Strength and Fracture Properties of Aggregates

  • Ignacio Artamendi
  • Chris Ward
  • Bob Allen
  • Paul Phillips
Conference paper
Part of the RILEM Bookseries book series (RILEM, volume 4)


This paper presents a study of the mechanical and fracture properties of various types of aggregates used in asphalt mixtures. Three types of rocks namely, greywacke, granite and limestone, were evaluated. Compressive and tensile characteristics of the rocks were determined by means of uniaxial compressive and indirect tensile tests, respectively. Resistance to fracture was determined by means of semi-circular bending tests. Results showed that the greywacke had the highest strength both in compression and in tension. The granite, on the other hand, had high compressive strength but the tensile strength was relatively low. Compressive tests also showed that the response of rock specimens under loading was linear elastic. It was found that the compressive elastic modulus of the limestone was the highest followed by the greywacke and the granite. Similarly, indirect tensile tests indicated that the response of the greywacke and the limestone rocks was linear elastic whereas that of the granite was non-linear. Furthermore, tensile elastic modulus values of the greywacke and the limestone were similar and about five times higher than that of the granite. As regards fracture, load-deflection curves for semi-circular bending tests indicated linear elastic behaviour of the three types of rocks. Thus, linear elastic fracture mechanics theory was applied to determine fracture toughness. Results showed that the greywacke had the highest resistance to fracture.


Fracture Toughness Fracture Property Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanic Asphalt Mixture Limestone Rock 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Mahmound, E., Masad, E., Nazarian, S.: J. Mater. Civil Eng. 22(1), 10–20 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pike, D.C.: Standards for aggregates. Ellis Horwood Ltd., Chichester (1990)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ISRM: Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 16, 135–140 (1978)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ISRM: Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 15, 99–103 (1978)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chong, K.P., Kuruppu, M.D.: Int. J. Fracture 26, R59–R62 (1984)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jianhong, Y., Wu, F.Q., Sun, J.Z.: Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 46, 568–576 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lim, I.L., Johnson, I.W., Choi, S.K.: Eng. Fract. Mech. 44(3), 363–382 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bearman, R.A.: Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., Technical Note 36, 257–263 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Thuro, K., Plinninger, R.J., Zäh, S., Schütz, S.: Rock Mechanics a Challenge for Society. In: Särkkä, Eloranta (eds.) ISRM Regional Symposium Eurorock 2001, pp. 169–174 (2001) (finland)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gercek, H.: Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 44, 1–13 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alkiliçgġl, Ç.: Development of specimen geometries for Mode I fracture toughness testing with disc type rock specimens. PhD. Middle East Technical University (METU), Ankara Turkey (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2012 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ignacio Artamendi
    • 1
  • Chris Ward
    • 1
  • Bob Allen
    • 1
  • Paul Phillips
    • 1
  1. 1.Research & Development DepartmentAggregate IndustriesBardonUK

Personalised recommendations