Asphalt Rubber Research Rubber Pavement Association Technical Advisory Board Meeting 11 July 2002 San Diego, California Kamil E. Kaloush Arizona State University

AR Research Background at ASU Started July 2001 Obtain Typical Engineering Material Properties for AR Mixtures and Binders >>> 2002 Design Guide Compare the Laboratory Performance of AR Mixtures To Conventional ADOT Mixtures Special Studies: Field - Laboratory Comparison

Arizona State University Research Partners Arizona State University

Current Projects 1st Project: I-40 Buffalo Range Sections 2nd Project: Completed Current Projects 1st Project: Jul 01 – Jun 02 I-40 Buffalo Range Sections 2nd Project: Nov 01 – Nov 03 I-17 Frontage Rd. AR Demonstration Program On-Going

Satisfy Research Needs Project 2: PG Binder Specifications for AR Binders. Project 8: Database of Asphalt Rubber Projects. Project 10: Evaluate AR Using 2002 Design Guide Test Protocols. Project 11: Laboratory and Field Evaluation

Current Projects 3rd Project: Alberta AR Test Section 4th Project: Jul 02 – Jan 03 Alberta AR Test Section Starting Soon! 4th Project: ALF Test Section

Asphalt-Rubber Technology Research Center (ARTIC) Library Update On Going Asphalt-Rubber Technology Research Center (ARTIC) Library Update Research Needs Project 3: Document Merits of Asphalt Rubber Products Project 5: Individual Technical Merit Documents

I-40 Buffalo Range One Stock Binder (58-22). Gap / Open Graded Mixes. Binder Tests. Mixture Tests on HMA. In-situ Air Voids I-40 MP 229

AR Demonstration Program Acting as a Catalyst to Expand the Environmental Responsible Use of Crumb Rubber Demonstrate the Use of Ground Tire Rubber in Asphalt Pavement Construction >> Nationwide Implementation.

Project Ends Pinnacle Peak Rd. Project Start

AR Demonstration Program Mainly PG 64-16 / (Test Section 58-22). Gap Graded Mix Binder and HMA Testing Lab Experimental Design on HMA 3 Compaction Levels 2 Aging Levels Field Specimens Reflective Cracking Model Verification (CONSULPAV: Dr. Jorge Sousa)

Gyratory Compaction / Coring

Air Voids Measurements - Corelok

Binder Tests Conventional Tests Superpave / SHRP Tests Penetration AASHTO T49-93 Softening Point AASHTO T53-92 Rotational Viscosity AASHTO TP48 Superpave / SHRP Tests Dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR): AASHTO PP1 Bending Beam Rheometer (BBR): AASHTO TP1-98

ASU Experience in AR Binder Handling / Testing Heating: Needs Additional 15 to 20 min Use Continuous & Rigorous Stirring RTFO : Spill Over (~ 20%) Brookfield: Select Proper Spindle

Buffalo Range (PG58-22 + R) Pen 59, 77oF Soft. Point 139oF Brookfield Viscosity 200-350oF

PG 58-22 With and Without Rubber

Comparison with ADOT Binders

Comparison with PG 76-16 Binder

Effect of RTFO and PAV

Comparison With PG 76-16 Binder RTFO PAV

Mixture Tests: NCHRP 9-19 SPT Candidates Triaxial Compression Dynamic Modulus (E*) Flow Time (FT) – (Static Creep Test) Flow Number of Repetitions (FN) – (Repeated Load Test)

E* Dynamic Modulus Testing Phase Lag in Dynamic Loading Confinement 3 to 200 psi

E* Master Curve

Shear Deformation Begins Creep Test - Rutting Stress s Time Secondary Primary Tertiary FT Defines Time When Shear Deformation Begins

Repeated Load Test - Rutting 2 14 16 2 14 16 Number of Cycles (N) 0.1 s 0.9 s er MR Permanent Strain (in/in) FN (Flow Number) ep = a N b N

Cracking Tests Indirect Tensile Creep Test Creep Compliance Strength

Cracking Tests Flexural Fatigue Tests SHRP M-009

2002 Design Guide Generalized fatigue equation for mixed loading mode: E Nf εt

E* Master Curves Comparison

Repeated Load Tests

Static Creep Tests

Indirect Tensile Strength Tests

Indirect Tensile Strength Tests Thermal Cracking As Tensile Strain

Indirect Tensile Strength Tests Thermal Cracking As Fracture Energy

Fatigue Test Results

Gap – Open – Dense Graded

Summary The Conventional Binder Tests are Adequate in Describing the Viscosity-Temperature Susceptibility (A-VTS) of Crumb Rubber Modified Binders. This A-VTS Relationship Also Appears to Relate to Observed Field Performance Behavior. Less Low-Temperature Cracking Good Resistance to Rutting at High Temperatures.

Summary Corelok is a Useful Device for Measuring Mixture Air Voids, Especially ACFC Mixes E*AR Mixes ~ E* Conv. Mixes (Note Va %) Permanent Deformation (PD)Tests: > ARAC Good Resistance to Deformation

Summary Tensile Strength: No Advantages of AR Mixes Strain at Failure Fracture Energy were Better Indicators of Field Performance Fatigue Relationships: AR-ACFC and ARAC Mixtures Provides Much Better Fatigue Life Than Dense Graded PG 76-16 Mix.

Acknowledgment Thank you ! George Way, Julie Nodes, Doug Forstie, ADOT Mark Belshe, FNF Construction Donna Carlson, Doug Carlson, RPA Andy Acho, Ford Motor Company Matthew Witczak, ASU ASU Advanced Pavement Laboratory Staff / GRA’s Kenny Witczak, Javed Bari, Mohammad Abojaradeh, Aleksander Zborowski, Andres Sotil Thank you !