Effects of Rejuvenating Agents On Superpave Mixtures Containing Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 9

Effects of Rejuvenating Agents on Superpave Mixtures

Containing Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement


Junan Shen1; Serji Amirkhanian2; and Jennifer Aune Miller3

Abstract: Rejuvenator is not a commonly used softening agent to be used in recycling of reclaimed asphalt pavement 共RAP兲. In this
study, Superpave mixtures containing RAP were designed using rejuvenating agents, including a rejuvenator and a softer binder, and
subsequently evaluated in terms of the volumetric results, obtained the indirect tensile strength 共ITS兲 of samples as well as evaluating the
mixtures for rutting using the asphalt pavement analyzer 共APA兲. The content of the rejuvenator used for those mixtures containing the
rejuvenator was determined from the blending charts of RAP binders containing the rejuvenator. A total of 12 Superpave mixtures
including 10 containing RAP and two virgin were designed. The results indicated, for the mixtures tested for this project, that: 共1兲
properties of the recycled mixtures using the rejuvenator, such as ITS and APA, were better than those containing the softer binder; 共2兲
10% more RAP could be incorporated in the Superpave mixtures by using the rejuvenator than using the softer binder; and 共3兲 the
blending charts established under the Superpave binder specifications can be used to determine the content of the rejuvenator for the
recycling.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0899-1561共2007兲19:5共376兲
CE Database subject headings: Recycling; Asphalt pavements; Asphalt mixes; Flexible pavements; Aging; Shear deformation.

Introduction gates to obtain required aggregate structure and volumetric prop-


erties of the mixtures.
The use of reclaimed asphalt pavement 共RAP兲 helps to conserve A procedure for determining the optimum RAP percentage for
natural resources and land needed for disposal of these materials. a Superpave mixture was proposed by considering the blend
Currently, according to the Federal Highway Administration charts of RAP binders containing a softer binder 共Kennedy et al.
共FHwA 1997兲 80% of the RAP removed each year during resur- 1998兲. A similar study was reported on determining the content of
face projects, approximately 73 million tons, is reused in the a rejuvenator for recycling a RAP binder with Superpave binder
United States. Increasing the percentage of the RAP and improv- specifications 共Shen and Ohne 2002兲. Interim guidelines for se-
ing the quality of recycled mixtures will facilitate the further uti- lecting a grade of a neat binder for recycling RAP were prepared
lization of the RAP. 共Bukowski 1997兲. It was suggested that up to 15% RAP could be
For many years, research on the use of a high percentage of used in Superpave mixtures without changing the grade of the
RAP in hot-mix asphalt 共HMA兲 was reported using the recycling added virgin binder. For mixtures containing 25% RAP, blending
technologies developed decades ago 共Noureldin and Wood 1988; charts of RAP binders containing a rejuvenating agent should be
AI 1981兲. With Superpave specifications being gradually adopted used for selecting the type and determining the content of softer
in the United States and RAP being used under this method, both binders/rejuvenators. The properties of coarser 12.5 mm Super-
binder grade and aggregate structure of recycled mixtures are to pave mixtures containing RAP fractions, screened coarse, and fine
meet the proper specifications. For example, blending charts of materials, were investigated 共Stroup-Gardiner and Wagner 1999兲.
RAP binders containing a rejuvenating agent have to be estab- Little change was observed in tensile strength because of the ad-
lished within the specifications instead of the conventional dition of as much as 40 and 15% of the coarser and finer RAP
penetration/viscosity system. RAPs are blended with virgin aggre- fractions. However, substantial increase in mixture stiffness was
observed when 15% of RAP was used, suggesting the need for a
1 softer binder. Superpave mixtures containing RAP can perform
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Construction Management and Civil
well provided the mixtures are properly designed and constructed
Engineering Technology, Georgia Southern Univ., Statesboro, GA 30460-
4085 共corresponding author兲. E-mail:jshen@georgiasouthern.edu 共McDaniel et al. 2002兲. Many of these researchers indicated the
2
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Clemson Univ., Clemson, SC need for additional research on the utilization of rejuvenating
29634-0911. E-mail: kcdoc@clemson.edu agents for Superpave recycled mixtures.
3
Volkert & Associates, Inc., 3809 Moffett Rd., Mobile, AL 36618. In general, a rejuvenator is used to recover the properties of
E-mail: aune_21@hotmail.com aged binders by reconstituting the chemical compositions of the
Note. Associate Editor: Eyad Masad. Discussion open until October 1, aged binders. An asphalt binder that experiences aging of oxidiza-
2007. Separate discussions must be submitted for individual papers. To tion has a lower concentration of more reactive components 关Ni-
extend the closing date by one month, a written request must be filed with
trogen base 共N兲+first acidaffins 共A1兲兴 and higher concentration of
the ASCE Managing Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted
for review and possible publication on February 3, 2005; approved on less reactive components 关Paraffines 共P兲+second acidaffins 共A2兲兴.
June 23, 2006. This paper is part of the Journal of Materials in Civil A rejuvenator used for restoring the aged asphalt binders usually
Engineering, Vol. 19, No. 5, May 1, 2007. ©ASCE, ISSN 0899-1561/ has a minimum N/P ratio of 0.5 to insure the compatibility of the
2007/5-376–384/$25.00. rejuvenator and the aged binder and to prevent syneresis. Rejuve-

