Hot Mix Asphalt Testing

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction......,.......2
2. Theoretical Information / Literature....................2
2.1 Volumetrics....................2
2.2
Viscosity.............7
2.3 Penetration ................8
3.Materials.......9
4.
Equipment..............10

5. Experimental Procedure.....11
6. Experimental Results.............11
6.1 Maximum Specific Gravity..............12
6.2 Bulk Specific Gravity..................12
6.3
Viscosity...............13
6.4 Penetration ..............13
7. Analysis..............................14
7.1 Maximum Specific Gravity Analysis...........15
7.2 Bulk Specific Gravity Analysis...................15
7.3 Viscosity
Analysis............15
7.4 Penetration Analysis............16
8. Discussion..........17
8.1 Maximum Specific Gravity Single Operator Discussion....18
8.2 Bulk Specific Gravity Single Operator Discussion.....18
8.3 Viscosity Single Operator
Discussion..18
8.4 Penetration Single Operator Discussion..18
8.5 Maximum Specific Gravity Multilaboratory Discussion.....19
8.6 Bulk Specific Gravity Multilaboratory Discussion..19
8.7 Viscosity Multilaboratory Discussion..20
8.8 Penetration Multilaboratory Discussion ............20
9.Conclusions.....21
10. References....22
11. Appendices...23
1. Introduction
The objective of the following experiment was to test the properties of hot mix asphalt (HMA).
The following asphalt properties were tested: maximum specific gravity (Gmm), bulk specific
gravity (Gmb), viscosity, and penetration.
2. Theoretical Information / Literature
Asphalt is the main layer of most roadways across the country, and bears the majority of the load
applied to the road. Asphalt has to be strong as it is the top layer in these roads. Aggregates and
binder are mixed to make asphalt. There needs to be enough interlock between the aggregates to
support the load, while the binder needs to hold the mix together. The aggregates need to be
along the MDL in an s curve so that there is a high amount of interlock so the asphalt can handle
the loading. High angularity is preferred so that the aggregates will interlock and distribute the
loading evenly through the mix. The binder needs to be elastic and stiff to prevent the mix from
experiencing mechanical distresses, such as rutting or cracking. The asphalt has to be laid at a
very hot temperature so that the binder can flow during the process. This means there needs to be
tests performed to make sure the mix will not set on fire(flashpoint). The asphalt in this lab was
tested for volumetrics, viscosity and penetration.

2.1 Volumetrics
Maximum specific gravity (G ) is a representation of the density of asphalt concrete without the
mm

presence of air voids. G is a measure of the mass of aggregate coated with asphalt binder
mm

divided by the volume of combined aggregate and asphalt binder coating, as seen in Equation 1.
Air content is not measured by G as only the mass and volumes of aggregates and asphalt
mm

binder.

The maximum specific gravity of HMA is critical in Superpave design as well as quality
assurance of the asphalt concrete since G is directly used to calculate the air content in a
mm

compacted sample of asphalt concrete(Pavement Interactive). Given that a compacted sample of

asphalt concrete includes air voids the difference in the G and bulk specific gravity is a direct
mm

measure of the volume of air in the compacted sample.

The bulk specific gravity is known as the G . G is different from G in that G is the specific
mb mb mm mb

gravity including air voids and it is calculated using a compacted sample rather than a loose
sample. G is calculated using Equation 2. If there is 0% air voids in the mix G is equal to G .
mb mb mm

The G is measured by finding the dry weight of the sample. Then the sample is suspended from
mb

a scale into a 25C water bath and the submerged weight is measured. The sample is removed
from the water bath and the surface is dried with a moist towel to remove water at the surface of
the sample, without removing water from the permeable voids of the sample. This is the
saturated surface dry weight.

Superpave mix design is a volumetric process and key properties are expressed in terms of
volume. However, direct volume measurements are difficult, therefore weight measurements are
usually made and then converted to a volume using specific gravities. Bulk specific gravity is
involved in most key mix design calculations including air voids, VMA and, indirectly, VFA.
Correct and accurate bulk specific gravity determinations are vital to proper mix design. An
incorrect bulk specific gravity value will result in incorrectly calculated air voids, VMA, VFA
and ultimately result in an incorrect mix design(Pavement Interactive). G and G must be
mm mb

calculated first so you can apply the volumetric equations and find the characteristics of the mix.

