Advanced Characterization of Asphalt and Concrete Materials

GSP 255 ASCE 2014

Impact of the Compaction Method Applied on Selected Characteristics of Cold

Recycled Asphalt Mixes
Zuzana Formanova1, Jan Suda2, Jakub edina3, Jan Valentin4
1

Ph.D. candidate, CTU in Prague, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Department of Road Structures,
Thakurova 7, Prague, 166 29, Czech Republic. E-mail: zuzana.formanova@fsv.cvut.cz
2
Ph.D. candidate, CTU in Prague, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Department of Road Structures,
Thakurova 7, Prague, 166 29, Czech Republic. E-mail: jan.suda@fsv.cvut.cz
3
Ph.D. candidate, CTU in Prague, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Department of Road Structures,
Thakurova 7, Prague, 166 29, Czech Republic. E-mail: jakub.sedina@fsv.cvut.cz
4
deputy head, CTU in Prague, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Department of Road Structures, Thakurova
7, Prague, 166 29, Czech Republic. E-mail: jan.valentin@fsv.cvut.cz

ABSTRACT: The quality of cold recycled asphalt mixes in most European countries
is currently characterized primarily by indirect tensile strength or stiffness assessed
after the defined curing period. These characteristics are usually supplemented by
residual values of both parameters after immersion in water. This way of assessing
quality empirically is very simple, fast and well-established. On the other hand, it also
has some unnoticed weaknesses. A major disadvantage is probably the strong
dependency on various factors like e.g. the method of test specimen compaction.
Technical specifications in different European countries prescribe the preparation of
test specimens by using different equipment which is based on static, dynamic or slow
rotational compaction (gyratory compactor). The laboratory compaction method
applied naturally affects bulk density and voids content, thus directly influencing the
values of indirect strength or stiffness modulus as well.
The paper focuses on the assessment of cylindrical test specimen preparation and its
impact on quality determination for cold recycled asphalt mixes. The specimens were
prepared by a static pressure compacting machine, Marshall hammer and gyratory
compactor. Two mixes were used, one of them containing bituminous emulsion and
the other one with bituminous foam, while the cement content was identical.
INTRODUCTION
While the cold recycling technology has been gradually introduced into particular
countries of the European Union (EU) the mixture quality requirements have been
specified in each country separately. The majority of European standards currently
include requirements for the minimum indirect tensile strength (ITS) value acceptable,
or even the stiffness modulus value. However, the devices used for the test specimen
compaction the specimen production process itself and the parameters required as well

24

Advanced Characterization of Asphalt and Concrete Materials

GSP 255 ASCE 2014

as the methods of specimen curing vary considerably. With respect to the scope of this
paper, i.e. the different attitudes to the specimen compaction, it should be borne in
mind that not only do the differences depend on the device used; they also relate to the
level of loading, number of revolutions, number of blows applied etc. Nonetheless, the
method of specimen compaction has a crucial influence on the bulk density of the
mixes examined and also affects the final ITS and stiffness. Therefore, the current
situation is quite unsatisfactory because there is no possibility to compare the values
obtained from particular countries using different compaction methods.
As a result of the situation described above, a number of international projects are
presently being launched such as e.g. the European COREPASOL project. It aims to
contribute to the comparison of current common methodologies as well as the
subsequent finding of the optimal methodology for the cold recycling technology
design and testing. This optimal methodology would be then uniformly established in
the entire EU. This paper analyzes variations among the quality values currently
collected with respect to the compaction methods applied.
METHODS OF COLD RECYCLED ASPHALT SPECIMEN COMPACTION
The specimens produced within the scope of this paper were compacted by means of
the most common compacting equipment used all over the world the static pressure
compactor, the Marshall hammer and the gyratory compactor. The static pressure
compaction is a relatively quick and simple method used in Germany, Czech Republic
(CZ), Norway, Portugal, France (Duriez) and other European countries. The
specimens produced for this paper were compacted according to the Czech
methodology, which requires the specimens to be compacted by the static pressure of
5.0 MPa. The compaction must repetitively compensate the axial force until the state
when the power is stabilized for 30 seconds at the value of 88.5 0.5 kN is reached.
The other method of specimen manufacturing applied was the Marshall hammer,
which compacts specimens by repeated loading with dynamic blows, usually with
identical quantities of blows applied gradually from both sides. This method is used
for example in the USA, Australia and Poland; however, it is being abandoned. The
specimens produced within the scope of this paper were compacted by 75 blows of the
Marshall hammer on each side, according to the requirement stipulated in Czech
standard CSN EN 12697-30 for specimens of 150 1 mm diameter.
Most of the specimens were prepared using a gyratory compactor which is
commonly used in many countries such as France, Great Britain, Ireland, Norway,
USA etc. The principle of test specimen preparation by a gyratory compactor is the
combination of moderate static compression of the sample from the top and
simultaneous movement of the mold. The mold moves in such a manner that its axis
creates a conical rotating surface. The upper part of the mold is deflected by the top
angle in the device while the bottom part should be kept perpendicular to the axis of
the conical surface. The particular device used for specimen compaction in our
laboratory was the Troxler Superpave Gyratory Compactor, Model 4140. The
specimen compaction was performed according to CSN EN 12697-31. The inclination

25

Advanced Characterization of Asphalt and Concrete Materials

GSP 255 ASCE 2014

26

angle of the mold was set to 1.25 with a speed of 30 revolutions per minute. The
specimens were compacted by the vertical pressure of 600 kPa and 900 kPa, both
loads in combination with 40, 60 and 80 revolutions respectively.
The preferred method of specimen compaction according to present technical
specifications valid in CZ is compaction by static pressure by means of a suitable
hydraulic press. In the past, specimens could also be prepared by the Marshall
hammer; however, this method has not been permitted in CZ since a few years ago.
The introduction of the optimal specimen compaction method which would best
simulate the compaction process during realistic site conditions in the Czech technical
specification was preceded by extensive testing. Nevertheless, it might be beneficial to
supplement bulk density values of laboratory specimens with bulk densities of cores
extracted from construction sites, thus validating the argument. This has however not
been carried out within the experimental work discussed herein. Such comparison is
planned as the next step within the key task of ongoing research.
EXPERIMENTAL TESTING AND DISCUSSION
Two cold recycled mixes were designed for the comparison of the compaction
method influence. The mix composition is given in Table 1. Mix A contains cationic
slow-breaking bituminous emulsion C60B7 which is commonly used in CZ. Mix B is
based on foamed bitumen produced by Wirtgen WLB10S. Essentially, the process of
foamed bitumen production injects water into the hot bitumen (70/100) at 170C
which results in the foaming effect. Dosages of foamed bitumen are immediately put
in the two-spindle mixing device with controlled mixing speed (Wirtgen WLM 30).
Foamed bitumen is characterized by the expansion ratio ER (ml/g) and the half-life
of foam settlement (seconds). Both parameters are strongly dependent on the kind
and origin of the bituminous binder, the amount of the compressed air added and the
pressure of the water injected into the hot bitumen. The intensity and efficiency of the
foaming effect can be influenced by basic physical conditions such as temperature,
moisture and pressure. The optimal amount of the foaming water was set s 3.8% of
bituminous foam in order to achieve maximal expansion ratio (value obtained: 18) and
maximum half life (value obtained: 12 seconds).
Table 1. Mix designs used
Reclaimed asphalt mix
Water
Bituminous emulsion
Foamed bitumen
Cement

Mix A
91.0 %
2.5 %
3.5 %
--3.0 %

Mix B
88.5 %
4.0 %
--4.5 %
3.0 %

In total, there were 108 cylindrical specimens compacted from each mix; 9 were
compacted by the static pressure compactor, another 9 were compacted by the
Marshall hammer and 90 specimens were manufactured using the gyratory compactor.
The diameter of the specimens was 1501 mm with a height of 605 mm. To obtain

Advanced Characterization of Asphalt and Concrete Materials

GSP 255 ASCE 2014

27

the degree of compaction, the bulk density was calculated for each sample from the
dimensions and weight thereof. The main focus of experimental testing was based on
systematic measurements of the ITS and stiffness modulus. Both values were
measured on specimens cured for 7 and 14 days, exposed to air with temperature
202C, as well as specimens cured for 7 days, exposed to air and then immersed in
water for 7 days.
Bulk density
Road construction in the Czech Republic and other countries frequently uses bulk
density of test specimens as a comparative parameter. However, this characteristic
greatly depends on homogeneity of the materials used; in the case of mixes containing
reclaimed material this might be of crucial importance. If different bulk densities are
achieved by mixes of identical composition it is not obvious whether this was caused
by different composition of the reclaimed material or whether the different test
specimen preparation methods result in different ways of grain arrangement/wedging
in the specimen, thus causing different void content values. The majority of tests
discussed herein were performed twice while the first and second test sets were almost
two months apart and different batches of reclaimed material was used to prepare the
specimens. The bulk density of specimens prepared in the first and second sets
differed by less than 2 % which meets the stringent requirements like asphalt wearing
course compaction limits. Thanks to that, reclaimed material may be considered
sufficiently homogeneous; the different bulk densities of specimens of identical
composition are likely to be caused by the different compaction methods.
2,20

