Experimental study and cost–benefit analysis of using polymer-modified binders for low-traffic roads in Minnesota
Source abstract
Abstract
Polymer-modified binders (PMB) improve the mechanical properties of asphalt mixtures compared to unmodified binders. Although for high-traffic roads, the choice of superior products is obvious, for low-traffic roads, there is not enough information to determine if using a PMB is cost-effective considering its higher initial cost. This research investigates the use of PMBs for low-traffic roads, focusing on Minnesota pavements. First, a laboratory experimental study is performed to compare the low-temperature cracking properties of polymer-modified and unmodified binders and mixtures used in Minnesota. Then, historical pavement performance data are analysed to compare the field performance of modified and unmodified mixtures. Based on the experimental results, a life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) is conducted to compare the use of polymer-modified and unmodified binders. A sensitivity analysis is performed to assess the impact of key factors on the LCCA outcomes. The results show that using PMBs is expected to extend pavement service life by six years, and PMBs are more cost-effective than unmodified binders for low-traffic roads.
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
Department of Civil, Environmental, and Geo-Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Minnesota Duluth, Duluth, MN, USA
Minnesota Department of Transportation, Maplewood, MN, USA
Funding
Minnesota Department of Transportation
References (36)
Show source-provided references
1. AASHTO T 313. (2019). Standard method of test for determining the flexural creep stiffness of asphalt binder using the bending beam rheometer (BBR). American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials.
2. 10.1080/1029843041233131414610.1080/10298430412331314146 ↗
3. Archilla, A. R. (2008). Effect of polymer modified asphalt binders on the performance of the asphalt concrete mixes used in Hawaii. Hawaii Department of Transportation.
4. Asphalt Institute. (2019). Use of the Delta Tc Parameter to Characterize Asphalt Binder Behavior. Retrieved from: https://mx.asphaltinstitute.org/Shop/Product-Details?productid=%7b4479DD14-FD32-EA11-80DE-000D3A0EE4ED%7d
5. ASTM D-7313. (2020). Standard test method for determining fracture energy of asphalt mixtures using the disk-shaped compact tension geometry. ASTM International.
6. Bonaquist, R. (2016). Critical factors affecting asphalt concrete durability (No. WHRP). Dept. of Transportation. Research and Library Unit.
7. Braham, A. F., Buttlar, W. G., Clyne, T. R., Marasteanu, M. O., & Turos, M. I. (2009). The effect of long-term laboratory aging on asphalt concrete fracture energy. Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, 78, 417–445.
8. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.12.06010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.12.060 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.07.03210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.07.032 ↗
10. Buncher, M., & Rosenberger, C. (2005). Understanding the true economics of using polymer modified asphalt through life cycle cost analysis. Asphalt, 20(2), 28–30.
11. Buttlar, W., Rath, P., Majidifard, H., Dave, E., & Wang, H. (2019). Relating DC(T) fracture energy to field cracking observations and recommended specification thresholds for performance-engineered mix design. Transportation Research Circular, E-C251, 51–71.
12. Dave, E. V., Hanson, C. E., Helmer, B., Dailey, J., & Hoplin, C. M. (2015). Laboratory performance test for asphalt concrete. Minnesota Department of Transportation.
13. 10.3141/2576-0510.3141/2576-05 ↗
14. Hicks R. G. & Epps J. A. (2000). Life cycle costs for asphalt-rubber paving materials. World of Asphalt Pavements International Conference Sydney New South Wales Australian Asphalt Pavement Association
15. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.06.10810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.06.108 ↗
16. 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.000022310.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000223 ↗
17. 10.3141/1767-1710.3141/1767-17 ↗
18. 10.3141/2150-1010.3141/2150-10 ↗
19. 10.1080/14680629.2008.969017610.1080/14680629.2008.9690176 ↗
20. Marasteanu, M. (2023). Comparing the Cost-Effectiveness of Asphalt Binders for Local Roads (No. 2023-19TS). Department of Transportation. Local Road Research Board. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/67895
21. Marasteanu, M., Buttlar, W., Bahia, H., Williams, C., Moon, K. H., Teshale, E. Z., Falchetto, A. C., Turos, M., Dave, E., Paulino, G., Ahmed, S., Leon, S., Braham, A., Behnia, B., Tabatabaee, H., Velasquez, R., Arshadi, A., Puchalski, S., Mangiafico, S., … Kvasnak, A. (2012). Investigation of low temperature cracking in asphalt pavements-phase II, national pooled fund study 776. Minnesota Department of Transportation.
22. Marasteanu, M., Ghosh, D., Cannone Falchetto, A., & Turos, M. (2017). Testing protocol to obtain failure properties of asphalt binders at low temperature using creep compliance and stress-controlled strength test. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 0(0), 1–16.
23. Marasteanu, M., Zofka, A., Turos, M., Li, X., Velasquez, R., Li, X., Buttlar, W., Paulino, G., Braham, A., Dave, E., Ojo, J., Bahia, H., Williams, C., Bausano, J., Gallistel, A., & McGraw, J. (2007). Investigation of low temperature cracking in asphalt pavement-phase I, national pooled fund study 776. Minnesota Department of Transportation.
24. 10.1177/036119811985354410.1177/0361198119853544 ↗
25. MnDOT. (2015). MnDOT PG binder guidelines-MSCR. Retrieved from: https://www.dot.state.mn.us/materials/bituminousdocs/bituminous-design/pg-mscr-guidelines-final.pdf
26. MnDOT. (2019). Pavement design manual. Minnesota Department of Transportation.
27. MnDOT. (2020). Standard specifications for construction. Minnesota Department of Transportation.
28. MnDOT. (2022). MnDOT LCCA spreadsheet (2021-2022) for District-2. Retrieved from: https://www.dot.state.mn.us/materials/pvmtdesign/lcca.html
29. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.27810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.278 ↗
30. 10.1177/036119819615450012010.1177/0361198196154500120 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.04.00710.1016/j.proeng.2016.04.007 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.08.01410.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.08.014 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.11110.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.111 ↗
34. 10.3141/2001-1610.3141/2001-16 ↗
35. 10.1007/s11043-020-09464-y10.1007/s11043-020-09464-y ↗
36. Yan, T., Marasteanu, M., Turos, M., Barman, M., Manikavasagan, V., & Chakraborty, M. (2023). Cost estimate of B vs. C grade asphalt binders. Minnesota Department of Transportation.