Bearing Capacity of Roads, Railways and Airfields – Loizos et al.

(Eds)
© 2017 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-29595-7

Structural characteristics of unbound aggregate materials

in conventional flexible pavements

Long Wang & Xiao Guang Xie

School of Transportation Science and Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology,
Harbin Heilongjiang, P.R. China

ABSTRACT:  The objective of this study was to investigate the dynamic structural characteristics of
unbound aggregates with quantitative expressions. Specimens were fabricated with top-down surface
vibrations, saturated and unsaturated specimens were administrated to load dynamically with 3000 rep-
etitions at three different stress states. Three coefficients, including dynamic structural stability, structural
variability, and dynamic load structural coefficient were defined that are useful to investigate the dynamic
characteristics of water susceptibility in fine aggregates and skeleton stability of coarse aggregates. It was
also found that dynamic load structural coefficient of unbound aggregates was not sensitive when the con-
fining pressure was more than 150 kPa, It may suggest that the rather lower confining pressure, less than
150 kPa, should be adopted. The outcome of this study showed that it is feasible to evaluate structural
characteristics of unbound aggregates with dynamic load structural coefficient.

1  INTRODUCTION Soil structure is a issue that has attracted many

The gradation types of pavement base aggregate
materials are traditionally classified based on the
extent to which the air void is filled by the fine
aggregates, i.e., skeleton-dense, skeleton-void,
and suspension-dense types. Such a classification,
which is very subjective and qualitative, is not suf-
ficient to characterize structural features of differ-
ent gradation types quantitatively and consistently.
Currently, there does not exist quantitative index
for describing the structural behavior of different
gradation types under dynamic loads, thus hinder-
ing the accurate and objective evaluation of the
aggregate materials structural behavior of pave-
ment base.
The structural characteristics of soils are defined
as the concentration of aggregate particles as well
as the size, shape, alignment, and connectivity of
air voids among aggregate particles (He Li-hong,
Wang Ren & Zhang Hui-mei 2003). Therefore, the
structural characteristics of soils consist of not
only geometrical features of skeleton aggregate and
air void but also particles arrangement, in other
words, the structural characteristics of soils include
both coarse particles arrangement and fine parti-
cles cohesion properties (Xie Ding-yi, Qi Ji-lin &
Zhu Yuan-lin 1999). In terms of unbound pave-
ment aggregate materials, the arrangement feature
of coarse particles is especially pronounced, which
exhibits strong anisotropy depending on the con-
tent and property of fine aggregates.
attentions of the scholars in recent years(Shen Zhu-
jiang1996). In 1925, the sensitivity of clayey soil st,
Karl Terzaghi proposed, is used to show the degree
of unconfined compressive strength reduction of
undisturbed soil after being disturbed, of which
the essence is, to certain extent, a reflection of the
structural characteristics of the clay. For clayey
soils, researchers (Xie Ding-yi & Qi Ji-lin 1999, Luo
Ya-sheng, Xie Ding-yi & Sheng-jun 2004, Hu Zai-
qiang, Shen Zhu-jiang & Xie Ding-yi 2000, Hu Zai-
qiang, Shen Zhu-jiang & Xie Ding-yi 2004), defined
the soil structural parameters on the basis of com-
pression tests, proposed soil structural param-
eters experiment method and calculated structural
parameters of the clay under static load through the
three line method (the ratio of undisturbed satu-
rated and disturbed soil compressive strain product
between undisturbed soil compressive strain square
under the same stress). For cohesionless soils, lit-
erature (Chen Cun-li, Hu Zai-qiang & Xie Ding-yi
2004) used the ratio of deviatoric stress difference
that generate the same axial strain ε1 in static triaxial
tests for saturated undisturbed and disturbed soils
to represent the degree of structural characteristics.
Pavement materials are always subject to the
dynamic wheel loads, therefore the definition
of structural parameters of unbound aggregate
materials under dynamic loading should take
into account the change of its using condition
and the development of pavement distresses,
and combination with laboratory experiments

