Construction Quality Control for Asphalt Concrete

Hydraulic Barriers
John J. Bowders, M.ASCE1; J. Erik Loehr, M.ASCE2; Deepak Neupane3; and Abdelmalek Bouazza4
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional Autonoma De Mexico on 09/08/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: Asphalt concrete has been used for low permeability barriers in numerous applications over many centuries. In recent times,
asphalt concrete barriers have been used for waste containment applications. The hydraulic conductivity of asphalt concrete specimens can
be measured in the laboratory; however, there is no expedient, efficient way of accurately measuring the in situ hydraulic conductivity of
low permeability asphalt concrete shortly after its placement and compaction in the field. A method has been developed to efficiently
check the in situ hydraulic conductivity of asphalt concrete in the field. Asphalt concrete specimens with varying asphalt cement contents
and unit weights were prepared in the laboratory and their hydraulic conductivity measured. The measured hydraulic conductivity data
were grouped into different ranges and plotted as a function of unit weight and asphalt cement content. An acceptable zone was specified
for a combination of asphalt cement content and unit weight that resulted in a specified hydraulic conductivity. In the field, a quality
control inspector can check the unit weight and asphalt cement content of the in-place barrier to make sure it lies within the acceptable
zone. The asphalt cement content and unit weight can be readily measured, thereby allowing rapid acceptance or rejection of the asphalt
concrete barrier shortly after compaction.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲1090-0241共2003兲129:3共219兲
CE Database keywords: Asphalt concrete; Quality control; Barriers; Hydraulic conductivity.

Introduction waste isolation was initiated by the U.S. Department of Energy

Asphalt derivatives have been used in waterproofing applications
since ancient times 共Kerisel 1985兲. Recent use of asphalt-based
barriers for hydraulic applications dates from the 1920s and
1930s. Sherard et al. 共1963兲, Creegan and Monismith 共1996兲,
Navdts 共2001兲, and Bowders et al. 共2001兲 provide a history of the
use of asphalt concrete and asphalt cement barriers in cutoffs for
dams, reservoir liners, and landfill liners and covers for hazardous
waste sites. In the late 1960s and early 1970s asphalt was becom-
ing the state-of-the-practice landfill liner 共Asphalt Institute 1976兲.
Several U.S. facilities were constructed using asphalt concrete
共hot-mix asphalt兲 liners, which in some cases were combined with
a sprayed-on fluid applied asphalt layer. The petrol shortage of the
1970s, along with the establishment of rules for hazardous and
solid waste landfill designs that focused the industry toward com-
posite liners consisting of geomembranes and compacted soil
contributed to the decline of the use of asphalt for containment.
However, in the mid-1980s, resurgence into the use of asphalt for
1
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Univ. of Missouri at Columbia, Columbia, MO 65211. E-mail:
bowders@missouri.edu
2
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Univ. of Missouri at Columbia, Columbia, MO 65211.
3
Graduate Research Assistant, Dept. of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Univ. of Missouri at Columbia, Columbia, MO 65211.
4
Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Monash Univ.,
Melbourne, Australia.
Note. Discussion open until September 1, 2003. Separate discussions
must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing
Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pos-
sible publication on January 14, 2002; approved on June 3, 2002. This
paper is part of the Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, Vol. 129, No. 3, March 1, 2003. ©ASCE, ISSN 1090-0241/
2003/3-219–223/$18.00.
共DOE兲 in their quest for very-long-term hydraulic barriers
共1000⫹ years兲 for radioactive and mixed waste sites 共Wing and
Gee 1994a兲.
Historical analog information collected by the DOE indicated
that asphalt could have lifetimes greater than 1000 years. DOE
developed performance criteria for a cover system that included
an asphalt barrier for mixed waste sites 共Wing and Gee 1994b兲. A
test cover including a fluid applied asphalt 共FAA兲 layer above the
asphalt concrete was constructed and evaluated. The initial results
indicated hydraulic conductivity of cores from the asphalt con-
crete layer to range from 1.3⫻10⫺9 to 1.2⫻10⫺10 cm/s and field-
measured conductivities to range from 1.1⫻10⫺7 to 1.9
⫻10⫺9 cm/s. The higher values in the field are attributed to mea-
suring techniques and may not be representative of the asphalt
conductivity. The conductivity of the FAA was measured and re-
ported to be 1.8⫻10⫺11 cm/s.
Results of laboratory and field efforts with asphalt concrete
and FAA have illustrated that low hydraulic conductivities can be
achieved with an asphalt barrier given proper design and high
level construction quality control 共Bowders et al. 2000兲. Several
lessons learned from the literature include:
• air voids must be below 4% 共volume basis兲 to achieve low
hydraulic conductivity;
• asphalt cement content must be above 6% 共weight basis兲 to
achieve low hydraulic conductivity,
• fines content 共fraction less than 0.074 mm兲 must be from 8 to
15% to ensure a dense graded mixture;
• two 共or more兲 layers of asphalt concrete should be used with a
minimum thickness of 5 cm/layer to minimize continuity of
potential defects and lateral spreading of any seepage;
• asphalt cement tack coat should be applied between layers,
and the joints staggered and sloped to permit good compac-
tion;

JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003 / 219

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:219-223.

 Fig. 1. Landfill liner cross sections: 共a兲 U.S. EPA recommended
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional Autonoma De Mexico on 09/08/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
subtitle-D liner; 共b兲 asphalt concrete hydraulic barrier with fluid ap-
plied asphalt-geotextile 共FAA-GT兲 layer
• any fluid applied asphalt layer should be between 1 and 3 mm
thick; and
• the subgrade must be stable and adequately drained.
In the United States several containment barriers incorporating
asphalt have been constructed primarily for cover systems of ex-
isting landfills and contaminated sites 共Bowders et al. 2001兲. The
designs followed closely with the lessons learned cited above;
however, lack of carefully documented performance has been par-
tially responsible for limited acceptance of asphalt barriers.
An example of a proposed asphalt-based barrier layer is shown
in Fig. 1. A U.S. EPA recommended subtitle-D barrier 共geomem-
brane plus compacted soil liner兲 is shown in Fig. 1 for compara-
tive purposes. As shown, the compacted soil portion of the
subtitle-D barrier is 600 mm thick, while the asphalt concrete
portion of the asphalt liner is only 100–150 mm thick. The as-
phalt concrete layer may be overlain by a 2–3-mm-thick fluid
applied asphalt-geotextile 共FAA-GT兲, which acts as an imperme-
able membrane 共Bowders et al. 2001, 2002a兲. The subject of this
paper is limited to the asphalt concrete layer.
The focus in this paper is on the development of practical
means to establish construction quality control criteria for asphalt
concrete hydraulic barriers. The scope of the effort involved pre-
paring asphalt concrete specimens at various asphalt cement con-
tents and unit weights, and subsequently, accurately measuring
the hydraulic conductivity of the specimens. The procedures and
results are described and discussed in the following sections.
Materials and Procedures
A series of asphalt concrete specimens were prepared using a
range of asphalt cement contents and compactive energies result-
ing in specimens with a range of unit weights. All of the speci-
mens were prepared using the same aggregate and fines gradation
共Fig. 2兲. The aggregate gradation was based on the recommenda-
tions of the Asphalt Institute 共1974兲 and the compilation of litera-
ture information 共Bowders et al. 2001兲. The maximum aggregate
size was 12.5 mm and the percentage of fines 共diameter less than
0.074 mm兲 was 12.9 共dry mass basis兲. The high fines content
facilitates a densely graded mix for the asphalt concrete.
The asphalt cement 共binder兲 used for all of the specimens was
an AC-20 graded material 共ASTM D3381兲. This binder is com-
monly used throughout the asphalt industry for asphalt pave-
ments. The mixtures were prepared using the desired percentage
of asphalt cement and then compacted using Marshall 共ASTM
D1559兲 procedures, albeit modified to achieve a range of unit
weights. The standard Marshall procedure involves 50 blows of
the compaction hammer to each face 共top and bottom兲 of the
asphalt concrete mixture. In order to achieve a range of unit
220 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:219-223.
Fig. 2. Aggregate gradation curve for the asphalt concrete specimens
weights, the number of hammer blows was varied. Specimens
