Prerequisites for

pavement quality control

Dr. Youngguk Seo

Senior Researcher
Expressway and Transportation Research Institute
Korea Expressway Corporation

Presented at ICC for KOICA seminar on April, 2012

 Contents
Introduction

Materials

Mixture designs

Construction
Introduction QC for HMA
Introduction QC procedure for HMA
Selection of asphalt manufacturer
and quarry

materials
Materials quality tests at

Fail
plant and quarry

Pass or Fail

Pass
Test results report on materials

Lab. mixture design results

design

Aggregate runoff results

Job Mix Formula (JMF) results Contractor

construction
Test production

Test construction plan

Test construction

Pavement
 Introduction HMA by numbers

Item U.S. Europe Japan Korea

millions of tons/year 500 – 600 300 – 330 75 – 82 29

Percentage recycled 80% 0 – 80% 50% <20%

Production companies 1100 2500 1000 420

Production plants 3600 4700 1500 499

Europe and Japan numbers from the European Asphalt Pavement Association
(http://www.eapa.org)
Introduction HMA compositions

● Described by:
 Maximum aggregate size
 Aggregate gradation
 Asphalt binder (asphalt cement) type
 Asphalt binder content
Materials Aggregate and binder
Materials Aggregate production
Materials Quarries
Materials Aggregate’s properties

● Consensus Requirements
 Coarse Aggregate Angularity (CAA)
 Fine Aggregate Angularity (FAA)
 Flat & Elongated Particles
 Sand Equivalent
● Source Properties
 Los Angeles (LA) Abrasion
 Soundness
 Specific Gravity (Coarse, Fine)
Materials Agg.’s percent crushed faces

● Quarried materials always 100% crushed

● Minimum values depended upon traffic level and layer
● Defined as % mass with one or more fractured faces
Materials Agg.’s percent crushed faces
Materials CAA criteria

Depth from Surface2

20-yr ESALs 1

(millions) ≤ 100 mm (4 inches) > 100 mm (4 inches)

< 0.3 55/- -/-

0.3 to < 3 75/- 50/-
3 to < 10 85/80 60/-
10 to < 30 95/90 80/75
≥ 30 100/100 100/100
Note 1
Requirements are based on the expected loading in the design lane for a 20-year period regardless of the
anticipated design life.
Note 2
The first number is a minimum requirement for one or more fractured faces and the second number is a
minimum requirement for two or more fractured faces.
Materials FAA tests

FAA testing apparatus

angular rounded
Materials FAA criteria

Depth from Surface

20-yr ESALs1
(millions) ≤ 100 mm (4 inches) > 100 mm (4 inches)

< 0.3 - -
0.3 to < 3 40 40
3 to < 10 45 40
10 to < 30 45 40
≥ 30 45 45

Note 1
Requirements are based on the expected loading in the design lane for a 20-year period regardless of the
anticipated design life.
Materials F/E particles
Materials F/E criteria

yr ESALs1
Maximum Flat & Elongated (%)
(millions)
< 0.3 -
0.3 to < 3 10
3 to < 10 10
10 to < 30 10
≥ 30 10
Note 1
Requirements are based on the expected loading in the design lane for a 20-year period regardless of the
anticipated design life.
Materials Sand equivalent

• The sand equivalent test is a rapid field test to show the

relative proportions of fine dust or clay-like materials in fine
aggregate (or granular soils).
20-yr ESALs Minimum Sand
(millions) Equivalent (%)
< 0.3 40
0.3 to < 3 40
3 to < 10 45
10 to < 30 45
≥ 30 50

F/E testing apparatus

Materials Source property tests
• LA abrasion test
• Soundness test to examine an aggregate’s resistance to
disintegration by weathering and, in particular, freeze-thaw
cycles
• Specific gravities

