Asphalt rubber pavement

1. “ASPHALT RUBBER PAVEMENT”

2. CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
3. OBJECTIVES
4. MATERIALS USED
5. MATERIAL TESTING
6. METHODOLOGY
7. WORK PLAN
8. REFERNCES

3. INTRODUCTION
• Waste tire rubber is an important source of secondary raw materials.
• It is estimated that 1.2 billions of waste tyre rubber produced globally in a
year.
• 33 million vehicles manufactured in India . The disposal of these discarded
tires is a major environmental concern worldwide.
• Tire landfilling a common method for disposing of waste tyre rubber, is
responsible for a serious ecological threat
• The landfilling of waste tyre creates soil and water pollution, because the waste
tyre rubber holds toxic and soluble components. It also provides a breeding
habitat for various pests. Burning of tyres results in serious fire hazards
• Therefore it is necessary to find out the alternative for consumption disposal of
the discarded rubber tyres. Waste tyre rubber can be used in construction
industry.
• An attempt to use this waste tire rubber for improving the properties of bitumen
by blending it with crumb rubber.it will improve the bitumen binder properties
and cost effective.

4. • What is rubberized bitumen?
Rubberized bitumen is a mixture of hot bitumen and crumb rubber are derived
from waste tire
• Rubberized bitumen was invented by Charles McDonald in the mid 1960’s
• It is extensively used in USA, particularly in the states of Arizona, California
and Texas.
• Difference between Asphalt pavement and Asphalt rubberized pavement
Asphalt pavement Asphalt rubberized pavement
Here only bitumen is used as a
binding material
Here both crumb rubber and bitumen
is used as a binding material

5. 2.LITERATURE REVIEW
PAPER
ENTITLED
TITLE PROPORTION CONCLUSION
Atul a
pasalkarr and
Yogesh m bajaj
Comprehensive
literature review on
use of waste tyre
rubber in flexible
pavement
The waste tyre rubber is
used with aggregates in
different layer and also on
top surface layer mixed with
bitumen in percentage (
5,10,15 %)
1.Addition of waste tyre
in rubber aggregate
modifies
the flexibility of surface
layer.
2 The permanent
deformation and
thermal cracking are
reduced in hot
temperature region.
3 The main properties of
rubber is sound
absorbing, so
reduced the noise
pollution of heavy traffic
roads

6. PAPER ENTITLED TITLE PROPORTION CONCLUSION
Mohamed Sulyman Asphalt Pavement
Material
Improvement
Reduction in
resilient modulus
have been higher as
the size and
content of rubber
increased, and
mixtures with
fine rubber
particles ranging
between 0.15 –
1.18 mm in size
at up to 2% (by
weight of the total
mix) have shown
very
good performance
in terms of rutting
resistance
it is considered as
one of
the greatest
problems facing the
rubber industry
today. Our
review focused on
SIW represented by
rubber tires as tow
very effective
modifiers for the
improvements
of asphalt
pavement material.

7. PAPER ENTITLED TITLE PROPORTION CONCLUSION
Tomas Ucol-Ganiron
Jr
Scrap Waste Tire as
an Additive in
Asphalt Pavement
for
Road Construction
Research has
shown that scrap
waste tire can be
partial replacement
by 2% total weight
of aggregate
The stability of the
design mixture is
twice lower than
the conventional
one, and
constitutes a lower
value in terms of
flow for Marshall
Test.
The stability of the
mixture depends on
the grading of the
aggregates,
temperature and
size of scrap waste
tire.

8. PAPER
ENTITLED
TITLE PROPORTION CONCLUSION
Ing. Mariya
Holubka
THE USE OF
CRUSHED
RUBBER IN
ASPHALT
MIXTURES
OF ROAD
PAVEMENTS
Dry process, called rubber
modified mixes, in which
rubber amounting to about 3
to 5 % of the
aggregate weight is added
before the asphalt is
introduced and mixing occurs
Utilization of
ground rubber
in road surfaces as
an admixture to
asphalt mixes can
improve
profitability of this
branch of industry
and in
this way also to
induce interest in
recycling used tires
in more extensive
way

9.  Utilization of waste rubber tire in flexible pavement construction.
 To reduce the amount of natural resources used in the pavement
construction.
 To study the variation in strength parameters by conducting different
tests.
 To know the quantity of rubber replacement in pavement.
 To minimize the cost of construction.
OBJECTIVES

10. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY
• MATERIALS USED
Sl no. Materials Source
1 Asphalt MNS project plant near Aluratti
2 Aggregate Crusher near Uchhangi durga
3 Crumb rubber Harihara

11. 6mm downsize coarse Aggregates VG30 Grade bitumen
Crumb rubber10mm downsize coarse Aggregates

12. MATERIALS
COARSE AGGREATES
BITUMEN
BASIC TEST
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
AND
WATER
ABSORPTION
IMPACT TEST
BASIC TEST
PENETRATION
TEST
DUCTILITY TEST
FLASH AND FIRE
TEST
SOFTENING
POINT
CRUMB RUBBER
BITUMEN MIXES
MARSHAL STABILITY
TEST

13. SL NO MATERIALS
USED
TEST
CONDUCTED
RESULTS
OBTAINED
PERMISSABL
E LIMITS
As per code:
1 COARSE
AGGREGATE
SPECIFIC
GRAVITY
2.62 2.6-2.7 IS :23986 (Part
3) 1963
WATER
ABSORPTION
0.5% Not more
than 3%
IS :23986 (Part
3) 1963
IMPACT TEST 29.76% NOT MORE
THAN 45%
IS :23986 (Part
4) 1963
2
Bitumen
Penetration
test
65mm 60-70 IS :1203-1978
Ductility test 67.5cm > 100 IS :1208-1978
Softening
point test
500C 450C-520C IS :1205-1978
Flash point
test
fire point
test
2200C
2500C
2300C
2600C
IS :1209-1978

14. Sl. No. Properties
Results
Obtained
AS PER IS
CODE
1 Penetration 68mm IS :1203-
1978
2 Softening point(R&B) °C 62 °C IS :1205-
1978
3 Ductility 78 cm IS :1208-
1978
4 Flash point, °C 230°C IS :1209-
1978
5 Fire point, °C 255°C IS :1209-1978
6 Specific gravity of bitumen 1.00 IS :1202-1978
Tests Values Obtained for Crumb rubber
Modified Bitumen

15. NUMBER OF SPECIMENS
• WITHOUT CRUMB RUBBER
• WITH CRUMB RUBBER
CRUMB RUBBER CRUMB RUBBER 0 %
NUMBER OF SPCIMEN 9
CRUMB
RUBBER
CRUMB
RUBBER 3%
CRUMB
RUBBER 4 %
CRUMB
RUBBER 5 %
NUMBER OF
SPECIMEN
3 3 3

16. SLNO WORK DONE DATES
1. MATERIAL PURCHASED 23-02-2018
2. MATERIAL TEST RESULTS 08-03-2018
3. TRIAL MIXES 29-4-2018to5-5-2018
4. RESULTS OBTAINED 29-4-2018to5-5-2018
7.WORK PLAN

17. S.D.B.C. job mix
Sl. No. Sieve No.
11.2 d/s
Gms
2000
6.7mm d/s
Gms
1000
F.A.
Gms
1000
Cement
Gms
1000
MORTH
table
500-4
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
Avg
value
Rtd. % passing Rtd. % passing Rtd. % passing Rtd. % passing
1 13.2 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 100 100 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
2 9.5 264 86.8 0 100 0 100 0 100 90--100 94.72 93.66 93.40 95.00
3 4.75 1702 1.7 216 78.4 7 99.3 0 100 35--51 54.00 47.87 46.75 43.00
4 2.36 34 0 524 26 208 78.5 0 100 24--39 31.78 29.70 30.23 31.50
5 1.18 0 0 232 2.8 268 51.7 0 100 15--30 17.32 17.09 18.01 22.50
6 0.300 0 0 20 0.8 256 26.1 0 100 9--19 9.55 9.48 9.97 14.00
7 0.075 0 0 8 0 184 7.7 90 91 3--8 3.98 3.98 4.13 5.50

18. PERCENTAGE GRADIATION OF AGGREGATES
11.2 d/s 6.7 d/s F.A. Cement
Trial 1 40% 30% 28% 2%
100%
Trial 2 48% 22% 28% 2%
100%
Trial 3 50% 18% 30% 2%
100%

19. Gradation of coarse aggregate
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
13.29.54.752.361.180.3000.075
PercentagePassing
Sieve Size
Lower limit
Trial 2
Upper Limit

20. SDBC Grading - II Marshal Mix Design (ASTMD-1559)
Without crumb rubber
Specific Gravity of Coarse Aggregate:- 2.620
Theoritical maximum
density Gmb =
100+wt of binder to aggr
% wt of aggr + % wt of
filler + wt of binder to aggr
Avg. Sp. Gr of Aggr Sp. Gr. of
filler Sp. Gr. of Binder
DATE: 03-05-2018
Specific Gravity of Filler:- 3.15
Bitumen Grade :- 60/70
Specific Gravity of Bitumen:- 0.99
Sl
.No
% of
Bitume
n
(Total
Aggr)
% of
Bitu
men
(Tot
al
Mix)
Wt of
Specime
n
in Air
gms
Wt of
Specim
en
in
Water
gms
S.S.D.
wt.of
Specim
en
in
Water
gms
Volume
of
Specim
en c.c
Col (6-
5)
(Gb)
Avera
ge
Bulk
Densi
ty of
Speci
men
gm/cc
Col
(4/7)
Air
voids
Va =
Col (9-
8)
Col 9
Voids
filled
with
bitumen
Vb =
Col
8X3
Sp.Gr of
Binder
Voids in
mineral
aggr
VMA =
Col
(10+11)
%
% Voids
filled
with
mineral
bitumen
VFB =
Col 11
X 100
Col 12
Stabili
ty in
KN
Flow
in mm
3 to 6
Above
12
65 to 75
Above
9.00
2 to 4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1 4.17 4.00 1158.00 668.00 1160.00 492.00 2.35 2.47 4.54 9.51 14.05 67.69 15.95 4.3
2 4.71 4.50 1165.00 687.00 1189.00 502.00 2.32 2.45 5.14 10.55 15.69 67.22 16.82 2.95
3 5.26 5.00 1175.00 700.00
1215.0
0 515.00 2.28 2.43 5.46 11.52 17.55 65.66 18.98 2.75
4
Laboratory Density= 2.33 0.98 2.28 gm/cc2

22. Marshal stability test apparatus

23. Marshall Stability Graph
2.37
2.35
2.32
2.29
2.30
2.31
2.32
2.33
2.34
2.35
2.36
2.37
2.38
4.00 4.50 5.00
Density
Binder Content
Density v/s Binder Content
3.82
3.88
4.39
3.50
3.60
3.70
3.80
3.90
4.00
4.10
4.20
4.30
4.40
4.50
4.00 4.50 5.00
AirVoids
Bunder Content
Air Voids v/s binder content

24. 15.95
16.82
20.18
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
4.00 4.50 5.00
stability
binder content
stability v/s binder content
13.41
14.57
16.11
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
18.00
4.00 4.50 5.00
VMA
Binder Content
VMA v/s Binder Content

25. 71.47
73.38
72.77
70.50
71.00
71.50
72.00
72.50
73.00
73.50
74.00
4.00 4.50 5.00
%VoidsFilledwithBitumen
Binder Content
VFB V/S Binder Content
4.00
3.50
3.30
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
4.00 4.50 5.00
Flow
Binder content
Flow v/s Binder Content

26. With rubberSpecific Gravity of Coarse Aggregate:- 2.620
Theoritical maximum1 density
Gmb =
100+wt of binder to
aggr
% wt of aggr + % wt of filler
+ wt of binder to aggr
Avg. Sp. Gr of Aggr Sp. Gr. of
filler Sp. Gr. of Binder
02-05-2018
Specific Gravity of Filler:- 3.15
Bitumen Grade :- 60/70
Specific Gravity of Bitumen:- 0.99
Sl
.No
% of
Bitumen
(Total
Aggr)
% of
Bitu
men
(Tota
l
Mix)
Wt of
Specimen
in Air
gms
Wt of
Specime
n
in Water
gms
S.S.D.
wt.of
Specime
n
in Water
gms
Volume
of
Specime
n c.c
Col (6-
5)
(Gb)
Avera
ge
Bulk
Densit
y of
Speci
men
gm/cc
Col
(4/7)
Air
voids
Va =
Col (9-
8)
Col 9
Voids
filled
with
bitumen
Vb =
Col
8X3
Sp.Gr of
Binder
Voids in
mineral
aggr
VMA =
Col
(10+11)
%
% Voids
filled
with
mineral
bitumen
VFB =
Col 11 X
100
Col 12
Stabilit
y in
KN
Flow
in mm
3 to 6 Above 12 65 to 75 Above
9.00
2 to 4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1 4.71 4.50 1225.50 690.50
1237.0
0 546.50 2.24 2.45 8.34 10.19 18.54 54.99 15.95 3.00
2 4.71 4.50 1242.60 696.00
1251.5
0 555.50 2.24 2.45 8.57 10.17 18.74 54.26 16.82 3.00
3 4.71 4.50 1249.50 685.50
1254.5
0 569.00 2.20 2.45 10.25 9.98 20.23 49.34 18.98 3.30
Laboratory
Density=
2.330.98 2.28
gm/c
c2

28. Failure of specimen

29. Marshall Stability Graph
2.24
2.24
2.20
2.17
2.18
2.19
2.20
2.21
2.22
2.23
2.24
2.25
4.50 4.50 4.50
Density
Binder Content
Density v/s Binder Content
3.82
3.88
4.39
3.50
3.60
3.70
3.80
3.90
4.00
4.10
4.20
4.30
4.40
4.50
4.00 4.50 5.00
AirVoids Bunder Content
Air Voids v/s binder content

30. 15.95 16.82
20.18
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
4.00 4.50 5.00
stability
binder content
stability v/s binder content
13.41
14.57
16.11
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
18.00
4.00 4.50 5.00
VMA
Binder Content
VMA v/s Binder Content

31. 71.47
73.38
72.77
70.50
71.00
71.50
72.00
72.50
73.00
73.50
74.00
4.00 4.50 5.00
%VoidsFilledwithBitumen
Binder Content
VFB V/S Binder Content
4.00
3.50
3.30
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
4.00 4.50 5.00
Flow
Binder content
Flow v/s Binder Content

32. DISCUSSION
• The properties of bitumen such as softening point, flash point, fire
point increases with addition of the waste Rubber. This is because
the bitumen becomes increasingly viscous and there is a significant
modified blends indicating the improvement in their temperature
susceptibility resistant characteristics.
• The ductility value decreases with increase in percentage of
modifier. The ductility value less than 50cm should not be used in
road constructions, but may be used as crack and joint filler material
• By varying Rubber content Marshall Stability value is checked,
Marshall Stability values goes on Decreases due to increasing of Air
voids content.

33. CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions drawn based on the results obtained in the present study.
• The properties of bitumen such as softening point, flash point, fire point increases
with addition of the waste Crumb rubber.
• Ductility value decreases with increase in percentage of modifier.
• The optimum dose of the bitumen found to be 5 percent based on performance
grade 60/70
From the Marshall Test results, it concluded that the Marshall Stability value
increases up to 5%, then on increase in bitumen content Marshall Stability value
decreases. So the optimum binder content found to be 5%.
• The properties of bitumen can enhance by adding small amounts of the modifier
called Crumb rubber. Therefore, modified bituminous mix can bring real benefits
to highway construction, maintenance, in terms of better and longer lasting roads,
and savings in total road life costing.

34. REFERANCES
• Mohamed Sulyman, Maciej Sienkiewicz, and Jozef Haponiuk : “Asphalt
Pavement Material Improvement ” International Journal of Environmental
Science and Development, Vol. 5, No. 5, October 2014
• Nitu H. Deshmukh etal, Prof. D. Y. Kshirsagar : “Utilization of Rubber Waste in
Construction of Flexible Pavement International Journal of Advance Research
and Development Page | 70 (Volume2, Issue7)
• Yogesh M. Bajaj : “Comprehensive Literature Review on use of Waste Tyres
Rubber in Flexible Road Pavement” international Journal of Engineering Research
& Technology (IJERT) ISSN: 2278-0181 Vol. 4 Issue 02, February-2015
• D. S. V. Prasad : “ Performance of waste tyre rubber on model flexible pavement”
VOL. 4, NO. 6, AUGUST 2009

35. THANK YOU