260
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Exploring the impact of humidity and water on bituminous binder aging: a multivariate analysis approach (TI CAB)

, & ORCID Icon
Received 14 Dec 2023, Accepted 28 May 2024, Published online: 17 Jun 2024

Figures & data

Table 1. Specifications of Q 70/100 and T 70/100 binders at fresh (unaged) state.

Figure 1. (a) Bitumen film of 1 mm in a petri-dish, (b) Climate chamber setup.

Figure 1. (a) Bitumen film of 1 mm in a petri-dish, (b) Climate chamber setup.

Figure 2. Average (a) minimum and maximum temperature, (b) precipitation (mm), (c) relative humidity (%) in Amsterdam, Netherlands during Jan. 2021 to Dec. 2021, from weather-and-climate.com.

Figure 2. Average (a) minimum and maximum temperature, (b) precipitation (mm), (c) relative humidity (%) in Amsterdam, Netherlands during Jan. 2021 to Dec. 2021, from weather-and-climate.com.

Table 2. Main functional groups of binder in FTIR spectra (Zhang et al., Citation2019).

Figure 3. Illustration of a dendrogram depicting the hierarchy of leaves and clades.

Figure 3. Illustration of a dendrogram depicting the hierarchy of leaves and clades.

Figure 4. FTIR spectra of Q binder aged at 60°C with 95% humidity during different aging times, i.e. 1, 7, 14, and 21 days.

Figure 4. FTIR spectra of Q binder aged at 60°C with 95% humidity during different aging times, i.e. 1, 7, 14, and 21 days.

Figure 5. FTIR results for (a) carbonyl index of Q samples, (b) carbonyl index of T samples, (c) sulfoxide index of Q samples, (d) sulfoxide index of T samples aged at 60°C, 70°C, and 85°C for 1, 7, 14, and 21 days in thermo-oxidative (O), hygrothermal (H), and water-immersion (W) conditions.

Figure 5. FTIR results for (a) carbonyl index of Q samples, (b) carbonyl index of T samples, (c) sulfoxide index of Q samples, (d) sulfoxide index of T samples aged at 60°C, 70°C, and 85°C for 1, 7, 14, and 21 days in thermo-oxidative (O), hygrothermal (H), and water-immersion (W) conditions.

Figure 6. FTIR results for field aged samples of 2014–2018, (a) carbonyl index, (b) sulfoxide index.

Figure 6. FTIR results for field aged samples of 2014–2018, (a) carbonyl index, (b) sulfoxide index.

Figure 7. Master curves (at 20°C) at 60°C for (a) Q binder and (b) T binder, at all aging states, i.e. fresh, TFOT short-term aged, and 1, 7, 14, 21 days (D) of hygrothermal (H), aqueous-thermal (W), and thermo-oxidative (O) conditioning.

Figure 7. Master curves (at 20°C) at 60°C for (a) Q binder and (b) T binder, at all aging states, i.e. fresh, TFOT short-term aged, and 1, 7, 14, 21 days (D) of hygrothermal (H), aqueous-thermal (W), and thermo-oxidative (O) conditioning.

Figure 8. Master curves (at 20°C) at 70°C for (a) Q binder and (b) T binder, at all aging states, i.e. fresh, TFOT short-term aged, and 1, 7, 14, 21 days (D) of hygrothermal (H), aqueous-thermal (W), and thermo-oxidative (O) conditioning.

Figure 8. Master curves (at 20°C) at 70°C for (a) Q binder and (b) T binder, at all aging states, i.e. fresh, TFOT short-term aged, and 1, 7, 14, 21 days (D) of hygrothermal (H), aqueous-thermal (W), and thermo-oxidative (O) conditioning.

Figure 9. Master curves (at 20°C) at 85°C for (a) Q binder and (b) T binder, at all aging states, i.e. fresh, TFOT short-term aged, and 1, 7, 14, 21 days (D) of hygrothermal (H), aqueous-thermal (W), and thermo-oxidative (O) conditioning.

Figure 9. Master curves (at 20°C) at 85°C for (a) Q binder and (b) T binder, at all aging states, i.e. fresh, TFOT short-term aged, and 1, 7, 14, 21 days (D) of hygrothermal (H), aqueous-thermal (W), and thermo-oxidative (O) conditioning.

Figure 10. Master curves (at 20°C) of field aged samples from 2014 to 2018.

Figure 10. Master curves (at 20°C) of field aged samples from 2014 to 2018.

Figure 11. Crossover complex modulus versus crossover frequency of Q binder at (a) 60°C, (b) 70°C, and (c) 85°C at all aging states, i.e. fresh, TFOT short-term aged, and 1, 7, 14, 21 days (D) of hygrothermal (H), aqueous-thermal (W), and thermo-oxidative (O) conditioning, (d) all 21-day aged samples of all conditions.

Figure 11. Crossover complex modulus versus crossover frequency of Q binder at (a) 60°C, (b) 70°C, and (c) 85°C at all aging states, i.e. fresh, TFOT short-term aged, and 1, 7, 14, 21 days (D) of hygrothermal (H), aqueous-thermal (W), and thermo-oxidative (O) conditioning, (d) all 21-day aged samples of all conditions.

Figure 12. Crossover complex modulus versus crossover frequency of T binder at (a) 60°C, (b) 70°C, and (c) 85°C at all aging states, i.e. fresh, TFOT short-term aged, and 1, 7, 14, 21 days (D) of hygrothermal (H), aqueous-thermal (W), and thermo-oxidative (O) conditioning, d) all 21-day aged samples of all conditions.

Figure 12. Crossover complex modulus versus crossover frequency of T binder at (a) 60°C, (b) 70°C, and (c) 85°C at all aging states, i.e. fresh, TFOT short-term aged, and 1, 7, 14, 21 days (D) of hygrothermal (H), aqueous-thermal (W), and thermo-oxidative (O) conditioning, d) all 21-day aged samples of all conditions.

Figure 13. Crossover complex modulus versus crossover frequency of field aged samples of 2014–2018.

Figure 13. Crossover complex modulus versus crossover frequency of field aged samples of 2014–2018.

Figure 14. Hierarchical clustering analysis of all laboratory-aged samples in combination with field aged samples from 2014 to 2018.

Figure 14. Hierarchical clustering analysis of all laboratory-aged samples in combination with field aged samples from 2014 to 2018.