1. Introduction
An asphalt mix is a composite material consisting of asphalt binder, i-e: bitumen, mineral aggregates, i-e coarse aggregate, fine aggregate, and mineral filler. While aggregates give an asphalt mix its load-bearing structure, the binder holds the particles together and subsequently gives the mix its tensile strength. A pavement is a multi-layered structure that rests on the soil’s subgrade. In the last few decades, asphalt pavement has been widely used in constructing roads and highways [
1]. As pavement is subjected to traffic loads, insufficient compaction of pavement layers, or temperature variations, permanent deformation may arise within the pavement or on its surface, such as rutting. Rutting usually occurs in both asphalt and the underlying unbound layers, but almost 85% - 95% of rutting accumulates in the asphaltic layers. Damage such as rutting would occur during the design life of asphalt pavement and at high temperatures. It would be dangerous to the users and produce a substantial amount of waste asphalt [
2,
3].
Rutting is the permanent deformation most dominant in the asphaltic course of a pavement or sometimes in the underlying layers, such as base or subgrade layers, caused by repeated action of traffic loads. Recent years have seen an increase in academic interest in the study of improving the resistance properties of raw virgin asphalt binders to pavement failures due to the growing emphasis on the sustainable development of resources, as well as the rising cost of asphalt binders and the scarcity of high-quality aggregates. [
3,
4,
5]. After compaction, the coarse aggregate particles in an asphalt mix are tightly in contact with one another, thus forming a firmly bonded interlocked skeleton structure. This interlocked structure bears the loads applied by heavy traffic flow. The viscoelastic asphalt binder and mineral filler fill the voids between coarse aggregate. This results in a stable asphalt pavement structure [
6].
Rutting deformation in an asphalt pavement can occur in 2 main modes: shear in one of the underlying layers or plastic flow in the Hot Mix Asphalt (H.M.A.) layer. According to (Button, Perdomo, and Lytton, 1990) [
7], rutting is caused due to three different mechanisms; these are as follows: (1) consolidation or over-compaction of the pavement due to traffic volume or cyclic loads; (2) plastic deformation due to the instability of the mix; and finally, (3) instability, due to the stripping of binder underneath the surface course. Rutting typically occurs on pavement in three stages: (i) Primary rutting, also known as wear rutting. Traffic loads and environmental factors contribute to this; (ii) Secondary rutting, also known as structural rutting, results from the permanent deformation of underlying structural layers; and (iii) Tertiary rutting, also known as instability rutting, results from the lateral movement of materials within an asphalt pavement [
8,
9].
Bitumen modification is carried out to enhance its chemical, physical, and rheological properties to better resist the drastic effects of temperature variation, loading, and water damage on asphaltic concrete roads and to minimize road failures which may lead to rehabilitation and frequent maintenance, which would ultimately add towards spending extra capital. Researchers across the globe have been working tirelessly to innovate new materials capable of mating with bitumen to enhance their properties. Researchers and authors from Pakistan have also been involved in this field of bitumen modification, as Pakistan is amongst the most severely affected countries regarding road failures. In their study, Aman et al., 2020 [
4] explore the effect of adding a phosphorous methyl compound (P.M.C.) to asphalt binder. The study involved preparing asphalt binder samples with varying concentrations of P.M.C. and conducting a range of laboratory tests to evaluate the physical and rheological properties of the samples. According to the findings, incorporating P.M.C. into the asphalt binder improved some of its essential attributes, including its point of softening, penetration, and ductility. The author proposes that adding polymer-modified bitumen, or P.M.C., to asphalt binder may have substantial consequences for designing and constructing asphalt pavements. It is because using P.M.C. as an additive in asphalt binder may improve the pavement’s durability and resistance to many different types of distress, such as cracking and rutting.
