Road Materials and Pavement Design

ISSN: 1468-0629 (Print) 2164-7402 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/trmp20

Application of microsurfacing in repairing

pavement surface rutting

R. Hafezzadeh & A. Kavussi

To cite this article: R. Hafezzadeh & A. Kavussi (2019): Application of microsurfacing

in repairing pavement surface rutting, Road Materials and Pavement Design, DOI:
10.1080/14680629.2019.1663243

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2019.1663243

Published online: 18 Sep 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=trmp20
Road Materials and Pavement Design, 2019
https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2019.1663243

Application of microsurfacing in repairing pavement surface rutting

R. Hafezzadeh ∗ and A. Kavussi†

Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

(Received 30 October 2018; accepted 21 August 2019 )

Rutting that causes roughness on the surface of pavements is one of the pavements distresses
that occurs mainly as a result of excessive loading on roads. The accumulation of water in
rutted areas at rainy conditions results in reduced skid resistance, creating accident-risk con-
ditions. One of the rapid and cost-effective practices in filling ruts is applying microsurfacing
mixes in the rutted areas. In this research, a coarse size microsurfacing mix was designed and
tested using a load wheel, a cohesiometer and wet track abrasion tests. The bitumen binders
varied from 6.3% to 10% of the retained bitumen and various amounts of latex, ranging from
3 to 5%, were applied. Based on the above testing results, the optimum condition consisted of
the addition of 5% SBR latex to emulsion mix containing 8.2% residual bitumen. With this
formulation, the mix showed almost 50% increase in both abrasion and wheel load rutting
resistance.
Keywords: Microsurfacing; latex; rutting; retained bitumen; loaded wheel

1. Introduction
Pavements distress as a consequence of a combination of several factors. The main mechanisms
of pavement distresses are environment and load-related effects. Load-related effects result in
the expansion of structural deteriorations like fatigue cracking and rutting. Environmental effects
that include parameters like temperature, oxidation and exposure to sunlight result in thermal
cracking, block cracking and ravelling (Uzarowski & Bashir, 2007). If a proper treatment is not
applied at the right time, pavement distresses will extend and will damage subsurface layers
(Vaitkus, Čygas, & Kleizienė, 2014).
In order to prevent the deterioration and destruction of pavements, relatively some cost-
effective operations can be performed before or even at the beginning of damages (Gujar &
Chauhan, 2013). Preservation of the existing pavements will provide users with good serviceabil-
ity at an acceptable and safe level. Thus, in recent decades, preventive maintenance operations
and applications of pavement repair methods have attracted the attention of researchers and road
operators in maintaining pavement conditions at proper serviceability levels (Raza, 1994).
For pavements that are in good structural conditions and do not exhibit significant distresses
and are capable of bearing loads, it would be better to be rehabilitated with thin surface treat-
ments. Application of the other alternative rehabilitation treatments, such as hot mix asphalt
(HMA) overlay, in addition to the increased costs and increased time of the project, require
milling of the existing asphalt surfacing to a depth of 40 mm and adjustment of curb lines,

*Corresponding author. Email: r.hafezzadeh@modares.ac.ir

† Highway and Transportation Engineering.

© 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

2 R. Hafezzadeh and A. Kavussi

guardrails, manholes, or bridge clearances due to its thick lift would cause severe disruption
to the traffic flow (Broughton, Lee, & Kim, 2012; Uzarowski & Bashir, 2007).
Among the various types of pavement surface treatments, microsurfacing is one of the most
effective cold asphalt mixture. Microsurfacing seals small cracks and surface imperfections and
waterproofs the surface. It provides correction of minor surface profile irregularities, fills ruts and
restores surface friction to concrete bridge decks (Gransberg, 2010; Nikolaides & Oikonomou,
2000). Furthermore, microsurfacing is a cost-effective and environment-friendly preservation
technique that reduces user delay by allowing traffic in an hour or less after its application (Kumar
& Ryntathiang, 2012). Microsurfacing is vulnerable under the excessive axle loading and is
deteriorated over time. However, latex and filler can improve its resistance against the distresses
caused by the traffic flow. The objective of this research was to evaluate the effect of different
percentages of SBR latex and Portland cement on the mechanical properties of microsurfacing
mixtures especially rutting resistance.

2. Literature Review
Microsurfacing, as the optimum method of preventive treatment, was applied on an asphalt pave-
ment in Ontario in 1993. The pavement was considered to be in a good structural condition. After
11 years of service, although parts of the pavement were deteriorated, on the majority of the sec-
tions, it remained healthy, intact and usable (Uzarowski & Bashir, 2007). In another project,
microsurfacing was applied on Brooklyn Bridge as pavement surfacing. Due to high traffic and
the need for short condition timing, type III mix design was placed on the bridge steel grid deck
at night and the results were satisfactory (Anonymous, 2018).
The other example was the use of microsurfacing as a cost-effective treatment operation to
repair surface rutting distresses on provincial roads which formed between Ixopo and the towns
of the KwaZulu Natal South Coast in Africa. The inspection of pavement after 4 years of ser-
vice has indicated a remarkable drop in rutting depth especially for depths between 20 and 30 mm
(Ducasse, Distin, & Osborne, 2004). In a project in Malaysia, LATAR highway was rehabilitated
with microsurfacing. After 36 months of operational time, the results showed that microsurfac-
ing has significant improvements on rutting, roughness and skid resistance (Salleh, Muhamad,
Abdillah, & Shahimi, 2019).
In order to reduce abrasion under wet conditions and reduce vertical displacement, in 1996,
Holleran recommended using SBR or EVA in microsurfacing at a concentration of 1–5% depend-
ing on the application and 3–5% polymer supplied the highest improvement in performance
(Holleran, 2006; Takamura, 2000). In 1998, Jones and Ng showed similar results with SBR, NRL
and SBS modifiers in microsurfacing, offering the greatest improvement in vertical deformations
(Gayle & John, 2008).
In another study, the effectiveness of type III microsurfacing in repairing aged asphalt rutted
slabs was evaluated. The results of the study revealed that thermal ageing of the slabs has a pos-
itive effect on the rutting resistance of HMA which is rehabilitated with microsurfacing (Garfa,
Carter, & Dony, 2018).

3. Materials
Microsurfacing consists of a mixture of polymer-modified emulsified asphalt, mineral aggregate,
water and additives (ISSA A143, 2010). The main components and features of this asphalt are as
follows:
 Road Materials and Pavement Design 3

Table 1. Compositions of the aggregates used as determined from X-ray fluorescent analysis.

Component L.O.I Br Fe2 O3 CaO SO3 SiO2 Al2 O3 MgO

Per cent 41.5 1.60 0.88 53.60 0.11 1.49 0.379 0.263

The aggregates used were from a crushed limestone rock quarry with type III gradation (ISSA
A143, 2010; Robati, Carter, & Perraton, 2014). Also, ordinary Portland cement (Type I) was
used as an alternative mineral filler as a part of the limestone dust.
The analysis of the composition of the aggregates, as determined from X-ray fluorescent
testing analysis, is reported in Table 1.
The emulsified asphalt that was used in this research was a cationic bitumen emulsion (CQS)
modified with SBR latex in post-addition1 method (Lesueur, 2011), based on ASTM D 2397
requirements. SBR cationic latex was milky white with a pH of 2.5 and a solid content of 60%.

4. Methodology and mix design

The purpose of mix design for microsurfacing is to provide a high-quality mixture with proper
consistency, set time, curing time, adhesion, wet track abrasion and loaded wheel track prop-
erties. After determining the quality of materials, a mix time test was carried out in order to
achieve proper component proportions needed to ensure sufficient mix time for the applica-
tion of microsurfacing. Then, the optimum contents of water and flow characteristics of mixture
were measured by the consistency test. In the next step, the initial set and cure development of
mixture were determined using a cohesiometer. Finally, after achieving a workable and consis-
tent mixture, for ensuring the adequate performance of microsurfacing mix, wearing and rutting
resistance tests were accomplished (|ASTM D3910, 1998; ISSA TB No. 111, 2005; Nishant,
Siddagangaiah, & Ryntathiang, 2019).
According to the microsurfacing standard recommendations and based on previous mix
designs, values of 6.3%, 8.2% and 10% residual bitumen were used to prepare mixtures.
Also, the bitumen emulsion was modified with 3%, 4% and 5% SBR polymer by the weight of
residual asphalt with post-addition method (Forbes, Haverkamp, & Robertson, 2001; Holleran,
2006; Takamura, 2001).
In order to adjust the initial set-time and cure-time and to minimize aggregate segregation, up
to 3% of ordinary Portland Cement (Type I) was added as a partial replacement of the limestone
aggregate filler. Considering three different percentages for each of the materials, including bitu-
men emulsion, latex and mineral filler, a total of 36 samples were prepared. Various combinations
of materials for preparation of the samples are shown in Table 2.

5. Mixing design testing results

Mixing design experiments were performed according to ASTM D-3910 and ISSA Standard
Methods. The summary of the results is as follows:

5.1. Cohesion test

The cohesion test was carried out to determine the initial adhesion and the curing time of mixture.
In this test, the cohesion test device was used to measure cohesion at the interface between a
4 R. Hafezzadeh and A. Kavussi

Table 2. Composition of various material contents

in the specimens.

Residual bitumen (%) Latex (%) Cement (%)

6.3, 8.2, 10 0.0 0.0

1.5
3.0
3.0 0.0
1.5
3.0
4.0 0.0
1.5
3.0
5.0 0.0
1.5
3.0

rotating neoprene cylinder and microsurfacing specimen to determine the cure development of
the samples (ISSA TB No. 139, 2017).

5.1.1. The effect of latex

In order to determine the effect of latex on microsurfacing mixtures, curing graphs were drawn for
different values of residual asphalt (6.3%, 8.2% and 10%) for microsurfacing mixtures (Figure 1).
As shown in this figure, the dotted curves with no marks are the specification limits. It is possible
to determine the mixture setting and traffic flow through the treated pavement by comparing the
testing data of a specimen at distinct times, with standard curves. The solid and dash curves with
marks in Figure 1 show the results of the cohesion test for mixtures containing different amounts
of latex.
It is generally expected that bitumen emulsion modified with latex will improve curing and
adhesion properties of mixtures. As shown in Figure 1, the curing process for mixtures without
latex is slower than those containing latex. The setting of mixtures containing latex was better

Figure 1. The role of latex on curing time of mixes.

 Road Materials and Pavement Design 5

Figure 2. The role of cement on curing time of mixes.

and was achieved faster than those containing no-latex. As the latex content was increased, the
process was performed quicker. In this research, among all mixtures, the mix containing 5% latex
showed the best result.
When SBR latex is uniformly distributed in the emulsion and the mixture, it shapes elastic
lattices within the mix. In fact, when the water of the emulsion evaporates, bitumen droplets
containing SBR combine along with the aggregate particles, resulting in the formation of a
continual, honeycombed polymer network which expands all over the binder. Plus, SBR par-
ticles form bonds between asphalt particles, which results in an increased tensile strength, stone
retention and better adhesion and bonding property within the mix (Gayle & John, 2008).

5.1.2. The effect of ordinary Portland cement

It is expected that the use of cement will improve mixture consistency and adjust breaking and
curing properties of the mixture. Cement also accelerates the curing process of the mix. As the
amount of cement increases, the mixture setting process will be accelerated.
As shown in Figure 2, at the early stages of curing (i.e. in the first half-hour), there was no
significant difference between mixtures containing different amounts of cement. With passing
time, mixtures containing high percentages of cement cured more than the other mixtures. When
Portland cement is mixed with water, the heat of hydration is liberated. This heat raises the tem-
perature of mixture and accelerates the evaporation process of water in the mixture. Therefore,
over time the mixture would be cured fast and become rigid. Moreover, by adding cement to the
mix honeycomb, networks are made. These honeycombs made with Portland cement would be
very brittle. This was the case when the polymer was present in the asphalt phase. Since Portland
cement particles also remained in the aqueous phase, the flexible polymer–cement compound
created these honeycomb structures (Takamura, 2001). In this research, the mixture containing
3% cement was considered the most effective in curing time.

5.2. Wet track abrasion test

This test method measures the wearing quality of microsurfacing under wet abrasion condi-
tions. In this test, microsurfacing-cured specimens were kept in water at 25°C for 1 h, then
6 R. Hafezzadeh and A. Kavussi

mechanically abraded under water. Loss in weight of the abraded specimen was measured in
grams and loss per unit area was also reported (ISSA TB No. 100, 2018).
Wet Track Abrasion Test (WTAT) was performed on mixes containing various amounts of
residual bitumen and latex. The results are shown in Figures 3–5. With reference to these graphs,
for different percentages of residual bitumen in WTAT, the abrasion values were decreased as
the amount of latex increased. For example, if the graph of the mixture containing 6.3% residual
bitumen and 1.5 cement% (critical state) is considered (Figure 3), it can be seen that for samples
containing 3%, 4% and 5% latex the abrasion resistance was improved by 15%, 36% and 40%,
respectively, compared with mixtures containing no-latex.
Table 3 shows the results of abrasion resistance of various microsurfacing mixtures. As it can
be seen, the mixture containing 8.2% residual bitumen and 5% latex showed the best perfor-
mance in abrasion resistance. Maximum improvement of abrasion resistance of this mixtures
was minimum 50%, compared with the base mix.
With the increased bitumen content, better adhesion resistance was achieved between aggre-
gate particles and bitumen. If the amount of bitumen is increased more than normal, slipping of
microsurfacing will occur. Also, as noted in the results of the cohesion test, the addition of latex
has created great bonding between aggregate particles (Khan & Wahhab, 1998).
As shown in Figure 4, with increasing the residual bitumen content to 10%, the effect of latex
on reducing abrasion was decreased. In mixtures containing 10% bitumen, specimens containing
different amounts of latex showed similar properties. In fact, as the amount of bitumen content
of the mixture increases, the role of latex in reducing the abrasions decreases and the adhesion
properties between bitumen and aggregates were more efficient than the effect of latex.

Figure 3. Abrasion resistance of mixes containing 1.5% cement and various amounts of latex.

Figure 4. Abrasion resistance of mixes containing 1.5% cement and various amounts of latex.
 Road Materials and Pavement Design 7

Figure 5. Abrasion resistance of mixes containing 1.5% cement and various amounts of residual bitumen.

Table 3. Abrasion resistance of various microsurfacing mixtures.

Latex = %3
Residual bitumen (%) Cement = %0 Cement = %1.5 Cement = %3

6.3 23 15 10
8.2 21.7 27 31
10 14.3 13 9
Latex = %4
Residual bitumen (%) Cement = %0 Cement = %1.5 Cement = %3

6.3 30.4 36 37
8.2 40.2 36 43
10 17.85 22 17
Latex = %5
Residual bitumen (%) Cement = %0 Cement = %1.5 Cement = %3

6.3 40.9 40 47
8.2 57.5 50 55
10 17.85 26 29

The curves of Figure 5 show the process of reducing the amount of abrasions of mixtures
containing different amounts of latex. As it can be seen from this figure, with increasing amounts
of latex, the slope of the graphs decreases as a result of increased bitumen content. It can be
concluded that with increased bitumen content of the mixture, the effect of latex in increasing
abrasion resistance decreases.

5.2.1. Statistical analysis of WTAT results

A statistical analysis was performed in the form of analysis of variance (ANOVA) and least
significant difference (LSD) testing analysis. This was done using one-way analysis in order to
check the significance of the effects of SBR latex on abrasion loss. All tests were evaluated at 5%
significance level. The results of ANOVA and LSD tests in a mixture containing 6.2% bitumen
are shown in Tables 4 and 5, respectively. The null hypothesis (H0 ) is that the mean (i.e. the
average value of the dependent variable) is the same for various latex effects. The alternative
8 R. Hafezzadeh and A. Kavussi

Table 4. ANOVA results.

ANOVA method

Condition Sum of squares Df Mean square F Sig.

Between-groups 7825.82 3 2608.61 180.8 .000

Within-groups 115.457 8 14.432
Total 7941.28 11

Table 5. LSD results.

Multiple comparisons
Dependent variable: LSD method

95% Confidence interval

(I) Latex (J) Latex Mean difference (I − J) Std. error Sig. Lower bound Upper bound

0.00 3.00 23.03a 3.1 .00 15.87 30.18

4.00 57.02a 3.1 .00 49.87 64.17
5.00 65.51a 3.1 .00 55.35 69.66
3.00 0.00 − 23.03a 3.1 .00 − 30.18 − 15.87
4.00 33.99a 3.1 .00 26.84 41.14
5.00 39.48a 3.1 .00 32.32 46.63
4.00 0.00 − 57.02a 3.1 .00 − 64.17 − 49.87
3.00 − 33.99a 3.1 .00 − 41.14 − 26.84
5.00 5.48a 3.1 .00 − 1.66 12.63
5.00 0.00 − 62.51a 3.1 .00 − 69.66 − 55.35
3.00 − 39.48a 3.1 .00 − 46.63 − 32.32
4.00 − 5.48a 3.1 .00 − 12.63 1.66
a The mean difference is significant at 5% level.

hypothesis (H1 ) is that the average is not the same for all the different latex effects. These null
and alternative hypotheses are defined by Equations (1) and (2):
(H0 : µ1 = µ2 = µ3 = µ4 ) (1)
(H1 : µ1 = µ2 = µ3 = µ4 ) (2)
According to Table 4, since the p-value is less than the significance level (i.e. 0.05), and also
with regard to F-statistic, the H0 hypothesis cannot be confirmed. In fact, there is a significant
difference between the means. In other words, the average abrasions are different, as affected by
various latex contents.
Furthermore, according to Table 5, there is a significant difference between mixtures contain-
ing different amounts of latex. Also, the effect of latex on abrasion resistance is significant for
mixtures containing 8.2% and 10% residual bitumen.

5.3. Wheel track test

The loaded wheel test is intended to study compaction rates and plastic deformation of microsur-
facing by means of a loaded, rubber-tired reciprocating wheel. In this test, microsurfacing slab
specimens were cured to constant weight at 60°C and then were cooled to room temperature.
In order to determine the vertical displacements at 25°C, 56.7 kg load was applied and samples
were compacted at the rate of 44 cycles/min for 1000 cycles (ISSA TB No. 109, 2018).
 Road Materials and Pavement Design 9

Figure 6. Effects of latex in rutting depths of mixtures.

Loaded Wheel Test (LWT) tests were carried out on mixtures containing 6.3%, 8.2% and 10%
residual bitumen and 3% and 5% latex. The results are shown in Figure 6. According to the
graphs of this figure, the range of the depths of the grooves was between 1 and 2 mm.
It is expected that the rut depth decreases by increasing the amounts of latex. For mixtures
containing different amounts of bitumen, the rut depths for samples containing 5% latex were
less than the other samples. If the rut depths of the mixtures containing 6.3% residual bitumen
are considered, it can be concluded that the rut depths of the mixtures containing 5% and 3%
latex, compared with the rut depths of the latex-free mixture, were decreased by 28.4% and 9%,
respectively. The reduction process for mixtures containing 8.2% residual bitumen were 49%
and 28.7%, and for mixtures containing 10% residual bitumen, these values were 35% and 20%,
respectively.
In the mixes containing 3% cement, the process of rut depth change was similar to the curves
shown in Figure 6. The rut depths for mixtures containing 5% and 3% latex and 6.3% residual
bitumen were reduced by 43.5% and 13.5%, respectively (compared with the rut depths of non-
latex containing mixtures). These values for mixtures containing 8.2% residual bitumen were
54.5% and 50.3%, and for the mixture containing 10% residual bitumen were 46% and 27.5%,
respectively. The lowest rut depth (i.e. rutting resistance) was attributed to the sample contain-
ing 8.2% bitumen. Also, the process of rut depth changes in the non-latex mixtures was not
noticeable.
In fact, by increasing the amount of latex, the mixture shows better rutting resistance to loads.
Since the SBR latex is a Thermoset Elastomeric polymer type, it can be stretched to 10 times
without breaking, while it quickly returns to its original shape, once the load is removed.
The process of increased rut depth values was also achieved with the increased percentages
of bitumen in mixtures containing various amounts of latex. In the mixtures containing vari-
ous amounts of latex and residual bitumen, the process of rut accumulation was in the concave
form. As the residual bitumen content was increased from 6.3% to 8.2%, the rut depth was
first decreased and then with increasing amounts of the residual bitumen from 8.2% to 10%, it
increased. Due to the excess amount of bitumen in the mixture, there were not enough air voids in
the specimen to accept the displaced bitumen. Therefore, the mix was prone to rutting under load.

5.3.1. Statistical analysis of LWT results

A statistical analysis was employed in the form of analysis of variance using one-way analysis.
This was in order to determine the significance of SBR latex effects on rut-depth values. All the
10 R. Hafezzadeh and A. Kavussi

Table 6. ANOVA results of LWT.

ANOVA method

Condition Sum of squares Df Mean square F Sig.

Between-groups 0.476 2 0.238 48.88 .000

Within-groups 0.029 6 0.005
Total 0.505 8

Table 7. LSD results of LWT.

Multiple comparisons
Dependent variable: LSD method

95% Confidence interval

(I) Latex (J) Latex Mean difference (I − J) Std. error Sig. Lower bound Upper bound

0.00 3.00 0.17a 0.05 .02 0.03 0.30

5.00 0.55a 0.05 .00 0.41 0.68
3.00 0.00 − 0.17a 0.05 .02 − 0.3 − 0.03
5.00 0.38a 0.05 .00 0.24 0.51
5.00 0.00 − 0.55 0.05 .00 − 0.68 − 0.51
3.00 − 0.38a 0.05 .00 − 0.51 − 0.24
a The mean difference is significant at 5% level.

tests were evaluated at 5% significance level. The results of ANOVA and LSD tests in a mixture
containing 6.3% bitumen are shown in Tables 6 and 7, respectively.
Similar to Section 5.2.1, the null (H0 ) and alternative (H1 ) hypotheses are defined by Equations
(3) and (4), respectively:

(H0 : µ1 = µ2 = µ3 = µ4 ) (3)
(H1 : µ1 = µ2 = µ3 = µ4 ) (4)

According to Table 7, since the p-value is less than the significance level (i.e. 0.05), and also with
regard to F-statistic, analysis of the H0 hypothesis cannot be confirmed and there is a significant
difference between the means. In fact, the average rut-depth values, as affected by various latex
contents, were different. Furthermore, according to Table 6 at a significance level of 0.05, there
was a significant difference between mixtures containing different amounts of latex.

6. Conclusions
SBR latex was used to enhance the mechanical properties of microsurfacing mixtures. In order to
compare the effects of bitumen in curing and mechanical properties of mixes, mixtures containing
6.3%, 8.2% and 10% residual bitumen were prepared. From the testing results, the following
conclusions can be drawn:

(1) Increased bitumen contents in mixtures (to a certain extent) resulted in better adhesion
properties between aggregate particles and bitumen. This resulted in ending to best reten-
tion of aggregate particles and reduced rutting values. However, the excess bitumen of
%10 resulted in increased rut depth values.
 Road Materials and Pavement Design 11

(2) Modifying bitumen emulsion with SBR latex had positive results. With the increasing
amounts of latex in bitumen emulsion, more continuous networks were formed which
resulted in best adhesion and bonding properties. With the increased amounts of latex (to
5% by weight of bitumen), the best performance and improved properties were achieved.
Plus, due to the elasticity of latex, the rutting depth values were decreased as a result of
increased amounts of latex in the mixture.
(3) The addition of 5% latex to emulsion mix containing 8.2% residual bitumen, the opti-
mum mix was obtained. With this formulation, the mix showed almost 50% increase in
both abrasion resistance and wheel load ruts.

Note
1. The latex polymer modifier is added to the final asphalt emulsion.

References
Anonymous. (2018). Not just pavements: Micro surfacing right for New York’s Brooklyn bridge. Pavement
Preservation Journal, Spring 2018, 36–38.
ASTM D3910. (1998). Standard practices for design, testing, and construction of slurry seal. Washington,
DC: American Society for Testing and Materials.
Broughton, B., Lee, S.-J., & Kim, Y.-J. (2012). 30 years of microsurfacing: A review. International
Scholarly Research Notices(ISRN), 2012. doi:10.5402/2012/279643
Ducasse, K., Distin, T., & Osborne, L. (2004). The use of microsurfacing as a cost effective remedial action
for surface rutting. 8th Conference on asphalt pavements for Southern Africa (CAPSA), Sun City,
South Africa.
Forbes, A., Haverkamp, R., & Robertson, T. (2001). Studies of the microstructure of polymer-modified
bitumen emulsions using confocal laser scanning microscopy. Journal of Microscopy, 204(3), 252–257.
doi:10.1046/j.1365-2818.2001.00955.x
Garfa, A., Carter, A., & Dony, A. (2018). Rutting resistance of HMA rehabilitated with microsurfacing.
Open Journal of Civil Engineering, 8, 245–255. doi:10.4236/ojce.2018.82019
Gayle, K., & John, B. J. (2008). Using polymer modified asphalt emulsions in surface treatments. A Federal
Lands Highway Interim Report.
Gransberg, D. D. (2010). NCHRP synthesis 411: Microsurfacing; A synthesis of highway practice.
Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.
Gujar, R. S., & Chauhan, K. A. (2013). Feasibility of rice husk ash as optional mineral filler in microsur-
facing incorporating type III aggregate. American Journal of Environmental Engineering, 3, 95–99.
doi:10.5923/j.ajee.20130302.02
Holleran, G. (2006). The use of polymer modification in slurry surfacings. ISSA Users Workshop,
Columbus, OH.
ISSA A143. (2010). Recommended performance guideline for micro surfacing. Glen Ellyn, IL: Interna-
tional Slurry Surfacing Association.
ISSA TB No. 100. (2018). Laboratory test method for wet track abrasion of slurry surfacing systems. Glen
Ellyn, IL: International Slurry Surfacing Association.
ISSA TB No. 109. (2018). Test method for measurement of excess asphalt in bituminous mixtures by use of
a loaded wheel tester and sand adhesion. Glen Ellyn, IL: International Slurry Surfacing Association.
ISSA TB No. 111. (2005). Outline guide design procedure for slurry seal. Glen Ellyn, IL: International
Slurry Surfacing.
ISSA TB No. 139. (2017). Test method to determine set and cure development of slurry surfacing Systems
by cohesion tester. Glen Ellyn, IL: International Slurry Surfacing Association.
Khan, M. I., & Wahhab, A.-A. (1998). Improving slurry seal performance in Eastern Saudi Arabia using
steel slag. Construction and Building Materials, 12(4), 195–201.
Kumar, R., & Ryntathiang, T. L. (2012). Rural road preventive maintenance with microsurfacing.
International Journal of Computer Applications, 4, 4–8.
Lesueur, D. (2011). Polymer modified bitumen: Properties and characterisation. In Woodhead publishing
series in civil and structural engineering (pp. 25–42). Sawston: Woodhead Publishing.
12 R. Hafezzadeh and A. Kavussi

Nikolaides, A., & Oikonomou, N. (2000). The use of fly ash as a substitute of cement in microsurfacing.
Waste Materialsin Construction, 1, 234–240. doi:10.1016/S0713-2743(00)80035-5
Nishant, B., Siddagangaiah, A. K., & Ryntathiang, T. L. (2019). State of the art review on design and
performance of microsurfacing. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 1–35. doi:10.1080/14680629.
2019.1607771
Raza, H. (1994). State of the practice design, construction, and performance of microsurfacing. Report.
No. FHWA-SA-94-051.
Robati, M., Carter, A., & Perraton, D. (2014). Evaluation of test methods and Selection of aggregate grading
for type III application of micro-surfacing. International Journal on Pavemnet Engineering & Asphalt
Technology, 14(2), 11–66. doi:10.2478/ijpeat-2013-0001
Salleh, S., Muhamad, R., Abdillah, M. H., & Shahimi, A. F. A. (2019). Performance of pavement preserva-
tion with Ralumac micro surfacing at LATAR highway. 10th IOP Conference Series: Materials Science
and Engineering, Selangor, Malaysia.
Takamura, K. (2000). SBR synthetic latex in paving applications. Bitumen Asia (pp. 20–21). Singapore.
Takamura, K. (2001). SBR Latices for asphalt modification: Advantages of fine polymer network formation.
ISSA Annual Meeting, Maui, Hawaii.
Uzarowski, L., & Bashir, I. (2007). A rational approach for selecting the optimum asphalt pavement pre-
ventive and rehabilitation treatments – Two practical examples from Ontario. Annual Conference of
the Transportation Association of Canada (TAC), Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.
Vaitkus, A., Čygas, D., & Kleizienė, R. (2014). Research of asphalt pavement rutting in Vilnius city streets.
9th International Conference Environmental Engineering 2014”, Vilnius, Lithuania.