Evaluation of Saturates/Aromatics/Resins/Asphaltenes (SARA) Fractionation of Asphalt Binders in Louisiana

Details

• Creators:
  Salari, Saman ; Akentuna, Moses
• Corporate Creators:
  Louisiana Transportation Research Center
• Corporate Contributors:
  Louisiana. Department of Transportation and Development ; United States. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  Aromatic Hydrocarbons Asphaltene Bituminous Binders GPC Iatroscan Maltene Resins SARA Fractionation Saturated Soils
• Publication/ Report Number:
  FHWA/LA.26/729
• Resource Type:
  Tech Report
• Geographical Coverage:
  United States ; Louisiana
• Edition:
  Final Report: 06/2022-03/2025
• Corporate Publisher:
  Louisiana Transportation Research Center
• Abstract:
  State and federal agencies face ongoing challenges in the characterization and qualification of diverse paving materials. Although conventional asphalt binder characterization relies on extensive rheological and mixture testing, these methods often leave long-term performance characterization uncertain. Consequently, agencies are exploring faster, more precise chemical testing at the molecular level. Gel Permeation Chromatography (GPC) is a standard tool for binder characterization. However, its high operational and maintenance costs, combined with its limited ability to provide detailed chemical insights, have prompted interest in alternative methods. SARA (saturates, aromatics, resins, and asphaltenes) fractionation using Thin-Layer Chromatography/Flame Ionization Detection (TLC/FID) equipment offers a more efficient alternative. This study evaluated the GPC method alongside two SARA approaches: the 4-peak method, which analyzes the whole sample directly, and the 3-peak method, which precipitates and separates asphaltenes first before grouping the remaining fractions. An analysis of 46 asphalt binder samples revealed significant differences between GPC and SARA results, with limited correlation between the methods. Additionally, an ANOVA comparison of the 3-peak and 4-peak methods showed significant differences in 55% of the samples. Based on these findings, GPC remains the superior tool for analyzing larger molecular weight distributions and polymer content detection, while SARA grouping is recommended for evaluating smaller molecular components and chemical fractions. Although both SARA methods showed similar performance, the 3-peak method showed better correlation to GPC data, while the 4-peak method was more practical.
• Format:
  PDF
• Funding:
  22-1B ; DOTLT1000423
• Collection(s):
  US Transportation Collection
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha-512:450d5695c7f70f69bf0e30296d161ad3754512af31874a696520ed6c3fcf0ee95a11158c9189c5d6a96273513a3c17503ca752c2d965287a8cf1a06df8dbbed6
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/93043/dot_93043_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 2.68 MB ]