In another research by Irfan et al., 2018 [
10], the authors analyze how asphalt mixtures amended with crumb rubber were performed in a laboratory and actual at-site settings. As part of the study, laboratory testing on crumb rubber-modified asphalt mixes were carried out. These tests included evaluations of the mixture’s physical qualities, as well as evaluations of its rutting and fatigue resistance. The authors also conducted field testing on portions of pavement containing crumb rubber-modified asphalt, employing several performance parameters to evaluate the results. Compared to unmodified mixes, the results showed that crumb rubber-modified asphalt mixtures enhanced physical qualities. When tested in the laboratory, these mixtures also exhibited improved rutting and fatigue resistance. In the field testing, the sections of the pavement that were changed with crumb rubber exhibited significantly less cracking and rutting than the sections that used a mathematical model that can reliably forecast the rut depth in asphalt pavements based on the data obtained from unmodified asphalt.
According to Authors Hussan et al., 2020 [
11], authors have recently published research works that have effectively devised various laboratory tests. The researchers evaluated several asphalt mixtures in the laboratory using a variety of procedures, such as the Marshall Stability test, the Dynamic Modulus test, the Indirect Tensile Strength test, and the Wheel Tracking test. After collecting data on the rut depth observed in each test, they analyzed the correlation between the several test findings. The research showed that there is a connection between the depth of the ruts that were seen in the various performance tests. The researchers developed a mathematical model incorporating test parameters to predict the rut depth. The model provides a valuable tool for assessing the rutting potential of asphalt mixtures and can aid in designing and evaluating durable asphalt pavements. The study highlights the importance of considering multiple performance tests to evaluate the rutting resistance of asphalt mixtures. By showing correlations between different test results, engineers and researchers can gain valuable insights into the performance of asphalt pavements and make informed decisions regarding pavement design and material selection.
However, due to the asphalt mixture’s viscoelastic plasticity under high temperatures combined with the pavement’s vehicular load, the asphalt mortar and coarse aggregate flows out of the skeleton gap resulting in destabilization of the asphalt mixture’s structure, which results in rutting to accumulate. Nanomaterials are progressively adopted to improve the resistance of modern asphalt pavement against rutting. At high temperatures, to enhance the performance of virgin asphalt binder, nanomaterials such as nano clay [
12], carbon nanotubes [
13,
14,
15], nano silica [
16], carbon black [
17], and graphene [
18,
19] are used.
With advancements and research in nanotechnology, a new material comprising layered silicate nanoparticles, called Nano clay, became an additive in asphalt [
20]. Nano clay is an organic clay that is nanometer-sized. It comprises clay particles that are less than 100 nanometers in size. Nano clay is utilized in various products such as food, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics. It can also be used as a filler in plastics and rubbers. Nano clay can improve these materials’ strength, stiffness, and heat resistance. Nano clay is also studied for batteries, fuel, and solar cells. Nano clay is an agglomerated clay where, for 50% or more of the particles in the number size distribution, one or more external dimensions is in the size range of 1 nm – 100 nm [
21,
22].
Nano clay Modified bitumen composition has been successfully used to improve the physical and rheological properties as well as the performance of bitumen [
23]. According to the findings of (Fu et al., 2004; Hanyu et al., 2005; Chen and Huang, 2007; Yildirim, 2007) [
24,
25,
26,
27], using nano clay as a modifier to improve the performance of S.B.S. (Styrene–Butadiene–Styrene) polymer-modified asphalt by adding Organophilic Montmorillonite (OMMT) nano clays, it was found that the viscosity of the SBS-modified asphalt as well as the stiffness (complex modulus) increased while the phase angle decreased. These outcomes confirmed that Organophilic Montmorillonite (OMMT) nano clays could reduce permanent deformation (rutting) in pavements, especially in the asphaltic layers.
Pakistan faces significant pavement failure due to excessive rutting because of high temperatures [
28,
29,
30,
31]. Many urban highways have excessive rutting due to high temperatures and excessive loading. Repair and maintenance work leads to traffic congestion and choke points at multiple work points. Traffic hazards due to loss of vehicle control and stability may lead to loss of life and damage to property. Constructing roads requiring minimal maintenance and rehabilitation work reduces rehabilitation costs, time, and resources. The purpose is to make a much safer and more reliable mode of transportation by reducing road accidents due to aquaplaning. By using modified binders and mixtures, the increase in resistance to such failures can help increase the life of pavements [
32,
33].
