Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Review

Effects of additives on the mechanical performance in recycled mixtures

with bitumen emulsion: An overview
Pooyan Ayar
Civil Engineering School, University of Granada, Dr. Severo Ochoa St., Granada 18071, Spain

h i g h l i g h t s

 Effects of additives on the mechanical performance in Recycled Mixture with Bitumen Emulsion (RMBE) have been reviewed.
 Fatigue response of RMBE containing cement could be affected by strain levels.
 The use of modified bitumen emulsion could improve rutting resistance of RMBE.
 Waste pozzolan can be used as a substitute for traditional additives in RMBE.
 The mechanisms of interaction between lime and bitumen emulsion need more clarification.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Cold recycling technology has been recognized as an efficient, cost-effective, and environmentally
Received 22 December 2017 friendly method to rehabilitate asphalt pavements. Based on previous experiments, some solutions such
Received in revised form 21 May 2018 as using additives (e.g. cement, lime, and waste pozzolans) and modifying bitumen emulsion have been
Accepted 22 May 2018
proposed to enhance the performance, as well as to improve the sustainability of Recycled Mixture with
Bitumen Emulsion (RMBE) as a cleaner product. Although some studies have evaluated the laboratory
protocols to design RMBEs, there still remain many unclear issues related to the use of additives.
Keywords:
Therefore, this article tries to review the general criteria for additive selection, and also to assess the dif-
Recycled mixture
Bitumen emulsion
ferent functional aspects of RMBEs (e.g. physical, durability and mechanical characteristics), paying
Performance attention to the impacts of additives. Additionally, key points concerning the use of modified bitumen
Modified emulsion emulsion in RMBEs were assessed. Finally, a series of important lines for further investigations in this
Waste pozzolan field have been presented.
Additive Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 552
2. Additives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 552
2.1. Additives incorporated in the mixture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 552
2.1.1. Lime. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 552
2.1.2. Cement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553
2.1.3. Waste pozzolans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556
2.2. Additives incorporated in the binder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557
2.2.1. Polymers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557
2.2.2. Rejuvenators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558
3. Selection of additives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558
4. Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559
Conflict of interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 560
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 560

E-mail address: payar@correo.ugr.es

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.05.174
0950-0618/Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
552 P. Ayar / Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561
1. Introduction
According to recent data, Europe and the U.S. produced 265.4
and 319.0 million tons asphalt mixtures in 2014 respectively [1].
It is clear that the production of asphalt mixes is accompanied by
a remarkable emission of greenhouse gases [2] and during the
manufacturing, construction and maintenance processes involved
in asphalt pavements, the adverse effects of energy consumption,
bitumen production, and extraction of natural aggregates should
be taken into consideration [2,3]. Given these critical issues, high-
way agencies have attempted to cut down the environmental and
the economic impacts of pavements through different efforts such
as reducing the temperature of production and construction pro-
cesses, as well as reusing existing materials [4–6]. One of these
important efforts emerges in cold recycling technology, which is
a combined measure to reduce the manufacturing temperature
and reuse of the existing pavement materials.
Cold recycling technology as a rehabilitation method can be
used to modify distresses that involve both surface and base
courses in a pavement system [7]. Furthermore, placing and paving
cold mixes at ambient temperature could reduce the stiffening
effects originating from initial aging [8] and also working at lower
temperatures is considered as the main advantage of employing
this technology in rehabilitation projects [9–11]. Additionally,
cost-effectiveness superiority and sustainability of cold recycling
technology compared with the traditional rehabilitation methods
have been previously reported [10,12,13].
Concerning the implementation steps of cold recycling technol-
ogy, when the whole recycling processes including milling, mixing
Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) materials with agents and also
paving are performed in-place, the method is called Cold In-place
Recycling (CIR), whilst when the recycled mix is prepared in a plant
and then is conveyed to the project site for paving, the method is
called Cold Central Plant Recycling (CCPR). Although CCPR allows
a better control of the mix properties, the CIR eliminates transport-
ing the recycled mixtures to the project site, resulting in less fuel
consumption [7,12,14] and compared to other rehabilitation meth-
ods, CIR technique possesses less environmental impacts [14,15].
Referring to this issue, Fig. 1 is depicted to reflect presented data
by Chappat and Bilal [16], shows that CIR’s energy consumption
is much less than other asphalt products. In CIR method, the treat-
ment depth of pavement is 50–100 mm when the recycling agent
is only a bitumen emulsion. However, higher depths of treatment
(125–150 mm) can be applied when chemical additives are used
to improve the performance [17]. Conventionally, cold recycled
layer can be used as a surface course for secondary roads and if a
protective wearing surface is placed over, it can also be imple-
mented as a base course for high-quality pavements [12,18,19].
Fig. 1. Comparing the energy consumption of different asphalt products, depicted based on presented data by (Chappat and Bilal, 2003 [16]).
Since 1970s, bitumen emulsion was used as the most common
recycling agent in cold recycled mixtures. Owning to its liquid form
at ambient temperatures, bitumen emulsion can disperse all over
the mix. In addition to improving the cohesiveness and load bear-
ing capacity of the cold recycled layer, the bitumen emulsion could
help in rejuvenating and softening the aged bitumen of the RAP
materials [7,20,21].
According to the earlier experiences, Recycled Mixture with
Bitumen Emulsion (RMBE) was exposed to problems such as exces-
sive plastic deformation (i.e. rutting), low initial strength, weak
adhesiveness and inappropriate dispersion of bitumen. These prob-
lems were more obvious at initial times of service due to long cur-
ing period. Thereupon, the idea of using additives (i.e. active fillers)
in RMBEs was introduced to overcome these problems [7,22,23].
Nonetheless, utilizing additives is not the unique way to improve
the performance of RMBEs, and the use of modified bitumen emul-
sion can also be considered as another solution [7]. Commonly,
cement and lime are employed as conventional additives in RMBEs
[7,24,25], as well as waste additives (e.g. waste pozzolans) have
been used in some experiments [7,26]. Moreover, in comparison
with additives, normal fillers (i.e. stone powder) does not have a
remarkable effect on the performance of RMBE [27]. It is important
to bear in mind that additives have a significant impact on RMBE’s
performance [28–30] and several factors can affect the selection of
their types and dosages [18,21,26].
Although researchers tried to synthesize different protocols
related to the preparation and evaluation of RMBEs [25], a tangible
gap can be seen in former experiments concerning combined
effects of additives and bitumen emulsion on the service perfor-
mance [31]. In fact, when additives and bitumen emulsion are to
be used at the same time, the mechanical behavior could be
strongly influenced by the dosage and characteristics of these
agents [32]. Accordingly, this article aims at reviewing and analyz-
ing the role of additives in the performance of RMBEs, as well as
evaluating other solutions to improve the sustainability of these
types of mixtures (e.g. using modified bitumen emulsion). More-
over, current article provides some technical recommendations
to choose the type and optimum dosage of additives in RMBEs
based on various studies with respect to physical, mechanical
and durability characteristics.
2. Additives
2.1. Additives incorporated in the mixture
2.1.1. Lime
Lime has been widely used as an additive or a filler in bitumi-
nous mixtures to improve durability [33] and likewise hydrated
 P. Ayar / Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561
lime, either as a powder or as a slurry is typically used in RMBEs
[34,35], because it can break bitumen emulsion and accelerates
curing process. Previously, some experiments based on Zeta poten-
tial measurements were used to evaluate the electrical change as
an important factor which could influence the breaking character-
istics of emulsions. The results revealed that lime renders the
emulsion more cationic or less anionic under certain conditions.
Accordingly, it can affect the interaction between emulsion dro-
plets and negatively charges aggregate surfaces [34]. Normally,
1–3% lime by weight of the RAP materials can be used in RMBE
[36,37], as well as it has usually been added to RMBEs containing
cationic emulsion [35]. According to Cross [22], in order to prepare
1 L of hydrated lime slurry from quicklime, 277.4 g of CaO was
mixed with 924.6 g of water.
The results of laboratory and field investigations showed that
the use of lime slurry regardless of the bitumen type can increase
the density of RMBE [22,38]. Similarly, Niazi and Jalili [37] showed
that RMBE containing 3.5% bitumen emulsion, 3.6% water and 0.5–
2% lime (whether slurry or powder) have a higher density in com-
parison with the RMBE without additive. Nevertheless, the lime
slurry is more capable to increase the density compared to lime
powder. Further, lime can diminish the air void in RMBE which
causes an overall improvement in performance [35,37]. These find-
ings could not only be attributed to the accelerated breaking effect,
but also lime can act as an adhesive agent which might modify the
rheology of the binder [34]. However, for approving the effects of
lime on the performance of RMBEs further morphological investi-
gations should be conducted.
Previous experiences have indicated that the moisture sensitiv-
ity of RMBEs is decreased by adding lime as an additive [22,37,38].
In this regard, Cross [22] has stated that the use of hot lime slurry
in the RMBE leads to a higher moisture resistance. In this study, the
RMBEs were manufactured by three types of bitumen emulsion
including Cationic Slow Setting (CSS-1), Cationic Medium Setting
(CMS-1) and High Float Anionic Medium Setting (HFE-150). The
results showed that the RMBE without hot lime slurry could not
obtain a Tensile Strength Ratio (TSR) value more than 50%, whilst
the RMBE containing CSS-1 or HFE-150 with hot lime slurry
acquired the TSR values higher than 80%. In addition, the index
Fig. 2. The effects of lime slurry and bitumen emulsion type on the durability of RMBEs, redrawn from selected data presented by Cross [22].
553
of retained resilient modulus indicated the beneficial effects of
lime on the moisture resistance of RMBEs. The redraw version of
these results has been shown in Fig. 2. According to this figure,
substituting lime slurry for water in RMBE containing 1.5% bitu-
men emulsion decreases moisture sensitivity. Moreover, Niazi
and Jalili [37] have shown that the RMBE containing lime slurry
has a superior moisture resistance compared to the mixture man-
ufactured with lime powder. It seems that the balanced distribu-
tion of lime in the form of slurry might help the adhesion
mechanism within the mixture. Afterwards, Modarres and Ayar
[4] have reported a significant increase in moisture resistance of
a RMBE containing 2.5% bitumen emulsion and 4% water by insert-
ing 3% lime.
Lime or its slurry can also improve the mechanical performance
of RMBEs in terms of tensile strength, resistance to permanent
deformation and stiffness [4,22,37]. In this connection, adding 1%
lime slurry has increased the dynamic modulus of the RMBE at
all tested temperatures [35]. Additionally, lime slurry could reduce
the wet and dry rut depths, whilst manufactured RMBE with CMS-
1 or CSS-1 demonstrated a superior performance compared to HFE-
150 [22]. Moreover, Niazi and Jalili [37] have reported that a RMBE
consisting of 3.5% bitumen emulsion, 3.6% water and 0.5–2.0% lime
(whether slurry or powder) shows a superior mechanical perfor-
mance (i.e. Marshall stability, resilient modulus, tensile strength
and rutting resistance) in comparison with the RMBE without addi-
tive. In particular, using lime slurry is more effective in improving
the mechanical performance of the RMBE, as well as it could pre-
vent air pollution problem at the project site [37].
2.1.2. Cement
Traditionally, 1–3% cement by weight of the RAP materials used
in the RMBEs [36–37]. In fact, RMBEs manufactured with a bitu-
men/cement ratio higher than 1 and when the cement dosage is
lower than 1% might be classified as a bitumen-stabilized material.
This type of material behaves similar to stress-dependence granu-
lar materials, in which failure could occur as a result of shear stress
or permanent deformation. In contrast, when the bitumen/cement
ratio exceeds 1 and the cement dosage is greater than 1%, the mix
could be classified as a cement–treated material. In general, this
554 P. Ayar / Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561

Fig. 3. Microscopic scans of cold bituminous emulsion mixture (A) without and (B) with cement (Brown and Needham, 2000 [34]).

type of material could represent a more time–temperature depen-
dent and cumulative damage failure behavior similar to asphalt
mixes [32].
The main effect of cement on the performance is controlled by
the reactions between cement and bitumen emulsion. The cement
not only can accelerate the emulsion breaking, but can also
increase the stiffness of RMBE. By using cement in RMBEs, hydra-
tion products can be dispersed within the binder and could pene-
trate the bond between the binder and the aged bitumen of RAP
which also leads to an additional effect on binder stiffening
[34,31,39,40]. Fig. 3 illustrates that applying 2% cement in a cold
mix asphalt with bitumen emulsion resulted in forming a rough
texture and a pitted surface (Fig. 3B) compared to mixture without
cement (Fig. 3A). These changes in the texture are probably due to
the existence of cementitious crystals [34]. These results have
almost been approved by Xu et al. [40]. They indicated that by
increasing the cement dosage, products of hydration process which
randomly distributed in asphalt mortar could enhance the adhe-
sion between the mortar and aggregates. Moreover, hydration
products have good temperature stability compared with asphalt
binder [40].
Lin et al. [41] have explained the strength development mech-
anism of RMBEs containing cement based on image analysis. They
explored that during early-stage of curing, the interface between
bitumen emulsion and RAP aggregates was a susceptible point
for fracture due to the existence of a water membrane. Conse-
quently, at the early-stage of curing, the adhesive failure in the
interface between emulsion-cement mortar and the aggregate
could be considered as the dominant type of fracture. By increasing
the curing time, a contiguous bituminous membrane appears in
the interface between aggregates with cement hydration and
emulsion demulsification in which bonding strength exceeds the
cohesive strengths of bitumen emulsion mortar. Thus, after curing,
the main type of failure is a cohesive fracture within bitumen
emulsion mortar and RMBE showed a remarkable increase in the
strength. In this respect, Fig. 4 demonstrates this mechanism.
Although positive effects of cement on the physical properties
of RMBE have been reported in some studies [37,42], it was
observed that using cement (especially in high dosages) could
reduce the density of cold mixes with bitumen emulsion
[34,43,44]. In fact, by increasing the cement dosage in RMBE, the
stiffness increases and at a certain compacting force, the level of
compaction will be less. Consequently, the density decreases as a
result of void content growth. Besides, by increasing the cement
dosage, the level of optimum moisture content increases which it
can also reduce the compactability [39,45,46].

Fig. 4. The mechanism of strength growth in RMBEs containing cement as an additive [41].
