MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

1.0 INTRODUCTION The main purpose of the design process is to determine the optimum bitumen content (OBC) of each asphaltic mixture. Before any asphalt mixes can be placed and laid on the road, the aggregate and the binder types are generally screened for quality and requirement. Approximately 15 samples are required Optimum Asphalt Content (OAC). The aggregates blend that will be used for mixtures preparation must fall within the specification requirements. Properties such as density and bulk specific gravity of aggregate and bitumen used for each mixture must be determined earlier before carrying out Marshall Test. By using the Asphalt Institute Method, the Optimum Asphalt Content are determined from the individual plots of bulk density, voids in total mix and stability versus percent asphalt content. The average of the 3 OAC values is taken for further sample preparation and analysis.

2.0 THEORY The mix design determines the optimum bitumen content. There are many methods available for mix design which varies in the size of the test specimen, compaction and other test specifications. Marshall Method of mix design is the most popular one. The Marshall Stability and flow test provides the performance prediction measure for the Marshall Mix design method. Load is applied to the specimen till failure, and the maximum load is designated as stability. During the loading, an attached dial gauge measures the specimens plastic flow (deformation) due to the loading. The amount of binder to be added to a bituminous mixture cannot be too excessive or too little. The principle of designing the optimum amount of binder content is to include sufficient amount of binder so that the aggregates are fully coated with bitumen and the voids within the bituminous material are sealed up. As such, the durability of the bituminous pavement can be enhanced by the impermeability achieved. Moreover, a minimum amount of binder is essential to prevent the aggregates from being pulled out by the abrasive actions of moving vehicles on the carriageway. However, the binder content cannot be too high because it would result in the instability of the bituminous pavement. In essence, the resistance to deformation of bituminous pavement under traffic load is reduced by the inclusion of excessive binder content.

Page | 1

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

3.0 OBJECIVES

(i)

To prepare standard specimens of asphalt concrete for the determination of the optimum asphalt content based upon ASTM D 1559, Resistance to Plastic Flow of Bituminous Mixtures Using Marshall Apparatus.

(ii)

To determine the combination of bitumen and aggregate that will give durable road surfacing.

4.0 EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii)

Marshall compactor Mixer Water Bath Oven Thermometer Marshall Compression Machine Marshall Mould Sieve Shaker

Page | 2

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

5.0 PROCEDURE In the Marshall Test method of mix design, three compacted samples are prepared for each binder content. At least four binder contents are to be tested to get the optimum binder content. All the compacted specimens are subjected to the following test: a) Bulk specific gravity determination test (ASTM D 2726) b) Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity (AASHTO T 209) c) Marshall Stability and Flow Test (ASTM D 1559) d) Density and voids analysis (ASTM D 2726)

5.1 Preparation of the Test Specimens

(i)

The aggregate (about 1200g), graded according to the ASTM standard are over dried at 170 180 C (not more than 280 C).

(ii)

The required quantity of asphalt is weighted and heated to a minimum temperature of about 135 C (maximum 160 C 5 C).

(iii)

The thoroughly cleaned mould is heated on a hot plate or in an oven to a temperature of about 135 150 C. The mould is 101.6 mm diameter by 76.2 mm high and provided with a base plate and extension collar.

(iv)

A crater is formed in the aggregate, the binder poured in and mixing carried out until all the aggregate is coated. The mixing temperature shall be within the limit set for the binder temperature.

(v)

A piece of filter paper is fitted in the bottom of the mould and the whole mix poured in three layers. The mix is then vigorously trowel 15 times round the perimeter and 10 times in the centre leaving a slightly rounded surface.

(vi) (vii)

The mould is placed on the Marshall Compactor and given 75 blows. After compaction, the base plate is removed and the same blows are compacted to the bottom of the sample that has been turned around.

(viii)

The specimen is then carefully removed from the mould and then marked.

Page | 3

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

5.2 Bulk density gravity determination test (ASTM D2726)

5.2.1

Introduction Bulk specific gravity of compacted Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) specimens, Gmb,is theratio of the weight in air of a unit volume of a compacted specimen of HMA (including permeable voids) at a standard temperature to the weight of an equal volume of water at a stated temperature. The bulk specific gravity can be calculated by using the following equation;

Bulk Specific Gravity, Gmm =

Where: A = mass of specimen in air (g) B = saturated surface dry (SSD) mass (g) C = mass of specimen in water (g)

5.2.2

Apparatus Apparatus that used in this test are: (i) (ii) Balance; and Water Bath.

