<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Precast Bridge Deck Panel Joint Testing</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2671999</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project investigated the effect of various experimental parameters on the static flexural capacity of longitudinal joints in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania precast concrete bridge deck panel systems. The laboratory component of this study included fifteen full-scale static flexural tests of laboratory-assembled precast concrete deck systems that were conducted at the Lafayette College Concrete Lab (LCCL) in Easton, Pennsylvania, USA. Most notably, the experimental design explored the influence of (a) different reinforcing steel details within the joint (e.g. reinforcing bar termination details, reinforcing bar spacing, joint lap length, and reinforcing bar size) and (b) the influence of different commercially available specialty joint materials on structural specimen behavior, joint cost, and constructability. As a result of the experimental work, the research team proposed various revisions to current PennDOT design and construction standards that reflect proposed implementations. Specifically, joint details and geometries are proposed for longitudinal and transverse bridge deck panel joints with ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC). The use of various polymer concrete products is recommended for conditional use in various configurations of transverse joints only. Further research is recommended to evaluate the durability of various joint details under repeated service-level cyclic loading and to further explore the potential implementations of polymer concrete products in longitudinal closure pours.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2026 16:28:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2671999</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Static and fatigue characteristics of longitudinal formwork-free joints for acceleration bridge construction</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2627455</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study develops a formwork-free joint with headed bars for accelerated bridge construction. A flexural static load test was conducted to investigate the crack resistance, failure mode, and load-bearing capacity of the proposed joint. For comparison, a formwork-free joint using U-bars with the same joint width was also designed. The influence of joint concrete strength on mechanical behavior was investigated. In addition, the experimental results were compared with analytically derived bearing capacities from existing methods. Based on the test results, a nonlinear FE model incorporating the cracking behavior of the joint interface was established, and the determination of interface parameters was discussed. Finally, the flexural fatigue performance of the proposed joint detail was evaluated. The results show that steel fibers control the crack width of the joint concrete within the specified limits, and the interface bearing capacity significantly affects the joint’s crack resistance. As the strength of the joint concrete is lower than that of the precast component, the interface cracking load and the bearing capacity of the joint drop, resulting in the failure of the joint concrete and a decrease in the ductility coefficient. The recommended value of the peak tangential stress is 0.2 ∼ 0.5 times that of the axial tensile stress strength of the weaker concrete when the cohesive contact relationship simulated by T-S law. After 2 million fatigue load cycles, the stiffness, bearing capacity, and ductility coefficient of the specimen with joint decrease by 12.5 %, 8.1 %, and 6.4 %, respectively, due to the damage of the joint concrete, which satisfies the bearing capacity requirement of the ultimate limit state.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2026 09:24:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2627455</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of Longitudinal Joint Densities of Asphalt Pavements in Kansas</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2652473</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The longitudinal joint between hot-mix asphalt (HMA) mats is often the weakest part of a bituminous concrete pavement. These joints often deteriorate fast under traffic because cracks in them allow water to ingress into the pavement, leading to further disintegration. Many studies, including one by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Asphalt Institute in 2012, have fully recognized this. 

It is believed that the longitudinal cracks result primarily from the density gradient encountered across the joint during HMA construction.  This density gradient can be attributed to low density at the unconfined edge when the first lane is paved and relatively high density at the confined edge when the adjacent lane is paved. The water infiltrates through the low-density area with high air voids and results in premature failures. The other causes of longitudinal cracks include loss in temperature during rolling; height differential due to poor construction (difficulty in compacting the unconfined edges) or differential settlements; residual stress (occurring at the wheel path as the HMA mat density increases) that exceeds the tensile strength of the HMA; and temperature and environmental forces. 

Asphalt pavement joints can be cold or hot. The cold joints occur where the first lane pavement has cooled overnight or longer, before the next lane is placed or where the first lane is carried so far ahead that the face has cooled to well below 120o F. Hot joints are produced by two pavers operating in echelon spaced close enough together so that the lane placed first does not cool significantly before the other lane is placed. There are many conventional joint compaction techniques such as rolling from the hot side, rolling from the cold side, and echelon paving. Various longitudinal joint construction techniques are being practiced now with varying results.
