Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PAVEMENT DESIGN
Xavier CARBONNEAU
Head of the Asphalt mixes
Department 1
COLAS CST
(France)
of High Modulus Asphalt (HMA)
Yann LEFEUVRE
Head of the Structural
and Road Base Asphalt (RBA)
Design Department
COLAS Expertise
and Documentation Centre
(France)
and a Proposal for a Compensation Principle
It is becoming increasingly frequent to perform full mix design
studies which include the determination of fundamental
characteristics such as the modulus and fatigue strength as
defined in the standard NF EN 13108-1 [1]. Historically, these
have been known as level 4 studies. The Colas Group possesses
a large database which provides the basis for a preliminary
detailed analysis dealing essentially the importance of the
nature of the binder and design possibilities. We shall begin
by describing recent changes in standards, and the concept of
critical distance, which is essential when the results from
different laboratories are compared. We shall then present
our results for two major families of products, namely class 2 high
Colas
Colas
For the class 4 RBAs, our population 70
is comparable with LCPC’s: 31 for the LCPC 9,000 10,000 11,000 12,000 13,000 14,000 15,000
and 38 for Colas. Modulus at 15°C (MPa)
The mean Epsilon 6 values for the 2 populations Figure 1
are similar: 99µstrain for the LCPC Plot of the modulus and fatigue values for the class 4 RBAs available in the Colas
and 101 for the CST, with standard deviations database for the period 2003-2008
[5,48 to 5,66]
160 [5,21 to 5,48]
therefore have a numerical value for the critical distance
150
as defined in NF ISO 5725-6 [11]. Two results
cannot be considered as being different
140
if the difference between them, in absolute terms,
130
is less than this critical distance. This is
120
a very important point. It assumes that when
110
a comparison is made between the experimental values
100 obtained from two laboratories the measurements
90 have been performed with the same batches
Colas
Colas
compliant for the modulus and the fatigue strength, 80
10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000 22,000
i.e. 14,000MPa and 130µstrain
from both the experimental results, assuming that Modulus at 15°C (MPa)
the difference between the individual values is Figure 5
Combined presentation of the modulus and fatigue strength results according to
the maximum possible, i.e. the reproducibility limit, binder source
the minimum results must be 15,370MPa
and 134µstrain. A performance requirement These areas do not have precise boundaries,
of this type exceeds the characteristics but they do reveal that some binders
recommended by the standard, have a tendency to produce better modulus
with a resulting increase in the cost or fatigue results. It is thus clearly apparent
of the proposed products increases. that with the binder from source A,
the desired modulus is more often obtained,
The importance but attaining the desired fatigue strength may be
of the nature of the binders less certain. In contrast, the binder from source B
tends to produce mixes which are noncompliant
As has been stated above, the studied mix designs with regard to their modulus, but with a fatigue
correspond to all the studies that have been strength which is frequently higher than 140µstrain.
conducted in the Colas Group Scientific On the other hand, with some binders, which give
and Technical Campus and therefore include variations very poor fatigue strength results, it is
in aggregate, granular skeleton, and the nature impossible to correct this shortcoming by a reasonable
and proportion of the binder. Those working increase in the binder content of the mixes.
in the field will understand how difficult it is
to obtain accurate data on variations Last, we can also see that the small number
of parameters such as binder content of mix designs shown on Figure 5 that contain
and/or density. It is not difficult to understand recycled asphalt exhibit very satisfactory performance,
why there have been few studies even if they have been made with a binder
that are as comprehensive as those performed which is softer than 10/20 pen, for example 20/30 pen.
in the framework of the LCPC This graph clearly shows the crucial importance
multiannual test campaigns, which gave rise of the nature of the binder used in the mix design
to the curves proposed by Moutier [12]. study, in terms of its possible implications >>>
Compensation
between the modulus and fatigue
The first stage when determining the allowable limits is to convert the cumulative number
of HGVs during the service life, TC, into an equivalent number of 13 tonne reference axle
loads (the French maximum axle load), NE. The relationship between the two is written
NE = CAM x TC where CAM is the mean aggressiveness coefficient of the traffic
which is generally obtained from design manuals and which depends on the type of structure
and the type of HGV making up the traffic. As an example, its default value for urban service
roads is 0.1 and for roads on the major network 0.8 [15].