79
method. The differences of structural character- 2.2  Test method
istics of unbound aggregate materials in pave-
The structural characteristics of unbound aggre-
ment are essentially attributed to varying particle
gate materials under dynamic load are measured
arrangement, air void composition, etc., which
by a medium-scale dynamic triaxial shear appara-
in turn leads to the differences and changes of
tus (Kong Xian-jing, Zhang Tao, etc., 2005). The
mechanical properties. From this perspective,
specimens were fabricated 20 cm in diameter and
the structural parameters should reflect not only
50 cm in height. In order to achieve the efficiency
the differences mechanical properties but also the
of a vibratory roller compactor, the specimens were
transition of structural characteristics. Accord-
molded and compacted by a vibratory compactor
ing to the two major distress types of asphalt
(Wang Long, Xie Xiao-guang, 2005).
pavements with unbound pavement base layer,
The vibration compaction frequency is 32  Hz
i.e., rutting (PIARC 1995) and fatigue (Garg
with centrifugal force of 10 kN and nominal ampli-
Navneet & Thompson Marshall R 1997), the
tude of 1.2  mm. The specimen was divided into
structural characteristics of unbound aggregates
three layers during compaction, with the compacted
under dynamic load should consist of two parts,
thickness of each layer is 20 cm, 15 cm and 15 cm,
i.e., one representing stiffness change at differ-
respectively. Specimens were mixed at the optimum
ent status and termed as stiffness structure, and
moisture content, the targeted dry density level is
the other representing the change of permanent
98% of the maximum dry density (ASSHTO T180,
strain at different conditions and termed as the
Modified Proctor compaction), three different
deformation structure. The former reflects the
confining pressure levels were applied, i.e., 50 kPa,
stability of aggregate particles arrangement, while
100  kPa and 150  kPa, respectively. To mimic the
the latter represent the deformability of unbound
dynamic vehicular load on pavements, certain
aggregates and the stability of cohesion proper-
dynamic stress with a half-sine wave was applied up
ties of fine aggregates. Those two parts should be
to about 3000 cycles, the load frequency of the half-
integrated in order to realistically characterize the
sine wave is 1 Hz with a loading time of 0.1 seconds
structural behavior of unbound aggregates under
and a rest period of 0.9 seconds.
dynamic load.
The best method to study the soil structural
properties is to destroy the structural integrity thor-
oughly, i.e., fully releasing the structural potential,
2  TEST MATERIALS AND TEST METHOD
which can be achieved essentially through distur-
bance, loading, and saturation. Since unbound
2.1  Test materials
aggregate base materials are in a closed-loop sys-
The unbound aggregate materials are limestone in tem of the pavement, excess water infiltrated into
test, with the gradation shown in Figure 1. Table 1 the pavement structure through surface cracks
summarizes materials basic physical properties. often plays a role of releasing the connectivity and
arrangement characteristics of unbound aggregate
structure under the effect of traffic loads, which fur-
ther causes pavement damage. Therefore, water is
used as a disturbing factor to categorize laboratory
tests into saturated and unsaturated conditions.

3  STRUCTURAL STABILITY

According to the definition of the soil structure

stability, it characterizes the extent which the soil
structure is destructed. It mainly reflects the cohe-
Figure  1.  Particles distribution curve of unbound sion properties of aggregate particles. Therefore,
aggregate materials. subjecting aggregate specimens to water saturation

Table1.  Basic physical properties of unbound aggregate specimen.

