International Journal of Pavement Engineering

ISSN: 1029-8436 (Print) 1477-268X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gpav20

Performance of recycled plastic waste modified

asphalt binder in Saudi Arabia

M. A. Dalhat & H. I. Al-Abdul Wahhab

To cite this article: M. A. Dalhat & H. I. Al-Abdul Wahhab (2015): Performance of recycled
plastic waste modified asphalt binder in Saudi Arabia, International Journal of Pavement
Engineering, DOI: 10.1080/10298436.2015.1088150

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2015.1088150

Published online: 28 Sep 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 24

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gpav20

Download by: [Tufts University] Date: 30 November 2015, At: 14:05

 International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2015.1088150

Performance of recycled plastic waste modified asphalt binder in Saudi Arabia

M. A. Dalhat and H. I. Al-Abdul Wahhab
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The amount of solid plastic waste generated from material packages like plastic bottle and similar utilities Received 7 March 2015
within the kingdom of Saudi Arabia has skyrocketed. This is as a result of the increased level of industrial Accepted 5 August 2015
packaging due to rapid industrialisation and fast urbanisation in the country. The associated cost of
KEYWORDS
managing these solid wastes has also multiplied as the task become difficult and enormous. The effect of Recycling; plastic wastes;
polypropylene, high- and low-density polyethylene (PP, HDPE and LDPE)-recycled plastic wastes (RPW) on asphalt; polypropylene;
the viscoelastic performance of the local asphalt binder has been investigated. The recycled plastics were polyethylene; performance
obtained by shredding and grounding the RPW to a desirable size for easier blending with the asphalt
binder. All the RPWs result in an improved rutting performance. The RPW-modified asphalts upper PG limit
Downloaded by [Tufts University] at 14:05 30 November 2015

increase by at least one level for each 2% increase in the RPW content, in most cases. An increase of 55,
19 and 9% in resilient modulus (MR) was observed for PP-, HDPE- and LDPE-produced asphalt concrete
(AC), respectively. Correlation between the MR of the AC and non-recoverable creep compliance (Jnr) of
the asphalt binder was established. The obtained viscoelastic properties of the RPW-modified binder was
utilised to model a typical pavement section using AASHTO mechanistic empirical pavement design guide
(ME-PDG) software. The predicted distresses of the modelled pavement shows significant rutting and
fatigue performance improvement for pavement produced with the RPW. Elastomeric type of polymer is
required to supplement these RPW to enable them meet the AASHTO TP 70 elastic recovery requirement.

1. Introduction construction at national level requires polymer-modified or sim-

The quantity of solid plastic waste generated from material pack-
ages like plastic bottle and similar utilities within the kingdom
of Saudi Arabia (KSA) has skyrocketed. This is as a result of the
increased level of industrial packaging due to rapid industri-
alisation and fast urbanisation in the country. The associated
cost of managing these solid wastes has also multiplied as the
task has become difficult and enormous. The per capita waste
generation is estimated at 1.5–1.8 kg per person per day (Zafar
2013). Solid waste generation in the three largest cities Riyadh,
Jeddah and Dammam exceeds 6 million tons per annum which
gives an indication of the enormity of the problem. According
to a literature survey of the solid waste composition statistics
of developed countries, plastic waste was found to constitute
approximately 10% of total generated solid waste (Huang et al.
2007). Meanwhile, the economic feasibility studies of processing
and utilising plastic waste in Saudi Arabia indicates rate of return
of more than 14% (Rahman et al. 2006).
The local available asphalt binder in Saudi Arabia can only
be utilised without modification, if the maximum pavement
temperature at service condition is below 64 °C. However, the
seven-day maximum temperature was found to range between
64 and 76 °C within the kingdom (Al-Abdul Wahhab et al. 1995).
In addition, the proportion of heavy trucks in the county’s traffic
has increased, and the variation in daily and seasonal tempera-
ture has become significant. Hence, all flexible pavement road
ilar asphalt binder, for an improved material characteristics and
pavement performance.
Recycled plastic wastes (RPW) such as polypropylene (PP),
polyethylene (PE) packages and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) has
been previously utilised to enhance the performance of asphalt
concrete (AC) (Casey et al. 2008, Ahmadinia et al. 2012, Singh
et al. 2013). However, most of these researches were performed
for stone mastic AC in countries like Ireland, Malaysia etc. More-
over, the modified asphalt binder (MAB) was subjected to limited
and outdated tests. In order to accurately establish the perfor-
mance of the polymer modified asphalt, tests like the multiple
stress creep and recovery (MSCR) need to be performed (Hafeez
and Kamal 2014).
Earlier, the effect of toner cartridge RPW on the properties
and the behaviour of asphalt binder was examined (Yildirim
et al. 2004). The toner level required to achieve different super-
pave performance grade (PG) was established for each type of
toner waste. Influence of molecular weight and molecular weight
distribution of recycled low-density polyethylene (LDPE) in
modified asphalt low-temperature behaviour and hot storage
stability was investigated (Ho et al. 2006). LDPE with low molec-
ular weight and wider molecular weight distribution were found
to be more effective than higher molecular weight and narrow
molecular weight distribution polymers. Positive effect of recy-
cled ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) and a combination of recycled

CONTACT  M. A. Dalhat  madab@kfupm.edu.sa   

© 2015 Taylor & Francis
 2    M. A. Dalhat and H. I. Al-Abdul Wahhab

Table 1. PG grade of the neat asphalt binder.

Property PG grade PG+ grade (AASHTO MP-19) PG+ grade (AASHTO TP-70)
Value 64-22 64S-22 Failed

­ avement section using AASHTO mechanistic empirical pave-

p
ment design guide (ME-PDG).

2.  Materials and tests

2.1. Asphalt
The asphalt used in this study was obtained from Riyadh refinery.
It is the typical asphalt commercially available within the KSA.
It has a 64 °C upper PG (UPG) limit, as established by Table 1.

2.2.  Recycled plastic waste

The local recycled wastes (PP, HDPE and LDPE) were identi-
Downloaded by [Tufts University] at 14:05 30 November 2015

fied and handpicked from Dammam municipality recycling pro-

gramme. This waste was then processed for easier blending. The
processing involved washing, shredding and grinding. Figure 1
shows the image of the RPW before and after grinding. Images
A and B represent LDPE, C and D represent HDPE, while E and
F depict PP.

2.3. Aggregate
Table 2 shows the final selected gradation of the AC mix utilised
Figure 1. RPWs before and after grinding. in this study. The gradation has a maximum nominal size of 1/2″.
It is the recommended gradation for wearing course and mainte-
EVA with LDPE on the linear viscoelastic properties of asphalt nance of AC mix by the ministry of transport, KSA. Table 3 also
binder was also reported (Navarro et al. 2009). Conventional shows the various measured specific gravities of the aggregates
asphalt tests were performed on a recycled PE-modified asphalt utilised for the study.
binder to examine the effect of temperature, mixing duration and
the PE content on binder properties (Punith and Veeraragavan
2011). The homogeneity of the PE-modified binder was checked Table 2. Aggregate gradation.
by florescent microscopy scanning. Higher PE loading was found
to raise the required blending time and temperature, as well the Control point Control Point
Sieve size % Passing (min) (max)
hardness of the asphalt binder. The homogeneity and disper-
3/4″ 100 100 –
sion of the PE waste in bitumen was reported to be improved 1/2″ 95.19 90 100
by the addition of an organophilic montmorillonite (Fang et al. 3/8″ 81.81 – –
2012). The ageing mechanism of recycled PE-modified asphalt No. 4 44.00 – –
No. 8 31.49 28 –
binder in combination with rubber powder was investigated by No. 10 28.49 – –
Fang and Co. (2013). Fourier transform infra-red spectroscopy No. 16 22.11 – –
in addition to conventional tests like softening point and duc- No. 30 16.11 – –
No. 40 12.40 – –
tility were employed to study the short-term-aged PE-modified No. 50 11.30 – –
asphalt binder. The physical properties of recycled LDPE-mod- No. 80 9.00 – –
ified asphalt binder in combination with maleic anhydride was No. 100 7.89 – –
No. 200 5.19 2 10
examined (Singh et al. 2013). Improvement in viscosity, softening
point and penetration of the LDPE-modified asphalt binder was
noticed.
Table 3. Specific gravities of aggregate.
The effect of recycled Polypropylene (PP), high-density pol-
yethylene (HDPE) and LDPE plastic wastes on the viscoelastic Coarse
performance of the local asphalt binder was documented in this aggregate Fine aggregate Filler
paper. The recycled plastics were obtained by shredding and Bulk specific gravity 2.47 2.56 2.75
Apparent specific 2.74 2.78 2.84
grinding the waste plastic to a desirable size for easier blend- gravity
ing with the asphalt binder. The obtained viscoelastic proper- Absorption 1.73 1.04 –
ties of the RPW-modified binder was utilised to model a typical Los Angelis abrasion 27% NA NA
 International Journal of Pavement Engineering   3

0.4 Table 4. Melting points of the RPWs.

RPW Recycle label Melting point (°C) Blending temp. (°C)

