Abstract:

In this experiment, it is required to obtain the asphalt content that

will give the best values for the major properties of an asphalt mix
specimen. Mainly, the Bulck specific gravity of a compacted mix
(Gmb), Stability, Flow, Air voids & the Maximum theoritical specific
gravity (Gmm). Marshall method of mix design is considered.
Introduction:
Marshall method of designing paving mixtures were formulated by
"Bruce Marshall", formerly Bituminous Engineer with Mississippi
Stat High Way Department. The U.S. Corps of Engineers, through
extensive research and correlation studies, improved and added
certain features to Marshall's test procedure, and ultimately
developed mix design critera. The Marshall test procedures have
been standardized by the American Society for Testing and
Materials. Procedures are given by ASTM D 1559,MS-2.
The main goal of this test is to find the asphalt content in a mix
sample that meet the required values for some of the most
important mix properties.
These properties mentioned above in the abstract, can be defined
as:
Bulk specific gravity of compacted bituminous mixture (Gmb):
The ratio of the weight of compacted paving mixture at stated
temperature to the weight of equal volume of gas free distilled
water.
Theoretical maximum specific gravity of bituminous paving mixture
(Gmm):
The ratio of the weight in air of non-compacted paving mixture at
a stated temperature to the weight of the same volume of gas free
distilled water.
Stability: It is the maximum load resistance in Newton (lb.) that the
standard test specimen will develop at 60*c when tested as
outlined hereinafter.
Flow: the total movement or strain, in units of 0.25 millimeter
occurring in the specimen between no load and maximum load
during the stability.
Voids of mineral aggregates (V.M.A%): the volume of intergranular void space between the aggregate particles of a
compacted paving mixture that includes the air voids and the
effective asphalt content, expressed as a percent of the total
volume of the sample.
Air voids (A.V %) : the total volume of small pockets of air between
coated aggregate particles throughout the compacted pavement
mixture. Expressed as percent of the bulk volume of the
compacted paving mixture.
1

Objectives:
I) To be familiar with this type of experement and tests.
II)
To determine the asphalt content in the mix
design that yields:
Sufficient stability to satisfy the demands of traffic .
Sufficient voids in the total compacted mix to allow
for a slight amount of additional compaction under
traffic loading without flushing, bleeding, and loss of
stability.
1)
Sufficient workability to permit efficient placement of
mixture without segregation.
III) To compare the results with the standard.
Material used:
1)
Asphalt cement that is produced in the jordianian
petrolium refinery company in Al-zarqa.
2)
Crushed limestone as aggregates thats comes from
stone crusher from Alhoson quarise.
Laboratory work:
Aggregate preparation:
4 samples of 1200 gm of aggregate were prepared following the
ministry of public work and housing specifications. (the lower limit
is considered in this experiment)
Marshall specimens Preparation:
1. The aggregate were heated in the oven to eliminate moisture
and in order to insure the remaining of high heat of asphalt
during mixing.
2. The mold of marshal was put in the oven.
3. The asphalt was heated to the mixing temperature.
4. Add asphalt to aggregate with different rates for each
sample (4.5, 5.0, 5.5 & 6.0 %) and mix throughly to achieve
a uniform mix (aggregate is fully coated by asphalt).
5. Place the mix in the preheated mold and compact the
specimen. 35 blow for low traffic, 50 blow for meduim traffic
and 75 blow for heavy traffic. In this test, it is assumed to be
meduim traffic.
6. Reserve the specimen, compact the other face of the
specimen using the same number of blows.
7. Remove the specimen from the mold.
8. Calculat the Bulk Specific Gravity of the compacted mix
using the formula:
Gmb= A/(B-C) where:
2

A: the dry weight in air.

B: SSD weight.
C: weight in water.
9. Place the specimen in water path @ 60oC for 30-40 minutes
(this temperature and duration have the same effect of 10
years in service)
10. Place the specimen loading machine(LVDT) and apply
load @ rate of 51mm/min and get the flow-stability curve of
the specimen.

Discussion:
In this experiment, and according to the results obtained, it is hard
to determine the asphalt content that will meet the required
specifications. This can be obviuosly seen from the five charts
plotted in the results. For example, if we considered the chart of
VMA vs. A.C., the curve is not accurate and even not correct,
because the VMA= 100 - (Gmb*Ps)/Gsb , the Gsb is basing on the
specific gravity of the coarse and fine aggregates and on fillers,
these values were considered from a previouse experiment
(including there errors!!), this will cause to an accomulative error
leading to non-sense results. For accurate and correct results, the
Gsb should be determined and measured exactly.
Now, considering the chart of bulk specific gravity (Gmb) vs. A.C., it
is noticed that the asphalt content that will give the optimum G mb is
arround 3%. The teste here were done only for asphalt content of
(4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0)% !! this is may due to the errors in taking the
readings of the weights of the compacted mix (in air, water and in
SSD condition). However, by checking the specific gravities, it is
seen that Gsb > Gmm > Gmb, which means that the errors did not
affect them largely, but it largely affected the percent of void.
For the chart of Flow vs. A.C., the asphalt contetn that meets the
standars for meduim traffic for flow (8-16) is about 5%.
For the chart of Stability vs. A.C., the standars requirments of
stability for medium traffic is 5338 N. each 1 cm in the stability flow
chart result from the LVDT in the vertical axix (that refers to the
stability) equals 87 kg. By calculation, it is seen that it does not
meet that requirment, this is may due to not leaving the specimen
in the water path for 30 min at temperature of 60oC exactly.
For the A.V. vs. A.C., the curve intialy was going downwards. This
make sense which means that the voids is getting lesser. At the
intial stage, the asphalt is going to fill the voids among aggregate
and by increasing the asphalt content, the air voids will decreas.
However, the curve rised again, which may be due to adding
asphalt in amount more than the required which causes increasing
3

the volume of the specimen because the asphalt will increas the
spaces between aggregate and caus decreasing the interaction
between aggregates, this will make the specimen more loose and
weak and causes increasing the voids, (as I guess!!).

These incorrect results can be due to the errors of:

1. The insufficient blows on the sample.
2. The inaccurate weighing during the preparation of the
aggregate.
3. Using the specific gravities of the coars aggregate, fine
aggregate and filler obtained in a previouse test (which were
inaccurate).
4. Instrumintal errors in the balance or the loading machine.
5. Inaccuracy in adding the required asphalt content.
6. Mixing and compacting in temperature less than 150 oC.
7. Leaving the specimen in the water path for more or less
than 30 min at temperature of more or less than 60oC .
Conclusion:
1) Marshall method is an important method used in designing a
HMA and to determine the optimum asphalt content.
2) It is a must to know the asphalt content that will give best
results in testing meeting the requirments standards.
3) Marshall method and tests can give a good indication about
the quality of the mix and how close to the specifications.
Whenever the properties did not meet the standars, the
materials should be changed and tests are then applied to be
sure of thier results.
4) While testing, good care of the conditions mentioned in the
standards should be taken to achieve good and sens results.
References:
1. ASTM, D 1559 .
2. Mix design methods for asphalt concrete, MS 2, chapter
3, pages (17 32).
3. Principles of pavement design, 2nd edition, chapter 17,
pages (755-776).
4. Laboratory & Pavement lecture notes.
Tables & Figuers:
Aggregate Gradation:
Siev
Passing
Passing
e
weight
middle

Retaine
d (%)
4

% in
betwee

Weight
in

size
1

specificatio
n limits (%)
100

point
(%)
100

90 100

90

10

71 90

71

29

3/8

56 80

56

44

#4

35 56

35

65

#8

23 38

23

77

#16

13 27

14

86

#50

5 17

95

#100

4 14

96

#200

28

98

Pan

100

chec
k

Stability
16.725
15.97
13.452
12.166

buik G.S
2.315199
2.33608
2.354346
2.337017

VMA
% AC
10.53011
4.5
11.32943
5
11.05962
5.5
12.13069
6

Flow
7.25
8.75
8.5
8.5

between

10

120

19

228

15

180

21

252

12

144

108

108

12

24

24

100%

1200

A.V.
9.938755
3.398448
-1.39227
2.887576

20
15
Series1

10
5
0
0

2.36
2.35
Series1

2.34
2.33
2.32
2.31

12.5
12
11.5
Series1

11
10.5
10

10
8
Series1

6
4
2
0
0

15
10
Series1

5
0
-5

Jordan University of Science

& Technology
Engineering Faculty
Civil Engineering Department
Highway Laboratory

Marshall Mix Design

Haytham M. Abu Laila

990023092
Dr. Saaed Abu Qudais
Group #I