Draft
Evaluation of recycled asphalt mixture at low temperature using different analytical solutions
Journal: Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Manuscript ID cjce-2019-0303.R1
Manuscript Type: Article
Date Submitted by the Author: 28-Jul-2019
Complete List of Authors: Cannone Falchetto, Augusto; Technische Universität Braunschweig, Civil Engineering - ISBSMoon, Ki Hoon; Korea Expressway Corporation, Corporate strategy and Policy Research Division; Korea Expressway Corporation, Pavement Research DivisionKim, Dong Hyuk; Inha University
Keyword:
Is the invited manuscript for consideration in a Special
Issue? :Not applicable (regular submission)
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
1
Evaluation of recycled asphalt mixture at low temperature using different
analytical solutions
Augusto Cannone Falchetto1, Ki Hoon Moon2 and Dong Hyuk Kim3
1Assistant professor, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Alaska
Fairbanks, 99775, Alaska, U.S. ([email protected])2Senior Researcher, Korea Expressway Corporation Pavement Research Division (KECPRD),
Dongtan-Myeon, Hwaseong-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, 445-812, Korea (Corresponding Author, email:
[email protected], [email protected])3Ph.D Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Inha University, Incheon 22212, Korea (email:
Page 1 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
2
Abstract
Using Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) in road infrastructures is crucial for mitigating the
environmental impact while controlling the construction costs. However, poorer low temperature
performance may be experienced for mixtures containing RAP. In this paper, the effect of RAP on
the material response at low temperature is investigated through mixture creep testing with the
Bending Beam Rheometer. Three different mathematical approaches are selected for further
evaluation in combination with simple statistical analysis. Based on the experimental data, creep
stiffness, m-value, relaxation modulus, thermal stress, and critical cracking temperature are
computed and compared. As a result, no differences are found between the virgin mixture and that
designed with 15% of RAP. Poorer performance is observed when more than 25% of RAP is
incorporated; however, no significant variation was observed for a further increase up to 40%
suggesting that higher amount RAP could be used depending on traffic level and climate.
Keywords: Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP), Bending Beam Rheometer (BBR), Hopkins and
Hamming’s algorithm, Advanced Power-law function, Advanced Laplace transformation, Low
temperature performance
Page 2 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
3
1. Introduction
It is well-known that the use of recyclable materials can provide considerable economic and
environmental benefits in the construction of pavement infrastructures (Lee et al. 1999; McDaniel
and Anderson 2001; Moon 2012; Moon et al. 2014; Cannone Falchetto et al. 2017; Cannone
Falchetto et al. 2018; Gu F. et al. 2019; Lyu Z. et al. 2019; Moon et al. 2019; Yan and Roque
2019). During the past decades, various types of recyclable materials, such as Reclaimed Asphalt
Pavement (RAP), iron blast furnace slag, waste tire rubber and reclaimed Portland cement concrete,
were investigated. Among these materials, RAP has found large application in pavement both in
developed and developing countries (McNichol 2005; Cannone Falchetto et al. 2017; Arambula-
Mercado E et al. 2018; Esfandiarpour and Shlaby 2018; Pi A.F. et al. 2018; Yan and Roque 2019).
Approximately 74 and 49 million tons of RAP are annually produced in U.S. and Europe,
respectively (Schimmoller V.E. 2000; Van den Bergh et al. 2009; Hansen et al. 2011; EAPA 2016;
Yan and Roque 2019). Based on different theoretical studies and field observation, pavement
agencies and road authorities proposed specifications and guidelines for designing recycled asphalt
mixture (Li et al. 2008; Hill et al. 2013; Moon et al. 2014; Cannone Falchetto et al. 2018). For
example, mixing RAP up to 55% is allowed based on pavement thickness, traffic level, climate
condition and binder grade in the state of Nebraska (Haghshenas et al. 2016). On the other hand,
in Germany, RAP content is set based on the evaluation of the mixture performance (Moon et al.
2019).
The effect of adding RAP into conventional asphalt mixture was investigated by several
researchers in the past (Lee et al. 1999; Mc Daniel and Anderson 2000; McGraw et al. 2007; Li et
al. 2008; McGraw and Johnson 2010; Hill et al. 2013; Pranshoo et al. 2013). Increase in viscosity
and stiffness was observed at high and intermediate temperature for a higher amount of RAP
Page 3 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
4
resulting in a better performance against rutting. On the other hand, higher stiffness and increased
brittleness were experienced for recycled mixtures at low temperature leading to an inferior
material response with respect to thermal cracking.
In the recent past, Shirodkar et al. (2011) introduced a method for determining the degree
of partial blending especially for a high percentage of RAP mixture through experimental
evaluations. Two degrees of partial blending, 70%, and 96%, were identified for mixtures prepared
with 25% and 35% RAP and designed with PG 70-28 and PG 58-28 binder, respectively
(AASHTO M 320 2016).
The impact of RAP on fracture properties was recently addressed by the authors of the
present paper (Cannone Falchetto et al. 2018). Finite Element Method (FEM), Indirect Tensile
(IDT) and Semi-Circular Bending (SCB) fracture configurations were adopted, showing a
reasonable correlation between strength and fracture energy for RAP mixtures.
Pi et al. (2018) investigated the effect of RAP on Warm Mix Asphalt (WMA) production
procedure along with material performance against cracking. It was observed that no specific
production means are needed when including up to 15% of RAP in WMA mixture. However,
higher production temperature is recommended when more than 30% of RAP is incorporated in
the mix design. As expected, the addition of RAP led to reduced cracking performance; however,
meeting the volumetric requirements did not translate into improved cracking resistance.
Forensic pavement performance simulation of various RAP mixtures using Mechanical-
Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) (AASHTOWare 2018) software was performed by
Esfandiarpour and Shalaby (2018). Dynamic modulus and creep compliance experimental data
were used as Level 1 input parameters in MEPDG analysis. The results indicated an over-
prediction of pavement performance compared to Level 3 analysis, suggesting that more precise
Page 4 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
5
calibration is needed for further research when introducing RAP mixture in the pavement design
process.
Gu et al. (2019) evaluated the mechanical performance of RAP mixtures through
experimental work, pavement analysis, simulation, and Life Cycle Cost analysis (LCCA). It was
found that bottom-up cracking distress on RAP mixture layers is negligible when compared to
conventional Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) pavement, while low temperature transverse crack is the
major distress for RAP mixture.
