A Follow-up Evaluation of the Concrete Pavements (U.S. 58) Rehabilitated in 2012

About the report:

The Virginia Department of Transportation usually rehabilitates old concrete pavements with an asphalt overlay, making them composite pavements. In 2012, a portion of U.S. Route 58 west in Southampton, Virginia, received two additional treatment options: a bonded concrete overlay and an unbonded concrete overlay. Around the same time, the eastbound lanes of the same area received the traditional treatment of asphalt overlay. This rehabilitation provided an opportunity to compare the performance of all three treatment options.

U.S. Route 58 is a four-lane divided primary highway built in 1988 with an 8-inch-thick continuously reinforced concrete pavement. The Virginia Transportation Research Council evaluated the performance of these sections after 12 years of traffic. This evaluation included visual observation of surface distresses, district maintenance records, Virginia Department of Transportation pavement management system condition rating, ride quality, skid resistance, and falling weight deflectometer testing to measure the structural health of the pavement. The investigation confirmed that the service lives of deteriorated continuously reinforced concrete pavements can be extended through an unbonded concrete or asphalt overlay, leading to improved safety and satisfaction of travelers and providing a cost-effective approach compared with the replacement or reconstruction of the distressed pavement.

_{Disclaimer Statement:The contents of this report reflect the views of the author(s), who is responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Commonwealth Transportation Board, or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Any inclusion of manufacturer names, trade names, or trademarks is for identification purposes only and is not to be considered an endorsement.}

Authors