LA abrasion tester
Materials Size definitions

• Nominal Maximum Size of Aggregate (NMSA)

 one size larger than the first sieve to retain more
than 10%
• Maximum Aggregate Size
 one size larger than nominal maximum size
Materials Superpave gradation
100
control point

i ne
Percent Passing

y l
nsit
d e
x
restricted zone Ma

NMSA Max size

0

.075 .3 2.36 4.75 9.5 12.5 19.0

Sieve Size (mm) Raised to 0.45 Power
Materials Superpave gradation

100
90
Maryland
80 Utah
70
Percent Passing

60 North Carolina
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.075 0.3 1 .18 4.75 9.5 12.5 19
Sieve Size (mm)
Materials Superpave size designations

Superpave Nom Max Size Max Size

designation (mm) (mm)

37.5 mm 37.5 50
25 mm 25 37.5
19 mm 19 25
12.5 mm 12.5 19
9.5 mm 9.5 12.5
Materials Gradation types

● Dense graded
 Most common before

● Gap graded
 Stone matrix asphalt (SMA)

● Open graded
 Used as a surface course in many areas

● Uniformly graded
 Not used as a construction material
Materials Gradation considerations

- Max. size < 1/2 AC lift thickness

- Larger max size
• Increases strength
• Improves skid resistance
• Increases volume and surface area of agg. which decreases AC content
• Improves rut resistance
• Increases problem with segregation of particles

- Smaller max size

• Reduces segregation
• Reduces road noise
• Decreases tire wear
Materials Binder penetration test

• Sewing machine needle

• Specified load, time, temperature

100 g Penetration in 0.1 mm

Initial After 5 seconds

Materials Test results
Materials Penetration specification

● Five grades
40 – 50, 60 – 70, 85 - 100,120 – 150, 200 - 300
 Materials Penetration specification

Penetration 40 - 50 200 - 300

Flash Point, C 450+ 350+
Ductility, cm 100+ 100+
Solubility, % 99.0+ 99.0+
Retained Pen., % 55+ 37+
Ductility, cm N/A 100+
Materials Binder viscosity test
Materials Viscosity specification

● Five grades
AC 2.5, AC 5, AC 10, AC 20, AC 40
Materials Viscosity specification

AC 2.5 AC 40
Visc, 60C 250 + 50 4,000 + 800
Visc, 135C 80+ 300+
Penetration 200+ 20+
Visc, 60C <1,250 <20,000
Ductility 100+ 10+
Materials Binder relationship
Penetration grades Viscosity grades

AC 40
40
Viscosity, 60C (140F)

100 ~ AC 20
50 60
50 ~ AC 10
70 85
~
100 120 AC 5
~
150 200 AC 2.5
10 ~
300
5
Materials PG specifications

• Fundamental properties related to pavement

performance
• Environmental factors
• In-service & construction temperatures
• Short and long term aging
 Materials Binder behavior

● High in-service temperature

 Desert climates
 Summer temperatures
● Sustained loads
 Slow moving trucks
 Intersections

● Low temperature
 Cold climates
 Winter
● Rapid loads
 Fast moving trucks
Materials PG Specification

● Determine
 7-day max pavement temperatures
 1-day minimum pavement temperature

● Use specification tables to select test

temperatures

● Determine asphalt cement properties and

compare to specification limits
Materials Superpave specification

PG 64 - 22

Min pavement
Performance temperature
Grade
Average 7-day max
pavement temperature
Materials Temperatures are calculated

• Calculated by Superpave software

• High temperature
– 20 mm below the surface of mixture
• Low temperature
– at surface of mixture

Pave temp = f (air temp, depth, latitude)

Materials Dynamic Shear Rheometer

Input oscillating shear stress

B
A
A
Rotating top
C

Output strain

Fixed bottom

B A C
*Attached firmly between inter-layers
Materials Dynamic Shear Rheometer
Materials DSR- G*and delta

• G*, complex modulus

• d, phase angle in degree

• G*/sin d – correlation to rutting resistance – Minimum

stiffness at high temp.

