The University of Technology Highway Engineering I

Third Year Class

Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design Methods:

1. Marshall method (ASTM D6927)

2. Hveem method (ASTM D1560)
3. Superpave method

Compaction Machines:

1. Marshall hammer
2. California kneading compactor
3. Gyratory compactor

Marshall Method

Marshall test is a type of unconfined compressive strength test. In this method a

hammer weighing 10 lb is dropped from a height of 18 in to create an impact
compaction force. The head of the Marshall hammer has a diameter equal to the
specimen size and the hammer is held flush with the specimen at all times.

Test specimen: 4” (101.6 mm) diameter, 2 ½” (63.5 mm) height.

Range of asphalt content: Difference in binder content is (0.5%) or (1%) such as

(5-7.5) 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5 and 7.5.

Aggregate weight: 1.2 kg.

Mixing temperature: The temperature that will produce a kinematic viscosity of

170∓20 centistokes, or a Saybolt Furol viscosity of 85∓10 sec.

Compaction temperature: Compacting temperature is that which produce a

kinematic viscosity of 280 ∓ 30 centistokes, or Saybolt Furol viscosity of 160∓15
sec.

Compactive effort: Is 35, 50 or 75 blows of the hammer falling a distance of 18 in

depending on the design traffic category.

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………1/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

1. Marshall Stability: Is the maximum load resistance of a standard specimen

1
(4” diameter × 2 2 " height) when tested in the direction of the diameter at 60
0
C and at a rate of 2”/min (50.8 mm/min).
MS (wearing course) > 10 kN (100 kg) for freeways and bridge approaches.
MS (wearing course) > 8 kN (800 kg) for highways.
MS (leveling) > 7 kN (700 kg) for highways.
MS (base course) > 5 kN (500 kg) for highways.

2. Marshall Flow: Is the deformation corresponding the maximum load

resistance (strain) (2-4 mm). Flow is an indication for the mixture flexibility.

Marshall graphical relationship: Prepare separate graphical plots for binder

content versus each of:

(a) Corrected Marshall Stability

(b) Marshall Flow

(c) %V.T.M

(d) %V.F.B

(e) %V.M.A; and

(f) Unit Weight (Density).

Determining the optimum binder content: as on average of binder content at:

• Maximum stability
• Maximum density
• Median of the (%V.T.M ) specification or desired (%V.T.M);
and in some situations desired (%V.F.B).

Check the optimum binder content with the design specifications: if the optimum
binder content does not meet the allowable limits of specification, it is necessary to
reject the mix and to adjust the grading of the original aggregate blend and carry
Marshall steps again.

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………2/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………3/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

The Iraqi Roads Design Specification:

Wearing
Property Binder Coarse Base Coarse
Coarse
Stability 8(min) 7(min) 5(min)
Flow 2-4 2-4 2-4
V.T.M. (%) 3-5 3-5 3-6
V.M.A. (%) 14 13 12
V.F.B (%) 70-85 60-80 _

Adjustment of Mix Design:

The final design composition is usually a compromise between the requirements of

stability and air void content and the requirements of good durability, flexibility
and economy.

Information to assist in the modification of mixes to meet specification

requirements is given below:

1. Stability satisfactory but voids too low:

• Reduce the filler and /or the binder

• Change the proportion s of the coarse and fine aggregates to produce higher
voids in mineral aggregate.

2. Stability satisfactory but voids too high:

• Increase the amount of filler and /or binder, porous aggregate absorbs binder
and requires higher binder content.
• Change the proportions of the coarse aggregate to the fine aggregate to
produce lower voids in the mineral aggregate.

3. Stability too low and voids too low:

• Increase the filler and reduce the binder.

• Increase the proportion of coarse aggregate.

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………4/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

4. Stability too low and voids too high:

• Increase the percentage of filler.

• Change the proportions of coarse to fine aggregate to produce lower voids in
the mineral aggregate.

5. Stability too low but voids within the specified:

If percentage of the binder is near the upper limit, try to increase the proportion of
coarse aggregate and reducing the binder. If the percentage of binder is near is the
lower limit, it is probable that the aggregate is inherently unstable. It is usual to
change the fine aggregate if the source aggregate is a crushed stone or the coarse
aggregate if it is round gravel.

6. Stability too high:

High Stability may be due to one of the following factors:

a. Critical location of one of larger aggregate fragments in the compacted

specimen. This may result in a false value which does not indicate the true
Stability of the mix.
b. Inherent stability of the mineral aggregate owning to interlocking of angular
fragments. This type of high stability is very desirable and requires no upper
limit. It can usually be identified by redesigning the mix to use a minimum
of fine aggregate with binder content slightly above optimum for the
particular mix the redesigned mix may not have a satisfactory density ,but if
its stability is still high ,the apparently excessive stability of the original
design is desirable rather that otherwise.
c. Excessively high density and low voids of the compacted mineral aggregate.
This type of stability is undesirable as it is lead to brittleness in cold weather
and relatively low resistance to cracking and raveling. Mixes of this type
frequently carry an excess of mineral filler and a deficiency of binder.
Proper correction is achieved by increasing the voids of the compacted
mineral aggregate so that a greater amount of binder may be used without
filling the voids. This can be achieved by the use of less fine aggregate and
filler.

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………5/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Example (1):

Marshall test results for six specimens gave the results below:
Unit weight
Binder Flow V. T. M V. F. B
Stability(kN) density
Content (%| (mm) (%) (%)
(kg/𝑚𝑚3 )
3.0 14.6 2.18 2306 9.5 41
3.5 15.6 2.30 2332 7.8 50
4.0 15.2 2.40 2335 7.0 56
4.5 14.2 2.95 2381 4.5 69
5.0 12.0 3.30 2388 3.4 76
5.5 11.9 4.13 2381 3.0 80
Find:

1. Determine the optimum binder content for (4.7%) V.T.M.

2. State for which layer this mix be suitable to use according to Iraqi roads and
bridges specifications.

Solution:

Step-1:

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………6/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

B.C at maximum stability = 3.7%

B.C at maximum density = 4.9%

B.C at 4.7% V.T.M = 4.4%

3.7+4.9+4.4
Optimum binder content = = 4.333 ≅ 4.3%
3

Step-2:

Mix characteristics at the optimum binder content.

∎ Stability = 14 kN

∎ Flow = 2.7mm

∎ %V.T.M = 4.7%

∎ %V.F.B = 71%
Binder content (%)

Command: The mix is suitable to use as wearing course and binder course and
base layer, but it is more suitable as binder course and base layer from the stand
point of % V.F.B (70-85).

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………7/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

H.W.:
Typical marshal test gave the following data:
Binder content Stability Flow Unit Weight V. T. M V. F. B.
(%) (kN) (mm) density (kg/𝑚𝑚3 ) (%) (%)
3.0 4.89 2.20 2169 12.5 24
4.0 7.06 2.30 2207 7.20 65
5.0 8.06 2.90 2255 3.90 84
6.0 7.52 3.60 2227 2.40 91
7.0 6.49 4.80 2190 1.90 93

1. Plot graphs of binder content versus stability, flow, %V.T.M, %V.M.A,

%V.F.B. and unit weight.
2. From these graphs determine the optimum binder content for assumed values of
(4% V.T.M.) and (80% V.F.B.).
3. Check if that optimum binder content will meet the Iraq design specification
(I.D.S.)?
4. State whether the mix requires redesigning or it can be used in the pavement?

Analysis of Results from Marshall Test

The bulk density of the sample usually is determined by weighing the sample in air
and in water.

where:
Gmb = the bulk specific gravity of the sample (the compacted mixture)
Wa = weight of sample in air (g)
Ww = weight of sample in water (g).

Bulk Specific Gravity of Aggregate

The bulk specific gravity is defined as the weight in air of a unit volume (including
all normal voids) of a permeable material at a selected temperature, divided by the

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………8/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

weight in air of the same volume of gas-free distilled water at the same selected
temperature.
Since the aggregate mixture consists of different fractions of coarse aggregate, fine
aggregate and mineral fillers with different specific gravities, the bulk specific
gravity of the total aggregate in the paving mixture is given as:

where:
Gsb = bulk specific gravity of aggregates in the paving mixture
Pca, Pfa, Pmf = percent by weight of coarse aggregate, fine aggregate and mineral
filler respectively in the paving mixture. (Note that Pca, Pfa and
Pmf could be found either as a percentage of the paving mixture
or as a percentage of only the total aggregates. The same results
will be obtained for Gsb)
Gbca, Gbfa, Gbmf = bulk specific gravities of coarse aggregate, fine aggregate and
mineral filler respectively.
It is not easy to accurately determine the bulk specific gravity of the mineral filler.
The apparent specific gravity may therefore be used with very little error.

Apparent Specific Gravity of Aggregate

The apparent specific gravity is defined as the ratio of the weight in air of an
impermeable material to the weight of an equal volume of distilled water at a
specified temperature.

where:
Gasb = apparent specific gravity of the aggregate mixture
Pca, Pfa, Pmf = percent by weight of coarse aggregate, fine aggregate and mineral
filler respectively in the mixture
Gaca, Gafa, Gamf = apparent specific gravities of coarse aggregate, fine aggregate and
mineral filler respectively.

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………9/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Effective Specific Gravity of Aggregate

The effective specific gravity of the aggregates is normally based on the maximum
specific gravity of the paving mixture. It is therefore the specific gravity of the
aggregates when all void spaces in the aggregate particles are included, with the
exception of those that are filled with asphalt.
100 − 𝑃𝑃𝑏𝑏
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 =
(100/𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ) − (𝑃𝑃𝑏𝑏 /𝐺𝐺𝑏𝑏 )

where:
Gse = effective specific gravity of the aggregates
Gmm = maximum specific gravity of paving mixture (no air voids)
Pb = asphalt percent by total weight of paving mixture (thus 100 – Pb is the
percent by weight of the base mixture that is not asphalt)
Gb = specific gravity of the asphalt.

Maximum Specific Gravity of the Paving Mixture

The maximum specific gravity of the paving mixture Gmm assumes that there are
no air voids in the asphalt concrete. Although the Gmm can be determined in the
laboratory by conducting the standard test (ASTM Designation D2041), the best

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………10/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

accuracy is attained at mixtures near the optimum asphalt content. Since it is

necessary to determine the Gmm for all samples, some of which contain much lower
or much higher quantities than the optimum asphalt content, the following
procedure can be used to determine the Gmm for each sample.
The ASTM Designation D2041 test is conducted on all specimens containing
selected asphalt cement content and the mean of these is determined. This value is
then used to determine the effective specific gravity of the aggregates using the
previous equation. The effective specific gravity of the aggregates can be
considered constant, since varying the asphalt content in the paving mixture does
not significantly vary the asphalt absorption. The effective specific gravity
obtained then is used to determine the maximum specific gravity of the paving
mixtures with different asphalt cement contents using:
100
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 =
(𝑃𝑃𝑠𝑠 /𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 ) + (𝑃𝑃𝑏𝑏 /𝐺𝐺𝑏𝑏 )
where:
Gmm = maximum specific gravity of paving mixture (no air voids)
Ps = percent by weight of aggregates in paving mixture
Pb = percent by weight of asphalt in paving mixture
Gse = effective specific gravity of the aggregates (assumed to be constant for
different asphalt cement contents)
Gb = specific gravity of asphalt.
Once these different specific gravities have been determined, the asphalt
absorption, the effective asphalt content, the percent voids in mineral aggregates
(VMA) and the percent air voids in the compacted mixture all can be determined.

Asphalt absorption
It is the percent by weight of the asphalt that is absorbed by the aggregates based
on the total weight of the aggregates.
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 − 𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠
𝑃𝑃𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 = 100 𝐺𝐺
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑏𝑏
where:
Pba = amount of asphalt absorbed as a percentage of the total weight of aggregates
Gse = effective specific gravity of the aggregates
Gsb = bulk specific gravity of the aggregates
Gb = specific gravity of asphalt.
Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………11/21
The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Effective Asphalt Content

The effective asphalt content is the difference between the total amount of asphalt
in the mixture and that absorbed into the aggregate particles. The effective asphalt
content is therefore that which coats the outside of the aggregate particles and
influences the pavement performance.
𝑃𝑃𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏
𝑃𝑃𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 = 𝑃𝑃𝑏𝑏 − 𝑃𝑃
100 𝑠𝑠
where:
Pbe = effective asphalt content in paving mixture (percent by weight)
Pb = percent by weight of asphalt in paving mixture
Ps = aggregate percent by weight of paving mixture
Pba = amount of asphalt absorbed as a percentage of the total weight of aggregates.

Percent Voids in Compacted Mineral Aggregates

The percent voids in compacted mineral aggregates (VMA) is the percentage of
void spaces between the granular particles in the compacted paving mixture,
including the air voids and the volume occupied by the effective asphalt content. It
usually is calculated as a percentage of the bulk volume of the compacted mixture
based on the bulk specific gravity of the aggregates.
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑃𝑃𝑠𝑠
𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 = 100 −
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠
where:
VMA = percent voids in compacted mineral aggregates (percent of bulk volume)
Gmb = bulk specific gravity of compacted mixture
Gsb = bulk specific gravity of aggregate
Ps = aggregate percent by weight of total paving mixture.

Percent Air Voids in Compacted Mixture

This is the ratio (expressed as a percentage) between the volume of the small air
voids between the coated particles and the total volume of the mixture.
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 − 𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 100
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
where:

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………12/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Pa = percent air voids in compacted paving mixture

Gmm = maximum specific gravity of the compacted paving mixture
Gmb = bulk specific gravity of the compacted paving mixture.

Evaluation and Adjustment of Mix Design

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.
The mixture should have:
• An adequate amount of asphalt to ensure a durable pavement.
• An adequate mix stability to prevent unacceptable distortion and displacement
when traffic load is applied.
• Adequate voids in the total compacted mixture to permit a small amount of
compaction when traffic load is applied without loss of stability, blushing, and
bleeding, but at the same time insufficient voids to prevent harmful penetration
of air and moisture into the compacted mixture.
• Adequate workability to facilitate placement of the mix without segregation.

When the mix design for the optimum asphalt content does not satisfy all of the
requirements given in the specification, it is necessary to adjust the original blend
of aggregates.

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………13/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Example (2):
In designing an asphalt concrete mixture for a highway pavement to support medium
traffic, data in Table (1) showing the aggregate characteristics and Table (2) showing data
obtained using the Marshall method were used. Determine the optimum asphalt content
for this mix for the specified limits given in Table (3).

Solution: The bulk specific gravity of the mix for each asphalt cement content is
determined by calculating the average value for the specimens with the same asphalt
cement content.

Table 1 Aggregate characteristics

% by weight of total paving

Aggregate type Bulk specific gravity
mixture
Coarse 52.3 2.65
Fine 39.6 2.75
Filler 8.1 2.70
Note: The nominal maximum particle size in the aggregate mixture is 1 in.

Table 2 Marshall test data

Weight of specimen (g) Flow Max.
Asphalt Stability (lb) specific
% by In air In water (0.01 in.)
gravity
wt. of
total
of
mix 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 paving
mixture
5.0 1325.6 1325.4 1325.0 780.1 780.3 779.8 1460 1450 1465 7 7.5 7 2.54
5.5 1331.3 1330.9 1331.8 789.6 789.3 790.0 1600 1610 1595 10 9 9.5 2.56
6.0 1338.2 1338.5 1338.1 798.6 798.3 797.3 1560 1540 1550 11 11.5 11 2.58
6.5 1343.8 1344.0 1343.9 799.8 797.3 799.9 1400 1420 1415 13 13 13.5 2.56
7.0 1349.0 1349.3 1349.8 798.4 799.0 800.1 1200 1190 1210 16 15 16 2.54

For 5% asphalt content, the average bulk specific gravity is given as

1 1326.6 1325.4 1325.0

𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = � + + �
3 1325.6 − 780.1 1325.4 − 780.3 1325.0 − 779.8
1
= (2.43 + 2.43 + 2.43) = 2.43
3
Therefore, the bulk density is 2.43x62.4 = 151.6 lb/ft3.
Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………14/21
The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Similarly,
For 5.5 asphalt content:
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 2.46, 𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 = 153.5 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙/𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 3
For 6.0 asphalt content:
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 2.48, 𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 = 154.8 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙/𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 3
For 6.5 asphalt content:
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 2.47, 𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 = 154.1 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙/𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 3
For 7.0 asphalt content:
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 2.45, 𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑒 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 = 152.9 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙/𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 3

Average bulk density then is plotted against asphalt content as shown in Figure 1a.
Similarly, the average stability and flow for each asphalt cement content are as follows.
% Stability Flow
5.0 1458 7.2
5.5 1602 9.5
6.0 1550 11.2
6.5 1412 13.2
7.0 1200 15.7

These values are plotted in Figures 1 (b) and (c).

We now have to compute percent voids in the mineral aggregate VMA and the percent
voids in the compacted mixture for each asphalt cement mixture.
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑃𝑃𝑠𝑠
𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 = 100 −
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠
For 5% asphalt content,
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 2.43,
𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 = 95.0 (𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝)

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………15/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

𝑃𝑃𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 + 𝑃𝑃𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 + 𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚

𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 =
𝑃𝑃𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑃𝑃𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
+ +
𝐺𝐺𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝐺𝐺𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝐺𝐺𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏
𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫𝑫 𝑷𝑷𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄 , 𝑷𝑷𝒇𝒇𝒇𝒇 𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂 𝑷𝑷𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎 𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐 𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂.
𝑃𝑃𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 0.523 ∗ 95.0 = 49.7
𝑃𝑃𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = 0.396 ∗ 95.0 = 37.6
𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 0.081 ∗ 95.0 = 7.7

Therefore,
49.7 + 37.6 + 7.7
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = = 2.69
49.7 37.6 7.7
+ +
2.65 2.75 2.70
and
2.43 ∗ 95
𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 = 100 − = 14.18
2.69
For 5.5% asphalt content,
𝑃𝑃𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 0.523 ∗ 94.5 = 49.4
𝑃𝑃𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = 0.396 ∗ 94.5 = 37.4
𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 0.081 ∗ 94.5 = 7.7
Therefore,
49.4 + 37.4 + 7.7
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = = 2.69
49.4 37.4 7.7
+ +
2.65 2.75 2.70
and
2.46 ∗ 94.5
𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 = 100 − = 13.58
2.69
For 6.0% asphalt content,
𝑃𝑃𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 0.523 ∗ 94.0 = 49.2
𝑃𝑃𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = 0.396 ∗ 94.0 = 37.2
𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 0.081 ∗ 94.0 = 7.6

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………16/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Therefore,
49.2 + 37.2 + 7.6
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = = 2.69
49.2 37.2 7.6
+ +
2.65 2.75 2.70
and
2.48 ∗ 94.0
𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 = 100 − = 13.34
2.69
For 6.5% asphalt content,
𝑃𝑃𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 0.523 ∗ 93.5 = 48.9
𝑃𝑃𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = 0.396 ∗ 93.5 = 37.0
𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 0.081 ∗ 93.5 = 7.6
Therefore,
48.9 + 37.0 + 7.6
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = = 2.69
48.9 37.0 7.6
+ +
2.65 2.75 2.70
and
2.47 ∗ 93.5
𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 = 100 − = 14.15
2.69
For 7.0% asphalt content,
𝑃𝑃𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 0.523 ∗ 93.0 = 48.6
𝑃𝑃𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = 0.396 ∗ 93.0 = 36.8
𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 0.081 ∗ 93.0 = 7.5
Therefore,
48.6 + 36.8 + 7.5
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = = 2.69
48.6 36.8 7.5
+ +
2.65 2.75 2.70
and
2.45 ∗ 93.0
𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 = 100 − = 15.30
2.69
A plot of VMA versus asphalt content based on these calculations is shown in Figure 1d.
We now have to determine the percentage of air voids in each of the paving mixtures.

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………17/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 − 𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 100
𝐺𝐺𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
For 5% asphalt content,
2.54 − 2.43
𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 100 = 4.33
2.54
For 5.5% asphalt content,
2.56 − 2.46
𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 100 = 3.91
2.56
For 6.0% asphalt content,
2.58 − 2.48
𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 100 = 3.88
2.58
For 6.5% asphalt content,
2.56 − 2.47
𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 100 = 3.50
2.56
For 7.0% asphalt content,
2.54 − 2.45
𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 = 100 = 3.54
2.54
A plot of 𝑃𝑃𝑎𝑎 versus asphalt content based on these calculations is shown in Figure 1e.

The asphalt content that meets the design requirements for unit weight, stability, and
percent air voids then is selected. The asphalt content having the maximum value of unit
weight and stability is selected from each of the respective plots.
1. Maximum unit weight = 6.0% [Figure 1(a)]
2. Maximum stability = 5.5% [Figure 1 (b)]
3. Percent air voids in compacted mixture using mean of limits [that is, (3+5)/2= 4] =
5.4% [Figure 1 (e)]. (Note the limits of 3 and 5% given in Table 3 below.)

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………18/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Table 3 Suggested test limits.

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………19/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

Figure 1 Marshall Test property curves.

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………20/21

The University of Technology Highway Engineering I
Third Year Class
Building and Construction Eng. Dept. BE 3230

The optimum asphalt content is determined as the average.

Therefore, the optimum asphalt cement content is
6.0 + 5.5 + 5.4
= 5.6%
3
The properties of the paving mixture containing the optimum asphalt content now can be
determined from Figure 1 and compared with the suggested criteria given in Table 3. The
values for this mixture are:

Unit weight = 153.8 lb/ft3

Stability = 1600 lb
Flow = 9.5 units of 0.01 in.
Percent void total mix = 3.9
Percent voids in mineral aggregates = 13
This mixture meets all the requirements given in Table 3 for stability, flow, and
percent voids in total mix.

Asphalt Concrete Mix Design ………………………………………………………………………………………………………21/21