Sprinkle Treatment of Asphalt Surfaces, HR-199, 1984

(1984) Sprinkle Treatment of Asphalt Surfaces, HR-199, 1984. Transportation, Department of

Preview

PDF IADOT_hr199_Sprinkle_Treatment_Asphalt_Surfaces_1984.pdf File Size:2MB

Abstract

Methods of improving highway safety are of major concern to everyone who is involved in the planning, development and construction of improvements of our vast highway network. Other major concerns are the conservation of our rapidly disappearing sources of energy and quality building materials. This research is devoted to further exploration of a process which will: 1. help preserve higher quality aggregates; and, 2. improve the frictional characteristics and surface texture of asphalt pavement surfaces. Sprinkle treatment of asphalt concrete pavement surfaces with a non-polishing aggregate, a procedure which was developed in Europe, is one method which has shown promise in accomplishing the above listed objectives. This research seeks to explore the feasibility and cost effectiveness of using standard asphalt mixtures of local, less expensive aggregates for surface courses followed by a surface sprinkle treatment of a hard, durable, non-polishing layer of precoated chips to produce a durable, non-skid pavement surface for safe highway travel. Three standard mixture types are being evaluated for aggregate retention characteristics and six sprinkle aggregates are being evaluated for durability, polishing and friction characteristics. In addition, measurements of the surface texture by the silicone putty method are being made. Another feature of this research is the evaluation of a rubberized asphalt material called Overflex MS as a crack filler. It has been reported that the material could be beneficial in reducing reflective cracking. The project was begun in July of 1978 and was completed in August. A review made in the spring of 1979 indicates very satisfactory performance. It was determined from slide photos taken after construction and again in the spring that aggregate retention was very good. However, many cracks had reflected indicating that the Overflex MS had not been effective. Follow up friction test results and texture analysis were also very good. The results of these tests are shown in Appendix A.