Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Review

Modelling the linear viscoelastic rheological properties of bituminous binders

Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff a,⇑, Montgomery T. Shaw b, Gordon D. Airey a
a
Nottingham Transportation Engineering Centre, University of Nottingham, UK
b
Polymer Program, Institute of Materials Science, University of Connecticut, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An extensive literature review on the modelling of the linear viscoelastic (LVE) rheological properties of
Received 21 September 2010 bitumen over the last six decades is presented in this paper. The use of reliable models can, in general, be
Received in revised form 4 October 2010 considered as a valuable alternative tool for estimating the LVE rheological properties of bitumen. These
Accepted 13 November 2010
properties are normally presented in terms of complex modulus and phase angle master curves at a par-
Available online 5 January 2011
ticular reference temperature. The review in this paper consists of three nonlinear multivariable models,
13 empirical algebraic equations and four mechanical element approaches. The details as well as the
Keywords:
advantages and disadvantages of the models are discussed. In general, all the models are able to predict
Modelling
Linear viscoelastic
the LVE rheological properties of unmodified bitumen as well as follow the time–temperature superpo-
Mathematic algebraic equations sition principle (TTSP). However, the observations suggest a lack of agreement between predicted and
Mechanical element approaches experimental LVE rheological properties for materials that contain a phase transition, such as found
Thermorheologically simple for highly crystalline bitumen, structured bitumen with high asphaltenes content and highly modified
bitumen.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2172
2. Bitumen rheology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2172
3. Time–temperature superposition principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2173
4. Nonlinear multivariable models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2174
4.1. Van der Poel’s nomograph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2174
4.2. Modified Van der Poel’s nomograph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2175
4.3. McLeod’s nomograph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2177
5. Empirical algebraic equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2179
5.1. Jongepier and Kuilman’s Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2179
5.2. Dobson’s Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2179
5.3. Dickinson and Witt’s Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2180
5.4. Christensen and Anderson (CA) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2180
5.5. Fractional Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2181
5.6. Christensen, Anderson and Marasteanu (CAM) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2182
5.7. Modified Christensen, Anderson and Marasteanu Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2182
5.8. Al-Qadi and co-workers’ Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2183
5.9. Polynomial Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2183
5.10. Sigmoidal Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2183
5.11. The LCPC Master Curve Construction Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2184
5.12. New complex modulus and phase angle predictive model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2185
5.13. Generalised Logistic Sigmoidal Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2185
6. Mechanical element models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2185
6.1. Huet Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2185
6.2. Huet–Sayegh Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2186

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 115 8468442; fax: +44 115 9513909.
E-mail address: evxnim@nottingham.ac.uk (Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff).

0950-0618/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.11.086
2172 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189
6.3. Di Benedetto and Neifar (DBN) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.4. The 2S2P1D Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1. Introduction
Bitumen is traditionally regarded as a colloidal system consist-
ing of high molecular weight asphaltene micelles dispersed in a
lower molecular weight oily medium (maltenes) [1–11]. It is this
colloidal structure that defines the rheological properties of bitu-
men ranging from sol (Newtonian dominated behaviour) to gel
(non-Newtonian dominated behaviour). Although there are many
methods available to determine the rheological properties, the cyc-
lic (oscillatory) and creep tests tend to be the best two techniques
for representing the uniqueness of bitumen behaviour [12]. How-
ever, recognising that testing is generally laborious, time consum-
ing and expensive, requiring skilled operators, predictive models or
equations can be a valuable alternative tool for quantifying the lin-
ear viscoelastic (LVE) rheological properties of bituminous binders
[13,14]. Using this approach, the rheological parameters (complex
modulus, phase angle, etc.) at any particular temperature and fre-
quency (time of loading) of a bitumen can be estimated by means
of the constitutive equations to an accuracy that is acceptable for
most purposes.
In the 1950s and 1960s, nonlinear multivariable methods (also
known as nomographs) were used to represent the LVE rheological
properties of bitumen [15,16]. However, these nomographs be-
came obsolete with time due to the invention of computational
techniques and tended to be replaced by empirical algebraic equa-
tions and mechanical element approaches. In the empirical alge-
braic (also known as mathematical or phenomenological or
constitutive) approach, any suitable mathematical formulation is
simply adjusted to the experimental main curve, with the quality
adjustment being the sole criterion of choice of formulation. Mean-
while, in the mechanical element approach (or analogical model),
use is made of the fact that the LVE properties of material can be
represented by a combination of simple spring and dashpot
mechanical models, resulting in a particular mathematical formu-
lation [17]. Most of these models rely on the construction of stiff-
ness/complex modulus and phase angle master curves and the
determination of temperature shift factor. In other words, they im-
ply that the time–temperature superposition principle (TTSP)
holds for the bituminous binders [18–23].
This paper provides a detailed description of the vast number of
LVE rheological models that have been developed for bitumens
over the years. These models range from nonlinear multivariable
models (known as nomographs) to empirical algebraic equations
and mechanical element approaches. The advantages and disad-
vantages of the various models are discussed and their applications
to different materials are described. In addition to the various
models, the concepts of bitumen rheology and TTSP are initially
discussed to aid the readers’ understanding of these important ele-
ments to data representation and modelling. It should be noted
that the authors have used the word ‘‘bitumen’’ in the European
sense throughout this paper and not ‘‘asphalt’’ or ‘‘tar’’ when refer-
ring to the binder. The word ‘‘asphalt’’ brings a similar meaning to
‘‘bitumen’’ in North America but in Europe, ‘‘asphalt’’ refers to the
complex mixture composed of various selected aggregates bound
together with different percentages of air voids. This composite is
often referred to as ‘‘asphalt concrete’’ in North America. Mean-
while, ‘‘tar’’ is a liquid obtained when organic materials such as
coal or wood are carbonised or destructively distilled in the ab-
sence of air [10].
2186
2186
2187
2187
Water level Spindle
Water chamber Bitumen
cover
DSR base plate DSR body
Fig. 1. Dynamic shear rheometer set-up [26].
2. Bitumen rheology
Rheology involves the study and evaluation of the flow and per-
manent deformation of time– and temperature - dependent mate-
rials, such as bitumen, that are stressed (usually shear stress or
extensional stress) through the application of force [9,24,25]. The
word rheology is believed to be originally from the Greek words
‘‘qex’’, which can be translated as ‘‘the river, flowing, streaming’’,
and ‘‘kocoo’’ meaning ‘‘word, science’’ and therefore literally means
‘‘the study of the flow’’ or ‘‘flow science’’ [26,27]. Therefore, the
rheology of bitumen can be broadly defined as the fundamental
measurements associated with the flow and deformation charac-
teristics of the material, with considerable research having been
undertaken over the last five decades in studying the rheology of
bitumen and asphalt [28].
Understanding the flow and deformation (rheological proper-
ties) of bitumen in an asphalt is important in terms of pavement
performance. Asphalt that deforms and flows too readily may be
susceptible to rutting and bleeding, while those that are too stiff
may be exposed to fatigue and cracking. Nowadays, the LVE rheo-
logical properties of bitumen are usually determined using an
oscillatory type testing apparatus known as a dynamic shear rhe-
ometer (DSR). The DSR is a very powerful tool used to determine
the elastic, viscoelastic and viscous properties of bitumen over a
wide range of temperatures and frequencies often using the testing
configuration shown in Fig. 1.
The LVE rheological properties of bitumen are normally pre-
sented in the form complex modulus magnitude (|G|)1 and phase
angle (d) master curves. |G| by definition is the ratio of maximum
(shear) stress to maximum strain when subjected to shear loading.
Meanwhile, d is the phase difference between stress and strain in
harmonic oscillation. If d equals 90°, bitumen can be considered to
be purely viscous in nature, whereas d of 0° corresponds to a purely
elastic behaviour. Between these two extremes, the material behav-
iour can be considered to be viscoelastic in nature with a combina-
tion of viscous and elastic responses. |G| and d are defined as the
following:
1
Many authors use G to mean |G| and refer to the magnitude as the ‘‘complex
modulus’’.
 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189 2173

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
standing bitumen rheology is of major concern since the mechani-
jG j ¼ G02 þ G002 ð1aÞ
cal properties of binders are closely linked to the service behaviour
or in complex notation as: of actual pavement mixtures [23].
00
G ¼ G0 þ iG ð1bÞ
3. Time–temperature superposition principle
with

d ¼ tan1 ðG00 =G0 Þ ð2Þ Work done by various researchers, has found that there is an
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi interrelationship between temperature and frequency (or temper-
where G0 and G00 are storage and loss moduli and i ¼ 1, with ature and time of loading) which through time–temperature shift
0  00 
G = |G | cos d and G = |G | sin d. Fig. 2 exhibits typical behaviour factors, can bring measurements done at different temperatures
of the |G| and d master curves for unmodified bitumen. Under- to fit one overall continuous curve at a reduced frequency (or time
scale) [20,26,28,29]. This curve is called a master curve and repre-
sents bitumen or asphalt behaviour at a given temperature over a
large range of frequencies. Indeed it is necessary to establish a
method that extends the frequency scale of measurements taken
over a limited range of frequencies, since conducting tests over this
extended range is impractical and time consuming. The time–tem-
perature superposition principle (TTSP) can be used to relate the
equivalency between temperature and frequency (time) and there-
by produce a master curve [13].
TTSP (also known as time temperature scaling, frequency tem-
perature superposition principle, method of reduced variables,
thermorheological simplicity, time temperature reducibility, time
temperature equivalency, and interchangeability of time and tem-
perature) represents a powerful and convenient tool for evaluating
rheological data. Materials whose rheological properties can be
shifted by TTSP to produce a smooth, continuous master curves
are termed thermorheologically simple materials. Fig. 3 shows a
standard procedure used to construct TTSP master curves.
To construct a master curve by applying the TTSP concept, data
Fig. 2. The |G| and d master curves [22]. needs to be collected over ranges of temperatures and frequencies.

