Final Project 2

Acknowledgement:
First and foremost, praises and thanks to the God, the most merciful, for His showers of
blessings throughout our research work to complete the research successfully.
We would like to express our deep and sincere gratitude and thanks to our kind & cooperative
research supervisor, (Dr. Sheymaa Ibraheem Muhammed) and (Mr.Sheyan Khalid Omer ) for
their valuable advices and suggestions throughout our semester in order to perform well & up to
mark ,for giving us the opportunity to do research and providing invaluable guidance throughout
this research. Their dynamism, vision, sincerity and motivation have deeply inspired us. It was a
great privilege and honor to work and study under their guidance. We are extremely grateful for
what she has offered us.
A special thanks to our teacher (Mrs. Viyan Abdul-Raheem Abdul-Kareem) for her help and
advices, she was with us in every step for lab works.
We would also like to thank the Duhok construction laboratory specially asphalt lab staff for
their help during our research.
Of course, we also want to thanks our parents for being there for practical support in all those
things of life beyond doing and who encouraged us and prayed for us throughout the time of our
research.
Finally, our thanks go to all the people and friends who have supported us to complete the
research work directly or indirectly.
May the Almighty God richly bless all of you.
Table of content
Preliminary Pages
Cover page
Certificate of the graduation project
DPU Graduation project page i

Acknowledgement:....................................................................................................................... i
Table of content ............................................................................................................................ i
Abstract: ..................................................................................................................................... iv
List of table.................................................................................................................................. v
List of figures .............................................................................................................................. v
List of Acronyms and Symbols .................................................................................................. vi
Chapter one Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1
1.1Background: ........................................................................................................................... 2
1.2 effect of RAP in HMA: ......................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Methodology of the project: .................................................................................................. 3
Chapter two Literature Review ....................................................................................................... 4
2. Literature Review .................................................................................................................... 5
2.1Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5
2.2 Theoretical Background ........................................................................................................ 6
2.3 The previous studies and works ............................................................................................ 8
2.4 Why use RAP? ...................................................................................................................... 9
2.5 Summary: ............................................................................................................................ 10
Chapter three Material and methods ............................................................................................. 11
3. Methodology and material: ................................................................................................... 12
3.1 Introduction: ........................................................................................................................ 12
3.2. Material .............................................................................................................................. 12
3.3 Asphalt binder tests: ............................................................................................................ 13
3.3.1 Penetration:....................................................................................................................... 13
3.3.2 Ductility:........................................................................................................................... 14
3.3.4 Rolling Thin Film Oven ................................................................................................... 15
3.4 Normal aggregate test: ........................................................................................................ 17
3.4.1Sieve analysis or aggregate gradation: .............................................................................. 17
3.4.2 Specific gravity for normal aggregates: ........................................................................... 18
3.4.2.1 Fine aggregate specific gravity: .................................................................................... 18
3.4.2.2 Coarse aggregate specific gravity: ................................................................................ 22
3.5 Marshal mix design (Finding optimum binder content by Marshal test): ........................... 25
DPU Graduation project page ii

3.6 Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement materials .............................................................................. 29
3.6.3 Tests on RAP materials .................................................................................................... 30
3.6.3.1 Marshal test on RAP materials ...................................................................................... 30
3.6.3.2 Specific gravity test for RAP materials ......................................................................... 30
3.6.3.3 Bitumen Extraction Test – Binder Content – Apparatus & Procedures ........................ 31
3.7 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 34
Chapter four: Result and discussion ............................................................................................. 35
4.Results and Discussions ......................................................................................................... 36
4.1 Results: ................................................................................................................................ 36
4.2 Calculations: ........................................................................................................................ 36
4.2.1 The optimum binder content: ........................................................................................... 36
4.3 Determining the parameters of asphalt with using of different percentages of reclaimed
asphalt (using as aggregate in the mix) after adding binder: ..................................................... 38
4.4 Discussions:......................................................................................................................... 45
4.5 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 45
Chapter Five: Conclusion and Recommendation ......................................................................... 46
5. Conclusion and recommendations ........................................................................................ 47
5.1 Conclusion........................................................................................................................... 47
5.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 48
5.3 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 48
REFERENCE ............................................................................................................................ 49
DPU Graduation project page iii

Abstract:
Reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) has been used in the United States for more than 25 years
because of the benefits in costs and environmental stewardship. The recent substantial increases
in asphalt prices have led asphalt technologists to examine the increase in RAP use. The
evaluation of the performance of the asphalt mixture containing RAP is therefore a priority for
the asphalt materials community.
This research investigates the effect of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement percentage and sources on
the properties of asphalt mixtures. Twelve asphalt mixtures, having the same RAP resource, the
same asphalt binder, four different percentages of RAP (10%, 20%, 30%, 53%) were
investigated in this study. A number of tests have been tested in the laboratory to analyze the
properties of each percentage of RAP by determining (The Marshal design method and
volumetric properties (VA, VFA, VMA, Flow and Stability)), the study was carried by
laboratory investigation.
After the completing the work and determining the finale results, it can be noticed that until the
percentage of reclaimed is been higher, the Gmm will gets a less value.
Also two figures can be drawing for relationships between (RAP % and Flow in 0.25mm) and
also between (RAP % and Stability), So after making figures (that showing in Curve 4.5 and
Curve 4.2), it can be noticed, the values of stability for all of the percentages of reclaimed asphalt
are acceptable in ASTM specifications, but also it can be noticed that not all the percentages of
reclaimed that used is acceptable about Flow in 0.25 mm according to the ASTM specifications.
That means not all of the percentages of reclaimed asphalt using in pavement is acceptable in
specifications, so that means that not all of the percentages of reclaimed can be used for
construction of roads.
DPU Graduation project page iv

List of table
Table 2.1 High RAP Field Projects................................................................................................. 7
Table 3.1: Typical Marshall Design Criteria (from Asphalt Institute, 1979) ............................... 27
Table (3.2) Typical Marshal Minimum VMA .............................................................................. 28
Table 4.1 properties of Marshall calculation for binder coarse .................................................... 40
Table 4.2 :The results of determined properties of (RAP + Normal) ........................................... 41
List of figures
Figure 3.1:RAP ............................................................................................................................. 12
Figure 3.2 :A: penetration device & B: penetration cups ............................................................ 13
Figure 3.3: A ductility mold & B testing machine........................................................................ 14
Figure 3.3 A: cylinder with bitumen & B: oven ........................................................................ 16
Figure 3.4 Sieve analysis ............................................................................................................. 18
Figure 3.5 : pycnometer of fine aggregate ................................................................................... 22
Figure 3.6: coarse aggregate ......................................................................................................... 23
Figure 3.7 specific gravity of course aggregate ............................................................................ 23
Figure 3.8 The basket used for underwater weighing. ................................................................. 24
Figure 3.9 : A :Marshall drop hammer , B : Marshall C: Marshall samples .............................. 27
Figure 3.10 A: adding solvent , B: filter , C : bowl with sample .................................................. 32
Figure 4.1 relation between VA% and %RAP.............................................................................. 42
Figure 4.2 relation between STABILITY% and %RAP ............................................................... 42
Figure 4.3 relation between VMA% and %RAP .......................................................................... 43
Figure 4.4 relation between VFA% and %RAP ........................................................................... 43
Figure 4.5 relation between FLOW 0.25mm% and %RAP ......................................................... 44
DPU Graduation project page v

List of Acronyms and Symbols
Acronyms and/or Symbol Description

ºC Celsius
ºF Fahrenheit
Kg Kilogram
G Gram
RAP Reclaimed asphalt pavement
% Percentage
NCAT National Center for Asphalt Technology
PG Performance Grading
M Meter
Cm Centimetre
Mm Millimeter
In Inch
Hr Hour
Min Minute
S Second
VA Air void
VFA Void filled aggregates
VMA Void in the mineral aggregate
IDT Illinois Department of Transportation
$ USA Dollars
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials
HMA Hot Mix Asphalt
NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Gmm maximum specific gravity of the mold
Gmb Bulk specific gravity
Gse effective specific gravity of the aggregate
Gsb Bulk specific gravity
Gb binder specific gravity
Ps percent of Aggregate.
Pb percent of binder
Gsa Apparent Specific gravity
SSD Saturated surface dry
DPU Graduation project page vi

