Cleaner Engineering and Technology 1 (2020) 100028

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cleaner Engineering and Technology

journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/cleaner-engineering-and-technology

Coupled effects of warm mix asphalt (WMA) additives and rheological

modifiers on the properties of asphalt binders
Ali Behnood a, *, Mohammad M. Karimi b, Goshtasp Cheraghian c
a
Lyles School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, 550 W Stadium Ave, West Lafayette, IN, 47907-2051, USA
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
c
Department Civil Engineering, Pavement Engineering Centre, ISBS, Technische Universit€
at Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Asphalt pavements, as an essential element affecting the economic vitality of the countries, are widely used to
Warm mix asphalt (WMA) construct the highways and expressways. Severe climate conditions and traffic loads can influence the service life
Rheological properties of asphalt pavements and lead to distresses such as thermal cracking and rutting. Various types of modifiers are
Polyphosphoric acid (PPA)
used in asphalt industry to enhance the resistance of the pavements to these distresses. Although these modifiers
Ground tire rubber (GTR)
Styrene-butadiene-styrene (SBS)
improve a wide range of physical and rheological properties, they increase the construction temperatures, leading
to increased energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions. The warm mix asphalt (WMA) technologies provide
several techniques and additives to reduce the construction temperature of asphalt pavements and decrease the
required energy and air pollution in construction phase. This research aims to investigate the influence of Sasobit
and Evotherm M1, as two of the commonly used WMA additives, on the performance of unmodified and modified
binders. Three types of modifiers (i.e., polyphosphoric acid (PPA), styrene-butadiene-styrene (SBS), and ground
tire rubber (GTR)) were used to modify the binders. The influence of modification on the performance of binders
was evaluated through some conventional tests such as viscosity, softening point, and penetration grade. More-
over, the performance grading (PG) tests were conducted at a broad range of service conditions. The results
indicate that, with some slight variations, the effects of WMA additives on rheological properties have insignif-
icant dependency on the type of modification. Overall, Sasobit increases the stiffness of binders while Evotherm
M1 shows negligible effects on the stiffness properties.

1. Introduction include polymers (Behnood and Modiri Gharehveran, 2019), re-

Asphalt pavement is the most common type of pavement in the
construction of highways and expressways around the world. During its
service life, asphalt pavement experiences a wide range of climate con-
ditions and traffic loads. It is well-known that the durability of asphalt
pavement significantly depends on the service conditions due to the
climate- and time-dependent responses of asphalt binder (Behnood,
2019). An appropriate response of the asphalt binder to these conditions
is a necessity to prevent the occurrence of major distresses such as
rutting, fatigue cracking, and thermal (low temperature) cracking (Kar-
imi et al., 2020). Asphalt binders are usually mixed with modifiers to
improve their resistance to these distresses (Kalantar et al., 2012). For
this purpose, an extensive variety of modifiers, which can function
differently and enhance various properties of binders, have been used in
asphalt industry (Yousefi et al., 2020). Examples of these modifiers
juvenators (Behnood, 2019), antioxidants (Jeong et al., 2017), warm mix
asphalt (WMA) additives (Cheraghian et al., 2020), and anti-stripping
agents (Ameri et al., 2021). Polymers are the most commonly used
type of modifiers due to their specific characteristics in enhancing the
properties of asphalt binders (Behnood and Modiri Gharehveran, 2019).
Among the polymers, styrene-butadiene-styrene (SBS) has been given
lots of attention since, compared to unmodified binder, SBS-modified
binder provides higher resistance to rutting (Hassanpour-Kasanagh
et al., 2020), reduced adhesive and cohesive failure (Xu et al., 2020),
enhanced flexibility at low temperatures (Airey, 2003), and reduced
temperature susceptibility (K€ok et al., 2014). However, the use of SBS
may have some disadvantages such as compatibility issues with some
asphalts (Polacco et al., 2008), increased optimum binder content
(Behnood et al., 2016), and relatively higher cost compared to other
modifiers (Zhu et al., 2014). To overcome some of these issues,

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: abehnood@purdue.edu (A. Behnood), mohammad.karimi@modares.ac.ir (M.M. Karimi), g.cheraghian@tu-braunschweig.de (G. Cheraghian).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2020.100028
Received 11 July 2020; Received in revised form 28 November 2020; Accepted 29 November 2020
2666-7908/© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
A. Behnood et al.
evaluation of the performance of alternative cost-effective modifies with
better technical benefits has been the focus of many previous studies.
Modifiers such as polyphosphoric acid (PPA) can enhance the properties
of binders with lower cost compared to SBS. The use of a small amount of
PPA for preparation of PPA-modified binder has been reported to provide
rheological properties similar to what can be expected from
SBS-modified binder (Jasso et al., 2015). The use of ground tire rubber
(GTR), as a recycled material obtained from end-of-life tires, can also
save in the modification cost and reduce the issues related to the waste
tires left in environment (Jahanbakhsh et al., 2020). Moreover, GTR can
enhance the resistance of asphalt pavement to distresses such as thermal
cracking (Rodríguez-Alloza et al., 2014), fatigue cracking (Behnood and
Olek, 2017a), and rutting (Fontes et al., 2010).
Although sustainable modifiers such as GTR enhance various prop-
erties of asphalt binders, they may cause some other issues such as
storage stability problems, increased viscosity and production tempera-
tures, and decreased workability (Behnood and Modiri Gharehveran,
2019). Warm mix asphalt (WMA) technologies can be used to reduce the
asphalt mixture production temperatures by about 20–60
C (Almeida--
Costa and Benta, 2016). The WMA technologies also provide several
other technical and environmental benefits such as improved working
conditions and reduced energy consumption (Perez-Martínez et al.,
2014), reduced greenhouse gases emissions (Rodríguez-Alloza et al.,
2015), and reduced costs (Sobhi et al., 2020). Overall, three main classes
of WMA technologies are available: organic additives, chemical addi-
tives, and foaming technologies (Capit~ao et al., 2012). The mechanism of
reducing the construction temperatures as well as the effects on rheo-
logical properties significantly depend on the type of the technology,
source of base binder, and presence of other modifiers (Behnood, 2020).
For example, chemical additives, unlike the other two classes of WMA
technologies, do not considerably affect the thermo-mechanical proper-
ties of asphalt mixtures.
Some previous studies have investigated the use of WMA additives in
the mixtures containing modified asphalt binders. The viscosity of SBS-
modified binders has been found to decrease in the presence of Sasobit
or Rediset (Kataware and Singh, 2017) and Deurex (Yang and Liu, 2018).
The addition of Deurex (Yang and Liu, 2018) and Sasobit (Kataware and
Singh, 2017) to SBS-modified binders also increases the resistance to
rutting. The viscosity of rubber-modified binders has also been found to
decrease in the presence of a wide range of WMA additives such as
Aspha-min, Sasobit, Evotherm DAT, Evotherm 3G (Yu et al., 2018), and
Licomont (Rodríguez-Alloza et al., 2016). However, these additives in-
fluence differently on thermo-mechanical and rheological properties. For
example, additives such as Aspha-min, Advera, and Sasobit increase the
resistance to rutting while Evotherm-DAT shows the opposite effect.
Given the above, to produce more cost effective and sustainable
modified binders, it is a necessity to assess the influence of different
WMA additives on the modified binders at various service conditions.
The use of WMA additives in asphalt binders could decrease the viscosity
of the modified binders, leading to reduced production temperatures and
energy consumption. This approach can also be helpful towards pro-
ducing cleaner asphalt mixtures with reduced greenhouse gases emis-
sions. This research aims to investigate the influence of Sasobit and
Evotherm M1, as two of the commonly used WMA additives, on the
performance of unmodified and PPA-, GTR-, and SBS-modified binders.
For this purpose, several conventional properties of the binders such as
viscosity, penetration grade, and softening point were tested. In addition,
intermediated and high temperature properties were studied using a
dynamic shear rheometer (DSR), and low temperature properties of the
binders were investigated using a bending beam rheometer (BBR).
2. Experimental design
2.1. Materials
To prepare the modified binders, a neat binder was mixed with
2
Cleaner Engineering and Technology 1 (2020) 100028
rheological modifiers (i.e., GTR, SBS, and PPA) and/or WMA additives
(i.e., Sasobit and Evotherm M1). The rheological modifiers included GTR
obtained from the tires of passenger cars (30 mesh size), block SBS
copolymer, and PPA containing 85% P2O5. The WMA additives included
Sasobit and Evotherm M1. Table 1 shows the properties of WMA addi-
tives used in this study. The percentage of rheological modifiers was
chosen according to the findings from previous studies and after evalu-
ating trial samples to produce modified binders with similar properties at
high temperatures (Behnood and Olek, 2017b). Therefore, for the asphalt
binders containing GTR, SBS, and PPA, respectively, 8%, 4%, 1.2% of the
modifiers by the weight of binder were used. For all the binders con-
taining Sasobit and Evotherm M1, 3% and 0.5% of the WMA additive
were used, respectively. These percentages were selected based on the
recommendations provided by the suppliers as well as the commonly
used content reported in previous studies (Behnood, 2020).
2.2. Modified binder preparation
Different approaches were taken for mixing the modifiers with the
neat binder using a high shear mixer. The SBS-modified binder was
prepared by adding 18 wt% of SBS pellets to heated binder (170
C) and
shearing for 30 min at a speed of 4000 rpm. Then, at a temperature of
150
C, this modified binder was diluted and mixed (for 2 h) with an
appropriate amount of neat binder to prepare a 4 wt% SBS-modified
binder. GTR- and PPA-modified binders were prepared by mixing a
heated neat binder with the appropriate amount of modifier at 150
C
and a speed of 4000 rpm for 20 min. A stirring process was followed
afterwards for 1 h to obtain a homogeneous blend.
The binders containing WMA additives were prepared by mixing
these additives with the unmodified and modified binders at a temper-
ature of 150
C for 5 min.
3. Experimental program
Fig. 1 depicts the experimental program used in this study. This
section discusses the experimental program and the tests conducted to
study the performance of the binders. Due to the low coefficients of
variation in determining the binder rheological properties, only two
replicate specimens were prepared for each test.
3.1. Conventional properties
Several conventional and advanced tests were conducted to assess the
influence of modifiers on the performance of binders. Conventional
properties included rotational viscosity (RV), penetration grade, and
softening point, which were conducted according to AASHTO T 316,
AASHTO T 49, and AASHTO T 53, respectively.
3.2. Performance grading (PG) tests
Superpave performance grading (PG) of the binders was conducted
according to AASHTO M 320. For this purpose, the rheological properties
Table 1
Properties of the WMA additives.
Property WMA additive
Sasobit Evotherm M1
Color Pale brown Amber dark
Physical state Pastilles Liquid
Boiling point (C) N/A 200
Flash point (C) 285 250
Melting point  (C) 105 < 30
pH neutral 10
Density at room temperature (gr/cm3) 0.94 0.99
Solubility in water Insoluble Partially soluble
Odor Odorless Amine like
A. Behnood et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 1 (2020) 100028

P10
ε
i¼0 ½ r ð3:2; iÞ
R3:2 ¼ (5)
10

where εr ð0:1; iÞ and εr ð3:2; iÞ are, respectively, the measured percent

recoveries at ith cycle at the stress levels of 0.1 kPa and 3.2 kPa.
The values of R0:1 and R3:2 can be used to calculate Rdiff : , such that:

Fig. 1. Experimental program for the evaluation of the effects of rheological
modifiers and/or WMA additives on the performance of asphalt binders.
at intermediate and high temperatures were determined using a DSR
device according to AASHTO T 315 while these properties at low tem-
peratures were determined using a BBR device according to AASHTO T
313. According to AASHTO M 320, to simulate the short- and long-term
aging of the asphalt binders, the rolling thin film oven test (RTFOT)
(AASHTO T 240) and the pressure aging vessel (PAV) (AASHTO R 28)
were used, respectively.
3.3. MSCR tests
To further investigate the influence of binder modifiers and WMA
additives on the behavior of asphalt binders, the multiple creep stress
recovery (MSCR) test was also conducted according to AASHTO T 350.
The MSCR test is performed on the RTFOT-aged binders at the stress
levels of 0.1 kPa and 3.2 kPa, respectively, for twenty and ten cycles. To
complete a cycle, 1 s of shear creep loading is conducted followed by 9 s
of recovery period. These stress levels allow for evaluating the linear and
non-linear viscoelastic behaviors of asphalt binders. Two essential pa-
rameters (i.e., non-recoverable creep compliance (Jnr) and percent re-
covery (R)) obtained from the MSCR test can be used to study the
behavior of the binders at various loading conditions and temperatures.
At 0.1 kPa and 3.2 kPa stress levels, the average Jnr values are, respec-
tively, determined such that:
P20
i¼11 ½Jnr ð0:1; iÞ
Jnr 0:1 ¼ (1)
10
P10
i¼0 ½Jnr ð3:2; iÞ
Jnr 3:2 ¼ (2)
10
½R0:1  R3:2 
Rdiff : ¼  100 (6)
R0:1
The values obtained from the recovery of the binders are not used as
grading parameters in AASHTO M 332. However, recovery-related pa-
rameters can provide useful information about the permanent deforma-
tion and the presence of modifiers (Behnood et al., 2016). Overall,
Jnr-related parameters provide better correlation with the in-service
rutting resistance than Superpave PG rutting parameter (i.e., G*/sinδ)
(Wasage et al., 2011). According to AASHTO M 332, two Jnr-related
parameters are used to grade the asphalt binders: Jnr diff : and Jnr 3:2 . A
maximum value of 75% is specified in AASHTO M 332 to avoid using the
overly stress-sensitive binders to unusual high temperatures or unex-
pected heavy loads. With regard to Jnr diff : , AASHTO M 332 specification
categorizes the binders based on traffic loads as Extremely Heavy (E),
Very Heavy (V), Heavy (H), and Standard (S).
3.4. Frequency sweep
The construction of a master curve is a beneficial technique to eval-
uate the performance of binder over a wide range of temperatures and
frequencies. In this study, to construct the master curve, the G* of binders
at intermediate and high temperatures were obtained using a DSR while
the stiffness of the binders at low temperatures were obtained using a
BBR. The test conditions of the frequency sweep and BBR tests are given
in Table 2. To convert the stiffness (S(t)) and time (t) obtained from the
BBR tests to, respectively, complex shear modulus (G*) and frequency
(ω), the following relationships were used (Christensen and Anderson,
1992):
SðtÞ 1
G*  ; ω (7)
3 t
The master curves of the binders were constructed using the
Christensen-Anderson (CA) model, which describes the relationship be-
tween G* at the frequency of ω (G* ðωÞ) and the rheological parameters,
such that:
  
ωc ðlog2Þ=R R=ðlog2Þ
G* ðωÞ ¼ Gg 1þ (8)
ωr
Table 2
Test conditions for master curve construction.
Condition Temperature range

where Jnr ð0:1; iÞ and Jnr ð3:2; iÞ are, respectively, the Jnr values at ith cycle Low Intermediate High
at the stress levels of 0.1 kPa and 3.2 kPa. Temperature 6 to 18 10 to 40 52 to 70
The values of Jnr 0:1 and Jnr 3:2 can be used to calculate the Jnr diff : as: (by 6
C
incremental)
½Jnr 3:2  Jnr 0:1  Frequency (rad/ Not 100, 63.10, 39.80, 100, 63.10, 39.80,
Jnr diff : ¼  100 (3) s) applicable 25.1, 15.90, 10.00, 25.1, 15.90, 10.00,
Jnr 0:1 6.31, 3.98, 2.51, 1.59, 6.31, 3.98, 2.51,
1.00, 0.631, 0.398, 1.59, 1.00, 0.631,
At 0.1 kPa and 3.2 kPa stress levels, the R values are, respectively,
0.251, 0.159, 0.001 0.398, 0.251, 0.159,
determined as: 0.001
P20 Time (s) 240, 120, Not applicable Not applicable
ε
i¼11 ½ r ð0:1; iÞ 60, 30, 15,
R0:1 ¼ (4)
10 8
Device BBR 25-mm DSR geometry 8-mm DSR geometry
Measured S(t) G* G*
property

3
A. Behnood et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 1 (2020) 100028

ωr ¼ ω  10log aðTÞ (9)

where R is rheological index; Gg is glassy modulus; ωc and ωr are,

respectively, the crossover and reduced frequencies at defining temper-
ature (Td); and log aðTÞ is the logarithm of the shift factor at the tem-
perature of T.
The amount of shift that is required for shifting the G* values from
test temperature to Td is defined by log aðTÞ. Td is a rheological param-
eter that defines the structural changes when a material changes from a
rubbery and soft state to a glassy and hard state. A higher Td value is a
representation of a harder binder at a broader range of temperatures. For
the case of temperatures above and below Td, the Williams-Landel-Ferry
(WLF) and the Arrhenius equations, have been respectively found as the
best description of the log aðTÞ for asphalt binders (Booshehrian et al.,
2012). Given the WLF and the Arrhenius equations, respectively, the
relationship between log aðTÞ, Td, and temperature are written such that:

19 ðT  Td Þ
log aðTÞ ¼ (10)
92 þ T  Td
 
1 1
log aðTÞ ¼ 13016:07  (11)
T Td

4. Results and discussion

In this section, the results of the tests, explained in previous section,

have been presented and discussed in detail.

4.1. Conventional properties

Fig. 2(a) and Fig. 2(b), respectively, show the results of softening
point and penetration grade tests. Irrespective of the type of modifica-
tion, the incorporation of Sasobit into unmodified and modified asphalt
binders increases the softening point and decreases the penetration
grade. Sasobit increases the softening point of the neat binder by about
14% and decreases the penetration grade of that by about 25%. Inter-
estingly, with regard to modified binders, Sasobit increases the softening
point by about 8–10% and decreases the penetration grade by about
15–17%. These observations indicate that the effects of Sasobit on the Fig. 2. The test results of (a) softening point and (b) penetration grade.
softening point and penetration do not significantly depend on the type
of modifier. The addition of Evotherm M1 to unmodified and modified
asphalt binders shows negligible effects on both penetration grade and
softening point.
To evaluate the effects of rheological modifiers and WMA additives
on the viscosity of asphalt binders, the RV tests were conducted at two
temperatures of 135
C and 165
C. The results of the RV tests, as shown
in Fig. 3, indicate that all rheological modifiers (GTR, SBS, and PPA)
significantly increase the viscosity of the binders. Irrespective of the type
of modification, WMA additives reduce the viscosity of the binders at
both examined temperatures (i.e., 135
C and 165
C). For example, at
165
C, 3% Sasobit and 0.5% Evotherm M1 decrease the viscosity of neat
binder by about 28% and 25%, respectively.

4.2. Performance grading (PG) tests

4.2.1. High-temperatures PG tests

High-temperature PG tests were conducted on unaged and RTFOT-
aged binders. Fig. 4 shows the average results of high-temperature PG
tests using two replicates on unaged binders. All three rheological
modifiers (i.e., GTR, SBS, and PPA) increase the G* values. As previously
mentioned, the percentages of these modifiers were selected in such a
way to have similar effects on the rheological properties at high tem-
Fig. 3. Rotational viscosity tests results.
peratures. This approach was taken to investigate the effects of WMA
additives on different modified binders with similar performance.
(G*) while the addition of Evotherm M1 to neat binder slightly decreases
Fig. 4(a) shows that irrespective of the test temperature, the addition of
the G* values. At 52
C, Sasobit increases the G* by about 112% while
Sasobit to neat binder significantly increases the complex shear modulus

4
A. Behnood et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 1 (2020) 100028

Fig. 4. High-temperature PG tests results on unaged binders.

Fig. 5. High-temperature PG tests results on RTFOT-aged binders.

Evotherm M1 decreases that by about 22%. At 70
C, the former in-
creases the G* by about 132% while the latter decreases that by about
25%. Fig. 4(a) also shows that the effects of the WMA additives on the G*
of modified asphalt binders do not significantly depend on the type of
rheological modifier. In other words, although slight differences can be
seen in the G* of modified binders after the incorporation of WMA ad-
ditives, the effects of WMA additives on the modified binders are rela-
tively similar. As shown in Fig. 4(b), both types of WMA additives (i.e.,
Sasobit and Evotherm M1) decrease the phase angle (δ) values at all test
temperatures. However, it should be noted that Sasobit results in more
reduction in δ values than Evotherm M1. Interestingly, the influence of
Sasobit and Evotherm M1 on δ values has relatively a linear relationship
with temperature. Among the rheological modifiers, the effects of PPA on
δ also shows a linear relationship with temperature. Fig. 4(c) shows that
Sasobit significantly increases the rutting parameter (G*/sinδ) while
Evotherm M1 slightly decreases this parameter. SBS-modified binder is
slightly more influenced by the addition of Sasobit compared to GTR- and
PPA-modified binders.
Fig. 5 shows the average results (two replicates) of high-temperature
tests on RTFOT-aged binders. Similar to the results of PG testing on
unaged binders, RTFOT-aged binders containing rheological modifiers
(i.e., GTR, SBS, and PPA) show higher values of complex shear modulus
and rutting parameter and lower values of phase angle compared to
unmodified binder. Among the three rheological modifiers, GTR shows
slightly higher G* and G*/sinδ values in RTFOT-aged binders compared
to other modifiers, while the difference among these three modifiers, as
shown in Fig. 4, is not significant in unaged binders. Fig. 5 also shows
that Sasobit increases the G* and G*/sinδ values while Evotherm M1
slightly decreases these values. Moreover, similar to the results of high-
temperature PG tests on unaged binders, both Sasobit and Evotherm
M1 decrease the δ values. Overall, irrespective of the type of rheological
modifiers, the WMA additives show similar effects on the high-
temperature PG tests results of the modified binders.

Fig. 6. Intermediate-temperature PG tests results on RTFOT-PAV-aged binders.

5
A. Behnood et al.
4.2.2. Intermediate-temperatures PG tests
The results of PG tests at intermediate temperatures, which were
conducted on RTFOT-PAV-aged binders, are shown in Fig. 6. GTR im-
proves the performance of asphalt binders at intermediate temperatures
by decreasing the values of G* (Fig. 6(a)) and G*.sinδ (Fig. 6(c)). At lower
intermediate temperature range (e.g., 22
C), SBS and PPA also slightly
improves the performance of asphalt binder. However, at higher inter-
mediate temperature range (e.g., 33
C), there is no significant effect on
the performance of the binders. All the rheological modifiers also
decrease the δ values at all intermediate temperatures. The results also
show that, irrespective of modification type, both WMA additives (i.e.,
Sasobit and Evotherm M1) increase the G* and G*.sinδ values.
4.2.3. Bending beam rheometer (BBR) tests
To study the rheological properties of asphalt binders at low tem-
perature using BBR tests, two replicate specimens were tested for each
binder-temperature combination. Two important parameters can be ob-
tained from the BBR tests: 1) stiffness and 2) m-value (slope of master
stiffness curve). A lower value of stiffness is favorable as it is an indica-
tion of less brittle binder with more resistance to low-temperature
cracking. A higher m-value is also favorable as it is an indication of a
quick response of the binder for relaxing the stress and lower level of
thermally induced stress due to temperature dropping. AASHTO M 320,
as shown in Fig. 7, specifies a 300 MPa maximum value and a 0.300
minimum value for stiffness and m-value, respectively.
As shown in Fig. 7(a), the addition of rheological modifiers (i.e., PPA,
GTR, and SBS) significantly decreases the stiffness of asphalt binders at
low temperatures. Among the rheological modifiers, GTR resulted in the
most reduction in the stiffness of asphalt binder. With regard to the ef-
fects of WMA, although they increase the stiffness of neat asphalt binder,
their influence is not significant. Modified asphalt binders in the presence
Fig. 7. BBR test results.
6
Cleaner Engineering and Technology 1 (2020) 100028
of Sasobit show increased stiffness while in the presence of Evotherm M1,
they show reduced stiffness. Among the different modification scenarios,
the simultaneous use of GTR and Evotherm M1 leads to the most
reduction in the stiffness value. The binder containing SBS and Sasobit
shows the highest stiffness values among the examined binders.
Interestingly, the rheological modifiers and WMA additives show a
relatively similar trends of the effects on the stiffness of asphalt binders.
However, a temperature-dependent behavior can be seen with regard to
the trends of the effects of rheological modifiers and WMA additives on
the m-value. For example, irrespective of test temperature, PPA-, PPA-
Sasobit-, and PPA-Evotherm M1-modified binders show lower values of
stiffness compared to the neat asphalt binder. However, PPA-modified
binder at 6
C decreases the m-value while at 12
C and 18
C in-
creases the m-value compared to neat binder. Overall, the simultaneous
addition of rheological modifier and WMA additive reduces the m-value.
At 6
C, neat binder shows the highest m-value while at 12
C and
18
C, PPA-modified binder shows the highest m-value. The lowest m-
value at all temperatures corresponds to the asphalt binder modified with
SBS and Sasobit.
To further evaluate the performance of asphalt binders at low tem-
peratures, ΔTc values were also calculated. The ΔTc value is defined as
the difference between the critical temperatures determined based on
stiffness criterion (temperature corresponding to the stiffness of 300
MPa) and m-value criterion (temperature corresponding to the m-value
of 0.300). This parameter can be used as an indication for the sensitivity
of the binders to fatigue cracking and thermal cracking (Behnood and
Olek, 2017a). A binder with more negative ΔTc value would be expected
to have weakness to recover to its initial stage. The ΔTc values of the
binders are shown in Fig. 8. Only the asphalt binder modified with PPA
shows less negative ΔTc value compared to neat (unmodified) binder.
Other modification scenarios result in more reduction in the ΔTc value,
which indicates that the binders become more sensitive to the thermally
induced stress. The only exception is the binder modified 1.2% PPA and
3% Sasobit, which shows the same ΔTc value as that for the neat binder.
4.3. MSCR tests results
Fig. 9 shows the values of Jnr 3:2 , Jnr 0:1 , and Jnr diff : , which were ob-
tained from the MSCR tests using two replicate tests. The results indicate
that Evotherm M1 does not significantly affect the Jnr values while
Sasobit decreases the Jnr values at both stress levels. A reduction in Jnr
values is an indication of more resistance to rutting. All the evaluated
rheological modifiers (i.e., GTR, SBS, and PPA) also result in reduced Jnr
values at both stress levels. GTR and SBS slightly show more reduction in
Fig. 8. ΔTc values of the evaluated binders.
A. Behnood et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 1 (2020) 100028

Fig. 9. MSCR tests results: Jnr-based parameters.

Jnr values compared to PPA. However, it should not be taken as endorsing

these two modifiers as the content of modifiers in modified asphalt
binders also play an essential role in their performance. The observations
regarding the Jnr values of unmodified asphalt binder containing Evo-
therm M1 are in line with the findings reported by Wu et al. (2017).
Overall, as shown in Fig. 9(a) and (b), the WMA additives (with some
slight variations) have relatively similar effects on the Jnr 3:2 and Jnr 0:1
values of the modified binders. For example, at 76
C, Sasobit decreases
the Jnr 3:2 values of GTR-, SBS-, and PPA-modified binders by 39.9%,
29.1%, and 32.6%, respectively. At the same temperature, Sasobit de-
creases the Jnr 0:1 values of GTR-, SBS-, and PPA-modified binders by
28.3%, 27.0%, and 24.3%, respectively.
The MSCR tests results indicate that Jnr 3:2 , which is a criterion spec-
ified by AASHTO M 332, is successfully able to predict the performance
of the binders. As previously mentioned, AASHTO M 332 specifies
another criterion based on Jnr diff : (i.e., a maximum value of 75%) to avoid
the use of over sensitive binders to unusual high temperatures or unex-
pected heavy loads. Based on this criterion, some of the binders, espe-
cially at high temperatures, can be considered as over sensitive to
unexpected climate or loading conditions. For example, the GTR-Sasobit-
modified asphalt binder shows a Jnr diff : value of 120.4% at 76
C. Based
on AASHTO M 332 specification, the use of this binder at this climate
condition should be avoided. However, AASHTO M 332 allows the use of
PPA-modified asphalt binder with the Jnr diff : value of 61.9% at 76
C. At
both stress levels, GTR-Sasobit-modified asphalt binder shows signifi-
cantly lower Jnr values than PPA-modified asphalt binder. In other words, Fig. 10. MSCR tests results: R-based parameters.
the former is more resistant to rutting than the latter. Therefore, the
criterion based on the Jnr diff : seems to not accurately represent the per- temperatures. An increase in the temperature leads to increased values of
formance of the binders at high temperatures. R3:2 and R0:1 and decreased values of Rdiff : . Unmodified binder and
Fig. 10 shows the values of R3:2 , R0:1 , and Rdiff : at various Evotherm M1-modified binder show the lowest R3:2 and R0:1 values

7
A. Behnood et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 1 (2020) 100028

among all the evaluated binders. The addition of Sasobit to the neat Table 4
(unmodified) binder increases the R3:2 and R0:1 values and decreases the Td, ωc , and R of the binders.
Rdiff : value while the addition of Evotherm M1 does not significantly Binder Td (C) ωc (rad/s) R
affect the recovery properties of the neat asphalt binder.
Neat 21.15 0.859 2.558
Fig. 10 shows that all three types of rheological modifiers increase the 3%Sasobit 21.35 0.123 2.578
values of R3:2 and R0:1 . However, at the temperatures of 70
C and 76
C, 0.5%Evotherm 22.15 0.995 2.575
the R3:2 values of GTR and SBS are higher than that of PPA. At the 4%SBS 20.35 0.076 2.940
temperature of 76
C, SBS-Sasobit modified asphalt binder shows the 4%SBSþ3%Sasobit 20.55 0.032 3.036
4%SBSþ0.5%Evotherm 21.75 0.097 2.975
highest R3:2 value followed by SBS-modified asphalt binder. Based on the 8%GTR 19.95 0.138 2.888
Jnr diff : , the use of these binders at the climate condition related to a 8%GTRþ3%Sasobit 20.35 0.062 2.992
temperature of 76
C should be avoided since these two binders were 8%GTRþ0.5%Evotherm 21.50 0.193 2.918
found as over sensitive binders with Jnr diff : value of more than 75% 1.2%PPA 21.95 0.097 3.017
1.2%PPAþ3%Sasobit 22.50 0.062 3.079
(Fig. 9(c)). Opposing the use of these binders while they show a good 1.2%PPAþ0.5%Evotherm 21.90 0.110 3.021
performance against rutting could be another reason why the Jnr diff :
criterion, specified by AASHTO M 332, needs further investigations to
optimize this criterion for better representing the performance of the the stiffness of the binders. Table 4 indicates that the addition of rheo-
asphalt binders. logical modifiers (i.e., PPA, SBS, and GTR) to the neat binder decreases
the value of ωc . The ωc value also decreases upon the addition of Sasobit
4.3.1. Binder grading to the neat binder and the binders modified with PPA, SBS, or GTR.
Table 3 provides the summary of the binders grading according to However, Evotherm M1 slightly increases the ωc values in all the modi-
AASHTO specifications. It can be seen that the addition of rheological fied and unmodified (neat) binders. In general, the values of ωc indicate
modifiers increases the high temperature continuous grade of binders that the overall hardness of the binders increases upon the addition of
compared to neat (unmodified) binder. Sasobit, irrespective of type of PPA, SBS, GTR, and Sasobit, while it slightly decreases upon the addition
modification, also increases the high temperature continuous grade. of Evotherm M1. Increased hardness is a favorable condition at high
However, it should be noted that its effect on the high temperature temperatures where rutting is a major concern, however, increased
continuous grade is higher for unmodified binder compared to modified hardness could adversely affect the low temperatures performance of the
binders. Evotherm M1 either does not significantly affect the high tem- binders.
perature continuous grade or slightly decreases that. At ωc , R is an indication of the difference between log of dynamic
With regard to the low temperature continuous grade, SBS, GTR, and modulus and the log of glassy modulus. At intermediate temperatures, a
PPA show increasing, insignificant, and decreasing effects, respectively. higher value of R is an indication of a less brittle binder that could show
Sasobit, irrespective of modification type, increases the low temperature more gradual transition from steady state flow to elastic behavior. The
PG. However, Evotherm M1 has insignificant effects on the low tem- values given in Table 4 indicate that the addition of WMA additives (i.e.,
perature PG. Similar findings regarding the effects of Sasobit and Evo- Sasobit and Evotherm M1) to the neat binder slightly increases the value
therm M1 on the PG of SBS-modified binders have been reported in a of R. Similarly, the addition of these additives to the PPA-, SBS-, and GTR-
previous study by Luo et al. (2020). modified asphalt binders results in an increase in the value of R, which is
an indication of more brittle binder at intermediate temperatures.
The master curves developed for different binders are shown in
4.4. Frequency sweep Fig. 11. At low frequencies and high temperatures, the addition of all
modifiers increases the G* values, which is an indication of the higher
In the Christensen-Anderson (CA) model, three rheological parame- resistance against rutting. The lowest and highest increases are associ-
ters (i.e., Td, ωc , and R) can describe the characteristics and behavior of ated with the binders modified with 0.5% Evotherm M1 and 4% SBSþ3%
the binders. The values of these parameters for different asphalt binders Sasobit, respectively. At high frequencies and low temperatures, the
are given in Table 4. Rheological properties of binders have temperature- WMA additives increase the G* values, which is an indication of less
dependent behavior, which can be evaluated by the values of Td. A higher resistance to fatigue and thermal (low temperature) cracking.
value of Td is an indication of higher dependency of shift factor to tem-
perature. The values given in Table 4 indicate minor differences in the Td 5. Conclusions
value of different binders. Overall, the Td values are obtained within the
range of 19.95
C to 22.50
C. This study investigates the effects of two WMA additives (i.e., Sasobit
The values of ωc can be used to determine the overall stiffness of the and Evotherm M1) on the rheological properties of neat and modified
binders. A reduction in the value of ωc is an indication of an increase in

Table 3
Binder grading according to AASHTO specifications.
Binder Grade designation Continuous grade

PG protocol MSCR protocol

Neat PG64-22 PG52E-22 PG58H-22 PG64S-22 66–25

3%Sasobit PG70-22 PG58E-22 PG64H-22 74–23
0.5%Evotherm PG64-22 PG58E-22 PG58H-22 64–24
4%SBS PG76-22 PG58E-22 PG64V-22 PG70H-22 76–23
4%SBSþ3%Sasobit PG76-16 PG58E-16 PG64E-16 PG70H-16 81–19
4%SBSþ0.5%Evotherm PG76-22 PG58E-22 PG64V-22 PG70H-22 76–22
8%GTR PG70-22 PG58E-22 PG64V-22 73–25
8%GTRþ3%Sasobit PG76-16 PG58E-16 PG64V-16 PG70H-16 79–20
8%GTRþ0.5%Evotherm PG70-22 PG58E-22 PG64V-22 PG70H-22 74–24
1.2%PPA PG70-22 PG58E-22 PG64V-22 PG70H-22 PG76S-22 75–27
1.2%PPAþ3%Sasobit PG76-22 PG58E-22 PG64V-22 PG70H-22 78–25
1.2%PPAþ0.5%Evotherm PG70-22 PG58E-22 PG64V-22 PG70H-22 PG76S-22 75–25

8
A. Behnood et al.
Fig. 11. Master curves of the binders evaluated in this study.
asphalt binders. The rheological modifiers used in this study included 8
wt% GTR, 4 wt% SBS, and 1.2 wt% PPA. The following conclusions are
drawn from the experimental results and rheological analyses:
1. All the rheological modifiers (i.e., GTR, SBS, and PPA) decreased the
penetration grade and increased the viscosity and softening point.
The addition of Sasobit to the binders modified with these agents
further decreased the penetration grade and increased the softening
point. Both WMA additives were found to decrease the viscosity of
unmodified and modified asphalt binders.
2. The rheological modifiers, evaluated in this study, improved the
resistance of asphalt binders to permanent deformation as indicated
by the rutting parameter values obtained from performance grading
tests. The addition of Sasobit to these binders further increased the
resistance to rutting. However, the addition of Evotherm M1 did not
significantly affect the properties of modified binders at high tem-
peratures. The results of the MSCR tests confirmed the findings from
the PG tests at high temperatures.
3. GTR and SBS resulted in more nagative ΔTc values while PPA resulted
in less negative ΔTc value compared to unmodified binder. Both WMA
additives also resulted in more negative ΔTc values of the asphalt
binders (irrespective of their modification type); however, the effect
of Sasobit was higher than that of the Evotherm M1.
4. The binder grading according to AASHTO specifications indicated
that Sasobit can adversely affect the low temperature PG of some of
the binders. Therefore, the use of this type of WMA additive at regions
with cold temperatures (especially in the presence of SBS) would not
be suggested.
5. The percent difference criterion of the MSCR tests (i.e., Jnr diff : ), which
is proposed to identify overly stress-sensitive binders to unusual high
temperatures or unexpected heavy loads, seems to incorrectly rank
the asphalt binders. This conclusion emphasizes the necessity of
further research to propose more reliable criteria for identifying
overly sensitive asphalt binders.
9
Cleaner Engineering and Technology 1 (2020) 100028
Declaration of competing interest
None.
References
Airey, G.D., 2003. Rheological properties of styrene butadiene styrene polymer modified
road bitumens☆. Fuel 82, 1709–1719.
Almeida-Costa, A., Benta, A., 2016. Economic and environmental impact study of warm
mix asphalt compared to hot mix asphalt. J. Clean. Prod. 112, 2308–2317.
Ameri, M., Ziari, H., Yousefi, A., Behnood, A., 2021. Moisture susceptibility of asphalt
mixtures: thermodynamic evaluation of the effects of antistripping additives.
J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 33 (2), 4020457.
Behnood, A., 2020. A review of the warm mix asphalt (WMA) technologies: effects on
thermo-mechanical and rheological properties. J. Clean. Prod. 259, 120817.
Behnood, A., 2019. Application of rejuvenators to improve the rheological and
mechanical properties of asphalt binders and mixtures: a review. J. Clean. Prod. 231,
171–182.
Behnood, A., Modiri Gharehveran, M., 2019. Morphology, rheology, and physical
properties of polymer-modified asphalt binders. Eur. Polym. J. 112, 766–791.
Behnood, A., Olek, J., 2017a. Rheological properties of asphalt binders modified with
styrene-butadiene-styrene (SBS), ground tire rubber (GTR), or polyphosphoric acid
(PPA). Construct. Build. Mater. 151, 464–478.
Behnood, A., Olek, J., 2017b. Stress-dependent behavior and rutting resistance of
modified asphalt binders: an MSCR approach. Construct. Build. Mater. 157, 635–646.
Behnood, A., Shah, A., McDaniel, R.S., Beeson, M., Olek, J., 2016. High temperature
properties of asphalt binders: comparison of multiple stress creep recovery and
performance grading systems. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2574, 131–143.
Booshehrian, A., Mogawer, W., Bonaquist, R., 2012. How to construct an asphalt binder
master curve and assess the degree of blending between RAP and virgin binders.
J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 25 (12), 1813–1821.
Capit~ao, S.D., Picado-Santos, L.G., Martinho, F., 2012. Pavement engineering materials:
review on the use of warm-mix asphalt. Construct. Build. Mater. 36, 1016–1024.
Cheraghian, G., Cannone Falchetto, A., You, Z., Chen, S., Kim, Y.S., Westerhoff, J.,
Moon, K.H., Wistuba, M.P., 2020. Warm mix asphalt technology: an up to date
review. J. Clean. Prod. 268, 122128.
Christensen, W.D., Anderson, A.D., 1992. Interpretation of dynamic mechanical test data
for paving grade asphalt cements (with discussion). J. Assoc. Asph. Paving Technol.
61, 67–116.
Fontes, L.P.T.L., Trich^es, G., Pais, J.C., Pereira, P.A.A., 2010. Evaluating permanent
deformation in asphalt rubber mixtures. Construct. Build. Mater. 24 (7), 1193–1200.
Hassanpour-Kasanagh, S., Ahmedzade, P., Fainleib, A.M., Behnood, A., 2020. Rheological
properties of asphalt binders modified with recycled materials: a comparison with
Styrene-Butadiene-Styrene (SBS). Construct. Build. Mater. 230, 117047.
Jahanbakhsh, H., Karimi, M.M., Naseri, H., Nejad, F.M., 2020. Sustainable asphalt
concrete containing high reclaimed asphalt pavements and recycling agents:
performance assessment, cost analysis, and environmental impact. J. Clean. Prod.
244, 118837.
Jasso, M., Hampl, R., Vacin, O., Bakos, D., Stastna, J., Zanzotto, L., 2015. Rheology of
conventional asphalt modified with SBS, Elvaloy and polyphosphoric acid. Fuel
Process. Technol. 140, 172–179.
Jeong, S.H., Xiao, F., Kim, Y.S., Kim, K.W., 2017. Evaluation of age retardation effect of
antioxidants in dense-graded asphalt (DGA) mixture using large molecular size.
Construct. Build. Mater. 149, 459–466.
Kalantar, Z.N., Karim, M.R., Mahrez, A., 2012. A review of using waste and virgin
polymer in pavement. Construct. Build. Mater. 33, 55–62.
Karimi, M.M., Dehaghi, E.A., Behnood, A., 2020. A fracture-based approach to
characterize long-term performance of asphalt mixes under moisture and freeze-thaw
conditions. Eng. Fract. Mech. 107418.
Kataware, A.V., Singh, D., 2017. Evaluating effectiveness of WMA additives for SBS
modified binder based on viscosity, Superpave PG, rutting and fatigue performance.
Construct. Build. Mater. 146, 436–444.
K€ok, B.V., Yılmaz, M., Akpolat, M., 2014. Evaluation of the conventional and rheological
properties of SBS þ Sasobit modified binder. Construct. Build. Mater. 63, 174–179.
Luo, H., Leng, H., Ding, H., Xu, J., Lin, H., Ai, C., Qiu, Y., 2020. Low-temperature cracking
resistance, fatigue performance and emission reduction of a novel silica gel warm mix
asphalt binder. Construct. Build. Mater. 231, 117118.
Perez-Martínez, M., Moreno-Navarro, F., Martín-Marín, J., Ríos-Losada, C., Rubio-
Gamez, M.C., 2014. Analysis of cleaner technologies based on waxes and surfactant
additives in road construction. J. Clean. Prod. 65, 374–379.
Polacco, G., Kríz, P., Filippi, S., Stastna, J., Biondi, D., Zanzotto, L., 2008. Rheological
properties of asphalt/SBS/clay blends. Eur. Polym. J. 44 (11), 3512–3521.
Rodríguez-Alloza, A.M., Gallego, J., Giuliani, F., 2016. Complex shear modulus and phase
angle of crumb rubber modified binders containing organic warm mix asphalt
additives. Mater. Struct. 50 (1), 77.
Rodríguez-Alloza, A.M., Gallego, J., Perez, I., Bonati, A., Giuliani, F., 2014. High and low
temperature properties of crumb rubber modified binders containing warm mix
asphalt additives. Construct. Build. Mater. 53, 460–466.
Rodríguez-Alloza, A.M., Malik, A., Lenzen, M., Gallego, J., 2015. Hybrid input–output life
cycle assessment of warm mix asphalt mixtures. J. Clean. Prod. 90, 171–182.
Sobhi, S., Yousefi, A., Behnood, A., 2020. The effects of Gilsonite and Sasobit on the
mechanical properties and durability of asphalt mixtures. Construct. Build. Mater.
238, 117676.
A. Behnood et al.
Wasage, T.L.J., Stastna, J., Zanzotto, L., 2011. Rheological analysis of multi-stress creep
recovery (MSCR) test. Int. J. Pavement Eng. 12 (6), 561–568.
Wu, S., Zhang, W., Shen, S., Li, X., Muhunthan, B., Mohammad, L.N., 2017. Field-aged
asphalt binder performance evaluation for Evotherm warm mix asphalt: comparisons
with hot mix asphalt. Construct. Build. Mater. 156, 574–583.
Xu, J., Sun, L., Pei, J., Xue, B., Liu, T., Li, R., 2020. Microstructural, chemical and
rheological evaluation on oxidative aging effect of SBS polymer modified asphalt.
Construct. Build. Mater. 121028.
Yang, P., Liu, J., 2018. Rheological properties of Deurex – modified WMA binder
containing SBS. Petrol. Sci. Technol. 36 (12), 813–819.
10
Cleaner Engineering and Technology 1 (2020) 100028
Yousefi, A., Behnood, A., Nowruzi, A., Haghshenas, H., 2020. Performance evaluation of
asphalt mixtures containing warm mix asphalt (WMA) additives and reclaimed
asphalt pavement (RAP). Construct. Build. Mater. 121200.
Yu, H., Leng, Z., Dong, Z., Tan, Z., Guo, F., Yan, J., 2018. Workability and mechanical
property characterization of asphalt rubber mixtures modified with various warm
mix asphalt additives. Construct. Build. Mater. 175, 392–401.
Zhu, J., Birgisson, B., Kringos, N., 2014. Polymer modification of bitumen: advances and
challenges. Eur. Polym. J. 54, 18–38.