Track wetness indicators

[Hoffman900]

Permeable pavement works well for frost as it drains into the engineered sub base.

No it doesn’t- and a lot of highways in the Netherlands are proofing that every winter.

https://www.ad.nl/binnenland/strenge-vo ... ~acfb4498/

“ De schade ontstaat door water of gesmolten sneeuw dat in het asfalt sijpelt. Als het vocht uitzet ontstaan er scheuren in het wegdek.”

//

“The damage is caused by water or melted snow seeping into the asphalt. When the moisture expands, cracks appear in the road surface.”

The used asphalt is ‘ZOAB’ aka ‘very open asphalt’.

https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeer_open_asfalt

If you're going to tell me I'm wrong, at least know what you're talking about. I ran highway projects in excess of $130mil USD.

There are multiple designs for porous paving.

Some use a porous mix ontop of a well drained engineered base layer. That's what I was referencing. Those types are typical of parking lots and are load limited. They do not have the frost issues of that design or of regular asphalt pavement or concrete pavement.

On a highway project, the typical cross section of an interstate highway might be like:
1) compacted subgrade (has proctor requirements).
2) 2' (compacted in 1' lifts) of an engineered soil with lime. When wet and compacted, it's nearly as hard as certain concrete mixes
3) Multiple layers of asphalt, with more fines as it increases. Typically about 1 foot thick
4) A .75" wear / porous layer.

The porous layer drains out to the shoulder which isn't covered in that later. .75" lip is acceptable in US Highways. These types of highways work pretty great if the grades are spot on and the subbase is very stiff. The issue in the one above is that if it was a similar design, everything below it wasn't dense enough, so wheel tracks were able to compact the asphalt and create little gullies for water to hide in.

That said, I can find THOUSANDS of miles of roadways in the US that look that bad after winter, and all are traditional asphalt or concrete construction.

[Andres125sx]

Good info there Hoffman. But I don´t think sub-zero temperatures are the biggest problem here, correct me if I´m wrong please

Porous asphalt cohesion is obviously much lower than non-porous asphalt, porous means there´s air in-between so obviously an asphalt with no air in-between will have higher cohesion. And even that non-porous asphalt is litteraly wrinkled (not sure if that´s the term in english) in braking points because of the huge forces F1 cars transmit when braking at 5Gs. Porous asphalt would be destroyed in less than a GP I think

[Jolle]

Racetrack asphalt is also quite a lot different then motorway asphalt. It's much rougher and provides a lot more grip. That's why, for instance, Monaco and Baku are such difficult tracks. I remember they had quite a new way to make the asphalt on Assen, they paved it like a normal track and then put gravel on it, rolled it and then brushed off the gravel again, making a structure that looked more like extreme rough sanding paper then asphalt.

[Hoffman900]

Racetrack asphalt is also quite a lot different then motorway asphalt. It's much rougher and provides a lot more grip. That's why, for instance, Monaco and Baku are such difficult tracks. I remember they had quite a new way to make the asphalt on Assen, they paved it like a normal track and then put gravel on it, rolled it and then brushed off the gravel again, making a structure that looked more like extreme rough sanding paper then asphalt.

It can be, but it’s still based on availability. Asphalt has to be produced within 30 minutes of the track, or it cools down too much.

If it goes on too cold, it won’t adhere or roll. Too hot and chemicals added to it start separating out.

Locally, it still depends on the inputs as far as sand quality and especially aggregate quality. The Atlanta region of the US has some of the best roads due to the availability if very high quality granite. Hauling that much gravel and sand, from some special location, is VERY expensive, as it’ll have to he trucked (as opposed to rail) for some portion of it. Bituminous quality and additives can vary, and it’s usually bought in barge sized quantities.

Race tracks do get polished down pretty quickly. This is why in the wet you see drivers about a car widths off the racing line under braking.

Too course and it eats tires. I remember when NJMP was new, we were the first real race weekend on it, tires that should have lasted the weekend were ripped apart after a session.

MotoAmerica in 2019 went to Barber Motorsports Park two weeks after repaving. The riders had zero feel in the front and likened it to hydroplanning. Lots of crashes resulted. The surface was very smooth with a lot of fines in it. It was installed with a special spreader that resulted in minimal seams though. It was bad fast in 2020.

