Y. Richard Kim, Ph.D, P.E. North Carolina State University...Fortaleza, Brazil October 5, 2009....

Asphalt Pavement Response and p pFatigue Performance Prediction Using the VECD Approach‐Application tothe VECD Approach Application to

Warm Mix Asphalt

Y. Richard Kim, Ph.D, P.E.North Carolina State University

Presented at the International Workshop onCold and Warm Asphalt Mixture Design/Characterization

and Pavement DesignIdentification of Worldwide Best Practices

Fortaleza, Brazil

October 5, 2009

Outline

FHWA PRS ProjectVEPCD ModelVEPCD Model• Characterization• Verification• Verification• Application

NCHRP 1 42A I t t d VECD FEP++NCHRP 1-42A Integrated VECD-FEP++

FHWA HMA‐PRS ProjectFo r ear long project started in Feb 2007Four year long project started in Feb. 2007Objectives

T d l i t l f t ti d l i f HMA • To develop various tools for testing and analysis of HMA mixture

• To develop a hierarchical system for performance-related p y pspecification

The original research plan includes a wide range of HMA mixtures from various pavement sections.Recently incorporated RAP and WMA mixtures from NCAT Test Track and Manitoba projects

Summary of PRS PavementsSummary of PRS Pavements FHWA ALF Pavements (control and modified)FHWA ALF Pavements (control and modified)NY I-86 Perpetual PavementsNCAT RAP and WMA PavementsNCAT RAP and WMA Pavements• Control, OGFC w/15% RAP, High RAP (50%), High RAP

plus WMA (Evotherm and Advera)Manitoba RAP and WMA Pavements• WMA (Sasobit, Advera, Evotherm)• RAP (0, 15, 50%)

Chinese Perpetual Pavements in Binzhou, ShandongKEC Test Road Pavements

Proposed Hierarchical PRSProposed Hierarchical PRSModel Description Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

E* Unconfined and Confined E* AMPT E* IR E* and 55°C

Predictive Equation

CrackingPredictive Equation for

VEPCD Coefficients

HMA Model

Cracking(Tension) Uniaxial VEPCD Uniaxial VEPCD VEPCD Coefficients

from Mix Characteristics

Rutting (Compression) MVEPCD VP at a Representative

Confining Pressure

Predictive Equation for VP Coefficients from Mix Characteristics

Pavement Model MVEPCD-FEP++ Layered Viscoelastic Model

Layered Viscoelastic Model

Testing Time 17 days 5 days Less than 1 dayA l i Ti 3 d 2 d L th 1 dAnalysis Time 3 days 2 days Less than 1 day

Total Time 20 days 7 days 1 day

VEPCDModelVEPCD ModelViscoelastoplastic Continuum Damage (VEPCD) ModelViscoelastoplastic Continuum Damage (VEPCD) Model

W kTime-

T tElastic- WorkPotentialTheory

Temperature Superposition with Growing

Damage

Viscoplastic Model

ElasticViscoelastic

Correspondence Principle

Linear Viscoelastic

Microcracking Related

Time-Temperature

Damage

Permanent DeformationViscoelastic

EffectsRelated

DegradationTemperature

EffectsDeformation

Growth

VEPCDModeling ApproachVEPCD Modeling Approach

Elastic

Monotonic Tests at 5°C or

C clic Tests at 19°C

Monotonic Tests at 5°C or

C clic Tests at 19°CStrain Hardening VP Model

Strain Hardening VP Model

ElasticLVE

Damage PlasticDamage Characteristic R l ti hi

Damage Characteristic R l ti hi

Cyclic Tests at 19°CCyclic Tests at 19°C

εεε +(Microcracking) VPRelationshipRelationship

vpvetotal εεε +=

VECD ModelVECD Model

Linear Viscoelastic Creep ComplianceLinear Viscoelastic Creep Compliance

Viscoplastic CoefficientsViscoplastic Coefficients

VECD ModelVECD ModelDynamic Modulus Test

and InterconversionDynamic Modulus Test

and InterconversionMonotonic Tests

at 40°CMonotonic Tests

at 40°C

VECD Experimental Program

Dynamic modulus (LVE Characterization)• -10°, 5°, 20°, 40° and 54°C10 , 5 , 20 , 40 and 54 C• 25, 10, 5, 1, 0.5 and 0.1 Hz• 50 – 75 microstrain peak-to-peak strain amplitude50 75 microstrain peak to peak strain amplitude• Tension-compression protocol

Monotonic at 19°C or controlled crosshead cyclic Monotonic at 19 C or controlled crosshead cyclic at 19°C and 10 Hz (Damage Characterization)

Linear Viscoelastic Behaviori ea i oe a i e a io

2 E+04

3.E+04

30

35

40

deg)

1.E+04

2.E+04

|E*|

(MPa

)

10

15

20

25

Pha

se A

ngle

(d

0.E+001.E-05 1.E-02 1.E+01 1.E+04

Reduced Frequency (Hz)

0

5

1.E-05 1.E-02 1.E+01 1.E+04


P2

4

6From MeasureFitted

1.E+04

1.E+05

)

-2

0

2lo

g a T

1.E+03|E*|

(MPa

)

-6

-4

-20 0 20 40 60Temperature (C)

1.E+021.E-05 1.E-02 1.E+01 1.E+04


Damage Characteristic CurvegCyclic and Monotonic

1.005C - 126 me

0.80

5C 126 me5C - 150 me19C - 190 me19C - 240 me

0.60

C*

19C - 240 me27C - 520 me27C -668 meMonotonic

0.40Monotonic

0 00

0.20

0.000.E+00 2.E+05 4.E+05 6.E+05 8.E+05

S

St d Mi tStudy MixturesFHWA ALF pooled fund study TPF 5(019)FHWA ALF pooled fund study TPF-5(019)Four mixtures each the same coarse 12.5 mm gradation with the same asphalt content (5 3%)with the same asphalt content (5.3%)• Unmodified PG 70-22 (Control)• Crumb Rubber Terminal Blend (CRTB, PG 76-28)Crumb Rubber Terminal Blend (CRTB, PG 76 28)• Styrene Butadiene Styrene (SBS, PG 70-28)• Ethylene Terpolymer (Terpolymer, PG 70-28)

ALF Mixtures ComparisonLVE Characteristics

40000 100000

30000

40000ControlCRTBSBS

100000

20000

*| (M

Pa) Terpolymer 10000

10000

|E*

1000

01.E-08 1.E-05 1.E-02 1.E+01 1.E+04

1001.E-08 1.E-05 1.E-02 1.E+01 1.E+04

Reduced Frequency (Hz) Reduced Frequency (Hz)

Simplified FormulationV ifi iVerification

0.8

1.019-CX-L 19-CX-L (2)19-CX-H 5-CX-L5-CX-H (2) 5-CX-H 0.8

1.019-CX-L19-CX-H19-CS-L19 CS H

0.4

0.6

C*

5 CX H (2) 5 CX H19-CS-L 19-CS-H5-CS-H Monotonic

0.4

0.6

C*

19-CS-H5-CS-HMonotonic

0.0

0.2

0.E+00 2.E+05 4.E+05 6.E+05 8.E+05 1.E+06S

0.0

0.2

0.E+00 1.E+05 2.E+05 3.E+05 4.E+05 5.E+05S

ControlControl CRTBCRTB

S S

0.8

1.019-CX-L19-CX-H19-CS-L19-CS-H

0.8

1.019-CX-L19-CX-H19-CS-L19-CS-H

0 2

0.4

0.6

C*

19 CS H5-CS-HMonotonic

0 2

0.4

0.6

C*

19 CS H5-CS-HMonotonic

0.0

0.2

0.E+00 1.E+05 2.E+05 3.E+05 4.E+05 5.E+05 6.E+05 7.E+05S

0.0

0.2

0.E+00 1.E+05 2.E+05 3.E+05 4.E+05 5.E+05S

TerpolymerTerpolymerSBSSBS

VECD Comparison of ALF MixturesDamage Characteristics

1.0Control

0.8

ControlSBSTerpolymer

0.6

C*

p yCRTB

0 2

0.4

0.0

0.2

0.E+00 2.E+05 4.E+05 6.E+05 8.E+05 1.E+06S

VEPCDModel VerificationVEPCD Model Verification

Random Loading ValidationRandom Stress le el and frequency 87 5 650 kPa 1 20 Hz 25°CRandom Stress level and frequency, 87.5‐650 kPa, 1‐20 Hz, 25 C

