Generating Mixture Inputs in

Pavement ME for North Dakota’s

Conditions
Presenter: Duncan Rioba Oteki, PhD. Student
Advisor: Dr. Daba Gedafa, Ph.D., P.E., ENV. SP, F. ASCE
 Presentation Layout

• Background

• Literature Review

• Materials and Methods

• Results and Discussion

• Conclusion

• Future Work
 Background

Rutting Fatigue Cracking

Thermal Cracking
MEPDG or Pavement ME
 Pavement ME Levels

Le • Mixture-specific laboratory tested

ve properties
l1
• Predictive models and laboratory
Le
vel measured binder data
2L
e • Predictive models and default binder
v properties
e
l
3
 Problem Statement
The development of durable and long-lasting pavements is
the most effective way to ensure good riding comfort, safety,
and low-cost maintenance.

Accurate and effective characterization of hot mix asphalt

(HMA) properties is vital to this goal

This project seeks to provide a HMA material input data to

support the implementation of Pavement ME in North
Dakota.
 Objectives
To measure the dynamic modulus (|E*|) for typical North
Dakota HMA mixes.

To determine the flow number (FN) for typical North Dakota
HMA mixes

To evaluate existing models' capability to predict |E*| for

North Dakota asphalt mixes.
 Literature Review
Author/Date Methodology Findings
Timothy et al. 2003 - 5 HMA mixes; -The Original Witczak
(Minnesota) - |E*| testing; model underpredicted |
- Original Witczak model. E*| for all the five
mixtures
Birgisson et al. 2004 - 28 HMA mixes; - |E*| predictions at high
(Florida) - |E*| testing and prediction; temperatures closer to
using the original Witczak measured values than
model for 28 HMA mixtures lower temperature
predictions

Mohammad et al. -13 HMA mixes; - Both models

2007 -|E*| testing; performed well.
(Louisiana) - Original Witczak & Hirsch - Hirsch model was
models. more accurate.
 Literature Review Cont'd
Author/Date Methodology
Gedafa et al. 2009 - Laboratory HMA mixes and
(Kansas) field cores from 5 sites;
- |E*| testing;
- Original Witczak, Modified
Witczak, and Hirsch Models.
Martinez and Angelone 2009 -Lab HMA mixes and Field
(Argentina) cores;
- Heukelomp and Klomp,
Original Witczak, Hirsch, and
Alkhateeb Models.
Yousefdoost et al. 2013 -Lab mixes |E*| testing
(Australia) - Original Witczak, modified
Witczak and Hirsch Models.
Findings
- Original Witczak
model
underestimates |E*|
at low temperatures
and overestimates |
E*| at high
temperatures
- The Heukelomp
and Klomp model
was more accurate.
- Recalibration to
improve accuracy
- Original Witczak
was more accurate.
- It underpredicted |
E*| values
- Not robust enough
Materials and Methods
5 HMA mixes

Measurements
|E|* Predictions
FN |E*|

|E*| models evaluation

Levels 1, 2, and 3 database inputs

for North Dakota
 Material Selection
Asphalt Mix NMAS Binder RAP (%)
Grade
HWY 32-Finley 12.5 PG 58H-34 15
HWY 32-Finley 12.5 PG 58S-28 15
HWY 6 - 12.5 PG 58S-34 25
Bismarck
HWY 83 - Minot 9.5 PG58H-34 10
HWY 28 - Minot 12.5 PG58S-28 -
|E*|
|E*| Relevance in Pavement
ME
Climatic Model

Traffic Model

Mechanistic
E = |E*|
Analysis

Fatigue Cracking
Rutting Prediction
Prediction
Specimen Preparation
 Asphalt Mix Performance
Tester (AMPT)
• NCHRP- Project 9-29
• Versatile
• Cost
• Time
|E*| Testing

Temperature Frequency
(⁰C) (Hz)
35 (95⁰F) 10, 1, 0.1, 0.01
20 (68⁰F) 10, 1, 0.1
4 (39⁰F) 10, 1, 0.1
Master Curve
Master Curve Interpretation
 |E*| Predictions (Level 2)
Model Description Original Modified Hirsch
Witczak Witczak
Binder Properties η √
f √
|G*| √ √
δ √
Mix Volumetric Vbeff √ √
Properties
Va √ √
VMA √
VFA √
ρ¾ √ √
ρ⅜ √ √
ρ4 √ √
ρ200 √ √
 |E*| Predictions (Level 3)
Model Description Original Witczak Modified Hirsch
Witczak

Binder Properties PG √ √ √
Mix Volumetric Vbeff √ √
Properties
Va √ √
VMA √
VFA √
ρ¾ √ √
ρ⅜ √ √
ρ4 √ √
ρ200 √ √
Flow Number
Flow Number Interpretation

Traffic level, million ESALs HMA Minimum Average Flow

Number

<3 -

3 to <10 50

10 to <30 190

>=30 740
Results and Discussion
|E*| at 4°C
|E*| at 20°C
E*| at 35°C
Phase angle at 4°C
Phase angle at 20°C
Phase angle at 35°C
Master Curve |E*|
Master Curve Phase Angle
Level 2 Predictions
Original Witczak Model
Modified Witczak Model
Hirsch Model
Level 3 Predictions
Original Witczak Model
Modified Witczak Model
Hirsch Model
Flow Number
 Conclusions
• HWY 32_PG58S-28_15% RAP had the highest |E*|.

• Binder performance grade, Aggregate grading, and RAP

significantly affected |E*| and Phase angle values.

• The Hirsch model performed well for Level 2 predictions.

• The Original Witczak model performed excellently for Level 3

predictions.

• HWY 32_PG58H-34_15% RAP had the highest flow number.

 Future work
• Incremental Repeated Load Permanent Deformation

(iRLPD) test.

• Simplified Viscoelastic Continuum Damage (S-VECD) test.

• Creep compliance predictions

• 5 HMA mixes from the 2022 construction season.

Thank you.

Questions?