季冻区沥青路面灌缝胶工作性能试验

doi:10.13229/j.cnki.jdxbgxb.20240876

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

在现行灌缝胶评价指标基础上，通过短期和长期老化试验，提出增设锥入度比、压缩弹性恢复率、低温拉伸等评价指标，并采用熵权-TOPSIS组合方法，构建了适用于季冻区沥青路面灌缝胶工作性能的指标评价模型。试验结果表明：短期老化后锥入度比和压缩弹性恢复率控制标准分别为90%、30%，长期老化后的锥入度比和压缩弹性恢复率控制标准分别为50%和20%；灌缝胶黏度的评价标准为190 ℃时的1~3 Pa·s，灌入深度评价标准为5 cm，浸水后灌缝胶的低温拉伸应力评价标准为0.06 MPa（-30 ℃）和0.03 MPa（-20 ℃），而冻融循环后的灌缝胶黏附力评价标准为0.03 MPa（-30 ℃）和0.025 MPa（-20 ℃）；采用熵权-TOPSIS法不仅可以判断样本合格与否，还可以根据各个指标的评价结果全面综合地判断样本的优劣。本文研究有助于提高灌缝材料应用效果和耐久性评价水平，为寒区灌缝胶性能评价及规范修订提供补充与参考数据。

关键词: 季冻区, 沥青路面, 灌缝材料, 熵权-TOPSIS, 评价指标

Abstract:

This study builds on existing evaluation criteria by introducing additional indicators， including cone penetration ratio， compression elastic recovery rate， and low-temperature tensile strength， which are assessed through short-term and long-term aging tests. An evaluation model tailored to the performance of sealants in seasonally frozen asphalt pavements is developed using the entropy weight-TOPSIS method. The experimental results indicate the following： After short-term aging， the control standards for cone penetration ratio and compression elastic recovery rate are 90% and 30%， respectively， whereas after long-term aging， these standards decrease to 50% and 20%. The evaluation criteria for sealant viscosity are 1-3 Pa·s at 190 °C， with a grouting depth of 5 cm. The low-temperature tensile stress evaluation criteria for sealants after immersion are 0.06 MPa at -30 °C and 0.03 MPa at -20 °C， while the adhesion strength after freeze-thaw cycles is 0.03 MPa at -30 °C and 0.025 MPa at -20 °C. The entropy weight-TOPSIS method not only determines whether the sample meets qualification standards but also provides a comprehensive assessment of its quality across multiple indicators. These findings contribute to improving the application efficiency and durability evaluation of sealant materials， offering supplementary data for performance assessment and specification updates in cold regions.

Key words: seasonal freezing zone, asphalt pavement, grouting material, entropy weight TOPSIS, evaluating indicator

中图分类号:

U414

王伟,何荣森,陈志国,石家乐,徐亮,孙彦楠. 季冻区沥青路面灌缝胶工作性能试验[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2025, 55(10): 3228-3241.

Wei WANG,Rong-sen HE,Zhi-guo CHEN,Jia-le SHI,Liang XU,Yan-nan SUN. Experiment on performance of asphalt pavement grouting adhesive in seasonal frozen zone[J]. Journal of Jilin University(Engineering and Technology Edition), 2025, 55(10): 3228-3241.

图/表 23

表1

图1

图2

图3

表2 -3

表3 -20

图4

图5

图6

表4

表5

表6

图7

图8

图9

表7

图10

表8

图11

图12

表9

表10

表11

参考文献 22

[1]	许正森, 雷相达, 管海燕. 多尺度局部特征增强Transformer道路裂缝检测模型[J]. 中国图象图形学报, 2023, 28(4): 1019-1028.
	Xu Zheng-sen, Lei Xiang-da, Guan Hai-yan. Multi-scale local feature enhanced transformer network for pavement crack detection[J]. Journal of Image and Graphics, 2023, 28(4):1019-1028.
[2]	陈嘉锐, 崔得龙, 邱泽环, 等. 基于YOLOv5s模型的新型道路裂缝检测系统[J]. 现代电子技术, 2023, 46(13): 62-66.
	Chen Jia-rui, Cui De-long, Qiu Ze-huan, et al. A new road crack detection system based on YOLOv5s model[J]. Modern Electronics Technique, 2023, 46(13): 62-66.
[3]	逄蕴泽. SBS/CNTs改性沥青灌缝胶的制备及性能研究[D]. 长春: 吉林大学交通学院, 2023.
	Pang Yun-ze. Investigation on the preparation and properties of SBS/CNTs modified asphalt sealant[D]. Changchun: College of Transportation, Jilin University, 2023.
[4]	李艳博. 适用于甘肃省典型气候环境的沥青路面灌缝胶研制与应用[D]. 兰州: 兰州交通大学土木工程学院, 2017.
	Li Yan-bo. Preparation and application of asphalt pavement´s sealants and fillers for the typical climate of gansu province[D]. Lanzhou: School of Civil Engineering, Lanzhou Jiaotong University, 2017.
[5]	覃金顺, 王振军, 孙宁, 等. 橡胶粉对沥青灌缝胶高温稳定性提升与机理[J]. 公路, 2023, 68(8): 332-340.
	Qin Jin-shun, Wang Zhen-jun, Sun Ning, et al. Improvements and mechanism of crumb rubber on high temperature stability performance of asphalt sealant[J]. Highway, 2023, 68(8): 332-340.
[6]	1:2004.
	Hot applied joint sealants [S].
[7]	. 路面加热型密封胶 [S].
[8]	Soliman H, Shalaby A, Kavanagh L. Performance evaluation of joint and crack sealants in cold climates using DSR and BBR tests[J]. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 2008, 20(7): 470-477.
[9]	Al-Qadi I L, Yang W, Fini E, et al. Towards performance-based selection guidelines for roadway crack sealants[C]∥International ISAP Symposium on Asphalt Pavements Environment, Zurich, Switzerland, 2008:161-172.
[10]	薛恒潇. 灌缝胶拉伸设备改进及低温性能评价研究[D].哈尔滨: 哈尔滨工业大学交通科学与工程学院, 2013.
	Xue Heng-xiao. Research on crack sealant stretching tester improvement and performance evaluation in low temperature[D]. Harbin: School of Transportation Science and Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, 2014.
[11]	董岩岩. 基于弱边界层理论的灌缝胶失效机理研究[D]. 哈尔滨: 哈尔滨工业大学交通科学与工程学院, 2017.
	Dong Yan-yan. The failure mechanism of crack sealant based on the weak boundary layer theory[D]. Harbin: School of Transportation Science and Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, 2017.
[12]	刘忠骥. 灌缝胶失效判别方法及自愈性研究[D]. 哈尔滨:哈尔滨工业大学交通科学与工程学院, 2017.
	Liu Zhong-ji. The failure evaluation and self-healing investigation of crack sealant[D]. Harbin: School of Transportation Science and Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, 2017.
[13]	Poulikakos L D, Falchetto A C, Wang D, et al. Impact of asphalt aging temperature on chemo-mechanics[J]. RSC Advances, 2019, 9(21): 11602-11613.
[14]	Wang S Q, Jia Y S, Li Z R, et al. Evaluating the effect of aging on adhesion for hot-poured road sealants through a modified adhesion test[J]. Construction and Building Materials, 2022, 347: No. 128576.
[15]	Masson J F, Collins P, Bundalo-Perc S, et al. Early thermodegradation of bituminous sealants resulting from improper installation: field study[J]. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2007, 1991(1): 119-123.
[16]	Masson J F, Woods J R, Collins P, et al. Accelerated aging of bituminous sealants: small kettle aging[J]. International Journal of Pavement Engineering, 2008, 9(5): 365-371.
[17]	Masson J F, Lacasse M A. Effect of hot-air lance on crack sealant adhesion[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 1999, 125(4): 357-363.
[18]	. Standard test methods for sealants and fillers, hot-applied, for joints and cracks in asphalt pavements and portland cement concrete pavements [S].
[19]	Wang S Q, Gao Y, Jia Y S, et al. Development of a modified bond test for hot applied crack sealants by using hot-cold cycles[J]. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 2023, 24(8): 1-21.
[20]	Wang S Q, Li Y S, Wei Z Y, et al. Effects of periodically changing temperatures on the bond interface between crack sealant and repaired pavement[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part B: Pavements, 2024, 150(1): No. 04024003.
[21]	Al-Qadi I L, Masson J F, Yang S H, et al. Development of performance-based guidelines for selection of bituminous-based hot-poured pavement crack sealant:an executive summary repor[R]. Virginia:Virginia Transportation Research Council,2009.
[22]	.Standard test method for effect of heat and air on a moving film of asphalt binder [S].

