Pavement
Design and Performance of Foamed Bitumen Stabilised Pavements
- Publication no: AP-T336-18
- ISBN: 978-1-925671-64-3
- Published: 17 July 2018
- PDF (free) Download
There is a need to improve the Austroads procedures for mix design and structural design of foamed bitumen stabilised (FBS) materials. This final report summarises the mix design test methods developed within the context of an Austroads mix design process. The report details the construction and performance monitoring of six trial sections. It was observed that cracking was the predominant distress type and that pavement thickness design needs to consider FBS fatigue. The observed fatigue lives were reasonably consistent with the predictions of the Austroads interim method. Generally, rutting and shape loss are not dominating performance, even when the host material stabilised includes 20% recycled asphalt.
- Summary
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Mix Design Procedures
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Background to Indirect Tensile Modulus Requirements
- 2.2.1 Pioneering Work in the 1990s
- 2.2.2 Early Development by TMR
- 2.2.3 Current TMR Test Methods and Modulus Requirements
- 2.3 Development of Austroads Mix Design Test Methods
- 2.3.1 Introduction
- 2.3.2 Determination of Foaming Properties
- 2.3.3 Mixing of Foamed Bitumen Materials
- 2.3.4 Compaction of Test Cylinders
- 2.3.5 Curing of Modulus Specimens
- 2.3.6 Resilient Modulus Measurement
- 2.4 Description of Procedure to Determine Binder Contents Framework
- 3. Effect of Moisture Content and Lime Type on Resilient Modulus
- 3.1 Introduction
- 3.2 Influence of Moisture Content on Newell Highway Trial Mix
- 3.2.1 Method
- 3.2.2 Compactability
- 3.2.3 Density and Modulus
- 3.3 Influence of Moisture Content on Western Freeway Trial Mix
- 3.4 Influence of Moisture Content on Calder Freeway Trial Mix
- 3.5 Effect of Lime Type
- 3.6 Summary
- 4. Effect of Laboratory Compaction Method on Modulus
- 4.1 Introduction
- 4.2 Effect of Specimen Size
- 4.2.1 Marshall Specimens
- 4.2.2 Gyratory Specimens
- 4.3 Compaction Method
- 4.3.1 Comparative Testing of Newell Highway Material
- 4.3.2 Comparative Testing of Calder Freeway Material
- 4.3.3 Additional TMR Testing
- 4.4 Summary
- 5. Comparison of Laboratory-mixed and Compacted Moduli with Field Core Moduli
- 5.1 Introduction
- 5.2 Newell Highway, Bellata
- 5.3 Calder Freeway, Woodend
- 5.4 Western Freeway, Ballan
- 5.5 Combining the Project Results
- 5.6 Summary
- 6. Testing of FBS Mixes during Construction
- 6.1 Introduction
- 6.2 Comparison of Moduli of Laboratory-mixed and Field-mixed Materials
- 6.3 Effect of Time Delay between Mixing and Compaction
- 6.4 Summary
- 7. Overview of Field Trial Observations of Distress
- 7.1 Introduction
- 7.2 Cracking
- 7.3 Rutting
- 7.4 Flushing/Embedment
- 8. Austroads Thickness Design Method
- 8.1 Introduction
- 8.2 Background to the Interim Method
- 8.2.1 Early use of Mechanistic-empirical Method
- 8.2.2 Laboratory Fatigue Life of Field Beams
- 8.2.3 TMR Development of the Method
- 8.3 Interim Austroads Method
- 8.3.1 Introduction
- 8.3.2 Method to Determine FBS Design Modulus
- 8.3.3 Fatigue Relationship
- 8.3.4 Surfacing Requirements
- 8.4 Initial Comparison of Predicted and Observed Performance
- 8.4.1 Introduction
- 8.4.2 FBS Design Moduli
