Asphalt Technology Guidance Program (ATGP)

Office of Asset Management, Pavements, & Construction Asphalt Technology Guidance Program (ATGP) Ohio Transportation Engineering Conference October 10, 2017 Long-Life Asphalt Pavement for the 21 st Century

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) Research and Development Office of Infrastructure R&D (Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, McLean, VA) 4

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 density 7

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

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 9

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

Routine Project Site Activities Material Characterization Mix Design Replication and Testing Mix Production Testing 11

Binder Tests and Analysis 12

Binder Characterization TEST PROCEDURES Performance Grading AASHTO M 320 AASHTO M 332 (MSCR) AASHTO R 49 (Low Temperature PG) Solubility & Separation AASHTO T 44 ASTM D7173 EQUIPMENT RV DSR RTFO PAV Vacuum Degassing Oven BBR DTT ABCD Torsional bar testing 13

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 courtesy of Anton Paar & TA Instruments. 14

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

Concentric Cylinder Geometry Advantage GTR modified asphalt can be measured with particle sizes up to 2 mm No trimming problems and filling problems courtesy of Anton Paar No edge effects 16

Rheological Properties: Master Curve Rheological parameter: Rheological index (R value) Crossover frequency (ω c ) 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: Master Curve - PG 76-22 Asphalt Rubber More conditioning causes the master curves to become flatter with R increasing and ωc decreasing. 19

Low Temperature BBR Test: Binder New Parameter ( T c ) T c is the difference between the critical low temperature determined by stiffness and relaxation criteria from BBR test T c = S critical temp - m critical temp As an asphalt binder ages, T c 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 courtesy of EZ Asphalt Technology. 21

Long Term Conditioning: Low Temperature - PG 76-22 Asphalt Rubber 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 T c ( 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 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

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

AIMS Masad et al. (2003) TP 81-12 25

AIMS Output - Example 100 Low AIMS Form2D Distribution Medium High 100 AIMS Texture Distribution Low Medium High 90 90 80 80 % of Particles 70 60 50 40 30 0.075 (#200)_RAP 0.15 (#100)_RAP 20 0.30 (#50)_RAP 0.60 (#30)_RAP 10 1.18 (#16)_RAP 2.36 (#8)_RAP 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 AIMS Form2D % of Particles 70 60 50 40 30 20 4.75 (#4)_RAP 9.5 (0.375)_RAP 12.5 (0.50)_RAP 19.0 (0.75)_RAP 10 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 AIMS Texture Index 100 AIMS Angularity Distribution Low Medium High 100 90 Low AIMS Sphericity Distribution Medium High % of Particles 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 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 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 AIMS Angularity Index % of Particles 80 70 60 50 40 4.75 (#4)_RAP 9.5 (0.375)_RAP 30 12.5 (0.50)_RAP 20 19.0 (0.75)_RAP 10 0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 AIMS Sphericity (SP) 26

AIMS Output - Example 1.0 1:5 Elongation vs Flatness 0.9 Elongation Ratio (Intermediate/Long) Less Elongated 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 4.75 (#4)_RAP 9.5 (0.375)_RAP 12.5 (0.50)_RAP 19.0 (0.75)_RAP 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Flatness Ratio (Short/Intermediate) Less Flat 27

FAA F&E (3:1 & 5:1) Aggregate Type AIMS TP 81 AASHTO T 304 FAA Rank FAA Rank Aggregate Type F&E (3:1) AIMS TP 81 ASTM D 4791 Rank F&E (5:1) Rank F&E (3:1) Rank F&E (5:1) 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 #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 ASTM D 5821 CAA Rank CAA Rank CAA (+1) (+2) #7 2637 4 100 1 100 1 #8 2954 1 100 1 100 1 Birdseye 2762 3 100 1 100 1 Rank CAA fractured faces #10 Wash 2834 2 -- -- -- -- RAP 2585 5 98 2 95 2 28

