Blacktop vs. Concrete

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

The noise, both the expansion joints and the whine, is annoying.

I've never found that so. (excepting Indiana's pavements from the '80s and '90s, that is.)

[jjakucyk]

It may not be so annoying to you as a driver, but you have to consider the people who live or work near that road too.

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

It may not be so annoying to you as a driver, but you have to consider the people who live or work near that road too.

Only if they were there first.  If the road was there first and they moved near it, that's their own damn fault.

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

While we're on the subject of noise, has anyone driven the newly rebuilt part of I-64 in St. Louis?  That's the quietest concrete I've ever driven on.  It makes almost no noise, period.

[jjakucyk]

It may not be so annoying to you as a driver, but you have to consider the people who live or work near that road too.

Only if they were there first.  If the road was there first and they moved near it, that's their own damn fault.

That's the dumbest thing I've heard all week.  It's not a problem limited to interstate-level highways, but even surface arterials and other lesser streets.  It could've been an asphalt road rebuilt with concrete, or an existing road that was widened or converted to an expressway, or any number of other situations.  

That's not even the point anyway.  The point is that regardless of who or what was there first, roads don't just affect the drivers on them, they impact their surroundings too.  Considerations must be made for everyone, whether that's for noise, pollution, accidents, flooding, or whatever.  

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

That's the dumbest thing I've heard all week.  It's not a problem limited to interstate-level highways, but even surface arterials and other lesser streets.  It could've been an asphalt road rebuilt with concrete, or an existing road that was widened or converted to an expressway, or any number of other situations.

All of which would technically mean "they were there first" - would they not?

That's not even the point anyway.  The point is that regardless of who or what was there first, roads don't just affect the drivers on them, they impact their surroundings too.  Considerations must be made for everyone, whether that's for noise, pollution, accidents, flooding, or whatever.

Fair enough.

I just find myself increasingly annoyed with people who get annoyed by little things.  For those who have no real choice where to live, such as the poor in the inner cities especially, it's a legitimate concern.  But out in the middle of the desert in, say, west Texas, or the middle of nowhere in Pennsylvania, what's a little kla-klunk and whine going to do to anyone, especially today, when cars' interiors are quieter than ever?  I guess that's more or less what I was getting at.

[Riverside Frwy]

That's the dumbest thing I've heard all week.  It's not a problem limited to interstate-level highways, but even surface arterials and other lesser streets.  It could've been an asphalt road rebuilt with concrete, or an existing road that was widened or converted to an expressway, or any number of other situations.

All of which would technically mean "they were there first" - would they not?

That's not even the point anyway.  The point is that regardless of who or what was there first, roads don't just affect the drivers on them, they impact their surroundings too.  Considerations must be made for everyone, whether that's for noise, pollution, accidents, flooding, or whatever.

Fair enough.

I just find myself increasingly annoyed with people who get annoyed by little things.  For those who have no real choice where to live, such as the poor in the inner cities especially, it's a legitimate concern.  But out in the middle of the desert in, say, west Texas, or the middle of nowhere in Pennsylvania, what's a little kla-klunk and whine going to do to anyone, especially today, when cars' interiors are quieter than ever?  I guess that's more or less what I was getting at.

Car interiors may be quieter, but trying rolling at 70+ mph from Concrete to newly asphalt section of the same freeway and you will realize how loud Concrete really is. It's like when the air conditioner goes off and then it's super quiet, then you realize how much sound the AC really makes-you just don't notice it. Same goes for Concrete vs Asphalt.

Considering that something like 80% of all highway noise is tires and the surface, the disparity of sound with asphalt vs concrete is obvious.

[roadfro]

They're putting rebar between the slabs which makes them less likely to shift out of place from one another.  Preventing that shifting also reduces the ka-thump ka-thump noise when you drive over the joints.

Additionally, the rebar between slabs helps to transfer the vehicle loads from one slab to the other. This improves durability, and reduces pivoting between the slabs. It also helps prevent blowout conditions where slabs angle upwards.

Often times, the slabs are tied together with rebar before initial concrete is poured. So the cuts that would be visible here when the project is finished would not be seen as in this case. When retrofitted as seen here, agencies usually only do some of the pavement (i.e. the lanes most likely to have trucks) as otherwise it might not be worth the effort.

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

Car interiors may be quieter, but trying rolling at 70+ mph from Concrete to newly asphalt section of the same freeway and you will realize how loud Concrete really is. It's like when the air conditioner goes off and then it's super quiet, then you realize how much sound the AC really makes-you just don't notice it. Same goes for Concrete vs Asphalt.

Considering that something like 80% of all highway noise is tires and the surface, the disparity of sound with asphalt vs concrete is obvious.

I've done it more times than many... and so long as the concrete produces a nice whine (i.e. uniform tining, not random) I've never once been bothered by it.  Some random tined pavements make a really bad noise...see Indiana's older pavements, for instance.

NEW asphalt is quieter, but it quickly gets louder.  Nevermind that the "quieter" asphalt pavements (finer aggregate) are not as durable as the "louder" ones, which are still not as durable as concrete.  The new concrete I mentioned above on I-64 in STL is as quiet, if not quieter than, most asphalt I've been on.  I believe it has the "carpet drag" texture as outlined in the WsDOT page linked earlier in the thread.

Of course that's how it always used to be, prior to '78 or so when all new concrete roads got for texture treatment was a burlap drag.  Transverse tining is what makes concrete so loud.  Diamond-ground concrete is also very quiet.

[jjakucyk]

Diamond grinding does help immensely, but there's also exposed aggregate concrete as well.  This isn't like the decorative exposed aggregate (which is way too rough and washes away too much of the "cream"), it's more specifically engineered, and it looks like tan asphalt.  In fact, in some cases it's even laid down more like asphalt.  It has much of the same noise and traction properties as asphalt as well, but the same durability of traditional concrete.  I believe it's used a lot more in Europe than over here, but the main advantage is that it eliminates the whine from grooved concrete and can be very quiet.

http://www.eupave.eu/documents/graphics/inventory-of-documents/febelcem-publicaties/noiseless-concrete-pavements.pdf

 

[vdeane]

I'm not sure how the DOT did it, but I-490 between Bushnell's Basin and Victor is noiseless at 55-65mph; you don't hear it unless you're doing under 40.

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

I'm not sure how the DOT did it, but I-490 between Bushnell's Basin and Victor is noiseless at 55-65mph; you don't hear it unless you're doing under 40.

Looks like carpet drag texture to me: http://g.co/maps/k4ma7

No transverse tining is evident, so that would explain it.

The noise you hear under 40 is probably more to do with your tires than anything.

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

And uniform transverse tining on a bridge on the same route for comparison's sake: http://g.co/maps/f593n

[vtk]

The southwest quadrant of I-270 in Columbus is paved in PCC.  I think they're going to repave it soon, probably also in PCC – I conclude this because they appear to be preparing to run two-way traffic on one side of the freeway, with crossovers.  Curiously, these crossovers are also PCC, possibly even incorporating rebar.  Why build such durable pavement in a place where its usefulness is temporary?  Maybe I'm missing something...

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

Don't be fooled by crossovers.  Many agencies are going to crossovers regardless for worker safety reasons.  It could very well be an asphalt overlay; knowing Ohio, it will be.

[vtk]

Don't be fooled by crossovers.  Many agencies are going to crossovers regardless for worker safety reasons.  It could very well be an asphalt overlay; knowing Ohio, it will be.

I found a brief description of the project on ODOT's website. They will rebuild the highway one side at a time, with two-way traffic on the other side.  They will also be widening bridges; currently the highway (particularly its bridges) doesn't have full-width breakdown lanes on the left, as the current standards prefer when there are more than 2 lanes each way.  I don't know if the bridges will be widened to accommodate 4 lanes (plus full breakdown lanes), but that would be wise IMO.  If ODOT thinks widening the whole highway to 8 lanes (effectively paving the whole median) is likely within 15 years, and doesn't mind leaving the crossover pavement in place in the meantime, then building the crossovers for longevity makes sense.

[hm insulators]

They're putting rebar between the slabs which makes them less likely to shift out of place from one another.  Preventing that shifting also reduces the ka-thump ka-thump noise when you drive over the joints.

Additionally, the rebar between slabs helps to transfer the vehicle loads from one slab to the other. This improves durability, and reduces pivoting between the slabs. It also helps prevent blowout conditions where slabs angle upwards.

Often times, the slabs are tied together with rebar before initial concrete is poured. So the cuts that would be visible here when the project is finished would not be seen as in this case. When retrofitted as seen here, agencies usually only do some of the pavement (i.e. the lanes most likely to have trucks) as otherwise it might not be worth the effort.

They did the rebar on I-405 between California 55 and the El Toro "Y" some years ago.                                                                                               

[Mamba205]

Does transverse grooved concrete produce that annoying whine that I hear on concrete sections of I-5 in Oregon and on I-15 in Nevada?  If that's the case, then I'm glad Caltrans does not groove their concrete that way.

No, it doesn't.