376 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2007


nators have to satisfy several the requirements for viscosity Materials and Test Program
共60°C兲, flash point, volatility, compatibility, chemical composi-
tion, and specify gravity 共ASTM 1980兲.
Materials Used
Research on the effectiveness of the rejuvenators on blended
RAP binders and recycled mixtures has been conducted. The in-
Aggregates
fluence of the rejuvenators with different ranges of viscosity on
Two types of aggregate 共referred to as C and L兲 were selected to
the properties of reconstituted RAP binder was confirmed 共Esco-
make virgin mixtures as control samples and mixtures containing
bar and Davidson 1979兲. The effect of the rejuvenators on the
RAP. Aggregate Source C is granite, while Source L is gneiss.
structural performance of recycled asphalt mixtures was also in-
The gradations and other properties of the two virgin aggregates
vestigated 共Little et al. 1981兲. The structural layer coefficients
are shown in Table 1.
used for pavement thickness design were found to be higher for
RAPs containing identical Aggregate Sources C and L were
the recycled mixtures than the control mixture, depending on the
selected. The RAP was sieved into two fractions as a normal
RAP content and source and the rejuvenator. Difference in per-
practice, namely coarse fraction retained on Sieve No. 4
formance, especially in cracking potential, was obtained for re-
共4.75 mm, labeled as + # 4兲 and fine fraction Passing Sieve No. 4
cycled mixtures using different RAP and rejuvenator. More
共labeled as − # 4兲 共Table 2兲. The gradation and binder content of
recently, rejuvenator has been introduced in mixtures using a
each fraction were obtained 共Table 2兲. When RAP containing
large percent of RAP and hot in-place recycling 共Crawley 1999;
Source C was incorporated, recycled mixtures using a high per-
Kazmierowski et al. 1999兲. The recycled mixtures containing
centage of the two fractions could not meet the Surperpave volu-
80% RAP were designed using a rejuvenator, 19% by weight of
metric requirements, therefore, fraction particles retained on No.
the binders in the RAP 共Crawley 1999兲. Acceptable properties of
8 共2.36 mm labeled as + # 8兲 were incorporated.
the recycled mixtures were attainable. The effectiveness of the
rejuvenators on rejuvenating the penetration was confirmed for Asphalt Binders
the past 10 years in Canada 共Kazmierowski et al. 1999兲. In Japan, The grade of all binders in various mixtures was expected to have
a research on the properties of recycled mixtures using recycling a final grade of PG64-22. A neat PG64-22 binder was selected for
agents with different components was conducted. The results in- the control virgin mixtures, whereas neat PG52-28 binder was
dicated that the aged binders could be recovered to a target pen-
etration by using different rejuvenating agents if adequate amount
is added 共Takahashi and Hachiya 2000兲. However, some states Table 1. Gradation and Properties of Virgin Aggregates
around the United States do not allow using any kind of rejuve-
nator for the mixtures to be recycled for many reasons including Virgin Aggregate C Virgin Aggregate L
the negative effect on the rutting resistance of the mixtures and
Measurement #789 MS RS #789 MSa RSb
additional equipment needed to introduce the rejuvenator into the
mix. 12.5 mm 100 100 100 100 100 100
9.5 mm 81.5 90 100 90 100 100
4.75 mm 22.9 35 99.8 35 99.8 99.4
Objectives
2.36 mm 4.3 6.3 96 6.3 96 82.5
0.6 mm 1.5 1.4 60.5 1.4 60.6 47.2
1. To evaluate the properties of Superpave mixtures containing 0.15 mm 0.9 0.7 22.3 0.7 22.3 7.6
various RAP sources using a rejuvenator and compare to 0.075 mm 0.6 0.44 12 0.44 12 2.3
those of the recycled Superpave mixtures using a softer LA abrasion 31 51
binder; loss 共%兲
2. To investigate the possibility of using blending charts of aged Absorption 共%兲 0.3 0.5
binders and a rejuvenator for determining the rejuvenator Bulk specific 2.62 2.67
contents for the design of Superpave mixtures containing gravity 共SSD兲
RAP; and Sand equivalent 96 65
3. To investigate the possibility of incorporating RAP in a
MS⫽manufactured screenings.
Superpave mixtures by evaluating the properties of virgin b
RS⫽regular screenings.
Superpave mixtures and Superpave mixtures containing
RAP.
Table 2. Gradation 共% Passing兲 and Binder Contents 共%兲 of Two RAP
Sources
Scope
RAP with Aggregate C RAP with Aggregate L
In this study, two typical South Carolina RAPs were incorporated
in 9.5 mm Superpave mixtures with either a rejuvenator or a Measurement +#4 −#4 +#8 +#4 −#4
softer binder 共for control samples兲 as a rejuvenating agent. The 12.5 mm 100 100 100 100 100
volumetric design, mechanical properties, moisture sensitivity 9.5 mm 100 84 88 97 100
and a selected performance properties of the HMA were obtained 4.75 mm 100 43 57 59 100
or calculated. Blending charts of extracted RAP binders contain- 2.36 mm 90 33 38 45 88
ing the rejuvenator were established by dynamic shear rheometer 0.6 mm 56 21 24 30 57
共DSR兲 and bending beam rheometer 共BBR兲 and implemented to
0.15 mm 16 9 10 14 24
determine the content of the rejuvenator by Superpave binder
0.075 mm 8 5.4 6 8 14
requirements. A total of 12 Superpave mixtures including ten re-
Binder content 共%兲 4.46 5.66 4.66 4.66 6.94
cycled and two virgin mixtures were designed.

