Effects of Temperature and Pressure on Hot Mixed Asphalt

Compaction: Field and Laboratory Study

Rodrigo Delgadillo1 and Hussain U. Bahia2

Abstract: A field and laboratory study was carried out to study the effect of pressure and temperature on the compaction of asphalt
pavements. Density, temperature, number of passes, and type of roller were recorded in the field at four different paving projects in
Wisconsin, with binder and mixture samples obtained from each project. Compaction in the field occurred at temperatures that ranged
Downloaded from [Link] by Suny At Buffalo on 06/02/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

from 125 to 60° C. Densification was achieved only for temperatures above the 70– 80° C range. Roller contact pressures were estimated
between 300 and 700 kPa during the compaction process. Laboratory compaction was performed with Superpave gyratory compactor
using the field compaction temperatures and contact pressures. The lab compaction results confirmed that below a certain temperature
limit densification decreased significantly. Binder testing was performed to determine the binder viscosities in the full range of field
compaction temperatures observed. The upper limit of viscosity for significant reduction in densification was estimated to be 50 Pa s. A
procedure for identifying the lowest temperature at which acceptable densification rate can be achieved is proposed based on testing using
the dynamic shear rheometer. The determination of the lower temperature limit for compaction is an important task that is absent in the
current specifications.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0899-1561共2008兲20:6共440兲
CE Database subject headings: Asphalts; Concrete; Asphalt pavements; Highway construction; Soil compaction; Field tests; Labo-
ratory tests.

Background teristics 共Bahia et al. 2001兲, the real challenge has been to develop
a set of criteria for selecting the temperatures that will result in
Compaction temperatures in the lab and in the field have been the acceptable compaction without unnecessarily heating the binders
subject of research for many decades 共Roberts et al. 1996兲. Since to very high temperatures. Some progress has been made in con-
the introduction of the Superpave volumetric mixture design pro- sidering the shear rate sensitivity of modified binders 共Khatri
cedure in the early 1990s 共Cominsky et al. 1994兲, and the in- et al. 2001; Yildrim et al. 2000兲; progress has also been made in
creased use of polymer modified binders, a significant focus has identifying the effects of pressure or stress applied during com-
been placed on the best method to select mixing and compaction paction 共Kamel et al. 2004; Cho et al. 2005兲, but few studies have
temperature. DeSombre et al. 共1998兲 used the Superpave gyratory tried to connect field and laboratory measurements, and derive a
compactor 共SGC兲 to estimate the compaction temperatures for simple limit of viscosity to guide the compaction process. One
mixtures prepared with nonmodified viscosity graded binders. such study was conducted by Purdue University with the Indiana
Department of Transportation 共DOT兲 共Haddock and Tang 2003兲,
Khatri et al. 共2001兲 introduced the concept of zero shear viscosity
and it showed that considering the shear rate sensitivity, and using
共ZSV兲 for estimating the mixing and compaction temperatures of
the low shear viscosity concept, could help in developing a guide
mixtures prepared with polymer modified binders.
for field compaction.
Although it is recognized that performance graded 共PG兲 bind-
This study was conducted for the Wisconsin DOT to evaluate
ers, particularly modified binders, have different viscosity charac-
the concept of low shear viscosity and develop limits that will be
suitable for laboratory compaction and field compaction. Several
1
Research Assistant, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, projects were selected for the 2005 construction season. Tempera-
The Univ. of Wisconsin–Madison, 2210 Engineering Hall, 1415 ture and density data were collected, and samples of binders and
Engineering Dr., Madison, WI 53706; and, Academic Instructor, Dept. de mixtures were taken from the field. The binders and mixtures
Obras Civiles, Univ. Técnica Federico Santa Maria, Chile. E-mail:
were tested at temperatures and stress conditions that mimicked
[Link]@[Link]
2
Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Univ. field conditions. The results were analyzed using various ap-
of Wisconsin–Madison, 3350 Engineering Hall, 1415 Engineering Dr., proaches to develop a criterion for field compaction temperatures
Madison, WI 53706. E-mail: bahia@[Link] that will define the effect of temperature and propose reasonable
Note. Associate Editor: Shin-Che Huang. Discussion open until limits for use in the laboratory and the field.
November 1, 2008. Separate discussions must be submitted for individual The testing included use of the SGC at various temperatures
papers. To extend the closing date by one month, a written request must and stress levels, varying between 60 and 160° C and between
be filed with the ASCE Managing Editor. The manuscript for this paper
300 and 600 kPa, respectively. The binders were tested using a
was submitted for review and possible publication on February 2, 2007;
approved on October 18, 2007. This paper is part of the Journal of rotational viscometer and a dynamic shear rheometer 共DSR兲 at a
Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 6, June 1, 2008. ©ASCE, wide range of temperatures and shear rates. In the DSR, the par-
ISSN 0899-1561/2008/6-440–448/$25.00. allel plate and the cone and plate geometries were used.

440 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2008

J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008.20:440-448.

 Table 1. Project and Sample Information
WisDOT Polymer Date
Project name Project IDa Layer Binder modified Mixtureb sampled
STH 17 9040-09-70 Base 58–34 Yes E-3 September 2003
Rhinelander Bypass 19 mm
I–94 1020-01-74 Surface 70–28 Yes E-30 October 2003
Baldwin 12.5 mm
Hanley Rd. Intersection 7200-05-70 Surface 70–28 Yes E-10 September 2005
Hudson 19 mm
Madison Beltline 5300-04-74 Surface 64–28 Yes E-10 October 2005
共Midvale-Gammon兲 12.5 mm
a
Project identification number, assigned by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation.
b
Mixture type as defined in the State of Wisconsin DOT 共1996兲.
Downloaded from [Link] by Suny At Buffalo on 06/02/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Field Compaction Data 28兲 and have the lower lay down temperatures. The temperature
for the first breakdown roller pass was between 115 and 125° C
Project Information and Compaction Data for all projects, an exception being Project 7200-05-70, where it
was close to 100° C.
Field compaction information was taken from four different hot The compaction continued even for mat temperatures close to
mixed asphalt 共HMA兲 paving projects in Wisconsin. The sam- 60° C. The final roller passes, however, are not for increasing the
pling was done between Fall 2003 and Fall 2005. Mixture density, but for surface finishing with static rollers. Table 3 shows
samples were taken directly in front of the paver. Binder samples that increases in density are observed in Project 5300-04-74 with
were taken from the asphalt mixing plant. The information from the vibratory breakdown roller at mat temperatures between 115
the projects is given in Table 1. and 125° C. There was a significant delay between the vibratory
In the field, compaction data including temperature and den- roller and the next roller that allowed the mat to cool down to the
sity were taken during the paving process. Using an infrared gun, 60– 70° C range, so it can be seen that this temperature was too
the surface temperature was measured and recorded after each low, as no further increases in density were achieved. It should be
roller pass. Density data were also taken after each roller using a noticed that the project was a warranted pavement, so no density
nuclear gauge. Because of the short time between roller passes, requirements were specified by the DOT. Table 2 shows that for
15 s readings were taken as opposed to the standard 4 min test Project 1020-01-74, increases in density are still observed with
readings. For each project, the data were taken from 2 to 4 mea- the second vibratory roller at mat temperatures in the 70– 80° C
suring points, depending on the time available between roller range. However, as the final roller passes with mat temperatures
passes. Tables 2 and 3 show the compaction data obtained for in the 50– 65° C range, no further density increases are observed.
each project. For Project 9040-09-70, the compaction stopped near 80° C, and
it can be seen that increases in the density were observed until the
Field Compaction Temperatures final roller passes. Finally, for Project 7200-05-70, increases in
density were observed until temperatures in the 70– 80° C range
The temperatures shown in Tables 2 and 3 correspond to mat
with the use of the pneumatic roller. For temperatures lower than
surface temperatures and average mat temperature. The surface
this, no further densification was achieved.
temperature was directly measured with an infrared device. How-
In summary, densification was achieved in the projects until a
ever, the average temperature of the mat was not measured di-
rectly so it needed to be estimated. The average temperature of limiting temperature was reached and/or acceptable density was
the asphalt lift is generally higher than the surface temperature achieved. Below this critical temperature, more roller passes did
and it depends on several factors such as air temperature, base not result in more density. The limiting temperature appears to be
temperature, mat thickness, and wind. As an approximation, the between 70 and 80° C for the sampled projects. Fig. 1 shows the
average mat temperature after lay down can be estimated some- densification data as a function of temperature for the four
where between 10 and 15° C higher than the surface temperature projects. For each project, the displayed temperature and density
共Wise and Lorio 2004; Mansell 2001兲, but the initial temperature is the average of all the measuring locations for each roller pass.
difference diminishes as the mat cools down 共ter Huerne 2004兲. Fig. 1 might seem somewhat confusing as it shows increase in
The lift thicknesses for the four projects vary between 4.5 and density with decreasing temperature. It should be realized, how-
7.5 cm, which are relatively thick lifts. Considering the thickness, ever, that the number of passes is increasing when temperature is
the average temperature was estimated as 15° C higher than the decreasing and also air-void content is reducing significantly, re-
surface temperature at the beginning of compaction. Toward the sulting in more resistance to densification.
end of compaction, this difference was estimated to be 10° C 共ter
Huerne 2004兲. Linear interpolation was used to determine inter- Roller Contact Pressure
mediate temperatures. For all the analysis that follows, the aver-
age mat temperature was used. The contact pressure of the rollers is not a constant value, and it
It can be observed in Tables 2 and 3 that the lay down tem- varies during the compaction process. For steel rollers, the factors
perature starts in the range of 135– 145° C for Projects 9040- that affect the contact pressure are the roller weight, the drum
09-70 and 5300-04-74, and in the range of 115– 125° C for diameter, the vibration, and the penetration of the drum into the
Projects 7200-05-70 and 1020-01-74. It is interesting to notice HMA mat. For the pneumatic rollers, the contact pressure is given
that the two latter projects have the stiffer asphalt binders 共PG70- by the tire pressure, which is typically in the range of 550–

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2008 / 441

J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008.20:440-448.

