Requests
Closed
RESEARCH
PROBLEM STATEMENT:
Alkali-Silica-Reactivity
(ASR) distress is present in some airfield concrete pavement.
The rate of deterioration of the concrete and the resultant damage
to structures and potential for flying safety hazard vary. In
those instances where mitigation is necessary the usual response
of the airport operator is to treat the symptoms of the distress
rather than treating the cause. Typical responses to ASR include
reconstruction of expansion joints, repairs to in-pavement structures,
etc.
Very little
is known about mitigating the rate of deterioration of concrete
pavement that has ASR. It is known that by minimizing the availability
of moisture the ASR process can be slowed but not arrested. Sealing
of pavement surfaces can be effective to eliminate surface moisture
sources but sealing the bottom and edges of the pavement is impractical.
Lithium bearing
materials have the potential to mitigate the causes of the expansion
of concrete as a result of ASR. Field tests on highway pavements
demonstrate that there is potential to slow the expansion by changing
the nature of the reaction products and therefore slowing the
rate of deterioration. Airfield concrete pavements are typically
thicker than highway pavements and little is understood on the
effect of depth of penetration on the efficiency of lithium to
mitigate ASR. Questions that remain unanswered include:
- Is there
a correlation between the depth of penetration and the efficiency
of lithium to mitigate ASR?
- If a topical
application of lithium is an effective mitigation, what constitutes
an effective treatment?
- And, at
what point in the progress of the ASR development is it effective
to use lithium as mitigation?
OBJECTIVES:
Airfield concrete
pavement, in various stages of ASR development, in different environmental
exposures will be treated with lithium as a topical application.
The intent is to demonstrate that the progression of ASR can be
disrupted and the life of the pavement extended. In the process,
any benefits achieved as a result of the application are to be
measured and documented. Specific answers to the questions that
are cited in the Research Statement must be developed. The documentation
of the research will be published in the form of a user guide
and a draft specification (in the form of an FAA "DRAFT" Advisory
Circular) as two distinct documents. The user guide is intended
to be used by airport engineers and operators to judge the applicability
of the research findings to situations similar to the test scenarios.
PRODUCTS:
The final product
will be a user guide that presents the findings of the investigation
in a format and presentation easily understood by the intended
user of products and a "DRAFT" Advisory Circular that will implement
the user guide. Recommendations for mitigation of the problems
described in the final report will be provided as a part of the
final report. At the conclusion of the research there will be
a document(s) that the engineer or airport operator can read,
gain an understanding of the problem and approach mitigation in
a rational manner. There must be sufficient information that would
allow the document user reasonable opportunity to realize the
potential for implementing a solution compatible with goals and
objectives of using topical applications of lithium.
The investigator
will provide two original reports, in a camera ready format including
artwork, graphics or photos. The final report will also be submitted
in an electronic format compatible with off-the-shelf desktop
computer publication software. The investigator will not be responsible
for the reproduction and printing of the final document(s) but
will assist with minor editing requirements generated by the printing
and reproduction process.
The investigator
will develop sub-tasks that when completed will result in completion
of the project within the time and budget available. It is not
necessary that the proposal reflect the exact budget or the planned
time. However, any deviation from the designated resources must
be justified and clearly explained in the proposal. The following
are the minimum tasks that are considered necessary to complete
the project.
Task 1 - Literature
Review, Information Gathering and Test Location Identification.
A. Search existing
literature to determine what documents have been written about
topical applications of chemicals for the mitigation of ASR
in existing concrete structures. Define in a summary document
the applicability of previous studies to this project. Search
existing literature to determine what documents have been written
about topical applications of chemicals for the mitigation of
ASR in existing concrete structures. Define in a summary document
the applicability of previous studies to this project.
B. Develop list
of airports where ASR is present in airfield pavements eligible
to be considered for this study. The research team will validate
that ASR is present in the pavement being considered for the
specific airport. The IPRF can provide a list of airports that
have asked to participate in this program. Runways, High Speed
Taxiways and Parallel Taxiways are not eligible. Based upon
the list of potential field test locations, recommend specific
airports for further investigation.
C. Other technologies
available.
IMPORTANT:
A written survey will not be accomplished to determine where ASR
problem pavements exist. A survey is defined as the random distribution
of a standard list of questions that seek trends or forecasting
information. The use of such surveys must receive approval through
the IPRF from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). That
process requires a minimum of 90 days from the date of application
for the survey approval. The 90 day approval period is not included
in the time designated as the performance period. The investigator
is encouraged to use a means other than "survey" to identify the
candidate airport projects.
Task 2 - Document
a Research Plan. Develop
a plan for doing the research. Determine what information is to
be gathered and the tests that will be used. The research plan
must include descriptions of the intended application techniques
and rates. The method and extent of monitoring must be described.
An on-board
review will be accomplished. The investigator will not proceed
to Task 3 without the written approval of the IPRF. An on-board
review must be scheduled at least 30 days prior to the actual
meeting. Documents that are prepared for technical panel review
must be provided at least 30 days prior to the meeting. The
location of the meeting will be coordinated with the IPRF. The
investigator is responsible for documenting the comments of
IPRF Technical Panel members and the disposition of each comment.
Task 3 -Airport
Specific Treatment and Monitoring Plan. Develop a specific
plan for doing the treatment and monitoring of a specific pavement
at approved airports. The airport owner / operator must coordinate
on the specific plan. The research plan shall include a description
of the method of measurement that will be used to judge the effectiveness
of the lithium treatment. The test plans for each airport will
be provided to the IPRF for review. Written comments will be provided.
