Design and management of recycled flexible pavement in Iraq

Mohmmad B. Abdljabar1*, Saud A. Sultan2

1
Dept. of Highways and Transport. Eng., College of Eng., Al- Mustansirya Univ., Bab Al- Mudham
Baghdad. mbakr67@yahoo.com Baghdad,Iraq,
2
Dept. of Highways and Transport. Eng., College of Eng., Al- Mustansirya Univ., Bab Al- Mudham
Baghdad, Iraq, sasultan2003@yahoo.com.
* Telephone: 00964-1-7642869.

Abstract

It is necessary to consider recycling as one of the attracting solutions for rehabilitation of

old flexible pavement. The roads network in Iraq deteriorated rapidly during the last few decades
due to the lack of efficient pavement management system and poor maintenance. During the past
few years, the use of new milling machines had produced increasing amounts of reclaimed
asphalt pavements materials (RAP). These amounts of RAP were accumulated due to milling of
old and deteriorated asphalt pavements of roads in Iraq without any beneficial usage. Different
types of locally available stabilizers and additives were investigated to find the most suitable one
from the point of view of economy and environment. The analysis of life cycle costs was carried
out using system analysis and management of pavement (SAMP). It was found that the use of
limestone dust with hydrated lime improves the properties of reclaimed asphalt materials to be
used as base or sub-base materials for new or rehabilitated old roads with a total cost reduction
up to 32% and maintenance cost reduction by more than 50%. The findings of this study and
recommendations may be considered as guidelines for future use of in-place recycling equipment
that the state corporation of roads and bridges in Iraq (SCRB) is going to implement.

Keywords: Recycling, Reclaimed asphalt, Hydrated lime, Limestone dust, and Pavement
stabilization.

1. INTRODUCTION

In Iraq, during the past few years, the use of new milling machines produced increasing
amounts of reclaimed asphalt pavements materials (RAP). These amounts of RAP were
accumulated due to milling of old and deteriorated asphalt pavements of roads without any
beneficial usage as shown in Figs. 1 and 2. While numerous agencies all around the world have
adopted the practice of recycling, only a rare number of research studies have been performed to
characterize and examine the strength, durability, and suitability of recycled materials in Iraq.

1
Kandhal and Mallick (1997) showed that the savings in using 1 ton of RAP materials instead of 1
ton of virgin materials was of a magnitude of $8.20. Additionally, they showed that using RAP
will results in savings between 14% and 34% per ton for 20% and 50% of RAP in the mix,
respectively.
Cold in-place recycling is more common method which involves a process that the asphalt
pavement is recycled in-place where the RAP is combined without heat with emulsified or
foamed asphalt and/or a recycling or rejuvenating agent, possibly also with virgin aggregate, and
mixed at the pavement site, at either partial depth or full depth, to produce new cold mix end
product (Epps 1990).

Fig. 1. Milling the old asphalt pavement of local roads in Baghdad.

Fig. 2. Reclaimed asphalt materials loaded on a dump truck.

Brown (2006) investigated the effects of reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) content and
cement content on the strength and durability of recycled aggregate base materials. He suggested
that milling plans should be utilized to achieve RAP contents in the range of 50 to 75 percent,
and a cement content of 1.0 percent should be specified for this material. Cement contents less
than 1.0 percent are not sufficient to stabilize the material, and greater cement content may cause
cracking. Li et al. (2007) used class c fly ash (10% by weight) to stabilize recycled pavement
material during construction of a flexible pavement. In situ testing was conducted on the RAP
and stabilized recycled asphalt pavement with a falling weight deflectometer (FWD). After 7
days the results of tests showed that California bearing ratio (CBR) ranging between 70 and
94%, dynamic modulus (Md) between 78 and 119 MPa, and unconfined compression strength
(UCS) between 284 and 454 kPa, whereas the reclaimed pavement material alone had CBR
between 3 and 17% and dynamic modulus (Md) between 46 and 50 MPa.

