4 Jeff Roesler - Ensayo Acelerado Losas TCP

8/18/2019 4 Jeff Roesler - Ensayo Acelerado Losas TCP

1/104

SEMINARIO INTERNACIONALTECNOLOGÍA E INNOVACIÓN

EN PAVIMENTOS DE CONCRETO

LIMA 29 MARZO 2010

ORGANIZADO POR:


2/104

ENSAYO ACELERADO DE

PAVIMENTOS DE CONCRETOCON LOSAS OPTIMIZADA

Jeffery Roesler, Ph.D., P.E.

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

Profesor Visitante

Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

Departamento de Ingeniería y Gestión de la Construcción

Lima, Peru

29 de Marzo 2010


3/104

Concrete Slabs with Optimized Geometry

Acknowledgements

University of Illinois (UIUC)

Victor Cervantes, M.S

Armen Amirkhanian, Tyler Waddle

Professor Jose Balbo (Sabbatical at UIUC- Summer 2008)

University of São Paulo

RESEARCH SPONSORS

TCPavements, Limitada (Santiago, CHILE)

Juan Pablo Covarrubias T, Juan Pablo Covarrubias V

Patente Industrial en Chile N° 44820-2009

U.S. Patent: N° 7,571,581

World Organization of Intellectual Property (PCT/EP2006/064732)

www.tcpavements.com

http://www.tcpavements.com/http://www.tcpavements.com/


4/104

Concrete Slabs with Optimized Geometry:

Design Concept

Concrete slabs designed and constructed such that

only one set of truck wheels rest on a single slab

Reduced slab tensile stresses or allowable wheel loads

increase

Thinner concrete pavements (7 to 10 cm less than

traditional AASHTO design)

Lower initial construction costs


5/104

Concrete Slabs with Optimized GeometryPavement Design Features Evaluated

Short slabs (


6/104

Research Objectives at Univ. of Illinois

Concrete Slabs w/ Optimized Geometry:

Conduct full-scale accelerated pavement tests ofthinner concrete pavements

Slab responses

Failure patterns

Fatigue performance (cracking and joint)

Full-scale evaluation

Fatigue life of 9, 15, & 20cm slab thickness

1.8mx1.8m slab size

Stabilized and unstabilized base layer Fiber vs. no fibers

Edge vs. wheel path loading

Full-scale results for design software validation


7/104

Concrete Slab Test Sections

Constructed

1.8m

1.8m

40m’Plain concrete

Fiber reinforced

concrete

(a)

free edge 1

2

h= 10cm h= 15 cm

1.8m

1.8m

40m

(b)

1

2

free edge

h= 15 cm h= 20 cm

1.8m

1.8m

40m

(c)

1

2

free edge

h= 9cm h= 9cm

ACB

Concrete

~18cm

h

1.8m 1.8m

(a)

15cmAggregate Base

Nonwoven geotextile

Concrete h

1.8m 1.8m

(b)

22 slabs per sectionOnly 14 slabs loaded


8/104

University of Illinois: Full-Scale

Testing Facilities (ATREL)


9/104

Subgrade Preparation


10/104

Geotextile and Granular Base

Compaction


11/104

Asphalt Concrete Milling (Section 1)


12/104

Concrete Mixture Design

Material Quantity (kg/m3)

Coarse Aggregate 1128

Fine Aggregate 720

Cement 250

Fly Ash (Type C) 83

Water 140

STRUX 90/40 Fibers 3.6

Daracem 19* 26 (Fl oz/ yd3)

w/cm = 0.42

Flexural Streng th

= 6.7 MPa


13/104

Prior to Concrete Casting


14/104

Casting Day – October 15, 2007


15/104

Final Concrete

Placement


16/104

Sawcutting Operation


17/104

Steel Pins for Lateral Restraint


18/104

Concrete Pavement Test Sections

Before Loading


19/104

Instrumentation Layout


20/104

Instrumentation Types

STRAIN GAGESThermocouples


21/104

FWD TestingNovember 2007

0.1 mm = 4 mils


22/104

(Advanced Transportation Loading ASsembly)

