Noise reducing asphalt pavements: A literature review on ...

Noise reducing asphalt pavements: A literature review on requirements,

evaluating methods and recent developments

Ehsan Ghafoori

VTI rapport 1022A | N

oise reducing asphalt pavements: A

literature review on requirem

ents, evaluating methods and recent developm

ents

VTI rapport 1022A Published 2019

www.vti.se/en/publications

VTI rapport 1022A

Noise reducing asphalt pavements: A literature review on requirements,

evaluating methods and recent developments

Ehsan Ghafoori

Author: Ehsan Ghafoori, VTI, http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5526-5896 Reg. No., VTI: 2017/0573-9.2 Publication No.: VTI rapport 1022A Cover pictures: Mostphotos.com och Allan Wallberg/Mostphotos.com Published by VTI, 2019

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5526-5896

VTI rapport 1022A

Abstract The demand for using asphalt pavements with noise-reducing properties is high. Recent experience of the durability of functional performance of this type of pavement in Sweden have been mixed. Hence, there are still needs for improvements until this type of pavement before it could be widely used in Sweden. This report is a summary of the existing knowledge about asphalt pavements with noise reducing properties and is expected to be used as a basis for future studies in vision of improving the quality of noise reducing asphalt pavements exposed to extreme weather and traffic conditions.

The report contains five major sections which addresses the followings: Introduction of the existing noise reducing pavement types; the current standard and non-standard test methods used for evaluating this type of pavement; the existing guidelines and standards regarding noise reducing asphalt pavements in different countries; summary of the recent developments and studies conducted on this topic; and finally the recommendations for research in vision of improving the durability of noise reducing asphalt pavements the risks for premature failures.

Title: Noise reducing asphalt pavements: A literature review on requirements, evaluating methods and recent developments

Author: Ehsan Ghafoori (VTI, http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5526-5896)

Publisher: Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI) www.vti.se

Publication No.: VTI rapport 1022A

Published: 2019

Reg. No., VTI: 2017/0573-9.2

ISSN: 0347–6030

Project: Pre-study and literature review of noise reducing pavements

Commissioned by: Swedish road administration

Keywords: Noise-reducing asphalt pavements

Language: English

No. of pages: 70

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5526-5896

VTI rapport 1022A

Referat Behovet av att använda asfaltbeläggningar med bullerreducerande egenskaper är stort. De senaste erfarenheterna av att använda denna typ av beläggning i Sverige har varit både positiva och negativa. Därför finns det fortfarande behov av förbättringar till den här typen av beläggning innan den används allmänt i bullerkänsliga miljöer i Sverige. Denna rapport är en sammanställning av den befintliga kunskapen om asfaltbeläggningar med bullerreducerande egenskaper och förväntas användas som underlag för framtida studier för att förbättra hållbarheten hos bullerreducerande asfaltbeläggningar för nordiska förhållanden.

Rapporten innehåller fem delar som behandlar följande: Introduktion av befintliga bullerreducerande beläggningar, testmetoderna som används för att utvärdera denna typ av beläggning, befintliga riktlinjer och specifikationer för bullerreducerande asfaltbeläggningar i olika länder, sammanfattning av den senaste utvecklingen och studier som gjorts om detta ämne och slutligen rekommendationerna för forskning som syftar till att förbättra hållbarheten hos bullerreducerande asfaltbeläggningar motverka tidiga beständighetsbrister.

Titel: Bullerreducering av asfaltbeläggningar: En litteraturstudie om krav, utvärdering av metoder och nya utvecklingar

Författare: Ehsan Ghafoori (VTI, http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5526-5896)

Utgivare: VTI, Statens väg och transportforskningsinstitut www.vti.se

Serie och nr: VTI rapport 1022A

Utgivningsår: 2019

VTI:s diarienr: 2017/0573-9.2

ISSN: 0347–6030

Projektnamn: Förstudie och litteraturstudie avseende funktionella egenskaper för bullerreducerande beläggningar

Uppdragsgivare: Trafikverket

Nyckelord: Bullerreducering asfaltbeläggningar

Språk: Engelska

Antal sidor: 70

VTI rapport 1022A

Foreword This study is part of a project funded by Swedish Road Administration (Trafikverket) with the title of “Literature study on specifications for quiet pavements”. For this project, a group of experts, i.e. Andreas Waldemarson, Håkan Arvidsson and Ulf Sandberg from VTI, Thorsten Nordgren, Kenneth Lind and Robert Karlsson from the Swedish Transport Administration, Hans Lundkvist and Carl Hultin from Nynas, Lars Jansson from Peab, Jerry lngelström from Svevia, Peter Lundberg from Skanska and Hassan Hakim from NCC, participated in a workshop and shared their visions on this topic.

This report has been prepared based on the directions given by the experts in the mentioned workshop and is expected to help in upcoming projects dealing with the same subject.

Linköping, May 2019

Andreas Waldemarson Project leader

VTI rapport 1022A

Quality review Review seminar was carried out on 9 August 2019 where Björn Kalman reviewed and commented on the report. Ehsan Ghafoori has made alterations to the final manuscript of the report. The research director Björn Kalman examined and approved the report for publication on 14 November 2019. The conclusions and recommendations expressed are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect VTI’s opinion as an authority.

Kvalitetsgranskning Granskningsseminarium har genomförts 9 augusti 2019 där Björn Kalman var lektör. Ehsan Ghafoori har genomfört justeringar av slutligt rapportmanus. Forskningschef Björn Kalman har därefter granskat och godkänt publikationen för publicering 14 november 2019. De slutsatser och rekommendationer som uttrycks är författarens egna och speglar inte nödvändigtvis myndigheten VTI:s uppfattning.

VTI rapport 1022A

Table of contents

Summary .................................................................................................................................................9

Sammanfattning ...................................................................................................................................11

1. Introduction to noise reducing pavements ....................................................................................13

1.1. Single layer porous asphalt (PA) ................................................................................................13 1.2. Double layer porous asphalt (DLPA) .........................................................................................13 1.3. Stone mastic asphalt (SMA) ......................................................................................................13

Noise-reducing split mastics asphalt (SMA-LA) ..................................................................13 1.4. Thin layers..................................................................................................................................14 1.5. Very- and Ultra-thin surfacing (VTAC) ....................................................................................14 1.6. Open graded friction courses .....................................................................................................14 1.7. Asphalt rubber friction course (ARFC) ......................................................................................15 1.8. Poroelastic road surface (PERS) ................................................................................................15 1.9. New generation OGFC (NGOGFC) ...........................................................................................15 1.10. Porous concrete ..........................................................................................................................15

Next generation concrete surface ..........................................................................................15

2. Evaluating test methods ..................................................................................................................16

2.1. Aggregate tests ...........................................................................................................................16 2.2. Binder and mastic tests ..............................................................................................................16

Binder rheological properties ................................................................................................16 Stiffness of the cohesive and adhesive zones ........................................................................17

2.3. Mixture tests ...............................................................................................................................17 Draindown ............................................................................................................................17 Air void content ....................................................................................................................18 Compactability ......................................................................................................................18 Indirect Tensile test (IDT) ....................................................................................................18 Water sensitivity ...................................................................................................................19 Direct tensile strength test (DTS) .........................................................................................19 Cyclic compression test ........................................................................................................19 Raveling/abrasion resistance tests .........................................................................................20 Semi Circular Bending (SCB) test ........................................................................................23

Resistance to rutting ..............................................................................................................24 Permeability test ...................................................................................................................24 2- and 4-point bending ..........................................................................................................25 Coaxial Shear Test ................................................................................................................25 Superpave shear tester...........................................................................................................26 Polishing resistance ...............................................................................................................26 Skid resistance test ................................................................................................................27 Rolling resistance test ...........................................................................................................27 Laboratory aging of the mix .................................................................................................28 Adhesion/bonding with base layer or substrate ....................................................................28 Additional cohesion and adhesion tests ................................................................................28

3. Noise reducing pavements in different countries .........................................................................30

3.1. Netherlands ................................................................................................................................32 Current requirements for porous layers in Netherlands ........................................................32

3.2. Switzerland.................................................................................................................................38 Requirements for open graded mixtures ...............................................................................38

VTI rapport 1022A

Requirements for Semi-dense asphalt (SDA) in Switzerland ...............................................40 3.3. Ireland ........................................................................................................................................43

Mixture requirements ............................................................................................................43 3.4. UK ..............................................................................................................................................44

Structure ................................................................................................................................44 Binder....................................................................................................................................44 Aggregate ..............................................................................................................................44 Mixture requirements ............................................................................................................44

3.5. Italy ............................................................................................................................................45 Bitumen .................................................................................................................................45 Aggregates ............................................................................................................................45 Gradation ..............................................................................................................................45 Drainage and sound absorbing requirements ........................................................................46 Mixture requirements ............................................................................................................46 Construction requirement ......................................................................................................46

3.6. Germany .....................................................................................................................................47 3.7. France .........................................................................................................................................47

Structure requirements ..........................................................................................................47 Aggregate ..............................................................................................................................47 Gradation ..............................................................................................................................48 Bitumen .................................................................................................................................48 Mixture requirements ............................................................................................................49

3.8. Belgium ......................................................................................................................................49 3.9. Denmark .....................................................................................................................................50

Structures and mixture requirements ....................................................................................50 3.10. Finland .......................................................................................................................................50 3.11. US ..............................................................................................................................................51

Gradation ..............................................................................................................................51 Mix design methods ..............................................................................................................52

3.12. Japan ..........................................................................................................................................52 Structure ................................................................................................................................52 Aggregate ..............................................................................................................................53 Bitumen .................................................................................................................................53

3.13. Summary ....................................................................................................................................53 Structure ................................................................................................................................53 Bitumen .................................................................................................................................54 Evaluating test methods ........................................................................................................55

4. Recent studies ..................................................................................................................................57

5. Recommendations ...........................................................................................................................61

5.1. Binder and mastics .....................................................................................................................61 5.2. Gradation ....................................................................................................................................61

Theoretical ............................................................................................................................61 Experimental .........................................................................................................................61

5.3. Production and handling ............................................................................................................62 5.4. Construction ...............................................................................................................................62

References .............................................................................................................................................63

VTI rapport 1022A 9

Summary

Noise reducing asphalt pavements: A literature review on requirements, evaluating methods and recent developments

by Ehsan Ghafoori (VTI)

There is a great demand for using noise-reducing pavements in Sweden. Despite of the success achieved in some of the projects, the durability issues still prevents using noise-reducing pavements in a larger scale in Sweden. This lack of performance consistency calls for a systematic approach for providing detailed requirements in both material and mixture levels. It is also important to identify and utilize performance-based evaluating test methods that are suitable for simulating the load and environmental conditions of Sweden. As an initial step, it is important to build up knowledge about the existing practices, standards and recent studies on this topic. Hence, this report was prepared with the aim of presenting an overview of the existing standards as well as recent advances on noise reducing pavements in different regions.

This report consists of five mains chapters as described below:

• in the first chapter, an overview of the most commonly used noise-reducing surface layers and their advantages and disadvantages are briefly stated

• in the second chapter, existing standard and innovative test methods used and recommended for evaluating the quality of the noise-reducing pavements are briefly presented

• in the third chapter, the existing requirements for noise-reducing pavements in different countries are presented

• in the fourth chapter, recent studies about the causes of premature failures as well as solutions for improving the quality of highly porous asphalt pavements are summarized

• in the fifth and final chapter, a recommendation for future work with the aim of improving the durability the noise reducing pavements is presented

This report is expected to be used as part of the feasibility phase for improving the Swedish standard requirements for the noise-reducing asphalt pavements.

10 VTI rapport 1022A

VTI rapport 1022A 11

Sammanfattning

Bullerreducerande asfaltbeläggningar: En litteraturstudie om krav, utvärderingsmetoder och nyare utveckling

av Ehsan Ghafoori (VTI)

Det finns en stor efterfrågan för att använda bullerreducerande beläggningar i Sverige. Trots den framgång som uppnåtts i några av projekten som redovisas i rapporten hindrar hållbarhetsfrågorna fortfarande att bullerreducerande beläggningar används i större skala i Sverige. Denna brist på förutsägbar prestanda kräver ett systematiskt tillvägagångssätt för att tillhandahålla mer detaljerade krav på både material- och blandningsnivåer. Det är också viktigt att identifiera och använda prestationsbaserade utvärderingsmetoder som är lämpliga för att simulera påkänningar och miljöförhållandena i Sverige. Som ett första steg är det viktigt att bygga upp kunskaper om befintliga metoder, standarder och senaste studier om detta ämne. Därför utarbetades denna rapport i syfte att presentera en översikt över de befintliga normerna samt de senaste framstegen på högporösa beläggningar i olika regioner.

Denna rapport består av fem kapitel som beskrivs nedan:

• i det första kapitlet beskrivs kortfattat en översikt över de mest använda bullerreducerande beläggningar och deras för- och nackdelar

• i det andra kapitlet presenteras både befintliga standards och innovativa testmetoder som används och rekommenderas för att utvärdera kvaliteten på de bullerreducerande beläggningarna

• i det tredje kapitlet presenteras de befintliga specifikationerna för bullerreducerande beläggningar i olika länder

• i den fjärde kapitlet sammanfattas nyligen utförda studier om orsakerna till tidiga misslyckanden samt lösningar för att förbättra kvaliteten på högporösa asfaltbeläggningar

• i den femte och sista kapitlet presenteras en rekommendation för framtida arbete med sikte på att förbättra hållbarhet för de bullerreducerande beläggningarna.

Denna rapport förväntas användas som en del av genomförbarhetsfasen för att förbättra de svenska kraven för bullerreducerande asfaltbeläggningar.


1. Introduction to noise reducing pavements The concept of porous asphalt (PA) was first proposed in mid-1950s [Nicholls, 1998]. The initial idea was to avoid accumulation of water on the pavements during the rain to prevent aquaplaning. Later, it was found out that such pavements are also useful for absorbing the noise, coming from vehicles and in particular the interaction between vehicle tires and pavements. As demands for less traffic nuisance has increased, the need for using PA or other noise-reducing pavements has been significantly increased. However, the main issue with the existing noise reducing pavements is in their serviceability as it is largely lower than the conventional dense graded pavements. Hence, improvements in this field seem necessary. For making durability improvements in noise reducing pavements, it is important to build up an understanding about the existing knowledge in this field. Hence, in this section, the existing types of noise reducing pavements are briefly presented and some of their pros and cons are stated.

1.1. Single layer porous asphalt (PA) This type of flexible wearing course layer typically consists of single size coarse aggregates, which forms the resisting skeleton of the layer, and very small amounts of the fine fractions plus conventional or modified bitumen as binder. Typically, the air void in this type of structure after compaction is between 20 to 25% of its total volume. It has been reported that the interconnected air voids in this type of road has around 2 to 3 decibels higher noise absorption than those paved with average dense asphalt mixtures [Bendtsen and Gspan, 2017]. One of the major reported problems with the single layer PA that compromises its noise reducing properties is clogging [Ahmed, 2015]. More details and standard requirements for this pavement type is presented in the third chapter of this report.

1.2. Double layer porous asphalt (DLPA) A double layer porous asphalt consists of a thin top layer and a thicker bottom layer. Obviously, the top layer consists of smaller aggregate fraction sizes than the bottom layer. The US version of this pavement normally has air void content between 15 to 19% whereas the European and Japanese ones have 20 to 30% void contents. This type of porous asphalt absorbs more traffic noise than the single layer PA, approximately between 4 to 6 decibels the first couple of years in service. Similar to the single layer, the double PA is also most suitable for high speed roads. During the construction of a double layer PA, a proper bonding between its top and bottom layers should be provided. The drawbacks of this type of pavement are the construction costs, its vulnerability to raveling at its top layer and clogging [Hamzah et al. 2013]. The minimum thickness for single- and double-layer porous asphalt under different loading conditions are normally recommended in standards.

1.3. Stone mastic asphalt (SMA) A conventional SMA has a gap-graded gradation with considerable binder content and low air void with the lifetime of approximately 15 years. Normally, this type of mixture is used as a reference mixture when measuring the noise reducing properties of an asphalt layer. However, a new generation of SMA with smaller nominal maximum aggregate sizes and higher air void contents than the conventional SMA mixture is proven to be effective for reducing the tire-pavement noise. [Praticò et al. 2012]. An example of this type of noise reducing asphalt is presented in the following.

