FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING III Reports

TITLE: GRADING OF THE AGGREGATE AND BENDING CONCENTRACTIN

STUDENT NAME: Siyasanda

STUDENT SURNAME: Dumzele

STUDENT NUMBER: 210165510

LECTUTER: Mrs C. Belford

TECHNICIAN: Mr. L. Minnies

CLASS: S4B

GROUP: 2

Due Date: 04 November 2013

TABLE OF CONTENT

Flow chart

Introduction

Aim

Apparatus

Procedures

Result

Conclusion

Recommendations
FLOW CHART: BLENDING OF AGGREGATE SIZES

OBTAIN MIX DESIGN

WEIGH OFF AGGREGATES ACCORDING TO MIX DESIGN

ADD PERCENTAGES OF AGGREGATES INTO OF ONE MIX INTO ONE PAN. IT WILL
THEREFORE EQUATE TO 16 PANS

PLACE PANS IN OVEN OVERNIGHT TO OBTAIN TO OPTIMUM TEMPRETURE (1600 C)

LABEL EACH SAMPLE CAREFULLY

Introduction
The super pave method was developed during the strategic Highway Research Program in the
late 1980’.The WVDOH is currently evaluating the impact of phasing in the super pave method
for all asphalt concrete mix designs. One of the primary differences between the Marshall and
super pave methods is the aggregate specifications. The stability of asphalt concrete is strongly
dependent on friction between the aggregate particles. The Marshall method controls the stability
of the asphalt concrete by testing the asphalt concrete. The super pave uses tests and
specifications on the aggregates to assure inter particle friction.
Aim
This section will entail the details concerning the method we used of obtaining the different
aggregate sizes to obtain a good grading for compaction as well as the percentage of binder
content in accordance the TMH 1.The aim of an asphalt concrete mix design method is to
determine the proper proportions of aggregates and asphalt to produce an economical mix that
meets the performance requirements of the pavement.

Apparatus
● Specimen extractor
● Compaction hammer
● Compaction
● Ovens
● Specimen mold holder
● Scale
● Miscellaneous equipment
Method
We obtained the mix design from the technician. Calculated the mass of the varies aggregate in
grams from the mix design.We then physically gathered the aggregates which were contained in
buckets and placed it into bowls.We then weighed off the respective mass of the aggregates
needed into the pans; there were 16 pan samples in all. We then mixed the samples thoroughly
threw with a spoon. Each sample was clearly labeled .The 16 pans were then placed in a pre-
heated oven at 1600C and left over night

All the aggregates, 13.2mm stone, 9.0mm stone, 6.0mm stone and sand were mixed together to
the correct proportions for each aggregate. The mix of these aggregates were then heated in the
oven to temperatures of 160oc so as bitumen was also heated to the same temperature.

The heating of bitumen was to turn it a liquid so that it would be easy to mix the aggregates and
the heating of the aggregates would provide the sample adhesion properties.

Sixteen pans with aggregate of different masses were then blended with different proportions of
hot bitumen. Twelve pans of aggregate were compacted and four were not compacted. The
compacted samples were done according to the method C3 in TMH1 to determine the bulk
relative density (SGR).

The mold base and the collar were all heated to 1600C of temperature. When the specimen
reached specimen temperature it was then placed in the mold. The mold was assembled by
placing the mold base at the bottom; filter paper; the mold and the collar were placed on top of
the mold base respectively.

The compaction was achieved using the Marshall hammer.75 blows were applied on both sides
of the specimen. All twelve specimens were compacted to the required specification. These
briquettes were removed from the mold using a hydraulic jack. The thickness of the specimen
was taken after the compaction was done. These results were recorded down.
RESULT

AGGREGATE GRADING (SIEVE ANALYSIS)

● Aggregate : 13.2 mm
Mass : 1200 g

Sieve Size Mass Passing Mass Retained Retained Passing

(mm) (g) (g) (%)
(%)

