CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 OVERVIEW

Suitably designed bituminous mix will withstand heavy traffic loads under adverse climatic
conditions and also fulfil the requirement of structural and pavement surface characteristics. The
objective of the design of bituminous mix is to determine an economical blend through several trial
mixes. The gradation of aggregate and the corresponding binder content should be such that the
resultant mix should satisfy the following conditions;

(i) Sufficient binder to ensure a durable pavement by providing a water proofing

coating on the aggregate particles and binding them together under suitable
compaction.
(ii) Sufficient stability for providing resistance to deformation under sustained or
repeated loads. This resistance in the mixture is obtained from aggregate
interlocking and cohesion which generally develops due to binder in the mix. (iii)
(iii) Sufficient flexibility to withstand deflection and bending without cracking. To
obtain desired flexibility, it is necessary to have proper amount and grade of
bitumen.
(iv) Sufficient voids in the total compacted mix to provide space for additional
compaction under traffic loading.
(v) Sufficient workability for an efficient construction operation in laying the paving
mixture.

There are three principal bituminous mix design methods in general use. They are Marshall
Method, Hveem Method and Superpave Method. Marshall mix design is the widely used
method. In this method load is applied to a cylindrical specimen of bituminous mix and the
sample is monitored till its failure as specified as indicated in the specification.

The mix design (wetmix) determines the optimum bitumen content.. There are many methods
available for mix design which vary in the size of the test specimen, compaction, and other test
specifications. Marshall method of mix design is the most popular one.

The Marshall Mix Design method was originally developed by Bruce Marshall of the
Mississippi Highway Department in 1939. The main idea of Marshall Mix Design Method involves
the selection of the asphalt binder content with a suitable density which satisfies minimum stability
and range of flow values (White, 1985).

The Marshall Mix Design method consists mainly of the following steps:

i. Determination of physical properties, size and gradation of aggregates.

ii. Selection of types of asphalt binder
iii. Prepare initial samples, each with different asphalt binder content. For example, three samples
are made each at 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 percent asphalt by dry weight for a total of 15 samples.
There should be at least two samples above and two below the estimated asphalt content.
iv. Plot the following graphs:
a) Asphalt binder content vs density
b) Asphalt binder content vs Marshall stability

1
 c) Asphalt binder content vs flow
d) Asphalt binder content vs air voids
e) Asphalt binder content vs voids filled in mineral aggregates
f) Asphalt binder content vs void filled with asphalt
v. Determine the asphalt binder content which corresponds to the air void content of 4 percent
vi. Determine properties at this optimum asphalt binder content by reference with the graphs.
Compare each of these values against design requirements and if all comply with design
requirement, then the selected optimum asphalt binder content is acceptable. Otherwise, the
mixture should be redesigned.

2
 CHAPTER TWO
DISCUSSION

2.1 MARSHALL MIX DESIGN

This test procedure is used in designing and evaluating bituminous paving mixes and is extensively
used in routine test programmes for the paving jobs. There are two major features of the Marshall
method of designing mixes namely, density – voids analysis and stability – flow test. Strength is
measured in terms of the ‘Marshall’s Stability’ of the mix following the specification ASTM D 1559
(2004), which is defined as the maximum load carried by a compacted specimen at a standard test
temperature of 60˚C. In this test compressive loading was applied on the specimen at the rate of 50.8
mm/min till it was broken. The temperature 60˚C represents the weakest condition for a bituminous
pavement. The flexibility is measured in terms of the ‘flow value’ which is measured by the change in
diameter of the sample in the direction of load application between the start of loading and at the time
of maximum load. During the loading, an attached dial gauge measures the specimen's plastic flow
(deformation) due to the loading. The associated plastic flow of specimen at material failure is called
flow value. The density- voids analysis is done using the volumetric properties of the mix.

2.2 MIX DESIGN BASICS

1. The right grade of asphalt cement relates to fatigue cracking, thermal cracking, stability
2. The right type of aggregate relates to stability, durability, stripping, skid resistance
3. The right mix volumetrics relates to stability, durability, stripping, bleeding, skid resistance.

