Upload
others
View
12
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Asphalt Technology Guidance Program
(ATGP)
Ohio Transportation Engineering ConferenceOctober 10, 2017
Long-Life Asphalt Pavement for the 21st Century
Office of Asset Management,
Pavements, & Construction
Agenda
• FHWA Pavement and Materials
• Trailer Activities
• Aggregate Imaging System (AIMS)
• Asphalt Mixture Performance Tester (AMPT)
• Questions and Tour
2
Pavement & Materials Discipline
• Program Office
– Office of Asset Management, Pavements, and Construction (FHWA HQ, Washington, DC)
• ATGP: Mobile Asphalt Testing Trailer (MATT) and Asphalt Binder Testing Laboratory (ABTL)
3
Pavement & Materials Discipline
• Program Office
– Office of Asset Management, Pavements, and Construction (FHWA HQ, Washington, DC)
• ATGP: Mobile Asphalt Testing Trailer (MATT) and Asphalt Binder Testing Laboratory (ABTL)
• Research and Development
– Office of Infrastructure R&D (Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, McLean, VA)
4
Pavement & Materials Discipline
• Program Office
– Office of Asset Management, Pavements, and Construction (FHWA HQ, Washington, DC)
• ATGP: Mobile Asphalt Testing Trailer (MATT) and Asphalt Binder Testing Laboratory (ABTL)
• Research and Development
– Office of Infrastructure R&D (Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, McLean, VA)
• Technical Services (Resource Centers)
– Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver
5
Pavement & Materials Discipline
• Program Office
– Office of Asset Management, Pavements, and Construction (FHWA HQ, Washington, DC)
• ATGP: Mobile Asphalt Testing Trailer (MATT) and Asphalt Binder Testing Laboratory (ABTL)
• Research and Development
– Office of Infrastructure R&D (Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, McLean, VA)
• Technical Services (Resource Centers)
– Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver
• Division Offices (nationwide) 6
MATT Program History
• Projects began in 1988
– DP 74: Field Management of Asphalt Mixes Using Volumetric Quality Control
• Transition to Superpave implementation
– Early-1990s
– Classroom and hands-on training
• Transition to performance-related specifications
– Shadow testing
– AMPT user since 2003!
• Innovative materials and practices
– WMA, GTR, RAP/RAS, increased density7
MATT in Ohio
• 1988 – Standard Materials, Jackson
– DP 74: Field Management Using Volumetric Quality Control
• 1994 – Ohio DOT, Columbus
– Superpave Level 1 Training
• 1995 – STONECO, Marion
– SPS-9 Project: Level 1 Superpave
• 2017 – Here and now!
8
9
Program Objective
• Provide Support to National Initiatives
– Increased Pavement Density
– Increased RAP/RAS Usage
– Understanding Asphalt Rubber Testing
– Mixture Performance Testing and the AMPT
– Stone Matrix Asphalt
– Binder Performance Testing
– Long-Term Aging
MATT Technology
• Equipment Development & Refinement
– Simple Performance Tester (SPT)
• Evaluation and Refinement of Innovative
Contracting Concepts
• Development of New QA Concepts for HMA
• Advanced Rapid Test Tools
– AIMS, CoreLok, CoreDry
10
11
Routine Project Site Activities
•Material Characterization
•Mix Design Replication and Testing
•Mix Production Testing
Binder Tests and Analysis
12
Binder Characterization
TEST PROCEDURES EQUIPMENT
• RV
• DSR
• RTFO
• PAV
• Vacuum Degassing Oven
• BBR
• DTT
• ABCD
• Torsional bar testing
13
• Performance Grading
– AASHTO M 320
– AASHTO M 332 (MSCR)
– AASHTO R 49 (Low Temperature PG)
• Solubility & Separation
– AASHTO T 44
– ASTM D7173
Additional DSR Testing
• Parallel Plate (PP) Geometry
– Frequency Sweep (Master Curve)
– Linear Amplitude Sweep (AASHTO TP 101)
– 4mm test
• Cylindrical Geometry
– Viscosity: AASHTO T 316
– Asphalt Rubber Testing
14courtesy of Anton Paar & TA Instruments.
DSR Testing Alternative: Asphalt Rubber Binder
Can it fit within existing PG grading system?
• DSR Testing Geometry
– Caltrans, University of California Pavement Research Center, Anton Paar
– Concentric Cylinder (CC) development testing evaluation looks promising
– CC test geometry may overcome specimen preparation limitations of PP geometry
– Draft AASHTO standard in development
15
• Advantage– GTR modified asphalt can be measured with
particle sizes up to 2 mm
– No trimming problems and filling problems
– No edge effects 16
Concentric Cylinder Geometry
courtesy of Anton Paar
Rheological Properties:Master Curve
• Rheological parameter:
– Rheological index (R value)
– Crossover frequency (ωc)
– Glover-Rowe (G-R)
• These parameters can be interrelated from understanding the relationship between loading time (or frequency) and temperature.
17
Extended Aging
Do current procedures provide similarly aged material compared to long term aging in the field?
• Binder: PAV procedure (AASHTO R 28)
– ETG task force evaluating 40 h PAV
– Rheological parameters are used to assess
• Mixture: Oven aging (AASHTO R 30)
– NCHRP 9-54 is underway to investigate the need for extended aging
18
Long Term Conditioning:
19
Master Curve - PG 76-22 Asphalt Rubber
• More conditioning causes the master curves to become flatter with R increasing and ωc decreasing.
Low Temperature BBR Test:Binder New Parameter (∆Tc)
• ∆Tc is the difference between the critical low temperature determined by stiffness and relaxation criteria from BBR test
– ∆Tc = S critical temp - m critical temp
• As an asphalt binder ages, ∆Tc value becomes more negative
– Indicating a loss of relaxation properties
• Important parameter related to asphalt binder durability
• Threshold of -5°C being evaluated
20
Low Temperature ABCD Test:AASHTO TP 92
• Asphalt Binder Cracking Device (ABCD)
– Cracking Temperature
– Fracture Stress
– Low Temperature Grade
21
courtesy of EZ Asphalt Technology.
Long Term Conditioning:Low Temperature - PG 76-22 Asphalt Rubber
• Reasonable agreement between the three measurements for 20 hours PAV conditioning
• Doubling PAV time:
– 1.1 °C ↑ of cracking temp (ABCD)
– 3.2 °C ↑ of cracking temp (Table 1)
– 1.9 °C ↑ of cracking temp (Table 2) 22
PAV
Conditioning
Time
(h)
AASHTO M
320 Table 1
Intermediate
Temperature
Continuous
Grade
(°C)
AASHTO M
320 Table 1
Low
Temperature
Continuous
Grade
(°C)
AASHTO M
320
Table 1
∆ Tc
(°C)
AASHTO M
320 Table 2
Critical
Cracking
Temperature
(°C)
ABCD Low
Temperature
Grade
(°C)
ABCD
AASHTO TP
92
Cracking
Temperature
(°C)
20 18.5 -27.7 -2.3 -27.7 -28.6 -35.5
40 18.5 -24.5 -5.2 -25.8 -27.7 -34.4
Aggregate and Volumetric
Testing and Analysis
23
Aggregate Characterization
• Physical Properties, AASHTO M-323– Sieve Analysis – AASHTO T 11 & T 27
– Specific Gravity & Absorption – AASHTO T 84 & T 85
– Flat & Elongation – ASTM D4791
– CA Angularity – AASHTO T 335
– FA Angularity – AASHTO T 308
– Sand Equivalent – AASHTO T 176
– Shape & Texture (AIMS) – AASHTO PP 64 & TP 81
• Angularity
• Shape
• Texture
24
25
Masad et al. (2003)
TP 81-12
AIMS
AIMS Output - Example
26
Low HighMedium
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
% o
f P
art
icle
s
AIMS Form2D
AIMS Form2D Distribution
0.075 (#200)_RAP 0.15 (#100)_RAP
0.30 (#50)_RAP 0.60 (#30)_RAP
1.18 (#16)_RAP 2.36 (#8)_RAP
Low Medium High
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
% o
f P
art
icle
s
AIMS Angularity Index
AIMS Angularity Distribution
0.075 (#200)_RAP 0.15 (#100)_RAP
0.30 (#50)_RAP 0.60 (#30)_RAP
1.18 (#16)_RAP 2.36 (#8)_RAP
4.75 (#4)_RAP 9.5 (0.375)_RAP
12.5 (0.50)_RAP 19.0 (0.75)_RAP
Low Medium High
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
% o
f P
art
icle
s
AIMS Texture Index
AIMS Texture Distribution
4.75 (#4)_RAP 9.5 (0.375)_RAP
12.5 (0.50)_RAP 19.0 (0.75)_RAP
LowMedium High
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
% o
f P
art
icle
s
AIMS Sphericity (SP)
AIMS Sphericity Distribution
4.75 (#4)_RAP
9.5 (0.375)_RAP
12.5 (0.50)_RAP
19.0 (0.75)_RAP
27
1:5
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Elo
ngation R
atio (
Inte
rmedia
te/L
ong)
Less E
longate
d �
Flatness Ratio (Short/Intermediate) Less Flat �
4.75 (#4)_RAP 9.5 (0.375)_RAP
12.5 (0.50)_RAP 19.0 (0.75)_RAP
Elongation vs Flatness
AIMS Output - Example
28
FAA
CAA –fractured faces
F&E (3:1 & 5:1)
Aggregate
Type
AIMS TP 81 ASTM D 5821
CAA RankCAA
RankCAA
Rank
(+1) (+2)
#7 2637 4 100 1 100 1
#8 2954 1 100 1 100 1
Birdseye 2762 3 100 1 100 1
#10 Wash 2834 2 -- -- -- --
RAP 2585 5 98 2 95 2
Aggregate
Type
AIMS TP 81 ASTM D 4791
F&E
(3:1)Rank
F&E
(5:1)Rank
F&E
(3:1)Rank
F&E
(5:1)Rank
#7 22.2 4 3.0 4 0 1 0 1
#8 27.7 5 9.3 5 0 1 0 1
Birdseye 7.8 3 0.0 1 -- -- -- --
#10 Wash 1.6 1 0.6 2 -- -- -- --
RAP 6.9 2 1.5 3 0 1 0 1
Aggregate
Type
AIMS TP 81 AASHTO T 304
FAA Rank FAA Rank
#7 3009 4 44.8 4
#8 2899 5 45.1 3
Birdseye 3166 1 44.5 5
#10 Wash 3164 2 50.6 1
RAP 3017 3 46.5 2
Mix Design Replication
• Use Plant Site Materials
29
Mix Design Replication
30
•Mixing, Aging, Compacting
Mixture Production Testing
31
Asphalt Mixture Sample
Volumetric Properties
Pb – Ignition (T 308)
Gradation – (T 30)
Gmm – Rice (T 209)
Gmb – (T 166)
- Corelok (T 331)
- Gilson SG 4 (TP 82)
Performance Testing
Dynamic Modulus (TP 79)
- Unconfined
Flow Number (TP 79)
- Confined
- Unconfined
Cyclic Fatigue (TP 107)
Gilson SG-4
• AASHTO TP 82 “Bulk Specific Gravity of Compacted Bituminous Mixtures Using Water Displacement Measured by Pressure Sensor”
32Courtesy of Gilson Company, Inc.
Corelok
AASHTO T 331 – “Bulk Specific Gravity (Gmb) and Density of Compacted Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Using Automatic Vacuum Sealing Method”
33CoreLok, courtesy of InstroTek, Inc.
Rapid Test Tools
CoreDry
• ASTM D7227– “Standard Practice for Rapid Drying of
Compacted Asphalt Specimens by using Vacuum Drying Apparatus”
• Rapid Vacuum Drying
– Alternating cycles of Vacuum and Heating
• Maintains Sample at Room Temperature
34
Mixture Performance Testing
and Analysis
35
Performance Characteristics
• Asphalt Mixture Performance Tester
IPC Global
36
AMPT – addressing a need
• Late 1980s-Early 1990s: Strategic Highway Research Program• Superpave mixture design approach
• Performance grade binders
• But no viable performance tests for mixture
• National Cooperative Highway Research Program• 9-19: Identify simple performance tests for Superpave (rutting,
fatigue)• Dynamic modulus, flow number, flow time
• 9-29: Produce test methods and prototype, conduct ruggedness and interlaboratory studies• Simple Performance Tester (now known as AMPT) was born!
37
AMPT
• Temperature range from about 4°to 70°C
• Computer-controlled device
• Software built-in for various test procedures
• Fundamental tests
• Stress and strain modeling
• “Bulk testing”
• Pavement ME
• Kits available for other tests
38
39
AMPT Overview
40
Gauge Point Gluing System
Dynamic Modulus Test
• Mixture Stiffness• Rutting• Fatigue Cracking
41
Stress
Strain
σ ε00
lΤ
Τp
Time
σ
εE*
0
0=
Dynamic Modulus Phase Angle
Τ
Τφ
p
l= (360)
Reduced Frequency, Hz
Dynamic Modulus Master Curve
10,000,000
1,000,000
100,000
10,000
1,000
E*,psi
115°F
70°F
40°F
FIT
1.0E-06 1.0E-04 1.0E-02 1.0E+00 1.0E+02 1.0E+04 1.0E+06
E*min=4,259 psi
E*max=3,376,744 psi
R2= 0.9978Se/Sy= 0.038 3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
Log S
hift Fact
or
0 50 100 150
Temperature
42
AMPT Cyclic Fatigue
• Fundamental, repeated loading test
• Direct tension (pull-pull)
• Small-specimen testing available
• AASHTO TP 107 – revisions out for ballot!
• Material behavior across all possible
loading conditions!
43
AMPT Cyclic Fatigue Process
Preparation
- Cylindrical specimen
- 100 mm x 130 mm
- Small-specimen: 38 mm x 110 mm
- End plate gluing, clamp system being
explored
- 2-3 days for mix
Testing
- Dynamic modulus fingerprint for specimen
variability
- Pull-pull fatigue test
- Strain level based on TFHRC database
- Test temperature based on location of
interest
- Load until crack forms
- 1-2 days for mix
Analysis
- AMPT automatically captures data for
analysis
- Calculate damage via spreadsheet or software
- Assign mixture rankings or use
pavement prediction software
- 1-2 hours for mix
44
AMPT Cyclic Fatigue field
validation
• Pavement prediction software built from models
• Field validation
• 59 mixtures
• 55 different pavement structures
• Develop laboratory-to-field transfer functions
• Built for use in a PRS framework…
45
AMPT Cyclic Fatigue advantages
• Standard sample preparation
• AASHTOWare Pavement ME compatible
• Ruggedness, precision and bias underway
• Commercial software available
• Spreadsheet analysis & formulation available
• Predicts performance!
• Material behavior across all possible loading/temperature conditions!
46
AMPT implementation
• Transportation Pooled Fund Study (TPF(5)-178)• Purchase, installation of 29 AMPTs • NHI Course (over 80 trainees)• Interlaboratory study on effect of air voids• National workshop• Equipment specification, and others!