were compacted using 15, 35, 50, or 75 blows per face. Asphalt
cement contents were varied from 6.0 to 8.5%. Sixteen specimens
were prepared 共Table 1兲.
The specimens were 102 mm in diameter and nominally 68
mm in height. The height varied slightly from 65 to 70 mm. The
specimens were set up in flexible-wall permeameters and the hy-
draulic conductivities were measured using ASTM D5084 proce-
dures. Tap water was used as the permeant liquid. The sides of the
cylindrical specimens were irregular and a technique using high
silicone vacuum grease applied to the sides of the specimens 共be-
tween the specimen and the flexible membrane兲 was developed.
This modification helped to eliminate the sidewall leakage that
was occurring. The procedure is described in Bowders et al.
共2002b兲. Initially, the falling head water-rising tail water method
共ASTM D5084 method C兲 was employed; however, to increase
the accuracy and the sensitivity of the readings, the constant vol-
ume technique was subsequently used 共ASTM D5084 method F兲.
All hydraulic conductivities reported in this paper were deter-
mined using the constant volume method.
Results and Discussion
The parameters and results of the hydraulic conductivity tests for
all 16 specimens are given in Table 1. For each specimen, the
number of blows per face during compaction, the percentage of
binder 共asphalt cement兲, the total unit weight, the percentage of
air voids, the final hydraulic conductivity, and the value of
Skempton’s B coefficient 共Skempton 1954兲 measured after satu-
ration but prior to permeation are given. Some consideration must
be given to the fact that the asphalt concrete specimens were
notably rigid, relative to compacted or natural soil specimens. As
such, it may not be possible to achieve B values of 1.0 even under
ideal conditions 共ASTM D5084兲. The reported B values 共0.95–
0.98兲 are thus deemed to be very close to saturation. All the
specimens were back-pressure saturated at a back pressure of 490
kPa. The specimens were saturated and permeated for 3 days or
longer.
The unit weights of the specimens are plotted versus the as-
phalt cement content in Fig. 3. The different symbols indicate the
compactive efforts 共in terms of number of blows per face兲. The
compactive effort increases as the number of blows increase. Fif-
teen blows per face is 30% of the standard Marshall energy while
75 blows is 150% of the standard Marshall energy.
 Table 1. Summary of Index Parameters and Measured Hydraulic Conductivities for Asphalt Concrete Specimens Compacted and Tested in this
Effort
Specimen No. of Asphalt cement Unit weight Hydraulic conductivity Skempton’s B
number blows/face content 共%兲 (␥ T) 共kN/m3兲 Air voids 共%兲 共k兲 共cm/s兲 coefficient
1 15 7.0 21.8 7.4 5.7E-06 0.95
2 15 7.5 22.1 5.8 2.1E-10 0.95
3 15 8.0 22.3 4.3 5.5E-11 0.97
4 15 8.5 22.2 3.1 5.2E-12 0.96
5 35 6.5 22.0 6.3 2.0E-05 0.99
6 35 7.0 22.5 4.6 4.0E-10 0.95
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional Autonoma De Mexico on 09/08/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

7 35 7.5 22.4 3.7 1.5E-10 0.96

8 35 8.0 22.6 3.2 1.9E-11 0.97
9 50 6.0 21.7 4.0 2.6E-07 0.95
10 50 6.5 21.9 3.7 2.9E-11 0.97
11 50 7.0 21.9 3.2 6.4E-11 0.96
12 50 7.5 22.8 3.2 1.2E-11 0.97
13 75 6.0 22.9 3.5 5.0E-10 0.95
14 75 6.5 22.7 3.5 2.7E-10 0.98
15 75 7.0 22.9 3.2 4.4E-11 0.97
16 75 7.5 22.8 3.2 5.4E-12 0.95