Fig. 3. The construction of (a) |G| and (b) d master curves [20].
2174 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189
Table 1
Various shift factor methods.
Method
Manual shift
William, Landel and Ferry (WLF)
Arrhenius
Log-linear
Viscosity Temperature Susceptibility (VTS)
Fox
Laboratoire Central des Ponts et Chaussées (LCPC)
A reference temperature (T0) needs to be selected and the rheolog-
ical data at all the other temperatures shifted with respect to fre-
quency until the curves merge into single smooth function. In
many cases, T0 can be taken from one of the test temperatures,
or as an arbitrarily chosen temperature within the range of the
data. The shifting can be done using any of the rheological param-
eters; and if, TTSP is valid, the other viscoelastic parameters will all
form continuous functions after shifting. The amount of shifting re-
quired at each temperature to form the master curve is termed the
shift factor (aT). A plot of aT versus temperature, with respect to the
reference temperature, is generally prepared in conjunction with
the master curve [26]. There are various ways of describing the
temperature dependence of the shifts, as shown in Table 1.
According to Chailleux et al. [45], master curve construction
only makes sense if there are, firstly, no major structural rear-
rangements with temperature and time, such as phase transforma-
tions and, secondly, tests are conducted within the LVE region. The
TTSP can be applied to all materials that undergo a transition, such
as the glass transition, as well as to heterogeneous materials, pro-
viding the disperse phase undergoes no structural change in the
transition zone [3]. However, the principle does not hold across
phase transition, as found in highly crystalline bitumens, struc-
tured bitumen with high asphaltenes contents and highly modified
bitumens (Fig. 4) [8,23,26,45–48]. The disruption of the TTSP of
these materials results in inconsistencies in the rheological proper-
ties and these materials are termed thermorheologically complex.
4. Nonlinear multivariable models
4.1. Van der Poel’s nomograph
As early as the 1950s, Van der Poel introduced the concept of
bitumen stiffness modulus as a function of temperature and time
1E+08
10C
1E+07
45C
1E+06
Complex modulus (Pa)
1E+05
1E+04
1E+03
1E+02
1E+01
1E+00
-8
Fig. 4. A breakdown in TTSP due to the presence of semi-crystalline structure in polymer-modified bitumen |G| master curve [26].
of loading into a nonlinear multivariable model [15,49]. This mod-
el, based upon 20 years of laboratory work [50], used the empirical
References tests, penetration and ASTM Ring-and-Ball (R&B) softening point
[30] (TR&B), as input parameters [10,15,49–53]. According to Van der
[18–22,31–33] Poel, a simple concept of Young’s modulus, E can be applied to vis-
[22,34–40] coelastic materials and can be shown as the following [15,54]:
[41,42]
[43] r tensile stress
E¼ ¼ ð3Þ
[44] e total strain
[45]
The ‘‘stiffness modulus’’ of bitumen, normally abbreviates as S is de-
fined as the ratio between stress and strain [16,50,54]:
r
ðSÞt;T ¼ ð4Þ
e t;T
where S is denoted as stiffness modulus and depends on loading
procedure, frequency (time of loading) and temperature. It is worth
mentioning that the term S was firstly coined by Van der Poel and is
now widely used among bitumen and asphalt technologists [9,54]. S
is equivalent to E(t), the tensile modulus.
In this work, a total of 47 bitumen samples from different re-
sources were tested with Penetration Index (PI) values ranging
from 2.3 to +6.3 at different temperatures and frequencies. In
addition, Van der Poel indicated that S depends on four variables:
(a) time of loading or frequency, (b) temperature, (c) hardness of
bitumen and (d) rheological type of bitumen. The rheological stiff-
ness property of bitumen could therefore be estimated by entering
the following information: (a) temperature, (b) softening point, (c)
loading time and (d) PI into the nonlinear multivariable model. The
hardness of bitumen can be completely characterised by the Ring-
and-Ball temperature and the PI determines the rheological char-
acteristics. Meanwhile, for purely viscous behaviour, differences
in hardness can be eliminated by a choice of temperature where
the viscosities of all bitumen are equal. The bitumen stiffness mod-
ulus, S, is a function of time of loading (s), the Tdiff = (TR&B  T) and
PI. The PI can be used to characterise the rheological type and can
be determined from the following equation:
 
20  PI log 800  log penetration
¼ 50  ð5Þ
10 þ PI T R&B  T
where the TR&B is Ring-and-Ball softening point temperature (°C)
and T is penetration temperature (normally taken at 25 °C) and
the penetration value of 800 dmm (tenths of millimetre) corre-
sponds to the penetration at softening point temperature for bitu-
mens. Therefore, obtaining test results from one penetration test
and the Ring-and-Ball softening point test, S can be found from
15C 25C 35C
55C 65C 75C
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4
Log reduced frequency (Hz)
 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189
the nonlinear multivariable model for any given temperature. Van
der Poel’s Nonlinear Multivariable Model is depicted in Fig. 5.
It can be recapitulated that S at any temperature condition and
time of loading, within a factor of two, can be predicted solely on
penetration and softening point data [55]. Moreover, it is believed
that Van der Poel employed the TTSP in the construction of his non-
linear multivariable model even though it was not clearly written in
his paper [22]. According to Van der Poel, the accuracy of this nomo-
graph which covers a temperature range of 300 °C, is amply sufficient
for engineering purposes. It was found that at lower temperatures, all
bitumens behaved elastically in the classical sense, with S being
equal to 3 GPa. This value is equal to the glassy modulus, in extension
or flexure, of bitumen [21]. As the temperature increased, S was ob-
served to depend solely on the polar molecules of bitumens.
The precision of mathematical functions used by Van der Poel in
developing the nonlinear multivariable model was never described
in any publication [22]. However, the following approximation for-
mula matches the predictions from the nomograph [56,57]:
S ¼ 1:157  107  t 0:368  ePI  ðT R&B  TÞ5
where S is bitumen stiffness (in MPa), t is loading time (s) and T is
temperature (°C). The other symbols are as previously defined.
However, this equation is restricted to a range of input parameters;
t between 0.01 and 0.1 s; PI between 1.0 and +1.0; and tempera-
ture difference (TR&B  T) between 10 and 70 °C [56,58].
Van der Poel’s Nonlinear Multivariable Model has been widely
adopted in pavement design by various researchers and in fact, ef-
forts have been made to modify this model [54,59,60]. These mod-
ifications, however, are largely minor and cosmetic and will be
discussed more fully in the following section [22]. As it stands,
the nonlinear multivariable model is a convenient and easily acces-
sible method for practical used. This model can be used to estimate
S over a wide range of temperature and loading times to an accept-
able accuracy [61].
Nevertheless, Van der Poel and other researchers found several
shortcomings when using this nonlinear multivariable model. For
Fig. 5. Van der Poel’s Nonlinear Multivariable Model [15].
2175
example, the model is vividly unable to describe the behaviour of
unmodified bitumen that contains more than 2% waxy elements
[15,51]. This model is principally developed on unmodified bitu-
mens and not suitable to be used for polymer-modified bitumen
[10,22]. It is well known that modified bitumens are more complex
in terms of their rheological behaviour and thus this nonlinear
multivariable model could be misleading. The modified bitumen
data lies almost exclusively below the equivalency line and clearly
indicates the inability of the nonlinear multivariable model to pre-
dict the stiffness of modified bitumen from the penetration and
softening point of these materials [9].
In addition, the discrepancies between stiffness values mea-
sured and predicted with the nonlinear multivariable model for
modified bitumen tend to be more significant at the lower temper-
atures and longer loading times [22,51]. Moreover, this method is
not readily amendable to numerical calculation since it involves
the usage of a nonlinear multivariable model [18]. Although the
nonlinear multivariable method seems to be effectively used, it is
ð6Þ inconvenient for analysis involving computers due to the lack of
mathematical expressions [62].
4.2. Modified Van der Poel’s nomograph
As mentioned above, Van der Poel’s Nonlinear Multivariable
Model has been widely used by various researchers for predicting
the stiffness of bitumen. In conjunction with this model, Heukelom
and Klomp [16] developed a relationship between stiffness of bitu-
men, S and the modulus of asphalt mixture, Sm, irrespective of the
combination of loading time (frequency) and temperature underly-
ing the value of S. A semi-empirical formula of this relation can be
shown as follows:
   n
2:5 Cv
Sm ¼ S 1 þ ð7Þ
n 1  Cv
2176 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189

!
where Sm is asphalt stiffness (N/m2 or Pa) and S is bitumen stiffness 4  104
(N/m2 or Pa). Cv (volume concentration of aggregates) and n are cal- n ¼ 0:83  log ð9Þ
S
culated using the following equations:
VA where VA and VB are percentage volume of aggregate and bitumen,
Cv ¼ ð8Þ respectively. Heukolem and Klomp [16] studied Van der Poel’s
VA þ VB
method in detail and then modified the relationship between S,
and Sm, and Cv using Eqs. (7)–(9), as shown in Fig. 6. However, the stiff-
ness equation suffers from various shortcomings, one of which is
that it is only applicable for air void contents of about 3% and Cv val-
ues from 0.6 to 0.9.
S m/S It is recommended to use C 0v if the air voids content is larger
than 3% [55,56,58]:

Cv
C 0v ¼ ð10Þ
0:97 þ 0:01  ð100  ðV A þ V B ÞÞ

This correction, however, is applicable only to asphalt having bitu-

men volume concentration factor, Cb satisfying the following equa-
tion [50]:

Cb P 1  C 0v ð11Þ
3
where C b ¼ V AVþV
B
B
¼ 1  Cv .
In 1966, Heukelom reshaped Van der Poel’s Nonlinear Multivar-
iable Model with a slight correction at very low PI values. This
model can be found in Heukolem’s paper [54]. To validate the mod-
ification, Heukolem checked the model predictions against the data
for hundreds of bitumens representing a variety of grades from dif-
ferent sources. He found that as in the original version, the accu-
racy is comparable with the distance between lines, or better [54].
This new revised nonlinear multivariable model was used to
predict stiffness of bitumen for roughly 7 years until Heukelom
S (kg/m2) found uncertainty when reviewing the original data on a few hun-
Fig. 6. Sm/S as a function of S and Cv [16]. dred bitumens. An extensive study of the penetration at the soften-
ing point revealed that considerable departures from 800-dmm

Fig. 7. Modified Van der Poel’s Nonlinear Multivariable Model [59].

 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189
Fig. 8. Correlation between viscosity at 135 °C and penetration at 25 °C [60].
penetration may occur with bitumen having high softening points
and high PI values [59]. In the few cases where there was a real
departure, Heukolem replaced softening point (TR&B) with temper-
ature at 800-dmm penetration. Consequently, PI (pen/pen) is pre-
ferred to PI (pen/R&B). Fig. 7 shows the new revised nonlinear
multivariable model [59]. Heukelom used this new model to pre-
dict the stiffness of bitumen, particularly for blown bitumen
Fig. 9. Suggested modification of Heukolem’s version of Pfeiffer’s and Van Doormaal’s nomograph [60].
2177
(blown bitumen is produced via an oxidation process that involves
passing air through the short residue, either on a batch or a contin-
uous basis, with the short residue at a temperature between 240
and 320 °C) [10].
Heukolem found that the results corresponded with the
experimental values within 10–15%, which is the average of
repeatability of the measurements. The use of TR&B and PI (pen/
R&B), in contrast, gave errors which were 4–10 times larger. The
revised nonlinear multivariable model, according to Heukelom,
can be used for dynamic loading conditions if the frequency, f is
replaced by an effective loading time of t = 1/2pf. However, for a
complete description of the dynamic behaviour of bitumen, the
phase angle between stress and strain is needed; needless to
say, its value cannot be obtained from the nonlinear multivariable
model [59].
4.3. McLeod’s nomograph
McLeod found that it was impossible to obtain a fixed relation-
ship between Pfeiffer and Doormaal’s PI for bitumens and low tem-
perature transverse cracking performance of pavement due to
penetration of many bitumens at their softening point varying
widely from 800-dmm penetration [60]. He established a different
method to measure a quantitative difference of the variation in
temperature susceptibility for bitumen. McLeod [63] defines tem-
perature susceptibility as the rate at which the consistency of bitu-
men changes with a change in temperature. This method uses the
penetration of bitumen at 25 °C and its viscosity in centistokes at
135 °C (or in poise at 60 °C) [60]. Therefore, the term ‘‘pen-vis
2178 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189

number’’ (PVN) is used by McLeod instead of PI as a quantitative
measure of temperature susceptibility. The PVN has been desig-
nated because the temperature susceptibility of bitumen is based
on penetration and viscosity values. The PVNs are numerically sim-
ilar to, and must be numerically identical with PI values for most
types of bitumen because of the way in which it is derived. The
PVN can be obtained by using the following equation [60,63,64]:
ðL  XÞ
PVN ¼ 1:5 
ðL  MÞ
where X is log viscosity (centistokes) measured at 135 °C, L is log
viscosity in (centistokes) at 135 °C for a PVN of 0.0 and M is log vis-
cosity (centistokes) at 135 °C for a PVN of 1.5. Fig. 8 shows a cor-
relation between viscosity at 135 °C and penetration at 25 °C for
various PVN values.
The following equations (based on a least squares line) could be
used to calculate more precise values of L and M [25,63,65]:
L ¼ 4:258  0:7967 logðPenetration at 25  CÞ
and
M ¼ 3:46289  0:61094 logðPenetration at 25  CÞ ð14Þ
The lower PVN values indicate that bitumens are more susceptible
to temperature [65]. The PVN values for bitumen are normally be-
tween +0.5 and 2.0 with a good range between +1 and 1 [25].
For example, bitumen has a penetration of 100 dmm at 25 °C and
a viscosity of 400 centistokes at 135 °C. From McLeod’s chart
(Fig. 8), L and M are taken as 450 and 180 centistokes, respectively.
ð12Þ Using Eq. (12), the PVN value is calculated equal to 0.19. Fig. 9
shows the suggested modification of Heukolem’s version of Pfeiffer
and Doormaal’s chart used to obtain the base temperature. Sup-
posed that the penetration of bitumen and the PVN are 90 and
1.0, respectively (calculated from Eq. (12)), a straight-line inter-
cept gives a value of 20 °C which is 25 °C (the temperature at which
the penetration test was made) below the base temperature of bitu-
men. Therefore, the base temperature for this sample is 45 °C.
After having established the base temperature, the stiffness of
bitumen for any specific temperature and rate of loading could
ð13Þ
be obtained using Fig. 10 [60]. Graphically, this model is more or
less similar to Van der Poel’s Nonlinear Multivariable Model, but

Fig. 10. Suggested modification to determine stiffness modulus of bitumen [60].

 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189 2179

has a slight modification where McLeod used the PVN and temper- determines the position of the spectrum along the relaxation time s
ature correlation to obtain stiffness of bitumen. For instance, it is axis at a given temperature). Gg is defined as [51]:
assumed that the loading time is 20,000 s at 28.9 °C. The service Z 1
temperature is 45 + 28.9 = 73.9 °C, with the base temperature of Gg ¼ HðsÞd ln s ð17Þ
bitumen being 45 °C. By drawing a straight-line intercept at 1

20,000 s, 73.9 °C and the PVN of 1.0, S is found equal to 49 MPa. and the parameter sm is given as:
Finally, McLeod used another graph that correlates the stiffness !
of bitumen with the stiffness of asphalt via Cv curves [63,64]. g0 b2
McLeod’s suggestion of using the relationship between viscosity sm ¼ exp ð18Þ
Gg 4
and base temperature rather than the Ring-and-Ball softening
point are significant deviations from Van der Poel’s model. The dis- Jongepier and Kuilman found the parameter b depends strongly on
advantage of this model is its inability to predict the LVE rheolog- the type of bitumen. Moreover, b for a particular bitumen can only
ical properties of polymer-modified bitumen since it was not be found by curve fitting. The storage and loss moduli are expressed
developed for that type of material. Although PVN can readily be by Eqs. (19) and (20) after the following substitution: u = ln xt and
determined from the specific tests, some researchers believe that x ¼ b22 ln xr ,
the temperature susceptibility obtained over higher temperature
 
2 Z 1  2
ranges (25–135 °C) cannot be extrapolated to be applicable at tem- Gg b x  12 u
G0 ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi exp   exp 
peratures below 25 °C. As discussed by Roberts et al. [65], one b p 2 0 b
noticeable difference between PI and PVN is that the PI changes

cosh x þ 12 u
on ageing (during mixing and subsequently in service) whereas  du ð19Þ
cosh u
PVN remains substantially the same. In general, Van der Poel, Heu-
kolem and McLeod’s models suffer from similar shortcomings and  
2 Z 1  2
their use should be avoided if other, more rational and accurate Gg b x  12 u
G00 ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi exp   exp 
methods of characterisation are available. Anderson et al. [22] b p 2 0 b

found the discrepancies between measured and predicted values cosh x  12 u

were more noticeable at lower temperatures and longer times of  du ð20Þ
cosh u
loading. When such nonlinear multivariable models are used, the
proper metric and conversion values are essential [50]. The tan d (loss tangent), is simply the ratio of G00 to G0 [19,22,66].
Jongepier and Kuilman numerically integrated Eqs. (19) and (20)
for a range of b values to produce |G| and d master curves. The fac-
5. Empirical algebraic equations
tor b was found to characterise the shape of the relaxation spec-
trum, and was thus determined to be a rational parameter for
5.1. Jongepier and Kuilman’s Model
characterising bitumen. Additionally, b was observed to be strongly
correlated with the composition of bitumen. It is reported that val-
Various researchers have used explicit empirical algebraic equa-
ues predicted from this model fit the observed data to within the
tions to characterise master curves of complex modulus for
experimental error, but that the accuracy of the model was not as
bitumen. Among them, Jongepier and Kuilman developed an empir-
good for bitumen with large b values as for bitumen with small b
ical algebraic model, suggesting that the relaxation spectrum of
values [22].
bitumen is approximately log normal in shape [22]. Based on this
Jongepier and Kuilman relied upon the WLF equation to charac-
assumption, they derived various rheological functions [19,66,67].
terise the temperature dependence of bitumens. Generally the Jon-
The relaxation spectrum was derived from experiments using the
gepier and Kuilman’s model is reasonably accurate in its treatment
Weissenberg rheometer operating from 20 to 160 °C at frequen-
of the viscoelastic properties of bitumens. Brodynan et al. [68] sug-
cies from 5  104 to 50 Hz (from 3  103 to 32 rad/s) [23]. A total
gested that the relaxation times are not log normally distributed
of 14 samples from different sources such as ‘‘pitch type bitumens’’
since they found relaxation spectrum highly skewed on a logarith-
(strongly temperature susceptible), ‘‘road bitumens’’ and ‘‘blown
mic scale distribution. It is also reported that the Jongepier and
type bitumens’’ (rubbery grades) were used in this study.
Kuilman’s model makes use of integral equations which makes
This approach, however, requires the use of integral equations
practical calculations with this model impossible [21,22,69]. No
and/or transforms, which can only be solved using numerical
details concerning the precise determination of the model param-
methods. The relaxation spectra of bitumen, although close to a
eters were presented by the researchers [22]. In addition, the
log normal distribution at long loading times, deviated signifi-
determination of relaxation spectrum from experimental data is
cantly from a log normal distribution at short loading times [22].
an ill-posed (ill-conditioned, no unique solution) problem [70,71].
The Jongepier and Kuilman’s Model is based on the distributions
of relaxation time and expressed mathematically using a relatively
complex set of equations. First, the frequency has been replaced by 5.2. Dobson’s Model
a (dimensionless) relative frequency:
Dobson developed an empirical algebraic equations for describ-
xg0 ing a master curve, based on the empirical relationship between
xr ¼ ð15Þ
Gg |G| and d for bitumen [18,67,72,73]. However, Dobson does not ex-
pressed modulus in term of frequency, but the reverse. Dobson
where xr is reduced frequency (rad/s), g0 is zero shear viscosity
presented the results in term of a universal master curve, with
(Pa s) and Gg is the glassy modulus (Pa). The logarithmic relaxation
the intention to characterise bitumen by graphical comparison
time distribution of the log normal type is given by:
with this master curve [22]. He described how the stiffness of bitu-
 2 men under any conditions of temperature and rate of loading may
Gg ln s=sm
HðsÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi exp  ð16Þ be calculated from three fundamental parameters; (i) a viscosity,
b p b
(ii) temperature dependence and (iii) rate dependence [18,72].
where H(s) is the relaxation spectrum distribution, b is the width The temperature dependence and viscosity parameters are ob-
parameter, s is relaxation time (s) and sm is a time constant (which tained by the use of a new viscosity–temperature chart, and the
2180 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189

rate dependent parameter is obtained from measurement of appar- 5.3. Dickinson and Witt’s Model
ent viscosity at two levels of shear stress [72].
The viscosity measurements were made at 60 °C by a vacuum Dickinson and Witt [20] performed dynamic mechanical testing
capillary viscometer and at 25 °C by a coni-cylindrical viscometer. on 14 different bitumens and developed analytical expressions for
The fundamental assumption of this model, which was based on the |G| and d in terms of their frequency dependencies. They pro-
the empirical observations of dynamic data on a range of bitumens, posed the following equation [20,22]:
is that the log–log slope of the |G| with respect to loading fre-
1n h 1
io
quency is a function of the loss tangent and the width of the relax- log Gr ¼ log xr  ðlog xr Þ2 þ ð2bÞ2 ð25Þ
ation spectrum [18,22]: 2



dy tan d where
Gr
is relative complex modulus at frequency, x (i.e.,
 
¼ ð21Þ Gr ¼ jG j=Gg ), xr is the relative angular frequency (xr = xg0aT/Gg)
dx ð1 þ tan dÞð1  0:01  tan dÞ
and b is a shear susceptibility parameter, which is defined as the
where y = log(|G|/Gg), |G| is the complex modulus magnitude, Gg is distance on a logarithmic scale between Gg and the modulus at
glassy modulus, x = log(g0xaT/Gg), g0 is the steady state or Newto- xr = 1. Meanwhile the phase angle can be expressed as the
nian viscosity and aT is the shift factor. Dobson also observed a lin- following:
ear relationship between tan d and |G| which can be expressed in
the following form:
logð1 þ tan dÞ ¼ by
where b is a parameter describing the width of the relaxation spec-
trum. It may also be regarded as a shear susceptibility index and is
related to the PI [18]. Eqs. (21) and (22) can be combined to give a
new equation for relating reduced frequency and complex modulus:
" #
2ðd  d0 Þ 2
1 20:5  Gb
Gr
¼ b ð27Þ
log xr ¼ log Gr  b
logð1  Gr Þ þ r
b 230:3
or by rearranging:
  20:5  Gb
log xb b r (SE) of fit of |G| obtained ranged from 0.008 to 0.025 on the loga-
r ¼ log Gr  1 þ
230:3
where xr = g0xaT/Gg and Gr = |G|/Gg. xb is a unique function of
r
Gb
r . All the equations above are applicable for the value of
tan d 6 9.5. Dobson developed an instrument to measure the com-
plex shear modulus of 45-mg bitumen samples over a frequency
range from 2 to 200 Hz and over a continuously variable tempera-
ture range [18]. This equipment was based on a plate measuring
geometry. Dobson used the value of Gg as 1  109 Pa
(1  1010 dynes/cm2) at tan d P 9.5, dy/dx = 1. It was found that
the model exhibit good agreement with experimental data.
Like Jongepier and Kuilman, Dobson described the effect of tem-
perature on viscoelastic properties using the WLF equation. He
found that a single set of coefficients could be used to fit the shift
factor data for a range of bitumens, but a different coefficient set
was needed for two extreme temperatures. The simple form of
the WLF equation with two sets of constants: For T  Ts < 0,
C1 = 12.5 and C2 = 142.5 K has been used. Meanwhile for T  Ts > 0,
use was made with C1 = 8.86 and C2 = 101.6 K. Ts is equivalent to
the reference temperature, with Ts = Tg  50. Tg was probably
determined from dilatometric measurements [22].
In general, Dobson’s method for characterising the temperature
dependency appears to be reasonably accurate. He also presents a
practical means for applying this part of his model to rheological
data on bitumen. Nevertheless, this model also has several short-
comings. Maccarrone [74] studied the Dobson Model for describing
temperature dependence of aT and found the WLF equation with
Dobson’s coefficients over predicted the aT at temperature below
20 °C when applied to aged bitumens. It is difficult to assess the
accuracy of Dobson’s Model since he only made a few comparisons
of measured and predicted |G| and d values. In addition, the failure
to express modulus as an explicit function of reduced frequency is
a serious shortcoming, as is the lack of a well-defined procedure for
determining the constants in his equation for the modulus [22]. In
addition, the development of this model was not applied to modi-
fied bitumen.
 h i12 
p  2d0
d ¼ d0 þ 1  log xr ðlog xr Þ2 þ ð2bÞ2 ð26Þ
4
ð22Þ
where d is the phase angle and d0 is the limiting phase angle at infi-
nite frequency [22]. By eliminating log xr in Eqs. (25) and (26), a
relationship between complex modulus and phase angle was estab-
lished by Dickinson and Witt, treated as a hyperbola model:
 1
log
ð23Þ p  2d
Because of the limited temperature range examined, they used the
same coefficients as Dobson to describe temperature dependence of
the aT for their bitumen (see Dobson’s Model). The standard errors
ð24Þ
rithmic scale, corresponding to a maximum error of about 10%.
The accuracy of the d was not reported by Dickinson and Witt
although it can be seen that the accuracy was comparable to the
experimental error in determining the phase angle [21,22]. In addi-
tion, Dickinson and Witt observed that the spectra were unsymmet-
rical with respect to the maximum value and disputed Jongepier
and Kuilman’s assumption of a log Gaussian distribution of relaxa-
tion times.
The reported values of log Gg (Gg in Pa), ranged from 9.5 to 10.6,
which are similar to the values of 9.7 or 10, reported by other
researchers like Dobson [18] and Jongepier and Kuilman [19]. Mac-
carrone [74] evaluated various models for predicting the dynamic
properties of bitumen based on 39 aged and 2 original bitumen
samples. It was found that the Dickinson and Witt’s Model fits
the rheological data quite well with a standard error of estimate
(Se) of log |G| ranging from 0.001 to 0.012. Generally, this model
is more practical and simpler than either Dobson’s or Jongepier
and Kuilman’s Model but Gg and viscosity in the model are deter-
mined statistically and in may cases, overestimated [9,22].
5.4. Christensen and Anderson (CA) Model
During the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) A-002A
study, Christensen and Anderson performed dynamic mechanical
analysis (DMA) on eight SHRP core bitumens for the purpose of
developing an empirical algebraic equation that described the vis-
coelastic behaviour of bitumen. The model will be referred to as
the Christensen and Anderson (CA) Model. They noted that four
primary parameters (the glassy modulus, Gg, the steady state vis-
cosity, gss, the crossover frequency, xc, and the rheological index,
R) are needed to fully characterise the properties of any bitumen
[21]. Fig. 11 shows some of the parameters mentioned above. De-
tailed explanations for each parameter can be found elsewhere and
are omitted in this section for brevity [8,21,22,46,75]. The CA Mod-
el is presented as a series of equations for the primary dynamic vis-
 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189
coelastic functions. For |G|, the following mathematical function
can be used:
" # R
x ðlogR 2Þ log 2
c
jG j ¼ Gg 1 þ
x
where xc is the crossover frequency and R is a rheological index.
The other parameters are as defined previously. Bitumen with lar-
ger values of R exhibit wider relaxation spectra. Meanwhile d (in de-
grees) can be taken as:
90
d¼" # ð29Þ
 ðlogR 2Þ
1þ x
xc
The other parameters are as defined above [22,46,62,76]. Christen-
sen and Anderson combined Eqs. (28) and (29) to define R as:
 

ðlog 2Þ  log jGGg j
R¼ d
ð30Þ
log 1  90
where the parameters are as previously defined. They found this
equation is quite useful when the value of R is desired, but it is
impossible to obtain data at the region when d = 90°. In using this
equation to calculate the R value, Gg can be taken as 1 GPa in shear
and 3 GPa in extension (or flexure).
It was reported that Eq. (30) is reasonably accurate within the
region where d is between 10° and 70° and the best results are ob-
tained near the crossover point, where d = 45° [22]. According to
Christensen and Anderson, this model is not recommended to be
used at temperatures and frequencies where d approximates 90°.
The CA Model was validated using the SHRP core bitumens (un-
aged), thin film oven test (TFOT) aged and pressure ageing vessel
(PAV) aged. It can generally be used over a wide range of frequen-
cies and temperatures extended well into the glassy region [21].
However Silva et al. [76] found the model presented lack of fit
particularly at high temperatures and/or long loading times
(Fig. 12). To surmount this inconsistency, Christensen and Ander-
son suggested calculating a second set of parameter values for
the secondary region in which the value of R is set equal to 0.81
when Newtonian flow is approached. They have manipulated the
equations above to generate a series of equations from which the
LVE parameters for the secondary viscoelastic region can be calcu-
lated. The details of those equations can be found elsewhere and
are omitted for brevity [21,22].
The WLF equation is used above the defining temperature, Td
and in the Newtonian region. Td is a characteristic parameter for
each bitumen. It is reported that the values of C1 = 19 and
C2 = 92 K can be used for all bitumens. However, it is recom-
Log |G*| (Pa)
Log
Fig. 11. Definition of the CA Model [8].
2181
ð28Þ
Fig. 12. Modelling using the CA Model [76].
mended to obtain the C1 and C2 by optimisation process from
experimental data. No universal values can, a priori, be applied.
Meanwhile, for the temperatures below Td and in the Newtonian
region, an Arrhenius function is used to describe aT. The activation
energy (Ea) for flow below Td was reported to be 261 kJ/mol. In gen-
eral, the CA Model is relatively simple in shape and reasonably
accurate as compared to the previous models. However, the sensi-
tivity analysis showed the use of only parameters related to the
shape of the relaxation spectrum (rheological index) is not enough
to describe bitumen behaviour [76]. In addition, the model is not
able to describe the LVE rheological properties of modified bitu-
men [9].
5.5. Fractional Model
Stastna et al. [77] proposed a simple model for |G| and d to de-
scribe the behaviour of bitumen. The model, called the Fractional
Model, is based on the generalisation of the Maxwell model [77–
84]. This model has a relatively low number of parameters and
requires only half the parameters compared to the generalised
Maxwell model. |G| represents the response function of viscoelas-
tic materials and can be described by a general power of a rational
fraction. Models of this type have been studied by Stastna et al.
[77] and comparison with experimental data for polymeric solu-
tions can be found in the study of Stastna et al. [78]. |G| can be
shown as the following:
"Q #2ðnmÞ
1
m
ð1 þ ðlk xÞ2 Þ
jG j ¼ g0 x Q1n 2
ð31Þ
1 ð1 þ ðkk xÞ Þ
where lk and kk are the relaxation times (lk > 0, kk > 0) and m and n
are the numbers of relaxation time (n > m). Stastna et al. found the
Fractional Model is much more flexible than the generalised Max-
well model and is easily manageable. d can be expressed as:
" #
p 1 X
m X
n
d¼ þ a tanðlk xÞ  a tanðkk xÞ ð32Þ
2 ðn  mÞ 1 1
where a is the Fourier transform of the Dirac delta function. They
performed DMA on 19 unmodified and 5 modified bitumen samples
from different sources. For almost all cases and with the reference
temperature set at 0 °C, the Fractional Model generates excellent
fitting of |G| and d master curves, both for the unmodified and
modified bitumens.
Stastna et al. [80] in their study employed both the WLF and
Arrhenius equations for shifting purposes but stress was given to
(rad/s)
the earlier equation for a better fit. Nevertheless, no details con-
cerning the precise determination of the parameters were pre-
2182 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189

sented in their papers. Marasteanu and Anderson [85] reported this where Ge = |G|(f ? 0) with Ge = 0 for bitumen, Gg = |G|(f ? 1), fc is
model lacks statistical robustness because of the number of un- a location parameter with dimensions of frequencies and f0 is re-
known parameters (10)–(15) approaches the number of observa- duced frequency, function of both temperature and strain and k
tions. Indeed it is difficult to interpret a model with so many and me are the shape parameters (dimensionless). fc is equal to
parameters on a phenomenological basis. However, they found crossover frequency in the CA and CAM Models. Fig. 14 shows a
the degree of flexibility offered by the model is very useful when schematic diagram of the Modified CAM Model. It is seen that Gg
simulating plateaus or other irregularities in the master curves. and Ge are horizontal asymptotes when frequencies approach infin-
This, however, can also lead to the fitting of anomalous portions ity and zero, respectively. The third asymptote is the one with the
of the master curve that are the result of testing error, rather than slope of me. The Gg and me asymptotes intercept at fc. Ge and me
real rheological properties of binders [85]. asymptotes intercept at:
 m1
5.6. Christensen, Anderson and Marasteanu (CAM) Model Ge e
fc0 ¼ fc ð36Þ
Gg
Marasteanu and Anderson [85] developed a new model by mod-
For binders, fc0 ¼ 0. According to Zeng et al., the distance (one loga-
ifying the CA Model to improve the fitting particularly in the lower
rithmic decade being unity) between |G|(fc) and Gg for bitumen is
and higher zones of the frequency range of bitumens. The model
given by:
known as the CAM Model after Christensen, Anderson and Maras-
teanu, attempts to improve the descriptions of both unmodified 2me =k
and modified bitumen. The researchers applied the Havriliak and R ¼ log me =k
ð37Þ
1 þ ð2  1ÞGe =Gg
Nagami Model to the initial CA Model and proposed the following
equation for |G| [85–88]. For binders, R = me/k log 2. The distance between jG jðfc0 Þ and Ge is
 x v wv given by:
c
jG j ¼ Gg 1 þ ð33Þ 8 9
x <   "  k=me #me =k =
0 Gg Gg
R ¼ 1þ 1  1þ ð38Þ
where v = log 2/R and R is the rheological index. d is defined as: : Ge Ge ;

90w
d¼h xc
v i ð34Þ For binders, R0 = log 2. For brevity, the physical meaning of the
1þ x parameters are not shown here and can be found elsewhere [62].
d (in degrees) is shown as:
The introduction of w parameter addresses the issue of how fast or
how slow the |G| data converge into the two asymptotes (the 45°
asymptote and the Gg asymptote) as the frequency goes to zero or
infinity [85].
During the work, Marasteanu and Anderson tested their model
using 38 unmodified and modified bitumens. The fitted |G| values
of the measured values for the CAM and CA Models were within
10–35%, respectively. They found that typically the lack of fit oc-
curred at the two asymptotes of the master curves and it was be-
lieved that the departure from the thermo-rheologically simplicity
is bitumen dependent and is strongly related to bitumen composi-
tion, especially the presence of waxy elements and higher asphalt-
enes. Marasteanu and Anderson did not specify clearly the
equation for describing the temperature dependence of bitumen.
The degree of precision in modelling |G| and d was greater than
the original CA Model. However, anomalies were still seen in the
construction of a smooth master curve when test bitumens be- Fig. 13. Modelling using the CAM Model [76].
haved as thermorheologically complex materials. Like the CA Mod-
el, Silva et al. [76] found the CAM Model presented lack of fit
particularly at high temperatures as shown in Fig. 13.

5.7. Modified Christensen, Anderson and Marasteanu Model

Zeng et al. [62] developed empirical algebraic equations to char-

acterise modified bitumens and asphalt with bitumen modification
under dynamic shear loading over a wide range of frequencies,
temperatures and strains. The model is composed of four formula-
tions for the |G| and d master curves, temperature and strain
dependencies. This model is capable of modelling the behaviour
of bitumen as a viscoelastic fluid, and for asphalt as a viscoelastic
solid in a universal form. The |G| equation is based on a generalisa-
tion of the CAM Model and generalised law model [12,62]:

Gg  Ge
jG j ¼ Ge þ  ð35Þ
 k mke
1 þ ffc0
Fig. 14. Definition of Generalised CAM Model [62].
 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189 2183

(  2 )md =2
logðfd =f 0 Þ
d ¼ 90I  ð90I  dm Þ 1 þ
Rd
where dm is the phase angle constant at fd, the value at the inflexion
(or inflection point) for bitumens, f0 is the reduced frequency, fd is a
location parameter with dimensions of frequency at which dm oc-
curs and Rd and md are the shape parameters. Zeng et al. did not
explicitly provide the definition of I but showed I = 0 if f > fd and
I = 1 if f 6 fd for bitumen. For asphalt, I is always equal to zero.
Eq. (39) satisfies the requirement that d varies from 90° to 0°
when the frequency is elevated from zero to infinity for bitumen
[62]. Like others, Zeng et al. used the WLF equation to describe
the shift factor of bitumens. In addition, they have suggested the
Arrhenius function should be used if low temperatures are in-
volved. Zeng et al. conducted the dynamic test by means of the
DSR and Simple Shear Test (SST) for bitumen and asphalt respec-
tively. Analysis of data involving 9 modified bitumens, 36 asphalts
and 4 types of aggregates over various ranges of frequency, tem-
perature and strain indicated that the model fits the measurements
very well. They found a good agreement between measured and
predicted |G| master curves.
Conversely, Zeng et al. observed that the d master curve was not
as good as its |G| counterpart. This phenomenon may be attributed
to some extent to errors in measurement and analysis. The source
of the discrepancies still remain unknown but they are believed to
be due to the presence of aggregates in asphalt as well as to minor
to moderate differences in temperature dependency existing be-
tween bitumen and its mixtures with aggregate [62].
5.9. Polynomial Model
ð39Þ
The Polynomial Model can be used to describe the |G| master
curves of bitumen, even though it was originally developed for as-
phalt. As suggested by Mohammad et al. [14], for practical pur-
poses, a simpler polynomial function may be used to express the
|G| master curve constructed from a dynamic modulus test. The
form of the Polynomial Model can be shown as the following:
log jG j ¼ Aðlog f Þ3 þ Bðlog f Þ2 þ Cðlog f Þ þ D ð42Þ
where f is reduced frequency and A, B and C are the shape parame-
ters and D is a scaling parameter. This model generally can fix the
test data from low to moderate temperatures satisfactorily. How-
ever, as the temperature increases or decreases, the curves tend
to skew, depending on the degree of freedom in the equation used
[89]. Moreover, a single Polynomial Model cannot be used for fitting
the whole master curve. The LVE rheological properties of bitumen
seem ‘‘incomplete’’ since the Polynomial Model does not take the
behaviour of d into account.
5.10. Sigmoidal Model
A new dynamic modulus function, the Sigmoidal Model, has
been introduced in the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design
Guide (ME PDG) developed in National Cooperative Highway Re-
search Program (NCHRP) Project A-37A. In the ME PDG, the Sigmoi-
dal Model is used to describe the rate dependency of the modulus
master curve [89–91]. Mathematically, the Sigmoidal Model can be
shown as the following:

5.8. Al-Qadi and co-workers’ Model

Al-Qadi et al. in their research, proposed a new model of |G|

and d for describing the rheological behaviour of straight run and
modified bitumen in the LVE region. They performed DMA using
a DSR with parallel plate geometry at frequencies between 0.01
and 30 Hz and temperatures ranging from 5 to 75 °C. The proposed
|G| based on the Havriliak and Negami function as follows [69]:
2 3
6 1 7
jG j ¼ Gg 41  h  v iw 5 ð40Þ
1þ x
x0

where x0 is the scale parameter that defines the location of the

transition along the frequency axis, v and w are the dimensionless
model parameters. In addition, the proposed d model (in degrees)
can be shown as:

90
d¼h   v iw ð41Þ
1 þ xx0

where the symbols are as previously defined. Fig. 15 shows the

comparison between measured and predicted |G| and d master
curves.
The WLF equation has been used by Al-Qadi et al. to show the
temperature dependency of bitumens. From the study, they found
a good agreement between the measured and predicted values for
|G|. Meanwhile the d model was found to be adequately described
for unmodified bitumen with small percentage errors (<5%). Never-
theless, anomalies can still be seen where the proposed model
could not simulate the small plateau region observed in the d mas-
ter curve of modified bitumen in an accurate way. The difference,
however, between the predicted and measured values was less Fig. 15. Comparison between measured and predicted (a) |G| and (b) d using Al-
than 10% which was within the acceptable range in such a test [69]. Qadi and co-workers Model [69].
2184 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189

a Z 1
log jG j ¼ t þ 2 u  dðuÞ  x  dðxÞ
1 þ ebþcflogðxÞg
ð43Þ log jG ðxÞj  log jG ð1Þj ¼  du ð45Þ
p 0 u2  x2
where log x is log reduced frequency, t is the lower asymptote, a is and
the difference between the values of the upper and lower asymp- Z
tote, b and c define the shape between the asymptotes and the loca- 2x 1
log jG ðuÞj  log jG ðxÞj
d¼ du ð46Þ
tion of the inflection point (inflection point obtained from p 0 u2  x2
x = 10(b/c)) [92]. In the ME PDG, aT is expressed as a function of
where u is defined as a dummy variable. Eq. (46) becomes exactly:
the bitumen viscosity to allow ageing over the life of pavement.
The definition of each parameter is shown in Fig. 16. p d log jG j
The Sigmoidal Model has been widely used by many research- d¼  ð47Þ
2 d log x
ers in the paving industry and details of this model are found else-
where [89–92]. Like the Polynomial Model, the Sigmoidal Model Chailleux et al. used the following shift factor relationship to char-
was only applied to the |G| master curve construction, without acterise temperature dependence of bitumen:
taking into account the behaviour of d. Hence the entire viscoelas-

tic behaviour of the material cannot be described. Normally for X
j¼ref log GðT j Þ  log GðT jþ1 Þ p
log að T i ; T o Þ ¼  ð48Þ
unmodified and polymer - modified bitumens, Gg can be taken as ðT ;T Þ
davrj jþ1 2
j¼i
1 GPa, for most engineering purposes. Bonaquist and Christensen
[89] have proposed the modification of Sigmoidal Model as: where davr is the average of two angles measured at xj and xj+1. To
validate the possible use of this methodology, they applied the
Max  t
log jG j ¼ t þ ð44Þ model to three unmodified bitumens, one SBS-modified bitumen
1 þ ebþcflogðxÞg
and two asphalts using DMA. They proposed to plot d log |G|/
where Max is limiting value of complex modulus. The other sym- d log x versus d/90 to verify both the Booij and Thoone equation
bols are as previously defined. and the Kramers–Kronig relations (Fig. 17).
Earlier, Marasteanu and Anderson applied the same Booij and
5.11. The LCPC Master Curve Construction Method Thoone approximation to analyse the dynamic shear data for a
set of 71 unmodified and modified bitumens [94]. The validity of
Chailleux et al. from the Laboratoire Central des Ponts et the Booij and Thoone relation was examined by calculating the
Chaussées (LCPC), France adapted an empirical algebraic equation slopes of the logarithmatic plots of |G| versus x, as the ratio of
in order to construct master curves from complex modulus mea- the difference of the logarithm of two consecutive |G| values di-
surements [45]. The researchers applied the Kramers–Kronig rela- vided by the difference of the logarithm of their corresponding fre-
tions, based on previous work done by Booij and Thoone [93], quencies. The d was, subsequently, calculated as the average of the
linking |G| and d of a complex function. The integral transform two corresponding phase angles. No LVE rheological model was as-
relationships between the real and imaginary parts of this function sumed and the slope was obtained by means of simple calcula-
are generally known as the Kramers–Kronig relations. tions. Furthermore, the Booij and Palmen approximation was also
Booij and Thoone [93] carried out experiments on a polyvinyl- used to calculate the relaxation spectra. This approximation can
acetate sample involving oscillation measurements in a Mechani- be shown as below:
cal Spectrometer at five different frequencies and temperatures
between 22.85 and 119.85 °C. Superimposed curves of both G0
1
HðsÞ ffi ½jG j sin 2dx¼1=s ð49Þ
and G00 versus frequency were produced. This was done by means p
of time–temperature shift factors on both master curves at a refer- where s is the relaxation time and H(s) is the strength of relaxation
ence temperature of 34.85 °C. Booij and Thoone also tested this at s for discrete spectra. From this study, a smooth master curve
relation for other materials as well, including a number of dielec- was produced when applying this equation to the data at different
tric data. It appears that the relation invariably holds with standard temperatures from frequency sweep tests. This approximation
deviation (SD) never exceeding 5% [93]. The Kramers–Kronig plays a significant role in modelling DSR data and in generating rhe-
approximations give the following equations for |G| and d [45]: ological master curves for bitumens. It is worth mentioning that

Fig. 16. Definition of the Sigmoidal Model [40]. Fig. 17. Example of plot d log |G|/d log x versus d/90 [45].
 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189 2185

this model fits data ranging from intermediate to high temperatures Table 2
satisfactorily [94]. Criteria of the goodness-of-fit statistics [96].

