Research Article

Transportation Research Record

1–11
Ó National Academy of Sciences:
Factors Affecting the Interlayer Transportation Research Board 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
Shear Strength of Laboratory sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0361198120975414

and Field Samples journals.sagepub.com/home/trr

Abu Ahmed Sufian1, Dan Swiertz2, Hussain U. Bahia2,

Louay Mohammad3, and Moses Akentuna4

Abstract
Asphalt emulsion is the most widely used tack coat material in the U.S. The objective of this study is to investigate factors
that may affect the interlayer bond shear strength of asphalt emulsion tack coats of both laboratory and field compacted sam-
ples. The laboratory study included six types of tack coat materials applied on two surfaces with two residual application
rates. The field study phase involved validation of the interlayer shear performance findings using field cores extracted from
paving projects. The field study included taking cores of the existing layer, emulsions used for interlayer bonding, and loose
mixes of new asphalt layers. Materials were collected to produce the laboratory prepared specimens for comparison with
the field cores. Results of the laboratory study demonstrate that there is a direct relationship between the roughness (tex-
ture) of the existing surface and the interlayer shear strength (ISS) between two surfaces. Statistical analysis provided a strong
correlation and indicated that 79% of the data variance can be explained with surface texture, emulsion type, application rate,
and replicate effects. Comparing field cores with laboratory produced samples showed no clear relationship between the
shear strength of laboratory and field specimens. It is speculated that the difference in compaction of the upper layers in the
laboratory and field, and effect of shearing during coring of the samples from the field, resulted in higher laboratory shear val-
ues relative to field core values. The study highlights major challenges in using laboratory prepared samples to predict field
behavior of tack coats.