The volumetrics for asphalt are calculations that determine a variety of properties including
volume of air voids and percent of effective binder. A picture of the layers of asphalt is shown in
Figure 1. The air voids in the the HMA puck for superpave are always going to be maintained at
4%. Air voids in the asphalt mix will affect the mix because if there are not enough voids the mix
will not have room to move around but if there are too many voids in the mix the asphalt will be
able to move around too much. The effective specific gravity is ratio of weight to volume of the
aggregates included in the asphalt. The aggregates in the mix determine how much asphalt will
be absorbed due to the permeable voids. The specific gravity of the mix can be affected by the
viscosity of the binder since the permeable voids of the aggregate can be filled even more by the
binder. This would make the specific gravity increase due to less air and more volume of solid
aggregate. The VMA of the mix is the combination of the air voids and volume of effective
binder. The VMA accounts for the space in between the aggregates in the mix. If the VMA is not
high enough the aggregates will not be coated with enough binder and will be more susceptible
to failure(Vavrik). The VFA takes into account the voids filled with binder in the mix. When the
VFA goes up this means that the binder has become more viscous and can fill more of the voids
in the aggregates.

Figure 1: Diagram of Aggregate in Asphalt(Mix Design)

The percent of binder absorbed is another property involved in the volumetrics of asphalt. The
percentage shows how much of the binder absorbed by the aggregate. As the binder become
more viscous the permeable voids will be filled with more binder and create a higher percentage.
The percent of effective binder is the amount of binder that is surround the aggregates in the mix.
The amount of effective binder will affect how the mix handles loading since if there is too much
binder the mix will not handle loading as well and be more susceptible to failure. The dust to
asphalt ratio is the percentage of aggregates passing the number 200 sieve divided by the
percentage of effective binder. The number should not be to high because if there is too much
dust compared to binder the mix will become too stiff. The binder can not be absorbed too much
by the dust because then there will not be enough binder for the mix.

The maximum specific gravity is calculated using Equation 1.

G = AA + D - E
mm (1)
Where,
A = mass of oven dry sample in air, grams
D = mass of container with lid filled with water, grams
E = mass of container with lid filled with sample and water, grams

The bulk specific gravity of the mix is calculated using Equation 2.

G = AB - C
mb (2)
Where:
A = mass of oven dry sample, grams
B = mass of SSD sample, grams
C = mass of sample under water, grams

G can be calculated using equation 3.

sb

G = Pa+Pb+PcPaGa+PbGb+PcGc
sb (3)
Where:
P , P , P ,...etc. = weight percent of each aggregate in the blend
a b c

G , G , G ,..etc.. = specific gravity of each aggregate in the blend

a b c

The effective specific gravity of the compacted HMA puck can be calculated Equation 4.

G = Ps100Gmm- PbGb
se (4)
Where:
G = effective specific gravity
se

P = percent weight of the aggregate, %

s

G = maximum theoretical specific gravity of the asphalt concrete

mm

P = percent weight of the asphalt cement, %

b

G = specific gravity of the asphalt binder

b

The percent of binder absorbed can be calculated using Equation 5.

P = 100(Gse - GsbGse*Gsb)*G
ba b (5)
Where:
P = percent absorbed binder based on the mass of the aggregates, %
ba

G = bulk specific gravity of the aggregate blend

sb

G = effective specific gravity of aggregate coated with asphalt

se

G = specific gravity of the asphalt binder

b

The percent of effective binder content can be calculated using Equation 6.

 P = P - (Pba100)*P
be b s (6)
Where:
P = percent effective binder content, %
be

P = percent weight of the asphalt cement, %

b

P = percent absorbed binder based on aggregate mass, %

ba

P = percent weight of the aggregate, %

s

If the compacted HMA specimen does not contain 4% air voids, corrections must be made to P b

and P using Equations 7 and 8.

be

P = P -0.4(4-Va)
b, est b (7)

P be, est = P -Pba*Ps100

b, est (8)
Where:
P = adjusted binder content, %
b, est

P = adjusted effective binder content, %

be, est

P = original binder content, %

b

V = original air voids content, %

a

P = percent absorbed binder, %

ba

P = original weight percent of aggregates, %

s

The voids in total mix of the compacted HMA puck can be calculated using Equation 9.

VTM = 100* (1 - GmbGmm) (9)

Where:
VTM = air voids of compacted HMA specimen, %
G = bulk specific gravity of the compacted asphalt mixture
mb

G = maximum theoretical specific gravity of the asphalt concrete

mm

The voids in mineral aggregates for the given mixture can be calculated using Equation 10.

