Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL NCHRP REPORT 539 COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Aggregate Properties and the Performance of Superpave- Designed Hot Mix Asphalt

OCR for page R1
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2005 (Membership as of March 2005) OFFICERS Chair: Joseph H. Boardman, Commissioner, New York State DOT Vice Chair: Michael D. Meyer, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS MICHAEL W. BEHRENS, Executive Director, Texas DOT LARRY L. BROWN, SR., Executive Director, Mississippi DOT DEBORAH H. BUTLER, Vice President, Customer Service, Norfolk Southern Corporation and Subsidiaries, Atlanta, GA ANNE P. CANBY, President, Surface Transportation Policy Project, Washington, DC JOHN L. CRAIG, Director, Nebraska Department of Roads DOUGLAS G. DUNCAN, President and CEO, FedEx Freight, Memphis, TN NICHOLAS J. GARBER, Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville ANGELA GITTENS, Consultant, Miami, FL GENEVIEVE GIULIANO, Director, Metrans Transportation Center, and Professor, School of Policy, Planning, and Development, USC, Los Angeles BERNARD S. GROSECLOSE, JR., President and CEO, South Carolina State Ports Authority SUSAN HANSON, Landry University Professor of Geography, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University JAMES R. HERTWIG, President, CSX Intermodal, Jacksonville, FL GLORIA J. JEFF, Director, Michigan DOT ADIB K. KANAFANI, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley HERBERT S. LEVINSON, Principal, Herbert S. Levinson Transportation Consultant, New Haven, CT SUE MCNEIL, Director and Professor, Urban Transportation Center, University of Illinois, Chicago MICHAEL MORRIS, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments CAROL A. MURRAY, Commissioner, New Hampshire DOT JOHN R. NJORD, Executive Director, Utah DOT PHILIP A. SHUCET, Commissioner, Virginia DOT MICHAEL S. TOWNES, President and CEO, Hampton Roads Transit, Hampton, VA C. MICHAEL WALTON, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin LINDA S. WATSON, Executive Director, LYNX--Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority MARION C. BLAKEY, Federal Aviation Administrator, U.S.DOT (ex officio) REBECCA M. BREWSTER, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA (ex officio) GEORGE BUGLIARELLO, Chancellor, Polytechnic University, and Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering (ex officio) THOMAS H. COLLINS (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard (ex officio) JENNIFER L. DORN, Federal Transit Administrator, U.S.DOT (ex officio) JAMES J. EBERHARDT, Chief Scientist, Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies, U.S. Department of Energy (ex officio) STACEY L. GERARD, Acting Deputy Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S.DOT (ex officio) EDWARD R. HAMBERGER, President and CEO, Association of American Railroads (ex officio) JOHN C. HORSLEY, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (ex officio) ROBERT D. JAMISON, Acting Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, U.S.DOT (ex officio) EDWARD JOHNSON, Director, Applied Science Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (ex officio) RICK KOWALEWSKI, Deputy Director, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S.DOT (ex officio) WILLIAM W. MILLAR, President, American Public Transportation Association (ex officio) MARY E. PETERS, Federal Highway Administrator, U.S.DOT (ex officio) ERIC C. PETERSON, Deputy Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S.DOT (ex officio) SUZANNE RUDZINSKI, Director, Transportation and Regional Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (ex officio) JEFFREY W. RUNGE, National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT (ex officio) ANNETTE M. SANDBERG, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT (ex officio) WILLIAM G. SCHUBERT, Maritime Administrator, U.S.DOT (ex officio) JEFFREY N. SHANE, Under Secretary for Policy, U.S.DOT (ex officio) CARL A. STROCK (Maj. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ex officio) NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Transportation Research Board Executive Committee Subcommittee for NCHRP JOSEPH H. BOARDMAN, New York State DOT (Chair) MARY E. PETERS, Federal Highway Administration JOHN C. HORSLEY, American Association of State Highway ROBERT E. SKINNER, JR., Transportation Research Board and Transportation Officials MICHAEL S. TOWNES, Hampton Roads Transit, Hampton, VA MICHAEL D. MEYER, Georgia Institute of Technology C. MICHAEL WALTON, University of Texas, Austin

