95915

Islamic University of Gaza
High Studies Deanery

Faculty of Engineering
Master in Science
Infrastructure Engineering
Reuse of Recycled Aggregates of Demolition Building Debris as an

Asphalt Binder Course in Road Pavements
Submitted By
Abed Al.hameed A. Qreaq'a
Supervised By
Prof. Dr. Shafik Jendia
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for Degree of Master

of Science in Infrastructure Engineering
June 2011

{

}

11
ii
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this work to my family

specially my mother who supports me in all stages of
my life, to my brothers and sisters and to my loving
caring wife, for their sacrifice and endless support,
finally to my children.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I extend my sincere appreciation and special thanks to my supervisor Prof. Dr. Shafik
Jendia, for his guidance, patience and encouragement.
I would like to thank all lecturers in Islamic University who have helped me during my study
of Infrastructure Civil Engineering Master Program. They are Prof. Dr. Shafik Jendia, Dr.
Abdelmajid Nassar, Dr. Fahid Rabah, Dr. Essam H. Almasri, Dr. Nabil I. El-Sawalhi,
Dr. Husam Al-najar.
Finally, I would like to thank all the staff of the Material and soil Lab. at the Islamic of Gaza
especially Eng. Ahmed Al Kurd, Eng. Adel Hamad and Mr. Amjad Abu Shamalla who
have supported and encouraged me to accomplish this work.
iv
ABSTRACT
The application of building debris collected from the demolished buildings is an important
issue in every country after crushing and screening. The undertaken research work includes a
study for Reuse of Recycled Aggregates of Demolition Building Debris as an Asphalt Binder
Course in Road Pavements. The study has been developed using a recycled aggregate from
demolition building debris in the asphalt mixes and a natural aggregate was used for
comparison.
In this research a number of aggregate tests is conducted which are sieve analysis, specific
gravity, absorption, abrasion, impact value and crushing value. These tests are to investigate
the applicability of using the recycled aggregates of demolition building debris as an asphalt
binder in road pavements. Also, for comparison, the same tests were applied on the
conventional aggregates. Furthermore, number of bitumen tests is conducted. They are
penetration test, softening point, ductility and specific gravity. The aim was to investigate its
applicability to be used as a binder material. Marshal samples are prepared using both
conventional blending aggregates and recycled blending aggregate to investigate the
properties of the asphalt mix; flow, stability and density and comparing the results with the
specifications.
The results showed that it is possible to use the recycled aggregates in preparing the Asphalt
Binder Course taking into account the need to increase the bitumen content (about 0.4%)
more than the Asphalt binder course using the conventional aggregates (i.e. the optimum
bitumen content using recycled aggregates is 5.7% and fro conventional is 5.3%). However,
the economic study in this research shows that using the recycled aggregate is feasible and
has less cost than using the conventional one.

.

.
:
, .

. )(

.

.

) (%0.4 )
%5.7
.(%5.3
.
vi
Table of contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENT................................................................................................................................ IV
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................... V
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 RESEARCH IMPORTANCE ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.4 RESEARCH LIMITATION ............................................................................................................................ 2
1.5 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE ............................................................................................................. 2
1.6 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................... 2
1.7 THESIS OUTLINE ..................................................................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................... 5
2.1 DEMOLITION DEBRIS ............................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.1 Division of demolition materials ................................................................................................. 5
2.2 RECYCLED AGGREGATES ........................................................................................................................... 5
2.2.1 Types of recycled materials ........................................................................................................ 6
2.2.2 Area of reuse.............................................................................................................................. 7
2.2.3 Recycling Process .................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.4 Production of Recycled aggregate ............................................................................................ 12
CHAPTER 3: ROAD PAVEMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS OF ASPHALT BINDER COURSE........ 13
3.1 ROAD PAVEMENTS BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................. 13
3.1.1 Asphalt Layers ......................................................................................................................... 13
3.1.2 Asphalt binder course............................................................................................................... 14
3.1.3 Asphalt Mix Design .................................................................................................................. 14
3.2 METHODS OF MIX DESIGN AND MARSHAL MIX DESIGN .................................................................................. 17
3.3 SPECIFICATIONS OF BINDER ..................................................................................................................... 18
3.3.1 International Specification (ASTM D3515- D-4) ....................................................................... 19
3.3.2 Egyptian Specifications ............................................................................................................ 20
CHAPTER 4: EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM ........................................................................................... 22
4.1 TESTS OF AGGREGATES .......................................................................................................................... 22
4.2 SELECTION OF SAMPLE ........................................................................................................................... 24
4.3 TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................... 26
4.3.1 Aggregate tests......................................................................................................................... 26
4.4 DETERMINATION OF GRADATION CURVE OF THE ASPHALT BINDER COURSE ........................................................... 44
4.5 TESTS OF BITUMEN ............................................................................................................................... 46
4.5.1 Penetration Test (ASTM D5) .................................................................................................... 47
4.5.2 Ductility test (ASTM D113) ...................................................................................................... 47
4.5.3 Specific gravity test (ASTM D70).............................................................................................. 47
4.5.4 Softening Point of Bitumen (ASTMD36, 2002) .......................................................................... 48
4.5.5 Summary of bitumen tests results .............................................................................................. 48
CHAPTER 5: PREPARATION AND TESTING OF ASPHALT MIXES .................................................. 49
5.1 METHODOLOGY OF SELECTING THE PROPOSED MIX ...................................................................................... 49
5.2 TRIAL A: CONTROL MIX ......................................................................................................................... 50
5.3 TRIAL B: ASPHALT MIX WITH RECYCLED AGGREGATE ...................................................................................... 56
5.4 CALCULATION OF THE OPTIMUM BITUMEN PERCENTAGE ................................................................................. 64
5.5 RESULTS DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................. 65
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 67
6.1 FEASIBILITY STUDY ................................................................................................................................ 67
6.2 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................................... 67
6.3 RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................................. 70
vii
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 71
APPENDIX A: AGGREGATE BLENDING ............................................................................................... 73
APPENDIX B: THE INPUTS OF THE BINDER COURSE JOB MIXES ................................................. 76
APPENDIX C: THE INPUTS OF THE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES FOR AGGREGATES ..................... 97
APPENDIX D: PHOTOS SHOW THE METHOD OF THE WORK IN THE LABORATORY ............. 101
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Area of use of recycled aggregates ..................................................................................................... 8
Table 3. 1: Summary of properties Asphalt- Aggregates mixes Projects (Wayne lee et al.2006) ....................... 16
Table 3.2: Gradation of Asphalt Binder Course (ASTM D5315 D-4) ............................................................ 19
Table 3.3: Gradation of Egyptian Asphalt Binder Course (MOH, 1998) ........................................................... 20
Table 3.4: The Mechanical Properties of the Egyptian Asphalt Binder Course (MOH, 1998)............................ 21
Table 4.1: Types of aggregate ......................................................................................................................... 22

Table 4. 2: main and local sources of the required materials for asphalt mix ..................................................... 24
Table 4.3: The test results of conventional and recycled coarse aggregate (Folia 0/19mm) ............................... 27
Table 4.4: Sieve analysis results of NM1 and RM1 (0/19) mm......................................................................... 28
Table 4.5: Gradation curve - (Folia 0/19mm) ................................................................................................... 29
Table 4.6: The Results of conventional and recycled coarse aggregate (Adasia 0/12.5 mm) .............................. 30
Table 4.7: Sieve analysis results of NM2 and RM2 (0/12.5) mm...................................................................... 31
Table 4.8: Gradation curve - (Adasia 0/12.5 mm) ............................................................................................ 32
Table 4.9: The Results of conventional and recycled coarse aggregate size (0/9.5)mm ..................................... 33
Table 4.10: Sieve analysis results of NM3 and RM3 (0/9.5) mm ...................................................................... 34
Table 4.11: Gradation curve - (Sismimia 0/9.5 mm) ........................................................................................ 35
Table 4.12: The Results of conventional and recycled fine aggregate size (0/4.75)mm ..................................... 36
Table 4.13: Sieve analysis results of NF1 and RF1 (0/4.75) mm ...................................................................... 37
Table 4.14: Gradation curve - (Trabia 0/4.75mm) ............................................................................................ 38
Table 4.15: Sieve analysis results of Natural Sand (0/0.60) mm ....................................................................... 39
Table 4.16: Gradation curve - (Natural Sand 0/0.60mm) .................................................................................. 40
Table 4.17: Gradations of Conventional and Recycled aggregates.................................................................... 41
Table 4.18: The suggested percentages for aggregates blending for different aggregates sizes according to the
ASTM and Egyptian specifications. ................................................................................................................ 44
Table 4. 19: Mix gradations of conventional aggregates for binder course ........................................................ 45
Table 4.20: Bitumen penetration test ............................................................................................................... 47
Table 4.21: Bitumen Ductility test results ........................................................................................................ 47
Table 4.22: Bitumen Specific gravity test results ............................................................................................. 47
Table 4.23: Summary of bitumen tests results.................................................................................................. 48
Table 5.1: Marshall Specimens using the recycled aggregate and conventional aggregate................................. 49
Table 5.2: Number of Marshal Specimens ....................................................................................................... 50
Table 5.3: The Outputs of job Mix for conventional aggregates blending with 4.5% Bitumen Content.............. 51
Table 5.6: The Outputs of job Mix for conventional aggregates blending with 6% Bitumen Content ................ 52
Table 5.7: Bitumen percentages Vs. different asphalt properties using conventional aggregate ......................... 53
Table 5.8: The Outputs of job Mix for recycled aggregates blending with 4.5% Bitumen Content .................... 56
ix
Table 5.9: The Outputs of job Mix for recycled aggregates blending with 5.0% Bitumen Content .................... 56
Table 5.10: The Outputs of job Mix for recycled aggregates blending with 5.5% Bitumen Content .................. 57
Table 5.11: The Outputs of job Mix for recycled aggregates blending with 6.0% Bitumen Content .................. 57
Table 5.12: Bitumen percentages Vs. different asphalt properties using recycled aggregate .............................. 58
Table 5.13: Asphalt mix properties with various bitumen percentages for both conventional and recycled
aggregate ........................................................................................................................................................ 61
Table 5.14: Calculation of the optimum bitumen percentage ............................................................................ 64
Table 5. 15: Properties of the asphalt mix using the optimum bitumen content ................................................. 64
Table 5. 16 Comments on the results ............................................................................................................... 65
Table 6. 1: Cost analysis for one tone of asphalt mix with conventional and recycled aggregates ...................... 67
Table 6. 2: Optimum blending percentages of the recycled aggregates ............................................................. 68
Table 6. 3: Mix gradations of recycle aggregates for binder course .................................................................. 68
Table 6. 4: Mechanical properties of the asphalt mix using the optimum bitumen content................................. 69
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Research methodology flow chart .................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2. 1: Process diagram for wet processing building rubble (Hansen,2005)................................................. 7

Figure 2.2: Applications of Recycled Aggregates in Construction Works (Fong and Yeung, 2002)..................... 9
Figure 2.3: Flow Chart of Recycling of Inert demolition Materials (Fong and Yeung, 2002) ............................ 11
Figure 2.4: Flow chart of typical plant for production of recycled aggregate from concrete debris (Hansen,1985)
....................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 3. 1: Road Pavement Layers ................................................................................................................. 13

Figure 3. 2: Marshall Stability and Flow Test Apparatus.(Kett,1998) ............................................................... 18
Figure 3.3: Gradation of Asphalt Binder Course (ASTM D3515) ..................................................................... 19
Figure 3.4: Gradation of Egyptian Asphalt Binder Course ............................................................................... 20
Figure 4.1: Types of recycled aggregate .......................................................................................................... 23

Figure 4.2: Types of conventional aggregates .................................................................................................. 23
Figure 4. 3: Example for demolished Building in Gaza Strip............................................................................ 25
Figure 4. 4: Khan Yunis crusher ...................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 4.6: Gradation curve - (Folia 0/19mm) for conventional aggregate ........................................................ 29
Figure 4.7: Gradation curve - (Folia 0/19mm) for recycled aggregate............................................................... 29
Figure 4.8: Gradation curve - (Adasia 0/12.5 mm) for conventional aggregate ................................................. 32
Figure 4.9: Gradation curve - (Sismimia 0/9.5 mm) for conventional aggregate ............................................... 35
Figure 4.10: Gradation curve - (Sismimia 0/9.5 mm) for recycled aggregate .................................................... 35
Figure 4.11: Gradation curve - (Trabia 0/4.75mm) for conventional aggregate ................................................. 38
Figure 4.12: Gradation curve - (Trabia 0/4.75mm) for recycled aggregate ........................................................ 38
Figure 4.13: Gradation curve - (Natural Sand 0/0.60mm)................................................................................. 40
Figure 4.14: Gradation Curve - Conventional Aggregate ................................................................................. 42
Figure 4.15: Gradation Curve - Recycled Aggregate ........................................................................................ 42
Figure 4. 15: Gradation of conventional and recycled aggregates compared with required gradation of asphalt
binder course according to ASTM Specifications............................................................................................. 45
Figure 4. 16: Gradation of conventional and recycled aggregate compared with required gradation of asphalt
binder course according to Egyptian Specifications ......................................................................................... 46
Figure 5.1: Marshall Specimens using recycled aggregate................................................................................ 49

Figure 5.2: Marshall Specimens using conventional aggregate ......................................................................... 49
Figure 5. 3: Density Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate ................................................................... 53
Figure 5. 4: Air voids Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate ................................................................ 53
Figure 5. 5: Stability Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate.................................................................. 54
Figure 5. 6: Flow Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate....................................................................... 54
Figure 5. 7: VFB% Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate .................................................................... 55
Figure 5. 8: % VMA Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate.................................................................. 55
xi
Figure 5. 9: Density Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate.......................................................................... 58
Figure 5. 10: Air voids Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate ..................................................................... 58
Figure 5. 11: Stability Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate ...................................................................... 59
Figure 5. 12: Flow Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate............................................................................ 59
Figure 5. 13: VFB% Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate ......................................................................... 60
Figure 5. 14: % VMA Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate ...................................................................... 60
Figure 5. 15: Density Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate .................................................................... 61
Figure 5. 16: Air voids Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate .................................................................. 61
Figure 5. 17: Stability Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate ................................................................... 62
Figure 5. 18: Flow Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate ........................................................................ 62
Figure 5. 19: VFB% Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate...................................................................... 63
Figure 5. 20: % VMA Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate ................................................................... 63
Figure 6. 1: Gradation of recycled aggregate compared with required gradation of asphalt binder course
according to Egyptian Specifications ............................................................................................................... 69
xii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AASHTO American Association State of Highway and Transportation Officials

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
AG Asphalt aggregate containing tar.
BS British Standards
BAG Asphalt bounded aggregate containing tar.
CBR California Bearing Ratio
d 25 Density of bitumen at 25oC.
IUG Islamic University - Gaza
MOH Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban development
MPWH Ministry of Public Works and Housing
RCA Recycled concrete aggregate
RA Recycled aggregate
RMA Recycled masonry aggregate.
RHMA Recycled hydraulic mixed aggregate.
RSA Recycled sand aggregate.
r bit Theoretical maximum density of asphalt mix
rA Density of Asphalt mix
r min Density of aggregate in the blend

SSD Saturated surface dry condition
UNDP United Nations Development Program
VFB Voids Filled Bitumen
VMA Voids Mineral Aggregates
Vb Bitumen Volume
Va Air voids
xiii
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background
Gaza strip is one of the most density populated places in the world with an area of 365
km2. It has a population of 1.416 million inhabitants.
In any country in the world, the demolition debris is considered as an environmental
problem as well as it could have economic benefits based on local factors. So a lot of
studies and researches have been done all over the world on the recycling of those
debris and their usage in aggregate production.
Gaza strip was suffering during the last decay from the Israeli incursions and military
actions, which produced damaged buildings and infrastructure. The last war on
December 2008 was the hardest one as it caused a massive destruction to governmental,
public and private buildings all over Gaza strip. The estimated number of damaged
buildings was about 49,670 building as stated in Ministry of Public Works and Housing
(MPWH) report (2009) with an estimated number of debris about 1.5 million tons.
This research aims to explore the possibility of identifying opportunities for reusing the
recycled aggregates in the Asphalt Binder Course.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The war on Gaza in 2009 resulted in huge amounts of demolition building debris, which
are accumulated in several locations and created a massive problem in Gaza. The large
quantity of destroyed concrete elements and buildings debris makes it necessary for
researchers to think seriously in finding ways and possibilities to reuse these debris as
new raw materials for construction of infrastructure, like the asphalt pavements. In
Gaza, there is currently a trend towards implementing construction and pavement of
streets despite the fact that construction materials are not available in Gaza.
1.3 Research importance
The following points show the importance of this research:
Reusing of the buildings rubble in making asphalt mixtures.
Providing temporary alternative for the conventional material when it is absent
due to the siege on Gaza Strip.
Maintaining the environment by using the rubble and reducing the fill areas.
The economic feasibility in the cost of the pre-used material.
1
1.4 Research Limitation
The results of this research depended on set of limitations and criteria that were taken
into account during the experiments. The limitations are as follow:
The source of the aggregates is the destroyed building debris in Gaza Strip that
were crushed and separated based on its size in KhanYunis crusher which belongs
to the ministry of economy.
There are only three types of the recycled aggregate (Foliia, Semsemia and Itrabia)
because the local crusher produces these types only. The sizes of these types will be
illustrated in chapter 3.
1.5 Research Objectives and Scope

The main objective of this research is to find investigate the possibility of reusing
aggregates of demolition building debris in asphalt binder courses instead of
conventional aggregates in bituminous pavements. The specific objectives are to:
1. identify opportunities for reuse the buildings rubble in making asphalt binder
course.
2. Evaluate the acceptance of reusing the buildings rubble as an alternative new
resource in constructing road pavements.
1.6 Research Methodology

To achieve the above research objectives, the following methodology was as followed
(see figure 1.1):
1. Literature review of previous studies regarding the aggregates and asphalt
mixes and reviewing groups of specifications.
2. Site visits and investigations of the aggregate production plants to get more
information and to collect samples.
3. Implementing laboratory tests to identify the characteristics of recycled and
conventional aggregates such as (sieve analysis, Los Angles abrasion value,
Absorption capacity, Moisture content, crushing value, impact value, etc.)
4. Comparison of test results of recycled aggregates with conventional one with
relative to Egyptian specifications.
5. Preparing new gradation from different sizes of recycled aggregates which
will be used for the layers of flexible pavements (Binder layer) within the
2
limits of standard gradation for these layers.
6. Implementing a series of sample mixes composed of different bitumen
percentages and aggregate gradations to achieve Marshal Stability and
optimum bitumen content that produce the conditions of the asphalt mix for
the pavement layers.
7. Discussion of testing results.
8. Drawing conclusions and recommendations.
Literature
review
Experimental
Program
Selection of Materials Test of Materials
Preparing a series of sample mixes
Discussion of
testing results
Conclusions and recommendations
3
1.7 Thesis Outline
The thesis consists of 5 additional chapters.
Chapter 2: Literature review:
This chapter summarizes literature about two main topics which are (1) Demolitions
debris and (2) Recycled aggregates including types of recycle, area of reuse, recycling
process and production of recycled aggregate.
Chapter 3: Road Pavements and Specifications of Asphalt Binder
This chapter includes the concepts of road pavements and the layers under the asphalt.
Furthermore, it includes the specification of the binder layer, both international and
regional specification.
Chapter 4 Experimental program
This chapter includes two stages, the first stage consist of collected materials
(aggregates and bitumen). In this stage, the basic properties of these materials were
determined. In the second stage, the aggregate blending is prepared and compared with
the international specifications for both recycled and conventional aggregates.
Chapter 5
This chapter includes the preparation and testing of asphalt mixes and discussion of test
results.
Chapter 6
This chapter includes feasibility study, conclusion and recommendations.
4
CHAPTER 2: Literature Review
This chapter Summarizes literature about two main topics which are demolitions debris
and recycled aggregates including types of recycle, area of reuse, recycling process and
production of recycled aggregate.
2.1 Demolition debris
When existing structures are destroyed or renovated the debris of their demolition exists
This can be applicable to all structures including both residential and nonresidential in
addition to all public works projects such as streets, highway, bridge and dams after
demolitions of structures takes place. It results in the waste materials or what is usually
referred to as debris. This contains all types of buildings. The demolition debris contain
things like asphalt, metals, concrete and so many other materials used in construction.
(Village and Franklin, 1998). According to Park (2003) Demolition debris are caused by
the remnants of destroyed houses and concrete pavements rehabilitation projects.
2.1.1 Division of demolition materials
Kharrufa (2007) mentioned that the types of waste obtained from building activity are
divided into the following:
Waste materials: These materials are caused by setting up, renovation, mending,
and demolition operation for pavements and other building structures.
Bulky wastes materials: They are wastes of large sizes such as tress, logs and
furniture due to being large. It is difficult to deal with these solid waste
collections.
Special wastes materials: They are that kind of wastes which affect the
environmental and public health many negatively. They contain dangerous and
toxic substances like asbestosetc.
2.2 Recycled aggregates
The aggregates are obtained from the materials that were used once at least in the
construction. So this type of aggregates is called recycled aggregates. The materials
resulting from the acts of demolition and renovation of facilities such as, roads and
other types of structures are the main components sources of this type of aggregates.
This type includes the concrete elements, building blocks, tiles and any other materials
from the buildings. These recycled aggregates pass through a series of stages, starting
from crushing to sieving and finally separation of the different sizes (Jendia, 2000).
5
2.2.1 Types of recycled materials
Pavement Recycling: the reuse of existing pavement materials in pavement

reconstruction and maintenance has already been existed as a concept. Recycling of
existing pavement materials has many benefits making advantage of aggregates, and
preservation of the environmental and existing pavement geometric moreover. It has
other benefits associated with the reduction of the project costs (AASHTO guide, 1993).
Aravind and Das (2007) pointed out that hot mix recycling is one of the most commonly
used techniques in pavement rehabilitation. In central plant hot mix recycling,
Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) used for recycling is mixed with specific quantity
of virgin asphalt binder and new aggregates in a hot mix plant far away from the
construction site. The result mix is carried to the paving site, placed, and compacted to
the required compaction level (Aravindand Das, 2007).
Asphalt recycling has become more important and popular due to its resource saving
and economical operation ( Park,2007).
Demolition debris recycling
Hansen (2005) divided the debris into the following types:

Concrete debris. Aggregates obtained from crushing of virgin concrete; these
aggregates can be either fine or coarse aggregates processed aggregates resulting
from mixed building rubble usually contain less than 1 percent of impurities.
They may be good enough for road construction purposes, but, they are not
necessarily amount good for road construction purpose nor concrete aggregates.
However, when recycled aggregates are obtained from raw materials containing
more than 95% of old concrete. The gotten product will be clean enough to meet
specifications for concrete aggregates without being washed.
Masonry debris. It is the different materials generated from the demolition of
buildings and civil engineering structures. Masonry rubble usually contains
mortar remains and burnt clay materials such as roofing tiles and shingles.
6
Figure 2. 1: Process diagram for wet processing building rubble (Hansen,2005)
2.2.2 Area of reuse

In Gaza, due to the uncontrolled debris and disposals and the large amounts generated,
researches tried to explore the potential uses of crushed material started. Several
projects for crushing and recycling of the quantities of debris had been started because it
was found that the recycling solves the environmental problems of the debris and it is
considered as an alternative for the lack of the conventional material due to the siege.
Using of construction and demolition wastes in producing recycled aggregate has good
potential for most construction application; it can be used as course aggregate in
concrete block and concrete interlock (Abed, 2009).
Also, there is a graduation project in Gaza published on 2010 prepared by Group of
undergraduate students from the Islamic University of Gaza. It is entitled with
Recycling of Demolition Debris in Road Pavements- Base-coarse and Sub-base.
In Sydney Basin of Australia, the recycled demolition materials are mainly used as fills,
base and sub-base for construction of road pavements, backfill material, drainage
medium and as a general fill material (Gambin, Leo and Rahman 2006).
7
While in Netherlands, the demolished waste aggregates is processed and suitable for use
in road construction or in concrete, Asphalt, too, is largely recycled. Table 2.1 shows
the most important application (Hendriks and Janssen 2001).
Furthermore, in a case study in Kuwait showed the applicability of using Recycling

building demolition waste in hot-mix asphalt concrete (Aljassar, et.al 2005).
Table 2.1 Area of use of recycled aggregates
Area of use of recycled aggregates

Type of recycled
RCA RA RMA RHMA RSA RCS AG BAG
aggregates
Road construction sub-
* * * *
base
Stabilized layers * *
Sand for embankment
and filling *
Sand for subgrade *
Aggregate
Lean concrete. * * * * *
Asphalt-bound
aggregate * *
(containing tar).
Asphalt mixtures. *
Concrete construction
aggregate in concrete. * * * * *
RCA Recycled concrete aggregate. RA Recycled aggregate.
RMA Recycled masonry aggregate. RHMA Recycled hydraulic mixed aggregate.
RSA Recycled sand aggregate. RCS Recycled Crushed Sand.
AG Asphalt aggregate containing tar. BAG Asphalt bounded aggregate containing tar.
In South Africa, the reuse of recycled demolished waste was used in site leveling,
landscaping, backfill, landfill engineering and informal housing (Macozoma, 2002).
Environmental Council of Concrete Organizations in USA (1999) stated in its report
that recycled concrete is technically feasible to be used to produce structural grade
concrete for non-pavement uses. Recycled concrete is being used to produce aggregate
for bulk fills, fill for drainage structures; pavement sub-bases; soil-cement pavement
bases; lean-concrete or concrete bases; bituminous concrete; and new concrete for
8
pavements, shoulders, median barriers, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, building and
bridge foundations, and even structural grade concrete. Crushed brick rubble may be
used as an aggregate for lightweight concrete, precast concrete industry, and concrete
block.
According to Public Works Technical Bulletin 200-1-27 (2004) in the United States,
recycled concrete aggregates have been primarily used as fill or sub-base materials, and
less often, as aggregates in new concrete pavements.
Fong, and Yeung, (2002) summarized the application of recycled inert demolition
materials as follow:
Concrete production
Granular materials for fill, filters, drainage layer, etc.;
Road sub-base materials;
Concrete paving blocks or similar block works.
Rock fill replacement for seawall, infill to gabion walls, etc.
Potential Applications
Rock infill for Gabion
Pipe Bedding U - Channel
Sea wall/Backing Road Sub base
RECYCLED AGGREGATES
Pipe surround Concrete production up

to Grade 35
Filler Paving Block
Figure 2.2: Applications of Recycled Aggregates in Construction Works (Fong and

