You are on page 1of 82

AP-T188/11

AUSTROADS TECHNICAL REPORT

Review of Structural Design Procedures for
Foamed Bitumen Pavements

Review of Structural Design Procedures for
Foamed Bitumen Pavements

Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements
Published August 2011

© Austroads Ltd 2011
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968,
no part may be reproduced by any process without the prior written permission of Austroads.

Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements
ISBN 978-1-921709-89-0
Austroads Project No. TT1358
Austroads Publication No. AP–T188 /11

Project Manager
Allan Jones (DTMR Qld)
Prepared by
Alvaro Gonzales (ARRB)

Published by Austroads Ltd
Level 9, Robell House
287 Elizabeth Street
Sydney NSW 2000 Australia
Phone: +61 2 9264 7088
Fax: +61 2 9264 1657
Email: austroads@austroads.com.au
www.austroads.com.au

Austroads believes this publication to be correct at the time of printing and does not accept
responsibility for any consequences arising from the use of information herein. Readers should
rely on their own skill and judgement to apply information to particular issues.

Review of Structural Design Procedures for
Foamed Bitumen Pavements

Sydney 2011

Energy and Infrastructure South Australia  Department of Infrastructure. Energy and Resources Tasmania  Department of Lands and Planning Northern Territory  Department of Territory and Municipal Services Australian Capital Territory  Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure and Transport  Australian Local Government Association  New Zealand Transport Agency. Austroads membership comprises the six state and two territory road transport and traffic authorities. advice and fostering research in the road transport sector . Austroads is governed by a Board consisting of the chief executive officer (or an alternative senior executive officer) of each of its eleven member organisations:  Roads and Traffic Authority New South Wales  Roads Corporation Victoria  Department of Transport and Main Roads Queensland  Main Roads Western Australia  Department for Transport. It aims to be the Australasian leader in providing high quality information.  promote consistency in road and road agency operations.About Austroads Austroads’ purpose is to:  promote improved Australian and New Zealand transport outcomes  provide expert technical input to national policy development on road and road transport issues  promote improved practice and capability by road agencies. and NZ Transport Agency. The success of Austroads is derived from the collaboration of member organisations and others in the road industry. the Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure and Transport. the Australian Local Government Association.

..............................2  Observed Behaviour of Foamed Bitumen Pavements ........................................3  Other Design Considerations .................................................................... Queensland ...........3  2..........................6  2.........4  Assumed Behaviour of Bitumen Stabilised Layers ....... 26  5.........................................................................3  City of Canning .... 19  4..2  Laboratory Observations ....................2  Design Inputs and Distress Models ........................................................... 19  4............................... 13  3............................................2  Concepts in the Development of the Pavement Number..3  TG2 2002 Thickness Design Method ...............2............................ 6  2...................................................11  3....3..........................................................................................1  Background............18  4................................................................2.......................... 23  5  TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH LABORATORY ..........18  4.................................................25  5............................................4  NZ Transport Agency Method................................................3................................................................................................................1  2  SOUTH AFRICAN TG2 2002 DESIGN METHOD ...................................................3  Calculation of PN ........................................................................3................2...............................................................2  Overview of the Report and Design Procedures ............................................ 26  Austroads 2011 — i— ...................................20  4.................1  Effective Fatigue Phase .........................2  Development of Fatigue Equation .......................................1  Background....2...... 16  4  KNOWLEDGE-BASED TG2 2009 STRUCTURAL DESIGN METHOD ........................................................ 19  4.........................11  3........ 25  5...................................2  Design Procedure ...................................................16  3........................3..........25  5............2..........................................2.............2  Department of Transport and Main Roads.........................................................................................11  3.........................................3  2.................................................................... 12  3......................2.............................................................25  5...................1  Background............ 7  2.....................3..................................................2..................... 18  4...............................................................4.....................................................................................................................................................................................5  Base Confidence Factor ............................... 3  2........................................................3  The Modular Ratio Limit Concept .....1  The Effective Long-term Stiffness (ELTS) .2  Other Pavement Design Considerations ...................2..........................4  Minimum Surface Requirements .........2  Characterisation of Subgrade Materials ..........................1  Design Equation ........ 6  2............................22  4.........................2  Foundation Class ............................1  Field Observations from Accelerated Pavement Testing .......2....................1  1.................................Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements CONTENTS 1  INTRODUCTION ........1  Project Background ..2.......3  Minimum Surface Requirements ...........3  2..3...... 16  3...........................................2.........................................4.......3  Classification of Foamed Bitumen Mixes and Design Chart ...........10  3  METHODS BASED ON AUSTROADS DESIGN GUIDELINE .................4...........................................................................4  Classification of the Foamed Bitumen Mixes ............4  Design Criteria PN Model ...............................................2  Minimum Surface Requirements ... 22  4....................................................................2  Equivalent Granular Phase ................................ 15  3........................................................................................................... 19  4..........................18  4................................................................4................................................ 13  3................................................1  Road Type Categories ..................1  Background......................................................................................................................13  3.........................1  Background. 16  3............................................................................................................................................1  1................... 11  3....................1  Allowed Capacity ........................................... 14  3..........................1  Background...................2............................................................................................

..............................2..................................................................2...............................................2...................................................................................................................................................................................................50  DETAILS OF THE THICKNESS DESIGN OF FOAMED BITUMEN PAVEMENTS.............................................. 33  6................................................................................................................4  6  Minimum Surface Requirements ....................6  Introduction ............................................. 28  COMPARISON OF PAVEMENT DESIGNS .....................................3  Department of Transport and Main Roads...........45  8............29  6...............................48  APPENDIX A  APPENDIX B  APPENDIX C  APPENDIX D  ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FOR THE TG2 2009 THICKNESS DESIGN METHOD...............Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 5..............1  Review of Design Methods ............5  NZ Transport Agency Design .......................................................................43  Fatigue Criteria ...............................................1  Description of the Example Project ...................................31  6............ CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......... 31  6............................................................................................................ 32  6..........................7  Knowledge-based TG2 2009 Design .....................2..................39  Rate of Loading Adjustment ............. 34  6............4  7........................2  7.....................................................................47  REFERENCES .................. Queensland Design ......................52  INTERIM DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR FOAMED BITUMEN PAVEMENTS......... 34  6..................................................................................................................66  Austroads 2011 — ii — ..........................................................................................................2  Comparison of Pavement Designs ......................................................................1  7.....2..........2.....................45  8.....................................................................................................................................................................38  Temperature Adjustment ...............8  Summary of Designs and Discussion ..... 36  7  INTERIM PROCEDURE FOR THE THICKNESS DESIGN OF FOAMED BITUMEN PAVEMENTS ..............................................................................2......................................................................38  Minimum Stiffness Requirements ....46  8.........................................................6  Transportation Research Laboratory (TRL) Design ...................................................................................2............................................................................2  TG2 2002 Design........29  6......................3  7.................44  8  SUMMARY.....................2................................................................1  Summary of Design Methods ...............................................................................................................................5  7................44  Minimum Surface Requirements . 31  6....................2  Case Study . 35  6..........3  Recommendations ......60  DESIGN EXAMPLE USING INTERIM DESIGN PROCEDURE ............................4  City of Canning Design ......................38  7................................................

Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements

TABLES
Table 2.1:
Table 2.2:
Table 2.3:
Table 3.1:

 
 
 
 

Table 3.2:  
Table 3.3:  
Table 5.1:
Table 5.2:
Table 5.3:
Table 5.4:
Table 5.5:
Table 6.1:
Table 6.2:
Table 6.3:
Table 6.4:
Table 6.5:
Table 6.6:
Table 7.1:
Table 7.2:
Table 7.3:
Table 7.4:

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Reliability factors based on road categories ...............................................................9 
Foamed bitumen treated material classification .......................................................10 
Foamed bitumen treated material properties ............................................................10 
TMR modulus requirements for foamed bitumen materials for high
trafficked roads .........................................................................................................12 
Temperature correction factor for TMR method .......................................................13 
Adopted modulus values for crushed granular pavements in City of
Canning ....................................................................................................................15 
Road type category for TRL method .........................................................................26 
Foundation classes for TRL method .........................................................................26 
Bitumen bound cold recycled material classification for TRL method.......................27 
Thickness design of pavements up to 5 x 106 ESA ..................................................28 
Requirements for surfacing thickness for TRL method .............................................28 
Summary of design methods ....................................................................................30 
Elastic characterisation using TMR method .............................................................33 
Elastic charactersiation for use in the City of Canning method ................................33 
NZ Transport Agency elastic characterisation ..........................................................34 
Rehabilitation treatment using the TRL method .......................................................35 
Solutions using the knowledge-based TG2 2009 method ........................................35 
Minimum mix design limits for initial modulus ...........................................................38 
Minimum mix design limits for dry modulus for foamed bitumen base .....................39 
Minimum mix design limits for dry modulus for foamed bitumen subbase................39 
Effect of temperature on indirect tensile resilient modulus test ................................40 

FIGURES
Figure 2.1:   Foamed bitumen pavement tested in the HVS sections; multi-depth
deflectometer ..............................................................................................................4 
Figure 2.2:   Calculated elastic modulus of foamed bitumen layers versus load
repetitions for P243/1 test, section 411A4 ..................................................................5 
Figure 2.3:   In-depth permanent deformation measured with MDD 8 for section
4114A .........................................................................................................................5 
Figure 2.4:   Location of the critical design parameters for the TG2 2002 Guidelines
design method ............................................................................................................8 
Figure 3.1:   Graphical representation of test results ....................................................................15 
Figure 4.1:   Steps in the knowledge-based structural design method for pavements .................20 
Figure 4.2:   Example of pavement number determination ...........................................................21 
Figure 4.3:   Criteria for determining allowed capacity based on PN ............................................23 
Figure 4.4:   Recommended layer thicknesses versus structural capacity ...................................24 
Figure 5.1:   Identification of material families ...............................................................................25 
Figure 5.2:   Design curves for bitumen bound cold recycled material, Foundation
Class 1 ......................................................................................................................27 
Figure 6.1:   Pavement rehabilitation case study ..........................................................................31 
Figure 6.2:   Solution for different relative densities using the South African TG2 2002
design method ..........................................................................................................32 
Figure 6.3:   Summary of pavement thicknesses (millimetres) for all design methods .................36 

Austroads 2011
— iii —

Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements

Figure 7.1:   Relation between subsurface temperature (at 150 mm deep) and backcalculated foamed bitumen mix (with 2.5% foamed bitumen and 1%
cement) resilient modulus: (a) for 2003 data (b) for 2005 data .................................41 
Figure 7.2:   Variation of modulus at weighted mean annual pavement temperature
(WMAPT) from Leek (2001) laboratory tests and Fu and Harvey (2007)
FWD data ..................................................................................................................42 
Figure 7.3:   Variation of ratio of modulus at vehicle speed V to modulus from
standard indirect tensile test (40 ms rise time) with design speed ...........................43 

Austroads 2011
— iv —

Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements

SUMMARY
Pavement designers in Australia and New Zealand trying to use alternative treatments such as
foamed bitumen in rehabilitation projects are severely constrained by a lack of data on the
performance of this type of stabilised material.
Structural thickness design methods have been developed for the design of foamed bitumen
pavements, most of them based on assumptions that do not necessarily represent the
performance of foamed bitumen pavements under Australia and New Zealand conditions. This
report presents a review of the following methods:
TG2 2002 guidelines (South Africa)
This method, published in 2002, was developed using testing data from a full-scale accelerated
testing of foamed bitumen pavements and extensive laboratory work. The TG2 2002 Guidelines
method suggests that foamed bitumen pavements behave in two separate phases. The first phase
starts after construction, when the layer is in an intact, undamaged condition and provides fatigue
resistance. This phase is called ‘effective fatigue phase’ and ends when, due to the applied
loading, the layer reduces its stiffness. The second phase is called ‘equivalent granular state’,
because the stiffness of the foamed bitumen layer is similar to that of a good quality granular base.
The assumed distress modes of the first and second phase are fatigue and permanent
deformation, respectively.
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland (Australia)
TMR adopted the Austroads asphalt fatigue relationship for the foamed bitumen layer. The asphalt
fatigue relationship relates the admissible number of load cycles with the volumetric properties of
the mix, the stiffness of the mix and the tensile strain at the bottom of the foamed bitumen layer.
The method assumes that fatigue is the primary distress mode.
City of Canning (Australia)
The City of Canning developed a fatigue relationship for foamed bitumen layers using data from
flexural beams prepared and compacted in the field and tested in the laboratory. It was found that
the fatigue relationship is independent of the stiffness of the mixes. The method is different to the
TMR method, but results similar pavement life predictions at typical strain levels.
NZ Transport Agency (New Zealand)
The NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) design procedure suggests that fatigue relationships are too
conservative and do not represent the observed behaviour in New Zealand foamed bitumen
pavements. Pavement designers in New Zealand normally consider the foamed bitumen layer as
an unbound granular layer. The method recommends an elastic modulus of 800 MPa (anisotropic,
no sub-layering) for the modelling of the elastic properties of the foamed bitumen layer. The
pavement thickness is calculated by reducing the vertical compressive strain at the top of the
subgrade to the value obtained by the Austroads subgrade strain criteria.
Transportation Research Laboratory (United Kingdom)
The TRL method assumes that foamed bitumen mixes behave similarly to hot mix asphalt mixes,
fatigue being the dominant distress mode of these mixes. The method is based on tables and
charts that classify subgrade, traffic and foamed bitumen type. These assumptions are mainly
based on engineering judgment.

Austroads 2011
— v—

Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements

Knowledge-based TG2 2009 Second Edition (South Africa)
A different approach known as the ‘knowledge-based’ method was developed by South African
researchers. The knowledge-based method is described in the second edition of the TG2
guidelines, published in 2009. The second edition of the TG2, TG2 2009, superseded the previous
TG2 2002 design method. The knowledge-based method is based on a ‘pavement number’ (PN)
that is calculated by multiplying the expected long-term stiffness of each layer and the respective
thickness of the layer, similar in principle to the AASHTO structural number approach to flexible
pavement design. The stiffness of the layers is corrected by other design factors such as the total
pavement thickness above the subgrade, the position of the layer within the pavement structure,
and the stiffness of the underlying layer. The knowledge-based method also incorporates some
practical aspects that do not exist in other mechanistic methods, such as the recommended
surface thickness and the minimum and maximum thickness for the foamed bitumen layer.
In order to compare the six design methods from a more practical, objective point of view, a
hypothetical case study was conducted as the last part of the review, which involved the design of
a foamed bitumen pavement using the six design methods. The case study consisted in the
rehabilitation of an existing unbound granular pavement using an in situ foamed bitumen
stabilisation technique. The pavement design carried out using the six design methods showed
that:

The TG2 2002 Guidelines method was found to be very sensitive to one of the inputs of the
equivalent granular state distress model (i.e. relative density). In addition, it was found that
this distress model provides unexpected outputs that contradict observed behaviour in
recently completed full-scale accelerated testing of foamed bitumen pavements.

The pavement methods that assume behaviour of foamed bitumen mixes to be similar to that
of hot mix asphalt mixes (TMR and TRL) yield similar foamed bitumen layer thicknesses
(between 290 mm to 310 mm), indicating consistency in the outputs.

The City of Canning design procedure yields similar thickness (288 mm) to those given by
the TMR method, since the fatigue relationship developed by the City of Canning is similar to
that used by the TMR.

The less conservative pavement thickness was given by the NZTA design procedure
(220 mm), because fatigue of foamed bitumen is ignored in the pavement design process.
Pavements are designed only to inhibit rutting and shape loss.

The knowledge-based TG2 2009 method provided the most conservative solution, in which a
thick asphalt layer (90 mm) was required in addition to the foamed bitumen layer. However,
this design method is currently under development, and only a limited number of foamed
bitumen sections have been incorporated into the knowledge-based data set.

Finally, an interim pavement design method for foamed bitumen pavements in Australia is
proposed, based on the Austroads asphalt fatigue relationship. The interim thickness design
method is applicable to pavements with foamed bitumen contents representative of Australian
mixes (normally about 3.5%). For the elastic characterisation of the foamed bitumen layer, it is
recommended the indirect tensile resilient modulus with temperature and vehicle speed
adjustments.

