Skip navigation
View Cart

Pavement

Cover of PMB Sprayed Seal Trials: 12 Month Summary Report
PMB Sprayed Seal Trials: 12 Month Summary Report
  • Publication no: AP-T253-13
  • ISBN: 978-1-925037-27-2
  • Published: 28 October 2013

This report details of the performance of polymer modified binder (PMB) trial sites in South Australia and New South Wales after 12 months service life. It includes related information such as the seal designs, binder testing in the laboratory, site inspections, surveys and photographic records. The trials are part of an Austroads project which aims to provide a measure of the relative performance of current PMBs used in strain alleviating membranes (SAMs) in sprayed bituminous sealing.

The binders were selected according to the latest Austroads PMB specification framework AGPT/T190 which has revised PMB classifications and includes the introduction of a new grade that is yet to be produced and field validated. Field validation of the performance of these current generation PMBs by means of these trials will ensure appropriate binder selection enabling longer seal life and reduced maintenance costs.

Nationally conducted trials will also avoid costly duplication of effort that would otherwise occur by conducting individual trials in various jurisdictions, thereby reducing both jurisdictional and industry costs, and reducing time delays in introducing improved binders into periodic reseal programs around Australia and New Zealand.

  • 1. Introduction
    • 1.1. Background
    • 1.2. Objectives
  • 2. Location of trials
    • 2.1. Coober Pedy Trial Site
      • 2.1.1. Location
      • 2.1.2. Existing Condition
      • 2.1.3. Climatic Conditions
      • 2.1.4. Traffic Count
      • 2.1.5. Site Detail
    • 2.2. Cooma Trial Site
      • 2.2.1. Location
      • 2.2.2. Existing Condition
      • 2.2.3. Climatic Conditions
      • 2.2.4. Traffic Count
      • 2.2.5. Site Detail
  • 3. Seal designs
    • 3.1. Coober Pedy Seal Designs
    • 3.2. Cooma Seal Designs
  • 4. periodic inspections
    • 4.1. Coober Pedy Seal Performance
      • 4.1.1. Section A1 and A2 – C170 (Control)
      • 4.1.2. Section B1 and B2 – S10E
      • 4.1.3. Section C1 and C2 – S20E
      • 4.1.4. Section D1 and D2 – S35E
      • 4.1.5. Section E1 and E2 –Shell S5E
      • 4.1.6. Section F1 and F2 – S45R
      • 4.1.7. Section G1 and G2 – S15E
      • 4.1.8. Section H1 and H2 – SAMI S20E SS
      • 4.1.9. Shandy Section
    • 4.2. Cooma Seal Performance
      • 4.2.1. Section A – S10E
      • 4.2.2. Section B – S35E
      • 4.2.3. Section C – S15E
      • 4.2.4. Section D – S15RF
      • 4.2.5. Section E – S20E
      • 4.2.6. Section F (Northbound) – Fulton Hogan Surfix 70X
      • 4.2.7. Section F (Southbound) – SAMI E40HR
      • 4.2.8. Section G – C170 (Control)
      • 4.2.9. Section H (Northbound) – S15E
      • 4.2.10. Section H (Southbound) – SAMI Polyseal HR
    • 4.3. General Discussion
  • 5. Binder Testing
    • 5.1. Test Methods
    • 5.2. Emulsion Extraction
    • 5.3. Coober Pedy Binder Test Results
      • 5.3.1. C170 Bitumen
      • 5.3.2. Austroads Grade PMBs
      • 5.3.3. Proprietary PMBs
    • 5.4. Cooma Binder Test Results
      • 5.4.1. C170 Bitumen
      • 5.4.2. Austroads Grade PMBs
      • 5.4.3. Extracted Emulsion Binders
    • 5.5. General Discussion
  • 6. Characterisation of recovered binders
    • 6.1. Sample Preparation
      • 6.1.1. Binder Recovery Procedure
      • 6.1.2. Recovery of Crumb Rubber Modified Binders
      • 6.1.3. Emulsion Extraction Procedure
    • 6.2. Dynamic Shear Rheometer and Test Method
      • 6.2.1. Test Procedure
    • 6.3. Data Analysis: Age Hardening
    • 6.4. Data Analysis: Changes in Viscoelastic Properties
      • 6.4.1. DSR ( and PMBs
      • 6.4.2. DSR ( and Bitumens
      • 6.4.3. DSR (: Data Overview
    • 6.5. Recovered Binder Test: Summary and Conclusions
  • 7. texture measurement
    • 7.1. Coober Pedy
    • 7.2. Cooma
    • 7.3. General Discussion
  • 8. Conclusions
  • References
  • Appendix A Aggregate Coverage
  • A.1 Coober Pedy
  • A.2 Cooma
  • Appendix B Test Section Photographs
  • B.1 Coober Pedy
  • B.2 Cooma
  • Appendix C Periodic Inspection Data
  • C.1 Coober Pedy
  • C.1.1 Section A1
  • C.1.2 Section A2
  • C.1.3 Section B1
  • C.1.4 Section B2
  • C.1.5 Section C1
  • C.1.6 Section C2
  • C.1.7 Section D1
  • C.1.8 Section D2
  • C.1.9 Section E1
  • C.1.10 Section E2
  • C.1.11 Section F1
  • C.1.12 Section F2
  • C.1.13 Section G1
  • C.1.14 Section G2
  • C.1.15 Section H1
  • C.1.16 Section H2
  • C.2 Cooma
  • C.2.1 Section A
  • C.2.2 Section B
  • C.2.3 Section C
  • C.2.4 Section D
  • C.2.5 Section E
  • C.2.6 Section F Northbound
  • C.2.7 Section F Southbound
  • C.2.8 Section G
  • C.2.9 Section H Northbound, Slow Lane
  • C.2.10 Section H Northbound, Overtaking Lane
  • C.2.11 Section H Southbound
  • C.3 Notes from Post-trial
  • Appendix D DSR Test Results
Related publications
Guide to Pavement Technology Part 2: Pavement Structural Design
AGPT02-24
Webinar: Validation of Superpave™ Method of Asphalt Compaction for Australasia
WEB-T376-24
Guide to Pavement Technology Part 1: Introduction to Pavement Technology
AGPT01-23
View all related publications
Latest Pavement News
5 Apr 2024
New technical report revises mix design procedure in light of laboratory compaction equipment changes

In a significant development for the Australian and New Zealand road construction industries, Austroads has updated its mix design procedure for asphalt compaction.
4 Apr 2024
Feasible alternatives to hydrated lime in asphalt mixes

In a bid to address concerns surrounding the sustainability of incorporating hydrated lime in asphalt mixes to reduce the risk of moisture damage occurring, Austroads has released a new research report that assesses the suitability of using anti-stripping additives as a potential alternative to hydrated lime.
View all news