Laboratory Test Methods for Foamed

Asphalt Mix Resilient Modulus

Pengcheng Fu* David Jones* John T. Harvey*
Syed A. Bukhari**
* University of California Pavement Research Center
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of California, Davis
One Shields Ave.
Davis, CA 95616 USA
{pfu; djjones; jtharvey} @ucdavis.edu
** University of California Pavement Research Center
Institute of Transportation Studies
University of California, Berkeley
1353 S. 46th St, Bldg. 452
Richmond, CA 94804, USA
abukhari@berkeley.edu

This paper investigates laboratory test methods for resilient modulus of foamed
asphalt mixes. By comparing test results from different laboratory test methods, the effects of
various stress states are identified. The indirect tensile resilient modulus test and the free-free
resonant column test were found to yield stress states irrelevant to pavement structures, and
to greatly overestimate resilient modulus. Triaxial resilient modulus test results showed that
the role of foamed asphalt treatment is to transform the material behavior from that of typical
unbound granular materials to that of partially asphalt-bound materials. Flexural beam tests
indicated that when subjected to tension, the resilient modulus of soaked foamed asphalt
mixes can be very low. Since triaxial and flexural beam tests each characterize one of the two
most important stress states relevant to pavement design, test results from these two methods
need to be combined to be used in design.
ABSTRACT.

KEYWORDS:

Foamed Asphalt, Resilient Modulus, Mechanistic-Empirical Design, Laboratory

Test.
DOI:10.3166/RMPD.10.187-212 2009 Lavoisier, Paris

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009, pages 187 to 212

188

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

1. Introduction and literature review

1.1. Resilient modulus of foamed asphalt mixes
Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) of cracked asphalt pavements with foamed
asphalt is a promising flexible pavement rehabilitation technique. In the past two
decades, successful application has been reported in numerous countries (e.g.
Mohammad et al., 2003; Saleh, 2004; Loizos, 2007; Ramanujam and Jones, 2007).
The prevailing mix design methods as well as structural design methods are largely
empirical (e.g. Muthen, 1998; the South Africa TG2, 2002). In recent years,
considerable effort has been devoted to achieving better knowledge of the behavior
of this material and to developing mechanistic-empirical (M-E) design methods (e.g.
Long and Theyse, 2004; Twagira et al., 2006; He and Wong, 2007). Regardless of
the specific formats of the M-E design schemes that have been proposed or will be
established in the future, resilient modulus is an important input parameter for
calculating pavement structural responses.
Resilient modulus characterizes the resistance of pavement materials to resilient
deformation under applied loads. It is defined as the ratio of the amplitude of the
applied stress to the amplitude of the resultant recoverable strain. Although the
definition prefers measuring recoverable deformation under cyclic loading, the
initial elastic modulus measured in monotonically loaded tests is also often used as
resilient modulus. In a typical FDR pavement structure, resilient modulus of the
foamed asphalt layer greatly influences bending deformation and fatigue life of the
surface asphalt concrete layer, and also influences how well the foamed asphalt base
layer can distribute the traffic load to reduce stresses in the underlying layers.

1.2. Microscopic structure and general material behavior

Foamed asphalt mixes have characteristics different from those of Hot Mix
Asphalt (HMA) and granular base materials, for which extensive research has been
carried out and considerable engineering experience has been accumulated over the
years. It is believed that the microscopic structure of a foamed asphalt mix features
partially coated large aggregates that are spot welded with fines mortar (Jenkins,
2000). Fine aggregate particles can only be partially coated by asphalt binder during
cold foaming to form the asphalt mastic phase, while a considerable portion of the
voids in the aggregate skeleton are filled by fine mineral particles (referred to
hereafter as mineral fillers) without asphalt coating. Portland cement is frequently
added to foamed asphalt mixes. If the portland cement content is relatively low (0 to
1.5% by mass) and the foamed asphalt content is moderate to high (2 to 3.5% by
mass), which is the case for most mixes reported in the literature, the foamed asphalt
mix can be regarded as a weakly asphalt-bound material. It is well known that the
strength, resilient modulus and permanent deformation resistance of foamed asphalt
mixes are dependent on its stress state (e.g. Ebels and Jenkins, 2006; Fu and Harvey,

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

189

2007; Jenkins et al., 2007), which is a typical behavior of unbound or weakly bound
granular materials. On the other hand, foamed asphalt mixes can bear tensile or
bending deformation, and even show some fatigue resistance, which is a typical
characteristic of bound materials. This has been demonstrated by indirect tensile
(IDT) strength tests (e.g. Nataatmadja, 2001), monotonic flexural beam tests (Long
and Theyse, 2002; Long and Ventura, 2004) and cyclic flexural beam tests
(Ramanujam and Jones, 2007; Twagira et al., 2006).

1.3. Laboratory test stress states vs. field stress states

Laboratory resilient modulus test methods and procedures that are used for
assessing foamed asphalt mixes were all originally developed for other pavement
materials. For instance, the indirect tensile resilient modulus (referred to in this
paper as IDT RM) test (AASHTO TP31, ASTM D41231 and LTPP P07) and the
cyclic flexural beam test for dynamic modulus and fatigue (AASHTO T321) were
both originally developed for HMA materials. The triaxial resilient modulus
(referred to in this paper as Tx RM) test (AASHTO T307) is a conventional test
method for unbound granular materials. This test and the frequency sweep with
cyclic flexural beam test were specifically designed to measure resilient modulus,
whereas resilient modulus is a byproduct of some other tests, such as the triaxial
permanent deformation (Tx PD) test and the cyclic flexural beam test for fatigue.
Although these tests all quantify stiffnesses of materials, the boundary conditions
applied and the resultant stress states are significantly different. The flexural beam
test to some degree simulates the stress state of the asphalt concrete layer subjected
to loading of a tire, with tensile stress at the bottom and compressive stress at the top
of a beam specimen, but with no horizontal confinement stresses. In contrast, the Tx
RM test applies various combinations of compressive confining stresses and
deviator stresses, whereas no tensile stress can be induced within the specimen in
typical test setups. The stress state within a specimen subjected to the IDT resilient
modulus test is more complicated. According to elastic theories for a homogenous
continuum, horizontal tensile strain and stress are induced within the cylindrical
specimen subjected to narrow vertical strip loads. However, the applicability of such
theories to foamed asphalt mixes, which present characteristics of typical granular
materials, is questionable.
The stress state in a foamed asphalt base layer subjected to traffic loading cannot
be represented by any one of these laboratory tests alone. The stress state at certain
locations in the foamed asphalt treated base layer is similar to that of a triaxial test;
at some other locations, for instance at the bottom of the foamed asphalt layer,
tensile strain is induced which is similar to the stress state at the bottom of a flexural
beam specimen. Therefore, laboratory test results should be interpreted with caution
1. AASHTO TP31 was deleted in 2002 and ASTM D4123 was withdrawn without
replacement in 2003.

