Quantification of activated aged binders in recycled asphalt mixture: a nanoscale indicator approach without binder extraction
Source abstract
Abstract
Various methods exist to quantify the degree of blending (DOB) in recycled asphalt mixtures, but most rely on chemical extraction that may alter the true blending state. A recent atomic force microscopy (AFM)-based method enables direct, non-destructive characterization of nanoscale properties without binder extraction. This study validates the feasibility of using nanoscale indicators to represent DOB. Nanoscale morphological, mechanical, and chemical properties of reclaimed binder were measured and correlated with macroscopic properties. The Pearson correlation and entropy weight method identified the nanoscale Derjaguin-Muller-Toropov (DMT) modulus as the most suitable indicator. An estimation model linking nanoscale properties to mobilised aged binder content was developed and verified. Based on these findings, a solvent-free approach for quantitative DOB evaluation is proposed, offering a reference for non-destructive assessment and mixture design optimization.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Asphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation · Concrete and Cement Materials Research · Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Dalian University of Technology
CCCC First Highway Engineering Group Co., Ltd
National University of Singapore
Guangxi Communications Investment Technology Co., Ltd
Guangxi Key Laboratory of Road Intelligent Maintenance for Transportation Industry
Tongji University
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China
References (52)
Show source-provided references
1. AASHTO. (2021). Standard method of test for determining the rheological properties of asphalt binder using a Dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR). AASHTO T315-21. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
2. Al-Qadi I. L. Elseifi M. & Carpenter S. H. (2007). Reclaimed asphalt pavement – A literature review. FHWA-ICT-07-001.
3. 10.1139/cjce-2019-063510.1139/cjce-2019-0635 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.25810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.258 ↗
5. 10.1177/036119811878763410.1177/0361198118787634 ↗
6. 10.1007/s42947-022-00218-210.1007/s42947-022-00218-2 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.jtte.2022.08.00110.1016/j.jtte.2022.08.001 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.06.02810.1016/j.resconrec.2019.06.028 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.fuel.2011.02.02810.1016/j.fuel.2011.02.028 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.06.01210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.06.012 ↗
11. Daly, W. H., Negulescu, I., & Balamurugan, S. S. (2013). Implementation of GPC characterization of asphalt binders at Louisiana materials laboratory (No. FHWA/LA. 13/505). Dept. of Transportation and Development.
12. 10.1080/14680629.2015.111401210.1080/14680629.2015.1114012 ↗
13. 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.000208810.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002088 ↗
14. 10.1007/s40092-015-0123-910.1007/s40092-015-0123-9 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.fuel.2025.13521810.1016/j.fuel.2025.135218 ↗
16. 10.1520/JTE2012012810.1520/JTE20120128 ↗
17. 10.1039/C5RA13982A10.1039/C5RA13982A ↗
18. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2020.14644910.1016/j.apsusc.2020.146449 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.11910.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.119 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2026.14595710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2026.145957 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.10650610.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106506 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.fuel.2025.13436210.1016/j.fuel.2025.134362 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12361610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123616 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12600510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.126005 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.14051910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.140519 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12679310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.126793 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.14471110.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.144711 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.13657710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.136577 ↗
29. McDaniel, R. S., Soleymani, H., Anderson, R. M., Turner, P., & Peterson, R. (2000). Recommended use of reclaimed asphalt pavement in the Superpave mix design method (NCHRP Web document, 30). National Technical Information Service.
30. 10.1080/14680629.2019.166324410.1080/14680629.2019.1663244 ↗
31. 10.1080/14680629.2014.88332210.1080/14680629.2014.883322 ↗
32. Newcomb, D. E., Brown, E. R., & Epps, J. A. (2007). Designing HMA mixtures with high RAP content: A practical guide. National Asphalt Pavement Association.
33. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.11732310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117323 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.09310.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.093 ↗
35. 10.1111/jmi.1284210.1111/jmi.12842 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.12004810.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120048 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.06.04510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.06.045 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.cie.2017.07.02310.1016/j.cie.2017.07.023 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.12.21210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.12.212 ↗
40. 10.1080/10298436.2020.179920810.1080/10298436.2020.1799208 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.05.15410.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.05.154 ↗
42. Stephens, J. E., Mahoney, J., & Dippold, C. (2001). Determination of the PG binder grade to use in a RAP Mix (No. JHR 00-278). Dept. of Transportation.
43. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13395810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.133958 ↗
44. 10.3390/ma1318405210.3390/ma13184052 ↗
45. 10.1080/14680629.2025.248902110.1080/14680629.2025.2489021 ↗
46. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.12.18010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.12.180 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.13210.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.132 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12805910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.128059 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.13651510.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136515 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.10.08510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.10.085 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.11938810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119388 ↗
52. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.13970810.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139708 ↗