0.2 PET 1 250 –
HDPE 2 132 180
PVC 3 298 –
0.0
Heat Flow (W/g)

LDPE 4 110 160

PP 5 162 190
PS 6 >300 –
-0.2

-0.4 ined, viz polyethylene terephthalate (PET) with recycled label of

1; HDPE with recycled label of 2; PVC with recycled label of 3;
-0.6 LDPE having recycled label of 4; PP with recycled label of 5; and
polystyrene (PS) with recycled label of 6. Only RPW with melt-
-0.8 ing point below 200 °C were considered suitable for the asphalt
Exo Up
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 modification. This selected criterion is purely based on the asphalt
Temperature (°C)
Universal V3.9A TA
characteristics. When asphalt is subjected to high temperatures
for an extended period of time, it will undergo oxidation (Fang
Figure 2. DSC output of recycled PET. et al. 2009). Oxidation leads to ageing of the asphalt, and ageing
is responsible for the degradation of vital properties of asphalt.
Downloaded by [Tufts University] at 14:05 30 November 2015

1.0 Results from Figure 2 show the melting peaks for PET in
the Heat/Cool/Heat circles to be 249  °C. We can finally con-
0.5 clude that the melting point of recycled PET sample is 250 °C.
This temperature level is beyond the suitable range of blending
0.0 with asphalt binder. Thus, the reason why PET was not included
Heat Flow (W/g)

among the utilised RPWs. Blending asphalt with PET will result
-0.5 in excessive oxidation and this will completely undermine the
research objective.
-1.0
Figure 3 shows the DSC result of recycled LDPE. The melting
peaks in the twin heating circle can be observed to be around
-1.5
110 °C. Hence, we can conclude that the melting point of the
LDPE-RPW sample is 110 °C. This temperature level is within
-2.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 the suitable range of blending with asphalt binder. The selected
blending temperature for LDPE-modified binder must be above
Exo Up
Temperature (°C) Universal V3.9A TA

Figure 3. DSC output of recycled LDPE.
2.4. Tests
Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) (ASTM E1356-08) was
employed to determine the exact melting point of the RPW. DSC
Q 1000 model was used for these tests. The thermal analysis results
served as bases for screening the RPWs. DV-II Brookfield viscom-
eter was utilised to obtain the RPW-modified asphalt viscosity
(ASTM D4402 2013). The viscosity results were used for optimi-
sation and as part of performance grading of the MAB. Sample
this value. Since the LDPE does not show any sign of decom-
posing within the tested temperature range, 160 °C was finally
selected for blending with asphalt.
The remaining RPW were screened in similar manner. The
summary of the RPWS melting point is given in Table 4. It can be
seen that only LDPE, HDPE and PP are qualified as suitable binder
modifiers. The blending temperatures were obtained by adding
5000
4% LDPE
Viscosity (cP) @ 135 oC, 20 rpm

RPW-modified asphalts were subjected to a short-term ageing 4000 4% HDPE

4% PP
test (AASHTO T 240 or ASTM D2872 2012) as per AASHTO Fresh
PG requirements (AASHTO PP6, AASHTO M 332 2014, and 3000
AASHTO TP 70-11 2013). Dynamic shear rheometer tests (DSR)
were performed on the modified asphalt for optimisation as well
as for PG, (AASHTO T 315 2012). Resilient modulus (MR) test for 2000
AC Mix (ASTM D7369-11 2011) was finally utilised to assess the
relative effectiveness of the RPW-modified asphalt binders in AC.
1000

3. Methodology
0
3.1.  RPW screening 0 20 40 60 80
Blending Time (minutes.)
The possibility of utilising all available RPW for the asphalt binder
modification was explored. Six common plastic wastes were exam- Figure 4. Viscosity vs. blending time at 4% RPW loading.
 4    M. A. Dalhat and H. I. Al-Abdul Wahhab
8 ified curve can be observed to relatively flatten after 50 min of
o
4% LDPE @ 64 C.
7
4% LDPE @ 70 oC.
6
5 4.1.1.  Sample preparation for RPW-modified asphalt
G*/sin δ (kPa)
4
3
2 190 °C. In order to ease the blending process, the RPW were
1
0 4.2.  Viscosity of RPW-modified asphalt
0 10 20 30 40
Blending Time (sec.)
Figure 5. G*/Sin δ (kPa) vs. blending time for LDPE.
Downloaded by [Tufts University] at 14:05 30 November 2015
50 °C to the melting point of selected RPW, given the condition
that the total blending temperature should not exceed 190 °C.
3.2.  Optimisation of the blending duration
The recycled LDPE-modified asphalt was obtained by hot blend-
ing both asphalt and the recycled plastic at 160 °C and around
5000 rpm shearing speed. The blend is first placed in an oven at
160 °C inside a sealed can, for 1 h prior to shear blending. Using
the same shearing speed, HDPE- and PP-modified asphalts were
obtained at 180 and 190 °C, respectively. Rotational viscosity test
and DSR test samples were obtained after 10-min blending time
interval. The mixing was continued for up to 50 and 70 min for
LDPE, HDPE and PP, respectively. Figures 4 and 5 show the results.
4.  Results analysis
4.1.  Optimisation results
The variation of the viscosity with time at 4% content of PRW (PP,
LDPE and HDPE) is shown in Figure 4. As can be observed, there
is a little increase in viscosity for the neat asphalt binder. This is
due to the unavoidable, but limited volatilisation and oxidation
that take place while stirring the binder in an oxygen surrounded
atmosphere (air) at high temperature. The LDPE-modified blend
shows a relatively uniform viscosity after 30 min of blending.
This indicates that the recycled LDPE plastic has already been
dispersed thoroughly, such that additional shearing no longer
changes the morphology of the blend. The change in viscosity of
the HDPE blend seems to stabilise after about 60 min of shearing.
The same trend as with the HDPE blend can be observed with
PP-modified asphalt binder.
The rutting parameter of recycled LDPE-modified asphalt
binder was plotted against the duration of mixing, as shown in
Figure 5. Results of test conducted at 64 and 70 °C are shown.
Both plots seem to be stabilised after 20 min. This indicates that
further blending after 20 min could be counterproductive, as the
little increase in the rutting parameter beyond 20 min could be
due to the little but insignificant oxidation of the asphalt binder.
Figure 6 shows the rutting parameter of HDPE- and PP-recy-
cled plastic plotted against duration of blending. The PP-mod-
blending. Based on the observed trends from Figures 4–6, the
optimum blending time of recycled PP, HDPE and LDPE were
selected to be 50, 60 and 30 min, respectively.
The asphalt and the RPW were blended at high temperature at a
shear speed of about 5000 rpm. The HDPE blends were obtained
after 60 min of mixing at 180 °C. The duration of mixing of the
LDPE was 30  min at 160  °C, while that of PP was 50  min at
pre-soaked in the asphalt for 60 min at 160 °C.
50
The viscosity variation at different levels of the RPW content
is shown in Figure 7. As expected, the viscosity increases with
more HDPE, LDPE or PP loading. However, the HDPE-modified
asphalt has a relatively higher viscosity than its LDPE and PP
counterparts. This could be attributed to the difference in molec-
ular structure, weight and density. The HDPE and LDPE contents
above 4 and 7% show viscosities above 3000 centi-Poise specified
limit, by strategic highway research programme, for convenient
pumping. While the viscosity of the PP-modified asphalt binder
remains within the stipulated limit, for PP content below 8%.
4.3.  Viscoelastic behaviour of RPW-modified asphalt
The rutting parameter and the phase angle plots of short-term-
aged recycled LDPE-modified asphalt are shown in Figure 8. As
can be anticipated, the rutting parameter (G*/sin δ) increases
with increasing LDPE content and declined at higher tempera-
ture. For example, G*/sin δ increased from 8 kPa for 2% LDPE
content to 26 kPa for 8% LDPE content at 64 °C. However, the
phase angle (δ) decreases from 81° for 2% LDPE content to
almost 73° for 8% of LDPE dosage at 64  °C. This reflects an
increased elastic behaviour with more LDPE content.
Figure 9 shows the rutting parameter and the phase angle
plots of the HDPE-modified asphalt. Similar trend as observed
with LDPE-recycled waste can also be witnessed here. The rut-
ting parameter increased from 18 kPa for 2% content of HDPE
to 102 kPa for 8% HDPE content, at 64 °C. δ decreases from 76°
for 2% dose of HDPE to 67° for 8% HDPE dosage. The rutting
resistance improvement is more significant in HDPE-modified
binders than its counterparts.
Two percent PP yields binder with 78.8° phase angle, which
decreases to 76.4° at 70 °C as shown by Figure 10. The rutting
parameter increases with increasing PP content from 9 kPa for
2% content to 19 kPa for 8% PP dosage at 70 °C. There is an over-
all increase in the viscoelastic behaviour of all the RPW-modified
asphalt binders.
4.4.  PG of the RPW-modified asphalt binders
The UPG represents the average seven-day maximum pavement
temperature below which the binder can perform satisfactorily.
The local binder satisfies the expected minimum design pave-
ment temperature in KSA. The lowest lower PG limit require-
ment within KSA regions is −10 (Al-Abdul Wahhab et al. 1995).
 International Journal of Pavement Engineering   5

140 30 86

120 o
4% HDPE @ 64 C. 25 84
o
4% HDPE @ 70 C.

Phase angle "δ" (degrees)

o
100 4% PP @ 64 C. 82
20
G*/Sin δ (kPa)

G*/Sin δ (kPa)
80
80
15
60
78
40 10
76
20
5
74
0
0 20 40 60 80 0 72
Blending Time (sec.) 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84
Temp. ( oC)
Figure 6. G*/Sin δ (kPa) for HDPE and PP vs. blending time. 2% LDPE (δ)
2% LDPE (G*/Sin δ)
4% LDPE (G*/Sin δ) 4% LDPE (δ)
6% LDPE (G*/Sin δ) 6% LDPE (δ)

Hence, the UPG being the main focus in this work. Table 5 shows 8% LDPE (G*/Sin δ) 8% LDPE (δ)
Downloaded by [Tufts University] at 14:05 30 November 2015

the summary of the PG (AASHTO PP6) and PG+ (AASHTO M Figure 8. G*/sin δ (kPa) and phase angle vs. temperature for LDPE asphalt.
10000
Viscosity (cP) @ 135oC, 20 rpm

HDPE 120 84
8000 LDPE
PP
82
100
80

Phase angle "δ" (degrees)

6000
80
78
G*/Sin δ (kPa)

4000 60 76

40 74

2000 72
20
70
0 2 4 6 8 0 68
% Recycled Polymer
66
62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84
Figure 7. Viscosity vs. RPWs (PP, HDPE and LDPE).
Temp. (oC)
2% HDPE (G*/Sin δ) 2% HDPE (δ)
4% HDPE (G*/Sin δ) 4% HDPE (δ)
6% HDPE (G*/Sin δ) 6% HDPE (δ)
8% HDPE (G*/Sin δ) 8% HDPE (δ)
332 2014 and AASHTO TP 70-11 2013) of the different recycled
plastic-modified asphalt binders. Two per cent dosage of LDPE Figure 9. G*/sin δ (kPa) and phase angle vs. temp. for HDPE asphalt.
changes the UPG of the neat binder to 70, and its equivalent
upper PG+ is 64H (64-heavy traffic). Four and six percent LDPE
blends showed similar UPG but with different elastic recover- raises the PG temperature by far more, relative to LDPE. The
ies. The PG+ grading system has the capability of distinguish- recycled PP yields blends with higher UPG than the LDPE, but
ing between blends of similar PG. Hence, 4% and 6% recycled higher than HDPE-modified binders only between 3.5 and 7.5%
LDPE-modified binders possess upper PG+ of 70H and 76H, contents.
respectively. All the LDPE blends did not meet the AASHTO TP
70 (2013) elastic recovery requirement. This is not surprising, 4.5.  Elastic recovery criteria (AASHTO TP 70 2013)
because PE in its self is not elastomeric in nature. For the same
reason, similar outcome related to recovery was observed for All the recycled plastic-modified blends could not meet the
HDPE- and PP-modified asphalt binders. However, according to requirement of and elastomeric polymer-modified asphalt binder
the usual practice of verifying the PG of an asphalt binder (AAS- set by AASHTO MP 70, as shown in Figure 12. The virgin PE
HTO PP6 and AASHTO M 332 2014), the RPW have yielded a and poly propylene are not elastomeric in nature. In order to
better performing binder. compensate for their lack of elastic recovery, these RPWs need
Figure 11 showed the plots of the upper performance tem- to be supplemented by some amount of elastomeric polymer.
perature at which each blend failed. Identical pattern can be The required amount of the elastomeric polymer that will be
observed for the HDPE and the LDPE. Only that the HDPE required might be less when compared to the amount required
 6    M. A. Dalhat and H. I. Al-Abdul Wahhab

22 84 95
20
LDPE.
18 82

Phase angle "δ" (degrees)

HDPE

Highest PG temperature (oC)

90 PP
16
G*/Sin δ (kPa)

14
80
12 85
10
78
8
80
6
4 76

2 75
0 74
68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84
Temp. (oC) 70
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2% PP (G*/Sin δ) 2% PP ( δ)
4% PP (G*/Sin δ) 4% PP ( δ) % RPW (PP, HDPE and LDPE)
6% PP (G*/Sin δ) 6% PP ( δ)
8% PP (G*/Sin δ) 8% PP ( δ)
Figure 11. Failed PG temperature vs. %RPW.
Figure 10. G*/sin δ and phase angle vs. temp. for PP asphalt.
Downloaded by [Tufts University] at 14:05 30 November 2015

binder, as observed in the viscoelastic analysis of both blends

if the elastomer alone is utilised to produce a targeted PG grade.
Hence, these RPW could be used to minimise the cost of polymer
in flexible pavement construction. They are definitely cheaper
than the virgin polymers if collected appropriately.
4.6.  Resilient Modulus (MR) of asphalt mix
Superpave design method was utilised to prepare AC mixtures
for the neat and the three RPW (PP, LDPE and HDPE). Similar
binder performance grade (PG and PG+) was employed, and
the mixtures turn out with the same gradation. Table 6 shows
the asphalt binder and RPW contents for the various types
of binders. UPG of 76 was selected as required for Dammam
Eastern Province climate. Two per cent HDPE and PP contents
are sufficient to yield 76 UPG, while 4% is needed in case of
LDPE. The MR of the various mixtures at 20 °C was determined.
Figure 13 shows the plot of the obtained MR of the various
mixes. All the RPW-modified binders resulted in higher MR
than the neat AC. The PP-modified asphalt produces mix with
55% increased MR. As anticipated, HDPE yield mix with higher
MR than its LDPE counterpart. This could be due to the supe-
rior viscoelastic performance of the HDPE relative to the LDPE
+ (Figures 9 and 8). HDPE and LDPE yielded AC mixtures with
19 and 9% increased MR relative to the neat binder, respectively.
Irrespective of the fact that the RPW-modified binder used for
the various mixtures possesses the same PG and PG+ grading,
similar mix gradation. Their various MR differ significantly. This
can be explained by the non-recoverable creep compliance (Jnr)
of the various RPW-modified binders as presented in Table 7.
The MR summary of mixes and the Jnr of the different asphalt
binders are given in Table 7. The Jnr at different applied stress
levels was obtained from the MSCR test result of the AASHTO
MP 70 standard test. This results show the reason why PP asphalt
binder mix possesses highest MR than the other RPW (LDPE and
HDPE). PP-modified binder exhibits the lowest Jnr and hence
highest recovery. So even though these binders happened to fall
within the same PG and PG+ grade class, their individual per-
formance differs to some extent.
4.6.1.  Correlation between MR and Jnr
Using MiniTab® statistical application package and the informa-
tion from Table 7, regression analysis was conducted to obtain
relationship between MR, Jnr and the applied stress (stress) at
which the Jnr was obtained. Equation (1) relates the MR at 20 °C

Table 5. Summary of PG temperature.

LDPE
Composition 2% 4% 6% 8%
PG grade 70-18 76-12 76-10 82-6
PG+ (MP 19-10) 64H; 70S-18 70H; 76S-12 76H-10 82S-6
PG+ (TP 70-11) Failed Failed Failed Failed
HDPE

Composition 2% 4% 6% 8%
PG grade 76-12 82-10 88* 88*
PG+ (MP 19-10) 70H; 76S-12 76H; 82S-10 82H* 82 V*
PG+ (TP 70-11) Failed Failed Failed Failed
PP

Composition 2% 4% 6% 8%
PG grade 76-12 82-10 82-10 88*
PG+ (MP 19-10) 76S-12 76H-10 76H-10 76 V*
PG+ (TP 70-11) Failed Failed Failed Failed

Note: *Upper in-service temp. limit only, and failed to meet viscosity specification requirement.
 International Journal of Pavement Engineering   7

Extreme Heavy traffic

70 Standard line 2% LDPE_64 H 4% LDPE_70 H
6% LDPE_76 (H) 8% LDPE 82 (S) 2% HDPE_70 (H)
4% HDPE_76 (H) 6% HDPE 82 (H) 8% HDPE_82 (V)
60 2% PP_7 6 (S) 8% PP_76 (V) Power (Standard line)

50

Very Heavy traffic

% Recovery

40

Heavy traffic

Standard traffic
30

20

10
Downloaded by [Tufts University] at 14:05 30 November 2015

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
-1
Jnr, kpa

Figure 12. Summary of RPW blends against AASHTO TP 70 2013 requirement.

Table 6. AC mix binder information.

Binder type Binder content (%) Binder PG Binder PG+ % RPW

Neat 4.6 64-22 – 0%
LDPE modified 4.6 76-12 70H-12 4%
HDPE modified 4.6 76-12 70H-12 2%
PP modified 4.6 76-12 70H-12 2%

(ksi), the applied stress (kPa) and Jnr at 70 °C (kPa−1) with 97.72% 18000
coefficient of statistical correlation. Similarly, equation (2) relates
16000
the MR at 20 °C (ksi), the applied stress (kPa) and Jnr at 76 °C
(kPa−1) with 91.02% coefficient of statistical correlation. 14000
Resilient Modulus (MPa)

MR (@20 °C) = 2411.3 + 0.0522 stress − 576.364 Jnr @70 °C ∗ ∗ 12000

(1) 10000

8000
MR (@20 °C) = 1303.98 + 0.0551∗ stress + 1225.76∗ e-Jnr @76 °C
6000
(2)
4000
5.  AC pavement modelling
2000
An AC pavement consisting of 20-cm wearing course and 0
30-cm aggregate base course was modelled for the various recy- Neat LDPE HDPE PP
cled plastic-modified asphalt binders. The selected pavement Asphalt binder type
components thicknesses are based on the local practice in the
Figure 13. MR of asphalt concrete mix.
KSA. AASHTO ME-PDG software was employed for this task.
ME-PDG software, unlike other purely empirical-based pave-
ment design software has the ability to utilise the viscoelastic viscoelastic behaviour of the RPW-modified binders. Material
property of pavement material (Li et al. 2011). It translates the properties are as specified in the previous sub-headings. Level 2
mechanistic response of the pavement component in to the per- analysis was selected for the new hot mix asphalt (HMA) layer
formance parameter using empirically developed relationships properties input option. Average annual daily traffic of 5000, 50
called transfer functions. The transfer functions were calibrated and 95% of truck in design lane and direction, respectively, were
by comparing their output with observed field performance data. utilised. Default traffic volume adjustment factor was utilised.
All parameters (layer thickness, traffic loading, climatic NCHRP 1-37A nationally calibrated coefficients were utilised.
data etc.) are kept constant for the different RPW (PP, LDPE, Figure 14 showed the predicted rutting of the asphalt sur-
and HDPE)-modified AC mix. The only property varied is the face layers for each type of HMA. Recycled PP-modified HMA
 8    M. A. Dalhat and H. I. Al-Abdul Wahhab

Table 7. MR of mix and non-recoverable compliance (Jnr) of the RPW-modified binders.

70 °C 76 °C 20 °C

Jnr@0.1 (kPa )
−1
Jnr@3.2 (kPa )
−1
Jnr@0.1 (kPa )
−1
Jnr@3.2 (kPa )
−1
Resilient Mod ‘MR’ (ksi)
PP 0.1322 0.6017 2.3339 2.6736 2299.70
HDPE 1.1739 1.3062 2.6029 3.0624 1757.36
LDPE 1.4223 1.6627 3.3591 4.0375 1619.93

Notes: Jnr@0.1: Non-recoverable creep compliance at 100 kPa.

Jnr@3.2: Non-recoverable creep compliance at 3200 kPa.

0.5

0.45

0.4

0.35
Rutting (inches)

0.3 HDPE Mod. HMA

0.25 PP Mod. HMA

Downloaded by [Tufts University] at 14:05 30 November 2015

0.2 LDPE Mod HMA

0.15 Neat HMA

Allowed Limit
0.1

0.05

0
0 5 10 15 20
Age of AC layer (yrs)

Figure 14. Rutting performance of the various RPW-modified HMA.

2500
Surface-Down Long. Cracking (ft/Mi)

2000

HDPE Mod. HMA

1500 PP Mod. HMA
LDPE Mod. HMA
Neat HMA
1000
Allowed Limit

500

0
0 5 10 15 20
Age of AC Layer (yrs)

Figure 15. AC surface-down longitudinal cracking performance of the RPW-modified HMA.

demonstrates better rutting resistance than the other HMAs. Due to the thick nature of the pavement, the top-down crack-
HDPE- and LDPE-produced HMAs were not far apart in terms ing will be the critical fatigue cracking expected. This has also
of rutting performance, with HDPE doing better. The neat (con- been observed from the overall fatigue cracking results (both
trol mix) happens to rut beyond the acceptable limit even before bottom-up and surface-down) of the ME-PDG software output.
the pavement reaches half of its design period. Figure 15 showed all the RPW-modified ACs have exhibited a

very low longitudinal surface-down cracking throughout their
life span. This is not surprising, as the service climate of KSA
hot, and the common pavement defect is rutting.
6.  Conclusions and recommendations
It can be concluded that the UPG limit increases by almost one
level for every 2% increase in the LDPE or HDPE content. The
improvement of the rutting performance indicator is more sig-
nificant in the HDPE samples than in the LDPE and PP blends.
But as a result of lower Jnr demonstrated by the recycled PP-mod-
ified binder relative to HDPE and LDPE, the PP blend produced
HMA with better rutting resistance than the HDPE and LDPE.
The RPW blends have met the low PG temperature requirement
within KSA region.
RPW-modified binders produce HMA concretes with bet-
ter performance than the neat binder. Recycled PP-modified
HMA demonstrates better rutting resistance, than the LDPE
and HDPE-modified HMAs.
Downloaded by [Tufts University] at 14:05 30 November 2015
The RPWs have improved the MR of the HMA. PP-modified
asphalt binder tends to produce AC mix with the highest MR than
HDPE and LDPE. PP-modified binder exhibits the lowest Jnr and
hence the highest recovery. Even though these binders happened
to fall within the same PG and PG+ grade class, their individual
performance differs to some extent. Regression equations corre-
lating the MR of asphalt mix at 20 °C, the non-recoverable creep
compliance (Jnr.) and the applied stress was obtained, with high
statistical correlation coefficient.
Although the RPWs yielded blends with higher and better PG
than the local neat binder, all the RPWs could not meet the elastic
recovery requirement for polymer-modified asphalt binder set by
AASHTO TP 70 (2013). In order to compensate for their lack of
elastic recovery, these RPWs need to be supplemented by some
amount of elastomeric polymer. In order to ascertain the feasibil-
ity of large scale production of the RPW-modified binder, their
storage stability must be investigated as further study. RPW-mod-
ified AC should also be subjected to field and laboratory experi-
ments in order to confirm their fatigue and rutting performance.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the support provided by King Fahd University
of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, KSA, in carrying out this research.
And Engr. Mirza Ghouse Baig, for his time and help for operation of some
laboratory equipments.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
References
AASHTO M 332, 2014. Standard specification for performance-graded
asphalt binder using multiple stress creep recovery (MSCR) test.
Washington, DC: American Association of State and Highway
Transportation Officials.
International Journal of Pavement Engineering   9
AASHTO T 315, 2012. Standard method of test for determining the
rheological properties of asphalt binder using a dynamic shear rheometer
(DSR). Washington, DC: American Association of State and Highway
Transportation Officials.
AASHTO TP 70, 2013. Standard method of test for multiple stress creep
recovery (MSCR) test of asphalt binder using a dynamic shear rheometer
(DSR). Washington, DC: American Association of State and Highway
Transportation Officials.
ASTM D4402/D4402M, 2013. Standard test method for viscosity
determination of asphalt at elevated temperatures using a rotational
viscometer. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International. doi:10.1520/
D4402_D4402 M
ASTM D2872, 2012. Standard test method for effect of heat and air on a
moving film of asphalt (Rolling thin-film oven test). West Conshohocken,
PA: ASTM International. doi:10.1520/D2872-12E01
ASTM D7369, 2011. Standard test method for determining the resilient
modulus of bituminous mixtures by indirect tension test. West
Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International. doi:10.1520/D7369-11
Ahmadinia, E., et al., 2012. Performance evaluation of utilization of waste
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) in stone mastic asphalt. Construction
and Building Materials, 36, 984–989.
Al-Abdul Wahhab, H.I., et al., 1995. Adaptation of SHRP performance
based binder specifications to the gulf countries. Proceedings of the 4th
Saudi engineering conference, KAU.
Casey, D., et al., 2008. Development of a recycled polymer modified binder
for use in stone mastic asphalt. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,
52 (10), 1167–1174.
Fang, C., et al., 2013. Aging properties and mechanism of the modified
asphalt by packaging waste polyethylene and waste rubber powder.
Polymers for Advanced Technologies, 24 (1), 51–55.
Fang, C., et al., 2012. Combined modification of asphalt with polyethylene
packaging waste and organophilic montmorillonite. Polymer Testing, 31
(2), 276–281.
Fang, C., et al., 2009. UV-aging resistance of packaging waste pe modified
asphalts. Polymer-Plastics Technology and Engineering, 48 (9), 945–949.
Hafeez, I. and Kamal, M., 2014. Creep compliance: a parameter to predict
rut performance of asphalt binders and mixtures. Arabian Journal for
Science and Engineering, 39 (8), 5971–5978.
Ho, S., et al., 2006. Study of recycled polyethylene materials as asphalt
modifiers. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 33 (8), 968–981.
Huang, Y., Bird, R.N., and Heidrich, O., 2007. A review of the use of recycled
solid waste materials in asphalt pavements. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, 52 (1), 58–73.
Li, Q., et al., 2011. Mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide
(MEPDG): a bird’s-eye view. Journal of Modern Transportation, 19 (2),
114–133.
Navarro, F.J., et al., 2009. Bitumen modification with reactive and non-
reactive (virgin and recycled) polymers: a comparative analysis. Journal
of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 15 (4), 458–464.
Punith, V. and Veeraragavan, A., 2011. Behavior of reclaimed polyethylene
modified asphalt cement for paving purposes. Journal of Materials in
Civil Engineering, 23 (6), 833–845.
Rahman, F., et al., 2006. Catalytic processing of waste plastics with/without
petroleum resid—an economic evaluation. Energy Sources, Part A:
Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, 28 (15), 1353–1363.
Singh, B., et al., 2013. Polymer-modified bitumen of recycled LDPE and
maleated bitumen. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 127 (1), 67–78.
Yildirim, Y., Hazlett, D., and Davio, R., 2004. Toner-modified asphalt
demonstration projects. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 42 (3),
295–308.
Zafar, S., 2013. Solid waste management in Saudi Arabia. EcoMena Articles.
Available from: http://www.ecomena.org/solid-waste-management-in-
saudi-arabia/