International Journal of Pavement Engineering

ISSN: 1029-8436 (Print) 1477-268X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gpav20

Characterisation of unbound aggregate materials

considering physical and morphological properties

Jayhyun Kwon, Sung-Hee Kim, Erol Tutumluer & Mark H. Wayne

To cite this article: Jayhyun Kwon, Sung-Hee Kim, Erol Tutumluer & Mark H. Wayne
(2017) Characterisation of unbound aggregate materials considering physical and
morphological properties, International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 18:4, 303-308, DOI:
10.1080/10298436.2015.1065997

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2015.1065997

Published online: 27 Jul 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 375

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 6 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gpav20
International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 2017
VOL. 18, NO. 4, 303–308
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2015.1065997

Characterisation of unbound aggregate materials considering physical and

morphological properties
Jayhyun Kwona, Sung-Hee Kimb, Erol Tutumluerc and Mark H. Waynea
a
Tensar International Corporation, Alpharetta, Georgia; bCivil and Construction Engineering, Kennesaw State University, Marietta, Georgia; cCivil and
Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The objective of this paper is to evaluate the factors affecting resilient and permanent deformation Received 22 April 2015
behaviour of unbound granular materials, with a focus on the aggregate physical and morphological Accepted 23 May 2015
characteristics. To evaluate the behaviour of base course, repeated load triaxial testing is commonly used KEYWORDS
to establish the stress-dependent resilient modulus properties of unbound aggregate base and subbase Morphology; modulus; shear
materials. Although resilient modulus of aggregates is a critical input into mechanistic-empirical pavement strength; Poisson’s ratio;
design methods, the resilient modulus of unbound base material is often estimated from empirical rutting
correlations with index properties in the AASHTOWare Pavement ME design procedure for its simplicity.
Since actual field stress conditions and resilient modulus stress states are generally quite different from
those generated in the empirical test methods, use of an empirical correlation could lead to an unreliable
prediction of resilient modulus and permanent deformation. In order to properly assess the stability of an
unbound aggregate layer, it is necessary to establish a proper process to understand the factors affecting
fundamental and performance-related properties of unbound granular materials. In this study, aggregate
samples from four different sources were tested for resilient modulus and Poisson’s ratio measurements
using the Precision Unbound Material Analyzer equipment. Morphological or shape properties of
aggregate samples were also measured using an image analysis device. The results demonstrate that
aggregate physical and morphological properties affect aggregate resilient and permanent deformation.
Further, it is suggested that the resilient modulus of the aggregate should not be used as the sole indicator
of rutting performance of aggregate base.

1. Introduction been classified as meeting the same specification as long as the

The quality of the unbound aggregate base layer can have a
significant impact on the performance of a flexible pavement.
An unbound granular layer that is composed of odd-shaped
aggregate particles of different sizes plays a structurally important
role, especially for thinly surfaced asphalt pavement subjected
to the medium- and low-volume traffic loadings by providing
load distribution through consolidation, distortion and attrition.
During the load distribution process, the resilient and perma-
nent deformation response of unbound aggregate base course is
known to be influenced by many factors such as aggregate type
and physical properties, density and moisture content, stress level
(pneumatic, pad foot and/or steel drum compaction equipment)
and history, and grading and fines content. Therefore, the low
strength of granular materials and resulting excessive deforma-
tion in flexible pavements are expected when poor-quality aggre-
gates are used in a base course. The importance of the base course
quality, however, is often overlooked in pavement system analysis
and current practice of pavement design does not consider the
effects of physical shape, texture and angularity of coarse aggre-
gate particles on the strength, stability and performance of the
pavement base layer. Further, different aggregate sources have
material meets the gradation requirements even though they
may have varying aggregate physical properties affecting per-
formance. The reason for the current approach might be due to
the lack of accurate and repeatable measurements of the coarse
aggregate morphology. Therefore, current AASHTOWare Pave-
ment ME design software does not consider Level I aggregate
base input and only accepts a single value of resilient modulus
or the empirical relationship to estimate resilient modulus of the
unbound materials, in particular the California Bearing Ratio
and the Hveem Stabilometer R-value. Since unbound aggregate
stress conditions in the repeated load triaxial test are different
from those in the empirical testing methods, use of an empirical
correlation may lead to an inaccurate estimation of resilient mod-
ulus and permanent deformation as the predicted permanent
deformation (rutting) using the AASHTOWare rutting model
is heavily dependent on resilient modulus properties. Moreover,
considering the fact that permanent deformation is more directly
linked to a strength property, the predicted rutting may be greatly
in error when aggregate physical and morphological properties
are not taken into consideration. The research approach, testing
procedure and results are presented and compared in this paper.

CONTACT  Sung-Hee Kim  skim86@kennesaw.edu

© 2015 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
304    J. KWON ET AL.

Table 1. AASHTOWare design inputs.

Design structure
Layer type Material type Thickness (mm) Layer properties
Flexible Asphalt concrete 50 Effective binder content: 10.6%
Air voids: 8%
Flexible Asphalt concrete 75 Effective binder content: 8.7%
Air voids: 8%
Non-stabilised base A-1-a 300 Resilient modulus: 206 and 275 MPa
Poisson’s ratio: 0.25, 0.35, and 0.45
Subgrade A-7–5 Semi-infinite Resilient modulus: 55 MPa
Poisson’s ratio: 0.35
Traffic
Age Heavy trucks (cumulative)
Initial 300
10 years 621,071
20 years 1,356,100

Table 2. Distress prediction summary.

Analysis cases (Various non-stabilised base properties)

Resilient modulus = 206 MPa Resilient modulus = 275 MPa
Distress type Ko = 0.3 Ko = 0.5 Ko = 0.8 Ko = 0.3 Ko = 0.5 Ko = 0.8
Terminal IRI (in/mile) 164.12 164.81 165.45 161.69 162.28 162.84
Permanent deformation – Total pavement (in.) 0.67 0.67 0.68 0.64 0.64 0.65
Permanent deformation – AC only (in.) 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
AC bottom-up fatigue cracking (%) 23.20 23.74 24.27 20.79 21.42 26.32
AC top-down fatigue cracking (ft/mile) 2165.24 2326.61 2457.88 1328.74 1483.61 1602.48

2.  Effect of aggregate properties on pavement tion of the aggregate base (Masad and Little 2004). The basic
performance – AASHTOWare pavement ME analysis relationship is:
( )
To illustrate the influence of the aggregate properties on pave- 𝜀 | 𝜌 𝛽|
ment performance, a low-volume conventional flexible pavement 𝛿a (N) = 𝛽s1 k1 𝜀v h o |e−( N ) |
𝜀r | |
section has been analysed using AASHTOWare Pavement ME
software version 2.1. Table 1 gives pavement details and Table 2 where 𝛿a (N): permanent deformation for the layer;
summarises predicted distresses. N:number of repetitions; 𝜀v : average vertical strain obtained from there spo
The resilient modulus of the base layer was
𝜀v : average evaluated
vertical at modu-
strain obtained from there sponse model; 𝜀o , 𝜌 and 𝛽: material properties
lus values of 206 and 275 MPa, covering the recommended range 𝜀r : resilient strain.
of an A-1-a material. The coefficient of lateral earth pressure was
varied by considering different Poisson’s ratios. The coefficient of For granular base, the ratio (εo/εr), ρ and β are a function
lateral earth pressure, Ko, was used to compute the combined in of moisture content and resilient modulus. Hence, the perma-
situ and induced stress states within the pavement system. The nent deformation behaviour of the aggregate is only dependent
Ko can be calculated based on the confined Poisson expansion: upon moisture content and resilient modulus. However, pre-
vious research studies indicate that aggregate strength is more
𝜈
Ko = directly linked to field permanent deformation but not the resil-
1−𝜈
ient modulus (Thompson 1998, Tao et al. 2010, Xiao et al. 2012).
where ν is Poisson’s ratio. Moreover, the NCHRP 4–23 study identified shear strength of
Values of Ko recommended in AASHTOWare Pavement ME unbound aggregates as one of the most significant mechanistic
software for typical non-stabilised base course ranged between properties influencing pavement rutting performance (Saeed
0.4 and 0.6. To evaluate the influence of Poisson’s ratio on pave- et al. 2001). The results from previous research studies indicate
ment distress, three different Poisson ratios were assigned and that the resilient modulus of the aggregate should not be used
the resulting coefficient of lateral earth pressure, Ko, was found alone as an indicator of rutting performance of aggregate base.
to be ranged from 0.3 to 0.8.
The predicted pavement distresses presented in Table 2 3.  Laboratory test programme
clearly show that the properties of unbound aggregate base affect The objective of the laboratory test programme was to utilise
pavement performance, especially in relation to asphalt fatigue current laboratory programmes and available technologies to
cracking, while the predicted permanent deformation of the base evaluate the factors affecting engineering properties and per-
course is not sensitive to the base course resilient properties, such formance of unbound granular materials for sustainable use in
as modulus and Poisson’s ratio. pavement engineering. Table 3 summarises the sources and the
The modified Tseng and Lytton model is used in AASHTO- moisture-density test data of aggregate materials used in the cur-
Ware Pavement ME design to predict permanent deforma- rent laboratory testing and characterisation programme.

