Farklı trafik, zemin, malzeme ve iklim koşulları için mekanistik-ampirik (M-E) yöntemle tasarlanan derzli donatısız rijit üstyapı sistemlerinin karşılaştırılması

Abstract

The differences between Mechanistic-Empirical design and AASHTO 1993  The effects of climate on the concrete slab thickness and joint spacing of JPCP  The effects of concrete material properties on the pavement design Comparison of targeted and estimated performance criteria

Data Collection for Implementation of the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) in Izmir, Turkey

“…Therefore, the okta unit should be converted into percent and the cloud percentage cover should be changed to sunshine percentage. And finally, the collected local climate data should be converted to the MEPDG format (text file in ".hcd" extension) because the climate data has not been yet developed in the MEPDG format for all parts of Turkey [22]. Each climatic file consists of date (YYYY/mm/dd/hr), air temperature (°C), precipitation (mm), wind speed (m/hr), cloud cover (%), and humidity (%) which is shown in Figure . 3.…”

Challenges and Benefits of the Use of AASHTOWare for 3 Climatic Regions in Turkey

“…In the Izmir (city in Turkey) study [15], the focus was the data collection to implement the M-E design, but no runs were performed. In the only study performing the M-E based rigid pavement designs [16], 8 cities were studied individually by simply matching them with the selected US city/weather stations.…”

“…In the case of Turkey, Shakhan et al [15] focused on the data collection needs for pavement design in the city of Izmir, Turkey, but, it fell short in creating any specific design. Ozturk et al [16] is the only study to use the M-E method for rigid pavement design for 8 different cities in Turkey. This follow-up study aimed to support the discussion of the challenges and benefits of switching to the M-E method for flexible pavement design.…”

“…AASHTOWare Pavement software Version 2.2 (AASHTOWare in short) was used to determine the optimum design thicknesses by iteratively varying these thicknesses to meet the target levels of distresses at the end of the life of the pavement. Following the research methodology for the rigid pavement design using the M-E design in [16], this study first charted the effect of selected design factors on flexible pavement thickness (thus, ultimately the cost of it indirectly). Secondly, the evaluation of selected designs by AASHTO'93 in the AASHTOWare enabled the quantification of benefits of the latter using some pavement performance criteria, as well.…”