الفهرس 
Literature ReviewOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 16 |  |  |
| | | from | 16 | | |
Abstract
This research aims to evaluate and compare different laboratory compaction methods to select the laboratory method that simulates compaction in field. The researcher has developed a research plan to achieve the requirements of the research contains appropriate choice of materials, testing program and method of asphalt mix design. The different asphalt mixes gradation that widely used in Egypt were chosen in the study (wearing surface 4C, 4B), (binder courses 3D, 3B) in accordance with the specifications of the Egyptian Code of roads and the General Authority for Roads and Bridges. The candidate compaction methods were: Marshall Automatic Impact Compaction, Marshall Manual Impact Compaction, mechanical Compaction (compression), gyratory Shear Compaction angle of gyration 1.25 and Gyratory Shear Compaction, angle of gyration 6. The evaluation of the five laboratory compaction methods was based on the similarity between the engineering properties of the laboratory compacted samples and the field cores. The engineering properties studied were, air voids, bulk density, stability, flow the laboratory compacted specimens and field cores were also evaluated with the objective of identifying a promising laboratory compaction technique which would be able to produce mixtures with engineering properties closest to those of mixtures compacted in the field. Samples for this study were selected four asphalt mix design widely used in Egypt roads as follow wearing mixes (4C,4B), binder mixes (3D,3B) according Egyptian code for highway. The principal conclusion of the study was that the Gyratory Shear Compaction angle of gyration 1.25. Method best represented the engineering properties of the field cores.