center for utilization effects of scrap tire rubber on ... cbu reports/rep-236.pdf · sieve...
TRANSCRIPT
-1
Center for
By-Products
Utilization
Effects of Scrap Tire Rubber on Properties of
Hot-Mix Asphaltic Concrete - A Laboratory
Investigation
By: Tarun R. Naik, and Shiw S. Singh
Report No. 236
November 1994
Department of Civil Engineering and Mechanics
College of Engineering and Applied Science
THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - MILWAUKEE
EFFECTS OF SCRAP TIRE RUBBER ON
PROPERTIES OF HOT-MIX ASPHALTIC CONCRETE-
A LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
Prepared for Paul J. Koziar, Director
Waste Tire Removal and Recovery Program Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management 101 S. Webster Street
P.O. Box 7921 Madison, WI 53707
BY: Tarun R. Naik, Director
and
Shiw S. Singh, Post Doctoral Fellow
Center for By-Products Utilization Department of Civil Engineering and Mechanics
College of Engineering and Applied Science The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
P.O. Box 784 Milwaukee, WI 53201
Telephone: (414) 229-4105 Fax: (414) 229-6958
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii 1. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 2. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
2.1 GENERAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
2.2 MATERIEALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2
2.2.1 Aggregates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2
2.2.2 Asphalt Binder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2
2.2.3 Crumb Rubber Modifier (CRM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7
2.3 MIXTURE DESIGNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7
3. RESULTS and DISCUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
3.1 EFFECTS OF ASPHALT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
3.2 EFFECT OF INCLUSION OF CRM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-2
4. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
5. REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1
ii
ABSTRACT
The major aim of this investigation was to establish mixture proportion
technology for manufacture of paving materials containing scrap tire rubber using a dry
process, especially a generic system. This research focussed toward development of
a modified generic technology that would not require any changes in gradation of
Crumb Rubber Modifier (CRM) in manufacture of dense-grade asphaltic concretes
(DGACs) varying in aggregate gradations. The new system will contain a fixed size or
a combination of sizes of CRM for all DGACs. It is believed that this new technology
will have much greater acceptance than the standard generic technology in commercial
application due to its simplicity without compromising performance.
An experimental investigation was carried out to evaluate the influence of the
size of CRM on performance of asphaltic paving materials. Two different Wisconsin
DOT dense-graded asphaltic concrete mixtures were selected as reference mixtures for
this investigation. Two sizes of CRM (3 mm and 180 µM) were chosen, to represent
the upper and lower limits of CRM size, based on technical and economic
considerations. The coarse CRM (3 mm) was varied between 1 and 9% of total
asphalt cement used, and the fine CRM (180 µM) was varied between 5 and 15% of
total asphalt used with an increment of 2%.
For each asphaltic mixture, properties such as air voids, voids in the mineral
aggregates (VMA), voids filled with asphalt cement (VFA), theoretical maximum specific
gravity, bulk specific gravity, stability, and flow were determined. Based on the
iii
analysis of data collected, it was found that addition of the coarse CRM (3 mm) affected
the performance of both Wisconsin DOT mixtures adversely. Thus, this size of CRM is
concluded to be unsuitable for manufacture of rubberized paving materials. However,
the materials made with the fine CRM (180 µM) showed the most encouraging
performance up to 15% CRM addition. The materials made with 180 µM can be
commercially utilized without any changes in conventional mixture design and
production technology. However, in order to achieve better economics, a combination
of sizes need to be further investigated. Additionally, further investigations are needed
to establish field performance of the mixtures that were developed in this laboratory
investigation at the Center for By-Products Utilization, University of
Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors express their appreciation to Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
for providing financial support for this project. Special appreciation is expressed to Mr.
Paul J. Koziar for his valuable suggestions and help during the startup phase of this
investigation.
The authors would like to express their deep sense of gratitude to Mr. David F. Nelson,
President, WISE, Milwaukee, WI, whose valuable help and encouragement were
instrumental in establishing the scrap tire use research project at the Center for
By-Products Utilization, UW-Milwaukee. The authors would also like to express
appreciation to Mr. James C. Kaminski, Commissioner of Public Works, City of
Milwaukee, for his encouragement and support for investigation. Special appreciation
is expressed to Mr. Robert A. Huelsman, Environmental Engineer, Department of the
Air Force, Milwaukee, for his valuable support, commitments, and interest in the project.
Thanks are due to Payne and Dolan, Inc. for providing facilities for making and testing
of asphaltic concrete mixture for this investigation. The authors express their deep
sense of gratitude to Mr. Jack Weigel of Payne and Dolan, Inc. for his active help,
participation, and suggestion throughout the study.
The authors express sincere thanks to Ms. Amanda Como for her help in data
collection. A note of thanks are due to Mr. M. M. Hossain for preparation of
v
illustrations used in this report.
The primary sponsors of the Center for By-Products Utilization are: Dairyland Power
Cooperative, LaCrosse, WI; Madison Gas and Electric Company, Madison, WI;
National Minerals Corporation, St. Paul, MN; Northern States Power Company, Eau
Claire, WI; Wisconsin Electric Power Company, Milwaukee, WI; Wisconsin Power and
Light Company, Madison, WI; and Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Green Bay,
WI. Their continuing help and interest in the activities of CBU is gratefully
acknowledged.
-1
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Recent technical and economic feasibility investigations carried out at the Center
for By-Products Utilization revealed that there is a very high potential for large scale use
of scrap tires in manufacture of rubberized asphaltic pavements and other construction
materials. Tire rubber is ground to particulate form prior to it's utilization as an
ingredient for such materials for improving their properties with compared to materials
without crumb rubber from used tires. The used tire particulates are called Crumb
Rubber Modifier (CRM). When added to asphalt mixtures, they tend to modify
properties of the asphaltic materials.
Two different processes exist for introducing CRM in paving materials. They are
wet and dry processes. In the case of wet processes, 15-25% of CRM is reacted with
asphalt at elevated temperature (375 -425 F) to produce a new binder which is thicker
and more elastic compared to conventional asphalt. The new binder is used in the
same manner as that of conventional asphalt in manufacture of paving and other
asphaltic materials. Two different processes that use the wet processes are the
McDonald (batch) and the continuous blending technologies. The McDonald
technology involves blending of CRM with asphalt in a holding tank and then allowing
sufficient time for reactions between them in the tank. In the continuous blending
technology, asphalt and CRM are mixed prior to mixing the blend with the asphaltic
mixture. The continuous system uses finer CRM compared to the McDonald
-2
technology. The detailed description of these technologies is presented in the
accompanying report (1) and elsewhere (2-5).
In the dry process, CRM is blended with aggregates prior to introduction of
asphalt to the mixture. The resulting material is generally referred to as rubber filled
systems. Two different systems, namely, Plus Ride and generic technologies are
commonly used to manufacture rubber filled systems. The PlusRide system is a
patented technology which was originally developed in the late 1960's in Sweden and
was patented under the trade name "Rubit". Currently, EnvirOtire, Inc. markets this
technology as PlusRide II in the USA. The advantages of the PlusRide system include
increased flexibility, fatigue life, resistance to reflective, shrinkage and thermal cracking,
and resistance to rutting compared to conventional asphaltic paving. The generic
systems was developed by Takallou in 1986 (6). This system employs designs and
standards similar to that for conventional asphaltic concrete (1, 2, 3, 6, 7). The
gradation of CRM is designed to be compatible with a specific dense-graded aggregate.
These generic systems have been used in several states including New York, Oregon,
and Ontario with a considerable success.
In general, the materials produced from the wet processes is costlier than the
rubber filled materials produced by the dry processes. Of the two rubber filled
systems, namely the PlusRide and the generic system, the latter is the most
cost-effective. Because of low cost and minimum changes in the design of
conventional asphalt concrete systems, the generic system has a great potential for
-3
widespread application in paving work. However, there is limited published data
available on the performance of the generic system. This investigation was under
taken to develop an improved design of the generic technology for increasing its
acceptance in commercial applications in Wisconsin.
The major aim of the work reported herein is to establish an optimum mixture
proportion for the generic system without much change in mixture proportioning and
manufacturing of conventional materials. This report includes experimental data on
the effects of fineness of CRM on performance of two different Wisconsin DOT
mixtures by using a modified generic technology. In the original generic system, CRM
gradation is adjusted in order to be compatible with individual gradation of aggregates
used in dense-graded asphaltic concrete (DGAC) systems. Whereas, in the modified
generic systems that is being reported in this work, it was planned to keep the same
size or gradation of CRM for all DGACs. This will allow a greater acceptance of CRM
in asphaltic pavements in Wisconsin because mixture designers do not have to
redesign gradation of CRM as required by individual aggregate gradations of different
DGACs.
-1
SECTION 2
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMS
2.1 GENERAL
In order to evaluate the effects of CRM in asphaltic paving materials, two
different asphaltic mixtures established by Wisconsin DOT were selected for this work
as reference mixtures. These were MV-3 and MV-4 dense-graded asphaltic mixtures
for medium volume traffic conditions. This work involved establishing a modified
generic system using a fixed size or fixed gradation of CRM as opposed to the
gradation of CRM used in the standard generic system. For the present investigation
two different sizes of CRM were selected: 3 mm and 180 µM. The entire experimental
work was divided into two different series. The first series of experiments were
concerned with evaluation of the effects of 3 mm CRM and the second series of
investigation was related to the effect of inclusion of 180 µM CRM on performance of
asphaltic concrete systems. The amount of CRM was varied between 1 and 9% by
weight of asphalt cement (used for the control mixture) for the coarse CRM, and 5 and
15% for the fine CRM.
2.2 MATERIALS
All materials used in this investigation except CRM were supplied by Payne and
Dolan, Inc. All materials were tested using the R and D Laboratory facilities available
-2
at Payne and Dolan, Inc.
