Ground Tire Rubber and Trans-Polyoctenamer as Asphalt ... · Ground Tire Rubber and Trans-Polyoctenamer as Asphalt Binder Additives Robert Amme [email protected] University of Denver Presentation

Ground Tire Rubber and Trans-Polyoctenamer as Asphalt Binder Additives

Robert [email protected]

University of DenverPresentation to the Western Research Institute 2004 Symposium on Additives

in Roadway AsphaltsCheyenne, Wyoming

June 23-25, 2004

Outline

I. Further Studies of Asphalt Rubber/Rubber Aggregate for paving of paths and trails (non-motorized use); Vestenamer® effects.

II. Asphalt-Rubber Binder viscosity: Field Measurement Standardization.

III. Progress with Asphalt-Rubber Chip Seal instalments in Colorado – performance after one year and 2004 sites.

IV. Tire-Roadway Noise Generation and the “Quiet Pavements Pilot Programs” (QP3).

Penn State “NECEPT” Report (Jan. 24, 2003) “Evaluation of Vestenamer Reactive Modifier in Crumb Rubber Asphalt” –for Degussa Corp.

Conclusions:1. Vestenamer® definitely reacts with the ground tire

rubber, and has a significant effect on the appearance and workability of the modified binder.

2. Two increases in binder PG grade were observed for some blends; both GTR and GTR + Vestenamerprovide higher rutting resistance compared to the control binder (PG58-28, Koch Pavement solutions).

3. Five percent GTR provides one grade bump in the performance grade (PG) of the binder.

Macrostructure of ARRA

Size distribution of the crumb rubber particles

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5

Sieve Size (mm)

Passing Percent

(%)

Rubber Modifier Rubber Aggregates

Dry Process for manufacturing ARRA

Dimensions of Tested Samples (compaction pressure: 140 kPa)

Blending effect on tension testing. (5% vestenamer modified ARRA 50-50, Testing temperature: 210C, compaction pressure: 140 kPa, Strain rate: 0.091 /min)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

Strain

Stre

ss (k

Pa)

Smoother surface of vestenamermodified ARRA

Vestenamer Effect on Mechanical behavior of ARRA (Testing temperature: 21 °C; Compaction pressure: 140 kPa)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Strain

Stre

ss (k

Pa)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

Strain (*-1)

Stre

ss (-

kPa)

0% Vestenamer/#4 5% Vestenamer/#4

Vestenamer ratio effect on the compression behavior of ARRA,

Strain rate: -0.091 /min

Vestenamer ratio effect on the tension behavior of ARRA,

Strain rate: 0.091 /min

Low temperature behavior of ARRA (Compaction pressure: 140 kPa)

-14000

-12000

-10000

-8000

-6000

-4000

-2000

0

2000

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

Strain (*-1)

Stre

ss (k

Pa)

Low temperature effect on tension behavior of 5%wt vestenamer modified ARRA,

Strain rate: 0.091 /min

Low temperature effect on compression behavior of 5% wt vestenamer modified ARRA,

Strain rate: -0.091 /min

T=190°C (374°F)

Summer 2004 AR Projects

Demonstrate an “ARRA” Trail for C-DOT and for state parks;Demonstrate 6 or 7 new Asphalt-Rubber Chip-Seal projects at sites with varying climates (one project may involve Vestenamer®) totaling ca. 700,000 yd2;Initiate sound level measurements for chip seals;Initiate skid resistance measurements on wet and dry AR chip-seal surfaces.

http://www.blacklidgeemulsions.com/rubber.htm

What is Noise, How is it Controlled, and How Does it Affect Our Lives

Doubling Traffic adds 3dBA

Effect of Distance On Noise Levels for Site 3D

Comparison of the Leq Data Relative to 50 ft away, 5 ft highAZ 202 Preproject PCCP

R2 = 0.894

R2 = 0.9711

R2 = 0.981

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87

Sound Pressure Level at 50x5 ft, dBA

Sou

nd L

evel

at V

aryi

ng D

ist,

dBA

50x12 100x5

250x5

How Is It Controlled

At the SourceVehicle & Tire Emissions

Through Distance3 dBA Reduction for Each Doubling of Distance25ft=70dBA, 50ft=67dBA, 100 ft=64

Through ObstructionsBerms, Walls, And Combination of both

The Technical Journey?

Development of Improved OGFC for Use in Snow Country (1970s-80s)Improved OGFC Used to Resist Reflective Cracking (1980s-90s)Improved OGFC Used as PCCP Overlay (1980s-2000s)Benefit For Smoothness (1990s)Benefit for Noise (1990s-2000s)

ADOT Uses ARFC to Provide Quiet Pavements

The ARFC is Minus 9.5mm & 9-9.5% Binder12.5 mm Thick When Used on Flexible Pavement25 mm Thick When Used on PCCPADOT Uses Pavement Type (ARFC) as a Noise Mitigation Strategy (4 dBA)

Controlled At the Source

Arizona Quiet Pavement Research Effort

FHWA/ADOT Quiet Pavement Pilot Program (QP3) or Composite Program—Ten Year, Multi Million Dollar EffortFlexible Pavement ProgramRigid Pavement ProgramStudy of Environmental Effects

Development of the Arizona Quiet Pavement Pilot Program

ADOT Receives a 4 dBA Credit for ARFCTen Year, Multi Million Dollar Research Program Underway

CompositeFlexibleRigid

Program Intended to Evaluate the Efficacy of Quiet Pavement Solutions

Quiet Pavement Pilot Program

Environmental Factors5 Minute L50 Values - AZ 101 Preproject PCCP

70

72

74

76

78

80

82

84

86

11:0011:1011:2011:3011:4011:5012:0012:1012:2012:3012:4012:5010:0010:1010:2010:3010:4010:5011:0011:1011:2011:3011:4011:50

Time of Day

Soun

d Pr

essu

re L

evel

, dB

A

50 ft x 5 ft

50 ft x 12 ft

100 ft x 5 ft

Aug 7th Aug 8th

Ways of Measuring Sound

Wayside (Far Field)Close Proximity (Near Field)Noise Intensity (Near Field)

ADOT ISO CPX Trailer

1995 Spg 2000 Spg 2001 Spg 2002 Spg 2003 2004

Noise Intensity

Network Level Evaluation of ARFC Surfaces

AR_ACFC Noise Levels Versus Pavement Age

y = 0.5453x + 93.279R2 = 0.5805

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Pavem ent Age

CP

X No

ise

Leve

ls d

BA

Evaluation of PCCP TiningMethods

Longitudinal Uniform Transverse

Random Transverse

SR 101 Before and After Results

Hz300 400 500 1 k 2 k 3 k 4 k L

dB(A)

40

60

80

100

120

C:( (A) Hz; 105.05 dB(A) / 2.00E-05 Pa; 3.577E+00 Pa) Averaged Sp

Hz300 400 500 1 k 2 k 3 k 4 k Lin(A)

dB(A)

40

60

80

100

120

C:( (A) Hz; 105.52 dB(A) / 2.00E-05 Pa; 3.776E+00 Pa) Averaged Spectrum Ch1 MicF

Hz300 400 500 1 k 2 k 3 k 4 k Lin(A)

dB(A)

20

40

60

80

100

120

C:( (A) Hz; 92.51 dB(A) / 2.00E-05 Pa; 844.4E-03 Pa) Averaged Spectrum Ch1 MicF

Tining Experiment Roadside Measurement Results at 50 ft

R2 = 0.3435

R2 = 0.4014

R2 = 0.5732

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

30 40 50 60 70 80

vehicle speed (mph)

Lmax

(dB

A)

RS1 random transverse, autos RS2 uniform longitudinal, autos RS3 uniform transverseRS1 random transverse, medium truck RS2 uniform longitudinal, medium truck RS3 uniform transverseRS1 random transverse, heavy trucks RS2 uniform longitudinal, heavy trucks RS3 uniform transverseLinear (RS1 random transverse, autos) Linear (RS2 uniform longitudinal, autos) Linear (RS3 uniform tra

Before and After Results of Site 3A

Sound Levels at 50 ft - AZ 101 Pre & Post ProjectUncorrected for Traffic Volume/Speed/Mix

70

72

74

76

78

80

82

84

8611

:00

11:0

511

:10

11:1

511

:20

11:2

511

:30

11:3

511

:40

11:4

511

:50

11:5

512

:00

12:0

512

:10

12:1

512

:20

12:2

512

:30

12:3

512

:40

12:4

512

:50

12:5

514

:10

14:1

514

:25

14:3

014

:35

14:4

014

:45

14:5

014

:55

15:0

015

:05

Time of Day

Soun

d Pr

essu

re L

evel

, dB

A

50 ft x 5 ft

50 ft x 12 ft

More Before and After Comparison for Site 3A Location

Arizona 101 Wayside Data at 50 ft - Pre & Post Project OGFCUncorrected for Traffic Volume/Speed/Mix

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

10 100 1000 10000

1/3 Octave Band Center Frequency, Hz

Soun

d Pr

essu

re L

evel

, dB

PCC Avg (82.2 dBA)

OGRFC Avg (74.3 dBA)

In Summary

Surface Type Does Matter-Noise Should be Controlled at the SourceNoise Should be Managed Just Like Friction, Roughness, Rutting, and Cracking

People Do Care How They Live-It’s a Quality of Life Issue!!!

Acknowledgments

Arizona DOT; Larry ScofieldRubber Pavements Association; Doug Carlson, executive director (www.rubberpavements.org)Colorado Scrap Tire Fund (Colo. Commission on Higher Education)