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP REPORT 539 Aggregate Properties and the Performance of Superpave- Designed Hot Mix Asphalt BRIAN D. PROWELL JINGNA ZHANG AND E. RAY BROWN National Center for Asphalt Technology Auburn, AL S UBJECT A REAS Materials and Construction Research Sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in Cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2005 www.TRB.org

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH NCHRP REPORT 539 PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective Project 9-35 approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local ISSN 0077-5614 interest and can best be studied by highway departments ISBN 0-309-08825-9 individually or in cooperation with their state universities and Library of Congress Control Number 2005926327 others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to 2005 Transportation Research Board highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Price $23.00 In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States NOTICE Department of Transportation. The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the was requested by the Association to administer the research approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval program because of the Board's recognized objectivity and reflects the Governing Board's judgment that the program concerned is of national understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely importance and appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee National Research Council. structure from which authorities on any highway transportation The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research, and, while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation they are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in Research Council, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation a position to use them. Officials, or the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. The program is developed on the basis of research needs Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation according to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific Board Executive Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed Council. to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. Published reports of the The needs for highway research are many, and the National NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of are available from: mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or Transportation Research Board duplicate other highway research programs. Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: Note: The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and the individual http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore states participating in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished schol- ars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and techni- cal matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Acad- emy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achieve- ments of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Acad- emy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both the Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. William A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is a division of the National Research Council, which serves the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. The Board's mission is to promote innovation and progress in transportation through research. In an objective and interdisciplinary setting, the Board facilitates the sharing of information on transportation practice and policy by researchers and practitioners; stimulates research and offers research management services that promote technical excellence; provides expert advice on transportation policy and programs; and disseminates research results broadly and encourages their implementation. The Board's varied activities annually engage more than 5,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 539 ROBERT J. REILLY, Director, Cooperative Research Programs CRAWFORD F. JENCKS, Manager, NCHRP EDWARD T. HARRIGAN, Senior Program Officer EILEEN P. DELANEY, Director of Publications ANDRA BRIERE, Associate Editor NCHRP PROJECT 9-35 PANEL Field of Design--Area of Pavements LONNIE S. INGRAM, Kansas DOT (Chair) ERVIN L. DUKATZ, JR., Mathy Construction, Onalaska, WI CHARLES R. MAREK, Vulcan Materials Company, Birmingham, AL JULIE E. NODES, Arizona DOT JOHN D'ANGELO, FHWA Liaison Representative FREDERICK HEJL, TRB Liaison Representative AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Proj- The authors acknowledge the contributions of the Aggregate ect 9-35 by the National Center for Asphalt Technology, Auburn Uni- Industry Advisory Panel--David Jahn (formerly of Martin Marietta versity. Brian D. Prowell, Assistant Director, National Center for Materials, Inc.), Don Powell of Vulcan Materials Company, and Asphalt Technology, was the principal investigator. The other author Randy Weingart of Luck Stone Corporation--who provided infor- of this report was Jingna Zhang, Research Engineer, at the National mation, guidance, and review to portions of the report. Center for Asphalt Technology. E. Ray Brown, Director, National Center for Asphalt Technology, provided guidance and review.

OCR for page R1
This report presents a critical review of the technical literature available since the FOREWORD conclusion of the Strategic Highway Research Program in 1993 on the impact of the By Edward T. Harrigan aggregate properties specified by the Superpave mix design method on the performance Staff Officer of hot mix asphalt. The report will be of particular interest to materials engineers in Transportation Research state highway agencies, as well as to materials supplier and paving contractor person- Board nel responsible for the production of aggregates and hot mix asphalt. The performance of hot mix asphalt (HMA) is largely determined by the charac- teristics of its constituents: asphalt binder and aggregate. In developing the Superpave mix design method, the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP, 19871993) targeted the properties of asphalt binders and HMA and their effects on pavement per- formance. However, in lieu of a formal aggregate research program, a group of acknowledged experts in the areas of aggregate production and behavior and HMA mix design developed--through the use of a modified Delphi process--the set of recom- mended aggregate criteria in the original Superpave mix design method that were sub- sequently specified in AASHTO MP2, Superpave Volumetric Mix Design. In its orig- inal form, this specification presented aggregate gradation control points and restricted zone boundaries as well as requirements for aggregate consensus properties such as coarse aggregate angularity and sand equivalent. Under NCHRP Project 9-35, "Aggregate Properties and Their Relationship to the Performance of Superpave-Designed HMA: A Critical Review," the National Center for Asphalt Technology (NCAT) at Auburn University was tasked with reviewing the technical literature and research in progress dealing with the development, evaluation, and validation of the Superpave aggregate criteria in AASHTO MP2 and other pro- posed criteria, with the goals of (1) identifying those criteria for which experimental results demonstrate positive relationships with HMA performance and (2) estimating the significance of any such relationships. Further, NCAT surveyed current state aggre- gate specifications to identify deviations from the original Superpave aggregate crite- ria and document the reasons for the deviations, if available, and their effect on HMA performance. Finally, the agency reviewed materials and performance data from rel- evant field experiments, including the LTPP SPS-1, 5, and 9 experiments and the WesTrack, FHWA ALF, MnROAD, and NCAT Test Track studies. These results were analyzed with the objective of accepting or rejecting relationships between aggregate criteria and HMA performance identified from the technical literature. NCAT found that experimental support for the consensus aggregate properties specified in the Superpave mix design method is mixed. Coarse aggregate angularity is strongly related to rutting resistance. However, there is little research to support the need for two-fractured-face counts in excess of 95 percent. Extreme levels (>10% of 5:1 ratio) of flat and elongated particles are likely undesirable in HMA, but no clear

OCR for page R1
relationship exists for 20 to 40% exceeding a 3:1 ratio. The test for uncompacted voids in fine aggregate is a reasonable measure of fine aggregate angularity (FAA), but the present FAA criteria are likely too restrictive. No relationship can be corroborated between the presence of clay-like particles in aggregate (as measured by the sand equivalent) and HMA performance, but this lack may be related to the inadequacy of the present test method. Similar mixed results were found for the aggregate source properties specified in the Superpave mix design method. No relationship could be established between the Los Angeles abrasion test results and long-term wear of HMA pavement surfaces. The magnesium sulfate soundness and Micro-Deval abrasion loss tests are highly correlated, and there is a demonstrated relationship between Micro- Deval results and pavement particle abrasion. Finally, available experiment results do not demonstrate any difference in rutting resistance between coarse- and fine-graded Superpave mix designs. The project final report presents the detailed results of the critical review and analy- sis in seven chapters and an appendix; this published report contains the complete final report. This report has been referred to the TRB Mixtures and Aggregate Expert Task Group for its review and possible recommendation to the AASHTO Highway Sub- committees on Materials as support for revision of selected specifications and methods.