Noise-reducing split mastics asphalt (SMA-LA) The split mastics asphalt is commonly used in Austria as one of the noise-reducing asphalt alternatives. This type of noise reducing asphalt has relatively lower portion of smaller aggregate sizes as compared with the conventional SMA. This results in the higher air void content in SMA-LA type which is between 9 to 11% by volume. This type of structure reduces the noise for about 2.5 dB as


compared with dense graded asphalt concrete and conventional SMA. Lowering the maximum aggregate sizes would also add to the noise reducing properties of this asphalt mixture type. Depending on its maximum aggregate size, the thickness of a SMA-LA layer is between 20 to 40 mm. Comparing to PA, SMA-LA has higher durability and less maintenance costs [Bendtsen & Gspan, 2017].

1.4. Thin layers This type of asphalt layer normally has a 15 to 40 mm of thickness. Its noise reducing properties lies in its smaller aggregate sizes, i.e. from 0/4mm up to 0/10 mm; for obtaining better noise reducing properties, sometime the structure of this type of mixture is adjusted to become either open or semi-dense graded [Bendtsen & Gspan, 2017]. Thin layers are more often used as a maintenance technique in urban areas where the noise is a problem. The thin layer asphalt normally has shorter lifetime than the normal pavement types and are not recommended for intersections, parking lots and roundabouts [Kragh et al., 2011].

1.5. Very- and Ultra-thin surfacing (VTAC) This type of layer is also used in urban areas where the porous asphalt cannot be used due to clogging problems and low shear resistance. This type of surfacing has an open-graded structure with the characteristics described in EU standard (EN 13108-2) as open-graded surface class 2. The structural difference between VTAC class 2 and PA is that the first one lacks medium size aggregates whereas the later one lack both medium and small aggregate sizes. Besides, the VTAC has the maximum aggregate sizes of 6mm or 10mm and a very thin lift thickness of 20 to 25 mm. The expected air void content in VTAC is about 18 to 25% with the sand content of 17–22%. In addition to urban areas, the VTAC has shown potential to be also used as emergency repair and for bridge decks [Praticò & Anfosso-Lédée, 2012].

Table 1 shows a comparison of the durability and noise reducing properties of different pavements based on their mechanical (bearing properties) and functional (surface properties) performances.

Table 1 Comparing the durability and noise reducing properties of different pavements [Praticò & Anfosso-Lédée, 2012]

Pavement type Durability Initial noise reduction (dBA)

Final / Min noise reduction (dBA)

Dense asphalt Variable 0 -2

Single layer PA 10 – 12 4 < 3

Double layer PA 9 6 4

SMA thin layer 9.5 4.7 3

Porous thin layer 8.5 5 3

1.6. Open graded friction courses An OGFC is a layer of asphalt with uniform aggregate size and minimum of fine fraction particles. The service life of this type of road is expected to be around 8 to 12 years. The air void content of this pavement type is less than 20%, between 15 to 22%, in the US [Alvarez et al. 2006]; the minimum thickness of OCFC is about 1.5 times the maximum aggregate size and the air void content [Cooley et al. 2009]. Raveling is a very common type of failure for this type of pavement in cold regions.


1.7. Asphalt rubber friction course (ARFC) This type of asphalt mixture normally has a gap- or open-graded structure containing crumb rubber. It has been used as the wearing layer mainly in US, Spain and Portugal. Despite the observed variety in performances, the overall results have shown promising results in terms of noise reduction. The range of noise reduction in this type of pavement is up to 6.7dBA. However, this type of pavement is more expensive than the normal pavements [Sandberg et al., 2011].

1.8. Poroelastic road surface (PERS) Poroelastic concept was developed many years ago in Sweden. Then, it was improved in Japan and studied more within an EU project, called “persuade”. Normally, PERS contains 20 to 40% air void. The rubber used in this mixture comes from crap tires. Despite of its high research value, it still requires more developments until it becomes commercially available. PERS contains almost 20% rubber in volume and the aggregates and the rubber are bounded by polymer modified binder or polyurethane binder. The Swedish-Japanese studies have shown that this type of pavement can reduce the noise between 5 to 15dBA compared to the conventional dense graded asphalt layers. Low interlayer adhesion, low skid resistance were the main issues raised with this type of pavement. In addition, during wintertime in cold regions snow removal machines can destroy the PERS easily [Sandberg and Goubert, 2011].

1.9. New generation OGFC (NGOGFC) The open graded friction course (OGFC) first was introduced in 1950s and used for many years as permeable and noise reducing pavement layer. In spite of good noise reducing properties, this type of pavement was proven to have significantly lower durability than the normal courses. Hence, in 1999, NCAT recommended a new type of the open graded asphalt so called New Generation open graded friction course (NGOGFC). In the new generation, the highly modified binder and modified gradations were introduced [Mallick et al., 2000].

1.10. Porous concrete Similar to porous asphalt, porous cement is made of gap- or open-graded aggregate structure. A single- or double-layer porous concrete, so called ModieSlab, has been developed in Netherlands allowing 6 to 7 dB noise reduction as compared with the reference mixture [Kragh, 2009 and Gibbs et al. 2005].

Next generation concrete surface This type of surface has been introduced for providing noise reducing properties in concrete pavements. In this technology, the surface of a concrete layer is grinded by means of diamond blades which results in reducing the noise between 3 to 6dBA [Rasmussen et al. 2004].

In the next chapter, some of the important test methods for evaluating the quality of the porous asphalt mixtures are briefly presented.


2. Evaluating test methods

2.1. Aggregate tests In all types of asphalt mixtures, the quality of the aggregates as the main skeleton of the road structure is very important and prevents premature failure of the pavements. This is especially more sensitive for porous asphalt. Below there is a list of tests that is also used for evaluating the quality of porous mixture aggregates:

Crushed faces (C) [EN 933-5]

Polished Stone Value (PSV) [EN 1097-8]

Stone resistance (LA) [EN 1097-2]

Water Absorption [EN 13755]

Grain size distribution [EN 933-1]

Aggregate abrasion value (AAV) [EN 1097/8]

Flakiness index (FI) [EN 933-3]

Frost and thaw resistance (F) [ASTM C666]

Micro Deval (MDE) [EN 1097-1]

Grading coarse (Gc) [ASTM C136]

Soundness [ASTM C88]

Soft particles in coarse [JIS A 1126]

Apparent density [ASTM C-127]

Stripping [IS:6241-1971]

Specific gravity (G) [AASHTO M 132]

2.2. Binder and mastic tests Due to high sensitivity of porous asphalt mixtures to raveling, the adhesion and cohesion properties of the binder and mastics in such mixtures are very important. Hence, in addition to normal evaluating tests such as penetration, softening point and etc. used for testing binders, more tests have been used for assessing porous asphalt binders. Two of these tests are presented below.

Binder rheological properties Dynamics Shear Rheometer (DSR), AASHTO T315, has been frequently used for obtaining rheological properties of bitumen. This test enables measuring elastic and viscous behaviors of an asphalt binder at high and medium temperatures. Figure 1 shows a schema of the test and an example of the device.


Figure 1. Schema of the DSR test method [Majidi et al., 2016].

Stiffness of the cohesive and adhesive zones One of the main causes for the low durability of noise reducing mixtures is raveling. It is believed that the raveling is caused by the weak cohesion within the mastics and/or low adhesion between the mastics and aggregates [Herrington et al., 2005]. Hence, DSR has been utilized for measuring these properties for improving the durability of asphalt mixtures. Figure 2 shows a schema of the mastics tested by DSR.

Figure 2. DSR setup used for testing mastics for obtaining stiffness of the cohesive and adhesive zones [Mohan, 2010].

2.3. Mixture tests

Draindown This test is used for determining whether the amount of bitumen drainage form a given mixture is acceptable or not. The range of acceptance for draindown is mentioned in different standards, e.g. AASHTO T305-09, EN 12697-18 or ASTM D6390-11. This type of test has been used for different asphalt mixtures especially noise-reducing mixtures to assure avoiding the premature failure of such mixtures.

In this test, a portion of a loose mixture is placed in a basket and placed in an oven, Figure 3, at the temperature of 175°C for an hour and then the amount of the drained bitumen from the mixture is measured with a simple formula.


Figure 3. The draindown test basket containing an asphalt mixture placed in the oven [Brown and Mallick, 1995].

Air void content For measuring the air void content of asphalt mixtures, the European and US Standards, EN 12697-8 and AASHTO T 269, are used. For porous asphalt, the interconnection of the voids is very important and determines the permeability of these mixtures. The old Swiss standard, SN 640 433b, has been proposed in the literature [Poulikakos, et al., 2006] for determining the interconnected voids in highly porous mixtures.

Compactability The quality of construction is significantly influenced by the compactibility of mixtures as well as the weather conditions during construction. In case of PA and thin layers, used as noise reducing pavements, the thickness is a very important parameter as the thinner layers are more sensitive to the cooling of the mixtures during the construction. Hence, laboratory scale researches have been focused on the compactibility of the PA mixtures and thin layers. Both Marshal and Gyratory compactors as the two well-known laboratory compactors are used for conducting compactability measurements. Normally, for compactability measurements, asphalt mixtures are compacted right after mixing and also after being aged.

Indirect Tensile test (IDT) Indirect Tensile Test is used for determining the tensile strength (stiffness) and the resilient modulus of asphalt mixtures at different temperatures. These tests are carried out based on the European and US standard procedures, EN 12697-23 and the ASTM D 4123. Figure 4 shows an IDT the test setup.

Figure 4. An example of the Indirect tensile test setup [Chen and Huang, 2008].


Water sensitivity

2.3.5.1. Indirect Tensile Strength Ratio (ITSR) The water sensitivity test is normally carried out on laboratory compacted specimens using the indirect tensile test setup at the temperature of 25ºC. This test is also part of the European standard, EN 12697-12, and is proven to be suitable for porous asphalt. Based on almost all standards, e.g. SN 640 431-7NA, the ratio between the results of the ITS on dry and wet specimens should not be lower than 70%.

2.3.5.2. Duriez The Duriez test [Duriez and Arrambide, 1961], EN 12697-12, used mostly in France, is another test for the water sensitivity measurements; however, there is still no field validation regarding this type of test (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Duriez test setup [CEDR, 2012].

Direct tensile strength test (DTS) The direct tensile strength test (DTS) enables to investigate and capture material’s strengths responses. Using the direct tensile test at low temperatures has been claimed to be suitable for simulating the rapture phenomena occurring at regions with high temperature falls [Populikakos et al., 2006]. Populikakos et al. in 2006 suggested adjusting the DTS for conducting measurements on porous asphalt, Figure 6. The results of their study showed that this test method was capable of capturing clear differences between different asphalt mixtures. Besides, this test has been used for measuring adhesive strength between the thin layer and its bottom layer.

Figure 6. The direct tensile test setup adjusted for PA [Populikakos et al., 2006].

Cyclic compression test Cyclic compression test has been suggested for PA using the European standard EN 12697-25 with cyclic axial loading. With the help of this test, the E* dynamic modulus of specimens with unconfined


as well as confined conditions can be measured. Figure 7 shows different test setups for confined and unconfined conditions.

Figure 7. The test setups for cyclic compression test [Populikakos et al., 2006].

Raveling/abrasion resistance tests As it was mentioned before, raveling is the most common type of failure in PA mixtures. Due to its high importance, there has been different suggestions regarding evaluating the resistance of such mixtures against this type of failure.

2.3.8.1. Cantabro test The standardized cantabro test, EN-12697-17/ASTM D7064M-08, is the mostly used test method in researches for measuring the durability of porous mixtures. This test is carried out on laboratory produced specimens to evaluate the cohesive strength of the mixtures. This test consists of a rotating drum machine, Figure 8. The amount of weight loss of the specimens after the Cantabro test is used for the durability evaluation of that asphalt mixture. In spite of its high use, this test type does not seem to represent the field conditions and is only suitable for making comparison between mixtures. The cantabro test has been used for both newly prepared specimens and also for the conditioned ones, water-conditioned/oven-aged/ frost and thaw cycled [Alvarez et al., 2011].

Figure 8. Schema of Cantabro test [Tenza-Abril et al., 2014].

2.3.8.2. The Aachener Raveling Tester This test is carried out on asphalt mixture slabs. In this test, the surface of a porous asphalt is loaded by two turning regular tires in order to cause particle losses, Figure 9. The amount of particle loss is then measured and used as an indicator of the particle loss resistance of that mixture.


Figure 9. Aachener ravelling test setup [Wang et al., 2017].

2.3.8.3. Darmstadt scuffing device (DSD) This device is another test for simulating the raveling on different types of asphalt mixtures. For this method a slab is placed on a moveable platform and by means of a pneumatic tire rotation and translation movements are imposed to the surface of the slab (Figure 10). This method has been used for thin and very thin pavements as well as porous asphalt.

Figure 10. DSD Test setup [De Visscher & Vanelstraete, 2016].

2.3.8.4. Rotating Surface Abrasion Test (RSAT) For measuring the mechanical stability of porous asphalt mixtures, a new test method so called the Rotating Surface Abrasion Test (RSAT) was developed [Hartjes, 2008], Figure 11. This type of test can be used for determining the rutting resistance in noise reducing mixtures [Watson et al., 2018].

This test method was developed with the aim of simulating surface damage of an asphalt layer at the end of its service life in the field. The test consists of normal and shear forces imposed by means of a massive rubber wheel to determine the durability of porous asphalt. The test is used for PA slabs at 20⁰C. The test lasts for 24 hours and then the amount of the loose materials is measured for determining the resistance of the mixture to the raveling.


Figure 11. The Rotating surface abrasion test (RSAT) [Sandberg et al., 2011].

2.3.8.5. Tribometer This test was developed in 2008 by LCPC in France [Hammoun et al., 2008] (figure12). Tribometer is used for determining the impact of the binder type on the resistance of the asphalt mixture against tangential forces. This test hasn’t been standardized in Europe yet.

Figure 12. the setup of the tribometer [Sandberg et al., 2011].

2.3.8.6. Prall The Prall equipment, Figure 13, is often used for testing dense graded asphalt mixtures conforming to the European standard EN 12697-16:2004. In addition to the dense grade mixtures, it has also been used for other type of mixtures including PA for determining their wearing resistance.

Figure 13. the apparatus of the Prall test [Göransson et al., 2018].


2.3.8.7. Road simulator The Road simulator, Figure 14, at VTI has been used to simulate the wear. The simulator consists of four-wheel axles mounted on a central rotating axle with the rotating speed up to 70 km/h (Figure 14). The diameter of the test ring is about 6 meters. This machine has a high accuracy as it enables measuring the particle loss of the pavement and the tires separately with high precisions. Earlier studies at VTI have shown promising results when compared with the wear in the field [Jacobson, 1995]. This method is carried out according to the European standard EN 13863-4:2004. The test can be conducted within the speed range of 20 to 70km/h and at different temperatures using different tire types [Gustafsson et al., 2009] and is very suitable for both dense graded and highly porous asphalt mixtures.

Figure 14. Road simulator [Lundberg et al., 2017].

2.3.8.8. Rolling bottle test The rolling bottle test, EN 12697-11, has been proposed for indication of the raveling resistance (Figure 15). This test allows investigating the adhesion between an aggregate and bitumen. However, it is difficult to relate its results to the performance of the mixture in the field.

Figure 15. Rolling bottle test device [Partl et al., 2018].

Semi Circular Bending (SCB) test This test is used for determining the fracture toughness of different mixtures [Frigio et al. 2013]. The SCB is used for providing comparison among different mixtures rather than relating its results to the reality fracture in the field. The test is carried out for dry and also water-conditioned specimens, Figure 16.


Figure 16. the SCB test setup (left) dry and(right) submerged in water specimens [Frigio et al., 2013].

Resistance to rutting The Hamburg wheel tracking test, EN 12697-22, and asphalt pavement analyzer (APA), ASSHTO TP 63, are used for investigating the potential for rutting in open graded and porous asphalt, Figure 17.

Figure 17. (left) Hamburg wheel tracking test; (right) Aasphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA) [Stuart et al., 2002, Shu et al., 2012].