Tracks are usually fastest the second year on the asphalt due to polishing off some as well as rubbering in. The rubber thing gets weird though as it all isn’t compatible with each other. You see this in weekends with many support series.

Laguna Seca is at the point with its asphalt that it is too smooth. There is a fine line between being too coarse and too smooth, and it’s usually too coarse going down and too smooth after a couple seasons, before it then gets too coarse as wear, elements, and UV light break it down.

I’ll have to see if I can dig up some RFP’s of some track repaves that are happening. Atlanta Motor Speedway is bring repaved after 22 years. Part of the reason goes back to my point about the granite quality in Atlanta area of the US.

[Jolle]

Racetrack asphalt is also quite a lot different then motorway asphalt. It's much rougher and provides a lot more grip. That's why, for instance, Monaco and Baku are such difficult tracks. I remember they had quite a new way to make the asphalt on Assen, they paved it like a normal track and then put gravel on it, rolled it and then brushed off the gravel again, making a structure that looked more like extreme rough sanding paper then asphalt.

It can be, but it’s still based on availability. Asphalt has to be produced within 30 minutes of the track, or it cools down too much.

If it goes on too cold, it won’t adhere or roll. Too hot and chemicals added to it start separating out.

Locally, it still depends on the inputs as far as sand quality and especially aggregate quality. The Atlanta region of the US has some of the best roads due to the availability if very high quality granite. Hauling that much gravel and sand, from some special location, is VERY expensive, as it’ll have to he trucked (as opposed to rail) for some portion of it. Bituminous quality and additives can vary, and it’s usually bought in barge sized quantities.

Race tracks do get polished down pretty quickly. This is why in the wet you see drivers about a car widths off the racing line under braking.

Too course and it eats tires. I remember when NJMP was new, we were the first real race weekend on it, tires that should have lasted the weekend were ripped apart after a session.

MotoAmerica in 2019 went to Barber Motorsports Park two weeks after repaving. The riders had zero feel in the front and likened it to hydroplanning. Lots of crashes resulted. The surface was very smooth with a lot of fines in it. It was installed with a special spreader that resulted in minimal seams though.

Tracks are usually fastest the second year on the asphalt due to polishing off some as well as rubbering in. The rubber thing gets weird though as it all isn’t compatible with each other. You see this in weekends with many support series.

Here in The Netherlands we're not really used to old asphalt, most of our roads have to be re-worked after about 10-ish years because of the soil, so, before it's really rolled in, it's redone again

[Hoffman900]

Racetrack asphalt is also quite a lot different then motorway asphalt. It's much rougher and provides a lot more grip. That's why, for instance, Monaco and Baku are such difficult tracks. I remember they had quite a new way to make the asphalt on Assen, they paved it like a normal track and then put gravel on it, rolled it and then brushed off the gravel again, making a structure that looked more like extreme rough sanding paper then asphalt.

It can be, but it’s still based on availability. Asphalt has to be produced within 30 minutes of the track, or it cools down too much.

If it goes on too cold, it won’t adhere or roll. Too hot and chemicals added to it start separating out.

Locally, it still depends on the inputs as far as sand quality and especially aggregate quality. The Atlanta region of the US has some of the best roads due to the availability if very high quality granite. Hauling that much gravel and sand, from some special location, is VERY expensive, as it’ll have to he trucked (as opposed to rail) for some portion of it. Bituminous quality and additives can vary, and it’s usually bought in barge sized quantities.

Race tracks do get polished down pretty quickly. This is why in the wet you see drivers about a car widths off the racing line under braking.

Too course and it eats tires. I remember when NJMP was new, we were the first real race weekend on it, tires that should have lasted the weekend were ripped apart after a session.

MotoAmerica in 2019 went to Barber Motorsports Park two weeks after repaving. The riders had zero feel in the front and likened it to hydroplanning. Lots of crashes resulted. The surface was very smooth with a lot of fines in it. It was installed with a special spreader that resulted in minimal seams though.

Tracks are usually fastest the second year on the asphalt due to polishing off some as well as rubbering in. The rubber thing gets weird though as it all isn’t compatible with each other. You see this in weekends with many support series.

Here in The Netherlands we're not really used to old asphalt, most of our roads have to be re-worked after about 10-ish years because of the soil, so, before it's really rolled in, it's redone again

The Netherlands are smaller than a lot of US States (NYC metro area has more people). We have plenty of areas like that, especially in coastal areas or areas with a lot of wetlands.