 P. Ayar / Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561
Researchers have stated that the use of cement as an additive in
RMBEs can improve the resistance to moisture damages [31,37,44],
since the produced compounds through hydration and pozzolanic
reactions in cement-emulsions blend increase the cohesiveness
of the mix [34,31,47]. Thereupon, in RMBEs containing cement,
sometimes it would be expected that the resistance of soaked sam-
ples exceeds the resistance of dry samples [31,48]. Additionally, it
can be emphasized that cement dosage is a key issue in this con-
text. According to Xu et al. [49], applying less than 0.5% cement
in RMBEs is not effective in improving moisture resistance. In the
same way, Xiao and Yu [50] reported that using more than 1%
cement in RMBEs in order to reduce only moisture sensitivity
may not be cost-effective. Further, the results of other study
showed that the positive effects of cement on the moisture sensi-
tivity of the RMBE in the range of 1.5–3% are not very tangible [51].
Many studies reported that using cement as an additive in
RMBEs enhances the mechanical properties such as unconfined
compressive strength, tensile strength, resilient modulus and rut-
ting resistance [10,37,49], as well as cement could improve the
resistance to traffic abrasive effect [52]. However, the considerable
enhancement in rutting resistance encourages highway agencies to
use cement in RMBEs [31,37,53]. During the first days of curing, the
effect of cement is more prevalent than bitumen emulsion for
improving strength of RMBEs. This effect is principally created by
adhesion between mortar and aggregate. Consequently, the use
of cement can be recommended to enhance the initial strength of
RMBEs [41]. Normally, mechanical properties of RMBEs are
increasing by an in increase in curing time and cement content
[30,44].
Recently, Yan et al. [54] have reported that the use of cement in
a RMBE (containing 15% virgin aggregates, 4.3% bitumen emulsion
and 2.6% pre-mix water) can increase the early-age strength, mois-
ture stability, high temperature stability and low-temperature
cracking resistance. However, the results of low-temperature
cracking test showed that when cement dosage exceeds 1.5%, the
low-temperature cracking resistance reduces [54]. This indicates
that when cement dosage surpasses a specific limit, the RMBE
could have a more brittle behavior under low temperature
conditions.
According to Kavussi and Modarres [44], at initial curing times
the tensile strength and resilient modulus of RMBE containing 1–
3% type I cement were almost 10–20% higher than the manufac-
tured samples with pozzolanic cement. Then, it was depicted that
by increasing the curing time, this difference was dropped and
Fig. 5. The evolution of resilient modulus with curing time in a RMBE containing different cement dosages at different testing temperatures [55].
555
even the RMBE containing pozzolanic cement demonstrated higher
values after a long curing time (120 days). In Fig. 5 the evolution of
resilient modulus with curing time in a RMBE containing different
cement dosages at various testing temperatures has been depicted
by Kavussi and Modarres [55]. It can be seen from this figure that
after 120 days curing, the resilient modulus of RMBE containing
100% RAP materials cured at room temperature (around 25 °C)
reaches 3000 MPa. Furthermore, the results of another study
showed that by increasing the cement dosage in a RMBE contain-
ing 75% RAP, 20% virgin aggregates, 5% mineral fillers and 4% bitu-
men emulsion, the tensile strength increases. However, this
relationship is nonlinear and if the cement dosage exceeds 2%,
the tensile strength of the RMBE will insignificantly change [51].
As applying cement in cold asphalt mix with bitumen emulsion
had a considerable effect on decreasing thermal susceptibility
[29], it is assumed that this effect could also promote the thermal
susceptibility of RMBEs.
The fatigue behavior of RMBE containing cement was a point of
focus in some studies. Previous field studies have reported the fati-
gue life of the RMBE without additives is the same or sometimes
higher than HMA. Besides, the fatigue behavior of RMBE was sim-
ilar to an open-graded HMA [30,55]. In fact, the reduction in early
aging in RMBEs due to its low manufacturing temperature can pos-
sibly affect the long-term flexibility and consequently increases
fatigue life [55]. However, according to recent studies, using
cement can change the fatigue behavior of RMBEs and this kind
of fracture should be considered as a criterion in their design
[46,47,55]. In consequence, some guidelines such as Asphalt Acad-
emy [26] and Wirtgen GmbH [56] have limited the cement dosage
to 1% in order to prevent the possible flexibility reduction in RMBE.
Accordingly, Kavussi and Modarres [55] have evaluated the fati-
gue behavior of RMBE containing 1–3% Portland cement based on
indirect tensile fatigue test. They reported that the fatigue behavior
of the RMBE containing Portland cement depends on the initial
strain level. It was observed that using cement reduces the fatigue
life at strain levels of 300 microstrain or higher. In contrast, at
strain levels less than 300 microstrain using cement increased
the fatigue life. Additionally, Kavussi et al. [47] have shown that
the use of pozzolanic cement resulted in increased fatigue life at
strain levels lower than 250 microstrain and inversely at the higher
strain levels, adding pozzolanic cement decreased the fatigue life of
RMBE. In this regard, Fig. 6 reflects the effects of pozzolanic cement
dosage on the fatigue behavior of RMBE at 25 °C. According to this
figure, the diminution in slope of the fatigue line by increasing the
556 P. Ayar / Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561
Fig. 6. The effects of pozzolanic cement dosage on the fatigue behavior of RMBE at
25 °C [47].
quantity of cement reveals changes in the properties from a con-
ventional asphalt mixture to a semi-cementitious material [47].
Furthermore, Kavussi et al. [47] found that at high strain levels,
RMBE containing pozzolanic cement have a superior fatigue behav-
ior compared to RMBE containing Portland cement. A few years
later, the similar results were reported by Ojum [42] using cement
up to 3% could improve the fatigue resistance of RMBE when the
strain level is less than 200 microstrain. Although the results of
these studies showed that generally adding cement to RMBEs can
reduce fatigue life in heavy traffic roads [46,47,55], it should be
noted that strain level of RMBEs which is frequently used as a base
course layer in pavement systems rarely exceeds 200 microstrain.
Therefore, applying cement (up to 3%) as an additive in RMBEs
could extend the fatigue life [55]. Moreover, the results of another
study illustrates that at a constant dosage of cement, the RMBE
which has a higher bitumen emulsion dosage could achieve a supe-
rior fatigue behavior [30]. As a summary, Fig. 7 presents the effects
of cement on the performance of RMBEs.
2.1.3. Waste pozzolans
Some studies have evaluated the effects of waste additives such
as coal waste, coal waste ash, fly ash, Ground-Granulated Blast-
Furnace Slag (GGBF) and Rice Husk Ash (RHA) on the performance
of RMBEs [10,31,57]. Generally, it can be said that the above-
mentioned waste additives have a pozzolanic nature and the effec-
tiveness of these additives is related to their pozzolanic potential.
Furthermore, in order to activate and generate semi-cementitious
reactions in RMBE, researchers have combined lime and waste poz-
zolans as a synthetic additive [4,31].
Fig. 7. The effects of cement on the performance of RMBEs in a summarized view.
The effects of waste pozzolans on physical properties of RMBEs
are not very clear. Since the experience of using waste pozzolans in
RMBEs is limited compared to traditional additives (i.e. cement,
lime). According to Behnood et al. [57], adding 1% fly ash or RHA
to a RMBE led to an increase in void content. Although they did
not report steady changes, it was observed that by increasing the
dosage of some additives like fly ash to 6%, the void content com-
pared to samples with 1% additive finally decreased.
Behnood et al. [57] have figured out that using 5% fly ash as an
optimum dosage in a RMBE containing 18% virgin aggregate and
3.4% bitumen emulsion can improve the moisture sensitivity
according to AASHTO T283 and Marshall conditioning methods.
Moreover, they reported the same results when 3% RHA was used.
