Abstract

Reliable characterization of unbound granular material and subgrade resilient modulus requires repeated load triaxial testing, advanced dynamic loading equipment, and technical experience not typically available in many geotechnical laboratories. For Level 2 design inputs, the Mechanistic–Empirical Pavement Design Guide recommends correlation models to estimate the resilient modulus of unbound granular material and subgrade from basic material properties (e.g., gradation, unconfined compressive strength, and California bearing ratio). These correlation models are developed from data on a wide range of soil and material types; this wide range increases the associated error with resilient modulus prediction. This paper compares laboratory measured resilient modulus for two types of locally available unbound granular materials to the predicted values; models developed under the Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) program were used. Resilient modulus tests of six gradations of two types of material—100% crushed limestone and gravel—were conducted at two levels of moisture content. Results showed that the LTPP models significantly underestimated resilient modulus for the limestone material and showed high residuals associated with evaluating resilient modulus of both gravel and limestone materials. The coefficient of variation of the root mean square error was 50.3% for gravel and 55.6% for limestone. The high residuals associated with evaluating resilient modulus with the LTPP models justify the development of local prediction models to improve the reliability of Level 2 design inputs for unbound granular materials.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call