 Table 2. Field Compaction Data for Projects 1020-01-74 and 9040-09-70
Location 1 Location 2 共center兲 Location 3
Temp. 共°C兲 Temp. 共°C兲 Temp. 共°C兲
Roller % max. % max. % max.
type Pass density Surf. Ave. density Surf. Ave. density Surf. Ave.
Project 1020-01-74, PG70-28, E-30 12.5 mm, lift thickness= 6 cm
Paver 1 70.3 106 121 — — — — — —
Pneumatic 1 77.0 108 123 83.0 106 121 78.0 104 119
Breakdown 1 85.6 99 113 87.9 96 110 — — —
共vibratory兲
2 84.8 96 110 87.1 97 111 86.8 95 110
Steel roller 1 88.9 66 78 90.2 64 76 91.1 65 77
共vibratory兲
Downloaded from [Link] by Suny At Buffalo on 06/02/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

2 88.4 61 73 91.7 55 66 90.4 59 71

3 89.7 59 70 — — — — — —
Cold 1 88.1 52 63 92.9 51 61 90.5 52 63
共vibratory兲
2 90.1 48 59 92.6 48 58 91.3 51 61
3 87.5 39 49 90.7 43 53 90.8 46 56
共static兲 → 4 — — — 90.8 43 53 91.9 42 52
Location 1 Location 2 共center兲 Location 3 Location 4
Temp. 共°C兲 Temp. 共°C兲 Temp. 共°C兲 Temp. 共°C兲
% max. % max. % max. % max
Roller type Pass density Surf. Ave. density Surf. Ave. density Surf. Ave. density Surf. Ave.
Project 9040-09-70, PG58-34, E-3 19 mm, lift thickness= 7.5 cm
Paver 1 73.7 130 145 70.2 128 143 74.0 127 142 73.7 127 142
Break down 1 78.7 104 116 — — — — — — — — —
共vibratory兲
2 — — — 78.1 103 115 — — — — — —
3 85.8 101 113 79.8 78 89 — — — — — —
4 — — — — — — — — — — — —
5 87.9 85 96 86.3 77 87 86.5 98 110 95.6 85 96
6 — — — — — — 88.2 82 93 92.1 81 92
7 — — — — — — 89.6 82 93 — — —
8 — — — — — — 90.0 77 88 89.6 77 88
9 — — — — — — 91.9 72 82 92.5 74 84
共static兲 10 — — — — — — — — — 92.0 72 82

600 Pa 共Roberts et al. 1996兲. Fig. 2 shows the schematics of the h1 − h2 = 共D2 − D1兲t 共2兲
mat compaction that allow calculation of the contact pressure for
a steel roller. where h1 – h2⫽drum penetration in the mat; D1⫽% max density
The vertical force is equal to the roller weight. The contact before the roller pass; D2⫽% max density after the roller pass;
area is calculated from the drum geometry and penetration in the and t⫽lift thickness.
mat. Contact area A is given by To calculate the vertical loads, standard rollers used in the
current practice were used. The breakdown and vibratory rollers

冉 冊
were assumed to be 15 t with drum diameters of 1.5 m, and the
r + h2 − h1
A = ␣rL = a cos 共1兲 cold roller was assumed to be 10 t with a drum diameter of 1.5 m.
r Using this information, together with Eqs. 共1兲 and 共2兲 and the data
from Tables 2 and 3, the penetrations were calculated for the
where L⫽drum width and ␣, r, h1 and h2 are defined in Fig. 2. rollers during the compaction process of each project. The contact
The contact pressure is calculated by dividing the roller weight by pressures can then be obtained from the penetration values ob-
contact area A. Using this procedure, the contact pressures were tained and the roller types selected. Table 4 shows the contact
estimated for the compaction processes of the four projects in- pressure for Project 1020-01-74 共negative values are not
cluded in the study. included兲.
The drum penetration in the mat 共h1 – h2兲 was estimated from Based on the analysis of the data for all projects, it is observed
the lift thickness and the difference in density before and after that the estimated contact pressure for the breakdown roller
each roller pass. The penetration is approximated by started at approximately 300– 400 kPa and reached the range of

442 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2008

J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008.20:440-448.

 Table 3. Field Compaction Data for Projects 5300-04-74 and 7200-05-70
Location 1 共north兲 Location 2 共south兲
Temperature 共°C兲 Temperature 共°C兲
Roller type Pass % max. density Surface Average % max. density Surface Average
Project 5300-04-74, PG64-28, E-10 12.5 mm, lift thickness= 4.5 cm
Paver 1 76.8 129 144 78.7 121 136
Breakdown 1 84.4 110 124 87.6 108.3 122
共vibratory兲
2 86.0 102 115 — — —
Cold 1 86.3 55 65 88.5 56 66
2 86.7 54 64 87.8 53 63
Project 7200-05-70 PG70-28, E-10 19 mm, lift thickness= 7.5 cm
Downloaded from [Link] by Suny At Buffalo on 06/02/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Paver 1 70.7 102 117 72.0 111 126

