SANA’A UNIVERSITY

GRADUATE STUDIES & SCIENTIFIC

RESEARCH

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

‫تأثير نوع ومحتوى المادة المالئة على سلوك الخلطات االسفلتية‬

EFFECT OF TYPE AND CONTENT OF MINERAL

FILLER ON PERFORMANCE OF ASPHALTIC
MIXTURES
By
Ali Abdullah Al-Raqass
BSc CIVIL ENGINEERING

Submitted in partial, fulfillment of the requirement

for Degree of Master of Science in
Civil Engineering
(Highway and Geotechnical Engineering)

supervised by
Prof. Dr. Fadhl Ali Saleh Al-Nozaily
Dr. Abdullah Ahmed Al-Maswari
July 2019
 SANA’A UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE STUDIES & SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

Approval Sheet

‫تأثير نوع و محتوى المادة المالئة على سلوك الخلطات‬

‫االسفلتية‬

EFFECT OF TYPE AND CONTENT OF

MINERAL FILLER ON PERFORMANCE OF
ASPHALTIC MIXTURES

supervised by
Prof. Dr. Fadhl Ali Saleh Al-Nozaily
Dr. Abdullah Ahmed Al-Maswari

This thesis was defended successfully in July 17th, 2019

COMMITTEE MEMBERS SIGNATURE

1. Prof. Dr. Eng. Fadhl Ali Al-Nozaily

2. Dr. Eng. Abdulsalam Al-Thawr

3. Dr. Eng. Abdelrakib Awon

i
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Fadhl Ali Saleh Al-Nozaily & Dr. Abdullah

Al-Maswari who have supervised my work over the last years.

I am very grateful to everyone involved in giving his time and resources to

this work. In particular, I would like to thank all technicians working in the

Asphalt plant of Military Construction Department and the people in the

Laboratories of Faculty of Engineering for their help support during my

studies.

Finally, the biggest thanks go to my family for all of the times I have locked

myself away and for all of the times when I have been busy and thinking

about the study.

ii
 ABSTRACT

It’s believed that the components of Hot Mix Asphalt HMA (coarse/fine

aggregate, asphalt, air voids and mineral filler) have several roles in

performance of HMA. Therefore; this study has been carried out to study the

characterization of four types of mineral filler namely: Ordinary cement

(OC), Hydrated lime (HL), Granite Waste powder (GW) and Cement bypass

(BP), in addition to Basalt Dust (BD) as the control filler. All of these

materials were collected from local market and used individually in three

amounts (30%, 70%, 100%) (by weight of control filler) in HMA specimens.

General characterization of the fillers was undertaken to account for specific

gravity and mineralogy using Wavelength Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence

Spectrometer (WDXRF).

The asphalt cement chosen for the study was 60/70 penetration grade

bitumen which was manufactured in Aden refinery. The bitumen was

rheologically characterized by using standard penetration and ductility tests.

Additionally, basalt coarse/fine aggregate were selected to blend and

compact 4 inches Marshall specimens.

iii
Marshall Test Method was used to obtain the optimum asphalt content for

the aggregate blend with 5% filler content (by weight of total aggregate) and

variable Mineral Filler (MF) contents, 30%, 70% and 100% were subjected

to Marshall test ASTM D 6927 and tensile strength ratio test ASTM D

4867/D 4867M.

Results indicate that the mineral filler which have the highest CaO content

increases asphalt and aggregate bonds and directly increases the Marshal

Stability and tensile strength. The results also show that excessive content

(100%) of high specific gravity mineral filler of (OC) tend to produce very

stiff and sticky mixture and that being difficult to compact. However,

Cement Bypass (BP) has fulfilled design requirement regarding the selected

Voids ratio of (4%) and minimum voids in mineral aggregate (VMA) of 14%

for the appropriate nominal maximum size of aggregate gradation. The

mixes of 70% HL, 100% BP and 70% GW have exceptionally increased

trend of Tensile Strength Ratio (TSR) and acts as more as control filler.

Generally, BP and GW are more economic than other mineral fillers and

utilizing these mineral fillers as part of pavement material would reduce the

negative environmental impact of the highway projects.

iv
 ABBREVIATIONS

1s % one-sigma limit in percent = appropriate standard deviation (1s) divided

by the average of the measurements and expressed as a percent.

AC Asphalt cement
BD Basalt Dust
BP Cement Bypass
cm Centimeter
D2s % difference two-sigma limit in percent = 1s% x 2 X (2)0.5
et al. “and others.”
g Grams
Gmb Bulk specific gravity of the compacted mixture
Gmm Maximum theoretical specific gravity of asphalt mixture
Gs Specific gravity
Gsb Bulk specific gravity of aggregate
Gse Effective specific gravity of aggregate
GW Granite Waste powder
HMA Hot Mix Asphalt
Kg Kilogram
KN Kilonewton
lb pound
MF Mineral filler
mm Millimeter
OAC Optimum asphalt content
OC Ordinary Cement
ppm Part per million
SMA Stone Matrix Asphalt
SO Single operator
Va Volume of Air voids
Vba Volume of absorbed asphalt
VBE Volume of effective binder content
VFA Voids filled with asphalt
VMA Voids in mineral Aggregate

v
 TABLE OF CONTENT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................................. ii

ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................................iii

ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................................... v

TABLE OF CONTENT .....................................................................................................................vi

LIST OF FIGURES: ....................................................................................................................... viii

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................ ix

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1

1.1. Background.................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Problem Statement ..................................................................................................... 2
1.3. Objective and Limitation ............................................................................................. 5
1.4. Research Framework ................................................................................................... 6
1.5. Thesis Organization ..................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATUER REVIEW ........................................................................................ 10

2.1. Introduction............................................................................................................... 10
2.2. Previous Studies ........................................................................................................ 10
2.2.1. Effect of Hydrated Lime ..................................................................................... 10
2.2.2. Effect of Ordinary Cement & Cement Bypass .................................................... 13
2.2.3. Effect of Basalt Dust & Granite/Marble Waste Powder ..................................... 20
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................ 27

3.1. Introduction............................................................................................................... 27
3.2. Selected Materials: .................................................................................................... 27
3.2.1. Asphalt Cement: .................................................................................................... 27
3.2.2. Mineral Aggregate ................................................................................................. 28
3.2.3. Mineral Fillers: ....................................................................................................... 30
3.2.3.1. General Description ........................................................................................... 30

vi
 3.2.3.2. Physical Requirements....................................................................................... 31
3.3. Experimental Work .................................................................................................... 34
3.3.1. Hypothesis ............................................................................................................. 34
3.3.2. Experimental Design .............................................................................................. 34
3.3.3. Marshall Mix Design .............................................................................................. 36
3.3.4. Tensile strength ..................................................................................................... 38
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................. 40

4.1. Volumetric Properties................................................................................................ 40

4.2. Mechanical Properties ............................................................................................... 45
4.3. Tensile Strength ......................................................................................................... 50
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................... 55

5.1. Conclusion: ................................................................................................................ 55

5.2. Recommendations and Further Research: ................................................................ 57
REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 58

APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................... 62

ARABIC ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... 69

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES:

Figure (1-1). Distresses and damages in asphaltic wearing course: ................................. 4

Figure (1-2): Research Framework ................................................................................... 7

Figure (3-1): Aggregate Gradation ................................................................................. 29

Figure (3-2): Experimental Program ............................................................................... 35

Figure (4-1): Air Voids & unit weight for Mixtures with control filler and 100% Lime,

cement, Bypass and Granite ................................................................................. 42

Figure (4-2): Air Voids & unit weight for Mixtures with 30% control filler. ................ 43

Figure (4-3): Air Voids & unit weight for Mixtures with 70% control filler. ................ 44

Figure (4-4): Flow & Stability for Mixtures with 100% MF. ......................................... 46

Figure (4-5): Flow & Stability for Mixtures with 30% control filler.............................. 47

Figure (4-6): Flow & Stability for Mixtures with 70% control filler.............................. 48

Figure (4-7): Stability& Flow, Air Voids, unit weight, VMA & VFA for Mixtures with

0.0%, 30% &70% control filler (C.F). ................................................................. 49

Figure (4-8): Indirect tensile strength & TSR for Mixtures with 100% MF.................. 52

Figure (4-9): Indirect tensile strength & TSR for Mixtures with 30% control filler. ..... 53

Figure (4-10): Indirect tensile strength & TSR for Mixtures with70% control filler. .... 54

Figure (A -1): Marshall Test Property Curves For Control Mix.................................... 66

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table (2-1): Marshall Test Results (100 % Crushed Granite & 80/20 blend). [20] ............ 24

Table (2-2):Summary of measured filler properties [24] .................................................... 26

Table (3-1): Physical Properties of Asphalt Cement ........................................................... 28

Table (3-2). Aggregate Gradation ....................................................................................... 29

Table (3-3) Physical Properties of Aggregate. .................................................................... 30

Table (3-4): Description of Mineral Fillers ......................................................................... 32

Table (3-5): Mineralogy of Mineral Fillers ......................................................................... 33

Table (3-6): Marshall Mix Design Criteria (Ms2) & Results of Control Mix Test ............. 38

Table (4-1): Test Results For Marshall Test Specimens ..................................................... 41

Table (4-2): Test Results For TSR Test Specimens. ASTM D 4867/D 4867M .................. 51

Table (A-1): Test Report For Control Mix by Marshall Test Method (Volumetric

Parameters).......................................................................................................... 62

Table (A-2): Test Report For Control Mix by Marshall Test Method (Stability-flow-

stiffness) .............................................................................................................. 64

ix
 CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

Flexible pavement is being commonly used in Republic of Yemen since the

government continuously aimed to upgrade the road network. On the other

hand, it is reported that common asphalt pavement distresses such as

stripping, permanent deformation (rutting) and fatigue cracking are being

observed after traffic operations. Commercially, this requires large amount

of maintenance work. Many researches have been conducted in other

countries to produce mixes using local materials for purposes of improve

Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) properties. Mineral filler is one of the local

materials that can play an important role for improving HMA performance.

Mineral filler defined as that portion in the total mix of aggregate that is

finer than 0.075mm (no. 200) sieve. This material was originally added to

dense-graded Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) and can reduces the air voids in the

mixture, the other interactions are depending on the chemical and physical

composition of the Mineral Filler (MF).

During the mixing of asphalt binder and aggregates, the asphalt binder

combines the fines material to form fines-asphalt mortar. Physically, the

1
addition of fines to the combined can extend or stiffen the asphalt binder or

both. Definitely, this modification of asphalt mastic should affect the HMA

performance.

This study is not intended to investigate or compare similar ideas related to

the effects of MF on HMA but to prove the ability of use local MF as a part

of asphaltic mixture components that presumed to play main role on the

performance of HMA by whether, physical or chemical effects.

1.2. Problem Statement

Asphalt concrete mix design requires the designer to select a combination

of aggregates, asphalt binder and air voids to produce a mix that meets the

criteria of the technical specifications of the projects.

Historically, it has been found that air voids ratio in the range of 3 to 5 % is

required for durable concrete mixes. Thus, the difficult thing is how the

designer can satisfy all criteria of HMA design such as, stability and

durability which depend on the attraction bond between asphalt and particles

of Mineral Filler, also the voids in the mineral aggregate (VMA) which has

significant influence in the volumetric properties of the mix.

[Adequate rut resistance can be achieved regardless of VMA by making

certain that the proper binder grade is selected for a given application and

2
that the aggregate blend contains sufficient fines relative to the design VMA]

Donald et al. [6].

The binder film thickness which depends on MF amount is to function on

the volume of asphalt mastic within the mix and the attraction bond between

asphalt and particles [16]. Since the purpose of the binder is to coat and bind

the aggregates together, the binder film thickness is a key factor in asphalt

concrete mix design.

On the other hand, in the construction of road, highway and airfield

pavement, one of the main problems is insufficiency of amount/type of

mineral fillers. Therefore, it is important to find an alternative type of

mineral filler materials. Thus, this study was made with this intention.

Currently, Sana’a, as well as many other governorates, use the crushed

basalt (coarse aggregate, fine aggregate and dust) for numerous mixes.

Depending on cost, crushed basalt dust may be more economical than

hydrated lime, Ordinary Cement, etc. The difference in physical and

chemical properties of other mineral fillers versus basalt dust leads to the

question of whether or not the use of other fillers is appropriate for HMA.

The visual survey for some of recently paved road in the Capital of Sana’a

indicates several damages and distortions of asphalt wearing course

(especially after one or frequent rain season) and this research is trying to

3
find out a new MF that can build more durable mixes. Figure (1-1) shown

below illustrates deteriorations and damages in asphaltic wearing course.

a) b)

c)

Figure (1-1). Distresses and damages in asphaltic wearing course:

4
 1.3. Objective and Limitation

The main goal of this research is to support the understanding, development

and implementation of four local materials of MF (HL, OC, BP, GW) in

addition to the control filler (Basalt dust) that can be used in wearing course

HMA. The objectives of this research are as follows:

- Determine the main properties and Mineralogy of different types of

fillers that can be used in local HMA. This includes Portland cement

(OC), Basalt dust (BD), By-pass product (BP), Granite waste (GW) and

hydrated lime (HL).

- Determine the effect of the type and quantity of fillers on the volumetric

properties of HMA (Va, VMA, Vfa, and Unit weight).

- Determine the effect of the type and quantity of fillers on the mechanical

properties of HMA (Stability, Flow, and Resistance of moisture-induced

damage).

- Recommend the most suitable filler type and content for local use.

- Participate in better management of wastes through the possible use of

different type of wastes in roads construction as an environmental issue.

5
 1.4. Research Framework

In order to achieve the objectives of this research comprehensive approach

has been formulated as shown in Figure 1-2

6
 definition, objectives&
Phase I – Problem
Problem statement

L.R
Objectives

Literature review (L.R.)

Material collection and characterization

Selection of Aggregate gradation

Phase II – Experimental Program (Methodology)

Optimum asphalt content determination for control mix.
(Materials used in Cont. Mix: basalt aggregate & basalt dust "BD" as MF)

MF optimization
(Replacing reference MF used in control mix i.e. BD by different types of
filler i.e. HL, OC, BP or GW at three levels of replacement 30, 70 & 100%)

MF1 (HL) MF2 (OC) MF3 (BP) MF4 (GW)

30, 70 & 100% 30, 70&100% 30, 70&100% 30, 70&100%

Comparing the volumetric& mechanical properties of

the mixes

Water susceptibility investigation.

Final tuning to select best filler type and percentage

& Recommendations.
Analysis/ Discussion
Phase III –Result

Analysis and discussion

Recommendations

Figure (1-2): Research Framework

7
 1.5. Thesis Organization

This thesis contains five chapters, list of references, an abstract in both

language (Arabic and English) and one appendix. Brief description of each

chapter is given in the following paragraph:

- Chapter one (introduction):

This chapter presents background of the research related to HMA, in

addition to problem statement, objective and limitations, research

framework and thesis organization.

- Chapter two (literature review):

This chapter gives brief summary for the researches related to the subject of

this thesis.

- Chapter three (Methodology and experimental work):

This chapter describes a procedure required to achieve the objectives of this

research. A comprehensive approach has been formulated to include

material used, laboratory work and testing procedures.

- Chapter four (Results, analysis and discussion):

This chapter gives results, comparison and discussion related to the using

of different type and amount of mineral fillers.

8
 - Chapter five (Conclusion and Recommendations):

This chapter concludes the main findings of this research in addition to the

recommendations for future work.

Finally, the list of references and appendix (A) are presented.

9
 CHAPTER TWO:
LITERATUER REVIEW

2.1. Introduction

Until now, there is no study in the Republic of Yemen related to MF and its

effect on HMA. Various global studies have tested the properties of mineral

filler and focusing its influence on performance of asphalt paving mixtures

in terms of permanent deformation, fatigue cracking, and moisture

susceptibility.

2.2. Previous Studies

2.2.1. Effect of Hydrated Lime

Khodary (2016) [9] added nano-hydrated lime (n HL) to the asphalt cement

of 60/70 penetration grade and studied the improvement of HMA physical

and mechanical properties in addition to fatigue life using Marshall stiffness

test, Flexural bending test and Fatigue test. The result shows that the

mechanical properties of modified asphalt concrete mixtures were improved

in the terms of Marshall stiffness and flexure strength. However; the

improvement in fatigue life for modified asphalt concrete mixtures with

Nano-hydrated lime (nHL) is not high compared with other types of

additives.

10
Jaya and Asif, (2015) [12] have a study to determine the asphalt thickness using

Hveem method by determining the total surface area. In this study, the effect

of fillers namely, Hydrated lime, Ordinary Portland Cement, and Fly ash in

varying percentage (2%, 4% and 6% by weight of aggregates) on bituminous

mixtures also discussed.

The evaluation of these mineral fillers conducted using Marshall mix design

parameters. The results of film thickness determination show that an average

film thickness of 6 μm is obtained for all fillers which is necessary for

durability of the mixes. The Fatigue results display that Lime at 4% can be

used for improved performance but the authors recommended using 2% for

both cement and fly ash filler.

Satyakumar et. al (2013) [13] cites that hydrated lime significantly

improves stability of HMA and increases its resistance to permanent

deformation. The creep characteristics, the stiffness modulus values and the

dynamic modulus were obtained in this study and shows that the most

advantageous filler among the three investigated fillers (hydrated lime, fly

ash and phosphogypsum) is hydrated lime, the other fillers shows

improvement from the control mix.

For 1.5% hydrated lime addition by the total weight of the mix the indirect

stiffness modulus value increased by 103.6% compared with the control

11
filler, while by the addition of phosphor-gypsum and fly-ash in the same

amount increased the indirect stiffness values by 16.9% and 11.4%

respectively.

Zeng and Wu (2008) [15] studied the effects of type and content of mineral

filler on the mixing and compaction temperatures of asphalt mixture. Two

types of asphalt binder (PG 64-28 unmodified asphalt binder, and PG 70-28

styrene-butadiene-styrene (SBS) modified asphalt binder) and three types of

mineral filler (Pulverized lime stone, portland cement and hydrated lime)

were used in this study to prepare asphalt mastic and six dust-to-binder ratios

were used in the mastics [i.e., 0 (without filler), 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.2, and 1.5].

The dust-to-binder ratio of 0.9 for pulverized limestone is equivalent to 0.75

for portland cement and 0.4 for hydrated lime. For a change of 0.1 in dust-

to-binder ratio, the mixing and compaction temperatures vary 3.5°C for

pulverized limestone mastics, 4.8°C for Portland cement mastic, and 9.3°C

for hydrated lime mastic.

Lesueur and Little, (1999) [5] studied the influence and the multifunctional

benefits of Hydrated Lime (HL) in the asphalt mixes, particularly, the

interaction of HL with bitumen. Some of objectives of this study were to

compare the impact of HL and Siliceous Filler on the rheology of the asphalt

mastic; and to evaluate the impact of these two fillers on the damage process

12
of mixtures. The Dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR) and Dynamic

Mechanical Analysis (DMA) were used to assess the impact of the fillers on

rheology at high and intermediate temperatures. The Bending Beam

Rheometer (BBR), tensile elongation, and fracture tests were used to assess

the impact of the fillers on the performance-related rheology of aged bitumen

at low performance temperatures.

The authors concentrated on promoting improved high-temperature

performance of the bitumen and mixture. (i.e., improved rutting resistance),

and they found that the addition of HL to a “compatible bitumen” may affect

the high-temperature rheology to much higher degree than an inert filler such

as silica fines. The reason of these effects is the ability of the HL to produce

an “interactive” layer with bitumen that depends not only on the

compositional and elemental characteristics of the bitumen, but also on the

time and temperature of the reaction period.

2.2.2. Effect of Ordinary Cement & Cement Bypass

F. Khodary et al. (2013) [7], prove the using of Nano-materials namely

cement bypass to improve physical, chemical, and rheological properties of

bitumen. In this study, asphalt cement 60/70 penetration grade was used to

prepare modified asphalt mastic by 8%, 10%, 15% and 20% of nanomaterial

13
cement bypass by weight of asphalt cement. The optimum modification level

was determined by using transmission electron microscope (TEM, JEOL

JEM-1230 with accelerating voltage of 120 kV) for the asphalt mastic. The

compressive strength also conducted for both modified and unmodified

asphalt mixtures prepared by Marshall mix design method.

The penetration for the modified bitumen decreases and softening point

increases with the increase of cement bypass ratio. However, 15% of nano-

sized cement bypass gives the highest penetration, softening point and

compressive strength.

Ahmed, et al. (2006) [10] studied the using of Cement Bypass (cement

waste dust) as mineral filler in HMA instead of the lime stone dust and they

used five amount of cement waste dust, 0%, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% by

weight of lime stone filler with 5% asphalt content. The filler content was

5% by weight of total aggregate.

The authors found that the increasing of cement dust increases Marshall

stability, specific gravity, indirect tensile strength, and unconfined

compressive strength. On the other hand, the flow, void ratio and voids in

mineral aggregates values decrease as the cement dust content increases.

Further, the optimum content of cement waste dust was 100% by weight of

14
filler content. Thus, they concluded that the cement waste dust can replace

lime stone as mineral filler in asphalt concrete mixtures.

Kerh et al. (2005) [23] evaluated MF to be used as anti-stripping additives

mixing in HMA, they compared the effectiveness of three mineral fillers

including rock dust, rock dust with 1% lime, and rock dust with 1% cement

in the HMA depend on several categories as well as stability value, flow

value, retained strength, wrapped asphalt rate in grains, resilient modulus,

dynamic stability, and rate of rutting deformation.

The results obtained from Marshall Design Method showed that the

mixtures included rock dust with lime have higher stability value, lower flow

value, and higher retained strength. Also, the authors found that the HMA

with same filler type (rock dust with 1% lime) has higher dynamic stability

value, lower rutting value, lower deformation rate, and higher percentage of

wrapped asphalt in the grains than other fillers according to rutting

simulation results and boiling method test.

Finally, the authors concluded that the rock dust with lime could increase

the ability of anti-stripping and resistance to rutting deformation.

Al Jassar et al. (2004) [1] studied the effect of pulverize limestone and

Portland cement as a filler in Kuwait’s local asphalt mixes. The

characteristics of two filler types were evaluated, individually, according to

15
Marshall Test and retained strength test (AASHTO T 165-99) with three

filler content 4%, 5%, and 6% (by weight of aggregate).

The authors concluded that both filler types have no significant effect on

Marshall stability. However, using Ordinary Portland Cement resulted in the

higher values of retained strength. The authors also found that the increasing

of cement content above 5% decreases Marshall stability, and increases the

retained strength. On the other hand, increasing the amount of pulverized

limestone filler content beyond 5% increases Marshall stability values and

decreases the retained strength. In this study, the optimum filler contents

were 5% and 6% for limestone and Portland cement fillers respectively.

Ramzi et al. (2002) [17] investigated the potential of use cement bypass dust

(CBPD) as mineral filler in asphalt concrete mixtures.

Two tasks were specified by the Authors, the first was investigating the

effect of cement bypass addition on asphalt binder properties and the other

task was the evaluating asphalt concrete mix design properties using

Marshall testing.

Binder properties (penetration, ductility, and softening point) were

investigated by adding either lime or cement bypass dust CBPD (0, 3, 5, 7,

10, and 15%) to the binder, then three different asphalt mixes were prepared

using 5% lime (as control filler), 5% CBPD substitution of 5% lime and 13%

16
CBPD substitution for lime plus fine aggregate retained on #200 mesh . The

mixtures were subjected to Marshall test method. The results indicate that

the 5% CBPD produced same optimum asphalt binder content (4.5%, by

weight of aggregate) as the control mixture without any negative effect on

asphalt concrete properties (stability, flow, Va, VMA, and VFA). However,

the use of 13% CBPD substitution for lime and fine aggregate requires a

higher optimum asphalt binder content of 5.7% by weight of aggregate. This

will produce an uneconomical mix. Accordingly, 5% CBPD substitution for

lime would be the optimum used in asphalt paving mixtures.

Arnaout (1995) [18] studied the performance of H.M.A related to MF. The

study aimed to discovering the possibility of improving the properties of the

bituminous mixtures by using 5% and 9% filler content (by weight of

aggregate). Eight different types of filler [Lime stone dust, Basalt dust,

Rapid hardening cement, Ordinary Portland cement, granite dust, Oil-shale,

Marble waste powder, and white cement waste powder] were singly used.

Stability, flow, air voids, and VMA were investigated in accordance with

Marshall mix design test with using limestone as aggregates, while five

percentages of asphalt content were used namely 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, and 6.5 by

weight of total mix.

17
After grading of HMA properties test results, the author concluded that the

ordinary Portland cement and limestone fillers have a good effect on flow at

5%, but the best filler on stability was the granite (stability 3580 Ib) at similar

filler content. Also, basalt exhibited best mechanical properties (stability

3100 Ib) among all fillers that participated alike filler content (9%).

Al-Haddadin (1994) [14] has a study about the possibility of using Waste

Powder of White Cement (WPWC) in HMA and the effects of this material

on HMA properties. The filler content was 5% by total weight of aggregate,

and three types of mineral filler (WPWC, lime, and aggregate dust) were

used.

The author made combinations of lime/filler, WPWC/filler and

lime/WPWC as three groups of Marshall specimens that soaked in water

before that were tested for 30 minutes, 24 hours, 30 minutes at temperature

of 60o C, 60o C, 100o C; respectively.

The results of this study show that the value of stability, retained stability

and flow when using WPWC filler in HMA is better comparing with the

mixes with lime and aggregate dust fillers.

Likitlersuang and Chompoorat (2016) [19] studied the influence of filler

materials on volumetric properties and mechanical performances of asphalt

concrete. The AC60/70 asphalt binder incorporating with cement and fly ash

18
as filler materials were mixed with limestone aggregate using Marshall mix

design method. The filler contents of cement and/or fly ash were varied. The

non-filler asphalt concrete mixtures of the AC60/70 and the polymer

modified asphalt were prepared for the purpose of comparison. The indirect

tensile test, the resilient modulus test and the dynamic creep test are

conducted under the humid temperate environments were then carried out

under standard temperature (25 oC) and high temperature (55oC).

The volumetric analysis and scanning electron micro graphs show that

shape and size of particles for both cement and fly ash can affect in

workability during the mixing and compaction and affecting the density as

result, however, fly ash provides denser properties than cement because fly

ash has greater specific surface area. The authors noted that the regular shape

and large enough diameter of particles acts as a friction-lubricating agent.

In this study, results show that cement and/or fly ash were beneficial in terms

of improved strength, stiffness and stripping resistance of asphalt mixture.

