MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

g i\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

3 1293 01022 1863

 

L‘ B Rig; .53; Y
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE iN RETURN BOX to roman this chockwt from your mood.
VOID FINES Mum on or baton dut- duo.

DUE DATE DUE

        

DATE DUE DATE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

POLYMER/FIBER MODIFIED ASPHALT FRACTURE MECHANISMS AND
MICROSTRUCTURE RELATIONSHIPS TO DISTRESSES
AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
By

Edward Burton Scott

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Chemical Engineering

1993

 

ABSTRACT
POLYMER/FIBER MODIFIED ASPHALT FRACTURE MECHANISMS AND
MICROSTRUCTURE RELATIONSHIPS To DISTRESSES
AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
By

Edward Burton Scott

Asphalt concrete pavements have been showing signs of early distress in areas of
thermal cracking, aging, fatigue cracking, rutting, and ravelling/stripping which are
diminishing pavement performance. Therefore, the focus of the research in this thesis is
a determination of the role of polymer modifiers on the properties of asphalt cement and
performance of asphalt concrete. The key to establishing this linkage is a fundamental
understanding of the microstructure, morphology, adhesion, locus of fracture, and fracture
toughness of polymer modified asphalt (PMA).

Tests were developed for microscopic, image, and fracture analyses enabling
rnicrostructural and morphological investigation and examination of crack propagation,
fracture mechanisms, and locus of fracture. The general failure mechanisms seen in
asphalt specimens through fracture analysis were yielding, crazing causing the formation
of microvoids and fibrils, and ultimate failure. Tests have also been proposed for
adhesion and fracture toughness evaluation of PMA and polymer modified asphalt cement

(PMAC).

To my patient and loving wife, Debra Lynn,

and

in loving memory of my God Father, Ron Dean,

December 6, 1946 - September 28, 1992.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis would have be unattainable if it were not for the help of many others.
I, the author wish to thank the many University Staff, CMSC Staff, and fellow graduate
students for those invaluable bits of information given. Special thanks goes to my wife,
and Jeff Shull on their comments for improvement. I wish to thank my committee Dr.
Lawrence Drzal, Dr. Martin Hawley, and Dr. Gilbert Baladi for their time at inopportune
moments, and a truly special thanks to Dr. Drzal for his many comments, guidance, and
abilities that have helped me develop and grow with an understanding of research and
development.

Portions of this work were supported by the Michigan Department of

Transportation.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .......................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................... ix
Chapter One - Introduction ...................................... 1
Chapter Two - Review of the Literature ............................. 10
2.1 Molecular make up of asphalt ............................ 10

2.2 Microstructural effects of modifiers in asphalt ................. 14

2.2.1 Modifier classification ........................... 14

2.2.2 Dispersed thermoplastic polymers ................... 14

2.2.3 Network thermoplastic polymers .................... 15

2.2.4 Reacting polymers ............................. 17

2.2.5 Fibers ...................................... 18

2.2.6 Particles .................................... 19

2.3 Microstructural effects of particles in similar composite materials . . . . 24
2.4 Morphology of straight and polymer modified asphalt/aggregate

mixtures ........................................ 26
2.4.1 Networks .................................... 26
2.4.2 Binder characterization .......................... 28
2.4.3 Network formation ............................. 29
2.4.4 Network Stability .............................. 35
2.5 Morphology through fractography ......................... 37
2.6 Microstructural and morphology effects of air voids ............. 38
2.6.1 Void theory .................................. 41
2.6.2 Void morphology .............................. 44
2.7 Fracture and failure mode of conventional and modified
asphalt/aggregate mixtures ............................ 47
2.7.1 Composite theory .............................. 47
2.7.2 Mechanisms of adhesion ......................... 48
2.7.3 Macroscopic failure mechanisms .................... 50
2.7.4 Microscopic failure mechanisms .................... 50
2.7.5 Thermal Cracking .............................. 51
2.7.6 Aging ...................................... 58

vi

2.7.7 Fatigue Cracking .............................. 60

2.7.8 Rutting ..................................... 66

2.7.9 Ravelling/Stripping ............................. 71

2.7.10 Surface Cracking ............................. 71

2.7.11 Fracture Toughness ............................ 72

2.7.12 Fracture with fiber modification ................... 72

2.8 Fiber morphology and microstructure in other composite materials . . . 75
2.9 Summary ......................................... 80
Chapter Three - Problem Refinement ............................... 82
3.1 Problem statement .................................... 82
3.2 Microstructure and crack growth .......................... 83
3.2.1 Type H ..................................... 83

3.2.2 Type F ..................................... 85

3.2.3 Type P ..................................... 87

3.3 Fracture ........................................... 89
3.3.1 Adhesion .................................... 89

3.3.2 Deformation and fibril bridging ..................... 90

3.3.3 Fracture strength and toughness ..................... 92

3.4 Summary ........................................... 96
Chapter Four - Experimental Details ................................ 97
4.1 Sample Preparation .................................... 97
4.1.1 Cleaning ..................................... 99

4.1.2 Impregnation .................................. 99

4.1.3 Curing ..................................... 101

4.1.4 Pre-polishing ................................. 101

4.1.5 Polishing .................................... 101

4.1.6 Mounting ................................... 103

4.1.7 Thin sectioning ............................... 104

4.1.8 Converting to a tensile specimen .................... 107

4.2 Mechanical testing of the fracture samples ................... 107
4.2.1 Recording system .............................. 109

4.2.2 Lighting .................................... 109

4.2.3 Recording ................................... 109

4.3 Microscopic Analysis .................................. 113
4.3.1 Thin and plane section samples ..................... 113

4.3.2 Fracture samples ............................... 115

4.4 Image analysis of plane sections .......................... 117
4.5 Raw data conversion for plane section analysis ................ 122
4.6 Summary .......................................... 126
Chapter Five - Results ......................................... 127
5.1 Morphological and microstructural analysis ................... 127
5.2 Plane section image analysis ............................. 132

 

 

vii

5.3 Crack propagation of fracture sample ....................... 141

5.4 Microscopic analysis of fracture samples .................... 150

5.5 Summary .......................................... 151
Chapter Six - Proposed Experiments for the Measurement of Adhesion and

Fracture Toughness ...................................... 156
Chapter Seven - Recommendations for Characterization and Evaluation of

Polymer Modified Asphalt Cement and Concrete .................. 164
APPENDIX ................................................ 167

LIST OF REFERENCES ....................................... 208

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 - Pavement Distress .................................... 2
Table 2.1 - Elemental analysis of asphalt cements. .................... 11
Table 2.2 - Test results of the elongation tests of the different fiber-bitumen

blends. .............................................. 20
Table 2.3 - Polymer critical concentrations for network formation in various

polymer modified asphalt cements. ............................ 35
Table 2.4 - Pavement Distress .................................. 51
Table 2.5 - Seasonal Temperature Regions in Degrees Fahrenheit. .......... 64
Table 4.1 - Image Analysis Equations ............................. 125
Table 5.1 - Good98 plane section image analysis results .................. 135
Table 5.2 - 30 pm thick bad plane section image analysis results ............ 137
Table 5.3 - 150 pm thick bad plane section image analysis

results. .............................................. 139
Table 5.4 - Experimental summary ............................... 154
Table 7.1 - Comparative experimental summary ....................... 165
Table A-1 - Fatigue Cracking Damage Index ......................... 167
Table A-2 - Rut Depth in Inches ................................. 168
Table A-3 - Sample: Good98 Original data for analysis of plane section ..... 169
Table A-4 - Sample: Good98 Sorted data .......................... 192

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 - Type H PMA Microstructure ............................ 6
Figure 1.2 - Type F PMA Microstructure ............................. 7
Figure 1.3 - Type P PMA Microstructure ............................. 8
Figure 2.1 - Theoretical structure of an asphalt molecule. ................. 12

Figure 2.2 - Two Phase Asphalt Model, phase 1 = asphaltenes + resins
(assemblies), phase 2 = oils (solvent). ......................... 13

Figure 2.3 - Strain (elongation) test curves of different fiber bitumen blends at
7: 1°C. .............................................. 21

Figure 2.4 - Strain (elongation) curves of the different fiber bitumen composites
measured after cooling the blends at -10°C before normal straining at
7°C. ................................................ 22

Figure 2.5 - Spherulitic structure in polyethylene modified asphalt cement. ...... 27
Figure 2.6 - Loss Tangent vs. Temperature (rate-0.1 rad/sec) measured by

dynamic mechanical testing Shows increased polymer modification

lowers the loss tangent. ................................... 30
Figure 2.7 - Original asphalt data from frequency sweeps at 16 temperatures. . . . 33
Figure 2.8 - A master curve for asphalt by shifting the data from the original

data along the original axis and superimposing them in regions of

modulus overlap. ....................................... 33

Figure 2.9 - PMA and straight asphalt moduli comparison for network
formation. ............................................ 34

Figure 2.10 - Energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy fractograph showing the
distribution of sulfur in asphalt at 118X. ....................... 39

ix

X

Figure 2.11 - Backscattered electron fractograph of sulfur modified asphalt
showing the morphology of the crystalline sulfur at 118X. ............ 39

Figure 2.12 - Energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy fractograph Showing the
spherical formation of sulfur in asphalt under confined growth at

1176X. .............................................. 40
Figure 2.13 - Backscattered electron fractograph of sulfur modified asphalt

showing the morphology of the crystalline sulfur at 1176X. .......... 40
Figure 2.14 - Influence of void content and temperature on fracture toughness

of gravel sand asphalt mixes. ............................... 42
Figure 2.15 - The Relative Strength of Mixtures May Depend on the Access to

Water in the Void System. ................................. 43
Figure 2.16 - Sample SV 13, two plane sections, under UV-illumination at full

scale. ............................................... 46
Figure 2.17 - Fraass Temperature vs. Polymer Content, data compilation. ...... 54
Figure 2.18 - General views of the new indirect tensile test frame. .......... 56
Figure 2.19 - The new indirect tensile frame in a standard Marshall test frame. . . 57
Figure 2.20 - Viscosity-Depth Profiles of Uncracked Pavements. ............ 59
Figure 2.21 - Comparison of Viscosity-Depth Envelopes with and without

Cracks. .............................................. 61
Figure 2.22 - Fatigue Resistance Test Results. ........................ 63
Figure 2.23 - Fatigue Cracking Damage Index for Four Climatic Regions. ..... 65

Figure 2.24 - Indirect tensile creep data at 77°F, 20 psi stress level, comparing
optimally designed and binder-rich Novophalt mixtures and unmodified

AC-20. .............................................. 67
Figure 2.25 - Creep resistance of hot mix asphalts ...................... 68
Figure 2.26 - Rut Depth for Four Climatic Regions. .................... 70

Figure 2.27 - Graphic Description of Cracks for Conditions. ............... 73

 

xi

Figure 2.28 - Comparison of toughness for Novophalt mixtures determined

from indirect tension testing at 32, 77, and 104°F. ................. 74
Figure 2.29 - Fiber Toughening Mechanisms ......................... 76
Figure 2.30 - Carbon fiber pulled out of cement concrete. ................ 78
Figure 2.31 - Carbon fiber pulled out from latex-modified cement concrete. . . . . 79
Figure 3.1 - Type H PMA microstructure ............................ 84
Figure 3.2 - Type H PMA microstructure crack mechanisms ............... 84
Figure 3.3 - Type F PMA microstructure ............................ 86
Figure 3.4 - Type F PMA microstructure crack mechanisms ............... 86
Figure 3.5 - Type P PMA microstructure ............................ 88
Figure 3.6 - Type P PMA microstructure crack mechanisms ............... 88
Figure 3.7 - Fracture surface of glass sphere filled Nylon 6 without coupling

agent at 1400 X. ........................................ 91
Figure 3.8 - Fracture surface of glass sphere filled Nylon 6 with one percent

arninosilane at 1400 X. .................................... 91
Figure 4.1 - Divisioning of samples for plane sections. ................... 98
Figure 4.2 - Buehler Petra-Thin thin sectioning system and viewer. .......... 105
Figure 4.3 - Steps to final preparation of the fracture samples. ............. 108
Figure 4.4 - Kodak EKTAPRO 1000 Motion Analyzer. .................. 110
Figure 4.5 - Experimental setup of the Kodak EKTAPRO 1000 Motion

Analyzer. ............................................ 111
Figure 4.6 - A typical thermal print of an asphalt fracture sample. ........... 114

Figure 4.7 - A 35 mm print of the high Speed camera’s monitor of an asphalt
fracture sample. ........................................ 114

Figure 4.8 - Typical micrograph of voids taken through an optical microscope
with reflective lighting represented here at 43X. .................. 116

xii

Figure 4.9 - Auto Image Analysis System Configuration. ................ 118
Figure 4.10 - Experimental Auto Image Analysis System. ................ 119
Figure 4.11 - Stage pattern for plane section analysis. ................... 123

Figure 5.1 - Photograph under normal lighting of a 30 um good plane section
at 1.5X. ............................................. 128

Figure 5.2 - Illustration of good section showing the voids at 1.5X. .......... 128

Figure 5.3 - Photograph under normal lighting of a 30 pm thick bad plane
section at 1.5X. ........................................ 128

Figure 5.4 - Illustration of bad section showing the voids at 1.5X. ........... 128

Figure 5.5 - Micrograph using reflected light through an optical microscope
showing voids in a good sample at 41X. ....................... 130

Figure 5.6 - Micrograph using reflected light through an optical microscope
showing a void in a good sample at 38X ........................ 130

Figure 5.7 - Micrograph using reflected light through an optical microscope

showing voids in a bad sample at 19X. ........................ 131
Figure 5.8 - Micrograph using reflected light through an optical microscope

showing voids in a bad sample at 19X. ........................ 131
Figure 5.9 - Typical Marshall specimen of asphalt concrete at 2X. ........... 133
Figure 5.10 - Asphalt core 1 of section 29, site 5 (used for bad samples) at

3.7X. ............................................... 133
Figure 5.11 - Photograph of Sample: Good98 under normal light at 1.3X. ..... 134
Figure 5.12 - Illustration of Good98 showing the voids at 1.3X. ............ 134
Figure 5.13 - Graphical results for air void area in sample Good98. .......... 136
Figure 5.14 - Graphical results for air void equivalent diameters in sample

Good98. ............................................. 136
Figure 5.15 - Photograph of Sample: Bad30 under normal light at 1.2X. ...... 137

Figure 5.16 - Illustration of Bad30 showing the voids at 1.2X. ............. 137

xiii

Figure 5.17 - Graphical results for air void area in sample Bad30. ........... 138
Figure 5.18 - Graphical results for air void equivalent diameters in sample

Bad30. .............................................. 138
Figure 5.19 - Photograph of Sample: Bad150 under normal light at 1.2X. ..... 139
Figure 5.20 - Illustration of Bad150 showing the voids at 1.2X. ............ 139
Figure 5.21 - Graphical results for air void area in sample Bad150. .......... 140
Figure 5.22 - Graphical results for air void equivalent diameters in sample

Bad150. ............................................. 140
Figure 5.23 (a-d) - Crack propagation of a good sample with reflective oblique

lighting and no background lighting at 2.4X. .................... 142
Figure 5.23 (e-h) - Crack propagation of a good sample with reflective oblique

lighting and no background lighting at 2.4X. .................... 144
Figure 5.24 - Close up of fibril during fracture of an asphalt sample viewed

through an optical microscope at lOOX. ........................ 145
Figure 5.25 (a-t) - Crack propagation of lst good sample with reflected oblique

lighting and background lighting at 3X. ........................ 146
Figure 5.26 (a-t) - Crack propagation of 2nd good sample with reflected

oblique lighting and background lighting at 3.8X. ................. 148
Figure 5.27 (a-f) -Crack propagation of a bad sample using reflected oblique

lighting without background lighting at 3.3X. .................... 149
Figure 5.28 - Cohesive failure of asphalt cement shown at 50X. ............ 152
Figure 5.29 - Adhesive failure with cohesive strings at 50X. ............... 152
Figure 5.30 - Adhesive failure with a low energy aggregate beading up the

asphalt at 69X .......................................... 153
Figure 5.31 - Adhesive failure showing a clean aggregate surface in the center

at 63X. .............................................. 153
Figure 6.1 - Adhesive test preparation .............................. 157

Figure 6.2 - Double cantilever beam test configuration. .................. 160

xiv
Figure 6.3 - Four point bending beam configuration for Mode 11 testing ....... 160

Figure 6.4 - Four point bending beam test configuration for asphalt concrete . . . . 163

Chapter One

Introduction

Our nation’s, as well as the State of Michigan’s, infrastructure of asphalt concrete
pavements are showing signs of early distress. New goals for the Federal and State
Departments of Transportation are to increase the performance and lifetime of asphalt
concrete pavements, thereby, reducing the overall cost. In recent studies from the
Strategic Highway Research Program (SI-IRP), there has been an indication that polymer
modification of asphalt with the proper additives will increase the performance and
lifetime of asphalt concrete pavement.

Asphalt cement is primarily a mixture of hydrocarbons lefi over from the refining
of crude oil. It is characterized as a black liquid having a high viscosity that changes with
temperature. Since asphalt is made up of the last remaining fractions of processed crude
oil significant variations are possible in asphalt cement. Each of these differences
complicate the selection of polymeric compatible modifiers since being able to find one
compatible modifier for one asphalt type does not necessarily mean it will work for
another asphalt type.

Asphalt cement mixed with aggregate forms asphalt concrete. Therefore, the
mixture is a composite made of asphalt cement, aggregate, and various added modifiers.
Modifiers are added to alter or enhance desirable properties in asphalt concrete to
overcome asphalt pavement distresses.

The prevalent pavement distresses found in asphalt are thermal cracking, aging,

2

fatigue cracking, rutting, and ravelling/stripping. The main causes for pavement distresses
are summarized in Table 1.1. Thermal cracking can be the result of three fracture
mechanisms. Materials having different coefficients of thermal expansion lead to strains
that cause crack failure. The presence of water in voids and existing cracks causes
fracture upon freeze/thaw cycling during Michigan winters by expanding and increasing
crack propagation. Asphalt concrete becomes brittle in cold weather being more
susceptible to fracture initiation and cracking with applied load. Aging has a similar
embrittlement effect from oxidation and evaporation of increasing the viscosity in the top

layer allowing fracture by load and environmental effects [1].

Table 1.1 - Pavement Distress

 

Thermal Cracking fracture due to coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE)
differences
- fracture due to H20 freeze/thaw cycling

- fracture due to low temperature embrittlement

Aging - fracture caused by embrittlement

Fatigue Cracking fracture due to tensile failure

Rutting - microstructural rearrangement due to asphalt plasticity under
load
Ravelling/Stripping - adhesive fracture due to low adhesion

Fatigue cracking is failure due to tensile stresses. The failure is initiated at the
bottom of the asphaltic layers where the tensile strain is the greatest. Rutting is a failure

due to the microstructural rearrangement of the aggregate and asphalt cement due to

3

plastic deformation under load. Modifiers can help stabilize the mixture reducing the
deformation. The last distress, ravelling/stripping is a failure due to loss in the adhesive
strength of the bond between the aggregate/fiber/rubber particle and asphalt cement.
Polymer modification offers the possibility of increasing and optimizing the adhesion;
thus, reducing failure during initiation and propagation.

The desired properties that polymers and other modifiers offer to overcome asphalt
distresses are dependent on the modifiers used. The desired properties are reduced creep
at high temperatures, less brittleness at low temperatures, better impact properties at
intermediate temperatures [2], increased toughness, higher elongation (ductility), increased
adhesion and cohesion, higher moisture resistance, less temperature susceptibility, to
increase mix viscosity allowing for the use of softer asphalts, and reduced apparent age
hardening. Polymers themselves may modify the binder properties through the complex
modulus, ductility, temperature susceptibility, air permeability, adhesion at the interface,
and cohesion while fibers and particles offer improved properties of the asphalt concrete
through their bulk properties.

In most cases the complex modulus of the binder, G“, is the most useful parameter
to characterize the asphalt binder. The complex modulus can be broken down into two
components; elastic modulus, G’, and viscous modulus, G". G’ and G" at the crack tip
in asphalt concrete characterize the fracture and deformation possibilities. In modifying
the asphalt with polymers, G’ and G" change. Polymers can increase the elastic modulus,
G’, which is important at low temperatures to stop fracture by absorbing energy
elastically. Polymers can also increase the viscous modulus, G", at high temperatures

leading to a decrease in rutting.

4

The aggregate is another very important aspect of the asphalt concrete. Course
aggregate should be crushed stone so the compacted aggregate structure in the roads will
support applied loads. The fine aggregate may be natural sand, but if heavy traffic is
expected manufactured sand with cleaved edges should be used. This also allows the fine
aggregate to help support the load and reduce rutting. The gradation of the aggregate
should follow a smooth curve above or below, and not criss-crossing a 0.45 power
gradation chart [3].

The effect of voids (size, distribution, and density) is also an important aspect in
pavement performance. Void microstructure and morphology relates to initiation of crack
failure and crack propagation.

Performance of asphalt concrete is ultimately judged based on failure criteria. A
review of the morphological literature on asphalt concrete suggests that the main root of
pavement distress is fi‘acture by various mechanisms. Polymer, fiber, and rubber particle
modifiers have the capability to affect asphalt concrete failure by altering the mechanisms
of fracture initiation and crack propagation. Therefore, polymer modification could be
the key to successfully creating a better pavement through enhancement of asphalt
concrete properties.

Asphalt modifiers can be catalogued into five types: dispersed thermoplastic
polymers, network thermoplastic polymers, reacting polymers, polymeric and organic
fibers, and rubber particles. Based on the microstructure of these five types, the polymer
modified asphalts can be catalogued into three morphological types: Type H, Type F, and
Type P. Type H refers to homogeneous asphalts, such as dispersed thermoplastic polymer

modified asphalts, network thermoplastic polymer modified asphalts, and reactive polymer

5
modified asphalts. Figure 1.1 is a drawing of type H polymer modified asphalt (PMA).

Type F refers to fiber modified asphalts and Figure 1.2 is a drawing of type F PMA.
Type P refers to rubber particle modified asphalts and a drawing of this type is shown in
Figure 1.3.

To summarize, polymer/fiber/particle modification may be beneficial in alleviating
the prevalent pavement distresses found in the State of Michigan’s infrastructure of
asphalt concrete pavements. Modifications have shown better fatigue cracking resistance,
permanent deformation resistance, lower temperature susceptibility, thermally induced
cracking resistance, improved impact resistance, less run-off in open-graded mixes, less
moisture sensitivity, and reduced apparent age hardening in asphalt pavements. These
modifications change the binder properties effecting microstructure, morphology, adhesion,
and fracture properties, thereby, effecting the pavement performance.

The focus of the research in this thesis is a determination of the role of polymer
modifiers in the properties of asphalt cement and performance of asphalt concrete. The
key to establishing this linkage is a fundamental understanding of the microstructure,
morphology, adhesion, and fracture of polymer modified asphalt. Chapter Two presents
a review of the literature including: the molecular make up of asphalt Showing the
significant chemical variations; asphalt modifier classification; concepts of adhesion;
morphology and microstructure of polymer modified asphalt; pavement distresses; and
fiber toughening in fracture and failure modes. Chapter Three covers the five categorized
types of polymer modified asphalts, three categorized microstructure modified asphalts,
crack growth mechanisms, relates the need for microscopic testing, and presents fracture

toughness related to asphalt concrete. Chapter Four presents the sample preparation,

PMA Microstructure TYPE H

 

Conventional Aggregate

'l'W/WWMLM . ’ Acceptable Void Content
/9 Homogeneous Asphalt
9, , % ’/// ., 9 Polymer Modifiers .
9 2. 42 .99, x; , Dispersed Thermoplastics
W //l/%% fi/lgl'lfjfiq Network Thermoplastics
m9,“ :1 9 , Reactive Polymers

PMA is HOMOGENEOUS in Microstructure
at the MICROSCOPIC LEVEL

 

Figure 1.1 - Type H PMA Microstructure

PMA Microstructure TYPE F

 

Conventional Aggregate
Acceptable Void Content
Homogeneous Asphalt
FIBERS
Polymer
Inorganic

 

FIBERS are UNIFORMLY dispersed
throughout the Asphalt phase.

Figure 1.2 - Type F PMA Microstructure

PMA Microstructure TYPE P

 

Conventional Aggregate
Acceptable Void Content
Homogeneous Asphalt
Dispersed Rubber Particles

 

PMA has Rubber Particles UNIFORMLY
dispersed throughout the Asphalt phase.

Figure 1.3 - Type P PMA Microstructure

9

mechanical testing, microscopic crack analysis, and image analysis of voids including data
refinement. Chapter Five presents current results for morphological and microstructural
analysis, image analysis, crack propagation, and microscopic analysis for straight asphalt
concrete. Chapter Six proposes future experimentation for the study of polymer modified
asphalt concrete in the areas of adhesion and fracture toughness. Chapter Seven
recommends characterization and evaluation tests for polymer modified asphalt cement

(PMAC) and polymer modified asphalt concrete (PMA).

Chapter Two

Review of the Literature

Microstructure, morphology, adhesion, and fracture of polymer-asphalt-aggregate
mixes and the mechanisms by which the addition of polymer, fiber, and particle additives
to asphalt concrete improve the mix properties, hence the pavement performance has been
reviewed. Additional potential beneficial property improvements such as crack blunting
and microcrack toughening mechanisms have been identified to be brought about by the
addition of polymer, particulate polymers, and/or fibrous materials to asphalt.

One important rule that does not change even with polymer modification is: "A

pavement is only as good as the materials and workmanship that go into it [4]."

2.1 Molecular make up of asphalt

Asphalt cement is primarily a mixture of hydrocarbons left over from the refining
of crude oil. It is characterized as a black liquid having a high viscosity that changes with
temperature. Since asphalt is made up of the last remaining fractions of processed crude
oil significant variations are possible in asphalt cement. Table 2.1 contains elemental
analyses of different asphalt cements differing primarily in their viscosity each a little
different from the other. Each of these differences complicate the selection of polymeric
compatible modifiers since being able to find one compatible modifier for one asphalt
type does not necessarily mean it will work for another asphalt type.

The average molecular weight of asphalt cement varies from 500 to 5000 grams

10

11

Table 2.1 - Elemental analysis of asphalt cements [5].

 

ASL-.5. AQiO £310.

Carbon, % 85.7 82.3 84.5
Hydrogen, % 10.6 10.6 10.4
Oxygen, % --- 0.8 1.1
Nitrogen, % 0.54 0.54 0.55
Sulfur, % 5.4 4.7 3.4
Vanadium, ppm 163 220 87
Nickel, ppm 36 56 35
Iron, ppm --- 16 100
Aromatic C, % 32.5 31.9 32.8
Aromatic H, % 7.24 7.12 8.66
Molecular Weight 570-890 810-930 840-1300

(Toluene)

per mole [5]. Figure 2.1 is a typical representation of an asphalt molecule which contains
linear and complex organic ring structures. The ring structures are generally naphthenic
and aromatic. Naphthenic compounds are simple or complex saturated rings that have a
large number of side chains. Aromatic compounds are heavier molecules that consist of
stable six atom rings with few side chains [6].

Asphalt has also been represented by a two phase model. Figure 2.2 shows the
model as a combination of asphaltene/resin/oil. Asphaltenes are the highest molecular
weight compounds with aromatic ring structures, a few side chains, a carbon/hydrogen
ratio greater than 0.8, and form one phase of the model. Oils are the second phase with
the lowest molecular weight materials containing large numbers of side chains and a few
rings. Resins are polar molecules enabling the two phases to be held together. These

resins are intermediate molecular weight compounds with a carbon to hydrogen ratio

12

ca, ,cmcwcwcwcmcmcmcwcm
\ct?

 

Figure 2.1 - Theoretical structure of an asphalt molecule [6].

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2.2 - Two Phase Asphalt Model, phase 1 = asphaltenes + resins (assemblies),
phase 2 = oils (solvent) [6].

14

between 0.6 and 0.8. The model depicts the asphaltenes and resins forming assemblies

in one phase and the oils as the solvent and second phase [6].

2.2 Microstructural effects of modifiers in asphalt

2.2.1 Modifier classification

Inorganic and polymer modifiers for asphalts can be categorized into five types;
dispersed thermoplastic polymers, network thermoplastic polymers, reacting polymers,
polymeric and inorganic fibers, and rubber particles. These five types have been reviewed

and descriptions of each with examples are presented.

2. 2. 2 Dispersed thermoplastic polymers

Dispersed thermoplastic polymers behave like asphaltenes, the high molecular
weight compounds in asphalt that increase the viscosity and give resilient properties.
Normally dispersed thermoplastic polymers require peptizing agents, like resins mentioned
in the introduction, to stabilize the modified systems. These resins are polar molecules
that enable the dispersed thermoplastic polymers to be stabilized in the oils of asphalt,
thereby not coalescing. Dispersed thermoplastic polymer concentrations can also be
increased to form a network structure. The formation of a network structure in asphalt
concrete increases the capabilities for relief from pavement distresses by allowing energy
and load transfer to the network, therefore giving the greatest pavement performance
benefits when a network is present. Usually, a considerable amount of thermoplastic

polymer, six percent or more, must be added before a macrostructural network forms.

15

Dispersed thermoplastic polymer modifiers that improved low temperature
susceptibility of asphalts include ethylene acrylic copolymer [7], hydroxylterminated
polybutadiene (HTPB) [8], and polypropylene wax (PPW) [8]. Those modifiers that
improved the fatigue cracking resistance included hydroxylterminated polybutadiene
(HTPB) [8], and polypropylene wax (PPW) [8]. When polyethylene (PE) was used to
modify AC-20 asphalt, the modified binder had higher resistance to permanent
deformation and thermal cracking [8-10].

Previous studies show PE to have the best performance for the dispersed
thermoplastic polymer modified asphalts, but PE can also coagulate and separate easily
if not handled properly. For example, PE will coagulate and separate from the asphalt
phase in half an hour at 160°C after mixing stops if no stabilization technique
was introduced. This instability comes from a low glass transition temperature range for
PE from -130°C to -15°C allowing it to behave as fluid and its insolubility in asphalts.
A commercial company called Novophalt has circumvented the problem of coagulation
and separation by having the asphalt continually shear mixed in trucks on site until ready
for immediate application. Another modified asphalt not yet commercially available
called Polyphalt is in the process of being patented. This modified asphalt circumvents

the problem by a proprietary stabilization technique.

2. 2.3 Network thermoplastic polymers
Network thermoplastic polymers form a network by bonding with themselves
throughout the asphalt forming a network when enough polymer is present. In network

thermoplastic polymers it generally takes between two to seven weight percent of the

16

binder to form a network.

Network thermoplastic modifiers that increase the binder resistance to rutting
include styrene-butadiene-styrene (83$) [8, 11-14], styrene-ethylene-butadiene-styrene
(SEBS) [12, 13], styrene-butadiene copolymer (SBR) [11, 14, 15], and styrene-butadiene
latex [7, 16]. These polymers have also lowered the cracking temperature from 32°F to
-10°F. The styrene in the copolymer strengthens the mix and increases the viscosity at
high temperatures increasing rut resistance while the butadiene in the copolymer boosts
the material’s flexibility lowering the fracture temperature [17]. Styrene-butadiene
copolymer (SBR) modified asphalt also reduced fatigue cracking [11, 14, 15]. Ethylene
vinyl acetate (EVA), ethylene acrylic acid, and acrylic ester copolymers increase the
softening point 10°F to 15°F making the asphalt more rigid during hot weather, thus
increasing rut resistance [17]. However, ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) modified asphalt
(AC-20) has displayed increased rutting and fatigue cracking as well as a tendency to
produce stripping effects [8, 12, 14, 15, 18]. Stripping is caused by a weakening of the
adhesive bond between the aggregate and polymer modified asphalt allowing failure to '
occur at this interface.

Reviews on previous studies show SBS/SEBS and SBR latex offer the greatest
potential benefits and ability to work as asphalt modifiers of the network thermoplastic
polymers. SBR modifier is usually used in a latex form, a polymer/water mixture. SBR
latex is manufactured at temperatures of 100°F - 110°F with a resulting polymer size of
0.1 micron and an overall solid weight percentage of 31 percent. Mechanical
agglomeration is used to concentrate the latex and the final commercial product is 70

weight percent solids with a polymer size of half a micron. Generally, a homogeneous

l7

blend is desired with either polymer or asphalt as the continuous phase. In SBR modified
asphalt, asphalt is the continuous phase if SBR concentration is below seven weight
percent. Molecular weight distribution and average polymer size in the latex are the two
variables that can be adjusted to increase compatibility between asphalts and polymers.
When using a SBR modifier, SBR of different molecular weight are used to match
asphalts having different properties. Typically, enough latex is added to produce a three

to five weight percent solid SBR in the asphalt.

2.2.4 Reacting polymers

Reacting polymers are those that chemically bond themselves to asphalt. This
increases the polymer stability reducing the need for continuous high speed stirring and
immediate application. The polymers normally chemically bond to the asphaltene
molecules and when enough polymer is present a network of continuous polymer will
form. Reacting polymers require even smaller quantities of polymer than network
polymers to form polymer networks, typically below three weight percent of the binder.

For reacting polymers, epoxy [19] and ELVALOY" AM [20] modified asphalts
show reduced rutting, thermal cracking, and temperature susceptibility. Furfural [18, 21]
modified asphalts have lower temperature susceptibility, higher resistance to rutting and
low temperature cracking, higher freeze-thaw resistance, and better adhesion, but lower
cohesion. Maleic anhydride (MAH) [22] modified asphalts have lower temperature
susceptibility, higher resistance to rutting and low temperature cracking, and better
adhesion, but lower cohesion.

ELVALOY" AM is a reactive thermoplastic polymer containing an epoxide group

18
that can chemically link to asphalt. ELVALOY® AM is a random copolymer of ethylene,

n-butyl acrylate, and glycidyl methacrylate (E/nBA/GMA) [20]. The glycidyl
methacrylate monomer contains the epoxide group that can chemically link to asphalt.
In the final form of the polymer the epoxide is at the end of a side chain allowing for
easy access and reaction with the asphalt. This allows the polymer to form a network and
at greater concentrations forms a gel. The recommended network concentration in asphalt
mixtures is approximately 2.5 weight percent [23]. Greater concentrations such as three
weight percent of the binder have formed gels which cause problems in the equipment.
ELVALOY" AM is mixed with asphalt at 350°F in a sealed tank for two to 48 hours to
complete the reaction of the epoxy groups with the asphalt constituents. Oxidation is kept

to a minimum through the use of the sealed tank [24].

2. 2.5 Fibers

Some fibers offer good methods of asphalt concrete modification. Studies show
that different fibers offer different sets of toughening mechanisms to strengthen the asphalt
composite and slow crack growth including: debonding, pullout, and deformation and
failure of the fiber. Fibers act as bridges across cracks where energy is required to extend
the cracks to overcome the toughening mechanisms. Fibers also increase the available
wetting surface area and behave as binder thickeners which reduces asphalt bleeding and
adds fiber toughening mechanisms. Organic fibers offer the largest reduction of crack
growth by debonding, pullout, deformation (yielding), and fracture of the fiber. Inorganic
fibers reduce crack propagation by debonding, pullout, and fracture, but are the least

effective due to smaller surface area and no yielding effect. Aramid (Kevlar) fibers have

19

been reported to offer good properties as asphalt modifiers, but polyethylene fibers did
not due to their low melting temperature (325°F) [25, 26].

Cellulose, mineral, glass, and polyester fibers have been used in asphalt
modification [27]. In the study by Peltonen a multiple role was suggested for fibers. It
was determined that fibers increase the viscosity and toughness of bitumen mixtures. The
elongation of the mix samples and their toughness were analyzed through strain curves.
Table 2.2 is a display of the mixes used and the numerical data for Figures 2.2 and 2.3
[27]. Figures 2.2 and 2.3 are graphical displays of the strain curves for the fiber modified
asphalts at 7°C and after the samples had been cooled to -10°C and then tested at 7°C,
respectively. This data indicates that the polyester fibers gave the best increase in total
energy or toughness and the maximum force needed for failure in both cases. Therefore,
polyester fiber would be a good reinforcement and offer asphalt a higher strength level.
Cellulose fibers also increase the total energy a small amount, but their main role is

stability of the bitumen (asphalt cement).

2. 2. 6 Particles

The current hypothesis for rutting reduction by particles in particle modified
asphalts is that particles offer an increased ability to stabilize the asphalt mix and prevent
asphalt bleeding. This effect is largely due to the adhesive effects from the particles
bonding to the asphalt and being able to transfer energy between the particles and asphalt
cement. Particles, also take up space between the aggregate reducing the amount of
asphalt cement needed and available for bleeding. Particles behave as aggregates if their

sizes are large and behave as dispersed thermoplastic polymers if their Sizes are small

20

Table 2.2 - Test results of the elongation tests of the different fiber-bitumen

blends [27].

Sample Amount Amount Max. Strain at Breaking Total

(wt%) (vol%) Force max. strain Energy

(N) stress (m) (N m)

 

 

(mm)
# Temp. (0c) 7 -10 7 -10 7 -10 7 -10 7 -10 7 -10
1 Bitumen - - - - 52 280 8 7 - 62 17.1 35.8

2 Cellulose] 5.0 5.0 3.4 3.4 102 230 15 10 42 27 25.0 37.8

3 Cellulosez 5.0 5.0 3.4 3.4 92 220 16 8 32 27 17.0 32.8

4 Cellulose 3 5.0 - 3.4 - 130 - 17 - 35 - 30.0 -
5 Mineral 5.0 - 1.8 - 196 - 8 - 37 - 34.0 -
M-P

6 Polyester 5.0 4.6 3.6 3.4 335 530 22 26 27 30 54.4 99.5

7 Mineral - 4.0 - 1.7 - 314 - 8 - 27 - 44.3

M-D2

8 Glass L-W - 4.0 - 1.7 - 256 - 7 - 18 - 26.9

21

Legend for Figure 2.3

 

# Fiber Modifier

1 straight bitumen B-120
2 cellulose 1

3 cellulose 2

4 cellulose 3

5 mineral M-P

6 polyester

 

 

400

BEEP?

