Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 11 (2018) 603–610
www.elsevier.com/locate/IJPRT

Influence of temperature on Jnr values of polymer modified

asphalt binders
Khaleel Al-Adham ⇑, Hamad Al-Abdul Wahhab
Department of Civil Engineering, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

Received 13 August 2017; received in revised form 21 October 2017; accepted 3 January 2018
Available online 10 January 2018

Abstract

At desert environment, asphalt binders that have performance grades of PG 70-16 or PG 76-16 may show early signs of rutting under
heavy loads due to lack of strain recovery when used in the design of asphalt mixes and structures. Type and amount of polymer in addi-
tion to testing temperature are the major factors that affect the recovery properties of asphalt binders. This study was conducted to eval-
uate Jnr parameters of four different polymers (Styrene–Butadiene–Styrene ‘‘SBS”, Crumb Rubber ‘‘CR”, light density Polyethylene
‘‘PE” and modified Olefin ‘‘OF”) used to modify asphalt binders. Asphalt samples were tested at various temperatures and regression
models were created. These models are useful to properly select the polymer type and amount suitable to the area of concern and to be
used in the design of pavement structures especially in Mechanical–Empirical Design Guide. It is found from this study that power-law
models best described the relationship between Jnr and temperature with signs of shear thickening. The results of Styrene–Butadiene–
Styrene Modified asphalt binders have shown best behavior of recovering the strain at high temperatures with Non-recoverable creep
compliance (Jnr) values less than 0.5 obtained at 76 °C. Polyethylene and Olefin polymers could improve local asphalt binders at areas
where PG 58 and PG 64 are required. The Jnr-temp curves can be considered as master curves for local conditions and material.
Ó 2018 Chinese Society of Pavement Engineering. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Keywords: Desert environment; Elastomer; Non-recoverable compliance (Jnr); Power law; Jnr master curves; Polymer modified asphalt binders; Multiple
Stress Creep Recovery MSCR

1. Introduction It is suggested that Multiple Stress Creep Recovery

In order to resist rutting at high temperatures, the con-
ventional Superpave design method requires that modified
asphalt binder should have high values of G*/sin and hence
high performance grades (PG). However, at desert environ-
ment, asphalt binders that have PG 70 or PG 76 may show
early signs of rutting under heavy loads due to lack of elas-
tic recovery of the binder used in the design of asphalt
mixes and structures.
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: Khaleel.aladham@gmail.com (K. Al-Adham),
hawahab@kfupm.edu.sa (H. Al-Abdul Wahhab).
Peer review under responsibility of Chinese Society of Pavement
Engineering.
(MSCR) test should be conducted at PG temperature to
measure the recovery parameters including the percent
recovery (%R) and Non-recoverable creep compliance
(Jnr). MSCR test is performed using Dynamic Shear
Rheometer (DSR) at PG temperature using a constant stress
creep of 1.0-s duration followed by a zero stress recovery of
9.0-s duration. The test is performed at two stress levels, 0.1
kPa and 3.2 kPa. Ten cycles are run at each of the two stress
levels making a total of 20 cycles. The stress and strain shall
be recorded at least every 0.1 s for the creep cycle and at least
every 0.45 s for the recovery cycle on an accumulated basis
such that, in addition to other data points, the data points
at 1.0 s and 10.0 s for each cycle’s local time are explicitly
recorded. There are no rest periods between creep and

