Comparison of performance of stone matrix asphalt mixtures using basalt and limestone aggregates

  • Published on
    18-Dec-2016

  • View
    212

  • Download
    0

Transcript

  • ri

    ng P

    " B-SMA shows the best rutting resistance, followed by BL-SMA and L-SMA comes in last." Aggregate type has no signicant effect on low temperature performance.

    , followthree S

    r curves of dynamic modulus for three SMA mixtures were constructed and B-SMA shows the highest dynamic modulus, while L-SMA shows the smallest dynamic modulus at each

    and reduced noise pollution [2], SMA has been widely adopted inEurope, Australia, USA, Canada, Japan, and many other countriesworldwide, as a surface course for heavily trafcked roads. Sincethe rst application of SMA in the capital airport highway in1992, it also has been used widely on road surfaces of expresswayin China [3].

    drain-down when this asphalt rubber was used. The results of thewheel tracking tests at 60 C showed that rutting resistance ofARSMA mixtures was better than that of the conventional SMAmixtures. A comprehensive study performed by Ahmadinia et al.[5,6] explored the utilization of waste Polyethylene Terephthalate(PET) in SMA. In this research the waste PET (46% by weight ofthe bitumen content) was added into the mixture in the last partof the mixing process and after adding and blended the binder withthe aggregate instead of mixing the additive with the aggregatebefore adding the binder. The results showed that the addition of

    Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 531 8839 2842; fax: +86 531 8839 5204.

    Construction and Building Materials 41 (2013) 474479

    Contents lists available at

    B

    evE-mail address: cwd2001@sdu.edu.cn (W. Cao).Limestone aggregatePerformance frequency.

    2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

    1. Introduction

    Stone matrix (or mastic) asphalt (SMA) is a hot mix asphalt(HMA) consisting of a coarse aggregate skeleton and a high bindercontent mortar. SMA was developed in Germany during the mid-1960s and it has been used in Europe for more than 40 years toprovide better rutting resistance and to resist studied tyre wear[1]. Because of the superior performance of SMA mixture compris-ing its high rut resistance, high skid resistance, high durability, im-proved resistance to reective cracking, better drainage condition

    There are many previous researches regarding the modicationof SMAmixtures and the utilization of wastematerials in SMA. Chiuand Lu [4] investigated the feasibility using asphalt rubber (AR) as abinder for SMA. The results of this study showed that it was notfeasible to produce a suitable SMAmixture using an asphalt rubbermade by blending an AC-20 with 30% coarse ground tire rubber(GTR) with a maximum size of 0.85 mm. However, SMA mixturesmeeting typical volumetric requirements for SMA could be pro-duced using an asphalt rubber containing 20% of a ne GTR witha maximum size of 0.6 mm. No ber was needed to preventBasalt aggregate

    Stone matrix asphalt (SMA)

    signicant difference in lowSMA mixtures. Also, maste" L-SMA has the best moisture stability" Master curves of dynamic modulus of

    a r t i c l e i n f o

    Article history:Received 5 September 2012Received in revised form 5 December 2012Accepted 19 December 2012Available online 28 January 2013

    Keywords:0950-0618/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.12.021ed by BL-SMA and B-SMA comes in last.MA mixtures were constructed.

    a b s t r a c t

    The main objective of this study was to compare the performance of three kinds of stone matrix asphalt(SMA) mixtures (using basalt coarse and ne aggregates, named B-SMA; limestone coarse and ne aggre-gates, named L-SMA; basalt coarse aggregates and limestone ne aggregates, named BL-SMA). The resultsindicated that B-SMA shows the best rutting resistance, followed by BL-SMA and L-SMA comes in last.However, in terms of low temperature performance of resistance to cracking and moisture susceptibility,they have the reverse sequence. The aggregate type has a signicant effect on rutting resistance, but no

    temperature cracking susceptibility or moisture susceptibility was found inComparison of performance of stone matand limestone aggregates

    Weidong Cao , Shutang Liu, Zhigang FengSchool of Civil Engineering, Shandong University, No. 17923 Jingshi Road, Jinan, Shando

    h i g h l i g h t s

    Construction and

    journal homepage: www.elsll rights reserved.x asphalt mixtures using basalt

    rovince 250061, PR China

    SciVerse ScienceDirect

    uilding Materials

    ier .com/locate /conbui ldmat

  • aggregates. The performance tests including wheel tracking test,low temperature beam bending test, moisture susceptibility test,and dynamic modulus test were carried out on three kinds ofSMA mixtures, which were: (a) both coarse and ne aggregatesare basalt, named B-SMA; (b) both coarse and ne aggregates arelimestone, named L-SMA; (c) coarse aggregates are basalt and neaggregates are limestone, named BL-SMA.

    2. Materials and experiments

    2.1. Materials

    2.1.1. Aggregates usedCrushed stones of basalt and limestone were used for coarse aggregate and ne

    aggregate respectively. In order to reduce test errors, all aggregates were sieved intosingle size particles as per China Standard T0302-2005 [12]. Three particle sizes ofcoarse aggregates (13.216 mm, 9.513.2 mm, and 4.759.5 mm) of two kinds ofstones were chosen. Properties of coarse aggregates as per Chinese specications[13] are shown in Table 1.

    Six particle sizes of ne aggregates (2.364.75 mm, 1.182.36 mm, 0.61.18 mm, 0.30.6 mm, 0.150.3 mm, and 0.0750.15 mm) of two kinds of stoneswere used. The basic properties of ne aggregates as per Chinese specications

    uilding Materials 41 (2013) 474479 475waste PET into the mixture had a signicant positive effect on theproperties of SMA which could improve the mixtures resistanceagainst permanent deformation (rutting), increase the stiffness ofthe mix, provide lower binder drain down and promotion ofre-use and recycling of waste materials in a more environmentallyand economical way. Furthermore, Baghaee Moghaddam et al. [7]carried out another research on dynamic properties of SMA mix-tures containing waste plastic bottles. The results indicated thatstiffness modulus of mixture increased at lower amount of PETcontent; however, adding higher amount of PET made mixture lessstiff. In addition, PET reinforcedmixtures exhibit signicantly high-er fatigue lives compared to the mixtures without PET. Putman andAmirkhanian [8] investigated the feasibility of utilizing waste tireand carpet bers in SMA. This study compared the performanceof SMA mixtures containing waste tire and carpet bers (0.3% byweight of total mixture) with mixes made with commonly usedcellulose and other polyester bers produced specically for usein HMA. No signicant difference in permanent deformation ormoisture susceptibility was found in mixtures containing wastebers compared to cellulose or polyester. Also, the tire, carpet,and polyester bers signicantly improved the toughness of themixtures compared to the cellulose bers. Mokhtari andMoghadas Nejad [9] performed a laboratory investigation on SMAmixtures containing polymers and bers, and then conducteda mechanisticempirical approach to determine the effect ofdifferent additives in increasing the service life of the pavementor reduction of the pavement layers thickness. Their researchindicated that styrenebutadienestyrene (SBS) was more effectivein improving the performance of asphalt mixtures compared tothe bers and the service life of the pavement system modiedwith mineral, cellulose and SBS were 1.07, 1.081 and 1.243 timesmore than unmodied mix, respectively. The research by Xueet al. [10] focused on a laboratory evaluation of the performanceof SMA used municipal solid waste incinerator (MSWI) ash andbasic oxygen furnace (BOF) slag as aggregates or mineral ller. Acomparison study was carried out to use those solid waste aboveand local materials to design the asphalt mixtures using bothMarshall and SUPERPAVE mixture design procedures. In all theperformed tests SUPERPAVE mixtures proved their superiorityover Marshall mixtures. Tests results showed that nearly 816%of MSWI ash substitution for aggregates and ller is guaranteedto meet the requirement of SMA mixtures. The large amount utili-zation of BOF slag and MSWI ash testied that it can be used as po-tential materials in road construction for saving natural resources.

    There are few researches about the use of different aggregatetypes in asphalt mixes. Ibrahim et al. [11] investigated the possibil-ity of improving the properties of local asphalt concrete mixes byreplacing different portions of the normally used limestone aggre-gate by basalt. The replacement included total replacement of thelimestone by basalt, replacing the coarse aggregate, and replacingthe ne aggregate. Results showed that the optimal mix was themix that had basalt coarse aggregate and limestone ne aggregate.In order to overcome the stripping potential of the optimal mix,20% of the ller portion of the aggregate, material smaller than0.075 mm, was replaced by lime. The optimal mix showed superi-ority, over the tested mixes, in all the evaluated properties. How-ever, the use of different rock aggregates in SMA is not studied indetail yet.