Table 3. Aggregate properties.
Sample ID Classification Source
1 Crushed limestone Iowa
2 Crushed gravel Idaho
3 Crushed limestone Texas
4 Crushed limestone Texas
To evaluate the relationship between angularity and surface
texture (ST) of the particles and modulus and permanent defor-
mation susceptibility, aggregate samples collected from various
sources were tested. All the aggregate samples were scanned
for particle morphological/shape indices which include the flat
and elongated (F&E) ratio, angularity index (AI), and ST indices
using the second generation of the University of Illinois Aggre-
gate Image Analyzer (UIAIA), which will be described in the next
section. The aggregate samples were then prepared and tested
according to the British Standard (BS. EN 13286–7:2004) for
the evaluation of resilient modulus using the Precision Unbound
Material Analyzer (PUMA). All of the samples were first air-
dried and then moisture-conditioned in the laboratory to achieve
the optimum moisture content. Samples were prepared using
the modified Proctor procedure (ASTM D1557) to achieve a
150-mm-diameter by 150-mm-tall cylindrical test specimen at
the targeted density level.
3.1.  University of Illinois aggregate image analyzer
In this study, the image analysis device, UIAIA, was used to
quantify imaging-based morphological indices, i.e. F&E ratio,
AI and ST index, of the coarse aggregates. Previous studies have
shown that there is a correlation between imaging-based particle
shape indices and resilient behaviour, strength and stability of
aggregates (Pan et al. 2006, Tutumluer and Pan 2008). Imaging
technology has been successfully used as a research tool in the
last decade for quantifying aggregate particle shape properties
(Tutumluer et al. 2005, Al-Rousan et al. 2007). Each availa-
ble imaging system uses a specific mathematical procedure in
calculating a validated index to evaluate form, angularity and
texture properties of aggregates. Among the most widely used
techniques in aggregate shape characterisation, the ratio F&E,
AI and ST index were recognised as key indices from national
studies such as NCHRP 4–30 and the TPF-5(023) pool fund.
These indices were determined using the UIAIA (Tutumluer
et al. 2000, Rao et al. 2002, Pan et al. 2006). The UIAIA uses three
orthogonally positioned cameras to capture three-dimensional
shape properties. The AI and ST indices are determined based
on the particle image outlines obtained from each of the top,
side and front views. The enhanced UIAIA uses a colour image
threshold scheme to provide an objective and accurate measure-
ment of aggregate particle size and shape properties in a rapid,
reliable and automated fashion when compared to traditional
manual methods/tools.
3.2.  Precision Unbound Material Analyzer
A newly acquired, innovative triaxial cell testing machine,
named PUMA, was used in this study for determining the resil-
ient modulus of the aggregate samples in the laboratory. The
PUMA equipment is shown in Figure 1. The samples compacted
in 150-mm-diameter and 150-mm-height triaxial cell system
International Journal of Pavement Engineering   305
Maximum dry density (kg/m3) Optimum moisture content (%)
2,050 5.8
2,146 5.4
2,050 10.0
2,307 5.0
and confined within eight-curved wall segments simulating the
elasticity of surrounding material in situ. Vertical load is applied
in four stages, with 1000 load applications during each stage; the
four vertical stress levels used are 20, 40, 80 and 160 kPa at a fre-
quency of 10 Hz. Vertical and horizontal stress and strain are all
monitored during the test. The horizontal strain in the specimen
is measured using a strain gauge located in the confining band.
The friction between the walls and the specimen is corrected
using a coefficient of friction of 0.5.
The resilient moduli obtained from PUMA based on the
­British Standard (BS. EN 13286–7:2004) were compared with
the measured resilient modulus in accordance with the AASHTO
T-307 procedure. In the AASHTO T-307-99 (2002) procedure,
specimen are subjected to a series of load pulses at a variety of
axial stresses and confining pressures (15 specific combinations
of stress levels), and recoverable deformation resulting from
these load pulses are measured. The quick shear test was also
performed in accordance with AASHTO T-307 at a confining
pressure at the end of the resilient modulus testing without
removal of the sample from the testing platen. The quick shear
test is prescribed in AASHTO T-307 as a simple shear controlled
by rate of axial deformation (1% axial strain per minute up to
5% strain).
4.  Test results and discussion
The resilient modulus, axial deformation and Poisson’s ratio for
those aggregate samples are presented in Table 4 along with mor-
phological index results of the aggregate samples.
The low end of AI is 0 for a perfect sphere and the high-end
range is 700–800° for very angular. The ST index often takes
values up to 1 for smooth gravel and higher values above 1 for
increasing angularity and crushed faces or corners and jagged
edges in the case of 100% crushed stone (Tutumluer et al. 2000,
Rao et al. 2002, Pan et al. 2006, Al-Rousan et al. 2007). The aggre-
gate samples 1, 3 and 4 have AI values that are greater than 400
indicating that the samples consist of subangular aggregate parti-
cles. The aggregate samples numbers 1 and 4 also have ST values
greater than 2.0, while sample 3 has an ST index value below 2.0.
These values indicate that the samples numbers 1 and 4 consist
of very rough-surfaced aggregate particles and sample 3 consists
of rough-surfaced aggregate. The aggregate sample 2 has an AI
value less than 325 and ST index values below 1.7. The results
indicate that the crushed gravel sample (sample 2) consists of
rounded and smooth-surfaced aggregate particles and crushed
limestone which consists of angular and rough surface textures.
The results presented in Table 1 clearly demonstrate the
influence of the AI and ST indices on resilient modulus of
the aggregates. Aggregate samples consisting of angular and
rough-surfaced particles (crushed limestone samples 1, 3 and
4) achieved higher modulus strength than the aggregate sam-
ples which consist of relatively rounded and smooth-surfaced
306    J. KWON ET AL.

