Abstract
Cracking is an inevitable fact of asphalt concrete pavements and plays a major role in pavement deterioration. Pavement cracking is one of the main factors determining the frequency and method of repair. Cracks can be treated with a number of preventative maintenance actions, including overlay surface treatments such as slurry sealing, crack sealing, or crack filling. Pavement cracks can show up as one or all of the following types: transverse, longitudinal, fatigue, block, reflective, edge, and slippage. Crack sealing is a frequently used pavement maintenance treatment because it significantly extends the pavement service life. However, crack sealant often fails prematurely due to a loss of adhesion. Because current test methods are mostly empirical and only provide a qualitative measure of the bond strength, they cannot accurately predict the adhesive failure of the sealant. This study introduces a laboratory test aimed at assessing the bonding of hot-poured crack sealant to the walls of pavement cracks. A pneumatic adhesion tensile testing instrument (PATTI) was adopted to measure the bonding strength of the hot-poured crack sealant as a function of the curing time and temperature. Based on a limited number of test results, the hot-poured crack sealants have very different bonding performances. Therefore, this test method can be proposed as part of a newly developed performance-based standard specification for hot-poured crack sealants for use in the future. PURPOSES : The purpose of this study was to evaluate both the adhesion and failure performance of a crack sealant as a function of its curing time and curing temperature. METHODS: A pneumatic adhesion tensile testing instrument (PATTI) was adopted to measure the adhesion performance of a crack sealant as a function of the curing time and curing temperature. RESULTS: With changes in the curing time, curing temperature, and sealant type, the bond strengths were found to be significantly different. Also, higher bond strengths were measured at lower temperatures. Different sealant types produced completely different bond strengths and failure behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: The bonding strength of an evaluated crack sealant was shown to differ depending on various factors. Two sealant types, which were composed of different raw materials, were shown to perform differently. The newly proposed test offers the possibility of evaluating and differentiating between different crack sealants. Based on alimited number of test results, this test method can be proposed as part of a newly developed performance-based standard specification for crack sealants or as part of a guideline for the selection of hot-poured crack sealant in the future.
