drat – development of the ravelling test sample preparation d5... · the overall objective of the...

CEDR Transnational Road Research ProgrammeCall 2014: Asset Management and Maintenance

funded by Belgium-Flanders, Finland,Germany, Ireland, Norway, the Netherlands,Sweden, United Kingdom and Austria

DRaT – Development of the RavellingTest

Sample preparationDeliverable D.5November, 2016

Partners:TRL Limited, United KingdomThe Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific ResearchBelgian Road Research Centre, BelgiumBAM Infra Asfalt, NetherlandsHeijmans Integrale Projecten, NetherlandsInstitut Français des Sciences et Technologies des Transports, de

l'Aménagement et des RéseauxTechnische Universität Darmstadt, GermanyRWTH Aachen University, Germany

CEDR Call 2014: Asset Management and Maintenance

CEDR Call 2014: Asset Management andMaintenance

DRaTDevelopment of the Ravelling Test

Sample preparation

Due date of deliverable: 30/06/2016Actual submission date 30/11/2016

Start date of project: 01/09/2015 End date of project: 31/08/2017

Authors of this deliverable:Maarten Jacobs, BAM Infra Asfalt, Netherlands

PEB Project Manager: Arash Khojinian (HE) and Franz Bommert (BASt)

Version: Final, 11.2016


Table of contents

1 Introduction 1

2 Objectives and description of the work in WP2 32.1 Introduction 32.2 Task 2.1: Mix design 32.3 Task 2.2: Manufacture specimens 32.4 Task 3.3: Transport of samples 4

3 Practical realisation activities in Work Package 2 53.1 Introduction 53.2 Mix design, mix variations and constituent materials 5

3.2.1 Mix design PA 16 70/100 ........................................................................63.2.2 Mix design BBTM 6 50/70 .......................................................................73.2.3 Mix design SMA 11 25/55-55 ..................................................................9

3.3 Manufacturing of the slabs 103.3.1 Desired amount of slabs .......................................................................113.3.2 Production of the slabs .........................................................................12

3.4 Determination of the quality of the slabs 16

4 Quality of the slabs 194.1 Introduction 194.2 Results of thickness measurements 224.3 Results of nuclear density measurements 224.4 Results of texture measurements 244.5 Results of visual inspection of slab surfaces 244.6 Conclusions 25

5 Distribution of the slabs 265.1 Introduction 265.2 Statistical background 265.3 Distribution of the slabs in practice 29

Annex A: Information about constituent materials asphalt mixtures 31

Annex B: Declaration of Performance and CE-marking PA 16 70/100 41

Annex C: Properties of the prepared slabs 43


List of FiguresFigure 1: Raw materials for slab preparation ....................................................................... 12Figure 2: Example of the detailed planning of the slab production ....................................... 12Figure 3: The sieving device for large quantities of aggregate and the fractionated

aggregates ............................................................................................................. 13Figure 4: Weighing of the aggregates and cans with aggregates ......................................... 13Figure 5: Oven and Bear mixer ............................................................................................ 14Figure 6: The slab boxes and a box with the exact amount of asphalt mix ........................... 14Figure 7: The roller compactor and the compaction facility in the lab of BAM ...................... 15Figure 8: The information sheet (in Dutch) for a slab containing all the information about the

slab production and the measurements performed to determine the quality of theslab ........................................................................................................................ 17

Figure 9: Measurements on the prepared slabs after compaction........................................ 21Figure 10: Nuclear measurements at 4 locations (R1 up to R4 clockwise) of a slab ............ 23Figure 11: Determination of the texture of the slab surface using the sand spot method ..... 25Figure 12: Picture of all slabs of one mix variant before the visual inspection ...................... 25Figure 13: Cutting of slab 14 to 17 in smaller slabs ............................................................. 30

List of TablesTable 1: Mixes and mix variations with respect to ravelling resistance in the CEDR DRaT

project ...................................................................................................................... 5Table 2: Information about the reference mix of PA 16 70/100 mix ........................................ 6Table 3: Information on variant 2 of the PA 16 70/100 mix..................................................... 7Table 4: Information on the reference mix of the BBTM 6 50/70 mix ...................................... 8Table 5: Information on variant 2 of the BBTM 6 50/70 mix ................................................... 8Table 6: Information on the reference mix of the SMA 11 25/55-55 mix ................................. 9Table 7: Information on variant 2 of the SMA 11 25/55-55 mix ............................................ 10Table 8: Density compensation due to the shrinkage of the asphalt slabs in the cooling down

period after compaction ......................................................................................... 10Table 9: Overview of the various specimen seizes for the 4 scuffing tests ........................... 11Table 10: Overview of the required slabs for each laboratory per mix variant ...................... 11Table 11: Mix variations and coding of the slabs ................................................................. 20Table 12: Information about the required and realized calculated densities of the slabs ...... 24Table 13: Information about the sand patch measurements on the slabs of mix 2 (BBTM) and

3 (SMA) ................................................................................................................. 24Table 14: Original plan of distribution of slabs to Q-devices................................................. 26Table 15: Original plan of distribution of slabs to W-devices ................................................ 26Table 16: Modified plan of distribution of slabs to Q-devices ............................................... 27Table 17: Modified plan of distribution of slabs to W-devices ............................................... 27Table 18: Variability analysis of slabs for Q-devices ............................................................ 27Table 19: Variability analysis of slabs for W-devices............................................................ 28Table 20: Definitive plan of distribution of slabs to Q-devices .............................................. 28Table 21: Definitive plan of distribution of slabs to W-devices .............................................. 28Table 22: Random distribution schema ............................................................................... 29Table 23: Distribution schema ............................................................................................. 30


1 IntroductionThe propensity of asphalt mixtures to ravelling, particularly following scuffing by vehicle tyrestraversing the surface at an angle to the direction of travel, is of interest to road owners. Assuch, Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN) task group TC227/WG1/TG2 has produceda draft test method for resistance to scuffing, prCEN/TS 12697-50, Bituminous mixtures –Test methods – Part 50: Resistance to scuffing. However, the draft was around four differentpieces of apparatus that have been developed around Europe for this purpose. Currently,there is only a limited number of each piece of equipment that has been built.

Because of the limited experience with these test methods, CEN are proposing to issue thecurrent draft as a CEN Technical Specification rather than as a European Standard untilmore experience, in particular comparative experience between the different apparatus, hasbeen gained. The Conferences of European Directors of Roads (CEDR), in order to facilitategaining that comparative experience, has commissioned a consortium, which includesoperators of each of the pieces of apparatus, to undertake a program of tests. The name ofthe project this consortium will performed is called 'Development of a Ravelling Test' withacronym DRaT.

The CEDR-DRaT project will look at the methods of testing and the results produced for thefour scuffing machines to try to identify:

· The extent to which sample preparation needs to be standardised, such asenvironmental conditions and age when tested;

· The most effective method of measurement;· Whether the results from one or more scuffing machines can be validated from

experience on site;· Whether the results from different scuffing machines can be converted to a common

measure;· Estimates of the precision of the results with each scuffing machine or, if the results

can be converted to a common measure, of the common measure;· A procedure to identify if other scuffing machines can be used for the standard test.

These findings may be the same for all asphalt mixture types or different for different types.The evaluations will be made based on a series of asphalt mixture designs that are tested inreplicate using five scuffing machines (two for one of the options and one each for the otherthree). All testing will be undertaken on laboratory prepared specimens. The validation of thetest methods will be undertaken by identifying how mixtures with each tested mix designhave performed on site.

The overall objective of the CEDR-DRaT programme is to provide advice on how torefine prCEN/TS 12697-50 to be an acceptable standard with a draft incorporating thatadvice.

In the CEDR-DRaT project 5 work packages are distinguished:1. Information review and site data;2. Sample preparation;3. Test programme;4. Analysis5. Dissemination and project management.

In this report the activities performed in Work Package WP2 'Sample Preparation' will besummarized. In Chapter 2, an overview of all activities will be presented. In Chapter 3 details


and the results of all activities and measurement will be summarised. Finally, in Chapter 4some conclusions and recommendation will be formulated.


2 Objectives and description of the work in WP2

2.1 Introduction

The objectives of WP2 'Sample preparation' are:1. To select component materials for the mix designs to be used in the testing

programme;2. To manufacture the necessary test specimens consistently at a central laboratory;3. To distribute the specimens to the relevant testing laboratories.

In short, in WP2 the aim is to produce a large quantity of slabs with the highest quality thatcan be realised in practice. In total 3 surface mixtures will be considered. The quality of theslabs must be sufficient so the variation in slab properties will be limited. In this way the issueof ravelling due to differences in slab properties can be as small as possible in the statisticalanalysis of the various ravelling test results.

2.2 Task 2.1: Mix design

Based on the deliverable D.3 'Compendium of sites and the extent of ravelling' in WP1, threeasphalt mixtures for surface layers are selected. The following mixtures are tested in theresearch plan:

· One porous asphalt (PA) mixture according to EN 13108-7;· One asphalt for very thin layers (BBTM) mixture according to EN 13108-2;· One stone mastic asphalt (SMA) mixture according to EN 13108-5.

The mix design of each mixture is chosen by the members of the consortium. Also thevariations in mix characteristics (e.g. degree of compaction, compaction temperature,maximum aggregate size, amount of bitumen, air voids, quality of the constituent materials,etc.) are investigated. For each mixture, a reference is chosen and a maximum of twovariations is applied.

Based on deliverable D.3, the main influential parameters for ravelling in practice should beclear for each mixture type. For example, for a PA mixture it is expected that an inappropriatedegree of compaction and compaction temperature are the main causes of prematureravelling.

2.3 Task 2.2: Manufacture specimens

In the project plan it was stated that the manufacturing and sampling shall be undertaken bya single laboratory to minimise the variability between specimens. The members of theconsortium discussed how the variations in mix compaction can be achieved in a controllableway. For each mixture, a reference was chosen and a maximum of two variations wereapplied.

For the preparation of the mixtures, only constituent materials within the Netherlands wereused. In this way the transportation costs were limited. According to the project plan, for eachvariation in the mix design 15 slabs have to be prepared. In order to limit the variationbetween the various slabs, the following procedure was used for the preparation of the slabs:

· The slabs were prepared in the laboratory; each slab should comply to the followingrequirements:


o nuclear measured density at 4 positions = required density ± 15 kg/m3;o measured thickness at 9 positions using a calliper = required thickness ± 1

mm.· The coarse aggregate was sieved into fractions (EN 12697-2) and, for each slab,

these fractions were dosed according to the job mix formula.· After the heating of the constituent components, the asphalt was mixed in a

laboratory plug mill mixer where a perfect mixing can be accomplished.· After mixing, the mixture was poured into boxes with the required size of the slabs.

The volume of the box and the required mix properties determine the amount ofmixture that is poured into the box. After a careful manual distribution of the mixtureover the surface of the box, the mixture was compacted (EN 12697-33) using a rollercompactor which is used in practice.

· After compaction each slab was checked with respect to dimensions (relative to thetolerance as specified by the test method), flatness (using a metal ruler), surfacetexture (visually) and compaction (nuclear). If the variation between the slabs is tolarge, a new set of slabs should be prepared.

2.4 Task 3.3: Transport of samples

After all slabs have been compacted, the slabs were transported to the test laboratories withthe scuffing machines in the test programme.

In the next chapter, all these items will be discussed in detail.


3 Practical realisation activities in Work Package 2

3.1 Introduction

In this chapter various activities and choices during the realisation of the WP2 are discussedin detail. In some cases an alternative approach was chosen because of theoretical orpractical reasons. If a different approach is used, this will be discussed in this chapter.

3.2 Mix design, mix variations and constituent materials

From the start of the project, the consortium agreed to determine the ravelling resistance of 3different surface mixtures. In the joint meeting of November 20, 2015 in Sterrebeek, Belgium,it was agreed to perform the test on the following mixtures:

1. a Dutch porous asphalt (PA) according to EN 13108-7;2. a French Asphalt Concrete for Very Thin Layers (BBTM) according to EN 13108-2;3. a German stone mastic asphalt (SMA) according to EN 13108-5.

The reason for choosing these three types of mixtures is the existence of ravelling problemsin practice for these mixtures.

In the meeting in Sterrebeek the variation within the 3 mixtures was also discussed, andshould be included in the research program. Based on practical experiences it was decidedto look at a variation in binder content and a variation in compaction temperatures. Fromthese two items it is known that they have a substantial influence on the ravelling resistanceof asphalt mixtures. An overview of all mixtures and mix variations are presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Mixes and mix variations with respect to ravelling resistance in the CEDRDRaT project

Mixturetype

Mixturecode Binder Reference Variant 1 Variant 2

PA PA 1670/100 70/100

Compaction at150°C;5,2 % bitumen;± 20 % air voids.

Compactionat 105°C

4,2 %bitumen

BBTM BBTM 650/70 50/70

Compaction at160°C;5,6 % binder;12-19 % air voids.

Compactionat 110°C

4,6 %bitumen

SMA SMA 11PmB

PmB 25/55-55 with 3%

SBS polymer

Compaction at155°C;6,8 % PmB;± 3 % voids.

Compactionat 105°C

5,5 %bitumen

In all mixtures the same kind of mineral aggregates were used:· Coarse crushed aggregate: Grauwacke Listertal in different fractions, such as 2/5,

5/8, 8/11 and 11/16 mm;· Natural sand: Putman river sand from the Netherlands;· Moraine crushed sand;· Factory-produced filler Wigro 60 K (for the PA and BBTM) and Wigro (for the SMA);


· Anti-stripping agent: Cellulose fibres Arbocel ZZ 8/1.

Information concerning the various minerals is provided in Annex A.

3.2.1 Mix design PA 16 70/100For the PA 16 70/100 variant, a Dutch mix design is used. In Table 2 information about thismix is given.

Table 2: Information about the reference mix of PA 16 70/100 mix

Mix componentRequiredquantity[%m/m]

Passing sieve: [%m/m]

Bitumen 70/100 5,1 C22,4 100,0

Cellulose fibres Arbocel ZZ 8/1 0,3 C16 99,5

Factory filler Wigro 60K 4,1 C11,2 80,0

Moraine crushed sand 7,8 C8 40,0

Grauwacke 5/8 21,4 C5,6 18,2

Grauwacke 8/11 42,3 2 mm 14,0

Grauwacke 11/16 19,0 500 μm 8,9

63 μm 5,5

Maximum density [kg/m3] 2486

Reference density [kg/m3] 1974

Air voids [%V/V] 20,6

For this mix an initial type test is available. A copy of the declaration of performance (DoP) isgiven in Annex B.

For variant 1 of the PA 16 70/100 mix with the lower compaction temperature, the same mixdesign as the reference mix is used.

For the second variant of the PA 16 70/100 mix, the amount of bitumen is reduced by 1,0 %.The reference density of the mix is not changed. This is because in practice a variation inbitumen content is not compensated by a change in the reference density. In Table 3 mixdesign of variant 2 of the PA 16 70/100 mix is given.


Table 3: Information on variant 2 of the PA 16 70/100 mix



Bitumen 70/100 4,1 C22,4 100,0

Cellulose fibres Arbocel ZZ 8/1 0,3 C16 99,4

Factory filler Wigro 60K 4,2 C11,2 80,0

Moraine crushed sand 7,8 C8 40,0

Grauwacke 5/8 21,6 C5,6 18,2

Grauwacke 8/11 42,8 2 mm 14,0

Grauwacke 11/16 19,2 500 μm 8,9

63 μm 5,5

Calculated maximum density[kg/m3]

2529



3.2.2 Mix design BBTM 6 50/70For the mix design of the BBTM 6 50/70 mix, the French experiences are adopted and aFrench mix design is carried out. The discrepancies between the French and the Dutchsieves (sieve set +2 vs. +1) are overcome by linear interpolation between the various sieves.In Table 4 the information about the final BBTM mix is presented.

In the mix design procedure Marshall specimens were produced with various amounts ofcoarse aggregates. The aim of this mix design procedure was to produce slabs andspecimens with the desired percentage of air voids. This can be achieved by variation of thegrading of the mixture, especially the ratio between the coarse aggregates and sandfractions. The result of the mix design procedure are presented in Table 4.


Table 4: Information on the reference mix of the BBTM 6 50/70 mix



Bitumen 50/70 5,6 C11,2 100,0

Factory filler Wigro 60K 2,1 C8 98,0

Moraine crushed sand 17,5 C5,6 72,3

Grauwacke 2/5 45,3 4 mm 48,1

Grauwacke 5/8 29,5 2 mm 23,5

500 μm 10,7

63 μm 4,0




For variant 1 of the BBTM 6 50/70 mix with the lower compaction temperature, the same mixdesign is used as the reference mix.

For the second variant of the BBTM 6 50/70 mix, the amount of bitumen is reduced by 1,0 %.Again the reference density of the mix is not changed because in practice a variation inbitumen content is not compensated by a change in reference density. The mix design ofvariant 2 of the BBTM 6 50/70 mix is given in Table 5.

Table 5: Information on variant 2 of the BBTM 6 50/70 mix



Bitumen 50/70 4,6 C11,2 100,0

Factory filler Wigro 60K 2,2 C8 98,0


Grauwacke 2/5 45,7 4 mm 48,1

Grauwacke 5/8 29,8 2 mm 23,5

500 μm 10,7

63 μm 4,0


2504




3.2.3 Mix design SMA 11 25/55-55For the third mixture, a German SMA-mixture is designed. The information on the referencemixture is presented in Table 6. This information is determined by a Marshall mix designprocedure. In this mix design procedure the ratio between coarse aggregates componentsand sand fractions were varied in order to find a mixture with 3,5 % air voids.

In Table 6 information about the final mix is presented.

Table 6: Information on the reference mix of the SMA 11 25/55-55 mix



Bitumen 25/55-55 6,6 C16 100,0

Cellulose fibres Arbocel ZZ 8/1 0,3 C11,2 95,4

Factory filler Wigro 9,3 C8 53,5


Grauwacke 2/5 12,3 2 mm 25,0

Grauwacke 5/8 8,8 500 μm 15,6

Grauwacke 8/11 49,6 63 μm 10,0




For variant 1 of the SMA 11 25/55-55 mix with the lower compaction temperature (110°Cinstead of 160°C), the same job mix formula is used as the reference mix.

For the second variant of the SMA 11 25/55-55 mix, the amount of bitumen is reduced by 1,3%. Again the reference density of the mix is not changed because in practice a variation inbitumen content is not compensated by a change in reference density. In Table 7 mix designof variant 2 of the SMA 11 25/55-55 mix is given.


Table 7: Information on variant 2 of the SMA 11 25/55-55 mix



Bitumen 25/55-55 5,3 C16 100,0

Cellulose fibres Arbocel ZZ 8/1 0,3 C11,2 95,4

Factory filler Wigro 9,4 C8 53,5


Grauwacke 2/5 12,5 2 mm 25,0

Grauwacke 5/8 9,0 500 μm 15,6

Grauwacke 8/11 50,1 63 μm 10,0


2480



Before the start of the production of the asphalt slabs, for each mix several extra slabs wereprepared to obtain information on the required density of the slabs (after cooling down) andthe fictive hot density. This fictive hot density is the density of the slab after the compactionprocess has finished and the cooling down period starts. Due to the cooling of the slab, theasphalt mix shrinks which will cause an increase in density. In Table 8 the densitycompensation for the shrinkage of the three different mixes are indicated.

Table 8: Density compensation due to the shrinkage of the asphalt slabs in the coolingdown period after compaction

Mixture type Mixture codeReference

density[kg/m³]

Desired hotdensity[kg/m³]

Porousasphalt PA 16 70/100 1974 1974

BBTM BBTM 650/70 1995 1995

SMA SMA 11 PmB 2364 2305

3.3 Manufacturing of the slabs

One of the topics in the CEDR-DRaT project is a statistical analysis of all data that areproduced in the project with respect to the ravelling tests. In order to evaluate the differencesbetween the 4 different scuffing tests, the influence of the variation in slab quality should beas small as possible. For this reason, the differences between slabs for each mix variantshould be as small as possible. This requires a constant slab production process.


As a result, for each slab the same procedure is used with respect to grading, compactionenergy, compaction target and desired density. In the next chapter the production of theslabs is presented.

