5 Expert Factors: A Practical Guide on How Mix Design Affects Asphalt Content bybasohalt Plant

Dic 10, 2025

Astratto

The determination of the optimal asphalt content in Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) is a foundational process governed by the principles of volumetric mix design. This procedure is not arbitrary but is methodically dictated by the physical and chemical properties of the constituent materials—aggregates and asphalt binder. The mix design process, whether following Marshall or Superpave methodologies, aims to find a binder quantity that effectively coats aggregate particles, fills a specific portion of the void space, and ensures adequate film thickness for durability without sacrificing stability. Key aggregate characteristics such as gradation, absorption, and specific gravity directly influence the void structure, particularly the Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA). VMA represents the volume available to be occupied by the asphalt binder and essential air voids. Therefore, the final asphalt content is a dependent variable, precisely calculated to satisfy predetermined volumetric targets like air voids (Va) and Voids Filled with Asphalt (VFA), which are critical for resisting rutting and moisture damage. An asphalt plant's function is to accurately replicate this laboratory-derived design on a mass-production scale.

Punti di forza

  • Aggregate properties like gradation and absorption are primary drivers of binder demand.
  • Volumetric targets, especially VMA and air voids, dictate the final asphalt percentage.
  • The Superpave design method offers a more performance-related approach than Marshall.
  • Understanding how mix design affects asphalt content by an asphalt plant is key to quality.
  • Proper plant calibration is necessary to translate the lab design into durable pavement.
  • Binder film thickness, a function of content and gradation, is vital for pavement longevity.
  • A change in aggregate source requires a complete redesign to find the new optimum binder.

Indice dei contenuti

Factor 1: The Foundational Role of Aggregate Gradation and Properties

To truly grasp how an asphalt mix design culminates in a specific asphalt content, one must first appreciate the aggregates. They are not merely passive fillers; they form the structural backbone of the pavement, accounting for roughly 95% of the mix by weight. Imagine building a stone wall. You wouldn't use stones of only one size, would you? You would use a combination of large, intermediate, and small stones to fit them together tightly, minimizing the gaps. The same logic applies to asphalt pavement. The properties of these aggregates—their size distribution, shape, and inherent nature—create the void structure that the liquid asphalt binder must fill.

Understanding Aggregate Gradation: The Skeleton of the Mix

Gradation refers to the distribution of particle sizes within the total aggregate blend. This is determined in the laboratory by passing the aggregate sample through a series of sieves with progressively smaller openings. The result is a recipe, a specific percentage of coarse, intermediate, and fine particles. This recipe is perhaps the single most significant factor influencing the required asphalt content.

A dense-graded mix, which is common for surface courses, has a good representation of all particle sizes. This creates a relatively tight packing, resulting in a lower percentage of voids between the particles. Consequently, it requires less asphalt binder to fill these voids and coat the particles. In contrast, an open-graded or gap-graded mix intentionally omits certain particle sizes. This creates a much larger void structure. Think of a jar filled with only large marbles versus one filled with marbles and sand. The jar with only marbles has much more empty space. An open-graded friction course (OGFC), designed to allow water to drain through it, is a perfect example. Its high void content (often 18% or more) demands a significantly higher asphalt content to ensure the particles are adequately glued together and to achieve a thick, durable binder film on each particle.

Therefore, the journey to determining asphalt content begins with the gradation curve. It sets the stage by defining the volume of empty space—the Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA)—that will need to be managed.

The Impact of Particle Shape: Angularity and Texture

Beyond size, the shape and surface texture of the aggregates play a profound role. Consider the difference between stacking smooth, round river pebbles versus sharp, crushed quarry stone. The river pebbles will pack together more tightly, leaving less void space. The crushed stone, with its angular, interlocking faces, will create a stronger structure but with more voids between the particles.

  • Angularity: Crushed, angular particles are preferred in high-quality asphalt mixes because they interlock, providing shear strength and resistance to deformation (rutting). This interlocking, however, creates more void space than would be found with rounded, uncrushed gravel. More voids mean a higher demand for asphalt binder to fill them.
  • Surface Texture: A rough, textured aggregate surface has a greater surface area than a smooth, glassy one of the same volume. This increased surface area requires more asphalt binder to achieve the same film thickness. A thicker binder film is generally better for durability and resistance to cracking, so a rougher texture, while beneficial for strength, also increases the optimum asphalt content.

