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

net/publication/267718070

MECHANICAL PERFORMANCE OF ASPHALT MIXTURES INCORPORATING

SLAG AND GLASS SECONDARY AGGREGATES

Article

CITATIONS READS

33 1,017

3 authors, including:

Gordon D. Airey Nick Thom

University of Nottingham University of Nottingham
247 PUBLICATIONS   5,038 CITATIONS    161 PUBLICATIONS   2,425 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Not attached to a specific project View project

SUSTAINABLE RAILWAYS: Maximising recycling by minimising the impact on people and planet View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gordon D. Airey on 25 November 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 MECHANICAL PERFORMANCE OF ASPHALT MIXTURES
INCORPORATING SLAG AND GLASS SECONDARY
AGGREGATES

G.D. Airey, A.C. Collop and N.H. Thom

Nottingham Centre for Pavement Engineering.
University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

ABSTRACT

The use of glass cullet as a secondary aggregate only marginally reduces the stiffness modulus
of an asphalt mixture. The increased moisture susceptibility of the material is also less than
what would be expected for a smooth surface-textured aggregate such as glass, with and
without the use of an anti-stripping agent. The ageing susceptibility of the mixture is significantly
reduced, while the permanent deformation resistance, although inferior to that of a primary
aggregate mixture, is still acceptable with the fatigue performance being comparable to the
control mixture. The use of basic oxygen steel and blast furnace slag secondary aggregates
significantly increases the mixture density and stiffness modulus compared to primary
aggregate mixtures. The moisture susceptibility of these secondary aggregate mixtures is
similar to that of the control mixtures, although there is an increased susceptibility to age
hardening. Overall the permanent deformation resistance and fatigue performance of the slag
mixtures tended to be similar to that of the control mixtures.

Keywords: Steel slag, blast furnace slag, glass cullet, asphalt mixture, stiffness, permanent
deformation, fatigue, NAT

1. INTRODUCTION

With a greater understanding of the need for sustainable development, the use of fresh
(primary) aggregate in the asphalt mixture layers of a road or airfield pavement is seen as a
wasteful use of a finite natural resource. Therefore the reuse of primary aggregates and/or the
use of waste (secondary) materials are seen as being of benefit to society. Of the various waste
streams, the by-products of the iron and steel making industries (blast furnace and steel slags)
and recycled crushed glass (cullet) can be considered sensible alternative sources of aggregate
for asphalt mixture production. These secondary aggregates have similar physical properties to
conventional, primary aggregate and can be processed, crushed and screened into practical
sizes for easy batching into both surfacing and base asphalt materials.

This paper assesses the mechanical performance and durability of a range of both base and
surfacing bituminous materials incorporating different combinations, size fractions and
percentages of two primary aggregates (limestone and gritstone) and three secondary
aggregates in the form of basic oxygen steel slag (BOS), blast furnace slag (BFS) and recycled
glass cullet. The mechanical properties of the asphalt mixtures have been measured using the
suite of tests (stiffness modulus, resistance to permanent deformation and resistance to fatigue
cracking) possible with the Nottingham Asphalt Tester (NAT). The durability of the primary and
secondary mixtures has been assessed by subjecting the materials to simulative long-term
laboratory ageing and moisture susceptibility conditioning using recognised testing
(conditioning) procedures and protocols.

Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Asphalt Pavements for Southern Africa (CAPSA'04) 12 – 16 September 2004
ISBN Number: 1-920-01718-6 Sun City, South Africa
Proceedings produced by: Document Transformation Technologies cc
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

2. MATERIAL BACKGROUND

2.1 Crushed Glass Cullet

Approximately 2 million tonnes of container glass, such as bottles and jars, are consumed
annually in the UK of which 70% is coloured glass (mostly green). Of this total only 22% (mostly
clear and brown glass) is recycled (DETR, 2001). Although crushed waste glass has the
potential to be used as a fill or drainage material, there is little or no evidence that it is being
used for this purpose (Blewitt and Woodward, 2000). The major use of crushed glass in road
construction would therefore seem to be as an aggregate in asphalt mixtures.

The use of glass cullet as an aggregate in asphalt mixtures was developed in USA in the 1960’s
(Malisch et al, 1970). However, the use of this secondary aggregate has not grown significantly
due to cost, availability and performance considerations (Collins and Ciesielski, 1994). In terms
of it mechanical performance, asphalt mixtures containing glass aggregate as a replacement for
primary aggregate have tended to perform slightly worse than conventional materials,
depending on the replacement ratio of glass to aggregate (West et al, 1993). As glass
aggregate does not absorb bitumen, stripping of glass modified asphalt mixtures is a potential
concern, with problems being reported by Malisch et al (1970) and West et al (1993). In
addition, ravelling of glass particles can be a serious safety concern with Maupin (1998)
recommending that glass should not be used in surfacing materials. However, asphalt mixtures
with 30% crushed glass have been successfully used in field trials in the UK as base layers
without any detrimental effect on the properties of the mixture (Nicholls and Lay, 2002).

2.2 Metallurgical Slags

Metallurgical slags consist of the non-metallic secondary products of the refining of metals from
metallic ores. Slags derived from the iron and steel industries are by far the most common types
produced and can be used as aggregates in road construction.

Blast furnace slag (BF slag) is an industrial by-product produced during the manufacture of iron
by chemical reduction in a blast furnace. Approximately 4 million tonnes of BF slag is produced
annually in the UK and used either as construction aggregates or as a cementitious binder in
the form of ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS). The BF slag is formed in a continuous
process by the fusion of limestone (and/or dolomite) and other fluxes with the ash from the
carbon source (coke) and the non-metallic components of the iron ore. The slag floats on the
surface of the molten iron and is subsequently drawn off and allowed to cool to produce a
semi-dense porous crystalline material (light weight aggregate) known as air cooled blast
furnace slag.

In terms of its physical properties, BF slag is made up primarily of silicates and alumino-silicates
of calcium and magnesium together with other compounds of sulphur, iron, manganese and
other trace elements (Dunster, 2002). It is as consistent in its physical properties as would be
expected for a natural aggregate and when crushed and screened produces an aggregate with
a rough surface texture and relatively high porosity resulting in good adhesive characteristics
with bituminous binders. BF slag is therefore recognised as having excellent resistance to
binder stripping in asphalt mixtures as caused by the combined actions of water and traffic.
However, due to its vesicular surface and high water absorption ratio, larger amounts of
bituminous binder may be required to produce an asphalt mixture containing BF slag (Emery,
1982).

Basic oxygen steel slag (BOS) is an industrial by-product of the steel making process with
approximately 1 million tonnes being produced annually in the UK. BOS slag is produced in a
batch process when iron is converted to steel. The slag is produced by blowing oxygen into
molten iron mixed with additional fluxes and recycled steel scrap. The process refines the iron
by fusion with a flux, such as limestone or dolomite, under oxidising conditions. Impurities from
the iron, such as carbon and silicon, are either oxidised to gases or chemically combined with
the slag. Steel slag is also produced in much lower quantities as electric arc furnace (EAF) steel
Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

slag during the production of more specialist steels in an electric induction furnace. Both types
of slag are processed into construction aggregates in a manner similar to that used for BF slag
involving the removal of the liquid slag that floats on the surface of the molten refined steel and
its subsequent cooling.

BOS slag consists primarily of calcium silicates together with oxides and compounds of iron,
manganese, alumina and other trace elements. It is relatively non-porous and produces a
high-density aggregate with high crushing strength. BOS slag is denser and stronger than BF
slag and delivers a high resistance to abrasion and polishing under traffic when used in asphalt
surface layers (Lee, 1968; Dunster, 2002; Lee, 1975). However, steel slag does have the
potential to undergo volumetric expansion in the presence of water due to a reaction of the
oxides of calcium and magnesium (lime and magnesia) in the steel slag with water (Emery,
1982; Garvin, 1999). Expansion problems in service can be avoided by subjecting BOS slag to
a long period of natural weathering in exposed stockpiles for at least a year before it is used as
a secondary aggregate (Rockliff et al, 2002).

The most significant difference between BOS slag and most natural aggregates is its high
particle density, which is a consequence of the presence of iron compounds in the slag. Asphalt
mixtures produced using steel slag aggregates will display higher density values and generally
greater stability and stiffness values compared to conventional, primary aggregate material
(Noureldin and McDaniel, 1990). Current practice recommends the use of blast furnace slag fine
aggregate together with steel slag coarse aggregate to compensate for the high particle density
of steel slag.

Steel slag aggregates have been used successfully in asphalt surfacing mixtures as well as
base layers in Europe, Australia, Canada and the USA (Emery, 1982; Lee, 1975; Ryell et al,
1979; Kandhal and Hoffmann, 1997). Steel slag modified asphalt mixtures have tended to
perform extremely well with no adverse durability problems. In addition, the surfacing materials
have shown improved skid resistance compared to conventional aggregate material. Concerns
over potential expansion of steel slag aggregates have generally not materialised as the
bitumen film coating the aggregate particles limits water ingress and therefore expansion.

3. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME

3.1 Materials

Two asphalt mixture types (gradations) were selected to investigate the performance of glass
cullet and slag (BOS and BFS) secondary aggregates in modified bituminous mixtures:

1. mm size dense base asphalt mixture (DBM) as specified in BS 4987-1:2001, Table 3, using
a 50 penetration grade bitumen;
2. mm stone mastic asphalt (SMA) wearing course asphalt mixture as specified in prEN
131018-5:2000, using a 50 penetration grade bitumen and cellulose fibres.

The two asphalt mixtures were selected to represent a typical UK base and wearing course
(surfacing) material. Table 1 shows the detailed sieve size gradations of the DBM and SMA
mixtures.

The following primary and secondary aggregates, in various combinations, were used to
produce the above asphalt mixtures:

• Gritstone aggregate (Bayston Hill) with a SG of 2.76;

• Limestone aggregate (Ballidon) with a SG of 2.7;

• Limestone filler (Ballidon) with a SG of 2.7;

• Steel slag (Llanwern) with a SG range of 3.0 to 3.27;

Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

• Blast furnace slag (Port Talbot) with a SG range of 2.36 to 2.47;

• Glass cullet with a SG of 2.5.

As the specific gravity of the aggregates differed considerably, the DBM and SMA mixtures were
designed volumetrically rather than gravimetrically to ensure that the mechanical properties of
the primary and secondary aggregate asphalt mixtures were a function of aggregate type rather
than changes in the volumetric proportions of the mixture.

Table 1. Aggregate grading of 28 mm DBM and 14 mm SMA.

Sieve Size (mm) 28 mm DBM Specification 14 mm SMA Specification
Specification Limits – Percentage Passing (%)
37.5 100
28 90 – 100
20 71 – 95 100
14 58 – 82 90 – 100
10 52 – 72 60 – 75
6.3 44 – 60 40 – 50
3.35 32 – 46 23 – 33
2.36 28 – 42 19 – 30
1.18 21 – 35 16 – 26
0.6 14 – 28 14 – 22
0.3 7 – 21 12 – 19
0.15 4 – 15 10 – 16
0.075 2-9 7 - 12

The six primary and secondary aggregates and fillers, together with the two asphalt mixture
gradations and one binder type, were used to produce the following six asphalt mixture
combinations (two control and four secondary aggregate mixtures) as described in Table 2.
Approximately 30 cylindrical specimens (100 mm diameter by 60 mm height) were produced for
each of the six asphalt mixtures with two sets of 10 specimens being subjected to simulative
laboratory asphalt mixture ageing and moisture susceptibility conditioning after their densities
were determined and prior to mechanical property testing. The long-term oven ageing
procedure consisted of force-draft oven ageing of compacted asphalt mixture specimens at
85°C for 120 hours (AASHTO PP2). The moisture conditioning procedure consisted of
subjecting compacted asphalt mixture specimens to saturation under a partial vacuum of
510 mm Hg at 20°C for 30 minutes, followed by saturation at atmospheric pressure at 60°C for
6 hours, and saturation at atmospheric pressure at 5°C for 16 hours (Scholz, 1995). The
samples are finally conditioned under water at 20°C (atmospheric pressure) for 2 hours prior to
non-destructive stiffness testing. The moisture susceptibility of the asphalt mixture is then
expressed as the ratio of conditioned to unconditioned stiffness modulus values.

As the asphalt mixtures were designed with a constant binder content by mass, the differences
in specific gravity of the primary and secondary aggregates meant that the volumetric binder
contents differed slightly. The higher SG of the BOS slag (compared to the two primary
aggregates) resulted in higher volumetric binder contents for asphalt mixtures incorporating
steel slag aggregate while the mixtures containing glass cullet, with its lower SG, had lower
volumetric binder contents. The differences between the slag and glass mixtures were
minimised by using low SG blast furnace slag fine aggregate with the high SG steel slag to
reduce the combined bulk specific gravity of mixed aggregate. In addition, the asphalt mixture
performance will be determined by the effective volumetric binder content and not simply by the
design volumetric binder content. The effective binder content takes into account the amount of
binder that is absorbed by the aggregate and therefore not available in the bulk mixture. The
effective volumetric binder contents (Vbeff) for the six asphalt mixtures are included in Table 2.

Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

Table 2. Primary and secondary aggregate DBM and SMA asphalt mixtures.

Mixture Coarse Fine Added Mb (%) Vbeff (%) Target Vv

Aggregate Aggregate Filler (%)

DBM 57% limestone 41% limestone 2% limestone 4.0 9.30 4.0

Con
DBM 45% limestone 50% glass 5% limestone 4.0 9.18 4.0
Glass
DBM 45% limestone 50% glass 5% limestone 4.0 9.18 4.0
Glass1
DBM 54% BOS 43% BFS 3% limestone 4.0 8.62 4.0
Slag
SMA 74% gritstone 19% gritstone 7% limestone 6.0 14.44 3.0
Con
SMA 71% BOS 21% BFS 8% limestone 6.0 14.26 3.0
Slag
1
0.3% anti-stripping agent

The mechanical properties of the primary and secondary aggregate asphalt mixtures were
measured using the NAT, developed in the mid 1980’s at the University of Nottingham (Cooper
and Brown, 1989).

The stiffness modulus of the primary and secondary mixtures was measured using the Indirect
Tensile Stiffness Modulus (ITSM) test according to British Standard DD213 (BSI, 1993):

• Test temperature: 20°C;

• Loading rise-time: 124 milliseconds;

• Peak transient horizontal deformation: 5 µm; and

• Assumed Poisson’s ratio: 0.35.

The permanent deformation resistance of the different asphalt mixtures was determined by
means of the Confined Repeated Load Axial Test (CRLAT) using a direct uniaxial compression
configuration according to British Standards DD185 (BSI, 1994):

• Test temperature: 40°C,

• Test duration: 7200 seconds (3600 cycles) with a load pattern 1 second loading on (load
application period) followed by one second off (rest period),

• Axial stress: 100 kPa,

• Confining pressure: 50 kPa, and

• Conditioning stress: 10 kPa for 600 seconds.

The fatigue resistance of the asphalt mixtures was determined by means of the Indirect Tensile
Fatigue Test (ITFT) with an experimental arrangement similar to that used for the ITSM but
under repeated loading and with slight modifications to the testing modulus crosshead.

Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

The ITFT tests were performed using the following test parameters:

• Test temperature: 20°C,

• Loading condition: Controlled-stress,

• Loading rise-time: 124 milliseconds, and

• Failure indication: 9 mm vertical deformation.

4. GLASS CULLET MIXTURES

4.1 Stiffness Modulus

Stiffness modulus measurements, using the ITSM test, were undertaken on the control and
glass DBM asphalt mixtures and presented, together with the volumetric properties of these
mixtures, in Table 3. The mean values as well as their coefficient of variation (CoV) have been
quoted for each asphalt mixture based on ten test specimen results. Compared to the control
limestone asphalt mixture (DBM Con), the replacement of limestone fines with glass cullet has
only had a marginal effect on mixture stiffness although the average air void contents of the two
glass cullet modified mixtures are lower than the DBM control mixture by 1.12% for the glass
mixture and 0.67% for the glass mixture plus additive. The stiffness values for these two
modified mixtures would therefore be expected to be lower than those presented in Table 3 if
the three materials were all compared at the same void content.

The effect of moisture conditioning (one to four cycles) on the stiffness modulus results of the
DBM asphalt mixtures can be seen in Table 4 in terms of the actual stiffness results (void
contents given in Table 3) and as a ratio of conditioned to unconditioned (initial) stiffness. All
three asphalt mixtures show an increase in stiffness modulus after the first moisture conditioning
cycle due to the dominance of the ageing element of the conditioning process compared to the
moisture damage component. The limestone control mixture shows by far the best resistance to
water damage after all four cycles with a 12% increase in stiffness after the final cycle compared
to the unconditioned stiffness. As expected, the replacement of primary aggregate with glass
cullet (DBM glass with and without anti-stripping agent) leads to an increase in moisture
susceptibility compared to the control mixture, although the use of an anti-stripping agent does
improve the mixture performance. Although the moisture susceptibility performance of the glass
secondary aggregate mixtures was inferior to that of the control mixture, the retained stiffness
results were still all above 80% even after four conditioning cycles.

Table 3. Volumetric and stiffness modulus results for glass cullet mixtures.

Mixture Density (kg/m3) Air Voids (%) Stiffness (MPa)

Average CoV Average CoV Average CoV
DBM Con 2376 0.6% 4.32 13% 4587 10%
DBM Glass 2347 0.5% 3.20 16% 4706 10%
1
DBM Glass 2337 0.6% 3.65 17% 4259 8%
1
0.3% anti-stripping agent

The control (DBM Con) and limestone + glass (DBM Glass) mixtures were subjected to
long-term laboratory ageing and their stiffness values before and after ageing are presented in
Figure 1. Both asphalt mixtures demonstrated an increase in stiffness modulus after ageing with
the ratio of aged to unaged stiffness being lower for the limestone + glass mixture (1.21). The
addition of glass cullet to the limestone mixture significantly reduced the ageing susceptibility
(by approximately 50%) relative to the control mixture. This is probably due to the low binder
absorbing properties of the glass aggregate which will reduce any potential for the lighter, more
volatile components of the bitumen to migrate into the aggregate during laboratory ageing.
Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

10000
Unaged
Ratio = 1.45 Aged Ratio = 1.21
8000
Stiffness Modulus (MPa)

6642 6219

5161
6000
4574

4000

2000

0
DBM Con MB = 4.0% Vv = 4.71% DBM Glass MB = 4.0% Vv = 3.03%

Figure 1. Stiffness modulus results for unaged and aged DBM control and glass asphalt mixtures.

Table 4. Stiffness modulus ratios after moisture conditioning for glass cullet mixtures.

Mixture Stiffness (MPa) – CoV / Stiffness Ratio – CoV

Initial Cycle #1 Cycle #2 Cycle #3 Cycle #4
DBM Con 4517 (12%) 5355 (13%) 5256 (11%) 5151 (10%) 5057 (14%)
1.19 (3%) 1.16 (4%) 1.14 (6%) 1.12 (4%)
DBM Glass 4425 (9%) 4785 (7%) 4575 (9%) 4377 (10%) 4283 (12%)
1.08 (6%) 1.03 (6%) 0.99 (7%) 0.97 (8%)
DBM Glass1 4278 (7%) 4697 (7%) 4490 (5) 4534 (6%) 4423 (8%)
1.10 (5%) 1.05 (6%) 1.06 (4%) 1.03 (6%)
1
0.3% anti-stripping agent

4.2 Permanent Deformation Performance

The permanent deformation results for the control and glass DBM asphalt mixtures are
presented in the form of cumulative permanent strain versus load cycles in Figure 2 and in Table
5 as measures of total strain (%) after 3600 cycles and average strain rate (microstrain/cycle)
between 1800 and 3600 cycles based on the average of five test results. The permanent
deformation properties have been determined on unaged as well as moisture conditioned (four
cycles) specimens.

The glass cullet mixtures showed a lower resistance to permanent deformation compared to the
limestone control mixture, although their total strains were still all below 2% (a commonly used
acceptance criteria). In addition, the performance of the secondary aggregate mixtures after
moisture conditioning was similar to that seen before conditioning with the limestone + glass
mixture even showing an improvement in rutting resistance after moisture conditioning.

Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

DBM Con DBM Glass DBM Glass + additive

1.5
Axial Strain (%)

0.5

0
0 900 1800 2700 3600
Number of Load Cycles
Figure 2. Accumulated permanent strain results for glass cullet asphalt mixtures.

Table 5. Permanent deformation parameters for glass cullet asphalt mixtures.

Mixture Unconditioned Moisture Conditioned

Total strain (%) Strain rate Total strain (%) Strain rate
(µε/cycle) (µε/cycle)
DBM Con 0.63 0.37 0.48 0.17
DBM Glass 1.51 1.01 1.00 0.53
DBM Glass1 1.42 0.78 1.38 0.87
1
0.3% anti-stripping agent

The greater rutting susceptibility of the limestone + glass mixtures can be attributed to the
smooth surface texture of the glass aggregate resulting in less aggregate interlock and surface
friction. It is also worth noting that the use of an anti-stripping agent has not improved the
long-term moisture conditioned rutting resistance of the asphalt mixture.

4.3 Fatigue Performance

Fatigue life versus initial tensile strain relationships have been determined for the control and
glass DBM asphalt mixtures in their unaged, aged and moisture conditioned states. Although
unique fatigue relationships have been determined for each of the mixtures, the fatigue
behaviour for the control and glass modified materials are all very similar. For this reason a
single, unique fatigue life versus strain relationship has been determined from the ITFT data
generated for the six combinations of mixture type and conditioning state.

The combined fatigue relationship is shown in Figure 3 together with the fatigue equation and
R2 value of 0.8692. The fatigue results show that based on one binder type, approximately the
same effective volumetric binder content, similar air void content and identical volumetric DBM
gradation, fatigue performance is relatively independent of aggregate source and type (primary
and secondary).

Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

1000

y = 1158.6x-0.2154
R2 = 0.8692
Strain (microstrain)

100

DBM Con - Uncon DBM Con - Aged DBM Con - Moist

DBM Glass - Uncon DBM Glass - Aged DBM Glass - Moist
10
100 1000 10000 100000
Number of Cycles
Figure 3. Fatigue functions for unconditioned, moisture conditioned and aged
glass cullet asphalt mixture.

5. SLAG MIXTURES

5.1 Stiffness Modulus

The volumetric properties together with stiffness modulus results for the control and slag DBM
and SMA mixtures are presented in Table 6. As would be expected the slag mixtures have
higher bulk densities compared to the control limestone DBM and gritstone SMA mixtures but
with the average air voids all being reasonably close to their respective targets of 4.0% and
3.0%. The effect of using steel and blast furnace slag aggregate has resulted in a substantial
(over 20%) increase in stiffness compared to the control mixtures. Part of this increase in
stiffness is inevitably associated with the lower effective volumetric binder content of the slag
mixtures (8.62% compared to 9.30% for the DBM mixtures and 14.26% compared to 14.44% for
the SMA mixtures as presented in Table 2), although the chemical and physical surface
properties of the BOS and BF slags will also have a significant effect on mixture stiffness.

Table 6. Volumetric and stiffness modulus results for slag mixtures.

Mixture Density (kg/m3) Air Voids (%) Stiffness (MPa)

Average CoV Average CoV Average CoV
DBM Con 2376 0.6% 4.32 13% 4587 10%
DBM Slag 2596 0.9% 4.41 20% 5617 10%
SMA Con 2420 0.4% 2.44 16% 3413 6%
SMA Slag 2637 0.7% 2.84 22% 4358 7%

The effect of moisture conditioning on the stiffness modulus results of the control and slag
asphalt mixtures can be seen in Table 7 in terms of the actual stiffness results and as a ratio of
conditioned to unconditioned (initial) stiffness. All four asphalt mixtures show an initial increase
in stiffness modulus after moisture conditioning followed by a gradual decrease in retained
stiffness with increasing conditioning cycles.

Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

Table 7. Stiffness modulus ratios after moisture conditioning for slag mixtures.
Mixture Stiffness (MPa) – CoV / Stiffness Ratio – CoV
Initial Cycle #1 Cycle #2 Cycle #3 Cycle #4
DBM Con 4517 (12%) 5355 (13%) 5256 (11%) 5151 (10%) 5057 (14%)
1.19 (3%) 1.16 (4%) 1.14 (6%) 1.12 (4%)
DBM Slag 5581 (10%) 6156 (7%) 5708 (8%) 5233 (8%) 4979 (8%)
1.10 (3%) 1.02 (3%) 0.94 (4%) 0.89 (4%)
SMA Con 3520 (5%) 3897 (10%) 3577 (12%) 3397 (18%) 3198 (21%)
1.11 (11%) 1.02 (11%) 0.96 (18%) 0.91 (20%)
SMA Slag 4279 (9%) 4635 (12%) 4592 (13%) 4460 (15%) 4500 (15%)
1.08 (5%) 1.07 (6%) 1.04 (9%) 1.05 (9%)

In terms of the four mixtures, the best performance (highest retained stiffness after 4 cycles)
belonged to the limestone control mixture, although the two slag mixtures with limestone filler
(DBM Slag & SMA Slag) both performed extremely well with the retained stiffness values of the
SMA slag mixture being greater than the control SMA gritstone mixture, which had a retained
stiffness of 91% after four conditioning cycles only marginally higher than the 89% of the DBM
slag mixture.

The laboratory aged stiffness properties of the control and slag mixtures are presented in Figure
4. All four asphalt mixtures demonstrated an increase in stiffness modulus after ageing with the
ratio of aged to unaged stiffness being highest for the DBM slag (1.94) and SMA slag (1.68)
mixtures. The increased hardening (oxidation) of the slag mixtures compared to the controls
was verified by recovering the binder from the two DBM mixtures and measuring their complex
modulus at 20°C and 1.2 Hz using a dynamic shear rheometer (DSR). The ratio of complex
modulus for the steel slag + BFS mixture’s recovered binder (3.745 MPa) versus the limestone
mixture’s recovered binder (2.890 MPa) was then compared to the ratio of slag DBM hardening
(1.94) versus limestone DBM hardening (1.45). The two ratios were almost identical, being 1.30
for the ratio of recovered binder complex moduli and 1.34 for the ratio of relative mixture
hardening. This compared favourably with the ratio of 1.68/1.29 (30%) found for the two SMA
mixtures. The precise cause of the increased ageing of the slag mixtures is unclear, although it
is probably linked to the chemical composition of the slag aggregate, which may act as a
catalyst for excessive oxidative hardening of the bitumen.

14000
Ratio = 1.94
Unaged
12000 Aged
10551
Stiffness Modulus (MPa)

Ratio = 1.68
10000
Ratio = 1.45
Ratio = 1.29 7095
8000
6642
5430 4269
6000
4574 4223
3452
4000

2000

0
DBM Con MB = DBM Slag MB = SMA Con MB = SMA Slag MB =
4.0% Vv = 4.71% 4.0% Vv = 5.10% 6.0% Vv = 2.58% 6.0% Vv = 2.59%

Figure 4. Stiffness modulus results for unaged and aged control and slag asphalt mixtures.
Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

5.2 Permanent Deformation Performance

The permanent deformation results for the control and slag DBM and SMA asphalt mixtures are
presented in the form of total strain (%) after 3600 cycles and average strain rate
(microstrain/cycle) between 1800 and 3600 cycles in Table 8. In terms of relative permanent
deformation performance, the slag mixture (DBM Slag) showed the lowest total strain as well as
strain rate compared to both the limestone control mixture (DBM Con) and gritstone control
mixture (SMA Con). In addition, the performance of all the secondary aggregate mixtures after
moisture conditioning was similar to that seen before conditioning

Table 8. Permanent deformation parameters for slag asphalt mixtures.

Mixture Unconditioned Moisture Conditioned
Total strain (%) Strain rate Total strain (%) Strain rate
(µε/cycle) (µε/cycle)
DBM Con 0.63 0.37 0.48 0.17
DBM Slag 0.45 0.34 0.46 0.23
SMA Con 0.83 0.32 1.09 0.45

The superior rutting resistance of the steel slag + BFS mixtures can be attributed to the rough
and vesicular surface texture of the BOS and BF slags, resulting in greater aggregate interlock
and overall permanent deformation performance.

5.3 Fatigue Performance

As with the DBM control and glass mixtures, the SMA gritstone control and steel slag mixtures
have been subjected to fatigue testing using the ITFT in their unaged, aged and moisture
conditioned states. All six asphalt mixture and conditioning combinations have produced similar
fatigue functions (similar experimentally determined coefficients) and therefore a single
combined fatigue function has been produced for both mixture types in Figure 5 with a R2 value
of 0.8946.
1000
Strain (microstrain)

-0.2422
100 y = 2055.5x
2
R = 0.8946

SMA Con - Uncon SMA Con - Aged SMA Con - Moist

SMA Slag - Uncon SMA Slag - Aged SMA Slag - Moist
10
100 1000 10000 100000
Number of Cycles
Figure 5. Fatigue functions for unconditioned, moisture conditioned and
aged slag asphalt mixture.

The results indicate that the fatigue performance of both the primary aggregate as well as the
secondary aggregate asphalt mixtures are similar, although the actual fatigue data points for the
slag mixture (SMA Slag) tend to lie marginally below the general fatigue function.
Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

6. CONCLUSIONS

Two secondary aggregate combinations have been assessed in this laboratory study. These
combinations have consisted of coarse primary aggregate + fine glass cullet with and without an
anti-stripping agent and steel slag coarse aggregate + blast furnace slag fine aggregate with
limestone filler. The performance of these secondary aggregate mixtures has been compared to
that of conventional, primary aggregate mixtures using both a base material (28 mm DBM) and
a surfacing material (14 mm SMA). All the mixtures have been designed to have similar
volumetric proportions within each mixture type and the mechanical properties of stiffness
modulus, resistance to permanent deformation and resistance to fatigue cracking have been
determined in the material’s unaged, aged and moisture conditioned states.

The use of glass cullet fine aggregate has been limited to the base material due to concerns
over road safety associated with the possible ravelling of glass particles in surfacing materials.
The overall effect of replacing primary aggregate with glass cullet is a slight reduction in asphalt
mixture stiffness relative to the control limestone mixture. Although the moisture susceptibility of
the glass aggregate mixtures was greater than the control mixture, probably due to the smooth
surface texture of the glass, the retained stiffness values after long-term moisture conditioning
were still considered acceptable. In addition, the use of an anti-stripping agent did improve the
material’s resistance to moisture damage. In terms of the materials’ ageing resistance, the
addition of glass cullet significantly reduced the ageing susceptibility of these modified mixtures.

The permanent deformation performance of the glass cullet mixtures was found to be inferior to
that of the control mixture. The greater rutting susceptibility of the glass aggregate mixtures can
be attributed to the smooth surface texture of the glass aggregate resulting in less aggregate
interlock and surface friction which has not been improved by the addition of an anti-stripping
agent. However, the rutting performance could still be considered to be satisfactory as the final
permanent strains were still below an acceptable limit. Finally the fatigue performance of the
limestone + glass aggregate mixture was found to be comparable to that of the control mixture.

The BOS and BF slag combination has been used to produce both the base material as well as
the surfacing material. Overall the use of BOS and BF slag has increased the density as well as
the stiffness modulus of both the base and surfacing materials relative to primary aggregate
mixtures. The increase in stiffness is partly due to the slightly lower effective volumetric binder
content of the slag mixtures and partly due to the chemical and physical surface properties of
the slag aggregate. With regard to the moisture susceptibility of the slag mixtures, the
performance in terms of retained stiffness modulus is comparable to that of the DBM and SMA
control mixtures. However, the slag mixtures do show an increased susceptibility to age
hardening when subjected to long-term laboratory ageing with a 30% larger increase in stiffness
modulus after ageing compared to the control mixtures.

The permanent deformation performance of the DBM slag showed a high degree of resistance
to permanent deformation compared to the control. As with the glass cullet mixtures, the fatigue
performance of the slag mixtures was found to be comparable to that of the control mixtures.

7. REFERENCES

Blewitt, J. and Woodward, P.K., 2000. Some Geotechnical Properties of Waste Glass.
Ground Engineering.
British Standards Institution, 1993. Method for Determination of the Indirect Tensile
Stiffness Modulus of Bituminous Mixtures. DD 213, BSI, London.
British Standards Institution, 1994. Method for Assessment of Resistance to Permanent
Deformation of Bitumen Aggregate Mixtures Subject to Unconfined Uniaxial Loading. DD
185, BSI, London.

Paper 056
 8th CONFERENCE ON ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

Collins, R.J. and Ciesielski, S.K., 1994. Recycling and Use of Waste Materials and By-
products in Highway Construction. NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 199,
Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Cooper, K.E. and Brown, S.F., 1989. Developments of a Simple Apparatus for the
Measurement of the Mechanical Properties of Asphalt Mixes. Proceedings of the
Eurobitume Symposium, Madrid, 494-498.
DETR, 2001. Waste Strategy – Report of the Market Development Group. Department of
Environment, Transport and the Regions.
Dunster, A.M., 2002. The Use of Blastfurnace Slag and Steel Slag as Aggregates.
Proceedings of the Fourth European Symposium on Performance of Bituminous and Hydraulic
Materials in Pavements, 257-260, Nottingham.
Emery, J.J., 1982. Slag Utilization in Pavement Construction. Extending Aggregate
Resources, ASTM STP 774, American Society for Testing and Materials, 95-118.
Garvin, S., 1999. Risks of Contaminated Land to Buildings, Building Materials and
Services. A Literature Review. R&D Technical Report 331, Environment Agency, London.
Goodrich, J.L., 1988. Asphalt and Polymer Modified Asphalt Properties Related to the
Performance of Asphaltic Concrete Mixes. Proceedings of the Association of Asphalt Paving
Technologists, Vol. 57, 116-175.
Kandhal, P.S. and Hoffmann, G., 1997. Evaluation of Steel Slag Fine Aggregate in Hot-Mix
Asphalt Mixtures. Transportation Research Record 1583, Transportation Research Board,
Washington, D.C., 28-36.
Lee, A.R., 1968. Slag for Roads – Its Production, Properties and Uses. Journal of Institution
of Highway Engineers, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2-14.
Lee, A.R., 1975. Blast Furnace and Steel Slag: Production, Properties and Uses. Halsted
Press, New York.
Malisch, W.R., Day, D.E. and Wixson, B.G., 1970. Use of Domestic Waste Glass as
Aggregate in Bituminous Concrete. Highways Research Record 307, Highways Research
Board, Washington, D.C.
Maupin, G.W., 1998. Effect of Glass Concentration on Stripping of Glasphalt, Final Report.
VTRC 98-R30, Virginia Transportation Research Council, Virginia.
Nicholls, J.C. and Lay, J., 2002. Crushed Glass in Macadam for Binder Course and
Roadbase Layers. Proceedings of the Fourth European Symposium on Performance of
Bituminous and Hydraulic Materials in Pavements, 197-212, Nottingham.
Noureldin, A.S. and McDaniel, R.S., 1990. Performance Evaluation of Steel Furnace Slag –
Natural Sand Asphalt Surface Mixtures. Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving
Technologists, Vol. 68, 276-303.
Rockliff, D., Moffett, A. and Thomas, N., 2002. Recent Developments in the Use of Steel
(BOS) Slag Aggregate in Asphalt Mixtures in the UK. Proceedings of the Fourth European
Symposium on Performance of Bituminous and Hydraulic Materials in Pavements, 251-255,
Nottingham.
Ryell, J., Corkhill, J.T. and Musgrove, G.R., 1979. Skid Resistance of Bituminous Pavement
Test Sections: Toronto By-Pass Project. Transportation Research Record 712,
Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 51-61.
Scholz, T.V., 1995. Durability of Bituminous Paving Mixtures.” PhD Thesis, School of Civil
Engineering, University of Nottingham.
West, R.C., Page, G.C. and Murphy, K.H., 1993. Evaluation of Crushed Glass in Asphalt
Paving Mixtures. Use of Waste Materials in Hot-Mix Asphalt, ASTM STP 1193, Ed. K.L.
Bergeson, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia.

Paper 056

View publication stats