Enhancing adhesive interlayer performance with waste tire rubber and amorphous poly alpha olefin compound modified asphalt
Source abstract
Abstract
Insufficient bonding performance in interlayers is a key factor in the deterioration of bridge deck pavements. This study evaluates the bonding and durability of Waste Tire Rubber (WTR)/Amorphous Poly Alpha Olefin (APAO) modified asphalt compared to the commonly used Styrene-Butadiene-Styrene (SBS) modified asphalt. We conducted shear and pull tests to analyze how different bonding processes and the texture depth of the concrete surface affect bonding performance. The research also assessed the durability of the adhesive layer under conditions such as temperature fluctuations, water immersion, and aging. Results show that the choice of bonding method significantly impacts adhesive performance, with the coating bond method being superior to the crushed stone bond method. A concrete surface texture depth of 0.88 mm was identified as optimal for improving adhesive performance. Moreover, the WTR/APAO adhesive interlayer provided better adhesive and durability performance than the SBS adhesive interlayer under conditions of temperature fluctuations and water immersion. Based on these findings, the study recommends using the coating bond process and 15%WTR + 4%APAO modified asphalt for the adhesive interlayer.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Asphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation · Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Hunan Provincial Communications Planning, Survey & Design Institute Co., Ltd, Changsha, China
College of Civil Engineering, Hunan University, Changsha, China
Funding
the Science and Technology Development Fund Project of the Department of Transportation of Hunan Province
References (43)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.3390/ma1519700110.3390/ma15197001 ↗
2. 10.3390/app910209010.3390/app9102090 ↗
3. 10.14048/j.issn.1671-2579.2022.01.00910.14048/j.issn.1671-2579.2022.01.009 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.10.05610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.10.056 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.05.04310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.05.043 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.12026910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120269 ↗
7. 10.1007/s10891-015-1218-210.1007/s10891-015-1218-2 ↗
8. 10.1080/01694243.2020.181679210.1080/01694243.2020.1816792 ↗
9. 10.14048/j.issn.1671-2579.2023.02.01210.14048/j.issn.1671-2579.2023.02.012 ↗
10. 10.1080/00222348.2014.100073910.1080/00222348.2014.1000739 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12802810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.128028 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12500910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125009 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12938710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.129387 ↗
14. 10.1007/s42947-021-00132-z10.1007/s42947-021-00132-z ↗
15. 10.1016/j.apm.2020.01.03110.1016/j.apm.2020.01.031 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.05.04110.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.05.041 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.09.01410.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.09.014 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.jtte.2022.07.00210.1016/j.jtte.2022.07.002 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.11941110.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119411 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.13011310.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130113 ↗
21. 10.3390/ma1605187410.3390/ma16051874 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.02.04010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.02.040 ↗
23. 10.3934/matersci.2019.6.116410.3934/matersci.2019.6.1164 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.jreng.2022.09.00110.1016/j.jreng.2022.09.001 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.12188110.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121881 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.01.11810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.01.118 ↗
27. 10.1007/s13369-022-07366-410.1007/s13369-022-07366-4 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.11923010.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119230 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.11907110.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119071 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12537110.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125371 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.13018810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.130188 ↗
32. 10.1080/10298436.2020.173083710.1080/10298436.2020.1730837 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12984010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.129840 ↗
34. 10.3390/ma1409245810.3390/ma14092458 ↗
35. Chobdar H, Farajollahi A, Ameli A. Performance evaluation of asphalt binder and mixture modified by amorphous poly alpha olefins (APAO). J Transp Res. 2023;20(4):1–18.
36. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.13156210.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131562 ↗
37. 10.1139/cjce-2018-029010.1139/cjce-2018-0290 ↗
38. 10.1155/2021/555553510.1155/2021/5555535 ↗
39. 10.1007/s42947-021-00039-910.1007/s42947-021-00039-9 ↗
40. AASHTO. AASHTO T 240; standard method of test for effect of heat and air on a moving film of asphalt binder (rolling thin-film oven test). Washington, DC: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials; 2013.
41. ASTM. ASTM D6084/D6084M–13: standard test method for elastic recovery of bituminous materials by ductilometer. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM International 2013.
42. Test O. Determining the rheological properties of asphalt binder using a dynamic shear rheometer (DSR). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board, 2010.
43. ASTM. Standard test method for determining the flexural creep stiffness of asphalt binder using the bending beam rheometer (BBR). West Conshohocken PA: ASTM International 2008.