Austroads 2011
— vi —

The method proposes distress models. In particular. South African Mechanistic Design Method. The method suggests that foamed bitumen pavements behave in two separate phases. The three procedures use the Austroads subgrade strain criterion but differ in the use of the fatigue relationship for the foamed bitumen layer. The last part of the report summarizes the design methods an presents a case study in which the rehabilitation of one granular pavement was designed using the six design methods. published in 2009.g. Section 2 presents the design models published in the Technical Guidelines (TG2 2002) for the design of foamed bitumen pavements (South Africa). United Kingdom Transportation Research Laboratory) with some variations to accommodate the observed or assumed behaviour of foamed bitumen pavements into the pavement design. The Austroads Guide (Austroads 2009) interim procedures for the thickness design of alternative structural treatments such as in situ recycling with bituminous or cementitious binders are not as well founded as those for conventional treatments due to lack of information about the performance of these alternative treatments. with some non-standard materials no longer being fit-for-purpose. Section 4 presents the ‘knowledge-based’ method. Growing traffic loadings are placing increasing pressure on these pavements. which includes the design of foamed bitumen pavements. improved design procedures are required that better reflect the structural contribution of stabilisation treatments as this will lead to more cost-effective rural road rehabilitation treatments. The knowledge-based method. most of them based on well known pavement design methods (e.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 1 INTRODUCTION 1. The basis of the method is a pavement index (called ‘pavement number’). These were developed by the Department of Transport and Main Roads. 1. which is calculated using the assumed long-term properties of the pavement layers and the thickness of each layer. the use of high quality crushed rock is not a cost-effective treatment to improve the structure of these pavements. which were developed using data from a full-scale accelerated pavement test and laboratory tests performed on foamed bitumen pavements. as a first step in the development of thickness design procedures. Austroads.2 Overview of the Report and Design Procedures The report is divided into seven sections. leading pavement designers to more conservative design approaches such as modelling the foamed bitumen layer as an unbound granular material instead of a stabilised material. there is not established procedure in the Austroads Guide for the design of foamed bitumen pavements. the first being a ‘fatigue’ phase and the second an ‘equivalent granular’ phase.1 Project Background Over 90% of the Australian sealed road network consists of sprayed seal granular pavements. This report presents a review of the available structural design methods for foamed bitumen pavements. superseded the TG2 2002 South African method. The Austroads 2011 — 1— . In many rural areas. Six design procedures were found in the literature. Consequently there is increasing use of treatments that enhance the existing non-standard materials by the addition of cementitious and bituminous binders to allow recycling of our scarce resources. the City of Canning (Western Australia) and the New Zealand Transport Agency (formerly Transit New Zealand). Queensland (formally Queensland Department of Main Roads). Section 3 describes three design procedures that use the design concepts and equations published in the Austroads Pavement Design Guide. Therefore. a new empirical pavement design procedure recently developed in South Africa.

Section 5 describes the design methodology proposed by the Transportation Research Laboratory (TRL).Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements pavement number was related with the allowable traffic loading by using an extensive set of data collected from South African pavements. Section 6 provides a summary and comparison of the six design methodologies previously presented in the report. Austroads 2011 — 2— . The Department of Transport and Main Roads. using a hypothetical pavement rehabilitation design case. For the elastic characterisation. Section 7 presents an interim thickness design procedure for foamed bitumen pavements to be used in Australia. The procedure adopted the Austroads asphalt fatigue relationship for the estimation of the fatigue life of the foamed bitumen layer. which adopted a procedure similar to that for the design of bitumen stabilised pavements. Results showed that the NZ Transport Agency design procedure gives the lowest thickness for the foamed bitumen layer. it is recommended the indirect tensile resilient modulus with temperature and vehicle speed adjustments. Queensland (TMR). while the new South African knowledge-based yields the most conservative pavement thicknesses. conclusions and recommendations. Section 8 presents the summary. City of Canning and TRL methods give similar pavement thicknesses.

The construction of the sections was conducted using deep in situ recycling of a cement treated1 ferricrete base with old multi-seal surfacings and part of the untreated ferricrete subbase. The rehabilitated pavement consisted of a 25 mm asphalt surfacing. a linear type of APT facility used in South Africa. 250 mm of untreated ferricrete subbase and the in situ subgrade (Figure 2. Austroads 2011 — 3— .1 a).2.0 m each (named section 409A4/B4 and section 411A4).2 Observed Behaviour of Foamed Bitumen Pavements 2. The APT was conducted using a Heavy Vehicle Simulator (HVS). 2008).Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 2 SOUTH AFRICAN TG2 2002 DESIGN METHOD 2.1 Field Observations from Accelerated Pavement Testing The development of the design models for foamed bitumen layers published in the TG2 2002 Guidelines was based on data from full-scale accelerated pavement testing (APT) and laboratory testing. 1 The original cement content of the existing treated ferricrete base is not detailed in the South African report used in this review (Jooste & Long 2007). The TG2 2002 Guidelines provide several important contributions to the structural design of foamed bitumen pavements were:  a description of the behaviour of foamed bitumen pavements (behaviour in two phases)  relationships between the elastic responses in the foamed bitumen layer (strains. The models were one of the outcomes of a large research project that involved the full-scale testing of foamed bitumen pavements and extensive laboratory work. stresses) with the number of load repetitions (for each of the two phases)  a material classification system for foamed bitumen mixes based on simple laboratory tests (unconfined compressive strength and indirect tensile strength). The models for the structural design of foamed bitumen pavements published in the TG2 2002 Guidelines were developed using concepts and material behaviours that were part of the South African Mechanistic Design Method (SAMDM) (Theyse & Rust 1996). 250 mm of foamed bitumen treated base. The HVS tests consisted of two foamed bitumen treated test sections of 8.1 Background One of the most widely accepted methods for the structural design of foamed bitumen pavements is the South African Interim Technical Guidelines (TG2) (Asphalt Academy 2002). 2 It is important to note that these binder types and content are very different from those currently used in Australia (normally 3%-4% foamed bitumen and 1%-2% of lime). This material was treated with 2% cement and 1. The 40 kN dual wheel load is the same wheel load as an 80 kN standard axle.8% foamed bitumen (80/100 penetration grade)2. moisture conditions and pavement vertical strains were continuously monitored during the application of the loads (Long 2001). The primary objectives of the guidelines (referred to as TG2 2002 Guidelines) were to assist road authorities in the adjudication of alternative designs for pavement rehabilitation projects and to assist practitioners in the design and construction requirements of foamed bitumen pavements (Jenkins et al. 2. The deflections. The performance of this pavement was investigated using 40 kN and 80 kN dual wheel loading. surface deformation.

Austroads 2011 — 4— . The measured rutting was unexpectedly low (Long 2001). The cracking was observed in the asphalt surface only.1 b). a device that measures strains at different depths of the pavement (Figure 2. and after the application of the 80 kN load this value increased approximately up to 3 mm.5 mm in section 409A4 and 5. and hence water was introduced into the pavement through surface cuts to induce further damage. MDD8 and MDD12.5 mm). Although significant rutting was only experienced after the addition of water. permanent In situ soil (a) (b) Figure 2. The elastic modulus was calculated using data from three MDD installed in 411A4 section (MDD4.2. 66% of the total surface deformation (4. In addition. after the application of 958 714 load cycles of 40 kN (Figure 2. depicted in Figure 2. This reduction in elastic modulus was again observed when the load was increased to 80 kN. The back-calculated modulus for section 411A4 is presented in Figure 2.1: Foamed bitumen pavement tested in the HVS sections.3).Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements The elastic and plastic vertical strains of the foamed bitumen layer were measured using a multi depth deflectometer (MDD). The elastic vertical strains were used to back-calculate the elastic modulus of the foamed bitumen at different stages of the test.2). multi-depth deflectometer The rehabilitation was conducted between January to October 2000. where the initial modulus of 1000-3500 MPa reduced to 600-1000 MPa under 40 kN loading. 2 mm of deformation were measured after 1x106 cycles of the 40 kN load. In section 411A4. Asphalt surface (25 mm) MDD Foamed bitumen treated base (250 mm) Strain Gauges Untreated granular subbase (250 mm) elastic.2). the plastic vertical strains were used to estimate plastic deformation of the foamed bitumen layer. and the pavements were tested during 2001. Very little cracking was observed in sections 409A4/B4 and 411A4 before the addition of water. The increase of permanent deformation of the foamed bitumen layer with load repetitions and at various depth below the surface was also measured with the MDD (Figure 2.4 mm in section 411A4). During the initial loading of the pavements a reduction of the elastic modulus of the foamed bitumen basecourse was observed. there was still relatively little permanent surface deformation at the end of the test (5.

. n St i ff n e . .1000 – 3400 MPa Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements R ed u ct i on in S tiffn e ss Red u c ti on i 600 – 1000 MPa . Figure 2. . . Source: Long (2001). .3: In-depth permanent deformation measured with MDD 8 for section 4114A Austroads 2011 — 5— . . ss . . .2: Calculated elastic modulus of foamed bitumen layers versus load repetitions for P243/1 test. . Figure 2. . . . . . Source: Long (2001). . section 411A4 Depth below the surface: . .

The strain-at-break value from the flexural beam tests showed that the higher the bitumen content (or the lower the cement to bitumen content ratio) the higher the strain-at-break value.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 2. because the stiffness of the foamed bitumen layer is similar to that of a good quality granular base. 2. An increase in the compressive strength results in an increased permanent deformation resistance. Details of the laboratory study are summarised in Long and Theyse (2002). in conjunction with the observed strength and deformational behaviour of foamed bitumen mixes tested in the laboratory. or a decrease in the cement to foamed bitumen content ratio (cem/bit). 2.3. An increase in the foamed bitumen content or a decrease in the cement to bitumen content ratio decreased the compressive and flexural strength of cement treated materials. respectively. increased the flexibility of the flexural beams. The tensile strain in the pavement under an Austroads 2011 — 6— . The model determines the number of repetitions to the equivalent granular state as a function of the strain ratio. RLT tests were used to assess the permanent deformation resistance and resilient modulus of the mixes.2 Laboratory Observations A laboratory testing program.2. was conducted in conjunction with the accelerated pavement test. The specimens were prepared with various moisture contents and compacted at different bulk densities.3 TG2 2002 Thickness Design Method The development of the mechanistic-empirical structural design procedure was based on the material behaviour and distress mechanisms observed in full-scale testing of pavements. The first phase starts after construction. This phase is called ‘effective fatigue phase’ and ends when. when the layer is in an intact. The results of the laboratory study showed that cement and foamed bitumen had an important effect on flexibility and strength of the mixes as follows:  Flexibility: The addition of foamed bitumen. using the same materials tested in the full-scale experiment. The observations from the HVS test suggested that foamed bitumen pavements behave in two separate phases. The strain ratio is the ratio of the maximum horizontal tensile strain calculated at the bottom of the foamed bitumen layer to the strain-at-break from the flexural beam test. The tests were conducted mixing the untreated milled material (collected in the field during construction) with different contents of bitumen and cement in the laboratory. undamaged condition and provides fatigue resistance.1 Effective Fatigue Phase A structural design model for the effective fatigue phase was developed using the elastic stiffness data measured in the HVS experiment with the MDD. due to the applied loading. The second phase is called ‘equivalent granular state’. the layer reduces its stiffness. Flexural beam tests. The shear strength of the mixes (angle of internal friction and cohesion) was estimated using the peak stress measured in MLT tests. The assumed distress modes of the first and second phase are fatigue and permanent deformation. compressive monotonic load triaxial tests (MLT) and compressive repeat load triaxial (RLT) were also used to develop the structural design models for foamed bitumen mixes.  Compressive and flexural strength: The addition of cement or an increase in the cement to foamed bitumen content ratio (cem/bit) increases both the compressive and flexural strength (defined as the peak stress attained during the flexural beam test) of the foamed bitumen treated materials.

2. after the analysis of a pavement structure similar to that of the HVS test sections. Therefore it was decided to develop the permanent deformation equation as a function of the stress ratio. using a linear elastic model. from bound material to an equivalent granular state) and a 2 mm permanent deformation of the foamed bitumen layer.3.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 80 kN standard axle load is calculated using a software based on multi-layer linear elastic theory such as mePads (CSIR 2001). the major and minor principal stresses are determined at four locations in the pavement (Figure 2. Austroads 2011 — 7— .e. FB  10      A  0. The effective fatigue phase equation has the following form (Equation 1): N F . using specimens prepared with identical materials.4) b = strain-at-break measured in the flexural beam test. It was found that the permanent deformation increases with the ratio between the applied stress in the RLT test and the peak stress attained in a MLT test (called ‘stress ratio’).2 Equivalent Granular Phase The structural design model for permanent deformation of the foamed bitumen treated material after fatigue was developed using the MDD measurements and the permanent deformation measured in RLT laboratory tests. These locations were suggested by Long (2001) as the critical locations in the foamed bitumen layer.FB = number of load cycles during the effective fatigue life of the foamed bitumen layer A = coefficient related to the category of the road or reliability (risk) of the design  = calculated horizontal tensile strain under standard axle load at the bottom of the layer (see h in Figure 2. The terminal distress condition for the first phase is a loss of stiffness (i. below and between a 40 kN dual wheel load  one quarter above the bottom of the layer.708    b    1 where NF. below and between a 40 kN dual wheel load. In the equivalent granular phase.4):  one quarter below the top of the layer and.

FB  1 ( A11. cement.691( cem / bit )) 10 30 2 where NPD. Austroads 2011 — 8— 3 .Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 20 kN Wheel 20 kN Centre of Loads Loads Surfacing Foamed bitumen basecourse 1 3 t/4 t 3t / 4 h Subbase Subgrade Figure 2.FB = number of load repetitions A = coefficient related to the category of the road or reliability (risk) of the design RD = relative density of the foamed bitumen mix. bitumen and water.0726PS 1. determined using the individual solid density (SD) values for the aggregate.4: Location of the critical design parameters for the TG2 2002 Guidelines design method The allowable loading in the equivalent granular phase is (Equation 2 to Equation 4): N PD .938RD  0.628SR  0. determined using the formula: RD  DDmix  100 ARDmix  Dw where DDmix = dry density of the mix (kg/m3) Dw = density of water (kg/m3) ARDmix = apparent relative density.

1: Reliability factors based on road categories Road category Name Reliability (%) A B C D 95 90 80 50 Description E.3-10x106 depending on design strategy <3 x106 depending on design strategy <106 depending on design strategy Source: CSIR (1996). and the foamed bitumen layer thickness is 180 mm. major interurban roads E. 3 The stress ratio equation has been extensively adopted in the South African Mechanistic Design Method (SAMDM) for the permanent deformation modelling of unbound granular materials. For instance.g.g. For the calculation of NPD. PS=18/180=0. major rural roads.FB the most critical (highest) stress ratio is used in Equation 2. Table 2.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements PS = allowed permanent strain of the foamed bitumen layer expressed as a percentage. interurban freeways. using the following formula: SR  4  1a   3a          3a  tan 2  45    1   2C tan  45     2 2        where 1a. 90%. listed in Table 2. determined from monotonic load triaxial (MLT) tests. expressed in kPa.3a = major and minor principal stresses.1. The terminal distress condition normally used for the second ‘equivalent granular’ phase is 18 mm of permanent deformation in the foamed bitumen layer (cem/bit) = cement to bitumen ratio of the foamed bitumen mix SR = stress ratio3 calculated at one quarter below the top of the layer and one quarter above the bottom of the foamed bitumen layer.4)  = angle of internal friction (expressed in degrees) c = cohesion (in kPa) of the foamed bitumen material studied. interurban collectors. calculated from the response model (Figure 2. major industrial roads Lightly trafficked rural roads. The models (both effective fatigue and equivalent granular) were adapted to account for reliability levels of the different traffic categories (95%. strategic roads Rural access roads Importance Very important Important Less important Less important Service level Total equivalent traffic (ESA) over structural design period Very high High Moderate Moderate to low 3-100x106 over 20 years 0. if the allowed permanent deformation in the second ‘equivalent granular phase’ for the foamed bitumen layer is 18 mm. Austroads 2011 — 9— .1=10%. 80% and 50%).

