SUPERPAVE Digest 302

SUPERPAVE Digest 302

Topics covered in this issue include:

1) Superpave Density requirements

by "Pochily, Jeff" <>

2) Superpave Density requirements send # 2

by "Pochily, Jeff" <>

3) RE: Superpave Density requirements send # 2

by "Dempsey, Steve (SPDE)" <>

4) Re: Superpave Density requirements

by Douglas Coleman <>

To:
Subject: Superpave Density requirements
From: "Pochily, Jeff" <
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 15:57:33 -0500

Good Day Everyone,

What density requirements are you all using to date?

We currently have a specification of:

In New Hampshire

CriteriaLSLUSLTarget

ToleranceMethod

4.010.0Rolling average of project2.0

Statistical/Random Sampling

% Voids by T-209 of Core

(converted)90.096.0about 94.0 average

In Maine

LSLUSLTargetTolerance

Method

92.597.5 95.02.5

Statistical/Random Sampling

% compaction by T-209 of Core

In Vermont*

LSLUSLTargetTolerance

Method

93.097.095.02.0

Statistical/Random Sampling

% Compaction by T-209 of Core

Proposed

We have had considerable problems with the ME specification and feel the VT

will present even greater difficulties.

Thanks for your input

To:
Subject: Superpave Density requirements send # 2
From: "Pochily, Jeff" <
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 16:16:17 -0500

Good Day Everyone,

Sorry about the last e-mail, my formatting did not hold, this should

be easier to read.

What density requirements are you all using to date?

We currently have a specification of:

In New Hampshire

LSL:4.0

USL:10.0

Target:Rolling average of project (averages 6.0)

Tolerance:2.0

Method:Statistical/Random Sampling,% Voids by T-209 of Core

Maine

LSL:92.5

USL:97.5

Target:95.0

Tolerance:2.5

Method:Statistical/Random Sampling,% Compaction by T-209 of Core

Vermont

LSL:93.0

USL:97.0

Target:95.0

Tolerance:2.0

Method:Statistical/Random Sampling,% Compaction by T-209 of Core

We have had considerable problems with the ME specification and feel the VT

will present even greater difficulties.

Thanks for your input

To: "''" <
Subject: RE: Superpave Density requirements send # 2
From: "Dempsey, Steve (SPDE)" <
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 18:06:49 -0600

Jeff, I may be stepping into my neighbors back yard on this so I apologize

if I offend anyone for my statement. One of the driving forces for SHRP

was the perception of the buying public, that they were not getting the

quality nor performance from the pavements they were paying for. There is a

plethora of data showing low air voids results in deformation of the

pavement. Excessive air voids results in poor moisture resistance and poor

durability of the pavement. The User Agencies have raised the benchmark in

response. To my knowledge the FAA has required similar void criteria with

the 401 specs. This is not a question whether these criteria are

attainable, for they are. Will they be easy? Not necessarily. The market

place will adjust. I remember back in the early development of the Binder

Specs in talking to Ray Brown. I asked if anyone had made an economic or

viability assessment of the PG specifications to the Suppliers. Ray

responded to me that those who wish to participate in the market will

adjust. Those who do not will be raw material suppliers to those who do. I

believe as similar cavalier statement is applicable for the mix producers

and lay down contractors.

To:
Subject: Re: Superpave Density requirements
From: Douglas Coleman <
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 20:34:29 -0600

Before I can give you an answer I need to know what do you design your

mixtures to: ie 3% voids with 50 Blow Marshall or 4% void Superpave. This

does make a differance as to what should be specified in the field. In

Michigan a 3% 50 blow marshall would call for 94-97% of the mixture TMD.

SUPERPAVE Digest 303

Topics covered in this issue include:

1) RE: Superpave Density requirements

by "Pochily, Jeff" <>

2) Re: Superpave Density requirements send # 2

3) RE: Superpave Density requirements

by Douglas Coleman <>

To: "''" <
Subject: RE: Superpave Density requirements
From: "Pochily, Jeff" <
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 08:34:20 -0500

We are using 4% voids across the board for 50, 75 blow mixes and Superpave.

To:
Subject: Re: Superpave Density requirements send # 2
From:
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 10:36:52 -0600

To:
Subject: RE: Superpave Density requirements
From: Douglas Coleman <
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 16:36:11 -0600

At 08:34 AM 1/7/2000 -0500, you wrote:

In that case if the contractor is producing the mixture you designed and

specified, you can not and should not expect 97% compaction. 93% to 96%

would be resonable.