Table of contents

JM. Piau Premium pavements from alternative material for European roads – Keynotes 3

F. Sinis Premium pavements from alternative material for European roads – What is the situation? 15

K. Krass The need for environmental assessment to promote sustainability 33

D. François General assessment methodology for best use of alternative materials 49

H.Van der Sloot Comments to the assessment method - Environmental Part 77S. Boetcher Prototype environmental annex to product standard 89B. Koenders Health, Safety, Environmental assessment 105S. Colwell Reaction to fire performance of pavement materials 121E. Nielsen Mechanical Assessment Towards functional specification

irrespective of type of material (Modelling) 131C Nicholls Implications of asphalt deformation results for standardisation 135S Soliman Techniques for recycling 151

Premium pavements from alternative materials for European RoadsSAMARIS final seminar Keynotes

Jean-Michel PIAULaboratoire Central des Ponts et ChausséesSAMARIS Pavement Stream scientific coordinator

Recycling: a multi-facet world

Recycling in pavement construction : a generic wording and a complex world covering at least 4 different situations

• Proper recycling of road materials (untreated, bituminous, cement materials) without change of function

• Ex: Base course materials base course materials with change of function

• Ex: wearing course materials base course materials In place or after storage

• Re-use of initially non road materials Ex: demolition concrete from buildings, scrap tyres,…

• First use of materials Ex: industrial by-products, waste material (MSWI),…

Main alternative materials considered in SAMARIS

Industrial by-products Slags

• Steel slag (basic oxygen and electric arc)• Air cooled blast furnace slag• Ground granulated blast furnace slag

Coal bottom ash Coal fly ash Foundry sand

“Waste” products (before re-use) Mining waste rock (colliery spoil) Building demolished by-products Municipal solid waste incinerator bottom ash Waste glass Scrap tyres

Potential Advantages

• Adequacy of Recycling with the general objectives of Sustainable Development Policy Pav. Const. needs important quantity of “granular”

materials Spare of natural resources Reduction of existing stockpiles Diminution of the storage of new waste materials Less transport of materials (especially, in the case

of in place recycling) : save of energy, less damage to roads, increase of road safety,…

Possibility of economical savings

Difficulties & Potential Dangers

A priori Recycling involves a wide diversity of materials, generally less well controlled and known than standard ones. Those ones must be:

No detrimental to the environment and the health at short term, especially for workers on job site

No detrimental to environment and health at long term, especially to ground water

In accordance with the expected performance of the structure:

• Durability• Properties of the wearing course - skid resistance,…

Complementary approaches to solve the problems

International bibliographic study (and transposition) SAMARIS states of the art & guides, gathering European experiences

Field experiments at limited scale Not covered by SAMARIS

Complementary approaches to solve the problems

International bibliographic study (and transposition) SAMARIS states of the art & guides, gathering European experiences

Field experiments at limited scale Not covered by SAMARIS

Global performantial assessment of alternative materials at lab scale, covering :

• Environmental and health aspects• Mechanical performance & durability aspects • Choice of the best application as a function of the material

and context Main focus of SAMARIS pavement stream

Pre-treatment of alternative materials before road application• Sorting , Homogenization, Deactivation, …

…

Elaboration of alternative materials

Industrial process

(WP6 : Francisco Sinis)

D12

General assessment methodology for the best use of alternative materials

Concept of use-scenario(WP3: Denis François)

D4, D9, D16

Assessment of mechanical performances in lab

Performantial approach of permanent deformation in UBM & AM

(WP5: Erik Nielsen)

D6,D10,D11, D27,D28

Detailed assessment of environmental, health and safety aspects

Draft to environmental annexes to standard products

(WP4: Cliff Nicholls)

D7,D23,D24 D8,D20 (fire)

Technical guidefor the recycling

of the main generic families of

alternative materials

(WP6)

D5,D15,D29

SAMARIS deliverables (1/3)

• Elaboration of alternative materialsD12: Recommendations for mixing plants for

recycling works *

• General assessment methodologyD4: Report on existing specific national

regulations applied to material recycling D9: Critical analysis of European documents D16: Report on a methodology for assessing

the possibility to re-use alternative materials in road construction *

SAMARIS deliverables (2/3)

Assessment of environment, safety & health aspects

D7: SoA on test methods for the detection of hazardous components in road materials to be recycled

D23: Test methods for the detection of hazardous components*

D24: Environmental annex to road product standards*

D8: Review of road authorities’ positions on reaction to fire of pavement materials

D20: Testing procedure for reaction to fire of pavement materials *

SAMARIS deliverables (3/3)Assessment of permanent deformation in UBM & asphalt materials

D6 : Data base and reference full scale tests D10: Models for prediction of permanent deformation of unbound

granular materials in flexible pavementsD11: Models for prediction of rutting in bituminous surface layers D27/D28: Calibration and validation report for modelling of

permanent deformation of unbound (D27) and bituminous (D28) materials in flexible pavements and recommendations for the definition of performance-based specifications*

Technical guide for the recycling of the main alternative materialsD5: Literature review on recycling of by-products in road construction

in EuropeD15: Report on the situation on recycling in Central European countries D29: Technical guide on techniques of recycling*

Precision about performantial approaches for road material assessment

• In terms of road material design, the current practice is based on a mixed approach between : recipe approach performantial approach

• Recipe approach Based on material components (ex: fine, sand, granulates, binder,…) Components specifications Mix design based on the mass or volumetric content of the different components Intensive use of empirical relationships fitted by feed-back from field observation Adapted to standard, well-known (natural) materials and formulae

• Performantial approach Rather based on the direct assessment of the materials themselves Try use as much as possible material models and structural models, for the

prediction of the material behaviour within the structureBetter adapted to innovation and to the introduction of a wide diversity of materials

• The difference between recipe and performantial approaches can be extended to other characterisations than the mechanical one: environment, health,…

Premium pavements from alternative materials for European roadsWhat is the situation?Francisco SinisTransport Research Centre of CEDEX

Towards a sustainable development

• growing commitment to preserve the environment making it compatible with social and economic development

• United Nations conference (1992) declaration of Rio (1992): Sustainable development action programme for a worldwide environmental policy

• European Union treaty of the union (art. 2): SD as ispiring objective for every

member state in 2001 was approved the strategy for sustainable

development in the European Union

• implementation at national level

Alternative materials in road construction

• road construction important quantities of material from natural

sources gradual degradation of the environment.

• adequate management of waste materials growing concern

• EU waste policy influence in the national enviromental legislation priority of re-utilisation and recycling

• EN harmonised standards references to the use of some alternative materials

as aggregates in road construction

Recycling in Europe: OECD report 1997



Changes in the European situation

• EU waste legislation and policy

• development of the construction product directive (CD 89/106/CE)

• generalization of recycling road by-products

• incorporation of new countries to the UE


EU waste legislation:• framework legislation

waste framework directive (Dir.75/442/EEC) hazardous waste directive (Dir. 91/689/EEC) waste shipment regulation (C.Reg. (ECC) 259/93)

• waste treatment operations incineration (C.Dir. 2000/76/EC) landfill (C.Dir. 1999/31/EC) recycling

• waste streams different directives (Related to: waste oils, titanium dioxide,

sewage sludge, PCBs, restriction of hazardous substances, mining waste, etc.)

Changes in the European situationEU waste new policy:

Sixth environment action programme adopted by EP&C in 2002 - runs until 2012 requires ec to prepare thematic strategies on

seven areas:• air pollution• prevention and recycling of waste (21/12/2005 com)• protection and conservation of the marine environment• soil• sustainable use of pesticides• sustainable use of resourses• urban environment

Changes in the European situationDevelopment of CD 89/106/CE

• EU construction products directive 89/106/CEE• harmonized en standards

origin: EC mandates to CEN

mandatory character when referred to products and performance tests

existing on road pavement construction aggregates:

• EN 12620: Aggregates for concrete

• EN 13043: Aggregates for bituminous mixtures and surface treatments for roads, airfields and other trafficked areas.

• EN 13242: Aggregates for unbound and hydraulically bound material for use in civil engineering work and road construction.

• references to some alternative materials


Generalization of recycling roads by-products: great development of recycling road pavements

in the last decade alternative to consider in pavement rehabilitation PIARC working group

• hot mix asphalt recycling in plant• cold in-place recycling with emulsion or foamed

bitumen• in situ recycling with cement

these techniques are considered as routine in many countries and are included in its specifications for highway works


Incorporation of new countries to the UE: 1957 TRATIES OF ROME (6): Belgium, West Germany,

Luxemburg, France, Italy and the Netherlands.

1973 (6 to 9): Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom.

1981(9 to 10): Greece.

1986 (10 to 12): Spain and Portugal.

1992 THE MAASTRICHT TREATY CREATED THE EU

1995 (12 to 15): Austria, Finland and Sweden.

2004 (15 to 25): Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia

Situation in CEEC countries

• increase in mobility and goods distribution improvement of the road network possibilities to recycling techniques

• SAMARIS deliverable D15

review of the situation of road and non-road by-products recycling in

ceecs

based on a similar questionnaire to that of oecd

coordinators of the works:

• Brno University of Technology from the Czech Republic

• Road and Bridge Research Institute from Poland

surveyed countries (10):

• Belarus (BY), Bulgaria (BG), Czech Republic (CZ), Hungary (H), Poland (PL),

Romania (RO), Russia (RUS), Slovakia (SK), Slovenia (SLO) and Ukraine (UA).


Product

Application

BY BG CZ H PL RO RUS SK SLO UA

Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP)

RAP/year (kt) - 3 690 50 140 300 22 30 10 355

Plant recycling %

- - 20 20 20 50 - - 80 3

In situ recycling %

- 100 50 15 80 30 50 40 - 11

Stock % - - 20 65 - 15 - 30 15 86

Landfill % - - 10 - - 5 50 30 5 -

Reclaimed

Concrete Pavement (RCP)

RAP/year (kt) - - 10 5 200 100 - - - -

Plant recycling %

- - 45 50 100 - - - - -

In situ recycling %

- - - 50 - 85 - - - -

Stock % - - 15 - - 15 - - - -

Landfill % - - 40 - - - - - - -


Recycling road-by productsConclusions

• recycling techniques are known

• better situation in central european countries

• only one recycling method in some countries

• often do not exist appropiate specifications

• road authorities are not well informed

• new technologies introduced by private companies (trial sections)


recycling non-road-by products

CONCLUSIONS• only few by-products are widely used:

blast furnace and steel slags (granular or stabilized bases, backfills and embankments)

fly ash (stabilized bases and embankments) mining waste rock (embankments,landscaping and backfills)

• the use of other by-products are almost unkown.• lack of funds for research in new technologies• lack of interest from road authorities

How to improve the situation?

Barriers

• vary from one country to other

• examples of barriers no difficulties for waste disposal environmental considerations financial and economic reasons lack of adequate information on long-term perfomance

of alternative materials lack of standard requirements concerning recycling lack of knowledge of all potential applications

How to improve the situation?

Solutions:• increase and improve existing legislation:

restrictive regulations:• to reduce waste production• to control waste disposal

encouraging sorting, recycling and reuse

• include the use of alternative materials in contracts• increase research and demonstration projects• increase transfer of knowledge among countries

SAMARIS projectguide on techniques for recycling in pavement

structures

The need for environmental assessment to promote sustainability

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Klaus Krass Ruhr-University Bochum


Work Package 4, entitled “Safety and Environmental Concerns in Material Specifications”, is a part of the pavement stream and primarily concentrates on addressing safety and environmental aspects in product standards.


Task 4.3 is entitled “Environmental Annexes to Product Standards”. The aim of task 4.3 is to make proposals how environmental sustainability requirements of road materials could be included in the European Product Standards for road materials in form of an annex.


Justification is derived from the goal of the European Commission to incorporate environmental requirements into the second generation of the European Product Standards for construction materials according to the essential requirement “Hygiene, health and environment”.


This subject was not a part of the mandates for the different construction materials that have been standardised so far.Therefore the present first generation of European standards for road materials does not include any regulations concerning environmental specifications.


In relation to the construction materials, the main focus of task 4.3 was on recyclable materials and industrial by-products which can be used as aggregates for unbound and bound mixtures. That means: For natural aggregates, the environmental compatibility is given by default. There is no need for further testing.


Concerning industrial by-products and recycled materials, it has to be ascertained whether very different experience has been gained with the application of these materials in different European countries. In any case, the requirements for these materials do vary significantly.


In addition to the input from WP 4, input has been derived from other Work Packages of this project, particularly from WP 3 dealing with the assessment of alternative materials.


Concerning recyclable materials, it was found to be advisable to deal not only with mineral construction waste but also to deal separately with bitumen-bound material (reclaimed asphalt) and with tar-bound materials. Tar, especially coal tar and other tar distillates, was used as a binder in the past in many European countries because its hazard was not so well known at that time.


According to EN 13108-8, reclaimed asphalt is “asphalt, not containing tar, reclaimed by milling of asphalt road layers, by crushing of plates torn up from asphalt pavements or lumps from asphalt plates and asphalt from surplus production”.


However, there is no European standard for tar bound reclaimed road material which can be defined as:

material containing tar, and possibly bitumen as well, that is reclaimed by milling of bound road layers, by crushing of plates torn up from bound pavements or lumps from bound plates.

Due to higher air pollution by heating tar bound reclaimed road material, this material can only be used in cold mixed base layers and sub-bases with bitumen and/or cement as the binder. This application too needs further examination for environmental reasons.


Starting from the considerations discussed above, some typical drafts for environmental annexes to product standards have been developed, later on represented here by Sabine Boetcher.


Mandate M/ 366 of EC to CEN for Horizontal TC

Development of horizontal standardised assessment methods for harmonised approaches relating to dangerous substances under Construction Products Directive (CPD)

Emission to indoor air, soil, surface water and ground water


The EC expects that the response to this mandate shall consist of a comprehensive package of technical reports and of measurement/test standards that are manageable and user-friendly for regulators, product technical specification writers, writers of ETA etc.


Therefore it is obvious that our proposals for annexes to the standards shall include no threshold values.That means for the time being:

Provisions valid at the place of use can be used to assess the suitability of recycled or industrially produced aggregates.


Concerning our work, the hope remains that such environmental annexes will expand into the next generation of road product standards in order to enforce the safety and to promote the sustainability when dealing with industrial by-products and recycled materials.

General assessment methodology for best usage of alternative materialsDenis FRANÇOISLaboratoire Central des Ponts et Chaussées - France

Content

• Introduction• Objective• Approach• Results• Conclusions

IntroductionReduction of

waste disposal Natural

resources saving Growing pressure to

use alternative materials

Barriers remain

Perception as « waste »

Economic reasons

Short to long term

Engineering performances Environmental effects

Technical Concerns

Can we use this material here ?

?

?

??

?

?

?

?

Need for an assessment methodology for the re-Need for an assessment methodology for the re-use of alternative materialsuse of alternative materials

The Assessment Methodology should be:The Assessment Methodology should be:

Integrated: Integrated: engineering + environmentengineering + environment

General: General: applicable to all alternative materialsapplicable to all alternative materials

Rational:Rational: the right material in the right placethe right material in the right place

Engineering assessment

To fulfil the same mechanical functions

But very rarely inert React to external factors

Environmental assessment

Landfill/Construction: same physical & chemical laws

But somewhat different conditions Different

effects

Toward the Methodology with WP3

Integrated:

The functional principle: Whatever the material, functional properties of the road structure have to be guaranteed

Some « rather known » materials for which a certain amount of knowledge was available

Materials representing considerable production and stockpiles, thus stakes at European level

Materials for which end users (road constructors and managers) had pressing questions

Materials presenting a broad set of properties met among alternative materials

Time available: 2 years

Recent knowledge progress on some materials

Contemporary methodological efforts in neighbouring fields

General:

Rational:

No experimental programme, no testing

Reflection on a range of materials

To make the most of the available knowledge

Context: Decisions:

The Assessment Methodology should be:

A multi-disciplinary group already aware of the recycling problematic

Interactions Material/Environment

External factors:Wind

RainfallWetting/DryingCold/Hot T°

Maintenance (winter, …)Traffic characteristics

Dumping (chronic, accidental)

…

Structure reactions:

Erosion

Runoff

Infiltration

Cracking

…Targets:

Living organisms

Surface waters …

Soil …

Groundwater …

Material reactions:

Particle emission

Dissolution

Chemical reactions

Self-binding/Stiffening

….

Assessment of

relevant properties

A testing procedure

… associated with acceptable Use scenarios

- Local environmental conditions (prevailing external factors, environmental sensitivity)

- The way the material is implemented (in relation to water notably)

The assessment methodology: A limited set of Use-scenarios + A limited set of Tests

Structure reactions:

Particle transfer/Plogging

Solute transfer/Precipitation

Bearing capy V°

Swelling

Cracking

…

Ambition and limits of WP3

Processing

Storage

Transport

Implementation

Service

Demolition

Transport

Storage

Effect of external factors on the material:

Thermal, Chemical, Physical

Life Cycle

Mechanical durability and Environmental acceptability of roads

Approach

First stage: Second stage:To identify the functional properties of each Application

To list the properties of each Alternative Material

« Rather-known » materials

The road Application: an essential element of the use-scenario

(Application: a structural element of the road body)

Defines the external factors to face Defines the properties to respect

Literature + Survey

Third stage: Compatibility between Material properties & expected Functions

The road Structure: an open multi-layer system

(Influence on not inert materials)

Whatever the material, functional properties have to be guaranteed

Road Structure and Applications

Typical road structure (from COST 337 and FHWA) : 5 applications

5

25

3

1

5V

II BaseV

III Sub-base

I Surface

IV Subgrade

V

VV Shoulders, landscaping,

embankments

The way the material can be implemented: 11 Application cases

Applications Cases

Unbound Bitumen bound

Cement bound

I I-a* I-b I-c

II II-a II-b II-c

III III-a - III-c

IV IV-a - IV-c

V V-a - -

… depends on Material properties, determines Interactions with the environment

Materials and PropertiesProperties: 8 Materials (representative of: stockpiles, uses, issues)

Particle sizeStiffening pot.Swelling pot.PetrographyPermeabilitySolubility pot.….

- Road crushed concrete

- Building demolition crushed concrete

- Coal fly ash

- Basic oxygen furnace slag (LD)

- Electric arc furnace slag

- Crystallized blast furnace slag

- Vitrified blast furnace slag

- MSWI bottom ash

Road

Building

Indus. By-

prod.

