You are on page 1of 10

# Summary:

## The Marshall method as presented here is applicable only to hot mix

asphalt paving mixtures using penetration or viscosity graded asphalt
cement and containing aggregates with maximum sizes of 25 mm (1in) or
less. This method is intended for laboratory design of asphalt hot mix
paving, the procedure for Marshall Method start with the preparation of
the test specimens, then heating, mixing and compacting asphalt
aggregate mixture.
The two principle of the Marshall method of mix design are density-voids
analysis and stability-flow test of the compacted test specimens.

Introduction:
The Marshall method of mix design is considered the most popular
method for designing the paving mixtures. The concepts of the Marshall
method of designing paving mixtures were formulated by Bruce
Marshall, formerly Bituminous Engineer with the Mississippi State
Highway Department. The U.S. Corps of Engineers improved and added
certain features to Marshalls test procedure and developed the mix
design criteria. The Marshall Test procedure has been standardized by the
American Society for Testing and Material (ASTM). (ASTM D 1559).
There are some definitions should be known:
Stability: is the maximum load resistance in Newton (lb.) that the
standard test specimen will develop at 60*c when tested as outlined
hereinafter.
Flow: the total movement or strain, in units of 0.25 millimeter occurring
in the specimen between no load and maximum load during the stability.

Objectives:
The aim of this experiment is to:
1-Check the density-voids analysis and the stability-flow test of the
compacted test specimen.
2- Be well known with the Marshall method of mix design.
3- Determine the optimum asphalt content that satisfy the five curves,
(unit weight vs. AC, air voids vs. Ac, stability vs. Ac, V.M.A vs. Ac,
flow vs. Ac.)
4- Determine of the specific gravity for asphalt and aggregates.
5- Compare the results with the specifications.

Material used:
1. Pans
2. Oven and hot plate for heating asphalt, aggregate, and
equipment as required.
3. Containers gill for heating asphalt.
4. Thermometer
5. Balance
6. Mixing spoon
7. Compaction mold.
8. Compaction hammer, weight 4.5 Kg (10 lb.), dropped from a
height of 457 mm (18 in).
9. Mold holder, to hold the compaction mold in place on
compaction pedestal.
10.Extrusion jack, for extruding compacted specimen from
mold.
11.Gloves
12.Marking Crayons, for identifying test specimens.
13.water bath

Test specimens:
Each specimen is made from aggregate and asphalt cement, the
aggregate must be taken considering the proportion of size
scheduled in the table 1 below.
Table 1: Aggregate Size Distribution.
Sieve
size

Passing
middle
point
(%)

Retained
(%)

Passing
weight
specificati
on limits
(%)
100

100

90 100

95

71 90

80.5

19.5

56 80

68

32

#4

35 56

45.5

54.5

#8

23 38

30.5

69.5

#16

13 27

20

80

#50

5 17

11

89

#100

4 14

91

#200

28

95

Pan

100

Check

Weight in
between

Cumula
tive
weight

62

60

174

236

150

386

215

601

168

769

89

858

198

1056

30

1086

54

1140

60

1200

1200

Each group must make three specimens of the same asphalt content and
different from group to group to have finally three specimens for each of
the four asphalt content (4%, 5%, 6%, and 7%).
The table 2 below shows the quantity of asphalt must be added.
Table 2: Asphalt Content.
Group No.
Asphalt % by total weight Weight of asphalt, (g)
1
4.0
50
2
5.0
63
3
6
77
4
7
84

Laboratory work:
1. Prepare at least three samples of aggregate blend according to
the aggregate distribution illustrated in the appendix.
2. Put the specimens of aggregate in the oven for 5 hours at
least.
3. Put the asphalt in the oven at 1500C for not more than 1 hour.
4. Put the aggregate in a pan and mix it until a homogeneous
aggregate blend yield.
5. Put the aggregate in the pan on a hot plate (heater), and make
a hole at the center of the aggregate.
6. Add the asphalt at the hole of the aggregate, according to the
weight specified before, which is the weight of asphalt by
total weight of mix. See table (52) for asphalt weights.
7. Mix the asphalt with the aggregate using a large spoon until
the mixture becomes homogeneous.
8. During the mixing, some one brings the Marshall mold from
the oven and put it on the compactor.
9. Put a filter paper at the bottom of the mold, and paint the
inside walls of the mold with grease.
10.Add the mixture in the mold, add a filter paper on the surface
of the mixture, then put the hammer on the mold, and start the
compaction, 35 blows for light traffic, 50 for medium, and 75
for heavy traffic.
11.Put the mold side until it is cool for the room temperature, and
then extrude the specimen form the mold using a hack.
12.Write the number of specimen on it, and make sure to save the
specimen number 1 to the next experiments.

Test results:

Group

1
A.C=
4%

Wt. Of dry
specimen
in air = A
(g)
1280.7
1248
1256

Wt. of SSD
specimen in
water =C
(g)
692
711
877

Wt. of the
specimen
in air = B
(g)
1280.5
1260.7
1259.3

Specific
gravity(Gmb)
=
A / (B-C)

2
A.C=
5%

1237.6
1279.06
1220

692
713
682

1250.38
1300
1232.95

3
A.C=
6%

1250.7
1219.08
1219.46

713
685
680

1256.92
1232.41
1225.65

2.29941903
2.22699622
2.23487584

1229.67
1280.67
1250.45

2.22648881
2.25668676
2.21415505

1225.17
1276.54
1246.68

679.4
715
687.4

Flow
(0.25m
m)

1800
1380
1370
1517
1590
1770
1720
1693
1880
1820
1400
1700

8
13
10
10.33
9
10
9
9.33
10
13
13
12

2.17621071
2.27032927
3.28537798
2.21641176
2.17897785
2.21435702

4
A.C=
7%

Stability
(N)

%V.M.A

%A .V

14.32

5.62

14.76

4.86

15.18

4.13

15.75

3.56

## Table 4: Specific gravity

Group

Mass of dry
sample in
air = A (g)

Mass of
container
+ water +
sample =
E (g)
2097

Specific
gravity(Gmm
)=
A / (A+DE)

500

Mass of
container
filled with
water =D
(g)
1798.32

2.48360819

2.2841281

2.52

0.00157

500

1807

2088.1

2.28414801

2.09630311

2.52

0.00312

500

1807

2090

2.30414747

2.11513593

2.52

0.00312

500

1798.32

2086.05

2.35549065

2.16348409

2.52

0.00312

Discussion:

Gse

Gsb

Absorbed
asphalt

There are many mix-design methods used to find the optimum asphalt
content, one of these methods is the Marshall method, which gives a
sufficient result can be used in mix design.
There are many calculation in this test, and we returned back the specific
gravity of the bitumen test to find the GB of the asphalt, and we found it
equal to 1.006, from the result shown in the appendix we found that the
asphalt content is equal 5.30 % by the weight of the total mix, and this
value satisfy the specification which put rang for most suitable asphalt
content (4.5%-5.5%).
From the tables shown in the appendix, and the five charts plotted vs.
content, we found that for the stability vs. A.C, the rang is (1500-1700lb)
which is larger than 750lb as in the specification,
And we found that the curve increase as AC% increase up to the max
stability,( this is due to the increasing in cementation action between the
asphalt and aggregates), then the curve goes down, due to the increasing
of the distance between the aggregates, so the cementation action
decrease.
And for the flow vs. A.C we found that the rang of the flow is (9-13)
which is within the rang as in the specification (8-18).and we found that
when the AC% increase the flow increase, and this is due to the
increasing in distance between the aggregates, will decrease the
interaction between the aggregates and the asphalt, so the mix will flow.
And for the unit weight of the asphalt vs. AC., we found that the rang of
the U.W is within the rang as in the specification. But we found that when
the AC% increase the U.W increase up to max U.W, (due to that the
specific gravity of the aggregates higher than for asphalt, and the volume
of aggregates in unit volume is higher than for asphalt, so the U.W will
increase), and then the curves will goes down,( due to the separation of
the aggregates from each other due to increasing in asphalt, so the volume
of asphalt in unit volume is higher than for aggregates.)
We saw above that the three relationships achieved the specification of
the mix design by Marshall method, but we noted that chart for A.V % vs.
AC, is not like as in the specification, we saw that the curve goes up then
goes down, and this due to many errors will mentioned later, but the real
relationship is that the curve goes down, this due to that the asphalt will
replace the air voids in the mix.
And for the relationship between M.V.A % vs. AC, we found that the
rang is much more than as in the specification, (16-20, in the spec. should
be around 15%), and the curve doesn't represent the real curve, which
pass through three stages, the first stage the curve goes down, due to the
lubrication of the asphalt, and the second stage the curve will be

constant , due to the asphalt will replace the air voids, the third stage, the
curve will increase due to the separation of the aggregates due to the
asphalt.
We found from the results that the relationship Gse > Gsb > Gmm > Gmb
doesnt achieved due to many errors mentioned later .
We found that the optimum asphalt content is = 5.3 % achieved the
specification for the stability, flow ,unit weight, but didnt achieved the
specification for the air voids & voids of mineral aggregates due to some
of errors in this experiment can be brief as the following:
The accuracy of the machines such as the balance, compacted
machine
Number of blows may be exactly 50 blows for each side.
Using assumed values for fine, filer and coarse aggregates
specific gravity, and for asphalt.
Errors in calculation

Conclusion:
From this experiment we can conclude that:
i. The errors may be not affect obviously on the values of G, but
will affect obviously on the air content and mineral voids in
aggregates.
ii. The calculation of the Marshall method is complicated, but if
calculated accurately, the optimum asphalt content will be very
good.
iii. If we want more accuracy in the Marshall test, we should take
more samples to test.
iv. If one chart from the five charts didnt achieve the specification,
the test must be done again with a new sample, and anew
materials proportions and properties.
v. The Marshall test is the core of any project.
vi. When the compaction of the sample increase, the stability will
increase, the flow will decrease, the air voids will decrease, the
voids of mineral aggregates will decrease, the unit weight will
decrease.

References:
o ASTM, D 1559
o MS2
o NOTES IN LAB.

Appendix
Sample of calculation, Sieve #8:
Passing weight specification limits = 23 38 %
Passing middle point (average) = (upper limit + lower limit) / 2
= (23 + 38) / 2 = 30.5 %
Retained percent = 100 passing middle point = 100 30.5 = 69.5 %
Percent in between = retained #16 retained #8 = 80- 69.5 = 10.5 %
Weight in between = percent in between * total weight of aggregate
= 10.5 % * 1200 = 126 g
Cumulative weight = previous weight + weight in between
= 834 + 126 = 960 g
Sample of calculation, group # 1:
Assume weight of asphalt = x
Then x / (1200 + x) = 4%
x = 50
Calculations:
Sample calculation for group #4 (sample #1):
Gmb= A/(B-C) = 1232.5/(1234.9-697) = 2.3.
We take the average for the three samples and it was = 2.27.
Stability & flow values from the millimeteric paper.
Stability =1880 N
Flow = 10 (0.25mm)
G mm =A/(A+D-E)
=500/(500+1832-2130) = 2.48
G se = (1-pb)/(1/ G mm-pb/Gb)
= (1-70/1200)/(1/2.48-(70/1200)/1.006) = 2.73
G sb = (2.65*834+2.7*306+2.675*60 )/1200 = 2.66.
A.V % = 100 (1- Gmb/ G mm)
= 100*(1-2.26/2.48) = 8.9%.
V.M.A % = 100- W agg. * Gmb/(W mix * G sb.) 100
= 100-1200*2.26/(1270*2.66)*100 = 19.72 %.
Absorbed asphalt = (G se- G sb)* Gb/( G se* G sb)

## Asphalt content (AC%) according to air voids = 4.5

** The average value of AC% = 4.8 % by weight of the mix.