Force 1N1

 

 

 

 

010 2030405060708090100
Strain 1mm)

 

Figure 2.3 - Strain (elongation) test curves of different fiber bitumen blends at 7il°C
[27].

22

 

 

600 Legend
r for Figure 2.4
500 ‘ r _#_ Fiber Modifier
1 straight bitumen
B-120
2©
2 cellulose 1
400‘-
3 cellulose 2
6 polyester
2 300.? 7 mineral M-D2
§ 8 glass fiber L-W
1?.
200+
5)
100"
(a
\ a)
0

 

 

 

 

 

010203040506070
Strain (mm)
Figure 2.4 - Strain (elongation) curves of the different fiber

bitumen composites measured after cooling the blends at
-10°C before normal straining at 7 °C [27].

23
(below 100 1.1m).

In order to relate microstructure to performance, the effects of modifiers need to
be understood. Khosla [28] looked at straight asphalt, asphalt with carbon particles, and
asphalt with styrene butadiene (SB) polymer. Performance test results showed that the
polymer modified asphalt offered the greatest fatigue cracking resistance followed by the
carbon particle modified asphalt and then straight asphalt [28]. However, the test results
were not related to the fundamental asphalt microstructure. In an earlier study [29], it
was also shown that particle (MICROFIL8) modified asphalt lasted longer than straight
asphalt.

Carbon black has been used in a great many asphalts with good field results
[28-30]. Where as rubber particle modified asphalt concrete has had good pavement
performance [31, 32] and bad pavement performance [26, 28, 33]. The bad pavement
performance showed severe aging, lower tensile and Shear strength, reflective cracking,
and ravelling (crumb rubber loss).

Crumb rubber modified (CRM) asphalt does not seem to pose a problem with the
standard handling, mixing, or construction practices even though the mix is a little stiffer
[34]. But ravelling/stripping of crumb rubber modifier has been a problem [33, 35]. In
practice, some CRM modified mixes have experienced a pick up problem during the
pneumatic rolling stage. The pick up problem showed characteristics of adhesive failure
between the mix and crumb rubber. This problem could be a result of extender oils added
to lower the viscosity because CRM stiffens asphalt concrete. Extender oils are
commonly used to plasticize rubber polymers making them softer and lowering the melt

viscosity for easier processing [36]. The extender oils may also create a thin, low

24

viscosity boundary layer around the crumb rubber particle giving poor adhesive
characteristics, hence a low fracture energy characteristic of adhesive failure. A reaction
between rubber particles and asphalt could solve this problem and has been claimed by
some, but no reaction has been found between the rubber particles and asphalt [3 5].
Since, the use of CRM asphalt is being mandated by law the amount of crumb
rubber added to asphalt is a concern. In a study [3 5], it was determined the crumb rubber

content should fall below three percent of the mix depending on the size of the particles.

2.3 Microstructural effects of particles in similar composite materials

In other areas of polymer and composites, surface treatments have been used
successfully to increase the adhesive bond between materials. One of the possible surface
treatments is sulfonation of crumb rubber or polymer particle surfaces. This modification
of the surface may enhance the adhesive properties of the CRM, hence increasing the
adhesive strength between the CRM and asphalt leading to the elimination of stripping
failure.

RT-PMMA is polymethylmethacrylate that has rubber particles of a core-Shell
structure dispersed throughout. The rubber particles have a core of styrene and
butylacrylate copolymer, 241 nm in diameter, grafted to a PMMA shell giving a final
rubber particle diameter of 271 nm [37]. Morphological parameters were found to govern
the toughness of rubber toughened polymethylmethacrylate. These parameters are: rubber
volume fraction, matrix rubber adhesion, particle size, and interparticle distance.

The deformation behavior of rubber toughened polymethylmethacrylate (RT-

25

PMMA) was investigated with respect to plasticity. The results of two parameters, work-
hardening rate, K and critical stress intensity, KC, Show a sharp transition in the materials
ability for shear band nucleation from difficult to easy as the critical rubber volume
fraction increases. The main deformation mechanism was Shear banding at moderate
strains and shear rates. The work-hardening rate parameter was developed in a constant
strain rate test to be a sensitive method to measure the nonelastic deformation (plasticity)
of solid polymers. The measure of this parameter seems very similar to modulus as it is
the differential stress over the differential strain. This parameter can then be used to
quantify contributions of plastic deformation to toughness.

RT-PMMA exhibits good adhesive bonding [37] and gives hope to higher levels
of recycled rubber in asphalt, if a good adhesive bond can be created between the asphalt
and crumb rubber. Results showed little to no effect on the materials behavior with
rubber particle volume fractions at less than 20 percent after which a large beneficial
change occurred which seemed to plateau at 40 percent volume fraction. Testing was
performed at 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, 0.20, 0.30, 0.40, and 0.45 particle volume fractions. At
the highest particle volume fractions of 0.40 and 0.45 notable shear banding was achieved.
This means an increase in the materials ability to nucleate plasticity and increased

toughness was achieved [37].

26

2.4 Morphology of straight and polymer modified asphalt/aggregate mixtures

2.4.1 Networks

Network structures formed in polymer modified asphalts are essential for property
enhancement. Previous studies showed that there were no Significant improvements in
properties of modified asphalt at concentrations below that required to form the network.
Because of the different network formation mechanisms, the amount of material required
to form a network is a strongly dependent on the modifier type. General concentrations
ranges for network formation of dispersed thermoplastic polymers, network thermoplastic
polymers, and reacting polymers are greater than six weight percent, two to seven weight
percent, and less than three weight percent, respectively. Depending on the paving
situation, any of these modifiers may be the appropriate choice, however only limited and
inconclusive field data are available. Even though laboratory tests on binders imply
improved properties, a model to quantitatively predict field performance and thereby
predict the economic benefit of adding modifiers is not available.

Some polymer/asphalt systems, such as polyethylene-asphalt emulsions, form
network structures, as shown in Figure 2.5 in which the physical and mechanical
properties of the mix are enhanced [9]. This polymer network is known as a Spherulitic
structure, an intricate structure of molecules that develop forming crystalline and
amorphous regions having the microscopic appearance of round objects or spheres.

The polymer network is the subject of continuing investigation because it is believed that
the network structure is closely related to the pavement performance. The polymer

network structure improves creep performance at high temperatures as well as elastic

27

3' "f..”’ . ‘, .‘
; ‘t‘\,; V ' ;..'.’5\$7-' ’52
33', \‘Q".3 .‘t 3;"
43 * s I a.
{59$ .3..- {4336 (‘4.

3 \\ ’ 5‘“
.-‘o : \‘ojfi 0
0“”.."‘qt' f’.

.Oafi

..
..Os
It" ’~

 

Figure 2. 5- Spherulitic structure in polyethylene modified asphalt cement [9].

 

28
behavior of the asphalt hinder (the ability to store deformation energy) [12]. The

polymer network may also increase the rutting resistance and high temperature stiffiiess
without losing low temperature flexibility. Literature on dispersed polymers support this

hypothesis [10, 38].

2. 4. 2 Binder characterization

The complex modulus of the binder, G', has been studied as an intrinsic parameter
to characterize polymer modified asphalt cement [39-41]. The complex modulus, G3 is
determined by dynamic mechanical testing. In dynamic mechanical testing, oscillatory
strain is applied to a sample which in turn produces a resulting sinusoidal stress which is
measured and correlated to the input strain. The complex modulus, G“ is obtained by
dividing this stress by the strain. G* represents the total amount of energy to deform a
material and is the vector sum of G’ and G". The storage modulus, G’, is the in phase
component of the stress obtained by multiplying G* by the cosine of the phase angle.
The phase angle is the shift between the sinusoidal stress and strain curves. G’ is also
proportional to the energy stored in the material elastically. The loss modulus, G", is the
out of phase component of the stress obtained by multiplying G“ by the sine of the phase
angle. G" is also proportional to the energy lost to viscous dissipation.

G* has been used to characterize the amount of polymer in polymer modified
asphalts. This technique requires polymer concentration high enough to effect the
modulus of the polymer modified asphalt. This polymer concentration is dependent on
each specific type of polymer modifier and asphalt cement mixed.

The most significant effect of polymer on asphalt properties seems to be on its

29

improved elastic behavior. The elastic behavior can be characterized though the use of
loss tangent or tan 8 values. Tan 5 is the tangent of the phase angle between the stress
and strain and is represented by the ratio of G" over G’. Polymer modified binders Show
much smaller loss tangent values at high temperatures than straight (unmodified) asphalts
as shown in Figure 2.6 [30]. Smaller loss tangent values Show an increase in G’, the
amount of energy that was stored elastically, thereby, a greater elastic response in the
sample being tested. Elsewhere, Bouldin and Collins [2] Showed that at 60°C, both the
storage modulus, G’, and the complex modulus, G, of the polymer modified binders are
substantially higher than those of the straight binders. These indicate that polymer
modified binders have more ability to recover through their elastic storage (higher G’),
and are more resistant to permanent deformation (higher G’) than the straight binders,
thereby better rutting resistance than the straight asphalt.

Asphalt-aggregate mixture properties were also tested to verify the binder results
by axial dynamic testing [30]. Polymer modified asphalt mixtures proved to have less
accumulation of plastic strain under the action of repetitive loading when compared to

straight mixes indicating an increase in elastic behavior, thus better rut resistance.

2. 4.3 Network formation

Finding the starting polymer network concentration, C“, in amorphous asphalt
cement can be done by dynamic mechanical testing when applying Time Temperature
Superposition. Time Temperature Superposition is a shifting procedure for stress/strain
data done at short testing times, increased frequencies, and higher temperatures to form

a complete master curve based on temperature and time relaxation. The master curve is

30

 

 

 

 

soon
34 Ari-2000 ——.\
3 7113-2000 + 20% MF _\\
Amoco + 57.1mm —~,\ 9/
100 \ /
a Ari-2000+ 3% K4460 a \\\ -‘ /
3 \
._ 2 Ala-2000 + 12% K4450 —— \
2 ‘l \
g In E ‘1’?
5 = _ .6"
‘ i d
-1 /
1 :1 ./
:1
:
q
.3 ,/
q 91/
0.1 I ' ' r I I T I r I
.40 .20 0 2° ‘0 60 w

TEMPERATURE, c

Figure 2.6 - Loss Tangent vs. Temperature (rate-0.1 rad/sec) measured by dynamic
mechanical testing shows increased polymer modification lowers the loss tangent
[30].

31

representative of a long time frame at a single temperature. Therefore, long term data can
be predicted from short time data obtained at elevated temperatures and frequencies over
a Short time period. The two principles this theory is based on are Boltzmann
Superposition Principle and Time Temperature Equivalence. Boltzmann Superposition
Principle states that strain is a linear function of stress allowing all strains to be applied
separately and summed together giving a strain that would be equivalent to that of a
single stress with all the strain done at one time. Time Temperature Equivalence states
that system equilibrium will be achieved more rapidly with an increase in temperature due
to the accelerated molecular and segmental motion [42]. The time for this accelerated
equilibrium is based on the temperature and relaxation time of the polymer. Generally
related through or called a shift factor. a, is a ratio of the relaxation time at a desired
temperature to that of the relaxation time at a reference temperature. An empirical
representation of ar in terms of the materials glass transition temperature or a reference

temperature has been done by Williams, Landel, and Ferry in the WLF equation [43].

-l7.44(T-Tg)

2.1 WLF Equation
51.6 + (T—Tg)

 

log a, =

Despite the molecular structure dependence this equation holds over a temperature range
from T8 to 100 K above the materials TI; [43].

Time and temperature affect the viscoelasticity of a material through a, , but a,
does not vary with response time. Therefore, changes in temperature shift the relaxation

times to represent all possible molecular responses of the system. The shift is represented

32

by multiplying a, by the frequency, 00, of the test. Thus, putting the two principles
together a master curve of long time creep data at a single temperature can be obtained
from short time dynamic stress/strain tests done over a range of temperatures and
frequencies by superimposing and Shifting the data to create a master curve. Figure 2.7
is an example of asphalt data and then shifted data making a master curve is shown in
Figure 2.8 [41]. The original data was taken at -28, -23, -14, -10, -5, 0, 5, 10, 20, 29,
39, 50, 60, 69, and 80°C. In making the master curve the original data was moved along
the horizontal axis until the regions of modulus overlapped. This type of test is also
frequently used in the polymer and adhesive industry [43].

The asphalt industry identifies the starting polymer network concentration, C",
through Time Temperature Superposition. Moduli G’ and G" are plotted against log a,*00
which can be correlated to temperature as previously stated. In straight asphalts, G" is
the dominate modulus and G" and G’ do not cross, therefore the behavior is dominated
by viscous forces all of the time. In polymer modification G’ can plateau crossing G".
This plateau is indicative of a polymer network and the crossing changes the governing
behavior of the asphalt to elastic forces. Figure 2.9, a) shows the straight Deer Park AC-5
where G’ and G" do not cross. Both SBR b) and SBS modified c) at four weight
percent, respectively, Show a crossing of G’ and G" curves indicating the start of network
formation. Note the region between 65°C and 80°C in c) the four weight percent SBS
modified Deer Park AC-5. This region indicates the start of the formation of a polymer
network while four weight percent SBR modified Deer Park AC-S b) has not formed a
network at four percent.

Some critical concentrations for the start of network formation, C, for SBS

33

 

 

 

 

61'!:§;::.,',“-
3";'--'.'. .3233 iEu'ad
1‘ .."
C. c.
u t " IEIOC
C a E
3.
.‘I ': ‘ 15104
1e 2
9 '2 "IEIOZ
' u
3 0.
' no
I‘ i 0 l l 0 0 0 0 I I 3 hi -I a») d --$ - e 3:300
10 IO 10 ID ID ID ID ID ID 10 ID ID ID ID 10 10 10 10

Reduced Frequency u (redienueeccnd)

Figure 2.7 - Original asphalt data from frequency sweeps at 16 temperatures [41].

 

    
 

tow ten-rune Cree-no

 

 

 

-' -

1e e e r e e e a a o e z
10 10 10 10 10 10 IO 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Reduced Frequency 0 Indieneleecondi

Figure 2.8 - A master curve for asphalt by shifting the data from the original data
along the original axis and superimposing them in regions of modulus overlap [41].

--e
10

15100

1E0“

COMPLEX SHEAR MODULUS d' .I’.11

COMPLEX SHEAR WOLLUS. 6' (Pat

Go. G”, Pa

Ge. G", Pa

6', 6", Pa

Figure 2.9 - PMA and straight asphalt moduli comparison for network formation

[2]-

34

1 E5 Time-Temperature Superposition for Deer Park AC-S

 

  
     

Tvei = SO'C

154

100

32‘ 9.3'

1 llil

 

 

 

1 5-2 I 100 1E4
at . m, rad/s or Temperature, °C

Time-Temperature Superposition
for Deer Park AC-S 4 4%w SBR

 

155 ‘

Trei = GO'C

IE4

100

 

 

 

 

I 60' 34' 12.5.
1 l L l i l
1E-2 1 100 1134

at - w. rad/s or Temperature, °C

Time-Temperature Superposition
ior Deer Park AC—S * new 585

 

   
   

 

 

 

155 ‘
Ire! = 60°C
C D
IE4 r—-
L

100 ”'-

l i-—- 50’ 33' 10°

1 l 1 l l 1
18-2 I 100 IE4

at - m, rad/s or Temperature. °C

35

(styrene-butadiene-styrene) and SBR (styrene-butadiene rubber) have been measured in
different asphalts and are listed in Table 2.3 [2]. These networks were also identified
visually at 50,000 magnification. Lower magnification was insufficient to identify the
networks. Collins also claims a polymer network with a micellar structure was formed

in EVA (ethylene-vinyl-acetate) modified asphalt [2].

Table 2.3 - Polymer critical concentrations for network formation in various

polymer modified asphalt cements [2].

 

Asphalt Polymer C’, wt %
MAR SBS ~2
BOS SBS >4
DPAC-5 SBS ~3
DPAC-S SBR ~4

MAR - Shell Martinez asphalt, AR1000

BOS - Boscan asphalt, AC-6

DPAC-S - Deer Park asphalt, AC-S

SBS - Kraton® D1101, Shell Chemical Company

SBR - SBR latex, Ultrapave 70, Goodyear

2.4.4 Network Stability

At network concentrations however, thermoplastic polymer networks have a
potential problem. Gross separation may occur between the two interpenetrating
continuous phases resulting in the formation of two separate phases. To prevent
separation the network needs to be stabilized. A stable network will increase rutting

resistance, decrease low temperature cracking, and elevate tensile strength. Stability can

36

usually be achieved through modification of the microstructure. Many approaches have
been proposed for increasing stability including [2]; adding inorganic or organic fillers,
the use of organic gelling agents, using block and random copolymers with greater
compatibility, formation of cationic emulsions, polymer oxidation, the use of peptizing
agents, steric stabilization by random block copolymers, polymer chlorination, the addition
of ester groups to the polymer, and the use of amphifatic block copolymer or comb type
graft-copolymers. Of these possible approaches, the most promising solutions appear to
be: addition of organic fibers if the small cracks are self healing; steric stabilization by
the addition of amphifatic polymers if creaming can be stopped; and steric stabilization
with ester groups if the wetting of the aggregate is enough to overcome the disadvantage
of the formation of amorphous micellar structures [9]. Amorphous micellar structures are
not rigid and will not hold their shape. In steric stabilization, PE coalescence is prevented
using a form of steric barrier to keep the particles far enough apart so that Van der Waals
attractions can be overcome by thermal forces. The steric barrier must be partially soluble
in asphalt and reactive with PE. Stabilizers studied were styrene-butadiene rubber, Kraton
61652, and styrene hydrogenated butadiene-styrene tri-block copolymer.

LDPE (low density polyethylene), a thermoplastic polymer, has been studied as
a modifier in a commercial product marketed under the name Novophalt. Novophalt is
a biphase binder of LDPE and asphalt blended through a patented high shear blender at
the mix Site. Separation can be a problem, but if mixed and stored properly LDPE
modified asphalt can give good pavement performance. This mixing and storage
encompasses the use of huge mixing trucks on construction sites so the asphalt cement

and LDPE stay dispersed until lay down. Usually, the smaller the particle Size the better

37

the performance of the polymer modified asphalt [44]. In the laboratory, the optimum
polymer content was 4.8 to 5.0 percent of the binder when the particles were below 100
um. Novophalt was found to offer better resistance to fracture (reflective cracking and
thermal cracking). Better durability was also found due to thicker asphalt films that
reduce air and water permeability, hence reducing aging and stripping [10]. In another
study [38], polyethylene chlorinated to less than 15 weight percent of the polymer and
polyethylene maleated to less than four weight percent also gave improved properties.
Chlorination and malleation helped stabilize the polyethylene by increasing the
compatibility between the polymer and asphalt allowing the beneficial properties of the
polyethylene to appear.

Another form of PE modified asphalt will be available as a commercial product
in the future under the name Polyphalt. Polyphalt is a stabilized binder of LDPE and
asphalt. The process is currently being patented and knowledge of the system and exact
means of stabilization has remained proprietary. Research has indicated particles between

1-5 pm in diameter are required for good steric stability [44].

2.5 Morphology through fractograph y

The morphology of sulfur modified asphalt was investigated through the use of
energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS) and backscattered electrons (BE) images.
Energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy makes dot maps based on the release of x-rays from
the surface after being excited by electrons. In sulfur modified asphalt, the sulfur will

release a specific x-ray. The intensity and location of the x-ray emission is converted to

38

a dot map showing sulfur distribution and morphology. Backscattered electron images
show the three dimensional morphology with more clarity. Four fractographs, two from
EDS and two from BE of sulfur modified asphalt are presented here. A fractograph is
a micrograph of a fractured surface. Figures 2.10 and 2.11 are Shown at 118X and
Figures 2.12 and 2.13 at 1176X [45]. Figures 2.10 and 2.12 are the energy dispersive x-
ray maps showing the sulfur distribution. Figures 2.11 and 2.13 are the backscattered
electron images revealing the surface morphology. Figures 2.10 and 2.11 Show that the
sulfur has formed crystalline faceted needles during their unconfined growth in the void
regions. Whereas in the confined regions, spherical sulfur particles were formed as

presented in Figures 2.12 and 2.13.

2.6 Microstructural and morphology effects of air voids

The occurrence of air voids in the microstructure is an important aspect of asphalt
mixes and its performance as pavement. Low air void content can lead to load sensitive
asphalt with a tendency to bleed at high temperatures. Bleeding is the rise of asphalt
cement to the surface through the aggregate structure. Too high an air void content can
lead to accelerated aging, fatigue cracking, and damage from moisture if the voids are
interconnected. The ideal air void content suggested by the Shell Oil Company is 4.9
percent determined empirically through laboratory and field experimentation.

In polyethylene modified asphalt, air void content has been acceptable from 1.8
percent up to eight percent of the binder with good performance below three percent air

voids[10]. This differs slightly with the earlier cited value by the Shell Oil Company of

39

     
  

   

- " 35.1 . ,
Figure 2.10 - Energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy
fractograph showing the distribution of sulfur in asphalt at
118X [4S].

  

' . . .1‘ _3: [‘1‘ - ‘ :23}: K?
Figure 2.11 - Backscattered electron fractograph of sulfur
modified asphalt showing the morphology of the crystalline
sulfur at 118X [45].

   

Figures printed with permission from ASM International.

40

    
    

Figure 2.12 - Ernegy I dispersive x-ray spectroscopy
fractograph showing the spherical formation of sulfur in
asphalt under confined growth at 1176X [45].

. 9 , ' V -,

Figure 2.13 - Backscattered electron fractograph of sulfur

modified asphalt showing the morphology of the crystalline
sulfur at 1176X [45].

Figures printed with permission from ASM International.

41

4.9 percent air void content being optimum. According to the National Center for Asphalt
Technology, the air void content should be closely controlled between three to four
percent [35]. In a study of crumb rubber modified asphalt [46], four percent air void
content was found to be the optimum. Four percent air voids has also been interpreted
as the maximum threshold value in asphalt concrete in a previous literature review [47].
On Murphy road in Oregon in 1989, test sections were laid down by the ODOT
(Oregon Department of Transportation) with rather large void content measured in field
cores of 14.5 and 17.6 percent [15]. As of 1990 the roads were showing no pavement
distresses. These values are believed questionably high because other roads that the Shell
Oil Company has monitored having such high void contents have failed prematurely.
Little [10] related higher void contents to a decrease in fracture toughness of
gravel sand asphalt mixes at four temperatures. Fracture toughness is represented by the
area under a stress/strain curve analyzed through indirect tensile testing and is a measure
of the materials overall strength. Figure 2.14 shows fracture toughness decreases with
increasing air void content. Although the higher regions were not tested, the data trend

seems to show higher air void contents would offer reduced benefits.

2. 6.1 Void theory

Additional work has been done in the area of air void morphology by Terrel and
Al-Swailmi [48] who formulated the theory of "pessimum" voids. The theory proposes
that three distinct void morphologies exist: impermeable, "pessimum" voids, and free
drainage. Literature data supports such categorizing and a diagram of their theory relating

mix strength to void content is presented in Figure 2.15. The theory suggests

42

N

\

m + -15 degrees C 9 '5 degrees C
E A 5 degrees C I 15 degrees C
V 20
2 '\.

“ ‘\*\\ l~\_ 1---,”

'g’g’ 15 "“~~\L:}\-—— 5-3.71 - .

‘LM g “Maxi an“, “7““-
E L g N a“ “A
33" 10 3° ‘ \\°\
0 ' a I".
[‘1
d.) .
a 5
g T WKKTKTTEWT“K\~+—
E 0

 

 

6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10
Void Content, percent

Figure 2.14 - Influence of void content and temperature on fracture toughness of
gravel sand asphalt mixes [10].

43

 

 

 

82 100
(D
E
U) 33\\\~\\ 777777 A ///

_ "Pessimum"
% Impermeable Voids Free Drainage
[—
E 0

0 5 10 15 20
AIR VOIDS, %

Figure 2.15 - The Relative Strength of Mixtures May Depend on the Access to Water
in the Void System [48].

44

impermeable, and free drainage give better retained strength than the "pessimum" voids.
Impermeable means not allowing the water to penetrate the asphalt and air voids range
from zero to approximately seven percent. The air voids in impermeable have a closed
void morphology. Free drainage is where the water is free to move down through the
asphalt and into the ground [48]. The void morphology in free drainage is open and
interconnected. The drainage would be similar to that of a packed bed or a sieve.
"Pessirnum" voids are partially interconnected, but not fully open voids, that allow for the
slow diffusion of water into the asphalt. The "pessimum" range of air void content is
between approximately seven to 13 percent. It is proposed that in the "pessimum" void
region water penetrates and is trapped in the asphalt to cause detrimental effects such as
stripping and freeze-thaw cracking [48]. Therefore, "pessimum" void morphology is not
desired, as well free drain would probably not be acceptable in Michigan with the high

humidity and rainfall in combination with freezing weather.

2. 6.2 Void morphology

Air voids have also been studied as part of the Strategic Highway Research
Program (SHRP). The study followed and modified cement concrete technologies from
the past 20 years in the area of air void characterization for asphalt concrete [49].
Microscopic analysis using automated image analysis of thin and plane asphalt sections
was used to characterize air void content, sizes, forms, and distribution. The study [50]
investigated the air void characteristics as they were related to compaction method, mix
type, and compaction temperature. The study consisted of preparation of thin and plane

asphalt sections. These sections were carefully prepared by filling the voids through

45

vacuum impregnation with an epoxy containing a fluorescent dye. The epoxy served two
purposes: it filled the voids allowing the specimen to be cut and polished without
breaking up and served as a medium to hold the dye which was used to detect the size,
shape, and distribution of the voids [51, 52]. Air void content results obtain through
plane section image analysis were comparable to the current dry methods. The problem
with image analysis is that it is a 2-dimensional technique, therefore not accounting for
possible interconnections of the air voids in three dimension [53]. Bulk gas measurement
of the air voids has potential to solve this three dimensional interconnection problem, but
has not been established. Percolation theories suggest that when the porosity is 27:5
percent, the air void morphology will shift from separated (closed) to interconnected
(Open) [49]-

To attain good pavement performance a homogenous air void content is desired
in asphalt pavement. This study showed not all laboratory compaction methods were the
same and all had some form of difficulty representing the field mixtures that generally
gave a homogenous void distribution [53]. Of all the laboratory molded samples, the
gyratory compacted samples gave the most homogenous air void distributions with only
problems along the sides of the molded Specimen.

An illustration of the plane section work is presented in Figure 2.16 [49]. This
picture was obtained with two plane section samples placed under UV-illumination and
photographed. The plane sections were approximately 90 mm wide by 110 mm high and
the top surface is the top of the photograph. The lines marked at the sides represent the
division of the compacted layers. The light grey to white areas are the voids fluorescing

under the UV light. The solid colored objects, generally medium size are aggregate, and

division

s .. ' -

aggrega , ML" ‘
4 J 51»

2% 8.4 .

division

cement

 

F41gure 2.16 - Sample SV 13, two plane sections, under UV-illumination at full scale
I 91-

47

the small Speckled black areas are asphalt cement, see figure with labeled details.
2. 7 Fracture and failure mode of con ventional and modified asphalt/aggregate mixtures

Morphology and microstructure are the heart of fracture mechanics. An
understanding of the these two items enable the fracture mechanisms and locus of fracture
to be determined giving insight to the performance of materials. The strategy is to apply
the knowledge of polymer composites to the composite macrostructure of asphalt concrete
and polymer modified asphalt concrete. Polymer composites have been studied from the
fracture mechanics point of view for a much longer time than asphalt which has only
started fracture mechanic analysis in the last few years. Due to this, limited theoretical
work has been found in the literature for asphalt fracture mechanics. The application of
polymer, composite, and adhesive theory can give insight for the development of the
fundamental relationships between morphology and microstructure to pavement

performance.

2. 7.] Composite theory

Composite theory helps explain the failure mechanisms in asphalt concrete. The
composite interphase is defined as the region between fiber/rubber/aggregate and the
matrix, asphalt cement, where both the chemical and physical properties are different [54].
The interface also influences to some extent the mechanical and thermal properties of
composites. It has been found that the fracture locus could be at the interface region.

Therefore, an understanding of the mechanisms of adhesion would be useful. The

48

microstructural bonding aspects of polymer-polymer adhesion and the macrostructural
properties effecting adhesive strength have been summarized by Kalantar [54]. These
aspects of adhesion/ cohesion are also important in asphalt/aggregate mixes as shown in

previously conducted tests.

2. 7.2 Mechanisms of adhesion

In asphalt, adhesion is an important concept when investigating fracture. Adhesion
is the measure of the ability of two surfaces to stay together. In asphalt many factors
appear to govern adhesion including; surface tension of the asphalt cement and aggregate,
chemical composition of the asphalt and aggregate, asphalt viscosity, surface texture of
the aggregate, aggregate porosity, aggregate cleanliness, and aggregate moisture content
and temperature at the time of mixing with asphalt cement [48]. The concept of adhesion
is explained through four microstructural mechanisms involving combinations of physical
and chemical interactions. These mechanisms are: mechanical adhesion, chemical
reaction, surface energy, and molecular orientation [48].

Mechanical adhesion is the interpenetration of surface irregularities and molecular
contacts to act as mechanical anchors. This mechanical interlocking between aggregate
and asphalt is strongest when the aggregate is’rough and porous. For smooth surfaces,
mechanical adhesion does not play a significant roll, thus the need for crushed and not
smooth aggregate.

Chemical reaction is the mechanism of absorption interactions where the molecules
of one phase such as asphalt are attracted to the molecules in the other phase, aggregate,

fibers, and/or particles. These interactions originate from basic chemical interactions,

49

covalent chemical bonds, and secondary interactions. Covalent bonding is the sharing of
electrons among atoms and is the primary form of chemical interactions [54]. When
forming a stable interface the formation of these covalent bonds at the interface are very
desirable. To form covalent bonds intimate physical contact must be achieved to which
secondary interactions are a prerequisite. Secondary interactions form over greater atomic
distances not requiring physical contact and include non polar dispersion forces (Van der
Waals forces), polar dipole interactions, and polar Lewis acid/base interactions which
includes hydrogen bonding. These chemical interactions are those responsible for better
adhesion between asphalt and basic aggregates as compared to that of acidic aggregates
[48].

Surface energy is the sum of the dispersive attractions across an interface. These
interactions are generally small, but the surface can be modified to increase the attractive
forces. The surface energy difference between the adherent and adhesive is responsible
for wetting. Wetting is needed in asphalt for the asphalt cement to coat the aggregate
forming a good bond.

Molecular orientation is the alignment of molecules at an interface. The extent of
alignment depends on the mutual molecular affinities. The attraction of asphalt to
aggregate molecules is low compared to the attraction of water to the aggregate.
Therefore, water has a stronger attraction to the aggregate surface. This mechanism
causes the wicking of water that occurs in small cracks and fractures created between the

asphalt and aggregate and is the mechanism of stripping.

50

2. 7. 3 Macroscopic failure mechanisms

The study of fracture mechanics of asphalt mixes has been concentrated on
macroscopic properties which can be seen with the naked eye and under low
magnification. Hugo and Kennedy published a list of general failure mechanisms as

follows [1]:

1. Excessive hardening of the binder.

2. Excessive stresses due to external loads or temperature changes.

3. Excessive voltune change of the asphalt.

4. Excessive loss of subgrade support.

5. Excessive volume change of non-asphalt components of the pavement
structure.

6. Excessive post construction compaction.

These macroscopic failure mechanisms are good for classification, but microscopic failure

mechanisms are needed to provide the basis for solutions.

2. 7. 4 Microscopic failure mechanisms

Macrosc0pic failure mechanisms or pavement distresses have been related and
categorized into microscopic failure mechanisms and are presented in Table 2.4. These
pavement distresses are: thermal cracking, aging, fatigue cracking, rutting, and
ravelling/stripping. The majority of distresses are seen to be related to fracture in various

ways. Pavement ingredients with different coefficients of thermal expansion cause failure

51

stresses. Cyclic temperatures due to the environment cause freezing and thawing of water
in seams, holes, and cracks which create and propagate fracture. Embrittlement of the
asphalt concrete caused by both low temperature and aging increases the viscosity.
Therefore, the resulting failure occurs at low strain as a brittle fracture rather than a

ductile fracture [55].

Table 2.4 - Pavement Distress

Thermal Cracking fracture due to thermal expansion differences
- fracture due to water freeze/thaw cycling

- fracture due to low temperature embrittlement

Aging - fracture caused by embrittlement of the asphalt
binder

Fatigue Cracking - fracture due to tensile failure

Rutting - microstructural rearrangement due to asphalt

plasticity under load

Ravelling/Stripping - adhesive fracture due to low adhesion

2. 7.5 Thermal Cracking
Many mechanisms have been reported in the literature as being responsible for the
thermal cracking problem. Binder stiffness was one of the most common criteria

mentioned in the literature in controlling thermal cracking. Compared to straight asphalts,

52

SBS (styrene-butadiene-styrene) copolymer and styrene-butadiene block copolymer
modified asphalts have reduced stiffiiess (i.e. less thermal cracking potential) while EVA
(ethylene-vinyl acetate) modified asphalts have higher stiffness at low temperatures [5 6].
The "limiting stiffness" or "defined asphalt stiffness modulus" are the value above which
pavement cracking is imminent [57], and has been reported by many researchers [58-60].
They range from 20,000 to 70,000 psi at a loading time of 10,000 seconds and SHRP has
proposed 29,000 psi (200 MPa) at a loading time of 60 seconds for the bending beam
stiffness test. This SHRP specification followed the work previously developed for the
critical stress value based on thermal stresses. It should be noted that these values might
not be applicable for polymer/fiber/aggregate modified binders. Tensile properties are
also important parameters in controlling thermal cracking.

In order to quantify the improvement in thermal cracking resistance, the concept
of cracking temperature was introduced and defined in two different manners. First, the
temperature at which the stiffness reaches the critical value of "limiting stiffness" can be
considered to predict the "cracking temperature." Bitumen stiffness has been used as a
fundamental indicator of asphalt cement performance [61]. Second, the temperature at
which the failure strain is one percent when a tensile strain of one millimeter per minute
is applied is also called the "cracking temperature."

Fraass brittleness tests were also reported in the literature to characterize the
possible benefits of adding polymer to improve low temperature cracking resistance. The
Fraass brittleness temperature is where a crack forms in a thin film of asphalt which has
been subjected to tensile stresses while being cooled at a rate of one degree celsius per

minute. Polymer modification was found to lower the Fraass brittleness temperature with

53

increasing polymer concentration [8, ll, 15, 62] as shown in Figure 2.17. European
bitumen specifications use the Fraass brittleness temperature as an indication of low
temperature cracking performance [63].

Polymer modified binders were reported to have a higher penetration than straight
binders and less temperature susceptibility [8, 11, 62]. Temperature susceptibility is
defined as the change in consistency of penetration or viscosity of asphalt over a
temperature change. This indicates that modified binders are softer and therefore, have
less thermal cracking potential than straight binders at low temperatures. It has been
reported that polymer modification is more effective in reducing thermal cracking when
used with soft-grade asphalts [28].

The ability of asphalt mixes to resist thermal cracking has often been examined
using indirect tensile testing at low temperatures. It has been found polymer modified
mixtures offer higher tensile strength at low temperatures [7] thereby, better thermal
cracking resistance as compared to straight mixtures.

Indirect tensile testing applies a compressive load to an asphalt core or Marshall
sample measuring the force and deformation involved to relate them to the tensile and
compressive strengths of the asphalt sample. The indirect compressive and tensile
strengths are dependent on test temperature, angularity, kinematic viscosity (centistoke),
and air voids.

Past indirect tensile tests have given data that is not strongly reproducible due to
Sloppiness of the equipment, equipment configuration allowing the sample to move during
testing, specimen positioning, and lack of measurement capabilities. The development of

a new indirect tensile test has overcome these problems with the development of a unique

54

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

O y I r I I I I T I T
o G 9 ‘
_2 i. ..
A "
8 —4 -
V .i
e -5 -
3 Rx“5‘. -
o ‘8 3
33 0 PE 1000 Modified ‘
Q _1 O 0 PE 40000 Modified —
E I 80/100 + $85 1
<1) "12 D 80/100 + EVA -
}_ _ A 80/100 + LDPE .
m _1 4 A 60/70 + $85 _
(n 0 60/70 + EVA
0 0 60/70 4» LDPE ‘
E —1 6 + AC—ZO + EVA "
L x AC—2O + SBR 1
—1 8 ~ ~
-20 1 1 l 1 1 A 1' 4 I
o 2 4 6 8 10 12

Weight Percent Modification

Figure 2.17 - Fraass Temperature vs. Polymer Content, data compilation [8, ll, 15,
62].

55

frame to transfer an applied force to an asphalt sample with reproducible results. Figure
2.18 [3] presents two general views of the new indirect tensile testing frame where the
circular holding device on the bottom can be seen. This frame can be placed under a
compressive load that can be applied by a variety of equipment depending on the test to
be conducted. Figure 2.19 [3] shows the new frame in a standard Marshall test frame
used to perform indirect tensile tests to failure with a constant load. Cyclic loading
requires the use different equipment such as a MTS hydraulic system where a compressive
load can be applied twice every second for a duration of 0.1 seconds.

