1、Designation:D422399 (Reapproved 2006) Designation: D4223/D4223M 12Standard Practice forPreparation of Test Specimens of Asphalt-Stabilized Soils1This standard is issued under the fixed designation D4223/D4223M; the number immediately following the designation indicates theyear of original adoption o
2、r, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of lastreapproval. A superscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope*1.1 This practice covers the selection and proportioning of soils and emulsified
3、or cutback asphalts and the fabrication of 4-in.(102-mm)100-mm 4-in. diameter by 2.5-in. (54-mm)65-mm 2.5-in. high test specimens.1.2All1.2 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established inPractice D6026.1.3The values stated in inch
4、-pound units are to be regarded as standard, except as noted as follows. The values given inparentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units, and are provided for information only and are not considered standard.1.3.1The gravitational system of inch-pound units is used when dealing with inch-pou
5、nd units. In this system, the pound (lbf)represents a unit of force (weight), while the unit for mass is slugs.1.3.2The slug unit of mass is almost never used in commercial practice (density, scales, balances, and so forth). Therefore, thestandard unit for mass in this practice is either kilogram (k
6、g) or gram (g), or both. Also, the equivalent inch-pound unit (slug) isnot given.1.3.3It is common practice in the engineering/construction profession in the United States to concurrently use pound to representboth a unit of mass (lbm) and of force (lbf). This use combines two separate system of uni
7、ts, the absolute system and thegravitational system. It is scientifically undesirable to combine the use of two separate sets of inch-pound units within a singlestandard. As stated in 1.3.2, this practice uses the gravitational system and does not present the slug unit for mass. However, theuse of s
8、cales or balances recording pounds of mass (lbm) or the recording of density in lbm/ft1.3 UnitsThe values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units presented in brackets are to be regarded separately asstandard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each syste
9、m shall be used independently ofthe other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.1.3.1 The gravitational system of inch-pound units is used when dealing with inch-pound units. In this system, the pound (lbf)represents a unit of force (weight) while the
10、 unit for mass is slugs. The rationalized slug unit is not given, unless dynamic (F=ma)calculations are involved.1.3.2 It is common practice in the engineering/construction profession to concurrently use pounds to represent both a unit ofmass (lbm) and of force (lbf). This implicitly combines two se
11、parate systems of units; that is, the absolute system and thegravitational system. It is scientifically undesirable to combine the use of two separate sets of inch-pound units within a singlestandard. As stated, this standard includes the gravitational system of inch-pound units and does not use/pre
12、sent the slug unit formass. However, the use of balances or scales recording pounds of mass (lbm) or recording in lbm/ft3shall not be regarded asnonconformance with this practice.standard.1.4 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. This document can
13、not replaceeducation or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this practice may beapplicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which theadequacy of a given professional servic
14、e must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a projectsmany unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved throughthe ASTM consensus process.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the sa
15、fety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibilityof the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatorylimitations prior to use.1This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D18 on Soil and R
16、ock and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D18.15 on Stabilization WithAdmixtures.Current edition approved MayJan. 1, 2006.2012. Published June 2006.February 2012. Originally approved in 1983. Last previous edition approved in 19992006 asD422399.D422399(2006). DOI: 10.1520/D4223-99R06.10.1
17、520/D4223_D4223M-12.1This document is not an ASTM standard and is intended only to provide the user of an ASTM standard an indication of what changes have been made to the previous version. Becauseit may not be technically possible to adequately depict all changes accurately, ASTM recommends that us
18、ers consult prior editions as appropriate. In all cases only the current versionof the standard as published by ASTM is to be considered the official document.*A Summary of Changes section appears at the end of this standard.Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Cons