TC620 / PF2 TC420 / PF4 The choice of these two extreme pavement cases
0.08m semi-coarse 0.06m semi-coarse allows us to take in all the customary road
asphaltic concrete asphaltic concrete thicknesses for HMA2 and RBA4.
Consequently, it will be possible to apply
0.11m RBA4 0.09m RBA4
our conclusions to all normal road structures.
0.11m RBA4
Subgrade class PF4
Subgrade class PF2 Design hypotheses
The hypotheses (Table 1) comply with
Table 3 the 1998 LCPC-SETRA catalogue [15]
Pavement structures designed for Class-4 asphalt treated roadbase aggregate
mentioned above, and relate to two types
of structure, one thick and the other thin,
Poisson
Material Modulus (MPa) ε6 with the following pairs of traffic class
coefficient
and subgrade class:
Thin and very thin 5,400 Does not work
• thick structure for heavy traffic: TC620 / PF2
asphaltic concrete in tension 0.35
• thin structure for low traffic: TC420 / PF4
HMA2 (standard values) 14,000 130×10 -6 0.35 The reference HMA2 structures
RBA4 (standard values) 11,000 100×10-6 0.35 from the catalogue [15] are as follows (Table 2).
The RBA4 reference structures obtained
Subgrade class PF2 50 / 0.35
with the hypotheses in [15] are as follows (Table 3)
Subgrade class PF4 200 / 0.35 (the surfacing layers have been selected
N.B.: the modulus for the mix is the value obtained at 15°C/10Hz
arbitrarily by analogy with the RBA3 structures
in the catalogue).
Table 4 The mechanical characteristics of the materials
Mechanical properties of materials are given in the Table 4.
Epsilon6 (μstrain)
160 TC6-20 / PF2
TC620 /PF2 and TC420 /PF4, the Figures 6 and 7 show 150 TC4-20 / PF4
the results for variations in the modulus 140
at 15°C/10Hz of between 10,000 MPa 130
and 20,000MPa for the HMA2s 120
110
Colas
and between 9,000 and 14,000MPa
100
for the RBA4s. The associated changes in ε6 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000
were between approximately 85 and 160×10-6.
E at 15ºC/10 Hz (MPa)
The curves show the boundary N.B.: the TC420 / PF4 curve does not show modulus values below 10,500MPa
as with these it is no longer to possible comply with the design criterion for deformation
between the permitted values of the subgrade whatever the value of ε6.
for the (E ; ε6) pair in order for the allowable
design limit (in this case Figure 6
Plot in the modulus-fatigue plane of the compensation curves for a class 2 HMA
the horizontal deformation at the base
of the roadbase) for the HMA2,
or the RBA4 always to be met. Compensation curves for RBA4
Consequently, the area below the curve
120
corresponds to prohibited values for this pair.
Epsilon6 (μstrain)
Colas
the limit values of compensation E/ε6 may be 80
9,000 10,000 11,000 12,000 13,000 14,000
approximated by the following equation:
E at 15ºC/10 Hz (MPa)
log(ε6) + αlog(E) = A Figure 7
Plot in the modulus-fatigue plane of the compensation curves for a class 4 RBA
where A is a constant with a different value
depending of the asphalt mix type, AHMA2
for HMA 2 and AGB4 for RB4. Additional impact of variations
• The maximum range of ε6 values in the fatigue slope
on the compensation curves (Figures 6 and 7)
is low, which provides the equations The laboratory results show that in addition to
with their validity: variations in E and ε6, another parameter
- for HMA2 structures: 4.5×10-6 at 10,000MPa which characterizes the fatigue of these materials,
and 3.4×10-6 at 20,000MPa, the fatigue slope denoted by b, sometimes takes
- for RBA4 structures: 3.6×10-6 at 9,000MPa on values which may differ from the standard value
and 3.2×10-6 at 14,000 MPa. of -1/5 given in the design manuals [15,16]
• This simplification could be used to and which was used to obtain
determine approximate allowable values the above compensation curve.
which are then refined by applying
full design methods. In order to assess how this variation affects
• The Figure 6 for TC420 /PF4 shows a zone the compensation curves that have been plotted
(E < 10,500MPa) where even if the design above, we shall conduct a sensitivity study
criterion for the HMA is respected, for standard structures using HMA2
the second design criterion related to for fatigue slope values b between -1/4 and -1/9
the subgrade (i.e. the vertical deformation which are the extreme values measured
at its top) is not. In this case, during the tests.
no value of ε6 is able to compensate
for the loss in modulus from the strict point Thus, for a given structure and traffic level,
of view of the design rules. This type of result applying the equation for the allowable limit εt,adm
is generally obtained for thin structures. for the mix and the calculation results >>>
150 b = -1/5
b’ = -1/7
population of noncompliant results, which proves
140
130 that the hypothesis of compensation we have made
120 here, which is frequently practiced
110 in individual cases, is valid. It is difficult to see
100
90 how it could be otherwise, as none of the hypotheses
Colas
120
Colas
Colas
70 80
9,000 10,000 11,000 12,000 13,000 14,000 15,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000 22,000
Figure 9 Figure 10
Graph showing the curves that delimit the performance domain Graph showing the curves that delimit the performance domain that has been
that has been validated by compensation for the class 4 RBAs validated by compensation for the class 2 HMAs
This article presents a highly representative survey [7] LPC Bituminous Mixtures design Guide CR 39A December 2007, under the
supervision of J.L. Delorme, C. de la Roche, L. Wendling
of the performance levels which are
[8] « Base de données fatigue » Présentation de Mr S. Moreira à l’occa-
frequently measured for class 2 HMAs and class 4 RBAs. sion des journées technique du LCPC « Durabilité structurelle des chaus-
The practice of regularly performing level 4 sées : Pathologie et entretien » le 9 Septembre 2008.
mix design studies means that we now have [9] J.-F. Corté, J.-L. Gourdon, J.-L. Delorme, « Les expériences d’exactitude
dans le domaine des essais relatifs aux chaussées », Revue générale des routes
enough experience to see what performance et des aérodromes (RGRA), n° 793, mars 2001, pp 26-30
differences result from the characteristics [10] C. de La Roche, « Essai de fatigue sur enrobés bitumineux : Résultats de
of the binders that are used. l’expérience d’exactitude », Revue générale des routes et des aérodromes
(RGRA), n° 793, mars 2001, pp 31-34
These studies also show that in the case
[11] NF ISO 5725-6 Application of statistics Accuracy ( trueness and precision)
of HMAs, some binders tend to provide of measurement methods and results Part 6 Use in practice of accuracy values
either good modulus performance or good fatigue [12] F. Moutier « Etude statistique de l’effet de la composition des enrobés
performance. Based on this observation, bitumineux sur leur comportement en fatigue et leur module complexe »
Bulletin de Liaison des LCPC N° 172, p 34-41, mars avril 1998
the possibility of compensation
[13] Guide technique “Utilisation des normes enrobes à chaud”,
between the measured mechanical characteristics janvier 2008, édité par le Setra
of the mixes, which is already done occasionally, [14] J.L. Delorme, C. De La Roche, L. Wendling, « Fatigue resistance of bituminous
is described in an explicit and general manner. mixes : variability analysis in the pavement and correspondence with the type
testing » Eurasphalt Eurobitume, Copenhague 2007
This possibility should be exploited
[15] Guide Technique “Conception et dimensionnement des structures de
in order to be able to use locally available binders. chaussée”, décembre 1994, édité par LCPC-SETRA
It nevertheless requires a full determination [16] Manuel « Catalogue des structures types de chaussées neuves »,
of the modulus and fatigue characteristics. édition 1998 LCPC-SETRA