Return to the VTRC Home Page
Click here to print the printer friendly version of this page.
Page Title: VTRC Report Detail

The contents of this report reflect the views of the author(s), who is responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Commonwealth Transportation Board, or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Any inclusion of manufacturer names, trade names, or trademarks is for identification purposes only and is not to be considered an endorsement.


Evaluation of Concrete Pavement Patching Techniques
Kevin K. McGhee
Michael M. Sprinkel
Year: 1989
VTRC No.: 89-R22
Abstract: This final report presents the results of a study undertaken to improve in concrete pavement patching techniques. Activities included an evaluation of the suitability of the impact hammer and maturity calculations for determining when a patch is ready to receive traffic, the determination of the compressive strength of typical patches at the time they are first subjected to traffic, the collection of installation data on selected patches, and subsequent monitoring of the performance of the patches over a 33- to 81-month period. The research is valuable to the Department because it shows that (1) with proper calibration, the impact hammer can be used to provide an indication of the compressive strength of a patch, (2) with the development of appropriate regression models, maturity calculations can be used to provide an indication of the compressive strength of a patch, (3) patches subjected to traffic at an age of 6 to 9 hours showed the most deterioration, (4) patches with a temperature matched cured strength greater than 4,500 psi when opened to traffic showed the least deterioration, and (5) all patch types evaluated performed satisfactorily over the study period with the exception of some faulting and early deterioration of some full-width, full-depth, Type I patches without load transfer devices that were [less than or equal to] 3 ft long. A longer evaluation period is needed to better assess the relative performance of the patch types.