journal article·2024-03-03

Critical fatigue strain calculations of flexible pavements in the mechanistic-empirical pavement design method, shortcomings, and improved methodologies

Reza Kamalizadeh, Mahdi Shojaei, Mahdi Nasimifar

Publisher page

Abstract

Fatigue Performance is considered one of the most effective measures for designing and maintaining flexible pavements. AASHTO proposed a Pavement Mechanistic-Empirical (PME) design framework in which the fatigue strains are calculated by the mechanistic part and then turned to fatigue cracking by the empirical part. However, it fails to compute actual fatigue strains since it utilizes multilayered linear elastic analysis and predefined calculation points. This paper aims to discuss the PME approach's deficiency in calculating fatigue strains and to develop simplified methodologies for addressing this issue. This study presents three solutions by comparing the fatigue life estimated from the multilayered linear elastic and viscoelastic analysis. The first solution modifies Asphalt Institute's model by suggesting adjusting factors for each axle load configuration. The second one proposes new response locations instead of predefined ones. The last solution involves developing an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) model to predict pavement fatigue life more accurately.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Asphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation · Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring · Transport Systems and Technology

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Civil Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran

Pavement Research Engineer, Engineering & Software Consultants, LLC, Reston, VA, USA

References (23)

Show source-provided references
1. AASHTO. (2020). Mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide: A manual of practice.
2. Asphalt Institute. (1982). Research and development of the Asphalt Institute’s thickness design manual.
3. 10.1080/14680629.2021.201138310.1080/14680629.2021.2011383 ↗
4. 10.1080/14680629.2020.174752310.1080/14680629.2020.1747523 ↗
5. Guide M-EPD. (2004). Guide for mechanistic empirical design of new and rehabilitated pavement structures. NCHRP Report.
6. 10.1061/JTEPBS.000004010.1061/JTEPBS.0000040 ↗
7. 10.1177/036119811877709010.1177/0361198118777090 ↗
8. 10.1080/10298436.2015.112177710.1080/10298436.2015.1121777 ↗
9. Huang, Y. H. (2004). Pavement analysis and design (2nd ed.). Pearson/Prentice Hall.
10. 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2009)21:7(324)10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2009)21:7(324) ↗
11. Kim, Y. R., Underwood, B., Far, M. S., Jackson, N., Puccinelli, J., & Engineers, N. C. (2011). LTPP computed parameter: Dynamic modulus. United States. Federal Highway Administration.
12. 10.3850/978-981-11-0449-7-132-cd10.3850/978-981-11-0449-7-132-cd ↗
13. 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.02.09510.1016/j.proeng.2017.02.095 ↗
14. 10.1007/s42947-021-00017-110.1007/s42947-021-00017-1 ↗
15. 10.1080/10298436.2015.108815210.1080/10298436.2015.1088152 ↗
16. Rada, G. R., Nazarian, S., Visintine, B. A., Siddharthan, R. V., & Thyagarajan, S. (2016). Pavement structural evaluation at the network level. United States. Federal Highway Administration. Office of Infrastructure.
17. Robbins M. M. Rodezno C. Tran N. & Timm D. (2017). Pavement ME design–A summary of local calibration efforts for flexible pavements. NCAT Report pp. 1–98.
18. 10.1080/14680629.2021.200901110.1080/14680629.2021.2009011 ↗
19. 10.3141/1709-0610.3141/1709-06 ↗
20. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1998)124:6(557)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1998)124:6(557) ↗
21. Theyse, H. L., De Beer, M., Maina, J. W., & Kannemeyer, L. (2011). Interim revision of the South African mechanistic-empirical pavement design method for flexible pavements. 10th Conference on Asphalt Pavements in Southern Africa.
22. Uzan, J. (1976). Influence of the interface condition on stress distribution in a layered system (abridgement). Transportation Research Record, 616.
23. 10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.000040510.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000405 ↗