Upload
nishant-ray
View
104
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Content
1. Objectives.2. Scope of Work.3. Methodology.4. Results obtained.5. Conclusion.6. References.
3
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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%
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Bitumen Extracted from recycled asphalt pavement with Zycotherm
Table 4.6
13
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Table for Hot bituminous concrete mix (70% conventional + 30% RAP)
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Table for Hot bituminous concrete mix (50% conventional + 50% RAP)
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
0%rapPolynomial (0%rap)10%rapPolynomial (10%rap)30%rapPolynomial (30%rap)50%rapPolynomial (50%rap)
Bitumen Content
Stab
ility
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
0%rapPolynomial (0%rap)10%rapPolynomial (10%rap)30%rapPolynomial (30%rap)50%rapPolynomial (50%rap)
Bitumen Content
Bul
k D
ensit
y
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
0%rapPolynomial (0%rap)10%rapPolynomial (10%rap)30%rapPolynomial (30%rap)50%rapPolynomial (50%rap)
Bitumen Content
Air
Voi
ds
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Table for hot bituminous concrete mix with WMA for conventional mix
Table 4.11
23
Sl no. Bitumen content
%
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Table for hot bituminous concrete mix with WMA (90% conventional mix + 10% RAP)
Table 4.12
24
Sl no. Bitumen content
%
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Table for hot bituminous concrete mix with WMA (70% conventional mix + 30% RAP)
Table 4.13
25
Sl no. Bitumen content
%
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Table for hot bituminous concrete mix with WMA (50% conventional mix + 50% RAP)
Table 4.14
26
Sl no. Bitumen content
%
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
0%rapPolynomial (0%rap)10%rapPolynomial (10%rap)30%rapPolynomial (30%rap)50%rapPolynomial (50%rap)
Bitumen Content
Stab
ility
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
0%rapPolynomial (0%rap)10%rapPolynomial (10%rap)30%rapPolynomial (30%rap)50%rapPolynomial (50%rap)
Bitumen Content
Flow
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
0%rapPolynomial (0%rap)10%rapPolynomial (10%rap)30%rapPolynomial (30%rap)50%rapPolynomial (50%rap)
Bitumen Content
Bulk
Den
sity
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
0%rapPolynomial (0%rap)10%rapPolynomial (10%rap)30%rapPolynomial (30%rap)50%rapPolynomial (50%rap)
Bitumen Content
Air
Voi
ds
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
0%rapPolynomial (0%rap)10%rapPolynomial (10%rap)30%rapPolynomial (30%rap)50%rapPolynomial (50%rap)
Bitumen Content
VFB
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Sample 3 : 30%RAP binder + 70%neat bitumen
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Sample 4 : 50%RAP binder + 50%neat bitumen
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Sample 6: 10%RAP binder + 30% neat bitumen (with Zycotherm)
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
Sample 7: 50%RAP binder + 50% neat bitumen (with Zycotherm)
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
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
RVCE - Marching Ahead April 2016
• 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