 
Starting in October 2002 letting, the Kansas Department of Transportation (KSDOT) added longitudinal joint density (for HMA lift thickness greater than 1 in.) evaluation procedure to all bituminous pavements as a subsection 603.03(e)(2) in Special Provisions 90M-6917 following the specifications of the Texas Department of Transportation. The traveled way joint density was evaluated by taking two or three Nuclear Density Gauge readings in the transverse direction one paver-width wide. The traveled-way joint density, either one or two locations, is subtracted from the interior density and the difference in density compared to the allowable limits. The acceptable criterion for the joint density was interior density-joint density < 50 kg/m3.  Since then, the specification has been modified as (Interior Density - Joint Density) ≤3.0 lb/ft3 or Joint Density ≥ 91.0% of Gmm, where Gmm is the theoretical maximum HMA specific gravity.  

Many agencies including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Connecticut DOT, Michigan DOT, and Pennsylvania DOT have established pay schedules for joint densities. Thus, research on potential pay schedules for joint densities in Kansas to improve the quality of HMA pavement construction is worth pursuing. 
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2026 15:50:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2652473</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Experimental Joint Sealants for Hot Mix Asphalt Pavements and Overlays</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2617991</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Longitudinal joints in the construction of hot mix asphalt pavements and overlays are a source of failure for the long-term performance of the pavement or overlay. Reduced density and increased permeability to surface water along the longitudinal joint lead to deterioration such as cracking, raveling, and stripping. The challenge of constructing a longitudinal joint that will not deteriorate under environmental and loading conditions has confronted pavement designers and constructors for numerous years. Many concepts and materials have been developed to address the deterioration of longitudinal joints in hot mix asphalt pavements and overlays. Notched wedge joints, the Michigan step joint, and many others, as well as variations in rolling patterns, have been developed to improve density at the joint. Joint tapes, liquid bituminous adhesives, and other products have been developed to seal the joint itself. In addition to these products, bituminous sealants have now been developed to address the issue of permeability at the longitudinal joint and surrounding area. Illinois experimented with the use of bituminous sealants on four projects in the fall of 2003. Two projects were constructed on interstate routes, and the remaining two projects were constructed on Illinois primary routes. Two products were used as part of the evaluation; however, both products were not used on each project. The two products include “J-Band® ” by Heritage Research Group, and “QuickSeam® ” by Hendy Products Inc.. This report will cover the construction and initial testing for all four projects. In addition, the material costs and future research objectives will be discussed.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Dec 2025 16:06:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2617991</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of Longitudinal Joint Sealant in Illinois</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2617992</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Longitudinal joint deterioration of hot mix asphalt pavement is often caused by low joint density that allows the infiltration of water and air into the pavement. The problem is not confined to the joint interface. Low density is typically found several inches from the joint on both the unconfined and confined edges. Previous joint seals have been applied to the joint interface, but this does not address the low density of the joint area. This report summarizes five field trials of two products, the Emulsicoat Jband and the Quik Pave Products QuikSeam. Both products extended between 6 to 9 inches on both sides of the joint in order to address the entire low-density area. Both products are a solid prior to covering with the Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) surface course. The heat of the HMA surface course softens the joint sealant. The pressure from compacting with a vibratory roller causes the joint sealant to migrate upward into the surface course air voids. The result is a joint area that prevents water and air infiltration into the lower pavement lifts and that significantly decreases infiltration within the HMA surface course. Effectiveness of the products was determined by using a field permeameter and visually monitoring joint sealant migration in cores. Results of these tests are included with the report. The results of the field trials show that both products significantly decreased joint permeability. Different trials were used to evaluate formulation changes to increase migration levels. The Jband and QuikSeam formulations evaluated in the fifth trial migrated respectively to within 0.5 and 0.625 inch of the top of the HMA surface course. Results and observations from the five field trials are included in this report. The report also includes a detail of the lab procedure that was used to minimize the number of field trials.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Dec 2025 16:06:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2617992</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Draft Design Plans and Drawings</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2584540</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recommendations for repair of U.S. 75 are included for the longitudinally faulted and longitudinally separated slabs located near Dennison, Texas.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2025 11:04:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2584540</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Improving Performance of Longitudinal Joints in Airfield Asphalt Pavements Volume 1: Literature Review of Construction Techniques to Improve the Performance of Longitudinal Joints and a Review of Longitudinal Joint Maintenance for Airfield Pavements</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2582406</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study examined void-reducing asphalt membrane (VRAM), rapid-penetrating emulsion (RPE), and other approaches to reducing the deterioration of longitudinal joints on airfield asphalt pavements based on experiences and field trials on highway pavements. The project deliverables are presented in three volumes. This volume, Volume 1, contains a literature review of VRAM, RPE, and other techniques to improve longitudinal joint performance, as well as a literature review of longitudinal joint maintenance for airfield pavements.