Review on Moisture Susceptibility in Asphalt Concrete: An Overlooked Test

Compromising Durability of Asphalt in Nepal"

Er. Sujit Dhital (Material and Pavement Engineer)

Introduction
The asphalt property of the asphalt pavement to resist factor such as change in the property
due to polimarization and oxidation, disintegration and stripping of the aggregate is called
durability. Moisture damage in asphalt pavements is a national concern. Correctly identifying
the problem and isolating the contributing factors—materials and construction—are equally
challenging.
A pavement is considered durable if it can resist the detrimental effects of these factors. The
moisture damage is the result of moisture interaction with the binder-aggregate adhesion
with in the Asphalt mixture .Moisture interaction lead to the decrease in the adhesion
between the binder and the aggregate and is referred as stripping.
The consequences of stripping are significant, as it weakens the bond between the asphalt
binder and the aggregate. This weakened bond can result in pavement failures such as
rutting and cracking.
Moisture damage is the loss of strength and durability in asphalt mixtures due to the effect of
water or moisture vapor. It tends to accelerate the presence of the distress types. The types
of distress that can be related to moisture or the other factors are bleeding, cracking, rutting,
and raveling, (Abed, 2006). It is generally agreed that moisture can degrade the integrity of
bituminous mixtures in two ways; the first mechanism is by causing a reduction in the
cohesive strength and stiffness of the mixture, characterized by a softening of the mixture.
The second mechanism is
by causing failure of the adhesion (or bond) between asphalt and aggregate, referred to as
stripping, (Terrel and Shute, 1989). Pore pressure of water in the mixture voids due to
wheel-loading repetitions, and temperature cycling above freezing, could be reported as
major causes of moisture damage.
Asphalt removal by water, in the mixture at moderate to higher temperatures, and Water-
vapor interaction with the asphalt filler mastic and larger aggregate interfaces are also
considered as possible causes of water damage. The other major consequence of moisture
damage is that of a reduction of stiffness and strength in the asphalt concrete layer, which
decreases the load spreading capabilities of the pavement. Under the action of traffic
loading, a pavement with reduced stiffness due to water damage is prone to rutting because
of increased stresses and
strains in the underlying layers. Loss of strength in the asphalt-aggregate matrix may also
encourage stripping, (Kennedy, 1985).
Moisture damage in asphalt concrete is a nationwide problem which often necessitates
premature replacement of highway pavement surfaces and required substantial amount of
the tax payer money.
The large-scale and costly nature of these replacements highlights the importance of
addressing and mitigating moisture damage in asphalt pavements to ensure their long-term
durability and reduce the need for frequent repairs or replacements. Efforts in research,
engineering, and material development are crucial for enhancing the resilience of asphalt
pavements against moisture damage and improving the overall sustainability of
transportation infrastructure.
Nepal's strategic road network encompasses approximately 15,000Km, classified under the
Highway Network (HN), of which around 8,500 Km are paved with blacktop. Beside this both
provincial and local governments are allocating significant portions of their budgets to road
infrastructure development. Few years back surface dressing was commonly used in
blacktop roads; however, there has been a shift in priority across all agencies toward asphalt
concrete roads. Consequently, the investment in asphalt concrete has been steadily
increasing and is expected to continue in the coming years.
However, the quality of asphalt being used is always in question by the public , resulting in
inefficient utilization of taxpayers' money. One of the significant factors contributing to the
deterioration of asphalt is moisture damage, alongside other causes. This review article
aims to examine the causes of moisture damage, the principles of adhesion in asphalt, tests
for assessing moisture damage, and methods to mitigate its effects.