It is worth mentioning that Behnood et al. [57] found the optimum
dosage of additives based on maximum Marshall stability. In addi-
tion, Modarres and Ayar [10] reported that using 7% coal waste ash,
which was similar to fly ash (type F or N) improves the moisture
sensitivity of RMBE containing 2.5% bitumen emulsion with 100%
RAP in term of increasing TSR value from 0.52 to 0.60. On the con-
trary, the use of coal waste increased the moisture sensitivity of
RMBE. The high value of Loss on Ignition (LOI) which indicates
higher coal content and consequently higher water absorption in
coal waste led to a reduction in moisture resistance. Modarres
and Ayar [10] have selected the optimum dosage of additives based
on maximum Marshall stability and tensile strength values. More-
over, Modarres and Ayar [4] utilized lime as a complement for coal
waste and its ash to produce a semi-cementitious synthetic addi-
tive for the studied RMBE. They found that the TSR value was
increased from 0.52 to 0.86 by adding 3% lime and 5% coal waste
ash as a synthetic additive. In the same way, Du [31] used 2.5%
combination of lime and GGBF (mass ratio of lime to GGBF was
1:3) as a synthetic additive in RMBE containing 4% bitumen emul-
sion. It was observed that using this synthetic additive has
increased the soaked and the freeze–thaw TSR values from 71%
and 63% to 98% and 91% respectively, whilst the RMBE without
additive contained more amount of bitumen emulsion (5%).
Concerning mechanical performance, it was observed that
applying 7% coal waste or its ash enhanced the mechanical proper-
ties including Marshall stability, tensile strength, resilient modu-
lus, rutting resistance and fatigue behavior of RMBE containing
100% RAP materials [4,10]. According to Modarres and Ayar [10],
the fatigue life of the RMBE containing 7% coal waste or its ash
was more than the mixture without additive under all strain levels,
and even at higher strain levels (e.g. 500 microstrain) the fatigue
life of the samples containing 1–2% cement was less than the
 P. Ayar / Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561 557

emphasized that selecting a suitable type of bitumen emulsion

for manufacturing RMBE is important. To improve the performance
of RMBE, some highway agencies used polymer modified bitumen
emulsions. Nowadays, polymer modified bitumen emulsions are
commonly sold on the market. In Europe and the U.S. the designa-
tion scheme of these materials is available in specific standards
(e.g. EN 13808). As one of the earliest attempts to address the rut-
ting, reflective cracking and moisture sensibility, New Mexico
Department of Transportation (NMDOT) employed styrene-
butadienestyrene (SBS) polymer modified high float bitumen
emulsion in a cold recycled mix. It was observed that polymer
improved the positive characteristics of the high float emulsion
[58,59]. Some similar results were reported by Salomon and New-
Fig. 8. The fatigue life of the RMBE containing different additives (coal waste, coal comb [60]. They used three types of bitumen emulsion including
waste ash and cement) at different initial strain levels [10]. CSS-1, high-float medium-setting emulsion with a residue of rela-
tively low viscosity (HFMS-2s), and high float medium-setting
emulsion modified with a polymer (HFMS-2p). The results showed
Table 1
The effects of waste pozzolans on the performance of RMBEs. that the RMBE manufactured by HFMS-2p had the lowest total air
void content. Recently, Chen [61] used a polymer (latex) modified
Type of Waste Effect Description
CSS-1h bitumen emulsion in RMBE containing 100% RAP. In this
pozzolan
study, 3% polymer was applied to modify the bitumen emulsion.
Coal waste Positive/ High organic content may reduce the
The results showed that polymer modified bitumen emulsion
Negative durability
Coal waste ash Positive Improving mechanical properties and
could not exert a positive effect on the tensile strength and mois-
durability ture sensitivity, however, it can improve the rutting resistance.
Fly ash Positive Improving mechanical properties and Additionally, it was stated that utilizing cement as an additive
durability along with a polymer modified bitumen emulsion resulted in an
Ground-Granulated Positive Improving mechanical properties and
enhanced mechanical performance of the RMBE [61]. Besides,
Blast-Furnace Slag durability
(GGBF) Babagoli et al. [62] have indicated the mechanical advantages of
Rice Husk Ash (RHA) Positive Improving mechanical properties and using SBS modified bitumen emulsion in RMBE. In this research,
durability a RMBE was prepared by using 3% CSS-1 and 100% RAP materials.
Waste pozzolan + lime Positive The presence of lime could generate
The optimum polymer dosage employed for modifying bitumen
more semi-cementitious reactions,
resulting in a superior performance.
emulsion was fixed at 3.5% (by weight of bitumen) considering
Marshall test results. The results showed that polymer modified
emulsion could improve the mechanical properties in terms of
mixture without additive. Fig. 8 demonstrates some results Marshall stability and rutting resistance. Despite of these positive
obtained from this test [10]. effects, the air void content was slightly increased because of using
Moreover, the use of 5% coal waste or its ash with 3% lime as a polymer and likely it is due to swelling of polymer, resulting in
synthetic additive in a RMBE was more effective in improving higher viscosity. Furthermore, similar to previous study, it was
mechanical properties than RMBE containing only coal waste or illustrated that applying polymer modified bitumen emulsion
its ash [4]. Therefore, lime can be used to activate additives with along with additives (i.e. cement or lime) can improve the perfor-
a low pozzolanic reactivity in RMBEs. A similar result was reported mance of RMBEs more effectively [62]. Regardless of many advan-
by Du [31] that used 2.5% of a synthetic additive containing lime tages of using polymer modified bitumen emulsion in RMBE such
and GGBF in a RMBE. It was observed that the rutting resistant of as providing enhanced setting [63], higher early strength, improv-
the mixtures containing synthetic additive was more than RMBE ing the cohesion and better adhesion, the polymer also permits uti-
containing only 2.5% lime or 1.5% cement. Afterwards, Behnood lizing softer bitumen which could more effectively rejuvenate the
et al. [57] have demonstrated that the use of 5% fly ash or 3% aged bitumen of the RAP [64,65].
RHA in RMBE can enhance the mechanical properties. However, According to the recent study conducted by Jiang et al. [66], by
these effects were more tangible when fly ash was used. adding 6% Styrene–butadiene rubber (SBR) latex, 8% chloroprene
Regarding the above-mentioned studies, the use of waste poz- rubber (CR) latex and 6% styrene-ethylene–butylene-styrene
zolans as additives in RMBE is an economically and environmen- (SEBS) to neat bitumen emulsion, the high-temperature perfor-
tally a sustainable option. However, due to lack of sufficient mance of RMBE was improved significantly based on both binder
knowledge regarding the interaction of theses materials with bitu- and mixture laboratory tests. In this regard, Fig. 9 shows the creep
men emulsion, it is necessary to select their dosage based on curves of the full-depth multilayer pavements with modified
mechanical and durability testing and also by considering their RMBEs under advanced cyclic creep tests at 60 °C. Based on
chemical compositions. In this context, it can be recommended Fig. 9, it could be concluded that the increasing speed of the per-
to use waste pozzolans containing lower amounts of organic mate- manent strain is reduced when the old cored sample was rehabil-
rials, as well as those have a greater amount of cementitious parti- itated by cold recycling technique. Nevertheless, when applying
cles to enhance the interactions with bitumen emulsion. In this the modified bitumen emulsion the improving effect was ampli-
concern, Table 1 illustrates the effects of waste pozzolans on the fied. It is worth mentioning that in this study the additive dosage
performance of RMBEs. was selected by considering the storage stability of bitumen
emulsion.