ATLAS


23/104

ATLAS Dimensions and Weight

Main Beams

Carriage

Winch

Track System Track System

End Weldment

Engine &

Hydraulics

Total =80,000 kg

38m

End Weldment

3.6m


24/104

Summary of ATLAS Features

Load capacity: 350 kN

Dual tires: load to 80 kN

Aircraft tire: load to 310 kN

26m traffic length (20m at 14 kph) Uni- or Bi-directional

Adjustable lateral position


25/104

ATLaS: Wheel Loads

Duals

44kN

90kN

Aircraft

44kN

90kN

130kN

220kN


26/104

Project Site in January 2008

D fl ti S (LVDT ) 9


27/104

Deflection Sensors (LVDTs) – 9cm

Sections


28/104

Edge Loading – 9 cm Slabs


29/104

ACCELERATEDPAVEMENT

TESTING

January 2008

•229,000 ESALs without any cracking•Frozen base/subgrade (CBR~100)


30/104

How do you calculate ESALs for

Accelerated Pavement Tests?

P = wheel load (kN)

n = number of passes of wheel load (P)

= wander magnifications factor (e.g., max. 20)

2.4

40

PnESAL


31/104

Determinations of Magnification

Factor ( ) for Channelized Traffic

4

225000 MOR

N n

a

)18(allow

e

)n(allow

e

N

n

N

n

Vesic and Saxena (1969) – AASHO Road Test


32/104

Section 3B – 9 cm FRC

TENSILE STRAIN

8 mm - F iber R einforced C onc reteS trains - Winter

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000

Passes

i c r o s t r a i n

58 E

59 J

59 E

40kN22kN

Winter 2008


33/104

Deflection Measurement Definition

8 L

8 M

8 R

N


34/104

Section 3A – 9 cm Plain Concrete

VERTICAL DEFLECTIONS

G ranular Bas e - 8mm - P lain C onc rete

V E R T I C AL L V DT S

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000

Passes

D e f l e c t i o n s ( i n 51 M

51 R

52 L

52 M

52 R

53 L

Winter 2008

40kN22kN


35/104

Section 3B – 9 cm FRC


G ranular Bas e - 8 mm F ibers R einforc ed C onc reteV E R TIC A L L V DTS

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000

P asses

D e f l e c t i o n s ( i n 57 R

58 L

58 M

58 R

59 L

59 M

Winter 2008

40kN22kN


36/104

April 2008 – Spring-time Loading

Near edge trafficking

Soil has low CBR 4


37/104

Plain (slabs 49 to 55)

FRC (slabs 56 to 62)

Section 3 (South)

9 cm Edge Loading (22, 40, 53 kN)

March 2009

Fibers Plain Concrete


38/104

SECTION 3 (South)

CRACK DEVELOPMENT

4/19/08 4/21/08 Final

193,000 ESALs 234,000 ESALs235,000 ESALs

9 c m -

F R C

9 c m

- P l a i n

S f C k d Sl b (9


39/104

Summary of Cracked Slabs (9

cm)*Passes*

kN40

LoadESAL

2.4

Load(kN)

PassesCumulative

PassesESALs

CumulativeESALs

Cracks9 cm

Plain /Granular

Cracks9cm FRC /Granular

22 2,643 2,643 4,477 4,477 0/7 0/722 2,778 5,421 4,706 9,183 0/7 0/7

40 3,000 8,421 60,000 69,183 0/7 0/7

40 309 8,730 6,180 75,363 0/7 0/7

40 5,875 14,605 117,500 192,863 4/7 1/7

40 2,053 16,658 41,060 233,923 4/7 2/7

53 10 16,668 670 234,592 7/7 3/7

Total 16,668 234,592 7/7 3/7

Cracking on 9 cm Section


40/104

Cracking on 9 cm Section


41/104

Section 3A (South)

9 cm Plain Concrete


8 mm - Plain Concrete - Vertical LVDT - Spring

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000

Passes

R e b o u n d D e f l e c t i o n ( i n )

51 M

51 R

52 L

52 M

52 R

53 L

40 kN22 kN

53 kN

S ti 3B (S th)


42/104

Section 3B (South)

