| Literature DB >> 29762533 |
Marta Vila-Cortavitarte1, Daniel Jato-Espino2, Daniel Castro-Fresno3, Miguel Á Calzada-Pérez4.
Abstract
Major advances have been achieved in the field of self-healing by magnetic induction in which the addition of metallic particles into asphalt mixtures enables repairing their own cracks. This technology has already been proven to increase the life expectancy of roads. Nevertheless, its higher costs in comparison with conventional maintenance caused by the price of virgin metallic particles still makes it unattractive for investment. This research aimed at making this process economically accessible as well as environmentally efficient. To this end, an intense search for suitable industrial by-products to substitute both the virgin metal particles and the natural aggregates forming asphalt mixtures was conducted. The set of by-products used included sand blasting wastes, stainless shot wastes, and polished wastes as metallic particles and other inert by-products as aggregates. The results demonstrated that the by-products were adequately heated, which leads to satisfactory healing ratios in comparison with the reference mixture.Entities:
Keywords: asphalt mixtures; induction heating; magnetic induction; metallic by-products; self-healing
Year: 2018 PMID: 29762533 PMCID: PMC5978177 DOI: 10.3390/ma11050800
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Flowchart of the six stages forming the proposed methodology.
Figure 2Textures of the set of by-products collected from local metal industries.
Figure 3(a) By-products heating test; (b) Thermographic image recorded with the infrared camera.
Particle size distribution of the reference mixture.
|
| 22 | 16 | 8.0 | 4.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.25 | 0.13 | 0.063 |
|
| 100.0 | 95.0 | 67.5 | 42.5 | 31.0 | 23.5 | 16.0 | 11.0 | 8.0 | 5.0 |
|
| 100.0 | 100.0 | 75.0 | 50.0 | 38.0 | 39.5 | 21.0 | 15.0 | 11.0 | 7.0 |
|
| 100.0 | 90.0 | 60.0 | 35.0 | 24.0 | 17.5 | 11.0 | 7.0 | 5.0 | 3.0 |
Figure 4(a) Pre-notched sample; (b) Group of demolded specimens.
Figure 5Details of the (a) Cradle with 7 cm between supports; (b) Three point bending test.
Figure 6(a) Healing of specimens after magnetic induction; (b) Thermal images of the specimens.
Summary of the inferential and descriptive statistical significance tests used.
| Statistics | Type | Test |
|---|---|---|
| inferential | parametric | student’s |
| one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) (>2 groups) | ||
| nonparametric | Mann–Whitney U test (2 groups) | |
| Kruskal-Wallis test (>2 groups) | ||
| descriptive | dependence | Pearson correlation coefficient |
Particle size distribution of the by-products considered.
| By-Product | Sieve Size (mm) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.25 | 0.13 | 0.063 | |
| REF | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| SB1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100 | 99.8 | 94.2 | 70.9 | 43.8 |
| SB2 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.9 | 99.5 | 57.8 | 31.1 | 15.1 |
| SB3 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 92.5 | 71.3 | 37.15 | 12.3 | 1.2 |
| SB4 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.8 | 37.1 | 5.3 | 3.0 | 1.4 | 0.8 | 0.0 |
| SB5 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 95.2 | 82.8 | 58.0 |
| S1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 98.2 | 71.7 | 28.6 | 6.7 | 1.8 | 0.7 | 0.0 |
| S2 | 96.2 | 89.0 | 75.8 | 53.0 | 36.2 | 5.9 | 2.5 | 0.9 | 0.0 |
| S3 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| S4 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| DS1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.5 | 90.9 | 67.2 |
| DS2 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 96.0 | 95.6 | 86.7 | 9.7 | 1.4 | 0.0 |
| MB1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.3 | 88.5 | 42.1 | 8.4 | 0.9 |
| MB2 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.7 | 98.1 | 89.3 | 78.5 | 62.3 | 44.0 |
| MB3 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.5 | 96.0 | 84.3 | 62.6 | 34.3 |
| MB4 | 94.63 | 88.2 | 81.5 | 67.7 | 53.3 | 43.1 | 19.6 | 10.3 | 5.7 |
Figure 7Temperature achieved by the by-products tested as potential heating inductors.
Bitumen content and particle size distribution of the mixtures.
| Mixture | Bitumen in Mixture (%) | Sieve Mize (mm) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.25 | 0.13 | 0.063 | ||
| REF_M | 3.8 | 100.0 | 70.3 | 44.3 | 34.1 | 21.6 | 14.3 | 10.4 | 8.5 | 6.6 |
| SB3_M | 3.9 | 100.0 | 70.4 | 44.4 | 32.3 | 24.8 | 16.7 | 11.3 | 8.4 | 6.0 |
| SB3_SB5_M | 3.9 | 100.0 | 69.9 | 44.0 | 32.1 | 24.6 | 16.6 | 11.3 | 8.3 | 5.5 |
| SB4_SB5_M | 3.8 | 100.0 | 69.2 | 43.6 | 31.0 | 22.3 | 15.0 | 11.3 | 8.7 | 6.1 |
| S1_SB3_M | 3.8 | 100.0 | 70.9 | 44.6 | 32.3 | 24.9 | 16.8 | 10.6 | 8.4 | 6.9 |
Figure 8Healing ratios (%) achieved in relation to the time (s) and intensity (A) applied to test the different mixtures studied (a) REF_M; (b) SB3_M; (c) SB3_SB5_M; (d) SB4_SB5_M; (e) S1_SB3_M.
Figure 9Healing ratios (%) achieved by the different mixtures in relation to (a) Temperature (°C) and (b) The product of time by intensity (s·A); (c) Breaking loads applied to the mixtures before healing ().
Comparative evaluation of the asphalt mixtures using nonparametric inferential tests.
| Comparison | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| REF vs. SB3 vs. SB3_SB5 vs. SB4_SB5 vs. S1_SB3 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| REF vs. SB3 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.129 | 0.002 |
| REF vs. SB3_SB5 | 0.007 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| REF vs. SB4_SB5 | 0.277 | 0.754 | 0.058 | 0.464 | 0.422 |
| REF vs. S1_SB3 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.740 | 0.316 |
| SB3 vs. SB3_SB5 | 0.030 | 0.126 | 0.014 | 0.647 | 0.000 |
| SB3 vs. SB4_SB5 | 0.006 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.040 | 0.113 |
| SB3 vs. S1_SB3 | 0.710 | 0.412 | 0.456 | 0.175 | 0.412 |
| SB3_SB5 vs. SB4_SB5 | 0.292 | 0.003 | 0.000 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| SB3_SB5 vs. S1_SB3 | 0.011 | 0.009 | 0.001 | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| SB4_SB5 vs. S1_SB3 | 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.131 | 1.000 |
Pearson correlation coefficients between the variables involved in the healing process.
| Interaction | Group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| REF + SB4_SB5_M | SB3_M + S1_SB3_M | SB3_SB5_M | |
|
| −0.264 | 0.521 * | 0.825 * |
|
| 0.244 | 0.567 * | 0.826 * |
|
| 0.504 * | 0.585 * | −0.750 * |
|
| 0.032 | 0.109 | −0.105 |
|
| 0.104 | 0.632 * | 0.597 * |
|
| 0.531 * | 0.512 * | 0.800 * |
|
| 0.006 | 0.109 | 0.628 * |
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.