Technical White Paper

Rheological Interconversions
Fundamental Properties of Asphalts and Modified
Asphalts III Product: FP 23
March 2015

Prepared for
Federal Highway Administration
Contract No. DTFH61-07-D-00005
By
Ronald R. Glaser, Thomas F. Turner, Changping Sui, Stephen
Salmans and Jean-Pascal Planche
Western Research Institute
3474 North 3rd Street
Laramie, WY 82072
www.westernresearch.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................1
Shifting.......................................................................................................................................2
Prony Series Shear Relaxation from Complex Modulus ...........................................................4
Shear Relaxation to Extensional Relaxation ............................................................................10
Creep Compliance Deconvolution and Stiffness .....................................................................12
Prony Series Distribution Improvement ..................................................................................12
EXPERIMENTAL .......................................................................................................................13
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................13
Nifty-Shifty Results .................................................................................................................14
Prony Herd Calculation Results ...............................................................................................21
CONCLUSIONS ..........................................................................................................................37
RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................................................37
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...........................................................................................................38
DISCLAIMER..............................................................................................................................38
REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................38

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Graph. Least squares and fractional exponent residual fits compared .............................3
Figure 2. Diagram. Alignment shifting method minimizing connecting line length .......................4
Figure 3. Graph. AZ1-3 complex modulus master curve reference temperature -12C ................14
Figure 4. Graph. AZ1-3 Arrhenius shift function ..........................................................................14
Figure 5. Graph. AZ1-3 WLF shift function..................................................................................15
Figure 6. Graph. AZ1-3 polynomial Arrhenius shift function .......................................................15
Figure 7. Graph. AZ1-3 black space ..............................................................................................16
Figure 8. Graph. MN1-5 complex modulus master curve reference temperature -18C ...............16
Figure 9. Graph. MN1-5 Arrhenius shift function .........................................................................17
Figure 10. Graph. MN1-5 WLF shift function ..............................................................................17
Figure 11. Graph. MN1-5 polynomial Arrhenius shift function ....................................................18
Figure 12. Graph. MN1-5 black space ...........................................................................................18
Figure 13. Graph. YNP complex modulus master curve reference temperature -24C ................19
Figure 14. Graph. YNP Arrhenius shift function ...........................................................................19
Figure 15. Graph. YNP WLF shift function ..................................................................................20
Figure 16. Graph. YNP polynomial Arrhenius shift function .......................................................20
Figure 17. Graph. YNP black space...............................................................................................21
Figure 18. Graph. AZ1-3. Prony spectrum ....................................................................................22
Figure 19. Graph. AZ1-3. Measured and calculated phase angle ..................................................22
Figure 20. Graph AZ1-3. Complex modulus measured compared to complex modulus calculated
from relaxation function convolution ............................................................................................23
Figure 21. Graph. AZ1-3. Shear relaxation from Prony series ......................................................23

ii

LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

Figure 22. Graph. AZ1-3. Extensional relaxation from shear relaxation assuming 0.5 Poissons
ratio and time dependant Poissons ratio .......................................................................................24
Figure 23. Graph. AZ1-3. Creep compliance from deconvolution calculation and
reciprocal extensional relaxation approximation ...........................................................................24
Figure 24. Graph. AZ1-3. Stiffness from calculated creep compliance ........................................25
Figure 25. Graph. MN1-5. Prony spectrum ...................................................................................25
Figure 26. Graph MN1-5. Measured and calculated phase angle ..................................................26
Figure 27. Graph MN1-5. Complex modulus measured compared to complex modulus calculated
from relaxation function convolution ............................................................................................26
Figure 28. Graph. MN1-5. Shear relaxation from Prony series .....................................................27
Figure 29. Graph. MN1-5. Extensional relaxation from shear relaxation assuming 0.5 Poissons
ratio and time dependant Poissons ratio .......................................................................................27
Figure 30. Graph. MN1-5. Creep compliance from deconvolution calculation and
reciprocal extensional relaxation approximation ...........................................................................28
Figure 31. Graph. MN1-5. Stiffness from calculated creep compliance .......................................28
Figure 32. Graph. YNP. Prony spectrum .......................................................................................29
Figure 33. Graph YNP. Measured and calculated phase angle......................................................29
Figure 34. Graph. YNP. Complex modulus measured compared to complex modulus calculated
from relaxation function convolution ............................................................................................30
Figure 35. Graph. YNP. Shear relaxation from Prony series.........................................................30
Figure 36. Graph. YNP. Extensional relaxation from shear relaxation assuming 0.5 Poissons
ratio and time dependant Poissons ratio .......................................................................................31
Figure 37. Graph. YNP. Creep compliance from deconvolution calculation and
reciprocal extensional relaxation approximation ...........................................................................31
Figure 38. Graph. YNP. Stiffness from calculated creep compliance ...........................................32

iii

LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

Figure 39. Graph. DSR and BBR stiffness compared using a constant Poissons ratio
assumption in the interconversions ................................................................................................33
Figure 40. Graph. The stiffness curves generated using a range of temperatures in the DSR ......34
Figure 41. Graph. The stiffness curves generated using a range of constant Poisson
ratio value assumptions ..................................................................................................................35
Figure 42. Graph. The stiffness curves generated using a range of constant Poisson ratio
value assumptions and time dependent Poissons ratio .................................................................36
Figure 43. Graph. Poissons ratio decay times as a function of temperature.................................37

