HUSKY ASPHALT 1-2-3’s of PGAC Calgary Presentation August 14, 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Selecting the Correct PG Asphalt for Your Airport Project
Advertisements

Asphalt The Bottom of the Barrel Sponsored by: Minnesota LTAP Center Presented by: Michael Marti, P.E. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. Dan Wegman, P.E. SemMaterials.
Regional Implementation of the MSCR Test
Product Properties, Classification, Selection and Application
Long-Life Pavements Concepts and Lab Testing
HMA permanent deformation study: Progress report to the RPF 7 May 2008 Erik Denneman.
CUPGA 2008 Western Canada Perspective on State – of - the Canadian Technology Challenges and Solutions John Berti, P. Eng.
Karl Zipf DelDOT February 2014
New Zealand Performance Based Chip Seal Bitumen Specification Opus Research Austroads Workshop 4 December 2014.
ROAD PAVEMENT FORUM GUIDELINES ON MODIFIED BINDERS FOR USE IN HOT- MIX ASPHALT AND SURFACING SEAL APPLICATIONS.
Behavior of Asphalt Binder and Asphalt Concrete
ASPHALT RUBBER BINDER Properties Quality Control An overview of the
SmartPave.
SuperPave Asphalt Specifications
Aggregates Usually refers to a soil that has in some way been processed or sorted. Soils are materials that are used as-is. An example would be a finished.
BASICS OF A GOOD ROAD ASPHALT AND AGGREGATES
In the United States, there are an estimated 250 million registered vehicles traveling on four million miles of public roads. With such a large volume.
Binder Characterizations for High Tire Pressure Project 04/26/2012 Injun Song Injun Song, Ph.D., P. E. SRA International, Inc. Federal Aviation Administration.
Recycled Asphalt Program & Environmental Stewardship Program (Post Consumer Content) Robert C. Rea Nebraska Department of Roads WASHTO – Omaha, Nebraska.
Fatigue Characterization of Asphalt Binders with the Linear Amplitude Sweep (LAS) Cassie Hintz, Raul Velasquez, Hassan Tabatabaee, Hussain Bahia.
Innovations in HMA Performance Testing John D’Angelo D’Angelo Consulting, LLC Canadian User Producer Group for Asphalt.
Development and Application of the Asphalt Mix Performance Tester Ramon Bonaquist, Ph.D., P.E Advanced Asphalt Technologies, LLC.
Test Result Relationships
HISTORY OF ASPHALT GRADING SYSTEMS
Asphalt Pavements and Materials
Tranlation: EASL’s Average Daily Traffic Time or Traffic Pavement Condition Index Pavement Performance Pavement Condition High Performance Intersections.
New Technologies Land on Airport Pavements Rocky Mountain Asphalt Conference February 18-20, 2009.
Types, Properties and Grades of Asphalt-Part B
Warm Mix Asphalt Yellowstone National Park Brad Neitzke Western Federal Lands Highway Division.
Activities as Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center Jack Youtcheff Materials & Construction Team Federal Highway Administration
Warm Mix for a Cold Climate Colorado DOT’s 2007 WMA Project.
Session 3-6 HMA Overlays.
Basic road construction materials includes  soils,  aggregates,  bitumen and  Portland cement.
Jerry G. Rose, PE University of Kentucky Department of Civil Engineering REES 3: Module 3-D REES 2014.
4. Results and Analysis When TiO 2 was used as a modifier, low NOx reduction was measured suggesting that the method of incorporation of TiO 2 into the.
Terence Milne South African Road Pavement Forum 13 & 14 November 2002 Conference Report Back: ICAP – 22 AUGUST 2002 COPENHAGEN AFRICON.
AAPA 2010 Study Tour – Accelerated Pavement Testing & Equipment Observations and Recommendations Accelerated Pavement Testing & Equipment.
AAPA STUDY TOUR QUESTIONS LIST & STATE OF BINDERS RESEARCH IN SA 7 th September 2011 Johan O’Connell.
Research Findings from the NCAT Test Track APAI Winter Conference Indianapolis, December 14, 2010.
Asphalt Institute Research Update FAA Airport Pavement Working Group Meeting April 26, 2012.
National Cooperative Highway Research Program. Superpave Mixture and Aggregate Expert Task Group Las Vegas, Nevada 16 – 18 September 2003.
Mihai Marasteanu & Adam Zofka Summary of Shingles Work at the University of Minnesota.
The application of locally developed pavement temperature prediction algorithms in Performance Grade (PG) binder selection Prepared for SATC 2007 By Erik.
Asphalt Concrete Mix Design
 The methods used for the characterization and testing of asphalt materials have advanced considerably in the past 20 years. The State of Qatar has.
Asphalt Rubber Research
National Performance of High Recycled Mixtures. 2 Outline Trends in RAP and RAS usage and practices Motivations for higher recycled contents Barriers.
DISSIPATED ENERGY STUDY OF FATIGUE IN AIRPORT PAVEMENTS PHD Candidate: Shihui Shen Advisor: Prof. S. H. Carpenter FAA Project Review Nov. 9, 2005.
General Rheology Senior/Graduate HMA Course Asphalt Binder
Using Reflective Crack Interlayer-
Road Pavement Forum May 2006 Technical Guideline: The use of Modified Bituminous Binders in Road Construction (TG 1: 2001)
Chip Seal Best Practices by: Larry Galehouse, P.E., P.S., Director National Center for Pavement Preservation.
6th China Asphalt Summit
Russian Engineers Training March 2011
An Overview of the Asphalt Mixture Performance Tester.
Asphalt Technology Course
1 Polymer Technology Department, Gdansk University of Technology - Poland by M. Sulyman, M. Sienkiewicz, J. Haponiuk 2 nd World Congress and Expo on Recycling.
A ACLAND.BIZ MAPPING CRACK SUSCEPTIBILITY OF BITUMINOUS MATERIALS WITH BINDER DURABILITY Daru Widyatmoko & Ric Elliott (Scott Wilson Pavement Engineering.
Evaluation of Cracking Resistance and Durability of 100% Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement Mixtures Hesham Ali, PhD, PE. Mojtaba M. Afzali.
TxDOT Implementation Project Darren Hazlett, Jerry Peterson
Asphalt Pavements and Materials
Viscoelasticity & Performance of Polymer Modified Mastic Binders
UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI MASTERS OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING
Performance Graded Specifications for Emulsified Asphalt
2018 Pavement Workshop May 23-24, 2018
Performance Assessment of 100% Recycled Hot Mix Asphalt
Jerry Peterson, Construction Division
Effect of Recovered Binder From Recycled Shingles
AASHTOWare Pavement-ME Design Software: Materials Library
Rethinking PP Timing Strategies
Presentation transcript:

HUSKY ASPHALT 1-2-3’s of PGAC Calgary Presentation August 14, 2006

HUSKY ASPHALT Properties of Asphalt Critical conditions during construction and service –Construction: mixing spreading  appropriate viscosity compacting –Service : plastic deformation (rutting) fatigue cracking thermal cracking

HUSKY ASPHALT Specifications of Paving Asphalts The role of specifications: –specify properties that directly reflect asphalt behaviour –express these properties in physical units –provide information from which the service performance can be predicted –establish limits for those properties to exclude poor performing products

HUSKY ASPHALT Canadian Federal Specification Penetration at 25°C [dmm]

HUSKY ASPHALT Superpave PG Specification Superpave specification attempts to measure properties that are directly related to pavement field performance Handling Pump Permanent Deformation Fatigue Cracking Thermal Cracking Flow Rutting Structural Cracking Low Temp Cracking Rotational Viscometer Dynamic Shear Rheometer Bending Beam Rheometer Direct Tension Tester TEST EQUIPMENT PERFORMANCE PROPERTY

HUSKY ASPHALT Superpave Asphalt Binder Specification PG Performance Grade Average 7-day Max pavement temperature Min pavement temperature

HUSKY ASPHALT Performance Grade Specifications –PGAC specifications explicitly quantify the binder performance at actual in-service pavement temperatures –PGAC specifications explicitly consider the in- service aging characteristics of the binder once it is placed on the road –PGAC specifications contain formal protocols for addressing in-service traffic conditions –PGAC specifications explicitly accommodate the concept of reliability –PGAC specifications can be used to specify (high performance) modified binder systems

HUSKY ASPHALT

PG 46 PG 52 PG 58 PG 64 PG 70 PG 76 PG 82 (Rotational Viscosity) RV (110) 100 (110) 110 (110) (Flash Point) FP (ROLLING THIN FILM OVEN) RTFO Mass Loss < 1.00 % (Direct Tension) DT (Bending Beam Rheometer) BBR Physical Hardening Avg 7-day Max, o C 1-day Min, o C (PRESSURE AGING VESSEL) PAV ORIGINAL < 5000 kPa > 2.20 kPa S < 300 MPam > Report Value > 1.00 % 20 Hours, 2.07 MPa (Dynamic Shear Rheometer) DSR G* sin  ( Bending Beam Rheometer) BBR “S” Stiffness & “m” - value How the PG Spec Works (Dynamic Shear Rheometer) DSR G*/sin  < 3 Pa. 135 o C > 230 o C CEC 5864 Test Temperature Changes Spec Requirement Remains Constant > 1.00 kPa

