Mineral Fillers in Asphalt Paving Mixtures

B . F . KALLAS, V . P. PUZINAUSKAS, and H . C. KRIEGER, The Asphalt Institute,

College Park, Maryland

This paper describes a continuation of investigations on effects of

various mineral f i l l e r s on properties of asphalt paving mijctures.
Previous studies indicated that introduction of varying amounts
and types of mineral f i l l e r s into a paving mixture may greatly
influence compaction characteristics and therefore resultant v o l u -
metric proportions and test properties of mixtures compacted
with a constant compactive e f f o r t .
Mechanical gyratory compaction procedures using variable
compactive efforts were developed to compact laboratory test
specimens containing constant volume proportions of mineral
aggregates and a i r regardless of types and amounts of mineral
f i l l e r s and asphalt used. The procedures permitted an evalu-
ation of the effects of mineral f i l l e r s and asphalt on compaction
characteristics of the paving mixtures. The relative effects
of mineral f i l l e r and asphalt on properties of paving mixtures
containing constant volume proportions of mixture components
were then determined.
Both sand asphalt and asphalt concrete paving mixtures were
studied. Mixtures were prepared with no added mineral f i l l e r ,
and with varying amounts of limestone dust, hydrated l i m e ,
kaolin clay, asbestos, and f u l l e r ' s earth. Varying amounts of
different viscosity asphalts were used i n the mixtures.
Test results presented and discussed indicate pronounced
and varying effects which mineral f i l l e r s and asphalts have
on paving mixture properties.

•MINERAL f i l l e r s f o r asphalt paving mixtures consist of f m e mineral particles that

are added to o r are naturally present i n the m i n e r a l aggregate, and that predominantly
pass U . S. Standard Sieve No. 200. As such, they may normally be viewed as a con-
tinuation or extension of the mineral aggregate which usually is well-graded and
larger than the opening of sieve No. 200. Jn this sense, mineral f i l l e r s are part of the
aggregate skeleton of the pavement. They provide contact points between individual
particles and, therefore, are generally considered to p e r f o r m the same function as the
coarser particles in resisting stresses imposed on the pavement.
However, the fine particles of mineral f i l l e r may sometimes assume a dual r o l e .
Extremely fine particles may be located in the asphalt f i l m s that coat the coarser
aggregate particles. In this case, mineral f i l l e r s may alter and have an appreciable
effect on the apparent viscosity characteristics of the asphalt used in the pavement.
Previous Asphalt Institute Studies (l) exammed a large number of mineral f i l l e r s ,
and i t was demonstrated that different f i l l e r s affect the properties of asphalt paving
mixtures differently. It was si^gested that such changes in test properties can be
associated with changes in viscosity of the f i l l e r - a s p h a l t binder containing different
fillers.
However, direct correlation between f i l l e r - a s p h a l t binder viscosity and compacted
mixture properties was d i f f i c u l t . The reason f o r this was the variable effects of
different f i l l e r s on compaction or densification characteristics of the specimens. This
resulted i n different volumetric proportions of m i x t u r e components when specimens
were compacted by constant compactive e f f o r t .
This paper considers correlation between f i l l e r - a s p h a l t binder viscosity and test
properties of specimens that were compacted to nearly constant volume proportions of
a l l mixture components, regardless of the f i l l e r used. Such compaction was ac-
complished by the use of a mechanical gyratory compactor. The effects of three
different asphalt cements on properties of compacted paving mixtures were also ex-
amined. The three asphalts varied widely i n consistency characteristics. Additionally,
densification characteristics as affected by asphalts and f i l l e r s were evaluated. It is
believed that the use of a mechanical gyratory compactor f o r these studies contributes
substantially to a clearer understanding of the function of different types of mineral
f i l l e r s i n asphalt paving mixtures.

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS
Asphalt
Three asphalts used i n this study varied widely i n consistency characteristics.
Their properties are given i n Table 1.

TABLE 1

Asphalt
Property
A B C

Penetration at 77 F , 100 g, 5 sec 222 91 42

Softening point, r i n g and b a l l (°F) 104 118 143
DuctiUty at 77 F (cm) 75 150+ 13
Specific gravity, 77/77 F 1.001 1.022 1.022
Viscosity: (poises)
At 77 F 1.60x10* 19.0x10* 65.75x10*
At 140 F 2.54x10* 26.00x10* 110.79x10*
At 275 F 1.72 4.14 6.58

Asphalts are identified by the letter designations shown i n the table.

Mineral Aggregates
Two mineral aggregates (natural sand and trap rock), both f r o m commercial
sources i n Maryland, were used i n the preparation of test specimens.
The natural sand was used f o r sheet asphalt mixtures. It was predominantly quartz,
with particles of medium angularity. The sand was poorly graded and contamed 5
percent of natural dust passing sieve No. 200.
The same sand, combined with trap rock was used f o r dense-graded asphalt con-
crete mixtures. However, f o r that purpose i t was necessary to supplement the poorly
graded natural sand with additional sand fractions between the No. 8 and No. 30 sieves.
The trap rock had highly angular particles with rough surface texture.
Gradations and specific gravities of sand and trap rock are given i n Table 2.

Mineral F i l l e r s
Five m i n e r a l f i l l e r s : limestone dust, kaolin clay, hydrated l i m e , short-fibered
asbestos, and f u l l e r ' s earth were studied. These f i l l e r s were used i n previous
Asphalt Institute studies, and their selection f o r this study was based on their
 TABLE 2

Sand Trap Rock

Total % Total i
Sieve Size Passing Sieve Size Passing
No. 16 100 %-in. 100
No. 30 93 y^-in. 83.3
No. 50 32 %-in. 66.6
No. 100 10 No. 4 33.3
No. 200 5 No. 8 0.0
ASTMapparentsp.gr. 2.655 ASTM apparent sp. gr. 3.103

100
90

80
z KAOLIN CLAY
o 70
I)
U
111 60
N
in
z 50
<
I
t- /v^HYDRATED /
40 T/ 1 ihjr-
Linnt -T/
U
_iJ ^//FULLER
_i
< 30
^ EARTH

ss 20
— L I M E S T O N E [) U S T
10

0
001 005 01 05
PARTICLE S E E IN MM

Figure 1. P a r t i c l e - s i z e distribution of mineral f i l l e r s .

TABLE 3
PROPERTIES OF MINERAL FILLERS

Hygroscopic Specific
Specific Ignition Surface Area
Filler Moisture pH
Gravity Loss (?-) (cm V gm)
Content (^)

Limestone dust 2,746 0.009 42.8 9.3 3.1

Hydrated lime 2.390 0.80 29.0 12.7
Asbestos 2.550 0.60 13.6 9.1 4.8
Kaolin 2.670 0.75 13.3 5.9 60.0
Fuller's earth 2. 760 5.90 10.3 7.7 24.9
^ q u a l f i l l e r to water weight r a t i o .
Glycerol retention method.
widely varying effects on the viscosity of asphalt and on the test properties of asphalt
paving mixtures. Particle-size distributions f o r a l l of the f i l l e r s except asbestos are
shown i n Figure 1. Properties of these f i l l e r s are given in Table 3.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
Proportioning of Materials
Proportioning of materials f o r sheet asphalt test specimens was based on a mix
meeting Asphalt Institute Mix Type V m (fine sheet) gradation requirements. For asphalt
concrete, a mixture meeting Asphalt Institute M i x Type IV (dense-graded) gradation
requirements was used. The aggregate gradations, including limestone dust f i l l e r , f o r
both sheet asphalt and the asphalt concrete are shown i n Figure 2. Weight and volume
proportions of total mixture (aggregate, f i l l e r and asphalt) f o r both types of mixtures
are given i n Table 4.
The optimum asphalt contents as determined by the Marshall design method i n
previous studies were used f o r both mixtures. However, when f i l l e r s or asphalts other
than limestone dust or asphalt B were used, adjustments were made so that i n a l l
cases the same volume proportions were maintained.
Volumetric f i l l e r - t o - a s p h a l t ratios were varied f o r a l l mixtures. This was done
while maintaining constant volumes of aggregate and f i l l e r - a s p h a l t binder. However,
within this constant volume of f i l l e r - a s p h a l t binder, volumetric ratios of f i l l e r to
asphalt were varied. j

