Post on 29-Mar-2018
Performance Guidelines for Selection of Hot-Poured
Bituminous Crack SealantNortheast Pavement Preservation Meeting Warwick, Rhode Island, 2007
Advanced Transportation Research and Engineering LaboratoryUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Imad L. Al-QadiJ-F MassonS-H Sam YangEli Fini
Blends of bitumen andstyrene-butadiene copolymer (SB, SBS)recycled rubberadditives
inorganic fillerbonding agent
A
500 mμ
B
500 mμ
500 μm500 μ
H E
500 μm
A M H E
What is Crack Sealant?
Crack SealingCrack sealing/ filling is the most widely used maintenance activity of in-service pavements Inexpensive, quick, and a well-proven technique to delay pavement deterioration
Reduce water penetration Maintain pavement structural capacity Improves road rideabilityExtend pavement service life (3 to 5 years)
Installation related parameters (QC/QA, crack cleaning and preparation, etc.)
Sealant related parameters (viscosity, softness, bond strength, compatibility, etc.)
Field Performance of Crack Sealant
Sealant Failure ModesTracking: sealant is smeared on the pavement due to passing traffic
Adhesive failure: loss of bonding between sealant material and its substrate
Cohesive failure: failure within sealant material
Intrusive failure: foreign objectives intrude into sealants
Sealant Property Test Method ASTM Spec.
Application Characteristics Viscosity (binder) D4402
AdhesionBond Test
Asphalt CompatibilityD5329D5329
ExtensibilityElongation (rubber)
Ductility (binder)D412D113
Durability Track Abrasion (slurry) D3910
FlexibilityFlexibility
Cone PenetrationD5329D5329
TrackingFlow
Softening PointD5329D36
Available Specifications
Objective
Development of performance-based guidelines for the selection hot-poured crack sealant
Make use of SuperPave™ binder-testing equipment
Adapting spirit of the binder Performance Grade (PG) specifications
Viscosity Test (SC-2)
At Installation Temperature
Test DevelopmentInstrument and Testing Optimization
Rigid rodMelting time
20minSpindle size
SC-27Speed
60rpm Waiting time
30s
Test variableTemperature 0
3
6
9
0 30 60 90Time (s)
Visc
osity
(pa.
s)BB NN QQ
0
1
2
3
4
5
130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200Temperature (C)
Vis
cosi
ty (P
a.s)
VVADAEWW
Apparent Viscosity Threshold
00.5
11.5
22.5
33.5
44.5
5
BB PPWW UU EE AE AD MM VV QQ NN YY DD AB ZZ
Sealant
App
aren
t Vis
cosi
ty (P
a.s)
Vacuum Oven Aging (SC-3)
Simulate Crack Sealant Weathering in Kettle & Field
Test DevelopmentMicrowave agingSmall-kettle aging and pressure agingSmall-kettle aging, pressure aging and vacuum oven agingPressure aging Vacuum oven aging
Test Development
Method Output
GPC Separation of bitumen and polymer
FTIR Fingerprint of composition
TGA Weight loss upon heating
DSR Stiffness, relaxation
Test Procedure35g in each pan
Vacuum oven at 30″ Hg and 115°C for 16hr
Shelves spacing designed to allow uniform temperature profile
Test Verification
1.E+03
1.E+04
1.E+05
1.E+06
1.E+07
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40Temperature, °C
Visc
osity
, Pa.
s
virgin 1 year 9 year 16h
24h 40h 64h
Dynamic Shear Rheometer Test (SC-4)
Intermediate Temperature for Tracking Resistance
Test Development
Taber Abraser to simulate field failure Correlate tracking flow as measured with DSRShear stress is applied for 2s then removed to allow recovery for 18s8 levels of stresses were applied
Year 1
Year 4
Time
Stra
in
Stress = 20Pa No stress: recovery
permanentdeformation
Test Parameter
Ostwald-DeWaelepower-law
γ&
10
100
1000
10000
0.0001 0.01 1Shear rate, 1/s
Stre
ss, P
a
46C52C58C64C70C76C82C
P)(C γ=σ & γ&
C: flow coefficient P: shear thinning exponent
Selection Criteria
10
100
1000
10000
100000
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1Shear thinning exponent (P)
Flow
coe
ffici
ent (
C)/
Pa.