2.2.1 Aggregates
Sieve analysis was carried out to determine gradation of the fine and coarse
aggregates. A "dry" sieve analysis was conducted in accordance with ASTM C 136
(AASHTO T 27). The amount of materials finer than 75 µM (No. 200) sieve in
aggregate was measured per ASTM C 117.
The bulk and apparent specific gravity of coarse and fine aggregates were
determined by ASTM C 127 (AASHTO T 85) and C 128 (AASHTO T 84), respectively.
The effective specific gravity was computed from theoretical maximum specific gravity
using ASTM D 2041. Los Angeles abrasion resistance, the resistance to degradation
of coarse aggregate, was evaluated in accordance with ASTM C 131. Sulfate
soundness of the aggregates was measured in accordance with ASTM C 88.
The properties of aggregates are shown in Tables 2-1 and 2-2, and in Fig. 2-1
and 2-2.
2.2.2 Asphalt Binder
The asphalt cement used was Type 120-150. It was obtained from AMOCO.
It's specific gravity at 77 F was 1.023.
-3
TABLE 2-1: Properties of Aggregates Used in Mix MV-3
Aggregate Source
Sample No. Test Number
Material
Source
Location
1
1216-A-92
½" Chip
East Quarry
SE ¼ SEC 26 T7 RN 19E WAUK. CO.
2
1233-A-92
¼" Chip
East Quarry
SE ¼ SEC 26 T7 RN 19E WAUK. CO.
3
1218-A-92
¼" Screenings
East Quarry
SE ¼ SEC 26 T7 RN 19E WAUK. CO.
4
1208-A-92
Manufactured Sand
East Quarry
SE ¼ SEC 26 T7 RN 19E WAUK. CO.
5
1220-A-92
Washed Sand
Johnson - S.& J.
NW ¼ SEC 6 T5 RN 20E WAUK. CO.
Aggregate Gradation (% Passing)
1216-A-92 BLD 10.0%
1233-A-92 BLD 15.0%
1218-A-92 BLD 30.0%
1208-A-92 BLD 30.0%
1220-A-92 BLD 15.0%
Blend
Job Mix
Spec.
1.0 IN
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100-100
¾ IN
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100-100
½ IN
73.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
97.3
97.3
90-100
3/8 IN
17.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
91.7
91.7
75-95
#4
3.2
38.6
76.9
95.9
98.6
72.7
72.7
45-80
#8
3.0
7.0
49.1
61.5
84.5
47.2
47.2
30-60
#16
2.9
2.1
33.1
34.4
63.1
30.3
-
-
#30
2.8
1.2
24.2
17.1
40.6
18.9
18.9
15-40
#50
2.8
1.1
19.4
8.1
16.1
11.1
11.1
10-25
#100
2.7
0.9
16.6
4.8
5.2
7.6
-
-
#200
2.4
0.9
13.4
2.8
3.2
5.7
5.7
3-8
Bulk Agg. Sp.
Gr.
2.68
2.69
2.69
2.70
2.69
2.69
2.69
-
Effective Agg.Sp.Gr = 2.78 Elongated Particles = <5% Soundness = 2.5 L.A. Wear = 4.1 (100) 21.0(500)
-4
TABLE 2-2: Properties of Aggregates Used in Mix MV-4
Aggregate Source
Sample No.
Test Number
Material
Source
Location
1
1217-A-92
3/8" Chip
East Quarry
SE ¼ SEC 26 T7 RN 19E WAUK. CO.
2
1233-A-92
¼" Chip
East Quarry
SE ¼ SEC 26 T7 RN 19E WAUK. CO.
3
1218-A-92
¼" Screenings
East Quarry
SE ¼ SEC 26 T7 RN 19E WAUK. CO.
4
1208-A-92
Manufactured Sand
East Quarry
SE ¼ SEC 26 T7 RN 19E WAUK. CO.
5
1220-A-92
Washed Sand
Johnson - S.&J.
NW ¼ SEC 6 T5 RN 20E WAUK. CO.
Aggregate Gradation (% Passing)
1217-A-92 BLD 10.0%
1233-A-92 BLD 10.0%
1218-A-92 BLD 30.0%
1208-A-92 BLD 30.0%
1220-A-92 BLD 20.0%
Blend
Job Mix
Spec.
1.0 IN
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100-100
¾ IN
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100-100
½ IN
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100-100
3/8 IN
84.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
98.4
98.4
95-100
#4
3.7
38.6
76.9
95.9
98.6
75.8
75.8
60-85
#8
3.4
7.0
49.1
61.5
84.5
51.1
51.1
40-65
#16
3.3
2.1
33.1
34.4
63.1
33.4
-
-
#30
3.2
1.2
24.2
17.1
40.6
20.9
20.9
15-40
#50
3.2
1.1
19.4
8.1
16.1
11.9
11.9
10-22
#100
3.1
0.9
16.6
4.8
5.2
7.9
-
-
#200
2.8
0.9
13.4
2.8
3.2
5.9
5.9
3-8
Bulk Agg. Sp.
Gr.
2.68
2.69
2.69
2.70
2.69
2.69
2.69
-
Effective Agg.Sp.Gr = 2.78 Elongated Particles = <5% Soundness = 2.5 L.A. Wear = 4.1 (100) 19.6 (500)
-5
-6
-7
2.2.3 Crumb Rubber Modifier (CRM)
Two different sizes were selected to represent the lower and upper size limits of
CRM that can be used in asphaltic materials to derive both technical and economic
advantages. The largest size CRM was obtained from fines obtained from a tire
shredder. The shredded rubber were further screened to obtain a nominal 3 mm
coarse rubber particles. This size was determined to be the maximum with respected
to reactivity of the particles with asphalt and stress concentration effects which can
influence strength and durability properties of the materials. A fine CRM of 180 µM
particles retained by 80 Mesh sieve was obtained from Baker, Inc. This was
considered to be the smallest size due to economic reasons because cost increases
abruptly with decrease in size. However, since reactivity of the rubber particle
increases with decrease in size, smaller than 180 µM will be even more desirable as a
CRM for asphaltic concrete as far as technical feasibility is concerned.
2.3 MIXTURE DESIGN
The Marshall mix design method was used to design bituminons mixtures with or
without CRM. First Marshall specimens (4 in. diameter x 2½ in.) were manufactured in
accordance with procedure outlined in ASTM D 1559. Each specimen was subjected
to 50 blows on each end in order to obtain the desired level of compaction.
The compacted specimens were tested for bulk specific gravity, stability and
-8
flow, and density and air voids. Bulk specific gravity test was performed in accordance
with ASTM D 2726. The stability and flow were measured by using Marshall Apparatus
in accordance with ASTM D 1559. The maximum theoretical specific gravity of mixture
(Rice specific gravity) was determined in accordance with ASTM D 2041.
From the known values of bulk specific gravity and maximum specific gravity,
voids in total mix (VTM) was computed. VMA (Voids in the Mineral Aggregate) was
determined using the values of bulk specific gravity of the aggregate, the bulk specific
gravity of the compacted mixture and the asphalt content by weight of total mix. VFA
(Voids Filled with Asphalt) was computed from the known values of VTM and VMA. A
total of 24 mixtures were tested using the two Wisconsin DOT mixtures (MV-3 and
MV-4). Test data for these mixtures are shown in Tables A-1 through A-24, Appendix
A.
Test properties such as bulk specific gravity, maximum theoretical bulk specific
gravity, air voids, unit weight, VMA, and VFA, stability, and flow were plotted against
percent asphalt content by weight of total mix (% AC by weight of Mix), Fig. A-1 through
A-24, Appendix A.
In this work, optimum asphalt content was determined in accordance with the
NAPA procedure outlined in TAS-14 (8). Recommended air void content for the
Wisconsin DOT mixtures varies between 3 and 4 percent. Therefore, medium air void
content was taken as 3.5 percent. The optimum asphalt content was taken as the
-9
value of asphalt derived at 3.5% air void content from the curve drawn between air
voids and %AC content by weight of total mixture. Other properties such as air voids,
VMA, VFA, theoretical maximum bulk specific gravity, bulk specific gravity, unit weight,
stability, and flow were determined from their respective plots corresponding to the
optimum asphalt content determined above. However, the values of air voids, stability,
flow, and VMA were compared with those specified by the Wisconsin DOT for the
Marshall design method. When all these values fell within the specification, the
optimum asphalt content was considered adequate for actual construction purposes. If
any of the above parameters were out of the specification range, the mixtures were
redesigned and retested until all the parameters were within acceptable limits per
WI-DOT.
-1
SECTION 3
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This section describes the effects of asphalt content on properties of asphaltic
materials. The effects of inclusion of CRM on performance of the Wisconsin DOT
dense-graded asphaltic concrete mixtures (MV-3 and MV-4) are described.
3.1 EFFECT OF ASPHALT
The effect of asphalt on properties of the mixtures tested is shown in Tables A-1
through A-24, and in Fig. A-1 through A-24.
In general air voids, bulk specific gravity, and maximum theoretical specific
gravity decreased, while unit weight, voids filled with asphalt cement (VFA) and flow
increased with increasing asphalt content. VMA (Voids in Mineral Aggregates)
decreased up to a certain level of asphalt content beyond which it increased. But in
some cases, VMA decreased with an increase in asphalt content. The effects of asphalt
addition on Marshall stability indicated two different trends. In the first case, the
stability increased with asphalt content up to a certain limit, and then decreased.
Whereas, in the second case, the stability decreased with increasing asphalt content,
and then increased. In order to meet strength and durability requirements for asphaltic
pavements, Marshall design criteria have been established for various types of
pavements by Wisconsin DOT and other agencies.
