See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/341978748

Laboratory evaluation of gap graded rubber modified warm mix asphalt

Article in International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology · June 2020

DOI: 10.1007/s42947-020-0317-4

CITATIONS READS

2 188

4 authors, including:

Sai KUBAIR Kota Akshay Waim

BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Shell Technology Centre Bangalore
7 PUBLICATIONS 16 CITATIONS 4 PUBLICATIONS 22 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sridhar Raju
BITS Pilani, Hyderabad
40 PUBLICATIONS 179 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Asphalt Rubber View project

HALF WARM ASPHALT MIXTURE USING POLYMER MODIFIED BITUMEN EMULSIONS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sridhar Raju on 22 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Chinese Society of Pavement Engineering
°Cd
International Journal of
Pavement Research and Technology
Journal homepage: www.springer.com/42947

Laboratory evaluation of gap graded rubber modified warm mix asphalt

Sai Kubaira, Waim Akshay Ravindrab, Sridhar Rajua*, Sham Ravindranathc
a Department of Civil engineering, Birla Institute of Technology & Science, Pilani - Hyderabad Campus, Hyderabad, India
b VNR VJIET, Bachupally, Hyderabad, India
c Department of Polymer and Process Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, India

Received 19 December 2019; received in revised form 14 May 2020; accepted 31 May 2020

Abstract

Crumb Rubber (CR), if used in Gap-graded Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA), forms an excellent splash-&-spray resistant, durable and fatigue resistant HMA
layer. The only drawback is the higher asphalt production temperature due to addition of CR. The higher production temperature can be reduced by using
Warm Mix Additives with only concern being its effect on the performance. The paper contemplates the use of 1.5% Sasobit® wit h a view to achieve similar
or better performance properties at lower mixing temperature. The results indicate an overall improvement in performance (in terms of rutting and fatigue)
in light of the laboratory tests performed. The paper concludes with Gap-graded Warm Mix Asphalt (WMA) as a feasible solution when 1.5% Sasobit® is
used as an additive.

Keywords: Gap graded; Asphalt rubber; Crumb rubber; Warm mix additive; WMA; Aging; fatigue; Rutting; Moisture damage

1. Introduction One of the major drawbacks of using a higher percentage of

The disposal of rubber in an environmentally friendly manner is
by using in the asphalt mixture with improved performance [1-4].
Utilization of crumb rubber in gap graded asphalt mixture helps in
reducing the moisture induced damage in asphalt mixtures [5-7]. It
is challenging to measure the bulk specific gravity of gap graded
asphalt mixtures using the buoyancy balance and without paraffin
coating. Hence, the bulk specific gravity was tested by coating the
gap graded asphalt specimens with Paraffin wax before testing
under the buoyancy balance, by using the automatic vacuum
sealing method, and by using X-ray Tomography to demonstrate
that all the 3 methods showed similar results [8].
Researchers have demonstrated that the gap-graded Asphalt
Rubber (AR) mixtures have higher fatigue life when compared to
dense graded asphalt mixtures due to higher rubber and binder
contents [9-11]. Raad et al. (2001) carried out beam fatigue tests
on the specimens extracted from a 10-year-old pavement and from
the laboratory studies, they have concluded that the fatigue
resistance of gap graded rubber asphalt mixture was better than
dense graded asphalt mixtures due to lesser aging of binder [12].
Venudharan. V et al. [11] from their studies have concluded that it
is more beneficial to use 20% crumb rubber in gap graded asphalt
mixtures than 12% by weight of asphalt binder.
* Corresponding author
E-mail address: sridhar.raju@hyderabad.bits-pilani.ac.in (S. Raju)
Peer review under responsibility of Chinese Society of Pavement
Engineering.
crumb rubber in asphalt mixtures is the increase in mixing
temperature by nearly 30°C (86°F) when compared to asphalt
mixtures without crumb rubber [13]. The mixing temperatures for
asphalt rubber mixtures are in the range of 170 to 180°C (338 to
356°F), with an increase in emission of greenhouse gases [13]. The
increase in mixing temperature releases more volatile gases in to
the atmosphere. In order to reduce the volatile gases, there is a need
to reduce the mixing temperature without compromise in the
workability or performance of the asphalt mixtures. The use of
warm mix technology can help in reducing the harmful emissions
and improve the workability of asphalt mixtures as the mixing
temperature will be lowered by 20 to 30°C [13]. The commonly
used siloxane-based warm mix additives reduce the mixing
temperature but tend to increase the rutting potential of asphalt
mixtures due to reduced short term aging [14-18]. In contrast, the
organic waxes prevent rutting but increases the cracking potential
of asphalt mixtures [19-22].
The warm mix additive, namely, Sasobit®, has proven to be
beneficial in reducing the mixing temperature by up to 20%
without compromise in the workability or performance of the
asphalt mixtures [23]. Sasobit® typically consists of paraffinic
hydrocarbons, which melts above 100°C and improves the
workability of asphalt mixtures at temperatures 20 to 30°C lower
[24]. The stiffness of asphalt binder increases due to the
recrystallization of Sasobit® below 100°C, which in turn resists
permanent deformation at pavement service temperatures.
Sasobit® is generally selected because its melting point is higher
than the pavement service temperature [25,26]. The moisture

ISSN: 1997-1400 DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s42947-020-0317-4

Chinese Society of Pavement Engineering. Production and hosting by Springer Nature
2 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx

induced damage in gap graded AR mixtures with Sasobit® is Table 1

lesser than in dense graded asphalt mixtures [27-29]. D'Angelo et Physical properties of the aggregates.
al. [13], through their field performance studies in France,
Germany, and Norway, have shown that the dense graded asphalt Test description Test method Results
with and without Sasobit® exhibited the same fatigue life [13]. Specific gravity - CA Indian Standard (IS): 2386 2.654
Studies have also demonstrated that there was better fatigue life (Part IV)
with the use of warm mix additives in gap graded mixtures [11,30]. Water absorption (%) Indian Standard (IS): 2386 3.081
The presence of crumb rubber in asphalt mixture results in -CA (Part III)
thicker binder film reducing the aging and oxidation [31]. The Specific gravity - FA Indian Standard (IS): 2386 2.588
crumb rubber particles lesser than 0.6 mm absorbs more oil due to (Part IV)
a larger surface area and enhances the mechanical properties of Water absorption (%) Indian Standard (IS): 2386 0.233
crumb rubber modified binder [32]. On the other hand, with the -FA (Part III)
increase in the size of crumb rubber particles from 0.6 to 2.36 mm, Impact value (%) Indian Standard (IS): 2386 22.0
the absorption rate decreases reducing the efficiency of crumb (Part IV)
rubber particles [16-18]. Abrasion value (%) Indian Standard (IS): 2386 29.0
The study aims at providing a comparative analysis between a (Part IV)
conventional Gap-graded Asphalt Rubber (GGAR) mixture and a Flakiness index (%) Indian Standard (IS): 2386 14.5
GGAR mixture with a WMA additive (prepared at a lower (Part I)
temperature). The study also aims in assessing the effect of asphalt Elongation index (%) Indian Standard (IS): 2386 16.3
mixture properties and performance due to the lowered mixing (Part I)
temperature because of wax-based additive which crystallises at Soundness (%) Indian Standard (IS): 2386 1.4
lower temperatures. (Part V)
[CA: Coarse aggregate (> 4.75 mm) & FA: Fine aggregate (≤ 4.75 mm)].
2. Materials Table 2
Aggregate gradation followed in this study.
2.1. Aggregates
IS sieve size Gap graded asphalt Adopted
The granite aggregates obtained from the Keesara quarry near mixture grading
Hyderabad, India was used in the present study. The physical Limits (%) (%)
properties of the coarse and fine aggregates, conforming to Indian 19.0 mm (3/4 inch) 100 100
Standard: 2386 - Part I, III, IV and V, are given in Table 1 [33-36]. 13.2 mm 80-100 80
The gradation limits for the gap graded asphalt mixtures are given 9.5 mm (3/8 inch) 65-80 65
in Table 2. 4.75 mm (No. 4) 28-42 30
2.36 mm (No. 8) 14-22 16
2.2. Asphalt rubber (AR) binder 1.18 mm (No. 16) -- 5
600 μm (No. 30) -- 3
In the present study, a powdered crumb rubber passing 425 µm 300 μm (No. 50) -- 3
sieve and having a specific gravity of 1.120 was used in place of a 150 μm (No. 100) -- 3
conventionally used 600 µm crumb rubber, for better performance. 75 μm (No. 200) 0-3 3
The asphalt rubber (AR) binder was prepared by blending 20% Table 3
crumb rubber by weight of binder in Viscosity Grade, VG 30 Properties of the base and modified binders.
bitumen at a temperature of 180°C (356°F) for a period of 60
minutes at 1000 rpm using a low-shear, Ika® make, mixer. The Property VG 30 Modified binder as
physical properties of the base binder and the AR binder are given per BIS:15462-2004
in Table 3. The base binder tests conform to BIS:73-2013 [37] BIS:73-2013 Crumb rubber
while the tests carried out on the AR binder conform to BIS:15462- modified asphalt
2004 [38]. The phase separation test in accordance with ASTM Softening point 49.0 71.1
D7173-11 [39], was carried out on the AR binder. The binder was (ring & ball)
found to be homogenous, with the phase separation being within Ductility (cm) 78 -
the specified limits of ± 4°C. Specific gravity 1.02 1.04
Elastic recovery - 69%
2.3. Warm mix additive (WMA) (59°F)
Viscosity at 135°C 4.5 Poise -
In this study, Sasobit® was used as a warm mix additive (WMA). (275°F)
It is a long-chain aliphatic hydrocarbon wax obtained during the Viscosity at 150°C 2.1 Poise 18 Poise
distillation of crude oil. Sasobit® has extremely low viscosity (275°F)
above its melting point of 105C, which helps in improving the Phase separation test as per ASTM D7173-11
workability of asphalt mixtures even at lower mixing temperatures. Softening point°C - 70.8 (161.24)
It starts recrystallizing below 100C and forms a lattice structure, (°F) top - 72.8 (163.04)
which increases the stiffness and stability of asphalt mixtures at Softening point°C
pavement service temperature [26]. In the present study, the (°F) bottom
 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx 3

temperature vs. viscosity plots were used to determine the Series 2 (MS 2) and the details are given in section 4.1. The tests
optimum content of Sasobit® and is discussed in section 2.3.1. on gap graded AR mixtures involved binder tests and the mixture
Also, the studies suggest that 1.5% Sasobit (by the weight of binder) tests. In the binder tests apart from penetration, softening point,
can be an optimum WMA content [15,22,40,41-45]. phase separation, the MSCR test was also carried out to determine
the rheological behaviour of AR binder due to addition of 1.5%
2.3.1. Optimization of Sasobit® content
Table 4
The temperature-viscosity relationship was plotted using
Specific heat measures (Cp) for constituents involved in asphalt
Brookfield’s Viscometer to determine the mixing temperature of
production.
the AR binder with the Sasobit®. The temperature corresponding
to the viscosity of 170 ± 20 cP was set as mixing temperature. The Latent and specific heat
Sasobit® was varied from 0% to 3% with an increment of 0.5% measures
and a relationship between viscosity and temperature was drawn at Aggregates 0.8037 kJ/kg/°C
each WMA content. The energy and fuel requirement were Bitumen 2.093 kJ/kg/°C
calculated for each of the combination. The energy consumption Rubber 2.068 kJ/kg/°C
for the asphalt production at each percentage of WMA was Water 4.185 kJ/kg/°C
computed by using the latent and specific heat measurements given Latent change in Vaporization 2.256 kJ/kg
in the Table 4 [46,47]. The convection loss due to flow of dry air [Water]
in the dryer and the loss due to irradiation were calculated. The Sasobit® 2.1 kJ/ kg/°C
cost of fuel was assumed to be $0.65/litre and the cost of Sasobit Latent heat of fusion [Sasobit] 142 kJ/kg
was assumed to be $2,000/Tonne. Table 5 shows the energy
requirements per tonne of asphalt production. The percent 6.0
reduction in CO2 emission due to increase in Sasobit content is
CO2 Produced (kg/tonne)
given in row 13 of Table 5. The addition of 1.5% Sasobit has 5.8
resulted in 7.9% reduction of CO2 emission, whilst the reduction is
10.1% with 3% Sasobit. Fig. 1 also shows that the there is no 5.6
significant difference in the CO2 emission with increase in Sasobit
from 1.5% to 3%, indicating that 1.5% can be considered as an 5.4
optimum WMA content.
5.2
3. Experimental Plan
5.0
The experimental plan for the following study is shown in Fig. 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
2. After arriving at the optimum Sasobit® content, the Optimum Sasobit dosage (%)
Binder Content (%) was determined using the Marshall method of
mix design in accordance with the Asphalt Institute’s Manual Fig. 1. Variation of CO2 production with increase in Sasobit
content.

Table 5
Energy requirement per tonne of asphalt production.
Sr. Particulars Sasobit Content added in excess to AR binder
No. +0% +0.5% +1% +1.5% 2% +2.5% +3%
1. Mixing Temperature at 170 ± 20 cP 180°C 175°C 170°C 165°C 163°C 161°C 160°C
2. Ambient Temperature 30°C
3. Heating of Sasobit® (GJ/tonne)
Heating in Solid Phase - 2.36E-05 4.72E-05 7.08E-05 9.45E-05 1.18E-04 1.41E-04
Latent Heat @ 75°C - 3.55E-04 7.1E-04 1.07E-03 1.42E-03 1.78E-03 2.13E-03
Heating in Liquid Phase - 5.09E-05 9.76E-05 1.4E-04 1.83E-04 2.23E-04 2.61E-04
4. Specific Heat during Asphalt 0.126 0.121 0.118 0.115 0.114 0.111 0.109
Production (GJ/tonne)
5. Losses due to convection (Stack 4.88E-04
Exhaust) and Irradiation (GJ/tonne)
6. Correction for Moisture (GJ/Ton)
Heating of Moisture 5.56E-03
Latent heat (Vaporization) 4.28E-05
7. Total Heat Measures (GJ/tonne) 0.132 0.127 0.125 0.122 0.121 0.119 0.118
8. Fuel-Oil Consumption (Litre/tonne) 3.29 3.15 3.10 3.03 3.01 2.96 2.93
9. Cost of Fuel Incurred ($/tonne) 2.13 2.04 2.01 1.96 1.95 1.93 1.91
10. Cost of Sasobit per Ton asphalt - 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
production ($/tonne)
12. CO2 production (kg/tonne) 5.70 5.46 5.38 5.25 5.23 5.17 5.12
13. CO2 reduction (%) - 4.2% 5.6% 7.9% 8.3% 9.2% 10.1%
4 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx

Table 6
Volumetric properties of GGAR-HMA.
S. Binder Voids in Voids filled Marshall
No content mineral with Stability
(%) aggregate asphalt
(VMA), % (VFA), % (KN)
1 6.2 20.52 68.6 4.97
2 6.5 20.63 71.28 5.48
3 6.8 20.65 74.4 6.02
4 7.1 20.79 76.93 6.36
5 7.4 21.31 77.66 5.74
Table 7
Volumetric properties of GGAR-WMA.
S. Binder Voids in Voids filled Marshall
No content mineral with Stability
(%) aggregate asphalt
(VMA), % (VFA), % (KN)
1 6.2 20.42 69.2 5.14
2 6.5 20.54 72.03 5.78
Fig. 2. Experimental Plan for the study. 3 6.8 20.63 74.8 6.19
4 7.1 20.68 76.63 6.48
Sasobit and its effect on the rutting parameter termed as, non- 5 7.4 21.75 77.9 6.16
recoverable Creep Compliance, Jnr. The mixture tests involved
drain-down test, Cantabro abrasion test, moisture damage test 2.146 7.00
(Indirect Tensile Strength Ratio), rutting test (Hamburg Wheel 2.144 6.00
Tracking Test) and fatigue test (Indirect Tensile Fatigue test). The
Bulk Specific Gravity

2.142
drain-down test was carried out to evaluate the extent of resistance Bulk specific gravity 5.00

Air Voids (%)

2.140 Air Voids
offered by the mixture to retain its binder at the mixing temperature, 4.00
2.138
whilst the Cantabro test was carried out to determine the degree of
disintegration due to abrasive action of moving tyres. The moisture 2.136 3.00
y = -0.02x2 + 0.2786x + 1.1684
damage test was to evaluate the effect water on a gap graded AR 2.134
2.00
mixture with and without Sasobit. The Hamburg Wheel Tracking 2.132
2.130 1.00
Test (HWTT) was carried out at 50°C to evaluate rutting potential
of the gap graded AR mixtures, whilst the Indirect Tensile Fatigue 2.128 0.00
Test (ITFT) was carried out to assess the effect of Sasobit® on the 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5
fatigue life. The ITFT samples were divided in two subsets, one Binder Content (%)
subset was tested after demoulding the specimens, whilst the other Fig. 3. Binder content vs. air voids and bulk specific gravity
subset was tested after accelerated aging for 5 days in a hot air (GGAR-HMA).
oven at 85°C with oxygen circulation. The 3D Tomography was
carried out to assess the distribution of Crumb Rubber in the gap
graded AR mixture. 2.144 7
2.142 6
Bulk Specific Gravity

4. Mixture design and characterization

2.140 5
Air Voids (%)

