1 / 19

Asphalt Shingles in HMA Missouri DOT Experience

Asphalt Shingles in HMA Missouri DOT Experience. Joe Schroer, PE Construction and Materials Division March 30, 2005. In The Beginning. Approached by Pace Construction and Peerless Landfill MoDOT Not Using RAP in Mixtures Deleterious Material Stiffness of Asphalt in Shingles.

harvey
Download Presentation

Asphalt Shingles in HMA Missouri DOT Experience

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Asphalt Shingles in HMAMissouri DOT Experience Joe Schroer, PE Construction and Materials Division March 30, 2005

  2. In The Beginning • Approached by Pace Construction and Peerless Landfill • MoDOT Not Using RAP in Mixtures • Deleterious Material • Stiffness of Asphalt in Shingles

  3. First LookThe “Ex” Factor • Exhaustive Literature Search • Exclusion of Tear Offs in States Allowing Manufacturing Waste • Extra Clean Material – Contained Little Deleterious Matter • Exceptionally Stiff Asphalt Extracted from Shingles

  4. Shingle Components • Asphalt  20%-40% • Stiffen Roadway Asphalt • Aggregate  30% • Good Stuff • Fiberglass or Paper Mat  30% • No Harm if Well Dispersed

  5. MoDOT Goals • Engineering Properties First • Harmful Effects of Deleterious Material • Asphalt Binder Properties • Traffic Safety – Nails, etc. • If Everything Else Works Out, Landfilling is Reduced

  6. Why Should We Pursue Shingles? • High Asphalt Content • Granules Are Hard and Durable • Recycling CO$T

  7. Concerns • How Will Deleterious Material Affect the Mixture • Can the Low Temperature Grading be Maintained at Various Blending Ratios

  8. Asphalt After Blending with Shingle Asphalt • Resist Rutting • Resist Fatigue Cracking • Resist Cold-Weather Cracking

  9. Asphalt Grades • High Temperature for Rut Resistance • Low Temperature for Fatigue and Cold Weather Performance Performance Graded = PG PG 64-22 (PG Sixty-four Minus Twenty-two) High Temp 64°C (147°F) Low Temp –22°C (-8°F)

  10. Asphalt Modifications Require PG 64-22 • Stiffer at High Temperature – OK • Stiffer at Low Temperature • Use Lower Percentage of Shingles • Use Softer Roadway Asphalt

  11. Deleterious Evaluation • Specification for Aggregate • 0.5% “Other Foreign Material” • Sticks, mud balls, deer fur, etc. • Shingle “OFM” • Approximately 3% Total

  12. Nails Wood Plastic Cellophane Paper Fiber Board Deleterious Material

  13. Trial by Fire

  14. No Difference • Visually • Standard Mixture Tests • Placement

  15. Big Difference • Rut Resistance • Cold Temperature Tests • OFM in Mixture

  16. Can Tear-Off Shingles be Used? • Allowance in OFM Due to Small Percentage of Shingles and Trial Mixture • Start with Softer Roadway Asphalt

  17. Where Are We?The “Ex” Factor 2 • Extrinsic Material Allowance Raised • 3.0% Total • 1.5% Wood • Expect PG 64-22 met w/ PG 58-28 • Extra grades optional w/ testing • Examining various proportions and asphalts • Exuberant Contractors

  18. Cardboard Milk Jugs, Aluminum Cans Plastic Bottles Newspaper Newspaper

  19. Exit

More Related