<%BANNER%>

Development and Evaluation of Permeable Friction Course Mix Design for Florida Conditions

xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20101123_AAAAAN INGEST_TIME 2010-11-23T06:54:03Z PACKAGE UFE0011900_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 796 DFID F20101123_AAAJYF ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH jaiswal_l_Page_161thm.jpg GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
1de73bd32ad879e10266d30cb7136881
SHA-1
2534a01586ea00ae27de73c269d37fd19c5b585e
6701 F20101123_AAAJXR jaiswal_l_Page_147thm.jpg
efc89ea84c69f602dae2dd93114e2ec9
98ec75cc9bffb7d3c8c60255bb0b08f43a5c1418
72911 F20101123_AAAIVD jaiswal_l_Page_084.jpg
3ef44150277e1ca5041649d11c956af3
d6d3d879622f47e053bb8e7014313d69cfaa0df9
31531 F20101123_AAAIUP jaiswal_l_Page_080.QC.jpg
df3712b6139797ef2d21c43fdec4b65b
88a9af727b638584f4b8390061e47ca0b1c980d9
74028 F20101123_AAAJAJ jaiswal_l_Page_048.jpg
8dd680b9985181d91ccb9d18201e211d
8a5747c4151167595b459620d157abf606720a46
3004 F20101123_AAAJYG jaiswal_l_Page_161.QC.jpg
7b019d37804effef98397c790ed9e6a3
e61cdf8fdeefb1f5e936ef89281172da332a6b1c
24702 F20101123_AAAJXS jaiswal_l_Page_147.QC.jpg
b1fcaba1c6b115a141239b84aa24bb57
691f14d53db097b92de74bda2a9d209fffb81793
28594 F20101123_AAAIVE jaiswal_l_Page_053.QC.jpg
3845ad31bc35105c1be236bd467331a9
bd748d0ea0d4bfc980cf403b15f94e19973d9214
2475 F20101123_AAAIUQ jaiswal_l_Page_171.pro
cdcd629d0cbdf1f9173920f010b52f95
345f3b2afa8d13988e8dfbc58a167da27fcbbf51
64996 F20101123_AAAJAK jaiswal_l_Page_049.jpg
407997a6b4d3c59e25321535e269b9e0
f1957ec4fd6c33f5ce60df3ee65d0770d7d48cc9
5558 F20101123_AAAJYH jaiswal_l_Page_162thm.jpg
d81047cf6033b24fd90a97b0eeaade70
b40f0a6fbbcd32aea9284bed9b5b4b25a5ceec78
91701 F20101123_AAAIVF jaiswal_l_Page_063.jpg
606f9aa470fab3bfa34544546b41dcf2
cd0da868b70124884defd53cb0424b159414d912
74532 F20101123_AAAJAL jaiswal_l_Page_050.jpg
dd83ce71329de9c4254f0e278bc037e6
b66e946f2c4db9a9b489ab58308ee87b380e59cb
23828 F20101123_AAAJYI jaiswal_l_Page_162.QC.jpg
dd22e8d497ab47007bbb5ab9a6378a19
ea67d41ddd3531c5dcef542d9c1da3a1eeb20297
8451 F20101123_AAAJXT jaiswal_l_Page_148thm.jpg
0015cf4061ad8be1be281fd4dc6421c1
bf668107f1e45a19c0ad284e7336026b01c64ca7
36696 F20101123_AAAIVG jaiswal_l_Page_102.pro
01c78349394f7cc2c77a217bfe4e336a
f74fac8aa5c2f996ca1dd17a3ccf9d38de1650d6
721053 F20101123_AAAIUR jaiswal_l_Page_111.jp2
b73b9bb079ac70552b921a085ac10f1d
5f1cfbae7a518ffd08555357561bb44f6df6f421
75632 F20101123_AAAJBA jaiswal_l_Page_087.jpg
41d58107cfdc8ba746e32015aac2eaa5
957e8c35d6958a0541ba2cb714ff9ebdbab9a474
96385 F20101123_AAAJAM jaiswal_l_Page_052.jpg
4775e31a49e313f90178b03fb6fdd611
d66f30a89ae351a3c8ec7bd50e247547986f1c1d
5938 F20101123_AAAJYJ jaiswal_l_Page_163thm.jpg
816685b52cf6a72b7626ba89cec61f93
02cea3d1f71252a192b70b4883f95a2f20c21172
32414 F20101123_AAAJXU jaiswal_l_Page_148.QC.jpg
7c6686c438289a48893f6a373031f102
7afab1f600d619bd51f63e092375997a37e57460
14510 F20101123_AAAIVH jaiswal_l_Page_183.pro
e80a91ca83241ebdf550747f470b9bd0
9a1bcc80c48002b3bdf5f9595f859d66a0be4df0
48585 F20101123_AAAIUS jaiswal_l_Page_089.jpg
64de1b53a519c19ce07d3ef8a0116905
a3871fd0eca837af47639cd028a58fd948d069f8
98501 F20101123_AAAJBB jaiswal_l_Page_090.jpg
c29dbe523a16402470ae31b1568f2141
f909971a11ef5c15eb7b92236357651e503415bb
68818 F20101123_AAAJAN jaiswal_l_Page_054.jpg
0fdd7e11dda0d2ffcb7196b53f9eec5b
2b089f8b79d84e4569a4af808bfecbaf53cc17e9
6358 F20101123_AAAJYK jaiswal_l_Page_164thm.jpg
dfbd712ea73a046b747560b661a7ba6a
070016eecc1008f604da125f3415d3e6e005b77f
4650 F20101123_AAAJXV jaiswal_l_Page_150thm.jpg
93d4ac22a9d7ec09d1ff133e57012dd3
c51c93fc14e149a65c94ccb2d5deeed586ba3345
25960 F20101123_AAAIVI jaiswal_l_Page_071.QC.jpg
55342777c1e70ff5cc36dbbe530c5063
5d2924fdb23bca3edbd834096b90d6f30cc36b72
49088 F20101123_AAAIUT jaiswal_l_Page_166.jpg
cee1b6eaa13c6e97f86dbc0d4e0ae826
f4ceedbd12f013fb71139b1a318e7f5e7d5bdab7
79220 F20101123_AAAJBC jaiswal_l_Page_093.jpg
ecb48db39b1514389036a75dc5d27aaa
8a6e39fe07b937247395f82f70fcb8ee2d2da5c0
85197 F20101123_AAAJAO jaiswal_l_Page_055.jpg
a0bd51d32a2367a8f4d0d91fb3e79275
6651194dbfc683e6a4f73d1dacbd0de3c112b5e1
3671 F20101123_AAAJYL jaiswal_l_Page_166thm.jpg
846853d6b1a2c14b6e2f91a76a9e6dd3
344c692e6f0be94e933c813925524d4a03eaed98
14303 F20101123_AAAJXW jaiswal_l_Page_151.QC.jpg
f1ddf3d0ca8724314805cd8c7fdec73f
ad6896c40a61ebace2be6a3fe3f689160ab13dbb
7654 F20101123_AAAIVJ jaiswal_l_Page_157thm.jpg
5e7f866043fb2a87e7db3b86ab477eaa
bdb94e8beb576e11caa1e49df96a01a439c79b72
18339 F20101123_AAAIUU jaiswal_l_Page_112.QC.jpg
e13916299fe644b4abb185caad4154ae
2b2094876f230d340e90bf8f7fcb895ee24a062f
60408 F20101123_AAAJBD jaiswal_l_Page_094.jpg
c53adee9d52f68f015dd917c14863053
3f2d9932e24ea26d5ffb70aeaea2ef7695860f95
86731 F20101123_AAAJAP jaiswal_l_Page_056.jpg
c7e936e34464d8ffca32486c773d6fa2
451b528c6e51f3eaabee3bdf34a062523edb7056
8105 F20101123_AAAJZA jaiswal_l_Page_181thm.jpg
727ba489524d6e68dfa33d7da7c87f2f
98100fdb310aea97523497ad263820329bbf892f
13389 F20101123_AAAJYM jaiswal_l_Page_166.QC.jpg
46a974b7665daee2a78a88e821f0840b
03f4954c68516c45a6cbcf383abdc4a9383ebf55
15827 F20101123_AAAJXX jaiswal_l_Page_152.QC.jpg
6b4d9e6ce2cf4b2ac70f40c1c9737edf
3020b615875e944621dfc0c1382474dc9589255d
50136 F20101123_AAAIVK jaiswal_l_Page_144.jp2
14e34e7cf4dc64dd91063defe0aaa6f6
e81bdf2545b13f536f8c9bef31caa6f972e4221c
87155 F20101123_AAAIUV jaiswal_l_Page_071.jp2
b14771eb154c75998daf69dea9ded1ee
29387f74755136b74965cd38b62e1669eec35847
73995 F20101123_AAAJBE jaiswal_l_Page_095.jpg
12c1da560a5b9cdd3b81341257a68515
3c30d0f99e3727ab573271bed077c737af78976a
70428 F20101123_AAAJAQ jaiswal_l_Page_059.jpg
ddc376feacea1c6d0c8a4b5ea44e830e
e0843fe238413afef7597682658fb453a52fa4f5
2567 F20101123_AAAJZB jaiswal_l_Page_182thm.jpg
2c92b72d181268949418392ec1d57442
eedcc80cc2ddea4e296e14d8e1f296ccb7a73cdc
2786 F20101123_AAAJYN jaiswal_l_Page_167thm.jpg
69864fdaf6a56d8c9d8d54a37556f88f
b4a9806f04665f6d83c91c27604850d0b8e7e1ea
6666 F20101123_AAAJXY jaiswal_l_Page_155thm.jpg
64b9cf4eaa1c9ecaa4345ad1df9bbfd8
f26f8db9e6b835a55973adf25ac389071fe72ecb
21159 F20101123_AAAIVL jaiswal_l_Page_117.pro
095930667358290c66cd8be72933d487
b4f98b1ec539b0fe48bae9643f17d813b955a70a
444 F20101123_AAAIUW jaiswal_l_Page_152.txt
d297600bce9d2ccfab284d0566674a9e
6feb6e6a2e11c9c384625d5ac2db2ec84e779647
48357 F20101123_AAAJBF jaiswal_l_Page_096.jpg
528b927e645693d2a5af1d362ec594d0
922d488a63aa55c1503239ab3ca7ed89c14e8acd
97627 F20101123_AAAJAR jaiswal_l_Page_062.jpg
52278409d89b6ec4d7fa5f2f04a07476
e430d9844cdc4c534ed98e69e97c5f1e60449e88
11038 F20101123_AAAJZC jaiswal_l_Page_183.QC.jpg
dddf222b0ab4fbe4be787094cdb98b93
7f82bd67e0575a006684d1b506c3da720a096ee4
3779 F20101123_AAAJYO jaiswal_l_Page_168thm.jpg
093eb63680d64376fb7f189f64a06be3
240a152d36894214c12b1a1daa26fa098709a4b2
24783 F20101123_AAAJXZ jaiswal_l_Page_155.QC.jpg
a63aff241fef7240a095515b0b283e73
f92ada55d44aae2390acda449a0581f96537778d
25271604 F20101123_AAAIVM jaiswal_l_Page_115.tif
0d765cb7aa8c1d83081c104868290753
a78815b146e2c9477976a103fb1cd089eab09147
101284 F20101123_AAAIUX jaiswal_l_Page_139.jpg
7897281e50fbd0634b55d1f73614b089
db18d8996c4a0fdd469b49a0d85e54592a76569b
63000 F20101123_AAAJBG jaiswal_l_Page_098.jpg
ab22f1fafea6a2ccdbb1743e46c257fd
be533bdc3981110905429afe479231e0f4806134
39278 F20101123_AAAIWA jaiswal_l_Page_071.pro
7c241a844a25b62e93e5e404afca06d6
be45beb116c7c894b6209ccc0a02f3cb4c7d0b07
82436 F20101123_AAAJAS jaiswal_l_Page_064.jpg
772c0412e4b6f8558a423611f73a40d8
56b69167087c3873b6cfda7f45684577a5fe9a14
211446 F20101123_AAAJZD UFE0011900_00001.mets FULL
947a074ef660291d01d908ac5b71d6a7
915bb6de028da62fd946742606a0672a0f944026
14757 F20101123_AAAJYP jaiswal_l_Page_169.QC.jpg
d991df172d8ee99dab218655ee9ab1f6
2d57f9d4c87e6bbd95f5e324f60521af7f5b2340
3657 F20101123_AAAIVN jaiswal_l_Page_145thm.jpg
0277af9e38b81270b8a12fb2a2e458a3
a94fb3ea0a859f85f681f17a95b796ca3585c26b
1120 F20101123_AAAIUY jaiswal_l_Page_084.txt
b834e5ff04d85399809d91b3a3555be3
0f1911171cfbaa1471447b2d2143f0cee6e915c9
77292 F20101123_AAAJBH jaiswal_l_Page_099.jpg
e93895775b7c7d6114273c0f3fb26acd
3a599ab3cbe36b8714530117b58e1ec32b055477
21158 F20101123_AAAIWB jaiswal_l_Page_058.QC.jpg
0d2cce490d6afab73677812e46fd2e4a
c4bcdbf710847da2d1b0b74c957001015a18eabc
72790 F20101123_AAAJAT jaiswal_l_Page_065.jpg
0feeefcec38d4e843f19c57ebf482965
1e96cf18adab51e8b1dbedd80cff8061fe9b739b
3410 F20101123_AAAJYQ jaiswal_l_Page_171.QC.jpg
c2bb0e9cc398473d2096bc323a639c03
266f390b661524db666c9bdd9a6caf302376d8f9
801041 F20101123_AAAIVO jaiswal_l_Page_008.jp2
9c678cc201d5d707eb847e9f242815ce
c8f9ef9b52cd03ecba2dd120d56afd6d952cda18
42124 F20101123_AAAIUZ jaiswal_l_Page_023.pro
08d485f55af23ca5fa472cacb35c892a
aa9b8322ee2657855cf85fe73d671b00ebf11fe4
84424 F20101123_AAAJBI jaiswal_l_Page_100.jpg
44e58e819a6fdaf910cbd7baba031faa
f778a0a58aac9b5a0a027727cfdfa4e04039f986
27688 F20101123_AAAIWC jaiswal_l_Page_047.QC.jpg
109dd51a55f0ade8e51995e6a3dc05ee
8099d09f837897502d411d930255e16588c1dcca
95046 F20101123_AAAJAU jaiswal_l_Page_067.jpg
3ab51ad14b26bc2d08308b54dae34229
b5759f3a82ef8a55ad6cddb1aa1f9491472357bb
3963 F20101123_AAAJYR jaiswal_l_Page_172thm.jpg
045852d7146a71a579fede4041afa38b
075418afa3f58947e59d007f76243cd2458ade0b
20411 F20101123_AAAIVP jaiswal_l_Page_175.jpg
d23603481defb5d01838429364beca32
1bd604f048fb7d1d5b7c9569da2bfc31b012595a
57860 F20101123_AAAJBJ jaiswal_l_Page_101.jpg
34b0cd4eaada2e874b7a5ece86fe6440
85f6bdbe463e450fcb534996f9c8847a8260c63d
5956 F20101123_AAAIWD jaiswal_l_Page_158thm.jpg
81e100f776317236372e8244cd2eecc8
20193cc266499035753314a3a91774ed4bd7b70f
78779 F20101123_AAAJAV jaiswal_l_Page_071.jpg
977f47e2bac7481c77cf60ecb5017548
67d2a07cd21ddb06df08d6d734971b2582a2e7b8
2787 F20101123_AAAJYS jaiswal_l_Page_174thm.jpg
fbfe22445dc7168828aba5bdea68b2f6
22f466eaf94613dc77ad49f8cc47abdc6e225970
94233 F20101123_AAAIVQ jaiswal_l_Page_036.jpg
666885050c43cbeada6ee981056f4213
b0fcb20002d3fc1432540f260084a6f3b7f1047f
76230 F20101123_AAAJBK jaiswal_l_Page_102.jpg
20b1436c63dc7c3e979ec3b78b414589
ae05f3bc406fee99cad04f0564c006406246fb85
83443 F20101123_AAAIWE jaiswal_l_Page_056.jp2
6cd109a80b067b4fc3b7485a9594c509
9d510e096a3723cb75763839ab980ccc6cef0581
74940 F20101123_AAAJAW jaiswal_l_Page_075.jpg
69878ea260be26060f7bd85ba854596a
81597cab92096199f26c7f2c1a51b13c3056651b
2189 F20101123_AAAJYT jaiswal_l_Page_175thm.jpg
5ee97e32b975c1d2d9ad8a8f7ddf89f0
c2523cf0240587c9b996e1faacf1504f5d49e014
1950 F20101123_AAAIVR jaiswal_l_Page_164.txt
6902860e6f86e81e49a217cdcd3eaa15
86959c6535f47b2c9babc2d34a79fb57128d190e
89164 F20101123_AAAJBL jaiswal_l_Page_103.jpg
f5d7634e894f5ccf3dade00c00417a53
35a0b7927e207abb18e3349de611de287d3e411b
69255 F20101123_AAAIWF jaiswal_l_Page_105.jpg
e669c554d881bb1d1df987a203b4602b
a5d4209e0210b3cec8cfc99e2a1b07b54a7dd6f3
78796 F20101123_AAAJAX jaiswal_l_Page_081.jpg
5992edc74f1ac29fea0ce88c2cd0a76c
b7aa9c0507de65dd42a154feef8913c751015101
56626 F20101123_AAAJCA jaiswal_l_Page_132.jpg
94ad9a4eb302e48cda617ddda71a11ce
95b44002e8d74de6355145d190126d324ff87c8e
38239 F20101123_AAAJBM jaiswal_l_Page_104.jpg
8a8f5f69f3bc89f37574df1caef50f69
8f469e2feb2a793ce473308c4f18e1a48d9c8bfc
1653 F20101123_AAAIWG jaiswal_l_Page_134.txt
b337d13874a0f52dd6fd870f95cd165d
f2ebd1c6e9edfa84d8e00a02f55da5c565cefd0a
90323 F20101123_AAAJAY jaiswal_l_Page_083.jpg
6a696f21e4dd0ed48456ae829af93ab4
bff20dcee3a18805ce966ace311152625a10d15c
6417 F20101123_AAAJYU jaiswal_l_Page_175.QC.jpg
b868370c36ec2337c9669892f24ae482
83ba7d40f3a83f7e4718e457ea91d3ea2c386d02
28858 F20101123_AAAIVS jaiswal_l_Page_063.QC.jpg
221570eefaff8875360d3a6b2910fda6
5ab1d73f8739bafc9fa47ff72f6ebea0551c7b85
91419 F20101123_AAAJCB jaiswal_l_Page_135.jpg
69eb411d6f9fecf5af111de9538a14a6
1625683e91902479f1006441760aa8b01d4c43b4
92634 F20101123_AAAJBN jaiswal_l_Page_107.jpg
8b2969b8b196c56fe1d0dc1438740f42
2764bc2aea900d2f757e28d7d124656828774a3d
23044 F20101123_AAAIWH jaiswal_l_Page_163.QC.jpg
2b35796a47b96218823b4ea6b043a4b9
a92e308efcf608a3d7300e95d702fa83f439674d
76652 F20101123_AAAJAZ jaiswal_l_Page_086.jpg
ca94cbadf255c093f925b9712b35dfeb
b0f037ab3bc7008f247a4c2e89a496bfa4d03561
4586 F20101123_AAAJYV jaiswal_l_Page_178thm.jpg
c232243d82e068b0aaa2b591b3f75293
c219954d63d2b241ac642ad2b35db154cc0608a5
84573 F20101123_AAAIVT jaiswal_l_Page_163.jpg
bee20c053460428de3df8bf160965782
b9e6a5f6b257abd5fe1d681df686a77d2c279ff7
94403 F20101123_AAAJCC jaiswal_l_Page_136.jpg
244c996188095e17c3719d723834697e
4eaa6fe9f13c91736724c2bcd6a6a9e9c9dfca4a
55222 F20101123_AAAJBO jaiswal_l_Page_111.jpg
b6046ab64d0975a807566f06405566ac
8a09b64eae70184e4b282763dab42b882859fdcd
1053954 F20101123_AAAIWI jaiswal_l_Page_060.tif
8b01640c1b74cd2d7cd7d742ff98d3ba
18ad3e3863a31e81c28c696d4d31faeb552888d3
2611 F20101123_AAAJYW jaiswal_l_Page_179thm.jpg
b86edc88b2db9b8569ccb7a07b6b6cd2
2d66d6041740d54341c2e062e60a2cfe6b816824
727678 F20101123_AAAIVU jaiswal_l_Page_127.jp2
ca82814557ed865de616ce1ef688caf9
cae6a2c6491d8c3240cdeb5d965a6c9f5af3d054
72174 F20101123_AAAJCD jaiswal_l_Page_138.jpg
6a53f19ec2d72bc2aa066b93401af894
a07cde7ab9359c6938c327aa123cf1798cc59bb5
52295 F20101123_AAAJBP jaiswal_l_Page_112.jpg
2702a604b61e6fb9cfda1cd61e280ff7
fe982c51d5f01b53ffd89a454d40bb955b325aa4
F20101123_AAAIWJ jaiswal_l_Page_050.tif
2e1c775f5e3b33f27efd4a85ed8520c1
ed2ba184eef36bb6e60b9cf0c583eef26b04c21e
9514 F20101123_AAAJYX jaiswal_l_Page_179.QC.jpg
b5f574d0fcdf7a28576f43ad2d40aba0
9b12993ba52382e4178b196fee994bd787d902e1
266 F20101123_AAAIVV jaiswal_l_Page_175.txt
f20dbb024c843f7d582cf0531cae9c57
535621d80b898770ebe91ed20bebc1cfc54f2ee8
97212 F20101123_AAAJCE jaiswal_l_Page_140.jpg
98fb3177f7b70ebc291e7e8df6e2bf3b
aceab4647c80e72cbed0223f2dcf923e98a12ef5
67196 F20101123_AAAJBQ jaiswal_l_Page_113.jpg
1cd1cc289aa0259069a0d82a1e59931a
094bdc4c9a8205364e964e2682c764bab100762b
1378 F20101123_AAAIWK jaiswal_l_Page_123.txt
67f306371550cacb6b50b2e892a8bfdd
1068113820cd57eadea5e68d5e265b252bead7a0
5312 F20101123_AAAJYY jaiswal_l_Page_180thm.jpg
52366bf77b086654f062a8dfca1f529d
845aaf42d00e263657106ecc6b64ec13fe5375db
92785 F20101123_AAAIVW jaiswal_l_Page_036.jp2
79bab769497e68732e2e906397e11c73
d977552b240e3b56e31657611e260d87a10ed62d
107293 F20101123_AAAJCF jaiswal_l_Page_141.jpg
b9258167bd16383a0436e43a84a8462f
cd082cfb625901aefee2697df1805e39eb84d568
81431 F20101123_AAAJBR jaiswal_l_Page_114.jpg
1989fd17dd3e6222318831de9d369f04
2621dda296973eb3e274f4b56e8236fde4fd7bcb
903634 F20101123_AAAIWL jaiswal_l_Page_034.jp2
60570e5d23ca486ec822de2acfef787e
f93937d3bae0d0c43a012b0cd6f79b2fc0fe8465
21054 F20101123_AAAJYZ jaiswal_l_Page_180.QC.jpg
203216f6d8646c97ca62f26ac0cd6cd0
b42fa9c4602f43606f35c4c9c467ed3e7f67bdea
F20101123_AAAIVX jaiswal_l_Page_046.tif
1072438a422bb4edcedeb0cacdd79658
c362c56826fbd4923e26955788634a1f1d6440ef
69227 F20101123_AAAJCG jaiswal_l_Page_142.jpg
a5bddeb8185459949e8bf649618703bb
af21e2b3cd93ea446dd824116fa48e87e5a7cfe8
26059 F20101123_AAAIXA jaiswal_l_Page_088.pro
37b36bfa733c495f77f46a230f31be64
7ebaf16d265125f07a40b02444c4847de4b151a3
51066 F20101123_AAAJBS jaiswal_l_Page_117.jpg
bbabb3f1bdfbdd75763498e95cbcd0e8
3a80bfb3140aa43bf921b443fa34355063e7d57a
F20101123_AAAIWM jaiswal_l_Page_103.tif
702f8a0e59bc36e7c9c3152c28b683df
477738287e39a134e3ea7f4559ec212399849cf5
21820 F20101123_AAAIVY jaiswal_l_Page_087.pro
360b304ba18e372499374f42168ba297
58062471f13218295a456e47f78fc4b3d7b36c05
51004 F20101123_AAAJCH jaiswal_l_Page_146.jpg
c64ac24a5ad24794ad81d57258a09108
45417b0c916ac2405a123e0637aabe84629cc8f6
42441 F20101123_AAAIXB jaiswal_l_Page_154.jpg
eefddfd91efe68519cba42ca50d1a790
06012e842b6780dd6547a9e1250543e4b6a02cc4
15369 F20101123_AAAJBT jaiswal_l_Page_120.jpg
35d0cc3e961dc1f9b15295fdb0d55640
2b18f172a489a1fc0ab6a3b15d62f956332f9598
1063 F20101123_AAAIWN jaiswal_l_Page_144.txt
e67d6e81adfe4d1fee51f3b4e8121f95
374bbd061672a0ecb3f167850274a224e0fb1a9f
1446 F20101123_AAAIVZ jaiswal_l_Page_177.pro
d16e2ba22a4bd604153abca9a8012b22
6d146ce1c702b6380d48fbb0bbf489f219306d7d
71563 F20101123_AAAJCI jaiswal_l_Page_147.jpg
0de75028f22c37a35287514620714b99
c6ab3716cf26e4098bc64959142b9f63b5f9b828
507 F20101123_AAAIXC jaiswal_l_Page_092.txt
9c1661dcca1edf6180790b379e62b54d
5a7bf1c5c588b85de08ad94395cc9bf1500d8160
71815 F20101123_AAAJBU jaiswal_l_Page_123.jpg
9fc60cc643c172459cb9da4608309ce1
d2f64b85db687668a94cec063f5d0a3d815e40f7
87433 F20101123_AAAIWO jaiswal_l_Page_016.jp2
4be99023eef57e2b4b033dce69b603d4
a14f247caacaa1b8029cb7ee6ca9e93e87a04477
43335 F20101123_AAAJCJ jaiswal_l_Page_153.jpg
dcbe5d92f15f0c36ec50aaf3c0e4fca3
21fde2bcf8a20313babd916b1ac18563bd8599d4
1667 F20101123_AAAIXD jaiswal_l_Page_048.txt
04925e8af6df044d10c8b6d334ce4d8a
de331040f6e719d63267bdd2f8caf560a086d0ee
97581 F20101123_AAAJBV jaiswal_l_Page_125.jpg
b981095b18f49ffaec5d1edf04c44dfa
9c9735b836070c787f8c28ffc5fd44795e71515b
5622 F20101123_AAAIWP jaiswal_l_Page_111thm.jpg
26ee20418e1d2026cd29558e3bfba7a6
23717f1507def38889cd48051ae9b8679e4985f1
93024 F20101123_AAAJCK jaiswal_l_Page_157.jpg
ee2869a3ce9504ebaf708950eee0c0a1
36fc4516f1a2c459e7e0509b64ffa6f89e0f2c56
46476 F20101123_AAAIXE jaiswal_l_Page_062.pro
cb45bd89718411687eb378a5b545d761
a6ffadcf51f464a1dc7fe4bbf5098e01697d435d
72381 F20101123_AAAJBW jaiswal_l_Page_126.jpg
7da42821d5e9bfd67542cac89127771e
4cd5dab22790a6f248a86e8c10ddce5135a6f975
54765 F20101123_AAAIWQ jaiswal_l_Page_106.jpg
4818a5b3fdcad6ef784eac2ac59e3806
a5fe2aa1500a76a1a2c04927139e45a74e7b4ade
19942 F20101123_AAAJCL jaiswal_l_Page_159.jpg
9def0a0c0eb6976149777cb13b6f8a55
87232108396da9132fb5225eef538a2f72a12a00
30535 F20101123_AAAIXF jaiswal_l_Page_181.QC.jpg
f9652218cc4d5a057f6c36ba34b49817
8fd25c71b71c9c886ee3da4317bc731be0281dd8
52253 F20101123_AAAJBX jaiswal_l_Page_127.jpg
fc12cd97c2f2ee6fe33ba0ff035964c5
d6e6af0a472ba3c8a6f1ebb98a4085b9d84200b7
1883 F20101123_AAAIWR jaiswal_l_Page_080.txt
8d0398c402b2db7d27a70d2ab6d5bda1
437e6428e631a6e413f43336a495c324227b9086
8411 F20101123_AAAJCM jaiswal_l_Page_161.jpg
c7a73d84c19eda475a3c6a8cf050a8e0
b7a65920101bf819f7914a0a3ce0ddd885b1a051
435049 F20101123_AAAIXG jaiswal_l_Page_169.jp2
aebe0f4dacf7ce93d496b8921e5e1ba6
60361860b83bf1e8082d5c50ab52a545cbae16d2
93097 F20101123_AAAJBY jaiswal_l_Page_130.jpg
b8d67209062dc09807f57ab4006295e5
ba63e836a81c27ae4348a05ebf947ff9e094d48d
31580 F20101123_AAAIWS jaiswal_l_Page_013.QC.jpg
e97b931bbdf09336ae9e3a882492023d
81efc9503345f150f99289a6f24348d60e2d56d1
78886 F20101123_AAAJDA jaiswal_l_Page_020.jp2
e8f46253c5b789e0f4448f249503a5de
7be1c5a99b590f6cc71b717a6eceec055ef78ac6
82626 F20101123_AAAJCN jaiswal_l_Page_164.jpg
7cd6c0c3e1d691a75b2671a1a38f59d4
251d724dcbf79781d27c735200e1dd52a21ab1d5
18828 F20101123_AAAIXH jaiswal_l_Page_178.QC.jpg
17a028c1747f16d2788fb1441a181192
14abc80627caf8d9df3edf739a5aee05cf2c15b3
30598 F20101123_AAAJBZ jaiswal_l_Page_131.jpg
3086c4ec44bd0057597f695ffbfaa2d6
a686b2eed8205f2fdb96a3b2d065b563012c83c8
93854 F20101123_AAAJDB jaiswal_l_Page_021.jp2
320bee70c2bf43c12275adb5ef4a3991
60a5a2472875f8aedcaf36431c2efb0f3e30f918
48132 F20101123_AAAJCO jaiswal_l_Page_169.jpg
049cc454ce18b1a8607fd089d1b4947e
5de5c83ce71581a7d9772fed259ae0a948e72daf
53572 F20101123_AAAIXI jaiswal_l_Page_085.jpg
f65a3167815d234670294bf83c7cae66
ce30b93187a78cacb9106b306974e9747c9160db
20564 F20101123_AAAIWT jaiswal_l_Page_160.pro
4f93e302db1a39dba0a48f54901eb762
5d5496a2a928942145a7363b82ac3ca8fffd8285
111033 F20101123_AAAJDC jaiswal_l_Page_022.jp2
e313e5ed5c1a1d09afa47b9ce6b1ae51
32ac8ff25c9393acb2e89331ed72a3517b8a2d7e
9772 F20101123_AAAJCP jaiswal_l_Page_171.jpg
0b86691b4621f4b5809bf82f816881dd
93060d18177460d450e9241e5dfdf1eff1bf8fe9
4691 F20101123_AAAIXJ jaiswal_l_Page_153thm.jpg
fb3a2d73bcf23b0ae764fb9536046645
8b479edbc9f83aacf5c5723a00412677c365bba3
1785 F20101123_AAAIWU jaiswal_l_Page_045.txt
dc6acb47d9449343e1d1ea8f6b752395
b3351db17c103a163a893d69db168c6e9ad9a8e4
90666 F20101123_AAAJDD jaiswal_l_Page_023.jp2
5797aa2694dff836b4fadf6ed2a9f8b2
a51039007aacaf4f0168e2dbdb88860bdccf1a16
26995 F20101123_AAAJCQ jaiswal_l_Page_172.jpg
09c54d03277eeae23ad445d94cf63e72
ef27db74ad87ca84b01627187083699f9fe629b5
51587 F20101123_AAAIXK jaiswal_l_Page_042.pro
49aee88d0f51da003c116034baf060eb
e11c39e602264d6f2a10920a301bbe23a5f1f947
1504 F20101123_AAAIWV jaiswal_l_Page_081.txt
b20fa3ec6d521ef012e9567b2b5c6195
6f89919f955b6e2e059cd1a73c6b06457ee9a17a
103148 F20101123_AAAJDE jaiswal_l_Page_024.jp2
43c769cf2663d9586290ac83c0f32b69
3e16d1a493453ba1f0edd8faaf83f8d1a074c4c6
31780 F20101123_AAAJCR jaiswal_l_Page_173.jpg
d96d68ce22e428a81d0ac83f7a457e33
0b2779411dd27a53a54137be3057bd954093091a
1908 F20101123_AAAIXL jaiswal_l_Page_018.txt
2e0a92a6faadaa6da16b026933f5a63b
92a35877989e2fa8db0a2c4bddcf4b2e81aaeddb
F20101123_AAAIWW jaiswal_l_Page_085.tif
b7ad92e7bfae73ec1b5c5cb74716b918
427c27eaf9c48707f8aa97345d1af88f5afd0e1e
100765 F20101123_AAAJDF jaiswal_l_Page_025.jp2
d68531ab14e63a5840c2519872cacf7d
1cf9abef9c663fbdffe69d3d8e37d05d6b6b9bf1
9575 F20101123_AAAIYA jaiswal_l_Page_074.QC.jpg
0e49bf0a8e8b57a403005683a220afe2
860c14ec5ef05b71c43fa09dafb006b34961deaf
23990 F20101123_AAAJCS jaiswal_l_Page_174.jpg
23fbafc92660240f9af011250d1d91ad
a306e2e615112f1112bedf95ce27e94fec39af94
2022 F20101123_AAAIXM jaiswal_l_Page_046.txt
1c5fd1868cd0b77f32fd5a8d428b1da7
b1e095dad6341b49e3019ae82d640bf547277c79
69856 F20101123_AAAIWX jaiswal_l_Page_092.jpg
ccf4daa46fe05b3e2ff3eb23263205a7
2072a77a48da1227aed5bb0e32a33ab7347ee3f1
105427 F20101123_AAAJDG jaiswal_l_Page_026.jp2
adfe0fb6aae1362c3699298e66d5450d
92515359b02a6c116e2f54e2d6c7fcfeb6e800a1
22315 F20101123_AAAIYB jaiswal_l_Page_116.QC.jpg
f94e4a600da54b5570937120d9f75fd2
30a7592777cf6eeead4fbfa11afbe70b41302443
5923 F20101123_AAAJCT jaiswal_l_Page_003.jp2
b4c4cb453f988d2f6dd6af4ed1698453
2678bc88d6065597c340aa5f53472f6eb244bce1
7572 F20101123_AAAIXN jaiswal_l_Page_067thm.jpg
12f31b965dfa27c9b2646edb4eae8e90
f111aa161b0308b2fa7602af9e60be142ab2d890
91503 F20101123_AAAIWY jaiswal_l_Page_030.jpg
41af368cee9753b6b41f958643b93bd6
6efa8b2171f1f6a834f986c04b60b82360a9bcd8
778370 F20101123_AAAJDH jaiswal_l_Page_029.jp2
543f566b38de982f8581a7bd5fee506a
72ac4689d8c8e47500572345f1b0290b90a4a9c3
1051942 F20101123_AAAJCU jaiswal_l_Page_007.jp2
b7236fa510b310b34dab7afb85dfe594
70a3386ef79c7cd2847a5652e96aadf08bd36988
51093 F20101123_AAAIXO jaiswal_l_Page_022.pro
7c14239d5093e11860757369ff9cb2c6
ebc4cf76bf02a81de8a1c84c12779065c09030c7
156 F20101123_AAAIWZ jaiswal_l_Page_171.txt
9b06c7ea93c2d79e6215d716a65626c4
afab348f2b4883dbaa70369c77da6e9e002b82eb
96721 F20101123_AAAJDI jaiswal_l_Page_030.jp2
5894633096f9920a187d8aafa57c7322
d4b0eed93f63e02a57cc08ae440b2595bae3c8b0
77971 F20101123_AAAIYC jaiswal_l_Page_051.jp2
1479fcfd994d407b681d5aa7857f6a49
9483428052e38528d2104b5493f0339ba4565e5c
1051986 F20101123_AAAJCV jaiswal_l_Page_010.jp2
7eb786bc64c60f46506556040fd69ba7
325999f13b812f068e4435fc8b0eea4ec2c68642
2614 F20101123_AAAIXP jaiswal_l_Page_097thm.jpg
fc33c8610fd74a37e0cf182736c794ef
8d4b0a23ff4acd62ddd31612b63ca8959f865757
84911 F20101123_AAAJDJ jaiswal_l_Page_032.jp2
e9c018806b7b0c69390d7e37a5763cd4
ee59106b1f69e801240383c013fa5c7da8f9538e
42599 F20101123_AAAIYD jaiswal_l_Page_151.jpg
27bf5a9351b4232ab3e99addc503cc50
009c539d4f05b990159418891a5e55a71d85f7a5
1051980 F20101123_AAAJCW jaiswal_l_Page_011.jp2
3025ea80cb1e08f10bc3c4987d6b41a5
750bcf6674577f1bc316f03de35004da65cd937d
60566 F20101123_AAAIXQ jaiswal_l_Page_133.jpg
56e54e037e6acb84131816310a98f301
0cd94a9b4763192f325d31c69e7286de055742c0
965628 F20101123_AAAJDK jaiswal_l_Page_033.jp2
1171fe75da38586ae58d5488035a55de
99eb2ae31283376c5d01bd453a596d2a95049057
85323 F20101123_AAAIYE jaiswal_l_Page_035.jpg
49fcf993059c68d036f8479dc5f62d3b
c8abbdce82204fb2ad0237145f13b227ec292c77
85831 F20101123_AAAJCX jaiswal_l_Page_015.jp2
fdab33daa072edb251c1c3e8b7658289
be835d7420c1e7342f3cd27614b94765c56eb0f6
936611 F20101123_AAAIXR jaiswal_l_Page_135.jp2
debb1bdf9c5b365cefcbdf68eace36b2
8af1c2f5207da0fc846bd38181ab4b84535c89c5
90786 F20101123_AAAJDL jaiswal_l_Page_035.jp2
151a395845652379211d65168d10e2e4
ff0b4e430be6e693d45b96a076e7d68ce5f8428a
82961 F20101123_AAAIYF jaiswal_l_Page_150.jp2
bd346f80fc06e52741334278ece5a345
37d0bc13f1886c797186abd86810a69c50b6d480
92115 F20101123_AAAJCY jaiswal_l_Page_017.jp2
565eb8ac4d25dd4617df683f8fb7e051
ceead927be8385401e8d8587f49817c5e2dcf31a
1115 F20101123_AAAIXS jaiswal_l_Page_118.txt
19f18038ea8d0081ede727c7101c7db3
ae0e9b603a2cf3d9aa9dc7260135b99c1eb28198
662786 F20101123_AAAJEA jaiswal_l_Page_069.jp2
c654fe813455edba4e9ac60a6b5376d8
00385fc55d7e6b8233bf3b0caf51f62fb8acd261
627282 F20101123_AAAJDM jaiswal_l_Page_038.jp2
7a998bec73d5886b82b4ce3070bff268
84c0361a97148a64a6b02b68476506431a77be73
24357 F20101123_AAAIYG jaiswal_l_Page_164.QC.jpg
6e2c0d5d3d51b4f66e2ccacfff0794e1
5b51ba576bc4a61f2fe903e58621ec41062009d6
90687 F20101123_AAAJCZ jaiswal_l_Page_019.jp2
1449bcba88480fa7b97f9616445c5c13
cb3cf2bc7e502e68da8d033889e7c89061d45834
1515 F20101123_AAAIXT jaiswal_l_Page_142.txt
54fce0518a0019306beee136f5b7a926
129837bc95d9d2d958c5e42aaa931ba60df4227f
671870 F20101123_AAAJEB jaiswal_l_Page_070.jp2
545a841a8f680b8d95b2b26e0d185c5b
c41561e14d46f7119aa0834abb301443f2a20be4
634363 F20101123_AAAJDN jaiswal_l_Page_039.jp2
c392313713690afecfc4eb89601a3334
4496c3d484f327670b29772d0cc683b8a81d6b77
3949 F20101123_AAAIYH jaiswal_l_Page_038thm.jpg
15f542bf0e634ad3f76c30e2c8fe8b4f
5f8ef27bdb43bffe68071bcb76c5ff956861f784
107993 F20101123_AAAJEC jaiswal_l_Page_072.jp2
78871c37ab3055dab7eedb3998e7ae57
b2a5cec39acd086643efdc2d0147d500b3c2ab68
86679 F20101123_AAAJDO jaiswal_l_Page_043.jp2
3706f6dba24abc1a57aa781badf42bdc
5ee428a48ad67f1c4e02feec57b8952393fead5a
35724 F20101123_AAAIYI jaiswal_l_Page_081.pro
13ff1aa8b08c4342a72365840551fb42
91845b77c7142f42e6ad7a22bc409dea210ae06e
97567 F20101123_AAAIXU jaiswal_l_Page_032.jpg
4a68835414c45f18f0f1a5b2b0c8b99e
4c2d4dc1e7b557226ecd6fa40afcfe7970941d8e
1012357 F20101123_AAAJED jaiswal_l_Page_076.jp2
6dd1a1d9516c4ee4d360ce3dd08e5f0d
6b09d9e123d5cd9e01389467eb25bb09a6477944
67413 F20101123_AAAJDP jaiswal_l_Page_044.jp2
750eb0054069f23648bac0852bd8545d
6227d52064ed81a3adbbe7d646129bbac87bcb9b
7591 F20101123_AAAIYJ jaiswal_l_Page_013thm.jpg
f2a266b4640fe8bc7034d6be76a1917c
f27b1b4da9aa01e9334078928ce37c24e543fb60
958 F20101123_AAAIXV jaiswal_l_Page_171thm.jpg
791dcc5bb38d6db305063eab9831f2cf
c12987e08e041a2adc1b753e00647e34c31b1e4f
932680 F20101123_AAAJEE jaiswal_l_Page_077.jp2
cd122f499985496cd1205713e83c2b05
ffdaa17aa20dd3c7f6641bb90ad4a550e39ca9ad
101778 F20101123_AAAJDQ jaiswal_l_Page_046.jp2
92d523871015bf926af5103820b6b682
47bf42deed9e3721fd28652c6a2315c47530d339
80578 F20101123_AAAIYK jaiswal_l_Page_051.jpg
30b9962b34fb259e2045cb343d12a02f
684b7e074627ea5ffd535f7079f793dbbcb7c1b2
1551 F20101123_AAAIXW jaiswal_l_Page_053.txt
1694404d4f984132b54e1dead14d026c
c9aa61274ae3b1c208a7af10382a2b795014b699
115885 F20101123_AAAJEF jaiswal_l_Page_078.jp2
461174543ccb3557afd6df519319d273
96b7e8a9ac6396984c531e634c33a5333d409990
923181 F20101123_AAAJDR jaiswal_l_Page_047.jp2
147210ec8c799815a23c9bd8af77c5ec
46ba5f336eef86a1041897d4857d9c8aeae4fe39
47874 F20101123_AAAIYL jaiswal_l_Page_069.jpg
60e9c5f35320a1b4e79c8b5b40926e49
02cc77f348bd77fd07fed1c64410f0a3f89a5730
709098 F20101123_AAAIXX jaiswal_l_Page_123.jp2
5fe48d4feba2adc5e96da143fc323d28
32395152f39f4b704affdb9ab35a62eec6246d0b
1030183 F20101123_AAAJEG jaiswal_l_Page_080.jp2
d9cb07e6212e191347d24314a81c1225
8f2da0e46689a4cdc4f8387f0f07b47c65aa898d
3159 F20101123_AAAIZA jaiswal_l_Page_160thm.jpg
177ef8855ffac4ba9b34dfcaacbb1679
ca487d33676cf22c29d7299295fad887883d9fec
78521 F20101123_AAAJDS jaiswal_l_Page_048.jp2
9c15e2f0aaf995a42dda5fd3cead11e2
0b4655b5a20bc693b85a642869965cac0a044c72
F20101123_AAAIYM jaiswal_l_Page_048.tif
4dc9c0382d6699fe67724b1f02e61bfe
a45d66a8fdd2bc2abc6ac42b8fcbb28b5929933f
1054428 F20101123_AAAIXY jaiswal_l_Page_178.tif
863625954f00a4e427a2cfef7a10bc9f
15342caf2413a18fc5e8161da7297bf10cc3d9b9
825722 F20101123_AAAJEH jaiswal_l_Page_081.jp2
296c272aff7b1d461fed55bec4ee2f8b
0afe54ac27d634a77f06a0148e7af0045a4f449f
826947 F20101123_AAAIZB jaiswal_l_Page_027.jp2
2f9472c1521813a93439bbc7eec4ed81
b796ff579a7430bd37548b2bd8b07604b8efae0f
64427 F20101123_AAAJDT jaiswal_l_Page_049.jp2
6c7519beeecc48e2fcb647ffbaac2c71
b19d3a0a82ae1fbcfbe1c1d1eb279bb62de3ce97
21487 F20101123_AAAIYN jaiswal_l_Page_108.pro
3dd1ddc1e7f3d478849e315647812ff1
2033d59e0e7cbba2408fbc3b092490022d57e6b3
44929 F20101123_AAAIXZ jaiswal_l_Page_038.jpg
f2eed5c2aadeb3a963a4c2ca16ef5be5
147bdc8881f519500ed99329ad1afd6843a59658
39163 F20101123_AAAJEI jaiswal_l_Page_082.jp2
345f12c494a1dc013a7f5f0ec11401e3
a3ae6cce6a4ac4f77b8d4c5bf4670585aadd2c83
23612 F20101123_AAAIZC jaiswal_l_Page_095.QC.jpg
a39cf2993577651f4011c7eb1ab96299
faea808cd27d9665ba27c4d92ddbfeb2181354c1
911270 F20101123_AAAJDU jaiswal_l_Page_057.jp2
b16d4eb3f8538d7e783dff132f390541
5cd849f0efcb1730ab13f07949cd5bb99e0bd971
3905 F20101123_AAAIYO jaiswal_l_Page_014thm.jpg
82d405b23f2ef5385b206c5d416633fb
69d7d25e06488d8bb3d8cce1f6c81f26e19320bf
94705 F20101123_AAAJEJ jaiswal_l_Page_083.jp2
ddacb271065fd70cef9fcbad1b5f4fff
dca8bfdb3d879f4d1e16d10c72ace8d6d6d1beae
14135 F20101123_AAAIZD jaiswal_l_Page_038.QC.jpg
c186aab9f15f345d7777edd95b357fe0
7a0064cb3396737e436bbd6178f92d5b25c01e18
68670 F20101123_AAAJDV jaiswal_l_Page_058.jp2
f1ff76bb926381e71368df88ab3b11ba
621bc4f66be407f660b0b53ab60c6d1186087ff8
57095 F20101123_AAAIYP jaiswal_l_Page_141.pro
0175643d88ba49b8dc19baa2c6f1fb7d
d77529887d68beb45f474e7a07d5705d5e2dc927
520264 F20101123_AAAJEK jaiswal_l_Page_085.jp2
af7eb8ff3eb13b415efe1bf329ee71c6
cc65a2eeb661436f64f83f75f194dad8c19ff552
2297 F20101123_AAAIZE jaiswal_l_Page_159thm.jpg
b668eb88b0e1026553885104a80a1264
cb476b03cd8ab8cedb7280b509849d15bb7a1daf
95066 F20101123_AAAJDW jaiswal_l_Page_060.jp2
4fb5d82d10fa527bae715f688a8ca674
eb597f66564d128ed2146a56a6559c7006d59572
837292 F20101123_AAAIYQ jaiswal_l_Page_084.jp2
28593020f73862b13329ce017a8c3272
61c4249ab2ea2b7651b433b6ef571bcfbe961e80
773379 F20101123_AAAJEL jaiswal_l_Page_086.jp2
391ae48535a0df0068f7cde814d07863
fe431676aa8d4ed84dc777882527e66a0d512907
29298 F20101123_AAAIZF jaiswal_l_Page_050.pro
b6378b55d5d74114e428a61e7a263cef
347abf82b24e3624537e285af54bd7963df0d7d6
104065 F20101123_AAAJDX jaiswal_l_Page_062.jp2
78115fd7e3ec9376368deac4fdb7981c
c3265bdddd0f0547c2fb3b0a8298b8fa0f808288
F20101123_AAAIYR jaiswal_l_Page_097.tif
d8c3501731c552003b2e142120eef17c
96a84c3a0de9310a2e98d7cad55c4556448ad9e9
647539 F20101123_AAAJFA jaiswal_l_Page_110.jp2
c777f56dcf061eedbb9fa8d5e81adfed
9d60e35279313cb69c010c3cdf8666923b68d6be
911065 F20101123_AAAJEM jaiswal_l_Page_087.jp2
559007ad37b320918094d17badc4b2f1
c2c771cf489ce88ab84a067e9421195928008dad
35652 F20101123_AAAIZG jaiswal_l_Page_170.pro
dded2de9b8969194d2e31cb78d2b482a
e696120aac0fb203a4dccae6b19afbaf60c1636a
830452 F20101123_AAAJDY jaiswal_l_Page_063.jp2
fc4752d93d117bd73ed3232d21e054fa
fc075865ae42f73cd31451a2163550d2144c8b8c
113016 F20101123_AAAIYS jaiswal_l_Page_012.jpg
8afa9c6d564d3a49ec7165995aa0fc20
1cf7686ddf4297d9e3a45039c34db5ddc277f08e
455678 F20101123_AAAJEN jaiswal_l_Page_089.jp2
37be9fff24e9ea63fd37e3ed4f8eef00
0d80cb7a0f9bfc0f261ba8997e410847a3267d95
21446 F20101123_AAAIZH jaiswal_l_Page_144.pro
796ac328953d06a7241b4c1ad224f021
73ea3a57e792b9eb47b22ac95256c326227c2f3f
1051941 F20101123_AAAJDZ jaiswal_l_Page_064.jp2
309c6d97b4d1a7c6d03d47249090f797
8c7fb85ac506feecceb4db71e2d9014a36f381fe
81002 F20101123_AAAIYT jaiswal_l_Page_053.jpg
b2b8302dd9cdc057ba62994d361aee77
1d7eba3f04e092d6ff28a51f257255af9cc0ce42
889734 F20101123_AAAJFB jaiswal_l_Page_113.jp2
da300a699d69bcd52f758badd669c042
ebbba02740b056cd264a5339a93dd8eef758c89e
103375 F20101123_AAAJEO jaiswal_l_Page_090.jp2
7b829b4b361057da4db2423216e4d455
256ae479fb2a16139b7de98b5a108a21d79eec70
F20101123_AAAIZI jaiswal_l_Page_045.tif
7e79260b271cb4c95321037ef8733a52
bccbb0df1e3fc4bfe76c403793945fbb6de2b46d
F20101123_AAAIYU jaiswal_l_Page_055.tif
72278d87786c92ce7142cb036da2ed2d
42c751f6bc503391c7f467da386ab645622d77a5
38507 F20101123_AAAICA jaiswal_l_Page_037.jp2
5a778b90c5389496a01fea22821b20a0
9524c755a1a427e89147b8adbae450d8b0b2010f
689578 F20101123_AAAJFC jaiswal_l_Page_116.jp2
bec09f94ac68735468fee34e41d7edc5
356d0a4380de70c56a0f068e692e27b33a36554a
538747 F20101123_AAAJEP jaiswal_l_Page_091.jp2
84f16a8fcc388bca43bcc5ead7126b70
c43930de7da937c0560be520de05ec9430f07a3c
39309 F20101123_AAAIZJ jaiswal_l_Page_043.pro
628d33ec0816350cb737600667d8bc2d
ec0bfe7f490e51360c784675c2bf581ca909b602
F20101123_AAAICB jaiswal_l_Page_123.tif
d050f89912a6cad9d5d5bdb6c5bec569
9b12ba644527810e6cb7924f5e4768f7f9ca39fa
558818 F20101123_AAAJFD jaiswal_l_Page_117.jp2
3833c9fc8d48d1a44c6dafc7f87c239c
3a98d17f230ae31f283d6c601c60dd9e2399b91b
F20101123_AAAJEQ jaiswal_l_Page_092.jp2
28a704148849dd375620478b37eb06a3
854ed249cd8e520125a02296d58a4e03966f6135
273993 F20101123_AAAIZK UFE0011900_00001.xml
005c5236bae0efd10a3749bbbcc11c2a
e79729debe50ce953e6ed30d091912b7ba16e4fa
2031 F20101123_AAAIYV jaiswal_l_Page_042.txt
170f7ecf7413d5e61a93445da5004cb6
31553ff3e90ae54f27013c6be73a2a53e129fefa
39387 F20101123_AAAICC jaiswal_l_Page_163.pro
8009bcbed780f91a12320d0cab3481c6
fd92f1a754b90c606a915e38819c2971bca0450c
83914 F20101123_AAAJFE jaiswal_l_Page_122.jp2
e28ce2f7e469bc82ca12a9225d276781
c998d3d041cd7b20302cbcff7635780a3c66af51
682088 F20101123_AAAJER jaiswal_l_Page_094.jp2
d57ce046858a7c01ebfcb67887544f0a
b2bbae0dc62ba49a264c12d66fff24e73e7d4e67
1051953 F20101123_AAAIYW jaiswal_l_Page_139.jp2
fb7739651fd4ad36009c5799ca671a04
1e61dd238f550b84fa9fde6bc9ff83b3e616cf08
25265604 F20101123_AAAICD jaiswal_l_Page_070.tif
cc0702fcdea0839174844ec91f579d46
131eebc78b0a6a870c0171e9854c7d7603e7003e
104505 F20101123_AAAJFF jaiswal_l_Page_125.jp2
9050db5dbb721ed1d8ee957b932c81ce
4f4bf84a580814fd6626ea33d08684af9a1fd385
29664 F20101123_AAAJES jaiswal_l_Page_097.jp2
80cd642aaa04a0f0c8588020d9a4a816
9714acb0a450e99a2e6050edfba92f04d7e9c61c
38329 F20101123_AAAIYX jaiswal_l_Page_015.pro
7ab8c254b38888b40b59fbef9d93e70c
d2e93b030b2c7890dfd3b8355934a6d41c8baf73
F20101123_AAAICE jaiswal_l_Page_009.tif
fc51c9d77f21ecc1a2686133799115ef
2024e23e917a5d221353fc3f315e0a61bdb66d44
74514 F20101123_AAAJFG jaiswal_l_Page_126.jp2
847410b009f92207e472a42e0ca366e8
bb581c157da8c305b67c27fbf90077e48f5215fc
65709 F20101123_AAAJET jaiswal_l_Page_098.jp2
7033e27a302ab355e83254a210da799b
9925bc833abccd100721e6f3e1f6a817eadf92c3
68606 F20101123_AAAIZN jaiswal_l_Page_004.jpg
7820ecce9704dc3c11e59b675d302f5d
45f98055deb57839a739c88508d1739ee19cef0a
F20101123_AAAIYY jaiswal_l_Page_036.tif
07c69bbfb7185a9e5c34dfae9ea318d8
5076402ee12bf9c44894241bb3cea0bac8e77c67
2762 F20101123_AAAICF jaiswal_l_Page_176thm.jpg
34bedb9a4dc6f009a62621b029dfd5a6
74454f26624696cdbf00f290fe49ae1009604ee0
113471 F20101123_AAAJFH jaiswal_l_Page_129.jp2
229608bd29db5b10cc0fd01a027d885d
a5f20c96c334b1a5b5a992ed807c8d7e3e2dc8ae
30055 F20101123_AAAIBS jaiswal_l_Page_064.pro
35feb1222074e7d8abddce9129dd3bea
48320242608933d2e61b79f41ec3857d1515bf47
90153 F20101123_AAAJEU jaiswal_l_Page_100.jp2
6913877cacc3900263fce16b531633b6
feda1c92dbef9c5beeca6e673e55d4d6d01426cb
103025 F20101123_AAAIZO jaiswal_l_Page_005.jpg
fc45d119199dce98465a45ad879e8d04
04a447cbe8d91aeb9263b2e19e0b3997cceec3e0
107102 F20101123_AAAIYZ jaiswal_l_Page_040.jp2
dd4b352d0af1337aeae95206430cd217
8c7f2665e09365fbec99f3d3aa925b4a217d78d9
F20101123_AAAICG jaiswal_l_Page_076.tif
7c30ed5fa76cc12c9b86060f0c286f6e
331fb9f9708870af2c2b96d2cbf143901bf547a1
1051970 F20101123_AAAJFI jaiswal_l_Page_130.jp2
17e7625f3ccfc501043d0e0d60c191cb
d1da1b90638b9cf6d76fa158bf39b6c92361151d
43703 F20101123_AAAIBT jaiswal_l_Page_080.pro
4a32b590ae24316b1b3c0559ec6339a7
e454732612c374af5fcf7e3bc0e45ce235338d67
82900 F20101123_AAAJEV jaiswal_l_Page_102.jp2
600981444f785ad87c74d06abc473e1d
3b8253bafbe9d22e6196e30b42c3874128faab52
148548 F20101123_AAAIZP jaiswal_l_Page_006.jpg
978b018d5f4f6bbbd7fc5980ad15c08f
a2986df5a1b5f84c94ca326560fc2cf888df7776
7430 F20101123_AAAICH jaiswal_l_Page_079thm.jpg
a5354dbad717d7c6ce8dbe94084757ff
2381508959ad51885bbf42c37b80e87581f0e5e6
40740 F20101123_AAAJFJ jaiswal_l_Page_131.jp2
bb51b6a0f0d0461825b40f8db084552f
8ff83f8ca1a7ea3368c336fbb71ab0d75ac651c5
7453 F20101123_AAAIBU jaiswal_l_Page_077thm.jpg
1a1037677dab603c12225c103f53baac
d213c8491b7a7376c975dee6346a9dd2543013e3
96395 F20101123_AAAJEW jaiswal_l_Page_103.jp2
e45b655bdd7055b9bd89b0f7e1c3531b
e2ac12fb0485a2b2452a3983e8a6c69214f786ca
131506 F20101123_AAAIZQ jaiswal_l_Page_007.jpg
9bccf47ea3d4d5de69f31c80b7ba4444
df05e7475b1387c4ddfe3130ca4402bb16071349
478 F20101123_AAAICI jaiswal_l_Page_153.txt
7628f056f4b1e34574400bd489f0a2e4
ef6e9767294eecb826a2ed5e17cc00599dc5b900
566969 F20101123_AAAJFK jaiswal_l_Page_133.jp2
fbc4c32fc8b292599f4d68232425d539
3023e42b6d4a8f47316f382b58cc8d8d8f0329cc
490957 F20101123_AAAJGA jaiswal_l_Page_167.jp2
3776a3de1e71c7f9ac4a9db5d5182f4b
1b0c2e00ab0f2dcf5b5ed2038e8468f9cd7c64e3
88087 F20101123_AAAIBV jaiswal_l_Page_121.jp2
2dffd614ec04b4454447b1c3a30b436b
c2aac7cd6640f770424f0a916d8cf5a4a5910c5f
36466 F20101123_AAAJEX jaiswal_l_Page_104.jp2
5ff335f28f67423f6281a4dc2a2d71c3
7948374f82045d58a17b09ba1753ef91010fec05
110231 F20101123_AAAIZR jaiswal_l_Page_011.jpg
0049a9ef9c078cdc16775e70aef59b1c
25229fa2dbe43b82adcd0186e348639063822dc3
47018 F20101123_AAAICJ jaiswal_l_Page_026.pro
b999c051fffd50ae624584cf42c836ad
51d452ab4ec88c94282650503ea1633b1541a77f
101483 F20101123_AAAJFL jaiswal_l_Page_136.jp2
4361812d26ac536301e5e8b63cf3349d
6f9b733b94a0bcb6233e16a71073d89fd3073bae
817452 F20101123_AAAJGB jaiswal_l_Page_168.jp2
586cda383ccded5f77a2957fff3d8121
9424e42572c292ccd697cbdf1077ab1dd3d5011b
6360 F20101123_AAAIBW jaiswal_l_Page_177.jpg
5474a442defe20d323681608f3dfb839
df053ce910b7cf59a0f61bbe793a3d851ac1afb0
723451 F20101123_AAAJEY jaiswal_l_Page_105.jp2
c8eab2ce821f4951cc22383344d53c64
e1c4aa8c6cd51a0a9a02b5fed9655d0b69dcf3b9
54846 F20101123_AAAIZS jaiswal_l_Page_014.jpg
c6c3366fad9eb207ad4640caec21c9ee
6d137168e8e63cd3a6a0e2fa1ad13dfb3e45af16
85830 F20101123_AAAICK jaiswal_l_Page_128.jpg
722a85c0d78f2185800e3c8a5022ba76
6645bd909cd06668aa556b73bb5728fade6afbe3
119268 F20101123_AAAJFM jaiswal_l_Page_141.jp2
ee465ce99312d933fe84cb7f874b01ae
27039ee7caa47a0b55b8dac50d88e7ce5c9744bd
F20101123_AAAIBX jaiswal_l_Page_056.tif
f8d1220bd25c2d101414466071c7304e
92ee4bd0f6ac0f1963c6ebe9224a1e47b2721a78
963023 F20101123_AAAJEZ jaiswal_l_Page_107.jp2
f80ab5c528b13dbda3fd930223ef8b89
6c2b2b18c194670a335e7d9c494184c8f2db4445
87292 F20101123_AAAIZT jaiswal_l_Page_017.jpg
cfe8fd2b78c0272571b7fd4c8804a3ed
4a375d86a6105270edadeff1b328517edaf64753
27608 F20101123_AAAICL jaiswal_l_Page_128.QC.jpg
4dfe9d9f641beb32bdb08259cec693bc
9ae8e2398d7679ed5929e93f2fd863006ac63a20
73140 F20101123_AAAJFN jaiswal_l_Page_142.jp2
a0dcbc376479f22e71e0fecf11d9fd51
7d7395cc74a48f3087ac66e729d3e1ba09e14642
727249 F20101123_AAAJGC jaiswal_l_Page_170.jp2
088528d18d8fdeb18eb5476d9b8da136
e47ef603c963b5617857ef4c6c113cc8a9d8c9b4
F20101123_AAAIBY jaiswal_l_Page_058.tif
64015d81fe42fb2e729a8a7e5a4d9b55
c9b42b558d36e1cca13433ded7fcb4f9c8094267
90219 F20101123_AAAIZU jaiswal_l_Page_018.jpg
c343ee079858f03ef4379969491fa8a9
a744e57a6dd57eaaab08300fcda3270d28543a8e
27472 F20101123_AAAIDA jaiswal_l_Page_018.QC.jpg
10c0fa66437ef6a1898a07cabf88600c
2d33db47c575fd082c8d84a1a32a4838a06eba1b
F20101123_AAAICM jaiswal_l_Page_034.tif
0b5cf2887fc6272931d26d3f5a05d262
30f6f381271ab6badc94cf775b8d9808736bfb93
55004 F20101123_AAAJFO jaiswal_l_Page_146.jp2
b9125215b0af449ceecd8c9ba4c11943
e7852491216523aeb80c998df996e7cd3c4ff80c
9889 F20101123_AAAJGD jaiswal_l_Page_171.jp2
77433b999bd5e9a79d6e0f683be5ab7b
d30c626fdde7e08323d511db670ab831193eca98
1514 F20101123_AAAIBZ jaiswal_l_Page_086.txt
7a1d5035f99b4ea07bf64c310e2ee8c3
6cf877bd3696ad1eb438e2436461772c11569eb0
85747 F20101123_AAAIZV jaiswal_l_Page_019.jpg
9598518d143e1b93ef23ad7a939f7087
32a5f7b08d05b93181629e0e2976e024bfa453f3
10319 F20101123_AAAIDB jaiswal_l_Page_172.QC.jpg
4213af7a60be799a45a5ad6c1d7735a8
4ea906dc0999ec4d88e1f28c4f60fdd12f8236d7
293465 F20101123_AAAICN jaiswal_l_Page_174.jp2
5e7505f3b7b87c1a81c6cb8aa0de6d73
145f27dd2bf5ea277cf7426ea97b10a11013a263
726737 F20101123_AAAJFP jaiswal_l_Page_147.jp2
5ddd03cdfcbf55707f4f399f68e60d9d
2ec8338fa2454aa58bb4b1c402e86828f18779ec
606661 F20101123_AAAJGE jaiswal_l_Page_173.jp2
67493925944dfec3cdfb2b67c46e3025
956688cbf58491ae6c4df29a2743a240ecd36e01
6044 F20101123_AAAIDC jaiswal_l_Page_004thm.jpg
eed6444b85640a37d52452820cafb3ef
762d906652e01a1d1992b35a8e99ccc2e874e7f9
91951 F20101123_AAAICO jaiswal_l_Page_143.jpg
78ab23e699df26df1bd51066712eeacf
2bc18999b0b00f39ed1d790d19849cdcc4f5cbf9
356752 F20101123_AAAJFQ jaiswal_l_Page_151.jp2
2cf06be6118a3d1ab8f233ae92324e75
c151d39366885fa96c376ed655fb661bd9c83b12
7306 F20101123_AAAJGF jaiswal_l_Page_177.jp2
42e07b849e8b5afe554c9c1a0b58c661
56a20485c425a39caf8434e5beab730125dc7a89
90060 F20101123_AAAIZW jaiswal_l_Page_021.jpg
a3361539db615e1a245a4c02a55ddc61
7ab193c41419fee8dfb22e51d18c9cf68115a2d0
F20101123_AAAIDD jaiswal_l_Page_174.tif
2c7e806f9dbd0e2dfea4c431a8ec8080
ba9261cbf05f2d17da52c990b364e631845c9870
7541 F20101123_AAAICP jaiswal_l_Page_119thm.jpg
f5c2ef3bab2fa98c7ead65c91b022efd
4fe2fa7d4d2f2b4ca812710d7bb4dea4f1676210
381093 F20101123_AAAJFR jaiswal_l_Page_152.jp2
15c2d969a2a6b3f76865de8cfd5d404b
51bdb55d7dcb115115dddc70ab3cb3d1ce2d62c8
35107 F20101123_AAAJGG jaiswal_l_Page_179.jp2
7e7dc6b744ce4b2995fbe8791d28387a
80e414c60a31b8d666d6e3e7f65abae1961e11bf
93061 F20101123_AAAIZX jaiswal_l_Page_023.jpg
fc99a43d6e7faa7e987af80e87efe2ff
957262e7dc98c0d30208618f311b9632280eb89c
104549 F20101123_AAAIDE jaiswal_l_Page_148.jp2
b8f62da828f0f1eeef89bfcdc03687f1
a2590320276d8e6e689b3714abf375044cb232de
F20101123_AAAICQ jaiswal_l_Page_069.tif
b74f5804634968b3a1c0a0b03505e311
f29a516fc8bfe33415d838b552478b370c354ab1
377374 F20101123_AAAJFS jaiswal_l_Page_153.jp2
e5ee018db66478d2b16d2c6e281086ee
2cbc5be0e06140525c5f1e8c78564f071be230f9
F20101123_AAAJGH jaiswal_l_Page_181.jp2
0b2601b42ed90a6a56ee0c46e2b7f4e9
25d8c23ca544c66fd30804004249adda508bff17
94798 F20101123_AAAIZY jaiswal_l_Page_024.jpg
604aa7d92dc6027a05a67e33e75b9048
f08da1dad5010a7d354ae441fb4a17a8eb6f3fbf
84699 F20101123_AAAIDF jaiswal_l_Page_155.jpg
dce84ad781c7e50e744ba5cbc09b1a2c
98c5d6f1a83da959caf32ad22fc4204e9b5f2a24
26260 F20101123_AAAICR jaiswal_l_Page_084.pro
3fede33451baa224c293d923dfbf27ef
6b9ed2b25e9e039247a319b250d76c0ee724fb37
851205 F20101123_AAAJFT jaiswal_l_Page_155.jp2
1751b7aa98512656f855abf8a540664d
0315b7626a4640ea107ee5a1833a27c22bb26c36
35255 F20101123_AAAJGI jaiswal_l_Page_182.jp2
7d0d47ec16479ce356bdd29c923639f5
cd4ea91f22f140ba9c35e5af88bfc274385e2dd8
95323 F20101123_AAAIZZ jaiswal_l_Page_025.jpg
bf1bbad03e98c5a1ba530e77110bf65c
ca3f3692700ac2d9a65cfba60f46bd1f66eed00a
14008 F20101123_AAAIDG jaiswal_l_Page_104.QC.jpg
f5c4dce603020ffd7d7ed1c5d8617af1
46014246dfc882ebfb9b32c242a87ae6abcbf9aa
22449 F20101123_AAAICS jaiswal_l_Page_167.pro
85a60c30de63d0ef3673e2cd34c6c2e9
78f28b8d3486ad30164871b424a1386498e982a9
66530 F20101123_AAAJFU jaiswal_l_Page_156.jp2
bb0fccc799357fa7b29abf5b3e769990
a505101021a6c9c2deb72e1ccd218bf1af4cbbc7
F20101123_AAAJGJ jaiswal_l_Page_003.tif
5c639120afe61706e19964a14b5400c6
d005a3f8f5d2f6ed7b276b9fadc472341cd89d8f
3065 F20101123_AAAIDH jaiswal_l_Page_005.txt
c922c7373e5af18d9fd5746a7ef30c33
1046628fa8cc40cc7fb18beee2abe34061149e4c
96001 F20101123_AAAICT jaiswal_l_Page_143.jp2
66e95f171ac1b06cf5553f81eeda5797
d6553a830a74beeab2dbd639f9f6c6f056025453
847514 F20101123_AAAJFV jaiswal_l_Page_157.jp2
32027f1e62df75f98e55d974f0cd9b89
c351b85fd6511573199cd756864c299f5f8390c6
F20101123_AAAJGK jaiswal_l_Page_004.tif
e29889c0e9731ac42d6ed6b134a35412
8f04ce741743be98fd1b5ad4c654dec0510b46bb
16621 F20101123_AAAIDI jaiswal_l_Page_120.jp2
4806769cd2983b82867ef95b81fcc048
21ad5f8af791814fc864fd3a229c22087b217d74
15244 F20101123_AAAICU jaiswal_l_Page_109.pro
d2234ee2f6dadf522f1a9f1b5ed65e61
7f178bb6bc9d03d3763f52c9029e5cdbfa806c43
369968 F20101123_AAAJFW jaiswal_l_Page_160.jp2
9031dc64510efdd75c07250fa54447cd
3a6108ec1c0dc4bbe9f00dd8425999a2ee505f1f
F20101123_AAAJHA jaiswal_l_Page_044.tif
40834d62e23f2b396794e9e1d8bf07d7
c7f83f7d0d16c491c789b8eaba8461fb23b1149e
F20101123_AAAJGL jaiswal_l_Page_006.tif
0c1a89b1642ca6e0e27e640a52cea617
12df82a323e436d3a8cbb86756ab1dab8e6fae0a
26727 F20101123_AAAIDJ jaiswal_l_Page_061.QC.jpg
a3c97fe21948d7f1c929b8dafdb85b94
7381b606b65837840c8cee45d1e7b54774fec289
102445 F20101123_AAAICV jaiswal_l_Page_073.jpg
bc2f3eff9ecdecd10a5cecbb53ef6646
0989625ca8fb57b6808a46e10925390768c6778f
1051967 F20101123_AAAJFX jaiswal_l_Page_163.jp2
df2dd8bd18bef7a8cc02889e99b72ccb
8b6ea8f401ff083265a32d8fc713af2829141bb8
F20101123_AAAJHB jaiswal_l_Page_047.tif
036513a382c06ff5e67336de2d237f05
9603260968d2f8bd5ceb34c97359d0cabfcbb0da
F20101123_AAAJGM jaiswal_l_Page_008.tif
12ef78e1b66fe2d5bed16258565e4be4
e9a71e8da70e9d25a40526fec8bc8b9ee420cf7b
780985 F20101123_AAAJFY jaiswal_l_Page_165.jp2
59d4579eb3082d6fb868d7cdf1980d67
857dece72e5228ababae9de444dd0cf417873de4
8099 F20101123_AAAIDK jaiswal_l_Page_080thm.jpg
f3fc25f30bc4544660fbdbfe90bc3fd1
7a4ed1f51bca3baddda2e71f5d2f6b876b8caf1a
882942 F20101123_AAAICW jaiswal_l_Page_079.jp2
824ef345091b80d6b260633d374798be
6f51d7ea7d58b2f1b031f294757d90e21a190ac3
F20101123_AAAJHC jaiswal_l_Page_049.tif
7382d942ec1a97e6497fdfd8008914d0
9684a0afa9b57f32bf188c1c2f0dc172059cc263
F20101123_AAAJGN jaiswal_l_Page_012.tif
d923df950eb2a8ce12838ba6795ead44
32546a05a4b5801e849eaf530a311cb4cf372ea0
798663 F20101123_AAAJFZ jaiswal_l_Page_166.jp2
821d563e4e9c3638002c088f898d0412
3d74bc229d44fb73f993369e74aa549c2cf18c45
1924 F20101123_AAAIEA jaiswal_l_Page_148.txt
c209321cf95011eba660edd16d66bf39
4cae286dadb9476b00d14011aa371af502f3ed01
81066 F20101123_AAAIDL jaiswal_l_Page_016.jpg
e7ca00bcb3725488c2e4010cd57864f3
576eb88f6adf73771ba3e9476595235733f05776
F20101123_AAAICX jaiswal_l_Page_163.tif
f049d4e6e6d657710382a815ba14f00d
e06188c055de8868f76bc9d2ce9b52c3689d71b0
F20101123_AAAJGO jaiswal_l_Page_013.tif
47f5d5e2fa44c47992e825706910c74b
c6d9578a24f1f9c7f6a0912ecd34f9fd0d29ff26
69320 F20101123_AAAIDM jaiswal_l_Page_013.pro
e9b47621816dd75b0a63028e92903126
38cd1cb3b0514bf9aa30583eb94560575acf6f68
7457 F20101123_AAAICY jaiswal_l_Page_093thm.jpg
8c9ffa490506f96b3538827482cffb29
e90afc8ce5ed3da8da20f94e08d16b31196ba972
F20101123_AAAJHD jaiswal_l_Page_051.tif
22deb0ab2c802937d4802ac2c641e8d1
9c70956f9b677185ac4a09bfcbb992da3a39f780
F20101123_AAAJGP jaiswal_l_Page_015.tif
5b39022dd505ab21e6dcd9dbdc42d098
987810c337320b61f17eb3d14c2aea1efea4a19f
4700 F20101123_AAAIEB jaiswal_l_Page_002.jpg
b9931e1b9d13dcb6ffeb6cae8db40eba
7df305025d0abc0f3d69f1070f3eaf956c398d40
1583 F20101123_AAAIDN jaiswal_l_Page_002.QC.jpg
4bfa8192c896f2bdedad150c62a9ed9c
7eb44129548fb0a071d976821b508f6769f3ddb4
21947 F20101123_AAAICZ jaiswal_l_Page_044.QC.jpg
7cb43303a30785c618ba4a6e4715b59e
a149d41a0f9249f151d92ad76bad535074fb3c84
F20101123_AAAJHE jaiswal_l_Page_053.tif
b39c426031a0dd2bcc92ef6a8f6fe3bb
a2ab78885373b9cbbb2c65743325bb151097b0ff
F20101123_AAAJGQ jaiswal_l_Page_018.tif
796bcf0e2974fb9a9b243fd6c5b533a8
e4e53bbc3f0d423506ab076a7144c50c529e37cc
7821 F20101123_AAAIEC jaiswal_l_Page_084thm.jpg
3547950d68e77bc22fb2ecc887b0f3b3
ab097723f8996338d52837c9e74477de66657653
1051983 F20101123_AAAIDO jaiswal_l_Page_138.jp2
aa7404090f653f1fd696d9359ae97842
aaeaf885bbd37a46ff91391739699d1d2f1a0644
F20101123_AAAJHF jaiswal_l_Page_054.tif
8a15db286d9c0702871ba78e0b408be3
1c69b9a95786e4675e87f6dd48ee27825167d17f
F20101123_AAAJGR jaiswal_l_Page_020.tif
f23a8f2cb93dea549a0725e39e5749e7
4aff379935124125f7c17422f40f875315907f74
F20101123_AAAIED jaiswal_l_Page_039.tif
8408048eddd79937d72b8a298f4d9cce
4cbc6594bd20ebe5702605b767d131f244f57b40
630 F20101123_AAAIDP jaiswal_l_Page_183.txt
cdf100fbe02d6229263fbf7f953ed2e6
1956ce18b89fde9cc7951aa000d3ec3835467eae
F20101123_AAAJHG jaiswal_l_Page_057.tif
00fc481df237b7651c4848d4beaf0391
e730f8f1d95d1f44b3c4bef26e144b1f89e0aff9
F20101123_AAAJGS jaiswal_l_Page_023.tif
2a29e4235e3442c37dc5764ea3f30801
e380caf82642ea2dbd4d93f188250dfc3788baa0
11119 F20101123_AAAIEE jaiswal_l_Page_091.QC.jpg
567fad13e0a5dcfc4d14744ffe9e3565
3f5507642e292a76608aa4cd3c11d6b1bef15039
111 F20101123_AAAIDQ jaiswal_l_Page_002.txt
ab1985d3cf19fc1a2156a6192ae97f29
32adb827fa2065009ebd451fc44e54ba7804f429
F20101123_AAAJHH jaiswal_l_Page_059.tif
bfdf4906a697eb026e23d5cd8b7fa164
40ade63646b30394bb574906977630e446f72f99
F20101123_AAAJGT jaiswal_l_Page_026.tif
348e30c1ddd732addf58896da0bb6505
7c08f365e3383f8d9aa5d7fd2708432c6ffb705a
1051956 F20101123_AAAIEF jaiswal_l_Page_009.jp2
d097f54d6f28e0c042a012c9ceff46e6
02f7c9f8b385285e431e221ba8ea6c971e6b7b58
88693 F20101123_AAAIDR jaiswal_l_Page_137.jp2
2a4c383a19219d9d78a39b360c735deb
f1e636c1d127560abdbb3a7ce813d32f82dd674d
F20101123_AAAJHI jaiswal_l_Page_061.tif
7a5b04757f337ed5d0d299a1a30a4d01
dd38b4fdeb25907659ddc7675a4c3b1b779e2640
F20101123_AAAJGU jaiswal_l_Page_029.tif
079f1aad6f5e6eb6ac009e82094fd221
bafb775e9499956c658e0eae4b232b9066817579
802762 F20101123_AAAIEG jaiswal_l_Page_093.jp2
7bb3891574f8296ca3493b01547da141
7b724ffb610a6daa703d600e0f058cb67415f605
6671 F20101123_AAAIDS jaiswal_l_Page_056thm.jpg
ffb744adeafcb0bd0b7bafe322b011ad
4e88c35d1171c5f37b46cd3a89a81bdcc2a4fc9e
F20101123_AAAJHJ jaiswal_l_Page_062.tif
3efccc3850c7aebc0229e9a1c9e4ca58
8e3e593c62ddd91f15a3e6739a83da86137e044c
F20101123_AAAJGV jaiswal_l_Page_031.tif
2b3ce2b22ffb0405d14b3af311723dc3
b74ee8fc8fc3de5bec38b491969abaa99efe7bbf
19086 F20101123_AAAIEH jaiswal_l_Page_150.QC.jpg
259855efdf2bd6a08835c994a7029a5d
af6e3477245b08a392442c068abc299d43e8497f
25464 F20101123_AAAIDT jaiswal_l_Page_084.QC.jpg
6492e0a87fac62ccb675d4d6cc2e8e46
e8b0e269b4271637ce9eef37545be13d329a054e
F20101123_AAAJHK jaiswal_l_Page_064.tif
4d29602e1139575deb652afdc3eb8a6b
203ada6ed78463df23d9d594419254480ce869c6
F20101123_AAAJGW jaiswal_l_Page_035.tif
ec3e3f47f423042603536cc337110748
6da470a48f4055c99f8643f6951d664da8643f07
7889 F20101123_AAAIEI jaiswal_l_Page_012thm.jpg
1f2b7f8c292de219da8274a072d97bdb
eeb8f37d0d42c3d528c5d0d029333b43911d52cc
101484 F20101123_AAAIDU jaiswal_l_Page_052.jp2
633bd046b573205c67e6171dc33d37cc
5b0433aaa4237101e926978182eb4686b400382b
F20101123_AAAJIA jaiswal_l_Page_105.tif
d52e8dc42872c87cc7a812adc92362be
e68365884c72b6923b783cdba95c8ab8063e54cf
F20101123_AAAJHL jaiswal_l_Page_073.tif
8f6dc9aa2d564106b821a711b511f29b
5659e1b91a8af1a613e0a254d66f9936ba4c67f1
F20101123_AAAJGX jaiswal_l_Page_038.tif
1b81ad2815a292849c50d6cf90ea6d64
4436be64785344aa79d8731aa2c1fa33be868fb8
5559 F20101123_AAAIEJ jaiswal_l_Page_108thm.jpg
775d06f40c3a4cabb118c15704a3e410
79f0147d37bba25614f4c272161370ab58a55bc7
F20101123_AAAIDV jaiswal_l_Page_025.tif
01b5b4c6fe93ba4cdfedefa9b71c73b7
bb7ca1a428d225a415b90dd48d120447b60a9e35
F20101123_AAAJIB jaiswal_l_Page_108.tif
e662023d47f092f8649b09ccbf624b10
3247d32c8183b361b48b4d0b927fb512b28ba6a2
F20101123_AAAJHM jaiswal_l_Page_075.tif
766a99ad27febfe59b2b3a770594bb51
4404509139378573b794a9a3474a05bee9790163
F20101123_AAAJGY jaiswal_l_Page_040.tif
ce518961163ca48ca463182b4032269c
6608e99dbb60e4ed8643b536c70fa314bdead4bc
400 F20101123_AAAIEK jaiswal_l_Page_104.txt
01bf25f09699e31478ede39b24de0519
f02ce2463b560dbaae01d05aa88dcdd80da18db5
25121 F20101123_AAAIDW jaiswal_l_Page_075.QC.jpg
6464e63b8b244d4de0e96f15393f1191
59e1f25ee717726a4307afe51832920eff5b40cc
F20101123_AAAJIC jaiswal_l_Page_110.tif
