Comparison of Tire Wear Emissions and

the Impact of Various Road Surfaces on

the Urban Heat Island Effect

Pima Association of Governments

Tucson, AZ

Air Quality Subcommittee Meeting

December 12, 2006

Kamil E. Kaloush, PhD, PE

Assistant Professor, CEE
Co-Director, National Center of Excellence on SMART Innovations
NCE - SMART
Founder
EPA
•Arizona Cement Association.
•CEMEX USA
•Asphalt Pavement Alliance
•ASU – FSE

Partners
Arizona Public Service
•Arizona Department of Transportation
•American Concrete Pavement
Association
•ASU Research Park
•Salt River Project
•City of Phoenix
•City of Tempe
•Raytheon

•Others: City of Glendale, City of

Tucson, City of London, …
NCE Goals
•Raise awareness: Industry-
Government meetings, workshops,
conferences, and demonstration
projects.
•Collaborate with other National
programs for innovative
opportunities to reduce energy
and improve environmental
quality.
•Address Urban Heat Island (UHI)
related to pavements and building
materials.
•Develop technical tools, web
resources, and case studies on
mitigation strategies.
UHI Definition and Causes
•Urban Heat Island (UHI)
•Elevated surface and air temperatures
•Mainly nighttime phenomenon (benefit
daytime)
Causes
•Urbanization
•Anthropogenic
 Malls (Tucson &
Foothills)

Alvernon &
I-10► Broadway

◄210
I-19► ◄Airport
 Strategies to Reduce
Urban Heat Islands
• Urban Vegetation
• Cool Roofing
• Cool Pavements
Pavements Focus Areas

• How pavement designs and materials

selection contribute to surface and
subsurface temperature fluctuations
• Determine the albedo characteristics of
various pavement surfaces.
• Collect surface and in-depth pavement
temperatures of several field sections.
• Conduct laboratory tests to measure the
thermal properties.
• Develop fundamental model that will
allow for comparative scenarios.
Laboratory Evaluation

o
( C)
 Pavement Materials and Heat
Heat
Air @T∞
Solar Radiation, Convection, Transfer
(1− ã)q”s h∞(Ts-T∞) Flows
Irradiation,
Ψskyεσ(Ts4 –T4sky) or Through
Pavement
hrad(Ts – Tsky)

To

Pavement Tm
Ti
Bound Base/Sub-base

Conduction, kgrd ∂T(t)

Natural Soil (Ground) ∂x
Tn

∂T ∂ 2T
Initial Condition: @t = 0s, T(0) = Tinitial
=α
Boundary Condition: @x → ∞, T(t) → Tinitial ∂t ∂x 2
12
 6/ o
25
/0
Temperature ( C)
4
12
:0
0
A

25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
M
6/
25
/0
4
6:
00
A
M
6/
25
/0
4
12
:0
0
P
M
6
/2
5/
04
6
:0
0
P
M
6/
26
/0
4
12
:0
0
AM
Simulation - UTW

6/
26
/0
4

10" HMA
6:
00
AM
6/
26
/0
4
12
:0
0

10" PCC
PM

6/
26
/0
4

Time of Day
6:
00
PM
6/
27
/0
4

3" Whitetopping
12
:0
0
A
M
6/
27
/0
4
1" OG FC 6:
00
A
M
6/
2
7/
04
12
:0
0
P
M
6/
27
/0
4
6:
00
P
M
6/
28
/0
4
12
:0
0
A
M
Part 2: Operative Temperature
Definition : Average of the mean radiant and ambient temperatures

Tambient

Tambient + Tsurrounding
Tsurr Toperative ≅
T operative 2
Pervious Concrete
Rio Verde - UTW
 Asphalt Rubber

1 inch AR-ACFC on
PCCP
I-10
October 2004
ASTER Thermal Imagery – Top 20%
B

A
Ray Road Test Site
Courtesy AZ511.com
 Asphalt Rubber Study Areas
Urban Heat
Urban Heat
Mixture
Mixture
Island
Island
Thermal Blanket
Blanket Performance
Performance
Thermal

Binder
Binder Noise:
AR-ACFC
AR-ACFC Noise:
Performance
Performance Field ++ Lab
Field Lab

Life Cycle
Life Cycle Tire Wear
Tire Wear
Costs
Costs Emissions
Emissions
Tire Wear Emissions for Asphalt
Rubber and Portland Cement
Concrete Pavement Surfaces

Olga Alexandrova, Jonathan O. Allen, Kamil E. Kaloush

Study Objective

• Test the hypothesis:

• Asphalt Rubber Asphalt Concrete

Friction Course (AR-ACFC) road surface
layer results in less tire wear than an
existing Portland Cement Concrete (PCC)
road surface layer.
Rubber Loss
• Rubber loss affected by road surface type, driving conditions,
and tire conditions.
• Estimated to average ~ 90 mg/km >>1.3 million metric tons per
year for the entire US.
• Tire wear emissions (TIRE) are estimated in the EPA MOBILE
6.1 model as:

TIRE = 0.002 * PSTIRE * WHEELS

o TIRE has units g/mi

o PSTIRE is the fraction of particles smaller than a cutoff size
o WHEELS is the number of wheels on a vehicle.

o A passenger vehicle is estimated to emit 13 mg/km of PM10 and

0.13 mg/km PM0.1.

