PPA WORKSHOP APRIL 7-8, 2009 MINNEAPOLIS, MN

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "PPA WORKSHOP APRIL 7-8, 2009 MINNEAPOLIS, MN"

Tyrone Cook
5 years ago
Views:

1 PPA WORKSHOP APRIL 7-8, 2009 MINNEAPOLIS, MN INFLUENCE OF AGGREGATE, GRADATION, & BINDER ON MIXTURE PERFORMANCE IMPACT OF PPA MODIFICATION ON RUTTING AND MOISTURE SENSITIVITY by Gerald Reinke Doug Herlitzka Steve Engber Scott Veglahn John Jorgenson Dave Tranberg

2 SCOPE OF PRESENTATION 1. WHAT QUESTIONS STILL NEED TO BE ADDRESSED REGARDING THE PERFORMANCE OF PPA MODIFIED BINDERS? 2. INVESTIGATION INTO RUTTING AND MOISTURE SENSITIVITY OF MIXES PRODUCED WITH BINDERS THAT CONTAIN PPA a. PPA is the only modifier b. PPA is used in conjunction with polymer 3. WHAT CAN BE SAID ABOUT RELATIVE PERFORMANCE OF PPA VERSUS POLYMER & PPA MODIFIED BINDERS?

3 KEEP IN MIND THE FOLLOWING Quod enim mavult homo verum esse, id poitus credit What man wishes were true, he more readily believes.

4 WHAT QUESTIONS REMAIN I gave a talk at AMAP in 2005 on this same subject. Upon review of those comments many of them are still relevant today

5 SOME POINTS TO PONDER GOING FORWARD ACID MODIFICATION HAS BEEN USED IN LOUISIANA FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS TO MAKE AC-30 AND AC-40 WITH SOME BINDERS BEGINNING IN 1992/1993 ACID ONLY MODIFICATION AND POLYMER + PPA MODIFICATION HAS GROWN IN USAGE ACROSS THE US AT THIS POINT SUPPLIERS IN ALL PARTS OF THE US USE THIS PROCESS I CONSERVATIVELY ESTIMATE THAT IN THAT TIME PERIOD AT LEAST 3,000,000 TONS OF BINDER CONTAINING PPA HAVE BEEN USED. THIS EQUALS ABOUT 51,000,000 TONS OF MIX GIVEN THESE QUANTITIES IF THERE ARE WHOLESALE PROBLEMS WITH THIS ADDITIVE DON T YOU THINK WE ALL WOULD BE AWARE OF THEM?

6 COMMENTS 1. At the time I stated that more data won t convince the unconvincable I still believe that, but I m here today with more data. 2. Those that use and supply binders produced using PPA aren t asking for more data, but maybe they should be. a. Keep in mind the old saying when things appear to good to be true, maybe they are

7 COMMENTS 1. THE TECHNICAL ISSUES SURROUNDING THE USE OF PPA ARE NOT AS CLEAR CUT AS THOSE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE DEBATE WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE 2. IN MY OPINION PPA USAGE IS NOT AN ISSUE FOR DEBATE. THESE ARE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS THAT HAVE TECHNICAL ANSWERS 3. THE ANSWER IS NOT ALWAYS YES AND IT IS NOT ALWAYS NO 4. MOST OF US ARE ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS DATA SHOULD GUIDE OUR DECISIONS, NOT OPINION

8 MOISTURE SENSITIVITY 1. A STUDY AT MTE LABELED BRRS-4 FOR PHASE 4 OF OUR BINDER RHEOLOGY AND RUTTING STUDY--WE LOOKED DRY AND WET HAMBURG RUTTING RESULTS 2. WET HAMBURG CONDUCTED ON 7 BINDERS (6 CONTAINED SOME LEVEL OF PPA) a. PPA ONLY BLENDS HAD 0.75% PPA b. POLYMER AND PPA BLENDS HAD 0.3% PPA 3. 3 AGGREGATE TYPES LIMESTONE, GRAVEL AND GRANITE 4. A 1 MILLION AND A 10 MILLION ESAL MIX FOR EACH AGGREGATE

9 ONSET OF STRIPPING FOR E-1 LIMESTONE, GRAVEL & GRANITE PPA PPA+ GRIPPER ELVALOY + PPA ELVALOY+PPA ELVALOY + PPA SBS + PPA E-1 LIMESTONE E-1 GRAVEL E-1 GRANITE

10 ONSET OF STRIPPING E-10 LIMESTONE, GRAVEL & GRANITE PPA PPA+ GRIPPER ELVALOY + PPA ELVALOY+PPA ELVALOY + PPA SBS + PPA E-10 LIMESTONE E-10GRAVEL E-10 GRANITE

11 RUT PASSES TO 12.5 mm FOR E-1 LIMESTONE, GRAVEL & GRANITE PPA PPA+ GRIPPER ELVALOY + PPA ELVALOY+PPA ELVALOY + PPA SBS + PPA E-1 LIMESTONE E-1 GRAVEL E-1 GRANITE