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Poissons ratio exponential decay parameters for three binders ......................................36

RHEOLOGICAL INTERCONVERSIONS
INTRODUCTION
The topic of interconversion of the various rheological moduli functions has been of interest to
rheologists for a considerable time. The utility of being able to measure a modulus function and
then generate a more useful one provides a great deal of latitude in selecting measurement
methods. In the area of asphalt binder rheology, measurements are taken at high and modest
temperatures using the dynamic shear rheometer (DSR). Until recently, low temperature data
was unobtainable with this method, and creep measurements of a beam using the bending beam
rheometer (BBR) were employed to obtain low temperature measurements needed for
performance grading (PG). This combination has been in routine use since it was developed
under the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP), but is limited for some applications due
to the large amount of material required to fabricate the binder beams. WRI developed the 4-mm
DSR plate method with machine compliance corrections that allows the use of DSR on very
small sample down to -40C (Sui et al. 2010).
There are other advantages to using DSR in lieu of BBR. Input data for mechanical performance
simulations generally require the time domain relaxation function, often expressed as a Prony
series in material files, instead of dynamic modulus. Conversion of dynamic modulus data to
relaxation is a one step process, while conversion from bending beam creep data involves several
steps, and has been shown to be inconsistent with DSR testing and conversion on the same
materials (Marasteanu and Anderson 1999). The mathematical manipulations required to convert
beam creep modulus data to relaxation are quite involved, and approximate methods are often
applied instead of the mathematically rigorous, but tedious methods. These are covered quite
well in the Marasteanu (1999) thesis.
We have developed a series of algorithms to make the conversions while adhering to
fundamental solutions based on linear viscoelastic theory as much as possible. This effort has
attempted, in part, to understand the discrepancies between relaxation as determined from BBR
measurements and relaxation as determined from DSR measurements. The objectives were to
produce more general and fundamental interconversions that would apply to highly modified
asphalt binders, and to determine if the use of approximate methods may have played a role in
discrepancies noticed in the literature.
The computing power available in the average personal computer is such that more rigorous
numerical methods are indeed practical. There is, however, always a concern over computation
error propagation with some of these numerical methods. To compare DSR and BBR
measurements, DSR data are converted to stiffness, and then compared to stiffness from BBR
measurements. The computational sequence is:
1) Shift DSR isotherm data to a time-temperature superposed (TTS) master curve.
2) Obtain a Prony series representation directly from the complex modulus using an
algorithm developed in this study that removes any error caused by erroneous phase
angle measurements.

3) Convert shear relaxation to extensional relaxation (assuming flexural and extensional

moduli are equivalent). These computations require the use of Poissons ratio, and we
employed a constant Poissons ratio and two approaches to time dependant Poissons
ratio methods in the calculations.
4) Numerical time domain deconvolution was employed to convert the extensional modulus
to creep compliance.
5) Creep compliance was inverted to get stiffness.
6) Compare the interconverted DSR stiffness to the stiffness obtained from BBR creep
measurements.
All of these computations are performed on two separate Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. The
first of these is Nifty Shifty, which performs a wild shift according to a modulus sorted
connecting line minimization routine The Prony Herd spreadsheet accepts the shifted master
curve data and performs all of the interconversion steps described in this study.
The Prony series computation was later modified by changing the form of the Maxwell element
coefficient distribution.
Shifting
The SHIFT routine first sorts the data according to complex modulus. The data are then
classified according to the isotherm temperature and then shifted using an alignment algorithm.
This spreadsheet requires that all isotherms overlap to some extent. If you imagine lines
connecting the data points, the unshifted data has many zigzag patterns in it. The alignment is
accomplished by minimizing the relative dimensionless length of the connecting lines using a
sum of fractional exponent residuals. This is a much better fitting criterion than the sum of least
squares. The square of the residuals weights the aberrant points more heavily than the good
points. The traditional equation for a dimensionless sum of squares residue is:
n 1

((data fit ) / data )

i =0

(1)

(Note this form evaluates local relative error and works over any range of data, including the
many decades encountered in rheological data.)
While a better approach is the fractional exponent sum of residuals:
n 1

( ABS ((data fit ) / data ))

i =0

0.25

(2)

The two methods are compared side by side in the following figure:

30

Dependent variable

25
20

data

15

relative fractional
exponent (.25)

10

standard least squares

5
0
0

10

15

20

25

Independent variable
Figure 1. Graph. Least squares and fractional exponent residual fits compared.

The shift factors are adjusted for each point according to its isotherm temperature until the sum
of the residuals (overlap sums) is minimized using Excel Solver. Good results are obtained
with an exponent of 0.25.
In usual math notation, the code line above is:
Residual at a data point =

(1 1 / 2 ) 2 + (1 G *1 / G *2 ) 2 + (1 2 / 3 ) 2 + (1 G *2 / G *3 ) 2

where:
= shifted frequency
G* = complex modulus
n = weighting exponent < 1
The shifted frequency is then computed. The following diagram (figure 2) geometrically
illustrates the line length minimization principle:

(3)

Figure 2. Diagram. Alignment shifting method minimizing connecting line length.

Minimization is accomplished using Solver programmatically by minimizing the residuals

sums by adjusting the frequency. The shift is made to the warmest isotherm one isotherm at a
time until all isotherms have been shifted. Once all the shift factors are computed, the shift
functions are fit (the linear Arrhenius using standard least squares, and the WLF and quadratic
Arrhenius using solver). Additional lines of code in the SHIFT subroutine manage the plots on
the spreadsheet.
Once the shift is accomplished and the various shift functions determined, the user can generate a
new master curve at any desired temperature by entering the values on the spreadsheet. The
curve is shifted according to the chosen shift function and temperature. The new temperature
only changes the frequency column, and new reference temperature columns are provided on the
spreadsheet. The glass transition temperature in this fit is not fixed, but is fit along with the other
parameters. The master curves are displayed on a plot that also contains the original isotherms so
the quality of the shift functions can be easily evaluated visually. A good shift function should
place the shifted back data through the isotherm generated at the same temperature.
Prony Series Shear Relaxation from Complex Modulus
We start with the defining equation, the hereditary integral for visco-elastic materials:
for a Maxwell Element the relaxation modulus is

g r (t ) = g r e

(4)

where t = time (s) and = decay constant (s)

The response of this element in a DSR is given by the hereditary integral:

t

(t ) = g r e

( t )

d (sin( )
d
d

(5)

where:
= stress (Pa)
= angular frequency (rad/s)
= variable of integration (s)
= strain (m/m)
The integral can now be evaluated:
(t )

( sin(t ) + 1 cos(t )) e

(t ) = g r

2 1

+ 2

(6)

Notice the exponential transient term. From a practical stand point, rheometric data should not be
collected until the response stabilizes. Some preliminary plots indicate this happens quite
quickly, usually in less than 1 cycle for a single Maxwell element. A rapid approach to steady
state is not necessarily true for a series with long decay times, which can be misinterpreted as the
equilibrium modulus for a visco-elastic solid. For our current inquiry, we are interested in steady
state response, so we take the limit as t and luckily find that the exponential vanishes.

1
( sin(t ) + cos(t ))

(t ) = g r

2 1
+

(7)

Define A and B as

1
B=

(8)

2 1
+ 2

A=

(9)

2 1
+ 2

After a little algebra (surprisingly simple) one obtains,

= tan 1

(10)

So, the steady state response function is

(t ) = g r A2 + B 2 sin t + tan 1

(11)

The full transient form is

(t )

(t ) = g r A + B 2 sin t + tan 1

2 + 1

(12)

Considering the series form with several Maxwell elements, the integrals simply add. Now that
we have the response for a single Maxwell element, most complex materials can be treated by
describing the relaxation function as series of Maxwell Elements:
n

g r (t ) = g r ,i e

(13)

i =1

The complex vector form of the response is most convenient to use, as we shall see when we
calculate the phase angle of the series:

1
( sin(t ) + cos(t ))

(t ) = g r

2 1
+ 2

(14)

g r

g r

(sin(t )) +
(cos(t ))
2 1
2 1

+ 2
+ 2

(15)

[ A(sin(t ))] + [ B(cos(t ))]

(16)

where: A =

g r

g r
2

2 1
+ 2

and B =

2 1
+ 2

So the series can be written as:

n
n

=
(t ) Ai (sin(t )) + Bi (cos(t ))

=
i 1=
i 1

Let A =

i =1

i =1

(17)

Ai and B = Bi

then

= tan 1

(18)

In the complex plane A represents the real part, and B represents the imaginary part, and one
can work this out with phasors.
The next concern in the computation is getting the modulus, which occurs when the response is
at its maximum. The maximum strain is at /2. The stress peaks before the strain, so the proper
angle at the peak is /2 phase angle. Divide this by the frequency, , to obtain the time at peak
stress:
max

G * ( ) =

= A (sin( / 2 )) + B (cos( / 2 ))

(19)

So, the algorithm is fairly straight forward. For each frequency we calculate complex modulus
G* and phase angle, , like this:
Given the prony series constants, first sum the A and B terms.
n

i =1

i =1

A = Ai , B = Bi

(20, 21)

where:

g i 2
Ai =
2 1
+ 2
i

g i
i
Bi =
2 1
+ 2
i

Now get the phase angle:

= tan 1

(22)

Then get the modulus:

max

G * ( ) =

= A (sin( / 2 )) + B (cos( / 2 ))

(23)

or

G*
=

= A 2 + B 2 sin ( / 2 )

max

(24)

G*
=

= A 2 + B 2

max

(25)

G*
=

= G '2 + G "2

max

(26)

Use the working equation above to fit the Prony coefficients using generalized gradient reduction
(Excel Solver). The Prony series to G(t) conversion is a straight-forward sum of exponentials.

The Prony Herd sheet constrains the coefficients to fit up to 3 log normal Gaussian distributions
(Jongepier and Kuilman 1969).
t
60
k , j
=
Ecalc g k , j e
j1
=
k 1=

where:
3

prony series 3 distributions

log10( k ) log10( centerk )

log10( k )

gj

(27)

Gglassy ( relative H k )
e
log10( k ) 2
3 60

gk , j

=
k 1=
j1

normalized distributed coefficients

The program solves for: relative H k , log10(centerk ), log10( k ), Gglassy

n

by minimizing: errorfunc =

G *data (tk ) G *calc (tk )

G*data (tk )

k =1

Using 3 log-normal distributions to describe the Prony series exponential decay coefficients
works well for creating a relaxation function that re-convolves to the master-curve, and this
approach was used for the comparison with BBR stiffness. Further studies with alternative
distributions revealed that a generalized Gaussian distribution (the exponent now a variable
instead of 2) would provide high quality relaxation computations for unmodified binders with
only one distribution (3 adjustable parameters). The distribution is further constrained by setting
the peak of the distribution at the decay time for the most rapidly decaying Maxwell element.
The reduction in adjustable parameters results in a unique solution using non-linear fitting
methods.

1
e
log10( k ) 2
3 60

gk , j

k 1=
=
j1

Gglassy ( relative H k )
gj =

log10( k ) log10( centerk )

log10( k )

(28)

It is important to note that using non-linear regression methods, the phase angle is not required to
obtain the shear relaxation modulus, and, can in fact be derived from the complex modulus
alone. This fact is quite helpful when working with data containing poorly measured phase
angles, a frequent occurrence with DSR measurements under low torque conditions.
Once the Prony series distributions are fitted, and the Prony series spectrum known, the shear
relaxation function is known and an x,y pair list can be generated to describe the material
relaxation in time.

Shear Relaxation to Extensional Relaxation

An approximate formula is presented by Lakes (1992) for the time dependency of Poissons
ratio, assuming the bulk modulus is constant:

(t )=

1 E (t )

2 6B

(29)

where:
(t) = time dependent Poissons ratio
E(t) = extensional modulus (relaxation)
B = bulk modulus (assumed time invariant)
So, the equation above combined with

=
E (t ) G (t )2(1 + )

(30)

can be rearranged with a bit of algebra to produce:

E (t ) =

3G (t )
3G (t )
1+
6B

(31)

The above formulation does not work when comparing BBR data. In the BBR flexural setting, it
appears that a Poissons ratio model based upon the flow of a mobile phase does indeed reconcile
the DSR and BBR data sets. An approximate formulation follows assuming Darcy flow:

dV
KA dP
=
dt
dh

(32)

where:
V = volume
t = time
K = permeability
A = area normal to flow
= viscosity
dP / dh = pore pressure (stress) gradient
and

dLwh
KLw dP
=
dt
dh

(33)

10

where:
w = width
h = height of some small slice
L = length
Assuming L, h, K, , and dP/dh dont change much

dw
K dP
dt
=
w
h dh

(34)

h dh
K dP

(35)

or

dh

(36)

K ' dP

where K ' = relative permeability,

so
w

dw
1
w w = 0 dt
0

(37)

w(t ) = w0e

(38)

=w / L =Poisson's ratio

(39)

so, approximately
t

w(t ) w0e
=
L
L

(40)

or
t

(t ) = 0e

(41)

which is about right if =

v(t ) 0 as t .
More generally
t

(t ) =
( 0 v ) e + v

(42)

11

The source code can be easily modified to use other Poisson ratio models, including the incorrect
constant assumption frequently employed by others.
Creep Compliance Deconvolution and Stiffness
From Ferry (1980) the relationship between creep and extensional relaxation is given by:
t

t
E (t ) D( )d =

(43)

A number of methods exist for deconvolving this equation to D(creep) based upon the idea that
for small steps D can be considered a constant (or ramp) and taken outside the integral in small
Euler or trapezoidal rule steps. E(t) is the extensional relaxation. A variety of combinations of
trapezoidal or Euler rule to either kernel or both have been employed, but we have found that the
double Euler is least likely to oscillate (Park and Kim 1999). The discrete form reduces to the
following recursive formula. Note that the double trapezoidal rule form for t1 is employed as the
equal spaced form is very sensitive to this first step.

D(t0 ) = 1 / E (t0 )

D(t1 ) =

(44)

3 E (t1 ) / E (t0 )
E (t0 ) + E (t1 )

(45)

n 1

D(tn ) =

tn D(ti 1 ) E (tn ti )(ti ti 1 )

1

( E (t0 ) + E (tn tn 1 ))(tn tn 1 )

(46)

for equal spacing

n 1

D(tn ) =

tn D(ti 1 ) E (tn ti )t
1

(47)

( E (t0 ) + E (t1 ))t

The recursion starts at index 2, so the last equation is looped n=2 to n maximum to get all the
point values for D.
Stiffness is the inverse of creep compliance.
Prony Series Distribution Improvement
A second series of studies was performed in an effort to improve the relaxation computation. We
replaced the Gaussian distribution of the Prony spectrum with a stretched exponential, improving
fit quality while reducing the adjustable parameter count. The ill-posed nature of this
12

computation appears to be eliminated. Additional investigations of single isotherm relaxation

computations were done to test the robustness of the method and to investigate the deviation of
asphalt binders from ideal thermally simple behavior.

EXPERIMENTAL
This report consists of three separate studies. The first investigates the interconversion of low
temperature DSR complex modulus data to stiffness, and then compares that to stiffness results
from the BBR. The second study focuses on the relaxation computation alone using and
improved Prony spectrum distribution shape. The third study investigates the limitations of timetemperature superposition and the use of relaxation modulus conversions of individual complex
modulus isotherms.
The data from the examination of 3 asphalts using the bending beam rheometer and the 4 mm
plate dynamic shear rheometer were inter-converted using the methods described in the
introduction and compared in this study. A detailed description of these measurements can be
found in Sui et al. (2010). These binders are MN1-5 from the Minnesota comparative pavement
performance site, AZ1-1 from the Arizona comparative pavement performance site, and YNP
from the Yellowstone comparative pavement performance site. These data were generated in
support of the 4 mm plate DSR method, described in a topical report (Farrar et al. 2015).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

