A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Cracking and Rutting Performance of Field and Laboratory HMA Mixes
A laboratory setting is a more controlled environment compared to the field where the environment can be more challenging due to heat and weather control. Comparison of performance measures such as rutting and cracking resistance are viable tests to investigate the difference between laboratory and field mixes. The research was done to compare rutting and cracking resistance of laboratory and field mixes. Performance grade (PG) 58-28 and PG 64-28 were considered for testing. Both performance grades were taken from highways in North Dakota with separate mix designs. The nominal maximum aggregate size (NMAS) for all mixes was 12.5 mm. Specimens for both laboratory and field mixes (150 mm diameter and 75 mm high) were compacted to a target of 7% air voids using a gyratory compactor. Asphalt pavement analyzer (APA) was used to determine rutting resistance of the specimens. Disk-shaped compact tension (DCT) and semi-circular bending (SCB) were used to determine low-temperature and fatigue cracking resistance, respectively. The DCT was performed at 10°C above the low-temperature PG grade. Cracking resistance was measured in terms of fracture energy. The results showed that for PG 58-28 the laboratory mix was more rut resistant than field mix whereas for PG 64-28 the field mix was more rut resistant than laboratory mix. The lab mixes were more cracking resistant than the field mixes for both binder grades. Fracture energy for virgin mixes was higher than mixes with reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) as expected.
Cracking and Rutting Performance of Field and Laboratory HMA Mixes
A laboratory setting is a more controlled environment compared to the field where the environment can be more challenging due to heat and weather control. Comparison of performance measures such as rutting and cracking resistance are viable tests to investigate the difference between laboratory and field mixes. The research was done to compare rutting and cracking resistance of laboratory and field mixes. Performance grade (PG) 58-28 and PG 64-28 were considered for testing. Both performance grades were taken from highways in North Dakota with separate mix designs. The nominal maximum aggregate size (NMAS) for all mixes was 12.5 mm. Specimens for both laboratory and field mixes (150 mm diameter and 75 mm high) were compacted to a target of 7% air voids using a gyratory compactor. Asphalt pavement analyzer (APA) was used to determine rutting resistance of the specimens. Disk-shaped compact tension (DCT) and semi-circular bending (SCB) were used to determine low-temperature and fatigue cracking resistance, respectively. The DCT was performed at 10°C above the low-temperature PG grade. Cracking resistance was measured in terms of fracture energy. The results showed that for PG 58-28 the laboratory mix was more rut resistant than field mix whereas for PG 64-28 the field mix was more rut resistant than laboratory mix. The lab mixes were more cracking resistant than the field mixes for both binder grades. Fracture energy for virgin mixes was higher than mixes with reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) as expected.
Cracking and Rutting Performance of Field and Laboratory HMA Mixes
Gedafa, D. S. (author) / Berg, A. (author) / Karki, B. (author) / Saha, R. (author) / Melaku, R. S. (author)
International Airfield and Highway Pavements Conference 2019 ; 2019 ; Chicago, Illinois
2019-07-18
Conference paper
Electronic Resource
English
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 2015
Successful High RAP Mixes Designed with Balanced Rutting and Cracking Requirements
| Online Contents | 2012
Experimental Mixes to Minimize Rutting
| NTIS | 1990