2.2.1 The right type of asphalt concrete

2.2.2 The Right Type of Aggregate

1. Strong and Durable
2. No Deleterious Substances
3. Cubical (Angular and Equidimensional)
4. Low Porosity
5. Clean, Rough, and Hydrophobic
6. Hard 7. Dense-Graded

3
2.2.3 The Right Mix Volumetric

2.3 MARSHALL MIX DESIGN STEPS

1. Create aggregate blend to meet gradation specifications.
2. Establish mixing and compaction temperatures from the viscosity-temperature chart.
3. Compact three specimens at each of five asphalt contents spanning the expected optimum
asphalt content.
4. Determine the relative density of each specimen and the mix volumetrics ( Pmb, VTM, VMA, VFA).
5. Measure the performance properties of the each specimen at 60ºC (140ºF).

2.4 MARSHALL SPECIMEN

4
2.2 SPECIMEN PREPARATION
Approximately 1200gm of aggregates and filler is heated to a temperature of 175−190oC. Bitumen is
heated to a temperature of 121 − 125oC with the first trial percentage of bitumen (say 3.5 or 4% by
weight of the mineral aggregates). The heated aggregates and bitumen are thoroughly mixed at a
temperature of 154 − 160oC. The mix is placed in a preheated mould and compacted by a rammer
with 50 blows on either side at temperature of 138oC to 149oC. The weight of mixed aggregates
taken for the preparation of the specimen may be suitably altered to obtain a compacted thickness of
63.5+/-3 mm. Vary the bitumen content in the next trial by +0.5% and repeat the above procedure.
Number of trials is predetermined.

2.3 PROPERTIES OF THE MIX

The properties that are of interest include the theoretical specific gravity Gt, the bulk specific gravity
of the mix Gm, percent air voids Vv, percent volume of bitumen Vb, percent void in mixed aggregate
VMA and percent voids filled with bitumen VFB. To understand these calculation a phase diagram is
given below

5
2.4 THEORETICAL SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF THE MIX
Theoretical specific gravity is the specific gravity without considering air voids, and is given

by:

where, W1 is the weight of coarse aggregate in the total mix, W2 is the weight of fine aggregate in the
total mix, W3 is the weight of filler in the total mix, Wb is the weight of bitumen in the total
mix, G1 is the apparent specific gravity of coarse aggregate, G2 is the apparent specific gravity of fine
aggregate, G3 is the apparent specific gravity of filler and Gb is the apparent specific gravity of
bitumen.

2.5 BULK SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF MIX GM

The bulk specific gravity or the actual specific gravity of the mix Gm is the specific gravity
considering air voids and is found out by:

where, Wm is the weight of mix in air, Ww is the weight of mix in water, Note that Wm-Ww gives
the volume of the mix. Sometimes to get accurate bulk specific gravity, the specimen is coated with
thin film of paraffin wax, when weight is taken in the water. This, however requires to consider the
weight and volume of wax in the calculations.

2.6 AIR VOIDS PERCENT

Air voids Vv is the percent of air voids by volume in the specimen and is given by:

2.7 PERCENT VOLUME OF BITUMEN

The volume of bitumen Vb is the percent of volume of bitumen to the total volume and given by:

2.8 VOIDS IN MINERAL AGGREGATE

Voids in mineral aggregate VMA is the volume of voids in the aggregates, and is the sum of air voids
and volume of bitumen, and is calculated from VMA=Vv+Vb

6
 2.9 VOIDS FILLED WITH BITUMEN
Voids filled with bitumen VFB is the voids in the mineral aggregate frame work filled with the
bitumen, and is calculated as:

2.10 MARSHALL MIX DESIGN PROCEDURE

The Marshall mix design method consists of 6 basic steps:

1. Aggregate selection.

2. Asphalt binder selection.

3. Sample preparation (including compaction).

4. Stability determination using the Marshall Stabilometer.

5. Density and voids calculations.

6. Optimum asphalt binder content selection.

2.10.1 AGGREGATE SELECTION

Although Hveem did not specifically develop an aggregate evaluation and selection procedure, one is
included here because it is integral to any mix design. A typical aggregate evaluation for use with
either the Hveem or Marshall mix design methods includes three basic steps (Roberts et al., 1996[2]):

