Date post: | 05-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | simplyharsh12 |
View: | 227 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 29
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
1/29
Structural Overlay Design
Using NDT MethodsZhong Wu, Ph.D., P.E.Louisiana Transportation Research Center2007 Transportation Engineering ConferenceBaton Rouge, February 11-14, 2007
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
2/29
OutlineBackgroundObjective
Overview of Overlay Design MethodsResearch ProjectsSummaryRecommendations
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
3/29
BackgroundAsphalt overlay has been considered assimplest and fastest means of restoring the distressedsurfaces of rigid and flexible pavements
A quality overlay designimprove the roadways rideabilityrestore the pavement structural stability.
Structural overlay thickness design requestsExisting subgrade conditionExisting pavement strengthEngineering judgment
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
4/29
Background (cont)Current DOTD overlay thickness designthe 1993 AASHTO Pavement design guide software (DARWin)
One required design input, subgrade resilient modulus value,Mr,
the pre-assigned parish-map valuesnot base on in-situ soil properties
Uses component analysis (layer co-efficients) method todetermine the existing pavements structure number
SN eff = a ihiSuch method can lead to design errors (over- or under-estimated overlay thickness)
since design values do not represent actual field conditions
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
5/29
Overlay Design Example
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Change in M r (MPa)
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
D i f f e r e n c e
i n o v e r
l a y
t h i c k n e s s
( m m
)
-4000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000Change in M r (psi)
Hot mix asphaltD1 =102 mm, a 1 =0.0165/mm
Base courseD2 =241 mm, a 2 =0.0063/mm
SubbaseD3 =457 mm, a 3 =0.0040/mm
Subgrade soil
Typical pavement section
W 18 =5,000,000 ESALsR=95 %
PSI=1.9S0 =0.35Design M r=34.5 MPaDesign SN=5
Mr = 2,000 psi
=> Underestimated ACthickness of 1.5 in
Mr = -2,000 psi
=> Overestimated ACthickness of 2.0 in
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
6/29
Objectiveto establish a methodology for mechanisticpavement overlay design, based on
in-situ pavement conditions, andutilizing non destructive test (NDT) methods,specifically the FWD and/or Dynaflect.
Dynatest 8002 model Falling Weight Deflectometer Dynaflect
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
7/29
Overview of Overlay Design MethodsEffective Thickness (ET) Approach
1993 AASHTO Pavement Design GuideAsphalt Institute (AI) ET Method (MS-17)
Deflection-based ApproachAI Benkelman Beam Deflection Method (MS-17)Caltran Flexible Pavement Rehabilitation
Mechanistic-Empirical (M-E) ApproachEVERPAVE (WsDOT)New M-E Pavement Design Guide
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
8/29
Effective Thickness (ET) Approach- Asphalt Institute (MS-17)
Thickness of Overlay = Tn - TeTn, new pavement thickness, determined from AI
Design Chart for Full-depth Asphalt Concrete, usingESAL d and MrTe , effective thickness of existing pavementstructure
Te= C ih iwhere, hi=thickness of the ith layer of the existingpavement;C
i=conversion factor associated with the ith existing layer
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
9/29
Effective Thickness (ET) Approach
-1993 AASHTO Pavement Design GuideOverlay Thickness Equation
SN f from AASHTO pavement design equationwhere Mr is a required input, which can be determined from
Laboratory TestingBackcalculation from NDT measurementsApproximate relationships ( used by DOTD )
The effective structure number of existing pavement, SN eff NDT methodComponent analysis method ( used by DOTD )Remaining life method
OL
eff f
OL
OLOL a
SN SN
aSN
h
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
10/29
Deflection-Based Approach
- Asphalt Institute Benkelman Beam (MS-17)Pavement is modeled as a two-layer system
Layer 1: AC OverlayLayer 2: Existing pavement
Overlay thickness is determined as following steps:Determine Representative Rebound Deflection (RRD)
Layer 2s elastic modulus is determined from RRD.
Compute Design Rebound Deflection (DRD) based on theallowable ESAL: DRD=1.0363 (ESAL )-0.2438
Other Deflections (e.g. FWD, Dynaflect) can beconverted into Benkelman beam deflections, such as
Benkelman Beam = 1.61 * FWDBenkelman Beam = 20.63 * Dynaflect
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
11/29
Mechanistic-Empirical (M-E) Approach
Modeled pavement as multi-layered elasticor visco-elastic structure
Pavement materials described by theirstiffness and strengths at different times of the year
Determine the critical stress, strain, ordeflection by mechanistic methodsPredict resulting damages by empirical
failure criteria, e.g. fatigue cracking, rutting.
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
12/29
Mechanistic-Empirical (M-E) Approach-EVERPAVE
Developed by Washington DOTSteps:
Backcalculate layer moduli using FWD dataAnalyze and determine the two failure criteria parameters.
Fatigue crackingRutting
Compute allowable repetitions to failure at each seasonCompute damage at each season and sum the seasonaldamage ratio.Determine the overlay thickness based on the sum of the
damage ratio is less than or equal to one.
