Effects of Temperature on Interface Shear
Strength of Emulsified Tack Coats and
Its Relationship to Rheological Properties
Abraham Bae, Louay N. Mohammad, Mostafa A. Elseifi,
Joe Button, and Nachiketa Patel
The objective of this study was to investigate tack coat interface shear
bond characteristics at various temperatures and to relate tack coat
characteristics in the field to the rheological test results in the labora-
tory. Interface shear strength (ISS) of two emulsified asphalt tack coats
(CRS-1 and trackless) was evaluated at temperatures ranging from
−10°C to 60°C. Two emulsified tack coats were applied on full-scale
pavement test sections at application rates of 0.14, 0.28, and 0.70 L/m2.
Cores were then extracted from the full-scale test sites to be tested in
the laboratory while simulating different field conditions. Tests were con-
ducted with a newly developed direct shear device. The binder grade for
the residue of CRS-1 emulsion was PG 58-28. The high temperature grade
for the residue of the trackless emulsion was PG 82. Trackless material
was brittle at a low temperature, and its low temperature PG grade
could not be determined. Within the evaluated temperature range, the ISS
of the tacked interface increased with the decrease in temperature.
Generally, bonding performance, as measured by the ISS, of the track-
less emulsion was superior to CRS-1 emulsion, specifically at temperatures
greater than 40°C. In addition, results show that interface shear strength
for both tack coat materials at each application rate increased with an
increase of the binder rheology parameter G*/sin ␦. This relationship
can be used to establish a laboratory design threshold for this parameter,
to ensure that the selected application rate and tack coat material will
perform adequately in the field.
The performance of a hot-mix asphalt (HMA) overlay strongly
depends on the interface bond strength between the overlay and the
underlying pavement layers. A tack coat, which typically consists of
emulsified asphalt, has been commonly used to achieve the necessary
bonding between pavement layers and to ensure that they behave as
a single system that withstands traffic and environmental stresses.
Tack coat is normally applied to an existing pavement surface before
a new layer of HMA is placed. It may also be applied to the surface
A. Bae, Louisiana Transportation Research Center, and L. N. Mohammad,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Louisiana Transportation
Research Center, Louisiana State University, 4101 Gourrier Avenue, Baton
Rouge, LA 70808. M. A. Elseifi and N. Patel, Department of Civil and Environ-
mental Engineering, Louisiana State University, 3506 Patrick Taylor Hall, Baton
Rouge, LA 70803. J. Button, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M Univer-
sity, 3135 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-3135. Corresponding author: L. N.
Mohammad, louaym@lsu.edu.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board,
No. 2180, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington,
D.C., 2010, pp. 102–109.
DOI: 10.3141/2180-12
102
of a new HMA pavement layer before the next layer is placed, such
as between a HMA leveling course and a HMA surface course.
The influence of tack coat application on pavement performance
has been widely recognized among practitioners in the field; however,
the selection of tack coat material type, application rate, and place-
ment methods has been mainly based on experience and empirical
judgment. In addition, quality control and quality assurance testing
of the tack coat construction process is rarely conducted, which results
in the possibility of unacceptable performance of the interface. This
may lead to premature failure of the overlay, causing a decrease
in pavement service life. Excessive tack coat may promote shear
slippage at the interface. In contrast, insufficient tack coat may cause
tensile stresses to be concentrated at the bottom of the overlay,
resulting in cracking (1).
One of the major challenges facing state agencies is the choice of
the correct type and quantity of tack coat that would perform satis-
factorily in the field, given the environmental and traffic conditions
at the site. It has been widely acknowledged that optimum tack coat
application rates vary with pavement surface type, loading, asphalt
mix characteristics, and service temperature (2). However, while
considerable research has been conducted in the laboratory, little
effort has been devoted to relating laboratory-measured parameters
to field performance. Such a relationship would allow state agencies to
design tack coat application in the laboratory based on conditions in
the field. This may also lead to development of performance-based
guidelines for selection of emulsion-based tack coat materials.
Recently, a research project for tack coat materials and perfor-
mance, NCHRP Project 9-40, Optimization of Tack Coat for HMA
Placement, was initiated (3). A unique advantage of the approach
followed in this project is that all tests results were derived from
pavement cores after carefully monitored tack coat applications in
the field. As part of the research activities conducted in this project, the
objective of this study was to investigate shear bond characteristics
of the tack coat interface at various temperatures, and to relate tack
coat characteristics in the field to laboratory-measured rheological prop-
erties of the tack material. This led the researchers to establish useful
correlations between tack coat characteristics and interface shear
strength (ISS) in the field and the measured rheological properties
of tack coat in the laboratory.
BACKGROUND
Many studies investigated the effect of temperature on tack coat as
well as its relationship to the ISS (4, 5). With tests conducted at two
or three temperature levels, results of those studies mostly showed high
Bae, Mohammad, Elseifi, Button, and Patel
interface strength at low temperatures and low shear interface strength
at high temperatures. Rheological characteristics of asphalt-based
emulsions have been examined using conventional tests (6, 7), and
it was recently shown that emulsions can be characterized using the
performance grade (PG) grading specification system (8). This refer-
enced study performed conventional and state-of-practice rheological
tests for emulsions, and it attempted to establish useful relationships
with interface shear behavior based on laboratory-prepared samples.
Uzan et al. evaluated the variation of ISS properties with tem-
perature based on laboratory shear test results (5). Direct shear
tests were conducted at a constant shearing rate of 2.5 mm/min at
two temperatures: 25°C and 55°C. One type of tack coat material
(Pen 60-70) was used at five application rates ranging from 0 to
1.94 L/m2. Results of this study showed that the ISS decreased with the
increase in temperature. The tack coat optimum application rate also
varied with temperature: 0.97 L/m2 at 25°C and 0.49 and 0.97 L/m2 at
55°C. These results seem to agree with the findings of Canestrari et al.,
who concluded that the influence of tack coat type is not pronounced
at high pavement service temperatures (40°C) at which modified
and unmodified emulsions behaved similarly (9). Mohammad et al.
concluded that, at high temperatures, the ISS was not sensitive to the
application rate, and mixture characteristics are the controlling
factors (1).
Given the results of previous studies, temperature apparently plays
a critical role in dictating the performance of tack coat materials at
the interface. Therefore, the need exists to evaluate the influence of
this factor over a wide range of temperatures and for different types of
tack coat materials. In addition, since tack coat is used as a stand-alone
material in the pavement structure and not part of a mixture, it may
be possible to correlate the rheological properties of emulsion to the
field performance at the interface. To that end, this study attempts
to reveal quantitative and qualitative correlations between emulsion
rheological behavior and ISS at various temperatures based on testing
of field-core specimens.
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
Test Matrix
A full factorial experiment was designed to test the effects of
temperature, emulsified tack coat type, and residual application rate
on interface shear bond strength; see Table 1. The factorial matrix
consisted of eight temperatures, two emulsified tack coats, and three
residual application rates, resulting in a total of 48 test conditions.
Each test condition had two replicates to minimize variation due to
experimental errors, resulting in a total of 96 interface shear tests.
Test temperatures ranged from −10°C to 60°C, with a 10°C interval.
Three residual application rates were considered in this study: 0.14,
0.28, and 0.70 L/m2. The experimental program was designed to
TABLE 1 Test Factorial
Variable Content Level
Emulsified tack coat Trackless, CRS-1 2 CRS-1 and trackless tack coats, the mean profile depth (MPD) was
Residual application rate 0.14, 0.28, and 0.70 L/m2 3 measured using a road surface profiler, DYNATEST 5051 Mark III,
Temperature −10°C, 0°C, 10°C, 20°C, 30°C, 8
40°C, 50°C, 60°C
Replicates Two replicates at each temperature 2 of the existing surface was kept constant in the conducted experiment.
Total number of tested specimens 96
103
present the performance of tack coats between two HMA layers, a
new overlay on an existing pavement. Tack coat was uniformly dis-
tributed with 100% coverage. The existing HMA surface condition
was dry and clean before distribution of tack coat in the field.
The two emulsified tack coats employed in this study were a
cationic rapid setting (CRS-1) and a trackless tack coat, which
consists of a polymer-modified emulsion with a hard base asphalt
cement. Performance graded (PG) and softening point tests were
performed on the asphalt binder residues according to ASTM D6373,
Standard Specification for Performance Graded Asphalt Binder and
ASTM D36, Standard Test Method for Softening Point of Bitumen
(Ring-and-Ball Apparatus), respectively. All asphalt binder residues
were obtained according to AASHTO D244, Residue by Evaporation.
Rheology of Emulsified Tack Residues
Table 2 presents the Superpave® PG tests conducted on the residue
of the two tack coats emulsions considered in this study. The binder
grade for the residue of CRS-1 emulsion was PG 58-28. The high
temperature grade for the residue of the trackless emulsion was PG 82.
The trackless was brittle at low temperature, and the low tempera-
ture PG binder grade for this type of tack coat material could not be
determined. While this study assumed the applicability of the binder
aging protocol for tack coat emulsions, validation of the assumption
is necessary to understand the aging mechanism for emulsified
tack coats.
To establish sound correlations between the rheological properties
of emulsified tack coat materials and the shear strength at the inter-
face, both tack coat materials were tested using the dynamic shear
rheometer (DSR) at a temperature ranging from −10°C to 60°C, with
a 10°C interval. This was the same temperature range used in interface
shear testing. Testing was conducted using an AR2000 rheometer
that was set up to work in the dynamic shear mode. Two sample sizes
were used depending on the testing temperature: a sample with a
25-mm diameter and a thickness of 1 mm was used at high tempera-
tures (from 40°C to 60°C), and a sample with an 8-mm diameter and
a thickness of 2 mm was used at low and intermediate temperatures
(from −0°C to 30°C). Figure 1 presents the DSR test results for both
tack coat materials. As shown in this figure, the complex shear modu-
lus (G*) increased linearly for both tack coat materials on a semi-
logarithmic scale. As expected, the trackless materials produced
higher G* values than CRS-1 did.
Interface Shear Strength Sample Preparation
Test lanes were prepared at the Louisiana Transportation Research
Center (LTRC) Pavement Research Facility to accommodate the test
factorial, as presented in Table 1. The total length of each lane was
56.4 m long and 4.0 m wide. Each lane contained a test section and
a truck access section. The length of the access section was selected
to ensure that the distributor truck could achieve the required speed,
to apply the correct tack coat application rate. Specimens for each test
condition were cored from the corresponding lane. Before applying
according to ASTM E1845. Both existing test lanes showed a consis-
tent surface roughness of 1.09 mm, which indicates that the roughness
An Etnyre computerized tack coat distributor truck, Model 2000,
was used in the application of tack coat materials. While the trackless
104 Transportation Research Record 2180

TABLE 2 Performance Grade Results for CRS-1 and Trackless Tack Coats

Aging Status Test Property AASHTO Method CRS-1 Trackless

Original binder Rotational viscosity, Pa-s 135°C T316 0.3 2.5

Dynamic shear 10 rad/s G*/sin δ, kPa T315 3.0 (52°C) 19.0 (64°C)
1.3 (58°C) 7.6 (70°C)
0.6 (64°C) 3.4 (76°C)
1.5 (82°C)
0.7 (88°C)
Softening point (°C) 42.5 76.0
Rolling thin-film Mass change (%) T240 0.1 N/A
oven residue Dynamic shear, 10 rad/s G*/sin δ, kPa T315 2.9 (58°C) 16.9 (70°C)
7.4 (76°C)
3.4 (82°C)
1.5 (88°C)
Pressure-aging Dynamic shear, 10 rad/s G*sin δ, kPa T315 3,306 (19°C) 10,907 (25°C)
a
vessel residue, Bending beam creep stiffness, S, MPa 60 s T313 86.8 (−12°C)
100°C 187.0 (−18°C)
a
Bending beam creep stiffness, m-value 60 s T313 0.340 (−12°C)
0.310 (−18°C)
a
Direct tension 1.0 mm/min (%) T314 1.1 (−18°C)
PG grading PG 58-28 N/A

NOTE: N/A = not available.

a
Trackless residue broke during testing.

tack coat was applied at a temperature of 82°C, the CRS-1 tack coat
material was applied at a temperature of 68°C. Tack coats were applied
in the undiluted state. Application rate was adjusted by altering the
truck speed and nozzle type and size. To verify the amount of applied
tack coats, geotextile pads were placed according to ASTM D2995,
and the amount of tack coat collected on each pad was measured.
Researchers verified that both tack coats were accurately sprayed with
low coefficients of variation (4).
A 12.5-mm HMA mixture was placed on top of the tacked surfaces
at a thickness of approximately 76.2 mm. A material transfer device
was used to transfer the mixture from the haul trucks to the hopper of
the paver, to eliminate problems associated with construction traffic
on tacked surfaces. A minimum of six test specimens were obtained
from each test section using a Simco 255 pavement test core drill.
Before testing, cored samples were cut to a height of 152.4 mm,
avoiding disturbances to the interface and the top layer.
1.0E+06
Trackless
Complex Modulus, G* (kPa)
Test Procedure
A direct shear device, known as the Louisiana Interlayer Shear
Strength Tester (LISST), was developed for the characterization
of ISS of cylindrical specimens (4). The device consists of two
main parts: a shearing frame and a reaction frame. Only the shearing
frame is allowed to move, while the reaction frame is stationary.
A cylindrical specimen is placed inside the shearing and reaction
frames and is locked in place with collars. Loading is then applied
to the shearing frame. As the vertical load is gradually increased,
shear failure occurs at the interface. The loading system was a
universal testing machine manufactured by James Cox & Sons, Inc.
This machine had a temperature chamber that can control the test
temperature from −20°C to 80°C. The maximum load capacity that the
actuator of machine can exert was 111.2 kN. Temperature condi-
tioning and interface shear testing were conducted inside the test
chamber. Figure 2 illustrates the followed test procedure. As shown
in Figure 2a, two replicate samples were conditioned for at least 4 h at
the test temperature. Samples were then placed in the middle of the gap
between the shearing and the fixed frames inside the testing chamber,
to minimize temperature loss (Figure 2b) and were then conditioned

1.0E+05 CRS-1 for 30 min at the target temperature to compensate for temperature loss
during sample placement on the LISST device (Figure 2c). Finally,
1.0E+04 shear load was applied by the shear loading frame at a loading rate of
y = 430,032e-0.159x
R² = 0.99 2.54 mm/s until failure, as shown in Figure 2d.
1.0E+03

1.0E+02 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

y = 30,875e-0.168x
R² = 0.99 Interface Bond Strength at Various Temperatures
1.0E+01

Table 3 presents the ISS test results for trackless and CRS-1 speci-
1.0E+00
mens. These values represent the average for two test specimens. At
-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
temperatures over 50°C, some specimens collapsed due to their own
Temperature (°C)
weights before shearing. This mostly occurred at a low application
FIGURE 1 Relationship between complex modulus (G*) rate and for the CRS-1 emulsion. This indicates that the trackless tack
for trackless and CRS-1 unaged residues and temperature. had a greater shear resistance than CRS-1 did at high temperatures. The
Bae, Mohammad, Elseifi, Button, and Patel 105

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

FIGURE 2 Illustrations of test procedure for interface shear testing: (a) sample conditioning (4 h), (b) assemblage of sample and
LISST device, (c) stabilization of test temperature (30 min), and (d) application of shear loading.

binder PG grade used in the asphalt mixture was PG64-22. Therefore,
test temperatures ranging from 0°C to 60°C did not exceed the binder
PG grading range. Penetrating shear failure within the mixture was
not observed during the testing process.
Figure 3a and 3b presents the variation of the ISS with application
rates and test temperatures. For both tack coats, as the application
rate increased, the ISS increased at all temperatures, and the highest
ISS values were measured at the rate of 0.70 L/m2. Therefore, for
the range of application rates from 0.14 to 0.70 L/m2, there was no
optimum strength at the intermediate application rate, as might have
been expected. This may be attributed to the highly oxidized and
coarse HMA surface at the selected site that required greater tack coat
rates than expected. For CRS-1, the ISS did not consistently increase
with the increase in application rates at a temperature of 20°C or
higher. However, ISS consistently increased with application rate
for the trackless material, even at high temperatures.
Variation of the ISS with test temperatures at each application
rate is presented in Figure 4. As shown in this figure, the ISS of
trackless increased from 60°C to 0°C, and then started to decrease
towards −10°C. This is due to poor elongation properties of the
106 Transportation Research Record 2180

TABLE 3 Interface Shear Strength at Various Test Temperatures

Mean Interface Shear Strength (kPa)

Trackless CRS-1
Temperature
(°C) 0.14 L/m2 0.28 L/m2 0.70 L/m2 0.14 L/m2 0.28 L/m2 0.70 L/m2

−10 910 1,763 2,554 1,018 1,357 2,287

0 876 1,814 2,771 770 1,181 1,491
10 610 1,338 2,225 589 628 830
20 274 702 1,155 317 319 314
30 151 316 519 76 116 148
40 26 123 235 20 13 22
a a a
50 30 98 19
a a a a
60 37 124

a
Specimens collapsed by their own weights before shear loading was applied.

3000
-10 C 0C
2750
10 C 20 C
2500
Interface Shear Strength (kPa)

30 C 40 C
2250 50 C 60 C
2000
1750
1500
1250
1000
750
500
250
0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80
Residual Application Rate (l/m2)
(a)

2500

2250 -10 C 0C
10 C 20 C
Interface Shear Strength (kPa)

2000
30 C 40 C
1750
50 C
1500

1250

1000

750

500

250

0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80
Residual Application Rate (l/m2)
(b)

FIGURE 3 Variation of ISS with residual application rate and test

temperature: (a) trackless and (b) CRS-1.
Bae, Mohammad, Elseifi, Button, and Patel 107

1200 2000
3200

1800
2800 Trackless
1000
1600 Trackless CRS-1
Trackless
CRS-1 2400

Interface Shear Strength (kPa)

Interface Shear Strength (kPa)

Interface Shear Strength (kPa)

CRS-1
1400
800
1200 2000

600 1000 1600

800
1200
400
600
800
400
200
400
200

0 0 0
-10 0 10 20 30 40 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Temperature (°C) Temperature (°C) Temperature (°C)
(a) (b) (c)
2 2 2
FIGURE 4 Variation of ISS with test temperature: (a) 0.14 L/m , (b) 0.28 L/m , and (c) 0.70 L/m .

trackless at low temperatures; see Table 1. In contrast, the ISS of the bonding performance of the trackless was superior to that of the
CRS-1 kept on increasing as the temperature decreased. However, CRS-1 as the temperature increased. The ratio of the k-modulus and
the trackless material still produced higher shear strengths than ISS was not plotted at a temperature greater than 40°C, since the
CRS-1 did at low temperatures and at application rates of 0.28 and bonding resistance of CRS-1 was significantly lower than that of the
0.70 L/m2. trackless material. The ISS values for the trackless emulsion tested
at temperatures greater than 40°C were much higher than those of
similar specimens with CRS-1 emulsion, shown in Table 3. Since the
Interface Stiffness Characteristics temperature at a pavement interface can reach 40°C or higher during
at Various Temperatures the summer months, the trackless type of emulsion would provide
greater shear resistance than the CRS-1 emulsion.
Stiffness of the interface is an important property for characterizing
the strength of bonding at the interface and for calculating the response
of the pavement structure to traffic loading. The interface stiffness Relationship Between Interface Shear Strength
is defined by Goodman’s constitutive law, as follows (9): and Tack Coat Rheology
τ = kξ (1) The parameter G*/sin δ is used as an indicator of the binder suscep-
tibility to permanent deformation in the Superpave binder specification
where
τ = interlayer shear stress (kPa),
ξ = interlayer displacement within the interface, and 350
k = interlayer tangential modulus (kN/mm3).
Interface Shear Stress (kPa)

300
The k-modulus is computed by dividing the peak stress by the Peak stress
displacement at failure from the stress versus displacement curve. 250
Figure 5 presents a typical interface shear stress and displacement 200
response curve. The peak stress (ISS) and the k-modulus were k-modulus
calculated, shown in Figure 5. 150
Variations of the k-modulus ratio and the ISS ratio between the Trackless 0.14 l/m2 at 30 °C
100
trackless and CRS-1 are shown in Figure 6a and 6b, respectively. In
Figure 6a, it is observed that the k-modulus of the trackless material 50
was greater than or equal to that for the CRS-1 tack coat, except
0
for residual application rate of 0.70 L/m2 at 30°C. In addition, the 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
difference between the two tack coats was marginal at an application Displacement (cm)
rate of 0.14 L/m2, except at a test temperature of 30°C, shown in
Figure 6b. However, at an application rate of 0.28 and 0.70 L/m2, FIGURE 5 Typical ISS versus displacement.
108 Transportation Research Record 2180

2.0 4.0

k-modulusTrackless /k-modulusCRS-1
0.14 l/m2 0.28 l/m2 0.70 l/m2
3.5 0.14 l/m2
0.28 l/m2
1.5 3.0

ISSTrackless /ISSCRS-1
0.70 l/m2
2.5

1.0 2.0

1.5

0.5 1.0

0.5

0.0 0.0
-10 0 10 20 30 -10 0 10 20 30
Temperature (°C) Temperature (°C)
(a) (b)

FIGURE 6 Ratio of trackless to CRS-1 in regard to (a) k-modulus and (b) ISS.

system. It was, however, adopted in this study because it simulates application rate also increased. However, it was found that the inter-
oscillation in a shear mode, which closely resembles the interface face stiffness did not vary noticeably with the residual application rate,
shear mode between two layers. The relationships between ISS as shown in Figure 8. Therefore, it may be concluded that the amount
and G*/sin δ and between k-modulus and G*/sin δ are presented in of tack coat material influences the ISS but not the interface stiffness.
Figures 7 and 8, respectively. Results presented in Figure 7 indicate It is believed that the interface stiffness modulus would be mainly
that as G*/sinδ increased, the ISS for both tack coat materials at each influenced by the surface texture or roughness.

3000 3000
0.14 l/m2
Interface Shear Strength

Interface Shear Strength

2
2500 0.14 l/m 2500
0.28 l/m2
0.28 l/m2
2000 2000 0.70 l/m2
0.70 l/m2
(kPa)

(kPa)

1500 1500

1000 1000

500 500

0 0
1.0E+01 1.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+04 1.0E+05 1.0E+06 1.0E+01 1.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+04 1.0E+05 1.0E+06
G*/sinδ (kPa) G*/sinδ (kPa)
(a) (b)

FIGURE 7 Relationship between ISS and G*/sin ␦: (a) trackless and (b) CRS-1.

12,000 7,000
2
10,000 0.14 l/m 6,000
k-modulus (kN/m3)

k-modulus (kN/m3)

0.28 l/m2
5,000
8,000 0.70 l/m2
4,000
6,000
3,000
4,000 0.14 l/m2
2,000
0.28 l/m2
2,000 1,000 0.70 l/m2
0 0
1.0E+01 1.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+04 1.0E+05 1.0E+06 1.0E+01 1.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+04 1.0E+05 1.0E+06
G*/sinδ (kPa) G*/sinδδ (kPa)
(a) (b)

FIGURE 8 Relationship between k-modulus and G*/sin ␦: (a) trackless and (b) CRS-1.
Bae, Mohammad, Elseifi, Button, and Patel
As shown in Figure 7, the ISS values did not exhibit much dif-
ference for a G*/sinδ value below about 100 kPa and 1,000 kPa for
trackless and CRS-1, respectively. At higher G*/sinδ values, the
difference in ISS between the three application rates became more
pronounced. Also noticed was that the trackless material produced
greater ISS differences than CRS-1 did at the same G*/sinδ values.
The relationship shown in Figure 7 between the ISS and G*/sinδ may
be used to establish a laboratory design threshold for this parameter,
to ensure that the selected application rate and tack coat material
would perform acceptably in the field. However, setting this limit on
G*/sinδ would require field validation of tack coat performance and
that the required ISS be greater than the predicted shear stress at the
interface due to traffic or thermal loading, or both. The variation of
the limit on G*/sinδ with surface texture and surface type should also
be investigated. The influence of surface texture on tack coat ISS has
been investigated as part of NCHRP 9-40 (10). Results indicated a
direct relationship between the roughness of the existing surface and
the developed shear strength at the interface. Therefore, a milled HMA
surface would provide the greatest ISS, followed by a PCC surface,
existing HMA, and new HMA surface.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The objective of this study was to investigate tack coat interface shear
bond characteristics at various temperatures and to relate tack coat
characteristics in the field to rheological test results in the laboratory.
The ISS of two emulsified tack coats was evaluated at a temperature
ranging from −10°C to 60°C. Two emulsified tack coats were applied
on full-scale test sections at three application rates: 0.14, 0.28, and
0.70 L/m2. Cores were extracted from a full-scale test site to simulate
different field conditions and were tested using a direct shear device.
On the basis of these results, the following conclusions may be drawn:
• The binder grade for the residue of CRS-1 emulsion was
PG 58-28. The high temperature grade for the residue of the track-
less emulsion was PG 82. Trackless material was brittle at low
temperature, and the low temperature PG binder grade could not be
determined.
• Both tack coat materials showed the highest shear strengths at
an application rate of 0.70 L/m2. Within the tested application rate
range, it was difficult to determine the optimum residual application
rate. This may indicate that, under actual field conditions, optimum
application rates may be greater than what is commonly predicted
from laboratory-based experiments.
• Within the evaluated temperature range, the ISS of the tacked
interface increased with the decrease in temperature. In general, the
bonding performance, as measured by ISS, of the trackless emulsion
was superior to that of the CRS-1 emulsion, especially at temperatures
greater than 40°C.
• Results of this study show that the ISS for both tack coat
materials at each application rate increased with an increase of the
binder rheology parameter G*/sinδ. This relationship can be used to
109
establish a laboratory design threshold for these parameters, to ensure
that the selected application rate and tack coat material will perform
acceptably in the field.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper is based on the results of NCHRP 9-40, Optimization
of Tack Coat for HMA Placement. The authors acknowledge the
assistance of the Technical Review Panel for NCHRP Project 9-40
and the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development.
The authors also acknowledge the assistance of Asphalt Products
Unlimited, Blacklidge, and Coastal Contractor Bridge, Inc., in pro-
viding the tack coat products and construction of the test lanes at the
LTRC Pavement Research Facility.
REFERENCES
1. Mohammad, L. N., M. A. Raqib, and B. Huang. Influence of Asphalt Tack
Coat Materials on Interface Shear Strength. In Transportation Research
Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1789, Trans-
portation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C.,
2002, pp. 56–65.
2. Canestrari, F., and E. Santagata. Temperature Effects on the Shear
Behaviour of Tack Coat Emulsions Used in Flexible Pavements.
International Journal of Pavement Engineering, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2005,
pp. 39–46.
3. Mohammad, L. N., and J. Button. Optimization of Tack Coat for HMA
Placement. NCHRP Project 9-40. Phase I Report. Louisiana Transporta-
tion Research Center, Baton Rouge, 2005.
4. Mohammad, L. N., A. Bae, M. Elseifi, J. Button, and J. Scherocman.
Interface Shear Strength Characteristics of Emulsified Tack Coats. Jour-
nal of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 78, 2009,
pp. 249–278.
5. Uzan, J., M. Livneh, and Y. Eshed. Investigation of Adhesion Proper-
ties between Asphaltic-Concrete Layers. Journal of the Association of
Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 47, 1978, pp. 495–521.
6. Dunn, C. S., and M. N. Salem. Temperature and Time Effect on the
Shear Strength of Sand Stabilized with Cationic Bitumen Emulsion.
In Highway Research Record 442, TRB, National Research Council,
Washington, D.C., 1973, pp. 113–124.
7. Hardin, J. C., S. D. Ban, and H. E. Schweyer. Rheology of Asphalt
Emulsion Residues. Journal of the Association of Asphalt Paving
Technologists, Vol. 48, 1979, pp. 65−90.
8. Marasteanu, M. O., and T. R. Clyne. Rheological Characterization of
Asphalt Emulsions Residues. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering,
2006, pp. 398–407.
9. Canestrari, F., G. Ferrotti, M. N. Partl, and E. Santagata. Advanced Test-
ing and Characterization of Interlayer Shear Resistance. In Transporta-
tion Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board,
No. 1929, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies,
Washington, D.C., 2005, pp. 69–78.
10. Mohammad, L. N., A. Bae, M. Elseifi, J. Button, and N. Patel. Effects
of Pavement Surface Type and Sample Preparation Method on Tack
Coat Interface Shear Strength. In Transportation Research Record:
Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2180, Transporta-
tion Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C.,
2010, pp. 93–101.
The Bituminous Materials Section peer-reviewed this paper.