Mechanism of Aggregate Binder Adhesion:

Terrel and Shute (1989) describe four theories that are often used to explain the adhesion
between asphalt and aggregate:
(a) Mechanical adhesion.
(b) Surface energy
(c) Molecular Orientation
(d) Chemical reaction
Most likely a combination of mechanisms occurs synergistically to produce adhesion, and no
one theory describes adhesion. Terrel and Shute explain that the four theories are affected by
the following factors: 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.
The binder aggregate adhesion is achieved in following four ways
a) Mechanical adhesion : A mechanical interlock is created when the bitumen binder
get into the pores and surface irregularities and get harden a mechanical interlock is created
. However with the moist aggregate the moisture interfere with the binder penetration and
thus decreasing mechanical interlock and increasing the risk stripping. Mechanical adhesion
is affected by several properties of the aggregate, including (a) surface texture, (b) porosity
(absorption), (c) surface coatings on the aggregate, (d) surface area, and (e) particle size.
Adhesion between the aggregate and asphalt cement takes place at the interface of the two
materials . It is often stated that the rougher the surface texture,the greater the total
adhesion between the asphalt cement and aggregate. Further, Rice (21) indicates the
stability and durability of the AC pavement is also related to surface roughness of the
aggregate.The philosophy is rather simple—to produce an aggregate surface capable of
maximizing the surface area and texture to facilitate a strong physical bond that can
synergistically improve the nature of the chemical bond between the asphalt and aggregate
even in the presence of water
b) Surface Energy : The wetting ability of asphalt cement is defined as the ability of the
asphalt cement to make intimate contact with the surface of the aggregate . The wetting ability
of asphalt cement, as with other liquids, is related to its viscosity (i.e., the resistance to flow
associated with molecular friction). For example, water is an excellent wetting agent compared
to asphalt cement because it has a much lower viscosity. Wetting ability is also related to
surface tension, which is the stress that tends to hold a drop of liquid in a spherical form. Rice
has noted that when asphalt spreads over and wets an aggregate surface, a change in energy
takes place. This change of energy, referred to as adhesion tension, is a surface phenomenon
that depends upon the closeness of contact and mutual affinity of the asphalt cement and
aggregate . Rice presents data indicating that adhesion tension for water to aggregate is higher
than for asphalt to aggregate. Consequently, water will tend to displace asphalt cement at an
aggregate-asphalt cement interface where there is contact between the water, asphalt, and
aggregate. Mack (1935) indicates that interfacial tension between the asphalt and aggregates
varies with both the type of aggregate and the type of asphalt cement.
c) Molecular Orientation: A week attraction between asphalt binder and aggregate
surface is created as asphalt binder molecules tends to orient in relation to the ions of the
aggregate surface. Water molecules which are dipolar and are more polar than the asphalt
binder comes in contact and will permanently satisfy the energy demand of the aggregate
surface and resulting the weak asphalt binder aggregate bond and finally causing the stripping.
d) Chemical : Chemical reaction between the asphalt binder and aggregate surface occurs
causing chemical adhesion. In general, aggregates with acidic surfaces do not react as strongly
with asphalt binders. This weaker reaction may not be strong enough to counter other moisture
damage factors. Savile and Axon (1937) have also noted that stripping is more serious in
acidic aggregate mixtures compared to basic aggregate mixtures.

Factors Influencing Moisture Damage

Moisture damage is a multifaceted phenomenon influenced by a combination of the previously
outlined mechanisms. The fundamental nature of these mechanisms, along with their complex
interactions, complicates the ability to accurately predict whether a specific characteristic will
dominate in determining moisture susceptibility.

In general, moisture damage is increased by any factor that increases moisture content in the
HMA, decreases the adhesion of asphalt binder to the aggregate surface or physically scours
the asphalt binder. Each of the factors listed below influence moisture damage to some degree
however none of the factor may not be the sole cause for predicting moisture damage .

The factors that influence moisture damage may be discussed under four broad headings: (a)
asphalt concrete characteristics, including aggregate, asphalt cement, and type of mixture, (b)
weather during construction, (c) environmental effects after construction, and (d) pavement
subsurface drainage.

a) Asphalt Concrete Characteristics

The asphalt concrete characteristics important to the mechanisms of moisture damage include
the nature of the aggregate, the nature of the binder, and the type of mixture. The aggregate
characteristics identified as being important to stripping include the surface texture, porosity,
mineralogy, surface moisture, surface coatings, and surface chemical composition.For asphalt
binder, viscosity is generally believed to be an important characteristic to consider.