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijprt.2018.01.001
1996-6814/Ó 2018 Chinese Society of Pavement Engineering. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
604 K. Al-Adham, H. Al-Abdul Wahhab / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 11 (2018) 603–610
recovery cycles or changes in stress level. The total time
required completing the two-step creep and recovery test is
200 s [1]. Two parameters are calculated from this test; per-
cent recovery (R) and Non-recoverable creep compliance
(Jnr). Percent recovery is the percent difference between the
final (e10) and initial (e0) strain of the tenth recovery curve
while Jnr is the ratio between final strain (e10) and applied
stress i.e., 3.2.
However, at hot climate, pavement service temperature
could reach up to 73 °C in summer which could harshly
affect most of asphalt binders’ properties that suppose to
resist rutting under very heavy and extremely heavy wheel
loads [2]. On the other hand, asphalt extracted from heavy
oil in Gulf Countries has PG 64-10 and did not satisfy the
requirements at all locations of local and international
market for pavement construction projects [3]. To solve
this problem, specific types of polymers are needed to
improve the recovery property that will resist rutting at
high temperatures. Several research projects conducted
studies to modify asphalt in order to achieve the PG
requirements at desert environment. Some researchers
found that polymer modification improves the asphalt bin-
der performance by decreasing the high temperature per-
manent deformation [4].
It is important to evaluate the strain recovery property
termed by percent recovery %R and Non-recoverable creep
compliance (Jnr) of polymer modified asphalt binders at
different temperatures and to create models in order to
properly select the polymer type and amount suitable to
the area of concern and to be used in the design of pave-
ment structures especially in Mechanical–Empirical Design
Guide. Many researchers conducted studies that consid-
ered the Non-recoverable compliance Jnr as a new param-
eter to evaluate the rutting behavior of polymer modified
asphalt binders using the Multiple Stress Creep and Recov-
ery (MSCR) test. This test is suggested to replace the con-
ventional Superpave standards for rutting criteria at high-
temperatures (G*/sin) [5,6]. The study includes an investi-
gation of the newly suggested parameter to capture the rut-
ting behavior and rheological analysis of the MSCR by
conducting the laboratory wheel tracking test of the
asphalt mix and create a correlation between Jnr and rut-
ting for theses mixes. They concluded from their study that
the best correlation between Jnr and rut depth was obtained
at high-levels of stress from the MSCR test.
Four groups of polymers that have good reputation in
international market were selected to be used in this study;
Styrene–Butadiene–Styrene ‘‘SBS”, Crumb Rubber ‘‘CR”,
Polyethylene ‘‘PE” and Olefin ‘‘OF”. These polymers are
characterized to basic tests including viscosity and perfor-
mance grading then subjected to controlled Multiple Stress
Creep Recovery test under the two standards [7,8].
The interest in using of crump rubber in asphalt pave-
ments is increasing to improve the performance of the
asphalt binder. Based on the literature, the modification
of the asphalt binder by the Crumb Rubber could reduce
noise [9] when used in high amounts; it also increases the
viscosity [10–13], elastic recovery [14], softening point and
complex modulus, and decreases the penetration, ductility
and phase angle of the CR modified asphalt binders.
A recent research conducted MSCR test on asphalt bin-
ders contains different sizes of Crumb Rubber particles
(No. 60, 40 and 28) to characterize their high temperature
performance [15]. They concluded that the accumulated
strain significantly decreases when using low asphalt grades
or fine CR particles in producing the modified asphalt
binders.
AASHTO MP 19 was conducted to evaluate the elas-
tomeric properties of the modified binders; all tested sam-
ples were compared to a standard curve recommended by
FHWA. %R–Jnr data points that lie above the suggest line
are considered as elastomer and have high potential to
resist rutting at high temperatures and extremely heavy
traffic. While AASHTO TP 70 requires classifying the
resulted percent recovery and Jnr values into four different
classes of traffic loading at each targeted high service tem-
perature of the binder (‘‘S” for Standard, ‘‘H” for Heavy,
‘‘V” very heavy and ‘‘E” for extremely heavy).
The results of this study could help designers of asphalt
mixes during their selection of polymer type and amount
taking into consideration all cost components that may
affect their decision. Moreover, the generated Jnr-temp
curves could be utilized in Mechanical–Empirical Design
methods of pavement structures as they considered as mas-
ter curve of recovery property. This relationship may
enforce or replace the viscosity and G*/sin d criteria of
asphalt binders. The current parameter G*/sin (delta),
which is measured by applying an oscillating load to the
asphalt binder at relatively low shear strain, is used to
determine the existence of elastic and viscous effects of
asphalt binders. So, additional tests (called PG-plus tests)
have been added to measure the potential of polymer mod-
ified asphalt binders in recovering the applied stress. One of
those tests is ‘‘Elastic Recovery” which is conducted to
evaluate the recovery of the modified binders at 25 °C
which does not capture the actual performance against rut-
ting at higher temperature, higher traffic volumes and
lower speeds.
On the other hand, MSCR test is using higher levels of
stress (3.2 kPa) to capture the effectiveness of polymer net-
work at high temperature. The resulted MSCR Recovery
provides an indication of the delayed elastic response of
the asphalt binder, while MSCR Non-recoverable creep
compliance (Jnr) is used to classify the modified asphalt
binders into different traffic levels at the targeted service
temperature. Furthermore, Jnr has better correlation with
field rutting than G*/sin d [5,16].
2. Methodology
2.1. Material selection
Asphalt samples were collected and evaluated in terms
for basic properties including viscosity and ductility in
 K. Al-Adham, H. Al-Abdul Wahhab / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 11 (2018) 603–610
addition to chemical composition. The average values of all
sampled asphalts are shown in Table 1:
Four types of polymers that are mostly used in local and
international projects are selected to modify asphalt bin-
ders in this study. Styrene–Butadiene–Styrene ‘‘SBS” with
70/30 Butadiene/Styrene thermoplastic copolymer, poly-
merized in solution and has a radial structure is used.
The second polymer is Crumb Rubber ‘‘CR” which is col-
lected from a local factory and is produced from the recy-
cled rubber obtained from automotive and truck scrap tires
and have grain size of passing sieve no. 0.1 mm and
retained on 0.075 mm. Two Plastomers include low density
Polyethylene ‘‘PE” and modified Olefin ‘‘OF” (also called
Alkenes) were selected in this study.
2.2. Material testing and evaluation
Binders were modified with 2–6% of SBS, PE and OF
and 5–10% of CR in order to meet different performance
grades (PG) suitable for desert environment. These grades
are PG 70, PG 76 and PG 82. Asphalt binder was heated to
reach a specific temperature (165–185 °C) then polymer
was added gradually and mixed with high shear mixing
for one hour. Each modified sample was stored at 145 °C
overnight to ensure the maturity of the polymer–asphalt
network. Dynamic viscosity was carried on the modified
samples to measure workability, mixing and compaction
temperatures (AASHTO TP 48). The fifty-two different
modified asphalt binders were subjected to short term
aging and then were subjected to Performance Grading
(PG) (AASHTO M320) and Multiple Stress Creep Recov-
ery (MSCR) (AASHTO M332).
2.2.1. Dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR) test
The dynamic temperature step measurements for the
samples were performed in CSA II rheometer. All samples
were tested in a range of 64–82 °C according to the stan-
dard test (AASHTO T315). The results of this test were
used to grade the polymer modified asphalt sample accord-
ing to their Performance (AASHTO M320) and to find out
the amount of polymer required to meet the targeted PG’s
(PG 70, PG76 and PG 82).
2.2.2. Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR) test
This test method is used to determine the Non-
recoverable creep compliance (Jnr) and percent recovery
(R) of asphalt binders by means of the Multiple Stress
Table 1
Properties of asphalt binders used in the study.
Property Average value
Flash Point, °C 338
Penetration Grade 60/70
Rotational viscosity at 135 °C, cP 464
Ductility at 25 °C, mm 100+
Performance Grade (PG) PG 64-16
605
Creep Recovery (MSCR) test using the Dynamic Shear
Rheometer (DSR) at different temperatures. Percent recov-
ery is the percent difference between the final (e10) and ini-
tial (e0) strain of the tenth recovery curve while Jnr is the
ratio between final strain (e10) and applied stress i.e., 3.2.
Fig. 1 shows typical MSCR results [1].
Each polymer modified asphalt sample was tested for
performance grade (PG), then the same sample was condi-
tioned to be tested for Jnr with 3 °C increments starting
from higher to lower temperatures around the PG temper-
ature, ranging from 58 to 79 °C. This temperature range
was selected because most of asphalt binders extracted
from crudes have performance grade of PG 64-16 and
PG 58-16 for heavy and light oil, respectively [2]. Because
rutting is the main concern of pavement distresses at high
service temperature in arid areas like gulf countries, the tar-
geted grades of modified asphalts in this study are PG 64,
PG 70 and PG 76.
Two samples for each polymer-asphalt combination
were tested and average values of Jnr were reported in
results section. A third sample for the same combination
was prepared, conditioned and tested for model validation
step. All prepared polymer modified asphalt samples were
drawn on the standard curve to differentiate between elas-
tomer and Plastomers.
3. Results and analysis
In this section, results obtained from binder testing are
discussed in the following sub-sections and full data are
listed in Table at the end.
3.1. Correlation between stiffness (G*/sin d) and relaxation
(1/Jnr) of polymer modified asphalts
Although the difference in testing procedure and applied
stress levels of both tests and the internal properties of
polymer modifications, the results of stiffness of modified
samples noted by G*/sin d were correlated to the reciprocal
of the Jnr parameter using Pearson Correlation method
which relate to the shear modulus at relaxation condition
and both have unit of kPa. A good but not strong correla-
tion was resulted with Pearson coefficient of 0.74 and p-
value <0.05. Fig. 2 shows the relationship between the 52
samples. (Full data is presented in Table 2.)
3.2. Effect of temperature on the elastomeric property of
polymer modified asphalt binders
By plotting percent recovery (%R) and Non-recoverable
strain creep compliance (Jnr) results on the standard curve
(%R = 29.4Jnr
0.26) recommended by AASHTO TP 70 for
each polymer modified asphalt binder tested at 3.2 kPa
stress and at different temperatures, the elastomeric prop-
erty of that binder can be evaluated. If the data point of
%R–Jnr at specific temperature lies above that line, the elas-
tomeric behavior is highly expected at that condition when
606 K. Al-Adham, H. Al-Abdul Wahhab / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 11 (2018) 603–610

