Is pavement Quality of any Value

Over the past 50 or more years I have read about adding all sorts of waste materials to pavements or to the material beneath the pavements. Some of the materials have benefits, some are just garbage.

Research has shown that including reclaimed asphalt in new pavements has a benefit with respect to quality as well as cost. If the resulting blend of new and recycled asphalt meets the specification requirements, the pavement should be at least as good as pavements made with new asphalt. One value of the recycled material (RAP) is that the rate of oxidation of the old asphalt on the aggregate will be less than that of new asphalt on new aggregate. That is because the rate of oxidation of new asphalt on aggregate deceases with time, (except perhaps for an asphalt from one particular crude source). The RAP asphalt has already experience the rapid oxidation phase.

Recycled asphalt shingles (RAS) are now being used. At the present time I am not comfortable with that although future testing may find it works well. Shingles consist of an air blown saturate in a felt on which a filled coating asphalt is placed. The softening point of the coating is above 200° F. Past experience has shown that the presence of air blown asphalt can accelerate non-load associated cracking. I don’t know if the addition of elastomers helps with this problem or not. Non-load associated cracking occurs when the binder cannot relax thermal stresses before they reach the failure stress. Time will tell.

Pavements have been used to get rid of glass. This is a novelty as there isn’t enough glass around to have an impact. It can work, however it must be realized that glass likes water better than asphalt resulting in possible areas of water damage.

I have heard that some agencies are adding reclaimed oil to asphalt. That is a very bad idea as paraffins and asphaltenes are incompatible. Asphalt naturally contains some paraffins which are kept in solution by the aromatics and polar materials in asphalt. Loading up the asphalt with more paraffins can cause phase separation, which would be expected to cause non-load associated cracking. Before adding such oils to asphalt it might be well to read up on the research done by Rostler et al. half a century or more ago. Refineries have had corrosion problems with the addition of such oils to their crude feed.

Reclaimed tire buffings have been added to asphalt for many years with success. Truck tire buffings (natural rubber) and passenger tire buffings (SBR) will react differently. There can be a problem in QA testing. A contractor may specify that they have added a certain amount of the tire buffings but testing on a sample taken from construction may indicate that there was less than what the contractor said there was. The tire buffings would be expected to contain some processing oils which would be extracted out, and if there was natural rubber in the buffings, it might have broken down some as cis-polyisoprene (natural rubber) is not as heat stable as SBR. It would be well for the contractor to tell the owner how much of what was added would not be found.

The original specifications for asphalt and hot mix were based upon unmodified asphalt and aggregate. Experience has shown that those specifications can still be valid with the addition of certain polymers and with the addition of lime to the aggregate. However adding other materials to the pavement simply to get rid of them doesn’t mean there won’t be unforeseen consequences ever if such mixes meet specification requirements. Early non-load associated cracking is especially difficult to predict.


Asphalt Compositions Vary.

Those skilled in the art of asphalt technology have known that the composition of an asphalt depends primarily on the crude source. Secondary effects are oxidation and modification either by the addition of polymers or air blowing, which is controlled oxidation to make roofing, pond linings etc. The properties of an asphalt therefore can also vary according to the crude source. Back in the 1960s Rostler, White and others compiled a list of properties and compositions of a very large number of asphalts. It turns out that the properties of blends of asphalts from different sources are sometimes not predictable.

Blending Predictions

The plot of the loglog(viscosity) vs. log(absolute temperature) of an asphalt generally is a straight line. Special graph paper has been available for decades. It turns out that in blending petroleum products, including asphalt, using that graph paper with 0% of an oil at 100° F and 100% at 300° will generally be linear also. At times the X axis may be assumed to be linear rather than the log(absolute temperature). (In ASTM D4887, the X axis is linear.) The resulting plot is not always linear, however, depending upon the composition of the second ingredient. As an example, when blending recovered asphalt from RAP with an aromatic oil, such as Dutrex® 739 or Reclamite® base stock, the viscosity may drop faster than predicted. On the other hand, if a paraffinic oil is used, the actual viscosity may be higher than that predicted from the plot.

We had found that blending 50% 85/100 asphalt from California costal crude with 50% 85/100 asphalt from San Joachim Valley crude resulted in an asphalt with a penetration in the 130s. The same thing was found with a blend of Dubai asphalt with LA Basin asphalt. There are thermodynamic reasons for this based upon non-electrolyte solution chemistry.

Recycled Shingles (RAS)

Roofing asphalt is manufactured by air blowing fluxes containing added lube stock. This changes the composition. An asphalt shingle contains two different air blown products. One is used to saturate the felt or fiberglass while the other is a more viscous asphalt (more air blown) and used in the coating. These two asphalts might be incompatible as the coating asphalt, though harder, contains more oil. If the oil from the coating migrates to the felt or fiberglass the coating might slide off. There is a test used to measure compatibility. Also ferric chloride or phosphorus pentoxide might be used as a catalyst. As the use of air blown asphalt in paving has been correlated with non-load associated cracking, care should be taken in recycling such asphalt. Cracking occurs when the asphalt cannot relax stresses as fast as they build up. A low temperature ductility test is valuable in detecting asphalts that are prone to crack.

Recycled asphalt shingles (RAS) are now being used in paving. In recovering the asphalt from shingles the saturant asphalt and the coating asphalt are blended. It will be interesting in following the performance of pavements using RAS and RAS/RAP added asphalt. As mentioned above, historically, air blown asphalts in pavements are more prone to crack.


It is therefore important to understand that the terms “asphalt” or “bitumen” describe a broad set of materials as does the word “vehicle” in describing a set of transportation equipment. Just because two asphalts are black does not mean that they are compatible. And just because two asphalts are of the same grade, does not mean that a blend will be the same grade. Also, the oxidation process that occurs over time in the pavement is not the same as that which happens in the hot plants, and which is mimicked by the Rolling Thin Film Oven test (RTFO). The RTFO oxidation is the same process that occurs in air blowing. That implies that the chemistry of the oxidation of the asphalt in RAP is different than the chemistry of the asphalt in RAS.


Controlling Voids in Mineral Aggregate (VMA)

Considerable effort is being made to reduce costs and amount of hydrocarbons that go into hot mixed asphalt (HMA) pavements. One such effort is to find ways to mix and compact at a lower temperature thus reducing the amount of fuel required. However, saving fuel can also be obtained by reducing the amount of asphalt used as asphalt can also be sold as a component of heavy fuel oil or cracked to make diesel, gasoline etc.

Mix Design.

Irrespective of the type of mix design or the amount of modification of the asphalt, the basic properties for an acceptable product remains the same. If we get down to basics, we want the gradation to be such that it inhibits rutting, want the gradation in the # 30 sieve size to be such that there isn’t a lack of material in that area and want the composition of the binder to be such that the film thickness is somewhere between 7 and 10 microns (based upon our experience. Idaho specifies 6 microns as a minimum) and, for example for a ½” nominal design, an effective asphalt content of 4-5%.

Trade off between % Asphalt and VMA. As the VMA increases, the % asphalt  required increases at a rate of about 0.25% per each percent of increased VMA, the exact amount depending on the actual specific gravities of the aggregate and asphalt. For a 400 ton an hour plant, the reduction of the VMA of 1% would reduce the asphalt by one ton per hour or a savings of $500/hour if asphalt is $500/ton.

Silliness of the “Forbidden Zone”. Some Superpave gradation specifications have a “forbidden zone” for the gradation through which the gradation must not go. It is supposed to be on the maximum density line (on the 0.45 power gradation curve) of the aggregate; however, in addition to being silly, it doesn’t even fall on the actual maximum density curve for the job mix formula.

Effect of RAP on VMA. With the introduction of SUPERPAVE the VMA, which used to be 13% if one was used, was increased to 14%. We were having problems in being able to make the 14% with granite aggregate, and found that we had to control this by blowing out -#200 material. On one project I used a factorial experimental design to aid in adjusting the gradation with considerable success. This allows evaluating the effect of numerous variables on mix properties. Of course saving money by reducing the VMA was not an option. With the introduction of RAP, however, the VMAs rose by as much as 2%, requiring as much as 0.5% more total asphalt (including that in the RAP).

Reducing VMA to Reduce Cost

A number of years ago I did a Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization on gradation data. I found that there were only three truly independent variables, one of which was the % -#200 material. By using three independent aggregate criteria and % asphalt as a fourth variable we should be able to determine what changes should be made in the mix to minimize the VMA within the specification criteria, thus minimizing cost. I would suggest the use of a 24 factorial design with triplicate centerpoint to find the most economical gradation. The following would be for a ½” nominal mix design. For variables I would use: 1) the % of the gradation between the ½” and the #4 screens; 2) the % of the gradation between the #4 and #30; 3) the  % -#200; and 4) the % asphalt. We have found that a Hveem compaction at the recommended compaction temperatures for a 75 gyration Superpave design give the same results as the gyratory compaction. We would suggest that this be done, therefore, with the Hveem compactor as it uses only 1/4th as much aggregate and asphalt as does the 6” gyratory design however gyratory compaction could be used. The advantage of the Hveem is we can also get as a bonus the stability. I would stipulate that one of the boundary limits would be that no gradation point should be above a line on the gradation curve (0.45 power graph) from the % passing through the first sieve that retains aggregate (1/2”) to the % passing of the #200 sieve. This would provide the information needed to minimize the VMA within the specification. The results could provide the starting gradation and asphalt needed for a gyratory design.

Decreasing the VMA from 16.5 to 14.5% for 100,000 tons of mix would save $ 250,000 of $500/ ton asphalt.

Petroleum Sciences, Inc. has the equipment and mathematical knowledge (as there is considerable mathematics involved) to provide a service should a contractor wish to reduce costs. We can set up the experiment to be done in the contractors own facility and then evaluate the results or do the complete project in our facilities.

Robert L. Dunning,,