PG 46 PG 52 PG 58 PG 64 PG 70 PG 76 PG 82 (Rotational Viscosity) RV (110) 100 (110) 110 (110) (Flash Point) FP (ROLLING THIN FILM OVEN) RTFO Mass Loss < 1.00 % (Direct Tension) DT (Bending Beam Rheometer) BBR Physical Hardening Avg 7-day Max, o C 1-day Min, o C (PRESSURE AGING VESSEL) PAV ORIGINAL < 5000 kPa S < 300 MPam > Report Value > 1.00 % 20 Hours, 2.07 MPa (Dynamic Shear Rheometer) DSR G* sin  ( Bending Beam Rheometer) BBR “S” Stiffness & “m” - value Permanent Deformation (Dynamic Shear Rheometer) DSR G*/sin  < 3 Pa. 135 o C > 230 o C CEC > 1.00 kPa > 2.20 kPa UnagedUnaged RTFO AgedRTFO Aged

Permanent Deformation Question: Why a minimum G*/sin  to address rutting Answer:We want a stiff, elastic binder to contribute to mix rutting resistance How: By increasing G* or decreasing 

PG 46 PG 52 PG 58 PG 64 PG 70 PG 76 PG 82 (Rotational Viscosity) RV (110) 100 (110) 110 (110) (Flash Point) FP (ROLLING THIN FILM OVEN) RTFO Mass Loss < 1.00 % (Direct Tension) DT (Bending Beam Rheometer) BBR Physical Hardening Avg 7-day Max, o C 1-day Min, o C (PRESSURE AGING VESSEL) PAV ORIGINAL > 1.00 kPa > 2.20 kPa S < 300 MPam > Report Value > 1.00 % 20 Hours, 2.07 MPa (Dynamic Shear Rheometer) DSR G* sin  ( Bending Beam Rheometer) BBR “S” Stiffness & “m” - value Fatigue Cracking (Dynamic Shear Rheometer) DSR G*/sin  < 3 Pa. 135 o C > 230 o C CEC < 5000 kPa PAV Aged

Fatigue Cracking Question: Why a maximum G* sin  to address fatigue? Answer: We want a soft elastic binder (to sustain many loads without cracking) How: By decreasing G* or decreasing 

PG 46 PG 52 PG 58 PG 64 PG 70 PG 76 PG 82 (Rotational Viscosity) RV (110) 100 (110) 110 (110) (Flash Point) FP (ROLLING THIN FILM OVEN) RTFO Mass Loss < 1.00 % (Direct Tension) DT (Bending Beam Rheometer) BBR Physical Hardening Avg 7-day Max, o C 1-day Min, o C (PRESSURE AGING VESSEL) PAV ORIGINAL > 1.00 kPa < 5000 kPa > 2.20 kPa 20 Hours, 2.07 MPa (Dynamic Shear Rheometer) DSR G* sin  ( Bending Beam Rheometer) BBR “S” Stiffness & “m” - value Low Temperature Cracking (Dynamic Shear Rheometer) DSR G*/sin  < 3 Pa. 135 o C > 230 o C CEC S < 300 MPam > Report Value > 1.00 % PAV Aged

Low Temperature Cracking Question: Why a maximum S value and minimum m and  ƒ values to address low temperature cracking? Answer: We want a soft, creep stiffness relaxing, ductile binder How: By decreasing S or increasing the m and  ƒ values.

PG 46 PG 52 PG 58 PG 64 PG 70 PG 76 PG 82 (Rotational Viscosity) RV (110) 100 (110) 110 (110) (Flash Point) FP (ROLLING THIN FILM OVEN) RTFO Mass Loss < 1.00 % (Direct Tension) DT (Bending Beam Rheometer) BBR Physical Hardening Avg 7-day Max, o C 1-day Min, o C (PRESSURE AGING VESSEL) PAV ORIGINAL > 1.00 kPa < 5000 kPa > 2.20 kPa S < 300 MPam > Report Value > 1.00 % 20 Hours, 2.07 MPa (Dynamic Shear Rheometer) DSR G* sin  ( Bending Beam Rheometer) BBR “S” Stiffness & “m” - value Miscellaneous Spec Requirements (Dynamic Shear Rheometer) DSR G*/sin  CEC < 3 Pa. 135 o C > 230 o C Flash Point Mass Loss

