The SCB test was found to have a good correlation with the LWT test in predicting moisture damage in asphalt mixtures. To further investigate the potential of the SCB test following future recommendations are listed:
▪ A wide range of asphalt mixtures properties must be evaluated with various moisture conditioning levels to validate the moisture on mixture sensitivity of the SCB test. The parameters must include but not be limited to:
a. modified asphalt binders (Like WMA, crumb rubber, polymer, bio-oils, plastic, etc.) b. different aggregate properties (like shape, texture, and absorption),
c. different mixture gradation (like open-graded)
▪ The ability of SCB test to predict moisture susceptible asphalt mixtures should be investigated by comparing the observed field performance to laboratory performance of moisture conditioning asphalt mixtures.
▪ Standardization of the SCB as a moisture damage test should be done by including various field cores from different states.
68
REFERENCES
1. Diab, A., You, Z., Yang, X., & Mohd Hasan, M. (2017). Towards an Alternate Evaluation of
Moisture-Induced Damage of Bituminous Materials. Applied Sciences, 7(10), 1049.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app7101049
2. Santucci, L. Minimizing Moisture Damage in Asphalt Pavements. Pavement Technology Update, University of California Pavement Research Center, Transfer Program, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2010, pp. 1-12.
3. Birgisson, B., Roque, R., & Page G. C. Evaluation of water damage using hot mix asphalt
fracture mechanics. J Assoc Asphalt Pav Technol (AAPT) 2003; 72:516–62.
4. Kennedy, T. W., Roberts, F. L., & Lee, K. W. Evaluation of water effects on asphalt concrete
mixtures. Transp Res Rec 1983; 911:134–43.
5. Kiggundu, B. M., & Roberts, L. F. (1988). Stripping in HMA Mixtures: Sate-of-the-art and
Critical Review of Test Methods. National Center for Asphalt Technology (NCAT) Report 88-
02.
6. ASTM D3625 / D3625M-20, Standard Practice for Effect of Water on Asphalt-Coated
Aggregate Using Boiling Water. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2020.
7. AASHTO T 182. Standard Method of Test for Coating and Stripping of Bitumen-Aggregate
Mixtures. America association of state highways and transportation officials, Washington,
D.C, 2002.
8. AASHTO T 165. Standard Method of Test for Effect of Water on Compressive Strength of
Compacted Bituminous Mixtures. America association of state highways and transportation
officials, Washington, D.C, 2006.
9. AASHTO T 283. Standard Method of Test for Resistance of Compacted Asphalt Mixtures to
Moisture-Induced Damage. American association of state highways and transportation
officials, Washington, DC, 2014.
10. AASHTO T 324. Standard Method of Test for Hamburg Wheel-Track Testing of Compacted
Asphalt Mixtures. American association of state highways and transportation officials,
Washington, DC, 2019.
11. West, R., Rodezno, C., Leiva, F., & Yin, F. Development of a framework for balanced mix
design. Project NCHRP. 2018 Aug 30:20-07.
12. Solaimanian, M.., Bonaquist, F. R., & Tandon, V. NCHRP Report 589: Improved Conditioning
and Testing Procedures for HMA Moisture Susceptibility. Transportation Research Board,
National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2007.
13. Epps, J. A., Sebaaly, P. E., Penaranda, J., Maher, M. R., McCann, M. B., & Hand, A. J. NCHRP
Report 444: Compatibility of a Test for Moisture-Induced Damage with Superpave Volumetric Mix Design. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC,
69
14. Mallick, R. B., Pelland, R., & Hugo, F. (2005b). Use of accelerated loading equipment for
determination of long term moisture susceptibility of hot mix asphalt. International Journal of
Pavement Engineering, 6(2), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/10298430500158984
15. Aschenbrener, T. Evaluation of Hamburg wheel-tracking device to predict moisture damage
in hot-mix asphalt. Transportation Research Record. 1995;1492:193.
16. Kandhal, P., & Rickards, I. (2002). Premature Failure of Asphalt Overlays from Stripping:
Case Histories. Asphalt Paving Technology 70: 301-351.
17. Lu, Q., & Harvey, J. T. (2006). Evaluation of Hamburg Wheel-Tracking Device Test with
Laboratory and Field Performance Data. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
Transportation Research Board, 1970(1), 25–44.
18. Walubita, L. F., Faruk, A. N., Zhang, J., Hu, X., & Lee, S. I., The Hamburg rutting test– Effects
of HMA sample sitting time and test temperature variation. Construction and Building
Materials, Vol 108, 2016, pp. 22-28.
19. Izzo, R. P., & Tahmoressi, M. (1999). Use of the Hamburg Wheel-Tracking Device for
Evaluating Moisture Susceptibility of Hot-Mix Asphalt. Transportation Research Record:
Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1681(1), 76–85. https://doi.org/10.3141/1681- 10
20. Berger, E., Monismith, C. L., Kwong, J., & Nodes, J. Summary Report: Breakout Session 2:
Testing and Treatments. In Moisture Sensitivity of Asphalt Pavements: A National Seminar,
Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 293– 301.
21. ASTM D7870 / D7870M-20, Standard Practice for Moisture Conditioning Compacted Asphalt
Mixture Specimens by Using Hydrostatic Pore Pressure. ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2020
22. AASHTO T 240. Standard Method of Test for Effect of Heat and Air on a Moving Film of
Asphalt Binder (Rolling Thin-Film Oven Test). American association of state highways and
transportation officials, Washington, DC, 2013.
23. AASHTO R 30. Standard Practice for Mixture Conditioning of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA). American association of state highways and transportation officials, Washington, DC, 2002. 24. AASHTO R 29. Standard Practice for Grading or Verifying the Performance Grade (PG) of
an Asphalt Binder. American association of state highways and transportation officials,
Washington, DC, 2015.
25. Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development. Louisiana Standard Specifications for Roads and Bridges, Baton Rouge, LA, 2016.
26. AASHTO R 56. Standard Method of Test for Uncompacted Void Content of Coarse Aggregate. American association of state highways and transportation officials, Washington, DC, 2003. 27. AASHTO M 323. Standard Specification for Superpave Volumetric Mix Design. American
70
28. AASHTO T 315. Standard Method of Test for Determining the Rheological Properties of
Asphalt Binder Using a Dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR). American association of state
highways and transportation officials, Washington, DC, 2020.
29. ASTM D7405-20, Standard Test Method for Multiple Stress Creep and Recovery (MSCR) of
Asphalt Binder Using a Dynamic Shear Rheometer. ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA, 2020.
30. ASTM D3625 / D3625M-20, Standard Practice for Effect of Water on Asphalt-Coated
Aggregate Using Boiling Water. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2020.
31. ASTM D7379 / D7379M-08(2015)e1., Standard Test Methods for Strength of Modified
Bitumen Sheet Material Laps Using Cold Process Adhesive. ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2015.
32. LaCroix, A., Regimand, A., & Lawrence, J. Proposed Approach for Evaluation of Cohesive
and Adhesive Properties of Asphalt Mixtures for Determination of Moisture Sensitivity. In
Transportation Research Record 2575, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2016, pp. 61-69.
33. Kusam, A. Alternative Test Methods to Evaluate Moisture Sensitivity of Asphalt Concrete. Dissertation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 2017.
34. ASTM D8044-16, Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Asphalt Mixture Cracking Resistance using the Semi-Circular Bend Test (SCB) at Intermediate Temperatures, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016.
35. Zhou, F., Newcomb, D., Banihashermad, S., Park, E. S., Sakhaeifar, M., & Lytton, R. L. (2016, April). Experimental design for filed validation of laboratory tests to assess cracking
resistance of asphalt mixtures (Project No. 9-57).
36. Mallick, R. B., Pelland, R., & Hugo, F. (2005). Use of accelerated loading equipment for
determination of long-term moisture susceptibility of hot mix asphalt. International Journal of
Pavement Engineering, 6(2), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/10298430500158984
37. Glover, T. L., Darter, I. M., & Quintus, V. H. Impact of Environmental Factors on Pavement
Performance in the Absence of Heavy Loads. Report No. FHWA-HRT-16-084. Applied
Research Associated, Inc. (2019).
38. Aodah, H. H., Kareem, Y. N. A., & Chandra, S. 2012. Effect of Aggregate Gradation on
Moisture Susceptibility and Creep in HMA. World Academy of Science and Technology. 6:
12–28.
39. Howson, J., Masad, A. E., & Bhasin, A. 2007. System for the Evaluation of Moisture Damage
Using Fundamental Material Properties. Report No. FHWA/Tx-07/0-4523-1. Texas
Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas (2007).