In addition, the combined use of both cement and fly ash can enhance rutting

resistance at wet and high temperature conditions. The results indicate that

the strength, stiffness and moisture susceptibility performances of the asphalt

concrete mixtures improved by filler are comparable to the performance of

the polymer modified asphalt mixture.

19
 2.2.3. Effect of Basalt Dust & Granite/Marble Waste Powder

Barra et al. (2014) [3] observed that the granite and limestone powder have

physical (hardening) and chemical (adhesion) effect on asphalt mastics and

asphalt mixtures. The samples containing 6% of each type of mineral filler

and asphalt binder (50/70) was evaluated through semi-quantitative

chemical analyses by X-ray fluorescence, granulometry by low angle laser

emission, scanning electron microscopy, softening point tests, penetration

tests, and aggregate-asphalt binder and aggregate mastic adhesion tests.

The results of adhesion and softening point tests that carried out after five

days of mixing time proves decisively the long-range chemical reaction due

to the addition of filler which provided the largest electrical field of

molecular interaction and with positive electrical charge (cationic), i.e., the

limestone powder.

The authors concluded that the active behavior of the fillers in the mastic

formulation is not related to the size of the particles, but rather to their form,

surface texture, specific surface area and mineralogical nature.

West and James (2005) [25] evaluated the Lime Kiln Dust (LKD) as mineral

filler for Stone Matrix Asphalt (SMA). The study compared the LKD to

20
common rock dust filler (marble dust) accordance with AASHTO PP41

Designing Stone Matrix Asphalt.

The specimens that consist of 7% filler content were tested by Resistance

of Compacted Bituminous Mixture to Moisture Induced Damage Test,

Tensile Strength Ratio Test, and additional moisture damage susceptibility

tests with harsher conditioning procedures to assess the potential for

moisture damage, and the reaction of available lime with water for the SMA

mixes.

The results showed that the Lime Kiln Dust (LKD) acts as well or better

than rock dust mineral filler and the SMA resistance to moisture damage

depends on the conditions of laboratory tests field, and the available calcium

oxide content on Lime Kiln Dust (LKD). Also, the authors believed that the

basic TSR tests can identify material problem.

Asi and Assa’ad (2005) [11] studied the performance of oil shale fly ash on

asphalt mixes through laboratory evaluation, and investigated the optimum

replacement percentage of the mineral filler with the fly ash. The selected

aggregate was the crushed limestone and 5.25% optimum asphalt content

was obtained using Marshall mix design procedure at 5% filler content by

weight of total mix. Asphalt concrete samples were prepared for 0% fly ash

(control mix), 10, 50, and 100% fly ash as replacement of the mineral filler.

21
In this study, the improvement in stripping resistance (water susceptibility)

of the asphalt concrete mixes due to the addition of the fly ash was evaluated

by the decreasing in loss of indirect tensile strength (ITS) value after

immersion in water for 24 h at 60°C according to AASHTO T-283 test

procedure. The authors found that the increasing of fly ash content more than

10% (by weight of filler content) decreases the Marshall stability of

unconditioned specimens and increases the Marshall stability for the

conditioned specimens. Also, the mix of 100% fly ash has the highest

improvement in the ITS loss value 18% (TSR%=82).

The authors concluded that the strength properties of the tested asphalt

concrete mixes indicated that replacing 10% of the mineral filler by fly ash

was the optimal replacement percentage, and the replacement of mineral

filler by fly ash can reach up to 50% without disturbing the performance

properties of the asphalt concrete mixes.

Tayebali et al. (1998) [21] studied the effect of MF type and amount on

design and performance of asphalt concrete mixtures by using marshal mix

design. The authors obtained the optimum asphalt content at 5% air voids

for 100% crushed granite and 80/20 crushed granite to natural sand blend,

respectively. They found that increasing the amount of MF, decreases

asphalt content, increases stability and bulk specific gravity of mixtures

containing 100% crushed granite at 5% air voids.

22
For the 80/20 aggregate blend, they found that increasing MF, decreases

asphalt content, decreases VFA, and increases Marshall stability. However,

increases in MF amount didn’t appear to affect greatly, VFA and Marshall

Flow for the aggregate blend of 100% crushed granite. Also, for the other

blend there wasn’t affect for increases MF on Marshall Flow and bulk

specific gravity. (Comparison of test results in Table 2-1).

On the other hand, the authors found that the increasing in amount of mineral

filler decreases the value of permanent deformation by applying repeated

load shear test to ensure that no adversely affecting of asphalt mixtures

rutting (permanent deformation performance) within the range of MF

content and type used in their study.

23
 Table (2-1): Marshall Test Results (100 % Crushed Granite & 80/20
blend). [21]
Mix Properties Mineral Filler Content

4% 6% 8% 12%
100 Percent Crushed Granite
Optimum Asphalt Content (%) 6.2 5.6 5.2 4.8
Marshall Stability (KN) (5.782 min) 11.56 12.90 12.90 14.18
Marshall Flow (7-18) 15.0 13.8 13.2 15.7
Air Voids (%) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
VFA (60-75%) 72.0 71.0 70.0 71.0
Unit weight (kg/m3 ) 2272.4 2285.3 2293.3 2315.7
80/20 Aggregate Blend
Optimum Asphalt Content (%) 5.7 5.2 5.2 4.3
Marshall Stability(KN)(5.782 min) 12.01 14.01 13.79 19.13
Marshall Flow (7-18) 13.5 13.0 12.8 13.0
Air Voids (%) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
VFA (60-75%) 69.0 68.0 68.0 63.0
Unit weight (kg/m3 ) 2291.7 2306.0 2296.5 2320.5
American Journal of Applied Sciences 2 (10): 1427-1433, 2005ISSN 1546-9239

Wang, et al. (2011) [24] have analyzed the effect of mineral filler properties

on asphalt mastic and the rutting potential of asphaltic mixture. The mineral

filler properties were characterized by four tests: Rigden voids (RV),

fineness modulus (FM), calcium oxide (CaO) content, and methylene blue

value (MBV). The rheological properties of asphalt binder and mastic were

characterized with the use of apparent viscosity and multiple stress creep

recovery tests. Dynamic modulus and flow number tests were conducted to

examine the asphaltic mixture rutting potential.

24
The tested mixtures included several variables: four asphalt binder types,

including virgin and polymer modified; two aggregate gradations; and a

selected group of fillers (refer to table 2-2).

The study concluded that asphalt mastic performance was significantly

affected by the fractional voids in the filler and possibly by the CaO content

and FM. This effect, however, depended on binder type. On the one hand,

the styrene–butadiene–styrene (SBS) modified binder showed the strongest

effect as a result of the mineral filler inclusion when tested as mastic. On the

other hand, RV and CaO content showed relatively greater correlation with

the mixture rutting potential, as compared with other filler properties.

Addition of RV improved the prediction models for dynamic modulus and

flow number. The effect of RV on the mixture rutting potential was more

pronounced for the coarse mixture than for the fine mixture.

25
Table (2-2):Summary of measured filler properties [24]

26
 CHAPTER THREE:
METHODOLOGY

3.1. Introduction

To achieve the objectives of this research, HMA material composite were

brought from different places inside the Country. and before preparation to

more than 120 HMA compacted specimens, these materials have been

subjected to the required tests to satisfy HMA material specifications for the

road and highway construction. The laboratory tests of physical properties

for asphalt cement was achieved at the laboratory of Faculty of Engineering.

Further experimental work was achieved at the laboratory of the Mix Plant

of Military Construction Department during the period of twelve months,

from 15th May 2013 to 29th May 2014 (about 180 working days) due to their

administration and conditioned by the availability of electrical power that

was working only at mixing time.

3.2. Selected Materials:

3.2.1. Asphalt Cement:

One type of asphalt cement was used in this research. Asphalt (60/70)

penetration grade was brought from Aden Refinery Company, and it is

27
widely used in flexible pavement constructions. Table (3-1) presents the

physical properties of Asphalt cement.

Table (3-1): Physical Properties of Asphalt Cement

Property Test Method Test Result

Ductility at 25°C 5 cm/min, cm ASTM D113 116.7

Penetration at 77°F (25°C) 100 g, 5 s ASTM D5 66.6
Flash point, °C (Cleveland open cup) ASTM D92 280o

Specific Gravity 25°C ASTM D70 1.028

3.2.2. Mineral Aggregate

The crushed Basalt stone used in this research were subjected to several

tests in order to assess their physical characteristics and suitability in the road

construction. The mineral aggregates were obtained from the quarry of

Military Construction Department located at Sawan area, east side of Sana’a

Capital. The coarse and fine aggregate particles were separated into different

sieve size and proportioned to obtain the chosen gradation for bituminous

mixtures 12.5mm nominal maximum aggregate size. The selected fine and

coarse aggregate was controlled by Standard Specification for Coarse & Fine

Aggregate for Bituminous Paving Mixtures ASTM D 692 & ASTM D 1073.

Incorporating mineral fillers, the Job-Mix-Formula (JMF) for the aggregate

particle size distribution that used for the preparation of mixtures and the

specified grading limits (according to Projects Department of Secretary of

Capital) are shown in Figure 3-1 and Table 3-2.

28
Figure (3-1): Aggregate Gradation

Table (3-2). Aggregate Gradation

Selected Specifications
Blend
Sieve size Passing %
3/4'' 19 mm 100 100
1/2'' 12.5 mm 95 80 - 95
3/8'' 9.5 mm 85 -
#4 4.75 mm 56 48 - 62
#8 2.4 mm 38 30 - 45
#16 1.18 mm 26 -
# 30 0.6 mm 19 -
# 50 0.3 mm 13 16 - 26
# 100 0.15 mm 9 8 - 18
# 200 0.075 mm 5 4-8

29
To investigate the physical properties of the aggregates and their suitability

in road construction, several tests were conducted as listed in Table 3-3.

Table (3-3) Physical Properties of Aggregate.

Properties Coarse Fine Test Method
Aggregate Aggregate
44% 51%
Abrasion loss (%)
14 (ASTM C131)
(Los Angeles)
Specific gravity 2.824 --- (ASTM C127)
Specific gravity 2.741 (ASTM C128)
Note: Gef (Effective specific gravity of aggregate mixture) =2.824
Gsb (Bulk specific gravity of aggregate mixture) = 2.782

3.2.3. Mineral Fillers:

3.2.3.1. General Description

Mineral filler shall consist of finely divided mineral matter such as rock

dust, slag dust, hydrated lime, hydraulic cement, fly ash, loess, or other

suitable mineral matter. At the time of use, it shall be sufficiently dry to flow

freely and essentially free from agglomerations.

30
 3.2.3.2. Physical Requirements

Mineral filler shall be graded within the following limits (ASTM D242):

Sieve Percent Passing (by Mass)

600-μm (No. 30) 100

300-μm (No. 50) 95 to 100
75-μm (No. 200) 70 to 100

Mineral Filler prepared from rock dust, slag/kiln dust, loess and similar

materials shall be free from organic impurities and have a plasticity index

not greater than 4.

Five types of local Mineral Filler were studied in this research, basalt dust

(BD) as control filler, Hydrated Lime (HL), Ordinary Cement (OC), Cement

Bypass (BP), and granite waste powder (GW). The description and specific

gravity are shown in Table 3-4. The results of mineral composition (using

WDXRF machine) is presented in Table 3-5.

31
Table (3-4): Description of Mineral Fillers

Type
Specific Special Normal
Index of Source
Gravity information Photograph
MF

1 Basalt Quarry of 2.85 Low to medium

Dust Military priced and poor
(BD) Construction production
Department
located at
Sawan area
2 Hydrated Sayun City/ 2.52 Medium to high
Lime (traditional priced
(HL) production)

3 Ordinary Amran 3.12 High priced put

Cement Cement available
(OC) Plant

4 Cement Amran 2.82 Approachable by

Bypass Cement transportation
(BP) Plant cost only
(up to 15% of
Clinker)

5 Granite Marib 2.63 Approachable by

Waste Governorate transportation
Powder cost only
(GW)

32
Table (3-5): Mineralogy of Mineral Fillers
LAB.
1 2 3 1 2
CODE
MF HL OC B GW BP
SiO2 % 2.22 18.1 40.4 2.79 13.45
Al2O3 % 0.46 4.5 12.8 1.07 5.29
Fe2O3 % 0.39 3.43 13.4 1.11 2.68
CuO (20ppm) 15 -
CeO2 % - 0.02 -
CaO % 61.23 58.74 8.63 52.4 57.68
MgO % 13.7 0.06 3.64 0.79 2.89
NiO (ppm) - - 16 -
SrO % 0.07 0.1 0.06 0.1 0.81
Rb2O (ppm) - - 16 - 0.03
TiO2 % - 0.44 3.34 0.13 0.32
SO3 % 0.13 3.01 0.05 0.14 7.19
MnO % 72 ppm 0.06 0.19 0.03 0.04
K2O % 0.11 1.1 0.1 0.09 5.97
ZrO2 % - 0.01 0.03 66 ppm 96 ppm
Na2O % 0.12 0.32 2 0.19 0.24
P2O5 % - 0.07 0.48 0.04 -
ZnO % 0.01 48 ppm 0.01
Nb2O5 ppm - - 35
L.O.I * % 33.88 6.17 14 40.12 4.09
Total % 99.9 99.98 100 100 99.98
* L.O.I = Loss on Ignition

33
 3.3. Experimental Work

3.3.1. Hypothesis

Based on the results of mineralogy test the percentage of calcium oxide

(CaO) is highly presented in four types of MF (HL,OC,BP,GW) that

expected to increasing the bond between aggregate and asphalt [2] [4]& [8].

And referring to literature review presented in chapter two, it has concluded

that the type and amount of MF has an effect on the performance of HMA.

The hypothesis of this research is that the using of three contents of different

type of local mineral fillers could interact to create unconventional asphalt

blends which have well properties concerning the stability and water

susceptibility than the conventional or common blends.

3.3.2. Experimental Design

In this study, the effects of MF on HMA were evaluated by multiple

laboratory test methods and conditioning procedures for several mineral

fillers. Figure 3-2 illustrates the experimental program of the research.

34
Collection of AC Collection of Fillers Collection of Aggregate

Characterization of
Collected Materials

Selection of Aggregate
Gradation and MF content

Determination of (OAC) Using Control Mix

AC % = ( 5.2 )
Marshall Mix Design Filler percentage of
Procedure aggregate blend= 5 %

MF 1 MF 2 MF 3 MF4
(HL) (OC) (BP) (GW)

Same as MF 2 Same as MF 2 Same as MF 2

% MF by weight of control filler

100%
30% 70%
(0%control filler)

Same as 70% Marshall Indirect Same as 70%

Stability tensile
Flow Strength
Unit weight &
Air voids TSR
VMA
VFA

Dry Wet

Figure (3-2): Experimental Program

35
 3.3.3. Marshall Mix Design

[The Marshall method of HMA mix design was originally developed by

Bruce Marshall in the 1940s, while he was working for the Mississippi State

Highway Department. The procedure was later adopted and further refined

by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). A wide range of engineers

and organizations have proposed improvements and variations to this design

procedure; publications of the Asphalt Institute are considered by many to

be the best references for this and many other mix design methods] (NCHRP

_rpt_673)

This method is used in this study to evaluate the selected aggregate

gradation & asphaltic mixtures. Standard test method ASTM D6926 &

ASTM D6927 was conducted to determine the optimum asphalt content for

the control mix. Before preparation of test specimens, mixing and

compaction temperatures were determined using the physical properties of

asphalt cement (viscosity). This was established by testing the asphalt

cement viscosity at different temperatures and plotting the viscosity versus

temperature relationship. The temperature that produce viscosities of 170 ±

20 centistokes kinematics and 280 ± 30 centistokes kinematics were

established as the mixing and compaction temperatures respectively. In this

study, mixing temperature was 160o C and the compaction temperature was

140o C.

36
An aggregate weighing about 1200g and heated to a temperature of 170o C,

the 60/70 asphalt grade was also heated to a temperature of 140o C. Then,

these ingredients were mixed at a temperature of 160o C, as previously

discussed. The percent by weight of asphalt content for was taken with

respect to the total weight of the mixture. The mixture was then placed in the

preheated mold and compacted using 75 blows on both ends of specimen.

After compaction, the specimen was allowed to cool and removed from the

mold by means of an extrusion jack. In accordance with Marshall Test

Method, four different AC percentages were used (4.5, 5, 5.5 and 6%) with

5% of Basalt dust control filler and each compacted test specimens were

subjected to determination of unit weight & void analysis, in addition to

stability and flow tests. Then, plots were made to determine the optimum

asphalt content. The selected optimum asphalt content OAC shall meet the

standard requirement shown in Table 3-6.

After select the OAC, 39 specimens were mixed with 5% control filler (by

weight of total aggregate) in addition to the suggested mineral fillers (HL-

OC-BP-GW) with different amount of 30%, 70% and 100% by weight of

control filler. Same to the previous, each compacted test specimens were

subjected to volumetric analysis and stability-flow test.

Appendix (A) illustrates all test results of Marshall test specimens.

37
Table (3-6): Marshall Mix Design Criteria (Ms2) & Results of
Control Mix Test
Control
mix
Minimum Maximum
AC =
5.2%

Compaction, number of blows

75 75
each end of specimen

815.4 1594
Stability Kg (lb.)
(1800) (3518)

Flow, 0.25 mm (mm) 8 (2) 14 (3.5) 12.2 (3.05)

Percent Air voids % 3 5 4.02

Percent voids in mineral aggregate

(VMA)
(Design Air voids=4%) 14 15.1
Nominal Maximum particle size
12.5mm
Percent voids filled with asphalt
65 75 73.4
(VFA)

3.3.4. Tensile strength

ASTM D 4867/D 4867M was performed by compacting specimens (using

Marshall hummer) to an air void level of six to eight percent. The steel

loading strips were manufactured locally according to ASTM test method

38
D4123. Three specimens are selected as a control and tested without

moisture conditioning, and extra three specimens are selected to be

conditioned by saturating with water in temperature of 60o C. The specimens

are then tested for indirect tensile strength by loading the specimens at a

constant rate and measuring the force required to break the specimen. The

tensile strength of the conditioned specimens is compared to the control

specimens to determine the tensile strength ratio (TSR). As Marshall tests,

charts were made to show the dry tensile strength, conditioned tensile

strength and TSR values of each respective specimen prepared using control

filler the Basalt dust and different types of mineral fillers (HL-OC-GW-BP)

in addition to different ration (30%, 70% only ) of MF by weight of control

filler as specified in chapter 4.

