FHWA’s Vision for Performance
Engineered Concrete Mixtures and
Quality Assurance Program
Gina Ahlstrom
Pavement Design and Analysis Team Leader
Office of Asset Management, Pavements, and Construction
Vision and Motivation
• Implement the adoption of Performance Engineered
Concrete Mixtures and provide guidance on
concrete QA
• Why Now?
▫ MAP-21 legislation focuses on performance
▫ Desire by Public Agencies and Industry to move
toward performance
 Optimized mixture designs (gradation, cement content,
cont.)
 Improved durability
 Sustainability
ETG /
Champion
States
Concrete Pavement Performance System
Pave Spec Tool?
Performance Spec
for Concrete
Pavements
Mixtures
Guidance on
Performance Specs
Guidance on Test
Methods
• Education
• You Tube videos
• One Pagers
• FHWA MCL
Support
Champion States
QA
Program
State Acceptance
Concrete Pavement QA Toolkit
• Tabbed notebook or manual organized
by test
o Test description, test frequency,
guidance on implementing tests
Pave Spec Tool?
Contractor QC
Concrete Pavement QA
Toolkit
• Template QC Plan (as part
of the QA Toolkit)
• FHWA
MCL
FHWA Research
Performance Related Specifications
For Construction
PaveSpec 4.1 Software Tool
Richard B. Duval, P.E.
Construction Research Engineer
FHWA-TFHRC
5
Performance Specifications
(ref. SHRP2 R07)
Scott et al. 2013. Performance Specifications for Rapid Highway Renewal. SHRP2 R07.
6
Specifications have Different
Risk Profiles
100
Risk
Owner
Contractor
0
Method
End-Result
QC/QA
Performance/
Warranty
Type of Specification
7
What Is PRS?
Performance Related Specifications
“QA specifications that describe the desired
levels of key materials and construction
quality characteristics that have been found
to correlate with fundamental engineering
properties that predict performance”
Transportation Research Circular Number E-C137 Glossary of Highway Quality Assurance Terms
8
What Is PRS?
Performance-Related Specifications
“…employ the quantified relationships
containing the characteristics to predict asconstructed pavement performance. They
thus provide the basis for rational
acceptance/pay adjustment decisions.”
Transportation Research Circular Number E-C137 Glossary of Highway Quality Assurance Terms
9
Performance-Related
Specifications Benefits
 Are measureable (more rapid the better)
 Have been found to correlate with performance
(prediction models required)
 Are under contractor’s control (can be varied on
a project)
 Can be used to compute incentives and
disincentives
10
PRS Field Trials &
Implementations

Iowa: Shadow spec project in 1996
Tests made and PF
computed according to
PRS, but results did not
affect pay or acceptance





New Mexico: Shadow spec project in 1997






Florida: Full spec project I-295 (Jacksonville) in 2003
Missouri: Shadow spec project in 1997
Kansas: Shadow spec project in 1997
Wisconsin: Shadow spec project in 1997
Indiana: Full spec projects I-465 (Indianapolis), I-65 (Clarksville), and I-70
(Indianapolis) in 2000-2003
Tennessee: Full project I-65 (Nashville) in 2004
Wisconsin: Full project I-39/90/94 (Madison) in 2006 and another in 2011
Illinois Tollway: Shadow project I-90 (west of Chicago) in 2013 (PaveSpec 4.0)
Illinois Tollway: FULL IMPLMENTATION in 2015 > (PaveSpec 4.1)
Future Shadow Implementation Georgia, Missouri, Colorado Concrete
Pavements
11
How PRS Works (contd.)
Use Specifications
Incorporate Pay Tables
Into Specifications &
Project Letting
Pavement Construction,
Sampling, and Testing
Incentive and
Disincentive Pay
12
Pavement
Design
How PRS Works
SOFTWARE
Planning
Establish Performance
Criteria
Identify AQCs and
Target Values
Design AQC vs.
As-Constructed AQC
Design
Constructed
Pay Factor
Time
Compare As-Built
and As-Designed
Model
Performance
Value of
Performance – M&R
13
Concrete Performance
Related Specifications (PRS)
Performance Spec
for Concrete
Pavements
Mixtures
Pavement
Design
Planning
ETG /
Champion
States
Concrete Pavement
Performance System
Guidance on
Performance Specs
Pave Spec Tool?
• Education
• Workshops
Establish
Performance
Criteria
Identify
AQCs /
Target
Values
Guidance on Test Methods
• You Tube videos
• One Pagers
• MCL Support
14
Champion States
QA
Program
State Acceptance
Concrete Pavement QA Toolkit
• Tabbed notebook or manual organized
by test
o Test description, test frequency,
guidance on implementing tests
Pave Spec Tool?
SOFTWARE
PaveSpec 4.1
Design AQC vs.
As-Constructed AQC
• MCL
Contractor QC
Concrete Pavement QA
Toolkit
o Template QC Plan (as
part of the QA Toolkit)
Model Performance
15
Design
Constructed
Compare As-Built
and As-Designed
Time
Pay Factor
16
1 Design
17
28-Day Strength PF Curve
18
Entrained Air Content PF Curve
19
Field Shadow Implementation Results
Acceptance
Quality
Characteristic,
AQC
Slab Thickness,
in
Lot Target Values
Lot 1
8/23/2013
Lot 2
8/27/2013
Lot 3
9/4/2013
Mean
Pay Factor
Pay Factor
Pay Factor
11.25
102.48
101.73
102.29
Concrete 28-day
Compressive
Strength, psi
6,300
100.66
100.74
100.06
Effective Dowel
Diameter, in
1.475
100.00
99.99
100.00
Air Content, %
6.5
99.95
99.87
99.76
Initial IRI, in/mi*
75*
103.05
101.71
103.26
Composite Pay Factor
106.2
Average Pay Factor for the3 Lots
104.1
105.4
105.3
* Converted from measured Profile Index
20
Field Shadow Implementation Results
Lot 1
8/23/2013
Lot 2
8/27/2013
Lot 3
9/4/2013
Lot Area, sq. yd.
7,561.11
Bid Price, $/ sq. yd.
60
Lot Bid Amount, $
453,667
Composite Pay Factor
106.2
Agency/Contractor Share
0.5
Factor*
Effective Composite Pay
103.1
Factor
Total Amount, $
481,794
Lot Incentive, $
$14,063
Total Incentive for the 3 Lots
6,282.33
60
376,940
104.1
8,000.00
60
480,000
105.4
0.5
0.5
102.05
102.7
392,394
$7,727
505,920
$12,960
$37,751
•
•
Assuming 50/50 sharing of agency/contractor risk and reward due to PRS implementation.
Previous PRS projects, all of pay factor has gone to contractor to provide greater incentive.
21
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
Leveraging Quality with the
FHWA Mobile Concrete Lab
Michael F. Praul, P.E.
Senior Concrete Engineer
FHWA Office of Asset Management,
Pavements, and Construction
Module 2
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
FHWA Mobile Concrete Laboratory
 Technology Transfer to SHA’s




Field demos on active projects
Equipment loan
Technician training in test
performance
Conferences and workshops
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
MCL Focus Areas
 Nondestructive/In-situ
 Quality
Tests
Assurance
 Performance Related Spec’s
 AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design
 Sustainability
 Performance Engineered Mixtures
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
Moving to Performance
 MAP-21
 Performance Engineered Mixture Specification
 Industry’s P2P Initiative
 Demographics in “Our World”
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
MCL Visits in the Past
 Set up on site
 Perform testing and
collect data
 Open house,
technology sharing,
technical guidance
 Issue report
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
Leveraging Quality with Future Visits
 Same activities as in the past
• Link effort to FHWA QA Stewardship Reviews
 Changes in the report
• Closeout meeting with Division and State, including
•
•
•
•
leadership from both (in person/web
meeting/teleconference)
Encourage performance specification
Risk analysis portion of report
Encourage Division to assess risks in the context of their
overall program
Action plan
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
Leverage Quality with PEM
Implementation
 PEM specification should be ready for prime time
soon
 QA Toolkit to assist with PEM implementation
• Early stages
• Will include guidance for using tests and incorporating
them into state acceptance program
• Guidance for QC applications
 MCL testing
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
 Two-day workshop on Quality Construction and the
benefits a Quality Assurance Program
• Increase concrete pavements life at reduced cost
• Contactor benefits of improved Quality Control
• New technologies and tools for testing and inspection
 Agency and Contractor Participation
•
•
•
•
Class size 30 to encourage discussion
DOT (Materials and Construction Staff)
Contractor staff (Superintendents, QC Managers, etc.)
FHWA Division Office Staff
Past Workshops
ME
WA
NH
MT
ND
OR
ID
WY
CA
(2)
NV
(2)
UT
AZ
(2)
CO
NM
WI
SD
NE
KS
OK
TX
VT
MN
MI
(2)
NY
PA (2)
IL
IN OH
(2)
WV
VA
MO
KY
NC
TN
AR
SC
MS AL GA
LA
IA
FL
AK
HI
RI
NJ
DE
MD
Quality in the Concrete Paving Process
For More Information:
• Gina Ahlstrom (Performance Concrete Mixtures,
FHWA concrete program, design & analysis)
gina.ahlstrom@dot.gov
202-366-4612
• Richard Duval (Pave Spec)
richard.duvall@dot.gov
202-463-3365
• Mike Praul (FHWA Mobile Concrete Lab)
michael.praul@dot.gov
207-512-4917