Yeung, 2002)
9
2.2.3 Recycling Process
Basicly, recycling facility consists of:
a. Grizzly, which is a primary sorting facility.;
b. Crushers;
c. Impurity removal facilities;
d. Vibrating sieves;
e. Stockpiles.
Preliminary sorting: directing of the incoming inert demolition materials to a vibrating
grizzly to sort the suitable of it for recycling because of containing oversize concrete
chunks materials observed to be recyclable will be unloaded in specified area until
passing through the grizzly. See Figure (2.3).
The materials will be crushed to suitable size using hydraulic crusher which also used
for removing reinforcement (Fong and Yeung, 2002).
10
Figure 2.3: Flow Chart of Recycling of Inert demolition Materials (Fong and Yeung, 2002)
Crushing of Inert Hard demolition Materials :After preliminary sorting, the

recyclable materials are fed into the primary crusher for
Primary crushing. The outcome materials of 200mm in size will then undergo a series
of
Impurity removal processes. By this process, the metal, dirt, plastic, timber, paper and
highly decomposed rocks, etc. will be removed. Afterwards, the cleaned recyclable
11
materials will then be fed into the cone crusher for secondary crushing into 40mm in
size. After sieving, the recycled aggregate products in different sizes will be stockpiled
in storage compartments.
2.2.4 Production of Recycled aggregate

Plants for production of recycled aggregates are not much different from plants for
production of crushed aggregate from other sources. They incorporate various types of
crushers, screens, transfer equipment, and devices for removal of foreign matter. A
number of different processes are possible for the crushing and sieving of demolition
waste which mainly consists of concrete, such as would be the case for example on a
pavement rehabilitation project. Some of these possibilities are illustrated in the flow
diagrams which are shown in Figures (2.4).
Figure 2.4: Flow chart of typical plant for production of recycled aggregate from
concrete debris (Hansen,1985)
12
Chapter 3: Road Pavements and Specifications of
Asphalt Binder Course
This chapter provides a summarized background about the road pavements types, and
the specifications for Binder layer.
3.1 Road Pavements background
The road pavement is a group of layers of specific materials that is positioned on the in-
situ soil (Sub Grade). The other layers are (Sub Base, Rock Road Base and Asphalt
covering Layers Binder and Wearing course). Figure (3.1) shows a sketch of the road
pavement layers.
Figure 3. 1: Road Pavement Layers

The main structural purpose of the pavement is the support of vehicle wheel loads
applied on the roads by distributing these loads into the subgrade. (Rogers, 2003).
The Asphalt mix consists mainly of Aggregate and Bitumen. The aggregate is
considered the most important components of the mixture of asphalt, which represent
bulk for the total materials used in roadbed. It is up to 100% in the non-bound gravel
layers (aggregate road base), 95% in the cement layers (cement bound layer), 96% in
the asphalt layers, and 88% in cement concrete layer (Jendia, 2000).
3.1.1 Asphalt Layers
The asphalt layers are usually two layers:
- Asphalt wearing course.
- Asphalt binder course.
13
The two layers are forming together a high resistance system for the horizontal and
vertical forces and the resultant shear forces especially in the high temperature during
the summer season.
3.1.2 Asphalt binder course
Asphalt course is the surface course of asphalt pavement structure consists of a mixture
of mineral aggregates and bituminous materials placed as the upper course and usually
constructed on a base course. The binder course lies between the wearing course and the
road base. So, it reduces the stresses which affect the road base and the soil base. The
selection of the aggregate mixture depends on the thickness of the layer (jendia, 2005).
In addition to that role of the binder course, it must also be designed to resist the
abrasive forces of traffic, to reduce the amount of surface water penetrating the
pavement, to provide a skid-resistance surface, and to provide a smooth and uniform
riding surface.
The surfacing is traditionally made up of two layers the binder course and the wearing
course. The binder course role is generally to ensure an even surface for laying the
wearing course.(Hunter,2000).
3.1.3 Asphalt Mix Design
Asphalt mixes are composite materials that consist of asphalt binder mixed with
ller/nes (together with asphalt called the mastic) and aggregates (Koneru et al.,2008).
The mixes of asphalt pavements consist of asphalt binder that connect between the filler
together and the aggregates.
The major properties to be incorporated in bituminous paving mixtures are stability,
durability, exibility and skid resistance (in the case of wearing surface). Traditional
mix design methods are established to determine the optimum asphalt content that
would perform satisfactorily, particularly with respect to stability and durability (Asi,
2007).
The main indices related to bituminous paving mixtures are stability, durability,
exibility and skid resistance.
Asphalt Mix design is the selection of the components to achieve a desirable balance in
these properties for the specific pavement application. Selection of the components and
their relative proportions is also influenced by the pavement section in which the mix
will be incorporated. Design of asphalt-aggregate mix consists of the following steps:
(Waynelee et al. 2002)
14
Select the type and gradation of the mineral aggregates.
Select the type and grade of asphalt binder.
Select the amount of asphalt binder to satisfy the project specific requirements
for mix properties. Wayne lee et al.(2006) summarized some properties of
Asphalt- Aggregates mixes (Table 3.1).
15
Table 3. 1: Summary of properties Asphalt- Aggregates mixes Projects (Wayne lee
et al.2006)
Examples of Mix Variables
Property Definition
Which have Influence
Aggregate gradation
Relationship between stress and Asphalt stiffness
Stiffness strain at a specific temperature and Degree of compaction
time of loading Water sensitivity
Asphalt content
Aggregate surface texture

Resistance to permanent Asphalt gradation
deformation (usually at high Asphalt stiffness
Stability
temperature and long times of Asphalt content
loading- conditions of low S(mix). Degree of compaction
Water sensitivity
Asphalt content
Resistance to weathering effects
Aggregate gradation
Durability (both air and water) and to the
Degree of compaction
abrasive action of traffic.
Water sensitivity
Aggregate gradation.
Asphalt Content.
Degree of compaction.
Asphalt stiffness.
Ability Of mix to bend repeatedly Water sensitivity.
Fatigue Resistance
without fracture Note: Selection of mix
component3 and or asphalt
thickness dependent on
structural pavement section
design.
16
Examples of Mix Variables
Property Definition
Which have Influence
Aggregate type.
Strength of mix under single tensile Asphalt Content.
Fracture Characteristics
stress application. Degree of compaction.
Asphalt stiffness.
Water sensitivity.
Ability of mix to provide adequate Aggregate texture and
Skid Resistance (surface coefficient of friction between tire resistance to polishing.
friction characteristics) and pavement under "wet" Aggregate gradation.
conditions Asphalt content.
Ability of air, water, and water
Permeability Asphalt content.
vapor to move into and through mix.
Degree of compaction
Asphalt content.
Asphalt stiffness at
Ability of mix to be placed and placement.
Workability
compacted to specified density Aggregate surface
texture. Aggregate
gradation.
3.2 Methods of mix design and Marshal Mix Design

Regarding the mix design methods, there are many methods that used overall the world
such as Marshall mix design method, Hubbard-eld mix design method, Hveem mix
design method, Asphalt Institute Tri- axial method of mix design, etc, but the two most
widely accepted methods are Marshall Mix design method and Hveem mix design
method (Asi, 2007). Furthermore, a more recent method for designing asphalt mix is
called (Superpave method) which can be used as alternative of Hveem and Marshal
Method.
In Marshal Method, The basic concepts were formulated by Bruce Marshall of the
Mississippi State Highway Department. Just prior to World War II, the U.S. Army
17
Corps of Engineers improved and added certain features to his test procedure. These
efforts resulted in the mix design criteria that were adopted by the American Society for
Testing Materials in use today. The Marshall Method is applicable only to hot-mix
asphalt paving mixtures using penetration grades of asphalt and containing dense or
fine-graded aggregates with a maximum size of 25 mm (1-inch) or less. The Method is
intended for the laboratory design of hot-mix asphalt paving mixtures. The Marshall
Method of mix design consists of the following steps: (Kett,1998)
1. Preparation of test specimens.
2. Bulk specific gravity determination.
3. Stability and flow test determination.
4. Density and voids determination.
Figure 3. 2: Marshall Stability and Flow Test Apparatus.(Kett,1998)
3.3 Specifications of Binder

In this part, two groups of specifications will be discussed which are the international
group and a regional group. They are selected because they are the most famous
specifications either around the world or because they are used in the neighbor
countries.
18
3.3.1 International Specification (ASTM D3515- D-4)
American Society for Testing and Materials
Typical grading limits for the aggregate used in American binder courses are shown in
Table (3.2) and Figure (3.3).
Table 3.2: Gradation of Asphalt Binder Course (ASTM D5315 D-4)

Sieve size Percentage by Weight Passing
(mm) Min Max
25.00 100 100
19.00 90 100
12.50 -- --
9.50 56 80
4.75 35 65
2.36 23 49
1.18 -- --
0.30 5 19
0.15 -- --
0.075 2 8
100
90
80
70
% Passing
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Sieve Size (mm)
Figure 3.3: Gradation of Asphalt Binder Course (ASTM D3515)
19
3.3.2 Egyptian Specifications
Egyptian Code for development of the urban and rural roads
Table (3.3) and Figure (3.4) show the Egyptian specification gradation for the asphalt
binder course. The gradation of the Egyptian specification. Table (3.4) illustrates the
mechanical properties.
Table 3.3: Gradation of Egyptian Asphalt Binder Course (MOH, 1998)

Sieve size Percentage by Weight Passing
(mm) Min Max
19.00 100 100
12.50 75 100
9.50 60 85
4.75 35 55
2.26 20 35
0.60 10 22
0.30 6 16
0.15 4 12
0.075 2 8
100
80
60
% Passing
40
20
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Sieve Size (mm)
Figure 3.4: Gradation of Egyptian Asphalt Binder Course
20
Table 3.4: The Mechanical Properties of the Egyptian Asphalt Binder Course
(MOH, 1998)
Properties Value (US units) Value (SI units)
Stability 600 (Ib) 272 (kg)
Flow 1 2 4 (mm)
[8 16] (inches)
100
Air void in mix (% ) 3-8
VMA (%) 15
No. of Marshal blows 50
Bitumen content (%) 3-6
Conclusion:
The Egyptian specifications seem to be similar to ASTM Specifications particularly in
the gradation; the researcher will use Egyptian specifications as it is regional and
neighbor to Gaza Strip (i.e. Gradation and mechanical properties). See Tables (3.3) and
(3.4) and Figure (3.2).
However, there are minor differences in the mechanical properties for the aggregates
between the Egyptian specifications and ASTM, particularly in the values of allowed air
voids (i.e. ASTM: %Va = 3 5 and Egyptian: %Va = 3 - 8) and the bitumen content
(i.e. ASTM: %mb = 4.5 6 and Egyptian: %mb = 3 6).
21
Chapter 4: Experimental Program
The work was carried out in two stages. The first stage was to determine the properties
of the aggregate and bitumen and the second stage is to prepare aggregates blending
were made to produce Marshall Samples for binder layer 0/19 (ASTM Specifications)
using recycled aggregates.
4.1 Tests of Aggregates

Three types of recycled aggregate were used to prepare the aggregate blending, also the
conventional aggregate was used for comparison. The types of aggregates are shown in
Table (4.1) and Figures (4.1) and (4.2).
Table 4.1: Types of aggregate
Type of Particle size Symbol

aggregate (mm) Recycled Conventional
Sand 0/0.60 F2 *
Fine
Itrabiah 0/4.75 RF1 NF1
Simsimia 0/ 9.50 RM3 NM3
Coarse Adasia 0/ 12.5 - NM2
Folia 0/ 19.0 RM1 NM1
*: The sand is natural and there is no recycled type.
22
RM3
RF1
RM1
Figure 4.1: Types of recycled aggregate
NM2
NM3
NF1
NM1
F2
Figure 4.2: Types of conventional aggregates
23
4.2 Selection of sample
To achieve the main objective, recycled aggregate and conventional aggregates were
used, Table (4.2) shows the main and local sources of the required materials for asphalt
mix.
Table 4. 2: main and local sources of the required materials for asphalt mix
Source
Material
Main Local
Ministry of economy
Demolished buildings. See
Recycled aggregates crusher in Khan Younis.
Figure (4.3)
See Figure (4.4).
Crushed rocks (Imported