-2
3.2 EFFECT OF INCLUSION OF CRM
Various Marshall design parameters corresponding to optimum asphalt content
determined at about 3.5% air voids are shown in Tables 3-1 through 3-4. WI-DOT
requirements are given in Table 3-5. The effect of CRM on various physical properties
of the two WI-DOT asphaltic mixtures is presented in Fig. 3-1 through 3-14.
The effects of inclusion of the 3 mm CRM on the properties of the two Wisconsin
DOT mixtures (MV-3 and MV-4) are shown in Tables 3-1 and 3-2 and in Fig. 3-1
through Fig. 3-7. In general, an increase in the 3 mm CRM content caused a decrease
in bulk specific gravity, maximum theoretical specific gravity, unit weight, and stability.
However, the values of VMA, VFA, and flow increased with addition of the 3 mm CRM
(Tables 3-1 and 3-2). Additionally, asphalt cement requirements increased
substantially when amounts of the 3 mm CRM was increased from 1% to 9% by weight
of total asphalt cement used. At the 9% level, the mixtures did not meet Wisconsin
DOT requirements for stability as well as flow (Tables 3-1, 3-2, and 3-5).
The influence of the 180 µm CRM on the mixtures are presented in Tables 3-3
and 3-4, and in Fig. 3-8 through 3-14. The various parameters of the mixtures (MV-3
and MV-4) such as bulk specific gravity, maximum theoretical specific gravity, unit
weight, VMA, VFA, and stability were not greatly affected by inclusion of the 180 µm
CRM within the experimental range (Fig.3-8 through 3-14). However, when the fine
-3
CRM (180 µM) was added to the asphaltic mixtures, the flow increased but the values
were substantially lower compared to the
-4
TABLE 3-1: Mixture Design Data for Mix MV-3 Containing 3 mm CRM
CRM content
(% of AC)
Optimu
m Asphalt Content
(%)
Marshall Data at Optimum AC Content
Bulk
Specific
Gravity
Theo.
Max. Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids (%)
Unit
Weight (PCF)
VMA (%)
VFA (%)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(0.01 in.)
Reco. Mixing Temp.
( F)
Dust to Asphalt Ratio
0
6.2
2.427
2.515
3.5
151.1
15.4
77.3
2260
11.2
300
1.1
1
6.0
2.441
2.529
3.5
151.9
14.8
76.4
2013
13.1
300
1.1
3
6.6
2.425
2.514
3.5
150.9
15.9
78.0
1750
16.6
300
1.0
5
6.9
2.415
2.502
3.5
150.3
16.5
78.8
1420
16.4
300
1.0
7
7.4
2.397
2.484
3.5
149.2
17.5
80.0
1250
18.0
300
0.8
9
8.2
2.366
2.452
3.5
147.3
19.3
81.9
1020
21.4
300
0.8
-5
TABLE 3-2: Mixture Design Data for Mix MV-4 Containing 3 mm CRM
CRM content
(% of AC)
Optimu
m Asphalt Content
(%)
Marshall Data at Optimum AC Content
Bulk
Specific
Gravity
Theo.
Max. Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids (%)
Unit
Weight (PCF)
VMA (%)
VFA (%)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(0.01 in.)
Reco. Mixing Temp.
( F)
Dust to Asphalt Ratio
0
6.5
2.419
2.505
3.4
150.6
16.8
78.8
2280
10.9
300
1.1
1
6.2
2.437
2.525
3.5
151.7
15.1
76.8
2100
12.5
300
1.0
3
6.9
2.418
2.506
3.5
150.5
16.4
78.7
1500
15.2
300
0.9
5
7.4
2.402
2.489
3.5
149.5
17.4
79.9
1400
16.8
300
0.8
7
7.4
2.405
2.492
3.5
149.7
17.3
79.8
1400
16.8
300
0.8
9
7.9
2.375
2.462
3.5
147.8
18.7
81.3
1100
18.8
300
0.8
-6
TABLE 3-3: Mixture Design Data for Mix MV-3 Containing 80 Mesh CRM (180 µM)
CRM content
(% of AC)
Optimu
m Asphalt Content
(%)
Marshall Data at Optimum AC Content
Bulk
Specific
Gravity
Theo.
Max. Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids (%)
Unit
Weight (PCF)
VMA (%)
VFA (%)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(0.01 in.)
Reco. Mixing Temp.
( F)
Dust to Asphalt Ratio
0
6.3
2.427
2.515
3.5
151.1
15.4
77.3
2260
11.2
300
1.1
5
6.4
2.430
2.519
3.5
151.2
15.5
77.4
2175
12.8
300
1.0
7
6.9
2.415
2.502
3.5
150.3
16.5
78.8
1800
16.0
300
1.0
9
6.3
2.440
2.528
3.5
151.9
15.1
76.8
2300
13.2
300
1.1
11
6.2
2.437
2.526
3.5
151.7
15.1
76.8
2350
13.4
300
1.1
13
6.4
2.430
2.518
3.5
151.2
15.5
77.4
2400
14.8
300
1.0
15
6.9
2.415
2.502
3.5
150.3
16.5
78.8
2200
16.0
300
1.0
-7
TABLE 3-4: Mixture Design Data for Mix MV-4 Containing 80 Mesh CRM (180 µM)
CRM content
(% of AC)
Optimu
m Asphalt Content
(%)
Marshall Data at Optimum AC Content
Bulk
Specific
Gravity
Theo.
Max. Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids (%)
Unit
Weight (PCF)
VMA (%)
VFA (%)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(0.01 in.)
Reco. Mixing Temp.
( F)
Dust to Asphalt Ratio
0
6.5
2.414
2.505
3.4
150.6
16.0
78.8
2280
10.9
300
1.1
5
6.4
2.427
2.515
3.5
151.1
15.6
77.6
2250
14.3
300
1.0
7
6.4
2.427
2.514
3.5
151.1
15.6
77.6
2250
14.0
300
1.0
9
6.5
2.429
2.516
3.5
151.2
15.6
77.6
2300
13.8
300
1.0
11
6.4
2.430
2.517
3.5
151.2
15.5
77.4
2350
12.8
300
1.0
13
6.8
2.412
2.500
3.5
150.1
16.5
78.8
2200
13.2
300
1.0
15
7.0
2.407
2.495
3.5
149.8
16.8
79.2
2000
15.0
300
1.0
-8
TABLE 3-5: Wisconsin DOT Requirements for MV-3 and MV-4 Mixtures
ITEMS
MV-3 (GRADATION 3)
MV-4 (GRADATION 4)
No. blows / end
50
50
Stability, min. lbs.
1200
1200
Flow, 0.01 in.
8-18
8-16
Air Voids, percent
3.5
3.5
V.M.A., min. percent
15.0
15.5
Tensile Strength Ratio, percent min. Mixture -no additive
70.0*
70.0*
* If an additive is used (lime or liquid) to improve the resistance to moisture
damage, the minimum Tensile Strength Ratio shall be 75 percent.
-9
-10
-11
-12
-13
-14
-15
-16
-17
-18
-19
-20
-21
-22
-23
mixtures made with the coarse CRM (3mm) for a given CRM content. The asphalt
requirements for the rubberized mixtures containing the fine CRM were essentially the
same as that for the reference Wisconsin DOT mixture (MV-3 and MV-4) without CRM
as shown in Tables 3-3 and 3-4. Additionally, both Wisconsin DOT mixtures
containing fine CRM (180 µM) met all the requirements of WI-DOT that are specified for
the reference asphaltic mixtures without CRM (Tables 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5).
In accordance with the requirements of the generic system (1), the optimum
asphalt content is selected based on air voids, as used in this work. This optimum
asphalt level should produce stability that should meet the minimum stability
requirements for control mixture without CRM. This condition was satisfied for the
rubberized mixtures containing the fine (180µM) CRM up to 15% CRM levels.
However, in the case of the rubberized mixtures containing the coarse CRM (3 mm),
the mixtures did not satisfy this requirement especially at 9% CRM level which is a low
level of CRM inclusion. Additionally, the materials made with the 3mm CRM were very
sticky and hard to remove from molds. Also, the stability values were much lower than
those observed for the mixtures containing 180 µM CRM. The mixtures with the
coarse CRM required larger amounts of asphalt compared to that for the materials
made with the fine CRM (180 µM) or mixtures without CRM. Therefore, it was
concluded that the material made with the coarse CRM is not suitable for construction
work.
-1
SECTION 4
SUMMARY and CONCLUSIONS
This study was carried out to establish a modified generic technology for
manufacture of rubberized paving materials. For this work, it was decided to use a
single size CRM in asphaltic mixtures in order to avoid designing gradation of CRM for
individual aggregate gradations of dense-graded asphaltic concrete systems.
In order to establish the new technology, it was decided to use two sizes of CRM.
A coarse CRM (3mm) was selected as the largest size and a fine CRM (180µM) was
taken as the smallest size based on technical and economic factors.
Two dense-graded Wisconsin DOT asphaltic mixtures (MV-3 and MV-4) were
chosen as reference mixtures. Entire experimental work was divided into two different
series. The first series of tests were carried out using the coarse CRM (3mm) and the
two Wisconsin DOT mixtures. The second series of tests were conducted using the
fine CRM (180µM) and the two Wisconsin DOT mixtures.
In the first series of experiments, mixtures were made with the 3mm CRM
varying between 1 and 9% percent of total asphaltic cement used. For each mixture,
various Marshall properties such as air voids, voids in the mineral aggregates (VMA),
void filled with asphalt (VFA), theoretical maximum specific gravity, bulk specific gravity,
flow and stability were evaluated using applicable standards. The data observed were
-2
analyzed for determining optimum asphalt level in accordance with the technique
established by the National Asphalt Paving Association (NAPA). The results showed
that performance of the control DOT mixtures deteriorated with increasing amounts of
the coarse CRM (3mm). Furthermore, asphalt requirements increased substantially
even at 9% CRM level compared to the reference mixtures without CRM.