It is well-known that poorer performance can be expected at low temperature when RAP
is used due to the characteristic of the oxidized asphalt binder (Moon et al. 2014; Cannone
Falchetto et al. 2017; Cannone Falchetto et al. 2018; Gu F. et al. 2019; Lyu Z. et al. 2019). Even
though several studies were performed to investigate the effect of RAP on asphalt mixture, most
of them mainly rely on experimentation, while fewer analyzed and evaluated the mechanical
performance of RAP mixture at low temperature based on analytical solutions and a model-
oriented approach (Gibson et al. 2003; Dongre et al. 2005; Orlard and Di Benedetto 2005; Xu and
Solaimanian 2010; Gudmarsson et al. 2015).
2. Objective and research approach
In this paper, the effect of adding a high amount of RAP on the low temperature performance of
asphalt mixture is investigated. Bending Beam Rheometer (BBR) mixture creep test (Marasteanu
et al. 2009; AASHTO T-313 2012) is performed on a set of eight asphalt mixture. Creep stiffness,
m-value, relaxation modulus, thermal stress, and critical cracking temperature are computed and
then visually and statistically compared. Three different mathematical models are considered for
computing, analyzing and evaluating the low temperature characteristics with the goal to provide
upper, intermediate and lower bounds for the calculated parameters. Finally, the feasibility of
Page 5 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
6
incorporating a high amount of RAP in asphalt mixture is discussed in the view of future research
recommendations. Figure 1 shows the schematic research approach adopted in the present work.
[Insert Figure 1]
Figure 1: Schematic research flow-chart in this paper.
3. Materials and testing
3.1. Asphalt mixture
A total of eight Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) mixtures designed with two different types of asphalt
binder, PG 64-28 (Plain) and PG 64-34 (1.1% Elvaloy + 0.3% PPA), were prepared and used in
this paper (AASHTO M 320 2016); the binder content was equal to approximately 4.8% to 5.1%
by weight, respectively. The virgin aggregate consisted of screen sand, lime sand, and limestone.
RAP material contained aggregate with a Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size (NMAS) up to
19.0mm and was provided from Korea Expressway Corporation (KEC). The RAP materials were
obtained from three different local county roads in South Korea, constructed approximately 12~15
years ago. Moreover, the original grading of the RAP asphalt binder was PG 64-22 (unmodified).
Three different amounts of RAP were considered in this paper to evaluate the impact of RAP on
the mechanical performance of the mixtures: 15% (low), 25% (medium) and 40% (high). The
HMA mix design followed the current expressway construction specification in South Korea
(MOLIT 2017). All asphalt mixtures were compacted with Superpave Gyratory Compactor (SGC)
and subjected to a short-term aging procedure: conditioned at 135ºC for 4 hours (AASHTO R30
2002; ASTM D 6925-15 2015). Table 1 presents the schematic information on the mixtures
prepared for this paper. It should be mentioned that inclusion of various amount of RAP changed
the NMAS and aggregate gradation curve compared to the control asphalt mixture.
Page 6 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
7
Table 1: Asphalt Mixtures
[Insert Table 1]
3.2. BBR mixture creep test
Bending Beam Rheometer (BBR) creep testing was performed on thin asphalt mixture beam
(102.0±5mm × 12.7±0.5mm × 6.25±0.5mm) to evaluate the response of the material at low
temperature (Marasteanu et al. 2009; AASHTO T-313 2012; Moon et al. 2014). Similar to the
testing specification for asphalt binder (AASHTO T 313-12 2012), creep stiffness, S(t), and
corresponding m-value, m(t), can be easily computed from the results of the mid-span deflection,
(t), when considering the actual constant load applied to the specimen (4,000mN) (see Eq. (1)).
Due to the higher stiffness of asphalt mixture compared to asphalt binder, testing time was
extended to 1,000 seconds in place of the conventional 240 seconds (Marasteanu et al. 2009; Moon
et al. 2014).
(1)
3
3
2
1(t)(t) (t) 4 (t)
[Log(t)] Log(t)Log (t)(t)Log(t) Log(t)
P lSD b h
d A B Cd Smd d
Where:
S(t) : time-dependent flexural creep stiffness (=MPa);
D(t) : creep compliance (=1/MPa);
σ : bending stress in the beam (=MPa);
ε(t) : time-dependent bending strain in the beam (=mm/mm);
P : applied constant load (=mN);
δ(t) : beam deflection (=mm);
l, b, h : beam dimensions (=mm);
Page 7 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
8
t : time (=sec);
A, B, C: fitting constants
Thermal stress, (TºC), and corresponding critical cracking temperature, TCR, were
computed with three different mathematical approaches: Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm
(1967), Power-law function with equivalent time concept (Park and Kim 1999) and advanced
Laplace transformation approach. More detailed information about these three computing
solutions is provided in section 4 of the present manuscript. In this paper, two different testing
temperature conditions, low PG+10ºC and low (PG+10 ºC) + 12ºC, were considered for generating
relaxation modulus, E(t), master curve and computing (TºC) and corresponding TCR (Marasteanu
et al. 2009). Schematic information of BBR mixture creep testing is presented in Table 2 and
Figure 2.
Table 2: BBR mixture testing information
[Insert Table 2]
[Insert Figure 2]
Figure 2: Bending Beam Rheometer (BBR) test specimens (Left) and testing set-up (Right)
4. Mathematical approaches
4.1. Application of advanced Power-law function with equivalent time concept
In this section, a computational solution for determining the thermal stress, (TºC), by using
Gaussian integration approach (Moon et al. 2014) on the approximate inter-converted results of
Page 8 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
9
relaxation modulus, E(t), derived on the experimental data of creep compliance, D(t), is presented
(Park and Kim 1999).
D(t) and E(t) can be related by simple expression (see Eq. (2)) or through the convolution
integral (see Eq. (3)) as (Findley et al. 1976; Ferry 1980; Park and Kim 1999; Ebrahimi et al.
