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

net/publication/272365792

The effect of aggregate gradation limits consideration on performance

properties and mixture design parameters of hot mix asphalt

Article  in  KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering · February 2015

DOI: 10.1007/s12205-015-0265-8

CITATIONS READS

3 995

3 authors, including:

Ebrahim Sangsefidi Hasan Ziari

University of Auckland Iran University of Science and Technology
9 PUBLICATIONS   19 CITATIONS    80 PUBLICATIONS   667 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Laboratory evaluation of the effect of waste plastic bottle (PET) on rutting performance of hot mix asphalt mixtures View project

Laboratory evaluation of the effect of reclaimed asphalt pavement on rutting performance of rubberized asphalt mixtures View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ebrahim Sangsefidi on 06 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering (0000) 00(0):1-8 Transportation Engineering
Copyright ⓒ2015 Korean Society of Civil Engineers
DOI 10.1007/s12205-015-0265-8 pISSN 1226-7988, eISSN 1976-3808
www.springer.com/12205
TECHNICAL NOTE

The Effect of Aggregate Gradation Limits Consideration on Performance

Properties and Mixture Design Parameters of Hot Mix Asphalt
Ebrahim Sangsefidi*, Hasan Ziari**, and Maryam Sangsefidi***
Received May 7, 2013/Revised April 26, 2014/Accepted December 25, 2014/Published Online February 18, 2015

··································································································································································································································

Abstract

The main aim of mixture design is to select the best configuration of material in order to achieve mixture fabricating purposes.
Aggregate make up a high proportion of volume and mass of mixtures, hence it considered as an important constituent of asphalt
concrete. It has been hypothesised that the gradation is an important feature of the aggregate in adoption of optimum mixture. Three
gradations are used to manufacture Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) within special specification band of local code. Rutting resistance was
evaluated using the Flow Number (FN) parameter and in order to determine the moisture sensitivity mechanism, a mechanical and
visual inspection tests are carried out. The main conclusion of this study is that contrary to customary belief, middle gradation of
select band does not produce the best results. Eventually some proposed factors, such as determining “sensitive mixtures” to binder
content variation, have been determined for mixture design process.
Keywords: moisture susceptibility, permanent deformation, optimum gradation, sensitive mixture, mixture design
··································································································································································································································

1. Introduction
An adequate and economical design for a pavement structure
is just as important as a design for any other engineering structure
(Trang Nhat, 2008). It is possible to improve the characteristics of
the asphalt mixture, using its components, aggregates and bitumen.
Aggregates make up high proportion of volume and mass of
asphalt mix, hence, it is predicted to have an enormous impact on
the mixture properties. Major characteristics of aggregate are
stiffness, shape, texture and gradation, that only gradation can be
changed for a special mine.
Aggregate gradation is the distribution of particle sizes expressed
as a percentage of the total weight (Abukhettala, 2006) and
considered as the centerpiece property of aggregate which needs
a careful consideration due to its effect on mix properties and
performance of HMA mixtures, including air void, stability,
stiffness, durability, permeability, workability, fatigue resistance,
frictional resistance, resistance to moisture damage (Abukhettala,
2006; Trang Nhat, 2008) and also rutting resistance of asphalt
concrete under traffic and environmental loads (Pan et al., 2006).
So this parameter is considered as a very important parameter in
the process of mixture design.
Usually pavement design codes supply proposed aggregate
gradations by an upper and a lower limits. It has been the custom
for researchers and contractors to choose a gradation between
these limits (in particular, the gradation that is located in the
middle of the band is more preferable).
Clark et al. (1980) further investigated the effect of gradation
on Hweem test results. The main conclusion to be drawn from
this study is that the best gradation for each mine is unique.
Sengoz and Agar (2007) showed that there is an acceptable
relationship between “asphalt film thickness” parameter and
moisture sensitivity and aggregate gradation has a significant
effect on this parameter.
Sánchez-Leal (2007) Introduced “gradation chart” method.
Based on this research, gravel to Sand Ratio (G/S) is a determinant
factor to predict mixture performance. The results of this study
show that mixture performance is not related to the gradation
specification limits, so the author suggested to use a perfect “free
design” of gradation to achieve the required performance of
HMA.
Bitumen is the other component of HMA that influences the
final performance of the mixture. So it is necessary to strictly
control the binder content in HMA to obtain optimum performance
(Kandhal and Cross, 1993). Pavement codes only allow limited
tolerances in this component to account for HMA plant variability
(in the local code a variation in binder content of ± 0.3% from
Job Mix Formula (JMF) is acceptable).
As the moisture damage was the first distress identified in
HMA, significant effort has been made to define moisture

*Graduate Student, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST) University, Tehran 6846-13114, Iran (Corresponding
Author, E-mail: ebrahim.sangsefidi@gmail.com)
**Professor, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST) University, Tehran 6846-13114, Iran (E-mail: h.ziari@iust.ac.ir)
***B.Sc. Student, School of Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (FUM), Mashhad 9177948974, Iran (E-mail: ma.sangsefidi@gmail.com)

−1−
 Ebrahim Sangsefidi, Hasan Ziari, and Maryam Sangsefidi

susceptibility mechanisms and predict its occurrence Kim and 4. Materials and Methods
Coree, 2005). Sagi (2004) stated that moisture damage is a
widespread problem and it generally starts at the bottom of an 4.1 Materials
asphalt layer or where the water content is the highest. Sengoz
and Agar (2007) introduced moisture damage as the major 4.1.1 Aggregate
causes of premature pavement failure which diminish the In this study, a kind of crushed aggregate and mineral filler,
performance and service life of the pavement and determined both manufactured from limestone, have been used as the
aggregate properties as a main factor that influences moisture aggregate skeleton. In the local code any specification band is
damage. given by an upper and a lower limit. Overall, seven different
Overall, two areas of focus have been identified for the ranges have been introduced in this code, among them the fourth
mechanism of moisture damage: a failure of binder bonding to one, which is the most popular specification for designers and
the aggregate (i.e., a failure of adhesion) and a failure within the contractors, was selected in this study. Table 1 shows the
binder itself (i.e., a failure of cohesion) (Kim and Coree, 2005). corresponding required aggregate properties.
Tests used to estimate moisture sensitivity can be classified To achieve the primary objective of this study, three gradations
into two general types: tests on loose mixtures and tests on were tried for mix design. These consist of gradations that are
compacted mixtures. In the first category the results are mostly denoted by a simple symbol, L, M and U, which represent, lower
qualitative, and the interpretation of results becomes a subjective bound, mid-range and upper bound gradations, respectively. The
matter depending on the evaluator’s experience and judgment. structure of these gradations becomes coarser from the upper
Loose mixture tests are best used for comparison between different limit to the lower limit. To determine the structure of these
aggregate– asphalt mixtures in terms of compatibility, strength of gradations (percent passing each sieve), the acceptance criterion
adhesion, and stripping. Mixtures failing in these tests, on the of the local code for gradation was chosen so that the final
basis of some established criteria, have the potential to strip and selected gradations meet band limit.
should be avoided. Tests in second category are conducted on Physical properties of the aggregate (shown in Table 2), are
laboratory compacted specimens or field cores or slabs. The those related to shape and size of the particles. In order to
results can be measured quantitatively, which minimizes subjective determine these characteristics, the aggregate gradation was fitted
evaluation of test results (Solaimanian et al., 2003). However, the with “Fuller equation”.
conclusion of these tests results cannot explain the mechanism of Table 2 shows that gradation L is coarser (highest G/S value)
moisture damage in HMA. and is also predicted to have the maximum rutting resistance in
comparison to other gradations (regardless of bitumen effect)
2. Objectives (Sánchez-Leal, 2007). In addition to that, it is obvious that
different gradations in this study have almost the same maximum
The objective of this study is to investigate the properties of stone size.
HMA which has been summarized as follows:
− To determine the effect of different gradations on permanent 4.1.2 Bitumen
deformation and moisture susceptibility behavior of HMA. 60/70 penetration grade paving bitumen has been used as the
− To evaluate the effect of aggregate gradations on the water binder and the physical properties of such bitumen according to
damage mechanism of HMA.
− To identify the influence of binder content on mixture design Table 1. Aggregate Properties
properties for different gradations. apparent specific bulk specific
− To express a method to recognize sensitive mixture in order Aggregate
gravity gravity
water
code
size absorption
to amend mixture design process. (gr/cm3) (gr/cm3)
On # 8 sieve 2.709 2.645 0.8 AASHTO-T85
3. Hypotheses Pass # 8
2.719 2.617 1.4 AASHTO-T84
sieve

It has been hypothesized that:

− The definition of moisture damage in HMA has been only Table 2. Physical Properties of Aggregate Gradations
regarded as the failure of adhesive and cohesive bonds Physical feature U gradation M gradation L gradation
between the asphalt and the aggregates in the presence of Dmax (mm) 16.26 16.57 16.55
water. Shape factor (n) 0.39 0.46 0.53
− Even though many researchers use the gradation specifica- Coefficient of uniformity (Cu) 102.5 49.16 26.77
tion band and particularly the middle range, this process Coefficient of curvature (Cc) 2.85 2.41 2.16
does not lead to selecting perfect gradation. G/S 0.59 0.79 1.07
− Changes in gradation can influence the moisture damage Type of gradation sand sand gravel
mechanism. Gradation condition well-graded well-graded well-graded

−2− KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

 The Effect of Aggregate Gradation Limits Consideration on Performance Properties and Mixture Design Parameters of Hot Mix Asphalt

Table 3. Physical Properties of 60/70 Penetration Grade Paving

Bitumen
Specification
Test Results code
limits
Penetration (25oC; 0.1 mm) 62 60-70 ASTM D5
Softening point (oC) 49 49-56 ASTM D36
Specific gravity 1.011 1.01-1.06 ASTM D70

Table 4. Mixture Design Results

Item U M L
Optimum asphalt content 5.8% 5.3% 5.1%

the local code are given in Table 3.

4.2 Mixture design

To determine the Optimum Asphalt Content (OAC) by weight
of total mix, for each aggregate gradation, Marshall mix design
procedures (ASTM D 1559) were followed. Three specimens of
each asphalt content (4.5%, 5%, 5.5%, 6% and 6.5% for mixes
prepared using gradation U, and 4%, 4.5%, 5.0%, 5.5% and
6.0%, for mixes prepared using gradations M and L) were
prepared and compacted using 75-blows/face (heavy traffic).
Once Specimens have been compacted using Marshall Hammer,
they were tested for stability, flow, air voids, unit weight, and
Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA). The OAC was determined
based on these parameters. It was calculated as the asphalt
content that meets 4.0% air voids, in accordance with local code
specification. Then the OAC was checked whether it achieved
the specification limits of the other parameters (stability, flow,
unit weight, and VMA). The resulting optimum asphalt contents
were 5.8%, 5.3%, and 5.1% for mixes prepared using gradations
U, M, and L, respectively as shown in Table 4.
The proportions of aggregates for different gradations are
illustrated in Fig. 1. The Fig. 1(a) shows conventional graph and
Fig. 1(b) shows FHWA graph and also the maximum density
line. One common way to characterizing aggregate gradation, is
to make a gradation plot on a 0.45 power chart, which also
Fig. 1. Aggregate Gradations of Asphalt Mixtures: (a) Conventional
Graph, (b) FHWA Graph
contains a maximum density line.
The asphalt concrete mix design process is conducted to
determine a mixture that not only meets the requirements of the
specifications in terms of air voids and other mix design
parameters but also has the least “sensitivity” to variation of its
component. This study focuses only on the consequences of the
various bitumen contents.
The results of Marshall test for various bitumen content were
fitted with different equations that are shown in Table 5. Also the
effect of binder content variation, considering local code
acceptance criteria are shown in the Table 6. Any changes that
occur in the asphalt content can alter the properties of the mix. In
this study the degree of change in the mix properties is the

Table 5. Fitted Equations for the Results of Marshall Test

Mix design parameter Gradation L Gradation M Gradation U
y = 0.0069x2 − 0.0946x + 0.3431 y = 0.0094x2 − 0.1205x + 0.4137 y = 0.0041x2 − 0.0724x + 0.322
Air void
R2 = 0.9924 R2 = 0.9924 R2 = 0.9984
Unit weight y = −0.0373x2 + 0.4092x + 1.276 y = −0.0196x2 + 0.2304x + 1.701 y = −0.0178x2 + 0.2086x + 1.7427
(g/cm3) R2 = 0.9886 R2 = 0.9864 R2 = 0.9802
y = 1.3478x2 − 13.981x + 50.189 y = 0.7105x2 − 7.527x + 34.754 y = 0.6339x2 − 6.6522x + 33.003
VMA
R2 = 0.9642 R2 = 0.9396 R2 = 0.9715
y = −0.044x2 + 0.6648x − 1.5332 y = −0.0432x2 + 0.5917x - 1.1937 y = −0.0017x2 + 0.1672x − 0.1581
VFA
R2 = 0.9732 R2 = 0.9923 R2 = 0.998
y = −1.4924x2 + 14.912x − 28.332 y = −1.8175x2 + 18.272x - 36.865 y = −2.5705x2 + 28.396x − 70.177
Marshall stability (KN)
R2 = 0.8579 R2 = 0.9133 R2 = 0.9907
Flow y = 0.1462x2 − 1.0942x + 4.917 y = 0.1581x2 − 1.0436x + 4.5307 y = 0.2867x2 − 2.568x + 8.8173
(mm) R2 = 0.9669 R2 = 0.9701 R2 = 0.9916
Marshall quotient y = −0.5555x2 + 5.2793x − 9.6354 y = −0.6038x2 + 5.7069x - 10.67 y = −0.8425x2 + 9.0254x − 21.717
(KN/mm) R2 = 0.9677 R2 = 0.9999 R2 = 0.9983

Vol. 00, No. 0 / 000 0000 −3−

 Ebrahim Sangsefidi, Hasan Ziari, and Maryam Sangsefidi

Table 6. Effect of Binder Content Variation on the Results of Marshall Test

Mix design parameter Gradation L Gradation M Gradation U
Bitumen content 5.4% 5.1% 4.8% 5.6% 5.3% 5% 6.1% 5.8% 5.5
Air void 3.37% 4% 4.96% 3.37% 4% 4.62% 3.3% 4% 4.8%
Amount of change 16.57% - 19.66% 13.84% - 18.17% 17.71% - 19.55%
unit weight (g/cm3) 2.398 2.39 2.381 2.377 2.372 2.363 2.353 2.354 2.352
Amount of change 0.22% - 0.5% 0.21% - 0.36% 0.04% - 0.1%
VMA 13.99% 13.94% 14.13% 14.88% 14.82% 14.88% 16.01% 15.74% 15.59%
Amount of change 0.37% - 1.37% 0.44% - 0.42% 1.7% - 0.97%
VFA 77% 71% 64% 77% 73% 68% 80% 75% 71%
Amount of change 8.53% - 9.65 4.97% - 6.04% 5.84% - 5.88%
Marshall stability (KN) 8.67 8.9 8.86 8.46 8.92 9.06 7.39 8.05 8.24
Amount of change 2.56% - 0.46% 5.17% - 1.51% 8.17% - 2.43%
flow (mm) 3.27 3.14 3.03 3.64 3.44 3.27 3.82 3.57 3.37
Amount of change 4.21% - 3.38% 5.93% - 5.1% 7.1% - 5.65%
Marshall quotient (KN/mm) 2.67 2.84 2.91 2.35 2.62 2.8 1.99 2.29 2.44
Amount of change 5.85% - 2.33% 10.03% - 5.87% 13.11% - 6.49%

function of aggregate gradation. As indicated, U gradation is Table 5.

more sensitive than other gradations. As shown, the U gradation has the lowest asphalt film thickness
although its OAC is the greatest.
4.3 Surface of Aggregate
This criterion is one of the most important factors of gradation 4.4 Test Method
which has a significant impact on the amount of bitumen Three mixes are prepared to evaluate each mixture. The moisture
required to coat aggregates. The aggregate gradation and “surface sensitivity of these mixes was evaluated using two commonly
area factor” (Table 7 from MS-2) are the key factors to mark out used test methods: AASHTO T-283 and ASTM D3625 and the
the surface area and and compute the asphalt film thickness. dynamic creep test was carried out using a UTM-5 according to
Asphalt film thickness is an important factor in translating Australian code 2891.12.1.
behavior of mixture. The outcomes of surface area and asphalt The mixtures were prepared at OAC, based on the Marshall
film thickness were shown in Table 8. laboratory compaction method and tested by performance-
The surface area and asphalt film thickness for each gradation related, mechanical test methods. The loose specimens used in
were calculated, as shown in Table 6, using the gradation values the Texas boiling test were prepared by mixing 100 gm of the
presented in Fig. 1 and the surface area factors presented in aggregate with the OAC.
The results from these tests were analyzed to evaluate the effect
of introduced gradations on performance of the HMA mixtures. The
Table 7. Surface Area Factor following section describes several laboratory performance
Sieve size (mm) Surface factor related tests, which were used.
19 0.41
12.5 0.41 4.4.1 Dynamic Creep Test
09.5 0.41 The dynamic creep test was carried out using a UTM-5 to
04.75 0.41 apply repeated axial stress pulse to asphalt specimens and mea-
02.36 0.82 suring the vertical deformation with Linear Variable Displacement
01.18 1.64 Transducers (LVDTs). Input data, including the dimensions of
00.60 2.87 the sample (height and diameter), preload stress, frequency of the
00.30 6.14 stress application and contact stress are controlled via the integ-
00.15 12.29
rated software. In addition, this software conforms to several
00.075 32.77
international standards (Khodaii and Mehrara, 2009). In this
research a square pulse wave with frequency of 0.5 Hz (by
Table 8. Surface Area and Asphalt Film Thickness for each Gra- setting 500 ms for the pulse width and 1500 ms for the rest
dation period) was chosen according to Australian code AS 2891.12.1.
The gradation U M L
Surface area (m3/kg) 7.69 5.54 4.88 4.4.2 Moisture Susceptibility Tests
Asphalt film thickness (µm) 6.88 8.73 8.99 Many variables affect the amount of water damage in asphalt

−4− KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

 The Effect of Aggregate Gradation Limits Consideration on Performance Properties and Mixture Design Parameters of Hot Mix Asphalt
concrete layer. In this study AASHTO T283 and ASTM D 3625
were carried out in order to determine the moisture susceptibility
mechanism of mixtures. It has been hypothesized that a
mechanical test is a necessary element to estimate the moisture
damage problem. Research work demonstrated that the modified
Lottman test (AASHTO T283) or the Root-Tunnicliff test
(ASTM D 4867) was more effective than the Boiling water test
(ASTM D 3625) (Kim and Coree, 2005), but in this study a
combination of these methods and visual inspection tests were
used to evaluate the moisture susceptibility.
4.4.2.1 AASHTO 283
The aim of the modified Lottman Test is to evaluate suscepti-
bility characteristics of the mixture to water damage. This test is
performed by compacting specimen to an air void level of
7%±1% (these levels of voids were obtained by adjusting the
number of blows). Three specimens are selected as a control and
tested without moisture conditioning; and three more are
selected to be conditioned by saturating with water (55%-80%
saturation level). The specimens are then tested for Indirect
Tensile Strength (ITS) and the force required to break the
specimen is measured. The ITS of the conditioned specimens is
compared to the control specimens in order to determine the
Tensile Strength Ratio (TSR) (AASHTO). According to AASHTO
T283 the tensile strength is calculated as Eq. (1):
ITS = ⎛ -------------⎞
2P
⎝ π.t.D⎠
where, D = Specimen diameter, mm
ITS = Tensile strength, Pa
P= Maximum load, Newtons
T= Specimen thickness, mm
And finally the resistance of asphalt mixture to the detrimental
effect of water is expressed as Eq. (2):
ITSwet
- × 100
TSR ( % ) = -------------
ITSdry
where,
ITSdry = Average tensile strength of dry subset
ITSwet = Average tensile strength of conditioned subset
It is obvious that higher value of this ratio indicates greater
resistance to moisture damage.
4.4.2.2 Texas Boiling Test
This procedure has been standardized as ASTM D3625. This
test was used to evaluate the stripping potential of loose specimens.
The loose mixture was placed in boiling water for 10 minutes
and every 3 minutes the mix was stirred for 10 seconds using a
glass rod. Then the mix was removed from the water and placed
on a white surface to determine, visually, the percent of areas
coated by asphalt (Abo-Qudais, 2007). The percent reduction in
the aggregate surface area coated by asphalt due to conditioning
in the boiling water was used as an indication of environmental
Vol. 00, No. 0 / 000 0000
damage occurrence. The reduction in HMA aggregate- coated
areas is calculated according to the following equation:
where,
A% – B%
X% = ⎛ ----------------------⎞ × 100% (3)
⎝ A% ⎠
A = Coated area in unconditioned specimens
B = Coated area in conditioned specimens
X = Reduction in areas coated by asphalt
The percent reduction in the surface area of aggregate that retain
its original coating after conditioning in the boiling water is
estimated and used as an indication of the potential of HMA to
fail by stripping.
This standard is based on the researcher observation of
bitumen color and the proportion of aggregate surface that still
has bitumen coating, so the moisture susceptibility of mixture is
determined empirically. This observation is a helpful method to
check moisture related adhesion failure. In order to make the
decision more accurate, image analysis using MATLAB was
carried out on the digital picture of mixtures, before and after the
test for each mixture.
4.4.2.3 Express a Method to Predict Moisture Sensitivity
Mechanism of HMA
Based on the literature review, the existing tests are typically
(1) used to compare the effect of water on the performance of
different mixtures or to identify the sensitive mixtures, considering
an ultimate limit criteria (such as designating the minimum value
for TSR in AASHTO T283). It should be recognized that this
procedure is perform to measure the degree of damage induced
in samples rather than giving any vision of the moisture suscepti-
bility mechanism.
As mentioned earlier, two modes of moisture damage mech-
anism were investigated in this study and it has proven difficult
to distinguish between the two modes of failure in predicting
(2)
failure mode. However, since the mechanism of cohesive
failure leads, ultimately, to an adhesive failure, most instances
of cohesive failure may only be inferred rather than observed,
and the final mechanism (i.e., adhesive) is reported as the cause
(Kim and Coree, 2005).
To determine the moisture susceptibility mechanism the authors
approached this problem using a rational method introduced by
(Sangsefidi et al., 2012). This effort is divided in two phases as
follows:
To carry out mechanical laboratory testing on samples to
evaluate the moisture sensitivity potential in HMA pavement (Kim
and Coree, 2005). In this study AASHTO T283 test is selected for
this stage. Work by Kiggunndu and Roberts indicates this test is the
most accurate test method currently available for predicting
moisture damage in HMA mixtures (Kim and Coree, 2005), but is
unable to distinguish its mechanism.
To carry out ASTM D3625 on loose mixtures. In this stage the
criteria of failure are decided by visual identification of stripped
−5−
 Ebrahim Sangsefidi, Hasan Ziari, and Maryam Sangsefidi
(uncoated) aggregate.
If the trend of these two tests results was similar, the dominant
mechanism of mixtures will be adhesion failure.
5. Results and Discussion
From the mix designs, the samples were prepared and tested. To
study the effects of gradation on the properties of the mixtures, the
results of the tests were analyzed and compared in the following
section. Each data point which presented in this study, represents
the average of three specimens prepared using the same mix
parameters and tested under the same conditions.
5.1 Dynamic Creep Test
The dynamic creep test was performed to measure the resistance
of asphalt concrete to tertiary deformation (flow). Finally, the
mixture’s response characteristics and flow number are obtained.
For each mixture, three specimens were manufactured with the
same design and examined under the conditions mentioned
earlier. Then the results from the UTM-5 machine for each
specimen were analyzed using a new method introduced by Goh
and You (2009). According to this method, the flow numbers were
determined and shown in Fig. 2.
The creep test distinguished clearly the effect of aggregate
gradation on the permanent deformation resistance of HMA.
Also, an increase in FN is accompanied with an increase in
Marshall Quotient. It is possible to draw a comparison between
the trend of FN and Marshall Quotient results, as (Abo-Qudais,
2007) suggested. Also, results of the dynamic creep test sum-
marized in Fig. 2 indicate that in general, there is an obvious
direct relationship between G/S and FN.
On the other hand it could be concluded that stone-on-
stone contact between coarse aggregate particles (L gradation
has the nearest gradation line to maximum density line in
Fig. 1(b)) can increase the load- bearing capacity in these
mixes and hence minimize the potential for rutting
(Kanitpong et al., 2011).
5.2 Moisture Susceptibility Tests
5.2.1 AASTO T283
Dry and wet ITS results were shown in Fig. 3(a) and the
Fig. 2. Flow Number Results for Different Kind of Mixtures
−6−
Fig. 3. AASHTO T283 Tests Results: (a) Dry and Wet ITS Results,
(b) TSR Results
Tensile Strength Ratio (TSR) were shown in Fig. 3(b).
The test results from AASHTO T-283 were used to distinguish
the effect of aggregate gradation on the moisture sensitivity of
hot mix asphalt concrete. HMA prepared using U gradation
shows the highest result for dry ITS and the greatest reduction
due to conditioning and eventually demonstrate the lowest TSR
and so poor moisture performance. This is a reflection of the thin
asphalt film thickness in mixtures manufactured using such a
gradation (as determined in Table 6) that diminishes the strength
of mixture in wet conditions. Overall, it can be concluded that
the gradation L has the lowest decrease in ITS due conditioning
which means it has the highest moisture resistance.
5.2.2 ASTM D3625
As mentioned before, in order to investigate moisture perfor-
mance of mixes precisely and also to determine the mechanism
of moisture susceptibility, ASTM D3625 was carried out as a
complementary test. The results of this test is used to distinguish
the effect of aggregate gradation on occurrence of stripping and
also to convert the qualitative results of this test (based on
researcher observation) to quantitative ones. To achieve this aim
a numerical analysis was performed on digital images taken after
applying the test on each specimen. In this test it is important to
determine which parts of the aggregates were stripped. For this,
at first all images were cropped in a fixed dimension and then
these pictures were converted to black and white images,
considering a specific color as a threshold color. Black areas are
aggregates covered with bitumen and white areas are aggregates
which have lost their bitumen coating and have been stripped.
Finally, each color (black and white) portion was determined
using a computer code written in MATLAB. In this program the
number of each color’s pixels was determined. An example of
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering
 The Effect of Aggregate Gradation Limits Consideration on Performance Properties and Mixture Design Parameters of Hot Mix Asphalt

Fig. 4. Steps for Image Processing on a Special Specimen

Table 9. Result of Image Processing for All Mixtures

Aggregate gradation U (%) M (%) L (%)
Calculated stripped part 12-26-32 10-15-19 8-13-17

the stages of such process is shown in Fig. 4 for each mixture.

In this Figure, the images on the left are real pictures and the
images on the right are the results after image analysis. The top
and bottom images are representative of loose specimen before
and after accomplishing boiling water test, respectively.
The results of the analysis for all mixtures are shown in Table
9. This table shows that Texas boiling test was able to assess the
effect of aggregate gradation on the stripping of HMA. Taking
into account that the results of this table evaluate the potential of
stripping and so “adhesion failure” mechanism, a similar trend in
TSR results indicates that the most important reason for moisture
susceptibility for this special mine is “adhesion failure”, and also
it can be concluded that “adhesion failure” is more noticeable for
HMA prepared using finer gradation.
As Hicks stated (Kim and Coree, 2005), “…the greater the
surface area of the aggregate, the greater the amount of asphalt
cement required for stability. ….Consequently, a mixture with
substantial fines tends to strip more readily, because complete
particle coating requires more asphalt cement which is more Fig. 5. Failure Surface for Mixtures with Different Gradations: (a) U
Gradation, (b) M Gradation, (c) L Gradation
difficult to achieve without creating a stability problem.”

5.2.3 Investigation of Failure Surfaces of Specimens under
AASHTO T283 Test
Based on AASHTO recommendations, after recording the
maximum compressive strength noted on the testing machine,
loading was continued until a vertical crack appeared. Then the
specimens were pulled apart at the crack and the interior surface
was investigated for stripping. These observations are worthwhile
to interpret the behavior of different specimens; so this surface
was checked out in dry and wet conditions. Fig. 5 shows the
failure surface for specimens manufactured with different types
of aggregate gradations. As can be seen, L mixtures have a
rougher surface which implies more interlocking between aggre-
gates and as aggregate become finer, the failure surfaces become
smoother. Overall, taking into account the creep test results and
also the amount of G/S, it can be deduced that a very good
relation exists between these parameters and the failure surface
of mixture. Also, it is important to mention that, in case of the
visual inspection, more stripping was reported for U gradation.
6. Conclusions
The main aim of this study was to determine the effect of
various gradations on performance of HMA and contrary to
general belief, the middle range of gradation does not produce
the best results. As a result of this study, the convenient selection
of gradation in the process of mixture design has a considerable
influence on performance of the mixture, furthermore the results
can help designer to use potential of the resource as much as
possible.
Based on the clear evidence of this study, it seems difficult to
realize appropriate aggregate gradation in advance without
conducting any test. While the gradation has inevitable effect on
the performance of the mixture and economic aspects in particular,
so overall considered as characteristic factor to determine optimum

Vol. 00, No. 0 / 000 0000 −7−

 Ebrahim Sangsefidi, Hasan Ziari, and Maryam Sangsefidi
mixture.
The variation in the OAC affects various mixtures differently.
Based on the results of Marshal tests, in this study U gradation is
more sensitive than other gradations. So it is suggested to eliminate
sensitive mixture in the mixture design process as a supplemen-
tary stage to the conventional method.
The change in aggregate gradation not only affects the moisture
performance, but also can influence on moisture susceptibility
mechanism. It was observed that as selected gradation gets finer
the “adhesion failure” becomes dominant mechanism.
It was observed that the resistance to permanent deformation
(rutting) is largely affected by aggregate gradation and L gradation
withstand permanent deformation considerably high, as it was
expected.
The result of this research indicates that, for this special mine
and considering this type of mixture gradations L, M, and U
demonstrate better performance, respectively, so it is predicted
that a gradation coarser than gradation L (outside the considered
band) may produce more better result. Generally, it is believed
that conventional method to select aggregate gradation (using
pre-specified bands) is not meaningful, in other words, the
gradation specification requirement is redundant for mixes so the
authors suggests a “free design” to select aggregate skeleton.
References
AASHTO (1997). In Standard specifications for transportation materials
and methods of sampling and testing: Part II: Tests, Vol 2, American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington,
D.C., pp. 1040-1043.
Abo-Qudais, S. (2007). “The effects of damage evaluation techniques
on the prediction of environmental damage in asphalt mixtures.”
Building and Environment, Vol. 42, Issue 1, pp. 288-96, DOI:
10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.08.005.
Abukhettala, M. E. (2006). The relationship between marshall stability,
flow and rutting of the New Malaysian hot-mix asphalt mixtures,
MSc Thesis, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia.
Clark, W., Wright, J., and Buu, T. (1980). Effects of Idaho aggregate
gradation on asphalt paving mix, Research Proj. No. 87, p. 18.
Goh, S. W. and You, Z. (2009). “A simple stepwise method to determine
−8−
View publication stats
and evaluate the initiation of tertiary flow for asphalt mixtures under
dynamic creep test.” Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 23,
Issue 11, pp. 3398-405, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.06.020.
Kandhal, P. S. and Cross, S. A. (1993). Effect of aggregate gradation on
measured asphalt content, National Center for Asphalt Technology,
NCAT Report 93-01, Issue No. 1417.
Kanitpong, K., Charoentham, N., and Likitlersuang, S. (2012). “Investi-
gation on the effects of gradation and aggregate type to moisture
damage of warm mix asphalt modified with Sasobit.” International
Journal of Pavement Engineering, Vol. 13, Issue 5, pp. 451-8, DOI:
10.1080/10298436.2011.565058.
Khodaii, A. and Mehrara, A. (2009). “Evaluation of permanent deformation
of unmodified and SBS modified asphalt mixtures using dynamic
creep test.” Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 23, Issue 7,
pp. 2586-92, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.02.015.
Kim, S. and Coree, B. J. (2005). Evaluation of hot mix asphalt moisture
sensitivity using the Nottingham asphalt test equipment, In (Ed.),
IHRB Project TR-483, CTRE Project 02-117, p. 65.
Pan, T., Tutumluer, E., and Carpenter, S. H. (2006). “Effect of coarse
aggregate morphology on permanent deformation behavior of hot
mix asphalt.” Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 132, No.
7, pp. 580-589.
Sagi, S. V. (2004). The impact of acceptance criterion on HMAC
moisture susceptibility, Department of Civil Engineering, The
University of Texas at El Paso, No. 1423725, pp. 133-141.
Sánchez-Leal, F. J. (2007). “Gradation chart for asphalt mixes:
Development.” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 19,
No. 2, pp. 185-97.
Sangsefidi, E., Ziari, H., and Mansourkhaki, A. (2012). “The effect of
aggregate gradation on creep and moisture susceptibility performance
of warm mix asphalt.” International Journal of Pavement Engineering,
Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 133-141, DOI: 10.1080/10298436.2012.752824.
Sengoz, B. and Agar, E. (2007). “Effect of asphalt film thickness on the
moisture sensitivity characteristics of hot-mix asphalt.” Building and
Environment, Vol. 42, No. 10, pp. 3621-8, DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.
2006.10.006.
Solaimanian, M., Harvey, J., Tahmoressi, M., and Tandon, V. (2003).
“Test methods to predict moisture sensitivity of hot-mix asphalt
pavements.” Moisture Sensitivity of Asphalt Pavements-A National
Seminar, pp. 77-110.
Trang Nhat, T. (2008). The relationship of bitumen content, aggregate
surface area, and extraction time using asphalt ignition furnace,
MSc Thesis, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia.
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering