Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories (2020)

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.

166 A P P E N D I X C Partner Laboratory Survey Responses The responses to the partner laboratory survey questionnaire are presented in this appendix. Current Status of Laboratory Asphalt Performance Testing Question 1: Does your organization prepare specimens and conduct asphalt laboratory performance tests?

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 167 Question 2: Please provide list of transportation agencies that contract asphalt laboratory performance testing to your organization. (If more than 15, please provide list of most recent 15 agencies that have contracted with your organization for asphalt laboratory performance testing.) AASHTO Materials Reference Library (AASHTO RE:SOURCE), Alabama Department of Transportation, Arizona Department of Transportation (2), Arkansas Department of Transportation, Asphalt contractors doing work for Caltrans on projects with PRS, Beltrami County (MN), Benton County (MN), Brown County (MN), California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Research, California Department of Transportation, Carver County (MN), Chisago County (MN), City of Phoenix, Colorado Department of Transportation, Connecticut Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration (3), Federal Highway Administration (3), Florida Department of Transportation (5), Hennepin County (MN), Illinois Department of Transportation (2), Illinois Tollway Authority, Indiana Department of Transportation, Ingham County Road Council, Iowa Department of Transportation, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (3), Minnesota Department of Transportation (6), Missouri Department of Transportation (2), National Cooperative Highway Research Program (2), Nevada Department of Transportation (2), New Hampshire Department of Transportation, New York Department of Transportation, North Carolina Department of Transportation (2), Oklahoma Department of Transportation (2), Olmsted County (MN), Oregon Department of Transportation, Otter Tail County (MN), Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Pennsylvania Turnpike, Private industry (2), Regional Transportation Commission, Sibley County (MN), South Dakota Department of Transportation, St. Louis County (MN), Stutsman County (ND), Tennessee Department of Transportation, Texas Department of Transportation (3), Transportation Research Board (2), U.S. Air Force Civil Engineering Center, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2), Utah Department of Transportation, Virginia Department of Transportation, Washington County (MN), Washington Department of Transportation, Wisconsin Department of Transportation (5), Wright County (MN) Numbers in parentheses represent the number of times an entity was identified by the partner laboratory.

Question 3: “For the agencies identified in previous question, please provide information regarding the purpose of the performance testing (select all that apply).” Partner Lab Agency 1 Agency 2 Agency 3 Agency 4 Agency 5 Agency 6 Agency 7 Agency 8 Agency 9 Agency 10 Agency 11 Agency 12 Agency 13 Agency 14 Agency 15 1 P 2 P, Q P, Q Q 3 P 4 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q P, Q P, Q Q Q 5 P P P 6 P, Q 7 P 8 P 9 P, Q P, Q P, Q 10 P P Q P 11 P 12 P, Q P, Q P, Q 13 P P P 14 P P P 15 P P P P P P P P P 16 17 P P P P P P P P P P P 18 P P P 19 P, Q Q P, Q 20 P P 21 22 P 23 P 24 P, Q 25 P, Q P P P P P P P P 26 P 27 28 P P 29 P 30 P, Q 31 P 32 P 33 P: Performance testing as part of a research study (or research studies); Q: Test required as part of mix design, mix acceptance, QA process or pay factor adjustment (select if any of these conditions apply).

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 169 Question 4: “Please select the types of laboratory asphalt performance testing conducted by your organization–select all that apply:” “Other” responses and brief descriptions 7 9 14 13 12 26 13 23 19 17 26 7 7 4 12 18 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 APA Cantabro CTIndex DCT DTCF E* FBF HWT IDT RLPD SCB SSG DTCF SSG E* SSG RLPD TxOT Other Number of Partner Labs Other Test-1 (briefly describe): Other Test-2 (briefly describe): IDT (creep-recovery, strength, etc.) Thermal Stress Restrained Specimen test BBR on small HMA beams Static Load Creep Stress Sweep Rutting Test IDT E* (NC state proposed test method) Repeated Load Creep Recovery Oregon Field Tack Coat Test and several other tack tests at the emulsion and mix level AASHTO TP114 Indirect Tensile Ratio Test (AASHTO T283 modified) Oregon Field Torque test Flexural Frequency Sweep—part of AASHTO T 321 Nflex IDT test—as proposed by NCAT Repeated Simple Shear Test AASHTO T 320 Uniaxial Fatigue ( Tension-Compression) Resilient Modulus (ASTM 7369) C* Fracture Test Resilient Modulus Bending Beam Test (AASHTO TP125)

