AASHTO EAST-1991 Report on the 1990 European Asphalt Study Tour (Revision 1)《1990欧洲沥青研究之旅的报告》.pdf

《AASHTO EAST-1991 Report on the 1990 European Asphalt Study Tour (Revision 1)《1990欧洲沥青研究之旅的报告》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《AASHTO EAST-1991 Report on the 1990 European Asphalt Study Tour (Revision 1)《1990欧洲沥青研究之旅的报告》.pdf（168页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、AASHTO TITLE EAST 91 m Ob39804 0003407 Ob1 m Report on the 1990 U r AASHTO - FHWA - NAPA - SHRP - TAI - TRB - DENMARK FRANCE GERMANY ITALY SWEDEN UNITED KINGDOM AASHTO TITLE EAST 91 W Ob39804 0003408 TTB W 5L EUROPEAN ASPHALT STUDY TOUR 1990 AASHTO TITLE EAST 91 m 0639BOY 0003Y50 b5b m SPONSORING OR

2、GANIZATIONS American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Federal Highway Administration National Asphalt Pavement Association Strategic IIighway Research Program The Asphalt Institute Transportation Research Board ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The sponsors and members of the European Asphalt

3、 Study Tour team would like to express our appreciation and thanks to all the people in the countries visited who contributed to making the trip the success that it was. We would also like to extend a special debt of gratitude to two individuals from the Federal Highway Administration-Mr. Richard F.

4、 Weingroff and Mrs. Deborah L. Stroessner-for their efforts in editing and rewriting sections of the report prepared by members of the tour group, and for the proofreading, graphic design, and page layout work performed, This report is published by : American Association of State Highway and Transpo

5、rtation Officials, 444 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 225, Washington, D.C. 20001 I Permission to reproduce material contained within the report is hearby granted, June 1991. ii AASHTO TITLE EAST 71 0637804 0003411 592 = TABLE OF CONTENTS I . INTRODUCTION by Federal Highway Administrator Thomas D

6、. Larson 1-6 II . TOUR PARTICIPANTS . 7-10 III . ANOVERVIEW . 11-26 o Table 1 . Demographics 14 o Table 2 . Highway Factors . 14 o Table 3 . Taxation Effort 15 o Stronger Emphasis on Durability 16 o Structural, Not Visual. Factors Trigger Rehabilitation . 17 o Asphalt Modification 18 Mix-Design Syst

7、ems . 19 o Scale. Diversity. andEfficiency . 20 o Performance-Enhancing ContractingProcedures . 21 o Environmental Concerns 21 o Stronger Research Emphasis 22 o Pending Market Changes 22 o Stronger Emphasis on Noise Reduction and Skid Resistance o Innovative Special-Purpose Mix Designs and Advanced

8、17 o Industry/Government Relationships and Industrial Structure 23 Public/Private Cooperation 23 Concentrated Industry Structure . 24 o Summary . 24 IV . TRIP SUMMARIES 27-64 o Sweden 29 o Denmark . 35 o Germany . 39 o Italy . 45 o France 51 o UnitedKingdom . 57 iii AASHTO TITLE EAST 95 M 0639OY 000

9、34l12 Y29 V . INNOVATIVE ASPHALTTECHNOLOGY . 65-98 o Possible Uses of European Technology in the United States . 67 o StoneMasticAsphalt 69 GeneralDescription . 69 StoneMasticAsphaltinSweden . 75 StoneMasticAsphaltinDenmark . 81 o PorousAsphalt 82 GeneralDescription . 82 Porous AsphaltinSweden 83 Po

10、rous AsphaltinGermany 86 Porous AsphaltinFrance 87 o Modified Asphalts and AsphaltAggregateMixtures 90 GeneralRemarks 90 StoneMasticAsphaltandPorous Asphalt . 90 VeryThinAsphalt Concrete (France) . 90 Paver-Laid Chip Seal (France) 91 Gussasphalt (Germany) . 92 Hot-Rolled Asphalt and Bitumen Macadam(

11、UnitedKingdom) . 94 o Other SpecialPurposeMixtures . 96 o MixtureDesignTechniques andTestApparatus 97 NovelMixtureDesignTechniques 97 NovelTestApparatus 100 References . 103 StoneMasticAsphaltinGermany . 72 VI . APPLICATIONofFINDINGS 105-112 o AsphaltPavementMixtures 107 o LaboratoryEquipment . 109

12、o InnovativeContractingPractices 110 o Research . 110 VIL ACRONYMS. DEFINITIONSandTECHNICALTERMS . 113-116 APPENDIX: Technical Project Data . 117-184 A metric conversion table has been provided on the inside front cover for your convenience . A list of commonly used acronyms and technical terms has