600

700

400

500

600s

(kPa

)

100

200

300

Stre

ss

00 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Time (s)700 25600

200300

400500

600700

tress

(kPa

)

10

15

20

25

eque

ncy

(Hz)

200

400

600

mbe

r of C

ycle

s

0100

200

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Loading Block

St

0

5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Loading Block

Fre

0

200

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Loading Block

Num

Random Loading Verificationa o oa i g e i i a io1.5E-02

6 0E 03

8.0E-03

Measured

Predicted TotalControlControl CRTBCRTB

5.0E-03

1.0E-02

Stra

in

Measured

Predicted Total4.0E-03

6.0E-03

Stra

in

Predicted Total

Predicted VP

0.0E+00

5.0E 03

0 200 400 600 800

Predicted VP

Predicted VE0.0E+00

2.0E-03

0 200 400 600 800

Predicted VE

Time (s) Time (s)

6.3E-03Measured

Predicted Total8 0E 03

1.2E-02

Measured

Predicted TotalTerpolymerTerpolymerSBSSBS

2.1E-03

4.2E-03

Stra

in

Predicted VP4.0E-03

8.0E-03

Stra

in

Predicted VP

0.0E+000 50 100 150 200

Time (s)

Predicted VE0.0E+00

0 75 150 225 300Time (s)

Predicted VE

MEPDG Fatigue ModelMEPDG Fatigue Model1000

ude

5C Measured

19C Measured

Am

plitu 27C Measured

Stra

in A

1001.E+01 1.E+03 1.E+05 1.E+07

Nf (Cycle)

Fatigue Life Prediction UsingFatigue Life Prediction Using Monotonic Data

0 8

1 1

0 4

0.6

0.8

C*

0 4

0.6

0.8

C*

5 CX L P di t d

0

0.2

0.4

19-CX-VL-Measured19-CX-VL-Measured19-CX-H-Predicted19-CX-H-Measured

0

0.2

0.4 5-CX-L-Predicted5-CX-L-Measured5-CX-H-Predicted5-CX-H-Measured

00.0E+00 1.0E+06 2.0E+06 3.0E+06 4.0E+06

Reduced Time (s)

00.0E+00 5.0E+03 1.0E+04 1.5E+04 2.0E+04 2.5E+04

Reduced Time (s)

VECD Failure CriteriaVECD Failure Criteria1.0

ALF Control0.8

re

ALF ControlALF CRTBALF Terp.Mix A

0 4

0.6

@ F

ailu

r Mix AFailure Envelope

0.2

0.4

C*@

0.00 5 10 15 20 25 300 5 10 15 20 25 30

Temperature (deg. C)

Prediction of Nf vs εt FatiguePrediction of Nf vs. εt Fatigue Relationship

1000

e

5C Measured19C Measured27C M d

mpl

itude 27C Measured

Predicted

Stra

in A

100

S

1.E+01 1.E+03 1.E+05 1.E+07

Nf (Cycle)

Prediction of Fatigue LifeCh i d i h C liCharacterized with Cyclic

1.E+06R2 = 0.91Se/Sy = 0.37

1.E+04

1.E+05Pr

edic

ted

Nf

E i CX C t l CX

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+02 1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E+05 1.E+06

P Eric-CX Control-CXCRTB-CX Terpolymer-CXEric-CS Control-CSCRTB-CS SBS-CSTerpolymer-CS LOE

Measured, Nf

3.E+05

4.E+05

Nf

R2 = 0.86Se/Sy = 0.37

1.E+05

2.E+05

Pred

icte

d

Eric-CX Control-CXCRTB-CX Terpolymer-CXEric-CS Control-CS

0.E+000.E+00 1.E+05 2.E+05 3.E+05 4.E+05

Measured, Nf

Eric CS Control CSCRTB-CS SBS-CSTerpolymer-CS LOE

Fatigue Life VerificationMultiple mixtures 10 H 100 700 5° 19° and 27°CMultiple mixtures, 10 Hz, 100 – 700 με, 5 , 19 , and 27 C1.E+06

