HK01 CIVIL ENGINEERING PROGRAM FACULTY OF CIVL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA SABAH KA31802 LABORATORY OF GEOTHECHNIC & HIGHWAY DUE DATE : 22nd MARCH 2018 TITTLE : F5 MARSHALL MIX DESIGN MEMBERS
MATRIC NUMBER:
NORHAISA BINTI LEHA
BK15110200 BK15110200
NORLISA BINTI HASSAN
BK15160371
MOHD ISHAQ BIN SELAMAT
BK15110180
MUHAMAD HISYAMUDDIN IDRIS
BK15110317 BK15110317
MUHD QAYUM BIN ABDUL SOUD
BK15160377 BK15160377
1
SIGNATURE
DEWI NUR ATIEQAH BINTI BAHARUN ALAM
BK15110069
TABLE CONTENT PAGE 3
1.0
INTRODUCTION
2.0
OBJECTIVE OF EXPERIMENT
3
3.0
APPARATUS & MATERIALS
3
4.0
PROCEDURE
4-6
5.0
RESULT
6 - 10
2
6.0
DISCUSSION
11
7.0
CONCLUSION
12
8.0
REFERENCES
12
1.0
INTRODUCTION This test procedure is used in designing and evaluating bituminous paving mixes and is extensively used in routine test programmes for the paving jobs. The basic concepts of the Marshall mix design method were originally developed by Bruce Marshall of the Mississippi Highway Department around 1939 and then refined by the U.S. Army. Currently, the Marshall method is used in some capacity by about 38 states. The Marshall method seeks to select the asphalt binder content at a desired density that satisfies minimum stability and range of flow values (White, 1985). In Malaysia the Marshall Mix Design has become the norm in the road industry. Before any bitumen
mixes can be placed and laid on the road, the aggregate and the binder types are generally screened for quality and requirement. Approximately 15 samples are required to be prepared to determine the required Optimum Bitumen Content (OAC). The prepared samples are to be analysed for bulk density, air void and stability. By using the Bitumen Institute Method, the Optimum Bitumen Content are determined from the individual plots of bulk density, voids in total mix and stability vs bitumen content (%).
3
2.0
3.0
OBJECTIVE OF EXPERIMENT: a)
To prepare standard specimens of bitumen for the determination of stability and flow using the Marshall Apparatus.
b)
To identify factors influence the mix design.
APPARATUS & MATERIALS:
Marshall testing machine, Marshall testing rig, Marshall compactor, Asphalt mixer, water bath with constant temperature, mould, balance, extrusion Jack, oven.
4.0 4.1
PROCEDURES PART 1: Batching of Aggregate
1. The aggregate was graded according to Class B (Sabah State Road) as in the table below. The required weight for each aggregate size were calculated. Table 1 ASTM
Percentage of passing by
Sieve size
weight (%)
19 mm
100
12.5 mm
80-95
Weight (g)
4
9.5 mm
70-90
4.75 mm
50-70
2.36 mm
35-50
600 μm
18-29
300 μm
13-23
150 μm
8-16
75 μm
4-10
2. The aggregate was sieved and weighted based on Table 1. The aggregate was prepared for 3 samples. The weight of aggregate for one sample is approximately 1100 g. the aggregate was then placed in a plastic bag.
4.2
PART 2: Mixing And Compaction
3. The aggregate, graded according to the ASTM or BS standard were oven dried at 150 °C for at least 4 hours. All mixing accessories such as mixer, scoop and Marshall mould were put inside the oven. 4. The binder was heated at the same temperature with aggregate. The thoroughly cleaned mould was heated on a hot plate or in an oven to a temperature between 140 °C-160 °C. 5. The heated aggregate was placed into the mixer and was then blend dried for 1 to 2 minutes. Then, appropriate amount of binder was added into the aggregate. 6. The materials were mixed thoroughly until the entire aggregate are coated. While mixing, factors that will influence the sample mixing were observed. 7. The mixture was placed in tray and was then divided into three samples. 5
8. The heated mould was placed on the table, and then a piece of filter paper was fit in the bottom of the mould. The hot mix was poured into the mould and it was made sure that it is evenly distributed in the mould. It was done by tamping the materials (using steel rod) 15 times around the edges and 5 times in the centre leaving a slightly rounded surface. 9. The compaction mould with mix was placed on the compaction machine and it was compacted for 75 blows both face which is top and bottom. 10. The sample was then left at least 2 hour before removing from the Marshall mould.
4.3
PART 3: Test on Specimen
11. The specimen was carefully removed from the mould, transferred to a smooth flat surface and allowed to cool to r oom temperature. 12. From the three samples, one sample was used for the volumetric analysis, one sample for Marshall Stability and flow and one sample for the resilient modulus test. 13. The specimen height and weight were measured in air and water. The specimen density was determined. 14. The marshall sample was soaked for at least 30-40 minutes in the water bath at 60°C. Then, the sample was tested for Marshall machine to determine its stability and flow. The specimen was loaded at a constant rate of starin of 50.8mm/minute. 15. The stability value obtained was corrected by the appropriate coefficient in Table 2. 16. For the Resilient Modulud test, the testing temperature was at 5°C.
6
5.0
RESULT
5.1
Part 3: Test on specimen
Group/Spec.
Bit.
Wt. of Specimen
Bulk
Density (g/cc)
Volume % Total
Voids
Spec.
Resilient
By
In Air
In
SSD
Vol.
Bulk
Max
Bit.
Agg.
Void
Agg.
Filled
Total
Height
Modulus
Wt.
(g)
Water
(g)
(cc)
b/e
(Theory)
(axf)/
(100-
Mix
100 –
(h%)/k
Mix
(mm)
(MPa)
Gac
a)f /
100-
i
Gagg
h —i
o
of
d-c
(g)
Mix
(gf)% /g
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
G2/1
4.5
1021
578
1023
445
2.294
2.49
10.12
82.05
G2/2
4.5
1100
j
k
l
m
n
1.68
0.08
57
G1/1 G1/2
2.49
G3/1 G3/2 G4/1 G4/2
7
7.83
17.95
61
3777
G1
G2
Mixing Temperature
153.0°C
Compacting Temperature
145.0°C
8
G3
G4
5.2
RESULT ANALYSIS
Unit Weight vs Asphalt Content Graph 620 610
) 600 3 m g 590 M ( t 580 h g i 570 e W560 t i n U550 540 530 3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
Asphalt Content (%)
Diagram 1 : Graph of Unit Weight vs Asphalt Content
9
6
Voids Total Mix vs Asphalt Content Graph 0.21 0.18
) %0.15 ( x i M l 0.12 a t o 0.09 T s d i 0.06 o V 0.03 0 3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
Asphalt Content (%)
Diagram 2 : Graph of Unit Weight vs Asphalt Content
10
6
Voids in Minerals Aggregate vs Asphalt Content Graph ) 30 %28 ( e t 26 a g 24 a r g 22 g A20 s l a 18 r e 16 n i M14 n 12 i s d i 10 o V 3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
Asphalt Content (%)
Diagram 3 : Graph of Voids in Minerals Aggregate vs Asphalt Content
Binder content calculation,
BC(g)
4.0 1100 100 4.0
11
45 g
6.0
DISCUSSION The main purpose of the design process is to determine the optimum bitumen content (OBC) of each asphaltic mixture. From Marshall
Mix Design laboratory test, data and result were found based on percentage sample binder. The aggregate were sieve exactly according the size were state in pavement manual laboratory. The sieve was doing in properly sieve to prevent the wrong size. From the sieving two sample were prepaid for each percentages of binder used as Marshall Mix Design. In Marshall Method were used Marshall Hammer, the Marshall Stability and Resilient Modulus test which is the biggest differentiate aspects. Both method are easily to get to the high and low temperature. The aggregate were put in oven about 6 – 8 hour to dry it before start the process of compaction. This is to ensure the aggregate are always in dry. The aggregate and asphalt were mix together at temperature 140 C - 160 C. Number of blows was used in this test is 75 blows for both face ( top and bottom ). ⁰
⁰
The Marshall sample is weighted to get the dry air mass and surface dry mass. The basket was placed with the Marshall sample not touch below the water level and the sample is wiped with cloth before weighed to ensure get the surface dry mass. The passing values of stability and flow depend upon the mix class being evaluated. In this test each group were used their own percentages of binder. From the calculation, the 4.0% of binder, we get the average for bulk specific gravity is 2.51% , bitumen volume is 3.08%, aggregate volume is 28.16%, Air void mix volume 67.66% , Void in the aggregate is 71.74% and Void filled with asphalt is 68.69%. From the experiment, the resilient modulus test result were obtain is 3741.25 MPa. The result were tabulated to determine the shape of graph.
12
7.0
CONCLUSION Most of the objectives for this experiment were successfully achieved. For the first test, we able to prepare the standard specimens of
asphaltic concrete for determination of stability and flow in Marshall apparatus and to determined density, percentage air voids and percent of aggregate voids filled with binder. Specimens with 4.05, 4.5%, 5.0%, 5.5% asphalt content are prepared successfully. For the density and void analysis, we also successfully determine the density and void analysis in the mix design specimens. The graphs of bulk density, VTM, VMA, and VFA versus percentage of binder are plotted. The proportion of void in the mix design can affect the strength of the pavement thus it should be design in such a way that is fulfilling the requirement of the asphalt mix design. The third test, we are able to determine the resilient modulus or the stiffness modulus of asphalt mixes using UMATTA machine and the graph of resilient modulus versus percentage of binder is plotted. For the Marshall stability and flow test, we able to measure the resistance of flow of cylindrical specimens of an asphaltic paving mixture loaded on the lateral surface by means of the Marshall Apparatus. Thus the objective of this experiment is achieved.
8.0 REFERENCES 1. Fred L. Mannering, Walter P. Kilareski, Principle of Highway Engineering and Traffic Analysis, 2 nd Edition. 2. Paul H. Wright, Karen K.Dixton, Highway E ngineering, 7th Edition, United State, (2004). 3. Ratnasamy Muniandy , Radin Umar Radin Sohaidi, Highway Materilas A guide Book for Engineers, University Putra Malaysia. (2001).
13