Chapter one
Introduction
DPU Graduation project page 1

Chapter one Introduction
1.1Background:
Reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) is defined as removed pavement materials containing asphalt
and aggregates. These materials are generated when asphalt pavements are removed for
reconstruction, resurfacing, or to obtain access to buried utilities. When properly crushed and
screened, RAP consists of high-quality, well-graded aggregates coated by asphalt cement.
Asphalt pavement has been America's most recycled material for a long time from 1962 until
now. Using RAP material has well-recognized financial and environmental benefits. Although
most of the produced RAP is recycled, a large portion of it is wasted or down-graded when used
in landfills, embankment or base layers.
1.2 effect of RAP in HMA:
Using recycled material in asphalt pavement mixtures still new subject. For
this we try to explore the substitute of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) as a
portion from the aggregate weight in asphalt pavement to:
1. evaluate the effectiveness on properties of hot mix asphalt pavement,
2. evaluate the effectiveness of the properties of RAP influence the of flow value
and the stability of pavement mixtures,
3. evaluate its the effectiveness of air voids %, voids filed with bitumen % and
unit weight pavement mixtures, and,
4. Find the best percentage of RAP as a substitute on asphalt pavement mixture.
5. Further, the environmental impact as a result of the reuse of RAP

1.3 Methodology of the project:
In order to satisfy the study objectives, laboratory experimental work to

investigate impact of using RAP on asphalt pavement as an aggregate.
Therefore the following flowchart will show the methodology of the
project:
1-GATHERING information :by combining several sources and make a background from either
book ,scientific journals ,online website pages about using RAP in asphalt pavement mixtures
and effect on its properties .
2-Preparation of raw material and configured for laboratory tests
3-Designing the aggregate gradation :according to the Iraqi specification .
4-Use marshall method to find:
A-Optimum binder content :which is the sufficient amount of binder so that the aggregates are
fully coated with bitumen and the voids within the bituminous material are sealed up.
B-Mixture stability and flow: the marshal equipment was used to find both the stability (which is
measured in Newton’s)and flow (which is measured in quarter of millimeters).
C-Effect of substitute RAP as a portion from the aggregate weight on the mixture: by examine
the molds with different percentage of RAP (10%,20%,30%,53%) using marshall method to
understand the behavior of asphalt pavement with RAP .
D-The comparing the result flow value,stability, air voids%, voids field with bitumen ,and unite
weight of RAP samples with the blend sample .
E-Discuss the result from marshall method of each RAP percent and the comparing between the
results to highlight the main points and conclusions to be drawn from this project in addition to
the most important recommendations based on the result .

Chapter two
Literature Review

Chapter two Literature Review
2. Literature Review
2.1Introduction
Recycling is a very simple but powerful concept. Recycling of existin pavement materials to
produce new pavement materials results in considerable savings of material, money, and energy.
At the same time, recycling of existing material also helps to solve disposal problems. Because
of the reuse of existing material, pavement geometrics and thickness can also be maintained
during construction. In some cases, traffic disruption is less than that for other rehabilitation
techniques.
In USA, 33 million tons of RAP is used per year for recycling purpose which is around 80% of
the total amount of RAP collected from old bituminous pavements. The amount of RAP used for
recycling per year is about 0.84 million tons in Sweden, 7.3 million tons in Germany, 0.53
million tons in Denmark and around 0.12 million tons in Netherlands. In the year 1995, 20
million tons of recycled hot mix was produced in Japan, which constituted 30% of the total hot
mix production.[1]
The RAP is a deteriorated bituminous mix that contains aged bitumen and aggregates. Hence, its
performance is poorer when compared to the fresh mix. The purpose of the bituminous recycling
is to regain the properties of the RAP, such that it tends to perform as good as fresh mix. Thus,
the process of bituminous recycling involves mixing of the RAP, fresh bitumen, rejuvenators and
new aggregates in suitable proportions. Rejuvenators are low viscosity oily substance ,which
helps to bring down the high viscosity of aged bitumen

2.2 Theoretical Background
Recycling of asphalt pavements is one of the great success stories of the

highway building industry. Although this practice dates back to 1915 it did not become common
until the 1970s, when asphalt binder prices dramatically increased as a result of the Arab oil
embargo. One way in which the highway construction industry reacted was by developing the
asphalt milling machine to remove distressed layers of the pavement and devise methods to
recycle the old paving material back into new pavements. Many practices initially developed
during that period are still in use today and have become part of routine operations for pavement
construction and rehabilitation. Asphalt mixture specifications have also evolved considerably
since RAP usage became common practice in the early1980s. Over the recent decade,
construction material prices have risen and asphalt binder prices have more than tripled. This has
affected the ability of most highway and road agencies to maintain their existing pavement
system. Numerous transportation agencies have increased allowable RAP contents in many of
their most used asphalt mix types. Since 2007, estimates from the National Asphalt Pavement
Association indicate that the average RAP content across the US has increased from
approximately 12% to 20%.[2]
A pavement which deteriorate gives poor riding quality, reduce vehicle traction due to lack of
surface friction and increase vehicle users maintenance costs .timely maintenance is required to
maintain the pavement at a certain desirable condition , pavement recycling can be combined
with other preventive pavement maintenance treatment to provide a long lasting pavement that
performs at high level of serviceability [8].
In the united states, approximately about 80%of asphalt pavement removed during highway
rehabilitation or reconstruction is recycled back into new hot mix asphalt (HMA). Disposing of
only 20% through normal waste stream channel[9].
These Material still posses desirable properties to be used for this surfacing layers, subjected to
the limitation set in the specification used, in the hot mix recycling process, RAP material is
combined with new aggregate and asphalt binder or recycling agent in a hot mix plant, with
proper materials evaluation and mix design, similar or better performance cab be achieved for
hot mix asphalt combined with RAP compared to mixtures made with virgin materials, however,
although recycling is beneficial in reducing the consumption for cost reduction [10].
It has been accepted that RAP can be a feasible constituent in HMA pavement and if properly
designed and constricted, HMA mixture with RAP can perform as well as conventional
mixtures[11].
Studies in Europe and the united states have concluded that over 80% of the recycled materials is
reused in the construction of roads, but regulation are still strict in allowing the inclusion of RAP
in proportion ranging between 5 and 50% for the production of new HMA mixture [12].
Some studied indicate that incorporating low percentage of RAP(up to 15% RAP) have no
signification changing in the performance of mixes [13&14].

Another noteworthy field study in regards to low temperature performance with 50% RAP mixes
was built in 2009 in Manitoba, Canada on Provincial Trunk Highway 8 between Gimli and
Hnausa. The existing pavement was completely removed which resulted in a large supply of
RAP. The project included two sections with 50% RAP, a section of 15% RAP, and a section of
virgin hot-mix. The two 50% RAP sections used different grades of virgin binder: one was a
150/200 pen asphalt and the other a softer grade 200/300 pen asphalt. The Marshall mix designs
targeted 4% air voids, 5.1% total asphalt content, and 13% voids in mineral aggregate (VMA). A
primary goal of the project is to compare the laboratory testing with actual field performance.
Extensive characterization of the mixtures and materials is currently being conducted by
members of the ARC. After nearly three years, the section with 50% RAP and the softer binder
has had no thermal cracking. All of the other sections have had just one or two low or moderate
severity thermal cracks[3].
Previous researchers also stated that RAP replacement at proportion below 50% is feasible to
produce new HMA mixtures, obtaining satisfactory results in the mechanical properties .in
additional , RAP replacement ar proportions above 50% is feasible to produce new HMA
mixture , obtaining satisfactory results in the mechanical properties(54)
On several projects where RAP sections had more cracking than virgin counterparts, the LTPP
database showed that the RAP mixes had excessive dust contents or low asphalt contents.
Table(2.1) provides a list of the locations of high RAP field projects, the percent RAP used in
each project, and the dates of construction.[4]
Table 2.1 High RAP Field Projects
Location % RAP Dates of Construction

North Carolina 40 % September 2007
South Carolina 30 and 50 % October 2007
Wisconsin 25 % November 2007
Florida 45% December 2007
Kansas 30 to 40 % May 2008
Delaware 35% Summer 2008
Minnesota (MnROAD) 30 % 2008
Illinois 10 to 50 % allowed 2008

