Paper No.

535

RUTTING IN FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS – A CASE STUDY†
V.K. SINHA*, H.N. SINGH** & SAURAV SHEKHAR***

ABSTRACT
Flexible pavements are generaly adopted for construction of roads in India. Bitumen as a binder is known to be highly sensitive to high temperatures. Distresses in the form of ruts, cracking, ageing etc. are common on Flexible pavements. These are still observed on pavements constructed presently with thick layers of binder courses at high cost. Rutting one of the commonly observed permanent nature distress is the subject matter of this case study. The effect of high pavement temperature on the stability of mix in conjunction with lower softening point of bitumen has been studied in the context of prevailing high temperature in top pavement layers. Study brings out the inadequacies in existing specifications and suggests some follow up actions to improve the existing specifications. Use of modifiers in the top binder courses like DBM to enhance the thermal dependent characteristics of the bituminous mixes is one of the recommendations. Adoption of catalogue type performance based specifications covering different climatic regions of the country are also suggested.

1. INTRODUCTION

Flexible pavements have been traditionally provided on most of the important highways of the country. Thick bituminous pavement layer broadly comprising of a DBM layer of 160 to 180 mm topped with 50 mm bituminous concrete are being provided presently by way of strengthening. The bitumen used in the design of mixes for SDBC, PC, DBM and BM is typically of 60/70 grade. However, in few cases wearing course, having bituminous concrete 50 mm thick is also being provided with modified bitumen. Modifiers in such cases are either CRMB or PMB. Use of modifiers, however, is not common. The design of mixes are being done as per Marshall method with normal 75 blows for all locations without considering the effects of climatic, traffic variations etc. Despite the construction of thicker pavement, such bituminous pavements suffer from rutting frequently in quite early age. Such deformations in the form of rutting are more pronounced at locations of intersections, curves and in stretches where heavy traffic operates with low speed and is subject to frequent stop/start condition. Such early rutting of the flexible pavements should concern all highway engineers. This is particularly so, when constructing long performing pavements is the moto of all highway agencies in view of huge investment being made on the construction of such highways. The Paper is based on a case study representing a typical rutted stretch of a four-lane road which has been

widened and strengthened recently with thick bituminous pavement layers. The effect of high temperature of pavement layers on in-service behaviour of compacted bituminous mixes is the key objective of this case study.
2. STUDY STRETCH

The stretch considered is about 250 m long, suffering substantial rutting to a maximum depth upto 35 mm. This stretch is near an intersection. Heavy trucks with high axle loads in large number (about of 4500 trucks per day) are operating on this stretch, at a relatively low speed with frequent stop/start condition. The crust composition of this stretch is given in Table 1.
TABLE 1. CRUST COMPOSITION
AT THE

STUDY STRETCH

S.No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Type of layer Bituminous Concrete (BC with CRMB 60) Dense Bitumen Macadam (DBM Layer II) Dense Bitumen Macadam (DBM Layer I) Wet Mix Macadam (WMM) Granular Sub-Base (GSB)

Thickness (mm) 50 80 80 250 260

The study stretch comprises both types of surfaces (i) Exposed DBM surface without BC and (ii) DBM layer covered with BC surface in adjoining length. Same traffic is operating on both these surfaces. Time lag between laying of DBM and laying of BC on the DBM is on average about six months plus.

* Secretary General, IRC } E-mail: secretarygen@irc.org.in ** Executive Engineer (Retd.) PWD Bihar, Material Engineer, Quest Consultants Pvt. Ltd. *** Director, SA Infrastructure Consultants Pvt. Ltd. † Written comments on this Paper are invited and will be received upto 31 st December, 2007

650 101.520 OF FI + EI (%) Air Voids (%) 3.200 102. SINGH & SHEKHAR ON BC layer.508 32.105 FI + EI (%) Air Voids (%) 3.67 4.100 102. due to movement of aggregates from rutted portion and due to some aggregate particles being cut partly through cutting of the cores. Optimum Bitumen Content (OBC) under job-mix formula (JMF) was 5.950 101. Both the bituminous mix material as taken from the cores at rutted locations and at fair locations.800 101.720 101. Density (gm/cc) Bitumen content (%) 5.05 03 S .770 101. These factors might contribute marginally to the process of rutting or may even have arisen due to rutting. Such marginal variations could be due to migration of bitumen during formation of the rut.497 2. RUT DEPTH MEASUREMENT SINHA. Some reduction in air voids is also noticed. ENGINEERING PROPERTIES FAIR PORTION OF BC Core No. DETAILS OF RUT DEPTH Off-set from Kerb edge (m) Chainage 102. Marginally higher bitumen content has been noted in the rutted portion. INVESTIGATION DONE The rut depth measurements has been done in the field using a string line across the carriageway.70 3.475 5. Tables 3 and 4 give the test details for the BC portion at rutted and fair locations respectively.3 per cent.850 101. Fig 1 depicts the general appearance of the rutted portion.551 5.496 2.600 33 26 22 10 12 9 12 4 8 2 9 2 1 14 22 8 12 12 12 21 12 23 28 2 16 21 9 12 9 1 15 2 10 5 3 11 18 10 11 6 9 15 1 18 14 32 19 21 21 17 15 4 4 7 15 9 11 6 0 4 0 10 -4 2 -5 6 6 10 3 5 3 14 9 5 2 5 5 1 6 -2 14 10 5 5 18 5 6 2 11 8 4 1 0 2 -4 2 -1 8 4 6 6 14 9 8 8 8 8 9 7 1 2 4 2 -2 1 2 -2 2 -2 The methodology of investigation is based on the TABLE 3.20 TABLE 4. was not found significantly disturbed.178 3. however.486 29.250 102. Density (gm/cc) Bitumen content (%) 5.63 3. the top layer of DBM (Layer II) was observed to have undergone deformations.34 3.150 102.300 102.09 01 R 02 R 03 R 2.137 5. immediately underneath the BC layer. It is seen that the density of the mix are same for both locations. 4.5 2. in general. ENGINEERING PROPERTIES BC OF Junction Crossing RUTTED PORTION OF Core No.511 2. Cores were taken from both rutted and fair locations. The variations are. At rutted locations. insignificant.080 5. Subsidence under the wheel paths was observed to be due to the deformation of top layer of DBM.750 101. The above observations reveal that the actual rutting is due to permanent deformation in the DBM (Layer II).050 102. The details of rut depth with assumed chainages are furnished in Table 2.700 101. Showing the Rutted Portion of the Pavement (Not to Scale) 2.0 per cent with permissible variation of ± 0.000 101. whereas TABLE 2.900 101. were tested in the laboratory for the engineering properties.9 01 S 02 S Fig 1.