2
2. METHODOLOGY

The mechanical characteristics of locally available RAP materials in terms of CBR and
gradation are not acceptable to be used as base or sub base materials following the local
specifications. The CBR value of tested RAP samples were between 10-15% and the gradation
was out the limits of SCRB specifications which specify a minimum CBR value of 30% for sub
base materials. Therefore, these RAP materials should be treated to improve their mechanical
properties. Different types of locally available stabilizers were used to find the most suitable one
from the point of view of economy and environment. Different contents and different
combinations of stabilizers were used, namely, hydrated lime, Portland cement, cutback asphalt,
and emulsified asphalt in addition to limestone dust as follows:

1. Stabilizing with hydrated lime alone.

2. Stabilizing with hydrated lime and limestone dust.
3. Stabilizing with hydrated lime, limestone dust and Portland cement.
4. Stabilizing with cutback asphalt (MC-70).
5. Stabilizing with cutback asphalt, hydrated lime, and limestone dust.
6. Stabilizing with emulsified asphalt only.
7. Stabilizing with emulsified asphalt, hydrated lime and limestone dust.

2.1. The use of hydrated lime

The use of lime to stabilize reclaimed asphalt pavement material was considered because it
is cheap and locally available material. Lime is a calcium oxide (CaO) that is manufactured by
heating crushed carbonate rock to very high temperatures. Lime is manufactured from limestone
or from dolomite. Limestone is made up of calcium, Carbon, and oxygen, whereas dolomite
contains magnesium in addition to these chemicals. Quick lime is a material which comes
directly from the kiln, reacts rapidly with water to produce slaked or hydrated lime (Yoder and
Witczak 1975).Quick lime very effective when is used with soil, while for aggregate hydrated
lime would be very effective. In this work, hydrated lime was used to stabilize reclaimed asphalt
materials (RAP). Hydrated lime has physical properties and chemical composition as shown in
Table 1 and 2, respectively.

2.2. The use of limestone dust

Limestone dust was used as an additive to lime stabilized reclaimed asphalt materials
(RAP). Limestone dust has physical properties and chemical composition as shown in Table 3
and 4, respectively. Limestone dust has almost similar composition to lime, but with different
concentrations. The limestone dust was used with lime with different percentages. Fly ash is used
usually with lime stabilized materials to improve the strength of these materials, but
unfortunately, it is not available locally. Therefore, limestone dust will be used as a substitute to
fly ash which is locally cheap and available material.

3
 Table 1. Physical properties of hydrated lime.
Properties Hydrated Lime
Form Fine dry white
powder
Color white
Specific Gravity 2.3
pH (25C) 12.93
2
Finess (m /Kg) 657

Table 2. Chemical composition of hydrated lime.

The composition Percent by weight
CaO 72.33
Al2O3 1.68
SiO2 10.25
Fe2O3 8.13
MgO 6.83

Table 3. Physical properties of limestone dust.

Properties Limestone Dust
Form Dry grayish white
powder
Color Grayish-white
Specific Gravity 3.1
pH (25C) 9.62
2
Finess (m /Kg) 212

Table 4. Chemical composition of limestone dust.

The composition Percent by weight
SiO2 1.2
Al2O3 0.05
Fe2O3 0.12
CaO 54.52
MgO 0.13
So3 Nil
Unsolved material 1.19
L.O.I. 41.3
CaCO3 95.00

2.3. Samples preparation

Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) materials were stabilized with different percentages
of the stabilizers mentioned above in addition to the use of limestone dust as an additive. Three
molds of each trial mixture were prepared. The molds used in this work were cubes with

4
dimensions of (150*150*150) mm. These cubes were prepared for each stabilizing material with
different concentration as follows:

RAP materials were stabilized each time by using different stabilizing material alone with
different percentages of 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, and 2.5%. The stabilizing material was mixed with RAP
materials. The mixture then was compacted in cubes of (150*150*150) mm using three layers
with 35 blows per layer. Then the molds were left to be cured for three days. These molds were
later submerged into water for four days before opening. The molded cubes were tested to
determine the dynamic modulus using ultrasonic device, the unconfined compressive strength,
and other physical properties such as density and water content.