S9.5C S9.5BI19C B25B

1.E+05

f

I19C B25BI19B RS12.5CRI19B RI19CRB25B LOE

1.E+04

dict

ed N

1.E+03

Pred

1 E+02

5 ~ 30% Error(in arithmetic space)

5 ~ 30% Error(in arithmetic space)

1.E 021.E+02 1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E+05 1.E+06

Measured Nf

Fatigue Endurance Limit

1E+03

gUsing VECD Model

Endurance Limit

1E+02n Le

vel

Stra

in

1E+01

5C19C

1E+011.E+01 1.E+05 1.E+09

Nf50 million

Effect of Mixture Variables

250

)

250

)

Solid Symbols = Modified Mixes

100

150

200

ance

Lim

it ( με

100

150

200

ance

Lim

it ( με

0

50

100

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Endu

ra

0

50

100

4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7

Endu

ra

Aggregate SizeAggregate Size Asphalt ContentAsphalt Content

NMAS % AC

200

250

t (με)

200

250

t (με)

100

150

dura

nce

Lim

it

100

150

dura

nce

Lim

it

0

50

58 64 70 76 82

High Temperature PG Grade

En

0

50

1 2 3 4

Use of RAP Materials

EnAsphalt GradeAsphalt Grade RAP EffectRAP Effect

RAPNo-RAP

Thermal Cracking Verification4000

3000

4000-4.4C/hr-8.6C/hr-17.7C/hr

2000

3000

ss (k

Pa)

1000

Stre

s

LVE

VECD

00 150 300 450

VEPCD

Actual

0 150 300 450Time (min)

TSRST Prediction4500 450

3000

3500

4000

Stre

ss (k

Pa)

250

350

Tim

e (m

in)

2000

2500

3000

0 5 10 15 20 25

Failu

re S

Filled Symbols: PredictedClear Symbols: Measured

50

150

0 5 10 15 20 25

Failu

re T

Filled Symbol: PredictedClear Symbols: Measured

0 5 10 15 20 25Cooling Rate (C/hr)

0 5 10 15 20 25Cooling Rate (C/hr)

-20

ure

at

(C)

-25

Tem

pera

tFa

ilure

(

Filled Symbols: PredictedCl S b l M d-30

0 5 10 15 20 25

Cooling Rate (C/hr)

Clear Symbols: Measured

Predictions from the VEPCD ModelPredictions from the VEPCD ModelStress-strain behavior of asphalt mix in:• monotonic tests at varying rates of loading and

temperature; and• random load cyclic tests under varying stress/strain random load cyclic tests under varying stress/strain

magnitudes, temperatures, and loading frequencies.Nf vs. εt relationship at various temperaturesf tEndurance limitTSRST results under different cooling rates i l diincluding:• thermal stress development history;

fracture time fracture stress and fracture • fracture time, fracture stress, and fracture temperature.

VECDModel ApplicationVECD Model Application

Fatigue Performance PredictionFatigue Performance Prediction of HMA Pavement

Two-Step Method• Pavement response model (3-D FEP++) plus VECD Pavement response model (3 D FEP ) plus VECD

modelIntegrated MethodIntegrated Method• Finite element simulation of damage under

continuous loading cyclescontinuous loading cycles

Two‐Step Method

3-D FEMLinear VE HMAElastic Base/SG

PavementResponse

ModelElastic Base/SG

ε kernel

Model

M t i l

VECD Model

MaterialLevel

PerformanceModel

Transfer FunctionsModel

Predicted Distresses

Effect of Material TypeypVertical Strain

ControlControl SBS ModifiedSBS ModifiedControlControl SBS-ModifiedSBS-Modified

ALF PavementTransverse Strain ResponseTransverse Strain ResponseVECD Input Kernel

3E-04ControlCRTBSBS

2E-04

∗f(ξ)

SBSTerpolymer

1E-04

ε0∗

0E+000 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

Time (s)

