Using Polymer Modified Asphalt Emulsions in Surface Treatments A ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

(80, 97), whereas French experts recommended the Vialit Pendulum Test (98). The best tool to date appears to be the MMLS3 procedures as developed by Dr. Richard Kim’s group at N.C. State for the North Carolina DOT (99, 100). Although too expensive to advance for specification purposes, it remains an excellent research tool against which the predictive capabilities of less expensive performance tests can be compared. This subject remains a significant data gap, with no specific project recommendations at this time. • Microsurfacing vs. Polymer Modified Slurry: Microsurfacing is formulated to provide significantly higher performance than Slurry Seals either with or without polymer. From a use perspective, Microsurfacing should be used for rut-fill applications and for high-traffic pavements with ADT exceeding 1000. Microsurfacing also contains emulsifier packages that break quickly, so that traffic can usually be returned in one hour or less. Where traffic control is a problem due to urban traffic, narrow roads or long detours, the faster curing microsurfacing might even be specified for lower volume roads. • Microsurfacing Performance Tests: The ISSA document A143 “Recommended Performance Guidelines for Micro-Surfacing” was cited by survey respondents as the best available current practice for performancerelated test procedures (39). Performance tests include Wet cohesion, Excess Asphalt by LWT Sand Adhesion, Wet Stripping, and Wet Track Abrasion Loss after one day soak and after six day soak. These tests should be used as pay items. o Newly proposed tests for mix design and performance: At a recent ETG meeting, Jim Moulthrop of Fugro, Inc. provided an update of a soonto-be-completed research study updating mix design methods for Microsurfacing (101). Significant contributions from this study include an automated test for cohesion, a German method to predict mixing time by measuring mixer torque, and a French adaptation of the wet track abrasion test using wheels in place of the rubber tube. It is recommended 99
the FLH report-only format be used to evaluate new tools as ultimately recommended by the Fugro study. • Polymer Modified Slurry: Since polymer modified slurry asphalt emulsions will only be used on roads carrying lower traffic levels (
Page 1 and 2:
Using Polymer Modified Asphalt Emul
Page 3 and 4:
2.10 SURFACE TREATMENTS, DISTRESS,
Page 5 and 6:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Needs to be Compl
Page 7 and 8:
DISCLAIMER This document is dissemi
Page 9 and 10:
1. Compile published research on th
Page 11 and 12:
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW OF POLYMER MO
Page 13 and 14:
the emulsion solution is termed the
Page 15 and 16:
molecular weights ranging up to 100
Page 17 and 18:
Elastomeric polymers exhibit a low
Page 19 and 20:
The first commercial process that w
Page 21 and 22:
2.2.3 Synthetic Rubber and Latex Sy
Page 23 and 24:
Latex Modified Unmodified 80 Chip R
Page 25 and 26:
of residual asphalt (3). Additional
Page 27 and 28:
Sabbagh and Lesser (1998) note that
Page 29 and 30:
2.2.6 Plastics The plastic polymer
Page 31 and 32:
high temperature performance, but w
Page 33 and 34:
2.2.7 Polymer Blends Select polymer
Page 35 and 36:
Table 2: Polymer Modification Metho
Page 37 and 38:
Forbes et al found that asphalt emu
Page 39 and 40:
Lubbers and Watson (2005) present t
Page 41 and 42:
Takamura and Heckmann (1999) sugges
Page 43 and 44:
Neat Asphalt + 8% LDPE1 + 8% LDPE2
Page 45 and 46:
Figure 16: Effect of SBS Concentrat
Page 47 and 48:
destruction of the polymer modifier
Page 49 and 50:
emulsified and non-emulsified aspha
Page 51 and 52:
However, in developing the SPG, Epp
Page 53 and 54:
• Forced Air-Drying Method - This
Page 55 and 56: • Wet Track Abrasion Loss - used
Page 57 and 58: ductility (61). King characterizes
Page 59 and 60: Polymer modified asphalt emulsions
Page 61 and 62: 3 40-120º F 5.02 12.81 6.04 14.92
Page 63 and 64: emulsions require a much longer set
Page 65 and 66: Figure 20: Chip Seal Aggregate Rete
Page 67 and 68: design specifications are meticulou
Page 69 and 70: Holleran (n.d.) recommends using SB
Page 71 and 72: 22 20 18 Vertical Displacement (%)
Page 73 and 74: seal stone retention, and to provid
Page 75 and 76: Microsurfacing applications by defi
Page 77 and 78: Thus, the cohesive properties of SB
Page 79 and 80: dimensional polymer network is pres
Page 81 and 82: Moreover, although the moduli of th
Page 83 and 84: Numerous decision tools and best pr
Page 85 and 86: 3.0 LABORATORY TESTING AND SPECIFIC
Page 87 and 88: and performance-related specificati
Page 89 and 90: were consistently twice as high as
Page 91 and 92: • Polymer/Asphalt Compatibility a
Page 93 and 94: angle at the lowest pavement temper
Page 95 and 96: damaged by temperature. The problem
Page 97 and 98: Because the industry survey and oth
Page 99 and 100: conforming to the following criteri
Page 101 and 102: with faster curing and longer wear.
Page 103 and 104: Table 17: Comparison of Microsurfac
Page 105: Emulsion/Aggregate Performance Test
Page 109 and 110: leading the negatives. If post-blen
Page 111 and 112: opportunity to evaluate performance
Page 113 and 114: traffic areas, as are durable, poli
Page 115 and 116: esearchers, with the leading candid
Page 117 and 118: Table 13 illustrates a draft Strawm
Page 119 and 120: Laboratory Design Procedures • Ch
Page 121 and 122: • Develop/improve performance met
Page 123 and 124: specification tests will cost appro
Page 125 and 126: PROPERTY TEST METHOD SPEC. RESULT B
Page 127 and 128: 14. Takamura, Koichi, “SBR Latice
Page 129 and 130: 38. Turk, Johannes, and Schmidt, Ma
Page 131 and 132: 62. Desmazes, C., Lecomte, M., Lesu
Page 133 and 134: 86. European Standard EN 14895, “
show all

Using Polymer Modified Asphalt Emulsions in Surface Treatments A ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?