sustainability

Article
Assessment of Field Compaction of Aggregate Base
Materials for Permeable Pavements Based on Plate
Load Tests
Yong-Jin Choi, Donghyun Ahn, Tan Hung Nguyen and Jaehun Ahn *
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Pusan National University, Busan 46241, Korea;
yj.choi@pusan.ac.kr (Y.-J.C.); Civi0641@naver.com (D.A.); nthung010189@gmail.com (T.H.N.)
* Correspondence: jahn@pusan.ac.kr; Tel.: +82-10-510-7650




Received: 27 September 2018; Accepted: 16 October 2018; Published: 22 October 2018


Abstract: The permeable pavement is one of Low Impact Development technics that allows
stormwater to infiltrate through the pavement surface and the underlying base layer, thereby
reducing surface runoff and preventing water contamination. For permeable base layers of permeable
pavements, open-graded aggregates are often used to infiltrate and store stormwater in the pore of
aggregate base layers. The mechanical behavior of open-graded aggregates has not been a major
interest of pavement industry and society, and therefore there is much less information known for
behavior of compacted open-graded aggregates comparing to dense-graded materials. This study
aims at investigating the mechanical behavior of compacted permeable or open-graded aggregate
base materials based on field experiments. Five different open-graded aggregates were selected,
and they were compacted in the field up to 12 passes with a 10-ton vibratory compaction roller.
The mechanical behaviors of aggregates were evaluated by conducting plate load tests at 2, 4, 8, and
12 passes of roller. For the test conditions considered herein, the strain modulus at the first loading
seems to provide more consistent results with respect to aggregate types and level of compaction
than other stiffness measures from plate load tests.

Keywords: permeable pavement; low impact development; open-graded aggregate; field test; plate
load test

1. Introduction
Increase in impervious areas due to urbanization has adversely affected the hydrologic cycle by
reducing stormwater infiltration, increasing river peak flows, reducing groundwater baseflow, and
increasing urban pollutant inflows into rivers [1,2]. The permeable pavements, one of most widely
used Low Impact Development (LID) technics, is considered as an approach to solving this problem [3].
Unlike conventional impervious pavements, permeable pavements have pores that allow stormwater
to infiltrate through the pavement surface and the underlying base layer, thereby reducing surface
runoff and preventing water contamination [2].
For road pavements, compaction is a key process during construction because it directly affects
the stability and durability of the pavement aggregate bases [4]. Therefore, proper compaction
quality control (QC) is essential to achieving adequate engineering performance. In permeable
pavements, for stormwater infiltration and retention, the base layer is composed of open-graded
aggregates with even particle size distributions and large voids between particles unlike conventional
(dense-graded) aggregate base materials. Despite the wide application of permeable pavements,
reasonable specifications or standards for compaction QC of open-graded aggregate materials do
not seem well established. Generally, the compaction quality of pavement base layers is assessed
by density in terms of relative compaction, which is defined as the ratio of the field dry density to

Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817; doi:10.3390/su10103817 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability
Sustainability 2018,
2018, 10,
10, x3817
FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of
of 13
13

terms of relative compaction, which is defined as the ratio of the field dry density to the maximum
dry
the density
maximum [5]. dry
Thedensity
characteristics
[5]. The of characteristics
these aggregates of are
these different from are
aggregates those of conventional
different from those baseof
materials,
conventional andbaseit is difficult
materials, to and
defineit isthe maximum
difficult dry density
to define the maximumand field drydensity
density using
andconventional
field density
test
usingmethods [6–10].test methods [6–10].
conventional
With
With the recent
recent adoption
adoption of of the
the mechanistic-empirical
mechanistic-empirical pavement pavement designdesign (MEPDG)
(MEPDG) method, method, there
there
have
have been increasing
increasing efforts
effortstotomonitor
monitorcompaction
compactionquality
quality byby evaluating
evaluating thethe stiffness
stiffness or strength
or strength of
of the
the compacted
compacted soil soil [4,11,12].
[4,11,12]. Modulus-based
Modulus-based compaction
compaction QC directly
QC directly measures
measures the modulus,
the modulus, rather rather
than
than the density,
the density, of theof the on-site
on-site compactedcompacted fill. Thefill. The measured
measured modulus modulus
has thehas the advantage
advantage of beingofdirectly
being
directly
related to related to structural
structural performance performance
and design and design parameters.
parameters. Various tests Various tests and
and devices fordevices
measuring for
measuring
modulus have modulus have been and
been developed developed and are
are currently incurrently
use, includingin use, including
the plate load the plate
test (PLT)load test (PLT)
[13,14], light
[13,14], light weight deflectometer
weight deflectometer (LWD) [15], soil (LWD) [15],
stiffness soil (SSG)
gauge stiffness
[16],gauge (SSG) [16],
and dynamic coneand dynamic cone
penetrometer [17].
penetrometer
Several related[17].studiesSeveral
usingrelated studies
these tests using these
and devices have tests and conducted
also been devices have also been conducted
[4,5,12,18–27]. With these
[4,5,12,18–27]. With theseConcrete
trends, the Interlocking trends, the Interlocking
Pavement Concrete
Institution (ICPI)Pavement
[1] and theInstitution
American (ICPI)
Society[1] and the
of Civil
American Society [28]
Engineers (ASCE) of Civil
have Engineers
recommended (ASCE) [28] have
assessing recommended
the compaction qualityassessing
of permeable the compaction
base layers
quality of permeable
using devices such asbasethe layers
LWD and using SSG.devices
However,such as thethere
since LWDare andnoSSG. However,
standards since modulus
or target there are
no standards
values or target
for assuring modulus
proper values itfor
compaction, is assuring
difficult in proper
practice compaction,
to evaluateitthe is difficult
quality of incompaction
practice to
evaluate
even when thethese
quality of compaction
devices are used. Seoul evenMetropolitan
when these City devices[29],are
ICPIused. Seoul
[1], and ASCEMetropolitan City [29],
[28] have suggested
ICPI [1], and ASCE
specifications based [28] have
on the suggested
number of passesspecifications based
of a vibratory on the number
compaction roller, ofbutpasses of a to
it is hard vibratory
find the
compaction
basis published roller,
forbut it is hard
selecting suchto afind the basis published for selecting such a number.
number.
Given
Given the challenges
challenges of of using
usingdensity-based
density-basedcompaction
compactionQC, QC,assessing
assessingthe the compaction
compaction quality
quality of
of pavement
pavement base base layers
layers by by modulus-based
modulus-based methods
methods can can provide
provide a valid
a valid alternative.
alternative. However,
However, therethere
have
have beenstudies
been few few studies attempting
attempting to elucidate
to elucidate the compaction
the compaction characteristics
characteristics of permeable of permeable
base materialsbase
materials
using the using
modulus the values
modulus for values
properfor proper
quality quality
control. Thecontrol. The mainofobjective
main objective this study of is
this study is to
to investigate
investigate
and understand and understand
the mechanical the mechanical
behavior ofbehavioropen-graded of open-graded
aggregates in aggregates in the field
the field based on PLT, based
whichon
PLT, which can
can provide provideinput
a valuable a valuable input in establishing
in establishing the methods theandmethods and specifications
specifications for QC of
for QC of permeable
permeable aggregate bases.
aggregate bases.

2. Permeable
2. Permeable Base
Base and
and Compaction
Compaction Quality
Quality Control

2.1. Permeable
2.1. Permeable Base
Base and
and Open-Graded
Open-Graded Aggregates
Aggregates
The base
The base of
of aa road
road pavement,
pavement, which
which is is the
the layer
layer installed
installed directly
directly below
below the
the surface
surface layer,
layer, plays
plays
the important
the important roles
roles of
of receiving
receiving vehicular
vehicular loads
loads from
from the
the surface
surface layer
layer and
and supporting
supporting thethe surface
surface layer
layer
itself [30]. In addition to these key functions, a permeable base should ensure adequate
itself [30]. In addition to these key functions, a permeable base should ensure adequate stormwater stormwater
infiltration into
infiltration into the
the underlying
underlying pavement
pavement layers.
layers. Thus,
Thus, unlike
unlike general
general base
base layers
layers that
that are
are constructed
constructed
with dense-graded aggregates, permeable bases use open-graded aggregates
with dense-graded aggregates, permeable bases use open-graded aggregates (Figure 1). In the (Figure 1). In the United
United
States, ASTM No. 57 aggregates are widely adopted for permeable base (choker course)
States, ASTM No. 57 aggregates are widely adopted for permeable base (choker course) [1,28]. In Korea, [1,28]. In Korea,
for example,
for example, Seoul
Seoul Metropolitan
Metropolitan CityCity [29]
[29] proposed
proposed its its own
own specification
specification ofof open-graded aggregates
open-graded aggregates
bases for the permeable block pavements. Since open-graded aggregates have
bases for the permeable block pavements. Since open-graded aggregates have very uniform particle very uniform particle
size distributions,
size distributions, and
and the
the fraction
fraction of
of fine
fine particles
particles isis negligibly
negligibly small,
small, the
the base
base layers
layers constructed
constructed withwith
these aggregates contain large voids among particles. Stormwater infiltrates through
these aggregates contain large voids among particles. Stormwater infiltrates through or is retained in or is retained in
these voids, thus satisfying the hydrologic requirements of the permeable
these voids, thus satisfying the hydrologic requirements of the permeable base. base.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 1.1.Conceptual illustration
Conceptual of pavement
illustration base materials;
of pavement (a) Open-graded
base materials; aggregates;aggregates;
(a) Open-graded (b) Dense-
graded aggregates.aggregates.
(b) Dense-graded
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 3 of 13

2.2. Compaction Quality Control and Permeable Base

Compaction of the base layer is a significant process in the construction of permeable pavements
and a key step towards achieving the desired engineering performance. Inadequate compaction of the
base layer can undermine the stability and durability of the entire pavement [11]. Thus, compaction
quality must be properly assessed during the construction of permeable pavements.
The most common criterion for ensuring adequate road base compaction quality is the relative
compaction, the ratio of the field dry density to the maximum dry density. However, conventional
density-based compaction control is hard to implement for open-graded aggregate bases. During the
construction of the base layer, the relative compaction of the compacted lift should meet certain target
values. Typically, the maximum dry density is obtained by the Proctor compaction test [6,7] and
the field dry density is measured by the techniques such as sand-cone [8], rubber balloon [9], and
nuclear density gauge [10] methods. However, because the characteristics of permeable base materials,
which is open-graded aggregates, are different from those of typical soils, it is difficult to measure
the maximum dry density and the field dry density with these conventional test methods. First,
because the particles of open-graded aggregates are very large and uniform, it is difficult to meet the
specifications of the Proctor test [6,7]. Moreover, the impact hammer used in the Proctor compaction
test often breaks the large particles, and thus changes the specimens [31]. Second, in the sand-cone
method, the shape of the test hole cannot be maintained due to the collapse of the aggregate, and
sand replacement is not valid because the sand used for filling the test hole enters the voids and pore
openings [8]. The rubber balloon test is also highly challenging due to problems with maintaining the
shape of the hole, and the rupturing of the rubber due to the sharp edges of the aggregate particles [5,9].
The nuclear density gauge method may also be affected by the gravel and large particles or the large
voids in the permeable base, and has not been calibrated for such condition. The safety of radioactive
wave is also arguable resulting in implementation and management challenges [5,10,11].
As mentioned in the introduction, modulus-based compaction QC has received increasing attention
due to its merits and validity. Because the measurement of field dry density and maximum dry density of
open-graded aggregates is challenging, modulus-based compaction QC can make an effective alternative
method for monitoring the compaction quality of permeable base layers. However, very few studies
have been conducted on the modulus-based compaction QC of permeable base layers. Although some
permeable pavement specifications such as those of the ICPI [1] and ASCE [28] have suggested the use
of the LWD and SSG to assess compaction quality, there are no specific target modulus values in these
specifications to ensure proper compaction. In addition, the ICPI and ASCE [1,28] have proposed at
least four passes of a 10-ton vibratory compaction roller as a standard for achieving proper compaction,
but, the proposed standards do not elaborate the basis for this specification.
There are several studies that used the PLT to evaluate the modulus of dense-graded ground
materials. The results from literatures are summarized in Table 1. Examples of compaction QC
specifications with target modulus values that can be assessed with the PLT are presented in Table 2.

Table 1. Moduli of dense-graded ground materials evaluated by PLT 1 in literatures.

MDD 2 OMC 3 Ev1 6 Ev2 7

Literature Soil Type RC 4 (%) MC 5 (%)
(g/cm3 ) (%) (MPa) (MPa)
Fine sand subgrade 1.72 3 14.4 3 99–101 5.3–9.9 35–36 97–107
Natural gravel 2.18 3 3.7 3 99.7 2.4 65 190
Wiman [27]
Crushed rock aggregate 2.17 3 4.7 3 99.8 2.7 61 185
Granular base 2.35 3 4.5 3 95.8 2.2 77.6 191
Kim and Park [18] Poorly graded gravel 2.27 - - 5.9 23–53 48–137
Silty sand - - - - 11~15 21~28
Kim et al. [32]
Lean clay - - - - 12~23 18~37
1 Plate load test; 2 Maximum dry density from the standard Proctor test; 3 Optimum moisture content from the
standard Proctor test; 4 Relative compaction; 5 Moisture content when PLT is conducted; 6 Strain modulus for first
loading cycle; 7 Strain modulus for second loading cycle.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 4 of 13
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13

2. Modulus-based
Table 2.
Table Modulus-based compaction
compaction specifications.
specifications.
Requirement
Requirement Corresponding
Corresponding
Literature
Literature Country
Country Material
Material
Ev2 (MPa)
Ev2 (MPa) EEv2v2/E
/Ev1
v1 k2.5 (MPa/m)
k2.5 (MPa/m) RC (%)
RC (%)
GW,
GW, GI, GI,GT
GU, GU,
1 GT 1
≥70 ≥70 -- - - ≥98 ≥98
ZTVE-StB
ZTVE-StB 94 [33]94 [33] Germany
Germany
- - - - ≤ 2.5
≤2.5 - - - -
Standard
Standard specification
specification for for
Korea Korea Subbase
Subbase - - -- ≥2294 2
≥294 ≥95 ≥95
road construction [34] [34]
road construction
11German soil 2 Modulus
German soilclassification
classificationaccording to DIN
according 18196
to DIN [35]; [35];
18196 of subgrade
2 Modulus reaction
of subgrade defineddefined
reaction at 2.5-mm
at
settlement using a 30-cm loading plate.
2.5-mm settlement using a 30-cm loading plate.