Breakdown 1 81.7 88 101 — — —
共vibratory兲
2 85.7 82 95 85.0 88 101
3 87.2 67 78 86.9 88 101
4 88.6 82 95 87.1 87 100
5 88.8 79 92 87.3 79 92
6 91.1 81 94 89.5 82 95
7 88.7 82 95 — — —
8 91.5 82 95 — — —
Pneumatic 1 91.9 68 79 87.5 73 85
共15 t兲
2 88.8 68 79 90.4 72 84
3 89.8 67 78 91.0 72 84
4 90.8 68 80 91.0 72 84
5 89.4 69 81 88.4 72 84
6 94.6 68 80 90.6 72 84
7 92.1 68 80 89.4 71 83
8 89.9 67 79 89.3 71 83
9 94.0 65 76 89.5 70 82
10 93.3 63 75 90.2 69 80
11 90.4 62 73 90.4 67 78
12 94.0 62 73 91.3 67 78
13 N/A N/A N/A 90.7 68 79
Cold 1 92.4 56 67 93.1 56 66
共vibratory兲
2 93.5 57 68 93.1 56 66
3 92.7 52 62 92.5 52 62
4 — — — 92.4 52 62
共static兲 → 5 — — — 92.6 52 62

600– 700 kPa, after two or three passes. This is expected because
the densification is higher at the beginning of the compaction, so
the penetration and the contact area are bigger. The intermediate
and cold rollers showed contact pressures in the range of
600– 700 kPa. This is also expected because they do not add den-
sity to the mat at very high rates, so the penetrations and contact
areas are smaller. It is interesting to note that the original inten-
tion of the SGC pressure was to simulate the tire pressure of the
trucks during the service life of the pavement 共Blankenship et al.
1995兲. The field data presented indicates that the 600 kPa also
agrees well with the contact pressure the rollers apply to the as-
phalt mat during most of the compaction process. Fig. 1. Field density versus temperature, all projects

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2008 / 443

J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008.20:440-448.

 Houston兲. The Superpave compaction temperature corresponds to
a binder viscosity of 0.28 Pa s 共⫾003兲. Two samples were tested
for each binder to assure repeatability. Table 5 shows the esti-
mated Superpave compaction temperatures for the four projects.
The ZSV mixing and compaction temperatures were obtained
by using a procedure developed during the NCHRP 9-10 project
共Khatri et al. 2001; Bahia et al. 2001兲. The binders were tested at
three temperatures: 165, 135, and 105° C At each temperature,
different shear rates applied to the binder and the viscosity values
were registered. The shear rates ranged from 0.28 to 93 L / s, cov-
ering the range allowed by the testing device. The lowest shear
rate allowed by the instrument is not low enough to be represen-
tative of zero shear, so extrapolation using a Cross Williamson
共CW兲 model was used, as suggested in the NCHRP 459 report
共Bahia et al. 2001兲. The compaction temperature according to this
Downloaded from [Link] by Suny At Buffalo on 06/02/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

procedure is the one at which a ZSV of 3.0 Pa s is achieved. Table

5 shows the ZSV compaction temperatures for each binder.
Fig. 2. Schematics of the mat compaction
The compaction temperatures obtained using the ZSV or Su-
perpave methods were higher than 135° C for all projects. These
Binder Testing values are not realistic in comparison to the field data; the com-
paction process in the field happened between 125 and 60° C for
the four selected projects. It was therefore decided that a new set
Zero Shear Viscosity and Superpave Compaction of viscosity measurements should be conducted to evaluate vis-
Temperatures cosities at actual field conditions.
In order to compare the field compaction data with some of the
current specifications and recommendations for compaction, the Binders’ Viscosities as a Function of Temperature
compaction characteristics of the mixtures were studied both at
the ZSV temperatures and at the Superpave temperatures. To de- In order to study the influence of the binder viscosity during the
termine the compaction temperatures, the binders were tested compaction process, asphalt samples were tested at temperatures
using a Brookfield viscometer Model DV-II 共J.D. Instruments, within the compaction range. Six different temperatures were
chosen: 135, 120, 105, 90, 75, and 60° C. Shear creep testing in
the DSR 共AR2000 TA Instrument, New Castle, Del.兲 was used to
Table 4. Contact Pressure for Project 1020-01-74 共PG70-28, E-30 determine the steady state viscosity of the binders. Two different
12.5 mm, Lift Thickness= 6 cm兲 geometries were used for the test: Parallel plate and cone and
Average Density Roller contact plate. Parallel plate was chosen because it is the most popular
temperature increase Penetration pressure geometry in asphalt rheology. Two different plate sizes were used:
Roller type Pass 共°C兲 共%兲 共cm兲 共kPa兲 25 mm 共for 60 and 75° C兲 and 40 mm 共for the rest of the tem-
Paver 1 117 — — — peratures兲. The cone and plate geometry was used to verify the
Pneumatic 1 117 9.0 0.57 587
results due to its ability to apply a constant strain rate throughout
the sample. Modified binders are highly stress sensitive, and par-
Breakdown 1 109 7.4 0.47 386
共vibratory兲 allel plate geometry does not provide a constant strain rate
2 107 −0.5 — —
throughout the sample, causing a nonhomogeneous stress distri-
bution in the sample. The cone used was 40 mm in diameter with
Steel roller 1 76 3.8 0.24 621
共vibratory兲
2° angle. For all creep tests, a low stress level was used, between
0.1 and 5 Pa, in order to achieve the low shear viscosity asymp-
2 70 0.1 0.01 690
tote.
3 70 −0.5 — —
The results of both geometries showed good agreement. The
Cold 1 63 0.8 0.05 621
results were also contrasted with the viscosities obtained at low
共vibratory兲
shear rates using the Brookfield viscometer, and good agreement
2 60 0.8 0.05 621
was also found. Fig. 3 shows the viscosities from the three test
3 53 −1.7 — —
methods for Binder 7200-05-70 共PG70-28兲. For the four binders,
共Static兲 → 4 54 1.7 0.11 621

