National Academies Press: OpenBook
Page i
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14200.
×
Page R1
Page ii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14200.
×
Page R2
Page iii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14200.
×
Page R3
Page iv
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14200.
×
Page R4
Page v
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14200.
×
Page R5
Page vi
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14200.
×
Page R6
Page vii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14200.
×
Page R7
Page viii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14200.
×
Page R8

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 629 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Edward T. Harrigan, Senior Program Officer Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications NCHRP PROJECT 09-29 PANEL Field of Materials and Construction—Area of Bituminous Materials Larry L. Michael, Hagerstown, MD (Chair) Ronald Cominsky, Pennsylvania Asphalt Pavement Association, Harrisburg, PA Gary A. Frederick, New York State DOT, Albany, NY Cindy LaFleur, Callanan Industries, Inc., Albany, NY Dean A. Maurer, Pennsylvania DOT, Harrisburg, PA Murari M. Pradhan, Arizona DOT, Phoenix, AZ John “Jack” Weigel, Jr., Payne & Dolan, Inc., Waukesha, WI Thomas Harman, FHWA Liaison Leslie Ann McCarthy, FHWA Liaison Audrey Copeland, Other Liaison John D’Angelo, Other Liaison Frederick Hejl, TRB Liaison AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 9-29 by Advanced Asphalt Technologies, LLC. The Simple Performance Test Systems evaluated in this report were developed by Industrial Process Controls, Ltd; Interlaken Technology Corporation; and Medical Device Testing Sys- tems. The Federal Highway Administration Mobile Asphalt Laboratory assisted with the ruggedness tests that are the subject of this report. Ramon Bonaquist, Chief Operating Officer for Advanced Asphalt Technologies, LLC, served as Prin- cipal Investigator for the project and authored this report. Donald W. Christensen, Senior Engineer for Advanced Asphalt Technologies, LLC and Donald Jack, Laboratory Manager for Advanced Asphalt Technologies, LLC assisted with the equipment refinements and equipment evaluation reported in this document. C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S

NCHRP Project 9-29, “Simple Performance Tester for Superpave Mix Design,” is a multi- phase effort to develop a practical, economical simple performance tester (SPT) for use in routine hot-mix asphalt (HMA) mix design and in the characterization of HMA materials for pavement structural design with the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG). In the phase of the project reported here, ruggedness testing was conducted with the SPT for the dynamic modulus and flow number tests developed in NCHRP Project 9-19 as simple performance tests for permanent deformation. Thus, the report will be of par- ticular interest to materials and pavement structural design engineers in state highway agencies, as well as to materials suppliers. The present HMA volumetric mix design method used by the majority of state highway agencies was developed in the asphalt component of the Strategic Highway Research Pro- gram (1987–1993). This method—standardized as AASHTO M 323 and R 35—does not include a simple, mechanical “proof” test analogous to the Marshall stability and flow tests or the Hveem stabilometer method. Though the utility and soundness of the HMA mix design method are evident by its almost ubiquitous, present-day use, mix designers from the beginning have asked for com- plementary simple performance tests to quickly and easily proof-test candidate mix designs. Work sponsored by FHWA and then NCHRP in the period 1996–2006 (and reported in NCHRP Reports 465, 547, and 580) recommended three test and parameter combinations as simple performance tests for permanent deformation: (1) the dynamic modulus, E*, determined with the triaxial dynamic modulus test; (2) the flow number, Fn, determined with the triaxial repeated load test; and (3) the flow time, FT, determined with the triaxial static creep test. The dynamic modulus, E*, also was chosen as the simple performance test for fatigue cracking as well as the chief HMA materials characterization test for HMA pave- ment design with the MEPDG. Under NCHRP Project 9-29, “Simple Performance Tester for Superpave Mix Design,” Advanced Asphalt Technologies, LLC was assigned the task of designing, procuring, and evaluating an SPT for (1) proof-testing for permanent deformation and fatigue cracking in HMA mix design and (2) materials characterization for pavement structural design with the MEPDG. In the portion (Phase V) of NCHRP Project 9-29 reported here, the research team con- ducted ruggedness testing for the dynamic modulus and flow number tests in the SPT. A formal ruggedness experiment was designed, conducted, and analyzed in accordance with ASTM E1169, Standard Guide for Conducting Ruggedness Tests. A second, equipment effects experiment investigated whether there are significant differences in SPT data collected with F O R E W O R D By Edward T. Harrigan Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

equipment from various manufacturers. Both experiments were performed separately for the dynamic modulus and flow number tests. Based on the findings from the ruggedness and equipment effects experiments, modifications to the SPT equipment specification and test procedures were made to improve the quality of the test data and reduce variability. This report presents the full text of the contractor’s final report for Phase V and six appen- dices, which present (1) dynamic modulus ruggedness data (Appendix A); (2) flow num- ber ruggedness data (Appendix B); (3) dynamic modulus equipment effects data (Appen- dix C); (4) flow number equipment effects data (Appendix D); (5) the final version of the SPT equipment specifications (Appendix E); and (6) SPT test methods (Appendix F). Earlier work completed in Phases I through IV is presented in NCHRP Reports 513, 530, and 614.

C O N T E N T S 1 Summary 2 Chapter 1 Introduction and Research Approach 2 1.1 Problem and Purpose 2 1.2 Scope 3 1.3 Ruggedness Experiments 3 1.3.1 Background 4 1.3.2 Ruggedness Testing Plan for Dynamic Modulus 7 1.3.3 Ruggedness Testing Plan for the Flow Number Tests 10 1.4 Equipment Effects Experiment 12 Chapter 2 Results and Analysis of Ruggedness Experiments 12 2.1 Analysis Approach 12 2.2 Dynamic Modulus Test 13 2.2.1 Factors Affecting Dynamic Modulus and Phase Angle 15 2.2.2 Factors Affecting Data Quality Indicators 19 2.2.3 Summary 20 2.3 Flow Number Test 20 2.3.1 Factors Affecting Flow Number 22 2.3.2 Factors Affecting Permanent Strain 24 2.3.3 Summary 27 Chapter 3 Results and Analysis of Equipment Effects Experiment 27 3.1 Introduction 27 3.2 Dynamic Modulus 27 3.2.1 Equipment Modifications 28 3.2.2 Statistical Analysis 32 3.3 Flow Number 33 3.3.1 Statistical Analysis 35 3.4 Repeatability 36 3.5 Summary 37 Chapter 4 Conclusions 37 4.1 SPT Equipment Specification Modifications 37 4.2 SPT Test Methods Modifications 38 4.3 Manufacturer Modifications 39 References

A1 Appendix A Dynamic Modulus Ruggedness Data B1 Appendix B Flow Number Ruggedness Data C1 Appendix C Dynamic Modulus Equipment Effects Data D1 Appendix D Flow Number Equipment Effects Data E1 Appendix E Final Version of the SPT Equipment Specifications F1 Appendix F SPT Test Methods

S U M M A R Y In Phases I and II of NCHRP Project 9-29, a detailed purchase specification for the Simple Performance Test System (SPT) was developed and two first article devices were procured and evaluated. This evaluation concluded that the SPT is a reasonably priced, user-friendly device for testing stiffness and permanent deformation properties of asphalt concrete. Additional work, however, was needed to further refine the SPT for use in routine practice. This additional work was undertaken in Phases IV and V of NCHRP Project 9-29. These phases of the project included four major activities directed at implementation of the SPT in routine practice: 1. Enhancement of the SPT to perform dynamic modulus master curve testing required for pavement structural design and analysis. 2. Procurement and evaluation of SPTs with dynamic modulus master curve testing capability. 3. Development of equipment for rapid preparation of test specimens for the SPT. 4. Ruggedness testing for the dynamic modulus and flow number tests conducted in the SPT. This report documents the ruggedness experiments that were performed in Phase V of the project. Two experiments were included in the SPT ruggedness testing. The first was a formal ruggedness experiment designed, conducted, and analyzed in accordance with ASTM E1169, Standard Guide for Conducting Ruggedness Tests. The second was an experiment designed to investigate whether there are significant differences in SPT data collected with equipment from the three manufacturers: Interlaken Technology Corporation (ITC); IPC Global, Ltd. (IPC); and Medical Device Testing Services (MDTS). The ruggedness and equipment effects experiments were performed separately for the dynamic modulus and flow number tests. The flow number and flow time tests are very similar. Both require similar control of stresses and temperature during the tests and similar accuracy in the measurement of deformations dur- ing the test. The results from the flow number test, therefore, can also be applied to the flow time test. Based on the findings from the ruggedness and equipment effects experiments, modifications to the equipment specification and test procedure were made to improve the quality of the test data and reduce variability. A final detailed purchase specification for the SPT and test procedures for the dynamic modulus and flow number tests were developed and are included as appendices to this report. Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester 1

21.1 Problem and Purpose National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 9-19, “Superpave Support and Performance Models Management” recommended three candidate simple perfor- mance tests to compliment the Superpave volumetric mixture design method. These tests are: flow time, flow number, and dynamic modulus. The recommended tests are conducted in uniaxial or triaxial compression on cylindrical specimens that are sawed and cored from over-height gyratory compacted samples. Data from all three candidates were shown to corre- late well with observed rutting in field pavements, and the dynamic modulus appears to have potential as a simple per- formance test for fatigue cracking (1). The dynamic modulus is also the primary material input for flexible pavement struc- tural design in the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) completed in NCHRP Project 1-37A (2). The use of this test for both mixture evaluation and structural design offers a potential link between mixture design and structural analysis that has been an underlying goal of a sub- stantial amount of past flexible pavement research. The objective of NCHRP Project 9-29 is to stimulate the de- velopment of commercial testing equipment that is capable of performing the NCHRP Project 9-19 performance tests. It is envisioned that this equipment will be used for two purposes: (1) as a simple performance test to complement Superpave volumetric mixture design and (2) for the asphalt concrete material characterization required by the MEPDG and other similar flexible pavement structural design methods. In Phase I of NCHRP Project 9-29, a detailed purchase specification for the Simple Performance Test System (SPT) was developed. The SPT is capable of performing the three NCHRP Project 9-19 performance tests, and it standardizes the instrumentation, data acquisition, and data analysis as- sociated with each test. In Phase II, two first article devices were procured and evaluated. This evaluation concluded that the SPT is a reasonably priced, user-friendly device for measuring stiffness and permanent deformation properties of asphalt concrete. Additional work, however, was needed to further refine the SPT for use in routine practice. This additional work was undertaken in Phases IV and V of NCHRP Project 9-29. These phases of the project included four major activities directed at implementation of the SPT in routine practice: 1. Enhancement of the SPT to perform dynamic modulus master curve testing required for pavement structural de- sign and analysis. 2. Procurement and evaluation of SPTs with dynamic modu- lus master curve testing capability. 3. Development of equipment for rapid preparation of test specimens for the SPT. 4. Ruggedness testing for dynamic modulus and flow num- ber tests conducted in the SPT. This report documents the ruggedness experiments that were performed in Phase V of the project. 1.2 Scope In Phase V of NCHRP Project 9-29 a series of experiments were designed, conducted and analyzed to assess the SPT equipment and test procedures for the dynamic modulus and flow number tests. Phase V included two major experiments. The first was a formal ruggedness experiment in accordance with ASTM E1169, Standard Guide for Conducting Ruggedness Tests. The second was an experiment designed to investigate whether there are significant differences in SPT data collected with equipment from the three manufacturers: Interlaken Technology Corporation (ITC); IPC Global (IPC); and Med- ical Device Testing Services (MDTS). Although the flow time test was not formally included in the experiments, the find- ings from the flow number testing were also applied to the flow time test. C H A P T E R 1 Introduction and Research Approach

Next: Report Contents »
Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 629: Ruggedness Testing of the Dynamic Modulus and Flow Number Tests with the Simple Performance Tester examines ruggedness testing that was conducted with a simple performance tester for the dynamic modulus and flow number tests.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!