Fatigue, Cracking and Permanent Deformation Resistance and their Relation

with the Rheological Characteristics of Bitumen and Asphalt Mixtures

Prof. dr. ir. Andre A.A. Molenaar

Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands

Introduction

Two very important defect types one can observe on asphalt pavements are fatigue cracking and
permanent deformation (figure 1 and figure 2).

Figure 1. Example of fatigue cracking.

 Figure 2. Example of permanent deformation.

The question is to what extent the characteristics of the bitumen determine the resistance to fatigue
cracking and permanent deformation and to what extent the Dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR) is a useful
tool in assessing this. This will be discussed in detail in the notes in front of you.

Fatigue

As mentioned in the introduction, this paper will focus on how the DSR equipment can be used for
analyzing the fatigue and permanent deformation characteristics of asphalt mixtures. However, one
should have some basic knowledge about fatigue and permanent deformation testing in order to
understand the concepts which will be discussed in detail in this paper.

With respect to fatigue as a result of repeated loading, a paper presented by the author at the AAPA
2013 conference in Brisbane is added to the files which were prepared for this workshop (see word file
“AAPA fatigue paper 2013” and the power point presentation “fatigue AAPA 2013”, reference [5]). The
reader is referred to that paper for getting a good background in fatigue of asphalt mixtures. Only some
general concepts will be summarized here.

Any material that is subjected to a certain stress or strain level will fail at a given moment. When the
applied tensile stress or strain is high only a limited number of load repetitions is needed while many load
repetitions are needed at lower stress or strain levels. When one plots the applied tensile strain or stress
and the number of load repetitions to failure in a log – log diagram, one obtains a straight line. But when
the plot is made in a linear scale then one first will see a rapid increase in the number of load repetitions
to failure with decreasing stress or strain level but at a given stress or strain level, the number of load
repetitions tends to go to infinity. The stress or strain level at which this occurs is called the endurance
limit.

Fatigue testing is done by means of a number of different test methods. Unfortunately these tests do not
give the same results. The reason for this is that the results seem to be dependent on the size of the
specimen and on the loading mode. Two loading modes are generally used being the constant load and
the constant displacement mode. The constant displacement type tests give the highest number of load
repetitions.
Laboratory fatigue tests are not really representative for the real pavement. In reality the asphalt layer is
always supported by the underlying base course. Such a supporting layer is not present in the fatigue
tests which are commonly used. The fact that in reality the asphalt layer is fully supported has a big
effect on the redistribution of stresses after crack initiation and on the propagation of damage. In the
paper on fatigue which is added separately to the files prepared for this workshop, it is clearly shown that
when a fatigue test is done on a beam which is supported by an artificial rubber subgrade a 20 times
higher number of load repetitions is obtained than when using a 4 point beam bending test. This clearly
shows that the support conditions strongly affect the fatigue performance of an asphalt concrete layer.

As mentioned before, extensive information can be found on all of this in the paper which is added to the
notes of this workshop.

Fatigue cracking in detail

All fatigue tests give a fatigue relationship of the mixture/specimen as a whole. This implies that we
describe failure of the specimen and the failure of the mixture as being a bulk material. However, asphalt
mixtures are complex composite materials which consist of bitumen, fines (also called filler), sand, coarse
aggregates and air voids. So in order to have a good idea of why asphalt mixtures fail, we need to have a
good look to the failure plane that develops in a fatigue test. Figure 3 shows how a crack develops in an
asphalt mixture.

Figure 3. Crack development in an asphalt mixture [1].

The figure clearly shows that cracks develop through the mortar and along the interface between the
coarse aggregates and the bituminous mortar. So if we talk about fatigue we are actually talking about
fatigue in the mortar and fatigue of the interface. These two cracking processes combined with the crack
growth retarding effect of larger aggregate particles which “stand in the way” of the preferred crack path,
determine the strength and the fatigue life of asphalt mixtures. In order to understand fatigue of the
mixture we therefore need to know about the cohesive fatigue strength of the mortar and the adhesive
fatigue strength of the interface.
Adhesive zone

Charges on the aggregate surface determine the extent of adsorption of bitumen active components to
the aggregate surface. These charges can be evaluated by measuring the zeta potential of the surfaces.

The development of a net charge at a particle surface in an aqueous medium affects the distribution of
ions in the surrounding interfacial region, resulting in an increased concentration of counter ions close to
the surface. Thus an electrical double layer exists around the particle (figure 4 [2]). This layer is divided
in two parts: an inner region, called the Stern layer, where the ions are strongly bound and an outer
diffuse region, called the Gouchy-Chapman layer, where they are less firmly attached. Within the diffuse
layer, there is a notional boundary inside which the ions and the particle form a stable entity. But any
ions beyond the boundary are not sufficiently bound to the particle to move with it. This boundary is
called the slipping plane and the potential that exists at this boundary is known as the zeta potential .

Figure 4. Electrical double layer and zeta potential.

Since the pH plays a role by influencing surface charges, most of the measurements of zeta potential are
expressed in function of pH and the pH value at which the zeta potential is zero is defined as the
isoelectric point.
 Figure 5. Zeta potential for one type of bitumen and a filler, sand, limestone aggregate and aggregate
made of ceramic waste.

Figure 5 shows that at PH levels above 2 the surface charges of the bitumen, the sand and ceramic waste
aggregate are all negative implying that these materials repulse each other when being brought in
contact with each other. In other words the adhesion between the sand, and ceramic waste aggregate on
one hand and the bitumen on the other will not be good. However the bond between the filler and the
bitumen will be good at PH levels between 2 and 6.1 since in that case the surface of the filler is
positively charged and the surface of the bitumen negatively. This implies attraction between both
materials. The figure also shows that the attraction between the limestone aggregate and the bitumen is
good at PH levels between 2 and 7.8.

Proof of the poor adhesion of the ceramic aggregate when compared to the limestone aggregate is given
in figure 6 which shows the failure plane after a compression test in both types of mixtures.
 Figure 6. Poor adhesion of the ceramic waste aggregate (left) compared to the adhesion in the asphalt
mixture with the limestone aggregates (right) [2].

However it is not only the attractive forces because of electrical charge differences that control adhesion,
texture is as important or even more important. Another reason why the ceramic waste aggregate
showed poor adhesion was because it had a very smooth texture compared to that of the limestone. This
is nicely shown in figure 7 [2].

Figure 7. Differences in texture between the ceramic waste aggregate and limestone.

It will be obvious that the much rougher textured limestone offers a much larger surface area to the
bitumen and therefore a better adhesion will be obtained.
Fatigue testing of the adhesive zone using the DSR

It will be clear that these fundamental considerations are very important in understanding the
phenomenon of adhesion but it will also be clear that these fundamental considerations do not
necessarily produce numbers which are relevant for practice. One should be able to test the adhesion
between aggregate and bitumen in such a way that the numbers can be used for design purposes.
Hereafter it will be shown that the DSR is excellently suited for doing such tests.

At the Delft University, extensive research has been done on the development of raveling on porous
asphalt concrete (PAC) surface layers. More about this research will be shown in the presentation on
special topics. After long discussions it was decided to analyze the porous asphalt concrete on a mezo
mechanics scale which implies that computer models were to be built which allowed to take into account
the real stone skeleton, the mortar and the adhesive zone. This approach was selected because it was
clear that an approach in which porous asphalt concrete was treated as a bulk material would not lead to
the insight that was needed to understand the development of raveling. This choice however implied that
all individual components, being the mortar and the adhesive zone, had to be characterized. Also the
effect of the type of aggregate to be used in PAC mixtures had to be analyzed.

In this section the way how the adhesive zone was characterized is described. It will be shown that the
DSR played an essential role in this analysis.

It was decided to prepare small aggregate - bitumen samples and subject them to the shear forces that
can be generated with the DSR. It was decided to use two small aggregate columns and placing a thin
layer of bitumen in between. It was decided to use bitumen in between the stone columns and not
mortar because it was believed that filler and fine sand particles will not be present in the adhesive zone.
Figure 8 shows the production of the stone columns. Large blocks of aggregate were casted in concrete
and thin slices were sawn from that block. These stone slices were then sand blasted to ensure that all
specimens would have the same texture. Then small columns were cut from the aggregate slices.

