Accelerated Pavement

Testing at LCPC
16 years of cooperation with
industry
Jean-François Corté
Technical Director
Lcpc’s testing facility
constant pressure
suspension F3

F1 W F2
Four sectors 19.5 m

15.5 m

Up to four wheel-paths
 Longitudinal strain L03 (µstrain) - Ciment
Cementbounded sand
treated Str1
sand
20
0
-20
-40
-60
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Cement
Transversal strain T10 (µstrain) - Ciment treated
bounded sand
sand Str1
20
-20
-60
-100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

SoilStr1
Vertical strain V23 (µstrain) - Soil
700
500
300
100
-100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Overview of 16 years
of experimentation
◆ New Pavement Structures
◆ Rutting of AC surface layers
◆ Evaluation of materials for
bases and overlays
◆ Pavement design
◆ Surface layers
New Pavement Structures
◼ Inverse

◼ Sandwich
 Inverse Structure
AC
h unbound gravel
cement treated sub-base

◼ Partners : Motorways companies

◼ Practical conclusions :
selection of h
adoption of pavement design model
 Sandwich Structure
High modulus AC
Foam treated base
High modulus AC

◼ Partners : Contractor EJL

◼ Practical conclusions :
failure mechanism
tentative pavement design model
 Rutting of A C surface layers

◼ Influence of the bituminous binder

◼ Comparison between axles and tires
configurations
◼ Tests of special solutions for tramways
 Influence of the bituminous binder

◼ Partners : Motorways companies,

Oil companies Shell, Total, Elf, BP

comparison with conventional 50/70 and 35/50

pen grade bitumen

PmB (SBS, EVA)

VTAC
Multigrade-type

HMAC Cable waste (HDPE)

50/70 pen
Fibres
 50/70 pen
APT
14 Multigrade 60/80
12 HMAC 10/20 + BBTM
10
PmB (3.3 % SBS)

mm
8
6
4
2
0
10 1000 100000

16
14
12
% rut
10
8
6
4
2
0
Wheel-tracking rutting tester
10 100 1000 10000 100000
 Influence of the bituminous binder

◼ Practical conclusions :
 VTAC + HMAC is a very good solution (rutting,
texture)
 addition of cable waste (HDPE) very effective
 similar performance for different multigrade-type
 no large difference between PmB and
multigrade-type
 fibres are not a solution
Influence of axles and tires configuration

◼ Partners : Motorways companies,

Tire manufacturer Michelin

comparison with standard dual axle

Isolated Tandem Tridem
Influence of axles and tires configuration
◼Practical conclusions :
 super single with nominal axle load more
aggressive than nominal dual tires axle
 all the more aggressive than AC is sensitive to
rutting
 tire pressure is a main factor
 no significant influence of time delay between
load applications
 data on aggressiveness of large tires
 data on temperature influence under
investigation for modeling
 Evaluation of materials
for bases and overlays

◼ Cold Asphalt Mixes

◼ Unbound aggregate
◼ Polymer modified A C
 A C cold mixes

◼ Partners : Contractors Colas, Screg, EJL

comparison between standard AC cold mixes and

special products
◼ Practical conclusions :
better cohesion for special products
less severe cracking
necessity to consider non-linear behavior
of cold AC on flexible supports
 Unbound aggregate
◼ Partners : Aggregate producers Union
possibilities of use of calcareous aggregate
◼ Practical conclusions :
- calcareous aggregate can exhibit stiff moduli
- pavement performance is not in line with
aggregate ranking from classical tests
- cyclic triaxial tests reflect differences in
pavement performance
- good performance can be destroyed by the
presence of water
 Polymer modified A C

◼ Partners : Motorways companies and oil

producer Elf
benefits from PmB for fatigue cracking
of A C base
comparison with traditional non-modified A C
◼ Practical conclusions :
resistance to fatigue cracking is improved
 Pavement design

◼ Flexible pavements
◼ Cement concrete slabs
 Flexible pavements

◼ Partners : Motorways, Oil producer

are differences in fatigue lab tests for
bitumens of the same penetration grade
supported by pavement behavior ?
◼ Practical conclusions :
differences in fatigue lab tests not
found with APT
 Concrete pavements

◼ Partners : Contractors Union, Cement

producers Union

revise standard pavement design for concrete

slabs
◼ Practical conclusions :

reduction in thickness (about 2 cm) for

slabs with and without dowels
importance of initial wrapping of slabs
 Surface layers

◼ Performance of thin overlays

 Performance of thin overlays

◼ Partners : Road contractors SCREG, EJL,

EUROVIA, SCR

◼ Practical conclusions :
indications on performance (resistance
to reflective cracking) and durability of
surface texture
Conclusions
◼ LCPC ’s experience based on over 15
years of extensive APT
14 tests with motorways companies on structural
design
34 tests with road contractors for evaluation of new
products for base and surface layers
12 tests with contractors and producers unions to
adjust design of pavements
60 tests with motorways companies and oil
producers on rutting
12 tests with tire manufacturer
28 tests with urban transportation consortium
 Conclusions
◼ APT is a valuable tool for research and industry
provided APT is complemented by :

- an extensive lab program on pavement

materials
- pavement analysis (to account for thickness
variations, actual climatic conditions…)
 Conclusions
◼ APT is beneficial to both industry and road
authorities

because of cost, look for cooperative

programs
Conclusions
◼ Recognize limitations of APT
(seasonal variations and ageing not
represented)

 work on a comparative basis

 complement with road tests