• G*sin d – correlation to fatigue resistance – Maximum

stiffness at intermediate temp.
Materials Binder aging

• Perform a short-term aging using rolling thin film oven to

simulate binder aging during mixing and construction
• Perform a long-term aging using pressure aging vessel to
Simulates aging of an asphalt binder for 7 to 10 years
 50 gram sample is aged for 20 hours
 Pressure of 2,070 kPa (300 psi)
 At 90, 100 or 110 C
 Materials Bending Beam Rheometer

Deflection Transducer
Computer
Air Bearing

Load Cell

Fluid Bath
Materials Direct Tension Test

Stress = s = P / A

DL sf

ef
Strain
Mix Designs Marshall and Superpave
 Mix Designs Goals of mix designs

 Requirements for Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA)

Sufficient asphalt to ensure a durable pavement

Sufficient stability under traffic loads
Sufficient air voids
- Upper limit to prevent excessive environmental damage
- Lower limit to allow room for initial densification due to traffic
Sufficient workability

 Design goals
• Develop an economical blend of aggregates and asphalt that meet design
requirements
• Proportion aggregates, asphalt and air voids not only to enhance the
workability, but also to ensure long-lasting pavement
 Mix Designs Design parameters

 Key variables

Aggregate
Asphalt binder
Ratio of aggregate to asphalt binder

 Procedure

Select aggregate
Select asphalt binder
Design aggregate structure
Select asphalt binder content
Conduct performance tests
Develop job mix formula (JMF)
 Mix Designs Volumetric properties

 Mix design is a volumetric process

Va = volume of air
VMA = voids in the
mineral aggregate Vbe = volume of effective binder
Vbe = volume of absorbed binder

VT = total volume
Vagg = volume of aggregate

Vb = Volume of binder = Vbe + Vba

 Mix Designs Design measurements

 We design volume but measure mass

Typical values
Constituent By total volume By total weight
Air 4% 0%
Asphalt 10% 5%
Accurate specific gravity is very important
Aggregate 86% 95%
MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

50
 Mix Designs Marshall design

• Developed by Bruce Marshall for the Mississippi Highway

Department in the late 30’s
• WES began to study it in 1943 for WWII
• Evaluated compaction effort
 No. of blows, foot design, etc.
 Decided on 10 lb. hammer, 50 blows/side
 4% voids after traffic
• Initial criteria were established and upgraded for
increased tire pressures and loads

51
Mix Designs Marshall hammers

52
 Mix Designs Marshall design process
• Select and test aggregate

• Select and test asphalt cement

 Establish mixing and compaction temperatures

• Develop trial blends

 Heat and mix asphalt cement and aggregates
 Compact specimen (100 mm diameter)

53
 Mix Designs Mixing and comp. temp.

10
5
Viscosity, Pa s

1
.5
.3 Compaction Range
.2 Mixing Range

.1
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
Temperature, C

54
 Mix Designs Marshall design criteria

Light Traffic Medium Traffic Heavy Traffic

ESAL < 104 10 4 < ESAL< 10 ESAL > 106
Compaction 35 50 75

Stability N (lb.) 3336 (750) 5338 (1200) 8006 (1800)

Flow, 0.25 mm (0.1 in) 8 to 18 8 to 16 8 to 14

Air Voids, % 3 to 5 3 to 5 3 to 5

VMA Varies with aggregate size

55
Mix Designs VMA criteria

1% tolerance band is permitted only when

all other criteria are met

56
 Mix Designs Marshall design tests
• Heights
 Used to correct stability measurements
• Bulk specific gravity of compacted sample
• Maximum specific gravity of loose mix
• Stability and flow
 60oC water bath (30 to 40 minutes)
 50 mm/min loading rate
 Max. load = uncorrected stability
 Corresponding vertical deformation = flow

