Return to the VTRC Home Page
Click here to print the printer friendly version of this page.
Page Title: VTRC Report Detail

The contents of this report reflect the views of the author(s), who is responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Commonwealth Transportation Board, or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Any inclusion of manufacturer names, trade names, or trademarks is for identification purposes only and is not to be considered an endorsement.


Follow-up Field Investigation of the Effectiveness of Antistripping Additives in Virginia
G. W. Maupin, Jr.
Year: 1997
VTRC No.: 97-TAR6
Abstract: A previous field study of 12 pavements revealed considerable stripping in the surface layers of mixtures placed in 1991-92. Most of the mixes containing chemical additives showed visual stripping, but the ones containing hydrated lime did not show significant stripping. This study was a broad field survey with cores taken from each of the nine VDOT districts. The purpose was to get a better estimate of stripping in Virginia than that of the earlier study. Significant visual stripping was detected in many sites, which verified the fmdings of the earlier study. However, in this study, hydrated lime performed no better than chemical additives. The SM-2A 50-blow mixes with slightly more asphalt performed no better than the SM-2B or SM-2C 75-blow mixes. Pavement voids at many sites were too high for good durability, and the compaction and mix design specifications should be examined. The degree of stripping damage in underlying layers could influence performance at many sites.