ALF Mixtures ComparisonDamage Characteristics

1.0Control

0.8

ControlSBSTerpolymer

0.6

C*

p yCRTB

0 2

0.4

0.0

0.2

0.E+00 2.E+05 4.E+05 6.E+05 8.E+05 1.E+06S

ALF Fatigue Life Prediction

y = 0.7119x + 2.321R2 = 0.84736.4

6.6SBSControlCRTB

6

6.2

edic

ted

Nf CRTB

EVYNo Terpolymer

y = 0.6189x + 2.73915 6

5.8

log

Pre With Terpolymer

yR2 = 0.9932

5.4

5.6

4 4 4 6 4 8 5 5 2 5 4 5 64.4 4.6 4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6log Field Nf

Integrated Method

M-E PDGM-E PDGPavement

Fully MechanisticFully Mechanistic

3 D FEM withLayered Elastic Model

σ ε

PavementResponse

Model

3-D FEM withVEPCDInterfaceFractureσ, ε

Performance Prediction Model

MaterialLevel

Performance

HealingAging

Nonlinear Base/SG

Transfer FunctionsModel

Transfer Functions

Predicted Distresses Predicted Distresses

Simulation Results (Damage)Simulation Results (Damage)Only Mechanical Loading

Thin Pavement Thick Pavement

C: 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75

Pavement Simulation for Lime‐Pavement Simulation for LimeModified Mix Evaluation

16.855cm

Viscoelastic AC Layer

Pressure 827.37kPa

10cm

Linear Base 75ksi (517107kPa) 20.3cm

Subgrade 10.9ksi (75056kPa)

Effect of Moisture ConditioningEffect of Moisture ConditioningCycles Control Control Moisture Lsub Lsub Moisture

50,000 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 100,000

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.10 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.10 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.10 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.10 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

500,000 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 1,000,000

0

0.05

0

0.05

0

0.05

0

0.051,000,000 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.50.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.50.1

2,500,000 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0 0 0

5,000,000 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 7,500,000

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 10,000,000

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

0

0.05

0.1

C: 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75

NCHRP 1‐42A VECD‐FEP++NCHRP 1‐42A VECD‐FEP++

Aging Stiffness|E*|

DamageM t i CS CX

ViscoplasticM t i

HealingC lig g |E | Monotonic, CS, CX Monotonic Cyclic

MaterialMaterial Characteristics(VECD + Aging)Pavement

Structure

Base Layer(Non-linear Elastic)

Subgrade

VECD-FEP++

g(Linear Elastic)

Moisture(EICM)

Traffic Loading(Non-uniform, Single, Dual)

ResponseStrain, Damage

Temperature(EICM)

Mesh Size Sensitivity Check

InterpretationCondition Index

Effect of Aging on |E*|100000100000

AL-STAAL-LTA1AL-LTA2

10000

*| (M

Pa)

AL LTA2AL-LTA3

1000|E

(b)

1001.E-08 1.E-05 1.E-02 1.E+01 1.E+04

(b)


Effect of Aging on Phase Angle45

35

40

45

g)

AL-STAAL-LTA1

20

25

30

Ang

le (d

e AL-LTA2AL-LTA3

10

15

20

Phas

e A

0

5

1.E-08 1.E-05 1.E-02 1.E+01 1.E+04


Effect of Aging on VECD Model

0.8

1.0

AL-STAAL-LTA1

0.6

C

AL LTA1AL-LTA2AL-LTA3

0 2

0.4

C

0.0

0.2

0.E+00 1.E+05 2.E+05 3.E+05 4.E+05S

Healing ModelHealing ModelKim, Lee, and Little (AAPT 1997)

Pa)

Region IIRegion I

Pa)

Region IIRegion I

iffne

ss (k

P

RSB’iff

ness

(kP

RSB’

Pse

udo

St R

BSBR

CSC

D’

Pse

udo

St R

BSBR

CSC

D’

P

DΔNf

P

DΔNf

No. of CyclesNo. of Cycles

Modified Healing ModelModified Healing ModelNCHRP 1‐42A

CΔCΔCCΔ

S1, ΔSi

S2, ΔSi

CCΔ

S1, ΔSi

S2, ΔSi2 i

S2, ΔSj

2 i

S2, ΔSj

kPa)