Mix Design Replication Use Plant Site Materials 29

Mix Design Replication Mixing, Aging, Compacting 30

Mixture Production Testing Asphalt Mixture Sample Volumetric Properties Performance Testing Pb Ignition (T 308) Gradation (T 30) Gmm Rice (T 209) Gmb (T 166) - Corelok (T 331) - Gilson SG 4 (TP 82) Dynamic Modulus (TP 79) - Unconfined Flow Number (TP 79) - Confined - Unconfined Cyclic Fatigue (TP 107) 31

Gilson SG-4 AASHTO TP 82 Bulk Specific Gravity of Compacted Bituminous Mixtures Using Water Displacement Measured by Pressure Sensor Courtesy of Gilson Company, Inc. 32

Corelok AASHTO T 331 Bulk Specific Gravity (G mb ) and Density of Compacted Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Using Automatic Vacuum Sealing Method CoreLok, courtesy of InstroTek, Inc. 33

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

AMPT Overview 39

Gauge Point Gluing System 40

Dynamic Modulus Test Mixture Stiffness Rutting Fatigue Cracking σ 0 ε 0 41 Τ l Τ p Time E* Stress Strain Dynamic Modulus = σ ε 0 0 Phase Angle φ Τ Τ = l (360) p

Dynamic Modulus Master Curve 10,000,000 E*max=3,376,744 psi E*,psi 1,000,000 100,000 10,000 R 2 = 0.9978 Se/Sy= 0.038 3 Log Shift Factor 2 1 0-1 -2 115 F 70 F 40 F 1,000-3 0 50 100 150 E*min=4,259 psi Temperature 1.0E-06 1.0E-04 1.0E-02 1.0E+00 1.0E+02 1.0E+04 1.0E+06 FIT Reduced Frequency, Hz 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 meetings 47

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, david.mensching@dot.gov, 202.366.1286 Matt Corrigan, matthew.corrigan@dot.gov, 202.366.1549 Chuck Paugh, chuck.paugh.ctr@dot.gov, 202.366.6640 50

Closing notes Trailer is parked outside! Come in for a tour! We re here to assist! Please stop by anytime for more discussion. Questions? 51

Mix Design Replication Mix Design Replication 3 Points Performance Test Specimens 4 Replicates per P b Ignition Furnace Correction Factor 52

Mixture Production Testing Volumetric Determination P b VMA V a VFA P be / 0.075 mm 53

HMA Production Testing HMA Sample P b Ignition Gradation T 30 G mm G mb T 166 CoreLok Performance Specimens 4 - Replicates Dynamic Modulus (E*) Unconfined Flow Number Unconfined 54

Performance Sample Preparation 55

Additional HMA Technology ServoPac Gyratory Compactor Capable of measuring Shear Resistance ServoPac Shear Mix Design Replication Volumetrics 500 490 480 470 460 Shear 450 440 430 420 410 400 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Gyrations Compacts tall specimens required for fabrication of SPT specimens IPC ServoPac 56

ServoPac Gyratory Compactor ServoPac Shear Mix Design Replication Volumetrics 500 490 480 470 460 Shear 450 440 430 420 410 400 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Gyrations 57

Extrapolation vs Full Height 1.28 Internal Angle - Extrapolated (deg) 1.26 1.24 1.22 1.20 1.18 1.16 1.14 1.12 1.10 "Best Fit" line: y = 0.9554 x + 0.0493 r 2 = 0.916 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) AFG1A AFGC 125X Interlaken Test Quip 1:1 Line "+0.02" line "-0.02" line 58

Extrapolation 2 Heights top & bottom 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 59

Rapid Test Tools CoreLok Marketed by Instrotek Inc. Versatile device G mm (ASTM D6857) G mb (AASHTO T 331, ASTM D6752) G sb for CA & FA Effective Porosity (ASTM D7063) Vacuum Sealing Procedure NCAT Ruggedness Study Round-Robin to establish AASHTO Precision Statement 60