Residue

Compilation of materials’ properties:

Material properties

sheets

- International references

- National literature reviews and databases- Samaris WP6 (Recycling Techniques across Europe)- Working group own experience

Application-Material Table

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

I a

b

c

II a

b

c

III a

c

IV a

c

V a

Ass.t

P.re 3Ass.t

P.re 1Ass.t

P.re 4Ass.t

P.re 6Ass.t

P.re 7Ass.t

P.re 2Ass.t

P.re 8Ass.t

P.re 5

El.ts Use Scenario I

El.ts Use Scenario

II

El.ts Use Scenario III

El.ts Use Scenario IV

El.ts Use Scenario V

8 Materials: Properties (phys., chim.)

2 3 4 5 6 7 81

11

Ap

plicati

on

s c

ases :

Fu

nct

ions

UnadvisableUnadvisable / / Possible use Possible use (+/- (+/- CConditions)onditions)

TestsTests

Progression of WP3

Review of the contemporary situation

The way the 8 materials are actually used and tested

International developments in alternative materials assessment (tests, methods) at

research and standardisation level

Development of the assessment methodology

(Materials & Properties) x (Applications & Functions)

=

Methodological proposal

Relevance of pre-existing protocols

Need for test developments

Material for the method

Deliverable 9

Development of a proposal for improving the integrated assessment of (some) alternative materials for their rational

use in road construction

Task 1 Task 2

Deliverable 4

Deliverable 16

The 8 Materials in different states

Status: Mostly considered through the European screen (classification and rules for wastes) – Importance of the European example

Market: Shortage of supply sometimes (Coal fa, CBF slag, VBF slag, EAF slag) - Importation

Answers to a questionnaire: A – DK – E – F – SLO – S – NL

Material Road uses Produced in n states

Coal fa All applications (I to V) 6

MSWI ba App° V, subgrade, sub-base 7

BDC concrete Road base, sub-base 6

RC concrete Road base 3

BOFs, EAFs, CBFs, VBFs Varies greatly between states 4,4,4,5

Mat. properties National documents Examples

Engineering Technical ones mainlyFew Management ones

Coal fa, VBFsMSWIba, BDcc, Rcc (1)

Environmental Great lack BOFs, EAFs, CBFs, VBFs (0)

Fields: Characterisation & use (+), Production (-) – Downstream situation of road use

Variety of states’ toolboxes – Beneficial experience to others Justification for an European synthesis attempt

Road applications’ functionsAnswers to a questionnaire: A – D – DK – F – S

Applications: linked to a range of functions rather than a single one

Applications Main functions… … but also

I - Surface course

Resistance to traffic stresses, Traffic safety, Comfort, Resistance to erosion*

Resistance to vertical load, Prevention of water infiltration

II - Road base Resistance to vertical load, Resistance to traffic stresses, Load distribution, Stiffness, Anti-frost

Anti-frost

III - Sub-base Resistance to vertical load, Drainage Stiffness, Anti-frost, Anti-capillary rise

IV - Subgrade Resistance to vertical load

V - Should. Lands. Emb.

Drainage, Resistance to erosion

Conclusions complemented with a literature review

To set up Application-Material Table:

Suitability matrix: Elts of Use Scenarios

The Rule: 1 major drawback sufficient to advise against an Un-appropriate application (U-AC)

Application Eng/Env MSWIba Cfa BDcc Rcc BOFs EAFs CBFs VBFs

I-a Eng U U P P P P P U

Env U U P P P P P P

I-b Eng U P U P P P P U

Env P P P P P P P P

I-c Eng U P P P P P P U

Env P P P P P P P P

II-a Eng U U P P P P P P

Env P P P P P P P P

II-b Eng U P P P P P P U

Env P P P P P P P P

II-c Eng U P P P P P P P

Env P P P P P P P P

III-a Eng P U P P P P P U

Env P P P P P P P P

III-c Eng U P P P P P P P

Env P P P P P P P P

IV-a Eng P P P P P P P P

Env P P P P P P P P

IV-c Eng U P U U U U U U

Env P P P P P P P P

V-a Eng P P P P P P P P

Env P U P P P P P P

(8 x 11) AC

- 24 U-AC

= 64 P-AC

Eng. U-AC : 21

Env. U-AC : 1

Eng.-Env. U-AC : 2

Un-appropriate AC

Possible ACP

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

Material Asst Procedures: BDcc Case

Grading (PSD) assessment

PSD requirements (AGGREGATE) for Applications I-a, II-

a, III-a, or IV-a

Particle Strength (PS) assessment

PSD requirements (AGGREGATE) for

Application V-a


Application II-b

Compactibility assessment (CMP) + Bearing Capacity assessment (BCA)

Threshold values for PS (II-a)

Threshold values for PS (III-a)

Threshold values for PS (IV-a)

Compactibility assessment (CSP or CVT) + Bearing

Capacity assessment (BCA)

Application IV-a design Application V-a design

Resilient & Permanent Deformation (RPD) assessment

Application II-a design

Application III-a design

Permeability (PER) assessment (if

specificaly required)

Soluble Sulfate (SOS) assessment

SOS limit value(s)

Organic Content (ORC) assessment

Threshold value(s)for ORC

Resistance to freezing and thawing (RFT) assessment (if


Voids volume (VOV) assessment

Stiffening Power (STP) assessment

Threshold value for VOV (II-b)

Threshold value for STP ( II-b)

Surface Cleanliness (SCL) assessment

Threshold values for PS (II-b)

Threshold value for SCL (II-b)

Mixture II-b classical design

Particle Shape (PSH) assessment

Threshold value for PSH (II-b)

Threshold values for PS (I-c matrix)

Threshold value for SCL (I-c)

Threshold values for PS (II-c)

Threshold value for SCL (II-c)

Threshold values for PS (III-c)

Threshold value for SCL (III-c)

PSD requirements (AGGREGATE) for Applications

I-c, II-c or III-c

Threshold value for PSH (I-c)

Mixture I-c classical design

Threshold value for PSH (II-c)

Mixture II-c classical design

Threshold value for PSH (III-c)

Mixture III-c classical design

Water Absorption Coefficient test

(WAC)

Threshold value for WAC (II-b)

PSD requirements (FILLER) for Application II-

b

Amount of fines (AMF) assessment

Threshold value for AMF (II-b)

Absorbing Capacity of Fines (ACF) assessment

Threshold value for ACF (II-b)

Designed mixture

Threshold values for PS (I-a)

Application I-a design

pH development - Buffering Capacity test

Organic Material test - TOC or LOI

Granular Leaching test:Column/batchANC/pH static

TOC or LOI threshold value

Threshold values Threshold values Threshold values)

Aggreement for use in applications II-a, III-a, IV-a and V-a

Monolith Leaching test

Inorganic salts:SO4--

Oxyanions:Cr

Organics:mineral oils, PAH

Aggreement for use in the designed mixture

Designed bound mixture

Unbound material or mixture

Engineering Prop. Branches

Leaching Prop. Branches

Ass.t

P.re 3

M.A.P.: Engineering P.ies Branches



a, III-a, or IV-a


Application V-a


Application II-b


SOS limit value(s)




I-c, II-c or III-c


b



a, III-a, or IV-a



Application V-a


Application II-b














SOS limit value(s)






















I-c, II-c or III-c








(WAC)



b





Designed mixture





Application II-b


















I-c, II-c or III-c








(WAC)



b





Designed mixture



a, III-a, or IV-a



Application V-a


Application II-b














SOS limit value(s)






















I-c, II-c or III-c








(WAC)



b





Designed mixture




a, III-a, or IV-a



Application V-a



















a, III-a, or IV-a



Application V-a


Application II-b














SOS limit value(s)






















I-c, II-c or III-c








(WAC)



b





Designed mixture



Building Demolition

crushed concrete

M.A.P.: Leaching P.ies Branches









Oxyanions:Cr







a, III-a, or IV-a



Application V-a


Application II-b














SOS limit value(s)






















I-c, II-c or III-c








(WAC)



b





Designed mixture











Oxyanions:Cr





BD crushed concrete



Threshold values Threshold values

Aggreement for use in applications I-a, II-a, III-a, IV-a and V-a

Oxyanions:B, Cr, Mo, V

Metals:Ba







Threshold values Threshold values

Aggreement for use in applications I-a, II-a, III-a, IV-a and V-a

Oxyanions:B, Cr, Mo, V

Metals:Ba







Applications I-a, II-a, III-a, or IV-a



Compactibility assessment (CMP) +

Bearing Capacity assessment (BCA)




Compactibility assessment (CSP or

CVT) + Bearing Capacity assessment

(BCA)



Application V-a


Resilient and Permanent Deformation (RPD)

assessment

Application II-a design Application III-a design




Applications I-b or II-b


Threshold value for PS (I-b matrix and chipping)


Resistance to Abrasion (RAB)

assessment

Threshold values for RAB for chipping (I-

b, I-c)

Threshold value for SCL (I-b)



(WAC)

Classical mixture I-b design

Threshold value for WAC (I-b)

Classical mixture II-b design

Classical mixture I-c design

Classical mixture II-c design

Classical mixture III-c design








Applications I-c, II-c or III-c


PSD requirements (FILLER) for Applications I-

b or II-b









Threshold value for VOV (I-b)

Threshold value for STP ( I-b)

Threshold value for AMF (I-b)

Threshold value for ACF (I-b)

Designed mixture

EAF slagpH development -

Buffering Capacity testRedox development test




Threshold values Threshold values Threshold values) Threshold values

Aggreement for use in applications III-a, IV-a and V-a

Inorganic salts:Na, K, Ca, Cl-, SO4--

Oxyanions:Cr, Mo, Sb

Organics:PCDDs, PCDFs, PCB,

PAH

Metals:Cu, Pb, Zn, Al




Application III-a



Application IV-a



Application V-a

Compactibilty assessment(CSP or CVT)

+ Bearing Capacity assessment (BCA)

MD threshold value for PS (III-a)

MD threshold value for PS (IV-a)

Resilient and Permanent Deformation (RPD) assessment

Compactibility assessment (CMP)

+ Bearing Capacity assessment (BCA)

SOS limit value(s)

Application III-a design Applications IV-a and V-a design

Resistance to Freezing and Thawing (RFT) assessment (if


Permeability (PER) test (if specificaly

required)


Redox development test




Threshold values Threshold values Threshold values) Threshold values

Aggreement for use in applications III-a, IV-a and V-a

Inorganic salts:Na, K, Ca, Cl-, SO4--

Oxyanions:Cr, Mo, Sb

Organics:PCDDs, PCDFs, PCB,

PAH

Metals:Cu, Pb, Zn, Al


MSWI bottom ash

Toward a General ImplementationGrading (PSD) assessment

[1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8]