s
no tracking1 sample tracks2 samples track
A
B
C
E
D
100%97%
0
0
0
Bending Beam Rheometer (SC-5)
Low Temperature Flexural Properties
Test DevelopmentDeflection of the sealant bean is above the limit of the current BBR device
Doubling the beam thicknessModifying BBR device to support both binder and sealant beams
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 40 80 120 160 200 240
Time
Def
lect
ion
(mm
)
0
300
600
900
Load
(mN
)
DeflectionLoad
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
0 40 80 120 160 200 240Time (s)
Def
lect
ion
(mm
)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Load
(mN)
DeflectionLoad
Crack Sealant Specimen
Standard Binder Specimen 6.35mm
12.7mm
= 0.0966(t)0.3428
R2 = 0.9999
0.01
0.1
1
0.1 1 10 100 1000Time (sec)
Stra
in (%
)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Time (s)
Def
orm
atio
n (m
m)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Load
(N)
DeformationLoad
Test ParameterStiffness @ 240s
Average creep rate
CAt)t( =ε
)t(bh4PL)t(S 3δ
=
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50Q
Q EE ZZ YY
AB
VV
UU
DD AE
MM
WW NN
AD PP BB
Sealant
Stiff
ness
(MPa
)
2°C -4°C -10°C -16°C -22°C -28°C -34°C -40°C
S(-10°C)=85MPa
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5Q
Q EE ZZ YY AB VV UU
DD
AE
MM
WW NN
AD PP
BB
Sealant
Ave
rage
Rat
e of
Cre
ep
2°C -4°C -10°C -16°C -22°C -28°C -34°C -40°C
CSBBR Threshold
CSDTT Test (SC-5)
Low Temperature Extendibility
Crack movement in the field Simulates sealant extension in the fieldModification for existing testing
Extension of SuperPaveTM specimen: 33% 90+%Utilize FE tool to select appropriate specimen Dim.Select appropriate loading rate 6%/min
Test Development
0.6%0.120.6%0.26.0%1.26.0%260.0%1260.0%20
Strain Rate, mm/min
Disp. Rate, mm/min
Strain Rate, mm/min
Disp. Rate,mm/min
Type CType A and B
0.6%0.120.6%0.26.0%1.26.0%260.0%1260.0%20
Strain Rate, mm/min
Disp. Rate, mm/min
Strain Rate, mm/min
Disp. Rate,mm/min
Type CType A and B
A
B
C
N/AN/A716Masson & Lacasse, 1999N/AN/A6+90Cook et al., 1991
5x10-58x10-3N/A63Linde, 19882.5
Min Crack(%)
5x10-3
Fast Move.(mm/min)
2.77x10-418Smith & Romine, 1993
Slow Move.(mm/min)
Max Crack(%)
Studies
N/AN/A716Masson & Lacasse, 1999N/AN/A6+90Cook et al., 1991
5x10-58x10-3N/A63Linde, 19882.5
Min Crack(%)
5x10-3
Fast Move.(mm/min)
2.77x10-418Smith & Romine, 1993
Slow Move.(mm/min)
Max Crack(%)
Studies
Extendibility (l)Effective gauge length (Leff=20mm)
Test Parameters
effLLΔ
=λ
The extendibility criterion is suggested based on various climatic conditions
T (°C) -4 -10 -16 -22 -28 -34 -40λ (%) 10% 25% 40% 55% 70% 85% 85+
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
DD AE MM WW NN AD PP BBSealant
Exte
ndib
ility
(%)
-22 -28-34 -40
-10°C
-16°C Grade
-22°C Grade
-28°C Grade
-34°C Grade
-40°C Grade +
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
QQ EE ZZ YY AB VVSealant
Exte
ndib
ility
(%)
-4 -10
-16 -22
-10°C
-16°C
-22°C Grade
-28°C Grade
-34°C Grade
-40°C Grade +
CSDT Threshold
Adhesion Test (SC-7)
For Low Temperature Bonding
Surface Energy Method (Work of Adhesion)
A compatibility test for sealant producers
Direct Bond MethodA quality control test for DOT
Blister Test MethodFundamental test for advanced research
Test Development
Coefficient of Thermal ExpansionSurface EnergySurface Roughness
Limestone>Sandstone>Quartzite>Granite>Steel>Aluminum
Pore SizeSandstone>Quartzite>Aluminum
Substrate Selection
MaterialCoeff. of Thermal Exp.,
cm/cm/°C x 10–6Surface Energy,
mJ/m2
Aluminum oxide 23 70Soda Lime Glass 8 72Polycarbonate 22 46Stainless Steel 9.9–17.3 57Granite 7–9 425Limestone 6 111Quartzite 11–13 200Sandstone 11–12 105Basalt 6–8 74
MaterialCoeff. of Thermal Exp.,
cm/cm/°C x 10–6Surface Energy,
mJ/m2
Aluminum oxide 23 70Soda Lime Glass 8 72Polycarbonate 22 46Stainless Steel 9.9–17.3 57Granite 7–9 425Limestone 6 111Quartzite 11–13 200Sandstone 11–12 105Basalt 6–8 74
Aluminum was conservatively selected as substrate
0
20
40
60
80
100
UU BB AE PP AD WW MM
Wor
k of
Adh
esio
n (m
J/m
2 )
LimestoneQuartziteGraniteAluminum
)cos1( θγ += totalsaW
1st Level Adhesion Test: Work of Adhesion
Fixture designed to be used in the DT device
Two aluminum half-cylindersDiameter: 25mmSealant thickness: 10mm
Simulates sealant installationSimulates crack expansion
Displacement rate: 0.05mm/sSpecific failure location
2nd Level Adhesion Test:Direct Bond Test (CS-7)
Pmax
De-bond Energy
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6Displacement (mm)
Load
(N)
PmaxEnergy
Test Parameter
0
40
80
120
160
Non-aged Oven-aged
Kettleaged
Less than3yr
More than3yr
Ener
gy (J
/m2 )
ABPPLL
0
50
100
150
200
Non-aged Oven-aged
Kettleaged
Less than3yr
More than3yr
P max
(N)
ABPPLL
Bonding Threshold
)t(d)t(PC)t(E =
3rd Level Adhesion Test: Blister Test
)()()( tE
tdtp∝)(tE
.iniIFE
.propIFE
CPdIFE .ini = )]t(IFE[AVG.IFEprop =
0
100
200
300
400
2 -4 -10 -16 -22
IFE
(J/m
2 )
EEDDUUABQQ
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
-22 -34 -40
IFE
(J/m
2 )
ADBBPPNNLLAEMM
Test Parameter
Temperature (°C)
Temperature (°C)
IFE
ini(J
/m2 )
IFE
ini(J
/m2 )
Crack SealantPerformance Grade
SG-46 SG-52 SG-58 SG-64 SG-70 SG-76 SG-82
-46-40-34-28-22-16-10-46-40-34-28-22-16-10-46-40-34-28-22-16-10-46-40-34-28-22-16-10-46-40-34-28-22-16-10-46-40-34-28-22-16-10-46-40-34-28-22-16-10
Apparent Viscosity, SC-2 Installation Temperature
Max. Viscosity (Pa.s) 3.5
Min. Viscosity (Pa.s) 1
Vacuum Oven Residue (SC-3)
Dynamic Shear, SC-4 46 52 58 64 70 76 82
Min. Flow Coefficient (kPa.s) 4
Min. Shear Thinning 0.7
Crack Sealant BBR, SC-5
-40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4
Max. Stiffness (MPa) 25
Min. Avg. Creep Rate 0.31
Crack Sealant DTT, SC-6
-40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4
Min. Extendibility (%)
>85>85>70>55>40>25>10>85>85>70>55>40>25>10>85>85>70>55>40>25>10>85>85>70>55>40>25>10>85>85>70>55>40>25>10>85>85>70>55>40>25>10>85>85>70>55>40>25>10
Crack Sealant DBT, SC-7
-40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4 -40-34-28-22-16-10 -4
Min. Load (N) 50
Min. Energy (J/m2) 40
Comprehensive tests based on sealant rheological properties was developedSelection criteria is proposedA significant economic impact on the sealant industry and the pavement preservation program is expected
Outcome of the Study
Future PlanLaboratory validationField validation
Monitoring test section for four yearsFine tuning thresholdsQuantify cost effectiveness of crack sealant
AcknowledgementsFederal Highway Administration Pool-fund TPF5 (045) The US-Canadian Crack Sealant ConsortiumParticipating US states, Canadian provinces, airport and city agencies, and industry
A continuation of this pool-fund study has been decided in the last consortium meetingVirginia will be the lead statePlease contact:
Kevin McGhee of VTRC (Email:Kevin.McGhee@VirginiaDOT.org )Imad Al-Qadi (Email:alqadi@ad.uiuc.edu)Eli Fini and S-H Sam Yang