- 8.4.3 Adjusted FBS Fatigue Relationship used in the Analysis
- 8.4.4 Predicted Allowable Traffic Loadings
- 8.4.5 Comparison of Observed and Predicted Fatigue Lives
- 8.5 Review of FBS Design Modulus
- 8.5.1 Definition of Design Modulus
- 8.5.2 Use of Mix Design Moduli
- 8.5.3 Maximum Design Modulus
- 8.6 Fatigue Relationship
- 8.7 Proposed Amendment to Interim Method
- 8.8 Summary
- 9. Summary and Conclusions
- 9.1 Mix Design
- 9.1.1 Test Methods
- 9.1.2 Laboratory Characterisation
- 9.1.3 Mix Design Moduli Compared to In Situ Values
- 9.1.4 Compliance Testing of Field-mixed Materials
- 9.2 Distress Types
- 9.3 Austroads Structural Thickness Design Method
- 9.1 Mix Design
- References
- Appendix A Kwinana Freeway, Baldivis
- A.1 Introduction
- A.2 Site Investigation Prior to Stabilisation
- A.3 Mix Design
- A.4 FBS Thickness and Predicted Allowable Traffic Loading
- A.5 Pavement Construction
- A.6 Condition Monitoring
- A.6.1 Visual Condition
- A.6.2 Rutting
- A.6.3 Surface Deflections
- A.7 Traffic Monitoring
- A.8 Performance Review
- A.9 Kwinana Freeway Trial Summary
- Appendix B Kewdale Road, Welshpool
- B.1 Introduction
- B.2 Site Investigation Prior to Stabilisation
- B.3 Mix Design
- B.4 Predicted Allowable Traffic Loading
- B.5 Pavement Construction
- B.6 Pavement Condition Monitoring
- B.7 Measured Surface Deflections
- B.8 Field Cores
- B.9 Traffic Monitoring
- B.10 Kewdale Road Trial Summary
- Appendix C Port Wakefield Road, Virginia
- C.1 Introduction
- C.2 Site Investigation Prior to Stabilisation
- C.3 Mix Design
- C.4 FBS Thickness Design and Predicted Allowable Traffic Loading
- C.5 Pavement Construction
- C.5.1 FBS Sections
- C.5.2 Asphalt Section
- C.6 Visual Condition Monitoring
- C.7 Pavement Investigation
- C.7.1 Asphalt Section
- C.7.2 Nominal 150 mm thick FBS Section
- C.7.3 Nominal 200 mm thick FBS
- C.8 Relationship between Indirect Tensile Modulus and Strength
- C.9 Pavement Deflections
- C.10 Rutting and Roughness
- C.11 Traffic Monitoring
- C.12 Comparison of Observed and Predicted Performance
- C.13 Port Wakefield Road Trial Summary
- Appendix D Calder Freeway, Woodend
- D.1 Introduction
- D.2 Site Investigation Prior to Stabilisation
- D.3 Properties of the Untreated Crushed Rock Base
- D.4 Mix Design Prior to Construction
- D.4.1 Downer Infrastructure Testing
- D.4.2 Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads Testing
- D.4.3 Adopted Mix Design
- D.5 Mix Design after Construction
- D.6 Predicted Allowable Traffic Loading
- D.6.1 FBS Crushed Rock Base
- D.6.2 Asphalt Section
- D.7 Construction and Testing of the FBS Trial Section
- D.7.1 Construction of the FBS Pavement
- D.7.2 Surface Prior to Sealing
- D.7.3 Double/Double Primerseal
- D.7.4 Field Density Testing
- D.7.5 Properties of Untreated Material Sampled from the Roadbed
- D.7.6 Lime Content
- D.7.7 Bitumen Content
- D.7.8 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content
- D.7.9 Modulus Testing of Laboratory-compacted Field-mixed Material
- D.8 Construction of Asphalt Section
- D.9 Surface Deflections
- D.9.1 Foamed Bitumen Stabilised Sections
- D.9.2 Dense Graded Asphalt made using Class 320 Bitumen
- D.9.3 Polymer Modified Binder Asphalt
- D.10 Moduli Back-calculated from Measured Surface Deflections
- D.10.1 FBS Section
- D.10.2 Asphalt
- D.11 Field Core Moduli
- D.11.1 Foamed Bitumen Stabilised Material
