See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/321077685

Developing the elastic modulus measurement of asphalt concrete using the

compressive strength test

Conference Paper in AIP Conference Proceedings · November 2017

DOI: 10.1063/1.5011541

CITATIONS READS
11 12,646

3 authors, including:

Arief Setiawan Latif Budi Suparma

Universitas Tadulako Universitas Gadjah Mada
12 PUBLICATIONS 31 CITATIONS 65 PUBLICATIONS 436 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Arief Setiawan on 24 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Developing the elastic modulus measurement of asphalt concrete using the
compressive strength test
Arief Setiawan, Latif Budi Suparma, and Agus Taufik Mulyono

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1903, 050002 (2017);

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5011541
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1903/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

Assessing the moisture susceptibility of aggregates with Los Angeles abrasion test
AIP Conference Proceedings 1903, 030008 (2017); 10.1063/1.5011515
 Developing the Elastic Modulus Measurement of Asphalt
Concrete Using the Compressive Strength Test
Arief Setiawan1, a), Latif Budi Suparma1, b), Agus Taufik Mulyono1, c)
1
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Gadjah Mada.
Jalan Grafika No. 2, Kampus Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
a)
Corresponding author: arief.setiawan@mail.ugm.ac.id
b)
lbsuparma@ugm.ac.id
c)
agust@tsipil.ugm.ac.id

Abstract. Elastic modulus is a fundamental property of an asphalt mixture. An analytical method of the elastic modulus is
needed to determine the thickness of flexible pavement. It has a role as one of the input values on a stress-strain analysis
in the finite element method. The aim of this study was to develop the measurement of the elastic modulus by using
compressive strength testing. This research used a set of specimen mold tool and Delta Dimensi software to record strain
changes occurring in the proving ring of compression machine and the specimens. The elastic modulus of the five types of
aggregate gradation and 2 types of asphalt were measured at optimum asphalt content. Asphalt Cement 60/70 and Elastomer
Modified Asphalt (EMA) were used as a binder. Manufacturing success indicators of the specimens used void-in-the-mix
(VIM) 3-5 % criteria. The success rate of the specimen manufacturing was more than 76%. Thus, the procedure and the
compressive strength test equipment could be used for the measurement of the elastic modulus. The aggregate gradation
and asphalt types significantly affected the elastic modulus of the asphalt concrete.

INTRODUCTION
Elastic modulus is a fundamental property of an asphalt mixture that can be used, in an analytical method, to
determine the thickness of pavement layers [1]. It also one of the parameters to determine the stress-strain analysis in
the finite element method (FEM) [2]. Now, in Indonesia, the cost of the machine and testing for measuring modulus
of elasticity is expensive. Therefore, the problem makes any limitation and needs any solution.
Leon et al [2] measured modulus of elasticity on the 2 types of dense graded and 1 type of stone matrix asphalt
mixture. Trinidad Lake Asphalt 60/75 penetration was used as a binder. The static unconfined uniaxial compression
test procedure using an MTS (material testing machine) was applied to test specimens. The optimum binder content
was 5%. The air voids were about 3-8%. The gyratory compactor was used to prepare the samples for each mix type
which was different on their height (100mm and 150mm). The air void should be in the range of 3-5%. The result
showed that the modulus of the elasticity was low because of idealizing the linear part of the stress-strain curve.
Further, the curve was divided into 4 sections: (1) purely elastic, (2) pure shear, (3) drop in friction angle, and (4)
residual coefficient of friction.
Starodubsky et al [3] measured modulus of elasticity with static compression; uniaxial and triaxial. The Variables
were the height of the specimens (150, 100, 73, 48, and 32 mm), the static compression (6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 MPa)
and the vibratory compaction, the bitumen contents (4, 5, and 6%), and two types of aggregate (basalt and limestone).
A stress-strain curve was divided into five specific parts. Domain concave was the first (0-20% of stress). Then, the
linear domain was 20-80% of stress. The third represented the nonlinear ascending domain of 80-100% of stress. The
fourth was the peak domain. Finally, the fifth part was descending branch. The linear domain was the most important
part to determine the elastic modulus. Therefore, a more specific part was needed. The problem of creep on loading
was alleviated by the atrophy model which showed the linear part up to peak point of the axial stress-axial strain curve

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Construction and Building Engineering (ICONBUILD) 2017
AIP Conf. Proc. 1903, 050002-1–050002-11; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5011541
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1591-1/$30.00

050002-1
in terms of specific stresses. The creep effect in the heterogeneous was a function of the specific, not the nominal,
stresses, the elastic state could be seen as independent of it, and they may be considered separately [3].
Gaus et al [4] investigated the stress-strain relationship in compression to describe the behavior of Asphalt
Concrete Binder Course (AC-BC) with Buton Granular Asphalt (BGA). The curve was divided into three parts. The
first part showed the initial bottom concave that reflected the settling of specimens. The second part showed the linear
zone that represented the elasticity arises up to approximately 80% of peak stress. Finally, the third part showed the
nonlinear zone arise up to peak stress. The linear zone needed a range to determine the elastic modulus because the
initial bottom was concave.
Zheng and Huang [5] developed a new triaxial method and determined the failure criterion of the asphalt mixture.
Axial stress-axial strain curve divided into two parts and the definition of failure point. The first part is tangent elastic
modulus. The second part is the tangent of stress peak as seen in Fig. 1. The tangent elastic modulus part does not
show a specific range to determine the elastic modulus.

FIGURE 1. Typical plane axial compression curve and definition of failure point.

Canestrari et al [6] showed the curve to depict the relationship between deflections (઼) and load (F). The curve
shows that the ductile material has a wider area than brittle material as seen in Fig 2.

FIGURE 2. Load-displacement curves for brittle and ductile materials.

ASTM proposed three methods to determine the modulus of the elasticity (Young’s modulus) from axial stress-
axial strain curve [7]. The first method is tangent modulus that is measured at a fixed percentage of ultimate strength.
The second is the average modulus of the linear portion of the axial stress-strain relationship. Finally, the third method
is secant modulus which is determined by measuring up to a fixed percentage of ultimate strength. This research
selected the tangent modulus to calculate Young’s modulus.
The aim of this study was to develop the measurement of the elastic modulus using the compressive strength
testing. The method used to determine Young’s modulus of the 5 aggregate gradations and 2 types of asphalt.

050002-2
 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Material Selection
Unmodified asphalt cement (AC) 60/70 ex. Pertamina and elastomer modified asphalt (EMA) Starbit E-55 ex. PT
Bintang Djaja was used as a binder. The bitumen test results meet the requirements of Indonesian Highway
Specification [8].
The aggregate was obtained from Tinalah River, Kulon Progo, Yogyakarta, Indonesia as one of the quarries for
the construction of roads and buildings in Yogyakarta. The aggregate test results have complied with the requirements
of the Indonesian Highway Specification. The selection of the aggregate gradation was based on Indonesian Highway
Specification Year 2010 (the third revised edition) for asphalt concrete wearing course (AC-WC) [5] by five types of
the aggregate gradation, such as (1) upper limit or UL; (2) upper-mid or UM; (3) mid-range or MR; (4) mid-lower or
ML; and (5) lower limit or LL as seen in Fig. 3.

FIGURE 3. Selected aggregate gradation of asphalt concrete.

Marshall Method
Marshall method was used for designing mixture and determining the stability, flow, void in the mix (VIM), voids
filled with asphalt (VFA), and voids in mineral aggregate (VMA) of each gradation type of the mixture. Fifteen
specimens were prepared for each gradation with bitumen content variation of 4.5% to 6.5% of the mix, interval 0.5%
for UM, MR, and ML gradation; UL gradation using bitumen content variation 5% to 7% at intervals of 0.5%; and
gradation LL variation bitumen content of 6% to 8% with intervals of 0.5%. Mixing and compaction temperatures
were measured at the viscosity of 0.2 Pa.s and 0.4 Pa.s [8], respectively. The test results showed that the mixing and
compaction temperatures for AC 60/70 are 157 °C and 143 °C, respectively and 160 °C and 180 °C for EMA.

Gradation Index
The proposed Gradation Index (GI) in this research was used to quantify actual position of the aggregate gradation
in continuous scale and to determine coarser or finer aggregate gradation. The GI is defined as the ratio of retained
area curve and the total area of the aggregate gradation curve [9]. Equation 1 and 2 were used to calculate the GI.

