Design of TxDOT Asphalt Mixtures Using the Superpave Gyratory Compactor

The primary objective of this project was to develop laboratory protocols for using the Superpave gyratory compactor (SGC) in place of the Texas gyratory compactor (TGC) to design essentially all of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) dense-graded hot mix asphalt (HMA) paving mixtures. The specific goal was to recommend a design number of gyrations (Ndesign) using the SGC for each TxDOT mixture type that will most closely simulate a mixture formerly designed using the TGC (Tex-204-F). TxDOT HMA mixtures included Type A, Type B, Type C, Type D, Type Course Matrix High Binder (CMHB)-C, and Type CMHB-F. Researchers conducted the experiment in four steps including 1) SGC compaction of plant mixed materials, 2) SGC compaction of laboratory mixed materials, 3) determination of optimum asphalt content using the SGC, and 4) indirect tension testing of mixtures. The number of SGC gyrations that most closely simulated the TGC design for each mixture type way recommended. Researchers discovered that the TGC and the number of SGC gyrations to match the TGC were producing mixtures with comparatively low asphalt contents that may yield poor performance. Therefore, Phase II was developed and implemented to determine an acceptable SGC design procedure using fewer gyrations than those proposed following Phase I. In both phases, more than 60 HMA mixture designs with related materials that had been designed by TxDOT personnel using the TGC were studied using the SGC. Phase II determined that mixtures indicating good performance in the Hamburg test can be designed using a considerably lower number of SGC gyrations than the number that will match optimum asphalt contents from the TGC. The final recommended SGC design gyrations should accommodate adequate asphalt in the mixture to improve resistance to cracking, raveling, and aging as well as decrease permeability while providing acceptable rutting resistance.

[1]  Gerald A Huber,et al.  THE EFFECT OF MIX DESIGN TECHNOLOGY ON THE CHARACTERISTICS OF ASPHALT PAVEMENTS , 2002 .

[2]  John D'Angelo,et al.  X-ray Tomography to Characterize Air Void Distribution in Superpave Gyratory Compacted Specimens , 2002 .

[3]  Joe W Button,et al.  EFFECTS OF SUPERPAVE RESTRICTED ZONE ON PERMANENT DEFORMATION , 2001 .

[4]  R B McGennis.  Evaluation of Materials From Northeast Texas Using Superpave Mix Design Technology , 1997 .

[5]  R M Anderson.  RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SUPERPAVE GYRATORY COMPACTION PROPERTIES AND THE RUTTING POTENTIAL OF ASPHALT MIXTURES (WITH DISCUSSION) , 2002 .

[6]  M S Buchanan,et al.  CONSOLIDATION OF THE N SUB DESIGN COMPACTION MATRIX AND EVALUATION OF GYRATORY COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS , 1999 .

[7]  Emmanuel G Fernando,et al.  DESIGN AND EVALUATION OF LARGE STONE ASPHALT MIXTURES , 1997 .

[8]  S F Brown.  Improved asphalt pavement engineering , 1988 .

[9]  Mike Butcher.  Determining Gyratory Compaction Characteristics Using Servopac Gyratory Compactor , 1998 .

[10]  J A D'Angelo,et al.  SUMMARY OF SIMULATION STUDIES FROM DEMONSTRATION PROJECT NO. 74 FIELD MANAGEMENT OF ASPHALT MIXES (WITH DISCUSSION) , 1991 .

[11]  Olga J. Pendleton,et al.  CORRELATION OF SELECTED LABORATORY COMPACTION METHODS WITH FIELD COMPACTION , 1994 .

[12]  R J Cominsky,et al.  THE SUPERPAVE MIX DESIGN MANUAL FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION AND OVERLAYS , 1994 .

[13]  Maupin.  ADDITIONAL ASPHALT TO INCREASE THE DURABILITY OF VIRGINIA'S SUPERPAVE SURFACE MIXES , 2003 .

[14]  B Sengoz,et al.  DETERMINATION OF OPTIMUM ASPHALT FILM THICKNESS IN RELATION WITH AGING OF HOT MIX ASPHALT , 2004 .

[15]  E R Brown,et al.  An initial evaluation for N (sub design) Superpave gyratory compactor , 1998 .

[16]  Hussain U Bahia,et al.  OPTIMIZATION OF CONSTRUCTIBILITY AND RESISTANCE TO TRAFFIC: A NEW DESIGN APPROACH FOR HMA USING THE SUPERPAVE COMPACTOR , 1998 .

[17]  P. Kandhal,et al.  Effect of Asphalt Film Thickness on Short- and Long-Term Aging of Asphalt Paving Mixtures , 1996 .

[18]  W H Goetz,et al.  ASPHALT HARDENING AS AFFECTED BY FILM THICKNESS, VOIDS AND PERMEABILITY IN ASPHALTIC MIXTURES , 1977 .

[19]  T Aschenbrener,et al.  INFLUENCE OF TESTING VARIABLES ON THE RESULTS FROM THE HAMBURG WHEEL-TRACKING DEVICE. FINAL REPORT , 1993 .

[20]  James A Scherocman,et al.  ASPHALT-AGGREGATE MIXTURE ANALYSIS SYSTEM: AAMAS , 1991 .

[21]  Robert S James,et al.  Development of Mix Design Criteria for 4.75-mm Superpave® Mixes , 2003 .

[22]  R B McGennis,et al.  SENSITIVITY OF MIXTURE PERFORMANCE PROPERTIES TO CHANGES IN LABORATORY COMPACTION USING THE SUPERPAVE GYRATORY COMPACTOR , 2000 .

[23]  Prithvi S. Kandhal,et al.  Hot Mix Asphalt Materials, Mixture Design and Construction , 1996 .

[24]  R J Cominsky,et al.  Quality control and acceptance of Superpave-designed hot mix asphalt , 1998 .

[25]  Gerald A Huber,et al.  RATIONAL METHOD FOR LABORATORY COMPACTION OF HOT-MIX ASPHALT (WITH DISCUSSION AND CLOSURE) , 1994 .

[26]  J. Haddock.  VALIDATION OF SHRP ASPHALT MIXTURE SPECIFICATIONS USING ACCELERATED TESTING. , 1999 .

[27]  Hussain U Bahia,et al.  Evaluation and Selection of Aggregate Gradations for Asphalt Mixtures Using Superpave , 1997 .

[28]  Rajib B. Mallick,et al.  Use of Superpave Gyratory Compactor To Characterize Hot-Mix Asphalt , 1999 .

[29]  Tim Aschenbrener,et al.  IN-PLACE VOIDS MONITORING OF HOT MIX ASPHALT PAVEMENTS , 2002 .

[30]  Thomas D. White,et al.  Validation of SHRP asphalt mixture specifications using accelerated testing: final report , 2003 .

[31]  T. W. Kennedy,et al.  Background of Superpave Asphalt Mixture Design and Analysis , 1995 .

[32]  Hussain U Bahia,et al.  Device for Measuring Shear Resistance of Hot-Mix Asphalt in Gyratory Compactor , 2000 .