2.4. Strength tests

All the prepared cubes were tested by ultrasonic test and then by unconfined compression
test as follows:

2.4.1. Ultrasonic test

Each cube was tested by ultrasonic device as shown in Figure 3. The determined wave
velocity used later to calculate the dynamic modulus of elasticity for each stabilized RAP
material sample according to BS 1881:Part203:1986 as follows:

Ed = . v2 . [(1+) . (1-2) . (1- )-1] (1)

where; Ed is the dynamic elastic modulus (in MN/m2), is the dynamic Poissons ratio (
equal to 0.3 for RAP materials (NCHRP Project 1-37A 2004)), is the density (in kg/m3), and
v is the compression pulse velocity (in km/s).

2.4.2. Unconfined compression strength test

The test was conducted according to ASTM C-470 on prepared cubes. The compression
testing machine as shown in Figure 4 applies the load at a rate of (1.25 kN/second) with an
accuracy of 0.01 kN as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 3. Ultrasonic testing of stabilized RAP material cubes

5
 Figure 4. Unconfined compression machine for testing of cubes.

3. ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS

3.1. Testing results

The use of hydrated lime alone as a stabilizing material was not successful because the
mixture had low strength and failed to hold the cubes intact after opening even when lime
percentage was increased up to 5%.The addition of limestone dust as an additive to the hydrated
lime stabilized RAP materials improved the strength characteristics such as the density,
unconfined compressive strength and the dynamic modulus. This can be attributed to the
pozzolanic reaction of limestone dust (similar to fly ash) and its action as a substitute to the lack
of fines in RAP materials. The RAP materials stabilized with equal percentages of hydrated lime
and limestone dust gives the best results in terms of strength characteristics of stabilized RAP
materials. Increasing the percentage of hydrated lime and the percentage of limestone dust above
4% for each of them decreases the strength characteristics of the RAP stabilized materials (the
unconfined compressive strength and the dynamic modulus) as shown in Figure 5 and 6.

The addition of ordinary Portland cement to the RAP materials stabilized with hydrated
lime and limestone dust did not improve the strength characteristics. The use of asphalt cutback
(MC-70) was not successful to prepare intact cubes after opening due to its low strength. The use
of asphalt emulsion improved the strength characteristics of RAP materials very little in
comparison with other stabilizing materials. The addition of hydrated lime and limestone dust to
the asphalt emulsion improves its ability to increase the strength of RAP materials.

6
 Figure 5. Effect of increasing limestone dust on the unconfined compressive strength

Figure 6. Effect of increasing limestone dust on the dynamic modulus of reclaimed asphalt

7
3.2. Comparison of testing results with literature

The strength coefficients of RAP materials which were stabilized with hydrated lime and
limestone dust in terms of dynamic modulus and unconfined compressive strength showed
higher values than expected in comparison with cement treated road materials. Taking into
consideration that limestone materials have thermal expansion coefficient about 1/5 of cement
treated materials. This finding is very good news to road engineers who suffer from temperature
cracking of cement stabilized materials. The following relationships were used for comparison
purposes (as shown in Figure 7):

I- Lean concrete (NCHRP Project 1-37A 2004):

E = 57000*(fc)0.5 (2)
where, E is the modulus of elasticity, psi, and fc is the compressive strength, psi.

II- For cement modified bases (Scullion, T., et. al., 2008):

Mr = 36.5*(UCS)0.5 (3)
where, Mr is the resilient modulus, ksi, and UCS is the compressive strength, psi.

III- For soil cement (Scullion, T., et. al., 2008):

Mr = 31.6*(UCS)0.5 (4)
where, Mr is the resilient modulus, ksi, and UCS is the compressive strength, psi.

Figure 7. Comparison of the testing results and literature.

