Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Moisture damage evaluation in SBS and lime modified asphalt using AFM and artificial intelligence

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Damage due to moisture in polymer modified asphalt pavements has been investigated for several decades; yet, the exact and mathematical causes of moisture are not precisely known. Nanoscale experiment has been conducted in this study with an atomic force microscopy (AFM) to determine these effects in terms of adhesive and cohesive forces. A base asphalt binder and one polymer styrene–butadiene–styrene (SBS) were utilized to modify asphalt binders, which was used to prepare sample for testing on glass substrates under AFM. The asphalt samples were conditioned under wet and dry conditions. Current study formulates an artificial intelligence rule which predicts the moisture damage relation in lime and SBS modified asphalts. Base asphalt binders have shown larger adhesion/cohesion values compared to the polymer modified asphalt samples under dry conditions. However, this trend is opposite under wet conditions. Base binders are more susceptible to moisture damage than the polymer modified asphalt binders. ANFIS model (as compared to MLP and SVM) was found to be very promising in these points. The mean relative error was very low 0.02 and 0.03, respectively, for projected and observed data, which also showed the steady performance of the model. Statistical analysis was also performed for dry sample by executing of the three neural network models and found MLP’s performance was very good to other two models.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lottman R (1978) Predicting moisture-induced damage to asphalt concrete. NCHRP Report 192, TRB

  2. Transportation Research Board (TRB) (2003) Moisture sensitivity of asphalt pavements. A National Seminar, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hicks R (1991) Moisture damage in asphalt concrete. NCHRP Synt. of Highway Pract. 175, Nati Rese Coun., Washington

  4. Little DN, Jones DR (2003) Chemical and mechanical mechanisms of moisture damage in hot mix asphalt pavements. National Seminar in Moisture Sensitivity, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  5. Jo MC, Tarrer AR, Jeon YW, Park SJ, Yoon HH (1997) Investigation of the effect of aggregate pretreatment with anti-stripping agents on the asphalt-aggregate bond. Pet Sci and Tech 15(3,4):245–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Huang B, Shu X, Dong Q, Shen J (2010) Laboratory evaluation of moisture susceptibility of hot-mix asphalt containing cementitious fillers. J Mat Civ Eng 22(7):667–673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sebaaly P, Hitti H, Weitzel D (2002) Effectiveness of lime in hot mix asphalt pavements. In: 82nd Annual meeting of the transportation research board, Washington

  8. Putman B, Amirkhanian S (2006) Laboratory evaluation of anti-strip additives in hot mix asphalt. Report No. FHWA-SC-06-07, South Carolina Department of Transportation

  9. Kandhal P, Rickards I (2001) Premature failure of asphalt overlays from stripping: case histories. NCAT Report 01–01, Annual meeting of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Clear Water, Florida

  10. Hill D, Blasco X, Porti M, Nafra M, Aymerich X (2001) Characterising the surface roughness of AFM grown SiO2 on Si. Microelectron Reliab 41(7):1077–1079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Noy A, Vezenov D, Liebe C (1997) Chemical force microscopy. Ann Rev Mate Sci 27:381–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Beach E, Tormoen G, Drelich J (2002) Pull-off forces measured between hexadecanethiol self-assembled monolayers in air using an atomic force microscope: analysis of surface free energy. J Adh Sci Tech 16(7):845–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Okabe Y, Akiba U, Hujihira M (2000) Chemical force microscopy of –CH3 and –COOH terminal groups in mixed self-assembled monolayers by pulsed-force-mode atomic force microscopy. Appl Surf Sci 157:398–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Du B, VanLandingham M, Zhang Q, He T (2001) Direct measurement of plowing friction and wear of a polymer thin film using the atomic force microscope. J Mater Res 16:1487–1492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Masson J, Leblond V, Margeson J (2007) Bitumen morphologies by phase detection atomic force microscopy. J Micros 221:17–29

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Pauli A, Grimes W, Huang S, Robertson R (2003) Surface energy studies of shrp asphalts by AFM. Pet Chem Div Prep 48(1):14–18

    Google Scholar 

  17. Masson J, Leblond V, Margeson J, Bundalo P (2007) Low-temperature bitumen stiffness and viscous paraffinic nano and micro-domains by cryogenic AFM and PDM. J Micros 227:191–202

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Tarefder R, Arif M (2010) Nanoscale evaluation of moisture damage in polymer modified asphalts. J. Mat Civ Eng 22:714–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sengoz B, Isikyakar G (2008) Evaluation of the properties and microstructure of SBS and EVA polymer modified bitumen. Con Build Mat 22(9):1897–1905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Airey G (2004) Styrene butadiene styrene polymer medication of road bitumens. J Math Sci 39(3):951–959

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Isacsson U, Lu X (1999) Characterization of bitumens modified with SEBS, EVA and EBA Polymers. J Mater Sci 34(15):3737–3745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kiridena W, Jain V, Kuo P, Liu G (1998) Nanometer scale elasticity measurements on organic monolayers using scanning force microscopy. Surf Int Anal 25(6):383–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Becker Y, Me´ndez M, Rodrı´guez Y (2001) Polymer modified asphalt. Vis Tech 9(1):39–50

