Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
The three main factors in HOT MIX ASPHALT pavement construction is
“compaction, compaction, compaction”. Compaction is the process by which the volume of
air in an HMA mixture is reduced by using external forces to reorient the constituent
aggregate particles into a more closely spaced arrangement. This reduction of air volume in a
mixture produces a corresponding increase in HMA unit weight, or density .Quality of
roadways also depends greatly on the pavement. In HMA roadways, the density of the HMA
plays a significant role in the overall ability to support load and provide long term service.
HMA pavement specifications include detail on density as well as percent voids. Under-
compaction results in low density and high void content. An under-compacted pavement will
have low strength, reduced durability, high deformation, and high permeability leading to
problems such as rutting, ravelling, and freeze-thaw damage. Over compaction results in high
density and low void content. This pavement may bleed, rut, crack, or have premature failure.
This paper mainly deals with compaction aspects of bitumen and also rutting aspects
of various binders. Rutting, also known as permanent deformation can be defined as the
accumulation of small amounts of unrecoverable strains as a result of applied loading to a
pavement. Rutting occurs when the pavement under traffic loading consolidates and or there
is a lateral movement of the hot-mix asphalt (HMA).
1.3 OBJECTIVES
A) To verify how well the specimens do fabricate using laboratory compaction
methods and to try and simulate the properties of the pavement in the field.
B) To correlate the mixture performance as compared by rolling compactor with that
of the performance evaluation procedure and design.
C) To find Optimum Binder Content (OBC).
D) To compare the density of bituminous mix compacting by Rolling Compactor cum
Rut Analyser with the Marshall method of compaction hammer.
The key points aimed to maintain the scope during the study were compaction of
asphalt concrete mixes by Marshall and Rolling Compactor cum Rut Analyzer (Patent
Pending) methods to evaluate HMA properties of the mix and to find some co-relations in
HMA properties between two laboratory compaction methods. Further more, to compare the
effect of different number of blows and different number of passes as compactive efforts for
various modified binder mix designs, as performance of mixes in terms of density and air
voids were observed according to the serial tests.
The compaction methods used to evaluate HMA properties were Marshall and
superpave laboratory compaction methods. Standard mix design procedures were
differentiated on their method of compaction, which is assumed to simulate field compaction.
With the Marshall design methods, specimens are prepared by impact compaction, while in
the superpave design method, specimens are fabricated by rolling compaction. This type of
compaction was developed to produce realistic specimens which compared favourably to in-
service mixtures after traffic compaction. The rolling compaction technique was introduced
to simulate the increasing loads and tire pressures of vehicles operating on the pavement.
Prior to this compaction technique, it was not possible to achieve a realistic field density in
laboratory specimens.
Viscosity tests were conducted on all the four binder using a rotational viscometer.
The Rotational Viscometer determines the asphalt viscosity by measuring the torque
necessary to maintain a constant rotational speed of a cylindrical spindle submerged in an
asphalt specimen held at a constant temperature, as per the ASTM 4402 standard test method.
Unlike the capillary viscometers used with the viscosity-graded method, the rotational
viscometer can evaluate modified asphalt binders. The viscosity of asphalt binders can be
measured within the range of 0.01 Pa·s (0.1 poise) to 200 Pa-s (2000 poise) [7]. All the four
binders when measured for viscosity qualify the superpave specifications of maximum value
3 Pa-s at 1350 C. The table 1.0 shows the viscosity test results. Figure 1.0 show the rotational
viscometer used to measure the viscosity.
As we all know that bitumen is a viscio-elastic material, the conventional test does not
really measure the visco-elastic nature of the bitumen. The binders were subjected to
conventional tests like penetration, ductility, softening point, flash and fire point and elastic
recovery; the results are given in the table 2.0. These tests proved to pass all the criteria given
by IS specifications.
Table 2.0: Shows the Test Results of the Binders at various Temperatures
Flash Point in deg C Min 230 deg C 250 205 210 218
IS: 1209-1978
2.67 2.66
The Marshall stability and flow test provides the performance prediction measure for
the Marshall mix design method. The stability portion of the test measures the maximum load
supported by the test specimen at a loading rate of 50.8 mm/minute. Load is applied to the
specimen till failure, and the maximum load is designated as stability. During the loading, an
attached dial gauge measures the specimen's plastic flow (deformation) due to the loading.
The flow value is recorded in 0.25 mm (0.01 inch) increments at the same time when the
maximum load is recorded. The important steps involved in marshal mix design are
summarized next.
Specimens were casted using CRMB-60, WPMB, OPMB 70 and CPMB 40 grade at
there OBC’s and was subjected to rutting test using an indigenously manufactured by authors
called Rolling Compactor cum Rut Analyzer (Patent Pending). The unique features of this
compactor are it can apply a constant pressure of 600 kpa and if required the pressure can be
applied up to 3000 kpa. Similarly the rolling speed in the compactor can be varied. It has a
temperature control unit which maintains the pre selected compaction and test temperature.
With this the equipment is also capable of noting the densification data of the mix while
compaction of mix. Using these measurements the specimen’s compaction characteristics can
be developed. The compactor is also capable of producing the vibrations in range of 0.5 to
1.5 Htz during compaction. The compactor is an hydraulically operated with twin non return
valve system and has a Programmable Logical Circuit (PLC) which is in-turn connected to
vertical and horizontal transducers and capable of recording minuet change as 1mm.
The Figure 4.2 shows picture of Rolling Compactor cum Rut Analyzer. The rutting test was
conducted on the specimens casted at its OBC and was conditioned at 60+10 C, a tyre
pressure of 6.2 Kg/cm2 was maintained constantly through out the test.
At first Marshal test was conducted and stability values were found for each of the
binders after finding the stability values OBC’s were found. Using these OBC’S slabs were
casted using Rolling Cum Rut Analyser for a total compaction thickness of 63.5cm. After
casting these slabs cores were taken from these slabs, again these cores were tested for there
stability values. And a comparison was conducted with the Marshall stability values, the
results are shown in the charts (5.1, 5.2, 5.3, and 5.4) below:
Of CRMB 40 of WPMB
CHART 5.3 Stability Comparison Chart of o‐pmb 70
CHART 5.4 Stability Comparison Chart of crmb 40
Rutting test was conducted on the specimens casted at its OBC and was conditioned at
25, 45 and 60 degrees; a tyre pressure of 6.2 Kg/cm2 was maintained constantly through out
the test. As we know that pavement surface temperature is more than the atmospheric
temperature it was quit reasonable to consider the rutting characteristics at a higher
temperature that is 60 deg. The table (6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4) below shows the rutting results from
which it is evident that CPMB40 & CRMB 60 performed better than the other two binders. It
was observed that all the modified binders showed same deformation trend in the graph up to
2500 passes later, only CPMB40 & CRMB 60 showed some significant improvement in
deformations up to 4000 passes, later the failure was rapid. Figure 6 showing rutting
operation
By using modified binders in DBM layers apart from enhancing the performance of
mix the environmental problem of disposing the rubber, plastic waste can be solved to some
extent.
Acknowledgements
The work reported herein was conducted as a research studies at Dayananda Sagar
College of Engineering, Bangalore under the guidance of B.V. Kiran Kumar Assistant
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, DSCE. The authors acknowledge the valuable
guidance and support extended by our guide Prof. B.V. Kiran Kumar. The authors would also
like to acknowledge M/s Tinna Overseas Limited, New Delhi and M/s KK Waste Plastic
Management Pvt. Ltd, Bangalore for supplying modified binders to the research centre.
Reference
[1] Ajay Sibal, Animesh Das and Pandey B.B, (2000) “Flexural Fatigue Characteristics of
Asphalt Concrete with Crumb Rubber”, International Journal for Pavement Engineering
(IJPE), Volume 1(2), pp 119 – 132.
[2] Anderson R.M and Bahia H.U (1997), “Evaluation and selection of Aggregate
Gradations foe Asphalt Mixture Using Superpave”, Transportation Research Record1583,
TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC. Pp 106-111.
[3] Ayers Jr. M and Witczak M.W (1995), “Resilient Modulus Properties of Asphalt Rubber
Mixes from Field Demonstration projects in Maryland”, Transportation Research
Record1499, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC. Pp 96-107.
[4] Gilmore .D.W, Lottman R.P and Scheroman J.A (1984), “Use of Indirect Tension
Measurement to Examine the Effect of Additives on Asphalt Concrete Durability”,
Proceedings of Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists Volume 53, pp. 43-79.
[5] Mc Gennis R.B, Buchanan S and Brown E.R (1998), “An Evaluation of Superpave
Gyratory Compaction of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA)”, Transportation Research Record1583,
TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC. Pp 98-105.
[6] Kennedy T.W. (1977) “Characterization of Asphalt Pavement materials Using the Indirect
Tensile Test”, Proceedings of Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Volume 46.pp.
132-150.
[7] “Performance Graded Asphalt Binder Specification and Testing Superpave Series No. 1
(SP-1)” Third Edition, Revised (2003) Asphalt Institute, USA.
[8] “Superpave Mix Design Superpave Series No. 2 (SP-2)” Third Edition (2001) Asphalt
Institute, USA.
[11] Anderson, R.M., “Using Superpave Gyratory Compaction Properties to Estimate the
Rutting Potential of Asphalt Mixtures”, Asphalt Paving Technology, Association of Asphalt
Paving Technologists-Proceedings of the Technical Sessions, Vol – 71, 2002c, pp 725-738.
[12] Anderson, R.M., Turner, A. P., Peterson, L. R., and Mallick, B. R., “Relationship of
Superpave Gyratory Compaction Properties to HMA Rutting Behavior”, NCHRP Report
478, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C, 2002a, pp 1-16.