Conventional aggregates
from outside locations) Local asphalt factory :
ALAML FACTORY.
Bitumen Egypt
The conventional aggregates and bitumen were obtained from ALAML FACTORY
Which located at East of Gaza city near to the land fill.
The obtained recycled aggregates were separated into various sizes which are RM1
(0/19), RM3 (0/9.5) and fine aggregate RF1 (0/4.75).
24
Figure 4. 3: Example for demolished Building in Gaza Strip
Figure 4. 4: Khan Yunis crusher
25
4.3 Test results and analysis
4.3.1 Aggregate tests

This stage of experimental program aims to determine physical properties for the
recycled and conventional aggregates. The following properties were measured for all
recycled aggregates, conventional aggregates.
1. Sieve Analysis( ASTM C 136)
2. Specific gravity test(ASTM: C127).
Bulk specific gravity.
Apparent specific gravity.
Effective specific gravity (Used to determine the theoretical density of
the asphalt mix).
3. Water absorption, %.(ASTM: C128)
4. Los Angles abrasion, %.(ASTM : C131)
5. Impact value, %.(IS: 2386 (PART IV) 1963)
6. Crushing value, %.(IS: 2386 (PART IV) 1963).
Note: The Egyptian code does not have any specific criteria or limitations regarding the
Impact value and Crushing value.
The local crusher in Gaza Strip is designed to produce two sizes only of the recycled
aggregate, which are:
Folia (0/19mm), denoted by RM1.
Semsimia (0/9.5mm), denoted by RM3.
Trabiah (0/4.75 mm), denoted by RF1.
These materials were tested in the Materials and soil Laboratory at the Islamic
University of Gaza. The results of these tests are shown in Tables [4.3 - 4.17] and
Figures [4.6 - 4.15].
26
Table 4.3: The test results of conventional and recycled coarse aggregate (Folia 0/19mm)
Symbols and Results
Type of
Conventional Recycled Aggregate Spec. Limits
Aggregat Property Designation No.
Aggregate (Egyptian Code)
e
Results Symbol Results Symbol
Bulk dry S.G 2.48 2.24
Bulk SSD S.G 2.55 2.38
ASTM : C127
Apparent S.G 2.66 2.60
Folia (0/19mm)
Effective S.G 2.57 2.42

Absorption (% Abs.) ASTM : C128 2.6 NM1 6.1 RM1 5
Abrasion
ASTM : C131 21 36.3
value(%A.V) 40
IS: 2386 (PART IV)
Impact value, % 1963 20.5 23.9
IS: 2386 (PART IV)
Crushing value,% 1963 22.6 27.7
27
Table 4.4: Sieve analysis results of NM1 and RM1 (0/19) mm
CUMULATIVE RETAINED % CUMULATIVE
% SAMPLE PASSING
SIEVE SIZE (g) RETAINED
SIEVE #
(mm)
Conventional Recycled Conventional Recycled Conventional Recycled
25 1" 28 0 1.1 0.0 98.9 100.0

19 3/4" 1335 1696 50.6 34.8 49.4 65.2
12.5 1/2" 2578 4132 97.7 84.8 2.3 15.2
9.5 3/8" 2602 4624 98.6 94.9 1.4 5.1
4.75 #4 2604 4816 98.6 98.9 1.4 1.1
2.36 #8 2604 4838 98.6 99.3 1.4 0.7
1.18 #16 2604 4842 98.6 99.4 1.4 0.6
0.6 #30 2604 4844 98.6 99.5 1.4 0.5
0.425 #40 2604 4846 98.6 99.5 1.4 0.5
0.3 #50 2606 4848 98.7 99.5 1.3 0.5
0.15 #100 2608 4856 98.8 99.7 1.2 0.3
0.075 #200 2622 4868 99.3 100.0 0.7 0.0
Pan Pan 2640 - 100.0 - 0.0 -
28
Table 4.5: Gradation curve - (Folia 0/19mm)
Gradation curve - (Folia 0/19mm)
100.0 100.0
80.0 80.0
% of passing
% of passing
60.0 60.0
40.0 40.0
20.0 20.0
0.0 0.0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
SIEVE SIZE (mm) SIEVE SIZE (mm)
Figure 4.5: Gradation curve - (Folia 0/19mm) for conventional aggregate Figure 4.6: Gradation curve - (Folia 0/19mm) for recycled aggregate
29
Table 4.6: The Results of conventional and recycled coarse aggregate (Adasia 0/12.5 mm)
Symbols and Results
Type of
Conventional Spec. Limits
Aggregat Property Designation No. Recycled Aggregate
e
Bulk dry S.G 2.49
The local crusher is not producing this

Bulk SSD S.G 2.56
ASTM : C127
Apparent S.G 2.67
Adasia (0/12.5mm)
size of aggregate
Effective S.G 2.58
Absorption (% Abs.) ASTM : C128 2.8

NM2 RM2 5
Abrasion
ASTM : C131 21 40
value(%A.V)
IS: 2386 (PART IV)
Impact value, % 20.5
1963
IS: 2386 (PART IV)
Crushing value,% 22.6
1963
30
Table 4.7: Sieve analysis results of NM2 and RM2 (0/12.5) mm
% SAMPLE PASSING
SIEVE #
(mm)
25 1" 0 0.0 100.0
The local crusher is not producing this size of

19 3/4" 64 1.6 98.4
12.5 1/2" 877 21.8 78.2
9.5 3/8" 2834 70.3 29.7
4.75 #4 3986 98.9 1.1
2.36 #8 4002 99.3 0.7
aggregate
aggregate
aggregate
1.18 #16 4002 99.3 0.7
0.6 #30 4002 99.3 0.7
0.425 #40 4002 99.3 0.7
0.3 #50 4002 99.3 0.7
0.15 #100 4004 99.4 0.6
0.075 #200 4024 99.9 0.1
Pan Pan 4030 100.0 0.0
31
Table 4.8: Gradation curve - (Adasia 0/12.5 mm)
100.0
80.0
% of passing
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
SIEVE SIZE (mm)
Figure 4.7: Gradation curve - (Adasia 0/12.5 mm) for conventional aggregate
Note: The gradation of the recycled aggregate for this size is not available because of the
capability of the local crusher which is producing only three sizes of aggregate as
mentioned above.
32
Table 4.9: The Results of conventional and recycled coarse aggregate size (0/9.5)mm
Symbols and Results
Type of
e
Sismimia (0/9.5mm)

ASTM : C127
Apparent S.G 2.67 2.63
Effective S.G 2.58 NM3 2.44 RM3

Absorption (% Abs.) ASTM : C128 2.8 6.0 5
Abrasion
ASTM : C131 21 36.3 40
value(%A.V)
33
Table 4.10: Sieve analysis results of NM3 and RM3 (0/9.5) mm
% SAMPLE PASSING
SIEVE #
(mm)
25 1" 0 0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0

19 3/4" 0 0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0
12.5 1/2" 0 0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0
9.5 3/8" 7 1048 0.2 21.2 99.8 78.8
4.75 #4 2192 3688 73.8 74.5 26.2 25.5
2.36 #8 2942 4700 99.1 94.9 0.9 5.1
1.18 #16 2948 4884 99.3 98.7 0.7 1.3
0.6 #30 2952 4846 99.4 97.9 0.6 2.1
0.425 #40 2954 4900 99.5 99.0 0.5 1.0
0.3 #50 2954 4904 99.5 99.1 0.5 0.9
0.15 #100 2966 4920 99.9 99.4 0.1 0.6
0.075 #200 2966 4950 99.9 100.0 0.1 0.0
Pan Pan 2970 - 100.0 - 0.0 -
34
Table 4.11: Gradation curve - (Sismimia 0/9.5 mm)
Gradation curve - (Sismimia 0/9.5 mm)
100 100
80 80
60 60
% of passing
% of passing
40 40
20 20
0 0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Figure 4.8: Gradation curve - (Sismimia 0/9.5 mm) for conventional Figure 4.9: Gradation curve - (Sismimia 0/9.5 mm) for recycled
aggregate aggregate
35
Table 4.12: The Results of conventional and recycled fine aggregate size (0/4.75)mm
Symbols and Results
Type of
e
(0/4.75mm)

Itrabia
ASTM : C127
Apparent S.G 2.77 NF1 2.69 RF1
Effective S.G 2.75 2.62
Absorption (% Abs.) ASTM : C128 2.45 3.68 5
36
Table 4.13: Sieve analysis results of NF1 and RF1 (0/4.75) mm
% SAMPLE PASSING
SIEVE #
(mm)
25 1" 0 0 0.0 0 100.0 100.0

19 3/4" 0 0 0.0 0 100.0 100.0
12.5 1/2" 0 0 0.0 0 100.0 100.0
9.5 3/8" 0 0 0.0 0 100.0 100.0
4.75 #4 5 2.64 1.0 0.53 99.0 99.47
2.36 #8 27 40 5.4 8.00 94.6 92.00
1.18 #16 106.3 106.15 21.2 21.23 78.8 78.77
0.6 #30 187.3 162.3 37.4 32.46 62.6 67.54
0.425 #40 235.24 220 47.0 44.00 53.0 56.00
0.3 #50 281 291.83 56.1 58.37 43.9 41.63
0.15 #100 370.53 401.97 74.0 80.39 26.0 19.61
0.075 #200 395 421.12 78.9 84.22 21.1 15.78
Pan Pan 500.5 500 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.00
37
Table 4.14: Gradation curve - (Trabia 0/4.75mm)
Gradation curve - (Trabia 0/4.75mm)
100.0 100.0%
80.0 80.0%
% of passing
% of passing
60.0 60.0%
40.0 40.0%
20.0 20.0%
0.0 0.0%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Figure 4.10: Gradation curve - (Trabia 0/4.75mm) for Figure 4.11: Gradation curve - (Trabia 0/4.75mm) for recycled
conventional aggregate aggregate
38
Table 4.15: Sieve analysis results of Natural Sand (0/0.60) mm
SIEVE %
SIEVE CUMULATIVE % SAMPLE
SIZE CUMULATIVE
# RETAINED (g) PASSING
(mm) RETAINED
25 1" 0 0.0 100.0
19 3/4" 0 0.0 100.0
12.5 1/2" 0 0.0 100.0
9.5 3/8" 0 0.0 100.0
4.75 #4 0 0.0 100.0
2.36 #8 0 0.0 100.0
1.18 #16 0 0.0 100.0
0.6 #30 0 0.0 100.0
0.425 #40 743.5 39.8 60.2
0.3 #50 1607 85.9 14.1
0.15 #100 1841.6 98.5 1.5
0.075 #200 1848 98.8 1.2
Pan Pan 1870 100.0 0.0
39
Table 4.16: Gradation curve - (Natural Sand 0/0.60mm)
Gradation curve - (Natural Sand 0/0.60mm)
100.0
80.0
% of Passing 60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
SIEVE SIZE (mm)
Figure 4.12: Gradation curve - (Natural Sand 0/0.60mm)
Note: It is known that the sand has only one type as there is not a recycled theme.
40
Table 4.17: Gradations of Conventional and Recycled aggregates
Conventional, % passing Recycled, % passing Sand, % passing

Sieve
size, mm NM1 NM2 NM3 NF1 RM1 RM3 RF1 F2
0/19 mm 0/12.5 mm 0/9.5 mm 0/4.75 mm 0/19 mm 0/9.5 mm 0/4.75 mm 0/0.60
25 98.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