• Test standard development, improvement, and revision
• Instructional videos, TechBriefs
• PRS shadow implementation (TFHRC-led)
• MATT projects/training
• User Groups at TRB and regional meetings47
AMPT Users Groups
• National/International
• TRB Annual Meeting
• Discussion of issues, best practices, future efforts
• 164 members, 28 DOTs present
• Regional
• User-Producer Groups
• State Asphalt Paving Assoc. meetings
48
MATT Staff
• Federal Highway Administration (FHWA HQ)
– Matthew Corrigan, Sr. Asphalt Pavement Engineer
– David Mensching, Asphalt Pavement Engineer
• ESC, Inc. (FHWA Contractor)
– Chuck Paugh, Senior Project Manager
– Mary Luz Echeverria, Project Administrator
– Amir Golalipour, Baron Colbert, Satish Belagutti, Project Engineers
– Warren Day, Anthony Fernandez, Steve Portillo, David Heidler, Laboratory Technicians
49
Technical assistance
• If you have upcoming projects where you’d like MATT technical assistance, contact:
– Dave Mensching, [email protected], 202.366.1286
– Matt Corrigan, [email protected], 202.366.1549
– Chuck Paugh, [email protected], 202.366.6640
50
• Trailer is parked outside!
• Come in for a tour!
• We’re here to assist! Please stop by anytime for more discussion.
• Questions?
Closing notes
51
Mix Design Replication
Mix Design Replication
3 Points
Performance Test Specimens
• 4 Replicates per Pb
Ignition Furnace Correction Factor
52
Mixture Production Testing• Volumetric Determination
– Pb
– VMA
– Va
– VFA
– Pbe / 0.075 mm
53
HMA Production Testing
HMA Sample
• Pb
• Ignition• Gradation• T 30• Gmm
• Gmb
• T 166• CoreLok
• Performance Specimens• 4 - Replicates
• Dynamic Modulus (E*)• Unconfined
• Flow Number• Unconfined
54
Performance Sample Preparation
55
IPC ServoPac
• ServoPac Gyratory Compactor
– Capable of measuring Shear Resistance
– Compacts tall specimens required for fabrication of SPT specimens
Additional HMA Technology
ServoPac Shear
Mix Design Replication Volumetrics
400
410
420
430
440
450
460
470
480
490
500
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Gyrations
Sh
ea
r
56
ServoPac Gyratory CompactorServoPac Shear
Mix Design Replication Volumetrics
400
410
420
430
440
450
460
470
480
490
500
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Gyrations
Sh
ear
57
Extrapolation vs Full Height
1.10
1.12
1.14
1.16
1.18
1.20
1.22
1.24
1.26
1.28
1.10 1.12 1.14 1.16 1.18 1.20 1.22 1.24 1.26 1.28
Internal Angle - Full Height Specimen (deg)
Inte
rna
l A
ng
le -
Ex
tra
po
late
d
(de
g)
AFG1A
AFGC 125X
Interlaken
Test Quip
1:1 Line
"+0.02" line
"-0.02" line"Best Fit" line:
y = 0.9554 x + 0.0493
r2 = 0.916
58
Extrapolation
DAV Loaded Angle at Top of Specimen
Specimen Height DAV angle Date Specimen
36 mm 1.218 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-2
37 mm 1.216 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-4
36 mm 1.206 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-6
70 mm 1.192 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-8
70 mm 1.191 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-10
70 mm 1.181 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-12
DAV Loaded Angle at Bottom of Specimen
Specimen Height DAV angle Date Specimen
27 mm 1.221 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-1
27 mm 1.214 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-3
27 mm 1.209 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-5
61 mm 1.207 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-7
61 mm 1.196 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-9
61 mm 1.192 degrees 22-Jul-2002 DAV4-11
• 2 Heights – top & bottom
59
Rapid Test Tools
CoreLok• Marketed by Instrotek Inc.
• Versatile device– Gmm (ASTM D6857)
– Gmb (AASHTO T 331, ASTM D6752)
– Gsb – for CA & FA
– Effective Porosity (ASTM D7063)
• Vacuum Sealing Procedure
• NCAT Ruggedness Study
• Round-Robin to establish AASHTO Precision Statement
60