Looking at Fig. 3, several items are immediately evident. First,
the unit weight does not vary greatly for this range of binder
contents and compactive efforts. The range is bounded by 21.7–
22.9 kN/m3. Second, the impact of binder content increases as the
compactive effort decreases. At 150% of standard Marshall effort
共75 blows/face兲, the change in binder content produced almost no
change in unit weight. At lower compactive efforts, increasing the
percentage of binder resulted in an increased unit weight. Recall
that the same aggregate gradation was used for all of the speci-
mens. Thus, the binder may have provided more of a role as a
lubricant during compaction at the lower efforts than at the high-
est compactive effort.
The hydraulic conductivities of the asphalt concrete specimens
are plotted versus the percent asphalt cement content in Fig. 4.
The hydraulic conductivities ranged from 2⫻10⫺5 to 5
⫻10⫺12 cm/s. In general, as the percentage of asphalt cement
increased, the hydraulic conductivity decreased. Increasing the
compactive effort also caused the hydraulic conductivity to de-
crease; however, this effect decreased as the percent binder was
increased.
At about the 7.5– 8.0% asphalt cement content, the change in
hydraulic conductivity with increased compactive effort became
small. The hydraulic conductivities of these specimens tended to
converge around the 10⫺11 – 10⫺12 cm/s range. This range of hy-
draulic conductivities represents the lower bound for detectibility
and accurate measurement.
The hydraulic conductivity versus unit weight for each speci-
men is shown in Fig. 5. The unit weight did not have a major
effect on the hydraulic conductivity when the unit weight was
equal to or greater than 21.9 kN/m3. As noted in the introduction,
hydraulic conductivity can be correlated to the percentage of air
voids in the asphalt concrete material. The unit weight versus
percent air voids is shown in Fig. 6. With three exceptions 共speci-
men Nos. 1, 2, and 5兲, the percent air voids for all of the speci-
mens are below 5%. The range, 3.1–5.0%, would indicate a small
range in hydraulic conductivity, and this is illustrated by the data
shown in Fig. 7. The data show the trend of increasing hydraulic
conductivity with increasing air void content. The one outlier is
the specimen at 4% air voids, which exhibited a hydraulic con-
ductivity of 10⫺7 cm/s. The data also suggest the rule of thumb

Fig. 3. Unit weight versus percent asphalt cement content for asphalt Fig. 4. Hydraulic conductivity versus percent asphalt cement content
concrete specimens for the asphalt concrete specimens

JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003 / 221

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:219-223.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional Autonoma De Mexico on 09/08/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 5. Hydraulic conductivity versus unit weight for asphalt con- Fig. 7. Hydraulic conductivity versus percent air voids for the as-
crete specimens phalt concrete specimens

of the in situ hydraulic conductivity is preferred, the extremely

that the asphalt concrete must have less than 4% air void content
low hydraulic conductivities coupled with the difficulties in mak-
is perhaps too restrictive, since several specimens with air voids
ing such measurements in an active construction project limit the
as high as 5.8% had low hydraulic conductivity.
applicability of such methods. Indirect methods can provide a
In general, the hydraulic conductivity of asphalt concrete de-
means to document the quality of the barrier. Such methods can
creases as the unit weight or asphalt cement content is increased.
include measuring other parameters that have been correlated
However, at high unit weights or at high asphalt cement contents,
with hydraulic conductivity, such as unit weight 共density兲, asphalt
the other parameter may have little effect. This finding enables
cement content, or percent air voids. However, sampling and test-
the designer to control the resulting hydraulic conductivity of the
ing of field specimens must still be performed but at a greatly
asphalt concrete by two methods.
reduced frequency.
Following compacted soil liner technology and considering
parameters that are readily and commonly determined in the as-
Practical Implications phalt paving industry, a correlation between unit weight, asphalt
cement content, and hydraulic conductivity was established 共Fig.
The objective of using asphalt concrete for hydraulic barriers is to
8兲. The various symbols represent hydraulic conductivity within a
ensure a low hydraulic conductivity material that provides con-
given range, e.g., greater than 1⫻10⫺7 cm/s. Using a procedure
tainment for the water or waste at a given site. Given the results
similar to that proposed by Daniel and Benson 共1990兲 for com-
shown previously in this paper and the information from the lit-
pacted soil liners, a zone of acceptance could be delineated, for
erature, a designer may specify a suitable mix design for the
which acceptable hydraulic conductivities result, given that unit
asphalt concrete, but variable construction procedures 共just as for
weights and asphalt cement contents fall within that zone. For
compacted soil liners, Daniel and Benson 1990兲 could result in
example, a designer specifies that the asphalt concrete barrier
the barrier having a different hydraulic conductivity than the de-
must have a hydraulic conductivity equal to or less than 1
signer intended. Thus, practical, implementable construction qual-
⫻10⫺9 cm/s. A range of unit weights and asphalt cement content
ity control processes are needed to ensure the completed liner
combinations can provide that hydraulic conductivity specifica-
provides the level of barrier specified. While direct measurement
tion as shown by line No. 1 in Fig. 8. At this stage, the quality
control person in the field measures the in situ unit weight, e.g.,
by nuclear densiometer, and samples the asphalt concrete as it is

Fig. 8. Zone of acceptability of hydraulic conductivity with respect

Fig. 6. Percent of air voids versus unit weight for the asphalt con- to unit weight and asphalt cement content for an asphalt concrete
crete specimens hydraulic barrier

222 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:219-223.

 placed to determine the percentage binder 共laboratory procedure兲.
If the point lies on or above 共to the right兲 of line No. 1, the asphalt
barrier meets the hydraulic conductivity specification. The zone of
acceptance is then the region of the unit weight–asphalt cement
percentage plot that lies up and to the right of line No. 1. A
stricter zone of acceptance is given by line No. 2. The maximum
hydraulic conductivity for a barrier meeting this zone of accep-
tance would be 1⫻10⫺10 cm/s.
The zone-of-acceptance procedure requires that the designer
develop the unit weight–asphalt cement–hydraulic conductivity
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional Autonoma De Mexico on 09/08/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
data in the laboratory prior to the project. While this requires
planning and some cost, the payoff is that it allows the contractor
additional leeway in meeting the hydraulic conductivity specifi-
cation for an asphalt barrier. It also provides a rapid 共the in situ
density test can be conducted in minutes and the percentage
binder can be determined in few hours兲, nondestructive procedure
for ensuring that an asphalt concrete hydraulic barrier meets the
hydraulic conductivity specification. A similar procedure for com-
pacted soil liners has been used successfully for the past few
decades.
The zone of acceptance presented in this paper is based solely
on the desired hydraulic conductivity of the asphalt concrete bar-
rier. The acceptable zone should be modified based on other con-
siderations e.g., strength, creep, ductility, self-healing ability,
among others. For example, creep of the asphalt concrete placed
on the steep slopes may be a concern. The creep potential of
asphalt concrete can be reduced by decreasing the asphalt cement
content. In this situation the zone of acceptance might be trun-
cated for higher asphalt contents. Similar considerations have
been used in the control for compacted soil liners 共Daniel and
Benson 1990兲.
Conclusions
Asphalt-based barriers have been used in hydraulic applications
throughout the ages. More recent applications have been as waste
containment and isolation barriers. Ensuring the low hydraulic
conductivity of asphalt concrete barriers in these applications is
critical to the expanded or even continued use of asphalt concrete
barriers for waste containment applications. Low hydraulic con-
ductivity on the order of 10⫺11 – 10⫺12 cm/s has been accurately
documented in the work presented herein. Obtaining such low
hydraulic conductivity in the field is more difficult and document-
ing the in situ performance has seldom been done due to the
extreme difficulties of doing so.
A practical approach to providing construction quality control
and quality assurance has been presented. The method requires
the designer to prepare laboratory specimens using the aggregate
gradation proposed for the project and varying the percentage
binder and compactive effort 共bracketing the expected field pa-
rameters兲. The hydraulic conductivity of the specimens is deter-
