Permeability of Superpave Mixtures: Evaluation of Field Permeameters
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.
 
 
Help
Clear All
i


Permeability of Superpave Mixtures: Evaluation of Field Permeameters

  • 1999-02-01

Filetype[PDF-533.57 KB]


  • English

  • Details:

    • Publication/ Report Number:
    • Resource Type:
    • TRIS Online Accession Number:
      789557
    • NTL Classification:
      NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Construction and Maintenance ; NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Design ; NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Materials ; NTL-HIGHWAY/ROAD TRANSPORTATION-Pavement Management and Performance ;
    • Abstract:
      During the last year all of the states within the southeast have placed Superpave deigned mixtures. Most have been on the coarse side of the restricted zone. Several states have expressed concerns that the Superpave designed pavements are more permeable than pavements previously designed with the Marshall hammer. As a results of the work performed by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), a laboratory permeability device is now available to evaluate the permeability of HMA pavements. However, this test is essentially a destructive test since cores must be cut from the roadway. If a field permeability device could be found that can provide accurate and repeatable results, it would negate the need for cutting cores. A device of this nature would also allow for corrections in pavement construction to be made in the field if permeability values are too high. Therefore a study is needed to evaluate several different field permeameters and to select and standardize a field permeability device. The objective of this study was to evaluate four field permeameters and select the best device based on correlation with laboratory permeability test results, repeatability, and ease o use. A standard test procedure associated with the selected permeameter should also be developed. Figures, tables, references, appendices. 63p.
    • Format:
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    • No Additional Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov

    Version 3.16