Road Construction Materials

M

mass88

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
1,014
Are there any benefits to building roads with concrete vs. asphalt?

I was out in Utah recently and noted that some roads were made of concrete and I was wondering why in Mass there's a lack of concrete used. I remember a stretch of 495 was built of concrete but has since been changed to asphalt.

It's spring time and that means potholes are going to show themselves and I have always wondered what could be done to prevent them? Have there been any developments in tech for materials to build stronger roads that are more durable?
 
I remember we had this conversation before.

Essentially..

Concrete = Skilled labor (relatively)
Asphalt = Any doofus can lay it

Concrete = Difficult to cut through and then patch after utility work
Asphalt = Easy to cut and later patch (although they still can't do it right...)

Concrete = Potential for sections of concrete to begin slanting, resulting in bumps
Asphalt = Continuous "sheet" essentially
 
The pro for concrete is of course its durability, ease of maintenance aside. The Palisades Parkway in New Jersey still has the majority of its original concrete pavement. Same goes for the extension of I-287 down there. I Imagine St Paul St in Brookline is paved with concrete for similar reasons: There is a firehouse right on it, the trucks would chew it up in no time.

I wonder how the Germans are able to maintain the Autobahn so well, as I believe it is concrete. I imagine they must re lay entire sections if there is a pothole, since as mentioned they are all but impossible to patch.
 
William F. Callahan, when he was Commissioner of the Mass DPW in the early 1950's, banned concrete as a roadway surfacing material on the state's expanding expressway system. I can't find a citation on that, but do distinctly remember him being quoted in that regard back on the 1950's when I was a kid. That is why concrete surfacing is notabaly absent from Bay State expressways.
 
When I was in high school, the section of Centre St., in Newton, between Route 9 and the Riverside line overpass was paved with concrete slabs. It made for quite the rhythmically bumpy and noisy stretch of road on the good 'ole 52.

This is going back 11 years since I was last on that road, so maybe it's been changed (though a quick trip to Street View shows that at least as of October '07 it hasn't). Maybe I'll have to take a trip down memory lane one of these days.
 
davem said:
I wonder how the Germans are able to maintain the Autobahn so well, as I believe it is concrete. I imagine they must re lay entire sections if there is a pothole, since as mentioned they are all but impossible to patch.
Click to expand...

If I'm not mistaken, most of the Autobahn is actually asphalt overlaying a very thick concrete foundation (something like 2-3x thicker than what they do here in the US). The key to their superior roads is the stronger foundation they invest in; it's relatively cheap to relay asphalt, especially when the underlying roadbed is in good condition. From what I understand, most of the poorly-maintained Autobahn routes are concrete-only, located in the east as a legacy of Soviet control.

I was born and raised in the Midwest, and actually found it quite odd when I first came to Boston that a vast majority of roadways are asphalt. Where I'm from, asphalt is typically only used for more temporary and less traveled roads (e.g. in the suburbs they use asphalt for two-lane roads which they anticipate will be widened to four lanes relatively quickly). Although I think that is changing - they recently (within the past 2-4 years or so) widened a segment of I-80 to 11 lanes and paved over the concrete with asphalt.

It seems that the vast majority of the Northeast/East Coast favors asphalt which, I'm guessing, is for two reasons: it is quieter and handles the array of weather (harsh sea air, winter freezing/spring thawing, etc.) much better than concrete.

erikyow said:
When I was in high school, the section of Centre St., in Newton, between Route 9 and the Riverside line overpass was paved with concrete slabs. It made for quite the rhythmically bumpy and noisy stretch of road on the good 'ole 52.

This is going back 11 years since I was last on that road, so maybe it's been changed (though a quick trip to Street View shows that at least as of October '07 it hasn't). Maybe I'll have to take a trip down memory lane one of these days.
Click to expand...

Hasn't changed a bit. Well, that's not true, it's probably way worse now. :) I cringe every time I have to drive that way. I think the worst road that I've encountered in Greater Boston, though, is Needham St-Highland Ave in Newton. Talk about an abomination!
 
Pleasant St in downtown Malden is made out of concrete; the very same concrete poured back when the "renewed" the urban center and put City Hall between the train station and downtown. So that must have been maybe 30+ years ago?

And they're doing over the street now, and it's as simple as grinding off maybe half an inch, and repouring a half inch. This will give the roadbed an extended life and will be much more aesthetically pleasing.
 
Charlie_mta said:
William F. Callahan, when he was Commissioner of the Mass DPW in the early 1950's, banned concrete as a roadway surfacing material on the state's expanding expressway system. I can't find a citation on that, but do distinctly remember him being quoted in that regard back on the 1950's when I was a kid. That is why concrete surfacing is notabaly absent from Bay State expressways.
Click to expand...