0

2 oadi

ng

kPa)

0

2kPa)

0

2 oadi

ng

kPa)

0

2 oadi

ng

kPa)

0

2kPa)

0

2 oadi

ng

restξrestξ

o S

tiffn

ess

(k 4

13

5

Lo

Time

0 1 3 52 4

o S

tiffn

ess

(k 4

13

5o S

tiffn

ess

(k 4

13

5

Lo

Time

0 1 3 52 4

o S

tiffn

ess

(k 4

13

5

Lo

Time

0 1 3 52 4

o S

tiffn

ess

(k 4

13

5o S

tiffn

ess

(k 4

13

5

Lo

Time

0 1 3 52 4

Pseu

do Time

Pseu

doPs

eudo Time

Pseu

do Time

Pseu

doPs

eudo Time

Damage, SDamage, SDamage, SDamage, SDamage, SDamage, S

Simulation Results (Cracking Index)i u a io e u ( a i g I e )Mechanical and Thermal Loading, Aging, Healing, and

Viscoplasticity

Thin Pavement Thick Pavement

CI: 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

Summary

VEPCD model’s ability to predict material’s behavior at a wide range of conditionsgCracking simulation of VECD-FEP++ does not need to know the crack location a priorineed to know the crack location a priori.Thermal stress, aging, healing, viscoplasticity models implemented into VECD FEP++models implemented into VECD-FEP++VECD-FEP++ as a tool to investigate and

d l WMA t i l d tmodel WMA materials and pavements

Thank you!Thank you!

NCAT Test Track Cross Section

Control, OGFC, Foam WMA,

Evotherm WMA

Control, OGFC, Foam WMA,

Evotherm WMA1.25” (32 mm)Surface (9.5 mm)

2.75” (70 mm)Intermediate (19 mm)

NCAT T t T k3.00” (76 mm)Base (19 mm)NCAT Test Track

50% RAP, 50% RAP with Foam

WMA

50% RAP, 50% RAP with Foam

WMA6.00” (152 mm)

Dense Graded Aggregate Base

WMAWMA

Stiff Subgrade

Summary of NCAT MixturesHMA Mixtures• Control, OGFC (15% RAP) ( )• High RAP (50%), High RAP + WMA

WMA• Evotherm (additive), Advera (foam)

RAP• 0 15 50% RAP• 0, 15, 50% RAP

Binder Grades• Surface/Intermediate layersSurface/Intermediate layers

No RAP – PG 76-22With High RAP – PG 67-22

• Base layer• Base layerPG 67-22

Summary of MIT MixturesWMA Project• WMA AdditivesWMA Additives

Advera, Sasobit, Evotherm

• Layer PropertiesSurface layer – 0% RAP, 150/200 penIntermediate layer – 30% RAP, 200/300 pen

RAP ProjectRAP Project• RAP

0, 15, 50%

• Binder150/200 pen for all % RAP, also 200/300 pen for 50% RAP

B M t i l ( t l d)• Base Materials (not sampled)70% RAP

MIT RAP SectionsMIT RAP Sections2 5 km

0% RAP150/200

15% RAP150/200

50% RAP150/200

50% RAP200/300 0 m

m

2.5 km

150/200 pen 150/200 pen 150/200 pen 200/300 pen 100

m

70% RAP Base Layer

100 m

m

MIT WMA SectionsMIT WMA Sections3 km 1 km0.5 km 3 km 3 km 0.5 km1 km

HMA Advera HMA Sasobit HMA Evotherm HMA

50 m

m

3 km 1 km0.5 km 3 km 3 km 0.5 km1 km

+30%RAP +30% RAP +30%

RAP +30% RAP +30%RAP +30% RAP +30%

RAP 50 m

m

Y. Richard Kim, Ph.D, P.E. North Carolina State University...Fortaleza, Brazil October 5, 2009....

Documents

Transcript of Y. Richard Kim, Ph.D, P.E. North Carolina State University...Fortaleza, Brazil October 5, 2009....