1 / 15

GAUTRANS APT

This report provides a detailed cost-benefit analysis comparing the Heavy Vehicle Simulator (HVS) Mark III and Mark IV. Key findings include a 57% decrease in total production costs and a 50% increase in overall production capacity with the HVS Mark IV. Additionally, there are notable improvements in fuel consumption, down time, and load repetition costs. The report outlines testing methodologies and the strategic needs identified by the APT Steering Committee, emphasizing the importance of continued research and development in pavement engineering.

hadley-franco
Télécharger la présentation

GAUTRANS APT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GAUTRANS APT ELZBIETA SADZIK MAY 2002

  2. SPECIFICATIONS FOR HVS MARK III AND MARK IV

  3. COST BENEFIT: HVS III vs HVS IV • 57% Decrease in total production cost • 50 % Increase in production • 19% Decrease in Fuel consumption • 56% Decrease in down time

  4. Comparative Cost: HVS III vs HVS IV • HVS Mk III: 80 cents/load repetition • HVS Mk IV+: 50 cents/load repetition

  5. HVS testing sites

  6. Testing subjects

  7. HVS accompanied tests • Laboratory • Standard laboratory • Grading, Atterberg, OMC/MDD (untreated) • CBR, UCS, ITS • Advanced laboratory • Flexural beam test (FBT) • Static and dynamic triaxial (STT and DTT) • Durability • Permeability • Wheel-tracking erosion (WTE) and mechanical brush (MBT)

  8. HVS accompanied tests • Field • HVS • Material characterisation • Field moisture and density, environmental data • Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) • Deflection, permanent deformation and rut • LTPP • Visual evaluation • Deflections • Traffic survey

  9. Test matrix for foam-treated material

  10. Test matrix foremulsion-treated material

  11. HVS management Steering Committee Scope Prioritisation Needs Technical management Guidelines Proposals Reports Technical panel Review Pool

  12. Issues discussed • Unanimous agreement on historical benefit of HVS research for pavement engineering in South Africa and a need to continue • Needs identified: • Long-term research objective • Ad hoc needs (proof testing)

  13. “Steering Committee” identified needs • Cold-mix recycling • Rut-resistant solutions • Ultra-thin & thin concrete layers • Appropriate asphalt overlays & seals • New cement / high UCS layers

  14. “Steering Committee” identified needs • Composite pavements • Cost-effective solutions for low-volume roads • Risk assessment & management • Vehicle-pavement interaction

  15. Proposal • It is proposed that an APT Steering Committee be established as a sub-committee of the RPF

More Related