Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:


Pages 65-90

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 65...
... 65   Tabulated Survey Responses A P P E N D I X B This appendix summarizes the responses to the survey questionnaire shown in Appendix A, as reported by the agencies. A total of 48 states, the District of Columbia, and one Canadian province (Ontario)
From page 66...
... 66 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements • NY: It is sometimes requested by the Regional Materials Engineer, based on his assessment of the situation. • SD: When 1.00% hydrated lime or more by weight of mixture is added TSR testing not required.
From page 67...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 67   NV: We use Nev. T 341 which is a modified version of T 283 (old definition of saturation percentage)
From page 68...
... 68 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements KS Minimum TSR 80% KY Verification of contractor's TSR value. Target 80 +/-20, so 60-100.
From page 69...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 69   PA Minimum TSR = 80%. Minimum average unconditioned tensile strength for asphalt mixtures with virgin asphalt binder grades of PG64-22/PG64S-22 and PG76-22/PG64E-22 = 80 psi.
From page 70...
... 70 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements AK No Response AL On T 283 we do not perform the freeze-thaw aspect of the test. CA https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/engineering/documents/californiatestmethods-ctm/ctm-389a11y.pdf CO Temperature and Load rates differ.
From page 71...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 71   TN One freeze-thaw cycle instead of multiple per NAPA Design Guide for OGFCs. TX Most likely.
From page 72...
... 72 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements IL I would guess at less than 10 to 15% of mixes before adjustment or additives.
From page 73...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 73   2e. If Hamburg is used, how is stripping inflection point determined?
From page 74...
... 74 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements ID Per AASHTO T 324 IL We do not measure stripping inflection point. We think that the S.I.P.
From page 75...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 75   So m et im es /u nd er c er ta in c on di tio ns ; P le as e ex pl ai n. AR: It is determined during first 3 days of production or during the first 3 days of production after and interruption of 120 calendar days or more.
From page 76...
... 76 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements 3a. What test methods are required for acceptance?
From page 77...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 77   LA No SIP MA TBD ME By binder grade: 20,000 passes to 12.5 mm deformation, 15,000 passes to SIP. Temps: PG64-28 at 45°C, PG64E-28 at 48°C, PG70E-28 at 50°C MN Contractor's minimum is 80% for high traffic volume mixes and minimum is 75% for low traffic volume mixes.
From page 78...
... 78 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements WA No stripping inflection point and max rut depth 10 mm ESALs (millions) < 0.3 - 10,000 passes 0.3 to 3 - 12,500 passes >3 - 15,000 passes WI TSR min.
From page 79...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 79   VT Link to be provided.
From page 80...
... 80 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements Yes, for all mixtures. AR, CO, DC, FL, GA, ID, LA, MS, MT, NC, NE, NV, PA, SC, TN, UT, VA, WY Yes, for certain mixtures or materials (aggregates)
From page 81...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 81   4b. What mixtures or materials require the use of anti-strip additive?
From page 82...
... 82 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements MS All mixes require 1% hydrated lime. MT All NC All NCDOT mixes NE All mixes except for shoulder mix NV All virgin aggregates for plant mix, but not RAP stockpiles.
From page 83...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 83   5. Does your agency use other measures - including alternate tests, limitations in your specifications, or other requirements - to mitigate moisture damage (examples: enhanced density requirements, field permeability testing, prohibiting use of certain aggregate types, Superpave5, or others)
From page 84...
... 84 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements PA Minimum density requirements for dense-graded Superpave asphalt mixtures are specified by lot and percent within limits (PWL)
From page 85...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 85   7. Is your agency implementing or researching the use of new or emerging technologies to identity moisture-susceptible materials or mixtures?
From page 86...
... 86 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements VA: MiST, Considering balanced mix design candidate tests to evaluate conditioned and non-conditioned performance WY: Dynamic modulus differences between moisture-conditioned and non-conditioned specimens 7b. Please identify the test method by including a link or emailing a copy to Dr.
From page 87...
... Tabulated Survey Responses 87   Study R27-078, Effects of Various Asphalt Binder Additives/Modifiers on Moisture Susceptible Asphaltic Mixture (2014) KS: Yes, KS-14-1, KSU/KU-07-5 MA: Yes, https://www.newenglandtransportationconsortium.org/wpcontent/uploads/NETC-15-3-Final-Report-1.pdf ME: Yes NC: Yes, See answer to 7b.
From page 88...
... 88 Practices for Assessing and Mitigating the Moisture Susceptibility of Asphalt Pavements WI: Yes, 0092-05-12, Test Method to Determine Aggregate/Asphalt Adhesion Properties and Potential Moisture Damage, https://wisconsindot.gov/documents2/research/0512moisturedamage-f1.pdf 9. Do you see a need for additional research into any of the following?
From page 89...
... Abbreviations and acronyms used without denitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAST Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (2015) FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration GHSA Governors Highway Safety Association HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012)
From page 90...
... Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ISBN 978-0-309-68725-6 9 7 8 0 3 0 9 6 8 7 2 5 6 9 0 0 0 0

Key Terms



This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.