See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/333568398

Laboratory Investigation on the Fresh, Mechanical, and Durability Properties of

Roller Compacted Concrete Pavement Containing Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement
Aggregates

Article  in  Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · June 2019
DOI: 10.1177/0361198119849585

CITATIONS READS

22 171

3 authors:

Solomon Debbarma Surender Singh

Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee Indian Institute of Technology Madras
21 PUBLICATIONS   194 CITATIONS    31 PUBLICATIONS   539 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

G.D. Ransinchung R.N.

Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
71 PUBLICATIONS   774 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Evaluation of Pavement Performance related Parameters of Cement Treated Sub-base and base using Stabilroad Additive View project

Concrete Pavements View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Solomon Debbarma on 13 August 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 1

1 LABORATORY INVESTIGATION ON THE FRESH, MECHANICAL AND

2 DURABILITY PROPERTIES OF RCCP CONTAINING RAP
3
4
5 Solomon Debbarma
6 Research Scholar
7 Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee – 247667,
8 India; Email: solo.debbarma124@gmail.com
9
10 Surender Singh
11 Ph.D. Assistant Professor
12 Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai – 6300036.
13 India; Email: surender@iitm.ac.in
14
15 G.D. Ransinchung R.N., Corresponding Author
16 Ph.D. Associate Professor
17 Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee – 247667,
18 India; Email: gdranfce@iitr.ac.in
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27 Please cite this article as: “Debbarma, S., Singh, S., & RN, G. R. (2019). Laboratory investigation
28 on the fresh, mechanical, and durability properties of roller compacted concrete pavement
29 containing reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregates. Transportation Research Record, 2673(10),
30 652-662. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119849585”
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44 Original link to the document:
45 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0361198119849585?casa_token=mGSmKRPR
46
HdEAAAAA%3AHrIvNoVSfM_5Hf9HnoizDXoKtDacdo5zUoY5GuVPS_zl231Rjd-
47 2EthNy2qQRhfuT1MsT24BFUN_kQ
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 2

1 ABSTRACT
2 The present study evaluates the potential and suitability of different fractions of Reclaimed
3 Asphalt Pavement (RAP) for Roller Compacted Concrete Pavement (RCCP) mixes. Natural
4 coarse and fine aggregates were partially & combinedly replaced by coarse RAP, fine RAP and
5 combined RAP for preparation of RCCP mixes. The considered properties to determine the
6 optimum RAP fraction and its proportion for RCCP were fresh density and water demand,
7 compressive strength, flexural strength, split tensile strength, porosity, water absorption, abrasion
8 resistance and performance in aggressive environment of chloride and sulphate-rich ions. It was
9 observed that inclusions of all the fractions of considered RAP could reduce the strength related
10 properties of RCCP mixes significantly at all the curing ages. However, fine RAP mixes were
11 found to exhibit better strength properties than coarse RAP and combined RAP mixes. It was
12 also observed that none of the RAP mixes could achieve the recommended compressive strength
13 criterion of 27.6MPa, however, exhibited enough flexural strength to replace either fraction of
14 conventional aggregates, individually or combinedly, for constructions of RCCP. In fact, 50%
15 coarse and 50% fine RAP mixes had higher flexural strength than the target laboratory mean
16 strength of 4.3MPa. Similarly, these mixes were found to have sufficient abrasion resistance and
17 could be suggested for RCCP (surface course) to be constructed in the areas having a higher
18 concentration of chloride and sulphate ions. Additionally, the results also indicated that higher
19 proportions of fine RAP may be suggested for RCCP mixes to be laid in sulphatic environments.
20
21
22
23
24 Keywords: RAP, Concrete, RCCP, Strength, Abrasion, Sulphate, Porosity
25
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 3

1 INTRODUCTION
2 Roller compacted concrete pavement (RCCP or RCC pavement) is a zero-slump concrete
3 mixture placed with asphalt pavers and compacted using drum/rubber-tired vibratory rollers (1-
4 8). Over the years, RCCP has been widely used for low structural applications such as for
5 parking lots, ports, military facilities, highway shoulders and pavement’s base course layer
6 (1,2,5). However, with recent advancements in the field of pavement engineering, low cement
7 requirement, and relatively rapid construction as compared to other traditional concrete mixes,
8 RCCP is now being popularly used as a surface course layer provided with a thin bituminous
9 coating of 50 mm (1.96 in.) thickness (to ensure a good riding surface) for different highway
10 applications (1). The recommended compressive strength for RCCP mixes desired to be used as a
11 surface course layer of pavements is 27.6 MPa (4003.04 psi) as specified by ACI (1). With
12 proper mixture proportioning (well-graded aggregates and adequate quantity of cement & water)
13 followed by dense compaction, RCCP mixes has been observed to achieve comparable strength
14 properties to that of conventional concrete mixes (1,4,5).
15 In the last few decades, due to rapid urbanization, sustainability has become the utmost
16 important criterion for all the civil engineering applications. Several countries have imposed a
17 ban on quarrying activities concerning disturbance to the natural topography. This condition has
18 compelled the concerning highway authorities to look out for alternative sources of aggregates
19 which are not only reliable, economical, and eco-friendly but are also abundantly available (9-
20 13). One of such an abundantly available recycled aggregate is Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement
21 (RAP) (14,15). RAP is the material milled/demolished material from an existing bituminous
22 pavement for various maintenance and rehabilitation activities (10,12,16-19). In the United
23 States alone, (2015) more than 85.1 million tons of reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) has been
24 reported to remain unused even after its effective utilization for different bituminous pavement
25 applications (10). A similar or even higher percentage of unused RAP may be assumed for Indian
26 conditions since the road density of both the countries are nearly equal and there is lack of
27 confidence among the engineers to utilize RAP even for lower layers of the pavement.
28 Utilization of RAP for cement concrete pavements has several pros and cons.
29 Advantages such as the elimination of RAP disposal problems, reduction in greenhouse gas
30 emissions, lesser consumption of natural aggregates and lower transportation costs are generally
31 associated with RAP (10-12). However, the main hurdle observed by highway agencies to enact
32 the use of RAP for cement concrete pavements is the lack and unavailability of proper
33 documentation and codal provisions (11). Another obstacle faced on using RAP for cement
34 concrete pavements is the formation of a weak interfacial transition zone (ITZ) between the RAP
35 surface and cementitious mortar matrix (9-13,20-25). In addition to asphalt coating,
36 agglomerated particles in RAP has also been reported to reduce the strength properties as much
37 by 70% w.r.t to the control mix (22,26). Most of the authors have recommended utilizing only
38 the coarser fraction of RAP up to a proportion of 50% only, whereas, prohibited to include any
39 proportion of fine RAP for cement concrete mixes (9,11,12,21,25,27,28). This is due to the
40 coarseness and gap-graded nature of fine RAP aggregates (12). On the other hand, only a handful
41 of studies pertaining to RAP inclusive RCCP mixes are available till date. Like cement concrete
42 pavements, incorporation of RAP for production of RCC pavements is also restricted to a
43 proportion of 50% only (7,29). Since RAP aggregates have a lower specific gravity and density,
44 inclusions of the same for RCCP mixes considerably reduces the compactness and density of
45 fresh mixes, which in turn have a great negative effect on the hardened properties (7). All the
46 above-mentioned factors (asphalt, agglomerated particles, weak ITZ, lower specific gravity &
47 density) greatly contribute to reducing the potential of RAP for RCCP mixes.
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 4

1 Apart from the mechanical properties of cement concrete pavements, concrete durability
2 is also equally important. Low concrete durability has been considered as one of the main reason
3 for the premature deterioration of concrete structures (12,30). Several concrete pavements are to
4 be constructed in aggressive environments (especially marine) and such areas are prone to severe
5 attack by chloride and sulphate ions (12,30), owing to which, the suitability of recycled
6 aggregates, especially RAP, which generally imparts porosity in the mixes (7,12,30) and thus
7 could accelerate the transportation of aggressive ions within the microstructure of pavements,
8 shall be evaluated very cautiously.

9 Research Objectives and Significance

10 A limited number of studies have been conducted to evaluate the suitability of RAP for RCCP
11 mixes. Out of which, studies pertaining to the determination of the optimum replacement level of
12 natural fine by fine RAP are very scanty. Also, all the previous studies evaluated the optimum
13 replacement level of RAP for RCCP mixes giving more impetus on fresh and mechanical
14 properties only. The present study is a comprehensive investigation taken up to evaluate the
15 optimum replacement level of both the fractions of conventional natural aggregates by coarse
16 RAP and fine RAP (individually & combinedly), respectively, based upon various fresh,
17 mechanical and durability properties. It is anticipated that the results of the present study would
18 help the concerned authorities in deciding the optimum fraction of RAP along with its optimum
19 proportion for preparation of RCCP mixes to be used either as base course or surface course of
20 pavements and also, the suitability of these mixes in the aggressive environments of sulphate and
21 chloride-rich ions.

22 MATERIALS AND EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

23 Materials and Mix Design

24 Portland cement Grade 43 was used throughout the study for preparation of RCCP mixes.
25 Natural coarse and fine aggregates used in the present investigation were provided by a local
26 supplier. Similarly, Reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) considered in the study was provided by
27 a local contractor. The stated RAP was fractionated into coarse and fine fractions by sieving on
28 4.75 mm (0.187 in.) Indian Standard (IS) sieve. The specific gravity and water absorption of the
29 natural coarse & natural fine and coarse RAP & fine RAP aggregates were determined in
30 accordance with IS: 2386 (31) and the values were found to be 2.63 & 2.59 and 0.65% & 0.81%
31 for natural coarse and fine aggregates, respectively, whereas lower values were observed for
32 coarse and fine RAP aggregates with values of 2.41 & 2.26 and 0.40% & 0.59% respectively.
33 The asphalt content in coarse and fine RAP was found to 3.22% and 7.5% respectively when
34 determined in accordance with ASTM D2172 (32). The particle size distribution of all the
35 considered aggregates is being presented in Figure 1. Fine RAP, as can be seen in Figure 1, was
36 found to be relatively coarser than the natural fine, whereas, coarse RAP was observed to be
37 slightly finer than the considered coarse natural aggregates which are in agreement with most of
38 the studies (10,12,28). Similarly, the considered fine RAP was highly gap-graded in nature
39 owing to lack of particles finer than 600 µm (#30) Indian Standard sieve and therefore, it was
40 decided to fill these gaps with the introduction of natural fine aggregates (finer than 600 µm
41 (#30)) in order to increase the suitability of fine RAP for RCCP mixes. The resultant fine RAP
42 (30% fine RAP & 70% natural fine) was found to have nearly the same particle size distribution
43 as that of considered natural fine aggregates (Figure 1).
44 The mix design for all the considered mixes was carried out in accordance with IRC:
45 SP:68 (32) guidelines. For the control/referral RCCP mix, the quantity of natural coarse and
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 5

1 natural fine aggregates was 962.5 kg/m3 (60.08 lb/ft3) and 787.5 kg/m3 (49.16 lb/ft3)
2 respectively. Thereafter, the considered natural aggregates were partly and fully replaced (by
3 mass) by individual fractions of coarse RAP (RC mixes), fine RAP (RF mixes) and combined
4 RAP (RAP mixes) aggregates in the proportions of 50% and 100% for the productions of RCCP
5 mixes. The quantity of Portland cement in all the considered mixes was kept constant at 350
6 kg/m3 (21.84 lb/ft3). All the considered mixes were prepared at their respective optimum
7 moisture content (OMC) values (Table 1).

