.

Abstract:

The suitability of this method depends on the types of specification and number of aggregates
involved the experience of the individual, and the major emphasis of the blending (closeness to
the desired gradation or economics). Aggregate Blending to meet specification methods is a
method to determine the relative proportions of various aggregate to obtain desired gradation
have been developed since the suggestion of the maximum density curves by Fuller and
Thompson.

Introduction:

There are ten properties of aggregates that contribute to the characteristics of pavements:

(1) Size. The maximum size of an aggregate is the smallest sieve size through which 100
percent of the aggregate will pass. The nominal maximum size is the largest sieve that retains
some of the aggregate particle but not more than 10 %. The maximum size becomes important
in relation to the thickness of the layer of the pavement in which the aggregate can be used. Put
differently, the minimum lift thickness of a pavement is governed by the maximum aggregate
size.

(2) Gradation. The size gradation of aggregate is generally governed by specifications. These
specifications give ranges for the total percent by weight of material passing a set of sieve sizes.

Aggregate that are used in asphalt concert have to have a certain gradation to achieve the
desired interlocking of the different sizes knowing that gradation limits is usually used to
achieve maximum density and desired void property.

Normally, aggregates from two or more sources must be blended to meet the specification
limits. Often a coarse aggregate is blended with a fine aggregate to achieve the desired results.

Objective:

The goal of blending aggregate is:

o To select the most suitable gradation of aggregate to use in our mix by select the best
aggregate blend and then use it to determine relative properties of various aggregate to
obtain a desired gradation. (Set the percentages of each aggregate used such that the
final blend has a gradation that lies within the specification limit).
Procedure:

o You must be prepare three samples of different gradation of aggregate called A, B, C

(coarse, medium, and fine) where A and B have the weight equal 1 kg and the sample C
has weight equal 0.5 kg and by the shaking machine you will put the sample a on the
sieves and starting sieving.
o When two minutes past you must turn the machine off and weight the amount of
aggregate that is returned on every sieve. Then you will find the % returned and the %
passing.
o By the data you get, you will use them to determine the % of each sample to be mixed
together to find the optimum gradation of aggregate that needed to use by shooting
method (trail and error).

Data & Analysis:

A B C
Coarse Agg. Medium Agg. Fine Agg.
sieve size Wt. of empty ( 1000 g) ( 1000 g) ( 500 g)
( inch ) sieves (g) Wt. Wt. Wt.
Sieve + Agg. Sieve + Agg. Sieve + Agg.
(g) (g ) (g)
1 1363 1363 1363
1363
3/4 1394 1394 1394
1545
1/2 1351 1376 1351
1762
3/8 1354 1442 1354
1544
#4 1274 1439 1274
1480
#8 1230 1640 1231
1272
# 16 1129 1304 1221
1129
# 50 981 1014 1139
981
# 100 943 948 964
943
# 200 915 989 964
915
Pan 866 891 1045
866
Summations 12800 13800 13300
13800

Table (1) : Sieve Analysis Results

sieve Sieve
# size (Sieve size) ^ 0.45 Wt. of Wt. of Wt. % Cum. Cum.
(in) ( mm ) empty sieve Sieve + Agg. Retained Retained % %
(g) (g) (g) Retained Passing
1" 25.4 4.2872141 1363 1363 0 0 0 100
3/4'' 19.05 3.76662809 1394 1545 151 15.1 15.1 84.9
1/2'' 12.7 3.13842442 1351 1762 411 41.1 56.2 43.8
3/8'' 9.525 2.75733316 1354 1544 190 19 75.2 24.8
#4 4.75 2.01610025 1274 1480 206 20.6 95.8 4.2
#8 2.36 1.47166988 1230 1272 42 4.2 100 0
# 16 0.85 0.92947672 1129 1129 0 0 100 0
# 50 0.3 0.58170737 981 981 0 0 100 0
# 100 0.18 0.46224543 943 943 0 0 100 0
#200 0.075 0.31172926 915 915 0 0 100 0
Pan 0 0 866 866 0 0 100 0
Sum 12800 13800 1000 100

Table 2.Coarse Aggregate Analysis (Sample A)

sieve Sieve
# size (Sieve size) ^ 0.45 Wt. of Wt. of Wt. % Cum. Cum.
(in) ( mm ) empty sieve Sieve + Agg. Retained Retained % %
(g) (g) (g) Retained Passing
1" 25.4 4.2872141 1363 1363 0 0 0 100
3/4'' 19.05 3.76662809 1394 1394
0 0 0 100
1/2'' 12.7 3.13842442 1351 1376 25 2.5 2.5 97.5
3/8'' 9.525 2.75733316 1354 1442
88 8.8 11.3 88.7
#4 4.75 2.01610025 1274 1439 165 16.5 27.8 72.2
#8 2.36 1.47166988 1230 1640
410 41 68.8 31.2
# 16 0.85 0.92947672 1129 1304
175 17.5 86.3 13.7
# 50 0.3 0.58170737 981 1014
33 3.3 89.6 10.4
# 100 0.18 0.46224543 943 948
5 0.5 90.1 9.9
#200 0.075 0.31172926 915 989
74 7.4 97.5 2.5
Pan 0 0 866 891
25 2.5 100 0
Sum 12800 13800 1000 100

