In-situ structural analysis of lightweight cellular concrete subbase flexible pavements
Source abstract
Abstract
This study in Canada aimed to improve the performance of flexible pavements by comparing the in-place behavior of Lightweight Cellular Concrete (LCC) at three densities with traditional unbound granular material. The research investigated the effect of traffic load and testing temperature on pavement response and determined the structural layer coefficient for the 475 kg/m³ density. The structural layer coefficient for the LCC subbase at this density was 0.22. Results showed that pavements with LCC had over three times less stress at the top of the subgrade compared to the conventional granular material. The Weslea software, which uses a multi-layer elastic theory, appeared to overestimate stress responses for LCC pavements, and the research suggested a prediction modification for more accurate results. Overall, the study demonstrated that lightweight cellular concrete with different densities could improve pavement performance.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Transport Systems and Technology · Asphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation · Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada
Civil Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
References (33)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1080/10298436.2016.114983610.1080/10298436.2016.1149836 ↗
2. 10.1080/10298436.2019.164036210.1080/10298436.2019.1640362 ↗
3. American association of state highway and transportation officials (AASHTO). (1993). AASHTO guide for design of pavement structures. AASHTO. Washington DC, USA.
4. 10.1155/2018/195690610.1155/2018/1956906 ↗
5. Applied Research Associates (ARA). (2015). Methodology for the development of equivalent pavement structural design matrix for municipal roadways. Including maintenance and rehabilitation schedules and Lifecycle cost analyses. Final report.
6. ASTM C469/C469M. (2014). Standard test method for static modulus of elasticity and poisson's ratio of concrete in compression. Astm international.
7. ASTM D1883. (2008). Standard test method for California bearing ratio (CBR) of laboratory-compacted soils. ASTM International.
8. ASTM D4694. (2015). Standard test method for deflections with a falling-weight-type impulse load device. ASTM International.
9. ASTM D4695. (2015). Standard guide for general pavement deflection measurement. ASTM International.
10. ASTM D 698. (2012). Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using standard effort. ASTM International.
11. Averyanov S. Ni F. M. Melese E. & Tighe S. (2018 June 13-16). Construction experience analysis of using CEMATRIX lightweight cellular concrete as a subbase material [paper presentation]. Canadian society of civil engineers annual conference Fredericton NB Canada.
12. 10.1080/14680629.2011.63702610.1080/14680629.2011.637026 ↗
13. Christopher B. R. Schwartz C. & Boudreau R. (2006). Geotechnical aspects of pavements. (Report No. FHWA NHI-05-037). Federal Highway Administration U.S. Department of Transportation. Washington D.C.
14. 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.58510.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.585 ↗
15. Dolton B. & Mclintosh S. (2018). Reconstruction of a high volume bus lane using cellular concrete [Paper presentation]. GEOEDMONTON.
16. Dolton B. Witchard M. Luzzi D. & Smith T. J. (2016). Application of lightweight cellular concrete to reconstruction of settlement prone roadways in Victoria [Paper presentation]. GEOVANCOUVER.
17. Drusa M. & Decky M. (2013). Designing and quality control of earth structures on transport constructions (In Slovak). Edis Uniza pp. 522 2013. ISBN 978-80-554-0823-1.
18. El-Hakim M. (2009). Instrumentation and overall evaluation of perpetual and conventional flexible pavement designs (Master's thesis. University of Waterloo).
19. European commission. (2000). Advance Models for Analytical Design of European Pavement Structures: AMADEUS. Final report.
20. Griffiths, F., & Popik, M. (2013). Pavement evaluation - CEMATRIX site dixie road. Final report. Thurber Engineering Ltd.
21. Huang, Y. H. (2004). Pavement analysis and design. (2nd Edition). Pearson Education Inc.
22. Immanuel S. & Timm D. H. (2006 30 April – May 3). Measured and theoretical pressures in base and subgrade layers under dynamic truck loading. Airfield and highway pavement specialty conference.10.1061/40838(191)14 ↗
23. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2006)132:7(574)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2006)132:7(574) ↗
24. Maher M. L. J. & Hagan J. B. (2016 June 1-4). Constructability benefits of the use of lightweight foamed concrete fill (LFCF) In pavement applications [paper presentation]. Canadian society for civil engineering annual conference London ON Canada.
25. Ministry of Transportation (MTO). (2019). Ontario’s default parameters for AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design. Interim Report 2019.
26. Ministry of Transportation Ontario (MTO). (2013). Pavement design and rehabilitation Manual.
27. National cooperative highway research program (NCHRP). (2004). MEPDG-guide for mechanistic-empirical design of new and rehabilitated pavement structures. Transportation Research Board National Research Council.
28. 10.1080/14680629.2021.199984410.1080/14680629.2021.1999844 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2009.04.00610.1016/j.cemconcomp.2009.04.006 ↗
30. TAC. (2013). Pavement asset design and management guide. Transportation Association of Canada (TAC).
31. University of Waterloo. (2011). Indirect tensile strength and resilient modulus testing of CEMATRIX cellular concrete Waterloo Ontario Canada. Unpublished test report.
32. 10.3390/ma1223382610.3390/ma12233826 ↗
33. Vijay P. V. & Smith J. S. (2019). Mechanical concrete for enhancing the properties of pavement base/subbase. Eighth international conference on case histories in geotechnical engineering (Geo-congress). American Society of Civil Engineers.10.1061/9780784482124.030 ↗