Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2 ... ?· DURABILITY OF PREFORMED THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT…

Download Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2 ... ?· DURABILITY OF PREFORMED THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT…

Post on 09-Jun-2018

212 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

<ul><li><p> Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. FHWA/TX-06/0-4471-3 </p><p> 2. Government Accession No. </p><p> 3. Recipient's Catalog No. </p><p> 4. Title and Subtitle DURABILITY OF PREFORMED THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKINGS FOR HORIZONTAL SIGNING APPLICATIONS </p><p> 5. Report Date December 2005 Published: April 2006 </p><p> 6. Performing Organization Code </p><p> 7. Author(s) Susan T. Chrysler, Steven D. Schrock and Timothy J. Gates </p><p> 8. Performing Organization Report No. Report 0-4471-3 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) </p><p> 9. Performing Organization Name and Address Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&amp;M University System College Station, Texas 77843-3135 </p><p> 11. Contract or Grant No. Project 0-4471 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Technical Report: September 2002 October 2005 </p><p> 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Texas Department of Transportation Research and Technology Implementation Office P. O. Box 5080 Austin, Texas 78763-5080 URL: http://tti.tamu.edudocuments/0-4471-3.pdf </p><p> 14. Sponsoring Agency Code </p><p> 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Project Title: Evaluation of Horizontal Signing Applications URL: http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-4471-3.pdf 16. Abstract The results of two-year durability tests of preformed thermoplastic pavement marking materials are reported. A survey of material manufacturers is also presented. Pavement marking materials in the form of transverse lines, arrowheads, and sections of the letter S were installed at test decks on three Texas roadways. Small square sections of colored pavement marking materials were also tested for some of the manufacturers. Manufacturers representatives performed the installations. Three types of pavement surface were tested: concrete, asphalt, and seal coat. Retroreflectivity and color measurements of the materials were made at the time of installation, after one year, and after two years. Thickness of the material was measured prior to installation and at the same time intervals using video microscopy of samples chiseled from the roadway. 17. Key Words Horizontal Signing, Pavement Marking Symbols, Pavement Marking Materials, Durability Testing </p><p> 18. Distribution Statement No restrictions. This document is available to the public through NTIS: National Technical Information Service Springfield, Virginia 22161 http://www.ntis.gov </p><p>19. Security Classif.(of this report) Unclassified </p><p> 20. Security Classif.(of this page) Unclassified </p><p> 21. No. of Pages 152 </p><p> 22. Price </p><p> Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized</p><p>http://tti.tamu.edudocuments/0-4471-3.pdfhttp://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-4471-3.pdfhttp://www.ntis.gov</p></li><li><p>DURABILITY OF PREFORMED THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKINGS FOR HORIZONTAL SIGNING APPLICATIONS </p><p> by </p><p>Susan T. Chrysler Research Scientist </p><p>Center for Transportation Safety Texas Transportation Institute </p><p> Steven D. Schrock, P.E. </p><p>Assistant Research Engineer Transportation Operations Group </p><p>Texas Transportation Institute </p><p>and </p><p>Timothy J. Gates Assistant Transportation Researcher </p><p>Transportation Operations Group Texas Transportation Institute </p><p> Report 0-4471-3 Project 0-4471 </p><p>Project Title: Evaluation of Horizontal Signing Applications </p><p>Performed in Cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation </p><p>and the Federal Highway Administration </p><p>December 2005 Published: April 2006 </p><p>TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE The Texas A&amp;M University System College Station, Texas 77843-3135 </p></li><li><p> v </p><p>DISCLAIMER </p><p>The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the </p><p>facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the </p><p>official view or policies of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or the Texas </p><p>Department of Transportation (TxDOT). This report does not constitute a standard, specification, </p><p>or regulation. The researcher in charge of this project was Dr. Susan Chrysler. The engineer in </p><p>charge of this project was Steven D. Schrock, P.E., Texas License #92982. </p><p>The materials included in this evaluation include several trademarked products, these are: </p><p> Flametape registered trademark of Ennis Paint, Inc. </p><p> PREMARK registered trademark of Flint Trading, Inc. </p><p> HotTape registered trademark of Avery Dennison Corporation </p><p> ThermaLine registered trademark of LaFarge, Inc. This product line was sold to Ennis </p><p>Paint, Inc. in June 2003. </p><p> Rocbinda registered trademark of Jobling Purser, Ltd. </p><p> DigiMark registered trademark of Digital Markings, Ltd. </p><p> StreetPrint registered trademark of Integrated Paving Concepts, Inc. </p><p>The United States Government and the State of Texas do not endorse products or </p><p>manufacturers. Trade or manufactures names appear herein solely because they are considered </p><p>essential to the object of this report. </p></li><li><p> vi </p><p>ACKNOWLEDGMENTS </p><p>This project was conducted in cooperation with TxDOT and FHWA. The authors would </p><p>like to acknowledge the support of Roy Wright of the Abilene District, who served as project </p><p>director, Sally Wegman of the Houston District, who served as program coordinator, Greg </p><p>Brinkmeyer of the Traffic Operations Division, who served as project advisor, and Wade Odell, </p><p>the RTI Research Engineer. Jerry Howell and Herb Smart of the Construction Division also </p><p>provided invaluable assistance with the durability testing. Dock Gee and Mike Manor of the </p><p>Houston and Abilene Districts provided logistical support with test deck installations in those </p><p>locations. This project enjoyed the great cooperation of the many pavement marking vendors </p><p>who all provided their materials and installation technical service free of charge. </p></li><li><p> vii </p><p>TABLE OF CONTENTS </p><p>Page List of Figures............................................................................................................................. viii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... xii Chapter 1: Pavement Marking Material Selection.................................................................... 1 </p><p>Vendor Survey ............................................................................................................................ 1 NTPEP Reports........................................................................................................................... 2 </p><p>Chapter 2: Test Deck Installation ............................................................................................... 7 Test Deck Materials and Configuration...................................................................................... 7 Test Instruments and Procedure................................................................................................ 10 </p><p>Material Thickness................................................................................................................ 11 Size of Marking..................................................................................................................... 12 Retroreflectivity .................................................................................................................... 13 Color Measurements ............................................................................................................. 13 </p><p>Test Deck Locations ................................................................................................................. 14 Asphalt Pavement: Austin..................................................................................................... 14 Concrete Pavement: Houston................................................................................................ 15 Chip-Seal Pavement: Abilene ............................................................................................... 15 </p><p>Chapter 3: Results of Durability Testing.................................................................................. 25 Retroreflectivity ........................................................................................................................ 25 Thickness .................................................................................................................................. 28 Color Measurements ................................................................................................................. 32 </p><p>Chapter 4: Recommendations for Additions or Revisions to TxDOTs Traffic Control Standards Sheets ........................................................................................................................ 43 Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations ...................................................................... 45 References.................................................................................................................................... 47 Appendix A: Vendor Surveys ................................................................................................... A1 Appendix B: NTPEP Field Testing Procedures for Pavement Markings .............................B1 Appendix C: Materials Installed and Measurements Taken................................................. C1 Appendix D: Photographs of Test Decks................................................................................. D1 Appendix E: Retroreflectivity Data by Product and Location...............................................E1 Appendix F: Color Data .............................................................................................................F1 Appendix G: Recommendations for Additions or Revisions to TxDOT's Traffic Control Standards Sheets ........................................................................................................................ G1 </p></li><li><p> viii </p><p>LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. Test Deck Layout. ........................................................................................................... 9 Figure 2. TxDOT Staff Measuring Test Areas. ............................................................................ 10 Figure 3. Layout of Preformed Sections before Application........................................................ 11 Figure 4. Thickness Measurements on a Piece of Red Preformed Thermoplastic. ...................... 12 Figure 5. Bead Embedment Inspection Using a Jewelers Loupe. ............................................... 12 Figure 6. Retroreflectivity Measurements. ................................................................................... 13 Figure 7. Color Measurement Instrument. .................................................................................... 14 Figure 8. Austin Test Deck. .......................................................................................................... 15 Figure 9. Preheating the Pavement with a Propane Torch............................................................ 16 Figure 10. Two Different Types of Propane Torches Used.......................................................... 16 Figure 11. The Streetprint Machine. ............................................................................................. 17 Figure 12. The Streetprint Machine Preheating the Application Area. ........................................ 17 Figure 13. The Streetprint Melting a Transverse Line.................................................................. 18 Figure 14. Rocbinda Masking and Binder Application. ............................................................... 19 Figure 15. Applying Aggregate to Rocbinda................................................................................ 20 Figure 16. Rocbinda after Aggregate Application........................................................................ 20 Figure 17. Sweeping Excess Aggregate........................................................................................ 21 Figure 18. Removing Masking from Symbols.............................................................................. 21 Figure 19. Detail of Completed Contrast Edging. ........................................................................ 22 Figure 20. Completed Rocbinda Segment. ................................................................................... 22 Figure 21. DigiMark Preformed Sheet.......................................................................................... 23 Figure 22. Retroreflectivity Values for White Transverse Lines for Asphalt Test Deck. ............ 26 Figure 23. Retroreflectivity Values for White Transverse Lines on Concrete Test Deck. ........... 27 Figure 24. Retroreflectivity Values for White Transverse Lines for Seal Coat Test Deck. ......... 28 Figure 25. Thickness Data for Abilene Test Deck........................................................................ 29 Figure 26. Thickness Data for Asphalt Test Deck........................................................................ 30 Figure 27. Thickness Data for Concrete Test Deck. ..................................................................... 31 Figure 28. Microscope Image of a Thickness Measurement. ....................................................... 32 Figure 29. Daytime Color Boxes. ................................................................................................. 34 Figure 30. Chromaticity Values for White Markings. .................................................................. 35 Figure 31. Chromaticity Values for Red Markings. ..................................................................... 36 Figure 32. Chromaticity Values for Blue Markings. .................................................................... 37 Figure 33. Cap-Y Values for White Markings on Seal Coat Pavement. ...................................... 39 Figure 34. Cap-Y Values for White Markings on Asphalt Pavement. ......................................... 40 Figure 35. Cap-Y Values for White Markings on Concrete Pavement. ....................................... 41 Figure 36. Project Overview, 2003, Abilene ............................................................................... D1 Figure 37. Avery 125 Installation, 2003, Abilene. ...................................................................... D1 Figure 38. Avery 125, New, 2003, Abilene................................................................................. D2 Figure 39. Avery 125, 1 Year, 2004, Abilene.............................................................................. D2 Figure 40. Avery 125, 2 Years, 2005, Abilene. ........................................................................... D2 Figure 41. Avery 125 Arrow, 1 Year, 2004, Abilene. ................................................................. D3 Figure 42. Avery 125 Arrow, 2 Years, 2005, Abilene................................................................. D3 </p></li><li><p> ix </p><p>Figure 43. Avery 90, New, 2003, Abilene.............</p></li></ul>

Recommended

View more >