170 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Question 5: “At your organization, is the fabrication of test specimens for performance testing conducted using standardized AASHTO or ASTM specifications and/or agency-specific protocols? (Provide one response for each test.)” Test Standardized Procedures (AASHTO or ASTM specifications) Standardized Procedure with Some Agency Recommended Modifications Other (nonstandardized procedure, such as entirely in-house protocol) APA 6 3 1 Cantabro 7 1 3 CTIndex 10 1 3 DCT 9 5 1 DTCF 11 0 1 E* 24 3 1 FBF 12 1 0 HWT 18 8 0 IDT 16 4 1 RLPD 16 1 1 SCB 23 6 2 SSG DTCF 6 0 1 SSG E* 6 0 1 SSG RLPD 4 0 0 TxOT 7 4 2 Other-1 6 2 6 Other-2 6 3 1 Question 6: “If you have a document describing organization-specific procedures for fabricating specimens for laboratory performance tests, either: (1) upload documents: FILE UPLOAD (please rename files to include organization name) or (2) please paste a link to a website where documents can be found.” Asphalt Pavement Analyzer Test (AASHTO T340) AASHTO T340, and also modified loading parameters of 250-lb load, 250-psi hose pressure (according to FAA AC 150-5370-10H) and 325-lb load, 325-psi hose pressure Cantabro Test AASHTO TP108 and also https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a590558.pdf Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) Test (ASTM D7313) SEE ASTM D7313-13/MNdot Modified Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing (AASHTO T342) AASHTO T342 http://www.dot.ca.gov/d3/projects/subprojects/0H10U/files/pdfs/LLP- AC3_Sample_Preparation_for_LL_HMA-Pavement_I-5%20Sacramento_2018-07-20.pdf AASHTO T 342 Flexural Beam Fatigue Test (AASHTO T321) http://www.dot.ca.gov/d3/projects/subprojects/0H10U/files/pdfs/LLP- AC3_Sample_Preparation_for_LL_HMA-Pavement_I-5%20Sacramento_2018-07-20.pdf

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 171 Fabrication of Asphalt Performance Test Specimens Question 7: “For laboratory performance tests used by your organization, are specimen dimensions as per standard specifications (such as AASHTO or ASTM)? (Select "No" if nonstandard dimensions are used for any performance tests that are conducted on behalf of an agency.)” Flow Number (RLPD) Test (AASHTO T378) http://www.dot.ca.gov/d3/projects/subprojects/0H10U/files/pdfs/LLP- AC3_Sample_Preparation_for_LL_HMA-Pavement_I-5%20Sacramento_2018-07-20.pdf Hamburg Wheel Tracking Test http://www.idot.illinois.gov/Assets/uploads/files/Doing-Business/Manuals-Guides-&- Handbooks/Highways/Materials/testproceduresmanual2015.pdf AASHTO T324 AASHTO T324 https://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0::::V,T:,302 CTIndex Test • https://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0::::V,T:,302 Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) Test (any version, I-FIT, LTRC, Minnesota) AASHTO TP124 Received from Illinois DOT, can't find on their website AASHTO TP105 https://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0::::V,T:,302 Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep Test AASHTO T322 Other Test-1 https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a590740.pdf http://www.dot.ca.gov/d3/projects/subprojects/0H10U/files/pdfs/LLP- AC3_Sample_Preparation_for_LL_HMA-Pavement_I-5%20Sacramento_2018-07-20.pdf Uploaded (C Fracture Test—ASU) https://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0::::V,T:,302 Other Test-2 https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a590740.pdf

172 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Question 8: “What are the dimensions of the final test specimen for the laboratory performance tests conducted by your organization on behalf of transportation agencies? (Typical values are shown; please edit as necessary and fill all that apply.)” NOTE: Respondents were requested to provide dimensions only when dimensions other than those recommended in test standards were used. Thickness Diameter (if applicable) Length (if applicable) Width (if applicable) If there are any additional features about the test specimen (e.g., flat faces or semi- circular shape), please describe them and share the dimensions used Asphalt Pavement Analyzer Test 89 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. Thickness=75+/-3 mm Cantabro Test 100 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test (S-VECD) N.A. 100 mm 130 mm N.A. N.A. 100 mm 130 mm N.A. Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) Test 50 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing N.A. 100 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. 100 mm 150 mm N.A. Flexural Beam Fatigue Test 2 inch N.A. 15 inch 2.5 inch Flow Number (RLPD) Test N.A. 100 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. 100 mm 150 mm N.A. Hamburg Wheel Tracking Test 2.4 inch 5.9 inch N.A. N.A. 2.4 inch 5.9 inch N.A. N.A. CTIndex Test 62 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) Test (any version) 50 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. 57 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test (S-VECD) N.A. 38 mm 100 mm N.A. Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Test N.A. 38 mm 100 mm N.A. Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Test Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep Test 50 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. 100 mm diameter. 38 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. Texas Overlay Test 37.5 mm 150 mm N.A. 75 mm 37.5 mm 150 mm N.A. 75 mm Other Test 1 100 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. 100 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A. Other Test 2 62 mm 130 mm N.A. N.A. Cylindrical specimen 50 mm 150 mm N.A. N.A.

