STUDIES ON MIXES PREPARED USING RECLAIMED BITUMINOUS MATERIAL AND WARM MIX ADDITIVE

RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016

STUDIES ON MIXES PREPARED USING RECLAIMED BITUMINOUS MATERIAL AND

WARM MIX ADDITIVE

Department of Civil Engineering,

R V College of Engineering, Bengaluru1


Project Guides:

Dr. ANJANEYAPPAAssociate Professor

VARUNA MAssistant Professor

Project Associates:NAKUL MISHRA-1RV12CV027

NANI KHONKHUNG -1RV12CV029NISHANT RAY-1RV12CV036

Department of Civil EngineeringR. V. College of Engineering

2


Content

1. Objectives.2. Scope of Work.3. Methodology.4. Results obtained.5. Conclusion.6. References.

3


Objectives

• To determine the optimum binder content in the mixes with varying percentages of reclaimed asphalt pavement.

• To study the properties of bituminous concrete mix and mixes containing varying percentages of reclaimed asphalt pavement.

• To study changes in structure of bitumen after adding warm mix additive.

4


Scope of work• The quantity of RAP and conventional aggregates are to be

adjusted in such a way that the resultant gradation of aggregates conforms to specified gradation for 10, 30, 50% RAP.

• Total quantity of asphalt binder should be adjusted in such a way that it satisfies the target mix.

• Preparation of warm mix binder by adding 0.1%zycotherm by weight and comparison study for conventional and RAP mixtures at varied content.

5


MethodologySelection of procurement of materials

Evaluation of basic engineering properties of materialsTest on

conventional

aggregates

Specific gravity and

water absorption

Impact value test

Combined Index and

ten percent fines

Stripping Value

Test on

RAP aggregates

Specific gravity and

water absorption

Impact value test

Combined Index and

ten percent fines

Stripping Value

Test on

Bitumen VG-30

Specific gravity

Softening Point

Ductility

Penetration

FTIR Test

Test on Rap

Bitumen

Specific gravity

Softening Point

Ductility

Penetration

FTIR Test


7

Test on Warm Mix

Bitumen:

1.Specific gravity

2.Softening Point

3.Ductility

4 Penetration

5 FTIR Test

Mix Design

For BC mix without warm mix

additive

• 10% RAP + 90% CA

• 30% RAP + 70% CA

• 50% RAP + 50% CA

For BC mix with warm mix

additive

• 10% RAP + 90% CA

• 30% RAP + 70% CA

• 50% RAP + 50% CAOptimum binder

content


Results obtainedConventional Aggregate

Table 4.1

8

Sl No Name of test Value Obtained in %

Permissible value Specifications

1 Aggregate Impact Value Test

22% <35% IS:2386-1963

Part-IV2 (a)

2 (b)

.Specific Gravity

Water absorption

2.6

0.55%

2.5 – 3.2

0.1 – 2%

IS:2386-1963

Part-IV

3 Combined Index 25.2% <30% IS:2386-1963 Part-I

4 Stripping Value 2.3% <10% IS:6241-1971

5 Ten percent fines 10.5% 7.5 – 12.5% IS:2386-1963

Part-IV


Neat BitumenTable 4.2

9

Sl No Name of Test

Value Obtained

Permissible value

Specifications

1 Softening point

46.5 °C 45 - 55 °C IS-1205: 1978

2 Penetration 65.6 mm 50 – 70 mm IS-1203: 1978

3 Ductility 81 mm Min 75 mm IS-1208: 1978

4 Specific Gravity

1.008 0.97 – 1.02 IS-1202: 1978


Recycled Asphalt pavement aggregate

Table 4.3

10

Sl No Name of test Value Obtained Permissible Value

1

Aggregate Impact Value Test

20.78% <35%

2 (a)

2 (b)

Specific Gravity

Water absorption

2.604

0.29%

2.5 - 3.2

0.1 – 2%

3 Combined Index 26.6% <30%

4 Stripping Value 86.2% --

5 Ten percent fines 11.4% 7.5 – 12.5%


Bitumen VG-30 with warm mix additive (Zycotherm)

Table 4.4

11

Sl No Name of Test Value Obtained

1 Softening point 40.5 °C

2 Penetration 81 mm

3 Ductility 77 mm

4 Specific Gravity 1.008


Bitumen Extracted from recycled asphalt pavement

Table 4.5

12

Sl No Name of Test Value Obtained

1 Softening point 48.5 °C

2 Penetration 51 mm

3 Ductility 53 mm

4 Specific Gravity 1.03


Bitumen Extracted from recycled asphalt pavement with Zycotherm

Table 4.6

13


Marshall Stability Test Results

Table for hot Bituminous concrete for conventional mixes

Table 4.7

14

Sl no. Bitumen

content %

Bulk densit

yKg/m3

Air voidsVV %

Vb% VMA%

VFB%

Marshall

Stability

Kg

Flowmm

1 5 2382 4.12 11.82 15.94 74.15 994 3.3

2 5.5 2413 3.21 13.01 16.22 80.20 1042 3.5

3 6 2475 3.9 14.09 17.11 82.34 1012 3.9


Table for Hot bituminous concrete mix (90% conventional + 10% RAP)

Table 4.8

15

Sl no.

