- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Civil Engineers - Sectional Concrete vs. Continuous Asphalt Pavement
Posted on 1/28/25 at 2:00 pm to winkchance
Posted on 1/28/25 at 2:00 pm to winkchance
quote:The DOTD writes the specs for all of it's projects. If the DOTD writes Concrete as the pavement material, all bidders must quote only concrete. The same is true with projects that specify only Asphalt pavement, that only asphalt paving would be accepted, not a concrete variant.
DOTD has to follow the law the legislature put in place. The law says lowest bidder right now. Until that changes DOTD cannot break the law.
If and only if (and this is rare that the DOTD puts out projects this way) the DOTD allows options for using either concrete or for using asphalt paving, then the DOTD can select the best option* (in their opinion) and the selected option does not have to be the cheapest bid.
So your statement in that case is not correct that the law REQUIRES the DOTD to always take the lowest bid.
*Life cycle, days of construction, safety issues, etc. factor into the DOTD's decision as to the best value for the taxpayers' money in those cases.
This post was edited on 1/28/25 at 2:01 pm
0
Posted on 1/28/25 at 2:53 pm to Power-Dome
Properly poured and maintained concrete will outperform asphalt with few exceptions. At times it is almost as cost effective, especially in areas where maintenance is going to ALWAYS cause major traffic tie ups. Asphalt is nearly always less expensive and maintenance is less expensive but has to be done more often so it winds up costing as much in the long run....but most asphalt maintenance is a relatively short process so its more effective where traffic is heavy.
Maintenance of asphalt is not rocket science...the data is well established. Money spent on maintenance provides a helluva ROI....the problem is it ain't sexy and bean counters won't fund it in a timely fashion and once its gone too far there is no ROI...its just expensive.
Maintenance of asphalt is not rocket science...the data is well established. Money spent on maintenance provides a helluva ROI....the problem is it ain't sexy and bean counters won't fund it in a timely fashion and once its gone too far there is no ROI...its just expensive.
Posted on 1/28/25 at 3:17 pm to The Boat
quote:
Concrete is superior when done right. Concrete Texas interstates >>>>>> Asphalt Louisiana interstates.
Compare the work Texas is doing at the state line compared to the work Louisiana is doing. Texas looks good and Louisiana looks like cheap shite.
I believe Texas actually reinforces their concrete roads while Louisiana doesn't.
Concrete vs. Asphalt - It all depends on the coast of oil to which one is more cost effective at the time of letting the project. DOTD will do alternative bids and part of the equation takes into account the maintenance cost comparison over the next 20 years. it also depends on the type of roadway project where if sequence is quicker to use asphalt then it may be chosen over concrete. Like another said, usually concrete is less maintenance but making sure the concrete is placed properly with the correct vibration to remove air void will reduce the spalling at the joints or even chunks of concrete in the middle of slabs.
Posted on 1/28/25 at 3:28 pm to The Boat
quote:Do we actually have these? I have not paid attention.
Asphalt Louisiana interstates.
Posted on 1/28/25 at 4:22 pm to Power-Dome
While we’re at it, explain why we cut a big square out of the concrete and then fill it three inches below grade with asphalt. I love those.
Posted on 1/28/25 at 4:26 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
Asphalt Louisiana interstates.
Yes there are some sections of I-10 around New Orleans is Asphalt.
I-12 outside of Baton Rouge is Asphalt.
Fun Fact Asphalt is theoretically a liquid instead of a solid.
Posted on 1/28/25 at 4:47 pm to thegambler
I wouldnt mind paying tolls in louisiana if there was roads that are toll worthy. build a toll road to bypass the nonsense on I-10 in baton rouge, or a bypass around the thruway in lafayette.
Posted on 1/28/25 at 5:27 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
Do we actually have these? I have not paid attention.
They are almost exclusively outside of the cities. And even some city interstates are asphalt.
