1.1本规程涵盖了通过加压空气和高温加速沥青粘合剂老化（氧化）。这旨在模拟在役氧化老化期间沥青粘合剂中发生的流变学变化，但可能无法准确模拟老化的相对速率。通常用于试验方法D2872（RTFOT）的残留物，该方法旨在模拟植物老化。 注1 — 在试验方法D2872（RTFOT）的烘箱调节过程中，改性沥青粘合剂可能会相分离或形成表皮；该残留物的后续测试结果可能无法代表现场条件下短期老化的改性沥青。PAV调节过程中也可能发生相分离或皮肤形成，或两者兼而有之。因此，这种做法可能不适用于某些改性沥青。 注释2 — 尚未验证含有颗粒材料的材料的PAV调节。 1.2沥青粘合剂在使用过程中的老化受环境温度和混合料相关变量的影响，例如混合料的体积比例、混合料的渗透性、骨料的性质以及可能的其他因素。该调节过程旨在评估不同沥青粘合剂在选定的高温高压下的相对抗氧化老化能力，但不能考虑混合料变量，也不能提供在使用条件下的相对抗氧化老化能力。 1.3以国际单位制表示的数值应视为标准。括号中以英寸-磅为单位的数值仅供参考。 1.4 本标准并非旨在解决与其使用相关的所有安全问题（如有）。本标准的用户有责任在使用前制定适当的安全和健康实践，并确定监管限制的适用性。 ====意义和用途====== 5.1本规程旨在模拟沥青粘合剂在路面使用期间发生的在用氧化老化。这种处理方法的残留物可用于估计沥青粘合剂在现场使用数年后的物理或化学性质。 5.2根据规范D6373或AASHTO M 320，使用本规程处理的粘合剂通常用于确定规范属性。 5.3对于不同等级或不同来源的沥青粘合剂，本调节实践中的时间和温度与在用路面年龄和温度之间没有唯一的相关性。因此，对于给定的一组使用中的气候条件，不可能选择一个单一的PAV调节时间、温度和压力来预测沥青粘合剂在特定的一组使用后的性能或性能的相对排名- 工作暴露条件。 5.4不同沥青粘合剂的相对硬化程度随PAV中的调节温度和压力而变化。因此，两种沥青粘合剂在一种温度和压力条件下的老化速率相似，但在另一种条件下的老化速率不同。因此，一组沥青在PAV条件下的相对老化速率可能与较低路面温度和环境压力下的实际在用相对速率显著不同。

1.1 This practice covers the accelerated aging (oxidation) of asphalt binders by means of pressurized air and elevated temperature. This is intended to simulate the changes in rheology which occur in asphalt binders during in-service oxidative aging but may not accurately simulate the relative rates of aging. It is normally intended for use with residue from Test Method D2872 (RTFOT), which is designed to simulate plant aging. Note 1 — Modified asphalt binders may phase separate or form skins during oven conditioning in Test Method D2872 (RTFOT); the results from subsequent testing of this residue may not be representative of modified asphalts short-term aged under field conditions. Phase separation, or formation of skins, or both can also occur during PAV conditioning. Therefore, the practice may not be suitable for some modified asphalts. Note 2 — PAV conditioning has not been validated for materials containing particulate materials. 1.2 The aging of asphalt binders during service is affected by ambient temperature and by mixture-associated variables, such as the volumetric proportions of the mix, the permeability of the mix, properties of the aggregates, and possibly other factors. This conditioning process is intended to provide an evaluation of the relative resistance of different asphalt binders to oxidative aging at selected elevated aging temperatures and pressures, but cannot account for mixture variables or provide the relative resistance to aging at in-service conditions. 1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Values in parentheses in inch-pound units are provided for informational purposes only. 1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. ====== Significance And Use ====== 5.1 This practice is designed to simulate the in-service oxidative aging that occurs in asphalt binders during pavement service. Residue from this conditioning practice may be used to estimate the physical or chemical properties of asphalt binders after several years of in-service aging in the field. 5.2 Binders conditioned using this practice are normally used to determine specification properties in accordance with Specification D6373 or AASHTO M 320. 5.3 For asphalt binders of different grades or from different sources, there is no unique correlation between the time and temperature in this conditioning practice and in-service pavement age and temperature. Therefore, for a given set of in-service climatic conditions, it is not possible to select a single PAV conditioning time, temperature and pressure that will predict the properties or the relative rankings of the properties of asphalt binders after a specific set of in-service exposure conditions. 5.4 The relative degree of hardening of different asphalt binders varies with conditioning temperatures and pressures in the PAV. Therefore, two asphalt binders may age at a similar rate at one condition of temperature and pressure, but age differently at another condition. Hence, the relative rates of aging for a set of asphalts at PAV conditions may differ significantly from the actual in-service relative rates at lower pavement temperatures and ambient pressures.