Bitumen content %

Bulk densityKg/m3

Air voidsVV %

Vb% VMA%

VFB%

MarshallStability

Kg

Flowmm

1 5 2303 4.23 11.82 16.05 73.64 1102 2.4

2 5.5 2404 3.28 12.98 16.26 79.82 1182 2.5

3 6 2425 3.09 14.02 17.11 81.94 1214 2.3



Table 4.9

16

Sl no. Bitumen content

%

Bulk densityKg/m3

Air voidsVV %

Vb% VMA%

VFB%

Marshall

Stabilitykg

Flowmm

1 5 2316 4.42 11.76 16.18 72.68 1365 2.2

2 5.5 2402 4.16 12.96 17.12 75.70 1476 2.3

3 6 2558 3.92 13.98 17.9 78.10 1410 2.5



Table 4.10

17

Sl no. Bitumen

content %

Bulk densityKg/m3

Air voidsVV %

Vb% VMA%

VFB%

Marshall

Stability

kg

Flowmm

1 5 2286 4.56 11.68 16.24 71.9 1191 2.0

2 5.5 2381 4.32 13.02 17.34 75.08 1211 2.1

3 6 2409 4.02 13.98 17.9 77.54 1276 2.3


Graphs obtained from the Marshall stability test for conventional mix

Flow vs Bitumen content

18

4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.20

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

0%rapPolynomial (0%rap)10%rapPolynomial (10%rap)30%rapPolynomial (30%rap)50%rapPolynomial (50%rap)

Bitumen Content

Flow


Stability vs bitumen content

19

4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.20

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600


Bitumen Content

Stab

ility


Bulk Density vs bitumen content

20

4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.22150

2200

2250

2300

2350

2400

2450

2500

2550

2600


Bitumen Content

Bul

k D

ensit

y


Air Voids vs bitumen content

21

4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.20

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5


Bitumen Content

Air

Voi

ds


VFB vs bitumen content

22

4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.266

68

70

72

74

76

78

80

82

84

0%rapPolynomial (0%rap)10%rapPolynomial (10%rap)30%rapLinear (30%rap)50%rapPolynomial (50%rap)

Bitumen Content

VFB


Table for hot bituminous concrete mix with WMA for conventional mix

Table 4.11

23


%

Bulk densityKg/m3

Air voidsVV %

Vb% VMA%

VFB%

MarshallStability

kg

Flowmm

1 5 2394 4.21 11.83 16.04 73.75 1012 3.2

2 5.5 2424 3.28 13.12 16.40 80 1068 3.3

3 6 2486 3.08 14.10 17.18 82 1023 3.7


Table for hot bituminous concrete mix with WMA (90% conventional mix + 10% RAP)

