Angularity is one of the important aggregate properties contributing to the permanent deformation resistance of asphalt mixtures. Therefore, methods that are able to rapidly and accurately describe aggregate angularity are valuable in the design process of asphalt mixtures. Two computer-automated procedures, which make use of the advances in digital-image processing, to quantify fine aggregate angularity, are presented. The first method relies on the concepts of the erosion-dilation techniques. This consists of subjecting the aggregate surface to a smoothing effect that causes the angularity elements to disappear from the image. Then, the area lost as a result of the smoothing effect is calculated and used to quantify angularity. The second method is based on the fractal approach. Image-analysis techniques are used to measure the fractal length of aggregate boundary. The fractal length increases with aggregate angularity. The proposed imaging techniques are used to capture the aggregate angularity of 23 sand samples that represent a wide range of materials. The results are compared with visual analysis and indirect methods of measuring fine-aggregate angularity, such as the uncompacted air voids, and the angle of internal friction of aggregate mass. In general, the results indicate much promise for measuring aggregate properties using automated imaging technologies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
MonismithC. L.Influence of Shape, Size, and Surface Texture on the Stiffness and Fatigue Response of Asphalt Mixtures. In Special Report 109: Effects of Aggregate Size, Shape, and Surface Texture on Properties of Bituminous Mixtures. HRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1970, pp. 4–11.
2.
BensonF. J.Effects of Aggregate Size, Shape, and Surface Texture on the Properties of Bituminous Mixtures—A Literature Survey. In Special Report 109: Effects of Aggregate Size, Shape, and Surface Texture on Properties of Bituminous Mixtures. HRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1970, pp. 12–22.
3.
BrownE. R., McReaJ. L., and CrawleyA. B.. Effect of Aggregates on Performance of Bituminous Concrete. STP 1016, ASTM, 1989, pp. 34–63.
4.
BarksdaleR. D., PollardC. O., SiegelT., and MoellerS.. Evaluation of Effects of Aggregates on Rutting and Fatigue of Asphalt, Technical Report FHWA-GA-92-8812, Georgia Department of Transportation, Atlanta, 1992.
5.
LottmanR. R., and GoetzW. H.. Effect of Crushed Gravel Fine Aggregate on the Strength of Asphaltic Surfacing Mixtures. National Sand Gravel Association Circular No. 63, 1956.
6.
ShklarskyE., and LivnehM.. The Use of Gravels for Bituminous Mixtures. Proceedings of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologies, Vol. 33, 1964, pp. 584–610.
7.
FosterC. R.Dominant Effect of Fine Aggregate on Strength of Dense-Graded Asphalt Mixes. In Special Report 109: Effects of Aggregate Size, Shape, and Surface Texture on Properties of Bituminous Mixtures. HRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1970, pp. 1–3.
8.
HuberG. A., JonesJ. C., MessersmithP.E., and JacksonN. M.. Contribution of Fine Aggregate Angularity and Particle Shape to Superpave Mixture Performance. In Transportation Research Record 1609, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998, pp. 28–35.
9.
LeeC.-J., PanC., and WhiteT.. Review of Fine Aggregate Angularity Requirements in Superpave. Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 68, 1999, pp. 305–318.
10.
YueZ. Q., BekkingW., and MorinI.. Application of Digital Image Processing to Quantitative Study of Asphalt Concrete Microstructure. In Transportation Research Record 1492, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 53–60.
11.
MasadE., MuhunthanB., ShashidharN., and HarmanT.. Aggregate Orientation and Segregation in Asphalt Concrete. ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication 85, 1998, pp. 69–80.
12.
MasadE., MuhunthanB., ShashidharN., and HarmanT.. Internal Structure Characterization of Asphalt Concrete Using Image Analysis. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1999, pp. 88–95.
13.
MasadE. A., MuhunthanB., ShashidharN., and HarmanT.. Quantifying Laboratory Compaction Effects on the Internal Structure of Asphalt Concrete. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1681, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1999, pp. 179–185.
14.
BarksdaleR. D., KempM. A., SheffieldW. J., and HubbardJ. L.. Measurement of Aggregate Shape, Surface, Roughness. In Transportation Research Record 1301, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1991, pp. 107–116.
15.
KuoC. Y., FrostJ. D., LaiJ. S., and WangL. B.. Three-Dimensional Image Analysis of Aggregate Particles from Orthogonal Projections. In Transportation Research Record 1526, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1996, pp. 98–103.
16.
BrzezickiJ. M., and KasperkiewiczJ.. Automatic Image Analysis in Evaluation of Aggregate Shape. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1999, pp. 123–130.
17.
LiL., ChanP., ZollingerD. G., and LyttonR. L.. Quantitative Analysis of Aggregate Shape Based on Fractals. Materials Journal, Vol. 90, No. 4, 1993, pp. 357–365.
18.
WilsonJ. D., and KlotzL. D.. Quantitative Analysis of Aggregate Based on Hough Transform. In Transportation Research Record 1530, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1996, pp. 111–115.
19.
YudhbirJ., and AbedinzadehR.. Quantifying of Particle Shape and Angularity Using the Image Analyzer. Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol. 14, No. 3, 1991, pp. 296–308.
20.
MasadE. and ButtonJ. W.. Unified Imaging Approach for Measuring Aggregate Angularity and Texture. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2000, pp. 273–280.
21.
HryciwR. D., and RaschkeS. A.. Development of Computer Vision Technique for In Situ Soil Characterization. In Transportation Research Record 1526, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1996, pp. 86–97.
22.
WangL. B., and LaiJ. S.. Quantifying Surface Area of Aggregates Using An Imaging Technique. Presented at 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.
23.
KandhalP. S., MotterJ. B., and KhatriM. A.. Evaluation of Particle Shape and Texture: Manufactured Versus Natural Sands. In Transportation Research Record 1301, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1991, pp. 48–56.
24.
ImageTool: Image Analysis Program. Department of Dental Diagnostic Science at the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, 1997.
25.
RosenfeldA., and KakA. C.. Digital Picture Processing, Academic Press, New York, 1976.
26.
BlumH. A.Transformation for Extracting New Descriptors of Shape. Models of the Perception of Speech and Visual Form (Whaten-DunnW., ed.), MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1967, pp. 362–380.
27.
CalabiL., and HartnettW. E.. Shape Recognition, Particle Fires, Convex Deficiencies and Skeletons. American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 75, 1968, pp. 335–342.
28.
YoungI. T., PeveriniR. L., VerbeekP. W., and van OtterlooP. J.. New Implementation for the Binary and Minkowski Operators. Computer Graphics and Image Processing, Vol. 17, No. 3, 1981, pp. 189–210.
29.
EhrlichR., KennedyS. K., CrabtreeS. J., and CannonR. L.. Petrographic Image Analysis: I. Analysis of Reservoir Pore Complexes. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, Vol. 54, No. 4, 1984, pp. 1365–1378.
30.
MandelbrotB. B.The Fractal Geometry of Nature. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, Calif., 1984.