The progress of the work will continue but amendments to specific
plans may be required. The research team will schedule a conference
call with the IPRF Technical Panel within 10 days of submitting
the airport specific plans.
Task 4 -Execution
of Airport Specific Treatment and Monitoring Plans. Accomplish
the approved research plan. The research team shall designate
a time at which the IPRF Technical Panel will review the results
of initial testing. The draft report will include a summary of
the literature search, airport pavement characteristics at test
sites, and the lessons learned from the studies through the date
of the report. The report should be based upon the work accomplished
through the date of the report.
An on-board
review will be accomplished. The review will be a meeting
between the investigator and the IPRF Technical Panel. The draft
report will be provided to the technical panel at least 30 days
prior to the meeting. The investigator is expected to present
to the technical panel discussion items that will result in
policy decisions for critical elements of the final report.
Additional research may be needed to respond to questions that
are developed as a result of the on-board review. The location
of the meeting will be coordinated with the IPRF. The investigator
is responsible for documenting the comments of IPRF technical
panel members and the disposition of each comment.
Interim Reporting
-The research plan shall specify intervals for reporting the progress
of the monitoring for each of the test sites to the IPRF Technical
Panel.
Task 5 - Advanced
Final Report. When the laboratory and the field study is completed,
make corrections to the interim reports, the reviews of those
reports and use data gathered as a result of the long term monitoring
to develop an advanced final report. Include in the report all
artwork, graphical presentations, format, etc. The document shall
be in a form that for all intent is complete with the exception
of final comments made by the technical panel. The 90% completion
of the project is defined as the completion of Task 5.
A 90% on-board
review will be accomplished. The review will be accomplished
by the IPRF Technical Panel. The report will include a summary
of the results of testing and recommendations for the mitigation
of problems that are discovered as a result of the research.
The investigator is responsible for documenting the comments
of IPRF Technical Panel members and the disposition of each
comment.
Task 6 - Final
Report. Make corrections to the 90% document and submit the
final documents to the IPRF. Assist the IPRF with publication
related editing.
Products Summary:
1. The final
report (an IPRF Report) will be a user guide that includes prescriptive
mitigation techniques. The document will be complete with all
artwork, graphics, tables, pictures, documentation, etc. ready
for reproduction and distribution. The user guide will be submitted
in two original documents and one original report in electronic
media. A "Draft" Advisory Circular will be provided as a unique
document but supplemental to the guide.
2. Interim Reports
- reports published relative to the progress of the work and
documenting any conclusions that can be made or hypothesis formed.
3. The summary
report of the literature search, a list of airports that have
pavements with ASR proposed for study and a proposed research
plan. Submit 8 copies. This is defined as the 20% level
of completion. The airport list and the proposed methods on
obtaining information will be reviewed at an on-board meeting
at a location to be determined. The investigator will host the
meeting. Location will be determined in coordination with the
IPRF.
4. The on-board
review will be accomplished approximately 30-days after submittal
of a draft report. The draft report (8 copies) will include
a summary of all research completed to date. The investigator
will host the meeting. Location will be determined in coordination
with the IPRF.
5. Advanced final
report submittal (8 copies) for 90% review.
Other Considerations
and requirements.
1. The investigator
will be responsible for the preparation of quarterly reports
that describe the progress of the research effort. Reports are
due in the offices of the IPRF on the last day of the fiscal
year quarter. The reports will be limited to two pages in a
format specified by the IPRF. The first page will be a word
document describing the progress of the work. The second page
will provide a summary of the estimated costs versus the costs
incurred to the report date.
2. The investigator
will initiate contact with the airports that are selected for
pavement sampling and documentation through the IPRF. The investigator
will provide a draft letter. The IPRF will edit the letter of
introduction to the airports and may include an endorsement
of the letter by the FAA. This is intended to encourage participation
by the airports and their sponsors.
SPECIAL
CONSIDERATIONS:
After
the technical panel completes the evaluation of proposals, each
of the proposals will be rank ordered. The organization, group,
or individual that is ranked as the first and second choice for
the recommendation to award may be asked to participate in a telephone
interview. The Principal Investigator, and one other person, representing
the entity ranked first and second choice by the technical panel
may be asked to participate in the interview to discuss the project
details, goals, and objectives. The interview will occur within
a 45-day window subsequent to the proposal submittal deadline.
IPRF
PROCEDURAL GUIDANCE:
Persons preparing proposals are urged to review the following
documents to be sure that there is a full understanding of IPRF
procedures and requirements. Proposals must be prepared in the
format specified in the instruction documents. The proposal will
be submitted as one (1) original and 8 copies.
The
documents required as an aide to the preparation of the proposal
include:
FUNDS
AVAILABLE: Not to Exceed $630,000
CONTRACT
TIME: Not to exceed 5 years
PROJECT DIRECTOR: Mr. David
Stokes, (704) 868-5492
ESTIMATED NOTICE TO PROCEED DATE: March 30, 2004
PROPOSAL DUE DATE: January 30, 2004 not later than 4:00 P.M. (Eastern
Time)
DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS:
Proposals
will be delivered to:
Innovative Pavement Research Foundation
Cooperative Programs Office
1010 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Suite 200
Washington DC 20001
(202) 842-1131
FAX: (202) 842-2022
Attention: Research Proposal Log