3.3.1 Desired amount of slabsIn the CEDR-DRaT projects scuffing tests are performed with 4 different scuffing devices:

· the Aachener Ravelling test (ARTe);· the Darmstadt Scuffing Device (DSD),· the Rotation Surface Abrasion test (RSAT) and· the TriboRoute Device (TRD).

All tests are described in the European standard EN 12697-50 'Resistance to Scuffing'. Eachtest needs a different specimen size. An overview of specimen sizes is given in Table 9.

Table 9: Overview of the various specimen seizes for the 4 scuffing tests

Scuffingdevice

EN 12697-50

Length

[cm]

Width

[cm]

Minimumthickness

[cm]

Maximumthickness

[cm]ARTe Annex A 50 50 3 8DSD Annex B 26 26 2,5 6RSAT Annex C 50 50 - -TRD Annex D 17 25 - -

Each participating laboratory (TU Darmstadt, TU Aachen, IFSTTAR, BRRC, Heijmans andBAM) will test 4 specimens per mix and mix variant. Besides that, IFSTTAR and BRRCrequested an extra slab each to perform addition ravelling tests. Based on the dimensions ofthe specimens given in Table 9 it was decided to prepare slabs in the lab with the followingdimensions: 60x60x4,3 cm. From this dimension, 4 specimens for the DSD- or the TRD testscan be obtained from one prepared slab. This implies that for each mix variant at least 17slabs should be prepared (see Table 10).

Table 10: Overview of the required slabs for each laboratory per mix variant

Scuffingdevice Laboratory Slab dimen-

sions [cm]

Amount ofspecimens from

one slab

Total slabsneeded

ARTeTU Aachen

50x501 4

BAM 1 4

DSD

TUDarmstadt 26x26

4 1

BRRC 4 1 + 1 extra(26x26 cm)

RSAT Heijmans 50x50 1 4

TRD IFSTTAR 17x25 4 1 +1 extra(50x50 cm)

In total 17 Extra slabs 2 Total number of slabs 19


For the CEDR-DRaT project, in total 177 (21+18+18+20+21+19+20+20+20) slabs wereprepared. To prepare all these slabs, in total about 13 mton of constituent materials weregathered in the lab (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Raw materials for slab preparation

3.3.2 Production of the slabsThe production of the slabs started January 2016 and finished in the middle of May 2016. Onaverage 10 slabs were made in each week. An example of the detail planning of the slabproduction is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Example of the detailed planning of the slab production

The following procedure was used to prepare the slabs. This procedure was chosen to makea series of slabs with all about the same properties (mix composition, density, texture):1. First the sand and coarse aggregates were sieved into fractions. Before starting the

sieving, the required amount of sand and coarse aggregates were put together and thensieved in fractions (< 2 mm, 2-5,6 mm, 5,6-8 mm, 8-11,2 mm, 11,2-16 mm, > 16 mm).These fractions were then used to be dosed in the asphalt mix. For sieving a largequantity of aggregates, the following sieving device was used (see Figure 3).


Figure 3: The sieving device for large quantities of aggregate and the fractionatedaggregates

2. After sieving, all mineral aggregates were weighed in fractions and ready for the asphaltmix.

Figure 4: Weighing of the aggregates and cans with aggregates

3. All materials were stored and pre-heated in an 700 litre oven. After heating up, thesematerials were mixed in a Bear Varimixer mixer (type AR60/MK1) with a Bishops head. Inthe Bear mixer about 45 kg of asphalt mixture can be effectively mixed. The mixing timewas about 90 seconds.


Figure 5: Oven and Bear mixer

4. After mixing, the mix was poured in a box with wooden bottom and steel side walls. Thewooden bottom plate guaranteed the limited slipping between box and asphalt mix duringcompaction. A minimum slip is needed for preparing homogeneous slabs withoutsegregation of the aggregates and without differences in densities. The steel side wallsguaranteed the height of the slabs having exact the desired value.The boxes were not preheated before the asphalt mix was poured into the boxes. It wasindicated that preheating caused problems in bending of the wooden bottom layer.The amount of asphalt mix was exact the calculated amount of mix taken into account thedesired density of the mix and the density compensation for shrinkage of the mix in thecool-down phase (see Table 8). During the production and compaction of the mixes, thetemperatures of the mixes were measured constantly using the infrared and analoguethermometers which measured the surface and inside temperature of the slab. All themixes were compacted at the predefined temperatures, depending on the type of bitumenand the measuring program of the CEDR-DRaT program.

Figure 6: The slab boxes and a box with the exact amount of asphalt mix


5. For the compaction of the asphalt mix in the boxes, a standard compaction roller (HAMMHD10 VV, a tandem roller with a total mass of about 2,5 mton) was used. This rollercomplies with EN 12697-33 and is also used in practice. With this roller it is possible tosimulate the compaction process in practice in the lab scale as-close-as possible.Furthermore, a very similar asphalt surface texture to that of the field can be achieved withthis roller compaction.

Figure 7: The roller compactor and the compaction facility in the lab of BAM

6. During the compaction process the slab was turned for 90°, so the slab was compacted intwo directions. This is similar to the compaction process in practice. After the desiredquantity of asphalt mix fits exactly in the box, the compaction process was finished. Thiswas measured with a steel bar on top of the slab.

Figure 7: The turning of the slab during the compaction process and a finished slab

For the determination of the quality of the slabs various measurements are performed. Thesemeasurements are discussed in details in the next paragraphs. For each slab a speciallydesigned information sheet is used to register the activities of the lab staff. On this sheetinformation is gathered about the production and the quality of each slab. An example of thisinformation sheet is presented in Figure 8.


3.4 Determination of the quality of the slabs

The homogeneity of the slabs is an important issue in this project, especially for a projectwhere a statistical analysis of the end results of the scuffing devices is an important goal. Asa result, the influence of disturbing factors in the analysis (e.g. due to the fact that the largequality differences between the various slabs within one mix variant) should be limited. Thisimplies that the variation between the slabs of one mix variant should be as small aspossible. This can be achieved by using always the same work flow procedure and the samelaboratory staff during the production of the slabs, which was explained in the previousparagraph.

In the project plan the following steps were taken to minimise the variation between slabs ofeach mix variant:

1. The slabs were prepared in the laboratory. Each slab will comply to the followingrequirements:- nuclear measured density at 4 positions = required density ± 15 kg/m3;

2. Measured thickness at 8 positions using a calliper = required thickness ± 1 mm.3. The coarse aggregate was sieved into fractions (EN 12697-2) and, for each slab,

these fractions were dosed according to the mix design;4. After the heating of the constituent components, the asphalt was mixed in a

laboratory plug mill mixer where a perfect mixing can be accomplished;5. After mixing, the mixture was poured into boxes with the required size of the slabs.

The volume of the box and the required mix properties determined the amount ofmixture that should be poured into the box. After a careful manual distribution of themixture over the surface of the box, the mixture was compacted (EN 12697-33) usinga roller compactor which was also used in practice.


Figure 8: The information sheet (in Dutch) for a slab containing all the informationabout the slab production and the measurements performed to determine

the quality of the slab


6. After compaction each slab was evaluated with respect to dimensions (relative to thetolerance as specified by the test method), flatness (using a metal ruler), surfacetexture (visually) and compaction (nuclear). If the variation between the slabs is toolarge, a new set of slabs shall be prepared.

Ad.1: The results of the measurements will be discussed in detail in the next chapters;

Ad.2: After the gradation of the coarse mineral aggregates has been determined, the masspercentage of each material to be added to the mix (i.e. the job mix formula) was thencalculated, using the desired gradation of the mix as input. A mix of coarse aggregatesin the ratio of the job mix formula was sieved again into fractions. These fractions weredosed in the final mix.

With this double sieving procedure, the mineral aggregate gradation in each slab of mixvariant is identical due to exclusion of segregation by inaccurate sampling;

Ad.3: In the project, a Bear mixer, type AR60/MK1 with a bishop shaped mixing arm wasused. In this mixer, the quantity of fine particles sticking to the walls of the mixing bowlduring mixing was very limited. For the asphalt mix this implies that segregation islimited and all slabs will approximately have the same gradation and bitumen content;

Ad.4: The pouring of the mix into the compaction box was carried out by hand. The mass ofthe mix that should fit in the compaction box is known. The pouring and filling processwas carried out by the same 2 lab workers, who always used the same procedure. Thislimited the segregation of the mixes as much as possible.

After the exact mass of asphalt mix was poured in the compaction box (based on thevolume of the compaction box and the desired density), the compaction box wasplaced in the compaction facility with the roller compactor. First the asphalt wascompacted with 3 roller passages. Then the slab was turned for 90° and again 3 rollerpassages were applied. This process continued until all the asphalt mix fits exactly inthe compaction box. The sticking of the asphalt to the roller was limited by using ananti-sticking fluid which was sprayed onto the roller. The material loss due to thesticking of the asphalt mix to the roller is evaluated by weighing the mass of the mix inthe compaction box before and after the compaction process.

Ad.5: The results of the measurements will be discussed in detail in the next chapters.


4 Quality of the slabs

4.1 Introduction

In the CEDR-DRaT-project in total 177 slabs were prepared, for 3 different asphalt mixtures,a PA, a SMA and a BBTM. For each mix, 3 different mix variations were prepared: areference mix variant, a variant with reference mix compacted at a lower temperature and amix variant with less bitumen.

For each mix at least 51 (3x17) slabs were prepared. These slabs are divided over 3 differentmix variations:

1. Slabs with the reference mix which were compacted at a predefined temperature,depending on the chosen bitumen in the mix;

2. Slabs with the reference mix which were compacted at a lower compactiontemperature;

3. Slabs with less bitumen in comparison with the reference mix, compacted at the highcompaction temperature.

The various mix variations are summarised in Table 11. Also the coding of the slabs ismentioned.