2.3 The previous studies and works
Recycling of asphalt pavements is a valuable approach for technical, economical, and

environmental reasons[5].
Using RAP has been favored over virgin materials in the light of the increasing cost of asphalt,
the scarcity of quality aggregates, and the pressuring need to preserve the environment. Many
state agencies have also reported significant savings when RAP is used[5].
Considering material and construction costs, it was estimated that using reclaimed HMA
pavement provides a saving ranging from 14 to 34% for a RAP content varying between 20 to
50%[5]. The main rheological parameters of PG binders are dynamic modulus and phase angle at
high temperatures and creep stiffness and rate of creep relaxation at low temperatures. These
parameters are also used to characterize RAP binders and their blends. The main objective of this
study was to evaluate the mostly used binder (ARL60/70) with two different RAP sources
binders in laboratory and see the performance of the different blends[5].
Using RAP has been favored over virgin materials in the light of the increasing cost of asphalt,
the scarcity of quality aggregates, and the pressuring need to preserve the environment.
Any state agencies have also reported significant savings when RAP is used[5]. This analysis
considered the cost of HMA at $11.90 per ton, which can only be considered as an indicator of
the true savings when RAP is used at the present time.
The use of RAP also decreases the amount of waste produced and helps to resolve the disposal
problems of highway construction materials, especially in large cities such as Chicago.
In 1996, it was estimated that about 33% of all asphalt pavement in the United States was
recycled into HMA[5].
In 2001, the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) used 623,000 tons of RAP in highway
construction and anticipates increasing its use in the near future[5]. After more than 30 years
since its first trial in Nevada and Texas, it appears that the use of RAP will not only be a
beneficial alternative in the future but will also become a necessity to ensure economic
competitiveness of flexible pavement construction. To facilitate incorporating RAP in the design
of HMA, many states have relied on blending charts developed by the Asphalt Institute in the
late 1980s[5]. Most states have also established limits on the maximum percentage of RAP that
can be used, ranging typically between 10 to 50%.However, high percentages of RAP are not
commonly used in practice. With the introduction of the SuperPaveTM HMA design procedure,
many questions were raised about the proper method of incorporating RAP in the SuperPaveTM
HMA. Despite the fact that the original SuperPaveTM HMA design procedure did not
incorporate the use of RAP, many states have continued its use. In 1997, the Federal Highway
Administration’s RAP expert task force developed guidelines for the design of SuperPaveTM
HMA containing RAP[5]. The developed methodology was based on a tiered approach to
determine the level of testing required in the design of HMA containing RAP. These guidelines
have been supported by the findings of the NCHRP research report 9-12[5] Despite recent

advancements in the design of HMA containing RAP, many states including Illinois insert
restrictions in their regulations to avoid durability problems related to the recycled materials.
In 2000, the Illinois Department of Transportation allowed the use of RAP in SuperPaveTM
HMA with a percentage varying between 0 to 30%; a maximum RAP percentage of 50% is
allowed in HMA shoulders and stabilized sub-bases. Based on expert opinions, future
specifications are expected to allow the use of RAP in highest-class HMA.
On the other hand, many state agencies are taking a more aggressive approach by considering
increasing the allowable percentages of RAP in HMA to take full advantage of this promising
technology. For instance, up to 80% RAP has been used in some HMA with an acceptable level
of performance[5]. However, ensuring confidence in the design procedure and the success of
using RAP would require addressing many durability concerns related to the interaction between
virgin and recycled materials[5].
William butler in 2004[6] in Illinois Transportation Research Center did a study the overall goal
of his study was to assist the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) in identifying and
developing methods for quality assurance of hot-mix asphalt (HMA) containing reclaimed
asphalt pavement (RAP). A major portion of his study was devoted to the development testing
techniques for quality assurance of asphalt mixtures to detect the presence of RAP. William used
tow samples with 15% and 30% RAP with 2 methods (Partial Extraction Method, Binder
Physical Testing) he resulted that both methods were successfully able to predict the presence of
RAP in each of the two mixes ,also he stated that two methods provided differing, yet reasonable
estimates of RAP amount, For the rigorous partial extraction method, the predicted and actual
RAP amounts were identical for mix BS-1, and differed only by 5% for mix BS-2 (predicted
RAP amount minus reported RAP amount). For the extraction, recovery, and G* test method, the
predicted and measured RAP amounts differed by 4% and 7% for mixes BS-1 and BS-2,
respectively [6].
2.4 Why use RAP?
The materials present in old asphalt pavements may have value even when the pavements
themselves have reached the ends of their service lives. Recognizing the value of those existing
aggregate and asphalt resources, states and contractors have made extensive use of Reclaimed
Asphalt Pavements (RAP) in the past when producing new asphalt pavements. Use of RAP has
proven to be economical and environmentally sound. In addition, mixtures containing RAP have,
for the most part, been found to perform as well as virgin mixtures. The original Superpave
specifications contained no provisions to accommodate the use of RAP. Continued use of RAP
in Superpave pavements is desired because
A. RAP has performed well in the past and is expected to perform well in Superpave
mixtures also, if properly accounted for in the mix design,
B. Use of RAP is economical and can help to offset the increased initial costs sometimes
associated with Superpave binders and mixtures,
C. Use of RAP conserves natural resources, and avoids disposal problems and associated
costs.

For these reasons, a subgroup of the FHWA Superpave Mixtures Expert Task Group developed
interim guidance for the use of RAP based on past experience. These guidelines established a
tiered approach for RAP usage. Up to 15% RAP could be used with no change in binder grade.
Between 15 and 25% RAP, the virgin binder grade should be decreased one grade 2 (6°
increment) on both the high and low temperature grades. When the aged binder from RAP is
combined with new binder, it will have some effect on the resultant binder grade. At low RAP
percentages, the change in binder grade is negligible. At higher percentages, however, the effect
of the RAP becomes significant. The aggregate in the RAP may also affect mixture volumetric
and performance. The design aggregate structure, crushed coarse aggregate content, dust
proportion and fine aggregate angularity should take into account the aggregate from the RAP.
Again, at low RAP percentages, the effects may be minimal. One recurring question regarding
RAP is whether it acts like a “black rock.” If RAP acts like a black rock, the aged binder will not
combine, to any appreciable extent, with the virgin binder and will not change the binder
properties. If this is the case, then the premise behind blending charts, which combine the
properties of the old and new binders, is void. These questions were addressed through NCHRP
Project 9-12, Incorporation of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement in the Super pave System. The
objectives of that research effort were to investigate the effects of RAP on binder grade and
mixture properties and develop guidelines for incorporating RAP in the Superpave system on a
scientific basis. The products of the research include proposed revisions to applicable AASHTO
standards, a manual for technicians and guidelines for specifying agencies.
2.5 Summary:
In this chapter we learned about information about RAP and the studies that considered use of
RAP, its uses and properties.
The next chapter contains the materials and methods of the project and the basic tests that we did
in this research.

Chapter three
Material and methods

Chapter three Material and methods
3. Methodology and material:
3.1 Introduction:
This chapter presents the experimental techniques and methodology implemented in satisfying
the objectives of this research. This chapter deals with the methods, techniques of research used
under as well as the data gathering tools and analytical tools used will be further explained in this
chapter. Both the asphalt binder and aggregates tests which are ((Penetration, ductility, Rolling
Thin Film Oven RTFO) and (Sieve analysis or aggregate gradation, Aggregate Specific Gravity),
respectively, are used in this research, which was carried out in Duhok construction materials
laboratory.
3.2. Material
In this research Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement in Duhok city was used, and all the RAP materials
were collected from Shexan highway. The asphalt binder and normal aggregates were collected
from HGG company in Grsheen Suhila for asphalt products. The tests of asphalt binder and
normal aggregates were tested in the laboratory within one week of the purchase of the products
in an environment with approximately the same range of ambient temperature.
Figure 3.1:RAP

3.3 Asphalt binder tests:
3.3.1 Penetration:
Penetration test is used to measure consistency of bituminous materials expressed as the distance
in tenths of millimeter that a standard needle vertically penetrates a sample of the materials under
known condition of loading, loading time and temperature, according to ASTM D5- 2006 and
AASHTO T 49-2010 “penetration of bituminous materials”.
Test condition:
 Load =100gm
 Time=5sec
 Temperature=25








A B
Figure 3.2 :A: penetration device & B: penetration cups

3.3.2 Ductility:
This test method describes the procedure for determining the ductility of a bituminous material
measured by the distance to which it will elongate before breaking when two ends of a briquette
specimen of the material are pulled apart at a specified speed and at a specified temperature. The
test shall be made at a temperature of 25 °C and with a speed of 5 cm/min, at other temperatures
the speed should be specified.
Asphalt binder is heated in oven, and the mold is also heated in oven with a temperature between
(110-150 °C). then the asphalt binder is poured into mold, then let the template into the room to
cool to a temperature for (30-40min) and then put them into a water bath controlled at a
temperature of 25 °C for 30mins, then smooth the surface by hot straight edge knife or spoon,
finally put the mold into the ductility machine.
A B
Figure 3.3: A ductility mold & B testing machine

3.3.4 Rolling Thin Film Oven
This test is used to determine the effect of heat and air on a moving film of semi-solid asphaltic
materials. The effects of this treatment are determined from measurements of the properties of
the asphalt before and after having heated in the oven for 85 minutes at 163°C a moving film of
asphaltic material while air at a rate of 4000±200 ml is directed against the sample. The
apparatus consists of a forced air circulation oven suitable for temperatures up to 180°C and
equipped with a rotating shelf placed inside along with a coil that preheats the air directed into
the sample container.
A sample of asphalt binder heated until it is fluid to pour. Sample stirred to ensure homogeneity
and remove air bubbles. If a determination of mass change is desired, Two RTFO bottles labeled
and weighted empty. These are designated as the “mass change” bottles. The weights recorded.
(35g) of asphalt binder poured into each bottle. Immediately after pouring each bottle, the bottles
turned on their side without rotating or twisting and placed on a cooling rack. All bottles allowed
to cool 60 to 180 minutes. After cooling, the two mass change bottles weighted again. The
weights recorded. The bottles placed in the RTFO oven carousel, the door closed, and carousel
rotated at 15 RPM for 85 minutes. During this time, the oven temperature maintained at 325°F
(163°C) and the airflow into the bottles at 244 in3/min (4000 ml/min). The bottles removed one
at a time from the carousel, setting the mass change bottles aside. Residue from the remaining
bottles should be transferred to a single container. Residue from each bottle removed by first
pouring as much material as possible, then the sides of the bottle scraped to remove any
remaining residue. There is no standard scraping utensil but at least 90 percent of the asphalt
binder should be removed from the bottle. RTFO residue should be tested within 72 hours of
aging. After cooling the two mass change bottles for 60 – 180 minutes, they weighted and their
residue discarded. The weights recorded.

The eq. (4) used to find ΔM is shown as below:
ΔM= M2−M1M1−Mb×100%-------------------------(4)
Where:
ΔM= Mass change M1= Initial mass
M2= The final mass of bottle and asphalt
Mb = Empty weight of bottle.
A B
Figure 3.3 A: cylinder with bitumen & B: oven

3.4 Normal aggregate test:
3.4.1Sieve analysis or aggregate gradation:
The sieve analysis, commonly known as the gradation test, is a basic essential test for all
aggregate technicians. The sieve analysis determines the gradation (the distribution of aggregate
particles, by size, within a given sample) in order to determine compliance with design,
production control requirements, and verification specifications. The gradation data may be used
to calculate relationships between various aggregate or aggregate blends, to check compliance
with such blends, and to predict trends during production by plotting gradation curves
graphically, to name just a few uses. Used in conjunction with other tests, the sieve analysis is a
very good quality control and quality acceptance tool. A known weight of material, the amount
being determined by the largest size of aggregate, is placed upon the top of a group of nested
sieves (the top sieve has the largest screen openings and the screen opening sizes decrease with
each sieve down to the bottom sieve which has the smallest opening size screen for the type of
material specified) and shaken by mechanical means for a period of time. After shaking the
material through the nested sieves, the7ee material retained on each of the sieves is weighed. The
cumulative method requires that each sieve beginning at the top be placed in a previously
weighed pan (known as the tare weight), weighed, the next sieve's contents added to the pan, and
the total weighed. This is repeated until all sieves and the bottom pan have been added and
weighed. The sample weighted to the nearest 0.1g by total weight of sample. This weight was
used to check for any loss of material after the sample has been graded. Suitable sieve sizes
selected in accordance with the specifications. The sieves nested in order of decreasing size from
top to bottom (1/2in, 3/8in, No.4, No8, No.50, No,200) and agitating and shaking the sample
began for a sufficient amount of time. Sieves are self-nesting and supported in a shaking
mechanism at the top and bottom by a variety of clamping and/or holding mechanisms. Small
shakers of this type require shaking times of 15 minutes to adequately grade the aggregate
sample. After the material has been sieved, each tray has been removed, each size weighted, and
each weight recorded to the nearest 0.1g. Any aggregate trapped within the sieve openings have
been removed by gently working from either or both sides with a trowel or piece of flat metal
until the aggregate is freed. The final total of the weights retained on each sieve should be within
0.3% of the original weight of the sample prior to grading. As a general rule, coarse wire brushes
was used to clean the sieves down through the No.50 (300 μm) sieve . Any sieve with an opening
size smaller than the No.50 (300 μm) was cleaned with a softer cloth hair brush . The final total
of the weights retained on each sieve should be within 0.3% of the original weight of the sample
prior to grading. shows the apparatus used in this test:

Figure 3.4 Sieve analysis
3.4.2 Specific gravity for normal aggregates:

3.4.2.1 Fine aggregate specific gravity:
The fine aggregate specific gravity test (Figure 3.7) is used to calculate the specific gravity of a
fine aggregate sample by determining the ratio of the weight of a given volume of aggregate to
the weight of an equal volume of water.
The fine aggregate specific gravity test measures fine aggregate weight under three different
sample conditions:

Oven-dry (no water in sample).
Saturated surface dry (water fills the aggregate pores).
Submerged in water (underwater).
Using these three weights and their relationships, a sample’s apparent specific gravity, bulk
specific gravity and bulk SSD specific gravity as well as absorption can be calculated.

Aggregate specific gravity is needed to determine weight-to-volume relationships and to
calculate various volume-related quantities such as voids in mineral aggregate (VMA), and voids
filled by asphalt (VFA). Absorption can beused as an indicator of aggregate durability as well as
the volume of asphalt binder it is likely to absorb.
Specific gravity is a measure of a material’s density (mass per unit volume) as compared to the
density of water at 73.4°F (23°C). Therefore, by definition, water at a temperature of 73.4°F
(23°C) has a specific gravity of 1
Absorption, which is also determined by the same test procedure, is a measure of the amount of
water that an aggregate can absorb into its pore structure. Pores that absorb water are also
referred to as “water permeable voids”.
Aggregate absorption is the increase in mass due to water in the pores of the material. Aggregate
absorption is a useful quality because:
1. High values can indicate non-durable aggregate.

2. Absorption can indicate the amount of asphalt binder the aggregate will absorb.
It is generally desirable to avoid highly absorptive aggregate in HMA. This is because asphalt
binder that is absorbed by the aggregate is not available to coat the aggregate particle surface and
is therefore not available for bonding. Therefore, highly absorptive aggregates (often specified as
over 5 percent absorption) require more asphalt binder to develop the same film thickness as less
absorptive aggregates making the resulting HMA more expensive.
Several different types of specific gravity are commonly used depending upon how the volume
of water permeable voids (or pores) within the aggregate are addressed.
Apparent Specific Gravity, Gsa. The volume measurement only includes the volume of the
aggregate particle; it does not include the volume of any water permeable voids. The mass
measurement only includes the aggregate particle. Apparent specific gravity is intended to only
measure the specific gravity of the solid volume, therefore it will be the highest of the aggregate
specific gravities. It is formally defined as the ratio of the mass of a unit volume of the
impermeable portion of aggregate (does not include the permeable pores in aggregate) to the
mass of an equal volume of gas-free distilled water at the stated temperature.
 Bulk Specific Gravity (Bulk Dry Specific Gravity), Gsb. The volume measurement
includes the overall volume of the aggregate particle as well as the volume of the water
permeable voids. The mass measurement only includes the aggregate particle. Since it
includes the water permeable void volume, bulk specific gravity will be less than
apparent specific gravity. It is formally defined as the ratio of the mass of a unit volume
of aggregate, including the water permeable voids, at a stated temperature to the mass of
an equal volume of gas-free distilled water at the stated temperature.

