55 w/ 8" SSA Alliance Geotechnical Group Pavement Investigation - Shallow Borings and Cores - Log & Sampling Summary

0.00030.0048.13,710

2" / 7"

2.5" / 7"

2" / 10"

23 / 5

SC-SM / A-4 (0)

2" / 8"

4' RT 6/22/2021 5'

5-gal bucket

Asphalt Classification, Resistivity, pH, Sulfates, and

Chlorides SPT @ 4' 5 / 7 / 9Aggregate Base Course, Light Brown

Sand Clayey, Dark Brown, V. Moist, V. Soft

SPT @ 4' 4 / 4 / 4

SPT @ 4' 4 / 3 / 34' LT 6/22/2021 5'

5-gal bucket

Asphalt

Sand silty, Dark Brown, Moist, V. Soft

6/22/2021

Asphalt Aggregate Base Course, Light Brown

Sand Clayey, Gray Brown, V. Soft, Moist

Classification, R-Value5'

P-8 3.0 Mi N of int SH 31

P-9 3.5 Mi N of int SH 31

5-gal bucket

Classification, R-Value

4.5' RT 6/22/2021 5'

5-gal bucket

Asphalt

P-6

P-5

2.5 Mi N of

int SH 31

5-gal bucket

Asphalt

4.5' RT

2.0 Mi N of

int SH 31

Asphalt

ClassificationAggregate Base Course, Light Brown

P-7 2.7 Mi N of int SH 31

5-gal bucket

6/22/2021

5'

Aggregate Base Course, Light Brown

Aggregate Base Course, Light Brown

Sand Clayey, Dark Brown, Moist

Classification

5' 5-gal bucket

P-4 1.5 Mi N of int SH 31

4' LT

Comments

SPT @ 4' 2 / 3 / 5

SPT @ 4' 5 / 6 / 7

SPT @ 4' 19 / 27 / 50/4"

Testing Requested

TX FLAP FM709(1) Navarro Mills Lake Access Contractor:

Logged By: Equipment:Sampled By:Marty Fey Marty Fey

6/22/20213.5' RT

100' N of int SH 31

Boring Observations (grey = sample depth )

Asphalt Aggregate Base Course, Light Brown Sand Clayey, Brown, Moist

Asphalt P-3 1.0 Mi N of int SH 31

4' RT 6/22/2021 5'

5-gal bucket

Classification, Resistivity, pH, Sulfates, and

Chlorides

SPT @ 4' 3 / 1 / 2 2" / 7"

2" / 9"

2" / 8"

Classification, R-Value

Classification SPT @ 4' 4 / 7 / 9 Aggregate Base Course, Light Brown

Sand Clayey, Gray Brown, V. Soft, Moist

Sand Clayey, Dark Brown, V. Soft, Moist

Sand Clayey, Brown, Moist

Sand Clayey, Gray Brown, V. Soft, Moist

Classification4' LT

Sand Clayey, Brown, Moist, Soft

8 SC / A-6 (2) 31 / 18

37 / 26

P-1 5' 5-gal bucket

6/22/2021

SC / A-6 (6)

Appendix C: Photographs

Photo 1: FM 709, Start of project

Photo 2: CME 55 Drill Rig

Photo 3: Typical Driveway Culvert

Photo 4: Split spoon sampler

Photo 5: Damage at edge of roadway

Photo 6: Chip seal w/ ABC underneath

Photo 7: Traffic control

Photo 8: Drilling Operations

Photo 9: Standing water on shoulder

Photo 10: Measuring pavement and subgrade thickness

Photo 11: Box culvert

Photo 12: Sample collection

Photo 13: Typical subgrade material

Photo 14: End of project

Appendix D: AASHTO ’93 Flexible Pavement Design

AASHTO FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN

Layer Thickness Determination Using Trial and Error

Recycled Aggregate Base w/ Cement

Layer Drainage Layer Layer No. Description Coefficient, ai Coefficient, mi Thickness, in SN