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2007 / 377


Table 3. Critical Temperatures of RAP Binders and Possible Percentage Table 5. Various Superpave Mixtures Used in the Study
of the RAP Using a Softer Binder
RAP
RAP containing RAP containing Codea Aggregate Binder 共%兲
Aggregate C Aggregate L
CV0 C PG 64-22 0
Tc Tc CV15 C PG 52-28 15
Temperature 共°C兲 Percentage 共°C兲 Percentage CR15 C Rejuvenator, PG 64-22 15
High 98.3 ⬎16.8 93.5 ⬎16.9 CV38 C PG 52-28 38
Intermediate 29.6 ⬍66.1 30.6 ⬍61.6 CR38 C Rejuvenator, PG 64-22 38
Low −3.9 ⬍42.9 −3.9 ⬍42.9 CR48 C Rejuvenator, PG 64-22 48
LV0 L PG 64-22 0
LV15 L PG 52-28 15
used as the softer binder as recommended by the South Carolina LR15 L Rejuvenator, PG 64-22 15
Department of Transportation 共SCDOT 2004兲. Both the virgin LV30 L PG 52-28 30
binders were obtained from the same source.
LR30 L Rejuvenator, PG 64-22 30
RAP binders used for obtaining the critical temperatures and a
First letter⫽aggregate source; second letter⫽type of rejuvenating agents;
for blending charts were extracted from the two RAPs. The criti-
V⫽virgin binder; R⫽rejuvenator; and numbers⫽percentage of RAP
cal temperatures 共Tc兲 of the RAP binders obtained from DSR and incorporated in each mixture.
BBR tests are shown in Table 3.

Rejuvenator
One oil type of rejuvenator available commercially in the United
States was selected for this study. The properties of the rejuvena- in this study兲; TRAP⫽critical temperature of extracted RAP binder
tor are listed in Table 4. The content of the rejuvenator 共%兲 共Table 3兲; and %RAP⫽percentage of RAP expressed as a decimal
needed for rejuvenating the RAP binder to PG 64-22 was deter- 共i.e., 0.30 for 30%兲.
mined on the blending charts established by DSR and BBR. When the softer binder was used as a rejuvenating agent, the
When using RAP, there has long been a question regarding to maximum percentages of 38 and 30% were determined to be
what extent the RAP binder blends with the virgin binder/ satisfying the volumetric requirements and the combined grada-
rejuvenator to achieve a target PG grade. To answer this question, tion requirements for the two RAP sources containing Aggregate
three situations of the RAP, i.e., black rock, total blending and Sources C and L, respectively. This process of determining the
real world were proposed. Black rock is the idea that there is RAP percentage was completed by adjusting the percentages of
absolutely no mixing between the RAP binder and virgin binder/ the two fractions of the RAPs into designated aggregate structure
rejuvenator, whereas total blending is assumed that the two bind- and satisfying the volumetric parameters. When the rejuvenator
ers completely and uniformly mix. The research indicated that the was used, 10% more 共48 and 40%兲 of RAPs with Aggregate
real-world results more closely match the total-blending, depend- Sources C and L were incorporated, respectively 共Table 5兲.
ing upon the amount of RAP. Based on this finding, the total
amount of the rejuvenator needed in the mixtures was obtained by
Test Program
multiplying the amount of the RAP binder contained in RAP with
the %rejuvenator. Fig. 1 shows the experimental design used in this study. Table 5
shows the combination of all Superpave mixture designs.
Percentage of RAP
The possible percentage of RAP incorporated was carefully de- Critical Temperatures and Blending Charts–DSR and BBR
termined so that both Superpave binder and mixture specifications Tests
could be met. The percentage of RAPs, 17–43%, was initially Extraction and recovery tests of the RAP binders were performed
calculated using Eq. 共1兲 below 共McDaniel and Anderson 2001兲 according to ASTM D 2172-81 共centrifuge extraction with ro-
共Table 3兲: tavapor recovery兲 and ASTM D 1856-95a 关recovery of asphalt
%RAP = 共Tblend − Tvirgin兲/共TRAP − Tvirgin兲 共1兲 cement 共Abson method兲兴 procedures. Samples were prepared in
accordance with ASTM Method D 979 共sampling bituminous
where Tvirgin⫽critical temperature of virgin binder 共PG58-22, in paving mixtrure兲. The properties of the RAP binders were ob-
this study兲; Tblend⫽critical temperature of blend binder 共PG64-22, tained by DSR and BBR on samples of the extracted RAP binders
in three stages: aged binder 共no further aging兲, RTFO residual,
and RTFO+ PAV residual.
Table 4. Properties of the Rejuvenator Used
Conventional blending chart is established with the viscosity/
Properties Ranges penetration as ordinate and the percentage of a rejuvenator as
Specific gravity 共15.6/15.6C兲 0.98–1.02 abscissa for selecting the type and the content of the rejuvenating
Viscosity, 60C CST 200–500 agent. This chart uses only two percentages of the rejuvenating
Flash Point, COC 共°C兲 204 minimum agent: 0 and 100% of the rejuvenating agent with the relationship
RTFO-C 163° C 关weight loss 共%兲兴 4.0 maximum
showing the viscosity/penetration and the percentage being as-
sumed to be linear 共Kandhal and Foo 1997兲. In the research
RTF-C 共viscosity ratio兲 2.5 maximum
project presented in this paper, blending charts were established
Compatibility 共PC/S ratio兲 0.5 minimum
with performance properties at high temperature 共64° C兲, interme-
Saturates 共w%兲 28 maximum
diate temperature 共25° C兲 and low temperature 共−12° C兲 as ordi-
Chemical compatibility 0.2–1.2
nates and the percentage of the rejuvenator as abscises. Three

