Comparison of 9.5 mm SuperPave and Marshall Wearing I Mixes in ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

viTable 2.8 Habib Superpave Analysis Results and Criteria ............................................................ 29Table 2.9 Habib Marshall Analysis Results and Criteria ............................................................... 30Table 2.10 Results of Huber’s APA tests ...................................................................................... 31Table 4.1 Results of Fine Aggregate Angularity Tests................................................................... 41Table 5.1 Blend Percentages for Marshall Mix Designs ............................................................... 45Table 5.2 Marshall Mix Design Volumetric Summary .................................................................. 48Table 5.3 Blend Percentages for Superpave Mixtures .................................................................. 50Table 5.4 Summary of Volumetric and Design Properties for Superpave Mixtures ..................... 56Table 5.5 Calculated and Adjusted Weights for APA Test Samples.............................................. 58Table 5.6 Results of APA Tests ...................................................................................................... 60Table 6.1 Global Comparisons of Rutting Potential ..................................................................... 63Table 6.2 Comparison of Superpave Mixes Rutting Potential ....................................................... 65Table 6.3 Comparison of Marshall Mixes Rutting Potential ......................................................... 66Table 6.4 Comparison of Superpave and Marshall Mixes ............................................................ 67Table 6.5 Correlation Coefficients from Regression Analysis ....................................................... 68Table 6.6 Summary of Marshall and Superpave Design Parameters ........................................... 72Table B-1 Weights Used for Testing Fine Aggregates for Fine Aggregate Angularity ................... 80Table B-2 Specific Gravity Determination ..................................................................................... 81Table B-3 Uncompacted Void Content Determination ................................................................. 82Table C-1 Stockpile gradations ..................................................................................................... 84Table C-2 Stockpile Blends per Mix Design .................................................................................. 84Table C-3 Computed Blend Gradations ......................................................................................... 86Table C-4 Marshall Heavy 100% LS Design Data ........................................................................... 87Table C-5 Marshall Medium 100% LS Design Data ........................................................................ 87Table C-6 Marshall Heavy 13% LS Design Data ............................................................................. 87
viiTable C-7 Marshall Medium 13% NS Design Data ......................................................................... 88Table C-8 Superpave Heavy 100% LS Design Data ........................................................................ 88Table C-9 Superpave Medium 100% LS Design Data ..................................................................... 89Table C-10 Superpave Heavy 13% NS Design Data ....................................................................... 89Table C-11 Superpave Medium 13% NS Design Data .................................................................... 89Table C-12 Superpave Light 100% LS Design Data ........................................................................ 91Table C-13 Superpave Light 50% LS Design Data .......................................................................... 91Table C-14 Superpave Light 64% NS Design Data.......................................................................... 92Table C-14 Superpave Light 100% LS (mod) Design Data .............................................................. 92Table D-1 Air Content of APA Samples .......................................................................................... 93Table D-2 Rut Depths for Each APA Specimen .............................................................................. 98
Page 1 and 2: COMPARISON OF 9.5 MM SUPERPAVE ANDM
Page 3 and 4: iNOTICEThe contents of this report
Page 5 and 6: iiiasphalt concrete wearing courses
Page 7: vMixing Procedure 78Appendix B Fine
Page 13 and 14: 4Table 1.1 Mix Design Types in Expe
Page 15 and 16: 6CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW2.1 INT
Page 17 and 18: 82. determine aggregate stockpile b
Page 19 and 20: 10SieveAllowable PercentPassing Sie
Page 21 and 22: 12Stability is recorded as the maxi
Page 23 and 24: 14The WVDOH procedure for determini
Page 25 and 26: 16sieve. This is somewhat different
Page 27 and 28: 18G sb = bulk specific gravity of a
Page 29 and 30: 20theoretical gravity at the initia
Page 31 and 32: 22D/B est = adjusted dust to binder
Page 33 and 34: 24P b,est - 0.5%,P b,est ,P b,est +
Page 35 and 36: Percent Passing261009080Superpave U
Page 37 and 38: 28Table 2.6 WVDOH Marshall and Supe
Page 39 and 40: 30Table 2.9 Habib Marshall Analysis
Page 41 and 42: 32theoretically correct in that the
Page 43 and 44: 34the machine. This variability was
Page 45 and 46: 36CHAPTER 3 EQUIPMENT3.1 INTRODUCTI
Page 47 and 48: 38Hose PressureWheel Load100 psi100
Page 49 and 50: 40mouth. This jar rests on a holder
Page 51 and 52: problematic, as the saturated surfa
Page 53 and 54: 44Mechanical Laboratory Sieve. Afte
Page 55 and 56: Percent Passing4610090100% Limeston
Page 57 and 58: 48Maximum specific gravity is a req
Page 59 and 60:
50gradation. This allowed for direc
Page 61 and 62:
Percent Passing521009080Light 100%
Page 63 and 64:
54percentage of aggregate from the
Page 65 and 66:
56Table 5.4 Summary of Volumetric a
Page 67 and 68:
58Table 5.5 Calculated and Adjusted
Page 69 and 70:
60Table 5.6 Results of APA TestsAir
Page 71 and 72:
62exhibit lower rut depths than any
Page 73 and 74:
design had significantly more rutti
Page 75 and 76:
66SP L 100LS SP L 64NS -10.335 2.77
Page 77 and 78:
68percent air voids and percent lim
Page 79 and 80:
Air Voids (%)Uncompacted Voids (%)7
Page 81 and 82:
72than the Marshall mixes. Table 6.
Page 83 and 84:
Voids in the Mineral Aggregate. As
Page 85 and 86:
76REFERENCESAmerican Association of
Page 87 and 88:
78APPENDIX A BUCKET MIXER INSTRUCTI
Page 89 and 90:
80APPENDIX B FINE AGGREGATE ANGULAR
Page 91 and 92:
82Table B-3 Uncompacted Void Conten
Page 93 and 94:
84AGGREGATE DESIGN DATATable C-1 St
Page 95 and 96:
86Table C-3 Computed Blend Gradatio
Page 97 and 98:
88Table C-7 Marshall Medium 13% NS
Page 99 and 100:
90%G mm%AC VMA VTM VFA @ N ini @N d
Page 101 and 102:
92Table C-14 Superpave Light 64% NS
Page 103:
946 2979.3 1696.7 2988.1 2.307 7.09
Page 106 and 107:
971 2912.7 1620.8 2917.9 2.246 7.65
Page 108 and 109:
992 8.40 10.80 7.402 7.90 9.90 7.80
Page 110 and 111:
1011 9.50 6.90 11.502 9.79 7.15 10.
Page 112 and 113:
1032 8.55 5.20 5.95L R RDate Tested
show all

Comparison of 9.5 mm SuperPave and Marshall Wearing I Mixes in ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?