The second series of experiments were conducted with the 180 µM CRM varying
between 5 and 15% of total asphalt cement content used. In this case most of the
CRM particles were expected to react with the asphalt cement due to their high
reactivity, and therefore, it would modify the asphalt cement to a marked extent. The
remaining unreacting particle should behave like elastic aggregates. All the Marshall
properties were also recorded for this series of the investigation. The mixtures
containing up to 15% of the fine CRM showed excellent results. All the mixtures
containing the fine CRM, not only met the design requirements for asphaltic mixtures,
but also did not increase asphalt requirement substantially up to 13% CRM of the
asphalt cement used. At the 15% CRM level, the asphalt requirement increased
slightly.
Based on the analysis of test results, it was concluded that the fine CRM (180
µM) can be used in both the Wisconsin DOT mixtures (MV-3 and MV-4) without any
changes in conventional manufacturing technology for asphaltic materials. Thus, it is
hoped that the proposed modified generic system in this investigation will have even a
greater acceptance compared to the standard generic system due to its ease of
-3
adoption in commercial applications. More evaluation is needed to use various
combination of finer CRM in order to derive both technical as well as economic benefits
without changing standard mixture design and production technology for asphaltic
paving materials.
After developing optimum mixture proportions for the proposed technology,
further developmental efforts will be needed for field performance evaluation of this new
technology with fine CRM.
-1
SECTION 5
REFERENCES
1. Naik, T.R., Singh, S.S., and Wandorf, R.B., "Application of Scrap Tire Rubber in Asphaltic Materials: State of the Art Assessment", A Technical Report, Prepared for Wisconsin DNR, Center for By-Products Utilization, Department of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, July 1994.
2. Heitzman, M.A., "State of the Practice: Design and Construction of Paving
Materials with Crumb Rubber Modifier", A Technical Report, No. FHWA-SA-92-022, May 1992.
3. Kandhal, P., and Hanson, D., "Crumb Rubber Modifier Technologies",
Proceedings of the Crumb Rubber Modifier Workshop, Merriville, Indiana, February 23-24, 1993.
4. Chehovits, J.G., "Design Methods for Hot-Mixed Asphalt-Rubber Concrete
Paving Materials", Asphalt Rubber Producers Group National Seminar on Asphalt Rubber, Federal Highway Administration, 1989.
5. Naik, T.R., and Singh, S.S., "Utilization of Scrap Tires", Report No.
CBU-1990-04, Department of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, College of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, April 1990.
6. Takallou, M.B., and Takallou, H.B., "Benefits of Recycling Waste Tires in Rubber
Asphalt Paving", Transportation Research Record No. 1310, TRB, Washington, D.C., 1991, pp. 87-92.
7. Singh, S.S., "Innovative Application of Scrap Tires", Wisconsin Professional
Engineer, July 1993, pp. 14-16. 8. National Asphalt Pavement Association, "Mix Design Techniques - Part I", NAPA
TAS-14, April 1982. 9. Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Supplemental Specification, SS 4.3,
State of Wisconsin, Department of Transportation, Division of Highways, Madison, WI, August 1992.
REP-236/alb
-2
APPENDIX A
MIX DESIGN DATA BY MARSHALL METHOD
-3
TABLE A-1: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(C1).
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.00
0.0
1243.8
720.2
1245.1
524.9
2.370
2330
2260
10.0
1241.7
721.7
1243.0
521.3
2.383
2440
2391
11.0
1250.9
725.9
1253.0
527.1
2.373
2440
2367
11.0
1245.1
726.0
1246.5
520.5
2.392
2600
2548
11.0
2.380
2.563
7.1
16.0
55.6
148.1
2392
10.8
5.50
0.0
1273.8
746.3
1274.4
528.1
2.412
2200
2112
11.0
1267.5
742.6
1268.3
525.7
2.411
2250
2183
10.5
1272.1
744.1
1272.6
528.5
2.407
2400
2304
10.5
1258.9
737.1
1259.5
522.4
2.410
2520
2470
11.0
2.410
2.542
5.2
15.4
66.2
150.0
2267
10.8
6.00
0.0
1264.3
742.5
1264.9
522.4
2.420
2230
2185
11.0
1252.5
734.8
1253.1
518.3
2.417
2240
2218
11.0
1253.4
738.5
1253.9
515.4
2.432
2420
2420
11.0
1256.2
738.4
1257.0
518.6
2.422
2340
2317
11.5
2.423
2.523
4.0
15.4
74.0
150.8
2285
11.1
6.50
0.0
1257.0
739.6
1257.3
517.7
2.428
2250
2228
10.5
1238.5
728.4
1238.9
510.5
2.426
2290
2313
11.5
1259.7
743.4
1260.5
517.1
2.436
2230
2230
12.5
1238.4
729.3
1239.0
509.7
2.430
2380
2428
11.5
2.430
2.503
2.9
15.6
81.4
151.2
2300
11.5
-4
-5
TABLE A-2: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(R1)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.50
1.0
1228.0
715.0
1229.2
514.8
2.388
1880
1880
13.0
1233.7
724.4
1234.4
510.0
2.419
1920
1958
12.5
1218.7
710.6
1819.5
508.9
2.395
1400
1428
11.0
1218.2
717.2
1219.0
501.8
2.428
1790
1862
12.0
2.408
2.549
5.5
15.5
64.5
149.9
1782
12.0
6.00
1.0
1231.9
727.6
1232.5
504.9
2.440
1765
1818
13.0
1236.5
732.2
1237.1
504.9
2.449
2095
2158
14.0
1230.5
728.3
1231.3
503.0
2.446
2095
2179
13.0
1223.8
720.2
1224.3
504.1
2.428
1840
1895
12.5
2.441
2.529
3.5
14.8
76.4
151.9
2013
13.1
6.50
1.0
1226.4
728.0
1227.0
499.0
2.458
2100
2205
13.5
1225.4
729.5
1226.2
496.7
2.467
2100
2226
13.5
1233.9
729.7
1234.3
504.6
2.445
1875
1931
14.5
1227.3
729.0
1227.8
498.8
2.461
2110
2216
14.0
1233.8
728.9
1233.3
504.4
2.444
1231.2
731.1
1231.5
500.4
2.460
1235.8
727.1
1236.2
509.1
2.427
1231.1
729.3
1231.5
502.2
2.451
2.452
2.509
2.3
14.8
84.5
152.6
2145
13.9
7.00
1.0
1233.1
730.7
1233.4
502.7
2.454
1925
2002
13.5
1223.7
723.3
1224.1
500.8
2.443
1670
1737
13.0
1233.6
730.0
1234.0
504.0
2.448
1875
1931
15.0
1237.6
734.4
1237.9
503.5
2.458
2135
2199
14.5
2.451
2.490
1.6
15.3
89.5
152.6
1967
14.0
7.50
1.0
1232.4
726.9
1232.8
505.9
2.436
1850
1906
16.5
1226.0
722.2
1226.4
504.2
2.432
1805
1859
16.5
1231.0
727.2
1231.3
504.1
2.442
2.448
1900
1957
17.0
1235.6
730.9
1235.7
504.8
1755
1808
16.0
2.440
2.471
1.3
16.2
92.0
151.9
1882
16.5
-6
TABLE A-3: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(R2)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.50
3.0
1233.7
711.5
1236.4
524.9
2.350
1700
1649
15.0
1231.9
714.0
1233.8
519.8
2.370
1800
1782
14.0
1220.7
705.1
1222.6
517.5
2.359
1780
1762
14.5
1228.3
711.7
1230.3
518.6
2.368
1650
1634
15.5
2.362
2.557
7.6
17.1
55.6
147.0
1707
14.8
6.00
3.0
1223.3
713.9
1224.4
510.5
2.396
1680
1697
16.0
1230.8
717.0
1232.0
515.0
2.390
1530
1530
15.0
1229.3
716.1
1230.1
514.0
2.392
1580
1580
16.5
1215.7
706.4
1216.6
510.2
2.383
1650
1683
15.0
2.390
2.537
5.8
16.5
64.8
148.8
1623
15.6
6.50
3.0
1229.2
727.2
1229.8
502.6
2.446
1900
1976
16.0
1231.4
732.8
1232.1
499l3
2.466
2150
2258
15.0
1205.1
716.6
1205.8
489.2
2.463
2050
2235
16.0
1235.7
734.0
1236.2
502.2
2.461
1950
2028
16.5
1228.8
712.8
1229.2
516.4
2.380
1450
1450
15.5
1224.2
709.9
1224.9
515.0
2.377
1310
1310
15.0
1235.3
719.4
1236.0
516.6
2.391
1500
1500
15.5
1232.0
721.2
1232.5
511.3
2.410
1570
1586
16.0
2.424
2.517
3.7
15.8
76.6
150.9
1793
15.7
7.00
3.0
1224.7
722.8
1225.2
502.4
2.438
1670
1737
18.0
1221.5
720.3
1222.1
501.8
2.434
1650
1716
17.5
