Composite Pavements:

Design, Construction,
and Benefits

Michael I. Darter & Derek Tompkins

Pavement Research Institute
University of Minnesota
 Presentation Outline

1. History of Composite Pavements

2. Critical Issues for Composite Pavements
• Design
• Construction
3. SHRP2 R21 Composite Pavements

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 Brief History of
Composite Pavements
• All pavements are “composite” since they
consist of layers of different materials bonded
together.
• Types of pavements generally called
“Composite” Pavements:
– AC/PCC (new construction)
– PCC/PCC (“wet-on-wet”)

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 AC-over-PCC
Composite Pavements

• North American urban areas,

US States, & Canadian Relatively
thin AC
Provinces have built AC/PCC surfacing
for many years
• European usage with
Newly placed
AC/CRCP is common on PCC w/ local
aggregates
major freeways

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 AC-over-PCC
Composite Pavements (Cont.)
• New AC/JPCP composite pavements built by NJ, WA, WI,
and Ontario in the past on major highways
• New AC/JPCP and CRCP on lane addition projects
• Urban areas such as Columbus, OH; NYC and adjoining
boroughs; Wash. D.C.; and City of Toronto
• Construction of AC/CRCP on major European highways:
Holland, Austria, Germany, France, Italy, and UK
– Relatively thin AC layer (2-3 in) over relatively thin CRCP
• Considerable AC/Roller Compacted Concrete has been
built in various locations (e.g., Columbus, OH; Spain)

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 PCC-over-PCC
Composite Pavements

• PCC / PCC composite

pavements used
frequently in Europe High quality smaller-
Sized aggregates
• State-of-the-art
construction expertise &
equipment resides in Lower-cost local
aggregates
Europe

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 PCC-over-PCC
Composite Pavements (Cont.)

First concrete pavement built in the U.S. (1891 in

Ohio) was a two-lift composite pavement.
12th Annual MN Pavement Conf
14 Feb 2008
 PCC-over-PCC
Composite Pavements (Cont.)
• European countries: Germany, Austria, Belgium,
Netherlands, and France.
– PCC/PCC built mainly to provide a cap of high
quality aggregate concrete over a thicker layer of
lower quality local aggregates or recycled concrete
– Some projects included porous concrete as the top
layer
• US applications (Detroit freeway, 1993), though
not as numerous as those of Europe, have
resulted in useful research results.

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 Two Layer Concrete
With Exposed Aggregate

• Permanent high skid

resistance
• Low development of
noise
• Long term life
> Exposed aggregate
surface
 Critical Issues for AC/PCC
Composite Pavements
• Quality of the AC mixture is critical. The most
critical issues include permanent deformation,
stripping of asphalt, de-bonding with the PCC, and
reflection cracking.
• Functional performance of the AC surfacing ideally
also provides low noise, high friction, reduced splash
and spray, and smoothness.
• The ability of the AC surfacing to bond securely and
have full friction with the PCC slab surface.

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 Critical Issues for AC/PCC:
Rapid renewal
Cold milling equipment

Ability to remove and replace the AC surfacing

rapidly and reliably
12th Annual MN Pavement Conf
14 Feb 2008
 Critical Issues for AC/PCC:
Reflection cracking

Needed: A reflection cracking solution for JPCP or RCC

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf
14 Feb 2008
 AC over PCC (NYC experiment)

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 Critical Issues for AC/PCC:
Reflection cracking (cont.)
New AC

Possible solution: ‘Saw and Seal’ joints in the AC surfacing

over joints in JPCP or RCC
12th Annual MN Pavement Conf
14 Feb 2008
 Example 1: Saw and Seal

15+ year old Saw & Seal transverse joints

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf
14 Feb 2008
 Example 2: Saw and Seal

Sawing missed joint

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 Critical Issues for
Composite Pavements (Cont.)
• Design of the JPCP or RCC slab is critical.
The key factors include thickness, joint
spacing, load transfer at joints, slab
width/shoulders, PCC coefficient of thermal
expansion, PCC strength/modulus, and base
course.
• Slab should be designed to have low
fatigue damage over the entire analysis
period so that fatigue cracking will not
develop.

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 Design to Minimize Fatigue
Damage and Cracking
Jointed Plain
Concrete
Pavement

Continuously
Reinforced Concrete
Pavement

Transverse cracks
Transverse cracks
Concrete Slab
(no transverse joints)

Continuous Base
Rebar Spacing
Longitudinal Steel

Subgrade

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 Critical Issues for
Composite Pavements (Cont.)

