Viscosity Determination of Hot-Poured Bituminous Sealants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hot-poured bituminous sealants are typically selected on the basis of empirical standard tests such as penetration, resilience, flow, and bond to cement concrete briquettes (ASTM D3405). Yet there is no indication of the pertinence of these standard tests to predict field performance. To bridge the gap between sealant fundamental properties and field performance, performance-based guidelines for selection of hot-poured crack sealants are currently being developed. A procedure to measure sealant viscosity is proposed as part of that effort. Using a sealant with an appropriate consistency at the recommended installation temperature would provide a better crack filling and would ensure appropriate bond strength. Therefore, to ensure that sealant–crack wall adhesion is achieved and that the sealant penetrates hot-mix asphalt during installation, a testing procedure for bituminous-based crack sealant viscosity at installation temperature is suggested. This paper proposes use of a rotational viscometer to measure viscosity of hot-poured crack sealant materials. From results of this study, the measured viscosity of hot-poured crack sealant using a SC4-27 spindle at 60 rpm at the recommended installation temperature is reasonably representative of sealant viscosity at shear rates resembling field application. To ensure measurement consistency and stability, a 20-min melting time and 30-s waiting time before data collection are recommended. Repeatability of measurements was acceptable, with an average coefficient of variation of less than 5%. Variability between operators and variability between sealant samples were acceptable.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".