Table 4.12

24


%

Bulk densityKg/m3

Air voidsVV %

Vb% VMA%

VFB%

MarshallStability

kg

Flowmm

1 5 2328 4.38 11.89 16.27 73.07 1196 2.3

2 5.5 2462 3.98 13.26 17.24 76.91 1280 2.2

3 6 2523 3.56 14.02 17.59 79.59 1252 2.5



Table 4.13

25


%

Bulk densityKg/m3

Air voidsVV %

Vb% VMA%

VFB%

MarshallStability

kg

Flowmm

1 5 2392 4.62 11.96 16.58 72.13 1398 2.4

2 5.5 2451 4.38 13.42 17.80 75.13 1512 2.6

3 6 2862 3.62 14.26 17.88 79.75 1462 2.8



Table 4.14

26


%

Bulk densityKg/m3

Air voidsVV %

Vb% VMA%

VFB%

MarshallStability

kg

Flowmm

1 5 2162 5.23 11.73 16.96 69.16 1120 2.2

2 5.5 2278 4.98 13.12 18.10 72.486 1250 2.1

3 6 2312 4.72 14.12 18.84 74.94 1322 2.4


Graphs obtained from the Marshall stability test for mix with warm mix additive

Stability vs bitumen content for warm mix

27

4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.20

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600


Bitumen Content

Stab

ility


Flow vs bitumen content for warm mix

28

4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.20

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4


Bitumen Content

Flow


Bulk density vs bitumen content for warm mix

29

4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.20

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500


Bitumen Content

Bulk

Den

sity


Air Voids vs bitumen content for warm mix

30

4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.20

1

2

3

4

5

6


Bitumen Content

Air

Voi

ds


VFB vs bitumen content for warm mix

31

4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6 6.260

65

70

75

80

85


Bitumen Content

VFB


Marshall Properties at OBC for bituminous concrete without

WMATable 4.15

32

Parameters CA 10% RAP+90% CA

30% RAP+70% CA

50% RAP+50% CA

OBC 5.54 5.7 5.76 6

Stability(kg)

1042.47 1200.56 1463.77 1276

Flowmm

3.52 2.45 2.39 2.3

Bulk densityKg/m3

2416.8 2422 2474.38 2409

Air voidVV

3.2 3.11 4.03 4.02

VFB

80.51 81.15 76.9 77.54

VMA 16.26 16.52 17.54 17.9


Marshall Properties at OBC for bituminous concrete with WMA

Table 4.16

33

Parameters CA 10% RAP+90% CA

30% RAP+70% CA

50% RAP+50% CA

OBC 5.5 5.63 5.75 5.7

Stability(kg)

1068 1283.5 1507.5 1285.76

FlowMm

3.3 2.24 2.7 2.17

Bulk densityKg/m3

2424 2483.24 2612.5 2301.4

Air voidVV

3.28 3.87 4.06 4.87

VFB

80 77.73 77.23 73.56

VMA 16.4 17.39 17.98 18.44


FTIR test results

Sample 1: Neat bitumen

34

4000 6003500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000

99

5255

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

cm-1

%T

2920.84cm-1, 52.70%T

2851.34cm-1, 63.24%T1455.94cm-1, 70.49%T 721.48cm-1, 73.26%T

807.76cm-1, 76.30%T

1376.02cm-1, 77.03%T

1030.92cm-1, 80.01%T

1597.83cm-1, 87.97%T


Sample 2 : 10%RAP binder + 90%neat bitumen

35

4000 6003500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000

100

5255

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

cm-1

%T

2920.35cm-1, 53.27%T

2851.32cm-1, 63.61%T1456.05cm-1, 72.66%T 721.43cm-1, 76.51%T

808.32cm-1, 79.52%T

1376.05cm-1, 79.63%T

1031.16cm-1, 84.50%T

1596.04cm-1, 90.71%T



36

4000 6003500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000

101

5355

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

cm-1

%T

2920.76cm-1, 54.24%T

2851.40cm-1, 64.37%T1455.88cm-1, 71.77%T

721.03cm-1, 74.80%T

616.73cm-1, 76.42%T

1031.51cm-1, 76.67%T

1375.94cm-1, 78.52%T

804.62cm-1, 78.59%T

1598.68cm-1, 89.53%T

3315.88cm-1, 94.73%T2163.99cm-1, 95.86%T



37

4000 6003500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000

100

5255

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

cm-1

%T

2920.57cm-1, 53.32%T2851.27cm-1, 63.76%T

1455.90cm-1, 71.67%T

721.71cm-1, 76.70%T

1376.09cm-1, 79.39%T

674.93cm-1, 79.83%T

806.89cm-1, 79.84%T

1031.46cm-1, 80.48%T

1596.55cm-1, 90.72%T


Sample 5: 30%RAP binder + 70% neat bitumen (with Zycotherm)

38

4000 6003500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000

100

5255

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

cm-1

%T

2920.48cm-1, 53.07%T 2851.35cm-1, 63.78%T

1455.96cm-1, 72.12%T721.28cm-1, 74.63%T

804.43cm-1, 77.69%T

1375.92cm-1, 78.66%T

1031.24cm-1, 79.91%T

1599.15cm-1, 89.59%T



39

4000 6003500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000

100

5155

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

cm-1

%T

2920.53cm-1, 52.63%T

2851.36cm-1, 63.14%T1456.00cm-1, 72.55%T

721.17cm-1, 76.63%T

1376.07cm-1, 79.52%T

807.11cm-1, 79.86%T627.96cm-1, 80.83%T

1030.57cm-1, 83.36%T

1599.65cm-1, 91.03%T



40

4000 6003500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000

101

5355

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

cm-1

%T

2921.43cm-1, 54.03%T 2851.78cm-1, 64.35%T

1015.45cm-1, 70.60%T1455.96cm-1, 71.88%T

722.06cm-1, 74.27%T

624.00cm-1, 75.68%T

1376.10cm-1, 79.02%T

1598.93cm-1, 89.76%T


Sample 8: RAP binder with Zycotherm

41

4000 6003500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000

100

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

cm-1

%T

2920.65cm-1, 56.36%T674.97cm-1, 63.69%T1015.99cm-1, 65.81%T

2851.51cm-1, 66.16%T

722.20cm-1, 72.63%T

1455.96cm-1, 72.66%T

1375.97cm-1, 78.35%T

1599.09cm-1, 88.56%T

3299.58cm-1, 93.76%T


Sample 9 : RAP binder without Zycotherm

42

4000 6003500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000

100

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

cm-1

%T

2921.64cm-1, 56.27%T

2851.92cm-1, 66.39%T

1013.93cm-1, 67.22%T

675.02cm-1, 67.73%T

618.04cm-1, 68.53%T

721.23cm-1, 69.44%T

1456.02cm-1, 72.92%T

1376.24cm-1, 79.80%T

1603.93cm-1, 88.06%T

3434.79cm-1, 90.87%T


Conclusion • Basic tests conducted on RAP and conventional aggregate satisfied all the

requirements as per MORTH&H, 5th revision.• Warm mix prepared with RAP material of 30 percent along with zycotherm

showed the highest stability.• The flow value of bitumen increased with increase in bitumen content of the

mixes.The air void was also found out to be 4.06% which was in the desired limit

• The compaction temperature of the conventional mix after adding Zycotherm was observed to have reduced from 120 degree Celsius to 90 degree Celsius. Thereby giving the same performance of bituminous mix.

• FTIR test showed no change in structure of bitumen even after the addition of zycotherm.

• The use of recycled materials in warm mix increases cost effectiveness and also lowers the overall fuel consumption.

43


Scope for Future study• Apart from 10, 30, 50 other percentages of RAP material can also be

used to determine stability.• Additives other than zycotherm can also be used to enhance the

properties of warm mixes.• Fillers other than quarry dust and cement can be used for bituminous

concrete mixes.• Thin film oven test and other similar tests can be carried out to

determine the alteration in the property of the bitumen binder.• Tests like fatigue and rutting analysis along with durability, ageing test

can be carried out.

44


References• Behmankheradmanda, RatnasamyMuniandya, Law TeikHuaa, Robiah Bt.

Yunusb and Abbas Soloukia “An overview of the emerging hot mix asphalt technology Department of Civil Engineering” Faculty of Engineering, University Putra Malaysia International Journal of Pavement Engineering, Vol 15, 2014, Pp. 1,79-94.

• Rutting and moisture damage resistance of high reclaimed asphalt pavement warm mixed asphalt: loaded wheel tracking vs. conventional methods Road Materials and Pavement Design , Vol. 14, 2013 Pp. 148-172,

• KanishkaChopra ,Anjankumar, RajibBasuMallick and Veeraragavan, “Investigation on laboratory performance of bituminous mixes with reclaimed asphalt pavement materials- a step towards sustainable road infrastructure in India”, Journal of Indian road congress, Vol.584, December 2012, pp.33-352

• “MoRTH; Specifications for Roads and Bridge Works, Fifth revision”, Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi, 2012. Published by Indian Offset Press.

• Arshadhussain and QiuYanjun, “Evaluation of Asphalt Mixes Containing Reclaimed Asphlat Pavement for Wearing Courses”, International Conference on Traffic and Transportation Engineering, Singapore, Vol 6, 2012, pp.43-48

45


• Baron Colbert, Zhanping you, “The properties of asphlat binder blended with variable quantites of recycled asphalt using short term and long term aging simulations”, Construction and Building Materials journals, Vol 12- Houghton , July 2011, pp.552-557

• Dr. R. Sathikumar and Nivediya M.K, “Reclaimed Asphalt Pavements (RAP) Technology for a Sustainable Pavement “, National Technological Congress conference, Vol 11, 2011, pp.41-45

• PrashantShirodkar, Yusuf mehta, Aaron Nolal, KhyatiSonpal, Alan Norton, Chris Tomlinson, Eric Dubois, Patrick Sullivian, Robert Sauber,”A study to determine the degree of partial blending of reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) binder for high RAP hot mix asphalt”, Construction and Building materials, Vol.25,2011, pp.150-155

• Williams keheindeKupolati, OluwoleAkinyleAgbede and Gabriel AyodeleAlade,”characterization of bitumen extracted from used Asphalt Pavement”, Journal of Civil Engineering research and Practice, Vol. 7 no.2, October 2010, pp.39-48.

46

Date post:	13-Apr-2017
Category:	Engineering
Upload:	nishant-ray
View:	102 times
Download:	3 times