2014):
(2)( ) ( ) 1E t D t
(3)0 0
0 0
1( ) ( ) ( )( )
1( ) ( ) ( )( )
t t
t t
E t D t d E t d tS t
E t D t d E t d tS t
While Eq. (2) is acceptable only for weak viscoelastic material, Eq. (3) is a more robust solution
but relatively more complex to solve. By taking the Laplace transformation, Eq. (3) can be re-
written as:
(4) 20
1( ) ( ) ( ) ( )t
E t D t d t E s D ss
L L
Finally, thermal stress, (TºC), and critical cracking temperature, TCR, can be computed based on
Eqs. (1) to (4). A brief computation process summary is hereafter presented:
1. Generate approximate mathematical expressions of E(t) and D(t) based on power-law function
fitting of the experimental results as:
(5)1 1 11( ) , ( )n nnE t E E t D t D t
t
In Eq. (5), E1, D1 and n are positive constants (Park and Kim 1999; Ebrahimi et al. 2014).
2. Apply the Laplace transformation and rewrite Eq. (5) as:
Page 9 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
10
(6)
1 1 1
1 1 11 1
(1 )( ) ( )
! (1 )( ) ( )
nn
nn n
nE t E t E s Es
n nD t D t D s D Ds s
L
L
In Eq. (6), is the Gamma function which can be expressed as:
(7)1
0
( ) n tn t e dt
Based on Eqs. (4) to (7) with the Euler reflection formula, the relationship between D(t) and E(t)
can be expressed as:
(8)
1
2 2 11 1
1
1 1 1
1 1
1 1 1 1 1( )( ) (1 ) (1 )
1( ) ( )(1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) (1 ) ( )
1 sin( ) 1 sin( ) 1 sin( )( )
sin( )( ) ( )
n
n
n n n
nn
sD ss E s s E n E n s
t t tD s D tE n n E n n E n n n
n n ntE n E t n E t n
nE t D tn
L
In Eq. (8), parameter n can be computed as:
(9)d log ( ) d log ( )
log logt t
D t E tn or n
In previous studies, it was observed that very-good fitting results can be obtained when
experimental data of D(t) (and/or E(t)) are close to a straight line in log-log scale (i.e. time versus
results (Park and Kim 1999).
3. Based on Eqs. (1) to (9) and introducing the concept of equivalent time (t*), E(t) can be derived
as (Park and Kim 1999):
Page 10 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
11
(10) 1
1
1
sin( )( *) ( ) 1 * 1
sin( ) sin( )* *
nn
nn n
n tE t D t E tn E
n nt t t tn n
4. Then, E(t) master curve can be generated at two different temperature conditions as (i.e.
lowPG+10ºC and low(PG+10)+12ºC):
(11)
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) 1 ( ) 1
1 10 T c
wv vv
g gc c
vLog t Log a Log tg
t w tE t E LogE t LogE Logt v t
wLogE Logv
Where:
Eg = glassy modulus, assumed equal to 30~40GPa for asphalt mixtures (Moon et al., 2014),
tc, v and w = fitting parameters.
aT = horizontal shift factor which can be expressed as:
(12)1 21 210 LogsC C T
T T sa a C C T
C1, C2 = constant parameters, and
Ts = reference temperature (ºC, in this paper lowPG+10ºC).
5. Finally, (TºC) is computed by solving Eq. (13) in the reduced time domain with 24 Gauss
points integration approach at temperature (TºC) ranging from 22ºC(=TiºC) to -40ºC. In this
paper, a cooling rate of 2ºC/hour was considered (Moon et al. 2014).
(13)( ) ( ) ( ') '
( ') ( )( ) ( ') ' ( ( ) '( )) '' '
t
t
t t E t t dt
d d TE d E t t dtd dt
&
where:
Page 11 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
12
reduced time (14)T
ta
= strain rate which can also be expressed as:( ) ( ') / 't d t dt &
(15)( )t T
= Coefficient of thermal expansion or contraction; in this study, it is assumed =0.00003
(Moon et al. 2014),
= temperature cooling rate.T
4.2. Application of Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm (1957)
In this section, a numerical approach for computing E(t) from the experimental D(t) by using
Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm (1957) is shortly summarized (see Eqs. (16), (17), (18) and
(19)).
(16)
01
1 1/2 1 1 1
1
1 1/2 1 1 10
1/21
1
1 1/2 10
1
( ) ( )
( ') ( ') ' ( ) [ ( ) ( )]
( ) [ ( ) ( )]( )
( )
( ) [ ( ) ( )]
( ) (
i
i
t
t
n i n i n it
n
n i n i n ii
nn n
n
n i i ii
n n
E t D t d t
E t D t t dt E t J t t J t t
t E t J t t J t tE t
J t t
t E t J t J t
J t J t
)
Where:
(17) 1 1 10
1( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )2
t
n n n n n nJ t D t dt J t J t D t D t t t
t: time interval (i.e. ) expressed as (18)0 1 2 1,0000, 1, 2,... 1,000t t t t )(21
121 iii
ttt
Page 12 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
13
, , , (19)0)( 0 tf 0)( 0 tE 11
1
( )( )tE t
J t
2 1 2 12
1
( ) ( ) ( )( )
( )t E t J t J t
E tJ t
After the computation of E(t), (TºC) can be computed based on Eqs. (11) to (15) similarly to the
previous section (Section 3.1).
4.3. Application of advanced Laplace transformation approach
Differently from the two previous computation methods (see Section 4.1 and 4.2), a more intuitive
and efficient (TºC) computation approach using the Laplace transformation technique can be
adopted. A schematic thermal stress computation process by using Laplace transformation can be
explained as follows:
1. From the experimental result of LogD(t) versus Log(t) curve (at lowPG+10ºC and
low(PG+10)+12ºC conditions), compute shift factor, aT, along with two parameters: C1 and C2
using Eq. (20) at reference temperature: Ti=22ºC.
(20)(ref 22 ) 1 2iT CLoga C C T
Eq. (20) can be re-written as:
(21)1 2 0 1 2 2 0 3 4 31 2 4 4( ) ( )010 10 10 10 10 10 10i iC C T C t C C T C C t C C t CC C T C t C t
Ta A
2. Generate master curve of in the reduced time domain using D(t) experimental data at ( )D
lowPG+10ºC and low(PG+10)+12ºC based on dual series Power-law function with additional
constants as seen in Eq. (22) differently from the previous study (Moon et al. 2019).
(22)( )B D
B D
T T T
t t tD A C E A C Ea a a
Where:
A, B, C, D, and E are function fitting parameters.
Page 13 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
14
In this paper, average D() (i.e. average between D(, at lowPG+10ºC) and D(, at
lowPG+10+12ºC)) data was used.
