This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
moisture damage. Water damage can be understood as a loss of cohesion in the mixture or loss of adhesion between the bitumen and aggregate interface, that is stripping. The report discuss one of the water sensitivity test (AASHTO T-283) carried out to evaluate moisture sensitivity of the bituminous mix.
Objectives: The test is done to find out the following objectives Evaluation of Bituminous mix moisture sensitivity, dividing into two categories: visual inspection test and mechanical test. Indirect Tensile Strength (IDT) of bituminous mix of dry and wet sample. IDT ratio (wet strength/dry strength) or Tensile Strength Ratio (TSR). Prediction of stripping susceptibility of bituminous mix.
Introduction: Longevity of bituminous pavements is seriously affected due to the presence of moisture in the pavement. Moisture sensitivity of bituminous mixtures generally called stripping is a major form of distress in asphalt concrete pavement. Many factors (Ref fig 1) are involved in moisture sensitivity of bituminous mix such as characteristics of the asphalt binder and the aggregate and environmental effects during and after construction, and the use of anti-stripping additives, so the test method are required to closely simulate the real field condition to reflect these variables. Moisture sensitivity of bituminous mixtures is a complex phenomenon but it can be explained as the loss of adhesive bond between the binder and the aggregate or by a softening of the cohesive bonds within the binder, which happens due to loading under traffic in the presence of moisture.
Degree of acidity
Type of mineral
Source of aggregate
Figure 1a : Showing the various factors affecting moisture sensitivity of bituminous mix.
Aggregate physical charecteristics Angularit y Surface roughness Surface area Gradation Pourosity Permeabil ity Dust & clay content Moisture content Resistanc e to degradati on
Literature Review: Even tho ough moistur sensitivity of bitumino mixtures has been re re y ous s esearched for decades. it has t proven to be very dif o fficult to con nfidently predict this typ e of distress in the labor ratory becaus of se factors in nvolved. he Since stri ipping is usu ually difficul to identify from surfac examinati alone the potential fo lt y ce ion e or moisture sensitivity in bituminou mix are ev i us valuated thro ough laborat tory testing.Figure 1b : Showing th various fac he ctors affecting moisture sen g nsitivity of bi ituminous mix x. Asphalt Envion nmental Chemi ical compos sition Hardness Source and e refining process Temperature Freezethaw cycle Damp pness and pave ement age Figure 1d Showing the various factors affecti moisture sensitivity of bituminous mix under asphalt d. which can be detected only after ope w ening the pa avement and observing th material. .e: f ing f and enviro onment class. tress general begins at the bottom of a bitumin lly t nous layer an progresse nd es upward. It can be viewed as a failure of the bond e ding of the b binder to the aggregate o a e or failure within the bin w nder itself (re fig3) due to the action of loading u ef t n under traffic in the prese c ence of moistu This dist ure. Figure 2 : Affect of moisture in bitumen. m b Tests can be put into three catego n ories: . Mixture d design & con nst Air void & d compact tion Perm miability & dr rainage Anti-str ripping additi ives Film thicknes ss he g Figure 1c : Showing th various factors affecting moisture y r c sensitivity of bituminous mix under design and const.