35 Strain-at-break 120–225 172 390–590 490 Cohesion (kPa) 110–425 210 110–210 120 Friction angle (°) 27–55 49 34–53 45 Source: Asphalt Academy (2002). Austroads 2011 — 10 — . strain-at-break (b). Poisson’s ratio.33 680–1625 0.35 1100 0.11 1240–2075 1600 Poisson ratio Recommended value 0. The testing temperature is 25 °C. FB2. Table 2. hence an interim material classification system. after 3 days of accelerated air-dried (kPa) ITS.3: Foamed bitumen treated material properties Material classification FB2 Range FB3 Recommended value Cem/bit Stiffness in effective fatigue phase (MPa) Range 1. The classification system consisted of four categories (FB1. This type of data normally is not readily available in practice. The TG2 2002 Guidelines recommends values of stiffness for the first effective fatigue phase. based on simple laboratory tests. after 3 days of accelerated air-dried (kPa) FB1 1400–2000 300–500 FB2 1400–2000 100–300 FB3 700–1400 300–500 FB4 700–1400 100–300 Source: Asphalt Academy (2002). was included in the TG2 2002 Guidelines. cohesion and angle of internal friction for each mix category. The guideline developed material properties for materials FB2 and FB3 only (listed in Table 2.3). The UCS and ITS specimens are sealed after compaction and de-moulded after 24 hours. FB3 and FB4) depending on the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and indirect tensile strength (ITS) measured on the foamed bitumen mix (Table 2.2). Then the specimens are tested after 72 hours of accelerated air-dried at 40 °C. flexural strength).2: Foamed bitumen treated material classification Material classification UCS. Table 2.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 2. because only these two materials had been extensively tested in the laboratory when the guidelines were published. sealed in individual loose plastic bags with a sealed volume at least twice that of the specimen.4 Classification of the Foamed Bitumen Mixes The design method presented above requires a large amount of laboratory data to be used with accuracy (shear strength values.

the Department of Transport and Main Roads. Queensland 3.1 Design Equation Since 1997. The distress mechanisms for flexible pavements. However. The design modulus (Smix) is based on the soaked indirect tensile resilient modulus results at the nominated design binder content for the rehabilitation project (Equation 5). however. The experience gained through pavement construction.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 3 METHODS BASED ON AUSTROADS DESIGN GUIDELINE 3.2. The three methods adopted at least one of the failure mechanisms mentioned above. pavement recycling using foamed bitumen has become an attractive alternative to traditional overlays for rehabilitation of existing pavements in Queensland.  Permanent deformation of unbound materials and subgrade which is related to vertical compressive strain on top of subgrade. South Africa. or simply do not use a fatigue relationship. Therefore. assumed by the Austroads Guide include:  Fatigue of asphalt and cemented materials due to repetition of horizontal tensile strains at the bottom of such layers. they differ in the specific fatigue model of the foamed bitumen layer. laboratory testing. 3. It is important to emphasize that foamed bitumen contents currently used in Australia are normally higher than foamed bitumen contents adopted in some other countries (e. the Austroads procedures have been adapted for foamed bitumen pavements by three organisations: the Queensland Department of Main Roads.1 Background Three pavement methodologies based on the design principles in Austroads (2004) were found in the literature. The Austroads Guide does not include specific procedures for the thickness design of foamed bitumen pavements.g. This relationship was recommended provided the assumed volumetric percentage of binder does not exceed 8% and the laboratory soaked modulus does not exceed 2500 MPa. Queensland (TMR) adopted the Austroads asphalt fatigue criterion used for asphalt design for a reliability of 95% to estimate the fatigue performance of foamed bitumen stabilised material. New Zealand). Therefore: Austroads 2011 — 11 — . Although field data in Queensland was limited when the design equation was suggested. there was enough data to indicate that the primary distress mechanism of foamed bitumen stabilised pavements was fatigue failure of the stabilised layer (Jones & Ramanujam 2004). the City of Canning (Western Australia) and NZ Transport Agency.2 Department of Transport and Main Roads. and monitoring of foamed bitumen pavements has contributed to the development of a design equation for foamed bitumen pavements in this state.

after:  3 hours of air-dried and curing at 25 °C  3 days of accelerated air-dried and curing at 40 °C  3 days of accelerated air-dried and curing at 40 °C. TMR normally conducts indirect tensile resilient modulus tests (Australian Standard AS2891. TMR adopts the soaked resilient modulus (Smix) for the fatigue equation and also recommends minimum Smix values for soaked-to-dry resilient modulus ratio for a range of design traffic as shown in Table 3. the assumed value should correspond to the minimum soaked modulus (Table 3.1). Austroads 2011 — 12 — .856Vb   N   ' 0.2.1.13. If Smix is not known.1: TMR modulus requirements for foamed bitumen materials for high trafficked roads Average daily ESA in design year of opening Minimum dry modulus (MPa) Minimum soaked modulus (MPa) Maximum soaked modulus (MPa) Minimum retained modulus ratio < 100 2500 1500 2500 40% 100–1000 3000 1800 2500 45% > 1000 4000 2000 2500 50% Source: Jones and Ramanujam (2004). The specimens have to meet a minimum resilient modulus value depending on the design traffic loading.2. followed by soaking in water under vacuum for 10 minutes. this value is corrected by temperature to reflect the actual weighted mean annual pavement temperature (WMAPT) of the site (Jones & Ramanujam 2008). The stiffness of the foamed bitumen mix (Smix) is determined in the laboratory at 25 °C. Table 3. The Smix should not exceed 2500 MPa.2.2 N = allowable number of load repetitions to fatigue of the foamed bitumen layer Vb = percentage by volume of bitumen in the foamed bitumen layer (normally between 6% and 8%) Smix = foamed bitumen mix modulus. measured using the indirect tensile resilient modulus test (MATTA testing) on soak specimens and corrected by temperature (Section 3.2)  = horizontal tensile strain at bottom of foamed bitumen layer produced by the load (microstrain).Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements  69181. The TMR normal procedure is to test nominally identical specimens prepared in the laboratory.08  0. Therefore. The temperature correction factor to be applied to Smix is listed in Table 3.36   S mix   5 5 where 3.1) on 150 mm diameter foamed bitumen specimens compacted using 50 blows Marshall Compaction. Other Pavement Design Considerations As part of the mix design process.

The types of asphalt used and layering are in accordance with the Queensland Pavement Design Manual (Queensland Department of Transport 1990).8 40 °C 0.35 and no sublayering.2. and if the viscoelastic properties of the bitumen binder were reflected in the stiffness and fatigue performance of foamed bitumen mixes.3 Minimum Surface Requirements TMR current practice is to use a sprayed seal surfacing for traffic below 1 x 107 ESA and a minimum of 40 mm thickness of hot mix asphalt for higher traffic loadings.3. similar to the TG2 2002 Guideline method. The TMR method may include a second post-cracking phase. The required thickness of asphalt may be much greater than 40 mm.9 35 °C 0. TMR recommends a minimum subgrade support of CBR 5%.0 30 °C 0. In the post-cracking phase. The study was conducted only to stabilisation of pavements containing crushed gravels.3 City of Canning 3. the actual thickness of asphalt placed above the foamed bitumen layer is governed by the predicted fatigue life of the asphalt. based on observations made on early failures of foamed bitumen pavements constructed on weak subgrades. Austroads 2011 — 13 — .7 Source: Jones and Ramanujam (2004). where:  the average daily ESA in the design lane is less than 1000  not less than 175 mm of dense graded asphalt cover is provided over the foamed bitumen stabilised material.2: Temperature correction factor for TMR method Weighted mean annual pavement temperature Temperature correction factor ≤ 25 °C 1. Poisson’s ratio of 0. 3. Samples of foamed bitumen mixes were collected at various sites in the Cities of Canning and Gosnells. In these higher traffic areas.1 Background The City of Canning in Western Australia conducted a research project (Leek 2009) to study the modulus and fatigue performance of in situ foamed bitumen pavement materials measured in the laboratory. 3. and hence the method is applicable only to this type of source aggregate.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Table 3. The aim of the research was to determine if a design procedure could be developed to predict the fatigue life of in situ foamed bitumen stabilised pavements. and are often in the order of 180 mm to 200 mm. the foamed bitumen stabilised material is considered to be cross-anisotropic (degree of anisotropy n=2) with a presumptive modulus of 500 MPa.

While bitumen content and stiffness would be considered to influence fatigue life. excluding specific reference to bitumen content and stiffness (Equation 6): 1558  N      6 6 where N = allowable number of load repetitions to fatigue of the foamed bitumen layer  = horizontal tensile strain at bottom of foamed bitumen layer produced by the load (microstrain). and predicts the mean fatigue life of the flexural beams Figure 3.3.2 Development of Fatigue Equation Slabs were cut from different foamed bitumen pavement sections located in the City of Canning.1. Therefore a simplified equation was proposed. Leek (2009) argued that given the size of the aggregate in the fatigue test beams and associated stress concentrations. The results of the testing showed that the performance of individual beams varied widely. In terms of the use of this laboratory relationship to predict the performance of in-service pavements. It should be noted that the first beams were taken from pavements in 1999. The slabs were then cut into beams for flexural beam testing.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 3. This equation is a best fit relationship to laboratory data. and have been taken from a number of subsequent foamed bitumen jobs since then. the laboratory fatigue relationship would be sufficiently conservative to use to predict in-service performance without the use of a laboratory-to-field shift factor. due to the scatter of test results no significant relationships were observed between modulus and fatigue life or bitumen content and fatigue life (Leek 2009). in order to measure the fatigue properties of the foamed bitumen samples. Austroads 2011 — 14 — .

3 Other Design Considerations In the absence of detailed site or laboratory testing.E+05 N = (1558. A post-cracking phase may also be incorporated into this design method. Figure 3. Austroads 2011 — 15 — .E+10 Test Beam Results 1.3. indirect tensile resilient modulus and Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) measurements.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 1. the presumptive design moduli in Table 3.175/e) 1. Table 3. It was found that modulus decreases with pavement depth and that the flexural modulus is approximately 60% of the resilient modulus.E+04 1.1: Graphical representation of test results 3.E+08 Load Repititions MRDQ Predicted Life 1.3 are used by the City of Canning when stabilising existing pavements composed of crushed limestone subbase.9369 1.E+03 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Strain Level (e) Source: Leek (2009).E+06 5.E+09 Predicted Life by Asphalt Model 1.E+07 Asphalt model best fit curve 1.3: Adopted modulus values for crushed granular pavements in City of Canning Depth below stabilised surface (mm) Design modulus (MPa) 0–100 4300 100–200 3600 >200 2600 Source: Leek (2009). These values were suggested after the analysis of a large data set of flexural beam modulus. crushed granite basecourse and asphalt surfacing.

5% of cement or lime by weight. 3. pavement designers in New Zealand design the pavement to inhibit rutting and shape and do not consider the fatigue characteristics of foamed bitumen. Local practitioners may recommend a sprayed seal if traffic is less than 106 ESA. it is unclear how appropriate the criterion is for foamed bitumen stabilised materials. During the preparation of the supplement it was initially suggested to adopt the fatigue life of the foamed bitumen layer using the Austroads asphalt fatigue equation.3. it was later argued (NZTA 2007) that the effective fatigue behaviour was not observed in New Zealand foamed bitumen pavements. 3. Therefore. and there was not enough evidence to justify the use of the Austroads fatigue equation for foamed bitumen mixtures. a supplement was published by NZ Transport Agency (2007). Dense grade and stone mastic asphalt has been placed onto the foam surface. Finally.2 Design Inputs and Distress Models The New Zealand supplement suggests the following general material properties for the mechanical characterization of foamed bitumen layers:  vertical elastic modulus of the order of 800 MPa  anisotropic layer (Evertical=2Ehorizonal)  no sub-layering  Poisson’s ratio =0. for a reliability of 95%. the New Zealand supplement suggested that only the second ‘equivalent granular’ phase should be accounted for in the design: While it is possible to analyse the ‘seating-in’ (fatigue) phase using the Austroads (Shell) hot mix asphalt performance criterion.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 3. Normally. the majority of the expertise in the field of foamed bitumen stabilisation is held by the contracting industry. Austroads 2011 — 16 — .4. However. This is lower than the normal bitumen content used in Australian foamed bitumen pavements (about 3.3. It is important to notice that the normal bitumen content used in New Zealand foamed bitumen pavements ranges from 2. the New Zealand supplement gives the following advice to pavement designers: At this stage.4. following the procedure adopted in the TMR. Given this uncertainty. designers should seek assistance from the industry regarding both the mix design and the layer thickness analysis. The supplement includes guidelines for engineering practitioners in applying Austroads design procedures resulting from research results and experience gained in New Zealand.0% to 1.4 NZ Transport Agency Method 3. it is generally appropriate to design the foamed bitumen stabilised layer for the steady-state condition only.4 Minimum Surface Requirements In the City of Canning the standard practice is to apply a 30 mm thick asphalt layer over the foamed bitumen stabilised layer.7% to 3%.5%).1 Background To adapt the Austroads Pavement Design Guide (Austroads 2010) to New Zealand conditions. plus 1. Therefore.

expressed in Equation 7:  9300  N     7 where N = allowable number of standard axles before an unacceptable level of permanent deformation develops  = maximum vertical (compressive) strain (microstrains) at the top of the subgrade. Austroads 2011 — 17 — 7 .Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements The distress model adopted is the Austroads subgrade strain criterion.

Austroads 2011 — 18 — . the ELTS averages out the effects of the long-term decrease of stiffness owing to traffic related deterioration. The other concepts and steps involved in this pavement design method are the effective long-term stiffness. An empirical relationship between the PN and observed performance of more than 80 pavement structures provides the basis for using the PN to assess design capacity. Jooste and Long (2007) developed a new knowledge-based structural design method for pavements. published in May 2009 (Asphalt Academy 2009). superseded the method previously published in the TG2 2002 guidelines.1 The Effective Long-term Stiffness (ELTS) The ELTS is a model parameter which serves as a relative indicator of the average long term in situ stiffness of a pavement layer. The knowledge-based design method relies on an index. An area of concern with the structural design models was the lack of validation using field performance data. As such. or TG2 2009.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 4 KNOWLEDGE-BASED TG2 2009 STRUCTURAL DESIGN METHOD 4. 4. Jooste and Long (2007) suggest that the PN is more suitable than the AASHTO SN in determining the stiffness of each layer. as defined for use in the PN. the characterisation of subgrade materials and the base confidence factor. The ELTS values used in the calculation of the PN may therefore differ somewhat from the stiffness values that are conventionally adopted in the South African Mechanistic Design Method. is not a stiffness value that can be determined by means of a laboratory or field test. which incorporated bituminous stabilised materials. The method is explained in the second edition of the TG2 guidelines. which was calibrated for use in the PN-based design method and was developed as part of Jooste and Long’s study.2 Concepts in the Development of the Pavement Number 4. Thus the ELTS does not represent the stiffness of a material at any specific time.2. and would need updating. it is a model parameter. South African practitioners felt that the TG2 2002 Guidelines did not illustrate the benefits of foamed bitumen treatment and that mechanistic-empirical design methods could lead to the inappropriate design of foamed bitumen pavements. It is also important to note that the ELTS. The PN is calculated using the layer thicknesses and assigned material classes (related to long-term stiffnesses).1 Background After the release of the interim South African TG2 2002 Guidelines (Section 2). behaviour under accelerated testing and predicted performance from laboratory testing. The index is called a ‘pavement number’ (PN) and is used to determine whether a pavement structure is appropriate for a given traffic intensity and confidence level. and apparent differences between long-term field behaviour. Rather. because it couples the material class with the ratio between the layer stiffness and the stiffness of the supporting layer (using the ‘modular ratio’ limit concept). The TG2 second edition. as well as seasonal variations in stiffness. it was acknowledged that the guideline was not representative of current best practice. The PN is similar to the structural number (SN) widely used in the AASHTO design method (AASHTO 1993). which quantifies the allowable traffic of a pavement. detailed in the following section.

In particular. are taken into account. This situation is specifically relevant in southern Africa.5 Base Confidence Factor The authors of the method argue that the required base quality is intimately linked to the intensity of the traffic loading. it is also assumed in the method that bitumen stabilised materials are able to develop significantly higher cohesive strength. However. the modular ratio for unbound granular materials is limited to less than 2. and the stiffness of the support below it is 200 MPa. 4. Then. the higher the equivalent stiffness). the appropriateness of the base material is controlled in two ways: (a) a base confidence factor (BCF) should be assigned to different material types. then the modular ratio of the base layer would be 2. but in cases of more cohesive materials and weak support.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 4. and (b) the design guidelines should include a checklist to ensure that practical considerations. Thus. where thin pavements are the norm (similar to Australia and New Zealand).2.0 may be possible (Jooste & Long 2007). high stresses are applied to the underlying base. bitumen stabilised layers are modelled in a similar manner to crushed rock materials. such as the appropriateness of the base material. Austroads 2011 — 19 — .5. 4. In the proposed PN-based method. Consequently. and thus. the stiffness has to be adjusted by climate conditions (wet.4 Assumed Behaviour of Bitumen Stabilised Layers The behaviour of bitumen stabilised layers is assumed to be similar to that of unbound granular materials.2 Characterisation of Subgrade Materials The first step in the calculation of the PN value is the determination of the subgrade class. to account for the higher cohesive strength. the method limits the types of base materials that can be used in certain traffic situations.2. An analysis of stress-sensitive material behaviour in finite element models showed that. modular ratio’s as high as 5. South African experience shows that there is a limit on the types of base materials that can be considered for a given traffic situation. compared to unbound granular materials. if the stiffness of a base layer is 400 MPa. the base is the main load-bearing element in the pavement.0.3 The Modular Ratio Limit Concept The modular ratio is a well known concept in flexible pavement engineering. and is defined as the ratio of a layer’s stiffness relative to the stiffness of the layer below it. these materials are less dependent on the stiffness of the support layer. 4.2. regardless of the overall pavement structure. the suitable design options decrease significantly as the design traffic increases. which relates the equivalent material class for subgrade with stiffness. For the purposes of determining the ELTS value.2. As the surfacing has a minor structural contribution. moderate or dry) and by the placement of the subgrade within the pavement structure (the thicker the pavement above the subgrade. The assumption of unbound material behaviour with a high cohesive strength places the behaviour of bitumen stabilised layers somewhere between that of a crushed stone and a cement stabilised material. but a higher modular ratio limit was allowed compared to crushed rock layers. as a general rule of thumb. In such situations.

