SEASONAL DEFLECTION AND IN SITU MODULI PATTERNS OF

POLYMER MODIFIED VERSUS UNMODIFIED ASPHALT PAVEMENTS

A. Samy Noureldin, Associate Professor

Hozayen Hozayen, Assistant Professor
Essam A. Sharaf, Associate Professor

Public Works Department

Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University
Cairo - EGYPT - Tel & FAX 983426

Paper Prepared for Presentation

at the “Pavement” Poster Session
of the 1997 XIIIth IRF World Meeting
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
ABSTRACT

Understanding the changes in the structural characteristics of paving layers with

season and asphalt binders type is essential in predicting how well the pavement responds
to traffic loads and thus how long it will last.

This paper presents a small scale investigation on the seasonal variations in the
structural characteristics of pavement layers constructed employing polymer modified
asphalt binders. These variations are compared to those of an unmodified binder.

Illustrated are the influences of asphalt binder type and seasonal temperature
variations on:
One) center deflection (D0 ) measured by the falling weight deflectometer
(FWD),
Two) in situ asphalt concrete modulus (EAC ),
Three) in situ base course modulus (Eb) and
Four) in situ subgrade resilient modulus (MR)

Analysis of results for the two polymer modified sections and the three
unmodified control sections used in this study indicates that EAC is the parameter most
affected by the change in temperature followed by D0 and Eb. The in situ asphalt concrete
modulus (EAC) of the polymer modified sections has shown less sensitivity to temperature
changes than other three control sections, especially at high temperature levels (350 C -
450 C). Variations in Eb with temperature are believed to be associated indirectly with
variations in EAC with temperature. Changes in EAC with temperature result in changes in
stress levels imposed on the underlying layer that causes variations in Eb. Temperature
adjustment factors for D0, EAC and Eb are provided for both polymer modified and
unmodified sections.

INTRODUCTION

Exploration of the influence of seasonal variations on pavement layer

characteristics is a basic element of the monitoring effort conducted for long term
pavement performance studies.
As the temperature and moisture content of pavement layers change, the structural
characteristics of these layers also change. Those changes influence the pavement
responses to traffic loads and hence have an effect on how long the pavement will last(1).
Nondestructive deflection testing using the Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) can be
used to quantify those pavement responses(1).

Nondestructive deflection testing can provide data necessary for in situ

characterization for the various pavement layers as well as information on material
variability(2,3,4). Backcalculated moduli from deflection measurements at a number of
locations within pavement test sections can be used to determine the mean and coefficient
of variation (C.O.V.) of moduli for each layer(2 - 5).

The effects of asphalt binder type and seasonal variations on pavement material
properties through simulating the field conditions in the laboratory are reported in many
research studies. Puzinauskas and King et al., for example, reported the effect of
polymer modification on asphalt concrete mix properties(6,7). Hicks reported the effect of
moisture conditions on the laboratory determined resilient characteristics of granular
materials(8). Thompson et al. documented the effect of degree of saturation on resilient
characteristics of subgrade soils(9,10). Witczak reported the effect of temperature on the
dynamic modulus of asphalt concrete determined in the laboratory(11).

A need still exists to verify that the effects of asphalt binder type, and seasonal
variations on pavement material characteristics obtained in the laboratory under simulated
field conditions are actually or closely, related to, those effects on the in situ
characteristics.

BACKGROUND ON THE POLYMER MODIFIED ASPHALT BINDERS

USED

Polymeric modifiers of asphalt binders (or paving mixtures) have been under
intense consideration worldwide for the last 10 years. These modifiers of asphalt
generally exhibit either nonelastic or rubber elastic behaviour. Some polymers exhibit,
relatively, high affinity to asphalt and tend to form a uniform and homogeneous solution
with asphalt cement(12). Others may be insoluble in asphalt and upon mixing, or
application of shearing forces, form uniform dispersions of fine droplets or particles
without dissolving in the asphaltic matrix(12).

Polymer 1 Modified Asphalt

The first polymer modified asphalt binder used in this study is a stable dispersion
of polyethylene in a 60/70 penetration graded asphalt cement (6% by weight). It
represents the group of modified asphalts where the modifier (polyethylene) does not
dissolve in asphaltic matrix.

In actual road applications, the dispersion of polyethylene in asphalt cement is

prepared in a special mobile blender equipped with other auxiliary equipment (storage
tanks and pumps). The treated asphalt binder must be kept stirred to prevent the
separation of polyethylene and the base asphalt. The introduction of polyethylene stiffens
the asphalt, i.e., increases the viscosity and softening point and reduces the penetration of
the resulting asphalt binder(13,14).

The modified asphalt binder has lower temperature susceptibility and heat
sensitivity than the original untreated base asphalt (as indicated by the temperature
viscosity relationship and the rolling thin film oven test respectively)(12). When using
polyethylene modified paving mixtures in pavement construction, the mixing time in the
pugmill is usually increased by 5 seconds. The mixing and compaction temperatures are
increased by 100C compared to untreated base asphalt. Increasing the compactive effort
may be required(12).

Polyethylene modified mixtures result in high laboratory measured values of the

dynamic asphalt concrete modulus and resistance to permanent deformations(6,7).

Polymer 2 Modified Asphalt

The second polymer modified asphalt binder is composed of 6%, by weight,

styrene butadene and 94% base asphalt (60/70 penetration grade). The addition of styrene
butadene to the asphalt in the presence of a reactant causes a chemical reaction and results
in an irreversible link between the modifier and some of the asphalt components(15).

Styrene butadene modified asphalt binders have lower penetration and higher
softening point and viscosity than the unmodified base asphalts(7,16,17). The polymer
improves the elastic properties, reduces the temperature susceptibility and heat sensitivity
of the resulting asphalt binder(7,16,17). As in the case of adding polyethylene, mixing time
and temperature and compactive effort and temperature are increased compared to the
untreated base asphalt.

Styrene butadene modified asphalt binders also result in high laboratory measured
values of the dynamic asphalt concrete modulus and the resistance to permanent
deformations(7,16,17).

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

The factor “Asphalt Binder Type” consists of three levels; Polymer 1, Polymer 2
and Control.

Polymer 1 is a pavement section of 400 meter length consisting of 60 mm

polyethylene modified asphalt concrete wearing course, 110 mm polyethylene modified
asphalt concrete base course and 160 mm aggregate base course (crushed limestone)
above the compacted subgrade soil.

Polymer 2 is a pavement section adjacent to “Polymer 1” and has exactly the same
design features described above except for the asphalt binder type. A styrene butadene
modified asphalt binder is used in section “Polymer 2”.

Control 1, Control 2 and Control 3 are pavement sections adjacent to “Polymer 2”

and have exactly the same design features described above except for the asphalt binder
type. An un-modified 60/70 penetration graded asphalt binder is used in these sections.

The factor “seasonal temperature variations” consists, of 3 levels (hot, cool and
medium), where each level is a specific month. Months selected are August (hot),
November (cool) and April (medium).

Site conditions including air temperature, pavement surface temperature,

pavement temperature at the mid-point of asphalt bound layer, temperature at the bottom
of asphalt bound layer and moisture density characteristics of nonbound paving layers are
obtained at each factor level.

Test Locations

Based on test section lengths of 400 meters, deflection testing is conducted at 50

meter intervals (8 points per section) on the outer wheel path of the truck lane
(approximately 900 mm from the shoulder edge). Test locations are marked properly to
assure that the successive seasonal testing are conducted at identical locations. The first
and last 25 meters of each section are not tested by the FWD in order to allow a 50 meter
transition interval between the adjacent sections. Deflection testing is made using an FWD
having 7 geophones and a loading plate radius of 150 mm. with a 40 KN load.

Response Variables

Main response variables measured (or computed) for the selected load (40 KN)
per seasonal temperature (August, November or April) per location (8 locations per
sections) are:

∑ center deflection D0.

∑ overall one layer modulus E0, computed using the load magnitude, the center
deflection and assuming a one layer system,
∑ backcalculated modulus for the asphalt bound layer, EAC,
∑ backcalculated modulus for the aggregate base course, Eb, and
∑ backcalculated subgrade modulus, MR.

Backcalculated layer moduli are obtained for a three layer system employing a
simple modification of the two layer process developed by the first author(5). This
process was tested thoroughly and its accuracy and consistency were verified.

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

Effect of Asphalt Binder Type and Seasonal Temperature Variations:

Center Deflection, D0

Figure 1 illustrates the seasonal deflection patterns of both polymer modified and
unmodified (conventional) asphalt concrete pavement sections. Upper data points in
Figure 1 are the center deflections obtained during August when the mean asphalt
concrete temperature was 450C (see Table 1). Lower data points are the center deflections
obtained during November when the mean asphalt concrete temperature was 250C.
Middle data points represent deflection values obtained during April, when the mean
asphalt concrete temperature was 350c. The seasonal effect illustrated in Figure 1 is only
temperature related because seasonal moisture conditions were practically identical as
indicated in Table 1.

Table 2 presents the statistics (means and coefficients of variations, C.O.V.) of

the FWD center deflection for all asphalt binder types during various seasons
(November, April and August). A two way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the
sections indicates that the center deflection D0 is significantly affected by season and
increases significantly with temperature.

Overall One Layer Modulus, E0

The overall one layer modulus is computed using the load magnitude (40 KN)
and by assuming the pavement is a one layer system. ANOVA indicates that E0 is
significantly affected by season and significantly decreases with the mean asphalt
concrete temperature.

Asphalt Concrete Modulus, EAC

Figure 1 also shows the influence of season (November, April and August) on
the backcalculated asphalt concrete modulus of all sections. The reduction in moduli with
temperature is apparent when the modulus profile in November (when the mean asphalt
concrete temperature is 250C) is compared with the modulus profiles in April and August
(the mean asphalt concrete temperature is 350C and 450C, respectively).

Table 3 presents the statistics of the backcalculated asphalt concrete modulus for
all asphalt binder types during various seasons. ANOVA suggests that EAC is
significantly affected by season and significantly decreases with mean asphalt concrete
temperature. The interaction effect (asphalt binder type - season) is also statistically
significant. Modulus value in August for the “Control 1” section is 80% of its value in
April while for the other sections of design (Polymer 1 and Polymer 2) this percentage is
89% suggesting that EAC of the polymer modified sections has less temperature
susceptibility at a temperature range of 350C - 450C.

Aggregate Base Course Modulus, Eb

 Table 4 presents the statistics of Eb for all sections during the various seasons.
ANOVA indicates that Eb is significantly affected by season and significantly decreases
with pavement temperature.

Sensitivity of the aggregate base course to temperature seems to be an indirect

sensitivity to stress level. The reduction in asphalt concrete modulus, with higher
temperature, results in an increased stress level on top of the base course that might have
caused the reduction in the base course modulus.

Occasional stress hardening and stress insensitivity patterns are also present
although the general pattern is stress softening. Base course soil classification is A-1-b
and seasonal moisture levels are almost identical as shown in Table 1.

Subgrade Modulus, MR

Figure 1 shows the backcalculated subgrade modulus patterns for all sections at
various seasons. It illustrates that MR values are not sensitive to seasons (temperature).
Subgrade soil classification is A-2-4 and seasonal moisture levels are almost identical.

Temperature Adjustment Factors

Table 5 provides the temperature adjustment factors for the in situ pavement
characteristics (of all sections) based on an adjustment factor of 1 at an average asphalt
concrete temperature of 200C. As expected, the greatest temperature sensitivity is
associated with EAC, D0 and E0. However, the response variable Eb also show signs
(probably indirect) of temperature sensitivity. In addition EAC of polymer modified
sections has lower sensitivity to temperature than other control sections as explained
previously.

CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions can be drawn from the investigation presented in this
paper:

1. The in situe asphalt concrete modulus EAC is the parameter most affected by changes
in temperature.

2. EAC of the polymer modified asphalt concrete sections are less sensitive to
temperature than unmodified (conventional) asphalt concrete sections.

3. Variations on the modulus of base layer (Eb) may be associated with variations on
EAC.

4. Temperature adjustment factors can be used to illustrate the temperature sensitivity

with pavement response.

SUMMARY

This paper presented an investigation of the seasonal variations in the structural

characteristics of pavement layers constructed employing polymer modified asphalt
binders. These variations have been compared to those of an unmodified binder.

Temperature adjustment factors for the center, D0, and the asphalt concrete
modulus, EAC were provided for both polymer modified and unmodified sections.

Analysis of results for the two polymer modified pavement sections and the three
unmodified control sections used in this study indicated that E is the parameter most
affected by the changes in temperature followed by D0 and the aggregate base course
modulus, Eb. The asphalt concrete elastic modulus (EAC )of the polymer modified
sections have shown the least sensitivity to temperature changes compared to the other
three control sections, especially at high temperature levels (350C - 450C).

Variations in Eb with temperature are believed to be associated indirectly with

variations in EAC with temperature. Changes in EAC with temperature result in changes in
stress levels imposed on the base layer that cause variations in Eb. Subgrade modulus MR
was not sensitive to seasonal temperature variations.

REFERENCES

1. USDOT, FHWA, “Strategic Highway Research Program Implementation,” FOCUS

Circular, FHWA, December 1993.
2. Richter, C.A., and J.B. Rauhut, “SHRP Plans for Nondestructive Deflection Testing
in the Development of Pavement Performance Prediction Models”, Special Technical
Publication 1026 (A.J. Bush III and G.Y. Baladi, eds.),ASTM, Philadelphia, Pa.,
1989.
3. AASHTO Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures, AASHTO Washington,
D.C., 1993.
4. Noureldin, A.S., Sharaf, E., Arafah, A., and F. Al-Sugair “Estimation of the
Standard Deviation of Predicted Performance of Flexible Pavements Using the
AASHTO Model”, In Transportation Research Record No. 1449, TRB, National
Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 46-56.
5. Noureldin, A.S., “New Scenario for Backcalculation of Layer Moduli of Flexible
Pavement” , In Transportation Research Record No. 1384, TRB, National Research
Council, Washington, D.C., 1993, pp. 23-28.
6. Puzinauskas, V.P., “Modification of Asphalt Cement and Asphalt Concrete with
Polyethylene Additive, Novophalt Process” , Report Prepared for Richard Flesinger
GES. M. B. H., The Asphalt Institute, November 1987.
7. King, G.N., Muncy, H.W., and J.B. Prudhomme, “Polymer Modification: Binder
Effect on Mix Properties”, Presentation, AAPT, Clean Water, Florida, February
1986.
8. Hicks, R.G., “Factors Influencing the Resilient Properties of Granular Materials”,
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1970.
9. Thompson, M.R. and Q.L. Robnett., “Resilient Properties of Subgrade Soils”,
Transportation Engineering Journal, ASCE, Vol. 105, Jan. 1979.
10. Thompson, M.R., et al., Final Report; “Subgrade Stability”, Report FHWA-IL-
UI-69, FHWA, USDOT, 1985.
11. Witczak, M.W., “Design of Full Depth Asphalt Airfield Pavements”, Proc. 3rd
International Conference on the Structural Design of Asphalt Pavement, London,
England, 1972.
12. Al-Dhalaan, M.A., Balghunaim, F., Al-Dhubaib, I., and A.S. Noureldin “Field
Trials With Polymer Modified Asphalts In Saudi Arabia”, Special Technical
Publication 1108 (K.R. Wardlaw and S. Shuler, eds.), ASTM, Philadelphia, Pa.,
1992.
13. Denning, J.H., and J. Carswell, “Improvement in Rolled Asphalt Surfacing by
the Addition Of Organic Polymers”, TRRL, Report LR 989, Crowthorne, England,
1981.
14. Jacobs, F.A., “Hot Rolled Asphalt: Effect of Binder Properties On Resistance to
Permanent Deformation”, TRRL, Report LR 1003 m, Crowthorne, England, 1981.
15. Hagenbach, G. and O. Philippon, “The Asphalt Polymer Reaction: A New Way
for the Improvement of the Performance of Bituminous Binders”, Proceedings, !7th
World Road Congress, Sydney, Australia, October 1983.
16. King, G.N., Muncy, H.W. and J.B. Prudhomme, “The Improved Rheological
Properties of Polymer Modified Asphalts”, AAPT Meeting, Nashville, Tennessee,
December 1985.
17. Reinke, G. and T. O’Connell, “Use of the Toughness and Tanacity Test in the
Analysis of Polymer Modified Binders”, Presentation, Asphalt Emulsion
Manufacturers Association Meeting, March, 1985.
Table 1. Site Conditions During FWD Testing.

