Evaluation of Pavement Surface Friction Treatments

The implementation of a pavement preservation program involves a learning curve with not only a determination to succeed, but also the courage to fail. Successful implementation of pavement preservation program requires knowledge of the performance of pavement preservation surface treatments over time, which is critical to the development of performance models for pavement management analysis. Additionally, preservation surface treatments, such as chip seal, fog seal, microsurfacing, and 4.75-mm thin or ultrathin overlay, can not only repair certain pavement surface defects, but also change the surface characteristics of pavement and therefore affect pavement surface friction performance. Nevertheless, such information is currently not available but is essential for the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) to evaluate the effectiveness of pavement preservation surface treatments. As a concentrated effort, this study focused on the long-term friction performance of preservation surface treatments, particularly those have been widely used and those have seen increasing use by INDOT. Based on the selected field pavement test sections, this study aimed to evaluate the surface characteristics, particularly the long-term friction performance for the surface treatments, such as chip seal, fog-chip, fog seal, rejuvenating seal, microsurfacing, ultrathin bonded wearing course (UBWC), 4.75-mm hot mix asphalt (HMA) thin overlay (UTO), and profile milling (or diamond grinding). The test sections for each type of surface treatment covered a wide range of traffic volume from light to high. The service life for the selected test sections varied from 6 months to 60 months. Friction testing was mainly conducted using ASTM E 274 locked wheel trailer. Surface texture testing was conducted using either the ASTM E 2157 circular track meter (CTM) or a laser scanner. Pavement roughness and noise tests were also conducted to address the smoothness and noise issues, particularly on microsurfacing. Detailed analysis was provided to evaluate the friction performance of 4.75-mm HMA thin overlays. It is believed that the test results and findings drawn from this study not only provides timely information for INDOT to improve its pavement preservation program, but also provides the original information for the potential readers to better utilize preservation surface treatments.

[1]  Roger E. Smith,et al.  Microsurfacing Usage Guidelines , 1999 .

[2]  Kevin K McGhee,et al.  High-speed texture measurement of pavements. , 2003 .

[3]  David G Peshkin,et al.  HIGH VOLUME/HIGH SPEED ASPHALT ROADWAY PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE SURFACE TREATMENTS , 2001 .

[4]  Robert S James,et al.  Development of Mix Design Criteria for 4.75-mm Superpave® Mixes , 2003 .

[5]  Jim Brownbridge The role of an asphalt rejuvenator in pavement preservation use and need for asphalt rejuvenation , 2010 .

[6]  R. E. Link,et al.  Evaluation of Friction Performance of Coarse Aggregates and Hot-Mix Asphalt Pavements , 2007 .

[7]  Todd E. Hoerner,et al.  OPTIMAL TIMING OF PAVEMENT PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE TREATMENT APPLICATIONS , 2004 .

[8]  Anne M. Johnson BEST PRACTICES HANDBOOK ON ASPHALT PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE , 2000 .

[9]  Shuo Li Evaluation of pavement surface friction treatments : [technical summary]. , 2011 .

[10]  Richard W. Miller,et al.  Life of Chip Seal on Kansas Highways , 2010 .

[11]  P S Kandhal,et al.  THE RESTRICTED ZONE IN THE SUPERPAVE AGGREGATE GRADATION SPECIFICATION , 2001 .

[12]  Shuo Li,et al.  Characterization of Microtexture on Typical Pavement Surfaces: A Pilot Study , 2011 .

[13]  Prithvi S. Kandhal,et al.  CONSTRUCTION AND PERFORMANCE OF ULTRATHIN ASPHALT FRICTION COURSE , 1997 .

[14]  R. M. Davis,et al.  Comparison of Surface Characteristics of Hot-Mix Asphalt Pavement Surfaces at the Virginia Smart Road , 2001 .

[15]  David E. Newcomb,et al.  Thin Asphalt Overlays for Pavement Preservation , 2009 .

[16]  P. J.,et al.  NEW TYPE OF ULTRATHIN FRICTION COURSE , 1991 .

[17]  David Mark Jared,et al.  Georgia Department of Transportation’s Experience with Microsurfacing , 1998 .

[18]  Jusang Lee,et al.  Treatment Guidelines for Pavement Preservation , 2010 .

[19]  Fujie Zhou,et al.  DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF VERY THIN OVERLAYS IN TEXAS , 2009 .

[20]  J. Corley-Lay Friction and Surface Texture Characterization of 14 Pavement Test Sections in Greenville, North Carolina , 1998 .

[21]  J. J. Henry,et al.  EVALUATION OF PAVEMENT FRICTION CHARACTERISTICS , 2000 .

[22]  Kd Hall,et al.  Comparison of the Frictional Properties of 4.75 and 12.5 mm HMA Surface Mixes , 2009 .

[23]  Dwayne Harris,et al.  Identifying Friction Variations with the Standard Smooth Tire for Network Pavement Inventory Friction Testing , 2005 .

[24]  A L Correa,et al.  CONCRETE PAVEMENT REHABILITATION - GUIDE FOR DIAMOND GRINDING , 2001 .

[25]  R. E. Link,et al.  Considerations in Developing a Network Pavement Inventory Friction Test Program for a State Highway Agency , 2005 .