Austin Meeting Focuses on Updates, Strategies

Austin Meeting Focuses on Updates, Strategies
The members of the Advisory Committee met September 1996 in Austin at the South Central Superpave Center to share updates on recent activity and discuss training needs and strategies for 1997.

The meeting, chaired by Katherine Holtz, included Bobbie Templeton, Dan Simpson, Jim Gee, Jarvis Poche, Fred Cooney, Jack Telford, Maghsoud Tahmoressi, Charles Smoot, Dallas Little, John Nichols, Ross Martinez, and Gary Fitts.

Bobbie Templeton, Assistant Executive Director for Field Operations for the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), discussed the roles of the Superpave centers. Templeton said the top goal of the Superpave Centers should be training. He encouraged all state DOTs to be active in the AASHTO steering committee for SHRP implementation and distributed a resolution supporting Superpave centers by the AASHTO Standing Committee on Highways. Templeton supported the use of loaned staff and encouraged the Advisory Committee to make use of this concept. He also challenged the committee to be creative in developing a pool of money to facilitate state DOT travel for training and other Superpave center activities.

Superpave Updates

Those in attendance presented updates on local Superpave issues within their organization.

Dan Simpson (Arizona DOT):

Dan Simpson indicated ADOT had placed two additional projects that used Superpave volumetric mix design. Performance testing on these projects had been accomplished by Reed and Graham, a San Jose, California, consultant. ADOT has ordered a simplified shear tester from Interlaken and five Superpave gyratory compactors. Along with industry and local governments in Arizona, ADOT has formed a local Superpave implementation team.

Jim Gee (Arkansas HTD):

Jim Gee presented a detailed update on Superpave implementation in Arkansas (see sidebar). He discussed Superpave binder selection and suggested that about three PG grades would be appropriate in Arkansas. AHTD is rapidly implementing Superpave, with more than 25 projects planned for 1997. If these projects go well, Gee suggested that AHTD will fully implement Superpave in 1998.

Chip Young, of Jack Wood Construction Company, said contractors in Arkansas are in the learning mode. He expressed concern whether tolerances in current HMA construction specifications are appropriate for Superpave mixes.

Jarvis Poche (Louisiana DOTD):

Jarvis Poche described the Superpave Showcase project on IH-10 near Baton Rouge. He anticipates that LADOTD will use about three PG grades and that they will be implemented by mid-1997. He expressed concern over the use of oxidized (blown) asphalt.

Fred Cooney (New Mexico SHTD):

Fred Cooney said that NMSHTD had placed four projects using Superpave gradations and that the coarser mixtures looked good. NMSHTD is placing an SPS-9 project on IH-10. He stated that New Mexico will likely use four PG grades and, by January 1997, all high volume roads will use Superpave binders. Cooney said that engineering professionals from NMSHTD headquarters have developed a Superpave-related training program for district-level personnel.

J. Telford (Oklahoma DOT):

Jack Telford indicated that ODOT finally received all Superpave binder equipment in May 1996. He said that ODOT is examining different levels of reliability as it pertains to Superpave binder selection. ODOT would like to implement PG grades by January 1997, but they will likely not make that date. In the summer of 1997, ODOT will place two to three small projects using Superpave mix technology. Telford coordinated a workshop for ODOT and industry personnel in December 1996 utilizing Superpave Center personnel.

Albert Lambert of the Oklahoma Asphalt Pavement Association commented that OAPA supports Superpave implementation. He described some of the mix design activity in OAPA's laboratory and said that his laboratory recently purchased a Superpave gyratory compactor.

Maghsoud Tahmoressi (TxDOT):

Maghsoud Tahmoressi said that TxDOT had three Superpave test sections of about 5000 tons each. He indicated that two additional projects would be constructed in 1996 and one in early 1997. Tahmoressi asked Darren Hazlett (head of TxDOT Asphalt Section) to describe the QC/QA specification being proposed by TxDOT for Superpave binders. (see article, pg. 1) Hazlett indicated that this specification was significantly different in that it requires sampling at the hot mix plant and requires contractor testing of Superpave binders. Data is being gathered on five projects in 1996 and 1997 to allow TxDOT to fine tune the specification.

Charles Smoot (Texas Hot Mix Asphalt Pavement Association):

Charles Smoot stressed that much training will need to be accomplished to properly implement Superpave, and that agencies need to help industry get up to speed with Superpave materials. He expressed concern over the availability of some of the Superpave testing equipment. Smoot described a workshop jointly sponsored by THMAPA and TxDOT on October 23, 1996, that will utilize Superpave Center personnel to train TxDOT and industry personnel. He also said there was a need for mix design workshops.

Dallas Little (Texas Transportation Inst.):

Dallas Little described the Superpave testing capabilities of TTI. TTI was the first laboratory in Texas that was proficient in Superpave test methods. Dr. Little expressed his interest in working with the Superpave Center to assist in implementing Superpave.

John Nichols (FHWA-Texas Division):

John Nichols echoed Templeton's view that a significant role of the Center will be in the area of training. He said that it will be important to keep FHWA field engineers up to date on Superpave issues.

Ross Martinez (FHWA-Region 6):

Ross Martinez suggested inviting industry to the Center for an open house. He suggested having the open house in conjunction with a highway letting. Martinez also said that the next Advisory Committee meeting should occur in another state.

Gary Fitts (Asphalt Institute):

Gary Fitts stated that asphalt suppliers are committed to Superpave binder implementation. He said he supported Hazlett's plan for Superpave binder QC/QA in Texas. He said that asphalt suppliers are now realizing that Superpave is a system and that the mix design and analysis system is a very important part of the system.

Superpave Strategic Plan

Holtz described the development of the Center's strategic plan at the Advisory Committee's previous meeting. She mentioned that Templeton had two suggestions for additional objectives: provide regional testing services (Level 2 and 3), and establish effective field procedures for ensuring quality pavements. The consensus of the committee was that these two items could be accommodated by the current strategic plan.

Holtz cautioned that the strategic plan was very ambitious and that there was the need for prioritizing the action plan. There was a considerable amount of discussion regarding this prioritization.

Round Robin Test Programs

Tahmoressi said that an important Center function was round robin test programs. Participants noted that round robin programs should be coordinated with other similar activities regionally and nationally. For example, Smoot indicated that his organization was conducting a binder round robin test program. McGennis agreed to transmit the results of test programs as they became available.

Training Activities

Center training activities were discussed in detail. Tahmoressi described a plan that would encompass all the thoughts and concerns of the group. He outlined four types of Center training activities, as listed below:

Duration Disposition and Purpose

A key feature of Tahmoressi's proposed plan is that each state contribute $25,000 to the Center. He suggested this amount be conveyed from FHWA in the name of each participating state DOT, and that the funds be conveyed from the SHRP equipment pooled fund currently administered by FHWA. A breakdown of the proposed use of these funds is as follows:

Amount: $15,000 Purpose: Establish fluid assets that can be used to directly reimburse travel expenses of participating agency personnel to attend training events conducted by the Center and other events related to Superpave implementation

Amount: $10,000 Purpose: Establish operational funds over and above those already fixed by TxDOT and FHWA to facilitate the mission of the SCSC.

Thus, Tahmoressi suggested a pooled fund, primarily to fund state DOT personnel travel to training events sponsored by the Center, but also to fund a portion of routine Center activities. It was decided that Templeton would correspond with each state DOT's CEO to describe this plan and obtain approval of the management of the individual states served by the Center. Upon obtaining this approval, Templeton would request the funds be transferred from FHWA. Tahmoressi indicated that he would contact Byron Lord of FHWA's Office of Technology Applications to explore the mechanism by which this could occur.

Survey of Training Needs

Holtz requested that each state DOT canvass local DOT and industry to arrive at local training needs. The results of this informal survey will be transmitted to McGennis.

Utilization of Loaned Staff

Telford introduced the topic of loaned staff. McGennis stated that he would like to have loaned staff for as much time as possible but that such personnel were not forthcoming, due to the required length of time away from their home states. Tahmoressi said that states should do everything they can to help the Center by providing loaned staff. There was general consensus that Tahmoressi was correct, but that it was difficult to loan personnel for lengthy periods. Smoot stated THMAPA's intent to provide loaned staff in the form of a certification center evaluator. Holtz stated her intent to ask Templeton for assistance in getting other states to send staff to help the Center.

Certification

Telford initiated a discussion regarding the merits of region-wide certification of asphalt tests. He stated, and there was wide consensus, that certification should be on a regional basis and not necessarily a state DOT basis. There was also general consensus that with current staffing the Center could not conduct certification activities. However, Telford suggested that McGennis obtain a copy of AASHTO PP26 and circulate it among the Advisory Committee to determine what, if any, problems might prevent it from being adopted throughout the region.

Center Name Change

So that the name would be more reflective of the regional role of the Center, the Advisory Committee selected as a name, "The South Central Superpave Center." They directed McGennis to change all correspondence, presentations, etc., to reflect this name.

Lead State Concept (M. Tahmoressi):

Tahmoressi described a meeting he attended in St. Louis pertaining to the lead state concept. He developed a related handout to be posted on the Center's Internet site. (see article, pg. 2)

Communication Issues (B. McGennis):

McGennis demonstrated the World Wide Web page developed and maintained by the Center. There was general agreement by the Committee that this activity should continue.

He introduced Clair LaVaye, who serves as the Administrator of the Center's World Wide Web site. She also developed the first newsletter for the Center. LaVaye described the steps necessary to produce the newsletter. The Committee congratulated LaVaye on a good first effort. LaVaye requested that each Advisory Committee member provide a one-paragraph (approximate) update on a quarterly basis describing Superpave activities in their area. This information would be included in the newsletter.

LaVaye described the use of a "List Server," which is a means to establish a question and answer forum through e-mail. The forum would serve members of the Advisory Committee and their staffs. LaVaye indicated she would establish a List Server to provide a forum on Superpave technology.

McGennis solicited the assistance of each Advisory Committee member in developing a list of recipients of the Center's newsletter.

Open Forum and Meeting Wrap up:

Telford raised the issue of use of PG grades without utilizing Superpave mix analysis. He stated that we need to use mix tests to eliminate asphalt grades that meet the PG system but are still performing poorly.

Telford also discussed the issue of PG binder selection. He said that issues like supply, cost, reliability, and design need to be addressed.

As an example, he stated that it was probably imprudent to pay for a highly modified binder for the purpose of eliminating low temperature cracks in an overlay if reflective cracks are expected to be a problem. Overall, Telford supported the use of sound engineering judgment in selecting PG grades.

Holtz stressed the need to obtain more industry and academic participation in Center activities. She suggested that each state DOT Advisory Committee member select an industry person from his/her area for inclusion as a Committee member.


Return to Articles about Superpave
Return to Superpave Home Page

Project Manager: Dr. Yetkin Yildirim
Website Administrator: Clair LaVaye
© The Superpave Asphalt Research Program,
The University of Texas at Austin.