Criteria R2 Se/Sy
5.12. New complex modulus and phase angle predictive model Excellent P0.90 60.35
Good 0.70–0.89 0.36–0.55
To surmount the limitations of the current models used in the Fair 0.40–0.69 0.56–0.75
ME PDG, Bari and Witczak developed a new predictive model for Poor 0.20–0.39 0.76–0.89
Very poor 60.19 P0.90
|G| and d [95]. A database containing 8940 data points from 41 dif-
ferent unmodified and modified bitumens was used in this study.
The equation for |G| is shown as follows:
where Max is the limiting value of complex modulus. The other
jG j ¼ 0:0051f s gfs ;T ðsin dÞ7:1542  0:4929f s þ 0:0211fs2 ð50Þ symbols are as previously defined. Although the Generalised Logis-
where fs is the dynamic shear loading frequency to be used with |G| tic Sigmoidal Model improves the prediction of the non-symmetri-
and d, gfs ;T is viscosity of bitumen (cP) as a function of both loading cal shape of the master curve, the model is still unable to predict the
frequency (fs) and temperature (T), and d is the phase angle (°). The behaviour of highly modified bitumens, as similarly observed for
value of |G| is limited to a maximum value of 1 GPa. d is obtained the Sigmoidal Model.
from a nonlinear optimisation technique in the form of the follow-
ing equation: 6. Mechanical element models
0 0
d ¼ 90 þ ðb1 þ b2 VTS Þ  logðfs  gfs ;T Þ þ ðb3 þ b4 VTS Þ It is useful to consider the simple behaviour of analogue models
 flogðfs ; gfs ;T Þg2 ð51Þ constructed from linear springs and dashpots to get some feeling
for LVE behaviour of bitumen. The spring (Hooke’s Model) is an
where VTS0 ¼ 0:9699fs0:0575  VTS, fs is loading frequency in dynamic ideal elastic element obeying the linear force extension relation
shear (Hz), b1, b2, b3, and b4 are the fitting parameters (7.3146, while the dashpot (Newton’s Model) is an ideal viscous element
2.6162, 0.1124 and 0.2029). The fitting parameters will change that extends at a rate proportional to the applied stress. A number
slightly as a function of the type of bitumen (crude source and grade). of different models with various arrays of spring and dashpot
To evaluate the model’s performance, Bari and Witczak used the arrangements, such as the Jeffery, Zener and Burgers’ Models, are
ratio of standard error of estimates over standard deviation (Se/Sy) available to facilitate the mathematical expression of the viscoelas-
and coefficient of determination (R2) to measure the goodness-of- tic behaviour of engineering materials. However, as reported by
fit statistics between measured and predicted data. The criteria of Monismith et al. [29] none of these models is itself sufficient to
the goodness-of-fit statistics used are shown in Table 2 [96].2 In represent the behaviour of bitumens.
general, Bari and Witczak found a good correlation between mea-
sured and predicted data. This new d model has a very good correla- 6.1. Huet Model
tion for unmodified bitumens compared with that of the modified
bitumens. They concluded that modified bitumens used in this study The Huet Model was initially conceived by Christian Huet in or-
had higher variability in stiffness characteristics as a result of their der to model the behaviour of both bitumen and asphalt [98]. This
type and amount of modification. However, the overall variation model consists of a combination of a spring and two parabolic ele-
from all 41 bitumens is practically negligible and the predicted plots ments (k and h) in series as illustrated in Fig. 18. According to Olard
are very close to the equality line. More bitumen modifications are and Di Benedetto [88], the parabolic element is an analogical
needed for future development as the current model only includes model with a parabolic creep function with equations for creep
a small sample of modified bitumens [95]. compliance and complex modulus as follows:
 h
5.13. Generalised Logistic Sigmoidal Model t
JðtÞ ¼ a ð54Þ
s
Rowe et al. introduced a generalisation of the Sigmoidal Model,
and
called the Generalised Logistic Sigmoidal Model (or Richards Mod-
el) to predict the stiffness of asphalt. This equation is also applica- ðixsÞh
ble to bitumen and the model can be shown as the following G ¼ ð55Þ
aCðh þ 1Þ
[92,97]:
a where J(t) is the creep function, h is the exponent such as 0 < h < 1, a
log jG j ¼ t þ ð52Þ is a dimensionless constant, C is gamma function, t is the loading
½1 þ keðbþcflogðxÞgÞ 1=k time, s is the characteristic time (which value
2
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi varies only with tem-
where the symbols are as previously defined. The k parameter al- perature), i is the complex number ði ¼ 1Þ and x is the angular
lows the curve to take a non-symmetrical shape for the master frequency.
curve. When k reduces to one, Eq. (52) reduces to the standard sig- This model, in addition, has a continuous spectrum and can be
moidal function as represented in Eq. (43). As the glassy modulus presented by an infinite number of Kelvin-Voigt elements in series
can be taken as 1 GPa for most engineering purposes, it is possible or Maxwell elements in parallel [88]. The analytical expression of
to modify and transform the equation into the following form: G can be shown as follows [88,98–100]:

Max  t G1
log jG j ¼ t þ ð53Þ G ¼ ð56Þ
½1 þ keðbþcflogðxÞgÞ 1=k 1 þ oðixsÞk þ ðixsÞh
where G is the complex modulus, G1 is the limit of the complex
2
modulus, h and k are exponents such as 0 < h < k < 1, o is a dimen-
These criteria are not very good for describing mismatch. The R2 is only applicable
for linear models with a large sample [96]. In addition, these two columns (R2 and Se/
sionless constant. The other symbols are as previously defined.
Sy) are not really independent, i.e. R2 1  [(n  k)/(n  1)](Se/Sy)2 (where n = the The Huet equation accounts for the non-symmetric shape of the
sample size and k = the number of regression coefficient). frequency response.
2186 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189
The WLF equation has been used by Huet to describe the tem-
perature dependency of bitumen. He presented the results ob-
tained under monotonic loading by means of the Cole–Cole
diagram. It can be seen that the Huet model is well suited for the
description of this kind of loading. However, it is believed that this
model is unable to model modified bitumen correctly. Another
drawback is that the original model does not contain a viscous ele-
ment for simulating permanent deformation, in contrast with the
Burger’s Model, a combination of the Maxwell and a Kelvin-Voigt
unit in serial connection (four parameters model) [101,102].
6.2. Huet–Sayegh Model
Sayegh developed a model based on the generalisation of the
Huet Model but modified by adding a spring of small rigidity com-
pared with G1 in parallel [99]. This model consists of the combina-
tion of two springs (G0 and G1–G0) and two parabolic creep
elements (k and h) and can be presented as shown in Fig. 19. If
the G0 is equal to zero, then the Huet–Sayegh Model is identical
to the Huet Model. As a matter of fact, the Huet–Sayegh Model
looks like a Zener Model but instead of one linear dashpot, it has
two parabolic dashpots [101–103]. The model can be described
mathematically using the following formula:
G1  Go
G ¼ Go þ
1 þ oðixsÞk þ ðixsÞh
with G0 is the elastic modulus and o is a dimensionless constant.
The other symbols are as previously defined. a, b, and c can be deter-
mined implicitly using s which is referred to as the characteristic
time and it is calculated using the following equation [101,102]:
ln s ¼ a þ bT þ cT 2
where a, b and c are regression parameters representing the mate-
rial characteristics. This model was originally developed for asphalt,
but it can also be used for unmodified bitumens.
Unlike the Huet Model, no analytical expression of the creep
function of the Huet–Sayegh Model is available in the time domain.
Olard and Di Benedetto attempted to fit the data both on bitumen
and asphalt using the Huet–Sayegh Model and they found the
model is unsuitable for bitumens at the very low frequencies
where it is equivalent to a parabolic element instead of a linear
dashpot [88]. The model also has a lack of an element representing
the permanent deformation characteristics of bitumen like the se-
rial dashpot in the Burger’s Model [101–103].
6.3. Di Benedetto and Neifar (DBN) Model
The DBN Model is a rheological model specially developed by
Di Benedetto and Neifar for asphalt [12,100,104–106]. The DBN
Model, abbreviated from Di Benedetto and Neifar, takes into
Fig. 18. The Huet Model [88].
Fig. 19. The Huet–Sayegh Model [18].
account the LVE behaviour in the small-strain domain, as well
as plastic flow for large strain values. To find a compromise
between the complexity of the development and a close descrip-
tion of the material behaviour, the number of considered bodies
must be reasonable. The DBN Model, which is depicted in Fig. 20,
can also be used for describing the rheological properties of bit-
umens in the LVE region. The G function of the DBN Model can
be written as:
ð57Þ !1
1 X n
1