Application I-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application V-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application I-b[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

PSD requirements (FILLER) for Application I-

b[2 - 4 - 5**** - 6 - 7]


Application II-b[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


b[2 - 3 - 4 - 5**** - 6 - 7]


Application III-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application II-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application IV-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

PSD requirements (FILLER) for Applications

II-a or V-a[8]

Swelling Potential (SWP) assessment (same for FILLER)****

[5]

Threshold value for SWP (I-a)[5]

Threshold value for SWP (I-b, I-c) = 0

[5]

Threshold value for SWP (II-a)[5]

Threshold value for SWP (III-a)

[5]

Threshold value for SWP (IV-a)

[5]

Threshold value for SWP (V-a)

[5]

Threshold value for SWP (III-c)

[5]

Chloride Content (CLC)

assessment[4]

Threshold values for CLC (I-c, II-c, III-c)

[4]

Reactivity (REA) assessment

[8]

Threshold values for REA (Alpha Coefficient)

(II-c or III-c[8]

Soluble Sulfate (SOS) assessment[1 - 3 - 7]

SOS limit value(s) for Applications X-a and X-c[1 - 3 - 7]


[3]

Threshold value(s) for ORC for Applications X-a and X-c

[3]


I-c, II-c or III-c[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Particle Strength (PS) assessment[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

AGGREGATE Orientation pre-testing[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Threshold value for SWP (II-b, II-c)

[5]

Hydraulicity test (HYD) [8][8]

Threshold values for HYD[8]


[8]


[8]

Assessment of fines (ASF)

[8]

Application V-a design***[8]

FILLER

Threshold value for ASF (II-a, IV-a

or V-a)[8]

PSD requirements (BINDER) for Application I-

c or IV-c[2]

PSD requirements (BINDER) for Applications

II-c or III-c[2 - 8]

Water Absorption Coefficient (WAC) and Water Content of

Fines (WCF) tests

Threshold value for WAC and WCF

[2]

Classical mixture I-c design *

[2]

Classical mixture II-c design *

[2]

Classical mixture III-c design *

[2]

Classical mixture IV-c design

[2]

Carbon Content (CAC) assessment

[2]

Sulfate Content (SUC) assessment

[2]

Assessment of the Reactivity to Lime (RLI)

[2]

Threshold value for SUC (ex: SO3 <

2,5%) NFP 98-110[2]

Threshold values for RLI[2]

Threshold value for CAC (ex: CC < 8%)

NFP98-110[2]

PSD requirements (FILLER) for Application

IV-a[2 - 8]

Amount of fines Assessment of fines (ASF) -

Sand Equivalent (SEQ)[2]

Threshold values for ASF and SEQ (IV-a)

[2]


assessment[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Application I-a design[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Application II-a design*[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8]

AGGREGATE

Application III-a design[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


specificaly required)[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Resistance to Freezing and Thawing (RFT)

assessment (if specificaly required)

[1 - 3 - 4]

Threshold value for RPD ( I-a)

Threshold value for RPD (III-a)

Threshold value for RPD (II-a)

Threshold value for PER (III-a)

Threshold value for RFT (II-a)

Threshold value for RFT (III-a)


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Compactibility (CMP) assessment + Bearing Capacity assessment

(BCA)[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Compactibility (CSP or CVT) assessment + Bearing

Capacity assessment (BCA)[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Application IV-a design**[2 - 8]

FILLERThreshold values for PS (I-c matrix)

[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Surface Cleanliness (SCL) assessment[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Resistance to Abrasion (RAB) assessment

[5 - 6 - 7]


b, I-c)[5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(WAC)[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]

Threshold value for PSH (I-b)

[4]


[2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 ]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[2 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Application IV-a design**[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

AGGREGATE

Application V-a design***[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

AGGREGATE

Application II-a design*[8]

FILLER

Density (DEN) assessment

[2]


Fines (WCF) tests[2]

Plasticity (PLA) assessment

[2]

Threshold values for WCF and WCA (I-b)

[2]

Threshold values for DEN (I-b)

[2]

Threshold value for PLA (I-b)

[2]

Threshold values for DEN (II-b)

[2]

Threshold value for PLA (II-b)

[2]

Threshold values for WCF and WCA (II-b)

[2]

MSWIba for III-a

Rcc for II-c

BOFs for I-b

64 P-AC

Test Methods for Engineering Pies

Materials

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Properties

Nota-tion

Methods

MSWI CFA BDCC RCC BOFS EAFS CBFS VBFS

Grading PSD EN 933-1 X X X X X X X X

Chloride Content CLC EN 196-21 X

Swelling Potential SWP EN 1744-1 (§ 19.3) X

Soluble Sulfate SOS EN 1744-1 (§ 10); XP P18-581

X X X

Organic Content ORC NF P 94-055; SS 027101 X

Particle Strength pack PS

Resistance to fragmentation PSLA EN 1097-2

X X X X X

Resistance to wear PSMD EN 1097-1 X X X X X

Density DEN EN 1097-3 X

Sand Equivalent SEQ EN 933-8 X X

Reactivity REA EN 13286-44 X

Hydraulicity HYD NF P 98-107 X

Water Absorbtion Coefficient WAC EN 1097-6

X X X X X X

Water Content of Fine Aggregates WCF EN 1097-5

X

Carbon Content CAC EN 13137 X

Sulfate Content SUC EN 196-2 (§8) X

Reactivity to Lime RLI NF P 98-111 X

Amount of Fines AMF EN 933-9 X X X X X X

Voids Volume VOV EN 1097-4 X X X X X

Stiffening Power STP EN 13179-1 X X X X X

Absorbing Capacity of Fines ACF NF P 98-256-1

X X X X X

Resistance to Abrasion RAB EN 1097-8; EN 1097-9 X X X

Surface Cleanliness SCL EN 933-1 X X X X X

Particle Shape PSH EN 933-6 X X

Plasticity PLA NF P 94-051; ISO/TS 17892-12

X

Compactibility pack CO

Modified Proctor CMP PR EN 13286-2 (NF P 94-093)

X X X X X X

Standard Proctor CSP PR EN 13286-2 (NF P 94-093)

X X X X X X

Vibrating Table CVT EN 13286-5 X X X X X X

Resilient and Permanent Deformation RPD EN 13286-7

X X X X X X

Permeability PER Alt-Mat X X X X X X

Resistance to Freezing and Thawing RFT EN 1367-1

X X X

Bearing Capacity BCA EN 13286-7 X X X X X X

31 Tests for 64 P-AC

EN standardsNo EN National

standardsRPD routine ?

PER standard ?

Main Cases Grading (PSD) assessment[1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8]


Application I-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application V-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]




b[2 - 4 - 5**** - 6 - 7]




b[2 - 3 - 4 - 5**** - 6 - 7]




Application II-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application IV-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


II-a or V-a[8]


[5]



[5]



[5]


[5]


[5]


[5]


assessment[4]


[4]


[8]


(II-c or III-c[8]




[3]


[3]


I-c, II-c or III-c[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]




[5]




[8]


[8]


[8]


FILLER


or V-a)[8]


c or IV-c[2]




Fines (WCF) tests


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


2,5%) NFP 98-110[2]



NFP98-110[2]


IV-a[2 - 8]




[2]


assessment[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]



AGGREGATE






[1 - 3 - 4]








[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(BCA)[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]





[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]



[5 - 6 - 7]


b, I-c)[5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(WAC)[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[4]


[2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 ]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[2 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


AGGREGATE


AGGREGATE


FILLER


[2]




[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]

MC 1

MC 2

MC 4

MC 5

MC 6

MC 7

MC 8

MC 3

Pre-testing

8 MC

Main Cases: Pre-testing


[5]



[5]



[5]


[5]


[5]


[5]


assessment[4]


[4]




[4]


[4]


AGGREGATE Orientation pre-testing

[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 7]


[5]

… from gradring (PSD) assessment

[1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

… toward applications I-b and II-b

[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

… toward applications I-c, II-c and III-c

[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

… toward applications I-a, II-a, III-a and IV-a

[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

MC 6 MC 7MC 3

Grading (PSD) assessment[1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8]


Application I-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application V-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]




b[2 - 4 - 5**** - 6 - 7]




b[2 - 3 - 4 - 5**** - 6 - 7]




Application II-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application IV-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


II-a or V-a[8]


[5]



[5]



[5]


[5]


[5]


[5]


assessment[4]


[4]


[8]


(II-c or III-c[8]




[3]


[3]


I-c, II-c or III-c[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]




[5]




[8]


[8]


[8]


FILLER


or V-a)[8]


c or IV-c[2]




Fines (WCF) tests


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


2,5%) NFP 98-110[2]



NFP98-110[2]


IV-a[2 - 8]




[2]


assessment[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]



AGGREGATE






[1 - 3 - 4]








[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(BCA)[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]





[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]



[5 - 6 - 7]


b, I-c)[5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(WAC)[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[4]


[2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 ]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[2 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


AGGREGATE


AGGREGATE


FILLER


[2]




[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]

Toward 9 Applications :- Surface course (a ; b ; c)- Base (a ; b ; c)- Sub-base (a ; c)- Subgrade (a)For 5 Materials:- MSWI bottom ash- Building DC concrete- Road C concrete- BOF slag- Crystallized BF slag

Main Cases: MC3




[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]



[5 - 6 - 7]


b, I-c)[5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(WAC)[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[4]


[2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 ]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[2 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

MC 3

Leaching Prop.