9 cm FRC


8 mm - Fiber Reinforce Concrete - Vertical LVDT - Spring

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000

Passes

R

e b o u n d D e f l e c t i o n

( i n )

57 R

58 L

58 M

58 R

59 L

59 M

40 kN22 kN53 kN

Section 3 – (South)


43/104

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0 5000 10000 15000

E f f i c i e n c y ( % )

Passes

Section 3 - LTE

Joint 51

Joint 58

Section 3 (South)

9 cm PCC & FRC

LOAD TRANSFER EFFICIENCY

40 kN22 kN

53 kN


44/104

Section 3 – North

9 cm Longitudinal Joint (40 kN)

March 12, 2009

FRC Plain

Longitudinal Joint


45/104

Section 3 (North) Wheel Path Loading

Final Crack Map

9 c m -

F R C

9 c m - P

l a i n

4700 ESALs 64,000 ESALs

Slab 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

Slab 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

Slab 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

Slab 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

48,000 ESALs

Slab 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

Slab 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

P Sl b C ki


46/104

Percent Slab Cracking:

9 cm Concrete Slabs with/without Fibers

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.00E+00 5.00E+04 1.00E+05 1.50E+05 2.00E+05 2.50E+05

ESALs

C r a c k e d S l a b s (

% )

Plain (South)

FRC (South)

Plain, Wheel Path(North)

FRC, Wheel Path(North)

Plain, Longitudinal(North)

FRC, Longitudinal(North)


47/104

SECTION 2 (North)

CRACK FORMATION

Slab 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

Slab 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

5/5/08 5/9/08 5/10/08 5/12/08

14 Million ESALs 17.2 Million ESALs 19.2 Million ESALs 19.6 Million ESALs

2 0 c m

1 5 c m

SECTION 2 (S h) 5 d 20


48/104

SECTION 2 (South) - 15 and 20cm

Summary of Cracked Slabs

Load

(kN)Passes

Cumulative

Passes

Cumulative

ESALs

Cracks

15 cm /

Granular

Cumulative

ESALs

Cracks

20 cm /

Granular

40 7287 12,662 139,182 0/7 118,778 0/7

66 6150 13,437 1,143,042 0/7 975,476 0/7

89 10,227 23,664 6,731,462 0/7 5,744,651 0/7

111 6995 30,659 16,489,232 2/7 14,071,963 0/7

111 2651 33,310 20,187,281 3/7 17,227,889 0/7

111 1655 34,965 22,495,945 3/7 19,198,111 0/7156 75 35,040 22,925,840 4/7 19,564,984 0/7

TOTAL 35,040 4/7 0/7

15 and 20 cm Cracking Performance


49/104

15 and 20 cm Cracking Performance

Section 2A (South)


50/104

( )

15cm Plain Concrete

TENSILE STRAINS

S ection 2A - S train

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000

Passes

i c r o s t r a i n

30J

30E

31J

31E

40kN 67kN 89kN 111kN 156kN

150 mm - Strain

Section 2B (South)


51/104

( )

20cm Plain Concrete

TENSILE STRAINS

S E C TION 2B - S train

0

50

10 0

15 0

20 0

25 0

30 0

35 0

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000

Passes

i c r o s t r a i n

37 J

37 E

38 J

38 E

200 mm - Strain

40kN 67kN 89kN 111kN 156kN

Section 2A (South)


52/104

( )

15cm Plain Concrete


S E C T ION 2A - VE R T IC AL L V DT S

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000

P a sse s

R e b o u n d D e f l e c t i o

n s ( i n

29R

30L

30M

30R

31L

31M

150 mm

40kN 67kN 89kN 111kN 156kN

Section 2B (South)


53/104

( )

20cm Plain Concrete


S E C T IO N 2B - VE R T IC A L L V DT S

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000

Passe s

R e b o u n d D e f l e c t

i o n s ( i n

36 R

37 L

37 M

37 R

38 L

38 M

200 mm

40kN 67kN 89kN 111kN 156kN

S i 2 (S h)


54/104

Section 2 (South)


S ection 2 - LT E

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000

Passes

E f f i c i e n c y (

J oint 29

J oint 30

J oint 36

J oint 37

40kN 67kN 89kN 111kN 156kN

Permanent Deformation


55/104

Section 2a – 15cm Plain Concrete

40 kN Wheel Load

9 kips loading test - Section 2a - VERTICAL LVDTS - Permanent or Plastic Deformation

-0.07

-0.06

-0.05

-0.04

-0.03

-0.02

-0.01

0

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

Passes

D I S P L A C E

E N T ( i n c h e s

LVDT 1 LVDT 2 LVDT 3 LVDT 4 LVDT 5 LVDT 6

S i 2 (N h)


56/104

Slab 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Slab 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

Section 2 (North)

CRACK FORMATION

April 2009

51 Million ESALs

17 Million ESALs

2 0

c m

1 5 c m

P t Sl b C ki


57/104


15 cm and 20 cm Concrete Slabs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.00E+00 1.00E+07 2.00E+07 3.00E+07 4.00E+07 5.00E+07 6.00E+07

ESALs

15cm (South)

20cm (South)

15cm (North)

20cm (North)

% S

l a b s C r a c k e d


58/104

Section 1 (10 cm and 15 cm)

Concrete Slabs on Asphalt Concrete Base

Asphalt Concrete

Concrete

21.5cm & 14cm

h=10cm & 15cm

1.8m 1.8m

(a)

1.8m

1.8m

40m’ Plain concreteFiber reinforced

concrete

(a)

free edge 1

2

h=10cm h= 15 cm

1.8m

1.8m


concrete

(a)

free edge 1

21.8m

1.8m


concrete

(a)

free edge 1

21.8m1.8m

1.8m1.8m

40m’40m’40m’ Plain concreteFiber reinforced

concretePlain concrete

Fiber reinforced

concrete

(a)

free edge 11

22

h=10cm h= 15 cm

SECTION 1 (S th) A h lt B


59/104

Slab 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Slab 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

SECTION 1 (South) – Asphalt Base

CRACK FORMATION

57.5 Million ESALs

1 5 c m

1 0 c m

SECTION 1 (South) 10 and 15 cm


60/104

SECTION 1 (South) - 10 and 15 cm


Load

(lb)Passes

Cumulative

PassesESALs

Cumulative

ESALs

Cracks10 cm /

Asphalt

Cracks15 cm /

Asphalt

9,000 2,506 2,506 50,120 50,120 0 0

15,000 2,500 5,006 427,302 477,422 0 0

18,000 2,500 7,506 918,959 1,396,381 0 0

21,000 3,499 11,005 2,457,403 3,853,784 0 0

25,000 1,126 12,131 1,644,742 5,498,526 1 0

25,000 1,211 13,342 1,768,901 7,267,428 2 0

28,000 2,300 15,642 5,407,581 12,675,009 5 0

31,000 2,200 17,842 7,931,462 20,606,471 5 0

34,000 25 17,867 132,850 20,739,321 5 0

35,000 2,730 20,597 16,385,507 37,124,828 6 1

35,000 1,170 21,767 7,022,360 44,147,188 7 1

33,000 1,642 23,409 7,697,384 51,844,572 7 1

33,000 347 23,756 1,626,670 53,471,243 7 1

33,000 274 24,030 1,284,460 54,755,703 7 1

33,000 62 24,092 290,644 55,046,347 7 1

35,000 416 24,508 2,496,839 57,543,186 7 1

Total 24,508 5.75E+07 7/7 1/7

Section 1 (South)


61/104

10 & 15 cm Plain Concrete

TENSILE STRAINS

35kips

33kips

35kips

31kips25kips

28kips21kips

18 kips9 kips

15 kips

Section 1A (South)


62/104

10 cm Plain Concrete


35kips

33kips

35kips

31kips25kips

28kips21kips

18 kips9 kips

15 kips

S ti 1 (S th)


63/104

Section 1 (South)


SECTION 1 (North) Asphalt Base


64/104

Slab 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Slab 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

SECTION 1 (North) – Asphalt Base

CRACK FORMATION

69.3 Million ESALs

1 5 c m

1 0 c m

SECTION 1 (North) 10 and 15 cm


65/104

SECTION 1 (North) - 10 and 15 cm


Load

(lb)Passes

Cumulative

PassesESALs

Cumulative

ESALs

Cracks

10cm. / Asphalt

Cracks

15 cm / Asphalt

9,000 2,700 2,700 54,000 54,000 0 0

15,000 2,500 5,200 427,302 481,302 0 0

21,000 2,230 7,430 1,566,164 2,047,466 6 0

21,000 270 7,700 189,625 2,237,092 6 0

25,000 136 7,836 198,654 2,435,746 6 0

25,000 2,680 10,516 3,914,662 6,350,408 7 0

30,000 4,870 15,386 15,298,529 21,648,938 7 0

*Trafficking on 6 in. slabs only.

35,000 500 15,886 3,001,009 24,649,946 7 1

35,000 1,000 16,886 6,002,017 30,651,964 7 1

35,000 3,500 20,386 21,007,061 51,659,024 7 2

35,000 2,954 23,340 17,729,959 69,388,983 7 4

Total 23,340 69,388,983 7/7 4/7

Section 1 10 cm Slabs


66/104

Section 1 - 10 cm Slabs

Fatigue Cracking Failure

NorthLarger amount of

moisture present

South

P Sl b C ki


67/104


10 and 15 cm Slabs on Asphalt Concrete

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.0E+00 1.0E+07 2.0E+07 3.0E+07 4.0E+07 5.0E+07 6.0E+07 7.0E+07 8.0E+07

ESALs

10cm (South)

15cm (South)

10cm (North)

15cm (North)

% S

l a b s C r a c k e

d


68/104

Application for Overloaded Vehicles

20 cm slabs

51 million ESALs without cracks

16 t wheel load (155kN) for 8,000 passes

Laboratory slab capacity tests: 10 & 15cm

9 cm Peak Loads (FRC)

80 kN

15 cm Peak Loads

100 to 145 kN

Concrete Slab Size effect?

Thinner slabs are nominally stronger

Bazant et al.


69/104

9cm and 15cm

Concrete Slab Tests

1.8 x1.8m slab geometry


70/104

Test DataSlab Load Capacity

Maximum Allowed Single

wheel Load ≈ 40 kN

9cm

15cm


71/104

Effect of Support Layer Stiffness

Soil CBR has large impact on cracking especiallyfor thinner slabs (~10cm)

Frozen soil test (or granular soil)

Spring thaw test

Spring test

Base type has a tremendous effect on fatigue life

of slab

Granular base vs. asphalt concrete base

Effects of Structural Fibers on Slab


72/104

Effects of Structural Fibers on Slab

Performance

Verified previous finding on fibers influence onconcrete slab resistance to cracking

Four benefits of structural fibers:

Extend fatigue life

Slow rate of crack deterioration

Promote load transfer

Eliminate need for lateral restraint pins

Economical feasible for slabs < 15 cm to 20 cm (?)


73/104

Lateral Restraint Pins

Use fibers in concrete

How did the Joints Perform?


74/104

How did the Joints Perform?

Are dowels needed at high traffic levels?

What was the long term load transfer? Will faulting or slab misalignment?

Did fibers help joint performance?

S ection 2 - LT E

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000

Passes

E f f i c i e n c y (

J oint 29

J oint 30

J oint 36

J oint 37

40kN 67kN 89kN 111kN 156kN

Slab Response Analysis


75/104

Slab Response Analysis

ISLAB2000 vs. Measured

Deflection basins match reasonable well

FWD results

Moving wheel load

Predicted strains are slightly higher than

measured

Built-in curling ~ -5C


76/104

Summary of Testing

9 cm section with high CBR (frozen soil) 230,000 ESALs w/o cracks

9 cm section cracks began in Spring 2008

75,000 and 193,000 ESALs

Fiber reinforced concrete outperformed plain

concrete (9 cm)

Free edge, wheel path, longitudinal joint Less cracks

More functional after cracks


77/104

Summary, con’t

15 cm fatigue cracking performance

12 million ESALs on granular base (average)

30 million ESALs on asphalt concrete base (average)

20 cm no fatigue cracks at 51 million ESALs

Permanent deformation caused cracking

Base/subgrade

CBR = 3 to 4 of soil

Higher deformations initially at joints with wide cracks

No transverse faulting measured under APT

Practical Observations:


78/104

Practical Observations:

Keys to Slab System Performance

No pumping of base/soil layer Lower fines content in base layer

Low permanent deformation of base/soil

min. thickness = 15 cm

Full-support of slab

Limited curling

Structural Fibers for slabs

< 15 cm to 20cm (?)