2.2. Additives incorporated in the binder As a common type of bitumen emulsions, high float type has
been widely used in RMBE because of it rejuvenating effects on
2.2.1. Polymers the RAP materials. In fact, the gel structure of high float bitumen
Bitumen emulsion is the most common recycling agent used in emulsions generates a thick film of asphalt around RAP materials
cold recycling process of asphalt pavement and it can be [58–59].
558 P. Ayar / Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561
Fig. 9. Creep curves of the full-depth multilayer pavements with RMBEs (contain-
ing different bitumen types) under advanced cyclic creep tests at 60 °C [66].
2.2.2. Rejuvenators
The use of rejuvenating type bitumen emulsions in RMBE was
not very common. Rejuvenating type emulsions are a combination
of pure bitumen emulsion and an emulsified rejuvenating maltene
oil. The rejuvenating oil could restore the characteristics of the
aged bitumen in RAP materials. However, the rejuvenation is a
time and temperature dependent process [64]. Further, chemically
engineered bitumen emulsion that does not contain a polymer or a
rejuvenator was developed for using in RMBE. An engineered bitu-
men emulsion provides selective properties (i.e. coating ability,
breaking times, curing times, moisture resistance, softening abil-
ity) for a given condition [21,67].
In addition, the emulsifier dosage could affect the mechanical
performance of RMBEs containing cement additive. In this regard,
cement hydration which plays an important role in strength gain-
ing can be highly influenced by emulsifier dosage [68].
According to the above-mentioned discussion, the use of poly-
mer modified bitumen emulsion could improve the mechanical
characteristics (especially resistance to permanent deformations
as a common distress in RMBEs), and also these effects are more
tangible when additives such as cement and lime were employed.
Since the rejuvenation capacity varies among different types of
bitumen emulsions, choosing a proper type is important to satisfy
the required long-term performance.
3. Selection of additives
Comparing the performance of additives in RMBEs is not easy
because of dissimilarity in methods, materials and additive
dosages used by researchers. Regarding comparative studies,
cement is more effective than lime in improving the mechanical
properties of RMBEs [34,37]. Nevertheless, as a critical matter,
the weak fatigue performance of RMBE containing cement under
high strain levels cannot be neglected [42,55]. In this regard,
Fig. 10 compares the results of wheel tracking test for a RMBE con-
taining 2% of different additives including cement, lime and lime
slurry. These results showed that the cement is more effective than
lime or lime slurry in reducing rut depth [37]. In addition, some
comparative studies revealed that the use of cement is more effec-
tive than waste pozzolans in improving mechanical properties
except fatigue behavior under high strain levels [10]. Moreover,
the use of waste pozzolans in RMBEs is a recent technique and
their effects on the performance mechanism are not thoroughly
assessed.
Small changes in the dosage of these additives particularly
cement could lead to great changes in RMBE’s response
[30,42,55]. Accordingly, in choosing the optimum dosage of
cement some criteria such as physical properties, mechanical
Fig. 10. Comparative results of wheel tracking test for a RMBE containing different
additives [37].
performance, durability and workability should be considered.
Additionally, it was observed that the use of cement more than a
specific dosage (1.5%) only to reduce moisture sensitivity of the
RMBE is not cost-effective and beneficial [50,51], as well as the
use of higher than 1.5% cement may not be technically justifiable
considering low-temperature cracking [54]. Consequently, as a
general statement, this review recommends that the use of cement
in RMBEs can be limited to 1.5% as a dosage which approximately
meets performance criteria and economical considerations. In
addition to the above-mentioned technical points, the selection
of cement content in RMBE could be affected by climate conditions.
According to the European experiences and recommendations, in
moist climate the use of RMBEs containing higher than 1% cement
might be more adequate, whilst in dry or moderate climates apply-
ing less than 1% cement content could be desirable [24].
Regarding choosing optimum content of lime, physical proper-
ties and mechanical performance can be used as criteria. Although
the use of lime in slurry form for improving the performance of
RMBE is more effective and it can prevent air pollution in project
site, the difficulties of manufacturing lime slurry should not be
overlooked.
Newly, some laboratory researches have evaluated the use of
waste pozzolans in RMBEs [10,31,57]. These studies specified the
optimum dosage of waste pozzolans based on mechanical proper-
ties [10,57]. It was observed that mechanical properties as the only
criteria cannot be useful for choosing the additive dosage. Because
some waste pozzolans can improve mechanical properties, whilst
negatively affect the durability of the RMBE [10]. Therefore, phys-
ical properties, mechanical performance (especially fatigue), dura-
bility and workability should be considered to select the optimum
dosage of waste pozzolan in RMBEs. Generally, it is better to avoid
using waste additives with high LOI or high water absorption
[10,57]. According to the studied literatures, Table 2 provides tech-
nical considerations for using cement, lime and waste pozzolan as
additives in RMBEs.
These technical considerations should not be regarded as gen-
eral rules, since there are other factors that could affect the selec-
tion of the additives and their dosages. Before considering the
technical recommendations, availability is suggested as the main
factor for selecting additives in RMBEs [21], as well as the cost-
effectiveness should be analyzed with respect to the long-term
performance.
The laboratory procedures should be compatible with additive
type and its dosage. As by using additives the required moisture
content could be increased [46], thus Marshall compactor is not
the best compaction equipment. In fact, because of the
incompressibility, water in an over saturated mix acts as an elastic
spring [69].
 P. Ayar / Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561
Table 2
Technical consideration for using cement, lime and waste pozzolan as additives in RMBEs.
Additive
Cement
Using forms: powder
 Ordinary or pozzolanic cement can be used.
 When higher initial strength is required, it is better not to use poz-
zolan cement.
Typical dosage:
1–3% (by of weight of RAP)
Optimum dosage criteria:
Physical properties, mechanical performance (especially fatigue and
low temperature cracking), durability and workability
Explanations:
– At high strain levels (higher than 200 microstrain):
 It is better to use the minimum acceptable dosage.
 Utilizing pozzolanic cement is preferable.
– Higher dosages are more recommended for moist climates.
The compatibility of additive with bitumen emulsion is a key
parameter regarding adhesiveness of the mixture [63,70]. It has
been stated that moisture loss of medium-setting bitumen emul-
sion is much higher than slow-setting bitumen emulsions. Hence,
a higher moisture loss leads to a faster setting of bitumen emulsion
which provides insufficient hydration reactions and consequently
RMBE containing additive (i.e. cement, waste pozzolan) could
attain a less strength. Further, the strength of RAP has a crucial
influence on the tensile strength of mixtures and the RAP charac-
teristics could limit the effect of additives [51]. Therefore, material
characteristics should be considered in the selection of the
additive.
When the local climate acts as a positive factor, it could reduce
the need for additives to accelerate the curing time. The evapora-
tion rate from the RMBE depends on a number of factors, including
the ambient temperature and relative humidity, the porosity and
the permeability of the mixtures and the competition between
drying and binding of water into hydration products of cement
[71]. The curing time can be reduced by using higher dosages of
additives when the traffic flows on the recycled layer after a short
time in order to prevent rutting distress [10,41]. Further, volume
and load of the early traffic could be determinant in choosing the
type and the dosage of the additives [18,25]. Consequently,
short-term conditions can also affect the additive selection.
The long-term conditions can affect the selection of the additive
type and its dosage [26,30]. In addition, service traffic, regional
long-term climate and the mechanical properties of upper support-
ing layers (e.g. surface course, overlay, chip seal, etc.), could signif-
icantly affect the selection of the additive type and its dosage [26].