Permeability test

2.3.11.1. In situ permeability test Clogging is one of the major problems with porous asphalt layers which causes decrease of permeability, EN 12697-40. Hence, the “permeameter”, Figure 18, is used in the field for measuring the water permeability of porous asphalt [Jacobson and Viman, 2015].

Figure 18. Test setup for the field permeameters [Jacobson and Viman, 2015].


2.3.11.2. Laboratory permeability tests In the laboratory the permeability of asphalt mixtures in horizontal and also vertical directions are measured as shown in Figure 19 [Poulikakos et al., 2006].

Figure 19. (left) vertical (right) horizontal permeability test setups [Poulikakos et al., 2006].

2- and 4-point bending Two- and four-point bending tests, Figure 20, are normally used for measuring the complex modulus, to evaluate the structural behavior, as well as fatigue behavior, to gain insight of the pavement resistance under repeated loads [Mackiewicz, 2012]. These tests have been used for evaluating a wide range of asphalt mixture and supports and has also been recommended for porous asphalt [Poulikakos et al., 2006].

Figure 20. Test setups for (left) two and (right) four point bending tests [Poulikakos et al., 2006 and Mackiewicz, 2012].

Coaxial Shear Test The Co Axial Shear Test (CAST), Figure 21, was developed at EMPA and used in different researches for determining the complex modulus (E*) of asphalt pavements [Sokolov et al., 2005], Figure 21. In this test, “a shear load is applied perpendicular to the specimen’s circular surface with lateral confinement provided by a metal ring surrounding the specimen”. This test method seems to allow loading with similar axis to the traffic. The surrounding confinement of the specimen in the test setup tries to simulate “a semi-infinite” field situation. The CAST has been used for dry and repeatedly water-conditioned specimens.


Figure 21. (Left) Schema and (right) a cut view of a CAST specimen [Poulikakos et al., 2006].

Superpave shear tester The Superpave shear tester, Figure 22, allows imposing both vertical and shear loads to the specimen [Bennert et al., 2004]. This test has been used for evaluating the quality of both dense and porous asphalt mixtures.

Figure 22. Superpave shear tester device [Bennert et al., 2004].

Polishing resistance Reports declare that the polishing action due to the tires can lower the friction of porous pavements in wet conditions. Hence, it is important to choose high quality aggregates to provide reasonably high resistant PA to the polishing.

2.3.15.1. Wehner and Schulze test device In order to measure the polishing resistance of PA the Wehner and Schulze test device (Figure 23) have been used for evaluating noise reducing asphalt pavements [Arampamoorthy & Patrick, 2011]. This test device consists of two parts enabling polishing and friction measurements.

2.3.15.2. NCAT polishing test device This test (Figure 23) was developed in NCAT Auburn University for testing the abrasion and polishing resistance of mixtures in dry and wet conditions [Turner & Heitzman, 2013]. This test method can be used for different types of asphalt including the noise reducing ones.


Figure 23. (Left) Wehner and Schulze test device; (right) NCAT polishing device [Arampamoorthy & Patrick, 2011 and Turner & Heitzman, 2013].

Skid resistance test As one of the standard safety evaluation parameters, skid resistance of PA is measured, EN 13036-4. The British pendulum tester is the method that is used for measuring this criterion, Figure 24.

Figure 24. British pendulum tester [Hadiwardoyo et al., 2013].

Rolling resistance test There is no standardized method for measuring rolling resistance of tire on a pavement. For performing rolling resistance test in the field, different methods were introduced [Bergiers & Vuye, 2012]. The most commonly used one is the one manufactured by TUG as shown in Figure 25.

Figure 25. Field rolling resistance measuring trailer [Bergiers & Vuye, 2012].


Laboratory aging of the mix Aging of the mixture depends on both the loss of cohesion in the binder and the loss of adhesion between the binder and aggregate. Aging and subsequent testing of binder alone is not a good predictor of how a mixture will behave due to the effect of the asphalt-aggregate interaction. Therefore, instead of aging the bitumen before the mixing, different methods of aging has been applied to the mixtures after the mixture preparation [Herrington et al., 2005].

Adhesion/bonding with base layer or substrate The testing principle and specific test methods described in the following paragraphs may be used for assessing the bond strength. For testing very thin asphalt layer, some adaptation of the techniques may have to be applied.

2.3.19.1. Torque test method This type of test is used for evaluating the bonding between the thin layers and its adjacent layer. Using the Torque test method enables to check whether the type of the failure is cohesive or adhesive. This test can be done on both laboratory and field cores [Sandberg et al., 2011].

2.3.19.2. Shear testing The Leutner test [Leutner, 1979] has been used for measuring the bonding between multiple layers in shear mode. This test has also been used for porous asphalt pavements [Zhang, 2017] (see Figure 26).

Figure 26. Leutner shear test [Collop et al., 2009].

Additional cohesion and adhesion tests

2.3.20.1. Vialit Pendulum test The Vialit pendulum test (Figure 27) has been designed for measuring the cohesion properties of bitumen. This device is claimed to indicate the maximum cohesion of a tested bitumen sample and the temperature in which the bitumen showed its highest cohesion strength. It also records the temperature range for the minimum cohesion strength [Xu et al., 2016].


Figure 27. Cooper-vialit cohesion pendulum test setup [Xu et al., 2016].

2.3.20.2. Bitumen Bond Strength (BBS) This test has been designed by Youtcheff, and Aurilio in 1997 for obtaining adhesive properties of asphalt binders. In this test method, the bond between a flat aggregate surface and an asphalt bitumen is measured. The components of the BBS test is shown in Figure 28.

Figure 28. Components of the BBS test [Mogawer et al., 2011].


3. Noise reducing pavements in different countries Low-noise road surfaces are more expensive than conventional dense asphalt concrete. They cost more than thin asphalt layers and almost half of the two-layer porous asphalt. Table 2 shows the average difference between the lifetime of different porous asphalt (PA) structures and dense graded asphalt pavements in different regions. The noise reducing asphalt mixtures are classified as [Sandberg, 2009]:

• Very good noise reduction x > 7.0

• Good noise reduction 5.0 < x < 7.0

• Noise reduction 3.0 <x < 5.0

Table 2. Approximate life span of serviceability between porous and dense asphalt layers in different Europe [Sandberg, 2009].

Life time (years)

Mixture Germany Switzerland Netherlands

1-layer PA 7 – 10 8 – 12 11 – 17*

2-layer PA 9 – 13*

Dense asphalt ≥ 16 15 12 – 18

* polymer modified bitumen

Based on influential parameters such as the environmental and traffic loads impacts in different regions, the problems that porous asphalt pavements are facing can vary. Table 3 summarizes the causes of failures in different regions of the Europe and US. Raveling and clogging the pores are the main problems in the Europe and in addition to these two problems ice removal and stripping are also observed in the US for porous / open graded asphalt pavements.

Table 3. The causes of PA failures in different parts of the Europe and US [Kandhal & Mallick, 1998 and Nielsen, 2006].

Continent Location Tpical problems

Europe

Austria Raveling Germany Raveling France Raveling Netherlands Raveling & rapid aging Spain Raveling & clogging UK Clogging & rapid aging

US

Alaska Ice removal Colorado Sripping Hawaii Raveling Idaho Clogging Iowa Ice removal Kansas Ice removal Louisiana Raveling Maine Ice removal Maryland Raveling Minnesota Raveling & clogging Rhode island Raveling South Dakota Clogging Tennessee Sripping & ice removal Virginia Stripping

Sweden has also a long history of using porous asphalt in urban areas. Recently, there have been two major projects in Sweden where double layer porous asphalt (Figure 29) was used as the noise-


reducing pavement surface. One of the projects was carried out in 2010 in Huskvarna and the other one in 2014 in Rotebro. The mix design for both projects was identical since the older project showed promising results. Some details about the Huskvarna project are reported in the literature [Jacobson et al., 2016] as follows:

• Length of the road 3.7 km.

• Speed limit: 90 km/h.

• Motor way, 4 driving lanes, K1 right and K2 left side of the drive way

• 40 000 m² double drain layers 11 + 16 mm, 20 000 m² single drain 11 mm (Figure 1)

• Layer thickness double drain: top 30 mm, bottom 50 mm.

• Layer thickness single drain: 30 mm.

• ADT: 20 000 – 30 000 vehicles (15 % heavy traffic).

• Distribution of traffic in the drive ways: 70 % in K1 and 30 % in K2

• Stone material in top layer: K1, Rhyolite, K2, diabase or Rhyolite.

• Stone material in bottom layer: diabase in both drive ways.

• PMB binder type Endura D1 (highly polymer modified binder complying with EN14023 for Pmb 75/130-65 with the properties in Table 4.) [Jacobson et al., 2016]

Table 4. Specifications of the polymer modified bitumen used in the Huskvarna project (Nynas©, 2013).

Property Method Unit Min Max Penetration @ 25⁰C SS-EN1426 mm/10 80 120 Softening point SS-EN1427 ⁰C 75 Resistance to hardening @ 163⁰C Weight loss SS_EN12607-1 % w/w 0.5 Softening point increase SS-EN1427 ⁰C 10 Maintained penetration SS-EN1426 % 75 Other properties Ignition point SS-EN ISO 2592 ⁰C 220 Technical properties Breaking point Fraass SS-EN12593 ⁰C -22 Deformation energy @ 5⁰C SS-EN13589 J/cm2 1 Elastic recovery @ 10⁰C SS-EN13398 % 90 After RTFOT (EN12607-1) Elastic recovery @ 10⁰C SS-EN13398 % 80

The measured noise reductions as compared with conventional stone mastic asphalt (SMA) with nominal maximum aggregate size of 16mm were as follows.

• 2010: noise-reduction 7 to 8dB(A)

• 2011: noise-reduction 7 to 8dB(A)

• 2012: noise-reduction 6.5 till 7.5dB(A)

• 2013: noise-reduction 6 till 7dB(A)

• 2014: noise-reduction 3 till 6dB(A) [Jacobson et al., 2016].


Figure 29. The structure of the PA used in Huskvarna, Sweden [Ahmed, 2015].

After 4 years of construction very minor particle loss on the surface was observed on the Huskvarna road. Although, most of the parameters in the Rotebro project were the same as the ones used in the Huskvarna, the recent inspection of the Rotebro road has revealed that the porous layer is majorly damaged due to high wearing and is planned to be removed and repaved after only 4 years from its construction. The main reason for the low durability of the Rotebro road lies in its higher traffic volume as compared with the Huskvarna road. Therefore, it seems necessary to improve the standard requirements and material specifications for constructing more durable porous asphalt mixtures in Sweden.

In the following, the existing standard requirements for porous asphalt from European and US Standard documents are briefly presented.

3.1. Netherlands Netherlands have a long history of broadly using porous asphalt as compared with other countries. Almost 90% of the motorways in Netherlands are open graded asphalt mixtures.

Asphalt roads in Netherlands have undergone a development and have 4 generations in it. Dense asphalt concrete is the first generation. The open graded asphalt concrete, so called “zoab” forms the second generation of the roads in Netherlands. Zoab roads are about 3 dB(A) quieter than dense coatings [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].

On the Dutch highways, open asphalt concrete (zoab) is the most widely used. This type of pavement reduces traffic noise and increases the capacity of the road through less splashing and spraying water during rain. Zoab is a pavement with a high percentage of hollow space (approximately 20%) [Hofman, 2017]. The porosity of the zoab is achieved because the mixture contains a relatively large amount of coarse granulate (crushed stone) and relatively few finer components. The zoab has a good resistance to rutting and that it is comfortable to drive over. Since the beginning of 2007, a new improved variant has been developed, called sustainable zoab. This road surface is stronger and more durable than standard zoab. On the other hand, due to the open structure of this mixture type, the bitumen ages earlier than with dense asphalt concrete. Besides, with newly constructed zoab, there is the risk of insufficient skid resistance because the stones are still coated with bitumen on the surface of new zoab. [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].

In the following, details of the requirements regarding the porous asphalt in Netherlands is mentioned.

Current requirements for porous layers in Netherlands

3.1.1.1. Structures • One layer of Zoab16 with minimum thickness of 50mm (Figure 30)

• Two-layer Zoab (Figure 30)


o Top layer Zoab 4/8 with minimum thickness of 25mm

o Bottom layer Zoab 11/16 with the minimum thickness of 45mm [Van Vilsteren, 2017a]

Figure 30. Typical porous asphalt structures in Netherlands; (left): one-layer, (right): 2-layer.

3.1.1.2. Bitumen properties • For one-layer ZOAB normally bitumen type of 70/100pen is used.

• For two-layer ZOAB polymer modified bitumen is demanded.

It is required for the bitumen to have at least 40% lower penetration than its grade after construction [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].

3.1.1.3. Bitumen content • ≤ 0.6% lower than the mix design after the construction

• ≤ 0.2% lower for the average bitumen content in all specimens [Van Vilsteren, 2017a]

3.1.1.4. Stone type The aggregates must at least fulfill requirement of the level 3 as listed below.

• C100/0

• PSV ≥ 58

• LA15

• WA241

• F2 [Van Vilsteren, 2017a]

3.1.1.5. Mixture requirements The compositions of the porous mixtures with different NMAS are shown in Table 5 [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].


Table 5. Boundaries for preparing PA in Netherlands [Van Vilsteren, 2017a]. Passing sieve ZOAB 11 ZOAB 16 2L**--ZOAB 16 2L-ZOAB 8 22.4 mm - 100 100 16 mm 100 93-100 90-100 11.2 mm 91-100 70-85 100 8 mm 15-40 - - 90-100 5.6 mm - - - 4 mm - - - 2 mm 15-25 15-25 5-25 5-25 0.5 mm 0.063 mm (2-10) * (2-10) * (2-10) * (2-10) *

Bitumen 4.2% (70/100pen)

4.2% (70/100pen)

4.2% (PMB)

5.4% (PMB)

Vmin 25% 20%

* The filler smaller than 0.063 should contain 25% hydrated lime

** 2L in the table (Two-layer)

3.1.1.6. Air void content • For the mix design the minimum requirements is 20% of air void content

• The constructed layer in the field

o ≤ 5% lower than the mix design void content

o ≤ 2% lower for the average void contents in all specimens [Van Vilsteren, 2017a]

3.1.1.7. Density • After construction the mixture should reach 100% of the design density

• After construction the maximum density difference between the design and reached densities must lower than 0.3% [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].

3.1.1.8. Water sensitivity • Minimum Indirect Tensile Strength Ratio (ITSR) should be at least 80 [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].

3.1.1.9. Noise reduction • No noise requirements will be met through the composition [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].

3.1.1.10. Skid resistance Two test methods for skid resistance:

• Initial dry friction, brake deceleration test (100% slip) ≥ 6.5m/s2

• Initial wet friction test (86% slip) ≥ 0.44 [Van Vilsteren, 2017a]

3.1.1.11. Evenness • The maximum longitudinal evenness should be around 2% [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].

3.1.1.12. Water drainage • There is only a requirement in warranty period.


3.1.1.13. Construction considerations Dynamic roller compactor is forbidden due to possible crushing the stone skeleton and raveling initiation. The degree of compaction must be at least 97% [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].

3.1.1.14. Two-layer porous asphalt Advantages:

• Faster laying process

• Better bonding between layers

• Less sensitive for bad weather

• More homogeneous temperature

Disadvantages:

Due to lower voids content in interface of two-layer PA:

• Lower noise reduction

• Danger for clogging

• Poor longitudinal evenness

3.1.1.15. Using shuttle Buggy Advantages:

• Homogeneous mix (no segregation, no dripping of bitumen)

• Homogeneous asphalt temperature

• Continuous laying process (no stops)

• No bumping of asphalt trucks

• Faster laying process

• Better quality

Disadvantages:

• Not suitable for small sites (city) [Van Vilsteren, 2017a]

3.1.1.16. Early life skid resistance Characteristic values for braking deceleration are shown in Table 6.

Table 6. Recorded deceleration of reference vehicles on different pavement surfaces [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].

Braking Open graded asphalt Dense graded asphalt New Old New Old

Without ABS 5.4 m/s2 7.0 m/s2 7.0 m/s2 8.0 m/s2 With ABS 9.0 – 9.5 m/s2 9.5 – 10.0 m/s2

As shown in Table 5, in some cases the braking deceleration results do not fulfill the requirements. In order to solve this problem, the newly laid zoab is scattered with a small amount of fine, sharp material, i.e. > 6.5 m/s², gritting with 100 to 200 g/m² crushed sand, just before the first roller passage is recommended to improve the deceleration with no influence on other properties (Figure 31). The sand may mainly consist of crushed sand with maximum size of 3mm. On the basis of intensive research, this method has no negative consequences for noise reduction, water storage capacity and


sustainability. Hence, gritting/ sanding the PA is recommended in the Dutch standard since 2009. The other method to improve the skid resistance is to reduce the speed limit for the lane when it is newly laid and then increase it [Van Vilsteren, 2017a].

Figure 31. Gritting for improving the skid resistance properties [Van Vilsteren, 2018].

3.1.1.17. Quality control For evaluating the quality of the newly built pavement the following actions are made.

• Taking field cores from porous layer

o One from every 2000 m²

o Two at every location

• Analysis

o Layer thickness

o Density

o Voids

o Bitumen percentage

o Mix composition

o Skid resistance [Van Vilsteren, 2017a]

3.1.1.18. Climate considerations In the following conditions the ZOAB shouldn’t be used:

• Extremely cold climates with studded tires or aggressive snow removal

• Locations with high shear stresses, e.g.

• Narrow curves

• Roundabouts

• Urban areas

• Junctions [Van Vilsteren, 2017a]

3.1.1.19. Damage distribution in Netherlands Based on the road inspections raveling is the most common damage on open graded asphalt layers in Netherlands, as shown in Figure 32.


Ravelling

Cracking

Evvenness &

Rutting

Skid resistanc

e

Figure 32. The distribution of the damages observed on PA in Netherlands [Bouman, 2017].

3.1.1.20. Maintenance For the maintaining the surfaces subjected to particle loss, the holes and voids are filled in-situ with an open graded emulsion sand asphalt mixture, Figure 33. The recipe of the mixture is shown in Table 7.

Figure 33. An example of the maintained PA in Netherlands.

Table 7. Recipe of the in-situ mixture used for maintaining the damaged porous asphalt [Van Vilsteren, 2017b].

Sieve sizes Open emulsion sand asphalt mixture 1/3 Minimum Maximum

5.6 mm 4 mm 97 2 mm 60 80 0.063 mm 2 10 Bitumen 5 8 Void ≥ 25%

3.1.1.21. Laying speed of maintenance • Open Emulsion Sand Asphalt mixture 800 m/h

• Thin inlay 350 m/h

• Inlay Porous Asphalt 200 m/h

• Spraying rejuvenator 3000 m/hv

Serviceability of the Open graded asphalt layers after construction and maintenance in Netherlands:

• After construction

o Slow lane 11 years


o Fast lane 17 years

• After maintenance

o Spraying rejuvenator 3 years

o Open Emulsion Sand Asphalt 3 years

o Thin inlay 6 years [Van Vilsteren, 2017b]

Note: The costs of construction and maintenance for a double layer porous asphalt with the noise reduction of 6dB in Netherlands are respectively 10% and 75% higher when compared with a single layer porous asphalt with noise reduction of 4dB [Van Vilsteren, 2017b].

Dutch road administration, “Rijkswaterstaat”, is investigating the possibility for an Ultra Quiet Road Surface (USW). The bar is set high here. The aim is to develop a road surface with a noise reduction of 10 dB compared to a dense coating and a service life of at least 7 years. According to an international state-of-the-art study, this objective can be achieved with a so-called porous-elastic road surface containing a non-bituminous binder, such as a polyurethane resin, and rubber granules. This new coating is still under development and will only become available after 2020.

3.2. Switzerland There are two different recipes available for highly porous mixtures in Switzerland, i.e. open graded and semi-dense asphalt (SDA) mixtures. Below, first, the standard requirements for open graded (porous) and then the SDA mixtures used in Switzerland are briefly presented.

Requirements for open graded mixtures

3.2.1.1. Binder type In the Swiss standard for porous asphalt layer, both wearing and binder courses, using polymer modified bitumen is mandatory. The requirements for the bitumen and polymer bitumen must be according to the European standard EN 12591 and EN 14023. Table 8 contains recommendations for the choice of binders depending on the type of mixed material [SN 640 431-7NA].

Table 8. Recommended bitumen types for PA in Switzerland [Ongel et al., 2007].

Bitumen sort & type Road layers Wearing course Binder course Drainage layer

Road construction bitumen 50/70pen o 70/100pen + Polymer modified & special bitumen PMB 25/55-65 (CH-E) o o PMB 45/80-65 (CH-E) + + o PMB 65/105-60 (CH-E) + + o Special bitumen o o o

+ Varieties that are usually used

o Varieties to be used depending on the demands of traffic and climate

Additives such as organic and mineral fibers, polymers, rubber additives, etc. may be used provided their suitability has been proven [Ongel et al., 2007].

3.2.1.2. Aggregates The types of mix are based on the combined grain group 0/4 (possibly the grain groups 0/2, 2/4) and the grain groups 4/8, 8/11, 11/16, 16/22 and 22/32 according to EN 13043. The aggregates used for producing mixtures must meet the requirements of the National Annex of EN 13043. Individual


requirements of EN 13043 (e.g. percentage of fractured surfaces of coarse aggregates) are to be distinguished according to layers and types of mix.

3.2.1.3. Gradations The grain size distribution shall be determined on the basis of the initial test in accordance with EN 13108-20. The nominal values of the aggregate size distribution must be within the ranges given in Table 9.

Table 9. Recommended gradation curve limits for PA in Switzerland [Ongel et al., 2007].

Sieve analysis Road layers Wearing course Binder course Drainage layer PA 8 PA 11 PA B 16 PA B 22 PA S 16 PA S 22 PA S 32

45 mm 100 31.5 mm 100 100 90–100 22.4 mm 100 90–100 100 90–100 16.0 mm 100 90–100 90–100 11.2 mm 100 90–100 15–35 15–65 15–60 8.0 mm 90–100 20–40 15–35 15–60 5.6 mm 4.0 mm 15–35 2.0 mm 10–17 8–15 7–14 6–13 7–20 6–20 5–20 0.5 mm 4–10 4–10 4–10 4–10 4–10 4–10 4–10 0.063 mm 3–5 3–5 3–5 3–5 3–5 3–5 3–5

3.2.1.4. Binder content The binder content shall be determined based on the initial test in accordance with EN 13108-20. The binder content for the nominal composition should not be less than the minimum values Bmin indicated in Table 10. The binder content is based on the weighted average apparent grain density of the total grain fraction pa of 2.65 Mg/m3 [Ongel et al., 2007].

Table 10. Minimum required binder content for PA in Switzerland [Ongel et al., 2007]. Road layers Gradation Minimum permitted binder content (%)

Wearing course PA 8 ≥ 6.0 PA 11 ≥ 5.5

Binder course PA B 16 ≥ 4.0 PA B 22 ≥ 3.5

Drainage layer PA S 16 ≥ 3.5 PA S 22 ≥ 3.0 PA S 32 ≥ 3.0

3.2.1.5. Air void content Based on the gradation and the layer type, for each layer there is a minimum required porosity that is shown in Table 11.

Table 11. Minimum requirements for the air void content for open graded asphalt layers in Switzerland [Ongel et al., 2007].

Road layers Gradation Permitted air void content (%)

Wearing course PA 8 ≥ 16.0 PA 11 ≥ 18.0

Binder course PA B ≥ 22.0 Drainage layer PA S ≥ 18.0

3.2.1.6. Water sensitivity The minimum required indirect tensile sensitivity ratio of the asphalt layers are shown in Table 12.


Table 12. Minimum required ITSR for open graded asphalt layers in Switzerland [Ongel et al., 2007]. Road layers Gradation ITSR (%) Wearing course PA ≥ 70.0 Binder course PA B ≥ 70.0 Drainage layer PA S ≥ 80.0

3.2.1.7. Temperature range for production and construction When using road construction bitumen, the mixture temperatures in all phases of the construction must be within the ranges listed in Table 13. The highest temperature applies for any points in the mixer. The minimum temperature of the bituminous mixture must be complied with upon delivery. The use of polymer bitumen or special bitumen may be subject to different temperatures.

Table 13. Recommended temperature range for using the conventional bitumen types in blending and construction [Ongel et al., 2007].

Penetration (1/10 mm) Allowable temperature ranges (⁰C) 50/70 140-175 70/100 140-170

Requirements for Semi-dense asphalt (SDA) in Switzerland The second type of pavement used as noise reducing asphalt layer in Switzerland, i.e. semi-dense asphalt, has shown more promising performance and durability as compared with the open graded one. Hence, the contractors in Switzerland currently use this type of asphalt when drainage and sound absorption is required for a road. In the following, standard details about the semi-dense asphalt used in Switzerland is presented.

3.2.2.1. Binder Only polymer bitumen should be used. The use of PMB (CH-E) is recommended [SNR 640436].

3.2.2.2. Air void content in Marshall test specimens The required air voids contents of the Marshall test specimens and their limits are shown in Table 14.

Table 14. Characteristic void content and limit values for the voids content of the Marshall test specimens [SNR 640436].

Class -12 -16 -20 Volume (%)

SDA 4 12 16 20 SDA 8 12 16 Limit values of the voids content of Marshall specimens SDA 4 10 – 14 14 – 18 18 – 22 SDA 8 10 – 14 14 – 18

3.2.2.3. Water sensitivity The requirements for the ratio of the indirect tensile strengths ITSR are shown in Table 15.

Table 15. The ITSR requirements [SNR 640436]. Class -12 -16 -20

Volume (%) SDA 4 ≥ 70 ≥ 70 ≥ 70 SDA 8 ≥ 70 ≥ 70

3.2.2.4. Gradation The gradation curve limits for preparing semi dense asphalt mixtures are shown in Table 16.


Table 16. Grain size distribution of the SDA mixtures [SNR 640436]. Sieve analysis (mm)

Passing mass (%) SDA 4 SDA 8

11.2 100 8.0 90 – 100 5.6 100 50 – 70 4.0 90 – 100 15 – 52 2.0 12 – 50 10 – 35 1.0 7 – 29 7 – 26 0.5 4 – 24 4 – 21 0.063 3 – 12 3 – 12

3.2.2.5. Minimum Bitumen content The lower limits required for the bitumen content in the SDA mixtures are shown in Table 17.

Table 17. Guide values for the metered binder content Bmin [SNR 640436]. Class -12 -16 -20

Mass (%) SDA 4 ≥ 6.0 ≥ 6.0 ≥ 6.0 SDA 8 ≥ 5.8 ≥ 5.8

3.2.2.6. Resistance to permanent deformation The maximum proportional rut shall meet the requirements specified in Table 18.

Table18. Proof conditions and requirements for the proportional rut depth SN EN 12697-22. Wearing type SDA* Class -12, -16, -20 Conditions of the test Thickness of the specimen (mm) 50 Temperature of the test (⁰C) 60 Number of cycles 30000 Requirements Percentage of the rutting depth (%) ≥ 7.5

* No requirements for SDA 4

3.2.2.7. Production control Table 19 shows the required evaluating tests for the Semi dense asphalt mixtures in Switzerland.

Table 19. Type and number of tests on semi dense mixed material SDA [SNR 640436]. Property Test method Grain size distribution SN EN 12697-2 Binder content SN EN 12697-1

Air void content SN EN 12697-8 SN EN 12697–6, Method D SN EN 12697–5, Method A

Binder drainage SN EN 12697-18 Water sensitivity SN EN 12697-12 Resistance to permanent deformation SN EN 12697-22

3.2.2.8. Recommended varieties and classes Table 20 classifies the types of mixed material (SDA4, SDA8) and their classes (12, 16, 20) on the basis of past experience.


Table 20. Recommended varieties and classes [SNR 640436]. Class -12 -16 -20 SDA 4 + + o SDA 8 + o

+ Recommended

O Conditionally accepted

3.2.2.9. Recommended layer thickness The recommended target value ranges of the layer thicknesses are contained in Table 21.

Table 21. Recommended nominal value ranges of the layer thicknesses depending on the type and the class of mixtures [SNR 640436].

Class -12 -16 -20 [mm]

SDA 4 20 – 35 20 – 35 20 – 35 SDA 8 25 – 40 25 – 40

3.2.2.10. Air void content (field compaction) Based on the class and the gradation of the SDA mixtures compacted in the field, the Swiss standard requires different air void content limits as shown in Table 22.

Table 22. Limit values of the air void contents of the built-in layers [SNR 640436]. Class -12 -16 -20

Volume (%) Individual values SDA 4 10 – 20 14 – 24 18 – 28 SDA 8 9 – 17 13 – 23 Average values SDA 4 10 – 18 14 – 22 18 – 26 SDA 8 10 – 16 14 – 20

3.2.2.11. The compaction degree on the lower layer The degree of compaction is defined as the quotient of the bulk density of a core or section of a layer and the bulk density of Marshall specimens of associated mix. The values in Table 23 show the requirements for the degree of compaction regarding different SDA mixtures.

Table 23. Requirements for the degrees of compaction of the layers [SNR 640436]. Class -12 -16 -20

(%) Individual values SDA 4 ≥ 97 ≥ 97 ≥ 97 SDA 8 ≥ 97 ≥ 97 Average values SDA 4 ≥ 98 ≥ 98 ≥ 98 SDA 8 ≥ 98 ≥ 98

3.2.2.12. Layer thicknesses The allowable deviations of the layer thickness from the target thicknesses are as follows.

• The average layer thickness calculated from the consumption of the mixture should not deviate more than ± 10% from the target nominal thickness.

• The average density of the Marshall samples should be used for the calculation. For layer thicknesses determined on cores, the individual values can deviate not more than ± 25% from the target thickness [SNR 640436].


Note: As mentioned earlier, currently, comparing the performance of the open graded and semi-dense asphalt has encouraged the road authorities in Switzerland to focus more on the SDA rather than the open graded asphalt.

3.3. Ireland Porous asphalt is normally constructed in one layer using a mixture with NMAS of 14mm blended with a polymer modified bitumen laid with a thickness of 40 to 50 mm. The other Irish standard requirements in material and mixture levels for porous asphalt mixtures are briefly addressed below.

Mixture requirements

3.3.1.1. Bitumen Table 24 shows the detail requirements that have to be met when using for preparing open graded asphalt in Ireland.

Table 24. The property requirements for the bitumen used for PA in Ireland [Ongel et al., 2007]. Properties Requirements Penetration @ 25°C 65 – 105 Softening point (°C) > 70 Fraass brittle point (°C) < -15 Storage stability, ⁰C difference in softening point, top to bottom, after 4 days @ 160°C < 5 Resistance to hardening RTFO (mass change) (%) < 1 Retained penetration (%) > 60 Softening point increase (°C) < 8 Softening point decrease (°C) < 2

3.3.1.2. Aggregates The gradation as well as allowed tolerances of the portions for preparing the PA mixtures are shown in Table 25.

Table 25. Gradation curve limits for PA in Ireland [Ongel et al., 2007]. Sieve size (mm) Passing (%) Tolerance 20 100 14 95 – 100 10 55 – 75 ± 10 6.3 15 – 25 ± 4 2 10 – 17 0.063 4 – 5.5 *

* Mass of hydrated lime in the total aggregate mass must be more than 2% and the hydrated lime should have more than 90% calcium and magnesium hydroxide.

The Irish standard require using crushed aggregates for preparing porous mixtures. Fine aggregate fractions can be either crushed rock or natural sand or a blend of both [Ongel et al., 2007]. The requirements regarding the aggregates is shown in Table 26.

Table 26. Requirements for stones used in PA in Ireland [Ongel et al., 2007]. Properties Requirements Polished stone value (PSV) > 60 Resistance to fragmentation (LA) < 25% Aggregate abrasion value (AAV) < 10% Flakiness index (10 – 14 mm) < 15% Flakiness index (6.3 – 10 mm) < 20%


3.3.1.3. Other quality control parameters Table 27 shows a summary of the test methods and their requirements for ensuring the quality of the PA in Ireland.

Table 27. Test methods and their required parameters in Ireland [Ongel et al., 2007]. Design test Parameter Performance level Applicability Binder drainage test @ 170⁰C

Drainage characteristics of binder from asphalt mixture Target binder content Design & QC

Air void (%) Void content Maximum 28% Design Relative hydraulic conductivity

Measure of water outflow under specific conditions

Average 0.12 s-1 (minimum value 0.8 s-1) Design & QC

Water sensitivity Tensile strength test ITSR 75% Design

Cantabro wear test Loss (%) Mass loss < 25% @18⁰C (20% @ 25⁰C) Design

In addition:

• Target binder content using the basket method < 0.3 % binder drainage

• Inorganic or organic fibers can be used to help prevent binder drainage.

3.4. UK

Structure Porous asphalt mixes in the United Kingdom are placed with the lift thickness of 45 to 55 mm. It is required to have a dense asphalt layer with the thickness of 60mm below the porous layer to protect the lower layers.

Binder A polymer modifier or fiber additive is specified to reduce drain down of porous asphalt mixes.

Aggregate Coarse aggregates used in porous asphalt mixes should be crushed rock or steel slag, while fine aggregate should be crushed rock fines, steel slag, natural sand, or a blend. Gravel is not allowed for porous mixes [Ongel et al., 2007]. The gradation for the porous mixture is given in Table 28.

Table 28. The gradation curve limits used for PA in United Kingdom [Ongel et al., 2007]. Sieve size (mm) Passing by mass (%) 31.5 100 20 95 – 100 14 55 – 75 6.3 20 – 30 2 5 – 10 0.063 3.5 – 5.5

The stone requirements for porous asphalt mixtures in UK are also summarized in Table 29.

Table 29. Stone requirements for PA mixtures in UK [Ongel et al., 2007]. Properties Requirements Resistance to fragmentation (LA test) < 30% AAV < 12% Flakiness index < 15

Mixture requirements Target binder content is specified as 4.5% by mass of the total mix. Target binder content is determined by a binder drainage test according to BS DD 232. At least 2% hydrated lime by mass of


the total aggregate is required to prevent excessive bitumen drainage. The hydraulic conductivity of the porous asphalt layer in UK should be between 0.12 and 0.4 s–1 [Ongel et al., 2007].

3.5. Italy A double porous layer composed of two different mixtures of crushed stones has been recommended. The lower layer is suggested to be a limestone layer; whereas, the upper one would be stones coming from effusive rocks. The stones are then mixed with sand, additive and modified bitumen to produce porous mixtures. As stated in the standard, this type of mixture has been recommended for increasing both drainage and sound absorption with high durability. The recommended mixture properties and the performance tests are briefly mentioned as follows.

Bitumen Polymer modified bitumen shall be used to fulfill Table 30 requirements; For the wearing course layers in amounts (by weight of the mixture) between 4.3% and 5.0% for the lower and 4.8% and 5.7% for the upper layer is required [ANAS, 2010].

Table 30. The requirements for the binder in PA mixtures in Italy [ANAS, 2010]. Characteristics Unit Modified base Soft 2.5%-3.5% Hard 4%-6% Penetration @25⁰C dmm 80 – 100 50 – 70 50 – 70 Softening point ⁰C 40 – 60 60 - 80 70 - 90 Fraass ⁰C ≤ -8 ≤ -10 ≤ -12 Ductility @25⁰C % - ≥ 70 ≥ 80 Dynamic viscosity @160⁰C Pa x s 0.01 – 0.1 0.1 – 0.35 0.15 – 0.4 Storage stability ⁰C - ≤ 3* ≤ 3* RTFO- Rolling Thin Film Oven Test Penetration @25⁰C ≤ 50 ≤ 40 ≤ 40 Increment of softening point ⁰C ≤ 9 ≤ 8 ≤ 5

*Both softening point values obtained for the ductility test must not differ from the reference softening value by more than 5 °C.

Aggregates The following requirements must be met when using aggregates in different layers of the noise reducing pavements in Italy.

3.5.2.1. Base layer • Crushed aggregates ≥ 70%

• Los Angeles test (LA) ≤ 25%.

• The flattening coefficient ≤15 [ANAS, 2010].

3.5.2.2. Wearing layer • Los Angeles test (LA) ≤ 20%

• The flattening coefficient ≤ 15% (UNI EN 933-3)

• Resistance to smoothness equal to PSV ≥ 44 (UNI EN 1097-8)

• Frost / thaw resistance ≤ 1% (UNI EN 1367-1)

Gradation The mixtures must have a particle size composition stated in Table 31.


Figure 31. Gradation curve limits for PA in Italy [ANAS, 2010]. Sieve sizes (mm) Base layer Wearing course 20 100 14 80 – 100 8 20 – 70 100 6.3 65 – 90 4 12 – 25 13 – 25 2 10 – 20 10 – 18 0.5 8 – 14 8 – 14 0.25 7 – 13 7 – 13 0.063 6 – 12 6 – 12

Drainage and sound absorbing requirements • Draining capacity of the mixture (double layer) > 25 lit / min.

• Sound absorption values @ 30 °C must be according to Table 32.

Table 32. The sound absorption requirements for PA in Italy [ANAS, 2010]. Frequency (Hz) Coefficient of sound absorption 400/630 α > 0.25 800/1250 α > 0.5 1600/2500 α > 0.25

Mixture requirements The mixtures must be verified by means of a gyratory compactor with the following parameters test:

• Vertical pressure 600 ± 3 (kPa)

• Angle of rotation 1.25 ± 0.02

• Velocity of rotation 30 (gyration / min)

• Diameter of specimen 100mm [ANAS, 2010]

The specimens must be compacted by a gyratory compactor and the following air void content requirements should be met at three levels of compaction, i.e. N1 (initial), N2 (medium) and N3 (final). The number of reference gyrations with the relative percentages of the voids are shown in Table 33.

Table 33. Air void content requirements after each level of gyratory compaction [ANAS, 2010]. No. of gyrations Lower layer Upper layer Void (%) N1 10 10 ≥ 28 N2 50 50 ≥ 22 N3 130 130 ≥ 20

The compacted specimens with gyratory must be tested with diametrical traction at 25 °C. The two reference parameters are Rt (indirect tensile strength) and CTI (coefficient of indirect tensile) are required as shown in Table 34.

Table 34. The requirements for PA compacted by gyratory compactor in the laboratory [ANAS, 2010]. Lower layer Upper layer Rt (GPa x 10-3) 0.34 – 0.58 0.36 – 0.60 CTI (GPa x 10-3) ≥ 20 ≥ 22

Construction requirement The second layer must be placed over the first one within 24 hours of the first layer construction. Furthermore, the temperature for mixtures during construction must not be less than 160°C and must not exceed 180°C [ANAS, 2010].


3.6. Germany The structure of a porous asphalt in Germany appeared to be consisting of a single open-graded layer with the thickness between 45 and 50mm for NMAS of 8mm and 50 and 60 for the PA with NMAS of 11mm. The Open-graded asphalt mixture (PA) consists of aggregate composition larger than 2mm, filler and Polymer modified bitumen as a binder and additives. This mixture contained high volume of interconnected air void. The requirements of this mixture type are stated in Table 35.

Table 35. Summary of the requirements for PA in Germany [TL Asphalt-StB, 2013]. Name PA 16 PA 11 PA 8 Material requirements Fraction of crushed stone surfaces C100/0 C100/0 C100/0 Stone resistance SZ18/LA20 SZ18/LA20 SZ18/LA20 Shape of the coarse aggregates SL15 / FI15 SL15 / FI15 SL15 / FI15 Polishing resistance PSVNR PSV (54) PSV (54) Binder type 40/100-65* 40/100-65* 40/100-65* Mixture composition

Aggregate gradation Sieve sizes (passing %)

22.4 mm 100 16 mm 90 – 100 100 11.2 mm 5 – 15 90 – 100 100 8 mm 5 – 15 90 – 100 5.6 mm 5 – 15 2 mm 5 – 10 5 – 10 5 – 10 0.063 mm 3 – 5 3 – 5 3 – 5 Minimum binder content Bmin 5.5 Bmin 6.0 Bmin 6.5 Binder content target ≤ 0.3% ≤ 0.4% ≤ 0.5% Asphalt mixture Minimum air void content Vmin 24 Vmin 24 Vmin 24 Maximum air void content Vmax 28 Vmax 28 Vmax 28

* The required temperature range for production and construction phases is between 140⁰C - 170⁰C.

It is noted that asphalt granules must not be used for this type of asphalt mixture [TL Asphalt-StB, 2013]. There are no other specific test requirements regarding the porous asphalt.

3.7. France

Structure requirements • 40 to 50 mm as wearing course for mixtures with NMAS of 10mm

• 30 to 40 mm as wearing course for mixtures with NMAS of 6mm [Delorme et al., 2007]

Aggregate The followings are the minimum requirements for mechanical strength and production characteristics of coarse aggregates [Delorme et al., 2007].

• Mechanical strength

o LA 20

o MDE 15

o PSV 50

o C 95/1

o Ecs 35


• Production characteristics

o Gc 85/20

o G20/15

o FI 20

o F 0.5

Gradation The aggregate structure limits for 4 different PA structures in France are shown in Table 36.

Table 36. Gradation curve limits for PA mixtures in France [Delorme et al., 2007]. Asphalt mixture D mm

(%) 6.3 mm (%) 4 mm (%) 2 mm (%) 0.25 mm

(%) 0.063 mm (%)

PA 6 class 1 90 – 100 - 15 – 35 10 – 15 6 – 12 4 – 6 PA 6 class 2 90 – 100 - 12 – 22 5 – 12 10 – 20 2 – 6 PA 10 class 1 90 – 100 15 – 35 - 10 – 15 6 – 12 4 – 6 PA 10 class 2 90 – 100 12 – 22 - 5 – 12 10 – 20 2 – 6

Slaked lime is added to the mixture for avoiding excessive drainage of bitumen.

Bitumen From the mix application guide the following bitumen types are recommended for porous asphalt under heavy loading [Delorme et al., 2007]:

• 30/50

• 50/70

• PMB 45/80-60 or 40/100-65

The amount of binder in mixtures in France was used to be stated in terms of richness modulus. However, for conforming to the European standard, the binder content as it is common in other European countries has also been stated [Delorme et al., 2007]. Both requirements are mentioned in Table 37.

Table 37. Binder content and richness modulus requirements for PA in France [Delorme et al., 2007].

Category 1 PA10 class 1 (%) PA 6 class 1 (%)

Binder content for aggregate mass density of 2.65g/cm3

PG bitumen: 4.4 – 4.8 Fibers: 5.1 – 5.5 Rubber: 5.6 – 6.0





Richness modulus K 3.3 3.4

Category 2 PA10 class 2 (%) PA 6 class 2 (%)


PG bitumen: 4.2- 4.6 Fibers: 4.9 – 5.2 Rubber: 5.3 – 5.7


K 3.2 3.1

New and recycling fibers are recommended to be added to the mixtures for avoiding the drainage of the bitumen from the mixtures [Delorme et al., 2007].


Mixture requirements

3.7.5.1. Compaction In the laboratory is carried out with a gyratory compactor and the requirements in terms of void contents are as shown in Table 38.

Table 38. Air void content limits for PA mixtures compacted by gyratory compactors [Delorme et al., 2007]].

Mixture type No. of gyrations (n) Void (%)

PA class 1 40 20 to 25 Vmin20 – Vmax25 200 > 15 Vmin15

PA class 2 40 25 to 30 Vmin25 – Vmax30 200 > 20 Vmin20

3.7.5.2. Water sensitivity • Compressive strength I/C between 2 and 4 MPA

• ITSR80 [Delorme et al., 2007]

Other tests recommended for evaluating porous asphalt mixtures in France are shown in Table 39.

Table 39. Complementary evaluating test methods for PA in France [Delorme et al., 2007]. Characteristics Testing methods Observations Permeability (performance related)

EN12697-19, Laboratory-based permeability test

Binder drainage (performance related)

EN 12697-18, Drainage test

Mass loss (performance related)

EN 12697-17, Abrasion test The "cantabro" test (deemed not pertinent for specifications purposes).

The recommended mixtures are all highly modified because of their high sensitivity to horizontal stresses leading to raveling. The high voids content makes the mixtures so susceptible to rapid aging; however, the binder film thickness prevents it from premature raveling.

It is recommended to use such mixtures on motorways with high traffic volumes and urban express roads with a design speed between 80 and 100 km/h in level terrain roads with no or only few curves with smaller radius of 300meters [Delorme et al., 2007].

3.8. Belgium A brief description of the standard requirements and specification for porous asphalt in Belgium is stated in Table 40.


Table 40. Specifications and requirements of single layer PA in Belgium [Van Heystraeten, 1990]. Property Specifications Grading 0 – 14 mm Stones ≥ 2 mm 83% Crushed sand (0,080 – 2 mm) 12% Filler ( < 0.080 mm) 5% Binder Bitumen 4 – 5 % Modified bitumen 4 – 5 % Rubber-bitumen 5.5 – 6.5 % Thickness 4 cm Voids ratio Average 19 – 25 % Individual 16 – 28% Draining capacity (for 1.4 liter water) Average ≤ 60 s Individual ≤ 180 s

The porous asphalt in Belgium was used more in 1980s and due to low durability problems with this type of pavement, it was decided to use the SMA as the noise reducing, durable road surface in this country [Gibbs et al., 2005].

3.9. Denmark

Structures and mixture requirements A brief description of the standard requirements and specification for asphalt mixtures used for noise reduction in Denmark is stated in Table 41.

Table 41. Specifications and requirements for noise reducing mixtures in Denmark [Vejregler, 2013]. Mixture type TB 6 TB 8 AB 6 AB 8 SMA6 +8 SMA 6+11 SMA 8 Bitumen 70/100–160/220 or

modified modified 40/60- 160/220 or modified

Maximum size (D) 6 mm 8 mm 6 mm 8 mm 6 mm 6 mm 8 mm Addition to oversized grain in SMA +

- - - - 5/8 8/11 -

Min. specified bitumen content 5.5 % 5.5 % 5.7 % 5.5 % 6.5 % 6.3 % 6.5 %

Marshall criteria Voids in aggregates (HS) ≥ 23 ≥23 ≥20 ≥20 ≥20 ≥19 ≥20

Void (Hm) 10 – 16 10 – 18 6 – 13 8 – 15 4 – 9 3 – 9 4 – 9 Minimum volume laid 40 kg/m2 45 kg/m2 45 kg/m2 55 kg/m2 45 kg/m2 50 kg/m2 55 kg/m2

Compaction degree - - - ≥ 92% ≥ 95% ≥ 95% ≥ 95 %

Adhesive emulsion column of permanent bitumen

Polymer modified Standard

≥ 700 g/m2 ≥800 g/m2

3.10. Finland A brief description of the standard requirements and specification for porous asphalt mixtures used for noise reduction in Finland [PANK, 2011] is stated in Table 42.


Table 42. Specifications and requirements for PA mixtures in Finland [PANK, 2011]. PA type

Aggregate passing (%) sieve sizes (mm)

Bitumen (KB: Rubber Bitumen)

Binder content (%) Additives

Mass/unit (kg/m2) (constant thickness) 0.063 0.5 2 8

AA5 2 – 4 4 – 10 18 – 30

100 35/50 – 70/100 5.0 – 6.0 Cellulose Fiber Or Natural asphalt

50 – 70

AA 8 2 – 4 5 – 10 12 – 23

90 35/50 – 70/100 5.0 – 5.8 60 – 100

AA 11 2 – 4 5 – 9 10 – 19

33 – 53

35/50 – 70/100 5.0 – 5.5 75 – 100

AA 16 2 – 4 4 – 10 9 – 19 27 – 43

35/50 – 70/100 4.7 – 5.3 100 – 125

3.11. US Open graded friction courses (OGFC) and European porous mixes (PEM) are used as the surface layer in the US for drainage and maybe noise resistance purposes. In general, PEM have higher porosity than the OGFC in the US (Figure 34). The porosity range for the PEM is between 20 and 25%; while the OGFC mixtures have less than 20% air void [Watson et al., 1998]. The recommended specification for the porous asphalt mixtures in the US are summarized in the followings.

Figure 34. textures of the OGFC (left) and PEM mixtures used in the US for noise reduction [Smit and Waller, 2007].

Gradation The recommended mix design gradation is given in Table 43.

Table 43. Gradation curve limits for open graded and porous European mixtures used in US and their contrast with the common dense graded mixture structure in the US [Kandhal, 2002; Watson et al., 1998].

Tolerance Sieve analysis (mm) OGFC PEM ± 0.0 19 100 100 ± 6.1 12.5 85 - 100 90 – 100 ± 5.6 9.5 55 - 75 35 – 60 ± 5.7 4.75 10 - 25 10 – 25 ± 4.6 2.36 5 – 10 5 – 10 ± 2.0 0.075 2 - 4 1 – 4

State DOTs that have had success with OGFCs typically use different additives for performance enhancement.

As an example, Kentucky with similar winter conditions to Sweden, uses open-graded mixes to provide wearing coarse with high draining and sound absorbing properties. The NMAS of these


mixtures are 9.5mm and are constructed with the lift thickness of 19mm. The recommended bitumen in Kentucky are PG 64-22, PG 70-22, or PG 76-22. In addition, anti-stripping agents are added to the bitumen to avoid excessive drainage of the binder from the mixture.

Table 44 shows the evaluating test method and their requirements for open graded asphalt mixtures in different states [Putman & Kline, 2012].

Table 44. Open Graded friction course requirements in different states [Putman and Kline, 2012].

Agen

cy

Gyr

atio

ns

Bind

er

cont

ent

(%)

Air v

oid

(%)

Dra

in

dow

n (%

)

Una

ged

abra

sion

(%

) Ag

ed

abra

sion

(%

)

TSR

(%)

Perm

eabi

lity

(in/h

r.)

LA (%

)

Frac

ture

fa

ces

(%)

Flat

&

elon

gate

d pa

rticl

e (%

)

ASTM 50 ≥18 ≤0.3 ≤20 ≤30 ≥80 ≥164 ≤30 90/95 ≤10* NCAT 50 ≥18 ≤0.3 ≤20 ≤30 ≥80 ≤30 90/100 ≤5*

NMDOT 6.5 75 NCDOT 50 ≥18 ≤0.3 ≤20 ≥164 ≤45 100 MSDOT 50 ≥15 ≤0.3 ≤30 ≤40 ≥49 ≤45 90 ≤20** MODOT 50 ≥ 6.0 ≥18 ≤0.3 ≤20 ≥80 ≤50 NDOT 50 5.8–

6.8 18±1 ≤0.3 ≤40 90/95

≤10* TNDOT ≤20 70 ≤20** VDOT 50 5.75–

7.25 ≥16 ≤0.3 ≤20 ≥80 ≤40 90/100

≤10*

*5:1 ratio

**3:1 ratio

Mix design methods There are different methods for carry out the mix design for open graded mixtures in different states that are summarized in Table 45.

Table 45. Mix design methods in different states [Kline, 2010]. Property & performance specifications Absorption calculation Visual determination ASTM FHWA Florida DOT NAPA Alabama DOT Nevada DOT NCAT Arizona DOT New Jersey DOT Kansas DOT Kentucky TC South Carolina DOT New Mexico DOT Wyoming DOT North Carolina DOT Mississippi DOT Missouri DOT Nebraska DOT Tennessee DOT Texas DOT Virginia DOT

3.12. Japan

Structure Single porous asphalt pavements are the most common type of noise reducing surfaces in Japan. The thickness of single porous layers is between 40 to 50mm and normally the porosity of the surface layer is between 17% and 23%. For avoiding unwanted drainage highly modified bitumen are used for preparing porous mixtures in Japan. In the following other specifications mentioned in the Japanese standard for asphalt mixtures with high air void contents are mentioned.


Aggregate The gradation curve limits used for different conditions in Japan for preparing PA is shown in Table 46.

Table 46. PA gradation limits in Japan [Shimeno and Tanaka, 2010]. Sieve analysis (mm) Ordinary Snowy and cold 19.0 100 100 13.2 92-100 92 – 100 9.5 62 - 81 62 - 85 4.75 10 – 31 14 – 35 2.36 10 – 21 14 – 25 0.6 4 - 17 6 - 19 0.3 3 - 12 5 - 14 0.15 3 - 8 4 - 9 0.075 2 – 7 2 – 7

Bitumen In Japan, the stripping resistance is considered vitally important for the durability of the porous surfaces. Hence, the adhesion between aggregates and bitumen and the portion of bitumen loss from a coated aggregate is tested by Japanese companies. The requirements for the bitumen used in PA in Japan are shown in Table 47.

Table 47. The requirements for bitumen used in PA in Japan [taiyu kensetsu co., ltd, 2018]. Properties Requirements Penetration @ 25⁰C (dmm) ≥40 Softening point (⁰C) ≥80 Ductility @15⁰C (cm) ≥50 Toughness @25⁰C (kg⸱cm) ≥200 Flash point (⁰C) ≥260

In order to prevent raveling or deformation of the porous asphalt pavement, High Polymer-Modified Asphalt (HPMA) became the standard binder. The HPMA binder contains about two times of polymer compared with ordinary polymer-modified asphalt. The polymer consists of mainly SBS (Styrene-Butadiene-Styrene block polymer). The binder content range for porous asphalt mixtures is between 4 to 6% of the total mixture weight. The HPMA binder is extremely cohesive and the Toughness & Tenacity Test applied for the ordinary polymer-modified asphalt binder is not suitable. The Bending Test for asphalt mortar beams is studied to evaluate the property of HPMA binder [Shimeno and Tanaka, 2010]. The requirements for the bending values of the polymer modified binder in Japan are shown in Table 48.

Table 48. The test methods and requirements in Japan for evaluating the PMB used for PA [Shimeno and Tanaka, 2010].

Property Ordinary conditions Cold conditions Bending toughness @20C x 10-3 MPa ≥ 100 ≥ 750 Bending stiffness @-20C MPa ≤ 450 ≤ 80

3.13. Summary The summary of the collected information from different standards regarding the highly porous asphalt mixtures are presented in three small sections, i.e. the structure, bitumen types and evaluating test methods.

Structure Table 49 is a summary of the structures recommended by different standards for constructing asphalt pavements with high porosities.


Table 49. Recommended structures for constructing noise reducing asphalt pavement in different countries.

Countries Structure Thickness limit Coarseness (mm) Air void content limits

Single layer Double layer Netherlands x x ≥ 50mm PA8/11/16 ≥ (20 – 25) %

Switzerland x - ±10% target PA8/11, PA B16/22, PA S 16/22/32 SDA4/8

≥ (16 – 22) %

Germany x - PA 8/11/16 24% ≤ ≥ 28% France x - 30 – 50 mm PA6/10 15% ≤ ≥ 30% Italy x - PA 6/14 ≥ 20% Belgium x 40 mm PA14 (19 – 25) % Ireland x - 40 – 50 mm PA14 ≤ 28% UK x - 45 – 55 mm PA20 -

Denmark x x - TB6/8 – AB6/8 – SMA6/8 – SMA6/11 – SMA8

(6 – 18) %

Finland x - - AA5/8/11/16 - US x - - FHWA / PEM ≥ 15% Japan x x 40 – 50 mm PA5/13/20 (17 – 23) %

Bitumen Table 50 is a summary of the recommended bitumen types by different standards for constructing asphalt pavements with high porosities.

Table 50. Recommended bitumen types for porous asphalt pavement in different countries. Countries Bitumen type Content

limits Allowable drainage

Comments

Netherlands 70/100pen ≥ 4.2%

≤ 0.2% Single layer

PMB ≥ 4.2% Coarse double layer PMB ≥ 5.4% Fine double layer

Switzerland

50/70pen ≥ (3 – 3.5) %

-

Draining layer 70/100pen Draining layer PMB 25/55-65 (CH-E) ≥ (3.5 – 6.0)

%

Binder and wearing courses PMB 45/80-65 (CH-E) Binder and wearing courses PMB 65/105-60 (CH-E) Binder and wearing courses

Germany 40/100-65 ≥ 5.5% ≤ 0.3% PA16 ≥ 6.0% ≤ 0.4% PA11 ≥ 6.5% ≤ 0.5% PA8

France 30/50 (4.2 – 6.15)

% - - 50/70 45/80-60 or 40/100-65

Italy PMB (4.3 – 5.0) % - Lower layer PMB (4.8 – 5.7) % Top layer

Belgium PG (4.0 – 5.0) %

- PA14 PMB (4.0 – 5.0) % Rubber Modified (5.5 – 6.5) %

Ireland Pen. 65 – 105

Soften. > 70 - ≤ 0.3% PA14

PMB + fiber additives

UK PMB ≥ 4.5% - 2% hydrated lime to avoid drainage

Denmark 70/100 – 160/220 or PMB 5.5%

- TB6/8

PMB (5.5 – 5.7) % AB6/8 40/60 – 160/220 or PMB (6.3 – 6.5) % SMA6+8 / SMA6+11 / SMA8

Finland 35/50 – 70/100 Rubber bitumen (4.7 – 6.0) % - -

US Ploymer modified PG (5.8 – 7.3) % ≤ 0.3% Depending on weather conditions


Countries Bitumen type Content limits

Allowable drainage

Comments

Japan PMB Pen. ≥ 40dmm Soften. ≥ 80⁰C

- - Highly polymer modified bitumen

Evaluating test methods Table 50 is a summary of the recommended standard test methods by different standards for constructing asphalt pavements with high porosities

Table 51. Recommended test methods for evaluating porous asphalt pavements in different countries.

Test methods

Countries

Net

herla

nds

Switz

erla

nd

Ger

man

y

Fran

ce

Italy

Bel

gium

Irela

nd

UK

US

Japa

n

Crushed faces (C) X X X X X X Polished Stone Value (PSV) X X X X X X

Stone resistance (LA) X X X X X X X X

Water Absorption X X Grain size distribution X X X X X X X X X X

Aggregate abrasion value (AAV)

X X X X

Flakiness index (FI) X X X X X X X

Frost and thaw resistance (F) X X X

Micro Deval (MDE) X

Environmental conditioning system Ecs

X

Grading coarse (Gc) X

Soundness X Soft particles in coarse X

Apparent density X Stripping X Specific gravity (G) X

Penetration X X X X Softening point X X X Fraass X X Ductility X X Dynamic viscosity X Storage stability X X Resistance to hardening X

Softening point increase X X

Softening point decrease X

Flash point X Toughness X ITSR X X X X X


Test methods

Countries

Net

herla

nds

Switz

erla

nd

Ger

man

y

Fran

ce

Italy

Bel

gium

Irela

nd

UK

US

Japa

n

Bitumen content X X X X X X X X X X Noise reduction X X Skid resistance X Evenness X Layer Thickness X X Air void content X X X X X X X X X X Mix composition X Resistance to permanent deformation

X

Binder drainage X X X X X X Permeability X Hydraulic Conductivity X X

Cantabro test X X X

In the following chapter, the recent research findings in the literature about methods for increasing the durability of porous mixtures as well as recommended evaluating test methods for evaluating this type of pavement are addressed.


4. Recent studies One of the main reasons that prevents the noise reducing pavements to take over the dense pavements lays on their significantly lower durability as compared to the latter ones. In many studies the cause premature failures in highly porous pavements are addressed. Among these studies, some also gave suggestions for solving some of these defects. In the following, a summary of these studies is presented.

The durability problems of the porous asphalt pavements could be related to their low freeze and thaw performance, low raveling resistance, aggregate loss during the snow removal, high clogging potential as well as the excessive drainage of bitumen during the construction phase (Schaus, 2007). Many studies, e.g. Cooley in 2000, suggested that using highly modified bitumen might improve the durability of porous pavements by enabling the binder to provide a thicker film around the aggregates and prevent draindown of bitumen for pavements with high air void contents.

Yi et al. in 2013 suggested that loss of cohesion is the main cause of failure under freeze and thaw cycles. They stated that good adhesion between the aggregates and bitumen may provide a high resistance against raveling. In addition, they recommended using mixtures with high binder and stone contents but limited air void contents. Besides, they recommended using fog seal emulsion when raveling problem was observed.

In another study (Tarmuzi et al., 2015), it was suggested that the shape of the aggregates has an impact on improving the resilient modulus, stability and raveling resistance of the porous asphalt pavements.

Jacobson et al. in 2016 recommended using large aggregate structure with good adhesion to bitumen and high wearing resistance. They also recommended using highly modified bitumen for the porous asphalt mixtures and also using fog seal emulsion to avoid occurrence of raveling is.

Mo et al. in 2010 named the raveling as the most dominant type of failure in PA and suggested that the material optimization, changing the mastic and bitumen properties, can help improving the raveling resistance. They also addressed the cohesion and adhesion problems as the main causes for the occurrence of raveling at high and low temperatures. They also claimed that the cohesive and adhesive failures result in raveling in high and low temperatures respectively. Besides, they mentioned that the aging can improve the raveling resistance of the PA at high temperatures where it has the opposite effect at low temperatures.

Alvarez et al. in 2006 inspected the durability of open graded friction course in terms of moisture damage and aging potential in Texas. They identified raveling as the most frequent cause of failure especially when its associated with binder aging (binder hardening and oxidation) as well as inappropriate mixture preparation (low binder content) and bad construction (compaction).

Hagos et al. tested the aging of bitumen using field cores and found out that the aging has a high impact on the raveling resistance of the porous asphalt pavements. They recommended that a new method of aging must be developed as the laboratory aging does not represent the field aging of bitumen. They also declared that the cohesive and adhesive properties of PA mixtures have prominent impact on raveling and other premature failures such as water damage.

Ohiduzzaman et al in 2016 made a state of the art on the existing pavements with noise reducing properties. They suggested that among asphalt pavements, SMA have the highest durability.

Niezgoda et al in 2016 conducted an extensive literature review which led to the following recommendations for improving porous asphalt performance:

• Using two grades stiffer performance graded bitumen than the one used for dense asphalt pavements by means of modifications


• Using aggregate gradation smaller than 19mm sieve size (10% larger than sieve no. 8 and additional 10% sand for maintaining the strength and permeability of the mixture)

• Using abrasion resistant aggregates not smaller than 11mm (specially for the ones exposed to studded tires)

• Using fibers (adding cellulose fibers 0.15% to 0.55% of total mixture weight)

• Using geosynthetics (providing additional stability for decreasing the clogging due to capillarity actions)

• The optimal air void content should be between 19% and 22% for acceptable drainage

They also provided some suggestions for the winter maintenance:

• Using pressure washing and vacuuming

• Snow removal by means of snowplow with the blades located upper than the PA surface or even using soft cover (rubber) for the blades

• Using deicing agents when clogging is a problem

Ma et al in 2018 used various materials and additives for improving the durability of the mixtures and some of their findings and recommendations are presented below:

• Using highly viscous bitumen

• Adding dibenzylidene‐D‐sorbitol polymer (DBS) for improving the high temperature performance

• Using fibers for low temperature cracking

• Using hydrated lime for moisture stability

Their final suggestion was to use highly viscous bitumen and polyester fiber for regions with high temperatures whereas using hydrated lime for PA in the regions with high precipitations.

Chen et al. in 2018 stated that using polyurethane mixture is more durable than the open graded mixtures.

Table 52 shows some of the recommendations for improving the durability of noise reducing pavements.

Table 52. Findings for improving the quality of noise reducing pavements.

# Authors Year Suggestion Considerations 1 Cooley 2000 Cellulose fibers (additive) Allowing increase of film thickness

2 Yi et al. 2013

Highly modified binder, High binder content (≥ 6.3 %) Improving cohesion

Good aggregate bitumen adhesion (General) Resistant to studded tires

Fog seal emulsion In case of raveling

3 Jacobson et al. 2016 Highly modified bitumen Improving the raveling resistance

4 Poulikakos & Partl 2013 Polymer modified bitumen Continuity of binder prevents loss of

aggregates

6 Cui et al. 2014 Adding Silane, amine/ rubbery polymer to bitumen Improving PA in wet conditions

7 Lesueur et al. 2013 Adding hydrated lime to bitumen Reducing aging, Stiffening mastics, improving adhesion, moisture damage resistance

8 Lyons & Putman 2013 Adding combined Crumb rubber,

SBS, Cellulose Fiber Improving abrasion properties of PA


# Authors Year Suggestion Considerations

9 Tarmuzi et al. 2015 Aggregate shape Resilient modulus, Stability & abrasion resistance

10 Mansour et al. 2013 Gradation optimization Depending on permeability/strength requirements

11 Kim et al. 2009 Grid reinforcement increase fatigue life 23% in dry & 27% in wet conditions

12 Way 2000 Adding Crumb rubber (9-10)% gap & (7.5-8.5)% open graded Durability increase (Arizona)

13 Partl et al. 2010 Asphalt rubber mixture Increase in mechanical props and durability

14 Vázquez 2015 Using crumb rubber as modifier for bitumen

Improving gap graded mixtures properties

15 Lu & Harvey 2011 Asphalt rubber mixture Increase moisture damage & Raveling resistance of OPGA

16 Licitra et al. 2015 Rubberized asphalt Extra care for construction is needed

17 Ongel et al. 2008 Open graded asphalt is better than gap graded for noise

Inspected roads after 8 years performance in US

18 Santagata et al. 2007 Asphalt rubber friction course Improving durability of noise reducing pavements

19 Ren & Gao 2008 New generation open graded, Binder content ≥ 6%, air void<20%

High durability

20 Lu & Harvey 2010 Single layer, small aggregates, rubberized &PMB Avoid raveling

21 Qian & Lu 2015 PA small aggregates + epoxy resin Durability improvements

22 Losa et al. 2012 Crumb rubber modified asphalt concrete Improving the quality of Wearing course

23 Greer et al. 2006 Using SMA Durable and noise reducing to some extent

24 De Bondt et al. 2016 Single layer, optimized limestone & Hydrated lime filler, PMB

Claimed as replacement for Double layer PA

25 Luo et al. 2015 using epoxy modified binder Durable open graded friction course

26 Ressel et al. 2007 using Dirt resistant or washable pores (hydrophilic or very hydrophobic)

clogging avoidance

27 Hernandez-Olivares et al. 2009 Dry process for adding rubber to

PA Better resistance to plastic deformation, higher durability

28 Wang et al. 2017 PERS with gradation (85% coarse + 15% basalt sand) and 15% binder

Improving raveling resistance

29 Takahashi 2013 Tightening the binder course layer avoiding rutting resistance of PA under heavy traffic

30 Wang et al. 2016 coating pavement surface with epoxy Tio2-containing material

Improving abrasion and raveling resistance

31 Hammer & Bühlmann 2017 Optimizing sand and filler portion

in PA Improving durability of Semi dense asphalt

32 Apostolidis et al. 2018 Using Steel slags into the porous mixtures (Netherlands)

Preserve pavements by closing the micro cracks

33 Chen et al. 2018 Using polyurethane mixture (Single size 4.75-9.0 mm),B.C. 6%, AV 32%

Better than open graded

34 Tang et al. 2017 Using Highly viscous bitumen, slaked lime and polyester Better performance for PA

35 James et al. 2017 increasing the portion of particles passing 0.057 sieve

Higher durability for porous friction courses

36 Zhang et al. 2017 Red mud as filler Improving raveling and rutting resistance of PA

37 Xu et al. 2016 Highly viscous bitumen Raveling resistance

38 Zhang et al. 2016 Surface treatment with emulsion Raveling resistance

39 Watson et al. 2018 Increasing aggregates passing from sieve #200 Raveling resistance


# Authors Year Suggestion Considerations 40 Lin & Tseng 2017 Using premium binder Raveling resistance

41 Masri et al. 2017 Using Nanosilica modified binder Durability improvements

42 Shukry et al. 2017 Using diatomite as filler Improving mechanical properties of PA

43 Skaf et al. 2016 Using ladle furnace slag as filler Better adhesion within the binder

44 Biligiri et al. 2014 Using Asphalt rubber friction course

Better than the other existing noise reducing ones


5. Recommendations The collected information from the literature and experts shows that there is still a great need and room for improving the quality of the porous asphalt. Achieving the required improvement in this field would be possible by conducting an extensive in-depth study on the behavior of porous asphalt components and their interactions during the production, road construction and the service life phases. To do this, the followings are recommended.

5.1. Binder and mastics Based on the findings of this pre-study, also mentioned earlier in this report, raveling is the most common failure that threatens the durability of the porous asphalt. For avoiding the premature raveling failure, it is important to improve the cohesive as well as adhesive properties of the bitumen and mastics in the porous asphalt. In most of the literatures as well as standards, using highly polymer modified bitumen is recommended for producing porous asphalt. However, there is not much information available about receipt to follow for producing polymer modified bitumen (PMB) that suits for different traffic and weather conditions. For example, in Sweden, very limited products are used for making porous asphalt and even the recommended binders did not perform as expected in different road conditions. Hence, it is recommended to first investigate the cohesive behavior of the existing binding materials in Sweden as well as the ones recommended in other regions with similar weather, road conditions and regulations. By doing so, it would be possible to find a range of properties for the existing binders. After that, it is possible to try new receipts for PMB to improve the cohesive properties of the existing binders.

In the third step, different types of filler with different percentages should be produced and tested for measuring the adhesive properties of the existing and the newly produced PMB. Next step is to measure the adhesion between the large aggregates and the bitumen and mastics in porous asphalts for identifying the most promising range of bitumen properties which provide the best possible adhesion in the mixtures. For this step, the knowledge can be obtained from using different test methods such as surface energy measuring devices, bitumen bond strength test as well as the ones used for measuring the absorption properties of the aggregates and etc.

5.2. Gradation To improve the resisting structure of the asphalt layer, the existing gradation might be needed to be adjusted. Technically, the shape of the aggregates as well as the portions of middle and small size particles in porous asphalt gradations play very significant roles on the stability of such mixtures and should be chosen carefully. For examining the possibility of improving the existing gradation for the porous asphalt, following theoretical and experimental methods are recommended.

Theoretical Obviously, the modeling would lower the number of try and errors and paves a faster path for finding the optimum size distributions to be used for the experimental part. Hence, it is recommended to find best possible size distributions for porous asphalt aggregates using the packing theory along with discrete element method (DEM), i.e. proven as a useful method for modeling materials with in-homogeneities such as asphalt mixtures.

Experimental In this part, the findings of the theoretical part can be used for producing mixtures in the laboratory to be evaluated for raveling resistance. Hence, first, the most promising gradations obtained from the modeling may be used for producing real porous asphalt mixtures with a reference binder. Using a reference binder in this step helps focusing only on the structure of the aggregate assembly. For the


evaluation of the produced mixtures, raveling tests such as Cantabro, water sensitivity, freeze and thaw cycles, rotating surface abrasion test (RSAT), and etc. are recommended.

5.3. Production and handling In this step, it is recommended to use the obtained information from the previous steps for producing new mixtures. Then, the produced mixtures are recommended to be evaluated using the previously mentioned test methods and compare them with a commonly used mixture receipt. This process would quantify the expected amount of improvements in the properties of the new porous asphalt mixtures.

It is also recommended to carry out theoretical and experimental studies on the significance of the segregation during the transportation and handling of the produced mixtures in form of laboratory scale slab productions.

5.4. Construction As mentioned before, in addition to the existing standard test methods that are mostly designed for evaluation of the asphalt layers after compaction, it is also important to understand the behavior of porous asphalt mixtures during the construction phase. Hence, it is recommended to conduct compactability measurements for different produced porous mixtures from the previous recommended steps to investigate their expected flow and rearrangement behaviors during the compaction phase. For this stage, it is recommended to use compaction simulators, e.g. Compaction Flow Test (CFT), which enables taking a close look at the material behavior during the construction phase in a laboratory scale.

Notes: For optimizing the structure of the porous asphalt mixtures, X-ray CT imaging can be a very important tool as it allows obtaining useful information about the internal structure of the mixtures and helps explaining the results of the other tests.

Since aging is one of the main problems with the durability of porous asphalt mixtures, it is important to find alternative methods for simulating the aging in a more realistic way than the existing methods. A better simulation of the aging is expected to help with finding the optimized portion and types of polymer and other additives for increasing the durability of the porous mixtures.


References Ahmed, F. (2015). Porous Asphalt Clogging Performance Under Swedish Conditions., Master’s thesis, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.

Alvarez, A. E., Martin, A. E., & Estakhri, C. (2011). A review of mix design and evaluation research for permeable friction course mixtures. Construction and Building Materials, 25(3), 1159-1166.

Alvarez, A. E., Martin, A. E., Estakhri, C. K., Button, J. W., Glover, C. J., & Jung, S. H. (2006). Synthesis of current practice on the design, construction, and maintenance of porous friction courses (No. FHWA/TX-06/0-5262-1).

ANAS (2010), Capiolato speciale di appalto, Parte 2a Norme techniche per pavimentazioni stradali/autostradali

Apostolidis, P., Liu, X., Wang, H., van de Ven, M. F. C., & Scarpas, A. (2018, July). Induction healing of asphalt mixes with steel slag. In Advances in Materials and Pavement Prediction: Papers from the International Conference on Advances in Materials and Pavement Performance Prediction (AM3P 2018), April 16-18, 2018, Doha, Qatar (p. 379). CRC Press.

Arampamoorthy, H., & Patrick, J. (2011, May). Comparison of the Wehner-Schulze and PSV test for estimating the polishing resistance of New Zealand chip seal aggregate. In International Surface Friction Conference, 3rd, 2011.

Bendtsen, H., & Gspan, K. (2017). State of the art in managing road traffic noise: noise-reducing pavements (No. Technical Report 2017-01).

Bennert, T., Maher, A., & Smith, J. (2004). Evaluation of crumb rubber in hot mix asphalt (No. Final Report). Rutgers University, Center for Advanced Infrastructure & Transportation, and Rutgers Asphalt/Pavement Laboratory.

Bergiers, A., Goubert, L., & Vuye, C. (2012). About The Rolling Resistance Trailer And Parameters Influencing Rolling Resistance.

Biligiri, K. P., & Way, G. B. (2014). Noise-damping characteristics of different pavement surface wearing courses. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 15(4), 925-941.

Bouman, F., (2017), Maintenance prediction and planning on PA, CEDR Symposium Road Traffic Noise Management and Abatement in Copenhagen

Brown, E. R., & Mallick, R. B. (1995). Laboratory study on draindown of asphalt cement in stone matrix asphalt. Transportation research record, 1513, 25.

CEDR Transnational Road Research Programme Call 2012: Recycling: Road construction in a post-fossil fuel society

Chen, J., Yao, C., Wang, H., Huang, W., Ma, X., & Qian, J. (2018). Interface Shear Performance between Porous Polyurethane Mixture and Asphalt Sublayer. Applied Sciences, 8(4), 623.

Chen, J., Yin, X., Wang, H., & Ding, Y. (2018). Evaluation of durability and functional performance of porous polyurethane mixture in porous pavement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 188, 12-19.


Chen, X., & Huang, B. (2008). Evaluation of moisture damage in hot mix asphalt using simple performance and superpave indirect tensile tests. Construction and Building Materials, 22(9), 1950-1962.

Collop, A. C., Sutanto, M. H., Airey, G. D., & Elliott, R. C. (2009). Shear bond strength between asphalt layers for laboratory prepared samples and field cores. Construction and Building Materials, 23(6), 2251-2258.

Cooley, Jr. L. Allen, Kandhal, Prithvi S., Mallick, Rajib B., and Watson, Donald E.,

Cui, S., Blackman, B. R., Kinloch, A. J., & Taylor, A. C. (2014). Durability of asphalt mixtures: Effect of aggregate type and adhesion promoters. International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives, 54, 100-111.

de Bondt, A., Plug, K., van de Water, J., The, P., & Voskuilen, J. Development of a durable third generation Porous Asphalt with a high noise reduction.

de RSAT proef. Proceedings Infradagen 2008, Delft, Nederland.

De Visscher, J., & Vanelstraete, A. (2016). A new performance test for resistance to ravelling by traffic: laboratory and field experience in Belgium. In 8th RILEM International Symposium on Testing and Characterization of Sustainable and Innovative Bituminous Materials (pp. 785-796). Springer, Dordrecht.

Delorme, J. L., De la Roche, C., & Wendling, L. (2007). LPC bituminous mixtures design guide. Laboratoire Central des Ponts et Chaussées.

Duriez, M., & Arrambide, J. (1961). Nouveau traité de matériaux de construction.

Frigio, F., Pasquini, E., Ferrotti, G., & Canestrari, F. (2013). Improved durability of recycled porous asphalt. Construction and Building Materials, 48, 755-763.

Gibbs, D., Iwasaki, R., Bernhard, R., Bledsoe, J., Carlson, D., Corbisier, C., Fults, K., Hearne, Jr., T., Mcmullen, K., Newcome, D., Roberts, J., Rochat, J., Scofield, L. and Swanlund, M. (2005). Quiet pavement systems in Europe (No. FHWA-PL-05-011).

Göransson, N. G., Viman, L., & Eriksson, O. (2018). Avnötningsbeständighet för högkvalitativa slitlagerbeläggningar: slitagemätningar i VTI: s provvägsmaskin (PVM) och jämförelser med laboratorietester enligt Prall. Statens väg-och transportforskningsinstitut.

Greer, G. (2006). Stone Mastic Asphalt-A Review of its Noise Reducing and Early Life Skid Resistance Properties. In Proceedings of ACOUSTICS (pp. 319-323).

Gustafsson, M., Blomqvist, G., Gudmundsson, A., Dahl, A., Jonsson, P., & Swietlicki, E. (2009). Factors influencing PM10 emissions from road pavement wear. Atmospheric Environment, 43(31), 4699-4702.

Hadiwardoyo, S. P., Sinaga, E. S., & Fikri, H. (2013). The influence of Buton asphalt additive on skid resistance based on penetration index and temperature. Construction and Building Materials, 42, 5-10.

Hagos, E. T., Molenaar, A. A. A., Van de Ven, M. F. C., & Voskuilen, J. L. M. (2007). Durability related investigation into porous asphalt. In The International Conference on Advanced Characterisation of Pavement and Soil Engineering Materials (pp. 20-22).


Hammer, E., & Bühlmann, E. (2017). A guideline for sustainable low-noise pavements. ICSV, 17, 1-8.

Hammoun, F.; Hamlat, S.; Terrier, J.P. (2008): “Laboratory evaluation of the resistance to tangential forces of bituminous surfacing”, Eurasphalt & Eurobitume Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark Cooley Jr, L. A., Brumfield, J. W., Mallick, R. B., Mogawer, W. S., Partl, M. N., Poulikakos, L. D., & Hicks, G. (2009). Construction and maintenance practices for permeable friction courses (No. Project 09-41).

HAMZAH, M. O. (2005). Characterization of the clogging behaviour of double layer porous asphalt. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 6, 968-980.

Hamzah, M. O., Hasan, M. R. M., Wan, C. C., & Abdullah, N. H. (2010). A comparative study on performance of Malaysian porous asphalt mixes incorporating conventional and modified binders. Journal of Applied Sciences(Faisalabad), 10(20), 2403-2410.

Hartjes, J. M., & Voskuilen, J. L. M., 2008. Classificatie van asfaltmengsels met behulp van

Hernández-Olivares, F., Witoszek-Schultz, B., Alonso-Fernández, M., & Benito-Moro, C. (2009). Rubber-modified hot-mix asphalt pavement by dry process. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 10(4), 277-288.

Herrington, P. R., Reilly, S., & Cook, S. (2005). Porous asphalt durability test. Wellington: Transfund.

Hofman, R., (2017), Porous Asphalt, Effect on other performance indicators, CEDR Symposium Road Traffic Noise Management and Abatement in Copenhagen

Jacobson, T. (1995). Study of the wear resistance of bituminous mixes to studded tyres: Tests with slabs of bituminous mixes inserted in roads and in the VTIs road simulator.

Jacobson, T., & Viman, L. (2015). Experiences of noise asphalt pavements. Statens väg-och transportforskningsinstitut. VTI report 843, (In Swedish).

Jacobson, T., Sandberg, U. & Viman, L. (2016). How do we improve the durability of porous asphalt?, Euroasphalt & Eurobitume Congress, dx.doi.org/10.14311/EE.2016.147

James, T., Watson, D., Taylor, A., Tran, N., & Rodezno, C. (2017). Improving cohesiveness of porous friction course asphalt mixtures. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 18(sup4), 256-272.

Journal, 59(3), 219–227.

Kandhal, P. S., & Mallick, R. B. (1998). Open graded friction course: state of the practice. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council.

Kim H, Sokolov K, Poulikakos LD, Partl MN (2009) Fatigue evaluation of carbon FRP-reinforced

Kline, L. (2010). Comparison of open graded friction course mix design methods currently used in the United States.

Kragh, J. (2009). DVS-DRI super quiet traffic-international search for pavement providing 10dB noise reduction. Report Danish Road Directorate, (178).

Kragh, J., Nielsen, E., Olesen, E., Goubert, L., Vansteenkiste, S., De Visscher, J., Sandberg, U. & Karlsson, R. (2011). Optimization of thin asphalt layers, OPTHINAL. Final report.


Lesueur, D., Petit, J., & Ritter, H.-J. (2012). Increasing the durability of asphalt mixtures by hydrated lime addition: What evidence?. European Roads Review, 20, 48–55.

Leutner, R. (1979). Untersuchung des Schichtenverbundes beim bituminösen Oberbau. Bitumen, 41(3).

Li, H., Kayhanian, M., & Harvey, J. T. (2013). Comparative field permeability measurement of permeable pavements using ASTM C1701 and NCAT permeameter methods. Journal of environmental management, 118, 144-152.

Licitra, G., Cerchiai, M., Teti, L., Ascari, E., & Fredianelli, L. (2015). Durability and variability of the acoustical performance of rubberized road surfaces. Applied Acoustics, 94, 20-28.

Losa, M., & Leandri, P. (2012). A comprehensive model to predict acoustic absorption factor of porous mixes. Materials and structures, 45(6), 923-940.

Lu, Q., & Harvey, J. (2011). Laboratory evaluation of open-graded asphalt mixes with small aggregates and various binders and additives. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (2209), 61-69.

Lu, Q., Fu, P. C., & Harvey, J. T. (2010). Laboratory evaluation of the noise and durability properties of asphalt surface mixes. UCPRC, Draft Report UCPRC-RR-2009-07, for the California Department of Transportation.

Lu, Q., Harvey, J. T., Kohler, E., Rymer, B.,& Motumah, L. (2011, May–June). Comparison of tire-pavement noise characteristics of rubberized and conventional asphalt concrete mixes. Noise Control Engineering

Lundberg, J., Blomqvist, G., Gustafsson, M., & Janhäll, S. (2017). Texture influence on road dust load. In TAP-Transportation and Air Pollution.

Luo, S., Lu, Q., & Qian, Z. (2015). Performance evaluation of epoxy modified open-graded porous asphalt concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 76, 97-102.

Lyons, K. R., & Putman, B. J. (2013). Laboratory evaluation of stabilizing methods for porous asphalt mixtures. Construction and Building Materials, 49, 772-780.

Ma, X., Li, Q., Cui, Y. C., & Ni, A. Q. (2018). Performance of porous asphalt mixture with various additives. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 19(4), 355-361.

Mackiewicz, P. (2012). Fatigue tests of bituminous mixtures with inclusion of initial cracks. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 25(1), 140-147.

Majidi, B., Taghavi, S. M., Fafard, M., Ziegler, D. P., & Alamdari, H. (2016). Discrete element method modeling of the rheological properties of coke/pitch mixtures. Materials, 9(5), 334.

Mallick, R., Kandhal, P., Cooley, L. A., & Watson, D. (2000). Design construction and performance of new-generation open-graded friction courses. Asphalt Paving Technology, 69, 391-423.

Mansour, T. N., & Putman, B. J. (2012). Influence of aggregate gradation on the performance properties of porous asphalt mixtures. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 25(2), 281-288.


Masri, K. A., Arshad, A. K., & Samsudin, M. S. (2016). Mechanical properties of porous asphalt with nanosilica modified binder. Jurnal Teknologi, 78(7-2), 139-146.

Mogawer, W. S., Austerman, A. J., & Bahia, H. U. (2011). Evaluating the effect of warm-mix asphalt technologies on moisture characteristics of asphalt binders and mixtures. Transportation Research Record, 2209(1), 52-60.

Mohan, S. (2010). Winter damage of porous asphalt. Delft University of Technology.

Nicholls C. (1998). “Asphalt Surfacing”. London: E and FN Spon;. p. 187.

Nielsen, C. B. (2006). Durability of porous asphalt-international experiences. Durability Of Porous Asphalt-International Experiences, (41).

Niezgoda, S. L., Muszynski, M., & Navickis-Brasch, A. (2016). A Critical Review of Permeable Asphalt Behavior and Performance to Guide Application to Arterial Streets in Cold Climates. In World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2016 (pp. 70-80).

Nynas,(2013), Endura D1 product document, https://notes.nynas.com/Apps/1112.nsf/wpds/SE_SV_Nynas_Endura_D1/$File/Nynas_Endura_D1_SE_SV_PDS.pdf

Ohiduzzaman, M. D., Sirin, O., Kassem, E., & Rochat, J. L. (2016). State-of-the-art review on sustainable design and construction of quieter pavements—Part 1: traffic noise measurement and abatement techniques. Sustainability, 8(8), 742.

Ongel, A., Harvey, J., & Kohler, E. (2007). State of the Practice in 2006 for Open-Graded Asphalt Mix Design. UCPRC-TM-2008-07. Draft technical memorandum prepared for Caltrans by the University of California Pavement Research Center.

Ongel, A., Kohler, E., & Harvey, J. (2008). Principal components regression of onboard sound intensity levels. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 134(11), 459-466.

PANK (2011), Päällystealan neuvottelukunta: Asfalttinormit. Pan kry, Edita. 118 p.

Partl, M. N., Pasquini, E., Canestrari, F., & Virgili, A. (2010). Analysis of water and thermal sensitivity of open graded asphalt rubber mixtures. Construction and Building Materials, 24(3), 283-291.

Partl, M. N., Porot, L., Di Benedetto, H., Canestrari, F., Marsac, P., & Tebaldi, G. (2018). Testing and Characterization of Sustainable Innovative Bituminous Materials and Systems.

porous asphalt composite system using a model mobile load simulator. Transp Res Record 2116:108–117

Poulikakos, L. D., & Partl, M. N. (2012). A multi-scale fundamental investigation of moisture induced deterioration of porous asphalt concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 36, 1025-1035.

Poulikakos, L. D., Gubler, R., Partl, M. N., Pittet, M., Arnaud, L., Junod, A., ... & Simond, E. (2006). Mechanical properties of porous asphalt, recommendations for standardization (No. LAVOC-REPORT-2008-020).


Praticò, F. G., & Anfosso-Lédée, F. (2012). Trends and issues in mitigating traffic noise through quiet pavements. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 53, 203-212.

Putman, B. J., & Kline, L. C. (2012). Comparison of mix design methods for porous asphalt mixtures. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 24(11), 1359-1367.

Rasmussen, R. O., Resendez, Y. A., Chang, G. K., & Ferragut, T. R. (2004). Concrete Pavement Solutions for Reducing Tire-Pavement Noise. Center for Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Technology, Iowa State University. Ames, IA.

Ren, R., & Gao, C. (2009). Improved Porous Noise-Reducing Asphalt Mixture Design Method. International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology, 2(6).

Ressel, W., Eisenbach, C. D., Alber, S., Bergk, B., & Wurst, F. (2007, September). Enduring traffic noise reduction with porous asphalt improved by polymer technology. In Proceedings 4th International SIIV (Società Italiana Infrastutture Viarie) Congress" Advances in Transport Infrastructures and Stakeholders Expectations", Palermo, Italy (Vol. 12, p. 14).

Sandberg, U. (2009). The global experience in using low-noise road surfaces: A benchmark report. Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department, Hong Kong.

Sandberg, U., & Gucbert, L. (2011). Poroelastic road surface (PERS): A review of 30 years of R and D work. In Inter-noise and Noise-con Congress and Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2011, No. 4, pp. 3014-3021). Institute of Noise Control Engineering.

Sandberg, U., Kragh, J., Goubert, L., Bendtsen, H., Bergiers, A., Biligiri, K. P., Karlsson, R., Nielsen, E. & Vansteenkiste, S. (2011). Optimization of thin asphalt layers: state-of-the-art review, Era-Net Road project deliverable no. 1.

Santagata, F. A., Canestrari, F., & Pasquini, E. (2007, September). Mechanical characterization of asphalt rubber-wet process. In Proceedings of 4th international SIV congress. Palermo. Italy.

Schaus, L. K. (2007). Porous asphalt pavement designs: Proactive design for cold climate use (Master's thesis, University of Waterloo).

Shimeno, S., Oi, A., & Tanaka, T. (2010). Evaluation and further development of porous asphalt pavement with 10 years’ experience in Japanese expressways. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Asphalt Pavements, Nagoya (pp. 43-52).

Shu, X., Huang, B., Shrum, E. D., & Jia, X. (2012). Laboratory evaluation of moisture susceptibility of foamed warm mix asphalt containing high percentages of RAP. Construction and Building Materials, 35, 125-130.

Shukry, N. A. M., Hassan, N. A., Abdullah, M. E., Hainin, M. R., Yusoff, N. I. M., Abdullah, N. A. M., & Jaya, R. P. (2017). EFFECTS OF DIATOMITE AS FILLER ON THE POROUS ASPHALT MIXTURES PROPERTIES. Malaysian Journal of Civil Engineering, 29.

Skaf, M., Ortega-López, V., Fuente-Alonso, J. A., Santamaría, A., & Manso, J. M. (2016). Ladle furnace slag in asphalt mixes. Construction and Building Materials, 122, 488-495.

Smit, A. D. F., & Waller, B. (2007). Sound pressure and intensity evaluations of low noise pavement structures with open-graded asphalt mixtures (No. NCAT Report 07-02).


Sokolov, K., Gubler, R., & Partl, M. N. (2005). Extended numerical modeling and application of the coaxial shear test for asphalt pavements. Materials and structures, 38(5), 515-522.

Stuart, K. D., Youtcheff, J. S., & Mogawer, W. S. (2002). Understanding the performance of modified apshalt binders in mixtures: evaluation of moisture sensitivity (no. Fhwa-rd-02-029,).

Swiss Pre-Standard SNR 640436 Semi Dense Mixtures and Wearing Courses. Semidichtes Mischgut und Deckschichten SDA, Festlegungen, Anforderungen, Konzeption und Ausführung (in press)

Taiyu Kensetsu Co., LTD, (2018), Japanese porous asphalt technology, (Presentation)

Takahashi, S. (2013). Comprehensive study on the porous asphalt effects on expressways in Japan: based on field data analysis in the last decade. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 14(2), 239-255.

Tang, G., Gao, L., Ji, T., & Xie, J. (2017). Study on the Resistance of Raveling for Porous Asphalt Pavement. DEStech Transactions on Materials Science and Engineering, (ictim).

Tarmuzi, N. A., Jaya, R. P., Yaacob, H., Hassan, N. A., & Aziz, M. M. A. (2015). Aggregate angularity effect on porous asphalt engineering properties and performance. Jurnal Teknologi, 73(4), 99-104.

Technische Lieferbedingungen für Asphaltmischgut für den Bau von Verkehrsflächenbefestigungen, Ausgabe 2007/Fassung 2013 (TL Asphalt-StB 07/13), FGSV Verlag, FGSV-Nr. 797, Köln, 2014.

Tenza-Abril, A. J., Saval, J. M., & Cuenca, A. (2014). Using sewage-sludge ash as filler in bituminous mixes. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 27(4), 04014141.

Tseng, M. Y., Lin, Y. Y., & Liao, M. C. (2017). Laboratory Evaluation of Aging on Engineering Properties of Fine-Graded Porous-Asphalt Concrete. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 46(1), 215-226.

Turner, P. and Heitzman M. (2013). Effect of Friction Aggregate on Hot Mix Asphalt Surface Friction (No. NCAT Report 13-09).

Van Heystraeten, G., & Moraux, C. (1990). TEN YEARS'EXPERIENCE OF POROUS ASPHALT IN BELGIUM. Transportation Research Record, (1265).

Van Vilsteren, I., (2017a), Workshop on porous asphalt as a noise reducing measure, Materials and construction, CEDR Symposium Road Traffic Noise Management and Abatement in Copenhagen

Van Vilsteren, I., (2017b), Workshop on porous asphalt as a noise reducing measure, maintenance techniques, CEDR Symposium Road Traffic Noise Management and Abatement in Copenhagen

Vázquez, V. F., Luong, J., Bueno, M., Terán, F., & Paje, S. E. (2016). Assessment of an action against environmental noise: Acoustic durability of a pavement surface with crumb rubber. Science of the Total Environment, 542, 223-230.

Vejregler (2013) Noise reducing pavements with original title of “støjreducerende slidlag,”SRS”(SAB-P)” in Danish

Wang, D., Leng, Z., Hüben, M., Oeser, M., & Steinauer, B. (2016). Photocatalytic pavements with epoxy-bonded TiO2-containing spreading material. Construction and building materials, 107, 44-51.


Wang, D., Schacht, A., Leng, Z., Leng, C., Kollmann, J., & Oeser, M. (2017). Effects of material composition on mechanical and acoustic performance of poroelastic road surface (PERS). Construction and Building Materials, 135, 352-360.

Watson, D., Johnson, A., & Jared, D. (1998). Georgia Department of Transportation's Progress in Open-Graded Friction Course Development. Transportation Research Record 1616.

Watson, D., Tran, N. H., Rodezno, C., Taylor, A. J., & James Jr, T. M. (2018). Performance-Based Mix Design of Porous Friction Courses (No. Project 01-55).

Way, G. B. (2000). OGFC meets CRM where the rubber meets the rubber 12 years of durable success. Asphalt Rubber, 2000, 15-31.

Xu, B., Chen, J., Li, M., Cao, D., Ping, S., Zhang, Y., & Wang, W. (2016). Experimental investigation of preventive maintenance materials of porous asphalt mixture based on high viscosity modified bitumen. Construction and Building Materials, 124, 681-689.

Yi, J., Shen, S., Muhunthan, B., & Feng, D. (2014). Viscoelastic–plastic damage model for porous asphalt mixtures: Application to uniaxial compression and freeze–thaw damage. Mechanics of Materials, 70, 67-75.

Youtcheff, J., & Aurilio, V. (1997). Moisture sensitivity of asphalt binders: evaluation and modeling of the pneumatic adhesion test results. In Proceedings of the annual conference-Canadian technical asphalt association (pp. 180-200). Polyscience publications inc..

Zhang, H., Li, H., Zhang, Y., Wang, D., Harvey, J., & Wang, H. (2018). Performance enhancement of porous asphalt pavement using red mud as alternative filler. Construction and Building Materials, 160, 707-713.

Zhang, W. (2017). Effect of tack coat application on interlayer shear strength of asphalt pavement: A state-of-the-art review based on application in the United States. International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology, 10(5), 434-445.

Zhang, Y., van de Ven, M., Molenaar, A., & Wu, S. (2016). Preventive maintenance of porous asphalt concrete using surface treatment technology. Materials & Design, 99, 262-272.

www.vti.se

VTI, Statens väg- och transportforskningsinstitut, är ett oberoende och internationellt framstående forskningsinstitut inom transportsektorn. Huvuduppgiften är att bedriva forskning och utveckling kring infrastruktur, trafik och transporter. Kvalitetssystemet och miljöledningssystemet är ISO-certifierat enligt ISO 9001 respektive 14001. Vissa provningsmetoder är dessutom ackrediterade av Swedac. VTI har omkring 200 medarbetare och finns i Linköping (huvudkontor), Stockholm, Göteborg, Borlänge och Lund.

The Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI), is an independent and internationally prominent research institute in the transport sector. Its principal task is to conduct research and development related to infrastructure, traffic and transport. The institute holds the quality management systems certificate ISO 9001 and the environmental management systems certificate ISO 14001. Some of its test methods are also certified by Swedac. VTI has about 200 employees and is located in Linköping (head office), Stockholm, Gothenburg, Borlänge and Lund.

HEAD OFFICELINKÖPINGSE-581 95 LINKÖPING PHONE +46 (0)13-20 40 00 STOCKHOLM Box 55685 SE-102 15 STOCKHOLM PHONE +46 (0)8-555 770 20

GOTHENBURGBox 8072SE-402 78 GOTHENBURGPHONE +46 (0)31-750 26 00 BORLÄNGE Box 920SE-781 29 BORLÄNGEPHONE +46 (0)243-44 68 60

LUND Bruksgatan 8SE-222 36 LUND PHONE +46 (0)46-540 75 00

Noise reducing asphalt pavements: A literature review on ...

Documents

Transcript of Noise reducing asphalt pavements: A literature review on ...