Abstract
AbstractThe objective of this study is to assess the impact of spatial variability in the subgrade layer on the critical response of pavements and the effectiveness of geogrid reinforcement, employing the random field finite difference analysis (RFFDA). A comprehensive parametric study was conducted to examine the influence of two crucial factors: the coefficient of variation ($${{\text{COV}}}_{E}$$
COV
E
) and scale of fluctuation (SOF) of the subgrade modulus. Further investigation was conducted to uncover the statistical and mechanical mechanisms underlying the impact of subgrade spatial variability with emphasis on the critical strain distributions and their correlation with both the overall modulus and the local spatial variability of the key influence zone. Furthermore, this study explored the influence of subgrade spatial variability on the effectiveness of geogrid in reducing critical strains, considering various placement positions and geogrid moduli. The following main conclusions are drawn: (a) subgrade spatial variability has a substantial amplifying effect on critical pavement strains due to low modulus dominating effect, (b) there exists a worst value of SOF that results in the most unfavorable statistics of critical subgrade strain, (c) the effect of subgrade spatial variability on critical subgrade strain is more pronounced compared to its effect on critical asphalt strain, (d) the mean value of critical subgrade strain in RFFDA can be significantly underestimated when assuming fixed location for the strain, and (e) the effectiveness of geogrid in reducing critical strains is impacted by subgrade spatial variability, with the impact varying with the type of critical strain and geogrid location. Specifically, when placed at the base course–subgrade interface, the ability of geogrid to reduce critical subgrade strain is significantly compromised due to the subgrade spatial variability.
Funder
Australian Research Council
University of New South Wales
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference43 articles.
1. AASHTO (2008) Mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide: a manual of practice. Washington, DC, USA
2. Abu-Farsakh M et al (2007) Effect of soil moisture content and dry density on cohesive soil–geosynthetic interactions using large direct shear tests. J Mater Civ Eng 19(7):540–549
3. Alhasan A, Ali A, Offenbacker D, Smadi O, Lewis-Beck C (2018) Incorporating spatial variability of pavement foundation layers stiffness in reliability-based mechanistic-empirical pavement performance prediction. Transp Geotech 17:1–13
4. Ali AW, Abbas AR, Nazzal M, Sett K (2013) Incorporation of subgrade modulus spatial variability in performance prediction of flexible pavements. Int J Pavement Res Technol 6(2):136–140
5. Al-Jumaili M (2016) Finite element modelling of asphalt concrete pavement reinforced with geogrid by using 3-D plaxis software. Int J Mater Chem Phys 2(2):62–70