1. Binder Characterizations for High Tire Pressure Project 04/26/2012 Injun Song Injun Song, Ph.D., P. E. SRA International, Inc. Federal Aviation Administration Airport Pavement Working Group Meeting Atlantic City Convention Center April 24 – 26, 2012 Atlantic City, NJ

2. 2 of 23 Acknowledgements Binder Testing; – Yusuf A. Mehta, Rowan University. APA Testing; – Jeff Stein, SRA International, Inc. – Matthew Wilson, SRA International, Inc. Roy D. McQueen, Roy D. McQueen & Associates Ltd. Navneet Garg, Federal Aviation Administration. Gordon Hayhoe, Federal Aviation Administration.

3. 3 of 23 Background Needs for New High Tire Pressure Limit; – The advent of new aircraft having tire pressures exceeding 220 psi, – International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standard. New Design Procedures; – Concentrating in the surface layers of the pavement structure, – Developing Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) mix design procedures.

4. 4 of 23 Objectives Characterizations of the HMA properties affecting the performance of HMA mixes under high pressure aircraft tires; – Full-Scale testing at the National Airport Pavement Test Facility (NAPTF), – Laboratory testing for HMA and asphalt binder. Conducting researches into the design of HMA to resist damage from high pressure aircraft tires.

5. 5 of 23 Outline Confirming Performance Grades. Multi Stress Creep Recovery. Frequency Sweep Test for Temperature Dependency. Temperature Susceptibility for HMA.

6. 6 of 23 Materials for Lab Testing Fifteen Mixtures Combining Three Aggregates with Five Binder Types. Three Aggregate Types; – NAPTF mix (Argillite & Dolomite), – Lexington mix (Limestone), – JFK (Granite). Five Binder Types; – Neat PG 64-22, – Neat PG 70-22, – Blend of Neat PG 64-28 + 25% Trinidad Lake Asphalt (TLA), – Polymer modified PG 76-22, – Polymer modified PG 82-22.

7. 7 of 23 NAPTF Mixtures Used for NAPTF Full-Scale and Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA). Mix Design; – Aggregates: Argillite and Dolomite, – Binder: PG 64-22 and PG 76-22 at 105°F and 119°F. Loading Conditions; – Inflation pressure for the north wheel=210 psi / south wheel=245 psi, – Simulate Taxiway Traffic Loading: West to East at 1.0 ft/sec. Return East to West at 4.0 ft/sec, – Wander spacing=0 and ±7 inches / Wander sequence: -1, +1, 0.

8. 8 of 23 Tests for Binder Characterization Tests for Binder Characterization Dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR); – G*, , – Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR), – AASHTO T 315; Determining the Rheological Properties of Asphalt Binder Using a Dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR), – AASHTO TP 70; Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR) Test of Asphalt Binder Using a Dynamic Shear Rheometer, – AASHTO M320; Standard Specification for Performance-Graded Asphalt Binder. Rolling Thin Film Oven (RTFO). Pressure Aging Vessel (PAV). Rotational Viscometer. Softening Point / Elastic Recovery (PG+).

9. 9 of 23 Binder G*/sin , kPaG*sin , kPa True Grade Unaged (>1.0)RTFO (>2.2)PAV (<5,000) PG 64-221.6703.6391,54367.9-26.6 PG 70-221.7653.3453,63273.6-23.2 PG 64-28 +25%TLA 1.4823.8044,60273.6-23.4 PG 76-222.0193.6252,21480.8-24.2 PG 82-221.7302.5261,42383.5-24.8 Superpave Performance Grade

10. 10 of 23 Superpave PG High Temperature G*/ sin  – >1.00 kPa for unaged. – >2.20 kPa after RTFO for production process during storing, mixing, transportation, and lay down, – Superpave Binder Specification inversely proportional to rutting potential, – Well for conventional speed and moderate traffic volume. Grade Bumping; – Losing linear viscoelastic behavior with excessive loading time (speed) and heavy traffic (volume),

11. 11 of 23 FAA Grade Bumping FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10F; Aircraft Gross Weight (pounds) High Temperature Adjustment to Base Binder Grade Pavement Type RunwayTaxiway/Apron Less than 12,500-- Less than 60,000--1 Less than 100,000--1 Greater than 100,00012

12. 12 of 23 AASHTO Grade Bumping AASHTO MP-2, “Standard Specification for Superpave Volumetric Mix Design”; Design ESAL (millions) Adjustment to Binder PG Grade Traffic Load Rate Standing (<20kph)Slow (20 to 70) Standard (70<) < 0.3-- 0.3 to < 321 -- 3 to <1021 -- 10 to <3021 -- ≥ 3021 1

13. 13 of 23 Multi Stress Creep Recovery

14. 14 of 23 MSCR Grading ≤ 4.0S (Standard) ≤ 2.0H (Heavy) ≤ 1.0V (Very Heavy) ≤ 0.5E (Extreme Heavy)

15. 15 of 23 MSCR Gradings (Traffic) Example; NJ 20mil ESAL, PG 64-22 Design ESAL (millions) Adjustment to Binder PG Grade MSCR Grading Traffic Load Rate Standing (<20kph)Slow (20 to 70)Standard (70<) < 0.3 -- S (Standard) 0.3 to < 3 21-- S (Standard) 3 to <10 21-- H (Heavy) 10 to <30 21-- V (Very Heavy) ≥ 30211 E (Extreme Heavy) V → PG 64-22V

16. 16 of 23 MSCR Gradings (Results) Binder MSCR Grading 64°C70°C64°C70°C PG 64-222.87.3PG 64-22SN/A PG 70-221.66.4PG 70-22HN/A PG 64-28 +25%TLA 1.32.9PG 64-22HPG 70-28S PG 76-220.41.0PG 64-22EPG 70-22V PG 82-220.10.4PG 64-22EPG 70-22E

17. 17 of 23 Frequency Sweep Test (RTFO)

18. 18 of 23 Frequency Sweep Test (PAV)

19. 19 of 23 Binder Types for G* (PAV)

20. 20 of 23 APA Test Results 2000 600

21. 21 of 23 Temperature Susceptibility

22. 22 of 23 Summary Binder Characterizations; – Confirming current binder gradings used for high tire pressure project, – Applications of MSCR for the current binders. Temperature Susceptibilities for Binder and HMA.

23. 23 of 23 Thank you