8 Experimental Program
9 The RCCP mix design is based on the optimum moisture content (OMC) corresponding to its
10 maximum dry density (MDD) values carried out in accordance with ASTM D1557 (34). All the
11 mixes were prepared at their respective OMC values. Compaction of the specimens was carried
12 out in 3 equal layers with the help of a standard compacting hammer. 63 cubical specimens of
13 size 150 mm (5.91 in.) were prepared and tested in accordance with IS: 516 (35) for
14 determination of compressive strength at 7, 28 and 90 days of curing. 42 prismatic specimens of
15 size 100mm x 100mm x 500mm (3.9 x 3.9 x 19.7 in.) were prepared and tested in accordance
16 with IS:516 (35) to evaluate the flexural strength of the hardened RCCP mixes at 7 and 28 days
17 of curing. Similarly, 42 no. of cylindrical specimens of size 100 mm x 200 mm (3.9 x 7.9 in.)
18 were cast and tested in accordance with IS:5816 (36) for determining the split tensile strength of
19 the mixes at 7 and 28 days of normal curing. ASTM C642 (37) procedure was adopted to
20 determine the density, water absorption and total permeable voids of the hardened RCCP mixes
21 at 28 days of curing. It should be noted that the recommended temperature [110±5ºC (230±9º
22 F)]and duration (24 hours) for completely drying the specimens for the determination of total
23 porosity and water absorption were changed to 48±2ºC (118.4±3.6ºF) and 8 days (until the
24 difference between successive readings is less than 0.5%) respectively (38). This was done to
25 ensure that the asphalt present around the RAP aggregates does not flow under high oven drying
26 temperature and subsequently affect the results (38).
27 The performance evaluation of the considered RCCP mixes in the aggressive
28 environments of sulphate and chloride ions was assessed in accordance with ASTM C267 (39)
29 guidelines. The test was simulated in the laboratory conditions using hydrochloric acid (HCl) and
30 sulphuric acid (H2SO4) solutions of 1.5% concentration each. The acidic solutions were renewed
31 after every 14 days to maintain a constant acidic concentration level throughout the study. 63
32 cubical specimens of size 100 mm were prepared and cured for 28 days (in normal curing tank)
33 after which 3 specimens from each RCCP mix were kept in individual acid solution tanks.
34 Subsequently, another set of 3 specimens were tested for compressive strength at 28 days of
35 normal curing. The initial weight of the test specimens in saturated surface dried (SSD) condition
36 was noted (SSD1) before placing them in solution tanks. After 63 days of exposure to the acidic
37 environment, the specimens were taken out from the solution tanks, washed with tap water,
38 cleaned with a cotton cloth and the SSD weight was noted as SSD2. Thereafter, the compressive
39 strength of these specimens was measured in accordance with IS:516 guidelines (34). The
40 difference in mass of the specimens before and after exposure (SSD1 and SSD2) to the acidic
41 environments is termed as the loss in mass of the specimens. Similarly, the difference between
42 the compressive strength is being denoted as the loss in the strength of the mixes after the acid
43 attack.
44 Concrete pavements are subjected to wear and tear due to abrasive forces caused by the
45 vehicular movements (40). This wear and tear reduces the functional performance of the
46 pavements and thus, its evaluation is necessary if RCCP is to be used as a surface layer of the
47 pavement. ASTM C1747 (41) procedure was adopted to determine the Cantabro abrasion loss of
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 6

1 the RCCP mixes. 42 no. of cubical specimens of size 100mm (3.9 in.) were prepared for the
2 determination of the abrasion resistance of the considered mixes. Los-Angeles abrasion machine
3 was used for determining the Cantabro abrasion loss. After 28 & 90 days of curing, 3 no. of
4 specimens from each RCCP mix were taken out from the curing tank and its initial weight was
5 noted down and subsequently, the specimens were kept in the Los-Angeles abrasion machine
6 (without steel balls) and rotated at about 33 rpm for 15 minutes. After 500 revolutions, the
7 specimens were removed from the Los Angeles machine, cleaned for any loose particles and its
8 mass was recorded. The difference between the initial mass and final mass of the specimens
9 before and after abrasion is termed as the Cantabro abrasion loss.

10 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

11 Fresh Properties
12 The effect of inclusions of different fractions of reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) on the
13 optimum moisture content (OMC) and maximum dry density (MDD) of the considered roller
14 compacted concrete pavement (RCCP or RCC pavement) mixes are being summarized in Table
15 1. It was observed that, despite lower water absorption of individual RAP fractions than the
16 considered natural aggregates, the water demand of the lower RAP proportion mixes (50%) was
17 higher than the control mix. Contrary, high RAP mixes exhibited lower OMC values than the
18 low RAP mixes and even lower than the control mix containing natural aggregates. The
19 reduction in OMC on the incorporation of RAP may be attributed to the lower water absorption
20 of considered RAP fractions than the considered natural aggregates. Whereas, the reason for
21 higher water demand of low RAP mixes is not known, however, the presence of agglomerated
22 particles may be held responsible to some extent (42). As far as the effect of RAP on the
23 workability of the fresh mixes is concerned, all the considered mixes were observed to be
24 workable in nature. However, this condition may/may not be true for other RAP materials. The
25 smoothly textured asphalt coating is generally hydrophobic in nature, and thus could result in
26 bleeding and segregation, as reported by several authors (42,43,44). Nevertheless, this condition
27 could be resolved by either increasing the fine content or by increasing the Portland cement
28 quantity (43,44). Additionally, inclusions of RAP aggregates may result in lesser compactive
29 effort owing to the combined effect of smooth texturing and slightly rounded morphology than
30 the rough textured and angular conventional nature aggerates. However, the afore-mentioned
31 statements need to be validated by conducting laboratory & field trials.

32 It was observed that inclusions of any fraction of RAP could reduce the MDD of the
33 considered RCCP mixes. The reduction in MDD was found to be profound for combined RAP
34 mixes (RAP), followed by fine RAP (RF) and coarse RAP (RC) mixes. This reduction in MDD
35 on the incorporation of RAP is due to the fact that RAP aggregates are lighter than natural
36 aggregates as depicted by their lower specific gravity value than the considered natural
37 aggregates. Nevertheless, a maximum of 5% reduction in MDD was noted for the 100RAP mix
38 (w.r.t the control mix) which may be considered as comparable to the referral control mix.

39 Compressive Strength
40 The results of the compressive strength of hardened RCCP mix at 7, 28 and 90 days of curing is
41 being summarized in Table 1. Consistent with the available literature, incorporations of different
42 fractions of RAP reduced the compressive strength of RCCP mixes considerably at all curing
43 days (except 50RF at 7 days) both experimentally and statistically (t-test comparing the RAP
44 mixes with the control mix at 95% confidence level). Moreover, as the percentage incorporation
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 7

1 of individual RAP fraction increases, the compressive strength tends to decrease linearly. This
2 reduction in strength is due to the presence of asphalt coating around the aggregates which
3 provided a hindrance in bonding formation between the surface of the aggregate with that of
4 cementitious mortar matrix (11,12,20,22,26). However, contrary to the published studies, the
5 reduction in strength was found to be higher in coarse RAP mixes as compared to fine RAP
6 RCCP mixes. For instance, the reductions w.r.t. the control mix for 50RC & 100RC mixes was
7 observed to be 33% & 59%, respectively, whereas only 26% & 35% strength reduction was
8 found for 50RF & 100RF mixes, respectively, at 28 days of curing. A similar reduction trend
9 was noted at other curing ages. The higher reduction in strength for coarse RAP mixes as
10 compared to fine RAP mixes despite the lower concentration of asphalt coating is possibly due to
11 the higher percentage RAP in RC mixes (50% and 100%). For fine RAP mixes, owing to gap-
12 graded particle size distribution, fine natural was introduced (as discussed in the experimental
13 program) which limited the percentage of fine RAP to 15% and 30% in 50RF and 100RF mixes,
14 respectively. Interestingly, the fresh densities of RC mixes (Table 1) were higher than the fine
15 RAP mixes and yet the compressive strength of RC mixes was lower than that of RF mixes, at all
16 the curing ages. This is contrary to the general perception that higher MDD will always lead to
17 better strength properties. This unnatural behavior may again be attributed to the presence of a
18 lower percentage of asphalt-coated aggregates in RF mixes compared to RC mixes which
19 contributed in the formation of relatively better mortar matrix, and thus, better bonding with the
20 surface of the natural aggregate. The aforementioned statement is further supported by the
21 compressive strength results of these mixes at 28 and 90 days curing wherein it can be clearly
22 seen that the strength development in RC mixes is very lower (<13%) as compared to RF mixes
23 (>20%).
24 The minimum recommended strength of 27.6 MPa (4003.04 psi) at 28 days of curing for
25 construction of RCC pavements (as a surface layer) as specified by ACI (1) was not found be
26 achieved by any of the considered RAP mixes, except 50RF mix. However, the stated mix
27 cannot be confidently suggested for preparation of RCCP mixes since the difference between the
28 achieved and minimum stipulated value is minimal.

29 Flexural Strength
30 As similar to compressive strength results, incorporation of fine RAP was found to have a lesser
31 negative effect on the flexural strength of RCCP mixes followed by coarse RAP and total RAP
32 fractions (Table 1). However, the percentage reduction w.r.t the control mix was noted to be
33 significantly lower (Figure 2). For instances, the percentage flexural strength reduction for
34 100RC, 100RF &100RAP at 28 days was noted be around 31%, 15% & 37%, respectively,
35 whereas the same mixes had 59%, 35% & 67% lower compressive strength w.r.t the control mix
36 at 28 days, respectively. This finding is of utmost importance to the pavement engineers since
37 RCC pavements are designed based upon the 28 days’ flexural strength results rather than
38 compressive strength. It can be seen in Table 1 that except 100RAP mix, all the considered
39 mixes had flexural strength higher than the stipulated field flexural strength of 3.67 MPa (532.28
40 psi) at 28 days of age. Even, except 100RC & 100RAP mixes, all the RAP mixes exhibited
41 higher flexural strength (experimentally as well as statistically) than the target laboratory mean
42 strength of 4.3 MPa (623.66 psi) which clearly depicts the suitability of RAP for pavement
43 applications. Based upon the results, it can be stated that 50% of RAP content, individually as
44 well as combinedly, may be included for the preparation of RCCP mixes.

45 Split Tensile Strength

46 Consistent with the compressive and flexural strength results, inclusions of all the RAP fractions
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 8

1 resulted in lowering the split tensile strength of RCCP mixes at both the curing ages. RF mixes
2 had the lowest reduction in split tensile strength w.r.t the control mix followed by a nearly
3 comparable performance by coarse RAP and total RAP mixes at both the curing ages.
4 It was observed that the RAP specimens could sustain the loading even after the failure
5 of the specimens and this may be attributed to the presence of asphalt coating around the
6 aggregates which may have increased the toughness of the concrete mixes (5,11,22,27,29). The
7 split tensile specimens of 100% RAP mixes did not even split into two halves (Figure 3) as
8 control mix specimens did (Figure 3), clearly suggesting that inclusions of RAP fractions would
9 certainly enhance the load carrying capacity of RCC pavements post-failure. This condition, in
10 turn, could be expected to increase the functional life of the RCC pavements. The afore-stated
11 phenomenon is of greater importance especially in hilly terrains wherein frequent repairs are
12 generally required after every monsoon season and provision of such remedial measures is
13 relatively harder as well as costlier owing to the harsh terrain in such areas. Based on the above
14 findings and the results of mechanical properties, replacement of traditional natural aggregates
15 by RAP fractions (individual or combined) in a proportion of 50% may be suggested for RCC
16 pavements. This combination of aggregates would not only provide with requisite strength
17 properties with increased residual value, but also, with several other economic & environmental
18 benefits such as lesser consumption of natural aggregates, reduced transportation costs (due to
19 on-spot utilization of RAP aggregates), elimination of RAP disposal problems, and reduction in
20 greenhouse gases emission etc. (10,24). However, prior suggesting this optimum proportion of
21 RAP for RCCP pavements, especially to be situated in higher temperature differential zones,
22 shrinkage & warping properties need to be considered and joint spacings be determined
23 accordingly. The usual joint spacing for RCCP pavements is generally kept between 6.1 m (20
24 ft) to 9.1 m (30 ft) and for the RCCP mixes containing 50% RAP (optimum for the present case),
25 the same stipulation may be followed as several authors have reported nearly insignificant effect
26 on the shrinkage behavior of concrete mixes containing RAP (25,45). However, this suggestion
27 needs to be validated via laboratory/field investigation.

28 Cantabro Abrasion Loss

29 When used as a surface slab of the pavements, RCCP mixes are expected to have significant
30 resistance to the wear and tear caused by the high speed & heavily loaded moving vehicles (40).
31 In the case of hilly terrains, frequent skidding and slipping are common phenomenon and thus,
32 the abrasion resistance of the surface slab becomes of utmost importance. The percentage loss in
33 mass of the considered mixes after abrasion testing (28 & 90 days) is being depicted in Figure 4.
34 As expected, the control mix was found to have the lowest percentage abrasion loss, whereas, all
35 the RAP mixes suffered a significant loss in mass after exposed to abrasion condition. It was also
36 observed that with the increase in the RAP inclusion proportions, the abrasion resistance tends to
37 reduce considerably. Both the individual fractions of RAP (RC & RF mixes) were found to
38 exhibit nearly similar abrasion resistance at lower proportions, however, a significant difference
39 in percentage abrasion loss was noted between 100RC and 100RF mixes at both the testing ages.
40 While the percentage reduction in abrasion resistance for 100RF mix was less than 35%, more
41 than 50% reduction in abrasion resistance was observed for 100RC mix w.r.t the reference mix.
42 As far as the abrasion resistance of the combined mixes is concerned, nearly 35% & 60% higher
43 loss in mass was found for 50RAP & 100RAP mixes, respectively, as compared to the control
44 mix at both the curing ages. These results reduce the potential of RAP when RCCP is to be used
45 as a surface/wearing course of pavements. Nevertheless, 50RC and 50RF mixes may be
46 suggested for RCC pavements since these mixes had sufficient resistance to wear and tear as
47 depicted by the results. It was also observed that the trend in abrasion resistance of the
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 9