    The coarse aggregate for SMA mixtures needs to be angular,cubical, and hard. Because basalt is harder than limestone, usingbasalt aggregate is preferred than using limestone in SMA [3,11].Since limestone aggregate is cheaper than basalt aggregate inChina, we try to use partial limestone aggregate in SMA by replac-

    W. Cao et al. / Construction and Bing ne aggregate portions of the normally used basalt aggregateby limestone. The main objective of this research was to comparethe performance of SMA mixtures using basalt and limestone[13] are shown in Table 2.

    2.1.2. Asphalt binderSBS modied asphalt binder supplied by a commercial petroleum company was

    used in laboratory. Properties of SBS modied asphalt binder are shown in Table 3.The results meet specications for modied asphalt binders [13].

    2.1.3. Other materials usedThe mineral ller used was limestone powder, which was passed through the

    #200 sieve. Wood ber as a drainage inhibitor for asphalt binder was applied inSMA mixtures. The performance indexes of the two materials meet the technicalrequirements of specications [13].

    2.2. Mix design

    According to the specications for construction of highway asphalt pavementsof China [13], a nominal maximum size 13.2 mm SMAmixture was used for the mixdesign in this study. To achieve the comparability of performance evaluation ofthree kinds of SMA mixtures (B-SMA, L-SMA, and BL-SMA), the principle of thesame coarse skeleton structure, the same asphalt content, and the similar volumet-ric parameters of compacted mixtures was applied in mix design. The design proce-dure used in the paper was as follows:

    (1) The median gradation of specications [13] was chose as the initial grada-tion of B-SMA, L-SMA, and BL-SMA, respectively.

    (2) Based on the estimation of optimum asphalt content range and eld expe-rience [3,14], the asphalt content of three SMA mixtures used in the exper-iment was determined to 5.90%.

    Table 1Properties of coarse aggregates.

    Properties Test values Specications

    Basalt Limestone

    Apparent specic gravity13.216 mm 2.864 2.731 >2.609.513.2 mm 2.866 2.7334.759.5 mm 2.867 2.724

    Bulk specic gravity13.216 mm 2.822 2.681 >2.509.513.2 mm 2.823 2.6874.759.5 mm 2.818 2.678

    Water absorption (%)13.216 mm 0.35 0.51 62.09.513.2 mm 0.35 0.504.759.5 mm 0.43 0.53Crushed stone value (%) 10.0 19.9 626L.A. abrasion (%) 8.3 17.8 628

    Percent of at and elongated particles (%)13.216 mm 7.4 11.0 6159.513.2 mm 8.2 10.5

    4.759.5 mm 8.3 14.6Polished stone value (PSV) 51 45 P40

  • Where eB is failure strain; h is height of section at midspan; d is displacement at mid-span; and L is span of specimen. Obviously, the larger failure strain is the better ofthe performance of resistance to cracking in low temperature.

    2.3.3. Indirect tensile test

    Table 2Properties of ne aggregates.

    Properties Test values Specications

    Basalt Limestone

    476 W. Cao et al. / Construction and Building Materials 41 (2013) 474479(3) According to the procedures described in T0702-2011 [15], Marshall spec-imens of three kinds of SMA mixtures were fabricated and the volumetricparameters of compacted mixtures were calculated.

    (4) To achieve the target air voids of 3.5%, we repeatedly adjusted the tails(2.500.30.6 mm 2.848 2.7100.150.3 mm 2.846 2.7100.0750.15 mm 2.844 2.715

    Angularity (%)2.364.75 mm 29.5 26.41.182.36 mm 33.8 30.1 0.61.18 mm 33.3 35.0The higher DS of asphalt mixtures is the better of the performance of resistanceto permanent deformation in high temperature.

    2.3.2. Beam bending testThe performance of resistance to cracking in low temperature test, i.e., beam

    bending test at 10 C according to China Standard T 0715-2011 [15] was per-formed using UTM-100. The specimens, which were 250 mm 30 mm 35 mmrectangular beam, were fabricated by cutting the rutting test specimens mentionedpreviously along a rolling direction. The loading velocity was 50 mm/min and thedisplacements were measured using a linear variable displacement transducer.The failure strain can be calculated using Eq. (2) as follows [15]:

    eB 6hdL2

    2

    Table 3Properties of SBS modied asphalt binder.

