EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON PERFORMANCE OF

FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT MATERIALS WITH THE

ADDITION OF ANTI-STRIPPING AGENT

A Project Report Submitted to

In Partial Fulfillment for the Award of the Degree of

BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
In
CIVIL ENGINEERING
(2014-2018)

By
P. SAHITH (14NG1A0138)
P. CHANDRA SEKHAR (14NG1A0144)
G. BASAVAIAH (15NG5A0106)
K.S.D. KALYAN PRASAD (14NG1A0120)
M. SAI CHARAN TEJ (14NG1A0130)

Under the Esteemed Guidance of

Mr. A. SIVA NAGARAJU M. Tech
Assistant professor
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

(Affiliated to J.N.T.University, Kakinada, A.P.)

N.H -16, TELAPROLU, KRISHNA DISTRICT, A.P.
APRIL-2018
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project report entitled “EXPERIMENTAL

STUDY ON PERFORMANCE OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT MATERIALS
WITH THE ADDITION OF ANTI-STRIPPING AGENT” is the bonafide
work carried out during the academic year 2014-2018 by P.SAHITH
(14NG1A0138), P.CHANDRA SEKHAR (14NG1A0144), G.BASAVAIAH
(15NG5A0106), K.S.D.KALYAN PRASAD (14NG1A0120), M.SAI CHARAN
TEJ (14NG1A0130), under the guidance of Mr. A. SIVA NAGARAJU,
Assistant professor is submitted to Department of Civil Engineering,
USHARAMA College of Engineering and Technology, Telaprolu in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the award of ‘Bachelor of Technology’
Degree in ‘Civil Engineering’.

PROJECT GUIDE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT

Mr. A. SIVA NAGARAJU Mr. K. SUNDARA KUMAR

M.Tech M. Tech (IITM), (Ph. D), MISTE.MIE,
Assistant Professor Associate Professor and Head
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
USHARAMA College of Engg.and USHARAMA College of Engg.and
Tech, Telaprolu - 521109 Tech, Telaprolu – 521109

EXTERNAL EXAMINER
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We sincerely acknowledge the constant support and guidance given by

our project guide Mr. A. Siva Nagaraju, during the entire course of our project
work.

We great fully acknowledge the constant encouragement, guidance and

unstinted help given by our Head of the Department of Civil Engineering, Mr.
K. Sundara Kumar throughout this project work.

We also express our heartfelt thanks to our beloved Principal,

Dr.G.V.K.S.V. Prasad for supporting us throughout the project work.

We also express our sincere thanks to Director, Dr. K. Raja Sekhara

Rao for permitting us to carry out the project work.

We also express our sincere thanks to Sri. S. Ramabrahmam,

Chairman of Usha Rama College of Engineering and Technology, for providing
necessary facilities in the course of our project work.

We also express our sincere thanks to all those who directly or indirectly
helped us in completing this project work.

By

P. SAHITH (14NG1A0138)

P. CHANDRA SEKHAR (14NG1A0144)

G. BASAVAIAH (15NG5A0106)

K.S.D. KALYAN PRASAD (14NG1A0120)

M. SAI CHARAN TEJ (14NG1A0130)

i
 ABSTRACT
Flexible pavement is the paving system most widely adopted all over the world.
It has been recognized that there are many different types of factors affecting
the performance and durability of pavement. Stripping and deformation are
main factors affecting in pavement. These two factors can be reduced by
hydrated lime and improve the properties of pavement. It has been found that
hydrated lime is one of effective additives because it widely available relatively
cheap compared to others.

Hydrated lime is added in different percentages like 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 were

properties are investigated. The hydrated lime is use as a partial replacement by
weight of bitumen. We are use CRMB60 grade of bitumen compare all the
properties of bitumen with respect to specifications by IS15462-2004. Stripping
value of with and without adding of hydrated lime can be determined by static
immersion method. These mixtures are designed and tested on Marshall
Stability procedure to evaluate permanent deformation at different percentages
and different temperatures and the properties of bitumen with and without
adding of hydrated lime. We compared all the properties like stability,
deformation, plasticity, hardness, and softening temperature of bitumen and
stripping value with and without adding of hydrated lime. Identify, Max.
Stability and min. flow value at investigate above percentages.

Finally, we conclude that this experimental result shows addition of hydrated

lime of about 8% in pavement mixture gives maximum stability, minimum flow
value and 0% stripping. So, use of 8% hydrated lime in the construction of road
gives durability, resisting high moisture damages in heavy rain fall area,
resisting the deformation due to heavy loads or repetitive traffic loads.

Keywords: Hydrated lime, Stripping, CRMB60 bitumen, Deformation,

Moisture damage

ii
CONTENTS Page.no
CHAPTER-1: Introduction 1-8

1.1 Flexible pavement 2

1.2 Failures of pavement 2-4
1.2.1 Stripping 2
1.2.2 Deformation 4
1.3 Hydrated lime 5-7
1.4 Properties of aggregates and its specifications 7
1.5 Properties of bitumen and its specifications 8
1.6 Objectives 8

CHAPTER-2: Literature review 9-17

CHAPTER-3: Methodology 18-19

3.1 Tests on aggregates 19

3.2 Tests on bitumen 19

CHAPTER-4: Tests on aggregates 20-37

4.1 Impact test 21-23

4.2 Crushing test 24-26

4.3 Water absorption test 27-28

4.4 Sp. gravity test 29-31

4.5 Los Angeles abrasion test 32-34

4.6 Shape test 35-37

CHAPTER-5: Tests on bitumen 38-46

5.1 Ductility test 39-40

5.2 Penetration test 41-43

5.3 Softening point test 44-46

CHAPTER-6: Marshall Stability mix design 47-54

iii
 6.1 Objective 48

6.2 Equipments required 48

6.3 Materials required 48

6.4 Theory 48

6.5 Preparation of test specimen 49

6.6 Properties of specimen 50-51

6.7 Permissible limits 52

CHAPTER-7: Stripping value test 53-57

7.1 Objective 54

7.2 Equipments required 54

7.3 Materials required 54

7.4 Theory 54

7.5 Procedure 55-56

7.6 Permissible limits 57

CHAPTER-8: Results and Discussion 58-63

8.1 Results for aggregates 59

8.2 Results for bitumen 59-61

8.3 Results for Marshall Stability test with graphs 61-62

8.4 Results for stripping value test with graphs 63

CHAPTER-9: Conclusion 64-66

CHAPTER-10: References 67-69

iv
LIST OF TABLES Page.no
1.4.1 Properties of aggregates as per IRC 27-1967 7

1.5.1 Properties of Bitumen as per IS15462-2004 8

8.1.1 Results for aggregates 59

8.2.1 Results for Bitumen without addition of Hydrated lime 59

8.2.2 Results for Bitumen with 2% addition of Hydrated lime 60

8.2.3 Results for Bitumen with 4% addition of Hydrated lime 60

8.2.4 Results for Bitumen with 6% addition of Hydrated lime 60

8.2.5 Results for Bitumen with 8% addition of Hydrated lime 61

8.2.6 Results for Bitumen with 10% addition of Hydrated lime 61

8.3.1 Results for Marshall Stability test 61

8.4.1 Results for Stripping value test 63

v
LIST OF FIGURES Page.no
1.2.1.1 Water drop contact surface of pavement 3

1.2.1.2 Stripping failure 3

1.2.2.1 Rutting failure 4

1.3.1 Hydrated lime 5

4.1.1 Impact testing machine 23

4.2.1 Crushing test 26

4.3.1 Water absorption test 28

4.4.1 Pycnometer 30

4.4.2 Specific gravity test 31

4.5.1 Los Angeles abrasion testing machine 34

4.6.1 Thickness Gauge 36

4.6.2 Length gauge 37

5.1.1 Ductility testing machine 40

5.2.1 Bitumen penetration test 43

5.3.1 Softening point test 46

6.6.1 Phase diagram for Marshall Specimen 51

6.6.2 Marshall stability test 52

7.5.1 Sample preparation for stripping value test 55

7.5.2 Sample keep in water bath 56

7.5.3 Aggregates after stripping test without addition of Hydrated lime 56

7.5.4 Aggregates after stripping test with addition of Hydrated lime 57

8.3.1 Plotting curve between Hydrated lime (%) vs Stability (kg) 62

8.3.2 Plotting curve between Hydrated lime (%) vs Flow value (mm) 62

vi
8.4.1 Plotting curve between hydrated lime (%) vs Stripping value (%) 63

vii
LIST OF ABBREVATIONS
IRC: Indian road congress

HMA: Hot mix asphalt

SHRP: Strategic highway research program

CRMB: Crumb rubber modified bitumen

NRMB: Natural rubber modified bitumen

PMB: Polymer modified bitumen

NCHRP: National cooperative highway research program

WBM: Water bound Macadam

viii
 CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

1
 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Flexible pavement:

Flexible pavement will transmit wheel load stresses to the lower layers by grain
to grain transfer through the granular structure. Flexible pavement consists of
four layers that are subgrade with existing soil, sub base, base course, surface
course or pavement course or wearing course. Mix design is the process of
choosing optimum content of stabilized various ingredients of the pavement.
The general principle of mix design is that the mixture should provide
satisfactory performance when constructed in the desired position of sub-grade.
Design proportions of ingradients are generally based on analysis of the effect
of various proportions on selected properties of mix. Before the design of
pavement check the properties of aggregates. In this report mainly the hydrated
lime is added in bitumen so the properties of bitumen is safe or not by different
methods.

1.2 Failures of pavement:

The different types of factors affecting the performance and durability of

pavement is stripping and deformation.

1.2.1 Stripping:

1. Stripping is the loss of adhesion between the aggregates and bitumen in

the presence of moisture.
2. Stripping is caused due to heavy rain falls and moisture damage.
3. It is mostly occurred in heavy rain fall areas.
4. When stripping begins at the surface and progresses downward it is
usually called raveling.
5. Stripping may result in raveling, loss of stability, load carrying capacity
of hot mix asphalt pavement.
6. This type of failure is accumulated by water drop acting on the surface
of pavement that are hydrophilic and hydrophobic surface contact.

2
 Hydrophilic surface: water drop is acting on surface of pavement, the
water drop contact angle is 90° so water drop does not roll from the
surface.
Hydrophobic surface: water drop is acting on the surface of pavement,
the water drop contact angle is 180º so water drop easily roll from the
surface.

Fig. 1.2.1.1 Water drop contact surface of pavement

7. Now a days, the roads are lacking in the respect of proper drainage
facilities, which is one of the main reason due to stripping.

Fig. 1.2.1.2 Stripping failure

8. Stripping can cause complete pavement failure. Stripping can cause

rutting raveling, bleeding, cracking and formation of pot holes and
culminate with complete failure of the pavement.
9. Method of determination of stripping value of road aggregates (IS:
6241-1971) is the standard describing the stripping test for the coarse
aggregates.

3
 10. The test is designed only to capture the amount of stripping in the
presence of water.

1.2.2 Deformation:

1. The accumulation of permanent strains that are produced by repetitive

traffic loads or wheel loads can cause deformation. It is also known as
rutting.
2. This failure is in the form of wheel path.
3. Two types of rutting that are mix rutting and sub-grade rutting, Mix
rutting occurs when the subgrade does not rut yet the pavement surface
exhibits wheel path depressions as the result of compaction or mix
design problems. Subgrade rutting occurs when the subgrade exhibits
wheel path depressions due to loading.
4. In the presence of pavement deformation is develops map cracking or
alligator cracking or fatigue cracking in narrow path or in the form of
wheel path.
5. Ruts are formed due to repeated application of loads along the same
wheel path resulting longitudinal ruts.
6. Wearing of the surface course along the wheel path resulting shallow
ruts.

Fig. 1.2.2.1 Rutting failure

4
Stripping and deformation can be reduced by anti-stripping agents like fly ash,
hydrated lime, derbo, wet bond etc. this type of agents can be used to reduce the
stripping and rutting in flexible pavement. So, we can choose hydrated lime
because of it is very cheap and effective than the other agents.

1.3 Hydrated lime:

The two of the main factors causing the development of distresses, such as
fatigue cracking, moisture damage and permanent deformation, in pavements
using additives has been found to be one of the effective techniques to improve
pavement durability. Recently, the use of hydrated lime, as mineral filler and
anti-stripping material has raised more and more interest. Hydrated lime has a
wide range of particle size distribution and proportion.

Hydrated lime in hot mix asphalt (HMA) creates multiple benefits. A

considerable amount of information exists in the current literature on hydrated
lime’s ability to control water sensitivity and its well-accepted ability as an
antistrip to inhibit moisture damage. However, recent studies demonstrate that
lime also generates other effects in HMA. Specifically, lime acts as an active
filler, anti-oxidant, and as an additive that reacts with clay fines in HMA.

Fig. 1.3.1 Hydrated lime [𝐂𝐚(𝐎𝐇)𝟐 ].

5
These mechanisms create multiple benefits for pavements. the ability of lime to
improve the resistance of HMA mixtures to moisture damage, reduce oxidative
aging, improve the mechanical properties, and improve resistance to fatigue and
rutting, has led to observed improvements in the field performance of lime-
treated HMA pavements.

Several highway agencies have proven the effectiveness of lime with cold-in-
place recycled mixtures. Hydrated lime is an additive that increases pavement
life and performance through multiple mechanisms. A number of additives to
reduce moisture sensitivity and stripping are used in the United States. Hydrated
lime is widely used as an antistrip additive. Others include liquid additives (e.g.
amines, diamines, and polymers), Portland cement, fly ash, and flue dust.
Pavement contractors usually prefer liquid antistrip additives as they are
relatively easy to use.

The filler effect of the lime in the asphalt reduces the potential of the asphalt to
deform at high temperatures, especially during its early life when it is most
susceptible to rutting. The hydrated lime filler actually stiffens the asphalt film
and reinforces it. Furthermore, the lime makes the HMA less sensitive to
moisture effects by improving the aggregate-asphalt bond. . Hydrated lime is
not simply an inert filler but reacts with the bitumen.

The lime particles adsorb polar components of the bitumen. This adsorbed inter-
layer makes hydrated lime a very effective additive. The level of the bitumen-
lime reaction was found to be bitumen dependent. The “active” filler effect has
a graduated temperature Sensitivity. At high temperatures the filler effect is
most pronounced; it is considerably less at temperatures near the glass transition
of the bitumen. This very positive characteristic allows the bitumen to resist
flow-damage at high temperatures and yet to relax at low temperatures,
dissipating energy by flow in lieu of fracturing.

The hydrated lime is added in different percentages like 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 etc. are

investigated and also check the properties of bitumen with addition of hydrated
lime Ca(OH)2 . These mixtures re designed and tested on Marshall Stability
procedure to evaluate permanent deformations at different temperatures.

6
The overall effect of mineral filler in hot mix asphalt specimens has been
investigated through a series of laboratory tests. It seems that a behavior
influenced by the adherence of fines to asphalt film has been developed. The
optimum bitumen content requirement in case of stone filler is almost the same
as for lime. The Marshall-flow increased with the use of lime filler, suggesting
that the resistance of bituminous mixes to permanent deformation is improved.

In all cases, asphalt formulators must now have in mind that, besides binder and
aggregate, there is an additional lever to be played with in order to fine-tune
mixture properties: hydrated lime. It makes it a promising additive in the search
of more sustainable and more durable asphalt pavements. Finally, the use of
hydrated lime in hot mix asphalt pavement can reduce the main failures in cold
regions in anywhere.

This hydrated lime is added in bitumen, the properties of bitumen such as

plasticity, hardness, sp. gravity, softening point etc. stability and flow value of
bituminous mixture is determined by Marshall mix design with and without
adding of hydrated lime , plotting the curves and also comparing the values of
that bituminous mix.

1.4 Properties of aggregates and its specifications:

Table 1.4.1 Properties of aggregates as per IRC27-1967

S.NO Test name Property Permissible value %

1 Impact test Toughness < 30
2 Crushing test Crushing strength <30

3 Abrasion test Hardness < 30

4 Sp. gravity test Sp.gravity 2.5-3.0

5 Water absorption test Porosity <2

6 Shape test(flakiness) Flakiness <15
7 Shape test(elongation) Elongation < 15

7
1.5 Properties of bitumen and its specifications:

Table 1.5.1: Properties of bitumen as per IS15462-2004

S.NO Test name Property Permissible limit

1 Ductility test(cm) Plasticity <50

2 Penetration test(mm) Hardness <50(1div=0.1mm)

3 Softening point test(°c) Softening point <60

1.6 Objectives:

The main objectives of this project is

 To reduce stripping
 To improve stability and durability.
 To reduce rutting (permanent deformation).
 It improves water retention.
 To improve plasticity of pavement.

8
 The adhesion of asphalt to aggregate was improved by Hellsten et al.
(1973) by the addition of alkyloxyalkyleneamines and alkanolamines.
Gilmore and Kugele (1987) prepared adhesion promoting additives for
asphalt for formaldehyde condensation with polyamines. Formaldehyde
adducts with amines, polyamines and amides to yield the additives.
These additives are typically introduced at a level of 0.2 to 2.0 or
preferably 0.3 to 1.0 parts of additive per 100 parts (by weight) of
asphalt. Conditions for the reaction conditions are given in the patent.
These additives performed well resulting in high levels of adhesion
between asphalt and mineral aggregate that were both hydrophilic and
hydrophobic, or glass fibers or glass fiber mesh. An increase in the
tensile strength of the asphalt coated filler was observed.
 Gilmore and Kugele (1988) improved the physical properties of
bitumen aggregate combinations by either adding > 0.05 wt.% of an
antistripping agent composed of one or a combination of the following:
imidazole’s, polyamines, alkoxylates polyamines, amino carboxylic
esters, or amides-amines; or by adding > 0.25 wt% of Portland cement
or by blending the antistripping agents with Portland cement. To the
asphalt was added 0.22 wt. % bis (hexamethylene-triamine); to the
aggregate was added 0.25 wt% Portland cement.
When added together with the additives, the dry and wet tensile
strengths were higher than without the additives.
 Grossi et al. (1983) found that incorporating a chemically modified
asphalt molecule into a hot mix asphalt increased the bond energy
between asphalt and aggregate. The chemically modified asphalt
compound was obtained by heating a mixture of organic species with an
acrylamide. The chemically modified asphalt was between 1 to 10 wt%
of the total weight of asphalt and modified asphalt.
 Several Russian researchers (Khudyakova et al. 1987) evaluated how
to predict adhesion of asphalt concrete mixes. The various combinations
which were tested were oxidized petroleum tars with sand, marble and
granites. The adhesion of petroleum tars with different grades and
degrees of oxidation was good with marble. However, the adhesion of

13
 the asphalt to sand and gravel was poor. The authors recommended that
the adhesion of asphalt-aggregate mixes be evaluated according the type
of aggregate in mix.
 The addition of antistripping agents affected properties of asphalts. In a
study by Anderson et al. (1982), ten antistripping agents were added to
three asphalts and the effect of the antistripping agent was measured
before and after the thin film oven.

Lime and other mineral aggregates:

 Rao and coworkers (1968) examined the effect of adding lime to

aggregates on the stripping of bitumen from the aggregate. By coating
wet aggregates with lime, the adhesion and stripping resistance of the
bitumen is improved. This method allows for coating wet aggregates,
resulting in shorter setting times and quicker utilization of new road
surfaces.
 The improvement of adhesion between waste glass aggregate and
bituminous materials when exposed to water was examined by Day et
al. (1970). A comparison was made between the effectiveness of three
commercial antistripping agents and Ca(OH)2 by using the immersion-
compression test on graded glass samples containing 5.5 wt% asphalt
cement. Immersions in 140"F water for 24 hours seriously damaged the
specimens containing 1 wt% commercial antistripping agents. When
the amount of the two most effective agents was increased to 4%, the
retained strength of the immersed specimens was 70% of the dry
control samples. When 5% Ca(OH)2 was substituted for the fine glass.
Aggregate, the strength retained after the immersion-compression test
was greater than for the dry samples. In this test system, the commercial
antistripping agents reduced stripping while Ca(OH)2eliminated it.
The relationship between the immersion-compression test and field
performance is unknown. A bituminous mix containing 4%
antistripping agent and waste glass showed no significant stripping
after six months of service in Toledo, Ohio. The traffic load was several
hundred cars and trucks daily.

14
  Dusdorf and coworkers (1970) sprayed glassy aggregates with
saturated Ca(OH)2solutions and heated the treated aggregates for 10
minutes in an CO2 atmosphere to promote adhesion. The process formed
a layer of on the surface of the aggregate and yielded better adhesion.
 AI-Jarallah and Lee (1987) examined the addition of hydrated lime
to relieve stripping problems in asphalt mixes. Their study used Saudi
asphalt cements and local aggregates. The lime slurry was directly
added to the aggregate when it appeared to react chemically
immediately. The effectiveness of different types of additives was
examined using the Texas Boil Test. For all of the aggregates tested,
the lime slurry treatment was most effective except for two kinds of
sand.
 A Japanese patent (1985) presented the treatment of granular slag by
sulfate salt to form a CaSO4 coating on the slag particles. The coating
keeps the Ca containing components in the slag from dissolving in the
asphalt. This helped to adhere the slag to the asphalt. Improved
adhesion was determined by comparing Marshall Stability with
untreated slag.

The antistripping additives used were hydrated lime and two liquid 11
antistripping agents, and metals-amine at 0.5 weight percent and an amino at
0.5 to 1.0 weight percent. The asphalts used were AC-20 grade that fulfilled
State of Alabama Highway Department requirements. Parker and Wilson's
results showed that the stress pedestal test results did not correlate with the field
performance data since the aggregate with both stripping and no stripping
performed the same in the test. The boiling water test showed that important
variables for retaining coating of asphalt onto the aggregate included aggregate,
asphalt cement, and additive type and properties. The different antistrip
additives gave different amounts of coating retention. No model could be
developed by which to rank the stripping propensity of each combination;
hence, each combination had to be tested to evaluate coating retention. The
effectiveness of antistripping agents was evaluated, utilizing the Texas boiling
test, by Lee and Al-Jarallah (1986). The study used Saudi

15
Asphalt of 60 to 70 penetration grade and local aggregates in conjunction with
different types of additives. Four types of aggregates from construction projects
were used: (1) sandstone and sand, (2) crushed stone and sand, (3) granite and
(4) limestone and sand. The antistripping agents used were hydrated lime, amid
amine antistripping agent, and mixtures of alkyl and alkylene amines. The
hydrated lime was added in three ways: to the asphalt, to the aggregate as a
mineral filler and to the aggregate as a slurry. The liquid antistripping agents
were added to the asphalt at 0.3 weight percent of the asphalt and then heated
to 163°C before being mixed with aggregate. The field performance of the
aggregates agreed with the test results from the Texas boiling test. Lime was the
most effective agent on all materials, except for two types of sand. This
effectiveness is observed immediately after adding lime slurry to the aggregate.
The amidoamine antistripping agent was the best additive for several sands.
These results indicate that the efficacy of particular combinations of asphalts,
aggregates and additives should be evaluated prior to their use.

A substantial amount of research has been performed in the area of antistripping

agents. Many different organic species have been tried in an attempt to bind
asphalt more tightly to aggregates. Most of the antistripping agents contain
nitrogen and are in 13 the form of amines, fatty amines, substituted amines, and
polyamines.