Figure 8. Production of the stone columns [3].

Figure 9 shows how the samples for the adhesive zone testing were prepared.

Figure 9. Preparation of the adhesive zone test samples [3].

First both columns were perfectly aligned and then placed in the DSR. The top column was fixed to the
upper plate of the DSR and the bottom column to the bottom plate. Initially special clamps were used for
that but later on the stone columns were simply glued to the top and bottom plate. Then the DSR was
used to make a certain gap between the top and bottom column. Next a drop of bitumen was placed on
top of the bottom column and the DSR was used to reduce the gap between the top and bottom column
to 15 µm. This thickness was assumed to represent the adhesive zone. This assumption was based on
work done by Lytton at Texas A&M who showed that the bond strength greatly depends on the film
thickness. He showed that at film thicknesses of less than 90 µm, adhesive failure is the dominant failure
mode while at a larger thickness cohesive failure (failure in the bitumen) is dominant. Of course loading
speed and temperature affect this number and therefore it was decided to limit the thickness of the
bitumen film to 15 µm.

Figure 10 shows a sample ready for testing. The stone columns shown in this figure have a length of
about 10 mm each and a diameter of 6.8 mm
 Figure 10. Sample ready for testing in a shear fatigue test [3].

Figure 11 shows an example of a fatigue test result performed on a sample like the one shown in figure
10.

Figure 11. Example of the results of an adhesive zone fatigue test [4].

Figure 12 shows fatigue relationships obtained on two different types of aggregate using virgin and aged
bitumen.
 Fatigue of adhesive zone
10000000

1000000
applications to failure

bestone
virgin
100000
bestone
aged
greywacke
10000 virgin
greywacke
aged

1000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
shear stress [MPa]

Figure 12. Examples of adhesive zone fatigue lines.

In doing these tests, one should realize that controlling the texture is important because the roughness of
the stone surfaces has a big influence on the stresses that really occur. Figure 13 shows the results of a
stress analysis that was made of a DSR test assuming two different levels of texture. The texture levels
were actually measured using microscopy techniques and then used as input for the analysis. As one will
observe, the actual stress at some point is much higher than the 1 MPa that was applied. Furthermore
the picture shows that the rougher the surface, the higher the peak stresses will be.

All in all it is clear that the DSR is a very effective tool for characterizing the fatigue resistance of
adhesive zones.

Mortar fatigue tests resulting in cohesive failure using the DSR

The DSR has also been used extensively for testing of mortars. In the following some examples will be
shown of fatigue tests on a mortar consisting 34% m/m bitumen, 30% m/m filler and 36% m/m sand
with a grain size smaller than 0.5 mm. The bitumen was a Carifalt XS, a SBS polymer modified bitumen
produced by Shell. The applied filler was a limestone filler containing 25% hydrated lime.

Figure 14 shows the DSR set up and the mortar columns as used in the fatigue tests. Figure 15 shows an
example of a fatigue test while figure 16 shows fatigue relationships obtained in this way.
 1.0MPa

Bitumen

Rmax= 5 µm

Rmax= 10 µm

Figure 13. Stresses in the adhesive layer as a function of the surface texture of the stone columns [3].

Figure 14. DSR as used for doing fatigue tests on mortar columns to assess the resistance to cohesive
failure [3].
 100 0.08

80 Torque
0.06

Displacement [rad]
Torque [N.mm]
Phase angle[o] 60
0.04
40
Phase angle
0.02
20
Displacement Failure

0 0
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Number of cycles

Figure 15. Example of a fatigue test result [3].

1.E+07
o
LM,10 C
Number of cycles to failure [-]

1.E+06

1.E+05

1.E+04
LM,0oC

1.E+03
o
SM,0 C
o
SM,10 C
1.E+02
1.E+00 1.E+01
Shear stress [MPa]
SM-10T-10Hz SM-10T-40Hz SM-0T-10Hz SM-0T-40Hz
SM_W-10T-10Hz SM_W-10T-40Hz SM_W-0T-10Hz SM_W-0T-40Hz
LM-10T-10Hz LM-10T-40Hz LM-0T-10Hz LM-0T-40Hz
LM_W-10T-10Hz LM_W-10T-40Hz LM_W-0T-10Hz LM_W-0T-40Hz

Figure 16. Examples of fatigue test results obtained on mortar columns using the DSR [3].