378 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2007


Fig. 1. Experimental design

percentages of the rejuvenator were added into the RAP binders test, two sets of three samples each after being cured under dif-
so that linear regression equations could be obtained 共Shen and ferent specified conditions were tested by following the SC-T-70
Ohne 2002; Kennedy et al. 1998兲. testing procedures.

Volumetric Parameters—Superpave Mixture Design


Volumetric parameters of all mixtures were obtained using Super- Results and Discussions
pave mixture design. A gyration of 75 was used by assuming a
traffic volume of 3 million ESALs for these mixtures. One aggre-
Rejuvenator Content
gate structure was finally adopted among three trials for 9.5 mm
Superpave mixtures. This aggregate structure was obtained for The content of the rejuvenator needed for RAP Binder Source C
virgin aggregates, but used for all mixtures. The use of an iden- to reach a target grade of PG64-22 was calculated with the blend-
tical aggregate structure for all mixtures was to eliminate the ing charts established in the following steps 共Shen and Ohne
influence of the aggregate structure on the properties of the mix- 2002兲. First, a maximum allowable content was determined by
tures. It is important to note that the final percentage of the RAP satisfying the rutting parameter, G* / sin共␦兲, of the blends in the
incorporated was adjusted in this stage so that all Superpave original state 共no aging兲 and after RTFO. Figs. 2 and 3 show the
specifications were satisfied. G* / sin共␦兲 obtained from the blends of RAP binders containing
the rejuvenator in original state and after RTFO aging at 64° C;
Performance Properties—Rutting Resistance (APA Test) respectively. Overall, good linear correlations between the rejuve-
It is well known that pavement rutting is caused mostly by the nator content and G* / sin共␦兲 were obtained for the three blends as
shear flow of HMA mixtures under high temperatures by repeated reported before 共Shen and Ohne 2002兲. These linear regression
traffic loading. This shear flow largely depends on the properties equations/lines were then used for the determination of the con-
of the aggregate and the asphalt binder. This issue is one of the
main concerns when utilizing RAP in mixtures containing a reju-
venator.
The asphalt pavement analyzer 共APA兲, one of the methods to
identify the rutting resistance of an asphalt mixture, has been
adopted in some agencies for evaluating the rutting resistance
properties of Superpave mixtures 共Kandhal and Cooley 2002;
Kandhal and Cooley 2003; Zhang et al. 2002; Martin and Parks
2003兲. The APA test was used in this study and carried out on
cylinder samples with air void contents of 4.0± 0.5%, height of
75 mm, a test temperature of 64° C, and a hose pressure of
690 kPa. The rut depth was recorded automatically after 8,000
cycles.