- D.11.2 Asphalt
- D.12 Surface Cracking of Foamed Bitumen Stabilised Section
- D.12.1 Visual Inspection
- D.12.2 Investigation of Cause of Cracking
- D.13 Surface Cracking of Asphalt Section
- D.14 Rutting and Roughness
- D.15 Effect of Temperature on Deflections and Moduli
- D.16 Traffic Loading
- D.17 Comparison of Observed and Predicted Performance
- D.18 Calder Freeway Trial Summary
- Appendix E Newell Highway, Bellata
- E.1 Introduction
- E.2 Site Investigation Prior to Stabilisation
- E.2.1 Traffic Loading
- E.2.2 Pavement Visual Condition Prior to Works
- E.2.3 Pavement Investigation Prior to Works
- E.2.4 Estimated In Situ CBR of the Natural Subgrade
- E.2.5 Laboratory Testing of Excavated Materials
- E.3 FBS Mix Design
- E.3.1 Roads and Maritime
- E.3.2 Downer Infrastructure Testing
- E.3.3 Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) Testing
- E.4 FBS Thickness and Predicted Allowable Traffic Loading
- E.5 Construction and Testing of the FBS Trial Section
- E.5.1 Construction of the FBS Pavement
- E.5.2 Lime Content
- E.5.3 Residual Bitumen Contents
- E.5.4 Field Density and Moisture Testing
- E.5.5 Differences between Nuclear Gauge and Oven-dried Moisture Contents
- E.5.6 Modulus Testing of Laboratory-compacted Field-mixed Material
- E.5.7 Opening to Traffic and Placement of Sprayed Seal
- E.6 Performance Monitoring
- E.6.1 Surface Deflections
- E.6.2 Moduli Back-calculated from Measured Surface Deflections
- E.6.3 Testing of Field Cores
- E.6.4 Rutting and Roughness
- E.6.5 Visual Survey
- E.7 Comparison of Predicted and Observed Performance
- E.8 Future Monitoring
- E.9 Newell Highway Trial Summary
- Appendix F Western Freeway, Ballan
- F.1 Introduction
- F.2 Site Investigation Prior to Stabilisation
- F.3 Inclusion of Asphalt Millings in Material to be Stabilised
- F.4 Mix Design
- F.4.1 Testing Prior to Construction
- F.4.2 Testing after Construction
- F.5 FBS Thickness Design and Predicted Allowable Traffic Loadings
- F.6 Construction of the FBS Trial Sections
- F.6.1 Introduction
- F.6.2 Preparation of the Material to be Stabilised
- F.6.3 Lime Stabilisation
- F.6.4 Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation
- F.6.5 Preparation of the Surface for Sealing
- F.6.6 Double/Double Sprayed Bituminous Seal
- F.7 Sampling and Testing During Construction
- F.7.1 Field Density Testing
- F.7.2 Properties of Untreated Material Sampled from the Roadbed
- F.7.3 Lime Content
- F.7.4 Bitumen Content
- F.7.5 Particle Size Distribution of Field-mixed Materials
- F.7.6 Maximum Dry Densities and Optimum Moisture Contents of Field-mixed Material
- F.7.7 Modulus Testing of Laboratory-compacted Field-mixed Material
- F.8 Traffic Monitoring
- F.9 Performance Monitoring
- F.9.1 Surface Deflections
- F.9.2 Back-calculated Moduli
- F.9.3 Field Core Moduli
- F.9.4 Roughness and Rutting
- F.9.5 Visual Inspection
- F.10 Comparison of Observed and Predicted Performance
- F.11 Western Freeway Trial Summary
- Appendix G Moduli Back-calculated from Measured FWD Deflections
- G.1 Calder Freeway Trial Section
- G.1.1 Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation Section
- G.1.2 Asphalt Section
- G.2 Newell Highway Trial Section
- G.3 Western Freeway, Ballan Trial Sections
- G.1 Calder Freeway Trial Section
Related publications
AP-PWT00-23
Latest Pavement News