Finally, moisture damage is believed to occur more easily in dense-graded mixtures compared
to open-graded mixtures .If water or moisture is not permitted to stay in the mixture, the chance
for either cohesive or adhesive type failures will be minimized. This is true with free draining
open graded mixtures and may be true for very dense mixtures where water or moisture is
prevented from entering the mixture.

Aggregate Characteristics:

Aggregates are composed of minerals. Each mineral has a characteristic chemical composition
and crystalline structure. Rock types are identified based upon the mineralogical composition
and the formation processes associated with the rock. Important to the stripping mechanism is
the classification of an aggregate based upon its affinity for water. Although a complicated
problem, aggregates that are hydrophilic (attract water) generally have a greater affinity for
water than asphalt cement. Aggregates that are hydrophobic(repulse water) generally have a
greater attraction for asphalt cement than water. In general, it may be stated that hydrophilic
aggregates are acidic and have a high silica content; hydrophobic aggregates are generally
basic and have low silica contents.

Limestone and other carbonaceous rocks generally are categorized as hydrophobic aggregates.
Hydrophobic aggregates, of course, are believed to provide greater resistance to stripping than
hydrophilic aggregates. However, there are always exceptions to the rule.

Maupin (1983) found out that an acidic quartzite has been found to be less susceptible to
stripping than most basic aggregates, whereas a limestone aggregate mixture was observed to
strip. Conglomerate-type aggregate containing minerals of clay compounds that cause
degradation are more susceptible to stripping than aggregates of more uniform composition.

Aggregate characteristics such as surface chemistry, surface area, pore size, or diameter make
more difference than aggregate mineralogy to the water sensitivity of a mixture:

• Surface Chemistry. Surfaces that can more readily form bonds with the asphalt
binder are less likely to cause stripping. In general, a more acidic aggregate surface is
more susceptible to stripping. Iron, magnesium, calcium and perhaps aluminum are
 considered beneficial, while sodium and potassium are considered detrimental. Clay
dust on the surface is also considered to be detrimental. The aggregate surface needs
to be able to accept or donate electrons or form hydrogen bonds, acid and base pairs,
or insoluble salts.

• Porosity. Some porosity of an aggregate is desirable, but too much causes substantial
amounts of absorption. The pore size makes a difference. If the pores are too small for
asphalt to move into, then porosity probably does not make much difference. If the
diameter of the pores is large and allows the asphalt to intrude, then the amount of
porosity is important.

Asphalt Characteristics

It is not possible to make a general statement as to which asphalt characteristics are most
important to stripping. However, most investigators have identified the fact that high viscosity
asphalt cements resist displacement by water to a greater degree than low-viscosity asphalt
cements. This may be due to higher concentration of polar compounds in these materials that
results in better wetting characteristics. Schmidt and Graf (1972) note that if asphalt cements
have the same viscosity, the chemical composition of the asphalt appears to have a negligible
effect on stripping. Others report that asphalt chemistry can be an important factor influencing
stripping. Compounds contained in asphalts, such as certain forms of carboxylic acids and
certain sulfoxide compounds, have been found to be susceptible to moisture damage (Petersen
et.al 1982).

Type of Mixture

Brown et al. (1959) indicate that dense-graded hot mixtures should not strip unless there are
excessive air voids, moisture, or insufficient asphalt cement, or unless the aggregates have
absorbed coatings. A high percentage of voids in dense-graded mixtures generally is
considered to be the most important factor contributing to stripping. Another important factor,
however, may be the complete drying of the aggregates in the mixtures.