Site Condition April August November Cross Section

o
Temperature ( C) * 170 mm AC Layer
Air 32 41 23 (60 mm wearing
Surface 38 49 27 Course and 110
mm
Midpoint of AC Layer 35 45 25 Base Course)
Bottom of AC Layer 32 41 25 * 160 mm
Aggregate
Aggregate Base Course Base
Classification A-1-b A-1-b A-1-b
Moisture Content 3.0% 3.1% 3.2%
3
Dry Density (t/m ) 2.082 2.080 2.078
Subgrade
Classification A-2-4 A-2-4 A-2-4
Moisture Content 4% 4.2% 4.1%
3
Dry Density (t/m ) 1.941 1.938 1.937

Table 2. Statistics of FWD Center Deflection in Microns(10 -6 meter) During

Various
Seasons for a 40 KN Load
SEASON
Statistic November April August
(25 o C ) (35 o C ) (45 o C )
Polymer Mean 114 140 161
1 C.O.V(%) 10.7 5.6 5.7
Polymer Mean 129 154 184
Asphalt 2 C.O.V(%) 12.6 7.2 12.1
Concrete Control Mean 134 162 193
Layer 1 C.O.V(%) 9.7 13.9 8.3
Type Control Mean 126 155 184
2 C.O.V(%) 12.8 14.6 19.2
Control Mean 130 158 189
3 C.O.V(%) 10.8 9.9 12.2

Table 3. Statistics of Backcalculated Asphalt Concrete Modulus, E A C , in MPa

During
Various Seasons
SEASON
Statistic November April August
(25 o C ) (35 o C ) (45 o C )
Polymer Mean 2359 1817 1612
1 C.O.V(%) 8.7 9.0 11.5
Polymer Mean 2210 1667 1480
Asphalt 2 C.O.V(%) 14.9 12.2 10.9
Concrete Control Mean 2410 1962 1573
Layer 1 C.O.V(%) 20.2 21.4 16.2
Type Control Mean 2686 2117 1642
2 C.O.V(%) 10.4 11.7 13.0
Control Mean 2469 2005 1406
3 C.O.V(%) 16.0 18.4 18.4
 Table 4. Statistics of Backcalculated Aggregate Base Course Modulus, E b , in MPa
During Various Seasons

SEASON
Statistic November April August
(25 o C ) (35 o C ) (45 o C )
Polymer Mean 532 485 424
1 C.O.V(%) 10.4 6.3 5.5
Polymer Mean 488 411 379
Asphalt 2 C.O.V(%) 11.1 8.9 8.7
Concrete Control Mean 449 405 337
Layer 1 C.O.V(%) 8.8 12.7 8.3
Type Control Mean 499 415 366
2 C.O.V(%) 17.6 19.6 23.9
Control Mean 473 403 374
3 C.O.V(%) 8.6 12.1 11.6

Table 5. Temperature Adjustment Factors for In Situ Pavement Layer Properties

Characteristics Asphalt
Concrete Layer Average Asphalt concrete Temperature
Type
20 o C 25 o C 35 o C 45 o C 50 o C
Center Deflection, D o Polymer 1 1.0 1.10 1.32 1.57 1.70
Polymer 2 1.0 1.12 1.38 1.59 1.71
Control 1,2,3 1.0 1.11 1.35 1.61 1.75
All 1.0 1.11 1.35 1.59 1.72
Overall One layer Polymer 1 1.0 0.91 0.75 0.64 0.59
Modulus, E p Polymer 2 1.0 0.89 0.73 0.63 0.58
Control 1,2,3 1.0 0.90 0.74 0.62 0.57
All 1.0 0.90 0.74 0.63 0.58
Asphalt Concrete Polymer 1 1.0 0.87 0.67 0.60 0.56
Modulus, E A C Polymer 2 1.0 0.88 0.68 0.60 0.57
Control 1,2,3 1.0 0.89 0.69 0.54 0.49
All 1.0 0.88 0.68 0.58 0.54
Aggregate Base Polymer 1 1.0 0.93 0.84 0.74 0.69
Modulus, E b Polymer 2 1.0 0.94 0.83 0.75 0.68
Control 1,2,3 1.0 0.95 0.82 0.72 0.67
All 1.0 0.94 0.83 0.73 0.68
Subgrade Resilient Polymer 1 1.0
Modulus, MR Polymer 2 1.0 No Specific Pattern
Control 1,2,3 1.0
All 1.0