Fabricating Optimum moisture Maximum dry No uniform Curvature Average particle

method content, % density g/cm3 coefficient Cu coefficient Cc size D50, mm

Vibrating 4.7 2.30 37.5 1.58 16

Fabrication

80
can weaken/dissolve the chemical substance in fine beginning of the loading (N < 1200), the struc-
aggregates and eliminate the cohesion among aggre- tural stability parameter me< 1, indicating strong
gate particles, under the application of dynamic structural stability, water destructed the cohe-
loading, the micro-structural change can be mani- sion among particle interfaces, as expected. For
fested into macro-mechanical change. As for N>1200, the structural stability parameter starts to
unbound aggregates in pavement, there is no exist- increase, i.e., the resilient modulus after saturation
ence of undisturbed and disturbed specimens, hence, is greater than that prior to saturation, indicating
the structural stability index (me) under dynamic the phenomenon of water-hardening.
load can be defined as the ratio of resilient modu- The reason behind this is due to the structural
lus between saturated and unsaturated specimens coupling effect. The initial structural stability of
subjected to the same number of loading cycles with specimens compacted by the vibratory compac-
identical stress magnitude, As shown in Eq. 1. tor is destructed during loading or saturation,
coupled with the generation of secondary struc-
me = Ew / E y (1) tural stability, therefore, the structural stability
parameter fluctuates with initial decrease repre-
where: Ey  =  Resilience modulus of unsaturated senting the destruction of initial structure and
aggregate specimen; Ew  =  Resilience modulus of subsequent increase representing the generation
saturated aggregate specimen. of secondary structure.
When the structural stability coefficient me < 1,
it means that the stiffness of unbound aggregate
materials decreases after saturation. The less me, is,
the more sensitive to water of the skeleton stability
is, and the more stronger of the structural stability
is. When me = 1, the stiffness of unbound materi-
als is not affected by water, indicating no bonding
effect (or cohesion) or in other words, no structural
stability. When me > 1, the materials are moisture-
hardening (moisture-hardening means after satu-
rated, materials stiffness increased, in other words,
the negative structural stability), the larger me is,
and the greater of the negative structural stability
is.
Table  2 lists all the test result and Figure  2
depicts the relationship between the structural
stability coefficient and the number of load cycle Figure  2.  Relation between structural stability coeffi-
times N. It can be seen from Figure 2 that at the cient and load cycles N.

Table 2.  Resilient modulus between saturated and unsaturated specimens.

σ3 = 150 kPa σ3 = 100 kPa σ3 = 50 kPa

Loading Ey Ew Ey Ew Ey Ew
cycle times (MPa) (MPa) me (MPa) (MPa) me (MPa) (MPa) me

  200 556.5 442.4 0.79 292.7 302.2 1.03 230.0 210.8 0.92
  400 516.7 400.3 0.77 330.0 308.0 0.93 249.2 221.3 0.89
  600 464.0 363.7 0.78 315.6 290.0 0.92 243.8 234.8 0.96
  800 445.3 430.3 0.97 314.7 310.3 0.99 249.1 223.5 0.90
1000 453.3 404.2 0.89 310.5 300.4 0.97 259.6 200.0 0.77
1200 437.9 424.4 0.97 332.6 330.2 0.99 188.1 205.9 1.09
1400 422.8 427.8 1.01 297.2 350.0 1.18   93.9 100.7 1.07
1600 419.9 402.3 0.96 263.7 286.7 1.09
1800 381.8 344.9 0.90 163.7 205.8 1.26
2000 284.2 351.3 1.24 131.0 123.3 0.94
2200 295.7 305.7 1.03
2400 208.1 209.2 1.01
2600 191.3 189.0 0.99