13、also been provided to assist you . It can be found on page 115 . iv AASHTO TITLE EAST 93 m Ob39804 0003433 365 m INTRODUCTION AASHTO TITLE EAST 91 Ob39804 0003434 2TZ W 3 INTRODUCTION bY Thomas D. Larson Federal Highway Administrator For the average motorist, one question about highways is of top pr

14、iority: is the pavement smooth? Dating back to the 19703, the answer to that question has, unfortunately, often been “no.“ The reasons for the problem are many. Some involve political decisions, such as how much funding is available for pavement maintenance. But to a large extent, the issues are tec

15、h- nical. How can we make our predictions about pavement use more reliable? What is the best design? What surface is most durable for current traffic loadings? How can we best recycle old pavements? Just to cite a few. In addition to the usual research and knowledge gained from experience, we have l

16、aunched several major efforts to find the answers. The best known and the most promising is the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP). The need for new or improved pavement technologies was one of the driving forces behind the SHRPs development and most of its work is directed toward these techn

17、ologies. The result of the SHRPs efforts should be recommendations for both the industry and the State highway agencies for improving the durability and longevity of the Nations pavements. One element of pavement research has, however, been missing-until now. That element is research into how other

18、countries build and maintain their pavements. This is not an idle question. During my years of teaching at Penn State, I had the opportunity to work with engineers from the United Kingdom and Sweden, and I learned many new and innovative techniques to deal with common highway problems. I also learne

19、d that we can gain a great deal through joint efforts with our counterparts in other countries who have advanced the state-of-the-art in roads and bridges. Since being appointed Federal Highway Administrator, I have gained increased respect for the European highway communitys knowledge and understan

20、ding of pavements. This renewed respect is a result of my own observations of European highways in the past 2 years, as well as conversations with European experts who have visited the United States to learn how we solve common problems. Although the purpose of their visit in many cases is to gain k

21、nowledge about SHRP and the Federal-aid highway program, they often comment on the poor condition of pavements in the United States and contrast them with their own experience in Europe. European Asphalt Study Tour 1990 AASHTO TITLE EAST 9L Ob3980Y 0003YL5 i138 4 The National Asphalt Pavement Associ

22、ation (NAPA) provided the impetus for the 1990 European Asphalt Study Tour (EAST). John Gray, President of the NAPA, asked me to promote a closer relationship between government and industry asphalt experts and to expand the concept to include European experts. He proposed an “on-the-ground“ pilot p

23、rogram to review and evaluate foreign pavements and asphalt technology. I agreed, as did the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and we decided to arrange a study tour of Europe. The objective was to exchange ideas and experience with highway agencies and the

24、 construction industry in Europe on design, production, and placement of asphalt pavements. We were particularly interested in the design of asphalt wearing courses, the use of asphalt modifiers and the benefits they offer to improve the durability of asphalt pavements, as well as recycling-both hot

25、 and cold. In addition, we were interested in contracting practices that would be inno- vative in the United States and cooperative publidprivate activities, not only in design and financing, but in research into new materials, methods, and machines. Most important, we wanted not only to discuss the

26、se and other subjects, but to see European technology at work. Working together, the AASHTO, the NAPA, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) selected a 21-member study group that included six AASECTO and eight industry representatives, as well as the Chairman of the Transportation Research B

27、oard, the President of The Asphalt Institute, and two SHRB officials. I asked Deputy Federal Highway Administrator Gene McCormick to represent the FHWA. Through cooperation with six government and industry representatives in Europe, we arranged a 14-day study tour of six countries: Denmark, France,

28、Germany, Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. It began on September 7,1990, with a flight from Dulles Airport to Goteborg, Sweden, and ended on September 22 with weary study tour participants arriving at Dulles after a flight from London. Whatever else the tour may have been, it was an exhausting

29、experience for all concerned. If the participants began with any chauvinistic ideas about the superiority of United States technology, they quickly realized we have a lot to learn from Europe about asphalt pavements and about pavement philosophy in general. European pavements =better than ours and i

30、ts no accident. The Europeans invest more in research, development, and deployment of new pavement technology. They build their pavement foundations better, They use innovative-for us-surfaces, such as Stone Mastic Asphalt (SMA), and mix in additives to a greater extent and with better results than

31、we do. Government and industry have a closer relationship-probably closer than would ever be possible in the United States-that encourages innovation and quality. And, the Europeans maintain their pavements to get the maximum life out of them. European Asphalt Study Tour 1990 AASHTO TITLE EAST 91 Ob

32、39804 O003416 074 5 Upon return to the United States, the participants developed the plan for this report. It describes the mission of the tour, and provides an overview, as well as a description of the activities observed in each country; summarizes the findings not only for asphalt technology but

