‘Advanced Testing and Characterization of Bituminous Materials ~ Loizos, Partl, Scarpas & Al-adi (eds) © 2009 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-0-415-55854-9. Effect of beam size on the creep stiffne: mixtures at low temperatures s of asphalt R. Velasquez, M. Marasteanu, M. Turos & J. Labuz Department of Civil Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA ABSTRACT: Creep stiffness of asphalt mixtures is an essential property used to estimate the susceptibility to low-temperature cracking of asphalt pavements. Curtently, creep stiffness is obtained by performing indirect tension creep tests on 150 mm (6 in.) cylindrical asphalt mixture specimens. A simpler test method, in which small mixture specimens are tested, has been recently proposed. The main obstacle in using this test method is the use of small size specimens and that the volume of material tested may not be representative. This paper addresses this critical issue by performing three point bending creep tests on beams of differ- cent sizes (6.25 x 12.5 x 100 mm, 12.5 x 25 x 200 mm, and 18.75 x 37.5 x 300 mm). The creep stiffness of 10 asphalt mixtures were determined at three low pavement service temperature levels: high temperature level (PG low limit + 22°C), intermediate temperature level (PG low limit + 10°C), and low temperature level (PG low limit -2°C). Visual inspection and statisti- cal analysis of the experimental results indicate that the cteep stiffness of asphalt mixtures can be obtained by testing small beam specimens at test temperatures in the vicinity of the component binder PG low limit 1 INTRODUCTION ‘The current Superpave specifications for low temperature cracking are based on strength and creep tests performed on asphalt binder and asphalt mixture specimens. For asphalt mixtures, the Indirect Tension Test (IDT) is used to perform strength and creep tests on cylindrical specimens loaded in compression along the diameter, according to AASHTO 122-02 (2005) IDT testing equipment is expensive and requires time consuming calibration procedures. The size of the IDT specimen limits the use of this test to investigate variation of asphalt pave- ment properties with depth. Previous research performed at the University of Minnesota (Zofka et al. 2005, Zofka et al. 2006, Zofka 2007 and Zofka et al. 2008) indicated that the Bending Beam Rheometer (BBR), currently used in the Performance Grading (PG) of asphalt binders, could be used to test thin asphalt mixture beams to obtain reliable measurements of creep compliance. There are significant advantages of using the BBR compared to the IDT: * The BBR has a reasonable price and most agencies and laboratories already have it as part of the asphalt binder grading requirements, * The BBR has a well documented history of good performance, user-friendly calibration verification, and the test procedure is very simple and has high repeatability. In addition, testing of thin mixture beams can provide critical information related to surface aging and compaction effects on the mechanical properties of asphalt mixtures at different layer depths, and can also be used to assess the effective properties of the binder in asphalt mixture containing reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) (Zofka et al. 2005). The use of small beams to estimate the properties of the actual asphalt pavement poses, however, a significant problem: the volume of material tested may not be representative, espe- cially when the asphalt mixtures contain aggregates that are larger than the smallest dimen- sion of the beam, The critical issue of the representative volume element of asphalt mixtures 313has received little attention in the past. Very few studies are available in the literature, and only for intermediate and high temperature properties. ‘Weissman et al. (1999) performed finite clement (FE) simulations to study the representa- tive volume element (RVE) of asphalt mixtures subjected to triaxial loading and simple shear at room temperatures. The authors suggested that at low temperatures, where the discrepancy between aggregate and mastic moduli was significantly smaller, the RVE was smaller compared to RVE at intermediate and high temperatures. Romero & Masad (2001) investigated the RVE of asphalt mixtures with x-ray imaging and shear tests. It was found from laboratory testing that a stiffer binder diminishes the aggregate size influence on the variability of the response. This paper presents a portion of the experimental work performed as part of a more com- prehensive study that investigates the RVE of asphalt mixtures with respect to the low tem- perature creep stiffness. 2 MATERIALS AND TEST PROCEDURE A total of 10 laboratory mixtures were tested in this study. The laboratory mixtures were prepared with four different asphalt binder grades, and two types of aggregate, limestone and granite, They were compacted to 4% air voids using a linear kneading compactor and follow- ing the Superpave mix design procedure for traffic level of 3,000,000 to less than 30,000,000 ESAL's (medium to high traffic). The mixing and compaction temperatures were 155°C and 135°C, respectively. Table 1 shows the 10 asphalt mixtures tested in this study. Low temperature three point bending creep tests were performed on specimens with three different sizes: 6.25 x 12.5 x 100 mm (1x), 12.5 x 25 x 200mm (2x), and 18.75 x 37.5 x 300 mm (3x). Additionally, the effect of temperature on the representative volume element was studied by performing bending creep tests at three temperatures: high temperature (HT) evel (PG low limit +22°C), intermediate temperature (IT) level (PG low limit + 10°C), and low temperature (LT) level (PG low limit -2°C). First, the slab compacted mixtures were cut into six 3x beams (Figure 1). Tests were per- formed at the three temperature levels HT, IT, and LT: three replicates were tested at HT and LT and six replicates were tested at IT. The test for 3x and 2x beams were conducted using a MTS 810 servo hydraulic testing machine. A special support manufactured in house was used to hold the beam and to meas- ure mid span deflection and deformation of the beam at both ends of the support, as shown in Figure 2. The ends can be adjusted to different span lengths. The beam deflections were measured using Epsilon extensometers with 38 mm gage length and +41 mm range. After testing was finished, the 3x beams were cut into 2x beams using a water-cooled dia- mond saw. Bending tests were performed on the 2x beams using the test setup for 3x beams After testing was completed, the 2x beams were cut into 1x beams the size of BBR specimens and tested in the BBR device Table 1. Laboratory mixtures description, PG binder Modification Aggregate 58-34 SBS Granite 58-34 SBS Limestone 58-28 inmodified Granite 58-28 Unmodified Limestone 64-34 Elvaloy Granite 6434 Elvaloy Limestone 64-28 Unmodified Granite 64.28 Unmodified Limestone 64-28 SBS Granite 64.28 SBS Limestone 314Figure 1. 1x, 2x, and 3x asphalt mixture beam specimens, Figure 2. 2x and 3x mixture beam test setup. To eliminate the creep from the weight of the 2x and 3x beams, the deflection measured was considered as the sum of the deflection due to the load applied at the mid span and the deflection due to a uniformly distributed load equivalent to the weight of the beam. For the 1x beams, the weight of the beam is counter balanced by the buoyancy forces in the BBR ethanol bath. 3. RESULTS A total of 360 tests were performed on the three different size beams at three temperatures, The creep stiffness as function of time was calculated using Bernoulli-Euler beam theory and the correspondence principle. For each asphalt mixture and temperature level, the average creep stiffness was calculated Figures 3 to 7 show the creep stiffness curves for the ten asphalt mixtures tested. Visual inspection of the creep stiffness average curves indicates that, at intermediate temperature, the effect of the beam size seems to be negligible. At low temperature the size of the beam appear to influence the creep stiffness. This effect is further investigated using statistical tools in the next section. It is important to note that, uring testing of the 2x and 3x beams at LT, the formation of layers of ice on the supports 3158 8 Granite = 2 o 2 9 Creep Stiffness (GPa) Creep Stiffness (GPa) 7 ° mm wD =. om Time (sec) 2 (se Figure 3. ‘Test results for PG 58-34 mixtuses e Limestone Granite B 8 stiffness (GPa) Croop Stiffness (GPa) | . mm om wo = Time ce) Tie se) Figure 4. Test results for PG 58-28 mixtures x» » < Sin | Lestone ae = S S| er) 37 &s Es) 5 = 3 3 Bo Et = é a gs gs Z ° ° o 2 400 600 800 o 200, 400 600 800 Time(s) Time(s) Figure 5. Test results for PG 64-34 mixtures. and around the extensometers was observed. This may have influenced the deflection readings since the deflection values are very small at LT and the level of error in measurements is higher compared to the other higher temperature levels, ‘At the high temperature level, for some of the mixtures, the creep stiffness curves are slightly different as well. This observation may indicate that the mismatch between the 316x» 2 A Limestone Be S Pr a e Es Bn a” gs &° 0 4 o om mo a oD Timm (soe) Time (see) Figure 6. Test results for unmodified PG 64-28 mixtures. 8 Bs! crane Bes] mesons s S on Ne = | ~ u £ 3.) G, Eo an | 8 SST . ment Timo (se) Figure 7. Test results for modified PG 64-28 mixtures. ‘Table 2, Variables definition for statistical analysis. Variable ‘Type/Description Binder PG Factors (dummy): PG 58-34, PG 58-28, PG 64-34, PG 64-28 Binder modification 0— unmodified: 1 modified Agercgate Type 0~ granite; 1 — limestone Beam size 1-1x beams; 2-2x beams; 33x beams Time 8, 15, 30, 60, 120 and 240 sec mechanical properties of aggregates and the binder (mastic) starts to affect the results, and the response of the mixtures becomes dependent on the size and distribution of the aggregate particles. 