(topmost) Layer 1 AC Layer 0.40 1.00 2.00 0.80 Layer 2 ABC (302) 0.12 1.00 8.00 0.96 Layer 3 Recyled Base w/ Cement 0.20 1.00 6.00 1.20 Layer 4 Select Borrow 0.08 0.90 0.00 0.00 Layer 5 0.00 Layer 6 0.00 Layer 7 0.00

(bottommost) Layer 8 0.00 Subgrade Subgrade N/A N/A N/A N/A

AC Layer 401 = 0.44 Trial SN 2.96

403 = 0.40

CAB 301 = 0.14 Design SN to Match 2.93 Subbase/Minor agg 302 = 0.12

FDR 304 = 0.12 Design is sufficient Recycled Base w/ Cement 308 = 0.20

Select borrow 204 = 0.06 to 0.08

(Refer to Exhibit 11.2-C in Chapter 11 of PDDM for additional guidance on coefficients)

AASHTO FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN

SN Determination

Design Inputs W18 = 140,000 ESALs Applications Over Design Period Typ. Range 50k to 10 million

R = 75 % Reliability Typ. Range 75 to 95%

So = 0.49 Standard Deviation AASHTO Standard

MR = 3,600 psi Subgrade Resilient Modulus Typ. Range 3000 to 15000 psi

Pi = 4.2 Initial Serviceability Typ. Range 4.2 to 4.4

Pt = 2 Terminal Serviceability Typ. Range 2.0 to 3.0

DESIGN SN = 2.93

Appendix E: PG LTPPBind Software

Five Closest Weather Stations For Latitude/Longitude= 32.053/96.453 Report Date: 7/21/2021 (LTPPBind V3.0 Alpha)

TX FLAP FM709(1) Navarro Mills Lake Access

General A=4 km B=27 km C=31 km D=45 km E=47 km Station ID TX2019 TX6210 TX0518 TX5869 TX3047 County/District navarro navarro ellis limestone freestone Weather Station corsicana navarro mills d bardwell dam mexia fairfield Elevation, m 120 128 130 151 122 Latitude, Longitude 32.08 ,96.47 31.95 ,96.7 32.27 ,96.63 31.68 ,96.48 31.73 ,96.18 Last Year Data Available 1997 1997 1997 1997 1997

Air Temperature Mean ( Std, N ) Mean ( Std, N ) Mean ( Std, N ) Mean ( Std, N ) Mean ( Std, N ) High Temperature 37.3 (16,35) 37.6 (13,35) 37.6 (14,33) 38.3 (16,34) 37.7 (19,30) Low Temperature ‐9.9 (29,35) ‐10.5 (29,35) ‐10.8 (31,32) ‐10.2 (33,35) ‐10.2 (32,31) Low Temperature Drop 29.5 (33,35) 30.4 (30,35) 29.9 (33,32) 30.1 (31,35) 28.4 (33,31) Degree‐Days > 10C 3959 (203,35) 3999 (176,35) 3972 (181,33) 4109 (224,34) 4110 (201,30)

PG High Low Rel. High Low Rel. High Low Rel. High Low Rel. High Low Rel.

Pavement Temperature, C 63.6 ‐04.1 63.8 ‐04.5 63.7 ‐04.8 64.5 ‐04.2 64.5 ‐04.2 50% Reliability PG 64‐10 (83,97) 64‐10 (67,97) 64‐10 (77,95) 70‐10 (98,96) 70‐10 (98,97) >50% Reliability PG 70‐10 (98,97) 70‐10 (98,97) 70‐10 (98,95) 70‐16 (98,98) 70‐16 (98,98)

= 70‐16 (98,98) 70‐16 (98,98) 70‐16 (98,98)

Appendix F: Preliminary Pavement Recommendation Memo

Subject: Preliminary Pavement & Materials Recommendations (V1) TX FLAP FM709(1) Navarro Mills Lake Access

From: Marty Fey Pavement & Materials Engineer, CFLHD

Through: Mike Voth Pavement & Materials Team Lead, CFLHD

To: Solomon Haile, Project Manager, CFLHD Stacy Diccicco, Design Engineer, CFLHD

INTRODUCTION

This memorandum provides preliminary pavement and material recommendations for the Navarro Mills Lake Access project located in Navarro County, north of Dawson, Texas.

