1. bookAHEAD OF PRINT
Dettagli della rivista
License
Formato
Rivista
eISSN
2444-8656
Prima pubblicazione
01 Jan 2016
Frequenza di pubblicazione
2 volte all'anno
Lingue
Inglese
access type Accesso libero

Basalt fibre continuous reinforcement composite pavement reinforcement design based on finite element model

Pubblicato online: 15 Dec 2021
Volume & Edizione: AHEAD OF PRINT
Pagine: -
Ricevuto: 16 Jun 2021
Accettato: 24 Sep 2021
Dettagli della rivista
License
Formato
Rivista
eISSN
2444-8656
Prima pubblicazione
01 Jan 2016
Frequenza di pubblicazione
2 volte all'anno
Lingue
Inglese
Abstract

The thrust of basalt fibre (BFRP) tendons will result in narrower transverse crack spacing, decreased load transfer capacity of transverse cracks and voids at the bottom of the slab, which will lead to thrust failure. The thesis uses the finite element analysis method to analyse the material characteristics of BFRP tendons. At the same time, the article determines the critical load position corresponding to the tensile stress of concrete and BFRP tendons, and analyses the influence of voids, crack spacing and other factors on the load stress of concrete and BFRP tendons. The study results found that continuously reinforced concrete and asphalt overlay composite design can reduce cracks.

Keywords

MSC 2010

Introduction

Continuously reinforced concrete pavement with basalt fibre (BFRP) is provided with continuous BFRP reinforcement in the concrete slab. This material eliminates the transverse shrinkage joints and adds a certain thickness of asphalt mixture to the concrete slab to significantly improve the integrity of the pavement structure and driving comfort. Controlling the longitudinal reinforcement ratio of concrete slabs and determining the reasonable spacing and width of transverse cracks to reduce the impact of concrete slabs are actual contents of this type of pavement research and design. Some scholars used the nonlinear finite element semi-discrete method to analyse the shrinkage strain of concrete and proposed a method for calculating the early crack width of CRCP. Some scholars have developed continuous reinforcement design software based on the stress analysis of steel bars under different conditions. Some scholars combined the finite element analysis and test data to obtain the concrete temperature stress equation [1]. According to the theory of composite slabs, some scholars used trigonometric series and Fourier transform to analyse the internal force and stress of concrete slabs on Winkler’s foundation. Some scholars established a single-reinforced slat model and used spring elements to perform finite element simulation analysis of the interface between steel and concrete. Some scholars used the CRC layer uniform temperature drop model to analyse the mechanism of cracks but did not consider the friction resistance of the base layer.

Studies have shown that BFRP bars have corrosion resistance characteristics, ageing resistance, and high strength and can realise longitudinal mechanised continuous production. We use BFRP bars to reinforce the CRC layer, which can prolong the pavement service life [2]. This effectively reduces construction overlap points and connection lengths. However, there are few research pieces on the reinforcement design method of BFRP bars in pavement structures.

In this paper, the uniform temperature drop model of the CRC layer is established with the continuously reinforced concrete plus asphalt overlay composite pavement (CRC+AC) as the research object. The article considers the drying shrinkage of concrete materials and the restraint effect of the grassroots level and derives the analytical solution formula of crack control index [3]. At the same time, we use ABAQUS finite element software to verify the validity of the formula. The AC asphalt layer can weaken the temperature gradient. So this article ignores the warpage stress of the CRC layer. The article uses the analytical method to study different BFRP bar material characteristics and reinforcement schemes on pavement cracks.

Basic principles of analytic reinforcement design
The impact of the grassroots on the CRC layer

The shrinkage of concrete materials due to temperature drops will cause relative slippage between the CRC and base layers. According to the shear test and regression statistics results, the distribution of frictional shear stress caused by slip is usually divided into linear, bilinear and hyperbolic models [4]. They are different due to different types of grassroots. We use a bilinear slip model closer to the actual situation, as shown in Figure 1. Comprehensively consider the critical displacement value uo of various types of bases. Suppose the amount of slippage ucuo when the crack occurs, that is, the shear stress τc = kcuc, where kc is the shear slip coefficient between the CRC layer and the base layer.