Other areas of the US is different. In New Jersey, as small as a State that it is land area wise (not population), it goes from coastal plain in the south, to Piedmont, to Appalachian “mountains” (very weathered and old).

Georgia had that as well, just a bit larger of a State land mass wise, as does California, and many others. Atlanta is in a piedmont region just on the cusp of Smokey / Blue Ridge (Appalachian) Mountains. Being very old and weathered means the rock left is very hard. With it’s location, it’s probably the only major US city built on really good ground. Majority of them were built on the water, in what were old swamps and forested wetlands

Florida is all sand and wetlands, some of it sitting over karst formations. They don’t have frost issues, but they do have sinkhole problems!

COTA in Texas has all sorts of issues with settlement. They screwed the pooch on location and cheaping out on the engineering with that.

[Jolle]

It can be, but it’s still based on availability. Asphalt has to be produced within 30 minutes of the track, or it cools down too much.

If it goes on too cold, it won’t adhere or roll. Too hot and chemicals added to it start separating out.

Locally, it still depends on the inputs as far as sand quality and especially aggregate quality. The Atlanta region of the US has some of the best roads due to the availability if very high quality granite. Hauling that much gravel and sand, from some special location, is VERY expensive, as it’ll have to he trucked (as opposed to rail) for some portion of it. Bituminous quality and additives can vary, and it’s usually bought in barge sized quantities.

Race tracks do get polished down pretty quickly. This is why in the wet you see drivers about a car widths off the racing line under braking.

Too course and it eats tires. I remember when NJMP was new, we were the first real race weekend on it, tires that should have lasted the weekend were ripped apart after a session.

MotoAmerica in 2019 went to Barber Motorsports Park two weeks after repaving. The riders had zero feel in the front and likened it to hydroplanning. Lots of crashes resulted. The surface was very smooth with a lot of fines in it. It was installed with a special spreader that resulted in minimal seams though.

Tracks are usually fastest the second year on the asphalt due to polishing off some as well as rubbering in. The rubber thing gets weird though as it all isn’t compatible with each other. You see this in weekends with many support series.

Here in The Netherlands we're not really used to old asphalt, most of our roads have to be re-worked after about 10-ish years because of the soil, so, before it's really rolled in, it's redone again

The Netherlands are smaller than a lot of US States (NYC metro area has more people). We have plenty of areas like that, especially in coastal areas or areas with a lot of wetlands.

Other areas of the US is different. In New Jersey, as small as a State that it is land area wise (not population), it goes from coastal plain in the south, to Piedmont, to Appalachian “mountains” (very weathered and old).

Georgia had that as well, just a bit larger of a State land mass wise, as does California, and many others. Atlanta is in a piedmont region just on the cusp of Smokey / Blue Ridge (Appalachian) Mountains. Being very old and weathered means the rock left is very hard. With it’s location, it’s probably the only major US city built on really good ground. Majority of them were built on the water, in what were old swamps and forested wetlands

Florida is all sand and wetlands, some of it sitting over karst formations. They don’t have frost issues, but they do have sinkhole problems!

COTA in Texas has all sorts of issues with settlement. They screwed the pooch on location and cheaping out on the engineering with that.

Oh I know that and believe you instantly. Just saying that here we don’t have that old nice ridden in tarmac that we love in the alps (and hate when we go through Belgium )

[GOAT]

If you're going to tell me I'm wrong, at least know what you're talking about. I ran highway projects in excess of $130mil USD.

I showed you that I know what I am talking about- don’t feel offended.

Perhaps we have different standards.

https://reports.weforum.org/pdf/gci-201 ... OSQ057.pdf

[Hoffman900]

If you're going to tell me I'm wrong, at least know what you're talking about. I ran highway projects in excess of $130mil USD.

I showed you that I know what I am talking about- don’t feel offended.

Perhaps we have different standards.

https://reports.weforum.org/pdf/gci-201 ... OSQ057.pdf

Sorry, but you haven’t.

Possibly re: standards but the sample size in the Netherlands is small. I would hope they would be able to manage their roadways adequately considering the lack of diversity in terrain and not having vast areas of nothing to manage.

[GOAT]

Possibly re: standards but the sample size in the Netherlands is small. I would hope they would be able to manage their roadways adequately ..

As shown in the link- again, the Netherlands is one of the best in ‘managing’ their roadways, in the World.

