Mechanical Properties of Thin Surface Treatment for Pavement Maintenance

Hery Awan Susanto, Shih-Hsien Yang, Huan-Hsun Chou


Specification tests for thin surface treatment are mainly simulated or empirical; without considering fundamental mechanical or rheological properties of the material. Thus, it is difficult to incorporate the test results into mechanical-based pavement design analysis. A series of test methods, which quantify performance-related mechanical properties of thin surface treatment employed in pavement maintenance and pavement preservation is thus needed. The objective of this study is to investigate the performance-related mechanical properties of thin surface treatment materials for pavement maintenance and preservation. The Micro-Surfacing Mat and Precast Rubber Asphalt Mat were used in this study. The Finite Element Model result indicated that the Modified Leutner Shear Test adequate to evaluate the direct shear strength of the thin surface treatment. The results show that the sensitivity loading frequency and the temperature susceptibility of the Precast Rubber Asphalt Mat were reduced by Rubber Modified Asphalt content. The Precast Rubber Asphalt Mat has greater interfacial shear strength as well as shear stiffness compared to those of Micro-Surfacing Mat. The tack coat application rate is crucial for the interfacial shear strength of Precast Rubber Asphalt Mat. This research found that shear stress and the displacement rate are positively related to the interfacial shear strength and shear stiffness. The interfacial shear strength and shear stiffness are negatively related to testing temperature. The Micro-Surfacing Mat had higher dynamic direct shear modulus, lower loading frequency sensitivity, and better rutting resistance than Precast Rubber Asphalt Mat.


mechanical properties; Micro-Surfacing Mat (MSM); pavement maintenance; Precast Rubber Asphalt Mat (PRAM); shear strength; shear stiffness; thin surface treatment (TST)

Full Text:



AASHTO T 342-11:2015 Standard Method of Test for Determining Dynamic Modulus of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA)

Al-Qadi, I. L., Carpenter, S. H., Leng, Z., Ozer, H., & Trepanier, J. (2008). Tack coat optimisation for HMA overlays: Laboratory testing. Illinois Center for Transportation.

ASTM C136-06:2006 Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates

ASTM D3497-79:2003 Standard Test Method for Dynamic Modulus of Asphalt Concrete

ASTM D7000-04:2004 Standard Test Method for Sweep Test of Bituminous Emulsion Surface Treatment Samples

Austroads (2003a). Sprayed Sealing Guide, 18 pp.

Austroads (2003b). Guidelines, and Specification for Bituminous Slurry Surfacing, Austroads Publication No. AP–T26/03, Sydney, Australia, 51 pp.

Cackler, E. T., Ferragut, T., Harrington, D. S., Rasmussen, R. O., & Wiegand, P. (2006). Evaluation of US and European concrete pavement noise reduction methods.

Collop, A. C., Sutanto, M. H., Airey, G. D., & Elliott, R. C. (2009). Shear bond strength between asphalt layers for laboratory prepared samples and field cores. Construction and Building Materials, 23(6), 2251-2258.

Collop, A. C., Thom, N. H., & Sangiorgi, C. (2003, November). Assessment of bond condition using the Leutner shear test. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Transport (Vol. 156, No. 4, pp. 211-217). Thomas Telford Ltd.

Gransberg, D. D. (2010). Microsurfacing-A Synthesis of Highway Practice. National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), 411.

Hanson, D. I., & Prowell, B. D. (2004). Evaluation of circular texture meter for measuring surface texture of pavements (No. NCAT Report 04-05). The Center for Asphalt Technology (NCAT).

Hegarty, E. (2008, July). IAT guidelines for surface dressing in Ireland. In International Sprayed Sealing Conference, 1st, 2008, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Hoogenboom, P. C. J., & Spaan, R. (2005, January). Shear stiffness and maximum shear stress of tubular members. In The Fifteenth International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference. International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers.

ISSA A143-2004:2010 Recommended Performance Guidelines for Micro Surfacing

ISSA TB 100:2018 Laboratory Test Method for Wet Track Abrasion of Slurry Surfacing Systems

Kim, Y. R. & Jones, E. L. (2015). Development of a Testing System for Asphalt Surface Treatments. Final Report No. FHWA/NC/2009-01, Dept of Civil, Construction, & Environmental Engineering North Carolina State University with NC Dept of Transportation Research and Analysis Group.

Losa, M., & Di Natale, A. (2012). Evaluation of representative loading frequency for linear elastic analysis of asphalt pavements. Transportation Research Record, 2305(1), 150-161.

Lu, Q., & Steven, B. (2006). Friction Testing of Pavement Preservation Treatments: Literature Review. Project Report, Friction Testing of Pavement Preservation Treatments as part of Maintenance Task Order FY06/07, California Dept of Transportation Division of Research and Innovation and Division of Maintenance Office of Pavement Preservation.

Mollenhauer, K., Wistuba, M., & Rabe, R. (2009). Loading frequency and fatigue: In situ conditions & impact on test results. University of Minho, Portugal.

Page, S. J., Patrick, J. E. & Dongol, D. M. S. (1998). Alternative to Sand Circle Test for Measuring Texture Depth. Report No. 110, Transfund New Zealand Research, Transfund New Zealand.

Pidwerbesky, B. D., Waters, J. C., Gransberg, D. D., & Stemprok, R. (2006). Road surface texture measurement using digital image processing and information theory.

Pierce, L. M., & Kebede, N. (2015). Chip seal performance measures: best practices (No. WA-RD 841.1). Washington (State). Dept. of Transportation.

Smith, R. E., & Beatty, C. K. (1999). Microsurfacing usage guidelines. Transportation Research Record, 1680(1), 13-17.

Stroup-Gardiner, M., Newcomb, D. E., Epps, J. A., & Paulsen, G. L. (1990). Laboratory Test Methods and Field Correlations for Predicting the Performance of Chip Seals. In Asphalt Emulsions. ASTM International.

Tredrea, P. (2008). Development of laboratory measures to assess surfacings used in high stress applications (No. AP-T105/08).

Xiao, Y. (2013). Towards a performance evaluation method for durable and sustainable thin surfacings.

Xu, L. R., & Rosakis, A. J. (2002a). Impact failure characteristics in sandwich structures: part I: basic failure mode selection. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 39(16), 4215-4235.

Xu, L. R., & Rosakis, A. J. (2002b). Impact failure characteristics in sandwich structures. Part II: Effects of impact speed and interfacial strength. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 39(16), 4237-4248.

Xu, L. R., & Rosakis, A. J. (2003). An experimental study of impact-induced failure events in homogeneous layered materials using dynamic photoelasticity and high-speed photography. Optics and Lasers in Engineering, 40(4), 263-288.

Yang, S.H., & Liu, G.W. (2017). Using Packing Theory to Improve Micro-Surfacing Mix Design Procedure and Evaluating Its Long Term Performance. In Transportation Research Board 96th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers, Washington, DC, 8-12 January 2017. 370, 1-16.

Yazgan, B., & Senadheera, S. (2004). A New Testing Protocol for Sal Coat (Chip Seal) Material Selection. In Transportation Research Board, TRB 2004 Annual Meeting CD-Rom

DOI: 10.7250/bjrbe.2019-14.437


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Hery Awan Susanto, Shih-Hsien Yang, Huan-Hsun Chou

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.