Figure 1. The Precision Unbound Material Analyzer.

Table 4. Test results.

Sample ID
Test Properties Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4
UIAIA Angularity index (AI) 411.33 325.11 425.21 458.09
Flat and elongation ratio (F&R) 2.64 1.95 2.06 2.28
Surface texture (ST) 2.27 1.39 1.88 2.50
PUMA Modulus (MPa)
Load cycles and axial stress (kPa) Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4
1–1000 cycles @ 20 159 81 169 187
1000–2000 cycles @ 40 167 93 172 178
2000–3000 cycles @ 80 187 110 190 187
3000–4000 cycles @ 160 232 142 254 241
Accumulated total axial deformation (mm)
Load cycles and axial stress (kPa) Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4
1–1000 cycles @ 20 1.0 1.3 0.8 0.9
1000–2000 cycles @ 40 1.8 2.9 1.4 2.0
2000–3000 cycles @ 80 3.4 4.9 2.3 3.4
3000–4000 cycles @ 160 5.7 7.3 3.5 5.7
Poisson’s ratio
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4
Average value 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.09

particles (crushed gravel sample 2). This is due to the high angle
of internal friction and aggregate particle contact with the angu-
lar and rough texture of aggregate particles. Similarly, sample 2
has accumulated higher deformation than samples 1, 3 and 4.
The resilient modulus of each sample measured according
to the British Standard (BS. EN 13286–7:2004) was compared
with resilient modulus measured following the AASHTO T 307
procedure at the bulk stress state of 80 and 160 kPa (Figure 2).
For the loading of the specimen in the PUMA test, only cyclic
axial loading and constant confining pressure are performed. The
constant confining pressure varied from 1 to 5 kPa. Therefore,
just the vertical stresses from PUMA and bulk stresses from the T
307 procedure are used to compare the resilient modulus results
at approximately similar stress states. The results show that the
British Standard resilient modulus values are greater than those
determined by use of the AASHTO procedure. The difference in
moduli could be attributed to different specimen geometries and
test set-ups. It is important to note that the lateral movement of
aggregate specimen is constrained in the PUMA set-up result-
ing in higher stiffness in the axial direction. Aggregate moduli
obtained from these procedures show a similar trend; the aggre-
gate sample 2 has the lowest moduli compared to samples 1, 3
and 4.
The average Poisson’s ratio of aggregate samples generally
ranged from 0.09 to 0.12 as shown in Table 4. Poisson’s ratio
should be the same in all directions (x, y and z) for isotropic mate-
rials, while the Poisson’s ratio is different in each direction (x, y
and z) for orthotropic materials. Unbound aggregate material
exhibits stress-dependent and direction-dependent (anisotropic)
behaviour. Unbound aggregate materials have greater modulus
in the vertical direction than horizontal direction, which can be
adequately modelled using cross-anisotropic, stress-dependent
modulus characterisation models. Kim et al. (2005) predicted
a level of (inherent) anisotropy (ratio of horizontal to vertical

