SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Teknik Dergi / 2020 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 5

Comparison of Mechanistic-Empirical and Traditional Rigid Pavement Design Methods: Afyon-Emirdağ Trial Section

Mekanistik-Ampirik ve Geleneksel Beton Yol Tasarım Yöntemlerinin Karşılaştırılması: Afyon-Emirdağ Deneme Kesimi

Emin ŞENGÜN
Hande İşık ÖZTÜRK
İsmail Özgür YAMAN
Pages
10251–10274
Publication Date
2020-09-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to M-E analysis, it is predicted that IRI and faulting will exceed but the cracking will be within the limit values during its service life.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The first rigid pavement section in Turkey under the jurisdiction of General Directorate of Highways was designed as Jointed Plain Concrete pavement (JPCP) according to Belgian catalog method.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This design was compared with the traditional empirical American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO-93) design method and with the mechanistic-empirical (M-E) pavement design guide.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to M-E analysis, it is predicted that IRI and faulting will exceed but the cracking will be within the limit values during its service life.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Üstyapı Tasarımı · Belçika katalog yöntemi · AASHTO 93 tasarım yöntemi

Abstract

The first rigid pavement section in Turkey under the jurisdiction of General Directorate of Highways was designed as Jointed Plain Concrete pavement (JPCP) according to Belgian catalog method. This design was compared with the traditional empirical American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO-93) design method and with the mechanistic-empirical (M-E) pavement design guide. Moreover, the international roughness index (IRI) values measured with intervals were compared with the predicted values of M-E analysis. According to M-E analysis, it is predicted that IRI and faulting will exceed but the cracking will be within the limit values during its service life.

Özet

Türkiye’nin Karayolları Genel Müdürlüğü bünyesindeki ilk beton yol uygulaması olan Afyon-Emirdağ kesimi derzli donatısız beton kaplama olarak Belçika Katalog yöntemine göre tasarlanmıştır. Bu tasarım, hem geleneksel Amerikan Devlet Karayolu ve Taşımacılık İdareleri Birliği ampirik tasarım yöntemi (AASHTO 93); hem de mekanistik-ampirik (M-E) üstyapı tasarım yöntemi ile yeniden analiz edilerek, mevcut yol üzerinden aralıklarla ölçülen düzgünsüzlük (IRI) değerleri ile karşılaştırılmıştır. Saha ölçümleri ile M-E analizleri sonucu tahmin edilen IRI değerlerinin birbirine oldukça yakın olduğu tespit edilmiştir. M-E analizleri sonucunda mevcut yolun servis sürecinde düzgünsüzlük ve faylanma performans kriterlerine göre sınır değerleri aşacağı, ancak enine çatlak yönünden sınır değerler içinde kalacağı öngörülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞENGÜN, E., ÖZTÜRK, H. İ., YAMAN, İ. Ö. (2020). Comparison of Mechanistic-Empirical and Traditional Rigid Pavement Design Methods: Afyon-Emirdağ Trial Section. Teknik Dergi, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 5, 10251–10274. https://ajindex.com/articles/83746

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Güngör G., Sağlık A., Ünal N., Karayolu Beton Yol Deneme Kesimleri Performans Değerlendirmesi, Hazır Beton Kongresi, İstanbul-Türkiye, 1, 96-111, 2013.
  2. Yeğinboğa A., Türkiye’nin İlk Beton Karayolları, TÇMB / AR-GE Enstitüsü, Ankara, Türkiye, 2010.
  3. Hall K., Dawood D., Vanikar S., Tally R., Cackler T., Correa A., vd., Long-life Concrete Pavements in Europe and Canada, FHWA, ABD, 2007.
  4. Ağar E., Sütaş İ., Öztaş G., Beton Yollar, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Yayınları,
  5. İstanbul, Türkiye, 1998. NCHRP Project 1-37A Report, Mechanistic-Empirical Design of New and Rehabilitated Pavement Structures, FHWA, ABD, 2004.
  6. Huang Y. H., Pavement Analysis and Design, 2.cilt,Par entice Hall, ABD, 2008.
  7. Ozturk H. I., Tan E. B., Sengun E., Yaman I. O., Comparison of jointed plain concrete pavement systems designed by mechanistic-empirical (M-E) method for different traffic, subgrade, material and climatic conditions, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 2018.
  8. Sachs S., Vandenbossche J.M., Snyder M.B., Calibration of national rigid pavement performance models for the pavement mechanistic–empirical design guide, Transportation Research Record: Journal of Transportation Research Board, 2524 (6), 59–67, 2015.
  9. Mu F., Mack J.W., Rodden R.A., Review of national and state-level calibrations of AASHTOWare Pavement ME design for new jointed plain concrete pavement. Int J Pavement Eng, 19 (9), 825-831, 2018.
  10. Kim S., Ceylan H., Ma D., Gopalakrishnan K., Calibration of pavement ME design and mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide performance prediction models for Iowa pavement systems, J Transp Eng, 140 (10), 2014.
  11. Vandenbossche J.M., Mu F., Burnham T.R., Comparison of measured vs. predicted performance of jointed plain concrete pavements using the Mechanistic–Empirical Pavement Design Guideline. Int J Pavement Eng, 12 (3), 239-251, 2011.
  12. Johanneck L., Tompkins D., Clyne T., Khazanovich L., Minnesota Road Research Data for Evaluation and Local Calibration of the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide’s Enhanced Integrated Climatic Model, Transportation Research Record: Journal of Transportation Research Board, 2226 (4), 30-40, 2011.
  13. Li J., Uhlmeyer J., Mahoney J., Muench S., Updating the Pavement Design Catalog for the Washington State Department of Transportation: Using 1993
  14. AASHTO Guide, Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide, and Historical Performance, Transportation Research Record: Journal of Transportation Research Board, 2154 (12)