Table 3.Medium Aggregate Analysis (Sample B)

sieve Sieve
# size (Sieve size) ^ 0.45 Wt. of Wt. of Wt. % Cum. Cum.
(in) ( mm ) empty sieve Sieve + Agg. Retained Retained % %
(g) (g) (g) Retained Passing
1" 25.4 4.2872141 1363 1363 0 0 0 100
3/4'' 19.05 3.76662809 1394 1394
0 0 0 100
1/2'' 12.7 3.13842442 1351 1351 0 0 0 100
3/8'' 9.525 2.75733316 1354 1354
0 0 0 100
#4 4.75 2.01610025 1274 1274 0 0 0 100
#8 2.36 1.47166988 1230 1231
1 0.2 0.2 99.8
# 16 0.85 0.92947672 1129 1221
92 18.4 18.6 81.4
# 50 0.3 0.58170737 981 1139
158 31.6 50.2 49.8
# 100 0.18 0.46224543 943 964
21 4.2 54.4 45.6
#200 0.075 0.31172926 915 964
49 9.8 64.2 35.8
Pan 0 0 866 1045
179 35.8 100 0
Sum 12800 13300
500 100

Table ( 4 ) : Fine Aggregate Analysis (Sample C)

110

100

90
Comulative % Passing

80
A
70
B
60
C
50
Upper Limit
40
Lower Limit
30

20

10

0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 3.75 4 4.25 4.5 4.75

Sieve Size ( ^ 0.45)

Figure (1): The Gradation for Sample A, B, C, and Specifications Limit

 sieve # Sieve size
% Passing
(inch) ( mm ) (Sieve size) ^ 0.45 A B C Specifications Median

1" 25.4 4.287214101 100 100 100 100.00 100

3/4''
19.05
3.766628091
84.9
100 100 90 - 100 95
1/2'' 12.7 3.13842442 43.8 97.5 100 71 – 90 81
3/8'' 9.525 2.757333155 24.8 88.7 100 56 – 80 68
#4 4.75 2.016100254 4.2 72.2 100 35 – 56 46
#8 2.36 1.47166988 0 31.2 99.8 23 – 38 31
# 16 0.85 0.92947672 0 13.7 81.4 13 – 27 20
# 50 0.3 0.581707368 0 10.4 49.8 5 – 17 11
# 100 0.18 0.462245431 0 9.9 45.6 4 – 14 9
# 200 0.075 0.31172926 0 2.5 35.8 2-8 5

Table (5): Blinding of Three Aggregate A, B, and C.

Percent Sieve Size

Aggregate used 1'' 3/4'' 1/2'' 3/8'' #4 #8 # 16 # 50 # 100 # 200
A Original 100 84.9 43.8 24.8 4.2 0 0 0 0 0
B Original 100 100 97.5 88.7 72.2 31.2 13.7 10.4 9.9 2.5
C Original 100 100 100 100 100 99.8 81.4 49.8 45.6 35.8
Specification   100 90-100 71-90 56-80 35-56 23-38 13-27 5-17 4-14 2-8
Median   100.0 95.0 81.0 68.0 46.0 31.0 20.0 11.0 9.0 5.0
                       
A 33 33.00 28.02 14.45 8.18 1.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
B 63 63.00 63.00 61.43 55.88 45.49 19.66 8.63 6.55 6.24 1.58
C 4 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.99 3.26 1.99 1.82 1.43
Blend   100.00 95.02 79.88 68.07 50.87 23.65 11.89 8.54 8.06 3.01
Remark   OK OK OK OK OK OK not OK OK OK OK
                       
A 32 32.00 27.17 14.02 7.94 1.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
B 62 62.00 62.00 60.45 54.99 44.76 19.34 8.49 6.45 6.14 1.55
C 6 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 5.99 4.88 2.99 2.74 2.15
Blend   100.00 95.17 80.47 68.93 52.11 25.33 13.38 9.44 8.87 3.70
Remark   OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK

Table (6): Blending Calculations Sheet

Sample of Calculation:
- Proportion Calculations:
Let take sieves ( 3/4 ) & ( 3/8 ) as a critical sieves;
a ( 84.9 ) + b ( 100 ) + c ( 100 ) = 95
a ( 24.8 ) + b ( 88.7 ) + c ( 100 ) = 68
a+b+c=1

 And by solving the previous three equations we get :

a = 0.33 b = 0.63 c = 0.04
 120

Comulative % Passing
100

80 Upper Limit
Lower Limit
60
Blend
40 Median

20

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
(Sieve size) ^ 0.45

Figure (2): Specification Limits, Median and Blend

Discussion & Conclusion:

o As we can see that the trial and error of our work make the range of our data has a big
limit, so the results I g have got for sure maybe different but not so much from the other
students because I we saw we depend for trial and error and for the engineering sense to
get the result we have.
o From the figure ( 1 & 2 ) In the blending aggregate if two curves cross each other then
the gradation curves for all possible combination pass through that point.
o In normal procedure … coarse & fine aggregates in the vicinity of the project site are
sampled & examined … if suitable can be used … economical alternative … if not …
suitable aggregate souse should be found.
o To get the gradation we want, we must separate the aggregate to the three part (fine,
coarse, medium) by sieve analysis and evaluate the % retained and passing and get the
critical sieves to calculate the proportions needed.
A (a) + B (b) + C (c) = percent of materials passing a given sieve for the A,B,C.
a+b+c=1
o We must be know the important thing we need from the aggregates, Aggregate is the
major component used in road making, it is used in granular bases and sub bases,
bituminous coarse and in cement concrete pavements, a study of the type of the
aggregates, there properties and tests is of great importance to a highway engineer.
o For sure we can say that the suitability of the blending method depends on the types of
specification and number of aggregate involved, the experiment of the individual, and the
major emphasis of the blending.
o Mixes are classified based on aggregate gradation of the mix ( like a uniform, open, gap,
and coarse and fine graded ). Aggregates that are used in asphalt mixes have to have
certain gradation and because that aggregate blending must be done.
o From this lab we see that the pavement mixtures are design and produced with a wide
range of aggregate types & sizes.