40. Little, D. N., & Jones, D. R. 2003. Chemical and Mechanical Processes of Moisture Damage
in Hot-Mix Asphalt Pavements, Moisture Sensitivity of Asphalt Pavements A National Seminar.
February 4–6.
41. McGennis B. R., Kennedy, W. T., & Machemehl, B. R. Stripping and Moisture Damage in
71
42. Rehabilitation Techniques for Stripped Asphalt Pavements FHWA/MT-002-003/8123
43. Kiggundu, B. M., & Roberts, F. L. Stripping in HMA Mixtures: State-of-the-Art and Critical
Review of Test Methods. NCAT Report 88-2, National Center for Asphalt Technology, Auburn
University, September 1988.
44. Asphalt Institute. Cause and Prevention of Stripping in Asphalt Pavements. Educational Series No. 10 (ES-10), College Park, Maryland, 1981.
45. Federal Highway Administration. Highway Performance Monitoring System Field Manual. 2014.
46. Pocius, A.V. Adhesion and Adhesives Technology. Hanser Gardner Publications Inc., Columbus, Ohio, 1997.
47. Masad, E., D.N. Little, & Sukhwani, R.. Sensitivity of HMA Performance to Aggregate Shape
Measured Using Conventional and Image Analysis Procedures. Submitted Journal of
Materials in Civil Engineering, 2004.
48. Marek, C.R., & Herrin, M.. Tensile Behavior and Failure Characteristics of Asphalt Cements
in Thin Films. Proceedings, Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 37, 1968, pp.
386-421.
49. Lytton, R.L. Adhesive Fracture in Asphalt Concrete Mixtures. Chapter in book edited by J. Youtcheff, Submitted for Publication, 2004.
50. Castelblanco, A., Masad, E., & Birgisson, B. HMA Moisture Damage as a Function of Air
Void Size Distribution, Pore Pressure and Bond Energy. Submitted for Publication Journal of
Testing and Evaluation, ASTM, October 2004.
51. Ford Jr., M. C., Manke, P.G., & O’Bannon, C. E. “Quantitative Evaluation of Stripping by the Surface Reaction Test.” In Transportation Research Record 515. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1974.
52. Kandhal, P. S. Moisture susceptibility of HMA mixes: identification of problem and
recommended solutions, national center for asphalt technology. NCAT report no. 92-1.
Auburn University, Alabama; 1992.
53. Orange, G., & Martin, J. V., Menapace, A., Hemsley, M., & Baumgardner, G. L. (2004).
Rutting and Moisture Resistance of Asphalt Mixtures Containing Polymer and Polyphosphoric Acid Modified Bitumen. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 5(3), 323–353.
https://doi.org/10.3166/rmpd.5.323-353
54. Vamegh, M., Ameri, M., & Chavoshian Naeni, S. F. (2019). Performance evaluation of fatigue
resistance of asphalt mixtures modified by SBR/PP polymer blends and SBS. Construction and
Building Materials, 209, 202–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.111
55. Kim, S., & Coree, B. J. Evaluation of hot mix asphalt moisture sensitivity using the Nottingham
asphalt test equipment. Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering.
Report no. IHRB Project TR-483. Iowa State University; 2005.
56. Mehrara, A., & Khodaii, A. (2013). A review of state of the art on stripping phenomenon in
asphalt concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 38, 423–442.
72
57. Kennedy, T. W., Roberts, F. L., & Lee, K. W. Evaluation of water effects on asphalt concrete
mixtures. Transp Res Rec 1983;911:134–43.
58. AASHTO T 361. Standard Method of Test for Determining Asphalt Binder Bond Strength by
Means of the Binder Bond Strength (BBS) Test. American association of state highways and
transportation officials, Washington, DC, 2016.
59. Moraes, R., Velasquez, R., & Bahia, H. Measuring the Effect of Moisture on Asphalt-
Aggregate Bond with the Bitumen Bond Strength Test. Transportation Research Record:
Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2011. 2209: 70–81.
60. Habal, A., & Singh, D. (2018). Influence of Recycled Asphalt Pavement on Interfacial Energy
and Bond Strength of Asphalt Binder for Different Types of Aggregates. Transportation
Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2672(28), 154–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198118784377
61. Apeagyei, A., Buttlar, W. G., & Dempsey, B. Moisture Damage Evaluation of Asphalt
Mixtures Using AASHTO T283 and DC(T) Fracture Test. Proc., 10th International Conference on Asphalt Pavements. International Society of Asphalt Pavements, Red Hook, N.Y., 2006,
pp. 862–873.
