Using Frequency Sweep Test to Predict Creep and

Recovery Response of Asphalt Binders

Nikhil Saboo, Ph.D. 1; Abhisek Mudgal, Ph.D. 2; and Akriti Singh 3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi on 12/19/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: This paper presents a methodology to obtain creep and recovery response of asphalt binders merely by using frequency sweep
tests, which are relatively easier to conduct. This proposed methodology would be useful for practitioners and researchers in modeling time-
dependent rutting performance of asphalt binders using simple linear viscoelastic measurements obtained from dynamic shear rheometer
(DSR). Frequency sweep tests were conducted on four different asphalt binders at temperatures ranging from 10°C to 70°C. Complex modulus
master curves were constructed for 40°C, 50°C, and 60°C followed by presmoothing using a power law and modeling using a Prony series. The
estimated complex modulus, which is in frequency domain, was translated into the relaxation modulus, a time domain entity. The relaxation
modulus was converted to creep compliance using Laplace transform. The resultant creep compliance was modeled using a generalized Burgers
model (GBM), which was used for predicting creep and recovery response of asphalt binders for different loading and unloading periods. The
predicted creep and recovery profiles were successfully validated with the multiple stress creep and recovery (MSCR) measurements obtained at
40°C, 50°C, and 60°C for all binders. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002707. © 2019 American Society of Civil Engineers.

Introduction unmodified and modified binders (Dubois et al. 2014; Saboo

Asphalt binder is a viscoelastic material whose rheological behav-
ior can be evaluated either in oscillatory or transient mode. Re-
searchers have recommended the oscillatory mode of testing for
asphalt binders using a dynamic shear rheometer (DSR) (Yusoff
et al. 2013). Over the years, researchers have successfully used
DSR to characterize asphalt binders (Airey et al. 2003, 2016;
Masad et al. 2008; Saboo 2016). The most basic test, which is usu-
ally performed initially, is a frequency sweep test (Airey et al. 2004;
Dondi et al. 2014). A frequency sweep test performed below the
linear viscoelastic (LVE) limit and at different temperatures can
be used for determining several rheological properties of asphalt
binders. Commonly, the time–temperature superposition principle
(TTSP) is used for combining the effects of temperature and time
(frequency). A master curve is plotted to study the behavior at a
wide range of frequency and time domain for different viscoelastic
functions such as complex modulus G
ðωÞ or creep compliance
JðtÞ (Matsumoto 1988; Yusoff et al. 2013). Extending the appli-
cability of DSR, new test methods have recently evolved to
study the rutting and fatigue performance of asphalt binders
(David and Domingos 2013; Hintz et al. 2011; Johnson et al. 2009;
Zhang et al. 2015). The multiple stress creep and recovery (MSCR)
test has been developed recently to study the rutting performance of
asphalt binders (D’Angelo 2009). Various laboratory and field
investigations have proved this method to be applicable for both
1 2001; Singh et al. 2016; Yusoff et al. 2013). However, to the best
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology (BHU) Varanasi, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 221005, India
(corresponding author). Email: nikhilsaboo.civ@iitbhu.ac.in
2
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology (BHU) Varanasi, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 221005, India.
Email: abhisek.civ@iitbhu.ac.in
3
Undergraduate Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of
Engineering Science and Technology, West Bengal 711103, India. Email:
akritispriha70@gmail.com
Note. This manuscript was submitted on July 6, 2018; approved on
November 21, 2018; published online on March 30, 2019. Discussion per-
iod open until August 30, 2019; separate discussions must be submitted
for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Materials in
Civil Engineering, © ASCE, ISSN 0899-1561.
and Kumar 2016). All these tests require a lot of testing time, DSR
operating hours, and sample preparation. Modeling enables studying
the behavior of materials at various conditions using significantly
fewer experiments.
However, utilizing fewer tests for predicting properties of a
wide range of viscoelastic materials such as an asphalt binder
requires interconversion of parameters into different forms, and this
may involve using complex mathematics. Relaxation modulus
½EðtÞ and creep compliance ½DðtÞ are two important parameters
characterizing LVE materials (Park and Schapery 1999). For as-
phalt binders, obtaining creep compliance from DSR data is not
straightforward. DSR operates using steady-state harmonic excita-
tion and thus it is important to be able to convert the frequency-
dependent modulus to the time-dependent relaxation modulus
(Park and Kim 2001). Over the years, researchers have proposed
various interconversion techniques, both exact and approximate,
to convert the relaxation modulus to creep compliance and vice
versa (Christensen 1982; Denby 1975; Park and Schapery 1999).
Also, methods are available for appropriate conversion of material
functions from the frequency domain to the time domain (Ebrahimi
et al. 2014). In addition to this, a large number of research articles
have focused on expressing viscoelastic material functions, specifi-
cally for asphalt binders, using explicit analytical representation
(Behzadfar and Hatzikiriakos 2013; Di Benedetto et al. 2004;
Monsia 2012; Moon et al. 2013; Mun et al. 2007; Park and Kim
knowledge of the authors, these modeling procedures and intercon-
version techniques have not been used synergistically for predicting
the creep and recovery response of asphalt binders.
This study was aimed at using multiple analytical techniques
for predicting the creep and recovery response of asphalt binders
using frequency sweep data from DSR. The literature suggests that
this type of study has not been conducted previously for asphalt
binders, which formed the motivation of this research. This study
will likely be useful for practitioners and researchers in predicting
the time-dependent rutting performance of asphalt binders using
simple LVE data obtained from DSR. The process will hence save
time and resources required for experiments.

© ASCE 04019081-1 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2019, 31(6): 04019081

 Table 1. Properties and processing variables of binders used in the study
Properties and variables VG-10 VG-30 PMB-1 PMB-2
Penetration (dmm) 75 62 56 49
Softening point (°C) 47 49 60 65
Penetration index −1.01 −0.95 1.31 1.92
Viscosity at 60°C (Pa · s) 258 375 2,120 6,120
Storage stability, Δsoftening point (°C) — — 1.5 1.3
High-temperature PG grade PG 58-XX PG 64-XX PG 70-XX PG 76-XX
True grade, intermediate temperature (°C) 25.3 20.1 15.7 12.2
Mixing temperature (°C) — — 180 190
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi on 12/19/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Blending time (min) — — 60 30

Shear rate (rpm) — — 1,500 600

Materials and Experiments was symbolized as εr . The following calculations according to

ASTM D7405-10a (ASTM 2012) were performed for analyzing the
Materials results obtained from the MSCR test. The calculations were made
corresponding to each creep and recovery cycle (N ¼ 1–10)
Two viscosity grade (VG) binders, VG-10 and VG-30, and two
polymer-modified binders (PMBs), PMB-1 and PMB-2, were used ε1 ¼ εc − ε0 ð1Þ
for validating the proposed methodology. They were modified us-
ing 3% styrene-butadiene-styrene (SBS) and 5% ethylene-vinyl
acetate (EVA), respectively. VG-10 was selected as the base binder ε10 ¼ εr − ε0 ð2Þ
for modification. Since the focus of this paper is to demonstrate the
application of the analytical techniques for predicting creep and The average percent recovery at all the stress levels was calcu-
recovery response of asphalt binders, details about the preparation lated as
method and performance of the binders are not included. The
conventional properties of the binders are presented in Table 1. RðσÞ ¼ sumðεr ðσ; NÞÞ=10 ð3Þ

where
Frequency Sweep Test
A frequency sweep test was performed, using a DSR, on all the ðε1 − ε10 Þ · 100
asphalt binders. In the initial part of the study, a strain sweep test εr ðσ; NÞ ¼ ð4Þ
ε1
was conducted to measure the LVE strain limit for all the asphalt
binders at different frequencies and temperatures. The magnitude
Similarly, the average percent nonrecoverable creep compliance
of strain in the frequency sweep test was chosen to ensure that
was calculated as
the asphalt binders remained in the LVE domain. The frequency
was varied from 0.1 to 20 Hz. The test was conducted from
J nr ðσÞ ¼ sumðJ nr ðσ; NÞÞ=10 ð5Þ
10°C to 70°C, with a 10°C increment in temperature. The spindle
was 8 mm in diameter with a 2-mm plate gap for temperatures
where
between 10°C and 40°C, and was 25 mm in diameter with a
1-mm plate gap for the remaining temperatures.
ðε10 Þ
J nr ðσ; NÞ ¼ ð6Þ
σ
MSCR Test
An MSCR test was performed to evaluate the performance of the The average nonrecoverable creep compliance (J nr ) (up to three
binders in rutting at 40°C, 50°C, and 60°C. These temperatures significant digits) and average percent recovery (R) at the three test
correspond to the high pavement temperatures at which rutting temperatures are given in Table 2 and Fig. 1. Because the main
could be the predominant failure criteria. The MSCR test was con- objective of the paper is to evaluate the suitability of analytical
ducted on asphalt binder specimens in accordance with AASHTO techniques for predicting the rutting response of asphalt binders,
TP70 (AASHTO 2012). DSR using 25-mm spindle and 1-mm gap a detailed comparison of the performance of these binders is not
was used for conducting the test. Despite the fact that a standard presented.
MSCR test is performed at stress levels of 1 and 3.2 kPa, several
studies have correlated the rutting behavior of asphalt mixes cor-
responding to rut depths measured with a wheel rut tester with the
creep and recovery response at 3.2 kPa. In this study also, the re- Table 2. Average J nr (kPa−1 ) values at different temperatures
sponse measurement for the binders was restricted to a stress level Stress level 3.2 kPa
of 3.2 kPa. Ten cycles of loading were given at the stress level.
Binder 40°C 50°C 60°C
The rutting susceptibility of the binders was evaluated by calcu-
lating the nonrecoverable creep compliance (J nr ) and percent VG-10 0.081 0.588 2.760
recovery (R) from the measured data averaged over the 10 cycles. VG-30 0.055 0.414 1.868
PMB-1 0.002 0.023 0.176
The creep strain at the beginning and end of each creep cycle was
PMB-2 0.000 0.008 0.032
denoted as ε0 and εc . The strain at the end of each recovery cycle