Branches



Application I-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application V-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]




b[2 - 4 - 5**** - 6 - 7]




b[2 - 3 - 4 - 5**** - 6 - 7]




Application II-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application IV-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


II-a or V-a[8]


[5]



[5]



[5]


[5]


[5]


[5]


assessment[4]


[4]


[8]


(II-c or III-c[8]




[3]


[3]


I-c, II-c or III-c[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]




[5]




[8]


[8]


[8]


FILLER


or V-a)[8]


c or IV-c[2]




Fines (WCF) tests


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


2,5%) NFP 98-110[2]



NFP98-110[2]


IV-a[2 - 8]




[2]


assessment[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]



AGGREGATE






[1 - 3 - 4]








[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(BCA)[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]





[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]



[5 - 6 - 7]


b, I-c)[5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(WAC)[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[4]


[2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 ]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[2 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


AGGREGATE


AGGREGATE


FILLER


[2]




[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]

Toward 5 Applications :- Surface course (b ; c)- Base (b ; c)- Sub-base (c)For 6 Materials:- Coal fly ash- Building DC concrete- Road C concrete- BOF slag- EAF slag- Crystallized BF slag

Main Cases: MC6 & MC7




assessment[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]



AGGREGATE






[1 - 3 - 4]








[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(BCA)[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Capacity assessment (BCA)[1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

Application IV-a design**[1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]

AGGREGATE


AGGREGATE

MC 6 MC 7

Leaching Prop.

Branches



Application I-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application V-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]




b[2 - 4 - 5**** - 6 - 7]




b[2 - 3 - 4 - 5**** - 6 - 7]




Application II-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


Application IV-a[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


II-a or V-a[8]


[5]



[5]



[5]


[5]


[5]


[5]


assessment[4]


[4]


[8]


(II-c or III-c[8]




[3]


[3]


I-c, II-c or III-c[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]




[5]




[8]


[8]


[8]


FILLER


or V-a)[8]


c or IV-c[2]




Fines (WCF) tests


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


2,5%) NFP 98-110[2]



NFP98-110[2]


IV-a[2 - 8]




[2]


assessment[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]



AGGREGATE






[1 - 3 - 4]








[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(BCA)[1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]





[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]



[5 - 6 - 7]


b, I-c)[5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


(WAC)[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[3 - 4]


[4]


[2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 ]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[2 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


[4 - 5 - 6 - 7]


AGGREGATE


AGGREGATE


FILLER


[2]




[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]


[2]

Toward 5 Applications :- Surface course (a)- Base (a)- Sub-base (a)- Subgrade (a)- Embankments, shoulders… (a)For 6 Materials:- MSWI bottom ash- Building DC concrete- Road C concrete- BOF slag- EAF slag- Crystallized BF slag

ConclusionsThe Application: a decisive element of the use-scenario

Engineering aspect: material properties application functionsLeaching aspect: form of the material (granular/bound, exposure) leaching propertiesEco-toxicity aspect: lack of data, difficulty to select among tests at that stage difficulty to include natural environment sensitivity in the use-scenario

Critical analysis of:Mechanical tests clarification (relevance)Suitability rationalization of the engineering approach: some practices should be avoided & management of materials

specific needs: engineering, leaching, eco-toxicity assessment

Conclusions

Development of an integrated, rational, general assessment methodology:Iterative process Field/Lab. « Rather known » materials = an implicit first experience feed backA first step: make the most of the available knowledgeMulti-disciplinary approach put into practice in SAMARIS WP3Complicated (?): 1 tree: 8 materials, 64 cases, 31 tests simplification (MC ?)Extension to a wider range of materials with additional properties

Acknoledgements

The audience

The Partners of SAMARIS WP 3:Danish Road Institute

Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute - VTI

Danish Hydraulic InstituteNetherlands Energy Research Foundation - ECNFrench National School of Public Works - ENTPE

Recycled Materials Resource Center (University of New-Hampshire)

Methodology for Environmental Impact AssessmentHans A. van der Sloot ECN - Environmental Risk Assessment

Ole HjelmarDHI Water & Environment

Construction Products Directive

• Essential Requirement No3 on Health & Environment Release of Dangerous substances

• Mandate accepted by Standing Committee Construction on October 2004 and subsequently issued by EU DG TREN to CEN in early 2005

• BT176 prepared for a new CEN TC 351 with a first meeting of CEN TC 351 in April 2006 at Malta

• Start of the horizontal standardisation work on: Sampling Indoor air Impact to soil and groundwater

relevant for road construction

Scenario approach in judging impact

APPLICABLE TO:

CONSTRUCT.

MATERIALS,

AGGREGATES

SOIL,

SLUDGE,

SEDIMENT,

WASTE,

etc

Lab, lysimeter, field data collection, data management, data formatting, storage and retrieval

Problem definition and test selection

pH, L/S & time dependence - redox, DOC, EC, ANC

Release with time GranularMonolithicPercolation related Surface area

Source term description

Impact evaluation subsoil and groundwater

Judgement and decision making; QC; Regulatory aspects; Treatment, Utilization, Disposal

Exp

ert

syste

m /

data

base

Data

in

teg

rati

on

betw

een

field

s

an

d t

ests

, m

od

elin

g a

nd

veri

ficati

on

ag

ain

st

field

data

Physical , chemical, biological properties

Management Scenario Description – configuration, design specifications, infiltration, climate

EN 12920

Judgement of the application of materials

Quality control of products

Product improvement

Limit valuesRelation lab-practice (Scenarios)

Modelling

Product modificationMeasurement for verification

Efficient measurementsPrecision measurement data

Characterisation leaching tests(identification of mechanisms

and processes)

Accessibility of data: data base/expert system

Development of criteria for regulation

Regulation

Leaching tests in Environmental judgement

Conformity assessment in the CPD

WT-Products Non WT-Products

Assessment of construction productsin view of

CPD/ER No. 3

Conformity Evaluationacc. to prescribed Conformity System

FT-ProductsWFT-Products

Non WT-Products

Conventionally Approved Materials

CE -marking

WT = Without testing

WFT = Without further testing

FT= Further testing

Main aim: avoid unnecessary testing and focus on the key issues

Basic characterisation tests

TANK LEACH TEST

(MONOLITH) and

COMPACTED

GRANULAR LEACH TEST.

PERCOLATION LEACHING TEST (PrEN

14405)

Granular materials

Monolithic materials

or

pH DEPENDENCE TEST : BATCH MODE ANC prEn 14429 or COMPUTER CONTROLLED

or

pH DEPENDENCE TEST : BATCH MODE ANC prEn 14429 or COMPUTER CONTROLLED

CEN/TC 292 EN 12920

Chemical speciation aspects

Time dependent release

Controllingfactors

Modelling leaching

Validationverification

Evaluation

Conclusions

ScenarioDescription

Materialcharacterization

Processes in a Road Scenario

Road shoulder, soil

Road stabilisation material (e.g. alternative construction material)

Precipitation

Physical factors:

Permeability

Particle size

Porosity

Chemical factors:

pH

Organic matter

Buffer capacity

Redox

Chemical form (speciation)

Soluble salts

Transport mechanisms:

Surface run-off

PercolationChemical mechanisms:Solubility control

Adsorption

Dispersion

Groundwater flow

Approach proposed in CPD to assess impact and to derive criteria similar to scenario approach in EU LFD Annex II

Modelling release by percolation

60 days

Construction material

Soil

Point of compliance

Interface reactions

pH Al

NaSO4

MgCa

Cl

H2CO3

Pb

Fe

Ferri-hydrite

Alsolid

CalcitePortlandite

iterations Cu

H2CO3solid

Mg

Brucite

Si

Tenorite Cr Ettringite

Cusoli

d

Cusoli

d

Pbsoli

d

Conclusions

• Too simple approaches for addressing the complex issue of environmental impact evaluation in the long term leads to poor management decisions

• A straightforward, scientifically sound and yet flexible framework covering many materials in various environmental settings is available (methodology approach versus material approach)

• A limited number of leaching tests can provide the crucial answers needed to assess long-term impact from a wide range of materials in a wide range of scenarios and life cycle stages

• For road materials this implies a pH dependence test and a column test for characterisation and a batch test for compliance

• The approach presented for inorganic contaminants is equally applicable for organic contaminants as well as for radionuclides, whenever relevant

Conclusions• The here proposed hierarchy in testing provides the

necessary detail required by regulators and developers of treatment techniques, while at the same time it provides for cost effective compliance and QC testing for industry

• Chemical speciation using mineral solubility, sorption on mineral surfaces and interaction with dissolved and particulate organic matter provides identification of release controlling factors similar among widely different materials to solve problems of undesired release from materials

• Contrary to the current situation in the CPD recycling and "end of life" aspects of road construction materials should be considered under ER3 to ensure sustainability

• Development of a European database/expert system for leaching and composition data to disclose inaccessible information from public domain research and avoid unnecessary duplication of work

Relevant Information• HOW TO JUDGE RELEASE OF DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES FROM

CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS TO SOIL AND GROUNDWATER • Topic 1 - Soil and groundwater impact• Topic 2 - Hierarchy in testing: Characterisation, initial type testing, further testing

and selection of tests in specific stages of material judgement• Topic 3 – Proposal for reference to ER 3 aspects in product standards and in CE

marking• Dijkstra, van der Sloot, Spanka, Thielen ECN-C--05-045

• Leaching background• www.leaching.net • CEN Construction and CEN Environment Workshop - Coimbra, Portugal

(Sept 2003)• www.cenorm.be/cenorm/workarea/sectorfora/construction+sector+network/

conference.asp • LeachXS

• Database/expert system for environmental impact evaluation: [email protected]; [email protected] ;[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Task 4.3: Prototype environmental annex to product standard

Dipl.-Ing. S. BoetcherRuhr-University Bochum

Proceeding

Activities on this task were subdivided into four steps:

(1) Identification of relevant road materials

(2) Identification of appropriate European Product Standards

(3) Identification of hazardous components and appropriate test methods

(4) Formulation of drafts

Step 1 – Relevant road materials

• Differentiation between industrial by-products e.g. municipal

solid waste incinerator bottom ash and recycled materials e.g. crushed mineral

construction waste

• Description of the relevant materials together with the potential applications in road structure 5

