Evaluation of Hardened Paint Pavement Markings

2020PDFTech ReportDwyer, Carmine E.Becker, Rachel L.Applied Research Associates, Inc.Arizona. Dept. of Transportation. Research CenterUnited States. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway AdministrationArizona. Department of Transportation. Research CenterUnited States. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway AdministrationUnited StatesAlternatives analysisCostsPaintMarking materialsPavement performanceRecommendationsRoad markingsService lifeState departments of transportationSurveysThermoplastic materialspavement markingsthermoplasticepoxypolyureaurethanemethyl methacrylateretroreflectivitydurabilitycolorNTPEPglass beadsFHWA-AZ-20-747SPR 000-1(020) 747Final Report, 2016-2020The objective of this study was to obtain and analyze relevant technical and performance data of various pavement marking products to determine which products can be used to stripe various roadway surfaces and to withstand the spectrum of Arizona weather, ranging from intense ultraviolet exposure to abrasion from snowplow blades. Data gathering consisted of a survey of state departments of transportation in nearby states with similar climates and a search of the National Transportation Product Evaluation Program (NTPEP) DataMine 3.0 for relevant pavement marking performance data. The study found a number of practices to improve marking performance from the four state departments of transportation that participated in the survey, as well as from a review of ADOT\u2019s specifications. The recommended practices for ADOT to consider include: recessing markings at elevations above 4,000 feet where snow is likely to occur, using thicker thermoplastic markings on roadways with surface treatments, and decreasing the bead application rate required in the specifications for epoxy markings at elevations above 4,000 feet. The NTPEP data analysis along with a calculation and comparison of the equivalent annual uniform cost (EAUC) of each of the five analyzed products (epoxy, polyurea, thermoplastic, urethane, methyl methacrylate) provided answers on which products provide the longest service lives and which have the lowest annualized cost. Thermoplastic markings had the longest service life in both colder and warmer climates. Thermoplastic also had the lowest annualized cost, and epoxy had the second lowest.104