Table 11: Mix variations and coding of the slabs

Mixture code Binder Specs mixture Slab code

PA 16 70/100 70/100

Compaction at 150°C;5,2 % bitumen70/100;± 20 % air voids

M1-1-1 up to M1-1-21


M1-2-1 up to M1-2-18


M1-3-1 up to M1-3-18

BBTM 650/70 50/70

Compaction at 160°C;5,6 % bitumen 50/70;12-19 % air voids

M2-1-1 up to M2-1-20


M2-2-1 up to M2-2-21


M2-3-1 up to M2-3-19

SMA 11 PmBPmB 25/55-55 with 3%

SBS polymer

Compaction at 160°C;6,8 % PmB;± 3 % voids;

M3-1-1 up to M3-1-20


M3-2-1 up to M3-2-20


M3-3-1 up to M3-3-20

In the project plan it was stated that the quality of the slabs should be as constant aspossible to be sure that differences in test results were not caused by difference in testmaterials. In the project plan 3 quality points were mentioned:

1. The density of all slabs and the density within each slab should be within certainlimits. In the project plan it was suggested that a nuclear measuring device will beused to determine the density of each slab at 4 point;

2. In order to guarantee the evenness of the slabs, the height of the slab should be asconstant as possible. The height of each slab should be measured at 8 differentlocations. Based on these results, the evenness of each slab can be determined;

3. Texture is an important factor for the resistance to ravelling. Greasy and scarce spotsshould be avoided. The texture itself will be measured using a laser scanner (for thePA) or the sand spot method (for the SMA and the BBTM).

In Figure 9 the surface of the slab (including the metal strips with a width of 2 cm) and theperformed measurements on this slab are illustrated. The slab is divided in 4 parts of eachapproximately 30 by 30 cm, counting clockwise from 1 to 4. To recognise part 1, each slab ismarked with a yellow dot (=H) in the left upper corner of the slab.


Figure 9: Measurements on the prepared slabs after compactionAfter compaction, cooling and demoulding, the following measurements were performed oneach part of the slab:· The surface of each slab was evaluated during the compaction procedure with a metal

ruler (see Figure 7). After the slab cooled down, the thickness of the slab and woodenplate was measured at 8 positions using a calliper. The measuring points are marked dAup to dH. The accepted variation in thickness is ± 1 mm;

· The density of each slab during and after the compaction process was measured on 4locations with a nuclear measuring device. In this project a Troxler 4640-B is used. Thisnuclear measuring device was specially fit for thin asphalt layer measurements. Thelocation of the nuclear vessel was chosen in such a way that always the density in themiddle of each part of the slab was measured. For example, in order to measure thedensity of part 1 of the slab, the Troxler was placed on both part 1 and 4 with the nuclearvessel point near the centre of part 1 of the slab (light green area with green dottedoutskirts). The 4 densities are coded from R1 to R4. The maximum difference in nucleardensity values of all slabs within one mix variation is ± 15 kg/m3;

· The surface texture of the slab was evaluated visually and optionally measured with atexture scanner, e.g. the Elatextur device (http://www.iwsmesstechnik.de/elatextur.htm) orusing the sand patch method. With the visual inspection, greasy spots on the slab wereexcluded. The Elatextur texture device measured the MPD (Mean Profile Depth)according to EN-ISO 13473-1 and the ETD (Estimated Texture Depth, sand patch) wereobtained according to EN ISO 13473-1. The measuring locations, indicated in orange inFigure 9, are marked MTD1 up to MTD4. Due to the unknown standard variation in textureproperties of an asphalt surface, the allowable texture variation of each slab is undefined.

If the variation in thickness or density within a slab or between the slabs was too large or incase a slab contained greasy spots, a new slab or a new set of slabs shall be prepared.

In the next chapters the results of these measurements will be presented and discussed.


4.2 Results of thickness measurements

After demoulding of the slabs the thickness of the complete slab (wooden underlayer andasphalt slab) was measured using a calliper. Because the thickness of the woodenunderlayer is 18,0 mm, the thickness of the asphalt slab can be determined.

It should be noted that the thickness of all slabs was measured at the outside of the slabs. Inthe centre of the slab it was not possible to measure the thickness of the slab. In order to besure that also in the centre of slab the thickness is correct, 2 addition evaluations werecarried out during the compaction of the slabs:

a. A metal bar was used to measure the flatness of the slabs (see Figure.7). Thedistance between this metal bar and the surface in the centre of the slab should beclose to zero. In practice this was always the case;

b. A new roller was used to compact the slabs. The HAMM HD10 roller was especiallychosen for this project, which implies that the drum of this roller was perfect circular.In practice it is often shown that the drums of the roller compactor are barrel shapeddue to the wear the drums, which has influence on the evenness of the compactedslabs.

The thickness of the steel bars on top of the wooden bottom of the compaction box is 43,0mm. This implies that the height of the produced asphalt slab should be close to 43,0 mm. InAnnex C the results of the measurements of the thickness of the slabs are presented. Fromthese results it can be concluded that the average measured height of the all slabs is 42,9mm with a standard deviation of 0,18 mm. The maximum measured height is 43,5 mm, theminimum measured height 42,4 mm. The maximum difference between minimum andmaximum value of the height within one slab is 0,9 mm and the minimum difference is 0,2mm.

This implies that all the slabs comply with the requirement that the difference in heightbetween the slabs should not exceed 1,0 mm.

4.3 Results of nuclear density measurements

The density of each slab was determined at 4 positions using a nuclear measuring device(see Figure 10). Before starting the measurements with the nuclear measuring device, firstthe repeatability and reproducibility of the nuclear measurements were determined:

1. The repeatability of the nuclear measuring device was determined by measuring thedensity of a PA slab without moving the device between the individualmeasurements. The measured density values are: 1922, 1929, 1930, 1936 and 1907kg/m³. The average value is 1925 kg/m³ and the standard deviation is 11,1 kg/m³.The difference between minimum and maximum measured value is 29 kg/m³;

2. The reproducibility was determined by measuring the density of the PA-slab aftermoving the device between the individual measurements. The measured densityvalues are: 1907, 1936, 1989, 1917 and 1945 kg/m³. The average value is 1939kg/m³ and the standard deviation is 31,8 kg/m³. The difference between minimum andmaximum measured value is 82 kg/m³.

The results of both the repeatability and reproducibility tests indicate that with the nuclearmeasuring device it is not possible to measure the density of a slab accurately. At least, thegoal for preparing slabs with a maximum density difference of ±15 kg/m3 with respect to thereference density could not be reached using a nuclear measuring device.


Therefore an alternative criterion for the density measurement was developed. The density ofeach slab was calculated by means of the volume of the compaction box and the mass of themix within the compaction box after the compaction of the slabs. So the loss of asphaltmixture due to the fact that the asphalt mix sticks sometimes to the drum of the roller is nottaken into account. The calculated density is an average of the density of the total slab. Thedisadvantage of this method is that the differences between the 4 parts of the slab cannot bedetermined anymore as is possible using the nuclear measuring device.

Figure 10: Nuclear measurements at 4 locations (R1 up to R4 clockwise) of a slab

In Annex C both the results of the measured density using the nuclear device (R1 up to R4)and the calculated density (Rcal) are presented. In Table 12 the mean, standard deviation,minimum and maximum value for the calculated densities of all mixes are presented.


Table 12: Information about the required and realized calculated densities of the slabs

Mix Numberof slabs

Density [kg/m3]

Required Mean Stand. Dev Minimum Maximum Max-Min

M1-1 211974

(PA)

1977 6,5 1967 1990 23

M1-2 18 1973 3,6 1967 1979 12

M1-3 18 1974 2,7 1968 1978 10

M2-1 201995

(BBTM)

1989 3,4 1983 1995 12

M2-2 21 1993 2,2 1990 1997 7

M2-3 19 1990 2,4 1985 1996 11

M3-1 202364

(SMA)

2360 3,4 2347 2362 15

M3-2 20 2361 2,9 2355 2367 12

M3-3 20 2360 2,6 2356 2365 9

From Table 12 it can be concluded that the difference between the slabs of one mix variant isin most cases smaller than 15 kg/m3 from the required reference density. In most cases thedifference is much smaller. Only mix M1-1 does not comply with this requirement.

4.4 Results of texture measurements

The texture was measured on 4 locations on each slab using 2 measuring procedures:a. using a laser scanner (for the PA, Figure 13) orb. using the sand patch method according to EN 13036-1 (for the SMA and the BBTM).

Figure 13: The Elatextur measuring device


The texture of the PA slabs was measured with an Elatextur laser scanner (see Figure 13)because the sand patch method cannot be used. For the Elatextur device the repeatabilityand reproducibility of this scanner was determined:

1. The repeatability of the scanner was determined by measuring the MTD-value of aPA slab without moving the device between the individual measurements. Themeasured density values are: 1,56; 1,56; 1,56; 1,55 and 1,56 mm. The average valueis 1,56 mm and the standard deviation of 0,004 mm (=0,3 %). The difference betweenminimum and maximum measured value is 0,01 mm;

2. The reproducibility is determined by measuring the MTD-value of the PA-slab aftermoving the device between the individual measurements. The measured densityvalues are: 1,56; 1,37; 1,60; 1,34 and 1,49 mm. The average value is 1,47 mm andthe standard deviation is 0,114 mm (=7,8%). The difference between minimum andmaximum measured value is 0,26 mm.

The results of the repeatability test show that the laser texture device can measure thetexture rather accurate. However, the reproducibility test shows that the laser device is notpossible to measure the texture very accurately. For this reason the Elatextur measuringdevice was only used for the PA mix.

In Annex C the results of the MTD-measurements using the Elatextur device are presented.Based on the results of these measurements it is not possible to qualify the surfaces as goodor bad.

The texture of the BBTM and the SMA mixtures was measured using the sand patch methodaccording to EN 13036-1. In Figure 11: Determination of the texture of the slab surface usingthe sand spot method an overview of the sand patch procedure on 4 locations (MTD1 up toMTD4) on each slab are presented.

Figure 11: Determination of the texture of the slab surface using the sand spot method

In Table 13 the results of the sand patch measurements on all slabs are presented.