• Development of construction guidelines and

QA procedures are also critical, both for
composite AC/PCC and PCC/PCC pavements

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 SHRP 2 Renewal Goal
Rapid
Approaches
To develop a consistent,
systematic approach
to performing highway
Successful renewal that:
Renewal
9 is rapid
Minimal
Disruption 9 causes minimum
Long-Lived
Facilities disruption
9 produces long-lived
facilities
 SHRP 2 Renewal Projects
Rapid Approaches Long-Lived Facilities
R01.
R01. Locating
Locating & & R19.
Minimize Disruption R19. Durable
Durable Bridge
Bridge
Characterizing
Characterizing Utilities
Utilities Systems
Systems
R02. R16.
R16. Railroad-DOT
Railroad-DOT
R02. Geotechnical
Geotechnical R21. Composite
R21. Composite
Solutions Mitigation
Mitigation Strategies
Strategies R21. Composite
Solutions Systems
Systems
R04.
R04. Innovative
Innovative Bridge
Bridge
Systems
R15.
R15. Integrating
Integrating Utility
Utility
Designs
Designs R23.
R23. Using
Using Existing
Existing
and
and Transportation
Transportation In-place
In-place Pavement
Pavement & &
R05. Agency
Agency Priorities
Priorities
R05. Modular
Modular Pavement
Pavement Achieving
Achieving long
long Life
Life
R06.
R06. High-Speed
High-Speed NDT
NDT R26.
R26. Preservation
Preservation
R07. Approaches
Approaches forfor High
High
R07. Performance
Performance Specs
Specs
For Traffic
Traffic Volume
Volume
For Rapid
Rapid Highway
Highway
Renewal Roadways
Roadways
Renewal
R09.
R09. Risk
Risk Manual
Manual for
for Technology related
Rapid
Rapid Renewal
Renewal Project Delivery related
 SHRP2 R21: New Research in
Composite Pavements

Two strategies show great promise for providing

strong, durable, safe, smooth, and quiet pavements
that require minimal maintenance
1. Surfacing of new portland cement concrete
(PCC) layer with high quality asphalt
concrete (AC) layer(s), and
2. Relatively thin, high-quality PCC surface
atop a thicker, less expensive PCC layer.

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 AC over PCC

HMA Upper Lift

(HMA, PMA, SuperPave)

PCC Lower Lift

(JPCP, CRCP, RCC)

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 AC over PCC

Slab Cracked Sensentivity Analysis

Slab Cracked (%)

100
AC 0 in
AC 1.5 in
AC 3.0 in
80

60

40

20

0
6 7 8 9 10
JPCP Thickness (in)

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 PCC over PCC

H1,
E1 PCC Upper Lift
(Exp Aggr, Porous, High Strength, etc. )

H2, PCC Lower Lift

E2
(Recycled/Low Quality Materials, etc. )

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 PCC over PCC

Effect of E2 Modulus on Slab Cracking (H1=3, H2= 6.5

in)

100 H1 = 3 in
Percent Slab Cracking

90
2.85 Mpsi
E1 = 4.4 Mpsi
80
70 3.2 Mpsi H2 = 6.5 in
60 E2 = Varies
50 3.5 Mpsi
40
30 PCC Lower Lift
4.4 Mpsi
20
10 (JPCP, CRCP, RCC)
0
1 2 3 4

E2 Modulus, Mpsi

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 PCC over PCC

Effect of H1 & E2 On Slab Cracking

(H2 = 6.5 in Constant)

100
E2 = 2.85 Mpsi H1 = Varies
Percent Slab Cracking

80
3.2 Mpsi E1 = 4.4 Mpsi
60
H2 = 6.5 in
3.5 Mpsi E2 = Varies
40

20
PCC Lower Lift
4.4 Mpsi

(JPCP, CRCP, RCC)

0
3 3.5 4

Thickness H1 Top PCC Layer, in

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
Composite Pavement Surfaces

Exposed Aggregate Surface

Porous Asphalt Surface
 Motivation for SHRP2 R21:
Composite Pavements
• The structural and functional performance of
these two types of composite pavements is not
well understood or documented.
• Models for predicting the performance of these
pavement systems need to be developed for use
in design, pavement management, and life-cycle
cost analysis (LCCA).
• Construction techniques, guidelines, and
specifications are limited and insufficient.

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008
 Goals of R21 Project

• Focus on new AC/PCC and new PCC/PCC

composite pavement systems to:
– Determine the behavior and identify critical material
and performance parameters
– Develop and validate mechanistic-empirical
performance models and design procedures that are
consistent with the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement
Design Guide (MEPDG)
– Develop recommendations for construction
specifications, techniques, and quality management
procedures for adoption by the transportation
community.
12th Annual MN Pavement Conf
14 Feb 2008
 SHRP2 R21 Project Team

• PI: Mike Darter, PRI

• Applied Research Associates, Inc.
– Co-PI: Harold Von Quintus
• Minnesota DOT & MnROAD
• University of Minnesota
– Co-PI: Lev Khazanovich, UMN Civil Engineering
• University of California at Davis
– Co-PI: John Harvey, UCPRC
• University of Pittsburg
• International Consultants
12th Annual MN Pavement Conf
14 Feb 2008
 SHRP2 R21 and Minnesota
Pavement Research

• $4 Million in FHWA funding over 48 months

• Over half of funding to the State of Minnesota
(Mn/DOT and UMN)
– UMN will investigate modeling and accelerated
loading, Mn/DOT will implement experimental
design in MnROAD test sections
• R21 is an opportunity to bring more federal
attention to quality and depth of research in
Minnesota
12th Annual MN Pavement Conf
14 Feb 2008
Summary Composite Pavements

Benefits
•Long life PCC surfacing
•Rapid renewal of AC
Relatively
surfacing thin AC
•Surface characteristics surfacing High quality smaller-
•Use local aggregates Sized aggregates
lower PCC slab
•Long life PCC slab, no
Newly placed
fatigue cracking PCC w/ local Lower-cost local
•Utility repair aggregates aggregates

•Lower life cycle costs

12th Annual MN Pavement Conf

14 Feb 2008