Figure 2. Comparison of stiffness modulus and resilient modulus.
Figure 3. Shear strength properties of crushed limestone samples.
modulus) ranging from 1.0 to 0.4. If cross-anisotropic behav-
iour of the aggregate samples was taken into consideration with
a modular ratio (vertical modulus/modulus in the horizontal
direction) of 0.3, the average Poisson’s ratio of the tested samples
ranged from 0.3 to 0.4, which is a typical Poisson’s ratio range
used in pavement design.
The results show that there is no clear correlation between
Poisson’s ratio, resilient modulus and accumulated axial deforma-
tion. This result indicates that there are certainly other aggregate
properties affecting the strength and permanent deformation
behaviour, such as the vertical/horizontal modulus ratio, grada-
tion properties, especially those passing the No. 200 sieve, and
achieved specimen compaction densities and moisture contents.
The quick shear test results of the crushed limestone samples
1, 3 and 4 are shown in Figure 3. It should be noted that all these
International Journal of Pavement Engineering   307
samples have similar modulus, but the accumulated axial defor-
mations are quite different. Samples 1 and 4 experienced about
60% more axial deformation than sample 3.
Aggregate sample 3 has a higher shear strength and accumu-
lated axial deformation and is much less than samples 1 and 4.
This indicates that there is a need to develop a realistic permanent
deformation model for an unbound aggregate layer considering
shear strength characteristics of aggregate base to better pre-
dict the ability of a base course aggregate to resist permanent
deformation. In general, shear strength of aggregate depends on
gradation. However, the influence of particle size distribution is
not considered in the rutting model in AASHTOWare Pavement
ME software. Without a proper assessment of the properties of
unbound aggregate base, any prediction of permanent deforma-
tion susceptibility will remain highly unreliable.
308    J. KWON ET AL.
5. Conclusions
Results from a laboratory test programme on selected unbound
aggregate base course materials from different sources are pre-
sented in this paper. The specific tests conducted consisted of
resilient modulus, quick shear and aggregate image analysis. The
influence of Poisson’s ratio on aggregate modulus and permanent
deformation characteristics was also evaluated in the experimen-
tal programme. The results demonstrate that the aggregate resil-
ient moduli obtained from the British Standard are comparable
to the resilient modulus obtained from the AASHTO procedure.
The results also highlight the fact that there is a good correla-
tion between aggregate shape properties and resilient modulus.
Aggregates with angular and rough surface texture particles have
greater resilient moduli in comparison to aggregate gradations
with rounded particles and smooth surface texture.
There was no clear correlation between Poisson’s ratio, modu-
lus and permanent deformation. Instead, the aggregate specimen
with higher shear strength values exhibited a greater resistance
to permanent deformation compared to the other samples even
though the resilient moduli of these samples were similar. The
