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 (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/ (http://www.kltv.com/2019/03/11/van-fire-department-warns-sinkhole-inside-lane-i-mile-marker/)
Appears original concrete pavement slab prevented left lane from dropping into the hole.
Hence the reason why an interstate should never be blacktopped.
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
Quote from: Verlanka on March 23, 2019, 10:45:27 AM
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
Ce-ment ;)
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.