© ASCE 04019081-2 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2019, 31(6): 04019081

 the proposed methodology, the various steps it incorporates, and
3.2 kPa 40˚C validations at various stages using experimental (DSR) data.
120

100 50˚C
Constructing the Master Curves
Average % Recovery

80 Using the frequency sweep data, complex modulus master curves

60˚C
60 were drawn for temperatures of 40°C, 50°C, and 60°C using TTSP.
The Arrhenius equation was used for evaluating the shift factors
40 required for the master curves. Details about TTSP, construction
20
of master curves, and use of the Arrhenius equation for finding shift
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi on 12/19/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

factors can be found elsewhere (Vikram and Saboo 2017). Fig. 3

0 shows a comparison of master curves at 40°C, 50°C, and 60°C for
VG 10 VG 30 PMB 1 PMB 2 all the binders.
-20
Binders

Fig. 1. Average percent recovery (R) for different binders.
Derivation of Creep Compliance from Frequency
Sweep Data
This paper proposes a methodology to obtain creep compliance us-
ing frequency sweep data. The methodology involves integration of
various steps previously found in the literature that have not been
used in a synergetic manner before. Fig. 2 presents the outline of
Presmoothing and Modeling Complex Modulus
Master Curves
Different engineering analysis of LVE materials requires developing
explicit analytical expressions for laboratory test data. One such
analytical function is the complex modulus spectra as a function
of reduced frequency acquired after construction of the master curve.
The literature highlights different analytical expressions proposed
for these LVE materials. One of the widely used expressions is
the Prony or the Dirichlet series, which is derived from spring
and dashpots models. The complex modulus representation of the
Prony series can be mathematically written as (Ebrahimi et al. 2014)

Fig. 2. Outline of the proposed methodology and validations.

© ASCE 04019081-3 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2019, 31(6): 04019081

 1.E+08 1.E+08
1.E+07 1.E+07

Complex Modulus, Pa

Complex Modulus, Pa
1.E+06 1.E+06
1.E+05 1.E+05
1.E+04 1.E+04
VG 10 VG 30
1.E+03 VG 10 VG 30 1.E+03
PMB 1 PMB 2
PMB 1 PMB 2
1.E+02 1.E+02
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi on 12/19/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1.E+01 1.E+01
1.E+00 1.E+00
1.E-05 1.E-02 1.E+01 1.E+04 1.E-04 1.E-01 1.E+02 1.E+05
(a) Reduced Frequency, Hz (b) Reduced Frequency, Hz

1.E+08
1.E+07
Complex Modulus, Pa

1.E+06
1.E+05
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02 VG 10 VG 30
1.E+01 PMB 1 PMB 2
1.E+00
1.E-03 1.E+00 1.E+03 1.E+06
(c) Reduced Frequency, Hz

Fig. 3. Complex modulus master curves for various binders at the temperatures of (a) 40°C; (b) 50°C; and (c) 60°C.

X
n
ω2 ρ2j Xn
ωρj The symbol Ge denotes the equilibrium modulus as in the pre-
G
ðωÞ ¼ Ge þ Gj 2 2
þi Gj ð7Þ ceding expression. The curve was fitted by minimizing the sum of
1 þ ω ρj 1 þ ω2 ρ2j
j¼1 j¼1 the squared difference between the measured and modeled data.
The master curves for all the binders at different reference temper-
where Ge = equilibrium modulus; Gj = relaxation strength; ρj = atures were fitted with different values of M (starting from 1) and
relaxation time; and ω = frequency (Hz). one such solution is presented in Fig. 4 for VG-30 at a reference
Different researchers have proposed simple and straightforward temperature of 40°C. The optimum solution for the least-square
methods for fitting Prony series and finding the model parameters minimization technique corresponded to M ¼ 6.
Ge , Gj , and ρj . However, these methods usually produce negative
values for model coefficients, which are not realistic. These neg-
ative values are associated with high variance in data, which is com-
monly seen in complex modulus master curves. The methodology
proposed in this paper utilized the modified power law (MPL) pre- 1.E+08
sented by Park and Kim (2001) for presmoothing the complex
modulus master curves and thus overcome the previous issue re- 1.E+07 R2 =0.992
lated to the fitting of a Prony series. The presmoothed series pre-
Complex Modulus, Pa

1.E+06
serves the representation of the data in a large domain without
being affected by any significant variance in the data at the local 1.E+05
level. The power law model, however, lacks computational effi-
1.E+04
ciency, specifically when Laplace transform is involved for inter- measured
conversion of material functions. Such cases require a Prony series 1.E+03 MPL presmooth
representation, whose Laplace transform can be computed with
1.E+02
greater ease. The MPL proposed for creep compliance by Park
and Kim has been used for complex modulus master curves in this 1.E+01
study using the following mathematical expression:
1.E+00
1.E-04 1.E-01 1.E+02 1.E+05
X
M
Ĝi
G
ðωÞ ¼ Ge þ   ð8Þ Reduced Frequency, Hz
τ̂ i n
j¼1 1 þ ω
Fig. 4. MPL presmoothing applied to complex modulus master curve
of VG-30 at a reference temperature of 40°C.
where Ge ; Ĝi ; τ̂ i ði ¼ 1; 2; 3; : : : ; MÞ; M; and n are all constants.

© ASCE 04019081-4 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2019, 31(6): 04019081

 1.E+08 1.E+08

1.E+07 1.E+07

Relaxation Modulus, Pa
R2=0.99

Complex Modulus, Pa
1.E+06 1.E+06

1.E+05 1.E+05

1.E+04 1.E+04
measured, MPL
1.E+03 Prony fit 1.E+03

1.E+02 1.E+02
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi on 12/19/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Relaxation Modulus
1.E+01 1.E+01

1.E+00 1.E+00
1.E-05 1.E-02 1.E+01 1.E+04 1.E+07 1.E-08 1.E-05 1.E-02 1.E+01
(a) Reduced Frequency, Hz (b) Reduced Time, seconds

Fig. 5. (a) Prony fit complex modulus master curve for PMB-1 at 60°C; and (b) relaxation modulus master curve obtained for PMB-1 at 60°C.

Converting Complex Modulus G
ω to Relaxation Converting Relaxation Modulus Et  to Creep
Modulus Et  Compliance Dt 
Since the objective in the first stage of the study was to estimate the The creep compliance and relaxation modulus are not reciprocal
creep compliance from complex modulus values, it was important but are related by a convolution integral (Ferry 1980) as follows:
to convert the complex modulus, which is in the frequency domain, Z t
to the relaxation modulus, which is in time domain. Hence, as an Eðt − τ ÞDðτ Þdτ ¼ t; for t > 0 ð10Þ
initial step, the complex modulus master curve obtained from 0
laboratory measurements was fitted using the Prony series as pre-
sented in Eq. (1). The coefficients obtained by fitting the master where E and D = time-dependent relaxation modulus and creep
curve were applied for evaluating the relaxation modulus using compliance, respectively. Laplace transform of the previous equa-
the following expression: tion further yields

X
M 1
EðtÞ ¼ Ee þ Ej e−t=ρj
j¼1
where Ee = equilibrium modulus (also called the long-term relax-
ation modulus); Ej = relaxation strength analogous to Gj obtained
by fitting the MPL curve with Eq. (7); and ρj = relaxation time.
Model parameters were obtained by minimizing the sum of the
squared difference between the MPL and modeled values. The
generalized reduced gradient (GRG) nonlinear technique was used
for solving the minimization problem. Fig. 5 illustrates a 10-term
Prony coefficient fitted to the complex modulus master curve for
PMB-1 at a temperature of 60°C. The Prony series was fitted to the
presmoothed complex modulus data as obtained using MPL. This
is denoted as “measured, MPL” in Fig. 5(a). The resulting relax-
ation modulus curve is depicted in Fig. 5(b). The Prony series
coefficients obtained for this data set are presented in Table 3.
ð9Þ ĒðsÞD̄ðsÞ ¼ ð11Þ
s2
where s = transform parameter; and the Laplace transform of fðtÞ is
represented as fðsÞ ≡ ∫ ∞ st
0 fðtÞe dt.
Different numerical integration schemes may be adopted to
solve the preceding equation. In this paper, the power-law-based
interrelationship was used, assuming that relaxation modulus and
creep compliance values are approximately represented using a
simple power law over their transition zones. Often this technique
provides good approximation for relationship between EðtÞ
and DðtÞ for LVE materials. Moreover, the low computational
requirement makes it a robust tool for efficient modeling and
analysis of material properties (Park and Kim 2001). The power
laws for relaxation modulus and creep compliance can be written
as follows:
EðtÞ ¼ E1 t−n ð12Þ

Table 3. Prony series coefficients obtained for PMB-1 at 60°C DðtÞ ¼ D1 tn ð13Þ
Gj (Pa) ρj (s)
1.05 × 107 1.90 × 10−7 where E1 , D1 , and n = positive constants.
1.41 × 107 6.60 × 10−7 Taking the s-multiplied Laplace transform of Eq. (6), we get
3.93 × 106 5.56 × 10−6
1.08 × 106 8.59 × 10−5 E1 Γð1 − nÞ
sĒ ¼ ð14Þ
4.08 × 105 6.88 × 10−4 s−n
6.38 × 104 8.07 × 10−3
9.68 × 103 7.84 × 10−2 where Ē = Laplace transform; and Γ is the gamma function.
1.43 × 103 9.47 × 10−1 From Eq. (5)
1.60 × 102 1.62 × 10−1
1.99 × 102 1.34 × 101 1
D̄ ¼ ð15Þ
Note: Gg ¼ 1.00 × 10 −1
Pa. E1 Γð1 − nÞs1þn

© ASCE 04019081-5 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2019, 31(6): 04019081

 1.E+00 1.E+00

1.E-01 1.E-01
R2=0.979 R2=0.966

Compliance, Pa -1

Compliance, Pa-1
1.E-02 1.E-02

1.E-03 1.E-03

1.E-04 modeled compliance 1.E-04 modeled compliance

measured compliance measured compliance
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi on 12/19/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1.E-05 1.E-05

1.E-06 1.E-06
0.E+00 5.E+00 1.E+01 2.E+01 2.E+01 3.E+01 0.E+00 5.E-01 1.E+00 2.E+00
(a) Time, Seconds (b) Time, Seconds

Fig. 6. (a) Interconverted and measured compliance for VG-30 at 40°C; and (b) interconverted and measured compliance for PMB-1 at 60°C.

An inversion of the preceding equation gives Validation and Application of Proposed

Methodology
tn
DðtÞ ¼ ð16Þ
E1 Γð1 − nÞΓð1 þ nÞ Long-Term Creep Behavior

Further solving the preceding equation yields
sin nπ 1
DðtÞ ¼
nπ E1 t−n
Eq. (11) can be simplified as
sin nπ
DðtÞEðtÞ ¼
nπ
In this equation, n is the local log-log slope of the source func-
tion, Eðτ Þ or Dðτ Þ, depending on which parameter should be
converted; n can be mathematically written as
 
 d log Fðτ Þ

n¼  ð19Þ
d log τ atτ ¼t
where Fðτ Þ is the source function. The preceding solution gives
accurate results in regions where EðtÞ and DðtÞ are approximated
using straight lines in log-log scale. As can be seen in Fig. 5(b),
this is not the actual case. Park and Schapery (1999) proposed a
different form of interconversion for cases where the relationship
deviates from straight line. The mathematical relationship can be
written as
1 Maxwell elements, and Kelvin-Voigt elements, respectively, while
DðtÞ ¼
EðαtÞ
where α ¼ ½ðsin nπÞ=ðnπÞ1=n , with n being the same as in Eq. (13).
After getting the Prony fitted relaxation modulus as depicted in
the Eq. (3), Eq. (14) was used for converting relaxation modulus
EðtÞ to creep compliance DðtÞ. The preceding interconversion
method gives fairly accurate results for both unmodified and modi-
fied binders. For illustration, the interconverted values of DðtÞ for
VG-30 at a reference temperature of 40°C and for PMB-1 at a tem-
perature of 60°C are shown in Figs. 6(a and b) along with the mea-
sured responses. The details of the measured value of creep
compliance will be discussed subsequently. As can be seen, the in-
terconverted values are in agreement with the measured response.
Like the complex modulus, the long-term creep behavior of asphalt
binders was evaluated using creep compliance ½JðtÞ master curves
that were generated for 40°C, 50°C, and 60°C temperatures using
ð17Þ MSCR test data. Figs. 7(a–d) depict the creep compliance master
curves for all binders at 3.2 kPa and a reference temperature of
50°C. The comparison of modeled and measured values of creep
compliance as shown in Fig. 6(a and b) was made using these
master curves.
ð18Þ
Modeling Creep Compliance Master Curve
As a viscoelastic material, bitumen can be characterized using vari-
ous mechanical models including a combination of springs and
dashpots placed in varying combinations. Many studies have dem-
onstrated the use of the four-element Burgers model (FEBM) for
characterizing the viscoelastic response of asphalt binders obtained
through creep and recovery tests (Hajikarimi et al. 2015; Yang et al.
2006; Zhou et al. 2009). FEBM is a combination of the Maxwell
model (spring and dashpot placed in series) and Kelvin-Voigt
model (spring and dashpot placed in parallel) placed in series
(Fig. 8). The mathematical form of a Burgers model can be derived
by considering the strain response under constant stress of each
coupled element in series as depicted in Fig. 8. The total strain
εB at time t is a sum of the strains in these three elements, where
the spring and dashpot in the Maxwell model are considered as two
elements. The subscripts B, M, and K indicate Burgers model,
ð20Þ
εM1 , εM2 , and εK are the strains of the Maxwell spring, Maxwell
dashpot, and Kelvin-Voigt unit, respectively. The total strain of the
material has three components, namely, an instantaneous elastic
strain, a viscous strain, and a retarded strain. Under constant stress,
the creep and recovery response of the asphalt binder can be written
in terms of compliance as
1 t 1
DðtÞ ¼ þ þ ð1 − e−t=ψ Þ ð21Þ
EM η M EK
τ 1
DðtÞ ¼ þ ð1 − e−t=ψ Þeðt−τ Þ=ψ ð22Þ
η M EK

© ASCE 04019081-6 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2019, 31(6): 04019081

 1.E-02 1.E-02

Creep Compliance, Pa-1

Crrep Compliance, Pa-1

1.E-03 1.E-03

1.E-04 1.E-04
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi on 12/19/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1.E-05 1.E-05
1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01
(a) Reduced Time, Seconds (b) Reduced Time, Seconds

1.E-02 1.E-02
Creep Compliance, Pa-1

Creep Compliance, Pa-1

1.E-03
1.E-03

1.E-04

1.E-04
1.E-05

1.E-06 1.E-05
1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01
(c) Reduced Time, Seconds (d) Reduced Time, Seconds

Fig. 7. Creep compliance master curves at 50°C for (a) VG-10; (b) VG-30; (c) PMB-1; and (d) PMB-2.

Fig. 8. Four-element Burgers model.

where EM , ηM , EK , and ηK = model parameters pertaining to modu-
lus and viscosity of Maxwell and Kelvin elements, respectively.
The viscous flow behavior parameter ηM is considered an important
parameter to describe the rutting potential of different binders. The
retardation time taken to produce 63.2% of the total deformation in
the Kelvin unit is Ψ ¼ ηK =EK (Yang et al. 2006).
Qualitatively, a Burgers model represents the behavior of a vis-
coelastic material. Quantitatively, a single Kelvin model is usually
not sufficient to incorporate the long duration over which the
retarded strain takes place, and several Kelvin models could be
needed (Huang 2010). The creep and recovery compliance under
a constant stress for the generalized model can be written as

© ASCE 04019081-7 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2019, 31(6): 04019081

 1.E+00
4.E-01
1.E-01
4.E-01

Creep Compliance, Pa-1

1.E-02 interconverted 3.E-01
1.E-03 GBM modelled 3.E-01 R2=0.994

Strain
1.E-04 2.E-01
1.E-05 2.E-01
1.E-06 1.E-01 measured
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi on 12/19/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

R2=0.966
1.E-07 5.E-02 modelled
1.E-08 0.E+00
1.E-07 1.E-05 1.E-03 1.E-01 1.E+01 0.E+00 5.E+00 1.E+01 2.E+01
(a) Reduced Time, Seconds (b) Time, Seconds

Fig. 9. (a) GBM model fit for PMB-2 at 50°C; and (b) measured and modeled response of creep and recovery for PMB-2 at 50°C.

Table 4. Six-element GBM for PMB-2 at 50°C example, the 6-term GBM model fit for PMB-2 at a reference tem-
EKi (Pa) ψi perature of 50°C is shown in Fig. 9(a). The corresponding creep
and recovery profile and the measured response are depicted in
6.34 × 10−7 1.56 × 102 Fig. 9(b). The GBM model parameters obtained for this binder
7.24 × 10−7 1.38 × 103
are also presented in Table 4. It can be seen that the modeled
1.66 × 10−6 5.38 × 103
4.93 × 10−5 6.87 × 104 and measured response are in good agreement. Similar results were
1.00 × 10−4 7.80 × 105 obtained for other binders at different reference temperatures.
1.20 × 100 1.83 × 105 The curves are not all presented here for brevity. For example,
Figs. 10(a and b) present the modeled and measured creep and re-
Note: EM ¼ 6.64 × 10−7 Pa; and ηM ¼ 1.27 × 10−6 Pa · s.
covery response of VG-10 and VG-30 at a reference temperature of
40°C. The validity of the model is self-explanatory. The selection of
n depends on the domain of the master curve. This paper suggests
1 t X
n
1 that n should be equal to the number of decades covered on a
DðtÞ ¼ þ þ ð1 − e−t=ψi Þ ð23Þ log-scale by the master curve. This is corroborated by a study by
EM ηM i¼1 EKi
Park and Kim (2001).

τ X
n
1
Dðt 0 Þ ¼ þ ð1 − e−t=ψi Þeðt−τ Þ=ψi
ηM i¼1 EKi
The interconverted values of DðtÞ as obtained previously were
modeled using Eq. (23) and the same model was used for predicting
the recovery profile of the binder using Eq. (24). The values of DðtÞ
acquired from MSCR (for 3.2-kPa stress level) test were compared
with the modeled values. The domain for checking the suitability
of a generalized Burgers model (GBM) was chosen based on the
MSCR test, i.e., 0–1 s of creep and 1.1–9 s of recovery. As an
ð24Þ Conclusions
The study appraised the use of frequency sweep data, obtained
using a DSR, for prediction of creep and recovery response of as-
phalt binders. The process included modeling and interconversion
techniques at various stages. It was found that presmoothing of data
using the modified power law can be beneficially used for modeling
complex modulus master curves using a Prony series. The intercon-
verted values of creep compliance using the method proposed
by Park and Schapery (1999) were in good agreement with the

5.E-01 4.E-01
5.E-01
3.E-01
4.E-01 R2=0.991 R2=0.981
4.E-01 3.E-01
3.E-01 2.E-01
Strain

Strain

3.E-01
measured
2.E-01 2.E-01
modelled
2.E-01 1.E-01
1.E-01 measured
5.E-02 modelled
5.E-02
0.E+00 0.E+00
0.E+00 5.E+00 1.E+01 2.E+01 0.E+00 5.E+00 1.E+01 2.E+01
(a) Time,Seconds (b) Time, Seconds

Fig. 10. Validation of creep and recovery at 40°C for (a) VG-10; and (b) VG-30.

© ASCE 04019081-8 J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2019, 31(6): 04019081

 measured values obtained through MSCR tests. Use of GBM on the
interconverted data of creep compliance could be successfully used
in obtaining the creep and recovery response of asphalt binders.
Validation of the prediction process on four different asphalt bind-
ers using the measured response proves the applicability of using
frequency sweep test data for prediction of creep and recovery pro-
file of asphalt binders. However, the validation in this study was
performed using only four asphalt binders. More binders can be
tested to appreciate the validity of the proposed methodology.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi on 12/19/22. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
References
AASHTO. 2012. Standard test method for multiple stress creep recovery
(MSCR) test of asphalt binder using a dynamic shear rheometer.
AASHTO TP70. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
Airey, G. D., J. R. A. Grenfell, A. Apeagyei, A. Subhy, and D. Lo Presti.
2016. “Time dependent viscoelastic rheological response of pure, modi-
fied and synthetic bituminous binders.” In Mechanics of time-dependent
materials, 1–26. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Airey, G. D., B. Rahimzadeh, and A. C. Collop. 2003. “Viscoelastic lin-
earity limits for bituminous materials.” Mater. Struct. 36 (10): 643–647.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02479495.
Airey, G. D., B. Rahimzadeh, and A. C. Collop. 2004. “Linear rheological
behavior of bituminous paving materials.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 16 (3):
212–220. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2004)16:3(212).
ASTM. 2012. Standard test method for multiple stress creep and recovery
(MSCR) of asphalt binder using a dynamic shear rheometer. ASTM
D7405-10a. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
Behzadfar, E., and S. G. Hatzikiriakos. 2013. “Viscoelastic properties and
constitutive modelling of bitumen.” Fuel 108 (6): 391–399. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2012.12.035.
Christensen, R. M. 1982. Theory of viscoelasticity: An introduction.
New York: Academic Press.
D’Angelo, J. 2009. “The relationship of the MSCR test to rutting.” Supple-
ment, Road Mater. Pavement Des. 10 (S1): 61–80. https://doi.org/10
.1080/14680629.2009.9690236.
David, M., and I. Domingos. 2013. “The application of the MSCR test on
the rheological characterization of asphalt binders modified with EVA
and PPA.” In Proc., Int. Journal of Pavements Conf. Abingdon, UK:
Taylor & Francis.
Denby, E. F. 1975. “A note on the interconversion of creep, relaxation, and
recovery.” Rheologica Acta 14 (7): 591–593. https://doi.org/10.1007
/BF01520810.
Di Benedetto, H., F. Olard, C. Sauzéat, and B. Delaporte. 2004. “Linear
viscoelastic behaviour of bituminous materials: From binders to mixes.”
Supplement, Road Mater. Pavement Des. 5 (S1): 163–202. https://doi
.org/10.1080/14680629.2004.9689992.
Dondi, G., V. Vignali, M. Pettinari, F. Mazzotta, A. Simone, and C.
Sangiorgi. 2014. “Modeling the DSR complex shear modulus of asphalt
binder using 3D discrete element approach.” Constr. Build. Mater.
54 (3): 236–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.12.005.
Dubois, E., D. Y. Mehta, and A. Nolan. 2014. “Correlation between multi-
ple stress creep recovery (MSCR) results and polymer modification of
binder.” Constr. Build. Mater. 65 (8): 184–190. https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.conbuildmat.2014.04.111.
Ebrahimi, M., M. Saleh, and M. Moyers Gonzalez. 2014. “Investigating
applicability of complex modulus and creep compliance interconver-
sion in asphalt concrete.” Adv. Civ. Eng. Mater. 3 (1): 107–121.
https://doi.org/10.1520/ACEM20130103.
Ferry, J. D. 1980. Viscoelastic properties of polymers. New York: Wiley.
Hajikarimi, P., M. Rahi, and F. Moghadas Nejad. 2015. “Comparing
different rutting specification parameters using high temperature
characteristics of rubber-modified asphalt binders.” Road Mater. Pave-
ment Des. 16 (4): 751–766. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2015
.1063533.
© ASCE 04019081-9
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2019, 31(6): 04019081
Hintz, C., R. Velasquez, C. Johnson, and H. Bahia. 2011. “Modification
and validation of linear amplitude sweep test for binder fatigue
specification.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2207: 99–106. https://doi.org/10
.3141/2207-13.
Huang, Y. H. 2010. Pavement analysis and design. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Education.
Johnson, C., H. Bahia, and H. Wen. 2009. “Practical application of visco-
elastic continuum damage theory to asphalt binder fatigue characteri-
zation.” J. Assoc. Asphalt Paving Technol. 78: 597–638.
Masad, E., C. W. Huang, G. Airey, and A. Muliana. 2008. “Nonlinear vis-
coelastic analysis of unaged and aged asphalt binders.” Constr. Build.
Mater. 22 (11): 2170–2179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007
.08.012.
Matsumoto, D. S. 1988. “Time-temperature superposition and physical
aging in amorphous polymers.” Polymer Eng. Sci. 28 (20): 1313–1317.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.760282005.
Monsia, M. D. 2012. “A mathematical model for predicting the relaxation
of creep strains in materials.” Phys. Rev. Res. Int. 2 (3): 107–124.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2017.0540.
Moon, K. H., A. Cannone Falchetto, and M. O. Marasteanu. 2013. “Rheo-
logical modelling of asphalt materials properties at low temperatures:
From time domain to frequency domain.” Road Mater. Pavement
Des. 14 (4): 810–830. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2013.817351.
Mun, S., G. R. Chehab, and Y. R. Kim. 2007. “Determination of time-
domain viscoelastic functions using optimized interconversion tech-
niques.” Road Mater. Pavement Des. 8 (2): 351–365. https://doi.org/10
.1080/14680629.2007.9690078.
Park, S. W., and Y. R. Kim. 2001. “Fitting Prony-series viscoelastic models
with power-law presmoothing.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 13 (1): 26–32.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2001)13:1(26).
Park, S. W., and R. A. Schapery. 1999. “Methods of interconversion be-
tween linear viscoelastic material functions. Part I: A numerical method
based on Prony series.” Int. J. Solids Struct. 36 (11): 1653–1675. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7683(98)00055-9.
Saboo, N. 2016. “Performance characterization of polymer modified as-
phalt binders and mixes.” Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee.
Saboo, N., and P. Kumar. 2016. “Analysis of different test methods for
quantifying rutting susceptibility of asphalt binders.” J. Mater. Civ.
Eng. 28 (7): 04016024. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533
.0001553.
Singh, B., N. Saboo, and P. Kumar. 2016. “Modelling the complex
modulus strain relationship of asphalt binders.” Pet. Sci. Technol.
34 (13): 1137–1144. https://doi.org/10.1080/10916466.2016.1190749.
Vikram, D., and N. Saboo. 2017. “Effective technique to estimate cross
model parameters.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 29 (11): 04017203. https://doi
.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002043.
Yang, J. L., Z. Zhang, A. K. Schlarb, and K. Friedrich. 2006. “On the char-
acterization of tensile creep resistance of polyamide 66 nanocompo-
sites. Part II: Modeling and prediction of long-term performance.”
Polymer 47 (19): 6745–6758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2006
.07.060.
Yusoff, N. I. M., F. M. Jakarni, V. H. Nguyen, M. R. Hainin, and G. D.
Airey. 2013. “Modelling the rheological properties of bituminous
binders using mathematical equations.” Constr. Build. Mater. 40 (3):
174–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.09.105.
Zhang, J., L. F. Walubita, A. N. M. Faruk, P. Karki, and G. S. Simate. 2015.
“Use of the MSCR test to characterize the asphalt binder properties
relative to HMA rutting performance: A laboratory study.” Constr.
Build. Mater. 94 (9): 218–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat
.2015.06.044.
Zhou, T., J. Yan, J. Masuda, and T. Kuriyagawa. 2009. “Investigation on the
viscoelasticity of optical glass in ultraprecision lens molding process.”
J. Mater. Process. Technol. 209 (9): 4484–4489. https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.jmatprotec.2008.10.030.
J. Mater. Civ. Eng.