Pavement

Cover of Validation of Superpave™ Method of Asphalt Compaction for Australasia
Validation of Superpave™ Method of Asphalt Compaction for Australasia
  • Publication no: AP-T376-24
  • ISBN: 978-1-922994-24-0
  • Published: 3 April 2024

This report details the testing of 21 Austroads jurisdictions mixes and one airport mix to develop a relationship between the Austroads Gyropac Gyratory compactor, which is now redundant, and the Servopac (setup to AS/NZS) and Superpave Gyratory Compactors. The review of the testing data found that while the relationship between the different gyratory compactors was somewhat affected by mix properties, especially at refusal void levels, mix properties have little impact on the critical mix design parameters of density and air voids. The testing found that equivalent densities can be achieved at constant cycles for each gyratory compactor, allowing for relatively easy adoption of different compaction methods in specifications.

While the testing found a constant offset, a review of available test data found that most Austroads jurisdictions design to compaction levels above the current Austroads levels, with New Zealand designing to the much higher Superpave compaction levels. As a result, a direct offset to the current Austroads compaction levels was not recommended.

Based on testing the range of mixes, initial compaction levels for the three Austroads traffic levels using the Superpave Gyratory Compactor have been recommended.

Before full adoption, there is a need for each Austroads jurisdiction to validate these limits for their locally manufactured asphalt mixes.

Watch a webinar about the report with Bevan Sullivan and Sean Dorahy.

  • Summary
  • 1. Introduction
    • 1.1 Background
    • 1.2 Purpose
    • 1.3 Scope
    • 1.4 Methodology
  • 2. Literature Review
    • 2.1 Background to Volumetric Mix Design Overview
      • 2.1.1 Austroads Volumetric Design
      • 2.1.2 Superpave Volumetric Design
    • 2.2 Gyratory Compactors
      • 2.2.1 Principle of Gyratory Compaction
      • 2.2.2 Energy in Gyratory Compaction
      • 2.2.3 Australian Adoption of the Gyratory Compactor
      • 2.2.4 Difference between Gyropac and AS/NZS Servopac Compactors
      • 2.2.5 Establishing Australian Compaction Levels
      • 2.2.6 Comparison of Gyropac and Servopac
    • 2.3 U.S. Experience with the Superpave Compactor
      • 2.3.1 Issues with Ndesign
      • 2.3.2 Current U.S. DOT Adoption
    • 2.4 Design Method
    • 2.5 Summary U.S. Experience
    • 2.6 Previous Studies
  • 3. Experimental Plan
    • 3.1 Overall Objective
    • 3.2 Mix Selection and Composition
      • 3.2.1 Mix Identification
      • 3.2.2 Mix Gradations
    • 3.3 Sample Preparation
      • 3.3.1 Production Mixes
      • 3.3.2 Laboratory Mixes
    • 3.4 Gyratory Compaction
      • 3.4.1 Test Equipment
      • 3.4.2 Compaction Method
    • 3.5 Laboratory Studies
      • 3.5.1 Phase 1 –Preliminary Laboratory Works
      • 3.5.2 Phase 2 –Preliminary Laboratory Works
      • 3.5.3 Phase 3- Main Laboratory Works
  • 4. Results
    • 4.1 Background
    • 4.2 Results of Direct Comparison
      • 4.2.1 Gyropac vs Superpave and Servopac (AS/NZS)
      • 4.2.2 Typical Compaction Curves
    • 4.3 Relationship between Compaction Equipment
      • 4.3.1 Servopac (AS/NZS) Vs. Superpave
    • 4.4 Equivalent Void Analysis
      • 4.4.1 Matest Superpave Compactor
    • 4.5 Actual Australian/New Zealand Mix Compaction Levels
      • 4.5.1 Determining Ndesign Compaction Levels
      • 4.5.2 Nmax or Refusal Cycles and Voids
    • 4.6 Validation of Ndesign
  • 5. Conclusions and Recommendations
    • 5.1 Conclusions
    • 5.2 Recommendations for Further Research
  • References
  • Appendix A Detailed Test Results