Bahia Studies on Emulsions

7/27/2019 Bahia Studies on Emulsions

1/30

Overview of theA h lt R h C ti (ARC)sphalt Research Consortium (ARC)Studies on EmulsionsHussain U. BahiaContributors: Andrew Han z, Zelalem Arega, Timothy M iller

AEMA-ARRA-ISSA Annual MeetingPalm Springs, California, February 20, 2009


2/30

Outline

Performance indicators of surface seals

Breaking and setting

Energy analysis -please see handout

Future plans


3/30

ARC Themes forEngineered Paving Materialsngineered Paving Materials

EngineeredGreen High performancem xes

-QuietSafe

m xes

Asphalt Applications

Thermal

Designed forintersections

TrafficCold and High recycled

resistant resistantwarm m xes con en


4/30

Low-Temperature Asphalt Applications Develop a more scientific characterization system for

emulsified (liquefied) asphaltswith consideration ofapplication type.

Surface Treatments Paving MixesChip Seals PavingSlurry / Micro-surfacing Base StabilizationFog Seals Partial Depth Recycling


5/30

Performance of Surface Treatments -EmulsionsmulsionsSurface treatment distresses are

different than those of pavingmixtures.

Binder in surface treatments is 2.

Emulsion ... during construction

es ue .... urng servce e


6/30

Research Focus Chip Seals

Difference in residue - top and bottomof

1. Construction Properties

.storage vessel - 24 hrs.

1.2 Spray-ability and Drain Out Viscosity @ application temp

1.3 Breaking / Setting RateChange in rheology (G*, Jnr, % recovery,

strain tolerance) with time

1.4 Early Raveling Adhesion / Cohesion


7/30

Research Focus Chip Seals

2. In-Service Properties

. ,

2.2 Resistance to Raveling Adhesion / cohesion @ high and low temp

2.3 Fatigue Cracking Reside fatigue @ intermediate temp

2.4 Early Raveling Rheology (S / m) after long-termaging

7


8/30

Testing Methods Selected Strain sweep G*, sin

Adhesion

PATTI test DSR

Sweep test


9/30

Strain Sweep - To Measure RavelingPotentialotential


10/30

Testing of Breaking and Setting ofEmulsions on Aggregatesmulsions on Aggregates

. +

1.00E+05

Neat Binder

24 hrs

1.00E+04G*(P 6 hrs

4 hrs

1.00E+03

2 hrs

1.0% 10.0% 100.0%

Strain (%)


11/30

Effect of Mineral Surface

No difference

Difference

surface > 2x


12/30

Preliminary ResultsDevelo ment of Failure Strain vs. Curin Time

CRS1HP

60

30

40

50

ailur

eStr

ain

Granite8mm

Limestone8mm

0

10

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

F


13/30

Why Strain Sweep?


14/30

Adhesion Testing highly dependent on development ofhighly dependent on development of

adhesion between emulsion and aggregate chips. Current test is qualitative ASTM D244 Coating Ability

Concept is to develop a simple test to measure: Bond stren th

Development of adhesion

re ate emulsion com atibilit


15/30

Early failures

and climate effects

Constructed 27/04 and

Constructed 29/04

Temperature drop 30/04

trafficked for 1 warm day

Source: Gerrie Van Z l RSA


16/30

Pneumatic Adhesion Tension Test PATTI50 kHz. 8 channel

Three-leg LVDT frame

TektronixOscilloscope

LVDT

Gasket Gasket

Pressurizedgas inlet

Pressuretransducer

e -a gnng screwpa e

Pull stabTo PATTI

testcontroller

Binder

Test surface

Space (Pulloutstub support)

pressure and

deflection


17/30

PATTI Testing Stubs Control FilmThicknesshickness

Based on work done at University of Ancona - Italy


18/30

Preliminary ResultsEffect of Time and Mineralogy

DevelopmentofTensileStrengthvs.CuringTime

Effect of Time and Mineralogy40 0

Base asphalt

25 0

30 0

tren

gth

(psi)

Granite

Granite Base

10 0

15 0

20 0

Tensile

Limestone

Limestone Base

Emulsion

50

0 5 10 15 20 25

Time(hrs)


19/30

Validation Using the Sweep Test

test to developuidelines for earl

resistance to raveling.

Correlate with DSRresults.

Evaluate percent

aggregate lost.


20/30

Preliminary Results Sweep Test25.0%

20.0%

teL Gras

Granite

10.0%

.

Aggrega

ga

teLo mes one

5.0%

Aggre

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35CuringTime,hrs


21/30

Correlation between DSR G*/sin

Granite

25

y = -0.115x + 32.321

R

2

= 0.851

20

Loss

10

%

Agg

eg

ateL

Limestoney = -0.1591x + 36.768

R2= 0.8103

5

%A

ggr

0

50 100 150 200 250

G*/sind at 12%strain K a


22/30

Energy AnalysisThe Path to Sustainabilityhe Path to Sustainability

Pur ose

Define asphalt pavement sustainability. Quantify benefits of using low-temperature binders/mixes.

Consider six critical areas:

natural resource consumption,energy consumptionnergy consumption, emissions, risk potential,

land use,


23/30

Premise of InvestigationFHWA Environmental StewardshipHWA Environmental Stewardship

e/To

Fu

Source: FHWA


24/30

Defining System Boundaries


25/30

Next StepsTesting of Emulsionsesting of Emulsions Finalize preparation and testing procedures

DSR l - x rim n v l ff

Modified emulsions

Surface rou hness

Environmental conditions ( Temp and Humidity)


26/30

Testing of Emulsions

Shrinkage CracksRaveling FatigueRaveling BleedingRaveling ConstructionOf Seals

. Stabilit

. Breaking time

. Viscosity

.

. Stiffness

.

Fatigue

.

. Adhesion

. Cohesion

- 20 20 60 +

,


27/30

Next StepsEnergy Analysisnergy Analysis

Short-term

e ne es ma on mo e s.

Develop consensus on boundaries for life cycle analysis.

on uc quan a ve ana ys s o curren n us ry prac ce.

Long-term Evaluate road construction projects using life cycleanalysis methodologies.

.


28/30

Concluding Remarks.

Establish framework for evaluating asphalt

pavement sustainability.

.


29/30

Thank you for the opportunityhank you for the opportunityAcknowledgments:cknowledgments:

WRI and FHWASem Materials Supportem Materials SupportAdvisory GroupQuestions?

Hussain U. Bahia, [email protected]


30/30

Eco-Efficiency AnalysisPrivate Industry Contributionrivate Industry Contribution

Source: BASF

Date post:	02-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	luis-jorge-nahle-ortiz
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Bahia Studies on Emulsions

Documents