GI= (a/A) 100 (1)

Sr Sri 1
a ¦in 0 i Ti Ti 1
2 (2)

050002-3
 Those equations were; the GI is gradation index (%), a is area retained of the curve (mm2), A is a total area of the
curve (mm2), Sr is sieve size (mm), and T is cumulative retained aggregate [10%=10mm] (mm).

Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) Test and Elastic Modulus

UCS Specimen

Compressive strength test is used to determine the modulus of elasticity (Young’s modulus). Compression machine
with proving ring 10,000 lbs, two dials Mitutoyo 543-390B 0.001 mm x 12.7 mm, and two cables data were used to
record the load on proving ring and length change on the specimen.
Vibratory compactor was used to compact the specimen. The specification of the vibratory compactor was rating
input 900 Watt continuously, impact per minute (ipm) 2,900, and impact energy per stroke 8.5 Joule.
The set of specimen mold was designed to able to meet the target density. The mold set can be seen in Fig. 4. The
target density was the density that would produce the optimum void. It consisted of Void in the Mix (VIM), Void
Filled with Asphalt (VFA) and Void in Mineral Aggregate (VMA) at optimum bitumen content (OBC). VIM 3-5%
was the criterion of success indicator of manufacturing specimen. The Specimens were made of 10 OBC on the 5
types of gradation and 2 types of asphalt. Aggregate and bitumen weight at loose conditions were determined to meet
density targets. The equations of 3 to 5 were used to determine the aggregate and asphalt needs.

Wmix = density x Vmold x 1.03 (3)

Wbitumen = OBC x Wmix (4)
Waggregate = Wmix – Wbitumen (5)

Those equations where; W is weight (gram), density (gram/cc), V is the volume of mold specimen (cc), and 1.03
is loss factor of asphalt mixtures.

FIGURE 4. A set of molds for manufacturing ucs’s specimen

Elastic Modulus

The position of specimens, vertical strain gauge, and UCS machine can be seen in Fig. 5. Loads and changes in
the height of test specimens were recorded by Delta Dimensi software as a data logger. Delta Dimensi Software was
created to read and save deflection data from proving ring and specimen in less than 1 minute. The temperature testing
was 25 °C.
Compressive strength was calculated by equation 6. Fig. 6 shows how to determine the elastic modulus as tangent
modulus based on the linear portion of the axial stress-vertical strain curve at a fixed of the percentage of ultimate
strength (σu) [7]. Equation 10 was used to calculate the elastic modulus. The dimension of the specimen was
determined by the ratio of length to diameter of the specimens (L/D) is 2 [10-12]. The result of Leon’s study, which
it had axial stress-axial strain curve [2], showed that the ratio L/D ≈2 were more consistent than L/D < 2.

σ = (P/Ac) ht (6)

050002-4
 A0 = 0.25 π D2 (7)

Ac = A0/(100-εv) (8)

εv = (δv/h) 100 (9)

E = (100∆σ)/∆εv (10)

Those equations where; σ is compressive strength (MPa), P is load (N), ht is height corrected factor, Ac is area
corrected of specimen (mm2), A0 is initial area of specimen (mm2), D is diameter of specimens (mm), εv is vertical
strain (%), δv is length change of specimen, h is length of gauge (mm), and E is elastic modulus (MPa).

(a) (b)
FIGURE 5. (a) UCS Specimen, Ring and Dial (b) UCS Machine

FIGURE 6. Method for calculating Young’s Modulus from axial stress-axial strain curve [7]

Two-Way Analysis of Variance

Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to measure the effect of the aggregate gradation and asphalt
type on the elastic modulus of the asphalt concrete. The model of two-way ANOVA without replication is shown in
equation 11 [14, 15]. Two-way ANOVA assumes that the interaction between two factors was zero [14]. Microsoft
Excel 2016 was used to determine ANOVA.

yij = μ+ αi + βj + εij (11)