190

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

and should not be assumed to be completely representative of the properties in the

pavement structure for design.
The IDT RM test was the most widely used test method for foamed asphalt
mixes in the literature (Nataatmadja, 2001; Chiu and Lewis, 2003; Marquis et al.,
2003; Collings et al., 2004; Ramanujam and Jones, 2007; Khweir, 2007), mainly
due to the ready availability of the equipment. However, unrealistically high
resilient modulus values (higher than 5,000 MPa) were reported by most of the
above researchers. On the other hand, researchers who used other test methods,
namely the Tx RM test (Jenkins et al. 2002; Jenkins et al. 2004; Fu and Harvey
2007; Jenkins et al., 2007), the Tx PD test (Long and Theyse, 2002; Long and
Ventura 2004; Jenkins et al. 2007), the monotonic flexural beam test (Long and
Theyse, 2002; Long and Ventura, 2004), the cyclic flexural beam fatigue test
(Twagira et al. 2006; Ramanujam and Jones, 2007), and the temperature-frequency
sweep with cyclic flexural beam test (Twarira et al., 2006) generally reported values
within a range of between 500 and 3,000 MPa, which is consistent with the backcalculation results from field deflection measurements, including Falling Weight
Deflectometer (FWD) tests (Lane and Kazmierowski, 2003; Ramanujam and Jones,
2007) and multi-depth deflectometer (MDD) tests (Long and Theyse, 2004). This
discrepancy between resilient modulus determined using IDT RM tests and other
test methods is evident in studies where multiple test methods were carried out for
the same materials. These studies have shown that the IDT test yields much higher
resilient modulus values than other test methods (Ramanujam and Jones, 2007),
while triaxial tests, beam tests and field deflection back-calculation all yield values
within a similar range (Long and Theyse, 2002; Long and Ventura, 2004; Long and
Theyse, 2004).
A preliminary observation from the literature reveals that the IDT RM test might
overestimate the resilient modulus of foamed asphalt mixes and thus should not be
used in mix design and structural design. On the other hand, resilient moduli tested
with triaxial type or beam type tests are more credible indicators and their test
conditions are more relevant to field stress states. Two potential reasons are
suggested below, but further investigation with theories and models capable of
capturing the semi-granular nature of foamed asphalt mixes, such as the discrete
element method (Ullidtz, 2001) is needed to better understand the IDT test, which is
beyond the scope of this paper.
The calculation of stress in the IDT test more heavily relies on the assumptions
of continuum mechanics than triaxial or beam tests. In IDT tests, loads are applied
vertically through two narrow loading strips, and calculation of horizontal tensile
stress relies on the continuum mechanics, whose applicability to foamed asphalt
mixes is questionable. In triaxial tests, confining stress and deviator stress are
applied uniformly and in a global sense, the calculation of resultant stresses only
relies on the assumption that the internal stress should balance the applied external
load. The situation for the internal stress of bending beam specimens is similar
because on any transversal cross section, the normal stress has to balance the applied

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

191

bending moment. This fundamental difference between the IDT test and the other
two types of tests is evident noting that the Poissons ratio is used in calculating
stress of the IDT test while no material-specific constant is involved in the stress
calculation for the other two test types.
In IDT tests, the width of the loading strips (13 mm) and the distance (25 mm)
between the two gages measuring deformation is smaller than or close to the
dimension of large aggregate particles. The specimen sizes for triaxial tests and
flexural beam tests are much larger and stress distribution is more uniform.

1.4. Water conditioning

The effect of water conditioning on foamed asphalt mix behavior is an important
issue in foamed asphalt mix- and structural design. Compared to HMA materials,
aggregate particles in foamed asphalt mixes are only partially coated (Jenkins, 2000)
and the voids ratio and permeability are much higher, which makes the material
properties highly sensitive to moisture conditioning. It was found that the properties
of foamed asphalt mixes under soaked conditions are critical to their field
performance (Fu et al., 2008b).
Resilient modulus measurements of water soaked foamed asphalt mixes were
occasionally reported by Australian researchers (Nataatmadja, 2001; Ramanujam
and Jones, 2007), but they were all carried out with the IDT RM test. Literature
searches for resilient modulus measurements for soaked foamed asphalt mixes with
triaxial or beam type tests were unsuccessful. Resilient modulus tests for water
soaked foamed asphalt mixes with Tx RM tests and monotonic flexural beam tests
are a main focus of this paper.

1.5. Temperature and loading rate

Because of the presence of asphalt (in the form of both newly introduced foamed
asphalt and partially oxidized asphalt from the original HMA), resilient modulus of
foamed asphalt mixes shows temperature and loading rate dependency. Fu and
Harvey (2007) studied temperature dependency of foamed asphalt mix resilient
modulus as well as its interaction with stress dependency under triaxial test
boundary conditions. Temperature sensitivity coefficients (a dimensionless
parameter) from 0.0065 to 0.013 were measured. Limited FWD back-calculation
results also showed similar temperature sensitivity coefficient values.
Frequency sweep from cyclic flexural beam tests was reported by Twagira et al.
(2006). The materials tested contained between 2.4 and 3.6% foamed asphalt and 0
to 1.0% portland cement. It was found that generally a 10 fold increase in loading
frequency increases the measured resilient modulus by approximately 25%.

192

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

Compared to the effects of water conditioning and stress states, the effects of
temperature and loading rates are of a less complicated and more predictable nature.

1.6. Scope of this study

This paper discusses laboratory test methods for resilient modulus of foamed
asphalt mixes, emphasizing the effects of water conditioning and different test
boundary conditions on test results. In (Fu et al., 2009), an bilinear anisotropic
constitutive model is presented to predict equivalent resilient modulus of foamed
asphalt mixes in the field stress state by combining the laboratory test results of Tx
RM tests with monotonic flexural beam test results. The temperature and moisture
dependencies of foamed asphalt mix resilient modulus observed in field Falling
Weight Deflectometer (FWD) tests are also discussed in (Fu et al., 2009).
Guidelines for using resilient modulus values in project level design are proposed in
(Fu et al., 2009), based on the conclusions of the two papers.