Table 13: Information about the sand patch measurements on the slabs of mix 2(BBTM) and 3 (SMA)

Mix Number ofslabs

MTD [mm]

Mean Stand. Dev. Minimum Maximum Max-Min

M2-1 20 1,28 0,074 (=5,8%) 1,13 1,42 0,29

M2-2 21 1,20 0,056 (=4,7%) 1,10 1,30 0,20

M2-3 19 1,08 0,061 (=5,6%) 0,96 1,18 0,22

M3-1 20 0,83 0,073 (=8,8%) 0,66 0,98 0,32

M3-2 20 0,79 0,062 (=7,8%) 0,63 0,89 0,26

M3-3 20 0,85 0,056 (=6,6%) 0,75 0,95 0,20

Based on these data the following conclusions can be drawn:1. Mix 2 (BBTM) has a larger texture depth than Mix 3 (SMA). This is probably due to

the fact that in mix 2 less bitumen used and large air voids in comparison to mix 3(5,6 vs. 6,8 %m/m). However, using less bitumen in the mix (mix M2-3 and M3-3)does not always result in a larger texture depth: for the BBTM mix the texturedecreases from 1,13 to 0,96 mm and for the SMA the texture depth increases from0,66 to 0,75 mm;

2. The maximum aggregate size of the mix (5,6 mm for the BBTM and 11,2 mm for theSMA) has a minor influence on the texture;

3. A greasy spot on the surface of one of the slabs has a small effect on the texturedepth;

4. From all the texture measurements with the sand patch method it seems that thetexture of slabs within one mix type is all rather identical. Based on the texturemeasurements no slabs were rejected for further testing.

4.5 Results of visual inspection of slab surfaces

Texture is an important factor for the resistance to ravelling. Greasy and scarce spots andloss of aggregates particles should be avoided. In fact the surface of all slabs within one mixvariant should be as smooth as possible without any irregularities. On the other hand, theproduction of the slabs is completely handwork which automatically introduces variationwithin and on the surface of the slabs. From the previous chapters it is concluded that thevariation of the density and the surface texture are almost all within the tolerances that arechosen before the start of the project. The last evaluation is the visual inspection of thesurfaces of the slabs (see Figure 12).

For the visual inspection all slabs of a mix variant are gathered and visually inspected.During this inspection the following irregularities are taken into account:

1. Greasy spots. Large greasy spots (diameter over 2 cm) should be avoided;2. Scarse spots. Scarse and lean spots (area larger than 50 cm2) are not acceptable;3. Stone loss due to sticking of aggregate parts on the drum of the roller during the

compaction of the slabs;4. Irregular distribution of the asphalt mix near the corners of the slabs. If the mix is not

regularly distributed over the box area, the changes of differences in mix density inone slab can be considerable.

Based on the results of the visual inspection, the following slabs are rejected:


1. For mix 1 (PA): M1-1-1, M1-1-2, M1-1-3, M1-1-14, M1-2-15 and M1-3-122. For mix 2 (BBTM): M2-1-7, M2-2-1, M2-2-14,3. For mix 3 (SMA): no rejections

Figure 12: Picture of all slabs of one mix variant before the visual inspection

4.6 Conclusions

Based on the experiences with the production of the slabs and with the measurementsperformed on the slabs, the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. The production of the slabs is handwork, so there are always minor irregularitieswithin the slabs. However, the irregularities of the slabs can be limited with thefollowing precautions:

a. The coarse aggregates should be sieved out in the various fractions of anasphalt mix;

b. The mixing and compaction should always be performed by the same people;2. The suggested measurement methodologies (nuclear density and laser texture) to

determine the quality of the produced slabs do not work efficiently in practice. In mostcases the reproducibility of these tests on lab produced slabs or in a lab situation israther poor;

3. The use of back-calculated density and visual inspection provide the most relevantinformation about the approval or rejection of the slabs.


5 Distribution of the slabs

5.1 Introduction

After the production and the approval/rejection of the slabs, the slabs were transported to thevarious partners within the CEDR-DRaT project to perform the various scuffing tests. To besure that all the labs will get a random set of slabs, a special procedure is used to divide theslabs over the various partners.

First the background of the special procedure is discussed. After that the attention is paid tothe practical distribution of the slabs.

5.2 Statistical background

TNO proposed a distribution of the slabs/samples over the 6 laboratories such that each ofthe laboratories assesses four unique slabs. This procedure is necessary because it was notfeasible to examine the variability between the quadrants of the slabs and the variabilityamong whole slabs with a nuclear testing device. Therefore, it cannot be established whetherthe inter-slab variability is of the same magnitude as the intra-slab variability. Hence, slabsneed to be distributed as evenly as possible over the laboratories to give each one the samechance for obtaining discriminative results between the different mix variations.

In the CEDR-DRaT project 2 kinds of devices are involved:· Devices that work with quarter slabs; ‘Q-devices’· Devices that work with whole slabs: ‘W-devices’

There are 3 ‘Q-devices’ (TU Darmstadt, BRRC, IFSTTAR) and 3 ‘W-devices’ (BAM,Heijmans, ISAC/TU Aachen).

Originally it was planned to distribute and test the slabs as follows, wherein ‘X’ represents aquarter of a slab.

Table 14: Original plan of distribution of slabs to Q-devices

DeviceSlab

1 2 3

Q1 XXXX

Q2 XXXX

Q3 XXXX

Table 15: Original plan of distribution of slabs to W-devicesDevice Slab

W4 4 5 6 7

W5 8 9 10 11

W6 12 13 14 15


In this scheme, Q-devices cannot determine the variability among plates and W-devicescannot determine the variability within plates. The distribution and test scheme as shownabove could therefore prejudice the results of either the Q- or the W-devices.

The following solution to this problem was suggested using the original total amount of plates(15), wherein ‘X’ represents a quarter of a slab.

Table 16: Modified plan of distribution of slabs to Q-devices

DeviceSlab

1 2 3

Q1 XX X X

Q2 X XX X

Q3 X X XX

Table 17: Modified plan of distribution of slabs to W-devicesDevice Slab

W4 4 5 6 7

W5 8 9 10 11

W6 12 13 14 15

In this scheme, the Q-devices assess three unique slabs and the W-devices assess fourunique slabs per mixture variation. This improves the potential of a Q-device to discriminateamong the mixture variations compared with the first proposal. However, the scheme stillfavours the W-devices theoretically. To see this, the statistical tests are considered to assessdifferences among the three mixture variations.

To test differences between the three mix variations, the total variability among the testedslabs is split into the variability due to differences in the mix variations and the variability dueto random differences among the slabs of one and the same mix variation. The variabilitydue to differences in the mix variations has 2 degrees of freedom (df), which is the totalnumber of mix variations minus 1. The variability due to random differences among the slabsof one and the same mix variation depends on the total number of unique slabs. For thedistribution and test scheme above however the difference in degrees of freedom betweenthe Q and W-devices is substantial.

Labs with Q-devices get information from 3 slabs per mix variation. Each laboratory will test 9unique specimen (3+3+3) per asphalt type. The degrees of freedom (df) are as follows:

Table 18: Variability analysis of slabs for Q-devicesSource df

Mix variation 2

Random slab variation 6

Total 8


Labs with W-devices get information from 4 plates per quality class. Each laboratory will test12 unique specimen (4+4+4). The degrees of freedom are as follows:

Table 19: Variability analysis of slabs for W-devicesSource df

Mix variation 2

Random slab variation 9

Total 11

This shows that in theory W-devices can pick up quality differences more easily than Q-devices!

To make the degrees of freedom for the random variation in Q-devices equal to thecorresponding number for W-devices, BAM offered to make a few extra slabs. The newlyproposed distribution and test scheme is as follows, wherein ‘X’ represents a quarter of aslab.:

Table 20: Definitive plan of distribution of slabs to Q-devices

DeviceSlab

1 2 3 4

Q1 X X X X

Q2 X X X X

Q3 X X X X

Out of the 4 unique slabs, 4 unique quarters remain at BAM and will not be tested.

Table 21: Definitive plan of distribution of slabs to W-devicesDevice Slab

W4 5 6 7 8

W5 9 10 11 12

W6 13 14 15 16

With this distribution and test scheme, the degrees of freedom of the random slab variationfor the Q-devices and W-devices are both equal to 9.

Only 1 extra slab is required per asphalt quality type (and only 9 extra slabs in total for allasphalt types and qualities) to remove the bias of the results. This will not influence thetesting stage and all laboratories will still perform the same amount of tests.

In conclusions it was agreed that BAM prepared one additional slab per asphalt quality forthe Q-devices and will cut the 4 unique slabs required for each asphalt quality into quadrantsof 25x25 cm. Each laboratory with a Q-device will still receive 4 quadrants of a slab and willperform tests on 4 specimen per asphalt quality, but the tests will now be performed on


specimen from 4 unique slabs. The total amount of tests for these laboratories will notchange.

For the W-devices nothing has changed. BAM will prepare all specimens for the W-devicesand will distribute these specimens as prepared. Each laboratory with a W-device will stillreceive 4 unique slabs and will perform tests on 4 specimens per asphalt quality. The totalamount of tests for these laboratories will not change.

5.3 Distribution of the slabs in practice

To distribute the slabs over the various partners, the following procedure was used:1. TNO provided a random distribution of the slabs over the participating laboratories. This

distribution is given in Table 22.

Table 22: Random distribution schemaReference mix Variant 1 Variant 2

4 8 2

15 9 10

8 11 14

14 15 1

7 14 5

11 5 8

6 1 6

16 4 13

12 6 11

13 16 9

9 13 15

3 12 16

5 10 7

1 3 4

2 2 12

10 7 3

This implies e.g. that the first available slab of the reference mix gets the random code 4and the second available slab the random code 15.

2. In the random code distribution it is decided that each lab always gets the slabs with thefollowing random numbers in Table 23:


30

Table 23: Distribution schemaRandom number Laboratory

1-4 ISAC/TU Aachen

5-8 Heijmans

9-12 BAM

13 IFFSTAR

14-17 BRRC+IFFSTAR+TU Darmstadt

3. The slabs with random number 14 to 17 were cut in three parts according to Figure 13:

Figure 13: Cutting of slab 14 to 17 in smaller slabs

· The slab parts with code O1 and O2 were transported to BRRC (=OCW) for testingat 20 and 40ºC;

· The slab parts with code Da were transported to TU Darmstadt;· The slab parts with code IF were transported to IFSTTAR. IFSTTAR gets an extra

slab to perform their tests both force and displacement controlled.