Mixing
Blending of mixture ingredients was accomplished with a Hobart mechanical mixer
(Model N-50). Aggregates and mineral f i l l e r s heated to 325 F were placed i n a p r e -
heated mixing bowl, and a required amount of asphalt heated to 275 F was introduced.
Mixing time of I ' A min was used f o r a l l mixtures. Each time an amount of mixture
sufficient f o r individual test specimens was prepared. A f t e r mixing and before com-
paction, mixture temperature ranged between 250 and 265 F .

Compaction of Test Specimens

A mechanical gyratory compactor s i m i l a r to the one described by McRae and
McDaniel (2) was used f o r compaction of a l l test specimens. However, certain m o d i f i -
cations were made on this apparatus. The compaction mold holder was equipped with

TABLE 4
WEIGHT AND VOLUME PROPORTIONS
OF BASIC MIXTURES

Basic Mixture W e i ^ t (iH) Volume (i)

Sheet asphalt:
Maryland sand 79.3 67.6
Limestone dust 9.7 8.0
Asphalt 11.0 24.4
Asphalt concrete:
Aggregate (Md. 88.4 80.4
trap rock and
Md. sand)
Limestone dust 6.6 6.5
Asphalt 5.0 13.1
10

100

90 /
80 /
70

SHE E T ASPH
60

50

40

SPHALT :oN :RET

30

20

10

0
200 100 50 30 16 8 4 3/8" 1/2" 3/4"
U& STANDARD S I E V E NO

Figure 2. Aggregate gradations for sheet asphalt and asphalt concrete.

a thermostatically controlled electric heater. This allowed maintenance of approxi-

mately constant specimen temperatures when additional compaction was applied to
specimens at a temperature of 140 F . The compactor also was equipped with a c a l i -
brated dial gauge attached to the lower hydraulic r a m . This gauge permitted measure-
ment of the heights of specimens to the nearest 0.001 i n . at any time during compac-
tion. For compaction of a l l specimens, the mechanical gyratory compactor settings of
100-psi r a m pressure and l " angle of gyration were used.
Immediately after mixing, the mixture, weighed to the nearest gram, was placed in
the compaction mold and compactor-gyrated until predetermined height of specimens
was obtained. The weight of mixture was such that after compaction constant volume
specimens contained nearly the same volumes of a i r voids, aggregate, and f i l l e r -
asphalt binder. The weights of mixture were calculated using ASTM apparent specific
gravities f o r a l l mixture components as a basis. Adjustments i n mixture weights were
required when different f i l l e r s , asphalts, or f i l l e r - t o - a s p h a l t ratios were used. The
difference between the volume of compacted specimens and the sum of solid volumes of
mixture ingredients represented the theoretical volume of a i r voids i n the specimens.
These theoretical volumes of a i r voids were 4.9 percent f o r sheet asphalt specimens,
and 5.8 percent f o r asphalt concrete specimens, both based on the volume of compacted
specimens calculated f r o m the diameter of the compaction molds and height of
specimens.
In studies of the effects of different f i l l e r s and asphalts on compaction or densifica-
tion characteristics of mixtures, specimens were initially compacted as described
previously. Additional gyratory compaction was then applied to these specimens.
However, the additional compaction was applied at 140 F, using the same compactor
settings (rampressure 100psi and l " gyration angle). Additional compaction was continued
until predetermined height of specimens was obtained. The predetermined height of
specimens was calculated to reduce theoretical a i r void volume of sheet asphalt speci-
mens f r o m 4.9 to 3.0 percent, and f o r asphalt concrete specimens f r o m 5. 8 to 4.0
percent.
The number of gyrations required to compact the specimens to constant volumes
i n i t i a l l y , and after the additional compaction at 140 F, were recorded f o r a l l specimens.
 11

These gyrations were used as a c r i t e r i o n f o r the evaluation of densification characteris-

tics of mixture's.

Tests on Compacted Specimens

For each individual mixture, three specimens were prepared. One specimen was
used to determine Hyeem stability and cohesiometer values. Marshall stability and
flow tests were made on the second specimen. The t h i r d specimen was subjected to
additional gyratory compaction at a 140 F temperature. Before such testing, bulk
volumes of each specimen were determined by the water displacement method.

TEST RESULTS
Test data are given i n Tables 5 and 6, respectively, f o r sheet asphalt and asphalt con-
crete specimens. Mixture components are given i n percent by weight and volume.
Volumetric proportions are based on volumes of specimens determined by the water
displacement method. Also given are Marshall and Hveem test properties, and the
number of compactor revolutions required to compact specimens to constant volumes.
Slight differences i n specimen volumes resulted, accounting f o r differences i n the
calculated a i r void contents, depending on the method used to determine specimen
volumes. Volumes based on specimen height indicated by the gyratory compactor and
the 4 - i n . diameter of the compaction molds were about 0. 5 to 1.0 percent greater f o r
sheet asphalt and about 2 to 4 percent greater f o r asphalt concrete than volumes
determined by the water displacement method. The volumes of water-permeable voids

TABLE 5
SHEET ASPHALT
Filter to Speci-
Asphalt Mix Composition Specimen Volume men No. d
Filler Asphalt Ratio Percent by Weight Proportli•ns' (%) Unit Compac- Marshall Hveem
(F/A) dt Total Mix Air Weight* tion Stab, Flow Stab. Cohes.
by Vol. Agg. Filler Asphalt Agg. Filler Asphalt Voids (lb/ft*) Revs.' (lb) (1/100 in.) Value Value
None A 0 64 5 0 IS. 6 63.8 0 30.6 5.6 124 6 15 230 16 14 40
B 0 84. S 0 16.5 63.6 0 30.4 6.0 125.1 14 400 24 11 41
C 0 84. S 0 16.5 63.7 0 30.3 6.0 124 7 14 576 34 11 82
Lime- A 0.141 61.6 6.0 13.2 64.6 3.8 27.1 4 6 130.5 32 345 12 16 42
stons 0.227 60. S 7.4 12.1 64.6 5.7 26.3 4.4 132.7 43 425 11 19 74 •
dust 0.S28 79.3 9.7 11.0 64.8 7.6 23.4 4.2 135.0 68 425 11 21 78
a 446 76.2 11.9 9.9 64 8 9.6 21.2 4.4 137.0 91 625 11 22 92
B a 141 81.8 5.0 13.2 64 5 3.6 27.2 4.5 130 7 18 620 19 16 101
0.22T 80. S 7.4 12.1 64.8 5.8 26.4 4.0 133.3 28 720 16 19 116
0.328 76.3 9.7 11.0 65.0 7.7 23.5 3.6 135.8 40 920 15 21 129
a 446 78.2 11.9 9.9 85.0 9.6 21.5 3.9 137.8 62 1,200 14 22 131
C 0.141 81.8 5.0 13.2 64.6 3.8 27.0 4.7 130.6 26 935 23 18 174
a 227 80.5 7.4 12.1 64.6 5.6 26.2 4.4 133 0 • 36 1,210
1,460
18 19 161
a 328 79.3 9.7 11.0 64.9 7.7 23.4 4.0 135.5 45
1,820
IS 22 174
a 446 78.2 11.9 9.9 64 9 9.6 21.3 4.2 137.3 78 15 24 187
Kaolin B 0.141 81 9 4.9 13.2 64.8 39 27.2 4.4 131.0 13 590 24 14 101
clay 0.227 ' 80.7 7.2 12.1 66.0 5.8 25.5 3.7 133.6 16 740 22 19 108
0.328 76.5 9.5 11.0 65.1 7.7 23.6 ' 3.7 135.6 20 005 20 18 142
a 446 78.4 11.7 9.9 84.8 96 21.4 4.2 137.0 26 1,315 19 18 154
Hydrated B 0.141 82.4 4.3 13.3 64.9 3.9 27.3 3.9 130.4 17 660 20 17 105
lime 0.227 81.5 6.3 12.2 66.1 5.7 25.5 3.7 132 4 22 800 19 19 127
a 328 80.6 8.3 11.2 64.9 7.6 23.5 4.0 133.5 29 1,100 17 18 151
0.446 79.6 10.3 10.1 64.9 9.8 21.4 4.0 136 2 129 1,600 IS 22 307
Asbestos A a 066 83.3 2.4 14.3 65.0 2.0 29.1 3.9 128.8 24 245 12 19 48
0.141 82.1 4.7 13.2 66.0 3.9 27.2 3.9 130.8 46 600 12 20 87
a 227 81.0 6.9 12.1 66.0 57 26.2 4.1 132.4 158 796 13 22 133
a 328 79.8 9.1 11.1 64.8 7.7 23.4 4.1 134.2 1,421 1,105 14 22 187
B a 068 83.3 2.4 14.3 64.9 1.9 29.1 ' 4.1 129.1 18 610 19 20 115
a 141 82.1 4.7 13.2 64.9 3.9 27.2 4.0 131.0 37 930 18 21 207
0.227 81.0 6.9 13.1 64.9 5.7 25.5 4.0 132.5 113 1,235 16 24 166
a 328 79.8 9.1 11.1 64.7 7.7 23.4 4.2 134.2 622 1,735 16 28 328
C 0.066 83.3 2.4 14.3 66.2 2.0 28. B 4.3 129.3 20 950 22 21 162
a 141 82.1 4.7 13.2 65.2 3.9 26.7 4.2 131.2 35 1,245
1,600
21 24 245
a 227 61.0 6.9 12.1 65.2 5.8 24.6 4.2 132.9 90
1,985
18 27 309
a 328 79.6 9 1 11.1 65.1 7.7 23.0 4.2 134.7 509 18 29 333
FUler's B 0.066 83 1 2.6 14.3 64.7 1.9 29.0' 4.4 128.9 21 730 20 17 105
earth a 141 81. S 5.0 13.2 64.9 3.6 27.3 4.0 131.4 47 1,255 17 22 272
0.227 8a 5 7.4 12.1 64.9 5.7 25.4 4.0 133.4 204 2,180 16 22 264
\Av8rage test values for three speclmeiifl7
^est values (ur one qieclineiL
12
TABLE 6
ASPHALT CONCRETE

FUler to Speci-
Asphalt Mix Composition Specimen Volume men No of
FUler Asphalt Ratio Percent 1^ Weight Proportions ' (% Unit Compac- Marshall' Hveera"
(F/A) of Total Mix Air Weight' tion Stab. Flow Stab Cohes
by Vol Agg. Filler Asphalt Agg. Filler Asphalt Voids (lb/ft») Revs ' (lb) (1/100 in ) Value Value
None A 0 92 2 0 7 8 77.5 0 19 3 3 2 154.4 6 203 9
B 0 92.2 0 7.8 77 5 0 19 0 3 5 154 4 7 697 15 21 103
C 0 92. 2 0 7 8 77 3 0 18 8 3 9 154.0 7 885 15 26 244
Lime- A 0. 146 90 7 2 6 6.7 77.7 2 4 16 9 3 0 157 2 7 374 10 28 84
stone 0. 298 89.5 4 7 5 8 78 0 4 4 14 9 2 7 160 2 9 744 10 30 140
dust 0.496 88 4 6.6 5 0 78 2 6 3 13 0 2 5 162 5 14 1, 024 9 33 194
0.766 87 2 8 6 4 2 77.4 8 2 11 0 3.4 163 2 22 1, 225 8 45 207
B 0 146 90 7 2 6 6 7 78 5 2.4 16.8 2 4 158 9 9 946 16 25 176
0. 298 89 5 4 7 5.8 78.5 4.4 14 7 2 4 161 0 10 1,435 15 28 315
0 496 88.4 6 6 5.0 78 1 6 3 12.8 2 8 162 3 13 1,674 13 30 329
0 766 87 2 8.6 4 2 77 6 8 2 10 8 3.4 163 5 23 2, 105 13 39 337
C 0. 146 90.7 2 6 6.7 78 0 2.4 16.6 3 0 159 2 11 1,492 15 25 273
0.298 89 5 4 7 5 8 78 1 4.4 14 6 2 9 160 3 12 1, 669 15 31 314
0 496 88 4 6 6 5 0 78 0 6.3 12 7 3 0 162 2 17 2,402 13 36 412
0.766 87 2 8 6 4 2 77.5 8 2 10.8 3.5 163 4 33 2,928 11 45 493
Kaolin B 0. 146 90.8 2.5 6 7 78 3 2 4 16.7 2.6 158 3 8 983 18 22 270
clay 0.298 89 6 4.6 5.8 78 3 4 4 14.7 2 6 160 4 9 1,399 17 25 330
0.496 88 5 6 5 5 0 78 1 6 3 12 7 2 9 162.0 13 1, 955 16 33 450
0 766 87 4 8 4 4 2 77 3 8.2 10 7 3 8 162.4 97 3. 070 16 43 546
Hydrated B 0 146 91 1 2 2 6 7 78 3 2 4 16.6 2.7 157 9 9 905 15 24 273
lime 0 298 90 1 4 0 5 9 78 3 4 4 14.8 2 5 159 6 12 1,451 15 27 374
0.496 89 3 5.7 5 0 77 6 6 3 12.6 3.6 159.6 34 2, 195 14 36 485
0 766 88 4 7 4 4 2 76 7 8 2 10 5 4 6 159 5 595 3, 550 12 57 571
Asbestos A 0 146 90 9 2 4 6.7 77 5 2.4 16 8 3 3 156.7 15 670 14 34 193
0 298 89 8 4 4 5.8 77 0 4 4 14.6 4.0 157.6 46 1,200 13 47 285
0.496 88 8 6 2 5 0 76.5 6.2 12. 7 4.6 158 2 314 1, 725 12 55 277
B 0 146 90 9 2 4 6 7 77 6 2 4 16 5 3 5 156.8 20 1,305 14 35 306
0 298 89 8 4 4 5 8 77 0 4 4 14 4 4 2 157 6 42 1, 760 14 45 394
0 496 88.8 6 2 5 0 76 7 6.2 12 5 4.6 158 7 1, 098 2,715 14 56 472
C 0. 146 90.9 2 4 6 7 77.6 2.4 16 5 3 5 156.8 14 1,565 15 31 386
0. 298 89 8 4.4 5 8 77.2 4.4 14.3 4 1 157 8 42 1,910 13 44 449
0.496 88.8 6.2 5 0 76.8 6 2 12.5 4.5 158.9 217 3, 040 16 65 578
Fuller's B 0 026 91 9 0 5 7 6 78 8 0 5 18.6 3. 1 155 6 10 820 17 22 159
earth 0 146 90 7 2 6 6.7 78 0 2 4 16.7 2.9 158.0 19 1,487 14 31 324
0 298 89 5 4 7 5.8 76 7 4.3 14.4 4.6 157 5 122 2, 943 14 52 360
T
Average test values for three specimens
"Test value for one specimen.