050002-5
 The equation where; Y is response variables (i.e. elastic modulus), μ is the overall mean effect, α and β represent
the two factors (i.e. aggregate gradation and asphalt type), i and j are the level of a factor, and ε is a random error.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Gradation Index (GI) and Optimum Bitumen Content (OBC)

Table 1 shows that the OBC for the higher GI will decrease then it will rise again. The downward trend of the
OBC for finer aggregate (UL) or GI = 18.65 requires more asphalt to cover the fine aggregate so that the bitumen
needs increasing. The mid-range aggregate gradation (MR) with the GI value of 24.41 had a balance between the
asphalt used to coat the aggregate and filled the void of the mixture. The coarser of the aggregate gradation (LL) at
GI = 30.17 required more asphalt to fill the void among the coarse aggregate so that the voids in the mixture or VIM
could be fulfilled according to specifications.
Based on the consideration, the resulting model could be determined. Polynomial regression was chosen as the
relationship between the GI and OBC. The resulting model is depicted in Fig. 7. The OBC relationship with the GI as
a single variable is presented in equation 12 and 13 for AC 60/70 and EMA respectively.

OBCA=0.0301 GI2 - 1.3995 GI + 21.736 R2 = 0.85 (12)

OBCE=0.0293 GI2 - 1.3466 GI + 20.745 R2 = 0.83 (13)

Those equations where OBCA is optimum bitumen content for AC 60/70 and OBCE is for EMA in percent of the
mix.
TABLE 1. Characteristics of asphalt concrete mixtures.
Gradation types [Gradation Index]
Descriptions
UL [18.65] UM [21.53] MR [24.41] ML [27.29] LL [30.17]
AC 60/70
OBC (%) 5.97 5.84 5.56 5.65 7.09
Stability (kg) 1889.95 1661.24 1827.81 1410.23 1188.29
flow (mm) 3.30 3.50 3.60 3.85 3.60
density (g/cm3) 2.38 2.36 2.37 2.33 2.31
VIM (%) 3.52 4.20 3.51 3.85 4.64
VMA (%) 15.72 15.64 15.03 16.32 18.21
VFA (%) 77.64 73.13 76.70 73.12 74.55
RMS (%) 90.3 92.0 93.0 95.3 92.6
EMA
OBC (%) 5.71 5.50 5.53 5.40 6.97
Stability (kg) 2470.10 2292.89 2064.71 1794.67 1695.67
flow (mm) 3.60 3.40 4.50 3.90 6.00
density (g/cm3) 2.36 2.36 2.35 2.34 2.31
VIM (%) 3.40 4.14 4.45 4.54 4.73
VMA (%) 15.75 15.66 15.75 15.74 18.07
VFA (%) 78.40 73.57 71.73 71.22 73.82
RMS (%) 92.4 96.14 95.42 99.71 99.57
Note: RMS = Retained Marshall Stability

Fig. 7 depicts obviously that the OBC of EMA is lower than AC 60/70. The EMA is an elastomer-modified asphalt,
a kind of gel type of bitumen. It can be proved from the penetration index (PI) of the EMA and AC 60/70 are 0.25 and
-1.17 respectively. It means that higher the PI, the more ‘gel-type’ of the bitumen there. The criterion of the PI is -1.5
to 0.7 by [13]. Thus, absorption of the EMA is lower than AC 60/70. The consequence of the lower absorption is
lower OBC. Habeeb et al [16], who compared between unmodified asphalt and polymer modified asphalt, had the
same result to this research.

050002-6
 8.0
7.5

Bitumen content (% of mix)

7.0
6.5
R² = 0.85
6.0
5.5
5.0
R² = 0.83
4.5
4.0
17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31
Gradation Index (%)
OBC AC 60/70 OBC EMA
Poly. (OBC AC 60/70) Poly. (OBC EMA)

FIGURE 7. Relationship between gi and bitumen content

Unconfined Compressive Strength Specimen

A specimen of unconfined compressive strength has a cylindrical mold shape of 78.2 ± 1.3 mm diameter at 166.7
± 1.5 mm height. The extended cylinder head has a function to regulate the height of the loose asphalt mixture. The
extended cylinder head had 100 ± 2 mm height.
The VIM of the specimen can be seen in Table 2. The result showed that manufacturing specimens were more than
76 – 95% meeting the criteria. The VIM average for all gradation type met the criteria 3-5%. Table 2 showed that the
manufacturing of specimen with AC 60/70 and EMA had resulted in accordance with the specification so that it could
be used to test UCS.
TABLE 2. VIM of the specimen
Asphalt type AC 60/70 EMA
No. of Gradation types Gradation types
Specimen UL UM MR ML LL UL UM MR ML LL
1 3.13 4.24 4.77 4.48 3.35 3.88 4.91 4.31 4.35 3.96
2 3.53 3.87 4.70 4.09 4.13 3.43 4.94 4.54 5.12 3.92
3 2.80 4.07 3.60 2.93 4.24 3.56 3.53 5.22 3.36 3.25
4 2.90 4.59 4.35 3.36 5.68 5.04 3.35 4.33 4.22 3.89
5 3.84 3.89 4.85 3.75 3.17 3.30 3.73 3.57 4.09 3.93
6 3.48 3.87 4.49 2.96 3.44 2.43 4.99 4.05 5.08 3.51
7 3.53 3.14 4.33 3.49 3.88 4.23 5.09 3.90 5.20 5.22
8 3.16 3.91 4.24 3.66 4.09 4.06 3.95 5.38 5.19 3.15
9 4.02 3.90 3.63 3.46 3.30 3.44 4.83 4.20 4.72 4.70
10 3.46 6.12 3.69 3.50 4.33 3.39 3.28 4.08 4.44 3.82
11 3.44 5.11 4.50 4.01 4.11 4.28 3.72 4.69 4.02 3.51
12 3.28 2.90 4.28 2.96 3.35 4.29 4.66 4.25 4.37 4.75
13 2.96 3.52 3.81 3.43 3.69 4.37 4.35 3.80 4.30 4.97
14 3.06 4.54 3.23 3.12 3.53 3.91 4.73 3.12 4.21 5.39
15 4.57 3.57 5.07 2.98 3.86 3.54 5.00 4.69 3.65 4.29
16 3.91 3.83 3.58 2.87 4.14 4.79 4.02 3.64 3.49 3.83
17 4.60 3.35 3.18 4.00 3.82 4.00 2.71 2.85 3.91 3.39
18 3.36 3.56 3.43 2.83 3.73 3.88 3.47 4.31 3.84 4.49
19 3.88 - 4.41 3.93 4.00 - 4.18 3.04 3.56 -
20 3.93 - 3.67 3.99 4.01 - - 3.17 - -
21 3.97 - 4.38 4.12 - - - 4.30 - -
22 - - - - - - - 4.29 - -
23 - - - - - - - 3.26 - -
VIM average (%) 3.56 4.00 4.10 3.52 3.89 3.88 4.18 4.04 4.27 4.11
Meet criteria (%) 83.33 83.33 95.24 76.19 95.00 88.24 88.89 91.30 78.95 88.89

050002-7
 Elastic Modulus
Fig. 8 showed that the EMA has the higher strength (stress) than AC 60/70 because of the elastomer. Obviously,
the curve showed that the UL gradation is more ductile than other gradation. The UL has the highest of ultimate
strength and the widest area under the curve which has the higher energy to deform the asphalt mix. The UL and UM
have good ductility because they have more mortar than other gradations [17]. The ML and LL have a ductile mix but
lower strength. The ML and LL are coarser aggregates; however, they need more OBC. Thus, they are ductile but
lower strength.

8 8
UL-14 UL-5

UL-21 UL-7
7 7 UM-2
UM-1
UM-3
UM-2
6 6 MR-6
MR-9 MR-21
MR-16 ML-4
5 5
ML-1 ML-22
Stress (MPa)

LL-10

Stress (MPa)
ML-2
4 4 LL-17
LL-17
LL-18
3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1
Strain (%) Strain (%)

(a) (b)
FIGURE 8. Relationship between strain and stress on asphalt concrete with (a) AC 60/70 and (b) EMA

Based on Fig. 8, determining elastic modulus has been proposed in Fig. 9. The consideration of elastic modulus
determination is a linear portion of the curve before peak stress [7]. The Linear part of the curve can be determined at
20-80% of peak stress [3] but from Fig 8 showed that the shape of the curve is different from one another.
Figure 9 is LL gradation typical curve in this research which has short of the linear part of the curve. Based on Fig.
9, the equation of the elastic modulus is shown in equation 14.

E = (100 (σ0.5-σ0.25))/(ε0.5-ε0.25) (14)

The equation where; E is elastic modulus (MPa), σ0.25 is stress at 0.25 ultimate stress (MPa), σ0.5 is stress at 0.5
ultimate stress (MPa), ε0.25 is strain at 0.25 ultimate stress (%), ε 0.25 is strain at 0.25 ultimate stress (%). The results
of equation 14 are presented in Table 3.

FIGURE 9. Proposed method for determining elastic modulus

050002-8
 Table 3 and Fig. 7 showed that the UL was the lowest GI (finer aggregate) with the highest elastic modulus
because of the highest mortar in the mix [13]. The LL had higher elastic modulus than the MR and ML because the
LL was the coarser aggregate gradation. Stone and stone contact in LL mixture contributed to the higher elastic
modulus. Aggregate gradation UM, MR and ML between UL and LL can be seen in the GI value.
TABLE 3. The elastic modulus of asphalt concrete.
Gradation Gradation Average elastic modulus (MPa)
type Index AC 60/70 EMA
UL 18.65 700.36 609.49
UM 21.53 695.67 575.35
MR 24.41 566.05 488.95
ML 27.29 574.30 477.48
LL 30.17 645.59 560.99

The comparison of the elastic modulus value can be seen from previous studies done by other researchers. The
result of the elastic modulus was examined by [18] showed that the modulus of the elasticity of the asphalt concrete
at 20 °C with Plastometer tool is 1229.07 MPa. Research of elastic modulus in Egypt [19] by using the Plastometer
tool had an elastic modulus of 724.65 MPa for coarse aggregate gradation at OBC 5.7%; 850.12 MPa for medium
gradation at OBC 5.5%; and 761.87 MPa for fine grading by KAO 6.0%. Therefore, the value of the elastic modulus
in Table 3 is reasonable so that equation 14 can be used to calculate the elastic modulus.

Effect of Aggregate Gradation and Asphalt Type on Elastic Modulus

The GI is the representation of the aggregate gradation that can be used to make a continuous scale for the aggregate
gradation to measure the behavior of asphalt concrete. Therefore, the relationship between the GI and elastic modulus
could be done. Figure 10 obviously shows that the elastic modulus of the AC 60/70 is higher than the EMA. The EMA
has elastomer which can produce higher strain at the same load and time than the AC 60/70. The EMA also has higher
strength. It is because of the cohesive property of the EMA is higher than the AC 60/70. Fig. 11 shows that EMA’s
asphalt yarn is thicker than the AC 60/70 on the ductility test of asphalt.

800
700
R² = 0.687
Elastic modulus (MPa)

600
500
400 R² = 0.821
300
200
100
0
17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31
Gradation Index (%)
AC 60/70 EMA
Poly. (AC 60/70) Poly. (EMA)

FIGURE 10. Relationship between gradation index and elastic modulus

FIGURE 11. Ductility test for AC 60/70 and EMA

050002-9
 To analyze the effect of the aggregate gradation and asphalt type on the elastic modulus of the asphalt concrete
using compressive strength testing could use two-way ANOVA. Table 4 shows the result of the analysis of variance.
F-crit and P-value are an indicator whether the factors are significant or not. One of them can be used to measure the
effect. The result showed that the aggregate gradation and asphalt type affect significantly on the asphalt concrete. P-
values are 0.001 and 0.0002 at confident level 95% for aggregate gradation and asphalt type respectively. Therefore,
the procedure can be used to determine the elastic modulus.
TABLE 4. The Result of analysis of variance.
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Gradation type 28956.3 4 7239.1 53.4 0.001 6.38
Asphalt type 22062.6 1 22062.6 162.8 0.0002 7.71
Error 542.2 4 135.55
Total 51561.2 9
Note: SS is sum of squares, df is degree of freedom, MS is mean square, F is F value from calculation of data, and F-crit is F
from F distribution table.