Bulk density

2,15
2,10

Mix A (emulsion)

2,05

Mix B (foamed bitumen)

2,00
1,95
/40 00/60 00/80 00/40 0/60 0/80
600
6
6
9
90
90
G
G
G
G
G
G

MH

SC

FIG. 1. Bulk density

As demonstrated by Figure 1 the bulk density value of the specimens produced by

the gyratory compactor grows with increasing pressure and number of revolutions.
Bulk density values of the specimens compacted by the static compactor and Marshall
hammer are situated in the centre of the range achieved. The figure confirms that
similar bulk densities of test specimens can be reached by identical mix designs
prepared by different compaction methods. This applies to mixes bound by bituminous
emulsion as well as foamed bitumen.

Advanced Characterization of Asphalt and Concrete Materials

GSP 255 ASCE 2014

Indirect tensile strength (ITS)

The indirect tensile strength values obtained vary considerably. Considering the fact
that the specimens were prepared with identical mixes (the same mix design), these
variations caused by the compaction methods applied are relatively outstanding. This
expected characteristic was the key motivation for the extensive comparison testing.
Clearly, the highest ITS values are always reached for static pressure compaction. In
some cases, the values are over 100 % higher than ITS values for specimens of similar
bulk density prepared by different compaction methods. Therefore, we can firmly
declare one compaction method may not be easily replaced by another. The following
diagrams show the results of the ITS measurement while each column represents the
average value for at least three specimens.

FIG. 2. Indirect tensile strength (mix A)

FIG. 3. Indirect tensile strength (mix B)

Stiffness modulus
Although the Czech technical specifications do not require stiffness modulus
validation for cold recycled mixes, it represents an important characteristic with good
potential for the future. It stems particularly from the predicative level of the
characteristic with respect to the description of the mix behavior. At the same time,
stiffness represents an important parameter for pavement structural design. Therefore.
it was decided to evaluate the stiffness modulus at 15C by the repeated indirect

28

Advanced Characterization of Asphalt and Concrete Materials

GSP 255 ASCE 2014

tensile stress (IT-CY) method for all test specimens. The values obtained are
summarized in figures 3 and 4.
It is interesting to consider that, compared to the indirect tensile strength values the
differences between the stiffness modulus values are not so extreme amongst
specimens with similar bulk densities. Some compaction methods even result in
similar build densities and stiffness moduli at the same time (e.g. specimens
compacted by static pressure and specimens compacted using a gyratory compactor
with 60 revolutions and static load of 900 kPa). This applies to both mixes; especially
if observing the mixes bound by bituminous emulsion (mix A).

FIG. 4. Stiffness modulus (mix A)

FIG. 5. Stiffness modulus (mix B)

Water susceptibility
According to the valid Czech regulations, water susceptibility is determined as an
indicator of ITS decrease in 7 days of curing exposed to air and a subsequent 7-day
curing in water in proportion to the ITS of specimens cured solely on air for 7 days.
ITS values of specimens of different ages are compared. As is shown by the right
section of Figure 6, there are relatively huge differences between the water
susceptibility values; some compaction methods (as opposed to others) result in water
susceptibility over 100 % For the sake of comparison, the diagram also indicates the
water susceptibility values as determined as a proportion of same-age specimen ITS
values, i.e. as the proportion of ITS of specimens cured in air for 7 days and

29

Advanced Characterization of Asphalt and Concrete Materials

GSP 255 ASCE 2014

subsequently in water for 7 days, to the ITS of specimens cured in air for 14 days in
our opinion, this is a more relevant comparison. These values do not show such great
differences; water susceptibility usually amounts to 70-80 % for both mixes. A
possible change of the Czech technical regulations is likely to be beneficial with
respect to laboratory results; however, the impact on the practical issues must be borne
in mind as well. The ITS values would be taken in 14 days instead of 7 which
contradicts the effort to restrict road traffic as little as possible.