The antistripping agents are effective in promoting tile adhesion of asphalt onto
aggregate. Since these agents have been shown to be effective, their effect on
the asphalt aggregate chemistry must be understood. Several aspects of the
chemistry must be known including how the antistripping agent interacts at the
interface with both the asphalt and aggregate, how the antistripping agent affects
the interphase and how the antistripping agent affects the chemistry as well as
the dispersion of the asphalt.

Lime has also been used effectively as an antistripping agent. Comparative

studies between lime and amine antistripping agents showed the lime to be
generally more effective. The differences in mechanisms between lime and
amine antistripping agents needs to be elucidated to capitalize on the effective
chemistry for adhesion. Tests have been developed with varying degrees of

16
success to evaluate the efficacy of antistripping agents in terms of their ability
to determine moisture and reduce moisture susceptibility. A number of tests
have been attempted including the cyclic stress tests, Texas boiling water tests,
indirect tensile strength, Marshall Stability and heats of immersion.

The effectiveness of the tests for correlating with field performance appear to
vary with the particular asphalt-aggregate mix. Perhaps through a more
thorough understanding of the effect of antistripping agents on the chemistry
and mechanisms of antistripping agents a more predictive test can be developed
to evaluate the efficacy of a combination of antistripping, asphalt and aggregate.

17
 CHAPTER-3

METHODOLOGY

18
 METHODOLOGY

3.1 TESTS ON AGGREGATES:

This below methods can be used to determine the aggregates properties like

toughness, Crushing strength, Hardness, Sp.gravity, elongation.

1. Impact test [IS2386 (PART-IV)-1963]

2. Crushing test [IS2386 (PART-IV)-1963]

3. Water absorption test [IS2386 (PART-III)-1963]

4. Specific gravity test [IS2386 (PART-III)-1963]

5. Los Angeles abrasion test [IS2386 (PART-IV)-1963]

6. Shape test [IS2386 (PART-I)-1963]

3.2 TESTS ON BITUMEN:

This below methods can be used to determine the bitumen properties like

ductility, hardness, softening point.

1. Ductility test (IS1208-1978)

2. Penetration test (IS1203-1978)

3. Softening point test (IS1205-1978)

19
 CHAPTER-4

TESTS ON AGGREGATES

20
 1. IMPACT TEST

Objective:

To determine the impact value of road aggregates.

Equipments required:

 Impact testing machine

(consisting of metal hammer of wt. 14kg with 10cm dia. and 5cm long,
cylindrical cup of internal dia.10.2cm and depth 5cm)
 Tamping rod (Length=230mm and dia. 10mm)
 Weighing balance
 IS sieves 12.5mm,10mm,2.36mm
 Cylindrical cup (7.5cm dia. And depth 5cm for measuring aggregates)
 Aggregate sample

Theory:

1.Impact testing method is used to find the toughness property of aggregates.

2.Toughness is the property of material to resist impact or sudden or shocks.

3. The aggregate impact test has been standardized by IS 2386 (part-IV)-1963.

4. The aggregate impact value indicates the relative measure of resistance of

aggregates to a sudden shock or impact, which in some aggregates differ from
its resistance to a slope compressive load in crushing test.

5. A modified impact test also often carried out in the case of soft aggregates to
find the wet impact value soaking the test sample.

6. IRC has the following some impact values for WBM and sub-base coarse is
50%, base coarse is 45%, Pavement coarse is 30%.

Formula:
W2
Impact value = ×100
W1

Where W2 = wt. of passing aggregates 2.36 mm sieve.

21
 W1 =total wt. of aggregate sample.

Procedure:

1. The test sample consists of aggregates passing 12.5 mm sieve and retained
on 10 mm sieve and dried in an oven for four hours at a temperature 100° C to
110° C, and cooled.

2. Test aggregates are filled up to about one third full in the cylindrical measure
and tamped 25 times with rounded end of the tamping rod.

3. Further, quantity of aggregates m then added up to about two third full m the
cylinder and 25 stroked of the tamping rod are given.

4. The measure is now filled with the aggregates to over flow, tamped 25 times.

5. The surplus aggregates are struck off using the tamping rod as straight edge.

6. The net weight of the aggregates in the measure is determined to the nearest
gram and this weight off the aggregates is used for earning out duplicate test on
the same material.

7. The Impact machine is placed with its bottom plate flat on the floor so that
the hammer guides columns are vertical.

8. The cup is fixed firmly in position of the base of the machine and the whole
of the test sample from the cylindrical measure is transferred to the cup and
compacted by tamping rod with 25 strokes.

9. The hammer is raised until its lower face is 38 cm above the upper surface of
the aggregates in the cup, and allowed to fall freely on the aggregates.

10. The test sample is subjected to a total of 15 such blows, each being delivered
at an interval of not less than one second.

11. The crushed aggregates are than removed from the cup and the whole of its
sieved on the 2.36 mm sieve until on further significant amount passes.

12. Repeat the procedure and take the average value for impact value.

22
Impact testing machine:

Fig. 4.1.1 Impact testing machine

Permissible limit:

As per IRC 27-1967, the permissible impact value of road aggregates is 30%.

23
 2. CRUSHING TEST

Objective:

To determine the crushing value of road aggregates.

Equipment required:

 Tamping rod (dia.16mm and length 450 – 600mm)

 Weighing balance
 Cylindrical measure (dia.115mm and length 180mm)
 Piston
 Compressive testing machine capable of applying load of 40 Tonnes at
a uniform rate of loading of 4 Tonnes per minute

Theory:

1.This method can be used to determine the hardness property of aggregate due
to movement of traffic on the road surface by the action of gradually applied
compressive loads.

2. Hardness is the property of aggregate to resist compressive loads and crushing

strength.

3. This method is standardized by IS2386 (PART-IV)-1963.

4. The aggregate crushing value provides a relative measure of resistance to

crushing under the loads.

5. To acheiw a high quality of pavement aggregate possess low aggregate

crushing value should be preferred.

6. The aggregate crushing values specified by Indian road congress for

pavement coarse should not exceed 30%. For WBM, the crushing value should
not exceed 40%.

Formula:
W2
Crushing value = ×100
W1

24
Where W1 = total wt. of aggregates.

W2 = wt. of aggregate passing 2.36mm sieve.

Procedure:

1. The aggregate passing 12.5 mm IS sieve and retained on 10 mm IS sieve is

selected for standard test.

2. The aggregate should be in surface dry condition before testing.

3. The aggregate may be dried by hearing at a temperature 100° С to 110° С for

a period of 4 hours and is tested after being cooled to room temperature.

4. The cylindrical measure is filled by the test sample of aggregate in three

layers of approximately equal depth, each layer being tamped 25 times by the
rounded end of the tamping rod.

5. After the third layer is tamped, the aggregates at the top of the cylindrical
measure are leveled off by using the tamping rod as a straight edge.

6. About 6.5 kg of aggregate is required for preparing two test samples.

7. The test sample thus taken is then weighted. The same weight of the sample
is taken in the repeat test.

8. The cylinder of the test apparatus is placed in position on the base, one third
of the test sample is placed in this cylinder and tamped 25 times by the tamping
rod similarly, and two parts of the test specimen is added, each layer being
subjected to 25 blows.

9. The total depth of the material in the cylinder after tamping shall however be
10 cm the surface of the aggregates is leveled and the plunger inserted so that it
rests on this surface in level position The cylinder with the test sample and
plunger in position is placed on compression machine.

10. Load is then applied though the plunger at a uniform rate of 4 ton per minute
until the total loads is 40 tonne.

25
11. Aggregates including the crushed portion are removed from the cylinder and
sieved on a 2.36 mm IS sieve.

12. The material which passes this sieve is collected.

13. Repeat the procedure for different samples and take avg. value of crushed
aggregates.

14. Also specify the aggregates are safe or not in construction

Diagrams:

Fig. 4.2.1 Crushing test

Permissible limit:

As per IRC27-1963, the permissible crushing value of road aggregate is 30%.

26
 3. WATER ABSORPTION TEST

Objective:

To determine the water absorption of road aggregates.

Equipment required:

 Aggregate sample
 Weighing balance
 Dry oven
 Water
 Bucket

Theory:

1. The ability to absorb water that is called water absorption.

2. The water absorption test has been standardized by IS2386 (part-III)-1967.

Formula:

(W1 −W2 )
Water absorption= ×100
W2

Where W1 =wt. of surface dry aggregates

W2 =wt. of oven dry aggregate

Procedure:

1. Pre-heat the aggregate sample by 100-110°.

2. The aggregate sample is placed in a water about 24 hours.

3. After 24 hours, the sample of aggregates should be surface dry by clothe and
weighing it W1

4. The surface dry sample of aggregates is placed in oven at 24hours.

5. After 24hours, take the oven dry sample and weighing it W1 .

27
Diagrams:

Fig. 4.3.1 Water Absorption Test

Permissible limit:

As per IRC27-1967, the permissible water absorption of road aggregate is 2%.

28
 4. SPECIFIC GRAVITY TEST

Objective:

To determine specific gravity of road aggregates.

Equipments required:

 Aggregate sample
 Pycnometer
 Weighing balance

Theory:

1. The specific gravity of an aggregate is considered to be a measure of strength

or quality of the material.

2. It is defined as the ratio of volume of solids to the equal volume of water.

3.. The specific gravity test helps in the identification of stone.

i) Specific gravity = (dry weight of the aggregate / Weight of equal volume of

water)

ii) Apparent specific gravity = (dry weight of the aggregate / Weight of equal
volume of water excluding air voids in aggregate)

4. This method is standardized by IS2386(PART-III)-1967

Formula:

(𝑊2 −𝑊1 )
𝐺 = (𝑊
4 −𝑊1 )−(𝑊3 −𝑊2 )

Where 𝑊1 = wt. of empty bottle

𝑊2 = wt of empty bottle +coarse aggregates

𝑊3 = wt. of empty bottle +coarse aggregates+full of water

𝑊4 = wt. of empty bottle + full of water

29
Procedure:

1. Pre- heat the aggregate sample about 100-110º.

2. Take the pycnometer and weighing it 𝑤1

3. Aggregate sample is filled with 1/3 of pycnometer and weighing it 𝑤2

4. After that filling of aggregates and filled with water until the top of
pycnometer and weighing 𝑤3

5. Clean the pycnometer is filled with full of water and weighing 𝑤4

6. Repeat the procedure and take average value of specific gravity.

Diagrams:

Fig. 4.4.1 Pycnometer

30
 Fig. 4.4.2 Specific gravity test

Permissible limit:

As per IRC27-1967, The Sp. gravity of road aggregate ranges in between 2.5-
3.0.

31
 5. LOS ANGELES ABRASION TEST

Objective:

To determine the abrasion value of aggregates and find out the suitability of
aggregates for its use in road construction.

Equipments required:

 IS sieves 12.5mm,10mm and 1.7mm

 Aggregate sample
 Weighing balance
 Steel tray
 Steel spherical balls 48mm dia. And weighing 390 to 445 grams with
respect to different grades.
 Hollow cylindrical machine having 700mm dia. And 500mm long.

Theory:

1. The aggregates used in surface course of highway pavements are subjected

to wearing due to movement of traffic.

2. When vehicles move on the road, the soil particles present between the
pneumatic tires and road surface cause abrasion of road aggregates.

3. The steel reamed wheels of animal driven vehicles also cause considerable
abrasion of road surface.

4. Therefore, the road aggregates should be hard enough to resist abrasion. This
property can be used to estimate by LOS ANGELES ABRASION TEST.

5. So the principle of this test is the rubbing action between the aggregates and
steel balls which when mixed with aggregates and rotated in a drum for specific
number of revolutions also causes impact on aggregates.

6. This method is standardized by IS2386 (PART-IV)-1963.

7.Abrasion value of different layers given by IRC for WBM is 50% and bitumen
coarse is 30%,sub- base is 40%.

32
Formula:
W2
Abrasion value= ×100
W1

Where W2 =wt. of aggregates passing 1.7mm sieve

W1 =Total wt. of aggregates

Procedure:

1. Clean aggregate dried in oven at 105° С to 110 °C to constant weight,

confirming to any one of the grading A, to G, is used for the test.

2.The grading or grading used in the test should be nearest to the grading to be
used in construction Aggregates weighing 5 kg for grading А, В, С or D and 10
kg for grading E, F or G may be taken as test specimen and placed in the
cylinder.

3. The abrasive charge is also chosen in accordance with Table 1 depending on

the grading of the aggregate and is placed m the cylinder of the machine.

4. The cover is then fixed dust sight. The machine is rotated at a speed of 30 to
33 revolutions per minute.

5. The machine is rotated for 500 revolutions for grading А, В, С and D. For
grading E, F and G, it shall be rotated for 1000 revolutions.

6. The machine should be balanced and driven in such a way as to maintain

uniform peripheral speed.

7. Repeat the procedure for different sample and take average value is the
abrasion value of pavement aggregates.

Specifications for testing:

1.IRC gives some specifications for determination of abrasion value with

different grades like A, B, C, D, E, F and G.

2. We can choose B grade because of that grade specifies 12.5mm-10mm size

and 20mm-12.5mm aggregates used for testing of abrasion value. This size of
aggregates is used for pavement construction.

33
3. B grade specifies use 11 steel balls and its total charge is 4584g.

Diagrams:

Fig. 4.5.1 Los Angeles Abrasion test

Permissible limit:

As per IRC27-1963, the permissible abrasion value of road aggregates is 30%

34
 6. SHAPE TEST (FLAKINESS &ELONGATION)

Objective:

To determine the flakiness and elongation index of road aggregates.

Equipments required:

 IS sieves 25mm,20mm,16mm,12.5mm,10mm and 6.3mm

 Standard thickness gauge and elongation gauge
 Weighing balance

Theory:

1. The particle shape of aggregate is determined by the percentages of flaky and

elongation particles contained in it.

2. Flakiness and elongation test conducted on coarse aggregates to assess the

shape of aggregates. Aggregates which are flaky or elongated are determined
by to the higher workability and stability of mixes.

3.They are not conductive to good interlocking and hence the mixes with an
excess of such particles are difficult to compact to required degree. Rounded
aggregates are preferred for cement road construction as the workability
improves.

4. The flakiness index of aggregates is the percentage by weight of particles

whose least dimension (thickness) is less than three fifths (0.6) of their mean
dimension. The test is not applicable to sizes smaller than 6.3 mm.

5. The elongation index of an aggregate is the percentage by weight of particles

whose greatest dimension (length) is greater than one and fifth times (1.8 times)
their mean dimension. The elongation test is not applicable to sizes smaller than
6.3 mm.

6. This method is standardized by IS 2386(PART-I)-1963.

Formula:
W2
A) Flakiness index = ×100
W1

35
Where W2 =wt. of aggregates passing in thickness gauge in each fraction

W1 = total wt. of aggregates in each fraction

W2
B) Elongation index = ×100
W1

Where W2 =wt. of aggregates retained in elongation gauge in each fraction

W1 =Total wt. of aggregates

Procedure:

A) Flakiness index:

1. A sufficient quantity of aggregate is taken such that a minimum number of

200 pieces of any fraction can be tested.

2. Each fraction is gauged in turn for thickness on metal gauge.

3. The total amount of passing in the gauge is weighed to an accuracy of 0.1%

of the wt. of samples taken.

4. The flakiness index is taken as the total wt. of material passing the various
thickness gauges expressed as a percentage of total wt. of the sample taken.

Diagram:

Fig. 4.6.1 Thickness gauge

36
B) Elongation index:

1. A sufficient quantity of aggregate is taken such that a minimum number of

200 pieces of any fraction can be tested.

2. Each fraction is gauged in turn for thickness on metal gauge.

3. The total amount of passing in the gauge is weighed to an accuracy of 0.1%

of the wt. of samples taken.

4. The elongation index is taken as the total wt. of material retained the various
thickness gauges expressed as a percentage of total wt. of the sample taken.

Diagram:

Fig. 4.6.2 Length gauge

Permissible limit:

As per IRC27-1967,

A) The permissible flakiness index of road aggregates is less than 15%.

B) The permissible elongation index of road aggregates is less than 15%.

37
 CHAPTER-5

TESTS ON BITUMEN

38
 1. DUCTILITY TEST

Objective: To determine the ductility value of bitumen.

Eqiupments required:

 Ductility machine with water bath

 Heater
 Bitumen
 Briquette mould
 Thermometer
 Knife

Theory:

1. Ductility is the measure of adhesiveness of bitumen.it is expressed as

the distance in centimeters to which a standard briquette of bitumen can
stretched before the thread break.
2. This method is standardized by IS1208-1978.

Procedure:

1. The bitumen is heated at a temperature of 100-110° to bring its fluid state.

2. In order to prevent the material under test from sticking, coat the surface of
plate and interior surface of the sides of mould with a mixture of glycerin.

3 .Pour the heated bitumen in the briquette assembly and placed on a brass plate.

4. The whole assembly including bitumen briquette along with brass plate is
allowed to cool in air for about 30-40 minutes.

5. The excess bitumen is cut and surface is levelled with the help of a knife.

6. The whole assembly now is kept in a water bath maintained at 25° for about
85-95 minutes.

7. The side mould is removed, the clips hooked on the machine and the pointer
adjusted to zero value or initial reading noted.

39
8. Now clips are pulled apart horizontally at a rate of 50 mm per minute. And
the distance up to the point of breaking of thread is noted.

9. This distance in centimeter gives the value of ductility of bitumen.

10. The ductility of bitumen vary from 5 -100 for different grades, but for
satisfactory performance it should not be less than 50.

Diagrams:

Fig. 5.1.1 Ductility testing machine

Permissible limit:

As per IRC15462-2004, the ductility value of bitumen is less than 50 cm.

40
 2. PENETRATION TEST

Objective: To determine the penetration value of bitumen.

Equipments required:

 Penetrometer
 Thermometer
 Penetration needle
 Container
 Water bath

Theory:

1. Bituminous materials are available in variety of types and grades.

2. The penetration test determines the hardness of these materials by measuring

41
Observation:

 1 DIV= 0.1mm

Procedure:

1. The bitumen is softened to a pouring consistency between 75 °C and 100 °C

above the approximated temperature at which bitumen softens.

2. The sample material is thoroughly stirred to make it homogenous and free

from air bubbles and water.

3. The sample material is then poured into the container to a depth at least 15
mm more than the expected penetration.

4. The sample containers are cooled in atmosphere of temperature not lower

than 18°C for one hour.

5. Then they are placed in temperature controlled water bath at a temperature of

25 °C for a period of one hour.

6. The sample container is placed in the transfer tray with water from the water
bath and is placed under the needle of the penetrometer.

7. The weight of needle, shaft and additional weight are checked. The total
weight of this assembly should be 100 gm.

8. The needle is now arranged to make contact with the sample surface.

9. This is done by placing a lamp to the rear of the apparatus in such a way that
the image of the needle can be checked to make surface contact.

10. Zero reading of the penetrometer dial is taken before-releasing the needle.

11. The needle is released-for- 5 seconds and-the final reading is taken on the
dial. At least three measurements are made on this sample by testing at distance
not less than 10 mm apart.

12. After each test, the needle is disengaged and wiped with benzene and
carefully dried.

42
13. The sample container is also transferred in the water bath before next testing
is done so as to maintain a constant temperature of 25 °C.

14. The test is repeated with sample in the other containers.

Diagrams:

Fig. 5.2.1 Bitumen Penetration test

Permissible limit:

As per IS 15462-2004, the penetration value of bitumen is less than 50 divisions.

43
 3. SOFTENING POINT TEST

Objective:

To determine the softening point of bitumen by ring and ball apparatus.

Equipments required:

 Bitumen sample
 Ring and ball apparatus
 Brass rings: depth=6.4mm,
Inside dia.at bottom=16mm,
Inside dia. at top=17.5mm,
Outside dia. 20.6mm
 Steel balls: Dia.=9.5mm
Weight=3.5g
 Water bath- heat resistance glass vessel 85mm dia. and 120mm depth
 Mechanical stirrer
 Thermometer up to 100º

Theory:

1. Softening point is defined as the temperature at which a substance attains a

particular degree of softening under specified conditions of tests.

2. Bitumen does not suddenly change from solid to liquid state, but as the
temperature increases, it gradually becomes softer until it flows readily. All
semi-solid state bitumen grades need sufficient fluidity before they are used for
application with the aggregate mix.

3. For this purpose, bitumen is sometimes cut back with solvent like kerosene.
The common procedure however is to liquefy the bitumen by heating.

4. The softening point is the temperature at which the substance attains

particular degree of softening under specified condition of test. For bitumen, it
is usually determined by Ring and Ball Test.

5. A brass ring containing the test sample of bitumen is suspended in liquid like
water or glycerin at a given temperature.

44
6. A steel ball is placed upon the bitumen and liquid medium is then heated at a
specified rate.

7. The temperature at which the soften bitumen touches the metal plate placed
at a specified distance below the ring is recorded as the softening point of a
particular bitumen.

8. The apparatus and test procedure are standardized by ISI. It is obvious that
harder grade bitumen possesses higher softening point than softer grade
bitumen.

9. Usually softening point for different grades of bitumen used for pavements
varies from 35 - 70°.

10. This method is standardized by IS 1205-1978.

11. Bitumen grades specified by softening value of bitumen as per

recommendations

12. The determination of softening point helps to know the temperature up to

which a bituminous binder should be heated for various road use applications.

Procedure:

1. Sample material is heated to a temperature between 75 °C - 100 °C above the

approximate.

2. Softening point until it is completely fluid and is poured in heated rings placed
on metal plate.

3. To avoid sticking of the bitumen to metal plate, coating is done to this with a
solution of glycerin and dextrin.

4. After cooling the rings in air for 30 minutes, the excess bitumen is trimmed
and rings are placed in the support.

5. At this time, the temperature of distilled water is kept at 5 °C.

6. This temperature is maintained for 15 minutes after which the balls are placed
in position. 7. The temperature of water is raised at a uniform rate of 5 °C per
minute with a controlled bottom plate by sinking of balls.

45
8. The temperature at which the softened bitumen touches the metal plate placed
at a specified distance below the ring.

9. This temperature called the softening point of bitumen.

10. Higher the softening point, harder the grade of bitumen.

11. The avg. of two readings to nearest 0.5ºc is reported as softening point.

Diagrams:

Fig. 5.3.1 Softening point test

Permissible limit:

As per IS15462-2004, the softening point of bitumen is 60º

46
 CHAPTER-6

MARSHALL STABILITY MIX DESIGN

47
 MARSHALL STABILITY MIX DESGN

6.1 Objective:

To determine the stability value of bitumen and flexibility (flow value).

6.2 Equipments required:

 Marshall stability test machine with flow meter and stability meter
 IS sieves20mm, 12.5mm, 10mm, 6.3 mm, and 4.75mm
 Marshal specimen mould ( 10cm dia. and 7.5cm )
 Heater
 Water bath
 Compaction rammer with 4.5 kg and free fall 45.7cm

6.3 Materials required:

 Coarse aggregates
 Fine aggregate
 Filler material
 Bitumen

6.4 Theory:

1. Marshall Stability and flow test provides the performance prediction measure
for the Marshall Mix design method.

2. The stability portion of the test measures the maximum load supported by the
test specimen at a loading rate of 50.8 mm/minute.

3. Load is applied to the specimen till failure, and the maximum load is
designated as stability. 4. During the loading, an attached dial gauge measures
the specimen's plastic flow (deformation) due to the loading.