4 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS To investigate the influence of parameters such as the size of the specimen, PG of the binder, aggregate type, loading time and temperature on the creep stiffness of asphalt mixtures, cor- relation matrices were calculated and analyses of variance (ANOVA) were performed using the creep stiffness as response variable and size, time, temperature, binder type, and aggregate as the independent parameters. A linear relation was assumed between response variable and the predictors. To reduce calculations, only the creep stiffness values at 8, 15, 30, 60, 120 and 240 seconds were used in the analysis. Table 2 shows how the variables were treated in the statistical analysis. 317First, the analysis considers all test results obtained at the three temperatures. Then, sepa- rate analyses are performed for each of the three temperature levels to avoid including errors that may occur in another temperature level such as the formation of ice at the LT. 41 All temperatures Correlation factors for the results at all temperatures are presented in Table 3. Correlation factors more than 2/n’ (rule of thumb in statistics), where n is the number of sample points, indicates high linear correlation between the parameters. For the data set used in this analy- sis, correlations larger than 0.046 (n = 1902) are significant and presented in bold Significant correlation is observed between the interaction of size and time variables and the creep stiffness: as time and size increases, the creep stiffness decreases. As expected, significant correlation is observed between test temperature and creep stiffness. Negligible correlation is observed between creep stiffness and size of specimens. No correlation is observed between aggregate type and modification of the binder and the creep stiffness The results of ANOVA are presented in Table 4. For a significance level of 5%, the vari- ables with p-values smaller than 0.05 are significant and are presented in bold. The parameters that are significant in the linear regression are: size, the factors from PG 64-34 and PG 64-28 binders, aggregate type, temperature and time, Forward selection and backward elimination analysis on the regression model indicates that size does not change the residuals sum squares (RSS) of the model significantly. The significance of the size observed in the ANOVA may be caused by the interaction with other terms in the regression since the correlation between the creep stiffness and the size is not significant. The positive coefficients for PG 64-34 and PG 64-28 indicate that mixtures prepared with these binders are stiffer than the mixtures prepared with PG 58-34, The large negative coefficient for aggregate type indi- cates that mixtures with granite have significantly higher creep stiffness than mixtures with limestone. As indicated by the large t-values in Table 4, the variables that contain most of the information for the prediction of creep stiffness are temperature and time, As expected, when time and temperature increases, the creep stiffness of the mixture decreases. ‘Table 3. Correlation factors for all temperatures, Creep stiffness Aggregate 0.044 Modification 0.011 Size 0.042 Size * Aggregate 0.022 Size * Time 0.214 Temperature 0.853 Time 0.259 Table 4, ANOVA for all temperatures Variable Estimate Std. Error value pevalue Constant 1642.10 324.93 5.05 0 Size 51781 113.16 458 0 Size * Agaregate 100.32 124.03 081 04187 Size * Time 097 074 131 0.1913 Bindes{58-28] =386.72 222.88 “174 0.0829 Binder[64-34] 1300.94 152.69 852 0 Binder|64-28) 907.03 158.26 5.73 0 ‘Modification 88.59 98.22 0.90 0.3672 Aggregate 3120.94 287.30 10.86 o Temperature 561.55 5.53 101.52 0 Time 16.48 159 10.36 0 318The parameters in the regression that do not significantly contribute to the prediction of cteep stiffness are the interaction terms between size, aggregate and time and the modifica- tion of the binder. No significant difference is observed between the creep stiffness of mix- tures prepared with PG 58-28 and with PG 58-34 (the reference level for binder PG in this analysis) 4.2. High temperature level (PG low limit + 22°C) ‘Table 5 presents the correlation factors when only the high temperature level data is used Correlations larger than 0,088 (n = $16) are significant and are presented in bold. A significant positive correlation is observed between the size of the beam and the creep stiffness. Larger beam specimens have larger creep stiffness