on the surfaces of specimens included in one case and excluded in the other undoubtedly
are the major cause of these differences.
Small differences between heights of specimens mdicated by the gyratory compac-
tor, and heights measured after cooling and removal from compaction molds were
also observed. Specimens, after removal from compaction molds, were generally
0.002 to 0.040 in. higher than indicated by the gyratory compactor. Specimen re-
bound of this magnitude was therefore indicated. Trends in specimen rebound were
consistent and appeared to be influenced by asphalt viscosity and filler-asphalt ratio,
^ecimen rebound increased with higher viscosities of the asphalt. Rebound was also
higher for the lowest and the highest filler concentrations. However, the differences
in specimen volumes due to specimen rebound, or depending on method of volume
determination, were not large. They did not appreciably affect the objective of the
compaction procedures; namely, to compact specimens with nearly constant volume
proportions of mixture components.
Test results include a number of figures of mixture test properties plotted on the
verticalaxisvs filler asphalt ratios on the horizontal axis. Volume proportions of all
mixture components are nearly constant at the same filler-asphalt ratio. As the
filler-asphalt ratio increases from zero (no added filler), given volumes of asphalt
are replaced by the same volume of filler so that the total volume of filler-asphalt
binder is maintained constant. Volume proportions of aggregates and air voids also
remain constant.
 13

2500

ASPHALT B

2000 FULLERS EARTH

ASBESTOS
01

1500
HYDRATED
LIME
i
1000
LIMESTONE
DUST
I
500

( ) FLOW l/lOO IN

01 02 03 Q4 Q5
FILLER TO ASPHALT (F/A) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure 3. E f f e c t of f i l l e r s on Marshall s t a b i l i t y and flow of sheet asphalt.

„(I2)
3500
HYDRATED LIME

^(16)
KAOLIN a.AY ^ /
3000
i (14)

(14)
1
FULL ER'S EARTl 1 /
• 2500
I / A S B t STOS
>-

I
(13)
S2000
(16)

(14)
(13),

1 1500 ( 1 4 ) / ^
^ (I5)|
^ v ^ L i r tESTONE DL ST

1000
^5^(16)
>^I5)
{ ) FLOW-!/ 0 0 IN

5001

FILLER TO ASPHALT ( F / A ) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure U. E f f e c t of f i l l e r s on Marshall s t a b i l i t y and flow of asphalt concrete.
14
Effects of FUlers and Asphalts on Marshall Test Properties
Marshall stability is plotted vs filler-asphalt ratio for sheet asphalt containing
Asphalt B and the five fillers in Figure 3. Marshall stability increases with increasing
filler-asphalt ratio for all the fillers. The increase in Marshall stability varies with
filler type and is greatest for fuller's earth, followed by asbestos, hydrated lime,
kaolin clay, and limestone dust. There is little difference between the latter two
fillers.
Figure 4 is a similar plot of Marshall stability vs filler-asphalt ratio for asphalt
concrete containing Asphalt B and the five mineral fillers. Marshall stability increases
with increasing filler-asphalt ratios for all the fillers. The increase in stability varies
with the type of filler similar to sheet asphalt, and is greatest for fuller's earth,
followed by asbestos, hydrated lime, kaolin clay, and limestone dust. The volume per-
cent of filler-asphalt binder in asphalt concrete specimens is about 19 percent compared
to approximately 31 percent in sheet asphalt. However, in spite of this difference,
trends in the effects of fillers on Marshall stability of asphalt concrete are similar to
sheet asphalt.
The effects of the three widely varying viscosity asphalts on Marshall stability for
sheet asphalt containing Asphalts A, B, and C, limestone dust, and asbestos
filler, are shown in Figure 5. Marshall stability is plotted vs filler-asphalt ratio. The
increase in Marshall stability with increasing asphalt viscosity is almost constant
regardless of fUler-asphalt ratio for both fillers. The relative effects of both filler and
asphalt type on Marshall stability are indicated by this figure. For example, asbestos
filler specimens at a fUler-asphalt ratio of 0. 22 with Asphalt A (lowest viscosity) have
the same Marshall stability as Asphalt B (medium viscosity) limestone dust filler speci-
mens at the same filler-asphalt ratio.
A general trend of almost constant increase in Marshall stability with increasing
asphalt viscosity also results for asphalt concrete. Figure 6 shows Marshall stability
vs filler-asphalt ratio for asphalt concrete containing Asphalts A, B, and C, and lime-
stone dust, and asbestos f i l l e r . The test results shown in Figures 5 and 6 indicate that
filler-asphalt ratio or type of filler may have equal or greater effect on Marshall sta-
bility as large variations in the viscosity of asphalt used.

2500
LIMESTONE DUST
ASBESTOS —

2000

ASPHALT C
OQ
_l
I ASPHALT B
1500 ASPHALT C

.5
1000
ASPHALT B

500
ASPHALT A

ASPHALT A

00 01 0.2 Q3 Q4 05 0 6
FILLER TO ASPHALT (F/A) RATIO BY VOLUME

I
Figure 5. E f f e c t of various asphalts on Marshall s t a b i l i t y of sheet asphalt.
 15

LIMESTONE DUST ASPHALT C

3000
ASBESTOS —

2500

ASPHALT C ASPHALT B

ASPHALT B
2000
I

<
1500

ASPHALT A

lOCO

ASPHALT A

500

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
FILLER TO ASPHALT (F/A) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure 6. Effect of various asphalts on Marshall stability of asphalt concrete.

The influence of asphalt viscosity on Marshall stability has been recognized for some
time. Fink and Lettier (3) found that for a particular aggregate-asphalt system,
Marshall stability was almost directly proportional to the logarithm of the viscosity of
the recovered asphalt. Because Marshall stability is influenced by the viscosity of
asphalt used, and because type and concentration of mineral filler have an appreciable
effect on viscosity of asphalt, it is expected that Marshall stability would be related to
the viscosity of the filler-asphalt binder as well as viscosity of asphalt alone. A gener-
al trend of increasing Marshall stability with increasing filler-asphalt binder viscosity
was indicated for sheet asphalt mixes with different fillers in previous Asphalt Institute
filler studies (1). Tests on the constant volume proportion specimens in this study
permit clearer evaluation of filler-asphalt binder viscosity and Marshall stability re-
lationships.
The concentration effects of the five fillers on the viscosity of Asphalt B are shown
in Figure 7, a plot of viscosity at 77 F of asphalt-filler mixtures vs filler-asphalt ratio
by volume. All fUlers greatly increase the viscosity of asphalt with increasing con-
centration. The increase in viscosity is greatest for fuller's earth and asbestos,
followed by hydrated lime, kaolin clay, and limestone dust.
The relationship of filler-asphalt binder viscosity at 77 F and Marshall stability of
sheet asphalt for Asphalt B and the five fillers is shown in Figure 8. Marshall stability
values shown in Figure 3 for the various fillers at different filler-asphalt ratios are
plotted vs the viscosity of the fUler-asphalt binder in the specimens at the same f i l l e r -