The air void level of the mixture is influenced by the compaction efforts asphalt content,
aggregate gradation and mixture temperature. The air void level will significantly influence the
moisture damage of the pavement. Terrel (1990) express that void levels between 8 and 15
percent are most susceptible to moisture damage. Void contents lower than 8 tend to produce
impermeable
mixtures. When HMA air voids exceed about 8 percent by volume, they may become
interconnected and allow water to easily penetrate the HMA and cause moisture damage
through pore pressure or ice expansion. To address this, HMA mix design adjusts asphalt
binder content and aggregate gradation to produce design air voids of about 4 percent.
Excessive air voids can be either a mix design or a construction problem.
.

b) Weather During Construction

Weather conditions during construction of an asphalt concrete pavement have a pronounced

influence on the susceptibility of the pavement to moisture damage. If the weather is cool and
wet during construction, moisture damage in the pavement is morelikely to occur; generally
speaking, these conditions are prevalent in the late fall. Insufficient or poor compaction can lead
to stripping because the high air void content allows water penetration into the asphalt mixture.

c) Environmental Effects After Construction

Environmental considerations that affect stripping after construction include climate and traffic
loadings. Temperature fluctuations, freeze-thaw cycles, and wet-dry cycles can all affect
pavement stripping. Obviously, if water is present in the HMA structure, increased traffic loading
can accelerate moisture damage for two reasons:

 Pore pressure buildup. If water is in the aggregate pores and cannot escape, traffic
loading will tend to compress these pores and cause a pressure buildup, which could push
asphalt binder away from the aggregate surface.
 Hydraulic scouring. Wheel passes over a HMA pavement tend to move water in the
pavement. This movement causes a scouring action that could remove asphalt binder from the
aggregate surface.

Accordingly, it may be stated that, all other facts being equal, increased traffic loading (in terms
of numbers of repetitions) would accelerate moisture damage.

d) Pavement Subsurface Drainage:

Lack of Pavement subsurface drainage has also been found to accelerate moisture damage in
asphalt-aggregate mixtures. Kandhal et al. (1989) presented results from three case histories in
Pennsylvania that clearly show the moisture held within the pavement can lead to accelerated
damage.

Moisture-Related Distress

Moisture-related distress shares many similarities with distress caused by other factors such as
materials, design, and construction practices. Moisture tends to speed up the occurrence of
these types of distress. The following are types of distress that can be linked to moisture or
other factors:

 Bleeding, Cracking, and Rutting: These issues arise from a partial or complete loss of
adhesion between the aggregate surface and the asphalt cement. This can occur due to
the presence of water in the mix, often resulting from poor compaction, insufficiently
dried or dirty aggregates, inadequate drainage, or poor aggregate–asphalt chemistry.
The problem is exacerbated by traffic and freeze–thaw cycles, potentially leading to early
bleeding, rutting, or fatigue cracking.
 Raveling: This refers to the gradual loss of surface material caused by weathering, traffic
abrasion, or both. It can be triggered by poor compaction, low-quality aggregates, low
asphalt content, high fines content, or moisture-related damage, with traffic further
worsening the issue.

Source: Moisture sensitivity of Asphalt Pavement –A national seminar (www.trb.org)

  Localized failures: This type of distress can be the end result of either of the types
discussed above. It is progressive and can be due to the loss of adhesion between the
binder and the aggregate or the cohesive strength in the mix itself.

• Structural strength reduction: This is a result of a cohesive failure causing a loss in stiffness
in the mixture.

Different Test for determination of Moisture susceptibility

Moisture damage has long been a significant issue for asphalt technologists. Efforts to create
laboratory tests that can differentiate between well-performing and poorly performing mixes
concerning moisture have been ongoing since the 1920s. These tests, designed to assess the
moisture damage potential of an asphalt–aggregate mixture, are generally divided into two main
categories:

 Tests on loose mixtures a

 Tests on compacted mixtures.

The static immersion and boil tests, initially performed on Asphalt mixtures, were the earliest
tests introduced in the paving industry. Following these, the immersion–compression test was
developed in the late 1940s to be conducted on compacted specimens and became the first to
achieve ASTM standardization by the mid-1950s. Research in the 1960s brought considerable
awareness to asphalt pavement technologists of the significant effects of climate and traffic on
moisture damage. The significance of these factors was emphasized through the work of
researchers such as Johnson (1969), Schmidt and Graf (1972), Jiminez (1974), and Lottman
(1978).

