Evaluation of the state of practice asphalt binder and mixture tests for assessing the compatibility of complex asphalt materials
Source abstract
Abstract
The present study aims to evaluate binder and mixture testing methods for capturing the compatibility of complex asphalt materials consisting of different virgin binder sources, reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) materials and recycling agents (RA). Binder evaluation methods include the saturate, aromatic, resin and asphaltene (SARA) fractionation, advanced polymer chromatography (APC) analysis, differential scanning calorimeter (DSC) and rheological measurements. Mixture performance tests include the complex modulus (E*), direct tension cyclic fatigue (DTCF), disk-shaped compact tension (DCT) and semi-circular bending (SCB) fracture tests. The results from the testing and analysis indicate that the rheological characterisation of asphalt binder or mixture may not capture the incompatibility between virgin binder, RAP and RA. Binder DSC analysis as well as mixture fracture tests have shown promise to evaluate the compatibility of complex asphalt materials with different virgin binders, RAP and RA, as well as the effect of incompatibility on mixture performance.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Asphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation · Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring · Epoxy Resin Curing Processes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI, USA
University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA
Cargill Bioindustrial, Minneapolis, MN, USA
Funding
Minnesota Department of Transportation
References (30)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b0373810.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b03738 ↗
2. 10.1080/14680629.2017.138907610.1080/14680629.2017.1389076 ↗
3. Anderson, R., King, G., Hanson, D., & Blankenship, P. (2011). Evaluation of the Relationship between Asphalt Binder Properties and Non-Load Related Cracking. Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, 80, 615–663.
4. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.01310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.013 ↗
5. Corbett, W. (1970). Relationship between composition and physical properties of asphalt and discussion. Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists Proceedings, 39, 481–491.
6. Daly W. H. Negulescu L. & Balamurugan S. S. (2013). “Implementation of GPC characterization of asphalt binders at Louisiana Materials Laboratory.” FHWA/LA.13/505 Louisiana Department of Transportation Baton Rouge LA USA.
7. Deusen D. V. D. C. T. (2015). Low temperature fracture testing pilot project (Technical report MN/RC 2015-20). Minnesota Department of Transportation.
8. Hesp, S., Johnson, K. N., McEwan, R. G., Samy, S., Ritchie, S., & Thomas, M. (2014). Effect of ten commercial warm mix additives on the quality and durability of cold lake asphalt cement. 93rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington DC, January 2014.
9. Hesp S. A. M. Genin S. N. Scafe D. Shurvell H. F. & Subramani S. (2009). Five year performance review of a Northern Ontario pavement trial. Proceedings of the 54th Canadian Technical Asphalt Association (Vol. 54 pp. 99–126).
10. 10.1016/S0016-2361(96)00169-X10.1016/S0016-2361(96)00169-X ↗
11. 10.3141/2444-1210.3141/2444-12 ↗
12. 10.1080/14680629.2008.969015810.1080/14680629.2008.9690158 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.11696610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.116966 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.11780010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117800 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.01010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.010 ↗
16. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Evaluating the effects of recycling agents on asphalt mixtures with high RAS and RAP binder ratios. The National Academies Press.
17. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.08.15610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.08.156 ↗
18. 10.1007/s40890-017-0034-010.1007/s40890-017-0034-0 ↗
19. 10.3846/enviro.2014.16210.3846/enviro.2014.162 ↗
20. Petersen C. (2009). “A review of the fundamentals of asphalt oxidation.” Transportation Research Circular E-C140 (pp. 1−78). Washington DC: Transportation Research Board October.
21. Rowe, M. (2011). Prepared discussion for the AAPT paper by Anderson et al.: “Evaluation of the relationship between asphalt binder properties and non-load related cracking”. Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, 80, 649–662.
22. 10.1016/0016-2361(91)90236-410.1016/0016-2361(91)90236-4 ↗
23. 10.1021/ef010160b10.1021/ef010160b ↗
24. Tabatabaee, H. A., & Sylvester, T. (2021). Relating thermal and rheological analysis to phase compatibility of bitumen modified with rejuvenating and softening recycling agents. Proceedings of the eurobitumen and euroasphalt congress, Madrid.
25. Tabatabaee, H. A., Sylvester, T., & Calcanas, C. (2021). Phase-compatibility of bitumen defined through deconvolution of modulated differential scanning calorimetry response. Proceedings of the European association of asphalt technologists (EATA) conference, Vienna.
26. 10.1080/10298436.2017.139410010.1080/10298436.2017.1394100 ↗
27. 10.1002/pc.1027010.1002/pc.10270 ↗
28. Zhang, R., Dave, E. V., Sias, J. E., Tabatabaee, H. A., & Sylvester, T. (2022). A state-of-the-art review: Approaches for assessing the compatibility of asphalt materials and additives. Proceedings of the 66th annual conference of the Canadian Technical Asphalt Association (CTAA).
29. 10.1080/14680629.2020.182634910.1080/14680629.2020.1826349 ↗
30. 10.1080/14680629.2017.138908510.1080/14680629.2017.1389085 ↗