相关文章 15

[1]	李伟,李萍,王晖,张留博,念腾飞,张强,李宁. 自修复微胶囊在沥青路面智能养护中的应用进展[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2025, 55(11): 3446-3462.
[2]	蔡正森,伍宇,许新权,范剑伟,马涛,郑鸿柔. 多孔沥青路面路用性能跟踪检测[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(10): 2941-2951.
[3]	宫亚峰,吴树正,毕海鹏,谭国金. 基于现场监测技术的装配式箱涵温度场及冻胀分析[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2023, 53(8): 2321-2331.
[4]	李岩,张久鹏,陈子璇,黄果敬,王培. 基于PCA-PSO-SVM的沥青路面使用性能评价[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2023, 53(6): 1729-1735.
[5]	阙云,季雪,蒋子平,戴伊,王叶飞,陈嘉. GAN数据增强下路面裂缝语义分割算法[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2023, 53(11): 3166-3175.
[6]	陈栩,曹超飞,尚静,黄明星,艾长发,任东亚. 动静水环境作用下级配离析对沥青混合料水损害的影响评价[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2023, 53(1): 210-219.
[7]	廖汉超,单汨源. 基于模糊聚类最大树算法的高层建筑基坑工程风险识别方法[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2022, 52(12): 2892-2897.
[8]	于晓贺,罗蓉,柳子尧,黄婷婷,束裕. 沥青路面典型裂缝湿度场数值模拟[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2022, 52(10): 2343-2351.
[9]	薛锋,何传磊,黄倩,罗建. 多式轨道交通网络的耦合协调度[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2021, 51(6): 2040-2050.
[10]	董伟智,张爽,朱福. 基于可拓层次分析法的沥青混合料路用性能评价[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2021, 51(6): 2137-2143.
[11]	毛昱,李萍,念腾飞,林梅,魏西应. 基于分形理论的沥青路面层间机械摩阻强度行为[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2020, 50(2): 594-605.
[12]	李伊,刘黎萍,孙立军. 沥青面层不同深度车辙等效温度预估模型[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2018, 48(6): 1703-1711.
[13]	孟繁宇, 潘晓东. 基于神经网络-遗传算法的功能性沥青路面材料优选[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2013, 43(增刊1): 535-538.
[14]	吉淑娇, 朱明, 胡汉平, 邢笑雪. 基于特征匹配的视频稳像算法[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2013, 43(增刊1): 322-325.
[15]	谭忆秋, 赵立东, 岳军声, 蓝天云. 沥青路面凝冰损坏程度检测设备[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2012, 42(01): 57-62.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

样本编号	样本A	样本B	样本C	样本D	样本E	样本F	样本G	样本H
成分	改性沥青
修补方式	加热
适用温度/℃	-30	-30	-30	-30	-20	-20	-20	-20
锥入度/0.1 mm	110.0~120.0	115.0~120.0	120.0~125.0	115.0~125.0	85.0~95.0	75.0~85.0	90.0~95.0	80.0~90.0
软化点/℃	86~90	80~88	85~95	90~95	87~92	85~90	92~98	88~94
压缩弹性恢复率/%	45~50	40~45	35~40	45~50	30~35	30~40	45~50	35~40
流动性/mm	1.5~2	0	0	1~1.5	0	0	0	0~0.5
适用规范	JT/T740-2015

	样本				JT/T 740要求
	A	B	C	D	JT/T 740要求
锥入度/0.1 mm	115.6	138.9	120.7	135.2	90~150
软化点/℃	84.4	87.8	82.5	80.7	≥80
流动度/mm	0.1	0.5	1.1	2.0	≤5
弹性恢复率/%	49.7	42.2	54.1	57.5	30~70
-30 ℃，150%，3次循环	满足	满足	满足	满足	满足

	样本				JT/T 740要求
	E	F	G	H	JT/T 740要求
锥入度/0.1 mm	99.6	102.2	88.0	84.2	70~110
软化点/℃	87.6	81.8	92.3	86.2	≥80
流动度/mm	1.2	0.0	0.1	0.5	≤5
弹性恢复率/%	32.5	33.9	47	35.4	30~70
-20 ℃，100%，3次循环	满足	满足	满足	满足	满足

评价指数	样本A	样本B	样本C	样本D	样本E	样本F	样本G	样本H
短期老化后的锥入度比/%	87.4	79.2	94.2	100	100	89.6	98.8	98.8
长期老化后的锥入度比/%	69.7	54..1	52.0	46.7	46.1	55.6	85.1	74.9
老化后软化点差值/℃	-3.1	-6.4	1.5	0	0	2.2	-9.1	0
短期老化后的压缩弹性恢复率/%	37.7	35.2	30.5	43.3	30.4	30.3	30.2	31.6
长期老化后的压缩弹性恢复率/%	69.20	93.9	100	51.01	90.5	99.7	46.0	76

	样本
	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H
老化前流动度/mm	0.1	0.5	1.1	1.1	1.2	0	0	1.1
老化后流动度/mm	0	0	0.5	0	0.9	0	0	0