The purpose of this project is to compare the effectiveness of surface treatments for creating a trail accessible to people with mobility impairments. Specifically, this study is examining the longitudinal effects of surface treatments on surface firmness and stability, the costs of applying the treatments, and their relative maintenance demands.
What is being tested:
The trail base contains compacted soil indigenous to central Indiana. The types of surfaces used were Quarter Minus Limestone, #11 limestone (refers to stone size), and indigenous soil. Quarter Minus Limestone is a by-product of crushed limestone in which the limestone fines are no larger than a quarter inch and most fines are dust particles.
1. Quarter Minus Limestone with Stabilizer
This test plot has shown considerable wear and is breaking down at the sides. The results of
this test so far have indicated that this surface has had an average of .36 -.59 inch
penetrations.
2. Quarter Minus Limestone with Road Oyl Resin Modified Emulsion
This plot has shown little wear and is holding up well under all the trail use. There is an
average penetration of .05 -.08 inches on this surface. This surface has proven to be very
usable by people with mobility impairments.
3. Quarter Minus Limestone with Mountain Grout Soil Stabilizer
This plot has shown the least wear of all test plots, the average penetration on this plot
was .009 -.03 inches.
4. Quarter Minus Limestone
This test plot has had an average penetration of .10 - .90 inches. This plot has shown
instability when wet and under adverse temperature changes. This surface has degraded and
broken down much faster than other surfaces where stabilizers have been applied.
5. 50% #11 Limestone and 50% soil
This surface has an average penetration of .45 - 1.2 inches, it has been the second worst
surface in terms of decay.
6. Soil
This surface has had the poorest results over the last two years; the average penetration is
.35 -1.80 inches. When wet, people with mobility impairments have deemed this surface
inaccessible and the surface has shown a substantial amount of decay.
7. Soil and Mountain Grout
This surface has an average penetration of .21 - .87 inches with signs of decay on the edges
of this test plot and in the middle.
|
Application |
Penetration |
|---|---|
| Quarter Minus Limestone with Mountain Grout SoilStabilizer | .009-.03 inches |
| Quarter Minus Limestone with Road Oyl ResinModified Emulsion | .05-.08 inches |
| Quarter Minus Limestone | .10-.90 inches |
| Soil and Mountain Grout Soil Stabilizer | .21-.87 inches |
| Quarter Minus Limestone with Stabilizer | .36-.59 inches |
| 50% #11 Limestone and 50% soil | .45-1.2 inches |
| Soil | .35-1.80 inches |
| Very Firm/Stable | Moderately Firm/Stable | Not Firm/Stable | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Firmness | 0.3 inch or less | 0.3 & <0.5 inch | 0.5 inch |
| Stability | 0.5 inch or less | 0.5 & <1.0 inch | 1.0 inch |