39
 CHAPTER FOUR:
RESULTS ANALYSIS
AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Volumetric Properties

Results from Marshall test Method at 100% of MF that shown in Table 4-1

and Figure 4-1, specimens with lowest specific gravity MF (HL or GW)

gains low air voids and high unit weight values, this indicates that the HL &

GW improve the workability of the mixture. Conversely, the other types of

fillers that have higher specific gravity value (OC and BP) increase the air

voids and decrease the unit weight of the mixtures. In fact, the excessive

content of this type of mineral filler may tend to produce a mixture that is

very stiff and sticky and difficult to compact. This effect decreases when

increasing the amount of control filler (refer to air voids & unit weight results

of 70 & 30% control filler shown in Fig. 4-1-2& 4-1-3. At these ratios, the

specimens have low air voids value and high unit weight value comparing

with the control mix.

As for percent air voids and VMA, Asphalt Institute [22] requires the

achievement of 4% air voids in asphalt mixture specimen that have

compaction of 75 blows on each end and minimum VMA is equal to 14 %

for the same chosen air voids limitation and Nominal maximum Particle size

12.5mm. So, 100% OC, 100% BP and 30% GW are only fulfilled Asphalt

40
Institute requirement for used mixes and other types and amount of MF need

to be evaluated with alternative Job mix. Though, we can conclude that the

mixes that contain HL&GW are more workable than other mixes since the

compaction effort is constant (75 blows) and these MFs act as good fill and

lubricant material, respectively.

Table (4-1): Test Results for Marshall Test Specimens. ASTM D6927
Stability unit Flow Va VMA
MF
(Kg) weight (0.25mm) % %
Basalt 100%
1593.78 2.492 12.92 4.016 15.10
(Control Filler)
HL 100% 2224.98 2.501 11 2.281 14.24
HL 70% 1978.45 2.510 15.2 2.780 14.31
HL 30% 1785.42 2.523 14.6 1.561 13.87

OC 100% 1097.23 2.462 17.4 4.470 16.46

OC 70% 1889.95 2.545 13.6 2.258 13.41
OC 30% 1961.49 2.547 14.4 1.782 13.31

BP 100% 1415.34 2.471 12.12 5.193 16.15

BP 70% 1972.40 2.534 9.32 2.206 13.61
BP 30% 1962.14 2.551 14.6 0.906 13.05

Granite 100% 1716.58 2.56 13.2 0.404 12.67

Granite 70% 1941.50 2.557 12.3 0.657 12.61
Granite 30% 1504.36 2.52 14.0 3.411 14.02

AC=5.2 %

41
Figure (4-1): Air Voids & unit weight for Mixtures with control
filler and 100% Lime, cement, Bypass and Granite

42
Figure (4-2): Air Voids & unit weight for Mixtures with
30% control filler.

43
Figure (4-3): Air Voids & unit weight for Mixtures with
70% control filler.

44
 4.2. Mechanical Properties

Generally, all test specimens provide stability values more than 1500 Kg

except the mixtures with 100% OC and 100% BP which have lowest unit

weight values. Referring to the results shown in Table 4-1, with respects to

the upper and lower limits of flow (8 to 14); maximum Stability values were

obtained using these rates of MF:

- 100% HL

- 70% OC

- 70% BP

- 70% GW

Figures 4-4, 4-5 & 4-6; show the variations between stability results or flow

results for different type and same amount of MF, the large variation is clear

at 0% control filler test specimen (100% Lime, 100% OC, 100% BP & 100%

GW). This variation decreases with increasing HL, OC or GW instead of the

control filler.

45
Figure (4-4): Flow & Stability for Mixtures with 100% MF.

46
Figure (4-5): Flow & Stability for Mixtures with 30% control
filler.

47
Figure (4-6): Flow & Stability for Mixtures with 70%
control filler.

48
Figure (4-7): Stability& Flow, Air Voids, unit weight, VMA & VFA for
Mixtures with 0.0%, 30% &70% control filler (C.F).

49
 4.3. Tensile Strength

Trial and error method was conducted to determine number of blows for the

requirement of water susceptibility test (ASTM D 4867/D 4867M), and the

chosen number of blows indicates that the specimen that has a low value of

air voids ratio at marshal test (75 blows) needs lower compaction effort (18

to 25 blows) than specimen with high value of air voids ratio to reach 6-8%

air voids. This fact is observable at the results of test specimen with 70%

control filler.

As expected, test results for the mixes of 70% HL, 100% BP and 70% GW;

by weight of control filler; with blows of 25, 60 and 15, respectively, have

exceptionally increases trend of TSR and acts as well or better than control

filler. The HMA resistance to moisture depends on the available calcium

oxide content in MF that interacts with asphalt bitumen [20], [2] & [8].

Table 4-2 and figures 4-8, 4-9 & 4-10; show the results for the rates of

100%, 70% and 30% for all type of mineral filler.

At 70% control filler, TSR values for all types of MF are in the range of

(min. = 49% & max. = 63%). On the other hand, TSR values for all MF at

30% control filler, have big differences between each other.

50
Table (4-2): Test Results For TSR Test Specimens. ASTM D 4867/D 4867M
Average
Average
Moisture- No.
AC strength TSR
conditioned of Blows
(Dry)
strength
% (Kpa (Kpa) %
cont.
5.2 1472.69 968.20 65.74 45
filler
HL 5.2 926.12 845.30 91.27 20
100%

OC 5.2 901.23 478.00 53.04 30

BP 5.2 783.00 640.72 81.83 60

GW 5.2 823.34 559.28 67.93 25

HL 5.2 705.93 679.40 96.24 25

OC 5.2 1317.95 429.43 32.58 25

70%

BP 5.2 1445.97 982.38 67.94 30

GW 5.2 677.06 554.66 81.92 15

HL 5.2 1003.34 629.48 62.74 18

OC 5.2 1208.10 590.66 48.89 15

30%

BP 5.2 1251.08 618.54 49.44 15

GW 5.2 1265.04 659.02 52.09 35

51
Figure (4-8): Indirect tensile strength & TSR for Mixtures with
100% MF.

52
Figure (4-9): Indirect tensile strength & TSR for Mixtures with 30%
control filler.

53
Figure (4-10): Indirect tensile strength & TSR for Mixtures
with70% control filler.

54
 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION
AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Conclusion:

This research identifies four types of local material (HL, OC, BP and GW)

that can be used as MF in the HMA and play a critical role on the mechanical

performance, Moisture resistance and/or change the volumetric

characteristics of the HMA, it also draws attention to the parameters that

influence HMA performance and the shortage of research data concerning

the effects of these materials on HMA. The test specimens contain 30%, 70%

& 100% MF of the 5% filler content by weight of total aggregate.

The primary conclusions from the test results and analysis are described

below:

- HL has the highest CaO content that influences the bonds between

asphalt and aggregate particles.

- The HMA resistance to moisture depends on the available calcium oxide

content in MF that interacts with asphalt bitumen.

- The HL & GW improve the workability of the mixture,

55
- The excessive content (100%) of high specific gravity mineral filler (OC

& BP) tend to produce very stiff and sticky mixture and that being

difficult to compact.

- The specimens with 70% & 30% control filler contents have a high unit

weight value more than 0% control filler.

- 100% OC, 100% BP and 30% GW are only fulfilled Asphalt institute

regarding to the selected Va ratio (4%) and minimum VMA (14%) and

respecting to the flow value limits (2 to 3.5mm) with the designed mix

and aggregate gradation. These mineral fillers are more economic than

other mineral filler even the dust of Basalt, and using Cement Bypass

and Granite waste powder will reduce the environmental impact.

- TSR test results for the mixes of 70% HL, 100% BP and 70% GW have

the exceptionally increases trend of TSR and acts as well or better than

control filler.

56
 5.2. Recommendations and Further Research:

- Using BP and GW mineral fillers in the flexible pavement is highly

recommended for economic and environmental issues.

- With respect to the Marshall and TSR test results, further investigation

should be done with each MF type and percentage to obtain the optimum

asphalt content at 3% to 5% air voids.

- Also. Before widely adapting these mineral fillers in asphalt paving, trial

sections and adequate provisions should be provided.

57
REFERENCES:
1- Ahmad H. Al Jassar, Sayed Metwali and Mohammed A. Ali. EFFECT OF
FILLER TYPES ON MARSHALL STABILITY AND RETAINED
STRENGTH OF ASPHALT CONCRETE, The international Jornal of
Pavement Engineering,Vol. 5(1) (2004).
2- Arno Hefer and Dallas Little. ADHESION IN BITUMEN-AGGREGATE
SYSTEMS AND QUANTIFICATION OF THE EFFECTS OF WATER
ON THE ADHESIVE BOND, Research Sponsored by International Center for
Aggregates Research Research Project No. ICAR 505, (December 2005)
3- BRENO BARRA, LETO MOMM, YADER GUERRERO and LIEDI
BERNUCCI, CHARACTERIZATION OF GRANITE AND LIMESTONE
POWDERS FOR USE AS FILLERS IN BITUMINOUS MASTICS
DOSAGE. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (Annals of the Brazilian
Academy of Sciences) (2014) 86(2): 995-1002 Printed version ISSN 0001-
3765/Online version ISSN 1678-2690
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/00013765201420130165.
4- Didier Lesueur , Joëlle Petit & Hans-Josef Ritter THE MECHANISMS OF
HYDRATED LIME MODIFICATION OF ASPHALT MIXTURES: A
STATE-OF-THE-ART REVIEW, road materials and pavement design, 14:1,
1-16, DOI: 10.1080/14680629.2012.743669, (2013)
5- Didier Lesueur and Dallas N. Little. EFFECT OF HYDRATED LIME ON
RHEOLOGY, FRACTURE, AND AGING OF BITUMEN, article in
transportation research record journal of the transportation research board
January 1999
6- Donald W. Christensen and Ramon F. Bonaquist, VMA: ONE KEY TO
MIXTURE PERFORMANCE Submitted to the South Central Superpave
Center for Publication in the National Superpave Newsletter. (February 2005)
7- F. Khodary, M.S. Abd El-Sadek, H. S. El-Sheshtawy, NANO-SIZE CEMENT
BYPASS AS ASPHALT MODIFIER IN HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION.
Journal of Engineering Research and Applications ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol. 3,
Issue 6, Nov-Dec 2013, pp.645-648

58
8- Farag Khodary, M.S. Abd El-sadek &H.S. El-Sheshtawy. CaO/BITUMEN
NANOCOMPOSITE: SYNTHESIS AND ENHANCEMENT OF
STIFFNESS PROPERTIES FOR ASPHALT CONCRETE MIXTURES.
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 1,
ISSN 2229-5518, (January-2015)
9- Farag Khodary, LABORATORY EVALUATION OF ASPHALT
CONCRETE MIXTURES PROPERTIES MODIFIED WITH NANO-
HYDRATED LIME (NHL). International Journal of Engineering and
Technical Research (IJETR) ISSN: 2321-0869 (O) 2454-4698 (P), Volume-5,
Issue-1, May 2016
10- Hassan Y. Ahmed, Ayman M. Othman and Afaf A. Mahmoud. EFFECT OF
USING WASTE CEMENT DUST AS A MINERAL FILLER ON THE
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF HOT MIX ASPHALT, Assiut. Univ.
Bull. Environ. Res. Vol. 9 No. 1, March 2006
11- Ibrahim Asi and Abdullah Assa’ad. Effect of Jordanian Oil Shale Fly Ash on
Asphalt Mixes, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 17, No. 5,
October 1, 2005.
12- Jaya R.S. and Asif, DETERMINATION OF BINDER FILM THICKNESS
FOR BITUMINOUS MIXTURES PREPARED WITH VARIOUS TYPES
OF FILLERS. International Conference on Structural Engineering and
Construction Management, Kandy, Sri Lanka, December 2015
13- M.Satyakumar, R.Satheesh Chandran and M.S. Mahesh, INFLUENCE OF
MINERAL FILLERS ON THE PROPERTIES OF HOT MIX ASPHALT.
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) ISSN 0976
– 6308. (Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 5, September –
October (2013)
14- Mazen Kamel Al-Haddadin. THE USAGE OF WHITE CEMENT-
INDUSTRY POWDER WASTE AS A FILLER MATERIAL IN HOT
ASPHALT MIXES, University of Jordan, (1994)
15- Menglan Zeng and Chaofan Wu, EFFECTS OF TYPE AND CONTENT OF
MINERAL FILLER ON VISCOSITY OF ASPHALT MASTIC AND
MIXING AND COMPACTION TEMPERATURES OF ASPHALT

59
 MIXTURE Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
Research Board, No. 2051, (2008)
16- NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM, A
MANUAL FOR DESIGN OF HOT MIX ASPHALT WITH
COMMENTARY, NCHRP REPORT 673, 2011
17- Ramzi Taha, A. M. ASCE, Amer Al-Rawas, and Ali Al-Harthy; and Ahmed
Qatan. USE OF CEMENT BYPASS DUST AS FILLER IN ASPHALT
CONCRETE MIXTURES, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering /
July/August, 2002.
18- Rania Arnaout. THE EFFECT OF MINERAL FILLER TYPE USED IN
ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE ON THE PROPERTIES
AND PERFORMANCE OF HIGHWAY PAVEMENTS, University of
Jordan, (1995).
19- Suched Likitlersuang, Thanakorn Chompoorat. LABORATORY
INVESTIGATION OF THE PERFORMANCES OF CEMENT AND flY
ASH MODIfiED ASPHALT CONCRETE MIXTURES. International
Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 9 (2016) 337–344
20- Tarrer, A.R. and Wagh, V. THE EFFECT OF THE PHYSICAL AND
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AGGREGATE ON
BONDING, SHRP-A/UIR-91-507, (1991)
21- Tayebali, AA; Malpass, GA; Khosla, NP. EFFECT OF MINERAL FILLER
TYPE AND AMOUNT ON DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE OF
ASPHALT CONCRETE MIXTURES, Transportation Research Record 1998
22- The Asphalt Institute. MIX DESIGN METHODS FOR ASPHALT
CONCRETE AND OTHER HOT-MIX TYPES, (MS-2), 6th Ed. (1997)
23- Tienfuan Kerh, Yu-Min Wang and Yulern Lin. EXPERIMENTAL
EVALUATION OF ANTI-STRIPPING ADDITIVES MIXING IN ROAD
SURFACE PAVEMENT MATERIALS, American Journal of Applied
Sciences, 2005
24- Wang, H., Al-Qadi, I. L., Faheem, A. F., Bahia, H. U., Yang, S. H., & Reinke, G. H.
EFFECT OF MINERAL FILLER CHARACTERISTICS ON ASPHALT MASTIC AND
MIXTURE RUTTING POTENTIAL. Transportation Research Record, (2208), 33-
39. DOI: 10.3141/2208-05 (2011)

60
25- West, Randy C. and James, Robert S. EVALUATION OF A LIME KILN
DUST AS A MINERAL FILLER FOR STONE MATRIX ASPHALT, the
85thAnnual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
(2005)

61
 APPENDIX A

Table (A-1): Test Report For Control Mix by Marshall Test Method (Volumetric Parameters)
Gse=2.824 Gb=1.028 Gsb=2.782
bulk unit Std. Accept. Range
specimen weight (g) volume weight deviation of two result
Code high in Air SO
AC% No. (mm) in Air in water SSD cm3 Gmb g/cm3 =0.028 S O =0.079 Gmm Va VMA VBE VFA
4.5 1 61.700 1253.22 752.94 1254.72 501.78 2.498
4.5 2 62.000 1245.6 741.64 1246.2 504.56 2.469 2.469
4.5 3 63.233 1242.43 744.59 1248.52 503.93 2.465 2.465
4.5 Avg. 2.467 0.002 0.001 2.618 5.772 15.32 9.54 62.31
5 1' 62.200 1241.13 745.55 1244.4 498.85 2.488 2.488
5 2' 62.150 1240.85 747.39 1246.16 498.77 2.488 2.488
5 3' 62.688 1241.49 743.88 1244.16 500.28 2.482 2.482
5 Avg. 2.486 0.000 0.000 2.597 4.288 15.12 10.83 71.64
5.2 1 62.200 1247.66 748.02 1245.45 497.43 2.508 2.508
5.2 2 63.000 1242.07 741.29 1249.73 508.44 2.443
5.2 3 62.100 1238.4 740.74 1240.49 499.75 2.478 2.478
5.2 4 61.500 1240.81 743 1241.53 498.53 2.489 2.489
5.2 Avg. 2.492 0.015 0.006 2.596 4.016 15.10 11.08 73.40

62
Table (A-1): Continued
Gse=2.824 Gb=1.028 Gsb=2.782
Std. Accept.
bulk unit deviati Range of
specimen weight (g) volume weight on two result
Code high in in Air SO
AC% No. (mm) in Air water SSD cm3 Gmb g/cm3 =0.028 S O =0.079 Gmm Va VMA VBE VFA
5.5 1 1261.41 762.26 1263.3 501.04 2.518 2.518
5.5 2 1256.19 750.7 1260.27 509.57 2.465
5.5 A 62.500 1244.82 745.55 1248.01 502.46 2.477 2.477
5.5 B 61.750 1251.77 757.17 1254.34 497.17 2.518 2.518
5.5 C 62.300 1248.61 751.95 1252.65 500.7 2.494 2.494
5.5 Avg. 2.502 0.020 0.008 2.576 2.905 15.03 12.12 80.67
6 1 61.800 1260.29 762.72 1260.68 497.96 2.531
6 2 62.400 1255.2 754.52 1255.51 500.99 2.505 2.505
6 3 64.867 1258.36 759.35 1259.29 499.94 2.517 2.517
6 Avg. 2.511 0.008 0.003 2.556 1.756 15.15 13.40 88.42
Note:
- The control filler is Basalt dust (BD)
- OAC= 5.2%

63
Table (A-2): Test Report For Control Mix by Marshall Test Method (Stability-flow-stiffness)
Gse=2.824 Gb=1.028 Gsb=2.782
Coff. of Accept. Range Coff. of
variation of two result variation
specimen Stability 1s % D2s % Flow 1s % D2s % Stiffness
AC Code high Dial % of % of % of % of
% No. (mm) ( Kg) factor adjusted mean mean mm mean mean Kg/mm
4.5 1 61.700 1680.00 1.046 1757.28 3.5
4.5 2 62.000 1918.00 0.96 1841.28 3
4.5 3 63.233 1428.00 1.02 3.2
4.5 Avg. 1799.28 3.30 9.34 3.23 7.78 22.03 556.478
5 1 61.800 1755.00 1.045 3.1
5 2 1535.00 1.045 1604.08 2.8
5 1' 62.200 1860.00 1.03 1915.80 3.3
5 2' 62.150 1615.00 1.033 1668.30
5 3' 62.688 1440.00 1.06
5 Avg. 1729.39 9.52 26.94 3.3 7.63 21.58 524.050
5.2 1 62.200 1288.00 1.0325 1329.86 3.6
5.2 2 63.000 1118.00 1
5.2 3 62.100 1673.00 1.03 1723.19 3.2
5.2 4 61.500 1646.00 1.05 1728.30 2.9
5.2 Avg. 1593.78 14.34 40.59 3.05 11.51 32.59 522.552

64
Table (A-2): Continued
Gse=2.824 Gb=1.028 Gsb=2.782
Accept.
Coff. of Range of Coff. of
variation two result variation
specimen Stability 1s % D2s % Flow 1s % D2s % Stiffness
high Dial % of % of % of % of
AC% Code No. (mm) ( Kg) factor adjusted mean mean mm mean mean Kg/mm

5.5 1 1394.00 1.04 1449.76 2.7

5.5 2 1360.00 1 2.77
5.5 A 62.500 1532.00 1.025 1570.30 2.75
5.5 B 61.750 1747.00 1.04
5.5 C 62.300 1641.00 1.03 1690.23 2.8
5.5 Avg. 1570.10 7.66 21.67 2.76 1.53 4.32 569.908

6 1 61.800 1317.00 1.04 1369.68 3

6 2 62.400 1318.00 1.04 1370.72 3.38
6 3 64.867 1117 0.986 3.3
6 Avg. 1370.20 0.05 0.15 3.23 6.21 17.57 424.65

65
Figure (A -1): Marshall Test Property Curves For Control Mix

66
Figure (A -1): continue

67
Figure (A -1): continue

68
 ‫‪ARABIC ABSTRACT‬‬

‫ملخص‬

‫علينننك ا ننننو متنننو منننل متوننننات الخلطنننة االسنننفلتية لنننك دوه و تنننأثير ننن سنننلوك تلننن‬ ‫منننل المتفننناه‬

‫الخلطننة ومننل اننكو المتونننات المننادة المالئننةا ااتمننب اننكو العهاسننة تحليننو اه فننة انننواع مننل المننادة المالئننة‬

‫وانننن س االسننننمتب ال وهت نننننع ‪ -‬التننننوهة – مخلفننننات م نننناني ال رانيننننب – مخلفننننات م ننننتي االسننننمتب‬

‫اإلضنننا ة النننى ل ننناه ال اكلنننب النننك ننننا المريننني ننن التخينننيم ويميننني انننكو المنننواد مختننناهة منننل ال نننو‬

‫نميننننات انننن ‪, %70 , %30‬‬ ‫ننننوهة متفننننردة نننن‬ ‫المحليننننة ومننننع تننننم اسننننتخعامبا دا ننننو الخلطننننات‬

‫‪ %100‬مل وك المادة المالئة المريفية‪.‬‬

‫االسنننفلب الم نننتخعل ننن العهاسنننة منننل التنننوع ‪ 70/60‬منننل ينننث م نننتوى ال نننرك منننل انتنننا م نننفاة عنننع ا‬

‫و نننرل الح نننوت علنننى تولنننيد واضنننة للمنننواد المالئنننة الم نننتخعمة تنننم الح نننوت علنننى ياننننات النننوك‬

‫نمنننا تنننم عمنننو الفحولنننات المتفلخنننة نننالخوال‬ ‫اسنننتخعال يبننناك)‪(WDXRF‬‬ ‫التنننوع والتحلينننو المفنننعن‬

‫لل تيننننوميل فاالسننننفلب نننننال رك و الممطوليننننةا و الت نننن ة للح ننننى تننننم ا تينننناه ال اكلننننب نم ننننعه للح ننننى‬

‫مانة ‪ 5‬سم استخعال يباك ماهشات‪.‬‬ ‫التاعم والخشل و تعه م ئم لعك لطة اسفلتية‬

‫ننننو منننني منننن ا مننننل‬ ‫تننننم واسننننطة رراخننننة ماهشننننات الولننننوت الننننى ن نننن ة االسننننفلب االلننننولية و اال‬

‫الح ننى ننك نميننة مننل المننادة المالئننة مننعهاا ‪ %5‬مننل الننوك التلنن للح ننى و فننع إعننعاد عيتننات اسننفلتية‬

‫نننننناعبا ال ت نننننناهات‬ ‫‪ %100 , %70 , %30‬تننننننم ا‬ ‫المفننننننعالت المننننننكنوهة مننننننل المننننننادة المالئننننننة‬

‫ماهشات ‪ ASTM 6927‬وا ت اه مفعت الشع‪ASTM D 4867/D 4867M.‬‬

‫نننن‬ ‫‪CaO‬‬ ‫التتننننائ التبائيننننة للفحولننننات المفمليننننة اوضننننحب انننننك اننننادة محتننننوى ان ننننيع التال ننننيول‬

‫نننيل الح نننى وال يتينننوميل‬ ‫الترنينننل المفنننعن للمنننادة المالئنننة ت انننع اعلينننة المنننادة ننن تف اننن منننوة التنننرا‬

‫‪69‬‬
‫ممننا اتننت عتننك اهتفنناع مننيم ث ننات ماهشننات واهتفنناع مننيم مخاومننة الشننعا نمننا اتبننرت التتننائ اا ننا نننك عتننع‬

‫تنننم الح نننوت علنننى‬ ‫‪ %100‬للمنننواد المالئنننة التننن لبنننا منننيم عالينننة الت ننن ة للنننوك التنننوع‬ ‫الت ننن ة الفالينننة‬

‫عيتنننات لبنننا لنننفة الخ ننناوة ولينننر سنننبلة الت ننن ة للخلننن والنننعك اسنننت تا مخلفنننات االسنننمتب التننن منننعمب‬

‫نتننننائ مرضننننية مننننا تخت نننن متطل ننننات مفبننننع االسننننفلب [‪ ]22‬للخلطننننة االسننننفلتية عتننننع ن نننن ة رالننننات‬

‫ت ننميمية مننعهاا ‪ Va = 4 %‬وعتننع ن ن ة رالننات ننيل الح ننات الح ننواة ‪ VMA=14%‬المختاهتننا‬

‫مخا و الخطر األسمى االعظم للتعه الح و ‪.‬‬

‫يمننا اتفلننع مفننعت مخاومننة الشننع ‪ TSR‬ننا علننى الخننيم تننم الح ننوت عليبننا ن الخلطننات ات المحتننوى‬

‫‪ %70‬مننننل التننننوهة والمحتننننوى ‪ %100‬مننننل مخلفننننات االسننننمتب واا ننننا ‪ %70‬مننننل مخلفننننات ال رانيننننب‬

‫ل اه ال اكلب لتفس الفحص‪.‬‬ ‫المخاهنة مي التتائ الت اعطتبا المادة المالئة المريفية‬

‫نننر ال رانينننب نمنننادة مالئنننة تفت نننر‬ ‫ونملخنننص عنننال للعهاسنننة نننا اسنننتخعال مخلفنننات االسنننمتب ومخلفنننات‬

‫ن نننر امت ننناداة المخاهننننة مننني المنننواد اال نننرى الم نننتخعمة ننن ال حنننث نمنننا ا توتيننند تلننن المنننادتيل ننن‬

‫لمشاهاي الطر ا‬ ‫الرلد االسفلت مع اؤد الى تخليو االثر ال يئ ال ل‬

‫‪70‬‬