3. Consider Eq. (23) to relate thermal stress and strain assuming an idealized scheme:
(23)0 0
( )( ) ( ) 0tTD d d
By applying the Laplace transformation, Eq. (23) can be rewritten as:
(24)
0 0
0 0
( )( ) ( )
( )( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 0
tTD d d
TD d d s D s s s s T s
L L
= L L
From Eq. (23), thermal stress can be derived as:
(25)( ) ( )( )
( )s T ssD s
Based on Eqs. (15), (20) and (21) parameter and T can be re-expressed as:
(26)
00
00 2
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
t t ss
CT t C t T t T ss
L
L
4. Perform inverse Laplace transformation of Eqs. (25), (26) using the Stehfest algorithm (Stehfest
1970; Villinger H. 1985). Then, fit the results of numerically computed () using dual power
law function with constant as:
(27)( ) C EA B D
5. Covert the reduced time domain thermal stress: ( to the actual time domain scale,(TºC),
using Eq. (28):
Page 14 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
15
(28)4
4 4
4
''
1'0 0 0 40 0 0 0
' ' 1 1 1010 ' 1 10[ ( ')] 10 ln10
tt t t C tC t C t
C tT
dt dt dt Aa T t A A A C
Where:
and (see Eq. (21)).3 1 20 10 10 iC C C TA 4 2 0C C C
By using Eqs. (21) to (28), of (TºC) can be finally computed from 22 to -40ºC with 0.5ºC of
temperature interval.
It must be mentioned that, for the present research, no additional asphalt mixture strength
test was performed therefore TCR was predicted through Single Asymptote Procedure (SAP)
method (Shenoy 2002; Moon et al. 2014). Schematic computation process of TCR with SAP method
is presented in Figure 3.
[Insert Figure 3]
Figure 3: Computation process example of TCR using SAP method (Shenoy, 2002)
5. Data analysis
5.1. Comparison of S(t), m-value and E(t)
Based on Eq. (1), S(t=60sec) and m(t-60sec)-value were computed for the eight different asphalt
mixture prepared in this study. Comparison results of S(t=60sec) and m(t=60sec)-value at
lowPG+10ºC and lowPG+10+6ºC are presented in Figure 4.
[Insert Figure 4]
Figure 4: Results of S(t=60sec) [Left] and m(t=60sec) [Right] results
Page 15 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
16
Based on the results from Figure 4, a clear difference in S(60) and m(60) between RAP 15% and
25% mixtures was observed. However, no significant variations in S(60) and m(60) were found in
Case 1: control (i.e. RAP 0%) versus RAP 15% mixtures, and Case 2: RAP 25% versus RAP 40%
mixtures, respectively. Overall, similar trends are observed for the two different binders. In South
Korea, RAP 15~25% mixtures are widely used for binder-course construction but also in some
cases they are used for surface-course construction depends on traffic volume. Since 2015, using
RAP 15~25% mixture in to surface layer construction increased due to reduction of environmental
pollution mitigation rather than construction budget rediction by government. Based on the results,
it can be said that the limited impact of a high amount of RAP on S(60) and m(60) may suggest
the possibility of using up to 40% of RAP in asphalt pavement not only for binder-course but also
for surface layer construction.
Similar to S(60) and m(60) comparison, relaxation modulus, E(t), was generated and then
a comparison was performed for each asphalt mixture using Eqs. (10), (11) and (16). First, E(t)
results were computed with two different inter-conversion solutions: advanced power-law function
(Eq. (10)) and Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm (Eq. (11)). Then, the E(t) was fitted with the
CAM model (Marasteanu and Anderson, 1999: Eq. (16)) over a range between 0.5 to 10,000
seconds and compared. Note that there is no E(t) generation step in Laplace transformation
approach therefore, only the two methods previously mentioned (see Section 4.1 and 4.2), were
considered in this paper.
Statistical analysis (i.e. hypothesis analysis) was performed with a 5% significance level
(i.e. , Cook and Weisberg 1999). Conditions of data normality and constant variance were
assumed together with the following hypotheses as:
Null hypothesis : (29)0 [ ( )] [ ( )]: A E t B E tH
Page 16 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
17
Alternative hypothesis : (30)0 [ ( )] [ ( )]: A E t B E tH
In Eqs. (29) and (30), indicates the mean (i.e. response) of S(t) (and/or m(t)) obtained from BBR
mixture creep test (Marasteanu et al. 2009). Then the value of pooled standard deviation: P, can
be expressed as (see Eq. (31)):
(31)
2 2,[ ( )] [ ( )]
[ ( )]
2 2,[ ( )] [ ( )]
( ( 10) 1) ( ( 10) 1)( 10) ( 10) 2
918
A A E t B B E tP E t
A B
A E t B E t
n nn n
Where:
: standard deviation of E(t) (Group A);[ ( ) ( )]A S t or m t
: standard deviation of E(t) (Group B);[ ( ) ( )]B S t or m t
nA and nB : number of specimens in Group A and B (n=10).
Based on Eq. (31), the t-static can be computed as:
(32)[ ( )] [ ( )] [ ( )] [ ( )]
[ ( )] [ ( ) ( )]
-static1 1 2
3
A E t B E t A E t B E t
P E t P S t or m tA B
t
n n
In Eq. (32), the degrees of freedom, df, can be expressed as:
(33) 2 10 10 2 18A Bdf n n
Based on Eqs. (32) and (33), the final output of the statistical test, p-value, was computed
and then compared with the adopted threshold value (i.e. =0.05) to verify if the two comparison
groups are statistically equivalent or different. All the comparison results are shown in Figures 5
to 6 and Table 3.
Page 17 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
18
[Insert Figure 5]
Figure 5: E(t) comparison based on two inter-conversion methods
(Mixtures 1 to 4, PG 64-28)
[Insert Figure 6]
Figure 6: E(t) comparison based on two inter-conversion methods
(Mixtures 5 to 8, PG 64-34)
Table 3: E(t) results: statistical test (t-test) results (p-value)
[Insert Table 3]
When RAP was added into virgin asphalt mixture, no significant differences in relaxation
properties were observed up to 15% addition (i.e. Case 1: control versus RAP 15% mixture). If the
RAP addition was increased up to 25%, a remarkable increase in E(t) was experienced with respect
to control and RAP 15% mixture. However, no significant variation in E(t) could be detected
between mixtures containing 25% and 40% of RAP; this was true for both binders: PG 64-28 and
PG 64-34.
