You must log in or register to comment.

D0D t1_iwdaza0 wrote

But how will companies sustain constant revenue???


Spinaccio t1_iwezmr0 wrote

I live in the US, there’s more than enough work to go around. Testing while laying down asphalt is a little bit late, though.


Unfetteredfloydfan t1_iwf9icn wrote

It’s used when compacted the subgrade and base coarse if I recall correctly. So if used correctly, it will help the construction crew account for the variability of the natural materials (earth foundations with high void ratios; subgrade; and base coarse) that typically cause uneven compaction and potholes. I don’t believe it’s used when compacting the surface coarse


Spinaccio t1_iwf9tpn wrote

You’re right, I was thinking of rolling the asphalt, which makes no sense.


civillyengineerd t1_iwd621z wrote

Interesting, but doubtful.


Civilengman t1_iwg470b wrote

It doesn’t work I’ve been on 3 projects where this was tested. It cost a lot of money and all 3 change ordered density controlled compaction into toe contract.


CajuNerd t1_iwdu67j wrote

Well, I know we'll never see this down in Louisiana. Having our roads either completely destroyed or under constant reconstruction is a state pass-time.


prophet001 t1_iwd93d3 wrote

This makes me think we've found the point of diminishing returns with regard to road construction techniques and technology.


mbod t1_iwk391l wrote

Let's go back to oiling down gravel roads to suppress dust!


prophet001 t1_iwktxe8 wrote

I was thinking build more trains but okay.


mbod t1_iwlpa00 wrote

Yeah I was being sarcastic. We need more light rail in urban centres


UserName8372861 t1_iwetw2k wrote

Sounds interesting, but you’re not getting away from using a nuclear densitometer for testing the actual compaction. I could see using this for adjusting the unit’s speed though.


Spinaccio t1_iwf06ha wrote

If it can accurately predict failure points while rolling, even guessing, it could save billions in repairs and insurance claims. Redo a potential soft spot, then bring in the nuke. Right now the standards I’ve seen for compaction testing leave potential holes like Swiss cheese. More testing is good.


mbod t1_iwk3ulv wrote

What's the use in predicting a fail point in the road base gravel when you pave in June, and then the seasons, weather, temperature, ground water, frost level, humidity, traffic variations and countless other variables come into play?

With this tech you might be able to prevent 0.01% of deficiencies.


Spinaccio t1_iwnvopv wrote

Don’t know where you get 0.01%. Current QC requirements in the US that I work with call for roll testing, visually observing a heavy object rolling over the substrate, hoping to see any soft spots in the substrate, and Nuclear densitometer testing which is highly localized and in my experience used to show an average compaction over an area. Adding testing that is more widespread, even without 100% accuracy, gives quality control an additional tool to find soft spots in a roadbed before it is paved over.


AutoModerator t1_iwd1n26 wrote

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.