1 / 21

Evaluation of Non-Linear and Tension Cutoff Material Modeling Features for Pavement Base Aggregate

Evaluation of Non-Linear and Tension Cutoff Material Modeling Features for Pavement Base Aggregate. Jeffrey Sharkey Undergraduate Research Assistant Dr. Steven Perkins Assistant Professor. Outline. Background Information Project Design/Methodology Results and Findings Conclusions.

torgny
Download Presentation

Evaluation of Non-Linear and Tension Cutoff Material Modeling Features for Pavement Base Aggregate

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluation of Non-Linear and Tension Cutoff Material Modeling Features for Pavement Base Aggregate Jeffrey Sharkey Undergraduate Research Assistant Dr. Steven Perkins Assistant Professor

  2. Outline • Background Information • Project Design/Methodology • Results and Findings • Conclusions

  3. Background • Pavement design analysis • Historical methods using empirical methods • Recent methods using Finite Element Analysis • Finite Element Analysis • Wide range of applications • NCHRP1 Design Guide 1 National Cooperative Highway Research Program

  4. Background

  5. Background • Goal: Simplify FE method • Increase throughput of a system • Increased productivity • More accessible

  6. Methodology • Two ways of simplifying FE models: • Reducing mesh resolution • Removing model features Time: Accuracy: Percentage (%)

  7. Methodology • Two features • Tension cutoff formulation • Non-linear behavior • Issues choosing modulus • Six source models • High, medium, and low traffic loads for Firm and Weak pavement surface designs.

  8. Methodology • Four sub-models: • Using both features • Removing Non-linear Behavior • Removing Tension-cutoff Formulation • Removing both features

  9. Findings • Examining completed models • Physical output variables • Pavement fatigue life • Cycles to permanent deformation

  10. Findings: U2 and E22 • U2 is deformation in vertical direction • Actual movement • E22 is strain in vertical direction • Ratio of deformation to size of original un-deformed object. E22 = ΔL/L0

  11. High Firm E22 • LE: 19.3% • LETC: 19.3% • High Firm U2 • LE: 22.3% • LETC: 22.4%

  12. High Weak E22 • LE: 4.8% • LETC: 4.8% • High Weak U2 • LE: 17.7% • LETC: 17.7%

  13. Medium Firm E22 • LE: 18.7% • LETC: 19.0% • Medium Firm U2 • LE: 21.2% • LETC: 21.2%

  14. Medium Weak E22 • LE: 19.7% • LETC: 19.6% • Medium Weak U2 • LE: 30.1% • LETC: 30.0%

  15. Low Firm E22 • LE: 17.0% • LETC: 16.9% • Low Firm U2 • LE: 14.8% • LETC: 14.8%

  16. Low Weak E22 • LE: 16.7% • LETC: 15.5% • Low Weak U2 • LE: 33.1% • LETC: 41.0%

  17. Findings: U2 and E22 • Physical output variables • Errors introduced into LE sub-models due to modulus calculation method. • Little difference noted when including or excluding tension cutoff formulation. • 0.28% (E22), 1.68% (U2) • Uniform results across source models.

  18. Findings • Pavement fatigue life • High error compared to NLETC (24.2%) • Average TC effect • 0.0% (high), 3.235% (med), 5.736% (low)

  19. Findings • Cycles to permanent deformation • Again, high error compared to NLETC (22.0%) • Average TC effect • 0.0% (high), 0.616% (med), 5.034% (low)

  20. Conclusions • Non-linear behavior • Can be removed only when modulus is carefully chosen. • Tension cutoff formulation • Little difference noted • More important for cycles calculations as traffic loads decrease. • Recommendations

  21. Conclusions • Goal: Simplify FE method • Increase throughput of a system • Increased productivity • More accessible • Thank you • Dr. Steven Perkins • Western Transportation Institute

More Related