Posted on 1/28/25 at 6:01 pm to AwgustaDawg
quote:
Properly poured and maintained concrete will outperform asphalt with few exceptions. At times it is almost as cost effective, especially in areas where maintenance is going to ALWAYS cause major traffic tie ups. Asphalt is nearly always less expensive and maintenance is less expensive but has to be done more often so it winds up costing as much in the long run....but most asphalt maintenance is a relatively short process so its more effective where traffic is heavy.
Not when you have to repave the enter roadway and lay new concrete down. That is a pain in arse.
See US 90 between Western St. Mary and Lafayette.
They are removing the old concrete road deck and replacing it with new concrete and removing a OT favorite spot that a member created back in the 1970's before the road opened and hit some wet cement. DOTD never repaired it before opening. Now it will be long gone since DOTD is replacing the entire road.
Asphalt is easier to mill and overlay, but you have to do every 5-10 years. In Louisiana, there are some heavily traveled roads that are going on 30-40 years between milling and overlays.
Depending on how you do overlay the road, you could do it in a single pass, the grater is run to remove the top coat and sweepers clean the milled road bed, an oil tanker oils the road bed, and the an asphalt paver follows with a crew to compact the fresh asphalt. It may take a 30 mintues to an hour before traffic can then pass on the road again. Then temporary lines are sprayed flowed by highly reflective road tape and reflectors on the roadway.
Concrete is totally different, you close the entire road, you remove all the road panels and rework the soil, and then you lay new reinforcing rods, expansion joints, and then laydown new pavement. It could take weeks, months, or years depending on how large of a section of road you are doing. If you are doing it like US 90 in New Iberia, you lose one lane of travel and put two way traffic on one side of the road not under construction for a few miles.
This post was edited on 1/28/25 at 6:03 pm
Posted on 1/28/25 at 6:16 pm to alphaandomega
quote:
The road to my farm in Sumter county is horrible. That area was once the shoreline of a shallow sea during the Cretaceous period. There are some type of mussel that is about 6-7" wide that is over 100 million years old that I disk up almost every year. There is a place a few miles north of me called Shark Tooth Creek that after every rain you can go into and find hundreds of shark teeth..
Your place is obviously in North Sumter. The Black Belt causes all kinds of problems. I-20/59 from Livingston to the Tombigbee was originally concrete but was replaced with asphalt. Our place is in South Sumter which is sandier.
Posted on 1/29/25 at 6:51 am to lostinbr
quote:
With funding that has been effectively reduced every year since 1990.
Yes. The answer to our shitty roads is more tax money.
Figure out how much money the state takes in yearly off of fuel tax and tell me how more would be the answer to the road problems.
Posted on 1/29/25 at 7:05 am to WestCoastAg
quote:
Engineers design shite. Operators put on Band-Aids
Posted on 1/29/25 at 7:33 am to Zakatak
quote:
Figure out how much money the state takes in yearly off of fuel tax and tell me how more would be the answer to the road problems.
Per the Louisiana Legislative Auditor:
quote:
As a result of inflation and fuel efficiency, the inflation-adjusted funding per VMT (vehicle mile traveled) decreased by 64.4% from 1990 to 2020, or from 2.81 cents per VMT in 1990 to 1.00 cent per VMT in 2020 dollars.
The following graphs show the impact of inflation alone; in other words, they do not include the additional impact of increased fuel efficiency:
So let me ask you - what is it about our shitty roads and/or our transportation budget that makes you think less money each year is the solution?
Posted on 1/29/25 at 9:05 am to lostinbr
quote:
So let me ask you - what is it about our shitty roads and/or our transportation budget that makes you think less money each year is the solution?
Fuel consumption is WAY over what the numbers were in 1990.
Percentage of inflation in regards to per gallon is not where we should be looking. What's the annual dollar amount taken in yearly now vs 1990?
Quick google search I did is for the USA. Couldn't find Louisiana specific but I'm sure it applies to the state with similar growth.
1990 diesel gallons consumed = 12.2 billion
2022 diesel gallons consumed = 45.6 billion
We use way more fuel than we did back then. That results in an increase in tax revenue. It does not get spent properly.
