Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 30, Issue 10, pp 2584–2590 | Cite as

A new look at rubber-modified asphalt binders

  • G. R. Morrison
  • S. A. M. Hesp


The high-temperature rheological characteristics and the low-temperature fracture properties of asphalt binders containing crumb and devulcanized rubber waste have been investigated. Asphalt binders containing crumb rubber of different mesh sizes, with and without surface modification, and a commercially available binder containing devulcanized rubber, were tested and compared with an unmodified asphalt and three commercially available polymer-modified binders. Interfacial modification of asphalt systems containing crumb rubber was found to give binders that were far superior in their low-temperature performance to commercially available products. The data suggest that a crack-pinning or crack-blunting mechanism is responsible for the increase in toughness found in these systems. A commercially available binder containing devulcanized rubber showed reasonably good high-temperature properties; however, its low-temperature fracture performance was disappointing in that it was not significantly better than that of unmodified asphalt binders.


Polymer Rubber Fracture Property Asphalt Mesh Size 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    C. H. Mcdonald, in “Highway Research Record 146” (Highways Research Board), (1966) pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. R. Piggott, W. Ng, J. D. George and R. T. Woodhams, in “Proceedings of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists”, Vol. 46 (1977) p. 495.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    L. Flynn, Roads Bridges, 12 (1992) 42.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. Moore, “Construction Equipment,” February (Cahners, 1991).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. Kuennen, Roads Bridges January (1992).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. E. Huffman, ASTM Special Technical Publication 724, (American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia PA, 1980) p. 3–12.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Bjorklund, in “Proceedings of the VII World Road Congress”, Vienna (1979).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H. B. Takallou and R. G. Hicks, Transportation Research Record 1171 (TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1988) pp. 113–20.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. L. Mcquillen, J. F. Member, H. B. Takallou, R. G. Hicks and D. Esch, J. Transp. Eng. 114 (1988) 259.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    F. P. Narusch, “Alaska Experience with Rubberized Asphalt Concrete Pavements, 1979–1982”, Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Div. of Design and Construction, Central Region, Juneau, Alaska.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. C. Esch, Report no. FHWA-AK-RD-85-07 (FHWA, 1985).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. Esch, Transportation Research Record 860 (TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, (1992) pp. 5–13.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. B. Takallou, “Evaluation of Mix ingredients on the Performance of Rubber Modified Asphalt Mixtures”, Oregon State University, Oregon, 12 June 1988.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    M. Heitzman, in Transportation Research Board 71st Annual Meeting, 12–16 January 1992, Washington DC, Preprint 920549.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. Tarricone, Civil Eng. April (1993) 46.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. C. Page, B. E. Ruth and R. C. West, in Transportation Research Board 71st Annual Meeting, 12–16 January 1992, Washington, DC, Preprint 920452.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. E. Joseph and G. Kennepohl, “Trial Section with Polymer-Modified Asphalts on Highway 400”, Report PAV-91-03, Ministry of Transportion of Ontario, Downsview, Ontario, June 1991.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    P. E. Joseph and J. H. Dickson and G. Kennepohl, in “Proceedings of the Canadian Technical Asphalt Association” (1992), pp. 243–264.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    F. R. Davis, US Pat. 4485 201, 27 November 1984.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. W. Causyn and K. Thys, World Pat. Appl. 92/21820.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Eecoflex, “Paving the Way to a Better World”, Company literature, Bitumar Inc., Montreal, Quebec (1993).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    S. A. M. Hesp, Z. Liang and R. T. Woodhams, US Pat. Appl. 92-863734 and WO Pat. Appl. 93-07219.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rheometrics Dynamic Analyser RDA II, Owners Manual (Rheometrics Inc., 1990) pp. 8–19 to 8–21.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    “Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness of Metallic Materials”, ASTM Method E-399-90, (American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 1984).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    D. Broek, “Elementary Engineering Fracture Mechanics”, 3rd revised Edn (Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, 1982) p. 171.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    A. J. Kinloch and R. J. Young, “Fracture Behaviour of Polymers” (Elsevier Applied Science, New York, 1983) p. 93.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    J. L. Goodrich, in “Proceedings of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists”, Vol. 57 (1988) p. 116Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. R. Morrison
    • 1
  • S. A. M. Hesp
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryQueen's UniversityKingstonCanada

Personalised recommendations