mined in the laboratory and a zone of acceptance is developed.
The field inspector can then readily check the unit weight and
asphalt cement content on the project and determine if the project
meets the hydraulic conductivity specification. Although the lit-
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003 / 223
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:219-223.
erature suggests that air void content less than 4% is required to
produce low hydraulic conductivity asphalt concrete barriers, the
data produced in this study show low hydraulic conductivities can
be achieved with air void contents up to 5.8% by volume.
Acknowledgments
Support for this project was provided in part by Pink Hill Acres.
The foresight and encouragement of Matt Bowen and John
Bowen are gratefully appreciated. One of the writers 共D.N.兲 has
been supported in part through the Midwest Transportation Con-
sortium; a U.S. Department of Transportation funded University
Transportation Center. The reviewers are thanked for their con-
structive comments.
References
Asphalt Institute. 共1974兲. ‘‘Asphalt linings for landfills.’’ Construction
Leaflet No. 9, The Asphalt Institute, College Park, Md.
Asphalt Institute. 共1976兲. Asphalt in hydraulics, Manual Series No. 12
(MS-12), November, College Park, Md.
Bowders, J. J., Loehr, J. E., Mooney, D. T., and Bouazza A. 共2000兲.
‘‘Asphalt barriers for waste isolation.’’ Proc., GeoEng2000, Mel-
bourne, Australia, November 19–24.
Bowders, J. J., Neupane, D., Loehr, J. E., Mooney, D. T., and Bouazza, A.
共2001兲. ‘‘Asphalt-based lining systems for landfills.’’ Proc., Missouri
Waste Control Coalition, Columbia, Mo., July 7–9, 73– 80.
Bowders, J. J., Neupane, D., Loehr, J. E., Mooney, D. T., and Bouazza, A.
共2002a兲. ‘‘Asphalt-geotextile barriers for waste containment.’’ Proc.,
7th Int. Geosynthetics Conf.—Geosynthetics: State of the Art, Recent
Developments, Ph. Delmas, J. P. Gourc, and H. Girard, eds., Nice,
France, September 22–27, IGS, 511–514.
Bowders, J. J., Neupane, D., and Loehr, J. E. 共2002b兲. ‘‘Sidewall leakage
in hydraulic conductivity testing of asphalt concrete specimens.’’ Geo-
tech. Test. J., 25共2兲, 210–214.
Creegan, P. J., and Monismith, C. L. 共1996兲. Asphalt concrete water
barriers for embankment dams. American Society of Civil Engineers,
New York.
Daniel, D. E., and Benson, C. H. 共1990兲. ‘‘Water content–Density criteria
for compacted soil liners.’’ J. Geotech. Eng., 116共2兲, 1811–1830.
Kerisel, J. 共1985兲. ‘‘The history of geotechnical engineering up until
1700.’’ Proc., 11th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation En-
gineering, San Francisco, August 12–16, 3–93.
Navdts, A. 共2001兲, ‘‘Hot bitumen grouting—Rediscovered.’’ Geotech.
News, 19共4兲, 59– 63.
Sherard, J. L., Woodward, R. J., Gizienski, S. F., and Clevenger, W. A.
共1963兲. Earth and earth-rock fill dams, Wiley, New York.
Skempton, A. W. 共1954兲. ‘‘Pore pressure coefficients A and B.’’ Geotech-
nique, 4共4兲, 143–147.
Wing, N. R., and Gee, G. W. 共1994a兲. ‘‘The development of surface
barriers at Hanford site.’’ In Situ Remediation: Scientific Basis for
Current and Future Technologies, Proc., 33rd Hanford Symp. on
Health and the Environment, Part I, G. W. Gee and N. R. Wing, eds.,
Pasco, Wash., November 7–11, Battelle Press, Columbus, Ohio, 427–
440.
Wing, N. R., and Gee, G. W. 共1994b兲. ‘‘Quest for the perfect cap.’’ Civ.
Eng. Mag., 64共10兲, 38 – 41.