Austroads 2011 — 20 — .9. followed by an example in Figure 4. Table A 3 in Appendix A). BSM2.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 4. G6. G7. etc.3 Calculation of PN The steps involved for the calculation of the PN are presented in Figure 4. a ‘BSM2’ bitumen stabilised layer (175 mm) and an ‘AC’ asphalt surface (30 mm). modular ratio(i) x ELTS(i-1) ] Adjust by climate zone (Table A2) PN(i)= ELTS(i) x thickness(i) Adjust by pavement thickness (Table A3) Adjust PN(base) by BCN (Table A4) PN=  PN(i) Determine allowable traffic (Figure 4. Estimate subgrade stiffness (Table A1) For each pavement layer (i) determine: Emax and modular ratio (Table A4) Determine ELTS for layer i: ELTS = min [ Emax. Then the initial stiffness (Eini) has to be adjusted by the climate zone and the total pavement thickness.1.2. which illustrates the calculation of the PN number for a pavement that consisted of a ‘G8’ subgrade material4. using Equation 8: ELTS = (Eini x Fclimate) + Fcover 8 where Eini = initial stiffness (MPa) Fclimate = climate adjustment factor Fcover = adjustment factor that varies with the thickness of the pavement layers above the subgrade. are material codes adopted by the material classification system used in the South African Mechanistic Design Method. a ‘G6’ subbase (200 mm). Table A 2 in Appendix A) and pavement thickness cover above the subgrade (Fcover = -4 MPa.3) Figure 4. a ‘G7’ selected material (180 mm). The first step of the calculation is the determination of the subgrade category and estimation of the initial stiffness value (Eini). Then Eini is adjusted for the climate zone (Fclimate = 0. which yields the ELTS of the subgrade layer.1: Steps in the knowledge-based structural design method for pavements 4 G8. The initial stiffness (Eini) of the G8 subgrade material is 100 MPa (Table A 1 in Appendix A).

8 ELTS = 180 MPa Emax = 180 MPa 1800 MPa x 30 mm Table A4 PN = 5.2: Example of pavement number determination Austroads 2011 — 21 — PN = 2. The ELTS is determined as the minimum value between Emax and the product between the modular ratio and the ELTS from the layer located below the current layer. this ELTS is 86 MPa (= 100 MPa x 0. The maximum stiffness (Emax) and modular ratio has to be determined for each layer above the subgrade (a list of recommended values for each material category is presented in Table A 4.4 0.7 Emax = 140 MPa 1.6 200 mm 1. divided by 10. the PN of each layer is calculated as the product of the layer thickness of each layer (in metres) and the respective ELTS value in MPa. the ELTS is determined for each layer above the subgrade.2. Later.9 . as shown in Figure 4. Appendix A).Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements In Figure 4.0 Emax= 450 MPa 2. The PN of the structure is the sum of the individual PN for each layer. Finally.9 Fcover = -4 Figure 4. ELTS = 1800 MPa MR = 5.4 PN = 4.5 PN = 16 .8x140 = 252 Emax = 180 180 mm G7 Table A4 ELTS = 140 MPa MR = 1.0x180 = 360 Emax = 450 200 mm G6 Table A4 MR = 1.7x86 = 146 140 MPa x 180 mm Emax = 140 G8 Moderate Table A1 Table A2 Table A3 Eini = 100 MPa ELTS = 86 MPa Fclimate = 0.0 AC 30 mm AC 175 mm BSM2 Emax = 3500 MPa Table A4 Table A4 5. Appendix A).0 x 360 = 1800 Emax = 3500 MPa ELTS = 360 MPa MR = 2. starting with the bottom layer.4 MPa). The PN of the basecourse has to be adjusted by the base confidence factor (listed in Table A 4.7 x 360 MPa x 175 mm 180 MPa x PN = 3.2.

at which distress is unlikely to occur. The maximum thickness for the hot mix asphalt surface is 100 mm. The structures are those recommended for unbound base materials. After an analysis of the trends exhibited by the combined data sets. formed the ‘knowledge’ base.4. and for traffic applications between 1 x 106 and 30 x 106 ESA. to be used in wet and dry climates. This confidence frontier represents the structural capacity for a given PN and assumed risk (road category). This data set was used as a foundation on which to calibrate the climate adjustment factors. The criterion is not a traditional design equation.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 4. and for which reliable historic pavement and traffic data could be obtained. but rather represents a ‘confidence frontier’. The three data sets are:  TRH4 Design Catalogue Set: this data set is comprised of structures extracted from the TRH4 design catalogue for Category ‘A’ and ‘B’ roads (reliability of 95% and 90%. respectively). The design method also provides recommendations for minimum and maximum foam bitumen layer thicknesses of 100 mm and 350 mm respectively. Austroads 2011 — 22 — .  The HVS Data Set for Bitumen Stabilised Pavements: this data set comprises pavements that incorporate bitumen stabilised materials and which were tested using the heavy vehicle simulator (HVS).  The LTPP Data Set for Bitumen Stabilised Pavements: this data set comprises all the identified in service pavements that incorporate bitumen stabilised layers.4 Design Criteria PN Model 4. a structural design criterion in the form of a step function was developed (Figure 4.1 Allowed Capacity The relationship between PN and the allowed structural capacity (traffic) was developed by Jooste and Long (2007) using three data sets.3). as well as the material constants for unbound and cement stabilised layers. which together with the rules of pavement behaviour presented above.

Austroads 2011 — 23 — .4. They support this recommendations by observing the knowledge base (the three sets of data mentioned above) and also arguing that the risk of early failures caused by the in situ recycling process can be greatly alleviated by placing an asphalt layer on top of the foamed bitumen layer. For traffic exceeding 15 x 106 ESA. a hot mix asphalt thickness of at least 50 mm is recommended.2 Minimum Surface Requirements The authors of the method recommend that bituminous stabilised layers should be surfaced with a sprayed seal if the traffic is less than 1 x 106 ESA. The asphalt surfacing requirements are summarised in Figure 4.3: Criteria for determining allowed capacity based on PN 4.4. For traffic between 1 x 106 and 15 x 106 they recommend a hot mix asphalt layer. Figure 4.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Category A (95% Reliability) Category B (90% Reliability) Source: Jooste and Long (2007).

Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements .4: Recommended layer thicknesses versus structural capacity Austroads 2011 — 24 — . Figure 4. Source: Jooste and Long (2007).

The guide presents design charts instead of design equations.2 Design Procedure 5. (2004). Fully hydraulically bound Fully viscoelastically bound Family 1 . For each road type category. Figure 5. fully visco-elastic bound and unbound material.1 Background A design guide was developed by the Transportation Research Laboratory (TRL) in the United Kingdom for the design and use of cold recycled materials for pavements (Merrill et al.1. different levels of risk are assigned. The four materials are defined as:  quick hydraulic (QH) with hydraulic only binder(s) including cement  slow hydraulic (SH) with hydraulic only binder(s) excluding cement  quick visco-elastic (QVE) with bituminous and hydraulic binder(s) including cement  slow visco-elastic (SVE) with bituminous only or bituminous and hydraulic binder(s) excluding cement. The guide defines three families of materials.1 Road Type Categories The first two steps of the TRL design method are to classify the pavement by the expected traffic and the foundation class. in which foamed bitumen mixes are classified within the visco-elastic ‘hydraulic’ binders (Family 3). assuming that foamed bitumen mixes behave similar to hot asphalt mixes.Visco-elastic / ‘Hydraulic’ binders Unbound Family 2 .Hydraulic binders Family 3 .Viscoelastic binders Source: Merrill et al.1: Identification of material families 5. The guide covers all material types that could be considered as cold recycled materials and both in situ and ex situ (recycled in plant) construction processes. 2004). presented in Figure 5. The charts were developed using asphalt fatigue relationships developed in previous research reports (Nunn 2004). Austroads 2011 — 25 — .Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 5 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH LABORATORY 5. Recycled materials using combinations of binder and curing behaviour can be characterised by areas within this chart. Traffic is described in terms of a cumulative number of equivalent 80 kN standard axles.2. The apexes of this diagram correspond to fully hydraulic bound. These road categories are defined in terms of million standards axles (MSA) in Table 5.1. Four material types that fall into three material families are illustrated.

1: Road type category for TRL method Road type category Traffic design standard (ESA x 106) 0 30 < Traffic < 80 1 10 < Traffic < 30 2 2. Once the conditioning is finished the indirect tensile resilient modulus is measured and the mix is classified using Table 5. Table 5. the designer selects the appropriate thickness design chart for the foundation class. the thickness for the design traffic can be determined for the curve associated with the material zone. Table 5. For instance. The four foundation classes are listed in Table 5.3 Classification of Foamed Bitumen Mixes and Design Chart Bitumen bound materials are classified according to their stiffness measured in the indirect tensile resilient modulus test. 5.2. Once the foamed bitumen mix is classified.3 shows a minimum long-term stiffness for each class which should be demonstrated in the specification using laboratory conditioning regimes defined in the guide in the mix design process.35 is proposed for the modelling of all foundation classes. Queensland method for foamed bitumen mixes (2200 MPa) classifies between zone B1 and B2.5 4 < 0.2.5 < Traffic < 10 3 0. (2004). Once wrapped.5 Source: Merrill et al. The foundation stiffness classes are defined in terms of the equivalent half-space stiffness of the composite foundations. the specimen is placed in a sealed plastic bag and then put in air or water at 40 °C for 28 days. which represents the long term stiffness of the foundation. the assumed resilient modulus for the Department of Transport and Main Roads. A Poisson’s ratio of 0.2: Foundation classes for TRL method Foundation class Assumed foundation support (MPa) 1 50 2 100 3 200 4 400 Source: Nunn (2004). The guide classifies the mixes into one of three zones labelled B1.5 < Traffic < 2. B2 and B3.2.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Table 5.3. The foamed bitumen specimens are compacted in the laboratory and later wrapped in cling-film plastic. 5.2 Foundation Class The method proposes foundation stiffness classes. Austroads 2011 — 26 — .

the designer has to use the expected traffic input data (X-axis in Figure 5. these minimum thickness requirements may give excess structural capacity and overly low risk of failure. Figure 5. (2004).4).Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Table 5. Foundation Class 1 For low volume roads. Therefore. Once the material zone is defined (Zones 1. expressed in ESA x 106) and read the intersection of the traffic with the material zone.2.2 shows an example of the design curves used in the TRL guideline.3: Bitumen bound cold recycled material classification for TRL method Bitumen bound cold recycled zone Minimum long-term stiffness (MPa) measured after 28 days B1 1900 B2 2500 B3 3100 Source: Merrill et al. (2004). an alternative table with recommended thicknesses is provided for roads with traffic less than 5 x 106 ESA (Table 5. using laboratory resilient modulus measurements. Austroads 2011 — 27 — .2: Design curves for bitumen bound cold recycled material. The designer has to first decide which material zone is representative of the foamed bitumen mixes to be used in the field. Figure 5. Total thickness of bound layer (mm) 500 T h e s e d e s ig n s in c lu d e u p t o 1 0 0 m m a s p h a lt s u r f a c in g 450 400 350 300 250 M a te r ia l Z o n e s (T a b le 9 ) 200 Zone B1 Zone B2 Zone B3 150 100 1 10 100 6 T r a f f ic ( E S A x 1 0 ) Source: Merrill et al. 2 or 3). which gives the thickness of the foamed bitumen layer.

5. For example. which relies on the traffic category. For Class B1 and B2 materials the compensation of the structural course can be determined using the equivalence relationship given in Equation 9: H RBase  1.2. for Type 1 and Type 2 roads the thickness of the surfacing placed on top of the bitumen bound cold recycled material can be reduced to a minimum of 50 mm with a compensating increase in the thickness of the cold recycled structural course.5 < Traffic < 10 50 3 0.5: Requirements for surfacing thickness for TRL method Road type category Traffic design standard (ESA x 106) Minimum thickness of surfacing (mm) 0 30 < Traffic < 80 100 1 10 < Traffic < 30 70 2 2.5 40 Source: Merrill et al.4 Minimum Surface Requirements Table 5.5 < Traffic < 2.3  H Surfacing where HSurfacing = change in the thickness of bituminous surfacing HRBase = change in the thickness of bitumen bound cold recycled base.4: Thickness design of pavements up to 5 x 106 ESA Type 2 road Surfacing thickness (mm) Type 3 road Type 4 road 40 100 40 100 40 100 <2 n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r 2–4 n/r n/r n/r 310 320 195 5–7 n/r n/r 330 290 300 1858 8–14 n/r 300 315 275 285 160 > 15 n/r 270 285 245 255 150 Subgrade design CBR Source: Merrill et al. However.5 shows the minimum thickness of surfacing. (2004).Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Table 5. Austroads 2011 — 28 — 9 .5 40 4 < 0. (2004). a bitumen bound pavement design with a 100 mm surfacing could be reduced to a 50 mm surfacing with a corresponding increase of 65 mm in the thickness of the cold recycled layer. Table 5.

8%). This method also incorporates some practical aspects that are inexistent in the other mechanistic methods. The study consists of the rehabilitation of an existing unbound granular pavement using the in situ foamed bitumen stabilisation technique. with some modifications. several limitations have been found by practitioners in the distress equations (Jenkins et al. Due to the uncertainty of the performance of the foamed bitumen layers. The TMR and TRL assumed that foamed bitumen mixes behave similarly to hot mix asphalt mixes and therefore fatigue relationships. which involves the design of a foamed bitumen pavement using the six methods presented above.1 Summary of Design Methods Six design methodologies for the design of foamed bitumen pavements have been presented in the previous sections. objective point of view. data and distress modes. The table shows that design methods have been developed using very different assumptions. Although this method is very different to the TMR method. The fatigue distress mode proposed by TMR has been observed in Queensland foamed bitumen projects. which is the only empirical method found in the literature. they arrive to similar predictions of pavement life at typical strain levels. However. new material and therefore more advanced testing was conducted to understand the fundamental performance of these mixes (i. a hypothetical case study was conducted. this assumption is based on engineering judgment and there is no data available to firmly support this approach. were adopted for the thickness design. the distress equations were developed using a foamed bitumen layer stabilised with a high (2%) cement content and low bitumen content (1. A summary and comparison of the methods are presented in Table 6.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 6 COMPARISON OF PAVEMENT DESIGNS 6. In the development of the TG2 2002 Guidelines method the foamed bitumen layer was treated as a different. However. which could not be totally representative of the normal long-term deterioration on this type of pavement. but only in early failures. The City of Canning is the only method that sublayers the foamed bitumen layer assuming different elastic modulus at different depths. such as the recommended surface thickness and the minimum and maximum thickness for the foamed bitumen layer. as described in the following section.e. However. Austroads 2011 — 29 — . accelerated full-scale testing). the method recommends an elastic modulus based on the observation of foamed bitumen pavements in New Zealand. Furthermore. A different approach was adopted by the ‘knowledge-based’ South African method. Pavement thickness design assumes rutting and shape loss is the main distress mode.1. NZ Transport Agency adopted a slightly different procedure. which is not the common practice in Australia. 2008). In order to compare the design methods from a more practical. which ignores the fatigue of the foamed bitumen layer. The City of Canning developed a fatigue relationship using data from several flexural fatigue tests.

Not observed Permanent deformation of subgrade. laboratory Engineering judgment Flexural beam fatigue tests and indirect tensile resilient modulus tests Observed behaviour of NZ pavements APT. collected data from APT. Not specified Sprayed seal for ESA<106 40–100 mm asphalt depending on the traffic (Table 5.4) Not specified Austroads 2011 — 30 — Not specified Not specified Minimum foundation value of 50 MPa . design catalogues and LTTP sections Not specified Assumed distress mode Fatigue followed by rutting of the foamed bitumen layer (observed) Fatigue of foamed bitumen layer (observed in early failure of pavements) Fatigue of foamed bitumen layer. HMA thickness is determined using fatigue life of asphalt with a minimum of 40 mm 5% CBR. based on early pavement failures 30–50 mm asphalt for ESA>106 (Figure 4. Not observed General pavement condition Fatigue Type of model Mechanistic Mechanistic Mechanistic Mechanistic Empirical Mechanistic Recommended minimum thickness Not specified Not specified Not specified Not specified 100 mm 150 mm Recommended maximum thickness Not specified Not specified Not specified Not specified 350 mm Not specified Minimum surfacing requirements Not specified Sprayed seal for ESA<107 Generally 30 mm of asphalt.5) Minimum subgrade support Not specified Country HMA is recommended for ESA>107.1: Summary of design methods TG2 2002 TMR City of Canning NZ Transport Agency Knowledge Based TG2 2009 TRL South Africa Australia Australia New Zealand South Africa United Kingdom Design models used with South African Mechanistic Design Method Austroads design method Austroads design method Austroads design method New ‘knowledge’ design method TRL design method Observed.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Table 6.

thickness).2. and if a low RD value was assigned to the foamed bitumen layer.2. the design should be carried out using a 95% confidence level. The pavement consists of a subgrade layer (CBR 5%).1 Description of the Example Project An unbound granular pavement (Figure 6. It was assumed a class material ‘FB3’ (Table 2. an unbound granular subbase (250 mm) and an unbound granular base (150 mm). Surface = ? 150 mm Granular Base Foamed Bitumen Base Granular Subbase Subgrade X mm Sprayed Seal 250 mm 5 x 106 ESA Granular Subbase CBR=5% Subgrade Figure 6. The foamed bitumen treatment needs to strengthen the pavement for a design traffic loading of 5 x 106 ESA.2 Case Study 6. since the cement to bitumen ratio (cem/bit) 1 to 3 (1/3) is more representative of foamed bitumen mixes used in Australia and New Zealand.1: Pavement rehabilitation case study 6. The elastic modulus of the subbase (150 MPa) was determined using recommendations of the South African Mechanistic Design Method (Theyse et al.2 TG2 2002 Design For the South African TG2 2002 Guidelines design method the pavement was modelled in the linear elastic program mePADS (CSIR 2001). it was impossible to achieve the traffic design. following the recommendations of the guidelines. It was found that the second ‘equivalent granular’ phase equation was very sensitive to relative density (RD). The Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (WMAPT) of the site is 25 °C.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 6. For the second phase there is not an elastic modulus value recommended in the TG2 2002 Guidelines. 1996). The elastic modulus adopted for the first phase was E = 1100 MPa (Table 2. For methods that provide for project reliability. A problem was found during the design of the foamed bitumen pavement using the TG2 2002 Guidelines method. There is not a recommended RD value in the TG2 Austroads 2011 — 31 — .3). The design should specify the foamed bitumen thickness and the surface requirements (type. The sprayed seal surface was modelled as a 10 mm thick basecourse material. and an arbitrary modulus of 600 MPa was adopted.3).1) needs to be rehabilitated using in situ foamed bitumen stabilisation (recycling).

Queensland Design The assumed elastic modulus of the foamed bitumen layer was E = 2200 MPa. No temperature correction in the stiffness of the foamed bitumen layer is needed since the WMAPT of the site is 25 °C (Table 3.68 0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 2002 Guidelines for foamed bitumen mixes. depending on the relative density is achieved.83 Relative Density Figure 6.2).2.0E+07 7. 0. 6.75 0. Details of the calculation are presented in Appendix B. The tensile strains at the base of the foamed bitumen under an 80kN standard axle load were calculated using the linear elastic model CIRCLY (2009). the most conservative layer thickness (300 mm) was assumed as the solution of the TG2 2002 Guidelines method5.75 and 0. Therefore. therefore.4 of the Austroads (2009).5E+06 Design Traffic 5. Austroads 2011 — 32 — . Results showed that the three pavement thickness could satisfy the traffic design. Representative RD values for foamed bitumen mixes were searched in the laboratory report of the HVS testing (Long & Theyse 2002) but this value varied widely depending on the bitumen and active filler used.80 (Figure 6. 5 The limitations of the TG2 South African Design Method have been discussed and published by South African researchers (Jenkins et al. 250 mm and 300 mm. the pavement was calculated for three RD values: 0.0E+00 0.80 0. The subgrade was considered anisotropic (Ev = 50 MPa.5E+06 0. The elastic modulus of the subbase was determined using Table 6. Eh = 25 MPa). or 300 mm if a relative density of 0. The structural contribution of the sprayed seal surface was not considered.2). The allowable loading repetitions to fatigue of the foamed bitumen was calculated from these strains using Equation 5 with Vb = 7%.2: Solution for different relative densities using the South African TG2 2002 design method The allowable load repetitions of an 80 kN standard axles were calculated for foamed bitumen layer thicknesses of 200 mm.0E+06 2.5E+07 H=200 mm 1.70 0.3E+07 H=250 mm 80 kN Standard Axles H=300 mm 1.786 is achieved. For instance. 2008).73 0.3 Department of Transport and Main Roads. The elastic characterisation is summarised in Table 6. The subbase was sub-layered and considered anisotropic. 1. the thickness of the foamed bitumen layer could be 200 mm if a relative density of 0.78 0.2.754 is achieved.70.

35 18 67 34 0. The calculated thickness for the foamed bitumen layer is 288 mm.35 22 57 28 0.4 City of Canning Design The critical strains in the pavement under a standard axle load were calculated using the linear elastic model CIRCLY (2009).2. Eh = 25 MPa).35 22 82 41 0. The elastic moduli of the foamed bitumen sub-layers were defined following Table 6 (Leek 2009).2: Elastic characterisation using TMR method Layer Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa) Eh (MPa)  Sprayed seal surface - - - - Foamed bitumen base 310 2200 2200 0.3: Elastic charactersiation for use in the City of Canning method Layer Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa) Eh (MPa)  Sprayed seal surface - - - - Foamed bitumen layer 1 96 4300 4300 0. Austroads 2011 — 33 — . The sprayed seal surface was not modelled in CIRCLY. Table 6.35 Sem-infinite 50 25 0.3.35 18 55 28 0.35 22 73 37 0.2). The subgrade was considered anisotropic (Ev = 50 MPa.45 Subgrade 6. Details of the calculation are presented in Appendix B. Queensland (TMR) method. Details of the calculation are presented in Appendix B. The elastic modulus of the subbase was determined using Table 6.35 22 64 32 0.4 of Austroads (2009).40 Foamed bitumen layer 3 96 2600 2600 0. The thickness of the foamed bitumen layer is 310 mm.45 Subgrade The allowable loading in terms of fatigue was calculated from the calculated tensile strains using the City of Canning fatigue relationship (refer to Section 3.35 Sem-infinite 50 25 0.3. The subbase was sub-layered and considered anisotropic. The elastic characterisation is summarised in Table 6.40 Granular subbase 22 93 47 0.40 Subbase 18 82 41 0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Sm = 2200 MPa following the recommendations provided by the Department of Transport and Main Roads.35 18 74 37 0.35 18 61 31 0.40 Foamed bitumen layer 2 96 3600 3600 0. Table 6.

The thickness of the foamed bitumen layer is 220 mm.35 39 61 31 0. The elastic characterisation is summarised in Table 7.5 NZ Transport Agency Design The foamed bitumen layer was modelled as anisotropic (Ev = 800. The design was considered as the average of the two thicknesses. the design of the pavement rehabilitation was carried out for the three ‘zones’ of bitumen mixes (B1. The three treatments required an asphalt surface thickness of 50 mm. As this design method does not consider fatigue of foamed bitumen. since the foundation is between class 1 and 2. The structural contribution of the sprayed seal surface was not considered. The critical strains in the pavement under an 80 kN standard axle load were calculated using the linear elastic model CIRCLY (2009).35 Sem-infinite 50 25 0.5).6 Transportation Research Laboratory (TRL) Design For 5 x 106 ESA the rehabilitated road classifies as category 2 (between 0. Because the classification of the foamed bitumen mixes is not known. Eh = 25 MPa). see Table 5. the foundation class for the current pavement rehabilitation design should lie between class 1 and 2. B2 and B3). Eh = 400 MPa) with no sub-layering. Table 5. The subbase was sub-layered and considered anisotropic.4: NZ Transport Agency elastic characterisation Layer Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa) Eh (MPa)  Sprayed seal surface - - - - Foamed bitumen base 220 800 400 0. The foundation class corresponding to 50 MPa (CBR = 5%) is class 1. the thickness of the foamed bitumen layer was determined from the design guide charts (similar to Figure 5.1). The subgrade was anisotropic (Ev = 50 MPa.2) for foundation class 1 and 2. The same procedure was applied for the three ‘zones’ of bitumen mixes (B1. the allowable loading in terms of permanent deformation was estimated from the vertical compressive strain on top of subgrade and Equation 7.45 Subgrade 6. Details of the calculations are presented in Appendix B and the solutions for the tree zones in Table 6. Austroads 2011 — 34 — . Therefore.30 Granular subbase 39 135 68 0. B2 and B3.35 39 74 37 0.5 x 106 and 10 x 106.35 39 91 46 0. Using the design traffic loading. however.2.1. Details of the calculation are presented in Appendix B. and because of the simplicity of this design method.35 39 110 55 0.2.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 6. the remaining subbase layer below the foamed bitumen layer will contribute to an increase in this support value.2.3). which is the minimum surface thickness recommended for road type 2 categories (Table 5. Table 6.

6: Solutions using the knowledge-based TG2 2009 method Layer Material zone BSM1 BSM26 Hot mix asphalt (mm) 90 150 Foamed bitumen base (mm) 320 350 Subbase (mm) 80 50 Subgrade - - 6 This material class gives a hot mix asphalt surface thickness that exceeds the maximum recommended thickness. the method recommends adding an additional fourth layer by subdividing the top of the subgrade into two layers. In that case. The stiffness for a CBR 5% subgrade is 60 MPa using CSIR South African relationships (Paterson 1978). the relatively weak support assumed in the case study was not sufficient to deliver a feasible solution for BSM2.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Table 6. Assuming moderate climate conditions and a cover below 500 mm. By definition. Table 6. the PN consists of the sum of the load spreading contributions of four pavement layers above the subgrade.10 MPa). foamed bitumen layer and subbase) has only three layers above the subgrade.3. Austroads 2011 — 35 — . which exceeds the maximum recommended thickness for the hot mix asphalt layer (see Section 4. the required asphalt surface had to be increased up to 150 mm.7 Material zone B1 B2 B3 Asphalt surface (mm) 50 50 50 Foamed bitumen base (mm) 320 300 290 Subbase (mm) 80 100 110 Knowledge-based TG2 2009 Design For 5 x 106 ESA the pavement number (PN) required by the knowledge-based design method is approximately 23. BSM1 required a thick asphalt surface (90 mm) plus a 320 mm foam bitumen layer to attain a PN of 23. the proposed solution (asphalt layer. and therefore was not considered as a solution in the rehabilitation design. Details of the calculation are presented in Appendix B. Since BSM2 is a weaker material. The material class assigned to this new ‘fourth’ sub-layer should be that of the subgrade.1). However. Although a design was sought for both BSM1 and BSM2 materials.9 . the calculated subgrade ELTS is 44 MPa (= 60 x 0.5: Rehabilitation treatment using the TRL method Layer 6.2. determined using the 95% reliability curve presented in Figure 4. the upper layer with a thickness of 100 mm.4.

0 x 106 ESA. The TG2 2002 Guidelines design method also gives a 300 mm thickness for the foamed bitumen layer. Another important observation on this design method is made on Equation 2 (permanent deformation of the foamed bitumen layer). this value decreases to 2.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 6.2. TNZ 220 288 QDMR 310 300 400 TG2 City of Canning 90 320 50 (BSM1) 290 Knowledge (B3) 50 TRL (B2) 300 TRL (B1) 50 TRL 320 400 CBR 5% CBR 5% Asphalt Surface Seal Foamed bitumen Existing Subbase Figure 6.75 to 0. For instance.FB) and the cement to bitumen ratio (cem/bit).8 Summary of Designs and Discussion A summary of the results for all design methods is presented in Figure 6.3: Summary of pavement thicknesses (millimetres) for all design methods The figure shows that most of the thicknesses of the foamed bitumen layers are close to 300 mm.5 x 107 ESA.3. if the same 300 mm thickness is assumed but if relative density increases from 0.80. if a RD = 0. In this equation there is a power relationship between the number of admissible load repetitions (NPD. Conversely. however. it was found that this value is highly sensitive to the relative density (RD) of the foamed bitumen mix.70 is achieved. The proposed relationship indicates that an increase in the foamed bitumen content for a constant cement Austroads 2011 — 36 — . the allowed loading increases from 5 x 106 ESA to 12.

5). Despite the low thickness. This contradicts the observed behaviour in the recently completed full-scale testing of foamed bitumen pavements conducted by the NZ Transport Agency.0) would have a better resistance to permanent deformation than a mix with 1% cement and 2% foamed bitumen (cem/bit = 0. plus an additional thick asphalt layer (90 mm). indicating a consistency in the distress equations for these methods within the studied strain range.1) but the assumed elastic moduli are higher leading to lower tensile strains at the bottom of the stabilised layer. The thick asphalt layer was needed to attain the design pavement number (PN). it is recommended as an interim solution the design of foamed bitumen pavements using the fatigue equation adopted by TMR. The deficiencies found in the TG2 2002 Guidelines method have also been discussed by South African researchers (Jenkins et al. and only a limited number of foamed bitumen sections have been incorporated into the knowledge-based data set. a mix with 1% cement with 1% foamed bitumen (cem/bit = 1. since the fatigue relationship reported by Leek (2009) is similar to that used by the TMR (Figure 3. However. for a constant cement content of 1% (Gonzalez et al.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements content. The pavement methods assuming behaviour of foamed bitumen mixes similar to those of hot mix asphalt mixes (TMR and TRL) yield similar foamed bitumen layer thicknesses (between 290 mm to 310 mm). since a foamed bitumen layer thickness of 320 was required. Details of the interim design method are presented in the following section. 2008). The NZ Transport Agency method produced a significantly lower foamed bitumen thickness (220 mm). in press). the NZ Transport Agency procedure was found conservative when foamed bitumen pavements were tested under accelerated loading in the full-scale testing of foamed bitumen pavements conducted by the NZ Transport Agency (Gonzalez et al. it is important to notice that this design method is currently under development. decreases the number of admissible load repetitions for the foamed bitumen layer. Austroads 2011 — 37 — . in press). primarily because fatigue of foamed bitumen is not recognised as a distress mode. The knowledge-based TG2 2009 method provided the most conservative solutions. in which better performance was observed in pavements with higher foamed bitumen contents. The City of Canning design procedure yields a slightly thinner thickness but within the same range (288 mm). since the thickness of the foamed bitumen and unbound subbase layers (400 mm) did not yield the minimum required PN value of 23. Although the design methods provide different solutions. For instance.

4. the minimum laboratory curing time and modulus values suggested in Table 7. to minimise the risk of rutting (Jones & Ramanujam 2008). Where the trafficking arrangements differ from this. The indirect tensile modulus is measured following AS 2891.1 may require adjustment to reflect actual construction practice. The elastic characterisation of foamed bitumen mixes is similar to that of asphalt.2.1: Minimum mix design limits for initial modulus Average daily ESA in design year of opening Initial modulus (MPa) < 100 500 ≥ 100 700 Source: Jones and Ramanujam (2008).2. In addition. preparation of foamed bitumen mixes using Marshall Compaction is also accepted if this method is used for the compaction of hot mix asphalt or gyratory compactor is not available. However. 7. An example of the design procedure is presented in Appendix D. The proposed interim design procedure assumes the stabilisation treatment results in sufficient residual bitumen to produce a bound layer with significant tensile strength.3 and Section 7. Details of the proposed interim design procedure are given in Appendix C. specimens should be prepared using gyratory compaction (AS 2891. Usually a minimum of 3% residual bitumen is required to produce a bound foamed bitumen pavement. The technical basis of these new interim procedures is described in Section 7. This issue is discussed in Section 7.13. The initial modulus is measured after three hours of air-drying at 25 °C (± 5 °C). procedures need to be developed to adjust the measured indirect tensile moduli for the effect of temperature and loading rate. it is recommended that foamed bitumen stabilised layers be designed as a bound pavement layer using the Austroads (2009) asphalt fatigue relationship for asphalt with appropriate moduli and volume of bitumen binder. Austroads 2011 — 38 — .1.13. This risk is minimised by ensuring the initial modulus of the stabilised material is greater than the indicative values provided in Table 7. However. Table 7.2). The interim method is applicable to either in situ stabilised (recycled) pavements or foamed bitumen mixes prepared in plant.1 Introduction As an interim measure.1-1995 (Standards Australia 1995). foamed bitumen mixes should attain minimum stiffness values immediately after construction and in the medium to long term period.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 7 INTERIM PROCEDURE FOR THE THICKNESS DESIGN OF FOAMED BITUMEN PAVEMENTS 7.1-1995.2 Minimum Stiffness Requirements Foamed bitumen stabilised pavements have shown to be susceptible to premature rutting early in their life. These values assume the pavement will be opened to traffic within three hours of compaction being completed. The proposed design procedure should be used with the Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 2 (Austroads 2010). According to AS 2891.

