Are we really getting quality modified paving bitumen in India?

In recent years, traffic loads and tyre pressures have increased, which has created a situation for which modified bituminous binders are needed. In the past, the following two specifications have been used by the highway agencies for specifying modified binders. 1. Indian Roads Congress Publication SP:53-1999, Tentative Guidelines on Use of Polymer and Rubber Modified Bitumen in Road Construction, December 1999. 2. Bureau of Indian Standards. IS 15462:2004, Polymer and Rubber Modified Bitumen Specification, 2004. Four types of modified binders are included in the preceding two publications: Polymer Modified Bitumen or PMB (elastomer), PMB (plastomer), Crumb Rubber Modified Bitumen (CRMB), and Natural Rubber Modified Bitumen (NRMB). Since these are different types of modified bitumen materials, separate specifications and criteria in form of four tables are included as is the practice across the world. These four modified binders are described briefly below. Elastomers: Elastomeric polymers have the ability to resist permanent deformation and cohesive failure in the bituminous mix by stretching and then recovering their shape when the deforming force is removed similar to a rubber band. Therefore, PMB (elastomer) is resistant to rutting as well as fatigue cracking. Plastomers: Plastomeric polymers form a tough, rigid, three dimensional networks within the bitumen. These plastomers give high initial strength to the bitumen to resist heavy loads. However, plastomers may crack at high strains. Therefore, PMB (plastomer) is primarily resistant to rutting. CRMB: Rubber from discarded tyres is ground to a particulate or crumb prior to adding it to bitumen to produce CRMB. CRMB is much more complex and least understood compared to PMBs with elastomers. Because of the complex and varying chemical composition of crumb rubber obtained from tread/side wall of truck and/or car tyres, its compatibility with bitumen is always questionable. That is why; CRMB has given mixed performance in the US. The quality control requirements right from the production to the end use of CRMB are too cumbersome because of two issues: (a) crumb rubber tends to separate and settle down in the bitumen and (b) crumb rubber is prone to degradation (devulcanization and depolymerization) if it is maintained at high temperatures for more than 6-8 hours. These quality control requirements for CRMB, which are hardly followed in India, are given in the following IRC paper which can be downloaded at the link provided. Kandhal, P.S., Quality Control Requirements for Using Crumb Rubber Modified Bitumen (CRMB) in Bituminous mixtures, Journal of the Indian Roads Congress, Volume 67-1, 2006.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19383778/Quality-Control-Requirements-for-UsingCrumb-Rubber-Modified-Bitumen-CRMB NRMB: Natural rubber modified bitumen is manufactured by adding natural rubber (which is available in south India) to bitumen. However, NRMB should be used with caution because like CRMB it has degradation problems if kept at high temperature for too long. However, the Flexible Pavement Committee (FPC) of the Indian Roads Congress (IRC) pulled a surprise in 2010 by revising IRC:SP:53-1999. The revised IRC:SP:532010 contains a unified single specification table for all four types of modified binders, which is not technically possible unless the unified specification is performance based which it is not. It was like mixing apples with oranges. The elastic recovery requirement was arbitrarily lowered to accommodate the CRMB. This IRC:SP:53-2010 has the following problems: (a) Lowering the requirements to the level where a weak modifier like crumb rubber can also qualify, would lower the performance standard for all modifiers; (b) Suppliers of better and more expensive products will tend to downgrade the quality of their products so as to be more competitive price wise if that is the criterion for decision making; and (c) Lowering the quality will come in the way of producing still better products thus having a negative effect on further R&D activities. Therefore, the highway agencies (government and contractors) who believe in quality should NOT specify the revised IRC:SP:53-2010. They should only specify: Bureau of Indian Standards. IS 15462:2004, Polymer and Rubber Modified Bitumen Specification, 2004 which remains unchanged in terms of four separate tables. PMB (elastomer) only should be demanded in the specifications in clear terms. Detailed information on all types of modified binders including their characteristics, specifications and recommended uses in highway construction are given in the following IRC paper which can also be downloaded at the given link. Kandhal, P.S. and M.P. Dhir. Use of Modified Bituminous Binders in India: Current Imperatives. Journal of the Indian Roads Congress, Volume 72-3, October-December 2011. http://www.scribd.com/doc/81350307/Use-of-Modified-Bituminous-Binders-inIndia-Current-Imperatives The following salient recommendations have been made in the preceding IRC paper: 1. Polymer modified bitumen (PMB) with elastomers is most commonly used with success on major highways in the developed countries because elasticity in this PMB provides resistance to both rutting and fatigue cracking. Such PMBs are also relatively more stable and maintain their integrity better compared to PMBs with plastomers, CRMB, and NRMB (natural rubber modified bitumen). Superpave performance grades have been made successfully with these PMBs. PMBs with elastomers are therefore recommended for heavily trafficked roads in India.

2. Polymer modified bitumen with plastomers are hardly used in flexible pavements in the developed countries because although they provide higher strength initially, they are prone to cracking at high strains and do not rebound after deforming force is removed. Therefore, there is no need to have a specification in India for PMBs with plastomers to avoid its unnecessary and improper use, until proper technical justification is provided. 3. Natural rubber modified bitumen (NRMB) has limited use to support the local industry in southern India. It should not be used on heavily trafficked roads where only PMBs with elastomers should be used as mentioned earlier. However, NRMB should be used with caution because like CRMB it has degradation problems if kept at high temperature for too long. 4. CRMB is much more complex and least understood compared to PMBs with elastomers. Because of the complex and varying chemical composition of crumb rubber, its compatibility with bitumen is always questionable and therefore it has given mixed field performance. Besides, it has potential settling and degradation problems as mentioned earlier. Therefore, CRMB is not recommended for use in India on heavily trafficked roads. It can be considered for use on medium trafficked roads its elastic recovery is considerably lower than that of PMBs with elastomers. However, it should be blended on site in close proximity of hot mix plants so that it can be used within 6-8 hours after production. Claims that the so-called chemically modified CRMB in India does not have settlement and/or degradation problems have not been validated as yet with any reported meaningful field test data. Obviously, if on-site blending is done, a fully equipped testing laboratory staffed with qualified technicians should be mandatory at the blending terminal. 5. Use of any modified binder in bituminous mix on low volume rural roads such as PMGSY is detrimental to their durability. The current practice of using CRMB in such applications should be discontinued until proper technical justification is provided.