Wheel tracking of asphalt mixes submerged under water gained popularity for determination of
moisture damage in the 1990s. The Hamburg wheel-tracking device and the asphalt pavement
analyzer are among the tests of this type. It was also during this period that the environmental
conditioning system was introduced to the industry at the completion of the Strategic Highway
Research Program (SHRP) in 1993.

The Superpave system, the product of SHRP, adopted the standard test method AASHTO T283
as the required test for determination of the risk of moisture damage. This test procedure is
similar to the Lottman test procedure with some modification. With the Superpave system being
adopted by most state highway agencies, AASHTO T283 became the most widely used test
procedure within the industry. Some agencies have reported problems with this test in terms of
correlation between the laboratory results and field observations.

In general, the tests that have been developed can be divided into two main categories:
qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative tests provide a subjective evaluation of the stripping
potential and include

• Boiling water test,

• Freeze–thaw pedestal test,

• Quick bottle test,

• Rolling bottle method, and

• Many others.

The quantitative tests provide a value for a specific parameter such as strength before and after
conditioning. These tests include

• Immersion–compression test,

• Indirect tensile test,

• Marshall immersion test,

• Double punch method,

• Resilient modulus tests, and

• Many others.

Provision in the Specification (Specification for the road and Bridge, 2075 , 2nd
Amendment 2078)
Standard Specification for road and bride 2075, 2nd Amendment 2078 issued by the Department of
Road, Nepal had made some provision for the test of aggregate and mix. The parameter to be
tested for the mixture and aggregate are presented in the table belong walong with the limiting
value.

Physical Requirements for Coarse Aggregate for Bituminous Concrete

Property Test Specification Method of
Test
Cleanliness (dust) Grain size analysis Max 5% passing 0.075 IS:2386 Part
mm sieve I
Particle shape Combined Flakiness and Max 35% IS:2386 Part
Elongation Indices I
Strength Los Angeles Abrasion Value Max 30% IS:2386 Part
or Aggregate Impact Value Max 24% IV
Durability Soundness either: Sodium Max 12% IS:2386 Part
Sulphate or V
Magnesium Sulphate Max 18%
Polishing Polished Stone Value Min 55 BS:812-114
Water Absorption Water Absorption Max 2% IS:2386.Part
Ill
Stripping Coating and Stripping of Minimum retained IS: 6241
Bitumen Aggregate Mix coating 95%

Water Sensitivity Retained Tensile Strength* Min 80% AASHTO

283
Similarly the mix shall have to satisfy the following criteria
Table 13.29: Requirements for Dense Graded Bituminous Macadam
Properties Viscosity Modified bitumen Test Method
Grade Hot Cold
Bitumen climate climate
Properties 75 blows on each face of the specimen
Minimum stability (kN at 60
9.0 12.0 10.0 AASHTO T245
oC)
Marshall flow (mm) 2-4 2.5-4 3.5-5 AASHTO T245
Marshall Quotient
2-5 2.5-5 MS-2 and ASTM 02041
( )
% air voids 3-5
% Voids Filled with Bitumen
65-75
(VFB)
 Table 13.29: Requirements for Dense Graded Bituminous Macadam
Properties Viscosity Modified bitumen Test Method
Grade Hot Cold
Bitumen climate climate
Coating of aggregate particle 95% Minimum IS:6241
Tensile Strength ratio 80% Minimum AASHTO T 283
% Voids in Mineral Minimum percent voids in mineral aggregate (VMA) are set
Aggregate (VMA) out in Table below
Minimum Percent Voids In Mineral Aggregate (VMA)
Nominal Maximum Particle Minimum VMA Percent Related to
Size (mm) Design Percentage Air voids
3.0 4.0 5.0
26.5 11.0 12.0 13.0
37.5 10.0 11.0 12.0
In the above requirement stripping and Tensile strength ration are directly related to the moisture
sensitivity and but these test are generally ignored in case of the Nepal. The air void level (or
permeability) of the mixture, which is influenced by compaction effort, asphalt content, aggregate
gradation, and mixture temperature, can greatly influence moisture damage of pavements are
clearly define in the specification.

