Abstract
A new resurfacing method has been proposed recently for rehabilitating low-cost unpaved resource access (forest) roads using a mobile crusher. The quality and performance of the road rehabilitated using this new method have been a concern for some forestry companies and a study was initiated to compare it with the traditional resurfacing method where pit-run material is used. Two selected forest roads in New Brunswick, Canada, one resurfaced with the mobile crusher and the other resurfaced with pit-run material from a stationary crusher, were examined to assess the relative merits and deficiencies of the two methods. The particle-size distribution, maximum dry unit weight, and optimum water content for standard Proctor compaction were similar for the resurfacing materials derived from each method. The Benkelman beam deflection data suggest that the resulting roads from the two resurfacing methods were of similar structural capacity but the thickness of the gravel added and the level of compaction applied during resurfacing were different. Moreover, the materials from both methods contained a significant proportion of larger size particles exceeding 25.4 mm (1 in.) and failed to contain the required cohesive (binder) component.Key words: road rehabilitation, road resurfacing, mobile crusher, Benkelman beam, unpaved low volume road, forest road.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call