Microsoft Word - ETASR_V12_N5_pp9295-9301
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 12, No. 5, 2022, 9295-9301 9295
www.etasr.com Almasoudi & Albayati: Statistical Analysis of Component Deviation from Job Mix Formula in Hot Mix …
Statistical Analysis of Component Deviation from Job
Mix Formula in Hot Mix Asphalt
Saba S. Almasoudi
Department of Civil Engineering
College of Engineering
University of Baghdad
s.khudair1901m@coeng.uobaghdad.edu.iq
Amjad Hamad Khalil Albayati
Department of Civil Engineering
College of Engineering
University of Baghdad
a.khalil@uobaghdad.edu.iq
Received: 26 July 2022 | Accepted: 3 August 2022
Abstract-The main objective of this research is to find out the
effect of deviation in the aggregate gradients of asphalt mixtures
from the Job Mix Formula (JMF) on the general mixture
performance. Three road layers were worked on (wearing layer,
binder layer, and base layer) and statistical analysis was
performed for the data of completed projects in Baghdad city
and the sieve that carried the largest number of deviations for
each layer was identified. No.8 sieve (2.36mm), No.50 sieve
(0.3mm), and 3/8'' sieve (9.5mm) had the largest number of
deviations in the wearing layer, the binder layer, and the base
layer respectively. After that, a mixture called Mix 1, was made.
This mixture was selected from a number of completed mixtures,
and it represents the worst mixture. Mix 1 was compared with
two other mixtures, Mix 2 and Mix 3, Mix 2 representing the
middle of JMF for the gradients of aggregates, and Mix 3 is the
same as Mix 1 except for the sieve that contains the largest
number of deviations, so the gradient of aggregates for it is the
middle of JMF. Fifteen Marshall specimens were made for each
mixture and for each layer in order to know the differences in
Marshall properties between the mixtures. Also, 6 specimens
were made for each mixture (the total is 18 specimens for each
layer) to check the indirect tensile strength, for the purpose of
knowing mixtures susceptibility to moisture. Finally, 1 specimen
was made for each mixture for repeated load test for the purpose
of knowing the performance of the mixtures with respect to
permanent deformation. The tests showed that the performance
of Mix 2 and Mix 3 was improved in comparison with Mix 1. The
deviation of the aggregate gradients in specific sieves may be
higher than the limits of the JMF or it may be less, and in both
cases, the implementation of a mixture like Mix 1 for the streets is
bad for the performance of the road and failures occur due to the
wrong implementation of the JMF. On the other hand, there are
much better mixtures in all respects such as Mix 2 and Mix 3,
and if they are implemented on the streets, they will certainly
have much better.
Keywords-hot mix asphalt; JMF; deviation; aggregate
gradations
I. INTRODUCTION
Road construction industry faces the challenge of designing
and constructing high-performance asphalt materials to meet
the ever-growing demand of increasing traffic volumes and
axle loadings. Quality control over the production of hot
asphalt compounds is a significant issue. When the asphalt
components are manufactured to have high performance under
weather and road conditions, this increases asphalt pavement
life and consequently reduces additional maintenance and
rehabilitation costs.
One of the most important issues that affect pavement
design is the occurrence of defects. The reasons for these
defects may be the quality of the used materials, laboratory
equipment, unqualified staff, the lack and delay of necessary
maintenance after the implementation of the pavement, wrong
construction, or a flaw or wrong execution of the JMF resulting
in aggregate gradients that do not conform to JMF contain
deviations. Generally, the deviations in aggregate gradations
are not accidental, but are caused by external factors [1]. The
method to verify that the produced mix complies with the
project specifications is the JMF or dense gradation mix
submittal. A successful mix design should meet the suggested
proportion of aggregates and asphalt binder. This suggested
mixture also includes the type of asphalt binder, the aggregate
gradation, and the permissible specification bands for inherent
material and production variability. The mix designer is free to
select a specific JMF gradation, and the manufacturer is
expected to produce the mix according to this JMF gradation
closely [2]. The Iraqi standard specifications for roads and
bridges, SCRB R/9 2003, allowed some tolerances in JMF with
regard to the following properties: coarse aggregate gradients,
fine aggregate gradients, filler content, asphalt concrete
content, and mixing temperature (Table I) [3]. The
characteristics of the asphalt mixture's components have a
significant and obvious impact on the performance of the
pavement, especially the aggregates that make up a significant
portion of the asphalt mixture. Aggregates are the largest and
most important volumetric component of the asphalt mixture
and its performance and are the basis of the homogeneous and
solid texture of the asphalt mixture.