19、hohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2C117 Test Method for Materials Finer than 75-m (No. 200) Sieve in Mineral Aggregates by WashingC136 Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse AggregatesD8 Terminology Relating to Materials for Roads and Pavemen
20、tsD75 Practice for Sampling AggregatesD653 Terminology Relating to Soil, Rock, and Contained FluidsD977 Specification for Emulsified AsphaltD1074 Test Method for Compressive Strength of Bituminous MixturesD1188 Test Method for Bulk Specific Gravity and Density of Compacted Bituminous Mixtures Using
21、Coated SamplesD1559 Test Method for Resistance to Plastic Flow of Bituminous Mixtures Using Marshall Apparatus3D1560 Test Methods for Resistance to Deformation and Cohesion of Bituminous Mixtures by Means of Hveem ApparatusD1561 Practice for Preparation of Bituminous Mixture Test Specimens by Means
22、of California Kneading CompactorD2026 Specification for Cutback Asphalt (Slow-Curing Type)D2027 Specification for Cutback Asphalt (Medium-Curing Type)D2028 Specification for Cutback Asphalt (Rapid-Curing Type)D2216 Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Roc
23、k by MassD2397 Specification for Cationic Emulsified AsphaltD2419 Test Method for Sand Equivalent Value of Soils and Fine AggregateD2726 Test Method for Bulk Specific Gravity and Density of Non-Absorptive Compacted Bituminous MixturesD3740 Practice for Minimum Requirements for Agencies Engaged in Te
24、sting and/or Inspection of Soil and Rock as Used inEngineering Design and ConstructionD4123 Test Method for Indirect Tension Test for Resilient Modulus of Bituminous MixturesD4318 Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of SoilsD6026 Practice for Using Significant Digits i
25、n Geotechnical Data3. Significance and Use3.1This3.1 This practice is intended for the preparation of standard specimens of soil-asphalt mixtures suitable for tests of TestMethods D1559, D1560, D1561, D4123, and other tests using specimens of the above dimensions. This practice is limited to onlyfin
26、e-grained soils as defined in 6.1.NOTE 1The quality of the results produced by this practice is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it and the suitability of theequipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of co
27、mpetent and objective testing,sampling, inspection, and so forth. Users of this practice are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself ensure reliable results.Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.4. Termin
28、ology4.1 Refer to Terminology D653 for terms relating to soils and to Terminology D8 for terms relating to asphalt.5. Apparatus5.1 All testing equipment is described in the appropriate standards given in Section 2 of this practice.6. Materials6.1 Soils, shall be combinations of sand, silt, and clay-
29、size materials generally encountered in ground deposits and containingnot more than 25 % of material larger than the 4.75 mm (No. 4) sieve. The types of soils considered to be suitable for stabilizationwith emulsified or cutback asphalts are sands, silty sands, and other fine-grained soils of low pl
30、asticity. Generally, a suitable soilwill have a sand equivalent test value not less than 25 determined in accordance with Test Method D2419, and the product obtainedby mutiplying the plasticity index as determined in accordance with Test Method D4318, by the percent passing the 75 m (No.200) sieve w
31、ill not be more than 60.6.1.1 Soils having more than 25 % passing the 745 m (No. 200) sieve or a sand equivalent value below 25 are consideredborderline prospects for suitable stabilization with asphalt. Continuation under this practice for such soils should be consideredexploratory. However, a soil
32、 may still be judged suitable on the basis of subsequent testing, depending on criteria set for the specificobjective of the stabilization project.6.2 Bituminous Material, shall be an emulsified asphalt as specified in Specifications D977 or D2397, or a cutback asphalt asspecified in Specifications
33、D2026, D2027, or D2028, the type and grade to be as specified.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or contact ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM Standardsvolume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page on the ASTM websi
34、te.3Withdrawn.3Withdrawn. The last approved version of this historical standard is referenced on www.astm.org.D4223/D4223M 1226.3 Potable Water, shall be used in preparing mixtures where required.7. Preparation of Soil7.1 Sample the soil in accordance with Practice D75.7.2Pulverize7.2 Pulverize appr
35、oximately 4.5 kg 10 lb of the air-dry soil in such a manner as to separate the soil particleswithout reducing the individual particle sizes and screen through a No. 4 (4.75-mm)4.75-mm (No. 4) sieve. Record the percentageretained on the 4.75-mm (No. 4) sieve. Screen the soil passing the 4.75-mm (No.