1 considered mixes is almost similar to the trend observed for considered strength related
2 properties. Strong linear relationships with high values of coefficient of determination were
3 found to exist between the abrasion loss and the compressive/flexural strength of the considered
4 RCCP mixes at different curing days. These relations depict that the potential of RAP for RCCP
5 mixes to be used as a surface layer of the pavements may be increased by increasing the strength
6 related properties. One of the best ways to increase the strength related properties of RAP
7 inclusive mixes is by increasing the quantity of the considered Portland cement (43,44).
8
9 Y = -0.46X + 35.22; R2 = 0.92 (1)
10
11 Y = -0.34X + 30.75; R2 = 0.95 (2)
12
13 Y = -5.54X + 48.57; R2 = 0.89 (3)
14
15 Where; Y is abrasion loss in %, X in the Equation 1 and Equation 2 is the value of compressive
16 strength at 28 and 90 days of curing respectively, whereas, for Equation 3, X is the value of
17 flexural at 28 days of age.

18 Porosity & Water Absorption

19 The effect of incorporation of individual/combined fractions of RAP on the total porosity and
20 water absorption of the considered RCCP mixes at 28 and 90 days of curing age is being
21 illustrated in Figures 5 & 6. Unexpectedly, inclusions of both the fractions of RAP were found to
22 reduce the total porosity and thus the water absorption of the considered RCCP mixes
23 considerably, at both curing ages. For instances, the concentration of total permeable voids in the
24 control mix was 8.5% which is approximately 70% and 27% higher than the voids present in
25 50RC and 50RF mixes, respectively. Similarly,100RC and 100RF mixes exhibited around 30%
26 and 21% lower porosity values than the control mix, whereas, more than 40% reduction in the
27 porosity values was noted for combined fraction mixes (50RAP & 100RAP) w.r.t the referral
28 mix. A similar trend in the water absorption values was noted when natural aggregates were
29 partially/combinedly replaced by the considered RAP fractions. 100RC, 100RF, and 100RAP
30 mixes had about 36%, 20% and 41% lower water absorption values than the control mix. Since
31 the considered mixes were oven dried at lower temperature and for longer durations against the
32 codal provision [to minimize the negative effect of flowing of asphalt at higher temperature
33 (38)], the reduction in the total porosity and water absorption capacity of RCCP mixes
34 containing RAP fractions may be attributed to the hydrophobic and soft textured nature of
35 asphalt-coated aggregates which facilitated with better workability (12,42) and thus better
36 compactness of the mixes was achieved than the control mix containing rough textured natural
37 aggregates. Moreover, the relatively finer gradation of RAP aggregates as compared to the
38 considered conventional aggregates (both coarse and fine) may also be held responsible for
39 lower porosity and thus lower water absorption of the RAP inclusive RCCP mixes. The results of
40 the statistical analysis also confirmed that the considered fractions of RAP had statistically
41 reduced the porosity of the RCCP mixes.

42 Resistance to Aggressive Ions

43 The loss in mass (in percentage) of the specimens after exposure to chloride and sulphate attack
44 is being depicted in Figure 7. As expected, the loss in mass of all the considered RCCP mixes
45 was higher when subjected to sulphate attack. This is due to the fact that sulphate possesses both
46 physical as well as a chemical attack (30). Complete surface deterioration (scaling) was observed
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 10

1 for the specimens kept in sulphate solution whereas specimens placed in chloride solution nearly
2 retained their shape and surface characteristics (Figure 8). The control mix, as expected, had the
3 highest resistance to both the attacks, whereas, RAP mixes suffered a dramatic mass loss when
4 subjected to aggressive ions of sulphate and chlorides. The higher mass loss in RAP mixes may
5 be due to the higher interconnectivity between the pores which allowed easy ingress of sulphate
6 and chloride ions well within the microstructure of specimens and thus subsequent leaching of
7 calcium sulphate and calcium chloride salts from the specimens into the acid solution (12,30).
8 However, lower proportion individual RAP fraction mixes exhibited comparable resistance to
9 both the attacks as that by control mix. For instances, 50RC & 50RF mixes suffered 4.39% &
10 4.18% and 6.93% & 6.77% mass loss in chloride and sulphate solutions, respectively, which are
11 only ~3% higher than that of the control mix’s mass loss (except 50RC which had 9% higher
12 mass loss in chloride solution). This finding clearly suggests that 50% of traditional natural
13 aggregates may be replaced by any fraction of RAP (coarse/fine) for the preparation of RCCP
14 mixes to be used in sulphate/chloride rich surroundings. On the other hand, since both the
15 combined fraction mixes (50RAP & 100RAP) had significant deterioration in both the acid
16 solutions, combined utilization of coarse and fine RAP should not be recommended.
17 It was also observed that the performance of RAP mixes was better in sulphate rich
18 environment than that in chloride solution. For instances, all the considered RAP mixes suffered
19 <20% higher mass loss than the control mix (except 100RAP) in sulphate rich environment,
20 whereas, >20% higher loss was noted w.r.t the control mix (except 50RC & 50RF) when these
21 mixes were subjected to chloride attack. This finding certainly suggests including more fraction
22 of RAP when RCCP mixes are to be placed in sulphate rich environment than chloride rich
23 surroundings. Moreover, the results also encourage to include higher proportions of fine RAP for
24 RCC pavements to be constructed in the vicinity of sulphate-rich environment since 100RF mix
25 only had <10% higher mass loss than the control mix when subjected to sulphate solution.
26 A similar trend in the values of percentage loss in compressive strength was noted for
27 all the considered mixes when subjected to sulphate and chloride attack. Lower proportion
28 individual RAP mixes had <15% lower strength loss w.r.t the control mix, whereas, combined
29 fraction mixes had the highest loss in strength when subjected to sulphate and chloride solutions.
30 Similarly, the loss in strength in sulphate solution was found to be lower than that in chloride
31 solution. However, as compared to the loss in mass, the loss in compressive strength associated
32 with the considered RAP mixes w.r.t the control mix was significantly higher. For instances, the
33 difference between the percentage strength loss and mass loss (w.r.t the control mix) was noted
34 to be 30% & 34%, 7% & 7%, and 34% & 32% for 100RC, 100RF, and 100RAP mixes when
35 subjected to chloride & sulphate attack, respectively. These results further lower the potential
36 and suitability of RAP aggregates for RCC pavements to be constructed in the vicinity of
37 aggressive ions. Nevertheless, 50RC and 50RF mixes may be suggested for these areas since the
38 difference between aforementioned parameters was less than 10% and moreover, the stated
39 mixes exhibited nearly comparable performance to that of control mix in both the solutions of
40 aggressive ions.

41 CONCLUSIONS
42 The present study evaluates the optimum fraction (coarse/ fine/combined) of Reclaimed Asphalt
43 Pavement (RAP) along with its optimum proportion (50%/100%) for Roller Compacted
44 Concrete Pavements (RCCP or RCC pavements) based upon several fresh, mechanical and
45 durability properties. The main inferences that have been drawn from the present study are:
46 • An inconsistent trend was observed in the values of optimum moisture content (OMC) of
47 the considered RCCP mixes when natural aggregates were partially/combinedly replaced
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 11

1 by different fractions of considered RAP. However, the maximum dry density (MDD) of
2 RCCP mixes was found to be in a decreasing trend with the increase in the proportion of
3 RAP aggregates. Coarse RAP mixes exhibited higher MDD values, followed by fine
4 RAP and combined RAP mixes.
5 • Incorporation of any fraction of RAP could reduce the compressive, flexural and split
6 tensile strength of RCCP mixes significantly at all the curing ages. However, fine RAP
7 mixes were found to have better strength properties than the coarse RAP and combined
8 RAP fraction mixes. Additionally, it was found that inclusions of RAP would have a
9 lower negative effect on the flexural strength values than the compressive strength at all
10 the curing days. None of the considered RAP mixes could achieve the recommended
11 compressive strength criterion of 27.6MPa (4003.04 psi) for constructions of RCC
12 pavements at 28 days of curing age, however, all the mixes had higher flexural strength
13 than the stipulated value of 3.6MPa (532.28 psi). Based on the results, partial
14 replacement of conventional natural aggregates in a proportion of 50% by either fraction
15 of RAP (coarse or fine) may be suggested for RCC pavements (for the base course) since
16 these mixes even had higher flexural strength than the recommended target laboratory
17 mean strength of 4.3MPa (623.66 psi).
18 • 50% of natural aggregates can be replaced by either fraction of RAP (coarse or fine) for
19 the RCCP mixes to be used as a surface course layer of pavements since these mixes had
20 sufficient resistance to abrasion caused by the moving vehicles. Different strong linear
21 relations were found to exist between abrasion resistance and compressive/flexural
22 strength values depicting that the stated proportion of RAP may be increased by
23 improving the strength related properties.
24 • RAP mixes owing to their lower porosities than the control mix were found to have lower
25 water absorption capacities. However, when subjected to sulphate and chloride-rich
26 environments, the mixes suffered a drastic loss in mass and compressive strength as
27 compared to the control mix. These results lower the suitability of RAP for RCC
28 pavements to be constructed in aggressive environments of sulphate and chloride-rich
29 ions. Nevertheless, 50% of natural aggregates can be replaced by any fraction of RAP
30 (coarse/fine) for these areas as the associated mass loss and compressive strength loss
31 was relatively lower. Moreover, the results also encourage to include higher proportions
32 of fine RAP for the surroundings rich in sulphate ions than chloride.
33 Acknowledgment
34 The authors want to acknowledge M/s N.B.C.C. Ltd. (Project No. CED-931) for funding the
35 present study.

36 AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION STATEMENT

37 The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study concept: Dr. G.D. Ransinchung
38 R.N., Solomon Debbarma, Surender Singh; Laboratory experimental program: Solomon
39 Debbarma, Surender Singh; analysis and interpretation of results: Solomon Debbarma, Surender
40 Singh, G.D. Ransinchung R.N.; draft manuscript preparation: Solomon Debbarma, Surender
41 Singh, G.D. Ransinchung R.N. All the authors reviewed the results and approved the final
42 version of the manuscript.
43
44
45
46
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 12

1 REFERENCES
2
3 1. American Concrete Institute. Report on Roller-Compacted Concrete Pavements. ACI
4 325-95-01. Farmington Hills, MI.
5 2. Williams, S. Construction of Roller-Compacted Concrete Pavement in the
6 Fayetteville Shale Play Area, Arkansas. Transportation Research Record: Journal
7 of the Transportation Research Board, 2014. 2408: 47-54.
8 3. Kim YS. Roller-compacted concrete shoulder construction on interstate highway
9 in Georgia. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
10 Research Board. 2007. 2040: 71-9.
11 4. Wahhab. H.I.A.A., and I.M. Asi. Optimization of Roller-Compacted Concrete for
12 Local Application. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
13 Transportation Research Board, 1994. 1458.
14 5. Harrington, D., F. Abdo, W. Adaska, C.V. Hazaree, H. Ceylan, and F. Bektas. Guide for
15 roller-compacted concrete pavements. 2010
16 6. Modarres, A., and Z. Hosseini, Z. Mechanical properties of roller compacted concrete
17 containing rice husk ash with original and recycled asphalt pavement material. Materials
18 & Design, 2014. 64: 227-236
19 7. Settari, C., F. Debieb, E. H. Kadri, and O. Boukendakdji. Assessing the effects of
20 recycled asphalt pavement materials on the performance of roller compacted concrete.
21 Construction and Building Materials, 2015. 101: 617-621.
22 8. Ferrebee. E.C., A.S. Brand, A.S. Kachwalla, J.R. Roesler, D.J. Gancarz, and J.E.
23 Pforr. Fracture Properties of Roller-Compacted Concrete with Virgin and
24 Recycled Aggregates. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
25 Transportation Research Board, 2014. 2441(1): 128-134
26 9. Shi, X., A. Mukhopadhyay, and K.W. Mix design formulation and evaluation of
27 portland cement concrete paving mixtures containing reclaimed asphalt pavement.
28 Construction and Building Materials, 2017. 152: 756-768.
29 10. Shi, X., A. Mukhopadhyay, and D. Zollinger. Sustainability assessment for
30 portland cement concrete pavement containing reclaimed asphalt pavement
31 aggregates. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018. 192: 569-581.
32 11. Singh, S., G.D.R.N. Ransinchung, and P. Kumar. Feasibility study of RAP
33 aggregates in cement concrete pavements. Road Materials and Pavement Design,
34 2017. 1-20.
35 12. Singh, S., G.D.R.N. Ransinchung, and P. Kumar. Laboratory Investigation of
36 Concrete Pavements Containing Fine RAP Aggregates.” Journal of Materials in
37 Civil Engineering, 2017. 30(2): 04017279.
38 13. Said, S. E. E. B., S. E. E. Khay, and A. Loulizi. Experimental Investigation of
39 PCC Incorporating RAP. International Journal of Concrete Structures and
40 Materials, 2018. 12(1): 8
41 14. Hong, F., D.H. Chen, and M.M. Mikhail. Long-term performance evaluation of
42 recycled asphalt pavement results from Texas: Pavement studies category 5
43 sections from the long-term pavement performance program. Transportation
44 Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2010. 2180: 58-
45 66.
46 15. Watson, D., A.V. Nordcbeck, J. Moore, D. Jared, and P. Wu. Evaluation of the
47 use of reclaimed asphalt pavement in stone matrix asphalt mixtures.
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 13

1 Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board,

2 2008. 2051: 64-70.
3 16. Taha, R., G. Ali, A. Basma, and O. Al-Turk. Evaluation of reclaimed asphalt
4 pavement aggregate in road bases and subbases. Transportation Research Record:
5 Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1999. 1652: 264-269.
6 17. Jiang Y., X. Gu, Z. Zhou, F. Ni, and Q. Dong. Laboratory Observation and
7 Evaluation of Asphalt Blends of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement Binder with Virgin
8 Binder using SEM/EDS. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
9 Transportation Research Board, 2018: 0361198118782023.
10 18. Ullah S., B.F. Tanyu, and E.J. Hoppe. Optimizing the Gradation of Fine Processed
11 Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement and Aggregate Blends for Unbound Base Courses.
12 Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board,
13 2018: 0361198118758683
14 19. Ghabchi, R., M. Barman, D. Singh, M. Zaman, and M.A. Mubaraki. Comparison
15 of laboratory performance of asphalt mixes containing different proportions of
16 RAS and RAP. Construction and Building Materials, 2016. 124: 343-351.
17 20. Brand, A.S., and J.R. Roesler. Bonding in cementitious materials with asphalt-
18 coated particles: Part I–The interfacial transition zone. Construction and Building
19 Materials, 2017. 130: 171-181.
20 21. Mukhopadhyay, A., and X. Shi, X. Validation of RAP and/or RAS in Hydraulic
21 Cement Concrete: Technical Report (No. FHWA/TX-17/0-6855-1). 2017
22 22. Huang, B., X. Shu, and E.G. Burdette. Mechanical properties of concrete
23 containing recycled asphalt pavements. Magazine of Concrete Research, 2006.
24 58(5): 313-320.
25 23. Delwar, M., M. Fahmy, and R. Taha. Use of reclaimed asphalt pavement as an
26 aggregate in Portland cement concrete. Materials Journal, 1997. 94(3): 251-256.
27 24. Singh, S., G.D.R.N. Ransinchung, S. Debbarma, and P. Kumar. Utilization of
28 reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregates containing waste from Sugarcane Mill for
29 production of concrete mixes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018. 174: 42-52.
30 25. Brand, A.S., and J.R. Roesler. Ternary Concrete with Fractionated Reclaimed
31 Asphalt Pavement. ACI Materials Journal, 2015. 112(1).
32 26. Huang. B., X. Shu, and G. Li. Laboratory investigation of portland cement
33 concrete containing recycled asphalt pavements. Cement and Concrete Research,
34 2005. 35(10): 2008-2013.
35 27. Khay, S.E.E, S.E.E.B. Said, A. Loulizi, and J. Neji. Laboratory investigation of
36 cement-treated reclaimed asphalt pavement material. Journal of Materials in Civil
37 Engineering, 2014. 27(6): 04014192
38 28. Singh, S., Shintre, Dhawal, G.D.R.N. Ransinchung and P. Kumar. Performance of
39 Fine RAP Concrete Containing Flyash, Silica Fume, and Bagasse Ash. Journal of
40 Materials in Civil Engineering, 2018. 30(10): 04018233.
41 29. Fakhri, M., and E. Amoosoltani. The effect of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement and
42 crumb rubber on mechanical properties of Roller Compacted Concrete Pavement.
43 Construction and Building Material, 2017. 137: 470-484.
44 30. Singh, S., G.D.R.N. Ransinchung, and P. Kumar, P. Performance Evaluation of
45 RAP Concrete in Aggressive Environment. Journal of Materials in Civil
46 Engineering, 2018. 30(10): 04018231.
47 31. Bureau of Indian Standards. Methods of test for aggregates for concrete. IS:2386-
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 14

1 Part-I-IV-1963. New Delhi, India.

2 32. American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard Test Methods for Quantitative
3 Extraction of Bitumen from Bituminous Paving Mixtures. ASTM D2172-11, West
4 Conshohocken, PA.
5 33. Indian Roads Congress. Guidelines for Construction of Roller Compacted
6 Concrete Pavements. IRC:SP:68-2005, New Delhi, India.
7 34. American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory
8 Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort (56,000 ft-lbf/ft3 (2,700 kN-
9 m/m3)), ASTM D1557-12. West Conshohocken, PA.
10 35. Bureau of Indian Standards. Methods of test for strength of concrete. IS:516-1959.
11 New Delhi, India.
12 36. Bureau of Indian Standards. Splitting tensile strength of concrete. IS:5816-1999.
13 New Delhi, India.
14 37. American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard Test Method for Density,
15 Absorption, and Voids in Hardened Concrete. ASTM C642-13, West Conshohocken, PA.
16 38. Singh, S., and G.D.R.N. Ransinchung R.N. Durability Properties of Pavement
17 Quality Concrete Containing Fine RAP. Advances in Civil Engineering Materials,
18 2018. 7(1): 271-290
19 39. American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard Test Methods for Chemical
20 Resistance of Mortars, Grouts, and Monolithic Surfacings and Polymer Concretes.
21 ASTM C267-12, West Conshohocken, PA.
22 40. Rao, S. K., P. Sravana, and T.C. Rao. Abrasion resistance and mechanical
23 properties of Roller Compacted Concrete with GGBS. Construction and Building
24 Materials, 2016. 114: 925-933.
25 41. American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard Test Method for
26 Determining Potential Resistance to Degradation of Pervious Concrete by Impact
27 and Abrasion. ASTM C1747-13, West Conshohocken, PA.
28 42. Singh, S., G. D. R. N. Ransinchung, K. Monu, and P. Kumar. Laboratory
29 investigation of RAP aggregates for dry lean concrete mixes. Construction and
30 Building Materials, 2018. 166: 808-816.
31 43. Taha, R., A.A. Harthy, A.S. Khalid, and A.Z. Muamer. Cement Stabilization of
32 Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement Aggregate for Road Bases and Subbases. Journal of
33 Materials in Civil Engineering. 2002. 14(3): 239-245.
34 44. Taha R. Evaluation of Cement Kiln Dust–Stabilized Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement
35 Aggregate Systems in Road Bases. Transportation Research Record: Journal of
36 the Transportation Research Board, 2003. 1819: 11-17
37 45. Hossiney, N., Tia, M, and Bergin, M. J. Concrete containing RAP for use in
38 concrete pavement. International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology.
39 2010. 3(5): 251-258.
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 15

1 LIST OF TABLES

2 TABLE 1 Fresh and hardened properties of the considered RCCP mixes

3
Mix OMC MDD Compressive Strength (MPa) Flexural Strength (MPa) Split Tensile Strength
(%) (kg/m3) (MPa)
7 days 28 days 90 days 7 days 28 days 7 days 28 days
X σ X σ X σ X σ X σ X σ X σ
Control 6.19 2242 21 1.36 38 0.98 42 0.13 3.8 0.12 5.4 0.46 3.2 0.39 3.6 0.31
50RC 6.95 2231 16 1.90 25 1.57 26 1.15 3.7* 0.07 4.6 0.03 1.7 0.31 2.1 0.19
100RC 5.89 2193 14 1.51 15 1.45 17 3.24 3.1 0.15 3.7 0.09 1.6 0.08 1.7 0.23
50RF 6.81 2220 24 0.37 28 5.04 35 3.65 3.5 0.09 4.7 0.07 2.5 0.20 2.6 0.18
100RF 6.06 2185 19 2.46 24 1.23 29 6.04 3.4* 0.49 4.6 0.35 1.9 0.39 2.5 0.19
50RAP 6.43 2156 17 0.27 20 1.00 21 0.04 3.4 0.08 4 0.45 2 0.29 2.2 0.25
100RAP 5.92 2129 11 1.48 12 1.08 12 1.81 3 0.05 3.4 0.13 1.4 0.05 1.6 0.04
4 Note 1: OMC= Optimum Moisture Content; MDD= Maximum Dry Density; 50RC=Mix containing 50% coarse RAP;
5 100RC=100% coarse RAP; 50RF=50% fine RAP; 100RF= 100% fine RAP; 50RAP= 50% coarse & fine RAP; 100RAP = 100%
6 coarse & fine RAP;
7 Note 2: 1kg/m3 = 0.062lb/ft3; 1 MPa = 145.038Psi; X = average; σ = standard deviation; *Numbers in the bold are not having a
8 mean that is statistically different from the control mix with 95% confidence.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 16

1 LIST OF FIGURES
100
Natural Coarse
Natural Fine 90
Coarse RAP 80
Raw Fine RAP

Cumulative passing (%)

Graded Fine RAP 70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.01 0.1 1 10
2 Indian Standard sieve (mm)
3 FIGURE 1 Particle size distribution of natural and RAP aggregates. (Note: 1 mm = 0.039
4 in.)
7 days compressive strength 28 days compressive strength
7 days flexural strength 28 days flexural strength
20
Reduction w.r.t Control Mix (%)

10

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

-80
50RC 100RC 50RF 100RF 50RAP 100RAP
5
6 FIGURE 2 Reduction in strength of considered RAP mixes w.r.t. the control mix
7
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 17

2 FIGURE 3 Split Specimens after failure

45

40
28 days 90 days
Cantabro Abrasion Loss (%)

35 3.22
1.56
30 3.79 4.07 4.12 0.85
2.07
25 1.12 0.21
1.29
1.13 0.89
1.75
20 1.25

15

10

0
Control 50 RC 100 RC 50 RF 100 RF 50 RAP 100 RAP
3
4 FIGURE 4 Cantabro abrasion loss of the considered RCCP mixes (error bars represent
5 standard deviation)
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 18

12.0

Total Permeable voids (%) 10.0

0.11
8.0 0.76 0.45
0.28
6.0 0.23 0.37
0.03
4.0

2.0

0.0
C

P
l

RF

P
F
RC
ro

0R

A
RA
0R
nt

50

0R
50

10
10
Co

50

10
1
2 FIGURE 5 Total permeable voids of the considered RCCP mixes (error bars represent
3 standard deviation)
7.0
6.0
Water Absorption (%)

0.15
5.0
0.10
4.0 0.38 0.22
3.0 0.24 0.12 0.12
2.0
1.0
0.0
l

P
F
RC

P
RF
ro

0R

RA

A
0R
nt

50

0R
50

10
10
Co

50

10

4
5 FIGURE 6 Water Absorption of the considered RCCP mixes (error bars represent
6 standard deviation)

8 FIGURE 7 Loss in mass and strength of RAP mixes after exposure to aggressive
 Debbarma, Singh, Ransinchung R.N. 19

1 environments

3 FIGURE 8 Control and RAP specimens after exposure to chloride (left) and sulphate
4 (right) attack
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 Please cite this article as: “Debbarma, S., Singh, S., & RN, G. R. (2019). Laboratory investigation
12 on the fresh, mechanical, and durability properties of roller compacted concrete pavement
13 containing reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregates. Transportation Research Record, 2673(10),
14 652-662. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119849585”
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25 Original link to the document:
26 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0361198119849585?casa_token=mGSmKRPR
27 HdEAAAAA%3AHrIvNoVSfM_5Hf9HnoizDXoKtDacdo5zUoY5GuVPS_zl231Rjd-
28
2EthNy2qQRhfuT1MsT24BFUN_kQ

View publication stats