)log(854.0)log(291.382.14log act f E N
4843.418 )(10077.1log V f N
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
13/29
EVERPAVE Design Input
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
14/29
New M-E Pavement Design Guide
Developed underNCHRP 1-37ANew Traffic inputEnhanced IntegratedClimatic Model(EICM)
Season variationsNew Distress ModelsNeed Calibration
Dr. Matthew W. Witczak (2003)
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
15/29
NDT Overlay Design SurveyState Method Software
Arkansas Equivalent Thickness ROADHOG
Mississippi Equivalent Thickness ELMOD5
Alabama 1993 AASHTO Spreadsheet program
Maryland 1993 AASHTO Spreadsheet program(VDOT)
Virginia 1993 AASHTO Spreadsheet program
California Deflection-based Design Manual
North Carolina AI Deflection-based Spreadsheet program
South Carolina Deflection-based Spreadsheet program
Idaho M-E WinFlex
Minnesota M-E MNPAVE
Oregon M-E /
Texas M-E FPS-19W
Washington M-E EVERPAVE
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
16/29
Project SelectionFour in-service pavements
I-12 (ESAL d=24,400,000, life=15yrs)
LA28 (ESAL d=1,513,000, life=10yrs)LA74 (ESAL d=700,590, life=10yrs)LA44 (ESAL d=353,256, life=10yrs)
Each project about 3 to 5 miles long
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
17/29
Design PlanBased on current DOTD overlay designmethod (Mr-parish map, SN eff -estimated)
I-12 4.5 AC overlay + 2 cold planningLA28 4.5 AC Overlay + 2 cold planningLA44 3.5 AC overlay + 2 cold planning
LA74 3.5 AC overlay + 2 cold planning
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
18/29
NDT TestsFWD and Dynaflect tests were performed oneach project site
at 0.1 mile intervalon both traffic directions
8 4 6 6 12 12 12 12
d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9
FWD Load
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
19/29
Dynaflect Deflection AnalysisKinchen and Temple(1980) developed aPavement EvaluationChart for Louisiana
SN of existing pavementsSubgrade Modulus
Routinely use inpavement researchprojects
Pavement Evaluation Chart
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
20/29
FWD Analysis (D0 & D9)
LA 44
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 . 0
1 . 2
1 . 4
1 . 6
1 . 8
2 . 0
3 . 1
3 . 3
3 . 5
3 . 7
3 . 9
6 . 0
6 . 2
6 . 4
6 . 6
6 . 8
7 . 0
Station (miles)
F W D D e f
l e c t
i o n
( m i l s D0 (NB)
D0 (SB)
D9 (NB)
D9 (SB)
LA 74
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 . 1
0 . 3
0 . 5
0 . 7
0 . 9
1 . 1
1
1 . 3
1 . 5
1 . 7
1 . 9
2 . 1
2 . 3
2 . 5
2 . 7
2 . 9
3 . 1
Station (miles)
F W D D e f
l e c t
i o n
( m i l s
D1(EB)D0 (WB)D9 (EB)D9 (WB)
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
21/29
Dynaflect (SN)
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
22/29
Overlay ThicknessDeflection-Based Approach (AI Method)
3.5"3.5"
4.5"4.5"
2"
4"4.5"
3"
2"
3"2"
3"
0
2
4
6
8
I-12 LA28 LA74 LA44Project
O
v e r
l a y
T h i c k n e s s
( i n
Current PlanAI (NB/EB)AI (SB/WB)
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
23/29
Equivalent Thickness Method(Arkansas ROADHOG)
3.5"3.5"
4.5"4.5"
2.8"2.7"
4.2"
2"2.6"2.2"
2.9"2"
0
2
4
6
8
I-12 LA28 LA74 LA44Project
O
v e r
l a y
T h i c k n e s s
( i n
Current PlanROADHOG(NB/EB)ROADHOG(SB/WB)
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
24/29
Based on M-E Design Approach
Only 0 or 1 overlay thickness required for allfour projects.
Possible explanations:Backcalculated modulus too highDefault values used in distress models (no
Calibrated)Not fully understand how to choose arepresentative design value
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
25/29
Summary (Deflection-based method)
Simple to use (e.g. AI method)Needs to verify and calibrate the relationship
between FWD (or Dynaflect) measureddeflections and BB rebound deflectionsRelationship between allowable rebound
deflection and ESAL d also needs to beverified and calibrated
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
26/29
Summary (Equivalent Thicknessmethod)
Simple to use (e.g. AASHTO and ROADHOG)1993 AASHTO NDT-based method generallyunderestimate the overlay thickness, due to over-estimate the existing pavement SN.ROADHOG uses its own relationship in estimationof SNeff.
Such relationships between SNeff and delta(D) may ormay not be applicable to Louisiana condition
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
27/29
Summary (M-E design method)Complicate to use.M-E-based overlay design method needs
sophisticate inputs, which usually are notavailable directly from in-situ NDT testsThe fatigue and rutting models used in any M-
E base design software must be verified andcalibrated before any locally implementation.
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
28/29
Proposed NDT-based Overlay DesignProcedure for Louisiana
Use Effective Thickness approachThe future Structure Number (SN future )determined from 1993 AASHTO designequation
Mr determined from in-situ tests (DCP, FWD orDynaflect)
SN eff determined from FWD or Dynaflect testIf FWD used, SN eff (FWD) needs to be scaleddown to SN eff (Dynaflect) for LouisianaCondition
Overlay thickness = (SN future -SN eff )/a AC
7/31/2019 Structural Overlay Design Using NDT Methods
29/29
Future WorksFurther validate the Dynaflect deflectiondetermined SNeff
The proposed overlay design procedure willbe automated into a EXCEL spreadsheet-based program