And unless they do the transverse grooves completely wrong (i.e. try to "randomize" them to make it not whine - result is usually a polar extreme opposite of what they're going for - see Indiana concrete from the 1980s and 1990s, for instance) the whine is not annoying.  NY and PA did it right, with the grooves more or less evenly spaced.  I always found that noise more pleasant than the toneless growl of asphalt - cheap coarse asphalt especially

Hey US-43/72, I know exactly what you mean by "trying to randomize the grooves". This problem happened on some bridge decks here in Illinois on I-270, I-55/70, and Route 255 (all within ten miles of one another).

The grooves on the bridge decks I mentioned are not uniformly spaced, but they form a pattern that goes, wide-narrow-wide-narrow-wide-narrow. The pattern breaks, but then repeats again, and so on. The spacing between every other groove is 3 inches, so the pitch of the sound is three octaves lower than the "whining" sound on a typical transverse-grooved pavement with 1 inch spacing. Likewise, the texture or timbre of the sound is very unusual, almost sounding like an alien.

Here are some links to videos that I uploaded of the weird-sounding bridge pavement. Tell me if they sound similar to the ones in Indiana:

video one (going 63 mph) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etktVDvKhbc&feature=relmfu

video two (going slow 45 mph) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFFTIus8-NU&feature=channel_video_title

video three (going 63 mph) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaGqm-QAiMA&feature=channel_video_title

video four (also going 63) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvUF1Nma3Ec&feature=channel_video_title

[Indyroads]

While concrete lasts longer (much, much longer) than asphalt, when it rains, the spray kicked up by the vehicles can just about blind a driver.  Over the past 4-6 years, Caltrans has used a new type of asphalt on some Bay Area freeways (most notably US 101 between San Jose and S.F. and I-880 from San Jose to Hayward) that contains ground up tires mixed in with the asphalt.  This surface provides a nice smooth, quiet ride and when it rains, there is very minimal spray because the rubberized asphalt allows the rain water to drain through the pavement.  IIRC, I-880 was repaved about 5 years ago and the rubberized asphalt is still in very good condition.

Obviously, this type of pavement works in California due to our mild climate but I suspect it's not really an option in harsher climates (freezing cold or blistering heat).

It's not necessarily the rubber in the asphalt that allows the rain water to drain through the pavement. With asphalt pavements, the top layer or "lift" is often designed as open graded layer ("open grade" being rock material containing very small fines or pebbles and bigger rocks or crushed aggregate pieces). The open grade material bonds together with asphalt binder, but since there's no small stone material in the mix, the result is a top layer (typically about 2" thick for major roads) that is porous. This allows rainwater to drain down slightly from the pavement surface and travel between asphalt lifts off to the side of the road or gutter due to the natural cross slope of the roadway.

From what I remember the rain performance of this top layer of "open-graded" AC is superor to any other type of pavement, and acoustically the openings in the fines also cause the roadway surface to be very quiet indeed. However I remember that after just a few years 3-5 or so, this roadway surface had deteriorated down ehough that the noise was much louder to the more exposed agregate and also the rain performance was also greatly diminished. In these cases water spray from tires can actually be worse than PCC pavement. Since Open-graded asphalt has such improved safety benefits initially it seems to make sense to use it where possible although it will need to be replaced every 5-6 years versus 10-12 years for regular AC-Overlays. It is too bad that this pavement will not work for mountainuous or snowy regions as the freezing and thawing and plowing would likely damage the roadway after one or two seasons.

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

Hey US-43/72, I know exactly what you mean by "trying to randomize the grooves". This problem happened on some bridge decks here in Illinois on I-270, I-55/70, and Route 255 (all within ten miles of one another).

The grooves on the bridge decks I mentioned are not uniformly spaced, but they form a pattern that goes, wide-narrow-wide-narrow-wide-narrow. The pattern breaks, but then repeats again, and so on. The spacing between every other groove is 3 inches, so the pitch of the sound is three octaves lower than the "whining" sound on a typical transverse-grooved pavement with 1 inch spacing. Likewise, the texture or timbre of the sound is very unusual, almost sounding like an alien.

Here are some links to videos that I uploaded of the weird-sounding bridge pavement. Tell me if they sound similar to the ones in Indiana:

video one (going 63 mph) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etktVDvKhbc&feature=relmfu

video two (going slow 45 mph) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFFTIus8-NU&feature=channel_video_title

video three (going 63 mph) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaGqm-QAiMA&feature=channel_video_title

video four (also going 63) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvUF1Nma3Ec&feature=channel_video_title

Some of those bridge decks sound a lot like those in Tennessee, actually.  Nothing like Indiana.