Table 5. Superpave and ZSV Compaction Temperatures

ZSV compaction
temperaturea 共°C兲 Superpave compaction temperaturea 共°C兲

Project Binder Sample A Sample B Average Sample A Sample B Average

9040-09-70 58-34 137.4 138.4 138 144.3 144.4 144
1020-01-74 70-28 151.1 148.4 150 162.8 162.3 163
7200-05-70 70-28 149.1 151.8 150 169.8 169.9 170
5300-04-74 64-22 137.7 137.6 138 154.6 154.2 154
a
Average value. The temperature range is about ⫾10% off this value.

444 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2008

J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008.20:440-448.

 Table 6. Compaction Parameters for Project 1020-01-74 74 共PG70-28,
E-30 12.5 mm兲
% Gmm % Gmm % Gmm
Sample Nini Ndes Nmax
120° C, 300 kPa− A 80.0 89.4 91.0
120° C, 300 kPa− B 80.1 89.7 91.3
105° C, 300 kPa− A 78.7 87.9 89.4
105° C, 300 kPa− B 81.1 90.5 92.0
163° C, 600 kPa− A 84.1 94.2 95.6
163° C, 600 kPa− B 83.5 93.9 95.4
150° C, 600 kPa− A 84.0 94.4 96.0
150° C, 600 kPa− B 83.6 94.1 95.7
120° C, 600 kPa− A 83.8 94.3 95.7
Downloaded from [Link] by Suny At Buffalo on 06/02/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

120° C, 600 kPa− B 83.7 94.2 95.7

105° C, 600 kPa− A 83.3 93.6 95.0
105° C, 600 kPa− B 83.7 93.9 95.4
90° C, 600 kPa− A 81.2 91.5 93.0
90° C, 600 kPa− B 82.8 93.2 94.7
75° C, 600 kPa− A 81.9 92.4 94.0
75° C, 600 kPa− B 82.2 92.5 94.0
60° C, 600 kPa− A 79.9 90.5 92.1
60° C, 600 kPa− B 79.4 90.1 91.7
Fig. 3. Fitted viscosities for all binders

power law correlations were fitted to the test results, determining The influence of the compaction stress was analyzed by com-
the temperature–viscosity relationship for the range of interest. paring the difference in the %Gmm between samples compacted at
Fig. 3 also shows the fitted data for all binders. the same temperature. The data from Table 6 shows that the dif-
ferences in %Gmm between samples compacted at the same tem-
perature but different stress is about 4%. Fig. 4 shows the
Mixture Testing compaction curves at 120° C for Project 7200-05-70. It can be
observed that at the end of the compaction, the difference in
The Superpave gyratory compactor AFGC125X Pine Instrument, %Gmm is also about 4%. To further evaluate the influence of
Grove City, Pa.兲 was used to compare the densification properties stress, statistical analysis of variation with 95% confidence was
of the mixes at conditions similar to the field conditions in terms used. For all projects and for both temperatures considered, it was
of temperature and pressure. The compaction temperatures esti- found that in all cases, changing the stress level from 600 to
mated according to the Superpave and ZSV criteria were also 300 kPa has a significant effect on the densification of samples
included in the testing plan. As discussed before, during initial 共the statistical analysis is not included in this paper due to length
breakdown, the contact area is bigger and so the contact pressure limitations兲. The comparison between the effects of stress level
is smaller. For this reason, a lower compaction pressure of and temperature is presented in Fig. 4 for Project 7200-05-70. As
300 kPa was considered for the temperature range where break- shown, decreasing the stress from 600 to 300 kPa has a much
down was observed in the field 共120 and 105° C兲. The rest of the greater effect on densification than changing the temperature from
compaction process happens at higher compaction pressures be- 120 to 90° C.
cause of the smaller contact areas. So for the lower temperatures,
only the standard 600 kPa was used, giving a good representation
of the compaction pressures in the field as discussed earlier in this
paper. The details of the testing conditions are as follows:
• 300 kPa of pressure at 120 and 105° C and
• 600 kPa of pressure at Superpave temperature, ZSV tempera-
ture, 120, 105, 90, 75, and 60° C.
The results of the laboratory compaction were analyzed in
terms of the %Gmm 共percentage of maximum specific gravity兲
achieved at different levels of gyrations: %Gmm at Nini 共initial
number of gyrations兲, Ndes 共design number of gyrations兲, and Nmax
共maximum number of gyrations兲. Projects 5300-04-74, 1020-01-
74, and 7200-05-70 all have the same Nini 共8兲, Ndes 共100兲, and
Nmax 共160兲, according to the State of Wisconsin DOT 共WisDOT兲
Standards 共1996兲. The corresponding compaction gyrations for
Project 9040-09-70 共E-3 mixture兲 are 7 共Nini兲, 75 共Ndes兲, and 115
共Nmax兲, according to the WisDOT standards. Table 6 includes the
laboratory compaction results for Project 1020-01-74 at different Fig. 4. Compaction curves Project 7200-05-70, 120° C 共600 and
temperature and pressure combinations. 300 kPa兲 and 90° C 共600 kPa兲

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2008 / 445

J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008.20:440-448.