FIG. 6. Water susceptibility

CONCLUSIONS
There are currently several international R&D projects complete or in progress in
Europe with a focus on the analysis and specification of the differences in approach
adopted by various European countries towards the evaluation of quality of asphalt
cold recycled mixes or similar mixes containing different types of recyclable
materials. The analyses mainly look at the criteria for materials used, methods for
preparing test specimens applied and sets of empirical and performance-based
characteristics adopted. In the case of cold recycling techniques, the optimal
methodology that could be implemented Europe-wide is envisaged.
The approaches to test specimen preparation for cold recycled mixes differ
significantly on the basis of the requirements of particular national technical
specifications. Nevertheless, the method of specimen compaction has a crucial impact
on bulk density and other characteristics presently assessed (indirect tensile strength,
stiffness). The effort to record all differences caused by the compaction method
applied has resulted in a comparative study whose results are summarized in this
paper. The study confirmed that the introduction of a unified methodology as opposed
to the present state marked by incomparability of values obtained in different countries
by different methods used for specimen compaction would be hugely beneficial.
The incomparability of results was clearly demonstrated by the variations between
the ITS values of the specimens, which were prepared from the same mix but the
applied compaction device or the loading was different. Even if the specimens showed
similar bulk density values, the difference between the ITS values reached in some
cases up to 100 %. (e.g. static pressure at 5 MPa vs. gyratory compactor with 600 kPa
vertical pressure and 60 revolutions for mix A). In the case of stiffness, the variations
are markedly lower; some compaction methods even show comparable bulk density
and stiffness modulus (e.g. specimens for mix A prepared by static pressure at 5 MPa
and by gyratory compactor with 900 kPa vertical pressure and 60 revolutions).
In the near future, this research is expected to be expanded to comparing the values

30

Advanced Characterization of Asphalt and Concrete Materials

GSP 255 ASCE 2014

on laboratory-prepared specimens and cores extracted from real construction sites in

selected EU countries. Another, similarly important, task for further experimental
activity is the assessment of different methodologies and conditions used by particular
European countries in the field of test specimens curing.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper has been supported by the research project COREPASOL carried out as
part of the CEDR Transnational Road research Programme Call 2012. The funding for
the research was provided by the national road administrations of Belgium (Flanders),
Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and UK. This
paper has been further supported by the CTU student research project
SGS13/125/OHK1/2T/11.
REFERENCES
Ballie, M., Morlot, Y. (2008). Cold recycling of surface dressings with bitumen
emulsion for low traffic road surfacing, 4th Eurasphalt and Eurobitume congress,
Copenhagen, Denmark
Bur, F. (2007). Master Thesis - Gyratory Compactor - Using for Cold Recycling
Mixes, Czech Technical University in Prague
SN EN 12697-30 Bituminous Mixtures - Test methods for hot mix asphalt Part 30:
Preparation of test specimens by impact compactor, October 2012
SN EN 12697-10 Bituminous Mixtures - Test methods for hot mix asphalt Part 10:
Compactability
Czech Ministry of Transportation (2009). TP 208 Cold recycling of structural layers of
flexible pavements, Technical Requirements, Praha (in Czech)
Eckmann, B., Soliman, S. (2008). Performance assessment of Cold Recycling in
Place. International Symposium on Asphalt Emulsion Technology 2008, 12
Harman T., Bukowski J., Moutier F., Huber G.(2001). The History and Future
Challenges of Gyratory Compaction 1939 2001.
Hosin, D.L., Yongjoo, T.K., Byunghee, T.H. (2009). Laboratory performance
evaluation of CIR-emulsion and its comparison against CIR-foam test results from
phase II. Research report, University of Iowa,
Iwaski, M., Chomicz-Kowalska, A., (2013). Laboratory Study on Mechanical
Parameters of Foamed Bitumen Mixtures in the Cold Recycling Technology,
Procedia Engineering, Volume 57, pp. 433-442, ISSN 1877-7058
Stephen, A., Cross, P.E., Jakatimath, Y. (2007). Evaluation of Cold In-Place
Recycling for Rehabilitation of Transverse Cracking on US 412. Research report,
Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma
Forde, M. (2009). ICE manual of construction materials. Volume I, London, Thomas
Telford Limited, ISBN 978-0-7277-3642-0
Masad, E., Muhunthan, B., Shashidhar, N., Harman, T. (1999). Quantifying
laboratory compaction effects on the internal structure of asphalt concrete,
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board,
National Research Council, Washington DC, United States, Vol. 1681: p. 179-185,
ISSN 0361-1981

31