SEAUPG Annual Meeting Williamsburg, VA Thursday, November 19, 2015



Similar documents
AASHTO Subcomittee on Materials Biloxi, Mississippi August 4-10, 2012 Chris Abadie, P.E.

A View From The Bureau of Materials & Physical Research. IAPA March 2015 Matt Mueller, PE BMPR Illinois Dept of Transportation

research report Investigation of Proposed AASHTO Rut Test Procedure Using the Asphalt Pavement Analyzer Virginia Transportation Research Council

COMPACTING BITUMINOUS SPECIMENS USING THE SUPERPAVE GYRATORY COMPACTOR (SGC)

Rutting Based Evaluation of Asphalt Mixes

HAMBURG WHEEL-TRACKING TEST

NorthEast Transportation Training and Certification Program (NETTCP) Course Registration Form

Testing and appraisal of Lucobit polymer effect as an additive on asphalt mixture performance

Oh No, We Got an Airport Job! Contractor Quality Control. Investment in Staff, Labs and Equipment. We ve Come A Long Way.

SECTION 334 (Pages ) is deleted and the following substituted: SECTION 334 SUPERPAVE ASPHALT CONCRETE

EVALUATION OF ASPHALT BINDER CHARACTERISTICS OF TYPICAL ONTARIO SUPERPAVE CRM AND RAP-HMA MIXTURES

Development of Laboratory Performance Test Procedures and Trial Specifications for Hot Mix Asphalt: Final Report

Asphalt Pavement Association Of Michigan Selecting the Right Mix Atrium Drive, Suite 202 Okemos, MI

SPECIAL NOTE FOR ASPHALT WATERPROOFING MIX FOR BRIDGE-DECK OVERLAYS AND ADJACENT APPROACHES

Hot Mix Asphalt Test Result Verification and Dispute Resolution

Evaluation of Permeability of Superpave Asphalt Mixtures ABSTRACT

6 QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES

Inspections: Central Laboratory of the Regions

Field Density Determination of Asphalt Concrete by the Coring Method

Evaluation of Fiber-Reinforced Asphalt Mixtures Using Advanced Material Characterization Tests

CREEP AND REPEATED CREEP-RECOVERY AS RUTTING PERFORMANCE TESTS FOR AIRPORT HMA MIX DESIGN

Laboratory Evaluation of Asphalt Rubber Mixtures Using the Dynamic Modulus (E*) Test

Pavement Rehabilitation Using Hot Mix Asphalt. - National Perspective -

HIGHWAYS DEPARTMENT GUIDANCE NOTES ON ROAD SURFACE REQUIREMENTS FOR EXPRESSWAYS AND HIGH SPEED ROADS

Laboratory Evaluation of Asphalt Concrete Mixtures from Rt.33 in Rochester, NY

South Dakota QC/QA Asphalt Concrete Training Manual January 2015

Application of the Endurance Limit Premise in Mechanistic-Empirical Based Pavement Design Procedures

The AASHO Road Test site (which eventually became part of I-80) at Ottawa, Illinois, was typical of northern climates (see Table 1).

Principles of Resolving Test Result Differences. Presented by Cindy Rutkoski Rocky Mountain Asphalt Education Center Instructor

STUDY OF THE BEHAVIOUR OF BITUMINOUS MIXTURES RESISTANT TO FUEL

PERFORMANCE TESTING FOR HOT MIX ASPHALT

Evaluation of Fiber-Reinforced Asphalt Mixtures Using Advanced Material. Characterization Tests

EVALUATION OF SASOBIT FOR USE IN WARM MIX ASPHALT

Performance of Asphalt Mixes Containing RAP

Comparison of Results of SHRP and Conventional Binder Tests on Paving Asphalts

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM FOR BITUMINOUS BINDERS

Minimizing Reflective Cracking With Applications of the Rolling Dynamic Deflectometer and Overlay Tester

Strain Measurement in Pavements with a Fibre Optics Sensor Enabled Geotextile

Bailey Method for Gradation Selection in Hot-Mix Asphalt Mixture Design

Evaluation and Implementation of a Heavy Polymer Modified Asphalt Binder through Accelerated Pavement Testing

DEVELOPMENT OF A TESTING TEMPERATURE TO BE USED WITH THE HAMBURG WHEEL TRACKING DEVICE ON ASPHALT MIXTURES THAT UTILIZE PERFORMANCE GRADE BINDERS