Preventive measure and Recommendation

Methods to reduce moisture damage, particularly stripping, include use of good aggregate,
pavement surface sealants, pretreatment of aggregates, and use of additives. The pretreatment of
aggregate with lime is the most effective method. The amount of lime typically used is in the range of
1 to 1.5 percent. A variety of test methods has been employed to assess the potential for moisture
damage in asphalt concrete mixtures. Thus far, no test is "superior" or can correctly distinguish a
moisture susceptible mixture in all cases; however AASHTO T 283 and ASTM D 4867 appear to
have greatly improved the ability to detect moisture damage in paving mixtures. Removal of the
damaged areas appears to be the most commonly used and the most effective method for moisture-
damaged pavement surface. Finally the following are the recommendation for the betterment of the
Asphalt concrete again the moisture damage
. Asphalt mix shall be tested for the retain tensile strength as mentioned in AASHTO T 283 or ASTM
D 4867 to minimize moisture damage.
• The use of lime-treated aggregate appears to have greatly reduced moisture damage in asphalt-
aggregate mixtures and should be continued.
• Good construction practices and improved pavement drainage have been shown to reduce
moisture damage in asphalt aggregate mixtures and should be continued.
• Develop a better fundamental understanding of the causes of moisture damage and implement the
recording keeping and information dissemination practice within Department of Road
• Study on the relationships between laboratory test results and field performance so that the long-
term effectiveness of the various treatment methods can be assessed.
• Implement strictly the specifications for controlling moisture damage

Reference:
Brown, A. B., J. W. Sparks, and G. E. Marsh, "Objective Appraisal of Stripping of Asphalt from
Aggregate," STP 240, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa. (1959) pp. 59-
74.
Kandhal, P. V., C. W. Lubold, and F. L. Roberts, "Water Damage to Asphalt Overlays: Case
Histories," Proceedings, Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists Vol. 58 (1989) pp. 40-76.

Mack, C, "Physio-Chemical Aspects of Asphalt Pavements:Energy Relations at Interface Between

Asphalt and Mineral Aggregate and Their Measurement," Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
(1935) pp. 1500-1505.
Maupin, G. W., "Final Report—Laboratory Investigation of Hydrated Lime as an Antistripping
Additive," Report No. FHWA/VA-84/14, Federal Highway Administration,Washington, D.C. (1983).
Petersen, J. C, H. Plancher, E. K. Ensley, R. L. Venable, and G. Miyake, "Chemistry of Asphalt-
Aggregate Interaction: Relationship with Pavement Moisture-Damage Prediction Test," in
Transportation Research Record 843, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council,
Washington, D.C. (1982) pp. 95-104.
Rice, J. M., "Relationship of Aggregate Characteristics to the Effect of Water on Bituminous Paving
Mixtures,"ASTM STP 240, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa. (1958) pp.
17-33.
Saville, V. B. and E. O. Axon, "Adhesion of Asphaltic Binders to Mineral Aggregates," Proceedings,
Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 9 (1937) pp. 87-101.
Schmidt, R. J. and P. E. Graf, "The Effect of Water on the Resilient Modulus of Asphalt Treated
Mixes," Proceedings, Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 41 (1972) pp. 118-162.

Terrel, R. L., and J. W. Shute. 1989. Summary Report on Water Sensitivity. SHRP-A/IR-89-
003.Strategic Highway Research Program, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
Terrel, R. L., "Water Sensitivity of Asphalt Concrete," Proceedings, Symposium on Pavement
Performance, Monitoring and Rehabilitation, University of New Mexico (1990).
Way, G. B., "A Study of the Arizona Design Criteria for the Prevention of Stripping of Asphalt
Concrete," Final Report X D 330-203, Arizona Department of Transportation (1974) 52 pp.