{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026923076923076925, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006593406593406593, 'mean_word_length': 5.434628975265018, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Ten-Year Field Performance Evaluation of Joint Reseating Project

In 1989, the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center and Crafco, Inc., initiated a research effort to develop improved materials and processes for sealing and resealing joints in portland cement concrete pavements. The objectives of the research were to develop specification limits for improved field performance of hot-applied, jet-fuel-resistant (JFR) and non-jet-fuel-resistant (non-JFR) sealants and obtain field data to determine the field performance of different sealants and installation configurations. The research effort was divided into a laboratory phase and a field phase. The laboratory phase focused on identifying ideal properties that a hot-applied non-JFR and hot-applied JFR sealant should possess, evaluating commercially available sealants to determine if they exhibited those properties, and developing improved hot-applied materials that would exhibit as many of those properties as feasible. The field phase was initiated in June 1991 at Fairchild Air Force Base near Spokane, Washington. The focus of this effort was to determine the field performance of field-molded sealants (including improved materials versus commercially available sealants) and possible improvements in field performance by changing the sealant installation geometry. Thirteen different field-molded sealants were installed, and their field performance was monitored at different times over 10 years. The evaluations indicated that two of the hot-applied, asphalt-based sealants, four of the silicone-based sealants, and one of the coal tar–based sealants had life expectancies of greater than 10 years. The improved JFR and non-JFR sealants exhibited better field performance than the standard hot-applied sealants included in the evaluation.