2021
DOI: 10.1155/2021/8894970
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimating the Asphalt Binder Film Thickness Using Scanning Electron Microscope and Energy Dispersive X‐Ray Spectroscopy

Abstract: Asphalt binder film thickness has relation to mixing temperature and binder content in hot mix asphalt, which influences mixture’s performance. A significant variation in assessing the asphalt binder film thickness has been observed in the literature. Development of state of the art technology and Superpave specification requires the study of actual asphalt binder film thickness at micro-level. This study estimates asphalt binder film thickness at micro-level and compares results with those obtained through an… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
2
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to SEM and EDS studies, the binder film thickness in recycled asphalt mixtures varies from 0.4 to 2 µm, with no correlation to recycled asphalt mixture or rejuvenator concentration, as shown in Figure 9. The results of SEM-based ABFT coincide with those of Elseifi et al [18] and Karim et al [10], but they contradict the analytical results of ABFT given in Tables 1 and 10. As indicated in Table 10, traditional ABFT values based on analytical models range from 6.4 to 13.5 µm, with film thickness being a function of recycled asphalt mixture's content, rejuvenator content, and model type.…”
Section: Analysis Of Abft Achieved Through Sem and Edssupporting
confidence: 66%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…According to SEM and EDS studies, the binder film thickness in recycled asphalt mixtures varies from 0.4 to 2 µm, with no correlation to recycled asphalt mixture or rejuvenator concentration, as shown in Figure 9. The results of SEM-based ABFT coincide with those of Elseifi et al [18] and Karim et al [10], but they contradict the analytical results of ABFT given in Tables 1 and 10. As indicated in Table 10, traditional ABFT values based on analytical models range from 6.4 to 13.5 µm, with film thickness being a function of recycled asphalt mixture's content, rejuvenator content, and model type.…”
Section: Analysis Of Abft Achieved Through Sem and Edssupporting
confidence: 66%
“…Figure 7a-c displays images of the asphalt specimen, captured at magnification of ×5000 and a scale bar of 5 µm, which revealed asphalt mastic, comprising a mix of bitumen and mineral filler. Figure 7b shows flaky, elongated, and spherical filler particles in asphalt mastic, as well as air voids of 0.3, 0.7, and 1.4 micron sizes, which agrees with the findings of Karim et al [10] but contradicts the assertion made by Kandhal and Chakraborty [11], that voids do not occur in asphalt mastic. Figure 8c also reveals a deviating binder film, gripping the filler particles in mastic.…”
Section: Analysis Of Abft Achieved Through Sem and Edssupporting
confidence: 60%
See 3 more Smart Citations