0c9733e81825c869a6d79820834c5fb5
f0c83d1138fbc6bb3fccea2aa5c2243ed5e81e33
F20101123_AAAJHN jaiswal_l_Page_080.tif
91c003b310d73df1f6254d5954676d0b
a79766a0e22857f30ae4a9a8470a302d0bf75498
F20101123_AAAJGZ jaiswal_l_Page_043.tif
1e634c797171a6b7ee6e383ea6920b78
7a4be4434247c5e2e7a5e0345cf8846c709c3801
4858 F20101123_AAAIEL jaiswal_l_Page_020thm.jpg
739ea6290961d54a880b5441a3daff96
4fe0c1dd8e3bf4ec1d24f8bf46513f9ac3ebc25a
2768 F20101123_AAAIDX jaiswal_l_Page_149thm.jpg
8dc774715aabfbd57ea7db07850cb1ce
243b292df427500405911329e5b211fbbf32a921
101064 F20101123_AAAIFA jaiswal_l_Page_009.jpg
ce69e7c38ad5eeb581e578f8bdf08e36
b1b016ebc498c639405bf576c968e727237eb814
F20101123_AAAJID jaiswal_l_Page_112.tif
de3f777a6728e0bee45e784e87da3963
d473b5eb1c871a90448ae96044386bd36a8451e0
F20101123_AAAJHO jaiswal_l_Page_081.tif
ccfcc69c2db2bbf5a02e7edeafd623d1
9ea5b059e79fe78e0c5d147bcce54d4a3ae62086
139 F20101123_AAAIEM jaiswal_l_Page_138.txt
62b096e49116735312e59f384d24c3e3
f02fbb5cb8d610e5d6acd4d6e78caf1087cd040d
31163 F20101123_AAAIDY jaiswal_l_Page_095.pro
457e608921ae00466fc9e28379865528
7e79f69444232641776ced5680d5226fce8bd284
24795 F20101123_AAAIFB jaiswal_l_Page_001.jp2
33419663d728019904d8e8be1764006c
fad7eaa91f79c16907c7e2242a606ce5ac62c4e0
F20101123_AAAJHP jaiswal_l_Page_084.tif
6aead92a1098d442bd1271cd474b171c
ac436c5468303544c1bde5fe45e3d277632bd350
648695 F20101123_AAAIDZ jaiswal_l_Page_075.jp2
6ead733f0e3a778518498c72c6d87636
50f34675d6d1ad45b0844e438f925dd4162d745e
89726 F20101123_AAAIEN jaiswal_l_Page_079.jpg
042927f40edc74c9e3f1ca06424f31df
23fd855e7bf5273e24758c0ba4b981ec1fd37a20
F20101123_AAAJIE jaiswal_l_Page_113.tif
fd995952dc15ad91338255152d2fecb9
60de71e39d046e29d5a3ca71a1d1549ad58da29f
F20101123_AAAJHQ jaiswal_l_Page_086.tif
0ac2b714592679cb809f553b7f37bd2f
c5ae66a5214b8a754444f7bd23fe6cecd25b38f7
55624 F20101123_AAAIFC jaiswal_l_Page_168.jpg
33f173f1d1a828e16c36b34210716c32
f7a365adc6ffc3eee2e1e3777378f153a970b9ba
30285 F20101123_AAAIEO jaiswal_l_Page_074.jpg
33740f40c7b3d7d19471bcae91dd7237
a6d7d06ad0da68ccc6fc31c53163a3780d390bfe
F20101123_AAAJIF jaiswal_l_Page_114.tif
a7b3a9637276eb2cfaec755cfbbb1b84
28d620b6d7994462f3e6cdb4112b4f80a9a46f7a
F20101123_AAAJHR jaiswal_l_Page_089.tif
ff5d0fbf5dc506246f696ba28dfcdfd6
9e76e454fdcd7bdd879c5f233b1729598c318447
8594 F20101123_AAAIFD jaiswal_l_Page_174.QC.jpg
6016012b269b8e0184e3168d638c55fb
245115a8dc3ace6d1905762749fc5c815d654583
9581 F20101123_AAAIEP jaiswal_l_Page_131.QC.jpg
8a697d97fb72e6916e4c835ec4d9823f
d26cf5e5b771ef39260749be8dacf5f1b5d5fd6d
F20101123_AAAJIG jaiswal_l_Page_116.tif
88c8adcfdc7b0acb108a935f0202475c
9d55b4fbdbc8a77c27ac40788be148d65beeda24
F20101123_AAAJHS jaiswal_l_Page_090.tif
a52ab423059ad60ab75f7652e4e90050
fa43c627cc187d6a680e16ef10e545ce04b4ccfc
5903 F20101123_AAAIFE jaiswal_l_Page_096thm.jpg
44abcaee02c33658e3abf068aa23ce71
c687d19ce8b494e5b473434c5ba81040868b2806
F20101123_AAAIEQ jaiswal_l_Page_155.tif
b9fe12072c88ce53b139a0b2da98a595
8159a618b9d4e9efc4879a4c6680e72cefeb01f7
F20101123_AAAJIH jaiswal_l_Page_117.tif
ccf1a35dbe222c10bfa4e3be11e203a4
7ebbfd96383de6341d790e7fa74491e17aaa9d27
F20101123_AAAJHT jaiswal_l_Page_091.tif
fe8ac398a02cd1687743dbfecccacc1c
bad703f903a8a6c5609fbfbeaf761df9b2903243
22929 F20101123_AAAIFF jaiswal_l_Page_008.pro
9333f8ba9ec5e2a55aec28b4f076fcd4
5517ef81fed96097a8e94b03135b2aac0d3b2b25
80875 F20101123_AAAIER jaiswal_l_Page_115.jpg
81bf18e5e18ee3c7cdcb9463578dcca8
f4795ae9e378392be30c47b51e65c8902996f105
F20101123_AAAJII jaiswal_l_Page_118.tif
b0ee249fd9a37147fb5df9da10105a86
370e684a89b3191eb3fa73e0ff733430a3f3de7b
F20101123_AAAJHU jaiswal_l_Page_092.tif
a89d434374146690e4463b1ad6d314bc
57e4c5fce533f5d8bbe4b6fe1859eb13a70096fe
22721 F20101123_AAAIFG jaiswal_l_Page_110.pro
81dd82d320f1fd1925b2eb9a5553e185
a71c45f5c1e835536450888242ecb64f20aba376
7077 F20101123_AAAIES jaiswal_l_Page_024thm.jpg
65c9b1128d076eff03c490e3ef69831a
30ac7fdb809de97ba02c1cf6c0f5e7ffbe9077fc
F20101123_AAAJIJ jaiswal_l_Page_119.tif
44ad61b5174a4481f21c44c826466ba7
942a150be0132c7929b2af300e7b95e0163cf26f
F20101123_AAAJHV jaiswal_l_Page_093.tif
2b7d476fbd4717df5bdfe64c81ad0d33
235b4a2ddd51a0408618c384e8f51ae7327ea705
1932 F20101123_AAAIFH jaiswal_l_Page_125.txt
6bcfc653db30a2efa999563ddd9f4e3f
184e3df5dd6142e55ca497d9c7ac85114b2289a2
27867 F20101123_AAAIET jaiswal_l_Page_017.QC.jpg
7c64fd5242ee56ca7b28c0ba1a3da57a
6e0e4fd0232fc7128c5e201af93ae1793b08585f
F20101123_AAAJIK jaiswal_l_Page_120.tif
d845d6729b1678cd2b33d735e4c6497a
546be0be9845b5799de3df1ec7067438101e68b5
F20101123_AAAJHW jaiswal_l_Page_095.tif
3be1393561932bb22034c8100be82e5a
2a4f9f68476aae887afa4320f6d5495cf45c473a
F20101123_AAAIFI jaiswal_l_Page_104.tif
9ce7fd254e43358db49658834193f0f2
7ac7a2fb07efafc566da2d91e36433a44bcd2240
54889 F20101123_AAAIEU jaiswal_l_Page_101.jp2
6a280f515ebf2eea7a93f321b9d94594
f28c5101bf22b85aa964178e5fe011f65b6e7dba
F20101123_AAAJJA jaiswal_l_Page_141.tif
8d85146ab50bc3f0ef8d801ab342584f
205e8f724b8c20b54c66ed20495e9015bdfe5172
F20101123_AAAJIL jaiswal_l_Page_121.tif
2a0e95c68a92b87b09a976de02a593d8
6941397da91af7aa9d3d5ab7f5e8e57215500396
F20101123_AAAJHX jaiswal_l_Page_098.tif
6795746e6c0cec3c30ff3dd5eca84246
a6408eb4159aa2a23f635214e10a53cc0bf364e1
2053 F20101123_AAAIFJ jaiswal_l_Page_022.txt
28e76f1080108920ca3ba6831bf0c1d4
1a45f8cc8ad5d72e10ff7dac518dd406b901e5d3
34577 F20101123_AAAIEV jaiswal_l_Page_149.jp2
4a8ab65eee5d463e7e41108b8a95c427
31ba4415aa880408535df81f2b5dd6b9da08ba5d
F20101123_AAAJJB jaiswal_l_Page_143.tif
b7ee28ceb851b0a29bf2affa98922aa3
64ad9a02c1570fe5f0f18e7d3f51cfe112555244
F20101123_AAAJIM jaiswal_l_Page_124.tif
9166f699283f9554b4286e77b3330637
c55eef62b830773f3476a39c1546b95bcab9d404
F20101123_AAAJHY jaiswal_l_Page_100.tif
b2ee4db2658ca6514b3c61c0f3a737fa
5f45330963bdcc387b645eab68aa7ee6301244f0
8648 F20101123_AAAIFK jaiswal_l_Page_078thm.jpg
80cac2503844c1332d639a8ff89425e5
1a4f80c3a122d3454e130284bbe3b4b1609b494f
1051979 F20101123_AAAIEW jaiswal_l_Page_013.jp2
25dc46b90fae069c83ce8f84d5abef76
beb314774b74e4f18f5fd2ccb5c282bb421e4f7a
F20101123_AAAJJC jaiswal_l_Page_147.tif
31529d4c6a16df29d6b45af39a472d0a
1be98fa7b8aa2813bdad978767c05beb8526afc0
F20101123_AAAJIN jaiswal_l_Page_125.tif
1b16bcfbbf6cf57a2e48e52b22bbc1da
c5420d92983ab1f4bce5e7443b6160eb2b54b813
F20101123_AAAJHZ jaiswal_l_Page_101.tif
6e10eca470cff86bba5631630e8118ca
b4a2c9228d4c0ed51e3d9d528b026cfaf53a7b7f
28697 F20101123_AAAIGA jaiswal_l_Page_098.pro
809351165c1b3f8dd82e30830a0876e9
bed497c3a0a3b836e92d44e22e5c4e0f3b175f39
1567 F20101123_AAAIFL jaiswal_l_Page_119.txt
c8f15fd0414d06e7fdc77c8b6e6eeb83
9b4f26255f51f1e6f6967654819ce16af301d8b3
7286 F20101123_AAAIEX jaiswal_l_Page_018thm.jpg
834ce907d12b00ed829b11710da74c1f
d950b04ad3f2c3921b835937064acd88a205b5a0
F20101123_AAAJJD jaiswal_l_Page_148.tif
eafbe583b99763d6883fe58226ca5b20
4917611ac8e607871fa2e410745c0f7da3424676
F20101123_AAAJIO jaiswal_l_Page_127.tif
c7177b4ae24093072f70508a93c26188
8fcd3ef4f925e986179e008ddc64fa4df8932116
655 F20101123_AAAIGB jaiswal_l_Page_182.txt
c29d884b7f24bcae3c6801f0f82a0462
cee294c6450b767fb974579c59f88535a25964e7
26387 F20101123_AAAIFM jaiswal_l_Page_115.QC.jpg
7c844cc1888e858d1038998e2072909b
61d8a393320e8b468796b1c95157b6a319a20503
2425 F20101123_AAAIEY jaiswal_l_Page_141.txt
98f337e452f41a10c4a206ad6ff05b63
ddf7d97dafd632aba7727a1beb48ec776c87be27
F20101123_AAAJJE jaiswal_l_Page_149.tif
26f98940f95020f58fa86530e07560f2
ff4f953d607c2129d2704278d4a6fcb74f6b28bf
F20101123_AAAJIP jaiswal_l_Page_128.tif
8d33cb1374bb09b1fb27c6164ecfae46
25df58f88d9900daa226274368da7f11fd8c4c5a
F20101123_AAAIGC jaiswal_l_Page_068.tif
3fa5de3e69bf3f6614d5a7a8424b4859
17d841a51bc5b2693f1125a1e26006bf3a836844
21870 F20101123_AAAIFN jaiswal_l_Page_059.QC.jpg
a0d694a31a83fa421356b564bb522db0
759caa379508044bc359e89546ed4ccd9eac6c59
7538 F20101123_AAAIEZ jaiswal_l_Page_115thm.jpg
4822db1a9291f9ec1e59c38caeabe29a
414d5b82e980bd90469bcb23fbadb207de992607
F20101123_AAAJIQ jaiswal_l_Page_129.tif
ecb09149c529c55cda4659b13a7ed5b9
e21bdd7164864779471b4d98383088b1bebc979f
34349 F20101123_AAAIFO jaiswal_l_Page_167.jpg
1a91f03f814be9343729750ced371e5a
519653fb4d3c651db9c0dfb80a1212d56fdd3a54
F20101123_AAAJJF jaiswal_l_Page_151.tif
c2f7af730d3fd3164a1795a30972892c
ef48acbaba99f7fa370fc5adbe1847814da7f7e8
F20101123_AAAJIR jaiswal_l_Page_130.tif
b16655625c2eba306dfe96db64d8bdd2
4a566d03eceae46d109ca1e18c3737af472a7250
8874 F20101123_AAAIGD jaiswal_l_Page_161.jp2
4f95f7f9b57f365aa1f9f86c46471bd3
09147e888359d919077c8c6fcc0d5bda58bfe4fe
818528 F20101123_AAAIFP jaiswal_l_Page_114.jp2
46173c3d3e8dcf096a5b69fcf9d27e48
0b017fafd8d4082c81334965460c3ed68c9d228d
F20101123_AAAJJG jaiswal_l_Page_152.tif
0fc70e2eb6a15f5769a4945149dfa637
9f6dba425607cc1886bbbfd2be416a35bdfbb5bd
F20101123_AAAJIS jaiswal_l_Page_131.tif
25072fcfa08579cb777556af0ec04b91
f166f81928efc684c895644799ed631131fb7e86
7164 F20101123_AAAIGE jaiswal_l_Page_083thm.jpg
81d08d495e8d6884c9fb0fa506b8710c
af7abc4d030a8311c6a052e789d2a6430ae1c5d6
2862 F20101123_AAAIFQ jaiswal_l_Page_012.txt
658d51c06991080c2632385a0fe6877c
7d9d23a016e3cbc5d815f1b15261171a1cf0c9b0
F20101123_AAAJJH jaiswal_l_Page_153.tif
b755ebc14f447c7856c17afdd2755fcc
8ab5d796a4e04f0894f520adea24373ef2684542
F20101123_AAAJIT jaiswal_l_Page_132.tif
d05d840f2923bb804950ef28438fe05a
d0d7bc1734fa93962a0735f2fef36fcfb35344d1
24279 F20101123_AAAIGF jaiswal_l_Page_087.QC.jpg
e8ac3d857e10fdd3a5b04549beeff110
1938fa95cc98ca633f557b59e94bc2e1a8ead202
F20101123_AAAIFR jaiswal_l_Page_028.tif
9da406b48cea42b805fb85417f09c1ba
47e17b5fabc872dc67fa77e738b001c64bdaaa02
F20101123_AAAJJI jaiswal_l_Page_154.tif
04d9ad4c4818ab9af8b001210340eac3
0d438ff55419b95dda385e8251977a18012929da
F20101123_AAAJIU jaiswal_l_Page_133.tif
1a0cae9ba5f424850f57fbffccdb2b20
3b0db9b37ebb942033f6f56e036260bb09c36b7b
87492 F20101123_AAAIGG jaiswal_l_Page_045.jp2
0010dc807faeec6191e1ffb4ee85a3ab
47066c952a87b7807dc2d7de9a43b5571fd437aa
12023 F20101123_AAAIFS jaiswal_l_Page_082.QC.jpg
18969d5d82f7dbec3bae8c3cf3dd230e
72bd5d74b4ff870453c747698d8d5019ce56ee4e
F20101123_AAAJJJ jaiswal_l_Page_156.tif
e413d3ea362ca0bf21fc7e8f4d290b4f
c777316a9c265463c1592ce4019c1a5d7bd35260
F20101123_AAAJIV jaiswal_l_Page_134.tif
0cc83296cfa0cdc96d4bcf93f7c54251
903ab06611a661fc4e84de891a5b9b05d4266e77
69435 F20101123_AAAIGH jaiswal_l_Page_005.pro
c4994d8eee9e012d48b787027e2d37f6
73bda2aebcb2d110af4ebc010c41d3c0efeaffe8
93463 F20101123_AAAIFT jaiswal_l_Page_033.jpg
80ca93a9b2f49c5fdd195944bb00e342
b84efedc10b278506e140481aed1d399776599f7
8423998 F20101123_AAAJJK jaiswal_l_Page_159.tif
8da8e79a62141ffcd9b10bac975b61bf
e37ace5415a61ac50f9c3f286d841e966cd73238
F20101123_AAAJIW jaiswal_l_Page_135.tif
38db2e2211518aa2d1ee32121ee6218a
194fc689f3c8f329d56b57fde5938ec9d4ae39dc
1923 F20101123_AAAIGI jaiswal_l_Page_036.txt
d10e5adc48c67f07b64dbc84addf7ff5
71ee65bb4261435fa23d0f30501b9a42608fa2a5
6328 F20101123_AAAIFU jaiswal_l_Page_048thm.jpg
9cc4c9f15c5091f8e8deda04d7855f72
3fc424809ca2a7ab46e8c2d491327f53539d700b
1353 F20101123_AAAJKA jaiswal_l_Page_003.pro
32e551bd82938647583724fc95eb4d2d
6d15ce6a3358a720cb983d0373258c0ad22dad5a
F20101123_AAAJJL jaiswal_l_Page_160.tif
1ec50782c3d4a153db4573a9b1cb888b
14cb44ae6ef1f040988fa61d12916b6cdd745934
F20101123_AAAJIX jaiswal_l_Page_136.tif
7a4da9f0a57d79bae18bf19df3eddf7f
9abadcdca93857a9f62670f7da6a031786746dcd
90070 F20101123_AAAIGJ jaiswal_l_Page_134.jp2
c994b3d06159e4ff758cad9acbb283cd
9f54e18626c4989fb4a877752421482ca996d6a2
14330 F20101123_AAAIFV jaiswal_l_Page_153.QC.jpg
5eafd09be6467b66cf52a30b2886dc46
04b2fddf76a9499c34fa11006b09430764f976b9
31768 F20101123_AAAJKB jaiswal_l_Page_004.pro
1721d41aab9c7646f8dc7f8b20ada553
c077a066ddc949269120f19c63925fe7c0eab889
F20101123_AAAJJM jaiswal_l_Page_161.tif
5349f174b34854c8794e3db12c5129bc
f3b7fa79041d57c9d85dfb3c4baf4fbf45d35827
F20101123_AAAJIY jaiswal_l_Page_137.tif
5a2337f069c49c02cbf75d2059bfbd35
03f50707906cfaaaac22eadb7c68b9038a75d53d
37008 F20101123_AAAIGK jaiswal_l_Page_099.pro
2745992e68a5c059dcdca8d3f0bf92a2
9e1ac6a7f09d2341cd203db7706544369aab89be
27951 F20101123_AAAIFW jaiswal_l_Page_077.QC.jpg
c19708aa8caa7d0ffd857b9e66244c4b
d842c85be3b891640bba0ddebc0baab9d6ada5e7
92403 F20101123_AAAJKC jaiswal_l_Page_007.pro
f93aa0766a55949c4fd9569876027ce0
0a682ff86d1e91a6331d6fdb6b99ea8deba21f4f
F20101123_AAAJJN jaiswal_l_Page_162.tif
f8812264ebf8574479f418665841318c
fb402f71441acfe9ab01aa1f321a1b646763cd2f
F20101123_AAAJIZ jaiswal_l_Page_138.tif
c831c2654579f894dd3d1410d4ba7e0f
692952d694e281af1f15253251573315328c6d9d
F20101123_AAAIGL jaiswal_l_Page_063.tif
d45917c4c883c05a4874b43399c09679
e3d07fd95ffee1044e245aab74e6d1ac950b86a1
34878 F20101123_AAAIFX jaiswal_l_Page_155.pro
cdb39fa993a31bb00bf46dfd55aa6f49
d9c243b58a02317acee6d4ef7840c8cb37991ded
26012 F20101123_AAAIHA jaiswal_l_Page_045.QC.jpg
63172910d12d1a400961b5c63146a82e
f3afda8c7943a11bb9f198311e503484f25df89f
56470 F20101123_AAAJKD jaiswal_l_Page_011.pro
987f6887f29ed572732959927f8c7a52
0e83b96fdabf7d6a7e502755bad0ade54abf55e7
F20101123_AAAJJO jaiswal_l_Page_165.tif
73030c9e561887e7c43987bf7ee61ea4
e29f1af64c6f45ae4c40cda09c01efbc8be831e1
6490 F20101123_AAAIGM jaiswal_l_Page_170thm.jpg
d0d2dcdb825a0d6c1cf04a4b345737fe
8f09a7f7ad31d61c431df696e6d17c88d408d040
35235 F20101123_AAAIFY jaiswal_l_Page_183.jp2
aeca375a09642d5405f2c14703caed67
73fe86c238a780f752bb7fe61393c779319e4f25
13979 F20101123_AAAIHB jaiswal_l_Page_165.QC.jpg
bb06c07a2e0c5855dc27913951c538a5
26c5d551029a016ef74946654b53d68c146e3f9f
72650 F20101123_AAAJKE jaiswal_l_Page_012.pro
891d85a787fd9db9ead795d258761954
3573c56e22886259e47153aed063a5c40e9de28a
F20101123_AAAJJP jaiswal_l_Page_166.tif
17a53b2dc67c87f14e59c98dbab1fe94
0f6050e87dabd0f68c38dc9e0c2a5541480ec4e0
97515 F20101123_AAAIGN jaiswal_l_Page_006.pro
e6800c121550483e3a04ccefd3099021
a30cf5bbe3e237f7baead471e480866933d63afb
28076 F20101123_AAAIFZ jaiswal_l_Page_035.QC.jpg
77b534a11304b8b481a9279c2fff96d9
461cd39f622fa3f98532fc1e461f93119be55651
33152 F20101123_AAAIHC jaiswal_l_Page_042.QC.jpg
e39a8c9b1fc3c6219ea2b2dabfd73971
655dfd49e9998772cd931c9f4229268b88d3b212
34778 F20101123_AAAJKF jaiswal_l_Page_014.pro
1c1097c1d1827b4fc208ec27a920a875
939cbb7e57bee46a9e45011b9469660b0496d076
F20101123_AAAJJQ jaiswal_l_Page_167.tif
3a3c1f3e1ae8b47e486c69d5b87bc091
29ad163b17208430b724dfb692b68629e1b2ed83
F20101123_AAAIGO jaiswal_l_Page_083.tif
898d782ce21e48a96c89879a431823ae
35f0932bf7d28beed4e27e32a5e783fcff9a7e52
110679 F20101123_AAAIHD jaiswal_l_Page_073.jp2
65464689b202f175abaeaf3f2753a1e8
6d9005f9229482674d931a2e947643cc838b7385
F20101123_AAAJJR jaiswal_l_Page_168.tif
fd6a2b05d37878e0eb97fa6b2a2e98b8
59de7fc41f748973efc963ec2de5990ca56149ff
71099 F20101123_AAAIGP jaiswal_l_Page_170.jpg
542b8a7f11f1d1e52dd2be882875ce01
ae1dde1c3eec1c503127d90640d51e6b9c39dcb6
38555 F20101123_AAAJKG jaiswal_l_Page_016.pro
5fe5b8787befd264da4e558c96774d97
6bb77664eae8006a16c95e32684ed842a46a37b6
F20101123_AAAJJS jaiswal_l_Page_169.tif
03aed4e74ffe93cdb93759cc16111855
b0a35389507462b32ee00e31ad580af5c2b45184
25103 F20101123_AAAIGQ jaiswal_l_Page_121.QC.jpg
e0f5f78eb6b07809d35624f9507f920b
16ba7f89d6487f5b720e499dff8d17e6c34201ee
98999 F20101123_AAAIHE jaiswal_l_Page_066.jp2
b5c364262868a601da9abb72d9b9f646
76a1c700a602115129da0623baa3c038cc444757
40104 F20101123_AAAJKH jaiswal_l_Page_019.pro
ffc80ac0f0c8e825e9ea2209b5f9bedb
8be0c1511ec19995062561b6f663d59ee559f333
F20101123_AAAJJT jaiswal_l_Page_170.tif
4de6e30e460ab8f1152ebb7766bfffd0
a957c0c3371d8d33c4fd53e4bc6d99ad1d96e2e5
67857 F20101123_AAAIGR jaiswal_l_Page_180.jpg
195ef26c084cbea4e8b6754b39bb7192
96c90ea5b11ddce080fe66a50878284d631c3baa
107894 F20101123_AAAIHF jaiswal_l_Page_031.jp2
2b0b8de6b3e7c3be8bc46b5cc54e5113
697a43b0996ed34eea6952f761063af513df5f34
42286 F20101123_AAAJKI jaiswal_l_Page_021.pro
4e20b903cf056e1ebd7cd1bd54510ebf
ad21e3fbbdcee7a3df89faf0eb76845c63c64a10
F20101123_AAAJJU jaiswal_l_Page_171.tif
f6103a0a63a61788c78059fa280d9272
48fa23bc9cf1643a0c5ca0afa74c0d3cbced456d
20702 F20101123_AAAIGS jaiswal_l_Page_094.QC.jpg
469fc64ac485bd474aef9a5a9d2fcc43
658248f9f459014654f7ae73db51bf1e51c3f77a
1706 F20101123_AAAIHG jaiswal_l_Page_015.txt
50f9db68edadc14163c1252a54d3105e
181184f24719a2ce32125363299fa4a7eb58467b
48174 F20101123_AAAJKJ jaiswal_l_Page_024.pro
8b3dbd68f400e8f14d7239ef5f3bba8b
8abdebe442f7e343e890c9ca1ead1ce349f5cbad
F20101123_AAAJJV jaiswal_l_Page_175.tif
9199610d46afbf7ee9f5cbdacbcf9b89
c91bd2b9bccb23d44fc7db607de002595df6ac64
28346 F20101123_AAAIGT jaiswal_l_Page_140.QC.jpg
606de6ff6f7cdcedbd298d6f29634802
1716db2b53cd78f3ada52a22c5867c1035efe31e
64081 F20101123_AAAIHH jaiswal_l_Page_150.jpg
86055177deed96919e365e0f35dc21c3
92e0f439d8d9c9dcbcdda8338a46bfda6914bbce
44794 F20101123_AAAJKK jaiswal_l_Page_025.pro
80ebcfee262f456d5e2f8a9dffb99788
b5a31c0df70ca4215f554afa62d3862409c0b5f5
F20101123_AAAJJW jaiswal_l_Page_180.tif
6d7842132381baa603dd6447c9f8b179
b93528d5705e54bc2793f6e2ebbc93bf360e07fb
71215 F20101123_AAAIGU jaiswal_l_Page_068.jpg
b153b97acc0443133470a5a4439c1ab6
76701fa8d2309ee0a6b476f57f034ef60ecff09e
593494 F20101123_AAAIHI jaiswal_l_Page_108.jp2
b5ee311c68c59cd7a1010309a784ded0
b9c0ba813027d97d13f8e7348bb1abe3f16261b9
38492 F20101123_AAAJLA jaiswal_l_Page_053.pro
de8a48b778d97dbfad5d5a33a144fae4
151b8809091284650576f8a007bb4fd7c8458941
35733 F20101123_AAAJKL jaiswal_l_Page_027.pro
80221d92f67f363ee97bb29ebfb14aa0
7350470b870982f89f4a4a0282e22cc4ed8f5640
F20101123_AAAJJX jaiswal_l_Page_181.tif
6b30822956b8f30c36ef2944e65363ae
20bfcae8b6693e4784d4bbd660e1aa760565b2e6
32625 F20101123_AAAIGV jaiswal_l_Page_059.pro
190bea77ebc8d86e75b259316c4a1766
5b925300b90b9cf15cbb664725affa212304424e
F20101123_AAAIHJ jaiswal_l_Page_005.tif
0a7d115e8a76837a8ec66ebfe1bcf476
1b732b4b85a5089e21622d68f541e8e222133d65
23257 F20101123_AAAJLB jaiswal_l_Page_054.pro
77899bf7b9ca614cdbf2abc093cc1351
ed755e3b985097641077939c8d3edfd260d57d7c
52278 F20101123_AAAJKM jaiswal_l_Page_028.pro
840390ecc51458ff9d5fc738c2e9e0ba
340865640ce625cbb24069acecbb1490a29ad7da
F20101123_AAAJJY jaiswal_l_Page_182.tif
cdfb777ad47d3d048801667b5e3c0e13
0580361f84bfe13408bf298edac2b256e05b8908
7295 F20101123_AAAIGW jaiswal_l_Page_007thm.jpg
b3caf967552149bd11a4fc1bdea6872a
a97a4e1df75d8204aadfc9a9a1f1c09dec487a6a
996 F20101123_AAAIHK jaiswal_l_Page_158.txt
7beba47d22e28ae7b6e7ece849ab45d7
5783ff5a1c596177efc9a0f5efc793dd724294a0
39921 F20101123_AAAJLC jaiswal_l_Page_055.pro
24b40c859e98e41812bbb0006b02605b
75f65ad312227090612596476b2b58bec5e19e34
29940 F20101123_AAAJKN jaiswal_l_Page_029.pro
8967cdf005780fdc2b35bd11978e00f2
d353efac4dc9f286556467f9892c3a5fa45a0ea6
8420 F20101123_AAAJJZ jaiswal_l_Page_001.pro
d8d31269b92cf6b72b2b42b22e8d6f41
b365a9b97954cb3f2b5fa9617a74d97b5cea03c0
6029 F20101123_AAAIGX jaiswal_l_Page_101thm.jpg
3d16011bf583d48fda98bf01e1e991c1
72818cfd418645e646a4fcf2583b0783d588dcd7
88980 F20101123_AAAIIA jaiswal_l_Page_060.jpg
88ac2a16a9297248b1c8258afb6d209d
28220d44de0f1e6f8745d713a48a72286e1ba532
2069 F20101123_AAAIHL jaiswal_l_Page_170.txt
76fd2767267e377a4e8b641f04f3a0c3
910cd4b65bb90a00e7a2611d68696f73781a78c9
38995 F20101123_AAAJLD jaiswal_l_Page_056.pro
0424c239735f724932ea606125216614
004fbe44312e9ed77626c9d7d6a29588e9bbf6b6
43350 F20101123_AAAJKO jaiswal_l_Page_030.pro
f8260e79e02b5fa30ec1258272ccbdfd
d9e3bc3cdd6bd660d5c4d39d10d59f1eae26031e
64324 F20101123_AAAIGY jaiswal_l_Page_118.jpg
36659a486217343573b40bcaf5bf0481
a884585093618689271a8e6d71907a6585c3ef39
90335 F20101123_AAAIIB jaiswal_l_Page_057.jpg
bf1cb8fa2df3bf7d5a13849a81b18508
7d9ed3d3cb5e8e4f004a61480eca00389e7b1c87
671200 F20101123_AAAIHM jaiswal_l_Page_118.jp2
3801a2bd4d64850ce2f5e5e996a76666
1d18cc80d13deaf291f21c8bc7831ab898cee52b
40125 F20101123_AAAJLE jaiswal_l_Page_057.pro
cdb8e00e56d79f0e685dc9969c40867c
b504c2464da903b25af6f6f84dab72f13675c861
44884 F20101123_AAAJKP jaiswal_l_Page_032.pro
9aa126ea4d28f8f34cab2a7bcc93f161
561fe5ab1013621bba5c902b2117752854dff25f
27616 F20101123_AAAIGZ jaiswal_l_Page_060.QC.jpg
2e5aa984cc7d61806b9dd4edfe66c6c4
9203816fd7756d493f6d77acf9f6623055a70d25
60234 F20101123_AAAIIC jaiswal_l_Page_180.jp2
c2257847c50fae51b24beaad0c5c8063
31532e14976df60059fb3e48fae49fa579a7d19d
6473 F20101123_AAAIHN jaiswal_l_Page_091.pro
e1ca7838aff9245079bd746c12b9eb3d
b1b6361ea44368b3514b43f503d1272fb31e818e
40801 F20101123_AAAJLF jaiswal_l_Page_061.pro
7808ca53dd680edb764fe68f67715c9e
de3646a610461ffca5a40714c3fcf2bf30e2f8c0
41250 F20101123_AAAJKQ jaiswal_l_Page_035.pro
2a666abe17b3e473ced04127ac523d49
f95ee2498cb8fd6a6e5d9047c29367c245747b8e
F20101123_AAAIID jaiswal_l_Page_079.tif
716b4f5a2b48d9b9b1bed860e6975af3
7c93854f1942538e58edf082f4809fe0302dffe1
31491 F20101123_AAAIHO jaiswal_l_Page_090.QC.jpg
57ef2ca3c4ed768d1e3c37578ae7dbb2
f7612f619ca8a6c0588def50b8c16d7b4662c0c8
36001 F20101123_AAAJLG jaiswal_l_Page_063.pro
c78067b8e7ccfaa1328ef2e7c87c5262
8d894be9c1e4317deffdd3cec783ea2bdb8dbfb6
43926 F20101123_AAAJKR jaiswal_l_Page_036.pro
b808ccd228b8497e8c02b4596770ad0f
e6818bed5a18bcae4497fa64049af2295844cfc9
27289 F20101123_AAAIIE jaiswal_l_Page_057.QC.jpg
de582db0622f6c5d403f945ffcabd956
618442e124cc5b353405547666b9d64b25bef41a
F20101123_AAAIHP jaiswal_l_Page_033.tif
f96be790788a5a8e0104c9725e2b2174
f6f5d81ebb373642ebd2aaa16a5765fe2c357041
27844 F20101123_AAAJKS jaiswal_l_Page_038.pro
d04783cb7fb2660ac959013aceaa8359
83e079e838532ac806bc504bd1dfa0f281e76590
106755 F20101123_AAAIHQ jaiswal_l_Page_078.jpg
fda57081c87a9552fc85defd3f8a4044
1bc781e5c3659c6f70d78c7fee9b15455793d016
31529 F20101123_AAAJLH jaiswal_l_Page_065.pro
7ecb4d9b4c8d80add405b8e8e90a61b2
8d939d6c268a1af076a9d9c6cd1eb1a368ad4d1d
27032 F20101123_AAAJKT jaiswal_l_Page_039.pro
4945f0132a9dc96de2caeb00cbe1b60c
d77110b09d032985611ebfcb7c92c9db4d81e436
46346 F20101123_AAAIIF jaiswal_l_Page_144.jpg
5c9e1b82a62cab112f8a788cd1048492
c198664dbb0de19186f7930267611b093dde78b7
629 F20101123_AAAIHR jaiswal_l_Page_177thm.jpg
1c36bbd7352a1857702ece690b12b8cb
e8b086931ec241c4004a6cb91a34526828d414ef
46545 F20101123_AAAJLI jaiswal_l_Page_067.pro
514622fac9d39104a2f33f2783ae2235
e9cf5c89512fb5adc256dc77f540ffc4ecced0b4
49150 F20101123_AAAJKU jaiswal_l_Page_040.pro
79318db164b892c5189690cb91e34bc9
591bec56f20599f372c6724088a4c830f2cf3919
48111 F20101123_AAAIIG jaiswal_l_Page_125.pro
78e2f4e69a2d6cb2e20bbd500e42acae
78f2cc67f7dca55a6ebe6660a75d751d4cadb53b
F20101123_AAAIHS jaiswal_l_Page_172.tif
79e190d0cf05b44a06a935dc7717065a
b7117deb10e2423a61254c4bdd9cab59225a127e
34120 F20101123_AAAJLJ jaiswal_l_Page_068.pro
2cdbbef5364bcd4a536d8a2e804f97b9
8cae53b41cdad87a132d5e42bef6f5bd34c25694
38887 F20101123_AAAJKV jaiswal_l_Page_041.pro
b16ee4b9dc6a0386df7e44abf4687c9f
21a0da7ebe1686be91e86b61aa8e0df45ec0bb61
443162 F20101123_AAAIIH jaiswal_l_Page_109.jp2
7a51c471bc04aa95ee854970852a202d
1e4157476401b953e391edd9f961591315d10374
479 F20101123_AAAIHT jaiswal_l_Page_101.txt
755c8aa58507eb1c10d6364d22d8d9d6
c2512abc3a1328753c828dbd632eab0942701756
29829 F20101123_AAAJLK jaiswal_l_Page_069.pro
519bb0f769e784e5a24a14b2251a9dd2
bf424346e6a5b58308cb3507656f65bc8943f06b
34249 F20101123_AAAJKW jaiswal_l_Page_044.pro
6c283aba0dd997a2fe39cb21c98ef8a0
02b9a1ad56e9728f56542c74d76a0b1fc551b764
102837 F20101123_AAAIII jaiswal_l_Page_067.jp2
8bda650aa2564bddbbca856b09f03360
fadf03f5555382f39d32480b4bdab03dddecc98f
55160 F20101123_AAAIHU jaiswal_l_Page_009.pro
9690d4a46d02463dba013c345a0e5aa5
59108415e9ebd5f9303ed7680b22072290c2a711
11924 F20101123_AAAJMA jaiswal_l_Page_097.pro
6f59a567fd161e543ce05ef952c06ed9
28442e4196dc52508e3d56ee50c6f0e9b191ed87
28649 F20101123_AAAJLL jaiswal_l_Page_070.pro
149803b7d6207bec17513b9c54ea044d
a5a805eee1cd976c92a51fc8418d54e7da6bb921
39698 F20101123_AAAJKX jaiswal_l_Page_045.pro
2e433f7b6a5f2f307231a96d653a5d53
e7e738a6a96befca6bf7ce4664dd3d080f53f7f8
1885 F20101123_AAAIIJ jaiswal_l_Page_057.txt
8758fc9c6f9bc95c3bb02029484ee17c
aa2b2b3675a38dd719d5b5ae3255666a156b4111
29811 F20101123_AAAIHV jaiswal_l_Page_139.pro
b1285d61fa0250c2bdd2c12c05c0a2c1
d20ff7ad79958d8e4b4699c33772d1190c3dad30
41255 F20101123_AAAJMB jaiswal_l_Page_100.pro
443131868f61a6501cd39b02a8965aa9
8472ad2cbb6ae9aade929c7b14093f61f849b9c9
50421 F20101123_AAAJLM jaiswal_l_Page_073.pro
7b626b59d90d6243f6f6a97e06af5f22
7b826df250f227a53d00ef5df324fcdfada3f4d7
40703 F20101123_AAAJKY jaiswal_l_Page_047.pro
0033b6911407474bf3ea38bb35ddc492
a6cc674bbd162c1870354240561bb68a0adc59c6
31211 F20101123_AAAIIK jaiswal_l_Page_020.pro
cd97e142abcba5ad53b0e9fd3fb800eb
c0d33c4d2f3ec8a4d506aa76c74b2234f51368c2
103676 F20101123_AAAIHW jaiswal_l_Page_042.jpg
0c438a72753a10db5e136e74b8fd5346
d55fee7191795b70c97930a3486d3fb0399f0c31
10179 F20101123_AAAJMC jaiswal_l_Page_101.pro
18b74e300bd2421a6be1bd56916077b3
471aaea0dd928eb660c6436d9afd68285389e6bf
28105 F20101123_AAAJLN jaiswal_l_Page_075.pro
c78960455dcaa72569cf3f82b54fec6d
618b46a4bdde7875962c4bd01d7eb6f02b97ba9e
46928 F20101123_AAAJKZ jaiswal_l_Page_052.pro
1c6553bb5ff1257a89352a00a5654b17
3abb720b801973a32679e8c22c974b64d1d67df4
64660 F20101123_AAAIJA jaiswal_l_Page_058.jpg
ab893240a792e0e2a1210b110539dbea
07402cde95e3187a19678418c3ea55316634aeb2
56349 F20101123_AAAIIL jaiswal_l_Page_108.jpg
6ea15da614df5ec92618d01c6e5efecc
d0b0ad17a03d55e6783533d1c410f1a74e2b71b7
5717 F20101123_AAAIHX jaiswal_l_Page_049thm.jpg
ed57e34d02f30ae329818d2af7033caf
6ecae35f7a89fbeeee2513e0423c9becbe84d409
43550 F20101123_AAAJMD jaiswal_l_Page_103.pro
24bdbed4fafb12cc5e26e33ae1369c87
e0c4269a4c56880538253defdd70e823c6c17a29
45010 F20101123_AAAJLO jaiswal_l_Page_076.pro
3ffe93eb4bc6eb2527cce671cfde1d2c
f1aa555d2cda7cf35de800bf7666dc11fa338575
F20101123_AAAIJB jaiswal_l_Page_096.tif
a20aed9d302bead344af731b7df1368a
60177c16f8e124e20d205a4f300c1dbbed46aa57
F20101123_AAAIIM jaiswal_l_Page_067.tif
a7fe0806c1da55b2517479a22179b033
61007b334420fdc79df7c77a61d16f005a3e847d
7800 F20101123_AAAIHY jaiswal_l_Page_025thm.jpg
4071e47b18aca87756dcf0c5e99198ee
2a58783682b51800521aeb5b7b73cc1690db7a3f
7063 F20101123_AAAJME jaiswal_l_Page_104.pro
24303e370f3c19ebb0da05102d24ac42
40fadf8465bcc2d2ae0214cb221f4bc7477916be
55450 F20101123_AAAJLP jaiswal_l_Page_078.pro
def8248021e710ae4c98b083dca34e05
312a0d7855ac9120c26ec17016b64581932898a0
F20101123_AAAIJC jaiswal_l_Page_065.tif
0971127d6725a9bc478cc54c521c8bf6
8257ddc151f973d22aec8c7f47a034e1d53434e1
14728 F20101123_AAAIIN jaiswal_l_Page_154.QC.jpg
0fb81be44c218d7eaa6af6a988f4e134
8ca178cbffb0ce3a607d1a409adeaa300dab7858
1051962 F20101123_AAAIHZ jaiswal_l_Page_128.jp2
7ab39918ecbe15b380236f617ea62b67
30c86c91ef1c5b21178f716033cbce66c82fc231
18004 F20101123_AAAJMF jaiswal_l_Page_106.pro
468c38971e0a06d6526b61cb2166b4cc
7584f9b19ae1d1af7e910716ff56021b2375c117
38878 F20101123_AAAJLQ jaiswal_l_Page_079.pro
b87747672ebd5116103eb172e13e12db
8fe34c23cd86116b5cede8ed1833f1ff34f13fcb
1173 F20101123_AAAIJD jaiswal_l_Page_112.txt
8fafdfa84a84c6710374a3043613a46d
6fc5996790dd1e5f2b6ba6e2a3bf7613b949d67e
F20101123_AAAIIO jaiswal_l_Page_024.tif
49fb31effb2d8d24c3b0cc663e48f01a
85922238b1754ef6430f22334123e9d6075f1990
20794 F20101123_AAAJMG jaiswal_l_Page_113.pro
e957c02e2e783ce0b1fda35020124496
aac6de4f645ebcda69030b8ecfcb825c45c5b9aa
16148 F20101123_AAAJLR jaiswal_l_Page_082.pro
1fd0555a9feb056a9808dd45c77928f9
039a74ee3ba77efe2d78d5505cb5033d2cbac86f
7254 F20101123_AAAIJE jaiswal_l_Page_066thm.jpg
fcbd953ea5897fec4f70752ab8dd691e
5564bbae7e3540964514cf256a3b6b988773fa64
F20101123_AAAIIP jaiswal_l_Page_021.tif
ea679ed93b0eda162ef1950c2c81e631
f2d2163a743c90812c3d5656efdb3f6829b8a18f
35668 F20101123_AAAJMH jaiswal_l_Page_115.pro
4a0bb21fb93e9ffcf0343e3d0f88b2cb
316f38160dce6b146d3ef5bc09ded0868497c293
42763 F20101123_AAAJLS jaiswal_l_Page_083.pro
9f964c591138546b8083217f6d544733
bca6337f98107dee00f0cd2bcb3cf531fa6b1101
970844 F20101123_AAAIJF jaiswal_l_Page_041.jp2
a4f9dc448dd5a15adcc893f7d723e671
28635164da7127ad9ba355ca2717e113af4981fb
15804 F20101123_AAAIIQ jaiswal_l_Page_070.QC.jpg
2c1314b8f1615ad4d2880893ea35e0c5
6bf0cf6687b9a64a617978ef39202e25041b06f1
21639 F20101123_AAAJLT jaiswal_l_Page_085.pro
fc0a10d0927f808c89e00fcfed547bbd
0c11ad2a9e0093da88ee78251b66a85013005548
90363 F20101123_AAAIIR jaiswal_l_Page_061.jp2
bb4c810f246b89be11887557850f29e4
c50bf8369cd9cd9ae03f3da9aa0c54a59cb9a9de
22698 F20101123_AAAJMI jaiswal_l_Page_116.pro
0c54d518cdcf6ededb4bcc87b6955c04
319d0ff55370c736237576f0b56fb26549cbd905
21526 F20101123_AAAJLU jaiswal_l_Page_089.pro
fbe0220bda88f40a3877911c60443fe8
25f01cae78eb43158bf50bcbe5057a3040f146eb
3514 F20101123_AAAIJG jaiswal_l_Page_165thm.jpg
345cd7554c0951ec313aa497efc40482
63784fce9abe6130bee1197e17401f028abdea30
1778 F20101123_AAAIIS jaiswal_l_Page_051.txt
d3ae6a6ec93bd1a0dabf629cb6f7bce1
38d4a5925db66185d1b4c67283f35d062adbb070
25240 F20101123_AAAJMJ jaiswal_l_Page_118.pro
71453e9618f4b338691d52fecb48f770
490dd9abe1c6264d36ee50a7961425a8d660749a
49270 F20101123_AAAJLV jaiswal_l_Page_090.pro
e0e6a3cfb62eff1c755d4da92d4b2005
cc915de3d76b76be81df0af53929554b07836d64
796330 F20101123_AAAIJH jaiswal_l_Page_050.jp2
529bbcd9c1d79424f7a9b33f34790b4e
724c08cbaec3da2456d051db964ab4c11cd5e051
F20101123_AAAIIT jaiswal_l_Page_037.tif
1c107f024612a648c7241d92c2d76426
81807aba7b0ca83349a992a32fd0d73d4431b1c9
6355 F20101123_AAAJMK jaiswal_l_Page_120.pro
89e4f6e71ff8bcff3ea7199108d0cabe
f94cf55252cf1366a5d7a9208027d7a2185a3a65
5210 F20101123_AAAJLW jaiswal_l_Page_092.pro
9b776b2dde84397fac89d0cea0aebad6
b1052f5e2b3f730e138eb9d46e6a8a20f8539b9d
51228 F20101123_AAAIJI jaiswal_l_Page_165.jpg
d1907d34cb9f761c16f910fefcb523fe
8c55605bd9ed0f36ed3c77e790cf97c077176dd7
18870 F20101123_AAAIIU jaiswal_l_Page_132.pro
bded8511efcbfa4953b3efaa1b6a7850
39808c85ec8ac38a10b539c0e9d983bacca8db8c
48717 F20101123_AAAJNA jaiswal_l_Page_148.pro
aad4b9e368a2684d3f84f4a754443e67
b41e1f6d46413d2878f92e03eb6a0471cddce422
36813 F20101123_AAAJML jaiswal_l_Page_122.pro
61a12158bddff0c86963c562343a9e0f
d51630dd8199c9d5f5a8315b77c9524646c3411b
32569 F20101123_AAAJLX jaiswal_l_Page_093.pro
b7556c6575583dab36e2a76d5bd64a27
67a20d3d3d8c4970df30d47da6f0cdfb5d02ab2c
F20101123_AAAIJJ jaiswal_l_Page_140.tif
b87ffbb23a2aecfb0664a4318a2927ff
cf8c786d0c35f24268de521bd42a0d170633e66a
30311 F20101123_AAAIIV jaiswal_l_Page_032.QC.jpg
eef08d39bd59773a0714e195a240772c
488f3e2a1d4f6a0aa3dcaf466bf65448962f6b85
14813 F20101123_AAAJNB jaiswal_l_Page_149.pro
88d5320a2631457794d81c5a72144780
6f41f4dfb7e360c99b2d59935a152e7e3863ddd7
27822 F20101123_AAAJMM jaiswal_l_Page_123.pro
17ee85595c25179af2ee4fc8cb840e05
eea607ac37ba2cd80a5bbc4d2151e3f334d74a86
18584 F20101123_AAAJLY jaiswal_l_Page_094.pro
62b36fc1e4a75937d4eb7f471daa74e4
9259bb635820f653ce054785e49b99003073c979
105249 F20101123_AAAIIW jaiswal_l_Page_129.jpg
f7c4408b4e01f67f2827235d8ab6aecf
d154305db3abfb3ce29d29fc0a1f5f5da8717e7b
F20101123_AAAIJK jaiswal_l_Page_002.tif
c20b7f6b272d12466b949ef76f283015
90f493c595834f9e077766d9c607c3cf66684cc0
40379 F20101123_AAAJNC jaiswal_l_Page_150.pro
ba7784dd6206ec398b80401e5cae034d
5c1b42319f85e45f757bcc97647ed46ba68a61eb
48951 F20101123_AAAJMN jaiswal_l_Page_124.pro
deda665a6793f62ba7241d0fda161491
9b5b4c747fdf013a619a1dd5b83c03703dbd3892
4705 F20101123_AAAJLZ jaiswal_l_Page_096.pro
5e1b7e16d0a073e9b9ceb428f2f4a521
2e9e806916f1ec705bae88c0417eb54a6e17c985
F20101123_AAAIIX jaiswal_l_Page_122.tif
8d22b83be04a5988ff4180380cae3ea4
7855d0bc2002479fc44e688335338673e0ec7a06
7158 F20101123_AAAIKA jaiswal_l_Page_010thm.jpg
ff67b2d4b1795bdd2e2a5ddb382a308c
c84d7135c66ae2746a2639176502fdb2d26a87a8
F20101123_AAAIJL jaiswal_l_Page_007.tif
f2b513a8a1e5b4c406d46d00b559615a
bd2dedc7fa77e6b2a481fd41950fc86000f951e1
10324 F20101123_AAAJND jaiswal_l_Page_152.pro
ccfdfe77f604f6e95a07c5953d825603
b5ee9d9047afac6596fc2a39fef7128d4fef9c19
33603 F20101123_AAAJMO jaiswal_l_Page_126.pro
4947697adb2a974fb3eb7b02fdb96db5
e66c6dfe16b32cde9d8aeffb0267e65e1efffff5
35157 F20101123_AAAIIY jaiswal_l_Page_077.pro
2379db6022ed5730eb2db3430ead5c10
095860abdd76b66816b9371e396bae871b37a20d
F20101123_AAAIKB jaiswal_l_Page_099.tif
1518ee75178fb555d0210152bcb8bf45
5f3899f64ef7e1b39a4e94e4f78caad3e996243d
4201 F20101123_AAAIJM jaiswal_l_Page_069thm.jpg
20d4ee10aeaf4d83cc6e2634446c054e
cde7b50ab81cc4ca4cdc1933c4f98bbb6be62129
11404 F20101123_AAAJNE jaiswal_l_Page_153.pro
32b52058acf696d91cdcee34b3a42344
b17a2ece58ecd18efa071b702b4ae4a862099e38
40846 F20101123_AAAJMP jaiswal_l_Page_127.pro
10ebb8b6d489e3794bae1020799f01fe
dcd25f975cf47c3461c65c513aa62ab93180ca82
23436 F20101123_AAAIIZ jaiswal_l_Page_105.QC.jpg
bf3ce91e8d5c71943c60ef5195d71ae6
caeb5edcc1bdd320f6dc20c02e8193ef185a6e04
58262 F20101123_AAAIKC jaiswal_l_Page_178.jpg
02d465be7edc67b0dcb7fdefe1aaaf0f
b8d0498b6597a3e9fb327b003b7499412ad17570
F20101123_AAAIJN jaiswal_l_Page_030.tif
d3f1ff076de23a812e5f3b192d436b43
98e1235946d95120771027be71d01a972d66b7e7
10468 F20101123_AAAJNF jaiswal_l_Page_154.pro
db8e5bef1d14dc808de422a52c8a8a76
b9a8199ff078a99c45b8c28ebf8eacfc80c3120b
14777 F20101123_AAAJMQ jaiswal_l_Page_128.pro
7340f56bdd5f9518f222f17e537b0435
b46a58b1b1ee71474c3bfc363a67b0d8c96b0101
70517 F20101123_AAAIKD jaiswal_l_Page_065.jp2
7ad3f342dac6315a0c3a94083b3a3fa5
61610d31a512ad75a3203d90fc43045bec1436e6
24286 F20101123_AAAIJO jaiswal_l_Page_133.pro
f9fe87e7ba25372a4947a9b095ed3e22
802cded094fa8f96df9f1b7a6316b076759c80b3
31089 F20101123_AAAJNG jaiswal_l_Page_156.pro
e4793c0674b3485c8c0efa6cd11752db
da9d42acd5362ca5396e3935c845febd3fdd796c
52321 F20101123_AAAJMR jaiswal_l_Page_129.pro
89d9f8b28b0bf23133dcd5165984c235
f867a9e7bd2965c550c791b553d74d6f80d4c2b6
45978 F20101123_AAAIKE jaiswal_l_Page_136.pro
27e88e033092dbc17415ca76f9191011
eaeccfcf2e8a1b59fdd268b752fddb216403e876
958218 F20101123_AAAIJP jaiswal_l_Page_014.jp2
8ab8c632de17e35624177c95bce9331d
fe655ed6839664441a5064f21418c90ef6e1336e
36515 F20101123_AAAJNH jaiswal_l_Page_157.pro
ec3f049d74b17dc4086cb25a1e7c6f44
694bbfbe749f276361ea63de2c86ac47faf377a9
31679 F20101123_AAAJMS jaiswal_l_Page_130.pro
cb43a742d298943f41eb8ac93a3444f9
bd5193fab3a0dbd433dd2662f76d086953ab67e4
42733 F20101123_AAAIKF jaiswal_l_Page_109.jpg
36e0ba64fbe232389e339bc877bf4a58
95fca621bf9fcd3b22e3d589c9530d2e47624dae
8252 F20101123_AAAIJQ jaiswal_l_Page_042thm.jpg
432b99f04da55640f6ac32c6150319fe
771eff62f723a81137eb5acf8ea5a4ac4a1308f5
21210 F20101123_AAAJNI jaiswal_l_Page_158.pro
c9ee1ce762603b4a1b00e4b925897f51
a929af2a9ec97d8652f0bcc145b6b85fd7faf2e9
39599 F20101123_AAAJMT jaiswal_l_Page_134.pro
c71760373e2d3459991834d55f376ae4
00293b2e3238ee951bd0e1136a675435898a9578
1987 F20101123_AAAIKG jaiswal_l_Page_073.txt
86585a197e8f850aee03abfcb10691fb
5535a5c4873c4f79f68906025f76cc34806e821d
33228 F20101123_AAAIJR jaiswal_l_Page_086.pro
40c25fb46518950986ff2a678f840938
9f6faa227b33724a5de0cb7f900977f125aca4c4
36833 F20101123_AAAJMU jaiswal_l_Page_135.pro
138299d95273a13f7bad6b202904bab1
19737ef5970cc3d9ed013927a33261e118fb0e9a
100611 F20101123_AAAIJS jaiswal_l_Page_148.jpg
4d4dbcfd7d65b52fda07d04b523e742a
9bee190d7f86d270fbc81070aa4039574e58a414
2122 F20101123_AAAJNJ jaiswal_l_Page_161.pro
e27edb0715d92b220c7371d6cacab446
2080cce1b60b1862a14d36bd67c3aeb08c7341c5
41439 F20101123_AAAJMV jaiswal_l_Page_137.pro
8f65af5696a41615fa7c3e41e62b3612
3d3c780985e791b0cd8941b96663d126826a44b4
29880 F20101123_AAAIKH jaiswal_l_Page_066.QC.jpg
4dc51635faa8bb76ae23e7daae89be5b
35062dd2446a421c223c8414f37c66051d1884d5
32695 F20101123_AAAIJT jaiswal_l_Page_072.QC.jpg
664963a9d451650b65216da404663a81
8253a6fc5dde485ba86f4629f77b9779184f268d
42336 F20101123_AAAJNK jaiswal_l_Page_162.pro
a5e960ac9338a90f179bfe394b4008ee
664f807f1a469d96651eec7ac73aa366824e1fa2
33343 F20101123_AAAJMW jaiswal_l_Page_142.pro
356536a1d60db6b746533975b6db46b8
69074bbc758fbc106b27012179446bf44ead9b32
22287 F20101123_AAAIKI jaiswal_l_Page_054.QC.jpg
31a4520adfe1e4d79999ce1f8d5d543f
226ff17c6a07bcd8f0973809548e2b65d91f4c60
6798 F20101123_AAAIJU jaiswal_l_Page_027thm.jpg
26052a546ea690a193099d3a9f8f1d08
46ba5449d55232c1d64e9a9d85d5637994e9b752
4128 F20101123_AAAJOA jaiswal_l_Page_006.txt
645645b7688cc3ac0c0357c3c2eebdb2
4ebe28487909a44bfc34d22225373ee1f640245e
42992 F20101123_AAAJNL jaiswal_l_Page_164.pro
761cf11e6b7131716dd75f4b26c411cc
1e1fc4c91bd72e1131244d65a796c8a365ba1801
44805 F20101123_AAAJMX jaiswal_l_Page_143.pro
c5553538855a3562bac1d749e3428c4b
edd030395fd558b3e3d969967d58606e9d044645
19857 F20101123_AAAIKJ jaiswal_l_Page_132.QC.jpg
d3aabf87186e499009d3e3f7bf588068
9060c1e25e1452258bee926e7691bea346a4a2ae
F20101123_AAAIJV jaiswal_l_Page_014.tif
1ed31f56c915d3a5d6e837f50f719b90
62fea2ce542efeb2797fd6e22946c81aeef1230c
925 F20101123_AAAJOB jaiswal_l_Page_008.txt
645eba0a5fce73592f15295ccf0db235
4c2969cf507b4e894c5841aec17e43c3f766db52
41044 F20101123_AAAJNM jaiswal_l_Page_165.pro
e89f3d1befad24287650f8aae7b062d6
5cfd08e8827023d49ace64a809da8a5da8082041
6294 F20101123_AAAJMY jaiswal_l_Page_145.pro
a244863abd50628911b3c0d8bc420b99
4b0646274a4c9caffe119c96b4362bf43b352ce5
15851 F20101123_AAAIKK jaiswal_l_Page_037.pro
163c2b2a11f69a6862fd57e576ceab60
9bcd037baede2c228da85ebaa6ffef57cd6f8fd2
6772 F20101123_AAAIJW jaiswal_l_Page_043thm.jpg
402d414715052e2c6455e743c22364cd
e4ec528f284dee94313e164a300d1c6e76477e7f
2399 F20101123_AAAJOC jaiswal_l_Page_010.txt
4503a21849e8e2c472394d1a14d9b181
3f4b979c443354aa1faedd54edcc9222a868d095
37260 F20101123_AAAJNN jaiswal_l_Page_166.pro
3d8b6155ae64da5502cec421a798a2c5
1a5253b8967d552ef1fd8105d1cb67775e59adde
24169 F20101123_AAAJMZ jaiswal_l_Page_146.pro
fe6605d3d8103f5ef44fd5bf80b4c262
ca031de23160f81ab50a291aa4096e562307cd30
4678 F20101123_AAAILA jaiswal_l_Page_127thm.jpg
9506d144780386781ca458abb0818416
a9221fec59828fd6271da128df661146cea7ad32
5649 F20101123_AAAIKL jaiswal_l_Page_002.jp2
37f69ecd6f78130cf41d95f214fb6e93
cbc1414f6cd33c44d1848f7dfd830e8aef54010d
8380 F20101123_AAAIJX jaiswal_l_Page_159.pro
292723507d107d3981f746c4554ded93
2d908d8fd44fda1d86adbcdce3415824063c8e08
2729 F20101123_AAAJOD jaiswal_l_Page_013.txt
0612af3c9fe7d7af3fdc4174b901869a
042a0e68993a6523c8230d93f04e712ed6df4726
42244 F20101123_AAAJNO jaiswal_l_Page_168.pro
7d48e9a0515d2eb3d3eed642f878e9e8
95081582fa80c06b9adb2858d870eadb68fbf422
2298 F20101123_AAAILB jaiswal_l_Page_011.txt
978abd8471d9225e4f4dc9cfd54251a2
337bd24a616a78694928ba0368553908f3beaf0c
1235 F20101123_AAAIKM jaiswal_l_Page_050.txt
3a7ac8175c8855c64ea6d72bb70071f7
bf9a9dda21eefb2bac1d5bd427f6afcfde8fd1fb
1468 F20101123_AAAIJY jaiswal_l_Page_095.txt
465d909837dcb0683ceb95d5401bae0d
4cb41caa7fd092909ec9206a1485342153dd870e
1393 F20101123_AAAJOE jaiswal_l_Page_014.txt
ab34fc19139cc4b4ead36e0ba8d0c400
95e741e13e2edef5798c38a567d991900d2fa4af
25056 F20101123_AAAJNP jaiswal_l_Page_169.pro
be452492d3bcea1fb1ffebf65a6c329d
1a9a9e129ad42027aa6f535b2ab70c2ca9f5509e
F20101123_AAAILC jaiswal_l_Page_066.tif
034398a2a24392a383787e78a0df3734
7a0e3535d7f1f8460a9c5c0630cfd5d255b95489
81188 F20101123_AAAIKN jaiswal_l_Page_121.jpg
8af8c95c373db3ac93857d34b8ca4450
57ae581917b2f2445bddfb530f2b7c74de8a4b6c
F20101123_AAAIJZ jaiswal_l_Page_032.tif
34ec0b11ea1d021783080e74ba7a8d9d
09868903dc4717be544f6d96c334ffeee46db2ea
1536 F20101123_AAAJOF jaiswal_l_Page_016.txt
7fea59fb91c7a86a36e983eac653cb5c
a7bbbbec07b69e534a2f3e7e5193b0d24efcb444
2018 F20101123_AAAJNQ jaiswal_l_Page_174.pro
c4dd1cab8f87e01c489ff8c2f04d31a0
e4a9a4e3e8798c5078de08640ce0e0ae26461859
34297 F20101123_AAAILD jaiswal_l_Page_183.jpg
7336a340b118dd31c00c04b22a5b6cc2
6be4813b7dd5221040836047bb8b7e50383c45a3
31449 F20101123_AAAIKO jaiswal_l_Page_033.QC.jpg
cc4d8b247eb57797c8d84444f7ae4b15
3c7bc533ce44118f824961afa754d3b3bafbb801
1731 F20101123_AAAJOG jaiswal_l_Page_017.txt
22d38a016cfb112db4b5734d29a154a5
e766c237ab63ecdc127ce4de08066663156e8767
3475 F20101123_AAAJNR jaiswal_l_Page_175.pro
a13dff0ecd3a7f0a22e2c584395e4955
7f12e8aa8af2f8dc57705a755111bd41a417d078
F20101123_AAAILE jaiswal_l_Page_157.tif
213ba0930edef1467a5a4313f60c1569
45d5b1c1978573238d94a60b845e2210ca8131e5
1687 F20101123_AAAIKP jaiswal_l_Page_100.txt
5e12e4a51a630730ae522780a1510c4e
f5c91e82c10529f0ce55b202b29c5c7c7ab8111b
1578 F20101123_AAAJOH jaiswal_l_Page_020.txt
f103967eeae95c7d2054a53a79e87b48
e6cf28cc768deae1d26021dab6aaff5adc926c9d
11348 F20101123_AAAJNS jaiswal_l_Page_176.pro
41a8fcdef8b534d452d0109df868b558
a695c3b3b67b091410deb70b3aa5fae0387354fa
F20101123_AAAILF jaiswal_l_Page_022.tif
07fb483d544c7a50c994abde93914c69
4f39ba38cfaffcff89e784a5055bec222ade42e4
1814 F20101123_AAAIKQ jaiswal_l_Page_122.txt
996c8530be1f359041570c30673b12fc
e257a2cbdf6248d2b13e65223cc1aa7d2a9216ef
1804 F20101123_AAAJOI jaiswal_l_Page_023.txt
5645d83925d5a5fcb8c90e72d0bf9317
11aac524a94a130ac8e05ae8f3732d4e64ffc1cb
35404 F20101123_AAAJNT jaiswal_l_Page_178.pro
8e6db9cc1b30c46e414d931644f58b7f
28da7b64457d545842d1c088f11e0a1b60d56310
1466 F20101123_AAAILG jaiswal_l_Page_140.txt
6153bfeb47b914dd293857ce455f9753
f5c94b41d22edf207a3145d76c519f6300279b9a
20412 F20101123_AAAIKR jaiswal_l_Page_108.QC.jpg
b391925179e45a3c4388f0af35ac6378
e9d7f3d382133a424d7aab14c3a1c48192380970
1500 F20101123_AAAJOJ jaiswal_l_Page_027.txt
269571a8beab87b15d6cd2e9fd2f47a4
1d06b150910565d1859137c88945352d6dcb555e
17120 F20101123_AAAJNU jaiswal_l_Page_179.pro
0ad2fd55f0ec690c91d7a1ac08326e1a
cfbd2e515f64f61329b786cc85e3fb4f7f717a23
29864 F20101123_AAAILH jaiswal_l_Page_136.QC.jpg
4824ecd0ef6cc98ec4a317bfc71c23c1
afae2e414fe284f958058d7f6b947bcb001d00ae
F20101123_AAAIKS jaiswal_l_Page_052.tif
0a8dea5f34f9bb75d2daa65b8f6bdf55
c2e8fd8de2c4a3e902df2ab25f45701d242f6868
31439 F20101123_AAAJNV jaiswal_l_Page_180.pro
fef81608c9e690eaf46cc546e4865134
852b1c39f1cc4ab0511254c52eb2d105d6d3d963
60746 F20101123_AAAIKT jaiswal_l_Page_010.pro
207a4d2887ceac51990a996887f6a4f4
45b439b90eb6536f62b362bd6f6d7692ea6f0209
2080 F20101123_AAAJOK jaiswal_l_Page_028.txt
f50ee5d2b918db0da079d84fa04c93f0
e5bb64e3d9dfb7b1a67801ea6786015e901473c2
52071 F20101123_AAAJNW jaiswal_l_Page_181.pro
5f9d8722dc68e5ce857c170ea168f3f4
458a359688fc11f5175cc3f1aa469b5f7c87cdc5
6329 F20101123_AAAILI jaiswal_l_Page_015thm.jpg
bc6766a4477d657701fdd640dbdda3ad
0681cd7042a05a94ccc7b65c574d47c888ef515d
47967 F20101123_AAAIKU jaiswal_l_Page_046.pro
fe335944da310612f242c918f57fef26
cdc5021c27df60844fac80ad44108484a998187f
1402 F20101123_AAAJPA jaiswal_l_Page_065.txt
58c87e533d2669a573950ae372a7b809
64d83c91de65f2f1829ca5e881726a71ee8b9a2e
1996 F20101123_AAAJOL jaiswal_l_Page_031.txt
b26ca373666b492fcf248d507b97e48e
0aad96f406f1c38a36e868c324dc002d61670ffb
15088 F20101123_AAAJNX jaiswal_l_Page_182.pro
b7612c808dfecc859756b2d226b4654a
ab00f6bc578656e3e720bdef07ff1a4eb537a79f
32773 F20101123_AAAILJ jaiswal_l_Page_149.jpg
61068a3287ef1241104e30cf00bf7261
3e574040583c8fff2bfffec9a8c8e305065f6df1
1773 F20101123_AAAIKV jaiswal_l_Page_021.txt
9f4f883d4dadcfbca5620b0df5b953e4
b1dc3724edc5acdea37527e1f8ca15063cf53da3
1770 F20101123_AAAJPB jaiswal_l_Page_066.txt
3f982d55797507a6b5b97ea787e6673e
2e4f2994400287001e61f5f6f19c63337ab7393f
1646 F20101123_AAAJOM jaiswal_l_Page_035.txt
60d3877d470124c8764e54676effcf06
dde573a6939addcee5e2e31843b663d03ca0595b
106 F20101123_AAAJNY jaiswal_l_Page_003.txt
b12a9b937d21a651cf6b2b4dcd3d52cf
5d17a78ef45b56c5f0f62d41ed0a9e2b9d795a5b
83935 F20101123_AAAILK jaiswal_l_Page_122.jpg
1ed9492c5fc0134a5b89ee8a580dcec6
843fc8ee714ca25ac483816961d62a131d866943
38405 F20101123_AAAIKW jaiswal_l_Page_034.pro
050e0184376438e7152b65dc9a1c5289
d166e930203193c3556818740d8077c299e10be1
1848 F20101123_AAAJPC jaiswal_l_Page_067.txt
b981787f87539a17425f20d6497acf1f
9d3ffcc94a99bb36fe560d5fad0a06441bf473e0
1612 F20101123_AAAJON jaiswal_l_Page_038.txt
ac37f720c899beb282283559d5abe7bb
f399f04e3ce1011029d49013effe147e33c4af2d
1335 F20101123_AAAJNZ jaiswal_l_Page_004.txt
6e09184c8ea32eb3aaec14dd1559b950
887401720f5456569732480f3eb1eebf54c5d36b
81690 F20101123_AAAILL jaiswal_l_Page_043.jpg
d212cc2d71023f74575de4874c025444
8af8a03a833f28a4370267e27f436e8b4fb13b53
100768 F20101123_AAAIKX jaiswal_l_Page_124.jpg
288001e5aafb0e0f0cf05e60f25db22a
777bf25d36248a532331adfa27b3121b2a2bfc18
4240 F20101123_AAAIMA jaiswal_l_Page_109thm.jpg
9893a0eb147e24cfa3221c3dc5c0d0fa
7e89e9c1aa524d1a4febef6905f0b7d5eaf273cf
1375 F20101123_AAAJPD jaiswal_l_Page_068.txt
f582b114d2e0a08fcf15306ec1f62246
615f470fe1915603e391fe977fc7b3df6f48aa53
1327 F20101123_AAAJOO jaiswal_l_Page_039.txt
73da2cadb3f16c579e3785c2d4b72f70
c0317b72eff29e39a449dfd7b1faefbc86a52587
29411 F20101123_AAAILM jaiswal_l_Page_049.pro
7a5e881188c01ad45183bb1b7fb7b6f8
bdac00b9197a817c6cf4a0a300b93484c0e4c5e3
F20101123_AAAIKY jaiswal_l_Page_047.txt
e5c9665e6e53c97b1204c7e58f5c0c03
59be6c4bbae6396350886657e4478c406137c0d7
F20101123_AAAIMB jaiswal_l_Page_011.tif
93d0f4e8dea5a757ca154faaff364339
6f2d6f6e925e74bd3a10dd7f8854d31108b0a306
1626 F20101123_AAAJPE jaiswal_l_Page_071.txt
1aa98e72f4c01844849abd3e23d2969b
46fa354ecfa24ce3c420d3d00992b18db4900d3b
1956 F20101123_AAAJOP jaiswal_l_Page_040.txt
009b45576e658337cc4ae01c2924877d
22955856855be4786751e1fcdeee1eabc9b73151
34100 F20101123_AAAILN jaiswal_l_Page_091.jpg
3e2883a0e4d1392d315726debc111739
0851d18e7c2a6d68ab36036b1e79d164d41e2083
30660 F20101123_AAAIKZ jaiswal_l_Page_036.QC.jpg
850d3bb279be1cde3d55815f4a3b5a16
db12c0120004b54d93f561cef6af59cad41f5426
8925 F20101123_AAAIMC jaiswal_l_Page_176.QC.jpg
3a35373ba3153206514785af259a19dd
53565076fce44783d650f9c55a5914572b8cb2c1
F20101123_AAAJPF jaiswal_l_Page_072.txt
413651178781752a451a0bee97f10a42
b312667a30fff85b0859ece754ac13774d767348
1587 F20101123_AAAJOQ jaiswal_l_Page_041.txt
f966c0e02449e9347b16a9149110cca7
51892fac6f6cfcfa73be0361426029af82eab540
38392 F20101123_AAAILO jaiswal_l_Page_119.pro
4c4092be94300515b3030aec9dde200f
305ba6b156ef763346494a8075e8a0995580e00d
26714 F20101123_AAAIMD jaiswal_l_Page_097.jpg
38891bed8d8f48e2f25f5b6ecf6b9669
c6050d75f4c0c2b1fa46cdd57ce1c559b9b4112e
F20101123_AAAJPG jaiswal_l_Page_074.txt
5ce24b28e51de5abd59c6cfa43e8809c
c1d60c3ef278401b9ca3908a40bde12b16709b0d
1613 F20101123_AAAJOR jaiswal_l_Page_043.txt
1559aca20197eceb88cf047a52e70ad7
97effe1f41dbe3ea805221abebbd74a0a55115d7
86342 F20101123_AAAILP jaiswal_l_Page_134.jpg
3bc3ef269f0b1c43438ebc895f6191cb
b701ec5dbd7b2715147d83b68b990353eefce189
1530 F20101123_AAAIME jaiswal_l_Page_120thm.jpg
694680b399f943cd3cbb2effa85f1f70
70bdef95892e4ee486a43123ebe080e9b5a3ce6e
1433 F20101123_AAAJPH jaiswal_l_Page_075.txt
04a524c869c3a66ac86acba0cdbde17b
948318d4d284d701ca98ec2efd6a3b49e9ac2838
1866 F20101123_AAAJOS jaiswal_l_Page_052.txt
a238cefeff9c620f5dca7ed2074df833
4cd5cdc54b915d6fbe1db2c4d4cca5f7ded9b8bf
F20101123_AAAILQ jaiswal_l_Page_106.tif
da6d0121f76a08e0dc57dddefc118f3f
055e0e98da4c6c035d60b373ec44118af734f980
1574 F20101123_AAAIMF jaiswal_l_Page_064.txt
92d71ed8775e4e18cdb49d0b89feaf02
7b192cdfbdabf73e86f89b23150529e671e5439a
1858 F20101123_AAAJPI jaiswal_l_Page_076.txt
7771f719b93cbcfa79091ea30c0ffb0c
3b32bf229798fe509462a81ecca597693356948b
1073 F20101123_AAAJOT jaiswal_l_Page_054.txt
08b7b2fae0df1dde2c58cd74debfacf1
4464f7a00bd3154a0750429b71c039483fab46b3
106936 F20101123_AAAILR jaiswal_l_Page_022.jpg
609b97d5a2c4db5f48b00fbaeb6fead4
3c47e3aa22e52f4a9d8fde18cc3efe00d4f2f30c
1289 F20101123_AAAIMG jaiswal_l_Page_098.txt
d8e1fc9a936b4c2186e28be721d45355
d8e82eee6809c7e183f5cc10a81cccceaf11783b
1601 F20101123_AAAJPJ jaiswal_l_Page_077.txt
3cf4ad2a944ccc1f7bb57a87b5176124
7514bff330a32ee83f46facfde9029829652c928
2082 F20101123_AAAJOU jaiswal_l_Page_055.txt
c9689310f617e3390c7d19fb6f7d6438
97c838edfde5cd3214ac032e632509be3a7fe6bb
250963 F20101123_AAAILS jaiswal_l_Page_145.jp2
c98e610a3806090d0133dc117e0d4852
13f98cc0039c7f1b23760bdc9d813f80143c7dcb
1577 F20101123_AAAIMH jaiswal_l_Page_044.txt
e08e7e4e8b986ca972a82311b4151b57
6b0bc7a9c865b63c8325d526f53c2fd6242f2192
1991 F20101123_AAAJPK jaiswal_l_Page_079.txt
0d3a805bc2244d25049e17b58ff81cf5
2c992bbd388e65e0fc68417da2f0062c95fec22a
1738 F20101123_AAAJOV jaiswal_l_Page_056.txt
b0cefb00fde37d66154a2a098505d99d
741471a9ef8a398557b3af2996323e15d4cf6d4c
3944 F20101123_AAAILT jaiswal_l_Page_007.txt
f930620c7cb2b6af5cd5353d002a67a8
ddf2ac2e5ff84ab6c159e4f95a29b0c35a55a513
86072 F20101123_AAAIMI jaiswal_l_Page_077.jpg
e3f0cfee2aba8cd6a1436aff42773d6d
8f83ad53ba32256ce8b79c9abad94bd2c7e1a834
1509 F20101123_AAAJOW jaiswal_l_Page_059.txt
af8434328fc027b535a2904db21bc8bc
a1338d2ae040dfc2a610802bc14354b0e972f6c9
1000228 F20101123_AAAILU jaiswal_l_Page_164.jp2
0265cbf4c23587ac1cba58a74eaa6aa1
262f19b7848363ab37557d78e29b91bf3a352a1e
817 F20101123_AAAJQA jaiswal_l_Page_109.txt
a35597d65873c5502319ae8472fd28c7
959d4c8f43b2b3b6fc95dfecf4aa5c7b9a44983e
650 F20101123_AAAJPL jaiswal_l_Page_082.txt
c99b5221ff87f14b0af433fcfbb34bea
d16af8838f0f9786c7fef835e1f7850c2e954d99
1810 F20101123_AAAJOX jaiswal_l_Page_060.txt
dd926d73f5c64cade3441f7d908af5e8
ed8979be3fe28e61efeebeeb0db7da070a152330
F20101123_AAAILV jaiswal_l_Page_177.tif
828cf83428e907330eaa958095ffda07
a477748b43b9baeeaf7dc4ace54955242be24603
46791 F20101123_AAAIMJ jaiswal_l_Page_008.jpg
7c40987930734941bda14d9b51c4ee51
3e427cbe6424c362fb46a803bb469225a22e7f33
F20101123_AAAJQB jaiswal_l_Page_110.txt
0e11d52f77206ee7fcbfdff981fea576
6b6c97d3e5fe66579b20289198675a6ea8176f8c
1098 F20101123_AAAJPM jaiswal_l_Page_085.txt
9e8bc6012ca463460446b5a73d2c4e0e
66f34a0f000bf7c4e0424038afafe7b022cf3f2e
1860 F20101123_AAAJOY jaiswal_l_Page_062.txt
61147d0fc41e2fd67856b3971b4d5d00
cc0f15fb7712d4e668e0baa4315f8ebe560b3ea2
109912 F20101123_AAAILW jaiswal_l_Page_013.jpg
9a64298cda9d5fa833bacca281b1c6e5
71f83117d12d47eff83c87855d608536e7205369
85895 F20101123_AAAIMK jaiswal_l_Page_053.jp2
10f0162bf10c4c8087f4e606761a8878
9fdeb34cfdf00b249882b9c2d7b6984bf5477165
919 F20101123_AAAJQC jaiswal_l_Page_113.txt
a878c906d7951987d795100ac1d6c46b
f9bf528bc7ea7d30d12844c45d94cb72e0793106
941 F20101123_AAAJPN jaiswal_l_Page_087.txt
c76e6a7c227d59d75537edb6cb07b502
9145b8dc4fb6d7c644a89b116ea7fc8a5cc5b955
1829 F20101123_AAAJOZ jaiswal_l_Page_063.txt
2763b695db5f44befb81a0b084c18f7b
e87ab620a7395d78b11b823c9e533cb7732cd5b4
5830 F20101123_AAAILX jaiswal_l_Page_065thm.jpg
52a1709bcc37e5b84ada40cf30a2e97a
d7fd226c599af26f9d69ac2a2fd2a5331ff1c2a4
485132 F20101123_AAAINA jaiswal_l_Page_132.jp2
435b00a3916a4c0cc93f0829b1cbfb7a
d6e2f41d5131984d0749e6d63c2dbc3d7350a6f8
36471 F20101123_AAAIML jaiswal_l_Page_082.jpg
0e85c2b8026a611d18bfbb3ea4493297
1e8badfee179a0db696983ad9df0b75b3f0c38aa
1672 F20101123_AAAJQD jaiswal_l_Page_114.txt
d9f3e0b10440b5f483d7d47133eb275c
a94286ce3756cb540c824757a7a336f5d0207c48
1563 F20101123_AAAJPO jaiswal_l_Page_089.txt
51dd9b48757b7a4011070090a39e7af9
14e544eb0c5f8b6a73659ba419aa4b1ed3b66afc
26187 F20101123_AAAILY jaiswal_l_Page_176.jpg
02d1f23309b50233692681dd5bc6766e
f92a0476ba58fa6dbfec90e35a44a75bf3c1d796
90709 F20101123_AAAINB jaiswal_l_Page_041.jpg
9071d897ab4c57c098462743227d78da
50b74a827bfa5e91902fd81992bbb5fdbd0f77a0
2343 F20101123_AAAIMM jaiswal_l_Page_177.QC.jpg
caba2a89f8f4cc739d84c3f0c9594386
943d41a6931c1c739b13f5f0c83f16586ccd0c3c
914 F20101123_AAAJQE jaiswal_l_Page_116.txt
db45f611e9252bf4e8c9206b5f74150d
0dfe49f84d7ce2221e872553894118d91d2c16d7
1994 F20101123_AAAJPP jaiswal_l_Page_090.txt
e95cd6b4d7d1b928fecefc2c3fcb26cd
3f5afea44e3d4e5fdd29731497454a58abc04e2d
39334 F20101123_AAAILZ jaiswal_l_Page_107.pro
f43d73e467b7431a986174d4c8246655
b9b37eb46df48eee52153cb5d6e8afa31f22d657
F20101123_AAAINC jaiswal_l_Page_163.txt
a162fc01c3d59720ab7a5b95503f348a
7d15787050eced307f176b8582cb33a95ad86812
756082 F20101123_AAAIMN jaiswal_l_Page_095.jp2
ff5de70d9d20932e9197992e0a1896c2
e995989f32168c3c3db3353a06fba02f0abc140b
1121 F20101123_AAAJQF jaiswal_l_Page_117.txt
74e55ad031cd6b71d7a6275a9764134d
cc7420e0d9f2d4daef91219d7388ec3557a7c02a
485 F20101123_AAAJPQ jaiswal_l_Page_091.txt
cfcd6043aaac5f904c85afc979abb784
64dfdf5f5bb8616dfad374f49637423c3c0edec6
1403 F20101123_AAAIND jaiswal_l_Page_029.txt
1362d4189757b067a3f9bb3f0f113696
beff826eeb21ded120beee5e2902de8a6da50cf0
8392 F20101123_AAAIMO jaiswal_l_Page_073thm.jpg
68412e2c1315d58d7f064e1677ddbbc2
d29271b03f54f5385b9b7d2423e65c0fd1b72e03
295 F20101123_AAAJQG jaiswal_l_Page_120.txt
9e5d89c24305a845ce47ef10d464b7cb
f69a53cabaf05e767185b2f8d707c6436914fdc4
1450 F20101123_AAAJPR jaiswal_l_Page_093.txt
b5c0158487ed5b02d97454c5d46cd93c
56bf332b915fcf09145f408b186ad422c4576c14
9630 F20101123_AAAINE jaiswal_l_Page_173.QC.jpg
f43fbe63a6bba34a8c326ae4f2510694
259e03bc0010ce1c6fe412f5387325b11fa839f0
F20101123_AAAIMP jaiswal_l_Page_176.tif
e8d369e144846a8e9672cb404654a503
f1c9545d96a6a6dd8799b5e4b10ffe4ddb93f164
1730 F20101123_AAAJQH jaiswal_l_Page_121.txt
1569e9826abdc5ea785b77a8851884aa
8c59cd83ca3509545236e70b192216e1db702773
882 F20101123_AAAJPS jaiswal_l_Page_094.txt
b35c82eee3745b418e6c6aa1f944f62b
18f9df813b9874d5ec3eeb5479db867a9a38bfce
96004 F20101123_AAAINF jaiswal_l_Page_162.jpg
5f2ec3ce2f76b81f14e3e8626d2de716
ead4248cf7186d73cfee2483107dee4bdcdb50fd
F20101123_AAAIMQ jaiswal_l_Page_027.tif
0ae1d5793b4ca73dcc73204bbdf8869b
cff18ad80c7ea7995c3a4e259162daee68420d16
F20101123_AAAJQI jaiswal_l_Page_124.txt
00d0f4d13cfb756f298ca6fe99de52b2
002a68b8a8ad40f308f6b0aa704dd195546bf501
189 F20101123_AAAJPT jaiswal_l_Page_096.txt
837f0424258cf3dc7e5b98da0c654c8c
99646f7d161a82786ade996a248e6b3ecac74dbe
10520 F20101123_AAAING jaiswal_l_Page_151.pro
51c6ffcea461551be8c3b48610474fd8
091004e5bc7afc01be19178a8253414452278c76
91460 F20101123_AAAIMR jaiswal_l_Page_066.jpg
c4993aa9191ae7745aac5aa97f9d9acf
e5dd2b9b15e1510790106859af37ea435bf381c1
1359 F20101123_AAAJQJ jaiswal_l_Page_126.txt
17709b00f4dd359fe3854d97767c2571
94676ab4929744010ac2f279e5c451b26ca32112
552 F20101123_AAAJPU jaiswal_l_Page_097.txt
0fd920a937030ebcd021a6a30f37f5ff
90fd890379d8e7cdd58026cae6f073ac1997ad97
F20101123_AAAINH jaiswal_l_Page_107.tif
c6cd4d335dad1f686792c8a68475ac91
56bbe992aa1554ef8e8bdc9dc3305d433b6348ac
1051976 F20101123_AAAIMS jaiswal_l_Page_012.jp2
2f203a1f7d283bec012399760fa13484
e7e17912c79d771f1ea6ad06b92d1ffd5f2b784d
2714 F20101123_AAAJQK jaiswal_l_Page_127.txt
c6069efeab24fbe4189592cf97544334
3267bdc2893a7039eb090e63bdedf8890d29ee74
1524 F20101123_AAAJPV jaiswal_l_Page_099.txt
acefe8285cbdaccd937f05975d6f45b0
690f29291fdcc7baaade0915219cfc75cd866396
48657 F20101123_AAAINI jaiswal_l_Page_070.jpg
c02eb8d71dc7059d408efbb019b96179
a6c9d82bc3021afc6ca11ce5a0aeba48eda2b886
50321 F20101123_AAAIMT jaiswal_l_Page_072.pro
5e071e6c7cf302ed40bea1a0cc370826
0d45e24aeafdfb3435b1cd612630c4c71a0efa5e
631 F20101123_AAAJQL jaiswal_l_Page_128.txt
afe078ad3612c02b5eaa6600a59ecfde
21538ea5bdf79d20feafd4360fa3106ce2caaee1
1649 F20101123_AAAJPW jaiswal_l_Page_102.txt
b258bb6a38c8b8759cfd7cbee8e537d1
b828922c29e1747b48b82eb7d99db2b157494bd0
8018 F20101123_AAAINJ jaiswal_l_Page_140thm.jpg
edece5d36dc6e32b4692e75bb41773f4
10bb7a533ec2e744ce10f71e859a0621dc613126
1586 F20101123_AAAIMU jaiswal_l_Page_058.txt
7750d02bcb21a14c65c631239abf07dc
6a4b429f89bc3fcaeb01100695b73756d9b18a10
1683 F20101123_AAAJRA jaiswal_l_Page_156.txt
86812815b1d83bb347b453e2d37574e5
cbbc696d83db68f667cbf639ffab66abe9b0916c
1742 F20101123_AAAJPX jaiswal_l_Page_103.txt
404e296266dd810797e31348d4af4750
28634e5f8e0c965ddda0f2faa36e6b443594c447
39695 F20101123_AAAIMV jaiswal_l_Page_114.pro
8843c2f60a477d7391c89564825f4751
3db48aa1ed4e8ba24686990808ca4b8db2d93c11
1238 F20101123_AAAJRB jaiswal_l_Page_160.txt
147c5ba745f4ab93faeb909678c5e3b0
fa2af1e9cde18317178cee838382bddb3f2f894b
2059 F20101123_AAAJQM jaiswal_l_Page_129.txt
b3538241eef90bb31e56da5dd25e29a9
d52d542da0d5e2158ec3c1ed0c069b415f6c6af9
1273 F20101123_AAAJPY jaiswal_l_Page_105.txt
91dc130d24c04c5351a66483553ea5a1
458c66ce4360aca80ec45aaa1d409eab0b1dff2f
F20101123_AAAINK jaiswal_l_Page_102.tif
69d902c908ce4a495890a216362a0d84
191930d58c5f5154eb438b8dca4553fad06c953a
6866 F20101123_AAAIMW jaiswal_l_Page_138thm.jpg
2525d7c99cbb22028e80fdd304bb0d62
e1705533389df6a105c135e2f0841def102a097d
121 F20101123_AAAJRC jaiswal_l_Page_161.txt
cea3e6d42276d4cd4c152024426e24d5
5b490892ef01844885f0c21f3ab1a66eb34d5f96
1339 F20101123_AAAJQN jaiswal_l_Page_130.txt
405dacc56662f9f9d6f7ecbd398f8cd6
0c61a2e57595425cfa72b65e28df5929187bcabc
825 F20101123_AAAJPZ jaiswal_l_Page_106.txt
ed0a14a170a3ac5c18c18c8ff431a8b4
ff620827a11aa080aac0582f586913751fcaab3d
35728 F20101123_AAAIOA jaiswal_l_Page_006.QC.jpg
6c16cc0ba5e73bc0daa2d4070ea50a22
ca0e0a1c8b3c6f95b802842b55b69df662a8b622
106926 F20101123_AAAINL jaiswal_l_Page_124.jp2
57eda5d6469f0b137f0db184b00acaee
ac4ac0d0a5e60d8fe4978b6046a9724044c87a21
83601 F20101123_AAAIMX jaiswal_l_Page_045.jpg
6037a705cbbd1023d27358a83cdd1517
9fea2a3a33eb92bbfc20b3fdf0d8d209040de578
1719 F20101123_AAAJRD jaiswal_l_Page_162.txt
e9de99fd0e2c5b77660219586a7c2b4f
4c6cabfc43650cd323313fda124dcb38af07e300
1290 F20101123_AAAJQO jaiswal_l_Page_131.txt
863d52073eedddaa693fd780f3c3e27c
58aaa1603701e373e578836ad19bc736bf8823db
83827 F20101123_AAAIOB jaiswal_l_Page_055.jp2
95b65245362df4e8b3c29dbe19d0be63
0febfab22f40173ed954a5e5b736eba63df6648c
2970 F20101123_AAAINM jaiswal_l_Page_183thm.jpg
7aa98c424920669617049fc676dfeaec
940940e815324ff25c51077047d894286c3a1928
647 F20101123_AAAIMY jaiswal_l_Page_037.txt
818baeb0880add890bfee1fff3787c40
f55717d897f7f06f67a13afdfd2b2a7a05ce93c9
1729 F20101123_AAAJRE jaiswal_l_Page_165.txt
6647314add9bc26c05beb493f2ffdcae
8097441295016dca811b892d125dca1fa9de2db2
F20101123_AAAJQP jaiswal_l_Page_132.txt
7eaec023b1c86a4cbca4ed5671704121
cae30503dbef5db20f8065b240affd66db03547b
20003 F20101123_AAAIOC jaiswal_l_Page_131.pro
de9a8a717833957e6f8ebeb7658e764b
27058a25fc1e4ecba48f49fd71e5667d5e731e38
F20101123_AAAINN jaiswal_l_Page_173.tif
6b119176c1b86837f1f5c8db396f2fca
f0ca877f06dab86ec255d364eefba8f6796b7eaf
43110 F20101123_AAAIMZ jaiswal_l_Page_074.jp2
47df0584c7ba67ecd0c088ae1914205c
bbcb4691c79f40e9110c1d29663455fcd998bd64
1558 F20101123_AAAJRF jaiswal_l_Page_166.txt
d50f0471f86efdcd93fc0624a74735ac
54061043a331c715f865aea81dc301bd4fe263fa
1589 F20101123_AAAJQQ jaiswal_l_Page_135.txt
7d349e0abdfbf24245300fb773ba9482
4e013e2ef96b1fb3ec8e19f6b4c5cc853d686bf1
4582 F20101123_AAAIOD jaiswal_l_Page_154thm.jpg
5ed96cf515ff38045a20b7b245224ed6
3d66589b92a6f2ba0f1c8353626409eb0f7f74c7
28666 F20101123_AAAINO jaiswal_l_Page_160.jpg
67448c374a4e3868ffe9e3cb156d3324
6498bac5a061bda87ee3580c5b2a4f2a8c22602b
1783 F20101123_AAAJRG jaiswal_l_Page_168.txt
a097891b66c9569a8fa24ede4282294a
c42204f0d18198deda6366d15dd4845440410cdf
1864 F20101123_AAAJQR jaiswal_l_Page_136.txt
2b07e9e85429a1c56a1bc6e46ea32720
904d23a2f771094f72dff6994277e32cd70ba4c9
35653 F20101123_AAAIOE jaiswal_l_Page_182.jpg
0ea5e0c4d06dcaae14ebf3cc81e3fc12
bacbe9cb841d624b9eedaca2c6ad4ff20d0180b9
1699 F20101123_AAAINP jaiswal_l_Page_115.txt
03a9b9e6f3cd089c1b69758117503e58
bab67625a68f7c09e0393df51e2f6dd199fadfea
1291 F20101123_AAAJRH jaiswal_l_Page_169.txt
58ca8c12e24901a66974ed02af56df3e
13044cdef7d6df495338854d6d6408006771b558
1240 F20101123_AAAJQS jaiswal_l_Page_139.txt
3f3bd855a4a4e042bf26df4a26ad3604
6fbe2c5c48e403dc52af7e78d6789d032a791e0d
7651 F20101123_AAAIOF jaiswal_l_Page_046thm.jpg
1aa8aa0e58529cf95ff4087c9b54ba10
c22fce4ba30be275832464c12508e0655c55b511
490 F20101123_AAAINQ jaiswal_l_Page_159.txt
e1bb3797d8c2f9334d0377db588d3781
e2d148eb0b57347969d6d9668f560d436903fba9
182 F20101123_AAAJRI jaiswal_l_Page_172.txt
2d0500540ec49da34391095735affe60
df0ad3fae050ffe6c2fabef99920d913c8abcdb3
1937 F20101123_AAAJQT jaiswal_l_Page_143.txt
7e08dcc0360b6aa70f6cd24bd2ceb0eb
3d01ffa2faa8eaaa3525eaa90fd2da62836a5985
81209 F20101123_AAAIOG jaiswal_l_Page_027.jpg
6a00e2d5722acafd2f04d1766b1b7243
2afbc6467e64c0e5b1f948c22b7afce96377a0b9
F20101123_AAAINR jaiswal_l_Page_179.tif
3b431e5c7b66cc04d30f23ac50503025
02e500e2baf3a794f8be300999743f6e812f59a1
152 F20101123_AAAJRJ jaiswal_l_Page_173.txt
159a9dd5b1f6e8f2c876a47abfef81cc
ccc9f4c7e1cf7987a87090b636846df457be8986
1160 F20101123_AAAJQU jaiswal_l_Page_146.txt
2be7e2d8d8b2e9c6d735c50816255a58
04d4c6fc3b690b40e81f823efa3db4974f9eaf63
8443 F20101123_AAAIOH jaiswal_l_Page_022thm.jpg
43c17c655464306dbdb66d29edd63ef6
1027c7ec78ad8cecf4029a0cfacef16e88919a9f
F20101123_AAAINS jaiswal_l_Page_087.tif
6f6eed04451a9f2036e69ac4dc347cc8
f09c228e8ba805b171d83c8e702a91d8c14ff1d8
F20101123_AAAJRK jaiswal_l_Page_174.txt
32653e608f611f2fb0c0ac04ad348d5e
890bd4ab765a18e5600474822bb438d6b77aaeef
F20101123_AAAJQV jaiswal_l_Page_149.txt
140d1b11ad31f8c01b687fd63efd53ec
c1d2c8fe2eb7ff9a81df93e204c06dfd6da5fa6e
F20101123_AAAINT jaiswal_l_Page_164.tif
f1915d783105fd875e73c44f1694ce07
24fe279ca4079bc0c34ab480e7fcf1b9579a73b4
F20101123_AAAIOI jaiswal_l_Page_158.tif
811718605bb06ff0074e601066070241
6ff40ebb93b8eea1db0afe41aad530d0c8f83cd4
89 F20101123_AAAJRL jaiswal_l_Page_177.txt
cf24176e84e6b004029e8639564029dd
03c99e63109aa71e2895c5d6ec96fe0913654d8d
2036 F20101123_AAAJQW jaiswal_l_Page_150.txt
89e0f0ee9e5cc1b17c6d2d741717c20f
f0bcd1c0aa6307e6e295777db3f0aff16f3dee3d
F20101123_AAAINU jaiswal_l_Page_019.tif
4cbc28f816942c95b09ae1356fbe2ae8
a9c30e1fe27c0255c1415e65817b63ff89183af7
4316 F20101123_AAAIOJ jaiswal_l_Page_169thm.jpg
5869189d3ce9f0795d9e44c85b18679c
7b4b289a2b2e846de03cdbd2bb46e76621ee9ae8
13479 F20101123_AAAJSA jaiswal_l_Page_008.QC.jpg
645ed98b271e56185fd04bff246d36d3
baa05c766f1de3531575b7e25798bb87d9ec3cf8
1948 F20101123_AAAJRM jaiswal_l_Page_178.txt
d5fcedd7561c783726ab7a1a9feb271f
75b4236e80eda842a3f999ce7aea2bf943759f84
488 F20101123_AAAJQX jaiswal_l_Page_151.txt
3613471352a2c48cab3a0f7f79a56d22
77cd4045988cf7d1e9c279d07f56b570fa129ef1
1608 F20101123_AAAINV jaiswal_l_Page_107.txt
5eaa75cd9ba45916d060a6233fd8e8cd
68b80ed1b5a4e928ef84c4fd0e967654d3c78623
F20101123_AAAIOK jaiswal_l_Page_001.tif
d8d2ff810cb617b863c6b1e1946b3ea8
933229c1ad4eabdc20bcd49d049bbe7c5ccfaedf
7102 F20101123_AAAJSB jaiswal_l_Page_009thm.jpg
a67d6b34ea48a0064ec3667d8e4a0bb4
6ace9bdfb81c337d9b9c3f79553d7a6f1cb086a3
516 F20101123_AAAJQY jaiswal_l_Page_154.txt
10733c08a266a2b5b9e98867cc8d07ee
91e91d3e9c6fd917165f88a4edc920d56d083a96
72069 F20101123_AAAINW jaiswal_l_Page_004.jp2
40f281590224685de7e6752987888768
5de2b75d770b46eccb1cbb00097e15612f2cb8ed
29634 F20101123_AAAJSC jaiswal_l_Page_009.QC.jpg
18f83000dce1dc7ed2f330c498fe9891
5be174226947fa1b6f84a973ce11eb93e1f749ce
1033 F20101123_AAAJRN jaiswal_l_Page_179.txt
a2ee2b1a387a11c9301e65a7e6305b03
bc9e79a4efe8b37de143ee83d68f5203045b2de4
1467 F20101123_AAAJQZ jaiswal_l_Page_155.txt
d9a8e4972b78f1988396c339e36d8887
0d4b8902973ba68d06c45afde0e9c29c145292a2
5687 F20101123_AAAINX jaiswal_l_Page_112thm.jpg
83df3185d666ff36d060473c0499693b
8041f62520fbfd96a6a9eb73f2686bd94e207a3c
1435 F20101123_AAAIPA jaiswal_l_Page_049.txt
a7de371d2b2d7dd414e2f51ae4374c3d
2602ef86a1b7ec21c4b24f2b9c4095597a64bea7
1201 F20101123_AAAIOL jaiswal_l_Page_002.pro
39071218e7104ad2b63be16063f09528
cc9941f893c67c998352288c1c74e1d7cf9de366
30800 F20101123_AAAJSD jaiswal_l_Page_011.QC.jpg
2842ca26a42f243b36b7327522da956e
d498c0f1a2221fee8c0b9ba59f783ea98287c48d
1978 F20101123_AAAJRO jaiswal_l_Page_180.txt
29fe101cd7c156086ab5f8356b915668
3059ca477035dc30d1946812033dbd89a73eeb2f
1629 F20101123_AAAINY jaiswal_l_Page_019.txt
27a8de962351da85806ca27d93fd695a
1d4a538b13b631e45e4d42e2fdef3cdc7c602fe9
F20101123_AAAIPB jaiswal_l_Page_139thm.jpg
0746ab6ffec98eb36bd70f82c1e67fc2
9910325ceb2c3217855f2940bb0eddab4d0ac724
474 F20101123_AAAIOM jaiswal_l_Page_001.txt
1fd6f248ffd8a67932955a3139f32377
5cc79faa8118b749d97674ebacbff625216ff1b5
31237 F20101123_AAAJSE jaiswal_l_Page_012.QC.jpg
ac15fbbb882e8f41dc75fdf9c5418cb8
5944e06e997197dff6dbb1a45871ec1488cabc9d
F20101123_AAAJRP jaiswal_l_Page_181.txt
b503945c494dc315b794c88efaa5ae67
4dd3c76a411f67b236cf8ac65128675b29cd899b
28656 F20101123_AAAINZ jaiswal_l_Page_145.jpg
fc02aae50941cb16e5da72806c70af69
e8f032b27fbe6bd1215c10316dd953f0816bafb9
6986 F20101123_AAAIPC jaiswal_l_Page_143thm.jpg
da9a6345d8d84ae66fdef7083e53334b
2a6d77acc25d02c8aa103e9d8f05ec9963f6dca1
8471 F20101123_AAAION jaiswal_l_Page_001.QC.jpg
87c5f738919e8c869a40adec0b7c1d3f
afd5bbee582785cf47ceb47b621c3d6ca2b1e23d
14659 F20101123_AAAJSF jaiswal_l_Page_014.QC.jpg
0de6b5014c39cf55e8b120f477171b0f
9c0336d407605db9c88d98e7d664e0be7bffa950
2223 F20101123_AAAJRQ jaiswal_l_Page_001thm.jpg
e9e5ea096e286c0fc15baa7208bacd1a
64afc75b32aae8604784569e8b0c733ae96cb7ec
43931 F20101123_AAAIPD jaiswal_l_Page_066.pro
8123e422874dff5e6b11e3a54dc839bc
169fb6d9b9cdacdb0afbe8d9f9a7c96abfad562f
31514 F20101123_AAAIOO jaiswal_l_Page_052.QC.jpg
c0188b76bf5a8023998a22654ee31f71
a02978521c617971cc8105f26be97a011038fa3a
6530 F20101123_AAAJSG jaiswal_l_Page_016thm.jpg
dceaa372f9ec7a007742f2270ba24ea8
4686ffc9e4776eb5bea9acade1f8c78cd4fef97d
2480340 F20101123_AAAJRR jaiswal_l.pdf
114f15fabb61410df9b891116dc77d51
0217271d0860378d11467780b6ec0483f3261de7
77290 F20101123_AAAIPE jaiswal_l_Page_156.jpg
baec6ae54018bbbd5aa53af67569b96a
b16eda8e088c65c7e28a22b3242bf05511f156e5
1051978 F20101123_AAAIOP jaiswal_l_Page_162.jp2
73363a1d5ecdfcccc1d4d2d7799d09dd
0e1a80d8e0bc997cc85da216f836c3e23ab0065b
26588 F20101123_AAAJSH jaiswal_l_Page_016.QC.jpg
00b5078728ac35af0dccc3ea4c835bb6
8574ff1cae16b7af90857326f83d904246d3c3c6
617 F20101123_AAAJRS jaiswal_l_Page_002thm.jpg
9e015396710ca5bbf81a88a0cc94f2e5
c03dc5bffb090341d39897b367afe39c2a47e653
F20101123_AAAIPF jaiswal_l_Page_042.tif
86c9f6300550b5d8cacf9350cf79e5c7
879ea156a5c383a3eece3c298fb98952547b6d3e
65775 F20101123_AAAIOQ jaiswal_l_Page_020.jpg
f79ea24a0ed60285872009e8c40dec9e
d2029fcb7912976e9e93ea0bf1f2342f30f59b76
6609 F20101123_AAAJSI jaiswal_l_Page_019thm.jpg
e0c3bfa6a89c09418cdf55758eb63863
da1e3ae1df442800ae6074aaa1581d9cc513cf7a
530 F20101123_AAAJRT jaiswal_l_Page_003thm.jpg
85f19bffed6426d6686ec5deb5c6dda0
11d54a632c954d49170d18c995ec99d69192ac5b
812 F20101123_AAAIPG jaiswal_l_Page_111.txt
1e6a37f3e0a9704619c1086c638b4bee
ab380ab414a173efb60295cc6f18233d8e0b4b19
F20101123_AAAIOR jaiswal_l_Page_070thm.jpg
a7f2d3b4a24b0e4fe8b6eca2346d7ee3
48a0eeab84806ed4869b255596c535ac6b6f6a0d
19518 F20101123_AAAJSJ jaiswal_l_Page_020.QC.jpg
3b8aac60833e9ab755b46fc7dc2e994f
ce09cbd0b0e5f002768f0333c9dd8d6530955ddc
1314 F20101123_AAAJRU jaiswal_l_Page_003.QC.jpg
6b91b4f76bc32d0c571a5c3281e59bca
fdb3b73e66726f2810ade39cd7e2c50999d443fe
86109 F20101123_AAAIPH jaiswal_l_Page_061.jpg
e0abf125ffdad2a617f81e721d9558a6
69c550fa132229203d667b109b149571969c8376
305 F20101123_AAAIOS jaiswal_l_Page_145.txt
a5dd2f2dbcc4ef34188ed0a2d2338ce4
d7f573470e0b9190c8a22119d302a63aedd68760
7228 F20101123_AAAJSK jaiswal_l_Page_021thm.jpg
4b8b2cd4765df16dcdb4278e15ec0347
18971a1fcdba3470ead1cb9ff901044460d413ed
21696 F20101123_AAAJRV jaiswal_l_Page_004.QC.jpg
abe92629d6d2a42cf4cb3a824b7e7079
f38d477d3c7f865710755a19a70826920a368ca1
825708 F20101123_AAAIPI jaiswal_l_Page_115.jp2
38e993ef963c8775ab9b736812f6f965
76332377303dd02309c7c28df9cbba1f27cc3e65
45087 F20101123_AAAIOT jaiswal_l_Page_018.pro
1f2a36ddffc419c87297f0f043bf0fd2
dcdb772ef8e216ca6721ec4f25aa89b98b5ae937
34213 F20101123_AAAJSL jaiswal_l_Page_022.QC.jpg
2b9f85fb8472ea268bc945e51b2ad0c6
ab16a9f1e6b3e7589d5e08b5124dd3910b5172a5
26181 F20101123_AAAJRW jaiswal_l_Page_005.QC.jpg
83dcac3db892800d0f4c6426ca57f419
f3c5722c5d4196b9c532c71e70b6e3d7372599a4
F20101123_AAAIPJ jaiswal_l_Page_146.tif
20d297d1a806c644767b5dac2ccd2677
0564204138200b3809b183c8f3c476780974cab1
30785 F20101123_AAAIOU jaiswal_l_Page_076.QC.jpg
e66a57e70f4e9d9860ce42f412249d22
0ff74376fa4cd7a60e427075e5ab02007f1a2f85
27813 F20101123_AAAJTA jaiswal_l_Page_034.QC.jpg
967f0278db6cf33b38b75a22055c140a
914ceae96b209abac214e23dd0ec420d7e818972
6978 F20101123_AAAJSM jaiswal_l_Page_023thm.jpg
0d13b3e88050ff3a0de71e8ca0e77992
14365ba5f05c7d22b0bfff2d2156395e801c5c0d
8394 F20101123_AAAJRX jaiswal_l_Page_006thm.jpg
c0ea8f62399792d9a5d45fb7b0a9f3e3
a9e2d9b0883d1afd79ac3ea6ae954c3de90beb5d
20179 F20101123_AAAIPK jaiswal_l_Page_098.QC.jpg
b7cf7400365a381ea98c0fdc57708caf
7b844387d448b958e94fe97226987910eb9ce48d
1015 F20101123_AAAIOV jaiswal_l_Page_167.txt
da88a0d4d7c8b5d1b4b4c6c951d0eaf6
d4d3f932e4d77bc6f9076687ec1b2281c8815f69
6886 F20101123_AAAJTB jaiswal_l_Page_035thm.jpg
839c289149684b066907040780e6ccd1
132359526e41d98ff6ac97e0d442fcb4defbb379
29182 F20101123_AAAJSN jaiswal_l_Page_023.QC.jpg
4b4af02a0f936b0f65cc04dfa430a088
4e909e6bd349102d15fe030b0197923a3d4a8778
30416 F20101123_AAAJRY jaiswal_l_Page_007.QC.jpg
159746ec9379b5e38e6c7470e75aeef9
be2164e8d396e4eb180e41b2c08efbb0743401b1
27493 F20101123_AAAIPL jaiswal_l_Page_019.QC.jpg
aa4a9b630280d8b7278dd4a78db1f265
5ca95c788201fc3cbf53b98779005e4281c4acc4
7603 F20101123_AAAIOW jaiswal_l_Page_011thm.jpg
293767558a78474d5a1bc45171c1ca83
a7a42521fc011425006f1fcf138ba050e7fe1f62
7316 F20101123_AAAJTC jaiswal_l_Page_036thm.jpg
364a0a0f913e501c57d32cedb7043f6b
b982cabb804bd3b08711aaa2c3ecb0b1bf863df8
3409 F20101123_AAAJRZ jaiswal_l_Page_008thm.jpg
af8a082cddba645594e93751b13cc2cc
b245817c3ca398a9a976f770211a9e3280305722
6689 F20101123_AAAIQA jaiswal_l_Page_102thm.jpg
84161254ca428bcefd779c3139c870f5
bab4110a49946938ef2a2d271f01aa92addcd295
F20101123_AAAIOX jaiswal_l_Page_142.tif
65e9483d4da1a63bb28058a91e061b3f
8791fc8287907d2f032dbc6328d40d7c3b5f03e7
3507 F20101123_AAAJTD jaiswal_l_Page_037thm.jpg
e9866da4ac83cde62cb494550d1d3452
ece756a18fd99437b553757ed474068dea3b95f4
28720 F20101123_AAAJSO jaiswal_l_Page_024.QC.jpg
0c8e74b39aedc2a737e935c85528b518
c47381bb79574009c08966e1c1d7be55efc41c87
2183 F20101123_AAAIQB jaiswal_l_Page_009.txt
8f7203f995db853f29f1f2915e6643af
46689594dcb620508a7dc33bbb4d45265b8ff6df
1051966 F20101123_AAAIPM jaiswal_l_Page_140.jp2
5aef4b2c215c0bb75b413150cdbca0bc
25d03285741152d7f01a06836d3d670dc79a8d2c
22847 F20101123_AAAIOY jaiswal_l_Page_123.QC.jpg
16a5e780702bf5a9635f98f7f6dcc937
3c36a58da77e8e72c8d11d57868d6c727717e277
11952 F20101123_AAAJTE jaiswal_l_Page_037.QC.jpg
a70b99c499186d5f81d4e12d91984405
cbda701e90b0a7d13819d722c6062f828bde64a3
31774 F20101123_AAAJSP jaiswal_l_Page_025.QC.jpg
b616c8343e92c5b3a3102f3785536e3c
3b5cc84ad1e9a2417ef14142fb0aea2c16f1cc2c
48772 F20101123_AAAIQC jaiswal_l_Page_088.jpg
83fa3eaf815e4a6535848105ed5a6e66
5b0dca20654ee9518efd481dc79f140c4c312cd7
5287 F20101123_AAAIPN jaiswal_l_Page_085thm.jpg
b9a1899f679f908e8d82b60ee073b353
f8c5ed903e9188464791de51654a3bcd60cdb0c6
F20101123_AAAIOZ jaiswal_l_Page_094.tif
f3552a44ec556c2792ad594abd1fa496
ac0e7aef7d24b62803d6827f964566274e871656
4035 F20101123_AAAJTF jaiswal_l_Page_039thm.jpg
22265bc55a59d208529eca8dc682481c
9d2f15c8a33a5c83a8f48822bf36a32a2f585a22
8188 F20101123_AAAJSQ jaiswal_l_Page_026thm.jpg
7aeac9a994ae140126111027a3547e2f
36bba02187361956b650928d4f23e7007c4203b3
1867 F20101123_AAAIQD jaiswal_l_Page_026.txt
e18b10eeba02d5748707cb54205b78ac
276a962a7710f0f07a839d8084a2c9e932f6e414
1051961 F20101123_AAAIPO jaiswal_l_Page_006.jp2
2b9658b945e319e9c6795e9cceaf7728
b1977da8497d0f0b7f59da1f0d16afc679c7f237
7974 F20101123_AAAJTG jaiswal_l_Page_040thm.jpg
d5056ea71351d9e488304384e577570a
9ca4ba6e21ffdd2a9b11bd9780e3e5dca55223db
32210 F20101123_AAAJSR jaiswal_l_Page_026.QC.jpg
72551b7cd00d37c437a4cfbfd0d7d5be
b6e31ee7da189b3d1da8b6cc6dcbcffc3ab98f75
109777 F20101123_AAAIQE jaiswal_l_Page_042.jp2
620b10aeaaf77015ce285d0991d903cf
129b97981cee60beeaf7ed7892734f9b68c022fb
49317 F20101123_AAAIPP jaiswal_l_Page_031.pro
fe810f88638080e50548cbb33720b0fd
f55896be3b08c81197b83a435119b329bc6da428
31903 F20101123_AAAJTH jaiswal_l_Page_040.QC.jpg
286ce3fc8226476c33ee3ea01d38480a
1cf4516eaac7c5b2fe4d20a5a6331863a37cf10f
25901 F20101123_AAAJSS jaiswal_l_Page_027.QC.jpg
0a5f06dc86b54c1f505ef2b9743eefa3
8bf5109e6b9c888a7212e920b7c89d1234cff9cd
6820 F20101123_AAAIQF jaiswal_l_Page_071thm.jpg
475080175cd4a88c5269c2320f50b44a
79fbfd11642d13fb6ffb0102723fa81e0465ab6d
1842 F20101123_AAAIPQ jaiswal_l_Page_157.txt
c4a01a0571e6481e81e7f4a2c4acfe78
455f05156b2d0acecdd37331dbe8375b37d2bbe9
7185 F20101123_AAAJTI jaiswal_l_Page_041thm.jpg
c2858dc43db414b3106f050d9a11019a
276d15c97c9de28c5699042d0da761ce2dc08bd8
8353 F20101123_AAAJST jaiswal_l_Page_028thm.jpg
b3488c935dcddf2051a9eb02b3f0ba6f
deba4bfd25620519bec3a7f042b31356e9c409e9
368721 F20101123_AAAIQG jaiswal_l_Page_154.jp2
80fca0667f8f678fd66df68b6d3e0cbf
90917266e94f4d2fe1a4da410f26d51f5992e484
25379 F20101123_AAAIPR jaiswal_l_Page_105.pro
6bb6bc32180e98cd7c47b9d2bab74f04
65b9c5dd508d4de5891112430cba64523c2b1863
28644 F20101123_AAAJTJ jaiswal_l_Page_041.QC.jpg
f8f4c0a15aaf54b3580592cd41ab909a
1bcbcb1e1dcd3edbd8d957d8068d74804224dbad
34243 F20101123_AAAJSU jaiswal_l_Page_028.QC.jpg
ac72a3d88ac4735159670a861a601427
8da6003fced45fa5834a2518e6ec4a4a62350900
98356 F20101123_AAAIQH jaiswal_l_Page_018.jp2
6ca370ff06ac03c2aec4d294f5713b32
1e200f02d661133aff6be763695f1c7bae1c0c23
17634 F20101123_AAAIPS jaiswal_l_Page_111.pro
146d2541a4a5cfb2d34a651a5a0605ec
75f16109dc7c82ec8ed281d56fa2c053ace3b9de
26544 F20101123_AAAJTK jaiswal_l_Page_043.QC.jpg
b35fcd8cc6159e6ab26617bb9c594ecc
80fc6681a072dc20a64447f472774e0e223f448a
6435 F20101123_AAAJSV jaiswal_l_Page_029thm.jpg
97fad1f8f27c4e573cd2ede1f43b1ec4
49a5b5a389819b252d731fb52d18e63eac1b8392
616848 F20101123_AAAIQI jaiswal_l_Page_106.jp2
0fae161ef22cbbb69330a20086b30271
053d124baa08c070f0dd383282fe4f66e5169bbb
2067 F20101123_AAAIPT jaiswal_l_Page_024.txt
e8f4d2d6d9e923dbd849fbcebda2a873
a7230dbcb01cf8ab3ad3f237d17871e145b61962
5576 F20101123_AAAJTL jaiswal_l_Page_044thm.jpg
ca4e4e2338662cead4be7aeb165faa03
3dadab6ae0d31cf22762c8a993dac305d82a6332
7437 F20101123_AAAJSW jaiswal_l_Page_030thm.jpg
dea4fafad8941fa1a7e04dd03049d33a
0456e26f9ca7840043977205329f19d6efdc5d9c
23113 F20101123_AAAIQJ jaiswal_l_Page_065.QC.jpg
037a5e1228e1fd17f589bb648333799b
b2e5eaa2721b3ad5a9ec96d591a45338a2b9158d
27299 F20101123_AAAIPU jaiswal_l_Page_056.QC.jpg
d4fd6b3e2501d0f63bcefe1aa5cbfcc6
d5b407ea9a3340c416f95aacec26da5f4c17bd2f
5996 F20101123_AAAJUA jaiswal_l_Page_058thm.jpg
1beeee2080cffafdaf0af2565f51c489
86b74a6a0101bf205ed1831c0f6487e5711f20c5
6919 F20101123_AAAJTM jaiswal_l_Page_045thm.jpg
db8595d90e235b571501d224b78246e8
74b461e4c768864e598a89a51da87a7e1ab9b3fb
29788 F20101123_AAAJSX jaiswal_l_Page_030.QC.jpg
8983330ea164cd7fbb16137a111449c2
7dbe094db78f334cce0a1cb9068fe2cfa8ef49a5
11319 F20101123_AAAIQK jaiswal_l_Page_149.QC.jpg
6ff286ac3dff95989e17091b6b2b5c41
e43ac6ea562e865ce87e1c2f4921263c08f05246
2356 F20101123_AAAIPV jaiswal_l_Page_078.txt
ef16fe81ced1f4076c86cde2624c72e0
a13f73084fdced85e27d3996b0416cd454db8a8a
5797 F20101123_AAAJUB jaiswal_l_Page_059thm.jpg
344d24f0748ee216cc62fa14548dd52c
3da1ac5513811f5fe39f098af898def1a6720706
7403 F20101123_AAAJTN jaiswal_l_Page_047thm.jpg
7f7e14b5773de5bb574786da2bf9f9e8
c608c82a74d8b71186168f399777ef23d8559fbf
7923 F20101123_AAAJSY jaiswal_l_Page_031thm.jpg
28f86de0cdbe7485bd567bb5f4dbb158
c8f1030d9619b5d01bb5b82cdc975e9ce587aa65
F20101123_AAAIQL jaiswal_l_Page_071.tif
c8409f3d0628136eaf4f8d6988cea8e0
88e26eaf20f4d4116af3c031f52cde6d4036c5e7
4786 F20101123_AAAIPW jaiswal_l_Page_088thm.jpg
cbe730275c4e93d8c50f706d8a4001df
46003d9c0bb3fa56663a3f31ab5c947e08fcb945
6757 F20101123_AAAJUC jaiswal_l_Page_060thm.jpg
c5311ee3b429509a7bed6b4b783c1c01
bb187857f9f5776d14159256aeaa83df4c5bfdb4
24133 F20101123_AAAJTO jaiswal_l_Page_048.QC.jpg
c28265922fda00c5aecebe72e96f5941
b1d244feac76bec8ff866d7024c7691fb7f5039b
32174 F20101123_AAAJSZ jaiswal_l_Page_031.QC.jpg
011bbfd77b1bdd112cccdaa80f02611a
78b9332941017b2d696a7bffe1d6cdc90bd55c72
4592 F20101123_AAAIQM jaiswal_l_Page_152thm.jpg
539f0cf25400ef98e17fe23e39f25142
bf8ea7a0ffdd23abab60016c5a0a9b742d49e468
F20101123_AAAIPX jaiswal_l_Page_126.tif
a938b42c07e2c327a96029b589bf6ffb
fcec864de45763ac04c2a4007eb86ce2d5ac0acb
76636 F20101123_AAAIRA jaiswal_l_Page_029.jpg
8a7f63944a26bffdebb9245e8bf354c3
a2aeafd5405d706a7a944cc685e4e11575be8274
7110 F20101123_AAAJUD jaiswal_l_Page_061thm.jpg
1dc4f2601ebc5d6ee662998b8c8f6e1e
23223c86417a132542bde07bb773a7259b50bf11
F20101123_AAAIPY jaiswal_l_Page_109.tif
37c7d8281cebdae82929b60bc1574ec9
0554727e47eb7effbbf3c0b3f8451bef2ca47056
39155 F20101123_AAAIRB jaiswal_l_Page_033.pro
ad62e3c61b959bd331cb7756ebccd8df
96efa0df8dba62a453862efd0fb73d51470b4065
32310 F20101123_AAAJUE jaiswal_l_Page_062.QC.jpg
fa426c62091698d3792526563ad15a62
d4eed21862405af0996d14c48fcacbd6f6347ffe
20553 F20101123_AAAJTP jaiswal_l_Page_049.QC.jpg
3b48908f004b408fcd7382100d59f31a
41ad79235e22c81616a539d2d772f093beb0a1c7
104095 F20101123_AAAIQN jaiswal_l_Page_010.jpg
988aab97166e4fff5dc08508e68d2dad
41e1a6a6d2493f4603c4d4fb537ccd8def2a8bff
1538 F20101123_AAAIPZ jaiswal_l_Page_069.txt
865eb831ca068c12e447a2d28be15bbf
bbad26f1027af936e98ebef7a9006f6a73b45c56
F20101123_AAAIRC jaiswal_l_Page_150.tif
7bdec700af1d073001ccaf31c220ea62
34e204f8cbb75ae75953db4b1a42c96f24a0da36
7628 F20101123_AAAJUF jaiswal_l_Page_063thm.jpg
9d47577ef22a572721660bb8dfdb9c7b
de88bd3556b60146b7233f13743620d7372af268
6754 F20101123_AAAJTQ jaiswal_l_Page_050thm.jpg
3346813c4614087e7c31bd95b34b8e03
dd3924b70e7bfa90cf39ee42ab7669b719f36f16
5610 F20101123_AAAIQO jaiswal_l_Page_126thm.jpg
92d3d86e13f0371655e9156b27e7afac
185370789c6a45986898babf42d916493b70731f
90711 F20101123_AAAIRD jaiswal_l_Page_119.jpg
e81ea8314bdabdc7e8f8b6b2dff6bf25
8d6b0a3b45779994ea305c1577e6d7b883df3dc3
7048 F20101123_AAAJUG jaiswal_l_Page_064thm.jpg
620d5ae4ae0e16499801cf077dc4b698
9a13e03e4e859d3c01171703b06ac4dcc0fe9382
25028 F20101123_AAAJTR jaiswal_l_Page_050.QC.jpg
31e72e935601c83d48e3432e13509f7d
06d27ee8c8eacf65ee8b2ce0250787d702ed8aeb
7822 F20101123_AAAIQP jaiswal_l_Page_136thm.jpg
e4e37ef50dc6858df12a3722e717c4d8
d786969e5b7bca6cfe5e78dd70b6e290581a5789
24314 F20101123_AAAIRE jaiswal_l_Page_074.pro
9cada882a312e939aacfefff6e0691f4
5775b32d73a0951031a3d3ebb3ca8ea03977776f
26180 F20101123_AAAJUH jaiswal_l_Page_064.QC.jpg
78a1acc1940325a57cc402c775b1c545
88135eb7fb87ad76eac37d6ad4f402a8806c8a53
6690 F20101123_AAAJTS jaiswal_l_Page_051thm.jpg
e853c0584e2e0088077bce136cf78447
31bc36bb3e357bd1dbbf523d95b0b8a44dbc6cca
21800 F20101123_AAAIQQ jaiswal_l_Page_113.QC.jpg
023e4c9df77bd5b6d8a123b72b5e5aaf
5e5b9952db9b9d2611144b01ced92451b53fc720
29964 F20101123_AAAIRF jaiswal_l_Page_147.pro
577331789871dd923c2a389af9309622
adf182b0b201781286cbfb41e4d5ccd92c3cf781
30266 F20101123_AAAJUI jaiswal_l_Page_067.QC.jpg
cf2b16c80820748a85b3f03c389e9f9c
c8ab6e9f343648d72dca67356afa1e66cbdf7fa0
26092 F20101123_AAAJTT jaiswal_l_Page_051.QC.jpg
2a04d8cae5faafe14ed3035af1cc7424
6b827c919e2d47f1b960bfdc07ae8c2398131d5e
F20101123_AAAIQR jaiswal_l_Page_041.tif
df52a01e561cec0c8c9c5a72336a802e
07055662cf9129c889876248a54e0b049448f120
1758 F20101123_AAAIRG jaiswal_l_Page_061.txt
00cd99b7ee74c2bd7e54c1717cf43b3b
2d12c1c0fdde368d9087a4493ae479f8f89666b3
5919 F20101123_AAAJUJ jaiswal_l_Page_068thm.jpg
4bb84a5fac5b736785709a5ccb33f0ea
3cf2e122dcd5afcf48505966230f02713dff2ba7
7895 F20101123_AAAJTU jaiswal_l_Page_052thm.jpg
954c39395bdd57d517170d464ae44808
becd5cd0cc49803cfad843fcfbcb2b7cae5bce43
1357 F20101123_AAAIQS jaiswal_l_Page_088.txt
c8929cdb02332a2f80dd108c35dba1eb
577c6c56427703ef954a3be05860fbe1d345a144
39612 F20101123_AAAIRH jaiswal_l_Page_121.pro
c940f309c68b541f64a86e5a72b159ce
038d2b39ab87c1b64b4df71080b44078bc79a924
23708 F20101123_AAAJUK jaiswal_l_Page_068.QC.jpg
35a145539580d6ecd961e195263d0106
03b43ef8f9d53163517d056bfeeb459d919d8db0
6797 F20101123_AAAJTV jaiswal_l_Page_053thm.jpg
abfc4250a75be0368c44b7ceef8535b6
841807989c049b210a7b16ad446b54006fd2a945
22791 F20101123_AAAIQT jaiswal_l_Page_170.QC.jpg
bab0018a0b38662cc48a87138f4cef62
6f064801214136c4f9def201f4d7a7bf9b6dae56
8880 F20101123_AAAIRI jaiswal_l_Page_097.QC.jpg
02a94f67e6ed0cef01d9d4066e466fc3
a06ee7c6fe0608aa9f7992ebabf5b34369993111
15714 F20101123_AAAJUL jaiswal_l_Page_069.QC.jpg
5887ce4fad32c996e239461119c15a13
545f91097ca17a43a67b4f8c993b3544636a7752
6326 F20101123_AAAJTW jaiswal_l_Page_054thm.jpg
942c316f07b5fd424750b8216641de07
53940ddd286552f5e4c1cc20ae30c5aae475e753
1819 F20101123_AAAIQU jaiswal_l_Page_025.txt
b04801f0e324b42c90366d863bb2ddc7
e372224670c4d0bd951d8ba81ebd65c7d7d3971e
F20101123_AAAIRJ jaiswal_l_Page_005.jp2
2b1c0ef2c32da2bf981f1c849cb009d2
d20296497df5871f44dad5d2bc5def60ffc3e38e
4937 F20101123_AAAJVA jaiswal_l_Page_089thm.jpg
c9616ce7bc5bc983c9cb3e4656c25133
0e587bb68f2a60e7c91ece4ba6de3b077ca91366
8132 F20101123_AAAJUM jaiswal_l_Page_072thm.jpg
f163a3a9fd55038e73a382968d537f66
08726b5043ba53481369fd14a26497900a37e3a6
6784 F20101123_AAAJTX jaiswal_l_Page_055thm.jpg
65f107b38502839126eaa1b2a9040f06
3a595ddecc32145f8ff36101da57d6f7af66bf3a
77880 F20101123_AAAIQV jaiswal_l_Page_068.jp2
127d96d9b2cbc8715e3c84ebd0e2c148
dcfaec1bc598f9dd8b6dbeaf8f4c56ee3f00a96f
F20101123_AAAIRK jaiswal_l_Page_145.tif
b5d3df7c17053828e1a01f027ca14d93
c25bde0ca5e950c44774f90d269c7da2335b8082
16787 F20101123_AAAJVB jaiswal_l_Page_089.QC.jpg
82ca8e3d9ed6913179ea0deb1769797e
f4add883c8cace314a22e0d0bd5228bb3959931c
33497 F20101123_AAAJUN jaiswal_l_Page_073.QC.jpg
dcfe67e9ebebb8a28a592b48ba8f4870
7d40900e1dd1f429a1b7b5a9892b8e5b008e1874
27329 F20101123_AAAJTY jaiswal_l_Page_055.QC.jpg
aa3f4572b3f61141ee7cbbc09191a2c8
ea5efc3503266caa8e19442d6831d47cd05af5d1
2615 F20101123_AAAIQW jaiswal_l_Page_172.pro
fd347f475d87464a4bfa5057925ff2ab
b289b7f26a72b7ba4c8c4e07cd5931f9fb98129d
F20101123_AAAIRL jaiswal_l_Page_010.tif
b688b0709184529bad5dd0b2d490c4d9
3637d9fd988350ce56e30de92e4a0925af0d0386
8362 F20101123_AAAJVC jaiswal_l_Page_090thm.jpg
b98adfc7bc0472ad13ed12bb725ca783
1a141a8057a1780f7d09cab2e49361be94226356
7449 F20101123_AAAJUO jaiswal_l_Page_075thm.jpg
92181226aca6775a12c667eaa5e8b322
e98da4c516343b31b8c018ccb7af47e6acae1424
7222 F20101123_AAAJTZ jaiswal_l_Page_057thm.jpg
38e6e86682e182de6c2e77e24e0c2e12
60089557856cbf5508608a0c7baa0746b7ea2378
476412 F20101123_AAAIQX jaiswal_l_Page_096.jp2
45b120061b5645b995f316754b1cfe14
9d3fb6666eb3b65f1c380ad7dfb54ba5dc900eb0
7414 F20101123_AAAISA jaiswal_l_Page_034thm.jpg
d070d0471643d0a3cb707cea3169b1e3
e1b194ce409a8bd0ca071626bc741742349f5bdb
F20101123_AAAIRM jaiswal_l_Page_139.tif
4385246d392db714f34cc32ef4192451
a7d2312dc1a83ac527525d4d7ccb17d4484d4065
4655 F20101123_AAAJVD jaiswal_l_Page_092thm.jpg
948bed7c42bccc8b414cb8f1d44e67b8
958eceb2febcf4b39b01ebd438407d4743700c75
7853 F20101123_AAAJUP jaiswal_l_Page_076thm.jpg
08f70fb810ce2189c7c57c3699b3f718
a89f325988e36707546845629cda47c1a88efc5b
7995 F20101123_AAAIQY jaiswal_l_Page_033thm.jpg
325b1fbfacd8cdd9576cb12b74149b44
62cfa32e935e4abc2ab30d91f9fa96d178dc83ea
1310 F20101123_AAAISB jaiswal_l_Page_147.txt
7afb578a575454b857fd7fa18fbd03e1
2ef902bab47ec89ab0d10dc71da24054336d7dd1
85576 F20101123_AAAIRN jaiswal_l_Page_137.jpg
667170356fd41600b835228446ded8af
f0dd3852dad89e46b077edf6ab98e8ec3a3b6adc
18757 F20101123_AAAJVE jaiswal_l_Page_092.QC.jpg
4d155e290d26d044a4df8a41fdb803a2
7e31b86c1b18973b20b2da68c01ac21a33e7eeb6
6308 F20101123_AAAIQZ jaiswal_l_Page_005thm.jpg
a6dfb68acc7b82ca013413c368046a0c
0cb4d5f5da426f1c8107122cdcfee378014ea7e8
37428 F20101123_AAAISC jaiswal_l_Page_051.pro
a237100e53803d25909c5f89bb071bde
e98ff122dabdfb19f67286bc160870508dc013e9
6042 F20101123_AAAJVF jaiswal_l_Page_094thm.jpg
b44f7875fe340dd43da9a41490923310
f2bb658413b594f993d39365427db726bc3eee62
34350 F20101123_AAAJUQ jaiswal_l_Page_078.QC.jpg
977acdb4efb955034a840a78da9c3380
cd3052927c5e273b38b73b2fed7e5e92c85c839b
F20101123_AAAISD jaiswal_l_Page_072.tif
ad25984586b94b84e247382456914c02
99dd6125fc851de1f250d832246647c53b103896
98546 F20101123_AAAIRO jaiswal_l_Page_080.jpg
803e5e73fe22fed31587908b4dad3b29
1932702483413c01b28ce73c76fd2f76ec6ee9ab
6231 F20101123_AAAJVG jaiswal_l_Page_095thm.jpg
ce9e1e7090af1b914841a92d9753d8c8
8d9644307cdec32a09243517be63abb0b2dd3694
28380 F20101123_AAAJUR jaiswal_l_Page_079.QC.jpg
b0db30912cd3a768218664f0cc96ad24
88c3b9adcd3237a0fba6249c5ac95d024221238f
428774 F20101123_AAAISE jaiswal_l_Page_172.jp2
fe1a0a51a964840eef965ff2edd94682
d10f904695fd0c08e13985a6f8cc2da359e711db
1735 F20101123_AAAIRP jaiswal_l_Page_137.txt
dfb70210813030cd3bb7eab2aa5125b4
a449169e7da8d8982363bce0cdf39fb31dab7553
17564 F20101123_AAAJVH jaiswal_l_Page_096.QC.jpg
6cc7caf2d0233f0cd64c05d40ac36ebd
58f07c1514ac0f8c4b19bdaecfc60dc52e43375c
6745 F20101123_AAAJUS jaiswal_l_Page_081thm.jpg
b1a9ff8edbbce293d77f34ff50eee495
229336641188f34db7e31a2f24a53f552087296f
23444 F20101123_AAAISF jaiswal_l_Page_029.QC.jpg
c8d0413bb1592b1ea43da5d3afd497be
8b35bb75d4e23de4f61370f3cc6440dc1a810c46
93391 F20101123_AAAIRQ jaiswal_l_Page_046.jpg
dd32b4ad8f5c6092a5b76a09c96fc413
e93c9512b070345d74aa843dd0a184fdb82b694f
5363 F20101123_AAAJVI jaiswal_l_Page_098thm.jpg
16ea72d97720f8f1037f6972d68f95f5
4c4a2b7a58b83e8068fb0abcf6fc786274ae0beb
25126 F20101123_AAAJUT jaiswal_l_Page_081.QC.jpg
0a794881e51684cab6fdd8b6dce6403e
ae35919db8ee1145b5752ab82addabf1432f14e5
37047 F20101123_AAAISG jaiswal_l_Page_048.pro
3bfa4ec0f1dd4c302a7a3ba5b50cc193
2b20b9706999dfbffbceae3a7b306da762ae8db1
1712 F20101123_AAAIRR jaiswal_l_Page_034.txt
0c11fdc17680a03fc7f51dd20e54b27d
7f7b4da8b2a2fd6680534fec3f9a834f9e64aa2a
6462 F20101123_AAAJVJ jaiswal_l_Page_099thm.jpg
f0b30e3332704fb32100af99fad21a21
a7a6595a404cb5e8c53cb0a8b12fc26ea613bf41
3233 F20101123_AAAJUU jaiswal_l_Page_082thm.jpg
aa3ef8b98148444d0058a53f1fb053a8
64e62d14172ecacb1b76bd32bd9eb48005c8a873
6805 F20101123_AAAISH jaiswal_l_Page_017thm.jpg
e530a3260406cc4eae8607abc3a76252
eb453a44db05c3270e5552ae1a86a942ca04dc8e
18560 F20101123_AAAIRS jaiswal_l_Page_085.QC.jpg
d7dd7db6977e9b586fcc061375feceb1
24cdb21cf3d8d13904177fd6326aceb091ac7d0b
26142 F20101123_AAAJVK jaiswal_l_Page_099.QC.jpg
a46fffa954120006dfeed00fa60f7e66
85daec4fd22b68d13c49adcc8af9f767ab917bc8
28311 F20101123_AAAJUV jaiswal_l_Page_083.QC.jpg
5cdd922c370024bc69a9242da9192f4c
a256429aceb290a2a0dd38f2b6d97bac4d8f2c36
1501 F20101123_AAAISI jaiswal_l_Page_133.txt
97641c7604cdce292333cb7357291e59
c1efccc413ef6a7b93c94d9a61180256a2d97153
26609 F20101123_AAAIRT jaiswal_l_Page_112.pro
a727326efb08f1a774c047e7383c56ed
6a403de87dfe7e31f4f24560b67a396c3b37f3f2
7086 F20101123_AAAJVL jaiswal_l_Page_100thm.jpg
ef5090a89df505f3c0ee3ff8720da752
744675674f2034c9aac973b6897956016e6aa1bc
6823 F20101123_AAAJUW jaiswal_l_Page_086thm.jpg
6aea8b4f40488b6543a20c8e8cb4052e
030ac2be9f53fcd435ba45b7faaca3eca0b1d200
2871 F20101123_AAAISJ jaiswal_l_Page_173thm.jpg
62e3e26e51945d4376eed70a110185d5
4f5f922c0f2c34d3973e8741cf22e3de676194ab
26719 F20101123_AAAIRU jaiswal_l_Page_093.QC.jpg
ee188d0f9aa5e99f7d3a72009131362e
ac01237db342dc6e406d910e6b8792a2fc62b41e
7883 F20101123_AAAJWA jaiswal_l_Page_114thm.jpg
e58aaa1e6b96aab9f0bfd77f5d901146
f2fc21e4e4d37cc429c7bd2a402f3e1f2acf0e0d
27507 F20101123_AAAJVM jaiswal_l_Page_100.QC.jpg
7a00ab9a6b583c1178f6bc7fb5f8774c
96cededa2f9594c37f87f84a09456333abcf5904
25158 F20101123_AAAJUX jaiswal_l_Page_086.QC.jpg
0c814c90f5ac99fd978804b30178c950
5a16c719563e418f8a4b709cbd8e1ccb567a6775
43563 F20101123_AAAISK jaiswal_l_Page_060.pro
869f49ab4a6ef1b44077926b3e960155
91e7153ee0db6558a6aaacfb62fa1f6a117a777d
10678 F20101123_AAAIRV jaiswal_l_Page_167.QC.jpg
6c30be6dd1d2ad1eeadfc1412dd41b62
8aabd5d32f9b78727c16913247e33f1f6564d861
27415 F20101123_AAAJWB jaiswal_l_Page_114.QC.jpg
12d585f941fa269b43929251fa446eca
8458a57178f09ae7c32edf36d0ab6477d2155122
19674 F20101123_AAAJVN jaiswal_l_Page_101.QC.jpg
7a19d0fd1f30381f7625c8a2f9570e99
a84750452c76a8f42a41e06aa655f0ad2b0a43c4
F20101123_AAAJUY jaiswal_l_Page_087thm.jpg
b868ef40fff4ea296c6378ef5fb7470d
e35dd39c0afb091011ae28e8490981397007f3aa
4934 F20101123_AAAISL jaiswal_l_Page_003.jpg
f43a119a11e2b353ee73f3458ecbbe69
9577792c75347f6ba6ddc7fbf0722e1e60a9f04d
2241 F20101123_AAAIRW jaiswal_l_Page_032.txt
01bea0cd31b78361aab139bb7a146b2d
ac462eb9277d0f35e45a344ad116c7758075638e
5329 F20101123_AAAJWC jaiswal_l_Page_117thm.jpg
de00186ac2759b08842d1979db28e930
afcab8f562fbf6c59acc532a56c7ebd459ec0202
7490 F20101123_AAAJVO jaiswal_l_Page_103thm.jpg
48cfd9137014e39b72e86ead14246b51
edaf01684c107522ec5c93158415b573fe75b73a
15888 F20101123_AAAJUZ jaiswal_l_Page_088.QC.jpg
d12cee72d2995e423758534c9f6a67a1
b94e9ddf4bc354675e28a9641a64f1649525a550
100351 F20101123_AAAITA jaiswal_l_Page_072.jpg
3b9b002c7bb39c84c31e7b36a9a4e01c
4bf6da074c0647cf0904f546ac02d049a9f14c07
F20101123_AAAISM jaiswal_l_Page_016.tif
3ed530a88e5ae40e75b7b8bb349a8feb
4e551b301e4110abfe9d10417bc48597569a7989
2500 F20101123_AAAIRX jaiswal_l_Page_138.pro
1d741355c07e61d8bade586645dcb42f
6d0d07b8b2ff158ddf3a8a6287ce60571aa31247
17591 F20101123_AAAJWD jaiswal_l_Page_117.QC.jpg
aa3c52763554be8f12cb77b8b8a511cb
ed906e68ed9b66d6146d09819b14c1c579483a08
30384 F20101123_AAAJVP jaiswal_l_Page_103.QC.jpg
47276e78a11ab651a76d5d2b04dde691
4eb1f7ec526daba6dd1457c4d59cb94095217c33
15102 F20101123_AAAITB jaiswal_l_Page_168.QC.jpg
6a57d86d87f99273ce3b17627ee17814
c8641056a24f05af61d97046f12e67d5af65a601
16710 F20101123_AAAISN jaiswal_l_Page_127.QC.jpg
d1d405353a8353c4a8fa617f1e3baef1
8a0578c6e59a979137842ac61dcc5db6b1e807b4
F20101123_AAAIRY jaiswal_l_Page_144.tif
a2ee7dd7c51b4b6fbee6ed690bf030cc
a28ce535f5cd9e1828130b9e59a70c669508fc8b
5702 F20101123_AAAJWE jaiswal_l_Page_118thm.jpg
930e9d77699406dd997be3867ef60e97
d1563e5ef04d269e071d74e22324b3adb7966392
4346 F20101123_AAAJVQ jaiswal_l_Page_104thm.jpg
5424f3c1bc9156d41c45aeca15ab6d18
b84fc6d968518bb6da70c0ce5275f5938db901f1
10191 F20101123_AAAITC jaiswal_l_Page_182.QC.jpg
cf83d0718f4b5a5e2812e071b4bd4b91
1540ef9677527968473c5c4364a45cf56d2e695f
82173 F20101123_AAAISO jaiswal_l_Page_099.jp2
569940f98a235fe7f2dfbb2c92200fa0
d4e79a24bb1b845cc49927bfa6676edb234a651f
32829 F20101123_AAAIRZ jaiswal_l_Page_058.pro
3b8a0aab05b286405870570c63021a35
de5c3b82b48ec6bd93fb1f8a3c1a781d69258829
20180 F20101123_AAAJWF jaiswal_l_Page_118.QC.jpg
70eb51eea2d77db6d0070d15e11642e1
4a5f828f6389bcae8973c0423852f8249dffbe43
51551 F20101123_AAAITD jaiswal_l_Page_088.jp2
26cb54eccd6ed371399d25122b37603b
ee5fefffb4b8f8eab80400a7d1c557ac26848c9b
29143 F20101123_AAAJWG jaiswal_l_Page_119.QC.jpg
c241c70d648c3d274de2c56c2374c5e9
30459aa1f9e2b97105f61a7023bed55adbe80f22
6713 F20101123_AAAJVR jaiswal_l_Page_105thm.jpg
e4e404b710c86a375ec17719e600d194
af14924922a44a33066874a435a98e5c01faba33
F20101123_AAAITE jaiswal_l_Page_183.tif
2ea1c2067b7100cf4e92d505bf6ae8c2
c1ad07c62d4118faa91edbd58a3ea6f99f844b3f
26739 F20101123_AAAISP jaiswal_l_Page_001.jpg
8df4201703de92287a2761bc02b7e6bc
25ab7bff37918b97525d7d938c9b88cd63a96a8b
5588 F20101123_AAAJWH jaiswal_l_Page_120.QC.jpg
b2c0f3dd0f17705e5ba890c3d225e8e7
a01f7b500c69886da1f4db2d0712c291ec9de493
F20101123_AAAJVS jaiswal_l_Page_106thm.jpg
dbf99aa5b4b4efea4355ced2195b5765
7f3d4a0f6bf58786ec75ff2c9abaca90813bddec
28584 F20101123_AAAISQ jaiswal_l_Page_010.QC.jpg
6935b79b9a7d8cfbb7a05ad6933d2e5e
bb70df58176f24603efc7ccee415c4ae89c7a1fc
2185 F20101123_AAAITF jaiswal_l_Page_173.pro
f4cd280d1cd09a88f4d396b30ced0db7
15f670174adc7a97baaeb2c29e0e449b3a68273c
6801 F20101123_AAAJWI jaiswal_l_Page_121thm.jpg
0a71634529ddaf4a5934df5d835e7551
1c85cde51e6b18dbdc9d937468eb207ba3e381cc
7669 F20101123_AAAJVT jaiswal_l_Page_107thm.jpg
1dac78c043e0cfdbb18dd821c95ae3a2
9d8635d872eecb97ad5d5dc25ed40894a43ceda9
45861 F20101123_AAAISR jaiswal_l_Page_152.jpg
c7e91486d918d308189ce946ceb6b6e8
fe94c65b194722afb586645a5d55d87a6757a171
F20101123_AAAITG jaiswal_l_Page_111.tif
bd6013eb441da48df8e7deed0c68ade2
b8b95f922651cbab609811f38b9922930cc1432c
6532 F20101123_AAAJWJ jaiswal_l_Page_122thm.jpg
fac88793253c160d0be0ce8078543c87
0e4b869e4a28379557b0e2e2e9b6503a85e5aaef
29891 F20101123_AAAJVU jaiswal_l_Page_107.QC.jpg
d1014c0beecccd99d050b2adf80a0a13
81b48016b903f4322bdfb221842b64d4ed4519f5
981110 F20101123_AAAISS jaiswal_l_Page_119.jp2
cbfc468c4d85f663d5c2c945a0d3c0f5
71908901304adb8be6c4d9421cc5240af0c5b367
72480 F20101123_AAAITH jaiswal_l_Page_178.jp2
d85c53ccd204ee423236e048a6249021
f077f9604dc5300d788a69b7d5586a02e94a6966
26946 F20101123_AAAJWK jaiswal_l_Page_122.QC.jpg
83444588593ed1cd6aefb4e8ed745327
f95595fcf582dc6f5f879969f67db3d3fd08ee6c
13953 F20101123_AAAJVV jaiswal_l_Page_109.QC.jpg
fb5966beecb50adb266470758ae4afac
c6d52fd6f514fc8e318c5ff8c28a5eb0564bea3a
25396 F20101123_AAAIST jaiswal_l_Page_015.QC.jpg
8f3a0749ffd443b82f129fc6724d7313
1d9e5ab95fef6eb2f5f840d13b3e6f8e167e392b
25677 F20101123_AAAITI jaiswal_l_Page_102.QC.jpg
4fecab754dc07e080508bab6ee8e530d
484c10d2b6e3e9e1a70fc64fd3d14194138e292e
6535 F20101123_AAAJWL jaiswal_l_Page_123thm.jpg
726fa9e4d665cd8820175066a9a787ef
a4df80dc15caee83cf8cfe0ac6958dc869c8526c
5417 F20101123_AAAJVW jaiswal_l_Page_110thm.jpg
bf8920bb780c6da93986ed946685885f
a431179723b811bbd6250fd3a6c7ddcc2144622f
3385 F20101123_AAAISU jaiswal_l_Page_091thm.jpg
3b215207e59d3e93d383750a9504a21f
33908504d21735dc74b0a661d3b4172a2099ee51
29329 F20101123_AAAITJ jaiswal_l_Page_021.QC.jpg
647cc24e2adfcbf9ed52bc564eb3f21d
9a421a42b7ede914ccce34260fa1828d222c012e
7105 F20101123_AAAJXA jaiswal_l_Page_134thm.jpg
5c9eec090ce3e45d57b54425e3c5cc0d
c6154ed823a36af08d68f58db099d2946f9aa67b
8261 F20101123_AAAJWM jaiswal_l_Page_124thm.jpg
073fd4893c6d2b084d5c37c9b40fd24c
5e50277db991933d47ee5da374004a938d2c21f1
19731 F20101123_AAAJVX jaiswal_l_Page_110.QC.jpg
39d156020b1966a9d9a9b459692903ef
6874fff23af3d665e54a35cd2c04be66965eca45
19065 F20101123_AAAISV jaiswal_l_Page_106.QC.jpg
4fc781cd935607f55f4c38efd7bbb14d
16468020c1453031cbc309ca7a91adb0b9f3b1bf
F20101123_AAAITK jaiswal_l_Page_083.txt
e3c33bdfd83f6822c55ee9a7c2ef4314
b9e80825aee27ee3907cc41bd33dd9dd778d11f3
27643 F20101123_AAAJXB jaiswal_l_Page_134.QC.jpg
ddd6074cc09cb025083afcb2399bb522
76453f215ee3d85686fcc1402188666fe4459f34
32836 F20101123_AAAJWN jaiswal_l_Page_124.QC.jpg
f4b0cfffe52e583db2b283ae9918f9f3
1a0549b2d7f88ab54803fd63bbbcc78c90262486
18420 F20101123_AAAJVY jaiswal_l_Page_111.QC.jpg
35b38f700137614c80a9c388e71acc9a
e8d8484100d5a1ed25fedcd622e0a0539c2ab695
184100 F20101123_AAAISW jaiswal_l_Page_159.jp2
8d655e6747cd30f19afd3644ac900e73
4d2aa33e6f572c73d2c08b5bc47511f30e87ea1d
F20101123_AAAITL jaiswal_l_Page_082.tif
97929a48854e25b717fba605b648da0c
9f39f451d27c518960b04b1d020cd03e7bf66eff
7938 F20101123_AAAJXC jaiswal_l_Page_135thm.jpg
4f500f681e75021ab733682ec5e6bd8f
44fcee07b85657c87706e2161090027293bd3c90
7711 F20101123_AAAJWO jaiswal_l_Page_125thm.jpg
0114492a666f3e1e73326b0c52009ce8
e1faeaaa4dece7c8fba48b6a7552d4cbf7882cd5
F20101123_AAAJVZ jaiswal_l_Page_113thm.jpg
3c2a97f57a0e9a6c3eb0c1a66cdf41ff
25f8067a7720c8a2db114ff5dccb7ee94f1d3249
508 F20101123_AAAISX jaiswal_l_Page_176.txt
1d650c685e7d09045ad013f84a8b4b13
758625103bd3c36077ea3e6930f98e57996147a3
F20101123_AAAIUA jaiswal_l_Page_077.tif
8cfd7f63327e112c0a4df48d780fc46f
96d83a66bdf03fb3885a2d52b074e5cd36f0d8b8
20591 F20101123_AAAITM jaiswal_l_Page_158.QC.jpg
3c123a3e17ff641c8572e2f21570b878
fdc85cacf31f6d03bd9780562c1896c7be149216
30156 F20101123_AAAJXD jaiswal_l_Page_135.QC.jpg
1927232d12e0cc91800c479d3ae24f8a
a9d7387ce3a41b0f155fc0d2402f529d7a5cacc1
30918 F20101123_AAAJWP jaiswal_l_Page_125.QC.jpg
b7e3f7ef53f8e44abb68ea4246445464
b89002c0da2904ac6890888362d2ce812c40ae17
40904 F20101123_AAAISY jaiswal_l_Page_017.pro
151e364a8dc30990ea76b89a3145cb79
a9f86e4d44f3fac7564277433719dc16be72c95a
528235 F20101123_AAAIUB jaiswal_l_Page_158.jp2
6e64dec6510e80bb86f118d10acfd6c3
938c0eb3350156466f6674bf8d03987f661868ba
57923 F20101123_AAAITN jaiswal_l_Page_110.jpg
95685ddf492dc48cfd8d90eff0a6dcdf
a2cbfe792b7f7b715e495e8b78e1d8f30d1d92f1
6242 F20101123_AAAJXE jaiswal_l_Page_137thm.jpg
cc4e2a051991762cb4465be8785e0a9b
7f39e0a45a3cc55b6fb76b8a161b628e0fdef75a
22479 F20101123_AAAJWQ jaiswal_l_Page_126.QC.jpg
a19b531e7cbca5c11dfeab1edc8cc706
76276a14cdb9f35cd63fc480bdb74e7fa038fe94
4638 F20101123_AAAISZ jaiswal_l_Page_151thm.jpg
b6ef4d662fc23ac05370988b70a0fcec
e9efafa1352ca8439c8ede7fe399873a18e9b0ae
942 F20101123_AAAIUC jaiswal_l_Page_108.txt
6c3e06b3b9228185ea39b29ad1f74220
4507265a435b4c7aaa3a4ba3991a8db38f73e9e4
59515 F20101123_AAAITO jaiswal_l_Page_158.jpg
cc5991df8f61941ffcfda9d84dd01922
bfa733aaf2911ba880ec53214b67035d816758b7
25612 F20101123_AAAJXF jaiswal_l_Page_137.QC.jpg
dfd3af01633af7879c3e88729ff18bcd
0d73687cdda1c1f9f2d6f84e8c6e282e93e71432
7446 F20101123_AAAJWR jaiswal_l_Page_128thm.jpg
19a8be79c51bb46f87412f48a57da756
a1d439f52a970f461f388fb883347e425e477885
64569 F20101123_AAAIUD jaiswal_l_Page_116.jpg
a1297f4180101a16c48416b1aaad5b7a
b60dab202e2c5681eddd789517344f5359fbe779
7741 F20101123_AAAITP jaiswal_l_Page_032thm.jpg
9730c6a0a93da6724f07123cdc80340c
4f317607148e69a6f299c0d28a8bb6b2e7f43413
23102 F20101123_AAAJXG jaiswal_l_Page_138.QC.jpg
cb1fd5fda590cd2efab19d0462227c04
9880357666712daa0c6042c73a1e978882740940
460834 F20101123_AAAIUE jaiswal_l_Page_176.jp2
e78c01721cb80324d9f6a37fa34321ba
76fea831f4c35736872b6369563b68294b753e23
31194 F20101123_AAAJXH jaiswal_l_Page_139.QC.jpg
0921958a98f54b2ad790d894ff418211
ac8d11415b447432ace50d8e849e0ed1b678b4c2
8482 F20101123_AAAJWS jaiswal_l_Page_129thm.jpg
520e1a0e640c4e4ed69edc239e90e0a9
b8127ecf5b50d62b26243adcebcd4c7379b09c53
6372 F20101123_AAAIUF jaiswal_l_Page_116thm.jpg
f8a46a222d305a2059eab453fd655c0e
3b8d3ac77e7ba3b5ab11f3f1faf23e35571bbc79
F20101123_AAAITQ jaiswal_l_Page_030.txt
62d8796bbc70e39b814bc0e75de6721c
4e4c28d6f0b29fc0ead7c7a1ad54c6847d1b5d3c
7996 F20101123_AAAJXI jaiswal_l_Page_141thm.jpg
5cb0c5032ddca38870b5e5cb5c7143bb
e6dd2054c0f39f7d13f3db34d2e935a78dd91957
35172 F20101123_AAAJWT jaiswal_l_Page_129.QC.jpg
7d3e14cf904e3e150640d2eef57772ab
3c021fa33a3e21c021bbd3a8766a1ef20466f3ef
97751 F20101123_AAAJAA jaiswal_l_Page_026.jpg
a9ca4b69802413d4f1f9892e8c43d080
7f95657ff5893c76c1400800b6223f3093d62ba4
69133 F20101123_AAAIUG jaiswal_l_Page_059.jp2
f037b7a21b0031983609ef555312ffa7
31ec174453188190fb7b34ab2514a217b1548830
32188 F20101123_AAAITR jaiswal_l_Page_141.QC.jpg
334f3fc2723f71d7cdda50e366c99f30
ad3fcfa787307c484f181ecbff93a7dd25a4f522
6080 F20101123_AAAJXJ jaiswal_l_Page_142thm.jpg
a3730d24768bafae0b30c70a4af7e6e0
080c0f33364a03635702b856cc40498324a972d4
8005 F20101123_AAAJWU jaiswal_l_Page_130thm.jpg
c1a63664234783f794b3d985a07ef4fb
6c8fe23c49deef5fc0acd319536d20c93f0beef0
106443 F20101123_AAAJAB jaiswal_l_Page_028.jpg
a47ae83f7f59ba0c95875b7785c786c3
74d2b977bdd62876ee11177b403f793fb8cfc958
13885 F20101123_AAAIUH jaiswal_l_Page_039.QC.jpg
4c6b5dd475feec36286bc948df816de1
eec7c6e4f2ed7874d900e275d1306328eb6d1c4d
555389 F20101123_AAAITS jaiswal_l_Page_112.jp2
fb84ea7fe33330fce8bc24b519c7beaf
cc8504397422eed18edb257e188aa6832f264108
23227 F20101123_AAAJXK jaiswal_l_Page_142.QC.jpg
b40767cb6f62da8f170a8d89631205fe
33a55e745cc7671ede9c5aa5af263c4d3c5fe14b
29226 F20101123_AAAJWV jaiswal_l_Page_130.QC.jpg
fcbf68e6be19d7da3736bf4cef5d0a3a
b4b658ab1b678f394d54e490b68fa64960b4f76a
F20101123_AAAIUI jaiswal_l_Page_078.tif
f566cb415dc6c5fbfd07f83c15ecf68c
e690010a13a9c4ce8fdd9b59c1ced15bc31c6be6
F20101123_AAAITT jaiswal_l_Page_017.tif
7dbb16a022649ec7c62a08934a7f4337
16efa8b51535d0b67b96d08481c2d7e0a8f39e8f
101298 F20101123_AAAJAC jaiswal_l_Page_031.jpg
30da96ceb4cf939b6d9377f477e7017d
c949fc4345623e8c1505e8b4bf6f609afc1a4229
26949 F20101123_AAAJXL jaiswal_l_Page_143.QC.jpg
71cf42cc57442b15c899ebe1c4098986
10b1d806e89aead4c927199d8a37daa0c5c0f3bc
2710 F20101123_AAAJWW jaiswal_l_Page_131thm.jpg
24c3e76908ace13a4e685e34a01bd027
2c49eb9b0f05327e4af1101df6f7e9dbf2ef4880
1481 F20101123_AAAIUJ jaiswal_l_Page_070.txt
2cd8ab2c9ac3a384bf1a14c041b1e654
9a46fd18d5bc9ee0f4660c07fd7f05db96cb2d7f
82522 F20101123_AAAITU jaiswal_l_Page_015.jpg
3ce9e8f60b2ba999cc4bf20f16bbf09c
abff4420babe8322863f8f923a23abb7daa565eb
85308 F20101123_AAAJAD jaiswal_l_Page_034.jpg
475d290fcc0a6447b7697148f3ccd9bc
480ca34c972ce3f9eb8728f49eb0c64a0535f77c
6608 F20101123_AAAJYA jaiswal_l_Page_156thm.jpg
ccb26f5de1023bb6d82f88fa2757dbdd
a0737fafcc4b74da0e0939e2d6909bf4e55edde3
4080 F20101123_AAAJXM jaiswal_l_Page_144thm.jpg
5e8969aa11a802de697cd3f30a9da285
593a4225d71a2fe586bb548751b43ff691eabc0f
6173 F20101123_AAAJWX jaiswal_l_Page_132thm.jpg
59688aea90ecd3ebdca7ba7e02a87737
16a92120cd0d33065b557d39826bd06b7bfdc8f7
106635 F20101123_AAAIUK jaiswal_l_Page_181.jpg
87d218d7541b201e81ee1476b121603c
5f14d96d979b75b21eeb845ef31b75a8e4bbdd4f
35093 F20101123_AAAITV jaiswal_l_Page_140.pro
a68f6aa79dc28a7529b9a703c18c18bb
13776e5a6f5ad3d4ec0bc282c72e90e95f5b8961
36488 F20101123_AAAJAE jaiswal_l_Page_037.jpg
26281c19762cbe6a5609eb1c389be84b
b7cbc469c69503ce737b7f08f860a2df715a87dc
25490 F20101123_AAAJYB jaiswal_l_Page_156.QC.jpg
b9ed3eb9d1299f0ec37ffee8575d7802
ee84acfbe702262c896e2e753dbd7e654176e07f
14806 F20101123_AAAJXN jaiswal_l_Page_144.QC.jpg
3370f814379e463165cf7f3cac174bd9
d85438074226db9d2676eab5f83b7974a807e4aa
5701 F20101123_AAAJWY jaiswal_l_Page_133thm.jpg
a5bb680b3cd97529d1bb50ae8e98d448
fd35367f5bfe9c355bafab6789e2ef1e4619c655
2665 F20101123_AAAIUL jaiswal_l_Page_074thm.jpg
adae970fbbc2da4a13cca0c3d0426fdb
e8f66b74d3dcc734e061d966c049ca0033a3e2f6
F20101123_AAAITW jaiswal_l_Page_074.tif
0060151b85136fd77b8be010d8f00007
33f7ed33c2ad7c67b94cf97922da328d4c292426
44526 F20101123_AAAJAF jaiswal_l_Page_039.jpg
534c54a4195134e83c5de85fbb3f98d2
3b5ddcfb50297ada6101b278c26ac0b9eee7538a
28114 F20101123_AAAJYC jaiswal_l_Page_157.QC.jpg
a8a5a93e8171905c18ba2c2c1c56f642
6b97d2295d802fcd3b6c368a8ac70be92bfc928b
10811 F20101123_AAAJXO jaiswal_l_Page_145.QC.jpg
96848da2c3988a144e45f9b6d3565fb1
55b1b1c1a615b31e4e01f6331963e264b18483cd
20684 F20101123_AAAJWZ jaiswal_l_Page_133.QC.jpg
9aa9c985ca38c44bd6c5ae3ddf674027
21ca0c61e3dd995cd3e31f8f076badaaccae449a
27590 F20101123_AAAIVA jaiswal_l_Page_179.jpg
44e29b99552172ed6678bc699450c823
1c0378f2c38d1f67281a406cbb42019676028bb0
F20101123_AAAIUM jaiswal_l_Page_088.tif
d6304d0b61eea65ab4a1d834f73fa9ac
5b2c2a46b3f7c6349c59eeef8aec5cc5031de36b
F20101123_AAAITX jaiswal_l_Page_033.txt
dbc779bb4cefeec91f98ed2555753542
0638b288c401591d4a444a6ff07b623d80c3359b
100472 F20101123_AAAJAG jaiswal_l_Page_040.jpg
9232ed86938ed9f0e78aa4b74fb0325e
a1ee71bf2a4be3afc50c6aeddad2f2fe89698892
7067 F20101123_AAAJYD jaiswal_l_Page_159.QC.jpg
44ddb333a218bb01d723eae8446c02b5
8bd0bd6377f5f433e500a2af5d744edbd76920f8
4654 F20101123_AAAJXP jaiswal_l_Page_146thm.jpg
2a8e2ddace4556fd61f13af96f6760bf
f485cc71147bd04c052d63a30fbf5a52f4d44e1d
696051 F20101123_AAAIVB jaiswal_l_Page_054.jp2
5c44d5b851b9b17b9ea536ab394fc4fc
1e78277efe7e41cdc54cd534df7b1d61c408339f
294095 F20101123_AAAIUN jaiswal_l_Page_175.jp2
f9a93991a909cd7857fb730b4e1fb6bc
9573025116b599d1e8d7c18764dead2f5560dbb5
112729 F20101123_AAAITY jaiswal_l_Page_028.jp2
3889d8b830ab2f84f21638f4b8c08ff3
1e8374b8f7f4f03ed40b3113776d46075015d8ac
67826 F20101123_AAAJAH jaiswal_l_Page_044.jpg
19c3d908f24ca5e4649208a8235d3819
8022f6430f9e831949ca03ad9c0cda9deb626a07
9906 F20101123_AAAJYE jaiswal_l_Page_160.QC.jpg
6a5b4bac49e44b915923631efe9318d3
f0f03715bb0ed876b18110fa991df0310208668b
17003 F20101123_AAAJXQ jaiswal_l_Page_146.QC.jpg
d55d4ea9cd8fc831125e97a03f65c0da
53220b90c8503825ac310826dc0ebe654d031cc7
7786 F20101123_AAAIVC jaiswal_l_Page_062thm.jpg
1bde9068a8deaf1dee8be5ab98bb30b8
2abbe8a5fbc9d934b0f4480bbac89de2d3b21bb7
30316 F20101123_AAAIUO jaiswal_l_Page_046.QC.jpg
e6f706eccefbac69678fa3b98bb7fa13
d64e98177bbe3d332f94c8c7d36ca4788e63cafd
97557 F20101123_AAAITZ jaiswal_l_Page_076.jpg
6d299de8ba481a68f47bddff6ca73cc1
8a9febad9f958db1dccc804f57de5e20bd9ad73d
87360 F20101123_AAAJAI jaiswal_l_Page_047.jpg
09e4594584557233cae92362ac938679
35ab377c5216377edb1ad4d237958dbf9f726461



