Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 61
62
the distributor, and half require computerized controls QC testing programs, and state-of-the-art construction equip-
on the chip spreader as well. All require the use of pneu- ment in their chip seal programs. One also notices that there
matic rollers and specify some control on rolling by spec- is very little difference between those agencies that restrict
ifying roller passes, maximum roller speed, or roller chip seal usage to lower-volume roads and those that rou-
weight. Most perform crack sealing to prepare the surface tinely use the system on high-volume roads. The one major
for chip sealing. difference is that those that apply PM chip seals on high-
volume roads ensure that the underlying pavement's condition
The agencies' specifications require the ambient air tem- is generally good. Thus, they are not trying to use their chip
perature to be in the range of 60°F to 70°F before chip seal- seal program for short-term repair.
ing can begin. The majority impose reduced speed limits of
an average of 35 mph on newly sealed roads. They enforce
CASE STUDY CONCLUSIONS
those limits by using flaggers and/or pilot cars for a time after AND BEST PRACTICES
sealing from as little as 30 min to as much as 3 days before
opening, with an average of approximately 4 to 6 h. All of Two major conclusions were reached in view of the afore-
these agencies perform their own inspection and require dis- mentioned case studies in chip seal excellence. First, those
tributor calibration before sealing. Nine of these agencies agencies that use chips seals as a PM measure appear to be able
also require spreader calibration in their contracts or in their to replicate success. They treat the technology as a science and
internal procedures, or both. use formal design procedures that have been adjusted by the
experience gained over a large number of years. Because they
Performance use chip seals for PM, they do not apply it to roads with severe
distress or poor structural conditions, and once they do apply
Bleeding is the most prevalent reported long-term distress that chip seals, they invest in maintaining the asphalt membrane by
appears in their chip sealed roads, and these respondents noted routine crack sealing and/or fog sealing. Second, these agen-
the use of rigorous QC testing. The major cause of failure cies transfer a high degree of specificity from their design
shortly after construction is weather related (rain or an unex- process to their construction contracts or in-house mainte-
pected temperature drop), followed by dusty or dirty aggregate. nance procedures. Again, such a procedure allows them to
The major public-user complaint is damage caused by loose replicate past success.
aggregate. Eleven of 13 described the pavement ride of their
roads as either good or excellent after chip sealing. Finally, they The following best practices can be gleaned from this
also undertake follow-up to maintain their chip seals with rou- chapter's analysis:
tine crack sealing and sometimes fog sealing to maintain the
integrity of the asphalt membrane for the life of the chip seal. 1. Viewing chip sealing as a PM tool to be applied on a
regular cycle reinforces the pavement preservation ben-
efits of the technology.
SPECIFIC DATA FROM PROGRAMS WITH
2. Chip seals can be successfully used on high-volume
EXCELLENT RESULTS
roads if the agency's policy is to install it on roads
Tables 14 and 15 have been developed to furnish the reader where pavement distresses are minimal and the struc-
with specific details on agencies that reported excellent tural integrity of the underlying pavement is in good
results from their chip seal programs. Three states, Colorado, condition.
Idaho, and Texas, provided multiple responses to the survey. 3. Both hot asphalt cement and emulsified asphalt binders
These responses were not consolidated, for each was unique can be used successfully on high-volume roads. The
to a given district. Both tables reflect practices grouped selection of binders modified by polymers or crumb
according to the traffic volume limitations imposed by the rubber seems to reinforce success.
local chip seal usage policy. 4. In-house maintenance personnel are best used to install
chips seals in areas where the greatest care must be
The impression that one gets from looking at these tables taken to achieve a successful product.
is that all the agencies that reported excellent chip seal per- 5. Requiring chip seal contractors to use state-of-the-art
formance appear to not only have introduced a high degree equipment and to control the rolling operation enhances
of prescriptive specification into their programs, but they also chip seal success.
are using the benefits that can be accrued by the advances in 6. An aggressive QA and QC testing program combined
material science, such as the use of modified binders, robust with close inspection leads to chip seal success.
OCR for page 62
63
TABLE 14
CASE STUDIES FOR CHIP SEAL USE ON LOW-VOLUME ROADS
Colorado DOT Idaho DOT WSDOT
Item Alamosa Boise Olympia
Average ADT ADT < 5,000 ADT < 5,000 ADT < 2,000
Limitation
Chip Seal Season May to September June 15 to Sept. 1 May to August
Major Binders Used HRFS, HRFS-2P CRS-2P CRS-2, CRS-2P
Modifiers Used Polymers, anti- Polymers, crumb Polymers
stripping agents rubber
Aggregate Used Natural gravels Trap rock, natural Granite, natural
gravels gravels, basalt
Aggregate Sizes Used 3/8 in. 3/8 in. 1/2 in. and 3/8 in.
Design Method Individual Kearby Empirical
Design Done By In-house maintenance No response In-house design
engineer engineer
Design Method 13 years 10 years 30 years
Usage
Distress Level of Moderate Moderate Moderate
Underlying Surface
Structural Condition Good Fair Fair
of Underlying
Surface
Computerized Yes/Yes Yes/No Yes/Yes
Control Required
on Distributor/Chip
Spreader
Specified Controls on Number of passes Roller weight and Roller weight
Rolling and maximum speed maximum speed
Traffic Control Reduced speed, Reduced speed, Reduced speed,
Measures interim pavement interim pavement interim pavement
markings, flaggers, markings, flaggers, markings, flaggers,
pilot cars pilot cars pilot cars
Time to Open to 10 min 4h As soon as possible
Reduced Speed
Traffic
Aggregate QC Tests
% fracture X X
Flakiness X
Anti-strip X X
Presence of clay X X
Gradation X X X
Methods to Maintain None reported
Seal after
construction X X
Crack seal X
Chip seal patch X
Sanding X X
Fog seal
OCR for page 63
64
TABLE 15
CASE STUDIES FOR CHIP SEAL USE ON HIGH-VOLUME ROADS
Colorado DOT Texas DOT City of Lubbock,
Item Grand Junction Austin Texas
Average ADT ADT > 20,000 ADT > 20,000 ADT > 20,000
Limitation
Chip Seal Season May to September May to October May to October
Major Binders Used HRFS-2P AC15, AC15-5TR CRS-2P
Modifiers Used Polymers Polymers, latex, anti- Polymers
stripping agents
crumb rubber
Aggregate Used Natural gravels, Precoated trap rock, Natural gravels
lightweight precoated limestone,
precoated
lightweight
Aggregate Sizes Used 1/2 in. and 3/8 in. 1/2 in. and 3/8 in. 1/2 in. and 3/8 in.
Design Method Individual Modified Kearby Empirical
Design Done By In-house maintenance In-house design In-house design
engineer engineer engineer
Design Method Usage Not reported 22 years 5 years
Distress Level of None to moderate Moderate Moderate
Underlying Surface
Structural Condition of Excellent Good Not reported
Underlying Surface
Computerized Yes/No Yes/No Yes/Yes
Control Required
on Distributor/Chip
Spreader
Specified Controls on Rolling pattern Roller weight and Rolling pattern
Rolling maximum speed
Traffic Control Reduced speed, Reduced speed, Reduced speed,
Measures interim pavement interim pavement interim pavement
markings, flaggers, markings, flaggers, markings, flaggers
pilot cars pilot cars
Time to Open to 3h Varies 30 min
Reduced Speed
Traffic
Aggregate QC Tests Not reported
% fracture X X
Flakiness X X
Decant X X
Anti-strip
X X
Presence of clay X X
Gradation
Methods to Maintain
Seal after
construction X X X
Crack seal X
X
Chip seal patch
X
Lime slurry
Fog seal
