Performance of field produced rejuvenated 30% RAP surface mix in Northwest Iowa

It is felt that shortening the abstract will take away from paper a very good summary. If it is possible could the abstract not be shortened. However, if this is not possible then the revised version of the abstract is shown below: In this research, as part of a broad investigation, it was determined that 3.6% epoxidized methyl soyate (EMS) by weight of PG 58-34H binder (0.125% by total mix weight) was needed to achieve a PG 52-40H binder due to there being 30% RAP in the mix design (29.80% in the total binder content). Both lab and field produced mix verification showed that 0.125% EMS met the criteria for moisture susceptibility/rutting and low temperature cracking according to Iowa DOT specifications. For comparison purposes, there was a Control mix (PG 58-34H binder and 18% RAP) with no rejuvenator, and a 30% RAP mix design made using a commercial tall oil derivative (CTOD) rejuvenator from the contractor of which both met Iowa DOT criteria for low temperature cracking, but that the Control group did not have adequate rutting performance for a binder rated as PG 58-34H.

Automated summary

The research found that adding 3.6% epoxidized methyl soyate to PG 58-34H binder in a mix design containing 30% RAP can achieve a binder rated as PG 52-40H while meeting Iowa DOT specifications for moisture susceptibility/rutting and low temperature cracking. The study also compared the performance of this rejuvenated mix with a Control mix and a mix design using a commercial tall oil derivative as a rejuvenator, with the conclusion that the rejuvenated mix outperformed the Control mix in rutting performance.