Lcr Thesis Presentation Final

CONCRETE MIXTURE PROPERTIES AFFECTING CONCRETE MIXTURE PROPERTIES AFFECTING

THE THE

AGGREGATE INTERLOCK MECHANISM OF AGGREGATE INTERLOCK MECHANISM OF

JOINTS AND CRACKS JOINTS AND CRACKS

SWANSON School of Engineering

JOINTS AND CRACKS JOINTS AND CRACKS

FOR RIGID PAVEMENT SYSTEMSFOR RIGID PAVEMENT SYSTEMS

LUIS CARLOS RAMIREZLUIS CARLOS RAMIREZ

Masters Thesis Defense November 19, 2010

Advisor : Dr. Julie Vandenbossche

OUTLINEOUTLINE�INTRODUCTION

�MOTIVATION

�APPROACH

�RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Masters Thesis Defense 11/19/2010

�METHODOLOGY

�EXECUTION

�RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

�CONCLUSIONS

�FUTURE WORK

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTIONPavementPavement PerformancePerformance

FaultingFaulting PunchoutsPunchouts


Corner BreaksCorner Breaks Transverse CrackingTransverse Cracking

Load Transfer Efficiency (Load Transfer Efficiency (LTELTE) of Cracks and Joints) of Cracks and Joints

LL= = 11 UU= 0= 0

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION

LL= = 11 UU= 1= 1

LTE = LTE = UU

LLMasters Thesis Defense 11/19/2010

x100%x100%

Aggregate Interlock MechanismAggregate Interlock Mechanism

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION

LTEjoint=LTEbase+LTEAGG

PCC Slab

Base

LTEjoint=LTEbase+LTEAGG

20%-40%

AGGAGG= Joint Spring Stiffness


Crack Surface TextureCrack Surface Texture

CA CA AngularityAngularity

CA CA HardnessHardness

CA Top CA Top SizeSize

CA CA GradationGradation

Matrix Matrix StrengthStrength

Factors Affecting the Aggregate Interlock MechanismFactors Affecting the Aggregate Interlock MechanismINTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION

Crack widthCrack width


MOTIVATIONMOTIVATION

Damage accumulationDamage accumulation

MM--E Design E Design

σσ + + δ δ = f( = f( AGG/AGG/klkl))

AGG = f( LTE)AGG = f( LTE)


MM--E Design E Design

LTELTE = f( = f( Surface textureSurface texture))

Surf. textureSurf. texture = f( PCC Material properties)= f( PCC Material properties)

APPROACHAPPROACH

Concrete Concrete Mixture Mixture

PropertiesProperties

Surface TextureSurface TextureVandenbosscheVandenbossche (1999(1999))


LTELTE AGGAGG//klklIoannidesIoannideset.al (1990)et.al (1990)

RESEARCH OBJECTIVESRESEARCH OBJECTIVES

1.1. Establish a relationship between Establish a relationship between PCC properties PCC properties and and LTELTE..

2.2. Establish a relationship between Establish a relationship between PCC properties PCC properties and and AGGAGG..

3.3. Investigate the effect of Investigate the effect of PCC properties PCC properties on on fracture fracture

parameters.parameters.


parameters.parameters.

4.4. Determine influence of Determine influence of fracture parameters fracture parameters on the on the aggregate interlock.aggregate interlock.

Data Data

Selection Selection

Previous Previous

Identify Identify

Data GapsData Gaps

Select Select

Data Points Data Points

to Includeto Include

Cast Cast

Specimens Specimens

& Testing& Testing

Calculate Calculate

Results Results

from Tests from Tests

METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGY

Previous Previous

StudiesStudiesfrom Tests from Tests

DataData

Analyzed Analyzed

Combined Combined

DataData

Statistical Statistical

Data FittingData Fitting


Analysis of Analysis of

ResultsResults

Development Development

of Modelsof Models

Full Factorial Design Matrix Full Factorial Design Matrix LA Category CA Top Size (in) w/c ratio Category Existent

Low resistance to abrasion

0.75

Low strength �

Medium strength �

High strength �

1.5

Low strength

Medium strength �

High strength �

2.5

Low strength

Medium strength

High strength

0.75

Low strength �

Medium strength

High strength

Low strength

EXECUTION

EXECUTION


Medium resistance to abrasion 1.5

Low strength

Medium strength �

High strength �

2.5

Low strength �

Medium strength

High strength �

High resistance to abrasion

0.75

Low strength �

Medium strength �

High strength

1.5

Low strength

Medium strength �

High strength �

2.5

Low strength

Medium strength

High strength

EXECUTION

EXECUTION

Concrete Mixtures Properties Concrete Mixtures Properties

EXECUTIONEXECUTION

Concrete Mix ID

LS_0.75_17_0.4 LS_0.75_17_0.45 SL_1.25_34_0.4 SL_0.75_34_0.4 SL_0.75_34_0.45

Aggregate Type

Limestone Limestone Slag Slag Slag

Top Aggregate Size (in)

0.75 0.75 1.25 0.75 0.75

Coarse Aggregate Volumetric

Proportion (%)

44


Proportion (%)

Water-to-Cement Ratio

0.4 0.45 0.4 0.4 0.45

LA Value (%) 17 34

Absorption Capacity, (%)

0.5 4.78

Bulk Specific Gravity

2.71 2.35

CA Gradation AASHTO No. 57

Day 1Day 1

Fracture Energy Fracture Energy

Test RILEM TPM Test RILEM TPM

1990 1990

(4 specimens per (4 specimens per

mixture)mixture)

Day 28Day 28

Fracture Energy Fracture Energy

Test RILEM TPM Test RILEM TPM

1990 1990


mixture)mixture) Volumetric Volumetric

EXECUTIONEXECUTIONTesting Program

mixture)mixture) mixture)mixture)

Flexural Strength Flexural Strength

Test ASTM C78 Test ASTM C78


mixture)mixture)

Volumetric Volumetric

Surface Texture Surface Texture

VST Test VST Test

(35 Fractured (35 Fractured

Faces)Faces)


INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTIONVolumetric Surface Texture Test (VST)Volumetric Surface Texture Test (VST)


Vandenbossche (1999)

RESULTS AND ANALYSISRESULTS AND ANALYSISVSTR Results0.2365 in0.2365 in33/in/in22 0.1289 in3/in20.1289 in3/in2


RESULTS ANDRESULTS AND ANALYSISANALYSIS

VSTR=0.3689+0.5004*TS-24.5162*(1/LA)-0.0540*w/c+0.2049*TS2-

2.2665*TS*w/c+61.5434*(w/c/LA)

R2=0.91 Adjusted R2=0.86

VSTR ModelVSTR Model

VSTR =Volumetric Surface Texture Ratio (in3/in2)TS = Aggregate Top Size(in)LA = LA Abrasion (%)w/c =w/c ratio

Response Surface Method (RSM)Response Surface Method (RSM)


Terms p-value

Constant 0.000

TS 0.002

1/LA 0.000

w/c 0.001

TS2 0.000

TS*w/c 0.000

w/c/LA 0.005

Source p-value

Regression 0.0000

Linear 0.0010

Square 0.0010

Interaction 0.0000

w/c =w/c ratio

0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600

0.0000 0.1000 0.2000 0.3000 0.4000 0.5000 0.6000Pre

dic

ted V

ST

R (

in³/

in²)

Measured VSTR (in³/in²)

0.20000

0.30000

0.40000

0.50000

0.60000

VS

TR

(in

3/i

n2

)

0.50000-0.60000

0.40000-0.50000

0.30000-0.40000

0.20000-0.30000

0.10000-0.20000

0.00000-0.10000

VSTR f(CA Top Size, CA LA)VSTR f(CA Top Size, CA LA) w/c ratio =0.45



0.751.07

1.391.71

2.022.34

0.00000

0.10000

16

21

26

31

37

42

LA (%)

CA top size(%)

0.15000

0.20000

0.25000

0.30000

0.35000

VS

TR

(in

3/i

n2

)

0.30000-0.35000

0.25000-0.30000

0.20000-0.25000

0.15000-0.20000

VSTR f(CA LA, w/c ratio)VSTR f(CA LA, w/c ratio) CA Top size = 1 in



1621

2732

3843

0.00000

0.05000

0.10000

0.38

0.40

0.43

0.45

0.48

VS

TR

(in

3/i

n2

)

w/c ratio

0.15000-0.20000

0.10000-0.15000

0.05000-0.10000

0.00000-0.05000

LA (%)

R2=0.95

Adjusted R2 =0.90

LTE ModelLTE Model

6.5log7.39 +

⋅=

cw

VSTLTE

Vandenbossche (1999)

efftVTSRVST ⋅=teff



−∗+∗−∗−∗+⋅=

22049.0/0540.0)/1(5162.245004.03689.0[(log{7.39

TScwLATSLTE

6.5}*54.2)]/_(5434.61/2665.2

+∗∗+∗∗

cw

tLAcwcwTS eff

LTE= Load Transfer Efficiency (%)VST=Volumetric Surface Texture (in3/in)VSTR =Volumetric Surface Texture Ratio (in3/in2)TS = Aggregate Top Size(in)LA = LA Abrasion (%)w/c =w/c ratioteff= Slab Effective Thickness (cm)cw= Crack Width (cm)

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

LT

E (

%)

Crack width (mils)

0.75 in

1 in

1.5 in

2 in

LTELTE vs. Crack Widthvs. Crack Width



40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

LT

E (

%)

Crack width (mils)

Predicted 1in

Mesured 1 in

Predicted 2 in

Measured 2 in

LTELTE vs. Crack Widthvs. Crack Width

Jensen & Hansen (2001)Slab thickness =10 inLimestone LA =34% , TS =1inGravel LA 22%, TS=2iin

AGG ModelAGG Model

lkLTEAGG ⋅⋅

−

=

− 17786.1

012.0

01.01

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Load

Tra

nsf

er

Eff

icie

ncy,

%

...

Crovetti (1994)

Ioannides et. al (1990)



−∗+∗−∗−∗+⋅=

22049.0/0540.0)/1(5162.245004.03689.0[(log{7.39

TScwLATSLTE

6.5}*54.2)]/_(5434.61/2665.2

+∗∗+∗∗

cw

tLAcwcwTS eff

LTE= Load Transfer Efficiency (%)VST=Volumetric Surface Texture (in3/in)VSTR =Volumetric Surface Texture Ratio (in3/in2)TS = Aggregate Top Size(in)LA = LA Abrasion (%)w/c =w/c ratioteff= Slab Effective Thickness (cm)cw= Crack Width (cm)k= Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (psi/in)l = Radius of Relative Stiffness (in)

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Nondimensional Stiffness, AGG/kl

25.0

2

3

)1(12

−⋅=

k

Ehl

ν

4.00E+04

5.00E+04

6.00E+04

7.00E+04

AG

G (

psi

)

6.00E+04-7.00E+04

5.00E+04-6.00E+04

AGG f(LA, w/c ratio)AGG f(LA, w/c ratio) k =200 psil= 30 incw=0.08 inteff=11 inCA top size= 1 in



16 19 21 24 27 30 32 35 38 40 43 46

4.00E+01

1.00E+04

2.00E+04

3.00E+04

0.380.40

0.42

0.44

0.46

0.48

AG

G (

psi

)

w/c ratio

5.00E+04-6.00E+04

4.00E+04-5.00E+04

3.00E+04-4.00E+04

2.00E+04-3.00E+04

1.00E+04-2.00E+04

4.00E+01-1.00E+04

LA (%)

CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS

�Development of VSTRmodelVSTR = f (w/c, TS, LA).

�Development of LTEmodelLTE = f (w/c, TS, LA, cw, t)


LTE = f (w/c, TS, LA, cw, t)

�Development of AGGmodelAGG= f (w/c, TS, LA, cw, t, k, l)

FUTURE WORK FUTURE WORK

�To expand and additional validation of VSTR model.

�To incorporate AGG model into the MEPDG.

�To investigate the effect of additional PCC properties on thesurface texture.


�To investigate the relationship between concrete fracture

parameters and the aggregate interlock mechanism.

QUESTIONS?/COMMENTS?QUESTIONS?/COMMENTS?

Thank you!Thank you!


Documents

Lcr Thesis Presentation Final