4.1. Design of gap graded asphalt mixture. 2.138 4

2.136 3
The Marshall method of mixture design, in accordance with
Asphalt Institute’s Manual Series-2 (MS-2) and Indian Roads 2.134 2
Congress’ Special Publication (IRC:SP:107-2015) [48-49], was 2.132 Bulk… 1
adopted to determine the Optimum Binder Content (OBC) for a 2.130 Air Voids 0
target air void content of 5% (subject to fulfilment of minimum
6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5
VMA value of 19%). The specimens were prepared with 75 blows Binder Content (%)
on both the face of the specimens and were extruded after
overnight curing. The Bulk Specific Gravity (G mb) was determined Fig. 4. Binder content vs. air voids and bulk specific gravity
by adopting the Wax Immersion Method [50], and the volumetric (GGAR-WMA).
properties were computed by considering the specific gravity of
paraffin wax as 0.92 at 25°C. The OBC for GGAR-HMA and At the target air void content of 5%, the OBC for GGAR-HMA
GGAR-WMA were determined, and the results are shown in and GGAR-WMA were 7.03% and 7.02% respectively and was
Tables 6 and 7 and is displayed in Fig. 3 and 4 respectively. fulfilling the requirements laid down in the IRC: SP:107 – 2015. It
 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx
was observed that the Marshall Stability values (kN) for GGAR-
WMA mixtures were marginally higher than GGAR-HMA
mixtures. Though, the Marshall stability test was not a specific
requirement for the gap graded AR mixture, the Marshall stability
tests were carried out to ensure that the mixture meets the
minimum Marshall stability value of 5.50 kN specified in the
Indian Roads Congress guidelines.
5. Test methods
5.1. Drain down test
Gap-graded mixtures, owing to higher binder content, are prone
to binder drain-down which may result in fat spot formation on the
surface. The drain-down test was carried out in accordance with
ASTM D 6390-11 to determine the extent of drain-down during
the conveyance and placement of the asphalt mixture at higher
temperatures [51]. The test involves the preparation of
uncompacted asphalt mixture at OBC (%) which is then transferred
to a wire basket. The wire basket is hung in a draft oven at a mixing
temperature (corresponding to the viscosity of 170 ± 20 cP) for an
hour. The binder loss in the uncompacted mixture was computed
using the formula given in Eq. (1) and has to be less than the
maximum permissible value of 0.3%.
𝑊3 −𝑊2
Drain-down (%)= × 100 (1)
𝑊2 −𝑊1
where, W1 = weight of empty wire basket; W2 = weight of wire
basket plus sample before testing; W3 = weight of wire basket plus
sample after testing;
In the following test, the GGA HMA and GGAR WMA were
subjected to test temperatures of 180°C and 165°C respectively.
The uncompacted samples were kept for an hour at the room
temperature before weighing (W3).
5.2. Cantabro abrasion
The Cantabro Abrasion test, in accordance with ASTM
C131/C131M-14, was carried out on the gap graded AR specimens
[52]. The Cantabro Abrasion test is generally carried out on open
graded mixtures. In this test, the compacted asphalt specimen was
first weighed (P1) and placed in the Los Angeles rattler without the
charge of steel balls. The machine was rotated for 300 revolutions
at a speed of 30 to 33 rpm, and then the asphalt specimen was
weighed (P2) to measure the weight loss due to abrasion. The
percentage loss due to abrasion (P) was calculated according to Eq.
(2), and the recommended maximum permitted abrasion loss value
for freshly compacted OGFC specimen was 25%.
P = 100 (P1 – P2)/ P1 (2)
where, P = Percentage abrasion loss; P1 = Weight of the specimen
before testing; P2 = Weight of the specimen after Cantabro
abrasion.
5.3. Hamburg wheel tracking test (HWTT)
The HWTT was carried out as per AASHTO T324 to study the
progression of rut depth with each passing cycle of loading for
comparative assessment with other types of mixtures [53]. The test
involves the preparation of a dumbbell-shaped asphalt specimen at
OBC (%) for a target air void content of 6.5±0.5%. The specimen
5
was subjected to water submersion with a test temperature of 50°C.
The termination of the test was subjected to the accomplishment
of terminal rut depth (14 mm) or successful completion of 20,000th
loading pass. The rut depth corresponding to the 20,000th loading
pass was reported as the final rut depth and based on the
differences, the mixtures were deemed as rut-susceptible or rut-
resistant. The rut depth, corresponding to each passing cycle, was
plotted to determine the extent of stripping and the progression of
the creep phase.
5.4. Multi-stress creep recovery (MSCR)
MSCR binder test, an improvement over the high-temperature
Superpave binder grading specification, was performed per
AASHTO TP70 [54,55]. The test is used to evaluate the rutting
parameter of the binder by recording the per cent recovery (R%)
and non-recoverable creep compliance per unit shear stress (Jnr) at
two stress levels, i.e., 0.1 kPa and 3.2 kPa. The Jnr is determined
by recording the non-recoverable strain and dividing it by the
stress applied (0.1 kPa or 3.2 kPa). These two parameters, namely
R% and Jnr, serve as an indicator of the mixture’s ability to be
resilient under heavy loading which leads to permanent
deformation. While the Jnr parameter serves as an indicator of
rutting resistance, R% indicates the degree of compatibility and
blending of polymer in the modified binder [56]. The J nr difference
is computed to determine the difference between two different
creep compliance values at two different stress levels. Lower Jnr
difference values are desirable as higher value indicates higher
sensitivity to stress levels. Based on the Jnr and Jnr difference.
values, the grading of the binder is assigned [45]. The test was
performed to evaluate the effect on the AR binder due to the
addition of Sasobit®. The samples were subjected to Short-term
ageing before testing for a temperature range of 52°C-76°C at an
increment of 6°C.
5.5. Moisture damage analysis
The Indirect Tensile Strength Ratio (ITSR) test was carried out
in accordance with AASHTO T-283 to determine the extent of
damage caused due to presence of moisture, thereby determining
the resistance offered by the asphalt against the extreme weather
conditions. The test involves preparing the cylindrical specimens
at OBC for an air void content of 7±0.5%, and dividing them into
two subsets. The first subset was tested at 25 ⁰C without any prior
conditioning, while the second subset was conditioned prior to
testing. The conditioning involved a16-hour freeze cycle at -18°C
followed by a 24-hour thaw cycle at 60°C. The samples were
partially saturated with water and then conditioned for 24-hour
freeze cycle followed by the placing the samples in water bath at
60°C for 24 hours for the thaw cycle. This was followed by 2-hour
secondary conditioning to stabilize the conditioned samples to the
test temperature of 25°C. The testing involved placing two loading
strips (with sample sandwiched between them) and loading at a
rate of 50 mm/min. The ITS and ITSR was determined by using
Eq. (3) and (4) respectively.
2𝑃
𝐼𝑇𝑆 = (3)
𝜋𝐷𝑡
where, P is the maximum load (kN); D is the diameter of the
specimen (mm); t is the thickness of the specimen (mm); ITS =
Indirect Tensile Strength value (kPa).
6 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx
𝑇𝑆𝑅 =
𝐼𝑇𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡
𝑋100 (4)
𝐼𝑇𝑆𝑑𝑟𝑦
where, TSR is Tensile Strength Ratio; ITSwet is conditioned
specimen;ITSdry is the unconditioned specimen.
5.6. Tomography studies using 3D X-Ray images
To further understand the role of AR in the gap graded specimens,
a 3D X-Ray tomography study was carried out with the technical
support from APM Technologies, Bangalore. The distribution of
binder-filled voids (binder pockets) in both the mixtures (GGAR-
HMA) and (GGAR-WMA) was assessed and the size distribution
of the binder pocket was compared to observe the effect of low-
temperature compaction on the binder-pocket distribution. A low-
temperature compaction is analogous to low-compaction efforts,
which can account for higher amount of larger binder pockets in
the mixture. The Image processing was done using ImageJ
software. Based on the threshold analysis, the area of the binder
pockets was computed, and the size distribution was plotted in the
histogram.
5.7. Indirect tensile fatigue testing (ITFT)
The ITFT test was conducted in accordance with EN:12697-24E
to determine the fatigue life (Nf) of asphalt mixture under the
application of cyclic loading [57]. The cylindrical asphalt
specimens, prepared at OBC and a target air void content of 7%,
were subjected to cyclic loading till the failure (splitting) of the
specimen or the fulfilment of termination criteria. The cyclic
loading involved a haversine loading with a loading period of 0.1
second followed by a rest period of 0.9 second. The initial resilient
modulus was recorded at the 100th loading cycle, reduced with
each passing cycle and the test was subjected to termination till the
failure of the specimen and the corresponding number of cycle was
reported as Nf. The test was a stress-controlled fatigue test
(constant stress amplitude) and was carried out at three different
stress levels of 100, 200 and 300 kPa. The Initial strain (µε) was
recorded at 100th cycle, correlated with the Nf to determine the ‘A’
and ‘B’ parameters in Eq. (5):
Nf = A(1/𝜀)^𝐵 (5)
For a higher fatigue life, the ‘A’ parameter should be higher
while the ‘B’ parameter should be as low as possible. Higher ‘B’
parameter also serves as an indicator of higher strain sensitivity
which indicates a rapid deterioration in fatigue life with low/steady
increase of strain levels in pavement.
In the following test, the gap-graded cylindrical specimens were
divided in two subsets. The first subset was tested without ageing
while the second subset was tested after subjecting to an
accelerated long term aging in a draft oven for 5 days at 85°C. The
ageing was carried out in accordance with AASHTO R30 [58], and
the fatigue test was carried out at a test temperature of 20°C.
6. Results and discussions
6.1. Drain down test
With a binder content of 7%, there was a higher possibility of
binder drain-down. The drain down test temperature for GGAR-
HMA and GGAR-WMA were determined from the Brookfield
viscometer studies. The Brookfield test was carried out for
determining the mixing temperature and also to arrive at the
Optimum Sasobit content (%) corresponding to a viscosity of 170
± 20 cPoise. Based on the results, the drain down test temperature
was set as 180°C and 165°C for GGAR-HMA and GGAR-WMA
respectively. Fig. 5 presents the drain-down values of GGAR
mixtures. The average drain-down values for the GGAR-WMA
and GGAR-HMA were 0.07% and 0.13% respectively. The drain-
down values were lower than the maximum permissible limit of
0.3%. Although the drain-down values for GGAR-WMA were
marginally lower than GGAR-HMA, but with a wide variation in
the values.
7. Cantabro abrasion test
The Cantabro abrasion test was conducted for both the mixture
types, namely, GGAR-HMA and GGAR-WMA, to determine the
net loss in the asphalt specimen due to the abrasion caused in the
rattler and the results have been shown in Fig. 6. It can be observed
that the abrasion loss (%) subdued with increase in binder content
(%). Improvement against abrasion can be related to increased
bonding due to increase in Binder content. The reduction of
abrasion loss was steady with increase in binder content (%) while
the losses in abrasion in GGAR-WMA were marginally lower than
that of GGAR-HMA. This was due to reduced thermal degradation
of AR binder at a lower mixing temperature and the said reason
can be validated with ITFT test results.
7.1. Hamburg wheel tracking test (HWTT)
The HWTT rut test results are shown in Fig. 7 and the details are
given in Table 8. The initial jump in the curve was due to post
0.30
Percent drain-down (%)
GGAR-HMA GGAR-WMA
0.20
0.10
0.00
Mixture Type
Fig. 5. Drain-down values for GGAR mixtures.
4
GGAR-HMA
Cantabro Abrasion Loss
GGAR-WMA
3.5
(%)
3
2.5
2
6 6.5 7 7.5 8
Binder (%)
Fig. 6. Cantabro Abrasion loss at varying binder contents for gap
graded AR specimens.
 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx 7

8 mixing temperature. Thus, it can be concluded that Sasobit® was

7 responsible for improvement in resistance against permanent
6 deformation.
5
Rut Depth (mm)

7.2. MSCR Test

4
3 From the Table 9 and Table 10, it can be observed that the Jnr
2 GGAR-HMA difference for WMA-AR binder was more than that of
conventional AR binder. Higher Jnr values were observed due to
1 GGAR-WMA
higher yielding at higher stress level for AR-WMA binder. Thus,
0 it can be concluded that WMA-AR binder was more sensitive to
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 change in stress level and the creep compliance was higher at
Number of Cycles higher stress level. Although, the Jnr at 3.2 kPa for WMA-AR
Fig. 7. Resistance to plastic deformation. binder was lesser than that of AR binder at all the test temperatures.
Also, the R% of WMA-AR binder was greater than AR binder
at both the stress levels indicating that elastic recovery of AR
compaction followed by a steady slope which indicates the
binder was better when mixing temperature was lowered with
beginning of a primary creep phase. Absence of stripping indicates
Sasobit®. Therefore, lower mixing temperature was responsible
better resistance to moisture damage and thus, eliminates the
for retaining the elastic properties of Crumb Rubber by avoiding
possibility of secondary creep phase post stripping phase. The
the possible high-temperature thermal degradation of CR in AR
creep slope signifies the progression rate of rutting with each
binder.
loading cycle whilst a steeper slope of consolidation indicates
The higher Jnr difference (in AR-WMA) indicates an exponential
presence of excess air voids in the mixtures which results in
variation in the creep compliance with a steady increase in stress
densification of the mixtures below the wheel track and side-hump
level. The lower Jnr values at both stress levels for AR-WMA were
formations.
lower than AR binder, and this can be related to an overall rut depth
The results indicate a lesser terminal rut depth for GGAR-WMA
in the gap graded AR mixture. The AR binder with WMA showed
when compared to GGAR-HMA mixtures. This signifies a better
higher recovery, indicating a better polymer matrix. From this it
rut resistance offered by the mixture with WMA additive when
may be inferred that the AR binder with WMA undergoes lesser
compared with conventional gap graded HMA mixtures. The
thermal degradation of crumb rubber as the mixing temperature is
initiation of primary creep phase begins at 1500th cycle for both the
15 C lower than the conventional AR binder.
types of mixtures and the Creep Slope (CS) for GGAR-WMA and
Thus, it can be concluded that AR-WMA (heated at lower
GGAR-HMA are 0.16 mm/1000 passes, and 0.17 mm/1000 passes
temperature) was better at resisting rut (owing to lower Jnr values)
respectively. Lesser CS indicates slow progression of rut
formation with respect to increase in loading cycle (traffic). and better at resilience (owing to higher R%) when compared to
Absence of stripping or Stripping Slope (SS) indicates a better conventional AR binder.
resistance to moisture damage at higher pavement temperature,
and thus validates the findings in the ITSR test. 7.3. Moisture damage test
It is worth noting that the rutting plots for both the mixtures are
almost similar, with equal CS and with absence of SS, with only The ITSR test for both the mixtures, i.e., GGAR-WMA and
difference being the behaviour of the surging phase of the curve, GGAR-HMA, are shown in Fig. 8 and the details are given in
i.e., the primary consolidation phase. While the air void content Table 11. A higher air void content allows for higher amount of
(7%) were same for both the mixtures, the only difference was the water to accumulate in the voids which freezes and expands during
addition of 1.5% Sasobit® and a subsequent reduction in the the freeze cycle followed by expansion due to vaporization during

Table 8
Results for HWTT (rutting).
Mixture Type No. of Samples Average Rutting after 20000 cycles Std. Deviation Co-efficient of variation
(mm) (mm) (%)
GGAR-HMA 3 6.79 1.63 24.01
GGAR-WMA 3 5.87 0.79 13.46
Table 9
MSCR test results for WMA-AR binder and AR binder.
Temperature in°C WMA-AR Binder AR Binder
Jnr (1/kPa) R% Jnr (1/kPa) R%
0.1 kPa 3.2 kPa 0.1 kPa 3.2 kPa 0.1 kPa 3.2 kPa 0.1 kPa 3.2 kPa
52 0.03 0.10 78.05 43.12 0.25 0.32 36.89 22.61
58 0.09 0.35 71.98 23.17 0.69 0.97 28.53 9.87
64 0.44 1.30 48.97 7.17 1.83 2.54 19.05 3.17
70 2.13 4.03 21.13 0.91 4.31 6.02 11.69 0.00
76 6.34 9.81 8.60 0.00 9.59 12.65 4.57 0.00
8 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx

the thaw cycle at higher temperature (60 C) to further the damage.
Table 10
Thus, Gap-graded mixtures have lower ITS values when compared
MSCR test results.
to dense-graded mixtures.
Temperature in°C WMA-AR Binder AR Binder From the test results, it is seen that with ITS values of GGAR-
Jnr Diff. (%) Jnr Diff. (%) WMA are marginally higher than the GGAR-HMA. Both the
52 237.66 31.40 mixtures had higher ITSR values, which indicates better resistance
58 286.19 39.96 against moisture damage that can be attributed to thicker AR
64 192.38 39.33 binder present in the mixture. The higher ITSR values can be
70 89.09 39.83 correlated with the HWTT results, where moisture damage was at
76 54.69 31.95 its minimal due to absence of stripping.
Thus, it can be concluded that AR binder had a better resistance
Table 11 against moisture damage due to thicker binder film which ensures
The average dry and wet ITS values. that the voids are uniformly filled for lesser moisture retention,
Mixture Dry Wet ITS (MPa) which subsequently leads to lesser damage. The distribution of AR
ITS 24 Hours 48 Hours (CR) can be better visualized with a 3D Tomography study as
(MPa) (ITSR, %) (ITSR, %) presented in section 5.6.
Gap-Graded HMA 0.661 0.654 (98.9%) 0.625 (95.6%)
Gap-Graded WMA 0.674 0.659 (97.8%) 0.627 (93.0%) 7.4. Tomography studies

Dry ITS (MPa) Figs. 9(a) and 9(b) represent the 3D Tomography images of the
0.70 Wet ITS (MPa)-24 hrs soaking surfaces of the GGAR-HMA and GGAR-WMA, respectively. The
Wet ITS (MPa)-48 hrs soaking processing and analysis of the image was done using ImageJ
Indirect Tensile Strength,

software. The said images were converted to 8-bit greyscale for

0.65
threshold analysis. The threshold analysis was used to compute the
binder-pockets (the voids filled by bitumen) and their respective
0.60
MPa

areas. The threshold analyses are presented in Figs. 9(c) and 9(d)
and the histogram analyses for both mixtures are shown in Figs.
0.55 9(e) and 9(f) respectively. The histogram for both the mixtures
follow a similar distribution with almost 42% of binder-pockets
0.50 falling in the range of 0 – 0.378 mm2 (least size) and the next 16%
Gap Graded Asphalt Gap Graded Asphalt + falling in the range of 0.378 – 0.685 mm2. Thus, it can be
Warm mix additive concluded that addition of Sasobit® accounted for similar binder
pocket distribution/ compaction effort even after compaction at
Fig. 8. Indirect tensile strength ratios for 24 and 48 hrs of soaking. lower temperatures.

(a) (e)
(c)

(b) (d) (f)

Fig. 9. (a) 3D Tomography Image of GGAR-HMA, (b) 3D Tomography Image of GGAR-WMA, (c) Threshold analysis for area-
computation of binder pockets in GGAR-HMA, (d) Threshold analysis for area-computation of binder pockets in GGAR-WMA, (e)
Histogram of bitumen-void areas in GGAR-HMA, and (f) Histogram of bitumen-void areas in GGAR-WMA.
 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx 9

7.5. Indirect tensile fatigue testing (ITFT) with and without aging
The ITFT test results are shown in Figs. 10 and 11 while the
fatigue equations are shown in Tables 12 and 13. Higher ‘B’
parameter accounts for speedy deterioration of Nf with increase in
strain levels. With first subset (unaged), the ‘B’ parameter of the
GGAR-WMA was lesser than that of GGAR-HMA mixtures
indicating a lesser strain sensitivity for mixtures with WMA
additive. This can be attributed to reduced mixing temperature
which was consequential for reduced thermal degradation of the
AR binder.
Post ageing, the absolute value of ‘B’ parameter increased for
both the mixture types, indicating an increased strain sensitivity.
Figs. 12 and 13 represent the variation of strains with respect to
1000 GGAR-HMA
stress levels in GGA-HMA and GGAR-WMA mixtures
respectively (for both the subsets). Reduction in slope of the lines
(post ageing) indicates reduced strain response with respect to
increase in stress levels due to stiffening of asphalt.
While both the mixtures were aged under similar conditions, the
stiffening/embrittlement of GGAR-HMA samples was higher
which caused a slightly higher reduction in Nf at higher strains.
This can be validated in the 5th and 6th column of Table 13 where
the Nf of GGAR-HMA was higher than its counterpart (GGAR-
WMA) at 100 µε, which got lesser than the other with increase in
strain to 150 µε. Thus, it can be concluded that a thermally
degraded AR binder deteriorates faster than the AR binder mixture
which was produced at lower temperature.
160 GGAR-HMA (Unaged)
GGAR-HMA (Aged)
GGAR-HMA Linear (GGAR-HMA (Unaged))
120 Linear (GGAR-HMA (Aged))

Initial Strain (µε)

y = 13153x-0.532 GGAR-WMA
Power (GGAR-HMA)
Initial Strain (µε)

Power (GGAR-WMA)
80

40
GGAR-WMA
y = 14358x-0.546
0
10 100 200 300
1000 10000 100000 Stress Levels
No. of Cycles (Nf)
Fig. 12. Strains produced at applied Stress levels for GGAR-HMA
Fig. 10. Indirect tensile fatigue testing of unaged specimens. (aged and unaged).

1000 GGAR-HMA 160

GGAR-HMA GGAR WMA (Unaged)
GGAR-WMA GGAR WMA (Aged)
y = 5397.8x-0.444 Power (GGAR-HMA) Linear (GGAR WMA (Unaged))
Initial Strain (µε)
Initial Strain (µε)

Power (GGAR-WMA) 120 Linear (GGAR WMA (Aged))

80

GGAR-WMA 40
y = 9128.8x-0.498
10 0
1000 10000 100000 100 200 300
No. of Cycles (Nf) Stress Levels

Fig. 11. Indirect tensile fatigue testing of aged specimens. Fig. 13. Strains produced at applied Stress levels for GGAR-WMA
(aged and unaged).

Table 12 8. Conclusions
ITFT results of unaged gap graded and dense graded asphalt
specimens. From the study, the following conclusions can be drawn:
B 1. Use of 1.5% Sasobit has resulted in decrease of around 8%
Mixture Type Nf =A(1/Ɛ0) Nf @ Nf @
CO2 emission. The reduction in CO2 emission is marginal
(Unaged) A B R2 Ɛ0=100µε Ɛ0=150µε
with the increase in Sasobit® from 1.5 to 3.0%. Hence,
GGAR-HMA 1e+07 1.568 0.83 7311 3872 1.5% Sasobit was considered as the optimum WMA
GGAR-WMA 1e+07 1.549 0.85 7980 4258 content.
Table 13 2. The drain-down values were marginally lower for
ITFT results of aged gap graded and dense graded asphalt Sasobit® added gap grade HMA with much variation in
specimens. results. Hence, it can have concluded that there is no
significant effect on the drain down reduction upon
Mixture Type Nf =A(1/Ɛ0)B Nf @ Nf @ Sasobit® addition.
(Aged) A B R2 Ɛ0=100µε Ɛ0=150µε 3. Lower Cantabro losses for GGAR-WMA suggest a better
GGAR-HMA 3e+07 1.802 0.80 7467 3596 aggregate-binder bonding. This can be related to the lower
GGAR-WMA 1e+07 1.58 0.78 6918 3646
10 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx
mixing temperature which reduced the thermal degradation
of the AR binder which had a higher content (20%) of CR.
4. While both the mixtures had similar gradation, binder
content and air voids, a subdued consolidation phase
existed for GGAR mixtures with Sasobit®. This indicates
an involvement of Sasobit® in resistance against the
permanent deformation. This can be related to decreased
mixing temperature which subsequently led to better
resilience in the AR binder. Although, the resilience
subdued with each loading cycle, the creep slope in the
steady creep phase for both the mixtures was almost
similar.
5. The MSCR test further validated the conclusion on the use
of WMA for rut resistant gap-graded AR mixture. It can be
concluded that the Sasobit® is effective in increasing the
blending efficiency of crumb rubber in AR binder by
improving the elastic recovery (R%) while decreasing the
overall rut depth owing to the lower Jnr value. The only
disadvantage
6. is the stress-sensitivity of the WMA-AR binder due to
higher Jnr difference.
7. Both the mixtures had higher resistance against moisture
damage with almost 95% retention of strength even after
getting subjected to extreme conditions. This was also
observed in the HWTT rut test where the stripping phase
was absent (indicating no moisture damage). This can be
attributed to thicker binder film offered by the AR binder
which was consequential in improved bonding.
8. Distribution of AR binder can be visualized in the 3D
Tomography studies where both the mixtures show a
similar distribution of binder-pockets. This ensures a
similar degree of compaction at lower temperatures when
1.5% Sasobit was added.
9. Embrittlement of a gap-graded mixture (GGAR-HMA)
with an already thermal degraded AR binder (during
mixing) fared a lesser fatigue life post long-term ageing.
This signifies the importance of having lesser mixing (pre-
heating) temperature when AR binder in involved.
References
[1] S.M. Bertollo, L.B. Bernucci, J.L. Fernandes, L.M. Leite,
Mechanical Properties of Asphalt Mixtures Using Recycled
Tire Rubber Produced in Brazil—A Laboratory Evaluation,
Proceedings of 83rd TRB Annual Meeting, Washington DC,
2004.
[2] K.E, Kaloush, M. Witczak, A.C. Sotil, Laboratory evaluation
of asphalt rubber mixtures using the dynamic modulus (E*)
test, presented at the 82nd TRB Annual Meeting,
Washington DC, 2003.
[3] C.T. Chiu, L.C. Lu, A laboratory study on stone matrix
asphalt using ground tire rubber, Constr. Buil. Mater. 21 (5)
(2007) 1027-1033.
https://doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.02.005
[4] M. N. Partl, E. Pasquini, F. Canestrari, A. Virgili, Analysis
of water and thermal sensitivity of open graded asphalt
rubber mixtures, Constr. Buil. Mater. 24 (3) (2010) 283-291.
https://doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.08.041
[5] A. Kumar, R. Choudhary, P. S. Kandhal, A. Julaganti, O. P.
Behera, A. Singh, R. Kumar, Fatigue characterisation of
modified asphalt binders containing warm mix asphalt
additives, Road Mater. Pavement Des. 21 (2) (2020) 519-541.
https://doi:10.1080/14680629.2018.1507921
[6] I. M. A. Abuawad, I. L. Al-Qadi, J. S. Trepanier, Mitigation
of moisture damage in asphalt concrete: Testing techniques
and additives/modifiers effectiveness, Constr. Buil. Mater.
84 (2015) 437-443.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.03.001
[7] K. Kaloush, G. B. Way, H. Zhu, Properties of crumb rubber
concrete, Transp. Res. Rec. 1914 (1) (2005) 8-14.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198105191400102
[8] Y. Zhang, Z. Leng, Z. Dong, Z. Liu, Z. Zhang, Z. Tan,
Performance verification of various bulk density
measurement methods for open- and gap graded asphalt
mixtures using X-ray computed tomography, Constr. Buil.
Mater. 158 (2018) 855-863.
https://doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.10.090
[9] G. King, R.D. Pavlovich, A.L.E. Texas, P. Kandhal,
Additives in asphalt. (Asociación Mexicana del Asfalto, A.C,
1999)
http://www.amaac.org.mx/archivos/eventos/1cma_1999/31.
pdf. Accessed 28 March 2019.
[10] V. Venudharan, K. P. Biligiri, J. B. Sousa, G. B. Way,
Asphalt-rubber gap graded mixture design practices: a state-
of-the-art research review and future perspective, Road
Mater. Pavement Des. 18 (3) (2016) 730-752.
https://doi:10.1080/14680629.2016.1182060
[11] N. Saboo, P. A Kumar, study on creep and recovery behavior
of asphalt binders, Constr. Buil. Mater. 96 (2015) 632-640.
https://doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.08.078
[12] L. Raad, S. Saboundjian, G. Minassian, Field Aging Effects
on Fatigue of Asphalt Concrete and Asphalt-Rubber
Concrete, Transp. Res. Rec. 1767 (1) (2001) 126-134.
https://doi:10.3141/1767-16.
[13] J. A. D'Angelo, E. E. Harm, J. C. Bartoszek, G. L.
Baumgardner, M. R. Corrigan, J. E. Cowsert, T. P. Harman,
M. Jamshidi, H. W. Jones, D. E. Newcomb, B. D. Prowell,
R. A. Sines, B. A. Yeaton, Warm-Mix Asphalt : European
Practice, Washington, (National Transportation Library,
2008). https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/772. Accessed 15
June 2019.
[14] F. Xiao, S. N. Amirkhanian, Laboratory investigation of
moisture damage in rubberised asphalt mixtures containing
reclaimed asphalt pavement, Inter. J. Pavement Eng. 10 (5)
(2009) 319-328. https://doi:10.1080/10298430802169432
[15] M. Fakhri, A. R. Ghanizadeh, H. Omrani, Comparison of
Fatigue Resistance of HMA and WMA Mixtures Modified
by SBS, Proc. Soci. Behavioral Sci. 104 (2013) 168–177.
https://doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.109
[16] Z. Hasan, B. Hamid, I. Amir, N. Danial, Long term
performance of warm mix asphalt versus hot mix asphalt, J.
Central South Univer. 20 (1) (2013) 256-266.
https://doi:10.1007/s11771-013-1483-1
[17] A. Vargas-Nordcbeck, D. H. Timm, Rutting characterization
of warm mix asphalt and high RAP mixtures, Road Mater.
Pavement Des. 13(sup1) (2012) 1-20.
https://doi:10.1080/14680629.2012.657042
[18] F. M. Nejad, A. Azarhoosh, G. H. Hamedi, H. Roshani,
Rutting performance prediction of warm mix asphalt
containing reclaimed asphalt pavements, Road Mater.
Pavement Des. 15 (1) (2013) 207-219.
https://doi:10.1080/14680629.2013.868820
 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx
[19] I. Omari, V. Aggarwal, S. Hesp, Investigation of two Warm
Mix Asphalt additives, Inter. J. Pavement Res. Technol. 9 (2)
(2016) 83-88. https://doi:10.1016/j.ijprt.2016.02.001
[20] Z. Arega, A. Bhasin, A. Motamed, F. Turner, Influence of
Warm-Mix Additives and Reduced Aging on the Rheology
of Asphalt Binders with Different Natural Wax Contents, J.
Mater. Civ. Eng. 23 (10) (2011) 1453-1459.
https://doi:10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0000315
[21] J. Cheng, J. Shen, F. Xiao, Moisture Susceptibility of
Warm-Mix Asphalt Mixtures Containing Nanosized
Hydrated Lime, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 23 (11) (2011) 1552-
1559. https://doi:10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0000308
[22] S. Diefenderfer, A. Hearon, Laboratory Evaluation of a
Warm Asphalt Technology for Use in Virginia, Virginia
department of transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, Charlottesville, USA, 2008.
[23] G. C. Hurley, B. D. Prowell, Evaluation of Sasobit® for use
in warm-mix asphalt. National Center for Asphalt
Technology (NCAT), Auburn, United States, 2005.
[24] T. Gandhi, Effects of warm asphalt additives on asphalt
binder and mixture properties, (PhD thesis), Clemson:
Clemson University, Department of Civil Engineering; 2008.
[25] A. Chowdhury, J. W. Button, A Review of Warm Mix
Asphalt. Report Number SWUTC/08/473700-00080-1.
Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University
System College Station, Texas, USA, 2008.
[26] M. Zaumanis, Warm mix asphalt Investigation, (PhD Thesis),
Riga Technical University, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark, 2010.
[27] B. Şengöz, A. Topal, C. Gorkem, Evaluation of moisture
characteristics of warm mix asphalt involving natural zeolite,
Road Mater. Pavement Des. 14 (4) (2013) 933-945.
https://doi:10.1080/14680629.2013.817352
[28] S. W. Goh, Z. You, Mechanical properties of porous asphalt
pavement materials with warm mix asphalt and RAP, J
Transp. Eng. 138 (1) (2012) 90–7.
[29] S. Zhao, B. Huang, X. Shu, M. Woods, Comparative
evaluation of warm mix asphalt containing high percentages
of reclaimed asphalt pavement, Constr. Buil. Mater. 44
(2013) 92-100.
https://doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.03.010
[30] I. L. Al-Qadi, J. Baek, Z. Leng, H. Wang, M. Doyen, J. Kern,
S. L. Gillen, Short-term performance of modified stone
matrix asphalt (SMA) produced with warm mix additives,
Illinois Center for Transportation; Illinois, USA, 2012.
[31] H. Ziari, A. Goli, A. Amini, Effect of Crumb Rubber
Modifier on the Performance Properties of Rubberized
Binders, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 28 (12) (2016).
https://doi:10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0001661
[32] W. D. Cao, S. T. Liu, X. Z. Cui, X. Q. Yu, Effect of Crumb
Rubber Particle Size and Content on Properties of Crumb
Rubber Modified (CRM) Asphalt, Appl. Mech. Mater. 99
(2011) 955-959.
https://doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.99-100.955
[33] Bureau of Indian Standards, Methods of test for aggregates
for concrete. IS 2386; 1963.Part I. BIS, New Delhi, India,
1963.
[34] Bureau of Indian Standards, Methods of test for aggregates
for concrete, IS 2386; 1963. Part III. BIS, New Delhi,
India,1963.
[35] Bureau of Indian Standards. Methods of test for aggregates
for concrete, IS 2386; 1963. Part IV. BIS, New Delhi,
India,1963.
11
[36] Bureau of Indian Standards, Methods of test for aggregates
for concrete, IS 2386; 1963. Part V. BIS, New Delhi, India,
1963.
[37] Bureau of Indian Standards, Paving bitumen-specification
second revision. IS 73; 2013. BIS, New Delhi, India, 2013.
[38] Bureau of Indian Standards, Polymer and Rubber Modified
Bitumen – Specification. BIS 15462; 2004. BIS, New Delhi,
India, 2004.
[39] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard
Practice for Determining the Separation Tendency of
Polymer from Polymer-Modified Asphalt. ASTM D7173-20.
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2020.
[40] Y. R. Kim, J. Zhang, H. Ban, Moisture damage
characterization of warm-mix asphalt mixtures based on
laboratory-field evaluation, Constr. Buil. Mater. 31 (2012)
204-211. https://doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.12.085
[41] H. Kim, S. J. Lee, S. N. Amirkhanian, Influence of Warm
Mix Additives on PMA Mixture Properties, J. Transp. Eng.
138 (8) (2012) 991-997. https://doi:10.1061/(asce)te.1943-
5436.0000406
[42] C. K. Akisetty, S. J. Lee, S. N. Amirkhanian, Effects of
Compaction Temperature on Volumetric Properties of
Rubberized Mixes Containing Warm-Mix Additives, J.
Mater. Civ. Eng. 21 (8) (2009) 409-415.
https://doi:10.1061/(asce)0899-1561(2009)21:8(409)
[43] K. Kanitpong, N. Charoentham, S. Likitlersuang,
Investigation on the effects of gradation and aggregate type
to moisture damage of warm mix asphalt modified with
Sasobit, Inter. J. Pavement Eng. 13 (5) (2012) 451-458.
https://doi:10.1080/10298436.2011.565058
[44] B. Hill, Performance evaluation of warm mix asphalt
mixtures incorporating reclaimed asphalt pavement, (PhD
Thesis), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana,
USA, 2011.
[45] P. V. Shivaprasad, F. Xiao, S. N. Amirkhanian, Performance
of warm-mix asphalt mixtures containing recycled coal ash
and roofing shingles with moist aggregates for low-volume
roads, Transp. Res. Rec. 2205 (1) (2011) 48-57.
https://doi.org/10.3141/2205-07
[46] I. Gillespie, Quantifying the energy used in an asphalt
coating plant, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering, University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom,
2012.
[47] Y. R. Kim, Asphalt Pavements, Proceedings of the
International Conference on Asphalt Pavements, Raleigh,
North Carolina, USA, 2014.
[48] Asphalt Institute, Mix Design Methods for Asphalt Concrete
and Other Hot-Mix Types. Manual Series No. 2 (MS-2).
Asphalt Institute. Lexington, USA, 2014.
[49] Indian Roads Congress, Guidelines for Gap graded Wearing
Course with Rubberised Bitumen- Rubber. IRC SP: 107-
2015. IRC, New Delhi, India, 2015.
[50] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard Test
Method for Bulk Density and Volume of Solid Refractories
by Wax Immersion. ASTM C914-09(2015). ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015.
[51] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard Test
Method for Determination of Draindown Characteristics in
Uncompacted Asphalt Mixtures. ASTM D6390-11(2017).
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2017.
[52] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard Test
Method for Resistance to Degradation of Small-Size Coarse
12 S. Kubair et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology xx (2020) xxx-xxx
Aggregate by Abrasion and Impact in the Los Angeles
Machine. ASTM C131 / C131M-20. ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, PA, 2020.
[53] American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, Hamburg Wheel-Track Testing of Compacted Hot
Mix Asphalt (HMA). AASHTO T324–14. AASHTO,
Washington DC., 2014.
[54] American Association of State and Highway Transportation
Officials, Standard method of test for multiple stress creep
recovery (MSCR) test of asphalt binder using a dynamic
shear rheometer (DSR). AASHTO TP 70. AASHTO,
Washington DC, 2013.
[55] H. Soenen, T. Blomberg, T. Pellinen, O. V. Laukkanen, The
multiple stress creep-recovery test: a detailed analysis of
repeatability and reproducibility, Road Mater. Pavement Des.
View publication stats
14 (sup1) (2013) 2-11.
https://doi:10.1080/14680629.2013.774742
[56] Multi-Stress Creep Recovery tests for Asphalt Binders.
PAPA Regional Technical Workshop, Breinigsville, PA,
2015.http://www.paasphalt.org/assets/_control/content/files
/Session%2010%20%20MSCR%20Multiple%20Stress%20
Creep%20Recovery%20Test%20for%20Asphalt%20%20B
inders.pdf [Accessed 24 May 2019]
[57] European Committee for Standardization, Bituminous
Mixtures. Test Methods for Hot Mix Asphalt. Resistance to
Fatigue. EN 12697-24. Brussels, Belgium, 2012.
[58] American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, Standard Practice for Mixture Conditioning of Hot
Mix Asphalt (HMA). AASHTO R30. AASHTO,
Washington DC, 2002.