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 173 Question 10: “Please identify laboratory performance test(s) for which there is a laboratory conditioning requirement (e.g., short- and/or long-term oven aging) as part of specimen fabrication process (select all that apply).” 6 6 13 10 12 25 11 20 16 16 22 7 13 17 2 3 1 4 1 4 2 5 5 3 6 1 1 1 1 2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 APA Cantabro CTIndex DCT DTCF E* FBF HWT IDT RLPD SCB SSG DTCF SSG E* SSG RLPD TxOT Other Number of Partner Labs Yes, there is a laboratory conditioning requirement No, there is not a laboratory conditioning requirement Question 9: “What type(s) of materials are evaluated using laboratory performance test(s) by your organization on behalf of state transportation agencies (check all that apply)?” Test Lab mixed, lab compacted Reheated plant mixed lab compacted or plant mixed lab compacted at the plant Plant mixed and field compacted, or field cores Other (briefly describe) APA 6 5 6 Cantabro 6 7 4 CTIndex 13 11 6 Research only DCT 11 11 7 DTCF 11 10 4 E* 23 19 9 FBF 12 11 3 HWT 23 18 16 IDT 18 12 11 RLPD 14 14 4 SCB 23 22 15 SSG DTCF 6 5 5 SSG E* 6 5 5 SSG RLPD 4 3 2 TxOT 11 8 5 Research only Other-1 10 10 7 Other-2 6 5 4 7 4

174 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Question 11: “Please provide information regarding the laboratory conditioning (e.g., short- and/or long- term oven aging) during specimen fabrication for laboratory performance testing (check all that apply).” “Other” responses and brief description: Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA) Only on lab-produced mix Cantabro Only on lab-produced mix Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S-VECD) Only on lab-produced mix Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) 2-h STOA; Short- & long-term Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing 2-h STOA; short-term; Only on lab-produced mix; STOA Flexural Beam Fatigue 2-h STOA; Only on lab-produced mix; STOA Flow Number (RLPD) 2-h STOA; Short-term; Only on lab-produced mix Hamburg Wheel Tracking 2-h STOA; Short-term; Only on lab-produced mix CTIndex 2-h STOA; Short-term; Only on lab-produced mix Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) (any version) 2-h STOA; Short and long-term; PAV; Only on lab-produced mix; STOA on mix, LTOA on sample Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S-VECD) Only on lab-produced mix Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Only on lab-produced mix Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Only on lab-produced mix Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep 2-h STOA; Only on lab-produced mix Texas Overlay Short and long-term; Only on lab-produced mix Other Test-1 NA; Only on lab-produced mix Other Test-2 NA; Only on lab-produced mix 6 6 13 10 11 10 19 14 15 22 6 4 12 13 3 1 1 3 3 1 5 1 8 2 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 APA Cantabro CTIndex DCT DTCF E* FBF HWT IDT RLPD SCB SSG DTCF SSG E* SSG RLPD TxOT Other Number of Partner Labs Loose Mix Compacted Sample 24 6 STOA = Short Term Oven Aging

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 175 Question 12: “Please provide details (such as temperature and time) for the loose mixture laboratory conditioning during specimen fabrication process (fill in all information that is applicable).” Loose mix aging temperature and aging time reported for non-AASHTO R30 protocol: Test Temperature (degreesCelsius) Time (minutes) Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA) Cantabro 85; 25 7,200 Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S-VECD) 85; 95 7,200; 7,200/17,280 Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) 85; 135; 95 7,200; 960; 7,200/17,280 Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing 85; 95 7,200; 7,200/19,280 Flexural Beam Fatigue Flow Number (RLPD) 85 7,200 Hamburg Wheel Tracking 135; 85 120; 7,200 CTIndex 85; 135; 135; 20 7,200; 960; 480 Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) (any version) 95; 85; 135; 135; 20 4,320; 7,200; 960; 480; 7,200/17,280 Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S- VECD) 85 7,200 Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus 85 7,200 Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep 85 7,200 Texas Overlay 135; 85; 135; 135 120; 7,200; 960; 480 Other Test-1 85 7,200 Other Test-2 85 7,200 5 5 12 9 10 22 17 12 14 19 5 5 10 12 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 APA Cantabro CTIndex DCT DTCF E* FBF HWT IDT RLPD SCB SSG DTCF SSG E* SSG RLPD TxOT Other Number of Partner Labs Yes, conditioned as per AASHTO R30 No, not conditioned as per AASHTO R30 10 3

176 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Descriptions of “other process followed” for loose mix conditioning: Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA) Cantabro We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h. Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S- VECD) We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h. Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h; long-term varies 12 to 16 h Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h. Flexural Beam Fatigue Experimenting now Flow Number (RLPD) We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h. Hamburg Wheel Tracking We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h. CTIndex We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h; long-term varies 12 to 16 h; 8 h at 135°C is for long-term (critical) oven aging in addition to short-term oven aging; experimenting now Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) (any version) We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h; long-term varies 12 to 16 h; 8 h at 135°C is for long-term (critical) oven aging in addition to short-term oven aging; experimenting now Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S-VECD) We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h. Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h. Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h. Texas Overlay We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h; long-term varies 12 to 16 h; 8 h at 135°C is for long-term (critical) oven aging in addition to short-term oven aging. Other Test-1 We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h. Other Test-2 We do all loose mix conditioning (both STOA and LTOA). LTOA is 85°C for 5 d or 135°C for 24 h.; experimenting now. STOA = Short Term Oven Aging

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 177 Question 13: “Is laboratory conditioning of compacted specimens conducted on bulk (prior to cutting and coring) specimens or on finished test specimens (after cutting and coring) (select one)?” 1 1 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 6 1 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 APA Cantabro CTIndex DCT DTCF E* FBF HWT IDT RLPD SCB SSG DTCF SSG E* SSG RLPD TxOT Other Number of Partner Labs Lab conditioning on bulk specimen (prior to cutting and/or coring) Lab conditioning on finished test specimen (after cutting and/or coring to get to final test specimen geometry)

178 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Question 14: “Please provide details (such as temperature and time) for the compacted specimen conditioning during fabrication process (fill in all information that is applicable).” Compacted specimen aging temperature and aging time reported for non-AASHTO R30 protocol: Test Temperature (degrees Celsius) Time (hours) Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA) Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA) Cantabro Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S-VECD) Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing Flexural Beam Fatigue Flow Number (RLPD) Hamburg Wheel Tracking CTIndex 85 5d Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) (any version) 95; 85 4320; 5d Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S-VECD) Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep Texas Overlay Other Test-1 Other Test-2 1 1 1 3 3 1 4 6 2 2 2 2 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 APA Cantabro CTIndex DCT DTCF E* FBF HWT IDT RLPD SCB SSG DTCF SSG E* SSG RLPD TxOT Other Number of Partner Labs Yes, conditioned as per AASHTO R30 No, not conditioned as per AASHTO R30

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 179 Descriptions of “other process followed” for compacted specimen conditioning: Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA) Cantabro Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S- VECD) Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing Flexural Beam Fatigue We have research on this now Flow Number (RLPD) Hamburg Wheel Tracking CTIndex Loose mix conditioned; we have research on this now Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) (any version) Loose mix conditioned; we have research on this now Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S-VECD) Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep Texas Overlay Other Test-1 Other Test-2 We have research on this now Question 15: “Is there a target air void level requirement for laboratory performance test specimens used by your organization? (Select one for each test.)” Test Target Air Void Required Target Air Void Not Required APA 6 1 Cantabro 4 5 CTIndex 13 1 DCT 13 0 DTCF 11 1 E* 24 2 FBF 12 1 HWT 23 0 IDT 18 1 RLPD 17 0 SCB 24 2 SSG DTCF 5 2 SSG E* 5 2 SSG RLPD 4 0 TxOT 12 0 Other-1 10 2 Other-2 6 0

180 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Question 16: “Please provide information regarding the target air void level requirement during fabrication of laboratory performance test specimens. (If requirements are in the AASHTO/ASTM specification, please select in first column and leave the rest blank. Fill in all information that applies and leave blank if no requirements are in place.)” Test Requirements as per Specification APA 5 Cantabro 1 CTIndex 10 DCT 10 DTCF 8 E* 19 FBF 11 HWT 18 IDT 14 RLPD 15 SCB 20 SSG DTCF 3 SSG E* 3 SSG RLPD 3 TxOT 11 Other-1 7 Other-2 3

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 181 Requirements Not Detailed in Test Specification or Deviated from Test Specification: Target Air Void Required on Bulk Compacted Sample Prior to Test Specimen Fabrication (e.g., prior to cutting or coring) Requirements Not Detailed in Test Specification or Deviated from Test Specification: Target Air Void Required on Finalized Test Specimen (e.g., after all necessary cutting or coring) Target Air Void Level (%) Allowed Variation (+/- %) Target Air Void Level (%) Allowed Variation (+/- %) Asphalt Pavement Analyzer Test 7 0.5 4, 7 0.5 0.5 Cantabro Test Nde, 4, 7 1 7 0.5 7 4 1 Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test (S-VECD) 7 0.5 7 0.5 ~8.0 0.5 7 0.5 0.5 4 0.5 7.0 0.5 Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) Test 7 0.5 7 0.5 7 0.5 7 0.5 7.0 1 0.5 Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing 4 .5 7 7 0.5 7.0 ~8.0 0.5 7 7.0 0.5 4 0.5 7.0 Flexural Beam Fatigue Test 7.0 1.0 7.0 1.0 0.5 7 1.0 Flow Number (RLPD) Test ~8.0 0.5 7 0.5 0.5 7.0 0.5 7 0.5 7.0 0.5 Hamburg Wheel Tracking Test 7.0 0.5 7 0.5 7 0.5 7 .5 7 0.5 7.0 0.5 ~8.0 0.5 7 0.5 CTIndex Test 7.0 0.5 7.0 0.5 7 0.5 7 0.5 5.5 0.5 Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) Test (any version) 5.5 0.5 7 0.5 ~8.0 0.5 7 0.5 7.0 0.5 7.0 0.5 0.5 Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test ~8.0 0.5 7 0.5 0.5 7 0.5 7.0 0.5

182 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Table continued from previous page. Requirements Not Detailed in Test Specification or Deviated from Test Specification: Target Air Void Required on Bulk Compacted Sample Prior to Test Specimen Fabrication (e.g., prior to cutting or coring) Requirements Not Detailed in Test Specification or Deviated from Test Specification: Target Air Void Required on Finalized Test Specimen (e.g., after all necessary cutting or coring) Target Air Void Level (%) Allowed Variation (+/- %) Target Air Void Level (%) Allowed Variation (+/- %) Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Test ~8.0 0.5 7 0.5 0.5 7 0.5 7.0 0.5 Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Test ~8.0 0.5 7 0.5 0.5 7.0 0.5 Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep Test 7.0 0.5 7.0 0.5 7 0.5 7 0.5 7.0 0.5 7 0.5 0.5 Texas Overlay Test 0.5 7 0.5 7 1.0 Other Test-1 4 0.5 7 0.5 Other Test-2 4 0.5 7 0.5

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 183 “Other” (such as more than one target air void level) responses and descriptions. Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA) Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S-VECD) Depending on research, air voids have ranged from 3.5 to 10% (all with +/- 0.5% tolerance). SMAs typically done at 6% +/- 0.5%. Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Sometimes 4% +/- 0.5% or 5% +/- 0.5% for research. Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) Depending on research, air voids have ranged from 3.5 to 10% (all with +/- 0.5% tolerance). SMAs typically done at 6% +/- 0.5%. Slice air voids (post-slice from bulk gyro, pre-notch and pre-core) 7.0% +/- 0.5%; SMA = 6.0% +/- Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing Depending on research, air voids have ranged from 3.5 to 10% (all with +/- 0.5% tolerance). SMAs typically done at 6% +/- 0.5%. SMA=6.0% +/- Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Varies depending on construction specification—e.g., rich bottom or enhanced compaction. Sometimes 4% +/- 0.5% or 5% +/- 0.5% for research. Flexural Beam Fatigue SMA = 6.0% +/- Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Varies depending on construction specification—e.g., rich bottom or enhanced compaction. Flow Number (RLPD) Depending on research, air voids have ranged from 3.5 to 10% (all with +/- 0.5% tolerance). SMAs typically done at 6% +/- 0.5%. SMA = 6.0% +/- Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Sometimes 4% +/- 0.5% or 5% +/- 0.5% for research. Hamburg Wheel Tracking SMA = 6.0% +/- Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. CTIndex SMA = 6.0% +/- Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) (any version) Slice air voids (post-slice from bulk gyro, pre-half and pre-notch) 7.0% +/- 0.5%; SMA = 6.0% +/- Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Sometimes 4% +/- 0.5% or 5% +/- 0.5% for research. Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue (S-VECD) Depending on research, air voids have ranged from 3.5 to 10% (all with +/- 0.5% tolerance). SMAs typically done at 6% +/- 0.5%. Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Sometimes 4% +/- 0.5% or 5% +/- 0.5% for research. Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Sometimes 4% +/- 0.5% or 5% +/- 0.5% for research. Depending on research, air voids have ranged from 3.5 to 10% (all with +/- 0.5% tolerance). SMAs typically done at 6% +/- 0.5%. Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Sometimes 4% +/- 0.5% or 5% +/- 0.5% for research. Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep Depending on research, air voids have ranged from 3.5 to 10% (all with +/- 0.5% tolerance). SMAs typically done at 6% +/- 0.5%. SMA = 6.0% +/- Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Texas Overlay Will target 7 percent air voids unless testing materials with a significantly different known in-place density. Other Test-1 Depending on research, air voids have ranged from 3.5 to 10% (all with +/- 0.5% tolerance). SMAs typically done at 6% +/- 0.5%. Other Test-2 Varies depending on construction specification—e.g., rich bottom or enhanced compaction.

184 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Question 17: “Identify equipment that is used in your laboratory to fabricate test specimens for laboratory performance tests (check all that apply).” Test M ix S pl itt er (e .g ., qu ar te rm as te r) Su pe rp av e G yr at or y C om pa ct or O ve n( s) R ot ar y Sa w (s ) C or in g D ril l C or e D ry in g D ev ic e G lu in g Te m pl at es (e .g ., te m pl at e fo r m ar ki ng lo ca tio n of g ag e po in ts o r t o at ta ch g ag e po in ts) G lu in g Jig s ( e. g. ,s pe ci m en h ol di ng de vi ce s t o gl ue lo ad in g pl at en s t o te st sp ec im en ) Te m pe ra tu re C on di tio ni ng C ha m be r( s) V ac uu m B ag S ea lin g D ev ic es (s uc h as C or eL ok ) Asphalt Pavement Analyzer Test 2 6 5 1 1 3 0 0 5 3 Cantabro Test 2 8 9 1 1 5 0 0 4 5 Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test (S- VECD) 6 12 11 11 11 9 11 11 11 8 Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) Test 7 13 12 12 9 5 10 2 12 5 Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing 10 26 25 24 22 17 18 14 24 15 Flexural Beam Fatigue Test 8 5 12 12 2 5 5 1 12 3 Flow Number (RLPD) Test 8 17 16 15 15 11 8 6 15 8 Hamburg Wheel Tracking Test 9 23 22 21 2 9 2 1 17 8 CTIndex Test 6 14 14 6 2 7 0 0 14 8 Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) Test (any version) 9 26 25 25 4 15 6 3 25 11 Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test (S-VECD) 4 6 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 3 Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Test 4 6 5 6 6 6 6 2 6 3 Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Test 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 1 Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep Test 7 19 18 17 6 9 14 7 17 9 Texas Overlay Test 3 12 11 11 2 7 5 8 11 4 Other Test-1 3 9 10 10 7 8 5 3 9 8 Other Test-2 1 3 4 3 2 3 0 1 4 3

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 185 Other equipment identified: Test Other(s) (briefly describe) Asphalt Pavement Analyzer Test Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Cantabro Test CoreLok typically used for high absorption mixtures Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test (S-VECD) Water bath for specific gravity measurement Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) Test Water bath for specific gravity measurement Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing Water bath for specific gravity measurement Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Flexural Beam Fatigue Test Slab compactor ARC slab compactor Kneading compactor Controls slab compactor Flow Number (RLPD) Test Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Hamburg Wheel Tracking Test Slab compact previously Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances CTIndex Test Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) Test (any version) Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Water bath for specific gravity measurement Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test (S-VECD) Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Test Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Test Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep Test Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Texas Overlay Test Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Other Test-1 Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances Water bath for specific gravity measurement Other Test-2 Core dryer & CoreLok used in special circumstances

186 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Operational Constraints and Rejection Rates of Test Specimens Question 18: “What is the allowable maximum storage time before, during, and after specimen fabrication for the performance tests that are instituted by your organization? Please use the comments column to provide any additional relevant information (fill all that apply; leave blank if no requirements are in place).” Test Allowable Maximum Storage Times Before, During, and After Specimen Fabrication for the Performance Tests Between Loose Mix Sampling and Laboratory Compaction Between Preparation of Compacted (bulk) Specimen and Finalized Test Specimen Between Finalized Test Specimen Fabrication and Mechanical Testing Between Repeated Mechanical Testing (if multiple tests are conducted on same specimens) Asphalt Pavement Analyzer Test 30; 3 5 5 Cantabro Test 5 5; 7 5; 30 Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test (S-VECD) 180; 3; 30 3; 14; 3 2; 14; 10 2; 14 Disk-Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) Test NA; 3 3; 5 10; 3; 2; 30 7 Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing 30; 3; NA; 180; 180 5; 7; 3; 5; 3 10; 5; 3; 3; 3 3; 90; 7; 2; 7 Flexural Beam Fatigue Test 30; NA; 180; 3; 30 5; NA; 3; 7; 3 10; 5; NA; 2; 30 NA; 14 Flow Number (RLPD) Test 30; NA; 180; 3; 30 5; 3; 5; 3; 7 10; 5; 3; 3; 2 7; 7 Hamburg Wheel Tracking Test 30; 3; NA; 180; 3 5; 7; 3; 5; 3 10; 5; 3; 3; 3 7 CTIndex Test 30; 3; NA; 180; 30 5; 7; 3; 5; 7 10; 5; 3; 3; 1 7; 7 Semi-Circular Bend (SCB) Test (any version) 30; 3; NA; 180; 3 5; 7; 3; 5; 3 10; 5; 3; 3; 2 7 Small-Scale Geometry Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test 180; 3 14 14 2 Small-Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Test 180; 3 14 14 90; 2 Small-Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Test 3 Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep Test 5; NA; 3; 30 5; 3; 5; 3; 3 10; 5; 3; 3; 2 7; 14 Texas Overlay Test 5; 3; 3 5; 7; 5; 3 10; 5; 3; 2; 2 Other Test-1 180; 30 1; 7; 3 30; 7 7 Other Test-2 180 3; 7 30

Test Comments Asphalt Pavement Analyzer Test 30 days if materials are stored inside at room temperature (mainly for field mixtures). If any of the storage times exceed 5 days after compaction, we keep them in a freezer at 0°F. No limit, but typically less than 30 days No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Cantabro Test If any of the storage time exceeds 5 days after compaction, we keep them in a freezer at 0°F We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days No limit, but typically less than 30 days No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible No strict rules Testing done in "reasonable" time Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test (S- VECD) We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Usually within 1-2 weeks the process is finished No requirements in place, but certainly not > 30 days NA Disk- Shaped Compact Tension (DCT) Test We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days Usually within 1-2 weeks the process is finished Try to have no more than 1 week from compaction to final mech testing Testing done in "reasonable" time NA NA Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Testing NA 3 hours between repeated testing is not a hard rule, typical practice. 30 days if materials are stored inside at room temperature (mainly for field mixtures). If any of the storage time exceeds 5 days after compaction, we keep them in a freezer at 0°F. Not applicable We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days Try to have no more than 1 week from compaction to final mech testing Follow Note 5 of T342; test within 2 weeks No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Loose mix samples stored in sealed metal cans; specimens stored in temperature-controlled room Usually within 1-2 weeks the process is finished No requirements in place but certainly not > 30 days NA Testing done in "reasonable" time Flexural Beam Fatigue Test Loose mix samples stored in sealed metal cans; specimens stored in temperature-controlled room Testing done in "reasonable" time No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible NA 30 days if materials are stored inside at room temperature (mainly for field mixtures). If any of the storage time exceeds 5 days after compaction, we keep them in a freezer at 0°F.

Flow Number (RLPD) Test NA 30 days if materials are stored inside at room temperature (mainly for field mixtures). If any of the storage time exceeds 5 days after compaction, we keep them in a freezer at 0°F. We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days Try to have no more than 1 week from compaction to final mech testing No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Loose mix samples stored in sealed metal cans; specimens stored in temperature-controlled room Usually within 1-2 weeks the process is finished No requirements in place but certainly not > 30 days Testing done in "reasonable" time Hamburg Wheel Tracking Test NA 30 days if materials are stored inside at room temperature (mainly for field mixtures). If any of the storage time exceeds 5 days after compaction, we keep them in a freezer at 0°F. Not applicable We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days Try to have no more than 1 week from compaction to final mech testing No limit, but typically less than 30 days No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Loose mix samples stored in sealed metal cans; specimens stored in temperature-controlled room No requirements in place but certainly not > 30 days Testing done in "reasonable" time CTIndex Test 30 days if materials are stored inside at room temperature (mainly for field mixtures). If any of the storage time exceeds 5 days after compaction, we keep them in a freezer at 0°F. We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days Try to have no more than 1 week from compaction to final mech testing No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Loose mix samples stored in sealed metal cans; specimens stored in temperature-controlled room Semi- Circular Bend (SCB) Test (any version) NA 30 days if materials are stored inside at room temperature (mainly for field mixtures). If any of the storage time exceeds 5 days after compaction, we keep them in a freezer at 0°F. We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days Try to have no more than 1 week from compaction to final mech testing No limit, but typically less than 30 days No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Loose mix samples stored in sealed metal cans; specimens stored in temperature-controlled room Usually within 1-2 weeks the process is finished No requirements in place but certainly not > 30 days NA Testing done in "reasonable" time Small- Scale We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Geometry No requirements in place but certainly not > 30 days

Direct Tension Cyclic Fatigue Test (S- VECD) NA Small- Scale Geometry Dynamic (Complex) Modulus Test We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible No requirements in place but certainly not > 30 days. NA Small- Scale Geometry Flow Number (RLPD) Test No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible No requirements in place but certainly not > 30 days Superpave Indirect Tensile Strength and Creep Test NA If any of the storage time exceeds 5 days after compaction, we keep them in a freezer at 0°F Not applicable We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days Try to have no more than 1 week from compaction to final mech testing No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Usually within 1-2 weeks the process is finished Texas Overlay Test 30 days if materials are stored inside at room temperature (mainly for field mixtures). If any of the storage time exceeds 5 days after compaction, we keep them in a freezer at 0°F. Not applicable We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Other Test-1 We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days No limit but typically less than 30 days No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Loose mix samples stored in sealed metal cans; specimens stored in temperature controlled room Usually within 1-2 weeks the process is finished NA Other Test-2 We don't have a maximum, but time between fabrication and testing is rarely more than 2 days No limit, but typically less than 30 days No official requirements, but process as quickly as possible Loose mix samples stored in sealed metal cans; specimens stored in temperature-controlled room

190 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Question 19: “How are performance test specimens prepared for storage at your organization? (Select all that apply.)” “Other” responses and descriptions: Between Loose Mix Sampling and Laboratory Compaction Between Preparation of Compacted (bulk) Specimen and Finalized Test Specimen Between Finalized Test Specimen Fabrication and Mechanical Testing Between Repeated Mechanical Testing (if multiple tests are conducted on same specimens) Placed in wax lined boxes, not sealed Keep them in freezer at 0°F after wrapping with plastic film or sealed in containers We receive some samples in boxes from partner agencies Cardboard box Laboratory ambient conditions Sealed metal buckets In wax-coated boxes with minimal air intrusion In bucket with lid Left in conditioned space Keep them in freezer at 0°F after wrapping with plastic film or sealed in containers We rarely wrap, but try to if we know there's a period of time between testing Laboratory ambient conditions Only for specimens (before saw trimming) that have to be stored for an extended period Kept in cooler Left in conditioned space Keep them in freezer at 0°F after wrapping with plastic film or sealed in containers We rarely wrap, but try to if we know there's a period of time between testing Laboratory ambient conditions; T342 dynamic modulus may be wrapped in plastic film depending on storage time Stored in a temperature- controlled room Specimens are tested as quickly as possible after saw trimming Kept in cooler Temperature-controlled room Normally, any specimens subject to multiple tests are run back-to-back; little to no time in between tests Keep them in freezer at 0°F after wrapping with plastic film or sealed in containers NA NA for destructive mechanical tests Kept in cooler NA As directed by client The legend is the same one as for Question 20 in Appendix B.

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 191 Question 20: “Please indicate the most frequent causes of operational disruptions that you have encountered during the test specimen fabrication process (check all that apply).”

192 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories “Other” responses: Solid-state relays going bad in ovens, compressors going bad, nothing related to specimens. There is a lot more to this discussion than presented here. Sometimes with lab mixes, just amount of student time available for agg prep. Premature failures during the testing. Question 21: “In your experience, what has been the rejection rate of test specimens (i.e., specimens that are not used for testing), due to the fabrication process (e.g., longer shelf storage than allowed, out-of-tolerance dimensions, wrong air void content, etc.) (select one and fill in the blank).”

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 193 Typical specimen rejection rates reported: Typical specimen rejection rate: (%) 20 to 30% due to % air void rejection 5 25 Changes depending on the quantity in one production, experience of students, type of asphalt mixture, test method, etc. T 378 samples have very low rejection rate (10 to 15%) compared to T321 samples (20 to 25%). 5 10 10% Less than 5% 10 30 20 5 15 5 10 50 Wrong air void content ~10%? 20 20 5 10 20

194 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Question 22: “Is your organization satisfied with your performance test specimen rejection rate? (Select one and fill in the blank.) If no, what rejection rate (%) would you consider as acceptable/satisfactory?” Responses to “If no, what rejection rate (%) would you consider as acceptable/satisfactory?” Responses 10 5 20

Partner Laboratory Survey Responses 195 Suggestions for Future Research Question 23: “Have you observed any gaps in knowledge that have made it challenging for your organization to start (or continue) successfully fabricating performance test specimens?” Yes (please describe) Hands-on training is paramount, especially with transient workers or students. Some of the tolerances are unrealistically tight for standard equipment. High-precision cutting equipment is very expensive. There is not a firm understanding of the impact of storage on specimen properties, such as oxidation in buckets, boxes, or between compacted state and cut-and-cored state. The multiple cuts involved with many of these specimens introduce variability. Need to assess if the test and such an involved procedure is adding value. A trial-and-error process is initially required to fabricate specimens to target densities (e.g., Va = 7.0% +/- 0.5%). This is a function of aggregate gradation, specimen preparation, etc. Long-term aging; current spec does not simulate real long-term aging and there are several strategies out there suggested by different research groups. We need a unified long-term aging protocol. Air void distribution within gyratory compacted samples Determining appropriate masses for trial specimens to meet air void targets—mass–volume relationships are not always accurate. Maintaining qualified personnel to perform testing. Getting repeatable compaction. We use core-locked air voids to be able to catch high air void content that are unmeasurable using SSD. Think that a lot of folks fooling themselves with repeatable compaction using SSD, which we think cannot measure air voids well above about 7 percent because of internal connectivity of air voids makes definition of volume no good. Having a more repeatable version of CoreLok on rough-surfaced specimens needed. Saw blade tolerance for notch is 1.5 mm +/-0.1 is too tight. Does it make a difference? Staff training

196 Practices for Fabricating Asphalt Specimens for Performance Testing in Laboratories Question 24: “The synthesis will also include case examples illustrating practices on asphalt performance-test specimen fabrication. The development of the case example(s) may require an additional follow-up interview. Organizations will be provided the opportunity to review the case example write-up for accuracy. Would your organization be interested in participating in a case example?” Question 25: “If you have any additional information or thoughts you would like to share regarding this topic, please share them here.” Feel free to contact for follow-up. Sample preparation is a critical step to reduce test variability and it also becoming an obstacle for DOTs, contractors and even researcher[s] to run some performance tests. We also do direct tension monotonic testing in the AMPT on small specimens (38-mm diameter by 110-mm height). The survey took about 1.5 hours for two people to do. Once the data is gathered it took about 20 minutes to enter.