FM 709 runs from the intersection of SH 31 on the south end of the project 3.8 miles north to the Navarro Mills Marina entrance. The project roadway improvements are anticipated to be full depth reclamation, shoulder widening, and new HACP.

CFLHD standards and guidelines were used to complete the pavement and materials recommendations.

FIELD INVESTIGATION

On June 22nd, 2021 CFLHD pavement & materials engineer Marty Fey completed a field investigation which included boring and subgrade sampling. Alliance Geotechnical Group was hired to assist with the field investigation. A CME 55 truck-mounted drill rig with an 8” O.D.

solid stem auger was used to complete the borings. Pavement borings were logged at 9 locations along FM 709. Subgrade samples were collected and tested in the laboratory. See the attached boring and testing logs for more detailed information.

Technical Memorandum

Date: July 23, 2021 Rev: July 28, 2021

The primary objectives of this field investigation were as follows:

Measure and record existing pavement and subgrade layer depths;

Gather subgrade soil samples for follow-up testing to determine engineering properties;

Evaluate and record pavement distress conditions;

Evaluate roadway and project area for constructability concerns.

The existing roadway consists of several chip seals on cemented roadbase. Preventative maintenance has been performed regularly. However, the surface is very uneven and the ride is rough. This roadway is a good candidate for full depth reclamation.

The information gathered as described above was used to support pavement rehabilitation, structural design, and material recommendations.

Below are summary tables of the data gathered and test results. For more complete and detailed results, see the attached logs and lab test reports.

Summary of Sampling & Test Results

Pavement Depth

Roadbase Depth

R‐value, subgrade

Plasticity Index

Comments

2 to 2 ½ inches

7 to 10 inches

8 to 57 NP to 26

Subgrade material consists primarily of Clayey and Silty Sands, A‐6 and A‐7. Some high plasticity clays were also observed. Low subgrade R‐values indicate the material has very poor support characteristics.

Resistivity values are low to moderate and indicate a potential increased risk of sulfate and chloride attack. Laboratory testing for chloride and sulfate content is being performed and results will be added when available.

TRAFFIC:

Traffic counts and analysis for FM 709 were provided by TXDOT and were used for pavement section recommendations. The following is a summary of traffic data as well as the estimated ESALs and structural number used for design:

2022 ADT = 600

2042 ADT = 800 (1.5% growth rate) 2022 % trucks = 4.6% medium duty, 2.5% heavy duty Directional factor = 57% Design Lane ESAL’s = 118,000 Structural Number = 3.0

For areas of roadway widening, aggregate roadbase will need to be imported and cemented to the same depth as the FDR.

The following is the recommended pavement structural section:

Layer Thickness HACP 3 inches (two lifts) FDR or ABC w/ Cement 9 inches

SN 3.0

ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS:

The asphalt binder grade should be PG 70-16. This aligns with recommendations from LTPPBind and local standards.

Include a nominal amount of subexcavation (~300 cu yd) to be used at discretion of the

CO.

A cement application rate of 4% should be used for estimating quantities.

Recommend the following bid items.

Item Number Item Description Unit 20402-0000 Subexcavation CUYD 30202-2000 Roadway Aggregate, Method 2 TON 30501-xxxx Full Depth Reclamation w/ Cement, 9” SQYD 30510-0000 Cementitious Material TON 40301-0000 Asphalt Concrete Pavement TON 40601-0000 Fog Seal TON 40605-0000 Blotter TON 41101-0000 Prime Coat TON 41201-0000 Tack Coat TON

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS & SPECIAL CONTRACT PROVISIONS

The contractor should expect to encounter some soft and moist subgrades during construction.

A pay item will need to be created for FDR w/ Cement, 9 inches.

CFLHD standard SCR’s related to pavements & materials will be used. A SCR for section 305 will need to be developed to guide the contractor on blending FDR mainline and ABC widening area during cement application. If the decision is made to use a local borrow source and/or develop a source, an SCR may need to be developed.