36、4) sieve through the No. 10 (2.00-mm)2.00-mm(No. 10) sieve, and if soil-binder aggregations are retained on the 2.00-mm (No. 10) sieve, further pulverize them to break downthe aggregations without reducing the individual particle sizes.7.3 Combine and thoroughly mix the material passing the 4.75-mm
37、(No. 4) sieve with the material passing the 2.00-mm (No.10) sieve and store in tightly closed containers.7.4 The material retained on the 4.75-mm (No. 4) sieve may be reintroduced into the mix at this point, provided it does notexceed 10 % of the total combined weight of all fractions, and the maxim
38、um size is not greater than the -in. (19.0-mm)19.0-mm(34-in.) sieve.8. Water Content, Sieve Analysis, and Sand Equivalent8.1 Water ContentDetermine the water content of at least a 500-g 1 lb sample of the air-dried soil in accordance withMethod D2216. Record water content for use in calculating the
39、dry mass of air-dried soil.8.2 Sieve AnalysisDetermine the amount passing the 75 m (No. 200) sieve on the dry soil of 8.1 in accordance with TestMethod C117 (wash test). Determine grain size distribution on the same sample in accordance with Method C136 using thefollowing sieve sizes: Nos. 4, 8, 16,
40、 30, 50, 100, and 200.8.3 Sand EquivalentDetermine the sand equivalent value on a representative sample of the air-dried soil in accordance withTest Method D2419.9. Preparation of Mixtures9.1 Emulsified Asphalt:9.1.1 Mix ProportionsThe emulsified asphalt contents of three trial mixes are estimated b
41、y using the centrifugekerosinekerosene equivalent (CKE) test.4The oil ratio determined by the CKE test is multiplied by the factors of 1.1, 1.4, and 1.7to establish the emulsion contents, in percent by dry weight of soil, for the trial mixes.9.1.2 Should the residue asphalt content of the emulsion b
42、e other than 60 %, a correction should be made as follows:Corrected emulsion content, % 5emulsion content, % 3 0.60actual residue, %(1)9.1.3 Mixing Test:9.1.3.1 To evaluate the ability of the emulsified asphalt to disperse uniformly throughout the mix and to judge mix workability,weigh out approxima
43、tely 500 g 1 lb of dry soil (corrected for water content recorded in 8.1), place in mixing bowl, and add theminimum amount of water to achieve wetting, and mix for 30 s. Normally, this is just enough water to darken the aggregateparticles.9.1.3.2 Add emulsified asphalt in the amount of 1.4 3 CKE oil
44、 ratio by dry weight of soil, and mix for an additional 30 s withthe laboratory mechanical mixer to simulate field mixing operations (if laboratory mixer is not available, a 2-min spoon bowlmixing is sufficient). Reject a mix which strips or stiffens excessively and make an additional mixture with a
45、n additional incrementof water. Repeat procedures described in 9.1.3.1 and 9.1.3.2 until a mix of adequate appearance and workability is obtained.9.1.3.3 Should mixes become excessively soupywatery and segregate on standing without passing through an adequateappearing and workable phase as additiona
46、l increments of water are added, start over with another type or grade of asphaltemulsion being considered for the project.9.1.3.4Take9.1.3.4 Take approximately 200 g of the above satisfactory mix and allow it to air dry at room temperature. Anelectric fan or a warm plate may be used to accelerate d
47、rying. Rate the appearance of the air-dry soil-asphalt mixture by visuallyestimating the percent total aggregate surface that is coated with asphalt. Record this value as percent coating. A minimum coatingof 50 % shall be attained before the mix is considered suitable for fabrication of test specime
48、ns. Spottiness denotes anunsatisfactory mix, usually due to insufficient water or improper mixing properties of the emulsion, and is cause for rejection.Report the type(s) of emulsified asphalts and the corresponding optimum fluid content of mixing. Fluid content is the percentasphalt emulsion plus
49、the percent mixing water, both as percent by weight of dry soil. This represents minimum fluid content forfield mixing.9.1.3.5 The total fluid content for mixing established by the mixing test is also used for preparing soil-asphalt mixtures usingemulsified asphalt contents for the other two trial mixes by adding or subtracting water to compensate for the changes in emulsioncontent.4See “Mix Design Methods for Asphalt Concrete and Other Hot-Mix Types,”4See “Mix Design Methods,” Manual Series No. 2, The Asphalt Institute, March 1974., The Asphalt Institute, re