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2025 17:23:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2582406</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Improving Performance of Longitudinal Joints in Airfield Asphalt Pavements Volume 2: Inspections of Existing and New Projects with Different Longitudinal Joint Construction Techniques</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2582405</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study examined void-reducing asphalt membrane (VRAM), rapid-penetrating emulsion (RPE), and other approaches to reducing the deterioration of longitudinal joints on airfield asphalt pavements based on experiences and field trials on highway pavements. The project deliverables are presented in three volumes. This volume, Volume 2, describes site inspections conducted for existing projects with VRAM installations to assess their performance, as well as site inspections of new projects installing VRAM and rapid-penetrating emulsion RPE to document their application. This report presents project summaries for each of the sites inspected.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2025 17:23:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2582405</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Improving Performance of Longitudinal Joints in Airfield Asphalt Pavements Volume 3: Best Practices Manual for Longitudinal Joint Maintenance</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2582404</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study examined void-reducing asphalt membrane (VRAM), rapid-penetrating emulsion (RPE), and other approaches to reducing the deterioration of longitudinal joints on airfield asphalt pavements based on experiences and field trials on highway pavements. The project deliverables are presented in three volumes. This volume, Volume 3, covers the overall joint construction process, with detailed emphasis on construction considerations, materials, specifications, and practices that build on the information provided in Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Advisory Circulars (ACs) 150/5370-10, Standard Specifications for Construction of Airports, and 150/5380-6, Guidelines and Procedures for Maintenance of Airport Pavements. Additionally, the manual references supplementary technical resources for the construction and maintenance of asphalt longitudinal joints to improve performance.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2025 17:23:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2582404</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Development of User-friendly Tools and Decision-making Algorithms for Service Life Design of ABC Bridges</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2534061</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Using prefabricated deck panels is one of the most popular accelerated bridge construction (ABC) methods. Prefabricated deck elements are connected by cast-in-place closure joints onsite. The performance of the closure joints under service loads is critical since it affects the structural integrity and durability of the structure. There are several design methods available in the literature. The state-of-the art of closure joints design methods for service life and durability are synthesized in a recent publication by the Accelerated Bridge Construction University Transportation Center (ABC-UTC). The published guide is comprehensive; however, it is not user friendly for bridge engineers and state departments of transportation (state DOTs) to be used and implemented in their design. The goal of this project is to design and implement a web-based decision support tool to facilitate the use of existing manuals and bridge specifications in practice. Decision-making criteria and algorithms, presented in the guideline for service life design of longitudinal deck closure joints, are first derived. They are then translated into UML (Unified Modeling Language) use cases to design a relational database and develop a series of well-designed interactive questions and user interfaces. This will allow users to walk through the service life process with the aids of visual elements, suggestions, and make final design decisions, without having to know fully the theory behind probabilistic approaches. Specifically, the estimated service life and initial costs are calculated for each solution/mitigation strategy given in the guide and trade-off analyses are conducted to choose the best option.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2025 17:07:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2534061</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Wide Cracks and Joints in Flexible and Composite Pavements: State DOT Maintenance Practices</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2536104</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The repair of transverse cracks and longitudinal paving joints and cracks in asphalt and asphalt-surfaced pavements is a common maintenance activity for state departments of transportation (DOTs). One of the limitations of crack sealing and filling, however, is the width of the crack for which these repairs are successful. Cracks that are good candidates for sealing and filling are relatively narrow and experience limited movement (both horizontal opening and closing and vertical movement). There is limited guidance available on maintenance practices for cracks that are not good candidates for sealing and filling. These are wider and deeper cracks for which crack sealing and filling may not be appropriate treatments. The objective of this synthesis is to document practices used by state DOTs for flexible and composite pavement maintenance for wide transverse and longitudinal cracks and joints. Information for this study was gathered through a literature review, a survey of state DOTs, and follow-up interviews with selected DOTs. Case examples of seven state DOTs provide additional information on their maintenance practices for wide cracks and joints in flexible and composite pavements.