0.040
εc
0.035

0.030

Recovery
% Strain

0.025

0.020

0.015

0.010
εr
0.005 ε0
0.000
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0

Time, (s)
Fig. 1. Typical MSCR test result after 10 cycles of creep and recovery.

25.0

20.0
1/Jnr, kPa

15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
G*/sinδ, kPa

Fig. 2. Relationship between G*/sin d and Jnr.

used in asphalt mix. Figs. 3 and 4 show the results of SBS
and CR modified asphalt binders, respectively.
Power-law curves parallel to the standard line of elas-
tomeric behavior are generated as shown in the Figures.
It can be shown from the Figure that 6%-SBS modified
asphalt binder has a remarkable elastomeric behavior at
any temperature. That means a number of polymer’s mole-
cules are sufficient to improve the elastic recovery for the
system, while 4% SBS modified asphalt binders at a lower
temperature might reach a point at which signs of elas-
tomeric behavior is reduced. By comparing the MSCR
recovery and Jnr values for each tested asphalt binders at
the same temperature, an improvement in recovery was
observed which indicates that there is a significant effect
of polymer type and amount on recovery values. There is
a sign of superposition of the temperature and number of
molecular interaction points between polymer and asphalt
binders that improve the elastic recovery property of the
system. With simple algebraic calculations the temperature
at which elastomeric behavior starts can be estimated. Sim-
ilar behavior could happen for Crumb Rubber (CR) but
the elastomeric behavior could change at very low temper-
atures which is an undesirable situation at desert
environment.
For Polyethylene and Olefin modified asphalt binders,
the resulted curves are not reaching the elastomeric curve
at high nor moderate temperatures, only the situation at
which the required temperature is less than 58 °C these
modified binders could have some strain recovery. Fig. 5
shows the results of Olefin modified asphalt binders at dif-
ferent temperatures while Fig. 6 presents PE results.
3.3. Effect of temperature and amount of polymer on Jnr
values
All polymer modified asphalt samples prepared in this
study were tested at 3.2 kPa stress level and at different
temperatures range from 58 °C to 79 °C in order to find a
 K. Al-Adham, H. Al-Abdul Wahhab / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 11 (2018) 603–610 607

Table 2
G*/sin d and MSCR results of all tested samples.
Sample PG Temperature, °C G*/sin d Jnr Recovery
kPa 1/kPa %
Unmodified PG 64 58 4.005 1.480 3.602
64 2.598 3.811 0.040
70 1.191 6.141 0.000
Styrene–Butadiene–Styrene PG 70 58 10.678 0.268 34.018
SBS 64 8.009 0.775 18.734
70 3.875 2.036 8.100
76 1.938 2.795 1.342
PG 76 58 17.154 0.079 62.236
64 14.490 0.241 46.549
70 7.519 0.685 29.145
76 4.035 1.703 16.258
82 2.192 2.006 4.435
PG 82 58 31.845 0.014 84.950
64 26.760 0.043 78.043
70 14.860 0.128 67.688
76 8.264 0.363 53.992
82 4.691 0.420 45.360
Crumb Rubber PG 70 58 14.010 0.158 31.048
CR 64 6.751 0.468 16.240
70 3.385 1.247 5.291
76 1.763 2.893 0.643
PG 76 58 8.459 0.135 40.802
64 6.357 0.419 23.320
70 3.160 1.163 8.857
76 1.606 2.830 1.810
PG 82 58 8.658 0.182 39.817
64 6.786 0.550 22.510
70 5.120 1.471 9.776
76 2.631 3.548 2.604
82 1.376 4.193 0.663
Polyethylene PG 70 58 13.141 0.386 9.937
PE 64 9.741 1.048 1.712
70 4.646 2.478 0.969
76 2.093 5.256 0.003
PG 76 58 13.552 0.253 17.830
64 10.423 0.740 5.835
70 7.634 1.843 0.692
76 3.487 4.132 0.044
82 1.377 4.927 0.000
PG 82 58 22.320 0.133 21.453
64 17.202 1.453 8.977
70 12.500 2.222 4.900
76 6.133 2.775 0.823
82 2.264 3.820 0.044
Olefin PG 70 58 6.447 0.825 12.001
OF 64 4.816 2.196 3.109
70 2.234 5.043 0.447
76 1.079 6.906 0.000
PG 76 58 10.803 0.249 18.392
64 9.135 0.675 6.624
70 4.488 1.634 1.140
76 2.225 3.482 0.198
82 1.153 4.174 0.004
PG 82 58 9.911 0.064 52.380
64 7.964 0.270 25.761
70 6.184 1.206 5.624
76 3.737 6.628 0.514
82 2.290 7.199 0.014
608 K. Al-Adham, H. Al-Abdul Wahhab / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 11 (2018) 603–610

90 70
2%SBS 2%OF
80 4%SBS 60 4%OF
70 6%SBS 6%OF
Power (Standard Curve)
50
60 Power (Standard Curve)
50 40
%R

%R
40 30
30
20
20
10 10
0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Jnr (1/kPa) Jnr (1/kPa)
Fig. 3. Evaluation of elastomeric behavior of SBS. Fig. 6. Evaluation of elastomeric behavior of PE modified asphalts.

70 results of the four selected polymer modified asphalts that

5%CR
have three levels of polymer amount and performance
60 7.5%CR
grades tested at various temperatures.
10%CR
50 It can be shown from previous analysis that MSCR
Power (Standard Curve) results are affected by testing temperature polymer type
40
and polymer amount. A comparison between all
%R

30 polymer-modified asphalts is included in this study which

is classified into three Performance Grades and tested
20 under different temperature levels. The remarkable behav-
10
ior of SBS polymers in improving the recovery properties
of asphalt binders is due to butadiene content which forms
0 around 70% of its structure and has a rubbery nature which
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 gives SBS its elasticity at higher contents.
Jnr (1/kPa) The best relationship was found between Jnr and tem-
Fig. 4. Evaluation of elastomeric behavior of CR.
perature follow the power law and has the following
equation:

70 J nr ðT Þ ¼ kT a ð1Þ
2%PE
60 4%PE where
6%PE Jnr is the average of Non-recoverable compliance (e10/s)
50 after 10 cycles tested under 3.2 kPa stress.
Power (Standard Curve)
T is the tested PG temperature in Celsius
40 a is the power law exponent
%R

k is an arbitrary constant that indicates to the scale unit

30
of the equation.
20
The exponent a of the power law curves can gives a sign
10 of rate of change of Jnr values. Table 2 summarizes the
components of the generated regression models a and k.
0 Goodness of fit R2 is excellent for all generated models as
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 shown in Table 3.
Jnr (1/kPa) The results of this study could help designers of asphalt
Fig. 5. Evaluation of elastomeric behavior of OF modified asphalts. mixes during their selection of polymer type and amount
taking into consideration all cost components that may
affect their decision. Moreover, the generated Jnr–temp
relationship between Jnr parameter and temperature and to curves could be utilized in Mechanical–Empirical Design
create regression models used for proper design of asphalt methods of pavement structures as they considered as mas-
mixes and structures against rutting. Fig. 7 shows the ter curve of recovery property. This relationship may
 K. Al-Adham, H. Al-Abdul Wahhab / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 11 (2018) 603–610 609

Jnr , 1/kPa 3

0
58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79
Testing Temperature, °C

Fig. 7. Effect of temperature on Jnr values.

Table 3
Components of power-law models generated.
Asphalt binder PG a k R2
Unmodified Asphalt PG 64 8.425 2.00E-15 0.981
Styrene–Butadiene–Styrene PG 70 10.81 2.00E-20 0.999
SBS PG 76 11.62 3.00E-22 0.999
PG 82 12.52 1.00E-24 0.995
Crumb Rubber PG 70 10.98 8.00E-21 0.999
CR PG 76 11.06 5.00E-21 0.999
PG 82 11.27 2.00E-21 0.999
Polyethylene PG 70 9.116 5.00E-17 0.999
PE PG 76 10.4 2.00E-19 0.997
PG 82 12.91 1.00E-24 0.994
Olefin PG 70 8.067 4.00E-15 0.995
OF PG 76 9.402 2.00E-17 0.98
PG 82 10.42 1.00E-19 0.978

enforce or replace the viscosity and G*/sin d criteria of
asphalt binders which is the material property that is cur-
rently included in the analysis of the dynamic modulus
|E*| of the mix [17].
These curves can be used to estimate the required
amount of polymer (as a percent of binder weight) at given
traffic level (Jnr) and targeted service temperatures. Com-
pared to unmodified asphalt binders, all tested samples in
this study showed signs of strain recovery improvement
when tested under high stress and different temperatures.
Furthermore, a comparison between elastomer (SBS and
CR) and Plastomers (PE and OF) modified samples was
conducted to differentiate the effect of polymer type on
the rate of change of Jnr when increasing the temperature.
SBS modified asphalt binders can sustain the change of
Jnr value even at high service temperatures (76 °C) which
can resist rutting at Extremely Heavy Traffic E (Jnr < 0.5
kPa
1) when adding 6% of SBS (PG 82) and Heavy Traffic
H (1 > Jnr > 2) when 4% of SBS (PG 76) is added to local
asphalt binder. The effect of Crumb Rubber (CR) on
improving the Jnr is low compared to SBS values. It can
only withstand Heavy traffic (Jnr 1–2 kPa
1) at 70 °C and
Standard Traffic (Jnr 2–4 kPa
1).
Local asphalt binders modified by 6% of Polyethylene
(PG 82-10) are suitable for weather of 70 °C temperature
and Very Heavy Traffic conditions, while 6% of Olefin
modified asphalts are suitable for Heavy Traffic only at
same weather conditions. None of the plastomeric modified
asphalt binders show significant improvement at 76 °C
temperature compared to SBS modified asphalts.
4. Conclusions
In this study, the effect of temperature on Non-
recoverable creep compliance (Jnr) was investigated on dif-
ferent polymer modified asphalt binders that have various
performance grades (PG). Regression models that predict
the Jnr values at any temperature were generated and listed.
It is concluded from this research the followings:
610 K. Al-Adham, H. Al-Abdul Wahhab / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 11 (2018) 603–610
 Type of polymer, amount of polymer and testing tem-
perature are the major factors affect the recovery prop-
erties of asphalt binders
 Power-law models are best describing the relationship
between Jnr and temperature with signs of shear thicken-
ing when reaching the higher ranges of temperatures.
These models can be used in the design of pavement
structure of level 1 in M-EPDG.
 Polymer modified asphalt binders could have elas-
tomeric behavior at lower temperatures ranging between
55 and 65 °C depending on polymer type and amount.
 SBS modified asphalt binders have shown best behavior
of recovering the strain at high temperatures with Jnr
values less than 0.5 obtained at 76 °C among all tested
samples. While Crumb Rubber is suitable only at mod-
erate temperatures with minor change of Jnr values.
 Polyethylene and Olefin based polymers could improve
local asphalt binders at moderate temperatures of 64
and 70 °C and moderate traffic levels Standard to heavy
traffic.
 An evidence of superposition between temperature and
number of molecular interaction of polymer and asphalt
binders was found in this study. The Jnr-temp curves can
be considered as master curves for local conditions and
materials.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by Deanship of Scientific
Research at King Fahd University of Petroleum and Min-
erals (Grant No. SB141009). The authors would like to
thank the reviewers of this paper for their comments and
suggestions.
References
[1] AASHTO-M-332. Standard Specification for Performance-Graded
Asphalt Binder Using Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR) Test:
American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials
(2014).
[2] H. Al-Abdul Wahhab, I.M. Asi, I.A. Al-Dubabe, M.F. Ali, Devel-
opment of performance-based bitumen specifications for the Gulf
countries, Constr. Build. Mater. J. 11 (1) (1997) 15–22.
[3] M. Ali, H. Al-Abdul Wahhab, I. Asi, I. Al-Dubabe, Characterization
of polymer modified Gulf asphalts, Pet. Sci. Technol. 17 (2) (1999)
125–146.
[4] G. Wonga, H. Hana, G. Hea, P. Wang, W. Lu, Rutting response of
hot-mix asphalt to generalized dynamic shear moduli of asphalt
binder, Constr. Build. Mater. 18 (6) (2004) 399–408.
[5] T. Wasage, J. Stastna, L. Zanzotto, Rheological analysis of multi-
stress creep and recovery (MSCR) test, Int. J. Pavement Eng. 12 (6)
(2011) 561–568.
[6] P. Shirodkar, Y. Mehta, A. Nolan, K. Dahm, R. Dusseau, L.
McCarthy, Characterization of creep and recovery curve of polymer
modified binder, Constr. Build. Mater. 34 (2012) 504–511.
[7] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO). Performance-Graded Asphalt Binder Using Multiple
Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR) Test, (2010) MP 19-10.
[8] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO). Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR) Test of Asphalt
Binder Using a Dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR), (2011) TP 70-11.
[9] E. Paje, J. Luong, F. Vázquez, M. Bueno, R. Miró, Road pavement
rehabilitation using a binder with a high content of crumb rubber:
influence on noise reduction, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (3) (2013) 789–
798.
[10] S. Lee, Ch. Akisetty, S. Amirkhanian, The effect of crumb rubber
modifier (CRM) on the performance properties of rubberized binders
in HMA pavements, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (7) (2008) 1368–1376.
[11] K. Jeong, S. Lee, S. Amirkhanian, K. Kim, Interaction effects of
crumb rubber modified asphalt binders, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (5)
(2010) 824–831.
[12] P. Cong, P. Xun, M. Xing, Sh. Chen, Investigation of asphalt binder
containing various crumb rubbers and asphalts, Constr. Build. Mater.
40 (3) (2013) 632–641.
[13] D. Presti, Recycled tire rubber modified bitumen’s for road asphalt
mixtures: a literature review, Constr. Build. Mater. 49 (3) (2013) 863–
881.
[14] M. Nejad, P. Aghajani, A. Modarres, H. Firoozifar, Investigating the
properties of crumb rubber modified bitumen using classic and SHRP
testing methods, Constr. Build. Mater. 26 (1) (2012) 481–489.
[15] Z. Lei, X. Chao, G. Fei, L. Tian-shuai, T. Yi-qiu, Using DSR and
MSCR tests to characterize high temperature performance of different
rubber modified asphalt, Constr. Build. Mater. 127 (2016) 466–474.
[16] E. Masad, C.W. Huang, J. D’Angelo, D. Little, Characterization of
asphalt binder resistance to permanent deformation based on
nonlinear viscoelastic analysis of multiple stress creep recovery
(MSCR) test, J. Assoc. Asphalt Paving Technol. 78 (2) (2009) 471–
501.
[17] J. Bari, M. Witczak, Development of a new revised version of the
Witczak E* predictive model for hot mix asphalt mixtures (with
discussion), J. Assoc. Asphalt Paving Technol. 75 (2006).