VMA = 100-P *GmbGsb s (10)

Where:
VMA = Voids in Mineral Aggregates, %
P = percent of solids
s

G = bulk specific gravity of the compacted asphalt mixture

mb

G = bulk specific gravity of aggregate blend

sb

If the compacted HMA specimen does not contain 4% air voids, a correction must be made to
VMA using Equation 11.

VMA = VMA+C(4-Va)est (11)

Where:
VMA = adjusted VMA, %
est

VMA = original VMA, %

V = original air voids content, %
a

C = 0.1 for V < 4.0% a

0.2 for V 4.0% a

The voids filled with asphalt for the given mixture can be calculated using Equation 11.

VFA = VMA-VaVMA*100 (12)

Where:
VFA = Voids Filled with Asphalt, %
VMA = Voids in Mineral Aggregates, %
V = air voids of compacted HMA specimen, %
a

If the compacted HMA specimen does not contain 4% air voids, a correction must be made to
VFA using Equation 12.

VFA = VMAest-4VMAest*100
est (13)
Where:
VFA = adjusted VFA, %
est

VMA = adjusted VMA, %

est

The dust to asphalt ratio can be calculated using Equation 13.

D/A = PdPbe (14)

Where:
D/A = dust to asphalt ratio
P = percent dust, or percent of aggregate passing #200 sieve, %
d

P = percent effective binder content, %

be

If the compacted HMA specimen does not contain 4% air voids, a correction must be made to
D/A using Equation 14.

D/A = PdPbe, est

est (15)
Where:
D/A = adjusted dust to asphalt ratio
est

P = adjusted effective binder content, %

be, est
2.2 Viscosity
Viscosity of a binder is defined as the ability of a fluid to flow, or the state of being thick, sticky,
and semi fluid in consistency, due to internal friction(Princeton). Viscosity is determined by the
amount of shear stress that can be applied to the liquid before it moves. More viscous materials
will take a high shear number before they respond and move. This example of determining
viscosity is demonstrated in Figure 2. In the subject of HMA, the binders consistency, or
viscosity is important to the strength of the mix. When testing the binders viscosity, the
rotational viscometer test is performed on fresh, unaged binders being used for HMA, typically
in Superpave applications. The test consists of a rotational coaxial cylinder viscometer along
with a temperature control regulator. The viscosity is determined by the amount of torque
required to rotate a spindle at a specified speed inserted into a sample (ASTM). As viscosity of
binder changes at different temperatures additional tests may be performed to check the
temperature susceptibility of the binder. Temperature susceptibility is vital to the mix design
process, as it is used to determine the compaction and mix temperatures to be used when HMA is
being applied.

Figure 2: Viscosity Test Showing Shear[5]

2.3 Penetration
The penetration test of asphalt cement is performed using a needle that penetrates into semisolid
and solid bituminous material. The purpose behind doing this test is to determine the consistency
of the binder and to asses the suitability of binder for use under different temperatures.
Bituminous material can be defined as the asphalt binder that keeps all components of the asphalt
concrete together (Mamlouk 2011). In most, if not all cases, the binder is the most important and
costly material used when preparing asphalt concrete for roadways or pavements.

In order to determine the consistency of the binder, it must be poured into a sample dish and
cooled before placement into a water bath to keep the temperature constant. When testing
different samples, it is crucial that all aspects of the experiment remain the same so that the
results can be accurately compared. By keeping the temperature, weight of the needle, and
setting time the same, various grades of binders can be compared to find best fit binder for any
climatic condition.

When the needle is dropped into the binder, it is allowed to drop for 5 seconds before the
measurement is taken. The depth of the needle after this time is considered the penetration value.
This value is specific for the parameters of the experiment. Again, it is important to keep drop
time the same when testing a different sample to ensure accurate results.

3. Materials
Table 1 below shows the materials used to perform the procedures for the laboratory tests to
determine the four HMA properties.

Table 1: Materials Used During Cement Properties Testing.

Property Test Materials Used Manufacturer/Source

Maximum Specific Gravity 3/8 inch gray granite coarse aggregate Fazzio

Fine aggregate Fazzio

PG 64-22 asphalt binder NuStar

Bulk Specific Gravity 3/8 inch gray granite coarse aggregate Fazzio
 Fine aggregate Fazzio

PG 64-22 asphalt binder NuStar

Viscosity PG 64-22 asphalt binder NuStar

Penetration PG 64-22 asphalt binder NuStar

4. Equipment
Table 2 below displays the equipment used to measured HMA properties.

Table 2: Equipment Used for HMA Property Testing.

Property Test Equipment Used Manufacturer and Model Accuracy
Number

Maximum Specific Vibro-Deaerator Gilson SGA-5R N/A

Gravity
Vacuum Pycnometer Gilson SG-16A N/A

Vacuum Pump HyVac 1 N/A

Scale CBK 70a 0.001 kg

Bulk Specific Gravity Scale CBK 70a 0.001 kg

Gyratory Compactor Troxler 4140 N/A

Water Tank Gilson SGA-122 N/A

 Basket Gilson SG-7A N/A

Viscosity Rotational Brookfield DV+ II Pro

Viscometer

Heating Element Brookfield Thermosel H12991 N/A

Temperature Brookfield 106 N/A

Controller

Penetration Penetrometer Soiltest AP-210Y N/A

5. Experimental Procedure
Table 3 below shows the AASHTO and ASTM standards used in HMA property testing.

Table 3: Procedures Used for HMA Property Testing.

Property Test Procedure Remarks

Maximum Specific Gravity AASHTO T 209 Type A Vacuum Container Used

Bulk Specific Gravity ASTM D2726 100 mm Mold Used

Viscosity ASTM D4402

Penetration ASTM D5

6. Experimental Results
Below are the measured raw data results for all laboratory experiments. These results were later
used to calculate final values for the property of the asphalt designed and tested, which will be
presented in the Analysis section.

Table 4 below shows the raw data of the aggregate samples used for the preparation of the
asphalt specimen. These values will be used to calculate the volumetric properties of the HMA
sample. This aggregate data can be found in full detail in Appendix A1 and was provided to the
group by the laboratory instructor.
Table 4: Raw Data of Aggregate Samples Used for the Hot Mix Asphalt Experiment
Aggregate Sample Aggregate Type Percentage of Blend (%) Specific Gravity (G ) SB

A Sand 25.0 2.692

B Grey Granite 54.0 2.770

C Filler 21.0 2.701

Table 5 below presents the raw data collected while preparing the asphalt specimen to be used
for the testing of asphalt properties.

Table 5: Raw Data Collected During Preparation of Asphalt Specimen

Mass of Binder and Aggregate Mix (g) 2103.0

Initial Sample Height (mm) 147.7

Final Compacted Sample Height (mm) 141.8

Compacted Sample Diameter (in) 4

6.1 Maximum Specific Gravity

Table 6 below shows raw data obtained from the Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity (G ) of mm

Asphalt Experiment.

Table 6: Raw Data for Maximum Specific Gravity.

Mass of Oven Dry Sample (g) 1500.3

Mass of Empty Container (g) 2195.9

Mass of Lid (g) 842.6

Mass of Container, Lid, Wet Sample, and Water (g) 8429.5

Mass of Container, Lid, and Water (g) 7532.2

Temperature of Water ( C)o 18.0

6.2 Bulk Specific Gravity

Table 7 below shows the raw data collected from the bulk specific gravity experiment. The
temperature of water for this experiment was the same as it was for the maximum specific
gravity experiment, which was 18 C. o

Table 7: Raw Data for Bulk Specific Gravity of Asphalt Experiment

 Component Mass (g)

Dry Asphalt Specimen 2097.9

Submerged Specimen in Water 1206.5

SSD Specimen 2176.1

6.3 Viscosity
Table 8 below presents the raw data obtained from the viscosity of asphalt experiment at 135.0
C running at 20 RPM.
o

Table 8: Raw Data from Viscosity of Asphalt Experiment at 135.0 C running at 20 RPM
o

Property Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

(60s) (120s) (180s)

Viscosity (cP) 1313.0 1325.0 1325.0 1321.0

Viscosity (Pas) 1.313 1.325 1.325 1.321

Table 9 below presents the raw data obtained from the viscosity of asphalt experiment at 165.0
C running at 50 RPM.
o

Table 9: Raw Data from Viscosity of Asphalt Experiment at 165.0 C running at 50 RPM
o

Property Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average

(60s) (120s) (180s)

Viscosity (cP) 600.0 587.5 600.0 595.8

Viscosity (Pas) 0.600 0.588 0.600 0.596

6.4 Penetration
Table 10 below displays the raw data obtained from the penetration of asphalt experiment. The
penetration test was performed on a single binder sample under a water bath at a temperature
which was determined to be 23. The same equipment, needle, and weight were used
consistently throughout all trials.

Table 10: Raw Data from Penetration of Asphalt Experiment

Trial Penetration (0.1 mm)

1 40.0

2 42.0
 3 45.0

Average 42.3
7. Analysis
An analysis of all calculated results for the testing of asphalt properties are found in the below
sections, broken up by experiment. All measured data in Experimental Results (Section 6) above
and all calculations use appropriate equations referenced to Theoretical Information/Literature
(Section 2) above.Table 11 below displays the volumetric calculations for the HMA specimen.
These values were found using Equations 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, and 14 above.

Table 11: Volumetric Calculations for HMA Specimen

Bulk Specific Gravity of Blend (G ) sb 2.700

Effective Specific Gravity (G ) se 2.728

Percent of Binder Absorbed (P ) (%) ba 0.393

Percent of Effective Binder Content (P ) (%) be 5.329

Air Voids of Compacted HMA (VTM) (%) 13.19

Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA) (%) 24.42

Voids Filled with Asphalt (VFA) (%) 45.98

Dust to Asphalt Ratio (D/A) 0.807

Table 12 below shows adjusted volumetric calculations found when 4% air voids were
used. These values were found using Equations 7, 8, 11, 13, and 15 above.

Table 12: Adjusted Volumetric Calculations for Asphalt Specimen for 4% Air Voids
Air Voids of Compacted HMA (VTM) (%) 4.0

Percent of Effective Binder Content (P ) (%) b,est 9.38

Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA ) (%) est 22.58

Voids Filled with Asphalt (VFA ) (%) est 82.29

Percent of Effective Binder Content (P ) (%) be,est 9.01

Dust to Asphalt Ratio (D/A ) est 0.477

7.1 Maximum Specific Gravity Analysis

Table 13 below uses data taken from Table 6 above and uses Equation 1 to show the value
obtained for the theoretical maximum specific gravity of the asphalt specimen.
Table 13: Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity of Asphalt Specimen
Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity (G ) 2.493
mm

7.2 Bulk Specific Gravity Analysis

Table 14 below uses data taken from Table 7 above and uses Equation 2 to show the value
obtained for the bulk specific gravity of the asphalt specimen.

Table 14: Bulk Specific Gravity of Asphalt Specimen

Bulk Specific Gravity (G ) 2.164
mb

7.3 Viscosity Analysis

Table 15 below shows the calculated average values of the viscosity of the asphalt at 135C and
165C. Tables 8 and 9 were used to calculate these values.

Table 15: Average Viscosity of Asphalt at Given Temperatures

Temperature (C) 135 165

Rotational Speed (RPM) 20 50

Average Viscosity (cP) 1321.0 595.8

Average Viscosity (Pas) 1.321 0.596

The figure below shows the relationship between temperature and viscosity of the HMA
specimen made in the lab.

Figure 3: Temperature vs. Viscosity for Asphalt Experiment

This relationship between temperature and viscosity will be discussed in section 8.3 below.
7.4 Penetration Analysis
After performing the penetration test three times on the asphalt binder, the average was
determined to be 42.3 tenths of a millimeter or 4.23 mm. When comparing the results it is
important to note that the penetrations must not exceed the allowed limit between highest and
lowest penetration. For this experiment, the penetration was between 0 to 49. However, the
maximum difference between the results was 5 tenths of a millimeter which is above the allowed
limit.

Table 16: Analysis of Penetration of Asphalt Experiment

Penetration 0 to 50 to 150 to 250 to
49 149 249 500

Maximum difference between highest and lowest 2 4 12 20

penetrations

8. Discussion
An assessment of all measured and calculated data is essential to determine the success and
accuracy of laboratory procedures. If data is found to be inaccurate and not within particular
standards, a thorough analysis should be completed to determine the cause of such errors. The
limits for single operator data was analyzed first and was compared to limits provided by
ASTM. Multi-lab comparisons were assessed afterward when results were compared with
another group (Group 6) from the same lab section.

Table 17 below presents the values for volumetric calculations. The limits for these values are
included as well.

Table 17: Volumetric Calculations and Limits for Asphalt Experiment

Property Value Limit Limit Met?

Bulk Specific Gravity of Blend (G sb Blend ) 2.700 N/A -

Effective Specific Gravity (G ) se 2.728 N/A -

Percent Binder Absorbed (P ) (%)

ba 0.393 N/A -

Percent of Effective Binder Content (P ) (%) be,est 9.01 N/A -

Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA ) (%) est 22.58 13 Passed

Voids Filled with Asphalt (VFA ) (%) est 82.29 65-78 Failed
 Dust to Asphalt Ratio (D/A ) est 0.477 0.6-1.2 Failed

The VFA was not within the limit. The reason the calculated value was over the limit could be
est

due to our SSD weight being too high resulting in a lower value for G , a higher value for VMA
mb est

and thus a higher value for VFA . The D/A also was not within the limit. The reason D/A was
est est est

too low could be due to the effective binder being higher than it should be. The effective binder
would be too high if the binder absorbed is greater than expected.

8.1 Maximum Specific Gravity Single Operator Discussion

No single operator discussion is needed for maximum specific gravity of asphalt experiment.

8.2 Bulk Specific Gravity Single Operator Discussion

No single operator discussion is needed for bulk specific gravity of asphalt experiment.

8.3 Viscosity Single Operator Discussion

As can be seen in Figure 3 above, the relationship between temperature and viscosity is an
inversely proportional relationship. As temperature increases, it can be seen the the viscosity of
the HMA specimen decreases. This relationship makes sense as asphalt will flow more easily at
higher temperatures as opposed to lower temperatures.

8.4 Penetration Single Operator Discussion

Table 18 below presents the single operator variability for the penetration of asphalt experiment.
The results of two properly conducted tests by the same operator on the same material of any
penetration, using the same equipment, should not differ from each other by more than 4% of
their mean, or by 1 unit, whichever is larger. In the case of this experiment, the results are
compared to 4% of the average since it is larger than 1 unit. The single operator variability
differs from the analysis of asphalt penetration since it is the comparison between the difference
of each trial to the mean value of the three trials. For the analysis, the difference is taken to be
the difference between each of the actual trials

Table 18: Single Operator Variability for Results from Penetration of Asphalt Experiment
Trial Result 1 Result 2 Difference ASTM Single ASTM
Comparison (0.1 mm) (0.1 mm) (0.1 mm) Operator Limit Requirement
(0.1 mm)

1&2 40.0 42.0 2 1.692 Failed

1&3 40.0 45.0 5 1.692 Failed

2&3 42.0 45.0 3 1.692 Failed

When comparing the three trials to each other, it is clear that all of the differences are larger than
the single operator limit. All of the tests were performed under the same parameters using the
same operator. The only variable in this experiment was the measurement of the time as it was
manually operated. If the needle was measured before or after five seconds, the results would
decrease or increase respectively. With this being said, it is a possible explanation as to why the
results are not within the limit.

8.5 Maximum Specific Gravity Multilaboratory Discussion

Table 19 below shows the multilaboratory precision of data collected for the maximum specific
gravity of HMA.

Table 19: Multilaboratory Comparison for Results from Theoretical Maximum Specific
Gravity.
Property Our Group Other Difference AASHTO AASHTO
Value Group Allowable Requirement
Value Difference

G mm 2.493 2.543 0.05 0.055 Passed

As can be seen in Table 19 above, our group passed the AASHTO Requirement for
multilaboratory comparison of theoretical maximum specific gravity.

8.6 Bulk Specific Gravity Multilaboratory Discussion

Table 20 below shows the multilaboratory variability for the bulk specific gravity of asphalt
experiment.

Table 20: Multilaboratory Comparison for Results from Bulk Specific Gravity of Asphalt
Experiment
Property Our Group Other Group Difference ASTM Allowable ASTM
Value Value Difference Requirement

G mb 2.164 2.250 0.086 0.042 Failed

It can be seen that our group did not meet AASHTO allowable difference for the multilaboratory
comparison of bulk specific gravity values. This could be attributed to variations in the making
of asphalt between the groups, which would cause errors to occur. Our group could have not
tapped the SSD HMA sample enough, leading to a higher saturated surface dry weight, which
would cause G to be lower.
mb

8.7 Viscosity Multilaboratory Discussion

Table 21 below shows the multilaboratory variability for the viscosity of asphalt experiment.

Table 21: Multilaboratory Comparison for Results from Viscosity of Asphalt Experiment
Temperature Our Other Difference Percent ASTM ASTM
( C) o
Group Group (cP) Difference Multilab- Requirement
Average Average (%) oratory
 Viscosity Viscosity Limit (%)
(cP) (cP)

135.0 1321 1321 0.0 0.0 4.3 Passed

165.0 596 596 0.0 0.0 4.3 Passed

As seen in the table above, our group recorded very similar results for the viscosity of asphalt
experiment, leading to us passing the ASTM Limit.

8.8 Penetration Multilaboratory Discussion

Table 22 below presents the multilaboratory variability for the penetration of asphalt experiment.
The results of two properly conducted experiments on the same material of any penetration
should not differ from each other by more than 11% of their mean, or by 4 units, whichever is
larger. In this case, the ASTM multilaboratory limit is 3.7565 tenths of a millimeter, which is
11% of the mean between the two groups.

Table 22: Multilaboratory Variability for Results from Penetration of Asphalt Experiment
Our Group Other Group Difference ASTM ASTM
Average Average (0.1 mm) Multilaboratory Requirement
Penetration Penetration Limit (0.1 mm)
(0.1 mm) (0.1 mm)

42.3 26.0 16.3 3.7565 Failed

Both of the tests were performed under the same conditions. Both used the same equipment at
the same temperature using the same binder sample. However, the tests did not pass the ASTM
requirement. A contributing factor of this could have been the time the needle was allowed to set
into the binder. For example, if our group did not measure the depth of the needle at the exact
same time as the other group, our values would be different like they are in this case. Since all
conditions are equivalent, the results should be similar. Based explicitly on our results, it can be
said that either our group allowed the needle to set for more than five seconds or the other group
did not wait five seconds before taking the final measurement.
9. Conclusions
The following are the results from the laboratory experiments conducted: the theoretical
maximum specific gravity of the HMA specimen was 2.493 while the bulk specific gravity of the
HMA specimen was 2.164. The following volumetric values were calculated using 4% air voids:
the effective specific gravity was 2.728; the percent binder absorbed was 0.393%; the adjusted
percent of effective binder content was 9.01%; the adjusted voids in mineral aggregate was
22.58%; the adjusted voids filled with asphalt was 82.29%; and the adjusted dust to asphalt ratio
was 0.477. The average viscosities at 135 C and 165 C were 1321 cP and 596 cP respectively,
o o

and the average penetration was 4.23 mm.

10. References
[1] "Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity | Pavement Interactive". (2016).
Pavementinteractive.org, (Dec. 16, 2016).

[2]Bulk Specific Gravity. <http://www.pavementinteractive.org/article/bulk-specific

-gravity/> (2016).

[3] Vavrik, William, William Pine, and Samuel Carpenter. "Aggregate blending for asphalt mix
design: Bailey method." Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
Research Board 1789 (2002): 146-153.

[4] Mix Design. (n.d.). <http://www.in.gov/indot/files/chapter_04(4).pdf> (2016).

[5] DEFINITION OF VISCOSITY. Princeton University,

<https://www.princeton.edu/~gasdyn/Research/T-C_Research_Folder/
Viscosity_def.html> (2016).

[6]ASTM (c). (2003). Standard Test Method for Viscosity Determination of Asphalt at Elevated
Temperature Using a Rotational Viscometer. ASTM International,
<http://enterprise.astm.org/SUBSCRIPTION/NewValidateSubscription.cgi?D4402/D440
2MHTML>.(2016).

[7] Mamlouk, M.S., and Zaniewski, J.P. (2011). Materials for Civil and Construction Engineers,
Pearson, Hoboken, NJ.
11. Appendices
Appendix A: Asphalt Weights Provided by Instructor Prior to Experimentation
Sieve Size Sand (3/8) Filler

(in) (mm)

1 - 1/2 37.5 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

1 25.4 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

3/4 19 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

1/2 12.5 100.0% 97.9% 100.0%

3/8 9.5 100.0% 59.4% 100.0%

#4 4.75 100.0% 2.1% 98.9%

#8 2.36 82.7% 0.8% 83.2%

#16 1.18 54.0% 0.8% 54.6%

#30 0.6 31.7% 0.8% 35.5%

#50 0.3 16.6% 0.7% 20.5%

#100 0.15 9.3% 0.6% 9.5%

#200 0.075 4.2% 0.5% 4.3%

Pan 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

BATCH PERCENTAGES 25% 54% 21%

 Gsb 2.692 2.770 2.701

Traffic Level 2 million