 Fig. 5. %Gmm at Nini versus temperature mixtures for Projects
Downloaded from [Link] by Suny At Buffalo on 06/02/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

5300-04-74 and 9040-09-70 共600 kPa兲

The data from Table 6 shows that when the temperature is

decreased from 163 to 75° C, the %Gmm gradually decreases.
However, when the temperature reaches 60° C, the %Gmm reduces
dramatically. The %Gmm at Nmax varies between 95.5 and 94% in
the temperature range between 163 and 75° C 共600 kPa兲, but the
%Gmm at Nmax for 60° C is about 92%.
Fig. 5 depicts this trend more clearly. It shows the %Gmm at
Nini for all the temperature ranges for Projects 9040-09-70 and Fig. 6. Average increase in field density 共%DI兲 per roller pass versus
5300-04-74 共average of the two tested samples for each condi- binder viscosity
tion兲. It can be observed that for Project 9040-09-70, there is a
significant drop in the %Gmm for the 60° C samples. For Project
5300-04-74, however, this drop in %Gmm appears to happen for
the samples compacted at 75° C. This result is expected as the roller pass from the density after the roller has gone over the mat,
binder used for Project 5300-04-74 共PG64-28兲 is stiffer than the as shown in Table 4. In other words, if the density after the sec-
binder used for Project 9040-09-70 共PG58-34兲, so the former has ond roller pass were, e.g., 75% of the maximum density, and the
a higher viscosity than the latter at 75° C. This observation sug- density after the third roller pass were 80% of the maximum
gests that there is a limiting viscosity for the densification, above density, then the increase in density with the third roller pass will
which the densification process is significantly affected. The drop be 5%. This increase in density was calculated for different vis-
observed in the %Gmm values for 105° C in both projects is not cosity ranges.
relevant for the purpose of this study, because it is followed with The binder viscosity in the field compaction temperature range
an increase in %Gmm when the temperature is further decreased. was divided into different intervals, and the average increase in
This means that compaction can be continued for temperatures density per roller pass was calculated for each viscosity interval.
below 105° C, as confirmed by the field data. Fig. 6 shows the viscosity ranges and the average increase in field
The results from the laboratory compaction agree with what density for each interval. By looking at the chart, it can be seen
was observed in the field. As shown in Fig. 1, the field densifica- how for viscosities higher than 100 Pa s, very low compaction
tion by rolling was achieved until temperatures in the 70– 80° C was achieved at each roller pass, compared with the densification
range. No further densification was achieved for temperatures achieved for viscosities lower than 100 Pa s. From the field data,
below this range. The lab densification showed a significant drop the limit appears to be a viscosity close to 100 Pa s. Further
when samples were compacted at 75– 60° C. The exact tempera- analysis was carried out by fitting an exponential curve to the data
ture limiting compaction logically depends on the binder viscos- of Fig. 6. The exponential fit is shown in the plot, and it suggests
ity. As temperature is not a material property, viscosity limits 共as the same lower viscosity limit of 100 Pa s for compaction.
material properties兲 should be established as will be discussed The observations from the previous analysis of field data were
next. contrasted with the lab compaction data. The viscosity tempera-
ture functions from Fig. 3 were used to correlate the %Gmm at
different gyration numbers in the SGC with the binder viscosity.
Analysis of Field and Lab Compaction Fig. 7 shows the %Gmm at Ndes for the four projects versus the
binder viscosity. It can be observed that the viscosity limit of
Analyzing the influence of the binder viscosity on field compac- 100 Pa s only seems to work well for the mixture from Project
tion is one of the main interests of this study. For this purpose, the 7200-05-70 共PG70-28兲. For the rest of the projects, this limit
viscosities of binders at the field mat temperatures 共from Tables 2 appears to be too high, as noticeable decreases in density are
and 3兲 were determined using the fitting functions from Fig. 3 for shown at lower viscosities. Mixtures from Projects 9040-09-70
each one of the projects, and a relationship between the field 共PG58-34兲 and 5300-05-070 共PG64-28兲 show a decrease in the
density and the binder viscosity was obtained. However, the in- %Gmm at Ndes for viscosities higher than 30 Pa s. The mixture
crease in density per roller pass at each viscosity level is more from Project 1020-01-74 共PG70-28兲 shows an initial decrease in
relevant than the density at each viscosity level. The density in- densification for viscosities higher than 10 Pa s, but the final
crease can be calculated by subtracting the density before each sharp decrease happens for viscosities higher than 100 Pa s. The

446 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2008

J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008.20:440-448.