In addition to serving as the base for the design of asphalt
mixtures, aggregates play a significant role in determining the
quality of the road, the loads applied on it, and the nature of
road layers. The type and viscosity of the asphalt used are
impacted by the gradient of the aggregates and internal friction.
The fundamental concept of choosing the aggregate quality and
Corresponding author: Sabs S. Almasoudi
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 12, No. 5, 2022, 9295-9301 9296
www.etasr.com Almasoudi & Albayati: Statistical Analysis of Component Deviation from Job Mix Formula in Hot Mix …
size is to get the highest consistency and homogeneity of the
asphalt mixture, creating the perfect layer to receive and
distribute the load of wheels and vehicles on the sub base
without failures [4-6].
TABLE I. ALLOWED TOLERANCES FROM JMF [3]
Sieve size Tolerance
Aggregate materials passing through sieve
4.75mm (No.4) or larger
±6%
Aggregate materials passing through sieve
2.36mm (No.8) to sieve 0.3mm (No.50)
±4%
Filler passing through sieve 0.075mm (No.200) ±1.5%
Asphalt ±0.3%
Mixing temperature ±15
o
C
Aggregate gradation, which is measured by sieve analysis,
is the distribution of aggregate particle size. While aggregates
of varying size made the mixture have fewer voids, the
aggregates that have no variety in sizes make the compacted
mass to have more voids due to the uniformity of the particles.
Aggregate gradation significantly affects Hot Mix Asphalt
(HMA) properties. The component content in the HMA
mixture has been shown to have an impact on the mixture's
structure and properties, which in turn affects the dependability
and durability of the pavement [7]. It is concluded that the
deviations related to the gradient of the asphalt mixture
aggregates are considered to be effective and common
deviations, which requires taking appropriate procedures to
avoid these failures, including doing the correct JMF in a
manner appropriate to the use of the intended layer in addition
to the use of materials that successfully pass laboratory testing
and ensure the correct implementation of the required thickness
and compaction, thus, improving the quality and performance
of the implemented road in a way that meets its purpose [8].
In order to find some performance requirements, designers
are interested in aggregate gradation. For good permanent
deformation resistance, Superpave defines the "Restricted
Zone" within the gradation of aggregates and recommends that
the limited area should not be violated. Depending on the
nominal maximum particle size, the restricted zone is between
the mid-size particles (4.75 or 2.36mm), and the 0.3mm at the
maximum dense line [9-11]. Aggregate gradation determines
how well an asphalt pavement performs. Any changes in
aggregate gradation cause changes in many factors, such as
directions and contact points, which in turn affect the
performance of asphalt pavements [12]. Authors in [13]
showed the use of 4 different aggregate gradations and the
wheel tracking test showed that they were superior to fine
aggregates regarding permanent deformation. Authors in [14]
showed that aggregate gradation was a significant factor of the
perfect mixture. With three grades and various percentages,
they produced a hot and a warm mix of asphalt from a single
source. The test results showed that the aggregate gradations
had a variety of effects on the introduced mixtures' rutting
resistance, particularly their sensitivity to moisture. Authors in
[15] examined the way aggregate gradation affects the different
characteristics of asphalt concrete mixtures. The effects of
different aggregate types and gradations on the mixing
properties have been investigated for blends with fine, medium,
and coarse aggregate gradations. The mixtures' asphalt content
remained constant at the job mix design content. They looked
at the properties of Marshall stability, Marshall flow, unit
weight, air voids, and mineral aggregates. Analysis of the
different aggregate types made clear that the fine-coarse and
coarse-fine variations had the greatest impact on the mix.
Authors in [16] estimated the effect of asphalt and aggregate
gradation type on HMA found in asphalt concrete mixtures.
Additionally, the effect of the aggregate characteristics on the
Marshall mix properties was investigated. Finally, an
estimation of the relationship between rutting potential and
HMA mixing was made. The study showed that characteristic
mineral aggregates had a significant influence on the
construction of local highways, giving the possibility to
develop resistance to various externally applied loads and
environmental conditions. Furthermore, it illustrated how
aggregate properties have a long-term impact on the way hot-
mix asphalt is deformed.
Many studies have been conducted to identify the effect of
aggregate gradation on moisture susceptibility and permanent
deformation of HMA. Rutting has recently taken over as the
main mode of flexible pavement failure as a result of increased
truck tire pressure and the lack of maintenance [17]. Rutting is
mainly brought on by the accumulation of permanent
deformations in the pavement or its layers. Heavy axle loads
and high tire pressure contribute significantly to rutting in the
flexible pavement surface layer. High tire pressure increases
stress and reduces the area of contact between the tire and the
pavement, which aggravates deformation in flexible
pavements. Additionally, the pavements' top layer is
significantly impacted by environmental conditions [18]. The
asphalt mixtures used in road construction must be resistant to
cracking and permanent deformations. They are composed of
voids, aggregates, and binder. To obtain relevant properties that
affect the way the asphalt behaves, appropriate materials must
first be chosen in advance, and their proportions in the asphalt
mixture must be determined. It's essential to know how asphalt
mixtures are built in, in addition to how they are produced [6].
It is widely accepted that coarser gradation results in an HMA
mixture that is more rut resistant. However, some studies have
discovered that mixtures with finer gradations have lower rut
potential [19]. Authors in [20] observed that, a significant
contributing factor to the asphalt binder film's loss of adhesion
may be the fine aggregates. They also noted that the presence
of crushed sand may reduce moisture damage and that
maximum aggregate size and mixture gradation have a
significant impact on rutting resistance.
II. DATA USED AND MOST COMMON DEVIATIONS
For the purpose of knowing the sieve that carries the largest
number of deviations in the aggregate gradients (the most
frequent) and for the three considered layers (wearing, binder,
and base layer) a data set was acquired from road projects
implemented in Baghdad governorate. The data were randomly
selected. Data were taken from 140 wearing layer specimens,
33 binder layer specimens, and 30 base layer specimens. The
percentage of passing through each sieve can be easily plotted
for each sieve and the conclusion is that the largest number of
deviations in the aggregate gradients from JMF of wearing
layer were sieve No.8 (2.36mm) for the wearing layer, No.50
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 12, No. 5, 2022, 9295-9301 9297
www.etasr.com Almasoudi & Albayati: Statistical Analysis of Component Deviation from Job Mix Formula in Hot Mix …
(0.3mm) for the binder layer, and sieve 3/8" (9.5mm) for the
base layer.
III. SELECTION OF AGGREGATE GRADATIONS
The sieve that has the largest number of deviations in
aggregate gradations was determined for each considered layer.
Figures 1-3 show the aggregate gradients for the worst
implemented chosen mixture, and the amount of its deviation
from Iraqi specification for roads and bridges (SCRB) and
JMF. This mixture was called Mix 1. The performance of this
mixture (Mix 1) was compared with mixtures without or less
errors and deviations, in order to determine how bad these
mixtures are being implemented. Another mixture, called Mix
2, was made. Its aggregate gradients represent the midpoint of
the JMF for Mix 1. A third mixture, called Mix 3, was prepared
with the same gradations of aggregates as Mix1, except for the
sieve containing the largest number of deviations (the sieve that
deviates from the JMF). So we have:
• Mix 1: as it is.
• Mix 2: mean of JMF.
• Mix 3: as it is, mid for deviated sieve.
The above were implemented on all layers (wearing, binder
and base). Figures 1-3 show the gradations of aggregates for
each mixture and for each layer.
Fig. 1. Wearing layer aggregate gradients.
Fig. 2. Binder layer aggregate gradients.
Fig. 3. Base layer aggregate gradients.
IV. MATERIAL CHARACTERIZATION
A. Aggregates
Crushed quartz was used as aggregates in this research. In
the city of Baghdad, this aggregate type is frequently used in
asphalt mixtures. Routine tests were performed on the
aggregates to assess their physical characteristics. Table II
provides a summary of the results along with the specification
limits established by the SCRB. The test results indicate that
the selected aggregates meet the SCRB specifications.
TABLE II. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES
Property
Coarse
aggregates
Fine
aggregates
SCRB
Bulk specific gravity (ASTMC127
and C128)
2.646 2.63 ……
Apparent specific gravity
(ASTMC127 and C128)
2.656 2.667 ……
Percent water absorption (ASTM
C127 and C128)
0.14 0.523 …...
Percent wear (Los-Angeles
Abrasion) (ASTM C131)
19.69 30 Max
Fractured pieces (%) 98 90 min
Sand Equivalent(ASTM D 2419) 55
45 min
Superpave
(SP-2)
Soundness loss by sodium sulfate
solution,%(C-88)
3.4 12 Max
TABLE III. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF AC 40/50
Tests Unit
40/50 AC
specification
SCRB
specification
Penetration at 25
o
C, 100gm, 5sec
(ASTM-D5)
0.1mm 45 40-50
Softening point R&B (ASTM-
D36)
o
C 48 …..
Specific gravity at 25
o
C (ASTM-
D70)
...... 1.04 …..
Flash point (ASTM-D92)
o
C 290 Min. 232
Ductility (ASTM-D113) cm 132 Min. 100
Residue from thin film oven test
(ASTM-D1754)
Retained penetration ,% of
original (ASTM-D5)
0.1mm 59 Min. 55
Ductility at 25
o
C, 5cm/min,
(ASTM-D113)
cm 90 Min. 25
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 12, No. 5, 2022, 9295-9301 9298
www.etasr.com Almasoudi & Albayati: Statistical Analysis of Component Deviation from Job Mix Formula in Hot Mix …
B. Asphalt Cement
The penetration grade (40/50) of asphalt cement, which is
frequently used in paving construction projects in Iraq, was
considered in this study. For the purpose of determining the
fundamental physical characteristics of asphalt cement, a
number of ASTM tests were carried out. The asphalt cement
used in this study complies with the necessary (SCRB/R9 2003
Revision) specification, as shown in Table III.
C. Filler
The filler is a non-plastic material passing through sieve
No.200 (0.075mm). The filler used in this work is limestone
dust. Its physical properties are presented in Table IV.
TABLE IV. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF MINERAL FILLER.
Property Test result
Specific gravity 2.78
Passing sieve No.200 (0.075mm) 85
V. SPECIMEN PREPARATION AND TESTING PROCEDURE
To evaluate the performance of the three mixtures, three
types of tests were performed, the Marshall test (ASTM
D6926-2010a) in order to obtain the optimum asphalt content,
density, stability, flow, and other properties, indirect tensile
strength test (ASTM- D-4867-96) in order to evaluate the
moisture sensitivity of the mixes, and finally the repeated load
test for permanent deformation evaluation.
A. Marshall Test
In Marshall design there are two kinds of test: stability-flow
tests and density voids tests. The Marshall method (ASTM
D6927) is used to determine the optimum asphalt content of the
HMA pavement. For the purpose of calculating the optimum
asphalt content, 5 different percentage values 4, 4.3, 4.6, 4.9
and 5.2%, were used for asphalt cement (binder course), while
3.4, 3.7, 4, 4.3, and 4.6% were used for base course, and 4.3,
4.6, 4.9, 5.2, and 5.5% were used for the wearing course. Three
specimens were prepared for each ratio. Therefore, 15
specimens were prepared for each mix, i.e. 45 specimens for
each layer (to a total of 135 specimens for the three layers).
The aggregate gradations for all mixtures (Mix 1, Mix 2, Mix
3) and for all layers were as explained above and the Marshall
specimens were made after the calculation of the optimum
asphalt content for each mixture. The Marshall test steps have
been performed.
B. Indirect Tensile Strength Test
To assess the moisture sensitivity of mixes, Indirect Tensile
Tests (ITSs), according to ASTM- D-4867-96 were performed
for each mix: two subsets, 3 specimens each were compacted
with blow range between 30 to 50 for wearing course, binder
course, and base course. So, 6 specimens were prepared for
each mixture and for each layer, to a total of 54 specimens. The
first subset was tested in a dry condition (soaked in water for
2hr at 25
o
C). The second subset was tested in wet condition,
i.e. it was inundated for 24hr at 60
o
C followed by 25
o
C for 2hr
in water bath. The Marshall device applies a compressive load
to a cylindrical specimen through two diametrically opposed
rigid strips consisting of 10×10mm (0.39×0.39in) rectangular
steel bars of 102mm (4in) diameter specimens to induce tensile
stress along the diametric vertical axis of the test specimen. A
series of splitting tensile strength tests were conducted at a
constant strain rate of 2in/min vertically until vertical cracks
appeared and the sample failed. The peak compressive load
was recorded and used to calculate the tensile strength of the
specimen using (1):
St = 2 Pu/ πtD (1)
where St is the tensile strength (Psi), Pu is the max. load (lb), t
is specimen's height immediately before tensile test (in), and D
is specimen's diameter (in.).
The Tensile Strength Ratio (TSR, %) was calculated by:
TSR = (Stm/Std) ×100 (2)
where Stm is the average tensile strength of the moisture
conditioned subset (Psi) and Std is the average tensile strength
of the dry subset (Psi).
C. Repeated Load Test
A total of 9 cylindrical specimens (1 specimen for each mix
for the 3 layers) were fabricated to investigate the effect of
deviation in the gradation of aggregates on permanent
deformation of asphalt concrete mixture at 40
o
C. The
cylindrical specimens produced for this study had initial
dimensions of 101.6mm (4in) diameter × 152.4mm (6in)
height. The tests were performed at single stress level of 20Psi
(138kPa). Repeated compressive loading for 10,000 repetitions
was conducted with a loading cycle of 60 cycles per minute in
duration and consisting of a 0.1s load period followed by a 0.9s
rest period (the 0.1s load duration was selected in order to
simulate the loading of truck moving at the highway with a
speed of 50km/hr). This test was applied to determine the
permanent deformation characteristics of paving materials.
Permanent axial deformation was recorded throughout the test
using Linear Variable Differential Transducer (LVDT) to
measure the deformation in the upper face of the sample via a
data acquisition system. A Pneumatic Repeated Load System
(PRLS) apparatus manufactured under the auspices of
University of Baghdad's Civil Engineering Department was
used to calculate the permanent strain values [21]. The values
of the permanent strain were obtained at 1, 2, 10, 100, 500,
1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000, 7000, 8000, 9000, and
10000 load repetitions. The permanent strain (Ɛp) was
calculated by:
Ɛp =
����
�
�
(3)
where Ɛp is the axial permanent microstrain, Pd is the axial
permanent deformation, andh is the specimen's height.
Authors in [22, 23] suggested a log-log relationship
between Ɛp and N, as in (4):
Ɛp = aN
b
(4)
where N is the number of load repetitions, and a and b are
positive regression constants. As depicted in Figure 4, the
parameter a is the intercept with the permanent strain axis, and
b is the slope of the linear portion of the logarithmic
relationship.
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 12, No. 5, 2022, 9295-9301 9299
www.etasr.com Almasoudi & Albayati: Statistical Analysis of Component Deviation from Job Mix Formula in Hot Mix …
Fig. 4. Log-log relationship between permanent microstrain and number
of load repetitions.
VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
As mentioned above, Mix 1 is the mixture that has already
been implemented in some of the streets of the city of Baghdad.
This mixture shows some deviations in the gradients of the
aggregates from the mixing equation and for the 3 layers of the
road. These deviations surely did not occur intentionally, but
due to defects in the JMF specified for each project,
implementation errors, or errors of weighing and determining
the exact amount of aggregate required for each sieve and for
each mixture. Some of these deviations were beyond the upper
limits of the mixing equation and even exceeded the amount of
tolerance specified according to the SCRB. On the other hand,
some of the deviations were less than the minimum limit of the
mixing equation. Both cases can cause defects in the mixture.
The occurrence of defects in the aggregate gradients
prescribed for a particular road, means an increase or decrease
of fine or coarse materials in the mixture, leading to problems
in the mixture and weakened performance of the road, making
it prone to failures. This was made clear from the test results.
To clarify the difference between the performance of the 3
mixtures, the results of each test and for each layer, will be
discussed.
For the wearing course, the deviated sieve is sieve No. 8
(2.36mm). For Mix 1, the passing percentage of aggregates for
this sieve is 24%, which is outside the lower limit of JMF (it is
even outside the tolerance limit ±4) and is also less than the
lower limit of Iraqi standard specifications, which is 28%.
For binder course, in Mix 1, the value of the aggregates that
passed through the sieve No. 50 is 8%, which is less than the
lower limit of the JMF and its tolerance limit, but within the
limits of the Iraqi specification, as the percentage of passing
through sieve No. 50 of binder course according to it must be
within 5-19%.
For base course, in Mix 1, the transit ratio of aggregates to a
3/8" sieve was 72%, which is outside the upper limits of the
mixing equation, and the tolerance limits of the mixing
equation, but it is within the limits of SCRB, as the value of
aggregates for this sieve and the base layer according to the
SCRB is from 48 to 74%.
Mix 2 is the best (ideal) mixture. Figures 5-11 show how
the properties of Mix 2 and Mix 3 were significantly improved
in comparison to Mix 1. The values of stability, flow, and
density of the asphalt mixture improved. Also, an increase in
the ITR value was observed, which means more moisture
resistance. A decrease in the values of slope and intercept was
also noticed for Mix 2 and Mix 3 compared to Mix 1 for all the
considered layers of the road (wearing, binder and base). The
higher the value of the intercept, the larger is the strain and
hence the larger the potential for permanent deformation [24],
while slope b represents the rate of change in the permanent
strain as a function number of loading cycles (N) in the log-log
scale. High-slope values of a mix indicate an increase in the
material deformation rate, hence less resistance against rutting.
A mix with a low slope value is preferable as it prevents the
occurrence of the rutting distress mechanism [25].
Fig. 5. Tests results of asphalt concrete percentage for each layer.
Fig. 6. Tests results of Marshall stability for each layer.
Fig. 7. Tests results of Marshall flow for each layer.
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 12, No. 5, 2022, 9295-9301 9300
www.etasr.com Almasoudi & Albayati: Statistical Analysis of Component Deviation from Job Mix Formula in Hot Mix …
Fig. 8. Tests results of Marshall desity for each layer.
Fig. 9. Tests results of indirect TSR for each layer.
Fig. 10. Intercept value from log-log relationship between microstrain and
load repetition for each layer.
Fig. 11. Slope value from log-log relationship between microstrain and
load repetition for each layer.
VII. CONCLUSION
In this research, three types of mixtures and three pavement
layers were studied. The first mixture is already implemented
in some of the road projects in the city of Baghdad, and it
shows deviations in the aggregate gradients from the mixing
equations, suffering from weak performance and noticeable
failures in some roads. Knowing the importance of adjusting
the aggregate gradients in the asphalt mixture according to the
specifications, noticeable performance improvement was
noticed when Mix 2 and Mix 3 were produced (correcting
deviant aggregate gradients according to the mixing equations).
Even if it is difficult to implement Mix 2 (which represents the
gradients of aggregates at the mean values of the mixing
equation), it is possible to implement Mix 3, which is closer to
the reality of implementation, and all its properties are better
than Mix 1, guaranteeing an improvement in road performance,
fewer failures, and greater durability.
REFERENCES
[1] Y. H. Huang, Pavement analysis and design. Hoboken, NJ, USA:
Prentice Hall, 1993.
[2] H. M. A. A. Kareem and A. H. K. Albayati, "The Possibility of
Minimizing Rutting Distress in Asphalt Concrete Wearing Course,"
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, vol. 12, no. 1,
pp. 8063–8074, Feb. 2022, https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.4669.
[3] Standards and Specifications for Roads and Bridges (Section R9).
Baghdad, Iraq: State Commission of Roads and Bridges, Ministry of
Housing and Construction, 2003.
[4] T. D. White, S. R. Johnson, and J. J. Yzenas, Aggregate Contribution to
Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Performance. West Conshohocken, PA, USA:
ASTM International, 2001.
[5] M. A. Al-Jumaily, "A Study into the Merits of Using Recycled Hot-
Mixes in the Construction of Surface Course Pavement in Iraq," M.S.
thesis, University of Technology, 1998.
[6] N. Zavrtanik, A. Ljubic, and G. Turk, "Statisticka odstupanja u
analizama svojstava asfaltnih mjesavina," Gradevinar, vol. 67, no. 12,
pp. 1199–1206, 2015, https://doi.org/10.14256/JCE.1176.2014.
[7] J. Braziunas and H. Sivilevicius, "Statistical analysis of component
deviation from job-mix formula in hot mix asphalt," in 8th International
Conference on Environmental Engineering, Vilnius, Lithuania, Dec.
2011, pp. 1044–1050.
[8] H. H. Joni, "Most Distresses Causes in Flexible Pavement For Baghdad
Streets At Last Years," Engineering and Technology Journal, vol. 28,
no. 18, pp. 894–906, 2010.
[9] P. S. Kandhal and L. A. Cooley, "The Restricted Zone in the Superpave
Aggregate Gradation Specification," National Academy Press,
Washington, DC, USA, NCHRP REPORT 464, 2001.
[10] L. T. de de Souza, "Investigation of aggregate angularity effects on
asphalt concrete mixture performance using experimental and virtual
asphalt samples," M.S. thesis, University of Nebraska, 2009.
[11] H. Al-Mosawe, N. Thom, G. Airey, and A. Ai-Bayati, "Effect of
aggregate gradation on the stiffness of asphalt mixtures," International
Journal of Pavement Engineering and Asphalt Technology, vol. 16, no.
2, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2015, https://doi.org/10.1515/ijpeat-2015-0008.
[12] H. Al-Mosawe, N. Thom, G. Airey, and A. Albayati, "Linear viscous
approach to predict rut depth in asphalt mixtures," Construction and
Building Materials, vol. 169, pp. 775–793, Apr. 2018, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.065.
[13] M. A. Ahmed and M. I. E. Attia, "Impact of Aggregate Gradation and
Type on Hot Mix Asphalt Rutting In Egypt," International Journal of
Engineering Research and Applications, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 2249–2258,
2013.
[14] E. Sangsefidi, H. Ziari, and A. Mansourkhaki, "The effect of aggregate
gradation on creep and moisture susceptibility performance of warm mix
asphalt," International Journal of Pavement Engineering, vol. 15, no. 2,
pp. 133–141, Feb. 2014, https://doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2012.752824.
[15] A. H. M. Afaf, "Effect of aggregate gradation and type on hot asphalt
concrete mix properties," Journal of Engineering Sciences, vol. 42, no.
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 12, No. 5, 2022, 9295-9301 9301
www.etasr.com Almasoudi & Albayati: Statistical Analysis of Component Deviation from Job Mix Formula in Hot Mix …
3, pp. 567–574, May 2014, https://doi.org/10.21608/jesaun.2014.
115005.
[16] A. F. Al-Ani, "The effect of aggregate gradation and asphalt type on
Marshall Properties and permanent deformation parameters of asphalt
concrete mixes," Association of Arab Universities Journal of
Engineering Sciences, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 195–212, Apr. 2018.
[17] O. M. Kunene and D. Allopi, "Comparison Between Conditions of
Major Roads Within and Outside the Port of Durban," Engineering,
Technology & Applied Science Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 363–367,
Feb. 2013, https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.263.
[18] F. Alzaidy and A. H. K. Albayati, "A Comparison between Static and
Repeated Load Test to Predict Asphalt Concrete Rut Depth,"
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, vol. 11, no. 4,
pp. 7363–7369, Aug. 2021, https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.4236.
[19] E. Vivar and J. Haddock, "HMA Pavement Performance and
Durability," Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA,
FHWA/IN/JTRP-2005/14 2-11–14, SPR-2646, 2006, https://doi.org/
10.5703/1288284313391.
[20] C. Pan and T. White, "Conditions for Stripping Using Accelerated
Testing," Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA,
FHWA/IN/JTRP-97/13, Feb. 1999, https://doi.org/10.5703/1288284313
476.
[21] A. Albayati, "Permanent Deformation Prediction of Asphalt Concrete
Under Repeated Loading," University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq, 2006,
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.2630.8242.
[22] T. L. J. Wasage, G. Ong, T. Fwa, and S. Tan, "Laboratory evaluation of
rutting resistance of geosynthetics reinforced asphalt pavement," Journal
of the Institution of Engineers, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 29–44, Jan. 2004.
[23] C. L. Monismith, N. Ogawa, and C. R. Freeme, "Permanent deformation
characteristics of subgrade soils in repeated loading," in 54th Annual
Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, USA,
Jan. 1975, pp. 1–17.
[24] M. W. Witczak and K. Kaloush, "Specimen Geometry and Aggregate
Size Effects in Uniaxial Compression and Constant Height Shear Tests,"
in Asphalt Paving Technology 2000, Reno, NV, USA, Mar. 2000, pp.
733–793.
[25] W. A. Gul, "Effect of recycled cement concrete content on rutting
behavior of asphalt concrete," M.S. thesis, Middle East Technical
University, Ankara, Turkey, 2008.