Annotated Literature Review for NCHRP Report 640 (2009)

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.

190 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Tire Stud Rutting Icing Problems Raveling Gouging/scarring (snow-plow, etc.) Deformation Rutting Clogging Potholes Fat spots/bleeding becomes problem Cracking due to inadequate structure Noisy ride Stripping Bumpy ride Reflective cracking Thermal cracking Frequency of F-mix Distress Never Seen Rare Scattered Pervasive Figure 22: Results of 2001 Survey of ODOT Maintenance Supervisors 1.45.8 Structural Design No specifics on inclusion within structural design were given. 1.45.9 Limitations No limitations on use were given. 1.46 Flintsch, G. W., E. de León, K. K. McGhee, I. L. Al-Qadi. “Pavement Surface Macrotexture Measurement and Application.” Transportation Research Record No: 1860. Transportation Research Board. National Research Council. Washington, D.C. 2003. 1.46.1 General This paper does not address any specific feature of porous friction course, but provides results and comparison of results obtained through different types of measurements for macrotexture properties of three mix types, one of which is an OGFC. The authors show correlations of macrotexture measurement results from the CTM meter and the laser profiler method, with results from the sand patch tests for different mixes. Of the different things present in these comparisons, the most important observation, relevant to this literature review is that the OGFC mix shows the highest macrotexture values (in mm) for both sand patch and laser profiler measurements. (The authors do not

191 indicate the OGFC mixes on the plot showing the comparison of results from the CTM meter and the sand patch test). Flintsch et al also evaluated the applicability of an equation based on material properties for estimating texture depth in non segregated hot mix asphalt (HMA). From a comparison of estimated depths and average results from sand patch measurements, they conclude that the relationship cannot appropriately predict the macrotexture for the mixes studied, especially for OGFC and stone matrix asphalt (SMA) mixes. 1.46.2 Benefits of Permeable Asphalt Mixtures No benefit of permeable asphalt mixture is mentioned. 1.46.3 Materials and Design Flintsch et al provides information on several techniques of macrotexture/friction/segregation measurements and gradation and material information on the different mixes (including OGFC) used in this study. The different test methods and equations are shown in Table 98, and the material properties of the OGFC mix are shown in Table 99.

192 Table 98: Measurement Methods and Equations Property Method Macrotexture Static: Sand patch, ASTM E965; Mean: Outflow meter: indirectly estimates pavement texture based on the time for a fixed volume of water to escape from a measured cylinder with a rubber bottom; The Circular Track Meter, or CTMeter; Dynamic: Vehicle-mounted laser device ASTM Standard E1845. Microtexture Low speed friction measurement devices such as the British Portable Tester (BPT), the Dynamic Friction Tester (DF Tester), and the locked wheel skid trailer when testing is performed at low speeds; skid trailer measurements conducted using a ribbed tire (ASTM E501); Skid Resistance/Friction International Friction Index (IFI): To calculate the IFI, it is necessary to have at least one friction measurement and one macrotexture measurement. The IFI is reported in two parameters: the normalized wet friction value at 60 km/hr (F60) and a speed constant (Sp). A transformation equation has also been established to allow for calculation of the wet friction value at speeds other than 60 km/hr. If the measurements are conducted using a ribbed tire, which is relatively insensitive to macrotexture properties of the surface, then the macrotexture measurement is also used to correct the normalized wet friction value at 60 km/hr (F60). The adjusted friction value and the texture measurement are used to calculate the value for F60. Non-Segregated ETD of a HMA NCHRP 441: ETD = 0.01980*MS - 0.004984*P 4.75+ 0.1038*Cc - 0.004861*Cu MS = maximum size of the aggregate (mm); P4.75 = Percentage passing 4.75mm sieve; Cc = coefficient of curvature = (D30)2/(D10D60); Cu= coefficient of uniformity = D60/D10; D10 = the sieve size associated with 10% passing (mm); Equation presented in this paper, based on this study: EPD = -2.896 + 0.2993*NMS+0.0698*VMA, where, EPD = estimated mean profile depth, NMS = nominal maximum size (mm); and VMA = voids in the mineral aggregate (%).