Gradation Analysis of Cold Feed and Extracted Bituminuous Mix Samples, MLR-88-2, 1988

Since 1987, the Iowa Department of Transportation has based control of hot asphalt concrete mixes on cold feed gradations. This report presents results of comparisons between cold feed gradations and gradations of aggregate from the same material after it has been processed through the plant and laydown machine. Results are categorized based on mix type, plant type, and method of dust control, in an effort to quantify and identify the factors contributing to those changes. Results of the report are: 1. From the 390 sample comparisons made, aggregate degradation due to asphalt plant processing was demonstrated by an average increase of +0.7% passing the #200 sieve and an average increase in surface area of +1.8 sq. ft. per pound of aggregate. 2. Categories with Type A Mix or Recycling as a sorting criteria generally produced greater degradation than categories containing Type B Mixes and/or plants with scrubbers. 3. None of the averages calculated for the categories should be considered unacceptably high, however, it is information that should be considered when making mix changes in the field, selecting asphalt contents for borderline mix designs, or when evaluating potential mix gradation specification or design criteria changes.

Sieve Analysis of Combined Aggregate Samples by Different Test Methods, MLR-84-05, 1982

This past winter the sieve analysis of combined aggregate was investigated. This study was given No. 26 by the Central Laboratory. The purpose of this work was to try and develop a sieve analysis procedure for combined aggregate which is less time consuming and has the same accuracy as the method described in I.M. 304. In an attempt to use a variety of aggregates for this investigation, a request was made to each District Materials Office to obtain at least 3 different combined aggregate samples in their respective districts. At the same time it was also requested that the field technician test these samples, prior to submitting them to the Central Laboratory. The field technician was instructed to test each sample as described in method I.M. 304 and also by a modified AASHTO T27 method which will be identified in the report as Method A. The modified AASHTO Method A was identical to T27 with the exception that a smaller sample is used for testing. The field technicians submitted the samples, test results and also comments regarding the modified AASHTO procedure. The general comments of the modified AASHTO procedure were: The method was much simpler to follow; however, it took about the same amount of time so there was no real advantage. After reviewing AASHTO T27, T164, I.M. 304 and Report No. FHWA-RD-77-53 another test method was purposed. Report No. FHWA-RD-77-53 is a report prepared by FHWA from data they gathered concerning control practices and shortcut or alternative test methods for aggregate gradation. A second test method was developed which also was very similar to AASHTO T27, The test procedure for this method is attached and is identified as Method B. The following is a summary of test results submitted by the Field Technicians and obtained by the aggregate section of the Central Laboratory.