Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 0 views

    Comparison with Kenlayer 6

    Uploaded by

    Dhanushka Manjula
    Comparison with Kenlayer 6

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Comparison with Kenlayer 6

    Uploaded by

    Dhanushka Manjula
    0 views1 page
    Comparison with Kenlayer 6

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Comparison with Kenlayer 6

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    0 views1 page

    Comparison with Kenlayer 6

    Uploaded by

    Dhanushka Manjula
    Comparison with Kenlayer 6

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    thicknesses obtained from AASHTO 1993 were analyzed using the KENLAYER

    software for the following three conditions:

    1. Assuming base and subgrade layer as linearly elastic


    2. Assuming base and subgrade as non-linear
    3. Incorporation of seasonal variation effects

    For all the above conditions, asphalt layer is assumed to be linearly elastic and the four
    levels of resilient modulus values are summarized in Table 2. In the case of non-linear
    analysis, unbound layers; base and subgrade are treated as stress dependent layers.
    Granular base layer was modeled in the KENLAYER program by the following
    relationships:
    M R  K1 K2 (3)

    Where K1 and K2 are experimentally derived constants and θ is the stress invariant and is
    estimated by the following relationship:

       x   y   z  z (1  2ko ) (4)

    In which γ is the average unit weight, z is the distance below surface at which the
    modulus is to be estimated and Ko is the coefficient of earth pressure at rest. For the case
    of fine grained soils, the stress dependency is estimated by use of bilinear relationship
    within the KENLAYER program, mathematically expressed as:

    E = K1 + K3(K2 - σd) hen σd < k2 (5a)

    E = K1 - K4(σd - K2 ) when σd > k2 (5b)

    Where d is the deviator stress and the K1, K2, K3 and K4 are material constants in the
    above equations. Typical K values used in the analysis for different types of base and
    subgrade layers were obtained from the work done by Thompson and Elliott (1985). The
    average effective modulus based on the K1 is used for linear analysis.

    Once the response is obtained under a given load condition, computation of pavement life
    is based upon fatigue and rutting (permanent deformation). For this, Asphalt Institute, AI
    (1982) models were used for the prediction of design repetitions for the standard 80kN
    (18 Kips) Single Axle load. The two models used are given below:

    N f  0.0796 ( t ) 3.291 ( E1 ) 0.854 (6)


    Where:
    Nf : number of repetitions to failure
    t : tensile strain at bottom of asphalt layer
    E1 : elastic modulus of asphalt layer

    You might also like