This study investigates the effects of waste cooking oil on the performance of modified asphalt, indicating significant improvements in stability and environmental traits.
Waste cooking oil (WCO) plays different roles in modified asphalt and significantly affects the performance of the binder. However, a systematic comparative study is still lacking in the existing research. This study investigates the effects of WCO used as a swelling agent for rubber powder (RP) and as a compatibilizer in rubber powder-modified asphalt (RPMA) on the performance of modified asphalt. Specifically, the microstructure and functional groups of WCO-coated RP were first characterized. Then, RPMAs with different RP dosages were prepared, and the storage stability and rheological properties of RPMAs were thoroughly investigated. Finally, the flue gas emission characteristics of different RPMAs at 30% RP dosing were further analyzed, and the corresponding inhibition mechanisms were proposed. The results showed that the RP coated by WCO was fully solubilized internally, and the WCO formed a uniform and continuous coating film on the RP surface. Comparative analysis revealed that when WCO was used as a swelling agent, the prepared S-RPMA exhibited superior storage stability. At a 30% RP content, the softening point difference value of S-RPMA was only 1.8 °C, and the reduction rate of the segregation index reached 40.91%. Surprisingly, after WCO was used to coat the RP, the average concentrations of VOCs and H2S in S-RPMA30 were reduced to 146.7 mg/m3 and 10.6 ppm, respectively, representing decreases of 20.8% and 22.1% compared with the original RPMA30. These findings demonstrate that using WCO as a swelling agent enhances both the physical stability and environmental performance of RPMA, offering valuable insights for the rational application and optimization of WCO incorporation methods in asphalt modification. It also makes meaningful contributions to the fields of coating science and sustainable materials engineering.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: