Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:02:12 +0000, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote:

Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

They could leave it, we have some concrete roads around here.

On 19/03/2021 13:08, jon wrote:
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:02:12 +0000, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote:

Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

They could leave it, we have some concrete roads around here.


Local station car park and the entrance has just been done for
Southern Rail. Planed off the entrance road down to concrete on day 1
and the whole job was finished by day 3.

"jon" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:02:12 +0000, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote:

Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

They could leave it, we have some concrete roads around here.

I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the M40 were
made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints. Not a nice road
surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard, but there's a bit more give
in it) and the thump-thump-thump of each joint gets very annoying after a
few seconds ;-) About the only thing in their favour was that concrete roads
were very hard-wearing and didn't need resurfacing every few years.

NY expressed precisely :
I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the M40 were made
up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints. Not a nice road surface to
drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard, but there's a bit more give in it) and
the thump-thump-thump of each joint gets very annoying after a few seconds
;-)

...and noisy. The built a motorway a few years ago in concrete, one mile
away. A petition soon had it resurfaced in tarmac.

In message , NY writes
"jon" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:02:12 +0000, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote:

Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

They could leave it, we have some concrete roads around here.

I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the M40
were made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints. Not a nice
road surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard, but there's a bit
more give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of each joint gets very
annoying after a few seconds ;-) About the only thing in their favour
was that concrete roads were very hard-wearing and didn't need
resurfacing every few years.

There is a section of the M25 a bit like that Ashstead/ Reigate area.


--
Tim Lamb

On 19 Mar 2021, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote

NY expressed precisely :
I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the
M40 were made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints.
Not a nice road surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard,
but there's a bit more give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of
each joint gets very annoying after a few seconds ;-)

..and noisy. The built a motorway a few years ago in concrete, one
mile away. A petition soon had it resurfaced in tarmac.

There are some stretches of the M25 -- through Surrey and Kent (I
think) -- that are still concrete slabs with expansion joints; I
absolutely hate driving on them because of the noise.

I could be mis-remembering, but ISTR reading some years ago that the
Highways Agency/MoT tender calls for resurfacing don't specify which
material is to be used -- that is, it's left up to the companies
bidding for the contract to choose whichever one they they can supply
at best price.

--
Cheers,
Harvey

In article ,
Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , NY writes
"jon" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:02:12 +0000, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote:

Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

They could leave it, we have some concrete roads around here.

I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the M40
were made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints. Not a nice
road surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard, but there's a bit
more give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of each joint gets very
annoying after a few seconds ;-) About the only thing in their favour
was that concrete roads were very hard-wearing and didn't need
resurfacing every few years.

There is a section of the M25 a bit like that Ashstead/ Reigate area.


it carries on to Chertsey (11). I live close to J10

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 19/03/2021 14:26, NY wrote:
"jon" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:02:12 +0000, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote:

Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

They could leave it, we have some concrete roads around here.

I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the M40 were
made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints. Not a nice road
surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard, but there's a bit more
give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of each joint gets very annoying
after a few seconds ;-) About the only thing in their favour was that
concrete roads were very hard-wearing and didn't need resurfacing every
few years.

There is still a chunk of concrete slab A19 like that round Billingham.
There may be a bit less of it after the latest roadworks have finished.

Hard wearing but noisy would be my summary.
Is there still some on the M6 old Preston bypass section?

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On 19/03/2021 13:02, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.


Possibly waiting for the weather forecast to tell them the temperature
is going to be above xC or that the concrete surface will by dry for y
hours.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 19/03/2021 14:26, NY wrote:


I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the M40 were
made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints. Not a nice road
surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard, but there's a bit more
give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of each joint gets very annoying
after a few seconds ;-) About the only thing in their favour was that
concrete roads were very hard-wearing and didn't need resurfacing every
few years.

Unless built on clay with a tendency to "heave".

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

alan_m wrote on 19/03/2021 :
Unless built on clay with a tendency to "heave".

Which is the case here. My assumption is that the slabs rock slightly
with passing traffic, which then breaks the tarmac up at the join. The
joins in the slabs soon show up after resurfacing.

On 19/03/2021 13:02, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

See if there is anything on the Highways web site? Ours seems to post
lists of jobs and estimated timings. Or indeed local council.

On 19/03/2021 19:31, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
alan_m wrote on 19/03/2021 :
Unless built on clay with a tendency to "heave".

Which is the case here. My assumption is that the slabs rock slightly
with passing traffic, which then breaks the tarmac up at the join. The
joins in the slabs soon show up after resurfacing.

I've seen roads where the slabs have randomly cracked.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

alan_m pretended :
I've seen roads where the slabs have randomly cracked.

Some of the original slabs are quite broken up, others seem intact, all
have been disturbed by later work on services.

From what I can gather, the intention is to eventually lay something
called Microashphalt.

Well, I do know they next have to see what the various drains and other
inspection covers supports are like and whether they need work or raising a
bit more.
That job no doubt is done by yet another contractor!
Also if there are cracks or holes or sinkage anywhere they may decide to dig
that part up and re concrete it. They did this near me a couple of years
back since it had to carry double deck busses and they did not want cracks
to form in the finished road due to the level differences or continued
sinkage.
Also idf they have done this part they always wait a month or so of settle
time so they don't get sinkage there. This does annoy the wotsit out of the
locals however due to all the slightly raised covers and drains, since they
need to be avoided!
I guess they could just shove it down and hope for the best, but in about
two years then they have to come back and start patching it.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
Harry Bloomfield; "Esq." wrote in message
...
Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally leave
it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

That was maybe because the underlying concrete was level and not too many
issues about inspection covers and drains or damage to the concrete from
past excavations.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Andrew" wrote in message
...
On 19/03/2021 13:08, jon wrote:
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:02:12 +0000, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote:

Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

They could leave it, we have some concrete roads around here.


Local station car park and the entrance has just been done for
Southern Rail. Planed off the entrance road down to concrete on day 1
and the whole job was finished by day 3.

newshound wrote:

See if there is anything on the Highways web site?

Or https://roadworks.org

I see that now shows vaccination centres, don't think I've ever noticed
one of those creating a traffic jam?

On the other hand every McDonald's seems to cause a queue round the
block twice a day since they re-opened.

HVS wrote:

There are some stretches of the M25 -- through Surrey and Kent (I
think) -- that are still concrete slabs with expansion joints; I
absolutely hate driving on them because of the noise.

Sections of the A46 between nottingham and leicester used to be like
that, kthunk-kthunk kthunk-kthunk, later they re-did the joints and
"grooved" the concrete and it's perfectly fine

https://goo.gl/maps/eGyt1Kx8W1HK2rQf7

On 19/03/2021 14:45, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
NY expressed precisely :
I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the M40
were made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints. Not a nice
road surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard, but there's a
bit more give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of each joint gets very
annoying after a few seconds ;-)

..and noisy. The built a motorway a few years ago in concrete, one mile
away. A petition soon had it resurfaced in tarmac.

Years ago ('80s or '90s IIRC) they demonstrated laying concrete as a
continuous slab and, when it had set, but not hardened, microcracking
it. It gave space for expansion, so no need for expansion joints
(although simply angling those or making them V shaped will do away with
the regular jolts and noise) and did away with the need for grooving the
road surface for water dispersal (and the irregular surface meant no
drone - just like tarmac). Unfortunately I never heard anything about it
again.

On 20/03/2021 08:16, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
Well, I do know they next have to see what the various drains and other
inspection covers supports are like and whether they need work or raising a
bit more.
That job no doubt is done by yet another contractor!
Also if there are cracks or holes or sinkage anywhere they may decide to dig
that part up and re concrete it. They did this near me a couple of years
back since it had to carry double deck busses and they did not want cracks
to form in the finished road due to the level differences or continued
sinkage.
Also idf they have done this part they always wait a month or so of settle
time so they don't get sinkage there. This does annoy the wotsit out of the
locals however due to all the slightly raised covers and drains, since they
need to be avoided!
I guess they could just shove it down and hope for the best, but in about
two years then they have to come back and start patching it.
Brian

It's such a pity that they don't run all the services under the
pavements or verges of roads that have them, use drainage kerbs rather
that gratings in the road and pass things from one side to the other at
regularly spaced ducts or by moleing. How much longer would roads last
without the jopints between road and ironwork and without ever having to
be dug up for service installation, repair or replacement?

On 20/03/2021 10:37, Steve Walker wrote:
On 20/03/2021 08:16, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
Well, I do know they next have to see what the various drains and other
inspection covers supports are like and whether they need work or
raising a
bit more.
That job no doubt is done by yet another contractor!
Also if there are cracks or holes or sinkage anywhere they may decide
to dig
that part up and re concrete it. They did this near meÂ* a couple of years
back since it had to carry double deck busses and they did not want
cracks
to form in the finished road due to the level differences or continued
sinkage.
Â* Also idf they have done this part they always wait a month or so of
settle
time so they don't get sinkage there. This does annoy the wotsit out
of the
locals however due to all the slightly raised covers and drains, since
they
need to be avoided!
Â* I guess they could just shove it down and hope for the best, but in
about
two years then they have to come back and start patching it.
Â* Brian

It's such a pity that they don't run all the services under the
pavements or verges of roads that have them, use drainage kerbs rather
that gratings in the road and pass things from one side to the other at
regularly spaced ducts or by moleing. How much longer would roads last
without the jopints between road and ironwork and without ever having to
be dug up for service installation, repair or replacement?

Looking at the unmarred country roads round here, the short answer is
'no longer than anywhere else'

Potholes galore.


--
How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.

Adolf Hitler

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:19:35 GMT, HVS
wrote:



There are some stretches of the M25 -- through Surrey and Kent (I
think) -- that are still concrete slabs with expansion joints; I
absolutely hate driving on them because of the noise.

I could be mis-remembering, but ISTR reading some years ago that the
Highways Agency/MoT tender calls for resurfacing don't specify which
material is to be used -- that is, it's left up to the companies
bidding for the contract to choose whichever one they they can supply
at best price.

I read, a long time ago, that the type of road surface tended to be a
reflection of the state of the economy: concrete - economy poor;
tarmac - economy good.
(I remember when the A50 Uttoxeter bypass was built towards Stoke on
Trent, within a few weeks of opening a local village (somewhere near
Checkley) erected signs on it complaining of the traffic noise from
the concrete road surface.)

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 19/03/2021 14:45, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
NY expressed precisely :
I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the M40 were
made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints. Not a nice road
surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard, but there's a bit more
give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of each joint gets very annoying
after a few seconds ;-)

..and noisy. The built a motorway a few years ago in concrete, one mile
away. A petition soon had it resurfaced in tarmac.

Years ago ('80s or '90s IIRC) they demonstrated laying concrete as a
continuous slab and, when it had set, but not hardened, microcracking it.
It gave space for expansion, so no need for expansion joints (although
simply angling those or making them V shaped will do away with the regular
jolts and noise) and did away with the need for grooving the road surface
for water dispersal (and the irregular surface meant no drone - just like
tarmac). Unfortunately I never heard anything about it again.

Presumably because it didn't work or was too expensive to do.

On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 04:38:56 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

Oh, ****! And this thread was Rodent-freed, so far! tsk

--
Marland answering senile Rodent's statement, "I don't leak":
"That¢s because so much **** and ****e emanates from your gob that there is
nothing left to exit normally, your arsehole has clammed shut through disuse
and the end of prick is only clear because you are such a ******."
Message-ID:

Peter Johnson wrote:

(I remember when the A50 Uttoxeter bypass was built towards Stoke on
Trent, within a few weeks of opening a local village (somewhere near
Checkley) erected signs on it complaining of the traffic noise from
the concrete road surface.)

I'm sure there was a time when the powers that be accepted that
the noise from busy concrete roads was unacceptable, and gave
dates for their replacement. Seems like they then moved on and
forgot about it.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
@ChrisJDixon1

Plant amazing Acers.

On 21/03/2021 09:34, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Peter Johnson wrote:

(I remember when the A50 Uttoxeter bypass was built towards Stoke on
Trent, within a few weeks of opening a local village (somewhere near
Checkley) erected signs on it complaining of the traffic noise from
the concrete road surface.)

I'm sure there was a time when the powers that be accepted that
the noise from busy concrete roads was unacceptable, and gave
dates for their replacement. Seems like they then moved on and
forgot about it.

The concrete can be stroked with a wire brush before it's set but wears
smooth quickly.

Grooves can be made before the concrete sets but makes a noise. If the
grooves are pseudo-random a white noise is produced but it's still
noisy. I think there was a place where the grooves were made that played
a tune. (Brushing was used near residential districts to reduce the noise.)

Once the concrete wears smooth it's hard to restore the texture so they
usually just cover it with asphalt.

The expansion joints are actually called contraction joints on "proper"
roads like motorways, as they are produced while the concrete sets and
contracts, with strips of wood underneath and on top to start the crack
so the joint is rough. The strips on top are removed and the joint
sealed with bitumen. There are also steel rods in cardboard tubes to
stop the slabs from tilting.

Concrete motorway carriageways are made in one go with a "concrete
train" which is impressive to watch.

Here endeth the lesson.

--
Max Demian

On 19/03/2021 01:08 pm, jon wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:02:12 +0000, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote:

Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

They could leave it, we have some concrete roads around here.

I used to live in a road (a cul de sac) with a mini-M1 type concrete
slabs surface. It looked fabulous.

Then a statutory authority dug a trench right along one side and
re-surfaced with tarmac. The result was absolutely *hideous*.

Following our complaints, the council eventually got them to come back
(or send someone who knew what they were doing) to reinstate the surface
of the trench with concrete as similar to the original as possible. It
looked better than the asphalt patch.

On 19/03/2021 03:19 pm, HVS wrote:
On 19 Mar 2021, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote

NY expressed precisely :
I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the
M40 were made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints.
Not a nice road surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard,
but there's a bit more give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of
each joint gets very annoying after a few seconds ;-)

..and noisy. The built a motorway a few years ago in concrete, one
mile away. A petition soon had it resurfaced in tarmac.

There are some stretches of the M25 -- through Surrey and Kent (I
think) -- that are still concrete slabs with expansion joints; I
absolutely hate driving on them because of the noise.

The part of the M6 between the A449 and the A5 was originally surfaced
in concrete. Then after you'd braved the A5, the bit of the M1 south of
A6 Luton Airport was all concrete, including the once-infamous Watford
2-lane stretch (and the M10, IIRC), all the way to Hendon North.

I could be mis-remembering, but ISTR reading some years ago that the
Highways Agency/MoT tender calls for resurfacing don't specify which
material is to be used -- that is, it's left up to the companies
bidding for the contract to choose whichever one they they can supply
at best price.

I'm sure that's correct.

On 19/03/2021 04:38 pm, Martin Brown wrote:
On 19/03/2021 14:26, NY wrote:
"jon" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:02:12 +0000, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote:

Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally
leave it, before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

They could leave it, we have some concrete roads around here.

I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the M40
were made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints. Not a nice
road surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard, but there's a
bit more give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of each joint gets very
annoying after a few seconds ;-) About the only thing in their favour
was that concrete roads were very hard-wearing and didn't need
resurfacing every few years.

There is still a chunk of concrete slab A19 like that round Billingham.
There may be a bit less of it after the latest roadworks have finished.

Hard wearing but noisy would be my summary.
Is there still some on the M6 old Preston bypass section?

No. I don't think there ever was a concrete-paved section there. There
used to be some further up around Lancaster.

On 19/03/2021 10:14 pm, alan_m wrote:
On 19/03/2021 19:31, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
alan_m wrote on 19/03/2021 :
Unless built on clay with a tendency to "heave".

Which is the case here. My assumption is that the slabs rock slightly
with passing traffic, which then breaks the tarmac up at the join. The
joins in the slabs soon show up after resurfacing.

I've seen roads where the slabs have randomly cracked.

That famously happened on the MI soon after the opening of the original
seventy-mile stretch in 1959.

On 24/03/2021 17:03, JNugent wrote:
On 19/03/2021 10:14 pm, alan_m wrote:
On 19/03/2021 19:31, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
alan_m wrote on 19/03/2021 :
Unless built on clay with a tendency to "heave".

Which is the case here. My assumption is that the slabs rock slightly
with passing traffic, which then breaks the tarmac up at the join.
The joins in the slabs soon show up after resurfacing.

I've seen roads where the slabs have randomly cracked.

That famously happened on the MI soon after the opening of the original
seventy-mile stretch in 1959.

Most of which has had to be rebuilt because of subsidence.

In message , Andrew
writes
On 24/03/2021 17:03, JNugent wrote:
On 19/03/2021 10:14 pm, alan_m wrote:
On 19/03/2021 19:31, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
alan_m wrote on 19/03/2021 :
Unless built on clay with a tendency to "heave".

Which is the case here. My assumption is that the slabs rock
slightly with passing traffic, which then breaks the tarmac up at
the join. The joins in the slabs soon show up after resurfacing.

I've seen roads where the slabs have randomly cracked.
That famously happened on the MI soon after the opening of the
original seventy-mile stretch in 1959.

Most of which has had to be rebuilt because of subsidence.

Locally rumoured that the hoggin used, taken from this farm by Redland
Aggregates, was too sandy!

--
Tim Lamb

In article , JNugent
writes
On 19/03/2021 03:19 pm, HVS wrote:
On 19 Mar 2021, Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote

NY expressed precisely :
I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the
M40 were made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints.
Not a nice road surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard,
but there's a bit more give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of
each joint gets very annoying after a few seconds ;-)

..and noisy. The built a motorway a few years ago in concrete, one
mile away. A petition soon had it resurfaced in tarmac.
There are some stretches of the M25 -- through Surrey and Kent (I
think) -- that are still concrete slabs with expansion joints; I
absolutely hate driving on them because of the noise.

The part of the M6 between the A449 and the A5 was originally surfaced
in concrete. Then after you'd braved the A5, the bit of the M1 south of
A6 Luton Airport was all concrete, including the once-infamous Watford
2-lane stretch (and the M10, IIRC), all the way to Hendon North.

Also A45 Coventry bypass. First time I hit it in my 105E Anglia I
thought the arse end had fallen out.
I could be mis-remembering, but ISTR reading some years ago that the
Highways Agency/MoT tender calls for resurfacing don't specify which
material is to be used -- that is, it's left up to the companies
bidding for the contract to choose whichever one they they can supply
at best price.

I'm sure that's correct.


--
bert

On 21/03/2021 11:11 am, Max Demian wrote:
On 21/03/2021 09:34, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Peter Johnson wrote:

(I remember when the A50 Uttoxeter bypass was built towards Stoke on
Trent, within a few weeks of opening a local village (somewhere near
Checkley) erected signs on it complaining of the traffic noise from
the concrete road surface.)

I'm sure there was a time when the powers that be accepted that
the noise from busy concrete roads was unacceptable, and gave
dates for their replacement. Seems like they then moved on and
forgot about it.

The concrete can be stroked with a wire brush before it's set but wears
smooth quickly.

Grooves can be made before the concrete sets but makes a noise. If the
grooves are pseudo-random a white noise is produced but it's still
noisy. I think there was a place where the grooves were made that played
a tune. (Brushing was used near residential districts to reduce the noise.)

Well, a "tune" of sorts: southbound on the original concrete surface of
M1 between A6 (Luton) and A5 (Markyate).

Once the concrete wears smooth it's hard to restore the texture so they
usually just cover it with asphalt.

The expansion joints are actually called contraction joints on "proper"
roads like motorways, as they are produced while the concrete sets and
contracts, with strips of wood underneath and on top to start the crack
so the joint is rough. The strips on top are removed and the joint
sealed with bitumen. There are also steel rods in cardboard tubes to
stop the slabs from tilting.

Concrete motorway carriageways are made in one go with a "concrete
train" which is impressive to watch.

Here endeth the lesson.

On 24/03/2021 07:30 pm, Andrew wrote:
On 24/03/2021 17:03, JNugent wrote:
On 19/03/2021 10:14 pm, alan_m wrote:
On 19/03/2021 19:31, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
alan_m wrote on 19/03/2021 :
Unless built on clay with a tendency to "heave".

Which is the case here. My assumption is that the slabs rock
slightly with passing traffic, which then breaks the tarmac up at
the join. The joins in the slabs soon show up after resurfacing.

I've seen roads where the slabs have randomly cracked.

That famously happened on the MI soon after the opening of the
original seventy-mile stretch in 1959.

Most of which has had to be rebuilt because of subsidence.

I think we can safely regard the original wearing surface(s) as well and
truly worn.

Harry Bloomfield, Esq. was thinking very hard :
Originally concrete slab, later tarmaced. They are resurfacing and have
scrapped up the tarmac down to concrete - how long do they normally leave it,
before returning to retarmac?

It's been two weeks now.

All done now, they finished it all off around 500 yards, during the
course of last week, at around 100 yards completed per day. Just the
speed bumps and yellow lines to be reinstated now. The only seemed to
work half days, mornings only. A massive double manned, tracked
machine, pushing a tipper lorry with the bulk of the hot tarmac on it.
Closely followed by a vibrating roller. So around six weeks, start to
surface finished.

The revealed concrete slab sub-surface had completely broken up in
several places, down to the soil - I'm surprised they didn't clean them
out and lay a new concrete sub-surface, before tarmac.

On 04/04/2021 07:55, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

The revealed concrete slab sub-surface had completely broken up in
several places, down to the soil - I'm surprised they didn't clean them
out and lay a new concrete sub-surface, before tarmac.


Even though that may have been sensible to extend the life of the newly
laid tarmac possibly not what they had been contracted for. Not my job!


--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 21/03/2021 09:34, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Peter Johnson wrote:

(I remember when the A50 Uttoxeter bypass was built towards Stoke on
Trent, within a few weeks of opening a local village (somewhere near
Checkley) erected signs on it complaining of the traffic noise from
the concrete road surface.)

I'm sure there was a time when the powers that be accepted that
the noise from busy concrete roads was unacceptable, and gave
dates for their replacement. Seems like they then moved on and
forgot about it.



Until now


https://www.gov.uk/government/news/h...concrete-roads



--
Adam

On 20/03/2021 10:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 19/03/2021 14:45, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
NY expressed precisely :
I remember when major roads like the A34 between Oxford and the M40
were made up of concrete slabs, with tar expansion joints. Not a nice
road surface to drive on - very hard (tarmac is hard, but there's a
bit more give in it) and the thump-thump-thump of each joint gets
very annoying after a few seconds ;-)

..and noisy. The built a motorway a few years ago in concrete, one
mile away. A petition soon had it resurfaced in tarmac.

Years ago ('80s or '90s IIRC) they demonstrated laying concrete as a
continuous slab and, when it had set, but not hardened, microcracking
it. It gave space for expansion, so no need for expansion joints
(although simply angling those or making them V shaped will do away with
the regular jolts and noise) and did away with the need for grooving the
road surface for water dispersal (and the irregular surface meant no
drone - just like tarmac). Unfortunately I never heard anything about it
again.

This?

https://www.roads.org.uk/blog/diamond-rough

--
Adam