81
4  STRUCTURAL VARIABILITY
The structure variability evaluates the magnitude
of soil deformation induced by the destruction
of the original structure. It is an indicator of the
extent to which aggregate particles are disturbed
and re-arranged under external disturbing factors
such as saturation and dynamic loading. There-
fore, the structural variability coefficient (mε) is
defined as the ratio of plastic strain between satu-
rated and unsaturated specimens subjected to the
same number of loading cycles with identical stress
magnitude, As shown in Eq. 2.
mε = ε pw ε py (2)
where: εpw  =  Plastic strain of saturated aggregate
specimen; εpy = Plastic strain of unsaturated aggre-
gate specimen.
When the structure variability coefficient mε < 1,
it means that the plastic deformation of unbound
aggregate materials decreases after water satura-
tion, and that the structure variability is small.
When mε = 1, the plastic deformation of unbound
materials is not affected by water, and there is no
particle rearrangement. When mε > 1, it means that
the plastic deformation of unbound aggregate
materials increases after saturation, and that the
structural variability is large. The larger mε is, the
greater the structural variability is, and the more
sensitive to water the materials are.
Table 3 summarizes the plastic deformation data
obtained under three different confining pressure
levels. Figure 3 illustrates the relationship between
the structure variability and the number of loading
cycles. As it can be seen from Figure 3, regardless of
the relative magnitude of the deformation stability,
the plastic deformation is larger at the early stage
of loading. when loading cycle increases, the struc-
ture variability coefficient decreases significantly,
and the decreasing rate changes from a large value
to a small value and then gradually tends to be
stable. This means that plastic deformation of
saturated specimens changes from being unsta-
ble to being stable under dynamic loading. At the
beginning of the loading cycles, the deformation
stability curves align successively from top to bot-
tom in Figure 3 in accordance with the increasing
confining pressure and extend to a wide range.
With the advance of loading cycles, the degree of
destruction increases, and the deformation stabil-
ity curves under different confining pressure levels
are distributed in a relatively narrow range. When
N(loading cycles), ≥1200 times, the initial struc-
ture of unbound aggregates is close to complete
destruction, and secondary structure starts to gen-
erate, as indicated by the overlapping of structural
variability curves. This means that unbound aggre-
gates have the same residual deformation stability
Figure  3.  Relation between the structure variability
coefficient and load cycles.

Table 3.  Deformation between saturated and unsaturated specimens.

σ3 = 150 kPa σ3 = 100 kPa σ3 = 50 kPa

Loading
cycles εpy εpw mε εpy εpw mε εpy εpy mε

  0   0.012   0.009 0.74 0.002 0.023 12.45 0.002 0.049 29.56

  200   0.061   0.055 0.90 0.027 0.095   3.48 0.034 0.192   5.67
  400   0.122   0.143 1.18 0.077 0.187   2.43 0.086 0.315   3.67
  600   0.201   0.219 1.09 0.157 0.299   1.90 0.159 0.466   2.93
  800   0.306   0.365 1.19 0.286 0.445   1.55 0.257 0.696   2.71
1000   0.425   0.510 1.20 0.446 0.596   1.34 0.623 1.081   1.73
1200   0.554   0.656 1.18 0.650 0.766   1.18 2.229 2.176   0.98
1400   0.749   0.854 1.14 1.060 1.051   0.99 5.086 4.504   0.89
1600   1.055   1.174 1.11 1.945 1.775   0.91
1800   1.606   1.759 1.10 4.086 4.365   1.07
2000   2.619   2.631 1.00 5.824 8.590   1.47
2200   4.544   4.122 0.91
2400   8.472   6.829 0.81
2600 11.795 11.185 0.95

