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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Polymer modification of asphalt emulsions offers improvements in performance and durability, mitigation of pavement distress, and reduced life cycle costs when compared to unmodified asphalt emulsions or hot mix asphalt surface dressings. Polymers have exhibited demonstrable reductions in rutting, thermal cracking, and increased resistance to many forms of traffic-induced stress. Conversely, polymer modifiers, when used in chip seal applications, have demonstrated some problems associated with accelerated stripping when placed over a moisture sensitive hot mix. Asphalt emulsions frequently provide a lower cost, efficient, and more environmentally-friendly alternative to hot mixes due to their low energy consumption, reduced hydrocarbon emissions, ease of implementation at remote sites, and preventive maintenance/life-extending benefits when applied to mildly distressed pavements. Although best-practice manuals and specifications for conventional asphalt emulsions are plentiful, there is no single document available which offers guidance on the proper use, application techniques, and benefits of high-performance polymer modified asphalt emulsions. Similarly, the preponderance of the published research on polymer modifiers has focused primarily upon their use in hot mix asphalt (HMA) applications. This research includes an exhaustive review of the literature to collect and analyze polymer modified emulsion practices and specifications, coupled with a laboratory testing and verification program designed to validate the findings and recommendations developed from the literature review. Guidance is provided on proper project selection, polymer dosing rates and methods, applicability under varying traffic load and environmental conditions, and contraindications to the use of polymer modifiers. 1.2 Study Objectives The principal objectives of this study were to: 1
1. Compile published research on the types of polymer modifiers, dosage rates, and modification methods; 2. Compare and contrast the performance, cost, and benefits of polymer modified versus non-modified asphalt emulsions; 3. Determine the applicability of polymer modified asphalt emulsions to low (i.e., generally < 400 ADT), medium (400 to 1000 ADT), and high (> 1000 ADT) volume roads (as defined by Federal Lands Highway Division), and varying environmental conditions; 4. Evaluate the applicability of polymer modified asphalt emulsions to non-roadway applications such as parking lots, hiking and bike trails; 5. Analyze information obtained from the literature review and develop recommendations and guidelines relating to the proper application, modification, and contraindications of polymer modified asphalt emulsions (PME); 6. Perform laboratory testing and verification to evaluate the recommendations and data gaps identified from the analysis of information obtained from the literature review; and, 7. Prepare a Federal Lands Highway (FLH) manual of best practices for polymer modified asphalt emulsions. 1.3 Scope Electronic and physical literature searches were performed using a variety of sources, including the National Center for Pavement Preservation (NCPP) on-line library; the Transportation Research Information Service (TRIS) database; the National Technical Information Service (NTIS); the COMPENDEX engineering research database; the Michigan State University College of Engineering Library; the State Library of Michigan; the Asphalt Emulsions Manufacturers Association (AEMA), International Slurry Surfacing Association (ISSA), and the Asphalt Recycling and Reclamation (ARRA) 2
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: DISCLAIMER This document is dissemi
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 and 106:
Emulsion/Aggregate Performance Test
Page 107 and 108:
the FLH report-only format be used
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 ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?