Practical asphalt parameters to characterize the binder are the viscosity and
temperature susceptibility. These parameters have the greatest effect in predicting
cracking temperature through thermal analysis [64]. Ruth et. al. proposed a predictive
method for thermal and load induced pavement cracking using the concept when an
asphalt concrete pavement meets a critical condition cracking occurs. Critical condition
was defined as "any combination of materials, environmental, and loading characteristics
which produced stresses or strains equivalent to those required for fracture [64]."
Currently, fatigue concepts are not like this and in most cases are inadequate pavement
life predictions. Current fatigue concepts are to repeat stress and/or loading cycles until
failure occurs building on the past stresses in the material. Ruth et. al. [64] believe the
high temperatures, which lower the viscosity, and traffic that asphalt pavements endure
during the summer months eliminates prior stress history.

The cracking criteria was based on incremental creep strain limits of failure stress,
fracture energy, and mix stiffness concepts. The computer program developed included

the thermal coefficients of contraction to account for their moderate effects on the asphalt

56

 

 

 

. _ ~7 3" .
Figure 2.18 - General views of the new indirect tensile test
frame [3].

57

     

"N-z- i

 

Figure 2.19 - The new indirect tensile frame in a

standard Marshall test frame [3].

58

cracking temperature. The larger the thermal coefficient the higher the cracking
temperature predicted. The most realistic failure values for predicting cracking
temperatures were obtained through the fracture energy ratio obtained through thermal
analysis. This was believed best because the values were calculated using both stress and
creep strain [64].

A similar concept was developed in Lausanne and Urbana discussed in Kausch et.
al. [65] where two cracked surfaces were brought together above their glass transition
temperatures, Tg, where interpenetration of molecular coils occurred. This interpenetration
caused healing effects where the original strength could be obtained in a fmite amount of
time. Others have also looked into this entanglement healing based on similar

considerations [65].

2. 7. 6 Aging

Aging is a pavement distress which causes cracking. The fracture of the pavement
occurs when the viscosity of the pavement increases to the extent it is no longer flexible.
The increase in viscosity at the surface is due to the evaporation of the lower molecular
weight materials and the oxidation/polymerization of asphalt molecules at the surface.
Low air void contents of two percent have allowed negligible field aging below the
surface after 11 to 13 years where as greater than two percent increases hardening of the
asphalt [47]. Hugo and Kennedy compiled their viscosity work and have related it to
cracking. Figure 2.20 presents typical examples of viscosity-depth profiles of uncracked
pavements showing a high increase in viscosity as the surface was approached. These

sites were in southern Africa and were; Johannesburg, P68/1, site B and Durban, R2/27

59

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i
0 ‘° s
O a
O _
>‘In
.3 © O ' i
O m '5 fl
8 do“ \\ Johannesburg
.... a. l
> at) \‘ \
o 1
PI! :2 \\
Durban',
0 15 30 45

Depth below surface, mm

Figure 2.20 - Viscosity-Depth Profiles of Uncracked Pavements [l].

60

(Natal). Figure 2.21 shows a comparison of viscosity between cracked and uncracked
asphalt pavements [1]. AS the viscosity rose a critical viscosity was achieved and the
plastic deformation of the asphalt could no longer compete with the applied stress/strains
of the environment ending in crack failure. Evaluation of viscosity has also been applied
to fatigue life by others [3].

Short term aging due to a higher processing temperatures can also be a problem.
Crumb rubber and other polymer modified asphalts often need increased processing
temperatures. It was found an increase in the mix temperature of 20°F, doubles the

oxidation rate during processing [34].

2. 7. 7 Fatigue Cracking

Fatigue cracking damage is related to rheological properties of asphalt binder and
is the least understood pavement distress mode because the results of fatigue testing are
dependent on the testing mode. Fatigue cracking is caused by tensile deformation and
strains in asphalt concrete from applied loads [3]. Fatigue analysis has been usually
studied by two approaches; phenomenological approach, using the flexural fatigue or the
diametral fatigue tests, and mechanistic approach using fracture mechanic principles to
estimate the period of time during which damage grows from an initial state to a critical
and final state [66]. Polymer modification provided asphalt mixtures with a superior
fatigue life as determined by the flexural beam fatigue test [8], and diametral fatigue test
[15, 29].

Laboratory investigation [67] on polymer modified asphalts reported the fatigue

cracking resistance increased with polymer modification. Due to proprietary rights the

Viscosity
log Pa-S @ 50°C

61

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

53
S - l

\ Cracked

i _ L ‘.

\\ ‘ i

~‘ Uncracked
.4 ‘ ‘

_ ~ 4”
q
,, 9 A _

0 15 30 45

Depth below surface, mm

Figure 2.21 - Comparison of Viscosity-Depth Envelopes with and without Cracks

[1].

62

exact modifiers were not reported, but some generic polymers reported were styrene-
butadiene copolymer and ethylene copolymer. The importance of polymer modified
asphalts is shown in Figure 2.22 [67] where most of the polymer modified asphalts Show
better fatigue cracking resistance than the straight asphalt, AC-20L and AC208. Failure
was measured in kilocycles to failure with the polymer modified asphalts sometimes being
better by an order of magnitude at the smaller initial stains. The fatigue cracking
resistance was measured through the push-pull fatigue test were tensile and compressive
loads were applied to the sample at 10 Hz and 10°C until failure occurred. The asphalts
were labeled with L, S, A showing different additives and sample preparation. L stands
for the test run on a level-up mix. S is for the test run on a surface mix, and A refers to
an antistrip additive [67].

In another laboratory study [29], fatigue cracking of straight asphalts (AC-5, AC-
10, and AC-20), modified asphalt with carbon black filler (MICROFIL8), and styrene
butadiene (SB) copolymer (Styrelf) modified asphalt were tested, analyzed, and fit to a
cracking index. The index predicts and extrapolates using time temperature superposition
techniques and extreme forethought should be exercised when using it. But, it does give
some useful insight matching what would be predicted by composite fracture mechanics.
The cracking index was subdivided into four different seasonal regions. These regions
are presented in Table 2.5 [29].

The fatigue cracking damage index is a computer formulation for the expected
fatigue cracking based on the response properties, traffic, pavement temperatures, and
layer thickness. An index number of one corresponds to fatigue cracking just initiated at

the bottom of the asphaltic layer and with increasing value increasing crack damage.

63

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

§ 10000
* ,
1000
g 100 . AC-20L I K?“ x
3 a XSLA I 933-
::1 ° X7LA N we; \
. X7SA ' t
0 In
2 4 6 s 10 14 20

Initial Strain x 10°

Figure 2.22 - Fatigue Resistance Test Results [67].

64

Table 2.5 - Seasonal Temperature Regions in Degrees Fahrenheit [29].

 

Region Winter Spring Summer Fall
1 0 40 90 70
2 40 70 90 70
3 40 70 120 70
4 40 70 140 90

Figure 2.23 predictions suggest straight asphalt would fail first followed by the filled
asphalt and finally the polymer modified asphalt. Table A-1 of the appendix has the
numerical data for these graphs. This would suggest the polymer modified asphalt has
better ways to absorb the fatigue energy put into the asphalt. The modifier used was
styrene-butadiene, an elastomer, which could absorb load energy in the form of stretching
and releasing it back in the form of heat after the load is removed and the elastomer
returns to its original shape minus any plastic deformation. These polymer particle
modifiers are also known to stop cracking by means of crack blunting and microcrack
toughen mechanisms in polymer composite materials. The carbon fill also has an
additional mechanism for energy absorption the particle-asphalt interface. The addition
energy is absorbed fracturing the interface slowing the crack growth and allows reduced

cracking.

65

 

 

 

 

 

 

cactus roar W

0.113138888331316aaadlalauauflflsiflssafliGlad!!!

'"IIIIIIFII'III'IIlll'l'llIIIUIUIUII'III'IIIIIII'IIIIIII'III'IIIIIII!

 

 

 

 

enactment! um

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2.23 - Fatigue Cracking Damage Index for Four Climatic Regions [29].

66
2. 7.8 Rutting

Rutting, a major distress, is the plastic deformation sustained by the
asphalt/aggregate matrix while supporting applied loads. It happens when the elasticity
and rigidity of the road are not resilient enough to withstand the applied loads.

Laboratory investigation on rutting deformation of different concentrations of
polyethylene modified asphalt (Novophalt) were reported to have larger values of fracture
toughness than straight asphalts. The greater the concentration of polyethylene
(Novophalt), the better the resistance to rutting deformation. Figure 2.24 shows with
increased polymer content better resistance to rutting deformation was achieved [10].
Similar results were obtained in another study [67] with a variety of modifiers. The creep
resistance, the ability to with stand movement under applied load over long periods of
time, was measured for several modified hot mix asphalts over a range of temperatures
from 80°F to 120°F. The creep test was run under purely compressive sinusoidal axial
stress with a constant isotropic stress to represent pavement confinement found in a road.
Due to proprietary rights the exact modifiers were not reported, but some generic
polymers reported were styrene-butadiene copolymer and ethylene copolymer. The
importance of polymer modified asphalts is shown in Figure 2.25 [67] where all of the
modified asphalts show better creep resistance than the straight asphalt, AC-20.

In the same laboratory investigation [29] where the fatigue cracking index was
developed, a rut depth damage index was developed for straight asphalts (AC-5, AC-10,
and AC-20), modified asphalt with carbon black filler (MICROFIL8), and styrene
butadiene copolymer (Styrelf) modified asphalt. This index also predicts and extrapolates

using time temperature superposition techniques and should be used with extreme

67

 

 

G 2500 i I Novophalt (5.8%)

| ,
m ' NOVOPhalt (4.8%) I.
o
'33 2000 x AC-20 (5.8%)
.Ei 1500
\.
.S x

87 1000 x .
'8 ______ A”, 4

g 500 x“ - ’5? /‘/ k-- I.
o ' , x if. Ir/ r ._. III,“ .. L-
'3" _x- / _fl .__, ”IJMMW-

a 0 #1,: ”1.x”-

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Time, see.

Figure 2.24 - Indirect tensile creep data at 77°F, 20 psi stress level, comparing
optimally designed and binder-rich Novophalt mixtures and unmodified AC-20 [10].

Kilocycles to 6 % Permanent Deformation

68

. AC-20
0 IX]
‘ 3X5
I 3X7
1000
R
Q . \~.\
100 x
1 A1 ‘1
\1..\\ \ \H"\\;\;V\\ \\
10 .
‘\ . \ ‘11
1 \ Si: \;:\\ i
0 i \0 \\:§;‘

 

 

7O 80 90 100 110 120 130

Temperature, Degrees F

Figure 2.25 - Creep resistance of hot mix asphalts[67].

69

forethought. Again the index gives useful insight matching what would be predicted by
composite fracture mechanics. The damage index was subdivided into the same four
seasonal regions found in Table 2.5 [29].

Rut depth which is a measure of the permanent deformation in the wheel path has
been predicted by the rut depth index and is presented in Figure 2.26. Table A-2 presents
the numerical data for the graphs in Figure 2.26 and are located in the appendix. The
predicted values are dependent on; permanent deformation characteristics, stiffness of the
materials in the pavement, and traffic. The rut depth was reported in inches with the
failure limit considered to be 0.6 inches.

The carbon particle modified asphalt was predicted to be the best in rut resistance
followed by the styrene butadiene copolymer modified asphalt and then the straight
asphalt with service lives of 10 to 12 years, 8 to 10 years, and 4 to 6 years, respectively
[29]. The carbon particle modified asphalt out-performed the polymer modified asphalt
because of its additional ability to help support the applied load where the polymer
modified asphalt was better at stopping cracks because it had better modulus
characteristics in the plastic zone. The plastic zone is defined as the region in the front
and around a crack tip where the stresses change from elastic to plastic allowing for
plastic yielding. The Irwin model of the plastic zone suggests a small circular area in
front of the crack tip would have the same stress distribution in it as would the real crack
[68]. Others have defined it as more like a dumbbell or double lobes for plane strain with
the crack intersecting their middle. In plane stress, the area is almost circular like a
balloon was being pushed over a straight edge creating an indentation at the crack tip

[69].

70

 

 

 

 

 

 

'IU'V'I'III'I'U'I'I'I'U'IITFUIIUUV'II'

  

RUT WIMNMS

 

'U'U'UI‘IUIIIIIUUI'

 

“'YIIII'I

 

 

 

 

 

[III

5;;Soahbbbbhbh_:‘3n;5

-5

I'IUU'I'I'UUU'IUYI‘VI'VU'

U'UII‘U'

MOUTHNNJCS

'l'lI'II

 

‘VVIIUU'IV
. . .

 

 

 

 

I'V'VVI'III'UYI'IIIIUIU'U'I'III'IIUIU‘UIIUU‘IU‘UIIUIIIIUIUU'

Oahhkbbhbb

 

 

O
a

Figure 2.26 - Rut Depth for Four Climatic Regions [29].

71

In most of these cases the binder modulus is an important factor in fracture. G’
and G" at the crack tip characterize fracture and deformation possibilities. In modifying
asphalt with polymers, G’ and G" are changed. Polymers can increase the elastic
modulus, G’, which is important at low temperatures to stop fracture by absorbing energy
elastically. Polymers can also increase the viscous modulus, G", at high temperatures
lending to the decreasing of rutting. This allows for the use of softer asphalts that are less

susceptible to low temperatures [24].

2. 7.9 Ravelling/Stripping

The other major distresses, ravelling/stripping, are fractures at the interface
between the asphalt and aggregate. Ravelling is the characteristic name for the failure at
the top surface while stripping is the failure that starts at the base of the asphalt layers.
Both are a result of poor adhesive strength known to be caused by the wicking of water
between the asphalt and aggregate creating poor adhesive characteristics and adhesive
fracture. Altering the aggregate surface chemistry has reduced ravelling/stripping with

additives such as lime and calcium carbonate [24, 70].

2. 7.10 Surface Cracking

Another macroscopic classification others have done is categorizing cracking into
six different types; transverse, longitudinal, skew, block, crazy, and crocodile cracking [1].
Figure 2.27 shows these classifications. This type of categorizing helps distinguish the
extent of cracking, but not the failure mechanisms or locus of fracture. Similarly, these

types of cracking can be broken down into their microscopic failure mechanisms, those

72

associated with thermal cracking, aging, and fatigue cracking.

2. 7.11 Fracture Toughness

Fracture toughness is a measure of the ability of something not to fracture or up
until fracture. Fracture toughness is the total energy for failure of a specimen calculated
by determining the area under a stress/strain curve. The importance of fracture toughness
is in its ability to be a predictive tool for future pavement performance. An example of
the importance of fracture toughness occurred after a mistake during the paving process
at an airport in Texas where the incorrect amount of LDPE was mixed into the asphalt
concrete. To determine the potential problems, the asphalt was tested and many benefits
were revealed from the mistake. The mixture had a LDPE content of 5.8 weight percent
of the binder, instead of 4.8 percent which was originally designed. A comparison of the
fracture toughness of the two concentrations of LDPE modified asphalt at three
temperatures, 33°F, 77°F , and 104°F, was completed using indirect tensile testing. Their
data showed the 5.8 percent modified binder gave higher toughness values than the 4.8
percent modified binder at all three temperatures tested and are presented in Figure 2.28

[10].

2. 7.12 Fracture with fiber modification

Fibers have been studied as asphalt modifiers to enhance pavement performance
with respect to fracture. Fibers improve the mechanical properties of composite materials
with increased toughness and tensile strength, as well as the flexural and impact strength.

These properties are offered through the three fiber toughening mechanisms: fiber-asphalt

73

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2.27 - Graphic Description of Cracks for Conditions [1].

Toughness, psi-in./in.

74

 

 

I Novophalt (4.8 %)
o Novophalt (5.8%)

0.7

0.5

0.4

03 // fl/fl/ ,,,,,, tixN‘R‘waz \

xx am \0

0.2 / \'

0.1

O i

32 77 104

Temperature, Degrees F

Figure 2.28 - Comparison of toughness for Novophalt mixtures determined from
indirect tension testing at 32, 77, and 104°F [10].

75

debonding, fiber pullout, and fiber deformation and failure, as shown in Figure 2.29.
Debonding is energy lost during adhesive failure between the fiber and matrix generally
occurring around the fiber break point. Fiber pullout is the mechanism of energy lost to
over come frictional resistance [71]. Fiber deformation and failure is the energy lost to
yielding and fiber breakage. Organic fibers have the ability to reduce crack propagation
and add strength to the system by providing the crack blunting and microcrack toughening
mechanisms. Organic cellulose fibers are currently being used at 0.3 weight percent by
BASF in their cellulose modified asphalt for stabilization. The stability is offered through
a large fiber surface area allowing the bitumen to stay in place due to wetting the fiber
surfaces, thereby reducing bleeding. Inorganic fibers may reduce the performance by
acting as Griffith crack initiators due to their length to width ratio. However, inorganic

fibers have been used as storage stabilizers [9] to slow down phase separation.

2.8 Fiber morphology and microstructure in other composite materials

Portland cement, also being a composite road material, provides some generic
information that can be applied to asphalt composites. The cement industry has studied
the added benefits of fiber reinforcement from 0.05 to 5.0 weight percent of steel, glass,
polypropylene, polyethylene, aramids, cellulose, acrylic, fiberglass, carbon, and nylon
fibers.

Fibers have been shown to increase the compressive strength of concrete up to 10
times over that of concrete without fibers [72]. Polypropylene fibers have doubled

concrete strength with pullout being the main fiber failure mechanism [73]. Steel fibers

76

  
 

ID

   

FIBER-ASPHALT FIBER FIBER
DEBONDING PULL-0U T DEF ORMA TION
and FAILURE

Figure 2.29 - Fiber Toughening Mechanisms

77

in concrete also fail by pullout [74, 75]. In other cement concrete studies carbon fibers
show a great increase in the flexural strength and toughness. The addition of carbon
fibers increases the toughness from 0.28 MPa*mm to 1.3 MPa*mm and the flexural
strength from 1.4 MPa to 8.3 MPa. Additional additives, such as latex, and curing
processes can increase these properties even more with the fiber failure mechanism still
being pullout [76]. Figure 2.30 is a single carbon fiber from a pullout failure of portland
cement concrete. The micrograph was taken with SEM (secondary electron microscopy)
at 5 kV and 1000 magnification. The adhesive bond strength is the weakest failure
mechanism and is shown by very little cement sticking to the fiber. The addition of latex
increased the fiber bond strength between the cement and fiber from 2.1 MPa to greater
than 5.9 MPa. The latex allows for a thin coating of polymer on the fiber and aggregate.
This thin film of latex increases the fiber/cement and cement/aggregate bond and can be
seen in a close up under the SEM in Figure 2.31. This picture was taken at 5 kV and at
a magnification of 3500 [76]. In corrosive conditions, carbon fibers have been found to
perform best [72].

ESEM (environmental scanning electron microscopy) investigation enabled the
cement industry to examine the cement microstructure, thereby identifying embrittlement
problems and their failure mechanisms during curing [72]. This is possible because the
ESEM allows samples to be in a liquid environment and under a low vacuum instead of

a dry, ultra high vacuum.

'71-

 

78

 

5K0 x1.eae :13}

Figure 2.30 - Carbon fiber pulled out of cement concrete [76].

79

     

. In
.- . S¢;‘ 4“. i 'qv'i
Figure 2.31 - Carbon fiber pulled out from latex-modified cement concrete [76].

8O

2. 9 Summary

Polymer modified asphalts increase pavement performance when used with
properly constructed asphalt concrete pavements. Polymer modifiers have improved the
creep resistance and fatigue resistance of hot mix asphalt at normal and high temperatures
by as much as an order of magnitude over straight asphalt [67]. Polymers like ethylene-
vinyl acetate can reduce rutting. Elastomeric polymers, SBS and SBR, can lower the
cracking temperature by as much as 13°F [17].

The greatest benefit of polymer modification is their ability to form polymer
network structures that can improve pavement performance. Polymer networks transfer
and distribute applied stresses to reduce creep at high temperatures, increase rutting
resistance, and gain high temperature stiffness without loosing low temperature flexibility.

Cellulose fibers offer good characteristics for asphalt modification, larger surface
area to help stabilize and low expense. Polyester fibers offered the highest strength of
those fibers reviewed in fiber modified asphalt.

Rubber particle modified asphalts were noted to under go adhesive fracture, a
ravelling/stripping problem. In the composite industry, surface treatments have helped
reduce and eliminate similar problems of adhesive fracture.

Air voids are an important aspect in pavement performance. Terrel and Al-
Swailmi [48] proposed an air void theory with three regions of which the lower range
from zero to approximately seven percent void content, the impermeable region, is best
in humid, freezing climates such as Michigan. The optimum air void content range being

between 3 and 4.9 percent in straight and polymer modified asphalts. Smaller amounts

 

car

Cl'd

M

It!

81

can have bleeding problems and greater void contents can lead to accelerated fatigue
crack, aging, and moisture damage.

Fracture toughness of a material represents a measure of the total energy for
material failure. It has been shown fracture toughness of PE modified asphalt goes down
with increased air void content (between seven and ten percent) at four tested
temperatures, -15, —5, 5, and 15°C. An improvement in the toughness of PE modified
asphalt has been shown with the use of 5.8 weight percent PE modified binder over 4.8
weight percent. This improvement may not be large enough to justify the added expense,
but does show an operating window for the binder content.

Laboratory tests and computer modeling has predicted better pavement
performance for carbon black and polymer modified (SB) asphalt over straight asphalts
[28].

Understanding fracture mechanics and the locus of fracture of polymer modified
asphalts is essential to relate PMA composition to pavement performance. Microscopic
failure mechanisms are needed for this relationship, but macroscopic failure mechanisms
of asphalt concrete constitute the majority of past work. The two key microscopic failure
mechanisms are fracture and deformation. Knowledge in these two areas will accelerate

pavement performance improvement.

 

Chapter Three

Problem Refinement

3.1 Problem statement

Asphalt concrete pavements have been showing signs of early distress in areas of
thermal cracking, aging, fatigue cracking, rutting, and ravelling/stripping diminishing
pavement performance. Microstructure, morphology, adhesion, and fracture are key
factors influencing all these distress areas and are the focus of work contained in this
thesis. Tests were developed to investigate the relationships between pavement
performance and these key factors. Pavement performance is directly related to fracture
of the pavement while fracture is governed by the microstructure and morphology of the
asphalt concrete. Additional investigation of asphalt concrete shows microstructure and
morphology are governed by the mix ingredients. This is where polymer modifiers can
have large effects, thereby showing a direct correlation between polymer modification and
pavement performance. The tested developed were: microscopic and image analysis of
thin asphalt concrete thin and plane sections enabling microstructural and morphological
investigation and fracture testing of thin asphalt samples allowing crack propagation,
fracture mechanisms, and locus of fracture to be investigated. Additional tests are
proposed for adhesion and fracture toughness. Therefore, existing and proposed tests will

allow characterization and evaluation of polymer modified asphalt cement and concrete.

82

83

3.2 Microstructure and crack growth

Categorization of modifiers and microstructure is a necessary organizational step
in order to understand the role of polymer modifiers on failure mechanisms. Therefore,
asphalt modifiers are catalogued into five types: dispersed thermoplastic polymers,
network thermoplastic polymers, reacting polymers, polymeric and organic fibers, and
rubber particles as discussed in Chapter Two. It is further desired to categorize these five
types by their microstructure for analysis of crack growth and fracture mechanisms. Since
fracture and crack growth mechanisms are inherent functions of microstructure. Therefore
based on the microstructure, three morphological types have been determined: Type H,

Type F, and Type P.

3. 2. 1 Type H

Type H refers to asphalt concrete with homogeneous asphalt cement, conventional
aggregate, and acceptable void content. The asphalt cement being homogenous at the
microscopic level. The majority of polymer modified asphalt cements are of this type and
include; dispersed thermoplastic polymer modified asphalts, network thermoplastic
polymer modified asphalts, and reactive polymer modified asphalts. Conventional asphalts
are also included in this category. Figure 3.1 is a drawing of Type H polymer modified
asphalt (PMA) showing their general characteristics.

For Type H polymer modified asphalts, the tip crack growth is a function of
asphalt-aggregate adhesion [77-81], properties of asphalt at the crack tip[82-87], plastic

zone size [68, 69, 88-95], and void content [77, 78, 96-98], as shown in Figure 3.2. The

84

PMA Microstructure TYPE H

 

 

C Conventional Aggregate
: Acceptable Void Content

D Q Homogeneous Asphalt
Polymer Modifiers
G QQ Dispersed Thermoplastics
Network Thermoplastics

{/\: fl Reactive Polymers

PMA is HOMOGENEOUS in Microstructure
at the MICROSCOPIC LEVEL

Figure 3.1 - Type H PMA microstructure

PMA Microstructure TYPE I-I

 

 

CRACK GROWTH
Asphalt (PMA)-
Aggregate Adhesion

Properties of Asphalt
at Crack Tip

Plastic Zone Size

 

 

Void Content
G', G”, 16c

 

    

Figure 3.2 - Type H PMA microstructure crack mechanisms

85

critical stress intensity factor, ch, a characteristic within the plastic zone, has been found
to measure crack blunting [99]. K1C is a measure of stresses and strains inside the plastic
zone when fracture occurs which can be used to measure the crack resistance of a material

[100].

3. 2. 2 Type F

Type F refers to asphalt concretes similar to Type H except with the addition of
fibers to form fiber modified asphalts. The fibers can be of either polymeric or inorganic
in nature. Figure 3.3 is a drawing of Type F PMA with their general characteristics.
Fibers are added as reinforcements leading to superior mechanical properties.

Type F PMA exhibits the same crack growth mechanisms as Type H, plus those
related to fibers. Fibers contribute to improving the asphalt crack growth performance
by adding three fiber toughening mechanisms [101]; fiber-asphalt debonding, fiber pullout,
and fiber deformation. These mechanisms must function individually and collectively for
the composite to give improved properties. Fibers contribute high strength and modulus
to resist breakage in bending under applied load while the matrix transfers the stresses to
the fibers and keeps the fibers separated and orientated. The matrix also serves as a
protective layer for the fibers preventing abrasion and decomposition. Figure 3.4 presents
the important crack growth mechanisms of Type F PMA where crack growth rate is a
function of asphalt binder-fiber adhesions [77, 79, 97, 101-104], binder-aggregate
adhesions [77, 79, 81, 102], fiber properties [102-107, Kinloch, 1983 #466], and void

content [77, 96-98, 108].

 

86

PMA Microstructure TYPE F

 

Conventional Aggregate
V, // Acceptable Void Content

» vt, v

W”

Homogeneous Asphalt
FIBERS

/ / / /,7

at
. //
l‘% 4,43 ~ , / Polymer

Inorganic

 

FIBERS are UNIFORMLY dispersed
throughout the Asphalt phase.

Figure 3.3 - Type F PMA microstructure

PMA Microstructure TYPE F

 

    
     
  
  
   

 

     

        
   
  

“WW CRACK GROWTH
'm’} Asphalt -Fiber

’ ’9 «w Asphalt-Aggregate

.1 ,«g. Adhesion

‘Y/ 5°27?“

we oi ontent

sauna/us“ 9

     

Figure 3.4 - Type F PMA microstructure crack mechanisms

87
3. 2.3 Type P

Type P refers to asphalt concretes similar to Type H except with rubber particle
modification. Rubber particles for asphalt modification come from ground up passenger
and truck tires. Figure 3.5 is a drawing of Type P PMA microstructure.

The crack growth mechanisms in Type P are similar to those of Type H, plus
those associated with the asphalt binder-rubber particle interactions. These interactions
allow energy of fracture to be adsorbed reducing crack growth through ductile tearing and
debonding of the rubber particles [109, 110]. Rubber particles can toughen materials
through a mechanism called toughening. Rubber toughening is the incorporation of a soft
rubbery phase into the brittle polymer matrix asphalt at low temperatures. This can
activate multiple shear yielding as the toughening mechanism in the material [111, 112].
Shear yielding is a ductile failure mechanism that takes place in highly localized shear
bands or diffuse shear deformation zones. Figure 3.6 displays the important crack growth
mechanisms of Type P PMA microstructure where the crack growth rate is a function of
binder-rubber adhesion [79, 80, 110, 111, 113, 114], rubber particle size [85, 102, 110,
112, 114-116], particle properties [112, 117, 118], rubber content [80, 115, 119], and void
content [77, 96-98].

A variety of polymers have benefitted from the addition of rubber particles.
Epoxy resins modified with rubber particles showed an increase in fracture toughness.
This considerable increase in toughness only reduces other properties a small amount
[113]. In high impact polystyrene (HIPS) dispersed rubber particles of one micron in
diameter were found to increase the impact behavior by ten percent when simple blending

was used. If the rubber particles were added during polymerization greater benefit was

88

PMA Microstructure TYPE P

 

Conventional Aggregate
Acceptable Void Content
Homogeneous Asphalt
Dispersed Rubber Particles

 

PMA has Rubber Particles UNIFORMLY
dispersed throughout the Asphalt phase.

Figure 3.5 - Type P PMA microstructure

PMA IVIicrostructure TYPE P

 

CRACK GROWTH

Asphalt-Rubber
Adhesion

Rubber Particle Size

Void Content

Rubber Content

Particle Properties

 

 

 

Figure 3.6 - Type P PMA microstructure crack mechanisms

89

achieved. The addition during polymerization increases the chemical compatibility of the
rubber particles to the matrix, thereby increasing the adhesive bond which serves as an
energy sink during fracture [115]. This bond is also dependent on both the elastic and

adhesive properties of the particle and matrix.

3.3 Fracture

In order to determine the role of polymer modifiers in asphalt concrete fracture an
understanding of adhesion, deformation, fibril bridging, and fracture toughness are

essential.

3.3.1 Adhesion

The fiber/particle-matrix bond is generally the site for premature failure of
composites due to high localized stresses in this region. Differential thermal expansion
is one of the causes of localized stresses between the fiber and matrix that adhesion must
resist. Therefore, the adhesive bond must possess the necessary chemical and physical
features enabling load transfer from matrix to fiber or particle reinforcement. Frequently,
coupling agents, molecules with dual functionality, are used to improve adhesive
properties.

There are many coupling agents used in the treatment of fibers and particles.
Coupling agent molecules must possess the ability to bond to both the matrix and the
fiber/particle of a system. Therefore, a coupling agent must be properly selected for each

specific fiber/particle-matrix system. The advantage of pretreatment with a coupling agent

90

can be illustrated by the application of one percent aminosilane (Union Carbide A-1100)
to glass spheres in Nylon 6 [120]. Figures 3.7 and 3.8 are SEM (secondary electron
microscope) micrographs at 1400 magnification showing glass sphere filled Nylon 6
without and with coupling agent, respectively. Figure 3.8 definitely shows the better
bonding capabilities of coupling agent pretreatment where the Nylon 6 strongly adheres
to the glass sphere instead of separating under stress and creating a void at the bond as
shown in Figure 3.7. Coupling agents may be useful in this application enabling the

aggregate and crumb rubber adhesive bond to be strengthened reducing stripping effects.

3. 3. 2 Deformation and fibril bridging

Asphalt cement is an amorphous polymer with glassy behavior at cold
temperatures. Most amorphous glassy polymers are brittle in tension, but yield and flow
(plastic deformation) under high strains in compression or pure shear when there is no
overall hydrostatic tensile stress [121]. Plastic deformation and crazing have a strong
relationship in the fracture of amorphous thermoplastics and asphalt. Both plastic
deformation and crazing are processes of energy dissipation. Crazing is the development
of concentrated bands of microvoids where fibrils are formed between the voids [122].
Normally crazing leads to brittle fracture, but with multiple crazing general yielding
results and acts as a toughening mechanism. A second phase, such as fibers, particles,
and/or a network, is needed to take full advantage of this toughening mechanism [121].

Plasticized fibrils increase the drawing of craze fibrils, but if crazed fibrils become
plasticized by the environment, i.e. introduction of water, then the crazing can turn into

a crack. This is dependent on molecular weight and molecular weight degradation of the

91

 

Figure 3.7 - Fracture surface of glass sphere filled Nylon 6 without
coupling agent at 1400 X [120]. Printed with permission from
Chapman & Hall.

  
   

Figure 3.8 - Fracture surface of glass sphere filled Nylon 6 with one
percent aminosilane at 1400 X [120]. Printed with permission from
Chapman & Hall.

92
fibrils [123].

3. 3. 3 Fracture strength and toughness

Fracture strength can be used to determine the effects of flaws when modulus and
fracture energy (toughness) are held constant for a given set of testing conditions.
Fracture strength, a, is the stress to failure and is controlled by the size of the largest
cracks and flaws. Fracture energy, G, or fracture toughness is the total amount of energy
dissipated during crack growth. The "inherent flaw size" of a material determines its
strength and toughness. These "inherent flaw size" effects are those flaws created during
loading from nucleation, growth, and breakdown of crazes [124]. A special property of
fracture toughness is its independence of testing geometry. Investigation [78] of adhesive
joints, aluminum-epoxy-aluminum, were used to determine this geometric independence
using single edge notch (SEN) and tapered double cantilever beam (DCB) geometries.

Fracture toughness can also be used for pavement performance evaluation.
Although fracture toughness is not fully accepted by industry, academia uses it with
favorable results when comparing toughness of modified asphalts and asphalt pavements.
The asphalt binder toughness can be measured by proven and accepted direct tensile strain
methods being a homogenous material. Two accepted theories are Griffith criterion and
stress intensity factor.

The basis of Griffith criterion was developed in 1921 to overcome the infinite
stress concentration at the crack tip. Griffith used an energy balance approach equating

the elastic energy, U, and the energy required for crack growth, W [125].

93

$12 = g 3.1 energy balance

dada

Using this approach he derived equation 3.2 relating the energy required to make a crack,

to the energy it took to create a new surface [124]:

0 = (fly/2 3.2
It a

where o = fracture stress required to fracture a crack of size 2a
E = Young’s Modulus
y = surface free-energy

a = half the length of the crack developed

Fracture stress measurements using this equation worked well for glassy polymers,
but when measuring lower modulus materials higher surface free energy values were
determined. This was due to the high degree of local plastic deformation at the crack tip
which dissipated energy to a greater extent. Therefore, equation 3.3 was developed
replacing 27 with the fracture energy, G, representing the total amount of energy
dissipated during crack growth under plane stress. The units of G are force per unit crack

extension.

0 = (E G)1fl 3.3
It a

94

This allows a fracture energy or toughness to be calculated from the fracture stress and
modulus of a material.

Stress intensity factor, KI , is a means of measuring crack resistance under plane
strain. K1 is similar to Griffith fracture, but a more characteristic measure of the plastic
zone’s stresses and strains [100]. The stress intensity factor value (fracture toughness)

reflective of an infinite crack plate is:

KI : (It/7t a 3.4

Where 0 is the fracture strain.
When the plate is of finite size the stress intensity factor becomes a function of

the crack size, a, to plate width, W, as below:

K1 = offifl—g—f) 3.5

This relationship can then be used to estimate the plastic zone size through the yield

stress, oyS once the function of crack size to plate width is determined for the system.

oys = —— 3.6

Where rp’ is the diameter of the plastic zone in front of the crack. Therefore, rp‘ can be

95

defined as:

r = = 3.7

 

 

For heterogenous materials the stress intensity factor is still not fully defined and
direct tensile testing for Griffith criterion is not acceptable with the shear forces in asphalt
concrete pavements. Accepting this, the asphalt industry has done work in the area of
fracture toughness for asphalt pavements. Three methods of testing have been triaxial,
indirect tensile, and flexural beam in a variety of configurations including compression,
creep, and constant and variable cyclic loading. Recent developments in indirect tensile
testing offer data that has a greater reproducibility [3], that could lead to industrial
acceptance. Plotting stress (Y-axis) and strain (X-axis) measurements obtained through
indirect tensile testing allows for fracture toughness (the area under the curve) to be
determined. The slope of the plot is also important indicating the rate of energy
dissipation. The greater the slope the faster the rate of dissipation and the lower the
fracture potential. This is also a valid statement for indirect tensile creep data where
deformation (Y-axis) is plotted versus time (X-axis) [10].

In the adhesive industry, it has been found the maximum adhesive fracture energy,
G, was obtained when the adhesive layer thickness and the plastic zone were
approximately equal [68]. This finding may give the greatest benefit to asphalt concrete
when asphalt cement film thickness on the aggregate is equal to the plastic zone size.

In thick fracture specimens, shear yielding and crazing are favored under plane

 

96

strain conditions. Both these mechanisms cause extensive plastic deformation at the crack
tip giving a greater fracture energy. These are important features when determining the
sample thickness for testing since to thin a testing sample may not be representative of

the pavement.

3.4 Summary

Microstructure, morphology, adhesion, and fracture are essential areas related to
pavement distresses. Fracture of asphalt concrete occurs by a variety of mechanisms
including adhesive failure, properties at the crack tip, plastic zone size, void content, and
material properties all of which are included in fracture toughness. Fracture toughness
is dependent on the fracture strength and therefore dependent on the cracks and flaws in
the material. Therefore, knowledge of the crack size and propagation are of fundamental
importance. A fundamental understanding of the failure mechanisms of the three types
of microstructure; Type H, Type F, and Type P will serve as the foundation for evaluation
and optimization of polymers as modifiers to asphalt concrete and for the improvement
in asphalt pavement performance.