PAGE 1

DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF PE RMEABLE FRICTION COURSE MIX DESIGN FOR FLORIDA CONDITIONS By LOKENDRA JAISWAL A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2005

PAGE 2

Copyright 2005 by Lokendra Jaiswal

PAGE 3

This document is dedicated to my parents.

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to specially thank Dr. Bjorn Birgisson and Dr. Reynaldo Roque for their guidance and understanding throughout the project. I believe that their technical knowledge and personal advice helped me to achieve this milestone in my life and career. I really appreciate advice I received from Georg Lopp throughout my research work and for making thing work in laboratory. Thanks go to Dr. Christos Drakos, Georg Lopp and Greg Sholar for reviewing Performance Test Database (P.T.D.) software and making helpful suggestions, and also to the anonymous referees for many insightful comments. I would like to thank Alvaro and Tung for their assistance in performing various laboratory tests. I would like to thank Greg Sholar and Howie Mosely from the FDOT research wing for their help during the course of the project. Thanks go to Jaeseung, Sungho and Jianlin for there suggestion in finite element analysis. I would like to thank all my friends for providing an unforgettable and enjoyable time during my two years of study in Gainesville. Finally, I would like to thank my parents and my aunt and uncle for all the love and support they have given me throughout my academic years. iv

PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................iv LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................ix LIST OF FIGURES...........................................................................................................xi ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................xv CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1 1.1 Background..................................................................................................1 1.2 Objectives....................................................................................................2 1.3 Scope............................................................................................................2 1.4 Research Approach......................................................................................3 2 DEVELOPMENT OF MIX DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR POROUS FRICTION COURSE..............................................................................................5 2.1 Initial Study and Objectives.........................................................................5 2.2 Georgia PEM Mixture Design as per GDT 114 Test Method: B (1996).....6 2.3 Overview of Evaluation of Preliminary OGFC/PFC Mix design Procedure Developed by Vardhan (2004)....................................................9 2.3.1 Determination of Compaction level for PFC...................................9 2.3.2 OGFC/PFC Mixture Design Procedure Proposed By Varadhan (2004).............................................................................................12 2.3.3 Long-Term Oven Aging Procedure Proposed for PFC Mixture by Varadhan (2004).......................................................................14 2.4 Verification of Florida Permeable Friction Course Mixture Design.........15 2.4.1 Materials........................................................................................15 Aggregate and gradation selection.................................................15 Binder and mineral fiber................................................................16 2.4.2 Sample Preparation for Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content...........................................................................................17 2.4.4 Mixing and Compaction of Samples for Determination of Bulk Specific Gravity.............................................................................18 2.4.4 Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content.................................20 v

PAGE 6

2.5 Evaluation of Film Thickness Criterion in PFC Design............................24 2.5.1 Review of Asphalt Film Thickness Calculation Methods.............27 2.5.2 Comparison of Results Obtained from Each Film Thickness Calculation Method........................................................................34 2.5.3 Relative Minimum Film Thickness Requirement..........................36 2.6 Recommended Specification for PFC Mixture Design.............................39 2.7 Conclusion of Verification of PFC mixture Design Procedure.................44 3 EVALUATION OF I-295 PFC MIX DESIGN.....................................................45 3.1 Objective....................................................................................................45 3.2 Scope of Project.........................................................................................45 3.3 Materials used for I-295 PFC project.........................................................46 3.3.1 Aggregate and Hydrated Lime.......................................................46 3.3.2 Binder and Mineral Fiber...............................................................46 3.4 Location of Project.....................................................................................48 3.5 Specification and Hypothesis Used...........................................................49 3.6 Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content.............................................50 3.6.1 Mixing and Compaction................................................................51 3.6.2 Asphalt Film Thickness.................................................................55 3.7 Superpave IDT Performance Test Results.................................................55 3.7.1 Superpave Indirect Test Results and Analysis...............................57 3.8 Analysis of Fracture Result Based on Interstitial Volume and Aggregate Interaction.................................................................................60 3.8.1 Determination of Porosity and Interstitial Volume........................61 3.8.2 Analysis and Conclusion................................................................63 3.9 Verification of Locking Point of Selected Gradation for I-295 PFC Project........................................................................................................65 3.10 Summary and Conclusion..........................................................................65 4 A PROPOSED NEW FRACTURE TEST FOR ASPHALT MASTIC.................67 4.1 Purpose and Need......................................................................................67 4.2 Background................................................................................................67 4.3 Specimen and Test Device Design............................................................68 4.4 Formulation of Tensile Force Transfer from Wedge to Specimen............71 4.5 Verification of Stress States within Loaded Specimen..............................74 4.6 Sample Preparation Guidelines..................................................................78 4.7 Recommendation for Further Development..............................................81 5 PERFORMANCE TEST DATABASE (PTD)......................................................82 5.1 Preface........................................................................................................82 5.1.1 Package Information......................................................................82 5.1.2 System Requirements.....................................................................83 5.1.3 Supported Output Format Requirement.........................................83 5.2 Program Overview.....................................................................................84 vi

PAGE 7

5.2.1 Database Storage Outline...............................................................86 5.2.2 Software Coding Architecture and Program Flow.........................87 5.3 Installation..................................................................................................88 5.4 Users Manual............................................................................................89 5.4.1 Interaction to All Interfaces of Database.......................................89 5.4.2 Button Function.............................................................................90 5.4.3 Data Entry......................................................................................91 5.4.4 Navigation through Input Templates and Database.......................97 5.4.5 Data transfer to Database...............................................................97 5.4.7 Report Generation........................................................................102 5.4.8 Repair and Remove Program.......................................................103 5.5 Summaries and Recommendation............................................................103 6 MOISTURE CONDITIONING ON I-295 PFC PROJECT................................105 6.1 Objective..................................................................................................105 6.2 Scope........................................................................................................105 6.3 Materials and Methodology.....................................................................106 6.3.1 Aggregate and Hydrated Lime.....................................................106 6.3.2 Binder and Mineral Fiber.............................................................106 6.4 Specimen Preparation and Testing...........................................................107 6.4.1 Mixing and Determination of Asphalt Content...........................108 6.4.2 Volumetric Properties..................................................................109 6.4.3 Moisture Conditioning and Testing.............................................109 6.5 Fracture Test on Moisture condition........................................................112 6.5.1 Findings and Analysis..................................................................113 6.6 Summary and Conclusion........................................................................117 7 SUPERPAVE IDT FRACTURE TEST RESULTS............................................118 7.1 Materials..................................................................................................118 7.1.1 Aggregate and Hydrated Lime.....................................................118 7.1.2 Binder and Mineral Fiber.............................................................119 7.2 Test Method.............................................................................................120 7.2.1 Sample Preparation......................................................................120 7.2.2 Testing Equipment.......................................................................121 7.2.3 Specimen Preparation and Testing Procedure.............................123 7.2.4 Test Procedures and Analysis of Test Results.............................124 7.2.5 Results of Fracture Testing on PFC Mixtures..............................131 7.3 Summary and Conclusion........................................................................139 APPENDIX A SAMPLE CALCULATION OF VOLUMETRICS FOR GPEM AND PFC MIXTURE...........................................................................................................140 vii

PAGE 8

B MAIN PROGRAMMING CODE OF PERFOMANCE TEST DATABSE (P.T.D.)................................................................................................................145 C EFFECTIVE ASPHALT CONTENT CALCULATION FOR FILM THICKNESS DETERMINATION.....................................................................153 D GEOMERTIC DETAILS OF FRACTURE TEST SPECIMEN AND MOLDS FOR ASPHALT MASTIC...................................................................................155 E VOLUMETRIC PROPERTIES OF MIXTURES...............................................161 F JOB MIX FORMULA.........................................................................................164 LIST OF REFERENCES.................................................................................................165 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH...........................................................................................167 viii

PAGE 9

LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2-1 Gradation specifications according to GDT 114 (1996)............................................7 2-2 Locking Point Based on Gradient of Slope (Varadhan, 2004).................................11 2-3 Locking Points of all Mixtures based on Gradient of Slope (Varadhan, 2004).......11 2-4 Composition of GPEM-Limestone gradation JMF..................................................16 2-5 Composition of GPEM-Granite gradation JMF.......................................................16 2-6 Material quantities....................................................................................................20 2-7 Surface Area Factor Hveem (1991).........................................................................28 2-8 Surface area Factor suggested by Nukunya (2001) for coarse aggregate structure.29 2-9 Surface area factors for Interstitial Volume.............................................................31 2-10 CoreLok calculation Sheet.......................................................................................33 2-11 Comparison of Film Thickness method for Limestone mixture..............................35 2-12 Comparison of Film Thickness method for Granite mixture...................................35 2-13 JMF of Optimum gradation for Gradation limits as per GDT 114 (1996)...............38 2-14 Minimum film thickness requirements for different set of Asphalt absorption.......39 2-15 Proposed Gradation and Design specifications for Florida Permeable....................40 2-16 Surface area factor as per Nukunya et al (2001)......................................................43 2-17 Minimum Effective Film Thickness Requirements.................................................43 3-1 JMF composition of Gradation (1)...........................................................................47 3-2 JMF composition of Gradation (2)...........................................................................47 3-3 PFC Gradation Design Range from FDOT specification SECTION 337................49 ix

PAGE 10

3-4 Summary of Indirect Tensile Test performed on I-295 PFC mixtures....................58 3-5 Surface area factors..................................................................................................63 3-6 Porosity for all the dominant aggregate size ranges (DASR)..................................64 3-7 Interstitial Volume for different JMFs.....................................................................64 3-8 Locking Point Based on Gradient of Slope..............................................................65 4-1 Part of fine aggregates to be mixed with total asphalt content (6%) of I-295 PFC project.......................................................................................................................79 5-1 Buttons and there corresponding function...............................................................91 6-1 Gradation of I-295 PFC Project.............................................................................106 6-2 Summary of fracture test on moisture condition sample compared with unconditioned sample.............................................................................................115 7-1 Summary of Fracture Test results on Short-Term and Long-Term Oven Aged Mixtures of Georgia PEM, PFC Project and OGFC Mixture................................134 A-1 Gradation for Georgia PEM-Granite......................................................................140 A-2 Bulk Specific Gravity for Georgia PEM-Granite...................................................140 A-3 Rice Test for Georgia PEM-Granite.......................................................................141 A-4 Drain-down Test for Georgia PEM-Granite...........................................................141 A-5 Film Thickness for Georgia PEM-Granite.............................................................142 C-1 Core-Lok Results calculation for Efffective asphalt content.................................154 C-2 Minimum Film Thickness......................................................................................154 E-1 Volumetric Properties of all the Mixtures..............................................................162 F-1 Composition of Job Mix Formula of FC-5 Limestone...........................................164 F-2 Composition of Job Mix Formula of FC-5 Granite................................................164 x

PAGE 11

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1-1 Flow chart showing Research Approach implemented...........................................4 2-1 Gradation Band with in GDT 114 (1996) specified gradation limits used by Varadhan (2004)....................................................................................................13 2-2 Georgias Permeable European Mixture gradation band.......................................17 2-3 Example of determination of inconsistent optimum asphalt content.....................18 2-4 Mix Design of OGFC with aggregate type: Limestone.......................................22 2-5 Mix Design of OGFC with aggregate type: Granite............................................23 2-6 Aggregate Structure for Coarse and Fine Mixtures (Nukunya et al. [2001])........25 2-7 (a) Granite with high film (Required against stripping) (b) Limestone with low film thickness as compared with granite due to absorption...................................34 2-8 Optimum Gradation Band for Calculating Minimum film thickness requirement............................................................................................................38 2-9 Proposed Gradation limits for Florida Permeable Friction Course Mixtures........41 3-1 Gradation of I-295 PFC mixtures..........................................................................47 3-2 Project Location.....................................................................................................48 3-3 Mix Design of PFC Gradation (1) with aggregate type: Granite........................53 3-4 Mix Design of PFC Gradation (2) with aggregate type: Granite........................54 3-5 A)Energy Ratio, B) Failure Energy, C) Failure Strain D) DCSE, E) Creep Compliance, F) Resilient Modulus, G) Strain Rate, H) Tensile Strength I) Creep Rate..............................................................................................................59 3-6 Curve showing interaction between contiguous aggregate sizes...........................61 4-1 Model showing Specimen along with bearings fitted on steel rods and wedge in loading direction................................................................................................68 xi

PAGE 12

4-2 Plan view showing geometry of specimen.............................................................69 4-3 Front view showing geometry of specimen...........................................................70 4-4 Testing Device used by Mindess & Diamond (1980) for SEM testing on cement mortar........................................................................................................71 4-5 Static analysis of force transfer from Wedge to Steel rods (Wedge angle = 2x ).......................................................................................................................73 4-6 Specimen 2-D Model subdivided in to 15 surfaces...............................................75 4-7 Meshing of 15 sub surface with critical model line divided into 175 elements....76 4-8 Deflection of Specimens 2-D Model subdivided.................................................76 4-9 Stress distributions along centerline of specimen Tensile stress is shown as positive...................................................................................................................77 4-10 Stress distribution along circumference of steel pin..............................................78 4-11 Mold for preparing specimen for Fracture and SEM testing.................................80 4-12 Geometry of main base plate to which side plates are attached............................80 5-1 Flow chart showing extraction and input sequence of Indirect Tensile Test Data........................................................................................................................85 5-2 Flow chart showing data input of Complex Modulus test.....................................88 5-3 Installation Screen..................................................................................................89 5-4 Main Interaction Template.....................................................................................90 5-5 Input template options............................................................................................92 5-6 MS-DOS Base text file input template..................................................................93 5-7 Input dialog box.....................................................................................................94 5-8 Save changes dialog box........................................................................................95 5-9 Decision Box for clipboard changes......................................................................95 5-10 Applied tensile stress input box.............................................................................96 5-11 Database Main Menu.............................................................................................97 5-12 Database Input Mask..............................................................................................98 xii

PAGE 13

5-13 (a) Correct state of input tables for data entry.......................................................98 5-13 (b) Incorrect state of input tables for data entry.....................................................98 5-13 (c) Right click projected arrow for opening paste option......................................99 5-13 (d) Dialog box: After selecting paste option. Opt Yes.....................................99 5-14 Search dialog box Select type of search............................................................100 5-15 Search form..........................................................................................................101 5-16 Search Result Form..............................................................................................101 5-17 Report delivery option.........................................................................................102 5-18 Email Report........................................................................................................103 6-1 Plot of I-295 PFC mixtures gradation.................................................................107 6-2 Mix Design of I-295 PFC-Granite mixture..........................................................111 6-3 Compacted pill rolled in 1/8 inch sample placed in vacuum chamber..............112 6-4 Vacuum Saturation of sample prior to moisture conditioning.............................112 6-5 Affect of conditioning over stone to stone contact of PFC mixtures...................114 6-6 Comparison of Fracture Test rsults A) Energy ratio, B) Fracture energy, C) Tensile strength, D) Failure strain, E) DCSE, F) Creep compliance, G) Resilient modulus, H) Strain rate, I)Creep rate....................................................116 7-1 Gradation Band of Georgia PEM and I-295 PFC Project....................................119 7-2 IDT testing device................................................................................................122 7-3 Temperature controlled chamber.........................................................................122 7-4 Typical Dense-Graded specimen with extensometers attached...........................123 7-5 Dehumidifying chamber......................................................................................124 7-6 Power Model for Creep Compliance...................................................................129 7-7 FE and DCSE from Strength Test........................................................................131 7-8 Energy Ratio........................................................................................................135 7-9 Fracture Energy....................................................................................................135 xiii

PAGE 14

7-10 Failure Strain........................................................................................................136 7-11 DCSE...................................................................................................................136 7-12 Resilient Modulus................................................................................................137 7-13 Creep Compliance................................................................................................137 7-14 Strain Rate............................................................................................................138 7-15 Power Model Parameter (D1)..............................................................................138 7-16 Power Model Parameter (m)................................................................................139 A-1 Final Mix Design for Georgia PEM-Granite.......................................................144 D-1 Showing 3-D view of mold designed for preparing specimen for Asphalt Mastic...................................................................................................................156 D-2 Base plate 3-D wire view showing position of groves and notch........................157 D-3 Base plate geometry.............................................................................................158 D-4 Notch plate 3-D wire view...................................................................................159 xiv

PAGE 15

Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Engineering DEVELOPMENT AND EVLUATION OF PERMEABLE FRICTION COURSE MIX DESIGN FOR FLORIDA CONDITIONS By Lokendra Jaiswal August 2005 Chair: Bjorn Birgisson Cochair: Reynaldo Ray Major Department: Civil and Coastal Engineering A mix design procedure for Permeable Friction Course that provides guidance on material properties, aggregate gradation, determination of optimum asphalt content, and mixture properties is needed for Florida conditions. This project involves 1) development of permeable friction course mix design procedure for Florida conditions, 2) evaluation of permeable friction course of I-295 project, 3) development of data extraction, analysis and database software for material properties, indirect tensile test results, and complex modulus test results, and 4) development of fracture test on sand asphalt for SEM analysis and tensile strength. In the course of study an extensive literature review was done on various mix design approach, material characteristics, and laboratory process guideline. Sample preparation and testing are carried in the laboratory for granite and limestone aggregate permeable friction course for determination of optimum asphalt content, moisture conditioning and long-term oven aging. An indirect tensile test is done xv

PAGE 16

on specimen with optimum asphalt content to evaluate performance of mixture. Film thickness, an important criterion for permeable friction course for ensuring resistance against stripping and asphalt hardening, is developed, based on the different absorption capacity of aggregate. This proposed mix design procedure was used to design PFC mixture for the I-295 project. Performance test database (PTD.exe) as data analysis and data storage software was developed using visual basic as the programming language. This software was used throughout the project for analyzing the test results and storing in database for future reference. Based on analysis of fracture test results of the I-295 PFC project, essentiality of fracture test on sand asphalt came up. A framework of fracture test on sand asphalt which can be conducted within SEM chamber is done. Observation of fracture test results of moisture conditioned sample of I-295 PFC mixture showed that coarse stone to stone contact is affected due to conditioning. Creep response of mixture remains approximately same after conditioning as compared with unconditioned sample. Finally, specifications and mix design procedure for PFC mixture are recommended and recommendations for further development of sand-asphalt fracture test are provided. Fracture test results FC-5 granite and FC-5 limestone samples, both aged and unaged, are compared with mixture designed for GPEM development and I-295 PFC project. xvi

PAGE 17

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Porous Friction Course (PFC) improves the frictional resistance of pavements, along with the drainage of water, for reducing the potential of aquaplaning. In the 1990s the traditional FC-2 friction course developed by Florida was replaced by coarser open graded friction course (FC-5) which is -inch Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size (NMAS), placed approximately -inch thick. Even though the FC-5 had coarser aggregate structure and additional water storage capacity as compared to the old FC-2, water ponding on pavement surfaces continued to be a problem. Many states in US developed porous friction courses to over come such problems. The Georgia DOT developed their porous friction course design by utilizing a gap-grading aggregate and lowering the percentage of filler, following European PFC mixture designs. The combination of gap grading, low filler, and high asphalt content lead to the draining of asphalt binder from mixture during transportation and lay down procedure. Due to this problem, the Georgia DOT introduced mineral fibers in Georgia PEM mixtures. This research project is focused to develop and evaluate the Georgia PEM (GPEM) mix design procedure for Florida conditions, and updating the GPEM mix design by introducing Superpave gyratory compaction. Also, in the course of this project two other important developments are accomplished. First, a Performance Test Database (PTD) was developed to facilitate data analysis and data storage of mixture design and 1

PAGE 18

2 performance test results. The second achievement is the preliminary design of a new fracture test for asphalt mastic. 1.2 Objectives The primary objectives of the research are summarized below: Open Graded friction course because of their macro texture and air voids may not have enough water storage capacity for some applications, and may also be susceptible to stripping. The rate of susceptibility depends on climatic conditions. Therefore the development and evaluation of mix design procedure for Porous Friction Course (PFC) for Florida Climatic Condition is main objective of this research project. Mix design for a test strip on I-295, containing a Porous Friction Course (PFC) mixture design developed in this research project. Developing data analysis and database software, to store data from Fracture Test and Complex Modulus Test. Developing basics framework of fracture test for asphalt mastic. 1.3 Scope Mix design for I-295 highway (PFC project) provides an excellent opportunity to use and implement mix design procedure developed for GPEM. Database developed for data analysis and data storage is an excellent tool for referring previous mixture properties and their performance, while selecting gradation and doing mix design .Fracture test done on various field and lab prepared mixes enlightens many factors affecting the fracture resistance of mixtures. These factors are discussed individually in this thesis. It is always assumed that coarse aggregate are mainly responsible for contribution towards fracture resistance. Steps taken to develop fracture test on sand asphalt provides view on the contribution of fines and binder towards fracture resistance.

PAGE 19

3 1.4 Research Approach A detailed literature review was performed previously by Varadhan (2004) to understand Georgias mix design procedure. Figure 1-1 shows a flow chart of the approach adopted for this research. The Georgia DOT used Marshalls blow for mix design of PFC. This research introduced the Superpave Gyratory Compactor. Therefore, a primary objective was to determine number of gyration required to attain compaction level same as field compaction. Second step was to determine film thickness corresponding to this compaction level. Different methods of determining film thickness are carried out and then most optimize method is selected for mix design procedure. Superpave Indirect tensile test were carried out on Short Term Oven Aged (STOA) and Long Term Oven Aged (LTOA) mixtures for determination of facture resistance. Simultaneously, analysis and database software was developed in order to analyze and store data from this project. Once the mix design procedure was finalized a section of I-295 highway is designed based on this mix design method. Two trial gradations (JMF) were selected with in control points and mix design was carried on both of these gradations to determine optimum asphalt content. Final selection of gradation was done based strength and energy ratio criteria. Fracture testing was carried on all STOA and LTOA samples from US highways27 and I-295 PFC project. In the course of the project necessity of sand asphalts fracture resistance lead to develop new fracture test.