    Index Specic gravity (15 C) Penetration (25 C, 0.1

    Test values 1.031 45The freezethaw indirect tensile test which is nearly equivalent AASHTO T283was done as per the procedure in standard test method T0729-2000 [15]. This testanalyzes the impact of saturation and immersion of the mix in water on the resis-tance to indirect tensile strength in Marshall specimens. Eight specimens were pro-duced for every type of mix under study, separating the specimens subsequentlyinto two groups in order to obtain a similar density. One group was tested in theindirect tensile loading in dry conditions, the other was moisture conditioned priorto loading. The moisture conditioning involved a freezethaw cycling, in which thesaturated specimen with 7080% degree of saturation was covered tightly with aplastic wrap and placed in a freezer bag containing 10 ml water. The sealed freezerbag containing specimen was then placed in a freezer at about 18 C for a mini-mum of 16 h. After removing from the freezer, the specimen was placed into a60 C water bath for 24 h. Prior to indirect tensile loading, the conditioned specimenwas moved from the hot water bath to another water bath at 25 0.5 C for about2 h to bring the specimen to the testing temperature.

    The indirect tensile strength ratio (TSR) was expressed as the ratio of the origi-nal strength that was retained after the moisture conditioning using Eq. (3) as fol-lows [15]:

    TSR TScTSd

    3

    Where TSc is average indirect tensile strength of conditioned group, and TSd is aver-age indirect tensile strength of dry group.

    The higher the TSR value is, the higher the resistance to moisture damage is andthe lower the moisture susceptibility is of the asphalt mixture.

    2.3.4. Dynamic modulus testTests were carried out as per AASHTO TP62 [16] using simple performance tes-

    ter shown in Fig. 3 to characterize the dynamic modulus of asphalt concrete mixes.The dynamic modulus test was conducted under unconned condition at three dif-ferent temperatures (15, 21.1, and 40 C). At each temperature, the test was per-formed at nine different frequencies (25, 20, 10, 5, 2, 1, 0.5, 0.2, and 0.1 Hz). Loadlevels were selected in such a way that at each temperaturefrequency combina-tion, applied strain was in the range of 75125 microstrain. This was done to ensurethat testing was conducted in the linear viscoelastic range of mixes, a necessaryrequirement for a valid dynamic modulus test [17]. The applied stress and resultingaxial strain from three on-specimen mounted displacement transducers were mea-sured as a function of time. The tests were conducted from the lowest temperatureto the highest temperature and from the highest frequency to the lowest frequency.This method was used to minimize destruction of the specimens. Stress versusstrain values were captured continuously and used to calculate dynamic modulusvalues. Dynamic modulus |E| was computed automatically by the test software.

    2.4. Data analysis methods[18]

    Statistical analysis was performed using the Statistical Product and ServiceSolutions (SPSS) program to conduct analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Fishers leastsignicant difference (LSD) comparison. The signicance level usually denoted bythe Greek symbol a is the criterion used for rejecting the null hypothesis. Use as fol-lows: (a) determine the difference between the results of the experiment and thenull hypothesis; (b) compare the probability of the null hypothesis to the signi-cance level. If the probability is less than or equal to the signicance level, thenthe null hypothesis is rejected and the outcome is said to be statistically signicant.Traditionally, researchers have used either the 0.05 level or the 0.01 level, althoughthe choice is largely subjective. In the analyses of this study, the level of signicancewas 0.05 (a = 0.05). The primary variables were the mixtures types: B-SMA, L-SMA,and BL-SMA. The ANOVA was performed rst to determine whether signicant dif-ferences among sample means existed between different aggregate combinations.Upon determining that there were differences among sample means using the AN-OVA, the LSD was calculated. The LSD is dened as the observed differences be-tween two sample means necessary to declare the corresponding populationmeans difference. Once the LSD was calculated, all pairs of sample means werecompared. If the difference between two sample means was greater than or equalto the LSD, the population means were declared to be statistically different.

    mm) Softening point (C) Ductility (cm)15 C 5 C

    81 >150 31

  • uildiW. Cao et al. / Construction and B3. Experimental results and discussions

    3.1. Results of wheel tracking test and analysis

    Wheel tracking tests are repeated three times for each type mixand the test values of DS of three types of SMA mixtures are shownin Fig. 4. (The error bars shown in Figs. 46 represent standard er-rors of the means.). These results meet specications for the SMAmixtures [13].