I
asphalt ratios. Despite the difference in temperature at which the viscosity of the
16

1 1
nMl c—1

FULLER'S EARTH_^ KAOLIN CLAY_

^ H Y D WTED LIM

1^ V ASBE STOS 7

P
\ LIMESTTDNP DUST

o
>

ASPHALT B

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
FILLER TO ASPHALT (F/A) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure 7. E f f e c t of concentration of various f i l l e r s on v i s c o s i t y of filler-asphalt

mixtures.

filler-asphalt binder was measured (77 F), and Marshall stability test temperature
(140 F), the results mdicate that Marshall stability is almost directly proportional to
the logarithm of the filler-asphalt binder viscosity for each filler type.
The same general relationship between filler-asphalt binder viscosity and Marshall
stability results for asphalt concrete. This is shown in Figure 9, a plot of f i l l e r -
asphalt binder viscosity at 77 F at different fUler-asphalt ratios vs Marshall stability of
asphalt concrete at the same filler-asphalt ratios for the five fillers.
Marshall stability may therefore be related to the viscosity of the filler-asphalt
binder as well as the viscosity of the asphalt. Because filler-asphalt binder viscosity
is appreciably affected by mineral filler concentration and type, type and concentration
of mineral filler may have an equal or greater influence on Marshall stability than large
differences in the viscosity of asphalt alone.
The test results m Figures 8 and 9 also indicate that filler properties such as
particle shape and particle-size distribution, in addition to filler properties that influ-
ence asphalt viscosity, affect Marshall stability. If the fillers had no effect on Marshall
stability other than their effect on aspahlt viscosity, the plotted points would fall on a
common line, or within a narrow band, with a width corresponding to the reproducibility
of the Marshall stability test.
Marshall flow values are indicated in parentheses beside the plotted stability values
in Figure 3 for sheet asphalt and Figure 4 for asphalt concrete. There is no significant
effect of filler type on Marshall flow value at the same filler-asphalt ratio, except for
kaolin clay. Kaolin clay consistently increases the Marshall flow value. Decreasing
flow values for all fillers with increasing filler-asphalt ratio reflect decrease in asphalt
content in the specimens as filler replaces the same volume of asphalt.

I
 17

HYDRATED LIME

FULLER'S EARTH

KAOLIN CLAY

LIMESTONE DUST

NO ADDED FILLER

ASPHALT B

400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

MARSHALL STABILITY AT I40»F ( LBS)
Figure 8. Binder viscosity at 77 F vs Marshall stability at II4D F of sheet asphalt
containing f i l l e r s at different concentrations.

Effects of Fillers and Asphalts on Hveem Test Properties

Hveem stability values increase as progressively larger volumes of asphalt are re-
placed by the same volumes of mineral filler in compacted test specimens. Stability
increases with increasing filler-asphalt ratio may vary considerably for some fillers.
Figure 10 shows Hveem stability vs filler-asphalt ratio for sheet asphalt containing
Asphalt B and five different fillers. Fuller's earth and asbestos produce the greatest
and approximately the same increase in Hveem stability as filler-asphalt ratios are in-
creased. Lesser and about the same stability increases result for hydrated lime, lime-
stone dust, and kaolin clay.
Figure 11 shows Hveem stability vs filler-asphalt ratio for asphalt concrete contain-
ing Asphalt B and the different fillers. The same general trends of stability increase
with increasing filler-asphalt ratios result for asphalt concrete as for sheet asphalt.
Hydrated lime, however, produces considerably higher stability than limestone dust or
kaolm clay at the higher filler-asphalt ratios for asphalt concrete.
It is generally accepted that the Hveem stability test is more dependent on aggregate and
filler characteristics than on asphalt characteristics. Testresults, however, indicate that
Hveem stability may be influenced by the viscosity of the filler-asphalt binder. Trends

I
in viscosity of asphalt-filler mixtures for different types and concentrations of fillers
18

KAOLIN CLAY

FULLER'S EARTH

LIMESTONE OUST

HYDRATED LIME

ADDED FILLER

ASPHALT B

400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800 3200

MARSHALL STABILITY AT I40«F(LBS)

Figure 9. Binder viscosity at 77 F vs Marshall stability at ll;0 F of asphalt concrete

containing f i l l e r s at different concentrations.

shown in Figure 7 are quite similar to trends in Hveem stability for the same types and
concentrations of filler.
Figure 12 shows Hveem stability vs filler-asphalt ratio for asphalt concrete con-
taining Asphalts A, B, and C, limestone dust, and asbestos f i l l e r . There is no con-
sistent or significant effect of the widely differing viscosity asphalts on Hveem stability.
Asphalt concrete specimens with Asphalt A and no added filler disintegrated at 140 F.
Stability tests could not be made for these specimens.
Figure 13 shows Hveem stability vs filler-asphalt ratio for sheet asphalt containing
Asphalts A, B, and C, limestone dust, and asbestos. There is no significant effect
of asphalt type on Hveem stability for the limestone dust filler mixes. However, for
sheet asphalt containing asbestos, there is consistent trend of increasing stability with
increasing viscosity of asphalt. Thus, with the exception of sheet asphalt containing
asbestos, Hveem stability is not appreciably affected by large differences in viscosity
of the asphalt.
Cohesion of compacted paving mixtures as measured by the Hveem cohesiometer test
is greatly influenced by type of f i l l e r , filler-asphalt ratio, and type of asphalt. The
effects of these variables on cohesiometer test values are quite similar to their effects

I
on the Marshall stability test.
 19

50

ASPHALT B

40

30
SBESTOS_
FULLER'S

S 20
iii
> \ _ L I M E S 1 ONE DUST
X
HYDRATED LIME
10
KAOLIN XAY

00 01 02 03 04 05 06
FILLER TO ASPHALT ( F / A ) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure 10. Effect of f i l l e r s on Hveem stability of asphalt concrete.

60
a
^1

ASBESTC s ^ ; ^ HYC RATED LIME

50
A
FUL LER'S EAR1• " H ^ / KAOLIN CLAY ^

LME£ TONE DUSl

40
^_ 0
c
>
^ m
i 30

i ...11 ^
1
^
s II ii

UJ — + » — — -

^ 20

10

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 OB

L
FLLER TO ASPHALT ( F/A) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure 11. Effect of f i l l e r s on Hveem stability of asphalt concrete.

20
70
LIMES!rONE DUST
ASBESTOS /•
/
60 /

/
ASPHALT A ^
u 50
-V AS 'HALT B

ASPHALT C -
> •
_ASPHALT

I 30 / m X

- X
.ASPHALT
/ ASPHALl B
/ .
20

10
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 0 8
FILLER TO ASPHALT ( F / A ) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure 12. E f f e c t of various asphalts on Hveem s t a b i l i t y of asphalt concrete.

LMESTONE DUST
ASBESTOS . •

ASPHALT C

ASPHALT B ASPHALT A

ASPHALT C

ASPHALT A
ASPHALT B

01 02 03 04 05
FILLER TO ASPHALT ( F / A ) RATIO BY VOLUME

J
Figure 13. E f f e c t of various asphalts on Hveem s t a b i l i t y of sheet asphalt.
 21

Figure 14 shows Hveem cohesiometer values vs filler-asphalt ratio for sheet

asphalt containing Asphalt B and five mineral fillers. Cohesiometer values increase
with increasing filler-asphalt ratio for all of the fillers. The Increase is greatest for
fuller's earth, followed by asbestos, hydrated lime, kaolin clay, and limestone dust.
The relative effects of the fillers on cohesiometer test values are closely related to
the effects of the fillers on viscosity of asphalt. Trends in cohesiometer values for the
different fillers correspond closely to trends in the viscosity of fUler-asphalt mixtures
shown previously in Figure 7. Fillers that produce the greatest increase in asphalt
viscosity also produce the greatest increase in Hveem cohesiometer values.

400

ASPHALl B
ASBESTOS _ 1
300 Ann 1 0
FULLER^ E ARTH

^ • ^ ^ H Y D F ATED LIME
I 200

a
1 ' II
^—*
/ • KAC LIN CLAY
^ 100
\ UMESl ONE DUST

00 0! 02 03 04 05 06
FILLER TO ASPHALT ( F / A ) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure lU. Effect of f i l l e r s on Hveem cohesiometer values of sheet asphalt.

500 I I
LIMESTONE DUST
ASBESTOS _ - •

400

ASPHALT C

300

ASPHALT B

200

ASPHALT C

ASPHALT B
100
ASPHALT A

PHALT A

01 02 03 04 05
RLLER TO ASPHALT (F/A) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure 15. Effect of various asphalts on Hveem cohesiometer values of sheet asphalt.

\
22

Hveem cohesiometer values are influenced by type of asphalt as well as type of

filler. Figure 15 shows cohesiometer values vs filler-asphalt ratio for sheet asphalt
containing Asphalts A, B, and C, limestone dust, and asbestos fiUer. The increase in
cohesiometer values for limestone filler mixes with increasing viscosity of asphalt is
fairly uniform regardless of filler-asphalt ratio. Although a considerable scatter of
test values results for asbestos filler mixes, there is also a general trend of increasing
cohesiometer values with increasing viscosity of asphalt.
Effects of Fillers and Asphalts on Compaction Characteristics
Compaction by the gyratory compaction method results from direct vertical pressure
on the ends of the specimen while movement of aggregate particles is produced by a
continuous gyratory motion of the compaction mold confining the specimen. The
vertical pressure and gyration angle were maintained constant for compaction of speci-
mens. Therefore, the number of compaction revolutions required to produce constant
volume specimens provides an indication of mixture compaction characteristics or
required compactive effort. Further, the proportioning procedures used permit evalu-
ation of the relative effects of filler type, asphalt type and filler-asphalt ratio on com-
paction characteristics of mixtures.
Test data were obtained for compaction at two different temperatures.
High Temperature Compaction. —The number of compaction revolutions required to
produce constant volume specimens is given in Table 5 for sheet asphalt and Table 6
for asphalt concrete.
Two factors should be mentioned concerning the high temperature compaction of
mixtures, or compaction immediately after mixing. Temperature control, other than
maintaining mixtures between 250 and 265 F at the beginning of compaction, was not
provided. Also, the initial bulk volume of loose mixtures as placed in the compaction
mold varied for the different fiUers, even though the theoretical volume of mixture
components was kept constant.
The differences in viscosity of Asphalts A, B, and C did not affect the number of re-
quired compaction revolutions for sheet asphalt or asphalt concrete containing no added
filler. Required compactor revolutions for sheet asphalt with Asphalts A, B, and C
were 15, 14, and 14, respectively. For asphalt concrete the required compaction
revolutions with Asphalts A, B, and C were 6, 7, and 7, respectively.
Trends in the number of compaction revolutions for both sheet asphalt and asphalt
concrete with limestone dust and asbestos dependent on type of asphalt were not con-
sistent. More revolutions, or greater compactive effort were required to compact
sheet asphalt with limestone dust with Asphalt A (lowest viscosity) than Asphalt C
(highest viscosity). On the other hand, slightly increasing number of required compac-
tion revolutions were required for asphalt concrete with limestone dust with increasing
viscosity of asphalt. In any case, differences in required compactive effort were not
large for high temperature compaction dependent on asphalt type or viscosity of asphalt.
Air entrapment related to type and grading of aggregate may have been a factor in high
temperature compaction, or the gyratory compaction techniques used may singly not be
sensitive to relatively small viscosity differences in asphalt at about 250 F.
Trends in required compactive effort dependent on filler-asphalt ratio were con-
sistent for sheet asphalt and asphalt concrete with all fillers and Asphalt B. The number
of compactor revolutions increases rapidly with Increasing filler-asphalt ratios. The
increase varies considerably for some fillers. For example, sheet asphalt with
asbestos required 622 compactor revolutions at a filler-asphalt ratio of 0.322. The
required number of compactor revolutions for a similar mix with limestone dust at the
same filler-asphalt ratio was only 40.
Asbestos and fuUer's earth, which cause the greatest increase in viscosity of
asphalt, require considerably higher compactive efforts. Hydrated lime, limestone
dust, and kaolin clay, which have less effect on asphalt viscosity, require lower com-
pactive effort. The test data for high temperature compaction also indicate that con-
siderably higher compactive efforts are required for sheet asphalt than asphalt concrete.
In general, the high temperature gyratory compaction test results indicate that type
of asphalt or viscosity of asphalt does not greatly influence compaction characteristics.
 23

Filler-asphalt ratio and type of filler have by far the greater influence on high tempera-
ture compaction characteristics of paving mixtures.
Compaction at 140 F.—The factors of temperature variation and bulking effects pres-
ent in the high temperature compaction were largely eliminated when additional compaction
was applied to specimens at 140 F. Test data for the 140 F compaction are summarized
in Table 7 for sheet asphalt and Table 8 for asphalt concrete. The summary includes
mix coiiq)osition in percent by weight of total mixture, volume percent of mixture com-
ponents after compaction, and the number of conq)action revolutions required to reduce
the theoretical volume of air voids by about 2 percent. Air void contents based on
volumes of specimens determined by the water displacement method indicate that air
void contents were fairly uniformly reduced approximately 1 percent by the additional
coiiq>action at 140 F. Considerable influence of specimen rebound after the additional

TABLE 7
SHEET ASPHALT A F T E R ADDITIONAL COMPACTION AT 140

Filler to Speci-
Asphalt Mix Composition Specimen Volume men No. of
FlUer Asphalt RaUo Percent by Weight Proportions (%) Unit Compac-
(F/A) of Total Mix Welght tion
by Vol. Agg. ^Uer Asphalt Agg FlUer Asphalt Voids (lb/ft*) Revs.

None A 84.5 0 15.0 64.6 30.9 4.5 126. 5

B 84.5 0 15.0 64.0 30.6 5.4 125. 9
C 84.5 0 15.0 64.1 30.6 5.3 125. 11
Lime- A ,141 81.8 5.0 13.2 65. 27.4 3.7 131. 12
stone .227 80.5 7.4 12.1 65. 25.6 3.3 134. 31
dust .328 79.3 9.7 11.0 65. 23.7 2.8 137. 68
.446 78.2 11.9 9.9 65. 9.7 21.4 3.6 138. 87
B .141 81.8 5.0 13.2 65. 3.8 27.4 3.6 131.9 17
.227 80.5 7.4 12.1 65. 5.8 25.7 3.1 134.5 37
.328 79.3 9.7 11.0 65.9 7.8 23.8 2.5 137.6 80
.446 78.2 11.9 9.9 65.6 9.7 21.7 3.0 140.2 219
0.141 81.8 5.0 13.2 65.0 3.9 27.2 3.9 131.7 36
0.227 80.5 7.4 12.1 65.1 5.8 25.4 3.7 134.0 48
.328 79.3 9.7 11.0 65.6 7.8 23.6 3.0 137.0 122
.446 78.2 11.9 9.9 65.6 9.7 21.6 3.1 139.0 398
Kaolin B .141 81.9 4.9 13.2 65.7 3.9 27.6 2.8 133.0 16
clay .227 80.7 7.2 12.1 65.9 25.8 2.5 135.3 27
.328 79.5 9.5 11.0 65.9 23.8 2.5 137.3 33
0.446 78.4 11.7 9.9 65.6 21.6 3.1 138.6 120
Hydrated B 0.141 82.4 4.3 13.3 65.8 27.7 2.6 132.4 23
lime 0.227 81.5 6.3 12.2 66.1 25.8 2.3 134.3 51
0.328 80.5 8.3 11.2 65.9 23.9 2.5 135.6 131
0.446 79.6 10.3 10.1 66.3 9.8 21.9 2.0 138.0 1,017
Asbestos A 0.066 83.3 2.4 14.3 66.0 2.0 29.5 2.5 130.9 32
0.141 82.1 4.7 13.2 66.1 3.9 27.5 2.3 133.0 100
0.227 81.0 6.9 12.1 66.2 5.9 25.7 2.2 135.0 1,126
0.328 79.8 9.1 11.1 65.4 23.6 3.2 135.5 2,000b
0.066 83.3 2.4 14.3 66.2 29.6 2.2 39
131.6
.141 82.1 4.7 13.2 27.8 2.0 159
66.3 133.7
.227 81.0 6.9 12.1 25.8 2.1 445
66.2 135.3
.328 9.1 11.1 23.8 2.8 2,000^
79.8 65.6 136.2
.066 2.4 14.3 28.9 3.2 58
83.3 65.9 130.8
.141 4.7 13.2 27.2 2.6 328
82.1 66.3 133.4
.227 6.9 12.1 25.2 2.7 1,095
81.0 66.2 5.9 135.2
.328 9.1 11.1 23.2 3.5 2,000b
79.8 65.5 7.8 135.7
.066 2.6 14.3 29.6 2.4 29
FuUer's B 83.1 66.0 2,0 131.5
.141 5.0 13.2 27.8 2.2 143
earth 81.8 66.1 3.9 133.8
.227 7.4 12.1 25.9 2.4 2,000b
80.5 65.9 5.8 135.7

5Test values f o r individual specimens.

'^Coiopaction discontinued at 2,000th revolution.
24
TABLE 8
ASPHALT CONCRETE AFTER ADDITIONAL COMPACTION AT 140 F *

FUler to Speci-
Asphalt Mix Composition Specimen Volume men No. of
FiUer Asphalt Ratio Percent by Weight Proportions (%) Unit Compac-
(F/A) of Total Mix AiF Weight tion
by Vol. Agg. Filler Asphalt Agg. FUler Asphalt Voids (lb/ft*) Revs.

None A 0 92.2 0 7.8

B 0 92.2 0 7.8 78.8 0 19 3 1.9 156.9 2
C 0 92.2 0 7.8 78.1 0 19.1 2.8 155.8 5
Lime- A 0.146 90.7 2.6 6.7 78.6 2.4 17.0 2.0 159.1 3
stone 0.298 89.5 4.7 5.8 78.7 4.4 15.0 1.9 161 5 3
0.496 88.4 6.6 5.0 78.6 6.4 13.1 1.9 163.6 5
0.766 87.2 8.6 4.2 78.3 8.3 11.1 2.3 164.9 22
0.146 90.7 2.6 6.7 79.2 2.4 16.9 1.5 160.2 11
0.298 89.5 4.7 5.8 79.1 4.5 14.8 1.6 162.3 12
0.496 88.4 6.6 5.0 78.7 6.4 12.9 2.0 163.7 17
0.766 87.2 8.6 4.2 78.6 8.3 10.9 2.2 165.4 60
0.146 90.7 2.6 6.7 78.6 2.4 16.7 2.3 159.2 10
0.298 89.5 4.7 5.8 78.7 4.4 14.7 2.2 161.5 8
0.496 88.4 6.6 5.0 78.7 6.4 12.8 2.1 163.6 28
.766 87.2 8.6 4.2 78.3 8.3 10.9 2.5 165.0 79
Kaolin .146 98.8 2.5 6.7 79.2 2.4 16.9 1.5 160.1 6
clay .298 89.6 4.6 5.8 79.0 4.5 14.8 1.7 161.9 9
.496 88.5 6.5 5.0 78.7 6.4 12.8 2.1 163.2 25
766 87.4 8.4 4.2 78.1 8.3 10.9 164.2 185
Hydrated B 0.146 91.1 2.2 6.7 79.3 2.5 16.8 159.7 8
lime 0.298 90.1 4.0 5.9 77.0 4.4 15.0 161.2 13
0.496 89.3 5.7 5.0 78.8 6.3 12.7 161.9 103
0.766 88.4 7.4 4.2 78.3 8.3 10.7 162.6 990
Asbestos A 0.146 90.9 2.4 6.7 78.5 2.4 17.0 158.6 12
0.298 89.8 4.4 5.8 78.2 4.4 14.9 2.5 160.0 60
0.496 88.8 6.2 5.0 78.0 6.3 12.9 2.8 161.3 496
B 0.146 90.9 2.4 6.7 78.5 2.4 16.7 2.4 158.6 41
0.298 89.8 4.4 5.8 78.0 4.4 14.6 3.0 159.6 107
0.496 88.8 6.2 5.0 78.1 6.3 12.7 2.9 161.4 ,220
C 0.146 90.9 2.4 6.7 78.3 2.4 16.6 2.7 158.2 30
0.298 89.8 4.4 5.8 78.3 4.4 14.6 2.7 160.1 168
0.496 88.8 6.2 5.0 78.2 6.3 12.7 2.8 161.7 732
Fuller's B 0.026 91.9 0.5 7.6 78.9 0.5 18.8 1.8 157.6 3
earth 0.146 90.7 2.6 6.7 78.9 2.4 16.9 1.8 159.8 32
0.298 89.5 4.7 5.8 78.1 4.4 14.6 2.9 160.2 353

*rest values for indlvidiial specimens.

compaction is indicated by the results. Fairly consistent trends of slightly higher air
voids at the lowest and highest fnier-asphalt ratio for all of the fillers are indicated.
Slightly increasing air void contents with increasing viscosity of asphalt are also in-
dicated.
Type of filler and fUler-asphalt ratio are the dominant factors in compaction charac-
teristics of sheet asphalt and asphalt concrete indicated by gyratory compaction at a
temperature of 140 F. Figure 16 shows number of compaction revolutions vs fUler-
asphalt ratio for sheet asphalt with Asphalt B and the five different fillers. The number
of compactor revolutions increases for all of the fUlers as fUler-asphalt ratio increases.
Fuller's earth and asbestos require the greatest compactive effort followed by hy-
drated lime, limestone dust, and kaolin clay. Relation of required compactive effort for
the different fillers to the effect of f iUers on viscosity of asphalt is evident. Fillers
requiring the greatest compactive effort also cause greatest increases in viscosity of
asphalt.
Figure 17 shows number of compactor revolutions for asphalt concrete with Asphalt
B and the five different fUlers. The effect of fUler type and fUler-asphalt ratio on re-
quired compactive effort for asphalt concrete is similar to sheet asphalt.
 25

\(f\

10- /
^
O

-aiU-ER'S t A K I J
y

/>/
X
V M T l)RATED
LIM E

A •wAoDbblUb
o

ESTONE
10'
? y
// -^TT^^ •Jd
+ DU!5T
1
J y JLIN CLAY-
/,
/
/
/ /
// +

IT

10

NOTE SPE :iMENS COMRI CTED TO C0^ STANT VOLUM i

ASPHALT B

00 01 02 03 04 05 06
FILLER TO ASPHALT (F/A) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure 16. E f f e c t of f i l l e r s on compaction c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of sheet asphalt.

