© United Contractors Midwest
© McAsphalt Industries Limited 2009
© Pavement International 2007
© Thorndyke Asphalt Paving
North East Asphalt User/Producer Group Steering Committee Meeting
Monday March 26, 2012
Presented by: Jo Sias Daniel, University of New Hampshire

University of New Hampshire
Dr. Jo Sias Daniel, PE (Project PI)

University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Dr. Walaa Mogawer, PE

Rutgers University
Dr. Tom Bennert, PE

NC State University
Dr. Y. Richard Kim, PE
2








New Hampshire (NHDOT) - Lead Agency
Maryland (MDOT)
New Jersey (NJDOT)
New York (NYSDOT)
Pennsylvania (PennDOT)
Rhode Island (RIDOT)
Virginia (VDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
3

Evaluate the fatigue and low temperature
cracking performance of plant-produced RAP
mixtures

Provide further understanding of the blending
that occurs between RAP and virgin binder in
plant-produced mixtures

Refine fatigue failure criteria for RAP mixtures
used in the Simplified Viscoelastic Continuum
Damage (S-VECD) model
4




Contractors have volunteered to produce
mixtures at different RAP contents
Mixtures sampled and taken to lab for testing
SGC specimens compacted at time of
production
Data collected on plant operations, raw
material info, placement location & conditions
(field cores if possible)
5


18 Mixtures
Focus on evaluating effect of binder grade and
plant type
Plant
Callanan NY
(drum)
Pike VT
(batch)
Pike NH
(drum)
NMAS
(mm)
12.5
9.5
12.5
PG
Grade
RAP Content (%)
0
20
30
40
64-22
58-28
58-28
52-34
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
64-28
x
x
x
x
6

Recovered & virgin binder





PG grade, master curves
CCT
ABCD
Softening point
Mixture





Complex Modulus
Hamburg & TSR
Low Temperature Creep & Strength
Fatigue (S-VECD protocol)
Workability (UMass device)
7

Recovered & virgin binder
 Glass transition point

Mixture
 Overlay Tester
 TSRST
 Beam Fatigue
8

Testing completed on everything except
 Extracted RAP binders
 Beam Fatigue on some mixtures
 TSRST on some mixtures

Analysis of data
 |E*| and |G*| comparisons/blending – AAPT
paper
 Low temperature cracking (binder & mix) – paper
in preparation for this year
9

RAP impact on measured properties
 Increase in |E*|
 PG high temp grade bump above 20%
 Minimal impact on low temp PG grade



Difference in ABCD and CCT
Lab handling procedures (reheating) impacts
properties
Production parameters (discharge temp, silo
storage time) appear to impact properties
10

Select Phase I mixtures
 Development
 Validation


Extensive fatigue characterization
Testing ongoing
11

NH 12.5 mm mixtures
 PG 52-28 with 0, 15, 25% RAP
 PG 52-34 with 25, 30, 40% RAP
 Field test sections with cores, FHWA Mobile Lab

VA 9.5 mm mixtures
 PG 70-22 with 0, 20% RAP
 PG 64-22 with 30, 40% RAP

NY 12.5 mm mixture, PG 64-22
 0% RAP with silo storage times of 0, 2.5, 5, 7.5 hrs
 25% RAP with silo storage times of 0, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10 hrs
12

Recovered & virgin binder





PG grade, master curves
CCT
ABCD
Softening point
Mixture





Complex Modulus
Hamburg & TSR (Hamburg on NH mixtures)
Low Temperature Creep & Strength
Fatigue (S-VECD protocol)
Workability (UMass device)
13

Recovered & virgin binder
 Glass transition point

Mixture
 Overlay Tester
 TSRST
 Beam Fatigue
14


Binder extractions in progress
Mixture testing in progress
 FHWA Mobile Lab testing completed


Silo storage study paper planned for
TRB/AAPT submission this year
Planning for 2012 season mixtures
 PennDOT PG 76-22 0, 20% and PG 70-22 30, 40%
 More silo storage data?
 Same mix through batch and drum plant?
15




Evaluation of field sites
Further investigation of production
parameters
Aging
Combination of RAP, RAS and WMA
16
Questions?
17