4. The code on the slabs the labs received is the origin code of the slab, which is mentionedin Annex C. The slabs which were send to BRRC, IFFSTAR and TU Darmstadt got anextension in the code:· a (left upper corner slab)· b (right upper corner slab)· c (right lower corner slab)· d (left lower corner slab)

So here a clockwise numbering is used starting in the left upper corner of the slab;

5. On all the slabs there is a yellow point painted on the surface of the slab (comparable withthe red dots in the Figure 13). This yellow point is an orientation mark for themeasurements (nuclear density, texture, photographs) which are performed in the lab ofBAM before sending the slabs to the participating labs.

After coding and proper packing, the slabs are transported to the various labs. In total 3deliveries were organized, always after all slabs for one mix and the mix variants wereavailable.


31

Annex A: Information about constituent materials asphaltmixtures

In this Annex information is gathered about the constituent materials that are used for theproduction of the 3 asphalt mixtures. Successively the CE-markings of the following productsare given:

Coarse crushed aggregates: Grauwacke Listertal in fractions of 2/5, 5/8, 8/11 and11/16

Natural sand: Putman sand from the Netherlands;

Crushed sand: Moraine sand;

Artificial factory filler: Wigro 60 K (for the PA and BBTM) and Wigro (for theSMA

Bitumen: 70/100 for the PA50/70 for the BBTM

25/55-55 for the SMA


32


33


34


35


36


37

Bitumen 70/100 from Total:


38


39


40


41

Annex B: Declaration of Performance and CE-marking PA16 70/100

In this Annex the Declaration of Performance and the CE-marking of the PA 16 70/100mixture is presented. This mix is used as Mix 1 in the CEDR-DRaT-project.


42


43

Annex C: Properties of the prepared slabsIn this Annex all the properties that are measured to determine the quality of the prepared slabs are gathered. In the following tables thenext symbols are used:

· R1 = nuclear density of the upper left part of the slab (in kg/m3)· R2 = nuclear density of the upper right part of the slab (in kg/m3)· R3 = nuclear density of the bottom right part of the slab (in kg/m3)· R4 = nuclear density of the bottom left part of the slab (in kg/m3)· Rcal = density, calculated from the volume and the mass of the slab after compaction (in kg/m3)· dA = thickness of the slab at position A (in 0,1 mm)· dB = thickness of the slab at position B (in 0,1 mm)· dC = thickness of the slab at position C (in 0,1 mm)· dD = thickness of the slab at position D (in 0,1 mm)· dE = thickness of the slab at position E (in 0,1 mm)· dF = thickness of the slab at position F (in 0,1 mm)· dG = thickness of the slab at position G (in 0,1 mm)· dH = thickness of the slab at position H (in 0,1 mm)· MTD1 = mean texture depth of the upper left part of the slab using the Elatextur device (in 0,01 mm)· MTD2 = mean texture depth of the upper right part of the slab using the Elatextur device (in 0,01 mm)· MTD3 = mean texture depth of the bottom right part of the slab using the Elatextur device (in 0,01 mm)· MTD4 = mean texture depth of the bottom left part of the slab using the Elatextur device (in 0,01 mm)· T1 = estimated texture depth of the upper left part of the slab using the sand patch method (in 0,01 mm)· T2 = estimated texture depth of the upper right part of the slab using the sand patch method (in 0,01 mm);· T3 = estimated texture depth of the bottom right left part of the slab using the sand patch method (in 0,01 mm)· T4 = estimated texture depth of the bottom left part of the slab using the sand patch method (in 0,01 mm)

The yellow marked slabs are spare slabs which are not distributed to the various partners. The red marked slabs are rejected and notinvolved in the testing program.


44

Slabcode

Date ofcompaction

R1 R2 R3 R4 Rcal dA dB dC dD dE dF dG dH MTD1 MTD2 MTD3 MTD4 Greasyspots[kg/m3] [mm] [mm]

M1-1-1 12-01-‘16 1972 43,2 42,7 43,2 42,7 43,3 42,7 43,3 42,8 1,56 1,48 1,49 1,18 YesM1-1-2 12-01-‘16 1977 43,2 42,9 43,5 42,9 43,2 42,6 43,1 42,9 1,29 1,62 1,69 1,57 YesM1-1-3 12-01-‘16 1972 1967 2032 1929 1990 43,3 42,9 43,3 43,3 43,1 42,8 43,3 43,5 1,44 1,71 1,75 1,84 YesM1-1-4 12-01-‘16 1941 1994 1913 2007 1984 43,2 42,8 43,3 43,5 43,1 42,7 42,8 42,6 1,54 1,62 1,79 1,40M1-1-5 12-01-‘16 1935 1977 1960 1955 1979 43,2 42,9 43,1 43,0 43,1 42,6 42,9 42,7 1,35 1,51 1,42 1,62M1-1-6 14-01-‘16 1963 2000 1916 1952 1967 42,8 42,5 42,9 42,8 43,0 42,8 43,0 42,9 1,50 1,53 1,39 1,69M1-1-7 14-01-‘16 1957 1943 1933 1923 1969 42,7 42,7 43,0 42,7 43,2 42,6 43,4 42,8 1,69 1,42 1,47 1,46M1-1-8 14-01-‘16 1971 1943 2015 1965 1972 43,0 42,5 42,9 42,7 43,2 43,0 43,2 43,0 1,37 1,54 1,28 1,61M1-1-9 14-01-‘16 2009 2019 1969 1986 1979 42,9 42,8 43,0 42,9 43,3 43,2 43,5 42,8 1,58 1,40 1,42 1,36M1-1-10 14-01-‘16 2009 2061 2015 2032 1989 43,0 42,7 43,2 42,9 43,3 42,8 43,2 43,0 1,57 1,20 1,47 1,59M1-1-11 19-01-‘16 1961 2006 1967 2001 1971 42,9 42,8 43,2 43,0 43,1 42,6 43,2 42,9 1,44 1,48 1,32 1,28M1-1-12 19-01-‘16 1969 1963 1993 2014 1974 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,7 43,2 42,8 43,1 42,7 1,48 1,14 1,27 1,47M1-1-13 19-01-‘16 1929 1906 1916 1959 1978 43,0 42,8 43,4 43,2 43,2 43,1 43,3 42,8 1,54 1,59 1,51 1,62M1-1-14 19-01-‘16 1903 1944 1922 1963 1977 43,2 43,2 43,1 43,1 43,3 43,4 43,1 43,0 1,41 1,40 1,63 1,44 YesM1-1-15 19-01-‘16 2024 1996 1989 1997 1982 42,9 42,9 43,2 43,1 43,2 43,1 43,4 42,9 1,66 1,46 1,67 1,63M1-1-16 09-02-‘16 1889 1919 1902 1995 1973 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,9 43,1 42,8 43,3 42,8 1,36 1,44 1,27 1,81M1-1-17 09-02-‘16 1897 1897 1874 1960 1976 43,1 42,8 43,0 43,1 43,4 42,8 43,1 42,9 1,74 1,50 1,42 1,42M1-1-18 09-02-‘16 1914 2018 1974 1965 1971 42,9 42,9 43,1 42,9 42,9 42,6 43,0 42,9 1,41 1,68 1,44 1,57M1-1-19 09-02-‘16 2031 1952 1937 1994 1970 43,3 42,7 43,0 42,8 43,4 42,5 42,8 42,5 1,55 1,35 1,50 1,59M1-1-20 15-02-‘16 1975 1963 1968 1918 1967 43,2 42,9 43,0 42,5 42,9 42,7 43,0 42,6 1,55 1,36 1,50 1,59M1-1-21 15-02-‘16 1945 1921 1881 1980 1972 42,9 42,5 43,1 42,8 43,1 43,0 43,0 42,8 1,45 1,53 1,38 1,28Mean 1963 1977 43,0 1,49St.dev 40,9 6,5 0,24 0,144Minimum 1874 1967 42,5 1,14Maximum 2061 1990 43,5 1,84

Slabcode

Date ofcompaction



45

M1-2-1 21-01-‘16 1976 1990 1988 1992 1969 43,1 42,8 42,9 42,5 43,0 42,6 43,3 42,9 1,58 1,51 1,45 1,61M1-2-2 21-01-‘16 2017 1994 2023 1991 1973 43,0 42,8 43,0 42,7 43,0 42,9 43,0 42,7 1,38 1,50 1,63 1,88M1-2-3 21-01-‘16 2029 2025 2011 2015 1973 43,2 43,0 43,0 42,9 43,0 42,8 43,2 42,8 1,51 1,74 1,45 1,47M1-2-4 21-01-‘16 1997 2044 2023 2036 1974 43,2 42,6 43,0 42,6 43,5 43,2 43,0 42,8 1,71 1,53 1,50 1,31M1-2-5 21-01-‘16 2010 2056 2007 2018 1978 43,3 43,1 43,2 42,9 43,1 42,8 43,0 42,9 1,22 1,50 1,27 1,35M1-2-6 26-01-‘16 2016 1985 1975 2001 1970 43,2 42,7 43,1 42,8 43,2 42,9 43,0 42,8 1,31 1,69 1,61 1,56M1-2-7 26-01-‘16 2013 1995 1958 1987 1978 42,9 42,6 43,1 42,8 43,3 43,3 43,1 42,9 1,57 1,75 1,37 1,74M1-2-8 26-01-‘16 2003 1918 1959 1915 1973 43,0 43,0 43,3 42,8 43,1 42,7 42,9 42,4 1,68 1,73 1,38 1,84M1-2-9 26-01-‘16 1961 1990 1992 1991 1979 43,3 43,0 43,4 42,7 43,2 42,8 43,1 43,0 1,49 1,51 1,68 1,49M1-2-10 26-01-‘16 1995 2042 2027 2029 1975 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,9 43,2 42,8 43,0 43,0 1,57 1,40 1,75 1,36M1-2-11 28-01-‘16 1988 1957 1974 2005 1976 43,0 43,0 43,2 42,9 43,2 42,9 43,3 42,8 1,66 1,40 1,30 1,47M1-2-12 28-01-‘16 2029 2020 1980 1989 1977 43,1 43,0 43,0 42,9 43,2 42,8 43,1 42,8 1,57 1,59 1,41 1,42M1-2-13 28-01-‘16 1940 1945 1932 1936 1974 43,2 42,8 42,9 42,6 43,2 43,1 43,0 42,9 1,86 1,39 1,42 1,36M1-2-14 28-01-‘16 1966 1927 1907 1941 1968 42,9 42,5 43,1 42,9 43,0 42,7 43,0 42,6 1,38 1,55 1,32 1,48M1-2-15 28-01-‘16 1969 1925 1988 1994 1967 43,0 42,7 43,1 42,7 42,9 42,5 42,9 42,8 1,64 1,48 1,25 1,60 YesM1-2-16 10-02-‘16 1969 1904 1951 1852 1974 43,1 42,9 42,9 42,9 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,8 1,29 1,17 1,37 1,59M1-2-17 10-02-‘16 1844 1887 1872 1945 1972 43,0 42,8 43,0 43,1 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,8 1,43 1,29 1,37 1,53M1-2-18 10-02-‘16 1959 1869 1918 1866 1969 42,9 42,6 43,3 42,6 43,3 42,6 43,3 42,6 1,28 1,35 1,48 1,34Mean 1974 1973 42,9 1,49St.dev 48,5 3,6 0,21 0,160Minimum 1844 1967 42,4 1,17Maximum 2056 1979 43,5 1,88


46

Slabcode

Date ofcompaction


M1-3-1 01-02-‘16 1957 1941 1997 1948 1974 43,0 42,8 42,9 42,7 43,2 42,8 43,0 42,7 1,50 1,23 1,45 1,17M1-3-2 01-02-‘16 1976 1990 1959 1945 1976 43,1 42,9 43,1 42,9 43,0 42,8 43,0 42,9 1,41 1,3 1,41 1,3M1-3-3 01-02-‘16 1935 1961 1920 1940 1976 43,3 42,8 43,2 43,2 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,7 1,14 1,54 1,06 1,41M1-3-4 01-02-‘16 2003 1954 1958 1951 1971 43,2 43,0 42,9 42,7 43,1 43,1 43,1 42,7 1,38 1,34 1,38 1,43M1-3-5 01-02-‘16 1928 1978 1969 1941 1972 43,1 42,8 43,2 42,6 42,9 42,6 43,1 42,9 1,18 1,23 1,62 1,57M1-3-6 03-02-‘16 1959 1921 1982 1973 1972 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,9 43,0 42,7 43,1 42,8 1,18 1,18 1,13 1,50M1-3-7 03-02-‘16 2003 1939 1993 1972 1975 43,1 42,9 43,1 43,1 43,0 42,8 42,9 43,0 1,14 1,29 1,50 1,47M1-3-8 03-02-‘16 1932 1940 1993 1935 1976 43,4 42,7 43,1 42,7 43,3 42,9 43,1 42,9 1,52 1,47 1,47 1,53M1-3-9 03-02-‘16 1963 2007 1965 2004 1975 43,1 43,0 42,9 42,5 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,9 1,22 1,43 1,35 1,55M1-3-10 03-02-‘16 1996 1999 1944 1944 1972 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,7 43,2 42,6 1,26 1,32 1,10 1,43M1-3-11 05-02-‘16 1967 1953 1999 1973 1969 43,1 42,8 43,3 42,6 43,1 42,6 43,3 42,9 1,28 1,51 1,35 1,42M1-3-12 05-02-‘16 1984 1991 1979 1983 1978 42,9 42,8 43,2 42,7 43,4 43,3 43,3 42,8 1,49 1,29 1,32 1,23 YesM1-3-13 05-02-‘16 1906 1915 1974 1889 1974 43,1 43,0 43,0 42,9 43,2 42,8 43,1 42,8 1,36 1,20 1,40 1,37M1-3-14 05-02-‘16 1939 1975 1918 1941 1973 42,9 42,5 43,1 43,0 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,8 1,23 1,26 1,46 1,54M1-3-15 05-02-‘16 1960 1948 1958 1939 1974 43,1 42,7 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,8 43,1 43,0 1,18 1,44 1,10 1,23M1-3-16 10-02-‘16 1899 1940 1903 1966 1977 43,1 42,9 43,1 43,0 43,4 43,2 43,1 42,6 1,50 1,36 1,18 1,33M1-3-17 15-02-‘16 1911 1983 1953 1914 1971 43,0 42,8 43,3 42,8 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,7 1,26 1,35 1,09 1,17M1-3-18 15-02-‘16 1938 1853 1915 1891 1968 43,1 42,6 43,0 42,8 43,0 42,8 43,0 42,8 1,28 1,11 1,09 1,35Mean 1954 1974 43,0 1,33St.dev. 31,8 2,7 0,20 0,142Minimum 1853 1968 42,51 1,06Maximum 2007 1978 43,38 1,62

Slabcode

Date ofcompaction



47

M2-1-1 23-02-‘16 1956 1958 1962 1939 1991 42,9 42,7 43,3 42,9 43,0 42,7 43,1 42,8 1,26 1,22 1,28 1,35M2-1-2 23-02-‘16 1993 1987 2016 1976 1985 43,0 42,9 43,1 42,6 42,9 42,7 42,8 42,6 1,20 1,24 1,35 1,35M2-1-3 23-02-‘16 1943 1889 1909 1991 1990 42,9 42,8 43,1 43,0 42,9 42,8 43,1 42,6 1,18 1,20 1,35 1,39M2-1-4 23-02-‘16 1995 1957 1927 1982 1991 42,9 42,8 43,1 42,7 42,9 42,7 43,1 42,8 1,24 1,18 1,32 1,37M2-1-5 23-02-‘16 2019 1945 1928 1954 1992 43,2 42,9 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,9 43,0 43,0 1,32 1,39 1,39 1,37M2-1-6 23-02-‘16 1888 1939 1806 1883 2000 42,9 42,7 43,2 42,9 43,1 43,0 43,2 42,9 1,28 1,35 1,39 1,35M2-1-7 26-02-‘16 1883 1925 1838 1935 1985 42,9 42,8 43,0 42,6 43,0 42,7 43,1 42,7 1,15 1,20 1,18 1,22 YesM2-1-8 26-02-‘16 1914 1903 1847 1906 1985 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,8 42,9 42,6 43,1 42,8 1,28 1,24 1,39 1,37M2-1-9 26-02-‘16 1953 1928 1986 1973 1983 42,9 42,5 43,1 43,0 43,0 42,9 43,3 42,6 1,39 1,28 1,28 1,13M2-1-10 26-02-‘16 1948 1958 1929 1919 1983 43,1 42,7 43,1 42,7 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,7 1,35 1,35 1,30 1,39M2-1-11 26-02-‘16 1947 1923 1919 1905 1985 42,9 42,6 43,0 42,7 42,9 42,8 43,1 42,6 1,22 1,32 1,24 1,32M2-1-12 26-02-‘16 1849 1929 1895 1926 1991 43,0 42,8 43,3 43,0 43,0 42,8 42,7 43,0 1,24 1,30 1,26 1,28M2-1-13 01-03-‘16 1941 1912 1927 1954 1991 43,0 43,0 42,8 43,1 43,0 43,3 43,0 43,0 1,39 1,30 1,28 1,26M2-1-14 01-03-‘16 1897 1956 1912 1946 1990 42,9 42,9 42,9 43,2 42,9 43,1 43,1 42,6 1,28 1,24 1,26 1,32M2-1-15 01-03-‘16 1944 1931 1959 1941 1987 43,0 42,5 42,9 43,1 43,0 43,0 43,1 42,5 1,35 1,42 1,24 1,32M2-1-16 01-03-‘16 1933 1977 1962 1951 1989 43,0 42,7 42,8 43,0 43,0 43,1 43,1 42,8 1,35 1,26 1,22 1,32M2-1-17 01-03-‘16 1939 1971 1943 1921 1988 43,1 42,7 42,9 43,1 43,0 43,0 43,1 42,7 1,37 1,20 1,26 1,26M2-1-18 01-03-‘16 1940 1917 1956 1915 1988 43,0 42,8 42,8 43,0 43,0 43,2 43,1 42,7 1,37 1,20 1,26 1,26M2-1-19 24-03-‘16 1942 1928 1965 1945 1989 43,1 42,7 42,8 43,1 43,0 43,1 43,1 42,7 1,15 1,20 1,15 1,18M2-1-20 24-03-‘16 1962 1922 1943 1934 1995 43,1 42,9 42,8 43,1 43,1 43,2 43,2 42,8 1,18 1,28 1,17 1,18Mean 1936 1989 42,9 1,28St.dev. 36,9 3,4 0,18 0,074Minimum 1806 1983 42,5 1,13Maximum 2019 1995 43,3 1,42

Slabcode

Date ofcompaction


M2-2-1 03-03-‘16 1971 1989 1938 2001 1996 43,1 42,8 42,7 43,1 43,1 43,2 43,0 42,9 1,15 1,28 1,15 1,13 YesM2-2-2 03-03-‘16 1936 1993 1980 1949 1994 43,1 42,7 42,8 43,1 43,1 43,1 43,0 42,8 1,28 1,28 1,22 1,24M2-2-3 03-03-‘16 1923 1958 1977 1962 1991 43,0 42,9 42,8 43,1 43,1 43,2 43,1 42,6 1,28 1,24 1,13 1,22M2-2-4 03-03-‘16 1928 1913 1991 1978 1992 43,1 42,6 42,9 43,0 43,0 43,0 42,9 42,7 1,28 1,22 1,28 1,30


48

M2-2-5 03-03-‘16 1942 1989 1981 1949 1996 43,1 42,9 42,7 43,1 43,3 43,2 43,3 42,9 1,30 1,18 1,13 1,22M2-2-6 03-03-‘16 1932 1957 1936 1981 1992 43,0 42,9 42,7 43,0 43,0 43,1 43,2 42,7 1,30 1,20 1,26 1,24M2-2-7 08-03-‘16 1939 1927 1959 1996 1992 42,8 42,8 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,7 43,0 42,7 1,22 1,24 1,20 1,11M2-2-8 08-03-‘16 1959 1970 1937 1960 1996 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,8 43,4 42,9 43,2 42,8 1,30 1,13 1,24 1,18M2-2-9 08-03-‘16 1932 1969 1973 1940 1995 42,9 42,7 43,1 42,8 43,3 43,0 43,1 43,0 1,24 1,17 1,15 1,20M2-2-10 08-03-‘16 1972 1934 1941 1926 1992 42,9 42,6 43,0 42,8 43,0 42,9 43,1 42,7 1,18 1,13 1,26 1,10M2-2-11 08-03-‘16 1924 1957 1961 1974 1990 42,9 42,8 43,1 42,5 42,9 42,8 43,1 42,7 1,30 1,18 1,22 1,15M2-2-12 08-03-‘16 1912 1953 1947 1921 1993 43,1 42,7 43,1 42,7 43,2 42,8 43,1 43,0 1,22 1,17 1,15 1,13M2-2-13 10-03-‘16 1978 1956 1934 1969 1997 43,1 42,8 42,8 43,0 43,0 43,2 43,2 42,8 1,20 1,24 1,22 1,18M2-2-14 10-03-‘16 1983 1959 1964 1936 1994 42,9 42,8 42,8 43,1 43,1 43,2 43,2 42,7 1,18 1,13 1,24 1,20 YesM2-2-15 10-03-‘16 1939 1929 1956 1918 1995 42,9 42,8 42,6 43,1 43,1 43,2 43,3 43,1 1,11 1,24 1,24 1,26M2-2-16 10-03-‘16 1945 1981 1996 1953 1991 42,9 42,7 42,6 43,0 43,1 43,0 43,1 42,8 1,15 1,15 1,11 1,11M2-2-17 10-03-‘16 1978 1965 1950 1934 1990 43,0 42,8 42,8 43,1 42,9 43,1 43,1 42,8 1,13 1,15 1,20 1,22M2-2-18 10-03-‘16 1935 1976 1955 1931 1991 43,1 42,6 42,9 43,0 42,9 42,9 43,1 42,8 1,15 1,20 1,18 1,17M2-2-19 24-03-‘16 1957 1981 1951 1974 1991 43,1 42,8 42,8 43,1 43,0 42,9 43,0 42,7 1,18 1,17 1,20 1,22M2-2-20 24-03-‘16 1986 1968 1981 1974 1995 43,2 42,9 42,8 43,0 43,0 43,1 43,1 42,7 1,18 1,15 1,22 1,15M2-2-21 24-03-‘16 1987 1993 1996 1991 1992 42,9 42,6 42,7 43,0 43,0 43,0 43,0 42,8 1,13 1,10 1,10 1,18Mean 1958 1993 43,0 1,20St.dev. 23,0 2,2 0,18 0,056Minimum 1912 1990 42,5 1,10Maximum 2001 1997 43,4 1,30


49

Slabcode

Date ofcompaction


M2-3-1 15-03-‘16 1969 1985 1973 1946 1996 43,0 42,7 43,0 43,1 43,0 42,9 43,0 42,8 1,05 0,96 1,03 1,11M2-3-2 15-03-‘16 1961 1936 1950 1941 1993 43,0 42,8 42,8 43,0 43,1 43,0 43,2 42,8 1,11 1,18 1,15 1,18M2-3-3 15-03-‘16 1966 1982 1960 1949 1990 42,9 42,7 42,6 43,1 43,1 43,1 43,2 42,8 1,15 1,17 1,18 1,17M2-3-4 15-03-‘16 1957 1969 1989 1945 1989 43,1 42,6 42,8 42,9 43,0 43,0 43,1 42,6 0,96 0,99 1,11 1,18M2-3-5 15-03-‘16 1983 1947 1939 1964 1991 42,9 42,7 42,8 43,0 43,0 43,1 43,0 42,9 1,13 1,08 1,06 1,08M2-3-6 15-03-‘16 1955 1962 1989 1977 1990 43,1 42,7 42,8 42,9 43,1 43,1 43,2 42,7 1,08 1,06 1,11 1,15M2-3-7 17-03-‘16 1968 1988 1980 1959 1992 43,0 42,9 42,9 43,0 43,2 43,0 43,2 42,9 1,15 1,06 1,08 1,08M2-3-8 17-03-‘16 1975 1988 2002 1974 1990 42,9 42,8 42,8 43,1 43,0 43,0 43,1 42,7 1,11 0,96 1,05 1,10M2-3-9 17-03-‘16 1951 1948 1973 1960 1989 43,0 42,8 42,7 43,1 43,1 43,0 43,1 42,9 1,18 1,13 1,00 1,03M2-3-10 17-03-‘16 1991 1977 1973 1959 1985 43,0 42,5 42,9 43,0 43,0 42,8 43,2 42,6 1,18 1,03 1,10 1,11M2-3-11 17-03-‘16 1947 1953 1986 1964 1988 43,1 43,1 42,8 42,7 43,0 43,0 43,1 43,0 1,11 1,03 1,05 1,11M2-3-12 17-03-‘16 1937 1948 1984 1971 1990 43,1 42,8 42,8 43,0 43,1 42,9 43,1 42,9 1,03 1,08 1,05 1,06M2-3-13 22-03-‘16 1968 1987 1991 1955 1993 42,9 42,9 43,2 42,8 42,9 43,0 43,1 42,7 1,00 1,00 0,99 1,02M2-3-14 22-03-‘16 1953 1978 1984 1974 1992 43,1 42,8 43,0 42,9 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,7 1,15 1,18 1,13 1,08M2-3-15 22-03-‘16 1938 1946 1965 1958 1992 43,1 42,8 42,8 43,1 43,0 43,2 43,2 42,7 1,02 0,98 1,02 1,10M2-3-16 22-03-‘16 1950 1944 1979 1956 1988 43,0 42,6 42,9 43,0 43,2 42,9 43,2 42,6 1,10 0,99 1,02 1,17M2-3-17 22-03-‘16 1965 1941 1954 1939 1992 43,0 42,7 42,9 43,1 43,0 43,0 43,1 42,8 1,08 1,08 1,08 1,11M2-3-18 22-03-‘16 1960 1946 1956 1948 1990 43,1 42,6 42,8 43,0 43,1 43,1 43,1 42,8 1,15 1,10 1,05 1,08M2-3-19 24-03-‘16 1979 1990 1969 1943 1988 43,0 42,8 42,6 43,0 42,9 43,0 43,0 42,8 1,08 1,00 1,05 1,11Mean 1964 1990 42,9 1,08St.dev. 16,5 2,4 0,16 0,061Minimum 1936 1985 42,5 0,96Maximum 2002 1996 43,2 1,18


50

Slabcode

Date ofcompaction


M3-1-1 20-04-‘16 2293 2289 2278 2288 2362 43,0 42,7 43,1 42,7 43,0 42,8 43,0 42,8 0,87 0,85 0,77 0,85M3-1-2 20-04-‘16 2269 2278 2266 2265 2362 42,9 42,8 43,1 42,7 43,2 42,9 43,0 42,8 0,72 0,90 0,73 0,90M3-1-3 20-04-‘16 2270 2268 2266 2299 2361 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,7 43,1 42,8 43,0 42,7 0,73 0,78 0,80 0,79M3-1-4 20-04-‘16 2297 2276 2269 2280 2358 42,9 42,6 43,1 42,9 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,7 0,71 0,74 0,87 0,84M3-1-5 20-04-‘16 2307 2278 2281 2286 2362 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,9 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,8 0,75 0,82 0,94 0,79M3-1-6 20-04-‘16 2259 2276 2259 2286 2359 43,0 42,6 43,1 42,7 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,7 0,82 0,98 0,98 0,76M3-1-7 22-04-‘16 2294 2276 2270 2283 2361 42,9 42,8 42,7 43,1 42,9 43,0 43,0 42,9 0,66 0,73 0,89 0,94M3-1-8 22-04-‘16 2269 2291 2275 2260 2362 42,9 42,7 43,0 42,7 43,0 42,8 43,0 43,1 0,96 0,89 0,91 0,81M3-1-9 22-04-‘16 2275 2289 2300 2280 2359 43,0 42,7 43,0 42,7 43,0 42,7 43,0 42,9 0,95 0,83 0,83 0,91M3-1-10 22-04-‘16 2281 2300 2270 2268 2358 42,9 42,7 43,0 42,7 43,1 42,8 43,1 42,6 0,95 0,84 0,83 0,86M3-1-11 22-04-‘16 2301 2283 2278 2291 2358 43,0 42,7 43,0 42,7 43,0 42,6 43,1 42,7 0,96 0,78 0,84 0,90M3-1-12 22-04-‘16 2277 2269 2259 2263 2347 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,8 43,0 42,8 43,1 42,7 0,92 0,96 0,94 0,95M3-1-13 26-04-‘16 2293 2306 2281 2269 2361 42,9 42,8 42,9 43,1 43,0 42,9 43,1 42,7 0,77 0,76 0,84 0,72M3-1-14 26-04-‘16 2272 2267 2259 2288 2360 43,1 42,8 42,7 43,1 43,0 43,0 43,1 42,8 0,76 0,72 0,86 0,80M3-1-15 26-04-‘16 2300 2276 2289 2279 2362 43,0 42,9 42,6 43,0 43,0 43,0 43,1 42,9 0,78 0,89 0,84 0,79M3-1-16 26-04-‘16 2258 2291 2284 2266 2360 43,0 42,6 42,9 43,0 43,0 43,1 43,0 42,7 0,81 0,96 0,87 0,85M3-1-17 26-04-‘16 2267 2284 2277 2283 2362 43,1 42,7 42,7 43,2 43,0 43,0 43,0 42,6 0,84 0,89 0,76 0,82M3-1-18 26-04-‘16 2302 2286 2278 2300 2362 43,1 42,8 42,8 43,0 42,9 43,0 43,1 42,8 0,82 0,84 0,77 0,90M3-1-19 27-05-‘16 2316 2320 2308 2292 2360 42,9 42,6 43,2 42,7 43,0 42,7 43,0 42,9 0,70 0,73 0,78 0,75M3-1-20 27-05-‘16 2289 2277 2321 2279 2358 43,0 42,7 43,1 42,6 42,9 42,7 43,0 42,9 0,76 0,81 0,73 0,82Mean 2282 2360 42,9 0,83St.dev. 14,6 3,4 0,16 0,073Minimum 2258 2347 42,6 0,66Maximum 2321 2362 43,2 0,98


51

Slabcode

Date ofcompaction




52

Slabcode

Date ofcompaction




53

drat – development of the ravelling test sample preparation d5... · the overall objective of the...

Documents