Stiffness-Based Quality Control Evaluation of Modified Subgrade Soil Using Lightweight Deflectometer

Kumar, Rakesh; Adigopula, Vinod Kumar; Guzzarlapudi, Sunny Deol

doi:10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0001958

Cited by 24 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, polymer additives typically consist of synthetic copolymers suspended in an emulsion by surfactants. Polymer additives can be classified according to four major families (Jones and Surdahl 2014;Tan et al 2020): polyurethanes (Cong et al 2019;Sun et al 2020), acrylates (Barbieri et al 2019;Daniels and Hourani 2009;Kumar et al 2017;Padmavathi et al 2018), styrene butadienes (Baghini et al 2016(Baghini et al , 2018, and acetates (Bolander 1999;Collins et al 2014). Polymerbased additives have been used to stabilize both fine-graded and coarse-graded aggregates as well as erodible slopes.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stabilization of Coarse Aggregates with Traditional and Nontraditional Additives

Barbieri

Lou

Dyke

et al. 2022

J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High-quality coarse aggregates are routinely used for the surface, base, and subbase layers in paved roads or the surface course in unpaved low-volume roads. Unfortunately, high-quality aggregates meeting stringent material specifications are becoming increasingly costly and difficult to find within reasonable distances of road construction projects. Various stabilization technologies can be employed to improve the mechanical properties of available aggregate materials, providing environmental and economic benefits. This investigation used three laboratory test methods to evaluate and compare all the existing kinds of additive technologies suitable to stabilize a coarse-graded road unbound layer. Two traditional solutions (cement and bitumen) and eleven nontraditional solutions (categorized as either brine salts, clay binders, organic nonpetroleum products, organic petroleum products, or synthetic polymers) were included. Repeated load triaxial tests were performed to evaluate the dynamic behavior of the untreated and treated aggregates in terms of their resilient modulus and the resistance against permanent deformation. A modified version of the rolling bottle test was used to appraise the stripping resistance offered by each additive. A microscopic analysis was conducted to visually evaluate the propensity of the additives to adequately coat the surface of the aggregates. All the stabilization technologies improved the material stiffness, with the most significant improvements produced by calcium chloride salt, bentonite, lignosulfonate, and cement mixed with a mineral mixture. The stabilization additives effectively reduced permanent deformations, except for the specimens stabilized with polyurethane and bitumen. Finally, the polymer-based additives and bitumen demonstrated very good resistance to stripping, with polyurethane providing the smallest mass loss. This study documents that nontraditional stabilization technologies can provide effective alternatives to the traditional stabilizers and documents that a "one-size-fits-all" additive agent is unlikely to be developed.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stabilization of Coarse Aggregates with Traditional and Nontraditional Additives

Barbieri

Lou

Dyke

et al. 2022

J. Mater. Civ. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several variables influence the deflection value of this nondestructive test, including temperature, moisture content, kind of component of the pavement layer, operator abilities, and type of equipment [20]. Typically, the equipment used for this test consists of static or dynamic loads that are given to the road surface through a load plate [21], while other tests are conducted by directly measuring the amount of the deflection [22].…”

Section: (B) Nondestructive Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asphalt Elasticity Modulus Comparison Using Modified Laboratory LWD Against UMMATA Method

Caroles

2022

Civ Eng J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highway consultants need pavement structure strength to examine and design. With advances in computer, sensor, and microelectronic technologies, the light weight deflectometer (LWD) can measure granular and asphalt layers. This portable, easy-to-use tool is suggested. This article was designed to improve LWD Pusjatan's accuracy and distinguish it from other testing methods. This study compares the LWD Pusjatan and UMMATA (Universal Material Testing Apparatus) methods for measuring modulus of elasticity on different materials. Boussinesq elastic theory is used to compute the modulus of most LWDs. In a semi-elastic environment, modulus is the connection between pressure and displacement in a rigid or flexible basis. The deflection value is derived from the process of vibrations caused by a load delivered from a given height onto a test item, with the wave/vibration collected by an acceleration measuring instrument, such as a geophone or accelerometer. The modulus of elasticity provided by the AUDL (Laboratory Deflection Test Equipment) method is less than that produced by the UMMATA method. According to the test results, the average value of AC Base material is 7.52% less than that of AC Base. The average value of AC BC material is just over 0.3%. These results indicate that more testing is necessary when using the AUDL methodology to detect correlations that might serve as a basis for comparison. Thus, the AUDL test method may be used as a nondestructive testing technique. This kind of non-destructive technique should be used frequently so that simulations of field circumstances are more accurate. Doi: 10.28991/CEJ-2022-08-06-012 Full Text: PDF

show abstract

“…Lower intensity and higher duration of precipitation would lead to increased water infiltration in subsequent layers. Influence of in situ moisture content and density of subgrade on elastic modulus values for various falling weights was assessed by correlation analysis [3].…”

Section: Investigation Of Factors Influencing Lwd Modulusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some researchers made several attempts to establish the correlation between the elastic modulus obtained from light weight deflectometer (LWD) with dynamic cone penetration test, falling weight deflectometer, plate load test, nuclear density gauge and geogauge [2], [3]. In the laboratory, resilient modulus of materials is used to estimate their stiffness parameter.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Ground Penetration Radar and Light Weight Deflectometer for Pavement Quality Control and Quality Assessment

Narnoli*,

Suman

2019

IJRTE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pavement evaluation requires the frequent assessment of structural and functional condition. Earlier functional assessment of pavement were rapid and non destructive whereas structural evaluation required destructive testing. With growth in technology the light weight deflectometer (LWD) and ground penetrating radar (GPR) replaced the destructive testing in most part of the world. This paper highlights the use of LWD and GPR as non destructive testing tool in pavement evaluation. LWD and GPR test were conducted on the granular material to investigate the composite modulus of layer for their quality assessment. LWD test results were found to be significantly affected by the base plate diameter, contact between plate and surface layer, whereas drop height does not show significant difference on composite modulus. GPR technology has showed its versatility in pavement layer thickness evaluation, void and crack detection, and sub surface exploration. Ground coupled GPR has been used for subsurface exploration. At project level pavement management system, the combined use of GPR and deflection testing device has resulted in effective monitoring of pavement structural capacity. Hence LWD and GPR had showed its effectiveness for quality control and quality assurance (QC/QA) in PMS.

show abstract

Stiffness-Based Quality Control Evaluation of Modified Subgrade Soil Using Lightweight Deflectometer

Cited by 24 publications

References 14 publications

Stabilization of Coarse Aggregates with Traditional and Nontraditional Additives

Stabilization of Coarse Aggregates with Traditional and Nontraditional Additives

Asphalt Elasticity Modulus Comparison Using Modified Laboratory LWD Against UMMATA Method

Application of Ground Penetration Radar and Light Weight Deflectometer for Pavement Quality Control and Quality Assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About