4.6 Article

Nonlinear Genetic-Based Models for Prediction of Flow Number of Asphalt Mixtures

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING
卷 23, 期 3, 页码 248-263

出版社

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000154

关键词

Asphalt pavements; Rutting; Flow number; Gene expression programming; Marshall mix design; Formulation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rutting has been considered the most serious distress in flexible pavements for many years. Flow number is an explanatory index for the evaluation of the rutting potential of asphalt mixtures. In this study, a promising variant of genetic programming, namely, gene expression programming (GEP), is utilized to predict the flow number of dense asphalt-aggregate mixtures. The proposed constitutive models relate the flow number of Marshall specimens to the coarse and fine aggregate contents, percentage of air voids, percentage of voids in mineral aggregate, Marshall stability, and Marshall flow. Different correlations were developed using different combinations of the influencing parameters. The comprehensive experimental database used for the development of the correlations was established on the basis of a series of uniaxial dynamic-creep tests conducted in this study. Relative importance values of various predictor variables were calculated to determine their contributions to the flow number prediction. A multiple-least-squares-regression (MLSR) analysis was performed to benchmark the GEP models. For more verification, a subsequent parametric study was carried out, and the trends of the results were confirmed with the results of previous studies. The results indicate that the proposed correlations are effectively capable of evaluating the flow number of asphalt mixtures. The GEP-based formulas are simple, straightforward, and particularly valuable for providing an analysis tool accessible to practicing engineers. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000154. (C) 2011 American Society of Civil Engineers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据