5% and 1.3: Minimum mix design limits for dry modulus for foamed bitumen subbase Average daily ESA in design year of opening Minimum dry modulus (MPa) Minimum soaked modulus (MPa) Minimum retained modulus ratio < 100 2500 1500 40% 100–1000 2500 1500 45% > 1000 2500 1500 50% Source: Jones and Ramanujam (2008). which were used to develop the load rate adjustment factor discussed in Section 7.5%). This temperature regime is aimed at simulating the medium term (3 to 6 months) stiffness properties of the stabilised layer. Details of the measurements are listed in Table 7. To ensure the foamed bitumen stabilised pavements are structurally sound in the medium to longer term.4. the test specimens are air-dried in the oven for 72 hours at 40 °C. Table 7. laboratory test specimens (at the design binder content) should comply with the requirements listed in Table 7. the measured modulus needs to be adjusted to the in-service temperature. The original pavement before rehabilitation normally consisted of:  a thin asphalt surface (or also called ‘reclaimed asphalt pavement’. RAP)  a granular base  a granular subbase. and quick lime was used as active filler (between 0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Following the initial modulus testing being completed. The indirect tensile resilient modulus tests were also conducted at different load rise times (between 25 ms and 100 ms). or Table 7. Leek (2001) conducted several indirect tensile resilient modulus tests at different temperatures (between 20 °C and 35 °C).3 Temperature Adjustment Where the in-service pavement temperature (WMAPT) differs from the temperature at which the laboratory indirect tensile resilient modulus is measured (25 °C). The foamed bitumen content used in the rehabilitation ranged from 3. Table 7. The RAP content was about 10-15% of the total mass of the foamed bitumen mix. This section describes how the temperature correction method was developed.2 when used as a base. 7.4.1-1995 (Standards Australia 1995).13.2: Minimum mix design limits for dry modulus for foamed bitumen base Average daily ESA in design year of opening Minimum dry modulus (MPa) Minimum soaked modulus (MPa) Minimum retained modulus ratio < 100 2500 1500 40% 100–1000 3000 1800 45% > 1000 4000 2000 50% Source: Jones and Ramanujam (2008). on cored specimens extracted from foamed bitumen pavements in the City of Canning.3 when used as a subbase.1% to 4. The modulus is measured following AS 2891.2%. Although these moduli are very Austroads 2011 — 39 — .

The existing asphalt concrete layer was recycled with some existing weathered granite subgrade to produce a foamed bitumen treated layer 200 mm thick. In California. the results for 2005 are plotted in Figure 7. Fu and Harvey (2007) performed a temperature sensitivity study on a rehabilitated pavement using foamed bitumen recycling. The nominal Portland cement and bitumen contents were 1.0% and 2.1 a. This data were normalised and expressed in exponential form in Equation 10: Modulus at WMAPT Modulus at test temperature (T) = exp(-0. hence the RAP content of the mix was approximately 75% of the total mass.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements high compared to common design moduli. In the Austroads 2011 — 40 — . respectively. The original structure before rehabilitation contained conventional HMA with a nominal thickness of 150 mm. The stiffness of the foamed bitumen layer was back-calculated using FWD data. FWD testing was carried after one year (2003) and three years (2005) of rehabilitation at different pavement temperatures.1 b.5%. which was overlaid with 37 mm of asphalt concrete.025[WMAPT-T]) 10 where WMAPT = Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (°C) T = Temperature of indirect tensile resilient modulus test (°C). they were utilised to develop the temperature and loading rate adjustments. Data from both years show a trend of decreasing foamed bitumen stiffness with increasing temperature. The relationship between subsurface temperature at 150 mm depth and the back-calculated foamed bitumen mix resilient modulus in 2003 is shown in Figure 7.4: Effect of temperature on indirect tensile resilient modulus test Temperature (°C) Rise time (ms) Modulus (MPa) 20 25 13 348 25 25 12 122 35 25 9 403 20 30 12 982 25 30 11 826 35 30 9 089 20 50 11 956 25 50 10 997 35 50 8 208 20 75 11 141 25 75 10 340 35 75 7 508 20 100 10 564 25 100 9 873 35 100 7 012 Source: Leek (2001). Table 7.

and it is assumed that the foamed bitumen mix has approximately constant stiffness at temperatures below 22 °C.0164 1/°C. The temperature sensitivity coefficient for the 2003 data is 0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 2003 data. Figure 7. Austroads 2011 — 41 — 11 . The temperature sensitivity coefficient for the 2005 data is 0.5% foamed bitumen and 1% cement) resilient modulus: (a) for 2003 data (b) for 2005 data Fu and Harvey found an equation to express the temperature sensitivity (Equation 11): M r (T0 )  10 (T T0 ) M r (T ) where Mr(T0) = resilient modulus at reference temperature T0 (MPa) Mr(T) = resilient modulus at temperature T (MPa)  = temperature coefficient (1/°C). there are no data for which the subsurface temperature is below 22 °C.1: Relation between subsurface temperature (at 150 mm deep) and back-calculated foamed bitumen mix (with 2. Source: Fu and Harvey (2007). In the 2005 data.03 1/°C from regression when the material temperature is higher than 22 °C. this trend appears to plateau at temperatures lower than 22 °C.

The temperature adjustment curve for hot mix asphalt (Austroads 2010) is also included in the figure for comparison. In the City of Canning pavements.038 after three years of construction WMAPT = Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (°C) T = Temperature of indirect tensile resilient modulus test (°C). by mass).0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (°C) Figure 7. 1.069 after one year of construction.2. Austroads (2010) 0.6 Using indirect tensile resilient modulus tests in the City of Canning (pavements with ~10-15% RAP) and 3.0 Temperature sensitivity increases with increase in the residual bitumen content Modulus at WMAPT 0. The three set of data are summarised in Figure 7.5% bitumen content (Fu & Harvey 2007) 0.1-4.4 Hot Mix Asphalt curve. Pavement with ~75% RAP and 2.2% foamed bitumen content (Leek 2001) 1.2 Using FWD data after three years of construction in California.2: Variation of modulus at weighted mean annual pavement temperature (WMAPT) from Leek (2001) laboratory tests and Fu and Harvey (2007) FWD data The figure shows that laboratory measurements conducted on the City of Canning pavement cores are less sensitive to temperature than California measurements. Pavement with ~75% RAP and 2. hence the residual bitumen content and the temperature sensitivity of the mix is Austroads 2011 — 42 — . Modulus at WMAPT = Modulus at test temperature (T) exp(-[WMAPT-T]) 12 where  = 0.8 Modulus at 25 °C 0. This higher temperature sensitivity is probably caused by the higher reclaimed asphalt content (RAP) in the California rehabilitated pavement (approximately 75% of the foamed bitumen mix.4 1. the RAP content was approximately 10-15% of the foamed bitumen mix (Leek 2001).2 0. 0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Equation 11 was converted to an exponential relationship consistent with Equation 10 as given in Equation 12.5% bitumen content (Fu & Harvey 2007) 1.6 Using FWD data after one year of construction in California. which depicts the variation of modulus with WMAPT.

3).5 0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements comparatively lower. Since thin asphalt pavements are more common in Australia.1 1. This section describes how the rate of loading adjustment was developed. =0. Using this equivalency and assuming traffic speed is inversely proportional to rise time.4 Rate of Loading Adjustment Where the in-service rate of loading (traffic speed) differs from the rate of loading at which the laboratory indirect tensile resilient modulus is measured (25 °C).3 and Equation 13: 1. Leek (2001) performed indirect tensile resilient modulus tests using different load rates (from 25 ms to 100 ms rise time).9 0. the relative modulus versus traffic speed relationship was determined as indicated in Figure 7.7 0.025 (Equation 12) should be used in most cases. Leek’s data was then used to determine the variation in modulus versus traffic speed.4.6 km/h. From this relationship. 7.0 0.6 0. Details of Leek (2001) measurements were listed in Table 7. in the cored specimens used for the temperature sensitivity study (Section 7.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Design speed (km/h) Figure 7.4 0.3: Variation of ratio of modulus at vehicle speed V to modulus from standard indirect tensile test (40 ms rise time) with design speed Austroads 2011 — 43 — . consistent with that for asphalt (Austroads 2010).2. the measured modulus needs to be adjusted to the in-service heavy vehicle traffic speed. In the analysis of the results it was assumed that a rise time of 40 ms is equivalent to an in-service traffic speed of 94.8 E at in-service speed E at 40 ms rise time 0. Conversely a HMA is more sensitive to temperature as depicted in Figure 7.

08  0.6 N = allowable number of load repetitions to fatigue of the foamed bitumen layer Vb = percentage by volume of bitumen in the foamed bitumen layer (normally between 6% and 8%) Smix = foamed bitumen mix modulus.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Modulus at speed V = Modulus at 40 ms rise time loading rate 0.  69181. Minimum Surface Requirements Based on the literature review and local practice adopted in Australia. a minimum of 30-40 mm hot mix asphalt layer is recommended. However. Where design traffic exceeds 107 ESA and the performance risk of a sprayed seal is considered unacceptable.36 S mix     5 14 where 7. measured using the indirect tensile resilient modulus test (MATTA testing) on soak specimens and corrected by temperature (Section 3. high loadings may result in embedment of a sprayed seal aggregate and therefore appropriate measures should be considered.46V0.856Vb   N   0.16 13 where V 7.2. for design traffic below 107 ESA either a sprayed seal or hot mix asphalt can be used.2)  = horizontal tensile strain at bottom of foamed bitumen layer produced by the load (microstrain).5 = heavy vehicle design speed (km/h). Fatigue Criteria In the interim design procedure the foamed bitumen stabilised layer is designed as a bound layer and the allowable loading in terms of fatigue adapted from the Austroads (2010) asphalt fatigue relationship with appropriate foamed bitumen moduli and volume of bituminous binder. Austroads 2011 — 44 — .

due to the applied loading. the stiffness measured in the indirect tensile resilient modulus test and the tensile strain at the bottom of the foamed bitumen layer. The assumed distress modes of the first and second phase are fatigue and permanent deformation. when the layer is in an intact. the layer reduces its stiffness. Austroads 2011 — 45 — . which is not the common practice in Australia and New Zealand. Australia)  City of Canning (Australia)  NZ Transport Agency (New Zealand)  Transportation Research Laboratory (TRL.  The full-scale data used for the development of the TG2 2002 Guidelines method suggests that foamed bitumen pavements behave in two separate phases. Based on this review. undamaged condition and provides fatigue resistance. 8. because the stiffness of the foamed bitumen layer is similar to that of a good quality granular base. plus extensive laboratory work. the distress models were developed using a foamed bitumen layer stabilised with a high cement content (higher than the foamed bitumen content). The asphalt fatigue relationship takes into account the volumetric properties of the mix. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Six different design methods for foamed bitumen pavements have been presented in this report. However. The second phase is called equivalent granular state. the deterioration observed in the field might be related to early failures and does not necessarily represent the long-term performance of foamed bitumen pavements.1 Review of Design Methods The first five sections of the report reviewed the basis of each pavement design method.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 8 SUMMARY. Queensland (TMR. data and distress modes. respectively.  The TMR adopted the Austroads asphalt fatigue relationship for the foamed bitumen layer. The critical response parameter for the effective fatigue phase is the maximum horizontal strain at the bottom of the foamed bitumen layer while the critical response for the equivalent granular state are the major and minor principal stresses at different locations of the layer. This phase is called ‘effective fatigue phase’ and ends when. based on field observations in Queensland. the following conclusions are drawn:  The pavement design methods for foamed bitumen pavements have been developed using a wide range of assumptions. The methods presented were:  TG2 2002 Guidelines (South Africa)  Department of Transport and Main Roads. The method assumes that fatigue is the primary distress mode. The fatigue relationship is used as part of the Austroads design method. The first phase starts after construction.  The TG2 2002 Guidelines method was developed using data from a full-scale accelerated testing of pavement sections. The distress equations are used as part of the South African Mechanistic Design Method. United Kingdom)  Knowledge-based TG2 2009 Guidelines (South Africa). However.

Austroads 2011 — 46 — . traffic and foamed bitumen type. full-scale accelerated testing and long-term performance of pavements. hence fatigue is the assumed distress mode.  The NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) design procedure argues that fatigue relationships are too conservative and do not represent the behaviour observed in New Zealand foamed bitumen pavements.2 Comparison of Pavement Designs In order to compare the design methods from a more practical. The method is based on a ‘pavement number’ (PN) that is calculated by multiplying the expected long-term stiffness of each layer with the respective thickness of the layer. The stiffness of the layers is corrected by other design factors such as the total pavement thickness above the subgrade. The pavement design was carried out using the six design methods showed that:  The TG2 2002 Guidelines method was found to be very sensitive to one of the inputs of the equivalent granular state distress model (i. These assumptions are mainly based on engineering judgment.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements  The City of Canning developed a fatigue relationship for foamed bitumen layers using data from flexural beams prepared and compacted in the field and tested in the laboratory.  A different approach was adopted by the ‘knowledge-based’ TG2 2009 South African method. The method is based on tables and charts that classify subgrade. because the fatigue relationship developed by the City of Canning is similar to that used by the TMR but the assumed stiffness of the foamed bitumen layer is higher. The results of the laboratory testing yielded similar results to that of the TMR fatigue relationship.  The pavement methods that assume behaviour of foamed bitumen mixes to be similar to that of hot mix asphalt mixes (TMR and TRL) yield similar foamed bitumen layer thicknesses (between 290 mm to 310 mm). which involved the design of a foamed bitumen pavement using the six design methods. which is the only empirical method found in the review. and the stiffness of the underlying layer. The case study consisted in the rehabilitation of an existing unbound granular pavement using in situ foamed bitumen stabilisation technique. objective point of view. The pavement thickness is calculated by reducing the vertical compressive strain at the top of the subgrade to the value obtained by the Austroads subgrade strain criteria. The method recommends an elastic modulus of 800 MPa (anisotropic. In addition. such as the recommended surface thickness and the minimum and maximum thickness for the foamed bitumen layer. Pavement designers in New Zealand consider the foamed bitumen layer as an unbound granular layer and consider the Austroads subgrade strain criterion only.e. but within the same range. relative density). The knowledge-based method also incorporates some practical aspects that are inexistent in other mechanistic methods. a hypothetical case study was conducted as part of the review. indicating consistency between assumptions and outputs. no sub-layering) for the modelling of the elastic properties of the foamed bitumen layer.  The City of Canning design procedure yields a slightly thinner thickness (288 mm) to those given by the TMR method. 8. the position of the layer within the pavement structure.  The TRL method assumes that foamed bitumen mixes behave similarly to hot mix asphalt mixes. The relationship between the PN and the pavement performance was calibrated using data from South African pavement design catalogues. It was found that the fatigue relationship is independent of the stiffness of the mixes. The City of Canning fatigue relationship for foamed bitumen is used as part of the Austroads design method. it was found that this distress model provides unexpected outputs that contradict observed behaviour in recently completed full-scale testing of foamed bitumen pavements.

40.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements  The less conservative pavement thickness was given by the NZ Transport Agency design procedure (220 mm). Based on the literature review and local practice adopted in Australia. following AS 2891. in which a thick asphalt layer (90 mm) was required in addition to the foamed bitumen layer. Austroads 2011 — 47 — . high loadings may result in embedment of a spray seal aggregate and therefore appropriate measures should be considered.1-1995 (Standards Australia 1995)  adjust the modulus for pavement temperature  adjust the modulus for load rate (vehicle speed).  Although the design methods provide different pavement thickness. because the distress of the foamed bitumen layer was ignored in the pavement design process. for design traffic below 107 ESA either a sprayed seal or hot mix asphalt can be used. The Austroads subgrade strain criterion was considered for the pavement design only.  The knowledge-based TG2 2009 method provided the most conservative solution. Due to the complexities involved in estimating the long term stiffness of the foamed bitumen layer. However. The interim thickness design procedure detailed in the document should be used pending further research. a minimum of 30-40 mm hot mix asphalt layer is recommended. and only a limited number of foamed bitumen sections have been incorporated into the knowledge-based data set. The assumed Poisson’s ratio is 0. it is recommended as an interim solution the design of foamed bitumen pavements using the fatigue equation adopted by TMR. 8.13. this design method is currently under development.3 Recommendations Based on the review conducted in this report. Where design traffic exceeds 107 ESA and the performance risk of a sprayed seal is considered unacceptable. However. the recommended method for determining the design modulus is as follows:  determine the indirect tensile resilient modulus in soaked specimens. The foamed bitumen layer should be considered isotropic and sublayering should not be applied in this layer. it is recommended to adopt the asphalt fatigue relationship for the design of foamed bitumen pavements.

