Reliability-based calibration for a mechanics-based fatigue cracking design procedure
Source abstract
Abstract
Most pavement design procedures incorporate reliability to account for design inputs-associated uncertainty and variability effect on predicted performance. The load and resistance factor design (LRFD) procedure, which delivers economical section while considering design inputs variability separately, has been recognised as an effective tool to incorporate reliability into design procedures. This paper presents a new reliability-based calibration in LRFD format for a mechanics-based fatigue cracking analysis framework. This paper employs a two-component reliability analysis methodology that utilises a central composite design-based response surface approach and a first-order reliability method. The reliability calibration was achieved based on a number of field pavement sections that have well-documented performance history and high-quality field and laboratory data. The effectiveness of the developed LRFD procedure was evaluated by performing pavement designs of various target reliabilities and design conditions. The result shows an excellent agreement between the target and actual reliabilities. Furthermore, it is clear from the results that more design features need to be included in the reliability calibration to minimise the deviation of the actual reliability from the target reliability.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Asphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation · Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring · Probabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (29)
Show source-provided references
1. AASHTO · 1993
2. AASHTO · 1997
3. AASHTO · 1997
4. ACI · 1995
5. AISC · 1994
6. Austroads · 2004
7. Canadian Geotechnical Society (CGS) · 1985
8. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1990)116:5(602)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1990)116:5(602) ↗
9. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1992)118:6(769)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1992)118:6(769) ↗
10. Darter M. I. · Proceedings of the Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists · 1973 · 42 · 589
11. 10.1080/14680629.2015.105533510.1080/14680629.2015.1055335 ↗
12. Ditlevsen O. · Journal of Engineering Mechanics Division · 1981 · 107 · 119110.1061/JMCEA3.0002775 ↗
13. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1998)124:6(582)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1998)124:6(582) ↗
14. Florida department of transportation (FDOT) · 2008
15. Florida department of transportation (FDOT) · 2009
16. Harr M. E. · 1987
17. Hasofer A. M. · Journal of Engineering Mechanics Division · 1974 · 100 · 11110.1061/JMCEA3.0001848 ↗
18. Hohenbichler M. · Journal of Engineering Mechanics Division · 1981 · 107 · 122710.1061/JMCEA3.0002777 ↗
19. Huang Y. · 2004
20. 10.1139/l98-02410.1139/l98-024 ↗
21. 10.1080/1029843060099724010.1080/10298430600997240 ↗
22. Montgomery D. C. · 2005
23. NCHRP Web-Only Document 162 · 2010
24. Ontario Highway Department (OHD). (1991).Ontario highway bridge design code(3rd ed.). Toronto: Ministry of Transportation and Communication, p. 370.
25. PMS Objekt, Vägverket · 2008
26. 10.1016/0045-7949(78)90046-910.1016/0045-7949(78)90046-9 ↗
27. 10.1007/978-3-642-83254-3_2010.1007/978-3-642-83254-3_20 ↗
28. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2005)131:5(546)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2005)131:5(546) ↗
29. Wang J. · 2006