Construction and Building Materials 41 (2013) 474–479

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /conbui ldmat

Comparison of performance of stone matrix asphalt mixtures using basaltand limestone aggregates

Weidong Cao ⇑, Shutang Liu, Zhigang FengSchool of Civil Engineering, Shandong University, No. 17923 Jingshi Road, Jinan, Shandong Province 250061, PR China

h i g h l i g h t s

" B-SMA shows the best rutting resistance, followed by BL-SMA and L-SMA comes in last." Aggregate type has no significant effect on low temperature performance." L-SMA has the best moisture stability, followed by BL-SMA and B-SMA comes in last." Master curves of dynamic modulus of three SMA mixtures were constructed.

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:Stone matrix asphalt (SMA)Basalt aggregateLimestone aggregatePerformance

0950-0618/$ - see front matter � 2013 Elsevier Ltd. Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.12.021

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 531 8839 2842; fE-mail address: cwd2001@sdu.edu.cn (W. Cao).

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 fine aggregates, named B-SMA; limestone coarse and fine aggre-gates, named L-SMA; basalt coarse aggregates and limestone fine 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 significant effect on rutting resistance, but nosignificant difference in low temperature cracking susceptibility or moisture susceptibility was found inSMA mixtures. Also, master 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 eachfrequency.

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

ll rights reserved.

ax: +86 531 8839 5204.

There are many previous researches regarding the modificationof SMA mixtures and the utilization of waste materials 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 SMA mixture 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 fine GTR witha maximum size of 0.6 mm. No fiber was needed to preventdrain-down when this asphalt rubber was used. The results of thewheel tracking tests at 60 �C showed that rutting resistance ofAR–SMA 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 (4–6% 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

Table 1Properties of coarse aggregates.

Properties Test values Specifications

Basalt Limestone

Apparent specific gravity13.2–16 mm 2.864 2.731 >2.609.5–13.2 mm 2.866 2.7334.75–9.5 mm 2.867 2.724

Bulk specific gravity13.2–16 mm 2.822 2.681 >2.509.5–13.2 mm 2.823 2.6874.75–9.5 mm 2.818 2.678

Water absorption (%)13.2–16 mm 0.35 0.51 62.09.5–13.2 mm 0.35 0.504.75–9.5 mm 0.43 0.53Crushed stone value (%) 10.0 19.9 626L.A. abrasion (%) 8.3 17.8 628

Percent of flat and elongated particles (%)13.2–16 mm 7.4 11.0 6159.5–13.2 mm 8.2 10.54.75–9.5 mm 8.3 14.6Polished stone value (PSV) 51 45 P40

W. Cao et al. / Construction and Building Materials 41 (2013) 474–479 475

waste PET into the mixture had a significant positive effect on theproperties of SMA which could improve the mixture’s 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 reinforced mixtures exhibit significantly high-er fatigue lives compared to the mixtures without PET. Putman andAmirkhanian [8] investigated the feasibility of utilizing waste tireand carpet fibers in SMA. This study compared the performanceof SMA mixtures containing waste tire and carpet fibers (0.3% byweight of total mixture) with mixes made with commonly usedcellulose and other polyester fibers produced specifically for usein HMA. No significant difference in permanent deformation ormoisture susceptibility was found in mixtures containing wastefibers compared to cellulose or polyester. Also, the tire, carpet,and polyester fibers significantly improved the toughness of themixtures compared to the cellulose fibers. Mokhtari andMoghadas Nejad [9] performed a laboratory investigation on SMAmixtures containing polymers and fibers, and then conducteda mechanistic–empirical approach to determine the effect ofdifferent additives in increasing the service life of the pavementor reduction of the pavement layers thickness. Their researchindicated that styrene–butadiene–styrene (SBS) was more effectivein improving the performance of asphalt mixtures compared tothe fibers and the service life of the pavement system modifiedwith mineral, cellulose and SBS were 1.07, 1.081 and 1.243 timesmore than unmodified 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 filler. 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 8–16%of MSWI ash substitution for aggregates and filler is guaranteedto meet the requirement of SMA mixtures. The large amount utili-zation of BOF slag and MSWI ash testified 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 fine aggregate. Results showed that the optimal mix was themix that had basalt coarse aggregate and limestone fine aggregate.In order to overcome the stripping potential of the optimal mix,20% of the filler 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-ing fine 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

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 fine aggregatesare basalt, named B-SMA; (b) both coarse and fine aggregates arelimestone, named L-SMA; (c) coarse aggregates are basalt and fineaggregates 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 fine

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 (13.2–16 mm, 9.5–13.2 mm, and 4.75–9.5 mm) of two kinds ofstones were chosen. Properties of coarse aggregates as per Chinese specifications[13] are shown in Table 1.

Six particle sizes of fine aggregates (2.36–4.75 mm, 1.18–2.36 mm, 0.6–1.18 mm, 0.3–0.6 mm, 0.15–0.3 mm, and 0.075–0.15 mm) of two kinds of stoneswere used. The basic properties of fine aggregates as per Chinese specifications[13] are shown in Table 2.

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

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

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

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

2.2. Mix design

According to the specifications for construction of highway asphalt pavementsof China [13], a nominal maximum size 13.2 mm SMA mixture 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 specifications [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 field expe-rience [3,14], the asphalt content of three SMA mixtures used in the exper-iment was determined to 5.90%.

Table 2Properties of fine aggregates.

Properties Test values Specifications

Basalt Limestone

Apparent specific gravity2.36–4.75 mm 2.851 2.7131.18–2.36 mm 2.855 2.7130.6–1.18 mm 2.850 2.713 >2.500.3–0.6 mm 2.848 2.7100.15–0.3 mm 2.846 2.7100.075–0.15 mm 2.844 2.715

Angularity (%)2.36–4.75 mm 29.5 26.41.18–2.36 mm 33.8 30.1 —0.6–1.18 mm 33.3 35.0

476 W. Cao et al. / Construction and Building Materials 41 (2013) 474–479

(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(<4.75 mm) of three initial gradation curves of SMA mixtures and repeatedstep (3).

The final design gradation curves of three kinds of SMA mixtures are shown inFig. 1. The calculated results of the percentage of air voids (AV), the percentage ofvoids in mineral aggregate (VMA) and the percentage of voids filled with asphalt(VFA) of the final compacted specimens are summarized in Table 4. We can observefrom Table 4 that three kinds of SMA mixtures have nearly the same volumetricparameters and the mixes design is finished.

2.3. Experiments program and test methods

We adopted four performance tests in the laboratory. The tests performed werewheel tracking, low temperature beam bending, moisture susceptibility, and dy-namic modulus tests.

2.3.1. Wheel tracking testThe wheel tracking test was conducted employing the wheel-tracking device

shown in Fig. 2 for evaluation of pavement performance in high temperature. Spec-imens, which were mixed with the determined asphalt contents from mix designand fabricated by the rolling machine, were of dimensions 300 mm � 300 mm incross-sectional area and 50 mm in height. According to China Standard T 0719-2011 [15], the wheel tracking test was performed using 0.7 MPa wheel load at60 �C temperature under dry condition. The testing indicator of dynamic stability(DS), which could be expressed by the number of times of wheel passing the sampleper rut depth on a time interval between 45 and 60 min, can be calculated using Eq.(1) as follows [15]:

DS ¼ ðt2 � t1Þ � Nd2 � d1

ð1Þ

where d1 is rut depth at t1 (45 min); d2, rut depth at t2 (60 min); N is speed of wheelpassing over the center of the sample, 42 cycles a minute.

The 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 ¼6hd

L2 ð2Þ

Table 3Properties of SBS modified asphalt binder.

Index Specific gravity (15 �C) Penetration (25 �C, 0.1

Test values 1.031 45

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 testThe freeze–thaw indirect tensile test which is nearly equivalent AASHTO T283

was 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 freeze–thaw cycling, in which thesaturated specimen with 70–80% 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 ¼ TSc

TSdð3Þ

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 unconfined 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 temperature–frequency combina-tion, applied strain was in the range of 75–125 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 Fisher’s leastsignificant difference (LSD) comparison. The significance 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 signifi-cance level. If the probability is less than or equal to the significance level, thenthe null hypothesis is rejected and the outcome is said to be statistically significant.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 significancewas 0.05 (a = 0.05). The primary variables were the mixtures types: B-SMA, L-SMA,and BL-SMA. The ANOVA was performed first to determine whether significant 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 defined 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

Fig. 2. Wheel tracking test device.

Fig. 3. Simple performance tester.

1000200030004000500060007000

B-SMA L-SMA BL-SMA

SMA mixtures

DS

(Tim

es/m

m)

Fig. 4. Results of wheel tracking test.

