a quantitative method for determining - rmaces · a quantitative method for determining by scott...
TRANSCRIPT
A Quantitative Method for Determining
by Scott Shuler
and Anthony Lord
Rocky Mountain Asphalt Conference and Equipment Show
2nd Annual Asphalt Research Symposium
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Acknowledgements
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Acknowledgements
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Acknowledgements
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Acknowledgements
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Project 14-17 “Manual for Emulsion-Based Chip Seals for Pavement Preservation”
Sunday, March 28, 2010
What Are Chip Seals?
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Aggregate Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Aggregate
• Spread Rate
Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Aggregate
• Spread Rate– One Stone Thick
Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Aggregate
• Spread Rate– One Stone Thick
Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Aggregate
• Spread Rate– One Stone Thick
–Or…..
Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Aggregate
• Spread Rate– One Stone Thick
–Or…..
Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Aggregate
• Spread Rate– One Stone Thick
–Or…..
Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Getting it One Stone ThickDesign
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Getting it One Stone Thick• Follow A Design Method
– South Africa/Australia/New Zealand• Flakiness Index < 25%• ALD/Gradation - One-Sized• Traffic• Texture• Embedment
Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Getting it One Stone Thick• Follow A Design Method
– South Africa/Australia/New Zealand• Flakiness Index < 25%• ALD/Gradation - One-Sized• Traffic• Texture• Embedment
– Asphalt Institute/McLeod/Hanson• Asphalt Rates Too Low, Aggregate Rates Too High
Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Getting it One Stone Thick• Follow A Design Method
– South Africa/Australia/New Zealand• Flakiness Index < 25%• ALD/Gradation - One-Sized• Traffic• Texture• Embedment
– Asphalt Institute/McLeod/Hanson• Asphalt Rates Too Low, Aggregate Rates Too High
– Texas/Kearby/Gallaway/Epps• Asphalt Rates Too Low, Aggregate Rates Too Low
Design
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Design Gets Us So Far, Then ‘Art’ Kicks in….. Right?
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Design Gets Us So Far, Then ‘Art’ Kicks in….. Right?
• Turning Traffic Loose– Touchy Feely?– Science ?
• Surface Texture
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Design Gets Us So Far, Then ‘Art’ Kicks in….. Right?
• Turning Traffic Loose– Touchy Feely?– Science ?
• Surface Texture– Touchy Feely?– Measure It?
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Design Gets Us So Far, Then ‘Art’ Kicks in….. Right?
• Turning Traffic Loose– Touchy Feely?– Science ?
• Surface Texture– Touchy Feely?– Measure It?
• Surface Resistance– Ball Penetration
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Design Gets Us So Far, Then ‘Art’ Kicks in….. Right?
• Turning Traffic Loose– Touchy Feely?– Science ?
• Surface Texture– Touchy Feely?– Measure It?
• Surface Resistance– Ball Penetration
• Emulsion Correct on Job?
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Design Gets Us So Far, Then ‘Art’ Kicks in….. Right?
• Turning Traffic Loose– Touchy Feely?– Science ?
• Surface Texture– Touchy Feely?– Measure It?
• Surface Resistance– Ball Penetration
• Emulsion Correct on Job?– Measure It
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Design Gets Us So Far, Then ‘Art’ Kicks in….. Right?
• Turning Traffic Loose– Touchy Feely?– Science ?
• Surface Texture– Touchy Feely?– Measure It?
• Surface Resistance– Ball Penetration
• Emulsion Correct on Job?– Measure It
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Question
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Question
• Can a Lab Test be Used to Predict Emulsion or Residue Strength in the Field?
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Question
• Can a Lab Test be Used to Predict Emulsion or Residue Strength in the Field?
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Question
• Can a Lab Test be Used to Predict Emulsion or Residue Strength in the Field?
• If it Could, Maybe Judgment Could be Improved
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Chips at One-Stone Thickness
Sunday, March 28, 2010
“Pin-Art” Holds ChipsThe ‘Grabber’
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Template = 40% Embedment
Sunday, March 28, 2010
A Pneumatic Roller Would be an Improvement
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
NCHRP 14-17“Traffic Simulator”
Sunday, March 28, 2010
The Experiment
Sunday, March 28, 2010
• AGGREGATES: – Basalt, Alluvial, Granite, Limestone
The Experiment
Sunday, March 28, 2010
• AGGREGATES: – Basalt, Alluvial, Granite, Limestone
• EMULSIONS: – RS-2, RS-2P, CRS-2, CRS-2P
The Experiment
Sunday, March 28, 2010
• AGGREGATES: – Basalt, Alluvial, Granite, Limestone
• EMULSIONS: – RS-2, RS-2P, CRS-2, CRS-2P
• EMULSION CURE: – 40%, 80%
The Experiment
Sunday, March 28, 2010
• AGGREGATES: – Basalt, Alluvial, Granite, Limestone
• EMULSIONS: – RS-2, RS-2P, CRS-2, CRS-2P
• EMULSION CURE: – 40%, 80%
• AGGREGATE MOISTURE: – Dry, SSD
The Experiment
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Experiment Design• Yiklm = µ + Ai + Wk + Ml + AWik + AMil + WMkl + AWMikl + eiklm
• • Where,• Yijklm = Chip Loss, %
• µ = mean loss, %
• Ai = effect of aggregate i on mean
• Wk = effect of water removed (40, 80%) k on mean
• Ml = effect of aggregate moisture l on mean (dry,SSD)
• AWik, etc. = effect of interactions on mean
• eiklm = random error
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Aggregates
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Aggregates
4.75 8.06.3 9.5
Sieve Size, mm
Pas
sing
, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Aggregates
Sunday, March 28, 2010
AggregatesLS GR BS AL
BSG 2.615 2.612 2.773 2.566Median Size, in 0.252 0.315 0.277 0.277ALD, in 0.170 0.265 0.218 0.222Design Coverage, psy
16.48 26.11 22.95 21.73
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Emulsions
Sunday, March 28, 2010
EmulsionsRS-2P RS-2 CRS-2 CRS-2P
SF, 50C 108 96 78 119Residue, % 65 68 68 68Pen, 25C, 100g 115 95 125 85Ductility, 25C 100+ 100+ 100+ 100+
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Dry Chips - 40% Moisture Loss
Chi
p Lo
ss, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Dry Chips - 40% Moisture Loss
Chi
p Lo
ss, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Dry Chips - 80% Moisture Loss
Chi
p Lo
ss, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Dry Chips - 80% Moisture Loss
Chi
p Lo
ss, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
SSD Chips - 40% Moisture Loss
Chi
p Lo
ss, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
SSD Chips - 40% Moisture Loss
Chi
p Lo
ss, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
SSD Chips - 80% Moisture Loss
Chi
p Lo
ss, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
SSD Chips - 80% Moisture Loss
Chi
p Lo
ss, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
ANOVA
Sunday, March 28, 2010
αααα
Source RS-2 RS-2P CRS-2 CRS-2P
ANOVA
Sunday, March 28, 2010
αααα
Source RS-2 RS-2P CRS-2 CRS-2P
ANOVA
Aggr <0.0001 <0.0001 0.3887 0.0049
Sunday, March 28, 2010
αααα
Source RS-2 RS-2P CRS-2 CRS-2P
ANOVA
Aggr <0.0001 <0.0001 0.3887 0.0049Moist 0.0169 0.0220 0.1597 0.0003
Sunday, March 28, 2010
αααα
Source RS-2 RS-2P CRS-2 CRS-2P
ANOVA
Aggr <0.0001 <0.0001 0.3887 0.0049Moist 0.0169 0.0220 0.1597 0.0003Cure <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001
Sunday, March 28, 2010
αααα
Source RS-2 RS-2P CRS-2 CRS-2P
ANOVA
Aggr <0.0001 <0.0001 0.3887 0.0049Moist 0.0169 0.0220 0.1597 0.0003Cure <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001
Sunday, March 28, 2010
αααα
Source RS-2 RS-2P CRS-2 CRS-2P
ANOVA
Aggr <0.0001 <0.0001 0.3887 0.0049Moist 0.0169 0.0220 0.1597 0.0003Cure <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001A x M 0.2468 0.3618 0.0994 0.7574
Sunday, March 28, 2010
αααα
Source RS-2 RS-2P CRS-2 CRS-2P
ANOVA
Aggr <0.0001 <0.0001 0.3887 0.0049Moist 0.0169 0.0220 0.1597 0.0003Cure <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001A x M 0.2468 0.3618 0.0994 0.7574
A x C 0.0001 0.0020 0.3927 0.0005
Sunday, March 28, 2010
αααα
Source RS-2 RS-2P CRS-2 CRS-2P
ANOVA
Aggr <0.0001 <0.0001 0.3887 0.0049Moist 0.0169 0.0220 0.1597 0.0003Cure <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001A x M 0.2468 0.3618 0.0994 0.7574
A x C 0.0001 0.0020 0.3927 0.0005M x C 0.5425 0.0136 0.9999 0.9546
Sunday, March 28, 2010
αααα
Source RS-2 RS-2P CRS-2 CRS-2P
ANOVA
Aggr <0.0001 <0.0001 0.3887 0.0049Moist 0.0169 0.0220 0.1597 0.0003Cure <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001A x M 0.2468 0.3618 0.0994 0.7574
A x C 0.0001 0.0020 0.3927 0.0005M x C 0.5425 0.0136 0.9999 0.9546A x M x C 0.1064 0.2088 0.8805 0.0114
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Newman-Keuls Multiple Comparison
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Newman-Keuls Multiple Comparison
RS-2RS-2
Allv A
Grn B
LS B
Bas C
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Newman-Keuls Multiple Comparison
RS-2RS-2
Allv A
Grn B
LS B
Bas C
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Newman-Keuls Multiple Comparison
RS-2RS-2
Allv A
Grn B
LS B
Bas C
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Newman-Keuls Multiple Comparison
RS-2RS-2
Allv A
Grn B
LS B
Bas C
RS-2PRS-2P
Allv A
Grn A
Bas A
LS B
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Newman-Keuls Multiple Comparison
RS-2RS-2
Allv A
Grn B
LS B
Bas C
RS-2PRS-2P
Allv A
Grn A
Bas A
LS B
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Newman-Keuls Multiple Comparison
RS-2RS-2
Allv A
Grn B
LS B
Bas C
RS-2PRS-2P
Allv A
Grn A
Bas A
LS B
CRS-2CRS-2
LS A
Grn A
Bas A
Allv A
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Newman-Keuls Multiple Comparison
RS-2RS-2
Allv A
Grn B
LS B
Bas C
RS-2PRS-2P
Allv A
Grn A
Bas A
LS B
CRS-2CRS-2
LS A
Grn A
Bas A
Allv A
CRS-2PCRS-2P
Grn A
Allv AB
Bas AB
LS B
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Newman-Keuls Multiple Comparison
RS-2RS-2
Allv A
Grn B
LS B
Bas C
RS-2PRS-2P
Allv A
Grn A
Bas A
LS B
CRS-2CRS-2
LS A
Grn A
Bas A
Allv A
CRS-2PCRS-2P
Grn A
Allv AB
Bas AB
LS B
Sunday, March 28, 2010
OK, So the Lab Test Works,But What About in the Field?
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Arches, NP
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Frederick, CO
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Forks, WA
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Arches, NP
Moisture Loss, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Frederick, CO
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Forks, WA
Moisture Loss, %Sunday, March 28, 2010
Chip LossField Site Aggregates - Lab Sweep Test Results
Moisture Loss, %
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Conclusions
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Conclusions
• This chip seal performance test may provide a means for comparing strength of aggregate/emulsion combinations under various curing conditions.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Conclusions
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Conclusions
• The amount of water remaining in the chip seal emulsion has a large effect on chip retention.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Conclusions
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Conclusions
• Significantly higher chip loss was
measured for test specimens
fabricated with dry aggregates
compared with saturated surface
dry aggregates.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Conclusions
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Conclusions
• No significant differences in chip loss could be measured either at 40 or 80 percent cure when cationic emulsions were compared with anionic emulsions on either calcareous or siliceous aggregates.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Conclusions
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Conclusions
• This Preliminary Data Suggests the New Sweep Test May be Used to Predict “Time to Traffic” for Fresh Chip Seals.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Questions ?
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Thank You !
Sunday, March 28, 2010