Implementation of the Double-Edge-Notched Tension Test for Asphalt Cement Acceptance

  • Miglė Paliukaitė
  • Michael Assuras
  • Suyanne Costa Silva
  • Haibo Ding
  • Yamnath Gotame
  • Yihua Nie
  • Imad Ubaid
  • Simon A. M. Hesp
Original Article


This paper focuses on an investigation of the implementation of the double-edge-notched tension protocol (DENT, Ministry of Transportation of Ontario LS-299 and American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials TP 113-15) for the acceptance of asphalt cement. Since 2012, the DENT test has been implemented with associated criteria for the acceptance of modified binders used in provincial and municipal paving contracts. A total of 21 binders from different contracts were collected for this study and tested according to the LS-299 DENT protocol to determine essential and plastic works of failure (we and βwp, measures of strength and toughness), and an approximate critical crack tip opening displacement (CTOD, a measure of strain tolerance). It was found that nearly all samples were able to reach the CTOD as specified in the contract but that a significant number contained recycled engine oil bottoms, with anticipated long term durability and moisture sensitivity problems. Polymer contents were inconsistent across different grades and performance differences between tank and recovered binders were found to be considerable and unpredictable. Hence, it is imperative that, at an early opportunity, recovered binders are tested to assure minimum performance criteria are being met in terms of CTOD as well as we and βwp, and that a ban be implemented on the use of deleterious additives. The implementation of the DENT test will allow user agencies to reduce detrimental fatigue cracking distress in thin asphalt pavements.


Double-edge-notched tension (DENT) test Critical crack tip opening displacement (CTOD) Essential work of failure (weAsphalt cement specification testing Pavement cracking 



Special appreciation goes out to the City of Timmins, Imperial Oil of Canada, the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada, the Regional Municipality of Peel, and the Vermont Agency of Transportation for their support of this research.


  1. 1.
    Anderson DA, Kennedy TW (1993) Development of SHRP binder specification. J Assoc Asphalt Pav 62:481–507Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deacon JA, Harvey JT, Tayebali A, Monismith CL (1997) Influence of binder loss modulus on the fatigue performance of asphalt concrete pavements. J Assoc Asphalt Pav 66:533–585Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Galal KA, White TD (1997) SHRP PG classification and evaluation of in-service asphalts after eight years. In: Jester RN (ed) Progress of superpave—evaluation and implementation, ASTM STP 1322. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp 135–150Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Romero P, Stuart KD, Mogawer WS (2000) Fatigue response of asphalt mixtures tested by the Federal Highway Administration’s Accelerated Loading Facility. J Assoc Asphalt Pav 69:212–235Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stuart KD, Mogawer WS (2002) Validation of the Superpave asphalt binder fatigue cracking parameter using the FHWA’s accelerated loading facility. J Assoc Asphalt Pav 71:116–146Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Iliuta S, Andriescu A, Hesp SAM, Tam KK (2004) Improved approach to low-temperature and fatigue fracture performance grading of asphalt cements. In: Proceedings of the forty-ninth annual conference of the Canadian Technical Asphalt Association, pp 123–158Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andriescu A, Hesp SAM, Youtcheff JS (2004) Essential and plastic works of ductile fracture in asphalt binders. Transp Res Record 1875:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Andriescu A, Iliuta S, Hesp SAM, Youtcheff JS (2004) Essential and plastic works of ductile fracture in asphalt binders and mixtures. In: Proceedings of the forty-ninth annual conference of the Canadian Technical Asphalt Association, pp 93–122Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhao MO, Hesp SAM (2006) Performance grading of the Lamont, Alberta C-SHRP pavement trial binders. Int J Pav Eng 7(3):199–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bodley T, Andriescu A, Hesp SAM, Tam KK (2007) Comparison between binder and hot mix asphalt properties and early top-down wheel path cracking in a northern Ontario pavement trial. J Assoc Asphalt Pav Technol 76: 345–390Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hesp SAM, Genin SN, Scafe D, Shurvell HF, Subramani S (2009) Five-year performance review of a northern Ontario pavement trial: validation of Ontario’s double-edge-notched tension and extended bending beam rheometer test methods. In: Proceedings of the annual conference on Canadian Technical Asphalt Association, vol 54, pp 99–126Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hesp SAM, Soleimani A, Subramani S, Marks P, Philips T, Smith D, Tam K (2009) Asphalt pavement cracking: analysis of extraordinary life cycle variability in eastern and northeastern Ontario. Int J Pav Eng 10(3):209–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hesp SAM, Shurvell HF (2010) X-ray fluorescence detection of waste engine oil residues in asphalt and its effect on cracking in service. Int J Pav Eng 11(6):541–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Evans M, Marchildon R, Hesp SAM (2011) Effects of physical hardening on stress relaxation in asphalt cements: implications for pavement performance. Transp Res Record 2207:34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Erskine J, Hesp SAM, Kaveh F (2012) Another look at accelerated aging of asphalt cements in the pressure aging vessel. In: Proceedings of Fifth Eurasphalt and Eurobitume Congress, Istanbul, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gibson N, Qi X, Shenoy A, Al-Khateeb G, Kutay ME, Andriescu A, Stuart K, Youtcheff JS, Harman T (2012) Performance testing for Superpave and structural validation. Report FHWA-HRT-11-045, FHWA, McLean, VAGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Freeston J-L, Gillespie G, Hesp SAM, Paliukaite M, Taylor R (2015) Physical hardening in asphalt. In: Proceedings of Canadian Technical Asphalt Association, vol 60, pp 53–81Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (2010) M320 standard specification for performance-graded asphalt binderGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hesp SAM, Johnson K-AN, Andriescu A (2014) Double-edge-notched tension testing for the fatigue grading of straight and modified asphalt binders. Int J Pav 13.
  20. 20.
    Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (2012) LS-299 method of test for asphalt cement’s resistance to fatigue fracture using double-edge-notched tension test (DENT). Revision no. 27 to MTO laboratory testing manual, Downsview, ONGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (2015) TP 113–15, determination of asphalt binder’s resistance to ductile failure using double-edge-notched tension (DENT) testGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cotterell B, Reddel K (1977) The essential work of plane stress ductile fracture. Int J Fracture 13:267–277Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Broberg KB (1968) Critical review of some theories in fracture mechanics. Int J Fracture 4:11–19Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Paliukaite M, Assuras M, Hesp SAM (2016) Effect of recycled engine oil bottoms on the ductile failure properties of straight and polymer-modified asphalt cements. Constr Build Mater 126:190–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Office of the Auditor General of Ontario (2016) Annual report 2016, vol 1, chap 3: reports on value-for-money audits, sect. 3.10: Ministry of Transportation of Ontario, Road Infrastructure Construction Contract Awarding and OversightGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (2009) T 240 effect of heat and air on a moving film of asphalt binder (rolling thin-film oven test)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (2009) R28-09 Accelerated aging of asphalt binder using a pressurized aging vessel (PAV)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Singh D, Girimath S (2016) Influence of RAP sources and proportions on fracture and low temperature cracking performance of polymer modified binder. Constr Build Mater 120:10–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miglė Paliukaitė
    • 1
    • 2
  • Michael Assuras
    • 1
  • Suyanne Costa Silva
    • 1
  • Haibo Ding
    • 1
  • Yamnath Gotame
    • 1
  • Yihua Nie
    • 1
  • Imad Ubaid
    • 1
  • Simon A. M. Hesp
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  2. 2.Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (VGTU)VilniusLithuania

Personalised recommendations