Subsequently, in addition to technical considerations, availabil-
ity, laboratory procedures, material characteristics, construction
conditions (i.e. short-term conditions) and long-term conditions
should be assessed in selecting the optimum type and dosage of
additives in RMBEs.
4. Conclusions
Employing RMBEs in road rehabilitation projects can be
regarded as a sustainable action, since in these types of mixes con-
siderable amounts of pavement materials are reused without the
need to apply heating. Some researchers utilized additives (e.g.
cement, lime and waste pozzolans) to improve the performance
of RMBEs, however, the effects of incorporation of different addi-
tives and bitumen emulsion on the performance are not very clear
(Du, 2015 [31]). Therefore, this article not only analyzes the effects
559
Lime Waste pozzolan
Using forms: Slurry/powder Using forms: powder
 Superior performance in  Avoid using pozzolans with high water absorption or
slurry form. high LOI.
Typical dosage: Typical dosage:
1–3% (by of weight of RAP) Not specified
Optimum dosage criteria: Optimum dosage criteria:
Physical properties, mechanical Physical properties, mechanical performance, durability
performance and durability and workability
Explanations: Explanations:
– – A small amount of lime can be used as a complement
in order to induce pozzolanic reactions.
of additives on the performance of RMBEs, but also provides tech-
nical recommendations to select the type and optimum dosage of
additives. In addition, application of modified bitumen emulsion
as another method to enhance the mechanical behavior in these
mixtures was discussed. Finally, the following conclusions can be
presented:
To accelerate the setting of bitumen emulsion and also improv-
ing the cohesiveness of RMBEs, 1–3% lime can be employed.
Nonetheless, its effectiveness could be influenced by the type of
bitumen emulsion used. A more homogenous coverage of slurry
lime compared to lime powder could superiorly improve the dura-
bility of the RMBE. The mechanical response and especially fatigue
resistance of the RMBE containing lime has not yet been well stud-
ied, thus further investigations are needed to address this issue.
Moreover, it is important to study whether the improvements
caused by lime are attributed to the increased density and/or its
interaction with bitumen emulsion.
Cement as a common additive can improve the short and long-
terms performance of RMBEs owing to its interaction with bitumen
emulsion. In fact, cement not only accelerate the emulsion setting,
but can also stiff its bitumen by generating hydration products. To
select its optimum dosage in RMBEs, some factors such as the type
of layer (i.e. surface course or base course) and mechanical proper-
ties can be considered. The minimum effective dosage of cement in
RMBEs is 0.5% and to choose its upper dosage the fatigue resis-
tance, low temperature cracking resistance and durability charac-
teristics are needed to be analyzed. In the same context, the
cement dosage up to 3% can be utilized where RMBEs utilized in
base course layers, since the fatigue resistance of these mixes con-
taining cement is sensitive to strain levels. Altogether 1.5% cement
is an acceptable dosage that can be applied in RMBEs to meet
mechanical and durability criteria, as well as economic
considerations.
Waste pozzolans can improve the mechanical behavior and
durability of RMBEs. As their chemical composition are not con-
stant, to select their dosages in RMBE, some properties such as
physical properties, mechanical performance, durability and work-
ability should be considered. Additionally, lime can be used as a
complement for waste pozzolans in order to enhance the mechan-
ical characteristics and durability by boosting the semi-
cementitious reactions. Nonetheless, using waste pozzolans con-
taining lower amounts of organic materials is preferable in terms
of durability features.
Although using polymer modified bitumen emulsion is not
common in comparison with using additives to promote the per-
formance of RMBEs, polymer modified bitumen emulsion can be
560 P. Ayar / Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561

considered as a promising solution. In this respect, it was revealed [19] UFC 3-250-07, Standard Practice for Pavement Recycling. Unified Facilities
Criteria (UFC), Series 3-200: Civil/Geotechnical/Landscape Architecture, Army
that polymer modified bitumen emulsion can improve the
TM 5-822-10, Department of Defense, USA, 2004.
mechanical performance particularly rutting resistance of RMBEs. [20] P.S. Kandhal, Asphalt cold recycling technology in Pennsylvania. In:
However, selecting a proper type of bitumen emulsion for modifi- Proceedings of Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists. vol. 53, Saint
cation seems to be important. Besides, further studies to evaluate Paul, Minnesota, USA, 1984.
[21] N. Suleiman, A State-of-the-art Review of Cold In-place Recycling of Asphalt
the influences of different bitumen emulsion (i.e. high float, poly- Pavements in the Northern Plains Region (Final Report Submitted to the North
mer modified, engineered and rejuvenating) on the performance Dakota Department of Transportation), Department of Civil Engineering,
of RMBEs are required. School of Engineering and Mines, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks,
North Dakota, USA, 2002.
[22] S.A. Cross, Evaluation of Cold In-place Recycled Mixtures on US-283. Report
No. KS-99-4, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA, 2000.
Conflict of interest [23] R. Karlsson, U. Isacsson, Material-Related Aspects of Asphalt Recycling—State-
of-the-Art, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 18 (2006) 81–92, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0899-1561(2006) 18:1(81).
There is no conflict of interest. [24] F. Batista, J. Valentin, Z. Čížková, T. Valentová, D. Simnofske, K. Mollenhauer, A.
Tabakovic, C. McNally, M. Engels, Report on available test and mix design
procedures for cold-recycled bitumen stabilised materials. DELIVERABLES No:
References D1.1, COREPASOL project, Conference of European Directors of Roads (CEDR),
Call 2012, Brussels, Belgium, 2014.
[25] G. Tebaldi, E.V. Dave, P. Marsac, P. Muraya, M. Hugener, M. Pasetto, A. Graziani,
[1] EAPA, Asphalt in figures 2014, European Asphalt Pavement Association (EAPA),
A. Grilli, M. Bocci, A. Marradi, L. Wendling, V. Gaudefroy, K. Jenkins, A. Loizos, F.
Brussels, Belgium, 2015, http://www.eapa.org/userfiles/2/Asphalt%20in%
Canestrari, Synthesis of standards and procedures for specimen preparation
20Figures/2014/AIF_2014_v10.pdf.
and in-field evaluation of cold-recycled asphalt mixtures, Road Mater.
[2] B. Peng, C. Cai, G. Yin, W. Li, Y. Zhan, Evaluation system for CO2 emission of hot
Pavement Des. 15 (2014) 272–299, https://doi.org/10.1080/
asphalt mixture, J. Traffic Transp. Eng. (English Ed.) 2 (2015) 116–124, https://
14680629.2013.866707.
doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2015.02.005.
[26] Asphalt Academy, Technical Guideline: Bitumen Stabilised Materials, A
[3] M. Pérez-Martínez, F. Moreno-Navarro, J. Martín-Marín, C. Ríos-Losada, M.C.
Guideline for the Design and Construction of Bitumen Emulsion and Foamed
Rubio-Gámez, Analysis of cleaner technologies based on waxes and surfactant
Bitumen Stabilised Materials, Technical Guideline 2 (TG2), Second ed., Asphalt
additives in road construction, J. Clean. Prod. 65 (2014) 374–379, https://doi.
Academy, The Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Pretoria,
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.09.012.
South Africa, 2009.
[4] A. Modarres, P. Ayar, Coal waste application in recycled asphalt mixtures with
[27] A. Hodgkinson, A.T. Visser, The role of fillers and cementitious binders when
bitumen emulsion, J. Clean. Prod. 83 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
recycling with foamed bitumen or bitumen emulsion, in: Proceedings of the
jclepro.2014.07.082.
