International Journal of Highway Engineering (한국도로학회논문집)

Korean Society of Road Engineers (한국도로학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Nonlinear Subgrade Model-Based Comparison Study between the Static and Dynamic Analyses of FWD Nondestructive Tests

노상의 비선형 모델에 근거한 비파괴 FWD 시험에 있어 정적과 동적 거동의 비교연구

  • Mun, Sungho (Seoul National Univ. of Science and Technology)
  • Received : 2017.01.16
  • Accepted : 2017.01.24
  • Published : 2017.02.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSES : This paper presents a comparison study between dynamic and static analyses of falling weight deflectometer (FWD) testing, which is a test used for evaluating layered material stiffness. METHODS: In this study, a forward model, based on nonlinear subgrade models, was developed via finite element analysis using ABAQUS. The subgrade material coefficients from granular and fine-grained soils were used to represent strong and weak subgrade stiffnesses, respectively. Furthermore, the nonlinearity in the analysis of multi-load FWD deflection measured from intact PCC slab was investigated using the deflection data obtained in this study. This pavement has a 14-inch-thick PCC slab over fine-grained soil. RESULTS: From case studies related to the nonlinearity of FWD analysis measured from intact PCC slab, a nonlinear subgrade model-based comparison study between the static and dynamic analyses of nondestructive FWD tests was shown to be effectively performed; this was achieved by investigating the primary difference in pavement responses between the static and dynamic analyses as based on the nonlinearity of soil model as well as the multi-load FWD deflection. CONCLUSIONS : In conclusion, a comparison between dynamic and static FEM analyses was conducted, as based on the FEM analysis performed on various pavement structures, in order to investigate the significance of the differences in pavement responses between the static and dynamic analyses.

Keywords

References

  1. AASHTO. (1993). AASHTO guide for design of pavement structures. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C.
  2. Brown, S. F. and Pappin, J.W., (1981) "Analysis of pavements with granular bases."Transportation Research Record, No. 810, pp. 17-23.
  3. Elliot, R. P., and David, L. (1989). "Improved characterization model for granular bases."Transportation Research Record, No.1227, pp.128-133.
  4. Foinquinos, R. and Roesset, J. M. (1995). Dynamic nondestructive testing of pavements, Research Report GR95-4, Geotechnical Engineering Center, University of Texas, Austin.
  5. Huang, Y. H. (1993). Pavement analysis and design, Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
  6. Kim, J-M. and Mun, S. (2008). "Fast spectral of an axisymmetric layered structure."Mechanics Research Communications, Vol.35, pp.222-228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechrescom.2008.02.002
  7. Kim, Y. R., Ranjithan, J. D., Troxler, J.D., and Xu, B. (2000). Assessing pavement layer condition using deflection data, Final Report, NCHRP 10-48.
  8. Kuo, C-M., Hall, K. T., and Darter, M. I. (1995). "Threedimensional finite element model for analysis of concrete pavement support."Transportation Research Record, No.1505, pp.26-32.
  9. Mallela, J. and George, K. P. (1994). "Three-dimensional dynamic response model for rigid pavements."Transportation Research Record, No.1448, pp.92-99.
  10. Mun, S. and Kim, Y. R. (2009). "Backcalculation of subgrade stiffness under rubblised PCC slabs using multilevel FWD loads."International Journal of Pavement Engineering, Vol.10, No.1, pp.9-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10298430701827650
  11. Pezo, R. F. (1993). "A general method of reporting resilient modulus of tests of soils, a pavement engineer's point of view." Paper presented at 72nd Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting, January.
  12. Santha, B. L. (1994). "Resilient modulus of subgrade soils: comparison of two constitutive equations."Transportation Research Board, No.1462, pp.79-90.
  13. Thadkamalla, G. B. and George, K. P. (1995). "Characterization of subgrade soils at simulated field moisture." Transportation Research Record, No.1481, pp.21-27.
  14. Thompson, M. R. and Elliot, R. P. (1985). "ILLI-PAVE-based response algorithms for design of conventional flexible pavements."Transportation Research Record, No.1043, pp.55-57.
  15. Thompson, M. R. (1999). "Hot mix asphalt overlay design concepts for rubblized PCC pavements."Transportation Research Board, Vol. 1684, pp. 147-155. https://doi.org/10.3141/1684-17
  16. Uddin, W., Hackett, R. B., Joseph, A., Pan, Z., and Crawley, A. B. (1995). "Three-dimensional finite element analysis of jointed concrete pavement with discontinuities." Transportation Research Record, No.1482, pp.26-32.
  17. Ullidtz, P. (1998). Modelingflexible pavement response and performance, Narayana Press, Gylling, Denmark.
  18. Uzan, J. (1985). "Characterization of granular materials." Transportation Research Record, No.1022, pp.52-59.
  19. Witczak, M. W. and Uzan, J. (1988). Universal airport pavement design system, Report I of IV, Granular Material Characterization, University of Maryland.
  20. Yi, J-H. and Mun, S. (2009). "Backcalculating pavement structural properties using a Nelder-Mead simplex search."International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Method sin Geomechanics,Vol.33, pp.1389-1406. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.769
  21. Yoder, E. J. and. Witczak, M. W. (1975). Principles of Pavement Design. 2nd Ed.John Wiley&Sons,Inc., NewYork.
  22. Zaghloul, S. M. and White, T. D. (1993). "Use of a threedimensional, dynamic finite element program for analysis of flexible pavement."Transportation Research Record, No.1388, pp.60-69.