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS 1 SUMMARY 12 CHAPTER 1 Introduction and Research Approach 1.1 Introduction, 12 1.2 Objective, 13 1.3 Scope, 13 14 CHAPTER 2 State of Practice 2.1 Introduction, 14 2.2 Coarse Aggregate Angularity, 14 2.2.1 Background, 14 2.2.2 Relationship Between Percent Coarse Aggregate Fractured Faces and Performance, 15 2.2.3 Precision of ASTM D5821, 16 2.2.4 Alternative Methods of Measuring Coarse Aggregate Angularity, 16 2.2.5 Summary of Research Related to Coarse Aggregate Angularity, 18 2.3 Flat and Elongated Particles, 19 2.3.1 Background, 19 2.3.2 Relationship Between F&E and Performance, 19 2.3.3 Precision of F&E Tests, 22 2.3.4 Summary of Research Related to F&E, 23 2.4 Methods of Measuring FAA and Their Relationship to Performance, 24 2.4.1 Introduction, 24 2.4.2 Uncompacted Voids Content in Fine Aggregate, 24 2.4.3 Alternative Methods of Measuring FAA, 25 2.4.4 Relationships Between Fine Aggregate Shape, Angularity, and Texture and HMA Performance, 26 2.4.5 Precision of AASHTO T304, 34 2.4.6 Summary of Findings on Fine Aggregate Texture and Angularity, 34 2.5 Imaging Methods for the Assessment of Aggregate Shape, Angularity, and Texture, 35 2.5.1 Introduction, 35 2.5.2 Video Imaging Systems, 35 2.5.3 Image Analysis, 37 2.6 Tests for Aggregate Properties Related to Moisture Damage, 39 2.6.1 Introduction, 39 2.6.2 Sand Equivalent Test, 39 2.6.3 Plasticity Index, 39 2.6.4 Methylene Blue Test, 39 2.6.5 Surface Free Energy Theory, 40 2.6.6 Net Adsorption Test, 40 2.6.7 Other Aggregate Tests Related to Moisture Damage, 41 2.6.8 Summary of Aggregate Tests Related to Moisture Damage, 41 2.7 Tests Related to Aggregate Durability, 42 2.7.1 Aggregate Tests Related to Abrasion Resistance and Breakdown, 42 2.7.2 Aggregate Tests Related to Weathering and Freeze-Thaw Durability, 48 2.7.3 Aggregate Properties Related to Polishing and Frictional Resistance, 49 2.7.4 Summary of Tests Related to Aggregate Durability, 49 2.8 Effect of Aggregate Grading on HMA Properties, 50 2.8.1 Methods for Analyzing Gradations, 50 2.8.2 Effect of the Restricted Zone on HMA Performance, 51 2.9 Effect of Aggregate Fines and Fillers on HMA Performance, 52 2.9.1 Research on Fines and Fillers, 52 2.9.2 Summary of Research Related to Fines and Fillers, 55 2.10 Effect of Crushing Operations on Aggregate Properties, 55 2.10.1 Types of Crushers, 56 2.10.2 Factors Affecting Aggregate Shape, 57 2.10.3 Applications of Crushers, 58 2.10.4 Influence of Shape on Performance, 58

OCR for page R1
60 CHAPTER 3 Survey of Current State Agency Specifications 3.1 Introduction, 60 3.2 Superpave Consensus Aggregate Properties, 60 3.2.1 Sand Equivalent Test, 60 3.2.2 Fine Aggregate Angularity, 60 3.2.3 Coarse Aggregate Angularity, 62 3.2.4 Flat and Elongated Particles, 63 3.3 Source Properties, 63 3.3.1 Introduction, 63 3.3.2 LA Abrasion Test, 64 3.3.3 Sulfate Soundness, 64 3.4 Mix Design Properties, 65 3.4.1 Gradation, 65 3.4.2 Aggregate Specific Gravity, 65 3.5 Summary of Agency Specification Survey, 66 67 CHAPTER 4 Review of Performance Data from Field Test Sections and Full-Scale Accelerated Testing 4.1 LTPP, 67 4.2 MnRoad, 67 4.3 WesTrack, 67 4.4 2000 NCAT Test Track, 69 4.4.1 Effect of Gradation, 69 4.4.2 Relationship Between Aggregate Properties and Performance, 70 4.5 Summary of Data from In-Service Pavements and Accelerated Load Facilities, 71 72 CHAPTER 5 Future Research Needs 5.1 Introduction, 72 5.2 The Relationship Between Test Methods to Characterize Aggregate Shape, Texture, and Angularity and Performance of HMA, 72 5.2.1 Laboratory Evaluation, 72 5.2.2 Field Evaluation, 73 5.3 The Relationship Between the Compacted Aggregate Resistance Test and Rutting Performance of HMA, 73 5.3.1 CAR Test Parameters, 73 5.3.2 Laboratory Evaluation, 73 5.3.3 Field Evaluation, 73 74 CHAPTER 6 Conclusions and Recommendations 6.1 Consensus Aggregate Properties, 74 6.1.1 Coarse Aggregate Angularity, 74 6.1.2 Fine and Elongated Particles, 74 6.1.3 Fine Aggregate Angularity, 74 6.1.4 Sand Equivalent, 75 6.2 Source Properties, 75 6.2.1 LA Abrasion, 75 6.2.2 Sulfate Soundness, 75 6.3 Gradation, 75 6.4 Aggregate Production, 75 6.5 Long-Term Pavement Studies and Accelerated Testing, 76 77 REFERENCES 85 GLOSSARY 86 APPENDIX NCHRP Project 9-35 Aggregate Specification Survey