1. Determine aggregate physical properties. This consists of running various tests to

determine properties such as:
 Toughness and abrasion
 Durability and soundness
 Cleanliness and deleterious materials
 Particle shape and surface texture
2. Determine other aggregate descriptive physical properties. If the aggregate is acceptable
according to step #1, additional tests are run to fully characterize the aggregate. These test
determine:
 Gradation and size
 Specific gravity and absorption
3. Perform blending calculations to achieve the mix design aggregate gradation. Often,
aggregates from more than one source or stockpile are used to obtain the final aggregate
gradation used in a mix design. Trial blends of these different gradations are usually
calculated until an acceptable final mix design gradation is achieved. Typical considerations
for a trial blend include:
 All gradation specifications must be met. Typical specifications will require the
percent retained by weight on particular sieve sizes to be within a certain band.

7
  The gradation should not be too close to the FHWA’s 0.45 power maximum density
curve. If it is, then the VMA is likely to be too low. Gradation should deviate from
the FHWA’s power maximum density curve, especially on the 2.36mm (no. 8) sieve.

2.10.2 ASPHALT BINDER EVALUATION

The Marshall test does not have a common generic asphalt binder selection and evaluation
procedure. Each specifying entity uses their own method with modifications to determine the
appropriate binder and, if any, modifiers. Binder evaluation can be based on local experience,
previous performance or a set procedure. The most common procedure is the superpave PG binder
system. Once the binder is selected, several preliminary tests are run to determine the asphalt binder’s
temperature-viscosity relationship.

2.10.3 SAMPLE PREPARATION

The Marshall method, like other mix design methods, uses several trial aggregates-asphalt
binder blends (typically 5 blends with 3 samples each for a total of 15 specimens), each with a
different asphalt binder content. Then, by evaluating each trial blend’s performance, an optimum
asphalt binder content can be selected. In order for this concept to work, the trial blends must contain
a range of asphalt contents both above and below the optimum asphalt content. Therefore, the first
step in sample preparation is to estimate an optimum asphalt content. Trial blend asphalt contents are
then determined from this estimate.

2.10.4 OPTIMUM ASPHALT BINDER CONTENT ESTIMATE

The Marshall Mix design method can use any suitable method for estimating optimum asphalt
content and usually relies on local procedures or experience.

2.10.5 SAMPLE ASPHALT BINDER CONTENTS

Based on results of the optimum asphalt binder content estimate, samples are typically
prepared at 0.5 percent by weight of mix increments, with at least two samples above the estimated
asphalt binder content and two below.

2.10.6 COMPACTION WITH THE MARSHALL HAMMER

Each sample is then heated to the anticipated compaction temperature and compacted with a
Marshall hammer, a device that applies pressure to a sample through a tamper foot (figure 1). Some
hammers are automatic and some operated. Key parameters of the compactor are:
 Sample size =102mm (4-inches) diameter cylinder 64mm (2.5-inches) in height (corrections
can be made for different sample heights).
 Tamper foot = flat and circular with a diameter of 98.4mm (3.875-inches) corresponding to
an area of 76 cm2 (11.8 in2).
 Compaction pressure = specified as a 457.2mm (18-inches) free drop distance of a hammer
assembly with a 4536 (10 lb) sliding weight.
 Number of blows = typically 35, 50 or 75 on each side depending upon anticipated traffic
loading.
 Simulation method = the tamper foot strikes the sample on the top and covers almost the
entire sample top area. After a specified number of blows, the sample is turned over and the
procedure repeated.

8
Marshall Hammer Apparatus, Hammer and Mould

2.11 DETERMINATION OF MARSHALL STABILITY AND FLOW

Marshall Stability of a test specimen is the maximum load required to produce failure when the
specimen is preheated to a prescribed temperature placed in a special test head and the load is applied
at a constant strain (5 cm per minute). While the stability test is in progress dial gauge is used to
measure the vertical deformation of the specimen. The deformation at the failure point expressed in
units of 0.25 mm is called the Marshall flow value of the specimen.