Type of asphalt has a significant effect on compaction characteristics of sheet

asphalt and asphalt concrete at 140 F. Increased compactive effort is required with
increasing viscosity of asphalt. The effect of type of asphalt, or wide viscosity dif-
ferences in asphalt, is relatively small compared to effect of the entire range of f i l l e r -
asphalt ratios used or type of filler for such widely differing types as asbestos and
limestone dust.
Test results for sheet asphalt and asphalt concrete with limestone dust are used to
show the effect of asphalt type on compaction characteristics at 140 F. Figure 18
shows number of compaction revolutions vs filler-asphalt ratio for sheet asphalt with
limestone dust and Asphalts A, B, and C. Compactive efforts required for Asphalt C
are the highest, followed by Asphalt B and Asphalt A. Required compactive effort i n -
creases with increasing viscosity of asphalt.
The effect of asphalt type on compaction characteristics of asphalt concrete is simi-
lar to sheet asphalt. Figure 19 shows number of compactor revolutions for asphalt
concrete with limestone dust filler and Asphalts A, B, and C. Although a considerable
scatter of test data results at lower filler-asphalt ratios, a trend of increasing number
of compactor revolutions with increasing viscosity of asphalt results.
26

ASE E S T O 5
Y YDRA" "ED
IME

y
FULLER'S <

O n

10' r

S
"f
o
o ^
w 1 U E S T O f JE
DUI 5T

z 10
—H- —T^H
lOLIN n A Y
11
/ / i

///
//^
W
NOTE. SPEC MENS ( ;OMRAC FED TC CONS" ANT V( )LUME

1
ASPHAL' ' B
1
00 01 02 03 0.4 05 0.6 0.7 OB OS
FILLER T O A S P H A L T ( F / A ) RATIO B Y V O L U M E

Figure 17. E f f e c t of f i l l e r s on compaction c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of asphalt concrete.

In general, compaction characteristics of mixes at 140 F are similar to compaction

characteristics at high temperature, with the exception of effect of type of asphalt.
Filler-asphalt ratio, or relative proportions of asphalt and f i l l e r , and type of filler are
dominant factors. Large increases in compactive effort are required with increasing
filler-asphalt ratio. Fillers that increase the viscosity of asphalt most also require
greatest compactive efforts. The effect of type of asphalt or viscosity of asphalt on
compaction characteristics is more pronounced at 140 F than at high temperatures.
 27

io»|

\_ASPHALT C
1
ASPHALT B

10' 1
ornMi.1 M -

8 o
10

NOTE SPECB EISS COMFWCTED TO CONSTm VOLUME

60 01 02 03 04 0.5 06
FILLER TO ASPHALT (F/A) RATIO BY VOLUME

Figure l 8 . Compaction c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of sheet asphalt containing limestone dust and

various asphalts.

Increased compactive effort is required at 140 F with increasing viscosity of asphalt.

This was not necessarily true for high temperature compaction.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The purpose of tests described in this p ^ e r was to evaluate the effects of different
fillers on properties of asphalt paving mixtures. In this respect, this study can be re-
garded as a continuation and extension of the Asphalt Institute work on this subject which
has been described in previous p ^ e r s . In earlier work, a constant compactive effort,
such as Marshall, was used to compact test specimens. Because different fillers affect
compaction characteristics of mixtures differently, such compaction resulted in speci-
mens which varied in density and, therefore, in the relative proportions of mixture
components.
In this phase of work, however, a different approach was used. Mixtures, regard-
less of type and concentration of filler, were compacted to nearly the same air voids
content by using variable compaction efforts. A mechanical g3rratory compactor was
used for this compaction. Because volumetric proportions of mineral aggregate and
filler-asphalt binder were kept constant and only type of fiUer or volumetric filler con-
centrations were varied, such compaction permitted a clearer and more direct evalua-
tion between the effects of different fillers or filler concentrations. Stability by
Marshall and Hveem methods and compaction or densification characteristics were two
main mixture properties determined under these rigidly controlled compaction condi-
tions. Two mixtures (sheet asphalt and asphalt concrete) containing three asphalt
cements varying in viscosity and five different fillers, were evaluated.
Test results obtained in this study indicate the following:
1. All mineral fillers regardless of type or concentration increase stability or
28

II.
I NOTE SPECI HEHS OMPAC'
( 'ED TO CONSTXNT V(LUME
<
CO
g
2 IC^
I-
3
-I •
UJ
q: ASPh ALT C

i 10 X
o

tc
UJ

AQD HALT A
MOr M
_ASR HALT B

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 OS 0.9

FILLER TO ASPHALT (F/A) RATIO BY VOLUME
Figure 19. Compaction characteristics of asphalt concrete containing limestone dust
and various asphalts.

strength properties of compacted asphalt paving mixtures. However, fillers also in-
crease compactive efforts required to coiiq)act specimens to the same volume or air
voids content. Such effects become more pronounced with increasing concentration of
fillers.
2. Properties of paving mixtures are strongly dependent on type of mineral filler.
For example, at the same volumetric concentration highly absorptive fuller's earth or
fibrous asbestos increase stability or compactive efforts considerably more than hy-
drated lime, kaolin, or limestone dust.
3. Use of higher viscosity asphalts results in higher stability and the need for higher
compactive effort. However, it spears (particularly at higher concentrations of filler)
that the effects of asphalt viscosi^ are less pronounced than the effects of type or con-
centration of filler. This may indicate that at certain concentrations filler, besides
changing viscosity of the binder, also contributes contact points between coarser
mineral particles.
4. In general, viscosity of the filler-asphalt binder correlates with physical proper-
ties of paving mixtures. Factors such as type and concentration of filler and viscosity
of asphalt contribute to the viscosity of the filler-asphalt binder. Because of these
 29

combined effects, it is difficlut to evaluate which factor is more important in influencing

the properties of paving mixtures.
5. Marshall stability values are more sensitive and reflect better the effects of
different fillers and asphalts than Hveem stability values. Trends in Hveem cohesi-
ometer values are similar to those indicated by Marshall stabilities. However, the
accuracy of the cohesiometer test is quite poor for some mixes. It spears that
Marshall stability values reflect both viscosity of asphalt and influence of fillers. On
the other hand, Hveem stability values are primarily influenced by the type and con-
centration of fiUer.
6. Initial compaction and subsequent densifications of asphalt paving mixtures are
strongly dependent on the type and concentration of mineral filler. The effects of
asphalt viscosity on these mixture properties are relatively small, particularly at
higher temperatures. Higher compaction temperatures are indicated for mixtures con-
taining high viscosity filler-asphalt binders. However, high compaction efforts re-
quired to densify further mixtures containing high viscosity flQer-asphalt binders at or
near 140 F may indicate improved resistance to densification by traffic and therefore
better performance of the pavement.
REFERENCES
1. Kallas, B. F . , and Puzinauskas, V. P . , "A Study of Mineral Fillers in Asphalt
Paving Mixtures. " Proc., Assoc. of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 30
(1961).
2. McRae, J . L . , and McDaniel, A . R . , "Progress Report on the Corps of Engineers'
Kneading Compactor for Bituminous Mixtures. " Proc., Assoc. of Asphalt
Paving Technologists, Vol. 27 (1958).
3. Fink, D. F . , and Lettier, J . A., "Viscosity Effects in the Marshall Stability Test. "
P r o c , Assoc. of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 20 (1951).