I-20 EB Closed Near Van, TX Due To Collapse of Hidden Washout

Started by Brian556, March 13, 2019, 02:26:44 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Brian556

I-20 EB was closed near Van, TX when the road surface above a hidden washout collapsed. Water somehow got behind the concrete slope at the end of a bridge over a creek and hollowed it out. Luckily the collapse started on the left shoulder. TxDOT Road Conditions Site shows it has re-opened, but only one lane is open.

https://www.inforney.com/local-news/eastbound-interstate-closed-in-van-zandt-county-due-to-a/article_6cb397ec-4463-11e9-98d2-b7af89cdda17.html
http://www.kltv.com/2019/03/11/van-fire-department-warns-sinkhole-inside-lane-i-mile-marker/


DJStephens

Appears original concrete pavement slab prevented left lane from dropping into the hole.   

cjk374

Hence the reason why an interstate should never be blacktopped.
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

Verlanka

Quote from: cjk374 on March 23, 2019, 10:12:16 AM
Hence the reason why an interstate should never be blacktopped.

What should they use instead? Bricks? :-D

US71

Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

DJStephens

Strongly prefer concrete pavement also.  But it is just awfully darn expensive.   Much of the original Interstate mileage was indeed concrete.  A lot had a short life however due to improper mix designs, alkali-silica reactions, and poor placement in the field.   

cjk374

Quote from: DJStephens on March 23, 2019, 05:02:00 PM
Strongly prefer concrete pavement also.  But it is just awfully darn expensive.   Much of the original Interstate mileage was indeed concrete.  A lot had a short life however due to improper mix designs, alkali-silica reactions, and poor placement in the field.   

Expensive, yes. But you get more bang for the buck when a proper mix is created and properly applied in the field. The best example I know of is I-20 in Louisiana between MP 81.1  and MP 85.5. Reworked between 1993 and 1995, this slab looks brand new to this day. The base on the WB side is black top while the base on the EB side is pugmill. The dirt underneath both sides was reworked as well.

From MP 85.5  to MP 92.8 was reworked in the mid to late 80s. It, too, is holding up remarkably well.

The original concrete that was replaced by everything mentioned above was only 30 years old or less.
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

US71

What's the average life of asphalt vs concrete? It would seem to me that concrete would last longer, but how does it compare cost-wise?

Everyone worries about what it will cost today not 5 years from now.  Is is cheaper to lay new asphalt every 3-4 years than have concrete that lasts 10 years?

Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

rte66man

Quote from: US71 on March 23, 2019, 11:28:46 PM
What's the average life of asphalt vs concrete? It would seem to me that concrete would last longer, but how does it compare cost-wise?

Everyone worries about what it will cost today not 5 years from now.  Is is cheaper to lay new asphalt every 3-4 years than have concrete that lasts 10 years?

As mentioned upthread, if the base isn't done right, it won't matter which one you use as it will fail long before it should.

It seems to me that many DOTs are skimping on base these days.  I drove the recently completed Duncan, OK southern bypass extension.  It felt like they graded the bed and threw a thin layer of asphalt down for the road.  I'm betting there will be failures within 5 years.
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

Bobby5280

Oklahoma is certainly not the place to be cutting corners on any elements of highway construction. We have a lot of red clay soil through much of the state. It's really prevalent the closer you get to the Red River. That type of soil is notorious for being unstable and very unforgiving of short cuts in construction. It doesn't matter if it's a highway, residential home, commercial building, etc.

longhorn

Quote from: cjk374 on March 23, 2019, 09:07:23 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on March 23, 2019, 05:02:00 PM
Strongly prefer concrete pavement also.  But it is just awfully darn expensive.   Much of the original Interstate mileage was indeed concrete.  A lot had a short life however due to improper mix designs, alkali-silica reactions, and poor placement in the field.   

Same can be said of I-10 between Lake Charles and Baton Rouge. I remember as a kid in the 70s when they laid the concrete. Same concrete (though bumpy and some whoopty dos) doing its job.
Expensive, yes. But you get more bang for the buck when a proper mix is created and properly applied in the field. The best example I know of is I-20 in Louisiana between MP 81.1  and MP 85.5. Reworked between 1993 and 1995, this slab looks brand new to this day. The base on the WB side is black top while the base on the EB side is pugmill. The dirt underneath both sides was reworked as well.

From MP 85.5  to MP 92.8 was reworked in the mid to late 80s. It, too, is holding up remarkably well.

The original concrete that was replaced by everything mentioned above was only 30 years old or less.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.