36 28 44 35 ±4 1.05 Sample No.68 45.26 8.21 72.15 513 9 ±3 0.075 2-8 100 ±7 6 ± 1.08 18. Similarly.5 100 19.7 6 7 5 6 .1.HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PAVEMENTS .86 24.1 8. 6 & 7 give the details of the gradation and other engineering properties of BC mix with CRMB 60. The Design Bitumen Content (OBC) has been arrived as per Marshall test. Binder content also appears to be as per JMF and MOSRT&H Specifications. BC/33 BC/34 BC/35 BC/36 26.11 25. SUMMARY OF AGGREGATE GRADATION FOR BC (CRMB 60) (GRADATION AFTER EXTRACTION OF BINDER) Sieve Sizes (Percent Passing) Range as per MOSRT& H Specifications As per approved JMF Permissible Variation for JMF Date 18.2 59 79 74 ±6 9.19 45.30 10 20 13 ±3 0.4.60 15 27 19 ±4 0. TABLE 5. Natural sand has not been used. Tables 8.26 35.84 46.5 52 72 63 ±6 4. From the perusal of the tables it will be seen that actual execution has been done in accordance with MOSRT&H Specifications and as per JMF. 9 &10 give similar details for DBM (Layer II) underneath BC.0 90 100 94 ±7 13.14 26. Inappropriate mix design • • • • Incorrect grading Excessive Binder content Excessive fines like sand/clay Round aggregates with smooth texture 179 Inadequate initial field compaction and density Effects of hot weather temperature on pavement Effects of heavy traffic loads Effect of slow speed (frequent stop/start or stationary condition) Effect of secondary compaction 4. Tables 5.16 18.82 25.11 8.4.1 34.16 18.09 12.59 66.09 65.15 8.19 73.18 20 34 25 ±4 0.14 11. Some marginal variations in gradation determined by extraction of bitumen and from dry aggregates taken from Hot Bins are just natural and are not significant.17 75.75 35 55 46 ±5 2. rounded aggregates are also not used as is evident from Photo 1.57 63.45 94.55 46.11 95.12 34. Photo 1. Inappropriate Mix Design Initial mix design was done by Marshall method with 75 blows.MEETING RUTTING IN FLEXIBLE 178TH COUNCILA CASE STUDY process of elimination of lesser or insignificant causes to enable focusing on the main cause.74 73.16 18. as used in actual construction of the rutted portion.17 34. Rutting in bituminous pavement can occur due to variety of causes.56 12.05 26.4 93.72 12. Grading of aggregates followed in actual execution are broadly as prescribed under Job-Mix Formula (JMF).55 64.5 Gradation as per samples taken at the time of laying mix at rutted locations 100 100 100 100 93. Some of the common causes for rutting could be as given below.