2. Laboratory testing program

This paper is based on work completed as part of an ongoing comprehensive
research program (UCPRC, 2005; Jones, et al., 2008) on FDR with foamed asphalt,
being undertaken by the University of California Pavement Research Center
(UCPRC) for the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). This research
includes extensive laboratory testing and field monitoring. The laboratory testing
program aims to identify the roles of constituents of foamed asphalt mixes and to
select suitable laboratory practices and appropriate test methods, both for advanced
research and routine project-level tests. Field monitoring on FDR-foamed asphalt
projects built by Caltrans is being performed by the UCPRC with the objective of
relating laboratory tested material properties to field tested properties and field
performance. The test results presented in this paper are from a phase of the study
that investigated parent materials of foamed asphalt mixes (asphalt cements,
recycled asphalt pavement and aggregate base) and their influence on mix
properties, and compared various laboratory specimen preparation procedures and
test methods.

2.1. Materials
The granular materials treated with foamed asphalt in this study primarily consist
of recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) which is in accordance with California FDR
practice. California has been using conventional asphalt overlays as the main asphalt
pavement rehabilitation and maintenance strategy for more than 50 years. In
California, even low traffic volume state roads typically have multiple cracked

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

193

asphalt concrete layers 150 to 600 mm thick. In this study RAP materials were
collected from two California highways: State Route 88 (SR88) in Amador County
and SR33 in Ventura County. The pavements were pulverized by recycling
machines commonly used in FDR projects in California to depths of about 200 mm,
but without the addition of any stabilizing agent. Both materials contained more than
75% pulverized asphalt concrete and less than 25% granular base and other
pavement layers by mass. Three gradations (denoted as Gradation A, B and C) were
constituted from each source by sieving the RAP materials into four fractions and
recombining them as shown in Figure 1. This ensured that consistent materials were
used throughout the study. RAP 33-A and 88-A represented the average gradations
as pulverized on each road, containing 8% and 10% fines passing the 0.075 mm
sieve by mass, respectively; RAP 33-B and 88-B were coarser gradations with 6.5%
fines passing the 0.075 mm sieve; RAP 33-C and 88-C were produced by adding
baghouse dust (collected from a local aggregate processing plant) to RAP 33-B and
88-B to produce materials that had 20% passing the 0.075 mm sieve.

% of mass passing

60

Zo
ne

80

33-A
33-B
33-C

Ide
al

88-A
88-B
88-C

Su
itab
le Z
one

100

40
20
0
0.0

0.1

1.0

10

100

Sieve Size (mm)

Figure 1. Gradation of the RAP used in the test program (the curves for 33-B and
88-B overlap and those for 33-C and 88-C overlap. Zone definition follows TG2,
2002)

Detailed quantitative morphological analyses were not carried out for the RAP
materials collected. A visual inspection found that the aggregate angularities of the
RAP from SR33 and SR88 were not significantly different as illustrated in Table 1.
However, many more aggregate particles of SR33 RAP were coated by oxidized
asphalt binder compared to those from SR88, and coated aggregate particles had
rougher surface texture than those of the uncoated particles. The surface texture of
typical RAP particles is shown in Figure 2.

194

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

Two grades of asphalt (PG 64-16 and PG 64-10) from a local California refinery
were used in the study. The asphalt was foamed with a Wirtgen WLB10 laboratory
plant at 165C with 4% foaming water by mass added. These two asphalts had
similar foaming characteristics with an average expansion ratio of 23 and an average
half-life of 21 seconds. Foamed asphalt was injected directly onto the RAP in a
custom built laboratory-scale twin-shaft pug-mill mixer. The aggregate temperature
was controlled between 25C and 30C. The foamed asphalt content was 3% (by
mass of aggregate). For each mix type, one batch of loose mix (65 kg total) was
prepared to fabricate different types of specimens for laboratory testing, including
Indirect Tensile Strength (ITS), Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS), flexural
beam, and Tx RM tests. No portland cement or other active fillers were added. Their
effects will be studied in a later phase of the research program.

Table 1. Aggregate particles from the two RAP sources

Particles passing 19mm sieve and
retained on 9.5mm sieve

Particles passing 9.5mm sieve and

retained on 4.75mm sieve

SR33

SR88

It was found that in terms of the properties concerned in this study, the effects of
asphalt binder grade were less significant that those of RAP type. Therefore, the test
results presented in later sections for each RAP type are the average of the two
asphalt types. Two replicate batches of each combination of RAP type and asphalt
type were typically prepared. The values shown in Tables 2 to 5 are the average of
replicate batches and specimens, while results for replicate batches and specimens
are plotted separately in Figures 4 to 7.

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

(a)

195

(b)

Figure 2. Surface texture of typical RAP particles. (a) SR33 RAP;(b) SR88 RAP.
(The diameters of both particles are approximately 5 mm)

2.2. Triaxial resilient modulus test

Cylindrical specimens with a diameter of 152 mm and a height of 305 mm were
prepared for Tx RM tests. The compaction procedure is based on the modified
Proctor compaction method (T180) with some additional modifications. Each
cylindrical specimen was compacted with 12 lifts of 25 mm thick layers, and the
mass of the mix for each layer was calculated based on 100% modified AASHTO
density. It should be noted that AASHTO T307 suggests that specimens shall be
compacted with a vibratory impact hammer without kneading action.
The Tx RM test procedure adopted in this study was modified from the
AASHTO T307 test protocol. Resilient moduli at various confining stress levels,
deviator stress levels and loading rates were tested. The confining stress and
deviator stress levels adopted were the same as those of AASHTO T307. At each
combination of confining stress and deviator stress, haversine load pulses at four
different loading rates: 0.05 s pulse width with 0.45 s relaxation, 0.1 s pulse width
with 0.4 s relaxation, 0.2 s pulse width with 0.8 s relaxation and 0.4 s pulse width
with 0.6 s relaxation were applied. Since the Tx RM test undertaken in this study
was largely nondestructive, each specimen was first tested for resilient modulus after
dry curing (unsoaked), and then tested for resilient modulus after soaking.
All triaxial tests as well as flexural beam tests were preformed at 20C.

2.3. Flexural beam specimen and test

A new monotonic flexural beam test procedure was developed at the UCPRC for
this study (see Figure 3). The nominal dimensions of the beam specimens are

196

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

560 mm x 152 mm x 80 mm. The amount of moist material needed to fabricate a

beam was calculated based on the 100% modified AASHTO density. The material
was then compacted in a steel mold to the target volume by alternately applying two
steel compaction heads (one flat and one curved, both with dimensions of 150 mm x
150 mm). The compaction heads were driven by a Hilti TE 76P Combihammer
with a vibration force. Specimens were tested as compacted, with no cutting to final
dimensions.
The flexural beam test configuration was similar to that of AASHTO T97, but
the beam thickness was 80 mm instead of 150 mm, and loading was displacement
rate controlled rather than stress rate controlled. The span length was 450 mm and
loads were applied monotonically at the two third-points with a constant
displacement rate of 25 mm/min. Two metal plates were glued at the mid span of the
beam and one linear variable displacement transducer (LVDT) was attached to each
medal plate to measure the deflection during testing.

2.4. Free-free resonant column test

The free-free resonant column (FFRC) test was carried out on triaxial and beam
specimens. The test setup was similar to that reported by Nazarian et al. (2003) and
Hilbrich and Scullion (2007). This test normally utilizes cylindrical specimens with
a length to diameter ratio of 2:1, while the ratio for beam specimens adopted was
4.5:1, which should be more preferable for wave velocity measurement. Since this
test is nondestructive, all cylindrical and beam specimens were subjected to this test
before the triaxial and flexural beam tests. The specimens were only tested under the
unsoaked condition, as it was not possible to mount the accelerometer on soaked
specimens.
R=

10
8

mm

Connector to a Hilti Combihammer

10 mm

mm

mm

0m
15

0
15
150

150

mm

10 mm

(a)

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

197

Apply vibration force

80 mm

Targ

eam
et b

su r f

ace

>160 mm

mm
560

15

ould
nm
o
i
t
c
pa
l com
Stee

2
m
m

(b)

Displacement control
loading
Deflection measurement
at mid-span

0
152 mm

80 mm

m
m
m
m
0
45

Metal plate
glued to beam

15

LVDT

(c)
Figure 3. The beam specimen compaction and test setup. (a) The curved compaction
head and the flat compaction head; (b) beam specimen compaction by applying
vibration force on compaction heads; (c)beam test setup

2.5. Curing and water conditioning

It is a well known fact that the strength development mechanism of a foamed
asphalt mix during curing is closely related to the loss of moisture, especially for
mixes that do not contain portland cement. Bowering (1970) found that foamed
asphalt specimens do not develop full strength until most of the mixing moisture has
evaporated. In this study, all compacted specimens were cured in a forced draft oven
at 40C for 7 days. Specimens subjected to water conditioning were soaked in a
water bath at 20C for 72 hours with the water level 100 mm above the surface of
the specimen. The prolonged drying and soaking durations were designed to

198

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

represent extreme and critical field conditions and to minimize the effects of
different specimen sizes. Both the foamed asphalt treated mixes and untreated
control mixes were subjected to the same curing and water conditioning conditions
before testing.

2.6. Fracture face image analysis

A fracture face image analysis technique providing insight into the internal
microscopic structure characteristics of foamed asphalt mixes was developed for this
research program (Fu et al., 2008a). In this technique, the internal asphalt mastic
phase distribution in foamed asphalt mixes is inferred from the visible distribution of
asphalt mastic spots on the fracture faces of tested ITS or flexural beam specimens.

(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4. Example of fracture face image analysis. (a) a tested ITS specimen;
(b)two fracture faces; (c) asphalt mastic spots identified on one fracture face

To quantify the characteristics of the asphalt mastic phase visible on fracture

faces, a new concept, Fracture Face Asphalt Coverage (FFAC) was defined as the
ratio of the area of the mastic phase visible on a fracture face to the total area of the
fracture face. Figure 4 shows a tested ITS specimen, two fracture faces of this
specimen, and the asphalt mastic phase visible on the fracture faces identified by
digital image processing techniques. The FFAC value for this fracture face is 16%.
FFAC is primarily a function of the asphalt mastic dispersion in the mix. High
values of FFAC generally indicate better asphalt dispersion. As a research tool,
FFAC combined with other test results provides useful information for investigating
the stabilization mechanism of foamed asphalt in the mix and for understanding how
other variables in mix design affect mix properties, as will be demonstrated in
Section 3.3.

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

199

3. Test results
3.1. ITS test results
Although the main focus of this paper is the resilient modulus characteristics of
foamed asphalt materials, ITS values of the material tested in this study are listed in
Table 2 as a reference. ITS test results are the most abundant quantitative
characteristics for foamed asphalt mixes available in the literature, and thus a good
reference property characterizing some basic properties of the materials (Fu et al.,
2008b).

Table 2. ITS test results on 100 mm briquettes

ITS (kPa)
33-A

33-B

33-C

88-A

88-B

88-C

Untreated
RAP

Unsoaked
Soaked

724
80

805
74

301
9

314
66

413
52

221
NR*

3% foamed
asphalt

Unsoaked
Soaked

898
166

792
174

587
86

512
196

569
191

513
125

NR*: No result, specimens disintegrated during water conditioning.

3.2. Free-free resonant column test (FFRC)

Several observations can be made regarding the FFRC test results.
The repeatability of this test is satisfactory. Figure 5 shows the test result
comparison for two replicate beams made of the same batch of mix. The relative
difference is generally within 5%.
There is a high correlation (with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.97)
between FFRC resilient modulus values for beam specimens and those for triaxial
specimens made of the same batch of mix (Figure 6). The FFRC resilient modulus
values for triaxial specimens were consistently lower (by 13% on average) than
those of the beam specimens. One important reason for this difference might be the
aggregate particle orientation induced by compaction. In FFRC tests, the wave
propagation direction in a triaxial specimen is the same as the direction of the
compaction action whereas it is perpendicular to the direction of compaction action
in a beam specimen.

200

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

Mr -FFRC-Specimen B (MPa)

12,000

5x
1.0
y=

10,000

5x
0.9
y=

8,000

33-A
33-B
33-C

6,000

4,000
4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

88-A
88-B
88-C

12,000

Mr -FFRC-Specimen A (MPa)

Figure 5. Repeatability of FFRC tests (Each combination of specimen A and B are

the two beam specimens made of the same batch of foamed asphalt mix.)