62. Azari, H. NCHRP Project 9-26A, Web-only Document 166. Precision Estimates of AASHTO
T283: Resistance of Compacted Hot-Mix Asphalt (HMA) to Moisture-Induced Damage. TRB,
National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2010.
63. Mohammad, L. N., Elseifi, M. A., Raghavendra, A., & Ye, M. Hamburg Wheel-Track Test
Equipment Requirements, and Improvements to AASHTO T 324. 2015 Sep.
64. Solaimanian, M., Harvey, J., Tahmoressi, M., & Tandon, V. Test methods to predict moisture
sensitivity of hot-mix asphalt pavements. InMoisture Sensitivity of Asphalt Pavements - A
National Seminar. California Department of Transportation; Federal Highway Administration; National Asphalt Pavement Association; California Asphalt Pavement Alliance; and Transportation Research Board. 2003.
65. Stuart, K. D., & Mogawer, W.S., Effect of Compaction Method on Rutting Susceptibility
Measured by Wheel-Tracking Devices. Presented at the 76th Annual Meeting of the
Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., January 12-16, 1997.
66. Aschenbrener, T., & Currier, G. Influence of Testing Variables on the Results from the Hamburg Wheel-Tracking Device. Final Report. Dec. 1993.
67. Lu, Q., & Harvey, J. T. Investigation of conditions for moisture damage in asphalt concrete
and appropriate laboratory test methods. RR No: UCPRC-RR-200515. Caltrans Division of
Research and Innovation; 2005.
68. Elseifi, M. A., Mohammad, L. N., Ying, H., & Cooper, S. (2012a). Modeling and evaluation
of the cracking resistance of asphalt mixtures using the semi-circular bending test at intermediate temperatures. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 13(sup1), 124–139.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2012.65703
69. Li, X. J., & Marasteanu, M. O. (2010). Using semi-circular bending test to evaluate low
temperature fracture resistance for asphalt concrete. Journal of Experimental Mechanics, 50,
73
70. Mull, M. A., Stuart, K., & Yehia, A. Fracture resistance characterization of chemically
modified crumb rubber asphalt pavement. Journal of Materials Sciences. 37 (3) (2002) 557–
566.
71. Kim, M., Mohammad, L. N., & Elseifi, M. A. (2012). Characterization of Fracture Properties
of Asphalt Mixtures as Measured by Semi-circular Bend Test and Indirect Tension Test.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2296(1), 115– 124. https://doi.org/10.3141/2296-12
72. Ali, S.A., Ghabchi, R., Zaman, M., & Bulut, R., (2019, December). Development of a SFE
Database for Screening of Mixes for Moisture Damage in Oklahoma (SPTC15.2-19-F).
Southern Plains Transporation Center.
74. AASHTO T 51. Standard Method of Test for Ductility of Asphalt Materials. American association of state highways and transportation officials, Washington, DC, 2009.
75. AASHTO T 313. Standard Method of Test for Determining the Flexural Creep Stiffness of
Asphalt Binder Using the Bending Beam Rheometer (BBR). American association of state
highways and transportation officials, Washington, DC, 2019.
76. AASHTO R 35. Standard Practice for Superpave Volumetric Design for Asphalt Mixtures. American association of state highways and transportation officials, Washington, DC, 2019. 77. Stempihar, J. J., Souliman, M. I., & Kaloush, K. E. (2012). Fiber-Reinforced Asphalt Concrete
as Sustainable Paving Material for Airfields. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
Transportation Research Board, 2266(1), 60–68. https://doi.org/10.3141/2266-0
78. Kanitpong, K., & Bahia, H. U. (2008). Evaluation of HMA moisture damage in Wisconsin as
it relates to pavement performance. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 9(1), 9-
17,
79. Kabir, M. S., & King Jr., W. Validity of multiple stress creep recovery (MSCR) test for DOTD
asphalt binder specification: final report 564. Louisiana Transportation Research Center; 2017
74
VITA
Sanchit Sachdeva was born in 1996 in Panipat, India. In 2018, he finished his Bachelor of Engineering in Civil Engineering from Panjab University. Motivated to excel in his career, he decided to join graduate school in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Louisiana State University. He plans to pursue a Doctor of Philosophy in Civil Engineering in the near future.