8th conference on asphalt pavements for Southern Africa (CAPSA’04), Sun City,
[5] M.C. Rubio, G. Martínez, L. Baena, F. Moreno, Warm mix asphalt: an overview,
South Africa, 2004.
J. Clean. Prod. 24 (2012) 76–84, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.11.053.
[28] M.K. Nivedya, P.T. Murru, A. Veeraragavan, J.M. Krishnan, Estimation of
[6] C. Sangiorgi, P. Tataranni, A. Simone, V. Vignali, C. Lantieri, G. Dondi, A
dynamic modulus of Bitumen Stabilized Mixes, Constr. Build. Mater. 136
laboratory and filed evaluation of Cold Recycled Mixture for base layer entirely
(2017) 202–216, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.12.116.
made with Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement, Constr. Build. Mater. 138 (2017)
[29] S. Oruc, F. Celik, M.V. Akpinar, Effect of cement on emulsified asphalt mixtures,
232–239, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.02.004.
J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 16 (2007) 578–583, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-
[7] P.S. Kandhal, R.B. Mallick, Pavement Recycling Guidelines for State and Local
007-9095-2.
Governments Participant’s Reference Book (Report No. FHWA-SA-98-042), U.S.
[30] I. Pérez, L. Medina, M.Á. del Val, Mechanical properties and behaviour of
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA),
in situ materials which are stabilised with bitumen emulsion, Road Mater.
Office of Engineering/Office of Technology Applications, Washington, D.C.,
Pavement Des. 14 (2013) 221–238, https://doi.org/10.1080/
USA, 1997.
14680629.2013.779301.
[8] C. Brovelli, M. Crispino, Investigation into cold recycled materials: Influence of
[31] S. Du, Performance characteristic of cold recycled mixture with asphalt
rejuvenant, mix design procedure and effects of temperature on compaction,
emulsion and chemical additives, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2015 (2015), https://
Constr. Build. Mater. 37 (2012) 507–511, https://doi.org/10.1016/
doi.org/10.1155/2015/271596.
j.conbuildmat.2012.07.070.
[32] C. Godenzoni, A. Graziani, E. Bocci, M. Bocci, The evolution of the mechanical
[9] M.J. Martínez-Echevarría, R.M. Recasens, M. Del Carmen Rubio Gámez, A.M.
behaviour of cold recycled mixtures stabilised with cement and bitumen: field
Ondina, In-laboratory compaction procedure for cold recycled mixes with
and laboratory study, Road Mater. Pavement Des. 19 (2018) 856–877, https://
bituminous emulsions, Constr. Build. Mater. 36 (2012) 918–924, https://doi.
doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2017.1279073.
org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.06.040.
[33] V. Mouillet, D. Séjourné, V. Delmotte, H.J. Ritter, D. Lesueur, Method of
[10] A. Modarres, P. Ayar, Comparing the mechanical properties of cold recycled
quantification of hydrated lime in asphalt mixtures, Constr. Build. Mater. 68
mixture containing coal waste additive and ordinary Portland cement, Int. J.
(2014) 348–354, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.06.063.
Pavement Eng. 17 (2016) 211–224, https://doi.org/10.1080/
[34] S.F. Brown, D. Needham, A study of cement modified bitumen emulsion
10298436.2014.979821.
mixtures, in: Proc. Assoc. Asphalt Pavement Technol. 69, 92–121. Reno,
[11] C.A.C. Silva, Evaluation of Sustainable Technologies for the Production of
Nevada, USA, 2000.
Recycled Asphalt Mixtures (MSc Dissertation), School of Engineering, Campus
[35] S.A. Cross, Y. Jakatimath, Evaluation of Cold In-place Recycling for
of Azurém, University of Minho, Guimarães, Braga District, Portugal, 2013.
Rehabilitation of Transverse Cracking on US 412. Report No. FHWA/OK 07
[12] C. Bugni, Cold in Place Recycling Comprehensive Report, Surfacing Design Unit,
(04), Oklahoma Department of Transportation, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,
Montana Department of Transportation (MDT), Helena, Montana, USA, 2015.
USA, 2007.
https://www.mdt.mt.gov/other/webdata/external/pavementanalysis/
[36] Y. Kim, H.D. Lee, Performance evaluation of Cold In-Place Recycling mixtures
SurfacingDesign/Reports/Cold-In-Place-Recycling/2015-CIR-
using emulsified asphalt based on dynamic modulus, flow number, flow time,
ComprehensiveReport.pdf, (accessed 01.06.2016).
and raveling loss, KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 16 (2012) 586–593, https://doi.org/10.1007/
[13] L. Gao, F. Ni, A. Braham, H. Luo, Mixed-Mode cracking behavior of cold recycled
s12205-012-1376-0.
mixes with emulsion using Arcan configuration, Constr. Build. Mater. 55
[37] Y. Niazi, M. Jalili, Effect of Portland cement and lime additives on properties of
(2014) 415–422, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.12.079.
cold in-place recycled mixtures with asphalt emulsion, Constr. Build. Mater.
[14] M.I. Giani, G. Dotelli, N. Brandini, L. Zampori, Comparative life cycle
23 (2009) 1338–1343, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.07.020.
assessment of asphalt pavements using reclaimed asphalt, warm mix
[38] G.A. Fager, Lime Slurry in Cold in Place Recycle. Report No. FHWA-KS-03-3,
technology and cold in-place recycling, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 104 (2015)
Kansas Department of Transportation, Topeka, Kansas, USA, 2004.
224–238, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.08.006.
[39] F. Giuliani, S. Rastelli, An analytical approach to evaluate the performance of
[15] J. Turk, A. Mauko Pranjić, A. Mladenovič, Z. Cotič, P. Jurjavčič, Environmental
cold recycled asphalt mixtures, in: Proceedings of International RILEM
comparison of two alternative road pavement rehabilitation techniques: cold-
Conference on the Use of Recycled Materials in Building and Structures,
in-place-recycling versus traditional reconstruction, J. Clean. Prod. 121 (2015),
Barcelona, Spain, pp. 13–22, 2004.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.040.
[40] O. Xu, Z. Wang, R. Wang, Effects of aggregate gradations and binder contents
[16] M. Chappat, J. Bilal, The Environmental Road of the Future: Life Cycle Analysis,
on engineering properties of cement emulsified asphalt mixtures, Constr.
Energy Consumption & Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Colas group, 2003, pp. 1–
Build. Mater. 135 (2017) 632–640, https://doi.org/10.1016/
40. http://www.colas.com/sites/default/files//publications/route-future-
j.conbuildmat.2016.12.095.
english_1.pdf, (accessed 02.07.2016).
[41] J. Lin, T. Wei, J. Hong, Y. Zhao, J. Liu, Research on development mechanism of
[17] ARRA, Basic asphalt recycling manual. Asphalt Recycling and Reclaiming
early-stage strength for cold recycled asphalt mixture using emulsion asphalt,
Association (ARRA), Publication No. NHI01-022. Annapolis, Maryland, USA,
Constr. Build. Mater. 99 (2015) 137–142, https://doi.org/10.1016/
2001.
j.conbuildmat.2015.09.019.
[18] A. Modarres, M. Rahimzadeh, M. Zarrabi, Field investigation of pavement
[42] C.K. Ojum, The Design and Optimisation of Cold Asphalt Emulsion Mixtures
rehabilitation utilizing cold in-place recycling, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 83
(PhD dissertation), University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK, 2015.