Figure 3 a. Magn nitude and duration of vacuum (Ref fig 3a) applied determines the l evel of satur ( a ration. 3. Water–vapor interaction with the asph filler ma W w halt astic and lar rger aggregat interfaces te s (a adhesion fail lure based on surface en n nergy theory) ). Asphalt remo by water in the mixt A oval r ture at mode erate to high temperature es (e emulsificatio on). s 3. d 2. and thermal shock. Tun nicliff (8) usi the chem ing mical reaction theory of a n adhesion exp plained that stripping was the disp g placement of the asphalt binder film from the ag t m ggregate surf face. Mechanical la M aboratory tes sting: The co ompacted m mixture is con nditioned in a manner th is hat in ntended to si imulate the real situation A compari r n. fr e reeze-thaw. thermal expansion and contraction p w c produced by ice formatio temperat y on. He noticed the behavior of water in the pore stru ucture of a bituminous m mixture loade by heavy traffic. ture cy ycling above freezing. trie to replica field relat condition in the labo ed ate ted ns oratory. 4. Lottman (30. ison of the p physical cond ditions such as st trength or resilient modu of the co ulus onditioned a uncondit and tioned sampl is used to les o ev valuate the moisture sen m nsitivity. or a combination of these fa n actors (m mechanical disruption). The developm of pore water pressure in the m T ment mixture voids due to the r s repetition of f wheel-loads. Indi irect Tensile Test and/or Modulus T e r Test–ASTM D 4867. Loaded whee testing: IT tries to simu or riginal devel loped for rut tting test but have been f t found that it provides m t more accurate ely ev valuate mois sture sensitiv when pe vity erformed on saturated m mixtures. Most rese earchers con nsider that moisture dam m mage is more due to the a adhesive mod of failure than de e cohesive mode. Water interac W ction with cla minerals in the aggreg fines (a ay gate adhesion fail lure based on n ch hemical reac ction). It has been found that. B n a Boiling Wate Test–ASTM D 3625 er 2.b : Showin the effect of vacuum on saturation & air void classificatio ng t n d on. Care needs to be take in the deg of satura en gree ation produc in the sam ced mple. AASHT T 283 TO L el ulates traffic loading in t laborator Test was c the ry. The criteria of failure ar decided by visual r fic re y id dentification of stripped (uncoated) aggregate. s d increasin the magnitude of vacu ng uum results in highly inc i creased level of saturati and ls ion . 31). He ed suggested some of th major moi d he isture damag mechanism (26): ge ms 1.1. Visual inspec V ction testing: The loose mixture is im : m mmersed in w water at room temperatu or m ure boiling water for a specif duration.
b m o Water bath ca W apable of ma aintaining 60 Celsius tem 0 mperature. In order to sim n mulate field condition saturation should be su which will be produc under the atmospheric pressure n s uch ce c condition in the field Water temp n d. Procedure: Fi igure 4: Gener layout of e ral experiment 1. 4. on e 5. After th Air void (VA) is fo hat d ound out. perature dur ring vacuum saturation a plays an important r m also n role and shou ideally sim uld mulate field conditions. 6. ID testing ap DT pparatus. rease the tem mperature up to 110° Cel p lsius for 2 ho our. ous e. Apparat used: Fo tus ollowing are the apparatu which are used for the test. After that IDT test is conducted The maxim d. The sa amples are divided into two groups (one group i for dry tes and anothe for wet test) so d t ( is st er that their average VA is nearly eq r A qual. 3. Th VA shou be nearly about 7% (The he uld y Determin calculatio of VA is shown table 2a and 2b). Vacuum cont V tainer for ext tracting air bubbles from sample. Measuring cy M ylinder.increasin the duratio of vacuum slightly in ng on m ncrease the sa aturation. The mix is then ke at room temperature for 2 hour. Six sa amples are then prepared with bitu umen conten of 5. o Freezer that can maintain almost -18 Celsius tem c n mperature. For dr test the three samples are maintain at 25o C ry ned Celsius temp perature for 2 hour. mum applied load is note down.5% and by giv nt ving 65 blow for w Compact tion on each face. Polythene bag and plastic film for pac g c cking the sam mple. and then kep at 60o Celsius temper m ept t rature for 16 ho then incr our. After that maxim mum theoretical density (Gmm) and bulk densi (Gmb) of each samp is y d ity f ple ned. Chose the gradat e tion of aggr regate and percentage of bitumen (here we use Semi D n Dense Bitumino Concrete For this th gradation of aggregate is shown in table 1). us e e Equipment fo preparation of samples E or s. he e n pt 2. Oven thermostatically con O ntrolled up to 176o Celsi temperat t ius ture. d ed .
5 1076.5 500 503 500.666 2. After that the samples are removed from freeze and kept in water bath maintaining 60o Celsius temperature for 24 hour.200 100. After that it is packed in polythene packet and sealed it and kept in freeze maintaining -18o Celsius temperature.469 2.500 Bitumen (5.5 BOTTLE+ SAMPLE+ WATER (D) (gm) 1077.5 500.5 100 38.278 1.750 43.5 1014.000 0.5 1014.500 104.820 2.500 9.180 22. The cracked specimens are inspected for Stripping susceptibility.500 8.300 14.5 1014. Then these are kept at temperature 25o Celsius temperature for 2 hour.5 573.500 95.0 1076. After that the IDT test is carried out.425 4.5 E-B (G) (gm) 541 541 541 541 541 541 Gmm (W/GF) 2.568 Total Aggregate content 1228.500 67. OF WEIGHT SAMPLE OF WITHOUT SAMPLE AIR VOID (W) (G-F) (gm) (gm) 37.5 VOL.500 104.423 Dust 0.000 61.597 1 2 3 4 5 6 .5 473. There the samples are kept for 16 hours.360 31.5 473.565 0.5 573. For wet test the three samples are first kept in vacuum container (contained water) for 10 minutes to reduce the air bubbles inside the samples.5 1074.5 100 40.5 473.5 1014. 9.5 573.5 BOTTLE + SAMPLE (C) (gm) 573.469 2.5 100 41 100 38 100 40.0 BOTTLE+ WATER (E) (gm) 1014. Table 1: Gradation of aggregate and bitumen content Sieve size(mm) %passing % of Retain Wt of Aggregate.5 100 Sr No D-C (F) (gm) 503.5 1014.075 5.000 5.5 573.000 52.5 502.0 1073.423 0.5 473.500 Table 2a: Calculation of Gmm (all weights in gm) BLANK BOTTLE (B) (gm) 473.5 573.000 5.000 8.500 141.631 2.7.0 1074.439 2. 10.000 110.5%) 71. Then the samples are taken out the container and kept in water at room temperature for 10 minutes. in gm 13.5 473.500 11.000 0.000 9. 8.000 638.
0 1135.5 BOTTLE+ SAMPLE (C) 673.308904 6.826783 7.5 462.439 2.5 543.5 673.5 543.7 6.454 Table 3a: Calculation of VA (all weights in gm) WEIGHT OF SAMPLE (W) (gm) 1174.774 7.4 6.0 1136.6 6.402961 Table 3b: Calculation of VA for new samples (all weights in gm) Dry wt of sample (gm) 1170 1170 1158.6 6. 1 2 3 4 2.3 H4 (cm) 5.285 2.448772 2.575 6.5 1175.5 1183.5 673.5 6.5 6.469 2.436 Results: .8 6 H2 (cm) 6. (cm) 10 10 10 10 10 10 H1 (cm) 6 6.469136 2.471763 2.5 462 543.5 Submerge wt of sample (gm) 666 665 662 668 Saturated wt of sample (gm) 1180 1177 1171.451 6.5 1185.55 6.4005 514.5 473.2 6.1 AVG.125 6.274 2.1 6.5 2.946675 7.597403 7.439 2.300573 2.273429 2.5 6.469 2.125 VOLUME OF SAMPLE (V) (cc) 475.5 1174 1178 1180.1 6.Table 2b: Calculation of Gmm for new samples (all weights in gm) VOLUME OF WEIGHT SAMPLE OF WITHOUT SAMPLE AIR VOID (G-F) 82 200 81 200 82 200 81. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Gmb (W/V) 2.5 473.0575 Sr NO.5 543.4005 481.5 473.0575 516.405118 Gmm VA (%) 2.439024 2.5 BOTTLE+SAM PLE+WATER (D) 1135.631579 2.7 6. H (cm) 6.5 673.439 2.0 1135.5 BOTTLE +WATE R (E) 1017 1017 1017 1017 D-C (F) E-B (G) Gmm 1 2 3 4 461.469136 2.271 2.167 516.673 7.4 6.2 6.1 6.575 6.1 6.1 H3 (cm) 6.9 6.276 2.5 6.5 Gmb Gmm VA(%) Sr no.439 2.05 6.5 200 Sr No BLANK BOTTLE (B) 473.666667 2.286016 2.789401 6.454 6.437 481.5 1157 Height of sample (H) DIA.6 6.416337 6.5 461.
673 8300 65.9 1175.078 (SL = SL NO.5 2.449 2.301 2.274 2.5 1174.271 2.472 2.451 7700 9 10 Freeze-Thawed Samples 100 100 64.Gmb/Gmm) × 100 % The samples are divided as per following Dry sample group: SL1.75 1180.469 7.In above the VA is calculated as VA = (1.4 1170 2.597 7.285 2.469 7.2 1170 2.632 6. (gm) Bulk sp gr Max Sp gr % Air Voids Loads.789 9200 65.276 2.947 9200 65. SL5 and SL6 with average VA 7. in the above table) Tensile strength is calculated as St = (2000×P)/ (3.25 1178 2.403 8800 Dry Samples 100 100 65. St= Tensile strength in kpa P= Maximum load in N t= Specimen thickness in mm D= Specimen diameter in mm The IDT ratio or TSR is calculated as TSR= (Sum of tensile strength of wet samples)/ (Sum of tensile strength of dry Samples) --(3) --(1) Table 4: Calculation of TSR Sample identification Parameters Diameter(mm) Thickness (mm) Dry Mass in Air.774 7500 65.469 6.5 1183.5 2. N 1 2 4 3 5 6 7 8 D t A Gmb Gmm Pa P Dry Samples 100 100 100 60. SL2 and SL4 with average VA 7.273 2.5 2.5 2.128 Wet sample group: SL3.416 10000 Freeze-Thawed Samples 100 100 100 61.667 7.5 2.25 1157 2.405 2.1416×t×D) --(2) Where.827 8900 61.75 1174 2.436 6800 .9 1158.439 6.454 7.286 2.439 6.309 9500 65.439 6.
95 736. State of the Art Report on Moisture Sensitivity Test Methods for Bituminous Pavement Materials.93 which is less than 1. AASHTO T-283 “Standard Test Method for Effect of Moisture on Asphalt Concrete Paving Mixtures”. TSR value is 0. Effect of asphalt film thickness on the moisture sensitivity characteristics of hot-mix asphalt. 4. Vacuum pressure and duration may dictate level of saturation (Ref fig 3a). the air voids that are not accessible to water at atmospheric pressure and the air voids that are waterpermeable at atmospheric pressure. this may be the reason of difference in the strength of the new and the old samples. 3. High vacuum pressure may itself damage the samples. 3. 2.AIREY. 4.65 807. Lowa Highway Research Board. .0 (Ref table 3). Evaluation of hot mix asphalt moisture sensitivity using Nottingam asphalt test equipment.39 751.00 Yes (2%) Yes Yes (1%) (3%) 0. In sample number 8 (Ref table 3) stripping was not visible. The test doesn’t consider the traffic condition under the saturation condition over the sample and hence may not stimulate the field condition accurately.78 Yes (2%) 968. 2.02 657. Instead the method takes the ratio of indirect tensile strength of conditioned and unconditioned samples (eq3). Burak Sengoz and Emine Aga. other test may be used depending upon the suitability. The laboratory test takes a longer time and hence is time consuming.CHOI.24 Yes (2%) 956. G.934564576 Yes (2%) Yes (2%) Yes (1%) Conclusion: 1. indicates the effect of moisture conditioning and the disturbance given to the sample which reduce the indirect tensile strength. The new samples tested where given only 60 blows on each face to reduce the air voids. Y. compare to 65 blows to the old samples. 6. Air void distribution in bituminous mix can be separated into two components.65 Yes (3%) 890. References: 1.Dry Strength (kPa) Wet Strength (kPa) Cracked/Brok en Aggregate? TSR S1 S2 999. Use of vacuum pressure for moisture saturation conditioning could play very notoriously if proper care is not taken.02 914.23 Yes (4%) 865. 5. indicating that the failure in the samples were dominant due to cohesive failure (Ref fig 2) of binder and not binding stripping failure of aggregate.