Presentation delivered by Bob Humer, P.E., Senior Regional Engineer, Asphalt Institute, at the CalAPA Fall Asphalt Pavement Conference Oct. 24-25, 2018 in Sacramento, Calif.

1. Best Practices for
Longitudinal Joints Construction
Robert (Bob) Humer, P.E.
Sr. Regional Engineer
Asphalt Institute
805-402-1211
rhumer@asphaltinstitute.org
October 25, 2018
CalAPA 2018 Fall Conference

2. “ In recent years, it has become evident
how critical longitudinal joint construction
is to the life of the pavement structure…
Many pavements have been or are in the
process of being resurfaced as a direct
or indirect result of longitudinal joint
deterioration.”
CalAPA 2018 Fall Conference

3. Too often longitudinal joints are the weak link in an
otherwise long-lasting asphalt pavement.
- Agency and industry concern!
- Offers greatest opportunity to improve overall life.

4. Alaska Some States have more
challenges than others!

7. • Note condition of
the rest of the mat
• Also sealed each
side of patch

8. -Contains:
- Workshop information
- Handout of workshop slides (180+)
- Video of entire 4-hr Workshop in OH, Feb 2013
- 2-hr webinar, Oct 2012
- Project report
- 5-page “Summary of Recommendations”
- Magazine articles on project and findings
http://www.asphaltinstitute.org/public/engineering/
longitudinal-joint-information
FHWA – AI National study

9. CalAPA 2018 Fall Conference
How can we improve
Longitudinal-Joint performance?
• A National FHWA-AI Study was conducted to determine
“Best Practices for Longitudinal-Joint Construction”
• Conclusions and recommendations:
 Mix selection
 Design of the joints
 Construction practices
 Specifications evolution

10. Mix Selection
• Joint Permeability
• NMAS (Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size)
• VMA and %Air Voids (MS-2 Mix Design Manual)
• “Production” Variability

11. DENSITY VS. PERMEABILITY
12.5 mm WEARING COURSE
86.0%
88.0%
90.0%
92.0%
94.0%
96.0%
98.0%
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Coefficient of Permeability (K) (cm x 10
-5
/ sec)
Density(%Gmm)
LONGITUDINAL
JOINTS
MAT
Dean Maurer, P.E.
Permeable Below 92% Density

12. Effect of In-Place Voids on Life
Washington State DOT Study
50
60
70
80
90
100
7 8 9 10 11
PercentServiceLife
In-situ Air Voids, %

13. E. Zube - California Dept. of Highways - 1962 8
L. Cooley, B. Prowell, R. Brown – NCAT - 2002 7.7
R. Mallick, et al - (fine graded) 8.5
B. Choubane, et al – Florida DOT - 1998 7
J. Westerman – Arkansas HTD - 1998 6
NCAT 03-02 – (coarse graded) - 2003 7
Critical Voids
where permeable9.5 mm
12.5 mm
Various Research Reports on Critical
Air Void Level for Permeability

14.  A pavement is permeable when the voids are
interconnected.
 Coarse-graded 9.5mm and 12.5mm Superpave
mixes become permeable at 7.7% voids.
 Coarse-graded 19mm mixes at 5.5%, and
25mm mixes at 4.4%. (ref: NCAT study)
 At what % the voids become interconnected
depends on the type of mix.
What we do know!

15. Mix Selection Recommendations
To avoid permeability:
• NMAS: ½” mixes better than ¾” mixes
• VMA and %Air Voids: with 4% Air voids and
the required VMA there is sufficient binder!
• “Production” Variability: Target in
production should be JMF. (Most of the detected
variability is caused by sampling and testing).
• Any segregated mix is not the optimum mix
determined in mix design!
• WMA can help as a compaction aid.

16. Design of Joints
• Wedge or Butt Joint
• 2nd paving pass 1/8” higher than 1st pass.
To avoid;
 starving the joint of material needed for roll-down
 roller bridging across the joint
• rain water butting up against the joint (height
difference)
• Plan passes from low side up to center
• Require use of a joint sealer.

17. Butt (Vertical) Joint
Milled or Cutback Joint
Notched Wedge Joint
Defining Different Types of Longitudinal Joints

18. Proper Overlap Sufficient Material
for Roll-Down
Low Density Area
Unsupported Edge Will Have Lower Density
Cold (unconfined) side Hot (confined) side
Please note “Cold side” and “Hot side” definitions.

19. Typical Density Profile across the mat.
Unconfined Middle of Mat Hot Side
Lowest Highest In-between
Value Value Value

20. Typical Spec requirements (of the past)
• “It is recommended to specify minimum compaction level at the
longitudinal joint (generally 2% lower than that specified for the
mat away from the joint).” NCAT / PaDOT, 2002
• “Maximum of 2% less than the corresponding mat density and
minimum of 90% of TMD at the specific location.” Nevada, 2004
• “The evaluation is considered failing if the joint density is more
than 3.0 pcf below the density taken at the core random sample
location and the correlated joint density is less than 90%.” TTI,
2006
• “Joint density, 2% less than mat density, is achievable when
measured with cores.” NCAT, 2007

21. Construction recommendations
• If not specified, use WMA as a compaction aid.
• Tack coats provide lateral confinement.
• Pave a straight edge or cut back (for consistent 1”
overlap by 2nd pass)
• Use a “Joint-Matcher” on last lift (to have sufficient mix
at the joint for roll-down).
• Avoid segregation (specifically at the augers, and by the
rakers).
• Use proper joint rolling techniques.