Binder Absorption: The Thirsty Nature of Aggregates

Not all aggregates are created equal in their porosity. Some aggregates, like certain types of limestone or lightweight aggregates, are like sponges. When mixed with liquid asphalt binder at high temperatures, they will absorb some of it into their surface pores. This absorbed asphalt does not contribute to the "effective" binder content—the binder that actually glues the particles together and provides durability.

During the mix design process, the absorption capacity of the aggregate (Pba) is carefully measured. The final recommended asphalt content (Pb) will be the sum of the effective asphalt content (Pbe) and the absorbed asphalt content (Pba). If a contractor switches from a low-absorption aggregate (e.g., granite) to a high-absorption aggregate (e.g., a porous limestone) without adjusting the mix design, the pavement will be starved of effective binder, leading to rapid aging, raveling, and cracking. This illustrates how an intrinsic property of the stone directly translates into a required adjustment in asphalt content, a clear example of how mix design affects asphalt content bybasohalt plant production.

Aggregate Property Descrizione Impact on Asphalt Content
Gradation Distribution of particle sizes. Dense-graded mixes have lower voids and require less asphalt. Open-graded mixes have higher voids and require more asphalt.
Angularity The degree of sharpness of particle corners. Higher angularity creates more voids and a stronger aggregate skeleton, increasing the demand for asphalt.
Surface Texture The roughness of the particle surface. Rougher textures have a larger surface area, requiring more asphalt to achieve a given binder film thickness.
Absorption The porosity of the aggregate. Highly absorptive aggregates soak up binder, increasing the total asphalt content needed to satisfy the effective binder requirements.

Specific Gravity (Gsb): The True Density of the Stone

The bulk specific gravity (Gsb) of the aggregate is a measure of its density, including the water-permeable voids. This value is fundamental to all volumetric calculations. It is the bridge that allows engineers to convert the known weights of materials used in the lab into the volumes they occupy. Without an accurate Gsb, all other volumetric properties, such as VMA and air voids, would be incorrect. An error in Gsb of just 0.02 can lead to a significant error in the calculated air voids, potentially leading the designer to select an incorrect asphalt content. It is the bedrock upon which the entire volumetric mix design is built.

Factor 2: Volumetric Properties – The Blueprint for Performance

If aggregate properties set the stage, volumetric properties are the architectural blueprint for the asphalt mix. An asphalt mixture is a three-phase system composed of aggregate, asphalt binder, and air. The goal of mix design is not simply to coat the rocks with black glue; it is to proportion these three components to create a final compacted pavement that will perform under traffic and environmental stress for many years. The language of this proportioning is volumetrics. The final asphalt content is almost entirely a result of satisfying these volumetric requirements.

Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA): Creating Space for Durability

VMA is one of the most important concepts in asphalt mix design. It is defined as the volume of intergranular void space between the aggregate particles of a compacted asphalt mixture. It includes the volume that will be filled by the effective asphalt binder and the volume of air voids.

Think of VMA as the "pantry" of your asphalt mix. You need enough space in the pantry to hold both the asphalt binder (the groceries) and a small amount of air (some empty shelf space). If the pantry is too small (low VMA), you face a difficult choice. You can either not buy enough groceries (insufficient asphalt content), leading to a dry, brittle mix prone to cracking, or you can cram the pantry full, leaving no empty space (low air voids), which leads to other problems.

Specification agencies set minimum VMA requirements based on the nominal maximum aggregate size (NMAS) of the mix. A mix with a larger NMAS will naturally have a lower VMA. The primary reason for a minimum VMA requirement is to ensure there is enough room for a sufficient film of asphalt binder on the aggregate particles. This binder film is what provides durability, flexibility, and resistance to water damage. A mix with low VMA cannot hold enough asphalt to be durable, no matter how much binder you add. Trying to force more binder into a low-VMA mix will simply fill up the air voids, leading to an unstable, rut-prone pavement.

Voids Filled with Asphalt (VFA): The Balance of Binder and Air

VFA represents the percentage of the VMA that is filled with effective asphalt binder. It is a measure of the relative proportion of binder and air within the aggregate void space.

VFA = (Volume of Effective Binder / VMA) * 100

Specifications typically provide a range for VFA (e.g., 65-75% for a typical surface mix). This range acts as a crucial check on the mix design.

  • A low VFA indicates that for a given VMA, there is not enough binder and too much air. This suggests the mix may be permeable and less durable.
  • A high VFA means the VMA is nearly full of binder, leaving little room for air. This is a red flag for potential rutting and flushing (bleeding of binder to the surface) as the pavement compacts further under traffic.