1224.2
722.3
1225.0
502.7
2.435
1700
1768
18.5
1218.9
719.3
1219.7
500.4
2.436
1750
1838
19.0
2.436
2.498
2.5
15.8
84.2
151.6
1765
18.3
-7
TABLE A-4: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(R3)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
6.50
5.0
1232.6
716.8
1233.5
516.7
2.386
1280
1280
165
1226.2
709.6
1227.1
517.5
2.369
1395
1381
17.5
1226.7
705.6
1227.8
522.2
2.349
1140
1129
16.0
1219.6
710.0
1220.5
510.5
2.389
1465
1494
17.0
1224.9
709.4
1225.3
515.9
2374
1290
1290
15.0
1232.7
721.7
1233.1
511.4
2.410
1640
1656
16.0
1231.5
712.1
1231.9
519.8
2.369
1450
1436
16.5
1234.6
716.3
1235.0
518.7
2.383
1410
1396
16.5
2.378
2517
5.5
17.4
68.4
148.0
1445
16.0
7.00
5.0
1218.2
716.0
1218.8
502.8
2.423
1300
1352
16.5
1234.5
724.2
1234.9
510.7
2.417
1400
1414
16.5
1226.0
721.7
1226.5
504.8
2.429
1410
1452
16.5
1234.1
724.5
1234.5
510.0
2.420
1550
1581
17.5
2.422
2.498
3.0
16.3
81.6
150.7
1450
16.8
7.50
5.0
1232.5
727.2
1238.0
505.8
2.437
1240
1252
17.5
1229.6
724.8
1230.2
505.4
2.433
1150
1162
18.5
1238.0
733.2
1238.5
505.3
2.450
1600
1632
17.5
1214.1
716.9
1214.5
497.6
2.440
1540
1571
18.5
2.440
2.479
1.6
16.2
90.1
151.9
1405
18.0
8.00
5.0
1218.2
713.9
1218.8
504.9
2.413
1360
1401
19.5
1229.0
722.8
1229.5
506.7
2.425
1560
1609
18.5
1220.7
719.6
1221.5
501.5
2.434
1550
1612
19.0
1222.3
721.5
1222.7
5012
2.439
1760
1830
20.5
2.428
2.460
1.3
17.0
92.4
151.1
1615
19.4
-8
TABLE A-5: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(R4)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.50
7.0
1232.4
706.3
1234.3
528.0
2.334
1355
1301
16.0
1235.1
714.3
1236.7
522.4
2.364
1630
1597
15.0
1224.5
702.4
1228.3
525.9
2.328
1350
1310
16.5
1235.9
713.0
1237.4
524.4
2.357
1630
1581
15.5
2.346
2.559
8.3
17.6
52.8
146.0
1447
15.8
6.00
7.0
1223.7
708.3
1224.5
516.2
2.371
1505
1505
15.5
1229.2
709.0
1230.7
521.7
2.356
1295
1269
15.0
1231.4
719.1
1232.3
513.2
2.399
1605
1621
15.0
1186.1
683.6
1187.3
503.7
2.354
1340
1308
15.5
2.370
2.539
6.7
17.2
61.0
147.5
1425
15.3
6.50
7.0
1233.5
717.1
1234.3
517.2
2.385
1270
1270
16.0
1244.5
720.2
1245.4
525.2
2.370
1400
1358
16.0
1230.6
717.2
1231.0
513.8
2.395
1450
1450
14.5
1237.7
717.0
1238.3
521.3
2.374
1340
1313
15.5
2.381
2.519
5.5
17.3
68.2
148.2
1348
15.5
7.00
7.0
1233.4
721.1
1233.8
512.7
2.406
1300
1313
17.5
1233.6
720.7
1234.3
513.6
2.402
1270
1270
17.0
1225.7
716.3
1226.4
510.1
2.403
1300
1326
17.5
1238.6
721.6
1239.1
517.5
2.393
1400
1386
17.5
2.401
2.499
3.9
17.1
77.2
149.4
1324
17.4
7.50
7.0
1211.7
705.6
1212.2
506.6
2.392
1300
1339
19.0
1225.9
716.0
1226.5
510.5
2.401
1310
1323
19.0
1206.1
702.8
1206.8
504.0
2.393
1210
1224
19.0
1215.2
708.0
1215.7
507.7
2.394
1200
1224
19.0
2.395
2.480
3.4
17.7
80.8
149.1
1283
19.0
8.00
7.0
1213.8
705.5
1214.3
508.8
2.386
1090
1111
20.0
1227.2
713.5
1227.8
514.3
2.386
1230
1230
20.0
1214.7
707.7
1215.4
507.7
2.393
1180
1204
18.5
1216.9
711.0
1217.5
506.5
2.403
1230
1267
19.0
1.392
2.461
2.8
18.3
84.7
148.9
1203
19.4
-9
-10
TABLE A-6: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(R5)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Comp Mix
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
7.00
9.0
1225.4
700.6
1226.9
526.3
2.328
1300
1313
18.0
1222.4
700.7
1223.7
523.0
2.337
1350
1364
17.5
1229.3
703.5
1230.8
527.3
2.331
1300
1300
18.0
1350
1364
17.5
2.332
2.494
6.5
19.4
66.5
145.1
1335
17.8
7.50
9.0
1221.3
701.4
1222.0
520.6
2.346
1200
1176
22.5
1214.7
697.0
1215.4
518.4
2.343
1025
1015
19.5
1219.1
702.5
1219.8
517.3
2.357
1175
1175
20.0
1125
1136
17.0
2.349
2.478
5.2
19.3
73.0
146.2
1126
19.8
8.00
9.0
1212.5
698.0
1213.3
515.3
2.353
900
900
20.0
1204.3
695.1
1205.0
509.9
2.362
1075
1097
20.5
1212.4
697.8
1213.1
515.3
2.353
1100
1100
22.5
1212.8
701.3
1213.5
513.2
2.368
1075
1086
22.0
2.359
2.459
4.1
19.4
78.9
146.8
1046
21.3
8.50
9.0
1219.2
706.0
1219.6
513.6
2.374
975
995
21.0
1212.6
700.6
1213.2
512.6
2.366
1250
1250
22.0
1222.9
707.0
1223.6
516.6
2.381
900
918
20.0
1214.4
706.7
1215.2
508.5
2.388
975
985
21.0
2.377
2.440
2.6
19.2
86.5
147.9
1037
21.0
-11
TABLE A-7: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(C2)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.50
1260.3
726.1
1261.9
535.8
2.352
2250
2115
10.0
1264.7
733.9
1265.5
531.6
2.379
2440
2318
9.5
1265.9
731.1
1267.3
536.2
2.361
2200
2068
10.5
1248.7
725.8
1249.2
523.4
2.386
2400
2328
10.5
2.370
2.544
6.8
16.8
59.5
147.5
2207
10.1
6.00
1266.1
739.6
1266.5
526.9
2.403
2400
2328
11.0
1263.3
735.5
1263.8
528.3
2.391
2400
2304
11.0
1271.1
742.3
1271.5
529.2
2.402
2210
2122
10.0
1255.4
732.7
1255.9
523.2
2.399
2350
2280
11.5
2.399
2.524
5.0
16.2
69.1
149.3
2260
10.9
6.50
1260.3
738.4
1260.7
522.3
2.413
2100
2058
11.0
1275.8
749.2
1276.4
527.2
2.420
2100
2016
10.0
1250.3
733.7
1250.5
516.8
2.419
2340
2340
11.5
1266.8
744.9
1267.3
522.4
2.425
2460
2411
10.0
2.419
2.505
3.4
16.0
78.8
150.6
2206
10.6
7.00
1257.9
741.3
1258.3
517.0
2.433
2120
2120
11.5
1247.2
734.9
1247.6
512.7
2.433
2390
2414
12.0
1240.0
730.3
1240.3
510.0
2.431
2290
2336
12.0
1244.6
733.3
1245.0
511.7
2.432
2410
2434
12.5
2.432
2.485
2.1
16.0
86.9
151.4
2326
12.0
-12
TABLE A-8: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(R6)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
6.00
1.0
1232.2
719.3
1232.7
513.4
2.400
2000
2020
13.5
1232.8
721.6
1233.3
511.7
2.409
2110
2131
12.5
1223.7
718.0
1224.3
506.3
2.417
2050
2112
12.0
1238.9
722.3
1233.3
511.0
2.413
2070
2091
12.0
1232.9
722.3
1233.3
511.0
2.413
1900
1881
11.5
2.401
2.538
5.2
16.2
67.9
149.4
1988
12.4
6.50
1.0
1237.9
735.6
1238.2
502.6
2.463
2390
2486
15.0
1232.3
729.2
1232.7
503.5
2.447
2130
2194
13.0
1235.1
732.4
1235.8
503.4
2.454
2250
2340
12.5
1229.0
730.7
1229.5
498.8
2.464
2370
2489
13.0
1235.6
732.2
1236.0
503.8
2.453
2100
2163
12.0
1233.3
726.9
1238.7
506.8
2.434
1950
2009
12.0
1226.1
724.4
1226.5
502.1
2.442
1970
2049
13.5
1334.8
729.9
1235.3
505.4
2.443
1990
2050
13.5
2.450
2.513
2.5
14.9
83.2
152.5
2223
13.1
7.00
1.0
1235.7
730.5
1236.1
505.6
2.444
2130
2194
14.0
1230.9
428.1
1231.3
503.2
2.446
2025
2106
13.0
1228.6
726.6
1229.1
502.5
2.445
2030
2111
14.0
1230.3
727.5
1230.8
503.3
2.444
2100
2184
14.0
1225.3
722.5
1225.7
503.2
2.435
1810
1882
13.0
1231.2
728.4
1231.7
503.3
2.446
2090
2174
14.0
1227.4
725.2
1227.9
5092.7
2.442
2000
2080
13.5
1223.5
721.3
1224.0
502.7
2.434
2000
2060
13.0
2.442
2.493
2.0
15.6
87.1
152.0
2099
13.6
-13
TABLE A-8: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(R6) (continued)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
7.50
1.0
1223.2
720.9
1223.6
502.7
2.433
1970
2049
15.0
1229.9
723.3
1230.4
507.1
2.425
1880
1936
14.5
1225.0
722.2
1225.5
503.3
2.434
2050
2132
13.5
1225.0
721.2
1225.7
504.5
2.428
1825
1880
14.5
1231.9
726.8
1232.2
505.8
2.486
1790
1844
15.5
1221.4
722.2
1221.7
499.5
2.445
1960
2058
16.5
1227.1
723.9
1227.5
503.6
2.437
1800
1854
15.5
1228.5
724.6
1229.0
504.4
2.436
1640
1689
17.5
2.434
2.474
1.6
16.4
90.2
151.5
1930
15.3
-14
TABLE A-9: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(R7)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
6.00
3.0
1240.0
710.9
1234.