 Suggested Procedure for Determining Compaction
Temperatures

Compaction in the field happens at much lower temperatures than

the ones predicted with the current methods, making the estima-
tion of temperatures based on current criteria meaningless. As the
binder and aggregates still need to be heated in order to be mixed,
the high initial temperature of the compaction is already guaran-
teed. But the missing item in the current specifications is the
determination of the lower temperature limit where densification
can be achieved. According to the present study, it appears that
the temperature at which the binder viscosity is equal to 50 Pa s is
a reasonable limit above which significant reduction in densifica-
tion rate is observed. The limit presented here is based on low
Fig. 7. %Gmm at Ndes versus binder viscosity 共lab data兲
Downloaded from [Link] by Suny At Buffalo on 06/02/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

shear rate viscosity. For the binders tested in the present study, it
was observed that the plateau for the low shear rate asymptote
was reached for shear rates below 0.5 1 / s. For the temperature
range below 90° C, this shear rate could be achieved with stresses
below 5 Pa for the creep test. A tentative procedure is suggested
same behavior was observed when the %Gmm at Nini and Nmax below to determine the viscosity limit:
trends were analyzed. • Perform a creep test with the DSR using parallel plate
Based on the density trends observed in Fig. 7 it appears that geometry;
the viscosity limit should be a number in the range of • Use three different temperatures: 60, 75, and 90° C;
10– 100 Pa s. The importance of the viscosity limit is that it could • Use a shear rate below 0.5 1/s, which can be normally
be translated into a temperature limit, which can be monitored achieved with a creep stress below 5 Pa;
easily in the field, and under which no more densification can be • Each creep test should last at least 45 min to reach equilibrium
achieved in the field. The lower the viscosity limit is, the higher and the average viscosity during the final 5 min of reading
the compaction temperature limit should be, so the approach be- should be recorded as the steady state viscosity;
comes more conservative. Table 7 shows the limiting tempera- • Use at least 15 min of sample temperature equilibrium be-
tures for the four projects considered in this study, using three tween creep tests;
different values of viscosity limit: 10, 50, and 100 Pa s. • After the viscosities are calculated for the three temperatures,
By comparing the different temperature limits from Table 7 obtain a power curve fitting for the viscosities using a spread-
with the field compaction data from Tables 2 and 3, some conclu- sheet; and
sions can be obtained. • Using the fitting equation, calculate the temperature at which
• The viscosity limit of 10 Pa s seems to be unreasonably con- the viscosity is equal to 50 Pa s, which will be equal to the
servative, as it specifies a lower temperature limit for compac- minimum temperature limit for compaction.
tion equal to 110° C for Project 7200-05-70 共PG70-28兲. The
field data from Table 2 indicates that the breakdown compac-
tion for Project 7200-05-70 started around 100° C, and ad- Summary of Findings
equate compaction was still achieved at this range.
• The viscosity limit of 100 Pa s gives reasonable temperatures The following summary of findings is based on the data collected
for three of the projects, but would result in a temperature and analysis of the results.
limit of 63° C for Project 9040-09-70 共PG58-34兲, which would The field compaction processes for the projects shown in this
appear to be too low. study happened at temperatures between 125 and 60° C. The ma-
jority of densification is achieved, however, at temperatures above
• An intermediate value of 50 Pa s appears to be a reasonable
the 70– 80° C range. The final roller passes, which are done at
choice. The temperature limits for the four projects obtained
lower temperatures, are generally for surface finishing only.
based on 50 Pa s are still high compared with the field data,
There appears to be no good relationship between the compac-
which makes this number a conservative choice.
tion temperatures recommended by the current specification
methods 共using 0.28 Pa s viscosity兲 and the effectiveness of the
compaction in the field. It appears that, for the same compaction
effort, a new higher level of viscosity and a lower limit for the
Table 7. Temperature Limits for Compaction based on different Low compaction temperature can be established without affecting
Shear Viscosity Limits number of roller passes required to achieve density. This conclu-
sion was based on the analysis of the efficiency of the compaction
Temperature limit for compaction 共°C兲 effort 共percent increase of field density divided by roller passes兲.
␩ ␩ ␩ A similar conclusion can be obtained from the lab compaction
Project limit= 100 Pa s limit= 50 Pa s limit= 10 Pa s data. The %Gmm curves did not reduce dramatically when the
9040-09-70 共PG58-34兲 63 69 86
temperature was reduced to approximately 75° C for the mixes in
this study. When the temperature was decreased below this limit,
5300-04-74 共PG64-28兲 73 79 97
however, significant decreases in the %Gmm curves were ob-
1020-01-74 共PG70-28兲 81 88 106
served. The specific temperature lower limit depended on the
7200-05-70 共PG70-28兲 84 91 110
binder viscosity.

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2008 / 447

J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008.20:440-448.

