Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 14 September 2014
Accepted 25 November 2014
Available online 10 December 2014
Keywords:
Asphalt mixture
Mixture stiffness
Waste Polyethylene Terephthalate
Environmental temperature
Applied stress
Response Surface Methodology
a b s t r a c t
Stiffness of asphalt mixture is a fundamental design parameter of exible pavement. According to literature, stiffness value is very susceptible to environmental and loading conditions. In this paper, effects of
applied stress and temperature on the stiffness modulus of unmodied and Polyethylene Terephthalate
(PET) modied asphalt mixtures were evaluated using Response Surface Methodology (RSM). A quadratic
model was successfully tted to the experimental data. Based on the results achieved in this study, the
temperature variation had the highest impact on the mixtures stiffness. Besides, PET content and amount
of stress showed to have almost the same effect on the stiffness of mixtures. The optimal amount of PET
was found to be 0.41% by weight of aggregate particles to reach the highest stiffness value.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Stiffness of asphalt mixture is a fundamental design parameter
of exible pavement. It was found that there is a correlation
between stiffness and other mixture properties such as rutting
and fatigue, and thus it can be used as a criterion to evaluate
Asphalt Concrete (AC) mixture performance [1]. As it is mentioned
by Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) the stiffness value
of AC mixture is very susceptible to environmental temperature
and loading conditions [2].
Stone Mastic Asphalt (SMA) is gap-graded AC mixture which
has been developed in Germany in 1916s. SMA consists of more
course aggregate particles, mineral ller and asphalt binder. Due
to inherited structure of SMA, it provides better permanent deformation (rutting) performance and durability compared to conventional dense-graded mixture [3,4]. Draindown is a common
problem in SMA mixture because it contains higher amount of
asphalt binder. Hence, to prevent from draindown in SMA mixture
stabilizer additives, bers and polymers are used. Using polymer in
SMA mixture is very common. Utilizing polymer in SMA mixture
prevents not only from the binder draindown but also it can
enhance mixture performance [5,6]. In many cases, using polymers
causes higher construction cost due to high cost of polymers. To
89
120
100
rx max
Sm
2P
pdt
P m 0:27
Ht
Lower limit
Upper limit
Design limit
Passing (%)
80
60
40
20
0
0.075
0.3
0.6
2.36
4.75
9.5
12.5
90
Table 1
Properties of materials.
Property
Unit
Used specication
Value
Requirements
Asphalt
Penetration at 25 C
Softening point
Flash point
Fire point
Specic gravity
0.1 mm
C
C
C
(g/cm3)
ASTM:
ASTM:
ASTM:
ASTM:
ASTM:
D5
D36
D92
D92
D70
87.5
46.6
300
320
1.03
Coarse aggregate
L.A. Abrasion
Flakiness index
Elongation index
Aggregate crushing value
Bulk specic gravity
Absorption
%
%
%
%
(g/cm3)
%
ASTM: C131
BS 812 Part 105.1
BS 812 Part 105.2
BS 812 Part 3
ASTM: C127
ASTM: C127
19.45
2.72
11.26
19.10
2.60
0.72
<30
<20
<20
<30
<2
Fine aggregate
Bulk specic gravity
Absorption
Soundness loss
(g/cm3)
%
%
ASTM: C128
ASTM: C128
ASTM: C88
2.63
0.4
4.1
<2
<15
Table 2
Summary of mix design.
a
b
c
d
PET (%)
BSGa
VMAb (%)
VFAc (%)
OACd (%)
0
0.5
1
2.294
2.296
2.283
18.12
17.34
17.55
77.92
76.90
77.20
6.77
6.36
6.51
Y b0
n
n
n X
n
X
X
X
bi xi
bii x2i
bij xi xj e
i1
i1
including PET modier (A) from zero to 1%, stress levels (B) from
200 kPa to 400 kPa and temperatures (C) between 10 and 40 C,
all at three levels, were studied through the Central Composite
Design (CCD). Related literature and preliminary studies were used
to choose these variables and the irrespective regions of interest
[58,1012].
Table 3 shows the levels and range of the actual values of independent numerical variables. By using Eq. (3) all dened numerical
variables transformed to the coded form.
X i X 0
DX
SSresidual
SSmodel SSresidual
R2adj 1
xi
R2 1
i1 j1
In the Eq. (4), Y is the calculated response, b0 is the constant. Independent variables in coded forms are described as xi, and xj. The
coefcients of bi and bii are the linear and quadratic terms. bij is
the interaction term coefcient, e is the random error, and the studied number of factors is described as n.
Besides, in order to assess appropriateness of the proposed
model, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed. The coefcients of determination (R2 and R2adj) express the wellness of the
t to suggested model. These values can be determined using the
following equations [24,25]:
Adequate Precision
VY
maxY minY
p
V Y
n
1X
pr2
VY
n i1
n
91
Stiffness (MPa)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
0
1
0.5
0
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0
0.5
1
0
1
0
0
0.5
0.5
1
0.5
0
1
1
0.5
0.5
0
0.5
1
0.5
1
0
0.5
1
0.5
0
200
400
300
200
300
300
200
400
300
300
400
300
200
400
200
300
300
400
300
400
200
300
300
300
400
300
400
400
200
400
200
200
300
200
10
40
10
40
25
25
25
25
25
25
10
25
10
10
40
25
25
40
25
40
10
25
40
40
40
10
10
25
40
10
25
40
25
10
10,801
452
10,608
1011
3689
4088
4310
3758
4041
4083
9391
4083
9710
10,762
1071
4025
4081
431
4022
632
9712
3722
645
623
664
10,701
9410
3671
832
10,769
4261
821
4089
10,841
Table 4
Anova analysis for stiffness.
Source
Sum of squares
Degree of freedom
Mean square
F value
Prob > F
Model performance
Model
A
B
C
A2
B2
C2
AB
AC
BC
Residual
Lack of t (LOF)
Pure error
Cor total
478763078.9
2115751.25
588,245
456232176.5
133703.7816
9322.861812
13761302.46
15252.25
1,054,729
42,436
486333.2542
466621.9209
19711.33333
479249412.1
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
24
5
19
33
53195897.65
2115751.25
588,245
456232176.5
133703.7816
9322.861812
13761302.46
15252.25
1,054,729
42,436
20263.88559
93324.38418
1037.438596
2625.158
104.4099
29.02923
22514.55
6.598131
0.460073
679.1048
0.752681
52.04969
2.094169
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001
0.0169
0.5041
<0.0001
0.3942
<0.0001
0.1608
Signicant
Signicant
Signicant
Signicant
Signicant
Insignicant
Signicant
Insignicant
Signicant
Insignicant
89.95654
<0.0001
Signicant
136.602
92
Fig. 2. Design-expert plot; predicted versus actual values plot for stiffness.
93
mixtures, and this represents the importance of ambient temperature on the stiffness property of asphalt mixture.
3.3. Effects of temperature and stress levels on the stiffness
The quadratic model for the effect of stress level and temperature on stiffness is presented in Fig. 6. The response was generated
using the Eq. (9). Fig. 6 shows that by variation of temperature
from 10 C to 40 C the amount of stiffness is decreased, however,
the effect of stress seems to be negligible compared to the temperature variation.
3.4. Effects of temperature and PET content on the stiffness
Effects of two parameters including PET and temperature are
evaluated on stiffness as shown in Fig. 7. Fig. 7 depicts the mixture
stiffness is more susceptible against variation of temperature. The
stiffness amounts decrease from over 10,000 MPa to under
94
Fig. 6. Effects of stress level and temperature on the stiffness, 0.5% PET.
Fig. 7. Effects of PET percentage and temperature on the stiffness, stress level 300 kPa.
95
Acknowledgements
The authors express their sincere thanks for the funding support they received from the Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia, Grant No: FP021-2011A and University of Malaya Grant No:
RP010A-13SUS.
References
[1] Pellinen TK, Witczak MW. Use of stiffness of hot-mix asphalt as a simple
performance test. Trans Res Rec 2002;1789:8090.
[2] Tayebali AA, Tsai BW, Monismith Carl L. SHRP-A-388 stiffness of asphalt
aggregate mixes. Berkeley: Institute of Transportation Studies, University of
California; 1994.
[3] Schmiedlin RB. Stone matrix asphalt: the Wisconsin experience. Trans Res Rec
1988;1616:3441.
[4] Asi IM. Laboratory comparison study for the use of stone matrix asphalt in hot
weather climates. J Constr Build Mater 2006;20:9829.
96
[21] Azargohar R, Dalai AK. Production of activated carbon from Luscar char:
experimental and modeling studies. Microporous Mesoporous Mater
2005;85:21925.
[22] Can MY, Kaya Y, Algur OF. Response surface optimization of the removal of
nickel from aqueous solution by cone biomass of Pinus sylvestris. Bioresour
Technol 2006;97:17615.
[23] Aksu Z, Gnen F. Binary biosorption of phenol and chromium (VI) onto
immobilized activated sludge in a packed bed: prediction of kinetic
parameters and breakthrough curves. Sep Purif Technol 2006;49:20516.
[24] Design-Expert Software, Version 6 users guide; 2001.
[25] Krbahti BK, Rauf MA. Response surface methodology (RSM) analysis of
photoinduced decoloration of toludine blue. Chem Eng J 2008;136:2530.
[26] Krbahti BK, Rauf MA. Determination of optimum operating conditions of
carmine decoloration by UV/H2O2 using response surface methodology. J
Hazard Mater 2009;161:2816.
[27] Krbahti BK, Rauf MA. Application of response surface analysis to the
photolytic degradation of basic red 2 dye. Chem Eng J 2008;138:16671.
[28] Zabeti M, Daud WMAW, Aroua MK. Optimization of the activity of CaO/Al2O3
catalyst for biodiesel production using response surface methodology. Appl
Catal A Gen 2009;366:1549.
[29] Hosseinpour V, Kazemeini M, Mohammadrezaee A. Optimisation of Rupromoted Ir catalysed methanol carbonylation utilising response surface
methodology. Appl Catal A Gen 2011;394:16675.
[30] Garg UK, Kaur MP, Garg VK, Sud D. Removal of nickel (II) from aqueous
solution by adsorption on agricultural waste biomass using a response surface
methodological approach. Bioresour Technol 2008;99:132531.
[31] lmez T. The optimization of Cr (VI) reduction and removal by
electrocoagulation using response surface methodology. J Hazard Mater
2009;162:13718.
[32] Shafeeyan MS, Wan Daud WMA, Houshmand A, Arami-Niya A. The application
of response surface methodology to optimize the amination of activated
carbon for the preparation of carbon dioxide adsorbents. Fuel
2012;94:46572.
[33] Snchez-Romeu J, Pas-Chanfrau JM, Pestana-Vila Y, Lpez-Larraburo I, MassoRodrguez Y, Linares-Domnguez M, et al. Statistical optimization of
immunoafnity purication of hepatitis B surface antigen using response
surface methodology. Biochem Eng J 2008;38:18.
[34] Mason RL, Gunst RF, Hess JL. Statistical design and analysis of experiments,
eighth applications to engineering and science. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley;
2003.