The Use of Rejuvenators in Asphalt Mixtures with High ... Short Course College Station, TX October 11, 2016 The Use of Rejuvenators in Asphalt Mixtures with High Recycled Materials

Transportation Short Course

College Station, TXOctober 11, 2016

The Use of Rejuvenators in Asphalt Mixtures with High Recycled Materials Content

A. Epps Martin, E. Arambula Mercado, F. Kaseer, L. Garcia Cucalon

NCHRP 9-58: The Effects of Recycling Agents on Asphalt Mixtures with High RAS and RAP Binder Ratios

• Amy Epps Martin

• Fujie Zhou

• Edith Arambula Mercado

• Jon Epps

• Dave Newcomb

• Charles Glover

• Eun Sug Park

• Arif Chowdury

• Xue Luo

• Fan Yin

• Fawaz Kaseer

• Lorena Garcia Cucalon

• Elie Hajj

• Nathan Morian

• Jo Daniel

• Gayle King

TTI

UNR

UNH

Consultant

Economic

Environmental

Engineering

BENEFITS

REMAINING ISSUESEngineering

• Embrittlement

• Aging

• Blending

• Mixture Performance

Mitigation – Recycling Agent (RA)Motivation – High Recycled Binder Ratio (RBR)

WI DOT & Recycled with RA

Total Agg. 94.6%

Total Binder 5.4%

RAP binder 1.7%

Virgin binder +RA 3.7%

RAP Agg. 34.3%

Virgin Agg. 60.3%

RAP content: 36%

DOT control Mix (0.22 RBR)

Recycled with RA Mix (0.31 RBR)

Total Agg. 94.4%

Total Binder 5.6% RAP binder 1.3%

Virgin binder 4.3%

RAP Agg. 25.7%

Virgin Agg. 68.7%

RAP content: 27%

Not to scale

NCHRP 9-58 Research PlanPHASE I

Identification of Gaps in Knowledge on RA Use with High

RBRs

Task 1. Gather Information

Task 2. Design Laboratory Experiment

Task 3. Document Results in First Interim Report

Task 4. Conduct Laboratory Experiment

Task 5. Design Field Experiment and Document Results in Second Interim

Report

Task 6. Conduct Field Experiment

Task 7. Propose Revisions to AASHTO Specifications and

Test Methods

Task 8. Develop Training Materials and Best Practices

and Deliver Workshop

PHASE IIInvestigation of Effectiveness of

RAs in Restoring Binder Rheology, Development of Blending

Protocol, and Associated Mixture Performance

PHASE IIIValidation of RA Use in Mixtures

with High RBRs

Task 9. Document Results in Final Report

Phase II Laboratory Tests – BINDER & MORTAR

PG - BOTH𝚫𝑻𝒄 = (𝑻𝑺 − 𝑻𝒎)

Glover-Rowe

G-R =𝑮∗(𝒄𝒐𝒔𝜹)𝟐

𝒔𝒊𝒏𝜹@ 15 °C, 0.005 rad/sec

Rejuvenating Effectiveness

𝑹𝑬 =(log G−R𝑫𝑶𝑻 𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒓𝒐𝒍 − log G−R𝑹𝒆𝒄𝒚𝒄𝒍𝒆𝒅)

log G−R𝑫𝑶𝑻 𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒓𝒐𝒍∗ 𝟏𝟎𝟎

Carbonyl Area Growth by FT-IR

Phase II Laboratory Tests - MIXTURE

Stiffness

‒ MR @ 25 °C

‒ E*

Cracking Resistance

‒ FI by SCB

‒ Nf by S-VECD

‒ RI by UTSST

Phase II TX (Expanded) Materials

TX: PG 64-22 + 0.28 RBR (0.1 RAP+0.18 MWAS)

+ 2.7% Tall Oil T1 (Target=PG 70-22)

+ 0.4 RBR w/RAP only, 0.5 RBR balanced RAP/RAS

+ Aromatic Extract A1

+ NH PG 64-28 & NV PG 64-28P

+ TX TOAS

RECYCLING AGENT (RA) DOSAGE SELECTION METHOD

SELECTMATERIALS

PREP MATERIALS

CONDUCT LAB TESTS

SELECT DOSAGE

SELECT MATERIALS

Target and base binder PG grade

RAP and/or RAS source(s)