Fig. 1

Bilinear shear stress-slip relationship between CRC layer and base layer.

Bond slip between BFRP bar and concrete

Relative slippage occurs between the concrete and the reinforcement due to the uncoordinated deformation. We use the shear stiffness ks to characterise the bond-slip relationship. It is related to the material properties and surface structure of the bar. According to the results of the indoor pull-out test of this subject, the typical bond-slip curve of BFRP bars is similar to the bond failure of steel bars [5]. The result is shown in Figure 2. When the relative slip is 0–0.5 mm, the relationship between bonding stress and relative slip is approximately linear. Therefore, we can adopt a simplified linear relation expression τs = ks(ucus), where τs is the bonding stress and us is the displacement of the contact interface.

Fig. 2

Bond-slip relationship between BFRP tendons and concrete. BFRP, basalt fibre.

Analytical equation considering the effect of temperature drop and drying shrinkage

The CRC board temperature drop and shrinkage model is shown in Figure 3. We analyse the micro-element section with the length of the concrete slat dx along the direction of travel. The origin of the coordinates is set at the midpoint of the slat. It is assumed that the concrete’s stress and the reinforcement are uniforms in the cross-section, and the deformation of the two perpendiculars to the axial direction is ignored [6]. For the strain caused by the drying and shrinkage of concrete, we can calculate it according to the humidity of the environment and using empirical formulas. The boundary conditions for solving the equation are assumed as follows. (1) At the crack surface, the tendon displacement is zero and the concrete stress is zero. (2) In the middle of the slab, the displacement of the bars is zero. After finishing the force balance equation of the slat model and the physical equation of concrete and reinforcement, the following formula can be obtained.

d2ucdx2(a1+a2)uc+a1us=0 {{{d^2}{u_c}} \over {d{x^2}}} - ({a_1} + {a_2}){u_c} + {a_1}{u_s} = 0 d2usdx2a3us+a3ux=0 {{{d^2}{u_s}} \over {d{x^2}}} - {a_3}{u_s} + {a_3}{u_x} = 0

Fig. 3

Schematic diagram of the analytical analysis model.

In the formula a1 = πdsks/(AcEc),a2 = bkc/(AcEc),a3 = πdsks/(AsEs), b is the rib spacing, ds is the diameter, Ec,Es is the elastic modulus of concrete and reinforcement, respectively, As is the cross-sectional area of a single rib and Ac is the cross-sectional area of the concrete slab.

