Sustainable Use of Recycled Polyethylene in
Asphalt Pavements
Walter J Tappeiner
E-mail: awjt.pmapave@gmail.com
Recycled Polyethylene (REC PE; preferably Low-Density LDPE and
Linear Low-Density LLDPE) can be used in virgin or recycled condition
to produce standardized PMB Grades for paving applications. Diligent
selection and use of REC PE in asphalt enhances pavement
performance and is environmentally sustainable.
Use of waste plastic in asphalt pavement is now widely discussed. The
following review provides information on using LDPE, LLDPE, and Ethylene
Vinyl Acetate (EVA) to produce standard polymer modified bitumen (PMB)
grades, which allow effective quality control at project level.
The European Construction Products Regulation (CPR)
CPR was issued in 2011 and lays down rules for manufacturing and using
construction products in the European Economic Area (EEA). CPR requires
compliance with standards and other regulations related to:
Structural integrity, durability, and performance
Safety in case of fire
Hygiene, health and environment
Safety and accessibility in use
Protection against noise
Energy economy
Sustainable use of natural resources
Suppliers of aggregates, bituminous binder, and asphalt mix in EEA countries
must comply with all CPR requirements that are relevant to their products. To
meet such requirements, a holistic approach to materials engineering and
pavement construction must be adopted considering performance, sustainable
use of natural resources, and health and safety regulations. Such
requirements are consistent with the United Nations global sustainable
development program, which emphasizes meeting the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.
The same asphalt binder and mix performance requirements should be applied
to use of recycled and virgin materials. Use of recycled materials must enable
constructing long-life asphalt pavements with a balanced performance to meet
demands of traffic loads, traffic speed, climate, reliability, and other
considerations. Effective quality management at the construction stage is
essential when using virgin or recycled materials. Without it efforts put into
asphalt binder development and production, and into asphalt mix design will
not result in long pavement life and reduced maintenance.
1
Brief History of Using Virgin and Recycled PE (REC PE) and Ethylene
Vinyl Acetate (REC EVA) as Asphalt Modifier

Plastomers have been used for several decades to improve Developed countries make
comprehensive efforts to
performance of full-depth asphalt pavement. Table 4 below is an
continually improve paving
excerpt from TRRL Laboratory Report 1101: Assessment of
materials, specifications, and
Novophalt as Binder for Rolled Asphalt Wearing Course, 1983. construction practices. Other
countries can use such information
and develop specifications that
optimize performance based on
climate, traffic, and fitness for
purpose.

Availability and quality of

bituminous binder plays a key role
in sustainable asphalt pavement
design and construction. If bitumen
of suitable quality is not produced in
a country, it must be imported and,
if necessary, modified to meet
regionally determined performance
requirements. Semi-empirical
asphalt binder specifications are
adequate for characterization of
rheologically simple binders, such
Novophalt is an asphalt binder that is produced with virgin or recycled as unmodified paving-grade
LDPE, LLDPE, or EVA, or a combination of any of these polymers. bitumen. For rheologically complex
Hundreds of projects, including large airport and highway projects binders (hard paving-grade
were carried out since the mid-1980s in Europe, Africa, Asia, the bitumen; multi-grade bitumen;
PMB), PG-grading or similar
Middle East, and the USA using the Novophalt or other technologies,
mechanistic methods of specifying
such as Polyphalt, or the more recently developed DITECPESA
bituminous binders should be
method of using recycled LDPE to produce storage-stable PMB. adopted.
Comprehensive research and development carried out in the For EME and other high-
laboratory and decades of field experience have shown that asphalt performance asphalt mix types,
binder and mix produced with REC PE performs as well as asphalt rheologically complex binders are
binder and mix produced with virgin PE, when similar polymer typically used. Such binders can be
selection criteria are applied. This finding is important because based produced with hard paving-grade
on it, the performance of projects carried out with virgin or recycled bitumen or modified bitumen. The
PE can be used to assess viability of using REC PE. Testing of PMB contribution that use of recycled
polymers can make to asphalt
produced with select REC PE has shown that it can be formulated to
pavement performance should be
meet most PMB standard grades used in Europe, USA (ASTM
determined through appropriate
D6373/AASHTO M 320), Australia and in other countries.
performance-based asphalt binder
For major projects located in countries where recycling of plastic was and mix testing. In France, where
EME was developed and has been
not yet well developed, PMB produced with samples of REC PE met
used for three decades, EME mix is
applicable specifications in laboratory trials but was not available in
specified using fundamental
quantities required to complete the project (for example, Kuala
(performance-based) asphalt mix
Lumpur International Airport 1996-98; Dubai International Airport properties.
1999-2000, and others). For resurfacing of a runway at Hobby

2
International Airport (Houston, Texas, 1987-1988), waste PE that did not meet the producer’s
specifications was used to produce PMB to the satisfaction of Houston Airports. For other projects, such
as reconstruction of a runway of the Casement Aerodrome Baldonnel (Dublin, Ireland) and for highway
and airport projects in Egypt, Austria, and Spain select REC PE was successfully used to meet applicable
asphalt binder and mix performance specifications for airport and highway projects. Use of (virgin) LDPE
is currently included in several national standard and project specifications of the Middle East.

Polyethylene (PE)

Polyethylene is a widely used plastic. At the trading level it is usually classified by its Density and Melt
Flow Index (MFI). Its mechanical properties depend primarily on the molecular weight and structure, on
type and extent of branching, on crystallinity and other properties. Crystallinity of PE is a function of
molecular weight and branching. The less the polymer chains are branched, the higher the crystallinity
of polyethylene. Branching patterns of different types of polyethylene are schematically shown below.
Crystallinity ranges from 35% for LDPE and LLDPE to about 80% for HDPE. Polyethylene has a density
of 1.0 g/cm−3 in crystalline regions, and a density of 0.86 g/cm−3 in amorphous regions. An almost linear
relationship exists between density and crystallinity. LDPE is defined by a density of 0.917 to 0.930 g/cm3
(including amorphous and crystalline regions).
Chemically PE consists of
nonpolar, saturated, high
molecular weight hydrocarbons.
The individual macromolecules
are not covalently linked. PE is
inert; its chemical behavior is
similar to that of wax. When PE is
blended with bitumen, it absorbs
aromatic hydrocarbon fractions of
bitumen and swells. The swollen
PE particles occupy a larger
volume than represented by the
PE dosage, and facilitate thus
molecular entanglement. MFI
controls the size of the swollen PE
particles in bitumen. As MFI increases (i.e. molecular weight decreases) the affinity of PE towards
bitumen constituents increases. This, in turn, increases swelling ratio of PE particles in bitumen. For the
above reasons, LDPE and LLDPE with low to moderate crystallinity interacts better with bitumen than
PE types with higher molecular weight and crystallinity. The SPI Resin Code for LDPE is 4. This code is
useful when separating plastic for recycling.
PE does not dissolve in bitumen but remains present in the form of discrete particles (bi-phase binder
system) that have absorbed aromatic fractions of bitumen. Because of it, PE added to bituminous binder
appears to compete with the asphaltenes for the solvent components of bitumen; it could therefore be
assumed that addition of PE destabilizes the bituminous colloid system. On the other hand, PE interaction
with saturates through hydrogen bonding may increase colloid stability. If the presence of a polymer in a
bi-phase binder system causes a colloidal imbalance, it will deteriorate as a binder ages.

3
To shed more light on this aspect of blending bitumen with PE, asphaltenes flocculation point (AFP)
testing was carried out on unmodified and PE-modified bitumen at the German Petroleum Institute (IfE)
to assess the relative stability of the colloid system. In this test a solution of bitumen in toluene is titrated
by an asphaltenes precipitant (i-octane). The beginning of asphaltenes flocculation is detected by
measuring the transmittance of the solution using a light source. At first, the transmittance of the solution
increases owing to dilution. When asphaltenes start to precipitate, flakes are formed and transmittance
decreases. The maximum of the titration curve is taken as flocculation point (AFP). The more precipitant
(i-octane) is required to flocculate asphaltenes, the more stable is the colloid system.

Results obtained under the BRITE EURAM study (see following section) showed that the colloid system
of the bitumen-PE blend is not significantly less stable than that of unmodified base bitumen. For some
combinations of bitumen and PE the colloidal stability appears to be better than for base bitumen used
to produce PMB. Examples of AFP test results are shown in the following table.

Asphaltenes Flocculation Point (AFP in ml of i-C8)

Base PE Type and Laboratory Material Code

Bitumen
None H H M/H LL LL L L L
1041 1042 1155 1023 1017 1160 1033 1054

NYNAS B 70/100 51.9 51.8 51.3 53.7 52.7 50.1 52.1 52.1 50.6

RUSSIA B 50/70 38.0 38.8 38.2 38.7 39.5 38.7 38.2 39.2 39.2

ESSO B 50/70 46.2 48.3 --- --- 47.6 --- 47.0 --- ---

MAYA B 70/100 32.1 36.9 --- --- 42.2 --- 38.5 --- ---

PAN JIN A-100 88.9 98.5 94.0 96.6 97.7 85.7 97.6 94.8 92.4

Because of poor compatibility with bitumen and therefrom arising poor storage stability (without agitation),
PE is more challenging to use as asphalt modifier than are elastomers, such as SBS, which is more
compatible with bitumen. However, plastomers offer in virgin or recycled condition specific performance
benefits that are not obtained with elastomers at comparable costs. Hybrid PMB formulations with SBS
or use of functionalized plastomers allow producing storage-stable, terminal-blend type PMB with
recycled PE and EVA the performance of which can be tailored to specification requirements.

The four-year BRITE EURAM project that is briefly described in the following section shows that PE and
EVA can be used as effectively in recycled as in virgin condition. This finding was confirmed in studies
conducted by others. Use of REC PE as bitumen modifier is allowed based on ASTM D6373 and
AASHTO M320 (traditional PG-grades) and based on ASTM D8239 and AASHTO M 332 (PG-MSCR
grades). Section 5 Materials and Manufacture, Clause 5.2 of each of these four standard specifications
states that modifiers can be used in virgin or recycled condition and that are capable of being dissolved,
dispersed, or reacted in asphalt binder with the objective of improving its performance. Modified asphalt
binder that meets applicable performance criteria (such as a specified PG grade) must be acceptable
irrespective of the type or dosage of polymer used. Specifications must not exclude use of recycled

4
polymers and should not include requirements that can only be met with specific types of polymers.
European countries specify fundamental asphalt mix types based on performance, which allows use of
any bituminous binder or additive as long specified asphalt mix performance requirements are met and
declared as required to comply with the CE marking system.

Use of Virgin and Recycled PE – the BRITE EURAM Project CT97- 4820

Five European companies with experience in relevant disciplines (bitumen; plastics; PMB; high shear
blending equipment, and an asphalt contractor) organized and carried out this project from 1998 to 2002;
half of the required funding was provided by the European Community under the BRITE EURAM
Program, and half by the participating companies. Results obtained confirm that REC PE (and EVA)
performs at least equally well as do virgin polymers of similar composition. Materials and key tasks of
this project included:

 6 different sources of bitumen (EN 12591 PEN 50-70 and PEN 70-100 grades)

 44 grades of virgin PE (LDPE; LLDPE; MDPE; HDPE) from eight European producers

 10 sources of REC PE from four European countries

 Based on combinations of the above materials, 288 different PMB formulations were tested

 The most promising PMB formulations using virgin and REC PE were used in two different types
of asphalt mixtures (Asphalt Binder Course 0/16S and SMA 0/8S) using German EN standard
practice for mix design. Asphalt mix modulus, IDT strength, resistance to fatigue and to
permanent deformation using wheel track testing and cyclic axial compression testing was
determined for each mixture.

 A test section was constructed in August 2002 on the Autobahn A-62 in Saarland, Germany using
combinations of asphalt binder and wearing course mixtures produced with REC PE, REC PE +
SBS, and control sections, for which SBS-modified NYPOL PmB 45 (supplied by NYNAS) was
used. SMA 0/8S mix was used for the 4 cm thick wearing course and 0/16S AB was used for the
7 cm thick binder course.

A brief description of REC PE samples used based on FTIR and other testing carried out at the Austrian
Plastics Institute is shown on the following page (excerpt from Task 5 Report of the BRITE EURAM
Project CT97- 4820). Modified asphalt binders were tested using traditional empirical properties and PG-
grading. On some modified binders BBR testing was carried out on original binder, on RTFOT residue,
and on RTFOT + PAV residue to evaluate the effect of aging on low-temperature properties. Selection
criteria for REC PE and EVA were developed at the Austrian Plastics Institute in cooperation with the
PMB producer using Weight-Average (Mw) and Number-Average (Mn) Molecular Weights, Fourier
Transform Infra-Red (FTIR) Spectroscopy, Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC), and shear-rate
dependent Melt Viscosity. Findings show that when suitable criteria are applied and REC PE/EVA is used
at dosages of about 5 to 6 % by weight of bitumen, asphalt binder modified with recycled PE/EVA
performs as well as asphalt binder modified with virgin PE/EVA. It also showed that asphalt mix designed
with binder containing select recycled plastic performs satisfactorily under a broad range of loading and
temperature conditions, including in cold climate (see Annex B).

5
Most paving-grade asphalt cements can be modified with virgin or recycled PE and EVA to meet PMB
standard specifications. Rigorous selection of recycled plastic and strict compliance with recommended
blending and PMB production procedures are very important to successful use of such materials in
asphalt binder and mix.

6
Novophalt, Polyphalt, DITECPESA Method and other Technologies that Use REC PE and EVA.

The Novophalt technology was

developed in Austria in the early
1980s and was commercially used
since the mid-1980s in more than a
dozen countries. It used originally
virgin LDPE and focused later on
use of select recycled LDPE/LLDPE
and EVA whenever such material
was available. Most types of
recycled plastic film used in
agriculture or horticulture were
found to be suitable; such film may
contain in addition to LDPE small
amounts of EVA, LLDPE, or HDPE.

Reference: “The Society of the

Plastics Industry”, Washington
D.C., USA, Winter 1990

In the late 1980s a storage-stable PE-modified asphalt binder was developed at the University of
Toronto (Canada) using steric stabilization technology under the supervision of Prof. R.T. Woodhams,
and subsequently licensed for commercial use under the name of Polyphalt, which was marketed as
a technically more advanced form of Novophalt. Commercial success of the proprietary Polyphalt

7
technology appears to have been limited because of complexities, availability, and costs of using steric
stabilizers. In addition to using virgin and recycled plastomers, the Polyphalt technical concept
included combinations of different types of virgin and recycled modifiers (as shown below) to achieve
desired asphalt binder and mix properties.

Major projects were carried out around the world using the Novophalt, Polyphalt, or other
technologies that use recycled or virgin plastic (primarily PE) to produce standard PMB grades.
Below are a few examples of projects completed using either virgin or recycled LDPE for asphalt
binder and wearing course:

• At Hobby International Airport in Houston, Texas, factory-reject LDPE (that did not meet
specifications for molding works) was used in 1987 to produce PMB for the reconstruction of
Runway 17-35. Extensive testing was carried out at the Texas A & M University. Houston
Aviation was satisfied with the pavement performance and included this technology in project
specifications issued ten and more years later.
• Asphalt binder and surface course of Runway 1 and Taxiways A and B of Kuala Lumpur
International Airport (Sepang) were newly constructed in 1996-97 using PE-modified binder.
PMB formulation testing carried out prior to construction showed that REC PE can be used
to meet project specifications but was not available in required quantities. A combination of
virgin LDPE and HDPE with high MFI from a Malaysian producer was used for the project.
• For reconstruction of a runway of Phase 1 expansion of Dubai International Airport virgin PE
from Qatar was used. Again, PMB formulation prior to start of construction works showed
that the specified PMB could have been produced with REC PE but could not be supplied on
time in the required quantity. Twenty years ago recycling of plastic was in most countries not
yet well developed. Dubai Airports was satisfied with the performance of LDPE-modified
asphalt binder and mix and included it in asphalt pavement specifications for Phase 2
expansion (2006/2007). At that time there was no company in the Middle East that had the
required experience to produce PE-based PMB that met applicable asphalt binder and
mixture specifications.

8
 • Public Works specifications for highways issued in Oman (2017) and in Kuwait (2012), as
well as several current project specifications issued in the Middle East include use of LDPE-
modified PMB. Specified LDPE selection criteria are based on older concepts and do not
include advances made from the mid-1990s onward.
• Large highway projects were carried out in Spain by DITECPESA and other companies using
REC LDPE film used in agriculture. Similar projects were also carried out in Costa Rica and
Colombia.

Despite the demonstrated performance of REC PE modified asphalt commercial success was twenty
years ago limited because

• At that time, there was little interest in using sustainable practices, such as recycled plastic
in asphalt pavement. To the contrary, many project consultants viewed recycled plastic as
inferior material and did not allow its use. Many still do not allow its use even though ASTM
and AASHTO standards for performance graded (PG) asphalt binder state specifically that
polymers can be used in virgin or recycled condition.
• To avoid storage stability problems PMB production with recycled or virgin PE was carried
out at asphalt hot mix plants. Commercial feasibility of this method depends largely on the
utilization of high-shear blenders, which was in many cases below the minimum required to
be profitable. When on-site production of PMB with recycled PE is planned, it should be
carried out at asphalt hot mix plants that are located so that they can serve several projects
rather than at plants that serve only one (small to medium sized) project.
• On-site blending of bitumen and REC PE should not be categorically rejected; production of
asphalt binder with crumb rubber from recycled tires has been carried out for decades at
asphalt hot mix plants. Combinations of crumb rubber and select REC PE are feasible.
• To reduce costs of keeping experienced expatriate operators for extended periods of time in
developing countries, production of PMB with REC PE was gradually transferred to local
companies in Egypt, India, China, and other countries. Local operators did frequently not
adhere to strict REC PE selection criteria and blending requirements needed to achieve
specified asphalt binder, mix, and pavement performance requirements.
• Adequate storage stability of PE-modified bitumen can be achieved if special additives are
used (for example, Polyphalt; DITECPESA patent). More recent laboratory and field trials
show that REC PE that is suitable for modifying bitumen to meet standard PMB grades can
be made storage-stable by adding compatible virgin polymers, such as Reactive Ethylene
Ter-polymer (RET). Grade and dosage of RET polymers used in such PMB must be selected
to optimize performance of available bitumen and REC PE.
• Direct addition to asphalt mix at the asphalt hot mix plant is another alternative. Like pre-
blending bitumen and recycled plastic, it is open to misuse and therefrom resulting poor
performance. “Dry” versus “Wet” methods of adding plastic to asphalt is discussed in the
following section in more detail.
• DITECPESA (Spain), a subsidiary of Ferrovial is specialized in developing high-quality
asphalt products and in using them to construct durable asphalt pavements. DITECPESA in
cooperation with CICLOPLAST, Spain’s national plastic recycling organization, has carried
out in 2010 a large highway project, for which 2000 tons of recycled agricultural film (primarily
LDPE) was used. DITECPESA has evaluated “Dry” and “Wet” methods of incorporating REC
PE in asphalt pavement and concluded in their presentation on Asfalto Ecologico (see
ANNEX C) that use of the “Wet” technology is better. DITECPESA’s patented process of

9
 producing storage stable PMB with recycled PE requires use of silica gel and fine carbon
black (gel de silica y negro de humo).

“Wet” versus “Dry” Use of Recycled Plastic in Asphalt Pavement

The “Wet” method consists of blending selected polymer(s) with bitumen and curing the modified
bitumen to achieve the target PMB grade. When PE or REC PE is used to modify bitumen, use of a
high shear mill is required for blending, because even in a molten state PE viscosity is much higher
than that of bitumen. The high-shear mill reduces and distributes uniformly particle size of PE, which
increases its surface area and with it the swelling ratio and molecular entanglement.

When using the “Dry” method, polymer is added (at ambient temperature) directly to hot aggregates or
asphalt mix at the hot mix plant. Testing of modified binder is in such case not feasible, which reduces
the effectiveness of QC at project level. The “Dry” method has been promoted for decades by producers
of virgin polymers, such as EVA, VESTOPLAST, SUPERPLAST, etc. but is much less used than the
“Wet” method (PMB production).

Most standard and project specifications require pre-blending and testing of modified binder prior to use
in asphalt hot mix production. This requirement applies to use of polymer in virgin or recycled condition.
The ASTM series of standards on polymer modified bitumen issued in the 1990s for individual polymer
groups, such as ASTM D 5841 Standard Specification for Type III Polymer Modified Asphalt Cement
for Use in Pavement Construction required (Paragraph 3.3) pre-blending of bitumen and polymer and
testing of PMB prior to use in asphalt mix production and pavement construction. Type III covered EVA
and other polyolefins. This and similar standards on use of SBS with and without cross-linking were
withdrawn in 2005 and replaced by performance-grading (PG), which was developed as part of the
Superpave technology. PG-grading is now standard practice in the USA for testing unmodified and
polymer-modified asphalt binders. In other countries PG-grading is widely used for modified bituminous
binders. ASTM D 6373 and AASHTO M 320 Standard Specification for Performance-Graded Asphalt
Binder, as well as ASTM D 8239 and AASHTO M 332 Standard Specification for Performance-Graded
Asphalt Binder Using the Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR) Test specify and require compliance
with binder properties stated for PG-grades. Such compliance testing and applicable binder quality
control is only feasible when bitumen and polymer are pre-blended (“Wet” method).

The “Dry” method is marketed as being logistically easier, because it does not require a high-shear
blender. It does, however, require special dosage equipment at the asphalt hot mix plant and dosage
control similar to that used for PMB production. Even then, overall quality and performance are not as
good as when PMB is produced using the “Wet” method. Based on laboratory research and on field
trials uniformity of distribution of the polymer in the asphalt mix and its interaction with bitumen is of
concern when polymer is added directly to the mix. To ensure adequate coating of aggregates with
unmodified or polymer-modified asphalt binder, viscosity limits are specified. The upper specification
limit for PG-graded bituminous binder is 3.0 Pa.s at 135°C. In Australia upper viscosity limits at 165°C
are specified (0.6 to 1.1 Pa.s for PMB grades shown in AGPT/T190-2019). In Europe, where higher
bituminous binder viscosity is usually allowed, viscosity rarely exceeds 5.0 Pa.s at 135°C.

Melt viscosity of plastic used as asphalt additive ranges at 180°C at a shear rate of 500 1/s from about
100 to over 500 Pa.s, which is on average two orders of magnitude higher than the upper specification
limit set for bituminous binder (including PMB). When plastic pellets are added to hot aggregates, they
start melting at the time of contact with hot aggregate. Because of the high melt viscosity of plastic

10
uniform coating of aggregates with molten plastic, as is often claimed, is unlikely. Even when after
addition of neat bitumen the wet mixing time is extended (thus reducing production capacity of the
asphalt hot mix plant) bitumen and polymer are not as well blended as can be achieved with the “Wet”
method. When RAP containing aged bituminous binder is used together with virgin aggregates and
asphalt binder, special precautions apply to ensure that RAP binder and virgin binder are uniformly
blended. The difference in viscosity between aged RAP binder and the added virgin bitumen is very
small when compared to the difference in viscosity between molten plastic and bitumen.

When asphalt mix and pavement performance between “Dry” and “Wet” methods are directly compared,
the “Wet” method yields typically better results. Test sections carried out over 20 years ago in
Switzerland (see Annex B) to evaluate different unmodified and polymer modified binders – including
“Wet” and “Dry” methods of adding polyolefin polymer – showed that crack resistance of asphalt
pavement constructed using PMB (“Wet” method) was significantly better than that constructed with the
“Dry” method. Also, field trials in which VESTOPLAST or EVA was added directly to the asphalt mix
showed that average asphalt mix performance properties, such as IDT strength; resilient or dynamic
modulus; deformation based on tri-axial cyclic compression test was lower and the standard deviation
of these properties was higher when compared to the “Wet” method of adding the same polymers.

Laboratory blending of bitumen and plastic intended for direct addition to asphalt mix as well as
extraction and recovery of modified binder from plant-produced asphalt mix, to which recycled or virgin
polymer has been added directly is not representative of what occurs at project level. Blending of
bitumen and additive in the laboratory provides an indication of the performance potential of polymers
but does not represent actual project conditions. Extraction and recovery from plant-produced asphalt
mix homogenizes the binder, which is again not representative of project conditions.

The degree of uniformity of polymer distribution in asphalt mix achieved through direct addition of virgin
or recycled plastic to asphalt mix could be evaluated using extensive performance-based asphalt mix
testing of plant produced asphalt mix and of cores or slabs extracted from the pavement. It should be
compared to asphalt mix produced with bitumen modified with the same plastic using the “Wet” method.
Useful information could also be obtained by taking samples of aggregates coated with plastic (after
the recommended mixing time with hot aggregate, prior to adding bitumen) and by inspecting the
samples visually (naked eye and microscope) to assess uniformity of coating. A method similar to ASTM
D2489 Standard Test Method for Estimating Degree of Particle Coating of Asphalt Mixtures could be
developed to assess uniformity of coating with plastic additive.

More accurate information on distribution of polymer in asphalt mix can be obtained by adopting an
investigative technique similar to that developed about twenty years ago at the Danish Road Institute
(DRI). The method requires preparation of ultra-thin sections (20 μm) of asphalt mix produced using
the “Wet” and “Dry” method. These ultra-thin sections are then examined by fluorescent microscope to
evaluate the distribution of polymer in asphalt mix. DRI Report 108 Effect of Design Parameters on
Polymer Modified Bituminous Mixtures (2001) and DRI Report 109 Microstructure of Polymer Modified
Binders in Bituminous Mixtures (2001) discuss the difference of polymer distribution between the “Wet”
and “Dry” method of adding polymer, including the effect of mixing time and temperature, of mixing
technique, and of the effect of polymer type and dosage. The overall conclusion is that the “Wet” method
(use of PMB) results in a more homogenous distribution of the polymer phase in bituminous mixtures
than can be achieved with the “Dry” method, even when mixing time using the “Dry” method is extended
to 5 minutes, which would be prohibitive, because it would slow down excessively asphalt mix

11
production in an HMA plant. Distribution of polymer in asphalt mix using the “Dry” method occurs only
during the batching cycle, which ranges usually from 30 to 60 seconds. Some swelling of polymer will
continue to occur during subsequent storage and transport of the modified hot mix asphalt but does not
improve spatial distribution of polymer which is needed to obtain a homogenous asphalt mix. Size
reduction of polymer particles (which improves the swelling ratio) and spatial distribution is not as good
with the “Dry” method as with the “Wet” method. Increasing polymer content when the “Dry” method is
used increases variations in polymer distribution in the mix and affects negatively low-temperature and
fatigue performance of the modified asphalt mix.

SABITA (South Africa) Technical Guideline TG1 The Use of Modified Bituminous Binder in Road
Construction (Third Edition, 2015) summarizes in Paragraph 4.4.4 use of high shear blenders for PMB
production as follows:

“In these mixers the polymer mixed into the bitumen is ground to finer particles. The size of the particles
is influenced by the gap width between the stator and the rotor. Decreasing size increases the specific
surface area, speeding up the absorption of the oily components in the bitumen. The absorption of the
oily components softens the polymer particle and allows shear forces in the high shear mixer to tear
and stretch these particles, further increasing the specific surface area. Eventually this should result in
a homogenous dispersion of the particles of the polymer throughout the bitumen”.

“Dry” and “Wet” methods have been evaluated for decades in conjunction with using crumb rubber from
recycled tires in asphalt pavement. At project level the “Wet” method is much more widely used than
the “Dry” method.

Effects of using REC PE on Health, Safety, and Environment (HSE)

Concern is frequently raised about emissions from asphalt binder and mix produced with recycled
plastic. G. Zenke published in 1985 (in German language) a series of articles in which he discusses
polymer properties and the interaction of various polymers with bitumen. The figure shown on the
following page has been extracted from his publications. In it he ranks polymers based on their
susceptibility to chemical degradation under the influence of weather, oxidation, light, UV-radiation, and
heat. He applies a ranking of (I) to (V) with (I) being the least susceptible to chemical degradation and
release of emission. He also shows (at the bottom) which structural element of a polymer is most
susceptible to chemical degradation. Of the polymers that he evaluated PE is the only one that he rated
as not being susceptible to chemical degradation. It does degrade in terms of mechanical strength (gets
brittle upon aging) but does not release emissions that affect health and safety.

When LDPE that did not meet the producers grade standard was used for PMB production at the Hobby
International Airport project (Houston, Texas), the Employer (Houston Airports) was concerned about
potential emission problems that may arise from using recycled PE in asphalt binder and mix. To
evaluate this potential risk the Texas A & M University (College Station, Texas) conducted an
environmental factors study to compare gaseous emissions from PMB modified with REC LDPE with
that of unmodified base bitumen. Samples of AC-20 (PEN 60-70) bitumen and of the same bitumen
modified with 5.5 percent REC LDPE were taken from bitumen and PMB storage tanks at the project
site.

The mass spectrographic analysis showed that for samples of equivalent mass less total hydrocarbon
and heteroatom-containing gaseous organic emissions were evolved from the REC LDPE modified
bitumen than from the unmodified base bitumen. In particular, the mass 57-ion peak, representative of

12
straight-chain aliphatic hydrocarbons, showed less evolved mass for the modified binder than for the
base bitumen under identical conditions. The ion peaks representative of the naphthalene series (ion
peaks 125, 142, 156 and 170) showed that the quantity of light aromatics evolved from the REC LDPE
modified binder is approximately one tenth of that evolved from unmodified bitumen under identical
conditions.

There are at least two potential mechanisms for the reduction of emissions found for REC LDPE
modified binder when compared to unmodified base bitumen. First, as stated by Zenke and other
polymer scientists LDPE is a stable, inert polymer; its substitution for a portion of bitumen in a modified
asphalt binder (in this case 5.5 % by weight of bitumen) should reduce the emissions proportionally.
Second, during its dispersion and solvation LDPE forms associations with and thus stabilizes fractions
of the light aromatic molecules present in bitumen. This reduces loss of molecules as gaseous
emissions during blending and use of modified binder. This effect is probably greater than that of the
proportional replacement of bitumen with REC LDPE, which is consistent with the order of magnitude
reduction in emission of light aromatics noted above.

The above benefits may not apply when a blend of various recycled plastics is used, or if plastic film
used in agricultural or horticultural applications has been treated with pesticide or otherwise
contaminated. In such case undesirable emissions may occur when plastic is exposed to high
temperatures. However, it should not be categorically stated that use of REC PE in asphalt binder and
mix represents an environmental or health hazard. Issues raised in some reports and news articles
appear to be exaggerated. It is recommended to evaluate potential HSE effects for each source of
recycled plastic that is proposed for use as asphalt modifier. Based on current information using select
REC LDPE to produce standard PMB grades is likely to offer performance and sustainability benefits
without affecting negatively HSE aspects.

High Modulus Asphalt – a Sustainable Asphalt Technology

High-modulus asphalt mix was developed and first used in France in the 1980s and standardized in the
early 1990s as Enrobé à Module Élevé (EME). EME 1 and EME 2 mix is used for base and binder

13
course; Béton Bitumineux à Module Élevé (BBME) mix is used for surface course. In reports prepared
in English language by the Forum of European National Highway Research Laboratories (FEHRL) on
sustainable pavement technologies for European new member states (SPENS program), the term High-
Modulus Asphalt Concrete (HMAC) is used for this type of asphalt mix. In Spain the term “Mezclas
Bituminosas de Alto Modulo” (MAM) is employed. EME/HMAC/MAM asphalt mix is now specified and
used in many countries using French practice or variations of it (Spain; Switzerland; Australia; Canada;
South Africa; Central and South America; etc.). Focus on the French EME technology is a good starting
point; adjustments can be made at project level to tailor asphalt mix and pavement performance to
availability of materials and to performance requirements based on traffic, environment, and strategic
considerations.

EME/HMAC/MAM asphalt mix improves load distribution, resistance to deformation, and fatigue, which
makes asphalt pavements more durable and thus increases pavement life. When this mix type is used
instead of traditional asphalt concrete, pavement thickness can be reduced by up to 25 %, which
reduces construction material requirements. Reducing the need for construction materials, extending
pavement life, and reducing maintenance requirements all contribute to sustainability. Sustainability is
further increased when REC PE or other recycled materials, such as RAP, is used.

In France EME mix is standardized using fundamental (performance-based) asphalt mix properties,
which allows asphalt mix producers to select asphalt binder grade and additives. Although hard paving-
grade bitumen PEN 10-20 and PEN 15-25 is widely recommended and used for this type of mix,
experienced contractors have also used successfully special polymer-modified binders (PMB) and
additives. To achieve minimum modulus values for EME/HMAC/MAM mix, bituminous binder of
adequate stiffness is needed. If suitable hard paving-grade bitumen is not available PEN 50-70 bitumen
modified with special additives can meet this requirement. Some practitioners are reluctant to use PMB
in EME mix because most elastomer (SBS) modified binders that are specified and used for traditional
asphalt mix types lack the stiffness required for EME/HMAC/MAM. For this type of mix special PMB
formulations or additives are needed, such as high dosages of SEBS or SBS with vinyl polybutadiene,
plastomers, asphaltite, or combinations of them. Some South American countries have issued for this
purpose specifications for use of PE-modified binder, which include low elastic or torsional recovery
requirements to allow use of plastomers as modifier.

Summary and Outlook

o This report provides information on historical, performance, and HSE

aspects of using virgin and recycled plastic in asphalt pavement.
Asphalt pavements modified with PE were carried out since the early
1980s using proprietary technologies, such as Novophalt, and later
Polyphalt, DITECPESA’s method, and other technologies. The
objective of this brief is not to encourage adopting any of these
technologies, but to use experience gained over several decades to
develop PMB technologies using recycled plastic, which meet current
and future demands based on performance, costs, and sustainability.
Information about satisfactory performance of major projects where
asphalt pavement modified with virgin or recycled PE was subject to
heavy loading for ten and more years is available.

14
o Indiscriminate disposal of plastic waste is now seen worldwide as a thread to the environment.
Recycling and re-use of plastic contributes to reducing this threat. There are many commercial uses
for recycled plastic; improving the performance of asphalt pavements is one of them. When using
recycled plastic in asphalt pavement, CPR regulations provide a sound basis. They require
compliance with established performance criteria, which are as essential to sustainability as are HSE
considerations. Adding recycled mixed plastic directly to asphalt mix may sound politically correct,
but closer examination shows that such approach is more likely to increase performance and HSE
risks than use of standardized PMB grades produced with select REC PE. When recycled plastic is
used in asphalt pavement, it should be done in accordance with applicable PMB specifications,
quality control, and other sound engineering practices.

o PE/EVA film used in agricultural and horticultural applications (greenhouses; crop covers; silo liners;
hay bales) and in the industrial-scale packaging industry has been shown to be suitable for improving
performance of asphalt binder, asphalt mix, and asphalt pavement in a sustainable manner. These
materials are readily available in many countries and can be recycled separately to obtain select
REC PE for use in asphalt pavement. In countries where the plastic recycling industry is not yet
adequately developed, collection of used agricultural and packaging film for subsequent treatment
and reuse creates business opportunities.

o Many asphalt pavements were constructed with REC PE. Test results for asphalt binder and mix
performance are available, including PG-grading and performance-related asphalt mix test results.
When PMB produced with REC PE is tailored to EME/HMAC/MAM requirements, and such mix is
used instead of more traditional asphalt mixes, thickness of base and binder course can be
decreased and pavement life extended, which increases sustainability.

o More than thirty years of field experience has shown that asphalt mix produced with recycled or
virgin plastic (typically less than 0.4 % by mass of asphalt mix) can be easily and safely recycled.

o PMB formulated with plastomers has typically lower viscosity than most other modified binders. If
needed viscosity of PMB can be further reduced through addition of compatible modifiers used for
warm-mix asphalt, such as functionalized low molecular weight polyolefins, Fischer-Tropsch wax, or
amide wax.

o Emissions that may be generated when producing and using asphalt binder and mix with REC PE
should be considered but should not be used to categorically reject use of REC PE. Testing carried
out has shown that hot bituminous binders and mixtures containing virgin or recycled PE emit less
harmful ions (for example, of the naphthalene series) than do unmodified bitumen and asphalt mix
under identical temperature conditions. Emissions can be further reduced because lower mixing and
compaction temperatures can be employed when using appropriately formulated PE/EVA modified
binder. Lower processing temperatures improve energy economy, which is one of the essential CPR
requirements.

o Because of its typically higher stiffness polyolefin modified asphalt mix is often considered
susceptible to cracking. Satisfactory fatigue performance can be obtained through appropriate
asphalt mix design that is tailored to PMB properties. LDPE-modified asphalt binder can be
formulated, produced, and used to perform satisfactorily in cold climate (see Annex B).

15
o Several technologies are feasible when using recycled polyolefins as additive. Traditional use of
REC PE as modifier results in asphalt binder that is not storage stable. Such binder needs to be
produced at the asphalt hot mix plant and requires continuous agitation until used in asphalt mix
production. Blending of modified binder at the asphalt hot mix plant should not be dismissed. Crumb
rubber modified asphalt binder (CRMB) has been produced at asphalt hot mix plants and used
successfully for several decades.

o Technologies exist that allow producing storage-stable (terminal-blend type) asphalt binders with
polyolefins, including recycled PE and EVA. Several proprietary stabilization techniques have been
developed. Also, combining select recycled PE and EVA in appropriate proportions with reactive
ethylene ter-polymer (RET) of suitable reactivity can provide storage-stable asphalt binder that
meets a broad range of PG-grades, including PG-grades required for hot climate and heavy traffic
(PG 82-16; PG 88-16; PG 76E-16).

There appear to be two schools of thought: one is focusing on adding a broad range of waste plastic
essentially without control of modified binder quality (“Dry” method); the other is to select REC PE
that allows - when properly blended with bitumen – production of PMB that is consistent with current
asphalt binder standards and quality management practises. As the asphalt industry moves forward
to meet performance challenges that come with increasing traffic loads and volumes, the latter
approach is preferable at least for primary roads and highways, and for airfield pavements.

Use of select REC PE to produce PG-graded asphalt binder should be acceptable. PG-grades are
based on performance, not on methods or other outdated concepts. Large quantities of polyolefins
and other polymers will continue to be required in virgin condition; using some of them in recycled
condition by itself or in combination with virgin polymers must be supported by all project
stakeholders, including the polymer industry. Diligent use of recycled materials in asphalt pavements
is technically smart, environmentally sustainable, and cost-effective.

Revision 1a, 20 NOV 2019

ANNEXES A to D

16
ANNEX A: Further Information and References on Use of Virgin and REC PE in
Asphalt Pavement
Polyethylene (PE) and Ethylene Vinyl Acetate (EVA) are frequently mentioned as additives for rut
resistant asphalt mix. Examples of literature references on using PE/EVA in virgin or recycled
condition are briefly discussed below:

• TRB Circular 503: Perpetual Bituminous Pavements (2001) includes a contribution by Jean-
Francois Corte, LCPC: “Development and Use of Hard-Grade Asphalt and of High-Modulus Asphalt
Mixes in France”. PE and
asphaltite are cited as suitable
additives to achieve the special
properties of EME. Figure 4 (to the
right; reproduced from Corte’s
paper) shows the effectiveness of
recycled PE in achieving rut
resistant asphalt mix. In the paper
“Special Bitumen” by Jean-Noël
Onfield use of PE and other
plastomers for high-modulus
asphalt mixtures is discussed.
Contractors and material suppliers
in several European countries have developed proprietary asphalt binders and mixes that meet
EME/HMAC/MAM performance requirements. For some of these asphalt mixes (for example,
SCREG’s Compomodule P and PR) polyolefins are used as sole additive or in combination with
other additives.

• In France polyolefins are sometimes added directly to asphalt mix (“Dry” method). Superplast
(Iterchimica, Italy) and PR Plast are other polymers that are added directly to asphalt mix.
Experience has shown that diligent selection and blending of plastomers with bitumen (“Wet”
method) offers usually more consistent performance than direct addition to asphalt mix.

Traditional wet mixing cycles in asphalt hot mix production are too short to achieve uniform
distribution of polymer when added directly at the asphalt mix production stage. To compensate for
this short-coming, larger additive dosages are sometimes recommended, which may reduce asphalt
mix and pavement performance. Pre-blending of PE, EVA, or other polyolefins with base bitumen
provides asphalt binder that can be tested for compliance with PG grade or other specifications
before use in asphalt mix production.

• In Spain CICLOPLAST (a non-profit society that focuses on recycling and use of recycled plastic)
and DITECPESA (a FERROVIAL subsidiary company that is specialized in development and use of
asphalt products) used 2000 tons of recycled agricultural film from the Almeria Province to construct
a major highway (2010). Subsequently, DITECPESA developed and patented PMB formulations
using recycled LDPE, which meet traditional storage stability requirements. Storage stability was
achieved by adding silica gel and very fine carbon black using a proprietary technology.
Demonstration projects using PE bags recycled from banana plantations have been carried out in

17
Columbia and Costa Rica. Several South American countries have issued PMB specifications that
can be met with select virgin or recycled plastic and that can be used for high-modulus asphalt mix.

Examples of publications that provide information on the viability of using REC PE:

“Polyethylene-modified Bitumen for Paving Applications”, Jew P; Woodhams, R T, et al.

Journal of Applied Polymer Science, Wiley, 1986:
“Analysis of the Influence of Low-Density Polyethylene Modification of Asphalt Concrete on
Mixture Shear Strength and Creep Deformation Potential”, by Dallas N. Little, ASTM STP
1108, 1992, USA.
“Enhancement of Asphalt Concrete Mixture to Meet Structural Requirements through the
Addition of Recycled Polyethylene” by Dallas N. Little, ASTM STP 1193, 1993, USA.
“Evaluation of Recycled Polyethylene in the Preparation of Stabilized High-Performance
Modified Asphalt Binder”, Liang, Zhi-Zhou et al.1993
“Composite Asphalt Binders: Effect of modified RPE on Asphalt” by Yousefi, A A et al. Laval
University Quebec, Canada, 2000
“Performance Characteristics of PMB – The Contribution of Recycled Polyethylene” by
Legnani, G and Tappeiner, W J in Rassegna del Bitume, 2003, Italy (in Italian language)
“Study of Recycled Polyethylene Materials as Asphalt Modifiers” by Ho, S and others, 2006;
NRC, Canada;
“Recycling Silo Bags and other Agricultural Plastic Films”, by Homs, B J and Springman, R,
Cooperative Extension of the University of Wisconsin, 2009
“Evaluación de los Propriedadas Mecánicas de una Mezcla Densa en Caliente modificada
con un Desecho de Polietileno de Baja Densidad (PEBD)”, by Qunitana, H R, Gómez, W F,
and López W C, Colombia, 2010.
“Behavior of Reclaimed Polyethylene Modified Asphalt Cement for Paving Purposes”, by
Punith, V S and others, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, 2011;
“Research on the Application of Recycled PE in High Modulus Asphalt Mixtures”, Jinglong
Bu and others, China, 2011;
“Recycling of Banana Production Waste Bags in Bitumen – A Green Alternative”, by
Villegas-Villegas.R E and others, Costa Rica, 2012 (presented at the 5th Eurasphalt &
Eurobitume Congress)
“Betunes Modificados con Polietileno Reciclado, procedente del Contenedor Amarillo,
estables al Almacenamiento”, Communication 21, Santiago Gil Rodondo (DITECPESA) &
Alberto Caldeiro Jimenez (CICLOPLAST), 2012, Spain
DITECPESA Productos Asfalticos: Asfalto Ecologico con PE Reciclado, Resultados de la
investigacion Cicloplast-Ditecpesa/Freeovial 2010-2012.