57
Mix Designs Marshall stability tester

58
 Mix Designs Optimum asphalt content
Air Voids, % Stability Unit Wt.

Asphalt Content, % Asphalt Content, % Asphalt Content, %

Average asphalt content =Target content

59
 Mix Designs Verify the asphalt content
Flow OK VMA, % OK

Upper limit

Minimum
Lower Limit

Asphalt Content, % Asphalt Content, %

Check if the target content meets those criteria

60
 Mix Designs Characteristics of Marshall

● Advantages
 Attention on voids, strength, durability
 Inexpensive equipment
 Easy to use in process control/acceptance
● Disadvantages
 Impact method of compaction
 Does not consider shear strength
 Load perpendicular to compaction axis

61
HVEEM MIX DESIGN

62
 Mix Designs Hveem design method

• Francis Hveem developed for California DOT in mid

1920’s
• Limited use
 Primarily in West coast states
• Addresses similar design considerations as Marshall
• Considers asphalt absorption by aggregate

63
 Mix Designs Hveem design process

• Selection and testing of aggregates

• Selection and testing of binders
• Centrifuge kerosene equivalent (CKE)
 Surface capacity of aggregate
 Estimate optimum asphalt content

64
 Mix Designs Hveem design process

• Use kneading compactor to prepare specimens

• Determine stability with Hveem stabilometer
 Evaluates horizontal deformation under axial load
 Specimen loaded along axis of compaction

• Visual observation, volumetrics, and stability used to

select optimum asphalt content

65
Mix Designs Compactor and tester

66
 Mix Designs Optimum asphalt content

Stability

Air Voids, %
Minimum

Asphalt Content, % Asphalt Content, %

Stability minimums
Heavy traffic = 37 min.

VMA
Medium = 35 min.
Light = 30 min.
Minimum

Asphalt Content, %
67
 Mix Designs Design process-Hveem
Step 1
Design Series

Centrifuge Kerosene Step 2

Equivalent test (CKE) for fine Est. OAC
aggregate

Hveem stabilometer test Step 3

Min. Stability

Density and void analysis Step 4

Max. AC with 4% Voids

68
 Mix Designs Characteristics of Hveem
• Advantages
 Attention to voids, strength, durability
 Kneading compaction similar to field
 Strength parameter direct indication of internal friction
component of shear strength
• Disadvantages
 Equipment expensive and not easily portable
 Not wide range in stability measurements

69
 Mix Designs Plant quality control
• Aggregate
 Gradation
 Moisture Content

• Volumetrics
 Air Voids
 VMA
 Asphalt Content
 Gradation
 Mix Designs Plant aggregate QC
• Aggregate
 Proper stockpiles
 Slope and Pave
 Cover, if needed
 Moisture content
• Plant operations
 Slower because
 More time to coat
 Higher moisture content
 Thicker aggregate veil
 Aggregate moisture management
 Construction Production and delivery

• RAP – process for size and consistency

 Max size < NMAS

• Storage and loading

 Follow normal best practices

• If you use warm mix,

 Increase haul distance
 Pave at cooler temperatures
 Achieve density at lower temperatures
 Extend paving season
 Pave over crack sealer
 Construction Preparation

• Milling for rehabilitation

 Remove defects
 Roughen surface
 Improve smoothness
 Provide RAP
 May eliminate need for tack
 Size machinery properly
• Tack
 Emulsion or hot asphalt
 Polymer emulsion or unmodified
 Rate: 0.10 to 0.15 gal/sy (undiluted
emulsion)
 Construction Paving and compaction

• Paving
 Best to move continuously
 MTV or windrow can help
 Cooling can be an issue
 1”cools 2X faster than 1.5”
• Compaction
 Seal voids & increase stability
 Low permeability
 No vibratory on < 1”
 Construction Field QC

• Field Density
 Thin-lift NDT gauges OK for > 1” mat
 Cores may not be representative
 Permeability not as big an issue
• Ride Quality
 Depends on
 Condition of existing pavement
 Surface preparation
 Overlay thickness
 Specification should be based on existing condition
 Survey and unbound layers
Construction
Construction Unbound subbase layers
Construction Installation of sensors
Construction Asphalt base layers
Construction Temperature control
Construction Compaction control
Construction Tack coat and surface layer
Construction Tack coating equipment
Construction Joint treatment