Download - HVS International Alliance
TRANSPORTATION Florida Department of
HVS International Alliance
Florida Department of Transportation
Topics
• Recently completed HVS research • Planned HVS research (2015 to 2016) • Issues testing concrete
Florida Department of Transportation
PG 76-22 (ARB)
• Objective: Validate newly developed PG 76-22 (ARB) specification – Three binder suppliers – Dense graded SP-12.5
Binder Producer
Binder Type
Modifier Mixture
ID A PG 76-22 (PMA) SBS PG 76-22 (PMA) A ARB-5 5% GTR ARB-5 A PG 76-22 (ARB) Min 7% GTR and SBS (Lower % GTR) Hybrid A-L A PG 76-22 (ARB) Min 7% GTR and SBS (Higher % GTR) Hybrid A-H B PG 76-22 (ARB) Min 7% GTR and SBS Hybrid B C PG 76-22 (ARB) Min 7% GTR GTR C
Florida Department of Transportation
ARB History
• 1988: Solid Waste Management Act – Florida Statute 336.044 – Directed FDOT to research and adopt specs
where feasible • Contracted research with NCAT and UF • FDOT laboratory research
Florida Department of Transportation
ARB History
• 1989 – 1991: Field Test Sections – SR 120, Alachua County – SR 16, Bradford County – I-95, St. Johns County
• 1992 – 1993 Worker Exposure Study – CR-39 Hillsborough
County
With ARB Without ARB
Florida Department of Transportation
ARB History
• 1994: ARB specifications – ARB-5, ARB-12, & ARB-20 – Used in friction courses and interlayers
• Benefits – Conserves resources – Improves performance
• Cons – Issues with settlement
Florida Department of Transportation
ARB History
• 2009: ‘Hybrid’ binder research with UF
• 2011: PG 76-22 (ARB) task group formed – Modernize specifications
• 2013: PG 76-22 (ARB) specification – Validation/refinement with HVS
and NCAT test sections
Florida Department of Transportation
PG 76-22 (ARB) Specification
• PG 76-22 is met • Minimum 7% GTR by weight of binder • Polymer modification optional • Solubility not required for PG 76-22 (ARB) • Separation test, 15⁰F maximum • Multi-Stress Creep Recovery
– Jnr and % recovery – 2 mm gap
Florida Department of Transportation
FDOT Spec Section 916
Test Test Temp., °C Specification Requirement
Original Binder Separation Test, Softening Point Difference, °F
N/A Max. 15°F
Flash Point, COC N/A Min 450°F Rotational Viscosity 135 Max 3 Pa•s1 DSR, G*/sin δ, @ 10 rad/s (with 2.00 mm gap)
76 Min 1.0 kPa
Phase Angle 76 Max. 75 degrees RTFO Residue
RTFOT, % Mass Change 163 Max ±1.000% MSCR(with 2.00 mm gap)
67 % Recovery, 3.2 kPa-1 %R3.2 ≥ 29.37(Jnr3.2)-0.2633
Jnr, 3.2 kPa-1 “V” grade =
Max 1.0 kPa-1 Jnr, % Difference Max 75%
PAV Residue DSR, G* sin δ, @ 10 rad/s 26.5 Max 5000 kPa BBR Creep Stiffness, S
-12 Max 300 MPa
BBR Creep Stiffness, m-value Min 0.300
Florida Department of Transportation
Test Sections
1.5-inch SP-12.5
10.5-inch limerock base
12-inch granular subgrade
1-inch existing SP-12.5
1.5-inch SP-12.5
PG76-22 (PMA) 1 Lane
1.5-inch SP-12.5
10.5-inch limerock base
12-inch granular subgrade
1-inch existing SP-12.5
1.5-inch SP-12.5
ARB-5 1 Lane
1.5-inch SP-12.5
10.5-inch limerock base
12-inch granular subgrade
1-inch existing SP-12.5
1.5-inch SP-12.5
PG76-22 (ARB) Modified with GTR and SBS
Polymer 3 Lanes
1.5-inch SP-12.5
10.5-inch limerock base
12-inch granular subgrade
1-inch existing SP-12.5
1.5-inch SP-12.5
PG 76-22 (ARB) Modified with
GTR 1 Lane
2 binder suppliers 1 binder suppliers
Florida Department of Transportation
Laboratory Binder Tests Test
Test Temp., °C
Hybrid A-L
Hybrid A-H
Hybrid B
GTR C
Specification Requirement
Original Binder Separation Test, Softening Point Difference, °F
N/A 11 17 6 26 Max. 15°F
Flash Point, COC N/A 500+ 500+ 500+ 500+ Min 450°F Rotational Viscosity 135 2.21 3.10 1.73 2.51 Max 3 Pa•s1 DSR, G*/sin δ, @ 10 rad/s (with 2.00 mm gap)
76 1.28 1.31 1.41 2.35 Min 1.0 kPa
Phase Angle 76 68.0 68.6 73.0 74.4 Max. 75 degrees RTFO Residue
RTFOT, % Mass Change 163 -0.118 -0.158 -0.160 -0.226 Max ±1.000% MSCR (with 2.00 mm gap)
67 % Recovery, 3.2 kPa-1 68.94 49.70 55.52 35.71 %R3.2 ≥ 29.37(Jnr3.2)-0.2633
Jnr, 3.2 kPa-1 0.322 0.559 0.297 0.357 “V” grade =
Max 1.0 kPa-1 Jnr, % Difference 17.93 54.52 24.30 21.92 Max 75%
PAV Residue DSR, G* sin δ, @ 10 rad/s 26.5 1580 1110 3190 3200 Max 5000 kPa BBR Creep Stiffness, S
-12 110 70 153 168 Max 300 MPa
BBR Creep Stiffness, m-value 0.358 0.385 0.300 0.299 Min 0.300 Notes: 1. FDOT allows binders with values higher than 3 Pa∙s to be used with caution and only after consulting with the suppler as to any special handling
procedures, including pumping capabilities. 2. MSCR test was not a requirement for PG 76-22 (PMA) at the beginning of the APT study.
Florida Department of Transportation
HVS Performance
Florida Department of Transportation
Laboratory Mixture Tests
Mixture ID
AMPT Properties Fracture Properties at 10 °C HVS Rut Depth,
mm Dynamic Modulus, ksi (1 Hz, 20 °C)
Flow Number
Fracture Energy (KJ/m3)
Creep Rate
(1/psi·sec)
Energy Ratio
Control 699 72 2.8 2.8E-09 4.2 5.9
ARB-5 573 60 5.4 6.8E-09 4.5 6.6
Hybrid A-L 421 97 5.0 9.5E-09 2.6 5.1
Hybrid A-H1 271 63 7.2 2.0E-08 2.5 4.4
Hybrid B 696 423 4.7 3.1E-09 6.6 3.9
GTR C2 657 382 2.7 2.3E-09 5.0 3.6 Notes: 1. Failed separation test and rotational viscosity 2. Failed separation test, MSCR % recovery, and BBR creep compliance
Florida Department of Transportation
NCAT Test Sections
• Initiated during 2012 research cycle • Completed 10 million ESALs in Oct 2014
Test Track Section
Section Description
Rut Depth, mm
Cracked Area, %
Lane Right Wheel Path
Left Wheel Path
E7A PG 76-22 (PMA) 2.2 6 4 14 E7B PG 76-22 (ARB) 2.0 15 19 15
Florida Department of Transportation
PG 76-22 (ARB) Summary
• All mixtures showed good rutting performance. Rutting resistance of PG 76-22 (ARB) mixtures was found to be comparable to that of mixture with a standard PG 76-22 (PMA).
• All mixtures exhibited a good range of ER values, which indicated good cracking resistance.
• Binders with a greater percentage of GTR (Hybrid A-H and GTR C) failed to meet the separation requirement.
• Adoption of a performance graded ARB specification replaces two ARBs (ARB-5 and ARB-12) with one (PG 76-22 (ARB)), which simplifies binder storage during HMA production.
Florida Department of Transportation
SP-4.75 mixture
• Objective: Investigate the thickness of a SP-4.75 layer
1.5-inch SP-12.5 w/ PG 67-22
10.5-inch limerock base
12-inch granular subbase
4.75-mm mixture w/ PG 67-22
1.5-inch SP-12.5 w/ PG 76-22
4.75-mm w/ PG 67-22
1.5-inch SP-12.5 w/ PG 67-22
10.5-inch limerock base
12-inch granular subbase
1.5-inch SP-12.5 w/ PG 76-22 4.75-mm mixture w/ PG 76-22
4.75-mm w/ PG 76-22
• Thickness: – ½ inch, ¾ inch,
and 1 inch • JMF:
– 6.5% AC – 4 to 6% voids
Florida Department of Transportation
Background
• Pavement preservation project on US-98 in Gulf County established in Fall 2012 – ½ and ¾ inch thick
• Five maintenance patches in District 3 – Less than 0.5 miles long
• District 1 considering SP-4.75 for a project to optimize layer thickness and milling depth options
Florida Department of Transportation
Rutting Resistance
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
0.5 inch 0.75 inch 1 inch
Rut D
epth
, mm
SP-4.75 Thickness
Rut Depth after 100,000 Passes
SP-4.75 with PG 67-22 SP-4.75 with PG 76-22 SP-12.5 with PG 76-22
Florida Department of Transportation
Cracking Resistance
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
SP-12.5 (PG 67-22) SP-12.5 (PG 76-22) SP-4.75 (PG 67-22) SP-4.75 (PG 76-22)
Ener
gy R
atio
at 1
0⁰C
Florida Department of Transportation
SP-4.75 Summary
• Layer thicknesses of ¾ inch and 1 inch had similar rut resistance of a SP-12.5 when PG 76-22 asphalt binder was used
• SP-4.75 with PG 76-22 was found to have better cracking resistance than SP-12.5 with PG 76-22
• Interest building in using a SP-4.75 as a crack relief interlayer
Florida Department of Transportation
Topics
• Recently completed APT research • Planned APT research (2015 to 2016) • Concrete Test Road update
Florida Department of Transportation
Planned APT Research
• FC-5 thickness • Asphalt segregation • Asphalt density • Tack coat rate effect on cracking
resistance • High polymer binder
Florida Department of Transportation
FC-5 Thickness
• Background: FC-5 is typically placed at ¾ inch thickness, but may be placed thicker due to design & construction issues
• Objective: Determine rut resistance of thicker FC-5 lifts
Florida Department of Transportation
FC-5 Thickness
• PG 76-22 & PG 82-22 binders 12.5 mm NMAS
• Placed at ¾, 1-¼, and 2 inches thick
• Two 400 ft. lanes
1.5-inch SP-12.5 w/ PG 76-22
10.5-inch limerock base
12-inch granular subbase
1.5-inch SP-12.5 w/ PG 76-22 FC-5 Variable thickness
Florida Department of Transportation
Asphalt Segregation
• Objective: Quantify the reduction of pavement life due to asphalt segregation. – Develop/refine methods
to identify segregation using texture measurements
Severe Segregation
No Segregation
Florida Department of Transportation
Asphalt Segregation
• Segregation Identification – Circular track meter – TM2: wide spot laser – FTM: in-house laser texture meter – Cores – IR Camera
The image part with relationship ID rId2 was not found in the file.
This image cannot currently be displayed.
This image cannot currently be displayed.
Florida Department of Transportation
Asphalt Density
• Objective: Provide guidance to inspectors when to remove and replace low density sections
• Three target densities – 87%, 90%, and 93%
Florida Department of Transportation
Tack Coat Rate • Background: Top-down cracking is one of
the primary distresses in Florida. Recent research has suggested that inadequate tack coat rates may be contributing to crack development.
• Objective: Evaluate effect of tack coat rate on cracking resistance.
• Three residual tack coat rates – 0.02 gal/sy, 0.04 gal/sy, 0.06 gal/sy, and – one unbonded section
Florida Department of Transportation
Tack Coat Rate
• Estimating longitudinal application rate of asphalt distributors in gallons per square yard in accordance with ASTM test method D 2995 – Test Method A – Pre-weighed geotextile pads
Florida Department of Transportation
High Polymer Binder
• Objective: Evaluate a high polymer binder for use at localized sections with a history of rutting and/or cracking
• Two binder contents will be evaluated – Design AC content – Design AC content + 0.5%
Florida Department of Transportation
Topics
• Recently completed APT research • Planned APT research (2015 to 2016) • Issues testing concrete
Florida Department of Transportation
Concrete Testing
• The HVS casts a large shadow
• Temperature gradients and environmental strain are minimized
Florida Department of Transportation
Recent Concrete Pavement Results
• Two instrumented slabs • Slab 1 was in full sun • Slab 2 was in the HVS
shadow
Slab 1 in the sun
Slab 2 in the HVS shadow
Thermocouple Tree & Strain
Gauges
Thermocouple Tree & Strain
Gauges
1 inch below the surface
1 inch above the base
Florida Department of Transportation
Temperature Near Slab Surface
HVS shadow reduced peak temperature near the slab surface by 10⁰C
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
3/23/0:00 3/23/12:00 3/24/0:00 3/24/12:00 3/25/0:00 3/25/12:00 3/26/0:00
Tem
pera
ture
(°C)
Time (M/D/H)
Slab1 in the sun Slab2 in the HVS shadow Ambient Temperature
Florida Department of Transportation
Temperature gradient of the slab in the HVS shadow is nearly 0⁰C
-5
0
5
10
15
3/23/0:00 3/23/12:00 3/24/0:00 3/24/12:00 3/25/0:00 3/25/12:00 3/26/0:00