Researchers in this era are thriving in developing new materials which are not only environmentally friendly but are cost-effective to improve the properties of bitumen; such materials include Nano clay. Pakistan has abundant raw materials for road construction, but to optimize organophilic nano clay to be used as an effective modifier to enhance the binder properties, testing for its compatibility with locally abundant materials is required, which is targeted in this study. In previous research studies, authors have used different organic and inorganic compounds as additives to determine their impact on rutting in asphalt [
14,
16,
18,
32,
33]. Still, organophilic nano clay was confined to measuring the rheological properties only [
34,
35,
36] instead of its rut resistance capabilities. After thorough research, it was concluded that limited studies on organophilic nano clay in Pakistan were available to enhance the rut resistance properties at high temperatures [
37].
The desired state for this study is to design an asphalt mix that can reduce failure in roads, primarily rutting. Also, there is only a tiny amount of information available; further research must be conducted before these alterations can be implemented in real-world settings because there is insufficient information on how these modifications improve rutting resistance in asphalt mixtures. Therefore, the research study was shaped to optimize the beneficial properties of organophilic nano clay with the locally available material in Pakistan to reduce rutting in asphaltic pavements. In this research, different percentages of nano clay ranging from 3.0%, 3.5%, 4.0%, 4.5%, and 5.0% of the total weight of bitumen in asphalt mix were used to make multiple molds or cakes of asphalt. The goal was to create an asphaltic mix comprising nano clay that would adhere to the binder at optimum nano clay content without compromising the rheological performance. The NC-modified asphalt mixtures were tested using a wheel tracker apparatus to measure permanent deformation/rutting and find the influence of nano clay on reducing rutting depth. After running the Cooper wheel tracker test, the target was determining the nano clay percentage yielding the least rutting in the asphalt cake/molds. Investigations were accompanied by multiple statistical tests to fortify and validate the authenticity of the results.
Figure 1.
An experimental program was adopted for the research study.
Figure 1.
An experimental program was adopted for the research study.
Figure 2.
(a)Bitumen, (b)Khanpur crush, and (c) Organophilic Nano clay.
Figure 2.
(a)Bitumen, (b)Khanpur crush, and (c) Organophilic Nano clay.
Figure 3.
(a) Location of Khanpur Crush plant, (b) Location of source of Aggregates.
Figure 3.
(a) Location of Khanpur Crush plant, (b) Location of source of Aggregates.
Figure 4.
Aggregate Gradation Curve using Bailey method of gradation.
Figure 4.
Aggregate Gradation Curve using Bailey method of gradation.
Figure 5.
Organophilic Nano clay.
Figure 5.
Organophilic Nano clay.
Figure 6.
Rotational Viscometer (R.V.) apparatus.
Figure 6.
Rotational Viscometer (R.V.) apparatus.
Figure 7.
Wheel Tracker Test Apparatus.
Figure 7.
Wheel Tracker Test Apparatus.
Figure 8.
Impact of Nano clay on the viscosity of virgin and modified PG 60/70 bitumen.
Figure 8.
Impact of Nano clay on the viscosity of virgin and modified PG 60/70 bitumen.
Figure 9.
Impact of Nano clay on the viscosity of virgin and modified P.G. 80/100 bitumen.
Figure 9.
Impact of Nano clay on the viscosity of virgin and modified P.G. 80/100 bitumen.
Figure 10.
Impact of PG 60/70 grade O.N.C modified binder on Rut Depth.
Figure 10.
Impact of PG 60/70 grade O.N.C modified binder on Rut Depth.
Figure 11.
Impact of P.G. 80/100-grade O.N.C modified binder on Rut Depth.
Figure 11.
Impact of P.G. 80/100-grade O.N.C modified binder on Rut Depth.
Figure 12.
Effect of load cycles on Rut Depth of PG 60/70 bitumen.
Figure 12.
Effect of load cycles on Rut Depth of PG 60/70 bitumen.
Figure 13.
P.G. 60/70 with 4.5% N.C. asphalt mixtures before and after Wheel Tracker Test.
Figure 13.
P.G. 60/70 with 4.5% N.C. asphalt mixtures before and after Wheel Tracker Test.
Figure 14.
P.G. 80/100 with 4.5% N.C. asphalt mixtures before and after Wheel Tracker Test.
Figure 14.
P.G. 80/100 with 4.5% N.C. asphalt mixtures before and after Wheel Tracker Test.
Figure 15.
Effect of load cycles on Rut Depth of P.G. 80/100 bitumen.
Figure 15.
Effect of load cycles on Rut Depth of P.G. 80/100 bitumen.
Figure 16.
Relationship between Rutting and Viscosity for N.R.L 60/70 and N.R.L 80/100 bitumen.
Figure 16.
Relationship between Rutting and Viscosity for N.R.L 60/70 and N.R.L 80/100 bitumen.
Figure 17.
Graphical representation of rutting concerning different equations for 60/70 binder.
Figure 17.
Graphical representation of rutting concerning different equations for 60/70 binder.
Figure 18.
Graphical representation of rutting concerning different equations for 80/100 binder.
Figure 18.
Graphical representation of rutting concerning different equations for 80/100 binder.
Figure 19.
Polynomial Regression – Curve fitting for N.R.L 60/70 and N.R.L 80/100 bitumen.
Figure 19.
Polynomial Regression – Curve fitting for N.R.L 60/70 and N.R.L 80/100 bitumen.
Figure 20.
Exponential Curve – Curve fitting for N.R.L 60/70 and N.R.L 80/100 bitumen.
Figure 20.
Exponential Curve – Curve fitting for N.R.L 60/70 and N.R.L 80/100 bitumen.
Table 1.
Conventional Binder Test Results.
Table 1.
Conventional Binder Test Results.
Test Name |
Standard |
Binder (N.R.L 60/70) |
Binder (N.R.L 80/100) |
Range |
Softening point (°C) |
ASTM D36 |
46 |
44 |
46-54 |
Penetration Test (0.1mm) |
ASTM D5 |
63 |
89 |
60/100 |
Table 2.
Aggregate gradation after sieve analysis.
Table 2.
Aggregate gradation after sieve analysis.
Sieve Size |
Passing % |
Tolerance |
N.H.A. Specifications |
19 mm |
100 |
± 7 |
100 |
12.50 mm |
76.9 |
± 7 |
75-90 |
9.50 mm |
62-76 |
± 7 |
60-80 |
#4 |
43-51 |
± 4 |
40-60 |
#8 |
31-39 |
± 4 |
20-40 |
#50 |
7-15 |
± 4 |
5-15 |
#200 |
4-6 |
± 1 |
3-8 |
Table 3.
Elemental Composition of Khanpur Aggregate.
Table 3.
Elemental Composition of Khanpur Aggregate.
Name of element |
Percentage % |
Dark Grey Limestone |
31 |
Light Grey Limestone |
13 |
Dark Grey to Grey Veined Limestone |
8 |
Cremish Brown limestone |
3 |
Quartzwacke |
2 |
Grey Limestone |
43 |
Table 4.
Physical properties of Aggregates.
Table 4.
Physical properties of Aggregates.
Sr. # |
Properties of aggregate |
BS/ ASTM Standards |
Results |
Test Limits |
1 |
Flakiness Index (%) |
BS 812.108 |
5.25 |
10 (max) |
2 |
Elongation index (%) |
BS 812.109 |
5.8 |
10 (max) |
3 |
Water Absorption (%) |
ASTM C127 |
1.32 |
3 (max) |
4 |
Specific Gravity |
ASTM C128 |
2.83 |
3.0 (max) |
5 |
Bulk Density (kg/m3) |
ASTM D1895 |
1508.0 |
1750 (max) |
6 |
Voids (%) |
ASTM D3203 |
44.56 |
45 (max) |
7 |
Impact Value (%) |
ASTM C125 |
16.50 |
20 (max) |
8 |
Crushing Value (%) |
ASTM D5821 |
29.80 |
30 (max) |
Table 5.
Penetration Test and Softening Point Results for Virgin and Modified N.R.L 60/70 and N.R.L 80/100 Binder.
Table 5.
Penetration Test and Softening Point Results for Virgin and Modified N.R.L 60/70 and N.R.L 80/100 Binder.
Properties |
Unit |
Virgin |
Modified |
Specification Limit (minimum) |
N.R.L 60/70 |
N.R.L 80/100 |
N.R.L 60/70 |
N.R.L 80/100 |
Penetration 0.1 mm @ 25 ℃ |
|
61 |
82 |
69 |
89 |
60/80 |
Softening point (°C) |
℃ |
46 |
49 |
41 |
44 |
43 |
Table 6.
Identification Numbers of different bitumen samples.
Table 6.
Identification Numbers of different bitumen samples.
Sampling Type |
Respective ID |
Organophilic Nano clay Modified binder |
ONMB |
Penetration Grade 60/70 Bitumen |
N.R.L 60/70 |
Penetration Grade 80/100 Bitumen |
N.R.L 80/100 |
Asphalt Binder containing 3.0% nano clay |
3.0% N.C |
Asphalt Binder containing 3.5% nano clay |
3.5% N.C |
Asphalt Binder containing 4.0% nano clay |
4.0% N.C |
Asphalt Binder containing 4.5% nano clay |
4.5% N.C |
Asphalt Binder containing 5.0% nano clay |
5.0% N.C |
Table 7.
Volumetric Properties of modified asphalt mixtures.
Table 7.
Volumetric Properties of modified asphalt mixtures.
Type of Mix |
Aggregate Source |
VA (%) |
VMA (%) |
VFA (%) |
Modifiers quantity by the weight of asphalt binder |
Mixing Method |
--- |
--- |
Limits 04 - 07 |
14 (Min.) |
Limits 65 - 75 |
--- |
--- |
O.N.C. modified Mix N.R.L 60/70 |
Khanpur Crush |
5.22 |
14.76 |
64.63 |
3% - 5% |
Marshal method |
O.N.C. modified Mix N.R.L 80/100 |
Khanpur Crush |
6.43 |
16.57 |
61.2 |
3% - 5% |
Marshal method |
Table 8.
Impact of Nano clay on viscosity and torque of Pen 60/70 and 80/100-grade bitumen.
Table 8.
Impact of Nano clay on viscosity and torque of Pen 60/70 and 80/100-grade bitumen.
Pen 60/70 |
Pen 80/100 |
Sr. No |
Nano Clay % |
Average Viscosity |
Average torque (%) |
Nano Clay % |
Average Viscosity |
Average torque (%) |
1 |
0 |
353.3 |
4.7 |
0 |
342.3 |
3.5 |
2 |
3 |
391.6 |
4.5 |
3 |
394.6 |
2.7 |
3 |
3.5 |
417.9 |
4.2 |
3.5 |
417.5 |
2.1 |
4 |
4 |
456.6 |
3.7 |
4 |
434.8 |
1.5 |
5 |
4.5 |
495.2 |
2.9 |
4.5 |
463.9 |
1.2 |
6 |
5 |
488.7 |
3.2 |
5 |
456.2 |
1.3 |
Table 9.
Test data obtained after completion of 10,000 passes for N.R.L 60/70 and 80/100.
Table 9.
Test data obtained after completion of 10,000 passes for N.R.L 60/70 and 80/100.