8
3.3. Design and management of stabilized materials

The pavement design process has as its objective the design and management of the
pavement through its lifetime in order to minimize the total cost to the general public. The
operation or performance of pavement systems involves the interactive of numerous variables
such as material properties, environment, traffic loading, construction practices, maintenance
activities and management constraints. In order to select an optimum pavement strategy, methods
are needed that consider the interaction of these variables and constraints.
The approach to meet this need was the development of the operational pavement system
model (SAMP), a system produced during the work of Hudson and McCullough (1973). The
SAMP method adopts the view that routine maintenance and future rehabilitation (overlay) are
part of the total pavement management process. Future costs are discounted to the present and
the total cost per square yard is used as the criterion for determining which pavement is the
optimum. Including in the total cost is the users cost a term for the expense to the traveling
public of being delayed while detouring on overlay activity.
These costs are weighted equally with actual construction cost. SAMP method was used to
analyze different types of stabilized RAP base layers (stabilized with hydrated lime plus equal
percent of limestone dust, hydrated lime plus limestone dust plus Portland cement, asphalt
emulsion, asphalt emulsion plus hydrated lime plus limestone dust) and other methods of
stabilization of base layer from the literature (stabilized with foam asphalt, bitumen, and hot in-
place recycling).
Comparison was made also with conventional pavement. Comparison made between all
types of stabilized RAP materials and conventional pavement to identify the effect of each type
in reducing the construction cost and maintenance cost for 6000000 18-Kip AASHTO standard
axle load repetitions during analysis period of 20 years (NCHRP Project 1-37A 2004). Figure 8
was prepared to show the reduction in construction cost and maintenance cost due to the use of
stabilized RAP materials.

9
 Figure 8. Comparison between pavement construction, maintenance cost and type of
stabilized base of RAP materials for 6 millions 18-kip AASHTO standard axle road
repetitions.

The results of the life cycle cost analysis using SAMP method showed that the use of
stabilized RAP materials as base layer for local and main roads in Iraq reduces the total cost of
new or rehabilitated asphalt pavement up to 32% in comparison with conventional asphalt
pavement practice.
The results of the life cycle cost analysis using the SAMP method showed that the use of
stabilized RAP materials as base layer for local and main roads in Iraq reduces the maintenance
cost of asphalt pavement during its life time by more than 50% in comparison with conventional
asphalt pavement practice.
These finding are in good agreement with literature reports about similar projects else
where in the world (Kandhal and Mallick 1997).

4. RECOMMENDATIONS

1. It is recommended to carry out strength tests on trial mixes of stabilized RAP materials before
the design and construction in order to determine the percentage of stabilizing material and/or
additive.
2. It is recommended to use locally available hydrated lime and limestone dust in the
stabilization of RAP materials due to their favorable advantages such as the cost, availability,
and their resistance to high temperatures as well as shrinkage cracks (self cracks healing) in
addition to their economical, environmental, and quick construction advantages.

10
5. REFERENCES

British Standard. Testing of Concrete. Recommendations for Measurement of Velocity of

Ultrasonic Pulses in Concrete. BS 1881, Part 203, 1986.

Brown, V. A. Cement Stabilization of Aggregate Base Material Blended with Reclaimed Asphalt
Pavement. Dept. of Civil and Environmental Eng., Brigham Young Univ., UT, 2006.

Epps, J.A. Cold Recycled Bituminous Concrete using Bituminous Materials. NCHRP, Synthesis
of highway practice No. 160. NCHRP, T. R. B, Washington, D.C., 1990.

Guide for Mechanistic-Empirical Design of New and Rehabilitated Pavement Structures.

NCHRP, Project 1-37A, 2004, pp. 2.2.61. www.trb.org/mepdg. Accessed March 5, 2010.

Highway Design Manual. State Corporation of Roads and Bridges (SCRB). Dept. of designs and
studies, Ministry of housing and construction, Republic of Iraq, 1979.

Hudson, W.R., McCullough B.F. Flexible Pavement Design and Management Systems
Formulation. NCHRP Report 139, T. R. B, Washington, D.C., 1973.

Kandhal, P. S., Mallick, R. B. Pavement Recycling Guidelines for State and Local Governments.
Publication FHWA-SA-98-042. FHWA, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1997.

Li, L., Benson, C.H., Edil, T.B., Hatipoglu, B. Sustainable Construction Case History: Flyash
Material. Dept. of civil and environmental engineering, Jackson State Univ. and Univ. of
Wisconsin- Madison, 2007.

Neville, A.M., Brooks, J.J. Concrete Technology, 2nd, Dept. of civil engineering, Univ. of
Leeds, England, 2010.

Scullion, T., et al. Thickness Design Systems for Pavements Containing Soil-Cement", PCA
Report, SN2863, PCA, Skokie, IL, 2008.

Yoder, E.J. Witczak, M.W. Principles of Pavement Design, 2nd edition, John Wiley and Sons,
Inc., New York, 1975.

11