Reclaimed Arizona — Asphalt Pavement in Application and

Reclaimed Arizona - Asphalt Pavement in Application and Verification October 3, 2008 Arizona Association of County Engineers 1

Outline v Introduction v Project Overview v Existing Pavement Condition v Construction and Production Operations v Granite/ADOT Test Results v Summary 2

Outline v Introduction v Project Overview v Existing Pavement Condition v Construction and Production Operations v Granite/ADOT Test Results v Summary 3

Change in DOT’s 4

5

Changing Market Conditions = Renewed Interest in Recycling v Price escalation for construction/rehabilitation and maintenance v Asphalt binder shortages v Polymer shortages v Environmental concerns v Energy concerns v Funding limitations 6

States Allowance of RAP v 75 -percent of States allow at least 10 percent RAP in surface course mixes v More States allow higher percentages in lower lifts 7

Value of Recycling – Percent Savings Relative to Conventional Materials – Initial Construction* 15% RAP in HMA 25% RAP in HMA 5 8 12 19 Aggregate Consumed, tons 6 10 CO 2 (lb) 7 12 CO (lb) 8 13 NOx (lb) 5 9 SOx (lb) 9 16 PM-10 (lb) 6 10 Energy, BTU AC Consumed, tons *equivalent square yards Note: Similar advantages found with Life Cycle Cost 8

PCI Over Time* *Projects constructed in Arizona 9

Outline v Introduction v Project Overview v Existing Pavement Condition v Construction and Production Operations v Granite/ADOT Test Results v Summary 10

Project Layout 11

Standard Sections 12

Scope of Work v Partial depth removal of existing asphalt concrete v Placement of dense grade asphalt concrete v Placement of AR-ACFC v Miscellaneous other work v Granite’s Proposal v Use RAP in base course HMA v 6% coarse RAP (3/4 -in x 3/8 -in) v 9% fine RAP (3/8 -in minus) v Note: RAP currently used as shoulder backing and aggregate base on ADOT projects 13

Standard Section 14

Outline v Introduction v Project Overview v Existing Pavement Condition v Construction and Production Operations v Granite/ADOT Test Results v Summary 15

Alligator Cracking Moderate severity alligator cracking Existing pavement prior to rehabilitation 16

Transverse Cracking Slight to moderate severity transverse cracking Existing pavement prior to rehabilitation 17

Block Cracking Block cracking Existing pavement prior to rehabilitation Maybe considered combination of longitudinal and transverse cracking 18

Outline v Introduction v Project Overview v Existing Pavement Condition v Construction and Production Operations v Granite/ADOT Test Results v Summary 19

Cold Milling Operations 20

Unprocessed RAP from I-19 21

Coarse RAP (3/4 -in x 3/8 -in) 22

Fine RAP (3/8 -in Minus) 23

Hot Plant Feeders 5 Virgin Aggregate Bins 2 RAP Bins 24

Hot Plant Cement Silo and Pugmill Virgin Aggregate Scalping Screen 25

Hot Plant Counter Flow Drum Mixer RAP Conveyor 26

Paving and Inspection HMA Paving Density Testing 27

Rolling Operations Echelon Breakdown Rolling Finish Rolling 28

Finished Mat 29

Outline v Introduction v Project Overview v Existing Pavement Condition v Construction and Production Operations v Granite/ADOT Test Results v Summary 30

Granite Test Results – RAP* Testing Lab RAP Source Coarse Granite Arizona Fine No. 200, % Passing Asphalt Binder Content, %DWA 10 10 10 2. 0 1. 1 0. 38 0. 53 11 11 11 0. 0 1. 9 1. 6 1. 17 1. 09 2. 81 0. 94 0. 28 Stat 3/8 -in Sieve, % Passing No. 8 Sieve, % Passing No. 40 Sieve, % Passing No. 10 10 Std. Dev. ** 3. 5 No. Std. Dev. Granley Std. Dev. Rep. Range Std. Dev. 2. 0 – 4. 5 2. 0 – 3. 5 0. 5 – 1. 5 0. 15 – 0. 45 Rep. Value Std. Dev. 3. 30 2. 80 0. 90 0. 30 *Test results based on ignition oven **Standard Deviation – measure of variability 31

Granite Test Results – RAP* Testing Lab RAP Source Coarse Granite Arizona Fine No. 200, % Passing Asphalt Binder Content, %DWA 5 5 5 3. 2 1. 5 0. 60 0. 42 7 7 7 0. 0 1. 9 1. 1 0. 70 0. 22 2. 81 0. 94 0. 28 Stat 3/8 -in Sieve, % Passing No. 8 Sieve, % Passing No. 40 Sieve, % Passing No. 5 5 Std. Dev. ** 5. 3 No. Std. Dev. Granley Std. Dev. Rep. Range Std. Dev. 2. 0 – 4. 5 2. 0 – 3. 5 0. 5 – 1. 5 0. 15 – 0. 45 Rep. Value Std. Dev. 3. 30 2. 80 0. 90 0. 30 *Test results based on solvent extraction **Standard Deviation – measure of variability 32

Granite/ADOT Test Results - Gradation v Gradation of aggregate extracted from field mixed samples Standard Deviation of Percent Passing Sieve, % 3/8 -in No. 8 No. 40 No. 200 Granite 2. 95 2. 56 1. 18 0. 57 ADOT 3. 22 2. 14 0. 88 0. 46 Granite & ADOT 3. 10 2. 35 1. 04 0. 51 Granley NCHRP 455 2. 81 0. 94 Rep. Range 2. 0 – 4. 5 2. 0 – 3. 5 0. 5 – 1. 5 Rep. Value 3. 3 2. 8 0. 9 *Standard Deviation – measure of variability 33

Granite/ADOT Test Results - Volumetrics v Volumetric properties of field mixed/lab compacted samples Bulk Density, lb/ft 3 Rice Air Asphalt Density, Voids, % Binder lb/ft 3 Content, % Granite 0. 95 0. 58 0. 81 0. 29 ADOT 0. 80 0. 49 0. 67 0. 21 Granite & ADOT 0. 88 0. 53 0. 74 0. 25 Granley NCHRP 455 0. 28 Rep. Range 0. 3 – 1. 2 0. 15 – 0. 45 Rep. Value 0. 7 0. 3 *Standard Deviation – measure of variability 34

Outline v Introduction v Project Overview v Existing Pavement Condition v Construction and Production Operations v Granite/ADOT Test Results v Summary 35

Recycling Benefits v Conservation v Materials (aggregate and asphalt binder) v Energy (burner fuel, trucking, etc. ) v Preservation of environment v Landfill v Green house gases (global warming) v Sustainability v Economics v Reduce first and life cycle cost v Complete reconstruction vs. alternative methods v Increased contractor competition 36

Questions 37