22. Tack Full Width to Minimize Lateral Movement

23. First Pass Must Be Straight!
Unanimous that a string-line should be used to
assure first pass is straight
Stringline for reference, and/or Skip Paint, Guide for following

24. Tough to get proper overlap (1”) with next pass

25. Cutting Back the Joint
- Eliminates low density area
- When HMA still warm
- Straight is critical
Cutting-back when mat is still warm.

26. http://www.highwaysmaintenance.com/kraktext.htm
Cutting Wheel Fixed to Roller in Europe
• Best practice in Europe
on Dense Graded mixes
on large projects when
traffic is managed
• Cut when mix is
warm and plastic.
• Watering of blade
prevents tearing
• Joint then painted
with 50 pen binder
• Cutting and painting
not done on open mixes

27. Uniform head of material
across entire screed to joint
…Do Not Overload Auger
Extend auger and tunnel
within 12 to 18 inches of
the end gate
Avoid Segregation at the Augers!

28. to control material flow at outer edges of screed
and deliver homogenous HMA at joint
Extend Tunnels the Same Distance
Extend the Tunnels
to 12 to 18” from the
end-gates

29. Examples of Auger Overload…
Likely to Segregate
Tunnel
Tunnel not
present?

30. Paver automation using Joint Matcher (versus
ski) to always achieve sufficient amount of mix
needed for roll-down.
• If hot-side is starved of material, the roller drum will
“bridge” onto cold mat and no further densification
occurs at joint
• NEVER STARVE JOINT by targeting a final height
difference of +0.1” on hot-side.
• NH spec requires compacted hot-side to be 1/8” higher
than cold side
Use Joint Matcher on last lift.

31. Types of Joint Matchers
Non-contact
sensor
Contact sensor

32. Contact Grade Sensor
Ultrasonic Grade Sensor
More Joint
Matchers
Types of Joint Matchers

33. Do NOT scalp the Joint and broadcast mix

34. Destined for
Failure Hot side of joint starved
of material where
bridging occurred?

35. Best way to roll a Joint
• Depending on mix characteristics, lift thickness
and surface conditions, compaction of the joint
can behave differently.
• In the first hours of paving try what works best,
and stick with it.
• Hopefully the mix will be consistent in
composition and behavior.
• Do a lot of joint testing early on.

36. Roller
6”
4”- 6”
4”- 6”
Option 1
Hang over 4-6”
Roller
Roller
Option 2
1st Pass 4”-6” inside
2nd Pass hang over 4”-6”
Rolling Unconfined Side?
50-50 on Where to Put 1st Pass

37. Edge of drum inside unsupported edge
can cause cracking near the edge
Rolling Unsupported Edge
(First Paver Pass)
What We Don’t Want
Rolling Unsupported Edge
With First Roller Pass
If edge of drum is located just inside the
unsupported edge, a stress crack can occur here.
A stress crack can occur

38. 1st pass all on hot mat with
roller edge off
joint approx 6-12 inches
2nd pass overlaps on cold mat
3-6 inches
Rolling the Supported Edge
Our Recommendation: Holding back 6” to 12”

39. Roller
Roller in vibratory mode with edge of drum
overhanging 2 to 4-inches on cold side.
Versus an Alternate Method of
1st Pass over the Supported Edge
Concern with this method is:
if insufficient HMA laid on hot side at
joint, then bridging occurs with first
pass (roller supported by cold mat)
Hot side Cold side

40. With Recommended Method,
Still Must Watch for Stress Cracks
Staying off 6” on 1st Pass
Stress cracks evident at edge of the drum
(while more likely from rolling
unsupported edge, can also occur from
rolling supported edge)

41. Potential Problem with Hot Side “Pinch”

42. Compacting Notched Wedge
Vibrating wedge
Wheel compactor

43. Paint the Side of the open Joint (Butt or Wedge)
Emulsion (Good),
PG Asphalt
(Better),
or
Joint Adhesive
(JA) (Best)

44. Proper Overlap:
• 1.0 + about0.5 inches
• Exception:
Milled or sawed joint
should be
0.5 inches
Aim for approximately 1” overlap.