25

3

1

4

55

25

3

1

4

5



Industrial by-productAbbreviation

1Crystallised (or air-cooled) blast furnace slag

CBF slag

2Vitrified (or granulated) blast furnace slag

VBF slag

3 Basic oxygen steel slag BOF slag

4 Electric arc furnace slag EAF slag

5 Coal fly ash CFA

6 Boiler slag BS

7 Fly ash from lignite combustion FALC

8Municipal solid waste incinerator bottom ash

MSWIBA


Recycled materialsAbbreviation

1 Crushed mineral construction waste CMCW

2 Reclaimed asphalt pavement RA

3 Tar-bound reclaimed road material TB

Step 2 – Identification of appropriate European Product Standards

Drafts to these selected typical standards for aggregates and their bituminous mixtures:

hEN 13043 hEN 13108-1 hEN 13108-8

Drafts to these selected typical standards for unbound and hydraulically bound materials :

hEN 13242 EN 13285

Step 3 – Identification of hazardous components and appropriate test methodsScepticism about application of industrial by-products and recycled materials because of a potential danger less for the workers during the processing but especially for soil and groundwater in consequence of leaching

Example: Decisive hazardous characteristics for MSWIBApH-value Chromium VIEl. conductivity Chromium tot.Chloride NickelSulphate CopperCyanide (e. p.) ZincDOC Arsenic Aluminium AntimonyMolybdenum LeadCadmium

Step 3 – Identification of hazardous components and appropriate test methods

Example: Decisive hazardous characteristics for RA:SulphurPhenol indexPAH (EPA)

Further potential hazard:

Tar Detection of PAH (proposal WP 4)

Step 4: Drafts of annexes to product standards

Environmental Annex to EN 13043 “Aggregates for bituminous mixtures and surface treatments for

roads, airfields and other trafficked areas” (normative)

With reference to the essential requirement “Hygiene, health and environment” of the Construction Product Directive (CPD) aggregates have to comply with the following specifications. For natural aggregates the environmental compatibility is on principle given. There is no need for further testing. The same can be assumed for boiler slag (BS).For recycled aggregates and industrially produced aggregates the hazardous characteristics according to table 1 and table 2 have to be determined.

Example 1:

Hazardous characteristics to determine for crushed mineral construction waste

Kind of determination Hazardous characteristic CMCW

Leaching test

pH − value (X)

El. conductivity (X)

Chloride X

Sulphate X

Chromium VI X

Content by mass

EOX X

Hydrocarbons 1) X

PAH (EPA) X

PCDD 2) X

PCB 2) X

1) only hydrocarbons not originated from bitumen2) only if susceptible(X) values to determine only for information

Hazardous characteristics for industrially produced aggregates to determine within a leaching test

Hazardous characteristic

CBF slag VBF slag

BOF slag EAF slag CFA

pH − value (X) (X) (X) (X) (X)

El. conductivity (X) (X) (X) (X) (X)

Sulphate X X X

Vanadium X X X

Chromium tot. X X X

Arsenic X

Cadmium X

The leaching test has to be carried out according to EN 1744-3. The content of PAH has to be determined according to ….

Provisions valid at the place of use can be used to assess the suitability of recycled or industrially produced aggregates.


Environmental Annexto EN 13108-8 “Bituminous mixtures – Material specifications –

Part 8: Reclaimed asphalt”(normative)

With reference to the essential requirement “Hygiene, health and environment” of the Construction Product Directive (CPD) aggregates have to comply with the following specifications. For proving the sole existence of bitumen as binder in the reclaimed asphalt information about the construction of the road can be applied, i. e. files or documentation of the construction time, or former results of quality control. In case of doubts the content of PAH (EPA) shall be determined according to… and the phenol index after a leaching test according to EN 1744-3.

Example 2: hEN 13108-8


Environmental Annexto EN 13108-8 “Bituminous mixtures – Material specifications –

Part 8: Reclaimed asphalt” (normative)

If a content of 30 mg PAH/kg of reclaimed asphalt and a phenol index of 0,1 mg/l is not exceeded, it can be assumed that the reclaimed asphalt doesn’t contain tar.In case of doubts the content of sulphur shall be determined and declared according to …

Example 2:


Handling tar-bound reclaimed road material:

No present European standard!

Content of PAH > 30 mg/kg TB

Leave material in the road Re-use in cold mixtures e. g. with bitumen emulsion or foamed bitumen and/

or cement as binder Disposal

Health, Safety, Environmental assessment

Procedures for identifying hazardous component materials for asphalt

Project team

Virginie MouilletLaboratoire Central des Ponts et ChauséesFrance

Cliff Nicholls & Piouslin SamuelTransport Research LaboratoryUK

François Deygout & Burgard Koenders France

Interest in recycling

• Recycling in the asphalt industry since 1970s• Proper recycling of road materials

with or without change in function

• Use of initially non-road materials e.g. demolition concrete, tyres, glass, furnace slag, fly

ashes

• Sustainable development: whole life cycle (EAPA) Health, safety, environment: now and in the future Optimising the use of natural resources

• Potential economic incentives to recycle/re-use

Risk assessment

• Procedures to deal with less ‘well-controlled’ materials than standard materials

• Identification of hazardous components• Nature and concentration• Degree of exposure (dose and duration)

• Occupational exposure to workers, public• Impact on air, water and soil

• Analyses and risk assessment before starting recycling work

• Circumstances that influence the risk

Health, Safety, Environment

• Investigations: Presence of (coal) tar Presence of sulphur Dust derived from pulverisation during

milling off and crushing Fumes arising from heating during mixing Spontaneous ignition during heating Leaching (once in place) Reaction to fire in tunnels

Presence of coal tar in road pavements

• Rather extensive use of coal tar until the 1980s

• High amounts of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

• 16 PAHs are listed as priority pollutants (EPA list) some are well-known for their carcinogenic properties in particular Benzo(a)Pyrene key: determination of PAH

• Limits in European countries are different

Screening methods for PAH

• PAK-marker spray • Stain test with toluene

Visual detection: minimum 5%w of coal tar present in binder

Semi-quantitative method: Thin Layer Chromatography (TLC) using fluorescence under UV light

Quantitative methods: vacuum sublimation, HPLC, GC-MS

Research: fast and reliable method

• LCPC - test procedure within 6 hours Recovered binders on TLC plate (separation) Precise quantification of individual PAHs by

High Pressure Liquid Chromatography (HPLC)

• Detection limits 2%w coal tar present in the binder (based on 5%w of binder in the asphalt mixture):

• about 260 mg PAHs / kg of Reclaimed Asphalt• about 8 mg BaP / kg of Reclaimed Asphalt

Presence of sulphur

• Sulphur as a substantial part of the asphalt mixture was used in road construction in 1970s

• Sulphur is present in bitumen – however, as part of various molecular structures

• LCPC - test method for total sulphur content in binder: emulsification and ICP-AES analysis

• Further study: How sulphur present? Hazard Risk assessment

Airborne particulates

Reclaimed Asphaltsample

(Personal)exposure

Assessmentairborne particles

Fines in sample<100 µm or <63 µm

Collectedparticles

Physical and Chemical analyses

Collectedparticles

Collectedparticles

Reclaimed Asphaltsample

(Personal)exposure

Assessmentairborne particles

Fines in sample<100 µm or <63 µm

CollectedparticlesCollectedparticles

Physical and Chemical analysesPhysical and Chemical analyses



Air samplingDustiness

Particle sizes

Shell Global Solutions study

Classification of airborne particulates• The American Conference of Governmental

Industrial• Hygienists (ACGIH)

• Inhalable: respiratory tract

• Thoracic: lung airways

• Respirable: gas-exchange region

• ACGIH/ISO/CEN health related sampling conventions, for Europe: EN 481

PM100

PM10

PM5 PM2.5

Physical, chemical analyses

• Total PM and benzene soluble matter

• PAH in airborne particles• Volatile organic compounds• Fibres• Silica• Heavy metals

• Halogens, TOC, PAH in leachate

Gravimetry

Microscopy

HPLC, GC

X ray diffraction

ICP X ray fluorescence

Spontaneous ignition

• TRL study• Screening

Direct combustion test Calorific value testing Microwave tests

• Quantitative detection Combustion susceptibility Ramped basket test Aerated powder test

Spontaneous ignition

TRL study: ramped basket test

P o r o u s a s p h a l t s a m p le b e f o r e a n d a f t e r t e s t

Tem p era tu re -t im e p lot o f p oro us a sp ha lt sa m ples

indication of self heating

Final comments

• Finding a potential hazard should not necessarily mean that the relevant component material cannot be used in asphalt

• Depending on the nature and extent of the hazard, the appropriate actions need to be defined: risk management

Reaction to Fire Performance of Pavement MaterialsDr. Sarah ColwellBRE

Background

Reaction to Fire contribution to the fire

scenario.

An essential requirement under the CPD

Classification - EN 13501-1: 2002

Stage One

Survey of MS Regulators and interested parties

Incidents involving pavement fires

Review Reaction to Fire test methods available

Findings from Stage One

• No specific Regulations or requirements. • Some requirements for tunnel lining materials. • Many expressed an ongoing interest in the

area. • A review of incidents did not identify

pavement material as adding a significant hazard to this type of incident.

• Heat fluxes typically twice standard RTF tests.

Stage Two

Investigate the response of typical pavement material to :

EN ISO 9239-1 (Current CPD flooring fire test)

ISO 5660-1(Cone Calorimeter test)

Pavement Material

Three examples of road pavement materials were identified for investigation, all were manufactured with relatively high levels of organic binder.