19 49.4 98.4 100.0 100.0 65.2 100.0 100.0 100.0
12.5 2.3 78.2 100.0 100.0 15.2 100.0 100.0 100.0
9.5 1.4 29.7 99.8 100.0 5.1 78.8 100.0 100.0
4.75 1.4 1.1 26.2 99.0 1.1 25.5 99.47 100.0
2.36 1.4 0.7 0.9 94.6 0.7 5.1 92.00 100.0
1.18 1.4 0.7 0.7 78.8 0.6 1.3 78.77 100.0
0.6 1.4 0.7 0.6 62.6 0.5 2.1 67.54 100.0
0.425 1.4 0.7 0.5 53.0 0.5 1.0 56.00 60.2
0.3 1.3 0.7 0.5 43.9 0.5 0.9 41.63 14.1
0.15 1.2 0.6 0.1 26.0 0.3 0.6 19.61 1.5
0.075 0.7 0.1 0.1 21.1 0.0 0.0 15.78 1.2
Pan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - 0.0
41
100
90
80
70
60 Conventional NM1
% Passing
50 Conventional NM2
40 Conventional NM3
30 Conventional NF1
20 Sand
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Diameter (mm)
Figure 4.13: Gradation Curve - Conventional Aggregate
100
90
80
70
60
% Passing
50 Recycled RM1
40 Recycled RM3
30 Recycled RF1
20
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Diameter (mm)
Figure 4.14: Gradation Curve - Recycled Aggregate
42
Comments on the results:
From the previous results, the following points are showing a comparison between the
conventional and recycled aggregates based on the following items:
Density:
The density of the recycled aggregate is lower than conventional aggregate because of
the porous and less dense residual mortar lumps that is adhering to the surfaces of the
recycled aggregates.
Absorption:
The absorption in the recycled aggregates is more than in conventional aggregates due
to the high porosity in the recycled aggregates which reflects on the strength of the
aggregates.
Impact and Crushing values:
Due to the existence of the suspended materials in the recycled aggregates, the impact
and crushing values are higher than the values in the conventional one. However, these
values are within the British standard (Less than 30%).
43
4.4 Determination of gradation curve of the asphalt binder course
In order to achieve the suitable gradation according to ASTM and Egyptian
specifications, we have to mix all the groups of the recycled aggregates (0/19), (0/9.5),
(0/4.75) and sand within specific percentages. The conventional aggregates were
blended in similar manner for the groups (0/19), (0/12.5), (0/9.5), (0/4.75) and sand as
shown in Appendix A: Mathematical Trail Method to Merge Aggregate Mixes. This
method depends on suggesting different percentages for the aggregates from all
gradation, then the percentages are to be compared with the specifications.
The final results of the suitable percentages for both conventional and recycled
aggregates are shown in Table (4.18).
Table 4.18: The suggested percentages for aggregates blending for different
aggregates sizes according to the ASTM and Egyptian specifications.
Suggested percent for final
Aggregates type Size, mm aggregate mix m.%
Conventional Recycled
Folia 0/19 15 25
Adasia 0/12.5 20 -
Simsimia 0/9.5 30 46
Itrabiah 0/4.75 30 24
Sand 0/0.60 5 5
Sum 100 100
Table (4.19) shows the gradation of the mixed aggregates for both types, conventional
and recycled, and the ASTM and Egyptian specification for the coarse aggregate in
Asphalt binder course.
44
Table 4. 19: Mix gradations of conventional aggregates for binder course
% Passing According to
% Passing % Passing According to
SIEVE SIZE ASTM Specifications Egyptian Specifications
(mm) Recycled Conventional
Min Max Min Max
Aggregate Aggregate
25 99.97 99.85 100 100 100 100
19 91.27 92.11 90 100 100 100
12.5 78.77 81.00 67 85 75 100
9.5 66.49 71.09 56 80 60 85
4.75 40.87 42.96 35 65 35 55
2.36 29.57 33.97 23 49 20 35
1.18 25.04 29.17 15 37 17 29
0.6 21.95 24.28 8 26 10 22
0.425 17.05 19.38 6 22 5 18
0.3 11.23 14.31 5 19 6 16
0.15 5.13 8.18 3 14 4 12
0.075 3.85 6.51 2 8 2 8
Recycled Aggregates ASTM Specifications Conventional Aggregates
100.00
80.00
%Passing
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Sieve size (mm)
Figure 4. 15: Gradation of conventional and recycled aggregates compared with

required gradation of asphalt binder course according to ASTM Specifications
45
Conventional Aggregates Egyptian Specifications
Recycled Aggregtes 2
100
80
%Passing
60
40
20
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Sieve size (mm)
Figure 4. 16: Gradation of conventional and recycled aggregate compared with

required gradation of asphalt binder course according to Egyptian Specifications
4.5 Tests of bitumen

In this stage of experimental program, the following properties of bitumen will be
measured
Penetration test.
Ductility test.
Specific gravity test.
Softening point test.
46
4.5.1 Penetration Test (ASTM D5)
Table 4.20: Bitumen penetration test

Sample 1 (container dimension 75mmX Sample 2 (container dimension 75mmX
55mm) 55mm)
Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Final 205 205 216 205 274 260 250 260
Initial 95 95 95 95 170 155 145 155
Penetration
110 110 121 110 104 105 105 105
Value
Penetration value for material = (104+105+105+105)/4 = 104*
Grade of material based on penetration value secured = B100
*: Sample 1 was neglected because the differences between the penetration values are
more than (8) which is refused based on the specifications. However, in sample 2, the
allowed difference between the penetration values is (2). Therefore, the penetration
value can be calculated as the average between the penetrations values of this sample as
the difference between them is not exceeding (2).
4.5.2 Ductility test (ASTM D113)
Table 4.21: Bitumen Ductility test results

Specimen Ductility, cm
A 112
B 131
C 150
Average 131
4.5.3 Specific gravity test (ASTM D70)
Table 4.22: Bitumen Specific gravity test results

Weight of sample (gm) 25
Weight of pycnometer + water at25C (gm) 1791.20
Weight of pycnometer + water at25C (gm) + Sample 1791.59
25
Density 1.016 g / cm 3
1791.20 25 1791.59
Specific gravity= 1.016.
47
4.5.4 Softening Point of Bitumen (ASTMD36, 2002)
Thermometer reading = 47.5o C.

4.5.5 Summary of bitumen tests results
Table 4.23: Summary of bitumen tests results

Test Results ASTM specification
Penetration 100 85 - 100
Ductility 130cm Min 100
o
Softening point 47.5 C (45 52)oC
Density 1.016
48
Chapter 5: Preparation and Testing of Asphalt Mixes
After selecting the suitable aggregate gradation for recycled aggregates; several asphalt
mixes were prepared by using various percentages of bitumen (from 4.5% to 6% at
0.5% incremental) with the recycled aggregates compared with a control mix (Asphalt
mix with conventional aggregate).
The concept of asphalt preparation is to prepare 4 samples for each percentage of
bitumen, 3 of them are used for Marshal Test and the fourth sample is to determine the
theoretical density of the asphalt mix.
Figures (5.1) and (5.2) show the Marshall Specimens using the recycled aggregate and
conventional aggregate respectively.
Table 5.1: Marshall Specimens using the recycled aggregate and conventional
aggregate
Marshall Specimens
Figure 5.1: Marshall Specimens using Figure 5.2: Marshall Specimens using
recycled aggregate conventional aggregate
5.1 Methodology of Selecting the Proposed Mix

To prepare the best mix for the asphalt binder course with the best mechanical
properties and the optimum bitumen content, the researcher made the following steps:
1. Two gradations (curves) were selected within the two types of aggregates
(Recycled and Conventional). see chapter 4 Part 4.4, Figures (4.16) and (4.17).
49
2. Trail mixes for the two gradations were carried out in the laboratory with using
several percentages of bitumen (4.5%, 5%, 5.5% and 6%) for each gradation.
Marshall Method was adopted. The inputs of the binder course job mixes are
illustrated in Appendix B.
3. The samples were tested and their mechanical properties were determined. The
results of the mechanical properties were compared with the international
specifications.
4. Propose the gradation or the range which achieves the best mechanical
properties with least bitumen content.
There are two types of aggregate; each gradation has four different percentages of
bitumen (from 4.5% to 6% at 0.5% incremental). Four Marshall specimens are needed
for each mix, three are essential and the fourth mix is used to find the theoretical density
of the bitumen. The total number of specimens was 32 Marshall Specimens as
illustrated in Table (5.2).
Table 5.2: Number of Marshal Specimens

Bit. Ratio
4.5% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0%
Gradation
Conventional
4 4 4 4
aggregate
Recycled
4 4 4 4
aggregate
Subtotal 8 8 8 8
Total No. of
32
samples
5.2 Trial A: Control Mix

In this section, the curve, the outputs of job mix with different bitumen contents for the
conventional mix will be illustrated.
The Outputs of Job Mix for Conventional Gradation with Different Bitumen Contents:
50
Tables [5.3 - 5.6] show the mechanical properties of asphalt mix using conventional
aggregate with different bitumen contents.
Table 5.3: The Outputs of job Mix for conventional aggregates blending with 4.5%
Bitumen Content
Bitumen Content 4.5 %
Corr.
Volume Flow Stiffness rA r bit
Sample# Stability Va % (1) Vb % (2) VMA %(3) VFB % (4)
(cm3) (mm) (kg/mm) (g/cm3) (g/cm3)
(Kg)
1 497.87 1686.40 4.06 415.37 2.33 2.47 5.58 10.33 15.91 64.93
2 516.36 1155.36 3.98 290.29 2.33 2.47 5.61 10.33 15.94 64.79
3 509.50 1271.57 4.00 317.89 2.32 2.47 6.09 10.27 16.36 62.78
Average 507.91 1371.11 4.01 341.18 2.33 2.47 5.76 10.31 16.07 64.17
(1) Va% Air voids.

(2) Vb% Bitumen Volume.
(3) VMA% Voids Mineral Aggregates.
(4) VFB% Voids Filled Bitumen.
Bitumen Content
Corr.
Sample# Stability Va % Vb % VMA % VFB %
(Kg)
1 489.20 1555.01 5.78 269.03 2.35 2.45 4.09 11.56 15.66 73.86
2 497.65 1586.77 4.72 336.18 2.33 2.45 4.78 11.48 16.26 70.62
3 510.56 1387.34 4.07 340.87 2.34 2.45 4.65 11.50 16.14 71.22
Average 499.14 1509.71 4.86 315.36 2.34 2.45 4.50 11.51 16.02 71.90
51
Bitumen Content
Corr.
(Kg)
1 499.35 1407.60 4.66 302.06 2.33 2.43 4.11 12.61 16.73 75.41
2 509.22 1181.27 4.88 242.06 2.33 2.43 4.11 12.61 16.73 75.41
3 503.57 1347.95 5.00 269.59 2.36 2.43 2.76 12.79 15.55 82.24
Average 504.05 1312.28 4.85 271.24 2.34 2.43 3.66 12.67 16.34 77.69
Table 5.6: The Outputs of job Mix for conventional aggregates blending with 6%
Bitumen Content
Corr.
(Kg)
1 509.60 1133.32 4.23 267.92 2.33 2.42 3.90 13.73 17.64 77.87
2 511.70 1177.36 4.20 280.32 2.33 2.42 3.83 13.74 17.57 78.21
3 512.80 1144.78 4.33 264.38 2.32 2.42 4.03 13.72 17.74 77.30
Average 511.37 1151.82 4.25 270.88 2.33 2.42 3.92 13.73 17.65 77.79
52
Table 5.7: Bitumen percentages Vs. different asphalt properties using conventional
aggregate
Chart Title Chart
Density Vs. Bitumen %

2.35
2.34
ra (g/cm3)
2.34
Density Vs. 2.33
Bitumen % 2.33
2.32
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 3: Density Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate
Air voids Vs. Bitumen %

8.00
6.00
% Va
Air Voids 4.00
Vs. Bitumen 2.00
% 0.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 4: Air voids Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate
53
Chart Title Chart
Stability Vs. Bitumen %

1600
1500
Stability kg
1400
Stability Vs. 1300
1200
Bitumen % 1100
1000
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 5: Stability Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate
Flow Vs. Bitumen %

6.00
5.00
Flow mm
4.00
Flow Vs. 3.00
2.00
Bitumen % 1.00
0.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 6: Flow Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate
54
Chart Title Chart
VFB% Vs. Bitumen %

100.00
% VFB 80.00
60.00
VFB% Vs. 40.00
Bitumen % 20.00
0.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 7: VFB% Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate
%VMA Vs. Bitumen %

20.00
18.00
% VMA
16.00
VMA% Vs. 14.00
Bitumen % 12.00
10.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 8: % VMA Vs. Bitumen % using conventional aggregate
55
5.3 Trial B: Asphalt mix with recycled aggregate
In this section, the curve, the outputs of job mix with different bitumen contents for the
conventional mix will be illustrated.
The Outputs of Job Mix for Recycled Gradation with Different Bitumen Contents:
Tables [5.8 - 5.11] show the mechanical properties of asphalt mix using recycled
aggregate with different bitumen contents.
Table 5.8: The Outputs of job Mix for recycled aggregates blending with 4.5%
Bitumen Content
Corr.
(Kg)
1 487.45 810.94 3.50 231.70 2.11 2.30 8.22 9.36 17.58 53.25
2 468.96 832.33 3.40 244.80 2.14 2.30 7.18 9.47 16.65 56.87
3 470.80 809.51 2.90 279.14 2.14 2.30 7.10 9.48 16.57 57.18
Average 475.74 817.59 3.27 251.88 2.13 2.30 7.50 9.44 16.94 55.77
Bitumen Content
Corr.
(Kg)
1 547.90 975.98 2.80 348.57 2.12 2.29 7.22 10.45 17.67 59.14
2 564.13 1456.77 4.30 338.78 2.14 2.29 6.38 10.54 16.93 62.28
3 560.10 1444.04 4.10 352.20 2.15 2.29 6.24 10.56 16.80 62.83
Average 557.38 1292.26 3.73 346.52 2.14 2.29 6.62 10.52 17.13 61.42
56
Bitumen Content
Corr.
(Kg)
1 561.66 968.84 2.50 387.54 2.12 2.27 6.89 11.46 18.34 62.46
2 551.74 1473.34 2.80 526.19 2.14 2.27 5.91 11.58 17.49 66.20
3 553.24 1125.88 2.30 489.51 2.11 2.27 7.28 11.41 18.69 61.04
Average 555.55 1189.36 2.53 467.75 2.12 2.27 6.69 11.48 18.17 63.24
Bitumen Content
Corr.
(Kg)
1 559.80 1774.68 2.80 633.81 2.17 2.26 3.91 12.81 16.73 76.60
2 544.70 1516.57 2.70 561.69 2.15 2.26 4.57 12.73 17.30 73.56
3 552.10 1636.53 3.50 467.58 2.16 2.26 4.19 12.78 16.96 75.33
Average 552.20 1642.59 3.00 554.36 2.16 2.26 4.22 12.77 17.00 75.16
57
Table 5.12: Bitumen percentages Vs. different asphalt properties using recycled
aggregate
Chart Title Chart

