PERFORMANCE OF PERMEABLE PAVEMENTS UNDER LOW

PERFORMANCE OF PERMEABLE PAVEMENTS UNDER LOW VOLUME TRAFFIC LOADS

Kerwin G. Modeste, MSc., P.Eng. (Corresponding Author) PhD Candidate

Department of Civil and Geological Engineering

University of Saskatchewan

57 Campus Drive

Saskatoon, SK, Canadá, S7N 5A9

Phone: +1 (306) 491-3901

Fax: +1 (306) 966-5427

Email: [email protected]

Lynne Cowe Falls, PhD., P.Eng.

Associate Professor

Department of Civil Engineering

Schulich School of Engineering

University of Calgary

2500 University Drive NW

Calgary, AB, Canada, T2N 1N4

Phone:+1 (403) 220-5505

Fax: (403) 282-7026

E-mail: [email protected]

Peter Y. Park, PhD., P.Eng.

Associate Professor

Department of Civil and Geological Engineering

University of Saskatchewan

57 Campus Drive

Saskatoon, SK, Canadá, S7N 5A9

Phone: +1 (366) 966-1314

Fax: +1 (306) 966-5427

Email: [email protected]

Word Count: 4,751 words + (2 Tables + 10 Figures) × 250 = 7,751 words

Submitted for Presentation at the 94th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Low Volume Road

Management, Performance, and Design, Washington D.C., January 11–15, 2015

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

94nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., January 11–15, 2015

Modeste 1

ABSTRACT

Most research on permeable pavements focused on the hydrological performance and was done primarily in mild

climates, with little information available for the pavement structural response in cold climates. Hence, this research was

commissioned in order to evaluate the performance of permeable pavements under low volume traffic loads in Calgary.

The research facility located at the Currie Barracks in SW Calgary was divided into three individual cells (cell No.1 to

3) with pervious concrete pavement (PCP), permeable interlocking concrete pavement (PICP), and porous asphalt

concrete pavement (PACP) as the wearing course, respectively.

The highest and lowest stress response on the subgrade was recorded in the PACP and the PCP, respectively; with the

exception of the frozen condition where the stress response for the PICP was slightly lower than the stress response for

the PCP. The maximum stress response on the subgrade was recorded at the lowest speed of 5 kmph; while the stress

response on the subgrade generally decreased with an increase in the traffic speed. The stress response was highest when

the pavement structure was unsaturated; and lowest when the pavement structure was frozen.

The findings indicated that the PCP showed the best structural performance with the exception of some ravelling. The

impact of the frost heave was highest in the PICP. There was a significant increase in the surface deformation in the PICP

subsequent to truck traffic for the flooded pavement structure.

KEYWORDS

Permeable pavements, pervious concrete, porous asphalt, permeable interlocking concrete pavers, stress and strain

response, unrecoverable deformation, freeze and thaw cycles, frost heave, unsaturated, saturated, flooded, and frozen.


Modeste 2

INTRODUCTION

In order to implement better land use measures to manage high runoff and the associated environmental problems,

municipalities have sought to implement extensive stormwater management structures such as retention ponds. These

structures result in higher development costs. To reduce the environmental impact of stormwater, the City of Calgary

commissioned research into the performance of permeable pavements (PPP).

Previous permeable pavement research has focused primarily on hydrological performance. Previous research has not

evaluated the structural performance of permeable pavements; particularly the stress and strain response for permeable

pavements under low volume traffic; and freeze and thaw environments. Calgary’s PPP Research study was designed to

investigate the performance of permeable pavements under low volume traffic loading in Calgary, and therefore also

included consideration of freeze and thaw environments.

The study evaluated the stress and strain response, and deformation of three types of permeable pavements (pervious

concrete pavement, permeable interlocking concrete pavement, and porous asphalt concrete pavements). The three

permeable pavement type were evaluated under low volume traffic loading while the pavement structures were

unsaturated, saturated, flooded and frozen. The pavement distress due to traffic loading was evaluated in addition to the

impact of frost heaving.