3.
3. Field
Field Test
Test
3.1. Test Materials
3.1. Test Materials
Three types of open-graded aggregates were used in the construction of the permeable base test
Three types of open-graded aggregates were used in the construction of the permeable base test
bed; the maximum particle sizes of these aggregates were 40 mm (D40), 25 mm (D25), and 13 mm
bed; the maximum particle sizes of these aggregates were 40 mm (D40), 25 mm (D25), and 13 mm
(D13), as they are presented in Figure 2. These rhyolite aggregates were brought to the field in air-dried
(D13), as they are presented in Figure 2. These rhyolite aggregates were brought to the field in air-
condition two days before the test started. Two additional aggregates, “D40 + D25” and “D25 + D13”,
dried condition two days before the test started. Two additional aggregates, “D40 + D25” and “D25
were prepared by mixing their component aggregates in equal proportions by volume. The mixing
+ D13”, were prepared by mixing their component aggregates in equal proportions by volume. The
was conducted by a backhoe excavator, and the volumes of the aggregates were approximated by the
mixing was conducted by a backhoe excavator, and the volumes of the aggregates were
excavator bucket. The volumetric compositions, basic properties, and particle size distributions of the
approximated by the excavator bucket. The volumetric compositions, basic properties, and particle
five open-graded aggregate test materials are presented in Table 3 and Figure 3. Figure 3 also presents
size distributions of the five open-graded aggregate test materials are presented in Table 3 and Figure
the lower and upper bounds of particle size distribution of two specifications, the ASTM No. 57 and
3. Figure 3 also presents the lower and upper bounds of particle size distribution of two specifications,
Seoul Metropolitan City [29]. The particle size distribution of D40+D25 was comparable to ASTM No.
the ASTM No. 57 and Seoul Metropolitan City [29]. The particle size distribution of D40+D25 was
57 (the material for choker layer in ICPI [1] and ASCE [28]) and specification of Seoul Metropolitan
comparable to ASTM No. 57 (the material for choker layer in ICPI [1] and ASCE [28]) and specification
City [29].
of Seoul Metropolitan City [29].

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 2. Three types of open-graded aggregates used to construct

aggregates used construct the test bed. The maximum particle
mm (D13).
sizes are: (a) 40 mm (D40); (b) 25 mm (D25); (c) 13 mm (D13).

Table 3. Basic information of the test materials.

Table 3. Basic information of the test materials.
Material
MaterialComposition
Compositionbyby
Volume
Volume 1 2
Test Material Lithology
Material
Test Lithology CCuu1 Specific
Cc 2Cc Specific GravityAbrasion
Gravity Abrasion Rate
Rate (%)(%)
D40
D40 D25
D25 D13
D13
D40D40 100%
100% - - -- 2.88
2.88 1.191.19 12.812.8
D40 + D25
D40 + D25 50% 50% 50%50% -- 2.99
2.99 1.081.08 9.8 9.8
D25D25 Rhyolite
Rhyolite - - 100%
100% -- 2.48
2.48 1.021.02 2.67–2.75
2.67–2.75 10.310.3
D25 + D13 - 50% 50% 2.84 1.16 11.2
D25 + D13 - 50% 50% 2.84 1.16 11.2
D13 - - 100% 2.79 1.16 12.3
D13 1
- - 100% 2.79 1.16 12.3
Coefficient of uniformity; 2 Coefficient of curvature.
1 Coefficient of uniformity; 2 Coefficient of curvature.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 5 of 13
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 13

100
D40
90 D40+D25
80 D25
Passing by weight (%) D25+D13
70 D13
ASTM No. 57
60
Seoul Metropolitan City [29]
50
40
30
20
10
0
100 10 1 0.1
Particle size (mm)

Figure 3. Particle size distribution of test materials and specifications.

Figure 3. Particle size distribution of test materials and specifications.
3.2. Test Program
3.2. Test Program
The test program in this study (Table 4) was set for each aggregate material. A 30-cm lift (first
lift) wasThelaid
testand
program in this
compacted bystudy (Table
12 passes of a4)10-ton
was set for eachcompaction
vibratory aggregate material. A 30-cm
roller. After 2, 4, 8,lift
and(first
12
lift) was
passes, twolaid and compacted
(duplicate) PLTs wereby 12 passes ofon
performed a 10-ton vibratory compaction
each compacted roller. After
aggregate. Another 30-cm2,lift
4, 8, and 12
(second
passes,
lift) two on
was laid (duplicate) PLTs
the first lift, andwere performed
the previous on each and
compaction compacted aggregate.
PLT sequences wereAnother
repeated.30-cm
Thus,lift
a
(second
total of 80lift) was
cases oflaid
PLTon the first lift,
(5 materials, and the
2 lifts, previous
4 numbers ofcompaction
passes, and and PLTwere
2 tests) sequences wereFrom
performed. repeated.
the
Thus,
PLT a totalthe
results, of strain
80 cases of PLTfor
moduli (5the
materials,
first and 2 lifts,
second 4 numbers
loading of passes,
cycles (Ev1and
and2 Etests) were performed.
v2 , respectively) and
the modulus of subgrade reaction (defined at 2.5 mm of settlement; k2.5 ) were obtained. (Ev1 and Ev2,
From the PLT results, the strain moduli for the first and second loading cycles
respectively) and the modulus of subgrade reaction (defined at 2.5 mm of settlement; k2.5) were
obtained. Table 4. Test program.