0 2.2 55-75 63 ±7 4.14 15.00 Min 5.2 94.472 2.45 474.52 4.55 76.35 TABLE 8.85 Max 30 Not 3-5 specific Min 14 65 .480 4.8 1358.71 46.72 7.87 2.56 99.472 OF 4.5 63-93 85 ±8 13.7 1386.0 96.25 18.99 44.5 15.2 473.4.9 99.93 2.6 27.17 1418.93 14.30 10 20 13 ±3 0.2 17.8 73. SINGH & SHEKHAR ON TABLE 6.2 2.22 10.75 Min to 16 1200 As per actual samples taken at the time of laying mix at rutted locations 5.17 15.4.68 28.75 38-54 45 ±6 2.2 64. SUMMARY MEASURED CALCULATED PROPERTIES OF DENSE BITUMINOUS MACADAM (DBM) (60/70) (GRADATION AFTER EXTRACTION OF BINDER) Sieve Sizes (Percent Passing) Range as per MOSRT&H Specifications As per approved JMF Permissible Variation for JMF 45.5 4.5 92.07 22.56 20.4.2 59 79 74 ±6 9.5 52 72 65 ±6 4.5 Gradation as per samples taken at the time of laying mix at rutted locations 100 100 100 100 93.18 20 34 25 ±4 0.8 1375.0 100 100 ±8 37. BC/33 BC/34 BC/35 BC/36 5.57 15.020 5.0 70.) Stability (%) Flow Stability (mm) / Flow (kg/mm) AIV (%) FI & EI (%) Average Core Density (gm/cc) Properties as per approved JMF Specified Limit as per MOSRTH Specifications Date 18.8 26.22 72.61 36.473 2.28 16. SUMMARY ACTUAL BITUMEN CONTENT VS DESIGN BITUMEN CONTENT Properties Measured Binder Bulk Air VMA VFB content Density Voids (%) (%) (%) (gm/cc) (%) Stability Retained (kg.0 1240 95.05 26.6 96.79 8.36 28-42 34 ±5 0. BC/33 BC/34 BC/35 BC/36 26.180 SINHA.2 OF 63.05 Sample No.011 2.66 43.17 90 Min 3.3 27.075 2-8 4 ±2 .7 44.5 71.08 24.13 36.0 987.04 16.15 513 9 ±3 0.2 73.474 2.90 6 7 5 6 TABLE 7.38 33.9 93.75 35 55 46 ±5 2. SUMMARY OF AGGREGATE GRADATION OF DRY AGGREGATES FOR BC (CRMB 60) (GRADATION DETERMIND FROM DRY AGGREGATES FROM HOT BINS) Sieve Sizes (Percent Passing) Range as per MOSRT&H Specifications As per approved JMF Permissible Variation for JMF Date 18.76 70.05 26.2 484.05 Sample No.90 2.52 4.5 15.75 24.9 2.5 95-100 100 ±8 26.05 71.52 AND 15.11 66.33 67.46 15.89 8.81 24.010 5.0 90 100 94 ±7 13.60 15 27 19 ±4 0.10 12.68 33.002 5.5 100 19.30 7-21 13 ±4 0.87 9.48 4.4.36 28 44 35 ±4 1.93 473.8 70.23 Max 30 24.44 15.500 15.5 250 .075 2-8 100 ±7 6 ± 1.8 26.

14 63.3.1 1152.52 63. Effect of High Pavement Temperature on Performance of BC and DBM Layer The key objective of the case study was to assess the likely effect of high temperature on the performance of top bituminous layers in a flexible pavement.075 2-8 4 ±2 Gradation as per samples taken at the time of laying mix at rutted locations 100 100 100 100 97.04 3.8.65 63.33 2.39 4.52 63.2.48 4.57 4.MEETING RUTTING IN FLEXIBLE 178TH COUNCILA CASE STUDY Date 2.5 63-93 85 ±8 13.65 85.12 14.75 1120 Min. 4.8.48 4.84 84.50 2.82 2-4 26. DBM/272 DBM/273 DBM/274 DBM/275 14.55 MEASURED AND CALCULATED PROPERTIES OF DENSE BITUMINOUS MACADAM (DBM) (60/70) (GRADATION DETERMINED FROM DRY AGGREGATES TAKEN FROM HOT BINS) Sieve Sizes (Percent Passing) Range as per MOSRT&H Specifications As per approved JMF Permissible Variation for JMF Date 2.93 35.2 1137.3 1272.48 4.97 4.74 66. The compaction density does not appear to be a significant cause of rutting from the specifications point of view.20 4.60 35.24 70.90 Min 12 to 14 14.36 28-42 34 ±5 0.42 62.) Flow (mm) FI & EI (%) AIV (%) Average Core Density (gm/cc) Properties as per JMF Specified Limits as per MOSRT&H Specifications Date 2.53 43.85 27.76 84.1 < 30 ≥ 98% Min 4.470 2.481 2.04 Sample No.20 17.36 16.55 44.50 98. 990 2.84 < 30 13.60 4.62 15.36 15. It is a common knowledge that bitumen as a material is quite sensitive to high temperature.477 4.45 34.58 2. SUMMARY OF 45.53 46.10 71.20 VMA (%) VFB (%) Stability (kg.59 4.45 62.51 12.8. DBM/272 DBM/ 273 DBM/274 DBM/ 275 TABLE 9.55 MEASURED AND CALCULATED PROPERTIES OF DENSE BITUMINOUS MACADAM (DBM) (60/70) (AS PER LAB TESTS RESULT OF RUTTED SAMPLES) Properties Measured Binder Bulk content Density (%) (gm/ cc) 4.46 34.47 32.99 25.8.0 100 100 ±8 37.56 100 100 82.97 15.04 3.27 46.60 35. Compaction and Density Details of Table 7 for BC and Table 10 for DBM suggest that there is no significant problem due to lack of compaction and inadequate density of the rutted portion at the time of execution.99 17.04 3.40 26.580 2.6 2.62 71.82 4.21 45.77 98.9 44.49 13. DBM/272 DBM/ 273 DBM/274 DBM/ 275 TABLE 10.14 63.49 13.24 33.09 62.04 Sample No.47 34.44 98.8.67 68.98 44.95 16.04 12.40 2.43 Air Voids (%) 4. SUMMARY OF 181 Gradation as per samples taken at the time of laying mix at rutted locations 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 85. Stability aspects of bitumen .27 46.98 4.HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PAVEMENTS .75 38-54 45 ±6 2.57 4.479 2.0 Not 3-6 specified As per actual samples taken at the time of laying mix at rutted locations 4.34 86.8.08 84.34 86.04 Sample No.61 15.12 14.30 7-21 13 ±4 0.5 95-100 100 ±8 26.48 5.20 4.86 1321.2 55-75 63 ±7 4.86 27.68 13.32 4.40 70.