    From Fig. 4, we can see B-SMA indicates the best rutting resis-tance, followed by BL-SMA and L-SMA comes in last. This can beattributed to the lower L.A. abrasion value, crushed stone value,

    Fig. 2. Wheel tracking test device.

    Fig. 1. Gradation

    Table 4Volumetric parameters of compacted SMA mixtures.

    SMA mixtures AV (%) VMA (%) VFA (%) VCA (%)

    B-SMA 3.5 17.4 80.1 39.9L-SMA 3.6 17.2 78.5 39.4BL-SMA 3.6 17.5 79.3 40.4ng Materials 41 (2013) 474479 477and percent of at and elongated particles of basalt aggregate thanthose of limestone aggregate (see Table 1), which result in thebetter coarse aggregate structure stability of B-SMA than that ofL-SMA. The statistical signicance of the change in the DS as afunction of aggregate type was examined and the results are sum-marized in Table 5.

    We can see from Table 5 that the DS differences between B-SMAand L-SMA and between BL-SMA and L-SMA are statisticallysignicant, while the differences between B-SMA and BL-SMA areinsignicant. This may be explained that both B-SMA and BL-SMA have the same coarse aggregate skeleton structure.

    Fig. 3. Simple performance tester.

    1000200030004000500060007000

    B-SMA L-SMA BL-SMASMA mixtures

    DS

    (Tim

    es/mm

    )

    Fig. 4. Results of wheel tracking test.

    curves used.

  • 02000400060008000

    100001200014000

    0 5 10 15 20 25Frequency (Hz)

    D

    ynam

    ic

    Mod

    ulu

    s (M

    Pa)

    L-SMAB-SMABL-SMA

    uildi0.0100.0200.0300.0400.0500.0600.0700.0800.0

    B-SMA L-SMA BL-SMASMA mixtures

    ITS

    (kPa)

    70.0

    75.0

    80.0

    85.0

    90.0

    95.0

    100.0

    TSR (%)

    Wet specimens Dry specimens TSR

    1000

    1500

    2000

    2500

    3000

    3500

    4000

    B-SMA L-SMA BL-SMASMA mixtures

    Failu

    re st

    rain

    (

    )

    Fig. 5. Results of beam bending test at 10 C.

    478 W. Cao et al. / Construction and B3.2. Results of beam bending test and analysis

    The beam bending tests at 10 C are repeated three times andthe average values of eB are shown in Fig. 5. Generally speaking, thehigher the failure strain, the better the performance of resistanceto cracking at low temperature. Table 6 shows the ANOVA resultsof the failure strain with the aggregate type used as blocking factor.

    From Fig. 5, we can see that the aggregate type has some effecton the failure strain. L-SMA shows the largest failure strain, whileB-SMA shows the smallest failure strain, and BL-SMA is betweenthe two. This may be due to the lower specic surface area andthicker effective asphalt lm of L-SMA when compared withB-SMA. In Table 6, the value of F is less than that of Fcritical, it canbe concluded that aggregate type has no signicant effect on fail-ure strain. That is, the low temperature performance of resistanceto cracking is statistically insignicant within each SMA mixture.

    3.3. Results of indirect tensile test and analysis

    Fig. 6 shows the results of indirect tensile strength (ITS) and TSRvalues for three kinds of SMA mixtures. It can be seen from Fig. 6that, L-SMA mixtures have largest values of TSR, followed by BL-SMA and B-SMA comes in last. This indicates that L-SMA mixtureshave the best resistance to moisture damage. This behavior can beattributed to the similar reasons mentioned for beam bending test.Even so, all SMA mixtures satisfy the TSRP 80% criterion inChinese specications JTG F40-2004 for SMA mixture [13]. Table 7shows the ANOVA results of the indirect tensile strength with the

    Fig. 6. Results of moisture susceptibility test.

    Table 5Statistical analysis results of the DS as a function of aggregate type.

    DS B-SMA L-SMA BL-SMA

    B-SMA S NL-SMA SBL-SMA

    N: non-signicant (there is no statistical difference between two means); S: sig-nicant (there is statistical difference between two means).Table 6Results of ANOVA of failure strain (a = 0.05).