Page | 4

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

5.2.3 Procedure

(i)

The specimen is cooled to a room temperature at 25 1 C and the dry mass is recorded as A.

(ii)

The specimen is immersed in a 25 1 C water bath and saturated at 4 1 minute.

(iii)

The specimen is then, placed in a basket and its mass is determined to nearest 0.1 g while immersed in water at 25 1 C.(C)

(iv)

The immersed saturated specimen is removed from the water bath and damp dried with a damp absorbent cloth as quickly as possible. The specimen is then weighted, (B). Any water that seeps from the specimen during the weighing operation is considered as part of saturated specimens.

Page | 5

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

5.3 Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity (AASHTO T 209)

5.3.1

Introduction Theoretical maximum specific gravity, Gmm, is the ratio of the weight in air of the a unit volume of uncompacted bituminous paving mixture at a stated temperature to the weight of an egual amount of water at a stated temperature. It is also called Rice Specific Gravity. The theoretical maximum specific gravity can be calculated by using the following equation;

Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity , Gmm=

Where: A= sample mass in air (g) B= mass of container filled with water (g) C= mass of container and sample filled with water (g)

5.3.2

Apparatus Apparatus that used in this test are: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix) Vacuum Container; Balances; Vacuum lid; Vacuum pump or water aspirator; Manometer or vacuum gauge; Thermometer; Water bath; Bleeder valve; and Timer.

Page | 6

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

5.3.3 Procedure

(i)

Separate the particles of the sample, taking care not to fracture the mineral particles, so that the particles of the fine aggregate portion are not large than 6.3mm (1/4in). If the mixture is not sufficiently soft to be separated manually, place it in a large flat pan and warm in an oven only until it is pliable enough to separation.

(ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)

Cool the sample to room temperature. Determine and record the mass of the flask, including the cover. Place the sample in the flask. Determine and record the mass of the flask, cover, and the sample. Add sufficient water at approximately 25 1C to cover the sample by 25mm.

(vii)

Place the lid on the flask and attach the vacuum line. To ensure a proper seal between the flask and lid, wet the O-ring or use a petroleum gel.

(viii)

Remove entrapped air by subjecting the contents to a partial vacuum of 3.7 0.3 kPa residual pressures for 15 2 minutes.

(ix)

Agitate the container and contents, either continuously by mechanical device or manually by vigorous shaking, at 2-minute interval. This agitation facilitates the removal of air.

(x)

Slowly open the release valve, turn off the vacuum pump and remove the lid. Suspend and immerse the flask and contents in water at 25 1C for 10 1 minutes. The holder shall be immersed sufficiently to cover it and the flask.

(xi)

(xii) (xiii)

Determined and record the submerged weight of the flask and contents. Empty and re-submerge the flask following step (xi) to determined the submerged weight of the flask.

Page | 7

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

5.4 Marshall stability and flow test (ASTMD1559)

5.4.1

Introduction The most widely used method of asphalt mix design is the Marshall method developed by the U.S. Corps of Engineers. The Marshall Flow and stability test provides the performance prediction measure for the Marshall Mix design method. The stability portion of the test measure the maximum load supported by the test specimen at a loading rate of 51mm/min. Stability and flow, together with density, voids and percentage of voids filled with binder are determined at varying binder contents to determine an optimum for stability, durability, flexibility, fatigue resistance, etc. The mechanism of failure in the Marshall Test apparatus is complex but it is essentially a type of unconfined compression test. This being so, it can only have limited correlation with deformation in a pavement where the material is confined by the tire, the base and the surrounding surfacing. Wheel tracking tests have shown that resistance to plastic flow increases with reducing binder content whereas Marshall Stability decreases. Improvement on the assessment, based on stability, is possible by considering flow and most agencies (e.g. Asphalt Institute, Malaysias JKR) set minimum for stability and maximum for flow for various purposes (roads, airports, etc) In addition to binder content, stability and flow being the prime variables in the performance of an asphalt sample, the type of binder, grading of aggregate, the particle shape, geological nature of parent rock (most importantly; porosity), degree of compaction, etc. also play an importance role.

5.4.2

Apparatus Apparatus that used in this test are: (i) (ii) (iii) Marshall Stability and Flow Machine; Water bath; and Rubber glove. Page | 8

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

5.4.3 Procedures The dimension and specifications of the Marshall apparatus are explained in ASTM D 1559. The diameter of the specimen is 101.6 mm and nominal thickness is 63.5 mm. (i) Three specimens, were prepared according to the Standard, are immersed in a water bath for 30 to 40 minutes or in an oven for 2 hours at 60 1.0 C. (ii) The testing heads and guide rods are thoroughly cleaned; guide rods lubricated and head maintained at a temperature between 21.1 and 37.8C. (iii) A specimen is removed from the water bath or oven, placed in the lower jaw and the upper jaw placed in position. The complete assembly is then placed in the Marshall Stability and flow machine and the flow meter adjusted to zero. (iv) The load is applied to the specimen at a constant strain rate of 50.8 mm/min until the maximum load is reached. The maximum force and flow at that force are read and recorded. The maximum time thats allowed between removal of the specimens from the water bath and maximum load is 30 second.

Page | 9

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

5.5 Density and Voids Analysis (ASTM D 2726)

5.5.1

Bulk Density

The bulk density of the specimen is simply determined by weighing in air and water.

Bulk Density, d = Gmb x w

Bulk Specific Gravity, Gmb =

A B C

Where: d Gmb w A B C = Bulk density (g/ cm) = Bulk Specific Gravity of the mix = density of water (1 g/ cm) = mass of specimen in air (g) = saturated surface dry (SSD) mass (g) = mass of specimen in water (g)

Page | 10

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

5.5.2

Percentage of Air Voids (%AV) The percentage of air voids in the mix is determined by firstly calculating the maximum theoretical density TMD (zero voids) and then expressing the difference between it and the actual bulk density d as a percentage of total volume.

AV (%) = (

Gmb ) Gmm

Where: Gmb = Bulk Specific Gravity of the mix Gmm = maximum theoretica

5.5.3

Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity

Gmm =

(*

+ *

+)

Or Max specific gravity test (AASHTOT209)

Where:

Gse =

*(

)+ (

Gmm Pb Gse Gb

= maximum theoretical Specific Gravity of the mix = asphalt content, percent by the weight of the mix = effective specific gravity of the mix = Specific Gravity of asphalt cement Page | 11

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

5.5.4 Voids in the Mineral Aggregate (VMA) The volume of void in mineral aggregate VMA is an important factor for the mixture design.

VMA = 100 (1 [

])

Where: Gmb Ps Gsb = Bulk Specific Gravity of the mix = asphalt content, percent by weight of the mix = bulk specific gravity of the aggregate

5.5.5

Voids filled with Asphalt (VFA)

VFA = (

Where: VFA VMA AV = voids filled with asphalt = void in mineral aggregate = the percentage of air voids

Page | 12

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

6.0 ANALYSIS OF RESULT

7.1 Gradation

The Aggregate Grading Sieve Size 20.00mm 14.00mm 10.00mm 5.00mm 3.35mm 1.18mm 0.425mm 0.150mm 0.075mm pan Control Point 100 90-100 78-86 50-62 40-54 18-34 12-24 6-14 4-8 % Passing 100.0 87.5 79.0 58.0 50.0 24.0 20.0 11.5 6.0 0.0 % Retained 0.0 12.5 8.5 21.0 8.0 26.0 4.0 8.5 5.5 6.0 Weight (g) 0.0 140.6 95.6 236.25 90.0 292.5 45.0 95.625 61.875 67.5 Accumulated Weight (g) 0.0 140.6 236.2 472.45 562.45 854.95 899.95 995.575 1057.45 1125.0

Total Weight of Aggregates and Filler Total Weight of Aggregates Filler (2%) Weight of Aggregates + Filler 1125.0 g 22.5 g 1147.5 g

Percentage of Binder % Binder 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 Weight of binder (g) 60.4 66.8 73.2 78.1 Total weight (g) 1208 1214 1221 1226

Page | 13

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

7.2 Aggregate Specific Gravity Where: A= sample mass in dry (burn in oven) (g) B= sample mass that had been dry at the surface of aggregate in air (g) C= sample mass in water (g)

Aggregate size 10mm;

SAMPLE A B C SGAgg. AVERAGE

1 711.6 833.0 442.5 1.822 2.217

2 779.7 783.0 484.5 2.612

Aggregate size 14mm;

SAMPLE A B C SGAgg. AVERAGE

1 860.5 864.0 533.0 2.600 2.604

2 831.7 835.0 516.0 2.607

Therefore, take aggregate size 14mm as specific gravity; SGAgg = 2.604

Page | 14

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

7.3 Bulk Specific Gravity, Gmb. Where; A= sample mass in air (g) B= sample mass that had been dry at the surface of bitumen in air (g) C= sample mass in water (g)

BITUMEN CONTENT (%) NO. SAMPLE A B C Gmb AVERAGE 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5

1164.5 1196.5 1199.5 1179.0 1160.0 1104.5 1184.0 1187.5 1175.5 1198.5 1200.0 1182.5 1166.5 1105.0 1186.5 1292.0 650.5 2.218 689.0 2.348 693.5 2.368 674.0 2.319 660.0 2.290 639.0 2.370 675.0 2.315 679.5 2.317

2.283

2.344

2.330

2.316

7.4 Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity,Gmm. Where; A= sample mass in air (g) B= mass of container filled with water (g) C= mass of container and sample filled with water (g)

BITUMEN CONTENT (%) A B C Gmm

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

1151.30 1380.00 2054.50 2.415

1201.90 1380.00 2084.00 2.414

1200.40 1380.00 2080.00 2.399

1165.40 1380.00 2058.50 2.394

Page | 15

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

7.5 Marshall Test Result SGBit. = 1.020 SGAgg.= 2.604 % Bit. Spec. No. % Bit. Spec. No. Weight (gram) Saturat In In ed Air Water Surfac e Dry c d e Bulk Vol. cc. Spec. Grav. Bulk Max. Theor. (Gmb) f g (Gmm) h i J K Volume-% total Bit. Agg. Voids Voids (%) Filled Total (Bit.) Mix (VTM) m N 100100(g/h)

Agg.

(VMA) l

a % Bit. by weight of Agg.

b % Bit. by weight of Mix 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.5 6.5

c-e 1175.5 1198.5 1200.0 1182.5 1166.5 1105.0 1186.5 1192.0 1164.5 1196.5 1199.5 1179.0 1160.0 1104.5 1184.0 1187.5 650.5 689.0 693.5 674.0 660.0 639.0 675.0 679.5 525.0 509.5 517.25 506.5 508.5 507.5 506.5 466.0 486.25 511.5 512.5 512.0 2.218 2.348 2.283 2.368 2.319 2.344 2.290 2.370 2.330 2.315 2.317 2.316

100-i-j

100-j

100(i/l)

AVG.

2.415

11.191

83.289

5.520

16.711

66.968

5.466

AVG.

2.414

12.639

85.065

2.296

14.935

84.627

2.900

AVG.

2.399

13.706

84.109

2.185

15.891

86.250

2.876

AVG.

2.394

14.759

83.159

2.082

16.841

87.637

3.258

Page | 16

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

% Bit. % Bit. Stability Spec. Spec. Meas. No. No. a b o p % Bit. by % Bit. Correlation weight by ratio of Agg. weight of Mix 5.0 1.000 12300 1.000 11050 AVG. 5.0 5.5 1.000 12560 1.000 11000 AVG. 5.5 6.0 1.000 13650 1.000 12500 AVG. 6.0 6.5 1.000 10870 1.000 1234 AVG. 6.5

Flow (mm) Correlation q Pxo r

stiffness

s q/r

12300 11050 11670.5 12560 11000 11780 13650 12500 13070.5 10870 12340 11600.5

3.270 3.290 3.280 3.560 3.770 3.665 4.400 4.180 4.290 4.500 4.780 4.640

355.95

321.42

304.78

250.11

From the graph, OBC = (a + b + c + d)/4 = e = (5.79 + 5.82 + 5.28 + 5.29)/4 = 5.545

Page | 17

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

7.0 SAMPLE CALCULATION

For 6.5% bitumen content.

7.1 Aggregate Specific Gravity Aggregate size 10mm, Aggregate Specific Gravity, SG Agg. = = = 1.822

So, take average of Aggregate Specific Gravity, SG Agg. = 2.217

Aggregate size 14mm, Aggregate Specific Gravity, SG Agg. = = =2.600

So, take average of Aggregate Specific Gravity, SG Agg. = 2.604 Then, take the highest of Aggregate Specific Gravity = 2.604 (from Agg. size 14mm)

Page | 18

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

7.2 Bulk Specific Gravity, Gmb. Bulk Specific Gravity, Gmb =

= = 2.315

And, take the average for sample 6.5 % = 2.316

7.3 Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity, Gmm. Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity, Gmm =

= = 2.394

7.4 Percentage of Air Voids, (%AV) @ VTM.

VTM

= (1 -

) 100

= (1 = 3.25 8

) 100

Page | 19

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

7.5 Void inMineral Aggregate, VMA

VMA

= 100(1

Pb
Gsb

= 100(1 =16.841

7.6 Void filled with Asphalt, VFA

VFA

= 100( = 87.637

7.7 Stiffness,S From the experiment, Flow Stability = 4.640mm = 1160.5

Stiffness =

= = 250.11

Then, prepare the following plots: 1) Asphalt Content versus density (or unit weight) 2) Asphalt content versus Marshall Stability 3) Asphalt content versus air voids (or VTM) 4) Asphalt content versus VMA 5) Asphalt content versus VFA Page | 20

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

From the graph, OBC = (a + b + c + d)/4 = e = (5.79 + 5.82 + 5.28 + 5.29)/4 = 5.545

Compare parameters with JKR/SPJ/2008-S4 Specifications, design is satisfactory.