12 RUT PASSES TO 12.5mm FOR E-10 LIMESTONE, GRAVEL & GRANITE PPA PPA+ GRIPPER ELVALOY + PPA ELVALOY+PPA ELVALOY + PPA SBS + PPA E-10 LIMESTONE E-10 GRAVEL E-10 GRANITE

13 PPA PPA+ GRIPPER ELVALOY+PPA ELVALOY + PPA ELVALOY + PPA SBS + PPA HAMBURG 50 C WET, RUT PASSES E-1 LMIESTONE E-10 LIMESTONE E-1 GRAVEL E-10 GRAVEL E-1 GRANTIE E-10 GRANITE

14 MOISTURE SENSITIVITY 1. IN ANOTHER STUDY WE LOOKED AT TSR RESULTS OF LIMESTONE AND GRANITE MIXES PRODUCED WITH 1) Citgo 67-22, % PPA = PG 82, % PPA= PG 76 2) BP 64-22, % PPA = PG NOTE THERE IS A PERFORMANCE PENALTY FOR USING TOO MUCH PPA WITH SOME BINDERS

15 AND SOURCE C % OR 0.6% POLYPHOSPHORIC ACID USING LIMESTONE AND GRANITE MIXES TENSILE STRENGTH VALUES IN KPA LIMESTONE TSR 88.2 LIMESTONE TSR 66.1 LIMESTONE TSR 73.0 GRANITE DRY STRENGTH VALUES 160 WET STRENGTH VALUES TSR 87.4 GRANITE TSR TENSILE STRENGTH VALUES IN PSI 0 CONTROL 1.2% ACID 0.6% ACID CONTROL 1.2% ACID ASPHALT USED WAS A CITGO /11/02 12:31:38 E:\(A)Rhios600_2002\RHODIA\RHODIA MIX DATA\LARAMIE TSR RESULTS FOR CITGO MIXES.spf 0

TENSILE STRENGTH VALUES IN KPA 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 TENSILE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS FOR SOURCE B 64-22 AND SOURCE B 64-22 + 1.

16 TENSILE STRENGTH VALUES IN KPA TENSILE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS FOR SOURCE B AND SOURCE B % POLYPHOSPHORIC ACID USING LIMESTONE AND GRANITE MIXES LIMESTONE TSR 90.2 LIMESTONE TSR 86.8 GRANITE DRY STRENGTH VALUES WET STRENGTH VALUES 140 TSR 83.8 GRANITE TSR TENSILE STRENGTH VALUES IN PSI 0 CONTROL 1.2% ACID CONTROL 1.2% ACID 0 ASPHALT USED WAS A BP /11/02 12:33:29 E:\(A)Rhios600_2002\RHODIA\RHODIA MIX DATA\LARAMIE TSR RESULTS FOR BP MIXES.spf

17 MOISTURE SENSITIVITY 1. A SERIES OF MOISTURE SENSITIVITY STUDIES WERE PERFORMED FOR ICL. a. Marathon Control asphalt b. Marathon % PPA = PG c. Hydrated lime was used with each binder in a limestone mix that typically results in low TSR values d. Two sources of phosphate ester antistrip were used with each binder 2. TSR testing was also performed

18 4/05/09 19:17:41 E:\DRIVE_E\PMW 2008\ICL CHEMICAL\FOR PPA WORKSHOP COMPARE RUT TEST ICL & 70-22C & C.spf 0 ICL E-1 Fabian agg, % phosphate ester 50 C AVERAGE BOTH WHEELS ICL E-1 Fabian Hemker agg, % Hy 50 C AVERAGE BOTH WHEELS ICL E-1 Fabian Hemker, 50 C AVERAGE BOTH WHEELS ICL E-1 Fabian Agg 70-22(PPA) +.5% phosphate ester 50 C AVERAGE ICL E-1 Fabian agg % phosphate ester C AVERAGE BOTH WHEELS ICL E-1 Fabian Hemker agg, (.75%PPA)+1% HY 50 C AVERAGE BOTH WHEELS -5 RUT DEPTH IN mm ICL CHEMICAL EVALUATION RUT TEST STUDY USING FABIAN QUARRY LIMESTONE TESTED IN PMW HAMBURG WET AT 50 C RUT PASSES AT 50 C & 158 LBS (702 N)

19 TENSILE STRENGTH, PSI COMPARE WET AND DRY STRENGTH WITH AND WITHOUT LIME HL PPA PPA + HL SR SR + HL % % % % 66.7% 52.6% 0 wet strength, psi dry strength, psi

20 DSR 70 C, kpa DSR STIFFNESS OF PG (PPA MODIFIED BINDER) RECOVERED FROM TSR SPECIMENS Orig DSR RTFO DSR SPEC TSR HL Soaked TSR HL Soaked TSR HL Dry TSR NO HL Soaked TSR NO HL Dry HAMBURG RUT PILL NO HL HAMBURG RUT PILL + HL