CONCLUSION
This aims of this study were to develop the elastic modulus measurement by using the compressive strength testing.
Thus, it concludes:
x A set of specimen molds and the procedure could achieve the VIM target of 3-5% so that the specimen meets
the specification criteria.
x Compressive strength testing with digital dials and Delta Dimensi Software could be used to measure Young’s
modulus of the asphalt concrete.
x The EMA asphalt mixture was more ductile and stronger than the AC 60/70 to resist deformation.
x The aggregate gradation and asphalt types affected significantly on the elastic modulus of the asphalt concrete.
x The average elastic modulus with the compressive strength testing and Gradation Index (GI) could assess the
behavior of the asphalt concrete due to the aggregate gradation and asphalt type.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work has been supported by the Doctoral Research Programme Grant from Ministry of Research, Technology
and Higher Education, of the Republic of Indonesia and Universitas Tadulako under the contract number
622.91/UN28.2/PL/2017.

REFERENCES
1. S. F. Brown and Brunton, An Introduction to the Analytical Design of Bituminous Pavement (University of
Nottingham, 1984).
2. L. Leon, R. Charles, and N. Simpson, Procedia Structural Integrity 2016, edited by Francesco Iacoviello, Luca
Susmel, Donato Firrao, and Giuseppe Ferro (Catania, Italy, 2016), 2, p. 2913-2920.
3. S. Starodubsky, I. Blechman, and M. Livneh, Material and Structures, 27(8), 474–482 (1994).
4. A. Gaus, Tjaronge M.W., N. Ali, and R. Djamaluddin, Procedia Engineering 2015, edited by Antoni, Ima Muljati,
Djwantoro Hardjito (Surabaya, Indonesia, 2015), 125, pp. 657-662.
5. J. Zheng and T. Huang, Journal Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition), 2, 93–106 (2015).
6. F. Canestrari, G. Ferrotti, X. Lu, A. Millien, M. N. Partl, C. Petit, A. Phelipot-Mardele´, H. Piber, and C. Raab,
Advances in Interlaboratory Testing and Evaluation of Bituminous Materials 2013, edited by M. N. Partl, H. U.
Bahia, F. Canestrari, C. de la Roche, H.Di Benedetto, H. Piber, and D. Sybilski (Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg
New York London, 2013), p. 311.
7. ASTM International Designation: D 7012-04, American Society Testing and Material (ASTM) International 2004,
(United States of America, 2004), pp. 4–11.
8. Ditjend Bina Marga, Divisi 6: Paved Pavement, General Specifications Revision 3 2014, (Indonesia, 2014), pp.
1–89.
9. A. Setiawan, L. B. Suparma, and A. T. Mulyono, IJASEIT, 7, 359–365 (2017).

050002-10
 10. A. M. Neville, Properties of Concrete Fourth and Final Edition (Pearson, Prentice Hall, England, 2004), p. 591.
11. ASTM International Designation: D2166/D2166M-13, American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
International 2013, (United States of America, 2013), pp. 1–7.
12. ASTM International Designation: C42/C42M-13, American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
International 2013, (United States of America, 2013), pp. 1–7.
13. R. N. Hunter, A. Self, and J. Read, The Shell Bitumen Handbook (Thomas Telford Publishing, London, 2015),
pp. 66.
14. J. J. Faraway, Practical Regression and Anova using R (2000), p. 171.
15. D. C. Montgomery and G. C. Runger, Applied Statistics and Probability for Engineers (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
United States of America, 2003), p. 510.
16. H. Habeeb, S. Chandra, and Y. Nashaat, Journal of Civil Engineering, 18, 1655-1663 (2014).
17. A. Setiawan, L. B. Suparma, and A. T. Mulyono, Proceedings of the 10 th Asia Pacific Conference on
Transportation and the Environment in conjunction with the 11th Malaysian Universities Transport, Green
Transportation Development and Sustainable Future 2016, (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2016), pp. 17–25.
18. A. Mohamady, B. E. A. Mousa, and M. R. El-Mitiny, Mansoura Engineering Journal, 28, 1-11 (2003).
19. M. A. Motaleb and A. Mohamady, Mansoura Engineering Journal, 29, 1-11 (2004).

050002-11
View publication stats