2 53 Below 80 mm 53. Fig 2 again shows these temperatures layer–wise.M. Fig 3 shows the equipment used for making the temperature measurement. covered with 50 mm BC wearing course as well as at locations where top surface of DBM was not covered with BC.3 50 50.182 SINHA.3 56 Below 40 mm 58.7 51 Below 100 mm 53. SINGH & SHEKHAR ON depth-wise in increment of 20 mm. The temperature was measured at different locations TABLE 11.2 59 63. From the perusal of the Table 11.e.2 67 60. These were duly calibrated before the measurement.07 AT mix for both top BC layer and underneath DBM layer were accordingly investigated. LAYER WISE RECORDING OF 2.3. Measurement of pavement temperature: Two different types of thermometers were used for recording the temperature.30 PM DBM Layer’s Exposed to Sun (Partial Construction) Location of recorded temperature in (oC) Temperature in Digital Thermometer in (oC) Temperature in Glass Thermometer in (oC) DBM Layer Covered with BC CRMB-60 (Completed Cosntruction) Location of recorded temperature at particular place near chowk Top surface of BC (at the depth of 20 mm from top) Below 50 mm BC (at the inter -face of BC and DBM layer) Below 20 mm (from DBM Top surface) Below 40 mm (from DBM Top surface) Below 60 mm (from DBM Top surface) Below 80 mm (from DBM Top surface) Below 100 mm from DBM Top surface) Temperature in Digital Thermometer in (oC) Temperature in Glass Thermometer in (oC) in (oC) Top surface of DBM (at the depth of 20 mm from top) Below 20 mm (from above) 68. 4. The corresponding layer-wise temperatures as measured are furnished in Table 11. The temperature measurement was done on the rutted portion of the pavement at number of locations. it will be seen that TEMPERATURE DATED 7.7 63 57.One was electronically controlled digital thermometer and the other was ordinary glass mercury thermometer.9 52 51.30 P. The first measurement was done at 20 mm below the top of BC surface and thereafter it was measured broadly at the interface of BC and underlying DBM layer. in the month of June 2007.6. The measurement in DBM layer continued thereafter at interval depth of every 20 mm.9 52 52. The ambient air temperature on the day of measurement was 48 oC layer-wise pavement temperature was measured during the peak summer hour of 2. The layer-wise pavement temperature was measured for both locations i.1.8 58 55 54 Below 60 mm 56 54 54.2 49 .

2oC 63. normally occurs in the plains of India for at least three months. 2. is less steep at locations covered with CRMB 60 than the locations where top layer was DBM without BC. The summer temperature.3. As per the test results done by the oil companies.80 mm 54oC 52oC 51oC DBM (Layer I) with 60/70 grade bitumen Thickness . The difference of 8 o C is due to better characteristic of CRMB modifier with respect to specific heat and other associated thermal attributes. It is further observed that the temperature gradient also. 4. 2. the softening point was 49oC (Panipat) and 47oC (Haldia).2 o C.MEETING RUTTING IN FLEXIBLE 178TH COUNCILA CASE STUDY BC (CRMB) 60 (50 mm) 60oC 183 57oC DBM (Layer II) with 60/70 grade bitumen Thickness . The heavy traffic operating during these months actually subject the mix DBM (Layer I) with 60/70 grade bitumen 53. The advantage of modifiers like CRMB in this respect needs to be noted. The softening point of 60/70 grade bitumen used. when compared with the pavement temperature in DBM layer (vide Table 11) is much lower than the temperature of corresponding pavement layers.9oC Thickness – 80 mm WMM Thickness – 250 mm GSB Thickness – 260 mm Fig.7oC Thickness – 80 mm 58. During these months the bituminous mixes of the pavement layers are obviously in a very soft state of cohesion. Against this. (b) Layer-wise Temperatures of Location having DBM without BC (Not to scale) . The softening point for CRMB as per Panipat refinery test was 61oC.80 mm WMM Thickness – 250 mm GSB Thickness – 260 mm Fig. 3.HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PAVEMENTS . Temperature Measured under the different Layers of Pavement 55oC 50oC DBM (Layer II) with 60/70 grade bitumen exposed to Sun 68.8oC 56 C o the pavement temperature in top BC layer was observed to be 60oC and at the interface of DBM and BC layer it was 57oC. broadly of this or still higher range.2. Softening point of bitumen used: The bitumen of 60/70 grade was procured from Panipat and Halida refineries. the pavement temperature in the top DBM layer (where BC has not been laid) was 68. (a) Layer-wise Temperatures of Location having DBM with BC (CRMB 60) (Not to scale) Fig.

REQUIREMENTS MIX PREPARED WITH MODIFIED BITUMEN Sl. Stability loss study: Stability of the mix is one of the key design consideration in the Marshall method of design. It needs to be addressed.0 3. 24 hours in water at 60oC. including mix design.184 SINHA.58oC < 52oC (Source: AAPA. ASTM D-1075 basically prescribe the procedure to evaluate the effect of hot weather temperature on cohesion of compacted bituminous mixes. It will be observed that minimum Marshall stability (75 blows) at 60oC is 1200 kg. 3.0 250-500 3. Asphalt Guide 2002) TABLE 13. PAVEMENT TEMPERATURE Temperature Category High Medium Low Maximum Pavement Temperature > 58oC 52 oC . because according to authors the temperature of the mix higher than softening point may be a significant factor to the occurrence of rutting in flexible pavements in our country. It also prescribes the requirement of minimum retained stability of 90 per cent after 24 hours in water bath at 60oC. Marshall Stability (75 blows)at 60oC. Properties Hot Climate Requirement Cold Climate 1000 Method of Test High Rainfall 1200 ASTM:D:15591979 ASTM:D:15591979 Stability /flow 1. therefore deserves reconsideration. Hveem method is more suitable under such situations. The tests for Retained Stability is done as per ASTM D-1075. SINGH & SHEKHAR ON 4. 2. the procedure prescribes conducting OF of top DBM layers into a kneading action. Minimum Marshall stability for both BC and DBM with 60/70 grade bitumen as prescribed in MOSRT&H Specifications (Fourth Revision 2001) is 900 kg only.5 95 100 ASTM:D:10751979 6. The determination of stability by applying blows as per Marshall. pavement temperatures as reproduced in Table 12 are to be rated as high to medium temperature category. No criteria for retained stability has been prescribed in MOSRT&H Specifications for BC and DBM with 60/ 70 grade bitumen. IRC:SP:53-2002 prescribes requirements of mix prepared with modified bitumen.0-4. Prescribing same stability for BC and DBM (900 kg) and not prescribing any minimum percentage for retained stability in normal 60/70 grade bitumen is a gap in the specifications. 95 95 (Source: IRC:SP:53-2002) 100 AASHTO T 182 . % Requirement of retained stability after. kg. mm Marshall Quotient kg/mm Voids in compacted mix.5-5.2 of the guide). deserving special consideration for the selection of bitumen type. TABLE 12. According to Australian Asphalt Pavement Association (AAPA) Asphalt guide (Table 3.3. % 1200 2.5 -4. Specifications should look into this aspect. This is reproduced in Table 13. 5.0-5. For this purpose.3. % Minimum Coating with aggregate. 4.No.0 90 3. For high rainfall areas it is 100 per cent. Minimum Marshall Flow at 60oC.

3 1221.767 2.5 1251.09 1.767 2.HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PAVEMENTS .767 2.09 1.53 Retained Stability = 24 hours stability * 100 at 600C 30 minute stability = 1201.3 1201.5 484.40 STABILITY AFTER 30 MINUTES IN WATER BATH @600C Sl. 3. 4.2 1176. 6.2 3.767 2.3 .5 4.4 2.09 1. 4. No Volume of marshall specimen (in cc) 486. No Volume of marshall specimen (in cc) 486.4 3.09 1.2 * D is corelated to ‘A’ FLOW IN (mm) 1 2.14 1.5 487.0 Proving Ring Reading Calibration factor of Proving Ring Volume Correction CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) FLOW IN (mm) 1 2.5 483.4 *100 = 96.63% 1243.09 1251.1 3.09 1. 415 400 410 405 415 410 2.767 2.6 3.3 *100 = 93.767 1.09 1.4 4.5 1191.7 1236.6 1221. RETAINED STABILITY OF 185 BC MIX AFTER 24 HOURS AT DIFFERENT TEMPERATURES Compaction 75 blows Binder CRMB-60 Date. 5.767 2.767 1.4 3. 395 405 395 2.767 2.15 Retained Stability = 24 hours stability * 100 at 650C 30 minute stability = 1161.09 1.5 485.0 3.767 Volume Correction (D)* 1.0 480.4 3.9 3.5 484.09 1191.40% STABILITY AFTER 24 HOURS IN WATER BATH @600C Sl. No Volume of marshall specimen (cc) (A) 486.3 4.09 CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) E = BxCxD 1161.767 2. 3.2 1243. 3.6 3.3 1146.09 1.5 485.6 1243.0 Proving Ring Reading Calibration factor of Proving Ring Volume Correction CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) FLOW IN (mm) 1 2.7 1261.0 483.5 484.1 1161.3 3.7 1236.MEETING RUTTING IN FLEXIBLE 178TH COUNCILA CASE STUDY TABLE 14.767 2.0 Proving Ring Reading (B) 385 390 380 Calibration factor of Proving Ring (C) 2.3/7/07 to 4/7/07 STABILITY AFTER 24 HOURS IN WATER BATH @650C Sl.