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2025 17:34:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2536104</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Non-destructive compaction evaluation and comparison of different asphalt centerline longitudinal joints</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2438480</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Longitudinal joint quality is critical to the service life of asphalt pavements. Maintaining failed joints of asphalt pavements is a challenge for many highway agencies. Long-term performance issues of flexible pavements may result from a poorly constructed joint; the low-density joint can prematurely deteriorate an otherwise sound pavement. The longitudinal joint is built using different geometries, rolling patterns, and construction techniques, all involving risk in achieving a well-compacted joint. Conventional quality control (QC) and quality assurance (QA) testing (using cores or density gauges) provide limited coverage due to their spot-test nature. Using conventional QC/QA methods involves the risk of accepting a poorly constructed longitudinal joint at the time of construction. This study used continuous data from the non-destructive dielectric profiling system (DPS) to identify compaction ability differences between the various joint types and construction techniques. The analysis suggests avoiding constructing an unconfined joint when possible. Percent within limits (PWL) analysis shows that any joint geometry could produce minimal compaction differences between the joint and the mat. However, if an unconfined joint needs to be constructed, a portion of the unconfined joint should be cut back before paving the adjacent lane. Such a cutback technique can result in better unconfined joint compaction. Further, PWL results showed that using a smaller subsection/sublot can isolate local compaction issues; a 100 ft sublot length is preferable for PWL analysis when utilizing DPS for compaction evaluation.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:11:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2438480</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Study on the shear mechanical response and failure characteristics of prefabricated double-cabin utility tunnel joints</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2427564</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Longitudinal joints are the most vulnerable parts of prefabricated utility tunnels, susceptible to damage from external forces and foundation settlement. Currently, the shear mechanical properties of prefabricated double-cabin utility tunnel joints are unclear, preventing the evaluation of the structural or joint safety of utility tunnels. The shear mechanical response and failure characteristics of the joints of prefabricated double-cabin utility tunnels are investigated by combining model testing with numerical simulation. The results indicate that the shear deformation of utility tunnel joints can be categorized into elastic, crack propagation, and damage stages. In the course of joint-shear deformation, the middle utility tunnel sustains centrosymmetric failure. The degree of deformation of the large cabin is greater than that of the small cabin, while the damage to the small cabin is more severe. When the utility tunnel is subjected to the same load, the joint dislocation under the gravelly sand foundation is the smallest, but the damage range is the largest and the cracks are the most. Local strengthening and protection are needed at the chamfer, near the bolt hole, and the top and bottom. The stratum conditions have little effect on the shear stiffness of the joint during the elastic stage, but they have a significant impact during the crack propagation and damage stages. Finally, the joint damage area is approximately 15% of the total utility tunnel, and the deformation region of the longitudinal connectors is approximately 16% of its length.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Oct 2024 09:23:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2427564</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Energy-based criteria for identification of impact-induced interfacial damage of longitudinally connected slab ballastless track structure</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2424731</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Interfacial damage as a potential threat affects the stability of the longitudinally connected slab ballastless track structure (LCSBTS). In most related research, the interfacial damage of LCSBTS is identified in terms of stiffness degradation, which makes it difficult to explore the role of energy in the development of the interfacial damage. As an alternative, a set of energy-based criteria rooted in a bilinear cohesive zone model was proposed, together with a new damage indicator that evaluates the loss of interfacial fracture energy. The proposed criteria were utilized in the simulation of the interfacial damage of LCSBTS subjected to wheel impact. Results show that, the energy-based damage indicator describes the growth of the interfacial damage at a slower speed than the stiffness-based damage indicator, better coordinating with the variation of the interfacial fracture energy. Under wheel impact, interfacial damages are most likely to occur out of a peanut-shaped region surrounding the impact point where shear stress surpasses tension stress. However, by considering a coupling action of the positive temperature gradient, severe interfacial damages appear around the center of the track slab where tension stress surpasses shear stress and interfacial damages caused by shear stress are located near the longitudinal edges of the track slab.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2024 13:48:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2424731</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SPR-4913:  Investigation of Longitudinal Joint Sealant Properties for Enhanced Durability of HMA Pavements</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2434106</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of using fog sealing over surface longitudinal joints. A similar assessment of void reducing asphalt membrane (VRAM) application will also be studied. The relative effectiveness of the two longitudinal joint treatment methods may be gauged by the elapsed time to first repair of the joints after treatment application. The study will also examine cases of debonding or poor adhesion of pavement marking material in cases where fog sealing was used. The end goal of this study is to identify the better of the two joint treatments, fog seal versus VRAM, for state-wide adoption.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2024 09:32:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2434106</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>