compared to smaller beams Itis also observed that specimens prepared with limestone are stiffer than specimens with granite, High positive correlation between the interaction of size and aggregate and stiff- ness is observed, indicating that mixtures prepared with limestone are stiffer when the size increases. ANOVA results are presented in Table 6. The variables that contain important infor- mation for the prediction of creep stiffness are: binder modification, size, interaction of size and aggregate, binder type, and time. From the high negative coefficient for binder modification, the mixtures prepared with unmodified binder are stiffer than mixtures pre- pared with modified binder, At this temperature level, each PG binder has significantly different creep stiffness curves as indicated by the p-values and the coefficients estimates in the ANOVA. Mixtures prepared with PG 58-34, PG 64-28, and PG 64-34 have higher creep stiffness than mixtures with PG 58-28 (the reference level for binder PG in this analysis). As expected, time is significant and its estimate indicates that as time increases, the creep stiffness decreases. The aggregate type and the interaction of size and time do not provide significant information for the prediction of the creep stiffness in the assumed linear model. ‘Table 5, Correlation factors for high temperature level. Creep stiffness Agaregate 0.158 Modification 0.081 Size 0.163 Size * Aggregate 0.235 Size * Time 0.523 Time 0.649 Table 6. ANOVA for high temperature level Variable Estimate Std. Error tvalue p-value Constant 4753.42 252.50 18.83, 0 Aggregate 292.34 268.46 1.09 0.2767 Modification 2198.67 164.57 13.36 0 Size 311.09 107.88, 2.88 0.0041 Size * Aggregate 478.97 124.90 3.84 0.0001 Size * Time 131 0.77 171 0.0880 Binder[64-28] 1084.92 162.06 6.70 0 Binder{58-34] 2562.60 229.04 119 0 Binder{64-34] 3317.50 20747 14.58 0 Time 13.08 1.65 792 0 3194.3. Intermediate temperature level (PG low limit + 10°C) The correlation factors for the intermediate temperature are presented in Table 7, Correlations larger than 0.068 (n = 864) are significant and are presented in bold. The results indicate that size does not have an effect on the ercep stiffness at the inter- mediate temperature level. This is indicated by the high p-value in the ANOVA presented in Table 8 The parameters that provide significant explanatory information for creep stiffness are: binder modification, binder PG, and time. Mixtures prepared with unmodified binder are stiffer than mixtures prepared with modified binder. Mixtures prepared with PG 58-34, PG 64-28, and PG 64-34 have higher creep stiffness than mixtures with PG 58-28 (reference level). The high p-values observed for the interaction terms indicate that they do not pro- vide significant information for the prediction of creep stiffness. The high correlation observed for the interaction term between size and time is due to the explanatory infor- mation carried by time. As observed in the ANOVA, when time is independently included in the linear regression then the interaction term between size and time becomes not significant. 4.4 Low temperature level (PG low limit -2°C) ‘The correlation factors for the low temperature level are presented in Table 9. Correlation factors larger than 0.088 (n = 522) are significant and are presented in bold. Contrary to what is expected at very low temperatures, the size of beam has a significant effect on the creep stiffness of the asphalt mixtures. Most likely, this is due to the difficul- ties associated with measuring the creep stiffness at very low temperatures of the 2x and 3x beams in the MTS. The small deflection values measured at this temperature increase the variability of the measured creep stiffness and, combined with the formation of layers of ice on the supports and around the extensometers, may produce the size effect observed in the analysis, Table 7. Correlation factors for intermediate temperature level. Creep stiffness ‘Aggregate 0.037 Modification 0.211 Size 0.004 Size * Agaregate 0.045 Size * Time 0.488 Time 0.560 ‘Table 8, ANOVA for intermediate temperature level Variable Estimate Std, Error tvalue p-value Constant 12905.50 346.80 37.21 0 Aggregate 78.87 358.16 0.22 0.8258 Modified 4196.73 214.26 19.59 0 Size 108.69 147.34 0.74 0.4609 Size * Aggregate 171.09 167.60 1.02 0.3076 Size * Time 0.04 1.03 0.04 0.9703 Binder{64-28] 1068.76 216.07 4.95 0 Binder{58-34] 3706.56 303.57 12.21 0 Binder{64-34] 5552.45, 307.72 18.04 0 Time 20.95 219 9.55 0 320Table 9, Correlation factors for low temperature level Creep stiffness Aggregate 0.136 Modified 0.067 Size 0.227 Size * Aggregate 0.043 Size * Time 0.280 Time 0.396 Table 10. ANOVA for low temperature level. Variable Estimate Std. Error tvalue p-value Constant 16682.20 564.07 29.58 0 Aggregate 661.92 606.35 