Design Gyration Number Determination of 100 mm-Diameter Asphalt Mixtures

  • Serkan TapkınEmail author
  • Mustafa Keskin
Research Paper


At present, there is no accepted standard by highway authorities on the compaction procedures of 100 mm-diameter gyratory compactor specimens. In previous studies on gyratory compaction, the method of either coring from 150 mm specimens, or preparing taller specimens than the usual 63.5 mm-long Marshall specimens, has been undertaken. However, the utilisation of 150 mm-moulds produces a significant amount of mechanical disturbance during the coring process of 100 mm-diameter specimens. The note-worthy aspect of this study is that a new standard for preparing gyratory compactor specimens with a diameter of 100 mm and a length of approximately 63.5 mm has been proposed for the first time. In this study, the design gyration number of the asphalt mixture was obtained by carrying out extensive laboratory testing on the specimens prepared, and by changing various testing parameters including the gyration number, angle of gyration, specimen height, and ram pressure. First, tests using 600 kPa ram pressure and a 1.25° gyration angle with varying gyration numbers were carried out. Then, the gyration angle was changed from 1.25° to 1.85° by 0.05° increments. Following that, a completely different pattern of loading level using 240 kPa with a 2° gyration angle was investigated. And finally, changing the gyration angle from 1.60° to 2.40° by 0.20° increments was carried out to provide a wider scope of investigation. As a result, the design gyration number for 100 mm-diameter asphalt mixtures was determined as 40 under medium traffic conditions.


Gyratory compaction 100 mm-diameter specimens Angle of gyration Ram pressure Design gyration number Medium traffic conditions 



The authors would also like to thank Prof. Dr. Ayşen Dener Akkaya for her help in the statistical analysis part of the study.


This study was supported by Anadolu University Research Fund with Grant no. 08.02.38.


  1. 1.
    Roberts FL, Mohammad LN, Wang LB (2002) History of hot mix asphalt mixture design in the United States. J Mater Civ Eng 14(4):279–293. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Khan ZA, Wahab HIA, Asi I, Ramadhan R (1998) Comparative study of asphalt concrete laboratory compaction methods to simulate field compaction. Constr Build Mater 12(6–7):373–384. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buchanan M, Brown E (2001) Effect of superpave gyratory compactor type on compacted hot-mix asphalt density. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 1761:50–60. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Asi IM (2007) Performance evaluation of SUPERPAVE and Marshall asphalt mix designs to suite Jordan climatic and traffic conditions. Constr Build Mater 21(8):1732–1740. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee S-J, Amirkhanian SN, Kwon S-Z (2008) The effects of compaction temperature on CRM mixtures made with the SGC and the Marshall compactor. Constr Build Mater 22(6):1122–1128. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jackson NM, Czor LJ (2003) 100-mm-Diameter mold used with superpave gyratory compactor. J Mater Civ Eng 15(1):60–66. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    General Directorate of Highways (2006) Highway technical specifications, Item No. 170/2, Ankara, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Keskin M (2011) Determining physical and mechanical differences of asphalt specimens using Superpave and Marshall design methods. MS thesis, Anadolu University, Eskişehir, Turkey (in Turkish) Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    IPC Servopac Gyratory Compactor Use Manual (2009) IPC Global, Boronia, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tapkın S (2008) The effect of polypropylene fibers on asphalt performance. Build Environ 43(6):1065–1107. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tapkın S, Uşar Ü, Tuncan A, Tuncan M (2009) Repeated creep behavior of polypropylene fiber-reinforced bituminous mixtures. J Transp Eng ASCE 135(4):240–249. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tapkın S, Çevik A, Uşar Ü (2009) Accumulated strain prediction of polypropylene modified marshall specimens in repeated creep test using artificial neural networks. Expert Syst Appl 36(8):11186–11197. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tapkın S, Çevik A, Uşar Ü (2010) Prediction of Marshall test results for polypropylene modified dense bituminous mixtures using neural networks. Expert Syst Appl 37(6):4660–4670. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tapkın S, Özcan Ş (2012) Determination of the optimal polypropylene fiber addition to the dense bituminous mixtures by the aid of mechanical and optical means. Balt J Road Bridge Eng 7(1):22–29. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tapkın S, Keskin M (2013) Rutting analysis of 100 mm diameter polypropylene modified asphalt specimens using gyratory and Marshall compactors. Mater Res Iberoam J Mater 16(2):546–564. Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tapkın S (2013) Optimal polypropylene fiber amount determination by using gyratory compaction, static creep and Marshall stability and flow analyses. Constr Build Mater 44(7):399–410. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tapkın S, Şengöz B, Şengül G, Topal A, Özçelik E (2015) Estimation of polypropylene concentration of modified bitumen images by using k-NN and SVM classifiers. J Comput Civ Eng ASCE 29(5):04014055. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tapkın S, Uşar Ü, Özcan Ş, Çevik A (2011) Polymer modified bitumen: properties and characterisation. In: McNally T (ed) Polypropylene fiber-reinforced bitumen. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, pp 136–194 (ISBN:0857090488) Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oliver J, Alderson A, Milne P (2008) A review of Austroads gyratory compaction research. Austroads Report, SydneyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Iran University of Science and Technology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering, Department of Civil EngineeringAntalya Bilim UniversityAntalyaTurkey
  2. 2.Faculty of Engineering, Civil Engineering DepartmentAnadolu UniversityEskisehirTurkey

Personalised recommendations