Mr -FFRC-Triaxial (MPa)

12,000
33-A
33-B
33-C

10,000

88-A
88-B
88-C

8,000
6,000

7x
0.8
y=
.90
2 =0
R

4,000
2,000
0
0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Mr -FFRC-Beam (MPa)

Figure 6. Correlation of FFRC resilient modulus values between beam specimens

and triaxial specimens made of the same batches of mixes

FFRC tests apparently overestimate resilient modulus of foamed asphalt mixes.

As will be shown in Section 3.3 and 3.4, resilient modulus values determined from
triaxial and flexural beam tests for the same mixes were generally lower than
2,000 MPa, while typical values of 4,000 to 12,000 MPa were produced by FFRC
tests. As mentioned before, resilient modulus of foamed asphalt mixes is stress and
loading rate dependent. The stress induced in FFRC tests is of a very small
amplitude and high frequency. For instance, the natural frequency of triaxial

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

201

specimens is as high as several thousand Hz. This kind of stress state has minimal
relevance to the stress state induced by traffic loading to pavement structures.
Similar observations were made by Hochuli et al. (2001) on resilient modulus
behavior of HMA. In their study, HMA rods were tested by wave propagation
methods. Because the amplitudes of the waves used were very small and frequencies
were very high, the measured modulus values were as high as 16,000 to 22,000 MPa
at ambient temperature (22C). The study concluded that the resulting moduli are
different from those commonly used for pavement design and cannot be used
directly for that purpose.

12,000

Mr -FFRC-Beam (MPa)

10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000

2
0.8

33-A

88-A

33-B

88-B

33-C

88-C

0
0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

Modulus of Rupture - Beam (kPa)

Figure 7. Correlation between FFRC resilient modulus values of beam specimens

and modulus of rupture of the same beam

The FFRC modulus values for unsoaked specimens appeared to be very

dependent on RAP type. All specimens made of RAP 33-A and 33-B had
significantly higher modulus than did other RAP type. The same phenomenon can
be observed from ITS test results in Table 2, and from the correlation between
FFRC resilient modulus and modulus of rupture (or stress-at-break as termed in
South Africa) results of monotonic flexural beam tests as shown in Figure 7.
Although no X-Ray diffraction tests were carried out on any of the materials, some
weak chemical bonding, attributed to the chemical composition of the fines,
appeared to be evident in the unsoaked state in the material sampled from SR33.
Results of pH tests on this material indicated slight alkalinity (pH of 8.2 using
AASHTO T289), compared to slight acidity (pH of 6.7) on the material sampled
from SR88, which did not show the same signs of chemical bonding. These pH

202

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

ranges are realistic for the natural materials and not indicative of earlier modification
with lime or cement. This weak chemical bonding exhibited brittle, but stiff,
properties especially at low stress levels, in the unsoaked state, but did not influence
performance of the material in the soaked state. This bonding appeared to play a
dominant role in FFRC testing. Fifteen percent inert baghouse dust was added to
RAP 33-C, which diluted the semi-reactive filler and impeded filler particles from
contacting each other. Unsoaked strength and stiffness values of 33-C were therefore
close to that of RAP 88-C, and also closer to that of 88-A and 88-B than to 33-A and
33-B. In the following discussion, RAP 33-A and 33-B are classified into one
category, and the other four types are classified into another category to avoid
complicating the discussion.
As an overall conclusion, although the FFRC test is easy and inexpensive to
carry out with high repeatability, the testing stress state is very different from the
working stress state of foamed asphalt mixes in pavement structures, and hence the
results are of questionable value for pavement design with these materials.

3.3. Triaxial resilient modulus test

All triaxial specimens were subjected to resilient modulus tests under unsoaked
and soaked conditions consecutively. Combinations of various load pulse durations,
confining stresses and deviator stresses were applied to each test. Equation [1],
which is modified from Uzans (1985) general model by the addition of
consideration of loading pulse durations, was used to fit the Tx RM test data. An
average R2 value of 0.983 was achieved.
k

Mr

k2

T
T

T W oct
k1 pa

pa pa
0.1second

k3

[1]

where pa= atmospheric pressure used to nondimensionalize stresses; T= duration of

the haversine load pulses; 0 = confining stress; d = deviator stress; = 30+d =
bulk stress; oct =octahedral shear stress, and in the triaxial stress state oct= d/3;
kT, k1, k2, and k3 are material related constants. Model fitting results are presented in
Tables 3 and 4.
In triaxial test stress states, the resilient modulus of foamed asphalt mix is
primarily a function of the confining stress (0), the deviator stress (d) and the
loading rate (characterized by the half-sine load pulse duration T), i.e. Mr = Mr (0,
d, T). Based on the fitting results, resilient modulus values at two reference stress
states, Mr1= Mr(20.7 kPa, 62.1 kPa, 0.1 second) and Mr2= Mr(137.9 kPa, 103.4 kPa,
0.1 second) were calculated as shown in Tables 3 and 4. The resilient modulus at
low confining pressure and relatively high deviator stress levels is represented by
Mr1, while Mr2 represents the resilient modulus at high confining stress and relatively
low deviator stress levels. Both stress states were used in the testing sequence of

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

203

AASHTO T307, but the values shown were calculated on the basis of model fitting
results. Resilient modulus retained (RMR) values are provided as a general
indication of the moisture sensitivity of the resilient modulus of each material and is
calculated as the average of the moisture sensitivity at the two reference stress states.
Table 4 shows the Tx RM test results for control mixes, which were made of the
same aggregate with the same procedure, but did not contain foamed asphalt.
The following general observations can be made by comparing the tests results
of the control mixes and the foamed asphalt treated mixes in both soaked and
unsoaked states.
1) Soaked control mixes of RAP 33-A and 33-B had significantly higher resilient
moduli than specimens of 88-A and 88-B. According to the parallel ITS test results
(Table 2), although weak cementation attributed to chemical bonding appeared to
develop for mixes 33-A and 33-B, they were largely damaged after water
conditioning. The soaked ITS values for 33-A and 33-B RAP were similar to those
for 88-A and 88-B RAP. The weak cementation/bonding probably did not
significantly contribute to the measured high soaked resilient modulus values for
these two RAP types although it might have contributed to the higher resilient
modulus of the corresponding unsoaked specimens. Apart from cementation and/or
bonding, resilient modulus of granular materials is also affected by aggregate
gradation, water content, density, aggregate size, and morphological characteristics
(Pan et al., 2006). Since the gradation, moisture content and density were all
controlled in the tests, morphological properties probably had some influence on the
results. As mentioned in Section 2.1, RAP from the two sources had similar
angularity, but the SR33 RAP had coarser surface texture, to which the higher
soaked resilient modulus values of the untreated control mixes of 33-A and 33-B
was attributed.
2) Adding 3 percent foamed asphalt generally did not increase resilient modulus
values in the unsoaked state, except for 33-C. The moduli of 33-C increased slightly
(by approximately 10%) at both stress levels, but remained essentially unchanged
for all the other RAP types, or even decreased slightly when foamed asphalt was
added.
3) Adding 3 percent foamed asphalt substantially increased the soaked resilient
moduli for 88-A and 88-B RAP, especially at the low confining stress level. Soaked
untreated specimens of 33-C and 88-C softened significantly after water
conditioning and eventually collapsed in the water bath with minor disturbance.
Therefore, the foamed asphalt treatment increased their stiffnesses from nearly
immeasurably low values to acceptable values.

88-C

-0.05

-0.03

0.19

0.19

0.18

0.15

0.16

-0.05

-0.03

-0.05

-0.03

-0.01

-0.03

k3

Unsoaked
0.19

k2

842

938

941

1015

1038

1131

Mr1

4,600

6,672

7,864

5,469

8,153

7,406

K1

-0.08

-0.09

-0.09

-0.09

-0.11

-0.09

kT

1 Mr1 soaked Mr2 soaked



Mr2dry
2 Mr1 dry

1078

1205

1188

1235

1298

1467

Mr2

6,469

8,369

9,278

8,447

33-C

88-A

88-B

88-C

-0.03

-0.03

-0.04

-0.01

9,240

-0.03

-0.04

10,901

33-B

kT

33-A

k1

0.23

0.26

0.25

0.29

0.24

0.16

-0.08

-0.10

-0.07

-0.19

-0.04

-0.05

Unsoaked
k2
k3

983

1116

967

880

1031

1211

Mr1

1322

1548

1332

1199

1420

1484

Mr2

-0.07

-0.06

kT

0.25

0.24

k2

0.31

0.22

0.21

0.27

0.15

0.17

k2

-0.10

-0.05

k3

Soaked

-0.10

-0.06

-0.05

-0.10

-0.06

-0.06

k3

Soaked

833

908

Mr1

564

763

881

664

916

833

Mr1

1131

1239

Mr2

837

1006

1163

920

1106

1026

Mr2

3,553

3,693

0.45

0.40

-0.17

-0.16

487

495

845

807

72%

RMR*

49%

56%

80%

79%

RMR

72%

82%

96%

70%

87%

Specimens disintegrated during water conditioning.

-0.06

-0.05

Specimens disintegrated during water conditioning.

6,953

8,004

K1

Table 4. Tx RM test results for untreated control mixes, Mr values are in MPa

* RMR = Resilient Modulus Retained. In this case, RMR

8,560

7,528

88-B

-0.04

-0.04

9,450

8,467

33-C

88-A

9,794

-0.06

-0.04

10,433

33-B

kT

33-A

k1

Table 3. Tx RM test results for foamed asphalt mixes, Mr values are in MPa

204
Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

205

4) The differences in soaked resilient moduli between SR33 (A and B) RAP and
SR88 (A and B) RAP were much less significant for the foamed asphalt treated
mixes than for the untreated control mixes. In the control mixes, the characteristics
of the aggregate (e.g. surface texture) dominated the resilient modulus behavior. On
the other hand, in the foamed asphalt mixes, the foamed asphalt played a dominant
role
The effects of the dispersed asphalt on the foamed asphalt mix resilient modulus
values were also observed by tracking the change of material constants (kT, k1, k2 and
k3) in Equation [1] with the change of asphalt dispersion. In Figure 8, FFACITS150mm-soaked denotes the fracture face asphalt coverage (Fu et al., 2008a) of
the soaked 150 mm ITS specimens, which were made of the same batches of mix
and compacted following a similar procedure as the triaxial specimens. Figure 8
shows the correlations between the FFAC values and all four material constants in
Equation [1] for soaked specimens. Data points with FFAC = 0 correspond to the
values for the soaked untreated (control) materials. It should be noted that the
untreated 33-C and 88-C specimens collapsed during soaking and thus resilient
modulus values were not available.
The constants kT, k2 and k3 represent the sensitivity of the foamed asphalt mix
resilient modulus to loading rates (or load pulse durations), bulk stresses, and
deviator stresses, respectively. Parameter k1 is a scalar term: if all the other
parameters are the same, the higher the k1 value, the higher the resilient modulus at
low confining stress levels.
It can be seen that as the FFAC value increased (which generally represents
better asphalt dispersion in the mix), the resilient modulus at low confining stress
levels also increased (Figure 8a). The resilient modulus was more sensitive to
loading rates (Figure 8b), but less sensitive to bulk stress values (Figure 8c) and
deviator stress values (Figure 8d). This effect was more significant for RAP from
SR88 and RAP 33-C, than for RAP from 33-A and 33-B.
As an overall conclusion, Tx RM test results showed that foamed asphalt
treatment did not always increase the absolute values of resilient modulus, under
either unsoaked or soaked conditions. The main role of foamed asphalt was to
transform the material behavior from that of typical unbound granular materials to
that of partially asphalt-bound materials, with resilient modulus behavior that was
more loading rate dependent but less stress dependent. The significance of this
transforming effect was also influenced by some characteristics of the RAP material
itself. For example, RAP materials with coarser surface texture appeared to be less
affected by foamed asphalt stabilization in triaxial stress states, during which
aggregate particle interlocking and frictional sliding play significant roles in addition
to the cohesion provided by the foamed asphalt.

