19.06.2014 Views

DIGEST 2006 - Sabita

DIGEST 2006 - Sabita

DIGEST 2006 - Sabita

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Or more appropriately, a lone thar<br />

bleating on the mountaintop?<br />

<strong>Sabita</strong>'s August <strong>2006</strong> edition of<br />

Asphalt News has a short article<br />

on research done by NCAT (USA)<br />

on Lift Thickness versus Nominal<br />

Maximum Aggregate Size<br />

(t/NMAS). (NMAS = 1 size larger<br />

than the first sieve to retain more<br />

than 10%). This extensive<br />

research can be found on the<br />

following website:<br />

www.eng.auburn.edu/centre/ncat/<br />

reports.<br />

The report says it all in these<br />

“deep and meaningfuls":<br />

• Mixes with larger maximum<br />

size aggregates have larger<br />

voids that are more likely to<br />

be inter-connected, resulting<br />

in higher permeability;<br />

• As density decreases,<br />

permeability increases;<br />

• As thickness decreases,<br />

permeability increases;<br />

• Therefore mats that are<br />

thicker, with higher<br />

density and smaller<br />

maximum size aggregate<br />

will be less permeable.<br />

Figure 1 is a chart from this<br />

research and shows the effect of<br />

t/NMAS on permeability. It is a<br />

trend curve for a variety of<br />

fine-graded mixes, and NCAT's<br />

recommendation is:<br />

t/NMAS should be at least 3:1<br />

(Note the “at least")! Our<br />

traditional mix is 1.9:1, which<br />

from Figure 1 indicates it may be<br />

60% more permeable than if it<br />

was 3:1.<br />

Oh dear, is our sacred cow in<br />

danger of becoming mincemeat?<br />

Figure 1<br />

121

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!