{"id":986,"date":"2026-07-25T01:55:29","date_gmt":"2026-07-25T01:55:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost:8081\/soyleitechnologies\/sip-1111-blankenship-45-percent-rap-balanced-mix\/"},"modified":"2026-08-01T13:44:06","modified_gmt":"2026-08-01T13:44:06","slug":"sip-1111-blankenship-45-percent-rap-balanced-mix","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/soylei-dev.ecochran.dyndns.org\/soyleitechnologies\/sip-1111-blankenship-45-percent-rap-balanced-mix\/","title":{"rendered":"SIP-1111\u2122 in a 45% RAP Balanced Mix Design"},"content":{"rendered":"

Blankenship Asphalt Tech & Training evaluated SIP-1111\u2122 in an engineered REARM HR mixture containing 45% reclaimed asphalt pavement. The laboratory study compared two bio-oil formulations at the same mixture composition and dosage, then measured cracking and rutting performance using IDEAL-CT and Hamburg Wheel-Track testing.<\/p>\n

The SIP-1111\u2122 formulation produced a 29% higher average IDEAL-CT Index<\/strong> than the comparison formulation. Hamburg testing showed the corresponding balanced-mix tradeoff: the comparison formulation delivered greater rutting resistance at the tested dosage.<\/p>\n

A demanding high-RAP design<\/h2>\n

The REARM HR design combined 45% RAP with a PG 64-22 virgin binder and aramid fiber. Each mixture contained 5.4% total asphalt binder. The bio-oil dosage was 4.2% by weight of virgin binder added, and the aramid-fiber dosage was 2.1 ounces per ton.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Design variable<\/th>\nStudy value<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Nominal maximum aggregate size<\/th>\n0.38 in.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RAP content<\/th>\n45%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RAP binder content<\/th>\n5.7%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Virgin binder grade<\/th>\nPG 64-22<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Total binder content<\/th>\n5.4%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Bio-oil dosage<\/th>\n4.2% by weight of virgin binder added<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Aramid fiber<\/th>\n2.1 oz\/ton<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/div>\n

Keeping those variables constant gave the laboratory a direct view of how the two bio-oil formulations shifted the balance between cracking tolerance and rutting resistance.<\/p>\n

Higher IDEAL-CT cracking tolerance<\/h2>\n

Four IDEAL-CT specimens from each formulation were tested at 25\u00b0C under ASTM D8225. The SIP-1111\u2122 formulation recorded an average CT Index of 115.5<\/strong>, compared with 89.6<\/strong> for the comparison formulation. That is a 29% increase in the study’s average cracking-tolerance result.<\/p>\n

The individual SIP-1111\u2122 results were 97.0, 138.2, 150.1, and 76.5. The comparison results were 105.0, 103.7, 81.6, and 68.0. The report lists coefficients of variation of 29.9% and 20.0%, respectively, preserving the specimen-to-specimen spread behind the averages.<\/p>\n

The Hamburg side of the balance<\/h2>\n

Hamburg Wheel-Track specimens were tested in water at 50\u00b0C under AASHTO T 324. Testing ended at 20,000 passes or 12.5 mm of rut depth.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Formulation<\/th>\nAverage passes<\/th>\nAverage rut depth<\/th>\nAverage RRI<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
SIP-1111\u2122<\/th>\n18,524<\/td>\n12.50 mm<\/td>\n9,408<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Comparison bio-oil<\/th>\n20,000<\/td>\n10.31 mm<\/td>\n11,886<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/div>\n

The comparison formulation’s average Rutting Resistance Index was 26% higher. Both mixtures produced stripping inflection points, and the laboratory reported no physical stripping in either set of specimens.<\/p>\n

What the study establishes<\/h2>\n

The Blankenship study demonstrates SIP-1111\u2122 compatibility in an engineered mixture carrying 45% RAP, PG 64-22 virgin binder, and aramid fiber. At the common 4.2% dosage, SIP-1111\u2122 moved the design toward greater cracking tolerance while the comparison formulation retained more rutting resistance.<\/p>\n

This is the purpose of balanced mix design: measure both sides of the performance spectrum and tune the formulation for the traffic, climate, materials, and performance targets of the project. The report’s recommendation was to optimize SIP-1111\u2122 dosage when a design requires additional rutting resistance.<\/p>\n

Review SIP-1111\u2122<\/a> \u00b7 Explore SIP-1111\u2122 projects and research<\/a> \u00b7 Discuss a high-RAP balanced mix design with SoyLei<\/a><\/p>\n

\n \"Dot\n <\/picture>
Blankenship REARM HR IDEAL-CT replicates<\/strong> SIP-1111\u2122 produced a 29% higher mean CT Index in the tested 45% RAP REARM HR design, with the reported replicate spread kept visible.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n

Higher IDEAL-CT Index is favorable; replicate values and reported COV provide variability context.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Blankenship REARM HR IDEAL-CT specimen results and reported means.<\/caption>\n
Formulation<\/th>\nSpecimen<\/th>\nCT Index<\/th>\nReported mean<\/th>\nReported COV (%)<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Comparison bio-oil<\/th>\n1<\/td>\n105<\/td>\n89.6<\/td>\n20<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Comparison bio-oil<\/th>\n2<\/td>\n103.7<\/td>\n89.6<\/td>\n20<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Comparison bio-oil<\/th>\n3<\/td>\n81.6<\/td>\n89.6<\/td>\n20<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Comparison bio-oil<\/th>\n4<\/td>\n68<\/td>\n89.6<\/td>\n20<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
SIP-1111\u2122<\/th>\n1<\/td>\n97<\/td>\n115.5<\/td>\n29.9<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
SIP-1111\u2122<\/th>\n2<\/td>\n138.2<\/td>\n115.5<\/td>\n29.9<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
SIP-1111\u2122<\/th>\n3<\/td>\n150.1<\/td>\n115.5<\/td>\n29.9<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
SIP-1111\u2122<\/th>\n4<\/td>\n76.5<\/td>\n115.5<\/td>\n29.9<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/div>\n

Source: Evaluation of Engineered High RAP Mixture REARM HR with Invigorate. PDF page 8, IDEAL-CT table<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Source Documents<\/h2>\n