523.8
2.367
1470
1426
14.5
1230.9
711.4
1231.5
520.1
2.367
1510
1495
13.5
1234.9
713.2
1235.8
522.6
2.363
1470
1426
13.0
2.366
12.54
6.9
17.4
60.3
147.3
1449
13.5
6.50
3.0
1230.2
714.2
1230.6
516.4
2.382
1440
1440
14.5
1228.9
709.5
1229l8
520.3
2.362
1440
1426
14.5
1230.2
711.9
1230.9
519.0
2.370
1500
1485
16.0
1228.6
712.0
1229.2
517.2
2.375
1460
1460
15.0
2.372
2.521
5.9
17.6
66.5
147.6
1453
15.0
7.00
3.0
1224.9
719.8
1225.4
505.6
2.423
1530
1576
15.5
1230.6
723.2
1231.1
507.9
2.423
1630
1663
15.5
1226.4
720.8
1226.9
506.1
2.423
1690
1741
14.5
1220.4
714.6
1220.9
506.3
2.411
1500
1545
15.5
2.420
2.502
3.3
16.4
79.9
150.6
1631
15.3
7.50
3.0
1226.3
711.4
1226.9
515.5
2.379
1380
1380
16.5
1224.0
706.4
1224.4
518.0
2.363
1150
1139
16.5
1212.3
706.7
1212.6
505.9
2.396
1400
1442
17.0
2.379
2.482
4.1
18.3
77.6
148.1
1320
16.7
-15
TABLE A-10: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(R8)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
6.50
5.0
1229.6
704.8
1229.9
525.1
2.342
1260
1222
15.5
1220.7
701.7
1221.5
519.8
2.348
1270
1257
16.5
1235.0
709.3
1235.6
526.3
2.347
1270
1232
16.0
1520
1505
16.0
2.346
1.524
7.1
18.5
61.6
146.0
1304
16.0
7.00
5.0
1222.3
707.3
1222.5
515.2
2.372
1200
1200
16.5
1224.5
704.4
1225.1
520.7
2.351
1160
1137
16.5
1231.1
710.1
1231.5
521.4
2.361
1250
1225
17.0
1227.9
705.8
1228.4
522.6
2.350
1150
1127
16.5
2.360
2.505
5.8
18.5
68.6
146.9
1172
16.6
7.50
5.0
1223.2
717.5
1223.4
505.9
2.418
1440
1483
16.5
1223.2
719.3
1223.1
504.3
2.426
1540
1586
16.5
1229.2
722.5
1229.5
507.0
2.424
1590
1638
16.5
1230.8
721.3
1231.0
509.7
2.415
1490
1520
16.5
2.421
2.485
2.6
16.8
84.5
150.7
1558
16.5
8.00
5.0
1219.7
716.0
1219.8
503.8
2.421
1500
1545
17.0
1209.2
709.6
1209.6
500.0
2.418
1450
1523
17.0
1221.7
716.7
1222.0
505.3
2.418
1440
1442
17.5
1770
1876
17.5
2.419
2.466
1.9
17.3
89.0
150.6
1597
17.3
-16
TABLE A-11: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(R9)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
7.00
7.0
1231.8
720.1
1232.3
512.2
2.405
1500
1515
16.0
1227.4
716.3
1227.8
511.5
2.400
1650
1667
16.5
1233.7
720.3
1234.1
516.7
2.388
1580
1580
17.0
1230.8
717.4
1231.3
513.9
2.395
1560
1560
16.0
2.397
2.508
4.4
17.2
74.4
149.2
1581
16.4
7.50
7.0
1226.4
715.1
1226.9
511.8
2.396
1310
1323
17.0
1230.9
718.9
1231.3
512.4
2.402
1410
1424
18.0
1219.8
710.3
1220.2
509.9
2.392
1300
1326
16.5
1225.8
715.8
1226.2
510.4
2.402
1340
1367
17.0
2.398
2.488
3.6
17.6
79.5
149.3
1360
17.1
8.00
7.0
1208.9
707.8
1209.3
501.5
2.411
1400
1456
17.0
1204.7
706.4
1205.0
498.6
2.416
1400
1470
18.0
1222.0
714.7
1222.5
507.8
2.406
1400
1428
17.0
1218.7
713.7
1219.0
505.3
2.412
1460
1504
16.5
2.411
2.469
2.3
17.6
86.9
150.1
1465
17.1
8.50
7.0
1208.2
706.4
1208.8
502.4
2.405
1420
1477
18.0
1221.9
712.0
1222.4
510.4
2.394
1300
1326
18.0
1213.9
710.6
1214.4
503.8
2.409
1500
1545
18.0
1220.1
711.4
1220.6
509.2
2.396
1430
1459
19.0
2.401
2.450
2.0
18.4
89.1
149.4
1452
18.3
-17
TABLE A-12: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(R10)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
7.50
9.0
1227.1
701.6
1227.9
526.3
2.332
1040
1009
18.0
1209.4
692.6
1210.0
517.4
2.337
1100
1100
18.5
1214.7
694.0
1215.5
521.5
2.329
980
960
17.0
1223.6
698.0
1224.5
526.5
2.324
1030
999
18.0
2.331
2.479
6.0
19.9
69.8
145.1
1017
17.9
8.00
9.0
1221.6
709.8
1222.1
512.3
2.385
1040
1009
18.0
1221.3
706.5
1222.0
515.5
2.369
1100
1100
18.5
1211.8
704.7
1212.4
507.7
2.387
980
960
17.0
1030
999
18.0
2.380
2.460
3.3
18.7
82.4
148.1
1017
17.9
8.50
9.0
1220.9
712.2
1221.5
509.4
2.397
1890
1988
18.5
1213.1
708.9
1213.8
504.9
2.403
1870
1926
18.5
1209.4
706.5
1210.0
503.5
2.402
1900
1957
19.5
1180
1204
18.5
2.401
2.442
1.7
18.4
90.8
149.4
1754
18.8
9.00
9.0
1208.61
698.7
1209.4
510.7
2.367
1000
1111
19.5
1212.8
702.0
1213.7
511.7
2.370
1130
1141
19.5
1206.0
697.6
1206.8
509.2
2.368
1090
1112
19.5
990
990
19.0
2.368
2.423
2.3
20.0
88.5
147.4
1089
19.4
-18
TABLE A-13: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(F1)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
6.00
5.0
1255.7
737.5
1256.1
518.6
2.421
2230
2208
12.5
1259.3
741.4
1260.0
518.6
2.428
2500
2475
12.5
1248.8
733.0
1249.5
516.5
2.418
2120
2120
13.5
1256.5
736.5
1257.0
520.5
2.414
2160
2117
12.0
2.420
2.535
4.5
15.5
71.0
150.6
2230
12.6
6.50
5.0
1242.8
732.6
1243.0
510.4
2.435
2170
2213
13.0
1251.7
736.0
1252.2
516.2
2.425
1910
1910
14.5
1242.9
731.5
1243.2
511.7
2.443
2200
2222
13.0
1249.5
733.5
1249.9
516.4
2.420
1880
1880
12.0
2.431
2.515
3.3
15.6
78.8
151.3
2056
13.1
7.00
5.0
1251.3
741.1
1251.5
510.4
2.452
2240
2285
14.0
1253.1
741.9
1253.4
511.5
2.450
2060
2081
15.0
1248.0
738.7
1248.4
509.7
2.448
2160
2203
13.5
1249.7
736.6
1250.0
513.4
2.434
1920
1939
15.0
2.446
2.496
2.0
15.7
87.3
152.2
2127
14.4
7.50
5.0
1255.8
742.5
1255.9
513.4
2.447
2120
2141
18.5
1247.3
738.7
1247.4
508.7
2.452
2000
2040
18.5
1241.1
734.4
1241.3
506.9
2.448
2130
2194
18.0
1235.9
732.7
1236.1
503.4
2.455
2140
2226
18.5
2.451
2.477
1.0
15.8
93.7
152.6
2150
18.4
-19
-20
TABLE A-14: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(F2)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
6.00
7.0
1252.1
729.6
1253.0
523.4
2.392
1950
1911
15.5
1248.9
731.5
1249.6
518.1
2.411
2050
2030
16.0
1251.8
725.4
1252.6
527.2
2.374
1750
1698
15.0
1245.3
725.0
1246.0
521.0
2.390
1800
1764
15.0
2.392
2.537
5.7
16.5
65.5
148.9
1850
15.4
6.50
7.0
1248.6
729.7
1249.1
519.4
2.404
1750
1733
15.5
1252.1
729.2
1252.6
523.4
2.392
1675
1642
16.0
1257.6
734.9
1258.2
523.3
2.403
1775
1740
15.0
1256.9
735.4
1257.3
521.9
2.408
1800
1764
16.5
2.402
2.517
4.6
16.6
72.3
149.5
1720
15.8
7.00
7.0
1253.3
736.6
1253.8
517.2
2.423
1700
1700
16.0
1250.7
732.6
1251.2
518.6
2.412
1700
1683
16.5
1247.5
731.1
1248.0
516.9
2.413
1750
1750
15.5
1257.9
739.5
2258.3
518.8
2.425
1900
1881
16.0
2.418
2.498
3.2
16.5
80.6
150.5
1754
16.0
7.50
7.0
1247.3
735.7
1247.7
512.0
2.436
1875
1894
17.0
1249.4
733.6
1249.8
516.2
2.420
1750
1750
17.0
1255.6
738.9
1256.1
517.2
2.428
1850
1850
16.5
1900
1900
16.5
2.428
2.479
2.1
16.6
87.3
151.1
1850
16.8
-21
TABLE A-15: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(F3)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.50
9.0
1247.9
723.7
1249.1
525.7
2.373
2175
2110
12.0
1263.4
734.8
1265.3
530.5
2.382
1950
1872
12.0
1260.0
731.7
1261.7
530.0
2.377
2025
1944
12.0
1253.4
726.7
1254.9
528.2
2.373
2000
1920
12.0
2.376
2.560
7.2
16.6
56.6
147.9
1962
12.0
6.00
9.0
1251.8
728.3
1252.7
524.4
2.387
1975
1916
13.0
1245.9
726.7
1246.6
519.9
2.396
1850
1832
12.5
1257.1
733.6
1257.8
524.2
2.398
2050
1990
13.0
1950
1872
13.0
2.394
2.540
5.7
16.4
65.2
149.0
1903
12.9
6.50
9.0
1246.9
735.2
1247.1
511.9
2.436
2275
2298
14.0
1250.9
740.5
1251.4
510.9
2.448
2300
2323
13.0
1250.3
738.3
1250.8
512.5
2.440
2350
2374
14.0
1248.8
737.3
1249.2
511.9
2.440
2300
2323
14.0
2.441
2.520
3.1
15.2
79.6
151.9
2330
13.8
7.00
9.0
1246.3
740.5
1246.6
506.1
2.463
2250
2318
18.0
1244.7
739.9
1245.0
505.1
2.464
2225
2292
18.5
1248.3
740.5
1248.5
508.0
2.457
2300
2346
17.5
1246.6
737.2
1247.1
509.5
2.455
2200
2244
17.5
2.460
2.500
1.5
15.0
90.0
153.1
2300
17.9
7.50
9.0
1242.8
735.4
1242.9
507.5
2.449
2175
2219
20.5
1245.3
736.8
1245.6
508.8
2.448
2000
2040
18.5
1245.4
737.2
1245.6
508.4
2.450
2100
2142
18.5
1246.6
737.2
1246.7
509.5
2.447
2150
2193
20.5
2.449
2.481
1.3
15.8
91.8
152.4
2150
19.5
8.00
9.0
1243.3
733.2
1243.5
510.3
2.436
1775
1811
22.5
1245.6
732.7
1245.8
513.1
2.428
1875
1894
21.5
1244.d5
733.4
1244.8
511.4
2.484
1950
1970
24.5
1250.4
736.7
1250.5
513.8
2.434
2175
2175
26.0
2.433
2.462
1.2
16.9
92.9
151.4
1963
23.6
-22
TABLE A-16: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(F4)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.50
11.0
1254.2
731.6
1255.2
523.6
2.395
2450
2377
12.0
1258.0
730.6
1259.7
529.1
2.378
2000
1920
12.0
1254.0
731.9
1255.0
523.1
2.397
2200
2156
12.0
1253.7
726.0
1255.1
529.1
2.369
1850
1776
11.5
2.385
2.554
6.6
16.3
59.5
148.4
2057
11.9
6.00
11.0
1246.1
734.0
1246.3
512.3
2.432
2400
2424
13.5
1247.9
735.1
1248.5
513.4
2.431
2425
2449
14.5
1253.3
735.0
1253.8
518.8
2.416
2375
2351
14.5
1236.6
726.2
1237.0
510.8
2.421
2450
2475
14.0
2.425
2.534
4.3
15.3
71.9
150.9
2425
14.1
6.50
11.0
1245.8
734.8
1246.0
511.2
2.437
2400
2424
14.0
1251.5
736.8
1251.8
515.0
2.430
2350
2350
15.5
1151.3
677.2
1151.5
474.3
2.427
2000
2300
12.5
1250.3
736.5
1250.6
514.1
2.432
2350
2350
15.5
2.432
2.514
3.3
15.5
78.7
151.4
2356
14.4
7.00
11.0
1246.0
737.3
1246.2
508.9
2.448
2225
2270
16.5
1246.4
737.9
1246.6
508.7
2.450
2225
2270
16.0
1251.8
741.5
1252.0
510.5
2.452
2225
2247
18.5
1252.0
741.8
1252.2
510.4
2.453
2350
2397
16.0
2.451
2.495
1.8
15.3
88.2
152.6
2296
16.8
7.50
11.0
1247.9
736.8
1248.0
511.2
2.441
2100
2121
18.0
1247.3
736.7
1247.5
510.8
2.442
2175
2197
19.9
1240.2
730.1
1240.3
510.2
2.431
1850
1887
18.0
1247.3
736.5
1247.3
510.8
2.442
2100
2121
18.5
2.439
2.476
1.5
16.21
90.7
151.8
2082
18.4
-23
TABLE A-17: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3 (F5)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.50
13.0
1248.7
730.1
1249.9
519.8
2.402
2550
2525
14.0
1246.5
726.7
1248.0
521.3
2.391
2625
2573
14.5
1250.5
729.1
1251.9
522.8
2.392
2300
2254
12.5
1246.9
728.4
1248.2
519.8
2.399
2375
2351
135
2.396
2.556
6.3
15.9
60.4
149.1
2425
13.6
6.00
13.0
1250.6
737.6
1251.2
513.6
2.435
2575
2575
14.0
1254.6
735.9
1256.4
519.5
2.415
2325
2302
14.0
1250.7
737.0
1251.6
514.6
2.430
2425
2425
15.0
1252.5
736.4
1253.4
517.0
2.423
2550
2550
14.5
2.426
2.536
4.3
15.3
71.9
151.0
2463
14.4
6.50
13.0
1245.0
734.0
1245.6
511.6
2.434
2325
2348
14.0
1248.1
735.3
1248.8
513.5
2.431
2425
2425
14.0
1249.6
737.0
1250.4
513.4
2.434
2475
2500
15.0
1249.5
734.9
1250.5
515.6
2.423
2425
2425
16.0
2.431
2.516
3.4
15.6
78.2
151.3
2425
14.9
7.00
13.0
1251.7
738.0
1252.4
514.4
2.433
2150
2150
16.5
1246.4
734.8
1247.0
512.2
2.433
2200
2222
16.0
1242.9
732.7
1243.4
510.7
2.434
2150
2172
16.0
1248.1
738.3
1248.6
510.3
2.446
2250
2295
16.5
2.437
2.497
2.4
15.8
84.8
151.7
2210
16.3
-24
TABLE A-18: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-3(F6)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.50
15.0
1250.5
726.8
1251.2
524.4
2.385
2190
2124
14.5
1250.4
730.0
1251.4
521.4
2.398
2190
2146
14.0
1257.2
726.0
1258.5
532.5
2.361
2030
1929
14.5
1253.0
729.0
1254.3
525.3
2.385
2350
2280
14.5
2.382
2.557
6.6
16.1
59.0
148.7
2120
14.4
6.00
15.0
1246.9
726.9
1248.3
521.4
2.391
2200
2156
14.5
1250.3
730.2
1252.1
521.9
2.396
2225
2181
13.5
1248.6
730.2
1250.0
519.8
2.402
2300
2277
14.5
1246.4
727.6
1247.6
5200
2.397
2325
2302
13.0
2.397
2.537
5.5
16.3
66.3
149.2
2230
13.9
6.50
15.0
1247.5
725.6
1248.5
522.9
2.386
2125
2083
15.5
1251.2
729.3
1252.0
522.7
2.394
2025
1985
15.0
1246.2
725.9
1247.0
521.1
2.391
2150
2107
13.5
1248.9
729.9
1249.9
520.0
2.402
2125
2104
14.6
2.393
2.517
4.9
16.9
71.0
148.9
2070
14.6
7.00
15.0
1255.2
734.7
1255.8
521.1
2.409
2050
2009
16.0
1248.3
734.2
1248.9
514.7
2.425
2125
2125
15.5
1250.7
734.1
1251.3
517.2
2.418
2150
2150
16.0
1250.3
734.7
1251.0
516.3
2.427
2200
2200
16.5
1251.5
735.5
1252.0
516.5
2.419
2.498
3.2
16.4
80.5
150.6
2120
16.0
7.50
15.0
1244.3
731.9
1244.9
513.0
2.426
2025
2045
18.5
1251.0
735.5
1251.5
516.0
2.424
2000
2000
17.5
1250.2
734.9
1250.8
515.9
2.423
2075
2075
19.5
1251.5
735.5
1252.0
516.5
2.423
2025
2025
20.0
2.424
2.479
2.2
16.7
86.8
150.9
2036
19.0
-25
-26
TABLE A-19: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(F7)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
6.00
5.0
1346.8
782.9
1347.4
564.5
2.386
2330
2004
14.0
1342.8
781.7
1343.2
561.5
2.391
2390
2079
14.5
1260.3
732.9
1260.8
527.9
2.387
2200
2112
13.5
1254.9
733.6
1255.2
521.6
2.406
2340
2293
14.0
2.393
2.531
5.5
16.4
66.5
148.9
2122
14.0
6.50
5.0
1275.3
748.3
1275.5
527.2
2.419
2250
2183
14.5
1262.2
745.4
1262.5
517.1
2.441
2450
2450
14.0
1262.7
743.5
1263.0
519.5
2.431
2330
2307
15.0
1265.0
745.7
1265.3
519.6
2.435
2340
2317
13.5
2.432
2.511
3.1
15.5
80.0
151.4
2314
14.3
7.00
5.0
1264.9
746.2
1265.1
518.9
2.438
2130
2109
15.5
1260.4
744.2
1260.7
516.2
2.442
2010
2010
16.5
1257.5
74d5.8
1257.7
511.9
2.457
2330
2553
17.0
1265.0
747.6
1265.2
517.6
2.444
2300
2277
15.0
2.445
2.492
1.9
15.5
87.7
152.2
2187
16.0
7.50
5.0
1268.7
748.8
1269.0
520.2
2.439
2150
2129
19.0
1277.0
752.0
1277.2
525.2
2.431
2100
2037
17.5
1262.1
744.5
1262.3
517.8
2.437
2100
2079
17.5
1258.8
744.9
1259.1
514.2
2.448
2250
2250
20.0
2.439
2.473
1.3
16.2
92.0
151.8
2124
18.5
-27
TABLE A-20: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(F8)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
6.00
7.0
1267.8
740.6
1268.1
527.5
2.403
2250
2183
13.0
1252.1
729.9
1252.5
522.6
2.396
2150
2107
13.5
1257.2
734.7
1257.5
522.8
2.405
2450
2401
15.5
1259.4
734.1
1259.8
525.7
2.396
2150
2086
13.5
2.400
2.529
5.1
16.2
68.5
149.4
2194
13.9
6.50
7.0
1265.7
745.1
1265.9
520.8
2.430
2150
2115
14.0
1251.6
737.8
1251.9
514.1
2.435
2160
2160
14.0
1262.6
743.7
1262.8
519.1
2.432
2380
2356
14.0
1259.8
739.8
1260.1
520.3
2.421
2150
2128
14.0
2.430
2.510
3.2
15.6
79.5
151.2
2190
14.0
7.00
7.0
1263.9
744.6
1264.1
519.5
2.433
2150
2129
15.5
1258.4
742.4
1258.6
516.2
2.438
2250
2250
15.0
1274.5
753.0
1274.8
521.8
2.442
2290
2244
15.0
1266.4
748.9
1266.6
517.7
2.446
2460
2435
16.0
2.400
2.491
2.0
15.7
87.2
151.9
2265
15.4
7.50
7.0
1259.6
743.7
1259.9
516.2
2.440
2300
2300
18.0
1257.4
741.7
1257.7
516.0
2.437
2080
2080
17.0
1265.3
743.6
1265.5
521.9
2.424
2050
2009
17.5
1257.7
742.4
1257.9
515.5
2.440
2180
2180
17.5
2.435
2.471
1.5
16.3
90.8
151.6
2142
17.5
-28
TABLE A-21: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(F9)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
6.00
9.0
1266.0
742.9
1266.6
523.7
2.417
2250
2160
14.5
1258.6
737.5
1259.3
521.8
2.412
2550
2474
12.5
1260.8
738.5
1261.4
522.6
2.413
2475
2426
13.0
2.414
2.536
4.8
15.7
69.4
150.2
2410
2362
13.5
6.50
9.0
1253.5
738.1
1254.1
516.0
2.429
2225
2225
13.0
1258.8
741.1
1259.1
518.0
2.430
2390
2366
14.0
1264.8
742.4
1263.5
521.1
2.424
2175
2132
14.0
1263.1
742.4
1263.5
521.1
2132
14.0
2.430
2.516
3.4
15.6
78.2
151.2
2297
13.8
7.00
9.0
1263.6
745.2
1263.9
518.7
2.436
2225
2203
15.0
1261.5
745.6
1261.8
516.2
2.444
2400
2400
14.5
1257.9
742.2
1258.2
516.0
2.438
2340
2340
15.5
1257.0
741.7
1257.3
515.6
2.438
2250
2250
15.5
2.439
2.497
2.3
15.7
85.4
151.8
2298
15.1
7.50
9.0
1263.0
745.2
1263.1
517.9
2.439
2300
2277
18.5
1260.2
743.5
1260.6
517.1
2.437
2200
2200
17.5
1252.8
740.3
1253.1
512.8
2.443
2190
2212
17.5
1258.8
743.0
1259.0
516.0
2440
2325
2325
18.5
2.400
2.478
1.5
16.2
90.7
151.9
2254
18.0
-29
TABLE A-22: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(F10)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.50
11.0
1253.2
729.l5
1253.8
524.3
2.390
2300
2231
13.0
1255.9
731.5
1256.7
525.2
2.391
2350
2280
12.0
1255.0
731.4
1256.7
524.2
2.391
2275
2208
12.5
1256.8
731.7
1257.7
526.0
2.389
2300
2231
12.0
2.391
2.553
6.3
16.1
60.9
148.8
2238
12.4
6.00
11.0
1255.1
732.9
1255.8
522.9
2.400
2225
2181
13.0
1254.6
730.4
1255.7
525.3
2.388
2225
2158
12.5
1250.9
729.0
1251.7
522.7
2.393
2275
2230
13.0
1251.9
730.6
1252.7
522.1
2.398
2275
2230
12.5
2.395
2.533
5.4
16.4
67.1
149.1
2200
12.8
6.50
11.0
1255.7
737.0
1256.2
519.2
2.419
2390
2366
12.5
1250.2
735.7
1250.7
515.0
2.428
2325
2325
12.5
1260.6
743.5
1261.1
517.6
2.435
2450
2426
13.5
1253.0
737.3
1253.5
516.2
2.427
2260
2260
12.5
2.427
2.513
3.4
15.7
78.3
151.1
2344
12.8
7.00
11.0
1248.6
735.1
1249.0
513.9
2.430
2210
2210
13.0
1254.6
739.3
1255.0
515.7
2.433
2190
2190
13.0
1258.3
743.5
1258.8
515.3
2.442
2350
2350
14.0
1252.8
739.5
1253.2
513.7
2.439
2300
2300
14.0
2.436
2.493
2.3
15.8
85.4
151.6
2263
13.5
-30
TABLE A-23: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(F11)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
5.50
13.0
1246.8
713.5
1248.3
534.8
2.331
2160
2030
13.5
1253.1
722.9
1254.8
531.9
2.356
2350
2233
12.0
1244.2
711.7
1246.0
534.3
2.329
2000
1900
13.0
1251.2
723.3
1252.8
529.5
2.364
2450
2352
11.5
2.345
2.552
8.1
17.7
54.2
146.0
2129
12.5
6.00
13.0
1252.4
728.0
1253.2
525.2
2.385
2500
2425
12.0
1248.7
720.5
1249.9
529.4
2.359
2025
1944
12.5
1250.5
724.0
1251.8
527.8
2.369
2240
2150
13.0
1252.4
726.2
1253.5
527.3
2.375
2310
2241
12.5
2.372
2.532
6.3
17.2
63.4
147.6
2190
12.5
6.50
13.0
1258.1
723.4
1259.2
535.8
2.348
1925
1810
14.0
1251.7
727.0
1252.3
525.3
2.383
2325
2255
13.0
1251.5
729.2
1252.2
523.0
2.392
2250
2205
13.0
1243.0
718.0
1243.9
525.9
2.364
2050
1989
13.0
2.372
2.512
5.6
17.6
68.2
147.6
2065
13.3
7.00
13.0
1248.0
730.8
1248.6
517.8
2.410
2260
2237
13.5
1250.9
732.2
1251.3
519.1
2.410
2310
2287
13.5
1250.2
734.4
1250.7
516.3
2.421
2300
2300
14.0
2040
1979
14.0
2.414
2.493
3.2
16.6
80.7
150.2
2200
13.8
-31
-32
TABLE A-24: Marshall Properties of Asphaltic Concrete for Mixture No. MV-4(F12)
% AC by
wt. of
Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air
Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01"
) In Air
In Water
SSD in
Air Measured
Adjusted
6.00
15.0
1248.8
728.4
1249.9
521.5
2.395
2480
2430
14.0
1253.2
727.6
1254.3
526.7
2.379
2400
2328
14.0
1250.3
726.6
1251.4
524.8
2.382
2600
2522
14.5
2040
1938
14.0
2.385
2.534
5.9
16.7
64.7
148.4
2305
14.1
6.50
15.0
1250.1
727.8
1250.7
522.9
2.391
1980
1940
14.5
1244.0
725.6
1244.9
519.3
2.396
2070
2049
15.0
1250.5
731.3
1257.4
526.1
2.388
1960
1901
14.5
1254.5
734.3
1255.3
521.0
2.408
2160
2117
14.5
2.396
2.514
4.7
16.8
72.0
149.l1
2000
14.6
7.00
15.0
1252.9
731.2
1253.5
522.3
2.399
1980
1940
14.5
1253.1
731.8
1253.8
522.0
2.401
2070
2029
15.0
1256.0
732.6
1257.0
524.4
2.395
1960
1901
15.5
1250.8
732.0
1251.5
519.5
2.408
2150
2129
15.0
2.401
2.495
3.8
17.1
77.8
149.4
2000
15.0
7.50
15.0
1253.5
735.2
1254.2
519.0
2.415
2020
2000
17.0
1241.2
729.5
1241.9
512.4
2.422
1950
1970
15.5
1252.8
735.0
1253.5
518.5
2.416
2000
1980
16.5
1249.4
734.3
1250.0
515.7
2.423
2040
2040
17.0
2.419
2.476
2.3
16.9
86.4
150.6
1998
16.5
-33
TABLE . Marshall Properties of Asphatic Concrete for Mixture No.
% AC by
wt. of Mix
% Rubber
by wt. of
AC
Mass (g)
Bulk
Volume
(cc)
Bulk
Sp. Gr.
Th. Max.
Sp. Gr.
Air Voids
(%)
VMA
(%)
VFB
(%)
Unit
Weight
(PCF)
Stability (lbs)
Flow
(x 0.01")
In Air In Water
SSD in Air
Measured
Adjusted
-34