ISSN Print: 2472-9558  ISSN Online: 2472-9566
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Construction Science  
Manuscript Information
Performance of Chip Seals Using Local and Minimally Processed Aggregates for Preservation of Low Traffic Volume Roadways
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Construction Science
Vol.1 , No. 1, Publication Date: Jul. 7, 2014, Page: 9-17
1193 Views Since July 7, 2014, 827 Downloads Since Apr. 14, 2015

Scott Shuler, Department of Construction Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA.


Many roadways in the world are in locations without high quality aggregates. Therefore, high quality aggregates must be transported to these locations when pavement construction or preservation activities are needed. This transportation increases the cost of pavement construction and preservation in these areas of the state. Increased costs often mean that timely pavement preservation activities are postponed. This postponement leads to deterioration of the infrastructure and, ultimately, increased costs. In addition, many of the pavements requiring preservation are low volume facilities. These low volume roads may not require the very high quality aggregates necessary on higher traffic volume facilities. Therefore, if more economical local aggregates could be demonstrated to perform acceptably, pavement preservation could be accomplished within budget at appropriate intervals. This would save costs in both the short and the long terms. Chip seals are used extensively by many road authorities for extending pavement life. Chip seals utilizing locally available and minimally processed aggregates should be a more economical pavement preservation treatment than chip seals constructed with higher quality, more expensive aggregates. Although chip seals constructed on high traffic roadways require high quality, crushed and approximately single-sized aggregates, low traffic roadways may not demand such materials to perform acceptably. Therefore, an experiment was designed to demonstrate the performance of chip seals constructed using two different aggregates on two low volume state highways. The control aggregate was the material routinely used for chip seal construction and the second aggregate was a material that did not meet specifications for gradation or fracture. Construction of the test sections was conducted by agency maintenance forces in 2009. Condition surveys were performed to determine pre-chip seal condition and then periodically for the next three years to track performance. Two five hundred foot long evaluation sections were located within each test pavement for each aggregate resulting in two thousand lane-feet of test area for each roadway. Results of the experiment after three years of service indicate no significant difference in performance between the aggregates. Distress in both pavements is limited to a return of transverse and longitudinal cracks, but with low percentages of chip loss. Some limited areas of the pavements also contain longitudinal flushing streaks where distributor nozzles may not have been adjusted correctly and higher quantities of asphalt were applied. Based on the results of this research it appears that locally available, minimally processed aggregates can be successfully applied as chip seal aggregate on low volume roadways. The report includes a recommended chip seal design procedure, aggregate and construction specification for low traffic volume roadways.


Chip Seal, Low Volume Traffic, Marginal Aggregates


Benson, F., & Gallaway, B. (1953). Retention of cover stone by asphalt surface treatments. Texas Engineering Experiment Station, 133, 1-58


Caltrans, “Chip Seals: Chapter 5,” Caltrans Division of Maintenance. Oct. 2003


Chen, D., Lin, D., & Luo, H. (2003, August). Effectiveness of Preventative Maintenance Treatments Using Fourteen SPS-3 Sites in Texas. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 136-143


Colwill, D., & Mercer, J., & Nicholl, J. (1995). U.K. Design Procedure for Surface Dressing. Transportation Research Record, 1507, 13-22.


Davis, D., Stroup-Gardiner, M., Davis, K., and Epps, J.A. Evaluation of 1989 Chip Seal Test Sections on US 95A between Wabuska and Yerington, Nevada: Vol. 1. University of Nevada, Reno report for Nevada department of Transportation. 1991.


Epps, J. A., Gallaway, B. M., and Hughes, C. H., “Field Manual on Design and Construction of Seal Coats”, Texas Transportation Institute, Research Report 214-25, July, 1981.


Gransberg, D; & James, D. (2005). Chip Seal Best Practices. A NCHRP Synthesis 342 of Highway Practice. Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C.


Hitch, L., (1981). Surface Dressing in Developing Countries: Research in Kenya, Transport and Road Research Laboratory: Crowthorne, Berkshire.


Hanson, F. M., “Bituminous Surface Treatments on Rural Highways”, Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 21, 1934-1935, p 89.


Kearby, J. P., “Tests and Theories on Penetration Surfaces”, Proceedings, Highway Research Board, Vol 32, 1953.


Jackson, D. (1990). Washington State Chip Seal Study. Transportation Research Record, 1259, 1-10.


Jahren, C., and Behling, K. R., (2004). Thin Maintenance Surface Treatments: Comparative Study. Journal of the Transportation Research Board, TRR 1866, pp. 20-27.


Janisch, D. & Gaillard, F. (1998). Minnesota Seal Coat Handbook, MN/RC-1999-07, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Maplewood, 112.


Kari, W. J., Coyne, L. D., and McCoy, P. E., (1962). Seal Coat Performance-Interrelation of Variables Established by Laboratory and Field Studies, Proceedings of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol 31, pp 1-34.


Kandhal, P. & Motter, J. (1991). Criteria for Accepting Precoated Aggregates for Seal Coats and Surface Treatments. Transportation Research Record 1300, 80–89.


Maintenance Chip Seal Manual, (2000). Montana Department of Transportation, Helena.


Major, N. G. (1965). A basis for selection of binders for chip sealing. New Zealand Engineering, Vol 20, Issue 12, pp 521-528.


Marais, C. P., “Rational Design of the Single Surface Treatment Technique for Road Maintenance, The Civil Engineer in South Africa, August, 1981.


McLeod, N. (1960). Basic Principles for the Design and construction of Seal Coats and Surface Treatments. Proceedings of the Associuation of Asphalt Paving Technologist, 29, 1-150.


McLeod, N. W., “Seal Coat Design”, Proceedings of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists, Vol. 38, February, 1969.


Potter, J. L., and Church, M., “The Design of Sprayed Seals”, Proceedings of the Australian Road Research Board, Vol 8, 1976, pp 18-23.


Sebaaly, P. E., Lani, S., and Hand, A., (1995). Performance Models for Flexible Pavement Maintenance Treatments, Journal of the Transportation Research Board, TRR 1508, pp. 9-21.


Shuler, S., (1996).“Chip Seals for High-Traffic Volume Asphalt Concrete Pavements”, NCHRP Final Report for Project 14-8A, 1996.


Shuler, S. (1998). “Design and Construction of Chip Seals for High Traffic Volume.” Flexible Pavement Rehabilitation and Maintenance. ASTM Special Technical Publication (STP) Number 1348. American Society for Testing and Materials. West Conshohocken, PA.


Sprayed Sealing Guide (2004). AP-676/104, Austroads, Sydney, Australia, , p 104.


Stroup-Gardiner, M, Newcomb, D. E., Epps, J. A., and Paulsen, G. L. (1990). Laboratory Test Methods and Field Correlations for Predicting the Performance of Chip Seals, Asphalt Emulsions, ASTM STP 1079, H. W. Muncy, Ed., ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 2-19.


Temple, W. (2002). Performance of Louisiana’s Chip Seal and Microsurfacing Program. Transportation Research Record, 1795, 3-16.


Texas Test Method Tex-224-F, “Flakiness Index”.


Washington State Department of Transportation. (2003, March). Asphalt Seal, Technology Transfer, 1-30.

  Join Us
  Join as Reviewer
  Join Editorial Board