Even though upper and lower bound limits of E(t) value can be derived using two different
computation approaches (i.e. Power-law function (1999) versus Hopkins and Hamming’s
algorithm (1957)), the trend of E(t) comparisons was almost identical. This confirms the idea that
40% of RAP can be potentially used in asphalt mixture for pavement construction not only as
binder course but as surface course depending on the pavement design conditions (e.g. traffic,
climate condition and budget and required performance, among others). Such an opportunity may
Page 18 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
19
provide not only a remarkable reduction in construction costs but also limits the environmental
impact of the road infrastructure. A more detailed evaluation of thermal stress and the
corresponding critical cracking temperature is provided in the next section.
5.2. Comparisons of thermal stress and corresponding critical cracking temperature
Similarly to the previous section (i.e. Section 5.1), thermal stress, (TºC) and critical cracking
temperature, TCR, were computed based on Eqs. (1) to (28) and then visually and statistically
compared. All the computed results with three different mathematical approaches are shown in
Figures 7 to 9.
[Insert Figure 7]
Fig. 7: (TºC) comparison with Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm (1957)
(Left: PG 64-28 and Right: PG 64-34)
Mix 1, 5: Control, Mix 2, 6: RAP 15%, Mix 3, 7: RAP 25%, Mix 4, 8: RAP 40%,
[p]: p-value
[Insert Figure 8]
Figure 8: (TºC) comparison with Power law function and equivalent time concept (1999)
[Insert Figure 9]
Figure 9: (TºC) comparison with Laplace transformation
Page 19 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
20
Based on Figures 7 to 9, no significant differences in (TºC) were found for Case 1 (i.e. control
versus RAP 15% mixture) and Case 2 (i.e. RAP 25% and RAP 40% mixture). It also needs to be
mentioned that approximately 25~33% higher (TºC) was observed for RAP 25% and 40%
mixtures compared to conventional and RAP 15% mixtures; this suggests potentially poorer
performance at low temperature. It must be recalled that the incorporation of 25% RAP in the mix
design is allowed in South Korea and hence a moderate inferior performance at low temperature
is tolerated. In addition, it can be easily expected that higher (TºC) would be computed for stiffer
asphalt binder (PG 64-28) compared to softer asphalt binder (PG 64-34). Based on the results,
approximately 21~33% higher values in (TºC) were estimated from asphalt mixture prepared
with PG 64-28 compared to PG 64-34. Moreover, a steep increase in thermal stress could be
detected for temperatures below -15ºC in most of the tested asphalt mixtures designed with RAP.
Therefore, the in regions experiencing low temperature above -15ºC (e.g. east/south asia), using
recycled mixture up to 40% may not necessarily affect the pavement performance if RAP quality
and construction control are provided. This trend was almost identical for all different three
computation solutions adopted in this paper for estimating (TºC). The comparisons of (TºC)
with respect to the different computation approaches are shown in Figures 10 and 11.
[Insert Figure 10]
Figure 10: (TºC) comparisons based on different computation approaches (Mixtures 1~4)
HH: Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm (1957), PL: Advanced Power-law function (1999)
La: Advanced Laplace transformation
Page 20 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
21
[Insert Figure 11]
Figure 11: (TºC) comparisons based on different computation approaches (Mixtures 5~8)
Figures 10 and 11 show that La (Laplace transformation) results in the highest thermal stress
compared to PL (Power law) and HH (Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm, 1967), which returned
the lowest value of (TºC). The PL computation approach showed intermediate level below 0ºC
in all cases. In this paper, a modified set of equations was considered in the Laplace solution for
providing upper (and/or lower) bounds on (TºC).
Along with (TºC), critical cracking temperature, TCR, was computed based on the Single
Asymptot Procedure (SAP) (Shenoy, 2002; see Figure 3) and compared (Tables 4 and 5). In the
case of statistical analysis, a procedure similar to that previously used in this paper was adopted
(i.e. Eqs. (29) to (33)).
Table 4: Results of TCR [ºC] computation (Mixtures 1 to 8)
[Insert Table 4]
Table 5: Comparison of TCR results [p-value] (statistical analysis, Mixtures 1 to 8)
[Insert Table 5]
Similar to the results of (TºC) comparisons, no significant differences of TCR were found
both in Case 1 (control versus RAP 15% mixture) and Case 2 (RAP 25% and RAP 40% mixture).
Hence, it appears that TCR is not affected by RAP up to 15% in content when compared to
conventional asphalt mixture. When RAP amount is increased to 25%, a remarkable increase in
Page 21 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
22
critical temperature is experienced; however, when further increasing RAP up to 40% no further
significant increase in TCR is observed. Lowest TCR values were computed when using the Hopkins
and Hamming’s algorithm (1957) while the highest TCR was estimated with the Laplace
transformation; power-law function provided an intermediate TCR.
In view of the trends observed in the plots, and the analysis performed, it may be
hypothesized that high proportions of RAP (40%) can be potentially used for highway (and/or
local roads) construction for binder and surface layers in South Korea depending on traffic level,
climate conditions, and construction budget. This appears to be supported as no significant
performance difference at low temperature was found compared to mixtures prepared with 25%
of RAP and considering that the latter design percentage is widely used in asphalt pavement
construction in South Korea.
6. Summary and conclusions
In this paper, the feasibility of designing asphalt mixture with a high amount of RAP up to 40%
was investigated at low temperature. Bending Beam Rheometer (BBR) mixture tests were
performed and creep stiffness, m-value, relaxation modulus, thermal stress, and critical cracking
temperature were computed and next visually and statistically compared. For this purpose, three
different computational solutions were used: Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm (1957), Power-
law function with equivalent time concept (1999) and a modified Laplace transformation method.
The conclusions derived in the present research effort are as follows:
For the entire set of rheological parameters (creep stiffness, m-value, relaxation modulus,
thermal stress, and critical cracking temperature), poorer low temperature response was
observed only when increasing RAP content to 25%. No significant differences were found
Page 22 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
23
between control versus 15% RAP mixture (Case 1) and 25% and 40% RAP mixtures (Case
2).
The three computational methods return distinct results with Laplace transformation and
Hopkins and Hamming’s procedure providing upper and lower bounds for thermal stress and
critical cracking temperature.
Based on these findings, higher amount of RAP (40%) should be considered for designing
surface and binder layers depending on materials, traffic conditions, climate, and constriction costs.