 Bulk Saturated Surface Dry (SSD) Specific Gravity. Volume measurement includes the
overall volume of the aggregate particle as well as the volume of the
 water permeable voids. The mass measurement includes the aggregate particle as well as
the water within the water permeable voids. It is formally defined as the ratio of the mass
of a unit volume of aggregate, including the weight of water within the voids filled to the
extent achieved by submerging in water for approximately 15 hours, to the mass of an
equal volume of gas-free distilled water at the stated temperature.
 water permeable voids. The mass measurement includes the aggregate particle as well as
the water within the water permeable voids. It is formally defined as the ratio of the mass
of a unit volume of aggregate, including the weight of water within the voids filled to the
extent achieved by submerging in water for approximately 15 hours, to the mass of an
equal volume of gas-free distilled water at the stated temperature.
 Effective Specific Gravity, Gse. Volume measurement includes the volume of the
aggregate particle plus the void volume that becomes filled with water during the test
soak period minus the volume of the voids that absorb asphalt. Effective specific gravity
lies between apparent and bulk specific gravity. It is formally defined as the ratio of the
mass in air of a unit volume of a permeable material (excluding voids permeable to
asphalt) at a stated temperature to the mass in air (of equal density) of an equal volume of
gas-free distilled water at a stated temperature. Effective specific gravity is determined by
a different procedure and is not covered in this section.
 The difference between Gsa and Gsb is the volume of aggregate used in the calculations.
The difference between these volumes is the volume of absorbed water in the aggregate’s
permeable voids. Both use the aggregate’s oven dry weight.
 The difference between Gsb and bulk (SSD) specific gravity is the weight of aggregate
used in the calculations. The difference between these weights is the weight of absorbed
water in the aggregate’s permeable voids. Both use the same aggregate volume.
 The difference between Gsa, Gse and Gsb is the volume of aggregate used in the
calculations. All three use the aggregate’s oven dry weight
 The following relationships are always true:
 Gsa ≥ Gse ≥ Gsb
 Bulk (SSD) specific gravity ≥ Gsb
 Aggregate specific gravities (Gsb, Gsa,Gse and bulk SSD specific gravity ) are all ≥
Gmm(because Gmm includes the asphalt binder, which has a lower specific gravity than
the aggregate)

1. Approximately 1000 g of aggregate material passing the No. 4 (4.75 mm) sieve was obtained.
2. The material was prepared.
The material dried until it maintained a constant mass. This indicated that all the water has left
the sample. Drying occurred in an oven regulated at 230°F (110°C).
The aggregate cooled to a comfortable handling temperature.
The aggregate immersed in water at room temperature for a period of 15 to 19 hours.

3. The sample dried to a saturated surface dry (SSD) condition. Sample spread on a flat, non-
absorbent surface and it stirred occasionally to assist in homogeneous drying. A current of warm
air was used to assist drying procedure. The air current (typically from a blow dryer) should not
blow the sample off the non-absorbent surface. Throughout this drying process, the aggregate
repeatedly tested for a SSD condition using the Cone Test as follows:
A cone-shaped metal mold filled to overflowing with drying aggregate.
The aggregate lightly tamped into the mold with 25 light drops of a small metal tamper.
Loose aggregate removed from the outside of the mold and carefully the mold lifted vertically.
If surface moisture is still present, the fine aggregate will retain its molded shape. When the
aggregate achieves an SSD condition, it will slump slightly.
Upon the first test where slumping occurs, the weight of the aggregate recorded as SSD mass.
4. The specific gravity flask pycnometer calibrated by filling with water at 73.4°F (23°C) to the
calibration line and the mass determined.
5. 500 ± 10 grams of the SSD aggregate placed into the pycnometer and filled with water at
73.4°F (23°C)) to 90% of pycnometer capacity. The pycnometer agitated to eliminate air bubbles
and then total mass of the pycnometer determined.
6. Additional water added to return the pycnometer to its calibrated capacity.
7. The total weight of pycnometer, specimen, and water determined.
8. The aggregate removed from the pycnometer and dried until it maintained a constant mass.
This indicated that all the water has left the sample. Drying occurred in an oven regulated at
230°F (110°C).
9. The aggregate cooled in air at room temperature for 1.0 ± 0.5 hours then the mass determined.
They are determined by equations shown below:
Bulk dry specific gravity Gsb= AB+S−C ------------------ (5)

Bulk SSD specific gravity = SB+S−C ----------------------(6)
Apparent specific gravity Gsa = AB+A−C -----------------(7)
Absorption (%) = S−AA×100 -----------------------------(8)
Where:
A= Dry weight
B= Weight of the pycnometer filled with water
C= Weight of the pycnometer filled with aggregate and water
S= Saturated surface – Dry weight of the sample
Figure 3.5 : pycnometer of fine aggregate
3.4.2.2 Coarse aggregate specific gravity:
The coarse aggregate specific gravity test (Figure 3.7) is used to calculate the specific gravity
of a coarse aggregate sample by determining the ratio of the weight of a given volume of
aggregate to the weight of an equal volume of water. It is similar in nature to the fine
aggregate specific gravity test.

Figure 3.6: coarse aggregate
Basic Procedure
A sample of coarse aggregate material retained on the No. 4 (4.75 mm) sieve (Figure 3.8)
obtained. This sample size is based on nominal maximum aggregate size (NMAS). Sample sizes
range from 2000 g for a 0.5 inch (12.5 mm) NMAS to 5000 g for a 1.5 inch (37.5 mm) NMAS.
2. The material prepared.
 The aggregate retained on the No. 4 (4.75 mm) sieve washed. These discarded small
aggregate particles clinging to the retained large particles.
 The material dried until it maintained a constant mass. These indicated that all the water
has left the sample. Drying occurred in an oven regulated at 230°F (110°C).
 The aggregate cooled to a comfortable handling temperature.
The aggregate immersed in water at room temperature for a period of 15 to 19 hours
Figure 3.7 specific gravity of course aggregate

1.The sample dried to a saturated surface dry (SSD) condition. The aggregate rolled up into the
towel and then the aggregate shook and rolled from side to side was effective in reducing the
sample to a SSD condition. It was necessary to wipe the larger particles separately. Once there
was no visible signs of water film on the aggregate particle surfaces, the sample mass
determined.
4. The entire sample placed in a basket and weighted underwater (Figure 3.9). The basket should
be pre-conditioned to the water bath temperature. The container shook to release any entrapped
air before weighing. The container overflow needed to work properly to compensate for the
water displaced by the sample.
Figure 3.8 The basket used for underwater weighing.
5. The aggregate removed from the water and dried until it maintained a constant mass. These
indicated that all the water has left the sample. Drying occurred in an oven regulated at 230°F
(110°C).
6. The aggregate cooled in air at room temperature for 1 to 3 hours then the mass determined.
𝐴
Bulk specific gravity =Gsb=𝐵−𝐶 ∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗ (9)
𝐵
Bulk SSD specefic gravity=𝐵−𝐶 ∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗ (10)
𝐴
Apparent specefic gravity =𝐴−𝐶***********(11)
𝐵−𝐴
Apsorption (in percent)= ∗ 100 ∗∗∗∗∗∗ (12)
𝐴
Three different masses are recorded during the test. Their common symbols are: A = mass of
oven-dry sample in air (g) B = mass of SSD sample in air (g) C = mass of SSD sample in water
(g)

3.5 Marshal mix design (Finding optimum binder content by
Marshal test):
The Marshall method seeks to select the asphalt binder content at a desired density that satisfies
minimum stability and range of flow values (White, 1985[17]).
Marshall Mix Design Procedure
The Marshall mix design method consists of 6 basic steps:

1. Aggregate selection.
2. Asphalt binder selection.
3. Sample preparation (including compaction).
4. Stability determination using the Marshall Stabilometer.
5. Density and voids calculations.
6. Optimum asphalt binder content selection.
Sample Preparation
The Marshall method, like other mix design methods, uses several trial aggregate-asphalt binder
blends (typically 5 blends with 3 samples each for a total of 15 specimens), each with a different
asphalt binder content. Then, by evaluating each trial blend’s performance, optimum asphalt
binder content can be selected. In order for this concept to work, the trial blends must contain a
range of asphalt contents both above and below the optimum asphalt content. Therefore, the first
step in sample preparation is to estimate optimum asphalt content. Trial blend asphalt contents
are then determined from this estimate.
Optimum Asphalt Binder Content Estimate
The Marshall mix design method can use any suitable method for estimating optimum asphalt
content and usually relies on local procedures or experience.
Sample Asphalt Binder Contents
Based on the results of the optimum asphalt binder content estimate, samples are typically
prepared at 0.5 percent by weight of mix increments, with at least two samples above the
estimated asphalt binder content and two below.

Compaction with the Marshall Hammer
Each sample is then heated to the anticipated compaction temperature and compacted with a
Marshall hammer, a device that applies pressure to a sample through a tamper foot (Figure 3.9).
Some hammers are automatic and some are hand operated. Key parameters of the compactor are:
Sample size = 102 mm (4-inch) diameter cylinder 64 mm (2.5 inches) in height (corrections can
be made for different sample heights)
Tamper foot = Flat and circular with a diameter of 98.4 mm (3.875 inches) corresponding to an
area of 76 cm2 (11.8 in2).
Compaction pressure = Specified as a 457.2 mm (18 inches) free fall drop distance of a hammer
assembly with a 4536 g (10 lb.) sliding weight.
Number of blows = Typically 35, 50 or 75 on each side depending upon anticipated traffic
loading, but we used 75 blows.
Simulation method = The tamper foot strikes the sample on the top and covers almost the entire
sample top area. After a specified number of blows, the sample is turned over and the procedure
repeated.

The Marshall Stability and Flow Test
The Marshall stability and flow test provides the performance prediction measure for the
Marshall mix design method. The stability portion of the test measures the maximum load
supported by the test specimen at a loading rate of 50.8 mm/minute (2 inches/minute). Basically,
the load is increased until it reaches a maximum then when the load just begins to decrease, the
loading is stopped and the maximum load is recorded.
During the loading, an attached dial gauge measures the specimen’s plastic flow as a result of the
loading (Figure 3.10). The flow value is recorded in 0.25 mm (0.01 inch) increments at the same
time the maximum load is recorded.
A B
A B C
Figure 3.9 : A :Marshall drop hammer , B : Marshall molds C: Marshall device
Table 3.1: Typical Marshall Design Criteria (from Asphalt Institute, 1979 [17])

Density and Voids Analysis
All mix design methods use density and voids to determine basic HMA physical characteristics.
Two different measures of densities are typically taken:
1. Bulk specific gravity (Gmb).
2. Theoretical maximum specific gravity (TMD, Gmm).
These densities are then used to calculate the volumetric parameters of the HMA. Measured void
expressions are usually:
Air voids (Va), sometimes expressed as voids in the total mix (VTM)
Voids in the mineral aggregate (VMA)
Voids filled with asphalt (VFA)
Generally, these values must meet local or State criteria.
Table (3.2) Typical Marshal Minimum VMA
(From Asphalt Institute, 1979, [17])
Selection of Optimum Asphalt Binder Content
The optimum asphalt binder content is finally selected based on the combined results of Marshall
stability and flow, density analysis and void analysis. Optimum asphalt binder content can be
arrived at in the following procedure [6]:

1. Plot the following graphs:
 Asphalt binder content vs. density. Density will generally increase with increasing
asphalt content, reach a maximum, and then decrease. Peak density usually occurs at
higher asphalt binder content than peak stability.
 Asphalt binder content vs. Marshall stability. This should follow one of two trends:
 Stability increases with increasing asphalt binder content, reaches a peak, then decreases.
 Stability decreases with increasing asphalt binder content and does not show a peak. This
curve is common for some recycled HMA mixtures.
 Asphalt binder content vs. flow.
 Asphalt binder content vs. air voids. Percent air voids should decrease with increasing
asphalt binder content.
 Asphalt binder content vs. VMA. Percent VMA should decrease with increasing asphalt
binder content, reach a minimum, and then increase.
 Asphalt binder content vs. VFA. Percent VFA increases with increasing asphalt binder
content.
2. Determine the asphalt binder content that corresponds to the specifications median air void
content (typically this is 4 percent). This is the optimum asphalt binder content.
3. Determine properties at this optimum asphalt binder content by referring to the plots. Compare
each of these values against specification values and if all are within specification, then the
preceding optimum asphalt binder content is satisfactory. Otherwise, if any of these properties is
outside the specification range the mixture should be redesigned.
3.6 Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement materials
3.6.1 Obtaining RAP materials
We had difficulty in finding desired RAP materials, at the first we found some uncrushed RAP
materials but it was not useful because it was much more difficult to break it into desired sized
aggregates according to grading we needed, finally wehad found crushed RAP material which
was residue from grabbing and milling of a road. We brought the materials about more than
50kg.

3.6.2 Preparations of RAP materials for tests
We did gradation for the RAP materials by Sieve analysis, we almost used all 50kg to only get
about 16kg of desired grades of RAP aggregate, because fine aggregates were very less and lots
of coarse aggregate was collected, but we only used about 16 kg of RAP materials. After
gradation of RAP materials, we made 33 mixtures of 1200g each three mixtures in different
percentages (10% RAP+80% normal, 20%RAP + 80% normal, 30% RAP + 70% normal, 53%
RAP+ 47% normal) for Marshal test to obtain the best percentage of them. And we made 6
mixtures of 1500g each two mixtures in different percentages (10% RAP+80% normal, 20%RAP
+ 80% normal, 30% RAP + 70% normal, 53% RAP+47% normal ) for specific gravity test.
3.6.3 Tests on RAP materials
3.6.3.1 Marshal test on RAP materials
Marshal test is used to determine the volumetric properties (VA, VFA and VMA), stability and
flow of the mixes containing RAP materials. Mixtures and asphalt binder heated in the oven then
asphalt binder added to the mixtures according to optimum binder content, then mixed and
heated again, after the mixes are heated we made molds for Marshal test by Marshal tamper,
each sample tamped into molds and stroke 75 blows on each face, then left to cool. A day later
we weighted all samples dry, in water and then saturated surface dry SSD for determining of
volumetric properties of the samples. Then the molds put in the Marshal bath for 1/2 hour then
put in Marshal test device and recorded flow and stability of each sample and made an average
of each three samples of the same RAP percentage.
3.6.3.2 Specific gravity test for RAP materials
Specific gravity test is used to determine the specific gravity of the mixtures. After making
mixtures, the mixes are heated in the oven, and then the mix is spread in the pan to let it cool,
after than we put the mix in the mold of specific gravity test and weighted it, then we added
water to it till 1in higher from the surface of the mix, then we put the mix in the device to let it be
free of air voids, and then added water to it till it is full then weighted it again and did
calculations by following equations:

𝐴
Bulk specific gravity =Gsb=𝐵−𝐶 ∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗ (9)
𝐵
Bulk SSD specefic gravity=𝐵−𝐶 ∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗ (10)
𝐴
Apparent specefic gravity =𝐴−𝐶***********(11)
𝐵−𝐴
Apsorption (in percent)= ∗ 100 ∗∗∗∗∗∗ (12)
𝐴
3.6.3.3 Bitumen Extraction Test – Binder Content – Apparatus &

Procedures
Bitumen Extraction test is used to determine the amount of bitumen that is actually used as
binding content in asphaltic pavement or asphaltic concrete recently laid at site. The durability,
compatibility and resistance from defects like rutting, bleeding, raveling and ageing of flexible
asphaltic roads is highly dependent on the amount of the bitumen used for the coating of the
filler aggregates used in the asphaltic matrix.
So this test is parallel to that of the cylindrical compression test of the actual concrete samples
obtained at site before placement of concrete to determine its actual compressive strength to be
as per the required mix design.
The mix design of asphalt is carried out by series of hit and trial in job mix formula for
determination of the optimum binder content. So at site, before final payment to the contractor it
must be ensured that the amount of bitumen required by the mix design is actually used at site or
not.
Apparatus for the Bitumen Extraction Test

Oven a well maintained oven is needed cable of maintaining the temperature at 110 degrees.
A flat pan for carrying the test specimens.
Balance or scales capable of weighing the sample to an accuracy of 0.05 % of its mass.
Extraction apparatus, consisting of a bowl and an apparatus in which the bowl may be revolved
at controlled variable speeds up to 3600 revolutions per minute.
Filter ring or filter paper to fit in the trim of the bowl.

A B C
Figure 3.10 A: adding solvent , B: filter , C : bowl with sample
Bitumen Extraction Test by Centrifuge Method

Sample Preparation
The sample can either be taken from the asphalt plant or from the dump truck at site depending
on the site situation. As the results obtained from the test sample may be affected by the age of
the material; thus for best results the test must be carried out on mixtures and pavement shortly
after their preparation.
If the sample is not soft enough so as to get separated by a spatula, it must be placed on a flat pan
and then warmed at a temperature of 1100C plus or minus 5 0C in the oven till it can be handled
or separated.
From that a representative sample is taken of the size in accordance with the nominal maximum
size of the aggregates in the mix. If the sample has aggregates of 4.75 mm than 0.5 kg of sample
is sufficient but if it had aggregates of 37.5 mm or so a 4 kg sample must be taken.
The sample taken is weighed to the nearest of 0.05% of its mass and is recorded as W1 and is
then placed in the bowl for the extraction machine.
The sample is then immersed or covered with the solvent that can be petrol of about 5 liters or it
is better to add commercial grade trichloroethylene or Benzene and let the mixture stand for
about an hour. The purpose of solvent is to disintegrate the test portion.
An oven dried filter ring is taken and its initial weight is recorded. The temperature of oven for
drying the ring is kept at 110 plus minus 50 The edge of the bowl is covered with this filter ring.
The bowl is then covered with a steel cover and is clamped tightly before placing in the
apparatus. A beaker or a clean container is placed underneath the drain outlet of the centrifuge
apparatus for collection of the extract (mixture of solvent and bitumen).
Centrifuge the Sample
The next step is to centrifuge the apparatus, the bowl is placed in the apparatus and the machine
is started to revolve. The speed is gradually increased till a maximum speed of 3600 rev/min is
attained.
The machine is allowed to revolve till solvent ceases to flow from the drain outlet.
Allow the machine to stop and additional solvent is added in quantity of 200 ml or more
depending on the amount of the sample.
The solvent is added again and again with minimum of 3 cycles till the color of extract coming
out from the drain outlet is clear and not darker than a light straw color.
The filter paper is carefully removed from the bowl or container along with the residual
aggregate in a metal pan; which is afterwards dried in air and in the oven at a constant
temperature around 1100
The fine fragments of mineral aggregates that are attached with the filter are carefully scratched
and then the weight of the filter and aggregate are noted.

Calculations & Report
The bitumen content obtained as a result of the bitumen extraction test is calculated and reported
as follows:-
Bitumen content (grams) =( W1-(W2+W3))/W1
Where,
W1 = weight of the sample test portion in grams
W2 = Weight of the extracted mineral aggregate in grams.
W3 = weight of the fine aggregate fragments in grams
Result :
The bitumen content may be expressed as a percentage of weight of bitumen with respect total
weight of the mix or with respect to total aggregate in the mix.
Bitumen content % by weight of total mix = (bitumen content in grams / W1) x
3.7 Summary
This chapter showed the preparations of the materials and the tests that had been done on these
materials in this research, and showed the details of the tests. Chapter four will discuss about the
results and discussion about this research and how the properties of the materials changes
according to our work.

Chapter four:
Result and discussion

Chapter four: Result and discussion
4.Results and Discussions

4.1 Results:
Our aim of these of these research ,was that we know that which percent of using the reclaimed
asphalt is the best percent to use in the normal asphalt is the best result and also each percent
(using 0%,10%,20%,30%,53%) of using it is acceptable in the specifications and also each
percent of reclaimed is acceptable and is the best percent with all of its properties (flow of
25mm , stability ,VMA, VFA, Gmm and Unit weight used in this research) .
4.2 Calculations:
So to determine these results we needed to divide our work to tow major steps that are at the
following (including results of the steps):-
4.2.1 The optimum binder content:
To determine the optimum binder content, we needed to divide the procedure to some anther
steps that are at following:
Determining (Gsb) for aggregate:
The result of Gsb for aggregate was 2.66, by using a test for the aggregate that using some
several weights of several sieves (retaining aggregate on the sieve) of aggregate that including
sand, gravel and filler.
Determining the (Gb) for binder:
The result of Gb for binder was 1.04, by also using a test for the binder in the laboratory.
C. Determining (Gse) that was 2.67

D. Determining the curves between parameters and binder contents that used for binder coarse
and determining the optimum binder content:
Because of the our research is about the result of the using of reclaimed percent in binder
coarse layer of the asphalt pavement on the road, in the ASTM codes we should use the
percentages of (4%,4.5%,5%,5.5% and 6%) of binder in the molds to get the curves, so we used
three samples of molds of asphalt for each percent of binder to get more accuracy, so that the
number of molds has been 15, we divided this step to some anther steps that are following:
4.2.2 Preparation:
Each mold of surface includes a specific weight for each sieve according to ASTM codes that the
weight of aggregate for each mold was 1200 g. Then the weight of binder is added to the mold
with using its percent. The weight of binder that it should be used in the mold is determined by
this equation:
Binder weight = p𝒆𝒓𝒄𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒇𝒃𝒊𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒓𝟏𝟎𝟎 X 1200
That the results are as the following:-
Using 50 g for percent of 4% of binder, 54 g for the percent of 4.5% of binder, 60g for the 5%,
66g for 5.5% and 72 g for 6% of percent of binder.
After that the molds are mixed with adding the weight of binder and giving 75 drops for each
side of it according to ASTM codes.
Then all of the 15 samples were tested under the marshal equipment to get the flow and stability
for each sample.
Note:- we used 4% of optimum binder content because we used Girsheen – Suhila material and
after they determined the curves between parameters ( VA and VFA and VMA and Gmm and
stability and flow) and binder contents they found the optimum binder content was 4%.

4.3 Determining the parameters of asphalt with using of different percentages
of reclaimed asphalt (using as aggregate in the mix) after adding binder:
After determining the optimum binder content for that type of aggregate, the samples of asphalt
(normal + reclaimed) can be mixed with that value of the binder (optimum binder content) to
calculate the parameters and know that each of them is acceptable in the ASTM specifications
For this step of the research, 15 samples are used, each three samples for a one percent to get
more accuracy in the results.
So it is also is divided to some steps:
A – Making mold samples with different percentages of the reclaimed asphalt:
Making 15 sample molds (each three samples for a percentages) for asphalt with (10% of
reclaimed), (20% of reclaimed), (30% ofreclaimed) and and two (53% of reclaimed) and
dropping each side of sample 75 drops.
Note 1:
0 % reclaimed samples: mix = 100% Normal aggregate + 4% binder (of the aggregate)
10% reclaimed samples: mix = 90% Normal aggregate + 10% reclaimed asphalt (using as
aggregate) + 4% binder (of the aggregate
aggregate) + 4% binder (of the aggregate
aggregate) + 4% binder (of the aggregate)
aggregate) + 4% binder (of the aggregate)
53% reclaimed samples: mix = 47% Normal aggregate + 53% reclaimed asphalt (using as RAP)
+ 4% binder (of the aggregate)

Note 2:
4% of the aggregate (by weight) = 𝟒/𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝒙𝟏𝟐𝟎𝟎 = 𝟓0𝒈
B - Determining the results of (Gmb) for samples:
To determine the Gmb, the following equation is used:
𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑖𝑟
𝐺𝑀𝐵 =
𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡(𝑆𝑆𝐷) − 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 (𝑖𝑛 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟)
Where: Weight in air:
weight of the sample in air (before marshal test). Weight (SSD):
weight of the sample with state of the material with a dry surface but with storage of water inside
the pores of the material. (Before Marshal test. Weight (in water): weight of the sample in water
(before marshal test)
Example:
Gmb for one of the samples that adding 4% of binder and 10 % of the reclaimed sample was
determined like as following:
1227.5
Gmb =1229.6−720.7 = 2.41
The results is written in Table 4.2

C - Determining Gmm for the samples:
Except the 15 samples that used for all that percentages that are used in this research , anther 8
samples that are containing 1500 g of the aggregate with adding 4.625% binder , each tow
samples are used for each percentage .
The results are written in Table 4.2
D - Measuring flow and stability by marshal test:
1 – Flow (in 0.25 mm):
The results (average of three samples) of Flow in 0.25mm are written in Table 4.2.

2- Stability:
The results (average of three samples) of stability are written in Table 4.2.
According to ASTM
The flow0.25mm should be: 8 mm < flow0.25mm <16 mm
And The Stability should be: Stability >7 KN
Table 4.1 properties of Marshall calculation for binder coarse
property binder coarse
resistance to Flow (ASTM D 1559) 75

blows/End
- Marshall Stability >7
- Marshall Flow 0.25mm 8-16
voids in Marshall specimen (Va) 3-5 %
Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA) 13
Void Filled with Asphalt (VFA) heavy
65-75
traffic

Table 4.2 :The results of determined properties of (RAP + Normal)

Figure 4.1 relation between VA% and %RAP
Figure 4.2 relation between STABILITY% and %RAP

Figure 4.3 relation between VMA% and %RAP
Figure 4.4 relation between VFA% and %RAP