2.12 GRAPHICAL PLOTS

The average value of the above properties is determined for each mix with different bitumen content
and the following graphical plots are prepared:
1. Binder content versus corrected Marshall Stability
2. Binder content versus Marshall Flow
3. Binder content versus percentage of void (Vv) in the total mix
4. Binder content versus voids filled with bitumen (V FB)
5. Binder content versus unit weight or bulk specific gravity (Gm)

2.13 THE MARSHALL STABILITY AND FLOW TEST

The Marshall Stability and flow test provides the performance prediction measure for the
Marshall Mix design method. The stability portion of the test measures the maximum load supported
by the specimen at a loading rate of 50.8mm/minutes (2-inches/minutes). Basically, the load is
increased until it reaches a maximum then when the load just begins to decrease, the loading is
stopped and the maximum load is recorded. During the loading, an attached dial gauge measures the
specimen’s plastic flow as a result of loading (figure 2). The flow value is recorded in 0.25mm (0.01-
inch) increment at the same time the maximum load is recorded.

9
: Marshall Stability Testing Apparatus

2.14 DENSITY AND VOIDS ANALYSIS

All mix design method use density and voids to determine basic HMA physical
characteristics. Two different measure of densities are typically taken:

1) Bulk specific gravity

2) Theoretical maximum specific gravity

These densities are then used to calculate the volumetric parameters of the HMA. Measured void
expressions are usually:

 Air voids
 Voids in the mineral aggregate (VMA)
 Voids filled with asphalt (VFA)

2.15 SELECTION OF OPTIMUM ASPHALT BINDER CONTENT

The optimum asphalt binder content is finally selected based on the combined results of
Marshall Stability and flow, density analysis and void analysis. Optimum asphalt binder content can
be arrived at in the following procedure (Robert et al., 1996):

1) Plot the following graphs:

 Asphalt binder content vs. density. Density will generally increase with increasing asphalt
content, reach a maximum, and then decrease. Peak density usually occurs at a higher
asphalt binder content than peak stability.
 Asphalt binder content vs. Marshall Stability. This should follow one or two trends:
*Stability increases with increasing asphalt binder content, reaches a peak, then
decreases.
*stability decreases with increasing asphalt binder content and does not show a peak. This
curve is common for some recycled HMA mixture.
 Asphalt binder content vs flow.
 Asphalt binder content vs. air voids. Percent air voids should decrease with increasing
asphalt binder content.
 Asphalt binder content vs. VMA. Percent VMA should decrease with increasing asphalt
binder content, reach a minimum, and then increase.
 Asphalt binder content vs. VFA. Percent VFA increases with increasing asphalt binder
content.

10
2) Determine the asphalt binder content that corresponds to the specifications median air void
content (typically this is 4 percent). This is the optimum asphalt binder content.
3) Determine properties at this optimum asphalt binder content by referring to the plots.

11
 CHAPTER THREE
CONCLUSION

3.1 CONCLUSION
Marshal stability test is the performance prediction measure conducted on the bituminous nix. The
procedure consists of determination of properties of mix, Marshal stability and flow analysis and
finally determination of optimum bitumen content. The concept of phase diagram is used for the
calculations. Each of the values in the plots must fall within local or state criteria for the result to be
considered satisfactory. Otherwise, if any of these properties is outside the specification range the
mixture should be redesigned.
The overall objective of the mix design is to determine an optimum blend of different components
that will satisfy the requirements of the given specifications. This mixture should have:
1. Adequate amount of asphalt to ensure a durable pavement.
2. Adequate mix stability to prevent unacceptable distortion and displacement when traffic
load is applied.
3. Adequate voids in the total compacted mixture to permit a small amount of compaction
when traffic load is applied without bleeding and loss of stability.
4. Adequate workability to facilitate placement of the mix without segregation. If the mix
design for the optimum binder content does not satisfy all the requirements of specifications. It is
necessary to adjust the original blend of aggregates. The trial mixes can be adjusted by using the
following guidelines.
a. If low voids : The voids can be increased by adding more coarse aggregates.
b. If high voids : Increase the amount of mineral filler in the mix.
c. If low stability: This condition suggests low quality of aggregates. The quality of aggregates
should be improved. (use different aggregate or use cement coated aggregate)

12
 REFERENCE

Mix Design Methods for Asphalt, 6th ed., MS-02. Asphalt Institute. Lexington, KY.
Mix Design Methods for Asphalt Concrete and Other Hot-Mix Types. Manual Series No. 2 (MS-2).
Asphalt Institute. Lexington, KY.
School of Engineering, Cochin University of Science and Technology
.

13