Chapter Four and Six will present existing and proposed testing techniques for
microstructural, morphological, adhesion, and fracture investigations of asphalt concrete.
Specifically, thin asphalt concrete plane sections are required for the morphological and
microstructural investigation of air void shape, size, distribution, and density. The use of
a fracture test will make it possible to observe the crack formation mechanisms and their

propagation.

Chapter Four

Experimental Details

Four experimental methods have been developed for characterization of asphalt
binder and asphalt concrete. They are: thin section specimens for void morphology,
plane section specimens for void image analysis, fracture specimens for crack propagation

and fracture mechanism, and failed fracture specimens for determining locus of fracture.

4. 1 Sample Preparation

In each test the initial preparation was the same. A core sample from an existing
pavement or a Marshall sample was sectioned using a diamond blade saw. The
Composite Materials and Structure Center (CMSC) at Michigan State University has a
Felker 41-AR rotating saw which was used to cut the Marshall and core samples. The
first cuts were done with a large rough cut blade and consecutive cuts were made with
a fine diamond blade containing mechanically embedded diamonds. For better cutting,
the Felker 4l-AR water bath was filled with ice to keep the asphalt sample and saw blade
cool. The colder temperature stiffened the asphalt sample and kept the saw blade pores
from filling up with asphalt. For the thin section and fracture samples, the Marshall and
core samples were cut into specimens with approximate dimensions of 11 x 15 x 40 mm.
For the plane sections, the samples were cut into specimens with dimensions of 15 x 50
x 70 mm. Figure 4.1 shows a core cut into thin (1-6) and plane (7-8) sections as prepared

by Kirsten Eriksen [49]. Similar cuts were made in the Marshall and core samples.

97

 

98

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.1 - Divisioning of samples for plane sections [49].

99

The sample type and traffic direction were recorded directly on the material for
identification. The direction indicates the traffic flow on the pavement surface. In the

case of a Marshall sample marking the top or the bottom was sufficient.

4.1.1 Cleaning

After the samples were cut they required cleaning. Cleaning the samples was
accomplished by rinsing them under running tap water. The cut samples were then placed
in beakers containing clean water (deionized water at the CMSC) which were placed in
an ultrasonic bath for 2 minutes. A Bransonic ultrasonic cleaner made by Fisher
Scientific was utilized taking care not to leave the specimens in too long to prevent the
aggregate and asphalt from separating. The asphalt specimens were rinsed with deionized
water twice and placed on towels to partially air dry. The samples were then placed in
a timer controlled oven, Fisher Isotemp oven model 230F, to control the drying at a
maximum temperature of 30°C for 6 to 8 hours. The oven was regulated by a Wahl

RS210 controller. After oven drying the samples were placed in a desiccator for one day.

4.1.2 Impregnation

Impregnation of the dried samples was accomplished using a two component low
viscosity epoxy embedded with a fluorescent dye before mixing. The system used was
HQ Epofix Resin and HQ Epofix Hardener from Struers. The dye used was EPODYE
(Hudson Yellow) also from Struers. This dye fluoresces at approximately 440 nm in
visible light and in the ultraviolet region between 256 nm and 285 nm. Fluorescence

emission occurs at 530 nm making the impregnated voids detectable through a filter

100

system. Filling the voids also helped keep the samples intact when polished to the fine
finish that was needed for viewing the thin and plane sections under the microscope.
When impregnation was not done, as with some of the fracture samples to enable seeing
the effects of filling the voids, it lead to some crumbling problems during cutting and
polishing of the samples. The main crumbling problems were from core 1-29—5F (core 1
from section 29 site 5) which showed signs of stripping.

The samples for impregnation were prepared by putting them in a disposable tray,
handmade from aluminum foil. As the manufacturer suggested, one liter of the Epofix
resin and five grams of EPODYE dye were mixed. The Epofix impregnation medium
was then mixed at a ratio of 30 ml Epofix Resin/dye to 4 ml Epofix Hardener. A pasteur
pipet was used to measure four milliliters, approximately 180 drops, although each pipet
differed. The mixture was stirred for approximately two minutes ensuring complete
mixing. The mixture was poured into the foil tray. Samples were positioned to insure
that the bottom of the specimens were well covered. The tray was immediately placed
in a vacuum oven and pumped down to -0.97 bar. The VWR 1410 vacuum oven with
Sargent-Welch DIRECTORR vacuum pump by General Electric was used. It took
approximately 2 to 2.5 minutes to reach a pressure of -0.97 bar which was held for 2 to
3 minutes. Outgassing of the sample occurred and foam overflowed the trays, therefore,
an overflow sheet under the tray was used to keep the vacuum oven clean. Briefly letting
some air in once when the samples were foaming heavily helped break down the bubbles
and kept the tray overflow to a minimum. The chamber was then pressurized over a
course of one to two minutes by venting the vacuum oven to the atmosphere. The

impregnated samples were taken out of the oven, removed from the trays, and placed on

 

101

a flat silicone mold for easy removal upon curing.

4. 1. 3 Curing

The samples were placed in a hood at room temperature for at least 24 hours.
During curing, the epoxy hardener will absorb water and be deactivated creating a sticky
film on the uncovered surfaces. Therefore, the samples were covered as much as possible
to keep moisture away from the surface. After curing, rough sanding using the Leco

water cooled Belt Grinder BG-20 removed any sticky film on the samples.

4.1.4 Pre-polishing

The excess epoxy and a thin layer of asphalt from the impregnated side of the
samples had to be removed before polishing. This was accomplished with the Felker 41-
AR diamond saw cutting approximately two millimeters off the samples thickness or the
belt grinder was used to grind it off. Thin sections and fracture samples were made best
with the diamond saw in sets of five or six samples all of the same thickness. The same
thickness proved to be very helpful during polishing. The best method to pre-polish the

plane sections was to do one at a time grinding the impregnated side on the belt grinder.

4.1.5 Polishing

The samples were prepared for polishing by affixing a strip of one inch double
sided Scotch tape to the out side after it had dried. One strip of tape for the thin and
fracture samples and two strips for the plane sections were used to cover the entire sample

to keep the samples on the polishing wheel and from breaking during polishing. The

 

102

polishing wheel was from the Struers Abramin Automated polisher and made out of
aluminum. Either, one plane section was mounted in the center or five to six thin or
fracture samples were mounted and evenly distributed in a circle pattern on the polishing
wheel. The first grinding was to level the specimens using 120 grit silicon carbide
abrasive paper. The time this step took depended on the thickness variability of the
samples attained during the pre-polishing step. Experience suggests cutting the samples
with even thickness is best. The pressure setting during polishing on the Abramin was
approximately 3 leO, although higher settings were used. When these higher pressure
settings were used, the samples would not always level. Once the samples were level they
were taken off the polishing wheel, turned over, dried, taped, and fixed to the wheel again
for the polishing of the first finished side of the sample. Since polishing took more than
a few seconds, a block of ice was polished at the same time as the asphalt specimens
keeping the surfaces cool and the asphalt behavior glassy. The first polishing was started
with 120 grit and cycled through 240, 320, 600, 1000, 2400, and 4000 grit wet or dry
abrasive paper at two minute intervals. Water was always used during polishing to
lubricate the surfaces. After polishing with the 120 grit the samples were checked for
levelness by visual observation. Polishing was continued at 120 grit until all samples
were level. When the abrasive paper was changed the samples and the sanding wheel
were thoroughly rinsed. The samples were placed under running tap water and the
sanding wheel was rinsed utilizing its water outlet. After polishing with the 240 grit
paper, the samples were examined to insure that less than five percent of the surface
showed empty air voids. If the surface showed a larger void concentration the

impregnation process was completed again. During a second impregnation process upon

103

reaching the pre-polishing step, grinding was done instead of cutting the specimens were
there was a better chance of having the voids filled because only a thin layer of asphalt
was removed. Upon completion of the 4000 grit paper the samples were removed, rinsed,

and air dried for 30 minutes. The specimens were then dried overnight in a desiccator.

4.1.6 Mounting

The specimens were affixed to their respective mounting plates. The thin sections
were affixed to glass petrographic slides with dimensions of 27 x 46 mm. The plane
sections were affixed to glass petrographic slides with dimensions of 51 x 75 mm. The
glass slides were purchased from Hugh Courtright and Co. LTD. The fracture samples
were affixed to a strip of 0.01 inch thick polycarbonate film, Lexan 8010, with
approximate dimensions of 35 x 100 mm. The polycarbonate film was purchased from
Cadillac Plastics and Chemical Company. The petrographic slides were ground to a level
finish prior to use. A Buehler Petra-Thin Thin Sectioning System was used to grind each
slide to a :5 micron finish. This equipment is maintained by Robert Harris and located
at the Michigan State University, Geological Science’s Thin Section Laboratory in the
Natural Science building, room 6. The laboratory phone number is (517) 353-7235. The
finish was achieved by removing approximately the top 50 microns giving a ground glass
appearance. The adhering agent used to affix the samples was EPON 828 (bisphenol A/
epichlorohydrin) with a V-40 curing agent (dimer fatty acid/ polyethylene polyarnine
based polyamide) from Shell Oil Company. The samples were cured at room temperature
for four or more days. The manufacture suggests four to seven days for curing to full

strength. The mixture proportions used were 50/50 resin and hardener and mixed well.

104

The amount of epoxy needed at a time was only about five milliliters, but consistent
formulation and mixing was better attained with about ten milliliters of each. The epoxy
mixture was applied in a very thin layer through the use of a tongue depressor. In thin
and plane section preparation the entire sample was adhered with epoxy. In fracture
samples epoxy was only applied to a small part of each end was insuring no epoxy got
on the center of the sample where fracture occurs later. To eliminate all of the air voids,
the sample and its respective mounting plate were pressed together creating a very thin
even fihn of epoxy. Dead weight loading of the samples during the cure helped create
a thin even film also. A 100 gram weight was sufficient. Curing was performed in a

hood on a level surface to keep the samples from sliding off their plates.

4.1. 7 Thin sectioning

The samples were cut thin and polished on the Buehler Petro- Thin Thin Sectioning
System. Figure 4.2 is a photograph of the thin sectioning system and viewer. The system
was designed for metal thin sectioning, but worked well in this application. A vacuum
held one slide in place at a time while a rotating diamond blade cut the sample. The
cutting speed was hand controlled. This speed was slow and steady ensuring the blade
did not drift and start cutting at an angle. The samples were cut around one millimeter
thick. After cutting, a sample was polished to a thin and even surface with a diamond
grinding wheel in the same device. Again the entry speed of the sample was controlled
by hand giving the best results when slow and steady. Grinding at fast speeds caused the
sample to be thicker in the middle and lead to excessive material removal at the end edges

due to the way the sample entered the grinding wheel. The system was water cooled.

105

 

Figure 4.2 - Buehler Petra-Thin thin sectioning system and viewer.

106

The thin and plane sections were cut and polished to 20 to 30 um, while the fracture
samples were left at approximately 1 to 1.5 mm thick polishing only enough to level the
samples. The system has the capability of controlling polishing to i 5 pm through the
use of a micrometer. For thin and plane sections, sample thickness was attained using a
Buehler Petra-Thin Thin Section Viewer in combination with the thin sectioning system.
The viewer uses polarized light and the principles of refraction to allow a user to
determine specimen thickness. This is done through the use of a Michel-Levy Chart and
quartz, a common rock also found in the asphalt concrete. A Michel-Levy Chart is a
color chart relating aggregate thickness to refracted light colors for 66 aggregates. The
samples were visually polished down to approximately 50 to 100 microns in 100 micron
steps using the micrometer. The samples were then polished 20 microns at a time
removing the sample each time and placing it under the viewer to observe the bright
colors from light diffraction through the aggregate. When the quartz aggregate no longer
deflected the light the sample generally took on a grey color indicative of the first order
region and approximately 20 to 30 pm thick. Thin and plane sections were also made at
approximately 50, 100, and 150 microns for comparative testing.

When the fracture samples were cut the polycarbonate film did not vacuum seal
as well as the glass slides and had to be kept in place by band due to the high shear
forces applied to the sample. This was the reason for the large film size. The protective
polyethylene film over the polycarbonate was removed before placing the sample on the
vacuum port for cutting. The first cut was made through half to three-quarters of the
specimen after which it was turned around and the cut finished. The vacuum was

sufficient to hold the sample in place during the following polishing procedure. During

107

cutting and polishing the vacuum system must be rinsed frequently with large amounts
of water to keep the line free of asphalt particles. The small asphalt particles can plug
up the vacuum line stopping the experiment for a three or more hour repair when the line

is not rinsed frequently.

4.1.8 Converting to a tensile specimen

The fracture samples were turned into dogbone samples and holes drilled in the
ends for mounting in the tensile frame. The steps are outlined in Figure 4.3. First, the
long sides of the polycarbonate film were cut down to within 5 mm of the asphalt
specimen with a trimming board. A dogbone sample was then created by cutting out the
center region, where the EPON 828 was not applied, with a TensilKut made by Sieburg
Industries located in the CMSC. The sample was mounted in a preformed dogbone
sample guide to assist in the cutting. Following this the ends were cut down with a razor
blade or trimming board leaving approximately 2 cm. The screw holes for mounting in
the tensile frame were then marked and drilled. The excess polycarbonate left on the

edges during drilling and dogbone preparation was trimmed as final sample preparation.

4.2 Mechanical testing of the fracture samples

The fracture samples were strained to determine crack propagation, fracture
mechanism, and locus of fracture. For tensile testing, a sample was mounted in a tensile
frame for hand straining. The tensile frame has a 200 lb strain capacity. This frame was

then mounted in an anvil to keep the sample in place for video recording during straining.

108

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.3 - Steps to final preparation of the fracture samples.

109

4. 2. 1 Recording system

Straining was performed in front of a 200 mm zoom lens hooked to a high speed
camera, Kodak EKTAPRO 1000 Motion Analyzer. Figure 4.4 [126] shows the manual’s
diagram of the camera equipment while Figure 4.5 is a photograph of the experimental
setup. The high speed camera has the capabilities to take pictures of events from 50 to
6000 frames per second of which 125 frames per second was deemed sufficient. This
gave a 13.1 second time period to capture pictures of the failure. The time period of the
pictures is based on the ability of the computer to store 1637 frames. These frames can
then be played back at speeds ranging from one per second to 480 frames per second
allowing for slow close up images to investigate crack propagation and the failure

mechanisms. Tests were conducted at room temperature.

4. 2.2 Lighting

Good lighting was essential for viewing the asphalt fracture sample. Two lights
were utilized one on each side of the sample for oblique lighting. Oblique lighting
offered the highest contrast between the aggregate and asphalt cement. Dye coated and
gold coated samples were also made and tested, but the non coated fracture samples gave
the best contrast. A goose neck halogen light was also used behind the specimen to

highlight the voids and cracks as they developed.

4. 2.3 Recording
Recording was done in a couple of different ways; start recording or stop

recording. Start recording is normal recording when the record button is pushed. Stop

110

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4.4 - Kodak EKTAPRO 1000 Motion Analyzer [126].

lll

 

Figure 4.5 - Experimental setup of the Kodak
EKTAPRO 1000 Motion Analyzer.

112

recording records the past 1637 frame after the recording is stopped. This can be done
because the computer memory can be thought of as a wheel that continually stores images
replacing the oldest with the new until told to stop. The last method, called stop
recording, was used most of the time so rushing at the beginning was not an issue because
upon failure of the sample the test was stopped capturing the fracture. Whereas, the
fracture process was just starting generally when the recording was stopped automatically
after filling 1637 frames using the regular recording mode.

Before actually starting the recording of the test, the lights and camera settings
were adjusted with the image on the screen in the live mode. When everything was set,
the computer was prompted into the ready mode, record was pressed in the stop record
mode, and the sample was strained by hand. Upon failure, the stop button was pressed
storing the images in the computer for visual observation. The stored images were then
down loaded onto super and/or regular VHS tape for storage, presentation, and later
analysis. Super VHS gave better resolution and is the choice media with the exception
of presentations where most places do not have direct access to super VHS players. When
down loading onto a tape the play back speed of the recording was set at 5 or 7 frames
per second while the video recorder recorded at its predetermined setting of 30 frames per
second. This recording rate allowed better photographic and viewing capabilities. A
thermal printer was available for a quick print of the screen image. This picture is rather
small, 2.25 X 2.75 inches, having good print quality with a good grey scale although
somewhat darker than desired at times. These thermal prints make excellent laser scanned
images with computer enhancement for enlarging. A picture of the screen can also be

taken with a 35 mm camera and a Screenshooter. A Screenshooter is a product of NPC

113

Photo Division which acts as a light funnel and camera mount enabling pictures to be
taken of a monitor screen. For comparison, Figures 4.6 and 4.7 present a thermal print
image and a 35 mm photograph, respectively. The 35 mm prints offer better handling and

visual characterization away from the computer, but lack in a full grey scale.

4.3 Microscopic Analysis

4. 3. 1 Thin and plane section samples

Morphology and microstructure of thin and plane sections were observed under a
BH-2 Olympus optical microscope with reflected light. Void analysis uses the fluorescent
dye that has been impregnated in the asphalt samples. The impregnation medium
fluorescence was visible through a set of two filters. The two filters were purchased from
Scientific Supply Company, an exciter filter cutting off light above 515 nm (45 mm in
diameter) and a banded barrier filter at 530 nm (20 mm in diameter). A 100 watt TH3
Olympus power source with halogen bulb illuminated the dye embedded regions allowing
the void size, shape, and distribution to be seen. The exciter filter was placed straight up
and down in the light path between the light source and the main body in the slot just
after the light source. The barrier filter was placed between the sample and the eyepiece
or camera in the polarizer slot in the front of the microscope. This same fluorescent filter
setup was utilized for the image analysis of the plane sections, discussed later.
The micrograph system used was a Polaroid 545 land film holder with light funnel (PM-
10ADS) and an AD system Exposure Control Unit PM-CBSP by Olympus allowing the

use of Polaroid high speed 4 x 5 instant sheet film. Type 57 film, ISO 3000/36° with

114

TIPE15286135 1/93

FRFI‘E

 

Figure 4.6 - A typical thermal print of an asphalt fracture sample.

”If. 152062 35

I
.

 

Figure 4.7 - A 35 mm print of thehigh speed camera’s monitor of an
asphalt fracture sample.

115

low light capabilities was needed. The exposure control unit settings were set on; format,
L, ISO/ASA, 3200, reciprocity, 4, exposure adjust, 1, and auto exposure. Some
micrographs had a better grey scale contrast when slightly under exposed using the
exposure setting and manually reducing the exposure time. This was due to the film
being ISO 3000 and having to set the speed at the predetermined setting of 3200 in the
Exposure Control Unit. The final magnification on the micrographs with a 5X objective
lens, a 2.5X photo relay lens, and 3X light funnel magnification was determined to be
38X through the use of a calibration slide. A typical picture of an observed void field is
displayed in Figure 4.8. The light areas are voids and the speckles are reflected light off

the aggregate.

4. 3.2 Fracture samples

The microscope was also utilized to observe the failed surfaces of the fracture
samples after mechanical testing. The failed samples’ aggregate surfaces were observed
under a magnification of 50X. Some fracture samples were mounted, while others were
hand held for viewing. Holding the samples by hand at 50X created a shaky view, but
allowed quick, easy viewing. When magnification greater than 50X was used or when
micrographs were taken, the samples were mounted and placed on the stage. Both
cohesive and adhesive failure were observed on the fractured surfaces. When both sides
of a fracture are covered with asphalt cement it indicates a cohesive failure. Those
failures between the asphalt cement and aggregate where no asphalt cement is on the
aggregate indicates an adhesive failure at the interface. Observing just one of these kinds

of failure is very rare, if ever. Usually failed samples have both cohesive and adhesive

116

 

Figure 4.8 - Typical micrograph of voids taken through an optical
microscope with reflective lighting represented here at 43X.

117

failure and are categorized depending on the degree of each type of failure. Of the
asphalt samples tested, those exhibiting good adhesion had little adhesive failure and those
with poor adhesive properties like asphalt samples showing signs of stripping exhibited
a majority of adhesive failure. Later work through ESEM will quantify the degree of

each failure type.

4.4 Image analysis of plane sections

Image analysis was performed on plane section samples to determine the void size,
shape, distribution, and density. Following the work of Kirsten Eriksen [50], the void
area, perimeter, and Ferret diameters were easily determined as well as additional
parameters through the use of the CUE-2 image analyzer by Olympus. Figure 4.9 [127]
shows the operating manual’s system configuration composed of a microscope setup, CCD
video camera, image monitor, and computer with monitor. Figure 4.10 is a photograph
of the experimental setup consisting of a microscope setup as described previously, CCD
video camera model XC-57, Sony Trinitron color video monitor, Galai camera power
supply, and Zenith 386/20 computer with monitor capable of EGA graphics. In past work
[50] the magnification ranged between 25 to 50X. Currently, the CMSC has reflective
light magnification capabilities down to 38X through the use of a 2.5X objective lens and
1.67X photo relay lens in the image analysis system. The additional magnification comes
from the internal optics of the camera and camera attachment.

The CUE-2 system analyzes objects through a black and white system upon

calibration of the system. Initially the camera image was digitized into a 256 grey scale

118

DNOOZQSB

    
  
   
  

CCD CAMERA

 

IMAGE MONITOR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PC MONITOR

  
 
 
   
    

 

are“

 

PC KEYnOARD

MOUSE

 

Figure 4.9 - Auto Image Analysis System Configuration [127].

119

 

120

image that was enhanced to determine the break points, or dividing regions, where the
image was converted to a black and white image. It was important to have the camera
settings of GAMMA and A.G.C. (automatic gain control) in the on positions. This
offered a better grey scale image to initially digitize the asphalt samples. Computer
analysis of the image gave the following parameters for each object in the digitized image
or set of images; area, perimeter, convexity, center of gravity, Ferret’s diameters,
orientation, aspect ratio, shape factor, specific length, hole area, hole area: object area,
areafract, mnlinintc, meanchord, anisotrpy, closeappr, areafill, avrg radius, and Martin’s
radii. Of these parameters the following ones were recorded; area, perimeter, Ferret’s
diameters, aspect ratio, shape factor, specific length, areafract, and average radius. The
Ferret diameter is the projection of the object measured at predetermined angles through
the center of gravity to the edges of the object. The Ferret diameter was measured at four
angles, but can be measured at up to 32 different angles. The aspect ratio is the ratio of
minimum Ferret diameter to the maximum Ferret diameter. Shape factor is a
measurement of the sharpness of an object calculated by multiplying the area by 41: and
then dividing by the perimeter. A shape factor of one refers to a circle and zero to that
of a straight line. The specific length is the total length of an object similar to that of the
Ferret diameter, but not measured at specific angles or necessarily through the center of
gravity. Areafract is the ratio of the area of an object over the total frame analyzed area.
Average radius is the mean of the eight Martin Radii, where a Martin radius is the
distance from the center of gravity to the object edge at predetermined angles of 0, 45,
90, 135, 180, and 225 degrees.

Image analysis was done through digitizing a set of images for each plane section

121

sample. The image analysis measured area of the section should be at least 500 mm2
spread over a total test area of 7,000 mm2 according to Kirsten Eriksen [50]. The plane
section samples each had a maximum area of 3825 m2, the area of our largest
petrographic slide useable with the equipment available. Therefore, the results of two
slides were combined or in some cases a smaller total test area was used. At the start of
an analysis run, a plane section sample was placed under the microscope and an image
focused. Next, the autoroute was defined through a number of predetermined steps. The
steps used for the analyses included: image stretching, clear small objects, pause, fill
holes, total image statistics, add to data base, and store lotus file. Upon defining the
autoroute, a manual enhancement and preprocessing was done to set the parameters for
the computer to follow. By pressing the <F1> key, the enhancement and preprocessing
step was started where a picture sketching was conducted via a grey scale histogram by
pressing <F2>. For the images analyzed a dividing low value of 40 and high value of 41
worked well. These values did vary day to day dependent on the lighting conditions. The
dividing values converted the grey scale pixels assigned values 5 40 to 0 the value for
black pixels and those pixels with values 2 41 were converted to white pixels. Thus, a
black and white image was formed. This ended the manual operation and the original
picture was returned to for start of the autoroute. At this point the user was prompted for
the number of images to be analyzed. The number of images needed for analysis depends
on the field image size (area of the frame), which depends on the magnification. At 38X,
at least 29 images need to be analyzed. This number was determined by dividing 500
mm2 by the field image size of 17.5 mmz.

It is important to note that the raw data file being stored in the form of a lotus file

122

can be added to as long as the parameters being collected during tests are the same. This
allows testing to be stopped and restarted during an image analysis data set collection.

The pause was placed in the autoroute before the total image analysis to take a
negative of the image, switching the black and white pixels. This was because the
computer only analyzes black images and the voids were white before taking the negative.
To take a negative simply press <n> when the autoroute stops, wait for the image to
appear, and when prompted press the <esc> key to restart the autoroute. After each image
was analyzed the computer prompted the user to change the image position manually and
continue the program by pressing <y> when the new image was ready or to discontinue
by pressing <n>.

Selection of the image position for analysis was done systematically to avoid bias.
The plane sections were analyzed every 10 increments in the X direction and then every
5 in the Y direction avoiding the use of the edges where artifacts of sample preparation
might appear. The increments are those found on the movable microscope stage. Figure
4.11 shows the general pattern used where the rectangles show the area analyzed and the
numbers indicate the stage increment numbers. Those numbers including an R on the Y
axis represent the slide being rotated 180 degrees on the stage enabling the entire sample

to be analyzed.

4.5 Raw data conversion for plane section analysis

Some image statistics were available through the CUE-2 system, but they were

limited to the screen output and graphs. For these reasons processing of the raw data via

124

a spreadsheet was more appropriate. The Lotus formate file can be imported to various
spreadsheets including Supercalc 5.0 and Excel. Supercalc 5.0 was chose for the work
done here. The recorded data was imported as a 1-2-3 Lotus file to calculate additional
parameters. The data on air void area, A; perimeter, Pm; and max Ferret diameter, Fe;
were used to calculate the following parameters for each object: air void content, P,;
average area, A*; equivalent circle diameter, D,; average equivalent circle diameter, D,*;
form factor, F; and weighted average form factor, F* [50]. Equations 4-1 through 4-6
found in Table 4.1 show these calculations.

During the image analysis some diffraction and irregularity of lighting commonly
called noise was encountered and interpreted by the computer as objects. Most of these
objects were small enough to be eliminated in the enhancement and preprocessing step.
A key factor is how to eliminate the rest of this noise and not hurt the data collection.
In previous work [50], voids or objects with equivalent diameters less than 50 microns
were discarded and the void class interval from 0 to 100 microns was slightly distorted.
This kind of noise reduction works, but observations were made showing some voids were
also eliminated. It is still to be determined whether or not these voids have structural
importance. All the parameters were calculated and collected for a determination of the
best noise eliminating factor to be determined at a later time when enough data

accumulates.

125

Table 4.1 - Image Analysis Equations

 

Air Void Content, Pa

EA

pA = * 100 Vol%
Number of fields x field area

 

Average area of air void sections, A*

A. = z A
Number of air voids

 

Equivalent circle diameters, D,

Average equivalent circle diameter, D:

D , _ 2 Da
a Number of air voids

 

Form factor, F

 

Average form factor, F“

F‘ = 2 F
Number of air voids

 

<4-1)

(4-2)

(4-3)

(4-4)

(4-5)

(4-6)

126

4.6 Summary

Sample preparation of thin, plane, and fracture samples was similar. Thin and
plane section samples allow investigation of void morphology and microstructure through
microscopic and image analysis. Fracture samples allow investigation of crack
propagation, fracture mechanisms, and locus of fracture through high speed photography
and microscopic analysis. Thin and plane section samples were obtained as thin as 20 pm
to investigate a single slice of an asphalt core or Marshall sample. Fracture samples, 1
to 1.5 mm thick, were tensile tested at room temperature under oblique lighting to
enhance the asphalt-aggregate contrast, thereby allowing fracture to be seen and crack

propagation followed.

Chapter Five

Results

This chapter consists of results and discussion of the four experimental methods:
thin and plane section morphological and microstructure analysis; plane section air void
image analysis; crack propagation of asphalt fracture samples; and microscopic analysis

of fracture samples to determine their locus of fracture.

5.1 Morphological and microstructural analysis

Under normal lighting of the thin and plane sections the impregnated voids are
yellow in color and hard to characterize in black and white, therefore samples have been
viewed under UV lighting and through a two filter fluorescent system. The UV lighting
condition allowed for visual observation of void distribution while the two filter system
allowed quantitative results through optical microscopy and image analysis of plane
sections. Figures 5.1, 5.2, 5 .3, and 5.4 illustrate the difference between a good and bad
sample plane section and their respective air void content. Good infers the sample shows
signs of good adhesion while bad samples show signs of poor adhesion and adhesive
failure. The good samples were made from Marshall samples and the bad samples were
made from an aged road core, section 29, site 5. The black spots in Figures 5.2 and 5.4
illustrate the voids of the samples in Figures 5.1 and 5.3. These spots would be the

colored voids visible under UV and fluorescent conditions.

127

   

Fire 5.1“ - H Photograph under
normal lighting of a 30 um good
plane section at 1.5X.

128

. ‘ C I
3" vords
.. ’- black
. f
, o ."f . '
‘ - . . I. ‘ . - '
7 " V .' h ' - 2"!
. .c : v
a ' ‘\
'7. ‘ I - - . \ ‘ I 7
4
‘ . r. 3‘ A
v ‘ ; J
I .
o . \ I
. "fr ’ \
7 ‘s _ , 'l a
I o- A ‘2‘ _ . ’. ’
O , ” ’7
I .2 I Q J ‘\
Figure 5.2 - Illustration of good

section showing the voids at 1.5X.

 

Figure 5.3 - Photograph under normal Figure 5.4 - Illustration of bad section
lighting of a 30 pm thick bad plane showing the voids at 1.5X.

section at 1.5X.

129

The two filter fluorescence emission system was used in conjunction with optical
microscopy for micrographs and image analysis. The low magnification allowed
investigation of the air voids in thin and plane sections. The thin sections are smaller than
the plane sections and easier to make which serve well for morphological characterization.
Figures 4.8, 5.5, and 5.6 illustrate small and large voids found in good asphalt samples,
while Figures 5.7 and 5.8 illustrate voids found in bad samples. The light areas are the
voids. In the bad samples, extra long voids were found formed along aggregate edges
where adhesive failure had occurred. In both good and bad samples, voids were generally
found associated with the aggregate surface where the surface was not completely wet.

Thin and plane sections offer good 2 dimensional void characterization of size,
shape (morphology), and distribution which includes the enclosed voids not measurable
through bulk testing. The test does have a problem being only 2 dimensional in analysis
and not offering a means for 3 dimensional analysis of the interconnected void
relationship. But, an incorporation of bulk testing with thin section analysis could solve
the problems leading to a good void analysis. Relating the current testing on conventional
asphalt to PMA’s, microscopic sample observation allows characterization of the air void
formation that occurred during the asphalt/aggregate wetting process. Sample preparation
of conventional asphalts benefited when the processing temperatures were kept below the
materials T8 through the application of ice in the saw’s water bath and on the polisher.
The cold temperature kept the saw blade’s pores and the abrasive paper used for polishing
from filling up with asphalt. Polymer modification will lower the asphalt T8, thereby

requiring sample preparation with colder temperatures.

130

    

.. . .3 t
Figure 5.5 - Micrograph using reflected light through an optical
microscope showing voids in a good sample at 41X.

Figure 5.6 - Micrograph using reflected light through an optical
microscope showing a void in a good sample at 38X.

131

 

Figure 5.7 - Micrograph using reflected light through an
optical microscope showing voids in a bad sample at 19X.

    

5.8 - Micrograph using reflected light through an
optical microscope showing voids in a bad sample at 19X.

 

132

5.2 Plane section image analysis

Air void image analysis using the two filter system utilized fluorescence for high
contrast between the voids and other material. Both a good and bad core were analyzed.
The good core, Figure 5.9, was a Marshall specimen with five percent by weight asphalt
cement and a bulk air void content of 3.6 percent as determined by the Michigan
Department of Transportation. The bad core, Figure 5.10, was core 1 of section 29, site
5, flexible pavement which showed signs of stripping. The bad plane sections tested were
taken from the middle section of the core where stripping was at a maximum.

Figures 5.11 and 5.12, a photograph and drawing, display the two good plane
sections tested and analyzed. Table 5.1 presents a summary of the image analysis results.
Figures 5.13 and 5.14 are graphical forms presenting the tabular data for the equivalent
circle diameter and area of the voids showing void range distributions. Note the log
scales showing the wide range of values detected and presented. Original and analyzed
data sets from the good core are located in the appendix in Table A-3 and A-4,
respectively. The air void content tested through image analysis is higher at 4.5 percent
air void content as compared to its bulk testing measurement of 3.6 percent. A higher
percentage would be expected with image analysis since the closed air voids are counted
in the analysis. During data collection care must be taken so that the data is not skewed
by unrepresentative or too few images that are not representative of the entire core.

The bad core was analyzed by the same method at two different thicknesses, 30
um and 150 pm. The results for their analyses are presented in Figures 5.15 through 5.22

and Tables 5.2 and 5.3. The 30 um bad sample gave a higher void content of 17.5

133

 

Figure 5.9 - Typical Marshall specimen of
asphalt concrete at 2X.

 

 

Figure 5.10 - Asphalt core 1
of section 29, site 5 (used for
bad samples) at 3.7X.

134

 

Figure 5.11 - Photograph of Sample: Good98 under normal light at 1.3x.

‘, . n.- tux" a
‘ a

‘s l . . 3 a
2*voidsblack “gr: ', a,

S

- .,. ‘ .d? f U ." 0’. I .0 .
1 .' . .“r 7 : ' - . . . o . ‘0‘ ‘
at. ‘ a ' . ,....I ‘ . e. . ' ‘0 ‘. ...‘~
. - -‘. ° \ “ r " I t
..'| ' l I. n ‘ ‘ r . e
a ' o o ..
. ‘ ‘ .. ' ’ .
. ‘
r -‘ ' . .t ‘- 4. ‘
° -:‘. ‘ ‘ "a“ 'I‘
o ‘ ,
. r J . _ \ . "at r o, .
- o . a a ’ n ’ ‘ o' “a“
.. l' . . -s o
" . C U ‘ 1“- . I ’ O -

Figure 5.12 - Illustration of Good98 showing the voids at 1.3x.

135

Table 5.1 - Good98 plane section image analysis results.

 

all voids voids >50 um

eq._cir_dia
Air void content, Pa (vol %) ........................ 4.6 ..... 4.5
Average area of air void sections, A“ (mmz) ............ 0.036 . . . 0.072
Average equivalent circle diameter (eq._cir_dia), D,*(mm) . . . 0.092 . . . 0.146
Average form factor, F“ ......................... 58.3 ..... 53.7
Total area of plane section, (cmz) ................... 57.0 ..... 57.0
Total scan area, (cmz) ............................ 7.0 ..... 7.0
Number of fields .............................. 40.0 ..... 40.0

Number of air voids ........................... 895.0 . . . . 434.0

136

Sample: Good98

a of void versus number 1 air vol
Std: with equivalent circle diameter-eds < 50 microns were deleted

 

 

 

 

 

rooo :
E
I o
100 _:_'
m :
'U r-
-- >-
O r
> h
L- l-
a o
- r—
0 DE
3 I 0
n >-
E r 0
:3
Z
1: o 000 m 0
f.
l"
p—
1 r r rrrrrrl m r errrrJ 1 1 rrrrrrl r 1 [IL L
lOOOO 00000 000000 0000000 100000000

Area of void. mm~2

Figure 5.13 - Graphical results for air void area in sample Good98.

Sample: Good98
Void numbers versus equivalent circle diameter 0! voids
Voids with equivalent circle diameters < 50 microns were deleted

 

 

 

 

000
F0
DO E a
(n .—
E F
o .—
> b.
S- D
a a
“a '0 r a
:3 i a
a : ..
:3
Z
l :- o oo o oo o
.1
O 500 000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Equivalent circle diameters. microns
Figure 5.14 - Graphical results for air void equivalent diameters in

sample Good98.

137

    

Figure 5.15 - Photograph of Figure 5.16 - Illustration of Bad30
Sample: Bad30 under normal showing the voids at 1.2x.

light at 1.2x.

Table 5.2 - 30 pm thick bad plane section image analysis results.

 

all voids voids >50 um

eq._cir_dia

Air void content, PI (vol %) ....................... 17.5 ..... 17.4
Average area of air void sections, A* (mm2) ............ 0.092 . . . 0.164
Average equivalent circle diameter (eq._cir_dia), D.*(mm) . . . 0.136 . . . 0.21
Average form factor, F* ......................... 57.1 ..... 53.0
Total area of plane section, (cmz) ................... 27.6 ..... 27.6
Total scan area, (cmz) ............................ 3.5 ..... 3.5
Number of fields .............................. 20.0 ..... 20.0

Number of air voids .......................... 667.0 . . . . 372.0

138

Sample. Bad30

Area of void versus number of air voids
Voids with equivalent circle diameters < 50 microns were deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lOOO
E
C o
l00 l:
U) C
E C
o e
> _
5 _
w 0
“5 10 E—
:3 I
_ 0 O
.o k 0
E 0 00
Z
' . mmn II.) D O O O D
1 L 1 1111111 L llllllJl 1 Jillllll l llllLL
10000 100000 000000 100000“) 00000000
Area of void. mmAZ
Figure 5.17 - Graphical results for air void area in sample Bad30.
Sample: Bad30
Void numbers versus equivalent circle diameter of voids
1000 Voids with equivalent circle diameters < 50 microns were deleted
I
r—D
100 :‘ o
m I:
2 Q
o b
> >—
2 °:.
m
*5 10 :—
‘- .L
B - o o o u u
E "
:3 e o o
z
1 E 00 o no 0 o o D o
.1
O 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Equivalent circle diameters. microns

Figure 5.18 - Graphical results for air void equivalent diameters in
sample Bad30.

 

139

     

Figure 5.19 - Photograph of Figure 5.20 - Illustration of
Sample: Bad150 under normal Bad150 showing the voids at 1.2X.
light at 1.2X.

Table 5.3 - 150 um bad plane section image analysis results.

 

all voids voids >50 um

eq._cir_dia
Air void content, P. (vol %) ........................ 8.0 ..... 7.9
Average area of air void sections, A* (mmz) ............ 0.079 . . . 0.103
Average equivalent circle diameter (eq._cir_dia), D,*(mm) . . . 0.192 . . . 0.239
Average form factor, F* ......................... 52.6 ..... 49.8
Total area of plane section, (cmz) ................... 26.8 ..... 26.8
Total scan area, (cmz) ............................ 3.5 ..... 3.5
Number of fields .............................. 20.0 ..... 20.0

Number of air voids .......................... 352.0 . . . . 269.0

 

140

Sample: Bad150
Area of void versus num r of air voids

 

 

 

 

 

V01 3 with equivalent circ e diameters < 50 microns were deleted
1000 :
.. o
100 r
m l:
E C
o l.
> -
1.. o
'8
“a '0 g
{-6 I o a
E * °
:1 r n a
Z
' :- cm a o o o
1 1 111111rL EL 1 1111111 1 rn_11111l 1 1 111111
0000 100000 000000 0000000 113000000

Area of void. mmAZ

Figure 5.21 - Graphical results for air void area in sample Bad150.

Sample: Bad150
Void numbers versus equivalent circle diameter of voids
Voids with equivalent circle diameters < 50 microns were deleted

 

000

 

 

 

too to

s a a
S : °
h - °
a O
h— 10 .—
o :
is 5 °°
_D » o
g i o ..
z

1 g o oo o o a

l 1 A 1 l 1 r 1 l 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 l r r 1

0 000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Equivalent circle diameters. microns

Figure 5.22 - Graphical results for air void equivalent diameters in

sample Bad150.

141

percent while the 150 um bad sample was only 8.0 percent. This large difference is
attributed to sample section location, stripping effects, and the 150 um bad sample not
having all of the closed voids filled, thereby giving a smaller air void content. The 30
um section sample allowed for an analysis of a single layer of asphalt a closer estimation
to the correct air void content. In this case the stripping effects look to have skewed the
data, but the stripping was representative of the small section investigated.

Plane image analysis quantizes the morphology data on size, shape, area, and
density of air voids. These numbers give a means for future comparison of air voids in
asphalts to asphalt compaction methods, stripping effects, and possibly pavement
performance. The measurements are all representative of 2 dimensions and the
interconnected voids in 3 dimension are not accounted for appropriately. Again the
problem may be solved with bulk air void testing. Plane section sample testing is a
lengthy process with sample preparation, testing, and data analysis currently lasting a few
weeks. Some adhesive modification in sample preparation might allow samples to be

prepared and analyzed in as little as 5 days.

5.3 Crack propagation of fracture sample

Crack propagation was observed when tensile testing fracture samples in front of
a high speed recording camera. Figure 5.23 (a-h) highlights crack propagation from start
to finish with photographs and drawings of a 1 mm thick sample. These photographs are
of the high speed camera’s video monitor taken with a 35 mm camera. This asphalt

sample was made from a Marshall specimen. The sequence of pictures goes from top

142

initial specimen

   

 

Figure 5.23 (a-d) - Crack propagation of a good sample with reflective oblique
lighting and no background lighting at 2.4x.

143
to bottom with the highlights in the pictures on the right. Figure 5.23 a) is the initial

specimen followed by pictures over a ten second period of tensile strain resulting in
failure. The asphalt yielded throughout the entire sample illustrated in 5.23 b) and 5 .23
c). Figures 5.23 b) and 5.23 c) also illustrate the start of fracture of a brittle aggregate,
upper right hand corner. Continued yielding turned to crazing predominately around the
larger aggregate where the stress concentrations were the largest, Figure 5.23 d), and then
to fracture, Figures 5.23 e) through 5.23 h). During fracture the crack widens and the
stresses increase, shown in Figure 5.23 e) and Figure 5.23 t). The crack takes another
path shown in the left of Figure 5.23 g) along the large aggregate. Note the elastic effects
of the asphalt where the crack to the right in Figure 5.23 f) shrinks in Figures 5.23 g) and
5.23 h) returning to its original position as the other crack grows.

When taking a closer look into a crack, fibrils were seen. Figure 5.24 illustrates
a fibril representing good adhesive bonding and the viscoelastic property of asphalt.
Observation of these fibrils during fracture shows that many break at the center and retract
toward the aggregate as a result of their elastic properties. Fibrils are responsible for the
elastic crack behavior in Figures 5.23 g) and 5.23 h) where the aggregate of one crack
along the right hand side returned to its original position.

Figure 5.25 (a-f) shows a crack propagation series of a good asphalt sample with
background lighting over a period of 12.9 seconds. The background lighting enabled the
crazing stage with fibrils to be seen. Figure 5.25 a) is the initial specimen with one void
present. Figure 5.25 b) shows crazing and the start of microvoids. These microvoids
continue to grow and develop new ones with fibrils between them, Figure 5.25 c).

Figures 5.25 d) through i) illustrate more of the crazing and crack development showing

 

"—.— \. .

 

Figure 5.23 (e-h) - Crack propagation of a good sample with reflective oblique
lighting and no background lighting at 2.4x.

145

   
   
   

aggregate

. * aggregate

asphalt fibril

Figure 5.24 - Close up of fibril during fracture of an
asphalt sample viewed through an optical microscope at
100x.

 

146

e) U

void
growth

a
t>

fibrils

 

c) 0

microvoids fibrils

°\\
¥fibrils

   

Figure 5.25 (a-f) - Crack propagation of 1st good sample with reflected oblique
lighting and background lighting at 3X.

147

an overall joining of the voids.

Figure 5.26 (a-f) is another crack propagation series of a good asphalt sample with
background lighting. In this series the fracture is more evident. The photographs are
from two video camera recordings over a combined 18.9 second period. Again fracture
starts with yielding and crazing in the larger aggregate planes, Figure 5.26 b). By Figure
5.26 c) crazing and microvoids were developing. Figures 5.26 d) through f) show the
increased crack development and fibril formation which ultimately lead to total failure.
Figure 5.26 e) also shows an elongated fibril and by Figure 5.26 f) the fibril had broken
and started retracting.

Figure 5.27 (a-f) is a crack propagation series of a bad asphalt sample without
background lighting over a 10.1 second period. The series shows evident fracture occurs
along the aggregate boundaries and in the last figures some of the aggregate is clean
showing adhesive failure. Adhesive failure is investigated more in the next section.
Figure 5.27 a) is the initial specimen. Yielding is starting in b) and then fracture along
the aggregate boundaries. Although not evident without the background lighting some
fibrils did exist. In Figure 5.27 c) through c), crack development increased and the crack
path changed in Figures 5.27 d) to e) and then again in i), following the path of least
resistance.

Fracture testing offers determination of failure mechanisms of asphalt concrete
during tensile failure and characterization of the cracking process. General failure of
conventional asphalt concrete has been characterized by yielding, cracking, and ”then
fracture of the specimen. Yielding was best determined using no background lighting and

oblique lighting from each side to illuminate the front of the sample. Crazing was

 

148

   

Figure 5.26 (a-l) - Crack propagation of 2nd good sample with reflected oblique
lighting and background lighting at 3.8X.

149

     

initial specrm‘ en

 

A?

Yielding

   

Figure 5.27 (a-f) - Crack propagation of bad sample using reflected oblique lighting
without background lighting at 3.3x.

150

best determined using both background lighting and oblique lighting. Cracking was seen
as a crazing process with the formation of microvoids and fibrils bridging the cracks.
These fibrils serve as a means for healing effects to take place when the strains are
reduced and/or eliminated. Fracture samples are currently prepared in 5 to 7 days and
with an adhesive modification may be reduced to 3 or less days. Polymer modified
asphalts should not pose a problem with this fracture test until: the elongation of the
PMA increases past 12 percent, the elongation to necking of the polycarbonate film; or
the asphalt concrete strength surpasses that of the epoxy bond holding the ends in place,
an unlikely event.

Fracture testing was performed at room temperature and in an open room where
the environmental conditions were not varied. Future work with ESE will allow various
condiions such as; high temperatures, low temperatures, temperature cycling, and moisture
effects, to be investigated. ESEM will also allow changing between high and low
magnification of the cracking region during testing, a process difficult with the current

high speed camera.

5.4 Microscopic analysis of fracture samples

Fracture samples were viewed under an optical microscope determining the locus
of fracture. It was found adhesive and cohesive failure occurred together, but the degree
of each differed. Figure 5.28 shows a common cohesive failure where the asphalt cement
left a black film coating on the aggregate. This was the dominate type of failure common

with most of the samples characteristic of good adhesion.

151

The samples with poor adhesive properties showed signs of adhesion failure. The
degree of this type of failure varied from sample to sample with the greatest adhesion
failure in core 1 of section 29, site 5 showing signs of stripping. Figures 5.29, 5.30, and
5.31 show different degrees of adhesion failure. Figure 5.29 shows an aggregate with
strips of asphalt remaining behind after fracture revealing signs of cohesive failure also.
Figure 5.30 illustrated a low surface energy aggregate where the asphalt cement had not
spread over the surface, but beaded up similar to that of water on a waxed car. Figure
5.31 shows a clean adhesion failure where the aggregate surface can be seen quite well
on the right side in the middle.

The micrographs presented here are only partly in focus because the depth of field
of an optical microscope is limited to a few microns. Future work is planned for
observations with ESEM that will eliminate this problem with its depth of field being 100
times greater than that of optical microscopy. This will allow the locus of fracture to be

further characterized into degrees of each type of failure, adhesive and cohesive.

5.5 Summary

The tests and procedures developed and reported here collectively can provide a

means for investigation of morphology, microstructure, and fracture of asphalt concrete.
Thin and plane sections offer illustrative morphological and microstructural results while

plane sections through auto image analysis offers numerical characterization of air void
size, shape, and density. Thin fracture samples offer a means for investigating crack

propagation and initiation of fracture by tensile testing through high speed camera

152

asphalt film
coating

     

M ' . ~ " ‘3 .
Figure 5.28 - Cohesive failure of asphalt cement shown at 50X.

 

aggregate
surface

Figure 5.29 - Adhesive failure with cohesive strings at
50X.

  
   

aggregate

surface

13 .5 . in
Figure 5.30 - Adhesive failure with a low energy aggregate heading up the
asphalt at 69X.

    

asphalt
cement

   

aggregate

 
     

surface

      

Figure 5.31 - Adhesive failure showing a clean aggregate
surface in the center at 63X.

  

 

spec

Plar
Spel

154

Table 5.4 - Experimental summary

 

Tests sample environment associated information
configuration equipment to be gained
All tests - optical microscope
- diamond saw
- polisher
Thin section -15X40 mm - open air - vacuum chamber - void shape
specimens asphalt sample - room temp. - thin sectioning - void size
- 30 pm thick - dry system - air void
- fully fixed to - T < 30°C - image analysis formation from
slide system asphalt aggregate
- filled voids - computer with wetting
spreadsheet
Plane section - 50X70 mm - open air - vacuum chamber - air void content
specimens asphalt sample - room temp. - thin sectioning including enclosed
- 30 pm thick - dry system voids
- fully fixed to - T < 30°C - image analysis - void size
- filled voids system - void shape
- Computer with - void distribution
spreadsheet and — void density
large memory - void area
- numbers for
comparison to
compaction
methods and
stripping
Fracture - 15X40 mm - room temp. - high speed camera - crack
specimens asphalt sample - open air system mechanisms
- 1 mm thick - tensile strain - tensile frame yielding
— fixed to poly- in frame by - background light crazing
carbonate at hand - 35 mm camera fibrils
ends of asphalt - computer with failure
sample laser scanner and - crack propagation
- filled voids enhancement observations
- unfilled voids — locus of fracture
adhesive

cohesive

155

observations. These observations showed fracture occurred first by general yielding,
crazing creating microvoids, and followed by ultimate failure. After failure the samples
were then observed under optical microscopy determining the locus of fracture consisting
of both adhesive and cohesive failures. Table 5.4 summarizes the experimentation with
sample configuration, testing environment, associated equipment, and the information to

be gained from each test.

Chapter Six

Proposed Experiments for the Measurement of Adhesion and Fracture Toughness

In the previous chapters, tests have been developed to investigate morphology,
microstructure, fracture mechanisms, and locus of fracture for asphalt pavements. The
information determined will give valued insight into predicting pavement performance and
its relation to: air void content, size, shape, and distribution; aggregate size, shape, and
content; and asphalt distribution, specifically the asphalt film thickness on the aggregate.
The remaining critical parameter is the measurement of adhesion between the asphalt
cement and the aggregate. An extensive body of literature which has been developed for
the measurement of adhesion in polymeric systems can be used to provide a basis for
either the selection or development of adhesion tests for asphalt concrete.

The best measure of adhesion is through torsional shear measurement [128]. There
is a great degree of difficulty in such an experimental configuration for asphalt on
aggregate. An adaptation for measuring the strength of adhesion through thick adherent
lap-shear testing [128] has been proposed. Lap-shear testing gives a measurement of the
adhesive bond strength between two flat parallel plates having an one inch overlap when
pulled apart under tensile loading. Shear stress concentrations and cleavage stresses at
the ends of the lap-shear plates may cause the adhesive to peel which could effect the
results, but the adhesive industry has shown that reasonable agreement exists between lap-
shear testing and shear measurements [128]. Applying this to an asphalt/aggregate bond
a lap shear test would give the needed adhesion information. An experimental

configuration similar to that shown in Figure 6.1 would be required. An aggregate

156

157

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________

 

--.__.__..._.._.______..,

 

 

 

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________

Figure 6.1 - Adhesive test preparation

encapsulated
aggregate

cut and polish
surfaces

_____..-,_,___.__..

L—_____-—-—_——-_—_

158

would be encapsulated in a block of polymer, 3) and cut into two pieces, b). This would
give two flat surfaces for use as plates in a lap shear test. The surfaces would be
prepared similar to conventional aggregate surfaces. The two surfaces would then be
configured so that a tensile load could be applied to the specimen, c). This can be done
with direct shear testing devices like those used in soil testing in the MSU Civil
Engineering Department. Asphalt cement would then be applied with controlled thickness
and confined to a fixed area between the two aggregates to create a specimen suitable for
measuring the adhesive bond strength. The two aggregate plates give the capability to
vary the asphalt cement film thickness of the asphalt adhesive bond which would allow
for a determination and comparison of the plastic zone size to the aggregate’s asphalt
cement film thickness to determine their effects on the fracture toughness, as in the
adhesive industry [78, 129]. After lap-shear testing, the test plate surfaces which failed
can be examined through microscopy for the determination of the locus of fracture.

Fracture toughness should be used when characterizing polymer modified asphalt
cement (PMAC) and polymer modified asphalt concrete (PMA). Technically, fracture
toughness is the energy required per unit area to create a new crack surface [130] and will
be considered theory 1. Fracture toughness is a difficult parameter to measure in
heterogenous materials such as asphalt concrete, therefore by convention fracture
toughness has been defined as the area under a stress-strain curve [10] which is equivalent
to the total energy for specimen failure and will be considered theory 2.

PMAC has been analyzed by both theories. Theory 2 fracture toughness is most
common with the new SHRP specification for direct tensile testing of a molded asphalt

specimen [131]. This specimen is cast in the form of a dogbone with metal brackets at

159

the ends for Mode I (tensile) loading which can be applied through a tensile loading
device. Theory 1 fracture toughness of asphalt cement has been analyzed by double
cantilever beam (a Mode I direct tensile failure) and four point bending beam (a Mode
11 shear failure) [132]. Additional tests based on theory 1 from the polymer and adhesive
industry could also be applied like the single edge notch (SEN) [78, 133-136], and three
point bending beam tests (3PT-BEND) [133]. Of these tests the two already tested with
asphalt, double cantilever beam (DCB) and four point bending beam seem most
promising. Figure 6.2 shows an illustration of a double cantilever beam configuration
where the asphalt cement is applied between the two beams and stressed while measuring
the crack opening to obtain a fracture toughness value. Figure 6.3 shows a four point
bending beam configuration where asphalt cement is applied between two plates and
flexed to produce shear stresses for Mode 11 failure of the asphalt cement. The crack
growth, stress, and strain would be measured for fracture toughness determination.

PMA fracture toughness has only been found to be studied based on theory 2 with
Mode 1 (tensile) failure through indirect tensile [3, 10], triaxial [3], and flexural beam
testing [3]. Of these three tests indirect tensile seems most promising and details on the
new sample holding frame configuration are contained in Chapter Three. The indirect
tensile test would measure the energy to failure starting with an intact Marshall or
gyratory specimen.

For polymer and Portland cement, the use of three point bending beam [137] and
four point bending beam configurations [138] are recommended for theory 1 fracture
toughness measurement. Polymer concrete being a viscoelastic heterogeneous material

has similar characteristics to that of asphalt concrete . Fracture toughness was evaluated

160

 

 

 

 

Figure 6.2 - Double cantilever beam test configuration.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 6.3 - Four point bending beam configuration for Mode 11 testing.

161

through a four point bending beam test configuration with equations adapted from the
initial notch depth method, ASTM E399 and the CMOD Method, a relationship between
linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) and the crack mouth opening displacement to
determine the stress intensity factor, K,, in polymer concrete [138].

The initial notch depth method uses the beam cross section of b x (1, thickness b,
initial crack length a, and the applied pure bending moment M to calculate the stress
intensity factor through equation 6.1 developed by Brown and Srawley presented in

Vipulanandan [138]:
K, = 6 M a"2 39% 6.1

where

Y(a/d) = 1.97 - 2.47(a/d) + 12.97(a/d)2 - 23.17(a/d)3 + 24.80(a/d)4

The CMOD method uses equation 6.2 to relate the elastic crack mouth opening to

the crack length in four point bending [138].

CMoe=4an(;“— 6.2

El

where o = net stress (6 M/ bdz)
a = crack length
or = (a + Ho)/(d + Ho)

Ho = clip gage holder thickness
V(0t) = 0.8 - 1.7(oc) + 2.4(0t)2 + 0.66/(1-0L)2
E’ = modulus for plane stress
= E/(1-02)°"
u = Poisson’s ratio

162

This crack length, a, includes both inelastic and elastic crack growth of which the inelastic
portion should be extracted to obtain the effective crack length, ac. Equation 6.3, a
numerical iterative procedure, is used where the compliance (CMOD/P) of the specimen
unloaded at 95 percent of peak load (Cu) is compared to that of the initial loading

compliance (Ci) where P is their respective loads.

a _ 0, _CE V(a,) 6.3
e ' Ci V(ae)

 

Using a,, the stress intensity factor can be determined through equation 3.4, presented here

again as equation 6.4.

KI : 0 ‘ln a 6.4

where o = fracture strain

The polymer concrete approach system could be adapted for asphalt concrete as
shown in Figure 6.4. An asphalt concrete beam would be notched with a diamond saw
and fatigued lightly to initiate a microcrack. A continuous measurement of the crack
opening would be done during loading through a crack opening displacement (COD) gage
while monitoring the loading stress, thereby allowing theory 1 fracture toughness to be

calculated.

163

 

 

A

 

 

 

COD Gauge

Figure 6.4 - Four point bending beam test configuration for asphalt concrete.

Chapter Seven
Recommendations for Characterization and Evaluation of Polymer Modified

Asphalt Cement and Concrete

A linkage between polymer modified asphalt cement/concrete to asphalt pavement
performance can be realized through a key fundamental understanding of microstructure,
morphology, adhesion, locus of fracture, and fracture toughness. These basic elements
are on a microscopic level with the exception of fracture toughness which must also be
evaluated on a macroscopic level for the ultimate relationship to pavement performance.
The microscopic relationships offer a means to evaluate the initial causes of pavement
distress, thereby allowing for evaluation and optimization of pavement performance by
the incorporation of polymers, fibers, and/or crumb rubber modifiers.

The recommended characterization and evaluation tests of polymer modified
asphalt concrete (PMA) and polymer modified asphalt cement (PMAC) has been
summarized in Table 7.1. The summary gives the existing and proposed tests with the
information to be retrieved through each. The majority of tests are run on PMA because
of the importance aggregate has on the results. These tests will supply the information
necessary for characterization and evaluation in the following areas; voids, aggregate,
stripping, crack mechanisms, crack propagation, locus of fracture, optimum asphalt cement
film thickness (asphalt cement content), fracture toughness, plastic zone size, and adhesive
bond strength. Therefore, characterization of conventional, polymer, and crumb rubber

modified asphalts with respect to morphology, microstructure, adhesion, fracture

164

165

Table 7.1 - Comparative experimental summary

 

Type Test Information retrievable
PMA Thin section - void shape and size _
specimens - air void formation from asphalt aggregate
wetting
Plane section - air void content including enclosed voids
specimens - void size, shape, distribution, density, and area
- comparison of voids to compaction methods
and stripping
Fracture - crack propagation and failure mechanisms
specimens (yielding, crazing, fibrils, and failure)
- locus of fracture (adhesive and cohesive)
Fracture toughness - fracture toughness, KI
Methodology 1 - crack growth mechanics
- locus of fracture
- relationship of adhesion to performance
- Mode I (tensile) failures
Fracture toughness - bulk fracture toughness
Methodology 2 - optimum asphalt cement film thickness (partial)
- locus of fracture
- relationship of adhesion to performance
- Mode I (tensile) failures
PMAC Lap-shear - adhesive bond strength

Fracture toughness
Methodology 1

Fracture toughness
Methodology 2

- plastic zone size
- optimum asphalt cement film thickness (partial)
- locus of fracture

- fracture toughness, Kl
- Mode I (tensile) and Mode II (shear) failures

- crack growth mechanics

- bulk fracture toughness
- Mode I (tensile) failures

166

mechanisms, locus of fracture, and fracture toughness will be possible using these existing
and proposed testing techniques. This characterization will determine those polymer
modifications necessary and beneficial for improvement in asphalt pavement performance.
An incorporation of polymer modified asphalt will then allow evaluation of their
pavement distresses in relation to pavement performance. From the results, an
optimization of the PMAs can be done achieving the ultimate goal of improved pavement

performance by solving/resisting pavement distresses.

APPENDIX

167

Table A-1 - Fatigue Cracking Damage Index [29]

 

Time (Year)
Region Binder 1 5 10 15 20
AC5 .93 4.68 9.36 14.04 18.73
AC5+C .12 .59 1.17 1.76 2.34
AC5+P .01 .05 .10 .15 .20
AC10 .55 2.74 5.48 8.22 10.96
1 AC10+C .09 .45 .91 1.36 1.82
AC10+P .004 .023 .046 .068 .091
AC20 .073 .366 .731 .109 1.46
AC20+C .03 .15 .29 .44 .59
AC20+P .002 .009 .018 .026 .035
AC5 1.15 5.77 11.54 17.32 23.05
AC5+C .09 .44 .88 1.32 1.75
AC5+P .11 .055 .110 .165 .220
AC10 .675 3.37 6.74 10.12 13.49
2 AC10+C .07 .35 .70 1.05 1.39
AC10+P .005 .025 .05 .075 .099
AC20 .092 .45 .92 1.37 1.83
AC20+C .03 .13 .26 .40 .53
AC20+P .002 .010 .019 .028 .037
AC5 3.54 17.74 35.48 53.22 70.96
AC5+C .39 1.94 3.87 5.81 7.75
AC5+P .039 .197 .394 .590 .78
AC10 3.02 15.14 30.28 45.43 60.57
3 AC10+C .31 1.57 3.13 4.70 6.26
AC 1 0+P .027 .136 .272 .407 .543
AC20 .561 2.80 5.60 8.40 11.21
AC20+C .18 .92 1.83 2.75 3.67
AC20+P .012 .058 .117 .175 .233
AC5 1II 1‘ '1‘ 11! 1|
AC5+C 3.21 15.68 31.36 47.12 54.84
AC5+P 1.75 8.79 17.5 26.38 35.17
AC10 =1! 11' 11' III *
4 AC10+C 3.6 17.84 35.68 53.68 72.28
AC10+P 1.24 6.20 12.41 18.61 24.82
AC20 4.51 22.59 45.19 66.77 90.39
AC20+C 2.80 14.00 28.08 42.08 56.8
AC20+P .85 4.27 8.54 12.82 17.09

* Not available

168

Table A-2 - Rut Depth in Inches [29]

 

* Not Available

Time (Year)

Region Binder 1 5 10 15 20
AC5 .26 .56 .78 .95 1.01
AC5+C .17 .39 .56 .69 .80
AC5+P .23 .47 .64 .77 .87
AC10 .22 .48 .67 .82 .94

1 AC10+C .16 .38 .55 .68 .79
AC10+P .21 .45 .61 .74 .84
AC20 .20 .43 .60 .73 .84
AC20+C .15 .32 .52 .62 .72
AC20+P .18 .39 .55 .68 .78
AC5 .31 .66 .92 1.1 1.3
AC5+C .18 .41 .58 .72 .83
AC5+P .24 .50 .68 .81 .92
AC10 .28 .58 .80 .97 1.11

2 AC10+C .18 .41 .58 .71 .77
AC 1 0+P .22 .46 .63 .75 .86
AC20 .23 .48 .66 .80 .92
AC20+C . 17 .37 .54 .66 .77
AC20+P .18 .41 .58 .70 .81
AC5 .37 .73 .98 1.18 1.34
AC5+C .20 .44 .63 .77 .89
AC5+P .25 .52 .71 .84 .95
AC10 .35 .67 .89 1.06 1.21

3 AC10+C .18 .41 .59 .73 .84
AC10+P .23 .48 .64 .80 .91
AC20 .26 .52 .71 .84 .96
AC20+C .16 .37 .52 .65 .75
AC20+P .20 .44 .62 .73 .83
AC5 * It * ’1! III
AC5+C .21 .46 .65 .80 .92
AC5+P .27 .53 .72 .89 .98
AC10 * * Ill 1' *

4 AC10+C .20 .46 .65 .79 .92
AC10+P .24 .48 .66 .77 .87
AC20 .36 .65 .80 .98 1.10
AC20+C .19 .42 .59 .73 .84
AC20+P .20 .46 .63 .76 .89

fable A-J

Original date for dialysis of plane section

Good98

Senate:

Date: 1216/93

297.0

GAtAl123 Hieron-

a_frac Avoladius

Peri Are

sp_latio Shepejac Spec

vgjeret A

Haajeret A

Angle Iln Fore: In Me“

Perimeter 0 0.00% 0 5.0050 90.0% 0 135.00'Alln

_A_r-e_a_

M9

0 O O O
83388838§82§23238323382323338

c-nPOGOmNno—Q—oooo—non—c-no—no-ouc-u
:3:==$8°3“"’°8:=:.E3..3n. 3:83

QOQOMOOOGGONOOOMMOOOOOOQQCO‘Oe-“OD

acascsgsaasancc°ese ae§5S§ egggg

”HMOOOCOQflHHMOHMOM.MBMHMflMOMnfl...

0008° °8§§§08£°3083° 3838833838”38§

O
8888 88 .3 8988§8 888 888 8 88“9§8

NOOHHMQMOOCCOOOOOC’OCN

as ceaseseaaa 55 5355

”MHOO..‘MHMOMOOMOMOMOMMHOMOHM"NO

aaaaaaaasgn§aaneaaaacaaacaacaga 5

0.0.“M‘OOmGOMOMOHMQOOOOOOOOOCONOOO
O

“RunSSKSES88°3”33°000888€ 8§8“8§§

QOOHQOM‘OMOOOOQMQOMOQO

6. 0°
anac°e~a§§a~ae .e5aeeaaaesaags'ggg

.1...‘9‘...figure.u-Oo-nnuN-to—h-c-v'qv-qoan-On
O 0.. 0...
NNN ssh manuaé’ N a «reuse: No. v-
c
ses§§~~3 er" °§ z§~gzzsazg§z e§§3
P
mono—nownhnnqoonnno-nnneonennovovo
I. I. .0 0.0. 0. 0 .000 0 I O. ....Q......
N NQN-NC-o-Nn

88883-883~ono3ono3§§2228938§8”” S
PF'NNNMNnOFG'N'F 'N'N---MF-VP N n
"a" a .- —

p

170

«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.8 «.«« «.«u «.«« «.«« ...«. «.~«..
...« .«8. ...« E. 8«. «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «.8 «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.... «...««.
..«. .«8. «.«« 2.. 8«. ..«« «.«. «.««. «.«« «.8 «.«. «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.««3
..«« ««««. «.«« «3. .3. «.«« «.«.. «.««. «.«. «.8 «.«.. ...«. «.«« «..«. ..«.« «.....««
«.«« .«8. «.«« «««. «««. «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.8 «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. ««««.
«.«. «.««. «.««... «.«. «.«. «.8. «.«3 «. «.««. «.8 «.««... «.««. ..«.. «.««... «.3. «.32...
«.«« .«8. «.3 «3. «... _...... «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«. «.«« «.«« «..3 «.«.««
...« .«8. «.«« ««.. «««. «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«.. «.8.
«.~« .«8. «.«« 3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«~ «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «.««:
..««« «.««. ..«3 .««. .8. ...«. ...«3 «.««. «.««. «.«« ..««« «3.. «.««. «..«. «.««3 ...««.:
...«. .«8. «.8 «««. ..«. «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.«...«...
«.«« ««««. «.««. «««. «««. ...«: «..«. «.««. «.«« «. «..«. «.3. «.«« «.«« «.«.« «.«...«.
«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«... «.«« «.«« «.«... «.«« «.«« ...«. «....«..
«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.8 «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «..«..
«.3 .«8. ..«« «««. «««. «..« ..«. «.«« «.«« «.8 «.«« «.«« ..«. «.«« ...«. ««««.
«.«« .«8. «.«« «««. 8«. «.«« «.«« «. «.«3 «.8 «.«« «.«u «.«« «.«« «..«. «.««...
«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«u «.8 «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «..«..
«.««. :3. «..«8 3.... «««. «.«.«. «.«««... «.«« «..«.. «.««. «..«.. ...««. «.«««u «.««... «.38 «.«..«3.
«.~« «.8. «.««. «...«. «...«. «.««... «.«3 «.«« «.««.. «.««. ...««. ....... «.««... «..«.... «.«3 ..«.«2
«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«... «.8 «.«« «.«~ «.«« «.«« ...«. «.~«..
«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«... «.8 «.«« «.«... «.«« «.«« ...«. «..«..
«.3 .«8. «.«« ««.. «««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.8 «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.2. «..«..
«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.8 «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «....«..
«.«« .«8. «.«« ««.. ««.. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. ««««.
«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«... «.«« «.«« ...«. «..«..
..«. .«8. «....« ..«.. 8«. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. ««««.
«.3... .«8. .....« E. 8«. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.8 «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.... «.««...
«.3 .«8. «.«« ..«.. ««.. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. ««««.
«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«... «.8 «.«« «.«... «.«« «.«« ...«. «....«..
«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«~ «.8 «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «.««:
«.3 .«8. «.«« 3.. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«... «.8 «.«« «.«... «.«« «.«« ...«. «.««:
«.3 .«8. «.«« ~... «««. «..« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.8. ...«3
«.«« «8«. «.8 ..«. ..«. ..«. «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. «.««.«
«.«« ««««. ...« ««.. «««. ..«. «..«. «.««. «.«« «. «..«. «.«. «.«. «.«« «6.. «.«~««
«.«« .«8. «.«« ..«.. ««.. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. ««««.
«.«« ««««. «.3. 8«. 8«. «.««. «.««. «. «.«« «.8 «.«.. «.«« ..«.. «.«.... ....««« «.««««
.... «.««. «.««. «««. 3«. «.««. «.««... «. ...««. «.8 ....... «.««. «.««. «.««... ..«.. «.38.
«.«« ««««. «..« ..«.. .««. «.«« ...«. «.«« «.«« «.8 «.«« «.«« «.«. «.«« ..«.. «.«...
«.«« .«8. «.«« «««. «««. «.«« «.«« «. «.«... «.8 «.«« «.«... «.«« «.«« «..«. ««««.
..««... ««««. «..«.. «««. ...««. «.««« «.«.« «. «.««« «.«« «.««« «.««« «.««« «.«.« «.««... «.«mafi .
3.3-...« 8:62.. ting 8......6 «23...: ...«.-«2 5...}: 3.5.5. ...«...c... «35...... «8.3. « «««.8 « «8.«« a «86 o .81.... J o .. «

«Paco: n.< 03-—

171

«.«« .«8. «.«« ..«.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..~«. «.~«:
«.«« 38. ..3 «n. «««. ..«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««... «.«««u
«.3 .«8. «.«« «a. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« 3: «.««:
«... ««««. «.««. «««. «««. ..«. «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.25 «.««:
«.«~ .«8. «.«« «««. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«u «.«« «.«« ..«.: «.««:
«.««. .«««. «.«« «c. «n. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. ««««.
«.3 .«8. «.«« «2. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«.. «.««:
..«.. .«««. «.«« «««. «««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.««:
«.«« .«««. «.«« «z. «««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«8 «.«««~
«.«... .«««. «.«« «u. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«.: «.~«:
«.3 38. «.«« «a. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«.: «.««:
...«. ««««. «.«« ...«. «««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«fi «.«....
..«.. .«««. «.«« .2. 8«. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.««:
«..« ««««. «.«« «k. «««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ~.«- ««.««
«.3 38. «.«« «2. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«.. «.««:
«.«« ««««. «.«« «z. «z. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.5 «.««:
...«. .«8. «.3 E. «««. «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.««:
«.««. .«8. «.«« «««. «««. «.3 «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«... «.«« «.«« «..«. «.«««.
«.««. .«««. «.«« «««. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«.. «.««:
«.«« ««««. «J: «««. «««. «..«. «.««. «.««. «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «.8 «.2. ~.«~« «.««««
«.2. .«8. «.«« E. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«.. «.««:
«.«... .«««. «.«« «««. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«.. «.««:
«.«~ .«8. «.«« «««. «««. «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. «.««.
«.«« ««««. «.«« «««. 3.. «.~. «.8 «.««. «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««... ««.««
...« ««««. «.««... «««. «««. «.«.... «...« «.«« «..«. «. «.««. «.««~ «.«2 «..«. «.««o «.25.
«.2 ««««. «.«« .2. «««. ...« «..«. «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.«« «..«. «.«« «.««... «.83
~.«« ««««. ~.««. 8«. «««. ..«.. «.««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.2. «.«« «.««. «.««. «.««. «.«~««
«..n ««««. ..«.. «««. «««. «.8 «..«. «.«« «.«« «. «.2 «.«« «..«. «.«« «.««~ ...««.
«.«~ 88. «.«« «««. «««. «.3 «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. ««««.
«.7 ««««. «.5 «««. «««. «.2. «.««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.«« «.««. «.««. «...« «.««.«
«.«... .«8. «.«« «2. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «.«« ..«.. «.««:
«.«« ««««. «.««. ..«. «««. «.«~. ~.««. «.«« «.«« «. «.««. «.««. «.««. «.«« «.««. «.««...
«.«« ««««. «.3. ...«. «««. «.2. «.«~. «. «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «.««. «.««. «.«a ..«.:
«.«~ .«8. «.«« «««. «««. «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. ««««.
«.3 88. «.«« «2. 8«. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«.. «.««:
«.«« ««««. «.«« «««. «z. «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« :3 ...««.
«.«« 38. «.««. «««. «2. «.««. «.««. «.««. «.8 «. «.««. «..«. «..«. «.«« «.««« «.««n
«.«~ .«8. «.«« «a. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«... «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«.. «.~«:
«.«~ 88. «.«« «««. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..«.. «.««:
«.«« ««««. «.«« «««. «z. «.2 «.8 «.««. «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.n «.««~ «.3 u -
3.3.9... «..«.-2.. .332... 3.2.23 ...«-an... ...«..«2 2833.. 3.5.3.. 53...... «.85.... ...««.««. .. «8.8 a «««.9 « ..8.« « 3..-..«.. -..« .. g

3383 mi 03:

 

tabla A-3 (cont'd)

N2

ONOOCOON’“°NOO°RBN°°°00-NOQOO§°OFF°°MQNO
C O I I 0 0 I C O 0 I O C 0
CNN NnQQNN" NOD: NNONNOON QUINN NM.-

.0002
.0001
.0001
.0001
.0003
.0001
.0003
.0005
.0006
.0006
.0001
.0002
.0013
.0010
.0001
.0003
.0003
.0002
.0001
.0001
.OW5

qfiqqfinQQfiqqfiquvzfl.onnvnnqnn0~°nQOQOn§OOc~t
.3zsssnggggszggsggassssagassaaxeacue aszg
.ifiééfifi3§§iéfififiéfifi§§§£§§¥E§5§§§§$§§§§EE§§

.716
.500
.500
.500
.625
.500

770
.617
.000
.600

.500
.033
.770
.727
.500
.770
.075
.500
.500
.500
.009
500
.5”
.600
.500
500
.600
629
500
.667
.500
.750
.716
.000
.500
.716
.750
.667
.625
.563

39 Rollo Shape in: Spec Perl Arc. fro: Mahatma

Q... . . .. °‘"'fifi€919%9§1
33:32.33;332333233332:.s«.:3:a:§gascz §§
YQQQfiQQQQQQQQQQQfiQQQQ“‘°"99Q"‘"“"fifl
33:2;22:33233322333233233assaaaassasangg
'- CDC--.- NN CDC-C- .-

QQQQQOCOB66999996OGOOOGOQOOOOQGOQQQQQQQQ
333333383333 3333 33 33 33 33 33333 33

C- c- .- o- '- P '- C- CD.-
33333383 3333§338333.3333333333333333333

OOOCOQOOOMOOI‘QOOMOOOOOOMOOOOOOOOOMOOOOP“

333°sag§3§° §3°"'3°«-aasc°"s°"°'3n° °3§§

.05 0 135.00% .HIanolqflancrct Ilanolo Infarct Avojcrct A

oonnonoononuonnooonnnnnoenoononononnoOwn

E3333333..33.3.383333o3333333333 a333"'

« 3
p

Q
geneqneqoneeeeneqnneee«'3‘oo°¢~9~~¢¢°0°~o
O O

escaagaggggangga §§a«g髧a agnagagsaansng

O
‘3
bflkwc-N-onwn—vnvw—ohn—w—c-novkovnwnho—hnkno
" 'g33«3«;««3«.‘;33«g33 '&&«gééfig;&§«;&défigd
U'

0 vvh n “'0 «G «vs a N
3NN—v-Nzncggzmngznnuww ——n—33~3n3«€333—3—3

p

h P
0
s

O O 0 Q g g o g o o a o O O I I I 0 O O 0 I O O 0 O O I

I'D-INN “N b N hNNhn O n O h
IP'HAVOOE3233§oz§33§§203n~oon€u338m8338 Q—SREn
.F'FF ponc- pm .- Nc-v-C-I-v-anC-No-m—v-Q .- an n
IQNv-c-vv-onh unwwpnqvu—ou—nmflon—o—wn Fat-now
5' NIH '- v-N no-
‘I

 

 

173

«.«« .«««. «.«« ««.. ««.. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«««.
«.«« ««««. ..«. ««.. «««. «.«« «.«« «. «.«. «.«« «.«« «.«. «.«« «.«« «.««. «..«««
«.«« .«««. «.«« «««. «««. «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.«««.
«.«« .«««. «.«« ««.. ««.. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«««.
«.«« .«««. «.«« u... «««. «..« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«««.
«.«« .«««. «.«« «««. «««. «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.«««.
«.«« .«««. «..« ««.. «««. «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.««.~
«.33 .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «.««..
«.«« ««««. «...« «««. «««. «.««. «.~«~ «. «..«. «.«« «..«. «..«. «.~«~ «.~«~ ..««« ..«.««.
«.«« .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..~«. «.««..
«.«« .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «.««..
...« .«««. ..«« ««.. «««. ..«« «.«. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«. «.«« ..««~ ..«««~
«..« «.««. ~.«.« .~«. ~«.. «.««~ «.««~ «. «.««. «.«« «..«. «.««~ «.««~ «.««~ «.««. «..«.«3
«.«« ««««. «.««. «««. ««.. ..«.. «..«. «.««. «.«.. «.«« «..«. «.««. «.«.. «.«~. ~..«« «..«««
«.«« .«««. «.«« «««. «««. «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «..«. «.«««.
«... «~««. «.«~« «.«. ..«. «.«.~ ...«~ «. «.««. «.«« «.««~ «.««~ ...«~ ...«~ «.«««. «.«««.«
«.«« .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..~«. «.««..
«.«« .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «.««..
...« ««««. ..««« «.3. «««. «.««. «.««3 «.«« «.««. «. «.««. «.««. «.««. «.««. «.««. «.««««.
«.«« ««««. «.««. «««. «««. «..«. «.~«~ «.«« «.««. «.«« «.««. «.««. «.««. «..«. «...« «..«««.
«.«« .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..~«. «.««..
«.«« ««««. «.««3 «««. «««. ~.... ~.«.~ «.«« «.«.. «. «.««. «.«.3 «.«.3 «.«.. «.««« ..««««.
«.«« ««««. «..«« «««. «««. «.«.. ..«~« «.«« «.««« «.«« ..«.. «.««« ..«~« «.«.« «...«. «.««..«
...« .«««. «.«« ««.. «««. «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«.. «...«.
«.«« ««««. ..««. ..«. «««. «.«.. «.««. «.«« «.«. «. «.««. «.««. «.««. «.«. «.««. ..««..
«.«« .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «..«..
«.«« .«««. «.«« ««.. ««.. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«««.
«.«« .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..~«. «.««..
..«« ««««. «..«. «««. «.«. «.««. «.««. «.««. «..«. «.«« «.««. «..«. «..«. «.««. «..~« «.«.««
«.33 .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «.3«..
«.33 .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ..~«. «.««..
«.«« .«««. «.«« ««.. ««.. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«««.
«...« .«««. ~.«.«« «««. «««. «.3... «.«««~ «.«« «.«««. «.««. «.«««. «..«.3 «.«««~ «.«««. «.«~.« «.««««.«.
«.«« .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «..«..
«.«« .«««. «.«« «3.. «««. ...« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« ...«. «.««..
«.«« ..««. «...« ««.. ««.. «.«.~ «.««~ «.««. «.««. «. «.««~ «.««~ «.««. «.««. ..««. «..«.«~
«.«« ««««. «.«« .««. «««. ..«. «..«. «.«« «.«« «. «.«. «.«« «..«. «.«« ..«.. «..«..
«..« ««««. «..o ««.. «««. ..«. «..«. «.«« «.«« «.««. «.«« «.«. «..«. «.«. «.««3 «.««.«
...« ««««. «.«.. ««.. «««. ..«.. «..«. «.«« «.«« «. «.««. «..«. «.««. «.«« «.«~« ..«««..
«.«« o... ««.. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «. «.«« «.«« «.«« «.«« «.««. «h«m«w -
IOLC

«.«« .«««.
3.3.9... «3..-2.. ..«..-88 «...««.5 ...«-.3. ...«..«2 28.-.... «.25.... ...«..c... 3.5.5.. «8.8. .. «8.8 .. ..8.«« « ..8.« « .32....

3.2.83 n.< 03:

table A-J (cont'd)

W4

NONOOOMOU‘U-QOGONMO-OnQOONHONNQOO O

O I I I I I O I I I
NQNNN Q DONNNmMMN n NOMNNfiNNNN n N
NNNNN NSNSNNNNNNNNNNaQ EN «.88 :SN

130.9

.0030
0001
0001
0001
0001
0001
0001
0001
0077
0016
0003
0002
0001
0001
0001
0001
0001
0001

0001

0001

0001

0002

0006

0056

0001

0001

0001

0001

0002

0M1

0001

0001

0001
0001
0001
0M1
0001
0001
.M6
0001

up. he Spec Perl Area inc Avalodlus

.gzzs°ems—2933333333333~§33°33«.333333333
-
“NEOCO'QNQ NKNG'OO. 0'0 MNQOOONOOQQ'F M.
5838888t883888883839858883=333888833538”
8
0° '5 O. O 0 no N N
as§a§§fi駧§33§§§§§3§§§a§§§33§z§%§§%3%%§§§
C
8
8
88887987"?!”9998879888".""""""!"."2"’."I""""‘"”’""'
5888383388§;8«««««««««8«8383«««««««83«33«
.I
3
31333333333033333339330303°30033330033333
8888888888§2 88888888888 §8888888888888888
It.” as '- '-
I
i
:3399939393339°°°°°°°°°°°°°°99°°°°°°99333
g n manna In manna m “'6“an “I!“ manna I!“
M QCGQQ n MMQQQ Q MQQ'IC'I wow '0'... '0‘

' u- v- CID.- .-
E§888 888 88E888 88888888§. 8888888888 88888
:I
E
£929.06.9°06OOBOOOOOOOOGOOGOOOOOQOOOOOOOOOO

W
90
90
90
90.
90
90
90
90
90

'333 8888 8888 3:: 88888888888 3

5

8

§QQQOIQOOQQv-OOMOOOI‘OONOIIMNOOOOQQOOQQQQ‘QO‘O’Q

n In onoon I» n 0

n3.. 8«888g§g8888«««««8« §§838 83.888«8888§8

n

’

O

go.9.annano—Nononnnnonennnonnononnnnncnnnnn

no n n

é§8888888888« 888888 88«§« 8888888888 «888§8

a

gt30033333e33333333333°¢°¢°o¢°32333331933

n cacao 006°C 9

.883°"88888 «8«««««88888§88 88 ««««8 «8888

Q

‘9

§~10 .90660.0NOOOOGOMOOOOQHNODOOMMOOOOI‘OOOOO

333“°= 333 3333333 3333§ 3:3 3333333333333

'3

:“°°"'°""°"“'-!‘!'"1'1'1'288'1'2'21'.88888178888888".

u N N MM Q—NNNN 8 NO INN NNONNNNN NNNN

‘8882«8«:««§««««««8«8««3««8««««««««8«««;2
gnu-”pupppnh NU-c-CD—C-c-C-v-v-Nnm—NU-o-Nc-O-C-v-v-Nc-I-C- '-

t.- v- N

0

m
'nnonoannnoooonnnnoonno—Nneenonnnnnnoacon
I I I o I o o a u c o O I I O I o I 0 o o u I o o 0 I I O I o O I I I 0 O I I O

I N O I! NNOONNO N ON KN
.§§3.33332£33.33..««.«.3:.3-.§«.333333333

I n—c—c-ovo mzn'--OU\U\O'SPNOMU\P o—U-C-U-nnnnvc-

“ls—NFN—ppgag pr—pp-—— ~8’~-'~---—' P's-fic-
I '- C-

‘l

table A-3 (cont'd)

175

'- NM OMNNNOMNNMM: 0N NNNFNQM-Mo- h

>

<

an- ~-“~’-n—--'-n CDNC-c-Nu-No-NC-Np- — - on.- .
~§§§§§§§§°8§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§°'§'§§§§§§§§'
3 8o 88 8 8
II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I

I

L

<

UN NM N MMM MMM'M MMM" M. Q

.2 3333 33333333333 333 333333333 33 333333 33

.666
.736
.630
.627
.695
.777

.759
.695
.726
523
726
.679
695
726
726
.522
627
.756
.600
732
726
.609
.726
.656
.726
.631
.695
330
695
303
.300
.726
.733
.760
.651
.n4
.695
.725
.611
.653

a Q N 8 GM 9 v- 3! uh oh '-
333:333333333333333333333533333333533333
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
foOMQM!!!-30..-!!!“Nook.QQQMQMOPOMOMQOC-Mc—QwMOM—
=3::=:::~o¢:un~o-;~Jc-¢$-o~;c— o-u-o-u-

o o a I o o 0 a I I I I I I I
33333333333 333333333333333333333333
'- v- N N'- .-

MQOOOMOOOOOOOQQMMMOMOQOOOOOMOMNQQQNQQQQM
O O
333333333333333333 33 33333 33333333333 33:
.- 0.“ N'- C- M.-
3333333333333333333333333333333333333333
MM M MM M MM MMM MMMMMMMM M MMMMMMM MMM
MM M 3" 3: '3' COM MQ'QMQQV *1 10.3033... MO.
CI- .- .- 0- '- o- .-
3333333333333333333333333333333333333333
MM M
33333 3333333 3333333 33333353353333 3;:

I I I I I I I I
8 88 88888888 88 88 .8 8888 _88 888888

65.0

oooouqqqnqngqfioqonooonooowonoonooooouo
88888388888888§§88 888 858g3838 3385C

101.3

0 135.00% Ninja.“ lllnjorct 01.3.5091. Major" Avojcm MEI-No Shapgfnc Spa;

ODOOMOMMMMMOMMMOMOO‘MMMMMOHOMNOMMOCMHCCQ

888888 H8888 8888888888 8888§8588 8888838

OMOOOMOQOOOOOMOONOOMOOOOO..MOQNCOONOCMMM
I

33333333333333333333 333333333 3533333 333g

QQQQQOCQOOOOMOOOOMOMOOOOMGOOQONOOMMOOOOOO
3333333 333333 3333§3333 33 3333 3 33f33 53
E323.3.333333333.3.333333333333233. 3~333333333
333233E£§§S§E§§§EEE£§§3§E§3§33 333 333333
3

8888888888878888888888888888888888888888
33333§§§§§§§3333§3333§3§§§§§§3333335338§3
bu3~88——~——3-882:333:88—~vn—n—zflgfi—38o333g8
4

 

 

table A-3 (cont'd)

“Nil‘

399999999999999999999999999~999999 9999999

V00

.0001
.0001
0001
.0001
.0001
.0001
.0001
.0001
.0001
.0001
.0001
.0001
J001
0001
0002
0001
0001
.0010
0002
0062
0001
.0003

Perl Area Inc A

.693
.726
.777

726
.636

.300
.300
.600
.300
.600
.300
.300
.600
.300
.730
.300
.600
.600
.600
300
600
.300
.300
.667
300
371
371
300
.300
.391
333
390
000
.692
.363
333
.073
.630
.730
.373
.600
.600

9: 99999: 999999999959599999

..v-OQU-v-U-nnOU-v-nQOONPNRGIIGIOOOG
0 0 O I 0 0 O

61.1
30.6
61.1
33.0
37.0
61.1
33.0
61.1
66.3
61.1
30.6
30.6

vgjcm Aspjulo ”magi-c Spec;
66.3

‘MOOMOCOMMNCMOOOC...O'.NMO~NB...MM.NI\

99999999999999999999 9:933’99999939E'

30.6

30.6

63.3
0.

lujcrct a

‘5.“
133.0

I
999 999 99 9999

63.0

MMQMMOMMMOMGOOMOOMOMQOMOOQPGOOONNQOHOCEQ

9999999999999999999 999 999999999999999999

. 0
999999999 999 9 99999 99999 99 '9'99

Anglo MIL fem Hanolc

ononoonooonononoooooocnunhooo—nuonnnoou

9999999999999 9999 99999999 999 9999999

30.6
30.

~23 “Fan’

MOHMOHQMOMBOOMOOMOMMOnOOOBOOONNNOOHOONG

9999999999999’ £“‘”3°°”t£k°‘ ESREE"

90. M 0 133.003 1110
23. 3

0

0'3 “no

QOOMMONBOOOOOOCMOMOIQOOM

'°: .‘9 . . . .‘E‘! ."
9999 999 999999999 9999999999999999999 9'99
0' Inc-CI.- 1‘.-

167.6
162.1
171.0
162.1
192.7
196.3
162.1
192.7
162.1
162.3
162.1
179.6
179.6
102.9
162.1
102.9
206.7
162.1
213.1
167.6
233.3
260.6
162.1

202.9
012.
293
96
9
2
09
29.
630.
736
62
73
92
02
32
76
96

Peri-uteri) 0.0060 63

_A_r_e_o_
1330.0
1162.3
1000.3
1162.3
1937.3
2193.0
1162.3
1937.3
1162.3
1330.0
1162.3
1937.3
1937.3
1937.3
1162.3
1937.3
2636.1
1162.3
2636.1
1330.0
2323.0
3330.3
1162.3
2323.0
10212.3
6006.1
73969.6

177

9.99 9999. 9..9 999. 999. 9..9. 9.9.. 9. 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.9.. 9.9.. 9.999 9.9999
9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
..99 9999. 9..9 .99. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 ..9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 89. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 9999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9.9 9..999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
..99 .999. 9.99 9.9.9. 89. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.9999 9999. 9.99.9 .99. 999. 9.9999 9.9999 9.99 9.9.99 9.99. 9.9.99 9.9999 9.9999 9.9999 9.999.9 9.9999999.
9.99 ..99. 9.999 999. 999. 9.99. 9.9.9 9.99 9.99. 9.99. 9.99. 9.99. 9.9.9 9.99. 9.999 9.9999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 89. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 89. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 998. 9.99. .99. 9.9. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.99.9
9.99 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. 9.99. 9..9. 9. 9..9. 9.99 9..9. 9..9. 9..9. 9..9. 9.999 ..9999.
9.99 9.99. 9..99 999. 999. 9.999 9.9.9 9.99 9.99. 9. 9.999 . 9.9.9 9.999 9.99. 9.999. 9.99999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 9999. 9.9.9 999. 999. 9.99. 9..9. 9.99 9.9.. 9. 9.99. 9.99. 9..9. 9.9.. 9.9.9 9.9999
9.99 9.99. 9.999 999. 999. 9.9.9 9.999 9.99 9.999 9. 9.9.9 9.999 9.999 9.999 9.999 9..9999
9.99 9999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9..999
9.99 .999. 9..9 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9...9 ..9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 99.9. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.9999
9.99 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. 9.99. 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9. 9..9. 9.9.. 9.99. 9.99 9.999 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. 9.99. 9..9. 9.99 9..9. 9. 9.99. 9.99. 9..9. 9..9. 9.9.9 9.9999.
9.99 9999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.999 9.9999
9..9 9999. ...9. 999. 999. 9.99 9..9. 9.99. 9.99 9. 9..9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..99 ..9999
9.99 .999. ..99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9 9.9 9.99 9.99. 9I9m9m I I
.99 9999.9 9 533...»; a o .. 9

8 no...» 8......5 2.34.2 35.9: .3in £83.... :54? 325.... 98.3 a :86. a .8:

-
G.

3:85: 09:39.9
99.2.83 9.9 .3:

178

9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9..9 939. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.99.9
9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .98. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 .99. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9...9 9.9999
9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .98. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 989. 9.99 999. 9.9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .89. ..99 999. 39. ..99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 ..9999
9.99 998. 9.99. 999. 999. 9..9. 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.9.. 9.999 ..9999
9.99 .98. ..99 999. 89. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .98. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99.9
9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
..99 .92.. 9.99 9.99. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.39.
9.999 99.9. 9.999. 9.9. 9.9. 9.999 9.999 9.99 9.999 9.99. 9.999 9.999 9.999 ..999 9.99.9 9.89999
9.99 989. 9.99. 999. .99. 9.99. 9.99. 9.99. 9..9. 9.99 9.99. 9.99. 9..9. 9.9.. 9.999 9.9999.
9.99. 998. 9.999 999. 999. ..999 9..99 9. 9.9.9 9.99 9..99 9.9.9 9.9.9 9..99 9.999. 9.399..
9.99 .98. 9.99 999. 89. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
..99 ..99. 9.99. 999. 999. 9.99. 9.999 9.99. 9..9. 9.99 9.999 9..9. 9..9. 9.99. ..999 9.999.
..9.. 9999. 9.999 999. 999. 9.999 9..99 9.99 9.9.9 9. 9.999 9.9.9 9..99 9.9.9 9.999 9.99.99
9.99 .93. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 89. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 989. 9.99 999. 9.9. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99.9.
9.99 9.99. 9.999 999. 999. 9.99. 9.9.9 9. 9.99. 9.99 9.99. 9.99. 9.99. 9.9.9 9.999 9.9999.
9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 89. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 989. 9.99 999. 9.9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 ..9999
9.99 .98. 9.99 9.9. 89. ..99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.9999
9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 89. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 998. 9.99 999. .99. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.999
9.999 909.. 9.9999 99.. 909. 9.99.9 9.9999 9.99 9.999. 9.99 ..999. 9.999. 9.9999 9.999 9.9999. 9.999999
9.99 .93. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .93. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.8 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.99 9999. 9.999 999. 999. 9.999 9.39 9.99. 9.999 9.99 9.999 9.999 9.999 9..99 9.999. 9.99999
..99 998. 9.99. .99. 999. 9..9. 9.99. 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.9.. 9.999 9.9999
3.905: 09:69.9 .3in9 “SW-92.9 3..-I999 3.3.9: «0.3qu... 39:99... .226... 0.954.... 999.99. 9 999.99 9 98.99 9 999.9 9 3..-.50.. InI.I..I<I

3.280. 9.9 0.3..

 

table A-J (cont'd)

W9

S‘OOQONOOONMOOCCOMBO-0OOMOOOOOOOOOMONO‘NOF

Id!
2
22.
36.
30.
26.
32.
26.
22.
22.
26.
23.
2L
2L
2L
2L
2L
23.
2L
27.
23.
23
2L
23
30
22
23.
22
22.
22
22.
2.
2.
29.
2.
0.
3.
I.
2.
7.

.0001
0001
0003
000i
000!
0002
0001
.0001
0001
0001
0001
0001
0001
0001
000'
000'
0001
.0001

0001
.0001
.0001

0001

0001

0001

0001

0001

0001

0001

0001

0001

0001
.0001
0001

53.3
63

.756
793
.756
.726
726
710
.730
726
.726
726
726
726
.730
726
756
693
.693
.726
730
769
.726
.693
.726
.726
726
.726
.726
.726
.371
726
.710
393
.023
.676
.726
.360

Gm
.500
.667
.600

600
.667

99999—9—9—o-9—o-9-999

”A
"J
5:

p
O O
-50 OF.- “9:9;va 0:6QQP '9
O the" 39999939999939

vgjcret AspJotlo 9.05:0ch Spocjcrl Arujroc Avail
.756
.726
.616
.797

63.3
30.6
‘13.9

:énsaaéaaaaaaaasaa°°~2°°°°aaé§éé iii“

lox_fcrct A

63.0

.0
3
9
6
0
6
0
.3
L3
.0
.0
.3
.3
L3
.3
.3
.0
.3
.0
3
3
3
.0
.6
3
.3
3
.3
.3
.3

ééééééé aann~naaaaéééaaéné*nanz éagéség

888 .888888 88888 88888 888888888888 88

‘0“0

O‘COOOOOQC‘OOM0.00MOOOOOOQOOOONOOCO

ansénaaanaaaaaaa°33°assa°°aaaaas°nnns

63.3

HOOMMOHMMMQQHOOQQHQ

338 8383333333339339£“33882388339°9 £839§

0.00% 0 65.00% 0 90.00% 0 135.00% Ninja.“ Ninja-ct Noam“

9999999999999999999999999999999999999999
9999 9999999999 9

99:9 ”3 999999999939 °°333333333333°3 9333§
999999999999999999 9_999999999999999~9999
9 '90 G

9 299 9333333339 33°33‘3333333333333 N33.3n
9

3 ‘5'1'1'3135'9'3":':'3"3':'7 ':':'7":'7'1'3:‘5'7'3‘“3'T‘1 'I't'T "'7"":'7":‘3 . ‘3'3"
9299—292999 99999 9 999 999999999 N 9 999
999 - 9

3--.--N--:a§::32:3:522232:=::::::§:§s§a=z
b

o

9
ISQQQQQQWQQQQWQQQQQWQQ3339°““““““3393°.33
9 N 999999999999 999 9 "°"°° '°
.9232883222322eegaeaafi2§§§333333333333333
I o- I-
‘7

 

180

9.99 .999. 0.99 999. 999. 9.99 0.99 9.99 9.99 9. 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 9.90. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 0.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 ..99. 9.90..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 0.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 ..99. 9.90..
9.99 9999. 9.99 099. 999. 9.99 0.99 9. 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.999 9.9.99
9.99 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. ..09. 9.99. 9. 9.99 9.99 0.90. 9.99 0.09. 9.99. 0.099 0..999
9.99 9999. ..99. 099. 099. 9.99 9.9.. 9.99. 9.90 9. 9.9.. 9..9. 9..9. 9.90 9.999 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 0.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 ..99. 9.90..
0.99 .999. 9.09 999. 999. 9.99 9.90 9.99 0.99 9. 9.90 0.99 9.90 0.99 9.99. ..9999
9.99 .999. 9.90 999. 999. 9.99 9.90 9.99 0.99 9. 9.90 0.99 9.90 0.99 9.99. 9.9999
9.99 9999. 0.99. 9.9. 990. ..99 9..9. 9.99. 9.90 9.99 9..9. 9.90 9.90 0.99 9.999 9.99.9
9.99 0999. 9.999 9.9. 999. 9.99. 9.99. 9. 9..9. 9.99 9.99. 9..9. 0.09. 9.99. 9.0.9 9.9999.
..09 .999. 9.90 999. 999. 9.99 9.90 9.99. 0.99 9. 9.90 0.99 0.99 0.99 9..9. 0.0099
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 0.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 ..99. 9.90..
9.99 9999. 9.09 999. 9.9. 9.99 0.99 9.99. 9.90 9. 0.99 9.99 9.90 9.90 9.999 9.9999
..99 .999. 9.99 099. 990. 0.99 9.90 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.90 9.99 0.99 0.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 9999. 9..0. 909. 999. 9.9.. 9.99. 9.99 9..9. 9. 9..9. 9.9.. 9.99. 9..9. ..999 9.9999
9.99 9999. 9.99. 099. 999. . 0.09. 0.90. 9.99 0.99 9.99 9.9.. 0.99 0.90. 9.99. 0.909 9.99.9
9..9 9999. 9.09. 099. 090. 0.99. 9.99. 9.99. 0.99 9.99 9.99. 0.99 0.99 9.9.. 0.999 9.9.99
9..9 9999. 9.90 099. 999. ..90 9.90 9.99 0.99 9. 9.90 9.90 9.90 0.99 9...9 0..999
9..9 9999. 9.09. 999. 990. 9.99 9..9. 9.99. 9.90 9.99 9..9. 9.90 9.99 0.99 9.099 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 0.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 ..99. 9.90..
9..9 9999. 9.99. 999. 990. ..99 0.09. 9.99. 9.99 9.99 0.09. 0.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99 0.00.9
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 0.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 ..99. 9.90..
..09 .999. 9.90 999. 999. 9.99 9.90 9.99 0.99 9. 9.90 0.99 9.90 0.99 9.99. 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.90 999. 999. 9.99 9.90 9.99 0.99 9. 9.90 0.99 9.90 0.99 9.99. 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 0.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 ..99. 9.90..
9.99 9999. 9.99. 999. 900. 9..9 9.9.. 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.9.. 9.99 9.99 9..9. ..9.9 9.9999
9.99 9999. ..99. 990. 999. 9.99 9..9. 9. 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 9..9. 9..9. 9.999 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 0.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 ..99. 9.90..
9.99 ..99. 9.999 9.9. 909. 9.999 ...99 9.99. 0.90. 9.99 ...99 9.999 0.90. 9.999 9.999 9.9999.
9.99 9999. 9.99 990. 999. 9.00 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.9.99
9.09 9999. 9.09. 999. 999. 9.99. 9.9.. 9. 0.99 9.99 9..9. 0.99 9.9.. 9.9.. 9..99 9.9099
9.99 9999. 9..09 90.. 099. 9.999 9.909 9.99. 9.999 9.99 9.909 9..99 9.999 9.999 9.099. 9.99999
9.99 9999. 9.99 990. 990. ..99 9..9. 9.99. 9.90 9. 9..9. 9.99 9.99 9.90 0.909 9.9999
..99 .999. 9.99 099. 990. 0.99 9.90 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.90 9.99 0.99 0.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 9999. 0.99 990. .99. 0.90 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 9.90 0.99 0.99 9.99 9.999 9.99.9
9.99 .999. 0.99 999. 999. 9.99 0.99 9.99 9.99 9. 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 9.90. 9.999.
9..9 ..99. 9.9.9 0.9. 990. 9.99. 9.999 9. 9.99. 9.99 0.90. 9.99. 9.999 9.999 9.999 9.9999.
0.99 .999. 9.90 999. 999. 9.99 9.90 9.99 0.99 9. 9.90 0.99 9.90 0.99 9..9. 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 0.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 0.99 9.99 ..99. 9.90..
.99 9 999.9 9 9303.39 nonongu9u

3:899: cute-099 .9993899 89:82.9 9..9-I999 3.39:9: 99.99.98. 9.29:5: .99-9..9... 39:94.... 999.99. 9 999.99 9 999

9.9.9899 9.9 939.

 

table A-3 (award)

1%

q.~°‘°.‘~n.¢-OQQ°--~Qg°~°‘n°~-°.-°‘°.°.°°
Na .Nn .‘nnnh 0b
CNMGIII<Rlsg6U1hl~IIIIHCU $313.n.=33313131=:=313‘°’""""'"""'--"~"’«n--ncv

HNNQ'NNQ o MN~N~:N

val-din.

.0001
0001
0001
0001
0001
0002
0001
0001
0002
0001

.0002

.0001
.0195
.0001
.0002
.0001
.0001
.0001
0000
.0001
.0001
.0001
.0001
.0001
.0002
.0001
.0001
.0003
.0003
0001
0001
0002
.0006
.0002
.0001
0001
0001
0001
.0027
.0001

POI'1 Arc. fro: A

65.5
66
66
65.
56
53
66.
50
50
02
53
60
65

9:9-9-1I9\vuv\9.v\ GDU\ . ' ° ' ' ' ° '
«9«9~0:c'0-9'0~0-0 v§9r:: 25:1EBEIE2""" ""
v-Iv

.726
.707
.736
.726
.695
.705
.699
.720
.700
.730
.616

756
.730
.726
.770
.726
.777

.600
.500
.500
.500
.667
.500
.600
.716
.750
.716

600
.663
.500
.667
.500
.600

9-IDIDGIIll.'59-1IID9-ODI-111I0b9-9-I-IDU-III!C-~o~tI-ilunvvviu-1b9-9|¢p9-

-999 9 909 9999 999»- "°'
"99 9999099 9299999 99§333 333:3
'

61.1
57.0
60.1
6.
6.
6.
57.
5L
61.

vgjorct “ml-No flung!» Spec_
.5“

0...“...nFCOOMMn‘CCMCOOOOMOHHOOCQC.OO

fins:°83§°=°aagaaaaasnn~én Eda so «6

509‘
63.3

Major“ 11

65.0
65.0
135.0
65.0

"COMMOOOMOMOOMOMOQDHMMMMOOEOQMOHOOMOMM‘H

£3888°333838§8°088§ 99833°89938839° 380989

a éaéaa 5' 838 éaaaaéééé aaaéésaaaaéa 8

Anal. Mn_ font ”01.50.10

OMOOQOOM...HQOOQMQOO‘OHCCO0M

. n O
annssas=§an323§aa asasaaggéé

QMQOOOOQOQONOC:O

‘
333°E993833E99

50.6
50
63.
50.
50.6
270.5
50

OMOOHMOOOMOPOOOQOV‘OOOMOOOO.‘COCOMOOOOC

O
:33: scanasa§3°zaa§aaasaaaa 2,3:°s§ saaségé

162.1
203
206
162
167.
200
192
102.
265.
162
201.
179
2639.2
162.1
220.2
162.1
171.0
171.0
619.5
162.1
162.1
162.1
192.7
162.1
252.7
162.5
162.1
350.0
162.1
179.6
206.2
671.6
225.1
162.1
179.6
162.1
167
990.6
1 2.1

Perl-cur 0 0.0000 65.M0 90.0000 135.MI10
50.6
.3
63.3
206.0

1937.5
369263.0
1162.5
2970.0
1162.5
1000.3
1000.3
13691.6
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1937.5
1162.5
3229.1
1550.0
1162.5
5961.6
5037.5
1162.5
1937.5
6006.1
6716.6
2970.0
1162.5
1937.5
1162.5
1550.0
60026.6
1162.5

70b" 6'3 “0006)

m2

333333¢°°°°~°n°00333~°~~93933933999933939
§33233 “a 23:azazanszaaazgagazsszzazgganz
5

:

u—c-pc-Nc-u-Nv-o-NN—v-Nu-hu-m— "“8"” -c-nobu-u-I-SQU-o-u-
=§§§§§§§§§§§§§§°'§§§°§§§° §"§§§§§§§§—§§§§
"0 O 0 O 0 I 0 O O 0 O 0 O .808. O O 8. O O 8.80 8. I O I O O I 0 0°. 0 O O O
l

O

3

33333333 .3 3:3 ggagagzsznss _32 3333§§333
g --

0. M 9.98 C 9 I! NNQONON 0. 0'0". 0. '1
{333$3§§33332§3§35$zfiasasegafiefiseeaqfiaafig
8
0° 6 OONOOPOO PONN $090 086 Oc- 9
£3§§§§3§§§8§38838€§88$3§€38$§§QSS§§§€€§E§
8

l
2
30.0.9.9.-Inc-nuc-clan-ONo-nnnoGav-Q'QOC-nvv-c-U-v-GQ-n-
5:: 33 :3 33ssgszsnE§3§3 333 ~33;.3=::::§§:3:

l
2
:QMOQBGOOOOOOOOOnOOMOQOOOC-O'OOOOOOOQQQQQQ
Essnag acc°a3na ggaga gnnsga§32°3aa Ragga a

I

I

333333: 333 2:32;; 33;: .3.nnansnns gnaw

N

'aaaéaaéa a £88 3 a aéaaa éééaa é 3

MI! . OMOOQ‘OOOOOOOMOOOOOG

CH 0"
332§°3naa§332333 a§°gnnsga§gaaaaaa°xgsa°

63.3

Perimeter 0 0.00% 0 65.0060 90.0060 135.006 Mn Anglo Mn font Nu Angle

..‘on‘nocan.‘9n‘..nn°..°°.n..n°.nnnnann°n
8383 838$39333393S§8°£3fl“ 3323833 £3383
33R3£°EC99§99 333§33RR883§§3383333 333
333389 3C8. 38883'3§32333§3 §8383338§ 3383
9353333313993393333333333tfietflfitfifitfittfit
NN NNN .~~N0~~°N'N°~ N0 N~~NN~ ~~~~'Q~~N
22 23sézz333233232:3332333333253333§5333
.- .-
mfitQQQteflwi399399939!efififlfieefietfleefiflfifien
.NNQONOONNNNPCN “ON90‘N NNONO'N n O
fl::32::33==8§2=.&3939§3399:2:==a:=:=23:2=
5 '- o-c- “ c- 0 U‘ ‘9
‘1 .- 0-0-
1

'10610 A—S (cont'd)

B3

399°.NfichcOFHOOOMNONnOO-OOOOCNOOFQOCOOOONO

NONNVIONN
§3~33 “a ~~:—~~:§333fi333§fi§§33 ~~S§~3fi§3§

.0001
0016
.0002
.0002
.0003
.0001
.0002
.0001
.000:

. 3'53 '53 535535 3535555535553'5'5'5'55'5

-’ o o

’23..“ g3722222 2222222222282222222

MM

.‘92

.733
.600
.609
.667
716
666
500
.667
.500
.500
.512
363
.500
.500
702
.676
.667
.633
.500
.500
.500
.500
.500
.563
.500
500
535
.667
500
.657
600
.500
.571
.616
.600
.600
.500
.500
.632
.600

up Iotlo ”up. he 6pc Perl Ar¢a_ fro: Avg!

167.7
50

e. so I O
3222323322332§322 3: 2.5332222222322338"

vu_fcret

DOOMOCQMMQOGM

223222222222222223282322283

169.9

63
291

75
66.
113
'50.
113
50.
50.
566.
1025.
50

um um A

65.0

O'NOMCMOMMU‘QMHMUO‘MOOMOHU!"HOOMOGHQCG‘HMOO

222222 ””32“”23332253 22222222222222222

'3
82 8 88 882 222882228222288 28 888 8 882

OO'OOMOOO.MNOOCNQOOOOHONO‘C'OCOMOHMOMOCOM

§Sg€883583353S§RQEE£SSS=RS'"S83°8233°8n3

Co
260.5

O‘HOQMQ

'HHH“.M.°MOMU§MI§NOMO°M‘~°OHRN‘

2222222 222322 H222 222222 2222 22222§2

139.2
50.6
0.

'"Oz
”0’

M
g2 2g222~22°2222§22222

177.2
50
53
75
63
113
36.
”9.
025
36.
36.
721
666.
63.
75.
63.
75.
36.
66.
0.
663.
36.
‘36.
36.
75
50
36
75
7
0
50
36
36
5
36.

596.2
179.6
929.0
260.3
253.9
306.0
162.1
321.5
162.1
162.1
1666.9
2567.5
162.1
162.1

Peri-our 0 0.006 0 65.006 0 90.005 0 135.006 .ann.“ Major" 11n_mlo
2120.6

‘A.r-o.a_
13620.7
1937.5
26676.6
3667.5
6006.1
6779.1
1162.5
6262.5
1162.5
1162
167606.6
1162.5
1162.5
211960.?
95970.0
2661.6

184

 

9.99 9.99. 9.93 .99. 999. 9.93 9.93 9. 9.9.. 9.99 9.99. 9.9.. 9.93 9.93 ..999 9.399.
9.3 .999. ..99 39. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 . 9.99 9.99 9.3. 9.999.
9.3 .999. ..99 39. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.3. 9.999.
9.3 .999. 9.99 ~99. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. ..993
9.3 .999. 9.99 39. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.99..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.3 .999. ..99 39. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.3. 9.999.
9.3 .999. 9.99 39. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99..
9.3 .999. 9.99 39. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..99. 939..
9.3 .999. 9.99 39. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.9.9..
9.99. 399. 9.99.. 9.9. 999. 9.999 9.999 9.99. ..999 9.99 9.999 9.999 ..999 9.999 9.993 9.999...
9.99 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. 9.99. 9..9. 9.99 9.9.. 9.99. 9.9.. 9.99.. 9..9. 9.99. ..999 9.9999
9.3 .999. 9.99 39. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.9.9..
9.3 .999. 9.99 39. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.99..
9.3 .999. 9.99 39. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..99. 939..
...9 9..99. 9.99. .99. 999. 9.99. 9.93 9.99 9..9. 9.99. 9..9. «.99. 9.999. ~.99. 9..99 9.9.99.
9.3 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.33
9.99 ~999. ..99. 999. 999. 9.99 9.9.. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9.. 9..9. 9.93 9.99.9
9.9. 9999. 9.999 9.9. 999. 9.999 9.999 9.99. ..999 9.99 9.999 9.999 ..999 ..999 9.99. 9.939..
9.99. 9999. 9399 999. ~99. 9.999 9..99 9.99 ..999 9.99. ..999 9.9.9 9..99 9.999 9..99. 9.9..9..
9.3 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 9999. 9.3. 999. 999. 9.99 9.9.. 9.99 9.99 9. 9..9. 9..9. 9.9.. 9.99 9.39 9.9999
9.99 9999. 9.3. 999. 999. 9.3. 9.3. 9. 9..9. 9.99 9.3. 9..9. 9.99. 9.3. 9..99 93999.
9.3 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..3. 9.9.9..
9.3 9.999. 9.99. 999. 999. 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.999 9.9.3
~39 9999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.93 9.993
9..9 9999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.93 ..939
9.99 9999. 9.3. 999. 999. ..99 9.3. 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.3. 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9..99 ..9999
9.3 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
..3 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.999.
9.3 .999. 9..9 39. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.993
9.3. 9999. 9.9.9 999. 999. 9.999 9.999 9. 9.999 9.99 9.39 9.999 9.39 9.39 9.999. 9.3999.
9.99 ~999. 9.99 999. 39. 9.3 9..9. 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.93 ..9999
9.3 .999. 9.99 39. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.9.9..
9.3 .999. 9.99 39. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.9.9..
..99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.3 ~999. 9.99 999. .99. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.93 9.993.
9.3 .999. 9.99 39. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 9.3 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.99..
9.3 .999. 9.99 9.9. 999. ..99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.39 9.33
9.3 .999. ..99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.9 9.99 9.9 9.3. 9.999.
3.9393 09.9-3: 13:92.9 09.109099 0.999199 90..-9:95 .0»..le: 0.95:5: «tonic... 9.953... 999.99. 9 999.99 9 98.99 9 999.9 9 ..«.-5.3.. 3.0-519:

3.9899 9.9 9.899

185

 

 

9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 9.9. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
..99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
..99 9999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99
9.99 9999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 9999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. 9..9. 9.9.. 9. 9.99 9.99 9.9.. 9.99 9..9. 9.9..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 9.99. 9.9.9 999. 999. 9.999 9.9.9 9.99. 9.9.9 9. 9.9.9 9.999 9.999 9.9.9
9..9 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. 9.99. 9..9. 9. 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.9.. 9..9.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 9999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 ..99. 9.999 999. 999. 9.99. 9.999 9.99 9.99. 9.99. 9.99. 9.9.9 9.999 9.99.
9.99 9999. 9.99. 9.9. 999. 9.9.. 9.99. 9.99. 9.99 9. 9.99. 9.99. 9..9. 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 9999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.9.. .999. 9.999 9.9. 9.9. 9.999 9.999 9.99. 9.999 9.99 9.999 9.999 ...99 ..999
9.99 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. 9.99 9.9.. 9.99. 9.99 9. 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99
..99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. 9.99 9..9. 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9..9.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 9999. 9.9.. 999. 999. ..99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.9..
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 9999. 9.99. 9.9. 999. 9.99. 9.99. 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99. 9.99.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.9.. 9999. ..999 .99. 999. 9.999 ..999 9.99 9.999 9.99 ..999 ..999 9.999 9.999
9.99 9.99. 9.999 999. 999. 9.99. 9.999 9. 9..9. 9.99 I 9.99. 9.. 9 9.999 9.999
9.969 9.: 9.99.99. 939.99 9999.99 9999.9

3.9.92.9 octane: 2.9-9099 39:85.9 3.99:9: 3.39:9: «9..9an 0.95:9... 932:5:

99.9cou9 9.9 9.99.

..99.
9.9.9
9.99.
..99.
9.99.
9...9
..99.
9.999
9.999
..99.
..999
9.999
..99.
9.99..
9.999
..99.
9.999
..99.
9.9.9
9.999
9.99.
..99.
9.999
..99.
..99.
9.99..
9.999
9.99.
9.99.
..99.
...99
..99.
9.999
..99.
9.999
..99.
..99.
9.99.
9.999.
9.999
9 53.3.39

9.99..
9.9999
9.999.
9.99..
9.999.
9.9999
9.99..
9.9999
9.9999
9.99.—
9.9999
9.9999
9.99..
9.99999
9.9999
9.99..
9.99.9
9.99..
9.9999.
9.9999
9.999.
9.99..
9.9999
9.99..
9.99..
9.9.999
9.9999
9.999.
9.999.
9.99..
9.9999
9.99..
9.9999
9.99..
9.9999.
9.99..
9.99..
9.9999
9.99999

 

16b10 0'3 (Cont'd1

B6

N‘D‘ONM'P‘FO ON .8

.0004
.0001
.0002
.0001

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ §§§ 2§§§§

.14‘

nah O I O 0 0 0 I I

3999 9 9“8€89“882883388838é833833 9383 “
= c- 0-9- '- Q.~ '

"’ VI

8.~.§~'n' NV“. O 0'.

N '0 O 0' O 0O O N
3g2g_ggggggggggiggfic3n§sz§S§Emfis§fiéa§§§é
O O O O I 0 I 0 O O I O O 0 O O I O

.600
.500
.500
.750
.350
000
500
000
500
500
.667
000
.500
.500
556
625
.714

9.7999999—999-199999999999—9.99999999—9939-
2: 3933:3308 o-vgggohc-Q 9—96—090- 9P0.- .
._ 3 0:999 99992§§309999908 999:3:
OOOOPMOUDO

.66: a.noncgozo.gonoonoonfloonOOMOMOOGov--0500
aunt 9399999§9 88

-9888838888o8°”°8~£§8§§§€°

°C°°°°°°°°
.£.£.‘fififi.929eeeeee°°eeee92°°°°°°°°°°°e
9 999999999999 ' ' '
., ., ...' 99 99 9999999 9 9
“-99-0991239999 3999:1339 9 9

”OOCOMOMM

nasg n°na°°s4é'. anazcnnonaaan gn° §taa

75.9

888 8 888 8889 3 888 888 888889 988 8 .88

113.9
50.
75

0
2
3
50.
0.
0.
0.
75.

9399 999 888”"82888889988839888§8§88€°

OO'-999999999999999999999999999999—9999

.288 $888 83888888 3&8"£8R88888R°88§°§88

292999999999999999999999999999999999999

“ . . C C C . . I . . . . . . . .

“.9 “"18 :35396»5::R 95::=:3 anuncavuvca 15¢: .- cpcacavquuca ~§¢§Iptai¢v '15
'

126.6

126.6
30
75
30
0

OOQOOOOOQOOO

2888888888

63.3
401.0

50.6
.6

101.3
50.6
30.0
”0‘

370.3
142.1
221.7
162.5
2213.4
191.4
142.1
191.4
142.1
167.4
230.4
199.0
142.1
167.4
302.9
262.5
243.7
2473.9
199.0
142.1
335.4
179.4
369.4
342.1
142.1
279.4
524.1
142.1
107.0
319.9
214.9
2657.6
142.1
10377.0
627.9
220.2
142.1

Pcrluter 0 0.006 0 45.006 0 90. 00: 0 135.0011111anglc MIL font fight“. Infarct ”Liam ”Ludo Shape)“: Specjcrl Are-_fnc Melodic.
1939.0

_A_r_o_6_
6329.1
1162.5
2041.6
1550.0

143632.1
2325.0
1162.5
2195.6
1162.5
1550.0
3356.3
2454.1
1162.5
1550.0
4520.0
3616.6
3356.3
94290.9
2454.1
1162.5
5941.6
1937.5
5425.0
7620.0
1162.5
4262.5
1162.5
2066.6
5037.5
2454.1
243664.6
1162.5
2634203.0
110694.,
25962.3
2712.5
1162.5

 

 

 

187

 

9.9~ .999. 9.~n nm~. 89. 9.3 n.n9 9.99. 9.99 9. n.n9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.n9.~
9.99. 399. ..99n 999. ~99. 9.9mm ~.~.9 9.99 ...9~ 9. ...9n ~.~.9 ..~9n ...9~ ..~9.. ~.n9n9~
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 a.“ 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.9a 9.9m ..~9. n.~9..
9.- .89. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.9a 9.3 ..~9. n.~9..
n.n~ .999. 9.99. a. 99~. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.3 9. 9.99 9.9M 9.99 9.99 n.~9. 9.999.
9.- .89. 9.99 9-. 93. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99 9.99 a.” 9.9m 9.9m ..~9. 9.3..
9.99. .999. 9.~99 man. 999. 9.39 9.~99 . 9.99 n.9- 9.9m. n.9- 9..99 9.~99 9.39 9.9~n. 9.9.999.
~99 ~.99. 9.9.~ 9n~. 999. ~.9- ~.nn~ 9.9m. n.~9~ 9.99 ~.nn~ 9.-~ n.~9~ ~.n.~ ~.~.~ ~.9999n
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.9a 9.9» ..~9. n.~9..
9.99 9999. 9.99. :9. ~99. n.9~. 9.9. 9.9». ...9. 9. 9.9. 9.9~. n..9. 9.9. 9.999 9.99~9
9.99. ~39. 9..9n 9~9. ~99. ..9.9 9.9» 9.99 ...9~ 9.9m. ...9~ 9..9n 9.3m 9.999 9.999. 9.9-99
n.n~ .999. 9.99 3. 9C. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9m 9. 9.9a 9.8 9.99 9.9m n.~9. 9.9mm.
9.9m .999. ~69. 9.9. men. 9.99. ~.9n. 9.9m. 9.n~ 9.99 ~.9n. 9.99 9.n~ 9.:— 9.n~n m.~.9n
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.9m 9.9m ..~9. m.~9..
9.99 9.99. 9..9n 9.9. 9~9. ~.nm~ 9.9; 9.99 9.99. 9. 9.-~ 9..9: 9.99m 9.99. n.-9 9.999:
9.n~ .999. 9.9~ 999. ~99. ..99 9.n~ 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.n~ n.n9 9.9.~ ..9nn~
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. Sn. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.9. 9.3 ..~9. n.~9..
~.9~ .999. 9.99 9C. 999. 9.~m 9.n~ 9.99 9.9m 9.99 9.99 9.9m 9.n~ n.n9 9.99. 9.n~n~
n.n~ .999. 9.99 a. 9m~. n.99 9.99 9.99 9.3 9. 9.99 9.9m 9.99 9.9» n.~9. 9.9mm.
9.n~ .999. 9.99 999. 9a. n.99 9.99 9. n.n~ 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99 9.99 9.~9. 9.99..
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.9a 9.3 ..~9. 9.9.9..
..- .999. «in 9n~. 999. 9.99. n.n9 9.9m. 9.9m 9.99 n.n9 9.9m 9.99 9.99 9.9~. n.~n9.
9.9~ .999. ..99 9-. 999. 9.: n.n9 9.99 9.99 9. n.n9 9.9m n.n9 9.9m 9.~9. n.~n9.
9.; ~89. ..~9. ~99. n~9. ..9~ n..9. 9.3. 9.99 9.99 ”..9. 9.n~ n.n9 9.n~ n.9- n.~99n
9.n~ .999. 9.99 999. Sn. n99 9.99 9. n.u~ 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99 9.99 9.~9. 9.9mm.
~.nn ~999. 9.n~ 999. n99. 9.99 9.n~ 9.99 n.n9 9. 9.n~ n.n9 9.n~ n.n9 9.9- n.9mnn
n.n~ .999. 9.99 E. 9C. n.99 9.99 9.99 9.9» 9. 9.9a 9.3 9.99 9.9m n.~9. 9.9mm.
n.9n .999. 9.m~ -9. 999. n.n9 9.n~ 9. 9.9m 9.99 n.n9 9.9m 9.n~ 9.n~ 9.9.~ n.nom~
«.3 ~89. 9.~9 99~. ~99. 9.99 9.n~ 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.n~ 9.9m 9.m~ n.n9 n.n- 9.9~9~
~.mn 399. 9.n.. ~99. 999. ..99 9.9~. 9.99 n.n9 9.99 9.99 n.n9 9.9~. 9.n.. 9.99m 9.899
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99. n.n~ 9.9a 9.8 ..~9. n.~9..
n.~n ~999. 9..9 999. 9.~. 9.- 9.99 9.99 n.n9 9. n.n9 9.n~ 9.99 n.n9 9.93 n.9mnn
9.99 9999. ..99. 999. 99~. 9.~9. 9.99. 9.99 9.9~. 9.99 ~.9n. 9.9~. 9.99. ~.9n. ..n99 5999..
9.- .999. 9..99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99. 9.9. ..~9. m.~9..
9.99 -99. 9.99 9:. ~9~. ~.~9~ 9.93 9.3. n.99~ 9.9 9.3m ~.nn~ n.99~ ~.nm~ 9..99. 9.99.:
n.9n n999. 9.99 999. ~99. 9.99 9.9.. 9.99. 9.n~ 9. 9.n.. 9.n~ 9.n~ 9.n~ 9.99~ ..9-9
~.an 399. 9.99. ~99. 999.. 9.99 9.9. 9. 9.99 9.99 n..9. 9.9m n..9. 9..9. n.99~ 9.9999
9... 9.99. 9.99 no~. . 999. 9.99m ~.9~n 9. 9.9. 9.99 9.9.n 9.9. 9.3» ~.9~n 9.m-. 9.39:”
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.n~ 9.99 9.99 ..~9. n.~9..
9.9mm ~9n9. ..999~ 9.n. nun. 9.n9.. . 9.999. 9.3. 9.~n9 9.99 I 9.999. 9.n... 9.~n9 ~.9~n. 9.9.99 9hnmnw9m I
9.999 9:. 9.99.3. 9 199.99 9199.9 9199.9 9 50:33.. a o .. 9

3.92.96 9.2-32 _..-gunk? 02.0923 3..-Ia: 923.93 .8215: 395:5: «22:9...

at. .80. n.< 9.8..

 

188

 

[Ii

9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.9~ .999. 9.99 99~. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
n.n~ .999. 9.99 9M~. 99~. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 . 9.99
~.9~ .999. 9.~9 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.99 9999. ~..n. 9.9. 999. 9..9 9.9.. 9. 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9..9. 9.9..
~.99 9999. 9.99. 9~9. ~99. ~.99. 9.99. 9.99 9.9.. 9. ~.99. ~.99. 9.99. 9.9..
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.9~ .999. 9.99 99~. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9..9. 9.99. 9.~99 999. 9.~. 9.99~ 9.99~ 9. 9.99. 9.99 ~.99~ 9.99. ~.99~ 9.99~
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
~..9. 9999. ~.~99 999. ~99. 9.~9n 9.999 9. ~.9.~ 9.99 ..9~9 ~.9.~ ..9~n 9.999
9.99 ~999. 9.99 99~. ~99. 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
~.~9 ~999. ..~9. n99. 99~. 9.99 9..9. 9.99. 9.9~ 9.99 9..9. 9.9~ 9.9~ 9.99
~.9~ .999. 9.99 9.~. 999. ..99 9.9~ 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.99 .999. 9.99 9.~. 999. 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.9~ 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. ~.~9 -~. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
..- .999. 9.99 99~. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9... 9999. 9.~9~ 999. 999. 9.99. 9.-~ 9. 9.9~. 9.99 ~.-. 9.9~. 9.99. 9.-~
~.99 ~999. ~.99 99~. 9~9. ..9~ 9..9. 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.9~ 9.99 9.9~
9.9~ .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.9~ .999. 9.99 99~. 99~. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99
9.9~ .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.99 9999. 9.99. 999. ~99. 9..9 9.9.. 9.99. 9.9~ 9.99 9.9.. 9.9~ 9.9~ 9..9.
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99
9.- .999. 9.99 9-. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99 n.9~ 9.99 9.99
..99 9.99. ~.99~ .99. 9~9. 9.~9~ 9.99~ 9. 9.9~. 9.99 I 9.~9~ 9.9 . ~.9.~ 9.9 ~

29:9 5: 999.99. 9 199.99 9 999.99 9 999.9

3.9399 conga-89 _.....Ioonu 338.23 9.9-clan: «22:93 3..-sun... SEQ-x “228:.

.9.ucoou 9.9 9.90.

..«..
to:
«.2.
3:
..«..
..8.
..«..
3:
9.999
3:
..u:
3..:
...E
9.3.
3:
:8.
as:
..2.
3:
~38
38
..S
3..:
3:
3:
3:
..8.
..2.
..3.
..«..
32
38
I:
3:
I:
..8.
:3
..«..
..N:
2%
A.— LOu'—~Ok

9.~9..
9.~n9.
9.999.
9.~n9.
9.~9..
9.~9..
9.~9..
9.9~99
9.~999.
9.~9..
9.~9..
9.~9..
9.~99.
~.~9.~n
9.~9..
9.99999
9..99~
9.~9..
9.~9..
9.99~n
9.9~9~
9.999~
9.~9..
9.~9..
9.999.
9.~9..
9.~9..
9.~n9.
9.~9..
9.~9..
~.99~9.
9.99.9
9.999.
9.999.
9.999.
9.~9..
..9-9
9.~9..
9.~9..

 

189

 

9.99 .999. 9.99 9n. 9:. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.9... 9.99 9.3 9.9... 9.99. 9.999.
9..» 899. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99... 9.99.9
9.99 9999. 9.99 9:. 9!. 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.9. 9.99 9.99 9.9. 9..9. 9.99 9.9.» 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 9:. 99.. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.8 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 998. 9.9~. 2.... 999. 9.99 9.9: 9. 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9..9. 9.9: 9.999 9.99.9
9.99 9.99. 9.999 999. 999. :9... 9.9.9 9. 9.99. 9.99 9.92 9.99. 9.999 9.9.... 9.999 9.9929
..99 .999. 9.9... 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.2. :99.
9.9... ~999. 9.99 E. 9:. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99... 9.9999
9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.9: 9.99:
9.3 9999. 9.99. 9:. 999. 9..9. 9.9.... 9.99 9.9. 9. 9.99 9.9: 9.9~. 9.2 9.99» 9.9.8
9.- .98. 9.3 99.. 99.... ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99:
9.99 .999. 9.99 9:. 93. 9.: 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99:
9.99 .999. 9.9... 999. 999. 9.: 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 E. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99:
9.99 9999. 9.9: :9. 999. 9..9. 9.9~. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.: 9.99. 9.2. 9.999 9.99.9
..99. .999. ..99 99». 999. . 9.: 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.9999
...9 .89. 9.99 9C. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.9999
9.99 .98. 9.99 9:. 999. 9.9... 9.99 9.9: 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.9999
9.3 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.~.: 9.32
9.99 9999. 9.999 999. 999. 9.9: 9.99. 9. 9.9.... 9.99 9.99. 9.9.... 9..9. 9.99. 9.999 9.999:
:9 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.9.9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 99.... 9.99 9.9... 9. 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.: .999. 9.99 999. 99.... 9.: 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.8 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.: 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. E: 9..9. 9.99. 9.: 9.99 9...... 9.99 9..9. 9.9: 9.89 9.299
9.2 .999. 9.: ~99. ~99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.: 9.99 9.93 9.999
9.99 9999. 9.9: ~99. E. 9.9~. 9.9: 9. 9..9. 9.99 9.9: 9..9. 9.99. 9.99. ..999 9.899.
9.99 .999. ..99 99L. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9..99 9.99 9.99. 9.39.
9.99 998. 9.99. 999. 9.9. 9.9: 9.99. 9.99 9..9. 9.99. 9..9. 9.9.... 9.99. 9.99. 9.5 9.9999
9.99. .999. 9.99 999. 99.... ...9 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99:
9.99 ~999. ..99 92. 9:. 9.9. 9.99 9.92 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.929
9.3 ~999. 9.99 999. :9. 99» 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.: 9.99 9.99 9.2 9.999 9.99:
9.9... .999. 9.99 9:. 9n. 9.: 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.992
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.: 9.99 9. 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99:
9.9... .999. 9.9 92. 999. ...9 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.99. .999. 9.99 999. 999. 9.9... 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.39.
9.99 .98. ..99 999. 999. 9.9... 9.99 9.3 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.~.: 9.32
9.: 9999. 9.3. 9...9. 89. 9.9: 9.9.... 9.99 9.99 9. 9.9~. 9.9: 9.9.... 9.99 9.999 999:
9.9... .999. 9.99 E. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.3 .999. 9.99 9:. 99.. 9.: 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.9... .999. 9.9 999. 8.... ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. M99... u .
93:6... 389...... 999.99. 9999.99 9999.99 9999.9 9 8.8:: 9 9 . 9

3:99:92 99.21929 299.6999 9.9.2.95 9.99-I999 929919: 9:99:38 9.95:9...

29.283 9.9 9.9.—

 

190

 

 

9.99 .999. 9..99 9k. 89. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
..99 9999. 9.99. 999. 999. 9.99. 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99. 9.99. 9.9.... 9.99 9.999 9.95
9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9.9 9.9... 9.99 ..99. 9.99:
9.9.9 .999. 9.99 9:. 9:. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .89. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.9... 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 9...9. 999. ...9 9.99 9.9.9 9.9.9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99:
..99 ~98. ..99 9...9. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.9999
9.99 .999. 9.99 92. 999. ...9 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9 ..99. 9.99:
9.99 .999. 9:99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9..9 ~999. 9.2 9:. 999. 9.99 9.: 9.99. 9.99 9. 9.: 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.99:
9.99 9.999. 9.999 999. 999. 9.29 :99 9.9: 9.999 9.99 9.29 ...99 9.999 9..9... 9.99: 9.99999
9.9... .999. 9.99 92. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.99:
9.99 ~999. 9.99 92. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9.9 9.989
9.99 .999. 9..99 92. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99:
9.99 .999. 9.99 9:. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
:9 .999. 9.9... 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.9: 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.2. 9.5.
..99 .999. 9.99 E. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.9: 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.5 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 89. 999. 9.99 9.9... 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 9...9. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.99:
9.99 9999. 9.99 E. ...99. 9.: 9..9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9..9. 9.99 9.~9... 9.9999
9.9. :99. 9.999 :9. 999. 9.99. 9.9: 9. 9.99. 9.99 9.99. 9.99. 9.999 9.9.9 9.999 9.299...
9.9... .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99:
..99. 9999. 9.9: 999. 9.9.. 9.999 9.999 9. 9.5.. 9.99 9.29 9.5.. :99 9.999 9.99: :99:
9.99 .999. 9.99 9:. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.99 .999. 9.9... 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9: 9.39.
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.99:
9.99 9999. 9.99. :9. 999. 9..9. 9.9.... 9.9: 9.: 9.99 9.9~. 9.9: 9.: 9.99 9.999 9.9999
9.: ~98. 9.99 :9. 9:. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 ...99 9.59
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.9.9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.9.9:
9..9 9999. 9.99 an. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.: 9.99 9.9. 9.99 9..99 ..99:
9.99 .98. 9.99 999. 999. 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.99 .999. 9.99 92. 99,... ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9:99:
9.99 .999. 9.99 92. 999. ...9 9.99 9.9.9 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.9... ..99. 9.99:
:99 99.9. 9.99: .99. 92. ..999 9.5 9.9.9 9.999 9.99 9.999 9.999 9:5 9.999 9.95 9.9995
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99 ..99. 9.99:
9.99 .999. 9.99 999. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.9... .999. ..99 92. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9..9. 989. 9.99. 999. 99.... 9.9~. 9..9. 9.9: 9.99 9. 9..9. 9.9~. 9.9.... 9.99 9.9.9.9 9.899
9.99 .999. 9..99 9...9. 999. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9: 9.999.
9.9... .999. 9.9.9 92. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 n 9.99 u 9.9... 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. aha; . -
9...9. 9:. 9.999 $9999.99. 9999.99 9999.99 9 999.9 9 9:99:99 9 9 9 9

9399995 999919994 29919999 «9...9-.95 9.99-..99 922:9: 99999.93: 9.95:5:
99.9903 n.< ..9.—

 

 

191

 

 

9.99 .999. 9.99 955. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9.9. 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.~9..
9.9.9 .999. 9.99 9.9.5. 89. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.8 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
5..9 9999. 9.9.. .95. 999. 9.59. 9.9~. 9. 9.95 9.99 9.9~. 9.95 9..9. 9.9~. 9.599 9.9.59
9.95 .999. 9.99 9~5. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9m 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.99 5999. 9.959 959. 9.5. 9.99. «.55. 9.99. 9.9~. 9.99 «.55. 9.9.9.. «.99. 9.99. 9.999 ..995..
9.59 9.99. ..99... 999. 999. 9.999. 9.999 9. 9.99. 9.99 9.99. 9.99. 9.999 9.99.9. 9.959 9.99.9.9.
9.- .999. 9.99 9.9.5. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.59 9999. 9.9.. 999. 999. ..99 9.9.. 9.99 9.99 9. 9..9. 9.9.. 9.9.. 9.99 9.999 ..9999
9.~u .999. 9.99 995. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9.9. 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.99 ~999. ..99 ~59. .59. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.95 9.99 9.99 9.999 9.99.9
9.~5 .999. 9.99 9.9.5. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9... 9.99 9.99 ..~9. 9.~9..
9.- .999. 9.99 995. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9.9. 9.99 9.99 ..~9. 9.~9..
9.- .999. 9.99 995. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.9.9. .999. 9.99 9~5. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9.9. 9.99 9.99 ..9.9. 9.~9..
9.95 .999. 9.99 9N5. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.- .999. 9.99 9N5. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.99 ~999. 9.99 995. 599. 9.99 9.95 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.95 9.99 9.9.5 9..99~
9.9.9. .999. 9.99 995. 995. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.9m .999. 9.95 999. 599. ..99 9.95 9.99. 9.99 9.99 9.95 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.9.9 .9999
9.95 .999. 9.99 995. 995. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9. 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99 9.99. 9.999.
9.- .999. 9.99 995. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.95 9.99 9.99 9.9N 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9.~9..
9.99. .999. 9.99 995. 999. ...9 9.99 9.99 9.9~ 9.99 I 9.99 9.9.9. 9.99 9.99 ..99. 9h~m.w I I
..9.9 5.. 999.99. 9999.99 9999.9 9999.9 9 90992909 9 9 .9 9

3.999999 9999:9999 9999:9999 92.2.9.8 9.99-I999 999-9..99 99.99.99: 9.9.3.99: 999-We...
99.99999 9.9 939—

 

W2

tabla A-6
Sonata: Good98 Sortad data

III-bar of fields data taken form ->
Fiald oraa->

60.0 fields
17.511 III‘Z

valuaa below in aicrona mlaaa otharviaa noted

Calculatad valuaa all voida
Air void contant.Pa(vol X) 6.6
Avaraoa araa of air void sections, A' (.02) .036
Avaraga emivalant circla dillatar, Da' (II) .092
Avaraoa for. factor, F' 58.3
Total araa of plana section, (of?) 57.0
Total scan area. (our?) 7.0
Nubar of fields 60.0
Ill-bar of air voids 895.0

_A_r_a_a_ Porinatar Shopajac Ilaxjarat
13380392.0 21283.3 .371 6260.5 6127.5
2636203.0 10377.0 .307 2886.1 1831.6
2363322.0 15682.6 .123 2696.2 1727.3
1616699.0 8123.8 .307 2969.6 1633.8
1323967.3 6669.2 .376 1797.5 1298.3
1023120.6 6867.6 .276 2038.0 1161.3
561333.0 6619.6 .319 1665.6 830.2
381962.7 2702.6 .657 868.1 697.6
369263.8 2639.2 .738 886.1 666.9
328209.8 3169.9 .616 976.7 666.6
277835.2 2752.6 .661 721.5 596.8
263866.6 2657.6 .636 1000.0 557.2
216869.0 2365.5 .687 898.7 525.5
216931.5 2212.6 .552 736.2 58.1
211960.7 2120.6 .592 721.5 519.5
187806.8 2567.5 .358 1025.3 689.0
187677.6 2996.8 .263 759.5 688.8
171273.6 1886.6 .605 519.0 667.0
156611.2 2676.0 .317 772.2 663.7
152932.1 1770.6 .613 620.3 661.3
163632.1 2213.6 .368 868.1 627.6
137690.5 1563.6 .726 569.6 618.7
130866.7 1955.6 .630 766.8 608.2
"9678.2 1651.8 .712 693.7 390.0
"7560.7 1667.2 .705 681.0 386.9
116119.9 1501.6 .667 681.0 386.5
111857.6 2563.9 .217 797.5 377.6
“0696.9 1939.8 .370 868.1 375.6
109919.? 1576.9 .555 607.6 376.1
103203.3 2376.6 .230 582.3 362.5
100769.2 2535.6 .197 596.9 358.2
95970.0 1360.1 .652 668.6 369.6
96290.9 2673.9 .196 632.9 366.5
85636.8 1668.9 .699 566.3 330.2
77757.7 1211.8 .665 663.0 316.6
76595.2 1182.1 .689 617.7 312.3
76207.7 1332.8 .539 663.0 311.5
75969.6 1696.6 .626 693.7 311.0
67295.3 1176.5 .611 356.6 292.7

 

voida > 50
oo. cir_dia

Eq._cir_d Fornjact

a aa a a aaaaoaaa aoaa aa
NNbObOONNDOObONbOObOOObNODNOOOOOMhNOOUN

338333888833382382§35233388338838338283

 

193

tabla A-6 (cont'd)

A_r_a_o_ Pariaatar Shapa_Fac Max_Farot Eq._cir_d Fora Factor

66778.6 1006.8 . 361.8 291.6 72.8
65099.5 1057.6 .732 605.1 287.9 50.5
63162.0 1679.6 .363 329.1 283.6 76.2
59565.3 1037.9 .695 356.6 275.3 60.6
57737.0 1152.1 .567 605.1 271.1 66.8
56703.7 1183.3 .509 605.1 268.7 66.0
55612.0 1166.3 .512 392.6 265.6 65.8
52957.9 1026.3 .636 367.1 259.7 50.0
69728.8 1297.7 .371 329.1 251.6 58.5
68826.6 998.6 .615 316.5 269.3 62.1
66699.6 1128.5 .659 617.7 263.3 33.9
66303.8 1826.7 .167 668.6 237.5 25.7
63658.0 1265.7 .356 506.3 235.8 21.7
62108.0 968.9 .588 361.8 231.5 65.9
61333.0 1066.9 .676 291.1 229.6 62.1
39395.5 1061.6 .639 303.8 226.0 56.3
33861.6 1225.9 .283 379.7 207.6 29.9
33066.6 822.3 .616 316.5 205.2 62.0
32808.1 1001.5 .611 316.5 206. 61.7
32162.2 866.0 .539 265.8 202.6 58.0
31387.2 1061.6 .350 278.5 199.9 51.5
30999.7 717.7 .756 253.2 198.7 61.6
30226.7 693.7 .789 260.5 196.2 66.5
30226.7 1150.3 .287 316.5 196.2 38.6
30095.6 1087.5 .320 316.5 195.8 38.3
29837.3 705.1 .756 253.2 196. 59.3
29191.6 1110.1 .298 278.5 192.8 67.9
28676.8 929.0 .618 291.1 191.1 63.1
27383.1 750.6 .611 303.8 186.7 37.8
26737.3 892.9 .621 265.8 186.5 68.2
26091.6 963.8 .368 253.2 182.3 51.8
25962.3 627.9 .827 202.5 181.8 80.6
25833.1 735.7 .600 265.8 181.6 66.5
25058.1 736.6 .586 303.8 178.6 36.6
26799.8 783.5 .508 291.1 177.7 37.3
26283.1 929.9 .353 379.7 175.8 21.6
23120.6 961.1 .328 316.5 171.6 29.6
23120.6 678.9 .630 260.5 171.6 50.9
22862.3 736.5 .533 227.8 170.6 56.1
21958.2 866.3 .385 316.5 167.2 27.9
21829.0 729.9 .515 260.5 166.7 68.0
21699.8 828.8 .397 260.5 166.2 67.8
21056.0 886.9 .338 278.5 163.7 36.6
20926.8 719.1 .508 265.8 163.2 37.7
20279.0 663.9 .615 215.2 160.7 55.8
19891.5 566.1 .780 202.5 159.1 61.7
19633.2 670.9 .568 215.2 158.1 56.0
19506.0 800.6 .383 278.5 157.6 32.0
19506.0 878.7 .317 291.1 157.6 29.3
19506.0 587.6 .710 202.5 157.6 60.5
18987.3 757.7 .616 202.5 155.5 58.9
18858.2 715.2 .663 253.2 155.0 37.5
18729.0 638.8 .577 202.5 156.6 58.1
18670.7 662.5 .529 265.8 153.6 33.3
18361.5 692.2 .681 265.8 152.8 33.0
18212.3 812.0 .367 291.1 152.3 27.6
18212.3 571.6 .701 202.5 152.3 56.5
17826.9 697.1 .661 278.5 150.6 29.3
17308.2 666.8 .523 215.2 168.5 67.6
16920.7 781.1 .369 260.5 166.8 37.2

 

16791.5
16016.5
15699.9
15261.5
16595.7
16595.7
16337.6
16337.6
16337.6
16208.2
13820.7
13820.7
13691.6
13691.6
12787.6
12658.2
12161.6
12012.6
11883.2
11756.1
11695.7
11695.7
11695.7
10979.1
10869.9
10869.9
10720.7
10591.6
10662.6
10662.6
10333.2
10206.1
10206.1

9816.6

9687.6

805.3
767.9
862.8
511.5
605.9
669.2
563.9
526.1
666.6
626.6
676.2
596.2
523.2

C
~o <>\n-a~o~in La-o‘o-loir «a.»

.§§$§§§fi5

52's

.325

E

276
.732
.500

.818
.752
.782

N4

Tabla A-6 (cont'd)

A_r_a_a_ Pariaatar Shapa_Foc Max_Farat

278.5
253.2
202.5
189.9
215.2
166.6
202.5
166.6
166.6
227.8
177.2
189.9
202.5
202.5
202.5
151.9
166.6
166.6
215.2
177.2
151.9
151.9
166.6
202.5
189.9
166.6
177.2
139.2
151.9
126.6
177.2
189.9
151.9
166.6
151.9
151.9
151.9
166.6
166.6
151.9
177.2
202.5
139.2
151.9
151.9
151.9
139.2
113.9
177.2
166.6
139.2
126.6
139.2
139.2
151.9
126.6
126.6
113.9
126.6
113.9

Eq._cir_d ForILFactor

166.2
162.8
160.5
139.3
136.3
136.3
135.1
135.1
135.1
136.5
132.7
132.7
132.0
132.0
127.6
127.0
126.3
123.7
123.0
122.3
121.0
121.0
121.0
118.2
117.5
117.5
116.8
116.1
115.6
115.6
116.7
116.0
116.0
111.8
111.1
111.1
111.1
109.6
108.8
108.8
107.3
106.5
106.2
103.6
102.6
102.6
101.8
101.8

100.2

33333333
OONUUWNU

27.6
31.8
68.1
53.8
60.1

oaaaaoaaaoaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

38d883333383383383333388838383838538K2835533885383838£8

195

Tabla A-6 (cont'd)

_ _ _ Pariaatar Shapa_Fac Max_Farat Eq._oir_d FornLFactor
7362.6 651.7 .653 113.9 96.8 72.2
7362.6 386.6 .620 126.6 96.8 58.5
7233.3 620.2 .515 139.2 96.0 67.5
7106.1 396.2 .569 126.6 95.1 56.5
7106.1 393.5 .577 126.6 95.1 56.5
7106.1 391.5 .583 126.6 95.1 56.5
6865.8 360.3 .763 126.6 93.6 56.6
6865.8 636.8 .655 151.9 93.6 37.8
6716.6 671.6 .380 151.9 92.5 37.1
6716.6 337.6 .761 126.6 92.5 53.6
6716.6 367.0 .701 126.6 92.5 53.6
6658.3 378.0 .568 126.6 90.7 51.3
6658.3 357.2 .636 113.9 90.7 63.6
6329.1 370.3 .580 126.6 89.8 50.3
6329.1 352.7 .639 126.6 89.8 50.3
6199.9 616.8 .653 139.2 88.8 60.7
6199.9 321.5 .756 113.9 88.8 60.8
6199.9 367.6 .577 126.6 88.8 69.3
6070.8 338.8 .665 113.9 87.9 59.6
5961.6 358.8 .580 126.6 87.0 67.2
5961.6 308.6 .785 113.9 87.0 58.3
5961.6 335.6 .666 113.9 87.0 58.3
5812.5 313.1 .765 113.9 86.0 57.0
5812.5 387.6 .686 139.2 86.0 38.2
5812.5 375.6 .518 139.2 86.0 38.2
5812.5 399.3 .658 151.9 86.0 32.1
5683.3 365.2 .599 126.6 85.1 65.2
5683.3 306.6 .761 101.3 85.1 70.6
5683.3 328.2 .663 126.6 85.1 65.2
5683.3 352.1 .576 113.9 85.1 55.8
5683.3 310.0 .763 101.3 85.1 70.6
5556.1 368.6 .576 126.6 86.1 66.1
5556.1 299.8 .776 88.6 86.1 90.1
5556.1 361.9 .597 126.6 86.1 66.1
5556.1 330.8 .638 113.9 86.1 56.5
5625.0 369.6 .699 139.2 83.1 35.6
5166.6 325.1 .616 113.9 81.1 50.7
5166.6 365.7 .563 126.6 81.1 61.1
5166.6 336.8 .579 113.9 81.1 50.7
5037.5 370.3 .662 126.6 80.1 60.0
5037.5 286.9 .780 88.6 80.1 81.7
5037.5 286.0 .776 101.3 80.1 62.5
5037.5 287.8 .766 101.3 80.1 62.5
5037.5 319.9 .619 126.6 80.1 60.0
6908.3 309.6 .663 126.6 79.1 39.0
6908.3 365.6 .517 101.3 79.1 60.9
6908.3 363.3 .523 126.6 79.1 39.0
6908.3 363.7 .522 101.3 79.1 60.9
6908.3 327.6 .576 113.9 79.1 68.2
6908.3 306.9 .655 113.9 79.1 68.2
6908.3 288.2 .763 101.3 79.1 60.9
6779.1 276.2 .787 101.3 78.0 59.3
6779.1 306.0 .661 113.9 78.0 66.9
6779.1 296.9 .690 113.9 78.0 66.9
6779.1 302.9 .656 113.9 78.0 66.9
6650.0 296.2 .666 101.3 76.9 57.7
6650.0 266.1 .825 88.6 76.9 75.6
6650.0 325.6 .552 113.9 76.9 65.6
6650.0 301.1 .665 101.3 76.9 57.7
6650.0 299.3 .652 101.3 76.9 57.7

 

 

196

lel. A-6 (cont'd)

A_r_e_a_ Perimeter Shape_Fac Max_Feret Eq._;ir_d Forn_Factor
6520.8 278.0 .735 101.3 75.9 56.1
6520.8 306.0 .607 113.9 75.9 66.6
6520.8 290.0 .675 101.3 75.9 56.1
6520.8 336.6 .501 126.6 75.9 35.9
6520.8 266.3 .813 88.6 75.9 73.3
6520.8 302.9 .619 113.9 75.9 66.6
6520.8 306.0 .607 126.6 75.9 35.9
6520.8 331.3 .518 113.9 75.9 66.6
6391.6 296.5 .636 113.9 76.8 63.1
6262.5 280.7 .680 101.3 73.7 52.9
6262.5 321.5 .518 113.9 73.7 61.8
6262.5 306.0 .572 126.6 73.7 33.9
6262.5 279.6 .686 101.3 73.7 52.9
6133.3 293.3 .606 88.6 72.5 67.0
6133.3 261.2 .761 88.6 72.5 67.0
6133.3 266.3 .763 101.3 72.5 51.3
6133.3 292.7 .606 113.9 72.5 60.5
6133.3 266.1 .733 101.3 72.5 51.3
6133.3 257.6 .783 88.6 72.5 67.0
6006.1 256.1 .779 88.6 71.6 66.9
6006.1 267.8 .702 88.6 71.6 66.9
6006.1 299.8 .560 101.3 71.6 69.7
6006.1 295.8 .575 113.9 71.6 39.3
6006.1 281.5 .635 101.3 71.6 69.7
6006.1 286.2 .623 101.3 71.6 69.7
6006.1 259.0 .750 88.6 71.6 66.9
6006.1 266.1 .710 88.6 71.6 66.9
6006.1 253.9 .780 88.6 71.6 66.9
6006.1 276.0 .670 101.3 71.6 69.7
6006.1 262.7 .729 101.3 71.6 69.7
3875.0 269.6 .670 101.3 70.2 68.1
3875.0 313.1 .697 113.9 70.2 38.0
3875.0 286.0 .595 101.3 70.2 68.1
3875.0 281.1 .616 88.6 70.2 62.8
3875.0 269.1 .673 88.6 70.2 62.8
3765.8 267.6 .769 88.6 69.1 60.7
3765.8 263.8 .677 88.6 69.1 60.7
3765.8 273.1 .631 101.3 69.1 66.5
3765.8 255.8 .720 88.6 69.1 60.7
3765.8 278.9 .605 101.3 69.1 66.5
3765.8 265.7 .780 88.6 69.1 60.7
3765.8 286.2 .583 101.3 69.1 66.5
3616.6 267.6 .763 88.6 67.9 58.7
3616.6 265.6 .756 88.6 67.9 58.7
3616.6 263.7 .765 88.6 67.9 58.7
3616.6 263.8 .653 101.3 67.9 66.9
3616.6 252.7 .712 75.9 67.9 79.8
3616.6 235.5 .819 75.9 67.9 79.8
3616.6 262.5 .660 101.3 67.9 66.9
3687.5 255.8 .670 88.6 66.6 56.6
3687.5 266.3 .627 88.6 66.6 56.6
3687.5 253.9 .680 88.6 66.6 56.6
3687.5 235.5 .790 88.6 66.6 56.6
3687.5 257.2 .663 101.3 66.6 63.3
3687.5 260.3 .759 75.9 66.6 77.0
3687.5 263.8 .630 101.3 66.6 63.3
3687.5 228.8 .837 75.9 66.6 77.0
3687.5 279.3 .562 101.3 66.6 63.3
3358.3 233.7 .773 75.9 65.6 76.1
3358.3 260.6 .729 88.6 65.6 56.5

 

N7

Tabl. 6'6 (cont'd)

 

alal5515.5“:Q‘IQB‘3IQ3333‘3335333‘362226266626661771771377777099

I'll FICtOl'

.6nn6s nunannnunnnammmmummm 666 66 666 566.6666666666666666

O
”_IJJJ6666111111111888888888888838.05555.0.0:.“555552222222222222888
fiaaaaawauuuuuuuuuuauuuuua6aauuuammmmummmmmmmmwwmwwwwww666 666
q

t
N699669696666696996666966636669696669699969996996996399999699

.unfiuufimnauuumnmnfiaauunuma muufiunuuunannnunnnmnnunnuafinnnnunn

u
u
C
. ozosmem1m1wmm1s 161m21a 265 m1 :m mmmm.mm.mm.mm6m1.mmm.mm 61m
wmnnnu.a 6.6. nfimn 6.nflflmm.6wmm.fim ....... w .m.&.
a
"mu 6666565666611536612. .mmu1 wmnmumsowoaem .m6 6666 um mmmm .u
.n
n
33333331111alalfllalelooo0000000000008888same-8.88886666666666666555
mmmmmmm.6...6..66666666666666666mm66m .mm6m111nnnnnnnnnnzza
sssssssm mmm mm 1mm 6 111
33666333233363:unnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnanan ma annnmmmmmmmmm mmmnnn

A_r_a_a_

 

198

Table A-4 (cont'd)

A_r_e_a_ Perimeter Shapejoc Max Fe

‘

et Eq._ci r_d Fomjactor

2712.5 223.7 .681 75.9 58.8 59.9
2712.5 211.9 .759 75.9 58.8 59.9
2712.5 228.2 .654 75.9 58.8 59.9
2712.5 243.3 .576 88.6 58.8 44.0
2712.5 208.4 .785 75.9 58.8 59.9
2712.5 228.2 .654 75.9 58.8 59.9
2712.5 228.2 .654 75.9 58.8 59.9
2712.5 263.8 .490 101.3 58.8 33.7
2712.5 228.2 .654 75.9 58.8 59.9
2583.3 208.2 .749 63.3 57.4 82.1
2583.3 208.2 .749 63.3 57.4 82.1
2583.3 206.6 .781 75.9 57.4 57.0
2583.3 208.4 .748 75.9 57.4 57.0
2583.3 208.2 .749 63.3 57.4 82.1
2583.3 238.4 .571 88.6 57.4 41.9
2583.3 238.4 .571 88.6 57.4 41.9
2583.3 211.9 .723 75.9 57.4 57.0
2583.3 219.9 .672 75.9 57.4 57.0
2583.3 213.1 .715 75.9 57.4 57.0
2454.1 199.8 .772 63.3 55.9 78.0
2454.1 199.8 .772 63.3 55.9 78.0
2454.1 204.7 .736 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 204.7 ..736 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 204.7 .736 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 204.7 .736 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 213.1 .679 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 204.7 .736 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 213.1 .679 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 211.9 .687 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 204.7 .736 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 199.8 .772 63.3 55.9 78.0
2454.1 204.7 .736 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 204.7 .736 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 204.7 .736 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 199.8 .772 63.3 55.9 78.0
2454.1 199.8 .772 63.3 55.9 78.0
2454.1 199.8 .772 63.3 55.9 78.0
2454.1 199.8 .772 63.3 55.9 78.0
2454.1 214.9 .668 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 214.9 .668 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 211.9 .687 75.9 55.9 54.2
2454.1 214.9 .668 75.9 55.9 54.2
2325.0 233.5 .536 88.6 54.4 37.7
2325.0 202.9 .710 75.9 54.4 51.3
2325.0 191.4 .797 63.3 54.4 73.9
2325.0 196.4 .758 75.9 54.4 51.3
2325.0 199.8 .732 63.3 54.4 73.9
2325.0 218.0 .615 75.9 54.4 51.3
2325.0 191.4 .797 63.3 54.4 73.9
2325.0 218.0 .615 75.9 54.4 51.3
2325.0 199.8 .732 63.3 54.4 73.9
2325.0 233.5 .536 88.8 54.4 37.7
2325.0 202.9 .710 75.9 54.4 51.3
2325.0 191.4 .797 63.3 54.4 73.9
2325.0 199.8 .732 63.3 54.4 73.9
2325.0 203.3 .707 63.3 54.4 73.9
2325.0 203.3 .707 63.3 54.4 73.9
2325.0 202.9 .710 75.9 54.4 51.3
2325.0 211.9 .651 75.9 54.4 51.3
2325.0 191.4 .797 63.3 54.4 73.9

199

table A-6 (cont‘d)

a Perimeter Shapejac Max Fe

’
0
n

Eq._ci r_d For. Factor

2325.0 202.9 .710 75.9 56.6 51.3
2325.0 202.9 .710 75.9 56.6 51.3
2325.0 191.6 .797 63.3 56.6 3.9
2325.0 199.8 .32 63.3 56.6 3.9
2325.0 199.8 .32 63.3 56.6 3.9
2325.0 199.8 .32 63.3 56.6 3.9
2325.0 203.3 .707 63.3 56.6 3.9
2325.0 202.9 .710 75.9 56.6 51.3
2325.0 203.3 .707 63.3 56.6 3.9
2325.0 196.6 .758 63.3 56.6 3.9
2325.0 218.0 .615 75.9 56.6 51.3
2325.0 191.6 .797 63.3 56.6 3.9
2325.0 196.6 .758 75.9 56.6 51.3
2325.0 202.9 .710 75.9 56.6 51.3
2325.0 191.6 .797 63.3 56.6 3.9
2195.8 196.5 .729 75.9 52.9 68.5
2195.8 191.6 .753 63.3 52.9 69.8
2195.8 191.6 .753 63.3 52.9 69.8
2195.8 196.5 .729 75.9 52.9 68.5
2195.8 191.6 .753 63.3 52.9 69.8
2195.8 196.5 .729 75.9 52.9 68.5
2195.8 196.5 .729 75.9 52.9 68.5
2195.8 191.6 .753 63.3 52.9 69.8
2195.8 191.6 .753 63.3 52.9 69.8
2066.6 191.6 .709 63.3 51.3 65.7
2066.6 192.7 .699 75.9 51.3 65.6
2066.6 191.6 .709 63.3 51.3 65.7
2066.6 187.8 .36 63.3 51.3 65.7
2066.6 192.7 .699 75.9 51.3 65.6
2066.6 191.6 .709 63.3 51.3 65.7
2066.6 192.7 .699 75.9 51.3 65.6
2066.6 187.8 .36 63.3 51.3 65.7
2066.6 187.8 .36 63.3 51.3 65.7
2066.6 187.8 .36 63.3 51.3 65.7
2066.6 187.8 .36 63.3 51.3 65.7
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6

 

200

Table A-6 (cont'd)

A_r_o__|_ Peril-tor Shape!» Infarct Eq.__ci r_d Forujactor
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 192.7 .656 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 182.9 .728 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1937.5 179.6 .756 63.3 69.7 61.6
1808.3 171.0 .m 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .m 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1808.3 171.0 .777 63.3 68.0 57.5
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .38 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .38 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .38 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .38 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0

 

201

table A-6 (cont'd)

A_t_o_q_ Perinltor Shapo_Fac Max_Fcrot Eq._cir_8 ForILFactor
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 167.6 .695 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0
1550.0 162.5 .738 50.6 66.6 77.0

 

1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1550.0
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5
1162.5

162.5
167.6
162.5
167.6
167.6
162.5
162.5
167.6
167.6
167.6
162.5
167.6
167.6
162.5
162.5
162.5
167.6
162.5
167.6
162.5
162.5
167.6
162.5
167.6
167.6
167.6
162.5
162.5
162.5
167.6
167.6
162.5
167.6
162.5
162.5
162.5
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1
162.1

§a§§§§a§§§§§§a§

E§§

an

Table A-6 (cont'd)

A_t_g_o_ Perinntor Shapo_Foc Hax_Forot

50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6
50.6

Eq.

'0
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I —
I
UILn1n<U|UN\n Uinn‘n UIunxn|n<UIunxn\n uvunsn|n Uitn\n e-as.r-s~4> a-c~a>‘h~a-c~a~4> a-a~4>.r~a~s~4h a-a~4> a-ah‘r~a-o~4> O-8~Jh<h-J-J~IFI

Sgggggggggggggggggggggggflfitttffitfififitfifififitfififififittttttfitfifififitt

'r 8 Form F

coonoooooooooouoooooooooooo

333:3Sfisnsnaaanmnsanszssuduuduuy:uuuuaduuuuuauuduudaududauum

0'9
0
q

203

table A-6 (cont'd)

A_r_e_e_ Perimeter Shape_rac Nex_Feret Eq._;ir_d Fonn_Fector
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 . 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7

204

table A-6 (cont'd)

A_r_e_p_ Perimeter Shepe_Fac lex_Feret Eq._pir_8 ForuLfector
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 '50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .72’ 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .724 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7

205

Table A-6 (cont'd)

 

A_r_e_e. Perineter Shape_Fec Hex_Feret Eq._pir_d Form_Fector
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7 ‘
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7

 

206

Table A-6 (cont'd)

A_r_e_e_ Perimeter Shepe_Fec Hex-Feret Eq._;ir_d ForuLFector
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5. 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 30.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7

207

Table A-6 lcont'd)

A_r_e_a_ Perimeter Shape_Fac Hax_Feret Eq._;ir_8 FormLFactor
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7
1162.5 162.1 .726 50.6 38.5 57.7

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

1. Hugo, F. and T. Kennedy, Surface Cracking of Asphalt Mixtures in Southern
Africa, in Association of Asphalt Paving Technology, 1985. 54. pp. 454-491.

2. Bouldin, M.G., J.H. Collins, and A. Berker, Rheology and Microstructure of
Polymer / Asphalt Blends. Rubber Chemistry And Technology, 1991. 64 No. 4,
September-October. pp. 577-600.

3. Baladi, G.Y., Integrated Material and Structural Design Method for Flexible
Pavements. 1988. Federal Highway Administration.

4. Geiger, F.W., ed. Equipment Operator 3&2, NA VEDTRA 10640-J1. 1987. Naval
Education and Training Program Management Support Activity: Washington, DC. 11.1.

5. Material Reference Library Asphalt Data, in Strategic Highway Research Program,
National Research Council, Washington, D. C. 1992.

6. Highway Materials Engineering - Asphalt Materials and Paving Mixtures. Vol.
FHWA-HI-90-008, Washington, DC. 1990. U.S.D.O.T, Federal Highway Administration,
National Highway Institute.

7. Newcomb, D.E., M. Stroup-Gardiner, and J .A. Epps, Laboratory and Field Studies
of Polyolefin and Latex Modifiers for Asphalt Mixtures, in Polymer Modified Asphalt
Binders, ASTM STP 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and S. Shuler, Editor. 1992. American Society
For Testing Materials: Philadelphia. pp. 129-50.

8. Jain, P.K., Sangita, S. Bose, and LR. Arya, Characterization of Polymer Modified
Asphalt Binders for Roads and Airfields, in Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders, ASTM
STP 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and S. Shuler, Editor. 1992. American Society For Testing
Materials: Philadelphia. pp. 341-356.

9. Hesp, SA. and RT. Woodhams, Stabilization Mechanisms in Polyolefin-Asphalt
Emulsions, in Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders, AST M STP 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and
S. Shuler, Editor. 1992. American Society For Testing and Materials: Philadelphia. pp.
1-19.

208

209

10. Little, D., Performance Assessment of Binder-Rich Polyethylene-Modified Asphalt
Concrete Mixtures (Novophalt). Transportation Research Record - Transportation Research
Board, 1991. 1317.

11. Anderson, D.A., et al., Rheological Properties 0f Polymer Modified Emulsion
Residue, in Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders, ASTM ST P 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and S.
Shuler, Editor. 1992. American Society For Testing Materials: Philadelphia. pp. 20-34.

12. Bouldin, MG. and J.H. Collins, Influence of Binder Rheology on Rut Resistance
of Polymer Modified and Unmodified Hot Mix Asphalt, in Polymer Modified Asphalt
Binders, ASTM STP 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and S. Shuler, Editor. 1992. American Society
For Testing and Materials: Philadelphia. pp. 50-60.

13. Linde, S. and U. Johansson, Thermo-Oxidative Degradation of Polymer Modified
Bitumen, in Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders, ASTM STP 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and S.
Shuler, Editor. 1992. American Society For Testing Materials: Philadelphia. pp. 244-253.

14. Schwager, B.P., Viscosity Measurements of Polymer Modified Asphalt, in Polymer
Modified Asphalt Binders, AST M STP 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and S. Shuler, Editor. 1992.
American Society For Testing Materials: Philadelphia. pp. 254-280.

15. Rogge, D.F., R.L. Terrel, and AJ. George, Polymer Modified Hot Mix Asphalt -
Oregon Experience, in Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders, ASTM STP 1108, K.R.
Wardlaw and S. Shuler, Editor. 1992. American Society for Testing and Materials:
Philadelphia. pp. 151-172.

16. Moore, E., Personal Communication. 1992.

17. Stewart, L., Polymers: Pavement ’s Miracle Additive? Experience portends
powerfirl performance, but the perfect mix design remains illusive. Highway & Heavy
Construction, 1989. pp. 48-50.

18. Farrar, M. and R. Harvey, Performance of Binder-Modifiers in Recycled Asphalt
Pavement. Transportation Research Board 72nd Annual Meeting, January, 1993. pp. 1-25.

19. Mayama, M., M. Yshino, and K. Hasegawa, An Evaluation Of Heavy Duty Binders
in the Laboratory, in Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders, ASTM ST P 1 108, K.R. Wardlaw
and S. Shuler, Editor. 1992. American Society For Testing Materials: Philadelphia. pp.
61-76.

20. Goodrich, J .L., Polymer and Asphalt Reaction Process and Polymer-Linked
Asphalt Product. 1991. Chevron Research and Technology Company.

210

21. Chollar, B.H., et al., Characteristics of the F urfirral Modified Asphalt Reaction.
Transportation Research Board 72nd Annual Meeting January 10-14, 1993. Washington,
DC, pp. 1-24.

22. Stuart, K.D., Asphalt Mixtures Containing Chemically Modified Binders.
Transportation Research Board 72nd Annual Meeting January 10-14, 1993. Washington,
DC, pp. 1-34.

23. Schwager, B.P., Personal Communication. 1993.
24. Statz, 3., Personal Communication. 1993.

25. Ishai, 1., YA. Tuffour, and J. Craus, Some Aspects of the eflect of Asphalt
Chemical Composition on Material Behavior and Pavement Performance. Transportation
Research Board 72nd Annual Meeting January 10-14, 1993. Washington, DC, pp. 1—38.

26. Jones, D.R., T.W. Kennedy, and HF. Torshizi, Field Performance of
Polymer-Modified Asphalts. Transportation Research Board 72nd Annual Meeting January
10-14, 1993. Washington, DC, pp. 1-18.

27. Peltonen, P.V., Characterization and testing of fibre-modified bitumen composites.
Journal of Materials Science, 1991. 26. pp. 5618-5622.

28. Khosla, N.P. Laboratory Characterization of Crumb Rubber Modified Mixtures,
in 72nd TRB Annual Meeting. 1993. Washington, DC.

29. Khosla, N.P., Eflect of the Use of Modifiers on Performance of Asphaltic
Pavements. Transportation Research Record, 1991. 1317: pp. 10-22.

30. Tayebali, A.A., et al., Influence of Rheological Properties of Modified Asphalt
Binders on the Load Deformation Characteristics of the Binder-Aggregate Mixtures, in
Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders, ASTM ST P 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and S. Shuler, Editor.
1992. American Society For Testing Materials: Philadelphia.

31. Huang, S.-C., et al., Effects Of Modifiers On The Temperature Susceptibility And
Aging Characteristics 0f Typical Asphalt Cements Used In Florida. Transportation
Research Board 72nd Annual Meeting January 10-14, 1993. Washington, DC, pp. 1-24.

32. Stroup-Gardiner, M., D.E. Newcomb, and B. Tanquist, Asphalt-Rubber
Interactions. Transportation Research Board 72nd Annual Meeting January 10-14, 1993.
Washington, DC, pp. 1-30.

33. Aurilio, V., Crumb Rubber Modified Asphalt Materials, Recycling Crumb Rubber
Modified Mixtures, in 72nd TRB Annual Meeting. 1993. Washington, DC.

211

34. Brock, D.J., Crumb Rubber Modified Asphalt Materials, Construction
Considerations, in 72nd TRB Annual Meeting. 1993. Washington, DC.

35. Kandhal, P.S., Crumb Rubber Modified Asphalt Materials, Specification Quality
Control and Quality Assurance, in 72nd TRB Annual Meeting. 1993. Washington, DC.

36. Grulke, E.A., Polymer Process Engineering. 1994, New Jersey: PTR Prentice Hall.
p. 119.

37. Gloaguen, J.M., et al., Plasticity and Fracture Initiation in Rubber-Toughened
Poly(MethylMethacrylate). Polymer Engineering and Science, 1993. 33 (No. 12): pp.
748-753.

38. Daly, W.H., Z. Qiu, and I. Negulescu, Preparation and Characterization of
Polyethylene Modified Asphalt. Transportation Research Board 72nd Annual Meeting
January 10-14, 1993. Washington, DC, pp. 1-17.

39. Bouldin, M.G., Results Of Repetitive Creep Experiments Carried Out On Polymer
Modified Hot Mix Asphalts Used On The Mesquite Nevada Job - Shell Development

Company. 1991, Shell Development Company.

40. Bouldin, MG. and J.H. Collins, Wheel Tracking Experiments with Polymer
Modified and Unmodified Hot Mix Asphalt, in Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders, AST M
STP 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and S. Shuler, Editor. 1990, American Society For Testing and
Materials: Philadelphia.

41. Luckenbach, T.A. Rheological Testing of Asphalt Using a Cup and Plate
Geometry. in Petersen Asphalt Research Conference. 1992. Western Research Institute,
Laramie, Wyoming: American Society For Testing and Materials.

42. Billmeyer, F.W.J., Textbook of Polymer Science. 3rd ed. 1984, New York: John
Wiley & Sons. p. 312.

43. Billmeyer, F.W.J., Textbook of Polymer Science. 3rd ed. 1984, New York: John
Wiley & Sons. p. 314.

44. Hesp, 8., Personal Communication. 1992.

45. ASM Handbook,. Vol. 12. Fractography, 1992. p. 473: fig. 1290, 1291, 1292,
1293.

46. Khosla, N.P., Crumb Rubber Modified Asphalt Materials, Laboratory
Characterization of Crumb Rubber Modified Mixtures, in 72nd TRB Annual Meeting.
1993. Washington, DC.

 

212

47. He, L.Y. and J .W. Button, Methods To Determine Polymer Content 0f Modified
Asphalt. Transportation Research Record - Transportation Research Board, 1991. 1317.

48. Terrel, R.L. and S. Al-Swailmi, The Role of Pessimum Voids Concept in
Understanding Moisture Damage to Asphalt Concrete Mixtures. Transportation Research
Board 72nd Annual Meeting January 10-14, 1993. Washington, DC. pp. 1-28.

49. Eriksen, K. Summary Report on Specimen Preparation. in SHRP Symposium. 1990.
Washington, DC.

50. Eriksen, K., Air Void Characteristics in Asphalt-Concrete Samples fiom the
Compaction Study. 1992. Strategic Highway Research Program, National Research
Council.

51. Eriksen, K. and A. Neidel., Thin Sections of Asphalt Concrete Preparation
Techniques, in SHRP Symposium. 1990. Washington, DC.

52. Eriksen, K. and A. Neidel., Plane Sections of Asphalt Concrete Preparation
Techniques, in SHRP Symposium. 1990. Washington, DC.

53. Eriksen, K., Microscopical Analysis of Asphalt-Aggregate Mixture Related to
Pavement Performance, in 72nd TRB Annual Meeting. 1993. Washington, DC.

54. Kalantar, J. and LT. Drzal, The Bonding Mechanism of Aramid Fibers to Epoxy
Matrices, Part IA Review of the Literature. J. Mat. Sci., 1990. 25: pp. 4186-4193.

55. King, G.N., et al. , Influence 0f Asphalt Grade And Polymer Concentration On The
Low Temperature Performance Of Polymer Modified Asphalt. Prepared for Presentation
at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, 1993.

56. Shuler, T.S., D.L. Hanson, and R.G. McKeen, Design and Construction of Asphalt
Concrete Using Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders, in Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders,
AST M STP 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and S. Shuler, Editor. 1992, American Society For
Testing Materials: Philadelphia. pp.97-128.

57. Kandhal, P.S., et al., Low Temperature Properties of Paving Asphalt Cements.
Report, Transportation Research Board, 1988. Washington, DC.

58. Van der poel, C., A General System Describing the Viscoelastic Properties of
Bitumens and its Relation to Routine Test Data. J. Appl. Chem, 1964. 4.

59. Gaw, W.J., ed. Measurement and Prediction of Asphalt Stifi‘ness. Technical
Publication, ASTM, Vol. 628. 1977. Philadelphia, PA. pp. 57-67.

213

60. Readshow, E., Asphalt Specifications in British Columbia for Low Temperature
Performance. Proc., Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, 1972. 41.

61. McLeod, NW. "A 4-Year Survey of Low Temperature Transverse Pavement
Cracking on Three Ontario Test Roads. 1972. Proceedings from Association of Asphalt
Paving Technologists.

62. Serfass, J .P., A. Joly, and J. Samanos, SBS-Modified Asphalt for Surface Dressing
- A comparison Between Hot-Applied and Emulsified Binders, in Polymer Modified
Asphalt Binders, ASTM STP 1108, K.R. Wardlaw and S. Shuler, Editor. 1992, American
Society For Testing Materials: Philadelphia. pp. 281-308.

63. King, 0., et al., Influence of Asphalt Grade and Polymer Concentration on the
High Temperature Performance of Polymer Modified Asphalt., in Association of Asphalt
Paving Technology, 1992. 61, pp. 29-66.

64. Ruth, B., L. Bloy, and A. Avital, Prediction of Pavement Cracking at Low
Temperatures, in Association of Asphalt Paving Technology, 1982. 51, pp. 53-103.

65. Kausch, H.H., Polymer Fracture. 2nd ed. 1987, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-
Verlag. pp. 416-426.

66. Majdzadah, K., E.M. Kauffmann, and CL. Saraf, ed. Analysis of Fatigue of
Paving Mixtures From the Fracture Mechanics Viewpoint. Fatigue of Compacted
Bituminous Aggregates Mixture, ASTM STP 508. 1972. American Society for Testing
and Materials. p. 67.

67. Nahas, N.C., et al. Polymer Modified Asphalts For High Performance Hot Mix
Pavement Binders, in Association of Asphalt Paving Technology. 1990.

68. Kinloch, A.J., Adhesion and Adhesives. 1987. New York: Chapman and Hall. pp.
280, 306-309.

69. Williams, J .G., Fracture Mechanics of Polymers. 1984. New York: John Wiley &
Sons. p. 98.

70. Kennedy, T.W., Use of Hydrated Lime in Asphalt Paving Mixtures, in Bulletin No.
325. 1984. National Lime Association.

71. Chawla, K.K., Composite Materials, Science and Engineering. ed. B. Ilschner and
NJ. Grant. 1987, New York: Springer-Verlag. 235.

72. Studt, T., New Advances Revive Interest in Cement-Based Materials. R&D
Magazine, 1992. (November), pp. 74-78.

 

214

73. Speakman, J .D., Performance Characteristics of Polypropylene (Monofilament)
FRC, in 72nd TRB Annual Meeting. 1993. Washington, DC.

74. MacDonald, C.N. Experiences with Steel Fiber and Expansive Cement for Concrete
Slab on Ground, in 72nd TRB Annual Meeting. 1993. Washington, DC.

75. Yalamanchi, S.S., Influence of Loading Type, Specimen Size, and Fiber Content
on F lexural Toughness of FRC, , in 72nd TRB Annual Meeting. 1993. Washington, DC.

76. Larson, B.K., L.T. Drzal, and P. Soroushian, Carbon fibre-cement adhesion in
carbon fibre reinforced cement composites. Composites, 1990. 21(No. 3): pp. 205-215.

77. Andrews, B.H., ed. Developments in Polymer Fracture - I . 1979, Applied Science
Publishers LTD: London. pp. 264-265.

78. Trantina, G.G., Fracture Mechanics Approach to Adhesive Joints. 1971,
Department of the Navy, Naval Air Systems Command.

79. Williams, J .G., Fracture Mechanics of Polymers. 1984, New York: John Wiley &
Sons. pp. 55-58.

80. Menges, G., Attempt to Explain Crazing in Amorphous Thermoplastics and
Adhesion Fractures in Semicrystalline Thermoplastics and Filled Polymers, in
Deformation and Fracture of High Polymers. 1972. Kronberg, Germany: Plenum Press.

81. Katz, HS. and J.V. Milewski, ed. Handbook of Fillers for Plastics. 2nd ed. 1987,
Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: Chapman & Hall, New York. p. 41.

82. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983, New York:
Applied Science Publishers. pp. 242-245.

83. Hellan, K., Introduction of Fracture Mechanics. 1984, New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company. pp. 60-61.

84. Andrews, B.H., ed. Developments in Polymer Fracture - 1. 1979, Applied Science
Publishers LTD: London. pp. 100-103.

85. Kinloch, A.J., Adhesion and Adhesives. 1987, New York: Chapman and Hall. pp.
265-266, 360.

86. Williams, J .G., Fracture Mechanics of Polymers. 1984, New York: John Wiley &
Sons. pp. 41, 175-189, 226.

87. Kausch, H.H., Polymer Fracture. 2nd ed. 1987, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-
Verlag. pp. 62, 224, 256, 306-312.

215

88. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983, New York:
Applied Science Publishers. pp. 88-92, 276.

89. Andrews, B.H., ed. Developments in Polymer Fracture - I. 1979, Applied Science
Publishers LTD: London. p. 273.

90. Kausch, H.H., Polymer Fracture. 2nd ed. 1987, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-
Verlag. pp. 306-312, 393.

91. Barenblatt, G.I., Methods of Combustion Theory in the Mechanics of Deformation,
Flow, and Fracture of Polymers, in Deformation and Fracture of High Polymers. 1972.
Kronberg, Germany: Plenum Press.

92. Vincent, P.I., Load-Extension Curves and Fracture Toughness, in Deformation and
Fracture of High Polymers. 1972. Kronberg, Germany: Plenum Press.

93. Rolland, L., et al., A Fracture Mechanics Approach to Surface Embrittlement in
Ductile Polymers, in F ifth International Conference on Deformation, yield and fiacture
of polymers. 1982. Churchill College, Cambridge: The Plastics and Rubber Institute.

94. Anderson, G.P., J .S. Bennett, and L.K. DeVries, Analysis and Testing of Adhesive
Bonds. 1977. New York: Academic Press. p. 213.

95. Knott, J .F., Fundamentals of Fracture Mechanics. 1973. London: Butterworth. pp.
120, 123-125, 239-241.

96. Kausch, H.H., Polymer Fracture. 2nd ed. 1987. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-
Verlag. p. 61.

97. Knott, J .F., Fundamentals of Fracture Mechanics. 1973. London: Butterworth. pp.
211—216.

98. Hellan, K., Introduction of Fracture Mechanics. 1984. New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company. p. 125.

99. Kausch, H.H., Polymer Fracture. 2nd ed. 1987. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-
Verlag. p. 306.

100. Brock, D., Elementary Engineering Fracture Mechanisms. 3rd ed. 1982. Boston:
Martinus Nijhoff. pp. 12-13.

101. Chawla, K.K., Composite Materials, Science and Engineering. ed. B. Ilschner and
NJ. Grant. 1987. New York: Springer—Verlag. p. 237.

216

102. Knott, J .F ., Fundamentals of Fracture Mechanics. 1973. London: Butterworth. pp.
204-206.

103. Friedrich, K., Microstructure and Fracture Mechanical Properties of Short Fiber
Reinforced Thermoplastic P. E. T, in F ifih International Conference on Deformation, yield
and fiacture of polymers. 1982. Churchill College, Cambridge: The Plastics and Rubber
Institute.

104. Wells, J.K. and P.W. Beaumont, The Use of Fracture Maps on Failure Analysis
of Fibre Composite Materials, in F ifih International Conference on Deformation, yield
and fi'acture of polymers. 1982. Churchill College, Cambridge: The Plastics and Rubber
Institute.

105. Andrews, B.H., ed. Developments in Polymer Fracture - I. 1979. Applied Science
Publishers LTD: London. pp. 280-310.

106. Chawla, K.K., Composite Materials, Science and Engineering. ed. B. Ilschner and
NJ. Grant. 1987. New York: Springer-Verlag. pp. 232-233.

107. Milewski, J.V. and HS. Katz, ed. Handbook of Reinforcements for Plastics. 2nd
ed. 1987. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: New York. pp. 6-7.

108. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983. New York:
Applied Science Publishers. p. 70. -

109. Williams, J.G., Fracture Mechanics of Polymers. 1984. New York: John Wiley &
Sons. p. 165.

110. Bucknall, CB. and DP. Jones, Deformation and Fracture of Thermoplastics
containing Spherical Particles, in F ifih International Conference on Deformation, yield
and fiacture of polymers. 1982. Churchill College, Cambridge: The Plastics and Rubber
Institute.

111. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983. New York:
Applied Science Publishers. pp. 448-451.

112. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983. New York:
Applied Science Publishers. pp. 442-448.

113. Kinloch, A.J., S.J. Shaw, and D.L. Hunston, Crack Propagation in a
Rubber- Toughened Epoxy, in F ifih International Conference on Deformation, yield and

fracture of polymers. 1982. Churchill College, Cambridge: The Plastics and Rubber
Institute.

217

114. Oliphant, K. and WE. Baker, The Use of Cryogenically Ground Rubber Tires as
a Filler in Polyolefin Blends. Polymer Engineering and Science, 1993. 33, No. 3: pp.
166-174.

115. Williams, J .G., Fracture Mechanics of Polymers. 1984. New York: John Wiley &
Sons. p. 143.

116. Katz, HS. and J .V. Milewski, ed. Handbook of Fillers for Plastics. 2nd ed. 1987.
Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: Chapman & Hall, New York. pp. 390, 402-404.

117. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983. New York:
Applied Science Publishers. p. 423.

118. Andrews, B.H., ed. Developments in Polymer Fracture - 1 . 1979. Applied Science
Publishers LTD: London. pp. 157-172.

119. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983. New York:
Applied Science Publishers. pp. 451-452.

120. Katz, HS. and J .V. Milewski, ed. Handbook of Fillers for Plastics. 2nd ed. 1987.
Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: Chapman & Hall, New York. pp. 70-74.

121. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983. New York:
Applied Science Publishers. p. 20.

122. Williams, J .G., Fracture Mechanics of Polymers. 1984. New York: John Wiley &
Sons. p. 124.

123. Andrews, B.H., ed. Developments in Polymer Fracture - I . 1979. Applied Science
Publishers LTD: London. p. 114.

124. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983. New York:
Applied Science Publishers. pp. 35-36.

125. Brock, D., Elementary Engineering Fracture Mechanisms. 3rd ed. 1982. Boston:
Martinus Nijhoff. pp. 15-17.

126. Kodak, E., Kodak EKTAPRO EM Motion Analyzer Operating Manual, Manual
part number 91000022-001. 1990.

127. Olympus, Cue 2 Image Analyzer Operation Manual. Version 3.0, 1989.

128. Kinloch, A.J., Adhesion and Adhesives. 1987. New York: Chapman and Hall. pp.
200-204.

218

129. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983. New York:
Applied Science Publishers. pp. 93-97.

130. Williams, J .G., Fracture Mechanics of Polymers. 1984. New York: John Wiley &
Sons. p. 18.

13]. Kennedy, T., Personal Communication. 1992.

132. Buchman, A., Personal Communication at 206th American Chemical Society
National Meeting and Exposition, Chicago, IL. 1993.

133. Kausch, H.H., Polymer Fracture. 2nd ed. 1987. Berlin Heidelberg:
Springer-Verlag. p. 323.

134. Aglan, H., et al. , Structure-Fracture Toughness Relationships of Asphalt Concrete
Mixtures. Transportation Research Record - Transportation Research Board, 1992. 1353
pp. 24-30.

135. Kinloch, A.J. and R.J. Young, Fracture Behaviour of Polymers. 1983. New York:
Applied Science Publishers. p. 343.

136. ASTM_E813, Standard Test Method for J,O A Measure of Fracture Toughness.
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1993. 3.01, pp. 738-752.

137. ASTM_D5045, Standard Test Methods for Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness and
Strain Energy Release Rate of Plastic Materials. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1993.
8.03, pp. 314-322.

138. Vipulanandan, C. and N. Dharmaraj an, Fracture Toughness of Polymer Concrete,
in Fracture Mechanics: Application to Concrete, C.L. Victor and RB. Zdenek, Editor.
1989. American Concrete Institute: Detroit, MI. pp. 69-90.