LITERATURE REVIEW

A literature review investigated the characteristics and performance of permeable pavements. The review (Applied

Research Associates Inc., 2009) found that the structural integrity of permeable pavements is a function of the subgrade

and drainage characteristics. Pavement design should also consider the drainage potential of the pavement structure

relative to the hydrological regime of the site. For cold regions, the design should also consider the freeze and thaw

performance of the pavement.

The review (ICPI, 2006) found that the design of permeable pavements may follow a total infiltration, partial infiltration,

or no infiltration approach. Total infiltration permits all the runoff to infiltrate the subgrade. Partial infiltration captures

most of the runoff with drainage pipes that transport the runoff to catch basins. The remaining runoff is allowed to

infiltrate the subgrade. No infiltration systems capture all the runoff within the pavement structure. The runoff eventually

flows through drainage pipes connected to catch basins.

The review (UNHSC, 2009) found that the design should mitigate the contamination of the reservoir material which may

result from the migration of the reservoir course into the subgrade. This may be done by placing a geotextile at the

interface of the reservoir layer and the subgrade soil. The geotextile should also be placed along the entire perimeter of

the excavation to fully enclose the vertical plane of the reservoir course. The design should include an observation well

which should extend to the bottom of the reservoir course at the downstream end. The assessment of the reservoir course

is based on the runoff storage requirements, the permeability of the subgrade soil, the structural design requirements of

the subgrade soil and the elevation of the static water table. The review (NAPA, 2008) found that the reservoir layer

should be designed to satisfy both the storage and structural requirement of the permeable pavement structure. To assess

the characteristics and extent of the runoff to be considered in the hydrological design of permeable pavements, the runoff

factor (runoff curve number) should be determined. The runoff cure number (CN) represents the runoff potential of the

site. The National Research Conservation Services and the United States Department of Agriculture (NRCS and USDA,

2004) have established a classification of soil types based on their runoff potential and permeability.

STUDY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Calgary’s PPP Research study had two goals as follows:

To evaluate the performance of permeable pavements under low volume traffic loading with an Average Daily

Traffic of up to approximately 200, including 50% of truck traffic; and


Modeste 3

To establish best practice standards for the implementation of permeable pavements on low volume traffic roads;

and in cold regions with average minimum winter temperatures of -12 οC.

The study’s objectives were as follows

To evaluate the performance of pervious concrete pavement (PCP), permeable interlocking concrete pavement

(PICP), and porous asphalt concrete pavement (PACP) by evaluating surface deformation, cracking, and structural

deterioration;

To evaluate permeable pavement response under low volume traffic loading;

To evaluate pavement response under various conditions, including unsaturated, saturated, flooded, and frozen

conditions, and the impact of freeze and thaw cycles; and

To determine the preferred option among the three permeable pavement types.

METHODOLOGY

A research facility was constructed at the Currrie Barracks located near Hochwald Avenue and Quesnay Wood Drive in

S.W Calgary (the research facility) as shown in Figure 1a. The research facility consisted of three individual pavement

cells. The wearing course in cell No. 1 to 3 consisted of PCP, PICP, and PACP respectively.

The construction phase began on November 8th 2010 and was completed on August 21st 2011. The site was excavated to

a depth of 1.0 m below the existing road surface to establish the final subgrade elevation. A non-woven geotextile was

placed on the subgrade to prevent migration of the overlying reservoir course into the subgrade. The walls of each cell

were lined with an impervious HDPE liner to isolate each cell. Each cell was equipped with a pressure cell placed on the

subgrade (above the geotextile); and two strain gages were placed immediately below the wearing course in each cell

(one in the longitudinal direction and the other in the transverse direction) to monitor the stress and strain response,

respectively. Temperature loggers were installed at various elevations within each cell to monitor the temperature

gradient across each cell. The instrumentation were installed in the east bound lane which was used as the test lane. The

reservoir course was the first course placed. This course was followed by the intermediate course and then the choker

course. Details of the pavement structures at the research facility, the instrumentation layout plan and photographs of the

construction activities are shown in Figure 1b, 1c, and 1d, respectively.