G ¼ þ ð59Þ
Go i¼1 Gi þ ixgi ðTÞ
where Go is the elastic modulus of the single spring, gi is a viscosity
function of the temperature (T) and x = 2pf. The number n of the
elementary body can be arbitrarily chosen [12]. The DBN Model
ð58Þ bears a resemblance with the generalised Kelvin-Voigt Model, ex-
cept the DBN Model does not incorporate an ‘‘end’’ dashpot ele-
ment. As comparison, the generalised Kelvin-Voigt equation is
shown as:
!1
1 X n
1 1
G ¼ þ þ ð60Þ
Go i¼1 Gi þ ixgi ðTÞ ixg0
Di Benedetto and Neifar used the 2S2P1D Model (see Section 6.4) to
calibrate the DBN Model and found good agreement between the
two models and experimental data using an optimisation process.
However, as reported by Blab et al. [100] the calibration of the
DBN Model based on the 2S2P1D Model means that uncertainties
associated with the 2S2P1D Model will also lead to uncertainties
in the DBN Model.
6.4. The 2S2P1D Model
Olard and Di Benedetto developed a mechanical element ap-
proach for modelling the LVE behaviour of bitumens and asphalts
[75,88,107,108]. This model, based on a generalisation of the
Huet–Sayegh Model, consists of a combination of two springs,
two parabolic elements, and one dashpot as shown in Fig. 21.
The model introduced by Olard and Di Benedetto has seven param-
eters and G is shown as:
G1  Go
G ¼ Go þ k
ð61Þ
1 þ oðixsÞ þ ðixsÞh þ ðixsbÞ1
where o and b are dimensionless constants. The other symbols are
as previously defined.
Like the Huet–Sayegh Model, this model has a continuous spec-
trum (i.e. can be presented by an infinite number of Kelvin-Voigt
elements in series or Maxwell elements in parallel) [86]. Olard
 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189
Fig. 20. The Di Benedetto and Neifar (DBN) Model [106].
Fig. 21. Representation of the 2S2P1D Model [108].
and Di Benedetto, however, found G0 for bitumen was very close to
zero; therefore, the parameters can be reduced to six for bitumen
as G0 can be neglected. They conducted complex modulus tests
on nine bitumens and four asphalts with one mix design. Olard
and Di Benedetto used the WLF equation to show the temperature
dependency of bitumen and the C1 and C2 constants were obtained
by an optimisation process from the experimental data. Delaporte
et al. used a similar model and found an excellent relation between
measured and predicted data of bitumen-filler mastics [109]. In
general it can be inferred that the 2S2P1D Model can significantly
reduce testing effort, at least for the purpose of describing bitumen
behaviour in the LVE region.
However, anomalies were still seen in the Olard and Di Bened-
etto study where the model did not perfectly fit the experimental
data for d of between 50° and 70°. A third parabolic element was
suggested by Olard and Di Benedetto, but this would have signifi-
cantly increased the complexity of the model. Another disadvan-
tage of the model is that it was unable to fit experimental data
for modified bitumen, particularly at high temperatures. To ac-
count for modified bitumen, Olard and Di Benedetto introduced
the partial time–temperature superposition principle (PTTSP)
based on the observation that modified bitumen tended to con-
form only to the TTSP at temperatures below 10 °C. The PTTSP is
therefore a shifting procedure that is only applied to the construc-
tion of a continuous |G| master curve.
7. Summary
This paper aims to offer bitumen and paving engineers with an
explanation on modelling methods used to predict the linear visco-
elastic (LVE) rheological properties of bitumens. The LVE rheologi-
cal properties of bitumen are generally and conveniently
represented in terms of complex modulus magnitude and phase
2187
angle master curves. The use of empirical models to describe these
curves can be classified into three groups; nonlinear multivariable
models, empirical algebraic equations and mechanical element ap-
proaches. However, nonlinear multivariable models have tended to
become obsolete with time due to the invention of computational
techniques and have been replaced by empirical algebraic equa-
tions and mechanical element approaches. The advantage of these
approaches is that the elements might be relatable to structural
features. This advantage might also apply to certain empirical alge-
braic equations. In general, all the models seem to be able to de-
scribe the rheological behaviour of bitumens satisfactorily if
there are no major structural rearrangements with temperature
and time, such as phase changes and, secondly, the tests are con-
ducted within the LVE region. However, the behaviour of bitumen
becomes more complex with the presence of waxy elements, high
asphaltene contents and crystalline structures, as well as polymer
modification, all of which can render a breakdown of the time–
temperature superposition principle (TTSP). These materials are
termed as thermorheologically complex. The introduction of a par-
tial time–temperature superposition principle (PTTSP) appears to
be as an alternative to the concept of thermorheologically complex
behaviour of material.
References
[1] Nellenstyen FJ. The constitution of asphalt. J Inst Petrol Technol
1924;10:311–25.
[2] Mack CJ. Collid chemistry of asphalts. J Phys Chem 1932;36:2901–14.
[3] Pfeiffer JP, Saal RNJ. Asphaltic bitumen as colloidal system. J Phys Chem
1940;44:139–49.
[4] Labout JWA. Constitution of asphaltic bitumens. In: Pfeiffer JP, editor. The
properties of asphaltic bitumen. New York: Elsevier; 1950. p. 13–48.
[5] Saal RNJ, Labout JWA. Rheological properties of asphalts. In: Eirich FR, editor.
Theory and applications, vol. 2. New York: Academic Press; 1958 [Chapter 9].
[6] Girder RB. Constitution of asphaltenes and related studies. Proc Assoc Asphalt
Paving Technol 1965;34:45–79.
[7] Halstead JC. Relation of asphalt chemistry to physical properties and
specifications. Proc Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol 1985;54:91–117.
[8] Petersen JC, Robertson RE, Branhaver JF, Harnsberger PM, Duvall JJ, Kim SS,
et al. Binder characterization and evaluation, vol. 1. SHRP-A-367; 1994.
[9] Airey GD. Rheological characteristics of polymer modified and aged bitumens.
PhD thesis, University of Nottingham; 1997.
[10] Read J, Whiteoak D. The shell bitumen handbook. 5th ed. London: Thomas
Telford Publishing; 2003.
[11] Leuseur D. The colloidal structure of bitumen: consequences on the rheology
and on the mechanisms of bitumen modification. Adv Colloid Interface Sci
2009;145:42–82.
[12] Di Benedetto H, Olard F. DBN law for the thermo-visco-elasto-plastic
behavior of asphaltic concrete. In: Kim YR, editor. Modeling of asphalt
concrete. New York: McGraw Hill; 2009. p. 245–65.
[13] Ferry JD. Viscoelastic properties of polymers. New York: John Willey & Sons;
1980.
[14] Mohammad LN, Wu Z, Myres L, Cooper S, Abadie C. A practical look at simple
performance tests: Louisiana’s experience. J Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
2005;74:557–600.
[15] Van der Poel C. A general system describing the viscoelastic properties of
bitumens and its relation to routine test data. J Appl Chem 1954;4:231–6.
[16] Heukolem W, Klomp JG. Road design and dynamic loading. Proc Assoc
Asphalt Paving Technol 1964;33:92–125.
[17] Eurobitume. First European workshop on the rheology of bituminous binders.
European Bitumen Association, Brussel; 1995.
[18] Dobson GR. The dynamic mechanical properties of bitumen. Proc Assoc
Asphalt Paving Technol 1969;38:123–35.
2188 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189
[19] Jongepier R, Kuilman B. Characteristics of the rheology of bitumens. Proc
Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol 1969;38:98–122.
[20] Dickinson EJ, Witt HP. The dynamic shear modulus of paving asphalts as
function of frequency. Trans Soc Rheol 1974;4:591–606.
[21] Christensen DW, Anderson DA. Interpretation of dynamic mechanical test
data for paving grade asphalt. J Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
1992;61:67–116.
[22] Anderson DA, Christensen DW, Bahia HU, Dongré R, Sharma MG, Antle CE,
et al. Binder characterization and evaluation, vol. 3: physical characterization.
SHRP-A-369; 1994.
[23] Lesueur D, Gerard JF, Claudy P, Letoffe JM, Plance JP, Martin DA. A structure
related model to describe asphalt linear viscoelasticity. J Rheol
1996;40:813–36.
[24] Barnes HA, Hutton JF, Walters K. An introduction to rheology, vol.
3. Netherland: Elsevier Science Publishers; 1989.
[25] Saleh FM. Effect of rheology on the bitumen foamability and mechanical
properties of foam bitumen stabilised mixes. Int J Pavement Eng
2007;8:99–110.
[26] Airey GD. Use of black diagrams to identify inconsistencies in rheological
data. Road Mater Pavement 2002;3:403–24.
[27] Mezger TG. The rheology handbook. 2nd ed. Hannover: William Andrew
Publisher; 2006.
[28] Goodrich JL. Asphalt and polymer modified asphalt properties related to the
performance of asphalt concrete mixes. Proc Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
1988;57:116–75.
[29] Monismith CL, Alexander RL, Secor KE. Rheological behaviour of asphalt
concrete. Proc Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol 1966;35:400–50.
[30] Medani TO, Huurman M. Constructing the stiffness master curves for
asphaltic mixes. Report 7-01-127-3, Delft University and Technology; 2003.
[31] Williams ML, Landel RF, Ferry JD. The temperature dependence of relaxation
mechanisms in amorphous polymers and other glass-forming liquids. J Am
Chem Soc 1955;77:3701–7.
[32] Tanner RI. Engineering rheology. 2nd ed. Britain: Oxford University Press;
2000.
[33] Shaw MT, MacKnight WJ. Introduction to polymer viscoelasticity. New
Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2005.
[34] Kadi AA, Brahimi B, Bousmina M. Polymer blends for enhanced asphalt
binders. Polym Eng Sci 1996;36:1724–33.
[35] Painter PC, Coleman MM. Fundamentals of polymer science: an introductory
text. 2nd ed. Basel: Technomic Publishing Co. Inc.; 1997.
[36] Ruan Y, Davison RR, Glover CJ. The effect of long term oxidation on the
rheological properties of polymer modified asphalts. Fuel 2002;82:1763–73.
[37] Morales GM, Partal P, Navarro FJ, Martínez-Boza F, Gallegos C. Linear
viscoelasticity of recycled EVA-modified bitumens. Energy Fuels
2004;18:357–64.
[38] Morales GM, Partal P, Navarro FJ, Martínez-Boza F, Gallegos C, Gonzáles N,
et al. Viscous properties and microstructure of recycled EVA modified
bitumen. Fuel 2004;83:31–8.
[39] Dongré R, Myres L, D’Angelo J, Paugh C, Gudimettla J. Field evaluation of
Witczak and Hirsh models for predicting dynamic modulus of hot-mix
asphalt. J Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol 2005;74:381–442.
[40] Garcia G, Thompson MR. HMA dynamic modulus predictive models: a review.
Research report FHWA-ICT-07-2005; 2007.
[41] Huang YH. Pavement analysis and design. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall;
2004.
[42] Pellinen TK, Witczak MW, Bonaquist RF. Asphalt mix master curve
construction using sigmoidal fitting function with nonlinear least squares
optimization technique. In: Proceedings of 15th ASCE engineering mechanics
conference, Columbia University, New York; 2002.
[43] Mirza MW, Witczak MW. Development of a global aging system for short and
long term aging of asphalt cements. J Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
1995;64:393–430.
[44] Gordon GV, Shaw MT. Computer programs for rheologists. Hanser/Gadner
Publication; 1994.
