Rutting — permanent deformation in the wheelpath
Rutting is accumulated permanent strain under repeated load, concentrated in the upper 100 mm of the bound layers where temperature and shear stress are both highest. It has two quite different causes that look the same from a car. Structural rutting is deformation in the subgrade or granular layers showing through as a broad depression; no binder change fixes it. Plastic flow, the one the binder owns, appears as a narrow rut with shoulders of displaced material either side of the wheelpath.
Governing property: high-temperature stiffness and elasticity. Under AASHTO M320 that is G*/sinδ, measured by DSR at the high grade temperature, with limits of 1.00 kPa on original binder and 2.20 kPa on RTFO residue. Under AASHTO M332 it is the non-recoverable creep compliance Jnr3.2 from the MSCR test, limited to 4.5, 2.0, 1.0 or 0.5 kPa⁻¹ for the S, H, V and E traffic designations. The honest caveat: mix factors — aggregate angularity, voids in the mineral aggregate, and binder content above optimum — cause at least as much rutting as binder grade. Before buying a harder grade, check whether the mix is simply over-binder.
Thermal cracking — regular transverse cracks
As a pavement cools, the surface layer tries to contract and the layers below restrain it. Tensile stress builds until it exceeds the tensile strength of the mix and the pavement cracks across the carriageway, typically at a regular spacing. It can happen in a single extreme cold event or accumulate through repeated thermal cycling.
Governing property: low-temperature creep stiffness and relaxation capacity, measured on PAV-aged binder in the bending beam rheometer (AASHTO T313), run 10 °C above the grade's low temperature, with limits of S ≤ 300 MPa and m-value ≥ 0.300 at 60 s. The m-value matters as much as the stiffness — it describes how fast the binder relaxes stress, and a binder that passes on S but fails on m will still crack. Direct tension testing (AASHTO T314) is used where the BBR result is marginal. In penetration terms, a softer grade resists thermal cracking better, which is the direct trade-off against rutting.
Fatigue cracking — interconnected cracking in the loaded path
Repeated flexing under traffic accumulates damage until cracks form and interconnect. Classical bottom-up fatigue initiates at the base of the bound layers where the tensile strain is highest and works upward, appearing at the surface as interconnected polygons in the wheelpath. Top-down cracking starts as longitudinal cracks at the edge of the wheelpath and is associated with an aged, brittle surface binder and high contact stresses at the tyre edge.
Governing property: intermediate-temperature stiffness after ageing — G*·sinδ ≤ 5000 kPa on PAV residue under AASHTO M320 — together with binder content and film thickness in the mix. Ageing resistance is the other half of it: the thin film oven test (ASTM D1754) result on the Certificate of Analysis, showing mass loss and the drop in penetration after heating, is the cheapest available predictor of how brittle the binder will be after a few years in the road. A specification limit of 20 % maximum drop in penetration exists for exactly this reason. The structural caveat: a pavement that is too thin for its traffic will fatigue regardless of binder quality.
Ravelling — loss of aggregate from the surface
Ravelling starts as a slight loss of fines and progresses to coarse aggregate being plucked out of the surface, leaving an open, noisy, spray-generating mat. It is a failure of cohesion within the binder or adhesion at the aggregate interface.
Governing property: binder cohesion and resistance to ageing — ductility, TFOT or RTFO mass loss and retained penetration. But ravelling is more often a construction failure than a binder failure. The recurring causes are compaction finished below the cut-off temperature so the mat never achieved density, binder content below optimum, dusty or wet aggregate that prevented proper coating at the plant, and segregation at the paver leaving coarse pockets with insufficient mastic. Porous and open-graded mixes are inherently vulnerable, which is why they are built with modified binder and thick films.
Stripping — moisture damage at the binder-aggregate bond
Stripping is the loss of adhesion between binder and aggregate in the presence of water. It begins invisibly inside the mix and surfaces late, as ravelling, potholing or sudden rutting in a pavement that had been performing normally. Water reaches the interface through a permeable mat — air voids above roughly 8 % make a mix water-permeable — through cracks, or from a saturated base with no drainage path.
Governing property: adhesion rather than consistency, which is why no penetration or PG value predicts it. The standard assessment is a moisture susceptibility test on the compacted mix: tensile strength ratio to AASHTO T283, commonly specified at a minimum of 0.80, or the boiling water stripping test in ASTM D3625 as a quick screen. The remedies are an anti-stripping additive — liquid amine dosed into the binder, or hydrated lime added to the aggregate — plus honest attention to drainage and in-place density. Aggregate mineralogy matters: acidic, siliceous aggregates such as granite and quartzite strip more readily than limestone.
Three distresses the binder does not own
Bleeding or flushing — binder rising to the surface in hot weather — is over-application of tack or prime, or binder content above optimum, not a defective grade. Slippage cracking in crescent shapes at braking points is a missing or unbroken tack coat. Potholing is almost always water plus an existing crack plus freeze or traffic action. Diagnosing these three as binder faults leads to a grade change that fixes nothing and, in the case of a harder grade, introduces a cracking risk that was not there before.