The following two reports prepared at the Danish Road Institute (DRI) using microscopic evaluation
of ultra-thin (20 μm) asphalt mix sections offer useful information on distribution of polymer in asphalt
mix when using the “Wet” and “Dry” method:

DRI Report 108: Effect of Design Parameters on Polymer Modified Bituminous Mixtures,
2001
DRI Report 109: Microstructure of Polymer Modified Binders in Bituminous Mixtures, 2001

18
The above and many other publications show that when properly selected and used, REC LDPE
and other polyolefins can be employed effectively as asphalt modifier for use in a range of different
types of asphalt mixes. Modified binder formulations can be tailored to meet targeted asphalt mix
stiffness and other performance criteria.

Selecting Recycled LDPE for Asphalt Modification

Hurley, S discusses in “Agricultural Plastic Film Use and Recycling in California” (2008) results of a
study carried out in California on recycling and use of agricultural plastic film. Based on this survey
between 50000 and 100000 tons of used agricultural plastic film is disposed each year in California.
Lack of recycling facilities, costs and inconvenience of recycling plastic film were listed as major
impediments to collection, processing, and use of this type of waste plastic. Soma plastic recycling
companies do not accept plastic film. This problem can be overcome if at least a few recycling
businesses focus on collecting, and sorting/cleaning this and other types of film (such as packaging
waste), and to keep it separate from other recycled plastic (as done, for example, in Spain). Using
recycled material from agricultural or industry sources allows more controlled and effective utilization
than would be possible if plastic from recycled household waste is used. For the latter other uses
may be more appropriate.

Evaluation of available sources of recycled plastic before use in asphalt binder and mix is important.
Properties such as density and Melt Flow Index (MFI), which were initially (and which are still used
in some project and public works specifications) do not provide sufficient information about blending
requirements and performance potential of recycled plastic and bitumen. Based on research carried
out from the late 1990s onward two or more of the following tests are recommended for assessing
the suitability of virgin and recycled plastic as asphalt modifier:

 Weight-Average (Mw) and Number-Average (Mn) Molecular Weights

 Polydispersity Index Mw/Mn
 Fourier Transform Infra-Red (FTIR) Spectroscopy for identification of polymer type
 Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC)/Differential Thermal Analysis for identification of
Different types of PE (LDPE; LLDPE; MDPE/HDPE)

 Shear-rate dependent Melt Viscosity for evaluating interaction (and miscibility) of polyolefins
with bitumen and asphalt mix. Critical values were identified below which good quality modified
asphalt binders and mixtures can be produced with polyolefins.

Numerous published papers and reports that present results of laboratory studies carried out on use
of virgin plastic as asphalt binder modifier focused on evaluating single grades of virgin PE. This
approach was also used in the BRITE/EURAM project to obtain a comparison with REC PE. Single
virgin PE grades have often a narrow molecular weight distribution and are therefore more difficult
to blend with bitumen. Virgin PE grades with multi-modal molecular weight distribution are available;
similar effects can be achieved by using at least two different types of PE with different molecular
weights to produce PMB. Recycled plastic film consists primarily of REC LDPE with some EVA;
these materials have usually a high polydispersity index, interact better with bitumen, and can thus
be used more effectively than single grades of virgin PE with a narrower molecular weight
distribution. The BRITE-EURAM study showed that some of the recycled polyolefins provided overall
better performance than did most single virgin PE grades.

19
ANNEX B: Comparison of Crack Resistance of “Wet” and “Dry” Method of adding
Polyolefin Polymer based on Field Test Sections

20
 Pre-blended/PMB

Direct addition

Comments:

As shown on page 20, asphalt mix produced with polyolefin (LDPE) using the “Wet” method showed
considerably less cracking than the same type of mix produced using the “Dry” method (using a
higher polyolefin dosage). This is probably due to larger variations in polymer distribution from spot
to spot when polymer is added directly to asphalt mix. Variation tends to increase with increasing
polymer content.

21
The “Dry” mixing method does not provide the same polymer size reduction and spatial distribution
as can be obtained when polymer and bitumen are mixed in a high-shear blender to produce PMB
(“Wet” method). When using the “Dry” method the contribution of polymers to asphalt binder and
mix performance is reduced. The wet mixing time in a batch or drum plant is too short and shear
forces are too low to achieve at the high melt viscosity of plastic adequate distribution of polymer in
the asphalt binder and mix. Swelling of polymer with bitumen components is likely to continue during
hot mix storage and transport to the paving site, but distributive and dispersive action is at that stage
negligible.

22
 ANNEX C: DITECPESA-CICLOPLAST Findings on using REC PE in Asphalt Pavement
Source: Caldeiro, A. et al (CICLOPLAST) Asfalto Ecológico con PE Recicaldo, 2010-2012

“Dry” Method (REC PE added directly at HMA plant)
• Poor PE-bitumen interaction
• Reduced improvement of rheological properties
• Low uniformity of (asphalt mix) properties
23
“Wet” Method (REC PE blended with bitumen)
• Good PE-bitumen interaction
• Better improvement of rheological properties
• Uniformity of (asphalt mix) properties is increased
 ANNEX D: Example of Laboratory Blender for Preparing Asphalt Binder Modified with
Virgin or Recycled Plastic

Milling Tool

When blending bitumen and plastic both dispersive and distributive mixing must be optimized. Use of
appropriate blending equipment and milling tools in the laboratory and in the field is very important to
micro-comminute plastic and homogenize the blend. The purpose of dispersing LDPE in bitumen is to
produce modified binder that shows two material phases, which are not completely dissolved into each
other but are homogeneously distributed.

For commercial production of PMB with virgin or recycled polyethylene resin, blender design, milling tool,
and blending process are very important. In published papers on use of recycled plastic in asphalt,
polymer (recycled plastic) dosages of 3 to 15 % have been recommended. When blending methods that
are suitable for this type of modification are employed, the optimum polymer dosage is found to be
typically in the range of 5.0 to 6.0 %. Much higher dosages indicate that the polymer is not
homogeneously distributed in the asphalt binder and mix, which increases variability in asphalt mix
properties and reduces low temperature and fatigue performance of asphalt mix and pavement.

24