findings in this study also demonstrated that aggregate shear
strength should be considered in the aggregate base course rut-
ting performance prediction.
More research is needed to investigate the influence of other
aggregate properties affecting the modulus and shear strength.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
References
AASHTO T307-99, 2002. Determining the resilient modulus of soils and
aggregate materials part 2B. 22nd ed. American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials.
Al-Rousan, T., et al., 2007. Evaluation of image analysis techniques for
quantifying aggregate shape characteristics. Construction and Building
Materials, 21, 978–990.
BS EN 13286-7, 2004. Unbound and hydraulically bound mixtures. Cyclic
load triaxial test for unbound mixtures. London: BSi.
Kim, S.H., et al., 2005. Estimation of level of anisotropy in unbound
granular layers considering aggregate physical properties. International
Journal of Pavement Engineering, 6 (4), 217–227.
Masad, S., and Little, D.N., 2004. Sensitivity analysis of flexible pavement
response and AASHTO 2002 design guide for properties of unbound
layers, ICAR 504–1. Austin, TX: International Center for Aggregates
Research.
Pan, T., Tutumluer, E., and Anochie-Boateng, J., 2006. Aggregate
morphology affecting resilient behavior of unbound granular materials.
In: Transportation Research Record 1952, TRB. Washington, DC:
National Research Council, 12–20.
Rao, C., Tutumluer, E. and Kim, I.-T., 2002. Quantification of coarse
aggregate angularity based on image analysis. In: Transportation
Research Record 1787, TRB. Washington, DC: National Research
Council, 117–124.
Saeed, A., Hall J., and Barker W., (2001). Performance-related tests of
aggregates for use in unbound pavement layers. NCHRP Report No.453.
Washington, DC: National Academy
Tao, M., et al., 2010. Application of Shakedown Theory in Characterizing
Traditional and Recycled Pavement Base Materials. Journal of
Transportation Engineering, 136 (3), 214–222.
Thompson, M.R., (1998). State-of-the-art: unbound base performance.
Proceedings of the 6th annual symposium of International Center for
Aggregate Research (ICAR). Austin, TX.
Tutumluer, E. and Pan, T., 2008. Aggregate morphology affecting strength
and permanent deformation behavior of unbound aggregate materials.
ASCE Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 20 (9), 1–11.
Tutumluer, E., Pan, T., and Carpenter, S.H., 2005. Investigation of aggregate
shape effects on hot mix asphalt performance using an image analysis
approach Transportation Pooled Fund Study TPF-5 (023). Federal
Highway Administration, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
Tutumluer, E., Rao, C., and Stefanski, J.A., 2000. Video image analysis of
aggregates. Final Project Report, FHWA-IL-UI-278, Civil Engineering
Studies UILU-ENG-2000–2015. University of Illinois Urbana-
Champaign.
Xiao, Y., et al., (2012). Gradation Effects Influencing mechanical properties
of aggregate base and granular subbase materials in Minnesota. In:
Transportation Research Record 2267, Journal of the Transportation Research
Board. Washington, DC: National Research Council, pp. 14–26.