45. Don’t Rake Overlap Across the Joint! – Starves the Joint
Photo by
James Scherocman, P.E

46. Bumping the Joint?

47. Lute the Avoid unnecessary rakingJ
This Raker is
doing a great job

48. To control material flow at outer edges of screed and
deliver homogenous HMA at joint
Extend Tunnels the Same Distance
Tunnels

49. Examples of Auger Overload…
Likely to Segregate
Tunnel
Tunnel?

50. Auger and Tunnel likely not extended
within 12 to 18-inches of the end gate.
The Result - SEGREGATION at joint

51. •Mill & Pave One Lane at a Time
•Cut Back joint
•Joint Heaters
•Joint Adhesives (hot rubberized asphalt)
•Surface Seals Over Joint
•Longitudinal Joint Seal (LJS) / VRAM
•Rubber Tire Rollers
•WMA, IC, IR Bar
SECTION 5Other Options / New Products

52. PA Story on Longitudinal Joint Density
• Increasing density was viewed as key
• 2007 - began measuring joint density
• 2008 - method spec. of best practices
• 2008 and 2009 - continued gathering data on joints
• 2010 - New joint density specification. Transition year with
no bonuses or penalties.
• 2011-2014 – bonuses and penalties on joint density
Article in NAPA’s magazine, Asphalt Pavement, Sept/Oct 2012
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/naylor/NAPS0512
Specifications Evolution for L-J in PA, CT, and MI

53. PA Joint Density Spec Highlights
• Both type of LJs allowed (butt or notch wedge)
• Joint Lot = 12,500’. Core every 2,500’. 5 cores per lot.
• Core location
o For Butt: directly over visible joint
o For Notch Wedge: middle of wedge
• Percent Within Limits (PWL)
• Incentive starts at 80% PWL
• Disincentive at <50% PWL
• Lower Specification Limit
o 2010-2013: 89% TMD (Theoretical Maximum Density = Gmm)
o 2014: 90% TMD
• Corrective action for < 88% TMD

54. -$10,000
PA: Impact on Lot Payment Summary
+$5,000
Disincentive
0 50 80 100
% PWL
IncentiveNo Pay Adjustment

55. PA: How Did it Work?In-place Density Summary, Reported by PA DOT
Year # Lots Avg. Roadway
Density, %TMD
Avg. Joint
Density, %TMD
Criteria
2007 18 93.9 87.8 begin measuring
at Jt.
2008 43 94.1 88.9 method spec
2009 29 94.1 89.2 method spec
2010 No data, transition to PWL spec
2011 137 94.1 91.0 PWL, LSL 89%
2012 162 94.0 91.6 PWL, LSL 89%
2013 167 93.9 91.4 PWL, LSL 89%
2014 316 94.1 92.3 PWL, LSL 90%
2015 493 92.6 PWL, LSL 90%

56. Increased Projected Joint Life due to Improved Density
50
60
70
80
90
100
PercentServiceLife
93% 92% 91% 90% 89%
Compaction Level
2012-2013
2007
2011
2009
2008
2014-2015

57. PA: Annual Statewide Totals on
Incentives/Disincentives for Joint Density
Year
Incentive
Payments
Disincentive
Payments
2011 $268K $99K
2012 $489K $63K
2013 $588K $25K
2014 $1,002K $127K

58. Connecticut Joint Density Spec
•Prior to 2011, acceptance from gauges only
•Tested joints only on hot side of joint
•Require notch-wedge joints (12:1 to 8:1)
•In 2011, moved to cores
•92% min average required in mat
•91% min average required over joint
•Requirement only for surface lifts
•typically 2” lifts of 12.5 Superpave mix
•Cores taken over middle of wedge

59. CT DOT Average In-Place Lot Density
on Cores for Entire Year
Roadway (Non-Bridge)
Year Mat
(Rqd. Min. of 92%)
Joint
(Rqd. Min. of 91%)
Prior to 2010: Acceptance from gauges
2011 92.6% 91.6%
2012 93.0% 91.4%
Std. Dev. 2.07
(on 2082 measurements)
2.40
(on 1863 measurements)
2013 93.1% 91.8%

60. MI DOT Joint Densities
6” cores directly over visible joint
1 core per 2,000 ft, 10,000 ft per section
Bonus/penalty based on averages, not PWL
• 2009
• Avg: 89.77%
• 2011
• Avg: 90.71%
• 2012
• Avg: 91.59%
• 53% sections received bonus (Avg > 91.5%)
• 20% sections received penalty (Avg < 90.5%)
• 27% sections had no adjustment (90.5 < Avg <
91.5%)

61. Proposed Acceptance Criteria
LJ Density Spec
Six-inch Cores located either directly over visible joint for butt joint,
or middle of wedge for wedge joint. This gives a 50/50 split, in order
to average the Gmm of both lots.
• > 92% of Gmm: maximum bonus
• Between 92% and 90% of Gmm:
100% pay, pro-rated bonus, need to “overband” or “surface
seal” joint
• < 90% of Gmm: reduced payment, overband or surface seal
the joint

62. GOAL
14 year old surface
 I-65 in IN: SR252 to US31
 12 inches HMA over Rubblized JCP
 Warranty Project

63. With proper focus, proper training, proper
construction and proper specifications, we
can build long-lasting longitudinal joints!
Questions?