Recycling Agent (RA)

RAP and/or RAS Recycled Binder Ratio (RAPBR/ RASBR)

PREP MATERIALS

Extract and recover binder from RAP and/or RAS source(s)

Prepare recycled binder blends:

• With no RA (control)• With low RA dosage• With high RA dosage

CONDUCT LABTESTS

Obtain high PG grade (PGH) and low PG grade (PGL) per

AASHTO M320:• Target binder• Recycled binder blend with

no RA (control)• Recycled binder blend with

low RA dosage• Recycled binder blend with

high RA dosage

y = -1.8x + 81.8

y = -1.7x + 85.1

y = -1.3x - 16.0

y = -0.7x - 28.5

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)

0.3 RBR (PG 64-22 | 0.1 TxRAP | 0.2 TxMWAS | T1)

Original G*/sin(d) RTFO G*/sin(d) PAV m-controlled PAV S-controlled

A (4.5,-22)

B (4.5,73)

Target Grade: 70-22

Actual Grade: 73-22

DTc = -10.0

Selected Dosage: 4.5%

y = -1.8x + 81.8

y = -1.7x + 85.1

y = -1.3x - 16.0

y = -0.7x - 28.5

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (4.5,-22)

Target Grade: 70-22

DTc = -10.0

y = -1.8x + 81.8

y = -1.7x + 85.1

y = -1.3x - 16.0

y = -0.7x - 28.5

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Lo

w T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



y = -1.8x + 81.8

y = -1.7x + 85.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)


Original G*/sin(d) RTFO G*/sin(d)

y = -1.8x + 81.8

y = -1.7x + 85.1

y = -1.3x - 16.0

y = -0.7x - 28.5

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (4.5,-22)

B (4.5,73)

Target Grade: 70-22

Actual Grade: 73-22

DTc = -10.0


y = -1.8x + 81.8

y = -1.7x + 85.1

y = -1.3x - 16.0

y = -0.7x - 28.5

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (4.5,-22)

Target Grade: 70-22

DTc = -10.0

y = -1.8x + 81.8

y = -1.7x + 85.1

y = -1.3x - 16.0

y = -0.7x - 28.5

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Lo

w T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



y = -1.8x + 81.8

y = -1.7x + 85.1

y = -1.3x - 16.0

y = -0.7x - 28.5

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (4.5,-22)

B (4.5,73)

Target Grade: 70-22

Actual Grade: 73-22

DTc = -10.0


y = -1.8x + 81.8

y = -1.7x + 85.1

y = -1.3x - 16.0

y = -0.7x - 28.5

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (4.5,-22)

Target Grade: 70-22

DTc = -10.0

y = -1.8x + 81.8

y = -1.7x + 85.1

y = -1.3x - 16.0

y = -0.7x - 28.5

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (4.5,-22)

B (4.5,73)

Target Grade: 70-22

Actual Grade: 73-22

DTc = -10.0


SELECT DOSAGEPlot original & RTFO

PGH, S- & m-controlled PGL vs. RA dosage for all blends

Establish linear regression equations

Select RA dosage in 0.5% increments to meet target binder PGL using warmer PGL regression line

Verify PGH of selected dosage vs. target binder PGHusing colder PGH

regression line

Meets target PGH?

REPORT w/PG grade

D dosage in 0.5%

increments to meet PGH & maintain PGL

YESNO

*For RAS mixtures, if dosage >5.5%, replace virgin binder with 50% RA and add other 50%.

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e ( C

)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)

0.5 RBR (64-22 | 0.25 TxRAP | 0.25 TxTOAS | T1)


A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

D (11.5,-25)

DTc = -11.0

DTc = -10.0

Target Grade: 70-22

Actual Grade: 74-25 Selected Dosage: 11.5%

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)


Original G*/sin(d) RTFO G*/sin(d)

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e ( C

)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

D (11.5,-25)

DTc = -11.0

DTc = -10.0

Target Grade: 70-22


y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e ( C

)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

D (11.5,-25)

DTc = -11.0

DTc = -10.0

Target Grade: 70-22


y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e ( C

)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

D (11.5,-25)

DTc = -11.0

DTc = -10.0

Target Grade: 70-22


y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e ( C

)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

D (11.5,-25)

DTc = -11.0

DTc = -10.0

Target Grade: 70-22


y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

DTc = -11.0

Target Grade: 70-22

y = -2.2x + 100.5

y = -1.8x + 102.3

y = -2.1x - 1.3

y = -1.0x - 23.3

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Low

Tem

p. P

G G

rad

e ( C

)

Hig

h T

emp

. P

G G

rad

e (

C)

Dosage (%)



A (10.0,-22)

B (10.0,78)

C (11.5,74)

D (11.5,-25)

DTc = -11.0

DTc = -10.0

Target Grade: 70-22


G-R Binder Black Space Diagram

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

25 35 45 55 65 75

log │

G*│ (Pa)

@ 1

5 C

, 0.0

05 r

ad

/s

Phase Angle (degrees) @ 15 C, 0.005 rad/s

0.3 RBR (0.1 RAP & 0.2 RAS)

DOT Control, 64-22, NO RA

G-R Binder Black Space Diagram

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

25 35 45 55 65 75

log │

G*│ (Pa)

@ 1

5 C

, 0.0

05 r

ad

/s


0.3 RBR (0.1 RAP & 0.2 RAS)

DOT Control, 64-22, NO RA

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

25 35 45 55 65 75

log │

G*│ (Pa)

@ 1

5 C

, 0.0

05 r

ad

/s


0.3 RBR (0.1 RAP & 0.2 RAS)DOT Control, 64-22, NO RA

Recycled Blend, 64-22, 4.5% T1

Recycled Blend, 64-22, 5.5% A1

1

10

100

1000

10000

DOT Control

64-22

NO RA

Recycled Blend

64-22

4.5% T1

Recycled Blend

64-22

5.5% A1

Glo

ver

-Row

e P

ara

met

er (

kP

a)

0.3 RBR (0.1 RAP & 0.2 RAS)

RTFO PAV 20 PAV 40

G-R Results w/Aging

Recycled Blends @ opt RA < DOT control Blend no RA

50%

24%

12%

52%

31%

10%% improvement

vs. the DOT control blend

Binder RE Evolution with PAV Aging

The “rejuvenating” effect of RA decreased with PAV aging

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0 20 40

% I

mp

rovem

ent

in L

og(G

-R)

PAV Aging Time (hours)

0.3 RBR (0.1 RAP & 0.2 RAS)



Control Blend, 64-22, no RA 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0 20 40%

Im

pro

vem

ent

in L

og(G

-R)


0.4RBR (0.4 RAP)



Control Blend, 64-22, no RA

Binder RE Evolution with PAV Aging

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0 20 40

% I

mp

rovem

ent

in L

og(G

-R)


0.5 RBR (0.25 RAP & 0.25 RAS)

Recycled Blend, 64-22, MWAS, 7.5% T1

Control Blend, 64-22, MWAS, no RA

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0 20 40% I

mp

rovem

ent

in L

og(G

-R)


0.5 RBR (0.25 RAP & 0.25 RAS)

Recycled Blend, 64-22, TOAS, 11.5% T1

Control Blend, 64-22, TOAS, no RA 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0 20 40

% I

mp

rovem

ent

in L

og(G

-R)


0.5 RBR (0.25 RAP & 0.25 RAS)

Recycled Blend, 64-28, TOAS, 12.5% T1

Control Blend, 64-28, TOAS, no RA

RA Dosage Selection – Mixture Validation - MR

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

DOT control Recycledw/ T1 @ FLD (2.65)

Recycledw/ T1 @ (3.5%)

Recycledw/ T1 @ OPT (4.5%)

Recycledw/ A1 @ OPT (5.5%)

Re

silie

nt

Mo

du

lus

(ksi

)

LTOA STOA

RA Dosage Selection – Mixture Validation - SCB

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

DOT Control Recycledw/ T1 @ FLD (2.65%)

Recycledw/ T1 @ 3.5%

Recycledw/ T1 @ OPT (4.5%)

Recycledw/ A1 @ OPT (5.5%)

Fle

xib

ility

In

de

x (F

I)

STOA LTOA

Phase IIB Materials

TX: PG 64-22 + 0.28 RBR (0.1 RAP+0.18 MWAS)

+ 2.7% Tall Oil T1 (Target=PG 70-22)

+ Better Base Binder (less negative DTc)

+ Softer Base Binder

+ Vegetable Oil V1, + Bio-Based Oil B

+ 0.5 RBR balanced RAP/RAS w/ TX TOAS

Related Phase IIA results

Phase IIB

RA Dosage Selection beyond restoring PGL/checking

PGH by restoring DTc to -5, restoring PGH

+ HWTT to preclude over-softening

+ BBR Sliver (AASHTO TP 125) for mixture Black Space

+ DSC (& UTSST) for onset of brittle

behavior




Select RA dosage in 0.5% increments to meet target binder PGL using warmer PGL regression line

Verify PGH of selected dosage vs. target binder PGHusing colder PGH

regression line

Meets target PGH?

D dosage in 0.5%

increments to reduce DTc to -5 &

REPORT w/PG grade

D dosage in 0.5%

increments to meet PGH & maintain PGL

YES

NO


1

10

100

1000

10000

DOT ControlIN 64-22NO RA

RecycledBlend

IN 64-222% T1

RecycledBlend

IN 64-222% A1

RecycledBlend

IN 64-221% V1

RecycledBlend

IN 64-221% B

Glo

ver-

Ro

we

Par

amet

er (

kPa)

RTFO PAV 20 PAV 40

G-R @ T= 21°C, same thresholds RAs may not be needed with 0.3 RBR

and a better binder

G-R Results @ 21°C – (0.28 RBR) Blends w/ IN PG 64-22

Restore PGL/Check PGH and Restore DTc

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

25 35 45 55 65 75

log

│G*│

(P

a)

Phase Angle (degrees)

DOT ControlIN 64-22NO RA

Recycled BlendIN 64-222% T1

Recycled BlendIN 64-222% A1

Recycled BlendIN 64-221% V1

Recycled BlendIN 64-221% B

1

10

100

1000

10000

DOT ControlTX 64-22

NO RA

RecycledBlend

TX 64-224.5% T1

RecycledBlend

TX 64-225.5% A1

RecycledBlend

TX 64-224% V1

RecycledBlend

TX 64-224% B

Glo

ver-

Ro

we

Par

amet

er (

kPa)

RTFO PAV 20 PAV 40

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

25 35 45 55 65 75

log

│G*│

(P

a)


DOT ControlTX 64-22NO RA

Recycled BlendTX 64-224.5% T1

Recycled BlendTX 64-225.5% A1

Recycled BlendTX 64-224% V1

Recycled BlendTX 64-224% B

G-R @ T= 21°C, same thresholds Control blend ages beyond the thresholds

RAs improve the blends

NA NA

G-R Results @ 21°C – (0.28 RBR) Blends w/ TX PG 64-22

Restore PGL/Check PGH

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

25 35 45 55 65 75

log

│G

*│ (

Pa)



Recycled BlendTX 64-2212.5% T1


Recycled BlendTX 64-228.5% V1

Recycled BlendTX 64-227% B

Restore DTc

HWTTRutting!!!

G-R Results @ 21°C – (0.28 RBR) Blends w/ TX PG 64-22

0

1

10

100

1000

10000

DOT ControlTX 64-22

NO RA

RecycledBlend

TX 64-2212.5% T1

RecycledBlend

TX 64-229.5% A1

RecycledBlend

TX 64-228.5% V1

RecycledBlend

TX 64-227% B

Glo

ver-

Ro

we

Par

amet

er (

kPa)

RTFO PAV 20 PAV 40




Select RA dosage in 0.5% increments to

restore PGH to minimum that meets

target using colder PGH regression line

REPORT w/ PG grade & DTc


4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

25 35 45 55 65 75

log

│G

*│ (

Pa)



Recycled BlendTX 64-226% T1



Recycled BlendTX 64-226.5% B

Estimated G-R @ 21°C(0.28 RBR) Blends w/ TX PG 64-22

Restore PGH

1

10

100

1000

10000

DOT ControlTX 64-22

NO RA

RecycledBlend

TX 64-226% T1

RecycledBlend

TX 64-226.5% A1

RecycledBlend

TX 64-225.5% V1

RecycledBlend

TX 64-226.5% B

Glo

ver-

Ro

we

Par

amet

er (

kPa)

RTFO PAV 20 PAV 40

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

25 35 45 55 65 75

log

│G

*│ (

Pa)



Recycled BlendTX 64-226% T1



Recycled BlendTX 64-226.5% B

Aging & Rejuvenation in Black Space

• Initial G−R =log G−R

𝟏𝟖𝟎 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒍𝒅

log G−R𝑹𝑻𝑭𝑶𝑻

• G−R Aging Susceptibility =log G−R

𝑴𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝑨𝒈𝒆𝒅

log G−R𝑳𝒆𝒔𝒔 𝑨𝒈𝒆𝒅

increases with aging

• RE′ at specific aging state =log G−R

𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝑹𝑨

log G−R𝑫𝑶𝑻 𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒕𝒓𝒐𝒍

evolves with aging

Finalize RA Dosage Selection Method

Consider Incompatibility by Chemical or Rheological Properties

Complete Aging Analysis to explore oven vs PAV aging, chemical vs rheological properties

Characterize Mixtures

Cracking Resistance – FI by SCB, Nf by S-VECD, RI by UTSST

Embrittlement - UTSST Viscous-Glassy Transition, Mixture Black Space with BBR Sliver and E*, f

Evaluate Phase III Field Projects to set thresholds for Rejuvenating Effectiveness w/Aging

Next Steps

NV 9/15: 0.3 RAPBRRAs: T2 + A2

TX 6/14: 0.3 RBRRA: T1

IN 9/15: 0.4, 0.5 RBRRA: T2

Phase III Field Projects

?? DE 2016: PG 64-28RA: ??

WI 9/16: 0.3 RBRRA: V2

NV Field Project

Dosage Selection

RE & Evolution

HWTTMR & SCB(STOA &

LTOA)

E* &UTSST(LTOA)

S-VECD(LTOA)

Target 64-28P – – √ √ √ √

Recycled (R)64-28P

(0.3 RAPBR)

– – √ √ √ √

(R) +T2@FLD (2%) √ √ √ √ √ √

(R) +A2@FLD (2%) √ √ √ √ √ √

DOT Control64-28P

(0.15 RAPBR)

– – √ √ √ √

Binder Mixture

Laboratory Mixtures (LMLC) & Field Mixtures (RPMLC, Cores)

RA Type

Mod Binder

IN Field Project

Dosage Selection

RE &Evolution

HWTTMR & SCB(STOA &

LTOA)

E* &UTSST(LTOA)

S-VECD(LTOA)

Target 64-22 – – – – – –

DOT Control (58-28)(0.32 RBR)

(0.25 RAP & 0.07 MWAS)

– – √ √ √ –

Recycled (58-28)(0.42 RBR)

(0.14 RAP & 0.28 MWAS)

+ T2 FLD (3%)

√ √ √ √ √ √

Binder Mixture


High RAS

WI Field Project

Dosage Selection

RE & Evolution

HWTTMR & SCB(STOA &

LTOA)

E* &UTSST(LTOA)

DOT Control58-28S

(0.22 RAPBR)

– – √ √ √

Recycled 58-28S(0.3 RAPBR)

– – √ √ √


– √ √ √ √


+ V2@FLD√ √ √ √ √

Binder Mixture


V Type

Mod Binders

Contact

Amy Epps Martin, Ph.D., P.E.

Professor and A.P. & Florence Wiley Faculty Fellow

Zachry Department of Civil Engineering

Research Engineer (TTI)

310D CE/TTI

3136 TAMU

College Station, TX 77843-3136

(979)862-1750

[email protected]

Contact

mailto:[email protected]

The Use of Rejuvenators in Asphalt Mixtures with High ... Short Course College Station, TX October 11, 2016 The Use of Rejuvenators in Asphalt Mixtures with High Recycled Materials

Documents