During the construction phase concrete cylinders were taken from the pervious concrete for compressive strength testing

at 3, 7, 14, and 28 days. Samples and cores from the porous asphalt concrete; and precast interlocking concrete pavers

were also taken for laboratory testing. Samples of the pavement structure constituent materials were also taken for

laboratory testing.

The field testing program started on September 9th 2011 and was completed on February 11th 2012. The field testing

program consisted of a data acquisition system (DAS) which was used to record the pavement stress and strain response.

The data conditioning and recording were done using a laptop computer equipped with a computer program called Lab-

View. Lab-View was used to develop a computer program to receive, monitor and record the analog signals. The program

was based on voltage and strain signals. The program was designed to acquire stress and strain response data at 0.002

second interval. The DAS used for data recording is shown in Figure 1e.

The field testing program consisted of stress and strain response, and deformation testing. A loaded tandem axle truck

with an average gross weight of approximately 200 kN was used as the test truck traffic. The truck was driven at speeds

of 5 to 30 kmph; and at intervals of 5 kmph. The pavement stress and strain response at each speed was recorded using

the DAS and laptop computer. The stress and strain response, and deformation were measured under four conditions as

follows:

While the pavement structures were unsaturated;

One hour after the pavement structures were manually flooded through the PVC monitoring pipes;

After the pavement structures were manually saturated through the PVC monitoring pipes; and

While the pavement structures were frozen during the winter conditions.


Modeste 4 The test truck was driven over the pavement structures three (3) times at each speed interval; for each of the four (4)

pavement conditions.

Subsequent to each stress and strain response testing the surface profile of each pavement section was measured along a

grid pattern using a laser level. The pavement profile was also measured in February 2012 to determine the extent of the

frost heave. The profile measurements were done based on the grid layout shown in Figure 1f.

Figure 1a: Location of the Currie Barracks Research Facility, (Google Earth, 2012)


Modeste 5

Figure 1b: Detailed Section of Test Road used at the Research Facility; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

.

Figure 1c: Instrumentation Layout Plan; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)


Modeste 6

Figure 1d: Photos of the Construction Phases of the PPP Research Facility; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Figure 1e: Setup of the Data Acquisition System; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)


Modeste 7 .

Figure 1f: Surface Grid Layout for Surface Profile Measurement; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM AND RESULTS

A laboratory testing program was also conducted. The laboratory testing program consisted of the following:

Pervious concrete compressive strength testing at 3, 7, 14 and 28 days;

Asphalt cement content testing of the porous asphalt concrete;

Pervious concrete elastic modulus and porous asphalt concrete resilient modulus testing;

Particle size distribution testing of the choker course, intermediate course, reservoir course material and aggregate in

the porous asphalt concrete; and

Material unit weights testing.

The laboratory testing results are shown in Tables 1a and 1b.

Table1: Pervious Concrete and Porous Asphalt Laboratory Testing Results

Table 1a: Pervious Concrete Strength Testing Results; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Age (Days) of Test

Sample

Average Compressive

Strength (MPa) Elastic Modulus GPa Unit Weight (kN/m3)

3 5.5 -

18.5 7 8.7 13.7

14 9.1 -

28 10.4 15.8


Modeste 8

Table 1b: Laboratory Testing Results for Porous Asphalt Concrete; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Average Unit

Weight

kN/m3

Average Asphalt

Content (%)

Average Poison

Ratio

Elastic Modulus (E)

Core Temperature

(oC) E (MPa)

22.7 3.9 0.2 5 2,817

0.1 25 881

FIELD TESTING RESULTS

Prior to the stress and strain response testing the load distributed to each axle and the pressure in each tire were

recorded. The average load on the front axle and the rear axles ranged from 50 kN to 59 kN and 75 kN to 81 kN,

respectively. The tire pressure in the rear tires ranged from 607 kPa to 756 kPa.

Stress Response Data Summary: Unsaturated Pavement Structures

The field testing stress response data for the unsaturated pavement structures are summarized in Figure 2. It is shown

that when the pavement structure is unsaturated, the stress response increased with a decrease in the traffic speed. It also

showed that the lowest stress response was recorded for the PCP, while the highest stress response was recorded for the

PACP. The highest stress response of 80 kPa was recorded for the PACP at a speed of 5 kmph.

Figure 2: Summary of Stress Response on Unsaturated Subgrade; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Strain Response Data Summary: Unsaturated Pavement Structure

The results of the longitudinal and transverse strain response for the unsaturated pavement structure are shown in Figure

3a and Figure 3b respectively. The longitudinal and transverse strain response for the unsaturated pavement structure

increased with a decrease in traffic speed. The highest and lowest strain response was recorded for the PICP, and the


Modeste 9 PCP, respectively. For the longitudinal strain response the sensitivity of all three pavement types was relatively similar.

The highest and lowest sensitivity for the transverse strain response was observed in the PACP and the PCP, respectively.

Figure 3a: Longitudinal Strain Response at the Interface of the Wearing Course and the Reservoir Course for

Unsaturated Pavement Structures; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Figure 3b: Transverse Strain Response at the Interface of the Wearing Course and the Reservoir Course for

Unsaturated Pavement Structures; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)


Modeste 10

Stress Response Data Summary: Flooded Pavement Structure

For the flooded pavement structures, the highest stress response on the subgrade was approximately 75 kPa at a traffic

speed of 5 kmph, recorded in the PACP. The lowest stress response on the subgrade at a traffic sped of 5 kmph was

approximately 15 kPa, recorded in the PCP. The stress response on the subgrade in the PICP at 5 kmph was approximately

56 kPa. For the flooded condition the lowest stress response was recorded at the highest traffic speed of 30 kmph as

shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Summary of Stress Response on the Subgrade for the Flooded Pavement Structure;

(Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Strain Response Data Summary: Flooded Pavement Structure

The results of the longitudinal and transverse strain response for the flooded pavement structures are shown in Figure

5a and Figure 5b, respectively. For the PACP the strain response generally increased with a decrease in traffic speed.

However, for the PICP and the PCP the strain response generally decreased with a decrease in traffic speed. This may

have resulted from the increase in the pore pressure below the wearing course as the traffic speed decreased; in addition

to the confining pressures. The highest and lowest sensitivity in the strain response was observed for the PICP and the

PCP, respectively.


Modeste 11


the Flooded Pavement Structure; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Figure 5b: Transverse Strain Response at the Interface of the Wearing Course and the Reservoir Course for

Flooded Pavement Structure; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)


Modeste 12

Stress Response Data Summary: Saturated Pavement Structure

For the saturated pavement structures the highest and lowest stress response on the subgrade at 5 kmph was

approximately 60 kPa recorded in the PACP; and was approximately 12 kPa recorded in the PCP. The stress response

on the subgrade in the PICP was approximately 50 kPa at a traffic speed of 5 kmph as shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Summary of Stress Response on Saturated Subgrade; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Strain Response Data Summary: Saturated Pavement Structure

The results of the strain response for the saturated pavement structures are shown in Figures 7a and 7b. The strain

response was generally highest for the PICP and lowest for the PCP; with the exception of the PACP strain response

being lowest for the traffic speeds of 18 to 30 kmph. The strain response for the PICP, PACP, and PCP generally

increased with a decrease in the traffic speed. The sensitivity of the strain response as a function of traffic speed was

highest for the PICP and lowest for the PCP.


Modeste 13


the Saturated Pavement Structure; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Figure 7b: Transverse Strain Response at the Interface of the Wearing Course and the Reservoir Course for the

Saturated Pavement Structure; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)


Modeste 14

Stress Response Data Summary: Frozen Pavement Structure

A summary of the pavement stress response while the pavement structures were frozen is shown in Figure 8. The stress

response for the frozen pavement structures was highest for the PACP; while the lowest stress response was recorded for

the PICP. The sensitivity of the stress response as a function of traffic speed was highest for the PACP and lowest for

the PICP.

Figure 8: Summary of Stress Response on Frozen Subgrade; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Permeable Pavement Stress Response Summary

The highest and lowest stress response on the subgrade were recorded for the PACP and PCP, respectively; with the

exception of the frozen condition where the stress response for the PICP was lower than that for the PCP. The maximum

stress response on the subgrade was recorded at the lowest speed of 5 kmph. The stress response on the subgrade generally

decreased with an increased in the traffic speed. The stress response was highest when the pavement structure was

unsaturated; and lowest when the pavement structure was frozen. A summary of the stress response for the unsaturated,

flooded, saturated, and frozen pavement conditions at a truck traffic speed of 5 kmph is shown in Figure 9. The analysis

summary shows that the stress response is a function of the effective stress state within the pavement structure.


Modeste 15

Figure 9: Summary of Stress Response on Subgrade at 5 kmph; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Frost Heave and Surface Deformation Assessment

The recorded temperatures below the wearing course are shown in Figure 10a. The results of the frost heave recorded

on February 11th 2012 are shown in Figures 10b. The extent of the frost heave was greater further away from the wheel

path. The frost heave was generally highest and lowest within the PICP and PCP, respectively. The unrecoverable surface

deflection was highest in the PACP and lowest in the PCP. The lowest and highest unrecoverable surface deflection was

recorded when the pavement structure was unsaturated and flooded, respectively. The results for the surface deformation

are shown in Figures 10c to 10e.


Modeste 16

Figure 10a: Summary of Temperature below Wearing Course – December 16th 2011 to February 11th 2012;

(Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Figure 10b: Summary of Frost Heave Profile – December 16th 2011 to February 11th 2012;

(Modeste, K., G., 2012)


Modeste 17

Figure 10c: Summary of Pavement Surface Profile for Unsaturated Condition – September 9th 2011;

(Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Figure 10d: Summary of Pavement Surface Profile for Flooded Condition – September 16th 2011;

(Modeste, K., G., 2012)


Modeste 18

Figure 10e: Summary of Pavement Surface Profile for Saturated Condition – October 14th 2011;

(Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Surface Distress Survey and Preferred Pavement Option Selection Criteria

Visual inspection of each pavement cell was conducted to assess the physical condition of the pavement. The visual

inspection data are presented in Table 2a to 2c, and the preferred permeable pavement selection criteria is shown in

Table 2d.

Table 2: Visual Surface Distress Data Summary and Preferred Pavement Option Selection Criteria

Table 2a: Visual Surface Distress Data Summary for PCP; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Distress

Level of Distress

Comments Low

≤ 20 %

Moderate

21 to 50 %

High

˃ 50 %

Ravelling Most of the ravelling was along the test lane

near the stop sign

Cracking

Very little cracking was observed with the

exception of isolated areas near the dividing

concrete beam

Clogging Minor clogging was observed near the

southeastern corner near the stop sign


Modeste 19

Table 2b: Visual Surface Distress Data Summary for PICP; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Table 2c: Visual Surface Distress Data Summary for PACP; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Permeable Pavement Preferred Option Selection Criteria

The criteria for determining the preferred permeable pavement type is based on the results of the field testing program

(stress and strain response, frost heave, unrecoverable deformation, surface distress and permeability); initial and

maintenance cost and visual (aesthetics). The PCP showed the best performance based on the selection criteria and rating

shown in Table 2d.

Table 2d: Selection Criteria for the Preferred Permeable Pavement Option; (Modeste, K., G., 2012)

Distress

Level of Distress

Comments Low

≤ 20 %

Moderate

21 to 50 %

High

˃ 50 %

Broken Pavers Most of the broken pavers were in the test lane

Loss of Infill Gravel There was some loss of the infill gravel

between the pavers

Distress

Level of Distress

Comments Low

≤ 20 %

Moderate

21 to 50 %

High

˃ 50 %

Clogging Clogging was due to silt originating from soil

stockpile upstream of test site

Rutting

Ravelling

Pavement

Type

Performance Criteria

Structural

Integrity and

Distress

Freeze

and Thaw

Permeability

and Clogging Visual

Initial and

Maintenance

Cost Weighted

Sum =

(ΣRSxWt)

Rating

Weight (Wt)

0.3 0.3 0.2 0.05 0.15

PCP 3.5 3 3.5 4 3.5 3.4 Good to

Poor

PICP 3.8 5 3.5 3.5 3 4.0 Poor

PACP 4 3.5 5 4 4 4.1 Poor

Rating Scale (RS) : Excellent = 1; Very Good = 2; Good = 3; Poor = 4; Very Poor = 6


Modeste 20

SUMMARY

The PPP research was commissioned to evaluate the performance of permeable pavements under low volume traffic

loads. The PPP Research facility consisted of three individual pavement cells with PCP, PICP, and PACP as the wearing

course, respectively.

The field testing program consisted of stress and strain response testing under a loaded tandem axle truck traffic. The

pavement response was evaluated while the pavement structures were unsaturated, saturated, flooded and frozen. The

impact of frost heave and surface distress were also evaluated.

The stress response on the subgrade was generally highest for the PACP, while the lowest response was generally

recorded for the PCP. The general trend showed that the stress response decreased as the traffic speed increased. This

may be the result of a reduction in the tire contact pressure on the pavement and a decrease in the contact stress duration

with an increase in the traffic speed. The stress response was highest when the pavement structures were unsaturated;

and lowest when the pavement structures were frozen. The highest and lowest unrecoverable surface deflection was

observed in the PACP and the PCP, respectively. The unsaturated pavement structure showed the lowest unrecoverable

surface deformation.

There was low to moderate frost heaving within the pavement structures. The highest impact of the frost heave was

observed within the PICP, while the PCP was least impacted by frost heaving. Some ravelling of the PCP was observed

primarily near the stop sign. Some broken pavers and some loss of the infill gravel were observed on the surface of the

PICP. The PACP surface was slightly undulated after the pavement stress and strain response testing. There was

significant clogging of the PACP surface due to silting originating offsite.

CONCLUSION

The permeable pavement research findings have shown that permeable pavements have the potential to be used

successfully for low volume traffic loads in cold climates; providing improvements are made in the quality of the wearing

course material particularly the strength and durability of the pervious concrete. Based on the findings; the PCP showed

the best structural performance with the exception of some ravelling which was evident near the stop sign. The PICP

showed significant deformation under traffic loading. There were some broken pre-cast concrete pavers due to the test

truck traffic. There was significant loss of the PICP infill gravel.

The PACP showed the least favourable pavement response. There was significant deformation of the PACP. In many

areas the PACP profile was undulating subsequent to traffic loading. There was some remoulding and polishing of the

PACP surface under traffic loading. There was significant clogging of the PACP from silt origination from off site. The

impact of frost heave was highest for the PICP; while the lowest impact of frost heave was observed for the PCP. The

impact of the frost heaving was higher further away from the wheel path.

The findings of the PPP research may be applicable for the implementation of permeable pavements in parking lots.

Pavement structures in parking lots are typically subjected to low volume traffic with speeds of up to 30 kmph; which

were evaluated as part of the PPP research.

The PPP research was based on evaluating the performance of the permeable pavement structures over a two year period.