Edge support shoulder or curb/gutter

Will improve fatigue life

Concrete Slab vs. Beam failure!

Questions / Comments


79/104

Q

[email protected]

217-265-0218

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


80/104


81/104

Recent Projects with

Optimized Slab GeometryDesign Concept


82/104

Ruta 5: km-251

• Condiciones actuales

– CTB con Kc = 137 Mpa/m

– Espesor 22cm -23 cm

• TCP Design

–

50.000.000 EE – 16 cm

– Hormigón 4,8 Mpa Flexotracción

– 10 % losas agrietadas como umbral de diseño

– 2 m x 1.75 m

– Corte delgado sin Sello

– Sin fierros, solo en junta de construcción

– Pines laterales de confinamientos

Ruta 5: km-251


83/104


84/104

Caso 2: Sodimac (Chile)

CBR 15%

60 cm CBR 40% Plataforma

15 cm Base Granular < 8% finos

350 Camiones Diarios= 10.000.000 EE

30.000 m2

Santiago, Chile


85/104

Caso 2: Sodimac


86/104

Caso 2: Sodimac


87/104

Caso 3: MOP Punta Arenas (Chile)

CBR 10%

12 cm

50 cm CBR 60% Base no heladiza

15 cm Base < 8% finos

Hormigón 4,8 Mpa

1.000.000 Esals

1 km

Case 3: MOP Punta Arenas


88/104



89/104


C A G l


90/104

Case 4: Antigua Guatemala

TCP Design

Febrero 2006

80.000.000 EE

BTC con K = 110 Mpa/m

Asfalto 21 cm, Mal estado

Espesor diseño TCP® 17 cm 20 % losas agrietadas

80cm x 180 cm

Corte delgado

Fierros solo juntas de construcción

Pines Laterales 11.07 km


91/104

Case 4: Antigua Guatemala 2007

i l


92/104


i l


93/104


i ( ú)


94/104

Case 5 Terrapuerto Lima (Perú)

CBR 15% Natural Soil

60 cm CBR 40% Construction Platform

15 cm Granular Base < 8% finos

Traffic 500 buses daily = 10.000.000 EE

30.000 m2

Lima, Peru

C T Li


95/104

Case 5 Terrapuerto Lima

BM3 Acceso CA9 Sur (2005)

Guatemala


96/104

Guatemala

120.000.000 EE

15 Años Espesor 21 cm

Base: Granular y Asfalto deteriorado

V ldi i


97/104

Valdivia•2008•Base Granular

•8 cm and 12 cm Concrete

Etac (Chile)


98/104

Etac (Chile)

•2008•12 cm concrete•Granular base

Salinas y Fabres 2008


99/104

•

50.000 EE•8 cm

Salinas y Fabres 2008

Chile

M t Pt M tt


100/104

Megacentro Pto Montt.

•2008

•11 cm•500.000 EE

Pl t L Fi d (Chil )


101/104

Planta Los Fiordos (Chile)

•

2007•3.000.000 EE•Base Granular•15 cm

T tt M ll T jill (P ú)


102/104

Tottus Mall Trujillo (Perú)

•2007•3.000.000 EE•Base Granular•14 cm

Chincha (Perú)


103/104

Chincha (Perú)

•DC

•2007•Granular Base•4.000.000 Esals•14 cm concrete

Confiperú (Perú)


104/104

Confiperú (Perú)

•2007•Old concretepavement•3.000.000 Esals•12 cm

Documents

4 Jeff Roesler - Ensayo Acelerado Losas TCP