5The flow value is recorded in 0.25 mm (0.01 inch) increments at the same time
when the maximum load is recorded.

6. Strength is measured in terms of the Marshall’s stability of the mix which is

defined as the maximum load carried by a compacted specimen at a standard
test temperature of 60ºc.

48
7. This temp. The flexibility is measured in terms of the flow value which is
measured by the change in dia. of sample in the direction of load application
between the start of loading and time of max. Load.

6.5 Preparation of test specimen:

1. Take 1200g of coarse aggregates, fine aggregates, filler material to produce

the desired thickness.

2.Mix proportions are 20-12.5mm is 72gm, 12.5-10mm is 312gm, 10-4.75mm

is 84gm, 4.75-2.6 is 204gm, filler is 480gm.

3. The aggregates are heated at a temperature of 175-190°c the compaction

mould is assembly and rammer re cleaned and kept pre-heated to a temperature
of 100ºc to 145°c.

4. The bitumen is heated at a temperature of 121-138ºc and the required amount

of first trail of bitumen is added to the heated aggregate and thoroughly mixed
using a mechanical mixer or by hand mixing with trowel. The mixing
temperature for about 60 grade at 160°c.

5. The total quantity of the mix is placed in a mould and compacted by rammer
with 75 blows. Invert the sample, and compact the other face with the same
number of blows.

6. The compacting temperature should be about 149ºc for 60 grade.

7. After compaction, invert the mould. With the collar of bottom, remove the
base and extract the sample by pushing it our extractor.

8. The compacted specimen should have a thickness of 63.5mm. Allow the

sample to stand for a few hours to cool.

9. Obtain the sample mass in air and submerged, to measure density of

specimen, so as to allow, calculation of voids properties.

10. The sample is kept in water bath about 2 hours and calculate the air voids
and water absorption.

49
6.6 Properties of specimen:

The properties that are of interest include the theoretical specific gravity Gt,

the bulk specific gravity of the mix Gm, percent air voids vv , percent volume

of bitumen Vb , percent void in mixed aggregate VMA and percent voids filled
with bitumen VFB.

Theoretical specific gravity:

Theoretical specific gravity is the sp. Gravity without considering air voids

WCa + WFa + Wb + Wf
Gt =
WCa WFa Wb Wf
GCa + GFa + Gb + Gf
Where WCa = weight of coarse aggregates and GCa = sp.gravity of coarse
aggregates

WFa = weight of fine aggregates and GFa =sp.gravity of fine aggregates

Wb = weight of bitumen and Gb =sp.gravity of bitumen

Wf = weight of filler materials and Gf sp.gravity of filler materials

Bulk specific gravity:

Bulk specific gravity is the actual specific gravity of mix (Gm) is considering
air voids.

Wm
Gm =
Wm − Ww

Where Wm is the weight of mix in air

Ww is the weight of mix in water

Air voids percent:

Percentage air voids present in the mix is given by

(Gt −Gm )×100

vv =
Gṫ

Where Gt is the theoretical specific gravity

50
 Gm is the bulk specific gravity

Percent volume of bitumen:

Gm ×Wb
Volume of bitumen vb =
Gb

Where Gb is the specific gravity of bitumen

Gm is the bulk specific gravity

Wb is the weight of bitumen

Voids in mineral aggregates:

Voids in mineral aggregates (VMA) = VV + Vb

Where VV is the volume of voids

Vb is the volume of bitumen

Voids filled with bitumen:

Vb ×100
Voids filled with bitumen (VFB) =
VMA

Where VMA= voids in mineral aggregates

Vb = volume of bitumen

Phase Diagram:

Fig. 6.6.1 Phase diagram for Marshall Specimen

51
Diagrams:

Fig. 6.6.2 Marshall Stability test

6.7 Permissible limits:

As per IRC recommendations,

1. The min. stability value is 340kg

2. The flow value is 8-17 (1div=0.25mm)

3. Percentage of air voids in mix is 3-5%

4. Voids filled with bitumen 75-85%

52
 CHAPTER-7

STRIPPING VALUE TEST

53
 STRIPPING VALUE TEST

7.1 Objective:

To determine the stripping value of road aggregates.

7.2 Equipment required:

 500ml capacity beaker

 IS sieves 12.5mm, 10mm
 Weighing balance
 Thermostatically water bath
 Heater

7.3 Materials required:

 Bitumen sample
 Aggregate sample

7.4 Theory:

1. Loss of adhesion between the aggregates and bitumen in the presence of

moisture that is called stripping.

2. The stripping value of aggregates is determined as the ratio of the uncovered

area observed visually to the total area of aggregates, expressed as a percentage.

3.Bitumen and tar adhere well to all normal types of aggregates provided they
are dry and are not exceptionally dusty.

4.This problem of stripping is experienced only with bituminous mixtures,

which are permeable to water.

5. This test gives the procedure for determination of the stripping value of
aggregates by static immersion method, when bitumen and tar binders are used.

6. This test is standardized by IS6241-1971.

7. The permissible stripping value of road aggregate is 5% as per IRC27

54
7.5 Procedure:

1. Take 200 grams of dry and clean aggregates passing 12.5mm and retained on
10mm sieves and heat up to 150ºc.

2. Take five percent by weight of bitumen binder and heat up to 160º C.

3. Mix the aggregates and the binder till they are completely coated and transfer
the mixture in to a 500ml beaker and allow to cool at room temperature for about
2 hours.

4. Add distilled water to immerse the coated aggregates.

5. Cover the beaker and keep in a water bath maintained at 40ºC taking care that
the level of water in the water bath is at least half the height of the beaker.

6. After 24 hours the beaker is taken out cooled at room temperature and extent
of stripping is estimated visually while the specimen is still under water.

7. Take the average values of stripping and noted down.

8. This stripping value is compared with stripping value of adding hydrated lime
with different percentages like 2, 4, and 6,8,10.

9. So, we can choose the lower stripping value compared with all the values.

Diagrams:

Fig. 7.5.1 Sample preparation for stripping value test

55
 Fig. 7.5.2 Sample keep in water bath

Fig. 7.5.3 Aggregates after stripping test without addition of Hydrated

lime

56
 RESULTS

8.1 Results for aggregates (AS PER IRC27-1967)

Table 8.1.1: Results for aggregates

S.NO Test name Obtained value% Permissible limit %

1 Impact test 19 30
2 Crushing test 12 30
3 Abrasion test 18 30
4 Sp. gravity test 2.8 2.5-3.0
5 Water Absorption test 1.8 2
6 Shape test(flakiness) 14 15
7 Shape test(elongation) 11 15

Discussion: The above aggregate results shows with in the permissible

limits. Hence it is suitable for road construction.

8.2 Results for bitumen (USE CRMB60 AS PER IS15462-

2004):

Table 8.2.1: Results for bitumen without addition of Hydrated lime

S.NO Test name Obtained value Permissible value

(IS15462-2004)
1 Ductility test(cm) 48 50
2 Penetration test(mm) 5.2 < 50
( 1 Div = 0.1mm)
3 Softening point test(ºc) 59 60

Discussion: The above results shows the Ductility, Penetration, Softening

point are within the limits.

59
Table 8.2.2: Results for bitumen with 2% addition of Hydrated lime

S.NO Test name Obtained value

1 Ductility test(cm) 51
2 Penetration test(mm) 5.07
3 Softening point test(ºc) 58

Discussion: The comparison of this test results shows the properties of

bitumen improved by 2% addition of hydrated lime than the plain bitumen.

Table 8.2.3: Results for bitumen with 4% addition of Hydrated lime

S.NO Test name Obtained value

1 Ductility test(cm) 52.5
2 Penetration test(mm) 4.9
3 Softening point test(ºc) 60

Discussion: The comparison of this test results shows the properties of

bitumen improved by 4% addition of hydrated lime than the plain bitumen.

Table 8.2.4: Results for bitumen with 6% addition of Hydrated lime

S.NO Test name Obtained value

1 Ductility test(cm) 55
2 Penetration test(mm) 4.8
3 Softening point test(ºc) 55

Discussion: The comparison of this test results shows the properties of

bitumen improved by 6% addition of hydrated lime than the addition of 4%
hydrated lime.

60
Table 8.2.5: Results for bitumen with 8% addition of Hydrated lime

S.NO Test name Obtained value

1 Ductility test(cm) 58
2 Penetration test(mm) 4.42
3 Softening point test(ºc) 57

Discussion: The comparison of this test results shows the properties of

bitumen improved by 8% addition of hydrated lime than the addition of 6%
hydrated lime.

Table 8.2.6: Results for bitumen with 10% addition of Hydrated lime

S.NO Test name Obtained value

1 Ductility test(cm) 59
2 Penetration test(mm) 4.2
3 Softening point test(ºc) 58

Discussion: The comparison of this test results shows the properties of

bitumen improved by 10% addition of hydrated lime than the addition of 8%
hydrated lime bitumen.

8.3 Result for Marshall Stability test with graph:

Table 8.3.1 Results for Marshall Stability test

S.NO Material Addition % of Stability value(kg) Flow value(mm)
Ca(OH)2
1 0 844 4.6
2 2 860 4.2
3 4 890 3.9
4 6 910 3.5
5 8 945 3.0
6 10 920 3.4

61
Discussion: The above results that are evident from that use of hydrated lime
gives the better results than the plain bitumen. The 8% hydrated lime gives
maximum stability value and low flow value than the other percentages shown
in above graph.

Hydrated lime content vs stability value graph:

960 945
940 920
920 910
900 890
880 860
stability(kg)

860 844
840
820
800
780
0 2 4 6 8 10
Hydrated lime content(%)

Fig. 8.3.1 Plotting curve between Hydrated lime content(%) vs Stability(kg)

Hydrated lime content vs flow value graph:

5 4.6
4.5 4.2
3.9
4 3.5 3.4
3.5 3
3
flow value (mm)

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Hydrated lime content (%)

Fig. 8.3.2 Plotting curve between Hydrated lime content (%) vs flow
value (mm)

62
8.4 Results for stripping value test with graph Representation:

Table 8.4.1: Results for stripping value test

S.NO Material % Addition of Stripping value%

Ca(OH)2
1 0 4
2 2 3.5
3 4 2
4 6 0
5 8 0
6 10 0

Discussion: The comparison of this test results, stripping value of plain

bitumen mixture is 4% and then it is compared with adding of different
percentages with hydrated lime like 2,4,6,8,10 etc. the stripping value from
addition of 6% to 10% is 0%. So, the anti-stripping mix is 6% hydrated lime
and also compared with Marshall Stability and flow value.

Hydrated lime content vs stripping value graph:

4.5
4
4
3.5
3.5
Stripping value(%)

3
2.5
2
2
1.5
1
0.5
0 0 0
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Hydrated lime content(%)

Fig 8.4.1 Plotting curve between Hydrated lime (%) vs Stripping value
(%)

63
CHAPTER-9

CONCLUSION

64
 CONCLUSION
Hydrated lime is the anti-stripping agent for the design of flexible pavement.
This type of agent is used to improve the properties of bitumen such that
stability, flow value, plasticity, hardness. This helps to have a better binding of
bitumen with hydrated lime and also reduces the air voids. This type of agent
used for the construction of pavement mixture to prevent the moisture damage.
This is also may result in reducing the rutting, raveling and stripping value of
asphalt pavement. The hydrated lime is used to improve the durability of
pavement. These roads can with stand any areas to face the any problems of
pavement mainly deformation and striping. This type of agent is used for the
construction of flexible pavement to improve the quality and life span. Finally,
the hydrated lime is adding and we conclude the mix proportion of pavement
mixture based on the properties of mix. This may results shows

 This aggregate results gives the properties of aggregates are within the
permissible limits as per recommendations such as toughness, crushing
strength, Sp. gravity, water absorption, shape, hardness. So, this type of
aggregates are suitable for road construction.
 This bitumen results shows the properties of bitumen with and without
adding of hydrated lime. We conclude that plasticity and hardness is
improved in bitumen compared to without adding of hydrated lime but
softening point value does not improve as per recommendations.
 This results shows stripping value of bitumen mixture is 4% without
adding of hydrated lime. After adding of hydrated lime, The stripping
value is reduced to 0% with 6% adding of hydrated lime. we conclude
that the mix proportion is taken as 6 or 8 or 10%.
 This result shows adding of 8% hydrated lime gives maximum stability
value and flow value is minimum compared to other other percentages.
We conclude that the mix proportion of pavement mixture is taken as
8%.

65
Finally, we conclude that the mix proportion of 8% hydrated lime in pavement
mixture gives better results than the other percentages. This results gives
maximum stability, minimum flow value and stripping value is zero. So, 8%
mix proportion is taken for the construction of road in any areas.it will also
reduce the maintenance cost for construction.

66
CHAPTER-10

REFERENCES

67
 REFERENCES
1.Al-Jarallah, Mohammed I.; Lee, Kang W. Evaluation of Hydrated Lime as
an Antistripping Additive Asphalt Mixtures. (King Sand Univ., Riyadh 11451,
Saudi Arabia). J. Eng. Sci., 13(1), 65-83 Eng) 1987.

2. Hydrated lime: A proven additive for durable asphalt pavements – Critical

literature review, European Lime

Association (Eula), Brussels: Eula Ed., 2011, available from www.eula.eu

3. Moisture Damage in Asphalt Concrete, R. G. Hicks, NCHRP Synthesis of

Highway Practice 175, Washington

(District of Columbus, USA): Transportation Research Board, 1991

4.The Benefits of Hydrated Lime in Hot Mix Asphalt, P. E. Sebaaly, D. N.

Little and J. A. Epps, Arlington (Virginia,USA): National Lime Association,
2006 (http://www.lime.org/BENEFITSHYDRATEDLIME2006.pdf)

5. Unique effects of hydrated lime filler on the performance-related properties

of asphalt cements: Physical and Chemical interactions revisited, D. N. Little
and J. C. Petersen, J. Materials in Civil Engineering vol.17, pp.207-218, 2005

6. The mechanisms of hydrated lime modification of asphalt mixtures: a state-

of-the-art review, D. Lesueur, J. Petit,

H.-J. Ritter, Road Materials and Pavement Design vol.14, pp.1-16, 2013

7. Increasing the durability of asphalt mixtures by hydrated lime addition:

What evidence?, D. Lesueur, J. Petit, H.-J.Ritter, European Roads Review
vol.20, pp.48-55, 2012

8. L’ajout de chaux hydrate dams les enrobés bitumineux, C. Raynaud, BTP

Matériaux n°22, pp.42-43, 2009.

9. Anderson, David A.; Dukatz, Ervin L.; Petersen, J. Claine. The Effect of
Antistrip Additives on the Properties of Asphalt Cement. (Pennsylvania State
Univ., University Park, PA, USA). Asphalt PavingTechn 01, 51, 298-317
(Eng) 1982.

68
10. The liqiuid anti-stripping and test for measuring striping by Christine W.
Curtis Auburn University ,Alabama 36849 , National Research Council
,Washington, D.C. 1990

11. IS CODES:

 IS 73-1992 paving bitumen specifications- S and A type bitumen

 IS 15462-2004 specifications for PMB, NRMB , CRMB bitumen
 IRC 27-1967 specification for road aggregates
 IS 2386(PART-IV)-1963 for Impact Test
 IS 2386(PART-IV)-1963 for Crushing test
 IS 2386(PART-IV)-1963 for Los Angeles Abrasion Test
 IS 2386(PART-I)-1963 for Shape test
 IS 2386(PART-III) for sp. gravity and water absorption test
 IS 1208-1978 for Ductility test
 IS 1205-1978 for Softening point test
 IS 1203-1978 for Penetration test
 IS 6241-1971 for Stripping value test
 IRC 111-2009 for Marshall stability test

69