Test Materials Lift Number of Roller Passes

Table 4. Test program.
D40
2
D40 +Test
D25Materials Lift Number of Roller Passes
First (30 cm) 4
D25 D40 2
D40 + D25 Second (30 cm) 8
D25 + D13 First (30 cm) 4
12
D13 D25 Second (30 cm) 8
D25 + D13
12
D13
3.3. Test Bed Construction and Test Procedure
3.3. The
Test test
Bed Construction and Test Procedure
bed was constructed at a site on the Yangsan campus of Pusan National University in
SouthThe Korea.
test First,
bed wasthe site was excavated
constructed at a siteason
shown in Figure
the Yangsan 4. The of
campus overall
Pusanplan dimensions
National of thein
University
excavated were 3.7 ×
South Korea. First, the site was excavated as shown in Figure 4. The overall plan dimensions offor
area 20 m with a trapezoidal vertical cross-section, except the excavation the
ramp needed
excavated forwere
area the entry
3.7 ×of20the m construction and testing
with a trapezoidal equipment.
vertical Afterexcept
cross-section, excavation, the test bed
the excavation for
was
ramp divided
neededinto for the
the five
entrysections using rubberand
of the construction partitions to isolate each
testing equipment. Aftertest material (Figure
excavation, the test 5a).
bed
The
washeight
divided ofinto
the the
lift five
(30 cm)
sectionswasusing
guided by the
rubber rubber to
partitions partitions thattest
isolate each hasmaterial
the same height
(Figure with
5a). The
the lift. of
height The theunloaded
lift (30 cm) aggregates
was guided werebyevenly spread
the rubber with thethat
partitions bucket
has ofthethe excavator
same to level
height with thethe
lift.
surface (Figure 5b).
The unloaded Thereafter,
aggregates were a 10-ton
evenlyvibratory rollerthe
spread with (Dynapac)
bucket of wastheused to compact
excavator the aggregates
to level the surface
(Figure
(Figure5c).5b).The roller operated
Thereafter, a 10-ton along the longitudinal
vibratory direction
roller (Dynapac) wasof used
the testto bed. Afterthe
compact theaggregates
specified
number
(Figure of 5c).roller
The passes (Table 4),along
roller operated the PLTs were performed
the longitudinal for each
direction testtest
of the material to determine
bed. After the
the specified
modulus
number of the compacted lift (Figure 5d). After the tests on the first lift were
roller passes (Table 4), the PLTs were performed for each test material to determine thecompleted, the second
lift was laid
modulus ofonthetop of the first
compacted liftlift, and the
(Figure compaction
5d). and on
After the tests PLTtheprocedures werecompleted,
first lift were repeated. the second
lift was laid on top of the first lift, and the compaction and PLT procedures were repeated.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 6 of 13
Sustainability
Sustainability 2018,
2018, 10,
10, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 66 of
of 13
13

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure 4.
4. Test
Test bed
bed layout:
layout: (a)
(a) Cross-sectional
Cross-sectional view;
view; (b)
(b) Plan
Plan view.
view.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure
Figure 5.5. Test
Test bed
bed construction
construction and
and test
test procedure:
procedure: (a)
(a) Test
Test bed
Test bed excavation
excavation and
and test
test section
sectionseparation;
section separation;
separation;
(b) Lift construction;
Lift construction;
(b) Lift (c)
construction; (c) Compaction;
(c) Compaction; (d)
Compaction; (d) PLT.
(d) PLT.
PLT.

The
The PLT
PLT was
was carried
carried out
out in accordance with
in accordance DIN 18134
with DIN 18134 [14]
[14] with
with some
somemodifications
modifications considering
considering
prevailing field
the prevailing fieldconditions.
conditions.InInthethe loading
loading process,
process, a loading
a loading plate
plate withwith a diameter
a diameter of 30ofcm30was
cm
was used
used without
without applying
applying seating
seating sandsand
becausebecause the surface
the surface of aggregates
of aggregates rightright
after after compaction
compaction was
was very
very flat. excavator
flat. The The excavator was used
was used to deliver
to deliver the reaction
the reaction force.force. The normal
The normal stressstress
actingacting
on theon the
plate
platemeasured
was was measured by reading
by reading the the hydraulic
hydraulic pressure
pressure acting
acting ononthethe hydraulicjack
hydraulic jackwith
withthe
the pressure
measurement dial
measurement dialgauge.
gauge.Before
Beforethethe
testtest
began, a preloading
began, stressstress
a preloading (~0.01(~0.01
MPa) MPa)
was applied for proper
was applied for
seating seating
proper of the plate,
of theand the and
plate, displacement measurement
the displacement dial gauge
measurement dialwas set to
gauge waszero. The
set to loading
zero. The
cycle (first
loading loading
cycle (first cycle)
loading was applied
cycle) was in eight approximately
applied equally spaced
in eight approximately equallystages
spaced upstages
to theup
planned
to the
maximum stress (~0.5 MPa); then, the load was reduced to 50% and 25%
planned maximum stress (~0.5 MPa); then, the load was reduced to 50% and 25% of the maximum of the maximum stress
successively,
stress and finally
successively, and back to back
finally the preloading stress. The
to the preloading reloading
stress. cycle (second
The reloading cycleloading
(second cycle) was
loading
cycle) was the same as the first loading cycle, but the last loading stage (the 8th stage) was not applied
following the DIN 18134 [14]. The magnitude of preloading and maximum stresses varied slightly
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 7 of 13

the same as the first loading cycle, but the last loading stage (the 8th stage) was not applied following
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 13
the DIN 18134 [14]. The magnitude of preloading and maximum stresses varied slightly among tests
accommodating equipment and
among tests accommodating field conditions.
equipment The test locations
and field conditions. The test were offset
locations from
were eachfrom
offset other to
each
minimize interference among the PLT measurements (Figure 6). The location of
other to minimize interference among the PLT measurements (Figure 6). The location of PLT in each PLT in each aggregate
bed is illustrated
aggregate bed is in Figure 6; the
illustrated numbers
in Figure 2, 4,numbers
6; the 8, and 122,represent
4, 8, andthe
12number of roller
represent passes,of
the number and the
roller
symbol “a” and
passes, and “b” represent
the symbol “a” andthe“b”
firstrepresent
and second the tests. Additional
first and second PLTs
tests. were also conducted
Additional PLTs were onalso
the
subgrade by the test bed.
conducted on the subgrade by the test bed.

Figure 6.
Figure 6. Layout
Layout of
of test
test locations
locations on
on aa test
test bed
bed section.
section.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1.
4.1. Modulus
Modulus Calculation
Calculation
The
The values
values of
of the
the strain
strain modulus
modulus atat the
the first loading EEv1
first loading and the strain modulus at the second
v1 and the strain modulus at the second

loading EEv2
loading were calculated based on the process specified in DIN 18134 [14]. The calculation method
v2 were calculated based on the process specified in DIN 18134 [14]. The calculation method
uses
uses a second-order polynomial
a second-order polynomial regression
regression analysis
analysis to to determine
determine the
the stress–settlement
stress–settlement curve
curve for
for the
the
first
first and
and second
second loading
loading cycles.
cycles. The
The determined
determined curve
curve is is expressed
expressed by
by the
the following
following equation:
equation:

s=
= a0 + + a2 ·σ∙ 02
+ a1 ·∙σ0 + (1)
(1)
where is the settlement of the plate (mm), is the normal stress below the plate (MPa), , ,
where s is the settlement of the plate (mm), σ0 is the normal stress below the plate (MPa), a0 , a1 , and a2
and is the constant determined from second-order polynomial regression analysis (mm,
is the constant determined2 from second-order polynomial regression analysis (mm, mm/MPa, and
mm/MPa, and mm/(MPa) , respectively). The determined curves and constants are illustrated with
mm/(MPa)2 , respectively). The determined curves and constants are illustrated with the test results
the test results shown in Figure 7. In Figure 7, “a” and “b” represent the duplicate of the tests (Figure
shown in Figure 7. In Figure 7, “a” and “b” represent the duplicate of the tests (Figure 6). The values
6). The values of Ev1 and Ev2 were determined from the first and second regression curves, respectively,
of Ev1 and Ev2 were determined from the first and second regression curves, respectively, as follows:
as follows:
11
1.5∙·r ·∙
Ev==1.5 (2)
(2)
a1 ++a2 ·σ∙0max

where Ev isisthe
where the strain
strain modulus
modulus (MPa),
(MPa), r is theis radius
the radius
of theofplate
the plate
(mm),(mm), is the maximum
σ0max is the maximum normal
normal
stress stressthe
below below
platethe plate (MPa).
(MPa).
For the
For thecalculation
calculationof of
thethe modulus
modulus of subgrade
of subgrade reaction
reaction at 2.5-mm
at 2.5-mm displacement
displacement (k2.5 ), the(kaverage
2.5), the

average
slope slope between
between the displacement
the displacement of 0 andof2.5 0 and
mm2.5onmmthe on the regression
regression curve
curve of the of theloading
first first loading
cycle
cycle (Figure
(Figure 7) was7)used.
was used. The following
The following is the equation
is the equation for calculating
for calculating k2.5 : k2.5:
∆
∆σ0 (3)
k2.5. == (3)
s
where ∆ is the difference between the preloading stress and the stress corresponding to 2.5-mm
where ∆σ0 is the difference between the preloading stress and the stress corresponding to 2.5-mm
displacement and is the displacement (therefore, 2.5 mm or 0.0025 m).
displacement and s is the displacement (therefore, 2.5 mm or 0.0025 m).
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 8 of 13
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13

0 0
a - 1st loading cycle a - 1st loading cycle
k2.5 at a a – 2nd loading cycle a – 2nd loading cycle
b - 1st loading cycle
k2.5 at a b - 1st loading cycle
2 b – 2nd loading cycle 2 b – 2nd loading cycle

Settlement, s (mm)
Settlement, s (mm)

y = −7.99 x2 + 20.48 x − 0.37 y = −9.55 x2 + 17.29 x − 0.80

4 y = −7.65 x2 + 21.62 x − 0.86 4
y = −8.77 x2 + 17.92 x − 0.85

6 6
y = 1.22 x2 + 1.30 x + 8.21

y = 1.28 x2 + 1.08 x + 5.91

8 8
y = 1.34 x2 + 0.97 x + 5.39

y = 1.11 x2 + 1.05 x + 8.47

10 10
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Normal stress, σ0 (MPa) Normal stress, σ0 (MPa)
(a) (b)
Figure 7. Examples
Examples ofof stress-settlement
stress-settlement curves
curves in
in the first lift: (a)
(a) D25
D25 at locations
locations “a”
“a” and “b”
“b” after 4
roller passes; (b) D25 at locations “a” and “b” after 12 roller passes.

4.2. Relationship
4.2. Relationship Between
Between Roller
Roller Pass
Pass and
and Modulus
Modulus
Figure 88 summarizes
Figure summarizes the the changes
changes in inEEv1v1,, EEv2 , k 2.5 and
v2, k2.5
and E Ev1 /E for the successive roller passes at
v1/Ev2v2for the successive roller passes at
which the PLTs were conducted. Each point
which the PLTs were conducted. Each point in Figure 8 is the average in Figure 8 is the average of of two
two test
test results
results (duplicate).
(duplicate).
The values
The values of Ev1of E , E
v1, Ev2
, and
v2, and k2.5 k steeply increase up to four roller passes for most
2.5steeply increase up to four roller passes for most of the test materials of the test materials
and lifts.
and lifts. It
It is
is clear
clear that that E Ev1 keepsincreasing
v1keeps increasingas asthe thenumber
number of of passes
passes raises
raises after
after four
four passes
passes but but with
with
declined trends. E v2 and k seem to somewhat reflect the change
declined trends. Ev2 and k2.52.5seem to somewhat reflect the change in materials with increasing number in materials with increasing number
of passes,
of passes, but buttheytheyare arenot notas assensitive
sensitiveororconsistent
consistenttotothe thenumber
number ofof passes
passes Ev1E. v1
asas It .isItnoted
is noted thatthat
Ev2
Ev2the
is is the strain
strain modulusmodulus during
during reloading
reloading process
process andand the thematerial
materialmay maybe becompressed
compressed and and become
become
denser during
denser during the the first
first loading
loading cycle, making E
cycle, making Ev2 the consequence of the first loading rather than the
v2 the consequence of the first loading rather than the
measure of
measure of roller compaction. kk2.5
roller compaction. isthe
2.5is the stiffness
stiffness measure
measure of of the
the aggregate
aggregate at at relative
relative smaller
smaller strain
strain
level than E v1 , so that the effect of increased compaction level
level than Ev1, so that the effect of increased compaction level on highly nonlinear material may not on highly nonlinear material may not
be captured well
be captured well by k2.5 by k . From Figure 8a–c, it can be found that the
2.5. From Figure 8a–c, it can be found that the minimum of four roller passes minimum of four roller passes
recommended
recommended by the ICPI by the ICPI and and ASCEASCE [1,28]
[1,28] isis anan efficient
efficient one,one, butbut one
one can
can expect
expect hardening
hardening of of the
the
open-graded materials for larger number
open-graded materials for larger number of roller passes than four. of roller passes than four.
The underlying
The underlying subgrade subgrade layer layer could
could affect
affectthe theresults
resultsof ofPLTs,
PLTs,and andthe valuesofofEv1
thevalues Ev1, ,EEv2v2 and
and kk2.5
2.5
of subgrade were 69 MPa, 196 MPa, and 143 MPa/m, higher
of subgrade were 69 MPa, 196 MPa, and 143 MPa/m, higher than those of all open-graded aggregates. than those of all open-graded aggregates.
Because the
Because the subgrade
subgradehas hasa considerably
a considerably higher
higher stiffness thanthan
stiffness the permeable
the permeablebase layers, the Ev1the
base layers, values
Ev1
of the first lift, built directly on the subgrade, are slightly higher than
values of the first lift, built directly on the subgrade, are slightly higher than those of the second lift those of the second lift for most
cases
for most (Figure
cases8a), but certainly
(Figure not significant.
8a), but certainly These differences
not significant. are not captured
These differences by other modulus
are not captured by other
measures such
modulus measures v2 as E and
such as 2.5k .
Ev2 and k2.5.
The strain
The strainmodulus
modulusatatreloading reloadingcycle cycle(E(E v2)v2
) showed
showed high high dependency
dependency on theon material
the material type.type.
The
The permeable base layers composed of large particles at
permeable base layers composed of large particles at the lowest compaction level, in some cases,the lowest compaction level, in some cases,
has
has higher
higher Ev2 the
Ev2 than thansmaller
the smaller particlesparticles
at the at the highest
highest compactioncompaction level.
level. For For example,
example, D13 with D13 12with 12
passes
passes showed considerably lower E v2 than D25 with 2 passes
showed considerably lower Ev2 than D25 with 2 passes (Figure 8b). These results indicate that the (Figure 8b). These results indicate that
the selection
selection of materials
of materials is very is very important,
important, and the andlevel the level of compaction
of compaction does does not compensate
not compensate the
the mis-
mis-selection
selection of theofmaterials.
the materials.
When the
When the values of values of E Ev1 of open-graded aggregates are compared to those of conventional
v1 of open-graded aggregates are compared to those of conventional
(densely-graded) ground
(densely-graded) ground materials in materials in literature
literature (Table(Table 1), 1), EEv1 of open-graded aggregates are smaller
v1 of open-graded aggregates are smaller
than those
than those of of dense-graded
dense-graded materials materials with with similar
similar particle
particle sizes
sizes (gravel),
(gravel), but
but rather
rather close
close to to those
those of
of
dense-graded materials with smaller sizes (sand
dense-graded materials with smaller sizes (sand and clay). The values of Ev2 and clay). The values of E are, however,
v2 are, however, closer to
closer to
densely-graded gravel
densely-graded gravelmaterials
materials rather thanthan
rather the densely-graded
the densely-graded sand orsand
clay. or
As such,
clay. moreAs such, permanent
more
deformation is expected in open-graded aggregates than in
permanent deformation is expected in open-graded aggregates than in dense-graded aggregates, but dense-graded aggregates, but the resilient
the resilient deformation may be similar for these materials. When they are compared to the
requirements in German [32] and Korean [33] guides, all the materials tested meet the requirement
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 9 of 13

deformation may be similar for these materials. When they are compared to the requirements in
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 13
German [32] and Korean [33] guides, all the materials tested meet the requirement for Ev2 but not
for EEv2v2but
for /Ev1 and
not fork2.5
Ev2./E
This would be partially because the current requirements are setup focusing on
v1 and k2.5. This would be partially because the current requirements are setup
dense-graded materials. For
focusing on dense-graded materials. open-graded aggregates, itaggregates,
For open-graded will be necessary
it will to
be develop more
necessary suitable
to develop
requirements for QC.
more suitable requirements for QC.

20 140

120
16
100
Ev1 (MPa)

Ev2 (MPa)
12 80

60
8
D40 (1st lift) D40 (2nd lift) 40
4 D40+D25 (1st lift) D40+D25 (2nd lift)
D25 (1st lift) D25 (2nd lift) 20
D25+D13 (1st lift) D25+D13 (2nd lift)
D13 (1st lift) D13 (2nd lift)
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Number of Roller Passes Number of Roller Passes
(a) (b)
100 14

80 12
k2.5 (MPa/m)

60 10
Ev2/Ev1

40 8

20 6

0 4
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Number of Roller Passes Number of Roller Passes
(c) (d)
Figure
Figure8. 8.Relationship
Relationship between
between number of roller
roller passes
passes and
andmodulus
modulusmeasures:
measures:(a)
(a)EEv1v1;; (b)
(b) EEv2
v2;; (c)
(c) k2.5
2.5; ;
(d)
(d) EEv2v2/E/E
v1.v1 .

4.3. Relationship
4.3. RelationshipBetween
BetweenMaterials
Materialsand
and Modulus
Modulus
The results
The results in
inFigure
Figure8 are reorganized
8 are in Figure
reorganized 9 to present
in Figure better the
9 to present differences
better among materials.
the differences among
The values of E
materials. The valuesv1 are of Ev1 are higher for larger size of particles with a few variations9a).
higher for larger size of particles with a few variations (Figure The D13
(Figure 9a).
sample, the smallest particles among the investigated, has the lowest values of E v1
The D13 sample, the smallest particles among the investigated, has the lowest values of Ev1, Ev2, and , E v2 , and k 2.5 for
most cases. The values of Ev2 are mostly within a band of 80~130 MPa. The values of
k2.5 for most cases. The values of Ev2 are mostly within a band of 80~130 MPa. The values of k2.5 do notk 2.5 do not seem
consistent,
seem possibly
consistent, because
possibly they represent
because the slope
they represent of stress
the slope and displacement
of stress at very
and displacement atnarrow range
very narrow
of displacement
range (2.5 mm).
of displacement (2.5 mm).
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 10 of 13
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 13

20 140

120
16
100
Ev1 (MPa)

Ev2 (MPa)
12 80

8 60

2 pass (1st lift) 4 pass (1st lift) 40

4 8 pass (1st lift) 12 pass (1st lift)
2 pass (2nd lift) 4 pass (2nd lift) 20
8 pass (2nd lift) 12 pass (2nd lift)
0 0
D40 D40+D25 D25 D25+D13 D13 D40 D40+D25 D25 D25+D13 D13
Material Material
(a) (b)
100 14

12
80
10
k2.5 (MPa/m)

60
Ev2/Ev1

40 6

4
20
2

0 0
D40 D40+D25 D25 D25+D13 D13 D40 D40+D25 D25 D25+D13 D13

Material Material
(c) (d)
Figure9.9.Relationship
Figure Relationshipbetween
betweenmaterials
materialsand
andmodulus
modulusmeasures:
measures:(a)(a) Ev1
Ev1 ; (b)EE
; (b) v2v2;;(c)
(c)kk2.5 v2/E
2.5; (d) Ev2 . .
/Ev1v1

4.4. Variations
4.4. Variations Between
Between Modulus
Modulus Measurements
Measurements
Figure 10
Figure 10shows
shows the the
examples of the of
examples modulus values obtained
the modulus values before averaging
obtained beforetheaveraging
measurements the
at two locations “a” and “b”. It can be found that E , which measures slope of stress
measurements at two locations “a” and “b”. It can be found that Ev1, which measures slope of stress
v1 and displacement
up todisplacement
and the maximum upstress,
to thepresents
maximum more consistent
stress, results
presents more comparing k2.5 that
consistenttoresults uses smaller
comparing to kportion
2.5 that
of thesmaller
uses stress-displacement
portion of thecurve (Figure 7). For dense-graded
stress-displacement curve (Figurematerials, this gap maymaterials,
7). For dense-graded be less significant;
this gap
for open-graded
may materials for
be less significant; that open-graded
undergoes considerable amount
materials that of displacement,
undergoes Ev1 and
considerable Ev2 give
amount of
more consistent results. Table 5 summarized the variations of duplicate measurements
displacement, Ev1 and Ev2 give more consistent results. Table 5 summarized the variations of duplicate for all the tests
conducted, andfor
measurements forall
open-graded aggregates,
the tests conducted, andEv1forand Ev2 wouldaggregates,
open-graded be a more reliable
Ev1 andmeasure
Ev2 would forbe QCa
than k
more reliable
2.5 . measure for QC than k2.5.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 11 of 13
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 13

20 100

16 80

k2.5 (MPa/m)
Ev1 (MPa)

12 60

8 40

4 D40+D25 (a) 20 D13 (a)

D40+D25 (b) D13 (b)
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Number of Roller Passes Number of Roller Passes
(a) (b)
Figure10.
Figure 10.Examples
Examplesofofmodulus
modulusmeasurements
measurementsbefore
beforeaveraging:
averaging:(a)
(a)EEv1v1 measurements
measurementsat atlocation
locationaa
andbbin
and inD40+D25
D40+D25ofoffirst
firstlift;
lift;(b)
(b)kk2.5 measurements at
2.5 measurements at location
location aa and
and bb in
in D13
D13 of
of second
second lift.
lift.

Table5.5.Coefficients
Table Coefficientsof
ofvariation
variationof
ofmodulus
modulusmeasures.
measures.
CoefficientofofVariation
Coefficient Variation (CV)
(CV)
Modulus
Modulus
Maximum
Maximum (%)
(%) Mean
Mean(%) (%)
Ev1 Ev1 16.1
16.1 5.3
5.3
Ev2 Ev2 22.4
22.4 4.5
4.5
k2.5 k2.5 40.6
40.6 10.5
10.5

5.5.Conclusions
Conclusions
The
Themechanical
mechanicalbehavior
behaviorofofopen-graded
open-gradedaggregates
aggregateshas
hasnot
notbeen
beenaamajor
majorinterest
interestof
ofpavement
pavement
industry
industryand
andsociety,
society,and
andtherefore
thereforethere
thereisisno
nomuch
muchinformation
informationavailable
availableforforbehavior
behaviorofofcompacted
compacted
open-graded
open-graded aggregates.
aggregates. Sets of PLTs
PLTs have
have conducted
conducted to
to investigate
investigate the
the mechanical
mechanical behavior
behavior of
of
compacted
compacted permeable
permeable oror open-graded
open-graded aggregates.
aggregates. Based
Based on
on the
the test
test results,
results, the
thefollowing
followingfindings
findings
were
weremade:
made:

• The values
The valuesof ofEEv1v1,, EEv2
v2, and k2.52.5 steeply
steeply increased
increased up up to four roller passes for for most
most ofof the
the test
test
materialsand
materials andlifts
liftsconsidered
consideredhere. here.EEv1v1 clearly
clearly keeps
keeps increasing
increasing asas the
the number
number ofofpasses
passesraises
raises
afterfour
after fourpasses
passesbut butwithwithdeclined
declinedtrends.
trends.TheTheminimum
minimumof offour
fourroller
rollerpasses
passesrecommended
recommendedby by
theICPI
the ICPIand
andASCE
ASCE[1,28] [1,28]isisefficient,
efficient,butbutoneonecan
canexpect
expecthardening
hardeningof ofthe
theopen-graded
open-gradedmaterials
materials
forlarger
for largernumber
numberof ofroller
rollerpasses
passesthanthanfour.
four.
• Thestrain
The strainmodulus
modulusatatthe thesecond
secondloading
loadingcycle
cycle(E(Ev2v2)) showed
showed high
highdependency
dependencyon onthe
thematerial
material
type. Large
type. Large particles
particles at at the
the lowest
lowest compaction
compaction level,
level, in in some
somecases,
cases,had
hadhigher
higherEEv2v2 than
than the
the
smaller particles at the highest compaction level. The selection of materials
smaller particles at the highest compaction level. The selection of materials is very important, and is very important,
andlevel
the the level of compaction
of compaction does does not compensate
not compensate the mis-selection
the mis-selection of theofmaterials.
the materials.
• Foropen-graded
For open-gradedaggregates
aggregatesthat thatundergoes
undergoes largelargedeformation
deformation duringduring PLT,
PLT,the
thestrain
strainmodulus
modulus
E v1 and Ev2 measures much wider range of stress and displacement than k2.5. As such, Ev1 and Ev2
Ev1 and Ev2 measures much wider range of stress and displacement than k2.5 . As such, Ev1 and
Egive more consistent results. For open-graded aggregates, Ev1 and Ev2 would make a more
v2 give more consistent results. For open-graded aggregates, Ev1 and Ev2 would make a more
reliable measurefor
reliable measure forQC QCthanthankk2.5.
2.5
• When the results are compared
When the results are compared to the torequirements
the requirements
in German in German and guides,
and Korean Koreanall guides, all the
the materials
materials
tested meettested meet the requirement
the requirement for Ev2 but for not Efor
v2 but not for Ev2/Ev1 and k2.5. This would be partially
Ev2 /Ev1 and k2.5 . This would be partially because
the current requirements are setup focusing onfocusing
because the current requirements are setup dense-graded on dense-graded
materials. It materials. It will to
will be necessary be
necessary to develop more suitable QC requirements
develop more suitable QC requirements for the open-graded aggregate base. for the open-graded aggregate base.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization and methodology Y.-J.C., D.A., and J.A.; Validation, Y.-J.C., T.H.N.,
D.A., and J.A.; Formal Analysis, Y.-J.C.; Investigation, Y.-J.C. and J.A.; Resources, J.A.; Data Curation, Y.-J.C.;
Writing—Original Draft, Y.-J.C.; Writing—Review & Editing, J.A.; Visualization, Y.-J.C.; Supervision, J.A.;
Project Administration, J.A.; Funding Acquisition, J.A.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 12 of 13

Author Contributions: Conceptualization and methodology Y.-J.C., D.A., and J.A.; Validation, Y.-J.C., T.H.N.,
D.A., and J.A.; Formal Analysis, Y.-J.C.; Investigation, Y.-J.C. and J.A.; Resources, J.A.; Data Curation, Y.-J.C.;
Writing—Original Draft, Y.-J.C.; Writing—Review & Editing, J.A.; Visualization, Y.-J.C.; Supervision, J.A.; Project
Administration, J.A.; Funding Acquisition, J.A.
Funding: This research was supported by a grant from the Technology Advancement Research Program (grant No.
18CTAP-C132363-02) funded by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport of the Korean government.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport of Korean
government for the grant from Technology Advancement Research Program (grant No. 18CTAP-C132363-02).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Smith, D.R. Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavements, 4th ed.; Interlocking Concrete Pavement Istitute:
Herndon, VA, USA, 2011; ISBN 978-1-4507-8440-5.
2. Brattebo, B.O.; Booth, D.B. Long-term stormwater quantity and quality performance of permeable pavement
systems. Water Res. 2003, 37, 4369–4376. [CrossRef]
3. Kumar, K.; Kozak, J.; Hundal, L.; Cox, A.; Zhang, H.; Granato, T. In-Situ infiltration performance of different
permeable pavements in a employee used parking lot—A four-year study. J. Environ. Manag. 2016, 167, 8–14.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Abu-Farsakh, M.; Alshibli, K.A.; Nazzal, M.; Seyman, E. Assessment of In-Situ Test Technology for Construction
Control of Base Courses and Embankments; FHWA/LA.041389; Louisiana Transportation Research Center:
Boton Rouge, LA, USA, 2004.
5. Berney, E.S., IV; Mejias-Santiago, M.; Kyzar, J.D. Non-Nuclear Alternatives to Monitoring Moisture-Density
Response in Soils; ERDC/GSL TR-13-6; U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Geotechnical
and Structures Laboratory: Vicksburg, MS, USA, 2013.
6. ASTM International. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort
(56,000 ft-lbf/ft3 (2700 kN-m/m3 )); ASTM D1557; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2012.
7. ASTM International. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard
Effort (12,400 ft-lbf/ft3 (600 kN-m/m3 )); ASTM D698; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2012.
8. ASTM International. Standard Test Method for Density and Unit Weight of Soil in Place by Sand-Cone Method;
ASTM D1556/D1556M; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2015.
9. ASTM International. Standard Test Method for Density and Unit Weight of Soil in Place by the Rubber Balloon
Method; ASTM D2167; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2015.
10. ASTM International. Standard Test Methods for In-Place Density and Water Content of Soil and Soil-Aggregate
by Nuclear Methods (Shallow depth); ASTM D6938 REV A; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA,
USA, 2017.
11. Nazzal, M. Non-Nuclear Methods for Compaction Control of Unbound Materials; National Cooperative Highway
Research Program Synthesis 456; Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, USA, 2014.
12. Meehan, C.L.; Tehrani, F.S.; Vahedifard, F. A comparison of density-based and modulus-based in situ test
measurements for compaction control. Geotech. Test. J. 2012, 35, 387–399. [CrossRef]
13. ASTM International. Standard Test Method for Repetitive Static Plate Load Tests of Soils and Flexible Pavement
Components, for Use in Evaluation and Design of Airport and Highway Pavements; ASTM D1195/D1195M; ASTM
International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2009.
14. Deutsches Institut fur Normung E.V. Soil—Testing Procedures and Testing Equipment—Plate Load Test;
DIN 18134; Deutsches Institut fur Normung E.V.: Berlin, Germany, 2012.
15. ASTM International. Standard Test Method for Measuring Deflections Using a Portable Impulse Plate Load Test
Device; ASTM E2835; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2011.
16. ASTM International. Standard Test Method for Measuring Stiffness and Apparent Modulus of Soil and
Soil-Aggregate In-Place by Electro-Mechanical Method; ASTM D6758; ASTM International: West Conshohocken,
PA, USA, 2018.
17. ASTM International. Standard Test Method for Use of the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer in Shallow Pavement
Applications; ASTM D6951/D6951M; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2018.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 3817 13 of 13

18. Kim, D.; Park, S. Relationship between the subgrade reaction modulus and the strain modulus obtained
using a plate loading test. In Proceedings of the 9th World Congress on Railway Research, Lille, France,
22–26 May 2011.
19. Alshibli, K.A.; Abu-Farsakh, M.; Seyman, E. Laboratory evaluation of the geogauge and light falling weight
deflectometer as construction control tools. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2005, 17, 560–569. [CrossRef]
20. Hufenus, R.; Rueegger, R.; Banjac, R.; Mayor, P.; Springman, S.M.; Bronnimann, R. Full-scale field tests on
geosynthetic reinforced unpaved roads on soft subgrade. Geotext. Geomembr. 2006, 24, 21–37. [CrossRef]
21. Jimenez, J.R.; Ayuso, J.; Agrela, F.; Lopez, M.; Galvin, A.P. Utilisation of unbound recycled aggregates from
selected CDW in unpaved rural roads. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2012, 58, 88–97. [CrossRef]
22. Sulewska, M.J. The control of soil compaction degree by means of LFWD. Balt. J. Road Bridge Eng. 2012, 7,
36–41. [CrossRef]
23. Umashankar, B.; Hariprasad, C.; Kumar, G.T. Compaction quality control of pavement layers using LWD.
J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2016, 28. [CrossRef]
24. Wersall, C.; Nordfelt, I.; Larsson, S. Resonant roller compaction of gravel in full-scale tests. Transp. Geotech.
2018, 14, 93–97. [CrossRef]
25. Lenke, L.R.; McKeen, R.G.; Grush, M. Evaluation of a Mechanical Stiffness Gauge for Compaction Control of
Granular Media; NM99MSC-07.2; New Mexico State Highway & Transportation Department: Albuquerque,
NM, USA, 2001.
26. Maher, A.; Bennert, T.; Gucunski, N. Evaluation of the Humboldt Stiffness Gauge; FHWA-NJ-2002-002; New
Jersey Department of Transportation: Trenton, NJ, USA, 2002.
27. Wiman, L.G. Accelerated Load Testing of Pavements: HVS-NORDIC Tests at VTI Sweden 2003–2004; VTI rapport
544A; Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute: Linköping, Sweden, 2006.
28. Eisenberg, B.E.; Lindow, K.C.; Smith, D.R. Permeable Pavements, 1st ed.; American Society of Civil Engineers:
Reston, VA, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-0-7844-7867-7.
29. Seoul Metropolitan City. Design, Construction and Maintenance Standards of Permeable Block Pavement; Ver. 2.0;
Seoul Metropolitan City: Seoul, Korea, 2013.
30. AASHTO. AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures; AASHTO: Washington, DC, USA, 1993; Volume 1,
ISBN 1-56051-055-2.
31. Cetin, A.; Kaya, Z.; Cetin, B.; Aydilek, A.H. Influence of laboratory compaction method on mechanical and
hydraulic characteristics of unbound granular base materials. Road Mater. Pavement Des. 2014, 15, 220–235.
[CrossRef]
32. Kim, D.; Choi, C.; Kim, S.J.; Yu, J.Y.; Yang, S.C. Study on the subgrade reaction modulus (K30 ) and strain
modulus (Ev ). J. Korean Soc. Railw. 2007, 10, 264–270.
33. Research Society of Road and Traffic. Additional Technical Contractual Conditions and Guidelines for Earthwork
in Road Construction and Technical Testing Instructions for Soil and Rock in Road Construction; ZTVE-StB 94;
Research Society of Road and Traffic: Koln, Germnay, 1994.
34. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Standard Specification for Road Construction; Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure and Transport: Sejong, Korea, 2015.
35. Deutsches Institut fur Normung E.V. Earthworks and Foundations—Soil Classification for Civil Engineering
Purposes; DIN 18196; Deutsches Institut fur Normung E.V.: Berlin, Germany, 2011.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).