ArticlePolymers2026
Drainage-Controlled Cellulose-Fiber Stabilization and Skeleton-Mastic Response of Polymer-Modified Stone Mastic Asphalt.
Article in Polymers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stone mastic asphalt (SMA) derives its performance from the coupled action of a load-bearing coarse aggregate skeleton and a binder-rich mastic phase. This study evaluates polymer-modified SMA using an integrated drainage-skeleton-mastic framework that combines drainage-based cellulose fiber selection, controlled gradation variation, aggregate-type comparison, binder-content sensitivity analysis, pre-compaction laboratory conditioning, and FTIR-SEM-EDX characterization. A 50/70 penetration-grade bitumen modified with 4.5% SBS was used with basalt and limestone aggregates, limestone filler, and Viatop cellulose fiber. The fiber dosage was selected using the Schellenberg binder-drainage test, while a separate preliminary load-deformation series was used to examine the response sensitivity to higher fiber contents. Increasing fiber content from 0.30% to 0.35% reduced mean binder drainage from 0.27% to 0.18% and decreased the standard deviation from 0.020% to 0.006%, supporting 0.35% as a drainage-based design dosage rather than a mechanical optimum. Higher fiber contents increased the maximum recorded load within the fixed test window; however, these results were interpreted only as preliminary load-deformation sensitivity rather than as conventional Marshall stability or MQ responses. The binder-content series showed that lower- and upper-limit gradations followed different volumetric and Marshall response patterns; therefore, these results were interpreted as binder-content sensitivity rather than complete optimum binder content determination. Aggregate-type comparisons showed the mechanical advantage of basalt, while the non-replicated post-extraction gradation results were directionally consistent with greater skeleton preservation in basalt mixtures. FTIR, SEM, and EDX observations indicated that cellulose fiber acted mainly through physical mastic stabilization rather than chemical binder modification. Overall, the results demonstrate that SMA response is governed by the combined contribution of drainage-controlled fiber dosage, SBS-modified binder, aggregate skeleton configuration, and limestone-filler mastic integrity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.