Page | 21

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

8.0 GRAPH MARSHALL PROPERTIES

Density vs Bitumen Content

Page | 22

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

Stability vs Bitumen Content

VTM (%) vs Bitumen Content

Page | 23

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

VFA (%) vs Bitumen Content

VMA (%) vs Bitumen Content (%)

17.5 17 VMA (%) 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.2 6.4 6.6 Bitumen Content (%)

VMA (%) vs Bitumen Content (%)

Flow (mm) vs Bitumen Content (%) Page | 24

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

Stiffness vs Bitumen Content (%)

Page | 25

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

9.0 DISCUSSION From Marshall Mix design laboratory test, data and result were found based on percentages sample binder such as 5.0%, 5.5%, 6.0% and 6.5%. The aggregate were sieve exactly according the size were state in pavement manual laboratory. The sieve was doing in properly sieve to prevent the wrong size. From the sieving three simple were prepaid for each percentages of binder but only two simple were used as Marshall Mix Design. The other one was used as simple to find the aggregate basic evaluation. In Marshall Method were used Marshall Hammer, the Marshall Stability and flow apparatus which is are the biggest differentiate aspects. Both method are easily to get to the high and low temperature. The aggregate, were put in oven about 6 8 hour to dry it before start the process of compaction. This is to ensure the aggregate are always in dry. The aggregate, cement and asphalt (based on group percentages were given by lecturer) were mix together in the kitchen at temperature 160oC. Number of blows is depending upon anticipated traffic loading such as 35, 50 or 75, but in this test was used in 75 blows.

The Marshall sample is weighted to get the dry air mass and surface dry mass. The basket was placed with the Marshall sample not touch below the water level and the sample is wiped with towel before weighed to ensure get the surface dry mass. The passing values of stability and flow depend upon the mix class being evaluated.

The total weight filler and aggregate is 1147.5g. For aggregate specific gravity we were used aggregate size 14mm which is in the highest average 2.604 and the specific gravity of bitumen is 1.020 were used in this laboratory test. In this test each group were used their own percentages of binder. From calculation, the 6.5% of binder, we get the average for bulk specific gravity is 2.316%. The rice specific gravity is 2.394%, Air Voids is 3.258%, Void in the Mineral Aggregate (VMA) is 16.841%, and Void filled with asphalt (VFA) is 87.637%. From the experiment the flow were got is 4.640mm, the stability is 1160.5 and the stiffness is 250.11mm.

Page | 26

MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

On graph below we can get the different value compare with value of calculation. This is because value point at graph are did not show the exactly shape of graph as shown in graph below. Based on graph, the new value of density is 2.312, stability is 118000, Air Void is 3.25%, Void filled with asphalt (VFA) is 80%, Void in the Mineral Aggregate (VMA) is 17%, Flow is 4.62 mm and stiffness is 252. From calculation of graph OBC were get the value 5.545 All the value were compare with Specification for Roadworks (JKR/SPJ/2008-S4: Flexible Pavement), Published by JKR Malaysia and show that the design is satisfactory.

10.0

CONCLUSION

From the study of compactive effort and mix design the mix design criteria recommended, the asphalt content that is too high. This is justification for use of a modified mix design criteria that produces lower asphalt content. Comparison of bulk densities produced during mix design and those from recompacting material from in service pavements indicates that higher

constructed density is achievable. A higher compactive effort during construction would produce both higher and more uniform density. So, base on our final results gained from the tests we can conclude that the HMA design is capable to be used as the road pavement material because of the VMA value we get from all the tests are adequate. The concepts are expected to give reliable performance as well relative economy in construction. These can be validated further by implementing in actual highway construction.

11.0

REFERENCES

(i) (ii) (iii)

Marshall Mix Design Laboratory Manual, UiTM Shah Alam Lecturers note ECG 524, Chapter 3.0, Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Construction http://www.cdeep.iitb.ac.in/nptel/Civil%20Engineering/Transportation%20Engg%20I/26Ltexhtml/nptel_ceTEI_L26.pdf

(iv)

http://www.engineeringcivil.com/what-is-the-optimum-binder-content-in-bituminouspavement.html

Page | 27