Last time ‘we’ were #5. I believe ‘we’ were #1. for consecutive years prior to that.

-edit.

I get the feeling you’re making ‘fun’ of our size, just keep in mind it were our engineers who helped you keep dry feet in Louisiana- with the flood control.

[Hoffman900]

Possibly re: standards but the sample size in the Netherlands is small. I would hope they would be able to manage their roadways adequately ..

As shown in the link- again, the Netherlands is one of the best in ‘managing’ their roadways, in the World.

Last time ‘we’ were #5. I believe ‘we’ were #1. for consecutive years prior to that.

Easier to do with high taxes and relatively the same terrain.

The Netherlands has just over 86,000 miles of roadway to manage. The US has over 4.17 million miles.

And I’m not making fun of your small size, but it’s easier to manage less roadways with a dense / high tax base, with relatively the same terrain.

I’m well aware, and respectful, of your flood control engineering capabilities.

Looking at your post history tells me how the rest of this is going to go, so I said my piece.

[GOAT]

The US has over 4.17 million miles.

.. and how big is your economy?

[Hoffman900]

Good info there Hoffman. But I don´t think sub-zero temperatures are the biggest problem here, correct me if I´m wrong please

Porous asphalt cohesion is obviously much lower than non-porous asphalt, porous means there´s air in-between so obviously an asphalt with no air in-between will have higher cohesion. And even that non-porous asphalt is litteraly wrinkled (not sure if that´s the term in english) in braking points because of the huge forces F1 cars transmit when braking at 5Gs. Porous asphalt would be destroyed in less than a GP I think

Correct. F1 cars, as well as heavy / powerful sedans (NASCAR) would rip the surface up very quickly.

Furthermore, the surface would not become porous with rubber build up on the racing line. The difference between offline / online would be greater (assuming it even lasted that long).

Most porous pavement systems just have minimum fines. You need that for structural reasons.

Let me see if I can find some technical specs for track repaves heres when I get a chance.

[Hoffman900]

I did find this:
https://www.rmaces.org/docs/highperform ... rowell.pdf

And
https://www.il-asphalt.org/files/5414/4 ... llenge.pdf

In hadn’t thought about matching the softening point of the binder to match typical tire temperatures (180* F in this case, which is typical for Goodyear and Hoosier racing compounds I’ve seen). Again they point out the quality of granite in the Atlanta Georgia region of the US.

[Edax]

Permeable pavement works well for frost as it drains into the engineered sub base.

No it doesn’t- and a lot of highways in the Netherlands are proofing that every winter.

https://www.ad.nl/binnenland/strenge-vo ... ~acfb4498/

“ De schade ontstaat door water of gesmolten sneeuw dat in het asfalt sijpelt. Als het vocht uitzet ontstaan er scheuren in het wegdek.”

//

“The damage is caused by water or melted snow seeping into the asphalt. When the moisture expands, cracks appear in the road surface.”

The used asphalt is ‘ZOAB’ aka ‘very open asphalt’.

https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeer_open_asfalt

If you're going to tell me I'm wrong, at least know what you're talking about. I ran highway projects in excess of $130mil USD.

There are multiple designs for porous paving.

Some use a porous mix ontop of a well drained engineered base layer. That's what I was referencing. Those types are typical of parking lots and are load limited. They do not have the frost issues of that design or of regular asphalt pavement or concrete pavement.

On a highway project, the typical cross section of an interstate highway might be like:
1) compacted subgrade (has proctor requirements).
2) 2' (compacted in 1' lifts) of an engineered soil with lime. When wet and compacted, it's nearly as hard as certain concrete mixes
3) Multiple layers of asphalt, with more fines as it increases. Typically about 1 foot thick
4) A .75" wear / porous layer.

The porous layer drains out to the shoulder which isn't covered in that later. .75" lip is acceptable in US Highways. These types of highways work pretty great if the grades are spot on and the subbase is very stiff. The issue in the one above is that if it was a similar design, everything below it wasn't dense enough, so wheel tracks were able to compact the asphalt and create little gullies for water to hide in.

That said, I can find THOUSANDS of miles of roadways in the US that look that bad after winter, and all are traditional asphalt or concrete construction.

Just wondering. We’re now talking at road solutions translated to racetracks. Wouldn’t runway paving more applicable due to the very high shear forces caused by braking?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 1417300068