Mazari, M (2014) Studying the parameters involved with modulus-based construction quality control for compaction of unbound pavement layers. PhD thesis, University of Texas at El Paso, USA.
Abstract
Pavement performance is impacted by several factors such as the properties of the materials, combination of traffic and loading, structural capability, climate changes and construction process. Earthwork and unbound materials is an important part of pavement constructions since most of the distresses can be related to these geomaterials. Appropriate process control, proper processing of geomaterials, adequate amount of moisture and suitable compaction effort would ensure the required density and stiffness of the compacted pavement layer. The Nuclear Density Gauge (NDG) has been the primary means of Quality Control and Quality Acceptance (QC/QA) by State Highway Agencies (SHAs) and department of transportations (DOTs) for many years. Although the difference in compacted layer moisture content at the time of testing with the moisture at the time of compaction plays an important role in stiffness of compacted geomaterials, most highway agencies have not been considered that in the construction quality control. Furthermore, measurement of moisture content and dry density, even though quite practical and straightforward, does not tie the construction with the design process where mechanical properties (as reflected in both AASHTO Pavement Design Guide and the Mechanistic Empirical Pavement Design Guide) such as stiffness and modulus were employed. Such transformation from density-based to modulus-based QC/QA approach has involved with some technical and organizational difficulties. In order to obtain high-quality pavement layers with long lasting performance, the reasons for such complications should be understood and promoted through complimentary laboratory and field investigations. Efficient and applicable control process should also be proposed alternatively. Recent advances emerged the use of in-situ Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) devices which adequately estimate the stiffness parameters of a constructed pavement structure. Such structural parameters are more representative of the pavement performance predicted during the empirical-mechanistic design process.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Nazarian, S |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | highway; in-situ; measurement; non-destructive testing; pavement; pavement design; quality control; traffic |
| Index terms: | quality control, distress, design process, density, process control, pavement construction, estimate, testing, mechanical property, laboratory, investigation, in-situ, earthwork, construction quality, climate change, agency, non-destructive testing, transformation, moisture content, construction process, loading, pavement design |
| Subjects: | building construction, construction operations, material properties and characteristics, data collection methods, analytical methods, climate science, professional development, professional practice, business, structural engineering, transportation engineering, design methods, research management, infrastructure engineering, control systems, project delivery, financial and cost management, quality assurance, sociology, construction methods |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Quality Management, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Research Practice, Construction Materials, Site Management, Urban Studies, Cost Management, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here