    SS df MS F Fcritical p-Value

    Source of variation (eB)Between 227804.2 2 113902.1 1.113339 5.143253 0.387954Within 613840.7 6 102306.8

    Total 841644.9 8

    Table 7Results of ANOVA of indirect tensile strength (a = 0.05).

    Samples F value Fcritical value Signicant

    Wet specimens 0.641425 5.143253 NoDry specimens 1.597701 No

    ng Materials 41 (2013) 474479aggregate type. It is observed that the indirect tensile strengthvalues of wet and dry specimens are affected insignicantlybetween each SMA mixture. In general, the aggregate type is foundto have no signicant effect on the moisture susceptibility at the5% level.

    3.4. Dynamic modulus master curve

    The effect of time and temperature on the behavior of the visco-elastic materials like asphalt concrete mixes can be described bytting master curve using timetemperature superposition princi-ple. In mechanisticempirical (ME) pavement design and analysis,the stiffness of an asphalt mixture should account for all tempera-tures and loading frequencies that may account during pavementservice life [19]. This wide range of stiffness of an asphalt mixturecould be determined from a dynamic modulus master curve gener-ated at a reference temperature.

    D

    ynam

    ic

    Mod

    ulu

    s (M

    Pa)

    D

    ynam

    ic

    Mod

    ulu

    s (M

    Pa)

    (a) 15o C

    02000400060008000

    10000

    L-SMAB-SMABL-SMA

    (b) 21.1o C

    0500

    1000150020002500

    L-SMAB-SMABL-SMA

    (c) 40o C

    0 5 10 15 20 25Frequency (Hz)

    0 5 10 15 20 25Frequency (Hz)

    Fig. 7. Results of dynamic modulus of SMA mixtures.

  • (4) The dynamic modulus increases as loading frequencyincreases under a constant testing temperature, whiledecreases as temperature increases under a constant fre-quency. B-SMA shows the greatest dynamic modulus, fol-lowed by BL-SMA and L-SMA comes in last. Also, mastercurves of dynamic modulus of SMA mixtures wereconstructed.

    1000

    10000

    100000du

    lus

    (MPa

    )W. Cao et al. / Construction and Building Materials 41 (2013) 474479 479The test results of the dynamic modulus of asphalt mixturesmeasured at three temperatures and nine loading frequencies areshown in Fig. 7. The dynamic modulus increases as loading fre-quency increases under a constant testing temperature, while de-creases as temperature increases under a constant frequency. B-SMA shows the greatest dynamic modulus, followed by BL-SMAand L-SMA comes in last. In this study, a reference temperaturewas chosen as 21 C. Master curves of dynamic modulus for allSMAmixtures used in this study are shown in Fig. 8. As can be seenfrom Fig. 8, B-SMA shows the highest dynamic modulus, andL-SMA shows the smallest dynamic modulus at each frequency.The reasons behind this behavior are similar to that for the ruttingresistance behavior.

    4. Conclusions and recommendations

    On the basis of the results and analyses of this laboratory test onthe performance of SMA mixtures using basalt and limestoneaggregates, the main ndings and conclusions are summarized asfollows:

    (1) According to the wheel tracking test, B-SMA indicates thebest rutting resistance, followed by BL-SMA and L-SMAcomes in last. Also, the DS differences between B-SMA andL-SMA and between BL-SMA and L-SMA are statistically sig-

    1

    10

    100

    1E-06 1E-05 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100Log Reduced frequency (Hz)

    Dyn

    amic

    Mo

    B-SMA

    L-SMABL-SMA

    Fig. 8. Master curves of dynamic modulus of SMA mixtures.nicant, while the differences between B-SMA and BL-SMAare insignicant.

    (2) As a result of the beam bending test, L-SMA shows the larg-est failure strain, while B-SMA shows the smallest failurestrain, and BL-SMA is between the two. However, the differ-ence of failure strain values between each SMA mixture isnot signicant and this means the insignicant differencesin terms of low temperature cracking susceptibility.

    (3) The moisture susceptibility of three kinds of SMA mixturesmeet the requirement of specications, and aggregate typehas no signicant effect on the moisture susceptibility atthe 5% level.(5) It is suggested to conduct a study to evaluate the fatiguecracking properties of SMA mixtures using basalt and lime-stone aggregates. Also, further study with other asphaltbinders is needed to conrm these ndings.

