This article was downloaded by: [University of Saskatchewan Library]

On: 31 January 2015, At: 12:40

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Road Materials and Pavement Design

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/trmp20

Comparison Between Flat Rubber Wheeled Loaded

Wheel Tester and Asphalt Pavement Analyzer
a a b
Xingwei Chen , Baoshan Huang & Zhihong Xu
a
Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering , The University of Tennessee , Knoxville,
TN, 37996, USA E-mail:
b
The Key Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering , Tongji University , Shanghai,
200092, PR China E-mail:
Published online: 19 Sep 2011.

To cite this article: Xingwei Chen , Baoshan Huang & Zhihong Xu (2007) Comparison Between Flat Rubber Wheeled Loaded
Wheel Tester and Asphalt Pavement Analyzer, Road Materials and Pavement Design, 8:3, 595-604

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2007.9690090

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 SCIENTIFIC NOTE

Comparison Between Flat Rubber Wheeled

Loaded Wheel Tester and Asphalt
Pavement Analyzer
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 12:40 31 January 2015

Xingwei Chen* — Baoshan Huang* — Zhihong Xu**

* Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

The University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN 37996,USA
{xchen15; bhuang}@utk.edu
** The Key Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering
Tongji University
Shanghai, 200092, PR China
Xuzhh39@sina.com

ABSTRACT. Rutting has been identified as one of the primary distresses in asphalt pavement.
Loaded Wheel Tester (LWT) has been widely used to evaluate the permanent deformation
(rutting) of asphalt mixture. In China, a flat solid rubber wheeled LWT (FLWT) has been
adopted by the highway design guide for many years. Dynamic Stability (DS), the number of
load repetitions to generate 1-mm rutting during the last 15-min of one-hour testing, has been
selected to characterize rutting of hot-mix asphalt (HMA). During the recent years, the
Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA), has been introduced into China, and has gained
popularity in pavement industry. APA uses final rut depth to evaluate the rutting performance
of HMA, and there is no criterion for the APA rut depth for HMA design in China. In order to
compare both data, a correlation between FLWT and APA test will be necessary. The present
study selected seven mixtures commonly used in China and correlated the test results between
FLWT and APA. The mixtures selected in this study included gyratory (Superpave) designed
25, 19 and 13-mm mixtures, dense-graded mixtures (25, 19 and 13-mm) designed with
Marshall mix design method, and a 13mm SMA mixture. The result from this study indicated
that a strong correlation existed between the FLWT DS and APA rut depth for the mixtures
studied. Recommended design criterion of APA rut depth was derived from the existing DS
specification and the correlation developed between the FLWT DS and APA rut depth.
KEYWORDS: Asphalt Mix, Permanent Deformation, Loaded Wheel Tester, Asphalt Pavement
Analyzer, Dynamic Stability.

DOI:10.3166/RMPD.8.595-604 © 2007 Lavoisier, Paris

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 8 – No. 3/2007, pages 595 to 604
 596 Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 8 – No. 3/2007

1. Introduction

Permanent deformation (or rutting) has been a critical concern during hot mix
asphalt (HMA) mix design (Leahy et al., 1996). Severe rutting will cause safety
problems for the traffic and lower the performance of asphalt pavements. Loaded
Wheel Tester (LWT) has been widely used as a proof test for rutting during HMA
mix design and Quality Control/Quality Assurance (QC/QA) process (Fwa et al.,
1992). Since first introduced in the United Kingdom, LWT has been adopted by the
transportation agencies worldwide with different variants, which include the United
Kingdom Wheel Tracking Device (Fwa and Tan, 1992), Hamburg Wheel Tracking
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 12:40 31 January 2015

Device (HWTD) (Izzo and Tahmoressi, 1999; Bhasin et al., 2004), the Georgia
Loaded Wheel Tester (GLWT) (Collins et al., 1995; Lai and Shami, 1995), the
Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA) (Bhasin et al., 2004; Cho and Lee, 2003), the
LCPC (French) Wheel Tracker (Cho and Lee, 2003), the Purdure University
Laboratory Wheel Tracking Device (PURWheel) (Cho and Lee, 2003), and the one-
third scale Model Mobile Load Simulator (MMLS3) etc. (Cho and Lee, 2003).
In China, a flat solid rubber wheeled LWT (FLWT) has been adopted by the
highway design guide for many years (JTGF40-2004). Dynamic Stability (DS), the
number of load repetitions to generate 1 mm rutting during the last 15 min of one-
hour testing of FLWT, has been selected as a criterion to characterize rutting for
HMA.
Many researches have been conducted to investigate the influence of mixture
types, gradation, asphalt types and testing temperatures to the FLWT DS. The
criteria for FLWT DS developed by the highway design guide in China varies
depending on the climate, mixture types and asphalt types (JTGF40-2004). For
example, for traditional dense-graded mixture with unmodified asphalt binder, the
minimum DS requirements vary between 600 and 1000 cycles/mm (with different
climate).
The FLWT and DS have also been adopted into the Japanese design guide, which
recommends DS = 800 cycles/mm for light and medium traffic, and DS = 3000
cycles/mm for heavy traffic highways (Lily D. Poulikakos et al., 2004).
One common type of LWT used in the USA is the Asphalt Pavement Analyzer
(APA). The APA is a modified version of the GLWT, and was first introduced in
1996. The APA can test rutting for three rectangular beams or six cylindrical
specimens concurrently. The concave shaped wheels travel back and forth over a
stiff, pressurized rubber hose that rests directly on the specimen. The APA has been
used to evaluate the rutting, fatigue, and moisture resistance of HMA mixtures.
Most states in US have established upper limits for APA rut depths. In Oregon,
the maximum acceptable APA rut depths varies from 5-7mm according to different
mixture type and asphalt Performance Grades (ODOT, 2006). Prithvi and Kandhal
recommended a tentative value of 8.0mm maximum rut depth for APA when tested
at the high temperature of the standard PG grade for a location (Prithvi et al., 2002).
 Flat Rubber Wheeled Loaded Wheel Tester and APA 597

The NCHRP report 508 presented the findings of a research project to determine the
suitability of the APA as a general method of predicting rutting potential and for use
in field QC/QA operations. The report also recommended practice for establishing
maximum specified rut depth for APA for different traffic categories (Prithvi et al.,
2003).
During the recent years, APA has been introduced into China, and has gained
popularity in pavement industry. The final APA rut depth has also been used in
China to evaluate the rutting performance of HMA. Researches have been conducted
to evaluate the rutting, moisture resistance of HMA mixtures. Chen used APA to
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 12:40 31 January 2015

evaluate the inferences of mixture types, gradation, asphalt type and test temperature
on the rutting resistance of HMA mixture (Chen, 2005). However, there is no APA
rut depth based criterion for HMA mixture design in China. To develop such a
criterion, utilizing the abundance of the existed data is critical. In order to compare
both data, a correlation between FLWT and APA test will be necessary.

2. Objective

The objective of the present study was to compare the FLWT and APA tests, and
to establish correlations between the FLWT DS and APA rut depth. Seven types of
mixtures were tested by the FLWT and APA at two elevated temperatures (60 and
70oC). In addition, recommended design criterion of APA rut depth was derived
from the existing DS specification and the developed correlation between the FLWT
DS and APA rut depth.

3. Laboratory experiment

The mixtures selected in this study included gyratory (Superpave) designed 25,
19 and 13-mm mixtures, dense-graded mixtures (AC) (25, 19 and 13-mm) designed
with Marshall mix design method, and a 13mm SMA mixture. Three coarse
aggregates (limestone, diabase, and basalt) and three asphalt binders were
considered FLWT and APA test for mixtures at 60 and 70oC.

3.1. Materials

One conventional asphalt binder (PG64-22) and two SBS modified asphalt
binder (PG70-22 and PG76-22) were selected. These asphalt binder were produced
from local refineries. Three types of coarse aggregates (limestone, basalt and
diabase) were selected in this study.
 598 Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 8 – No. 3/2007

3.2. Mixture design

A gyratory compactor based mix design procedure and traditional Marshall mix
design procedure were adopted in this study. The gyratory compactor mix
volumetric design procedure utilizes the identical equipment specifications as the
US Superpave Gyratory Compactor (SGC). The SGC-based design procedure was
employed for the volumetric design of three mixtures – Sup-13, Sup-19, and Sup-25.
Whereas, dense-graded mixtures AC-13, AC-19, AC-25 and mixture SMA-13 were
designed by the traditional Marshall mix design procedure with 75 blows on both
sides of the specimen. These mixtures are commonly used in China (Chen, 2005).
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 12:40 31 January 2015

3.3. Specimen fabrication

Slabs and cylindrical specimens were prepared for laboratory FLWT and APA
test respectively. The slabs for FLWT tests were compacted by the steel roller
compactor, and the specimens for APA tests were compacted by the SGC. It should
be pointed out that these two compaction methods may produce differences in air
void distributions within the specimens. However, the effect of air voids distribution
was not included in the present study. The dimensions of slabs for FLWT test were
300×300×50mm.The samples for the APA test were 150-mm in diameter and 75-
mm in height. The air voids of slabs for FLWT test and samples for APA test with
same mixture had the same level. Samples were tested triplicate, the average of three
data were used to analyze.

3.4. FLWT test

Figure 1 presents the test setup for FLWT. Prior to testing, the compacted slab
was held in an environmental chamber for six hours to reach the temperature
thermal equilibrium. During this test, the slab was set at 60 or 70 °C under 686 N
repeated loading at 42 cycles/min by a flat solid rubber tire (200mm in diameter and
50mm in width) for 1 hour. From the measured rut depth, dynamic stability (DS),
the number of load repetitions to generate 1-mm rutting during the last 15-min of
one-hour testing, was calculated by the following formula (JTGF40-2004).
N 15 ' [1]
DS =
d 60 − d 45
where
DS = dynamic stability, cycles/mm,
N15' = loading cycles in 15 minutes, cycles,
d60 = rut depth at the 60 minute, mm, and
d45 = rut depth at the 45 minute, mm.
 Flat Rubber Wheeled Loaded Wheel Tester and APA 599
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 12:40 31 January 2015

Figure 1. FLWT test Figure 2. Relationship between FLWT

rut depth and time

Figure 2 presents a typical time-displacement curve from the FLWT test. A curve
fitting by a logarithmic function yields almost perfect matches, which can be
expressed as following:
D ( t ) = K ln( t ) + C [2]

where
D(t) = rut depth at time t, mm,
K,C = regress coefficient, and
T = test time, s.
According to the definition, DS can also be calculated as following:

42 × 15
DS =
D ( 3600 ) − D ( 2700 )
42 × 15
=
K × (ln( 3600 ) − ln( 2700 ))
2189 . 917
=
K [3]

3.5. APA test

In this study, 150-mm diameter laboratory compacted cylindrical specimens were

tested, at 60 or 70 °C, 444.4 N load, and 0.7MPa hose pressure. Rut depth vs.
loading cycle curves and final rut depth after 8,000 cycles (16,000 passes) under dry
conditions were recorded. The wheel speed was approximately 0.6m/s.
Similar to the DS in FLWT, the number of load repetitions to generate 1-mm
rutting during the last quarter testing, can be defined as APA dynamic stability
(DSAPA). DSAPA can be calculated from the measured rut depths.
 600 Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 8 – No. 3/2007

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Results of FLWT

4.1.1. Scattering of FLWT rut depths and dynamic stability

The FLWT rut depths and loading time were used to curve fit into Equation [2].
The regressional variants (R2) varied from 0.8222 to 0.9938. The calculated rut
depths (Dcal) and calculated dynamic stability (DScal) could be obtained from
Equations [2] and [3], respectively. The errors between the test rut depth and
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 12:40 31 January 2015

calculated rut depth and between test dynamic stability and calculated dynamic
stability were calculated. Figure 3 presents the scatter of FLWT rut depth and
dynamic stability. The errors between the measured and calculated rut depth varied
from 0.3% to18.8%; whereas, the errors between measured and calculated dynamic
stability varied from 4.0% to 223.4%. Hence, the scattering of rut depths was much
smaller than that of dynamic stability.

Figure 3. Scattering of FLWT rut depth and dynamic stability

4.1.2. Correlating FLWT rut depth and DS

Figure 4 presents the relationship and error distributions between FLWT rut
depth and DS. The regressional variant (R2) was 0.9379. When the rut depth was
less than 3mm, DS increased rapidly as the rut depth decreased; when the rut depth
was greater than 3mm, the slope of DS vs. rut depth became much flatter. It was
noted that the deviation of calculated DS from the statistical trend varied between 0
to 47%.
 Flat Rubber Wheeled Loaded Wheel Tester and APA 601
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 12:40 31 January 2015

Figure 4. Relationship between FLWT rut depth and DS and error distributions

4.2. Results of APA

Similar to FLWT, the DS concept was introduced into APA in this study. Figure 5
presents the relationship and error distributions between rut depth and the dynamic
stability of APA (DSAPA). The regressional variant (R2) was 0.8777. When the rut
depth was less than 2mm, DSAPA increased rapidly as the rut depth decreased; when
the rut depth was greater than 2mm, the slope of rut depth and DSAPA became much
flatter. It was noted that the deviation of the calculated DSAPA from the statistical
trend was greater than that from the FLWT, ranging between 0 to 102%.

Figure 5. Relationship between APA rut depth and DSAPA and error distributions

4.3. Correlation of APA and FLWT test

4.3.1. Relationship between APA rut depth and FLWT DS

Figure 6 presents the relationship between APA rut depth and FLWT DS. The
regressional variant (R2) was 0.9014. Similarly, when the APA rut depth was less
 602 Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 8 – No. 3/2007

than 1.35mm, FLWT DS increased rapidly as the rut depth decreased. When the
APA rut depth was greater than 1.35mm, FLWT DS decreases slowly as the APA rut
depth increased.
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 12:40 31 January 2015

Figure 6. Relationship between APA Rut Depth and FLWT DS

4.3.2. Relationship between APA and FLWT rut depth

Figure 7 presents the relationship between rut depth from APA and FLWT tests.
Regressional variant (R2) from linear regression was 0.8982. The rut depth from
FLWT was greater than that from APA test.

Figure 7. Relationship between APA and FLWT rut depth

4.4. Recommended criteria of APA rut depth

Depending on climate, mix types and asphalt binder, the Chinese Pavement
Design Guide specifies variable FLWT DS values for HMA mixtures (JTGF40-
2004). Chen suggested the criteria of rut depth and DS for FLWT for different traffic
categories (Chen, 2005). There is currently no specification for the rut depth of APA
to evaluate the rutting performance of HMA in China. Based on the criteria of DS
suggested by Chen (2005) and the correlation between FLWT and APA, the criteria
of APA rut depth can be calculated from the correlation as shown in Figure 6.
Similarly, the criteria of DSAPA can be calculated by the correlation as shown in
 Flat Rubber Wheeled Loaded Wheel Tester and APA 603

Figure 5. The recommended criteria for rut depth of HMA for different traffic
categories are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Recommended criteria of APA rut depth for different traffic categories

Extreme-heavy Ultra-heavy
Traffic level Heavy traffic Middle traffic
traffic traffic
ESALs*
>80,000 40,000~80,000 12,000~40,000 4,000~12,000
(×1000)
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 12:40 31 January 2015

DS
>6,000 3,000~6,000 2,000~3,000 1,400~2,000
(Cycles/mm)
FLWT rut
<2 2~3 3~4 4~5
depth (mm)
APA rut
<1.1 1.1~1.35 1.35~1.6 1.6~1.9
depth (mm)
DSAPA
>31,000 22,000~31,000 17,000~22,000 13,000~17,000
(Cycles/mm)
Note: * ESALs: Equivalent Single Axle Load 100kN.

5. Summary and conclusion

A study has been conducted to correlate FLWT and APA through seven mixtures
commonly used in China. The following can be summarized from this study:
– The scattering of rut depths is much smaller than that of dynamic stability;
– A strong correlation existed between FLWT rut depth and DS for the mixtures
studied;
– A strong correlation existed between APA rut depth and DSAPA for the mixtures
studied;
– A strong correlation existed between APA rut depth and FLWT DS for the
mixtures studied;
– A strong correlation existed between APA and FLWT rut depth for the mixtures
studied;
– Recommended criteria for APA rut depth for different traffic categories were
developed.

Acknowledgement
This study was funded by the Municipal Government of Shanghai, China, under
the Shanghai City Key Research Program. The authors would like to express their
special thanks to the following individuals who helped to prepare and conduct the
laboratory tests: Mr. Yang Cai, Mr. Meifa Wu, Mr. Zhiyuan Liu, and Mr. Xiao Lin.
 604 Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 8 – No. 3/2007

6. Bibliography

Bhasin A., Button J.W. and Chowdhury A., “Evaluation of simple performance tests on hot-
mix asphalt mixtures from south central United States No.”, Transportation Research
Record, No. 1891, 2004, p. 174-181.
Chen X., Research on Design of Asphalt Pavement under Heavy Loads, Ph.D. Dissertation,
School of Transportation Engineering of Tongji University, China, 2005.
Cho Y.-H. and Lee K., “Design and performance of the HEART wheel load simulator”,
Journal of Testing and Evaluation, Vol. 31, No. 6, 2003, p. 458-464.
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 12:40 31 January 2015

Collins R., Watson D. and Campbell B., “Development and use of Georgia loaded wheel
tester”, Transportation Research Record, No. 1492, 1995, p. 202-207.
Fwa T.F., and Tan S.A., “Laboratory evaluation of rutting potential of asphalt mixtures”,
ASTM Special Technical Publication, No. 1147, 1992, p. 211-224.
Izzo R.P. and Tahmoressi M., “Use of the Hamburg wheel-tracking device for evaluating
moisture susceptibility of hot-mix asphalt”, Transportation Research Record, No. 1681,
1999, p. 76-85.
JTGF 40-2004, “Technical Code for Construction and Acceptance of Highway Asphalt
Pavement”, Ministry of Communication of P.R of China, 2004, Beijing.
Lai J.S. and Shami H., “Development of rolling compaction machine for preparation of
asphalt beam samples”, Transportation Research Record, No. 1492, 1995, p. 18-25.
Leahy R.B., Hicks R.G., Monismith C.L., and Finn F.N., “Framework for performance-based
approach to mix design and analysis”, Asphalt Paving Technology: Association of Asphalt
Paving Technologists-Proceedings of the Technical Sessions, Vol. 64, 1996, p. 431-473.
Lily D. Poulikakos S.T. and Manfred N.P., “A Comparison of Swiss and Japanese Porous
Asphalt Through Various Mechanical Tests”, 3th Swiss Transport Research Conference,
Monte Verita/Ascona, Swiss, March 19-21, 2003.
Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), “Contractor Mix Design Guidelines for
Asphalt Concrete ”, January 2005.
www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/CONSTRUCTION/docs/MixGuideJan2004Final.pdf
Prithvi S.K. and Cooley Jr., Allen L., “Evaluation of Permanent Deformation of Asphalt
Mixtures Using Loaded Wheel Tester”, Asphalt Paving Technology: Association of
Asphalt Paving Technologists-Proceedings of the Technical Sessions, Vol. 71, 2002,
p. 739-753.
Prithvi S.K., Cooley Jr., Allen L., “Accelerated Laboratory Rutting Tests: Evaluation of the
Aaphalt Pavement Analyzer”, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report
508, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 2003, USA.

Received: 10 April 2006

Accepted: 3 November 2006