PAGE 20

4 Figure 1-1. Flow chart showing Research Approach implemented Reference of database during Mix design Data in p u t Mix Design of Porous Friction C ourse (I-295 PFC project) based performance test Selection of two trail grad ation M i x D e s i gn Indirect Tensile Test Selection of gradation based on energ y r a tio Development an d evaluation of mix design pro c edure of GPEM for Florida Condition. Determ inat ion o f Com p action L e vel Developm ent o f Film Thickn ess Criterion Determ inat ion o f aging eff e c t of F r acture T e s t Developm ent o f P e rform ance Tes t Database Data Extr act ion and Anal ysis Anal yzed da ta s t or ed in database Data entr y of PFC mixtures in d a tabase for referen ces Develop m ent of fracture test o n as p hal t Fracture testing on sample s (STOA and LTOA) from I-295 PFC project and GPFC samples Data input Thesis Literatur e R e view: Stud y o f pr evious work done and finalizing ob jectiv es to be achieved. Res earch Appro ach

PAGE 21

CHAPTER 2 DEVELOPMENT OF MIX DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR POROUS FRICTION COURSE 2.1 Initial Study and Objectives The Georgia Department of Transportation started evaluation of Porous European Mix (PEM), a form of Porous Friction Course Mixture, in 1992 for development a mix design for Porous Friction Course (PFC), which is entitled for Georgia Permeable European Mixture. Georgia PEM mixtures proved to be more permeable than conventional OGFC, due to its gap-graded characteristics, with a predominant single size coarse aggregate fraction that contains high percentage of air voids as specified by Watson et al. (1998). The Georgia PEM mix design (GDT 114, 1996) was used as a starting point for the new Florida Permeable Friction Course (PFC) mixture design. In the following, the GPEM mixture design developed by the Georgia DOT will be reviewed briefly, followed by the development of a new Florida PFC mixture design, which is based on the GPEM mixture design. Main objective of the Permeable Friction Course Design is to design a highly permeable mixture with good durability characteristics, while also providing sufficient mixture stability through coarse stone to stone contact. In order to enhance durability, it is desirable to have a high asphalt content, while preventing the drain down of binder, thus providing sufficient binder film thickness. Once the coarse aggregate contact structure is chosen, the design asphalt content is obtained by selecting four (4) trial mixtures of varying asphalt contents, and choosing the asphalt content that results in a minimum 5

PAGE 22

6 VMA. This is done to ensure reasonably high asphalt content. Importantly, it is necessary to use four trial asphalt contents, rather than three. Choosing only three asphalt contents will always result in one of the chosen asphalt contents to show a minimum, whereas choosing four asphalt contents will result in a true minimum that can be verified. The objectives of this chapter is to develop a Porous Friction Course (PFC) mixture design for Florida conditions and materials using the Superpave gyratory compactor, and to evaluate the new PFC mixture design using two mixtures that contain aggregates and asphalt that are typical to Florida. The Georgia PEM mixture design is used as a starting point for the development of the Florida PFC mixture design. 2.2 Georgia PEM Mixture Design as per GDT 114 Test Method: B (1996) In the following the Georgia DOT GPEM mixture design will be reviewed and used as a starting point for the Florida PFC mixture design approach. The first and foremost change was the introduction of the Superpave gyratory compaction into the mixture design in lieu of the Marshall compaction used by Georgia DOT. The main elements of the Georgia PEM mixture design are as follows: Georgia DOT GPEM mixture design method (GDT-114 Test Method: B, 1996) specifies the use of modified asphalt cement (PG 76-22) as specified in Section 820 (GDT 114,1996) and does not require the determination of surface capacity (KC) to determine initial trial asphalt contents. The Georgia DOT uses the Marshall Method of compaction during the design of the Georgia PEM mixtures. A stabilizing fiber is added to mixture for avoiding binder drain down, which meets the requirement of Section 819 (GDT 114, 1996). In the following, the steps in the Georgia PEM mixture design (GDT-114 Test Method: B, 1996) are listed. Table 2-1 shows gradation limits as GDT 114 (1996). A. SCOPE OF GPEM MIXTURE DESIGN

PAGE 23

7 The Georgia DOT method of design for a modified open graded bituminous GPEM mixture consists of four steps. The first is to conduct a modified Marshall mix design (AASHTO T-245) to determine asphalt cement content. The second step is to determine optimum asphalt content. The third step is to perform a drain down test, according to GDT-127 (2005), or AASHTO T 305-97 (2001). The final step is to perform a boil test, according to GDT-56, or ASTM D 3625. Table 2-1 gives gradation limits and design requirement for Open Graded Friction Course (For 9.5 mm and 12.5 mm Gradation) and Permeable European Mixture (12.5 mm Gradation). Gradation limits specified for 12.5 GPEM are used as design limits for development of PFC mix design for Florida Design. There are no mixture design guidelines currently available for the determination of trial gradations within the specification limit. Rather, the mixture designer has to use his own judgment to determine a trial gradation within the limits provided. Table 2-1. Gradation specifications according to GDT 114 (1996) Mixture Control Tolerance Asphalt Concrete 12.5 mm PEM Grading Requirements 0.0 3/4 in (19 mm) sieve 100 6.1 1/2 in (12.5 mm) sieve 80-100 5.6 3/8 in (9.5 mm) sieve 35-60 .7 No. 4 (4.75 mm) sieve 10-25 .6 No.8 (2.36 mm) sieve 5 10 .0 No. 200 (75 m) sieve 1-4 Design Requirement .4 Range for % AC 5.5-7.0 Class of stone (Section 800) "A" only Coating retention (GDT-56) 95 Drain-down, AASHTO T 305 (%) <0.3 B. APPARATUS

PAGE 24

8 The apparatus required shall consist of the following: 1. Drain-Down equipment as specified in GDT-127 (2005) or AASHTO T 305-97 (2001) 2. Marshall design equipment as specified in AASHTO T-245 3. Boil Test Equipment as specified in GDT-56 (2005) or ASTM D 3625 4. Balance, 5000 grams Capacity 0.1 grams accuracy. Step 2 Modified Marshall Design and Optimum AC After determining a trial aggregate blend the following steps are required to determine the asphalt content: 1. Heat the coarse aggregate to 350F 3.5F (176C 2.5 C ), heat the mould to 300F 3.5 F (148 C 2.5 C) and heat the AC to 330 F 3.5 F (165 C 2.5 C). 2. Mix aggregate with asphalt at three asphalt contents in 0.5 % interval nearest to the optimum asphalt content establishes in step 1. The three specimens should be compacted at the nearest 0.5% interval to the optimum and three specimens each at 0.5% above and below the mid interval. 3. After mixing, return to oven if necessary and when 320F 3.5F (160 C 2.5 C) compact using 25 blows on each side 4. When compacted, cool to the room temperature before removing from the mold 5. Bulk Specific Gravity: Determine the density of a regular shaped specimen of compacted mix from its dry mass (in grams) and its volume in cubic centimeters obtained from its dimensions for height and radius. Convert the density to the bulk specific gravity by dividing by 0.99707 g/cc, the density of water at 25C Bulk Sp.Gr = W / ( r2h/ 0.99707) = Weight (gms) 0.0048417/Height (in) W = Weight of specimen in grams R = radius in cm H = height in cm 6. Calculate percent air voids, VMA and voids filled with asphalt based on aggregate specific gravity 7. Plot VMA curve versus AC content 8. Select the optimum asphalt content at the lowest point on VMA curve

PAGE 25

9 Step 3 Drain-Down Test Perform the drain test in accordance with the GDT 127 (2005) (Method for determining Drain Down characteristics in Un-compacted Bituminous Mixtures) or AASHTO T 305-97 (2001). A mix with an optimum AC content as calculated above is placed in a wired basket having 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) mesh openings and heated 14C (25F) above the normal production temperature (typically around 350F) for one hour. The amount of cement, which drains from the basket, is measured. If the sample fails to meet the requirements of maximum drain down of 0.3%, increase the fiber content by 0.1% and repeat the test. Step 4 Boil Test Perform the boil test according to GDT 56 (2005) or ASTM D 3625 with complete batch of mix at optimum asphalt content as determined in step 2 above. If the sample treated with hydrated lime fails to maintain 95% coating, a sample shall be tested in which 0.5% liquid anti stripping additive has been used to treat the asphalt cement in addition to the treatment of aggregate with hydrated lime. 2.3 Overview of Evaluation of Preliminary OGFC/PFC Mix design Procedure Developed by Vardhan (2004) Varadhan (2004) introduced the Superpave gyratory compaction into PFC mixture design in lieu of the Marshall compaction used by Georgia DOT. The study used to make the specified changes in preliminary mix design approach and the development of long-term aging procedure for compacted PFC mixture are discussed in the following. 2.3.1 Determination of Compaction level for PFC The Georgia DOT prepares specimen using the Marshall Hammer with 25 blows on each side of the specimen. Due to the overall strong desire by both the FDOT and the

PAGE 26

10 University of Florida researchers to use a compaction procedure that is more in line with current mix design compaction procedures in America, it was decided to use the Superpave gyratory compactor for compacting the specimens. Based on the work performed by Varadhan (2004) it was determined that an appropriate compaction level of 50 gyrations was sufficient to compact OGFC mixtures. This determination was based on a modified locking point concept (Vavrik & Carpenter, 1998). The approach by Vavrik (1998) was developed for dense graded mixtures. Varadhan (2004) found that the use of the locking point concept by Vavrik & Carpenter (1998) resulted in a severe over compaction of OGFC mixtures, leading to aggregate breakdown. Therefore, the locking point concept was modified for use in OGFC mixtures, as described by Varadhan (2004). As determined by Vardhan (2004) the compaction curve for OGFC/PFC mixtures follows a logarithmic trend. To identify the locking point, the rate of change of slope of compaction curve was used. The stage, at which the rate of change of compaction was insignificant, is the point of maximum resistance to compaction. Thus, using the logarithmic regression of the compaction data, the rate of change of slope can be obtained as follows: y = m ln(x) + c Rate of compaction = dy/dx = m/x (at any x=N) Rate of change of slope of compaction curve = d2y/dx2 = -m/ x2 (at any x =N) Based on the above idea the locking point was identified as the point at which two gyrations at same gradient of slope were preceded by two gyrations at same gradient of slope. The gradient was taken up to four decimal places, as shown in Table 2-2 for FC-5 Granite (Varadhan, 2004). The reason this was chosen as locking point was based on the

PAGE 27

11 fact the change in air voids was insignificant at this stage and that this trend was consistently observed in all the mixtures. In addition, the compaction level as identified from visual observation was around 50-60. Thus, based on the above study, the locking points for theses mixtures were identified as shown in Table 2-3 Table 2-2. Locking Point Based on Gradient of Slope (Varadhan, 2004) FC-5 Granite # of Gyrations Gradient of slope 39 0.0018 40 0.0017 41 0.0016 42 0.0015 43 0.0014 44 0.0014 45 0.0013 46 (LP) 0.0013 47 0.0012 48 0.0012 49 0.0011 50 0.0011 Table 2-3. Locking Points of all Mixtures based on Gradient of Slope (Varadhan, 2004) Mixtures Locking Point FC-5 Limestone 56 FC-5 Granite 46 NOVACHIP 50 Thus based on above concept the locking points for FC-5 with Limestone, FC-5 with Granite and NOVACHIP were 56, 46 and 50 respectively. The specimens were compacted again to these gyrations and extraction of asphalt was performed to observe the gradations after compaction. For FC-5 Lime even when the gyrations were reduced to 56 from 125, the same amount of breakdown was observed. This clearly indicated that in case of limestone, the breakdown occurred in the initial stages itself i.e. at very low gyrations. Hence, even if

PAGE 28

12 the gyrations were to be further reduced, the breakdown was still going to persist. For FC-5 with granite and NOVACHIP, the gradation looks nearly the same as that of the original gradation. In addition, the air voids for FC-5 Granite and NOVACHIP were around 21 % and 15 % respectively, which is typical for these open graded mixtures. Thus, from the above the study it is clear that, though the locking point of each of these mixtures differed slightly from each other, it was around 50 gyrations. This was further corroborated by the study done by NCAT on the compaction levels of friction courses. NCAT suggests 50 gyrations as compaction level for all friction courses. Thus based on this study from visual observation and rate of change of compaction, NCAT study for friction course, Varadhan (2004) stated that 50 gyrations should be the compaction level for friction course mixes. 2.3.2 OGFC/PFC Mixture Design Procedure Proposed By Varadhan (2004) Use of modified asphalt cement does not require determination of surface capacity (Kc) as per GDT 114 Test method: B (1996). Boil test is not included in proposed mix design of PFC as a modified asphalt cement PG76-22 with 0.5% anti strip agent is used. The gradation band used by Varadhan (2004) with in GDT 114 (1996) specified gradation limits (Ref. Table 2-1) is shown in Figure 2-1. Following is the method developed and proposed: Modified GDT 114 test method: B by Varadhan (2004) 1. Heat the coarse aggregate, the mould to 350 F 3.5 F (176 C 2.5 C) and the AC to 330 F 3.5 F (165 C 2.5 C) 2. Mix aggregate with asphalt at three asphalt contents, viz., 5.5%, 6% and 6.5%. Just before mixing, add the required amount of mineral fibers to the aggregate. Prepare three samples at each of the asphalt content 3. After mixing, return to oven for two hours for STOA at 320 F 3.5 F (160 C 2.5 C). Then compact using the Superpave Gyratory Compactor 50 gyrations

PAGE 29

13 4. When compacted, cool to the room temperature before removing from the mold. It typically takes 1 hour 45 min to cool down. 5. Bulk Specific Gravity: Determine the density of a regular shaped specimen of compacted mix from its dry mass (in grams) and its volume in cubic centimeters obtained from its dimensions for height and radius. Convert the density to the bulk specific gravity by dividing by 0.99707 g/cc, the density of water at 25 C Gradation Band b y Vardhan (2004) 0102030405060708090100Sieve SizesPercentage Passing Max Control Points Min Control Points No. No. No. No. No. No. No. 3/8" 1/2" 3/4" 200 100 50 30 16 8 4 Figure 2-1. Gradation Band with in GDT 114 (1996) specified gradation limits used by Varadhan (2004) 6. Bulk Sp.Gr = W / ( r2h/ 0.99707) = Weight (gms) 0.0048417/Height (in) 7. W = Weight of specimen in grams 8. R = radius in cm 9. H= height in cm 10. Calculate percent air voids, VMA and voids filled with asphalt based on aggregate specific gravity 11. Plot VMA curve versus AC content 12. Select the optimum asphalt content at the lowest point on VMA curve

PAGE 30

14 Drain-Down Test Perform the drain test in accordance with the GDT 127 (2005) or AASHTO T 305-97 (2001). A mix with an optimum AC content as calculated above is placed in a wired basket having 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) mesh openings and heated 14 C (25 F) above the normal production temperature (typically around 350F) for one hour. The amount of cement, which drains from the basket, is measured. If the sample fails to meet the requirements of maximum drain down of 0.3 %, increase the fiber content by 0.1 % and repeat the test. It is recommended by GDOT that the asphalt content should not be below 6% because of coating issues. The film thickness requirement for granite mixture as per Georgia DOT is 27 microns. Moisture Damage Test Perform the moisture damage test in accordance with AASHTO T-283 (2003) on compacted specimen. The specimens are rolled in 1/8 wire mesh which are kept in position using two clamps on either edges of pills for avoiding fall down at high temperature of 60C (140F). 2.3.3 Long-Term Oven Aging Procedure Proposed for PFC Mixture by Varadhan (2004) In order to evaluate the mixture susceptibility to aging, it was necessary to develop a modified long-term aging procedure that was based on AASHTO PP2 (1994). Since these mixtures are very course and open, there is a possibility of these mixes falling apart during aging. Hence, a procedure was developed to contain the compacted pills from falling apart during aging. A 1/8 opening wire mesh is should be rolled around pills, with two clamps tightened at 1-inch distance from each end of the pill. The mesh size is chosen in

PAGE 31

15 order to ensure that there is good circulation of air within the sample for oxidation and at the same time, to prevent the smaller aggregate particles from falling off through the mesh. Specimens are kept in ovens with porous plate at bottom for 185 F 5.4 F (85 C 3 C) for 120 0.5 hours. After that time period, turn off the oven and open the door. Allow the oven and specimen to cool to room temperature for about 16 hours. 2.4 Verification of Florida Permeable Friction Course Mixture Design 2.4.1 Materials Aggregate and gradation selection An existing Georgia PEM gradation obtained from the Georgia DOT was used as a starting point in the mixture design. Figure 2-2 shows the gradation for the Georgia PEM. Interestingly, the Georgia DOT mixture design follows the middle of the specified gradation band on the coarse side, transitioning to the maximum allowable fines content on the fine side. This selection of gradation will likely result in a good coarse aggregate to aggregate contact structure, as well as ensuring the highest possible amount of asphalt binder in the mixture, without significant drain down. Two types of aggregate are used for this development i.e. Granite and Limestone. Nova Scotia granite and oolitic limestone from South Florida (White Rock) were used for preparing the mixtures. The same JMF is used for both granite and limestone mixture composed of aggregates from different stockpiles. The Job mix formula for the granite was composed of aggregates from stockpiles #7, #789 and Granite Screens. The job mix formula for the limestone was composed of aggregates from stockpiles S1A, S1B and limestone screens. Hydrated lime (1% by weight of aggregate) was used as anti-stripping agent for the granite aggregates. All aggregates were heated to 350F 3.5F (176 C 2.5 C) as specified in GDT 114

PAGE 32

16 Test Method: B Section C (1996). Table 2-4 and Table 2-5 shows composing of GPEM-limestone and GPEM-garanite job mix formula. Table 2-4. Composition of GPEM-Limestone gradation JMF Type S1A S1B Scrns JMF Control Points % Amount 55.56 37.37 7.07 100 Max Min Sieve Size Size^0.45 37.5 5.11 100 100 100 100 25 4.26 100 100 100 100 19 3.76 100 100 100 100 100 100 12.5 3.12 82 100 100 90 100 80 9.5 2.75 28 99 100 60 60 35 4.75 2.02 3 39 99 23 25 10 2.36 1.47 2 8 70 9 10 5 1.18 1.08 2 3 54 6 0.6 0.79 1 1 40 4 0.3 0.58 1 1 30 3 0.15 0.43 1 1 13 2 0.075 0.31 1 1 2 1 4 1 Table 2-5. Composition of GPEM-Granite gradation JMF Type #7 #789 Granite Granite Screens Lime JMF Control Points % Amount 55 37 7 1 100 Max Min Sieve Size Size^0.45 37.5 5.11 100 100 100 100 100 25 4.26 100 100 100 100 100 19 3.76 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 12.5 3.12 82 100 100 100 90 100 80 9.5 2.75 28 99 100 100 60 60 35 4.75 2.02 2 39 99 100 23 25 10 2.36 1.47 2 6 69 100 9 10 5 1.18 1.08 2 2 46 100 6 0.6 0.79 1 1 30 100 4 0.3 0.58 1 1 17 100 3 0.15 0.43 0 1 7 100 2 0.075 0.31 0 0 1 100 1 4 1 Binder and mineral fiber SBS modified PG 76-22 asphalt, with 0.5% anti strip agent was used in the mixture design. Mineral fiber (Fiberand Road Fibers) supplied by SLOSS Industries, Alabama,

PAGE 33

17 0.4% by weight of total mix, was added to mix in order to avoid binder drain drown. Chemical composition of the mineral fiber is Vitreous Calcium Magnesium Aluminum Silicates. Mineral fibers were shredded into fine fragments before adding to the mixture. Geor g ia's Permeable European Mixture Gradations for Limestone and Granite Mixes0102030405060708090100Sieve SizesPercentage Passing Georgia PEM Gradation Max Control Points Min Control Points No. No. No. No. No. No. No. 3/8" 1/2" 3/4" 200 100 50 30 16 8 4 Figure 2-2. Georgias Permeable European Mixture gradation band 2.4.2 Sample Preparation for Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content Based on experience, the Georgia DOT procedure almost always results in design asphalt content of 6 percent, when Georgia granite aggregates are used. However, following the GDOT GDT-114 (1996) procedure, three trial mixtures were prepared at different asphalt contents. The trial asphalt content of 5.5%, 6% and 6.5% were selected for the Nova Scotia granite blend for choosing the asphalt content that results in a minimum VMA. As per GDT 114 (1996), the specified range of percent asphalt content is 5.5%-7.0%. As a note, based on the early experience with the use of only three trial asphalt contents to obtain an optimal asphalt content, it was observed that it is necessary to use four trial asphalt contents for determining the optimum asphalt content. Choosing only

PAGE 34

18 three asphalt contents will always result in one of the chosen asphalt contents to show a minimum, whereas choosing four asphalt contents will result in a true minimum that can be verified. Figure 2-3 shows example of determination of higher asphalt content as optimum asphalt content due selection of (3) trial asphalt contents. V oids in Mineral Aggregates(VMA) Vs Asphalt Content (%AC)28.2028.4028.6028.8029.0029.2029.4029.605.05.56.06.57.07.5% ACVMA Higher optimum asphalt content with (3) trail asphalt Figure 2-3. Example of determination of inconsistent optimum asphalt content Because of this reason, a broader range of trial asphalt contents was used for the limestone mixture, namely 5.5%, 6.0%, 6.5% and 7%. For each trail asphalt content three pills were prepared. 2.4.4 Mixing and Compaction of Samples for Determination of Bulk Specific Gravity Sieved aggregates from each stockpile are batched by weight of 4400 grams for each pile. Three pills are prepared for each trial percentage. Hydrated lime 44 grams (1.0% of aggregate weight) is added to batched samples. Table 2-2 shows the amount of material used for mixing. Aggregates, tools, mixing drum, shredded fibers and the asphalt binder are heated to 330 F 3.5 F (165 C 2.5 C) for at least 3 hours. Aggregates are mixed with asphalt at all trial asphalt contents. Just before mixing, add the required

PAGE 35

19 amount of mineral fibers to the aggregate. Table 2-2 shows amount of aggregates and asphalt used for each trial blend. Once the sample is mixed it is placed in a clean metal tray. Due to the presence of the SBS in the asphalt binder, these mixtures tend to be sticky making the mixing somewhat challenging. In particular, it is important to ensure that there is no loss of fines while retrieving the mix from the mixing drum. The AASHTO RM 30 specification for loss of fines was used, requiring that a maximum 0.1 percent loss of fines. After mixing, mixtures are aged for short term of two hours at 320 F 3.5 F (160C 2.5 C) as per AASHTO PP2 (1994). The specimens are compacted to 50 gyrations using the Superpave Gyratory Compactor. Molds should be lubricated. The angle of gyration during compaction is 1.25 degrees. From prior experience, compacted samples should not be retrieved from molds immediately. They should be allowed to cool for 1hr 45 min before extracting the specimens from the molds. Once the specimen is ejected from the mold, it is allowed to cool for another 5 minutes at ambient room temperature before handling. It was found that if sufficient cooling of the specimen after extraction of the specimen from the mold were not followed (especially for granite mixtures), small aggregate particles would tend to dislodge and stick to gloves due to the high specimen air voids. Finally, it was found that it was necessary to allow the pills to cool at ambient room temperatures for another 24 hours before processing them any further.

PAGE 36

20 Table 2-6. Material quantities Bulk Specific Gravity Aggregate Weight = 4400 grams AC Content AC Weight (Grams) Fiber Weight (Grams) Total Weight 5.5 256.1 18.6 4674.7 6 280.9 18.7 4699.6 6.5 305.9 18.8 4724.7 7 331.2 18.9 4750.1 5.5 58.2 4.2 1062.4 6.0 63.8 4.3 1068.1 6.5 69.5 4.3 1073.8 7.0 75.3 4.3 1079.6 2.4.4 Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content The determination of bulk specific gravity test in accordance with AASHTO T166 (2000) cannot be conducted on the PFC mixtures because of their high air voids. The determination of Saturated Surface Dry (SSD) weight of the pills is not reliable for mixtures at these high air void contents as per Cooley et al (2002). Therefore, bulk specific gravity (Gmb) of pills was determined by Dimensional analysis, as described in GDOT-114 (1996). The determination of Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity (Gmm) was made via the use of the Rice test procedure as per AASHTO T209 (2004). For preparation of samples for determination of Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity as per AASHTO T-209-99 (2004), aggregates are batched by weight of 1100 grams. Two mixes for each trial asphalt percentage are prepared. Once all trial asphalt content pills had been prepared, the VMA was determined from the Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity (Gmm) and the Bulk Specific Gravity (Gmb) determined from Dimensional analysis. The design asphalt content is selected at the point of minimum VMA. The main purpose of using minimum VMA criterion is to

PAGE 37

21 ensure reasonably high asphalt content of the mixture. Secondly, VMA is calculated on a volume basis and is therefore not affected significantly by the specific gravity of aggregate. Refer Appendix A for detail calculations and Laboratory work sheets of volumetric properties of PFC mixtures. Figure 2-4and Figure 2-5 show a summary of the volumetrics for the limestone and granite mixtures. Optimum asphalt contents of PFC mixtures were found to be 6.5% and 6.0% for the limestone and granite mixtures, respectively. The porous nature of limestone resulted in a higher optimum asphalt content.

PAGE 38

22 Effective Sp Grav. of Agg. % AC6 Gmm1 Gmb2 VMA3 (%) VTM4 (%) VFA5 (%) 2.513 5.5 2.323 1.877 29.40 19.21 34.67 6.0 2.314 1.908 28.62 17.54 38.71 6.5 2.298 1.927 28.30 16.16 42.89 7.0 2.286 1.934 28.42 15.39 45.84 Voids in total mix14.0015.0016.0017.0018.0019.0020.004.05.06.07.08.0% ACVTM (%) Voids in mineral aggregates28.0028.5029.0029.504.05.06.07.08.0% ACVMA (%) Voids filled with asphalt30.0032.0034.0036.0038.0040.0042.0044.0046.0048.004.05.06.07.08.0% ACVFA (%) Figure 2-4. Mix Design of OGFC with aggregate type: Limestone Optimum Asphalt Content: 6.5% VMA at Optimum Asphalt Content:28.30% Mineral Fiber: 0.4% of Total Mix Aggregate Type: Limestone Gmm1 = Maximum specific gravity of mixture, Gmb2 = Bulk specific gravity of mixture, VMA3 = Voids in Mineral Aggregates, VTM4 = Voids in Total Mix, VFA5 = Voids filled with Asphalt, AC6 = Asphalt Content

PAGE 39

23 Effective Sp Grav. of Agg. % AC6 Gmm1 Gmb2 VMA3 (%) VTM4 (%) VFA5 (%) 2.641 5.5 2.442 1.936 30.74 20.72 32.60 6 2.414 1.961 30.23 18.78 37.86 6.5 2.389 1.967 30.38 17.68 41.82 Voids in mineral aggregates30.1030.2030.3030.4030.5030.6030.7030.8055.566.57% ACVMA (%) Voids filled with Asphalt30.0032.0034.0036.0038.0040.0042.0044.0055.566.57% ACVMA (%) Voids in Total Mix17.0018.0019.0020.0021.0055.566.57% ACVTM (%) Figure 2-5. Mix Design of OGFC with aggregate type: Granite Optimum Asphalt Content: 6.0% VMA at Optimum Asphalt Content:30.23% Mineral Fiber: 0.4% of Total Mix Aggregate Type: Limestone Gmm1 = Maximum specific gravity of mixture, Gmb2 = Bulk specific gravity of mixture, VMA3 = Voids in Mineral Aggregates, VTM4 = Voids in Total Mix, VFA5 = Voids filled with Asphalt, AC6 = Asphalt Content

PAGE 40

24 2.5 Evaluation of Film Thickness Criterion in PFC Design The Georgia DOT uses a required minimum calculated asphalt film thickness criterion for ensuring that the mixture has enough asphalt for adequate durability. Since durability of mixtures is a surface phenomenon, where the binder is damaged from the surface inward, a mixture with a low film thickness is expected to damage more than a mixture with a thicker film, irrespective of surface area. Therefore, it is important to clearly establish a link between the calculated film thickness and the physics of the mixture in question. The appropriate film thickness calculation is affected by the aggregate structure of the mix. The first attempts to calculate minimum asphalt film thicknesses were made by Goode and Lufsey (1965). Their method was based on empirical considerations, leading to the development of the theoretical film thickness (Hveem, NCAT 1991), which assumes that all aggregates are rounded spheres, with predefined surface areas, which are coated with an even thickness of asphalt film. Recognizing that these theoretical film thickness calculations were developed primarily for fine-graded mixtures with very different aggregate structures from that found in coarse-graded mixtures, let alone OGFC and PFC mixtures, Nukunya et al. (2001) developed an effective film thickness concept based on a physical model of coarse-graded mixtures. Nukunya, et al. (2001) observed that the aggregate structure for fineand coarse-graded mixtures is fundamentally different, as shown in Figure 2-6 Fine-graded mixtures tend to have more continuous grading such that the fine-aggregates are an integral part of the stone matrix. Coarse mixtures, on the other hand, tend to have aggregate structures that are dominated by the coarse aggregate portion (i.e., stone-to-stone contact).

PAGE 41

25 COARSE FINE Figure 2-6. Aggregate Structure for Coarse and Fine Mixtures (Nukunya et al. [2001]) Therefore, coarse-graded PFC mixtures are effectively composed of two components: the first one is the interconnected coarse aggregate, and the second component is the fine mixture embedded in between the coarse aggregate particles. The mixture made up of asphalt and fine aggregates coats the coarse aggregate particles, and the fine aggregates within that matrix have access to all the asphalt within the mixture. This results in film thicknes that is much greater than that calculated using conventional theoretical film thickness calculation procedures that assume that the asphalt is uniformly distributed over all aggregate particles. To account for the different nature of the aggregate structure in coarse-graded mixtures, a modified film thickness calculation, entitled the effective film thickness, was developed by Nukunya, et al. (2001), in which the asphalt binder is distributed onto the portion of the aggregate structure that is within the mastic. Also recognizing that the Theoretical Film Thickness (Hveem, NCAT 1991) may not adequately represent the physics of PFC mixtures, the Georgia DOT introduced a modified film thickness calculation. However, the Georgia DOT modified film thickness calculation method is based on empirical considerations and yields similar results to the theoretical film thickness calculations.

PAGE 42

26 More recently, work at the University of Florida under the direction of Drs. Roque and Birgisson has led to the establishment of a tentative gradation selection framework for the optimization of the fracture and rutting resistance of dense graded mixtures. Key concepts in this new proposed framework include the observation that enhanced cracking and rutting resistance can be obtained by ensuring that the aggregates in the course portion of the mixture gradation interact sufficiently amongst each other to allow for the effective transfer of forces through the course-aggregate portion of the mixture. This interaction of the course aggregate component should not reach down to the finer materials, so as to control mixture sensitivity. For optimizing the fracture resistance of mixtures, the material within the interstitial volume of the course aggregate portion also needs to be proportioned and designed so that an adequate Dissipated Creep Strain Energy (DCSE) limit is maintained, as well as providing enough flow and ductility to enhance the fracture resistance of the mixture. Too little interstitial material, or interstitial material with a low creep strain rate, will result in a brittle mixture. It is anticipated that these gradation concepts will be transferable to OGFC and PFC mixtures, thus allowing for the development of guidelines for the selection of gradations that optimize the resistance to cracking and rutting. Using these concepts it is also possible to define a modified film thickness that is calculated strictly based on the interstitial volume component of the mixture. In the following the Georgia DOT modified film thickness criterion will be compared to the effective film thickness criterion developed by Nukunya, et al. (9), as well as the new film thickness criterion based on interstitial volume considerations. For completeness the Theoretical Film Thickness proposed by (Hveem, NCAT 1991) is

PAGE 43

27 also calculated and included in the comparison, even though it is recognized that it may not adequately represent the structure of PFC mixtures. However, first the methods for calculating these asphalt film thicknesses are reviewed. 2.5.1 Review of Asphalt Film Thickness Calculation Methods Goode and Lufseys method Even though this method is not used in this research, it is important to note the contributions of Goode and Lufsey (1965), who related empirically asphalt hardening to voids, permeability and film thickness. They recognized that the hardening of the asphalt binder in a mix was a function of air voids, film thickness, temperature, and time. Goode and Lufsey (1965) introduced the concept of the ratio of the air voids to bitumen index, as a measure of the aging susceptibility of a mix (developed for dense graded mixture with 4% air voids). Goode and Lufsey (1965) had proposed a maximum value of 4.0 for this ratio, which they believed, would prevent pavement distress by reducing the aging of the asphalt film coating the aggregate. Mathematically, what they stated was: 410(%)3exBitumenIndAirVoids (Maximum) (2.1) Where: Film thickness (microns) = Bitumen index x 4870 Equation 2-1 with the air voids content of the mixture is reduced to a minimum film thickness requirement based on air voids to bitumen index ratio analysis. The film thickness then varies with the percent air voids as follows (Goode and Lufsey, 1965):

PAGE 44

28 31044870(%) AirVoidsessFilmThickn (Minimum) (2.2) The total air voids in the compacted PFC limestone mixtures at 50 gyrations is 16.16%. Goode and Lufseys minimum film thickness requirement for 16.16% is 19.67 microns. Theoretical film thickness method This technique for calculating film thickness is based on the surface area calculated as per Hveem (1991). The surface area factors suggested by Hveem (1991) is shown in Table 2-7. The Film thickness of asphalt aggregates is a function of the diameter of particles and the effective asphalt content. The film thickness is directly proportional to volume of the effective asphalt content and inversely proportional to diameter of particle: aggefffilmWSAVT1000 (2.3) filmT = Film Thickness SA = Surface Area aggW = Weight of aggregate Table 2-7. Surface Area Factor Hveem (1991) Sieve Size Surface Area Factor Percentage Passing Maximum Sieve Size 2 Percent Passing No. 4 2 Percent Passing No. 8 4 Percent Passing No. 16 8 Percent Passing No. 30 14 Percent Passing No. 50 30 Percent Passing No. 100 60 Percent Passing No. 200 160

PAGE 45

29 Effective film thickness method (Nukunya et al, 2001) According to this method only aggregates passing the No. 8 Sieve are taken into account in the calculation of the surface area by using factors suggested by Hveem (1991) Then Equation 2-3 is used for calculating Film Thickness. Table 2-8. Surface area Factor suggested by Nukunya (2001) for coarse aggregate structure Sieve Size Surface Area Factor Percent Passing No. 8 4 Percent Passing No. 16 8 Percent Passing No. 30 14 Percent Passing No. 50 30 Percent Passing No. 100 60 Percent Passing No. 200 160 Modified film thickness method used by gdot Georgia developed this method primarily for PEM mix with granite aggregate. The basic assumption was that the absorption of asphalt is very low or no absorption by surface pores of granite aggregate. The method is empirical and assumes that fixed aggregate unit weight per pound of aggregate, based on Georgia aggregates. Hence, the effective film thickness () is given as: effT AC of gr. Sp. ft. sq.per m 0.09290Sq. lbft / squarein area Surface] Poundsper g 453.6 [ ] Aggregate %by divided Poundsper g 453.6 [effT (2.4) Where, = Effective Film Thickness effT Film thickness based on interstitial volume concept The aggregate interaction curve is plotted to determine the portion of the gradation curve with interacting aggregate sizes. Following is equation used for calculating points of interaction :

PAGE 46

30 )Re(%Re(%100*)Re(%intRe%SizeSieveattainedSizeSieveSuccesiveattainedSizeSieveattainedPonInteractioParticletained (2.5) The aggregates are considered to be interacting, if the percent-retained particle interaction is between 30% and 70%. Any point that falls outside these limits is considered to be non-interacting. Therefore, aggregate sizes below this break point are not interacting towards contribution of strength. These aggregate sizes are filling the cavities between the coarse aggregate structure defined by aggregate sizes above the break point. The aggregate sizes below the break point along with asphalt are contributing to Interstitial Volume. Mastic, comprising aggregate sizes below the break point, asphalt, and air voids, form the interstitial volume of the compacted mixture. Hence, the interstitial volume is the ratio of mastic in specimen to the total volume of the compacted mixture, as shown in Equation 2-6: MixtureCompactedofVolumeTotalMasticofVolumeVolumealInterstiti____)__(_ (2.6) In order to calculate the film thickness of the particles in the interstitial volume, the surface area of the particles in the interstitial volume needs to be determined. As per the hypothesis discussed above, aggregates below the break point are within the interstitial volume. Hence, the surface area (SA) of aggregates below break point can be obtained from the surface area factors given in Table 2-9. As the absorption in granite is negligible, the as the effective asphalt content (V) is taken to be the total asphalt content of the compacted mixture. Weight of aggregates (W) in air is taken into account for calculating film thickness. Equation 2-7 denotes calculation of film thickness with in interstitial volume: eff agg

PAGE 47

31 aggefffilmWSAVT1000 (2.7) Recognizing that these film thickness calculations all use effective asphalt content to determine the available amount of asphalt binder for the coating of particles, it is important to establish clear guidelines for determining the effective asphalt content of PFC mixtures. Table 2-9. Surface area factors for Interstitial Volume Sieve Size Surface Area Factor Percentage Passing Maximum Sieve Size 2 Percent Passing No. 4 2 Percent Passing No. 8 4 Percent Passing No. 16 8 Percent Passing No. 30 14 Percent Passing No. 50 30 Percent Passing No. 100 60 Percent Passing No. 200 160 Aggregate with in interstitial volume Aggregate with in interstitial volume The Georgia DOT method of film thickness calculations assumes that there is no absorption of asphalt into the aggregate surfaces. Their method of film thickness calculation is an empirical approach. This assumption may be a reasonable approximation for low absorption granite aggregates. However, for high absorption limestone aggregates it is necessary to account for absorption. In this research, asphalt absorption was estimated using two approaches: 1) Asphalt absorption obtained from basic volumetric equations is used to calculate effective asphalt content. This is the true asphalt contributing towards in film thickness: 13. Effective Specific gravity (Gsb): The effective specific gravity is calculated from the maximum specific gravity (Gmm) of mixture and Asphalt content (). Pb

PAGE 48

32 GbPbGmmPbGse10011001 (2.8) 14. Asphalt Absorption (): The absorbed asphalt content is differences of bulk volume of aggregate and the effective volume. asbP GbGsbGseGsbGsePasb100 (2.9) 15. Effective Volume of Asphalt (): The effective volume of asphalt is amount of asphalt available for coating aggregates, which is obtained by subtracting absorbed asphalt from Total Asphalt Content (). effV TotalP asbTotaleffPPV (2.9) 2) Determination of effective asphalt content based on bulk specific gravity determined through from the CoreLok test procedure as per CoreLok manual (2003). The main justification for using the CoreLok procedure is that open graded mixes readily absorb water and drain quickly when removed from the water tank, during the determination of Saturated Surface Dry (SSD). Weight conditions in traditional laboratory-based procedures for determining. The lack of control over the penetration and drainage of water in and out of asphalt specimens creates a problem with the water displacement measurement using the current principles for determination of specific gravity as per Cooley et all (2002). The CoreLok system makes the determination of SSD conditions unnecessary. Perform calculation as per directions given in Data Collection Table: 2.10

PAGE 49

33 Table 2-10. CoreLok calculation Sheet A B C D E F G H I J Sam-ple I D Bag Weight(g) Dry Sample Weight before Sealing (g) Sealed Sample Weight in Water (g) Dry Sample Weight After Water Submersion(g) RatioB/A Bag Volume CorrectionFrom Table Total Volume(A + D) C Volumeof Sample A/F Volumeof Sample (G-H) Bulk Specific Gravity B/I I II After determination of Bulk Specific gravity (Gmb) following steps in calculation are involved for estimating the effective asphalt content. Air Voids in compacted mix (VTM) and Voids in Mineral Aggregates (VMA) are calculated using Equation 2-10 and Equation 2-12 based on bulk specific gravity determine by CoreLok method. 1001GmmGmbVTM (2.10) 100100GmbWGsbWVMATagg (2.11) TTVVaggVVTMVeff100. (2.12) Where, TV = Total volume of compacted specimen Vagg = Volume of aggregate Gmm = Maximum theoretical specific gravity. Gsb = Aggregate bulk specific gravity

PAGE 50

34 VTM = Voids in total mix VMA = Voids in Mineral aggregate. TW = Weight of Total specimen aggW = Weight of aggregate 2.5.2 Comparison of Results Obtained from Each Film Thickness Calculation Method Limestone has higher absorption capacity than granite aggregate. Figure 2-7 shows the absorption of asphalt into the surface cavities of limestone aggregate, therefore reducing the effective asphalt content and resulting in a lower film thickness when compared to granite mixtures. (a) (b) Figure 2-7. (a) Granite with high film (Required against stripping) (b) Limestone with low film thickness as compared with granite due to absorption The four different asphalt film thickness calculations methods discussed previously were used to calculate the film thickness of asphalt with in compacted granite and limestone PFC mixtures. The surface area calculated by the Nukunya et al (2001) Method and the Interstitial Volume method is exactly same for the two mixtures evaluated, due to the fact that the break point defining the interstitial volume is at the No. 8 Sieve Size.

PAGE 51

35 Table 2-11. Comparison of Film Thickness method for Limestone mixture Method Film Thickness (microns) Asphalt absorption Film Thickness (microns) Corelok Method Theoretical Film Thickness (Hveem 1991) 34.20 31.22 Nukunya's Effective Film thickness 50.71 46.29 GDOT 34.80 31.58 Interstitial Volume 50.71 46.29 Table 2-11 shows the comparison of true film thickness to film thickness calculated from CoreLok bulk specific gravity. CoreLok is determining comparative film thickness. Nukunyas method and Interstitial volume method are predicting higher film due consideration of coarse aggregate structure. Table 2-12. Comparison of Film Thickness method for Granite mixture Method Film Thickness (microns) Asphalt Absorption Theoretical Film Thickness (Hveem 1991) 37.25 Nukunya's Effective Film thickness 55.23 GDOT 38.10 Interstitial Volume 55.23 As shown in Table 2-12, Comparison of Film Thickness method for Granite mixture, GDOT method is over predicting film thickness. Hence, in summary, either the CoreLok or the equivalent water absorption methods can be used. However, the Corelok method is still under review and development, nationally. Therefore, until the method has been thoroughly verified on the national level, it is recommended that the equivalent

PAGE 52

36 water absorption method be used as a lower limit on asphalt absorption. Similarly, the asphalt film thickness of the aggregates within the interstitial volume is the most theoretically correct method. However, it is still under development and evaluation. Therefore, it is recommended that the Effective Film Thickness calculation proposed by Nukunya, et al. (2001) be used to determine the film thickness of PFC mixtures. 2.5.3 Relative Minimum Film Thickness Requirement For establishing minimum film thickness requirement based on Effective Film Thickness Nukunya et all (9), Georgia Department of Transportation minimum film thickness criterion is used as standard. According to GDOT minimum film thickness required for granite PFC mixture against stripping is 27 microns for surface area calculated based on GDOT factors. This requirement is not specified in their specification but they use it as tentative film thickness criterion. Georgia DOT typically uses granite aggregate for their GPEM mixtures. Georgia DOT, ignore asphalt absorption while calculating film thickness as per Eason (2004). But limestone due to its porous surface texture has high asphalt absorption capacity. This property of limestone does not allow attainment of high film thickness. Aggregates with different asphalt absorption will lead different minimum film thickness. Therefore, the relative minimum film thickness requirement is calculated for set of range of asphalt absorption, i.e. 0-0.5%, 0.5-1 %, 1 % or more. While calculating minimum film thickness requirement for each of these ranges, upper limit of range is considered. For calculating the relative minimum film thickness requirement, 27 micron is used to back calculate the effective asphalt content. )(GDOTVeff

PAGE 53

37 As Georgia DOT ignores asphalt absorption this effective asphalt content is total asphalt content of the mixture. Subtracting upper limit of range of asphalt absorption () from this the total asphalt content gives actual effective asphalt content (). This value of effective asphalt content is substituted in standard film thickness Equation 2-3 using surface area as per Nukunya et al (2001) as shown in Step V for calculating relative minimum film thickness (). absorptionAsphalt NukunyaVeff MinimumlativeT_Re Optimum gradation band for surface area calculation A gradation band, which is representative of all gradations with in specified control limits, is required for calculating surface area for relative minimum film thickness requirement. Average of maximum control points and minimum control points of specified gradation limits as per GDT-114 (1996) to obtain optimum gradation, which represents gradation between those gradation limits. Figure 2-8 shows optimum gradation band used for calculating surface area. Job mix formula of this optimum gradation showed in Table 2-13 is used to calculate surface area as per Georgia DOT method () and Nukunya et al. (2001) (). It is assumed that this optimum gradation represents the different gradation band with in this specified limit. Therefore the film thickness calculated for this optimum gradation band represents al set of gradation band with in this gradation limit. GDOTaSurfaceAre )2001(NukunyaaSurfaceAre

PAGE 54

38 Optimum Gradation Band for Minimum Film thickness requirement Calculation 0204060801000.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.504.00Sieve Size^0.45Percentage Passing (%) Max Control points Min Control Points O p timum Re p resentative Gradation Figure 2-8. Optimum Gradation Band for Calculating Minimum film thickness requirement Table 2-13. JMF of Optimum gradation for Gradation limits as per GDT 114 (1996) Type % Amount Sieve Size Size^0.45 Optimum Gradation Band 37.5 5.11 100 25 4.26 100 19 3.76 100 12.5 3.12 90 9.5 2.75 48 4.75 2.02 18 2.36 1.47 8 1.18 1.08 5 0.6 0.79 4 0.3 0.58 3 0.15 0.43 2 0.075 0.31 2 Following steps are used for calculating relative film thickness requirement: Step I: micronsTimumGDOT27min Step II: 1000minaggregateGDOTimumGDOTGDOTWaSurfaceAreTVeff

PAGE 55

39 Step III: GDOTasphaltVeffTotal Step IV: absorptionasphaltNukunyaAsphaltTotalVeff Step V: aggregateNukunyaNukunyaMinimumlativeWaSurfaceAreVeffT )2001(_Re1000 Based on above steps minimum film thickness requirement is calculated for different set of asphalt absorption. The relative minimum film thickness for Nukunya et al (2001) based on this concept is tabulated in Table 2-14. Table 2-14. Minimum film thickness requirements for different set of Asphalt absorption Asphalt absorption Range Total asphalt content (ml) Maximum asphalt absorption (%) Effective asphalt content (ml) Minimum film thickness requirement (microns) 0 % to 0.5% 213.84 0.5% 191.84 32 0.5% + to 1 % 213.84 1% 169.84 28 1%+ to 1.5% 213.84 1.50% 147.84 24 1.5% or more 214.84 Greater than 1.5 % 125.84 13 2.6 Recommended Specification for PFC Mixture Design SCOPE The method of design for a modified open graded bituminous mixture consists of four steps. The first step is the selection of a trial aggregate blend and asphalt binder. The second step involves the determination of optimum asphalt content and checking for adequate asphalt film thickness to ensure durability. The third step involves the performance of AASHTO T 305-97 (2001) (i.e. a asphalt drain down test), and the fourth step involves the performance of AASTHO T-283 (2001). The details of each step are discussed below.

PAGE 56

40 APPARATUS The apparatus required shall consist of the following: 1. Drain-Down equipment as specified in AASHTO T 305-97 (2001). 2. Superpave gyratory compactor. 3. Equipment to perform AASHTO T-84 and T-85. 4. Balance, 5000 gr. Capacity, 0.1 gr. Accuracy. 5. 10 metal pie pans 6. Oven capable of maintaining 330 F 3.5 F (165 C 2.5 C) 7. Oven capable of maintaining 350 F 3.5 F (176 C 2.5 C 8. Timer. STEP 1: Determination of Trial Blend and Asphalt Binder The aggregate trial blend should be selected to fit within the gradation limits listed in Table 2-15 and shown in Figure 2-9. The asphalt binder should be SBS modified PG 76-22 asphalt. Either the addition of 0.5% liquid anti-strip agent or 1 percent hydrated lime is required. The use of hydrated lime requires pretreatment of the aggregates with the hydrated lime. 0.4 % mineral fiber by weight of total mix should be added to avoid binder drain down. Table 2-15. Proposed Gradation and Design specifications for Florida Permeable Mixture Control Tolerance Asphalt Concrete 12.5 mm PFC Gradation Requirement 0.0 3/4 in (19 mm) sieve 100 6.1 1/2 in (12.5 mm) sieve 80-100 5.6 3/8 in (9.5 mm) sieve 35-60 .7 No. 4 (4.75 mm) sieve 10-25 .6 No.8 (2.36 mm) sieve 5 10 .0 No. 200 (75 m) sieve 1-4 Design Requirements .4 Range for % AC 5.5-7.0 AASHTO T-283 (TSR) 80 Drain-down, AASHTO T 305 (%) <0.3

PAGE 57

41 Gradation Band b y Vardhan (2004) 0102030405060708090100Sieve SizesPercentage Passing Max Control Points Min Control Points No. No. No. No. No. No. No. 3/8" 1/2" 3/4" 200 100 50 30 16 8 4 Figure 2-9. Proposed Gradation limits for Florida Permeable Friction Course Mixtures STEP 2: Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content and Asphalt Film Thickness Heat the coarse aggregate, the mould to 350F 3.5F (176C 2.5 C) and the AC to 330 F 3.5 F (165 C 2.5 C) Mix aggregate with asphalt to obtain at least four trial asphalt contents, viz., 5.5%, 6%, 6.5% and 7%. Just before mixing, add the required amount of mineral fibers to the aggregate. Prepare three samples at each of the asphalt contents After mixing, return the mix to oven for two hours for STOA at 320 F 3.5 F (160 C 2.5 C). Then compact to 50 gyrations using the Superpave Gyratory Compactor When compacted, cool down at room temperature for 1 hour 45 minutes before removing the specimens from the compaction mold. Determine Bulk Specific Gravity: Determine the density of a regular shaped specimen of compacted mix from its dry mass (in grams) and its volume in cubic centimeters obtained from its dimensions for height and radius. Convert the density to the bulk specific gravity by dividing by 0.99707 g/cc, the density of water at 25 C Bulk Sp.Gr = W / ( r2h/ 0.99707) = Weight (gms) 0.0048417/Height (in) W = Weight of specimen in grams R = radius in cm

PAGE 58

42 H = height in cm Determine Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity according to AASHTO T-209-99 (2004). Calculate percent air voids, VMA and voids filled with asphalt based on aggregate specific gravity Plot VMA curve versus AC content and determine point of minimum VMA, select corresponding AC as Optimum asphalt content. Prepare a mixture at the optimal asphalt content. Determination of film thickness: Step (I) Determination of Effective Specific gravity (): asbP GbPbGmmPbGse10011001 (2.13) Step (II) Determination of Asphalt absorption (): asbP GbGsbGseGsbGsePasb100 (2.14) absWater Determined is in percentage of weight of aggregate. Convert into volume of water in ml, by using following equation:03.1*100)(__*_gramsaggregateofWeightPPabsmlabsabs (2.15) Step (III) Determination of Effective Volume of Asphalt (): effV mlabsabsTotaleffPPV_ (2.16) (Where = Total asphalt content in ml) TotalP Calculate the Effective Film thickness using following procedure as per Nukunya et al (2001): a) Determine Surface area (SA) from Table 2 below:

PAGE 59

43 Table 2-16. Surface area factor as per Nukunya et al (2001) Sieve Size Surface Area Factor Percent Passing No. 8 4 Percent Passing No. 16 8 Percent Passing No. 30 14 Percent Passing No. 50 30 Percent Passing No. 100 60 Percent Passing No. 200 160 b) Film thickness of asphalt (in microns): aggefffilmWSAVT1000 (2.17) where, aggW = Weight of aggregate SA = Surface area The minimum acceptable effective film thickness is determined as a function of the measured percent asphalt absorption per weight of aggregate as follows: Table 2-17. Minimum Effective Film Thickness Requirements Percent Asphalt Absorption Minimum Required Film Thickness (micron) 0.5 % or less 32 0.5+ to 1 % 28 1.0+ to 1.5 % 24 Greater than 1.5 % 13 E Step 3: Performance of Drain-Down Test Perform the drain test in accordance with the AASHTO T 305-97 (2001). A mix with an optimum AC content as calculated above is placed in a wired basket having 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) mesh openings and heated 14 C (25 F) above the normal production temperature (typically around 350F) for one hour. The amount of cement, which drains

PAGE 60

44 from the basket, is measured. If the sample fails to meet the requirements of maximum drain down of 0.3 %, increase the fiber content by 0.1 % and repeat the test. Step 4: Performance of Moisture Damage Test Perform the moisture damage test in accordance with AASHTO T-283 (2003) on compacted specimen. The specimens are rolled in 1/8 wire mesh which are kept in position using two clamps on either edge of the pill for avoiding mixture damage or breakdown at the conditioning temperature of 60C (140F). Minimum requirements should include TSR of 0.8 or greater. 2.7 Conclusion of Verification of PFC mixture Design Procedure The research presented in this chapter led to the following conclusions: It is recommended that at least (4) trial asphalt content should be used for predicting fairly accurate optimum asphalt content. Only PG 76-22 SBS modified binder containing 0.5% liquid anti stripping agent should be used. Minimum amount of batched sample for sample should not be less than 1000 grams for all purposes of testing. Air voids levels in the PFC limestone mixture were around 16% at 50 gyrations. Gradation analysis by Varadhan (2004) on extracted aggregate after compaction showed that the limestone undergoes crushing early in the compaction process. Therefore, the specified gradation limits may have to be adjusted for limestone to obtain air voids in the desired 18-22 percent range. In order to ensure adequate durability, the effective film thickness method developed by Nukunya, et al. (2004) should be used. In order to determine the effective asphalt content, the aggregate asphalt absorption should be used.

PAGE 61

CHAPTER 3 EVALUATION OF I-295 PFC MIX DESIGN PFC pavements are subjected to high temperature variance, hydroplaning and are in direct contact with rolling loads. In order to check field performance of PFC in Florida, construction of a test section was proposed at I-295, Jacksonville, FL. The Mix design of for this section follows the procedure discussed in Chapter 2. 3.1 Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate mix design procedure of PFC mixture at I-295 test section. The I-295 test section will be monitored for its long-term performance. Gradation selections for optimizing fracture resistance. Determination of optimum asphalt content for attaining minimum voids in the mineral aggregate (VMA) for ensuring high binder coating without drain down. Obtain a mixture for I-295 with highest Energy Ratio among selected gradation to ensure best performance. 3.2 Scope of Project Separate mix design was carried on gradation proposed by DOT contractor (Gradation (1)) and designed gradation (Gradation (2) to determine optimum asphalt content. Following is the complete plan of project:For each of the gradations, 4-trial asphalt percentages are used to obtain a VMA curve. The reason for selecting 4-trial percentages is to obtain polynomial curve for determining point of minimum VMA. Sieving, batching, mixing and compaction, as discussed in section 3.3.1 of this chapter, of mixes is done as specified in previous development in laboratory. Asphalt used is SBS modified PG76-22, which contains 0.5% 45

PAGE 62

46 anti strip agent in addition to 1% of hydrated lime added to aggregates to resist against stripping. Dosage rate of mineral fiber is 0.4% by total weight of mix. Superpave Indirect tensile test is run on compacted mixes for both gradations, in order to obtain fracture test parameters including energy ratio. Process of testing and criteria considered are discussed in section 3.4 of this chapter. Selection of gradation based on higher energy ratio for I-295 test section. Effect of moisture conditioning and long-term oven aging on selected gradation. 3.3 Materials used for I-295 PFC project 3.3.1 Aggregate and Hydrated Lime The final aggregate blend for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) is composed of #67 Granite stone from Pit No TM-579/NS-315, #78 Granite Stone from Pit No GA-383 and Granite Screens from Pit No. TM-579/NS-315. The FDOT codes for these source stone stockpiles, #67 Granite is 54, #78 Granite is , and for Granite Screens is respectively. The producer of these aggregates is Martin Marietta Aggregate. Figure 3-1 shows the gradation band used for I-295 PFC project and control points as per FDOT specification SECTION 337. Table 3-1 and Table 3-2 gives details of composing of job mix formula of Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) respectively. One percent by weight of aggregate hydrated lime is added to the mixture as an antistrip agent. Global Stone Corporation provided hydrated lime. 3.3.2 Binder and Mineral Fiber An SBS polymer modified asphalt cement PG 76-22 with 0.5% antistrip agent was used in this project. Mineral fiber used was regular FIBERAND ROAD FIBERS. Atlantic Coast Asphalt Co. supplied asphalt and mineral fiber. The dosage rate of mineral fiber was 0.4% by weight of total mix.

PAGE 63

47 I-295 PFC Gradations0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0100.0Sieve SizesPercentage Passing Gradation (1) DOT Max Control Points Min Control Points Gradation (2) UF No. No. No. No. No. No. No. 3/8" 1/2" 3/4" 200 100 50 30 16 8 4 Figure 3-1. Gradation of I-295 PFC mixtures Table 3-1. JMF composition of Gradation (1) Type #67 Granite #78 Granite Granite Screens Lime JMF Control Points % Amount 20 70 9 1 100 Max Min Sieve Size Size^0.45 37.5 5.11 100 100 100 100 100 25 4.26 100 100 100 100 100 19 3.76 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 12.5 3.12 60 95 100 100 89 95 85 9.5 2.75 45 62 100 100 62 65 55 4.75 2.02 8 6 91 100 15 25 15 2.36 1.47 4 4 61 100 10 10 5 1.18 1.08 3 3 38 100 7 0.6 0.79 2 3 22 100 5 0.3 0.58 2 3 15 100 5 0.15 0.43 2 2 7 100 3 0.075 0.31 1 1 3.5 100 2 4 1 Table 3-2. JMF composition of Gradation (2) Type #67 Granite #78 Granite Granite Screens Lime JMF Control Points % Amount 30.0 60.3 8.8 1 100 Max Min Sieve Size Size^0.45 37.5 5.11 100 100 100 100 100 25 4.26 100 100 100 100 100

PAGE 64

48 Table 3-2. Continued Type #67 Granite #78 Granite Granite Screens Lime JMF Control Points % Amount 30.0 60.3 8.8 1 100 Max Min 19 3.76 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 12.5 3.12 60 95 100 100 85 95 85 9.5 2.75 45 62 100 100 61 65 55 4.75 2.02 8 6 91 100 15 25 15 2.36 1.47 4 4 61 100 10 10 5 1.18 1.08 3 3 38 100 7 0.6 0.79 2 3 22 100 5 0.3 0.58 2 3 15 100 5 0.15 0.43 2 2 7 100 3 0.075 0.31 1 1 3.5 100 2 4 1 3.4 Location of Project Figure 3-2 shows the project location, which is on I-295 between Lem Turner Road and Duval Road in Jacksonville, Florida. The test section starts at MP 31.910 (Station 1684+88.86 on I-295) and ends at MP 32.839 (Station 1733+91.61 on I-295), outside lane at northbound and south bound. Figure 3-2. Project Location

PAGE 65

49 3.5 Specification and Hypothesis Used As per FDOT specification SECTION 337-4, developed based on previous work done described in Chapter 2, and the design of the PFC mixtures is based on the final procedure developed in Chapter 3. The basic steps in the mixture design may be summarized as follows: 1. The design number of gyration should be 50. 2. Final JMF should be within the gradation limit specified in Table 337-2 of FDOT specification SECTION 337-3.3.2. This specified gradation limit is shown in Table 3-3 3. The PFC mix design should use a SBS modified PG 76-22 asphalt binder. 4. The optimum asphalt content should be selected at the minimum voids in the mineral aggregate (VMA) content. 5. The air void content should be between 18 and 22 percent. 6. Hydrated Lime dosage rate of 1.0% by weight of the total dry aggregate. 7. Mineral fiber dosage rate of 0.4% by weight of the total mix. Table 3-3. PFC Gradation Design Range from FDOT specification SECTION 337 Control Points Max Min Sive Size (mm) % Amount Passing 37.5 25 19 100 100 12.5 95 85 9.5 65 55 4.75 25 15 2.36 10 5 1.18 0.6 0.3 0.15 0.075 4 1

PAGE 66

50 The FDOT contractor proposed a JMF (Gradation (1)) for the given source gradations of stockpiles. As the source gradation was gap graded and gradation limits according to SECTION 337 are tight, it was difficult to adjust this gradation to obtain another candidate gradation. Therefore, only one other trial gradation was used in addition to the contractors gradation. The second gradation, denoted as Gradation (2) was based on increasing the amount of coarser stone in the mix. This objective was accomplished by increasing the percentage of # 67 granite from 20 % to 30 %. Even though, the material type used in Georgia PEM mix design development is different than in the I-295 PFC project, its characteristics are used as base for the evaluation of fracture results. Table 3-1 and Table 3-2 shows source gradation and final JMF of Gradation (1), Gradation (2) and Georgia PEM gradation. The hump in gradation at No. 4 sieve might create some effect fracture resistance because of uneven aggregate arrangement in mix. 3.6 Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content Based on number of experiments, the Georgia DOT suggested that if the gradation is within the specific limits, the initial estimate comes out to be 6% using granites that are native to Georgia. Hence, the probable optimum asphalt content with in this gradation band is 6% if the aggregate is Georgia granite. Depending on surface texture and angularity of aggregates, or a change in the JMF might cause changes in optimum asphalt content. Therefore, four trial percentages (5.5%, 5.8%, 6.2% and 6.5%) for each gradation, and two piles for each trial percentage are produced in this project.

PAGE 67

51 3.6.1 Mixing and Compaction Sieved and batched aggregates, asphalt and mineral fiber are preheated for 3 hours in an oven before mixing. Due to the SBS modified viscous asphalt and addition of mineral fiber; the mixing temperature was selected as 330 F (165 C), to maintain enough flow during mixing. All tools and mixing drum were also preheated to 350 F (176 C). While mixing, asphalt is added to mix of aggregate and mineral fiber. These SBS mixes are very sticky, making mixing and handling challenging. Therefore, it is important to ensure that while retrieving material from mixing drum there is no loss of fines. Mixing procedure was the same for both Rice testing specimens as well as the Superpave gyratory compacted specimens. It is also important to avoid over heating of binder during mixing, as it causes aging of binder. Before compaction, the mixes are subjected to Short Term Oven Aging (STOA) for two hours, which includes stirring after one hour. Compaction temperature is reduced to 320 F, for avoiding draindown of binder during compaction. As already stated, 50 gyrations were used to attain compaction level similar to field after traffic consolidation. The angle of gyration kept during compaction was 1.25. Essentially, because of sticky nature of these mixture oil is sprayed in molds. From prior experience, compacted samples are not retrieved from the molds immediately. They are allowed to cool from 1hr 45 min before retrieving from molds. Once the specimen is ejected from the mold let it cool for 5 min before holding specimen. Especially in granite mixtures if cooling after ejection is not allowed small aggregates due to high air voids stick to gloves and comes out causing discontinuity in specimen.

PAGE 68

52 Allow piles to cool for 24 hr before any further processing or activity related to the compacted specimens. Determination of Rice specific gravity (Gmm) on loose PFC mixes was done in accordance with AASHTO T209 (See Appendix B) Calculations of all volumetric properties are shown in Appendix B. The de termination of optimum asphalt content was as per recommended specification, as specifi ed in Chapter 3, by selecting AC at the lowest point of the VMA curve. Gradation (2) is coarser than Gradation (1 ), which results in more surface area in Gradation (1) as compared to Gradation (2). Refer to Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-4 for mix design details for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2), respectively. A decrease in effective specific gravity of Mixture 2 with respect to Mixture 1 shows the increase in volume of water permeable pores not absorbing asphalt. These facts support re duction in optimum asphalt content of Gradation (2). Essentially, the VMA at optimum asphalt content is not changing significantly for both gradations. Ba sically, Gradation (2) is giving air voids (21.93 %) similar to Gradation (1) (21.2%) and all other volumetric properties are comparable and within the restricted specifica tion ranges. Therefore, the final selection of gradation depends on fracture test results.

PAGE 69

53 Effective Sp Grav of Agg % AC6 Gmm1 Gmb2 VMA3 (%) VTM4 (%) VFA5 (%) 2.732 5.5 2.513 1.944 32.777 22.655 30.883 5.8 2.501 1.955 32.603 21.820 33.073 6.2 2.473 1.964 32.600 20.578 36.877 6.5 2.470 1.966 32.721 20.379 37.718 Voids in Total Mix20.0021.0022.0023.005.45.65.866.26.46.6% ACVTM Voids in Mineral Aggregates32.5532.6032.6532.7032.7532.805.45.65.866.26.46.6% ACVMA Voids filled with Asphalt30.0031.0032.0033.0034.0035.0036.0037.0038.0039.005.45.65.866.26.46.6% ACVMA Figure 3-3. Mix Design of PFC Gradation (1) with aggregate type: Granite Optimum Asphalt Content: 6.0% Gmm at Optimum Asphalt Content:2.485 Mineral Fiber: 0.4% of Total Mix VMA at Optimum Asphalt Content: 32.69% Gmm1 = Maximum specific gravity of mixture, Gmb2 = Bulk specific gravity of mixture, VMA3 = Voids in Mineral Aggregates, VTM4 = Voids in Total Mix, VFA5 = Voids filled with Asphalt, AC6 = Asphalt Content

PAGE 70

54 Voids filled with Asphalt30.0031.0032.0033.0034.0035.0036.0037.0038.0039.005.45.65.866.26.46.6% ACVMA % Gmm1 = Maximum specific gravity of mixture, Gmb2 = Bulk specific gravity of mixture, VMA3 = Voids in Mineral Aggregates, VTM4 = Voids in Total Mix, VFA5 = Voids filled with Asphalt, AC6 = Asphalt Content Effective Sp Grav. of Agg. % AC6 Gmm1 Gmb2 VMA3 (%) VTM4 (%) VFA5 (%) 2.722 5.5 2.497 1.935 32.819 22.501 31.440 5.8 2.494 1.946 32.648 21.963 32.727 6.2 2.479 1.953 32.713 21.245 35.057 6.5 2.452 1.957 32.788 20.212 38.357 Mineral Fiber: 0.4% of Total Mix VMA at Optimum Asphalt Content: 32.76% Optimum Asphalt Content: 5.9% Gmm at Optimum Asphalt Content:2.491 Voids in Total Mix20.0021.0022.0023.005.45.65.866.26.46.6% ACVTM % Voids in Mineral Aggregates32.6032.6532.7032.7532.8032.855.45.65.866.26.46.6% ACVMA % Figure 3-4. Mix Design of PFC Gradation (2) with aggregate type: Granite

PAGE 71

55 3.6.2 Asphalt Film Thickness As granite has fine texture, the surface absorption is negligible, meaning that water absorption (=0) can be assumed to be negligible. The surface areas calculated for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) are based on the method proposed by Nukunya et al (2001 and discussed in Chapter 3. The resulting surface areas for Mixture 1 and Mixture 2 are 1.8 m^2/Kg and 1.78 m^2/Kg, respectively. Taking the total asphalt content for both gradation as the effective asphalt content the film thickness is calculated by following equation mentioned in recommended specification (Chapter 2): absWater aggefffilmWSAVT1000 (2.3) Where, 16. = Weight of aggregate aggW SA = Surface area Gradation (1) has film thickness of 33.12microns where as Gradation (2) has of 31.65 microns. These film thicknesses for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) are calculated assuming zero asphalt absorption. Both film thicknesses are above the specified minimum film thickness requirement, i.e. 32 microns, for 0% to 0.5% asphalt absorption. The minimum film thickness requirement is to ensure resistance against stripping and asphalt hardening. 3.7 Superpave IDT Performance Test Results In the following, the results from the Superpave IDT fracture testing results are presented. The basics of the Superpave IDT test equipment and data acquisition system have been specified by Buttlar and Roque (1994), Roque et al., (1997), and AASHTO

PAGE 72

56 TP-9. Additional information on the specific testing system used in this study is as follows: An environmental chamber was used to control specimen temperature. The chamber is capable of maintaining temperatures between -30 C and 30 C with an accuracy of + 0.1C. Loads were controlled using a MTS Model 418.91 MicroProfiler. Vertical and horizontal deformation measurements were obtained using extensometers designed by MTS specifically for use with the Superpave IDT. A gage length of 1.5 inches was used for all specimens. Since the friction course mixtures are very porous, it was decided that the sample thickness be around 1.5 inches in order to avoid end effects. A cutting device, which has a cutting saw and a special attachment to hold the pills, was used to slice the pill into specimens of desired thickness. Two two-inch samples were obtained from each specimen. Because the saw uses water to keep the blade wet, the specimens were dried for one day at room temperature to achieve the natural moisture content. Before testing, the specimens were placed in the humidity chamber for at least two days to negate moisture effects in testing. Gage points were attached to the samples using a steel template and vacuum pump setup and a strong adhesive. Four gage points were placed on each side of the specimens at distance of 19 mm (0.75 in.) from the center, along the vertical and horizontal axes. A steel plate that fits over the attached gage points was used to mark the loading axis with a marker. This helped placing the sample in the testing chamber assuring proper loading of the specimen. Standard Superpave IDT tests were performed on all mixtures to determine resilient modulus, creep compliance, m-value, D1, tensile strength, failure strain, fracture energy, and dissipated creep strain energy to failure. The tests were performed at 10C. First,

PAGE 73

57 resilient modulus test was conducted on specime n. Thereafter, specimen was allowed to rest for 45 min, before creep test was conducte d, in order to regain delayed elasticity. The indirect tensile strength test was performed after the creep test. 3.7.1 Superpave Indirect Test Results and Analysis Superpave fracture testing was conducted on both mixes prepared for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2). Mixes were subjected to short-term oven aging. Even though, these porous mixtures with air voids around 21% does not hold moisture, the specimens were kept in dehumidifier for 48 hours before testi ng. The applied stress used for calculation of Energy ratio is 88.23 psi. Georgia PEM fracture test results were used as a reference to understand the mechanism of aggregate stru cture. Table 3-4 pr ovides a summary of fracture test results of Georgia PEM and I-295 PFC project mixtures. Figure 3-5 (a) through (i), show comparison of the Superpave IDT test results. The parameters presented include: Energy Ratio, Fracture Energy, Dissipated Creep Strain Energy, Failure Strain, Creep Compliance, Re silient Modulus, Strain Rate, Creep Rate and Tensile Strength between Georgia PEM and PFC mixtures. A lthough, Gradation (1) shows higher tensile strength, the Energy Ratio for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) are 1.66 and 1.20 for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) respectively. Because of reduction in surface area and increase in volume of water pe rmeable pores not absorbing asphalt there should be increase in film thickness in Gr adation (2) over Gradation (1). But, the reduction in optimum asphalt content counteracte d this effect. Hence the creep response, which is a measure of the visco-elastic natu re of asphalt, was about the same for both gradations. The creep compliance of Gradation (1) is 17.53 (1/Gpa), which is comparable with the creep compliance of Gradation (2) i.e. 18.07 (1/Gpa).

PAGE 74

58 Table 3-4. Summary of Indirect Tensile Test performed on I-295 PFC mixtures Property Stress= 88.23 p si Sample ResilientModulus(Gpa) Creep complianceat 1000 seconds (1/Gpa) Tensile Strength(Mpa) Fracture Energy (kJ/m^3) Failure Strain (10-6) m-value D1 DCSE (kJ/m^3) e0(10-6) Elastic E. (kJ/m^3) Energy Ratio Strain Rate p er Unit stress Georgia PEM 4.97 19.933 1.24 4.2 4383.2 0.74 8.35E-07 4.05 4133.73 0.154 1.95 1.1E-07 Gradatio n (1) 4.41 17.531 1.15 3.6 3940.1 0.66 1.2E-06 3.45 3679.32 0.150 1.67 7.9E-08 Gradatio n (2) 5.01 18.078 1.12 2.4 2742.3 0.71 8.9E-07 2.27 2518.79 0.125 1.21 8.6E-08

PAGE 75

59 Energy Ratio0.000.501.001.502.002.50GeorgiaPEMGradation(1)Gradation(2)Energy Ratio A) Fracture Energy012345GeorgiaPEMGradation(1)Gradation(2)Fracture Energy (kJ/m^3) .B) Failure Strain010002000300040005000GeorgiaPEMGradation(1)Gradation(2)Faliure Strain (10-6) C) DCSE0.001.002.003.004.005.00GeorgiaPEMGradation(1)Gradation(2)DCSE (kJ/m^3) D) Creep Compliance0510152025GeorgiaPEMGradation(1)Gradation(2)Creep Compliance (1/Gpa) E) Resilient Modulus0123456GeorgiaPEMGradation(1)Gradation(2)Resilient Modulus (Gpa) F) Strain Rate0.00E+002.00E-104.00E-106.00E-108.00E-101.00E-091.20E-09GeorgiaPEMGradation(1)Gradation(2)Strain Rate G) Tensile Strength0.000.501.001.50GeorgiaPEMGradation(1)Gradation(2)Tensile Strength (MPa) H) Figure 3-5. A)Energy Ratio, B) Failure Energy, C) Failure Strain D) DCSE, E) Creep Compliance, F) Resilient Modulus, G) Strain Rate, H) Tensile Strength I) Creep Rate

PAGE 76

60 Creep Rate0.00E+002.00E-104.00E-106.00E-108.00E-101.00E-091.20E-09GeorgiaPEMGradation(1)Gradation(2)Creep Rate (1/psi-sec) I) Figure 3-5. Continued Essentially, due to this reason, the resilient modulus of Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) are 4.41 Gpa and 5.01 Gpa, respectively, which are comparable magnitudes for the resilient modulus. The Georgia PEM had a creep compliance of 19.933 1/Gpa and a creep rate of 1x10^-7 1/psi-sec, which implies that the arrangement of aggregate structure is such that it is giving more room for mastic between coarse aggregate. This indicates the aggregate arrangement and interaction of coarse and fine aggregate in mixes plays an important role thus affecting the strength of Gradation (2) relative to Gradation (1). 3.8 Analysis of Fracture Result Based on Interstitial Volume and Aggregate Interaction Ongoing work at the University of Florida has led to the establishment of a tentative gradation selection framework for the optimization of the fracture resistance of dense graded mixtures. Key concepts in this new proposed framework include the observation that enhanced cracking resistance can be obtained by ensuring that the aggregates in the course portion of the mixture gradation interact sufficiently amongst each other to allow for the effective transfer of forces through the course-aggregate portion of the mixture. This interaction of the course aggregate component should not reach down to the finer materials, so as to control mixture sensitivity. The material within the interstitial volume of the course aggregate portion also needs to be proportioned and designed so that an adequate Dissipated Creep Strain Energy (DCSE)

PAGE 77

61 limit is maintained, as well as providing enough flow and ductility to enhance the fracture resistance of the mixture. Too little interstitial material, or interstitial material with a low creep strain rate, will result in a brittle mixture. It is anticipated that these gradation concepts will be transferable to Georgia-PEM mixtures, thus allowing for the development of guidelines for the selection of gradations that optimize the resistance to cracking. 3.8.1 Determination of Porosity and Interstitial Volume In the following, the portion of the coarse aggregate for each of the three mixtures will be evaluated, followed by a characterization of the interstitial volume component. First, the aggregate interaction curve needs to be defined: The Aggregate Interaction Curve: Aggregate interaction curve is plot of points of interaction of aggregate size with its successive aggregate size. Following is equation used for calculating points of interaction: )Re(%Re(%100*)Re(%intRe%SizeSieveattainedSizeSieveSuccesiveattainedSizeSieveattainedPonInteractioParticletained (3.1) Aggregate Interaction Curve010203040506070809010012.5-9.59.5-4.754.75-2.362.36-1.181.18-0.60.6-0.30.3-0.150.15-0.0750.075-0Contiguous sizes, mm % Retained Particle Interaction Gradation (1) Georgia PEM Gradation (2) Figure 3-6. Curve showing interaction between contiguous aggregate sizes

PAGE 78

62 Figure 3-6 shows the aggregate interaction curves for Georgia PEM and I-295 PFC projects. If the percent Retained Particle Interaction falls outside the range between 30% and 70% the aggregates in that size range are not interacting. Therefore, aggregate sizes below this break point are not interacting towards contribution of strength. These aggregate sizes are filling the cavities between coarse aggregate above the break points. The aggregate sizes below the break point along with asphalt are contributing to the Interstitial Volume. The range of aggregate sizes above this break point between 30%-70% is called the Dominant Aggregate Size Range (DASR). Porosity: Porosity for this DASR represents the actual porosity for the total mix. It is the ratio of summation of volume of air voids and effective asphalt in compacted mix, to volume of DASR and below. )_______)___()___(DASRbelowandDASRwithinAggregatesofVolumeAsphaltEffectiveofVolumeVoidsAirofVolumePorosity (3.2) Interstitial Volume: Mastic, comprising aggregate sizes below break point, asphalt and air voids, forms the interstitial volume of compacted mixture. The interstitial volume is the ratio of mastic in specimen to the total volume of compacted mixture. MixtureCompactedofVolumeTotalMasticofVolumeVolumealInterstiti____)__(_ (3.3) The film thickness based on Interstitial Volume (): Calculation of surface area is main issue of this method. As per the hypothesis discussed above, aggregates below the break point (i.e. aggregates within the interstitial volume) contain all of the effective asphalt volume, thus covering the coarse aggregate. The surface area (SA) of aggregates below the break point is calculated using surface area factors tabulated in Table 3-7 are calculated. As the absorption in granite is negligible, the total asphalt content is taken as effective asphalt content () of the compacted mixture. Weight of aggregates () in filmT effV aggW

PAGE 79

63 air is taken into account for calculating film thickness. Equation 3-1 denotes calculation of film thickness with in interstitial volume: aggefffilmWSAVT1000 (3.4) Table 3-5. Surface area factors Surface Area Factor Surface Area Sieve Size Percent Passing ft.2/lb. m2/Kg ft2/lb. m2/Kg 11/2 in.(37.5mm) 100 1 in. (25.0mm) 100 3/4 in. (19.0mm) 100 1/2 in. (12.5mm) 89 3/8 in .( 9.5mm ) 62 2.0 0.41 No. 4 (4.75mm) 15 2 0.41 0.3 0.06 No. 8 (2.36mm) 10 4 0.82 0.4 0.08 No.16 (1.18mm) 7 8 1.64 0.6 0.12 No.30 ( 600um ) 5 14 2.87 0.8 0.16 No.50 ( 300um ) 5 30 6.14 1.5 0.30 No.100 (150um ) 3 60 12.29 2.1 0.42 No.200 ( 75um ) 2 160 32.77 3.5 0.73 Aggregate with in interstitial volume Aggregate with in interstitial volume 3.8.2 Analysis and Conclusion The DASR of Gradation (1) and the Georgia PEM is 9.5-4.75 mm, resulting in porosity of 46.29% and 49.51% respectively. Table 3-6 shows the porosity and interstitial volume of all the three JMFs. Due to the interaction of 12.5 mm aggregate size with successive aggregate size, the DASR of Gradation (2) is 12.5-4.75, resulting in a porosity of 42.71%. As porosity is below 50% the mixes should perform well in strength. Similarly, due to the relatively high interaction resulting in percent retained particle interaction of 44.77 percen (see Figure 3-6) in the critical 9.5-4.75 range, the Georgia PEM mixture is expected have a higher energy ratio than Gradation (1) and Gradation

PAGE 80

64 (2), which had percent retained particle interaction of 35.55% and 34.85% respectively, as shown in Figure 3-6. Table 3-7 shows the interstitial volume for the three mixtures studied. The interstitial volume of Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) is comparatively the same. Therefore due to the same amount of interstitial volume component, for both gradations, it is not surprising that both gradations result in a similar creep response. Table 3-6. Porosity for all the dominant aggregate size ranges (DASR) 9.5mm 4.75mm 2.36 mm Range 12.5-9.5 9.5-4.75 12.5-4.75 4.75-2.36 9.5-2.36 12.5-2.36 Gradation (1) 74.65 46.29 42.70 52.77 42.71 39.39 Georgia PEM 71.97 49.51 46.04 50.34 38.96 36.23 Gradation (2) 73.44 47.51 42.71 53.56 43.76 39.34 The Similarly, Georgia PEM results in a higher creep compliance and strain rate due to the higher interstitial volume. Due to this reason, the DCSE threshold for Gradation (1) and Gradation (1) is reduced to 2.27 KJ/m^3 and 3.45 KJ/m^3, respectively from 4.05 Kj/m^3 for the Georgia-PEM granite. Table 3-7. Interstitial Volume for different JMFs JMF Interstitial Volume (%) Film Thickness with in Interstitial Volume (Microns) Gradation (1) 42.70 33.12 Georgia PEM 46.04 54.58 Gradation (2) 42.71 31.65 In summary, it is not possible to differentiate between the fracture performance of Gradation (1) and (2) at the low Superpave IDT test temperature of 10 C. Therefore, it was recommended that Gradation (1) be selected since the FDOT contractor had already obtained all necessary materials to run that mixture. The difference in fracture

PAGE 81

65 performance between Gradations (1) and (2) did not justify the selection of Gradation (2) over Gradation (1). 3.9 Verification of Locking Point of Selected Gradation for I-295 PFC Project According to Vardhan (2004) the compaction curve follows a logarithmic trend. To identify the locking point, the rate of change of slope of compaction curve was used. The stage, at which the rate of change of compaction was insignificant, was essentially the point of maximum resistance to compaction. The locking point, i.e. 49, was identified as the point at which two gyrations at same gradient of slope were preceded by two gyrations at same gradient of slope. The gradient was taken up to four decimal places (as shown in Table 3-8 for PFC-Granite mixture, Gradation (1)). Table 3-8. Locking Point Based on Gradient of Slope N umber of Gyration Gradient of Slope 39 0.0022 40 0.0020 41 0.0020 42 0.0019 43 0.0018 44 0.0017 45 0.0016 46 0.0015 47 0.0015 48 0.0014 49 (LP) 0.0014 50 0.0013 3.10 Summary and Conclusion The optimum asphalt content for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) were determined at 6% and 5.9% respectively. The difference in fracture test parameters for both gradations is not significant. As shown in Table 3-7, the coarser portion in Gradation (2)

PAGE 82

66 was increased by 10% over that of Gradation (1), but the interstitial volume of both mixtures was unchanged at 42.70%. Therefore, the creep response of both mixtures is approximately the same. This implies that interaction between coarser and finer part of gradation and aggregate arrangement plays important role in optimizing fracture resistance. Gradation (1) is recommended for construction of test section at I-295 even though both gradations are performing well, as the Gradation (1) is giving higher Energy Ratio, and there was simply no justification for selecting Gradation (2) over Gradation (1).

PAGE 83

CHAPTER 4 A PROPOSED NEW FRACTURE TEST FOR ASPHALT MASTIC 4.1 Purpose and Need Analysis of I-295 project mixtures fracture test results shows importance of interstitial volume in the fracture performance of mixtures. Mastic within the interstitial volume, which is comprised of asphalt and aggregates below the break point of the Aggregate Interaction Curve likely has an impact on the creep and fracture response of mixtures. Therefore, it is important to be able to study the tensile strength and the fracture energy of the mastic component under direct tension loading conditions. This chapter presents the preliminary design of a new mastic fracture test. 4.2 Background A device for studying fracture initiation and crack growth in mortar was developed by Mindess & Diamond (1980). This device was modified version of work developed by Subramanian et al (1978) for study of crack growth in ceramics. The specimen configuration used by Mindesss & Diamond (1980) was similar to the compact tension described in ASTM E399 (1978): Plain-Strain fracture toughness of Metallic Material. This device functions is such a way that cracking is induced under carefully controlled conditions, so that the details of slow crack growth may be observed at high magnification in the SEM at all stages in the cracking process. This device was constructed to permit the testing of wedge-loaded compact tension. Using this device, the process of cracking was observed in mortar specimens. It was found that the process of crack extension in mortars is very complicated: the crack is tortuous, there is some 67

PAGE 84

68 branch cracking, discontinuities in the cracks are observed, and there is some tearing away of small bits of material in some areas of cracking. The results suggest that the simple fracture mechanics models oversimplify the geometric features of the crack extension process. 4.3 Specimen and Test Device Design The basic idea for this test is that tension can be induced by penetrating a wedge between two rollers that lie on steel rods that penetrate through the specimen. Figure 4-1 shows specimen with bearings mounted on steel rods and wedge in loading direction Figure 4-1. Model showing Specimen along with bearings fitted on steel rods and wedge in loading direction. The specimen is 32 mm long, 24 mm wide and 13 mm thick with a 13 mm long and 0.6 mm wide notch at loading side of specimen. Two 3.10 mm diameter steel rods on either side of notch were cast into specimen for applying load. Figure 4-2 and 4.3 show the geometry of the specimen. Steel rods are

PAGE 85

69 placed at 6 mm distance from outer edge of specimen. Steel bearings were fitted on steel rods to make friction less application of load on specimen through rods. A notch is provided in the specimen to create a stress concentration and pre-define the path of cracking. Also, without the notch, there is a slight possibility that cracks initiate at the contact area between the steel rods and the mastic, rather than in the desired center portion of the test specimen. The steel rods are extended for 6.5 mm over the specimen surface at both the top and the bottom sides of the specimen in order to avoid contact of bearing roller and the driving wedge with the specimen Figure 4-2. Plan view showing geometry of specimen

PAGE 86

70 Figure 4-3. Front view showing geometry of specimen The rate of loading is directly proportional to angle of wedge. As the wedge moves in forward direction, the distance between the bearings is increasing gradually, causing an increase in tension at the tip of the notch stress concentrator. Due to the roller bearings, there is no friction associated with the load transfer from the wedge to the steel rods. A mechanical system is required to propel the wedge in a forward direction. Mindess & Diamond (1980) developed a device, which uses a screw system for the driving of the wedge. Their test device is shown in Figure 4-4. It consists of a frame to support the specimen and the loading wedge; the turning of a screw advances the wedge, such that one complete rotation of the screw advances the wedge 0.64 mm. The screw feed is activated through a pulley system driven by a small electric motor and a gearbox with a reduction of 360:1. The motor is rated at 12 volts; by varying the voltage using a variable power supply, different rates of motion of the wedge can be achieved. The overall dimensions of the device are 82.6 mm long, 41.0 mm wide and 54.0 mm high.

PAGE 87

71 Figure 4-4. Testing Device used by Mindess & Diamond (1980) for SEM testing on cement mortar 4.4 Formulation of Tensile Force Transfer from Wedge to Specimen The rotary action of an electrical motor moves a screw through pulley action with the help of a rubber belt. One complete rotation of this screw moves the wedge for 0.64 mm in direction towards notch. The load applied on the wedge can be measured by placing a load cell at the back of the specimen. As it can be assumed that the complete system is acting as a rigid body for the determination of the balance of external forces. The load (P) on the specimen applied by wedge, is measured by a load cell located at the end of the specimen. In the following, the static analysis is presented for calculating horizontal thrust on the steel rod due to wedge loading:

PAGE 88

72 Taking Moment at point B, shown in Figure 4-5, results in: 0)2(xVxPa (4.1) Solving for : aV )2(xPxVa 2PVa (4.2) Where, P = Applied load on wedge aV = Vertical component of resultant Ra x = Horizontal distance between bearings As the wedge moves in the y-direction, there is a change of distance x. In the above equation there is no affect of x. The force components Va and Ha, shown in Figure 4-5 denote the the vertical and horizontal component of the reaction Ra. The angle in Equation 4-3 is the half angle of the wedge used to apply the load. Resolving forces in the horizontal direction for equilibrium at point A results in: aaRH cos (4.3) and aaRV sin (4.4) Substituting Equation 4-2 into Equation 4-4, results in: 2sinPRa Hence, solving for Ra results in: sin12PRa (4.5)

PAGE 89

73 Figure 4-5. Static analysis of force transfer from Wedge to Steel rods (Wedge angle = 2x ) Finally, solving for by substituting value of Ra from Equation 4-5 to 4.3 results in: aH sin12cosPHa (4.6) This means that the wedge angle ( x 2) is inversely proportional to horizontal thrust Therefore, a small wedge angle will result in a high horizontal thrust, hence minimizing the effect of the vertical component of the vertical force P. However, a small wedge angle requires a longer wedge to cause the same magnitude of horizontal aH

PAGE 90

74 force (tensile force) than a large angle wedge. As this specimen is designed for compact fracture testing on mastic, it may be desirable to keep the testing device as small as possible. Therefore, it is recommended to make the wedge angle at least 4-5 degrees. The final wedge designed for this study has has a wedge angle of 4.5, resulting in: PHa72.12 (For = 2.25) (4.7) Hence horizontal thrust is approximately 12 times P. 4.5 Verification of Stress States within Loaded Specimen In order to verify the stress concentration at the notch and to ensure that the sizing of the steel rods did not cause excessive bearing forces in the specimen, a finite element analysis using ADINA was performed. Considering the line of symmetry along the centerline of the notch, the specimen is divided into two half, with only one half being analyzed with ADINA. Plain stress analysis is done on 2-D model of specimen in ADINA by dividing the total surface in to 15 sub surfaces, shown in Figure 4-6. The isotropic linear elastic material finite element analysis in ADINA is done on specimen. The critical section line is divided into 170 elements with last element to first element ratio 0.25. Figure 4-7 shows meshing of sub surfaces divided. The modulus of steel adopted is 19GPa with Poisson ratio of 0.3 for the finite element analysis. The modulus of asphalt mastic at temperature 10 C is taken 4 Gpa and poisons ratio was 0.18. Essentially, while executing plain stress finite element analyses in ADINA the stress obtain at any section are irrespective to modulus. In order to keep the problem general, all results below are presented in terms of normalized loads. A horizontal thrust of 12.72 x P is applied at steel pins center. In ADINA, the load P is taken as P = 1, for simplicity. Therefore the Ha = 12.72 and Va =

PAGE 91

75 0.5 from Equation 4-4 and Equation 4-7. Figure 4-8 shows the exaggerated deformation of the 2-D model due to the effects of Ha and Va. Figure 4-6. Specimen 2-D Model subdivided in to 15 surfaces

PAGE 92

76 Figure 4-7. Meshing of 15 sub surface with critical model line divided into 175 elements. Figure 4-8. Deflection of Specimens 2-D Model subdivided.

PAGE 93

77 The predicted stress (yy) distribution along the centerline of the specimen is shown in Figure 4-9. As expected, the maximum stress is found at the tip of notch (yy = 273 x P/ mm2), which confirms the stress concentration effects of the notch. Stress (yy) Distribution from tip of Notch along center of specimen-50.000.0050.00100.00150.00200.00250.00300.000.500.700.901.101.301.501.701.902.10Coordinate distance (mm)Stress,yy (P/mm^2 ) Stress at Tip of Notch 273 P/mm^2 Figure 4-9. Stress distributions along centerline of specimen Tensile stress is shown as positive. Figure 4-10 shows the distribution of stresses (yy) along the circumference of the steel pins at contact with the mastic. The normalized stress distribution is a function of the load P which is applied to the wedge. Part of this contact surface facing loading is in compression. As the steel pin is loaded, the surface behind the loading area develops tension. Due to the observed stresses at the tip of notch being substantially higher than stresses at the contact surface between the mastic and the steel pins, the initiation of crack is much more likely to be at the tip of the notch.

PAGE 94

78 Stress distribution along circumference of Steel Pin-30.00-20.00-10.000.0010.0020.0030.000123456Circumferential distance (mm)Stress (P/mm^2) Ha =12.72 x P Va = 0.5 x P Figure 4-10. Stress distribution along circumference of steel pin 4.6 Sample Preparation Guidelines Aggregates contributing to the interstitial volume below the break point in the aggregate interaction curve, dicussed previously in section 5.5.1, are mixed with total asphalt content of the I-295 PFC mixture for preparing the mastic. Table 4-1 shows the proportion of the aggregate gradation below the breakpoint for the I-295 PFC mixture that is mixed with the 6 percent asphalt by weight of the total mixture (see Chapter 5 for mixture design details).

PAGE 95

79 Table 4-1. Part of fine aggregates to be mixed with total asphalt content (6%) of I-295 PFC project Sieve Size 11/2 in. (37.5mm) 1 in. (25.0mm) 3/4 in. (19.0mm) 1/2 in. (12.5mm) 3/8 in .( 9.5mm ) No. 4 (4.75mm) No. 8 (2.36mm) No.16 (1.18mm) No.30 ( 600um ) No.50 ( 300um ) No.100 (150um ) No.200 ( 75um ) Aggregate within interstitial volume Aggregate within interstitial volume The aggregates and asphalt binder are heated to 330 F 3.5 F (165 C 3.5F) for 2 hours before mixing. The aggregates are mixed with the asphalt binder using equipment as specified in AASHTO T-209-99 (2004) for mixing. The prepared mastic is molded into the desired shape, using a mold shown in Figure 4-11. Figure 4-12 shows geometry of main base plate to which side plates are attached. As the asphalt tends to bulge inside after cooling at the surface in contact with air, it is recommended that the mastic should be filled to a level slightly above the mold surface. The mold in Figure 4-10 is designed to provide a flat surface for trimming the excess mastic. First fit the steel pins and then assemble the mold into the groves of the bottom base plate and notch plate. Then, the top base plate is fitted on top and all bolts are screwed into position for a tight mold.

PAGE 96

80 Figure 4-11. Mold for preparing specimen for Fracture and SEM testing Figure 4-12. Geometry of main base plate to which side plates are attached

PAGE 97

81 4.7 Recommendation for Further Development Further work needs to be done for developing a test device and deformation measurement system. The following recommendations should be considered in further development: A trial test specimen needs to be molded using the mold shown in Figure 4-11 to check workability. A wedge angle within the range of 4% to 5% to obtain maximum horizontal thrust with optimum wedge length, is recommended.

PAGE 98

CHAPTER 5 PERFORMANCE TEST DATABASE (PTD) 5.1 Preface This program was developed to store and analyze data from performance testing of mixtures (Performance Test Database: PTD ). The program is entirely interactive. It is set up for easy navigation from one part of the program to another. The functionalities included are: 1) data input, 2) data extraction, 3) data export to database, 4) data analysis, and 5) report generation. All the instructions for using the tutorial are available in the help menu and users manual in order to work with the program's interface. Program details in this manual are provided for system administrators or programmers that want to understand its architecture and design, to extend or modify the PTD. 5.1.1 Package Information This package for the PTD contains the following: a) The User's Manual. b) One set of CDs labeled PTD The User's Manual contains information on how to operate the program and how to execute the commands. It also describes terminology behind programming and provides details of algorithms developed for specific task. 82

PAGE 99

83 5.1.2 System Requirements The minimum requirements for successfully executing the PTD program are: a) Windows2000/Me/Xp or later. b) 64 MB RAM. c) Hard disk with 2.5 MB of free space. The PTD program may be installed either onto a hard-disk system or onto a network computer system, and can also be easily uninstalled by using the provided installation software. 5.1.3 Supported Output Format Requirement The P.T.D. supports multiple report output formats. All reports are generated in a native Access format which is transformed into other output formats by Visual Basic commands. The following formats are supported : Print This output format requires a computer system connected to a printer. This format uses default printer settings. The report is printed directly using this option. Rich text format This format creates word file with a rich text format extension (.rtf) at a user specified directory. Image characters of the report are not retained in this output format. Email This output format provides the means to export a report to other systems through email. An automated function is used to send a report as an attachment to an email. This option requires that the Microsoft Outlook SendmailTM be activated. There is an option to choose the format of the report from the Rich text format, Snapshot format, Microsoft Excel Format, HTML, and MS-Dos text format.

PAGE 100

84 The rich text Snapshot and HTML formats are preferred as orignal alignment is maintained in the extracted data. 5.2 Program Overview The Superpave Indirect Tensile Test at Low Temperatures (ITLT) computer program can be used to analyze test data obtained from the Superpave Indirect Tensile Test. The ITLT program generates five text files, which have the following extensions: .MRO, .FAM, .OUT, .IN an .STR files. For input into the PTD database, the Data from these text files need to be extracted, analyzed and stored for a future reference. This database is designed with an aim to not only store performance test data, but also to keep track of the findings and analysis of different mix design and performance test on various materials. Extracted data from text files is reformatted in order to make storage easier in the database. The included search engine makes allows the user to customize desired queries of data and analysis results. The data and analysis results categorized according to the search criteria are then reported through report generation. Visual basic for Excel Applications was used to automate the process of data extraction and formatting in a tabular form. The flowchart in Figure 5-1 provides a complete overview on the flow of data from raw data files to storage, analysis, and final report generation. All the test readings from text files are inputted into an Excel file. There is interface, which is developed in visual basic that has categorized option for each set of test data for extracting data from text file.

PAGE 101

85 Raw f iles f ro m I n d i rect Ten s il e T estin g m ach in e Figure 5-1. Flow chart showing extraction and input sequence of Indirect Tensile Test Data For analysis of this data there is a customized button with caption Analyze. Once this data is extracted visual basic pop-up form comes up asking for applied stress to be used for calculating energy ratio, after which the calculation of DCSE, Elastic Energy, Analysis (VBAExcel) Database (VBAAccess) Reformatting Data I.T.L.T. output is text files (.MRO, .FAM, .OUT, .IN & .STR) Windows Based Interface MS DOS Based Interface I.T.L.T. output is excel file (New IDT format.xls) Analyzed data by I.T.L.T. Data Extraction (VBAExcel) Analysis (VBAExcel) Data Mining/Search ( S Q L ) Report Test Data (Tabulated) Material Properties (Summary and Bar charts) Report End

PAGE 102

86 Energy ratio and Strain rate are performed. These raw and analyzed data are exported into the database developed in Microsoft Access. The Structural Query Language (SQL) is used to develop search criteria. Search results can be retained in desired output format through a built-in visual basic environment. 5.2.1 Database Storage Outline Data stored in the database are organized for ease of retrieval. Following is the list of data and mixture properties that the database stores:1. Gradation 2. Volumetrics (Maximum specific gravtiy, Bulk specific gravity, Air voids, Absorbed asphalt, effective asphalt content, Voids in meneral aggregates, Voids filled with asphalt, N-design, Bulk specific gravity of aggregates) 3. Mixture properties:Mixture type ( Open graded Friction Course, Dense graded fine, or dense graded coarse) Aggregate Type, Mixture Source, Binder Type, Binder content and Miscelleanous 4. Superpave Indirect Tensile test data a. Resilient Modulus test data b. Creep Test data c. Strength test data 5. Superpave Indirect Test Analyzed data :Resilient modulus, Creep compliance, Tensile strain, Fracture energy, Faliure strain, D1, m-value, Dessipated creep strain energy, Elastic energy, Energy ratio. 6. Compex Modulus test and analyzed data: Stress amplitude, Strain amplitude, Dynamic modulus, Elastic modulus, Phase angle. The flow chart

PAGE 103

87 in Figure 5-2 depicts a brief sketch of the data flow in the program up to the report generation. 7. APA Ruth depth 5.2.2 Software Coding Architecture and Program Flow The software broadly covers to basic types of data extraction, analysis and storage first is from Indirect Tensile Test and second is Complex Modulus Test Data. Appendix C gives complete coding written to generate: Input template Macros written in Excel for specific functions are called in Main Macro of the module to attain main task. Visual Basic Form components are assigned with a command to execute these modules. The data is analyzed based on extracted data values and external input of applied stress is required to complete variables values in equations with in Macros. A common macro, which is programmed to change the Visual Basic Form Components features on completion of specific tasks, is assigned to all modules. If any changes or extension is required to the main code, this macro does not need any changes. These macrocodes are specified in Appendix C. Database Data transfer is automated using Microsoft Clipboard Unicode text format. Each line ends with a carriage return/linefeed (CR-LF) combination. A null character signals the end of the data. Data entered on screen template is automatically transferred to tables that are contented/related with other table containing their identity properties. An Access-VBA code collects all fragmented query parameters and then returns a unified SQL (Structural Query Language) statement, which generates the master query. This master query is the source for the main search result template.

PAGE 104

88 Database (VBAAccess) Data Mining/Search ( S Q L ) Material Properties (Summary and Bar c harts) Test Data (Tabulated) Report Report Data Extraction (VBA Excel ) Reformatting Data Complex Modulus Test Results File End Figure 5-2. Flow chart showing data input of Complex Modulus test 5.3 Installation The installation program copies the Performance Test Database software and other database supporting files into a directory. The default directory is c:\Program

PAGE 105

89 Files\Database. The target drive or directory name can be changed during the installation as desired. The installation also creates a Windows Program Group called PTD.exe Installation procedure: 1) Insert the CD into the CD drive. 2) Double click setup file setup.msi. 3) On the installation screen, modify the drive or directory name if desired, and then click NEXT. Figure 5-3 shows the installation screen. 4) Once installation is completed, click CLOSE for closing installation program. 5) Same setup file can be used for uninstalling or repairing the program. Figure 5-3. Installation Screen 5.4 Users Manual 5.4.1 Interaction to All Interfaces of Database The user interface for the P.T.D. is browser based. Double click PTD icon on desktop or in start menu to run program.

PAGE 106

90 As shown in Figure 5-1, on screen a Main Interaction form pop up. This form is means to direct user towards different part of PTD. Select the type of activity need to be carried out. Step 1: For data entry, select first option Open Input Template for data entry in database and then press OPEN button. Step 2: -Similarly for data search and report generation in different format, select second option Data Search and Report generation and then press OPEN button. Step 3: To end program press QUIT button. Browser Figure 5-4. Main Interaction Template 5.4.2 Button Function The most current functions corresponding to buttons is described as follows:

PAGE 107

91 Table 5-1 shows common button and there corresponding functions. All the menus, buttons, etc. conform as much as possible to the standards of Microsoft Windows Common User Access (CUA). Table 5-1. Buttons and there corresponding function Button Function Open To open an activity, define by an option selected. Quit To quit program. Input To extract data from text file as indicated and populate table. Copy To copy data from table to the clipboard as indicated. Reset Erase the data from table and reset all control properties. Main Menu To close that template and switch to main menu template. Help To access users manual. To add set of data record to database. To delete set of data record from database To navigate previous or next record. To navigate last record. End application. Search To search data records for selected query. Print Report To export search result in desired output format. 5.4.3 Data Entry Output files from I.T.L.T software are text files or Excel files. Extraction and analysis of data from the both this formats is similar. Following are the steps for inputting data from MS DOS base interface or Windows Base Interface: Step 1: Once you choose data entry option two templates are opened. First is Performance Test Database Main Menu (refer Fig) and Input Template options (refer Figure 5-5). Select the type of format of your specimen test file, whether it is MS-DOS

PAGE 108

92 base text files or excel file. Desired option continues to template design for specified kind of format. Both template works in same manner except the input interfaces are designed to incorporate the different files from I.T.L.T software. Figure 5-5. Input template options Step 2: As shown in Figure 5-6, page tab are provided for navigating different parts of program. Frame tags define the type of text file name and sub frame tags denote the test reading whose input is assigned to underneath button. You can access this user manual while using the program by clicking help button.

PAGE 109

93 Figure 5-6. MS-DOS Base text file input template Step 3: Once input button is pressed a dialog box is opened, for navigating your computer system, which is designed to open only assigned file type. In current example assigned file type is .MRO file. This provides user ease of searching file at his system. Refer Figure 5-4 for details.

PAGE 110

94 Figure 5-7. Input dialog box Step 4: Select file and then press open to continue. After the input process is completed a dialog box pops up (Figure 5-8) asking whether you want to save changes in opened file. Through out this program opt No for such kind of dialog box. As we dont want to change the main source files. Status of any activity is recorded and shown by changing color of button assigned. Sometimes while using this program you will face a dialog box as shown in Figure 5-6, where it asks whether to save clipboard contents. Always opt Yes for such decision boxes.

PAGE 111

95 Figure 5-8. Save changes dialog box Figure 5-9. Decision Box for clipboard changes.

PAGE 112

96 Step 5: For extracting data from different text files same procedure needs to be followed. For analyzing Indirect Tensile Test data navigate to IDT Analyzed Data using page tabs, then press analyze button which initiates an input box for applied tensile stress, as shown in Figure 5-10. The applied tensile stress is taken at the bottom of the AC layer and is very much dependent on the stiffness of the AC layer. Figure 5-10. Applied tensile stress input box

PAGE 113

97 5.4.4 Navigation through Input Templates and Database Once you have inputted data for all tests, these analyzed and tabulated data need to be transferred to database. For navigation between database and inputted template press key F10 and then Windows key on Key Pad. For activating Database Input Mask you have to click Input New Data button at Database main menu (Ref Figure Figure 5-11. Database Main Menu 5.4.5 Data transfer to Database Input mask (Figure 5-12) contains a set of field, which has to be entered manually. Data for particular mixture, which need to be entered in those fields, can be easily found on logbook. Use Main Menu button for closing input mask and return to database main menu.

PAGE 114

98 Figure 5-12. Database Input Mask While inputting data to any table in this database the correct form of tables is shown in Figure 5-13 (a). It is very essential that there is no data in input table. When there is data in table its form looks as shown in Figure 5-10 (b). Delete the data by selecting arrow head shown and right click and thereafter selecting delete option. Figure 5-13. (a) Correct state of input tables for data entry Figure 5-13. (b) Incorrect state of input tables for data entry For inputting data right click on the arrow at left side to open paste option. Select the paste option for transferring data in clipboard to the screen table linked to internal database storage area. Figure 5-13 (c) shows this process.

PAGE 115

99 Figure 5-13. (c) Right click projected arrow for opening paste option Figure 5-13 (d) shows confirmation of pasting data asked by Microsoft assistance. Press yes to complete the data transfer process. Figure 5-13. (d) Dialog box: After selecting paste option. Opt Yes 5.4.6 Data Search Data stored in database needs haul out in proper presentable format. Following steps describes process of data search and report generation and transferring report to different output format as per required. Step 1: Press Search button at Main Database Menu Form. Customized Microsoft assistance pops up with a dialog box. Select the type of search criteria, which is to be

PAGE 116

100 carried out of Materials Properties and Test Data file. Ref. Figure 5-11 for this process demonstration. Figure 5-14. Search dialog box Select type of search Step 2: Once the type of search is selected corresponding Search Form (Figure 5-15) comes on screen for entering the search criteria. Search can be made based on, ranges for quantitative parameters like Asphalt content, air voids etc, fix criteria by selecting option commands and variables. Search Button clicked with out any data entry will display all mixtures details. Figure 5-16 shows search results. Upper part of form shows properties of individual mixture in frame, and at bottom bar chart are generated comparing properties of all mixture satisfying the search criteria. Set of navigation button at right top side allows to navigate to properties of other mixture.

PAGE 117

101 Figure 5-15. Search form Figure 5-16. Search Result Form

PAGE 118

102 5.4.7 Report Generation For presentation of results produced by query, report generation and its output in desired format is developed, as shown in Figure 5-17, by pressing Print Report button and following the Microsoft Assistance directions. Figure 5-17. Report delivery option Following report delivery format are available through this software: 1. Print Report: Selection of this option leads to print of report through printer using default printer setting. 2. Create File Word: This option create rich text format file at desired location on system. 3. Email Report: For web transfer of report this option is designed. Figure 5-18 shows different types of format can be selected which are attached to automatically generated email. Note: Microsoft Snapshot format is the recommended output format for best bar chart and other graphic details.

PAGE 119

103 Figure 5-18. Email Report 5.4.8 Repair and Remove Program For repairing or removing the program from your PC, double click the same setup.msi file. The options on template developed on screen direct the repair and remove process. For any assistance regarding this program use, program extension and suggestion please email to contact@lokendra.us. Your queries and suggestion are important of us to improve the quality and performance of Performance Test Database, and any other software development. 5.5 Summaries and Recommendation This software is capable to support all kind of data generated for SuperpaveTM Indirect Tensile Test text files, Mixture properties, Volumetric properties, Gradation details, APA rut depth, and Complex modulus data. Software has a separated interface, which calculates fracture test parameters like energy ration, DCSE and Strain rate. Therefore it can be used has analyzes software. This software has capability to produce report in Rich text format, Snapshot format, HTML format, and Direct Print document. It is recommended to develop a Storage Area Network (SAN) for this software (P.T.D.) for developing Distributed Database Management System. This will ease data input and availability of certain information in database to global users. A Storage Area Network (SAN) is any high-performance network whose primary purpose is to enable

PAGE 120

104 storage devices to communicate with computer systems and with each other. Basically from single user P.T.D., data is transferred to globally accessible P.T.D. interface so that there is common set of data stored in all databse.

PAGE 121

CHAPTER 6 MOISTURE CONDITIONING ON I-295 PFC PROJECT The AASHTO T283 (2003) moisture conditioning protocol was adopted to evaluate the moisture sensitivity of the I-295 PFC mixture. The Superpave IDT test and associated fracture parameters were used to quantify the effects of moisture damage. 6.1 Objective Due to high air voids and dense graded pavement at bottom these porous mixtures retain water for long time. This continuous exposure to moisture at high temperature affects coarse aggregate arrangement and also causes stripping. PFC mixture if does not have sufficient resistance towards these effects, then it will lead to decrease in tensile strength. The main objective of moisture conditioning is to measure damage due to conditioning and predict resistance of mixture against moisture in actual field conditions. 6.2 Scope The scope of project for determination of moisture sensitivity is tabulated as following: Optimum asphalt content of I-295 PFC project gradation was determined and six pills of 6-inches diameter were prepared. Three for moisture conditioning and three as control samples, i.e. Unconditioned samples. Moisture conditioning was conducted, as per AASHTO T-283 (2003) protocol with modification, on three 6-inches diameter pills compacted in laboratory using Superpave gyratory compactor. SuperPave IDT was used to perform Resilient Modulus (MR), Creep Compliance, and Strength tests (13, 14, 15) for determining fracture parameters. 105

PAGE 122

106 6.3 Materials and Methodology 6.3.1 Aggregate and Hydrated Lime The final aggregate blend for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) is composed of #67 Granite stone from Pit No TM-579/NS-315, #78 Granite Stone from Pit No GA-383 and Granite Screens from Pit No. TM-579/NS-315. The F.D.O.T. code for this source stone stockpiles #67 Granite, #78 Granite and Granite Screens are 54, 54 and 23 respectively. Producer of these aggregates is Martin Marietta Aggregate. Table 6-1 shows JMF used for I-295 PFC project and Figure 6-1 plot this gradation along with control points as per FDOT specification SECTION 337. Hydrated lime is added to mixture as antistrip agent, 1% by weight of aggregate. Global Stone Corporation provided hydrated Lime and its Pit No. is Luttrel Co. TENN. 6.3.2 Binder and Mineral Fiber An electrometric type of polymer modified asphalt cement PG 76-22 with 0.5% antistrip agent was used in this project. Mineral fiber used was regular FIBERAND ROAD FIBERS. Atlantic Coast Asphalt Co. supplied asphalt and mineral fiber. The dosage rate of mineral fiber was 0.4% by weight of total mix. Table 6-1. Gradation of I-295 PFC Project Sieve Size Percent Passing (%) 11/2 in. (37.5mm) 100 1 in. (25.0mm) 100 3/4 in. (19.0mm) 100 1/2 in. (12.5mm) 89 3/8 in. (9.5mm) 62 N o. 4 (4.75mm) 15 N o. 8 (2.36mm) 10 N o.16 (1.18mm) 7 N o.30 (600m) 5 N o.50 (300m) 5

PAGE 123

107 Table 6-1. Continued Sieve Size Percent Passing (%) N o.100 (150m) 3 N o.200 (75m ) 2 I-295, PFC Project's Selected Gradation0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0100.0Sieve SizesPercentage Passing (%) PFC-Granite Mixture Max Control Points Min Control Points No. No. No. No. No. No. No. 3/8" 1/2" 3/4" 200 100 50 30 16 8 4 Figure 6-1. Plot of I-295 PFC mixtures gradation 6.4 Specimen Preparation and Testing Based on number of experiments, the Georgia DOT suggested that if the gradation is within the specific limits, the initial estimate comes out to be 6%. Therefore, for gradations that control points the surface capacity (Kc) determination is not needed. The probable optimum asphalt content with in this gradation band is 6%. Depending on surface texture and angularity of aggregates and change in JMF might cause changes in optimum asphalt content. Four trial percentages (5.5%, 5.8%, 6.2% and 6.5%), and two piles for each trial percentage are produced in this project.

PAGE 124

108 6.4.1 Mixing and Determination of Asphalt Content Sieved and batched aggregates, asphalt and mineral fiber are preheated for 3 hours in oven before mixing. Due to viscous asphalt and addition of mineral fiber temperature of mixing selected was 330 F, to maintain enough flow during mixing. All tools and mixing drum were also preheated to maintain desired temperature. While mixing, asphalt is added to mix of aggregate and mineral fiber. These mixes are very sticky due to which it makes mixing very difficult. Ensure that while retrieving material from mixing drum there is no lose of fines. Mixing procedure was same both Rice and servopac samples. Avoid over heating of binder during mixing, as it causes aging of binder. Before compaction, mixes are subjected to Short Term Oven Aging (STOA) for two hours, which includes stirring after one hour. Compaction temperature is reduced to 320 F, for avoiding draindown of binder during compaction. As already stated, 50 gyration were used to attain compaction level similar to field. The angle of gyration kept during compaction was 1.25. Essentially, because of sticky nature of these mixture oil is sprayed in molds. From prior experience, compacted samples are not retrieved from molds immediately. They are allowed to cool from 1hr 30 min before retrieving from molds. Once the specimen is ejected from the mold let it cool for 5 min before holding specimen. Especially in granite mixtures if cooling after ejection is not allowed small aggregates due to high air voids stick to gloves and comes out causing discontinuity in specimen. Allow piles to cool for 24 hr before processing any other activity over it. Determination of Rice specific gravity (Gmm) on loose PFC mixes in accordance with AASHTO T209, Refer Appendix B, was conducted. Calculations of all volumetric

PAGE 125

109 properties are shown in Appendix B. The determination of the optimum asphalt content as per recommended, as specified in chapter 3, was done by selecting AC at lowest point at VMA curve. 6% is the determined optimum asphalt content for this PFC-granite mixture. 6.4.2 Volumetric Properties Figure 6-2 summarizes the volumetric properties for the mixture studied. The maximum specific gravity (Gmm) and Bulk specific gravity (Gmb) of mixture at optimum asphalt content are 2.485 and 1.957 respectively. The total air voids is designed mixture is 21.27 %. It should be noted that the effective film thickness (EFT) was developed by Nukunya et al. (9) to account for the nature of the coarse aggregate-to-aggregate contact structure in coarse-graded mixtures. Film thickness calculated as per Nukunya et al (9) is 35.4 microns. Film thickness is above specified minimum film thickness requirement, i.e. 35 microns, for 0%0.5% asphalt absorption. The minimum film thickness requirement is to ensure resistance against stripping and asphalt hardening. This indicates mixture have sufficient asphalt content. 6.4.3 Moisture Conditioning and Testing Three samples were then subjected to saturation according to the AASHTO T-283 (2003) procedure, with the following modifications: 9. Since the PFC mixture has air voids around 21%, it is possible that the specimens creep during or fail during moisture conditioning. To over come this problem, the specimens were wrapped in 1/8 mesh and two clamps are provided without exerting pressure. 17. Wire mesh wrapped specimen is vacuum saturated at 25 inches of Hg absolute suction pressure for 30 minutes at a temperature of 25C. This allows water to penetrate into specimen, intercepting pocket of mastic. The vacuum saturation setup is shown in Figure 6-4.

PAGE 126

110 18. Vacuum saturated samples are immersed in preheated water bath at 60C 1C temperature. Samples are conditioned in hot water bath for 24 1 hour. 19. After 24 hours samples are moved to water ba th with temperature 25 0.5C for 2 hours. Conditioned samples are kept 36 hours for draining all water before removing the wire mesh. Once the specimens had drained for 36 hours, both the conditioned and unconditioned specimens were cut, by a wet saw, into 2-inch thick specimens. The specimens were placed in a dehumidifier ch amber for 48 hours. This ensured that the surface of the specimen was dry. SuperPave IDT was used to perform Resilient Modulus (MR), Creep Compliance, and Strength te sts (13, 14, 15) from which the following properties were determined: tensile strength, resilient m odulus, fracture energy limit (FE), dissipated creep strain energy limit (DCSE), creep compliance, and m-value. The FE and DCSE values and the modulus can be accurately determined using the SuperPave Indirect Tensile Test following the procedures developed by Roque and Buttlar, and Buttlar and Roque (16, 17). Us ing these mixture properties and the HMA fracture mechanics framework developed at the University of Florida (Roque et al., 2004), the Energy Ratio was calculated.

PAGE 127

111 Gmm1 = Maximum specific gravity of mixture, Gmb2 = Bulk specific gravity of mixture, VMA3 = Voids in Mineral Aggregates, VTM4 = Voids in Total Mix, VFA5 = Voids filled with Asphalt, AC6 = Asphalt Content Voids filled with Asphalt30.0031.0032.0033.0034.0035.0036.0037.0038.0039.005.45.65.866.26.46.6% ACVFA Effective Film Thickness (EFT) as per Nukunya et al for PFC-mixture with optimum asphalt content: 35.4 microns Effective Sp Grav of Agg % AC6 Gmm1 Gmb2 VMA3 (%) VTM4 (%) VFA5 (%) 2.732 5.5 2.513 1.944 32.777 22.655 30.883 5.8 2.501 1.955 32.603 21.820 33.073 6.2 2.473 1.964 32.600 20.578 36.877 6.5 2.470 1.966 32.721 20.379 37.718 Mineral Fiber: 0.4% of Total Mix VMA at Optimum Asphalt Content: 32.69% Optimum Asphalt Content: 6.0% Gmm at Optimum Asphalt Content:2.485 Voids in Total Mix20.0021.0022.0023.005.45.65.866.26.46.6% ACVTM Figure 6-2. Mix Design of I-295 PFC-Granite mixture Voids in Mineral Aggregates32.5532.6032.6532.7032.7532.8055.566.57% ACVMA

PAGE 128

112 Figure 6-3. Compacted pill rolled in 1/8 inch sample placed in vacuum chamber Figure 6-4. Vacuum Saturation of sample prior to moisture conditioning 6.5 Fracture Test on Moisture condition Moisture conditioning causes sever damage to strength of mixture therefore it is essential to handle sample carefully during testing for obtaining consistent results. In order to avoid end effects due to porous nature of OGFC and PFC mixtures, the Superpave IDT specimen thickness to be cut from compacted pill was kept around 1.5

PAGE 129

113 inches.After cutting, all specimens were allowed to dry in a constant humidity chamber for a period of two days. Figure 9.5 shows a picture of the dehumidifying chamber used. Four brass gage points (5/16-in. diameter by 1/8-in. thick) were affixed with epoxy to each specimen face. The strain gage extensometers were mounted on the specimen. Horizontal and vertical deformations were measured on each side of the specimen. Since the PFC air voids content is very high (around 18-22%), handling of the specimens at room temperature could cause specimen damage. Therefore specimens with glued gauge points were placed in a cooling chamber at a temperature 10 0.5 C for at least 3 hours before attaching the strain gage extensometers to the specimens. Without this step, occasional loss of gauge points, along with stone or mastic, was experienced, thus compromising the specimen for further testing. The test specimen was placed into the load frame. A seating load of 5 to 8 pounds was applied to the test specimen to ensure proper contact of the loading heads. As mentioned earlier, a 45-minute rest period was allowed between tests at different frequencies. Start up load for resilient modulus test was kept around 60 % of load applied on unconditioned sample during resilient modulus test to obtain resilient deformation of 100 microns (instead of 100-180 microns). If initial load applied is high it damages specimen in resilient test itself. 6.5.1 Findings and Analysis Moisture conditioning was done in water bath of 60C for 24 hours on I-295 PFC samples. At such a high temperature and due negligible surface absorption capacity of granite mixture asphalt tends to flows with in mixture. Table 6-2 shows summary of fracture testing result of the conditioned and un-conditioned sample. Creep compliance of conditioned mix is 17.66 1/Gpa, which is not a significant change as compared to unconditioned sample i.e. 17.53 1/Gpa. The strain rate per unit

PAGE 130

114 stress of unconditioned sample, i.e. 7.9 x 10^-8 1/psi-sec, remains same after conditioning. This indicates that the asphalt with in is not affected from the conditioning substantially. Where as, the threshold limit DCSE had reduced from 3.45 KJ/m^3 to 1.03 KJ/m^3 due to conditioning. Fracture energy also plummet from 3.6 KJ/m^3 to 1.1 KJ/m^6 as result of conditioning. Probably, as granite is not absorbing asphalt and asphalt at such a high temperature is in liquid state, the reinforcement of mixture due to stone to stone contact is affected as shown in Figure 6-5. Therefore the failure strain is reducing around half as compared to unconditioned sample. The energy ratio, calculated as per Roque et al (2004), of conditioned specimen is 0.6, which is good value as compared with energy ratio, i.e. 1.67, of unconditioned sample. Resilient modulus is increased to 5.25 Gpa from 4.41 Gpa, due to conditioning but this change is not significant. This confirms the constant strain rate and creep compliance. Figure 6-5. Affect of conditioning over stone to stone contact of PFC mixtures

PAGE 131

115 Table 6-2. Summary of fracture test on moisture condition sample compared with unconditioned sample Property Sample Resilient Modulus(Gpa) Creep complianceat 1000 seconds (1/Gpa) Tensile Stren g th(Mpa) Fracture Energy (kJ/m^3) Failure Strain (10-6) m-value D1 DCSE (kJ/m^3) e0(10-6) Elastic E. (kJ/m^3) Ener gy Ratio Strain Rate per Unit stress (1/psi-sec) Creep Rate (1/psi-sec) Unconditioned 4.41 17.53 1.15 3.6 3940 0.66 1.16E-06 3.45 3679.32 0.150 1.67 7.916E-08 8.86E-08 Conditioned 5.25 17.67 0.84 1.1 1827 0.73 7.9E-07 1.03 1666.89 0.067 0.60 8.827E-08 8.91E-08

PAGE 132

116 Energy Ratio0.000.501.001.502.00UnconditionedConditionedEnergy Ratio A Fracture Energy01234UnconditionedConditionedFracture Energy (kJ/m^3) B Tensile Strength01234UnconditionedConditionedTensile Strength (MPa) C Failure Strain010002000300040005000UnconditionedConditionedFaliure Strain (10-6) D DCSE0.001.002.003.004.00UnconditionedConditionedDCSE (kJ/m^3) E Creep Compliance0.005.0010.0015.0020.00UnconditionedConditionedCreep Compliance (1/Gpa) F Figure 6-6. Comparison of Fracture Test rsults A) Energy ratio, B) Fracture energy, C) Tensile strength, D) Failure strain, E) DCSE, F) Creep compliance, G) Resilient modulus, H) Strain rate, I)Creep rate

PAGE 133

117 Resilient Modulus0123456UnconditionedConditionedResilient Modulus (Gpa) G) Strain Rate0.00E+002.00E-104.00E-106.00E-108.00E-101.00E-09UnconditionedConditionedStrain Rate(in/in) H) Creep Rate0.00E+002.00E-104.00E-106.00E-108.00E-101.00E-09UnconditionedConditionedCreep Rate (1/psi-sec) .I) Figure 6-6. Continued 6.6 Summary and Conclusion The energy ratio is reduced 0.6 from 1.67. Initial energy ratio of unconditioned indicates good field performance. Moisture conditioning procedure was to sever because of the warm water soaked in vacuum saturated specimen. This could have developed internal water pressure. Even though, after under going this conditioning liberation of energy ratio 0.6 is indicting good field performance. Finally, sample is still in good shape to with stand further conditioning, indicating good field performance of mixture for I-295.

PAGE 134

CHAPTER 7 SUPERPAVE IDT FRACTURE TEST RESULTS In this chapter, all Superpave IDT fracture test results from US-27 and I-295 project are presented and compared with an aim to evaluate the fracture performance of these mixtures. 7.1 Materials 7.1.1 Aggregate and Hydrated Lime Two types of aggregate are used for the development of Georgia PEM for Florida condition i.e. Granite and Limestone. Nova Scotia granite and oolitic limestone from South Florida (White Rock) were used for preparing the mixtures. Same JMF is used for both granite and limestone mixture composing of aggregates from different stockpiles. Job mix formula of granite was composed of aggregates from stockpiles #7, #789 and Granite Screens. Job mix formula of limestone was composed of aggregates from stockpiles S1A, S1B and limestone screens. Hydrated lime (1% by weight of aggregate) was used as anti stripping agent for granite aggregates. FC-5 limestone and FC-5 granite are composition of stockpiles as shown in Appendix F. Hydrated lime is added to FC-5 Granite mixture with a dosage rate of 1%. Table F.2 of appendix show JMF of FC-5 granite with 1 % limestone. The final aggregate blend for I-295 Permeable Friction Course (PFC) project is composed of #67 Granite stone from Pit No TM-579/NS-315, #78 Granite Stone from Pit No GA-383 and Granite Screens from Pit No-TM-579/NS-315. The F.D.O.T. code for this source stone stockpiles #67 Granite, #78 Granite and Granite Screens are 54, 54 and 23 118

PAGE 135

119 respectively. Producer of these aggregates is Martin Marietta Aggregate. Hydrated lime is added to mixture as antistrip agent, 1% by weight of aggregate. Global Stone Corporation provided hydrated Lime and its Pit No. is Luttrel Co. TENN. Figure 7-1 shows Gradation used for Georgia PEM and I-295 PFC project. Gradations of Georgia PEM and I-295 PFC Project0102030405060708090100Sieve SizesPercentage Passing (%) Georgia PEM Granite and Limestone I-295 PFC Granite Mixture No. No. No. No. No. No. No. 3/8" 1/2" 3/4" 200 100 50 30 16 8 4 Figure 7-1. Gradation Band of Georgia PEM and I-295 PFC Project 7.1.2 Binder and Mineral Fiber SBS modified PG 76-22 asphalt, with 0.5% anti strip agent was used in the mixture design. Mineral fiber (Fiberand Road Fibers) supplied by SLOSS Industries, Alabama, 0.4% by weight of total mix, was added to mix in order to avoid binder drain drown. Chemical composition of mineral fiber is Vitreous Calcium Magnesium Aluminum Silicates. Mineral fibers were shredded into fine fragments before adding to mix. An electrometric type of polymer modified asphalt cement PG 76-22 with 0.5% antistrip agent was used in I-295 PFC project. Mineral fiber used was regular FIBERAND ROAD FIBERS. Atlantic Coast Asphalt Co. supplied asphalt and mineral fiber. The dosage rate of mineral fiber was 0.4% by weight of total mix.

PAGE 136

120 7.2 Test Method SuperPaveTM IDT was used to perform Resilient Modulus (MR), Creep Compliance, and Strength tests (14, 15) from which the following properties were determined: tensile strength, resilient modulus, fracture energy limit (FE), dissipated creep strain energy limit (DCSE), creep compliance, and m-value. The FE and DCSE values and the modulus can be accurately determined using the SuperPave Indirect Tensile Test following the procedures developed by Roque and Buttlar, and Buttlar and Roque (16, 17). Using these mixture properties and the HMA fracture mechanics framework developed at the University of Florida, the Energy Ratio was calculated (Roque, et al, 2004). 7.2.1 Sample Preparation Both OGFC and PFC mixtures are very porous. Therefore both the long-term oven aging procedure and the Superpave IDT test procedure that was developed for dense-graded mixtures by Roque and Buttlar (1992) cannot be used unmodified. In the following, the long-term oven aging procedure used will be discussed, followed by a discussion on the Superpave IDT sample preparation and test procedures used. Long-Term Oven Aging Procedure The PFC and OGFC mixtures were subjected to long-term aging according to AASHTO PP2 (1994). However, the mixtures being very course and open, there was a possibility of these mixtures flowing or even falling apart during aging. Hence, the following procedure was developed to contain the compacted pills from falling apart during aging: 1. A 1/8 inch opening wire mesh is rolled around pills, with two tightening clamps located on each side of the specimen, at a distance of 1 inch from the top and bottom of the specimen, respectively. The mesh size was chosen to ensure that

PAGE 137

121 there is good circulation of air within the sample for oxidation and at the same time, to prevent the smaller aggregate particles from falling through the mesh. 2. Following AASHTO PP2, the specimens are kept in an oven with porous plate at bottom for 185 F 5.4 F (85 C 3 C) for 120 0.5 hours. 3. After that time period, the oven is turned off and the doors are opened to allow the oven and specimens to cool to room temperature for 16 0.5 hours. 7.2.2 Testing Equipment The basics of the Superpave IDT test equipment and data acquisition system have been specified by Buttlar and Roque (1994), Roque et al., (1992), and AASHTO TP-9. Figure 7-2 shows a picture of the Superpave IDT testing setup used. Additional information on the specific testing system used in this study is as follows: An environmental chamber was used to control specimen temperature. The chamber is capable of maintaining temperatures between -30 C and 30 C with an accuracy of + 0.1C. Figure 7-3 shows a picture of the environmental chamber used. Loads were controlled using a MTS Model 418.91 MicroProfiler. The data acquisition system used was Labtech Notebook Pro software. A data acquisition program written specially for complex modulus tests. Approximately 50 data points per loading cycle were obtained. Vertical and horizontal deformation measurements were obtained using extensometers designed by MTS specifically for use with the Superpave IDT. A gage length of 1.5 inches was used for all specimens. Figure 7-4 shows a picture of the extensometers used.

PAGE 138

122 Figure 7-2. IDT testing device Figure 7-3. Temperature controlled chamber

PAGE 139

123 Figure 7-4. Typical Dense-Graded specimen with extensometers attached 7.2.3 Specimen Preparation and Testing Procedure Test specimens were obtained from 6-in. diameter specimens that were compacted to 50 gyrations with the Superpave gyratory compactor. Each Superpave gyratory compacted specimen yielded two Superpave IDT specimens. Three specimens were tested at each of three test temperatures for each mixture. Additional details on the testing procedure used are as follows: In order to avoid end effects due to porous nature of OGFC and PFC mixtures, the Superpave IDT specimen thickness to be cut from compacted pill was kept around 1.5 in. After cutting, all specimens were allowed to dry in a constant humidity chamber for a period of two days. Figure 7-5 shows a picture of the dehumidifying chamber used. Four brass gage points (5/16-in. diameter by 1/8-in. thick) were affixed with epoxy to each specimen face. The strain gage extensometers were mounted on the specimen. Horizontal and vertical deformations were measured on each side of the specimen. Since the PFC

PAGE 140

124 air voids content is very high (around 18-22%), handling of the specimens at room temperature could cause specimen damage. Therefore specimens with glued gauge points were placed in a cooling chamber at a temperature 10 0.5 C for at least 3 hours before attaching the strain gage extensometers to the specimens. Without this step, occasional loss of gauge points, along with stone or mastic, was experienced, thus compromising the specimen for further testing. The test specimen was placed into the load frame. A seating load of 5 to 8 pounds was applied to the test specimen to ensure proper contact of the loading heads. As mentioned earlier, a 45-minute rest period was allowed between tests at different frequencies. Figure 7-5. Dehumidifying chamber 7.2.4 Test Procedures and Analysis of Test Results Standard Superpave IDT tests, as specified by Roque & Butlar (1992) were performed on all mixtures to determine resilient modulus, creep compliance, m-value, D1, tensile strength, failure strain, fracture energy, and dissipated creep strain energy to failure. The tests were performed at 10C. Resilient Modulus Test The resilient modulus is defined as the ratio of the applied stress to the recoverable strain when repeated loads are applied. The test was conducted according to the system

PAGE 141

125 developed by Roque & Butlar (1992) to determine the resilient modulus and the Poissons ratio. The resilient modulus test was performed in load control mode by applying a repeated haversine waveform load to the specimen for a 0.1 second followed by a rest period of 0.9 seconds. The load was selected to keep the horizontal strain in the linear viscoelastic range, in which horizontal strain is typically 100 to 180 micro-strains. The procedures for resilient modulus test are as follows: 1. The specimens compacted are cut parallel to the top and bottom faces using a water-cooled masonry saw to produce 2 inches thick specimens having smooth and parallel faces. 2. Four aluminum gage points are affixed with epoxy to each trimmed smooth face of the specimen. 3. Test samples are stored in a humidity chamber at a constant relative humidity of 60 percent for at least 2 days. In addition, specimens are cooled at the test temperature for at least 3 hours before testing. 4. Strain gauges are mounted and centered on the specimen to the gage points for the measurement of the horizontal and vertical deformations. 5. A constant pre-loading of approximately 10 pounds is applied to the test specimens to ensure proper contact with the loading heads before test loads are applied. Applying a repeated haversine waveform load for five seconds to obtain horizontal strain between 100 to180 micro-strains then tests the specimen. If the horizontal strains are higher than 50 micro-strains, the load is immediately removed form the specimen, and specimen is allowed to recover for a minimum 3minutes before reloading at different loading level. 6. When the applied load is determined, data acquisition program begins recording test data. Data are acquired at a rate of 150 points per seconds. 7. The resilient modulus and Poissons ratio are calculated by the following equations, which were developed based on three dimensional finite element analysis by Roque and Buttlar (11). The equation is involved in the Superpave Indirect Tensile Test at Low Temperatures (ITLT) program, which was developed by Roque & Butlar (1994). P GL H t D C co m p MR=

PAGE 142

126 Where, MR = Resilient modulus P = Maximum load GL = Gauge Length H = Horizontal Deformation t, D = Thickness, Diameter Ccomp = 0.6354 (X/Y)-1-0.332 Creep test Creep compliance is a function of time-dependent strain over stress. The creep compliance curve was originally developed to predict thermally induced stress in asphalt pavement. However, because it represents the time-dependent behavior of asphalt mixture, it can be used to evaluate the rate of damage accumulation of asphalt mixture. As shown in Figure 5-5, D0, D1, and m-value are mixture parameters obtained from creep compliance tests. Although D1 and m-value are related to each other, D1 is more related to the initial portion of the creep compliance curve, while m-value is more related to the longer-term portion of the creep compliance curve. The m-value has known to be related to the rate of damage accumulation and the fracture resistance of asphalt mixtures. In other words, the lower the m-value, the lower the rate of damage accumulation. However, mixtures with higher m-value typically have higher DCSE limits. The creep compliance is a time dependant strain, (t), divided by a constant stress. That is, the inverse of the creep compliance, which is called creep

PAGE 143

127 stiffness, is a kind of stiffness. According to the analysis conducted by Roque & Butlar (1994), MR is higher than creep compliance stiffness at 1 second. The Superpave Indirect Tensile Test at Low Temperatures (ITLT) computer program was used to determine creep properties of the mixtures. The test was conducted in a load control mode by applying a static load. The load was selected to keep the horizontal strain in the linear viscoelastic range, which is below a horizontal strain of 180 micro strains at 100 seconds and 750 microns at 1000 seconds. The test procedure was presented by Roque & Butlar (1992). The procedures for indirect tensile creep test consist of the following steps: The preparation of test samples and the pre-loading are same as those for resilient modulus test Apply a static load for 1000 seconds. If the horizontal deformation is greater than 180 micro inch at 100 seconds, the load is immediately removed from the specimen, and specimen is allowed to recover for a minimum 3 minutes before reloading at a different level. At 100 sec, the horizontal deformation should be less than 750 micro inches When the applied load is determined, the data acquisition program records the loads and deflections at a rate of 10 Hz for the first 10 seconds, 1Hz for the next 290 seconds, and 0.2 Hz for the remaining 700 seconds of the creep test. The computer program, ITLT, was used to analyze the load and deflection data to calculate the creep compliance properties. Creep compliance and Poissons ratio are computed by the following equations. = -0.1+1.480 (X/Y) 2 0.778 (t/D)2 (X/Y)2 Where, D (t) = Creep Compliance P GL D( t ) = H t D Ccom p

PAGE 144

128 Strength test Failure limits such as tensile strength, failure strain, and fracture energy were determined from strength tests using the Superpave IDT. These properties are used for estimating the cracking resistance of the asphalt mixtures. The strength test was conducted in a displacement control mode by applying a constant rate of displacement of 50 mm/min for field mix and 100 mm/min for saturated mix until the specimens failed. The horizontal and vertical deformation and the applied load are recorded at the rate of 20 Hz during the test. The maximum tensile strength is calculated as the following equation. b d 2 P C sx S t = Where, St = Maximum Indirect tensile Strength P = Failure load at first crack Csx = 0.948 0.01114 (b/D) 0.2693 + 1.436 (b/D) b, D = Thickness, diameter

PAGE 145

129 Figure 7-6. Power Model for Creep Compliance

PAGE 146

130 From the strength test and the resilient modulus test, fracture energy and dissipated creep strain energy can be determined. Fracture energy is a total energy applied to the specimen until the specimen fractures. Dissipated creep strain energy (DCSE) is the absorbed energy that damages the specimen, and dissipated creep strain energy to failure is the absorbed energy to fracture (DCSEf). As shown in the Figure 7-7, fracture energy and DCSEf can be determined as described below. The ITLT program also calculates fracture energy automatically. MR = & 0 = MR f-St S t f 0 MR Elastic Energy (EE) = () St (f 0) Fracture energy (FE) = St () d (Upper Limit of strain is Faliure strain f, Refer Figure 7-7) f 0 Dissipated Creep Strain energy (DSCE) = FE EE Where, St = Tensile Strength f = Failure Tensile Strain 0 = Elastic Strain MR = Resilient Modulus

PAGE 147

131 Figure 7-7. FE and DCSE from Strength Test 7.2.5 Results of Fracture Testing on PFC Mixtures The short-term oven aged and long-term oven aged test results for the PFC friction courses are presented in Table 7-1 and Figure 7-8 through 7-16, along with a comparison with results from the OGFC mixtures from US Hwy 27, Highlands County. Below, the short-term oven aged and the long-term oven aged results are discussed briefly. Discussion of results for short-term oven aged mixtures The original GPEM mixture designs in this project used NS315 aggregate from Nova Scotia and oolitic limestone from South Florida, with an existing gradation obtained from the GDOT. Hence, these two mixtures are entitled GPEM (Granite) and GPEM (Limestone), respectively. The mixture entitled PFC (granite) is the mixture that was designed for the test section on I-295, Jacksonville. Finally, the granite and limestone OGFC mixtures from US Hwy 27, Highlands County are shown for comparison purposes.

PAGE 148

132 The Energy ratio for short-term oven aged Georgia PEM-G (Granite) and PFC-G (Granite) ranges from between 1.5 and 2, which indicates good field performance. Similarly, for the GPEM (Limestone) mixture, the short-term oven aged energy ratio is around to 3.5. In the case of GPEM (Granite), the short-term oven aged failure strain is around 4000 micro strain and the DCSE limit is close to 4 KJ/m3. In comparison, the short-term oven aged GPEM (Limestone) had a DCSE limit of 3.28 KJ/m3. This lower DCSE limit is primarily due to the low failure strain 2735 micro strain as compared with granite mixture (4000 micro strain). For the short-term oven aged PFC-G the DCSE limit is 3.5 KJ/m3 with a failure strain of 3940 micro strains. Discussion of results for long-term oven aged mixtures All granite mixtures showed a decrease in the energy ratio due to long-term aging. As shown in Figure 7-10 the failure-strain of the granite mixtures was reduced by half, as compared to the short-term oven aged mixtures. This decrease in the failure strain led to a decrease in the DCSE limit. The resilient modulus for the long-term oven aged mixtures is not affected significantly when compared with short-term oven aged mixtures. Interestingly, limestone mixtures in general have a rough texture, with a lot of crevices and pores on the aggregate surfaces. During the long-term oven aging, the temperature is around 85 C, and at such a high temperature, the asphalt will flow, further enhancing the absorption of the asphalt into the crevices and the pores in the aggregate. This absorption mechanism may result in a mixture with enhanced ductility and failure strains, thus resulting in higher energy ratios. For example, in the extreme, the FC-5 Limestone mixture showed a significant increase in the energy ratio from 1.62 to 3.57,

PAGE 149

133 due to an increase in both failure strain and fracture energy. This shows that FC-5 limestone has sufficient cavities to absorb flowing asphalt. Interestingly, the GPEMLimestone has a high-energy ratio for short-term oven aged conditions of about 3.3, and only a slightly reduced energy ratio of 3.09 for the long-term oven aged conditions. It is possible that the added mineral fiber is play ing a role in reducing the absorption during long term oven aging, along with the SBS m odified asphalt, which tends to be stickier than the ARB-12 asphalt.

PAGE 150

134 Table 7-1. Summary of Fr acture Test results on Short-Term an d Long-Term Oven Aged Mixtures of Georgia PEM, PFC Project and OGFC Mixture Property Sample Resilient Modulus (Gpa) Creep compliance at 1000 seconds (1/Gpa) Tensile Stren g th (Mpa) Fracture Energy (kJ/m^3) Failure Strain (10-6) m-value D1 DCSE (kJ/m^3) e0(10-6) Elastic E. (kJ/m^3) Energy Ratio Strain Rate per Unit stress (1/psi-sec) Short-Term Oven Aged Mixtures GPEM-G 4.97 19.93 1.24 4.2 4383 0.74 8.35E-07 4.05 4133.73 0.154 1.95 1.061E-07 GPEM-L 5.81 3.54 1.59 3.5 2735 0.51 6.75E-07 3.28 2461.61 0.22 3.32 1.161E-08 FC-5 G 4.98 7.23 1.16 3 3248 0.60 7.84E-07 2.86 3014.79 0.14 1.59 2.896E-08 FC-5L 7.35 1.88 1.11 0.9 982.1 0.48 4.29E-07 0.82 831.50 0.08 1.62 5.808E-09 PFC-G 4.41 17.53 1.15 3.6 3940 0.66 1.16E-06 3.45 3679.319 0.150 1.67 7.916E-08 Long-Term Oven Aged Mixtures GPEM-G 4.9 10.93 0.97 1.1 1552 0.70 5.86E-07 1.00 1354.31 0.10 0.86 5.127E-08 GPEM-L 6.27 2.47 1.57 2.3 2026 0.34 1.59E-06 2.10 1775.57 0.20 3.09 5.536E-09 FC-5 G 4.81 8.74 0.89 1 1454 0.77 2.80E-07 0.92 1268.76 0.08 0.68 4.567E-08 FC-5L 7.57 1.81 1.69 2.1 1609 0.43 5.92E-07 1.91 1385.89 0.19 3.57 4.972E-09 PFC-G 3.28 27.91 0.94 1.6 2349 0.692 1.56E-06 1.47 2062.21 0.135 0.49 1.283E-07

PAGE 151

135 Energy Ratio0.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.504.00FC-5 G FC-5 L PFC-GraniteGPEM(Granite)GPEM (Limestone)ER Short-Term Oven Aged Long-Term Oven Aged Figure 7-8. Energy Ratio Fracture Energy0.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.504.004.50FC-5 G FC-5 L PFC-GraniteGPEM (Granite)GPEM (Limestone)FE (KJ/m3) Short-Term Oven Aged Long-Term Oven Aged Figure 7-9. Fracture Energy

PAGE 152

136 Faliure Strain0.0500.01000.01500.02000.02500.03000.03500.04000.04500.05000.0FC-5 G FC-5 L PFC-GraniteGPEM(Granite)GPEM (Limestone)Faliure Strain (in/in) Short-Term Oven Aged Long-Term Oven Aged Figure 7-10. Failure Strain DCSE0.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.504.004.50FC-5 GFC-5 LPFC-GraniteGPEM(Granite)GPEM(Limestone)DCSE (KJ/m3) Short-Term Oven Aged Long-Term Oven Aged Figure 7-11. DCSE

PAGE 153

137 Resilient Modulus0.001.002.003.004.005.006.007.008.00FC-5 G FC-5 L PFC-GraniteGPEM(Granite)GPEM (Limestone)Mr (1/GPa) Short-Term Oven Aged Long-Term Oven Aged Figure 7-12. Resilient Modulus Creep Compliance0.00E+005.00E+001.00E+011.50E+012.00E+012.50E+013.00E+01FC-5 G FC-5 L PFC-GraniteGPEM(Granite)GPEM (Limestone)Creep Rate (1/Gpa) Short-Term Oven Aged Long-Term Oven Aged Figure 7-13. Creep Compliance

PAGE 154

138 Strain Rate00.000000020.000000040.000000060.000000080.00000010.000000120.00000014FC-5 G FC-5 L PFC-GraniteGPEM(Granite)GPEM (Limestone)Strain Rate (1/psi-sec) Short-Term Oven Aged Long-Term Oven Aged Figure 7-14. Strain Rate D10.00E+005.00E-071.00E-061.50E-062.00E-06FC-5 G FC-5 L PFC-GraniteGPEM(Granite)GPEM (Limestone)D1 Short-Term Oven Aged Long-Term Oven Aged Figure 7-15. Power Model Parameter (D1)

PAGE 155

139 m00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9FC-5 G FC-5 L PFC-GraniteGPEM(Granite)GPEM (Limestone)m Short-Term Oven Aging Long-Term Oven Aging Figure 7-16. Power Model Parameter (m) 7.3 Summary and Conclusion Summary and conclusion of findings and analysis of Superpave IDT fracture test results are as follows: All limestone short-term oven aged mixtures are showing higher energy ratio as compared with granite short-term oven aged mixture. Due to absorption of asphalt in FC-5 limestone mixture during long-term oven aging, ductility is increased resulting in higher failure strain and energy ratio. Where as in GPEM limestone mixture use of SBS modified mixture, which is stickier than AR-12, and mineral fiber is reducing absorption of flowing asphalt at high temperature. Therefore, there is slight reduction in failure strain and energy ratio with approximately same tensile strength as compared with short-term oven aged samples. All granite mixture show substantial drop in failure strain, failure energy and energy ratio due to long-term oven aging. GPEM-granite and PFC-granite short-term oven aged mixture posses highest failure strain, fracture energy and energy ratio, as compared with FC-5 granite. Same mixtures is showing highest drop, more than 50%, in energy ratio, failure strain and fracture energy ratio.

PAGE 156

APPENDIX A SAMPLE CALCULATION OF VOLUMETRICS FOR GPEM AND PFC MIXTURE Table A-1. Gradation for Georgia PEM-Granite Type #7 #789 Granite Granite Screens Lime JMF Control Points % Amount 55 37 7 1 100 Max Min Sive Size Size^0.45 37.5 5.11 100 100 100 100 100 25 4.26 100 100 100 100 100 19 3.76 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 12.5 3.12 82 100 100 100 90 100 80 9.5 2.75 28 99 100 100 60 60 35 4.75 2.02 2 39 99 100 23 25 10 2.36 1.47 2 6 69 100 9 10 5 1.18 1.08 2 2 46 100 6 0.6 0.79 1 1 30 100 4 0.3 0.58 1 1 17 100 3 0.15 0.43 0 1 7 100 2 0.075 0.31 0 0 1 100 1 4 1 Table A-2. Bulk Specific Gravity for Georgia PEM-Granite AC (%) Number Height (cm) Weight (gms) Bulk Specific Gravity Avg Bulk Specific Gravity 5.5 1 13.668 4659.3 1.930 1.936 2 13.618 4657.1 1.936 3 13.586 4658.3 1.941 6.0 1 13.539 4682.0 1.958 1.961 2 13.557 4683.0 1.956 3 13.468 4681.5 1.968 140

PAGE 157

141 Table A-2. continued AC (%) Number Height (cm) Weight (gms) Bulk Specific Gravity Avg Bulk Specific Gravity 6.5 1 13.583 4704.9 1.961 1.967 2 13.449 4701.8 1.979 3 13.598 4707.1 1.960 Table A-3. Rice Test for Georgia PEM-Granite % A/C 5.5 6 6.5 Wt. Flask+Sample 2876 2867.6 2884.5 2851.7 2892 2892.6 Wt Flask 1872.9 1872.9 1875.7 1844.8 1872.9 1872.9 Wt Sample (A) 1003.1 994.7 1008.8 1006.9 1019.1 1019.7 Wt Flask+Water(D) 6126 6126 6125 6117.6 6126.1 6075.6 Wt Flask+Water+Sample(E) 6719.5 6714.7 6715.8 6707.4 6720.6 6671.4 SSD(B) 1005.4 995.4 1009.2 1007.2 1022.2 1022.2 Multiplier 1.00061 1.00038 1.00095 1.00095 1.00084 1.00084 Gmm 2.437 2.447 2.413 2.415 2.385 2.393 Avg Gmm 2.442 2.414 2.389 % Agg 0.945 0.940 0.935 Gse 2.647 2.660 2.640 2.641 2.625 2.636 Avg Gse 2.641 Table A-4. Drain-down Test for Georgia PEM-Granite %AC: 6.0 Mix Type: GPEM Sample: A B Mi, (g) Weight of mix before 1-hr aging 1274.2 1275.3 Pf, (g) (weight of paper disc + asphalt after draindown) 10.4 10.3 Pi, (g) (Initial Wt. Of paper Disc) 10.3 10.2 D (%Draindown) 0.01 0.01

PAGE 158

142 Table A-4. continued %AC: 6.0 Mix Type: GPEM Davg (Avg) 0.01 Drain-down test: Passes X Fails Table A-5. Film Thickness for Georgia PEM-Granite Sieve Percent Surface Area Factor SurfaceArea Size Passing ft.2/lb. m2/Kg ft2/lb. m2/Kg 11/2 in.(37.5mm) 100 1 in. (25.0mm) 100 3/4 in. (19.0mm) 100 1/2 in. (12.5mm) 90 3/8 in .( 9.5mm ) 60 2.0 0.41 No. 4 (4.75mm) 23 2 0.41 0.5 0.10 No. 8 (2.36mm) 9 4 0.82 0.4 0.08 No.16 (1.18mm) 6 8 1.64 0.5 0.10 No.30 ( 600um ) 4 14 2.87 0.6 0.12 No.50 ( 300um ) 3 30 6.14 0.9 0.19 No.100 (150um ) 2 60 12.29 1.1 0.23 No.200 ( 75um ) 1 160 32.77 1.7 0.35 hrs Total Surface Area 7.6 1.57 AC % = 6.0

PAGE 159

143 Table A-5. continued Film Thickness = [ 453.6 g per Pounds divided by % Aggregate ] [ 453.6 g per Pounds ] Surface area in square ft / lb 0.0 9290Sq. m per sq. ft. Sp. gr. of AC Or = 453.6 divided by 0.94 Minus 453.6 28.953 divided by 0.731 Or = Film Thickness 39.6 Micron Coating

PAGE 160

144 Effective Sp Gravof Agg% ACGmmGmbVMAVTMVFA2.6415.52.4421.93630.7420.7232.6062.4141.96130.2318.7837.866.52.3891.96730.3817.6841.82Optimum AC6% Mixing Temperature330 F Mineral Fiber0.4% of Total Mix Compaction Temperature325 F VMA30.1030.2030.3030.4030.5030.6030.7030.805.45.65.866.26.46.6% ACVMA VTM17.0018.0019.0020.0021.005.45.65.866.26.46.6% ACVTM VFA30.0032.0034.0036.0038.0040.0042.0044.0055.566.57% ACVMA Figure A-1. Final Mix Design for Georgia PEM-Granite

PAGE 161

APPENDIX B MAIN PROGRAMMING CODE OF PERFOMANCE TEST DATABSE (P.T.D.)

PAGE 162

146

PAGE 163

147

PAGE 164

148

PAGE 165

149

PAGE 166

150

PAGE 167

151

PAGE 168

152

PAGE 169

APPENDIX C EFFECTIVE ASPHALT CONTENT CALCULATION FOR FILM THICKNESS DETERMINATION C-1 Water Absorption and Effective Asphalt Calculation 153

PAGE 170

154 Table C-1. Core-Lok Results calculation for Efffective asphalt content A BCDEFGHIJBag Weight (g ) Dry Sample Weight before Sealing (g ) Sealed Sample Weight in Water (g ) Dry Sample Weight After Water SubmerdioRatio B/ A Bag Volume Correction From TableTotal V olume (A + D) CVolume of Sample A /FVolume of Sample ( G-H ) Bulk Specific Gravity B/II50.74700.32328.8470092.710.7062421.971.8132350.0872.0001II50.74700.72312.54700.792.720.7062438.971.8132367.0871.9859Sam-ple ID Gmb2.00011.985 9 2 Gmb1.993 Table C-2. Minimum Film Thickness Effective Asphalt content Asphalt Absorption (%) Effective asphalt (ml) Film thickness (microns) 4.36 0.5 191.84 32.30 3.86 1 169.84 28.59 3.36 1.5 147.84 24.89 2.86 2 125.84 21.19 1.86 3 81.84 13.78 0.86 4 37.84 6.37

PAGE 171

APPENDIX D GEOMERTIC DETAILS OF FRACTURE TEST SPECIMEN AND MOLDS FOR ASPHALT MASTIC

PAGE 172

156 Figure D-1. Showing 3-D view of mold designed for preparing specimen for Asphalt Mastic

PAGE 173

157 Figure D-2. Base plate 3-D wire view showing position of groves and notch

PAGE 174

158 Figure D-3. Base plate geometry

PAGE 175

159 Figure D-4. Notch plate 3-D wire view.

PAGE 176

160 Figure D-5 Notch plate geometry

PAGE 177

APPENDIX E VOLUMETRIC PROPERTIES OF MIXTURES

PAGE 178

Table E-1. Volumetric Properties of all the Mixtures Volumetric Properties Denotation GPEM-Granite GPEM-Limestone I-295 PFC Granite Gradation (1) I-295 PFC Granite Gradation (2) FC-5 Granite FC-5 Limestone Bulk specific Gravity Gsb 2.626 2.442 2.729 2.716 2.623 2.444 Maximum Specific Gravity Gmm 2.414 2.298 2.485 2.491 2.441 2.336 Specific Gravity of Asphalt Gb 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 Total Asphalt Pb (%) 6.00 6.50 6.00 5.90 6.00 6.40 Effective Specific Gravity Gse 2.640 2.513 2.731 2.734 2.675 2.558 Asphalt Absorption Pab (%) 0.215 1.193 0.031 0.252 0.762 1.874 Effective Asphalt Content Peff (%) 5.785 5.307 5.969 5.648 5.238 4.526 Bulk Specific Gravity of Compacted Gravit y (Dimensional Analysis) Gmb 1.961 1.927 1.957 1.945 1.916 1.923 Voids in Mineral Aggregates VMA 30.23 28.3 32.69 32.76 32.67 29.64 Voids filled with Asphalt VFA 3.86 42.89 34.94 33.05 34.17 40.34 Voids in Total Mix VTM 18.78 16.16 21.27 21.93 21.51 17.68 Bulk Specific Gravity of Compacted Gravity (CoreLok) Gmb 1.992 162

PAGE 179

163 Table E-1. Continued. Volumetric Properties Denotation GPEMGranite GPEMLimestone I-295 PFC Granite Gradation (1) I-295 PFC Granite Gradation (2) FC-5 Granite FC-5 Limestone Water Absorption Wab (%) 3.38 Film Thickness (GDOT's method) (Microns) 38.08 34.76 27.12 25.77 19.96 24.12 Effective Film Thickness (Nukunya, 2001) (Microns) 54.58 50.07 33.12 31.65 23.95 32.19 Theoretical Film Thickness (Hveem, 1991) (Microns) 36.94 33.89 26.26 25.03 19.48 23.71

PAGE 180

APPENDIX F JOB MIX FORMULA Table F-1. Composition of Job Mix Formula of FC-5 Limestone Blend 45 48 7 JMF N umber of StockPiles S1A S1B Scrns 3/4" 19.0mm 100 100 100 100.0 1/2" 12.5mm 79 100 100 90.6 3/8" 9.5mm 36 92 100 67.4 N o. 4 4.75mm 7 26 100 22.6 N o. 8 2.36mm 3 7 68 9.5 N o. 16 1.18mm 3 3 67 7.5 N o. 30 600m 3 3 55 6.6 N o. 50 300m 3 2 35 4.8 N o. 100 150m 2 2 14 2.8 S I E V E S I Z E N o. 200 75m 1 1 3 1.1 Specific Gravity 2.4252 2.4509 2.527 2.444 Table F-2. Composition of Job Mix Formula of FC-5 Granite Blend 77 12 10 1 JMF N umber of Stockpiles #7 #789 Granite Granite Screens Lime 3/4" 19.0mm 100 100 100 100 100.0 1/2" 12.5mm 95 100 100 100 96.2 3/8" 9.5mm 64 92 100 100 71.3 N o. 4 4.75mm 11 20 97 100 21.6 N o. 8 2.36mm 3 5 68 100 10.7 N o. 16 1.18mm 2 3 43 100 7.2 N o. 30 600m 2 3 28 100 5.7 N o. 50 300m 2 3 18 100 4.7 N o. 100 150m 2 3 11 100 4.0 S I E V E S I Z E N o. 200 75m 1.1 2.5 8 100 2.9 Specific Gravity 2.627 2.633 2.58 2.69 2.624 164

PAGE 181

LIST OF REFERENCES Cooley, L. A., B.D. Prowell, M. R. Hainin, M. S. Buchanan, J. Harrington. Bulk Specific gravity Round-Robin using the Corelok Vacuum Sealing Device, National center of Asphalt Technology, NCAT Report 02-11, November 2002. Georgia Department of Transportation. Sample Testing and Inspection. http://tomcat2.dot.state.ga.us/thesource/sti/index.html GDT Table of Contents, October 27, 2004. Goode, J.F., L.A. Lufsey. Voids, Permeability, Film Thickness VS. Asphalt Hardening. Proceedings of AAPT, Vol. 35, pp 420-463, 1965. InstroTek. CoreLok Manual. http://www.instrotek.com/download.htm Raleigh, NC 27617 USA, November 10, 2003. Kandhal, P. S., R. B. Mallick. Open Graded Asphalt Friction Course: State of The Practice, NCAT Report No. 98-7, May 1998. Method of Test for Determining Optimum Asphalt Content for Open-Graded Bituminous Paving Mixtures. Georgia Department of Transportation, GDT-114, June 1989, Revised May 28, 1996. Mindess, S., S. Diamond. A Preliminary SEM Study of Crack Propagation in Mortar. In Journal of the Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 10,pp 509-519,April 21 1980. Nukanya, B., R. Roque, M. Tia, B. Birgisson. Evaluation of VMA and other Volumetric Properties as Criteria for the Design and Acceptance of Superpave Mixtures. Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 70, pp 38-69, 2001. Roque, R., W.G. Butlar. Development and Evaluation of the Strategic Highway Research Program Measurement and Analysis System for Indirect Tensile Testing at Low temperatures. Transportation Research Record 1454, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1994. Roque, R., Z. Zhang, B. Shankar. Determination of Crack Growth Rate Parameters using the Superpave IDT. Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol.68, 1999. Subramanian, K. N., P.F. Becher, C.C. Wu. Paper presented at the 80th Annual Meeting of the American Ceramic Society, Detroit, May 1978. 165

PAGE 182

166 Vardhan A. Evaluation of Open-Graded And Bonded Friction Course For Florida, Masters Thesis, University of Florida, August 2004. Vavrik, W.R., S.H. Carpenter. Calculating Air Voids at Specified Number of Gyrations in Superpave Gyratory Compactor. In Transportation Research Record 1630, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998. Watson, D., A. Johnson, D. Jared. Georgia Department of Transportations Progress in Open Graded Friction Course Development. Transportation Research Record 1616,TRB, National research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998.

PAGE 183

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Lokendra Jaiswal was born on August 27, 1981, in the city of Indore, India. He received his Diploma in Civil Engineering from Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education, Nagpur, India, May 1999. He received his bachelors degree in civil engineering from University of Pune, Pune, in May 2002. After his undergraduate studies, He came to the University of Florida to pursue a Master of Engineering degree. He plans to work in a Structural engineering consultancy firm in Florida after he graduates with his M.E. degree. 167


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0011900/00001

Material Information

Title: Development and Evaluation of Permeable Friction Course Mix Design for Florida Conditions
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0011900:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0011900/00001

Material Information

Title: Development and Evaluation of Permeable Friction Course Mix Design for Florida Conditions
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0011900:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text












DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF PERMEABLE FRICTION COURSE MIX
DESIGN FOR FLORIDA CONDITIONS

















By

LOKENDRA JAISWAL


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2005

































Copyright 2005

by

Lokendra Jaiswal

































This document is dedicated to my parents.















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to specially thank Dr. Bjorn Birgisson and Dr. Reynaldo Roque for their

guidance and understanding throughout the project. I believe that their technical

knowledge and personal advice helped me to achieve this milestone in my life and career.

I really appreciate advice I received from Georg Lopp throughout my research

work and for making thing work in laboratory.

Thanks go to Dr. Christos Drakos, Georg Lopp and Greg Sholar for reviewing

Performance Test Database (P.T.D.) software and making helpful suggestions, and also

to the anonymous referees for many insightful comments.

I would like to thank Alvaro and Tung for their assistance in performing various

laboratory tests. I would like to thank Greg Sholar and Howie Mosely from the FDOT

research wing for their help during the course of the project.

Thanks go to Jaeseung, Sungho and Jianlin for there suggestion in finite element

analysis.

I would like to thank all my friends for providing an unforgettable and enjoyable

time during my two years of study in Gainesville. Finally, I would like to thank my

parents and my aunt and uncle for all the love and support they have given me throughout

my academic years.
















TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ................................................................................................. iv

L IST O F T A B L E S ........................................................................... ........... ix

LIST OF FIGURES ......... ........................................... ............ xi

A B S T R A C T .........x.................................... ....................... ................. xv

CHAPTER

1 IN TR OD U CTION .............................. ...... .. .... .. ......... ................

1.1 B ack g rou n d .................................................................................. 1
1 .2 O b je ctiv e s ................................................... ................ .. 2
1.3 Scope ................. ................ ................................. .........2
1.4 R research A approach ......................................................... ................ ..... 3

2 DEVELOPMENT OF MIX DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR POROUS
FR IC T IO N C O U R SE .............................................................. ....................... 5

2.1 Initial Study and O bjectives................................................... ................. ..5
2.2 Georgia PEM Mixture Design as per GDT 114 Test Method: B (1996).....6
2.3 Overview of Evaluation of Preliminary OGFC/PFC Mix design
Procedure Developed by Vardhan (2004)......................... .....................9
2.3.1 Determination of Compaction level for PFC..............................9
2.3.2 OGFC/PFC Mixture Design Procedure Proposed By Varadhan
(2004) .................. ......... ....... ........ .........12
2.3.3 Long-Term Oven Aging Procedure Proposed for PFC Mixture
by V aradhan (2004) ......................... .......... .... ................ ... 14
2.4 Verification of Florida Permeable Friction Course Mixture Design .........15
2 .4 .1 M materials ............................................. ................ 15
Aggregate and gradation selection.............................. .. .....15
B inder and m ineral fiber ......................................... .................... 16
2.4.2 Sample Preparation for Determination of Optimum Asphalt
C ontent ............... ...... ....... ........ ... ......... .... ... .. ........ 17
2.4.4 Mixing and Compaction of Samples for Determination of Bulk
Specific c G gravity ........................................................ .. ... 18
2.4.4 Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content.............................20









2.5 Evaluation of Film Thickness Criterion in PFC Design............................24
2.5.1 Review of Asphalt Film Thickness Calculation Methods .............27
2.5.2 Comparison of Results Obtained from Each Film Thickness
C alculation M ethod ............. .... ......... ........................................34
2.5.3 Relative Minimum Film Thickness Requirement........................36
2.6 Recommended Specification for PFC Mixture Design ...........................39
2.7 Conclusion of Verification of PFC mixture Design Procedure .................44

3 EVALUATION OF 1-295 PFC MIX DESIGN............................................. 45

3 .1 O bj e ctiv e ............ .. ............. ......... .... .......... ................ 4 5
3.2 Scope of Project ......... .. ...................................... ..... .... .. ........ .... 45
3.3 M materials used for 1-295 PFC project................................ ... ..................46
3.3.1 Aggregate and Hydrated Lime................................................. 46
3.3.2 Binder and M ineral Fiber................................... ............... 46
3.4 L location of Project...................... .. ............................. ... .......... ..... 48
3.5 Specification and Hypothesis U sed ................................. ............... 49
3.6 Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content........................................50
3.6.1 M ixing and Com action ..................................... ............... ..51
3.6.2 A sphalt Film Thickness ...................................... ............... 55
3.7 Superpave IDT Performance Test Results................................................55
3.7.1 Superpave Indirect Test Results and Analysis.............................. 57
3.8 Analysis of Fracture Result Based on Interstitial Volume and
Aggregate Interaction.................... ..........................60
3.8.1 Determination of Porosity and Interstitial Volume.....................61
3.8.2 Analysis and Conclusion............................. ................ ..............63
3.9 Verification of Locking Point of Selected Gradation for 1-295 PFC
P roje ct ................. ........... ......... .. .. ............................. ............. 6 5
3.10 Summary and Conclusion .................... .. .................. ............... 65

4 A PROPOSED NEW FRACTURE TEST FOR ASPHALT MASTIC.................67

4 .1 P u rp o se an d N eed ........................................................... ....................67
4.2 Background ............... ............................. .. .................. .............. 67
4.3 Specim en and Test D evice D esign .................................................... .... 68
4.4 Formulation of Tensile Force Transfer from Wedge to Specimen............71
4.5 Verification of Stress States within Loaded Specimen..............................74
4.6 Sample Preparation Guidelines...................... ..... ....................78
4.7 Recommendation for Further Development ...........................................81

5 PERFORMANCE TEST DATABASE (PTD)........................... .....................82

5 .1 P re fa c e ..................................................... ................ 8 2
5.1.1 Package Inform ation ........................................... ............... 82
5.1.2 System Requirements.............. ........ ...............83
5.1.3 Supported Output Format Requirement ............... .....................83
5.2 Program O verview ........................ .. ............ ................... ............... 84









5.2.1 Database Storage Outline................... ............... 86
5.2.2 Software Coding Architecture and Program Flow ......................87
5.3 Installation.................................... ........................................ 88
5.4 U ser's M annual ................................................................ .. ....... ..... 89
5.4.1 Interaction to All Interfaces of Database ................. ................89
5.4.2 B utton Function ........................................ ......... ............... 90
5.4.3 D ata Entry ......... ................................. ......... ...91
5.4.4 Navigation through Input Templates and Database.......................97
5.4.5 D ata transfer to D atabase............... ..............................................97
5.4.7 R report G eneration.................................... ........................ 102
5.4.8 Repair and R em ove Program ...................................................... 103
5.5 Sum m aries and Recom m endation...........................................................103

6 MOISTURE CONDITIONING ON 1-295 PFC PROJECT .............................105

6 .1 O bj ectiv e ............................................................................ 10 5
6 .2 S co p e ......................................................... ......................... 10 5
6.3 Materials and Methodology ............................................................106
6.3.1 Aggregate and H ydrated Lim e....................................................106
6.3.2 Binder and M ineral Fiber.................................. ............... 106
6.4 Specim en Preparation and Testing....................................................... 107
6.4.1 Mixing and Determination of Asphalt Content .........................108
6.4.2 V olum etric Properties .............. ......... ...................................109
6.4.3 Moisture Conditioning and Testing ............................................109
6.5 Fracture Test on M oisture condition.................................... ............... 112
6.5.1 Findings and Analysis..... .......... ....................................... 113
6.6 Sum m ary and Conclusion .............................................. .................. 117

7 SUPERPAVE IDT FRACTURE TEST RESULTS ............ ...............118

7 .1 M materials .............. .... .................. ...................... ............... 1 18
7.1.1 Aggregate and Hydrated Lime...............................................118
7.1.2 B inder and M ineral Fiber............................................................119
7.2 Test M ethod .................. .......................... .. .... .. .. .......... .... 120
7.2.1 Sample Preparation .......... ................................. ..............120
7.2.2 Testing Equipm ent................. .............................................. 121
7.2.3 Specimen Preparation and Testing Procedure ...........................123
7.2.4 Test Procedures and Analysis of Test Results.............................124
7.2.5 Results of Fracture Testing on PFC Mixtures..............................131
7.3 Summary and Conclusion .............................................. .................. 139

APPENDIX

A SAMPLE CALCULATION OF VOLUMETRICS FOR GPEM AND PFC
M IX T U R E ....................................................... .............. 14 0









B MAIN PROGRAMMING CODE OF PERFORMANCE TEST DATABASE
(P .T .D .) ........................................................................ 1 4 5

C EFFECTIVE ASPHALT CONTENT CALCULATION FOR FILM
THICKNESS DETERM INATION ........................................ ............... 153

D GEOMERTIC DETAILS OF FRACTURE TEST SPECIMEN AND MOLDS
FOR ASPHALT M ASTIC.......................... ....................................... ... 155

E VOLUMETRIC PROPERTIES OF MIXTURES ............................................161

F JO B M IX F O R M U L A ......... ................. .........................................................164

LIST O F R EFEREN CE S ... .... ............................................................ ............... 165

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...... ........ .. ................. .... ....................... 167
















LIST OF TABLES


Table Page

2-1 Gradation specifications according to GDT 114 (1996).........................................7

2-2 Locking Point Based on Gradient of Slope (Varadhan, 2004)..............................11

2-3 Locking Points of all Mixtures based on Gradient of Slope (Varadhan, 2004)....... 11

2-4 Composition of GPEM-Limestone gradation JMF ..............................................16

2-5 Composition of GPEM-Granite gradation JMF ............................ ............... 16

2 -6 M material qu entities ............................................................................... .. 2 0

2-7 Surface Area Factor Hveem (1991) .............................................. ............... 28

2-8 Surface area Factor suggested by Nukunya (2001) for coarse aggregate structure .29

2-9 Surface area factors for Interstitial Volume ............... ........................................31

2-10 C oreL ok calculation Sheet ............................................... ............................ 33

2-11 Comparison of Film Thickness method for Limestone mixture ............................35

2-12 Comparison of Film Thickness method for Granite mixture ................................ 35

2-13 JMF of Optimum gradation for Gradation limits as per GDT 114 (1996) ..............38

2-14 Minimum film thickness requirements for different set of Asphalt absorption.......39

2-15 Proposed Gradation and Design specifications for Florida Permeable....................40

2-16 Surface area factor as per Nukunya et al (2001) ............ ....................................43

2-17 Minimum Effective Film Thickness Requirements ...........................................43

3-1 JM F com position of Gradation (1)..................................... .......................... 47

3-2 JM F com position of G radiation (2) ................................................ .....................47

3-3 PFC Gradation Design Range from FDOT specification SECTION 337................49









3-4 Summary of Indirect Tensile Test performed on 1-295 PFC mixtures ....................58

3-5 Su rface area factors ......................................................................... ................... 63

3-6 Porosity for all the dominant aggregate size ranges (DASR) ................................64

3-7 Interstitial V olum e for different JM Fs ........................................ .....................64

3-8 Locking Point Based on Gradient of Slope..........................................................65

4-1 Part of fine aggregates to be mixed with total asphalt content (6%) of 1-295 PFC
p ro je ct ...................................... ................................................... 7 9

5-1 Buttons and there corresponding function .................................... ............... 91

6-1 Gradation of 1-295 PFC Project ................................ ......... ............... .. 106

6-2 Summary of fracture test on moisture condition sample compared with
unconditioned sam ple............ ... ...................................................... .. .... .. .. .... 115

7-1 Summary of Fracture Test results on Short-Term and Long-Term Oven Aged
Mixtures of Georgia PEM, PFC Project and OGFC Mixture .............................134

A-i Gradation for Georgia PEM-Granite............... ....................................140

A-2 Bulk Specific Gravity for Georgia PEM-Granite........................ ............... 140

A-3 Rice Test for Georgia PEM-Granite............................................. ...............141

A-4 Drain-down Test for Georgia PEM -Granite........................................................ 141

A-5 Film Thickness for Georgia PEM-Granite............ ................................142

C-1 Core-Lok Results calculation for Efffective asphalt content ..............................154

C-2 M inim um Film Thickness ............................................. ............................. 154

E-l Volumetric Properties of all the Mixtures..........................................................162

F-l Composition of Job Mix Formula of FC-5 Limestone ................ ................164

F-2 Composition of Job Mix Formula of FC-5 Granite ................................................164
















LIST OF FIGURES


Figure Page

1-1 Flow chart showing Research Approach implemented .......................................4

2-1 Gradation Band with in GDT 114 (1996) specified gradation limits used by
V aradhan (2004) ..................................................................... 13

2-2 Georgia's Permeable European Mixture gradation band.................................17

2-3 Example of determination of inconsistent optimum asphalt content...................18

2-4 Mix Design of OGFC with aggregate type: Limestone...........................22

2-5 Mix Design of OGFC with aggregate type: Granite.........................................23

2-6 Aggregate Structure for Coarse and Fine Mixtures (Nukunya et al. [2001]) ........25

2-7 (a) Granite with high film (Required against stripping) (b) Limestone with low
film thickness as compared with granite due to absorption................................34

2-8 Optimum Gradation Band for Calculating Minimum film thickness
require ent ........................................................................ 38

2-9 Proposed Gradation limits for Florida Permeable Friction Course Mixtures........41

3-1 Gradation of 1-295 PFC mixtures ........................................................ ....... 47

3-2 Project L location ............ ... ... ..... ................................... 48

3-3 Mix Design of PFC Gradation (1) with aggregate type: Granite ...................53

3-4 Mix Design of PFC Gradation (2) with aggregate type: Granite ...................54

3-5 A)Energy Ratio, B) Failure Energy, C) Failure Strain, D) DCSE, E) Creep
Compliance, F) Resilient Modulus, G) Strain Rate, H) Tensile Strength I)
C re ep R ate ..................................................... ................ 5 9

3-6 Curve showing interaction between contiguous aggregate sizes.........................61

4-1 Model showing Specimen along with bearings fitted on steel rods and wedge
in loading direction. ....................................... ............... .... ....... 68









4-2 Plan view showing geometry of specimen......................................................69

4-3 Front view showing geometry of specimen..................................... .................70

4-4 Testing Device used by Mindess & Diamond (1980) for SEM testing on
cem ent m ortar .......................................................................7 1

4-5 Static analysis of force transfer from Wedge to Steel rods (Wedge angle =
2 x 0 ) .............................................................................. 7 3

4-6 Specimen 2-D Model subdivided in to 15 surfaces ............................................75

4-7 Meshing of 15 sub surface with critical model line divided into 175 elements. ...76

4-8 Deflection of Specimen's 2-D Model subdivided. ..............................................76

4-9 Stress distributions along centerline of specimen Tensile stress is shown as
positive e ..............................................................................77

4-10 Stress distribution along circumference of steel pin................ ....... ...........78

4-11 Mold for preparing specimen for Fracture and SEM testing .................................80

4-12 Geometry of main base plate to which side plates are attached ............................80

5-1 Flow chart showing extraction and input sequence of Indirect Tensile Test
D ata ..............................................................................................8 5

5-2 Flow chart showing data input of Complex Modulus test ....................................88

5-3 Installation Screen ............ ........................................................................ .... 89

5-4 M ain Interaction Tem plate.......................................................... ............... 90

5-5 Input tem plate option s......................................... .............................................92

5-6 M S-DOS Base text file input template ...................................... ............... 93

5-7 Input dialog box ....................................... ................ .. ........ .... 94

5-8 Save changes dialog box .............................................. .............................. 95

5-9 Decision Box for clipboard changes. ............................... ............................... 95

5-10 A applied tensile stress input box .................................... ........................... ........ 96

5-11 D database M ain M enu ..........................................................................97

5-12 D database Input M ask............................................................................. ........ 98









5-13 (a) Correct state of input tables for data entry .....................................................98

5-13 (b) Incorrect state of input tables for data entry..............................................98

5-13 (c) Right click projected arrow for opening paste option ...............................99

5-13 (d) Dialog box: After selecting paste option. Opt 'Yes'.................................99

5-14 Search dialog box 'Select type of search' ....................................... ...............100

5-15 Search form ...................... ........ ................................ .......... 101

5-16 Search R result Form ........................................................................ .. 101

5-17 Report delivery option ......................... .................. ................. ............... 102

5-18 Em ail Report ............. .................. .. ....................... ......... 103

6-1 Plot of 1-295 PFC mixture's gradation .............. ......................................... 107

6-2 Mix Design of 1-295 PFC-Granite mixture......... ......................................111

6-3 Compacted pill rolled in 1/8" inch sample placed in vacuum chamber ............112

6-4 Vacuum Saturation of sample prior to moisture conditioning..........................112

6-5 Affect of conditioning over stone to stone contact of PFC mixtures ................114

6-6 Comparison of Fracture Test results A) Energy ratio, B) Fracture energy, C)
Tensile strength, D) Failure strain, E) DCSE, F) Creep compliance, G)
Resilient modulus, H) Strain rate, I)Creep rate.................................................. 116

7-1 Gradation Band of Georgia PEM and 1-295 PFC Project...............................119

7-2 ID T testing device .................. ............................. .. ...... .. ........ .... 122

7-3 Tem perature controlled cham ber ................................... ................................... 122

7-4 Typical Dense-Graded specimen with extensometers attached ...........................123

7-5 D ehum idifying cham ber ............................................ .............................. 124

7-6 Power M odel for Creep Compliance ....................................... ............... 129

7-7 FE and D CSE from Strength Test.................................... ........................ 131

7 -8 E n ergy R atio ...................................................................... 13 5

7-9 Fracture Energy.............................. ......... ..... .... ... .............. 135









7-10 Failure Strain ......... .. ..................................................................................136

7 1 1 D C S E .............................................................................1 3 6

7-12 Resilient M odulus ..................................... ........ .. ................. 137

7-13 C reep C om pliance.......... .............................................................. .. .... .. .... .. 137

7-14 Strain R ate......................................................138

7-15 Power Model Parameter (D) .......... ............... ........................... 138

7-16 Power M odel Param eter (m) ............................................ ........................ .139

A-1 Final Mix Design for Georgia PEM-Granite ................................................144

D-1 Showing 3-D view of mold designed for preparing specimen for Asphalt
M astic ...................................... ...................................................156

D-2 Base plate 3-D wire view showing position of groves and notch........................157

D -3 B ase plate geom etry .......................................................................... 158

D -4 N otch plate 3-D w ire view .............................................................. ............... 159















Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Engineering

DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF PERMEABLE FRICTION COURSE MIX
DESIGN FOR FLORIDA CONDITIONS

By

Lokendra Jaiswal

August 2005

Chair: Bjorn Birgisson
Cochair: Reynaldo Ray
Major Department: Civil and Coastal Engineering

A mix design procedure for 'Permeable Friction Course' that provides guidance on

material properties, aggregate gradation, determination of optimum asphalt content, and

mixture properties is needed for Florida conditions. This project involves 1) development

of permeable friction course mix design procedure for Florida conditions, 2) evaluation

of permeable friction course of 1-295 project, 3) development of data extraction, analysis

and database software for material properties, indirect tensile test results, and complex

modulus test results, and 4) development of fracture test on sand asphalt for SEM

analysis and tensile strength. In the course of study an extensive literature review was

done on various mix design approach, material characteristics, and laboratory process

guideline.

Sample preparation and testing are carried in the laboratory for granite and

limestone aggregate permeable friction course for determination of optimum asphalt

content, moisture conditioning and long-term oven aging. An indirect tensile test is done









on specimen with optimum asphalt content to evaluate performance of mixture. Film

thickness, an important criterion for permeable friction course for ensuring resistance

against stripping and asphalt hardening, is developed, based on the different absorption

capacity of aggregate. This proposed mix design procedure was used to design PFC

mixture for the 1-295 project. Performance test database (PTD.exe) as data analysis and

data storage software was developed using visual basic as the programming language.

This software was used throughout the project for analyzing the test results and storing in

database for future reference. Based on analysis of fracture test results of the 1-295 PFC

project, essentiality of fracture test on sand asphalt came up. A framework of fracture test

on sand asphalt which can be conducted within SEM chamber is done. Observation of

fracture test results of moisture conditioned sample of 1-295 PFC mixture showed that

coarse stone to stone contact is affected due to conditioning. Creep response of mixture

remains approximately same after conditioning as compared with unconditioned sample.

Finally, specifications and mix design procedure for PFC mixture are

recommended and recommendations for further development of sand-asphalt fracture test

are provided. Fracture test results FC-5 granite and FC-5 limestone samples, both aged

and unaged, are compared with mixture designed for GPEM development and 1-295 PFC

project.














CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Porous Friction Course (PFC) improves the frictional resistance of pavements,

along with the drainage of water, for reducing the potential of aquaplaning. In the 1990's

the traditional FC-2 friction course developed by Florida was replaced by coarser open

graded friction course (FC-5) which is 1/-inch Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size

(NMAS), placed approximately 34-inch thick. Even though the FC-5 had coarser

aggregate structure and additional water storage capacity as compared to the old FC-2,

water ponding on pavement surfaces continued to be a problem. Many states in US

developed porous friction courses to over come such problems.

The Georgia DOT developed their porous friction course design by utilizing a gap-

grading aggregate and lowering the percentage of filler, following European PFC mixture

designs. The combination of gap grading, low filler, and high asphalt content lead to the

draining of asphalt binder from mixture during transportation and lay down procedure.

Due to this problem, the Georgia DOT introduced mineral fibers in Georgia PEM

mixtures.

This research project is focused to develop and evaluate the Georgia PEM (GPEM)

mix design procedure for Florida conditions, and updating the GPEM mix design by

introducing Superpave gyratory compaction. Also, in the course of this project two other

important developments are accomplished. First, a Performance Test Database (PTD)

was developed to facilitate data analysis and data storage of mixture design and









performance test results. The second achievement is the preliminary design of a new

fracture test for asphalt mastic.

1.2 Objectives

The primary objectives of the research are summarized below:

* Open Graded friction course because of their macro texture and air voids may not
have enough water storage capacity for some applications, and may also be
susceptible to stripping. The rate of susceptibility depends on climatic conditions.
Therefore the development and evaluation of mix design procedure for Porous
Friction Course (PFC) for Florida Climatic Condition is main objective of this
research project.

* Mix design for a test strip on 1-295, containing a Porous Friction Course (PFC)
mixture design developed in this research project.

* Developing data analysis and database software, to store data from Fracture Test
and Complex Modulus Test.

* Developing basics framework of fracture test for asphalt mastic.

1.3 Scope

Mix design for 1-295 highway (PFC project) provides an excellent opportunity to

use and implement mix design procedure developed for GPEM. Database developed for

data analysis and data storage is an excellent tool for referring previous mixture

properties and their performance, while selecting gradation and doing mix design

.Fracture test done on various field and lab prepared mixes enlightens many factors

affecting the fracture resistance of mixtures. These factors are discussed individually in

this thesis. It is always assumed that coarse aggregate are mainly responsible for

contribution towards fracture resistance. Steps taken to develop fracture test on sand

asphalt provides view on the contribution of fines and binder towards fracture resistance.









1.4 Research Approach

A detailed literature review was performed previously by Varadhan (2004) to

understand Georgia's mix design procedure. Figure 1-1 shows a flow chart of the

approach adopted for this research. The Georgia DOT used Marshall's blow for mix

design of PFC. This research introduced the Superpave Gyratory Compactor. Therefore, a

primary objective was to determine number of gyration required to attain compaction

level same as field compaction. Second step was to determine film thickness

corresponding to this compaction level. Different methods of determining film thickness

are carried out and then most optimize method is selected for mix design procedure.

Superpave Indirect tensile test were carried out on Short Term Oven Aged (STOA) and

Long Term Oven Aged (LTOA) mixtures for determination of facture resistance.

Simultaneously, analysis and database software was developed in order to analyze and

store data from this project. Once the mix design procedure was finalized a section of I-

295 highway is designed based on this mix design method. Two trial gradations (JMF)

were selected with in control points and mix design was carried on both of these

gradations to determine optimum asphalt content. Final selection of gradation was done

based strength and energy ratio criteria. Fracture testing was carried on all STOA and

LTOA samples from US highways- 27 and 1-295 PFC project. In the course of the project

necessity of sand asphalt's fracture resistance lead to develop new fracture test.








4



Research Approach





work done and finalizing objectives to
be achieved.


1-295 PFC prjct ad G C sap
1-295 PFC project and G3PFC samples


1-1. Flow chart showing


of Performance Test


S Data Extraction and Analysis


Analyzed data stored in database
------- ------ -- --------- -




Data


references


- d + ,-


- - !e erenCe 0 aLta ase
during Mix design
Data input



Development of
fracture test on asphalt





-ch Approach implemented


Development and evaluation of mix design procedure of
GPEM for Florida Condition.
---------------------------------------
Detennination of Compaction Level


----------------- --------------
.::::..:::::::::::::I:::::::::::::::::::
Development Thickness Criterion


Determination of aging of Fracture Test
-- - - - - :


Mix Design of Porous Friction Course (1-295 PFC based
performance test
r ------------------------------------
Selection of two trail gradation


I Mix Design


SIndirect T Test
... ... .. ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. .. ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ...


I














CHAPTER 2
DEVELOPMENT OF MIX DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR POROUS FRICTION
COURSE

2.1 Initial Study and Objectives

The Georgia Department of Transportation started evaluation of Porous European

Mix (PEM), a form of Porous Friction Course Mixture, in 1992 for development a mix

design for Porous Friction Course (PFC), which is entitled for Georgia Permeable

European Mixture. Georgia PEM mixtures proved to be more permeable than

conventional OGFC, due to its gap-graded characteristics, with a predominant single size

coarse aggregate fraction that contains high percentage of air voids as specified by

Watson et al. (1998). The Georgia PEM mix design (GDT 114, 1996) was used as a

starting point for the new Florida Permeable Friction Course (PFC) mixture design. In

the following, the GPEM mixture design developed by the Georgia DOT will be

reviewed briefly, followed by the development of a new Florida PFC mixture design,

which is based on the GPEM mixture design.

Main objective of the 'Permeable Friction Course Design' is to design a highly

permeable mixture with good durability characteristics, while also providing sufficient

mixture stability through coarse stone to stone contact. In order to enhance durability, it is

desirable to have a high asphalt content, while preventing the drain down of binder, thus

providing sufficient binder film thickness. Once the coarse aggregate contact structure is

chosen, the design asphalt content is obtained by selecting four (4) trial mixtures of

varying asphalt contents, and choosing the asphalt content that results in a minimum









VMA. This is done to ensure reasonably high asphalt content. Importantly, it is

necessary to use four trial asphalt contents, rather than three. Choosing only three asphalt

contents will always result in one of the chosen asphalt contents to show a minimum,

whereas choosing four asphalt contents will result in a true minimum that can be verified.

The objectives of this chapter is to develop a Porous Friction Course (PFC) mixture

design for Florida conditions and materials using the Superpave gyratory compactor, and

to evaluate the new PFC mixture design using two mixtures that contain aggregates and

asphalt that are typical to Florida. The Georgia PEM mixture design is used as a starting

point for the development of the Florida PFC mixture design.

2.2 Georgia PEM Mixture Design as per GDT 114 Test Method: B (1996)

In the following the Georgia DOT GPEM mixture design will be reviewed and used as a

starting point for the Florida PFC mixture design approach. The first and foremost

change was the introduction of the Superpave gyratory compaction into the mixture

design in lieu of the Marshall compaction used by Georgia DOT. The main elements of

the Georgia PEM mixture design are as follows:

* Georgia DOT GPEM mixture design method (GDT-114 Test Method: B, 1996)
specifies the use of modified asphalt cement (PG 76-22) as specified in Section 820
(GDT 114,1996) and does not require the determination of surface capacity (KC) to
determine initial trial asphalt contents.

* The Georgia DOT uses the Marshall Method of compaction during the design of
the Georgia PEM mixtures.

* A stabilizing fiber is added to mixture for avoiding binder drain down, which meets
the requirement of Section 819 (GDT 114, 1996).

In the following, the steps in the Georgia PEM mixture design (GDT-114 Test

Method: B, 1996) are listed. Table 2-1 shows gradation limits as GDT 114 (1996).

A. SCOPE OF GPEM MIXTURE DESIGN









The Georgia DOT method of design for a modified open graded bituminous GPEM

mixture consists of four steps. The first is to conduct a modified Marshall mix design

(AASHTO T-245) to determine asphalt cement content. The second step is to determine

optimum asphalt content. The third step is to perform a drain down test, according to

GDT-127 (2005), or AASHTO T 305-97 (2001). The final step is to perform a boil test,

according to GDT-56, or ASTM D 3625. Table 2-1 gives gradation limits and design

requirement for Open Graded Friction Course (For 9.5 mm and 12.5 mm Gradation) and

Permeable European Mixture (12.5 mm Gradation). Gradation limits specified for 12.5

GPEM are used as design limits for development of PFC mix design for Florida Design.

There are no mixture design guidelines currently available for the determination of trial

gradations within the specification limit. Rather, the mixture designer has to use his own

judgment to determine a trial gradation within the limits provided.

Table 2-1. Gradation specifications according to GDT 114 (1996)


Mixture
Control 12.5 mm
Tolerance Asphalt Concrete PEM
Grading Requirements
S0.0 3/4 in (19 mm) sieve 100
S6.1 1/2 in (12.5 mm) sieve 80-100
+ 5.6 3/8 in (9.5 mm) sieve 35-60
+5.7 No. 4 (4.75 mm) sieve 10-25
+4.6 No.8 (2.36 mm) sieve 5 10
+2.0 No. 200 (75 tm) sieve 1-4
Design Requirement
+0.4 Range for % AC 5.5-7.0
Class of stone (Section 800) "A" only
Coating retention (GDT-56) 95
Drain-down, AASHTO T 305 (%)<0.3


B. APPARATUS









The apparatus required shall consist of the following:

1. Drain-Down equipment as specified in GDT-127 (2005) or AASHTO T 305-97
(2001)
2. Marshall design equipment as specified in AASHTO T-245
3. Boil Test Equipment as specified in GDT-56 (2005) or ASTM D 3625
4. Balance, 5000 grams Capacity 0.1 grams accuracy.

Step 2 Modified Marshall Design and Optimum AC

After determining a trial aggregate blend the following steps are required to

determine the asphalt content:

1. Heat the coarse aggregate to 3500F 3.5F (176C 2.5 o C ), heat the mould to
300oF 3.5 0 F (1480 C 2.5 0 C) and heat the AC to 330 o F 3.5 0 F (1650 C 2.5
o C).

2. Mix aggregate with asphalt at three asphalt contents in 0.5 % interval nearest to the
optimum asphalt content establishes in step 1. The three specimens should be
compacted at the nearest 0.5% interval to the optimum and three specimens each at
0.5% above and below the mid interval.

3. After mixing, return to oven if necessary and when 320oF 3.50F (1600 C 2.5 0
C) compact using 25 blows on each side

4. When compacted, cool to the room temperature before removing from the mold

5. Bulk Specific Gravity: Determine the density of a regular shaped specimen of
compacted mix from its dry mass (in grams) and its volume in cubic centimeters
obtained from its dimensions for height and radius. Convert the density to the bulk
specific gravity by dividing by 0.99707 g/cc, the density of water at 250C

Bulk Sp.Gr = W / (7 r2h/ 0.99707)
= Weight (gms) x 0.0048417/Height (in)
W = Weight of specimen in grams
R = radius in cm
H = height in cm
6. Calculate percent air voids, VMA and voids filled with asphalt based on aggregate
specific gravity

7. Plot VMA curve versus AC content

8. Select the optimum asphalt content at the lowest point on VMA curve









Step 3 Drain-Down Test

Perform the drain test in accordance with the GDT 127 (2005) (Method for

determining Drain Down characteristics in Un-compacted Bituminous Mixtures) or

AASHTO T 305-97 (2001). A mix with an optimum AC content as calculated above is

placed in a wired basket having 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) mesh openings and heated 14C (25F)

above the normal production temperature (typically around 350F) for one hour. The

amount of cement, which drains from the basket, is measured. If the sample fails to meet

the requirements of maximum drain down of 0.3%, increase the fiber content by 0.1%

and repeat the test.

Step 4 Boil Test

Perform the boil test according to GDT 56 (2005) or ASTM D 3625 with

complete batch of mix at optimum asphalt content as determined in step 2 above. If the

sample treated with hydrated lime fails to maintain 95% coating, a sample shall be tested

in which 0.5% liquid anti stripping additive has been used to treat the asphalt cement in

addition to the treatment of aggregate with hydrated lime.

2.3 Overview of Evaluation of Preliminary OGFC/PFC Mix design Procedure
Developed by Vardhan (2004)

Varadhan (2004) introduced the Superpave gyratory compaction into PFC mixture

design in lieu of the Marshall compaction used by Georgia DOT. The study used to make

the specified changes in preliminary mix design approach and the development of long-

term aging procedure for compacted PFC mixture are discussed in the following.

2.3.1 Determination of Compaction level for PFC

The Georgia DOT prepares specimen using the Marshall Hammer with 25 blows

on each side of the specimen. Due to the overall strong desire by both the FDOT and the









University of Florida researchers to use a compaction procedure that is more in line with

current mix design compaction procedures in America, it was decided to use the

Superpave gyratory compactor for compacting the specimens. Based on the work

performed by Varadhan (2004) it was determined that an appropriate compaction level of

50 gyrations was sufficient to compact OGFC mixtures. This determination was based

on a modified locking point concept (Vavrik & Carpenter, 1998). The approach by

Vavrik (1998) was developed for dense graded mixtures. Varadhan (2004) found that the

use of the locking point concept by Vavrik & Carpenter (1998) resulted in a severe over

compaction of OGFC mixtures, leading to aggregate breakdown. Therefore, the locking

point concept was modified for use in OGFC mixtures, as described by Varadhan (2004).

As determined by Vardhan (2004) the compaction curve for OGFC/PFC mixtures

follows a logarithmic trend. To identify the locking point, the rate of change of slope of

compaction curve was used. The stage, at which the rate of change of compaction was

insignificant, is the point of maximum resistance to compaction. Thus, using the

logarithmic regression of the compaction data, the rate of change of slope can be obtained

as follows:

y = m ln(x) + c

Rate of compaction = dy/dx = m/x (at any x=N)

Rate of change of slope of compaction curve = d2y/dx2 = -m/ x2 (at any x =N)

Based on the above idea the locking point was identified as the point at which two

gyrations at same gradient of slope were preceded by two gyrations at same gradient of

slope. The gradient was taken up to four decimal places, as shown in Table 2-2 for FC-5

Granite (Varadhan, 2004). The reason this was chosen as locking point was based on the









fact the change in air voids was insignificant at this stage and that this trend was

consistently observed in all the mixtures. In addition, the compaction level as identified

from visual observation was around 50-60. Thus, based on the above study, the locking

points for theses mixtures were identified as shown in Table 2-3

Table 2-2. Locking Point Based on Gradient of Slope (Varadhan, 2004)

FC-5 Granite
# of Gyrations Gradient of slope
39 0.0018
40 0.0017
41 0.0016
42 0.0015
43 0.0014
44 0.0014
45 0.0013
46 (LP) 0.0013
47 0.0012
48 0.0012
49 0.0011
50 0.0011

Table 2-3. Locking Points of all Mixtures based on Gradient of Slope (Varadhan, 2004)

Mixtures Locking Point
FC-5 Limestone 56
FC-5 Granite 46
NOVACHIP 50

Thus based on above concept the locking points for FC-5 with Limestone, FC-5

with Granite and NOVACHIP were 56, 46 and 50 respectively. The specimens were

compacted again to these gyrations and extraction of asphalt was performed to observe

the gradations after compaction.

For FC-5 Lime even when the gyrations were reduced to 56 from 125, the same

amount of breakdown was observed. This clearly indicated that in case of limestone, the

breakdown occurred in the initial stages itself i.e. at very low gyrations. Hence, even if









the gyrations were to be further reduced, the breakdown was still going to persist. For

FC-5 with granite and NOVACHIP, the gradation looks nearly the same as that of the

original gradation. In addition, the air voids for FC-5 Granite and NOVACHIP were

around 21 % and 15 % respectively, which is typical for these open graded mixtures.

Thus, from the above the study it is clear that, though the locking point of each of

these mixtures differed slightly from each other, it was around 50 gyrations. This was

further corroborated by the study done by NCAT on the compaction levels of friction

courses. NCAT suggests 50 gyrations as compaction level for all friction courses.

Thus based on this study from visual observation and rate of change of compaction,

NCAT study for friction course, Varadhan (2004) stated that 50 gyrations should be the

compaction level for friction course mixes.

2.3.2 OGFC/PFC Mixture Design Procedure Proposed By Varadhan (2004)

Use of modified asphalt cement does not require determination of surface capacity

(Kc) as per GDT 114 Test method: B (1996). Boil test is not included in proposed mix

design of PFC as a modified asphalt cement PG76-22 with 0.5% anti strip agent is used.

The gradation band used by Varadhan (2004) with in GDT 114 (1996) specified

gradation limits (Ref. Table 2-1) is shown in Figure 2-1.

Following is the method developed and proposed:

Modified GDT 114 test method: B by Varadhan (2004)

1. Heat the coarse aggregate, the mould to 350 o F 3.5 o F (176 o C 2.5 o C) and the
AC to 330 oF 3.5 oF (1650 C 2.5 o C)

2. Mix aggregate with asphalt at three asphalt contents, viz., 5.5%, 6% and 6.5%. Just
before mixing, add the required amount of mineral fibers to the aggregate. Prepare
three samples at each of the asphalt content

3. After mixing, return to oven for two hours for STOA at 320 F 3.5 F (1600 C +
2.5 o C). Then compact using the Superpave Gyratory Compactor 50 gyrations










4. When compacted, cool to the room temperature before removing from the mold. It
typically takes 1 hour 45 min to cool down.

5. Bulk Specific Gravity: Determine the density of a regular shaped specimen of
compacted mix from its dry mass (in grams) and its volume in cubic centimeters
obtained from its dimensions for height and radius. Convert the density to the bulk
specific gravity by dividing by 0.99707 g/cc, the density of water at 25 C


Gradation Band by Vardhan (2004)



100
S-90
3 80
70
S60
S50-
40
30
S20
0
No No No No No No No 3/8" 1/2" 3/4
200100 50 30 16 8 4
Sieve Sizes

-- Max Control Points -- Min Control Points

Figure 2-1. Gradation Band with in GDT 114 (1996) specified gradation limits used by
Varadhan (2004)

6. Bulk Sp.Gr = W / (n r2h/ 0.99707) = Weight (gms) x 0.0048417/Height (in)

7. W = Weight of specimen in grams

8. R= radius in cm

9. H= height in cm

10. Calculate percent air voids, VMA and voids filled with asphalt based on aggregate
specific gravity

11. Plot VMA curve versus AC content

12. Select the optimum asphalt content at the lowest point on VMA curve









Drain-Down Test

Perform the drain test in accordance with the GDT 127 (2005) or AASHTO T

305-97 (2001). A mix with an optimum AC content as calculated above is placed in a

wired basket having 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) mesh openings and heated 14 C (25 F) above the

normal production temperature (typically around 350F) for one hour. The amount of

cement, which drains from the basket, is measured. If the sample fails to meet the

requirements of maximum drain down of 0.3 %, increase the fiber content by 0.1 % and

repeat the test.

It is recommended by GDOT that the asphalt content should not be below 6%

because of coating issues. The film thickness requirement for granite mixture as per

Georgia DOT is 27 microns.

Moisture Damage Test

Perform the moisture damage test in accordance with AASHTO T-283 (2003) on

compacted specimen. The specimens are rolled in 1/8" wire mesh which are kept in

position using two clamps on either edges of pills for avoiding fall down at high

temperature of 60C (140oF).

2.3.3 Long-Term Oven Aging Procedure Proposed for PFC Mixture by Varadhan
(2004)

In order to evaluate the mixture susceptibility to aging, it was necessary to develop

a modified long-term aging procedure that was based on AASHTO PP2 (1994). Since

these mixtures are very course and open, there is a possibility of these mixes falling apart

during aging. Hence, a procedure was developed to contain the compacted pills from

falling apart during aging.

S A 1/8" opening wire mesh is should be rolled around pills, with two clamps
tightened at 1-inch distance from each end of the pill. The mesh size is chosen in









order to ensure that there is good circulation of air within the sample for oxidation
and at the same time, to prevent the smaller aggregate particles from falling off
through the mesh.

* Specimens are kept in ovens with porous plate at bottom for 1850 F 5.4 F (850 C
3 C) for 120 + 0.5 hours.

* After that time period, turn off the oven and open the door. Allow the oven and
specimen to cool to room temperature for about 16 hours.

2.4 Verification of Florida Permeable Friction Course Mixture Design

2.4.1 Materials

Aggregate and gradation selection

An existing Georgia PEM gradation obtained from the Georgia DOT was used as a

starting point in the mixture design. Figure 2-2 shows the gradation for the Georgia PEM.

Interestingly, the Georgia DOT mixture design follows the middle of the specified

gradation band on the coarse side, transitioning to the maximum allowable fines content

on the fine side. This selection of gradation will likely result in a good coarse aggregate

to aggregate contact structure, as well as ensuring the highest possible amount of asphalt

binder in the mixture, without significant drain down. Two types of aggregate are used

for this development i.e. Granite and Limestone. Nova Scotia granite and oolitic

limestone from South Florida (White Rock) were used for preparing the mixtures. The

same JMF is used for both granite and limestone mixture composed of aggregates from

different stockpiles. The Job mix formula for the granite was composed of aggregates

from stockpiles #7, #789 and Granite Screens. The job mix formula for the limestone was

composed of aggregates from stockpiles S1A, S1B and limestone screens. Hydrated lime

(1% by weight of aggregate) was used as anti-stripping agent for the granite aggregates.

All aggregates were heated to 3500F 3.5F (1760 C 2.5 o C) as specified in GDT 114









Test Method: B Section C (1996). Table 2-4 and Table 2-5 shows composing of GPEM-

limestone and GPEM-garanite job mix formula.

Table 2-4. Composition of GPEM-Limestone gradation JMF
Type S1A S1B Scrns JMF Control Points
% Amount 55.56 37.37 7.07 100 Max Min
Sieve SizeSizeA0.45
37.5 5.11 100 100 100 100
25 4.26 100 100 100 100
19 3.76 100 100 100 100 100 100
12.5 3.12 82 100 100 90 100 80
9.5 2.75 28 99 100 60 60 35
4.75 2.02 3 39 99 23 25 10
2.36 1.47 2 8 70 9 10 5
1.18 1.08 2 3 54 6
0.6 0.79 1 1 40 4
0.3 0.58 1 1 30 3
0.15 0.43 1 1 13 2
0.075 0.31 1 1 2 1 4 1

Table 2-5. Composition of GPEM-Granite gradation JMF
#789 Granite
Type #7 Granite Screens Lime JMF Control Points
% Amount 55 37 7 1 100 Max Min
Sieve SizeSizeA0.45
37.5 5.11 100 100 100 100 100
25 4.26 100 100 100 100 100
19 3.76 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
12.5 3.12 82 100 100 100 90 100 80
9.5 2.75 28 99 100 100 60 60 35
4.75 2.02 2 39 99 100 23 25 10
2.36 1.47 2 6 69 100 9 10 5
1.18 1.08 2 2 46 100 6
0.6 0.79 1 1 30 100 4
0.3 0.58 1 1 17 100 3
0.15 0.43 0 1 7 100 2
0.075 0.31 0 0 1 100 1 4 1


Binder and mineral fiber


SBS modified PG 76-22 asphalt, with 0.5% anti strip agent was used in the mixture

design. Mineral fiber (Fiberand Road Fibers) supplied by "SLOSS Industries, Alabama",










0.4% by weight of total mix, was added to mix in order to avoid binder drain drown.

Chemical composition of the mineral fiber is Vitreous Calcium Magnesium Aluminum

Silicates. Mineral fibers were shredded into fine fragments before adding to the mixture.


Georgia's Permeable European Mixture Gradations for
Limestone and Granite Mixes


100
V 90
*o 80-
70
S60
S50
40
30
S20-
10 m
0
No No No No No No No 3/8" 1/2" 3/4
200100 50 30 16 8 4
Sieve Sizes

-- Georgia PEM Gradation U Max Control Points A Min Control Points

Figure 2-2. Georgia's Permeable European Mixture gradation band

2.4.2 Sample Preparation for Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content

Based on experience, the Georgia DOT procedure almost always results in design

asphalt content of 6 percent, when Georgia granite aggregates are used. However,

following the GDOT GDT-114 (1996) procedure, three trial mixtures were prepared at

different asphalt contents. The trial asphalt content of 5.5%, 6% and 6.5% were selected

for the Nova Scotia granite blend for choosing the asphalt content that results in a

minimum VMA. As per GDT 114 (1996), the specified range of percent asphalt content

is 5.5%-7.0%.

As a note, based on the early experience with the use of only three trial asphalt

contents to obtain an optimal asphalt content, it was observed that it is necessary to use

four trial asphalt contents for determining the optimum asphalt content. Choosing only










three asphalt contents will always result in one of the chosen asphalt contents to show a

minimum, whereas choosing four asphalt contents will result in a true minimum that can

be verified. Figure 2-3 shows example of determination of higher asphalt content as

optimum asphalt content due selection of (3) trial asphalt contents.


Voids in Mineral Aggregates(VMA) Vs Asphalt
Content (%AC)

29.60

29.40 Higher optimum
_29.20 asphalt content with
(3) trail asphalt
29.00

28.80

28.60

28.40

28.20
5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5
% AC

Figure 2-3. Example of determination of inconsistent optimum asphalt content

Because of this reason, a broader range of trial asphalt contents was used for the

limestone mixture, namely 5.5%, 6.0%, 6.5% and 7%. For each trail asphalt content

three pills were prepared.

2.4.4 Mixing and Compaction of Samples for Determination of Bulk Specific Gravity

Sieved aggregates from each stockpile are batched by weight of 4400 grams for

each pile. Three pills are prepared for each trial percentage. Hydrated lime 44 grams

(1.0% of aggregate weight) is added to batched samples. Table 2-2 shows the amount of

material used for mixing. Aggregates, tools, mixing drum, shredded fibers and the asphalt

binder are heated to 3300 F 3.5 o F (1650 C 2.5 o C) for at least 3 hours. Aggregates

are mixed with asphalt at all trial asphalt contents. Just before mixing, add the required









amount of mineral fibers to the aggregate. Table 2-2 shows amount of aggregates and

asphalt used for each trial blend. Once the sample is mixed it is placed in a clean metal

tray. Due to the presence of the SBS in the asphalt binder, these mixtures tend to be

"sticky" making the mixing somewhat challenging. In particular, it is important to ensure

that there is no loss of fines while retrieving the mix from the mixing drum. The

AASHTO RM 30 specification for loss of fines was used, requiring that a maximum 0.1

percent loss of fines. After mixing, mixtures are aged for short term of two hours at 3200

F 3.5 0 F (1600C 2.5 0 C) as per AASHTO PP2 (1994).

The specimens are compacted to 50 gyrations using the Superpave Gyratory

Compactor. Molds should be lubricated. The angle of gyration during compaction is 1.25

degrees. From prior experience, compacted samples should not be retrieved from molds

immediately. They should be allowed to cool for lhr 45 min before extracting the

specimens from the molds. Once the specimen is ejected from the mold, it is allowed to

cool for another 5 minutes at ambient room temperature before handling. It was found

that if sufficient cooling of the specimen after extraction of the specimen from the mold

were not followed (especially for granite mixtures), small aggregate particles would tend

to dislodge and stick to gloves due to the high specimen air voids. Finally, it was found

that it was necessary to allow the pills to cool at ambient room temperatures for another

24 hours before processing them any further.









Table 2-6. Material quantities

Bulk Specific Gravity

Aggregate Weight = 4400 grams

AC Weight Fiber Weight
AC Content AC Weit Fer Total Weight
(Grams) (Grams)
5.5 256.1 18.6 4674.7
6 280.9 18.7 4699.6
6.5 305.9 18.8 4724.7
7 331.2 18.9 4750.1
5.5 58.2 4.2 1062.4
6.0 63.8 4.3 1068.1
6.5 69.5 4.3 1073.8
7.0 75.3 4.3 1079.6

2.4.4 Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content

The determination of bulk specific gravity test in accordance with AASHTO T166

(2000) cannot be conducted on the PFC mixtures because of their high air voids. The

determination of Saturated Surface Dry (SSD) weight of the pills is not reliable for

mixtures at these high air void contents as per Cooley et al (2002). Therefore, bulk

specific gravity (Gmb) of pills was determined by Dimensional analysis, as described in

GDOT-114 (1996). The determination of Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity (Gmm)

was made via the use of the Rice test procedure as per AASHTO T209 (2004). For

preparation of samples for determination of Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity as

per AASHTO T-209-99 (2004), aggregates are batched by weight of 1100 grams. Two

mixes for each trial asphalt percentage are prepared.

Once all trial asphalt content pills had been prepared, the VMA was determined

from the Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity (Gmm) and the Bulk Specific Gravity

(Gmb) determined from Dimensional analysis. The design asphalt content is selected at

the point of minimum VMA. The main purpose of using minimum VMA criterion is to









ensure reasonably high asphalt content of the mixture. Secondly, VMA is calculated on a

volume basis and is therefore not affected significantly by the specific gravity of

aggregate.

Refer Appendix A for detail calculations and Laboratory work sheets of volumetric

properties of PFC mixtures.

Figure 2-4and Figure 2-5 show a summary of the volumetrics for the limestone and

granite mixtures. Optimum asphalt contents of PFC mixtures were found to be 6.5% and

6.0% for the limestone and granite mixtures, respectively. The porous nature of limestone

resulted in a higher optimum asphalt content.


















Effective Sp Grav.
of Agg. % AC6 Gmm' Gmb2 VMA3 (%) VTM4 (%) VFA (%

2.513 5.5 2.323 1.877 29.40 19.21 34.67

6.0 2.314 1.908 28.62 17.54 38.71

6.5 2.298 1.927 28.30 16.16 42.89

7.0 2.286 1.934 28.42 15.39 45.84


Voids in mineral aggregates


29.50

S29.00

| 28.50-

28.00
4.0 5.0 6.0
% AC


Voids filled with asphalt


4800
46 00 -
44 00 -
42 00
40 00
3800
>3600
34 00
32 00
7.0 8.0 3000-
40 50 60 70 80
% AC


Voids in total mix


20 00
1900
1800
S1700
1600
1500


40 50 60
% AC


Figure 2-4. Mix Design of OGFC with aggregate type: Limestone


Optimum Asphalt Content: 6.5% VMA at Optimum Asphalt Content:- 28.30%
Mineral Fiber: 0.4% of Total Mix Aggregate Type: Limestone
Gmm1 = Maximum specific gravity of mixture, Gmb2 = Bulk specific gravity of mixture, VMA3 = Voids in Mineral Aggregates,
VTM4 = Voids in Total Mix, VFA5= Voids filled with Asphalt, AC6 = Asphalt Content


70 80














Effective Sp Grav.
of Agg. % AC6 Gmm' Gmb2 VMA3 (%) VTM4 (%) VFA (%)
2.641 5.5 2.442 1.936 30.74 20.72 32.60
6 2.414 1.961 30.23 18.78 37.86
6.5 2.389 1.967 30.38 17.68 41.82


Voids in mineral aggregates


30.80
30.70
S30.60
S30.50
S30.40
>30.30
30.20
30.10


Voids filled with Asphalt


44.00
42.00
40.00
38.00
36.00
34.00
32.00
30.00


Voids in Total Mix


21.00
20.00
19.00
18.00
17.00


5 5.5 6
% AC


5 5.5 6
% AC


6.5 7


5 5.5 6
% AC


Figure 2-5. Mix Design of OGFC with aggregate type: Granite

Optimum Asphalt Content: 6.0% VMA at Optimum Asphalt Content:- 30.23%
Mineral Fiber: 0.4% of Total Mix Aggregate Type: Limestone
Gmm = Maximum specific gravity of mixture, Gmb2 = Bulk specific gravity of mixture, VMA3 = Voids in Mineral Aggregates,
VTM4 = Voids in Total Mix, VFA5 = Voids filled with Asphalt, AC6 = Asphalt Content


0f


6.5 7


T;rrl


6.5 7









2.5 Evaluation of Film Thickness Criterion in PFC Design

The Georgia DOT uses a required minimum calculated asphalt film thickness

criterion for ensuring that the mixture has enough asphalt for adequate durability._Since

durability of mixtures is a surface phenomenon, where the binder is damaged from the

surface inward, a mixture with a low film thickness is expected to damage more than a

mixture with a thicker film, irrespective of surface area. Therefore, it is important to

clearly establish a link between the calculated film thickness and the physics of the

mixture in question. The appropriate film thickness calculation is affected by the

aggregate structure of the mix. The first attempts to calculate minimum asphalt film

thicknesses were made by Goode and Lufsey (1965). Their method was based on

empirical considerations, leading to the development of the theoretical film thickness

(Hveem, NCAT 1991), which assumes that all aggregates are rounded spheres, with

predefined surface areas, which are coated with an even thickness of asphalt film.

Recognizing that these "theoretical film thickness" calculations were developed

primarily for fine-graded mixtures with very different aggregate structures from that

found in coarse-graded mixtures, let alone OGFC and PFC mixtures, Nukunya et al.

(2001) developed an effective film thickness concept based on a physical model of

coarse-graded mixtures. Nukunya, et al. (2001) observed that the aggregate structure for

fine- and coarse-graded mixtures is fundamentally different, as shown in Figure 2-6

Fine-graded mixtures tend to have more continuous grading such that the fine-aggregates

are an integral part of the stone matrix. Coarse mixtures, on the other hand, tend to have

aggregate structures that are dominated by the coarse aggregate portion (i.e., stone-to-

stone contact).


















COARSE FINE
Figure 2-6. Aggregate Structure for Coarse and Fine Mixtures (Nukunya et al. [2001])

Therefore, coarse-graded PFC mixtures are effectively composed of two

components: the first one is the interconnected coarse aggregate, and the second

component is the fine mixture embedded in between the coarse aggregate particles. The

mixture made up of asphalt and fine aggregates coats the coarse aggregate particles, and

the fine aggregates within that matrix have access to all the asphalt within the mixture.

This results in film thicknes that is much greater than that calculated using conventional

theoretical film thickness calculation procedures that assume that the asphalt is uniformly

distributed over all aggregate particles. To account for the different nature of the

aggregate structure in coarse-graded mixtures, a modified film thickness calculation,

entitled the "effective film thickness," was developed by Nukunya, et al. (2001), in which

the asphalt binder is distributed onto the portion of the aggregate structure that is within

the mastic.

Also recognizing that the Theoretical Film Thickness (Hveem, NCAT 1991) may

not adequately represent the physics of PFC mixtures, the Georgia DOT introduced a

modified film thickness calculation. However, the Georgia DOT modified film thickness

calculation method is based on empirical considerations and yields similar results to the

theoretical film thickness calculations.









More recently, work at the University of Florida under the direction of Drs. Roque

and Birgisson has led to the establishment of a tentative gradation selection framework

for the optimization of the fracture and rutting resistance of dense graded mixtures. Key

concepts in this new proposed framework include the observation that enhanced cracking

and rutting resistance can be obtained by ensuring that the aggregates in the course

portion of the mixture gradation interact sufficiently amongst each other to allow for the

effective transfer of forces through the course-aggregate portion of the mixture. This

interaction of the course aggregate component should not reach down to the finer

materials, so as to control mixture sensitivity. For optimizing the fracture resistance of

mixtures, the material within the interstitial volume of the course aggregate portion also

needs to be proportioned and designed so that an adequate Dissipated Creep Strain

Energy (DCSE) limit is maintained, as well as providing enough flow and ductility to

enhance the fracture resistance of the mixture. Too little interstitial material, or

interstitial material with a low creep strain rate, will result in a brittle mixture. It is

anticipated that these gradation concepts will be transferable to OGFC and PFC mixtures,

thus allowing for the development of guidelines for the selection of gradations that

optimize the resistance to cracking and rutting. Using these concepts it is also possible to

define a modified film thickness that is calculated strictly based on the interstitial volume

component of the mixture.

In the following the Georgia DOT modified film thickness criterion will be

compared to the effective film thickness criterion developed by Nukunya, et al. (9), as

well as the new film thickness criterion based on interstitial volume considerations. For

completeness the "Theoretical Film Thickness proposed by (Hveem, NCAT 1991) is









also calculated and included in the comparison, even though it is recognized that it may

not adequately represent the structure of PFC mixtures. However, first the methods for

calculating these asphalt film thicknesses are reviewed.

2.5.1 Review of Asphalt Film Thickness Calculation Methods

Goode and Lufsey's method

Even though this method is not used in this research, it is important to note the

contributions of Goode and Lufsey (1965), who related empirically asphalt hardening to

voids, permeability and film thickness. They recognized that the hardening of the asphalt

binder in a mix was a function of air voids, film thickness, temperature, and time.

Goode and Lufsey (1965) introduced the concept of the ratio of the air voids to

bitumen index, as a measure of the aging susceptibility of a mix (developed for dense

graded mixture with 4% air voids). Goode and Lufsey (1965) had proposed a maximum

value of 4.0 for this ratio, which they believed, would prevent pavement distress by

reducing the aging of the asphalt film coating the aggregate. Mathematically, what they

stated was:

AirVoids(%) 4
BitumenIndex x 103 (Maximum) (2.1)

Where:

Film thickness (microns) = Bitumen index x 4870

Equation 2-1 with the air voids content of the mixture is reduced to a minimum

film thickness requirement based on air voids to bitumen index ratio analysis. The film

thickness then varies with the percent air voids as follows (Goode and Lufsey, 1965):










AirVoids(%)/x 4870
Film sickness = Voids() x 4870 (Minimum) (2.2)
4 x 10

The total air voids in the compacted PFC limestone mixtures at 50 gyrations is

16.16%. Goode and Lufsey's minimum film thickness requirement for 16.16% is 19.67

microns.

Theoretical film thickness method

This technique for calculating film thickness is based on the surface area calculated

as per Hveem (1991). The surface area factors suggested by Hveem (1991) is shown in

Table 2-7. The Film thickness of asphalt aggregates is a function of the diameter of

particles and the effective asphalt content. The film thickness is directly proportional to

volume of the effective asphalt content and inversely proportional to diameter of particle:

V x1000
T em (2.3)
iS SA x W


Tfm = Film Thickness

SA = Surface Area

Wgg = Weight of aggregate

Table 2-7. Surface Area Factor Hveem (1991)
Sieve Size Surface Area Factor

Percentage Passing Maximum Sieve Size 2
Percent Passing No. 4 2
Percent Passing No. 8 4
Percent Passing No. 16 8
Percent Passing No. 30 14
Percent Passing No. 50 30
Percent Passing No. 100 60
Percent Passing No. 200 160









Effective film thickness method (Nukunya et al, 2001)

According to this method only aggregates passing the No. 8 Sieve are taken into

account in the calculation of the surface area by using factors suggested by Hveem (1991)

Then Equation 2-3 is used for calculating Film Thickness.

Table 2-8. Surface area Factor suggested by Nukunya (2001) for coarse aggregate
structure
Surface Area
Sieve Size Factor
Factor
Percent Passing No. 8 4
Percent Passing No. 16 8
Percent Passing No. 30 14
Percent Passing No. 50 30
Percent Passing No. 100 60
Percent Passing No. 200 160

Modified film thickness method used by gdot

Georgia developed this method primarily for PEM mix with granite aggregate. The

basic assumption was that the absorption of asphalt is very low or no absorption by

surface pores of granite aggregate. The method is empirical and assumes that fixed

aggregate unit weight per pound of aggregate, based on Georgia aggregates. Hence, the

T
effective film thickness ( eff) is given as:

[ 453.6 g per Pounds divided by % Aggregate] [ 453.6 g per Pounds (2.4)
f Surface area in square ft / lb 0.09290Sq. m per sq. ft. Sp. gr. of AC
Where,
T, = Effective Film Thickness

Film thickness based on interstitial volume concept

The aggregate interaction curve is plotted to determine the portion of the gradation

curve with interacting aggregate sizes. Following is equation used for calculating points

of interaction










%Retained Particle Interaction Point = (%Retainedat Sieve Size) *100 (2.5)
-(%Retained at Succesive Sieve Size + (%Retained at Sieve Size)

The aggregates are considered to be interacting, if the percent-retained particle

interaction is between 30% and 70%. Any point that falls outside these limits is

considered to be non-interacting. Therefore, aggregate sizes below this break point are

not interacting towards contribution of strength. These aggregate sizes are filling the

cavities between the coarse aggregate structure defined by aggregate sizes above the

break point. The aggregate sizes below the break point along with asphalt are

contributing to Interstitial Volume. Mastic, comprising aggregate sizes below the break

point, asphalt, and air voids, form the interstitial volume of the compacted mixture.

Hence, the interstitial volume is the ratio of mastic in specimen to the total volume of the

compacted mixture, as shown in Equation 2-6:

(Volume of Mastic)
Interstitial Volume = ( f Mastic) (2.6)
Total Volume of Compacted Mixture

In order to calculate the film thickness of the particles in the interstitial volume, the

surface area of the particles in the interstitial volume needs to be determined. As per the

hypothesis discussed above, aggregates below the break point are within the interstitial

volume. Hence, the surface area (SA) of aggregates below break point can be obtained

from the surface area factors given in Table 2-9. As the absorption in granite is


negligible, the as the effective asphalt content (Veff) is taken to be the total asphalt


content of the compacted mixture. Weight of aggregates (Wagg) in air is taken into

account for calculating film thickness. Equation 2-7 denotes calculation of film thickness

with in interstitial volume:









V x 1000
T elm (2.7)
fim SA x W
Recognizing that these film thickness calculations all use effective asphalt content

to determine the available amount of asphalt binder for the coating of particles, it is

important to establish clear guidelines for determining the effective asphalt content of

PFC mixtures.

Table 2-9. Surface area factors for Interstitial Volume
Surface
Sieve Size Area
Factor
Percentage Passing Maximum Sieve Size 2
Percent Passin No. 4 2


Aggregate Aggregate
with in with in
interstitial interstitial
volume volume


The Georgia DOT method of film thickness calculations assumes that there is no

absorption of asphalt into the aggregate surfaces. Their method of film thickness

calculation is an empirical approach. This assumption may be a reasonable approximation

for low absorption granite aggregates. However, for high absorption limestone

aggregates it is necessary to account for absorption. In this research, asphalt absorption

was estimated using two approaches:

1) Asphalt absorption obtained from basic volumetric equations is used to calculate

effective asphalt content. This is the true asphalt contributing towards in film thickness: -

13. Effective Specific gravity (Gsb): The effective specific gravity is calculated from
the maximum specific gravity (Gmm) of mixture and Asphalt content (Pb).









Pb
1-^
G 100 (2.8)
Pb
1 100
Gmm Gb

14. Asphalt Absorption (Pa,,): The absorbed asphalt content is differences of bulk
volume of aggregate and the effective volume.

(Gse Gsb>
asb = 10Ox s x Gb (2.9)
\ Gse x Gsb

15. Effective Volume of Asphalt (Veff): The effective volume of asphalt is amount of
asphalt available for coating aggregates, which is obtained by subtracting absorbed
asphalt from Total Asphalt Content (Pota1).

V = Potal Pas (2.9)



2) Determination of effective asphalt content based on bulk specific gravity

determined through from the CoreLok test procedure as per CoreLok manual (2003).

The main justification for using the CoreLok procedure is that open graded mixes readily

absorb water and drain quickly when removed from the water tank, during the

determination of Saturated Surface Dry (SSD). Weight conditions in traditional

laboratory-based procedures for determining. The lack of control over the penetration and

drainage of water in and out of asphalt specimens creates a problem with the water

displacement measurement using the current principles for determination of specific

gravity as per Cooley et all (2002). The CoreLok system makes the determination of

SSD conditions unnecessary.

Perform calculation as per directions given in Data Collection Table: 2.10









Table 2-10. CoreLok calculation Sheet
A B C D E F G H I
Dry
Sam- Dry Sealed Sample
ple Bag Sample SampleWeight Bag
ID Weight Weight Weight After Volume Total Volume Volume Bulk
(g) before in Water Correction Volume of of Specific
Sealing Water Submersion RatioFrom (A + D) Sample Sample Gravity
(g) (g) (g) B/A Table C A/F (G-H) B/I
I
II______ __________

After determination of Bulk Specific gravity (Gmb) following steps in calculation

are involved for estimating the effective asphalt content. Air Voids in compacted mix

(VTM ) and Voids in Mineral Aggregates (VMA) are calculated using Equation 2-10 and

Equation 2-12 based on bulk specific gravity determine by CoreLok method.




VTM -- Gmb x100 (2.10)
Gmm0

W

VMAA =100 x100 (2.11)

Gmb 1

VTM.V
Veff = -V Vagg + V, (2.12)
100

Where,

VT = Total volume of compacted specimen

Vagg = Volume of aggregate

Gmm = Maximum theoretical specific gravity.

Gsb = Aggregate bulk specific gravity









VTM = Voids in total mix

VMA = Voids in Mineral aggregate.

W,= Weight of Total specimen

Wg = Weight of aggregate

2.5.2 Comparison of Results Obtained from Each Film Thickness Calculation Method

Limestone has higher absorption capacity than granite aggregate. Figure 2-7 shows

the absorption of asphalt into the surface cavities of limestone aggregate, therefore

reducing the effective asphalt content and resulting in a lower film thickness when

compared to granite mixtures.














(a) (b)
Figure 2-7. (a) Granite with high film (Required against stripping) (b) Limestone with
low film thickness as compared with granite due to absorption

The four different asphalt film thickness calculations methods discussed previously

were used to calculate the film thickness of asphalt with in compacted granite and

limestone PFC mixtures.

The surface area calculated by the Nukunya et al (2001) Method and the Interstitial

Volume method is exactly same for the two mixtures evaluated, due to the fact that the

break point defining the interstitial volume is at the No. 8 Sieve Size.









Table 2-11. Com prisonn of Film Thickness method for Limestone mixture
Film Thickness (microns) Film Thickness (microns)
Method
Asphalt absorption Corelok Method
Theoretical Film
Thickness 34.20
(Hveem 1991) 31.22
Nukunya's
Effective Film 50.71
thickness 46.29
GDOT 34.80 31.58
Interstitial
50.71
Volume 46.29

Table 2-11 shows the comparison of true film thickness to film thickness calculated from

CoreLok bulk specific gravity.

CoreLok is determining comparative film thickness. Nukunya's method and Interstitial

volume method are predicting higher film due consideration of coarse aggregate

structure.

Table 2-12. Comparison of Film Thickness method for Granite mixture
Film Thickness (microns)
Method
Asphalt Absorption

Theoretical Film
Thickness (Hveem 37.25
1991)

Nukunya's Effective 55
55.23
Film thickness
GDOT 38.10
Interstitial Volume 55.23

As shown in Table 2-12, Comparison of Film Thickness method for Granite

mixture, GDOT method is over predicting film thickness. Hence, in summary, either the

CoreLok or the equivalent water absorption methods can be used. However, the Corelok

method is still under review and development, nationally. Therefore, until the method

has been thoroughly verified on the national level, it is recommended that the equivalent









water absorption method be used as a lower limit on asphalt absorption. Similarly, the

asphalt film thickness of the aggregates within the interstitial volume is the most

theoretically correct method.

However, it is still under development and evaluation. Therefore, it is

recommended that the Effective Film Thickness calculation proposed by Nukunya, et al.

(2001) be used to determine the film thickness of PFC mixtures.

2.5.3 Relative Minimum Film Thickness Requirement

For establishing minimum film thickness requirement based on Effective Film

Thickness Nukunya et all (9), Georgia Department of Transportation minimum film

thickness criterion is used as standard. According to GDOT minimum film thickness

required for granite PFC mixture against stripping is 27 microns for surface area

calculated based on GDOT factors. This requirement is not specified in their specification

but they use it as tentative film thickness criterion.

Georgia DOT typically uses granite aggregate for their GPEM mixtures. Georgia

DOT, ignore asphalt absorption while calculating film thickness as per Eason (2004). But

limestone due to its porous surface texture has high asphalt absorption capacity. This

property of limestone does not allow attainment of high film thickness. Aggregates with

different asphalt absorption will lead different minimum film thickness. Therefore, the

relative minimum film thickness requirement is calculated for set of range of asphalt

absorption, i.e. 0-0.5%, 0.5-1 %, 1 % or more. While calculating minimum film thickness

requirement for each of these ranges, upper limit of range is considered.

For calculating the relative minimum film thickness requirement, 27 micron is used

to back calculate the effective asphalt content (VeffDOT ).









As Georgia DOT ignores asphalt absorption this effective asphalt content is total

asphalt content of the mixture. Subtracting upper limit of range of asphalt absorption

(Asphalto,,,,, ) from this the total asphalt content gives actual effective asphalt content

(VeffNukuya ). This value of effective asphalt content is substituted in standard film

thickness Equation 2-3 using surface area as per Nukunya et al (2001) as shown in Step V

for calculating relative minimum film thickness (TRelave Mim.nmum)

Optimum gradation band for surface area calculation

A gradation band, which is representative of all gradations with in specified control

limits, is required for calculating surface area for relative minimum film thickness

requirement. Average of maximum control points and minimum control points of

specified gradation limits as per GDT-114 (1996) to obtain optimum gradation, which

represents gradation between those gradation limits.

Figure 2-8 shows optimum gradation band used for calculating surface area. Job

mix formula of this optimum gradation showed in Table 2-13 is used to calculate surface

area as per Georgia DOT method (SurfaceArea GDO) and Nukunya et al. (2001)

(SurfaceAl ea _:,,,)). It is assumed that this optimum gradation represents the

different gradation band with in this specified limit. Therefore the film thickness

calculated for this optimum gradation band represents al set of gradation band with in this

gradation limit.











Optimum Gradation Band for Minimum Film thickness requirement Calculation


- Max Control points Min Control Points
-- Optimum Representative Gradation
Figure 2-8. Optimum Gradation Band for Calculating Minimum film thickness
requirement


Table 2-13. JMF of Optimum gradation for Gradation limits as per GDT 114 (1996)
Type Optimum
% Amount Gradation
Sieve SizeSize^0.45Band
37.5 5.11 100
25 4.26 100
19 3.76 100
12.5 3.12 90
9.5 2.75 48
4.75 2.02 18
2.36 1.47 8
1.18 1.08 5
0.6 0.79 4
0.3 0.58 3
0.15 0.43 2
0.075 0.31 2

Following steps are used for calculating relative film thickness requirement: -

Step I: TmlimumGDOT = 27microns


S. .. -TmmnimumGDOT x SurfaceAreaGDOT aggregate


1000


0 -
0.00


0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50
Sieve Size^0.45


p etS II: VeffGDOT









Step III: Totalphalt = effGDOT

Step IV: VeffNukua = Totalsphlt Asphaltborpon


VeffNu, a x 1000
Step V: Telahve Minimum
SurfaceAreaNukunya(2001) Waggregate


Based on above steps minimum film thickness requirement is calculated for

different set of asphalt absorption. The relative minimum film thickness for Nukunya et

al (2001) based on this concept is tabulated in Table 2-14.

Table 2-14. Minimum film thickness requirements for different set of Asphalt absorption
Ma m Effective Minimum
Maximum
A t a tion R e Total asphalt asphalt film thickness
Asphalt absorption Range asphalt
content (ml) absorption (%) content requirement
absorption (%)
(ml) (microns)
0 % to 0.5% 213.84 0.5% 191.84 32
0.5% +to 1 % 213.84 1% 169.84 28
1%+ to 1.5% 213.84 1.50% 147.84 24
Greater than 1.5
1.5% or more 214.84 125.84 13


2.6 Recommended Specification for PFC Mixture Design

SCOPE

The method of design for a modified open graded bituminous mixture consists of

four steps. The first step is the selection of a trial aggregate blend and asphalt binder.

The second step involves the determination of optimum asphalt content and checking for

adequate asphalt film thickness to ensure durability. The third step involves the

performance of AASHTO T 305-97 (2001) (i.e. a asphalt drain down test), and the fourth

step involves the performance of AASTHO T-283 (2001). The details of each step are

discussed below.









APPARATUS

The apparatus required shall consist of the following:

1. Drain-Down equipment as specified in AASHTO T 305-97 (2001).
2. Superpave gyratory compactor.
3. Equipment to perform AASHTO T-84 and T-85.
4. Balance, 5000 gr. Capacity, 0.1 gr. Accuracy.
5. 10 metal pie pans
6. Oven capable of maintaining 330 F 3.5 F (1650 C 2.5 o C)
7. Oven capable of maintaining 350 F 3.5 F (1760 C 2.5 o C
8. Timer.

STEP 1: Determination of Trial Blend and Asphalt Binder

The aggregate trial blend should be selected to fit within the gradation limits listed

in Table 2-15 and shown in Figure 2-9. The asphalt binder should be SBS modified PG

76-22 asphalt. Either the addition of 0.5% liquid anti-strip agent or 1 percent hydrated

lime is required. The use of hydrated lime requires pretreatment of the aggregates with

the hydrated lime. 0.4 % mineral fiber by weight of total mix should be added to avoid

binder drain down.

Table 2-15. Proposed Gradation and Design specifications for Florida Permeable


Mixture
Control 12.5 mm
Tolerance Asphalt Concrete PFC
Gradation Requirement
+ 0.0 3/4 in (19 mm) sieve 100
6.1 1/2 in (12.5 mm) sieve 80-100
5.6 3/8 in (9.5 mm) sieve 35-60
5.7 No. 4 (4.75 mm) sieve 10-25
+4.6 No.8 (2.36 mm) sieve 5 10
+2.0 No. 200 (75 tm) sieve 1-4
Design Requirements
+0.4 Range for % AC 5.5-7.0
AASHTO T-283 (TSR) 80
Drain-down, AASHTO T 305 (%) <0.3










Gradation Band by Vardhan (2004)



100 A-
S90
S 80 -
70
60 -
5 50
4 40
g 30 -
S20
S 10
No No N No No No No 3/8" 1/2" 3/4"
200100 50 30 16 8 4
Sieve Sizes

Max Control Points A Min Control Points

Figure 2-9. Proposed Gradation limits for Florida Permeable Friction Course Mixtures

STEP 2: Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content and Asphalt Film Thickness

* Heat the coarse aggregate, the mould to 350 F 3.5F (176C 2.5 o C) and the
AC to 330 F 3.5 F (1650 C 2.5 o C)

* Mix aggregate with asphalt to obtain at least four trial asphalt contents, viz., 5.5%,
6%, 6.5% and 7%. Just before mixing, add the required amount of mineral fibers to
the aggregate. Prepare three samples at each of the asphalt contents

* After mixing, return the mix to oven for two hours for STOA at 3200 F 3.5 o F
(160 C 2.5 o C). Then compact to 50 gyrations using the Superpave Gyratory
Compactor

* When compacted, cool down at room temperature for 1 hour 45 minutes before
removing the specimens from the compaction mold.

* Determine Bulk Specific Gravity: Determine the density of a regular shaped
specimen of compacted mix from its dry mass (in grams) and its volume in cubic
centimeters obtained from its dimensions for height and radius. Convert the density
to the bulk specific gravity by dividing by 0.99707 g/cc, the density of water at 25
oC

Bulk Sp.Gr = W / (7 r2h/ 0.99707)

= Weight (gms) x 0.0048417/Height (in)
W = Weight of specimen in grams


R = radius in cm









H = height in cm

* Determine Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity according to AASHTO T-209-
99 (2004).

* Calculate percent air voids, VMA and voids filled with asphalt based on aggregate
specific gravity

* Plot VMA curve versus AC content and determine point of minimum VMA, select
corresponding AC as Optimum asphalt content.

* Prepare a mixture at the optimal asphalt content.

* Determination of film thickness: -

Step (I) Determination of Effective Specific gravity (Psb): -

Pb
1-^
G, 100 (2.13)
Pb
1 100
Gmm Gb
Step (II) Determination of Asphalt absorption (Pu~): -

(Gse Gsb>
Pab = 10Ox s x Gb (2.14)
\ Gse x Gsb)
Waterabs Determined is in percentage of weight of aggregate. Convert into volume of

water in ml, by using following equation:-

P-ba Weight of _ggregite(grams) (2.15)
absabs ml 100*1.03
100 1.03

Step (III) Determination of Effective Volume of Asphalt (Vef): -


eff = PTotal Pabsabs ml (2.16)

(Where Po,,, = Total asphalt content in ml)

* Calculate the Effective Film thickness using following procedure as per Nukunya et
al (2001):

a) Determine Surface area (SA) from Table 2 below:









Table 2-16. Surface area factor as per Nukunya et al (2001)
Surface Area
Sieve Size Factor
Factor
Percent Passing No. 8 4
Percent Passing No. 16 8
Percent Passing No. 30 14
Percent Passing No. 50 30
Percent Passing No. 100 60
Percent Passing No. 200 160


b) Film thickness of asphalt (in microns):

V x 1000
"flm SAx W

where,


(2.17)


Wgg = Weight of aggregate
SA = Surface area

The minimum acceptable effective film thickness is determined as a function of the

measured percent asphalt absorption per weight of aggregate as follows:

Table 2-17. Minimum Effective Film Thickness Requirements


Percent Asphalt Minimum Required
Absorption Film Thickness
(micron)
0.5 % or less 32
0.5+ to 1% 28
1.0+to 1.5 % 24
Greater than 1.5 % 13

E Step 3: Performance of Drain-Down Test

Perform the drain test in accordance with the AASHTO T 305-97 (2001). A mix

with an optimum AC content as calculated above is placed in a wired basket having 6.4

mm (1/4 inch) mesh openings and heated 14 C (25 F) above the normal production

temperature (typically around 350F) for one hour. The amount of cement, which drains









from the basket, is measured. If the sample fails to meet the requirements of maximum

drain down of 0.3 %, increase the fiber content by 0.1 % and repeat the test.

Step 4: Performance of Moisture Damage Test

Perform the moisture damage test in accordance with AASHTO T-283 (2003) on

compacted specimen. The specimens are rolled in 1/8" wire mesh which are kept in

position using two clamps on either edge of the pill for avoiding mixture damage or

breakdown at the conditioning temperature of 60C (140'F). Minimum requirements

should include TSR of 0.8 or greater.

2.7 Conclusion of Verification of PFC mixture Design Procedure

The research presented in this chapter led to the following conclusions:

* It is recommended that at least (4) trial asphalt content should be used for
predicting fairly accurate optimum asphalt content.

* Only PG 76-22 SBS modified binder containing 0.5% liquid anti stripping agent
should be used.

* Minimum amount of batched sample for sample should not be less than 1000 grams
for all purposes of testing.

* Air voids levels in the PFC limestone mixture were around 16% at 50 gyrations.
Gradation analysis by Varadhan (2004) on extracted aggregate after compaction
showed that the limestone undergoes crushing early in the compaction process.
Therefore, the specified gradation limits may have to be adjusted for limestone to
obtain air voids in the desired 18-22 percent range.

* In order to ensure adequate durability, the effective film thickness method
developed by Nukunya, et al. (2004) should be used. In order to determine the
effective asphalt content, the aggregate asphalt absorption should be used.














CHAPTER 3
EVALUATION OF 1-295 PFC MIX DESIGN

PFC pavements are subjected to high temperature variance, hydroplaning and are in

direct contact with rolling loads. In order to check field performance of PFC in Florida,

construction of a test section was proposed at 1-295, Jacksonville, FL. The Mix design of

for this section follows the procedure discussed in Chapter 2.

3.1 Objective

The objective of this study is to evaluate mix design procedure of PFC mixture at I-

295 test section. The 1-295 test section will be monitored for its long-term performance.

Gradation selections for optimizing fracture resistance. Determination of optimum

asphalt content for attaining minimum voids in the mineral aggregate (VMA) for

ensuring high binder coating without drain down. Obtain a mixture for 1-295 with highest

Energy Ratio among selected gradation to ensure best performance.

3.2 Scope of Project

Separate mix design was carried on gradation proposed by DOT contractor

(Gradation (1)) and designed gradation (Gradation (2) to determine optimum asphalt

content. Following is the complete plan of project:-

For each of the gradations, 4-trial asphalt percentages are used to obtain a VMA

curve. The reason for selecting 4-trial percentages is to obtain polynomial curve for

determining point of minimum VMA. Sieving, watching, mixing and compaction, as

discussed in section 3.3.1 of this chapter, of mixes is done as specified in previous

development in laboratory. Asphalt used is SBS modified PG76-22, which contains 0.5%









anti strip agent in addition to 1% of hydrated lime added to aggregates to resist against

stripping. Dosage rate of mineral fiber is 0.4% by total weight of mix. Superpave

Indirect tensile test is run on compacted mixes for both gradations, in order to obtain

fracture test parameters including energy ratio. Process of testing and criteria considered

are discussed in section 3.4 of this chapter. Selection of gradation based on higher energy

ratio for 1-295 test section. Effect of moisture conditioning and long-term oven aging on

selected gradation.

3.3 Materials used for 1-295 PFC project

3.3.1 Aggregate and Hydrated Lime

The final aggregate blend for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) is composed of #67

Granite stone from Pit No TM-579/NS-315, #78 Granite Stone from Pit No GA-383 and

Granite Screens from Pit No. TM-579/NS-315. The FDOT codes for these source stone

stockpiles, #67 Granite is '54', #78 Granite is '54', and for Granite Screens is '23'

respectively. The producer of these aggregates is 'Martin Marietta Aggregate'. Figure 3-1

shows the gradation band used for 1-295 PFC project and control points as per FDOT

specification SECTION 337. Table 3-1 and Table 3-2 gives details of composing of job

mix formula of Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) respectively. One percent by weight of

aggregate hydrated lime is added to the mixture as an antistrip agent. 'Global Stone

Corporation' provided hydrated lime.

3.3.2 Binder and Mineral Fiber

An SBS polymer modified asphalt cement PG 76-22 with 0.5% antistrip agent was

used in this project. Mineral fiber used was regular FIBERAND ROAD FIBERS.

'Atlantic Coast Asphalt Co.' supplied asphalt and mineral fiber. The dosage rate of

mineral fiber was 0.4% by weight of total mix.










1-295 PFC Gradations


100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0


No No No No
200100 50 30


No No
8 4

Sieve Sizes


-- Gradation (1) DOT
A Min Control Points


3/8" 1/2" 3/4"


* Max Control Points
--- Gradation (2) UF


Figure 3-1. Gradation of 1-295 PFC mixtures


Table 3-1. JMF composition of Gradation (1)
#78 Granite
Type #67 Granite Granite Screens Lime JMF Control Points
% Amount 20 70 9 1 100 Max Min
Sieve SizeSizeA0.45
37.5 5.11 100 100 100 100 100
25 4.26 100 100 100 100 100
19 3.76 100 100 100 100 100 oo00 100
12.5 3.12 60 95 100 100 89 95 85
9.5 2.75 45 62 100 100 62 65 55
4.75 2.02 8 6 91 100 15 25 15
2.36 1.47 4 4 61 100 10 10 5
1.18 1.08 3 3 38 100 7
0.6 0.79 2 3 22 100 5
0.3 0.58 2 3 15 100 5
0.15 0.43 2 2 7 100 3
0.075 0.31 1 1 3.5 100 2 4 1

Table 3-2. JMF composition of Gradation (2)
#78 Granite
Type #67 Granite Granite Screens Lime JMF Control Points
% Amount 30.0 60.3 8.8 1 100 Max Min
Sieve SizeSizeA0.45
37.5 5.11 100 100 100 100 100
25 4.26 100 100 100 100 100


U"










Table 3-2. Continued
#78 Granite
Type #67 Granite Granite Screens Lime JMF Control Points
% Amount 30.0 60.3 8.8 1 100 Max in
19 3.76 100 100 100 100 100 1001oo
12.5 3.12 60 95 100 100 85 95 85
9.5 2.75 45 62 100 100 61 65 55
4.75 2.02 8 6 91 100 15 25 15
2.36 1.47 4 4 61 100 10 105
1.18 1.08 3 3 38 100 7
0.6 0.79 2 3 22 100 5
0.3 0.58 2 3 15 100 5
0.15 0.43 2 2 7 100 3
0.075 0.31 1 1 3.5 100 24 1



3.4 Location of Project

Figure 3-2 shows the project location, which is on 1-295 between Lem Turner Road

and Duval Road in Jacksonville, Florida. The test section starts at MP 31.910 (Station

1684+88.86 on 1-295) and ends at MP 32.839 (Station 1733+91.61 on 1-295), outside

lane at northbound and south bound.


w

VIJa, S i .e ,1-,l, .i' rf.'
FI. Ie
;I~~iljl '-"!1 Ei'~

F-

Pt,~e' Lmcd~m


AJU'jA


Figure 3-2. Project Location


%a AV .,1.
ruh ir C drI e1 r, rp fq









3.5 Specification and Hypothesis Used

As per FDOT specification SECTION 337-4, developed based on previous work

done described in Chapter 2, and the design of the PFC mixtures is based on the final

procedure developed in Chapter 3. The basic steps in the mixture design may be

summarized as follows:

1. The design number of gyration should be 50.

2. Final JMF should be within the gradation limit specified in Table 337-2 of FDOT
specification SECTION 337-3.3.2. This specified gradation limit is shown in Table
3-3

3. The PFC mix design should use a SBS modified PG 76-22 asphalt binder.

4. The optimum asphalt content should be selected at the minimum voids in the
mineral aggregate (VMA) content.

5. The air void content should be between 18 and 22 percent.

6. Hydrated Lime dosage rate of 1.0% by weight of the total dry aggregate.

7. Mineral fiber dosage rate of 0.4% by weight of the total mix.

Table 3-3. PFC Gradation Design Range from FDOT specification SECTION 337
Control Points
Sive Size
Max Min
(mm)
% Amount Passing
37.5
25
19 100 100
12.5 95 85
9.5 65 55
4.75 25 15
2.36 10 5
1.18
0.6
0.3
0.15
0.0754 1









The FDOT contractor proposed a JMF (Gradation (1)) for the given source

gradations of stockpiles. As the source gradation was gap graded and gradation limits

according to SECTION 337 are tight, it was difficult to adjust this gradation to obtain

another candidate gradation. Therefore, only one other trial gradation was used in

addition to the contractor's gradation. The second gradation, denoted as Gradation (2)

was based on increasing the amount of coarser stone in the mix. This objective was

accomplished by increasing the percentage of # 67 granite from 20 % to 30 %.

Even though, the material type used in Georgia PEM mix design development is

different than in the 1-295 PFC project, its characteristics are used as base for the

evaluation of fracture results. Table 3-1 and Table 3-2 shows source gradation and final

JMF of Gradation (1), Gradation (2) and Georgia PEM gradation. The hump in gradation

at No. 4 sieve might create some effect fracture resistance because of uneven aggregate

arrangement in mix.

3.6 Determination of Optimum Asphalt Content

Based on number of experiments, the Georgia DOT suggested that if the gradation

is within the specific limits, the initial estimate comes out to be 6% using granites that are

native to Georgia. Hence, the probable optimum asphalt content with in this gradation

band is 6% if the aggregate is Georgia granite. Depending on surface texture and

angularity of aggregates, or a change in the JMF might cause changes in optimum asphalt

content. Therefore, four trial percentages (5.5%, 5.8%, 6.2% and 6.5%) for each

gradation, and two piles for each trial percentage are produced in this project.









3.6.1 Mixing and Compaction

Sieved and batched aggregates, asphalt and mineral fiber are preheated for 3 hours

in an oven before mixing. Due to the SBS modified viscous asphalt and addition of

mineral fiber; the mixing temperature was selected as 330 o F (1650 C), to maintain

enough flow during mixing. All tools and mixing drum were also preheated to 3500 F

(1760 C).

While mixing, asphalt is added to mix of aggregate and mineral fiber. These SBS

mixes are very sticky, making mixing and handling challenging. Therefore, it is

important to ensure that while retrieving material from mixing drum there is no loss of

fines. Mixing procedure was the same for both Rice testing specimens as well as the

Superpave gyratory compacted specimens. It is also important to avoid over heating of

binder during mixing, as it causes aging of binder.

Before compaction, the mixes are subjected to Short Term Oven Aging (STOA) for

two hours, which includes stirring after one hour. Compaction temperature is reduced to

320 o F, for avoiding draindown of binder during compaction. As already stated, 50

gyrations were used to attain compaction level similar to field after traffic consolidation.

The angle of gyration kept during compaction was 1.25. Essentially, because of sticky

nature of these mixture oil is sprayed in molds.

From prior experience, compacted samples are not retrieved from the molds

immediately. They are allowed to cool from lhr 45 min before retrieving from molds.

Once the specimen is ejected from the mold let it cool for 5 min before holding specimen.

Especially in granite mixtures if cooling after ejection is not allowed small aggregates

due to high air voids stick to gloves and comes out causing discontinuity in specimen.









Allow piles to cool for 24 hr before any further processing or activity related to the

compacted specimens.

Determination of Rice specific gravity (Gmm) on loose PFC mixes was done in

accordance with AASHTO T209 (See Appendix B). Calculations of all volumetric

properties are shown in Appendix B. The determination of optimum asphalt content was

as per recommended specification, as specified in Chapter 3, by selecting AC at the

lowest point of the VMA curve.

Gradation (2) is coarser than Gradation (1), which results in more surface area in

Gradation (1) as compared to Gradation (2). Refer to Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-4 for mix

design details for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2), respectively. A decrease in effective

specific gravity of Mixture 2 with respect to Mixture 1 shows the increase in volume of

water permeable pores not absorbing asphalt. These facts support reduction in optimum

asphalt content of Gradation (2). Essentially, the VMA at optimum asphalt content is not

changing significantly for both gradations. Basically, Gradation (2) is giving air voids

(21.93 %) similar to Gradation (1) (21.2%) and all other volumetric properties are

comparable and within the restricted specification ranges. Therefore, the final selection

of gradation depends on fracture test results.




















Effective Sp Grav

of Agg % AC6 Gmm' Gmb2 VMA3 (%) VTM4 (%) VFA (%

2.732 5.5 2.513 1.944 32.777 22.655 30.883

5.8 2.501 1.955 32.603 21.820 33.073

6.2 2.473 1.964 32.600 20.578 36.877

6.5 2.470 1.966 32.721 20.379 37.718


Voids in Total Mix


Voids in Mineral Aggregates


Voids filled with Asphalt


2200


2100


2000


54 56 58


6 62 64 66
% AC


3275

3270

S3265- ---

3260______


56 58


6 62 64 66
%AC


ry uu --- ---- --- ---- --- ---
38 00
3700 _
36 00 -
35 00 --
34 00 -
33 00
3200
31 00 ---
30 00 --- ---


54 56 58


6 62 64 66
% AC


Figure 3-3. Mix Design of PFC Gradation (1) with aggregate type: Granite


Optimum Asphalt Content: 6.0% Gmm at Optimum Asphalt Content:- 2.485


Mineral Fiber: 0.4% of Total Mix VMA at Optimum Asphalt Content: 32.69%



Gmm1 = Maximum specific gravity of mixture, Gmb2 = Bulk specific gravity of mixture, VMA3 = Voids in Mineral Aggregates,


VTM4 = Voids in Total Mix, VFA5 = Voids filled with Asphalt, AC6 = Asphalt Content
















Effective Sp Grav.
of Agg. % AC6 Gmm' Gmb2 VMA3 (%) VTM 4 % VFAs (%

2.722 5.5 2.497 1.935 32.819 22.501 31.440
5.8 2.494 1.946 32.648 21.963 32.727

6.2 2.479 1.953 32.713 21.245 35.057
6.5 2.452 1.957 32.788 20.212 38.357


Voids in Total Mix


Voids in Mineral Aggregates


Voids filed with Asphalt


32.85
32.80
32.75
32.70
32.65
32.60


54 56 58 6 62 64 66
%oAC


56 58 6 62
% AC


64 66


3900
3800
3700
36 00
35 00
S34 00
33 00
3200
31 00 -
3000
5


4 56 58


6 62 64 66
%AC


Figure 3-4. Mix Design of PFC Gradation (2) with aggregate type: Granite


Optimum Asphalt Content: 5.9% Gmm at Optimum Asphalt Content:- 2.491


Mineral Fiber: 0.4% of Total Mix VMA at Optimum Asphalt Content: 32.76%


Gmm1 = Maximum specific gravity of mixture, Gmb2 = Bulk specific gravity of mixture, VMA3 = Voids in Mineral Aggregates,


VTM4 = Voids in Total Mix, VFA5 = Voids filled with Asphalt, AC6 = Asphalt Content


2300

2200

2100

2000


i/









3.6.2 Asphalt Film Thickness

As granite has fine texture, the surface absorption is negligible, meaning that water

absorption (Waterab =0) can be assumed to be negligible. The surface areas calculated for

Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) are based on the method proposed by Nukunya et al

(2001 and discussed in Chapter 3. The resulting surface areas for Mixture 1 and Mixture

2 are 1.8 mA2/Kg and 1.78 mA2/Kg, respectively. Taking the total asphalt content for

both gradation as the effective asphalt content the film thickness is calculated by

following equation mentioned in recommended specification (Chapter 2):

Vy x1000
Tm = (2.3)
Sm SA x W
Where,

16. Wgg = Weight of aggregate
SA = Surface area

Gradation (1) has film thickness of 33.12microns where as Gradation (2) has of 31.65

microns. These film thicknesses for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) are calculated

assuming zero asphalt absorption. Both film thicknesses are above the specified

minimum film thickness requirement, i.e. 32 microns, for 0% to 0.5% asphalt absorption.

The minimum film thickness requirement is to ensure resistance against stripping and

asphalt hardening.

3.7 Superpave IDT Performance Test Results

In the following, the results from the Superpave IDT fracture testing results are

presented. The basics of the Superpave IDT test equipment and data acquisition system

have been specified by Buttlar and Roque (1994), Roque et al., (1997), and AASHTO









TP-9. Additional information on the specific testing system used in this study is as

follows:

* An environmental chamber was used to control specimen temperature. The
chamber is capable of maintaining temperatures between -30 C and 300 C with an
accuracy of +0.10 C.

* Loads were controlled using a MTS Model 418.91 MicroProfiler.

* Vertical and horizontal deformation measurements were obtained using
extensometers designed by MTS specifically for use with the Superpave IDT. A
gage length of 1.5 inches was used for all specimens.

Since the friction course mixtures are very porous, it was decided that the sample

thickness be around 1.5 -2 inches in order to avoid end effects. A cutting device, which

has a cutting saw and a special attachment to hold the pills, was used to slice the pill into

specimens of desired thickness. Two two-inch samples were obtained from each

specimen. Because the saw uses water to keep the blade wet, the specimens were dried

for one day at room temperature to achieve the natural moisture content. Before testing,

the specimens were placed in the humidity chamber for at least two days to negate

moisture effects in testing.

Gage points were attached to the samples using a steel template and vacuum pump

setup and a strong adhesive. Four gage points were placed on each side of the specimens

at distance of 19 mm (0.75 in.) from the center, along the vertical and horizontal axes. A

steel plate that fits over the attached gage points was used to mark the loading axis with a

marker. This helped placing the sample in the testing chamber assuring proper loading of

the specimen.

Standard Superpave IDT tests were performed on all mixtures to determine resilient

modulus, creep compliance, m-value, D1, tensile strength, failure strain, fracture energy,

and dissipated creep strain energy to failure. The tests were performed at 100C. First,









resilient modulus test was conducted on specimen. Thereafter, specimen was allowed to

rest for 45 min, before creep test was conducted, in order to regain delayed elasticity.

The indirect tensile strength test was performed after the creep test.

3.7.1 Superpave Indirect Test Results and Analysis

Superpave fracture testing was conducted on both mixes prepared for Gradation (1)

and Gradation (2). Mixes were subjected to short-term oven aging. Even though, these

porous mixtures with air voids around 21% does not hold moisture, the specimens were

kept in dehumidifier for 48 hours before testing. The applied stress used for calculation of

Energy ratio is 88.23 psi. Georgia PEM fracture test results were used as a reference to

understand the mechanism of aggregate structure. Table 3-4 provides a summary of

fracture test results of Georgia PEM and 1-295 PFC project mixtures.

Figure 3-5 (a) through (i), show comparison of the Superpave IDT test results. The

parameters presented include: Energy Ratio, Fracture Energy, Dissipated Creep Strain

Energy, Failure Strain, Creep Compliance, Resilient Modulus, Strain Rate, Creep Rate

and Tensile Strength between Georgia PEM and PFC mixtures. Although, Gradation (1)

shows higher tensile strength, the Energy Ratio for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) are

1.66 and 1.20 for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) respectively. Because of reduction in

surface area and increase in volume of water permeable pores not absorbing asphalt there

should be increase in film thickness in Gradation (2) over Gradation (1). But, the

reduction in optimum asphalt content counteracted this effect. Hence the creep response,

which is a measure of the visco-elastic nature of asphalt, was about the same for both

gradations. The creep compliance of Gradation (1) is 17.53 (1/Gpa), which is comparable

with the creep compliance of Gradation (2) i.e. 18.07 (1/Gpa).












Table 3-4. Summary of Indirect Tensile Test performed on 1-295 PFC mixtures
88.23
Property Stress=

Creep Strain
Sample Resilient compliance Tensile Fracture Failure Elastic Rate
Modulusat 1000 StrengthEnergy Strain D1 10 ) E. per
alue (kJ/m^3) atio
(Gpa) seconds (Mpa) (kJ/mA3)(10-6) aue ((k/mA3) Unit
(1/Gpa) stress

Georgia 8.35E-
Georga 4.97 19.933 1.24 4.2 4383.20.74 35E4.05 4133.730.154 1.95 1.1E-07
PEM 07
Gradation 1.2E-
4.41 17.531 1.15 3.6 3940.10.66 3.45 3679.320.150 1.67 7.9E-08
(1) 06
Gradation 8.9E-
5.01 18.078 1.12 2.4 2742.3 0.71 2.27 2518.79 0.125 1.21 8.6E-08
(2) 07









Fracture Energy


I


I


Georgia Gradation Gradation
PEM (1) (2)

Failure Strain





1-


, 5.00 -
4.00
, 3.00 -
2.00
1.00
0.00


Georgia Gradation Gradation
PEM (1) (2)


Georgia Gradation Gradation
PEM (1) (2)


DCSE


I


I


Georgia Gradation Gradation
PEM (1) (2)


Creep Compliance


Georgia Gradation Gradation
PEM (1) (2)


Resilient Modulus

6
4-
3



Georgia Gradation Gradation
PEM (1) (2)


Tensile Strength


1.20E-09
1.00E-09
8.00E-10
. 6.00E-10
2.00E-10
O.OOE+00


1
Georgia
PEM


Gradation Gradation
(1) (2)


1.50
1.00
S0.50
S0.00
r


Georgia Gradation Gradation
PEM (1) (2)


G) H)
Figure 3-5. A)Energy Ratio, B) Failure Energy, C) Failure Strain, D) DCSE, E) Creep
Compliance, F) Resilient Modulus, G) Strain Rate, H) Tensile Strength, I)
Creep Rate


2.50
S2.00
1.50
S1.00
0.50


u.uu


S5000
' 4000
S3000
2000
0 looc


- 25
20
15
S10
5


Strain Rate


"1


-- !


Energy Ratio


I-










Creep Rate

S1.20E-09
1.00E-09
8.00E-10
6.00E-10
4.00E-10
2.00E-10
.0.00E+00
Georgia Gradation Gradation
PEM (1) (2)

Figure 3-5. Continued

Essentially, due to this reason, the resilient modulus of Gradation (1) and Gradation

(2) are 4.41 Gpa and 5.01 Gpa, respectively, which are comparable magnitudes for the

resilient modulus. The Georgia PEM had a creep compliance of 19.933 1/Gpa and a creep

rate of 1x10^-7 1/psi-sec, which implies that the arrangement of aggregate structure is

such that it is giving more room for mastic between coarse aggregate. This indicates the

aggregate arrangement and interaction of coarse and fine aggregate in mixes plays an

important role thus affecting the strength of Gradation (2) relative to Gradation (1).

3.8 Analysis of Fracture Result Based on Interstitial Volume and Aggregate Interaction

Ongoing work at the University of Florida has led to the establishment of a

tentative gradation selection framework for the optimization of the fracture resistance of

dense graded mixtures. Key concepts in this new proposed framework include the

observation that enhanced cracking resistance can be obtained by ensuring that the

aggregates in the course portion of the mixture gradation interact sufficiently amongst

each other to allow for the effective transfer of forces through the course-aggregate

portion of the mixture. This interaction of the course aggregate component should not

reach down to the finer materials, so as to control mixture sensitivity. The material

within the interstitial volume of the course aggregate portion also needs to be

proportioned and designed so that an adequate Dissipated Creep Strain Energy (DCSE)










limit is maintained, as well as providing enough flow and ductility to enhance the fracture

resistance of the mixture. Too little interstitial material, or interstitial material with a low

creep strain rate, will result in a brittle mixture. It is anticipated that these gradation

concepts will be transferable to Georgia-PEM mixtures, thus allowing for the

development of guidelines for the selection of gradations that optimize the resistance to

cracking.

3.8.1 Determination of Porosity and Interstitial Volume

In the following, the portion of the coarse aggregate for each of the three mixtures

will be evaluated, followed by a characterization of the interstitial volume component.

First, the aggregate interaction curve needs to be defined:

The Aggregate Interaction Curve: Aggregate interaction curve is plot of points of

interaction of aggregate size with its successive aggregate size. Following is equation

used for calculating points of interaction: -


% Retained Particle Interaction Point= (% Retained at Sieve Size) 100 (3.1)
(% Retained at Succesive Sieve Size + (% Retained at Sieve Size)


Aggregate Interaction Curve

S 100
90



k 40
S 830
20
10
0



Contiguous sizes, nun
--- Gradation (1) Georgia PEM + Gradation (2)

Figure 3-6. Curve showing interaction between contiguous aggregate sizes









Figure 3-6 shows the aggregate interaction curves for Georgia PEM and 1-295 PFC

projects. If the percent Retained Particle Interaction falls outside the range between 30%

and 70% the aggregates in that size range are not interacting. Therefore, aggregate sizes

below this break point are not interacting towards contribution of strength. These

aggregate sizes are filling the cavities between coarse aggregate above the break points.

The aggregate sizes below the break point along with asphalt are contributing to the

Interstitial Volume. The range of aggregate sizes above this break point between 30%-

70% is called the "Dominant Aggregate Size Range" (DASR).

Porosity: Porosity for this DASR represents the actual porosity for the total mix. It

is the ratio of summation of volume of air voids and effective asphalt in compacted mix,

to volume of DASR and below.

(Volume of Air Voids) + (Volume of Effective Asphalt)
Porosity = (3.2)
Volume of Aggregates 1i ihin DASR and below DASR)
Interstitial Volume: Mastic, comprising aggregate sizes below break point, asphalt

and air voids, forms the interstitial volume of compacted mixture. The interstitial volume

is the ratio of mastic in specimen to the total volume of compacted mixture.

(Volume of Mastic)
Interstitial Volume= (Volume f Mastic) (3.3)
Total Volume of Compacted _Mixture

The film thickness based on Interstitial Volume ( fiT): Calculation of surface area

is main issue of this method. As per the hypothesis discussed above, aggregates below the

break point (i.e. aggregates within the interstitial volume) contain all of the effective

asphalt volume, thus covering the coarse aggregate. The surface area (SA) of aggregates

below the break point is calculated using surface area factors tabulated in Table 3-7 are

calculated. As the absorption in granite is negligible, the total asphalt content is taken as

V W
effective asphalt content ( eff) of the compacted mixture. Weight of aggregates ( agg) in









air is taken into account for calculating film thickness. Equation 3-1 denotes calculation

of film thickness with in interstitial volume:

V x 1000
Tflm (3.4)
SA SA xW

Table 3-5. Surface area factors


Surface Area
Percent Area Surface Area
Sieve Size Percent Factor
Passing

ft.2/lb. m2/Kg ft2/Ib. m2/Kg
11/2 in.(37.5mm) 100
1 in. (25.0mm) 100
3/4 in. (19.0mm) 100
1/2 in. (12.5mm) 89
3/8 in .(9.5mm) 62 2.0 0.41
No.4 4.75mm 15 2 0.41 0.3 0.06


Aggregate Aggregate
with in with in
interstitial interstitial
volume volume



3.8.2 Analysis and Conclusion

The DASR of Gradation (1) and the Georgia PEM is 9.5-4.75 mm, resulting in

porosity of 46.29% and 49.51% respectively. Table 3-6 shows the porosity and interstitial

volume of all the three JMFs. Due to the interaction of 12.5 mm aggregate size with

successive aggregate size, the DASR of Gradation (2) is 12.5-4.75, resulting in a porosity

of 42.71%. As porosity is below 50% the mixes should perform well in strength.

Similarly, due to the relatively high interaction resulting in percent retained particle

interaction of 44.77 percent (see Figure 3-6) in the critical 9.5-4.75 range, the Georgia

PEM mixture is expected have a higher energy ratio than Gradation (1) and Gradation









(2), which had percent retained particle interaction of 35.55% and 34.85% respectively,

as shown in Figure 3-6.

Table 3-7 shows the interstitial volume for the three mixtures studied. The

interstitial volume of Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) is comparatively the same.

Therefore due to the same amount of interstitial volume component, for both gradations,

it is not surprising that both gradations result in a similar creep response.

Table 3-6. Porosity for all the dominant aggregate size ranges (DASR)
9.5mm 4.75mm 2.36 mm

Range 12.5-9.5 9.5-4.7512.5-4.75 4.75-2.369.5-2.3612.5-2.36

Gradation (1) 74.65 46.29 42.70 52.77 42.71 39.39
Georgia PEM 71.97 49.51 46.04 50.34 38.96 36.23
Gradation (2) 73.44 47.51 42.71 53.56 43.76 39.34

The Similarly, Georgia PEM results in a higher creep compliance and strain rate

due to the higher interstitial volume. Due to this reason, the DCSE threshold for

Gradation (1) and Gradation (1) is reduced to 2.27 KJ/mA3 and 3.45 KJ/mA3, respectively

from 4.05 Kj/mA3 for the Georgia-PEM granite.

Table 3-7. Interstitial Volume for different JMFs
Film Thickness
JMF Interstitial Volume (%) with in Interstitial
Volume (Microns)
Gradation (1) 42.70 33.12
Georgia PEM 46.04 54.58
Gradation (2) 42.71 31.65

In summary, it is not possible to differentiate between the fracture performance of

Gradation (1) and (2) at the low Superpave IDT test temperature of 10 C. Therefore, it

was recommended that Gradation (1) be selected since the FDOT contractor had already

obtained all necessary materials to run that mixture. The difference in fracture









performance between Gradations (1) and (2) did not justify the selection of Gradation (2)

over Gradation (1).

3.9 Verification of Locking Point of Selected Gradation for 1-295 PFC Project

According to Vardhan (2004) the compaction curve follows a logarithmic trend. To

identify the locking point, the rate of change of slope of compaction curve was used. The

stage, at which the rate of change of compaction was insignificant, was essentially the

point of maximum resistance to compaction. The locking point, i.e. 49, was identified as

the point at which two gyrations at same gradient of slope were preceded by two

gyrations at same gradient of slope. The gradient was taken up to four decimal places (as

shown in Table 3-8 for PFC-Granite mixture, Gradation (1)).

Table 3-8. Locking Point Based on Gradient of Slope
Number of
umer of Gradient of Slope
Gyration
39 0.0022
40 0.0020
41 0.0020
42 0.0019
43 0.0018
44 0.0017
45 0.0016
46 0.0015
47 0.0015
48 0.0014
49 (LP) 0.0014
50 0.0013


3.10 Summary and Conclusion

The optimum asphalt content for Gradation (1) and Gradation (2) were determined

at 6% and 5.9% respectively. The difference in fracture test parameters for both

gradations is not significant. As shown in Table 3-7, the coarser portion in Gradation (2)









was increased by 10% over that of Gradation (1), but the interstitial volume of both

mixtures was unchanged at 42.70%. Therefore, the creep response of both mixtures is

approximately the same. This implies that interaction between coarser and finer part of

gradation and aggregate arrangement plays important role in optimizing fracture

resistance.

Gradation (1) is recommended for construction of test section at 1-295 even though

both gradations are performing well, as the Gradation (1) is giving higher Energy Ratio,

and there was simply no justification for selecting Gradation (2) over Gradation (1).














CHAPTER 4
A PROPOSED NEW FRACTURE TEST FOR ASPHALT MASTIC

4.1 Purpose and Need

Analysis of 1-295 project mixture's fracture test results shows importance of

interstitial volume in the fracture performance of mixtures. Mastic within the interstitial

volume, which is comprised of asphalt and aggregates below the break point of the

'Aggregate Interaction Curve' likely has an impact on the creep and fracture response of

mixtures. Therefore, it is important to be able to study the tensile strength and the

fracture energy of the mastic component under direct tension loading conditions. This

chapter presents the preliminary design of a new mastic fracture test.

4.2 Background

A device for studying fracture initiation and crack growth in mortar was developed

by Mindess & Diamond (1980). This device was modified version of work developed by

Subramanian et al (1978) for study of crack growth in ceramics. The specimen

configuration used by Mindesss & Diamond (1980) was similar to the compact tension

described in ASTM E399 (1978): Plain-Strain fracture toughness of Metallic Material.

This device functions is such a way that cracking is induced under carefully controlled

conditions, so that the details of slow crack growth may be observed at high

magnification in the SEM at all stages in the cracking process. This device was

constructed to permit the testing of wedge-loaded compact tension. Using this device, the

process of cracking was observed in mortar specimens. It was found that the process of

crack extension in mortars is very complicated: the crack is tortuous, there is some









branch cracking, discontinuities in the cracks are observed, and there is some tearing

away of small bits of material in some areas of cracking. The results suggest that the

simple fracture mechanics models oversimplify the geometric features of the crack

extension process.

4.3 Specimen and Test Device Design

The basic idea for this test is that tension can be induced by penetrating a wedge

between two rollers that lie on steel rods that penetrate through the specimen. Figure 4-1

shows specimen with bearings mounted on steel rods and wedge in loading direction
























Figure 4-1. Model showing Specimen along with bearings fitted on steel rods and wedge
in loading direction.

The specimen is 32 mm long, 24 mm wide and 13 mm thick with a 13 mm long and

0.6 mm wide notch at loading side of specimen.

Two 3.10 mm diameter steel rods on either side of notch were cast into specimen

for applying load. Figure 4-2 and 4.3 show the geometry of the specimen. Steel rods are







69


placed at 6 mm distance from outer edge of specimen. Steel bearings were fitted on steel

rods to make friction less application of load on specimen through rods.

A notch is provided in the specimen to create a stress concentration and pre-define

the path of cracking. Also, without the notch, there is a slight possibility that cracks

initiate at the contact area between the steel rods and the mastic, rather than in the desired

center portion of the test specimen. The steel rods are extended for 6.5 mm over the

specimen surface at both the top and the bottom sides of the specimen in order to avoid

contact of bearing roller and the driving wedge with the specimen



.0 -----4,00----.-
















7D
St 3ee







1 ^ 3.10


Steel
Rods V- 11.70 -- .70


Figure 4-2. Plan view showing geometry of specimen











/\T
teer 6,5o
Rods




26.00 1300




Notch
6, 0




Figure 4-3. Front view showing geometry of specimen

The rate of loading is directly proportional to angle of wedge. As the wedge moves

in forward direction, the distance between the bearings is increasing gradually, causing an

increase in tension at the tip of the notch stress concentrator. Due to the roller bearings,

there is no friction associated with the load transfer from the wedge to the steel rods. A

mechanical system is required to propel the wedge in a forward direction. Mindess &

Diamond (1980) developed a device, which uses a screw system for the driving of the

wedge. Their test device is shown in Figure 4-4. It consists of a frame to support the

specimen and the loading wedge; the turning of a screw advances the wedge, such that

one complete rotation of the screw advances the wedge 0.64 mm. The screw feed is

activated through a pulley system driven by a small electric motor and a gearbox with a

reduction of 360:1. The motor is rated at 12 volts; by varying the voltage using a variable

power supply, different rates of motion of the wedge can be achieved. The overall

dimensions of the device are 82.6 mm long, 41.0 mm wide and 54.0 mm high.






























Figure 4-4. Testing Device used by Mindess & Diamond (1980) for SEM testing on
cement mortar

4.4 Formulation of Tensile Force Transfer from Wedge to Specimen

The rotary action of an electrical motor moves a screw through pulley action with

the help of a rubber belt. One complete rotation of this screw moves the wedge for 0.64

mm in direction towards notch. The load applied on the wedge can be measured by

placing a load cell at the back of the specimen. As it can be assumed that the complete

system is acting as a rigid body for the determination of the balance of external forces.

The load (P) on the specimen applied by wedge, is measured by a load cell located at the

end of the specimen.

In the following, the static analysis is presented for calculating horizontal thrust on

the steel rod due to wedge loading:









Taking Moment at point B, shown in Figure 4-5, results in:

x
-(P x ) + xx = 0 (4.1)

Solving for Va

x
Va xx = (P x )
2
P
Va = (4.2)
2
Where,

P = Applied load on wedge

Va = Vertical component of resultant 'Ra'

x = Horizontal distance between bearings

As the wedge moves in the y-direction, there is a change of distance 'x'. In the above

equation there is no affect of 'x'. The force components Va and Ha, shown in Figure 4-5

denote the the vertical and horizontal component of the reaction Ra. The angle 0 in

Equation 4-3 is the half angle of the wedge used to apply the load. Resolving forces in the

horizontal direction for equilibrium at point A results in:

H, =cos0 x R (4.3)

and Va = sinO x Ra (4.4)

Substituting Equation 4-2 into Equation 4-4, results in:

P
sin0 xR =R
2

Hence, solving for Ra results in:

P 1
Ra -x (4.5)
2 sin 0






73



P




------- -
7
\ /
\ /
1
Y
\ /
", /
Ha \ B Hb

S :\ /


/90-e 9/-e



Va Vb



x
X


Figure 4-5. Static analysis of force transfer from Wedge to Steel rods (Wedge angle =
2x0)

Finally, solving for H, by substituting value of Ra from Equation 4-5 to 4.3 results

in:

P 1
H = cos x x (4.6)
2 sin 0

This means that the wedge angle (0 x 2) is inversely proportional to horizontal thrust

Ha. Therefore, a small wedge angle will result in a high horizontal thrust, hence

minimizing the effect of the vertical component of the vertical force 'P'. However, a

small wedge angle requires a longer wedge to cause the same magnitude of horizontal









force (tensile force) than a large angle wedge. As this specimen is designed for compact

fracture testing on mastic, it may be desirable to keep the testing device as small as

possible. Therefore, it is recommended to make the wedge angle at least 4-5 degrees.

The final wedge designed for this study has has a wedge angle of 4.50, resulting in:

H, = 12.72 x P (For 0 = 2.250) (4.7)

Hence horizontal thrust is approximately 12 times P.

4.5 Verification of Stress States within Loaded Specimen

In order to verify the stress concentration at the notch and to ensure that the sizing

of the steel rods did not cause excessive bearing forces in the specimen, a finite element

analysis using ADINA was performed.

Considering the line of symmetry along the centerline of the notch, the specimen is

divided into two half, with only one half being analyzed with ADINA. Plain stress

analysis is done on 2-D model of specimen in ADINA by dividing the total surface in to

15 sub surfaces, shown in Figure 4-6. The isotropic linear elastic material finite element

analysis in ADINA is done on specimen. The critical section line is divided into 170

elements with last element to first element ratio 0.25. Figure 4-7 shows meshing of sub

surfaces divided. The modulus of steel adopted is 19GPa with Poisson ratio of 0.3 for the

finite element analysis. The modulus of asphalt mastic at temperature 100 C is taken 4

Gpa and poisons ratio was 0.18. Essentially, while executing plain stress finite element

analyses in ADINA the stress obtain at any section are irrespective to modulus.

In order to keep the problem general, all results below are presented in terms of

normalized loads. A horizontal thrust of 12.72 x P is applied at steel pin's center. In

ADINA, the load P is taken as P = 1, for simplicity. Therefore the Ha = 12.72 and Va =









0.5 from Equation 4-4 and Equation 4-7. Figure 4-8 shows the exaggerated deformation

of the 2-D model due to the effects of Ha and Va.















U U

F1 d i t 1
S24 S16




S 25:: j




Figure 4-6. Specimen 2-D Model subdivided in to 15 surfaces







76









317

















Figure 4-7. Meshing of 15 sub surface with critical model line divided into 175 elements.





DISP MAG 166

17





B V
C-


Figure 4-8. Deflection of Specimen's 2-D Model subdivided.









The predicted stress (oyy) distribution along the centerline of the specimen is

shown in Figure 4-9. As expected, the maximum stress is found at the tip of notch

(oyy = 273 x P/ mm2), which confirms the stress concentration effects of the

notch.


Stress (6yy) Distribution from tip of Notch along center of specimen

300.00

250.00 Stress at Tip of
I \Notch 273 P/mm^2
< 200.00

S150.00

S100.00

50.00

0.00

-50.0o0 0 0.70 0.90 1.10 1.30 1.50 1.70 1.90 2.10

Coordinate distance (mm)


Figure 4-9. Stress distributions along centerline of specimen Tensile stress is shown as
positive.

Figure 4-10 shows the distribution of stresses (oyy) along the circumference of the

steel pins at contact with the mastic. The normalized stress distribution is a function of

the load "P" which is applied to the wedge. Part of this contact surface facing loading is

in compression. As the steel pin is loaded, the surface behind the loading area develops

tension. Due to the observed stresses at the tip of notch being substantially higher than

stresses at the contact surface between the mastic and the steel pins, the initiation of crack

is much more likely to be at the tip of the notch.




































Figure 4-10. Stress distribution along circumference of steel pin



4.6 Sample Preparation Guidelines

Aggregates contributing to the interstitial volume below the break point in the

aggregate interaction curve, discussed previously in section 5.5.1, are mixed with total

asphalt content of the 1-295 PFC mixture for preparing the mastic.

Table 4-1 shows the proportion of the aggregate gradation below the breakpoint for

the 1-295 PFC mixture that is mixed with the 6 percent asphalt by weight of the total

mixture (see Chapter 5 for mixture design details).


Stress distribution along circumference of Steel Pin

30.00

20.00

< 10.00

0 0.00

10.00

-20.00

-30.00


Circumferential distance (mm)









Table 4-1. Part of fine aggregates to be mixed with total asphalt content (6%) of 1-295
PFC project


Sieve Size


11/2 in. (37.5mm)
1 in. (25.0mm)
3/4 in. (19.0mm)
1/2 in. (12.5mm)
3/8 in .(9.5mm)


F-
Aggregate
within
interstitial
volume


Aggregate
within
interstitial
volume


The aggregates and asphalt binder are heated to 3300 F 3.5 o F (1650 C 3.5F)

for 2 hours before mixing. The aggregates are mixed with the asphalt binder using

equipment as specified in AASHTO T-209-99 (2004) for mixing. The prepared mastic is

molded into the desired shape, using a mold shown in Figure 4-11. Figure 4-12 shows

geometry of main base plate to which side plates are attached. As the asphalt tends to

bulge inside after cooling at the surface in contact with air, it is recommended that the

mastic should be filled to a level slightly above the mold surface. The mold in Figure 4-

10 is designed to provide a flat surface for trimming the excess mastic. First fit the steel

pins and then assemble the mold into the groves of the bottom base plate and notch plate.

Then, the top base plate is fitted on top and all bolts are screwed into position for a tight

mold.











A '-


Figure 4-11. Mold for preparing specimen for Fracture and SEM testing


Figure 4-12. Geometry of main base plate to which side plates are attached


~G~






81


4.7 Recommendation for Further Development

Further work needs to be done for developing a test device and deformation

measurement system. The following recommendations should be considered in further

development:

* A trial test specimen needs to be molded using the mold shown in Figure 4-11 to
check workability.

* A wedge angle within the range of 4% to 5% to obtain maximum horizontal thrust
with optimum wedge length, is recommended.














CHAPTER 5
PERFORMANCE TEST DATABASE (PTD)

5.1 Preface

This program was developed to store and analyze data from performance testing of

mixtures (Performance Test Database: PTD). The program is entirely interactive. It

is set up for easy navigation from one part of the program to another. The functionalities

included are: 1) data input, 2) data extraction, 3) data export to database, 4) data analysis,

and 5) report generation. All the instructions for using the tutorial are available in the

help menu and user's manual in order to work with the program's interface.

Program details in this manual are provided for system administrators or

programmers that want to understand its architecture and design, to extend or modify

the PTD.

5.1.1 Package Information

This package for the PTD contains the following:

a) The User's Manual.

b) One set of CDs labeled PTD

The User's Manual contains information on how to operate the program and how to

execute the commands. It also describes terminology behind programming and provides

details of algorithms developed for specific task.









5.1.2 System Requirements

The minimum requirements for successfully executing the PTD program are:

a) Windows2000/Me/Xp or later.

b) 64 MB RAM.

c) Hard disk with 2.5 MB of free space.

The PTD program may be installed either onto a hard-disk system or onto a

network computer system, and can also be easily uninstalled by using the provided

installation software.

5.1.3 Supported Output Format Requirement

The P.T.D. supports multiple report output formats. All reports are generated in a

native Access format which is transformed into other output formats by Visual Basic

commands. The following formats are supported :

Print

This output format requires a computer system connected to a printer. This format

uses default printer settings. The report is printed directly using this option.

Rich text format

This format creates word file with a rich text format extension (.rtf) at a user

specified directory. Image characters of the report are not retained in this output format.

Email

This output format provides the means to export a report to other systems through

email. An automated function is used to send a report as an attachment to an email. This

option requires that the Microsoft Outlook SendmailTM be activated. There is an option to

choose the format of the report from the Rich text format, Snapshot format, Microsoft

Excel Format, HTML, and MS-Dos text format.









The rich text, Snapshot and HTML formats are preferred as original alignment is

maintained in the extracted data.

5.2 Program Overview

The Superpave Indirect Tensile Test at Low Temperatures (ITLT) computer

program can be used to analyze test data obtained from the Superpave Indirect Tensile

Test. The ITLT program generates five text files, which have the following extensions: -

.MRO, .FAM, .OUT, .IN an .STR files. For input into the PTD database, the Data from

these text files need to be extracted, analyzed and stored for a future reference. This

database is designed with an aim to not only store performance test data, but also to keep

track of the findings and analysis of different mix design and performance test on various

materials. Extracted data from text files is reformatted in order to make storage easier in

the database. The included search engine makes allows the user to customize desired

queries of data and analysis results. The data and analysis results categorized according to

the search criteria are then reported through report generation.

Visual basic for Excel Applications was used to automate the process of data

extraction and formatting in a tabular form. The flowchart in Figure 5-1 provides a

complete overview on the flow of data from raw data files to storage, analysis, and final

report generation.

All the test readings from text files are inputted into an Excel file. There is

interface, which is developed in visual basic that has categorized option for each set of

test data for extracting data from text file.