September 2005
Back to Article Index

Asphalt Producer

Superpave Enters the Modification Era
Why — and how — some states are increasing the binder content
in their Superpave mixes.

by Dan Brown, Contributing Editor

Designing and building hot-mix asphalt pavements is a precise business. Just one aspect of mix design is to find the right asphalt binder content for a durable mix. Too much asphalt and you can have rutting problems. Too little asphalt means  durability will suffer and the mix may be permeable.

Largely to correct rutting on high-volume asphalt roads, federal officials in 1987 created the asphalt portion of the federal Strategic Highway Research Program. Under SHRP, some $50 million of federal money went to develop Superpave, the relatively new federal system for designing hot-mix asphalt.

Today, Superpave appears to have halted the rutting problem. But in recent years, a number of government agencies, private owners, and contractors have noted that other problems can occur with Superpave-designed pavements. Some have raveled prematurely at the joints, cracked, and become permeable to water — a problem noticed especially with coarse-aggregate mixes. “We must fix Superpave,” said Pierce Flanigan III, one of the nation’s leading asphalt contractors, speaking at last year’s annual meeting of the National Asphalt Pavement Association.

“Some Superpave surface mixes do not have enough asphalt (binder) in them,” says Flanigan, who is president of Baltimore-based P. Flanigan & Sons. A  growing number of agencies, contractors, and asphalt technologists agree with Flanigan. Considerable discussion develops, however, about how to increase binder content.

“Getting the right amount of asphalt binder is important,” says Kent Hansen, director of engineering for NAPA. “Some states are  reducing air voids. Maryland, for example, has reduced air voids from 4 to 3.5%, and that allows for      an increase in asphalt content.    Other states, like Virginia, are looking at lower design compaction levels. Virginia has only one design compaction level, at 65 gyrations. And still other states don’t feel they’re having any problems. They’re going with Superpave by the book.”

“Locking Point” design 

In Alabama, over time, the state DOT reduced N-design for high-volume roads from 125 to 100, and then to 85 gyrations in the compactor, says Mel Monk, executive director, Alabama Asphalt Pavement Association. “We realized that once we solved the rutting, we had to get more asphalt back into the mixes to improve durability,” says Monk. “So the way to do that is to reduce the number of gyrations. But even at 85 gyrations we weren’t getting what we wanted.

Superpave-designed pavements rely on a volumetric system that has requirements for asphalt binder content, voids in the mineral aggregate, and voids in the total mix. 

In 2002, a section of Interstate 84 in Portland, Oregon, was paved with a Superpave 12.5-mm nominal maximum aggregate size mix using a PG 70-28 binder. In the aerial photo, the completed lanes (with traffic) were paved with an N-design of 125 gyrations in the compactor. The contractor and the Oregon DOT were not satisfied with the level of compaction and believed that the 125-gyration mix was too lean in asphalt binder. So, on the lanes shown under construction, the mix was changed to a 100-gyration mix with a higher binder content. The compaction achieved on that side of the pavement was considerably better. Both sides have performed very well to date with no measurable rutting or other distress to date.

Paving Interstate 84 in Portland, Oregon proceeded in 2002 with two N-designs, 125 on one side and 100 on the other (see photo, page 32, lower left). Both sides have performed very well with no measurable rutting or other distress to date.

“So AAPA had a series of meetings with the Alabama Department of Transportation,” Monk says. The upshot of those meetings was that the two parties came up with a “Locking Point” design principle to govern N-design. “At a certain point the aggregate structure in a mixture locks up,” says Monk. “The mix has been compacted to an optimum point. We felt like once you go beyond that point you degrade your aggregate and, secondly, you reduce the amount of space available for liquid asphalt in your design.”

With the Locking Point design, a print-out shows the lab technician the height of the compacted specimen vs. the number of gyrations, as the gyratory compactor is working. The shorter the height, of course, the more the specimen has been compacted. “In Alabama, we said that when you have two consecutive gyrations that produce no change in specimen height, the second gyration is the Locking Point,” says Monk.

Monk says the DOT was still concerned about setting N-design too low, because data showed that most mixes “locked up” in the range of 45 to 55 gyrations. So the DOT set the minimum N-design at 60 gyrations. “If the locking point is below 60, we use 60,” says Monk. “But if it’s above 60, we use the higher number.”

Asphalt content? Compared to mixes based on an N-design of 85, the binder content of the new N-60 mix has increased 0.2 to 0.4% as a general average.