(2014) 112–120, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.12.011.
 P. Ayar / Construction and Building Materials 178 (2018) 551–561
[43] S. Du, Effect of different fillers on performance properties of asphalt emulsion
mixture, J. Test Eval. 42 (2014) 126–134, https://doi.org/10.1520/
JTE20130020.
[44] A. Kavussi, A. Modarres, A model for resilient modulus determination of
recycled mixes with bitumen emulsion and cement from ITS testing results,
Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (2010) 2252–2259, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2010.04.031.
[45] R.B. Mallick, P.S. Kandhal, E.R. Brown, R.L. Bradbury, E.J. Kearney, Development
of a Rational and Practical Mix Design System for Full Depth Reclamation
(FDR). Final Report (Subcontract No. 00-373), Recycled Materials Resource
Center (RMRC), The University of New Hampshire (UNH), Durham, New
Hampshire, USA, 2002.
[46] A. Modarres, F.M. Nejad, A. Kavussi, A. Hassani, E. Shabanzadeh, A parametric
study on the laboratory fatigue characteristics of recycled mixes, Constr. Build.
Mater. 25 (2011) 2085–2093, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.
11.030.
[47] A. Kavussi, F.M. Nejad, A. Modarres, Laboratory fatigue models for recycled
mixes with pozzolanic cement and bitumen emulsion, J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 17
(2011) 98–107, https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2011.553990.
[48] R. Issa, M. Zaman, G. Miller, L. Senkowski, Characteristics of cold processed
asphalt millings and cement-emulsion mix, Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res.
Board. 1767 (2001) 1–6, https://doi.org/10.3141/1767-01.
[49] J. Xu, S. Huang, Y. Qin, F. Li, The impact of cement contents on the properties of
asphalt emulsion stabilized cold recycling mixtures, Int. J. Pavement Res.
Technol. 4 (2011) 48–55.
[50] J. Xiao, Y. Yu, Research on moisture susceptibility of emulsion treated cold
reclaimed asphalt mixture, Pav. Mater. (2011) 45–52, https://doi.org/10.1061/
47623(402)6.
[51] T. Ma, H. Wang, Y. Zhao, X. Huang, Y. Pi, Strength mechanism and influence
factors for cold recycled asphalt mixture, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2015 (2015),
https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/181853.
[52] R.M. Recasens, F.E. Pérez Jiménez, S.C. Aguilar, Mixed recycling with emulsion
and cement of asphalt pavements. Design procedure and improvements
achieved, Mater. Struct. 33 (2000) 324–330, https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02479703.
[53] G. Dondi, F. Mazzotta, C. Sangiorgi, M. Pettinari, A. Simone, V. Vignali, P.
Tataranni, Influence of cement and limestone filler on the rheological
properties of mastic in cold bituminous recycled mixtures, in: Proceedings
of 3rd international conference on transportation infrastructures – ICTI 2014,
Pisa, Italy, 2014.
[54] J. Yan, Z. Leng, F. Li, H. Zhu, S. Bao, Early-age strength and long-term
performance of asphalt emulsion cold recycled mixes with various cement
contents, Constr. Build. Mater. 137 (2017) 153–159, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2017.01.114.
[55] A. Kavussi, A. Modarres, Laboratory fatigue models for recycled mixes with
bitumen emulsion and cement, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (2010) 1920–1927,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.04.009.
[56] Wirtgen GmbH, Wirtgen Cold Recycling Technology, first ed., Wirtgen GmbH,
Windhagen, Germany, 2012.
[57] A. Behnood, M. Modiri Gharehveran, F. Gozali Asl, M. Ameri, Effects of copper
slag and recycled concrete aggregate on the properties of CIR mixes with
bitumen emulsion, rice husk ash, Portland cement and fly ash, Constr. Build.
Mater. 96 (2015) 172–180, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.
08.021.
561
[58] M.D. O’Leary, R.D. Williams, In situ cold recycling of bituminous pavements
with polymer-modified high float emulsions, Transp. Res. Rec. 1342 (1992)
20–25. http://onlinepubs.trb.org...trr/1992/1342/1342-004.pdf, (accessed
07.07.2016).
[59] Y. Kim, D.Y. Lee, Development of a Mix Design Process for Cold-in Place
Rehabilitation Using Foamed Asphalt. Final Report for TR-474 Phase 1,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Iowa,
Iowa City, Iowa, USA, 2003.
[60] A. Salomon, D.E. Newcomb, Cold In-place Recycling Literature Review and
Preliminary Mixture Design Procedure (Final Report: No. MN/RC-2000-21),
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, USA, 2000.
[61] X. Chen, Evaluation of Cold Recycled Asphalt Mixtures Modified with
Conventional and Polymer Modified Emulsion (MSc dissertation),
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Pennsylvania State
University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA, 2015.
[62] R. Babagoli, A. Ameli, H. Shahriari, Laboratory evaluation of rutting
performance of cold recycling asphalt mixtures containing SBS modified
asphalt emulsion, Pet. Sci. Technol. 34 (2016) 309–313, https://doi.org/
10.1080/10916466.2015.1135168.
[63] Caltrans, Maintenance Technical Advisory Guide (MTAG): Volume I – Flexible
Pavement Preservation, second ed., California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans), Office of Pavement Preservation, Division of Maintenance,
Sacramento, California, USA, 2008.
[64] J.K. Davidson, J. Croteau, Best practices in cold in-place recycling, in:
Proceedings of Annual Meeting Asphalt Emulsion Manufacturers Association,
Nashville, USA, 2003.
[65] J.K. Davidson, C. Blais, J. Croteau, A review of in-place cold recycling/
reclamation in Canada, in: Proceedings of Transportation Association of
Canada (TAC) Annual Conference and Exhibition, Quebec, Ontario, Canada,
2004.
[66] J. Jiang, F. Ni, J. Zheng, Y. Han, X. Zhao, Improving the high-temperature
performance of cold recycled mixtures by polymer-modified asphalt emulsion,
Int. J. Pavement Eng. 8436 (2018) 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1080/10298436.
2018.1435882.
[67] S.A. Cross, E.R. Kearney, H.G. Justus, W.H. Chesner, Cold-in-place Recycling in
New York state. Final Summary Rep. (No. C-06-21) to New York State Energy
Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), New York State Dept. of
Transportation, Albany, New York, USA, 2010.
[68] M. Miljković, M. Radenberg, X. Fang, P. Lura, Influence of emulsifier content on
cement hydration and mechanical performance of bitumen emulsion mortar,
Mater. Struct. Constr. 50 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-017-1052-4.
[69] M. Hugener, M.N. Partl, M. Morant, Cold asphalt recycling with 100% reclaimed
asphalt pavement and vegetable oil-based rejuvenators, Road Mater.
Pavement Des. 15 (2014) 239–258, https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2013.
860910.
[70] M. Ameri, A. Behnood, Laboratory studies to investigate the properties of CIR
mixes containing steel slag as a substitute for virgin aggregates, Constr. Build.
Mater. 26 (2012) 475–480, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.
06.047.
[71] A. García, P. Lura, M.N. Partl, I. Jerjen, Influence of cement content and
environmental humidity on asphalt emulsion and cement composites
performance, Mater. Struct. Constr. 46 (2013) 1275–1289, https://doi.org/
10.1617/s11527-012-9971-6.