Besides, were our roads that great in 1990?
Posted on 1/29/25 at 9:25 am to DakIsNoLB
quote:
Asphalt is the cheaper upfront cost, but won't last as long and needs more continuous maintenance. Concrete is more expensive upfront, but lasts longer and doesn't need as much continuous maintenance.
Last time I did a value engineering decision at DOTD, the asphalt still came out cheaper even when considering maintenance.
Posted on 1/29/25 at 10:23 am to Hu_Flung_Pu
Only thing I know about this subject is my church had to make the choice between concrete and asphalt. What we saw in the past was that the asphalt would tend to be "pushed" to the sides if a heavy truck (even like a mailtruck) made a regular daily path, and had to be repaired. We choose concrete and so far glad we did.
Posted on 1/29/25 at 11:41 am to Galactic Inquisitor
quote:
Texas can afford to do concrete because their highways aren't funded by a single tax that has remained stagnant for 40 years.
yeah, thats it. Thats all there is to it.
Posted on 1/29/25 at 12:24 pm to Zakatak
quote:
Fuel consumption is WAY over what the numbers were in 1990.
Percentage of inflation in regards to per gallon is not where we should be looking. What's the annual dollar amount taken in yearly now vs 1990?
Quick google search I did is for the USA. Couldn't find Louisiana specific but I'm sure it applies to the state with similar growth.
1990 diesel gallons consumed = 12.2 billion
2022 diesel gallons consumed = 45.6 billion
We use way more fuel than we did back then. That results in an increase in tax revenue. It does not get spent properly.
Luckily we have some actual data from the Louisiana Legislative Auditor:
quote:
The use of Louisiana's highway system increased from 37.7 billion vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) in 1990 to 48.4 billion in 2020 (a 28.4% increase), while the state's motor fuel tax revenues increased from $452.0 million to $483.2 million (a 6.9% increase). During this time (1990 through 2020), the cost of labor, materials, and other expenses associated with building and maintaining highway infrastructure, as measured by the National Highway Cost Construction Index and Producer Price Index for Highway and Street Construction, increased by 133.8%.
So to recap:
- Fuel tax revenues increased by 6.9% from 1990 to 2020.
- Road usage, in terms of vehicle miles traveled, increased by 28.4% from 1990 to 2020.
Even without accounting for inflation, actual road usage increased by 4x as much as tax revenue. This is primarily due to increased fuel efficiency, with EV’s playing a growing role as well.
- Meanwhile the cost of road maintenance and construction increased by 133.8%.
This means our $483.2 million in fuel tax revenue in 2020 would have been worth $206.7 million in 1990 - 54% less than the actual revenue in the 1990. That’s without accounting for the increased road usage.
When you combine these factors, you’ve increased road usage by 28% and decreased real revenue by 54%.
You can stick your fingers in your ears and say “nuh-uh” but the fact is that we have significantly less funding on both a per-usage basis and a total inflation-adjusted basis than we did in 1990.
quote:
Besides, were our roads that great in 1990?
I don’t know, that was before I started driving. But I know that the road conditions and congestion have become worse over my years on the road. Let’s say they weren’t great - do you think cutting the per-vehicle-mile funding by ~65% should have resulted in better roads?
Posted on 2/1/25 at 9:20 am to SoFlaGuy
From experience; it’s easier to fix a design than to create a new design. Engineers and designers are not always free to produce their own or best design. Every project has a goal and a budget.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 9:32 am to jeffsdad
quote:
Only thing I know about this subject is my church had to make the choice between concrete and asphalt. What we saw in the past was that the asphalt would tend to be "pushed" to the sides if a heavy truck (even like a mailtruck) made a regular daily path, and had to be repaired. We choose concrete and so far glad we did.
It happens like that on highways too. Most asphalt highways in Louisiana have two huge continuous channels where vehicles travel. It becomes really dangerous when it rains because those channels become pools of water.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News