Spray Applied Polymer Surface Seals

Lessons Learned Workbook

Home
Intro
Test Plan
Where
When
How
Products
Tests & Specs
Conclusions
Project Library
Bibliography
Photo Gallery

 Test Plan for Spray Applied Polymer Surface Sealer Study

The detailed test plans, project reports and test reports are in the Project Library. In summary, the project began with a user survey and the development of Expert Task Groups and State-of-the-Knowledge workshops at Myrtle Beach, South Carolina on March 1, 2001, Flagstaff, Arizona on September 11, 2001, Washington DC in January 2002 (at TRB), and in Minneapolis, Minnesota on August 21st, 2002.  Test projects were placed in Michigan, Arizona, Minnesota and California with a number of different emulsions.  The projects were open to any emulsion suppliers who agreed to donate materials and the application of their products.  The plan was to reapply the same products on treated and untreated sections at defined time intervals with a variety of testing (including the methods described in the Tests section below) on the test and control sections.  Based on early results and the constraints of the projects, the original test plan was modified. Some tests were discontinued, and others added as experimental findings dictated. Test elements added late in the project included friction testing of sanded surfaces, emulsion surface tension, emulsion particle size and Bending Beam Rheometer low temperature testing of mix specimens cut from test cores.

The original planned application sequence is diagrammed below.  Materials were to be placed at two year intervals, with some new and some overlapping applications, and varying application rates.

Planned Application Sequence

Text Box: Year Zero – Initial Application – 
 
Transition
 
Transition
 
Transition
Year Two – Second Application
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Year Four – Third Application
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Outlined boxes=application of material that year.  
Shaded areas = previously treated sections. 
Additional product applications were to follow same protocol.  
 
 
Material 1
 
Material 2
 
Material 3
A 500-ft section was left untreated as a general project control.

The original test plan is given in the table.

Descriptions of the test sites are given below, and the table gives a summary of the treatments.  (Construction reports for some of the projects may be found in the Project Library and photos in the Photo Gallery.)

Arizona, US 87 (40 miles north of Winslow), application of CSS-1h, Reclamite, Pass QB, ERA-25 and ERA-1 on September 12, 2001.  Friction testing was done pre-project and at 1 and 30 days. A second application of CSS-1h, Pass QB and Reclamite was made on October 19, 2006.  All the materials were tested on three different surface types: a dense graded surface, a chip seal surface, and an open graded asphalt rubber surface (AR-ACFC).  Friction tests with the portable devices and the trailer were done in 2006 a few days after application.  Sand was also used on a portion of the 2006 treatments.

California Interstate 5 (described as "Marysville, 10 miles north of Sacramento"), application of Reclamite, Pass QB, CQS-1h, CSS-1h and Topein C on 10/25/01.  Friction and surface texture data was collected before construction and after 1, 42 and 272 days. 

California State Route 78 (Salton Sea), application of Reclamite, Pass QB, CQS-1h, SS-1h, and a control section.  Each of the products was placed over an asphalt rubber surface.   Friction testing was done pre-project and at 1 and 30 days, and cores taken in 2007.

Test Site Summary

Arizona US 87 (Winslow, high desert, severe climate) Project Summary

 

Surface

9/12/2001 Application

10/19/2006 Application

 

Product

Mile Post

gal/yd2


Product

Mile Post


gal/yd2


Sand

 

AR-ACFC

Control

372.516

 

Control

372.562

 

 

 

Dense-Graded

Control

386.099

 

Control

386.146

 

 

 

Chip Seal

Control

392.203

 

Control

392.250

 

 

 

AR-ACFC

Pass QB

372.649

0.08

Pass QB

372.696

0.10

 

 

Dense-Graded

Pass QB

386.217

0.08

Pass QB

386.265

0.10

 

 

Chip Seal

Pass QB

392.000

0.08

Pass QB

392.031

0.06

 

 

AR-ACFC

Reclamite

372.781

0.08

Reclamite

372.829

0.10-0.12

2 lbs/ft2

 

Dense-Graded

Reclamite

386.348

0.08

Reclamite

386.367

0.07-0.09

2 lbs/ft2

 

Chip Seal

Reclamite

392.089

0.08

Reclamite

392.127

0.05

2 lbs/ft2

 

AR-ACFC

CSS-1h

373.047

0.08

CSS-1h

373.047

0.08

2 lbs/ft2

 

Dense-Graded

CSS-1h

386.712

0.08

CSS-1h

386.664

0.08

2 lbs/ft2

 

Chip Seal

CSS-1h

392.497

0.08

CSS-1h

392.545

0.06

2 lbs/ft2

 

AR-ACFC

ERA-25

372.914

0.08

 

 

 

 

 

Dense-Graded

ERA-25

386.752

0.08

 

 

 

 

 

Chip Seal

ERA-25

392.350

0.08

 

 

 

 

 

AR-ACFC

ERA-1

386.484

0.08

 

 

 

 

 

Dense-Graded

ERA-1

373.180

0.08

 

 

 

 

 

Chip Seal

ERA-1

392.640

0.08

 

 

 

 

 

California Interstate 5 (Marysville, heavy traffic, mild climate) (All applied on October 25, 2001)Reclamite, Pass QB, CQS-1h, CSS-1h and Topein C sections were repaved shortly after the 9-month friction tests.

 

California State Route 78 (Salton Sea, low desert) (All applied in 2002)Reclamite, Pass QB, CQS-1h, SS-1h, and Control.  Each of the products was placed over an asphalt rubber surface.  Cores were taken for additional testing in 2007.

 

Michigan M-35 (Perkins) (All applied 8/26/2002)CRF and Reclamite were applied.  Problems were reportedly encountered with controlling the field application rates to the specified rates.  It is believed this site was covered before further testing could be done.

 

Minnesota State Route 251 (Maple Island, rural, severe wet climate) Project

 

Site
Mile Post
8/22/2002 Application
7/2004 Application
9/14/2006 Application

 

2
9.11
Control
 

 

 

3
9.23
CSS-1h
 
CRS-2Pd

 

4
9.34
GSB (B)
 
LD-7

 

5
9.45
Pass QB
 
Pass QB

 

6
9.57
Reclamite
 Reclamite (6A)
Reclamite

 

7
9.68
CRF
 CRF (7A)

 

 

8
9.79
Chip seal
 
CRS-2Pd
Minnesota Olmstead County Highway 112 (suburban rural, severe wet climate) (All applied in 9/13/2006)
Site
Product
Residue
Shot Rate, gal/ yd2
Feet with Sand/No Sand
Sand, lb/ yd2
1
CRS-2Pd
51%
0.10
200 / 100
0.5
2
Pass-QB
37.5%
0.08
200 / 100
0.5
3
LD-7
52.7%
0.10 & 0.12
300 / 100
0.5
4
Control
 
 
       / 1200
 
5
Reclamite
37.2%
0.10
200 / 100
>1

 

Minnesota State Route 251 (Maple Island), application of CSS-1h, CRF, Pass QB, GSB Type B, Reclamite, and a control section on August 22, 2002. The Minnesota DOT also placed a chip seal.  Additional applications were made in July, 2004 and on September 14, 2006.