4.5 Article

Modelling of five-point bending beam test for asphalt surfacing system on orthotropic steel deck bridges

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PAVEMENT ENGINEERING
卷 22, 期 11, 页码 1469-1490

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10298436.2019.1697440

关键词

Five-point bending beam test; orthotropic steel deck bridge; multilayer surfacing system; membrane; asphalt concrete; finite element

资金

  1. Rijkswaterstaat, Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management in the Netherlands

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study focused on the fatigue response characteristics of orthotropic steel deck bridges in the Netherlands, analyzing the multilayer system in 5PB tests. The influence of different layer thicknesses and mechanical properties on system performance was evaluated, assessing the sensitivity of parameters.
The orthotropic steel deck bridges (OSDBs) in the Netherlands consists mostly of multilayer system: top porous asphalt layer, guss asphalt layer, steel deck and two membrane layers. The five-point bending (5PB) beam test is the standard device in France for characterization of fatigue response of asphalt concrete surfacings used on orthotropic steel deck bridges. In this paper, an analytical solution for the 5PB beam test setup is presented first. In order to better understand the influence of geometrical, mechanical and structural parameters on the performance of the typical multilayer surfacing system of OSDBs, the 5PB test specimens with five structural layers have been investigated. The parametric study is performed at the numerical platform CAPA-3D that was developed at the Section of Structural Mechanics of TU Delft. The influences of the thickness of the asphalt layers and the mechanical properties of both top and bottom membrane layers are studied. The sensitivities of those influence factors are evaluated by the examination of the maximum tensile stress at the top surface of the porous asphalt layers and the strain distributions through the entire thickness of the specimen at two cross-sections.

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

4.5
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