19.0 1200 0 0.000 100

13.2 1164 36 3 97

9.5 372 792 66 31

6.7 168 204 17 14

4.75 72 96 8 6

2.36 48 24 2 4

1.18 36 12 1 3

0.600 24 12 1 3

0.300 12 12 1 2

0.150 12 12 1 1

0.075 1 0.02 0 1

< 0.075 1 0.01 0 0

Total 1200 100

● Aggregate : 9.0 mm
Mass : 1200 g

Sieve Size Mass Passing. Mass Retained Retained Passing

(mm) (g) (g) (%)
(%)
 19.0 0 0 0 100

13.2 1200 0 0 100

9.5 1080 120 10 90

6.7 504 576 48 42

4.75 168 336 28 14

2.36 60 108 9 5

1.18 36 24 2 3

0.600 24 12 1 2

0.300 12 12 1 1

0.150 12 12 1 0

0.075 1 0.02 0 0

< 0.075 1 0.01 0 0

Total 1200 100

● Aggregate : 6.7 mm
Mass : 1200 g

Sieve Size Mass Passing. Mass Retained Retained Passing

(mm) (g) (g) (%)
(%)

19.0 0 0 0 100

13.2 0 0 0 100

9.5 1200 0 0 100

6.7 780 420 35 65

4.75 732 348 29 36

2.36 108 324 27 9

1.18 84 24 2 7

0.600 48 36 3 4

0.300 36 12 1 3
 0.150 12 24 2 1

0.075 1 12 1 0

< 0.075 0 0 0 0

Total 1200 100

● Aggregate : Sand
Mass : 1200 g

Sieve Size Mass Passing

Mass Retained Retained Passing
(mm) (g) (g) (%) (%)
37.5 mm 0 0 0 100
26.5 0 0 0 100
19.0 1200 0 0 100
13.2 780 0 0 100
9.5 732 0 0 100
6.7 108 0 0 100
4.75 84 3 0.251 99.749
2.0 48 8 0.668 99.081
1.18 36 22 1.838 97.243
0.600 12 131 10.944 86.299
0.300 1 507 42.356 43.943
0.150 1 437 36.508 7.435
0.075 86 7.185 0.251
< 0.075 3 0.251 0
Total 1197 100
Mass of aggregate = Aggregate % × 1200g = Mass of aggregate (g)

Aggregate (mm) Aggregate (%) Mass of Aggregate (g)

13.2 33 396

6 45 540

Crusher Dust 13 156

Sand 9 108

Table: Aggregate Masses Required

Mass of Bitumen = Mass Total Aggregate × Percentage of Bitumen
100 – Percentage of Bitumen

Bitumen Total Mass of Aggregate Mass of Bitumen

(%) (g) (g)

4.5 1200 56.5

5.0 1200 63.2

5.5 1200 69.8

6.0 1200 76.6

Table: Bitumen Mass Required

ANALYSIS
From the appearance of the mixed sample we could tell that the sample was well graded, no
voids or gaps were visible.

RECOMMENDATIONS
A mechanical mixer would more effective for mixing the aggregate.
 FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING III Reports

TITLE: RELATIVE BULK DENSITY

STUDENT NAME: Siyasanda

STUDENT SURNAME: Dumzele

STUDENT NUMBER: 210165510

LECTUTER: Mrs C. Belford

TECHNICIAN: Mr. L. Minnies

CLASS: S4B

GROUP: 2

Due Date: 04 November 2013

TABLE OF CONTENT

Flow chart

Introduction

Aim

Apparatus

Procedures

Result

Conclusion

Recommendations
Flow chart

Determining of the maximum theoretical relative density of asphalt mix.

One sample of each group of bitumen content is required.

Determine mass of 2l flask & glass plate.

Determine mass of sample.

Fill flask with water and seal with glass plate and determine mass.

Remove water and transfer sample into flask and submerge in water about 30mm above
sample.

Add a few drops of soap (detergent) and transfer to air pump

After all the air is removed, determine the mass of the flask with contents.
Introduction

This is the method which is done in the bituminous laboratory with the main aim of determining
the bulk relative density of the bituminous mix which had been compacted in the previous test
which is the determining of resistance flow using the Marshall apparatus and the voids content of
the mix or the briquette can be determined by means of calculations using the solutions acquired
from the relative bulk density test.
Aim

The relative bulk density of a compacted a bituminous can be calculated the mass and the bulk
volume of the briquette form when it is still in a dry state, and the void content can be calculated
by obtaining the difference between the bulk volume of the briquette and the theoretical volume
of the combined constituents and it is then expressed in percentage.

Apparatus

● Balance
● Briquette
● Wire basket with water fitted in the scale
● Cloth to dry the briquette

PROCEDURES

The briquette which was compacted in the method of determining the resistance of flow of a
briquette using Marshall apparatus compaction and was then allowed to settle and cool off in the
mold was then taken out of the molds using a jack hammer and then they were measured using
the and were approximately 150 x 150 mm, and then the edges were neatly trimmed using the
diamond saw and the surface were smoothen up, then the different briquette were then weighed
on the scale in their dry state to determine the dry mass in the air which is taken as my mass A
and they were then placed in the basket which was floating in the water container with water of
25 °C and that basket was attached to the balance then the briquette was then placed in the basket
such that the mass of the briquette within the water could be determined and that is considered as
mass C, and then the briquette is then taken out of the water and it is then weighed again to
determine the mass of the saturated surface-dry briquette in air and that is considered as mass B.

Result
Bitumen Percentage Dry Mass Mass in water Surface dried
(g) mass (g)
(g)

4.5 % Sample 1 1228.7 715.5 1249.0

Sample 2 1228.8 719.2 1252.6

Sample 3 1223.3 719.2 1253.6

5.0 % Sample 1 1224.0 718.0 1251.9

Sample 2 1213.0 711.3 1238.4

Sample 3 1219.9 711.8 1239.0

5.5 % Sample 1 1199.8 676.6 1226.6

Sample 2 1225.8 711.9 1244.0

Sample 3 1192.2 698.3 1217.1

6.0 % Sample 1 1153.0 662.5 1176.5

Sample 2 1237.1 704.4 1266.8

Sample 3 1222.0 714.6 1250.1

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● Bulk relative density of the briquette (BRD)
 A
Bulk relative density (25/25°C) =
B−C
A = dry mass of briquette in air
B = mass of surface dry briquette in air
C = mass of briquette in water.

Bulk relative density of the briquette

Bitumen Average Bulk

Relative Density
Percentage (BRD)

Dry Mass Mass in Surface dried Bulk Relative

(B) Density
water (g) mass (g)
(g)
(BRD)

Sample 1 1228.7 715.5 1249.0 2.30

Sample 2 1228.8 719.2 1252.6 2.30

4.5 %
Sample 3 1223.3 719.2 1253.6 2.29 2.24

Sample 1 1224.0 718.0 1251.9 2.29

Sample 2 1213.0 711.3 1238.4 2.30

5.0 %
Sample 3 1219.9 711.8 1239.0 2.31
 2.26

Sample 1 1199.8 676.6 1226.6 2.18

Sample 2 1225.8 711.9 1244.0 2.30

5.5 %
Sample 3 1192.2 698.3 1217.1 2.30 2.30

Sample 1 1153.0 662.5 1176.5 2.24

Sample 2 1237.1 704.4 1266.8 2.20

6.0 %
Sample 3 1222.0 714.6 1250.1 2.28 2.29

● Mass Of Aggregate (Ga)

Ga = BRD(100 - B )

Bitumen Content (B) Mass Of Aggregate (Ga)

(g)

4.5 % 213.92

5.0 % 214.70

5.5 % 217.35

6.0% 215.26

● Volume Of Aggregate (Va)

Ga
GA=
BRD

Bitumen Content (B) ● Volume Of Aggregate

(Va) (m3)

4.5 % 95.50

5.0 % 95.00

5.5 % 94.50
 6.0% 94.00

Volume of Effective Binder (Vb)

Vb=B ×V

Where: Vb = Volume of effective binder in mix

V = Volume of effective binder in mix
V = ( πd²/4) xh

Bitumen Volume Height Volume of Volume of Effective

Content effective binder in Binder (m3) (Vb)
3
(B) (m ) (m)
mix (m3) (V)

4.5 % 31451.93 71.4 560.631 25.228

5.0 % 31451.93 70.10 550.409 27.520

5.5 % 31451.93 70.60 555.913 30.575

6.0% 31451.93 72.10 566.135 33.968

● Percentage Of Voids In Aggregate (VMA)

V − (Va−Vb )
% Voids= ( V )
×100

Bitumen Content (B) Percentage of Voids (%)

(VMA)

4.5 % 87.47

5.0 % 87.74

5.5 % 88.501

6.0% 89.39
 Vb
Percentage Of Voids Filled With Bitumen %Vfb =
VMA
Bitumen Content (B) Percentage of Voids (%)