Tem
pera
ture
(°C)
Time (M/D/H))
Slab1 in the sun Slab2 in the HVS shadow
Temperature Gradient
Florida Department of Transportation
Environmental Strain
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0:00 3:00 6:00 9:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 0:00
Mic
ro st
rain
(Rel
ativ
e)
Time (hour)
Vibrating Wire Gauge Near Slab Surface
Shade Sun
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0:00 3:00 6:00 9:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 0:00
Mic
ro st
rain
(Rel
ativ
e)
Time (hour)
Vibrating Wire Gauge Near Slab Bottom
Environmental strain due to curling is 20 to 30 microstrain less when shaded
Shade Sun
Florida Department of Transportation 37
Benefits from Florida’s Accelerated Pavement Testing
Program
Florida Department of Transportation
Research Project Selection
• APT program integrated with overall research effort – Planning, development & execution of research
projects performed on an annual basis • Research projects solicited from FDOT’s offices,
industry, & academia – Critical issues that should be addressed through APT – Critical issues not applicable to APT but should be
performed with in-house resources – Critical issues that should be addressed through a
contracted research effort
38
Florida Department of Transportation
Major Research Projects
39
• 2001 - Evaluation of Superpave mixtures with and without polymer modified binders
• 2003 - Assessment of the appropriate APT loading condition
• 2004 -Evaluation of early strength requirement of concrete for slab replacement
• 2005 - Evaluation of coarse and fine graded Superpave mixtures
• 2006 - Evaluation of a thin concrete overlay of an asphalt pavement
Florida Department of Transportation
Major Research Projects
• 2007 - Development of methodologies to assess cracking potential of asphalt mixtures
• 2008 - Evaluation of asphalt strain gauge repeatability
• 2009 - Impact of wide-base tires on pavement damage
• 2011 – Evaluation of an ARMI to mitigate reflection cracking & resist rutting
• 2011 – Evaluation of a PG 82-22 asphalt binder
40
Florida Department of Transportation
Impact of APT Research
• Revision of pavement design and construction methods and specifications – Implementation or discontinued use of
researched materials and methods • Informed policy decision making • Furthering knowledge/education of
pavement engineers
41
Florida Department of Transportation
SOME EXAMPLES OF BENEFITS
42
Florida Department of Transportation
Benefits of Polymer Modified Binder
• First APT experiment evaluated SBS polymer modified binder – Two layers of SBS modified PG 76-22 binder – One layer of SBS modified PG 76-22 binder – Two layers of unmodified PG 67-22 binder
• Rate of rutting for pavement with unmodified binder approximately twice that of the pavements with modified binder
• Two layers of modified binder performed slightly better than one layer
43
Florida Department of Transportation
Benefits of Polymer Modified Binder Research
• 2011 data: Resurfacing ~ $125,000 per lane mile
• ~ 500 lane miles of Traffic Level D and E mixes placed each year
• Assuming 2 more years of life, the reduction in annualized cost is $1,000 per lane mile, or ~$500,000 per year
44
Florida Department of Transportation
Benefits of Polymer Modified Binder Research • FDOT specifies PG 76-22 for the final two
structural courses in traffic level E mixtures but only the top structural course in traffic level D mixtures
• ~ 450,000 tons of traffic level D mix placed each year
• Use of modified binder for top layer only equals 50% savings on total initial cost of polymer, ~$2.1M per year (2011 HMA cost data)
45
Florida Department of Transportation
Benefits of Allowing Fine Graded Mixtures • Based on initial Superpave guidelines, FDOT
specified use of coarse graded mixtures to provide better rutting resistance
• A 2004 APT study showed that fine graded mixtures performed as well as coarse graded mixtures
• In 2005, FDOT allowed fine graded mixtures for traffic levels D and E mixtures
• According to industry, a cost savings of $2 to $5 per ton of asphalt mix, ~ $1.5M per year by allowing fine graded mixes
46
Florida Department of Transportation
Other Recent Projects • Impact of wide-base tires, 2010
– APT study that showed new generation wide-base tires produced similar pavement damage as dual tires
• Discontinue routine use of ARMI, 2012 – Ineffective at mitigating reflection cracking – Contributes to instability rutting – Initiated research project to identify alternatives
• Implementation of High Polymer Modified Binder, 2012 – Pavements with historically high rutting – Two projects recently constructed
47
Florida Department of Transportation
Educational Benefits
• Collaborate with Florida universities • Several graduate level research efforts
have used APT data – 1 Master’s Degree – 8 PhD’s
• Students work on-site and assist with APT research
48
Florida Department of Transportation
Summary
• APT is a critical component of FDOT’s pavement research program
• Key to success is the careful selection of research projects that address critical issues
• Technology transfer is essential
49
Florida Department of Transportation
Questions?
APT Website: http://www.dot.state.fl.us/statematerialsoffice/pavement/research/apt/index.shtm