Asphalt mixtures containing 25% of RAP have been widely used for highway (and/or local roads)
in South Korea for several decades; however, not many practical studies showed clear feasibility
on incorporating RAP up to 40% especially for low temperature performance evaluation with
various mathematical model approaches in South Korea. Nevertheless, the results obtained in the
present research are limited to low temperature response of the material. Other factors, including
moisture susceptibility may affect the current conclusions. A more in depth evaluation represents
a critical research objective as more extensive experimentation and advanced modeling are needed
to further support the findings in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The support of Korea Expressway Corporation Research Division (KECPRD) and of the Japan
Society for Promotion of Science (JSPS) for international research in Japan is gratefully
acknowledged.
Page 23 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
24
References
AASHTO R 30. 2002. Standard practice for mixture conditioning of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA).
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
AASHTO T-313. 2012. Standard method of test for determining the flexural creep stiffness of
asphalt binder using the bending beam rheometer (BBR). American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials.
AASHTO M320. 2016. Standard specification for performance-graded asphalt binder. American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
AASHTO 2018. AASHTOWare-Pavement ME(Mechanical Empirical) design, https://me-
design.com/MEDesign/
Arámbula-Mercado, E., Kaseer, F., Martin, A. E., Yin, F., and Cucalon, L. G. 2018. Evaluation of
recycling agent dosage selection and incorporation methods for asphalt mixtures with high RAP
and RAS contents. Construction and Building Materials, 158, 432-442, DOI:
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.10.024.
ASTM D6925-15. 2015. Standard test method for preparation and determination of the relative
density of asphalt mix specimens by means of the Superpave Gyratory Compactor (SGC),
American Society for Testing and Materials.
Cannone Falchetto A. and Moon K. H., 2015a. A novel micromechanical-analogical model for
low temperature creep properties of asphalt binder and mixture. Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, 42, 1019-1031, DOI: 10.1139/cjce-2014-0485.
Cannone Falchetto A. and Moon K. H. 2015b. Micromechanical-analogical modeling of asphalt
binder and asphalt mixture creep stiffness properties at low temperature. Road Material and
Pavement Design, 16(S1), 111-137, DOI: 10.1080/14680629.2015.1029708.
Page 24 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
25
Cannone Falchetto A., Moon K. H., and Wistuba M. P. 2017. An alternative method for computing
thermal stress in asphalt mixture: the Laplace transformation. Road Material and Pavement Design,
18(S2), 226-240, DOI: 10.1080/14680629.2017.1305146.
Cannone Falchetto A., Moon K. H., Wang D., Riccardi C., and Wistuba M. P. 2018. Comparison
of low temperature fracture and strength properties of asphalt mixture obtained from IDT and SCB
under different testing configurations. Road Material and Pavement Design, 19(3), 591-604, DOI:
10.1080/14680629.2018.1418722.
Cook, D. R. and Weisberg, S. 1999. Applied regression including computing and graphics. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, US.
Dongre, Raj, et al. 2005. Field evaluation of Witczak and Hirsch models for predicting dynamic
modulus of hot-mix asphalt (with discussion). Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving
Technologists, (74).
Ebrahimi, M. G., Saleh, M., and Gonzalez, M. A. M. 2014. Interconversion between viscoelastic
functions using the Tikhonov regularisation method and its comparison with approximate
techniques. Road Material and Pavement Design, 15(4), 820-840, DOI:
10.1080/14680629.2014.924428.
Esfandiarpour, S. and Shalaby, A. 2018. Effect of local calibration of dynamic modulus and creep
compliance models on predicted performance of asphalt mixes containing RAP. International
Journal of Pavement Research and Technology, 11(5), 517-529, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijprt.2018.04.002.
EAPA. 2016. Asphalt in Figures 2016, Ver. 22-01-2018, European Asphalt Pavement Association.
Ferry, J. D. 1980. Viscoelastic properties of polymers, 3rd ed., Wiley, New York, US.
Findley, W. N., Lai, J. S., and Onaran, K. 1976. Creep and relaxation of nonlinear viscoelastic
materials. Dover Publications, New York, US.
Page 25 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
26
Gibson, N. H., Schwartz, C. W., Schapery, R. A., & Witczak, M. W. 2003. Viscoelastic,
viscoplastic, and damage modeling of asphalt concrete in unconfined compression. Transportation
Research Record, 1860(1), 3-15.
Gudmarsson, A., Ryden, N., Di Benedetto, H., & Sauzéat, C. 2015. Complex modulus and complex
Poisson’s ratio from cyclic and dynamic modal testing of asphalt concrete. Construction and
Building Materials, 88, 20-31.
Gu, F., Ma, W., West, R. C., Taylor, A. J., and Zhang, Y. 2019. Structural performance and
sustainability assessment of cold central-plant and in-place recycled asphalt pavements: A case
study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 208, 1513-1523, DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.222.
Haghshenas, H., Nabizadeh, H., Kim, Y. R., and Santosh, K. 2016. Research on high RAP asphalt
mixtures with rejuvenators and WMA additives. Technical report: SPR-P1(15) M016. Nebraska
Department of Roads. US.
Hansen K., Newcomb, D. and Cervarich, M. 2011. Asphalt tops the charts for environmental
stewardship-again. Asphalt Pavement Magazine of the National Asphalt Pavement Association
(NAPA), 16, 20-25.
Hill, B., Oldham, D., Behnia, B., Fini, E. H., Buttlar, W. G., and Reis, H. 2013. Low-temperature
performance characterization of bio-modified asphalt mixtures containing reclaimed asphalt
pavement. Transportation Research Board (the 92nd annual meeting), Washington D.C., DOI:
10.3141/2371-06.
Hopkins, I. L. and Hamming, R. W. 1957. On creep and relaxation. Journal of Applied Physics,
28(8), 906-909, DOI: 10.1063/1.1722885.
Page 26 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
27
Lee, K. W., Supharath, N., Shukla, A., Franco, C. A., and Manning, F. J. 1999. Rheological and
mechanical properties of blended asphalts containing recycled asphalt pavement binders, Journal
of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, 68, 89-118.
Li, X., Marasteanu, M. O., Williams, R. C., and Clyne, T. R. 2008. Effect of reclaimed asphalt
pavement (RAP: proportion and type) and binder grade on asphalt mixtures. Transportation
Research Record, 2051, 90-97.