( Vfb )

4.5 % 28.842

5.0 % 31.367

5.5 % 34.548

6.0% 38.00

(RD−BRD)
● Percentage Of Voids In Mix (%VIM) = × 100
RD

Relative density Bulk Relative

Bitumen Content (RD) Density (BRD) % VIM
4.5 %
2.41 2.24 7.054
5.0 %
2.41 2.26 6.224
5.5 %
2.36 2.30 2.542
6.0%
2.36 2.29 2.966
GRAPH
 Bulk Relative Density (kg/m^3)
2.31
2.3
2.29
2.28
2.27
2.26
2.25
2.24
2.23
2.22
2.21
4.0% 4.5% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0% 6.5%
Bitumen Content

Void-in-Mix (%)
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0%
Bitumen content

VMA %
0.90
0.90
0.89
0.89
0.88
0.88
0.87
0.87
4.0% 4.5% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0% 6.5%
Bitumen Content
 Vfb (%)
40.00
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
4.0% 4.5% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0% 6.5%
BItunmen Content

Conclusion

With this method the apparatus were all functioning well which then lead to the results acquired
being more accurate. The relative bulk density was calculated using the mass of the briquette in
dry air, mass of briquette in the water and the mass of the briquette out of the water, which then
gave us the lead to calculate the void content of the mix.
 FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING III Reports

TITLE: RICE ‘N METHOD

STUDENT NAME: Siyasanda

STUDENT SURNAME: Dumzele

STUDENT NUMBER: 210165510

LECTUTER: Mrs C. Belford

TECHNICIAN: Mr. L. Minnies

CLASS: S4B

GROUP: 2

Due Date :04 November 2013

TABLE OF CONTENT

Flow chart

Introduction

Aim

Apparatus

Procedures

Result

Conclusion

Recommendations
Flow charts

Determining of the maximum theoretical relative density

of asphalt mix

One sample of each group of bitumen content is required

Determine mass of 2l flask & glass plate.

Determine mass of sample.

Fill flask with water and seal with glass plate and
determine mass.

Remove water and transfer sample into flask and

submerge in water about 30mm above sample.

Add a few drops of soap (detergent) and transfer to air

pump

After all the air is removed, determine the mass of the

flask with contents.
Introduction

The maximum theoretical relative density of asphalt is the relative density of the voidless mixture .The
absorption of bituminous binder of an aggregate is determine in terms of the mass of the dry aggregate is
determine in terms of the mass of the dry aggregate which is absorbed by the aggregate what altering the
bulk volume of the aggregate , and which does not contribute towards interparticle adheshion.

Theoretical maximum specific gravity is used along with bulk specific gravity values from field cores and
laboratory compacted specimens to calculate air voids and in place air voids of a HMA pavement.
Theoretical maximum specific gravity is needed to calculate air void content , therefore it is involved in
place air void determination
AIM
The determination of the theoretical relative density (i.e the relative density of the voids less the mixture)
is defined by filling all the voids in the material with water under reduced pressure.

Apparatus

● Filter flasks
● Vacuum pump connected to a manometer
● Electronic scale
● Rubber stoppers, rubber tubing and glass tubing

Method
(a)( i) Relative Density of aggregate and binder

Determine the bulk relative density of the blended aggregate in accordance with
Methods B14 and B15. Determine the relative Density of the binder in accordance
with Method E2.

(ii)Preparation of Sample
 Prepare a mixture of aggregate from a sample of the mixture being used. The
aggregate must consist of all the different that will be used in the proportions that
will give the required grading. The binder content must be the same amount that
will be used in the mix and should not be lower.

(iii)Determination of the mass and volume of the voidless mixture

Clean, dry and weigh the filler flask with glass plate and stopper for closing the
spout. Fill the flask one-third full of the sample and reweigh. The particles of the
mixture must be separated manually to prevent large the occurrence of large
lumps in the flask.
Add water until the sample is completely covered without filling the flask and add
two drops of a solution (liquid soap) in water to facilitate the removal of
entrapped air. Attach the vacuum pump to the flask. Reduce the pressure in the
flask to 30mm Hg and shake the flask vigorously at intervals of 2 minutes.
Maintain the flask at the reduced pressure of 15 for ± 2mins. Restore the sample
to atmospheric pressure there should be no visible bubbles in the sample.
Fill the flask with water. Close the spout of the flask, fill it up to the top with
water and seal the mouth with the glass plate so that no air is trapped in the flask.
Determine the mass of the flask with contents.Empty the flask, clean it and refill it
with water. Seal it with a glass plate and determine the mass of the flask with
water.

Maximum theoretical relative density of the mixture:

(S)-(FG)
RDm=
(FG-S)-(FWSG-FWD)
Where:
▪ RDm = max relative density of the mix
▪ (S)= mass of flask
▪ (FG)= mass of flask and sample
▪ (FWSG) = mass of flask and sample, filled with water after removal of air
▪ (FWG) = mass of flask filled with water

(b) Binder Absorbed

Calculate the total volume of the aggregate and the binder in the sample from the
relative density of each. Subtract the volume of the sample obtained from the
determination (i.e the voidless mix). The difference is the volume of the binder
absorbed. Express as a percentage of the mass of dry aggregate in the sample.

RESULT
Bitumen Mass of Mass of empty Mass of flask + Mass of the flask Mass of the flask +
 percentage sample (g) flask + glass water + glass + sample + glass sample + water + glass
plate (g) plate (g) plate(g) plate, after suction (g)
(S)
(FG) (FWG) (FSG) (FWSG)

4.0 % 1256.50 1280.80 3308.20 2537.30 4053.00

5.0 % 1263.20 1230.50 3271.80 2493.70 4025.50

5.5 % 1269.84 1295.80 3294.70 2565.64 4031.50

6.0 % 1276.60 1187.90 3232.10 2464.50 3965.00

BC ×(FSG−FG)
● Mass of Binder (Mb) =
100

(100−BC )(FSG−FG )
● Mass of aggregate (Ma) =
100

Bitumen percentage/ Binder content Mass of Binder Mass of Aggregate (g)

(BC)
(g)

4.5 % 56.54 1199.960

5.0 % 63.16 1200.040

5.5 % 69.84 1200.000

6.0 % 76.596 1200.004

A
Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity (SG) or (RD) =
A−C

A = Weight of the dry sample in air (g)

C = Weight of the sample in water (g)
 *The specific gravity of the asphalt mix shall be calculated at 25oC

Bitumen Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity (SG) or (RD) (SG) Average

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 (SG) or (RD)

Percentage

4.0 % 2.40 2.41 2.43 2.41

5.0 % 2.42 2.42 2.40 2.41

5.5 % 2.29 2.39 2.41 2.36

6.0 % 2.35 2.32 2.41 2.36

● Volume of binder (Vb)

Mb
Vb = SG

Bitumen percentage/ Mass of Binder (Mb) Volume of binder (Vb)

Binder content (BC)
(g) (m3)

4.5 % 56.54 23.46

5.0 % 63.16 23.21

5.5 % 69.84 29.59

6.0 % 76.60 32.46

● Volume of aggregate (Va)

Ma
Va = SG

Bitumen percentage/ Mass of Aggregate (Ma) Volume of Aggregate (Va)

Binder content (BC)
(g) (m3)

4.5 % 1199.960 497.909

5.0 % 1200.040 497.942

 5.5 % 1200.000 508.475

6.0 % 1200.004 508.476

● Volume of Voidless Mix (Vm)

Vm = (FWG – FG) – (FWAG – FSG)

Bitumen percentage/ Binder content (BC) Volume of Voidless Mix (Vm) (m³)

4.5 % 511.7

5.0 % 509.5

5.5 % 533.04

6.0 % 543.7

● Percentage of binder absorbed by the aggregate (Pb)

Pb = ( Vb+ Va - Vm)Gb*100
A

Bitumen percentage/ Binder content (BC) Percentage of binder absorbed by the

aggregate (%)

4.5 % 1.94

5.0 % 2.34

5.5 % 0.98

6.0 % 0.53

Conclusion
The results show that the percentage of voids will be greatest in the 6.0 bitumen content briquette.
RECOMMENDATIONS
I recommend that about three people watch the flow and stability meters to improve the degree of
accuracy when taking readings.
 FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING III Reports

TITLE: MARSHALL STABILITY FLOW

STUDENT NAME: Siyasanda

STUDENT SURNAME: Dumzele

STUDENT NUMBER: 210165510

LECTUTER: Mrs C. Belford

TECHNICIAN: Mr. L. Minnies

CLASS: S4B

GROUP: 2

Due Date :04 November 2013

TABLE OF CONTENT

Flow chart

Introduction

Aim

Apparatus

Procedures

Result

Conclusion

Recommendations
FLOW CHART: MARSHALL STABILITY AND FLOW

PRE-HEAT WATER IN WATER BATH TO 600C

PLACE BRIQUETTES FROM THE THEORETICAL MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY

IN WATER BATH FOR 30 MINUTES AT 600C
 REMOVE BRIQUETTES, DRY AND LABEL CLEARLY

CALIBRATE MARSHALL APPERATUS FOR EACH BRIQUETTE BEFORE THE

EXPERIMENT BEGINS

PLACE EACH BRIQUETTE INTO MARSHALL APPERATUS AND BEGIN

BREAKING

RECORD ALL DATA

INTRODUCTION

Hot mix asphalt (HMA) is one of the types of premix used in construction worldwide.it is considered by
many engineers as premier paving product is available anywhere with the any cost and most popular with
its high skid resistance, high comfort ability and low maintenance required. In short, HMA gains a lot of
attention from engineers and researchers over the world because of its material cost and high
performance.

Asphalt mix design method involved the concept that mixtures must be stable in mix and durable in any
condition. It is a complex issue with a lot of variable involved. However two methods of mix design have
become popular worldwide .They are the Marshall Mix Design and the Hveem Mix Design Method. Then
Marshall testing device applied a compression load on the circumference of a cylindrical sample through
semi-circuit heads.

The temperature of testing is 600c and testing speed is rapid with the best being continue to failure, the
maximum load is recorded as well as the deformation undergo by the sample in reaching max load .This
value is known as Marshall stability and Marshall flow.

AIM
This report investigates the determination of the stability and flow. It measures the resistance to plastic
flow of cylindrical specimens of asphalt mixtures loaded on the lateral surface by means of the Marshall
apparatus. After it has been prepared and analyzed, in accordance with Method C2 TMH 1, 1986.

APPARATUS
● Marshall Apparatus
 ● Water bath
● Breaking Head
● Thermometer
● Loading Jack
● Ring Dynamometer Assembly or Electronic Equivalent – 2267kg Capacity
● Flow meter
● Protective rubber gloves

PROCEDURE
Pre-heat the water in the bath equipment to 60ºC.Place the briquettes (x12) obtained from the theoretical
maximum dry relative density. Put the sample in the bath for 30 minutes. Remove the briquettes, dry and
label clearly using protective rubber gloves. Clean the guide rods and the inside surfaces of the test heads
prior to making the test, and lubricate the guide rods so that the upper test head slides freely over them.
Oil the breaking head before placing the briquette inside it.Place the breaking head back onto the loading
jack and fix. Set the two gauges to zero to take the readings. Put the flow meter in the position and adjust
it to zero. The bottom gauge is taken for the stability and the top gauge taken for the flow. Record the
readings once the flow gauge at the top strikes back.

RESULTS

Bitumen Percentage Average Average Flow (mm)

Stability (kN) Flow (mm)
Stability (kN)

Sample 1 5.336 0.080  

4.5 % Sample 2 8.766 0.070  

Sample 3 15.427 9.843 0.030 0.060

Sample 1 10.436   0.060  

5.0% Sample 2 9.530   0.130  

Sample 3 8.258 9.408 0.090 0.073

Sample 1 9.262   0.030  

5.5% Sample 2 7.986   0.130  

Sample 3 9.806 9.018 0.060 0.093

Sample 1 9.455   0.070  

6.0% Sample 2 9.560   0.080  

Sample 3 8.915 9.310 0.190 0.113

Bitumen
Percentage Stability (kN)
4.5 b% 9.843
5.0 % 9.408
5.5 % 9.018
6.0 % 9.310
GRAPH

Stability
10
9.8
9.6
Stability (kN)

9.4
9.2
9
8.8
8.6
4.50% 5.00% 5.50% 6.00%
Bitumen Content

Bitumen
Percentage Flow (mm)
4.5 % 0.060
5.0 % 0.073
5.5 % 0.093
6.0 % 0.113
 Flow (mm)
0.12
0.1
Flow (mm)

0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
4.50% 5.00% 5.50% 6.00%
Bitumen Content

Void in Mix
FSG−FG
RD = (Relative Density)
( FGW −FG )−( FSWG−FSG)

Voids in Mix (VIM = %)

(RD−BRD)
Voids In Mix = × 100
RD

Relative density Bulk Relative

% BITUMEN (RD) Density (BRD) % VIM

4.5 2.455 2.41 1.833

5.0 2.479 2.41 2.783

5.5 2.83 2.36 4.996

6.0 2.388 2.36 1.173

 Table 4.3 – Results for the VIM (%)

Void-in-Mix (%)
6

0
4% 5% 6% 7% 8%
Bitumen content

CONCLUSION
We can conclude that the sample was fairly well compacted and it is durable.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Conditions in the lab are not the same as conditions on site, in saying this I recommend that a mechanical
compactor be used to obtain a higher compaction for the samples.
 FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING III Reports

TITLE: BINDER CONTENT (EXTRACTION)

STUDENT NAME: Siyasanda

STUDENT SURNAME: Dumzele

STUDENT NUMBER: 210165510

LECTUTER: Mrs C. Belford

TECHNICIAN: Mr. L. Minnies

CLASS: S4B

GROUP: 2

Due Date: 04 November 2013

TABLE OF CONTENT

Flow chart

Introduction

Aim

Apparatus

Procedures

Result

Conclusion

Recommendations
 FLOW CHART

Title: Asphalt Content by Centrifuge extraction.

Aim: to determine the asphalt content of asphalt aggregates in the mixtures when sieved

Equipment: bowls, 1000ml cylinder flask, 19.00mm -0.075mm sieves, sieve pan, rubber gloves,
electrical scale, centrifuge mould cup, centrifuge extractor, hammer, oven, steel brush, mixing
spoon and 4000ml of toluene solvent.

Procedure:

Use the sample from the Marshall stability and flow test. One samples from each the binder percentage.

TRANSFER EACH SAMPLE INTO BIGGER BOWLS (500 ml) RESPECTIVELY and break them up.

ADD TOLOENE TO EACH SAMPLE UNIT UNTIL SAMPLE IS ALMOST COVERED

CLEAN THE BITUMEN OFF FROM THE AGGEGATES BY RUBBING AGGREGATES

DISPENCE TOLOENE INTO A DIFFERENT BOWL BUT DON’T THROW AWAY

REPEAT THE PROCESS UNTIL TOLOENE OBTAINS TURNS A LIGHT BROWN COLOUR WHEN

DRY THE AGGREGATE AND PERFORM SIEVE ANALYSIS WITH THE DRY SAMPLE

WEIGH CENTRIFUGE CUP OF THE CENTRIFUGE DEVICE

THROW TOLOENE OF EACH SAMPLE INTO CENTIFUGE CUP

MAKE SURE THE BOWL IS CLEAN OF ALL AGGREGATES

ADD THE AGGREGATES OBTAINED ON THE 0.075 SIEVE TO EACH RESECTIVE SAMPLE

DRY SAMPLE IN CENTRIFUGE CUP IN OVEN THEN WEIGH AND RECORD DATA

The centrifuge cup is emptied to the original sample aggregates

Sieve the sample through the 19.00mm- 0.075mm and weigh at each sieve size

Tabulate the results and through sample away once done.

INTRODUCTION

The centrifuges are used for the determination of bitumen percentage in bituminous mixtures. All models
comprise a removable precision-machined rotor bowl housed in a cylindrical aluminium box. They are
driven by an electric motor fit with AC drive (inverter) with the double function of speed control up to
3600 r.p.m regardless of the frequency (50 or 60Hz ) and electrical braking

The centrifuge can be set for the for the automatic speed ramp up to r.p.m or to any intermediate speed by
the front knob. A digital display monitors the frequency, which is proportional to the speed. The rotating
unit is suspended on the base by four calibrated springs, which assure a perfect stability all over the test.
The cover is precisely machined and fit with solvent resistant gasket to avoid leakages.
AIM
Use this test method to determine, four cold solvent extraction procedures, the percentage of asphalt in a
paving mixture based on the weight of an asphalt and aggregate mixture. The aggregate and fines
recovered can be used for sieve

APPARATUS

● A centrifugal extractor
● Centrifugal cup
● Suitable bottle (metal or heavy glass) with a tight sealing lid or stopper, or sieving extractor
apparatus
● A burette
● A volumetric flask
● A drying oven
● A hot plate
● Scale
● Miscellaneous items as required, such as basins, crucibles, spatulas, etc.
● Round pans of adequate size to accommodate the test sample
● Organic solvent
● Range of sieves for the final sieve analysis
● Thermometer

PROCEDURE
The 4 specimens used for the rice test will be used for this test.The samples were placed in 4 separate
bowls and we placed 4 more close by for dispensation of material.The 4 samples were dried over a hot
plate.We then added toluene to the bowl until the aggregates were almost covered; the sample was then
washed thoroughly through and then dispensed into the extra bowl.This process is repeated until the
dispensed toluene has a light brown colour. This was done for all 4 samples The aggregates left in bowls
were then left in the sun to dry.While the aggregates dried out we gathered all the necessary sieve sizes,
pan and lid and assembled it.When the aggregate dried we performed the sieve analysis test. We then
weighed our centrifuge cup on the scale. Then we placed the cup in the centrifugal extractor and placed
the 0.075mm sieve over the cup. We then poured the left over toluene in the centrifuge device and the
extraction began extracting. All material remaining in the 0.075 sieve was dried and added to aggregate
sample to be sieved. We were careful to only through a little toluene in the device at a time to allow the
device to thoroughly extract. Once the extraction was done we dried the sample in the oven and then
weighed the cup containing the sample .The fines were then added to the aggregate sample to be sieved.
This process was repeated for each bitumen percentage sample.

RESULTS

Bitumen Content Mass of Mass of Fines Mass Sample

Centrifuge Bowl
(g) (g)

4.0 % 144 43 1140

5.0% 144 36 1116

5.5 % 144 39 1091

6.0 % 144 38 1066

● 4.5 %

Sieve Size Mass Retained Retained Passing

(mm) (g) (%)
(%)

19.0 0 100

13.2 29 2.52 97.48

9.5 322 28.02 69.45

6.7 284 24.72 44.73

4.75 212 18.45 26.28

 2.36 99 8.62 17.67

1.18 46 4.00 13.66

0.600 37 3.22 10.44

0.300 76 6.61 3.83

0.150 33 2.87 0.96

0.075 10 0.87 0.09

< 0.075 1 0.09 0.00

Total 1149 100

● 5.0 %

Sieve Size Mass Retained Retained Passing

(mm) (g) (%)
(%)

19.0 0.68 100

13.2 27.32 0.68 99.32

9.5 27.06 27.32 72.00

6.7 17.28 27.06 44.94

4.75 8.43 17.28 27.66

2.36 4.77 8.43 19.23

1.18 3.57 4.77 14.47

0.600 6.89 3.57 10.89

0.300 2.81 6.89 4.00

0.150 1.11 2.81 1.19

 0.075 0.09 1.11 0.09

< 0.075 0.68 0.09 0.00

Total 1175 100

● 5.5 %

Sieve Size Mass Retained Retained Passing

(mm) (g) (%)
(%)

19.0 0 100

13.2 24 2.15 97.85

9.5 291 26.03 71.82

6.7 247 22.09 49.73

4.75 279 24.96 24.78

2.36 108 9.66 15.12

1.18 36 3.22 11.90

0.600 28 2.50 9.39

0.300 52 4.65 4.74

0.150 40 3.58 1.16

0.075 11 0.98 0.18

< 0.075 2 0.18 0.00

Total 1118 100

● 6.0 %
 Sieve Size Mass Retained Retained Passing
(mm) (g) (%)
(%)

19.0 0 100

13.2 44 3.77 96.23

9.5 276 23.65 72.58

6.7 318 27.25 45.33

4.75 218 18.68 26.65

2.36 93 7.97 18.68

1.18 52 4.46 14.22

0.600 38 3.26 10.97

0.300 67 5.74 5.23

0.150 44 3.77 1.46

0.075 12 1.03 0.43

< 0.075 5.0 0.43 0.00

Total 1167 100

CONCLUSION
All sample grading are suitable for use in the industry.

RECOMMENDATIONS
I recommend that a mechanical shaker be used.