[Mamba205]

Hey US-43/72, I know exactly what you mean by "trying to randomize the grooves". This problem happened on some bridge decks here in Illinois on I-270, I-55/70, and Route 255 (all within ten miles of one another).

The grooves on the bridge decks I mentioned are not uniformly spaced, but they form a pattern that goes, wide-narrow-wide-narrow-wide-narrow. The pattern breaks, but then repeats again, and so on. The spacing between every other groove is 3 inches, so the pitch of the sound is three octaves lower than the "whining" sound on a typical transverse-grooved pavement with 1 inch spacing. Likewise, the texture or timbre of the sound is very unusual, almost sounding like an alien.

Here are some links to videos that I uploaded of the weird-sounding bridge pavement. Tell me if they sound similar to the ones in Indiana:

video one (going 63 mph) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etktVDvKhbc&feature=relmfu

video two (going slow 45 mph) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFFTIus8-NU&feature=channel_video_title

video three (going 63 mph) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaGqm-QAiMA&feature=channel_video_title

video four (also going 63) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvUF1Nma3Ec&feature=channel_video_title

Some of those bridge decks sound a lot like those in Tennessee, actually.  Nothing like Indiana.

Some of those bridge decks sound a lot like those in Tennessee, actually.  Nothing like Indiana

Interesting. I'll have to make a trip to Tennessee. I do know of an area on I-70 in Indianapolis that makes a low-pitch "rumbling" or "wah wah wah" sound. I heard it on my way from Illinois to New Jersey and back last November.

Here's a link to that video of I-70 rumbling pavement in Indianapolis. Is this the sound you're talking about?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PqZxswqo2E&feature=channel_video_title

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

That spot is a good example, but try the left-most lane.  It's loudest there, I verified this when I was in Indy back in December 2010.  It's particularly bad on the southwest quadrant of 465, too. figured that out when I was on my way up to Wisconsin to pick up my latest car.

The tining, on I-70 here: http://g.co/maps/6bvcg

Next time I'm in Tennessee, I'll be sure to have my HD camcorder running for at least one bridge deck.

[Mamba205]

That spot is a good example, but try the left-most lane.  It's loudest there, I verified this when I was in Indy back in December 2010.  It's particularly bad on the southwest quadrant of 465, too. figured that out when I was on my way up to Wisconsin to pick up my latest car.

The tining, on I-70 here: http://g.co/maps/6bvcg

Next time I'm in Tennessee, I'll be sure to have my HD camcorder running for at least one bridge deck.

Here you can see the pattern in the grooves on an Illinois 255 bridge deck:

http://maps.google.com/?ll=38.792813,-90.045077&spn=0.001269,0.002747&t=m&z=19&vpsrc=6&layer=c&cbll=38.792687,-90.045078&panoid=lANgzrKpu1SK2sycBVKzSg&cbp=12,266.89,,3,26.55

This pattern was done on several bridges in the area, so the same weird "droning" sound is heard on them. The pattern of the grooves looks similar to the ones on I-465 and 70. I wonder why they even bother trying to randomize the spaces. It should be easy to avoid a pattern.

[roadfro]

I wonder why they even bother trying to randomize the spaces. It should be easy to avoid a pattern.

I don't think they're trying to randomize as much as they just want to avoid a consistent spacing. Having a consistent spacing starts to produce a harmonic vibration that can be harmful to the pavement over time due to, I believe, oscilation effects. It's for similar reasons that the expansion joints between adjacent PCC slabs in a lane are made at different lengths.

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

Here you can see the pattern in the grooves on an Illinois 255 bridge deck:

http://maps.google.com/?ll=38.792813,-90.045077&spn=0.001269,0.002747&t=m&z=19&vpsrc=6&layer=c&cbll=38.792687,-90.045078&panoid=lANgzrKpu1SK2sycBVKzSg&cbp=12,266.89,,3,26.55

This pattern was done on several bridges in the area, so the same weird "droning" sound is heard on them. The pattern of the grooves looks similar to the ones on I-465 and 70. I wonder why they even bother trying to randomize the spaces. It should be easy to avoid a pattern.

The tining on the Tennessee bridges looks basically identical, reinforcing my belief that they sound very similar.

I don't think they're trying to randomize as much as they just want to avoid a consistent spacing. Having a consistent spacing starts to produce a harmonic vibration that can be harmful to the pavement over time due to, I believe, oscilation effects. It's for similar reasons that the expansion joints between adjacent PCC slabs in a lane are made at different lengths.

I've only ever observed this in Kentucky, and only on their 1980s/90s pavements.  The newest KY concrete pavements have evenly spaced expansion joints, the western-most section of I-275 for instance.