N.R.L 60/70 with N.C |
N.R.L 80/100 with N.C |
No. of Passes |
3 |
3.5 |
4 |
4.5 |
5 |
Virgin |
3 |
3.5 |
4 |
4.5 |
5 |
Virgin |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
500 |
0.31 |
0.28 |
0.27 |
0.2 |
0.11 |
0.5 |
0.39 |
0.35 |
0.27 |
0.2 |
0.11 |
0.49 |
1000 |
0.59 |
0.52 |
0.49 |
0.36 |
0.22 |
0.91 |
0.71 |
0.64 |
0.49 |
0.36 |
0.22 |
0.89 |
1500 |
0.8 |
0.7 |
0.6 |
0.41 |
0.29 |
1.13 |
0.88 |
0.78 |
0.6 |
0.41 |
0.29 |
1.09 |
2000 |
0.97 |
0.82 |
0.68 |
0.43 |
0.32 |
1.26 |
0.97 |
0.84 |
0.68 |
0.43 |
0.3 |
1.18 |
2500 |
1.09 |
0.91 |
0.75 |
0.47 |
0.38 |
1.37 |
1.09 |
0.91 |
0.75 |
0.47 |
0.31 |
1.29 |
3000 |
1.18 |
0.99 |
0.79 |
0.49 |
0.39 |
1.45 |
1.18 |
0.99 |
0.79 |
0.49 |
0.35 |
1.35 |
3500 |
1.27 |
1.05 |
0.81 |
0.51 |
0.41 |
1.52 |
1.28 |
1.05 |
0.81 |
0.5 |
0.38 |
1.4 |
4000 |
1.33 |
1.11 |
0.85 |
0.55 |
0.43 |
1.59 |
1.33 |
1.11 |
0.85 |
0.52 |
0.4 |
1.47 |
4500 |
1.39 |
1.15 |
0.89 |
0.59 |
0.45 |
1.68 |
1.4 |
1.14 |
0.89 |
0.55 |
0.44 |
1.55 |
5000 |
1.45 |
1.17 |
0.91 |
0.6 |
0.47 |
1.74 |
1.46 |
1.17 |
0.91 |
0.6 |
0.49 |
1.66 |
5500 |
2.02 |
1.21 |
0.95 |
0.64 |
0.51 |
1.81 |
1.51 |
1.21 |
0.95 |
0.62 |
0.51 |
1.72 |
6000 |
1.59 |
1.26 |
0.98 |
0.67 |
0.56 |
1.89 |
1.59 |
1.26 |
0.98 |
0.67 |
0.57 |
1.81 |
6500 |
1.65 |
1.29 |
1.1 |
0.7 |
0.6 |
1.97 |
1.62 |
1.29 |
1.1 |
0.7 |
0.61 |
1.9 |
7000 |
1.69 |
1.32 |
1.05 |
0.71 |
0.62 |
2.05 |
1.69 |
1.32 |
1.05 |
0.71 |
0.68 |
1.99 |
7500 |
1.71 |
1.35 |
1.09 |
0.74 |
0.65 |
2.15 |
1.71 |
1.35 |
1.09 |
0.74 |
0.78 |
2.1 |
8000 |
1.77 |
1.39 |
1.11 |
0.76 |
0.69 |
2.25 |
1.77 |
1.39 |
1.11 |
0.76 |
0.86 |
2.21 |
8500 |
1.8 |
1.42 |
1.15 |
0.79 |
0.7 |
2.35 |
1.85 |
1.48 |
1.12 |
0.79 |
0.92 |
2.36 |
9000 |
1.84 |
1.46 |
1.17 |
0.8 |
0.74 |
2.43 |
1.99 |
1.6 |
1.17 |
0.81 |
1.01 |
2.59 |
9500 |
1.89 |
1.49 |
1.19 |
0.8 |
0.82 |
2.51 |
2.21 |
1.89 |
1.38 |
0.94 |
1.14 |
2.95 |
10000 |
1.93 |
1.5 |
1.2 |
0.81 |
0.93 |
2.6 |
2.5 |
2.2 |
1.6 |
1.1 |
1.3 |
3.4 |
Table 10.
ANOVA Analysis for Rutting concerning O.N.C.
Table 10.
ANOVA Analysis for Rutting concerning O.N.C.
ANOVA |
Rutting |
|
Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Square |
F |
Sig. |
Between Groups |
5.920 |
5 |
1.184 |
7.478 |
.015 |
Within Groups |
.950 |
6 |
.158 |
|
|
Total |
6.870 |
11 |
|
|
|