82
under different confining pressure, and that the
ultimate level of deformation stability is independ-
ent with the initial deformation stability level.
As the specimen gradation, physical state and fab-
ricating method are the same under three different
confining pressure levels, therefore, it can be seen
from Fig. 3 that the confining pressure has a great
influence on the structural variability of unbound
aggregates materials. When the confining pressure
is low, the structural variability coefficient mainly
reflects the deformation stability properties (perma-
nent deformation behavior) of unbound aggregates
materials. on the other hand, when the confining
pressure increases, the additional structure generated
by the confining pressure is enhanced, and the sen-
sitivity of structural variability coefficient decreases.
Under such circumstance, the structural variability
coefficient reflects both initial structural of speci-
mens and the additional structural caused by con-
fining pressure. When the confining pressure further
increases (σ3 = 150 kPa), the specimen initial struc-
tural will be suppressed, at this moment, the struc-
tural parameters only characterize the additional
structure. Therefore, lower confining pressure level
should be used for measuring structural parameters
of unbound aggregate materials.
5  DYNAMIC LOAD STRUCTURAL
COEFFICIENT OF UNBOUND
AGGREGATE MATERIALS
The aforementioned analysis of the structural
stability and the structural variability are the two
aspects of the structural characteristic of unbound
aggregate materials, to develop a coefficient for
structural characteristic, these two aspects should
be integrated so that the contribution of both par-
ticle cohesion/connectivity and particle arrange-
ment properties to structural behavior can be taken
into account. Therefore, the structural coefficient
of unbound aggregates under dynamic load is
defined as the ratio of structural variability to the
structural stability, as shown in Eq. 3.
ε pw σd
m ε py ε pw E y ε pw ε ey ε pwε ew
mN = ε = = = = (3)
me Ew ε py Ew ε py σd ε pyε ey
Ey ε ew
where: mN   =  structural coefficient of unbound
aggregate materials; εpw = plastic strain of saturated
aggregate specimen; εpy  =  plastic strain of unsatu-
rated aggregate specimen; Ey = resilience modulus of
unsaturated aggregate specimen; Ey = resilience mod-
ulus of saturated aggregate specimen; εew = resilience
strain of saturated aggregate specimen; εey  =  resil-
ience strain of unsaturated aggregate specimen; and
83
σd = deviator stress of dynamic triaxial test, or (σ1–
σ3), where: σ1 = axial stress, σ3 = confining pressure.
As can be seen from Equation 3, the structural
coefficient (mN) under dynamic load is the ratio of
the product of plastic strain εpw and elastic strain
εew of saturated specimen to the product of plastic
strain εpy and elastic strain εey of unsaturated speci-
men at the same number of loading cycles, if plastic
strain εpw and elastic strain εew of saturated specimen
of saturated specimen increase, dynamic load struc-
tural coefficient becomes large, the structural of
unbound aggregate materials is strong, conversely,
when integrated dynamic load structural coefficient
becomes small, the structural is weak.
If the εpw becomes larger and εew becomes small,
or the εpw becomes small and εew becomes larger,
but the product of these two parameters remains
the same, according formula 3, the structural coef-
ficient (mN) is still the same, hence, the structural
behavior is the same too. The changes of both
plastic and elastic deformation are involved in the
structural coefficient under dynamic load.
The scope mN can be defined like this, when
MN > 1, specimen has a positive structural property.
MN = 1, specimen has no structural property.
MN < 1, specimen has negative structural property.
Figure 4 illustrates the relationship between the
structural coefficient and the loading cycles N under
different confining pressure levels, which reflects
stability and variability of the unbound aggregate
materials. When the load cycle N < 1200, the scat-
tering of the curves shows that the structural coef-
ficient is sensitive to confining pressure, when load
time N > 1200, the clustering of curves shows the
uniformity of the damage state of unbound aggre-
gate materials. The fluctuation of curves reflects the
evolution of the initial and secondary structures.
Broadly speaking, the method presented in this
paper can be adopted to evaluate the structural prop-
erty of unbound aggregate materials with different
dynamic load testing and varying disturbing condi-