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wegan V, Nielsen B (2001) Microstructure of polymer modified binders in bituminous mixtures. Report 87-90145-85-8, DRD, Roskilde, Denmark

  25. Roque R, Birgisson B, Tia M, Kim B, Cui Z (2004) Guidelines for the use of modifiers in superpave mixtures: executive summary. Eva. of SBS Mod. State Job. 99052793, FDT, Tallahassee, FL

  26. Burnham NA, Kulik AJ (1997) Surface Force and Adhesion. In: Bhushan B (ed) Handbook of Mico/nanotribiology, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  27. USGS Annual Commodity Mineral Yearbook, Lime, Table 4, 2004

  28. Berger and Huege (2002). www.internationallime.org/doc/BERGER%20Eric.doc. Accessed 22 Sept 2010

  29. Majidzahed K, Brovold F (1968) Effect of water on bitumen–aggregate mixtures. Highway Research Board (HRB), National Research Council, Washington, DC

  30. Hunter E (2001) Evaluating moisture susceptibility of asphalt mixes. MPC report. University of Wyoming, WY

  31. Stuart K (1990) Moisture damage in asphalt mixtures: a state of art report. Res. Dev. and Tech., Turner-Fairbank H R Center

  32. Zvejnicks A (1958) Progress with adhesion-improving bitumen additives. High Res Board Bull 192:26–32

    Google Scholar 

  33. Robertson R (2000) Chemical properties of asphalts and their effects on pavement performance. Tran. Res. Cir. Num. 499, TRB, Nat Res Council

  34. Park S, Jo M, Park J (2000) Adsorption and thermal desorption behavior of asphalt-like functionalities on silica. Ads Sci Tech 18(8):675–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Vaidya A, Chaudhury M (2002) Synthesis and surface properties of environmentally responsive segmented polyurethanes. J Col Int. Sci. 249(1):235–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jang S (1993) Adaptive network-based fuzzy inference system. IEEE 23(3):665–685

    Google Scholar 

  37. Tabatabaei S, Khaledi S, Jahantabi A (2013) Modeling the deduct value of the pavement condition of asphalt pavement by adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system. Int J Pavement Res Technol. 6(1):59–65

    Google Scholar 

  38. Fakhreddine K, de Silva C (2004) Soft computing and intelligent systems design—theory, tools and applications. Addison Wesley, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mohammadhassani M, Nezamabadi-Pour H, Jumaat M, Jameel M, Hakim S, Zargar M (2013) Application of the ANFIS model in deflection prediction of concrete deep beam. Struct Eng Mech 45(3):319–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Vapnik V (1995) The nature of statistical learning theory. Springer, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Boser B, Guyon I, Vapnik V (1992) A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers. In: Proceedings of the 5th annual ACM workshop on computational learning theory, New York

  42. Tran Q, Zhang Q, Li X (2003) Reduce the number of support vectors by using clustering techniques. Mach Learn Cybern 2:1245–1248

    Google Scholar 

  43. Marcelo B, Antonio D, Joao P (2000) SVM-KM: speeding svms learning with a priori cluster selection and k-means. Sixth Brazilian Symposium on Neural Networks

  44. Yang X, Lin D, Hao Z, Liang Y, Liu G, Han X (2003) A fast SVM training algorithm based on the set segmentation and k-means clustering. Pro Nat Sci 13(10):750–755

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Mohammadhassani M, Nezamabadi-pour H, Jumaat M, Jameel M, Arumugam A (2013) Application of artificial neural networks (ANNs) and linear regressions (LR) to predict the deflection of concrete deep beams. Comput Conc 11(3):237–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Mas Diane M L, Ahlfeld David P (2015) Comparing artificial neural networks and regression models for predicting faecal coliform concentrations. Hydrol Sci J 52(4):713–731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Shi H, Lee K, Lee H, Ho W, Sun D, Wang J, Chiu C (2012) Comparison of artificial neural network and logistic regression models for predicting in hospital mortality after primary liver cancer surgery. PLoS ONE 7(4):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Hota H, Shrivas A, Singhai S (2013) Artificial neural network decision tree and statistical techniques applied for designing and developing e-mail classifier. Int J Recent Technol Eng 1(6):164–169

    Google Scholar 

  49. Lee T et al (2012) An intelligence system approach using artificial neural networks to evaluate the quality of treatment planning for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Sci Res Essays 7(23):2076–2088

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank University of Bahrain and KFUPM (Saudi Arabia) for the AFM testing, asphalt laboratory facilities, and computational work facilities.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Bahrain, Isa Town, Bahrain

    Md Arifuzzaman

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Shahjalal University of Science and Technology, Sylhet, Bangladesh

    Muhammad Saiful Islam

  3. Office of International Cooperation (OIC), King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, 31261, Saudi Arabia

    Muhammad Imtiaz Hossain

Authors
  1. Md Arifuzzaman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Muhammad Saiful Islam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Muhammad Imtiaz Hossain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Md Arifuzzaman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arifuzzaman, M., Islam, M.S. & Hossain, M.I. Moisture damage evaluation in SBS and lime modified asphalt using AFM and artificial intelligence. Neural Comput & Applic 28, 125–134 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-2041-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-2041-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation