4.4 Article

A Method to Quantify Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement Binder Availability (Effective RAP Binder) in Recycled Asphalt Mixes

Journal

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD
Volume 2673, Issue 1, Pages 205-216

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0361198118821366

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project [09-58]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

State highway agencies recognize the environmental and economic benefits of utilizing reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) in asphalt mixes. Currently, most agencies assume all of the RAP binder content is available for mix design purposes. However, the percentage of available or effective RAP binder in the asphalt mix is usually less than 100% and not quantified, which could yield dry asphalt mix with a high air void content, potentially leading to premature distress. The term available or effective RAP binder refers to the binder that is released from the RAP, becomes fluid, and blends with virgin binder under typical mixing temperatures. This study proposes a method to estimate the RAP binder availability factor (BAF) which can be used to adjust the virgin binder content in RAP mixes to ensure that the mix design optimum binder content is achieved. In this method, asphalt mixes were prepared so that, after mixing and conditioning, the RAP material can be separated from the virgin aggregate, which allows for a thorough evaluation of the extent of RAP binder availability in the asphalt mix. This method was verified in a preliminary experiment and then used to estimate the BAF of RAP from different sources, and a correlation between RAP BAF and the high temperature performance grade (PG) of each RAP source was established. Finally, factors affecting the RAP BAF were also evaluated such as mixing temperature, conditioning period, the use of recycling agents (or rejuvenators), and the method of adding the recycling agent to the mix.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available