Lyu, Z., Shen, A., Qin, X., Yang, X., and Li, Y. 2019. Grey target optimization and the mechanism
of cold recycled asphalt mixture with comprehensive performance. Construction and Building
Materials, 198, 269-277.
Marasteanu, M. O. and Anderson, D. A. 1999. Improved model for bitumen rheological
characterization. European Workshop on Performance-Related Properties for Bituminous
Binders, Belgium, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.11.274.
Marasteanu, M., Velasquez, R., Cannone Falchetto A., and Zofka, A. 2009. Development of a
simple test to determine the low temperature creep compliance of asphalt mixture, IDEA Program
Final Report NCHRP 133, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., US.
McDaniel, R. S. and Anderson, R. M. 2001. Recommended use of reclaimed asphalt pavement in
the super-pave mix design method, Technician’s Manual: NCHRP Report 452, Transportation
Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., US.
McGraw, J., Zofka, A., Krivit, D., Schroer, J., Olson, R., and Marasteanu, M. O. 2007. Recycled
asphalt shingles in hot mix asphalt, Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists,
76, 235-274.
McGraw, J. and Johnson, G. 2010. Incorporation of recycled asphalt shingles in hot mixed asphalt
pavement mixtures, Final Report: No. 2010-08, Minnesota Department of Transportation, US.
Page 27 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
28
Minnesota Department of Transportation. 2008. Combined 2350/2360 plant mixed asphalt
pavement: standard specifications for construction, Minnesota Department of Transportation, US.
MOLIT. 2017. Specification of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) material, production and construction.
Ministry of Land Infrastructure and Transport, South Korea.
Moon, K. H. 2012. Investigation of asphalt binder and asphalt mixture low temperature properties
using analogical models. PhD Thesis, Dept. of civil engineering, University of Minnesota (Twin
Cities).
Moon, K. H., Cannone Falchetto A., Marasteanu, M., and Turos, M. 2014. Using recycled asphalt
materials as an alternative material source in asphalt pavements. Korean Society of Civil
Engineers, 18(1), 149-159, DOI: 10.1007/s12205-014-0211-1.
Moon, K. H., Kwon, O. S., Cho, M. J., and Cannone Falchetto A., 2019. An-alternative one-step
computation approach for computing thermal stress of asphalt mixture: the Laplace
transformation, Journal of the Korea Society of Civil Engineers, 39(1), 219-225, DOI:
10.1080/14680629.2017.1305146.
Moon, K. H., Cannone Falchetto, A., Wang, D. and Kim, Y. S. 2019. Experimental Investigation
on Fatigue and Low Temperature Properties of Asphalt Mixtures Designed with Reclaimed
Asphalt Pavement and Taconite Aggregate., Transportation Research Record. DOI:
10.1177/0361198119835525
Olard, F., & Di Benedetto, H. 2005. The" DBN" Model: A Thermo-Visco-Elasto-Plastic Approach
for Pavement Behavior Modeling (with discussion). Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving
Technologists, 74.
Page 28 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
29
Park, S. W. and Kim, Y. R. 1999. Interconversion between relaxation modulus and creep
compliance for viscoelastic solids. American Society of Civil Engineers: Journal of materials in
civil engineering. 11(1), 76-82, DOI: 10.1061/(asce)0899-1561(1999)11:1(76).
PI, A. F., Abboud, B., Coe, J., and Alsalihi, M. 2018. Effect of Warm Mix Asphalt (WMA) low
mixing and compaction temperatures on Recycled Asphalt Pavement (RAP) binder replacement,
Final Report: FHWA-PA-2018-002-TEM-WO-008. Pennsylvania Department of Transportation,
U.S.
Pranshoo, S., David, A., Musharraf, Z., and Zahid, H. 2013. Influence of Recycled Asphalt
Pavement on Creep Compliance of Hot Mix Asphalt. Constitutive Modeling of Geomaterials,
Springer series in Geo-mechanics and Geo-engineering, 135-138, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-
32814-5_14.
Schimmoller, V. E., Holtz, K., Eighmy, T. T., Wiles, C., Smith, M., Malasheskie, G., Rohrbach,
G. J., Schaftlein, S., Helms, G., Campbell, R. D., Van Deusen, C. H., Ford, B., and Almborg, J. A.
2000. Recycled materials in European highway environments: uses, technologies, and policies,
Final Report FHWA-PL-00-025, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Washington, D.C.
Shenoy, A. 2002. Single-event cracking temperature of asphalt pavements directly from bending
beam rheometer data. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 128(5), 465-471, DOI:
10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2002)128:5(465).
Shirodkar, P., Mehta, Y., Nolan, A., Sonpal, K., Norton, A., Tomlinson, C., Dubois, E., Sullivan,
P., and Sauber, R. 2011. A study to determine the degree of partial blending of reclaimed asphalt
pavement (RAP) binder for high RAP hot mix asphalt. Construction and Building Materials,
25(1), 150-155, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.06.045.
Page 29 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
30
Stehfest, H. 1970. Algorithm 368: Numerical inversion of Laplace transform. Communication of
the ACM, 13(1), 47-49, DOI: 10.1145/361953.361969.
Van den Bergh, W. and Van de Ven, M.F.C. 2009. Hot recycling of asphalt: Experiences in
Flanders and the Netherlands. Proc. of ENVIROAD, Warsaw, Poland.
Villinger, H. 1985. Solving cylindrical geothermal problems using Gaver-Stehfest inverse Laplace
transform. Geophysics, 50(10), 1581–1587.
Xu, Q. and Solaimanian, M. 2010. Modeling temperature distribution and thermal property of
asphalt concrete for laboratory testing applications. Construction and building materials, 24(4),
487-497.
Yan, Y., Hernando, D., and Roque, R. 2019. A solvent free method to characterize the effect of
recycled asphalt shingles on virgin asphalt binder. Journal of Cleaner Production, 208, 795-805,
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.153.
Page 30 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
31
List of figures
Figure 1. Schematic research flow-chart in this paper.
Figure 2. Bending Beam Rheometer (BBR) test specimens (Left) and testing set-up (Right)
Figure 3. Computation process example of TCR using SAP method (Shenoy, 2002)
Figure 4: Results of S(t=60sec) [Left] and m(t=60sec) [Right] results
Figure 5: E(t) comparison based on two inter-conversion methods (Mixtures 1 to 4, PG 64-
28)
Figure 6: E(t) comparison based on two inter-conversion methods (Mixtures 5 to 8, PG 64-
34)
Figure 7: (TºC) comparison with Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm (1967)
(Left: PG 64-28 and Right: PG 64-34) , [p]: p-value
Mix 1, 5: Control, Mix 2, 6: RAP 15%, Mix 3, 7: RAP 25%, Mix 4, 8: RAP 40%
Figure 8: (TºC) comparison with Power law function and equivalent time concept (1999)
Figure 9: (TºC) comparison with Laplace transformation
Figure 10: (TºC) comparisons based on different computation approaches (Mixtures 1~4)
HH: Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm (1957), PL: Advanced Power-law function (1999)
La: Advanced Laplace transformation
Figure 11: (TºC) comparisons based on different computation approaches (Mixtures 5~8)
Page 31 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
List of tables
Table 1. Asphalt Mixtures
Table 2. BBR mixture testing information
Table 3: E(t) results: statistical test (t-test) results (p-value)
Table 4: Results of TCR [ºC] computation (Mixtures 1 to 8)
Table 5: Comparison of TCR results [p-value] (statistical analysis, Mixtures 1 to 8)
Page 32 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
Table 1. Asphalt Mixtures
MixID
BinderType
A.V.[%]
B.C.[%]
RAP[%]
VMA[%]
NMAS[mm]
Mixture information[aggregate(mm), passing %]
1 4 4.8 0 16.42 12.5HMA, Wearing Course (WC-1)[13:91%,10:81%,5:52%,2.5:35% 0.6:22%,0.3:15%,0.08:6%]
2 4 4.9 15 16.89 19.0HMA, Wearing Course (WC-3)[19:92%,13:5%,10:63%,5:42%2.5:32% 0.6:23%,0.3:15%,0.08:6%]
3 4 5.0 25 16.91 19.0 Same as Mixture 2 (WC-3)4
PG64-28(Plain)
4 4.9 40 16.55 19.0 Same as Mixture 2 (WC-3)5 4 5.1 0 16.91 12.5 Same as Mixture 1 (WC-1)6 4 5.0 15 17.35 12.5 Same as Mixture 2 (WC-3)7 4 4.9 25 17.41 19.0 Same as Mixture 2 (WC-3)8
PG64-34
(Modified)4 5.0 40 14.23 19.0 Same as Mixture 2 (WC-3)
A.V.: Air Voids (%), B.C.: Binder Content (%), VMA: Voids between Mineral Aggregates (%),
NMAS: Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size (mm)
Table 2. BBR mixture testing information
Test MixtureID
Bindertype
Test temperature [Number of replicates]
Applied load[Testing temperature]
1,2,3,4 PG64-28
lowPG+10ºC: -18ºC [10]low(PG+10)+12ºC:-6ºC [10]
6,000 60mN [-18ºC]±4,000 40mN [-6ºC]±BBR
5,6,7,8 PG64-34
lowPG+10ºC: -24ºC [10]low(PG+10)+12ºC:-12ºC [10]
6,000 60mN [-24ºC]±4,000 40mN [-12ºC]±
Page 33 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
Table 3: E(t) results: statistical test (t-test) results (p-value)
t-test results: p-value (statistically significant if p-value<0.05)Contents 5s 10s 60s 100s 200s 400s 1,000s 2,000s 10,000sApproach 1: Advanced power-law function with equivalent time conceptM1v.M2 0.105 0.112 0.143 0.213 0.151 0.111 0.184 0.195 0.085M2v.M3 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000M3v.M4 0.213 0.255 0.233 0.274 0.178 0.123 0.072 0.071 0.064M5v.M6 0.215 0.355 0.318 0.275 0.222 0.158 0.065 0.041 0.058M6v.M7 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000M7v.M8 0.298 0.348 0.345 0.215 0.222 0.158 0.075 0.062 0.051Approach 2: Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm (1967)M1v.M2 0.223 0.355 0.278 0.178 0.111 0.105 0.071 0.055 0.062M2v.M3 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000M3v.M4 0.111 0.085 0.077 0.066 0.115 0.063 0.055 0.048 0.059M5v.M6 0.412 0.355 0.317 0.298 0.222 0.253 0.254 0.154 0.211M6v.M7 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000M7v.M8 0.145 0.111 0.123 0.185 0.098 0.088 0.065 0.055 0.052
M1v.M2: Mixture 1 versus Mixture 2
Table 4: Results of TCR [ºC] computation (Mixtures 1 to 8)
Asphalt binder: PG 64-28 Asphalt binder: PG 64-34Contents Mix 1
[Control]Mix 2
[R15%]Mix 3
[R25%]Mix 4
[R40%]Mix 5
[Control]Mix 6
[R15%]Mix 7
[R25%]Mix 8
[R40%]HH -27.79 -27.62 -26.99 -26.63 -28.56 -28.29 -27.30 -26.72PL -27.72 -27.48 -26.75 -26.44 -28.46 -28.05 -26.86 -26.57La -27.39 -27.09 -26.34 -26.03 -28.20 -27.99 -26.63 -26.43
HH: Hopkins and Hamming’s algorithm (1967), PL: Power-Law function,
La: Laplace transformation, R: RAP, Mix: Asphalt mixture
Page 34 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
Table 5: Comparison of TCR results [p-value] (statistical analysis, Mixtures 1 to 8)
Asphalt binder: PG 64-28 Asphalt binder: PG 64-34Contents M1v.M2 M2v.M3 M3v.M4 M5v.M6 M6v.M7 M7v.M8
HH 0.082[Non-Sig.]
0.032[Sig.]
0.094[Non-Sig.]
0.121[Non-Sig.]
0.012[Sig.]
0.022[Sig.]
PL 0.152[Non-Sig.]
0.012[Sig.]
0.099[Non-Sig.]
0.094[Non-Sig.]
0.024[Sig.]
0.094[Non-Sig.]
La 0.071[Non-Sig.]
0.015[Sig.]
0.088[Non-Sig.]
0.094[Non-Sig.]
0.011[Sig.]
0.094[Non-Sig.]
M1v.M2: Mixture 1 versus Mixture 2, Sig.: Statistically significant,
Non-Sig.: Statistically Non-significant
Page 35 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 36 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 37 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 38 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 39 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 40 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 41 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 42 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 43 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 44 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 45 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Draft
...
254x190mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 46 of 46
https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com//cjce-pubs
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
Top Related