 The rollers contact pressures seem to vary between 300 and ated. Special thanks to Tomas Brokaw, Judie Ryan, Nancy Bushe,
700 kPa during the compaction process. The breakdown rolling and Richard Barden from WisDOT.
occurs at contact pressures between 300 and 400 kPa. After a few
rolling passes, the contact area decreases increasing the contact
pressure to values between 600 and 700 kPa. This shows that the References
current standard pressure of the SGC is a good estimate of the
contact pressures at which the most of the compaction happens in Bahia, H. U., Hanson, D. I., Zeng, M., Zhai, H., Khatri, M. A., and
the field. Anderson, R. M. 共2001兲. “Characterization of modified asphalt bind-
The compaction pressure has a significant effect on the densi- ers in Superpave mix design.” National Cooperative Highway Re-
fication of the samples tested in the lab. As the breakdown rolling search Program, Rep. No. NCHRP 459, National Academy Press,
Washington, D.C.
happens at lower contact pressures, it is important that the break-
Blankenship, P., Mahboub, K., and Huber, G. 共1995兲. “Rational method
down rolling happens at high asphalt mat temperatures, not too
for laboratory compaction of hot mix asphalt.” Transportation Re-
long after being placed by the paver. search Record. 1454, Transportation Research Board, National Re-
The field and lab data for the four projects analyzed indicated search Council, Washington, D.C., 144–153.
Downloaded from [Link] by Suny At Buffalo on 06/02/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

that the low temperature limit for compaction can be estimated Cho, D. W., Bahia, H. U., and Kamel, N. 共2005兲. “Critical evaluation of
using a low shear viscosity limit of 50 Pa s at a 0.5 共1/s兲 shear use of the procedure of superpave volumetric mixture design for
rate. The DSR with parallel plate geometry can be used to mea- modified binders.” Transportation Research Record. 1929, Transpor-
sure this temperature. tation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.,
The fact that densification happens successfully at such low 114–125.
temperature ranges indicates that there is most likely a significant Cominsky, R. J., Huber, G. A., Kennedy, T. W., and Anderson, R. M.
influence of the stress sensitivity of the binders on the compaction 共1994兲. “The superpave mix design manual for new construction and
overlays.” Strategic Highway Research Program, Rep. No. SHRP-A-
process. When the temperature is dropped from 135 to 90° C, the
407, Washington, D.C.
viscosity of the binder can increase between 20 and 30 times. The DeSombre, R., Newcomb, D. E., Chadbourn, B., and Voller, V. 共1998兲.
fact that this does not have a substantial effect in the densification “Parameters to define the laboratory compaction temperature range of
suggests that the roller pressures, and SGC stresses, are high hot mix asphalt.” Asph. Paving Technol., 67, 125–145.
enough to cause shear thinning in the binders and generate den- Haddock, J., and Tang, Y. 共2003兲. “Investigation of the performance of
sification nonetheless. This effect needs further research. neat and modified asphalt binders.” Joint Transportation Research
One of the limitations of the work presented here is that it Program Project No. C-36-56L, Indianapolis.
considers only the binder viscosity, neglecting the effect of the Kamel, N., Bahia, H., and Cho, D. W. 共2004兲. “Critical laboratory evalu-
aggregate interlock on the compaction process in order to sim- ation of asphalt binders modified by refining process.” Proc., Cana-
plify the analysis and to estimate the lower temperature limit for dian Technical Asphalt Association, 49, Polyscience Publication Inc.,
compaction. Laval, Que., Canada, 57–75.
The study shows that compaction in the field is done at tem- Khatri, A., Bahia, H., and Hanson, D. 共2001兲. “Mixing and compaction
temperatures for modified binders using the superpave gyratory com-
peratures much lower than what has been commonly used in the
pactor.” Asph. Paving Technol., 70, 368–395.
laboratory. It also shows that the Gyratory compactor can be used Mansell, T. 共2001兲. “Raveling in hot-mix asphalt pavements.” Gran-
at much lower temperatures than commonly used, and that den- iterock, 具[Link] 共July 2006兲.
sity can still be achieved at relatively high viscosities for the same Roberts, F., Kandhal, P., Brown, E. R., Lee, D., and Kennedy, T. 共1996兲.
number of gyrations. The results confirm the concerns expressed Hot mix asphalt materials, mixture design and construction, 2nd Ed.,
by some practitioners that mixtures are being overheated, and that National Asphalt Pavement Association 共NAPA兲, Research and Edu-
the need for low viscosities is possibly overemphasized. The re- cational Foundation, Lanham, Md.
sults cover a relatively small set of field projects, and the recom- State of Wisconsin Department of Transportation 共DOT兲 共1996兲. “Stan-
mended procedure is proposed as a starting point to change the dard specifications for highway and structure construction.” Madison,
thinking about compaction temperatures. There is no doubt that Wis.
energy and pollutants could be reduced when lower compaction ter Huerne, H. L. 共2004兲. “Compaction of asphalt road pavements using
temperatures are used. finite elements and critical state theory.” Civil Engineering and Man-
agement Dept., Univ. of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Wise, J., and Lorio, R. 共2004兲. “A practical guide for estimating the
compaction window time for thin-layer hot mix asphalt.” Proc., 8th
Acknowledgments Conf. on Asphalt Pavements for Southern Africa (CAPSA’04).
Yildrim, Y., Solaimanian, M., and Kennedy, T. 共2000兲. “Mixing and com-
This study was sponsored by the Wisconsin Department of Trans- paction temperatures for superpave mixes.” Asph. Paving Technol.,
portation. The continuous support of WisDOT is greatly appreci- 69, 34–57.

448 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2008

J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008.20:440-448.