Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Overview
The soundness test repeatedly submerges an aggregate sample in a sodium sulfate or magnesium
sulfate solution. This process causes salt crystals to form in the aggregate’s water permeable pores.
The formation of these crystals creates internal forces that apply pressure on aggregate pores and
tend to break the aggregate (Figure 1). After a specified number of submerging and drying
repetitions, the aggregate is sieved to determine the percent loss of material.
Figure 1: Aggregate before (top) & after (bottom) the soundness test.
The formation of salt crystals is supposed to mimic the formation of ice crystals in the field and
could therefore be used as a surrogate to predict an aggregate’s freeze-thaw performance.
The standard soundness test is:
Background
There are several tests for aggregate soundness used in the U.S. These tests, described in
descending order of popularity, are briefly described here.
This test, described in the Test Description section, subjects aggregate samples to repeated
immersion in either sodium sulfate or magnesium sulfate solution. Salt crystals that form during
this test are intended to mimic ice crystals formed in the normal water freeze-thaw process in the
field. Wu, Parker and Kandhal (1998[1]) report that just over half of the states have a sodium sulfate
soundness requirement, while about one-fifth have a magnesium sulfate soundness requirement.
In general, sulfate soundness tests can serve as a useful first evaluation of a particular aggregate
or as a confirming test for an aggregate with a long test and performance record. However, issues
with applicability, variability and relation to actual performance prevent the test from being
meaningful beyond this:
Applicability. While aggregates used in unbound base courses usually contain small
amounts of water (usually 0.1 to 3 percent by weight), aggregates used in HMA usually do
not contain appreciable water because they are dried during production and are, if
incorporated in a proper HMA mix design, coated with a waterproofing film of asphalt
binder (Roberts et al., 1996[2]). Therefore, while freezing and thawing conditions may be
important to unbound base course aggregate, they may not be of concern to aggregate used
in HMA. There is some question as to whether or not soundness tests are applicable to
HMA. Despite this, they seem to be at least somewhat capable of differentiating between
poor performing and well performing HMA pavement aggregate (Wu, Parker and Kandhal,
1998[1]).
Variability. Testing variability is poor for both the sodium and magnesium sulfate tests (it
is worse for the sodium sulfate test). The coefficient of variation for the sodium sulfate
soundness test is 41% for tests done in different laboratories meaning that it is unlikely two
different laboratories will closely agree on test results. The implication is that soundness
testing should be done in one central laboratory where close control over testing elements
like temperature, timing controls, types of containers and sieving methods can be
maintained (Meininger, 2002).
Relation to HMA Pavement Performance. The sodium and magnesium sulfate tests have
been widely criticized and many reports exist which describe their inability to accurately
predict field performance for specific aggregates (Roberts, et al., 1996[2]). For instance,
some aggregates containing carbonates of calcium or magnesium are chemically attacked
by the sulfate solution resulting in erroneously high measured losses (Meininger, 2002).
This test, specified in AASHTO T 103, is similar to the sulfate soundess tests, however it uses
actual freeze-thaw cycles with water or a weak ethyl alcohol – water solution. Wu, Parker and
Kandhal (1998[1]) report that about 10 percent of states have a freeze-thaw soundness requirement.
This test, specified in AASHTO T 210, measures the relative resistance of an aggregate to produce
detrimental clay-like fines when subjected to mechanical methods of degradation (AASHTO,
2000b[4]). It is not widely used; its chief use has been by western states to identify weathered basalt
containing interstitial montmorillonite, which will not maintain strength when used as unbound
aggregate base (Wu, Parker and Kandhal, 1998[1]).
Test Description
The following is a brief summary of the test. It is not a complete procedure and should not be used
to perform the test. The complete test procedure can be found in:
AASHTO T 104 and ASTM C 88: Soundness of Aggregate by Use of Sodium Sulfate or
Magnesium Sulfate
Summary
About 5 days. Each cycle involves between 16 and 18 hours of submergence in the sulfate solution
followed by 4 or more hours of drying. Therefore, about one cycle can be done per day with a
typical number of cycles being 5.
Basic Procedure
1. Prepare the sulfate solution. When used, the sodium sulfate solution’s specific gravity
should be between 1.154 to 1.171 and the magnesium sulfate solution’s specific gravity
should be between 1.297 and 1.306.
[warning]Either sodium sulfate or or magnesium sulfate can be used however, results from the two
solutions will be significantly different.
NOTE: If the sample contains less than 5 percent of any of the above sizes then that size will not
be tested.
o Thoroughly wash the sample on a No. 50 (0.300 mm) sieve and dry it in an oven at
230°F (110°C).
o Separate the different sizes using a nest of sieves. Sieve each size individually until
no more material passes through the sieve.
o Obtain 100 g of each size, record the weight, and place in separate containers for
the test (the aggregate can be placed in 3 to 5 layers of cheesecloth).
3. Prepare the coarse aggregate.
NOTE: If the sample contains less than 5 percent of any of the above sizes then that size will not
be tested.
1.
Thoroughly wash the sample on a No. 50 (0.300 mm) sieve (Figure 4) and
dry it in an oven at 230°F (110°C).
4. Place each sample in separate containers for the test (the aggregate can be placed in 3 to 5
layers of cheesecloth)
5. Immerse the samples in the prepared solution of sodium sulfate or magnesium sulfate for
16 to 18 hours. Cover the containers to reduce evaporation and prevent contamination and
maintain the temperature between 20.3 to 21.9°C for the immersion period
6. Remove the samples and allow them to drain for 15 minutes.
7. Place the samples into an oven set at 230°F (110°C).
8. Allow the samples to dry until the change in mass is less than 0.1 percent over a 4hour
period (the weight is checked on four hour intervals without letting the sample cool).
9. After the samples reach constant mass allow the samples to cool to 68 to 77°F (20 to 25°C);
cooling may be aided by the use of an air conditioner or fan.
10. Repeat the immersion process (steps 4 through 8) until the specified number of cycles is
obtained (five cycles are normally performed).
11. After the final cycle is complete and the sample has cooled, wash the sample.
Do not impact or abrade the sample while washing because this could break particles and cause
inaccurate results.
12. Check the thoroughness of washing by obtaining a sample of rinse water after it has passed
through the samples and adding 0.2 M barium chloride. If the sample water becomes
cloudy when the barium chloride is added, then continue to wash the sample.
Many water supplies will react with barium chloride even before washing the sample; in these
cases the barium chloride check will not work and other analytical methods should be used to
assure thorough washing.
13. After washing is complete, dry each fraction of the sample to a constant mass in an oven
at 230°F (110°C).
14. Examine the fine aggregate.
o Sieve the fine aggregate over the same sieve on which it was retained before the
test and in the same method as was used in preparing the test samples
o Determine the mass of the material retained on each sieve.
o The difference between the amount retained at the end of the test and the initial
amount of the samples is the loss in the test and is expressed as a percentage of the
initial mass.
15. Examine the coarse aggregate.
o Use Table 2 to determine which sieve to use to sieve the material when determining
loss.
o Sieve the coarse material by hand with agitation sufficient only to assure that all
undersize material passes the designated sieve.
Do not try to break up any particles and do not manipulate in a way to force the particles to pass
the sieve.
o Determine the mass of the material retained on the sieve.
o The difference between the amount retained at the end of the test and the initial
amount of the samples is the loss in the test and is expressed as a percentage of the
initial mass (this is the quantitative examination).
o For samples coarser than 0.75 inches (19.0 mm), separate the particles of each test
sample into groups according to the action produced by the test (i.e. disintegration,
splitting, crumbling, cracking, flaking, etc). Record the number of particles
showing each type of distress (this is the qualitative examination).
Results
Parameters Measured
The percentage loss by weight for each sample fraction. For material that was coarser than 0.75
inches (19 mm) before test, the number of particles in each fraction before test and the number of
particles affected, classified as to number disintegrating, splitting, crumbling, cracking and flaking
is also measured. Additionally:
For samples containing significant amounts of both fine and coarse materials, get separate
results for the fine and coarse material as if they were from separate supplies.
For fine material with more than 90 percent passing the 0.375 inch (9.5 mm) sieve, assume
sizes finer than the No. 50 (0.300 mm) sieve to have zero percent loss and sizes coarser
than the 0.375 inch (9.5 mm) to have the same loss as the next smaller size for which test
data are available.
For coarse material with less then 10 percent passing the No. 4 (4.75 mm) sieve, assume
sizes finer than the No. 4 (4.75 mm) sieve to have the same loss as the next larger size for
which test data is available.
For any size that was not tested due to the material containing less than 5 percent of that
size, consider the loss to be the average of the next smaller and the next larger size, or if
one of these sizes is not available, consider the loss to be equal to the next larger or next
smaller size, whichever is available.
Specifications
Note 1 Percent loss specifications vary from agency to agency but typically specify a number of
cycles (most often 5) and a maximum percent loss (e.g., 12 percent). For example, ASTM D 692,
Coarse Aggregate for Bituminous Paving Mixtures, specifies 5 cycles and a maximum percent loss
of 12 percent when the sodium sulfate is used or 18 percent when the magnesium sulfate is used.
Typical Values
Typical values depend upon the type of soundness test used. The sodium sulfate loss is typically
between about 0 and 15 percent, while the magnesium sulfate loss is typically between about 0
and 30 percent. For a particular aggregate sample, the sodium sulfate loss will tend to be less than
the magnesium sulfate loss by 0 to 20 percent with 5 to 10 percent being most typical.
For each aggregate size reported, determine the mass loss (in percent) using the following
equation:
Where:
A weighted average (the by mass) of each aggregate size tested should be calculated and reported
as the overall mass loss of
Footnotes
1. Wu, Y.; Parker, F. and Kandhal, K. (1998). Aggregate Toughness/Abrasion Resistance and
Durability/Soundness Tests Related to Asphalt Concrete Performance in
Pavements. NCAT Report 98-4. National Center for Asphalt Technology. Auburn,
AL.http://www.eng.auburn.edu/center/ncat/reports/rep98-4.pdf. Accessed 23 June 2004.↵
2. Roberts, F.L.; Kandhal, P.S.; Brown, E.R.; Lee, D.Y. and Kennedy, T.W. (1996). Hot Mix
Asphalt Materials, Mixture Design, and Construction. National Asphalt Pavement
Association Education Foundation. Lanham, MD.↵
3. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
(2000b). Standard Specifications for Transportation Materials and Methods of Sampling
and Testing, Twentieth Edition: Part II – Tests. American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials. Washington, D.C.↵