No Volume of marshall specimen(cc) (A) 487. 6.09 1085.0 483.77 mm Retained Stability = 24 hours stability * 100 at 600C 30 minute stability = 1110.8 3.9 4.767 2.09 1.4/7/07 to 5/7/07 Binder 60/70 Bitumen without CRMB STABILITY AFTER 24 HOURS IN WATER BATH @650C Proving Ring Calibration factor Volume CORRECTED Reading of Proving Ring Correction VALUE (Kg) (B) 320 330 340 (C) 2.0 1115.9 3.4 1176.3 1025. RETAINED STABILITY OF BC MIX AFTER 24 HOURS AT DIFFERENT TEMPERATURES Compaction 75 blows Date.09 1.0 1 2. * D is corelated to ‘A’ STABILITY AFTER 30 MINUTES IN WATERT BATH @600C Proving Ring Reading Calibration factor of Proving Ring Volume Correction CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) FLOW IN (mm) Sl.186 SINHA.9 1206.8 2.08% .73 FLOW IN (mm) Sl.5 486.767 1.767 2.09 1.5 486.5 484.0 484.5 486.09 1.5 1206.767 2.09 E = BxCxD 965.09 1.0 3.09 1206.5 481.5 1 2.767 1.767 2.4 2.767 2.0 487.6 1221.7 4.767 2. 4.767 2. 360 375 370 2. 400 395 400 390 410 405 2.8 3. No Volume of marshall specimen (in cc) 485. 5.6 4.05 mm Retained Stability = 24 hours stability * 100 0 at 65 C 30 minute stability = 995.5 995.09 1.8 1131.3 1236.1 3.3 *100 = 82.5 483. 3.767 2.3 3.14 1.767 2.5 Proving Ring Reading Calibration factor of Proving Ring Volume Correction CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) FLOW IN (mm) 1 2.4 *100 = 92.50% 1206. 3.2 3.09 1.7 3.1 995.9 3.9 1110.3 4. No Volume of marshall specimen (in cc) 484.4 1191. 3.767 (D)* 1.3 1206.09 1.4 Compaction 75 blows Binder 60/70 bitumen STABILITY AFTER 24 HOURS IN WATER BATH @ 600C Sl. SINGH & SHEKHAR ON TABLE 15.

767 2.5 487.2 STABILITY AFTER 30 MINUTES IN WATER BATH 600C Sl.09 1.9 1070.5 1261.MEETING RUTTING IN FLEXIBLE 178TH COUNCILA CASE STUDY TABLE 16.0 483.09 1176.56% 1194. 390 395 410 360 400 385 2. No Volume of marshall specimen (in cc) 486.5 488.9 2.3 1293. 3.767 2.8 4 3.2 1194.8 1194.3 1040.3 3. 3. RETAINED STABILITY OF 187 DBM MIX AFTER 24 HOURS AT DIFFERENT TEMPERATURES Compaction 75 blows Binder 60/70 Bitumen Proving Ring Reading (B) 370 365 355 Date-7/7/07 to 9/7/07 STABILITY AFTER 24 HOURS IN WATER BATH @550C Sl.767 2.09 1.9 *100 = 91.7 1095.5 Calibration factor of Proving Ring (C) 2.09 1.9 .1 3. No Volume of marshall specimen(cc) (A) 486.18 Retained Stability = 24 hours stability * 100 0 at 55 C 30 minute stability = 1095. 330 345 330 2.767 2.767 Volume Correction (D)* 1.7 34 3.4 *100 = 84. 4.5 484.8 Retained Stability = 24 hours stability * 100 0 at 60 C 30 minute stability = 1010.8 1161.71% Binder 60/70 bitumen STABILITY AFTER 24 HOURS IN WATER BATH @600C Sl.767 2.14 1.3 3.0 3.767 1. 6. No Volume of marshall specimen (in cc) 486.767 2. 3.5 481. 5.7 3.14 1.09 1.5 484.5 484.3 1085.0 Proving Ring Reading Calibration factor of Proving Ring Volume Correction CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) FLOW IN (mm) 1 2.3 1191. 3.5 480.767 1.9 2.09 1.09 CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) E = BxCxD 1115.5 995.767 2.3 1010.09 995.HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PAVEMENTS .767 2.5 Proving Ring Reading Calibration factor of Proving Ring Volume Correction CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) FLOW IN (mm) 1 2.09 1.8 * D is corelated to ‘A’ FLOW IN (mm) 1 2.0 487.09 1.4 3.9 1100.2 3.7 3.767 2.

4 995.9 Compaction 75 blows Binder 60/70 bitumen STABILITY AFTER 24 HOURS IN WATER BATH @650C Sl.3 1251.767 2.5 STABILITY AFTER 30 MINUTES IN WATER BATH @600C Proving Ring Reading Calibration factor of Proving Ring Volume Correction CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) FLOW IN (mm) Sl.09 762.09 1.5 6.767 2.0 784.81% . RETAINED STABILITY SINHA.9 *100 = 63.0 2.3 * D is corelated to ‘A’ FLOW IN (mm) 1 2.767 2.767 2.5 483.6 5.6 1213.5 1191.5 487.6 2.3 5.09 1.767 2.5 496.9 3. 265 270 260 2.6 3. SINGH & SHEKHAR ON OF DBM MIX AFTER 24 HOURS AT DIFFERENT TEMPERATURES Compaction 75 blows Binder 60/70 Bitumen Proving Ring Reading (B) 335 330 320 Date-30/6/07 to 2/7/07 STABILITY AFTER 24 HOURS IN WATER BATH @600C Sl.767 2.04 1.8 2.0 485.767 1. 3.2 774.5 486. 6.3 965. 5.767 2.0 487.6 1213.93 Retained Stability = 24 hours stability * 100 at 600C 30 minute stability = 990.7 1261.04 1.7 3. No Volume of marshall specimen (in cc) 498.767 Volume Correction (D)* 1. 3.0 Proving Ring Reading Calibration factor of Proving Ring Volume Correction CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) FLOW IN (mm) 1 2.3 *100 = 81.14 1.6 777.09 1.0 Calibration factor of Proving Ring (C) 2.3 1236.0 Retained Stability = 24 hours stability * 100 0 at 65 C 30 minute stability = 774.09 CORRECTED VALUE (Kg) E = BxCxD 1010.5 1 2.1 990.188 TABLE 17.9 3.1 2.767 1.5 480.5 488.58% 1213. No Volume of marshall specimen (in cc) 497. 405 395 415 400 390 410 2.09 1165. 3.3 3.09 1. 4.8 1176.3 3. No Volume of marshall specimen(cc) (A) 486.5 484. 3.767 2.767 2.09 1.04 1.2 3.

around 63 per cent. This loss of stability with temperature is a measure of stable performance of the bituminous mixes at high temperature. 5. Performance grade bitumen with superpave type specifications needs to be evolved. The stability loss in case of DBM at higher temperatures deserves early consideration for up-gradation and updation of our specifications of top layers of flexible pavement. however is 82. Ten number of samples have been tested in the laboratory to study the effect of high temperature in terms of the retained stability.5.63 per cent which is well above 90 per cent prescribed in IRC:SP:53-2002. Layer-wise retained stability of pavement materials Vs various temperatures Fig. particularly in case of DBM mixes.3. comprising the study stretch for this case study.08 per cent without CRMB as against 96. The retained stability at 650C for DBM is 189 far low.40 per cent with CRMB at 65oC. Histogram Showing Stability (kg) of different mix at 600C (30 min). DBM with 60/70 grade bitumen (without CRMB). Fig 5 shows. The typical values presented in the Tables and Figures as above. Details of these tests are furnished in Tables 14 to 17. indicate the likely loss of stability at high temperature.MEETING RUTTING IN FLEXIBLE 178TH COUNCILA CASE STUDY the tests at a temperature of 60oC ± 1oC. These tests are done in a bath tub at 60oC by keeping the samples both for 30 minutes and for 24 hours. 600C (24 hours) & 650C (24 hours) .50 per cent against 93.HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PAVEMENTS . Retained stability for BC mix: Retained stability of BC mix with CRMB after 24 hours at 60oC is 96.4. 4. We should otherwise consider providing composite or even rigid pavements as an alternative considering the expected long-term pavement life of 20 years plus. Fig 4 shows in a graphical form the retained stability (per cent basis) of different mixes at temperatures 650C & 600C after 24 hours as compared to stability value at 600C after 30 minutes. ASTMD – 1075-1979 Fig. Retained stability for DBM mix: The retained stability for top layer of DBM at 60oC is about 82 per cent. It is 92. These samples have been taken for different types of bitumen mixes i. The behaviour of BC mixes with modifiers like CRMB is much better as compared to those without a modifier. the stability values of these mixes at the temperatures of 600C and 650C. The JMF for this stretch prescribes a retained stability of 95 per cent for BC (CRMB 60) layer.e. The retained stability of the BC mix of 60/70 bitumen without CRMB at 65oC. BC with CRMB 60.3. The samples have been taken directly from batch mix plant producing these mixtures as per the JMF and as used in the construction of the rutted portion of the road project.63 per cent with CRMB at 60oC. 4. The effect of modifier like CRMB or PMB in preventing the stability loss at higher temperature is thus quite vivid. BC with 60/70 grade. bitumen (without CRMB). in the form of a histogram. The test results obliquely suggest that perhaps we cannot have flexible pavements in our country lasting for 20 to 30 years with the use of 60/70 grade bitumen without modifiers. The stability after 30 minutes and after 24 hours is compared and the ratio of the stability values gives the retained stability (per cent basis) at the temperature of 60oC. It is observed that loss of stability is substantial at a higher temperature. 4. This is interesting when compared with the lower softening points of these mixes.