How To Fix A Cracked Road Surface

Evaluation of Long-Lasting Perpetual Asphalt Pavement Using Life-Cycle Cost Analysis. Arnar Agustsson Sulton Azamov

Construction of Quality Hot Mix Asphalt Pavements

Asphalt Institute Technical Bulletin. Laboratory Mixing and Compaction Temperatures

On Bituminous Mix Design

New Simple Performance Tests for Asphalt Mixes

Expected Service Life and Performance Characteristics of HMA Pavements in LTPP

Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas

The Superpave Mix Design Manual for New Construction and Overlays

SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF COARSE AGGREGATE AASHTO T 85

Asphalt for Athletic Uses

Section 300 Base Courses

Quality Assurance Program for Design-Bid-Build Projects. January by Texas Department of Transportation 512/ All Rights Reserved

NOTES TO THE PERFORMANCE BASED SPECIFICATION FOR HOTMIX ASPHALT WEARING COURSE SURFACING

Pavement Design. Guest Lecturer Dr. Sirous Alavi, P.E. SIERRA TRANSPORTATION Terminal Way, Suite 125 Reno, Nevada 89502

19. Security Classif. (of report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) Unclassified Form DOT F (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

Bailey Tool for Gradation Control in Superpave Mix Design

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM (QAP) City Rohnert Park

SECTION 311 PLACEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF CEMENT TREATED SUBGRADESOIL CEMENT BASE COURSE

Methodology and rules for design and rehabilitation of road pavement using new hot and cold recycled asphalt mixtures

ACCELERATED LOAD TESTING OF ASPHALT MIX DESIGNS FOR HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTS IN HOT CLIMATES

Hello viewers welcome to lesson 4.7 which is on pavement materials part IV and in this lesson we will be covering bituminous binders.

SECTION 403 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT

Quality Assurance Concepts. Outline

Apr 17, 2000 LAB MANUAL

Recycling with CRM. John D Angelo D Angelo Consulting, LLC Phone johndangelo@dangeloconsultingllc.com

DIVISION 300 BASES SECTION 304 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE DESCRIPTION MATERIALS CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS

HIGHWAYS DEPARTMENT GUIDANCE NOTES ON THE USE OF WATERPROOFING MEMBRANES ON CONCRETE BRIDGE DECKS

C. Section TESTING LABORATORY SERVICE.

COMPACTING SPECIMENS USING THE TEXAS GYRATORY COMPACTOR (TGC) PART I COMPACTING SPECIMENS USING THE TGC. Test Procedure for

Performance Evaluation of Jet Fuel Resistant Polymer-Modified Asphalt for Airport Pavements

NOTE: FOR PROJECTS REQUIRING CONTRACTOR MIX DESIGN, THE DESIGN PROCEDURES ARE SPECIFIED IN THE SPECIAL PROVISIONS OF THE CONTRACT.

Standards for Specifying Construction Of Airports

Final 1 st Edition January 2006 A GUIDELINE FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF ASPHALT PARKING LOTS IN COLORADO

Summary of FHWA In-Place Recycling Activities

GRI-GT13(a) Specification Geotextile Separation for Roadways (ASTM Test Method Based)

CH 6: Fatigue Failure Resulting from Variable Loading

Nevada DOT Cold In-Place Recycling Federal Highway Administration National Review Close out meeting, August 25, 2005

Quality Assurance Program. June by Texas Department of Transportation (512) all rights reserved

Using Accelerated Pavement Testing to Evaluate Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavement Performance

Engineering Road Note 9 May 2012

Strength of Concrete

CONSTANT HEAD AND FALLING HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST

EVALUATION OF WARM ASPHALT ADDITIVES ON PERFORMANCE PROPERTIES OF CRM BINDERS AND MIXTURES

OHIO ASPHALT PAVING CONFERENCE

GRADATION OF AGGREGATE FOR CONCRETE BLOCK

Florida s Experience with Crumb Rubber

Lecture Notes CT 4860 Structural Pavement Design. Design of Flexible Pavements

DETERMINING DENSITY OF COMPACTED BITUMINOUS MIXTURES

SOIL-LIME TESTING. Test Procedure for. TxDOT Designation: Tex-121-E 1. SCOPE 2. APPARATUS 3. MATERIALS TXDOT DESIGNATION: TEX-121-E

Transcription:

LADOTD Balanced Mixture Design Samuel Cooper III, Ph.D., P.E. Southeastern Asphalt User Producer Group November 6 9, 25 Williamsburg, Va. Acknowledgements LTRC Asphalt Research Group Jeremy Icenogle, Patrick Frazier, Willie Gueho, Md. Kabir, Bill King EMCRF Dr. Louay Mohammad, Dr. Minkyum Kim Introduction LADOTD s conventional design practice: Gradation AC Content VFA, VMA, % Air Voids Moisture Susceptibility Test (Modified Lottman), and Roadway : Density, Smoothness Increases in recycled material content Methods to evaluate mixture performance indicators Determine Asphalt Quality vs Quantity How? New laboratory tests to evaluate the as built pavement qualities. The test will screen materials prone to rutting, cracking and alternative moisture damage indicators. Create a Balanced Mixture Design How? How? Resistance What is a balanced mixture design? Process to ensure adequate resistance to both rutting and cracking distresses Laboratory testing: and.6.4.2.8.6.4.2 5 5 2 Resistance Mechanistic Tests Pavement Intermediate Fatigue endurance Permanent deformation Features Fundamental Easy to Use Reliable Cost

Major Issue LTRC Research Project 3b Current LADOTD volumetric specifications created stiff mixtures very strong vs rutting failure. Concerns that the mixtures are too dry and too stiff. Early cracking and durability Two research projects to create new specification parameters LTRC Project 3b LTRC Project 4b To implement the Loaded Wheel Tracking (LWT) test as a measure of mixture rutting resistance. To evaluate Semi Circular Bend (SCB) test for intermediate temperature cracking resistance. Resistance: LWT Test Resistance: LWT Test Indicator Resistance to and Moisture Sensitivity Test Protocol AASHTO T324 5 C Loading Wheel Diameter: 23.5 mm (8 inch) Wheel Width: 47mm (.85 inch) Fixed Load: 73 N (58 lbs) Rolling Speed:. km/hr Passing Rate: 52 passes/min Indicators Resistance to and Moisture Sensitivity Indicator: Plot Rut Depth vs Number of Passes Report Rut Depth at, 5, 75,, 5, and 2 Passes Moisture Sensitivity Indicator Determine Stripping Inflection Point The point where slope of the line begins to steepen Test? Several options available! Bending Beam Fatigue, SVECD, Overlay Tester, Intermediate SCB, Energy Ratio, Fracture Energy (ITS) Which one is best? Each has advantages and disadvantages LADOTD selected Intermediate SCB LADOTD TR 33 Why SCB? Gyratory and field core Simplicity of testing equipment can be adapted to plant lab History of forensic success and field correlation Fundamental fracture mechanics principles Test procedure Repeatable Reporting COV of fracture energy less than 5% 2

Intermediate : SCB Test Standard Method of Test for Evaluation of Asphalt Mixture Crack Propagation using the Semi-Circular Bend Test (SCB) AASHTO Designation X XXX-XX. SCOPE.. This test method covers procedures for the preparation, testing, and measurement of fracture failure of semi-circular asphalt mixtures of specimens loaded monotonically. SCB Sample Preparation Indicator Resistance to Crack Propagation Test Protocol TR 33 25 C Loading.5 mm/min vertical deformation The Critical Value of Fracture Resistance, du J c ( ) b da b = sample thickness, a = notch depth, U = strain energy to failure.2. This standard may involve hazardous material, operations, and equipment. This standard does not purport to address all safety problems associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this procedure to establish appropriate safety and health practices and to determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 2. REFERENCED DOCUMENTS 2.. AASHTO STANDARDS PP 2, Practice for Mixture conditioning of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) T 67, Standard Practices for Load Verification of Testing Machines T 66, Bulk Specific Gravity of Compacted Hot Mix Asphalt Using Saturated Surface-Dry Specimens T 68, Sampling Bituminous Paving Mixtures T 29, Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity and Density of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) T 269, Percent Air Voids in Compacted Dense and Open Bituminous Paving Mixtures T 32, Preparing and Determining the Density of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Specimens by Means of the Superpave Gyratory Compactor 5mm x 57mm Conventional SCB Test Modified SCB Test Servo Hydraulic Test System Environmental Chamber Expensive Complicated Deformation Load Deformation Force (Kn).7.6.5.4.3.2 Original Data Max of Data set Fitted Curve Peak of Curve. Load.5.5 2 2.5 3 Length(mm) J c ( ) b du da Modified SCB Test LADOTD Specification Changes J c ( ) b du da Force (Kn).7.6.5.4.3.2. * is controlled using an external environmental chamber.5.5 2 2.5 3 Length(mm) Original Data Max of Data set Fitted Curve Peak of Curve Lowered Gyrations (Level and Level 2) L: 65 Gyrations N d L2: 75 Gyrations N d VTM Remains 3.5% Raised design VFA 72% Raised VMA.5% Increase for each NMAS 3

23 Pilot Project Descriptions Analysis: Loaded Wheel Tester Route LA 3235 (H.949) LA 93 (H.26) LA 3 (H.89) LA 59 (H.95) US 8 (H.9536) LA 6 (H.243) DOTD Dist. 2 3 7 Description 2 Lvl BC.5 Lvl F WC 3 Lvl BC 2 Lvl WC 2 Lvl BC 2 Lvl WC 4 2 Lvl WC 5 62 2.5 Lvl BC 2 Lvl WC 2 Lvl 2 BC.5 Lvl 2 FWC Rut Depth @ 2, Passes, mm 2 8 6 4 2 8 6 4 2 PG 64 22 PG 7 22M PG 76 22M PG 82 22CRM PG 64 22 Criteria Modified Binder Criteria 5 5 2 25 3 35 4 45 5 55 Mixture Number Analysis: Semi Circular Bend Analysis: Balanced Design.2 PG 64 22 PG 7 22M PG 76 22M PG 82 22CRM.2 PG 64 22 PG 7 22 PG 76 22 PG 82 22. Modified Binder Criteria J c, kj/m 2.8.6.4 Jc, KJ/m 2.8.6 PG 64 22 Criteria.2.4. 5 5 2 25 3 35 4 45 5 55 Mixture Number.2 5 5 2 LWT Rut Depth, mm LTRC Research Project 4b Development of performance based specification criteria. Field Validation: LTRC Project 4B Laboratory and Field evaluation of projects Projects in service for 3 years. Does SCB parameter translate to field performance? 5.. LADOTD PMS Index 95. 9. 85. 8. 75. 7. 65. Y = (.969+.36X) -7 ) r 2 :.73 6..3.4.5.6.7.8.9. Laboratory Measured J c, kj/mm 2 4

Field Validation: LTRC Project 4B Field Validation: LTRC Project 4B 5.. 95. Traffic PMS Trigger LADOTD PMS Index 9. 85. 8. 75. Low Traffic PMS Trigger Y = (.969+.36X) -7 ) r 2 :.73 7. 65. 6..3.4.5.6.7.8.9. Laboratory Measured J c, kj/mm 2 LWT, Rut Depth, 5 C, Wet SCB, min, J c, kj/m 2 @ 25⁰ C, Aged Level : mm @ 2, passes maximum, Level 2 : 6mm @ 2, passes maximum. Level : Jc =.5 minimum, Level 2 : Jc =.6 minimum. LADOTD Specification Changes LADOTD Experience LWT required for all mixtures L: mm @2K passes (maximum) L2: 6mm @ 2K passes (maximum) SCB required for all mixtures L: PG 7 22m,.5 kj/m 2 (minimum) L2: PG 76 22m,.6 kj/m 2 (minimum) Allow for 5% increase in RAP if fractionated split on the. (still must meet LWT and SCB for design) Developed a system to conduct mechanical property test to determine the anticipated performance of asphalt mixtures LWT and SCB were the most feasible for implementation by state and contractor. Incorporate tests into state specification compliance evaluation. Develop a plant lab SCB test protocal. Utilize Marshall Load Frames. Contractors in the state have adopted the methodology and are currently evaluating mixtures with success. Reporting low variability of fracture energy <5% Specimen fabrication is a complication Long Term aging protocol 5 day @ 85 C is a concern. What s Next? New round of pilot project to further evaluate plant produced mixture and field cores Continue collecting a database of mixture LWT and J c results and compare to field performance. 5

Thank You! 6