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

10,000
9,000

k1 -soaked

8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000

33-A
33-C
88-B

4,000

33-B
88-A
88-C

3,000
0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

FFAC-ITS150mm-soaked
(a)

-0.12

-0.10
kT -soaked

206

-0.08

-0.06

33-A
33-C

33-B
88-A

88-B

88-C

-0.04
0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

FFAC-ITS150mm-soaked
(b)

0.30

0.35

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

207

0.5

k2 -soaked

0.4

33-A

33-B

33-C

88-A

88-B

88-C

0.3

0.2

0.1
0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

FFAC-ITS150mm-soaked
(c)

-0.18
33-A
33-C
88-B

-0.15

33-B
88-A
88-C

k3 -soaked

-0.12
-0.09
-0.06
-0.03
0.00
0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

FFAC-ITS150mm-soaked
(d)
Figure 8. Correlation between FFAC and material constants for soaked resilient
modulus. (a) FFAC vs. k1-soaked; (b) FFAC vs. kT-soaked;(c) FFAC vs. k2-soaked;
(d) FFAC vs. k3-soaked

208

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

3.4. Flexural beam test

The monotonic flexural beam test results for both unsoaked and soaked
specimens are shown in Table 5. Ebend is the equivalent tangential Youngs modulus
for bending determined from the stress-strain curves. Strain-at-break (b) was the
calculated tensile strain at the bottom of the beam at the mid-span, computed based
on the measured beam deflection when the deflection-load curve reached its peak.
All calculations were based on Euler-Bernoulli beam theories. Values listed in Table
5 are the averages of pooled values for mixes treated with the PG64-16 and PG64-10
binders and replicate specimens. Many of the metal plates detached after soaking,
thus only a small number (1 to 2) of successful tests were available for several of the
RAP types. In these instances, test results should be interpreted carefully since the
variance could be large.
Table 5. Monotonic flexural beam test results
Unsoaked
RAP

bend
unsoaked

(MPa)

bend
Esoaked
bend
Eunsoaked

4230

7%

Soaked

N*

bend
soaked

(MPa)

bend
Esoaked
M r1 soaked

14%

33-A

1689

2632

117

33-B

1381

2632

249

2444

18%

27%

33-C

1673

2444

70

3760

4%

11%

88-A

855

2181

98

4230

11%

11%

88-B

1073

2820

82

4512

8%

11%

88-C

873

2444

50

4606

6%

9%

* N = number of specimens that were tested with successful deflection measurement.

In the unsoaked state, beams made of SR33 RAP had higher bending stiffness
than those made of SR88 RAP, while the difference in strain-at-break was small.
Interestingly, the magnitude of the equivalent Youngs modulus for bending (Ebend)
for unsoaked specimens was similar to that of the Tx RM. However, when the
beams were soaked, they lost 82% to 94% of their stiffnesses, while the strain-atbreak values had a moderate increase. On the other hand, triaxial specimens only
lost 21% of their stiffnesses on average when soaked.
The large discrepancy between the Tx RM test results and the monotonic
flexural beam test results in terms of moisture sensitivity can be attributed to the
different stress states associated with these two tests. Foamed asphalt materials
without portland cement resist applied loading primarily by three mechanisms: 1)
interlocking and frictional sliding of aggregate particles, 2) bonding of foamed
asphalt, and 3) bonding (i.e. weak chemical cementation and suction of residual
water) in the mineral filler phase. These three mechanisms are 1) insensitive to water
conditioning, 2) moderately sensitive to water conditioning and 3) highly sensitive

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

209

to water conditioning (Fu et al., 2008b), respectively. The first mechanism can resist
compression and shearing forces under confinement in triaxial stress states, so it has
a dominant role in soaked triaxial specimens when the other two mechanisms are
impaired. Consequently water conditioning only reduces Tx RM slightly or
moderately. For unsoaked beam specimens, the third mechanism contributes most of
the deformation resistance, which is relatively strong but brittle. When beams are
soaked, foamed asphalt bonding becomes the only available mechanism resisting
tensile deformation, so the overall stiffness of beam specimens is highly sensitive to
moisture damage. At the same time, because asphalt bonding is more ductile than
the bonding in the mineral filler phase, the strain-at-break is moderately increased
for soaked beams.

4. Summary and conclusions

Previous research programs have often not sufficiently considered that the
resilient modulus of foamed asphalt mixes is highly dependent on the stress state,
and that the available laboratory test methods cannot fully simulate field stress
states. This paper investigates these laboratory test methods, emphasizing the
importance of stress states associated with different test boundary conditions,
especially under soaked conditions.
In a laboratory testing program performed at the UCPRC, foamed asphalt mixes
made of RAP from different parent materials and different asphalt grades were
tested with three methods, namely the free-free resonant column (FFRC) test, the
triaxial resilient modulus (Tx RM) test, and the monotonic flexural beam test.
The FFRC test yields stress states that are very different from those in the
pavement. It greatly overestimates the resilient modulus values of foamed asphalt
mixes, and thus presents problems for its use in pavement design.
Tx RM tests were carried out for both unsoaked and soaked specimens. It was
found that foamed asphalt transformed the material behavior from that of typical
unbound granular materials to that of partially asphalt-bound materials, without
significantly increasing the resilient modulus values.
Flexural beam tests were also carried out for both unsoaked and soaked
specimens. The range of values of tangential Youngs modulus for bending was
similar to the resilient modulus determined from Tx RM tests in the unsoaked state.
However, the modulus reduction due to water conditioning of beam tests was 85%
to 95%, while that of triaxial tests was only approximately 5% to 30%.
Tensile stress due to bending and shear/compressive stress with lateral
confinement both exist in pavement structures under traffic loading. The Tx RM test
or the flexural beam test alone can only partially represent the field stress state. The
test results from both tests should be combined for calculating an equivalent resilient
modulus value characterizing the overall deformation resistance of foamed asphalt

210

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

materials in field stress states. This issue is discussed in a subsequent paper by Fu

et al. (2009). It should be emphasized that simply using Tx RM test results could
result in an unsafe design because of the dramatic reduction of resilient modulus in
tensile stress states that are not characterized by the triaxial test.
Acknowledgements
The work presented in this paper was sponsored by the California Department of
Transportation, Division of Research and Innovation, for which the authors are
grateful. The authors also wish to thank their collaborators in the California
Department of Transportation, and at the UCPRC. The results presented in this
paper do not represent any standard or specification of the California Department of
Transportation, and the opinions expressed are those of the authors alone.

5. References
Asphalt Academy, The design and use of foamed bitumen treated materials (Interim
Technical Guidelines, TG2), CSIR Transportek, Pretoria, South Africa, 2002.
Bowering R.H., Upgrading marginal road-building materials with foamed bitumen,
Highway Engineering in Australia, Mobil Oil Australia, Melbourne South, 1970.
Chiu C.T., Lewis A.J.N., A study on properties of foamed-asphalt-treated mixes, Journal of
Testing and Evaluation, Vol. 34, No. 1, 2006, p. 5-10.
Collings D., Lindsay R., Shunmugam R., LTPP exercise on a foamed bitumen treated base evaluation of almost 10 years of heavy trafficking on MR 504 in Kwazulu-Natal,
Proceedings 8th Conference on Asphalt Pavements for Southern Africa, 2004, p. 468-499.
Ebels L.J., Jenkins K.J. Determination of material properties of bitumen stabilised materials
using Tri-axial testing, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Asphalt
Pavements, Quebec City, Canada, 2006.
Fu P., Harvey J.T., Temperature sensitivity of foamed asphalt mix stiffness: field and lab
study, International Journal of Pavement Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2007, p. 137-145.
Fu P., Harvey J.T., Jones D.J., and Chao Y.C., Understanding internal structure
characteristics of foamed asphalt mixes with fracture face image analyses,
Transportation Research Record, No. 2057, 2008a, p. 20-27.
Fu P., Jones D.J., Harvey J.T., Bukhari S.A., Dry and soaked laboratory tests for foamed
asphalt mixes, Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 77,
2008b, p. 71-106.
Fu P., Steven B.D., Harvey J.T., Jones D.J., Relating Laboratory Foamed Asphalt Mix
Resilient Modulus Tests to Field Measurements, Road Materials and Pavement Design,
Vol. 10, No. 1, 2009, p. 155-185.
He G.P., Wong W.G., Laboratory study on permanent deformation of foamed asphalt mix
incorporating reclaimed asphalt pavement materials, Construction and Building
Materials, Vol. 21, No. 8, 2007, p. 1809-1819.

Laboratory Tests Methods for Foamed Asphalt

211

Hilbrich S., Scullion T., A rapid alternative for laboratory determination of resilient modulus
input values on stabilized materials for the AASHTO M-E design guide, 86th Annual
Meeting of Transportation Research Board, 2007.
Hochuli A.S., Sayir M.B., Poulikakos L.D., Partl M.N., Measuring the complex modulus of
asphalt mixtures by structural wave propagation, Journal of the Association of Asphalt
Paving Technologists,Vol.70, 2001, p. 646-674.
Jenkins K.J., Mix design considerations for cold and half-cold bituminous mixes with
emphasis on foamed bitumen, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa,
2000.
Jenkins K.J., Van de Ven M.F.C, Molenaar A.A.A., and de Groot, J.L.A., Performance
prediction of cold foamed bitumen mixes, Proceedings of the 9th International
Conference on Asphalt Pavements, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2002.
Jenkins, K.J., Robroch S., Henderson M.G., Wilkinson J., Molenaar A.A.A., Advanced
testing for cold recycling treatment selection on N7 near Cape Town. Proceedings 8th
Conference on Asphalt pavements for Southern Africa, 2004, p. 537-552.
Jenkins K.J., Long F.M., Ebels L.J., Foamed bitumen mixes = shear performance?
International Journal of Pavement Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2007, p. 85-98.
Jones, D., Fu, P., Harvey J. Full-depth recycling with foamed asphalt: Final Report.
Research Report RR-2008-07, 2008, University of California Pavement Research Center,
Davis and Berkeley, California.
Khweir K., Performance of foamed bitumen-stabilised mixtures, Proceedings of the
Institution of Civil Engineers: Transport, Vol. 160, No. 2, 2007, p. 67-72.
Lane B., Kazmierowski T., Implementation of cold in-place recycling with expanded asphalt
technology in Canada, Transportation Research Record, No. 1905, 2005, p. 17-24.
Loizos A., In-situ characterization of foamed bitumen treated layer mixes for heavy-duty
pavements, International Journal of Pavement Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2007, p. 123135.
Long F.M., Theyse H.L.,Laboratory testing for the HVS sections on road P243/1, Contract
Report CR-2001/22, 2002, Transportek, CSIR.
Long F.M., Theyse H.L., Mechanistic empirical structural design models for foamed and
emulsified bitumen treated materials, Proceedings 8th Conference on Asphalt pavements
for Southern Africa, 2004, p. 553-568.
Long F.M., Ventura D.F.C., Laboratory testing for the HVS Sections on the N7 (TR11/1).
Contract Report CR-2003/56, 2004, Transportek, CSIR.
Marquis B., Bradbury R.L., Colson S., Malick R.B., Nanagiri Y.V., Gould J.S., OBrien S.,
Marshall M., Design, construction and early performance of foamed asphalt full depth
reclaimed (FDR) pavement in Maine, 82th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research
Board, 2003.
Mohammad L.N., Abu-Farsakh M.Y., Wu Z., Chris A., Louisiana experience with foamed
recycled asphalt pavement base materials, Transportation Research Record, No. 1832,
2003, p. 17-24.

212

Road Materials and Pavement Design. Volume 10 No. 1/2009

Muthen K.M., Foamed asphalt mixes, mix design procedure, Report CR-98/077, 1998, SIR
Transportek.
Nataatmadja A., Some characteristics of foamed bitumen mixes, Transportation Research
Record, No. 1767, 2001, p. 120-125.
Nazarian S., Yuan D., Williams R.R., A simple method for determining modulus of base and
subgrade materials, ASTM Special Technical Publication, No. 1437, 2003, p. 152-164
Pan, T., Tutumluer E., Anochie J., Aggregate morphology affecting resilient behavior of
unbound granular materials, Transportation Research Record, No. 1952, 2006, p. 12-20.
Ramanujam J.M., Jones J.D., Characterization of foamed-bitumen stabilization,
International Journal of Pavement Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2007, p. 111-122.
Saleh M., New Zealand experience with foam bitumen stabilization. Transportation
Research Record, No. 1868, 2004, p. 40-49.
Twagira M.E., Jenkins K.J., Ebels L.J., Characterisation of fatigue performance of selected
cold bituminous mixes, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Asphalt
Pavements, Quebec City, Canada, 2006.
Ullidtz P., Distinct Element Method for Study of Failure in Cohesive Particulate Media,
Transportation Research Record, No. 1757, 2001, p. 127-133.
University of California Pavement Research Center, Davis and Berkeley, Work plan for the
development of improved mix and structural design and construction guidelines for deep
in situ recycling (DISR) of cracked asphalt concrete with foamed asphalt, Report
prepared for the California Department of Transportation, UCPRC-WP-2005-05, 2005.
Uzan J., Characterization of granular material, Transportation Research Record, No. 1022,
1985, p. 52-59.

Received: 21 January 2008

Accepted: 13 July 2008