Hot-mix asphalt (HMA) lifts compacted days or even
years apart from each other are expected to behave as a
monolithic structure to carry the anticipated traffic load.
Proper bond strength between the layers is a prerequisite
for a sound pavement structure. Most tack coats used
today are asphalt emulsions, which consist of a paving-
grade asphalt binder blended with water and an emulsi-
fying agent to keep these dissimilar materials in suspen-
sion together. Tack coats, when properly selected and
applied, can be effective in preventing premature failure
in the form of debonding, mat slippage, and potentially
fatigue cracking, which may lead to reduced pavement
life. Conversely, applying too heavy of a tack coat has
been reported to result in low shear strength between
adjacent layers (1, 2).
In the laboratory, interlayer shear strength (ISS) has
been found to be a useful parameter to express the effec-
tiveness of tack coat in increasing interlayer bonding (3).
However, tack coats can affect ISS differently in differ-
ent conditions such as tack coat type, application rate
and coverage, pavement surface type and age, testing
temperature, humidity, and aggregate gradation. The
optimum tack coat application rate typically corresponds
to the maximum ISS although some researchers report
that the application of any tack coat rate in specific con-
ditions does not improve bonding since tack coat intro-
duces a slippage plane. The conditions under which tack
coat may create a slippage film may include extreme high
application rate, high existing pavement density, inability
of the tack coat to thoroughly penetrate into the pave-
ment surface, poor construction practices such as dusty
1
National Institute for Advanced Transportation Technology (NIATT),
University of Idaho, Moscow, ID
2
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI
3
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Louisiana State
University, Baton Rouge, LA
4
Louisiana Transportation Research Center, Louisiana State University,
Baton Rouge, LA
Corresponding Author:
Abu Ahmed Sufian, sufian@uidaho.edu
2 Transportation Research Record 00(0)
or dirty pavement surface, and low ambient or construc-
tion temperature in which the tack coat may not be
totally cured when the overlay mixture is placed on it
(3).
Researchers have proven that ISS can be affected by
many factors such as emulsion type, residual application
rate, temperature, moisture, condition of surface, and
type and texture of the surface. Mohammad et al. quan-
tified the effects of tack coat type, tack coat application
rate, and surface type on the interface shear strength
based on full-scale test application (4). Both milled and
unmilled surfaces of HMA and Portland cement concrete
(PCC) were evaluated. Five types of tack coat materials
(SS-1h, SS-1, CRS-1, trackless, PG 64-22) were used at
three application rates: 0.03, 0.06, and 0.15 gal/yd2.
Interface shear strength was measured using the
Louisiana Interface Shear Strength Tester (LISST) and
AASHTO TP 114 ‘‘Standard Method of Test for
Determining the Interlayer Shear Strength (ISS) of
Asphalt Pavement Layer’’ after the samples were cored
from the constructed test lanes. Researchers found a
direct relationship between the roughness of the existing
surface and the measured shear strength at the interface.
The milled HMA surface provided the greatest interface
shear strength followed by the PCC surface, existing
HMA, and new HMA surface. It was not possible to
identify an optimum residual application rate since the
interface shear strength increased as the residual applica-
tion rate increased continuously. Trackless tack coat
exhibited the highest shear strength at the application
rates of 0.06 and 0.15 gal/yd2 for both existing HMA
and PCC surfaces, while CRS-1 and SS-1 exhibited the
lowest. The study also found that a small amount of
water on the surface of existing pavement seemed to
negatively affect interface shear strength in the case of
the use of PG 64-22 as a tack coat material, but the effect
was minimal for emulsion-based tack coat materials.
Findings from NCHRP Project 09-40 using three sur-
face texture conditions (open graded friction course
[OGFC], sand mixture, and stone mastic asphalt [SMA])
found a pronounced effect of texture, with a spread in
ISS of approximately 20 pounds per square inch (psi)
between surface texture extremes and at relatively similar
residual application rates to those used in this study (1).
The field prepared specimens tested during the NCHRP
study exhibited substantially lower ISS values for the
same application rate and the same mixture materials
(1). Further, results of NCHRP Project 9-40A demon-
strated that the ISS values measured with test method
AASHTO TP 114 correlated well with short-term crack-
ing performance at six field sites with different climatic
conditions and traffic levels (5). Research also verified
that a minimum ISS of 40 psi was required for satisfac-
tory tack coat performance.
A recent research by the University of Oklahoma
investigated the effect of different surface types (i.e., new
HMA, aged and surface conditioned HMA, milled
HMA, and grooved PCC), residual application rate (i.e.,
0.031, 0.062, and 0.155 gal/yd2), and different tack coat
materials on the ISS of laboratory compacted specimens.
The researchers concluded that, in general, ISS of the
laboratory compacted specimens decreased as the resi-
dual application rate increased. Only the two non-
tracking tack coats (NTHAP and NTQS-1hh) showed
slightly higher ISS values when their application rates
increased. The study has also confirmed the dominating
effect of surface texture conditions on the ISS values, in
which the HMA specimens showed significantly higher
ISS values than the PCC cores (6).
Some researchers attempted dynamic shear testing
devices to simulate cyclic loading conditions at different
frequencies and temperatures in the field, which is not
possible in the static laboratory shear testing. Tozzo
et al. investigated dynamic interface shear behavior by
developing a simple device named Sapienza Dynamic
Shear Testing Machine (SDSTM). They tested several
combinations of normal pressure and shear load ampli-
tude and proposed a new model to join the contributions
of normal stress and shear stress to the interface fatigue
behavior. Although an attempt was made to compare
monotonic and fatigue loading modes because of the
great difference in testing modes and loading application,
the correlation between monotonic and dynamic tests
has not been found and further investigation was recom-
mended (7). Another approach of experimental charac-
terization of interfaces shear fatigue behaviour through
dynamic shear fatigue test was undertaken by Diakhate
et al. (8). Samples consisting of asphalt concrete mix
layers with tack coat interface were subjected to a cyclic
symmetrical alternate shearing load at the interfaces,
aiming interfaces failures within the range of 104–105
cycles of loading. Finding from the research showed that
the interface shear strength increases linearly with the
decimal logarithm of the displacement rate and this result
may be explained by the viscoelastic behaviour of the
emulsion. No direct comparisons of static shear tests
over dynamic shear tests were made, and more interface
testing at several shear displacement rates for the direct
shear tests, and at several frequencies of loading for the
shear fatigue tests, was recommended to determine their
influences on the interface model parameters (8).
Objectives
The objective of this study is to investigate the factors
that affect shear strength performance of asphalt emul-
sion tack coat materials of both laboratory and field
compacted samples. In addition, the study attempts to
Sufian et al
Table 1. Test Factorial for Laboratory Prepared Samples
Factor
Emulsion type
Laboratory residual application rate (gal/yd2)
Field residual application rate (gal/yd2)
Bottom or existing surface layer texture
Test temperature
Confining pressure
Replicate samples
Note: MTD = mean texture depth; psi = pounds per square inch.
identify the reasons behind the discrepancies between
laboratory and field ISS values.
Materials and Methods
The study was divided into two phases. The first phase
involved a laboratory evaluation of some commonly used
tack coat for interlayer shear performance. The second
phase involved validation of the interlayer shear perfor-
mance findings using field cores extracted from paving
projects in Wisconsin during the 2017 and 2018 paving
seasons. Emulsion types, residual application rates, and
testing temperatures were selected to encompass materi-
als, methods, and pavement temperatures commonly
encountered in the state of Wisconsin. Trackless emul-
sion is not commonly used in Wisconsin and is included
to compare with standard materials. Asphalt mixtures
were sampled from field production to ensure that sam-
ples prepared in the laboratory simulated field conditions
as much as possible. Table 1 presents the laboratory test
matrix used for this study.
During the field study, materials from active paving
projects were collected to produce the laboratory pre-
pared specimens for comparison, which included field
cores of the existing layer, emulsions for the interlayer
bonding, and loose mixes of the new asphalt layers. A
materials collection worksheet was requested for all proj-
ects to record relevant project information. Initially 16
combinations of surface type, application rate, and emul-
sion type were requested for this study. In all, nine of 16
combinations were sampled from five projects.
Preparation of Laboratory Compacted Samples
Laboratory compacted samples consisted of two layers,
top and bottom, with a tack coat at the interface of these
layers. The bottom layers were compacted to a height of
50 mm at 135°C using the Superpave gyratory compactor
(SGC) with a target air void of 7% 6 1% and allowed
to cool to laboratory temperature. Emulsion was then
3
Level Description of levels
4 CSS-1, CSS-1hL, CQS-1h, trackless (NTQS-1hh)
2 0.02 gal/yd2, 0.05 gal/yd2
3 0.01 gal/yd2, 0.021 gal/yd2, 0.025 gal/yd2
2 Low: dense graded, fine mix (MTD = 0.17 mm)
High: stone mastic asphalt type mix (MTD = 0.96 mm)
2 25°C, 46°C
2 7 psi, 0 psi
3 Three specimens tested per factor combination.
applied to the surface of the bottom layer after measur-
ing the surface texture; a laboratory balance was used to
ensure the correct amount of tack coat was applied. Tack
coat was uniformly applied to the top face of the speci-
men by using a 2-in. bristle brush. Then the tack coat
material was allowed to cure for 30 min at room tem-
perature after which the sample was placed in the gyra-
tory compactor mold. Finally, the top half of the sample
(fresh mix) was compacted by placing the bottom half in
a preheated SGC mold and compacting loose mix on top
of the tack-coated bottom half, again targeting a 50 mm
thick compacted sample at 7% 6 1% air voids.
ISS Test Procedure
Shear testing for this study followed AASHTO TP114
procedure (9). The compacted specimens were condi-
tioned at the test temperatures (25°C and 46°C) for 2 h
before testing. A testing temperature of 25°C was chosen
according to the AASHTO standard (9). A temperature
of 46°C was specifically selected as the 50% reliability
high pavement temperature in the southern part of state
of Wisconsin at 2 in. below the pavement surface accord-
ing to the Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP)
database. The 150 mm diameter samples were loaded in
the ISS tester device in such a manner that the interlayer
is located directly in the middle of the gap between the
loading and the reaction frames. The shear tests for the
initial laboratory study were conducted at one laboratory
using 7 psi confining pressure, while the shear tests for
field study were conducted at another laboratory using a
different shear testing device that allows 0 psi confining
pressure. The 7 psi confining pressure was applied using
a normal load actuator and calibrated dial gage to hold
the two-part specimen together during testing. This was
required because the test fixture cannot hold the two
parts of the sample without confinement. It is worth not-
ing that the same confinement pressures have been used
in other ISS Studies (1, 10). The shearing load in all cases
was applied at a constant rate of 2.54 mm/min on the
4 Transportation Research Record 00(0)
Figure 1. Effect of emulsion type and residual application rate: (a) low-texture existing surfaces at 25°C, and (b) high-texture existing
surfaces at 25°C.
Note: ISS = interlayer shear strength; psi = pounds per square inch.
sample until failure. ISS was calculated from the maxi-
mum shear load applied on the test sample at failure.
Texture Measurement using the Modified Sand
Patch Method
Surface textures of the compacted bottoms were mea-
sured using a modified volumetric technique using natu-
ral silica sand (sand patch method) (5). The initial mass
of the bottom sample was measured and a small amount
of sand was poured on the surface and it was spread with
a rubber disc into a circular patch until the surface
depressions filled to the level of the peaks. Sand was
added until the depressions on the surface of sample
were totally filled by silica sand. The sample mass was
again taken and the difference (sand mass) was con-
verted to volume. Since volume of added sand and area
of the circular sample were known, mean texture depth
(MTD) was calculated dividing the volume by the area.
Result and Analysis
ISS was measured for different asphalt emulsions, resi-
dual application rates, and existing surface textures.
Additionally, the effect of testing temperature and coring
was investigated for a subset of material combinations.
Triplicate samples were tested and mean ISSs, along with
their standard deviations and coefficients of variation
(COVs), were obtained for each defined test condition
considered in the test factorial. COVs in the test results
were less than 10% for all test conditions. The ISS test
results were analyzed to evaluate the effects of the
selected variables considered in the test factorial on ISS.
Effect of Emulsion Type and Residual Application Rate
on ISS for the Laboratory Study
A confining pressure of 7 psi was applied during the ISS
test to investigate the effect of residual application rate.
The four emulsions chosen for this portion of the study
(CSS-1, CQS-1h, CSS-1hL, and trackless) were selected
to represent commonly used emulsions. As such, it would
be expected that if residual asphalt properties signifi-
cantly affect shear strength, a significant difference
between the ISS values for the emulsions would be noted.
Figure 1 shows the results of the laboratory experiment
for the four emulsions for both low-texture and high-
texture surfaces at both residual application rates. The
low-texture surface was created using a dense graded
mixture, while the high texture was created using an
SMA mix design. The compacted top layer was always
of the dense graded mixture.
The results in Figure 1 show that there does not
appear to be a significant effect of residual application
Sufian et al
rate on ISS for the two application rates evaluated at the
specified confining pressure of 7 psi and testing tempera-
ture of 25°C. In all but one case, the higher residual
application rate resulted in marginally lower average ISS
values. Similarly, ISS values for the mixtures with vari-
ous emulsions vary within a very narrow range for each
texture level with the exception of the trackless product
(NTQS-1hh) which shows slightly higher ISS values for
the low-texture mixture, but it gives similar strength to
the other three emulsions for the high-texture mixture.
These findings suggest that under the laboratory testing
conditions used, the selected application rate and emul-
sion types do not have significant effects, and other vari-
ables (such as surface texture) are dominating the ISS
response. It is noted that ISS tests were conducted at a
specified confining pressure of 7 psi, and therefore a dif-
ferent level of confining pressure may alter the values of
ISS at different tack coat application rates depending on
the test temperature (11).
Effect of Surface Texture on ISS
for the Laboratory Study
To investigate the effect of surface texture, a 7 psi confin-
ing pressure was applied during the ISS test. Results
shown in Figure 1 were re-organized to compare the low
and high texture for each emulsion, and a sample with
no tack coat is included, as shown in Figure 2. The mix-
ture used to prepare the top half of all ISS specimens
tested during this study is the same for all combinations
of emulsion and residual application rate. The results re-
organized in Figure 2 show that surface texture effect is
clearly evident, with increasing texture resulting in
increased ISS. Interestingly, the average spread between
the high-texture and low-texture ISS value for a given
emulsion at a given residual application rate is approxi-
mately 20 psi for most cases, which is the approximate
largest spread between the two extreme types of emulsion
(CSS-1 and NTQS-1hh). It should also be noted the
same spread between the textures is observed without
application of tack coat. These findings suggest that for
newly compacted specimens in the laboratory, surface
texture dominates ISS performance.
To further evaluate the effect of surface texture, fine
mix samples were prepared and cut using a wet saw to
create a smooth surface. The top portion compacted on
the smooth surface included both fine and SMA mix,
and CSS-1hL at 0.05 gal/yd2. ISS testing results of these
samples are shown in Figure 3, which indicate that reduc-
ing the texture of the bottom portion for the two mixture
types (i.e., fine mix and SMA mix) resulted in a signifi-
cant reduction in the ISS value. The reduction in surface
texture of the bottom part caused a 27% drop in ISS
value for the low-texture mix (i.e., fine mix) and 52% for
5
the high-texture mix (i.e., SMA mix). These findings con-
firm that surface texture dominates ISS performance in
the laboratory.
Further confirmation of effects of texture is also
reported in European studies. In a comprehensive study
by the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science
and Technology (EMPA) (12) it was found that the use
of tack coats does not necessarily result in a better ISS,
but the different surface textures do influence ISS, and
tack coats could lead to better adhesion. The study also
indicates under conditions of wet surfaces, and in cases
where test specimens are oven heated at 60°C for 75 h,
the use of tack has the potential to increase ISS as com-
pared with ‘‘no tack’’ conditions.
Effect of Testing Temperature on ISS
To evaluate the relative effect of testing temperature on
ISS values, laboratory compacted test samples were con-
ditioned at 46°C before testing; this temperature was spe-
cifically selected as the 50% reliability high pavement
temperature in the southern part of state of Wisconsin at
2 in. below the pavement surface according to the LTPP
database. All other testing conditions were held constant
(see Table 1).
The effect of test temperature is pronounced for both
levels of surface texture, but the relative ranking of ISS
remains the same (high texture provides higher ISS) at
the higher test temperature (see Figure 4). The percent
decrease in ISS with increased temperature is approxi-
mately the same for both mixtures and among asphalt
emulsion types; this finding suggests surface texture is
again the most important factor controlling ISS, indepen-
dent of temperature. For practical purposes, this finding
also suggests that testing at 25°C alone is reasonable to
screen emulsion or surface types when an application rate
of 0.02–0.05 gal/yd2 is used.
Statistical Analysis of Laboratory ISS Testing
An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to
determine the statistical significance of the ISS results
presented above. To conduct the ANOVA, the emulsion
type is quantified using the ER-DSR Test (AASHTO
TP123) tested on the emulsion residue at 25°C. The ER-
DSR subjects the emulsion residue to a monotonic shear
strain rate while recording shear stress up to a predefined
shear strain, then applies a zero-stress condition while
recording shear strain recovery. The log of the maximum
observed shear stress was used in this study to quantify
residual asphalt properties of the emulsion. Surface tex-
ture is quantified using the MTD as described in earlier
sections of this paper. The replicate factor was included
to provide information in relation to the variability of
6 Transportation Research Record 00(0)

Figure 2. Effect of existing surface texture on ISS for: (a) 0.02 gal/yd2 residual application rate at 25°C, and (b) 0.05 gal/yd2 residual
application rate at 25°C.
Note: ISS = interlayer shear strength; psi = pounds per square inch.

Figure 3. ISS values of samples with cut faces (no texture) with CSS-1hL tack coat at 25°C.
Note: ISS = interlayer shear strength; psi = pounds per square inch; SMA = stone mastic asphalt.
Sufian et al
Figure 4. Effect of test temperature on ISS using: (a) low surface textures for the bottom layer (0.05 gal/yd2), and (b) high surface
textures for the bottom layer (0.05 gal/yd2).
Note: ISS = interlayer shear strength; psi = pounds per square inch.
Table 2. Analysis of Variance for Interlayer Shear Strength Main
Factors
Main factor F ratio p-value
Surface texture 103.5 \0.0001
Emulsion type 59.3 \0.0001
Application rate 7.6 0.0085
Replicate 6.8 0.0123
Note: na = not applicable.
the test method itself relative to varying other factors.
The statistical software used to generate the ANOVA
was JMPÒ. Results of the ANOVA are given in Table 2.
All controlled factors are found to be significant at
the a = 0.05 level. Based on the results of F ratio in
Table 2, it is found that surface texture is the most signif-
icant factor influencing ISS, as expected based on the
results presented earlier in this section. Emulsion type
shows the second highest influence on ISS, followed by
application rate and the replicate factor. The R2ADJ for
the regression equation including only these four main
factors is relatively strong at 79%, indicating that 79%
of the data variance can be explained with these four fac-
tors alone. Including interactive factors in the model
improves the R2ADJ by only 1%, indicating interactive
factors are not significantly influencing ISS. It should be
noted that the replicate factor is found to be somewhat
significant, indicating the test method variability should
be considered when comparing results.
Field Study Results
The ISS test at 0.0 psi (no confinement) was used to test
road cores and field materials sampled from active
7
paving projects during the 2017 and 2018 paving seasons
to validate the laboratory study findings. Two emulsions,
SS-1h and QS-1h, were used in these projects. It should
R2ADJ be noted that QS-1h is the same emulsion as SS-1h, only
for QS, an additive was added to the emulsion tanker
0.79
before applying the tack. (QS [anionic quick set] emul-
na
na sion is not a recognized AASHTO emulsion designation.
na CQS [cationic quick set] is recognized.) The actual resi-
dual application rates differed between projects and are
listed in the associated data plots. For all combinations
except the 25 mm new surface, three road cores and three
laboratory prepared specimens were tested for each com-
bination; two samples were tested for each of the 25 mm
surface combinations.
Three sets of semi-laboratory compacted specimens
were prepared (i.e., laboratory compacted top layer on
field core bottom layer). Field cores were obtained from
new or milled HMA pavement surfaces and trimmed to
a height of 50 mm. Tack coat was uniformly applied to
the top surface of the trimmed specimen by using a 2-in.
bristle brush. Then the tack coat material was allowed to
cure for 30 min at room temperature after which sample
was placed in the gyratory compactor mold. Finally, the
top half of the sample (fresh mix) was compacted by pla-
cing the bottom half in a preheated SGC mold and com-
pacting to a target air void of 7% 6 1%.
The ISS test for the field versus laboratory compari-
son was conducted by applying a confining pressure of 0
psi. The summary of the ISS results of the field validation
study is shown in Figure 5. Samples are grouped by exist-
ing surface type. The intended (target) residual applica-
tion rate is listed with each sample; note that the field
actual residual rate was not verified on site at the time of
application, but the residue percentage was verified for
each emulsion type and section in the laboratory. The
error bars in Figure 5 represent 6 1 SD from the mean
8 Transportation Research Record 00(0)

Figure 5. Comparison of laboratory and field ISS for field validation study at 25°C.
Note: ISS = interlayer shear strength; psi = pounds per square inch.

Table 3. p-Values from t-Tests on Groupings of Interlayer Shear Strength Data for Field Validation Study

Application rate Emulsion type* Laboratory-to-field

Field Laboratory Field Laboratory SS-1h QS-1h
Grouping SS-1h QS-1h SS-1h QS-1h Low rate High rate Low rate High rate Low High Low High

Milled 0.390 0.460 0.299 0.004 0.901 0.299 0.004 0.302 0.609 0.171 0.022
19 mm 0.278 0.511 0.531 0.214 0.639 0.134 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000
25 mm 0.360 0.003 0.445 0.058 0.000 0.003 0.127 0.000 0.048 0.000 0.007

Note: Bold indicate groupings that show statistical significance at the 95% confidence level.
*If application rate is not found to be significant, data from both application rates is used to compare emulsion type; if application rate is significant, the
data is separated by application rate to compare emulsion type.

value of the ISS. All samples were tested in one labora-
tory by one technician to eliminate testing bias from the
analysis.
A series of statistical t-tests was performed at the 95%
confidence level to determine the significance of applica-
tion rate, emulsion type, and compaction method on the
ISS. The resulting p-values from this analysis are shown
in Table 3; values that are bolded are groupings that
show statistical significance at the 95% confidence level.
For all three existing surfaces, the effect of target resi-
dual application rate is not statistically significant at the
test temperature of 25°C and confining pressure of 0 psi
for all combinations tested, except the unique case of the
laboratory prepared milled surface using QS-1h (0.050
gal/yd2.0.025 gal/yd2) and the field core 25 mm surface
QS-1h (0.021 gal/yd2.0.01 gal/yd2). It should be noted
that range of residual application rates for all samples is
relatively narrow, and application rates significantly
higher or zero could affect results, as was the case for the
findings of the NCHRP Project 09-40 (1).
The effect of tack coat material type was analyzed
with respect to the significance of residual application
rate. If application rate is not found to be significant,
data from both application rates is used to evaluate
emulsion type effect; if application rate is significant, the
data is separated by application rate to evaluate emulsion
type effect. The results show emulsion type effect is not
statistically significant for five of the eight combinations
tested. This finding can be partially explained because
the residual asphalt used for both emulsions is the same.
A liquid additive was added to the SS-1h to create a QS
emulsion. In the cases where emulsion type is significant,
it appears to be caused by the low values of ISS when
using the QS-1h emulsion, which was reported to have
incomplete coverage, and perhaps a dirty existing surface
noted during the testing. Based on the limited scope of
the field study, the effect of tack coat type cannot be reli-
ably verified.
The effect of compaction method (laboratory versus
field) is inconsistent, but statistically significant for nine
Sufian et al
of 12 combinations and all combinations for the 19 mm
and 25 mm surfaces. For the milled surfaces, the effect is
not statistically significant for three of the four combina-
tions. For the 19 mm and 25 mm surfaces, the laboratory
ISS is statistically higher than the field ISS.
For this data set, it is clear that laboratory prepared
samples cannot be used to reliably predict field ISS val-
ues using the same materials. However, the effect of sur-
face type is still pronounced, although the milled samples
exhibited lower ISS relative to the new surfaces. This is
unexpected, as milled surfaces are expected to provide
greater texture relative to the new surface. Several note-
worthy observations were made during the testing of
these samples that could provide some explanation for
this finding. First, the direction of travel (milling) was
not noted on the samples, so a bias could have been
introduced based on the direction of milling. Second, it
was noted that during the testing, several of the samples
broke in the lower layer away from the tack interface.
One sample combination (25 mm new, QS-1h, 0.01
gal/yd2 residual) exhibited non-uniform tack coat cover-
age and dusty/dirty interface surfaces following testing.
These samples exhibited an average reduction in ISS of
over 50% relative to the next lowest field ISS value for
this surface type, demonstrating the potentially severe
negative impacts of non-uniform coverage and dirty sur-
faces during tack coat application. This finding agrees
with ones reported in NCHRP Project 09-40 and is consis-
tent with the language in the WisDOT Construction and
Materials Manual (CMM) and Standard Specification.
Effect of Coring on Laboratory Prepared Samples
Assuming surfaces in the field were clean and substan-
tially dust-free, two prevailing theories explaining the
laboratory-to-field shift are offered. Laboratory testing
results of laboratory prepared, laboratory cored speci-
mens (a 4-in. core is cored out from a 6-in. diameter gyra-
tory sample) are shown in Figure 6. The results indicate a
negative impact of coring on ISS, with a reduction in ISS
of approximately 25%. The second possible cause of
lower ISS values in the field is hypothesized to be the dif-
ference in compaction method and effectiveness between
the laboratory and field. Compaction in the laboratory is
100% confined, and pore structure at the layer interface
may be substantially different than what is observed in
the field.
Summary of Findings
The objectives of this study are to investigate the factors
that affect shear strength performance of asphalt emul-
sion tack coat materials of both laboratory and field
compacted samples and identify the reasons behind the
9
Figure 6. Effect of coring on ISS of laboratory prepared and
cored samples.
Note: ISS = interlayer shear strength; psi = pounds per square inch.
discrepancies between laboratory and field ISS values.
To attain these objectives, four types of tack coat materi-
als were applied on three types of surfaces with residual
application rates of 0.05 gal/yd2 and 0.02 gal/yd2.
Further, field and laboratory compacted specimens were
evaluated and compared at 0.01, 0.021, 0.025, and 0.05
gal/yd2 residual application rates. Texture of the com-
pacted bottom surfaces was measured by a modified
sand patch method. The difference of ISS between field
extracted and laboratory prepared samples was also
investigated. Based on the analysis of test results derived
from the ISS test performed in the laboratory on both
laboratory and field prepared samples, the following
findings can be summarized:
Laboratory Shear Strength using ISS
1. The ISS at 7 psi confinement is primarily a func-
tion of surface texture and emulsion residue prop-
erties. The surface texture, quantified using
volumetric techniques, has a pronounced effect
and appears to dominate shear response in the
laboratory at the specified confining pressure and
test temperature. Considering only conventional
tack coat materials currently specified by
WisDOT there is not a significant effect of emul-
sion type on shear strength. Only the trackless
tack coat showed a higher shear strength.
2. Within the range of residual asphalt rates used in
this study (0.02–0.05 gal/yd2) at the specified con-
fining pressure of 7 psi, the change in ISS because
of application rate is not practically significant
and no clear trend between residual application
rate and ISS is observed.
3. Testing temperature is found to significantly
affect ISS, with higher temperatures resulting in
10
lower ISS; surface texture, however, is still found
to dominate ISS at higher testing temperature.
4. Samples prepared with no tack coat exhibited
similar, and in some cases higher, ISS values com-
pared with those prepared with tack coat applica-
tion. This finding agrees with limited prior
literature and is hypothesized to be the result of
surface texture and compaction methods in the
laboratory. This finding represents a critical chal-
lenge associated with using ISS in the laboratory
to determine optimal application rates and emul-
sion types.
5. Accounting for test method variability, all of the
combinations of surface texture and emulsions
tested during this study achieved ISS values of
100 psi or greater in the laboratory. Proposed
limits in the literature vary between approxi-
mately 40 psi and 100 psi. This finding may sug-
gest that a laboratory-to-field shift factor needs
to be applied if evaluating ISS on laboratory
compacted specimens is used.
6. All the laboratory shear testings performed for
this study were static. It is recommended to check
the effect of cyclic loading with consideration of
the temperature and frequencies for future study.
Validation of Laboratory ISS using Field Cores
1. There is not a clear relationship in ISS values
between field and laboratory prepared samples,
even when the same materials are used for both
samples at the test temperature of 25°C. If bond
strength needs to be tested or verified in the field,
cores must be taken.
2. Field cores taken from various projects throughout
the state of Wisconsin show that for unmilled sur-
faces, the ISS values of field cores are significantly
lower than the ISS of laboratory compacted speci-
mens. For the milled surface, the ISS of the labora-
tory and field were found to be similar, although
ratio between laboratory and field was inconsistent.
It should be noted that residual application rate
and surface texture were not measured and verified
in the field portion of this study.
3. Within the range of application rates reported,
ISS is not significantly affected by application
rate for nearly all of the combinations tested.
4. Emulsion type is not found to significantly affect
ISS for most combinations, since both emulsion
residues used in this study are similar.
5. There is evidence that poor construction practice
can significantly reduce ISS in the field, as evi-
denced by one sample which exhibited a reduc-
tion in ISS of over 50% relative to the next lowest
Transportation Research Record 00(0)
value. After testing this sample, it was noted
that the existing surface exhibited non-uniform
tack coat coverage and significant surface dust was
present. This finding highlights the need for a clean
surface and uniform coverage. Comprehensive con-
struction control is recommended to minimize the
implications from these variables.
6. Assuming existing surfaces in the field are sub-
stantially dust-free, two prevailing theories
explain the difference between laboratory and
field samples. Testing of laboratory prepared,
laboratory cored specimens showed that coring
can have a negative impact on ISS, with a reduc-
tion in ISS of approximately 25% noted in this
study. The second cause of lower ISS values in
the field is hypothesized to be the difference in
compaction method and effectiveness in the field.
Compaction in the laboratory is 100% confined
in the gyratory compaction mold, and pore struc-
ture at the layer interface may be substantially
different than what is observed in the field.
Acknowledgment
Support of the project oversight committee is acknowledged.
Author Contributions
The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study
conception and design: A. Sufian, D. Swiertz, H. Bahia, L.
Mohammad; data collection: A. Sufian, M. Akentuna; analysis
and interpretation of results: A. Sufian, D. Swiertz, H. Bahia,
L. Mohammad; draft manuscript preparation: A. Sufian, D.
Swiertz, H. Bahia, L. Mohammad. All authors reviewed the
results and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial sup-
port for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article: This study was funded by the Wisconsin Highway
Research Program of WisDOT (WHRP 0092-17-06).
Data Accessibility Statement
Raw data were generated at the Modified Asphalt Research
Center of University of Wisconsin Madison and at the
Louisiana Transportation Research Center of Louisiana State
University. Derived data supporting the findings of this study
are available from the corresponding author (Abu Sufian) on
request.
Sufian et al
References
1. Mohammad, L. N., M. A. Elseifi, A. Bae, N. Patel, J. But-
ton, and J. A. Scherocman. NCHRP Report 712: Optimi-
zation of Tack Coat for HMA Placement. Transportation
Research Board or the National Academies, Washington
D.C., 2012.
2. Mohammad, L. N., M. A. Elseifi, R. Das, and W. Cao.
NCHRP Report 878: Validation of the Louisiana Interlayer
Shear Strength Test for Tack Coat. Transportation
Research Board, Washington D.C., 2018.
3. Zhang, W. Effect of Tack Coat Application on Interlayer
Shear Strength of Asphalt Pavement: A State-of-the-Art
Review Based on Application in the United States. Interna-
tional Journal of Pavement Research and Technology, Vol.
10, 2017, pp. 434–445.
4. Mohammad, L. N., A. Bae, M. A. Elseifi, J. Button, and
N. Patel. Effects of Pavement Surface Type and Sample
Preparation Method on Tack Coat Interface Shear
Strength. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
Transportation Research Board, 2010. 2180: 93–101.
5. ASTM E965 – 15. Standard Test Method for Measuring
Pavement Macrotexture Depth using a Volumetric Technique.
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015.
6. Ghabchi, R., M. Zaman, and S. Rani. Selection and
Evaluation of Track Coats in Oklahoma. Presented at
SPTC-ODOT Workshop, Oklahoma, 2017.
7. Tozzo, C., N. Fiore, and A. D’Andrea. Dynamic Shear
Tests for the Evaluation of the Effect of the Normal Load
11
on the Interface Fatigue Resistance. Construction and
Building Materials, Vol. 61, 2014, pp. 200–205.
8. Diakhate, M., A. Phelipot, A. Millien, and C. Petit. Shear
Fatigue Behaviour of Tack Coats in Pavements. Road
Materials and Pavement Design, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2006,
pp. 201–222.
9. American Association of State Highway and Transporta-
tion Officials. Determining the Interlayer Shear Strength
(ISS) of Asphalt Pavement Layers. AASHTO TP 114-15.
American Association of State Highway and Transporta-
tion Officials, Washington, D.C., 2015.
10. Ozer, H., and J. Rivera-Perez. Evaluation of Various
Tack Coat Materials using Interface Shear Device and
Recommendations on a Simplified Device. Project ICT-
17-027/FHWA-ICT-17-021. Illinois Center for Transpor-
tation, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, IL,
2017.
11. West, R. C., J. Zhang, and J. Moore. Evaluation of Bond
Strength between Pavement Layers. No. NCAT Report 05-
08. National Center for Asphalt Technology, Auburn Uni-
versity, Auburn, AL, 2005.
12. Raab, C., and M. N. Partl. Effect of Tack Coats on Inter-
layer Shear Bond of Pavements. Proc., 8th Conference on
Asphalt Pavements for Southern Africa. Sun City, South
Africa, 2004.
The results and opinions presented are those of the authors and
do not necessarily reflect those of the sponsoring agency.