60/20 Porous Asphalt Mastic AsphaltDense Bitumen Macadam

Flooring Test - EN ISO 9239-1

Measurements: Flame spread Smoke

Findings: No sustained ignition

outside measuring zone

No sustained flame spread outside measuring zone

No differentiation of product types

Cone Calorimeter – ISO 5660-1

Measurements:• Heat Release Rate• Smoke• Mass lossIrradiance levels:• 35 and 50 kW/m2

Findings:• Critical Flux range 21-28 kW/m2

• Differentiation based on THR - 24/54/87 (PA/MA/DBM) MJ/m2

Summary of Findings (1)

• The cone calorimeter test can discriminate between pavement materials.

• Since EN 13501-1 is primarily reliant upon EN ISO 9239-1 to provide discrimination between classes Bfl and Dfl all three pavement materials have the potential to achieve at least a Bfl classification.

Summary of Findings (2)

• The critical flux values for the pavement materials are typically higher than other flammable materials present in a road vehicle.

• In a confined area such as a road tunnel, the heat flux radiated back from the hot smoke layer and the tunnel walls would higher than in an open environment.

• The data from this study could enhance current modelling studies of fire and smoke issues in transport infrastructure scenarios such as tunnels.

Part 2 : Mechanical Assessment Towards functional specification irrespective of type of material (Modelling)

Erik NielsenDanish Road Institute

Mechanical assessment for modelsTowards functional specifications

Alternative or recycled materials

Virgin materials

Functional

engineering

properties

Empirical and

rheological

models

Mechanical assessment

Modelling permanent deformation

Unbound granular materials

Bituminous materials

Deliverable 27

Deliverable 28

Presentations

Unbound granular materials Pierre Hornych, LCPC, France

Bituminous materials Ronald Blab, TU Vienna, Austria

Implication for standardisation Cliff Nichols, TRL, United

Kingdom

Implications of asphalt deformation results for StandardisationDr Cliff NichollsTRL, UK, & CEN TC227/WG1/TG2

Contents

• Current position of CEN standards EN 12697 EN 13108

• Test Results Obtained Wheel tracking Cyclic compression

• Possible Developments• Conclusions

Current Position of Standards

• Asphalt “package” to be implemented in 2008• Test methods, EN 12697, already published• Material specification and quality documents,

EN 13108, to be published in 2006• CEN Marking

Will be required to sell asphalt Single test method for each situation Multiple tests only permitted if identical Equivalence not assumed for adjacent situations Ideally most appropriate test selected


• EN 12697-22: Wheel tracking Large size devices Extra large devices Small size devices, Procedure A in air Small size devices, Procedure B in air Small size devices, Procedure B in water

• EN 12697-25: Cyclic compression test Test method A — Uniaxial cycling

compression test with confinement Test method B — Triaxial cyclic compression

test


• EN 13108-1, Asphalt concrete• EN 13108-2, Asphalt concrete for very thin

layers• EN 13108-3, Soft asphalt• EN 13108-4, Hot rolled asphalt• EN 13108-5, Stone mastic asphalt• EN 13108-6, Mastic asphalt• EN 13108-7, Porous asphalt• EN 13108-8, Reclaimed asphalt• EN 13108-20, Type testing of asphalt mixes• EN 13108-21, Factory production control


Ref. DeviceCond

.Temp.

oCTest duration

cycles

EN 13108

-1 -4 -5

D.1.2Small device, procedure

AAir 45 1000 — X —


AAir 60 1000 — X —


BAir 45 10000 X — X


BAir 50 10000 X — X


BAir 60 10000 X — X

D.1.7 Large device Air 50 30000 X — X

D.1.8 Large device Air 60 3000 X — —



EN 13108-20 Test conditions for wheel-tracking test


Ref. CourseCond. temp.

Test temp.

Confining stress

Axial load

Frequency

Pulse

D.2.1

Surface

15 °C 50 °C 150 kPa 300 kPa 3 HzHaversin

e

D.2.2

Surface

15 °C 50 °C 150 kPa 300 kPa 1 s/1 s Block

D.2.3

Base & binder 15 °C 40 °C 50 MPa 200 kPa 3 Hz

Haversine

D.2.4

Base & binder 15 °C 40 °C 50 MPa 200 kPa 1 s/1 s Block

EN 13108-20 Test conditions for cyclic compression test(for EN 13108-1 only)

Test Results Obtained

Tests @ 50 oC / 60 oC

Large Size

Small Size in air Small Size in water

Rutting(%)

Slope(mm/10³ cycles)

Rutting(%)

Slope(mm/10³ cycles)

Rutting(%)

LAVOC

Surface 6,0 / 7,60,102 / 0,242

6,3 / 14,4

0,200 / 1,116

11,2/35,5

Up. Base 3,0 / 5,00,036 / 0,061

3,0 / 4,60,084 / 0,060

3,4 / 3,3

Low. Base

–0,042 / 0,003

0,8 / 2,70,016 / 0,002

2,0 / 1,8

DRISurface 4,0 / 4,2

0,111 / 0,125

11,9/21,9

3,11 * / 16,75 *

144*/836*

Binder10,5/16,

20,092 / 0,360

5,2 / 16,9

0,174 / 0,772

7,5 / 24,0

* Calculated value because deformation reached 20 mm before 10 000 cycles


UnconfinedStrain after 3600

cycles

TriaxialStrain after 1000

cycles

@ 40 oC @ 50 oC @ 40 oC @ 50 oC

LAVOC

Surface 1,6 % 6,6 % * – 2,1 %

Upper base

0,78 % 1,6 % 0,88 % –

DRISurface 12 % * 45 % * 2,6 % 12 %

Binder 1,7 % 2,5 % 1,5 % –

* Calculated value because strain too great before 3600 cycles on one or more samples


Tests @ 50 oC Tests @ 60 oC

Slope Rutting Slope Rutting

LAVOC

Surface 0,51 0,56 0,22 0,41

Upper base 0,43 0,89 1,02 1,40

Lower base 2,63 0,39 1,50 1,48

DRI Surface 0,04 0,08 0,01 0,03

Binder 0,53 0,69 0,47 0,70

Ratio of Small Size in air to Small Size in water

• Ratios (ex. DRI surface course) SS air/SS water from 0,22 to 2,63 SS water/SS air from 0,38 to 4,61

• Effect of water Curing to give better result Stripping to give worse result


LS (

% r

ut)

SS

air

(Slo

pe)

SS

air

(% r

ut)

SS

wat

er (

Slo

pe)

SS

wat

er (

% r

ut)

DRI SurfaceLAVOC Surface

DRI BinderLAVOC Upper baseLAVOC Low er base

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

Tests @ 60 °C

LS (

% r

ut)

SS

air

(Slo

pe)

SS

air

(% r

ut)

SS

wat

er (

Slo

pe)

SS

wat

er (

% r

ut)

DRI SurfaceLAVOC SurfaceDRI BinderLAVOC Upper baseLAVOC Low er base

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

Tests @ 50 °C

Ratio of inverse of result to inverse of “best” result for test method


• Previous studies found rough equivalence

• Large size device results counter to small size device results DRI surface course mixture good

deformation resistance rather than bad Both tests in specifications

• Cyclic compression support small size devices


• Factors affecting deformation resistance the angularity of the aggregate particles the frictional properties of the aggregates the grading of the aggregate the voids content of the mixture the binder content of the mixture the viscosity of the binder

• Which explain different rankings?

Possible Developments

• Research• Correlate test results with site experience

Difficult The ideal – if good correlation found

• Identify test parameters causing differences Even more difficult Relate differences to physical situations

• Both options expensive Financially In time

Possible Developments

• Standards• Administratively acceptable

One situation, one test

• Intellectually unacceptable Inconsistent with differences

• Change possible when know truth No point beforehand

Conclusions

• Test results conflict• Current Standards do not allow conflict

EN 13108-20 defines single method Choice of method not rational

• Research needed Correlate test results with site experience Identify relevant tests for each situation

• Possible revisions needed to parts of EN 13108 and EN 12697

Premium pavements from alternative materials for European roads. Digests on recycling techniquesGeneral presentation of the Technical guideFrancisco SinisTransport Research Centre of CEDEX

WP6: Techniques for recycling

Objective To provide up-dated information and recommendations

about techniques and applications of recycling

Partners involved CEDEX (Spain) Francisco Sinis EUROVIA (France) Samir Soliman and

Ivan Drouadaine TU Brno (Czech Republic) Jan Kudrna and Michal

Varaus IBDIM (Poland) Dariusz Sybilski and

Krzystof Mirsky


Description of tasks

• Task 6.1

Production of a technical guide on techniques of

recycling

• Task 6.2

Review of the situation in CEE countries about

recycling


Deliverables produced• Deliverable 5 (March 2004)

Report on literature review on recycling of by-products in road construction in Europe

• Deliverable 12 (July 2004) Recommendations for mixing plants for recycling works

• Deliverable 15 (September 2004)Review of the state of art in road and other industry by-product use in road construction and rehabilitation in the central and eastern countries

• Deliverable 29 (December 2005)Guide in techniques for recycling in pavement structures

The guide on techniques for recyclingin pavement structures

PARTNERS INVOLVED

• authors : Cedex (Spain) with the collaboration of Eurovia

(France) AND TUBrno (Czech Republic)

• contribution to Chapter 5 (Technical Standards, Specifications or Guidelines by Country”): DRI (Denmark) - IBIDM (Poland)

RUB (Germany) - EPFL (Switzerland) BAST (Germany) - TRL (United

Kingdom) ECN (The Netherlands) - ZAG (Slovenia)

Work done for the elaboration of the guide

Starting point• Deliverable D5: ”Literature review of recycling of by-

products in road construction in Europe” literature analysis first drafts of digests of technical information by by-

product format for a technical guide

• Deliverable D12: “Recommendations for mixing plants for recycling works”

Work done for the elaboration of the guide

Internal information taken into account• Deliverable D4: ”Existing specific national

regulations applied to material recycling” • Deliverable D7: “State of the art for test methods to

detect hazardous components in road materials for recycling”

• Deliverable D16: “Methodology for assessing alternative materials for road construction”

• Deliverable D24: “Environmental annexes to road product standards”

Structure of the guide

• eleven digests of technical information one by material

• for every material the information has been mostly structured in the following chapters1. Origin2. Recycling3. Uses in road construction4. Environmental issues5. Technical standards, specifications or guidelines

by country6. Technical references

Alternative materials considered







• materials from asphalt pavement recycling have not been included in the guide

because its recycling techniques have been deeply covered by PIARC working groups

• materials from concrete pavement recycling have been incorporated under the “building

demolished by-products” digest


Recycling• properties of the waste material or by-

product physical chemical

• recycling process description quality control of the process

• properties of the recycled material physical chemical


Uses in road construction• Uses• Special considerations on design and

construction• Quality control of the construction

process• Examples or references of uses

Summary of used by-products inroad construction

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocks

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocksOriginIt is referred for this digest to:

By-products originated in the exploitation of coal and anthracite shafts and mines, as well as those resulting from the coal wash activities.

• mine spoils:Waste material from exploitation of shafts and mines (basically fitting rocks from coal layers: carbonaceous shale and sandstones) (10%)

• washery spoils:Waste material obtained after coal wash (90%)

• dump spoils• the result of stocking MS and WS

unburnt: Resulting from the burnt: The result of the auto-combustion of the coal included

in the unburnt spoils. Reddish colour and higher strength

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocksRecycling. Waste material

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF A SAMPLE OF COLLIERY SPOIL (<50mm)

(ESTERAS, S.et al..1994)

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocksRecycling. Waste material

CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF COLLIERY SPOILS IN THE UK

(SHERWOOD,P..2001)

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocksRecycling process

• no direct use in road construction abundance of very thick sizes

• recycling process depends of the final use general

• Exclude bigger sizes by sieving washery spoils for embankments all-in-aggregates from dumping as aggregates

• Crushing and grading to fulfil specifications unburnt spoils in subgrades

• Elimination of particles inferior to 20 mm

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocksRecycling. Recycled material

PROPERTIES OF RECYCLED BURNT AND UNBURNT SPOILS

(ESTERAS,S. et al..1994)

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocksUses in road construction

USES OF COLLIERY SPOIL IN THE UK

(SHERDWOOD, P..2001)

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocksUses in road constructionEmbankments, capping layers and fills• Spain

Unburnt spoils can be used in embankments• Care in grading curve: avoid big sizes and reduce fine portion

Burnt spoils can be used in sub-bases construction

• United Kingdom A great variety of performances Unburnt spoils are permitted for embankments and as fill material Burnt spoils are permitted as fill material and capping material

provided it meets the requirements of SHW . They are vulnerable to freezing temperature

• France Burnt spoils have been mainly used in subgrades

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocksUses in road constructionGranular bases and subbases• in the UK

SHW (1998): Difficult for burnt spoils to fulfil the requirements for unbound sub-bases (durability)

• in Spain Unburnt spoils: sub-bases for light traffic situations Burnt spoils may be used as granular sub-base for

all level of traffic

hydraulic bound sub-bases• in the UK

SHW permitted the use of both as aggregate in CB SB M

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocksEnvironmental issues• advantages

decrease of stoked volumes and releases occupied land saving of natural aggregates

• disadvantages attention to the potential of spontaneous fire washery spoils may contain sulphates It should be

required:• special cements• detailed analysis of potential lixiviate production

in the proximities of concrete structures a control of the concentration of sulphates in leaching must take place

Colliery spoil / mining waste rocksTechnical standards, specifications or guidelines by country

• European Union

• Czech Republic

• France

• Germany

• Poland

• Spain

• United kingdom


Germany TL WB-StB 95. Technical Terms of Delivery for

Colliery Spoils as Construction Material in Road and

Earthwork Construction. 1995.

RuA-StB 01. Guidelines for the environmentally

compatible use of industrial by-products and RC

building materials in road construction. 2000.

Bulletin for use of mineral construction materials

from mining in road construction and for earthworks.

2002.


United Kingdom

SHW Clause 601. Classification, Definitions and Uses of

Earthworks Materials. Specification for Highway Works (Highways

Agency). 2005.

AggRegain Spicifier. WRAP.2005

• http://www.aggregain.org.uk/spicifier/index.html

ISBN 1 85112 577 9. Controlling the Environmental Effects of

Recycled and Secondary Aggregates Production: Good Practice

Guidance. ODPM. 2000.

ISBN

http://www.aggregain.org.uk/spicifier/index.html

http://www.aggregain.org.uk/spicifier/index.html

Thank you for your attention!

Techniques for recycling

S. Soliman, I. DrouadaineEUROVIA MANAGEMENT (FRANCE)

SAMARIS FINAL SEMINAR

EUROVIA is a VINCI subsidiary: A world leader in roadworks French Leader in road natural aggregate European leader in recycling materials 5.3 billion euros net sales A network operating in 17 countries 4 business lines:

• Roadworks• Industries and materials• Quality of life and environment• Services

SAMARIS final seminar

Industries &

Materials

25%

19%

Quality of life &Environment

Services

48%

Roadworks

8%

Lines of BusinessLines of Business

Industries & Materials

• Quarries(47Mt), binder plants(0.43Mt), asphalt plants(23Mt)

• Recycling and re-use platforms (105 facilities-4.5Mt)

Waste from public works & civil engineering (e.g. concrete, mixes) (~ 1.3 Mt).

Municipal waste incineration bottom ash (0.7 Mt).

Blast furnace slag, black coal shale (1.8 Mt).

Fly ash & other industrial by-products (0.5 Mt).

WP6-1 : Elaboration of a technical guide on recycling techniques

CEDEX (Spain) - Leader Francisco Sinis

EUROVIA (France) Samir SolimanIvan Drouadaine

TURBrno (Czech Republic) Jan KudrnaMichal Varaus

IBDIM (Poland) Dariusz SybilskiKrzystof Mirski

WP6 : Techniques for recycling


Task 6.1: Elaboration of a technical guide

on recycling techniques

The task was to provide:- Report on literature review on recycling of

by-products in road construction in Europe (D5)- recommendations for the plants (D12)- technical guide on techniques of recycling

(D29)


Three by-products:1. Building, civil engineering and

roadway demolition materials2. Municipal Solid Waste Incineration

Bottom Ash3. Crystallized blast furnace slag


Building, civil engineering and roadway demolition materials

• All countries are concerned as producer/user• < 5% of total aggregates

consumption Heterogeneous situation in EU Accuracy of data collected ? Tonnage

• Wide range of uses• Considered as inert


Mobile recycling installation

Hopper and crusherHopper and crusher

OberbandOberband

ScreeningScreening

30-80

0-20

SAMARIS final seminarExample of fixed recycling installation

Iron

Iron

Hopper Crusher

6/14

0/20

20/60

Screen

0/6Screen

overband

Hand sorting

Hand sorting

Control station

Hopper

overband

Crusher


Fixed recycling installation

Recycling aggregate from

concrete


Demolition materialsOrigin SortingBuilding demolition

Plaster, timber, light mat…Road demolition

Soil, clay…

USESUnbound, treated with hydraulic or bitumen binderPre-normatives European specifications are completed

Other specificitiesHigh pHHigher compaction energy needed Prevent contact with sulphate sources


Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Bottom Ash

• Most countries are concerned as producers• 3 countries are involved

Experimental stage in others

• Very low quantity / aggregate market• High quantity / waste disposal• Elaboration process needed• Environmental specificity

SAMARIS FINAL SEMINAR

Example of elaboration process- Specific unit- Waterproof area- Covered stocks

Trommel

NFSNFS

Hand sorting

Secondary iron

0/30

Hopper

>200 mm

UnburnedPrimary Iron

30/200

Crusher

Wind tunnelOB

8/12

Crible

0/30

Non ferrous metal

Screen

12/30

OB

0/8

8/30

ElaboratedBottom ash

MSWI BA


Bottom ash elaboration installation

Recycling aggregate from

MSWI BA


Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Bottom Ash:

Origin separate from incineration gas treatment residues

Sorting: metals (Fe, non ferrous), unburned Weathering: carbonatation of lime, pH decrease,

monitoring Moisture content management

Uses: Mainly backfill Road foundation layer Treatment with hydraulic or foam bitumen Restricted area


Aggregates standard and bottom ash Pre-normative European specifications are being

discussed for future implementation in aggregates standard :

Al contentLoss of ignitionSoundness

Environmental issuesNational documents are appliedControl on product use batch leaching testDefined protection area

CEN dangerous substances mandate should provide harmonized specifications

SAMARIS final seminarCold mixing plant for lime, hydraulic binder, emulsion and foam bitumen

treatments

10/144/100/4

Cement

or lime

silo

AdhesiveAgent

Foam bitumen or emulsion + water ramp

StoragePlug mill

Slag or fly ash


Increase mechanical performancesFoam and emulsion treatment are

promising


Crystallized blast furnace slag High performance aggregate Complete range of use in

road construction Volume stability Inert material in many cases


• Elaboration close to natural aggregate with separation of residual iron

• High wear of crushing, sieving equipment• High density and porosity• Normative European specifications are achieved

Coherent & Complementary - Lines of Business


Binder Plants Binder Plants

Mix PlantsMix Plants

Recycling Recycling

Re-useRe-useQuarriesQuarries

Quality of life & Quality of life & EnvironmentEnvironment

ServicesServices

Road worksRoad works

Date post:	13-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	sanura
View:	34 times
Download:	0 times

Table of contents

Documents