HUSKY ASPHALT

Performance Grade Specifications Husky supports the use and the specification for Performance Graded Asphalt Cements (PGAC) as written in AASHTO M Table 1 (MP1) and Table 2 (MP1A). –No adjustment to spec limits (BBR S m DSR G*/sin δ values) –No additional PG + Specifications –PGAC specifications are based on the science of rheology, the study of stress and strain and not a consistency measurement such as penetration

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Selection Process

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining Pavement Design Temperatures Starting with the Climatic Data It is important for practitioners to: look at several sites near your design location, understand the nature of the weather data for each site, and apply proper engineering judgment as to which data set(s) are most applicable to your specific design situation. “The best weather station may not necessarily be the closest weather station”

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining Pavement Design Temperatures For each weather station: –the hottest seven-day period was identified and the average maximum air temperature (for this seven-day period) was computed and used to define the hot temperature design condition, and –the one-day minimum air temperature was used to define the cold temperature design condition.

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining Pavement Design Temperatures

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining Pavement Design Temperatures Converting Climate Data into Pavement Temperatures –Most practioners in western Canada support the use of the LTPP High Pavement Temperature Model coded into LTPPBind V2.1, July 1999 More conservative than the SHRP High Pavement Temperature model –Most practioners in western Canada support the use of the Revised Low Pavement Temperature Model in TAC Technical Brief #15, October 1998 Superior correlation to observed field measurements at select Canadian sites

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining Pavement Design Temperatures Converting Climate Data into Pavement Temperatures –LTPPBind 2.1 does not support the TAC model –LTPPBind 2.1 has aggressive grade bumping protocols (KMC,SHRP)

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining Pavement Design Temperatures Specifying Reliability– Explicitly Considering Risk –Reliability is defined as the percent probability, in a single year, that the actual temperature (one-day low or seven-day average high) will not exceed the design temperature “A higher level of reliability means a lower level of risk”

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining Pavement Design Temperatures Specifying Reliability – Explicitly Considering Risk –Level of reliability is a function of the application Is this a major highway or low volume road? What is the implication of a failure? Reliability must be consistent with Owner Agency policy. –Reliability of the high temperature grade can be different for the low temperature –Husky supports a high level of reliability (99%) on the high temperature Rutting leading to safety issues i.e. Hydroplaning In addition to LTPP High Pvm’t Temperature model

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining Pavement Design Temperatures Specifying Reliability – Explicitly Considering Risk –Husky supports a moderate level (90%) for low pavement temperature Failure modes like cracking are a performance cost/ issue and therefore must be set within the context of life cycle cost considerations. –Consider using 99% reliability on the high temperature and 90% reliability for the low temperature Then adjust your reliability thresholds to be consistent with Owner/Agency policy and suit your site specific design requirements and project economics Provides reasonable environmental grades for most sites across western Canada

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining PGAC Environmental Grade

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining Pavement Design Grade

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining Pavement Design Temperatures Pavement PG design grade is determined by: 1) climatic statistics of the design site, 2) the pavement temperature model selected, 3) the design reliability, 4) high temperature grade bumping protocol,

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining PGAC Environmental Grade Grade Selection Matrix-Customized for Western Canada –Husky supports the splitting of the low temperature grade into 3 C intervals The splitting of grades allow you to spec the actual performance that has been provided by CGSB graded asphalts in western Canada (SGS and Cold Lake crudes) PG (80/100A) PG (120/150A) PG (200/300A) PG (300/400A)

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining PGAC Environmental Grade Grade Selection Matrix-Customized for Western Canada –Husky supports the splitting of the low temperature grade into 3 C intervals The slope of the straight run PG grading curve indicates the high temperature grade increases 1.4 C for every 1 C decrease (worsening) in the low temperature grade Depending on the project site, modification in 3 C increments on the low temperature will save costs. May achieve the desired reliability at -37 C instead of - 40 C.

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining PGAC Environmental Grade Recommended Grade Selection Matrix- Customized for Western Canada –16 potential grades for western Canada Production and inventory considerations Some grades are redundant in that the lowest quality straight run asphalt exceeds them Some grades are too expensive to be practical Some modified grades can be consolidated into higher grades with similar cost structures –Maximize grade availability to maximize design flexibility –Minimize grade availability to limit grade proliferation

HUSKY ASPHALT Determining PGAC Environmental Grade

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta Environmental Grade PG 58-31

HUSKY ASPHALT PGAC Calgary, Alberta –Environmental Grade PG PG –Slow traffic where the average traffic speed is between 20 to 70 km/hr –Design ESAL’s over 0.3 million PG –Standing traffic where the average traffic speed is less than 20 km/hr –Design ESAL’s over 0.3 million

HUSKY ASPHALT Questions ?