Suppose ΔT is the temperature drop. εsh is the concrete drying shrinkage strain. ac is the longitudinal linear expansion coefficient of the bar. ac is the longitudinal linear expansion coefficient of concrete. σc is the concrete stress. σs is the stress of the bar. We substitute the boundary conditions and finally simplify the resulting displacement stress expression as follows: us=F1b1sh(r1x)+F2b2sh(r3x) {u_s} = {F_1}{b_1}sh({r_1}x) + {F_2}{b_2}sh({r_3}x) uc=F1sh(r1x)+F2sh(r3x) {u_c} = {F_1}sh({r_1}x) + {F_2}sh({r_3}x) σc=Ec(F1r1ch(r1x)+F2r3ch(r3x)+acΔT+εsh) {\sigma _c} = {E_c}({F_1}{r_1}ch({r_1}x) + {F_2}{r_3}ch({r_3}x) + {a_c}\Delta T + {\varepsilon _{sh}}) σs=Es(F1b1r1ch(r1x)+F2b2r3ch(r3x)+asΔT) {\sigma _s} = {E_s}({F_1}{b_1}{r_1}ch({r_1}x) + {F_2}{b_2}{r_3}ch({r_3}x) + {a_s}\Delta T) where r3=12[a1+a2+a3(a1+a2+a3)24a2a3] {r_3} = \sqrt {{1 \over 2}[{a_1} + {a_2} + {a_3} - \sqrt {{{({a_1} + {a_2} + {a_3})}^2} - 4{a_2}{a_3}} ]} r1=12[a1+a2+a3+(a1+a2+a3)24a2a3] {r_1} = \sqrt {{1 \over 2}[{a_1} + {a_2} + {a_3} + \sqrt {{{({a_1} + {a_2} + {a_3})}^2} - 4{a_2}{a_3}} ]} F1=(acΔT+εsh)b2sh(r3L)b1r3sh(r1L)ch(r3L)b2r1ch(r1L)sh(r3L) {F_1} = {{({a_c}\Delta T + {\varepsilon _{sh}}){b_2}sh({r_3}L)} \over {{b_1}{r_3}sh({r_1}L)ch({r_3}L) - {b_2}{r_1}ch({r_1}L)sh({r_3}L)}} F2=(acΔT+εsh)b1sh(r1L)b1r3sh(r1L)ch(r3L)b2r1ch(r1L)sh(r3L) {F_2} = {{- ({a_c}\Delta T + {\varepsilon _{sh}}){b_1}sh({r_1}L)} \over {{b_1}{r_3}sh({r_1}L)ch({r_3}L) - {b_2}{r_1}ch({r_1}L)sh({r_3}L)}} b1=(a1+a2r12)/a1,b2=(a1+a2r32)/a1 {b_1} = ({a_1} + {a_2} - r_1^2)/{a_1},{b_2} = ({a_1} + {a_2} - r_3^2)/{a_1}

From the force balance analysis, it is easy to know that the stress of the reinforcement is the smallest at the midpoint of the slab and the stress of the concrete is the largest here. The stress of the reinforcement increases gradually away from the midpoint [7]. It reaches the maximum value at the crack end x = ±L, and the concrete stress is reduced to zero. The calculation method of the crack spacing L of the secondary cracking under the action of temperature drop and dry shrinkage is as follows: It can be back-calculated using the maximum concrete stress in the middle of the slab as the critical condition. At the same time, we can further obtain the analytical formula for the control stress of the bar: σcmax=σc|x=0=ft {\sigma _{c - \max}} = {\sigma _c}{|_{x = 0}} = {f_t} σsmax=σs|x=0.5L {\sigma _{s - \max}} = {\sigma _s}{|_{x = 0.5L}}

The shrinkage of the concrete slab on both sides of the crack is the same. The crack width ω is equal to the shrinkage of the concrete at the cracked place, that is, two times the displacement of the concrete at that place: ω=2uc|x=0.5L=2F1(1b1)sh(r1x)+2F2(1b2)sh(r3x) \omega = 2{u_c}{|_{x = 0.5L}} = 2{F_1}(1 - {b_1})sh({r_1}x) + 2{F_2}(1 - {b_2})sh({r_3}x)

The analytical expressions of crack width, crack spacing and stress of the reinforcement in the continuous reinforcement design control index of the CRC layer can be obtained [8]. For cement stabilised bases, since the frictional shear stress can easily reach the limit value, we should judge the correctness of the base slip relationship assumption based on the calculation result of uc.

Finite element numerical simulation verification
Finite element model and material parameters of stiffened slats

To verify the validity of the analytical method, we established a finite element model to simulate the temperature field cooling. The base layer and the CRC layer adopt a linear shear-slip relationship. Based on the known crack spacing, we obtain the concrete stress in the slab, the crack width and the BFRP tendons’ control stress.

According to the symmetry, we use the plate length L for analysis. We arrange two BFRP ribs symmetrically in the transverse direction to consider the interaction between the ribs. We use an 8-node reduced integral solid element (C3D8R) for the BFRP rib, CRC and base layers. At the same time, we encrypt the BFRP rib mesh, as shown in Figure 4. Assuming that each part of the material is uniform linear elasticity, the concrete and BFRP tendons have orthotropic expansion characteristics, and only the longitudinal expansion coefficient is given. We use cohesive contact to simulate the bond-slip characteristics between BFRP bars and concrete and ignore the lateral deformation caused by the embedding of the bars [9]. We use general static analysis to achieve uniform temperature drop simulation by setting different temperature field values. At the bottom of the model, the intermediate phase displacement constraints are imposed on both lateral sides and the longitudinal ends of the base layer.

Fig. 4

Base layer + CRC layer model and meshing.

The length of the slats used by the finite element and analytical methods is L = 1.8 m. The longitudinal BFRP ribs in the board are arranged at 1/2 the height of the CRC board. The horizontal spacing and board margin are 8 cm. The longitudinal bending stiffness between BFRP bar and concrete is 20 GPa/m. The bottom friction coefficient of the CRC layer is 40 MPa/m. The temperature field decreases evenly by 30°C. Compared with the finite element results, we use the analytical method to calculate separately [10]. The shrinkage strain εsh takes two working conditions of 0 and 10−5. The material parameters used in our analysis are shown in Table 1. In Table 1, H is the thickness, E is the elastic modulus, α is the linear expansion coefficient and nu; is the Poisson’s ratio.

Material parameters of finite element simulation

Material H/cm E/Pa α/°C ν
Concrete 28 2.7 × 1010 10−5 0.15
BFRP rib 1.8 4 × 1010 9 ×10−6 0.3
Grassroots 20 1.3 × 103 _ 0.25

BFRP, basalt fibre.

Comparison of analytical method and finite element results

Due to the limited range of influence of the base layer and BFRP bars, the stress and displacement of each element at the same section of the CRC layer are not uniform. For example, the longitudinal displacement value at the bottom of the CRC layer is more significant than that near the BFRP ribs. The CRC layer is 1/4 height from the bottom and 1/2 of the horizontal element node as the output position of the representative value of σc−max the stress in the middle of the concrete slab. The displacement of the concrete node at the crack end B, which is 1/2 of the crack width, is w. The average stress of the BFRP tendon element is used as the control stress σs−max. The comparison of the three maximum results is shown in Table 2.

Comparison of analytical method and finite element results

Method w/mm /MPaσs−max /MPaσc−max
Analytical method ( = 0σsh) 0.83 171 2.01 < 2.54
Analytical method ( = 1σsh0−5) 1.1 229 2.69 > 2.54
Finite element ( = 0σsh) 0.88 167 2.14 < 2.54

From the results in Table 2, it can be seen that the crack control index results of the analytical method and the finite element method are consistent without accounting for shrinkage strain. The error is <7%. The displacement value of the concrete at the crack, which is 1/2 of the width value, does not exceed the critical slip value of most base courses. This is in line with the assumption of the slip relationship at the grassroots level [11]. When we use the analytical method to calculate the shrinkage strain, each index value has increased by about 35%. The concrete stress in the slab has exceeded the ultimate tensile strength, indicating that the effect of concrete drying shrinkage on the transverse cracks of the CRC layer cannot be ignored.

In summary, the analytical crack calculation proposed by us can more accurately predict the actual road conditions of the BFRP bar continuously reinforced pavement under the conditions of uniform temperature drop and dry shrinkage. This can provide a reference for the continuous reinforcement design of BFRP bars.

BFRP reinforcement design
The influence of BFRP bar elastic modulus

We use the analytical method to analyse the influence of the elastic modulus of BFRP bars on the crack mode of the CRC layer. The BFRP bars used are two types of thread bars with the elastic modulus of 40 and 60 GPa, and the yield strength is 510 MPa. In addition, the comparative calculation of the steel bar shows that the elastic modulus of the steel bar is 200 GPa and the yield strength is 335 MPa. The linear expansion coefficient of the bar is 9×10−6°C, the diameter is 12 mm and the bending stiffness is 20 GPa/m. The horizontal spacing of longitudinal bars adopts eight types between 8 cm and 22 cm, and the reinforcement ratio is 0.18–0.51%. The shrinkage factor of concrete is 0.0002. The rest of the parameters are the same as the values taken while verifying the above-mentioned finite element model. The calculation results of crack width, spacing and BFRP tendon control stress are shown in Figure 5.

Fig. 5

The effect of BFRP bar elastic modulus on cracks. BFRP, basalt fibre. (A) The influence of the elastic modulus of BFRP bars on the crack width. (B) The influence of the elastic modulus of BFRP bars on the crack spacing. (C) The influence of the elastic modulus of BFRP tendons on the control stress.

It can be seen from Figure 5 that the three indexes of BFRP tendons are the same as the steel bars along with the change of the longitudinal bar spacing, and the crack width and spacing are more significant than the calculated values of the bars [12]. For the same type of reinforcement, the crack spacing and width of the BFRP bars are more significant than the calculated values of the steel bars. Taking the longitudinal rib spacing of 16 cm as an example, when the elastic modulus of BFRP ribs changes from 60 MPa to 40 MPa, the crack width increases by about 15.3%, the maximum crack spacing increases 14.8% and the control stress decreases by 3.4%. When the spacing of longitudinal bars is <16 cm, the restraining effect of BFRP bars on the concrete gradually weakens with the spacing increase, and the effect of elastic modulus on the crack spacing and width becomes more significant. When the longitudinal rib spacing is >16 cm, the calculation result of the control stress is only a theoretical value. This can be used to reflect the overall trend of change.

The characteristics of low elastic modulus of BFRP tendons result in large pavement crack spacing and width, and its joints have inadequate load transfer capacity and are prone to breakage. We take the crack width as the primary control target, so we need to choose a material with a higher elastic modulus.

The effect of BFRP bar bonding stiffness

Let’s take a diameter of 12 mm and a modulus of elasticity of 40 GPa as an example. The bonding stiffness of BFRP tendons was selected as 15, 20, 25 and 30 GPa/m to analyse the influence on the control index, as shown in Figure 6. The parameter settings of the transverse spacing of longitudinal ribs and other materials are the same as the elastic modulus analysis in Section 4.1.

Fig. 6

The effect of the bond stiffness of BFRP bars on the crack width. BFRP, basalt fibre. (A) The effect of BFRP bar bonding stiffness on crack width. (B) The effect of BFRP bar bonding stiffness on crack spacing. (C) The effect of BFRP bar bending stiffness on the control stress.

The results in Figure 6 show that under the condition that the reinforcement is not changed, the bonding stiffness decreases and the crack spacing and width increase, and the increase in the two is equivalent. When the reinforcement ratio is low, the bonding stiffness has a more significant impact on the stress of the BFRP tendons. For example, when the spacing is 8 cm (reinforcement ratio is 0.50%), the crack spacing and width increase of the remaining three bonding stiffness are 9%, 20% and 36%. On the whole, the stress increase of BFRP tendons is less affected by the bonding stiffness.

According to the results of laboratory tests, it can be known that the bonding stiffness of BFRP bars is related to the strength of concrete, the diameter of the bars and the thickness of the protective layer. The bonding stiffness is usually about 25 GPa/m. Therefore, to control the width and spacing of cracks, BFRP bar material and surface structure choice should ensure that the bending stiffness is not <20 GPa/m in actual engineering.

The influence of BFRP bar reinforcement ratio

We analyse the influence of the reinforcement ratio on the three major indicators. The article takes three kinds of BFRP bars with diameters of 12, 14 and 16 mm as examples, and the lower value of 40 GPa is selected for the modulus of elasticity. The transverse spacing of the longitudinal ribs and the material parameters are the same as the elastic modulus analysis. The reinforcement ratio ρ is 0.33–0.90%. The calculation result is shown in Figure 7.

Fig. 7

Variation curve of crack width with BFRP reinforcement ratio. BFRP, basalt fibre. (A) The influence of the reinforcement ratio on the crack width. (B) The influence of the reinforcement ratio on the crack spacing. (C) The influence of the reinforcement ratio on the control stress.

As shown in Figure 5, the crack spacing, width and control stress of the two types of BFRP tendons increase approximately linearly with the spacing of longitudinal tendons. For example, when the spacing is 8–22 cm, the crack spacing, width and control stress of BFRP tendons are increased by 1.4 times. The three major indicators of BRFP reinforcement in Figure 6 change with the fluctuation of the reinforcement ratio, and the overall trend becomes smaller as the reinforcement ratio increases. The diameter of the reinforcement limits the size of the reinforcement ratio. This shows that simply controlling the reinforcement ratio in the crack control design cannot achieve the desired effect. This requires careful consideration of the design of the reinforcement scheme. Three sets of data are selected from the analytical calculation results, and the reinforcement ratio of each set is close. It was shown in Table 3. Through analysis, it is found that the crack width, spacing and control stress are smaller under the reinforcement scheme with small diameter and small spacing. And the smaller the reinforcement ratio, the more significant the difference. Therefore, the diameter and spacing of the control ribs should not be too large to obtain a better crack control effect.

Comparative analysis of BFRP reinforcement schemes

ds/mm Ls/cm ρ/% w/mm L/m /MPa
1σs−max4 12 0.46 1.18 2.61 275
16 16 0.45 1.28 2.81 277
12 12 0.34 1.43 3.16 362
14 16 0.34 1.5 3.3 350
16 20 0.36 1.53 3.35 333

BFRP, basalt fibre.

Crack control index

The current ‘Code’ mainly provides three control standards for reinforcement design for continuous reinforced cement concrete pavement. (1) The average spacing of transverse cracks is not >1.8 m. (2) The average width of the cracks at the embedding depth of the longitudinal steel bars is not >0.5 mm. (3) The tensile stress of the steel bar does not exceed the yield strength of the steel bar.

According to the conclusion that the limit slip of BFRP bar and concrete linear bonding is about 0.5 mm according to the experiment in this paper, we use the analytical method to calculate the crack width limit to be about 1.0 mm. Considering the absence of rain corrosion in BFRP and the reduction of road cost, we can appropriately relax the cracks and spacing limits given in the existing ‘Code’ in the design of BFRP reinforcement. Therefore, we propose to increase the limit of crack width to 1.0 mm, the corresponding limit of average crack spacing is 2.0 m and the reinforcement ratio of the CRC layer is not <0.5%. The actual project must consider various factors such as specific traffic volume and traffic axle load, pavement functional requirements, pavement structure composition, and short-term and long-term economic rationality to select a reasonable reinforcement ratio.

Conclusion

According to the calculation and analysis results of the analytical method in this paper and taking into account the absence of rain corrosion and cost of BFRP bars, we recommend a limit of the average crack spacing of 2.0 m, a limit of crack width of 1.0 mm and reinforcement ratio in the design of BFRP bar reinforcement.

Fig. 1

Bilinear shear stress-slip relationship between CRC layer and base layer.
Bilinear shear stress-slip relationship between CRC layer and base layer.

Fig. 2

Bond-slip relationship between BFRP tendons and concrete. BFRP, basalt fibre.
Bond-slip relationship between BFRP tendons and concrete. BFRP, basalt fibre.

Fig. 3

Schematic diagram of the analytical analysis model.
Schematic diagram of the analytical analysis model.

Fig. 4

Base layer + CRC layer model and meshing.
Base layer + CRC layer model and meshing.

Fig. 5

The effect of BFRP bar elastic modulus on cracks. BFRP, basalt fibre. (A) The influence of the elastic modulus of BFRP bars on the crack width. (B) The influence of the elastic modulus of BFRP bars on the crack spacing. (C) The influence of the elastic modulus of BFRP tendons on the control stress.
The effect of BFRP bar elastic modulus on cracks. BFRP, basalt fibre. (A) The influence of the elastic modulus of BFRP bars on the crack width. (B) The influence of the elastic modulus of BFRP bars on the crack spacing. (C) The influence of the elastic modulus of BFRP tendons on the control stress.

Fig. 6

The effect of the bond stiffness of BFRP bars on the crack width. BFRP, basalt fibre. (A) The effect of BFRP bar bonding stiffness on crack width. (B) The effect of BFRP bar bonding stiffness on crack spacing. (C) The effect of BFRP bar bending stiffness on the control stress.
The effect of the bond stiffness of BFRP bars on the crack width. BFRP, basalt fibre. (A) The effect of BFRP bar bonding stiffness on crack width. (B) The effect of BFRP bar bonding stiffness on crack spacing. (C) The effect of BFRP bar bending stiffness on the control stress.

Fig. 7

Variation curve of crack width with BFRP reinforcement ratio. BFRP, basalt fibre. (A) The influence of the reinforcement ratio on the crack width. (B) The influence of the reinforcement ratio on the crack spacing. (C) The influence of the reinforcement ratio on the control stress.
Variation curve of crack width with BFRP reinforcement ratio. BFRP, basalt fibre. (A) The influence of the reinforcement ratio on the crack width. (B) The influence of the reinforcement ratio on the crack spacing. (C) The influence of the reinforcement ratio on the control stress.

Comparison of analytical method and finite element results

Method w/mm /MPaσs−max /MPaσc−max
Analytical method ( = 0σsh) 0.83 171 2.01 < 2.54
Analytical method ( = 1σsh0−5) 1.1 229 2.69 > 2.54
Finite element ( = 0σsh) 0.88 167 2.14 < 2.54

Material parameters of finite element simulation

Material H/cm E/Pa α/°C ν
Concrete 28 2.7 × 1010 10−5 0.15
BFRP rib 1.8 4 × 1010 9 ×10−6 0.3
Grassroots 20 1.3 × 103 _ 0.25

Comparative analysis of BFRP reinforcement schemes

ds/mm Ls/cm ρ/% w/mm L/m /MPa
1σs−max4 12 0.46 1.18 2.61 275
16 16 0.45 1.28 2.81 277
12 12 0.34 1.43 3.16 362
14 16 0.34 1.5 3.3 350
16 20 0.36 1.53 3.35 333

Enieb, M., Diab, A., & Yang, X. Short-and long-term properties of glass fiber reinforced asphalt mixtures. International Journal of Pavement Engineering., 2021. 22(1): 64–76. EniebM. DiabA. YangX. Short-and long-term properties of glass fiber reinforced asphalt mixtures International Journal of Pavement Engineering. 2021 22 1 64 76 10.1080/10298436.2019.1577421 Search in Google Scholar

Deilami, S., & White, G. Review of reflective cracking in composite pavements. International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology., 2020. 13(5): 524–535. DeilamiS. WhiteG. Review of reflective cracking in composite pavements International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology. 2020 13 5 524 535 10.1007/s42947-020-0332-5 Search in Google Scholar

Liu, L., Yang, C. C., & Liu, Z. H. Multiparameter Sensitivity Analysis of Flexural–Tensile Property of Basalt Fiber–Reinforced Asphalt Mixture. Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development (English Edition)., 2021. 15(1): 14–21. LiuL. YangC. C. LiuZ. H. Multiparameter Sensitivity Analysis of Flexural–Tensile Property of Basalt Fiber–Reinforced Asphalt Mixture Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development (English Edition). 2021 15 1 14 21 10.1061/JHTRCQ.0000761 Search in Google Scholar

You, L., You, Z., & Yan, K. Effect of anisotropic characteristics on the mechanical behavior of asphalt concrete overlay. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering., 2019. 13(1): 110–122. YouL. YouZ. YanK. Effect of anisotropic characteristics on the mechanical behavior of asphalt concrete overlay Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering. 2019 13 1 110 122 10.1007/s11709-018-0476-4 Search in Google Scholar

Shi, X., Zollinger, D. G., & Mukhopadhyay, A. K. Punchout study for continuously reinforced concrete pavement containing reclaimed asphalt pavement using pavement ME models. International Journal of Pavement Engineering., 2020. 21(10): 1199–1212. ShiX. ZollingerD. G. MukhopadhyayA. K. Punchout study for continuously reinforced concrete pavement containing reclaimed asphalt pavement using pavement ME models International Journal of Pavement Engineering. 2020 21 10 1199 1212 10.1080/10298436.2018.1533134 Search in Google Scholar

Ali, S., Fawzia, S., Thambiratnam, D., Liu, X., & Remennikov, A. M. Performance of protective concrete runway pavement under aircraft impact loading. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering., 2020. 16(12): 1698–1710. AliS. FawziaS. ThambiratnamD. LiuX. RemennikovA. M. Performance of protective concrete runway pavement under aircraft impact loading Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. 2020 16 12 1698 1710 10.1080/15732479.2020.1730405 Search in Google Scholar

Hassan, S., Reddy, M. & Rout, R. Dynamics of the Modified n-Degree Lorenz System. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences., 2019. 4(2): 315–330. HassanS. ReddyM. RoutR. Dynamics of the Modified n-Degree Lorenz System Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences. 2019 4 2 315 330 10.2478/AMNS.2019.2.00028 Search in Google Scholar

Guo, C., & Lu, Z. Vibration experiment of CTCP-CRCP composite pavement under heavy traffic. International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology., 2019. 12(4): 416–422. GuoC. LuZ. Vibration experiment of CTCP-CRCP composite pavement under heavy traffic International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology. 2019 12 4 416 422 10.1007/s42947-019-0049-5 Search in Google Scholar

Rahman, M. M., Saha, S., Hamdi, A. S. A., & Alam, M. J. B. Development of 3-D finite element models for geo-jute reinforced flexible pavement. Civ. Eng. J., 2019. 5(2): 437–446. RahmanM. M. SahaS. HamdiA. S. A. AlamM. J. B. Development of 3-D finite element models for geo-jute reinforced flexible pavement Civ. Eng. J. 2019 5 2 437 446 10.28991/cej-2019-03091258 Search in Google Scholar

Feng, D., Wang, D., Yi, J., & Zhang, F. Designation principle and method for functionally graded composite pavement. Chinese Science Bulletin., 2020. 65(30): 3270–3286. FengD. WangD. YiJ. ZhangF. Designation principle and method for functionally graded composite pavement Chinese Science Bulletin. 2020 65 30 3270 3286 10.1360/TB-2020-0200 Search in Google Scholar

Koniki, S., Kasagani, H., Prathipati, S. R. R. T., & Paluri, Y. Mechanical behavior of triple-blended hybrid fiber-reinforced concrete: an experimental and numerical study. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions., 2021. 6(3): 1–14. KonikiS. KasaganiH. PrathipatiS. R. R. T. PaluriY. Mechanical behavior of triple-blended hybrid fiber-reinforced concrete: an experimental and numerical study Innovative Infrastructure Solutions. 2021 6 3 1 14 10.1007/s41062-021-00526-9 Search in Google Scholar

Vanli, A., Ünal, I. & Özdemir, D. Normal complex contact metric manifolds admitting a semi symmetric metric connection. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences., 2020. 5(2): 49–66. VanliA. ÜnalI. ÖzdemirD Normal complex contact metric manifolds admitting a semi symmetric metric connection Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences. 2020 5 2 49 66 10.2478/amns.2020.2.00013 Search in Google Scholar

Articoli consigliati da Trend MD

Pianifica la tua conferenza remota con Sciendo