2.17
2.16
ra (g/cm3)
Density Vs. 2.15

2.14
Bitumen 2.13
% 2.12
2.11
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 9: Density Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate

8.00
7.00
6.00
Air Voids
5.00
% Va
Vs. 4.00
3.00
Bitumen
2.00
% 1.00
0.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 10: Air voids Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate
58
Chart Title Chart

1700
1500
Stability
Vs. Stability (Kg) 1300
1100
Bitumen
900
% 700
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 11: Stability Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate
Flow Vs. Bitumen %

4.00
3.50
3.00
Flow (mm)
Flow Vs. 2.50

2.00
Bitumen 1.50
% 1.00
0.50
0.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 12: Flow Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate
59
Chart Title Chart
VFB% Vs. Bitumen %

80.00
70.00
60.00
VFB% Vs. 50.00

% VFB
40.00
Bitumen 30.00
% 20.00
10.00
0.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 13: VFB% Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate
% VMA Vs. Bitumen %

18.40
18.20
18.00
VMA%
17.80
% VMA
Vs. 17.60
17.40
Bitumen
17.20
% 17.00
16.80
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 14: % VMA Vs. Bitumen % using recycled aggregate
60
The following charts show the asphalt mix properties with various bitumen percentages
for both conventional and recycled aggregate:
Table 5.13: Asphalt mix properties with various bitumen percentages for both
conventional and recycled aggregate
Chart
Chart
Title

Recycled Aggregate Conventional Aggregate
2.40
2.35
Density
ra (g/cm3)
2.30
Vs. 2.25
2.20
Bitumen 2.15
% 2.10
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 15: Density Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate

Recycled aggregate Conventional Aggregate
8.00
Air 7.00
6.00
Voids 5.00
% Va
Vs. 4.00
3.00
Bitumen 2.00
1.00
%
0.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 16: Air voids Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate
61
Chart
Chart
Title

1700
Stability 1500
Stability (Kg)
Vs. 1300
1100
Bitumen
900
%
700
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 17: Stability Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate
Flow Vs. Bitumen %

6.00
5.00
Flow Vs.
Flow (mm)
4.00
Bitumen 3.00
2.00
%
1.00
0.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 18: Flow Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate
62
Chart
Chart
Title
VFB% Vs. Bitumen %

100.00
VFB% 80.00
60.00
% VFB
Vs.
40.00
Bitumen
20.00
%
0.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 19: VFB% Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate
% VMA Vs. Bitumen %

20.00
VMA%
18.00
Vs.
% VMA
16.00
Bitumen 14.00
% 12.00
10.00
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50
Bitumen %
Figure 5. 20: % VMA Vs. Bitumen % for both types of aggregate
63
5.4 Calculation of the optimum bitumen percentage
In order to calculate the optimum bitumen content, we should obtain three values for the bitumen content,
which are:
The bitumen content Vs the highest stability of the asphalt mix. %mb Stabilty
The bitumen content Vs the highest value of the density of the asphalt mix. %mb ra
The bitumen content Vs the allowed percent of air voids in the asphalt mix. %mb Va
Therefore, the optimum bitumen content is calculated as the average of the above mentioned bitumen
contents.
%mb Va %mb Stabilty %mb ra
Optimum %mb
3
Table 5.14: Calculation of the optimum bitumen percentage
Type of Aggregate
Optimum Bitumen % due to
% Va 5.55 % 5.0 %
Stability 5.0% 6.0%
Density ( r A ) 5.35% 6.0%
5.55 5.0 5.35 5.0 6.0 6.0

% mb 5.3% 5.70%
3 3
Table (5.15) shows the properties of the asphalt mix using the optimum bitumen content with both
recycled and conventional aggregate.
Table 5. 15: Properties of the asphalt mix using the optimum bitumen content
Type of aggregate
Property at optimum
Egyptian Specification
bitumen content Conventional
Recycled aggregate
aggregate
Optimum Bitumen
5.30 5.70 4.5 - 6
content (%)
Stability (kg) 1400 1280 272
Flow (mm) 5.0 2.8 24
Void in Mineral 15
13.5 18
aggregate (VMA)%
Air voids (Va)%) 3.9 6.5 38
Density (gm/cm3) 2.34 2.125
64
5.5 Results discussion
With reference to the previous results for the asphalt mixes using two types of aggregate blending
(Recycled Conventional) and with various percentages of bitumen, the following table shows comments
on the results and summarizing it.
Table 5. 16 Comments on the results

Value at optimum bitumen
content
Property Comment
aggregate aggregate
The density of compacted asphalt mix using
conventional aggregate has a logical value
because of the existence of different gradations
of the aggregate in the blending which reflects
on the air voids. However, when using the
Density of recycled aggregate, there is irregularity in the
compacted density values due to absence of some of the 2.34 2.125
Asphalt (gm/cm3) aggregate gradations. Also, the value of asphalt
mix density using recycled aggregate is lower
because the recycled aggregates contains
suspended materials (Calcareous materials)
also it has high porosity which led to reduce the
weight of aggregate in unit volume.
At optimum bitumen content with recycled
aggregate, the air voids percentage = 6.5%
Air voids (Va)% 3.9 6.5
which is within the Egyptian specification (3-
8)%.
For asphalt mix using conventional aggregate,
the value of stability is increasing with
increasing the bitumen content to a specific
percent, then the stability decreases. However,
if recycled aggregate is used, there is irregular
varying for the stability with changing the
bitumen percentages due to the non-
homogeneous content of the recycled aggregate
Stability (kg) as it includes several concrete structures which 1400 1280
are different in strength; also the recycled
aggregate includes suspended materials.
The stability of asphalt mix using recycled
aggregates is less than the stability using the
conventional one. However it exceeds the
criteria in the Egyptian specifications.
Therefore, the asphalt mix using the recycled
aggregates has high strength.
65
Value at optimum bitumen
content
Property Comment
aggregate aggregate
For asphalt mix using conventional aggregate,
the value of flow is increasing with increasing
the bitumen content to specific bitumen content
then the flow is decreasing. However, for
recycled aggregate, the value of flow is varying
Flow (mm) 5.0 2.8
in irregular manner.
The flow of the asphalt mix using recycled
aggregates is within the Egyptian specifications
and less than the flow in asphalt mix using
conventional aggregates.
The two curves of VFB Vs. Bitumen content for
asphalt mixes with recycled aggregate and
VFB % conventional aggregate has a similar manner 70 70
because that this property is independent of the
aggregate type.
VMA for asphalt mix using conventional aggregate
is affected by Va and Vb which has regular values
with the bitumen percentages except at 5.5%
bitumen content which has a severe drop in the
Void in Mineral VMA value. However, when using the recycled
aggregate aggregate, the VMA is increasing to a specific limit 13.5 18
(VMA)% and then it begins reducing.
The value of VMA for asphalt mix using the
recycled aggregates is more than the value using
conventional aggregates and exceeds the Egyptian
specifications.
66
Chapter 6: Conclusion and Recommendations
6.1 Feasibility Study
The asphalt mixes consist mainly of aggregate and bitumen. Therefore, the cost of these components will
control the cost of the mix as whole. However, the bitumen material in our research will be the same with
different percentages between the recycled and conventional aggregates.
Based on above, the cost of the recycled aggregate items will influence directly on the total cost for the
asphalt mix. Therefore, the following cost analysis shown in Table (6.1) was conducted to compare the
cost of the asphalt mix using the conventional aggregates and the recycled one.
Table 6. 1: Cost analysis for one tone of asphalt mix with conventional and recycled aggregates
Percent for total mix

Weight(Ton) Price $/ton Total price($)
(%)
Aggregates
mixture
Conventiona Convention
Conventional Recycled Conventional Recycled Recycled Recycled
l al
Bitumen 5.33 5.70 0.0533 0.0566 1300 1300 69.29 73.58

* *
NF1(Trabia) 28.4 (30) 22.640 (24) 0.2840 0.2260 15 3 4.26 0.678
* *
NF2(Sand) 4.73 (5) 4.720 (5) 0.0470 0.0470 3 3 0.14 0.141
* *
NM3(simsimia) 28.4 (30) 43.200 (46) 0.2840 0.4340 46 33 13.06 14.322
*
NM2(Adasia) 18.93 (20) 0.1893 45 8.52
* *
NM1(Folia) 14.2 (15) 23.590 (25) 0.1420 0.2360 44 30 6.25 7.08
Sum 1.000 0.9996 101.52 95.801
* The suggested percentage of the aggregate mix
From the feasibility study, it is clear that using the cost of asphalt mix using recycled aggregates will be
relatively less than the conventional one.
6.2 Conclusion
In this research, a lot of experimental tests were conducted for the asphalt mixes using two types of
aggregates (Recycled and conventional) and the results were compared with the regional specification.
Therefore, the following points can be concluded:
1. It is possible to use the aggregates from demolition debris in preparing the asphalt layers
particularly in the asphalt Binder course, knowing that the bitumen content when using recycling
aggregate (5.70%) is higher than bitumen content with conventional aggregate (5.3%).
2. The optimum blending percentages of the recycled aggregates are shown in Table (6.2)
67
Table 6. 2: Optimum blending percentages of the recycled aggregates
Suggested percent for
Aggregates type Size, mm final aggregate mix m.%
Recycled
Folia 0/19 25
Adasia 0/12.5 -
Simsimia 0/9.5 46
Itrabiah 0/4.75 24
Sand 0/0.475 5
Sum 100
3. The gradation of the recycled aggregates blending is shown in Table (6.3) and Figure (6.1)
compared with regional specification.
Table 6. 3: Mix gradations of recycle aggregates for binder course
% Passing % Passing According to % Passing According to
ASTM Specifications Regional Specifications (Egypt)
SIEVE SIZE
(mm) Recycled
Aggregate Min Max Min Max
25 99.97 100 100 100 100

19 91.27 90 100 100 100
12.5 78.77 67 85 75 100
9.5 66.49 56 80 60 85
4.75 40.87 35 65 35 55
2.36 29.57 23 49 20 35
1.18 25.04 15 37 17 29
0.6 21.95 8 26 10 22
0.425 17.05 6 22 5 18
0.3 11.23 5 19 6 16
0.15 5.13 3 14 4 12
0.075 3.85 2 8 2 8
68
Test sample Egyptian Specifications
100
80
%Passing
60
40
20
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Sieve size (mm)
Figure 6. 1: Gradation of recycled aggregate compared with required gradation of asphalt

binder course according to Egyptian Specifications
4. The mechanical properties of the asphalt mix using the recycled aggregate is shown in Table (6.4).
Table 6. 4: Mechanical properties of the asphalt mix using the optimum bitumen content
Property at optimum Regional specification
Properties
bitumen content (Egypt)
Optimum Bitumen
5.70 3.0 6.0
content (%)
Stability (kg) 1280 272
Flow (mm) 2.8 24
Void in Mineral 15
18
aggregate (VMA)%
Air voids (Va)%) 6.5 3-8
Density (gm/cm3) 2.125
69
6.3 Recommendations
1. It is possible to use multi sources of the aggregate for the asphalt mix, such as (construction
debris, pavement stone Interlock Asphalt mixes curb stone).
2. It is recommended to conduct similar tests on other layers of the asphalt mix using different
aggregate percentages.
3. It is recommended that the local authorities to confirm using this research and to pave a test
road to ensure the quality
4. It is recommended to conduct researches on using the destroyed asphalt pavements to produce
new asphalt layers (Reclaimed Asphalt pavements).
5. It is recommended for further studies to use the asphalt materials in preparing the aggregate
layers (Cold mix recycling).
70
References
AASHTO GUIDE,(1993) Design ofPavement Structures American Associaton of State Highway and
Transportation Officials, 444N 20001
Abed, F. (2009). Using of Recycled Aggregate in Producing Concrete Elements. Gaza: IUG.
Aljassar, H.,Ahmad, Al-Fadala,Khalifa and Ali,Mohammed (2005)Recycling building demolition waste
in hot mix asphalt concrete: a case study in KuwaitJ mater cycles waste manag, 7:112-115
Aravid K., and Das Animesh,(2007)Pavement design with central plant hot-mix recycled asphalt
mixesConstruction and Building Materials, 21,928936
Asi Ibrahim M.,(2007) Performance evaluation of SUPERPAVE and Marshall asphalt mix designs to
suite Jordan climatic and trac conditionsConstruction and Building Materials,21,17321740
ASTM, (2004) Test Method for Resistance to Plastic Flow of Bituminous Mixtures Using Marshall
Apparatus, Annual Book. D5581-96 (2000).
Besiso Adel, Himdiat Sameh, Mishal Tareq. (2010). Recycling of Demolition Debris in Road Pavements
(Base-coarse and Sub-base). Gaza: IUG
Environmental Council of Concrete Organizations (1999)Recycling Concrete And Masonry, Illinois