AGPT02/10. Nottingham. New Zealand Institute of Highway Technology (NZIHT). DC. pp 137-45. Sydney. ‘Mix design considerations for cold and half-warm bituminous mixes with emphasis on foamed bitumen’. Austroads Pavement Research Group. ‘TG2: The design and use of foamed bitumen treated materials: shortcomings and imminent revisions’. Austroads. ‘Foamed bitumen stabilisation in New Zealand: projects. Sydney. Wellington. E & Stubstad. F 2008. Asphalt Academy 2002. Leiden. NSW. Sydney. Auckland. Development of relationships between laboratory loading rate and traffic speed. pp. New Zealand. South Africa. ’Temperature sensitivity of foamed asphalt mix stiffness: field and lab study’. Austroads 2010. International symposium on unbound granular aggregates in roads. Gonzalez. MN. Austroads 2009. no. Minneapolis. Recycling and stabilisation conference. Jenkins. New Zealand. Guide for design of pavement structures. Auckland. Cubrinovski. South Africa. Balkema. APRG document 00/16. AGPT05/08. B & Alabaster. PC 2000. University of Minnesota. Frobel. NZ. performance’. M. vol. ‘Rehabilitation of unbound granular pavements using foamed bitumen stabilisation’. Asphalt Academy. P & Harvey. South Africa. T & Hallet. New Zealand Institute of Highway Technology. Baltzer. pp. A. International conference on the bearing capacity of roads and airfields. 16 pp. GW & Hopman. Austroads. 219. Wellington. J & Ramanujam. Lukanen. New Zealand Institute of Highway Technology (NZIHT). technical recommendations for highways TRH4. A 2008. Transportation Research Record. University of Stellenbosch. K 2000. Pidwerbesky. Recycling and stabilisation conference. 31 pp. United Kingdom. R 1994. Guide to pavement technology: part 2: pavement structural design. Technical recommendations for highways: structural design of interurban and rural road pavements. USA. H. 301-10. J 2007. ‘Full-scale experiment on foam bitumen pavements in CAPTIF accelerated testing facility’. South Africa. D 2009. 4th Minneapolis. do’s and don’t’s. Committee of Land Transport Officials (COLTO) 1996. no. Pretoria. T 2008. JM 2004. NZ. 2008. PhD dissertation. Jameson. Ertman-Larson. Pretoria. Pavement analysis and design software.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements REFERENCES AASHTO 1993. ‘Foamed bitumen stabilisation in New Zealand: a performance review and lessons learnt’. Washington. Collings. Guide to pavement technology part 5: pavement evaluation and treatment design. Jenkins. International Journal of Pavement Engineering. CSIR 2001. technical guide no. 2094. ‘Prediction of AC mat temperature for routine load/deflection measurements’. D & Jooste. 2. USA pp 401-12. Recycling and stabilisation conference. 8. K. Department of Transport. 6th. Netherlands. New Zealand. NZ. Austroads 2011 — 48 — .S. Wellington. Auckland. Browne. NSW. The design and use of foamed bitumen treated materials: interim technical guidelines.TG2. Minnesota. NSW. Jones. Austroads. CSIR Transportek. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Fu. Pretoria.

A knowledge-based structural design method for pavements incorporating bitumen stabilized materials. Melbourne. AS 2891. City of Canning. Crowthorne. Gauteng Department of Public Transport and Public Works. The development of structural design models for foamed bitumen treated layers. Standards Australia 1995. no. pp. Hallmark Editions. ‘Review of the performance of in-situ foamed bitumen stabilised pavements’. M & Rust. H. Paterson.pdf. F 2001. SA. Melbourne. C 2010.za/popup/CR_2003_56/CR_2003_56. Melbourne. F & Long. National Institute for Transport and Road Research. Long. Jooste. WDL 1978.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Jones. Pretoria. Victoria. F 1996. NSW. 2001. I 2004. Brisbane.pdf.1:1995. Vic. Supplement to Part 2 Pavement Structural Design of the Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology. South Africa. Leek. Methods of sampling and testing asphalt. 611. South Africa. Nunn. Australian road engineering and maintenance conference.%20FINAL. Pretoria. MINCAD Systems.13. Nunn. CSIR Transportek. 20th.za/popup/CR-2001_32. Mincad Systems 2009. C 2009. D 2004. Roads and Works & SABITA. Uzan. Gauteng Department of Public Transport and Public Works. Vic. Circly manual. ARRB Transport Research. Qld.1: determination of the resilient modulus of asphalt: indirect tensile method. Transport Research Laboratory. F 2007. Leek. UK. 1985. Theyse. 5th. North Sydney. D. C 2001. ‘Review of the performance of insitu foamed bitumen stabilised pavements in the City of Canning’. M & Carswell. Laboratory testing for the HVS test sections on the N7 (TR11/1). 52-9. New Zealand Transport Agency 2007. Design of foamed bitumen stabilised pavements. Australia. Merrill. 615. Richmond South. H 2002. 1022. Long. Gauteng Department of Public Transport.co. J & Ramanujam. Brisbane. Australia. Overview of the South African mechanistic pavement design analysis method. F & Theyse. Pretoria. Qld. http://www. 2010. Wellington. South Africa. Australia. viewed 2 May 2011. In situ foamed bitumen stabilisation: the City of Canning experience. Pretoria. Pretoria. South Africa. J 2008. http://www. Queensland Department of Main Roads. F & Ventura. Vermont South. Long. Vic. Victoria. technical report RP/6/78. Transportation Research Record.co. Victoria. NZ. Pretoria. viewed 2 May 2011. UK. method 12. NZTA. CSIR Transportek. Leek. South Africa. Laboratory testing for the HVS sections road P243/1.gautranshvs. report no.gautrans-hvs. ‘Characterization of granular material’. Crowthorne.N7%20lab%20report. Transport Research Laboratory. D 2004. J 1985. report no. A guide to the use and specification of cold recycled materials for the maintenance of road pavements. South Africa. ARRB Transport Research conference. de Beer. New Zealand supplement to the Austroads pavement design guide. Queensland Department of Main Roads 2009. Austroads 2011 — 49 — . Background supplement to draft TRH4 (1978). Development of a more versatile approach to flexible and flexible composite pavement design. Pavement design manual.

0 Source: Jooste and Long (2007).6 Moderate 0. Table A 2: Climate adjustment factors Climate Stiffness value (MPa) Wet 0.9 Dry 1. Austroads 2011 — 50 — . Table A 3: Adjustment of subgrade stiffness Cover thickness (mm) Correction (in MPa) > 800 + 10 MPa < 500 -10 MPa Else = -10 + [(Cover – 500)/300 ] * 20 Source: Jooste and Long (2007).Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements APPENDIX A ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FOR THE TG2 2009 THICKNESS DESIGN METHOD Table A 1: Stiffness determination for subgrade Design equivalent material class for subgrade Stiffness value (MPa) G6 or better 180 G7 140 G8 100 G9 90 G10 70 Source: Jooste and Long (2007).

AC.4 90 -4.0 800 N/A High strength bitumen stabilised material.2 70 -5.8 400 0.0 600 1.4 Natural gravel Gravel-soil blend Source: Jooste and Long (2007).8 180 -2. S2. S3.7 140 -2.0 G7 1.0 G10 1.8 G3 1.7 G4 1.5 G8 1. normally using crushed stone or reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) source material BSM1 3. S5.0 3500 1.8 375 0. S5 2.1 G2 1.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Table A 4: Modular ratio limit and maximum allowed stiffness for pavement layers General material description Design equivalent material class Modular ratio limit Maximum allowed stiffness (MPa) Base confidence factor Hot mix asphalt (HMA) surfacing and base material AG. Austroads 2011 — 51 — .6 100 -3.0 G9 1.0 Medium strength bitumen stabilised material. AO 5.1 G6 1.0 450 0. normally using crushed stone or RAP source material BSM2 2.2 G5 1.9 500 0.0 Surface seals S1.7 Crushed stone material G1 2.8 Cement stabilised natural gravel C3 4 550 0.0 700 1. S4. AS.6 C4 3 400 0.8 320 0.0 Cement stabilised crushed stone C1 and C2 9 1500 0.

1 Stress (MPa) 0.35 Base 250 1 100 0. Loads ESA 5 000 000 Radius (mm) 92. Initial pavement Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa)  - - - Base 150 350 0.75 X1 (mm) -165 Y1 (mm) 0 X2 (mm) 165 Y2 (mm) 0 X3 (mm) 1 635 Y3 (mm) 0 X4 (mm) 1 965 Y4 (mm) 0 D.35 Ev (MPa)  10 600 0.35 Subgrade - 50 0.35 - 50 0.35 Subbase 150 150 0.35 Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa)  10 1 100 0. Rehabilitated pavement Phase 1 Surface Subgrade Phase 2 Surface Thickness (mm) Subgrade - C.35 Subbase 150 150 0.35 - 0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements APPENDIX B B. Reliability R 95% Austroads 2011 — 52 — Note 1 .35 Surface B.35 Subbase 250 250 0.35 Base 250 600 0.1 DETAILS OF THE THICKNESS DESIGN OF FOAMED BITUMEN PAVEMENTS TG2 2002 Pavement Design Method A.

80 0.00 18.33 0. This value was arbitrarily adopted.80 PS 18.33 N_Phase2 5 605 121 8 590 697 11 272 956 E_Total 6 479 406 9 665 272 12 508 683 E Phase 1 (MPa) N_Phase1 Note 2 Note 3 F. which is more representative of Australian pavement mixes than FB2 (1. Notes 1 2 3 An FB3 material class is assumed.8% FB and 2% cement).80 0.50 0.33 0. Value provided in TG2 2002 Guidelines. Austroads 2011 — 53 — .39 0. Calculation (H=200 mm) (H=250 mm) (H=300 mm) 1 100 1 100 1 100 eb (e) 490 490 490 e (e) 275 213 171 874 285 1 074 575 1 235 727 E Phase 2 (MPa) 600 600 600 Cohesion (kPa) 120 120 120 Friction angle (degree) 45 45 45 RD 0.00 18. Table B3.31 Cem/bitumen 0.00 sm1 290 224 182 sm3 0 0 0 SR 0. because this material class was defined using a mix with 3% FB and 1% cement.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements E.

45 37.35 - 50 25 0.2 TMR Design Method A. Notes 1 This value was corrected applying Evertical_max (top of the layer) from Table 6. the final thin subbase (approximately 90 mm) yields an Evertical_max smaller than Evertical_max = 150 MPa because the thickness is not enough to attain this value.0 Multiplier for Subgrade 1. Reliability R 95% Multiplier for FB 1.35 18 74 37 0.1 Stress (MPa) 0.75 X1 (mm) -165 Y1 (mm) 0 X2 (mm) 165 Y2 (mm) 0 X3 (mm) 1 635 Y3 (mm) 0 X4 (mm) 1 965 Y4 (mm) 0 D.35 259.45 Surface B. However. Rehabilitated pavement Surface Subgrade Note 1 C.35 18 61 31 0.35 185.4 in the Austroads Guide (Austroads 2010).6 E.35 18 55 28 0.2 Subgrade - 50 25 0.0 Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa) Eh (MPa)  - - - - Base 310 2 200 - 0.3 Subbase 250 250 125 0. Initial pavement Thickness mm) Ev (MPa) Eh (MPa)  f - - - - - Base 150 350 175 0.40 Subbase 18 82 41 0. Loads ESA 5 000 000 Radius (mm) 92.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements B.35 18 67 34 0. Austroads 2011 — 54 — .

the final thin subbase (approximately 112 mm) yields an Evertical_max smaller than Evertical_max = 150 MPa because the thickness is not enough to attain this value. Loads ESA 5 000 000 Radius (mm) 92.45 Surface B. Rehabilitated pavement Surface Subgrade Note 1 C. However.1 Stress (MPa) 0.2 Subgrade - 50 25 0.35 22 64 32 0. Notes 1 This value was corrected applying Evertical_max (top of the layer) from Table 6.35 185.40 FB Layer 3 96 2 600 - 0. Reliability R 95% Multiplier for FB 1.35 259. Austroads 2011 — 55 — .40 FB Layer 2 96 3 600 - 0.3 Subbase 250 250 125 0.35 22 73 36 0.3 City of Canning Design Method A.40 Subbase 22 93 47 0.0 Multiplier for subgrade 1.45 37.0 Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa) Eh (MPa)  - - - - FB Layer 1 96 4 300 - 0.6 E.35 22 82 41 0.35 22 57 28 0. Initial pavement Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa) Eh (MPa)  f - - - - - Base 150 350 175 0.4 in the Austroads Guide (Austroads 2010).75 X1 (mm) -165 Y1 (mm) 0 X2 (mm) 165 Y2 (mm) 0 X3 (mm) 1 635 Y3 (mm) 0 X4 (mm) 1 965 Y4 (mm) 0 D.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements B.35 - 50 25 0.

35 82.0 Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa) Eh (MPa)  f - - - 0.4 NZ Transport Agency Design Method A. This value was corrected applying Evertical_max (top of the layer) from Table 6. the final thin subbase (approximately 180 mm) yields an Evertical_max smaller than Evertical_max = 150 MPa because the thickness is not enough to attain this value. Reliability R 95% Multiplier for FB 1.5 Surface B.2 Subgrade - 50 25 0.3 39 91 46 0. However.1 Stress 0. Initial pavement Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa) Eh (MPa)  f - - - - - Base 150 350 175 0.75 X1 -165 Y1 0 X2 165 Y2 0 X3 1 635 Y3 0 X4 1 965 Y4 0 D.35 45.4 Subbase 39 135 68 0.35 - Base 220 800 400 0.30 615.35 259. Notes 1 2 Value assumed using NZ Supplement to the Austroads Pavement Design Guide (NZTA 2007).35 185.35 55. Rehabilitated pavement Phase 2 Surface Subgrade Note 1 Note 2 C.45 34.4 39 110 55 0. Loads ESA 5 000 000 Radius 92.4 in the Austroads Guide (Austroads 2010).35 100.3 Subbase 250 250 125 0.3 - 50 25 0.4 39 74 37 0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements B. Austroads 2011 — 56 — .35 67.2 39 61 31 0.6 E.0 Multiplier for subgrade 1.35 37.

5 TRL Design Method A. Foundation Class 2 D. Adopted design Austroads 2011 — 57 — . Traffic assessment Road type category Foundation class Requirements for surfacing thickness 2 1 to 2 50 mm Zone B1 340 mm Zone B2 320 mm Zone B3 300 mm Zone B1 305 mm Zone B2 285 mm Zone B3 275 mm Average Class 1 & 2 Adopted (mm) Subbase (mm) Surface (mm) Zone B1 323 320 80 50 Zone B2 303 300 100 50 Zone B3 288 290 110 50 B.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements B. Foundation Class 1 C.

BCF Layer PN Surfacing 90 AC 5. the subgrade was divided into 2 sub-layers. Design assuming BSM1 Thickness (mm) Material class Modular ratio Max emod (MPa) ELTS (MPa) Thickness adj. The PN.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements B.6.0.2 Subbase 80 G6 1.0 N/A 12.0 3500 1425 1. by definition.2 60 52 Subgrade 2 N/A Layer G10 44 Note 2 Pavement Number = Notes: 1 2 The adopted Base Confidence Factor (BCF) was 1.8 Subgrade 1 100 1. Initial pavement Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa) - - Base 150 350 Subbase 250 250 Subgrade - 50 Surface  B.1 Design Assuming Foamed Bitumen Material Class BSM1 A. Austroads 2011 — 58 — Note 1 23 . Parameters required Subgrade class G10 Initial stiffness 60 Climate Required PN 23 Moderate Climate adjustment 0.0 1 9.0 600 285 1.9 Cover depth 490 Cover adjustment -10 Subgrade ELTS 44 C. Therefore.8 FB Base 1 320 BSM1 3.0 N/A 0.8 180 95 1.6 Knowledge-based TG2 2009 Design Method B. has to be calculated using 4 layers.

Austroads 2011 — 59 — Note 1 23 .84 1.6.6 Subgrade ELTS 47.2 60 56.36 FB Base 1 350 BSM2 2. by definition.0 N/A 15.0 1.0 7. has to be calculated using 4 layers.4 C. Therefore. the subgrade was divided into 2 sub-layers.88 Subgrade 2 N/A G10 47.384 1.0 450 204. Initial pavement Thickness (mm) Ev (MPa) - - Base 150 350 Subbase 250 250 Subgrade - 50 Surface  B. BCF Layer PN Surfacing 150 AC 5.2 Design Assuming Foamed Bitumen Material Class BSM2 A.0 due to the thick surface asphalt layer.0 N/A 0. Design assuming BSM2 Layer Thickness (mm) Material class Modular ratio Max emod (MPa) ELTS (MPa) Thickness adj.51 Subgrade 1 100 G10 1.4 Note 2 Total PN= Notes: 1 2 The adopted Base Confidence Factor (BCF) was 1.9 Cover depth 550 Cover adjustment -6.0 3500 1023.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements B.8 180 102. Parameters required Subgrade class G10 Initial stiffness 60 Climate Required PN 23 Moderate Climate adjustment 0.768 1.17 Subbase 50 G6 1. The PN.