1.09 0.2755 Modification 2964.93, 368.78, 8.04 0 Size 1144.53 243.19 4m 0 Size * Aggregate 134.53 285.61 0.87 0.6378 Size * Time 2.19 176 1.25 0.2123 Binder[64-28] 1655.54 369.44 4.48 0 Binder{58-34) 4926.49 518.08 951 0 Binder[64-34] 5918.43, 518.08 11.42 0 Time 12.43 3.73 3.33 0.0009 High negative correlation is observed between aggregate type and creep stiffness, indicating that mixtures prepared with granite are stiffer than mixtures with limestone. However, if a linear model is assumed to explain the creep stiffness of the mixtures then, the information provided by the aggregate is not significant as indicated by the high p-value in the ANOVA presented in Table 10. Time is significant as expected. It is important to note the reduction of the effect of loading time on the creep stiffness as the temperature decreases: ~0.396 for LT, -0.560 for IT, and -0.649 for HT, respectively, which is expected. The variables that are significant in the linear regression are: size, binder modification, binder type, and time. At this temperature, mixtures prepared with PG 64-34, PG 64-28, and PG 58-34 are stiffer than mixtures prepared with PG 58-28 (reference level). The large negative coefficient for binder modification indicates that mixtures with unmodified binder have significantly higher creep stiffness than mixtures with modified binder. The interaction terms of size and aggregate, and size and time do not provide significant information for the explanation of the creep stiffness. 5 CONCLUSIONS The following important conclusions could be drawn from this experimental study: + Creep stiffness of asphalt mixtures at low pavement service temperatures can be obtained by testing small beams. As the temperatures decreases, the mismatch between the stiffness of aggregates and of the binder (mastic) diminishes and the creep stiffness of asphalt mix- ture becomes less dependent on the size and distribution of aggregate particles # The analysis of the test results obtained at three temperature levels, high (HT), intemediate (IT), and low (LT) indicate that the effect of the beam size on the creep stiffness is negligi- ble only at IT (PG low limit + 10°C), + AUHT (PG low limit + 22°C), the difference between the stiffness of the aggregates and the asphalt binder (mastic) starts to become significant and the mechanical response of the mixture becomes dependent on the size of the aggregates. 321+ AtLT (PG low limit ~ 2°C), contrary to expectations, the size of the beam appears to be a significant factor with respect to mixtures creep stiffness. It is hypothesized that the small deflection values measured at this temperature, which increase the variability of the measured creep stiffness, combined with the formation of layers of ice on the supports and around the extensometers, may produce the size effect observed in the analysis. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ‘The support provided by NCHRP-IDEA 133 is gratefully acknowledged. The results and opinions presented do not necessarily reflect those of the sponsoring agencies. REFERENCES American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Standard T 322-03, 2005, Determining the Creep Compliance and Strength of Hot-Mix Asphalt (HMA) Using the Indi- rect Tensile Test Device, Standard Specifications for Transportation Materials and Methods of Sam- pling and Testing, 25th Edition Romero P, Masad E. 2001. Relationship between the representative volume element and mechanical properties of asphalt concrete, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, vol. 13(1): 77-84. Weissman S.L., Sackman JL, Harvey J, Long F. 1999, Selection of laboratory test specimen dimension for permanent deformation of asphalt concrete pavements, Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, Zofka, A., Marasteanu, M., Li, X., Clyne, Tl, McGraw, J. 2005. Simple method to obtain asphalt binders low temperature properties from asphalt mixtures properties, Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 80; 255-282. Zofka, A., Marasteanu, M., Turos, M. 2006, Investigation of Asphalt Mixture Creep Behavior Using Thin Beam Specimens, Proceedings of the International Conference FGM IX, Multiseale and Func tionally Graded Materials , Honolulu, October 15-18: 718-723. Zofka, A. 2007. Investigation of asphalt concrete creep behavior using 3-point bending test. Ph.D. dis- sertation, University of Minnesota. Zofka, A., Marasteanu, M., Turos, M. 2008, Determination of Asphalt Mixture Creep Compliance at Low Temperatures Using Thin Beams Specimens. CD Proceedings of the 87th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Paper No. 08-2361. Zofka, A, Marastcanu, M., Turos, M. 2008, Investigation of asphalt mixture creep compliance at low temperatures", Road Materials and Pavement Design, Vol. 9: 269-286, 322