Fig. 1. Gradation curves used.

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 40.4

W. Cao et al. / Construction and Building Materials 41 (2013) 474–479 477

3. 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. 4–6 represent standard er-rors of the means.). These results meet specifications 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,

and percent of flat 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 significance 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 statisticallysignificant, while the differences between B-SMA and BL-SMA areinsignificant. This may be explained that both B-SMA and BL-SMA have the same coarse aggregate skeleton structure.

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

700.0

800.0

B-SMA L-SMA BL-SMA

SMA mixtures

ITS

(kPa

)

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

95.0

100.0

TSR

(%)

Wet specimens Dry specimens TSR

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-significant (there is no statistical difference between two means); S: sig-nificant (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 Significant

Wet specimens 0.641425 5.143253 NoDry specimens 1.597701 No

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

B-SMA L-SMA BL-SMA

SMA mixtures

Fail

ure

stra

in (μ

ε)

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

02000400060008000

100001200014000

0 5 10 15 20 25Frequency (Hz)

Dyn

amic

M

odul

us (M

Pa)

Dyn

amic

M

odul

us (M

Pa)

Dyn

amic

M

odul

us (M

Pa)

L-SMA

B-SMA

BL-SMA

(a) 15o C

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

L-SMA

B-SMA

BL-SMA

(b) 21.1o C

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

L-SMA

B-SMA

BL-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.

478 W. Cao et al. / Construction and Building Materials 41 (2013) 474–479

3.2. 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 specific surface area andthicker effective asphalt film 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 significant effect on fail-ure strain. That is, the low temperature performance of resistanceto cracking is statistically insignificant 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 TSR P 80% criterion inChinese specifications JTG F40-2004 for SMA mixture [13]. Table 7shows the ANOVA results of the indirect tensile strength with the

aggregate type. It is observed that the indirect tensile strengthvalues of wet and dry specimens are affected insignificantlybetween each SMA mixture. In general, the aggregate type is foundto have no significant 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 byfitting master curve using time–temperature superposition princi-ple. In mechanistic–empirical (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.

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

1E-06 1E-05 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

Log Reduced frequency (Hz)

Dyn

amic

Mod

ulus

(M

Pa)

B-SMA

L-SMA

BL-SMA

Fig. 8. Master curves of dynamic modulus of SMA mixtures.

W. Cao et al. / Construction and Building Materials 41 (2013) 474–479 479

The 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 allSMA mixtures 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 findings 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-nificant, while the differences between B-SMA and BL-SMAare insignificant.

(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 significant and this means the insignificant differencesin terms of low temperature cracking susceptibility.

(3) The moisture susceptibility of three kinds of SMA mixturesmeet the requirement of specifications, and aggregate typehas no significant effect on the moisture susceptibility atthe 5% level.

(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.

(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 confirm these findings.

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 financial support.

References

[1] Scherocman JA. Stone mastic asphalt reduces rutting. Better Roads1991;61(11):26–7.

[2] Moghadas Nejad F, Aflaki E, Mohammadi MA. Fatigue behavior of SMA andHMA mixtures. Constr Build Mater 2010;24(7):1158–65.

[3] Shen JA. Modified 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;21:1027–33.

[5] Ahmadinia E, Zargar M, Rehan Karim M, Abdelaziz M, Shafigh Payam. Usingwaste plastic bottles as additive for stone mastic asphalt. Constr Build Mater2011;32:4844–9.

[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;36:984–9.

[7] Baghaee Moghaddam T, Rehan Karim M, Syammaun T. Dynamic properties ofstone mastic asphalt mixtures containing waste plastic bottles. Constr BuildMater 2012;34:236–42.

[8] Putman BJ, Amirkhanian SN. Utilization of waste fibers in stone matrix asphaltmixtures. Resour Conserv Recy 2004;42:265–74.

[9] Mokhtari A, Moghadas Nejad F. Mechanistic approach for fiber and polymermodified SMA mixtures. Constr Build Mater 2012;36:381–90.

[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;23:989–96.

[11] Ibrahim A, Faisal S, Jamil N. Use of basalt in asphalt concrete mixes. ConstrBuild Mater 2009;23:498–506.

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

[13] JTG F40-2004. Technical Specifications 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):39–42 [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 Officials (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):1302–9.

[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;24:513–9.