NB: SM = short term aged, mortar; LM = long term aged, mortar, W = specimen is subjected to water conditioning for 1 hour at 5
o
C and vacuum. Lines only indicate effect of temperature and NOT the effect of water conditioning and test frequency.

Again it is clear that the DSR is a very useful tool for characterizing the fatigue resistance of the
bituminous mortar. By using the information on stiffness, which is also obtained by means of DSR testing,
and the fatigue information obtained in the way described here, as input in a finite element program, the
stresses at all locations in the asphalt layer can be calculated and it can be determined where failure will
initiate. An example of the results of such an analysis is given in figure 17.

Figure 17. Results of a mezo-mechanics analysis of the behavior of PAC.

It will be obvious that such analyses give a fundamental insight in where fatigue will initiate and how it
will progress. It will however also be clear that these analyses are not yet ready to be used on a day to
day purpose. Therefore the more traditional approach to fatigue will be discussed in the next section.

Traditional approach to fatigue of asphalt mixtures and the role of the DSR

As mentioned before, fatigue testing is usually done on beams or cylinders using types of tests which are
described in the paper on fatigue of asphalt mixtures which is added to the notes prepared for this
symposium [5]. The fatigue relation is then described with:

log N = log k1 – n log 

Where:

N = number of load repetitions to failure,

log k1, n = material constants,

 = applied tensile strain

In the notes on Fatigue of Asphalt Mixtures [5], it is shown that, in case of the 4 point beam bending
test, the so called material constant “log k1” is not a material property but a specimen property. Its value
depends on the type of test and the thickness of the beam. The observed size effect in the 4 point beam
bending test results is in line with the analysis presented in [6]. There a damage mechanics approach
was used to show the effect of the specimen size on the test results. For a 4 point beam bending test it
was shown that the fatigue life can be written as:

(1-n/2) -n n
N=h Fc  / A Smix

Where: N = number of load repetitions to failure,

 A,n = material constants,
A = f(tensile strength, fracture energy and mixture stiffness),
n = 2/m * correction factor depending on the void content,
m = slope of the mixture stiffness master curve at temperature and frequency of interest
h = height of the beam,
Fc = parameter describing the growth of damage,
 = tensile strain in the outer fiber of the beam,
Smix = mixture stiffness.

This equation clearly shows the effect of the beam thickness. Since n always takes a value somewhere
between 3 and 6, the equation implies that thicker beams result in a lower fatigue life. Furthermore
comparison of equations shows that log k1 being the intercept value of the fatigue relation, is in fact a
very complex factor which depends on a large number of factors.

The parameters A and n are the same as the ones that appear in Paris’ crack growth law which is:

dc/dN = A Kn

Where: dc/dN = increase in crack length c per load cycle N,

K = stress intensity factor, representing the stress conditions at the tip of the crack,

A, n = material parameters.

Figure 18 summarizes the approach.

Figure 18. Dependency of the slope of the fatigue line on the slope of the stiffness master curve.

What becomes evident from all these equations is that the slope of the fatigue relation n, strongly
depends on the slope of the mixture stiffness master curve, which as we have seen in the lectures on
bitumen stiffness and rheology, strongly depends (and even is equal) to the slope of the bitumen
stiffness master curve. The bitumen stiffness master curve can easily be determined with the DSR.

Furthermore we have seen that ageing results in a flatter master curve which indicates that the slope of
the fatigue line will increase. An increase in the value for the slope of the fatigue line (let us say from 3 to
5) indicates that the material has become more brittle. We have also seen that a gel type bitumen has a
much flatter master curve than a sol type bitumen indicating that a mixture made of a gel type bitumen
will behave more brittle than a mixture made of a sol type bitumen.

The question now is whether the parameter log k1 is somewhat related to parameters which can be
determined by means of the DSR. Figure 19 shows the results of an extensive analysis that was made at
the Delft University in an attempt to predict log k1 from mixture parameters. The relationships shown
were developed for 4 point beam bending test results and should therefore not be used to predict
fatigue relationships as determined by means of other tests. The equations show that n and S mix are
needed to predict log k1. It has been shown that n can be predicted from DSR measurements while S mix
can be determined with a nomograph using the stiffness of the bitumen, as determined with the DSR, as
input.

Figure 19. Estimation of 4 point beam bending fatigue characteristics.

All in all this shows that DSR testing to obtain the stiffness characteristics of a bitumen also gives a very
important fingerprint of the fatigue characteristics of the mixture!
Cracking

Asphalt wearing courses do not only crack because of repeated traffic loads. They also crack for the
simple reason that they are exposed to such climatic conditions that ageing rapidly occurs which results
in embrittlement of the layer and hence in crazing and raveling. This type of cracking can e.g. be
observed where large asphalt pavement areas on airfields which do not receive any aircraft loadings but
which are only exposed to climatic influences. An example of such cracking is shown in figure 20.

Figure 20. Example of non wheel load associated cracking.

Work has been done by several researchers to relate this non wheel load associated type of cracking to
the properties of the bituminous binder. Rowe in his presentation at the 4th International Conference on
Asphalt Materials [9] presented a criterion which can be used to determine whether the asphalt mixture
is prone to this type of cracking or not.

Before we will discuss this criterion we will recall first of all the Black diagram. As was mentioned in the
lecture about stiffness, mastercurves of G * and  can be obtained by means of the DSR. As a result a plot
of G* vs  can be made which is called the Black diagram. Figure 21 shows such a Black diagram.

Ageing will increase G* and will decrease ; this causes the Black diagram to change like shown in figure
22.
 Figure 21. Example of a Black diagram

Figure 22. Change of Black diagram because of ageing [9]

The R values shown in the figure are calculated in the following way.

  *

log 2  * log G
R
G g

    
log 1  
 90 
Where: G*(ω) = complex shear modulus at frequency ω (rad/s), Pa
Gg = glassy modulus, Pa (assumed to be 1E+09 Pa)
δ(ω) = phase angle at frequency ω (rad/s), degrees (valid between 10 and 70°)

Figure 23 shows how the location of 3 bitumens in the Black diagram changed as a result of ageing. The
specimens were first RTFO aged and were then subjected to PAV ageing for diferent periods of time. The
DSR tests were done at 15 oC and 0.005 rad/sec.

9.000

No Block
8.000
Cracking

7.000

WTX
80 hr
log G* 6.000 PAV
(Pa) GSE
40 hr WC
PAV
5.000 20 hr
Block PAV

Cracking
4.000
0 hr
PAV

3.000
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0

Phase Angle

Figure 23. Black diagram, R values and examples [9].

Field investigations showed that an R value of 2.3 indicated onset of cracking while R values higher than
2.7 indicated propagation of block cracking.

In summary it can be stated that the Black diagram can provide essential information about how ageing
has progressed. Furthermore relating the position in the Black diagram to R values gives an indication
about the likelihood of the initiation and progression of no wheel load associated cracking. It is obvious
that the DSR plays a vital role in these analyses.

Permanent deformation of asphalt mixtures

Asphalt mixtures share many similarities with soil mixtures. Figure 24 shows the physical state of soil
mixtures while figure 25 shows x-ray tomography images of Porous Asphalt Concrete (PAC), Stone Mastic
Asphalt (SMA) and Dense Asphaltic Concrete (DAC). By comparing the two images, similarities can be
observed. The soil mixture shown in figure 20a has a lot of similarities with PAC.
 Figure 24. Three basic soil structures (after Yoder, “Principles of Pavement Design”)

Figure 25. X-ray tomography images of PAC, SMA and DAC [7] .

In PAC mixtures, the resistance to permanent deformation is provided by the very well compacted stone
skeleton. The friction forces between the particles are actually carrying the load and the amount of lateral
support (confinement) is very important. If the lateral support = 0, PAC mixtures will fail very rapidly.
Fortunately the horizontal stresses in the wearing course are always high and it are these high horizontal
confinement stresses that give the PAC, together with the well-designed gradation, a high resistance to
permanent deformation. However, if the compressive forces are becoming too high then the PAC mixture
will not compact (decrease in volume) but dilate (increase in volume). In that case the bituminous mortar
must keep the particles together and tension will occur in the bituminous mortar as well as in the
adhesive zone between the large particles and the bituminous mortar. It will be obvious that the tensile
strength of a PAC is lower than that of a DAC because of its much higher void content.

SMA mixtures are in fact designed according to the same principles as PAC mixtures. The only difference
is that more bitumen is applied to give the mixture a higher tensile strength and a higher durability
against climatic influences. However when the stone skeleton starts to deform, pore pressures might
occur just like in soil skeletons saturated with moisture. In such cases the SMA will deform easily. It is
therefore of outmost important that SMA’s are very well designed from a volumetric point of view in order
to prevent that such “pore pressure conditions” might occur. If pore pressures do not occur during
compressing a SMA mixture, dilation might occur which results in tension forces in the bituminous mortar
and the adhesive zone.

In DAC’s the large particles are in fact floating in a mixture of finer particles and bituminous mortar. It
will be clear that in this case the stiffness of the bituminous mortar plays a very important role in the
resistance to permanent deformation. Compressive forces may occur in the mortar as well as tension
forces when the mixture starts to dilate.

In conclusion we can say that the importance of the bituminous mortar in the resistance to permanent
deformation is higher in DAC mixtures than in SMA and PAC mixtures. Furthermore it is clear that in DAC
mixtures, the mortar will be subjected to compression and tension forces. In well-designed SMA and PAC
mixtures the mortar will be subjected to tension forces when the mixture tends to dilate.

This implies that some of the aspects discussed when dealing with fatigue are also applicable to
permanent deformation.

Resistance to permanent deformation and rheology

In the chapter on rheology and stiffness, figure 26 has already been shown.

Figure 26. Deformation characteristics of bitumen in relation to its stiffness and PI.

This figure clearly shows that if one wants to limit the amount of permanent deformation a bitumen with
a high stiffness and a high PI are desirable because in that case the amount of viscous deformation is
limited. We have seen that bitumens with a high PI have a master curve with a flat slope indicating that
the stiffness is less dependent on loading time and temperature. Such bitumens also show to have a low
phase angle.

Bitumens with such a behavior can easily be picked up from DSR measurements. The question however
is whether high PI bitumens will behave favorable in a pavement. As mentioned earlier, bitumens with a
PI  0 are considered to be the most favorable ones because they combine sufficient low viscosity at high
temperatures for mixing, sufficiently high viscosity at intermediate temperatures to give enough
resistance to permanent deformation and sufficient flexibility at low temperatures to prevent brittle
failure. All this implies that using high PI bitumens to prevent permanent deformation is not really
feasible. A more feasible solution is to increase the stiffness.

As has been mentioned a number of times, it is not the bitumen that glues the particles together but it is
the bituminous mortar and the most important part in the mortar is the mastic being the mixture of filler
(also called fines) and the bitumen. It is a well-known fact that adding fines increases the stiffness of the
bitumen – fines mixture. However, one should never forget that the types of fines play an important role
in this stiffening. Particle size and particle shape of the fines are very important parameters since they
determine how much bitumen can be bound by the particles.

In order to illustrate the importance of the type and amount of filler, some examples of this important
influence will be given hereafter. The examples show that it is NOT sufficient to test only the bitumen. It
is ESSENTIAL to test at least the mastic (filler/bitumen mixture) or the mortar (filler/bitumen/fine part of
the sand). It has already been shown earlier that the DSR is excellently suited to test such composites.

Figure 27 shows how different amounts of artificially produced fines, called filler, of different types affect
the softening point. Tables 1 to 4 give properties of the fillers while table 5 give the properties of the
bitumen used.

Figure 27. Influence of amount and type of filler on softening point. Base bitumen is a 80/100 pen
bitumen [8].
 Table 1. Types of fillers used [8].

Table 2. Chemical analysis of fillers used [8].

 Table 3. Properties of fillers used [8].

Table 4. Particle size distribution of fillers used [8].

 Table 5. Properties of bitumen used [8].

Figure 28 shows results of uniaxial creep tests in which DAC specimens in which different amounts of
bitumen were used, were subjected to a uniaxial vertical load of 10 5 Pa during 1 hr at 40 oC. The mixture
stiffness was calculated by dividing the vertical stress by the occurring vertical strain. The longer the
loading time, the lower the stiffness. Also the stiffness of the bitumen was determined and plots showing
the relationship of Sbit vs Smix (figure 28) were developed. The higher the Smix, the higher the
resistance against permanent deformation. The figure clearly shows the effect of different amounts of
bitumen, different amounts of fines and different types of bitumen.

It should be noted that the uniaxial creep test has been used for a long time in the Netherlands but is
replaced by the triaxial test simply because of the fact that the creep test is not able to give a good
picture of the resistance of stone skeleton mixtures to permanent deformation. As mentioned earlier,
stone skeleton mixtures need confinement in order to be able to develop their excellent resistance
against permanent deformation.
 Figure 28. Sbit vs Smix relationships in relation to bitumen and filler content and filler type [8].

Correlations have been made between the creep stiffness and the Marshall test results. A fairly good
correlation could be obtained between the Marshall flow and the creep stiffness. This relationship is
shown in figure 29.

Figure 29. Creep stiffness vs Marshall flow and influence of filler type [8].
Closure

From the material presented above it is clear that the viscous behavior of the bituminous mastic/filler is
determined by:

- The bitumen characteristics.

- The characteristics of the fines.
- The ratio bitumen : fines.

From the material presented in this section and in the section on bitumen stiffness and rheology, it has
become clear that a mortar with a high stiffness and a low phase angle at the loading frequencies and
temperatures of interest provides the highest resistance to permanent deformation. It has also been
shown that rheological properties of the bitumen are important parameters related to permanent
deformation especially for mixtures like DAC. However, it has also clearly been shown that the fines
(filler) have a significant influence on the viscosity and resistance to permanent deformation of the
bituminous mastic/mortar. As has been shown in the section on bitumen stiffness and rheology, the DSR
is excellently suited to obtain very important information on the effects of the type of bitumen and
filler/fines as well as their quantities on the stiffness characteristics of such materials (G * and ).

All in all it is shown that the DSR is an extremely useful tool to analyze the contribution of the bituminous
binder to the resistance to permanent deformation.

References

1. M.M.M. Jacobs; Crack Growth in Asphaltic Mixtures, 1995; PhD Thesis, Delft University of
Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
2. P.Q.Y.E. Nguyen; Asphalt Pavements based on Environmentally Friendly Waste Materials, 2007;
PhD Thesis, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
3. L.T. Mo; Damage Development in the Adhesive Zone and Mortar of Porous Asphalt Concrete,
2010; PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
4. M. Huurman and L.T. Mo; Fatigue in Mortar and Adhesive Zones, Test Interpretation and
Determination of Model Parameters, 2007; Report 7-07-170-2, Road and Railway Research
Laboratory, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
5. A.A.A. Molenaar, N. Li and F. Pramesti; Fatigue Characterisation of Asphalt Mixtures for Long Life
Pavements, 2013; Paper presented at the 2013 AAPA Conference, Brisbane, Australia
6. J. Groenendijk; Accelerated Testing and Surface Cracking of Asphaltic Concrete Pavements,
1998; PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
7. P.M. Muraya; Permanent Deformation of Asphalt Mixes, 2007; PhD Thesis, Delft University of
Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
8. N.J.N.A. Bolk, J.P.J. van der Heide and M.C. van Zantvliet; Basic Research into the Effect of Filler
on the Mechanical Properties of Dense Asphaltic Concrete, 1982; Proc. AAPT Vol.51 pp 398-452,
Kansas City, USA.
9. G.M. Rowe, G.N. King and M. Anderson; The Influence of Binder Rheology on the Cracking of
Asphalt Mixes on Airport and Highway Projects, 2013; presentation at the 4th Int. Conf. on
Asphalt Materials, Guangdong, China.