journal article·2016-08-08

Performance of porous European mix (PEM) pavements added with crumb rubbers in dry process

Zhaoxing Xie, Junan Shen

Publisher page

Abstract

Crumb rubber modifier, made from scrap tires, has been introduced into the production of different types of hot mix asphalt in either wet or dry process. To determine if the rubberised asphalt mix performs as well as polymer-modified asphalt cement (PMAC), test sections of rubberised and control PMAC porous European mix (PEM) in Georgia were examined through a visual inspection and laboratory testing. The results indicated that the performance of rubberised PEM pavements from visual inspection was almost equal to that of PMAC PEM (as the controls) with no rutting or cracking being found, except that the Cantabro test showed a higher mass loss after 3 years' service. After 5 years' service in I-75 Perry, the rubberised PEM still performed a little better rutting resistance, although the rubberised section experienced about twice cumulative traffic as compared to the control; the other visual inspections remained the same.
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.

References (22)

Show source-provided references
1. Cooper S.B. · 2007
2. FagerG.A., 2001. Asphalt rubber: a summary of the use of crumb rubber in the hot mixes: Kansas experience 1990–2000. Topeka, KS: Kansas Department of Transportation.
3. 10.1080/1029843080216941610.1080/10298430802169416 ↗
4. Hicks R.G. · 1995
5. HuangB., et al. 2002. Louisiana experience with crumb rubber-modified hot-mix asphalt pavement. In: Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, 1–13.10.3141/1789-01 ↗
6. Hunt E.A. · 2002
7. KaloushK., SotilA., and WayG., 2003. Dynamic modulus properties of asphalt rubber mixtures. 3rd international symposium on maintenance and rehabilitation of pavements and technological controlGuimaraes: University of Minho.
8. 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2007)19:12(1079)10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2007)19:12(1079) ↗
9. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.07.04110.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.07.041 ↗
10. LoveK.N., 2014. Influence of different rubber modified binder variables on performance properties of porous asphalt mixtures. Clemson, SC: Clemson University.
11. LuQ. and HarveyJ.T., 2011. Laboratory evaluation of open-graded asphalt mixes with small aggregates and various binders and additives. In: Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, 61–69.10.3141/2209-08 ↗
12. LyonsK.R., 2012. Evaluation of rubber modified porous asphalt mixtures. Clemson, SC: Clemson University.
13. OliverJ.W.H., 2000. Rutting and fatigue properties of crumbed rubber hot mix asphalts. In: Jorge B.Sousa, ed. Conference on asphalt rubber, Vilamoura, 221–240.
14. Pavement Design Manual, Georgia Department of Transportation2005.
15. RahmanM., 2004. Characterization of dry process crumb rubber modified asphalt mixtures. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.
16. RahmanM., AireyG.D., and CollopA.C., 2010. Moisture susceptibility of high and low compaction dry process crumb rubber-modified asphalt mixtures. In: Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, 121–129.10.3141/2180-14 ↗
17. Sheila H. · 2007
18. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.12.00510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.12.005 ↗
19. Shen J. · 2012
20. SingletonT.M., 2000. Characterization of impact absorbing asphalt. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.
21. 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2007)19:6(475)10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2007)19:6(475) ↗
22. 10.1061/9780784413005.09610.1061/9780784413005.096 ↗