21 RUT PASSES ONSET OF STRIPPING HAMBURG RUT TEST 50 C NEAT + 1% Hydrated lime +0.5% phosphate ester #2 +0.5% phosphate ester #1 +0.5% Redicote E MIXES )PPA) MIXES

22 RUT PASSES PASSES TO ONSET OF STRIPPING PASSES TO 12.5 mm RUT DEPTH PPA NEAT PPA + 1% lime (2% SBS) NEAT (2% SBS) + 1% lime (1% Elvaloy, 0.3% PPA) NEAT (1% Elvaloy, 0.3% PPA) + 1%Lime (1% SBS, 0.3% PPA) NEAT (1% SBS, 0.3% PPA) + 1% Lime

23 CONCLUSIONS FOR MOISTURE SENSITIVITY 1. HYDRATED LIME IMPROVES THE MOISTURE SENSITIVITY OF ALL MIXES REGARDLESS OF THE USE OF ACID 2. PHOSPHATE ESTER ANTI-STRIP ALWAYS IMPROVES THE HAMBURG PERFORMANCE OF ANY MIX WHETHER PPA IS USED OR NOT

24 CONCLUSIONS FOR MOISTURE SENSITIVITY 3. FOR ANY BINDER THERE IS A LEVEL OF PPA THAT IS TOO HIGH THAT WILL RESULT IN DECREASED MOISTURE RESISTANCE PERFORMANCE a. It seems preferable to me to limit the amount of PPA modification to 1 PG grade and set an upper limit on the amount of PPA that can be used. Some binders are just not suitable for PPA modification

25 CONCLUSIONS FOR MOISTURE SENSITIVITY 4. SOME BINDERS MODIFIED WITH PPA ONLY MIGHT EXPERIENCE A REDUCTION IN DSR STIFFNESS WHEN MIXED WITH HYDRATED LIME CONTAINING MIXES BASED ON EXTRACTED BINDER TESTS a. This is difficult to verify because we don t know to what extent HL retards binder aging and because of the difficulty of quantitatively removing all phosphorus containing compounds from the aggregate

26 CONCLUSIONS FOR MOISTURE SENSITIVITY 5. PPA MODIFICATION BY ITSELF IS NOT THE EQUIVALENT TO POLYMER MODIFICATION IN TERMS OF RUTTING AND MOISTURE SENSITIVITY 6. THE USE OF PPA IN CONJUNCTION WITH PPA RESULTS IN MIX PERFORMANCE THAT IS GENERALLY BETTER THAN POLYMER ALONE

27 FATIGUE 1. DSR TORSIONAL FATIGUE WAS PERFORMED ON MIXES PRODUCED WITH % PPA ONLY AND PRODUCED WITH ELVALOY + 0.3% PPA 2. MIXES WERE TESTED UNAGED, AFTER 5 AND 10 DAYS OF AGING AT 85 C IN A FORCED DRAFT OVEN

28 COMPARISON OF FATIGUE FAILURE BETWEEN PG POLYMER MODIFIED AND PG ACID REACTED CYCLES TO 20 C 1E+06 1E+05 1E+04 PG POLYMER MIX, UNAGED PG ACID REACTED MIX, UNAGED MICROSTRAIN

29 COMPARISON OF FATIGUE FAILURE BETWEEN PG POLYMER MODIFIED AND PG ACID REACTED CYCLES TO 20 C 1E+06 1E+05 1E PG POLYMER MIX, UNAGED PG ACID REACTED MIX, UNAGED PG POLYMER MIX, 5 DAY AGED PG ACID REACTED MIX, 5 DAY AGED MICROSTRAIN

30 COMPARISON OF FATIGUE FAILURE BETWEEN PG POLYMER MODIFIED AND PG ACID REACTED CYCLES TO 20 C 1E+06 1E+05 1E PG POLYMER MIX, UNAGED PG ACID REACTED MIX, UNAGED PG POLYMER MIX, 5 DAY AGED PG ACID REACTED MIX, 5 DAY AGED PG POLYMER MIX, 10 DAY AGED PG ACID REACTED MIX, 10 DAY AGED MICROSTRAIN

31 FATIGUE CONCLUSIONS? 1. IT DOES APPEAR THAT MIXES PRODUCED WITH POLYMER HAVE BETTER FATIGUE PERFORMANCE THAN THOSE PRODUCED WITH JUST ACID 2. THIS NEEDS TO BE STUDIED IN MORE DEPTH DESPITE WHAT MANY WOULD SAY IS OBVIOUS

32 AND DON T FORGET THIS Quod enim mavult homo verum esse, id poitus credit KEEP CHALLENGING YOURSELF What man wishes were true, he more readily believes.

33 THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION QUESTIONS COMMENTS

Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR): New Binder Grade Testing and Terminology

Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR): New Binder Grade Testing and Terminology 2016 AASHTO - Subcommittee On Materials Mick Syslo, P.E. Materials & Research Engineer Nebraska Department of Roads Current