    Acknowledgements

    This work was supported by Shandong Province Reward Fundfor Excellent Young and Middle-aged Scientists (BS2010CL034)and the authors would like to acknowledge their nancial support.

    References

    [1] Scherocman JA. Stone mastic asphalt reduces rutting. Better Roads1991;61(11):267.

    [2] Moghadas Nejad F, Aaki E, Mohammadi MA. Fatigue behavior of SMA andHMA mixtures. Constr Build Mater 2010;24(7):115865.

    [3] Shen JA. Modied asphalt and SMA pavement. PR China (Beijing): ChinaCommunications Press; 1999.

    [4] Chiu CT, Lu LC. A laboratory study on stone matrix asphalt using ground tirerubber. Constr Build Mater 2007;21:102733.

    [5] Ahmadinia E, Zargar M, Rehan Karim M, Abdelaziz M, Shagh Payam. Usingwaste plastic bottles as additive for stone mastic asphalt. Constr Build Mater2011;32:48449.

    [6] Ahmadinia E, Zargar M, Rehan Karim M, Abdelaziz M, Ahmadinia E.Performance evaluation of utilization of waste Polyethylene Terephthalate(PET) in stone mastic asphalt. Constr Build Mater 2012;36:9849.

    [7] Baghaee Moghaddam T, Rehan Karim M, Syammaun T. Dynamic properties ofstone mastic asphalt mixtures containing waste plastic bottles. Constr BuildMater 2012;34:23642.

    [8] Putman BJ, Amirkhanian SN. Utilization of waste bers in stone matrix asphaltmixtures. Resour Conserv Recy 2004;42:26574.

    [9] Mokhtari A, Moghadas Nejad F. Mechanistic approach for ber and polymermodied SMA mixtures. Constr Build Mater 2012;36:38190.

    [10] Xue YJ, Hou HB, Zhu SJ, Zha J. Utilization of municipal solid waste incinerationash in stone mastic asphalt mixture: Pavement performance andenvironmental impact. Constr Build Mater 2009;23:98996.

    [11] Ibrahim A, Faisal S, Jamil N. Use of basalt in asphalt concrete mixes. ConstrBuild Mater 2009;23:498506.

    [12] JTG E42-2005. Standard Test Methods of aggregate for HighwayEngineering. PR China (Beijing): Ministry of Transport; 2005.

    [13] JTG F40-2004. Technical Specications for Construction of Highway AsphaltPavements. PR China (Beijing): Ministry of Transport; 2004.

    [14] Liu ST, Shang QS, Guo ZY. Estimation of optimum asphalt content range of hotmix asphalt in objective mix design. J of Highway Transport Res Dev2006;23(2):3942 [in Chinese].

    [15] JTG E20-2011. Standard Test Methods of Bitumen and Bituminous Mixtures forHighway Engineering. PR China (Beijing): Ministry of Transport; 2011.

    [16] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Ofcials (AASHTO).AASHTO TP62: Standard Method of Test for Determining Dynamic Modulus ofHot-Mix Asphalt (HMA), Washington DC, USA, 2007.

    [17] Apeagyei Alex K. Rutting as a function of dynamic modulus and gradation. JMater Civ Eng 2011;23(9):13029.

    [18] Hong N, Lin A, Li ZH. Tutorial for Statistical analysis of SPSS for Windows. PRChina (Beijing): Publishing House of Electronics Industry; 2009.

    [19] Cho YH, Park DW, Hwang SD. A predictive equation for dynamic modulus ofasphalt mixtures used in Korea. Constr Build Mater 2010;24:5139.

    Comparison of performance of stone matrix asphalt mixtures using basalt and limestone aggregates1 Introduction2 Materials and experiments2.1 Materials2.1.1 Aggregates used2.1.2 Asphalt binder2.1.3 Other materials used

    2.2 Mix design2.3 Experiments program and test methods2.3.1 Wheel tracking test2.3.2 Beam bending test2.3.3 Indirect tensile test2.3.4 Dynamic modulus test

    2.4 Data analysis methods[18]

    3 Experimental results and discussions3.1 Results of wheel tracking test and analysis3.2 Results of beam bending test and analysis3.3 Results of indirect tensile test and analysis3.4 Dynamic modulus master curve

    4 Conclusions and recommendationsAcknowledgementsReferences

Recommended

View more >