138 healing infradagen
TRANSCRIPT
1 Challenge the future
Healing of asphalt mortar
An investigation into the possibilities of the American
healing approach
Infradagen 2014
Greet Leegwater, Tom Scarpas and Sandra Erkens
2 Challenge the future
Content
• Aim of the PhD project
• Literature review:
• the Texas A&M healing model
• Fit of the model / approach to literature
• Next steps
3 Challenge the future
Research motivation
• Bazin and Saunier first systematically studied healing of
asphalt.
• Asphalt heals, to what extend depends on the material, the
damage, time, temperature, and pressure.
• In most design guidelines healing is incorporated based on
own experience and assumptions.
• For innovative mixtures healing parameters are expected to
be different, however there is no method to determine a
healing parameter based on material performance.
4 Challenge the future
Goal
• Formulate a fundamental healing model, based on healing
mechanisms and driving material parameters, that can rank
healing performance of asphalt mortars using experimental
results.
5 Challenge the future
Literature review; the Texas A&M
healing model
• Little and Bhasin adopted healing from polymers (Wool and
O’ Conner).
• Recovery of mechanical properties is the sum of two
functions
• Wetting distribution function (part of surface in contact)
• Intrinsic healing function (load bearing capacity of surfaces in contact)
• The function shows how healing (R) is a convolution of
wetting (𝜙(𝜏,X)) and intrinsic healing (Rh) functions.
• R is 1 if all damage is healed and 0 if no damage is healed.
( ,X)( )
t
h
dR R t d
d
6 Challenge the future
Example healing curve according
to the model
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
time
Rh
R0
7 Challenge the future
Wetting function [Little and Bhasin]
•
8 Challenge the future
Intrinsic healing function [Bhasin,
Palvadi et al. 2011]
•
9 Challenge the future
Two piece healing method
• Qiu (2012) demonstrated that this method was dependant on
pressure level: no real intrinsic healing.
10 Challenge the future
Match of the model with literature
• The model matches well with observed impact of
temperature, pressure and time, versus material parameters.
• The approach matches with the observed healing in softer
materials.
• There is also room to incorporate adhesion differences in
materials.
• The separate analyses of contact surface, could be the key to
explain differences dependant of test methods.
• The seperate analyses of contact surface and strength
development might explain quick recovery of stiffness.
11 Challenge the future
Conclusions convolution model
• The convolution approach will be adopted, as the separation
of the two different processes is expected to increase the
fundamental insight in the healing mechanism.
• The presented formula’s for wetting and intrinsic healing will
not be adopted, as there is no convincing evidence to support
these models.
12 Challenge the future
Next steps
• Create a crack, measure
strenght and sitffness.
• Place two halves togehter
under different pressures.
• Measure healing strength at
different moments in time.
• Use tomography to measure
development of contact
area.
t = 0
Contact area = 0
t = t1
Contact area = 10%
t = t2
Contact area = 60%
t = ?
Contact area = 100%