Modification of Asphalt Rubber with Nanoclay towards Enhanced Storage Stability
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.2. Testing Program
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Physical Properties
3.2. Workability
3.3. Rutting Resistance
3.3.1. Rutting Factor
3.3.2. Creep Compliance
3.4. Fatigue Resistance
3.4.1. Fatigue Factor
3.4.2. LAS Fatigue Life
3.5. Low Temperature Cracking Resistance
3.6. Storage Stability
3.6.1. Effects of Nanoclay on Neat Bitumen
3.6.2. Effects of Nanoclay on AR
3.7. Mechanism Investigation
4. Conclusions
- Adding nanoclay slightly increased the viscosity of AR, but had insignificant effects on its rutting, fatigue and low-temperature properties.
- The addition of all three types of nanoclays to AR had obviously positive effects on the storage stability of AR binder, for both high and low CRM dosages.
- Nanoclay A, which is pure montmorillonite with Na+ inorganic group, exhibited the most significant effect in enhancing storage stability.
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Yu, H.; Leng, Z.; Zhou, Z.; Shih, K.; Xiao, F.; Gao, Z. Optimization of Preparation Procedure of Liquid Warm Mix Additive Modified Asphalt Rubber. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 141, 336–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pais, J.C.; Thives, L.P.; Pereirâ, P.A.A.; Trichês, G. Constructing Better Roads with Asphalt Rubber. Rom. J. Transp. Infrastruct. 2015, 4, 23–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Behnood, A.; Olek, J. Stress-Dependent Behavior and Rutting Resistance of Modified Bitumens: An MSCR Approach. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 157, 635–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Behnood, A.; Olek, J. Rheological Properties of Asphalt Binders Modified with Styrene-Butadiene-Styrene (SBS), Ground Tire Rubber (GTR), or Polyphosphoric Acid (PPA). Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 151, 464–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kök, B.V.; Yılmaz, M.; Akpolat, M. Evaluation of the Conventional and Rheological Properties of SBS+Sasobit Modified Binder. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 63, 174–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kök, B.V.; Yılmaz, M. The Effects of Using Lime and Styrene–Butadiene–Styrene on Moisture Sensitivity Resistance of Hot Mix Asphalt. Constr. Build. Mater. 2009, 23, 1999–2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hajikarimi, P.; Rahi, M.; Nejad, F.M. Comparing Different Rutting Specification Parameters Using High Temperature Characteristics of Rubber-Modified Bitumens. Road Mater. Pavement Des. 2015, 16, 751–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, T.; Xiao, F.; Zhu, X.; Huang, B.; Wang, J.; Amirkhanian, S. Energy Consumption and Environmental Impact of Rubberized Asphalt Pavement. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 180, 139–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, J.M.; Yu, X.S.; Gao, Z.M.; Guo, F.; Yu, H.Y. Fatigue Resistance Characterization of Warm Asphalt Rubber by Multiple Approaches. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shu, X.; Huang, B. Recycling of Waste Tire Rubber in Asphalt and Portland Cement Concrete: An Overview. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 67, 217–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akisetty, C.K.; Lee, S.J.; Amirkhanian, S.N. High Temperature Properties of Rubberized Binders Containing Warm Asphalt Additives. Constr. Build. Mater. 2009, 23, 565–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, X.; Wang, Y.H.; Lou, Y.L. Effects of Types and Content of Warm-Mix Additives on CRMA. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2012, 25, 939–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghavibazoo, A.; Abdelrahman, M.; Ragab, M. Effect of Crumb Rubber Modifier Dissolution on Storage Stability of Crumb Rubber–Modified Asphalt. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2013, 2370, 109–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zanzotto, L.; Kennepohl, G.J. Development of Rubber and Asphalt Binders by Depolymerization and Devulcanization of Scrap Tires in Asphalt. Transp. Res. Rec. 1996, 1530, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Golestani, B.; Nam, B.H.; Nejad, F.M. Nanoclay Application to Asphalt Concrete: Characterization of Polymer and Linear Nanocomposite-Modified Bitumen and Mixture. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 91, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, R.; Fang, C.Q.; Liu, P. Storage Stability and Rheological Properties of Asphalt Modified with Waste Packaging Polyethylene and Organic Montmorillonite. Appl. Clay Sci. 2015, 104, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leng, Z.; Tan, Z.F.; Yu, H.Y.; Guo, J. Improvement of Storage Stability of SBS-Modified Asphalt with Nanoclay using a New Mixing Method. Road Mater. Pavement Des. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Százdi, L.T. Structure–Property Relationships in Polymer/Layered Silicate Nanocomposites. Ph.D. Thesis, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Ghile, D.B. Effects of Nanoclay Modification on Rheology of Bitumen and on Performance of Asphalt Mixtures. Master’s Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Zilg, C.; Dietsche, F.; Hoffman, B.; Dietrich, C.; Mühlhaupt, R. Nanofillers Based Upon Organophilic Layered Silicates. Macromol. Symp. 2001, 169, 65–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, J.; Wang, L.; Zeng, X.; Wu, S.; Li, B. Effect of Montmorillonite on Properties of Styrene–Butadiene–Styrene Copolymer Modified Bitumen. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2007, 47, 1289–1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galooyak, S.S.; Dabir, B.; Nazarbeygi, A.E.; Moeini, A. Rheological Properties and Storage Stability of Bitumen/SBS/Montmorillonite Composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 2010, 24, 300–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ASTM. Standard Test Method for Penetration of Bituminous Materials; ASTM designation: D5; American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- ASTM. Standard Test Method for Softening Point of Bitumen (Ring-and-Ball Apparatus); ASTM Designation: D36; American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- AASHTO. Standard Method of Test for Viscosity Determination of Asphalt Binder Using Rotational Viscometer; AASHTO Designation: T316; American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials: Washington, DC, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- AASHTO. Standard Specification for Performance-Graded Asphalt Binder; AASHTO Designation: M320; American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- AASHTO. Performance-Graded Asphalt Binder Using Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR) Test; AASHTO Designation: MP19-10; American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- AASHTO. Standard Method of Test for Estimating Damage Tolerance of Asphalt Binders Using the Linear Amplitude Sweep; AASHTO Designation: TP101; American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- AASHTO. Standard Method of Test for Determining the Flexural Creep Stiffness of Asphalt Binder Using the Bending Beam Rheometer (BBR); AASHTO Designation: T313; American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- ASTM. Standard Practice for Determining the Separation Tendency of Polymer from Polymer Modified Asphalt; ASTM Designation: D7173; American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Abdelrahman, M.; Katti, D.R.; Ghavibazoo, A.; Upadhyay, H.B.; Katti, K.S. Engineering Physical Properties of Asphalt Binders through Nanoclay–Asphalt Interactions. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2014, 26, 04014099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Navarro, F.J.; Partal, P.; Martı́Nez-Boza, F.; Gallegos, C. Thermo-Rheological Behaviour and Storage Stability of Ground Tire Rubber-Modified Bitumens. Fuel 2004, 83, 2041–2049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghavibazoo, A.; Abdelrahman, M. Composition Analysis of Crumb Rubber during Interaction with Asphalt and Effect on Properties of Binder. Int. J. Pavement Eng. 2013, 14, 517–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vargas, M.A.; Moreno, L.; Montiel, R.; Manero, O.; Vázquez, H. Effects of Montmorillonite (Mt) and Two Different Organo-Mt Additives on the Performance of Asphalt. Appl. Clay Sci. 2017, 139, 20–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saboo, N.; Kumar, R. Ranking the Rheological Response of SBS- and EVA-Modified Bitumen using MSCR and LAS Tests. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2018, 30, 04018165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, Y.; Lee, J.K.; Lee, J.K.; Jeong, Y.M.; Cheong, S.I. Production and Dispersion Stability of Nanoparticles in Nanofluids. Powder Technol. 2008, 186, 145–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loeber, L.; Muller, G.; Morel, J.; Sutton, O. Bitumen in Colloid Science: A Chemical. Structural and Rheological approach. Fuel 1998, 77, 1443–1450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leite, L.F.M.; Soares, B.G. Interaction of Asphalt with Ground Tire Rubber. Pet. Sci. Technol. 1999, 17, 1071–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeong, K.D.; Lee, S.J.; Amirkhanian, S.N.; KimInteraction, K.W. Interaction Effects of Crumb Rubber Modified Bitumens. Constr. Build. Mater. 2010, 24, 824–831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Nanoclay ID | A | B | C |
---|---|---|---|
Composition | Pure MMT with Na+ inorganic group | Pure MMT with Hydroxyl organic ammonium | Pure MMT with Double alkyl ammonium |
Specific gravity | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.7 |
Bulk gravity | ≤0.3 | ≤0.3 | ≤0.3 |
Hydrophilicity | Medium | Strong | Poor |
X-ray d001 | 2.24 nm | 2.09 nm | 3.73 nm |
Applicable polymer | PE, PP, PVC | N/A | PP and other thermos plasticity polymers |
Binder Type | Modifier | Dosage of Crumb Rubber (wt. %) | Dosage of Nanoclay (wt. %) |
---|---|---|---|
Pen60/70 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
AR10 | CRM | 10 | N/A |
A10 | CRM, Nanoclay A | 10 | 3 |
B10 | CRM, Nanoclay B | 10 | 3 |
C10 | CRM, Nanoclay C | 10 | 3 |
AR20 | CRM | 20 | N/A |
A20 | CRM, Nanoclay A | 20 | 3 |
B20 | CRM, Nanoclay B | 20 | 3 |
C20 | CRM, Nanoclay C | 20 | 3 |
A0 | Nanoclay A | N/A | 3 |
B0 | Nanoclay B | N/A | 3 |
C0 | Nanoclay C | N/A | 3 |
Performance Property | Tests | Aging Level | Specification/Standard | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|
General property | Penetration | unaged | ASTM D5 | N/A |
Softening point | ASTM D36 | N/A | ||
Workability | Rotational viscosity | unaged | AASHTO T316 | 135 °C & 160 °C |
Rutting resistance | Rutting factor (G*/sin δ) | unaged | AASHTO M320 | 2 mm gap; 25 mm plate; beginning at 64 °C |
MSCR | RTFO aged | AASHTO MP19-10 | 2 mm gap; 25 mm plate; 64 °C | |
Fatigue resistance | Fatigue factor (G*sin δ) | RTFO + PAV aged | AASHTO M320 | 2 mm gap; 8 mm plate; beginning at 25 °C |
LAS | AASHTO TP101 | 2 mm gap; 8 mm plate; 25 °C | ||
Storage stability | Softening point | unaged | ASTM D36 | N/A |
Complex shear modulus | AASHTO M320 | 25 mm plate; 25 °C, 64 °C, 70 °C and 82 °C | ||
Low temperature cracking resistance | BBR | RTFO + PAV aged | AASHTO T313 | −12 °C, −18 °C, −24 °C |
Internal layer distance of nanoclay | XRD | unaged | N/A | N/A |
Binder Type | Jnr | % Recovery | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
@ 0.1 kPa (kPa−1) | @ 3.2 kPa (kPa−1) | Jnr% Diff | @ 0.1 kPa (kPa−1) | @ 3.2 kPa (kPa−1) | |
Pen60/70 | 3.988 | 4.586 | 15.0 | 2.1 | −0.5 |
AR10 | 1.723 | 2.230 | 29.4 | 10.4 | 2.1 |
A10 | 1.635 | 2.145 | 31.2 | 11.4 | 1.9 |
B10 | 1.548 | 2.105 | 36.0 | 13.1 | 1.9 |
C10 | 1.470 | 2.117 | 44.0 | 15.6 | 1.9 |
AR20 | 0.019 | 0.098 | 402.6 | 91.6 | 63.0 |
A20 | 0.034 | 0.168 | 392.7 | 89.0 | 55.8 |
B20 | 0.013 | 0.090 | 608.0 | 94.6 | 67.1 |
C20 | 0.023 | 0.141 | 518.4 | 92.0 | 59.5 |
Binder Type | A | B | Applied Strain (%) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 | 4 | 8 | 15 | 30 | |||
Pen60/70 | 2.81 × 105 | −3.02 | 3.46 × 104 | 4.26 × 103 | 5.24 × 102 | 7.83 × 101 | 9.64 × 100 |
AR10 | 4.63 × 105 | −3.04 | 5.63 × 104 | 6.86 × 103 | 8.34 × 102 | 1.23 × 102 | 1.50 × 101 |
A10 | 4.07 × 105 | −2.98 | 5.16 × 104 | 6.56 × 103 | 8.33 × 102 | 1.28 × 102 | 1.63 × 101 |
B10 | 4.30 × 105 | −3.03 | 5.27 × 104 | 6.46 × 103 | 7.92 × 102 | 1.18 × 102 | 1.45 × 101 |
C10 | 7.17 × 105 | −3.09 | 8.45 × 104 | 9.95 × 103 | 1.17 × 103 | 1.69 × 102 | 1.99 × 101 |
AR20 | 6.74 × 106 | −3.47 | 6.08 × 105 | 5.48 × 104 | 4.93 × 103 | 5.56 × 102 | 5.01 × 101 |
A20 | 4.88 × 106 | −3.32 | 4.89 × 105 | 4.89 × 104 | 4.89 × 103 | 6.07 × 102 | 6.08 × 101 |
B20 | 1.02 × 107 | −3.45 | 9.39 × 105 | 8.61 × 104 | 7.90 × 103 | 9.04 × 102 | 8.29 × 101 |
C20 | 8.87 × 106 | −3.40 | 8.40 × 105 | 7.96 × 104 | 7.54 × 103 | 8.89 × 102 | 8.43 × 101 |
Binder Type | −12 °C | −18 °C | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Stifness (MPa) | m-Value | Stifness (MPa) | m-Value | |
Pen60/70 | 280 | 0.280 | 541 | 0.199 |
AR10 | 274 | 0.301 | 527 | 0.208 |
A10 | 208 | 0.307 | 437 | 0.217 |
B10 | 241 | 0.301 | 482 | 0.207 |
C10 | 224 | 0.300 | 432 | 0.204 |
AR20 | 166 | 0.347 | 321 | 0.239 |
A20 | 110 | 0.338 | 220 | 0.268 |
B20 | 89.1 | 0.358 | 209 | 0.299 |
C20 | 105 | 0.348 | 238 | 0.268 |
Binder Type | 25 °C | 64 °C | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top (kPa) | Bottom (kPa) | SI | Top (kPa) | Bottom (kPa) | SI | |
AR10 | 893.184 | 915.579 | 1.24 | 1.952 | 4.856 | 42.66 |
A10 | 874.587 | 836.958 | 2.20 | 2.884 | 2.874 | 0.17 |
B10 | 873.405 | 889.83 | 0.93 | 2.781 | 2.777 | 0.07 |
C10 | 812.966 | 755.015 | 3.70 | 2.725 | 2.343 | 7.54 |
AR20 | 1458.138 | 718.015 | 34.01 | 10.888 | 10.838 | 0.23 |
A20 | 1065.133 | 1008.977 | 2.71 | 10.69 | 10.71 | 0.09 |
B20 | 1062.84 | 961.9 | 4.99 | 14.545 | 15.166 | 2.09 |
C20 | 886.238 | 970.832 | 4.56 | 11.611 | 12.159 | 2.31 |
Binder Type | 70 °C | Binder Type | 82 °C | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top (kPa) | Bottom (kPa) | SI | Top (kPa) | Bottom (kPa) | SI | ||
AR10 | 0.927 | 2.422 | 44.64 | AR20 | 2.576 | 2.715 | 2.63 |
A10 | 1.377a | 1.416 | 1.40 | A20 | 2.905 | 2.895 | 0.17 |
B10 | 1.364 | 1.379 | 0.55 | B20 | 4.143 | 4.242 | 1.18 |
C10 | 1.344 | 1.136 | 8.39 | C20 | 3.102 | 3.37 | 4.14 |
Binder Type | k (Top) | k (Bottom) | SI (k) |
---|---|---|---|
AR10 | −0.0670 | −0.0577 | 7.4868 |
A10 | −0.0628 | −0.0622 | 0.4856 |
B10 | −0.0630 | −0.0631 | 0.1014 |
C10 | −0.0624 | −0.0633 | 0.7087 |
AR20 | −0.0493 | −0.0432 | 6.6247 |
A20 | −0.0460 | −0.0456 | 0.4637 |
B20 | −0.0432 | −0.0421 | 1.2228 |
C20 | −0.0439 | −0.0441 | 0.1520 |
Nanoclay Type | Original Layer Distance (Å) | Measured Layer Distance in AR10 (Increment) (Å) | Measured Layer Distance in AR20 (Increment) (Å) |
---|---|---|---|
Nanoclay A | 22.33 | 48.46 (26.13) | 46.49 (24.16) |
Nanoclay B | 20.09 | 50.70 (30.61) | 48.42 (28.33) |
Nanoclay C | 37.32 | 46.33 (9.01) | 48.33 (11.01) |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yu, J.; Ren, Z.; Yu, H.; Wang, D.; Svetlana, S.; Korolev, E.; Gao, Z.; Guo, F. Modification of Asphalt Rubber with Nanoclay towards Enhanced Storage Stability. Materials 2018, 11, 2093. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11112093
Yu J, Ren Z, Yu H, Wang D, Svetlana S, Korolev E, Gao Z, Guo F. Modification of Asphalt Rubber with Nanoclay towards Enhanced Storage Stability. Materials. 2018; 11(11):2093. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11112093
Chicago/Turabian StyleYu, Jiangmiao, Zhibin Ren, Huayang Yu, Duanyi Wang, Shekhovtsova Svetlana, Evgeniy Korolev, Zheming Gao, and Feng Guo. 2018. "Modification of Asphalt Rubber with Nanoclay towards Enhanced Storage Stability" Materials 11, no. 11: 2093. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11112093