Mechanical Properties—Indirect Tensile Strength


The mixtures susceptibility of all mixtures were evaluated by ob-
taining the indirect tensile strength 共ITS兲 of samples and calculat-
ing the tensile strength ratio 共TSR兲 of various mixtures. For this Fig. 2. G* / sin共␦兲 versus rejuvenator content at 64° C 共original state兲

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2007 / 379


Fig. 3. G* / sin共␦兲 versus rejuvenator content at 64° C 共RTFO Fig. 5. Stiffness versus rejuvenator content at −12° C 共RTFO
residual兲 + PAV residual兲

tents with which the G* / sin共␦兲 reaches 1.0 and 2.2 kPa for the Volumetric Results
blends in the original state 共no aging兲 and after RTFO, respec-
Results of the 12 Superpave mix designs are shown in Table 7.
tively. These contents of 12.7 and 13.5% were obtained by ex-
The average optimum binder content of Superpave mixtures con-
trapolating the lines or algebraically using the equations for no
taining RAPs using the rejuvenator was lower than that of those
aging and RTFO aging cases; respectively.
using the softer binder regardless of the sources of the RAP
Second, a minimum allowable content was determined by sat-
sources 共i.e., C or L兲. Generally, the optimum binder content of
isfying the fatigue and the shrinkage parameters, i.e., G*sin共␦兲,
the Superpave mixtures containing RAPs decreased slightly with
stiffness and m-value, of the blends after RTFO+ PAV aging.
the increased content of the RAP, but no clear relationship be-
G*sin共␦兲 that was obtained at the intermediate temperature of
tween the optimum binder content and the content of the RAP
25° C was also linearly correlated with the content of the rejuve-
was found, Fig. 7. In addition, optimum binder content of virgin
nator 共Shen and Ohne 2002兲. A minimum rejuvenator content of
mixtures was higher than that of all recycled mixtures.
12.3% was obtained by extrapolating the regression line with the
The change in the optimum binder content may be caused by
G*sin共␦兲 value being less than 5.0 MPa 共Fig. 4兲. Similarly, the
the difference in the viscosity of the binders in the mixtures. The
m-value and stiffness obtained at low temperature of −12° C were
amount of the rejuvenating agents 共rejuvenator or softer binder兲
correlated linearly with the contents 共Figs. 5 and 6兲. A minimum
was obtained based on the estimated weight of the RAP binders
rejuvenator content of 10.8 and 2.9% were obtained by extrapo-
lating the regression lines with the stiffness value being less than
300 MPa and the m value being larger than 0.3, respectively. As a
result, the minimum rejuvenator content satisfying the fatigue and
the shrinkage parameters was found to be 12.3%.
Finally, a mean value of the common contents, 12.5%, with
which all requirements were satisfied 共AI 2001兲, was used as a
design value in this study 共Table 6兲. This content is approximately
2-3% of the weight of the mixtures containing 30–50% of RAP.
This is a reasonable and practical value for this rejuvenator ac-
cording to the manufacturer.

Fig. 6. m values versus rejuvenator content at −12° C 共RTFO


+ PAV residual兲

Table 6. Rejuvenator Content 共%兲 from Blending Charts for PG64-22


SHRP binders requirements Rejuvenator
G / sin共␦兲 ⬎ 1.00 kPa, T = 64° C, DSR 共original兲
*
⬍12.7
G* / sin共␦兲 ⬎ 2.20 kPa, T = 64° C, DSR 共RTFO兲 ⬍13.5
G*sin共␦兲 ⬍ 5.00 MPa, T = 25° C, DSR 共RTFO PAV兲 ⬎12.3
Stiffness⬍ 300 MPa, T = −12° C, BBR 共RTFO PAV兲 ⬎10.8
Fig. 4. G* / sin共␦兲 versus rejuvenator content at 25° C 共RTFO+ PAV m ⬎ 0.30, T = −12° C, BBR 共RTFO PAV兲 ⬎2.9
residual兲 Common contents 共%兲 12.3– 12.7

380 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2007


Table 7. Results of 9.5 mm Superpave Mixtures
Type of Superpave mixture
Specification RAP source containing Aggregate C RAP source containing Aggregate L
Sieve Limit CV0 CV15 CR15 CV38 CR38 CR48 LV0 LV15 LR15 LV30 LR30 LR40
12.5 mm 98–100 100 100 100 100 100 98 100 100 100 100 100 100
9.5 mm 90–100 91 90 90 90 90 88 95 94.2 94.2 94 94 95
4.75 mm 54–70 61 58 58 59 59 58 53 62.7 62.7 57 57 61
2.36 mm 32–48 42 41 41 40 40 39 32 42 42 35 35 40
0.6 mm 14–26 21 21 21 21 21 21 18 24.7 24.7 21 21 25
0.15 mm 13–5 8.4 7.8 7.8 8.1 8.1 8.7 5.7 8.3 8.3 9.3 9.3 10.6
0.075 mm 9–3 4.95 4.4 4.4 4.62 4.62 5.11 5.02 4.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.9

Aggregate blend % Passing % Passing


Stone 789 50 49.2 49.15 31.4 31.4 25 69 52.9 52.85 59.3 59.3 50
Regular screenings 18 10 10 5 5 4 25 12 12 10 10 4
Manufactured screenings 31 25 25 25 25 20 5 19 19 0 0 5
Lime 1 0.85 0.85 0.6 0.6 1 1 0.85 0.85 0.7 0.7 1
−4RAP 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 9 9 18 18 24
+4RAP 0 6 6 0 0 0 0 6 6 12 12 16
+8RAP 0 0 0 38 38 48 69 52.9 52.85 59.3 59.3 50

Test results
%Max density at Ndes 96 95.5 95.9 96 95.8 96 96 94.9 95.9 96 95.8 96 96
%VMA 15.5–17.5 16.2 15.8 15.62 15.52 15.55 15.52 16.6 15.8 15.85 15.52 15.58 15.65
%VFA 70–80 72.5 76.1 75 71.9 72 74.5 76.2 76.1 74.5 71.9 70 72
%Max density at Nini ⇐89 88 88.4 88 88.5 88.3 88.2 87 88.4 89 88.5 88.3 87.8
%Max density at Nmax ⇐98 96.5 97.1 96.5 96.9 97.2 97.3 96.1 97.1 97 96.9 97.4 97
Dust-to-asphalt ratio 0.6–1.2 0.95 0.83 0.89 0.94 0.92 1.05 0.91 0.83 0.9 0.94 1.13 1.18
Optimum binder content 共%兲 5.02 5.3 4.93 5.05 5.01 4.87 5.5 5.4 5.09 4.9 4.8 4.85
Note: C⫽Aggregate Source C; V⫽virgin binder; R⫽rejuvenator; L⫽Aggregate Source L; and 0, 15, 38, and 48⫽percent of RAP incorporated in each
mixture.

using the binder content in each RAP source. Considering the 共65 psi兲 required by the SCDOT, regardless of the aggregate
Black Stone effect of some RAPs in the mixtures, the amount of source, the rejuvenating agent, and the curing state. The mixtures
the rejuvenating agents added may overdose, leading to a smaller containing the rejuvenator agent produced higher strengths than
viscosity than expected. The volumetric properties of HMA is those containing the softer binder. Furthermore, the mixtures con-
closely related with the content and viscosity of the binder for a taining RAP, in general, had higher ITS values than the corre-
given compaction condition. In general, a lower viscosity and sponding virgin mixture of the same aggregate source. The mix-
higher binder content will make the compaction easier to accom- ture made with 10% more RAP Source L and containing the
plish. Therefore, to get the same air void content 共i.e., 4%兲, less rejuvenator still had higher strength than required by SCDOT’s
asphalt content is needed for a lower viscosity binder. specifications. This trend was also true for mixtures containing
Percent voids in the mineral aggregate 共%VMA兲 of the mix- Aggregate Source C. This indicated that the mixtures containing
tures, as shown in Fig. 8, were greater than 15.5%, a value re- the rejuvenator produced ITS results as good as or even better
quired by the Superpave specifications. The values of %VMA of than the mixes made with the softer binder. There was no appar-
the Superpave mixtures containing RAPs with the rejuvenator
ent relationship between the percentage of the RAP incorporated
were less than those using the softer binder regardless of the
in the mixtures and the ITS values. In addition, some mixtures
sources of the RAP. The virgin mixtures had a higher %VMA
produced higher ITS values in wet state than in dry state, espe-
than the recycled mixtures using either rejuvenator or the softer
cially for Aggregate Source C. This phenomenon was occasion-
binder. In general, the %VMA decreased with the increase of the
rejuvenator content in mixes made with aggregate C and contain- ally observed in experiments for the mixtures using hydrophobic
ing RAP Source C. The percent voids filled with asphalt 共%VFA兲 aggregates. However, the curing of the recycled mixtures under
and dust asphalt ratio of all the mixtures satisfy the requirements hot water may improve the interaction of the RAP aggregate with
of Superpave mix specifications 共Table 7兲. the binders.
The percent tensile strength ratio 共%TSR兲, defined by the ITS
strength in the wet state divided by that in the dry state, are higher
ITS and TSR Results than the standard of 85% required by the SCDOT 共Fig. 10兲 for all
Fig. 9 shows the ITS average values of three samples of the mixtures. For Aggregate Source C, the ratios ranged from 95.7%,
mixtures incorporating Aggregate Sources C and L in wet and dry the lowest for the virgin mixture and as high as 141% for the
states. Generally, it is shown that all of the Superpave mixtures mixture containing 15% RAP. For Aggregate Source L, the range
have higher wet ITS values than the standard of 0.46 MPa of TSR ratio was from 83.3%, for the mixture containing 30%

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2007 / 381


Fig. 8. %VMA of the Superpave mixtures containing RAP sources:
共a兲 C; 共b兲 L
Fig. 7. Optimum binder content of the Superpave mixtures contain-
ing RAPs for aggregate sources: 共a兲 C; 共b兲 L

depths of the mixtures containing RAP with a rejuvenator and


with a softer binder was less than the mixtures made with a higher
RAP, to 118%, for the control mixture. The data indicated that the RAP percentage 共e.g., 38%兲.
mixtures containing RAP, in general, have better antistripping The control mixtures containing Aggregate Source L showed a
properties than the virgin mixtures regardless of the aggregate very small rut depth value. For mixtures containing 15% RAP,
type. less difference was observed in rut depth of specimens made with
Based on the results, it was concluded that the mixtures con- a rejuvenator compared to that of a softer binder. Whereas, when
taining RAP have the same potential as the control virgin mix- a high percent of 30% RAP was used, the rut depth of the re-
tures to provide a bearing strength and having the same type of cycled mixtures using the softer binder was higher than those
moisture susceptibility as the virgin mixtures. Test samples con- using the rejuvenator. However, all of the rut depths were smaller
taining RAP did not exhibit visual signs of stripping even for the than the tentative criteria value. When 40% RAP was used, the rut
mixtures containing the highest percent of RAP 共40 and 48%兲 for depth values of the recycled mixtures with rejuvenator were still
Aggregates L and C; respectively. acceptable.
The rut depths of the mixtures using rejuvenator were, in most
cases, smaller than those using softer virgin binder, specifically
Rut Depth Results when a higher amount of RAP is incorporated. A higher percent
Fig. 11 shows the rut average depths from six replicate samples of of RAP can be incorporated by using a rejuvenator than a softer
various mixtures containing different %RAP contents. Kandhal binder considering the APA results. Aggregate type still has an
and Cooley 共2003兲 suggested tentative acceptance criteria for obvious influence on the rut depth, which can be seen by com-
mixtures after 8,000 cycles using either automatic or manual mea- paring mixtures containing Aggregate Sources C and L 共Fig. 10兲.
surements. For a 4% air void sample designed for the traffic level
of 3 million EASLs, the acceptable rut depth is 8.0 mm for auto-
matic measurements. In general, the rut depths of all the mixtures Summary and Conclusions
were less than this value. In addition, most of the rut depths of the
mixtures containing Source C RAP are less than that of the virgin Blending charts of extracted RAP binders containing a rejuvena-
mixture. Even for the mixture containing 38% of the RAP with tor were established through DSR and BBR testing in order to
softer binder, the maximum rut depth observed was still much investigate the possibility of determining the rejuvenator content
less than the virgin mixture. The rut depths of the mixtures con- when RAP is incorporated in Superpave mixtures. Superpave
taining the rejuvenator are much less than those mixtures made mixtures incorporating two sources of RAPs were designed with
with softer binder. It was also found that when a lower RAP the rejuvenator content determined by the blend charts. Virgin
percentage 共i.e., 15%兲 was used, the difference between the rut control mixtures and mixtures containing RAPs using a softer

382 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2007


Fig. 10. %tensile strength ratio for aggregate sources: 共a兲 C; 共b兲 L

Fig. 9. Indirect tensile strength for aggregate sources: 共a兲 C; 共b兲 L

binder were designed for comparison purposes. Moisture suscep-


tibility of the mixtures was investigated by the indirect tensile
strength test. The rutting properties were evaluated using the as-
phalt pavement analyzer. The main conclusions are drawn, for the
materials tested, as follows:
1. The Superpave mixtures containing RAPs and a rejuvenator
content determined with the blend charts produced mechani-
cal and rutting performance properties that were as good as
or even better than those using a softer binder.
2. The recycled mixtures containing as much as 40 and 48% of
the RAP Sources L and C, respectively, can be incorporated
in the 9.5 mm Superpave mixtures when a rejuvenator is
used. However, only 30 and 38% of the two RAPs can be
incorporated in the same Superpave mixtures with softer
binder.
3. All Superpave mixtures incorporating RAPs show as good
properties as the two control virgin mixtures. Volumetric re-
quirements of recycled mixtures were satisfied and ITS re-
sults of the recycled mixtures were within the requirements.
A visual observation of the ITS samples indicated the lack of
stripping in all mixtures.
4. The rut depth of all mixtures containing RAPs from APA
testing after 8,000 load cycles, was much less than the ten-
tative criteria of 8.0 mm.
5. Blending charts of extracted aged binders with a rejuvenator
show that there are good relationships between the perfor- Fig. 11. Rutting depths of the Superpave mixtures containing various
mance parameters and the rejuvenator contents. It is possible RAP contents for aggregate sources: 共a兲 C; 共b兲 L

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2007 / 383


to determine a design content of the rejuvenator for recycling erative Highway Research Program, Washington, D.C.
RAP under Superpave specifications by using these charts. Kandhal, P. S., and Foo, K. Y. 共1997兲. “Designing recycled hot-mixture
6. RAP percentage incorporated in Superpave mixtures is de- asphalt mixtures using Superpave technology.” NCAT Rep. No. 96-5,
pendent not only on properties of the RAP binder, the RAP National Center for Asphalt Technology, Auburn, Ala., 7–23.
aggregate 共e.g., critical temperature, the blend charts of the Kazmierowski, T., Marks, P., and Lee, S. 共1999兲. “Ten-year performance
aged binder and rejuvenator added, the RAP gradation, etc.兲, review of in situ hot-mix recycling in Ontario.” Transportation Re-
search Record. 1864, Transportation Research Board, Washington,
but also the requirements for Superpave mixtures 共e.g., volu-
D.C.
metric properties, mechanical and performance properties,
Kennedy, T. W., Tam, W. O., and Solaimanian, M. 共1998兲. “Optimizing
etc.兲. Changes in the fractions 共e.g. from mesh -#4 to -#8 in use of reclaimed asphalt pavement with the Superpave system.” Asph.
the study兲 of the RAP incorporated can effectively affect the Paving Technol., 67, 311–325.
possible percentage of RAPs. Little, D. H., Holmgreen, R. J., and Epps, J. A. 共1981兲. “Effect of recy-
cling agents on the structural performance of recycled asphalt con-
certed materials.” Asph. Paving Technol., 50, 375–402.
Acknowledgments Martin, A. E., and Park, D.-W. 共2003兲. “Use of the asphalt pavement
analyzer and repeated simple shear test at constant height to augment
This research was financially supported by the Asphalt Rubber Superpave volumetric design.” J. Transp. Eng., 129共5兲, 522–530.
Service Technology 共ARTS兲, Clemson University, South McDaniel, R., and Anderson, R. M. 共2001兲. “Recommended use of re-
Carolina. claimed asphalt pavement in the Superpave mixture design method:
Technician’s manual.” NCHRP Rep. 452, National Cooperative High-
way Research Program, Washington, D.C.
McDaniel, R. S., Soleymani, H., and Shah, A. 共2002兲. “Use of reclaimed
References
asphalt pavement 共RAP兲 under Superpave specification.” Final Rep.,
North Central Superpave Center, West Lafayette, Ind.
Asphalt Institute 共AI兲. 共1981兲. Asphalt hot-mix recycling, Manual Series
Noureldin, A. S., and Wood, L. 共1988兲. “Evaluation of hot recycled as-
No. 20, 2nd Ed., AI, Lexington, Ky.
phalt mixtures containing large amount of RAP for use as surface
Asphalt Institute 共AI兲. 共2001兲. Performance graded asphalt binder speci-
mixtures.” Proc., 32nd Annual Conf. of the Canadian Technical As-
fication and testing, Superpave Series, No.1, AI, Lexington, Ky.
phalt Association, E. Thompson, ed., Canadian Technical Asphalt As-
ASTM. 共1980兲. Recommended practice for classifying hot-mix recycling
sociation, Victoria, B.C., Canada, 276–301.
agents, Philadelphia.
Shen, J., and Ohne, Y. 共2002兲. “Determining rejuvenator content for re-
Bukowski, J. 共1997兲. “Guideline for design of Superpave mixtures con-
cycling reclaimed asphalt pavement by SHRP binder specifications.”
taining reclaimed asphalt pavement 共RAP兲.” Memorandum, Expert
Task Group, San Antonio. Int. J. Pavement Eng., 3共4兲, 261–268.
Crawley, A. B. 共1999兲. “Innovative hot in-place recycling of hot-mix South Caroline Department of Transportation 共SCDOT兲. 共2004兲. “Supple-
asphalt pavement in Mississippi.” Transportation Research Record. ment specification of recycled asphalt pavement 共RAP兲 material.”
1654, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. SCDOT, Columbia, S.C.
Escobar, S. J., and Davidson, D. D. 共1979兲. “Role of recycling agents in Stroup-Gardiner, M., and Wagner, C. 共1999兲. “Use of reclaimed asphalt
the restoration of aged asphalt cements.” Asph. Paving Technol., 48, pavement in Superpave hot-mix asphalt applications.” Transportation
375–402. Research Record. 1681, Transportation Research Board, Washington,
Federal Highway Administration 共FHwA兲. 共1997兲. “Pavement recycling D.C., 1–9.
guidelines for state and local governments.” FHWA-SA-98-042, Wash- Takahashi, O., and Hachiya, Y. 共2000兲. “A study on the chrematistics of
ington, D.C. recycled asphalt mixture used different kind of recycling additive.” J.
Kandhal, P. S., and Cooley, L. A. 共2002兲. “Evaluation of permanent de- Pavement Eng., JSCE, 5, 23–30.
formation of asphalt mixtures using loaded wheel tester.” Asph. Pav- Zhang, J., Cooley, A., and Kandhal, P. 共2002兲. “Comparison of funda-
ing Technol., 71, 739–753. mental and simulative testmethods for evaluation permanent deforma-
Kandhal, P. S., and Cooley, L. A. 共2003兲. “Accelerated laboratory rutting tion of hot-mix asphalt.” Transportation Research Record. 1789,
tests: Asphalt pavement analyzer.” NCHRP Rep. 508, National Coop- Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 9–100.

384 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2007

You might also like