That might mean ban on concrete as top surface, but any expressway built to interstate standards since the earliest interstate standards were created (which pretty much means any expressway, period) must have a concrete roadbed underneath the main carriageways. It's part of the design speed standard to have a roadbed that won't be overly susceptible to sinkholes. Many stretches of 2-lane state roads with 55 or greater speed limits also use it for the same reason.


Old 4-lane state highway/turnpike roadbeds like MA 9, sub-expressway MA 2 in Lincoln/Concord/Acton, US 6 and 6A, US 20, the various original US 1 alignments all are from the first half of the 20th century when those were the high-speed trunk routes. Those generally aren't built like that anymore.
 
omaja said:
Hasn't changed a bit. Well, that's not true, it's probably way worse now. :) I cringe every time I have to drive that way. I think the worst road that I've encountered in Greater Boston, though, is Needham St-Highland Ave in Newton. Talk about an abomination!
Click to expand...

Truer words... They do seem to be doing some work on it at the moment, though. Both the Newton and Needham sides of the street have some serious tearing up going on.
 
They are starting to build bridges out of plastic.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/frp/

"The project involves replacement of existing structure with twelve Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) beams [I-beans] used for the superstructure and concrete deck and upgrade the structure to HS-25 loading. The beams are hybrid carbon/fiberglass reinforced epoxy resin."

The new deck was also plastic panels, and then covered with asphalt. Bridge was fabricated in Ohio, panels and beams trucked to the site, and installed in a day.

HS-25 takes a heavy load, may be 35 or 40 tons.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
That might mean ban on concrete as top surface, but any expressway built to interstate standards since the earliest interstate standards were created (which pretty much means any expressway, period) must have a concrete roadbed underneath the main carriageways. It's part of the design speed standard to have a roadbed that won't be overly susceptible to sinkholes. Many stretches of 2-lane state roads with 55 or greater speed limits also use it for the same reason.
Click to expand...

Not so F-Line. My company has 13 miles of I-95 under construction right now. None of the full-depth construction calls for concrete. It's pretty standard to do something like 8"-12" gravel, topped by 4"-8" dense grade, topped by 8"-12" asphalt. In fact, I've never worked on a highway project that called for a concrete base course (excluding tunnels and bridges).
 
That is true. I'm a licensed civil engineer who has done a lot of roadway design, and a base of gravel under asphalt pavement is the rule. The only time asphalt pavement over concrete happens (on a highway) is when the concrete was the original pavement, and the asphalt is placed over it after the concrete has undergone many years of wear and tear. If this is done, the concrete has to be ground level to eliminate the humps from the setlement of the concrete slabs.
 
I am just surprised that after all these years, someone has not been able to develop a highly durable material, or combination, that can hold up to heavy traffic, plows, bad weather, etc.

Has anyone else seen the big pivot in the road over on Cambridge Street near the Rite Aid? It's like the road has just sunk in.
 
Brighton Ave is wavy, presumably from all the trucks and buses. It was repaved in 2000 I believe.
 
AmericanFolkLegend said:
Not so F-Line. My company has 13 miles of I-95 under construction right now. None of the full-depth construction calls for concrete. It's pretty standard to do something like 8"-12" gravel, topped by 4"-8" dense grade, topped by 8"-12" asphalt. In fact, I've never worked on a highway project that called for a concrete base course (excluding tunnels and bridges).
Click to expand...

That seems pretty accurate, given our roads turn to crap much faster than most anything in Europe. ;) I'm pretty sure they tend to use some sort of stone/concrete base beneath a top coat of asphalt that is easily twice as thick as what we have in the US.
 
omaja said:
That seems pretty accurate, given our roads turn to crap much faster than most anything in Europe. ;) I'm pretty sure they tend to use some sort of stone/concrete base beneath a top coat of asphalt that is easily twice as thick as what we have in the US.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where in Europe you are comparing us to, but most of Western Europe is warmer and less snowy than Boston. We have a hell of an uphill battle maintaing roads around here.
 
We also spend half as much on infrastructure as most of Western Europe which is more of an uphill battle than the fact that we have around twice as much snow.
 
Boston could benefit from laying concrete slabs at frequently-used bus stops and using concrete for dedicated bus lanes.

I can't remember if NYC does it, but LA lays down a slab at stops to save on the wear and tear caused by heavy buses braking and accelerating.

As far as bus routes go, the rutted asphalt on Washington St. is a good example of how not to pave one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top