To examine inter-conversion results for unmodified asphalts, three binders were examined where
data already existed from 4 mm plate DSR testing and BBR runs on the same materials. These
binders are all unmodified and were used in field performance test sites as well. The Minnesota
test site binder, MN1-5, the Arizona test site binder, AZ1-3, and the Yellowstone test site binder,
YNP were examined. The BBR testing on the MN1-5 binder was done at -18C, the AZ1-3
binder was run at -12C, and the YNP binder at -24C. The first step in the interconversion
process is to convert the DSR isotherms to a master curve shifted to the BBR test temperature.
Three shift functions were then fit to the alignment based master curve. The standard Arrhenius
plot was used to obtain a simple Arrhenius shift function, the WLF equation was fit without
specifying the glass transition temperature. While the use of a known glass transition temperature
is often employed, for asphalts this produces poor fits at low temperatures, and a curve fitted
reference temperature (usually lower than the true glass transition temperature) provides
excellent shift function fits. The free volume theory for the WLF does not appear to work very
well for producing a precise shift function. An alternative to WLF is also used. This simple
alternative is a quadratic fit on an Arrhenius plot, which essentially describes temperature
dependant activation energy for viscous flow. All three methods work reasonably well.
Figures 3-17 show the shifting results for these three binders.

13

Nifty-Shifty Results

shift G*

Complex Modulus, Pa

1.E+10
1.E+09
1.E+08

shift Tmax
Data

1.E+07

Shift New Arrhenius

Shift New Poly

1.E+06

Shift New WLF

1.E+05
1.E-09

1.E-04 1.E+01 1.E+06 1.E+11

Reduced time, s

Figure 3. Graph. AZ1-3 complex modulus master curve reference temperature -12C.

Arrhenius
30
25
20
15
10
Log at

5
0

Series1
y = 1.3977E+04x - 1.7959E-01
R = 9.9867E-01

-5
-10

Linear (Series1)

-15
-20
-0.002

-0.001

0.001

0.002

1/(T+273.15)-1/(Tref+273.15)

Figure 4. Graph. AZ1-3 Arrhenius shift function.

14

WLF
14
12
10
Log at

8
6

data

WLF

2
0
-40

-30

-20

-10

10

20

30

40

T-Tref

Figure 5. Graph. AZ1-3 WLF shift function.

POLY
30
25
20

data

Log at

15
fit

10
5

Poly.
(data)

0
-5
-10

y = 1.2410E+06x2 + 1.2966E+04x - 6.3681E-02

R = 9.9906E-01

-15
-1.5E-03 -1.0E-03 -5.0E-04 0.0E+00 5.0E-04 1.0E-03 1.5E-03 2.0E-03
1/(T+273.15)-1/(Tref+273.15)

Figure 6. Graph. AZ1-3 polynomial Arrhenius shift function.

15

Black Space
60

Phase angle, degrees

50
40
30
20
10
0
1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

1.E+10

Complex Modulus, Pa

Figure 7. Graph. AZ1-3 black space.

shift G*
1.E+10

Complex Modulus, Pa

1.E+09
1.E+08

shift Tmax

1.E+07

Data

1.E+06

Shift New Arrhenius

Shift New Poly

1.E+05

Shift New WLF

1.E+04
1.E-09 1.E-05 1.E-01 1.E+03 1.E+07 1.E+11
Reduced time,s
Figure 8. Graph. MN1-5 complex modulus master curve reference temperature -18C.

16

Arrhenius
30
25
20
15
10
Log at

5
0

Series1
y = 1.3100E+04x - 4.3894E-01
R = 9.9585E-01

-5
-10

Linear (Series1)

-15
-20
-0.002

-0.001

0.001

0.002

0.003

1/(T+273.15)-1/(Tref+273.15)

Figure 9. Graph. MN1-5 Arrhenius shift function.

WLF
14
12
10
Log at

8
6

data

WLF

2
0
-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

10

20

30

T-Tref

Figure 10. Graph. MN1-5 WLF shift function.

17

40

POLY
35
30
25

data

20
fit

Log at

15
10

Poly.
(data)

5
0
-5
-10

y = 2.9872E+06x2 + 1.0146E+04x - 8.5085E-04

R = 9.9989E-01

-1.5E-03 -1.0E-03 -5.0E-04 1.0E-17 5.0E-04 1.0E-03 1.5E-03 2.0E-03

1/(T+273.15)-1/(Tref+273.15)

Figure 11. Graph. MN1-5 polynomial Arrhenius shift function.

Black Space
80
Phase Angle, degrees

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

Complex Modulus, Pa
Figure 12. Graph. MN1-5 black space.

18

1.E+09

1.E+10

shift G*

1.00E+08

shift Tmax

1.00E+07

Data

1.00E+06

Shift New
Arrhenius
Shift New Poly

1.00E+05

Shift New WLF

1.00E+04
1.00E+03
1.00E+02
1.E-12

1.E-06

1.E+00
1.E+06
Reduced time, s

1.E+12

Figure 13. Graph. YNP complex modulus master curve reference temperature -24C.

Arrhenius
30
25
20
15
10

Log at

Complex Modulus, Pa

1.00E+09

Series1

0
-5

y = 1.1764E+04x - 3.3593E-01
R = 9.9783E-01

-10

Linear (Series1)

-15
-0.002

-0.001

0.001

0.002

0.003

1/(T+273.15)-1/(Tref+273.15)

Figure 14. Graph. YNP Arrhenius shift function.

19

WLF
14
12

Log at

10
8

data

WLF

4
2
0
-40

-20

20

40

60

T-Tref

Figure 15. Graph. YNP WLF shift function.

POLY
30
25
data

20

Log at

15

fit

10
Poly.
(data)

5
0
-5
-10

y = 1.9162E+06x2 + 9.8573E+03x - 6.3776E-02

R = 9.9988E-01

-1.5E-03 -1.0E-03 -5.0E-04 1.0E-17 5.0E-04 1.0E-03 1.5E-03 2.0E-03

1/(T+273.15)-1/(Tref+273.15)

Figure 16. Graph. YNP polynomial Arrhenius shift function.

20

Black Space
80
70

Phase Angle, degrees

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

Complex Modulus, Pa
Figure 17. Graph. YNP black space.

Prony Herd Calculation Results

The Prony Herd spreadsheet does all of the interconversions of the DSR to finally arrive at
stiffness. The spreadsheet contains graphical displays of these computations and Graphs of these
for three binders are shown in figures 18-38 for the Darcy flow model case of time dependent
Poissons ratio:

21

Prony Spectrum
9.E+07
8.E+07
7.E+07
6.E+07
gi, Pa

5.E+07
4.E+07
3.E+07
2.E+07
1.E+07
0.E+00

1.E-19

1.E-15

1.E-11

1.E-07

1.E-03

1.E+01

1.E+05

1.E+09

decay constant, s

Figure 18. Graph. AZ1-3. Prony spectrum.

Phase angle
60

Phase angle degrees

50
40
30
calc
20

data

10
0
1.E-09

1.E-07

1.E-05

1.E-03

1.E-01

1.E+01

1.E+03

angular freq radians

Figure 19. Graph. AZ1-3. Measured and calculated phase angle.

22

Complex Modulus
1.E+10
1.E+09
1.E+08
1.E+07
1.E+06
G(w)

1.E+05
Calc

1.E+04

Data

1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
1.E-09

1.E-07

1.E-05

1.E-03

1.E-01

1.E+01

1.E+03

angular freq radians

Figure 20. Graph. AZ1-3. Complex modulus measured compared to complex modulus calculated
from relaxation function convolution.

Shear Relaxation Modulus G(t)

G(t)

1.E+09

Calc
Calc

1.E+08
0.0E+00 5.0E+01 1.0E+02 1.5E+02 2.0E+02 2.5E+02 3.0E+02
time, s

Figure 21. Graph. AZ1-3. Shear relaxation from Prony series.

23

Relaxation Modulus E(t)

G(t)

1.E+10

1.E+09
E(t) v=0.5
E(t) using v(t)

1.E+08
-1.0E+01 4.0E+01 9.0E+01 1.4E+02 1.9E+02 2.4E+02 2.9E+02
time, s

Figure 22. Graph. AZ1-3. Extensional relaxation from shear relaxation assuming
0.5 Poissons ratio and time dependant Poissons ratio.

Creep Compliance, D(t)

6.E-09
5.E-09

D(t)

4.E-09
3.E-09

Calc
1/E(t)

2.E-09
1.E-09
0.E+00
1.2E+00 5.1E+01 1.0E+02 1.5E+02 2.0E+02 2.5E+02 3.0E+02
time, s

Figure 23. Graph. AZ1-3. Creep compliance from deconvolution calculation and reciprocal
extensional relaxation approximation.

24

Stiffness, S(t)

G(t)

1.E+10

1.E+09
Calc

1.E+08
0.0E+00 5.0E+01 1.0E+02 1.5E+02 2.0E+02 2.5E+02 3.0E+02
time, s

Figure 24. Graph. AZ1-3. Stiffness from calculated creep compliance.

Prony Spectrum
1.E+08
1.E+08

gi, Pa

8.E+07
6.E+07
4.E+07
2.E+07
0.E+00
1.E-20

1.E-16

1.E-12

1.E-08

1.E-04

1.E+00

1.E+04

decay constant s

Figure 25. Graph. MN1-5. Prony spectrum.

25

1.E+08

Phase angle
80
70

Phase angle degrees

60
50
40
30

calc

20

data

10
0
-10

1.E-09

1.E-07

1.E-05

1.E-03

1.E-01

1.E+01

1.E+03

1.E+05

angular freq radians

Figure 26. Graph. MN1-5. Measured and calculated phase angle.

Complex Modulus
1.E+10
1.E+09
1.E+08
1.E+07
1.E+06
G(w)

1.E+05
Calc

1.E+04

Data

1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
1.E-09

1.E-06

1.E-03

1.E+00

1.E+03

1.E+06

angular freq radians

Figure 27. Graph. MN1-5. Complex modulus measured compared to complex modulus
calculated from relaxation function convolution.

26

Relaxation Modulus, E(t)

G(t)

1.E+10

1.E+09

E(t) v=0.5
E(t) using v(t)

1.E+08
-1.0E+01

9.0E+01

1.9E+02

2.9E+02

time, s

Figure 28. Graph. MN1-5. Shear relaxation from Prony series.

Relaxation Modulus, E(t)

G(t)

1.E+10

1.E+09
E(t) v=0.5
E(t) using v(t)

1.E+08
-1.0E+01 4.0E+01 9.0E+01 1.4E+02 1.9E+02 2.4E+02 2.9E+02
time, s

Figure 29. Graph. MN1-5. Extensional relaxation from shear relaxation assuming 0.5 Poissons
ratio and time dependant Poissons ratio.

27

Creep Compliance, D(t)

1.2E-08
1.0E-08

D(t)

8.0E-09
6.0E-09

Calc
1/E(t)

4.0E-09
2.0E-09
0.0E+00
1.2E+00 5.1E+01 1.0E+02 1.5E+02 2.0E+02 2.5E+02 3.0E+02
time, s

Figure 30. Graph. MN1-5. Creep compliance from deconvolution calculation and reciprocal
extensional relaxation approximation.

Stiffness, S(t)

G(t)

1.E+10

1.E+09
Calc

1.E+08
0.0E+00 5.0E+01 1.0E+02 1.5E+02 2.0E+02 2.5E+02 3.0E+02
time, s

Figure 31. Graph. MN1-5. Stiffness from calculated creep compliance.

28

Prony Spectrum
1.E+08
9.E+07
8.E+07
7.E+07
gi, Pa

6.E+07
5.E+07
4.E+07
3.E+07
2.E+07
1.E+07
0.E+00
1.E-16

1.E-12

1.E-08

1.E-04

1.E+00

1.E+04

1.E+08

1.E+12

decay constant, s

Figure 32. Graph. YNP. Prony spectrum.

Phase angle
80
70
Phase angle degrees

60
50
40
calc

30

data

20
10
0

1.E-12

1.E-10

1.E-08

1.E-06

1.E-04

1.E-02

1.E+00

angular freq radians

Figure 33. Graph YNP. Measured and calculated phase angle.

29

Complex Modulus
1.E+09
1.E+08
1.E+07
1.E+06
G(w)

1.E+05
1.E+04

Calc

1.E+03

Data

1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
1.E-12

1.E-10

1.E-08

1.E-06

1.E-04

1.E-02

1.E+00

angular freq radians

Figure 34. Graph. YNP. Complex modulus measured compared to complex modulus calculated
from relaxation function convolution.

Shear Relaxation Modulus, G(t)

1.E+10
1.E+09
1.E+08
1.E+07
G(t)

1.E+06
1.E+05
Calc

1.E+04

Calc

1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0.0E+00 5.0E+01 1.0E+02 1.5E+02 2.0E+02 2.5E+02 3.0E+02
time, s

Figure 35. Graph. YNP. Shear relaxation from Prony series.

30

Relaxation Modulus, E(t)

G(t)

1.E+10

1.E+09
E(t) v=0.5
E(t) using v(t)

1.E+08
-1.0E+01 4.0E+01 9.0E+01 1.4E+02 1.9E+02 2.4E+02 2.9E+02
time, s

Figure 36. Graph. YNP. Extensional relaxation from shear relaxation assuming
0.5 Poissons ratio and time dependant Poissons ratio.

Creep Compliance, D(t)

8.E-09
7.E-09
6.E-09

D(t)

5.E-09
4.E-09

Calc

3.E-09

1/E(t)

2.E-09
1.E-09
0.E+00
1.2E+00 5.1E+01 1.0E+02 1.5E+02 2.0E+02 2.5E+02 3.0E+02
time, s

Figure 37. Graph. YNP. Creep compliance from deconvolution calculation and reciprocal
extensional relaxation approximation.

31

Stiffness, S(t)

G(t)

1.E+10

1.E+09
Series1

1.E+08
0.0E+00 5.0E+01 1.0E+02 1.5E+02 2.0E+02 2.5E+02 3.0E+02
time, s

Figure 38. Graph. YNP. Stiffness from calculated creep compliance.

The interconverted DSR stiffnesses were compared to the BBR flexural stiffnesses for the three
binders studied. In general, the slope of the stiffness curve was higher for the BBR testing than
from the DSR. An example of the DSR and BBR stiffness curves over a time frame relevant to
the determination of m-value is shown in figure 39.

32

1.E+09
9.E+08
8.E+08

S(t), Pa

7.E+08
BBR Stiffness -18C
MN-5

6.E+08
5.E+08

Mn-5 DSR stiffness 18C Poisson's=0.5

4.E+08
3.E+08
2.E+08
1.E+08
1

10

100

Time, s
Figure 39. Graph. DSR and BBR stiffness compared using a constant Poissons ratio
assumption in the interconversion.

The question of whether small errors in temperature measurements in either instrument affected
results was investigated by repeating the stiffness calculations at different shift temperatures.
Figure 40 shows that some of the error in absolute terms could be attributed to a few degrees
measurement error in the temperature, but a difference in slope persists. A drift to warmer
temperatures would correct this, but seems much more unlikely than a drift to colder
temperatures. Notice, however, that a 0.5C change over 2 minutes time would cause this much
error.

33

1.E+09
9.E+08

S(t), Pa

8.E+08
7.E+08

BBR -18C
DSR -18C

6.E+08

DSR -17C
DSR -16C

5.E+08

DSR -15C

4.E+08
3.E+08
0

100

200

300

time, s
Figure 40. Graph. The stiffness curves generated using a range of temperatures in the DSR.

A range of stiffnesses were computed based upon a range of assumed constant Poissons ratio in
the interconversion calculation (figure 41).

34

1.E+09
9.E+08
8.E+08

BBR -18C

7.E+08

Poisson's=0.5
Poisson's=0.4

S(t) Pa

6.E+08

Poisson's=0.3

5.E+08

Poisson's=0.2

4.E+08

Poisson's=0.1

3.E+08

Poisson's=0.0

2.E+08

Poisson's=-0.1

1.E+08
0.E+00
1

101

201
Time, s

Figure 41. Graph. The stiffness curves generated using a range of constant
Poisson ratio value assumptions.

Poissons ratio for a visco-elastic material is time dependent, but generally is considered to
increase as the material relaxes and flows (Tschoegl et al. 2002). Certainly this is true if the
material is nearly incompressible. However, the data from the BBR suggest that the Poissons
ratio is actually decreasing. This is only possible if the material consists of two phases, a mobile
phase and a stationary phase. Compression of the top of the beam would drive flow toward the
bottom, and tension at the bottom would pull flow toward it. An approximate Darcys law was
derived earlier in the introduction to describe this kind of flow resulting in a decaying
exponential description of the Poissons ratio in time. The decaying Poissons ratio
interconversion from DSR data is shown in figure 42.

35

1.E+09
BBR -18C

9.E+08
8.E+08

Poisson's=0.5

7.E+08
S(t) Pa

6.E+08

Poisson's=0.4

5.E+08
Poisson's=0.3

4.E+08
3.E+08

Poisson's=0.2

2.E+08
1.E+08

Poisson's=0.1

0.E+00
1

101

Poisson's=0.0

201

Time, s
Figure 42. Graph. The stiffness curves generated using a range of constant Poisson ratio value
assumptions and time dependent Poissons ratio.
The time dependent Poisson ratio parameters for the three binders studied, 0, time zero value,
, infinite time value, and , the decay constant, are tabulated below in table 1 for the three
binders studied.
Table 1. Poissons ratio exponential decay parameters for three binders.
Binder

MN1-5

AZ1-3

YNP

(s)

0.33

0.33

0.33

-0.1

-0.2

-0.1

10

15

The BBR data were collected at three temperatures depending on lower PG grade temperature.
These correlate nicely (figure 43) with the decay times, suggesting that the decay function, no
matter its physical meaning, might be used to reconcile BBR and DSR data, since at the same
temperatures, the Poisson decay function would essentially be the same. It may be possible to
match DSR derived stiffness to BBR stiffness consistently to obtain m values.

36

BBR Temperature, Celsius

y = 1.2x - 30
R = 1

-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
4

10

12

14

16

Figure 43. Graph. Poissons ratio decay times as a function of temperature.

CONCLUSIONS
The rigorous approach to interconversion of DSR complex modulus to BBR stiffness does not
improve agreement between the two methods over approximate approaches unless a time
dependant Poissons ratio is employed in the conversion from shear relaxation to flexural
relaxation. The physical explanation for the Poissons ratio time dependent form is not clearly
understood, but might be due to flow of a fluid component in the asphalt. Other explanations,
such as softening in the BBR solvent bath may be the cause for the differences.
A stretched exponential to describe the Prony series coefficients in the computation of the
relaxation from DSR complex modulis removes the uniqueness issues with this computational
method.
Non-linear regression can be used to get relaxation directly from complex modulis master
curves, or individual isotherms, without phase angle data. The computational method can be used
to compute phase angles that compare well with those reported from the instrument.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The current embodiment of this calculation exists as a Visual Basic for Applications (VBA)
program in Microsoft Excel. A more user friendly stand alone application for routine use would
be better suited for use by the asphalt industry and research community.

37

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, for financial support of this project under contract no. DTFH61-07D-00005.

DISCLAIMER
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the
interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its
contents or use thereof.
The contents of this report reflect the views of Western Research Institute which is responsible
for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect
the official views of the policy of the Department of Transportation.

REFERENCES
Christensen, D. W., and D. A. Anderson, 1992, Interpretation of dynamic mechanical test data
for paving grade asphalt cements. J. Assoc. Asphalt Paving. Technol., 61: 67-116.
Farrar, M., C. Sui, S. Salmans, and Q. Qin, 2015, Technical white paper FP 08 Determining the
Low Temperature Rheological Properties of Asphalt Binder Using a Dynamic Shear Rheometer
(DSR). Prepared for Federal Highway Administration, Contract No. DTFH61-07-D-00005,
Fundamental Properties of Asphalts and Modified Asphalts, III, March 2015.
Ferry, J. D., 1980, Viscoelastic Properties of Polymers, 3rd ed., John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New
York.
Jongepier, R., and B. Kuilman, 1969, Characteristics of the rheology of bitumens. Proc.,
Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, 38: 98122.
Lakes, R. S., 1992, The time-dependent Poisson's ratio of viscoelastic materials can increase or
decrease. Cellular Polymers, 11: 466-469.
Marasteanu, M. O., and D. A. Anderson, 1999, Improved Model for Bitumen Rheological
Characterization. Eurobitume Workshop on Performance Related Properties for Bituminous
Binders, Luxembourg, 1999.
Park, S. W., and Y. R. Kim, 1999, Interconversion between Relaxation Modulus and Creep
Compliance for Viscoelastic Solids. J. Mat. Civ. Eng., 11 (1): 76-82.
Sui, C., M. J. Farrar, W. H. Tuminello, and T. F. Turner, 2010, New Technique for Measuring
Low-Temperature Properties of Asphalt Binders with Small Amounts of Material.
Transportation Research Record, 2179: 23-28.

38

Tschoegl, N. W., W. G. Knauss, and I. Emri, 2002, Poissons Ratio in Linear Viscoelasticity A
Critical Review. Mechanics of Time-Dependent Materials, 6: 3-51.

39