Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5

CIV3703 Transportation Engineering

Guides on Q4 and Q5 Assignment 2: Refer to Lecture Rec. Week 8 Sesion 3.

3 factors to be considered in determining the design asphalt modulus:
1. In situ air voids (AV) value
2. Weighted Mean Average Pavement Temperature (WMAPT)
3. Average traffic speed (or design traffic speed)

1. Laboratory asphalt specimen is tested for the modulus at an AV of
around 5%. Field compaction is expected to produce an as-compacted
(field) AV ranging from 3 to 7% or 8%. Normally, 6% should be
achievable after some trafficking (with some exceptions). The higher
the field AV, the lower the design modulus would be. You need to
apply a correction factor for the in-service AV using this chart:

2. Each location in Australia has its own design pavement temperature
called the WAMPT. In the laboratory, asphalt specimens are normally
tested at 25C. If the in-service temperature is higher than 25C then
the modulus will be lower than the laboratory modulus. You need to
apply a correction factor for the in-service temperature using this

3. The asphalt modulus is determined in the laboratory using a machine
that applies a load in 40 ms, corresponding to a vehicle speed of 95
kph. If the design speed is not 95 kph, you need to apply a correction
factor. The higher the design speed, the higher the design modulus.

All of the above correction factors have to be applied to the laboratory
modulus (multiplicatively).

Using the design asphalt modulus for thickness design using Austroads
For example, for a full-depth asphalt pavement you can use a chart such as
shown below (mind the asphalt modulus) to find the thickness of asphalt for
the given design traffic (ESA).

For other pavement types, appropriate charts can be used to find the
thickness(es) of pavement layer(s).
You are provided with this list:

Hints: Find the % AV and % Effective Binder Content by volume.
You will see that % AV and % Effective Binder Content by volume are
interrelated. Therefore, the calculations may look somewhat lengthy and
complicated. Follow the steps below and try to understand why certain steps
are required before you can get the % AV and % Effective Binder Content by
1. First, consider information within the red box.
Aggregate mix = coarse aggregate + fine aggregate + filler.
Firstly, calculate % aggregate in total asphalt mass = 100% - % binder
content by mass = P
Then, calculate % mass coarse aggregate in aggregate mix = 60/P . 100% =
Similarly, calculate % mass fine aggregate (R) and % mass filler (S) in
aggregate mix.
Note: Q + R + S = 100%
2. Next, calculate the bulk density of the aggregate mix using Eq. 5(2) of
3. Using the calculated bulk density in (2) and the supplied maximum
asphalt density and % binder by mass, calculate the % binder
absorbed using Eq. 5(3) of AS2891.8-2005.
4. The % effective binder by mass can then be calculated using Eq. 5(4)
of AS2891.8-2005.
5. Percent air voids in the specimen can be calculated from Eq. 5(1) of
AS2891.8-2005. But you need to calculate the bulk density of the
specimen first (mass volume). Volume of specimen is calculated
using the mass in air and the mass in water (Archimedes principle
see Eq. (1a) of the supplied notes on Preparation of Specimens for
Marshall Test).
6. Percent binder by volume (effective) is calculated as follows (see
Figure 1 of the supplied notes on Preparation of Specimens for
Marshall Test):
% Volume of (effective binder + aggregate) = (100 AV) = X
Volumetric proportion of effective binder = % effective binder by mass
density of binder = Y
Volumetric proportion of aggregate = % aggregate by mass bulk
density of aggregate mix = Z
Hence, % volume of effective binder = X . {Y/(Y + Z)}
You should comment on this value, whether it is good or bad, why
good/bad, etc. Read Section 5.5 of the Study Book.
7. Maximum theoretical density, VMA and VFB can be obtained from Eq.
5(5), 5(6) and 5(9) of AS2891.8-2005.
8. The use of the Shell Nomograph for estimating the stiffness modulus
of asphalt was discussed in Recording 28 - CIV3703 - Week 8 -
Session 3. Note that the stiffness modulus of a recovered binder is
higher than that of a fresh binder due to field oxidation/ageing (as
discussed in the lecture, field ageing process is often simulated using
the Rolling Thin Film Oven Test or RTFO in the laboratory).