Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 77 views

    Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt (RHMA) Mix Design

    Uploaded by

    Alsayed Diab
    This document summarizes a presentation on the mix design process for rubberized hot mix asphalt (RHMA). Key points include: RHMA uses asphalt rubber binder and gap-graded aggregates, requiring a minimum binder content of 7.5%; the aggregate gradation and binder properties are more tightly controlled than conventional HMA; volumetric requirements of 4% air voids and 18-23% VMA must be met at the minimum 7.5% binder content; and performance tests such as the Hamburg wheel tracking test and moisture susceptibility testing have higher thresholds for RHMA mixes compared to conventional HMA. Proper selection of materials, volumetric mix design, and verification of performance criteria are critical to

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt (RHMA) Mix Design

    Uploaded by

    Alsayed Diab
    77 views32 pages
    This document summarizes a presentation on the mix design process for rubberized hot mix asphalt (RHMA). Key points include: RHMA uses asphalt rubber binder and gap-graded aggregates, requiring a minimum binder content of 7.5%; the aggregate gradation and binder properties are more tightly controlled than conventional HMA; volumetric requirements of 4% air voids and 18-23% VMA must be met at the minimum 7.5% binder content; and performance tests such as the Hamburg wheel tracking test and moisture susceptibility testing have higher thresholds for RHMA mixes compared to conventional HMA. Proper selection of materials, volumetric mix design, and verification of performance criteria are critical to

    Original Description:

    Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt (RHMA) Mix Design

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a presentation on the mix design process for rubberized hot mix asphalt (RHMA). Key points include: RHMA uses asphalt rubber binder and gap-graded aggregates, requiring a minimum binder content of 7.5%; the aggregate gradation and binder properties are more tightly controlled than conventional HMA; volumetric requirements of 4% air voids and 18-23% VMA must be met at the minimum 7.5% binder content; and performance tests such as the Hamburg wheel tracking test and moisture susceptibility testing have higher thresholds for RHMA mixes compared to conventional HMA. Proper selection of materials, volumetric mix design, and verification of performance criteria are critical to

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    77 views32 pages

    Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt (RHMA) Mix Design

    Uploaded by

    Alsayed Diab
    This document summarizes a presentation on the mix design process for rubberized hot mix asphalt (RHMA). Key points include: RHMA uses asphalt rubber binder and gap-graded aggregates, requiring a minimum binder content of 7.5%; the aggregate gradation and binder properties are more tightly controlled than conventional HMA; volumetric requirements of 4% air voids and 18-23% VMA must be met at the minimum 7.5% binder content; and performance tests such as the Hamburg wheel tracking test and moisture susceptibility testing have higher thresholds for RHMA mixes compared to conventional HMA. Proper selection of materials, volumetric mix design, and verification of performance criteria are critical to

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 32

    CalAPA Fall Conference

    October 26 - 27, 2016


    Sacramento, CA

    Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt


    (RHMA) Mix Design

    By
    Jack Van Kirk
    Director of Asphalt
    Technology
    George Reed Inc.
    Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt
    (RHMA)
    • What is rubberized HMA?
    • Binder, aggregate requirements ?
    • How do you design it?
    • How do you test it?
    • What are the differences from
    conventional HMA?
    • Critical factors?
    What is RHMA?
    • Completely different than
    conventional HMA
    • Uses asphalt rubber binder
    • Uses gap-graded or open graded
    aggregate gradation
    • Used in reduced thickness
    pavement design
    Asphalt Rubber Specifications
    Rubberized hot mix asphalt (RHMA)
    Type “G” *
    Type “O”
    Type “O-HB”

    * For this presentation will


    only discuss Type G
    Extremely Important
    • RHMA mixes are more
    temperature sensitive
    • Lab and field compaction must be
    achieved at higher temperatures
    Parameters of the Mix Design
    • Binder requirements
    • Aggregate requirements
    • Volumetrics and performance tests
    • Mix and compaction requirements
    • Major differences from
    conventional HMA
    Quality characteristic Test method Requirement
    Air voids content (%) AASHTO T 269a Ndesign = 4.0
    Gyration compaction (no. of gyrations) AASHTO T 312 Ndesign = 50–
    150b
    Voids in mineral aggregate (min, %) SP-2
    Asphalt
    Mixture 18.0–23.0
    Volumetricsc

    Hamburg wheel track (min, number of passes at AASHTO T


    0.5-inch rut depth) 324 (Modified)d
    Binder grade: 15,000
    PG 58 20,000
    PG 64 25,000
    PG 70

    Hamburg wheel track (min, number of passes at the inflection AASHTO T 324
    point) (Modified)d
    Binder grade:
    PG 58 10,000
    PG 64
    PG 70
    10,000
    12,500
    Moisture susceptibility, dry strength (min, psi) AASHTO T 283d 100
    Moisture susceptibility, wet strength (min, psi) AASHTO T 283d, 70
    Selection of Materials
    • Binder
    – Asphalt rubber binder
    – PG 58-22, PG 64-16, PG 70-10
    base asphalt
    • Aggregate
    – Quality requirements
    – Gap-graded aggregate gradation
    Asphalt Rubber Binder
    • Uses a minimum of 20 +/- 2 % crumb
    rubber
    • Uses 10 mesh (2mm) maximum size
    crumb rubber
    • Reacts/interacts crumb rubber for a
    minimum of 45 min. at elevated
    temperatures
    • Modifies original properties of asphalt
    cement
    Asphalt Conventional
    Rubber Asphalt
    Laboratory Binder Design
    • Asphalt heated to 400 to 425°F
    • Asphalt modifier added to asphalt
    • Crumb rubber (18-22 %) blended into
    asphalt/asphalt modifier blend
    • Reacted for a minimum of 45 minutes
    • Agitated (stirred) frequently during
    reaction period
    • Properties tested over 24 hour period
    Compatibility of components
    Optimum Binder Content
    (OBC) (by total weight)
    • Minimum 7.5% for RHMA Type G
    • OBC target value cannot go below 7.5%
    • For best practice - field produced AR
    binder should be used for the mix design
    Minimum OBC (by total weight)
    • Minimum 7.5% for RHMA Type G is
    extremely important for good
    performance in the field (resistance to
    reflective cracking and raveling)
    • Some aggregate sources encounter
    difficulty meeting the minimum binder
    content, volumetrics and performance
    requirements
    Aggregate Requirements

    • High quality aggregate is required


    because of the reduced thickness
    pavement design
    – High % fractured faces
    – Low % flat and elongated
    – Sound durable particles
    Aggregate Gradation
    • Uses a gap-graded aggregate gradation
    • Limits of proposed gradation tolerances
    much tighter
    • For gap graded and open graded mixes -
    40% higher binder content (7.5 -8.5% by
    total weight)
    • Use of asphalt rubber allows for higher
    binder contents and thicker film thickness
    Aggregate Gradations for RHMA-G
    (Percentage Passing)

    1/2 inch
    Sieve size Target value limit Allowable
    tolerance
    3/4" 100 --
    1/2" 90–98 TV ± 6
    3/8" 83–87 TV ± 5
    No. 4 28–42 TV ± 6
    No. 8 14–22 TV ± 5
    No. 200 0.0–6.0 TV ± 2.0
    Gap-Graded Aggregate
    Gap-Graded
    Aggregate

    Dense Graded
    Aggregate
    Rubber particles
    in the binder help fight cracking
    Mixing and Compacting
    • Select a combined grading
    • Prepare samples at 4 binder contents
     7.5 % – 9.0 %
    • Compact using the gyratory compactor
     Select gyrations (50-150) and pressure (600-
    825 kPa)
     30 - 90 minute dwell or squaring time (use of
    fan to cool optional)
    • Analyze volumetric properties for each binder
    content
     Air voids (4.0 or 5.0 % and VMA (18 – 23 %)
    6 “ Diameter Specimen
    Fan to Aid in Cooling

    SuperPave
    Gyratory
    Compactor
    Aggregate/Binder Combination
    Selection
    • Select best aggregate and binder
    combination that meets the
    requirements
    • Select optimum binder content
    (OBC)
    OBC Verification

    • Mix and compact 3 specimens at


    the OBC
    • Verify mix volumetrics
    • If volumetrics meet requirements
    proceed with performance testing
    Performance Tests of the
    RHMA Mix
    AASHTO T-283
    Hamburg Wheel Tensile Test
    Tracking Device
    (HWTD)
    HWTD Performance Test
    • Hamburg Wheel Tracking Device
    (HWTD) for rut resistance
    • 15,000 – 25,000 minimum passes for
    maximum rut depth of 0.5 “depending
    on grade of binder
    • No stripping inflection
    point requirement
    (pending)
    Stripping Inflection Point
    Diagram

    No discernable SIP
    For RHMA

    Normal SIP
    For HMA Type A
    AASHTO T-283 Performance
    Test
    • AASHTO T-283 for moisture
    induced damage resistance
    • Only dry and wet strengths required
    (100 psi and 70 psi)
    • No tensile strength
    ratio (TSR) required
    (except for selected areas)
    Critical Issues With RHMA
    • 7.5 % binder content (by total wt.)
    – For RHMA mixes the voids and VMA must
    be met for the 7.5 % binder content (this is
    why we have a range for gyration and
    pressure)
    – For HMA Type A the binder content is
    adjusted to meet the voids and VMA Dwell or
    squaring time critical for cooling specimens to
    eliminate swelling of specimens
    Critical Issues With RHMA
    • Voids and VMA requirements
    – Must adjust grading, gyrations and pressure to
    achieve requirements
    – 18 vs. 20 % CRM
    – The higher the CRM % and the coarser the CRM the
    more difficult to compact and achieve volumetric
    requirements (longer dwell time is required for higher
    % of CRM)
    • HWTD minimum number of passes are higher for the
    0.5” rut requirement because of the higher viscosity
    (5000 higher than HMA Type A for each grade)
    Summary
    • Mix design is similar to
    conventional HMA
    • But there are some significant
    differences
    • Industry continues to work
    together with agencies in a
    partnering effort with the goal of
    improving the mix design process
    Thank You

    You might also like