tions, the structural coefficient of unbound aggre-
gate materials can not only reflects the structural
Figure  4.  Relation between structural coefficient and
load cycles.
Table  4.  Structural coefficient in different confining ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
pressures.
Thanks to Ministry of Transportation Ji Lin prov-
Loading
ince to provide financial support, thanks to the
cycles σ3 = 150 kPa σ3 = 100 kPa σ3 = 50 kPa
guidance of Professor Erol Tutumluer of UIUC,
  200 1.13 3.37 6.18 thanks to doctoral candidate Yuan-Jie Xiao of
  400 1.52 2.60 4.13 UIUC selfless help.
  600 1.39 2.07 3.04
  800 1.23 1.58 3.02
1000 1.35 1.38 2.25 REFERENCES
1200 1.22 1.19 0.89
1400 1.13 0.84 0.83 Chen Cun-li, Huzai-qiang & Xie Ding-yi. 2004. Research
1600 1.16 0.84 on the relationship between deformation-strength
1800 1.21 0.85 property and structure of red mud[J]. Rock and Soil
Mechanics, 25(12):1862–1866.
2000 0.81 1.06
Garg Navneet, Thompson Marshall R. 1997. Triaxial
2200 0.88 characterization of Minnesota road research project
2400 0.80 granular materials[J]. Transportation Research Record
2600 0.96 1577: 27–36.
He Li-hong, Wang Ren & Zhang Hui-mei. 2003. The
status quo of research methods of soil structural
characteristics[J]. Soil Engineering and Foundation,
17(3): 84–86.
Hu Zai-qiang, Shen Zhu-jiang & Xie Ding-yi. 2000.
stability and structural variability but also the effect Research on structural behavior of unsaturated
of test conditions on those properties, those coeffi- loess[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engi-
cients have good stability, sensitivity, operability and neering, 19(6):775–779.
applicability. Hu Zai-qiang, Shen Zhu-jiang & Xie Ding-yi. 2004.
Deformation properties of structural loess[J]. Chinese
Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 23(24):
6  CONCLUSION 4142–4146.
Kong Xian-jing, Zhang Tao, Zou De-gao, et al. 2005.
Development of medium scale dynamic triaxial appa-
According to analysis results of the modulus and ratus and application of small strain measurement
permanent deformation of saturated and unsatu- technique [J]. Journal of Dalian University of Technol-
rated unbound aggregate specimens subjected to the ogy, 45(1):79–84.
same number of loading cycles during dynamic tri- Luo Ya-sheng, Xie Ding-yi, & Shao Sheng-jun. 2004.
axial test, the following conclusions can be reached: Variation characteristics of soil structure of unsatu-
rated loess[J] Journal of Northwest Sci-Tech Univ of
1. Unbound aggregate materials have the struc- Agri and For (Natural Science Edition), 2004(8):
tural stability and variability under the dynamic 115–119.
load, the methods for measuring and calculating PIARC. 1995. Technical Committee on Flexible Roads.
the structural coefficients are proposed, which Bituminous Materials with a High Resistance to Flow
achieves the objective of quantitatively assessing Rutting[M].
the structural behavior of unbound aggregates. Shen Zhu-jiang. 1996. Mathematic model of soil struc-
2. Skeleton structure performance can be reflected ture-the key question of mechanics in 21 century[J].
by the structural variability parameter, while the Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
18(1):95–97.
performance of filling materials can be char- Terzaghi K., Peck R.B. & Mesri G. 1996. Soil mechanics
acterized by the structural stability parameter, in engineering practice[M]. A Wiley-Inter science Pub-
those two parameters are two aspects of aggre- lication. Third edition. John Wiley and Sons, 127–133.
gates structural characteristic, when confining Wang Long, Xie Xiao-guang. 2005. Research on the
pressure σ3 150  kPa, the unbound aggregate vibrating compaction method of graded aggregate
materials structural behavior is suppressed. material[J]. Journal of Highway and Transportation
therefore, the structural parameters should be Research and Development, 22(7): 26–30.
measured under a small confining pressure level. Xie Ding-yi, Qi Ji-lin & Zhu Yuan-lin. 1999. Soil struc-
3. It is rational to use the dynamic load structural ture parameter and its relations to deformation
and strength[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
coefficient to evaluate structure characteristic 1999(10):1–6.
of unbound aggregate materials, it integrally Xie Ding-yi, Qi Ji-lin. 1999. Soil structure characteris-
reflects the development of stiffness and defor- tics and new approach in research on its quantitative
mation and is related to fatigue and rutting parameter[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engi-
damage of asphalt pavements. neering, 21(6): 651–656.

84