4. Superpave mix design recommends for additional requirements in the selection of bitumen grade etc. Bitumen mixes used in study stretch had been tested for 300 blows. According to superpave recommendations “for slow moving design loads. the binder would be selected one high temperature grade higher. Effect of Secondary Compaction One of the known cause of rutting in flexible pavement is the secondary compaction by the plying vehicles over the time. such as a PG-70 instead of PG-58”. roundabouts and adjoining Toll Plazas and other control booths like Check posts. It demonstrates that existing pavement design method followed in India requires an early review and upgradation to meet the different (specific) site conditions.5. These recommendations do suggest the additionality of adverse effect due to slow moving vehicles on the performance of flexible pavement. The generic nature of specifications as prescribed at present cannot cater to the need of constructing flexible pavements for design life of 20 to 30 years. It has attempted to examine the adverse effects of high temperature in the top layers of binder course on the overall performance of flexible pavements. particularly near intersections. SINGH & SHEKHAR ON bituminous pavements are inadequate and need early updation. This is reproduced in Table 18.000 ESAL) the engineer is encouraged to consider one high temperature binder grade higher than the selection based on climate. effect of the secondary compaction was not considered in the case study.000. For standing design loads. This also speak loudly that our specifications for 4. These are over and above the effects due to the hot climatic region. climbing lanes or generally < 25 km/h Generally > 25 km/h 5 x 105 to 5 x 106 < 5 x 10 5 < 5 x 105 (Source: AAPA.000 to 30. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS The present case study is a limited study. As the study stretch has been opened to traffic only about a year back. Asphalt Guide 2002) temperature. such as a PG-64 instead of a PG-58. while broadly maintaining air voids at 2.75 per cent and VMA and VFB as per specifications. This is a typical situation on most of heavily trafficked corridors in India. Australian Asphalt Pavement Association (AAPA) gives a table indicating damaging effect of slow moving vehicles. Compaction of bitumen mixes at refusal density while maintaining a minimum air voids of 3 per cent is being suggested in the literature. when the heavy truck traffic operates at a slow speed with frequent stop/start condition as is the case in the study stretch. TRAFFIC LOADING Indicative Traffic Volume Traffic category Very heavy Heavy vehicle/lane/day > 1000 > 500 Heavy 500 to 1000 100 to 500 Medium 100 to 500 < 100 Light < 100 Structural design level (MSA) 2 x 107 5 x 106 5 x 106 to 2 x 107 5 x 10 to 5 x 10 5 6 Traffic speed Generally > 25 Km/hr Stop/start Generally < 25 Km/hr Generally > 25 Km/hr Stop/start Generally < 25 Km/hr Generally > 25 km/h Sop/Start.000.4. Effect of Heavy Traffic Loading Moving at Slow Speed Literature suggests that permanent deformation like rutting gets further accentuated at high pavement TABLE 18. Octroi booths etc. to account for the vehicles moving at a slow speed and for conditions of standing load applications.190 SINHA. For extraordinary high numbers of heavy traffic loads (between 10. At least some catalogue type specifications covering different regions of the country need to be evolved on the pattern . Rutting observed in the case study obviously. the binder would be selected two high temperature grades higher. had the compound effect of both the high pavement layer temperature and slow moving/stationary vehicles.

Composite construction including Whitetopping in top layers should be tried on pilot basis to safeguard bituminous roads against deformations at high temperature. Specifications should be evolved considering the need to construct long-term performing pavements. 2. Elsevier Publishing Company. • • 4.PH. In heavy traffic corridor with high temperature. MOSRT&H (Fourth Revision 2001). Special provisions to account the adverse effect of slow moving/stationary vehicles is to be provided rather presuming transient loads in our design. General paving bitumen as being used in the DBM layers may not serve. I & Vol. 6. IRC. Generic nature specifications. • . Inc. 3. Higher standards in respect of bitumen binder is required to be set. Asphalt Institute.HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PAVEMENTS . 189 “Design Performance and Surface Properties of Pavement (9 Reports)” 1967. Data bank needs to be created. REFERENCES • • • • 1. Some of the recommendations are as below:• Needs for instrumentation to study the behaviour of temperature on the performance of the bituminous mixes is required to be taken up to enforce development of mechanistic design based on indigenous database. Superpave Mix Design Vol. stability. Superpave series No. The results of the limited case study undertaken are only indicative. For top DBM layers stability loss at 60oC should preferably be kept around 97 per cent. The Properties of Asphaltic Bitumen . IRC:SP:53-2002 (First Revision) “Guidelines on Use of Polymer and Rubber Modified Bitumen in Road Construction”. London Brussels. Asphalt Guide. maintained and analyzed to study the variations and variability in material characterization.MEETING RUTTING IN FLEXIBLE 178TH COUNCILA CASE STUDY • 191 of performance based specifications like Superpave of USA. More elaborate studies are required to ensure wider understanding of the problems of the flexible pavement. Highway Research Record No. loss of stability at higher temperature etc. The present standards for viscosity. Pffiffer. as followed today need to be discarded in favour of performance based specifications as highlighted above. cement concrete roads may be considered as a viable alternative on long-term performance considerations. II. are either inadequately provided or are missing in the existing specifications. Specifications need to provide against stability loss at higher temperature. Specifications for Road and Bridge Works. Edited by J. based upon life cycle cost. Lexington. New York Amsterdam. Australian Asphalt Pavement Association (AAPA) AUSTROADS Sydney 2002. Cement is relatively much better binder compared to bitumen.1 & 2 (SP1 & SP2). Use of modifiers to enhance thermal related characteristics of bitumen should be made mandatory in top DBM layer. 5.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.