33、for innovative contracting practices and innovative construction equipment; and provides a plan for applying these findings in the United States. The implementation plan may be the most important part of the report, because we do not see the 1990 EAST as the culmination of our efforts. Its just the

34、start. The FHWA will work with the NAPA, the AASHTO, the SHRP, and other industry and State officials to begin incorporating what we have learned into everyday practice. The success of the study tour is the result of a lot of hard working people. Dick Morgan of the NAPA, Frank Francois of the AASHTO

35、, and Doug Bernard of the FHWA deserve special thanks for making the arrangements. At times, the tour-trying to get 21 people across Europe in 14 days-was something like doing a jigsaw puzzle, but amazingly, they fit all the pieces together and the picture proved to be perfect. In the end, though, t

36、he success of the study tour depended on the willingness of European highway and industry officials to share their ideas and their technology. Tour participants found their European counterparts not only willing but eager to do so. This was especially appreciated because the tight schedule imposed r

37、estrictions on the European hosts, too. Nevertheless, the schedules were adhered to in every case, and with good cheer. In every country, team members made many new friends. For too long, we have seen international technology transfer as a one-way street, with the United States showing other countri

38、es how to build better highways. Today, we can no longer afford such an attitude. Our transportation network is our greatest economic asset. f we do not give it our best-and Europes best-we will undermine our own success. Internationally, our ability to compete in the world markets is dependent on o

39、ur ability to demonstrate our expertise. We are, today, a world leader in highway technology, but that reputationwill slip, along with our competitiveness, if we do not expand our technology sharing, in both directions, with the international community. Some of the European technologies seen, such a

40、s SMA and some mix design testing equipment, will be displayed at AASHTOs Technology Transfer Fair, in conjunction with that organizations annual meeting in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The “Fair” is scheduled for October 12 and 13,1991, and booths will be staffed by specialists, who can discuss the techno

41、logies displayed and answer questions. European Asphalt Study Tour 1990 AASHTO TITLE EAST 93 W 0639804 0003437 TOO TOUR PARTICIPANTS AASHTO TITLE EAST 91 m 0639804 0003q18 947 m 9 TOUR PARTICIPANTS American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Mr. Thomas H. Espy, Jr., Chief Engi

42、neer, Alabama Highway Department Mr. Byron C. Blaschke, State Engineer-Director,Texas State Department of Mr. James D. Quin, Chief Engineer, Mississippi State Highway Department Mr. Bernard B. Hurst, Director, Ohio Department of Transportation Mi. Francis B. Francois, Executive Director, AASHTO Mi.

43、Dwight Bower, Deputy Director, Colorado Department of Highways Federal Highway Administration Highways and Public Transportation Mr. Gene McCormick, Deputy Administrator Mr. Edwin Wood, Regional Administrator Mr. Douglas A. Bernard, Chief, Demonstration Projects Division Mr. Robert A. Ford, Chief, I

44、nternational Cooperation Division National Asphalt Pavement Association Mr. Lloyd O. Thompson, President, Border States Paving, Inc. Mi. Ned W. Bechthold, President, Payne OVERVIEW AASHTO TITLE EAST 91 0639804 0003420 5T5 13 THE 1990 EUROPEAN ASPHALT STUDY TOUR AN OVERVI In mid-September 1990, a tea

45、m of pave- ment specialists from the United States participated in a 2-week tour of six European nations. The team included representatives from the AASHTO, the FHWA, the NAPA, the SHRP, TAI, and the TRB. The full European Asphalt Study Tour (EAST) team visited, in order, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, F

46、rance, and the United Kingdom, while a subcommittee drawn from the AASHTO and the FHWA participants visited Italy. The six nations have much in common with the United States. AU are indus- trialized, have extensive highway and road systems, and rely increasingly on motor vehicles for moving people a

47、nd freight. While the six nations have mature railroad networks that move large numbers of passengers and considerable freight, the number of motor vehicles and the use of trucks to move goods have grown constantly. All the nations visited have modern, capable highway agencies and a mature construct

48、ion industry. Some also have extensive highway research facilities. The emerging European Economic Community of the 1990s will cause tar- iff and trade barriers to decline among the nations, leading to a confederation that-to some extent-will resemble the United States, but without our strong nation

49、al government. The coming together of the nations is affecting highways, as it is many other aspects of life in Europe. For example, a highway system is emerging that is comparable in many ways to the Interstate System in the United States. The European motorway network totals some 40,000 km (about 25,000 miles), including approximately 13,500 km (8,400 miles) of toll roads. It will be capable of moving goods by truck from Norway in the north to Italy in the South, and from Eastern Europe to the Atlantic ports. Despite these similarities, the six nations differ fr