CE 20103 Transportation Engineering

Hot Bituminous Mix Design

bjective of Hot Mix Design
develop an economical blend of aggregates and asphalt
t meets design requirements

ould be economical after considering the initial and life

le cost

uminous mixes –
signed to withstand heavy traffic loads under adverse
matic conditions and to provide adequate structural an
ctional character to the pavement
Desirable Properties of Bituminous Mix
Deformation Resistance:
Bituminous Mix - Should not distort (rut) or defor
shove) under traffic loading. Mix deformation
elated to aggregate surface and abrasio
haracteristics, gradation, asphalt binder content an
binder viscosity at high temperatures.
Desirable Properties of Bituminous Mix

Fatigue Resistance: Mix should not crack when

subjected to repeated loads over time.
Fatigue cracking - related to bitumen content &
stiffness.
Desirable Properties of Bituminous Mix

ow temp. cracking resistance:

should not crack when subjected to low ambien
emperatures.
ow temp cracking -primarily a function of the aspha
•temperature

inder low temperature stiffness.

Desirable Properties of Bituminous Mix

Workability. - capable of being placed and compacte

with reasonable effort.
Workability - generally related to aggregate
texture/shape/size/gradation, asphalt binder conte
and asphalt binder viscosity at mixing and placement
temperatures.
oisture damage resistance:
ould not degrade substantially from moisture penetra
o the mix.
oisture damage resistance - related to air voids as we
gregate mineral and chemical properties.

d resistance:
placed as a surface course should provide sufficient
ction when in contact with a vehicle's tire. Low skid
istance is generally related to aggregate
aracteristics or high asphalt binder.
Mix Design Procedure
No matter what specific method is used, the basic
mix design procedure remains the same.
All mix design processes involve three basic steps:
Step: 1
Aggregate selection. Different agencies/owners
pecify different methods of aggregate acceptance.
Typically, a series of aggregate physical tests is run
eriodically on each particular aggregate source.
Then, for each mix design, gradation, and size
equirements are specified (MORT&H, Superpave).
Normally, aggregate from more than one quarry
tockpile is required to meet gradation specifications
tep: 2
sphalt binder selection. Different authorities can an
o specify different methods of asphalt bind
aluation.
UPERPAVE PG system/ Viscosity/ penetration is used.
Step: 3
Optimum Bitumen binder content: Mix design method
are generally distinguished by the way in which they
determine the optimum bitumen binder content. This
process can be subdivided into:
Make several trial mixes with different bitumen binde
contents.
Compact these trial mixes in the laboratory. This compaction
meant to be a rough simulation of actual field conditions.
Conduct laboratory tests to determine sample characteristics
Select the bitumen binder content that best satisfies the mi
design objectives
olumetrics of Bituminous Mixes

tuminous mix has

Bituminous binder
Aggregates of different sizes (Coarse, fine and filler

Identified by the maximum size of aggregate used

(Maximum aggregate Size or Nominal Maximum
Aggregate Size)
x Design Methods for HMA Mixes

mmon Methods are

Marshall (Most Common)
Hveem
Superpave (Recent Development)
arshall Method of Mix Design
 arshall Method of Mix Design

eveloped by Bruce Marshall in the late 30’s for

Mississippi Highway Department

ompaction effort considered initially

10 lb. Hammer, 50 blows/face
4% voids after traffic

hese criteria were upgraded for increased tire pressu

nd loads
or Dense graded Bituminous Mixes
arshall Method of Mix Design

tandard Marshall Method involves preparation of a 4 i

(102mm), 2.5 inch (64mm) thick specimen of
ituminous mix with a selected gradation of aggregates
nd binder content.

tandard Compaction effort is used

5kg (10lb) mass and a free fall of 457mm (18 inches)

Maximum size of aggregate = 25.4 mm (one inch)

inch (150mm) mould for larger aggregate size

arshall Method of Mix Design

Height of Fall
arshall Method of Mix Design
arshall Method of Mix Design
arshall Method of Mix Design

te of Compression
1mm/minute Breaking Head
mperature = Inside Radius = 5

Observations
Breaking Load
Deformation at fail
Marshall Method of Mix Design
 arshall Method of Mix Design - Steps

Grading of Commercially available Mineral Aggregate

roportioning of Mineral Aggregate Blend
Specific Gravities of binder and aggregates
reparation of Marshall Specimens
Testing of Marshall Test Specimens
Bulk Specific gravity of compacted specimen
Stability
Flow
Specific gravity of loose mix
rshall Method of Mix Design – Steps (contd..)

Computation of percent Air Voids in Compacted Mix

Computation of percent Voids in Mineral Aggregates F
Binder
Selection of Optimum Binder Content
Checking Specification Values at Optimum Binder Cont
Computation of Materials required for 100 sqm
 arshall Method of Mix Design

election of Mix – Selection of layer thickness, maximu

ggregate size
Minimum Layer thickness > 2 to 3 times Max. aggregate
ze
ggregate Fractions Coarse (Retained on 2.36mm), Fine
ggregate (Pass 2.36mm and Retained on 0.075mm),
Mineral Filler (Passing 0.075mm)
rshall Method of Mix Design

election of Binder and Aggregates that satisfy the

pecifications for the given traffic and climatic conditi
Testing source materials ( Conduct tests to certify th
aterials)
election of Design Aggregate Gradation considering th
raffic and climatic conditions
gregate Size & Gradation
eve Size (mm) % of agg. Passing the sieve
19 100
13.2 92
9.5 77
4.75 62
2.36 50
1.18 41
0.60 32
0.30 23
0.15 16
0.075 7
aximum Aggregate Size – 19mm
ominal Maximum Aggregate Size – 13.2mm
MOSRTH Aggregate Gradation for BC

Sieve Size I (19mm) II (13mm)

50-65 mm 30-45 mm
26.5 mm 100 --
19 mm 79-100 100
13.2 mm 59-79 79-100
9.5 mm 52-72 70-88
4.75 mm 35-55 53-71
2.36 mm 28-44 42-58
1.18 mm 20-34 42-58
600µ 15-27 26-38
300µ 10-20 18-28
150µ 5-13 12-20
75µ 2-8 4-10
Bitumen Content % 5.0-6.0 5.0 – 7.0
nding of Aggregates by weight

ing the proportions in which aggregates from differen

ces are to be mixed to attain a gradation that is close
the target gradation
basic equation governing the blending process
Aa + Bb + Cc + … …
ere,
% of the combined aggregates passing a given sieve
C,… = % of material passing a given sieve for the indivi
regates
c,.. = Proportions of individual aggregates used in the
bination (total = 100)
lending of Aggregates by weight

% Passing

ieve Size Aggregate Aggregate Aggregate Filler

A (20 mm) B (10 mm) C (Stone (Lime
Dust) Stone )
19 mm 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
13.2 mm 46.5 100.0 100.0 100.0
9.5 mm 13.1 100.0 100.0 100.0
4.75 mm 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
2.36 mm 0.0 40.0 100.0 100.0
1.18 mm 0.0 17.6 86.8 100.0
600µ 0.0 0.5 63.7 100.0
300µ 0.0 0.0 47.7 100.0
150µ 0.0 0.0 24.8 90.0
75µ 0.0 0.0 9.5 74.3
nding of Aggregates by weight

100

90

80

70

60
% Passing

50

40

30
Target Lower
20

10 Upper Blend
0
0 5 10 15 20
Sieve Size, mm
Preparation of Test Specimens

es of test specimens prepared with the selected aggregate bl

different binder contents ( 5 to 6 samples with varying bind
ent %)
ct Trial Binder Content
0.035a + 0.045b + Kc + F
re, P = approx. Binder content (% by wt. of mix)
a = % of aggregate retained on 2.36mm sieve
b = % of aggregate passing 2.36mm and retained o
0.075mm sieve
c = % of aggregate passing 0.075mm sieve
K = 0.15 for 11-15 % passing 0.075mm sieve
= 0.18 for 6-10 % passing 0.075mm sieve
= 0.20 for <= 5% passing 0.075mm sieve
F = 0 to 2 % (based on absorption of aggregate)
paration of Test Specimens

cimens at 6 binder contents

ee specimens at each binder content
ut 25 kg of blended aggregate and 4 lt of binder
ermine viscosity of binder at different temperature
g Rotational Viscometer and selection of Mixing and
paction Temperatures
Mixing and Compaction Temperatures

10
5 Viscosity, Pa s

1
Compaction Range (0.28 +/- 0.03 Pa-s)
.5
.3
.2
Mixing Range (0.17 +/- 0.02 Pa-s)
.1
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Temperature, C
Marshall Samples
umetrics of Bituminous Mixes

Absorbed
Water Bitumen

Dry Surface Bitumen

Dry Coated
Aggrega
rix of Bitumen Mix
umetrics of Bituminous Mixes

Air Void
Bitumen coating
around aggregate

Water Permeable Pores not

permeable to bitumen

Absorbed bitumen
Aggregate
lumetrics of Bituminous Mixes
Vmb = Bulk
Volume of
Compacted
Vmm = Vo
Volume of

Air Va
Paving Mix
Va = Volum
Air Voids

Vfa Vma Vma = Volu

Asphalt Vb Voids in m
aggregates
Vba Vfa = Volum
Voids filled
asphalt

Vmm Vmb Vb = Volum

asphalt
Vsb Vba = Volu
Mineral absorbed a

Aggregate Vse Vsb = Volu

mineral
aggregates
bulk sp. Gr
Vse = Volu
mineral
aggregates
effective sp
Gravity)
olumetrics of Bituminous Mixes

= Volume of Voids in mineral aggregates

b = Bulk Volume of Compacted Mix
m = Void-less Volume of Paving Mix
= Volume of Voids filled with asphalt
= Volume of Air Voids
= Volume of asphalt
= Volume of absorbed asphalt
= Volume of mineral aggregates (by bulk sp. Gr.)
= Volume of mineral aggregates (by effective sp.
Gravity)
olumetrics of Bituminous Mixes

rameters to be Measured
Specific Gravity of Binder (Gb)
Bulk Sp. Gr. of mineral aggregates (Gsb)
Bulk Sp. Gr. of Compacted Mix (Gmb)
Sp. Gravity of Void-less Volume of Paving Mix (Gmm

rameters to be Computed
Effective sp. Gravity of mineral aggregates, Volume o
Voids in mineral aggregates, Volume of Voids filled
with asphalt, Volume of Air Voids, Volume of asphalt,
Volume of absorbed asphalt
olumetric Analysis of Bituminous Mixes

(Dry) Specific Gravity of aggregates = Dry mass/Volu

ater replaced by the saturated surface dry agg.

Specific Gravity of
pacted Mix = Dry mass of
/Volume of water replaced by
saturated surface dry
cimen

ecific Gravity of Void-less Volume of Paving Mix

) = Dry mass of loose mix / Volume of water
aced by the saturated surface dry loose mix
 Theoretical specific gravity

Gmm = A/(A+D-E)
 . Testing of Samples

ermine Bulk Specific Gravity of specimens

dition the specimens in Water bath at 600C for 30
minutes
duct Marshall Stability Test – Determine Stability
Flow for each specimen
rect the Stability Values for (non-standard height
ume)
t should be completed within 30 seconds after
moving from the water bath
Testing of Marshall Sample
rection Factors for Stability

Volume Correction Volume Correction

cc Factor cc Factor
432-443 1.32 547-559 0.89
444-456 1.25 560-573 0.86
457-470 1.19 574-585 0.83
471-482 1.14 586-598 0.81
483-495 1.09 599-610 0.78
509-522 1.00 611-625 0.76
523-535 0.96
536-546 0.93
nsity and Voids Analysis

etermine the maximum specific gravity on

ose mix
ompute the effective specific gravity of
gregates

arryout Volumetric Analysis

Air Void, VMA, VFB
nsity and Voids Analysis - Example

men content = 5.3 % (by weight of mix)

cific Gravity of bitumen , Gb = 1.03
Specific Gravity of Aggregate, Gsb = 2.703
imum Specific gravity of loose mix Gmm = 2.535
Specific Gravity of the specimen Gmb= 2.442

ective Specific Gravity of Aggregate

= (Pmm-Pb)/ (Pmm/ Gmm - Pb / Gb)
= (100-5.3)/ (100/2.535 – 5.3/1.03) = 2.761

men absorption = 100* ((Gse-Gsb)/(Gsb*Gse))*Gb

= 100((2.761-2.703)/(2.703*2.761))*1.
= 0.8 %
ective Bitumen = Pb – Pba*Ps/100 = 5.3 – 0.8*94.7/100 = 4.
nsity and Voids Analysis - Example

s in Mineral Aggregate (VMA) = 100 – Gmb*Ps/Gsb

= 100 – 2.442*94.7/2.703 = 14.4%

Voids, Va = 100 * (Gmm-Gmb)/Gmm

= 100 * (2.535 – 2.442)/2.535 = 3

s Filled with Bitumen, VFB = 100*(VMA-Va)/VMA

= 100*(14.4-3.7)/14.4 = 74.3 %
Interpretation of Data
 Bulk density v/s Binder content
2.380
2.375
Bulk density, gm/cc

2.370

2.365

2.360
2.355

2.350

2.345

2.340
2.335
4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 6.0

Binder content, %
 Marshall Stability v/s binder content
1100

1050

1000
Stability, kg

950

900

850

800
4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9

Binder content %
 Flow v/s Binder content

5.0

4.8

4.6

4.4
Flow, mm .

4.2

4.0

3.8

3.6

3.4

3.2

3.0
4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 6.0

Binder, %
 % Air voids in compacted mix v/s Binder
6.0

5.5
Air voids in mix, %

5.0

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0
4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9

Binder, %
 % Voids Filled by Bitumen (VFB) v/s Binder

85

80

75
VFB

70

65

60
4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 6.0
Binder, %
 MoSRTH Specifications

nimum Marshall Stability, kg 900

arshall Flow, mm 2-4

ids in Compacted Mix, % 3-6

ids in Mineral Aggregates Filled by Bitumen, % 65-

ater Sensitivity, Loss of Stability on immersion in water at 6
Min 8
Minimum VMA in Mineral Aggregates
Aggregate AV=3% AV=4% AV=5%
Size
9.5 MM 14 15 16
12.5 13 15 16
19.0 12 13 14
25.0 11 11 12
ptimum binder content

nder content for maximum bulk density 5.5%

nder content for maximum stability 5.0%
nder content for 4.5% voids in compacted mix, 4.8%
verage binder content 5.1%

ller to Binder ratio shall be in the range of 0.6 to 1.2 b

is better to select binder content corresponding to 4

r Voids Content and check for other parameters
rimary Objective of Mix Design

e primary objective of bituminous mix design exercise

ried out by most agencies is to select aggregate
dation and binder content, which when compacted by
ndard compaction effort should yield an air void conte
4%.
e compaction effort should correspond to that attaine
he field after years of traffic
e mix also has to satisfy other volumetric and strength
eria
nder Content
Stability/
Durability
Strength
Air Voids

Bitumen Content Bitumen Content

 nificance of Air Void Content for Pavement
rformance

dies in several countries, especially in hot tropical

ntries, indicated that mixes whose air void content
uced to less than 2 to 3 % are more likely to fail by
ting and bleeding
Voids in Mix (%)

Days after Construct

gnificance of Air Void Content

ficient Void Content Low Void Content

gnificance of Air Void Content

Air Void Content – Load transmitted by Bitumen and

by aggregates. Mix loses strength when bitumen is in
tinuous phase. Also leads to bleeding mixes due to
ondary compaction and expansion of bitumen
h Air Void Content – Allows free circulation air (causi
dation of bitumen) and free circulation of water (causi
pping and ravelling)
SRTH recommends 3 to 6 % air void content for BC
DBM Mixes
st Agencies design mixes to have 4% air void content
er Years of traffic.
Marshall Method

Advantages
Attention on voids, strength, durability
Inexpensive equipment
Easy to use in process control/acceptance

Disadvantages
Impact method of compaction
Does not consider shear strength
Load perpendicular to compaction axis
arshall Method
is method has by and large stood the test of time
cause of limits on air void,VMA, voids filled with
tumen and flow coupled with feed back from field
rformance data
arshall test data can not predict fatigue or permanent
formation behaviour of in -service pavement . This
ethod does not give any guide line for judging the quali
bitumen
Marshall Method

spite of the shortcomings , Highway engineers have

en happy with method because the method is
Simple
Costs little
Can be used at the site also
Most of the bituminous surfacing designed by th
Marshall method have behaved satisfactorily.
arshall Method - Limitations

s unconfined test but actual pavement material is subjected to t

al stress of stress
s empirical and test parameters are not related directly to the
ement performance such as permanent deformation and fatigue
cking behaviour
does not identify easily compactable mixes under traffic
act compaction used in the method does not simulate mixture
sification as it occurs in a real pavement
does not guarantee that air voids would not become zero with
eated traffic loading
sequently ,there has been a growing feeling among the bituminou
ineers that the Marshall method should be replaced with bett
hod which measures the fundamental properties of bituminous
tures
Marshall Method - Limitations

uminous concrete mixtures are failing (rutting and

eding) in most places due to
ong interpretation of MOSRTH specifications
ck of research in mix design under Indian climate
eding and rutting failure mode is indicative of low or z
void
Marshall Method - Limitations

OSRTH specifications refer to mix parameters after

eral years of traffic.
ntractors,consultants and others insist on the mix
ameters immediately after rolling
8% air void soon after rolling is accepted international