Pavement

Cover of Development of a Stone Mastic Asphalt Mix Design Procedure: Selection of Appropriate Compaction Equipment for the Mix Design
Development of a Stone Mastic Asphalt Mix Design Procedure: Selection of Appropriate Compaction Equipment for the Mix Design
  • Publication no: AP-T250-13
  • ISBN: 978-1-925037-24-1
  • Published: 15 October 2013

This report examines the selection of an appropriate laboratory compaction device for stone mastic asphalt (SMA). The laboratory compaction of the SMA mix is crucial as the volumetric properties are selected based on the results from laboratory samples, which should replicate volumetric properties that are similar to those achieved during field compaction. Therefore the mix design relies heavily on the applicability of the laboratory compaction method.

While this project focused on the selection of an appropriate laboratory compaction device for SMA, due to the complexity of this task it was necessary to also investigate compaction temperatures. The method described in European Standard EN 12697-10 and the achieved air void contents were used to assess the compactibility of bituminous mixtures. Based on the outcomes of this study, it is suggested that Australian Standards are harmonised in terms of the required mixing and compaction temperatures, and the requirements for laboratory mixing and compaction temperatures should be selected as a function of the binder type.

It was found that for SMA applications the Gyropac compactor is not capable of achieving the same level of compaction (i.e. air void content) as the Servopac. When using the Servopac according to AS 2891.2.2, it was found that 250 gyratory cycles would be applicable for preparing SMA samples in the laboratory. However, this value requires validation. The design air void content achieved using the Marshall compactor at 50 blows may replicate field conditions and a further decrease of the air void content is possible when using 75 blows; this needs to be considered when using the Marshall compaction.

  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Overview of SMA Specifications
    • 2.1. Stone Mastic Asphalt Composition
    • 2.2. SMA Specifications and Design Considerations in Australia
      • 2.2.1. Grading
      • 2.2.2. Method of Mix Design
      • 2.2.3. Binder
      • 2.2.4. Fibre Additives
      • 2.2.5. Air Voids
      • 2.2.6. Production
    • 2.3. SMA Mix Design in Australia, According to AGPT Part 4B
    • 2.4. Laboratory Compaction Equipment used in Australia
    • 2.5. Compaction Cycles used in Australia for Laboratory Compaction
    • 2.6. SMA Mix Design in the United States of America
      • 2.6.1. Critical Analysis of the Superpave and its General Applicability for Mix Design
      • 2.6.2. The Bailey Method for Aggregate Packing: A Possible Selection Tool for SMA Aggregate Grading
    • 2.7. European Approach in SMA Mix Design, SMA Specification Framework in EN 13108-5 and EN 13108-20
      • 2.7.1. Mix Design in European Countries, Requirements at the National Level
      • 2.7.2. SMA Volumetric and Binder Content Requirements According to Specifications of Selected European Countries
      • 2.7.3. SMA Design, Production and Compaction Requirements in Germany
  • 3. Temperature Requirements for Laboratory Compaction
    • 3.1. Requirements for Compaction Temperatures in Europe According to EN 12697-35
    • 3.2. Current USA Approach to Temperatures during Mix Design using Different Binders
    • 3.3. Test Method to Determine Optimum Mixing and Compaction Temperature Ranges for Polymer Modified Asphalt – the Japan Method
    • 3.4. Mixing and Compaction Temperatures in Australia
      • 3.4.1. Gyratory Compaction
      • 3.4.2. Marshall Compaction
  • 4. Laboratory Test Series, Assessing Compactibility
    • 4.1. Assessment of Compactibility
      • 4.1.1. Impact Compaction
      • 4.1.2. Gyratory Compaction
    • 4.2. Mix Composition
    • 4.3. Test Procedures for the Binder
      • 4.3.1. Test Procedures for Bitumen
      • 4.3.2. Test Procedures for PMBs
    • 4.4. Brookfield Test
    • 4.5. Determination of Binder Viscosity Ranges for Mixing and Compaction
    • 4.6. Sample Preparation
      • 4.6.1. Compaction
      • 4.6.2. Marshall Compaction
      • 4.6.3. Gyratory (Gyropac and Servopac) Compaction
      • 4.6.4. Laboratory Sample Coding
  • 5. Results
    • 5.1. Offset between SSD and Silicone Sealing Method (Marshall Compaction)
    • 5.2. Offset between the Two Gyratory Compactor Types
    • 5.3. Laboratory Test Results, Marshall Compaction
    • 5.4. Laboratory Test Results, Gyratory Compaction
      • 5.4.1. Analysis of the K Value
      • 5.4.2. Gyratory Cycles versus Air Void Content
    • 5.5. Analysis of Marshall, Gyropac and Servopac Air Void Contents
    • 5.6. Water Absorption
  • 6. Summary and Conclusions
  • References
  • Appendix A Background of Asphalt Mix Compaction in the Laboratory
  • A.1 Comparison of Density of Marshall Specimens and Pavement Cores
  • A.2 The Effect of Traffic on the Density of Bituminous Paving Mixtures
  • A.3 Pavement Density – What Influences It
  • A.4 The Effect of Viscosity of Asphalt1F on Properties of Bituminous Wearing Surface Materials
  • A.5 Comparative Studies of Pneumatic Tyre Rolling
  • A.6 Pavement Density – How It Changes
  • A.7 Long-term Compaction of Asphalt Concrete Pavements
  • A.8 Comparison of Laboratory and Field Density of Asphalt Mixtures
  • A.9 Investigation of Effects of Traffic with High-pressure Tyres on Asphalt Pavements
  • A.10 Traffic Densification of Asphalt Concrete Pavements
  • A.11 An Initial Evaluation for Ndesign Superpave Gyratory Compactor
  • A.12 Marshall Mix Design Method: Current Practices
  • A.13 Level One Mix Design: Materials Selection, Compaction and Conditioning
  • A.14 The Optimum Binder Content of Hot Mix Asphalt