The improvement has been marked, Monk says. “We’re seeing a big difference in the field. The mixes are easier to compact, which in turn makes them less permeable and improves our durability,” he explains. “And we haven’t added so much liquid that we would incur rutting problems. We’ve been very pleased, and so has the DOT.”

Monk responds to Huber’s point about voids in the mineral aggregate by saying that the Locking Point design does not ignore VMA. “We’re getting the same or higher VMA with our new procedure, but I’m a proponent of lowering N-design at the same time,” says Monk.

Reduced air voids 

In Colorado, the DOT now may decide, on a case-by-case basis, to lower the air voids content from 4 to 3%. The contractor still must optimize his mix at 4%. “Then we allow ourselves to target up to 1% less air voids in production,” says Bill Schiebel, the DOT’s Region 1 materials engineer.

“There’s more than one way to fill VMA,” says Schiebel. “We want to ensure that decreases in air voids are due to an increase in liquid binder content. If you tell somebody to design a mix at 3% air voids instead of 4%, they can plug up the voids with things like rounded or dirty fines.

“So we adjust the air voids target after the mix design is complete,” Schiebel says. “In some mixes, a change of 1% air voids will result in an increase of 0.3% of binder, and in other mixes it might change binder content by only 0.2 or 0.1%. Each mix reacts differently, depending on the aggregate gradations and the aggregate source.”

Colorado made the change to lower air voids and higher asphalt content as a result of a 2002 study that confirmed problems with Superpave durability and fingered inadequate binder content as the culprit. “The study showed that our lab-designed mixes were over-compacted and they were too dry relative to the way they were supposed to perform,” says Schiebel.

He says Superpave mixes designed at 4% air voids were being laid down at 6% air. But those pavements were not seeing the expected 2% of additional compaction under traffic. “We tested densities at one-two-three-four-five years, and there was very little compaction in the field,” says Schiebel. “That’s because the gyratory compactors are compacting too much — more than rollers and traffic. We were at 5.4% voids after three years, and we only got down to 5.2%. That was 1.2% higher than it should have been, which was 4.0%. The mixes were too stiff to get any more compaction.”

Improvement noticed

Has the additional asphalt helped? “Yes, we believe so, this far,” says Schiebel. “The natural fear is that you’re moving toward the rutting line, but we felt we were a long way from the rutting line. We wanted to make a first step, a first iteration, and now we’re going to repeat the same density study.

“We’re seeing improvements in terms of decreased segregation, improved compaction during construction, improved density at our longitudinal joints,” Schiebel says. “And the jury is still out on durability, but I’m sure we’ll see an  improvement in that.”

Like Colorado, Maryland has reduced design air voids in its Superpave designs. Instead of designing mixes at 4%, the state specifies 3%, says Brian Dolan, president, Maryland Asphalt Association.  The change permits an increase in binder of 0.2%. “With mutual agreement between the industry and the State Highway Administration, this would be the first step toward increasing asphalt content in order to improve the durability of mixes,” says Dolan.

“Here in Maryland we’re encouraging county and local governments to use Level 1 mixes — the 50 gyration mixes, instead of the 75 or 100 gyrations required in Level 2 or 3,” says Dolan. “It makes a fairly significant difference in the binder content. Between Level 3 and Level 1 there’s probably an increase of 0.5 to 1.0% asphalt content.

Binder bumping

Virginia’s experience has been different. The state implemented the Superpave PG binder system in 1997, using PG grades with their Marshall hammer mix design system, says Richard Schreck, Executive Vice President of the Virginia Asphalt Association.

“Rut testing analysis by Brian Prowell, a senior research scientist (at the time) at the Virginia Transportation Research Council, found that the 50-blow Marshall mixes with the stiffer PG 70-22 binder had better rut resistance than the 75-blow Marshall with the same binder,” says Schreck.

“Virginia started using ‘binder bumping’ and a 50-blow Marshall mix design for all traffic levels,” says Schreck. “Binder bumping” means VDOT would use progressively stiffer binders as the design traffic loading increased. “From a subdivision up to the heaviest truck loading, our asphalt contents did not change. We just use a one-grade stiffer binder for the heavier loadings, and stayed with the 50-blow Marshall,” he recalls. “We had three years of that, starting in 1997, and it worked beautifully.”

When Virginia implemented the Superpave mix design in 2000, technicians found they had to go to coarse-graded mixes to maintain VMA at the high gyration  levels of design compaction. Those mixes didn’t work as well. “When you placed them they ended up with low binder contents, were more permeable, and they did not appear to be very durable,” says Schreck.  “We also did not accept the concept of the “Restricted Zone” because all our best mixes from the Marshall era passed through it.”

Many states have found that Superpave designs need more asphalt content.

By the third year of full Superpave implementation, thanks to Prowell’s work at VTRC, Virginia was using 65 gyrations for N-design on all traffic levels and continuing its “binder bumping” practice. Schreck says recent VTRC studies conclude that 65 gyrations are still too high compared to the Marshall mixes that performed so well. “For our materials, 65 gyrations is close to a 75-blow Marshall and we know from past experience that 75-blow Marshalls were not good durable mixes,” Schreck says.

With the large-mix-design sample size, Virginia has found it difficult to reduce gyrations further as a way to increase asphalt content. “Instead we have increased the Voids-Filled-with-Asphalt Criteria, and shifted the production mix Voids in Total Mix range to the low side,” says Schreck. “It’s not the best fix, but with our materials and the large-mix sample size we’re struggling with how to increase binder content in a scientific way. We have also introduced permeability testing as part of the mix design process to eliminate the permeable coarse graded mixes.”

So is Superpave a bust? No, but it’s evolving and needs fine tuning. Some argue that no one design compaction level is right for everybody’s aggregates across the country. N-design needs to change to accommodate various aggregate types, they say. Jim Huddleston, executive director, Asphalt Pavement Association of Oregon, is confident that Superpave mixes can work. “With Superpave, we have the potential to get the best of both worlds,” he says. “We can have durable, rut-resistant mixes with lower air voids, sufficient asphalt content for durability, and an aggregate gradation that will stand up under traffic.”


How Superpave Works

Superpave is a volumetric system of mix design. To succeed, it requires careful control over air voids (typically specified at 4%), voids in the mineral aggregate, proper proportioning in the aggregate blend, and binder content. VMA is the amount of interstitial space between the stones in the aggregate blend for a given mixture.

Enter N-design, the level of design gyrations in the laboratory’s gyratory compactor. For high-volume pavements, N-design is typically set at 125 or 100 gyrations. Some in the industry argue that a lower N-design, or fewer lab gyrations, will allow more space between aggregates to boost the binder content.

That logic is flawed, says Gerald A. Huber, associate director of research at the Heritage Research Group in Indianapolis. He says that reducing N-design will do little or nothing to change asphalt binder content, if VMA is left at the level required in the original design.

“In actual practice, if design gyrations are reduced, the mix will be redesigned to bring asphalt content back into line,” says Huber. “As a result, design gyrations will not change asphalt content because there is no requirement for the aggregate blend to be held constant.” 

Proponents of increased asphalt content also say that the additional binder will make mixes more compactable and that film thickness will increase on the aggregate. So less segregation is likely to occur, especially with coarser mixes.

Granted, the solution may be to increase asphalt content, Huber says. But specifiers cannot do it by lowering N-design, he stresses. “The way to accomplish increased asphalt content is to increase the VMA, and allow the aggregate to accommodate more asphalt binder.”

How Compaction Affects VMA

These graphs from the National Center for Asphalt Technology show how laboratory compaction standards affect the voids in the mineral aggregate value and thus, the capacity for asphalt binder. Figure 1 shows a gradation plot for a fine-graded (red line) and a coarse-graded (green line) aggregate blend. The two aggregate blends have the same nominal maximum aggregate size and the same value for VMA.

  Figure 2 is a compaction plot from NCAT’s Superpave Gyratory Compactor for the fine-graded (blue) and coarse-graded (red) aggregate mixtures. The density of both mixes increases with increasing gyrations, but the fine-graded blend achieves higher density in fewer gyrations.

  Figure 3 shows the relationship between voids and density in a compacted aggregate sample. As the aggregate particles are forced closer together, density increases and voids in the mineral aggregate decrease. Thus, as density occurs, space for asphalt cement and air declines. Or inversely, if design gyrations (N-design) were decreased, VMA would increase and the aggregate would have more capacity for asphalt binder.

Reprinted from Better Roads Magazine
September 2005

Click Here to return to article index

Copyright © 2005 James Informational Media, Inc.
All rights reserved.

Home/Site Map
 
Buyers Guide
Supplier/Equipment
Information
Products
Top Products & More!
Industry Links
Associations, Suppliers,
DOT's, Counties
Article Archive
A popular Starting Point
Articles and News
Event Calendar
Trade Shows/Exhibits
& Events
RoadFax Forms
On-Line inquiry form
Advertising
Rate Card,
Advertising Information
Circulation
Subscription Form
Editorial
Editorial Calendar,
Submission Guidelines
Search  Classifieds Contact Us