• MOBILE 6.1 estimates are used for air quality modeling;

however these factors have not been verified experimentally
for existing or new pavement surfaces.
Scope of Work
• Measure the Particulate Matter (PM) emissions from
the on-road vehicle traffic during typical highway
driving conditions for the two different roadway
surfaces: AR-ACFC and PCC.

• Collect and analyze representative tire tread samples

for tires wear marker compounds.

• Analyze PM emissions to determine emission factors

for tire wear emissions for the two different road
surface types.

• Examine and compare the roughness and frictional

characteristics of the two pavement surfaces.
Deck Park Tunnel, I-10 Phoenix, AZ
• Tire-wear marker compounds in PM emissions
were measured at the Deck Park Tunnel Highway
on Interstate 10: 2004 and 2005.
• Rare opportunity to sample tire wear emissions at
the tunnel before and after the AR-ACFC overlay.
PM Concentrations Measurements
• PM concentrations were measured using two high
volume cascade impactors, ChemVol 2400.
• 1-incoming air at the eastern entrance of the tunnel
• 2-western exit of the tunnel.
• CO2 concentrations were measured at the tunnel
exhaust chimney using a LiCor 7500 infrared
hygrometer.
Traffic
•Video camera at the exit of the westbound tunnel
•Counts: passenger vehicles, medium and heavy
duty truck miles during each of the sampling
periods.
Tunnel Traffic
• Traffic data May 27th and 28th
2004 and on June 9th and 10th
2005.

• Manual counting of vehicles

grouped by different FHWA
classification categories

• Group 5: Vehicle types 5, 6, 7

Group 6: Vehicle types 8, 9 10
Group 7: Vehicles 11, 12, 13 TOTAL NUMBERS OF VEHICLES

VEH ICLE TYPE

DATE TIME 1 2 3 4 5* 6* 7* total s
5/27/2004 10:00- 11:00 AM 9 4417 1352 15 264 248 53 6359

• Traffic was fairly constant during 5/27/2004

5/27/2004
11:00- 12:00 AM
12:00- 1:00 PM
13
25
4361
4673
1320
1683
13
13
291
330
231
210
0
0
6229
6934

each hour. 5/27/2004

5/28/2004
5/28/2004
1:00-2:00 PM
7:00- 8:00 AM
8:00- 9:00 AM
19
26
33
5168
4431
5235
1767
1416
1469
43
22
32
288
198
194
204
205
172
0
19
9
7489
6317
7126
5/28/2004 10:00- 11:00 AM 31 4736 1557 16 315 270 3 6928
5/28/2004 11:00- 12:00 AM 40 4937 1617 7 291 201 0 7093
5/28/2004 12:00- 1:00 PM 22 5429 1746 19 249 153 0 7618

• No substantial difference of the 5/28/2004 1:00-2:00 PM

TOTAL VEHICLES
16
235
5546
48935
1767
15697
22
206
249
2669
183
2077
0
84
7783
69903

traffic patterns and type for the * VEHICLE TYPE 5 CORRESPONDS TO TYPE 5, 6, 7 FROM FHWA

2004-2005 time periods. * VEHICLE TYPE 6 CORRESPONDS TO TYPE 8,9,10 FROM FHWA
* VEHICLE TYPE 7 CORRESPONDS TO TYPE 11,12,13 FROM FHWA
Tire Wear Marker Compounds
• Tire wear composite samples
were extracted to determine the
concentration of tire wear
markers, 24MoBT[ 2- (4-
morpholinyl) benzothiazole] and
NCBA [N-cyclohexyl-2-
benzothiazolamine].

• 24MoBT concentrations found in

CRM samples agrees with
reported values ~ 2.3 ppm in
particles.

• Measured using Gas

Chromatography-Mass
Spectroscopy (GC-MS).

• The emission rates of 24MoBT

and NCBA per mass of carbon in
fuel burned were calculated.
Ei = (Ci1 - Ci0) / (Cc1 - Cc0)
Organic Compounds

• Tire wear may contain

other organic
compounds besides
24MoBT and NCBA
which can also serve
as tire wear tracers.
• Chromatograms of
heavy and light duty
tire wear composite
extracts were
analyzed to determine
such compounds.
Tire Wear Tracers
• Identified compounds #3
&4
• first in the samples of
different tire treads
• then in samples from two
different tunnels (Deck Park
and Caldecott).
• No specific chemical
names.
• the elements of chemical
structure typical for tire
rubber in these compounds.
• Compounds #3 and #4 are
Potential Tracer
Compounds in Tire Tread
Samples and in Aerosol
Samples
Tire Wear Emission Rates
Based on Tire Wear Tracers
Emission rates calculated per kilogram of carbon burned in the fuel
Tire wear tracer Experiment 1 Experiment 2
(before repaving) (after repaving)
Compound # 3 0.0038 ± 0.0008 0.0019 ± 0.0004
Compound # 4 0.0025 ± 0.0005 0.0017 ± 0.0003

Emission rates calculated per kilometer driven (µg/kgC)

.
Tire wear tracer Experiment 1 Experiment 2
(before repaving) (after repaving)
Compound # 3 0.046 ± 0.009 0.023 ± 0.005
Compound # 4 0.030 ± 0.006 0.021 ± 0.004
Tire wear Experiment 1 Experiment 2
emission rate (PCC road surface) (AR-ACFC road surface)
based on (µg/km).
Compound # 3 354 ± 71 177 ± 35
Compound # 4 172 ± 34 120 ± 24
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH)
• PAHs are well known byproducts
of combustion.

• Their chemical features make

them easier to identify and
quantify than tire wear tracer
compounds.

• PAH concentrations obtained for

the tunnel inflow and outflow
samples were used to check the
quality of measurements, i.e.
whether inflow concentrations
can be considered as
background measurements.

• Supported the results that

emission rates of tire wear tracer
compounds were higher on the
PCC road surface layer than on
AR-ACFC road surface
Roughness
IRI (in/mi)
LANE
PCCP AR-ACFC
I010EHOV 96.34 43.57
I010ELN1 123.20 59.03
I010ELN2 104.29 48.81
I010ELN3 111.87 47.80
I010ELN4 115.30 52.91
I010WHOV 85.44 32.51
Profilometer Test-Deck Park Tunnel I010 East HOV Comparison
I010WLN1 87.94 37.79 PCCP to AR
I010WLN2 85.40 46.92
170
I010WLN3 96.83 46.11 160
150

I010WLN4 97.75 36.81 140

130
120
110
IRI(IN/MI)
100
90 PC C P
80 AR

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
2500
2600
2700
Distance every 100ft
Friction
Average Friction Value
LANE
PCCP AR-ACFC
I010EHOV 0.54 0.66
I010ELN1 0.60 0.61
I010ELN2 0.49 0.61
I010ELN3 0.47 0.60
I010ELN4 0.47 0.54
I010WHOV 0.51 0.58
I010WLN1 0.64 0.57
I010WLN2 0.50 0.59
I010WLN3 0.44 0.59 Friction Test-Deck Park Tunnel I010 East HOV Lane @ 60 mph
Comparison PCCP to AR-ACFC
I010WLN4 0.42 0.58
0.8

0.7

0.6
Fricti on Value (Mu)

0.5
PCCP
0.4
AR-ACFC
0.3

0.2

0.1

0
50 200 35 0 5 00 650 800 950 1 100 125 0 1400 15 50 1 700 1850 20 00 215 0 2 300 2450 26 00

Friction average every 50 feet

CONCLUSIONS
• Tire wear tracer compounds have been identified and
quantified in representative tire wear composite samples
from used tires in Arizona and aerosol samples collected
from two roadway surfaces.
• Test extraction and separation protocols to determine the
amounts of tire wear tracers in tire treads have been
developed.
• Emission rates of tire wear tracers were found higher at
PCC road surface than at AR-ACFC road surface.
• Emission rates of tire wear per kilometer driven at PCC
road surface were 1.4-2 times higher than emission rates of
tire wear at AR-ACFC road surface.
• These findings potentially provide ADOT with revised tire
wear emission data for use in their federally-mandated air
quality modeling for the Phoenix airshed.
• Roughness and frictional characteristics of the pavement
surface after the AR-ACFC overlay have been improved as
shown by the IRI and skid numbers measurements,
respectively.
 Thank You
Financial support and Help of the following ADOT
Personnel:

Dale Buskirk
Arnold Burnham
Beverly Chenausky
Kathleen Sommer
Mark Wheaton
James Delton
Ali Zareh
Dennis Rusher
Ernie Johnson
Edward Walsh
John Kruger