[45] Chailleux E, Ramond G, de la Roche C. A mathematical-based master curve
construction method applied to complex modulus of bituminous materials.
Road Mater Pavement 2006;7:75–92.
[46] Marateanu M, Anderson D. Time temperature dependency of asphalt binders
– an improved model. J Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol 1996;65:407–48.
[47] Plance JP, Leseuer D, Hines ML, King GN. Evaluation of elastomer modified
bitumens using SHRP binder specifications. In: Proceedings of the
euroasphalt & eurobitume congress session 5: binders-functional properties
and performance testing, E&E.5.121. Strasbourg; 1996.
[48] Philips MC. Developments in specifications for bitumens and polymer
modified binders, mainly from a rheological point of view. In: Cabrera JG,
editor. Proceedings of the 2nd European symposium on the performance and
durability of bituminous materials. Leeds; 1997. p. 3–18.
[49] Van der Poel C. Time and temperature effects on the deformation of asphaltic
bitumens and bitumen mineral mixtures. J Soc Plast Eng 1955;11:47–53.
[50] Yoder EJ, Witczak MW. Principle of pavement design. 2nd ed. New York: John
Wiley & Sons; 1975.
[51] Khong TD, Malhotra SL, Blanchard LP. Rheological behaviour of asphalts.
Rheol Acta 1979;18:382–91.
[52] Franken L. Bituminous binders and mixes; state of art and inter-laboratory
tests on mechanical behaviour and mix design. RILEM report 17: E & FN Spon;
1998.
[53] Van de Ven MFC, Jenkins KJ, Bahia HU. Concepts used for development of
bitumens specifications. In: CAPSA ’04, 8th conference on asphalt pavements
for Southern Africa, roads the arteries of Africa, Sun City, South Africa. Paper
no. 070; 2004.
[54] Heukelom W. Observations on the rheology and fracture of bitumens and
asphalt mixes. Proc Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol 1966;36:359–97.
[55] Bonnaure F, Gest G, Gravois A, Uge P. A new method of predicting the stiffness
of asphalt paving mixtures. Proc Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
1977;46:64–104.
[56] Ullidtz P. A fundamental method for the prediction of roughness, rutting and
cracking in asphalt pavements. Proc Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
1979;48:557–86.
[57] Thom N. Principle of pavement engineering. London: Thomas Telford
Publishing; 2008.
[58] Ullidtz P, Larsen BK. Mathematical model for predicting pavement
performance. Transport Res Rec 1983;949:45–55.
[59] Heukolem W. An improved method of characterizing asphaltic bitumens with
the aid of their mechanical properties. Proc Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
1973;42:67–98.
[60] McLeod NW. A 4 year survey of low temperature transverse pavement
cracking on three Ontario test roads. Proc Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
1972;41:424–93.
[61] Gershoff DR, Carswell J, Nicholls JC. Rheological properties of polymer-
modified binders for use in rolled asphalt wearing course. Transport Res Lab
157. Thomas Telford Ltd.; 1999.
[62] Zeng M, Bahia HU, Zhai H, Anderson MR, Turner P. Rheological modeling of
modified asphalt binders and mixtures. J Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
2001;70:403–41.
[63] McLeod NW. Asphalt cements: pen-vis number and its application to moduli
of stiffness. J Test Eval 1976;4:275–82.
[64] McLeod NW. Using paving asphalt rheology to impair or improve asphalt
pavement design performance. In: Briscoe OE, editor. Asphalt rheology:
relationship to mixture, ASTM STP 941. Philadelphia: American Society for
Testing and Materials; 1987. p. 51–7.
[65] Roberts FL, Kandhal PS, Brown ER, Lee DY, Kennedy TW. Hot mix asphalt
materials mixture design and construction. 2nd ed. Maryland: NAPA
Education Foundation; 1996.
[66] Jongepier R, Kuilman B. The dynamic shear modulus of bitumens as a
function of frequency and temperature. Rheol Acta 1970;9:102–11.
[67] Soleymani HR, Bahia HU, Bergan AT. Time–temperature dependency of
blended and rejuvenated asphalt binders. J Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
1999;68:129–52.
[68] Brodynan JG, Gaskins FH, Philippoff W, Thelen E. The rheology of asphalt III:
dynamic mechanical properties of asphalt. J Rheol 1960;4:279–96.
[69] Elseifi MA, Al-Qadi I, Flincsh GW, Masson JF. Viscoelastic modeling of straight
run and modified binders using the matching function approach. Int J
Pavement Eng 2002;3:53–61.
[70] Honerkamp J. Ill-posed problems in rheology. Rheol Acta 1989;28:
363–71.
[71] Friedrich C, Honerkamp J, Weese J. New ill-posed problems in rheology. Rheol
Acta 1996;35:186–90.
[72] Dobson GR. On the development of rational specifications for the rheological
properties of bitumen. J Inst Petrol 1972;58:14–24.
[73] Reubush SD. Effects of storage on the linear viscoelastic response of polymer
modified asphalt at intermediate to high temperature. MSc dissertation,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; 1999.
[74] Maccarrone S. Rheological properties of weathered asphalts extracted from
sprayed seals nearing distress conditions. Proc Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
1987;56:654–87.
[75] Olard F, Di Benedetto H, Eckmann B. Linear viscoelastic properties of
bituminous binders and mixtures at low and intermediate temperatures.
Road Mater Pavement 2003;4:185–224.
[76] Silva LSD, Forte MMDC, Vignol LDA, Cardozo NSM. Study of rheological
properties of pure and polymer-modified Brazilian asphalt binders. J Mater
Sci 2004;39:539–46.
[77] Stastna J, De Kee D, Powley MB. Complex viscosity as a generalized response
function. J Rheol 1985;29:457–69.
[78] Stastna J, Zanzotto L, Ho K. Fractional complex modulus manifest in asphalt.
Rheol Acta 1994;33:344–54.
[79] Stastna J, Zanzotto L, Kennepohl G. Dynamic material functions and the
structure of asphalts. Transport Res Rec 1996;1535:3–9.
[80] Stastna J, Zanzotto L, Berti J. How good are some rheological models of
dynamic material functions of asphalt? J Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
1997;66:458–79.
[81] Stastna J, Zanzotto L. Linear response of regular asphalts to external harmonic
fields. J Rheol 1999;43:719–34.
[82] Stastna J, Zanzotto L. Response to ‘‘letter to the editor: on the
thermorheological complexity and relaxation of asphalt cements’’ [J Rheol
1999;43:1701]. J Rheol 1999;43:1705–8.
[83] Zanzotto L, Stastna J, Ho K. Characterization of regular and modified bitumens
via their complex moduli. J Appl Polym Sci 1996;59:1897–905.
[84] Lesueur D. Letter to the editor: on the thermorheological complexity and
relaxation of asphalt cements. J Rheol 1999;43:170–1704.
[85] Marasteanu O, Anderson DA. Improved model for bitumen rheological
characterization. Eurobitume workshop on performance related properties
for bitumens binder. Luxembourg. Paper no. 133; 1999.
 Nur Izzi Md. Yusoff et al. / Construction and Building Materials 25 (2011) 2171–2189
[86] Marasteanu O. Interconversions of the linear viscoelastic functions used for
the rheological characterisation of asphalt binders. PhD dissertation,
Pennsylvania State University; 1999.
[87] Li X, Zofka A, Marasteanu M, Clyne TR. Evaluation of field aging effects on
asphalt binder properties. Road Mater Pavement 2006;7:57–73.
[88] Olard F, Di Benedetto H. General ‘‘2S2P1D’’ model and relation between the
linear viscoelastic behaviours of bituminous binders and mixes. Road Mater
Pavement 2003;4:185–224.
[89] Bonaquist R, Christensen DW. Practical procedure for developing dynamic
modulus master curves for pavement structural design. Transport Res Rec
2005;1929:208–17.
[90] Biswas KG, Pellinen TK. Practical methodology of determining the in situ
dynamic (complex) moduli for engineering analysis. J Mater Civ Eng
2007;19:508–13.
[91] Medani TO, Huurman M, Molenaar AAA. On the computation of master curves
for bituminous mixes. In: Proceedings of 3rd eurobitume congress, vol. 2,
Vienna; 2004. p. 1909–17.
[92] Rowe G, Baumgardner G, Sharrock M. Functional forms for master curve
analysis of bituminous materials. In: Proceedings of the 7th international
RILEM symposium ATCBM09 on advanced testing and characterization of
bituminous materials, vol. 1. Rhodes, Greece; 2009. p. 81–91.
[93] Booij HC, Thoone GPJM. Generalization of Kramers–Kronig transforms and
some approximations of relations between viscoelastic quantities. Rheol Acta
1982;21:15–24.
[94] Marasteanu MO, Anderson DA. Booij and Thoone approximation and bitumen
relaxation spectrum generation. Eurobitume workshop for performance
related properties for bituminous binders Luxembourg. Paper no. 134;
1999.
[95] Bari J, Witczak MW. New predictive models for viscosity and complex shear
modulus of asphalt binders: for use with mechanistic-empirical pavement
design guide. Transport Res Rec 2007;2001:9–19.
[96] Tran NH, Hall KD. Evaluating the predictive equation in determining dynamic
moduli of typical asphalt mixtures used in Arkansas. Electronic J Assoc
Asphalt Paving Technol 2005:74E.
[97] Rowe GM. A generalized logistic function to describe the master curve
stiffness properties of binder mastics and mixtures. In: 45th Petersen asphalt
research conference, Laramie, Wyoming; 2008.
2189
[98] Huet C. Étude par une methods d’impédance du comportement
viscoélastique des matériaux hydrocarbons. These de Docteur-Ingenieur,
Faculté des Science de Paris; 1963 [in French].
[99] Sayegh G. Viscoelastic properties of bituminous mixtures. In: Proceedings of
the 2nd international conference on structural design of asphalt pavement,
held. Rackham Lecture Hall, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; 1967. p. 743–
55.
[100] Blab R, Kappl K, Lackner R, Aiger L. Sustainable and advance materials for
road infrastructure (SAMARIS) report. Permanent deformation of bituminous
bound materials in flexible pavements: evaluation of test methods and
prediction models SAM-05-D28; 2006.
[101] Pronk AC. Revival of the Huet–Sayegh response model – notes on the Huet–
Sayegh rheological model. DWW-2003-029, RHED; 2003.
[102] Pronk AC. The Huet–Sayegh Model: a simple and excellent rheological model
for master curves of asphaltic mixes. In: Masad E, Panoskaltsis VP, Wang L,
editors. Asphalt concrete simulations, modeling and experimental
characterization. Proceedings of the R. Lytton symposium on mechanics of
flexible pavements, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, ASCE; 2005. p. 73–82.
[103] Pronk AC. The variable dashpot. DWW-2003-030, RHED; 2003.
[104] Olard F, Di Benedetto H. The ‘‘DBN’’ Model: a thermo-visco-elasto plastic
approach for pavement behavior modeling. J Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol
2005;74:791–828.
[105] Olard F, Di Benedetto H. Thermo-visco-elasto-plastic law for bituminous
mixes: simulation of direct tensile tests and restrained thermal shrinkage.
Bull Des Laboratories Des Ponts Et. Chaussées 2005;254:15–39.
[106] Di Benedetto H, Mondher N, Sauzeat C, Olard F. Three-dimensional thermo-
viscoplastic behaviour of bituminous materials: the DBN Model. Road Mater
Pavement 2007;8:285–315.
[107] Di Benedetto H, Olard F, Sauzeat C, Delaporte B. Linear viscoelastic behaviour
of bituminous materials: from binders to mixes. Road Mater Pavement
2004;5:163–202.
[108] Pellinen TK, Zofka A, Marasteanu M, Funk N. The use of asphalt mixture
stiffness predictive models. J Assoc Asphalt Paving Technol 2007;7:575–626.
[109] Delaporte B, Di Benedetto H, Chaverot P, Gauthier G. Linear viscoelastic
properties of bituminous materials; from binders to mastics. J Assoc Asphalt
Paving Technol 2007;76:455–94.