USA.
FongWinston F.K.,(2002)Production and Application of Recycled AggregatesThe Government of the

HKSAR
Gambin N., Dr Leo C., and Dr Rahman A. (2006) Recycling of construction and demolition material in
the Sydney Basin Australia, IE(I) Journal-EN, Vol 86, March 2006.
Hansen T.C., (2005)Recycling of Demolished Concrete and MasonryReport of Technical Committee

37-DRC.
Hendriks, Ch.F., Mrs. G.M.T. Janssen (2001)Reuse Of Construction And Demolition Waste In The
Netherlands For Road Constructions, HERON, Vol. 46, No. 2.
Hunter N Robert,(2000) Asphalts in road construction First published
IrvingKett,(1998)Asphalt materials and mix design manual Library of Congress Cataloging-in-

Publication Data,0-8155-1425-5
71
Jendia Shafik,Highway Engineering-Structural Design Daralmanaralaboratory,First Edition : Gaza
2000 (Arabic reference).
Kharrufa Sahar,(2007)Reduction of building waste in BaghdadIraqBuilding and Environment,42,

20532061
Koneru Saradhi, Masad Eyadand Rajagopal, K.R.,(2008)A thermomechanical framework for modeling
the compactionof asphalt mixesMechanics of Materials, 40,846864
Macozoma, D S (2002)Secondary Construction Materials: An Alternative Resource Pool For Future

Construction Needs, Concrete for the 21st Century Conference, Gauteng- South African
Martin Rogers,(2003)HIGHWAY ENGINEERING "Department of Civil and Structural Engineering

Dublin Institute of Technology,0-632-05993-1
MoHU, (1998). Egyptian Code for development of Urban and rural roads.
MPWH, (2009). Ministry of Public Works and Housing.
Park Taesoon,(2003) Application of Construction and Building Debris as BaseandSubbase Materials in

Rigid PavementJournal of Transportation Engineering,0733-947X/2003/5-558563
Park TaesoonCauses of bleeding in a hot-in-place asphalt pavementConstruction and Building

Materials,21, 20232030
Prairie Village, KSandFranklin Associates,(1998)Characterization Of Building-Related Construction

And Demolitiondebris In The United States TheU.S. Environmental Protection Agency Municipal and
Industrial Solid Waste Division Office of Solid Waste,Report No. EPA530-R-98-010.
Public Works Technical Bulletin 200-1-27 (2004), Reuse Of Concrete Materials From Building
Demolition, USA.
Torben C. HansenTorben C,.(1995)Recycled aggregates and recycled aggregate concretesecond state-

of-the-art report, developments 1945-1985
UNDP-Gaza (2007) Removal Of Residential Debris From The Evacuated Settlements In The Gaza Strip,
Examining Potential Use Of Recycled Construction Waste, Analysis Report.
Wayne Lee, K., Kamyar, PE., and Mahboub,C.(2006) Asphalt Mix Design and Construction past,
present, and future: published by American Society of Civil Engineers, ISBN 0-7844-0842-4
72
Appendix A: Aggregate Blending
73
Suggested percentages for Aggregate mix.(conventional aggregaates):
Grain size (mm) Suggested
percents for
Aggregate mix
<0.075 0.075/0.15 0.15/0.3 0.3/0.425 0.425/0.6 0.6/1.18 1.18/2.36 2.36/4.75 4.75/9.5 9.5/12.5 12.5/19 19/25 final agg.
Mix
21.10 4.90 17.90 9.10 9.60 16.20 15.80 4.40 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
NF1 (0/4.75) 30
6.33 1.47 5.37 2.73 2.88 4.86 4.74 1.32 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.18 0.34 12.55 46.48 39.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
F2 (0/0.60) 5
0.06 0.02 0.63 2.32 1.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.20 25.30 73.70 0.20 0.00 0.00
NM.3 (0/9.5) 30
0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.06 7.59 22.11 0.06 0.00 0.00
0.10 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 28.60 48.60 20.20 1.60
NM.2 (0/12.5) 20
0.02 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 5.72 9.72 4.04 0.32
0.70 0.50 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.90 47.10 49.50
NM.1 (0/19) 15
0.11 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 7.07 7.43
Sum 6.51 1.66 6.13 5.07 4.90 4.89 4.80 8.99 28.13 9.92 11.11 7.75 100.00
% passing 6.51 8.18 14.31 19.38 24.28 29.17 33.97 42.96 71.09 81.00 92.11 99.85
Sieve size (mm) 0.075 0.15 0.3 0.425 0.6 1.18 2.36 4.75 9.5 12.5 19 25
Binder0/ 19 (min) 2 3 5 6 8 15 23 35 56 67 90 100 ASTM
Specifications
(max) 8 14 19 22 26 37 49 65 80 85 100 100 D 5315 D-4
74
Suggested percentages for Aggregate mix.(recycled aggregates):
Grain size (mm)

Suggested
Aggregate mix. percents for
<0.075 0.075/0.15 0.15/0.3 0.3/0.425 0.425/0.6 0.6/1.18 1.18/2.36 2.36/4.75 4.75/9.5 9.5/12.5 12.5/19 19/25 final agg. Mix
15.78 3.83 22.03 14.37 11.54 11.23 13.23 7.47 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00
RF1 (0/4.75) 24
3.79 0.92 5.29 3.45 2.77 2.70 3.18 1.79 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.18 0.34 12.55 46.48 39.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
F2 (0/0.60) 5
0.06 0.02 0.63 2.32 1.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.60 0.30 0.10 0.30 0.80 2.90 20.40 53.30 21.20 0.00 0.00
RM.3 (0/9.5) 46
0.00 0.28 0.14 0.05 0.14 0.37 1.33 9.38 24.52 9.75 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.30 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.50 3.90 10.10 50.00 34.80
RM.1 (0/19) 25
0.00 0.08 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.13 0.98 2.53 12.50 8.70
Sum 3.85 1.29 6.10 5.82 4.90 3.09 4.53 11.30 25.62 12.28 12.50 8.70 100.00
% passing 3.85 5.13 11.23 17.05 21.95 25.04 29.57 40.87 66.49 78.77 91.27 99.97
Sieve size (mm) 0.075 0.15 0.3 0.425 0.6 1.18 2.36 4.75 9.5 12.5 19 25
Binder0/ 19 (min) 2 3 5 6 8 15 23 35 56 67 90 100 ASTM
Specifications
(max) 8 14 19 22 26 37 49 65 80 85 100 100 D 5315 D-4
75
Appendix B: The Inputs of the Binder Course Job Mixes
76
Used Equation to calculate the mechanical properties of asphalt mix:
rA
Vb mb %.
d 25
r bit rA
Va 100%.
r bit
%VMA Va Vb .
V .
%VFB b 100 .
VMA
Vb : Percent bitumen volume.

Va : Air voids contents in total mix.
mb : Percent of Bitumen.
r A : Density of compacted mix (g/cm3).
d 25 : Density of Bitumen at 25oC.
r bit : Max. Theoretical density.
VMA : Voids in mineral Aggregates.
VFB : Voids filled with bitumen
77
Inputs of conventional gradation Job Mix with Different Bitumen Contents
No. of blows on Each Face : 50 BLOWS
Mixing Temp. : 150 C
BITUMEN GRADE 80/100 Bitumen % = 4.5%
SAMPLE NO. AVREAGE
TEST DESCRIPTION 1 2 3
Weight of sample in Air (g) 1161.13 1203.83 1181.81 1182.26
Weight of sample SSD (g) 1162.60 1208.46 1184.29 1185.12
Wight of sample in water(g) 664.73 692.10 674.79 677.21

Bulk volume (cm3) 497.87 516.36 509.50 507.91
Density of compacted mix A (g/cm3) 2.33 2.33 2.32 2.33
Max.theoritical density bit (g/cm3) 2.47 2.47 2.47 2.47

Average of specimen Height(mm) 63.50 68.85 64.58 65.64
Marshal satbiltiy (Kg) 1686.40 1314.40 1308.20 1436.33

Satbiltiy correction factor 1.0000 0.8790 0.9720 0.95
Corrected sabiltiy 1686.40 1155.36 1271.57 1371.11
Flow (mm) 4.06 3.98 4.00 4.01
Sability/flow (Kg/mm) 415.37 290.29 317.89 341.18
Percent bitumen volume Vb (%) 10.33 10.33 10.27 10.31

Air voids contents in total mix Va (%) 5.58 5.61 6.09 5.76
Voids in mineral Agg.(V.M.A) (%) 15.91 15.94 16.36 16.07
Voids fill with bitumen (V.F.B) (%) 64.93 64.79 62.78 64.17
Percent bitumen content of total mix(%) 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50
78
Calculations of the Max. Theoretical density
Input data
Effective Specific gravity Results Calculation
NM1 ( min1) (Folia) 2.57 mb/d 4.43
NM2(min2)(Adasia) 2.58 m1/min1 5.84
NM3 ( min3) (Simsimia) 2.62 m2/min2 7.75
NF1 ( min4) (Trabia) 2.75 m3/min3 11.45
NF2 ( min5)( sand) 2.65 m4/min4 10.91
Percentsaggreagtes mix m4/min4 1.89
m1 15 Sum 37.83
m2 20 rmin 2.64
m3 30 rbit 2.47
m4 30
m5 5
Bitumen percent
mb 4.5
d bitumen density 1.016
79
SAMPLE NO. AVREAGE

Bulk volume (cm3) 489.20 497.65 510.56 499.14

Flow (mm) 5.78 4.72 4.07 4.86
80
Input data
NM1 ( min1) (Folia) 2.57 mb/d 4.92
NF2 ( min5)( sand) 2.65 m4/min4 10.91
m1 15 Sum 37.83
m2 20 rmin 2.64
m3 30 rbit 2.45
m4 30
m5 5
Bitumen percent
mb 5
81
SAMPLE NO. AVREAGE
Bulk volume (cm3) 499.35 509.22 503.57 504.05
Corrected sabiltiy(kg0 1407.60 1181.27 1347.95 1312.28
Flow (mm) 4.66 4.88 5.00 4.85
82
Input data
NM1 ( min1) (Folia) 2.57 mb/d 5.41
NF2 ( min5)( sand) 2.65 m4/min4 10.91
m1 15 Sum 37.83
m2 20 rmin 2.64
m3 30 rbit 2.43
m4 30
m5 5
Bitumen percent
mb 5.5
83
SAMPLE NO. AVREAGE
Bulk volume (cm3) 509.60 511.70 512.80 511.37
Flow (mm) 4.23 4.20 4.33 4.25
84
Input data
NM1 ( min1) (Folia) 2.57 mb/d 5.91
NF2 ( min5)( sand) 2.65 m4/min4 10.91
m1 15 Sum 37.83
m2 20 rmin 2.64
m3 30 rbit 2.41
m4 30
m5 5
Bitumen percent
mb 6
85
Inputs of recycled gradation Job Mix with Different Bitumen Contents
SAMPLE NO. AVREAGE

Bulk volume (cm3) 487.45 468.96 470.80 475.74


Flow (mm) 3.50 3.40 2.90 3.27

86
Input data
RM1 ( min1) (Folia) 2.42 mb/d 4.43
RM3 ( min2) (Simsimia) 2.44 m1/min1 10.33
RF1 ( min3) (Trabia) 2.46 m2/min2 18.85
RF2 ( min4)( sand) 2.65 m3/min3 9.76
m1 25 Sum 40.83
m2 46 rmin 2.45
m3 24 rbit 2.30
m4 5
Bitumen percent
mb 4.5
87
BITUMEN GRADE 80/100 Bitumen % = 5%
SAMPLE NO. AVREAGE

Bulk volume (cm3) 547.90 564.13 560.10 557.38


Flow (mm) 2.80 4.30 4.10 3.73
88
Input data
RM1 ( min1) (Folia) 2.42 mb/d 4.92
RF2 ( min4)( sand) 2.65 m3/min3 9.76
Percents aggreagtes mix m4/min4 1.89
m1 25 Sum 40.83
m2 46 rmin 2.45
m3 24 rbit 2.29
m4 5
Bitumen percent
mb 5
89
SAMPLE NO. AVREAGE
Bulk volume (cm3) 561.66 551.74 553.24 555.55
Corrected sabiltiy(kg0 968.84 1473.34 1125.88 1189.36
Flow (mm) 2.50 2.80 2.30 2.53
90
Input data
RM1 ( min1) (Folia) 2.42 mb/d 5.41
RF2 ( min4)( sand) 2.65 m3/min3 9.76
Percents aggreagtes mix m4/min4 1.89
m1 25 Sum 40.83
m2 46 rmin 2.45
m3 24 rbit 2.27
m4 5
Bitumen percent
mb 5.5
91
BITUMEN GRADE 80/100 Bitumen % = 6%
SAMPLE NO. AVREAGE
Bulk volume (cm3) 559.80 544.70 552.10 552.20
Flow (mm) 2.80 2.70 3.50 3.00
92
Input data
RM1 ( min1) (Folia) 2.42 mb/d 5.91
RF2 ( min4)( sand) 2.65 m3/min3 9.76
m1 25 Sum 40.83
m2 46 rmin 2.45
m3 24 rbit 2.26
m4 5
Bitumen percent
mb 6
93
Determination of the theoretical maximum density for the asphalt mix
It is known that calculating the theoretical asphalt density can be done by using the Pycnometer or by
calculations using specific gravities for all aggregates:
100 100
r bit r min
mb 100 mb m1 m2 m m4
3
d 25 r min r min 1 r min 2 r min 3 r min 4
rbit : Max. Theoretical density.
mb : % of Bitumen.
d 25 : Density of Bitumen.
m1 : The percentage of Aggregate 1 in the aggregate blend.

r min1 : Density of aggregate 1.
The researcher used the equations to find the theoretical density, as it was clear that there is no significant
difference in the values for theoretical density between the equation and the Pycnometer test. The following
example will illustrate.
94
For an asphalt mix, the following were given:
Bitumen percentage = 5% ( mb ).
Density of Bitumen.= 1.016 g/cm3. ( d 25 ).
Conventional Aggregate with the following properties:
Density and percentage of aggregate types in the aggregate blend

Percentage in the
r min
Type of aggregate aggregate blend
(g/cm3)
(m)
NM1 (Folia) 15 2.57
NM2(Adasia) 20 2.58
NM3 (Simsimia) 30 2.62
NF1 (Trabia) 30 2.75
NF2 (sand) 5 2.65
Pycnometer Test:
Pycnometer test results

Item Value
Weight of Pycnometer filled with water (WP+W) 1790.62 g.
Weight of the asphalt sample (Ws) 572.26 g
Weight of Pycnometer filled with water and the crushed sample (Ws+P+W) 2104.3g
95
1- Calculte r bit using the specific gravities for all aggregates:
Calculation of specific gravities for all aggregates types

Percentage in the aggregate blend r min
Type of aggregate r min/m
(m) (g/cm3)
NM1 (Folia) 15 2.57 5.84
NM2(Adasia) 20 2.58 7.75
NM3 (Simsimia) 30 2.62 11.45
NF1 (Trabia) 30 2.75 10.91
F2 (sand) 5 2.65 1.89
Sum 37.84
100 100 100

100 r bit 2.47 g / cm 3
r min 2.64 g / cm 3 5 100 5 4.92 35.98 40.90
37.83
1.016 2.64
2- Calculate r bit using Pycnometer:
572.26 572.26
r bit 2.47 g / cm 3
572.26 (2104.3 1790.62) 213.58
From the previous calculations it was clear that the results are near enough to use the specific gravities for all
aggregates method to calculate the theoretical density of the asphalt mix.
96
Appendix C: The Inputs of the physical properties for aggregates
97
Physical properties for recycled aggregates Physical properties for conventional aggregates
1. Specific gravity and absorption 1. Specific gravity and absorption
Coarse Aggregate RM1(Folia 0/19) Coarse Aggregate NM1(Folia 0/19)

Weights Weights
A= Weight of oven-dry sample in air, grams = 1452.92gr
A= Weight of oven-dry sample in air, grams = 1665gr B=weight of saturated - surface -dry sample in air=1490.67 gr
B=weight of saturated - surface -dry sample in air=1766.5 gr C= weight of saturated sample in water= 905.93 gr
C= weight of saturated sample in water= 1025 gr
A 1452.92 1452.92
A 1665 1665 i. Bulk S.G = 2.48
i. Bulk S.G = 2.24 B C 1490.67 905.93 584.74
B C 1766.5 1025 741.5
A 1452.92 1452.92
A 1665 1665 ii. Apparent S.G = 2.66
ii. Apparent S.G = 2.6 A C 1452.92 905.93 546.99
A C 1665 1025 640
B 1490.67 1490.67
B 1766.5 1766.5 vii. S.S.D S.G = 2.55
iii. S.S.D S.G = 2.38 B C 1490.67 905.93 584.74
B C 1766.5 1025 741.5
Bulk Apparent 2.48 2.66
Bulk Apparent 2.24 2.6 iii. Effective S.G = 2.57
iv. Effective S.G = 2.42 2 2
2 2
B AX 100 (1490.67 1452.92) X 100 3775
2.6
v. Absorption in percent =
B AX 100 101.5 X 100 1665 6.1 % Absorption =
A 1452.92 1452.92
A 1665 640 Coarse Aggregate NM2(adasia 0/12.5)
Coarse Aggregate M3(Simsimia 0/9.5)

A= Weight of oven-dry sample in air, grams = 1464.95 gr
A= Weight of oven-dry sample in air, grams = 1810 gr B=weight of saturated - surface -dry sample in air = 1505.97 gr
B=weight of saturated - surface -dry sample in air = 1930 gr C= weight of saturated sample in water= 916.68 gr
C= weight of saturated sample in water= 1123 gr
A 1464.95 1465.95
A 1810 1810 v. Bulk S.G = 2.49
i. Bulk S.G = 2.24 B C 1505.97 916.68 589.29
B C 1930 1123 807
A 1464.95 1464.95
vi. Apparent S.G = 2.67
A C 1464.95 916.68 548.27
98
A 1810 1810 B 1505.97 150.97
ii. Apparent S.G = 2.63 vii. S.S.D S.G = 2.56
A C 1810 1123 687 B C 1505.97 916.68 589.29
B 1930 1930 Bulk Apparent 2.49 2.67

iii. S.S.D S.G = 2.39 viii. Effective S.G = 2.58
B C 1930 1123 807 2 2
iv. Effective S.G =

Bulk Apparent 2.24 2.63
2.44 viii. Absorption in percent =
B AX 100 41.02 X 100 12000 2.8 %
2 2 A 1464.95 1810
vi. Absorption in percent =

B AX 100 120X 100 12000 6.6 % Coarse Aggregate M3(Simsimia 0/9.5)
A 1810 1810 A= Weight of oven-dry sample in air, grams = 979.15 gr
B=weight of saturated - surface -dry sample in air = 1005.84 gr
2. Abrasion value C= weight of saturated sample in water= 617.18 gr
Sieve Sizes from ASTM Designation: E 11 Aggregate Grading (B)
Passing 19mm (3/4) Retained on 12.5 mm (1/2) = 2500 Gram A 1464.95 1465.95
Passing 12.5mm (1/2) Retained on 9.5mm (3/8) = 2500 Gram i. Bulk S.G = 2.49
B C 1505.97 916.68 589.29
A= Original sample weight = 5000 gram
B=Weight retained on the 1.7mm sieve = 3185 gram A 1464.95 1464.95
ii. Apparent S.G = 2.67
C=Weight passing from the 1.7mm sieve = 1815 gram A C 1464.95 916.68 548.27
B 1815
i. A.V = X 100 36.3% B 1005.84 1005.84
A 5000 iii. S.S.D S.G = 2.59
B C 1005.84 617.18 388.66
3. Aggregates impact value
A= Original sample weight = 300.2 gr Bulk Apparent 2.49 2.67
iv. Effective S.G = 2.58
B=Weight passing from 2.36mm sieve = 71.84 gr 2 2
C=Weight retained on 2.36mm sieve = 227.68 gr
(B+C)=Total Weight =299.52 gr less than the initial weight Absorption in percent =
B AX 100 41.02 X 100 12000 2.8 %
by less than one gram so we dont need afresh test done A 1464.95 1810
B 71.84
i. AIV = X 100 X 100 23.9% valid for M2 (Adasia 0/12.5)
A 300.2
4. Aggregates crushing value 2. Abrasion value

A= Original sample weight = 2470 gram Passing 19mm (3/4) Retained on 12.5 mm (1/2) = 2500 Gram
99
B=Weight passing from 2.36mm sieve = 685 gram Passing 12.5mm (1/2) Retained on 9.5mm (3/8) = 2500 Gram
B 685 B=Weight retained on the 1.7mm sieve = 3952 gram
i. ACV = X 100 X 100 27.7% valid for M2 (Adasia 0/12.5)
A 2470 C=Weight passing from the 1.7mm sieve = 1048 gram
B 1048
i. A.V = X 100 21%
A 5000
3. Aggregates impact value

A= Original sample weight = 300.2 gr
B=Weight passing from 2.36mm sieve = 61.5 gr
C=Weight retained on 2.36mm sieve = 238.5 gr
(B+C)=Total Weight =299.52 gr less than the initial weight
by less than one gram so we dont need afresh test done
B 61.5
ii. AIV = X 100 X 100 20.5% valid for M2 (Adasia 0/12.5)
A 300.2
4. Aggregates crushing value

B=Weight passing from 2.36mm sieve = 565 gram
B 565
ii. ACV = X 100 X 100 22.6% valid for M2 (Adasia 0/12.5)
A 2500
100
Appendix D: Photos Show the Method of the Work in the Laboratory
101
Figure (1): Site visit to the asphalt factory Figure (2): Removing the samples from the water bath
Figure (3): Asphalt mixes after cooling Figure (4): Weighing the asphalt mixes
102
Figure (5): Measuring the sample height Figure (6): Removing the asphalt mix sample after compaction
Figure (7): Marshal test Measuring flow and stability Figure (8): Measuring the theoretical density of asphalt mix using Pycnometer
103
Figure (9): Site Visit to Khan Yunis Crusher Figure (10): Site Visit to Khan Yunis Crusher
104

95915

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

95915

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Islamic University of Gaza

High Studies Deanery

Reuse of Recycled Aggregates of Demolition Building Debris as an

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for Degree of Master

I would like to dedicate this work to my family

Table 4.1: Types of aggregate ......................................................................................................................... 22

Figure 2. 1: Process diagram for wet processing building rubble (Hansen,2005)................................................. 7

Figure 3. 1: Road Pavement Layers ................................................................................................................. 13

Figure 4.1: Types of recycled aggregate .......................................................................................................... 23

Figure 5.1: Marshall Specimens using recycled aggregate................................................................................ 49

AASHTO American Association State of Highway and Transportation Officials

rA Density of Asphalt mix

r min Density of aggregate in the blend

1.5 Research Objectives and Scope

1.6 Research Methodology

Selection of Materials Test of Materials

Preparing a series of sample mixes

Conclusions and recommendations

Pavement Recycling: the reuse of existing pavement materials in pavement

Hansen (2005) divided the debris into the following types:

2.2.2 Area of reuse

Furthermore, in a case study in Kuwait showed the applicability of using Recycling

Table 2.1 Area of use of recycled aggregates

Area of use of recycled aggregates

Rock infill for Gabion

Pipe Bedding U - Channel

Sea wall/Backing Road Sub base

Pipe surround Concrete production up

Figure 2.2: Applications of Recycled Aggregates in Construction Works (Fong and

Crushing of Inert Hard demolition Materials :After preliminary sorting, the

2.2.4 Production of Recycled aggregate

Figure 3. 1: Road Pavement Layers

Select the type and grade of asphalt binder.

Aggregate surface texture

3.2 Methods of mix design and Marshal Mix Design

Figure 3. 2: Marshall Stability and Flow Test Apparatus.(Kett,1998)

3.3 Specifications of Binder

Table 3.2: Gradation of Asphalt Binder Course (ASTM D5315 D-4)

Figure 3.3: Gradation of Asphalt Binder Course (ASTM D3515)

Table 3.3: Gradation of Egyptian Asphalt Binder Course (MOH, 1998)

Figure 3.4: Gradation of Egyptian Asphalt Binder Course

4.1 Tests of Aggregates

Table 4.1: Types of aggregate

Type of Particle size Symbol

Simsimia 0/ 9.50 RM3 NM3

Coarse Adasia 0/ 12.5 - NM2

Folia 0/ 19.0 RM1 NM1

*: The sand is natural and there is no recycled type.

Figure 4.1: Types of recycled aggregate

Figure 4.2: Types of conventional aggregates

Crushed rocks (Imported

Figure 4. 4: Khan Yunis crusher

4.3.1 Aggregate tests

Effective S.G 2.57 2.42

25 1" 28 0 1.1 0.0 98.9 100.0

The local crusher is not producing this

Absorption (% Abs.) ASTM : C128 2.8

25 1" 0 0.0 100.0

The local crusher is not producing this size of

The local crusher is not producing this size of

The local crusher is not producing this size of

Bulk SSD S.G 2.59 2.39

Effective S.G 2.58 NM3 2.44 RM3

25 1" 0 0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0