The two load associated distress modes that have been identified for foamed bitumen stabilised materials are (Jones & Ramanujam 2008):  rutting of the stabilised layer  fatigue cracking of the stabilised layer.0% to 4. The bitumen foam coats the fine fraction of the treated aggregate. The rutting of the stabilised layer can generally be avoided by confirming the stabilised materials meet minimum stiffness characteristics (Jones & Ramanujam 2008). creating a mastic that binds the larger particles of the aggregate skeleton. As with asphalt and cemented materials layers. Austroads 2011 — 60 — . it is recommended that foamed bitumen stabilised layers be designed as a bound pavement layer with allowable loading in terms of fatigue calculated using the Austroads asphalt fatigue relationship. In the foamed state bitumen can be mixed with aggregates at ambient temperatures and in situ moisture contents. currently there is no fatigue relationship for foamed bitumen pavements in the Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 5 (Austroads 2009).1 INTERIM DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR FOAMED BITUMEN PAVEMENTS Introduction Foamed bitumen is a hot bituminous binder that has been temporarily converted from a liquid state to a foamed state by addition of a small amount of water (2%-3% of the bitumen mass). In Australia the foamed bitumen content added to the aggregates normally ranges from 3. the failure criterion that relates to the stabilised layer for thickness design purposes is fatigue through horizontal tensile forces at the bottom of the layer. and the adhesion between the bituminous and hydraulic binders and the aggregate.1 Characterisation for Pavement Design Foamed bitumen mixes are generally stress dependent. As an interim measure. A minimum of 3% residual bitumen is required to produce a bound foamed bitumen pavement. Jenkins (2000) identified cases where this behaviour becomes less evident:  the inclusion of cement in the foamed mix  foamed bitumen contents approaching 4%. The strength/stiffness of foamed bitumen mixes is derived from:  friction between the aggregate particles  viscosity of the bituminous binder under operating conditions  cohesion within the mass resulting from the binder itself. It is assumed that the stabilisation treatment includes sufficient quantity of residual bitumen to produce a bound layer with significant tensile strength.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements APPENDIX C C. However. However.1.0% and lime is normally added (between 1% and 2%) to improve strength of the mix and dispersion of bitumen through the aggregate. C. Foamed bitumen stabilised layers are suitable for the following pavement types (Jones & Ramanujam 2008):  foamed bitumen stabilised base with thin asphalt or sprayed seal surfacing  foamed bitumen stabilised subbase with thick asphalt layer (>100 mm).

C.1 Temperature An important factor in determining the modulus of asphalt is temperature.025 for pavements with 10-15% of reclaimed asphalt pavement (most common for Australian pavements) and bitumen contents of 3-4%. Therefore. linear elastic solid. Due to the complexities involved in estimating the effect of all these factors on the long term stiffness of a foamed bitumen stabilised layer. In addition. Its effect. the viscoelastic effect of asphalt is not considered in the characterisation of foamed bitumen mixes. time)  temperature during mixing  in-service temperature  moisture content  rate of loading  age. If RAP content is higher a higher value of  may be appropriate 7 The testing on soaked specimens should be conducted at 25 °C after 3 days of accelerated air-drying at 40 °C. based on data obtained by indirect tensile resilient modulus testing (Leek 2001) and FWD testing on foamed bitumen pavements in California (Fu & Harvey 2007) is presented in Equation A1: Modulus at WMAPT Modulus at test temperature (T) = exp(-[WMAPT-T]) where  = 0.1-1995 (Standards Australia 1995)  adjust the modulus for pavement temperature  adjust the modulus for load rate. the stress dependency will be neglected for design purposes. the recommended method for determining the design modulus is as follows:  determine the indirect tensile resilient modulus in soaked specimens7. Austroads 2011 — 61 — A1 .13. the foamed bitumen mix will be approximated as an isotropic. following AS 2891.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Since in Australia the common practice is the addition of active filler and 3-4% foamed bitumen contents.2. the stiffness of which depends on temperature and loading rate (traffic speed).2 Factors Affecting Stiffness of Foamed Bitumen Mixes The design modulus of foamed bitumen treated materials is influenced by many factors:  properties of the untreated material  bitumen type and content  active filler type and content  foaming characteristics of the bitumen  curing conditions (temperature. followed by soaking in water under vacuum for 10 minutes. C.

2 0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements WMAPT = Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (°C) T = Temperature of indirect tensile resilient modulus test (°C). the effect of temperature variations is taken into account by estimating the layer moduli at the Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (WMAPT). 1. the loading time used will depend on the type of testing device and the shape of the load pulse as well as the depth below the pavement surface at which the modulus is being sought. which depicts the variation of modulus with WMAPT for different types of foamed bitumen mixes. the stiffness of foamed bitumen is also dependent on the rate at which it is loaded – the slower the rate.2 1. This effect is less significant than in hot mix asphalt mixes. the lower the modulus. together with the method for calculating the WMAPT.6 1.0 Modulus at WMAPT 0.4 0.4 1. WMAPT values for Australian and New Zealand cities are presented in Appendix B of the Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 2 (Austroads 2010). bus stops and parking areas. The previous equation is plotted in Figure C 1. Commonly.8 Modulus at 25 °C 0.6 0.2. Austroads 2011 — 62 — . but should be considered when foamed bitumen is used in pavement areas such as intersection approaches. When determining the modulus for a given traffic speed.0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (°C) Figure C 1: Variation of modulus at weighted mean annual pavement temperature (WMAPT) to modulus from standard indirect tensile test with weighted mean annual pavement temperature C.2 Rate of Loading (Traffic Speed) Because of the viscoelastic nature of the bituminous binder.

5 0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements The effect of rate of loading is indicated in Figure C 2.0 0. then the design moduli may be estimated by selecting a representative value of modulus from available published data.3. Austroads 2011 — 63 — .8 E at in-service speed E at 40 ms rise time 0.3 Determination of Design Foamed Bitumen Modulus and Poisson’s Ratio C.1 1. C.1 Definition of Design Modulus For pavement design purposes. 1.40 is assumed for foamed bitumen mixes. Repeat load triaxial testing (Jenkins 2000) has shown that Poisson’s ratio is stress dependent for mixes without active filler.6 0. considerable care is needed in selecting a value which will represent the proposed foamed bitumen mix in its field situation. C.3. If this is unavailable. the appropriate value of foamed bitumen modulus is an estimate of the value obtained from the resilient modulus measured using the standard indirect tensile test (ITT) adjusted to the in-service temperature (WMAPT) and for the rate of loading in the road-bed. However.9 0.2 Poisson’s Ratio Determination of a value for Poisson’s ratio from laboratory testing is difficult. For design purposes a Poisson’s ratio of 0.7 0.1-1995)) is the most commonly used laboratory test in Australia for the determination of foamed bitumen mix modulus.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Design speed (km/h) Figure C 2: Variation of ratio of modulus at vehicle speed V to modulus from standard indirect tensile test (40 ms rise time) with design speed C.4 0. because the testing equipment is relatively inexpensive and the test easy to conduct.3.3 Determination of Design Modulus from Measured Modulus The indirect tensile test (Standards Australia 1995 (AS 2891.13.

The specimens are tested after 72 hours of accelerated air-drying at 40 °C. while recording the extension of the perpendicular diametral plane. The results of resilient modulus tests can vary appreciably even between specimens of essentially the same composition tested on the same apparatus. pulsing of the load provides good simulation of loading produced by a succession of wheel loads. 5 Using the following relationship. with a pulse repetition period of 3 seconds. designers are advised not to assign a high level of accuracy or precision to a design modulus determined from the mean of a single set of triplicate specimens. Consideration needs to be given to the number of resilient modulus results required to achieve a representative and statistically significant design modulus.025[WMAPT-T]) This relationship is shown in Figure C 1.16 . 2 Select the WMAPT for the project location (from Appendix B of the Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 2 (Austroads 2010)). calculate the ratio of the modulus at the rate of loading inservice to the modulus at the laboratory loading rate (40 ms rise time): Modulus at speed V Modulus at test loading rate = The relationship is shown in Figure C 2. Peak load is controlled to produce a nominal strain of 50 microstrain on the perpendicular diametral plane. The rate of load application is pre-set by the user. calculate the ratio of the modulus at the in-service temperature (WMAPT) to the modulus at the laboratory test temperature (25 °C).Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements In this test. followed by soaking in water under 95 kPa vacuum for 10 minutes. Due to this variability. Modulus at WMAPT Modulus at test temperature (T) = exp(-0. Specimens should be prepared at the design moisture and binder content. Samples should be prepared in 150 mm diameter moulds. The steps involved in the determination of design modulus from laboratory tensile test modulus are as follows: 1 Determine (from project information) a representative value for heavy vehicle traffic speed (V km/h).46V0. Standard Reference Test Conditions are 40 ms rise time (time for the applied load to increase from 10% to 90% of its peak value) and 25 °C temperature. Marshall compaction (50 blows) is recommended for the preparation of laboratory indirect tensile resilient modulus samples. Austroads 2011 — 64 — 0. a pulsed load is applied to the diametral plane of a cylindrical specimen. variations in mix constituents and the limits of reproducibility of the test. 3 Conduct the indirect tensile test on a laboratory compacted specimen at the optimum foamed bitumen and moisture content using a rise time of 40 ms and a test temperature of 25 °C. regardless of material grading (Jones & Ramanujam 2008). Further variability is introduced due to the inherent unstable nature of the bitumen foam. While the stress and strain conditions developed within the specimen are complex and somewhat unrelated to those developed under traffic loading. Due to the simplicity and transportability of the compaction equipment. 4 Using the following relationship.

C. high loadings may result in embedment of a sprayed seal aggregate and therefore appropriate measures should be considered. with appropriate design moduli and volume of bituminous binder:  6918(0.856 Vb  1.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements 6 Correct the measured modulus for temperature and speed by multiplying the measured modulus by the temperature and load rate modulus ratios.4 Fatigue Criteria As an interim measure. C.2 of the Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 2 (Austroads 2010). Austroads 2011 — 65 — .5 N = allowable number of repetitions of the load  = tensile strain produced by the load (microstrain) Vb = percentage by volume of bitumen in the foamed bitumen stabilised material (%) Smix = foamed bitumen stabilised material modulus (MPa). However. Where design traffic exceeds 107 ESA and the performance risk of a sprayed seal is considered unacceptable.08)  N   0. An example of the design procedure is presented in Appendix D. it is recommended that the following fatigue relationship for foamed bitumen stabilised layers be used (adapted from that asphalt fatigue relationship recommended by Austroads (2009)). Calculation of Allowable Loads For the calculation of allowable traffic loading in the foamed bitumen layer refer to the mechanistic procedure described in Section 8. a minimum of 30–40 mm hot mix asphalt layer is recommended.6 Surfacing Requirements For design traffic below 107 ESA either a sprayed seal or hot mix asphalt can be used.36 S mix με   5 A2 where C.

The pavement consists of a subgrade layer (CBR 5%).1.1-1995.2 and Table 8.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements APPENDIX D DESIGN EXAMPLE USING INTERIM DESIGN PROCEDURE An unbound granular pavement (Figure D 1) needs to be rehabilitated using foamed bitumen stabilisation and a sprayed seal surface. The average indirect tensile resilient modulus is 2438 MPa. an unbound granular subbase (250 mm) and an unbound granular base (150 mm).3 of the Austroads Guide to Pavement Technology – Part 2 (Austroads 2010): Step 1 Try pavement composition of: Material type Thickness (mm) Sprayed seal surface - Foamed bitumen base 310 Unbound granular material 90 Subgrade. CBR = 5% Semi-infinite Austroads 2011 — 66 — . measured in 150 mm diameter specimens after 72 hours of accelerated air-drying at 40 °C. The specimens were tested after soaking in water (95 kPa vacuum for 10 minutes) following AS 2891. Table 8.5 °C and the traffic speed is 90 km/h.13. The desired project reliability is 95%. The foamed bitumen treatment needs to strengthen the pavement for a design traffic loading of 5 x 106 ESA. 5 x 106 ESA 250 mm Granular base Foamed bitumen base X mm 150 mm Sprayed Seal Granular subbase Granular subbase Subgrade Subgrade CBR=5% Figure D 1: Pavement rehabilitation case study Following the steps in Table 8. The Weighted Mean Annual Pavement Temperature (WMAPT) is 26.

3 MPa Ev5 = R x Ev subgrade = 1.3 = 74.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Step 2 Subgrade CBR = 5% Ev = 50 MPa Eh = 25 MPa h = v = 0.2 = 60. Step 6 No sublayering. Therefore. Austroads 2011 — 67 — .5 °C.104 x 74.40.5. Step 5 Not relevant. Step 4 Other granular subbase sublayers. Ev top of base = Ev subgrade x 2(total granular thickness/125) = 82 MPa Eh = 41 MPa.2). Heavy vehicle traffic speed = 90 km/h.2 MPa Ev2 = R x Ev subgrade = 1. Poisson’s Ratio = 0. elastic parameters of the first granular sub-layer on top of the subgrade are: Ev1 = R x Ev subgrade = 1.104 x 67.104 x 60.9 = 67.3 = 82.9 MPa Ev3 = R x Ev subgrade = 1. each 100/5 = 20 mm thick. In-service temperature: 26.104 x 50 = 55.45 = 34. Divide the total granular layer thickness into five equi-thick sub-layers (Section 8.0 MPa.104 x 55.3 MPa Ev4 = R x Ev subgrade = 1. Step 3 Top granular subbase. Resilient modulus measured in the laboratory = 2464 MPa.45 f = Ev / (1 + v) = 50/1.

35 50 Granular 18 60. Step 8 Not relevant.025[26.35 0.35 0.5-25]) = 0.35 0.95.2 0. Step 9 Foamed bitumen fatigue:  69181.35 45 Granular 18 55. including granular sublayers.35 41 Subgrade Semi-infinite 50 25 0.95 x 0. N = [9300 /]7.96 Modulus at speed V Modulus at test loading rate The load rate ratio = 0.45 0.40 0.08  0.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Modulus at WMAPT Modulus at test temperature (T) = exp(-0.3 37.0 0. Modulus correction = 2464 MPa x 0.94 = 2200 MPa.7 0.40 1571 Granular 18 82. Elastic properties of all materials.35 0.9 30.856  7   N  2200 0.0 41.35 55 Granular 18 67.35 0.6 0.36     Assumed volume of bitumen (Vb) = 7%. Austroads 2011 — 68 — 5 .46 x 900. are listed in the following table: Material type Thickness (mm) Elastic modulus (MPa) Poisson’s ratio Ev Eh v h f value Sprayed seal - - - - - - Foamed bitumen 310 2200 2200 0. Step 10 Design traffic is 5 x 106 ESA.16 Temperature ratio = 0.45 34 Step 7 Permanent deformation allowable loading.2 27.3 33.5 0.35 61 Granular 18 74.

08 x 106.Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Step 11 Standard axle load represented as: Tyre-pavement contact stress = 750 kPa Load radius = 92.59 x 106 / 1. Step 13 Critical strains from CIRCLY output:  foamed bitumen: maximum tensile strain is 137 beneath a loaded wheel  subgrade: maximum vertical compressive strain is 318  between the loaded wheels. Step 12 Critical locations to calculate strains are:  top of subgrade  bottom of foamed bitumen layer. Step 15 From step 14.59  10 6 SAR5 0. 1470 mm and 330 mm.6: N = 1.1 = 5.6 = 1.14 x 1010  foamed bitumen stabilised material fatigue = 5.82  1010 SAR7   318  Convert from Standard Axle Repetitions of allowable loading to ESA of allowable loading using SAR5/ESA = 1. The above strains are calculated directly beneath one of the loaded wheels and midway between the loaded wheels. the following allowable loadings in ESA were calculated:  permanent deformation = 1. Austroads 2011 — 69 — .82 x 1010 / 1.1: N = 5.  Subgrade 7  9300  N   1.08 x 106.856  7   N   5.08  0.36  2200  137   5 Convert from Standard Axle Repetitions of allowable loading to ESA of allowable loading using SAR5/ESA = 1.14 x 1010.1 mm Four circular areas separated centre-to-centre 330 mm. Step 14 Calculation of overall allowable traffic loading:  Foamed bitumen stabilised material  69181.

the trial pavement composition is acceptable. Step 17 A sprayed seal surfacing may be used as the expected traffic is 5 x 106 ESA (less than 1 x 107 ESA). Austroads 2011 — 70 — .Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements Step 16 As allowable loading for each distress mode exceeds the design traffic.

A4. Structural thickness design methods have been developed for the design of foamed bitumen pavements. recycling Abstract: Pavement designers in Australia and New Zealand trying to use alternative treatments such as foamed bitumen in rehabilitation projects are severely constrained by a lack of data on the performance of this type of stabilised material. most of them based on assumptions that do not necessarily represent the performance of foamed bitumen pavements under Australia and New Zealand conditions. Sydney. pp. as the first step of a large research project that aims to develop appropriate thickness design procedures for foamed bitumen pavements. This report presents a review of these methods.76. Review of Structural Design Procedures for Foamed Bitumen Pavements.INFORMATION RETRIEVAL Austroads. rehabilitation. foamed bitumen. . stabilisation. 2011. AP-T188-11 Keywords: pavement design.