Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1 Penetration 60-70
before the heavy
65
weight 60-79 0,1 mm
After losing weight 64 min 50 % first
2 point flame 290 200 C
3 Point burning 310 C
4 point of Mushy 52 48-58 C
5 Weight type 1,036 Min 1 -
Table Result of Aggregate Characteristics
Aggregate
Specific
No Unit
ations
Testing Rough Smooth
1 Tear 35,72 Max 40 %
2 Heavy type %
BJ.Bulk 3,158 2,649 Min 2,5 -
BJ.SSD 3,204 2,649 Min 2,5 -
Bj. -
Apparent 3,311 2,875 Min 2,5
Absorption
3 of 1,470 2,575 Max 3,0 %
4 Pug Index 86,53 %
levels of
5 Mud 0.997 Max 5 %
Table Marshall test results For Test Standard Filler 1%.
asphalt
Conten Stabilit Marshall
VMA VIM
No t y Flow Quotient
Test Objects (%) (Kg) (mm) (kg/mm)
23.2
725.99
I 5% 2,272.3 3.13 31.49 7
25.0
905.92
II 5.5%. 2,808.3 3.10 33.46 4
21.4
3,199.9 1322.29
III 6% 2.42 31.28 6
17.7
3,250.7 991.07
IV 6.5%. 3.28 28.80 1
17.5
3,361.0 877.57
V 7% 3.83 29.90 6
Specification Min Min
of 800 Min3 Min 250 17 3-6.
Table Results of Standard Tests To Test Marshall Filler 2%.
Marshall
No asphalt Content Stability Flow Quontient VMA VIM
639.36
I 5% 1,962.82 3.07 33.68 26.93
617.12
I 5.5%. 2,925.60 3.19 33.77 25.93
1052.78
III 6% 3,179.42 3.02 30.33 20.92
1030.39
IV 6.5%. 3,297.26 3.20 30.00 19.36
1004.41
V 7% 3,314.54 3.30 26.52 14.11
asphalt Stabili
No Content ty Flow Marshall Quotient
Test VMA VIM
Objects (%) (Kg) (mm)
(kg/mm)
1,962.
715.46
I 5% 82 3.07 33.68 26.93
2,696.
II 5.5%. 69 3.18 848.02 27.73 18.11
2,933.
III 6% 76 3.08 952.52 27.61 16.81
3,000.
IV 6.5%. 49 3.19 940.59 23.53 10.89
3,093.
V 7% 04 3.24 954.46 23.11 9.14
Spesificat Min Min
ion 800 Min3 Min 250 17 3-6.
Graphs the relationship level asphalt vs. stability filler 1%
stability
level asphalt
Graph relationships vs. stability levels asphalt filler 2%
stability
level asphalt
the relationship Graph of asphalt content of filler stability vs. 3%
stability
level asphalt
Graphs the relationship of asphalt content of 1% vs. flow filler
flow
level asphalt
Graphs the relationship of asphalt content of 2% vs. flow filler
flow
level asphalt
Graphs the relationship of asphalt content of 3% vs. flow filler
flow
level asphalt
For the composition of the aggregate of the
same, seen from the results of testing using the
optimum asphalt content, value added tax rise at
the Marshall Quotient asphalt levels. This is
because the material of the subdistricts of Tubo
have pores which varies
relationship Graph of asphalt content vs. air cavity filler 1%
VIm
level asphalt
relationship Graph of asphalt content vs. air cavity filler 2%
VIm
level asphalt
relationship Graph of asphalt content vs. air cavity filler 3%
VIm
level asphalt
relationship
relationship Graph of asphalt
Graph asphalt content
aggregate vs. vs.
levels air grain
cavityfiller
filler
1%3%
aIm
VmV
level asphalt
relationship Graph asphalt aggregate levels vs. grain filler 2%
vma
level asphalt
relationship Graph asphalt aggregate levels vs. grain filler 3%
Vma
level asphalt
Optimum asphalt content
Optimum asphalt
No Sawdust ash content
Test Objects (%) (%)
I 1 6,63
II 2. 6,00
III 3 6,00
CONCLUSIONS
From the results of research can be inferred that
the filler ash sawdust can be used in a mixture of
HRS-Base with asphalt content of optimun 6%.
REFERENCES