Figure 4.5 relation between FLOW 0.25mm% and %RAP

4.4 Discussions:
After the completing the work and determining the finale results, it can be noticed that until the
percentage of reclaimed is been higher, the Gmm will gets a less value.
Also four table can be drawing for relationships between (RAP % and VA%)(figure4.1) and
also between (RAP % and Stability)(figure4.2), and (RAP and VMA%)(figure4.3) , last one
for (RAP% and VFA%)(figure4.4),So after drawing tables (that showing in), shows that
increasing the rate of RAP% decreased the void ratio (VA), it can be noticed, the values of
stability for all of the percentages of reclaimed asphalt are acceptable in ASTM specifications,
also for VMA when adding the percentage of RAP% the value of VMA was not acceptable
except 53%, for last table showing that increasing the rate of RAP increase VFA, also it can be
noticed that not all the percentages of reclaimed that used is acceptable about Flow in 0.25 mm
according to the ASTM specifications (figure4.5).
That means not all of the percentages of reclaimed asphalt using in pavement is acceptable in
specifications, so that means that not all of the percentages of reclaimed can be used for
construction of roads.
But in table the that not all of the percentages can be used, but the best percentage that can be
used is 53%, because the percent of 53% reclaimed that using in asphalt as RAP with extract
bitumen is the best percentage because all value was acceptable according to ASTM
specification . table (4.2) shows the curves of stability and flow of the RAP samples. As we think
the 53% of RAP was better because all aggregates used were homogeneous so the bounding
between the aggregate particles and adhesion were good, but for other percentages which were
combination of RAP and normal aggregates the aggregates used were not homogeneous so the
bounding between the aggregate particles were not good enough which leaded to higher flow
4.5 Summary
This chapter showed the results and the discussions of the research and showed briefly in details
which one of the percentages was the best of them all, and the discussed about the results of the
research.
Chapter five concerns the conclusion and the recommendations after we did this research.

Chapter Five:
Conclusion and Recommendation

Chapter Five: Conclusion and Recommendation
5. Conclusion and recommendations

5.1 Conclusion
The combination of RAP and normal aggregate results in bad mixture properties except RAP
53% .
As we noticed that the 53% use as RAP had good flow because the aggregates used were
homogeneous.
The combination of RAP and normal aggregate results in higher flow than the specification
range, because the aggregates used were not homogenous so the adhesion were very low.
Use of 53% use as RAP mixture is better than combination of RAP and normal aggregate
mixtures but also better than 100% normal aggregate mixtures.
Use of 53% as RAP with 47% normal aggregate is very economic comparing to 100%
normal aggregates.
Use of 53% as RAP had a good flow according to specifications.
Reusing asphalt which is collected from milling and crushing as a RAP and using it in paving
is good for both economy and environment.
At the first we expected that mixtures containing (10% and 30%) of RAP will results in better
properties of the mixtures, but we were wrong.
The bonding and adhesion is better in 53% RAP and 47% normal aggregate than other mixes.

5.2 Recommendations
According to our research we discovered that the use of 53% of use as RAP in the asphalt
mixture is very better than other combination of the RAP and normal aggregates, because other
combination of RAP and normal aggregate causes a higher flow than the specifications due to
using non-homogeneous materials so this caused low bonding and less adhesion between
aggregate particles.
So we recommend the researcher after us or who will work with RAP to use 53% as RAP
percentage, because according to our research the 53% as RAP had a flow in range of
specifications.
We recommend that if the government builds companies and factories to crush the reclaimed
asphalt into desired particle sizes, because as researchers we found so much difficulty in finding
desired RAP. So as long as it is useful for both economic and environment, why we don't open a
new factories for RAP materials.
5.3 Summary
In this chapter we talked about conclusion and recommendations about our research.
The next pages contain references that helped us to complete this research.

REFERENCE
1. Aravind K. and Animesh Das Bituminous pavement recycling Department of Civil
Engineering IIT Kanpur 2011
2 Thomas J. Kazmierowski and Robert B. McGennis and Harold Paul and Delmar R. Salomon
and John Haddock . Application of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement and Recycled Asphalt Shingles
in Hot-Mix Asphalt , Washington, D.C. 2014
3. Elie Y. Hajj, PhD , Peter E. Sebaaly, PhD, P.E. , Luis Loria , Said Kass , and Tara Liske.
Impact of High RAP Content on the Performance Characteristics of Asphalt Mixtures in
Manitoba , Canada .2011
4. A. S Dhananjay , Zaid M Sayyad , Omkar B Sawant , Saif A Tamboli and Abrar A Tamboli.
Recyclability using Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement: A Review, India 2016
5. Imad L. Al-Qadi , Mostafa Elseifi , Samuel H. Carpenter . RECLAIMED ASPHALT

PAVEMENT – A LITERATURE REVIEW. Illinois –USA 2007
6. William Buttlar and F. Eugene Rebholz and Walid Nassar. Detection of Recycled Asphalt
Pavement (RAP) in Bituminous Mixtures .Illinois –USA 2004
7. Recommended Use of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement in the Superpave Mix Design Method
Prepared for: National Cooperative Highway Research Program Transportation Research Board
National Research Council
8. Asphalt Recycling and Reclaiming Association ,Basic Asphalt Reclaiming Manual ARRA
,Annapolis(2016)
9. A. Carter, Development of A Non-Solvent Based Test Method For Evaluating Reclaimed

Asphalt Pavement Mixes ,PHD Thesis , Auburn University ,Alabama ,USA, (2004)
.
10 L .Mohammed, I Negulescu , Z. Wu C. daranga, w .Daly ,J .Assoc .Asphalt pav. Tech
.72,551 -594 (2003)
11. B. Huang X. Shu, D.Vukosavljevic ,ASCE J , of mat . in civil Eng .23, 1535-1543 (2011)
12.w. Mengqi , W Haifang , W . Muhunthan , N Kalehiwot ,N .., PROC of the 9 1st Trans. Res
.Board Mtg .Transportation Research Board Washington D.C..,(2012)
13 H.R. Paul ,Proc of The Assoc .of Asphalt paving Tech .65 231-254 (1996)
14. Austroads ,Maximising the Re-use of Reclaimed Asphalt pavement (Field Validation
)Austroads Ltd ,Sydney ,(2016)

15 R. West , JR Willis ,Marasteanu ,Improved Mix Design Evaluation ,and materials
management practices for hot mix asphalt with High Reclaimed Asphalt pavement content
,transportation Research Board ,Washington D.C (2013)

Final Project 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Project 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Acknowledgement:

Certificate of the graduation project

DPU Graduation project page i

DPU Graduation project page ii

DPU Graduation project page iii

DPU Graduation project page iv

DPU Graduation project page v

Acronyms and/or Symbol Description

DPU Graduation project page vi

DPU Graduation project page 1

1.2 effect of RAP in HMA:

DPU Graduation project page 2

In order to satisfy the study objectives, laboratory experimental work to

DPU Graduation project page 3

DPU Graduation project page 4

DPU Graduation project page 5

Recycling of asphalt pavements is one of the great success stories of the

DPU Graduation project page 6

Table 2.1 High RAP Field Projects

Location % RAP Dates of Construction

DPU Graduation project page 7

Recycling of asphalt pavements is a valuable approach for technical, economical, and

DPU Graduation project page 8

2.4 Why use RAP?

DPU Graduation project page 9

DPU Graduation project page 10

DPU Graduation project page 11

DPU Graduation project page 12

Figure 3.2 :A: penetration device & B: penetration cups

DPU Graduation project page 13

Figure 3.3: A ductility mold & B testing machine

DPU Graduation project page 14

DPU Graduation project page 15

Figure 3.3 A: cylinder with bitumen & B: oven

DPU Graduation project page 16

DPU Graduation project page 17

3.4.2 Specific gravity for normal aggregates:

Saturated surface dry (water fills the aggregate pores).

Submerged in water (underwater).

DPU Graduation project page 18

1. High values can indicate non-durable aggregate.

DPU Graduation project page 19

DPU Graduation project page 20

The aggregate immersed in water at room temperature for a period of 15 to 19 hours.

DPU Graduation project page 21

Figure 3.5 : pycnometer of fine aggregate

3.4.2.2 Coarse aggregate specific gravity:

DPU Graduation project page 22

The aggregate immersed in water at room temperature for a period of 15 to 19 hours

Figure 3.7 specific gravity of course aggregate

DPU Graduation project page 23

Figure 3.8 The basket used for underwater weighing.

DPU Graduation project page 24

Marshall Mix Design Procedure

The Marshall mix design method consists of 6 basic steps:

Optimum Asphalt Binder Content Estimate

Sample Asphalt Binder Contents

DPU Graduation project page 25

DPU Graduation project page 26

Figure 3.9 : A :Marshall drop hammer , B : Marshall molds C: Marshall device

DPU Graduation project page 27

Selection of Optimum Asphalt Binder Content

DPU Graduation project page 28