The VFA range works in concert with the air void requirement to prevent the selection of an unstable mix. It ensures a healthy balance between the durability provided by the binder and the stability provided by the air void structure.

Air Voids (Va): The Key to Resisting Compaction and Rutting

Air voids are the small, empty pockets of air within the compacted asphalt mixture. They are the "empty shelf space" in our pantry analogy. A certain amount of air voids (typically around 4.0% in a new pavement) is absolutely necessary. These voids provide space for the asphalt binder to expand and contract with temperature changes and allow for a small amount of additional compaction under traffic without the mix becoming unstable.

If the air voids are too low (e.g., less than 2-3%), the mix becomes like a sealed hydraulic system. When a heavy wheel load passes over it, the aggregate particles cannot move or adjust because the void space is full of incompressible binder. This leads to high pore pressure, a loss of internal friction, and ultimately, shoving and rutting.

Conversely, if the air voids are too high (e.g., more than 8%), the pavement is overly permeable. Water and air can easily penetrate the mix, accelerating the aging of the binder (oxidation) and making the pavement susceptible to moisture damage like stripping.

During the mix design process, trial batches are made with several different asphalt contents. These samples are compacted, and their air voids are measured. The designer then plots air voids versus asphalt content. The "optimum" asphalt content is typically selected as the content that yields the target air void level, usually 4.0%. All other properties, like VMA and VFA, are then checked at this specific asphalt content to ensure they meet the specification criteria. This process clearly demonstrates how the target air void level is the central pivot around which the final asphalt content is determined.

Factor 3: The Characteristics of the Asphalt Binder Itself

While the aggregate structure dictates the volume of binder required, the properties of the binder itself influence how it will perform within that volume. The binder is the "glue" that holds the mix together, provides waterproofing, and imparts much of the pavement's flexible, viscoelastic properties. Selecting the right binder and understanding its characteristics is a key part of the design process that indirectly affects the optimum content and directly affects long-term performance.

Performance Grading (PG) System: Selecting the Right Glue

Modern pavement design uses the Performance Graded (PG) binder system. This system characterizes binders based on their expected performance in specific climate conditions, rather than just their physical properties at one or two arbitrary temperatures. A binder is designated with two numbers, for example, PG 64-22.

  • The first number (64) represents the average 7-day maximum pavement temperature (°C) at which the binder can resist rutting.
  • The second number (-22) represents the minimum pavement temperature (°C) at which the binder can resist thermal cracking.

A binder designed for a hot desert climate (e.g., PG 76-10) will be much stiffer and more viscous at high temperatures than a binder for a cold northern climate (e.g., PG 52-34). This stiffness has an impact on the mix design process. A stiffer binder may require higher mixing and compaction temperatures to achieve proper coating and workability. It also contributes more to the overall stiffness of the mix, which can affect the compaction effort needed to reach the target 4.0% air voids. While the PG grade doesn't directly change the volumetric target for asphalt content, it ensures that the binder selected has the appropriate properties to function correctly within the void structure defined by the aggregates.

The Influence of Binder Viscosity and Stiffness

Viscosity is a measure of a fluid's resistance to flow. At the high temperatures found in an asphalt plant's mixer, the binder must be fluid enough (low viscosity) to be pumped and to evenly coat all the aggregate particles, from the coarsest rock to the finest dust. If the binder is too viscous at mixing temperature, it will not coat the particles properly, leading to a poorly performing mix.

Conversely, during compaction on the roadway, the binder must have enough viscosity to act as a lubricant, allowing the aggregate particles to orient themselves into a dense configuration under the force of the rollers. As the mat cools, the binder's viscosity increases dramatically, "locking" the aggregates in place and giving the pavement its initial strength. The relationship between temperature and viscosity is unique to each binder and is a critical consideration for both the mix designer and the paving crew.

Role of Modifiers and Additives (Polymers, Fibers)

To enhance the performance of standard asphalt binders, various modifiers can be added. These are common in high-stress applications like intersections, airfields, and major highways.

  • Polymers: Elastomeric polymers like Styrene-Butadiene-Styrene (SBS) are frequently used. They create a microscopic polymer network within the binder, significantly improving its elasticity and toughness. This makes the pavement more resistant to both rutting at high temperatures and cracking at low temperatures. Polymer-modified binders are "stickier" and often require a slightly higher asphalt content to achieve proper workability and a robust film thickness.
  • Fibers: Cellulose or mineral fibers can be added to the mix, particularly in open-graded or stone-matrix asphalt (SMA) designs. These fibers act as a stabilizer, preventing the thick binder film from draining off the aggregates during transport and placement. They effectively allow the designer to use a higher asphalt content than would otherwise be possible, leading to a very durable, rut-resistant pavement.
  • Anti-Stripping Agents: In the presence of water, some aggregates have a greater chemical affinity for water than for asphalt. This can cause the binder to "strip" away from the aggregate surface, leading to rapid failure. Liquid anti-stripping agents (often amine-based) or hydrated lime can be added to the mix to improve the adhesive bond between the binder and the aggregate, ensuring the integrity of the mix in wet conditions. The addition of these materials is a design choice that ensures the selected asphalt content will be effective for the long term.

Factor 4: The Mix Design Method – Marshall vs. Superpave

The procedure used to conduct the mix design in the laboratory provides the framework and calculations that ultimately lead to the recommended optimum asphalt content. For many decades, the Marshall method was the standard. However, since the 1990s, the Superpave (Superior Performing Asphalt Pavements) system has become the predominant method in North America and many other parts of the world. The choice of method has a significant bearing on the entire process.

The Marshall Method: A Legacy Approach

The Marshall method, developed in the 1940s, is an empirical approach. It involves creating cylindrical specimens at various asphalt contents and compacting them using a standardized drop hammer. The density and voids of these specimens are determined. Then, the specimens are heated to 60°C (140°F) and loaded in a special breaking head until they fail. Two key properties are measured:

  • Marshall Stability: The maximum load the specimen can withstand, measured in pounds or Newtons. This is intended to be an indicator of resistance to rutting.
  • Marshall Flow: The amount of deformation the specimen undergoes at the point of maximum load, measured in units of 0.01 inches. This is an indicator of the mix's flexibility or plasticity.

The optimum asphalt content is selected to be a compromise that meets criteria for stability, flow, air voids, and VFA. Often, the content that yields 4.0% air voids is chosen, and the other properties are checked for compliance. While the Marshall method has served the industry for a long time, it has limitations. The impact compaction method does not closely simulate the action of rollers on a roadway, and the stability test at a single temperature is not a robust predictor of performance across a range of real-world conditions.

The Superpave System: A Performance-Based Revolution

The Superpave system was the result of a massive research effort aimed at creating more durable, longer-lasting asphalt pavements. It differs from the Marshall method in several key ways.

  1. Superior Binder Specification: It uses the PG binder system, which is directly related to climate and performance, as discussed earlier.
  2. Gyratory Compaction: Instead of an impact hammer, the Superpave method uses a Superpave Gyratory Compactor (SGC). The SGC applies a constant vertical pressure while simultaneously kneading the sample with a gyratory motion. This action is believed to better simulate the orientation of aggregates that occurs during field compaction.
  3. Performance-Related Properties: The Superpave system focuses entirely on volumetric properties (Va, VMA, VFA) and the compaction characteristics of the mix as measured in the SGC. It does away with the Marshall stability and flow measurements. The design is considered acceptable if it meets the volumetric criteria at the design number of gyrations (Ndesign), which is selected based on the expected traffic level.

How the Method Dictates the Path to Optimum Asphalt Content

The fundamental process of finding the optimum asphalt content is similar in both methods: create trial blends, compact them, measure their properties, and select the content that best meets the specified criteria, with 4.0% air voids being the central target. However, the difference in compaction method can lead to different results.

The kneading action of the gyratory compactor often orients the aggregate particles into a denser configuration than the Marshall hammer for the same mix. This can result in a different aggregate void structure (VMA) and, consequently, a different optimum asphalt content to achieve the target 4.0% air voids. Because the Superpave system is more closely tied to observed field performance, the optimum asphalt content it yields is generally considered a more reliable starting point for producing a durable pavement. This is why a thorough understanding of the design process, including the specific capabilities of various types of asphalt plants, is so important for project success.

Caratteristica Marshall Mix Design Superpave Mix Design
Compaction Method Impact Hammer (Drop Hammer) Superpave Gyratory Compactor (SGC)
Binder Selection Based on viscosity or penetration grade Performance Graded (PG) system based on climate
Primary Test Properties Stability and Flow Volumetrics (Va, VMA, VFA) and densification slope
Simulation of Field Poor; impact is not representative of rolling Good; gyratory action simulates field compaction
Design Philosophy Empirical (based on observation) Mechanistic-Empirical (based on engineering properties)

Factor 5: The Asphalt Plant’s Role in Translating Design to Reality

A mix design, no matter how meticulously crafted in the laboratory, is only a recipe. The final quality of the pavement depends entirely on the ability of the asphalt plant and paving crew to execute that recipe accurately and consistently, batch after batch, ton after ton. The asphalt plant is the factory where the design comes to life, and its operation is the final, critical step that determines the actual asphalt content in the mix delivered to the project. This is the practical nexus of how mix design affects asphalt content bybasohalt plant operations.

Batch Plants vs. Drum Mixers: Control vs. Continuity

There are two main types of asphalt plants, and their method of operation affects how they control the proportioning of materials.

  • Batch Plants: As the name implies, these plants produce asphalt in individual batches. Aggregates from different cold feed bins are dried and heated in a drum, then lifted to a set of screens on top of the plant tower. The screens separate the aggregates by size into multiple hot bins. For each batch, precise weights of aggregate from each hot bin are dropped into a weigh hopper. The required weight of asphalt binder is also pumped into a separate weigh bucket. These precisely weighed components are then discharged into a pugmill mixer for a set amount of time. This batch-wise process offers exceptional control over gradation and asphalt content.
  • Drum Mix Plants: These plants operate in a continuous process. Aggregates are metered by volume from the cold feed bins onto a conveyor belt that feeds directly into a long, sloped drum. The binder is injected into the drum at a calibrated rate, and mixing occurs simultaneously as the aggregates are dried and heated. The production rate is continuous. While modern drum plants have highly sophisticated controls, their accuracy depends on the precise calibration of the cold feed bins and the binder metering system.

Regardless of the plant type, the goal is the same: to combine the correct proportions of aggregate and asphalt binder as specified by the mix design.

Calibrating the Plant: Ensuring Accuracy of Proportions

Calibration is the process of verifying that what the plant's control system thinks it is adding to the mix is what is actually being added.

  • Aggregate Feeds: The cold feed bins must be calibrated to ensure that a certain gate opening and belt speed delivers a known weight of aggregate per minute. This must be done for each bin.
  • Asphalt Binder System: The binder pump and meter must be calibrated to ensure that the flow rate is accurate. A "bucket test" is often performed where the amount of binder pumped over a set time is collected and weighed.
  • Dust Collection System: The fine dust collected by the baghouse is often returned to the mix. The rate at which this "baghouse fines" material is returned must be calibrated and accounted for in the mix proportions, as it is a part of the fine aggregate.

Without proper, regular calibration, the plant could be consistently producing a mix that is off-specification. A plant that is adding just 0.3% too much asphalt may not seem like a lot, but on a 10,000-ton project, that amounts to 30 extra tons of expensive binder being wasted. More importantly, that excess binder can reduce the air voids below the critical threshold, leading to a pavement that will rut prematurely. An advanced asphalt batching plant with modern controls is essential for maintaining this precision.

Mixing Temperature and Time: Activating the Binder

The asphalt plant controls the temperature to which the aggregate and binder are heated. This temperature is critical. It must be high enough to dry the aggregate completely (moisture is an enemy of asphalt) and to reduce the binder's viscosity so it can properly coat the aggregate. However, excessively high temperatures can damage and accelerate the aging of the asphalt binder, reducing the pavement's lifespan before it's even placed. The mix designer will typically recommend a mixing temperature range based on the viscosity characteristics of the selected PG binder.

The mixing time (in a batch plant) or the location of the binder injection (in a drum plant) is also important. The materials need to be mixed long enough for the binder to be distributed evenly and to coat all the fine particles, but not so long that the binder begins to drain from the larger aggregates. A well-run asphalt plant is a symphony of calibrated systems, all working together to transform the laboratory mix design from a set of percentages on paper into a high-quality, durable construction material.

Domande frequenti (FAQ)

1. Why can't I just add a fixed percentage of asphalt, like 5.5%, to every mix? Asphalt content is not a one-size-fits-all number. It is a result of the mix design process, which is tailored to the specific aggregates being used. A mix with dense, non-absorptive aggregates might only need 5.0% asphalt, while another mix with gap-graded, highly absorptive aggregates might need 6.5% to achieve the same durability and performance. Using a fixed percentage would lead to some pavements being too dry (and cracking) and others being too rich (and rutting).

2. What happens if the asphalt content is too high? If the asphalt content is too high for a given aggregate structure, it will overfill the void space (VMA). This reduces the air voids to a critically low level. The resulting pavement will be unstable, especially in hot weather. It will be prone to permanent deformation, such as rutting in the wheel paths and shoving at intersections. You might also see "flushing" or "bleeding," where the excess binder migrates to the pavement surface, creating a slick, hazardous condition.

3. What happens if the asphalt content is too low? A mix with insufficient asphalt content is considered "dry." The asphalt film coating the aggregate particles will be too thin. This makes the pavement brittle and highly susceptible to fatigue cracking under traffic loads. The mix will also be more permeable to air and water, which accelerates the aging (oxidation) of the binder, making it even more brittle. This can lead to surface defects like raveling, where the fine aggregate particles begin to dislodge.

4. If I change my aggregate source, do I need a new mix design? Absolutely. Any change in the source of aggregates, even for just one of the stockpiles (e.g., changing the source of manufactured sand), requires a full new mix design. Different rock sources have different specific gravities, absorptions, and particle shapes. These changes will alter the VMA of the mix and the binder demand. Simply substituting a new aggregate into an old design is a recipe for failure, as the old optimum asphalt content will no longer be correct for the new blend of materials.

5. How does Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA) affect the asphalt content? VMA is the most critical factor. It defines the amount of space available in the aggregate skeleton that can be filled with asphalt binder and air. To achieve the target air void content (e.g., 4.0%), a mix with a higher VMA will naturally require a higher asphalt content to fill the remaining space. A mix with low VMA simply doesn't have enough room to hold a durable amount of binder and the necessary air voids simultaneously.

Conclusione

The process of determining the final asphalt content for a paving mixture is a rigorous exercise in materials engineering, not a matter of guesswork. It is a dependent variable that emerges from a structured design process aimed at achieving a balance between stability and durability. The journey begins with the aggregates; their gradation, shape, and absorptive properties create the void structure that dictates the volume of binder needed. This void structure is quantified through volumetric properties—VMA, VFA, and most centrally, air voids. The mix design procedure, whether Marshall or Superpave, is a systematic search for the binder content that satisfies the target air void level while keeping all other volumetric properties within their specified ranges. Finally, the asphalt plant serves as the production facility where this carefully crafted recipe is brought to scale. Its precise calibration and controlled operation are what ensure the pavement laid on the road truly reflects the performance potential embedded in its design. A deep understanding of how mix design affects asphalt content by an asphalt plant is therefore not just academic; it is the foundation of building roads that last.

Riferimenti

Brown, E. R., Kandhal, P. S., & Zhang, J. (2001). Performance testing for hot mix asphalt (NCAT Report 01-05). National Center for Asphalt Technology.

Cominsky, R. J., Leahy, R. B., & Harrigan, E. T. (1994). The Superpave mix design manual for new construction and overlays (SHRP-A-407). Strategic Highway Research Program, National Research Council.

Hassan, M. M., & Khalid, H. A. (2010). A new approach to optimise asphalt film thickness in porous asphalt. Construction and Building Materials, 24(1), 84-91.

Huber, G. A. (1997). Weathering of asphalt and its effect on performance. Transportation Research Board.

Kandhal, P. S., & Chakraborty, S. (1996). Effect of aggregate gradation on measured asphalt content. Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, 65, 439-461.

McDaniel, R. S., & Anderson, R. M. (2001). Recommended use of reclaimed asphalt pavement in the Superpave mix design method (NCHRP Report 452). Transportation Research Board. https://doi.org/10.17226/10084

Prowell, B. D., Brown, E. R., & Hurbis, E. C. (2011). Evaluation of the effect of asphalt mixture type on pavement performance (NCAT Report 11-04). National Center for Asphalt Technology.

Roberts, F. L., Kandhal, P. S., Brown, E. R., Lee, D. Y., & Kennedy, T. W. (1996). Hot mix asphalt materials, mixture design, and construction (2nd ed.). NAPA Research and Education Foundation. []()

Shen, S., & Wu, S. (2011). Review of the roles of Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA) in asphalt mixture design. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 23(8), 1184-1190. (ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000282

Witczak, M. W. (2007). Simple performance tests: Summary of recommended test methods and database (NCHRP Report 580). Transportation Research Board.