This may be representative of the performance evaluation period for new pavement structures prior to commissioning;

and may provide valuable performance data for the acceptance criteria for new pavements.

RECOMMENDATIONS

To minimize ravelling, it may be necessary to carefully control the quality of the PCP both at the batch plant and during

placement. Adequate compaction and finishing is required to produce a durable PCP to guard against surface distress.

The extent of the ravelling may be reduced by using pervious concrete with a minimum 28 day compressive strength of


Modeste 21 30 MPa; particularly for placement in areas near stop signs where frequent braking and traffic stops are expected. The

analysis showed that the pavement response is a function of the pavement condition, specifically the effective stress state

of the pavement structure. Hence, it is recommended that permeable pavements be designed based on the saturated

condition, and on the basis of a stress response of 60 kPa and 12 kPa for PACP and PCP, respectively.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author thanks the City of Calgary for having commissioned and financed the PPP Research. The author also thanks

the contractors, Lafarge for their cooperation during the construction phase of the PPP Research; and UNI Group USA

for supplying the precast concrete pavers for the PICP.


Modeste 22

REFERENCES

AASHTO 1993, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, “Guide for Design of Pavement

Structures” 1993.

Applied Research Associates Inc., 2009, “SF Permeable Paving stone systems” Report Prepared for SF Concrete

Technology Inc.

Bass, W., 2006, “Pervious Concrete Pavement Surface Durability in a Freeze-Thaw Environment where Rain, Snow,

and Ice Storms are Common Occurrences,” CD-ROM, NRMCA, Proceedings of the 2006 NRMCA Concrete

Technology Forum – Focus on Pervious Concrete, Silver Springs, Maryland, USA, 2006.

Brown, R. C., 2007, “Characterization of Solids Removal and Clogging Processes in Two Types of Permeable

Pavement”, Thesis Submitted to the University Of Calgary.

Henderson, V., Tighe, L. S., and Norris, J., 2009, “Behaviour and Performance of Pervious Concrete Pavement in

Canada”, Prepared for presentation at the Advances in Pavement Design and Construction Session of the 2009 Annual

Conference of the Transportation Association of Canada Vancouver, British Columbia.

ICPI, 2006, “Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavements, Selection, Design, Construction, Maintenance”.

ICPI, 2006, “Structural Design of Interlocking Concrete Pavements for roads and parking Lots”.

Interpave, 2006, “Permeable Pavements, Guide to the Design, Construction, and Maintenance of Concrete Block

Permeable Pavements”, Interpave: The Precast Concrete Paving & Kerb Association 60 Charles Street, Leicester.

Modeste, K., 2012. “Performance of Permeable Pavements Under Low Volume Traffic Loads in Calgary”

NAPA, 2008, National Asphalt Pavement Association, “Porous Asphalt Pavements for Stormwater Management,

Design, Construction, and Maintenance Guide”, National Asphalt Pavement Association, 2008.

National Center for Asphalt Technology, 2000, “Design, Construction, and Performance of New Generation Open-

Graded Friction Courses”, NCAT Report No. 2000-01.

NRCS and NSDA. 2004, “Part 630-Hydrology, National Engineering Handbook”

Schaus, L. K., 2007, “Porous Asphalt Pavement Design: Proactive Designs for Cold Climate Use”, A thesis presented to

the University of Waterloo.

Tighe, S. L., and Henderson, V., 2010, “Developing Sustainable Design, Construction, and Maintenance Techniques for

Cold Climate Pervious Concrete Pavement”, Paper 36, p427-446, Compendium of Papers from the First International

Conference on Pavement Preservation.

UNHSC, 2009, University of New Hampshire Stormwater Center, 2009, “Design Specifications for Porous Asphalt

Pavement and Infiltration Beds”, Rev. October 2009, UNHSC, 2009.

UNI-Group USA, 2008, “Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavement, Design Guide and Research Summary”.

.

Documents

PERFORMANCE OF PERMEABLE PAVEMENTS UNDER LOW