Stress and Strain in Flexible

Pavements
 Major content covered in this block
 Source of stresses and strains
 Critical AC pavement responses
 Calculation of pavement responses
 One-layer systems
 Two-layer systems
 Design considerations for minimize pavement
responses
 For any pavement design procedure to be
completely rational in nature, total consideration
must be given to three elements:
 The theory used to predict the failure/distress
parameter,
 The evaluation of the pertinent material properties
necessary for the theory selected, and
 The determination of the relationship b/n the magnitude
of the parameter in question to the failure or
performance level desired.
Source of Stresses and Strains

• Load related
– Vertical stress and strain
– Shear stress and strain
– Radial stress and strain

• Shrinkage stresses and strains

• Temperature induced stresses and strains
Multiple Wheel Loads
Why Stresses and Strains?
• Need to predict & understand stress/strain
distribution within the pavement structure as they
(σ & ε) relate to failure (cracking & rutting)
• Numerical Models
– Need model to compute deflections (δ) and strains (ε)
– Numerous models available with different:
• Capabilities
• Underlying assumptions
• Complexity
• Material information requirements
The type of theory used is generally distinguished by
reference to three properties of material behavior
response:
1.The relationship between stress and strain (linear or
nonlinear),
2.The time dependency of strain under a constant
stress level (viscous or non viscous), and
3.The degree to which the material can rebound or
recover strain after stress removal (plastic or elastic)
Behavior of materials
• Most pavement materials are nonlinear but the use of
linear model suffice provided the stress states are low.
• For the case of viscous materials (two models shown),
the strain magnitude is a function of the time the
specimen is stressed.
– Model I: a simple Maxwell-type system comprising a spring
and dashpot in series. The strain can be denoted by:
t
 (t )  
E 
• Where t is the time and η is coefficient of viscosity of the dashpot
system.
• Model II: The Kelvin system characterized by a spring and
dashpot in parallel. The time dependent strain for this system is:

 (t )  1  e Et 

E
• For this system, as the loading time approach ∞, the strain
approaches the elastic value. Upon load release, all the strain is
recoverable fully.
• Most viscous pavement materials, such as asphalt mixtures at
elevated temperatures and very cohesive soils, do not follow either
of this ideal cases, and as a consequence, various combinations
of models have been developed to simulate the behavior
response.
Layered Elastic Theory

• Single layer system

– Boussinesq theory

• Graphical and tabular solution

• Flexible plate/rigid plate equation (@ r=0)
• Multi layer system
• Burmister’s theory
Layered Elastic Theory

 Pavement behavior under wheel loads is

characterized by considering it to be a
homogeneous half-space subjected to a circular
load of radius “a” and uniform pressure “p” also
given by “q”.
Assumptions

 Homogeneous Material Properties

 Finite Layer Thickness
 Layers Infinite in Lateral Directions
 Isotropic Layers
 Full Friction Between Layers
 No Surface Shearing Forces
 Solutions Characterized by E, μ or ν
Assumptions

 Most Not Valid

 Reasonable for Small Strains
Stresses

 Normal Stresses (Perpendicular)

 σz, σt, σr
 Shear Stresses (Parallel)
 τrt = τtr
 τzt = τtz
 τrz = τzr
Strains
Single-Layer Systems
 Boussinesq Theory (1885) – elastic solid half space
one layer
 Stress, Strains, Deflections
 Assumes
 Homogeneous
 Isotropic
 Elastic Media
 Point Load at Surface
Vertical Stress Distribution
Boussinesq’s Formula
Single-Layer Systems
 Circular Area

 Graphical and Tabular Solutions

 Foster and Ahlvin (1954)
 Ahlvin and Ulery (1962)

 Solutions at axial symmetry

One-layer Solutions (Foster & Ahlvin)
• Developed charts to determine σz, σt, σr, τrz & w
(ν=0.5)
• Axisymmetric loading:
– σz = Vertical stress
– σr = Radial stress
– σt = Tangential stress
– τrz = Shear stress
– w = Deflection
Pre-solved @ radial distances
One-layer Solutions
(Foster & Ahlvin)
Depth (z) and offset (r) are expressed in radial ratios
Example
• Given:
– Load, P = 40 kN
– Pressure, q = 552 kPa
• Find:
– Vertical Stress, σz @ z= 152 mm & r= 152 mm
– First,Pwe 40
need to calculate
40000
the radius:
q  a
A a 2
 * 0.552
 152mm

• z/a = 1 & r/a = 1
z
x100  33
q
• Hence, from the chart  
552
x33  182 kPa
100
z
(fig 2.2):
Deflection

• When a wheel load is applied a single contact area, the most

critical stress, strain and deflection occurs under the centre of the
circular area on the axis of symmetry. {st =sr principal
stresses)
Fig. 2.6 Vertical deflection due to circular loading (Foster and Ahlvin, 1954)
One Layer Elastic Equations
Two-Layer Systems
(Burmister 1958)

Assumptions
1. Each layer is homogeneous, isotropic, linear elastic
material with an elastic modulus of E and a Poisson
ratio v
2. Material is weightless and infinite in areal extent

3. Each layer has a finite thickness h, except that the

lowest layer is infinite in thickness
4. A uniform pressure q is applied on the surface over a
circular area of radius a
5. Satisfying continuity conditions (same vertical stress,
shear stress, vertical displacement, and radial
displacement at the layer interfaces)
Developed solutions for:
– Vertical deflections (flexible & rigid)
– Vertical stresses (limited # of cases)
– σ & δ highly dependent on stiffness ratio E1/E2
• Vertical stress decreases considerably with increase in modular
ratio.
• For example,
– for a/h1=1 and E1/E2 = 1, sz at interface = 65% of contact pressure
– for a/h1=1 and E1/E2 = 100, sz at interface = 8% of contact pressure
Vertical Surface Deflection in a Two
layer System
 Burmister (1958) developed a chart for computing vertical
surface deflection in a two-layer system.
 The deflection factor, F2, is obtained from the chart based on
the values of a/h1 and E1/E2.
 Then the deflection is computed from the following equations:

qa
Deflection under a flexible Plate  1.5 F
E
2

qa
Deflection under a rigid Plate  1.18 F
E
2

2
• In one-layer theory we assumed that all
layers could be represented as one.
– δsurface = δtop of the subgrade
• For two-layer theory we have:
– Vertical Surface Deflection
– Vertical Interface Deflection
• Surface Deflections:

– Why use E2 for surface deflection?

• E2 accounts for most of the deflection
• F2 takes into account the stiffness ratio
Surface Deflections Example
Interface Deflection in a Two-layer System

• Huang (1969) developed charts for interface

deflection in a two-layer system.
• These charts are prepared for varying E1/E2 values.
• The interface deflection factor, F, is obtained from the
chart based on the values of E1/E2, h1/a and r/a values.
• The interface deflection (∆S) is then found from:

The deflection that takes place qa

  F
within the pavement (∆p) is given by: s
E 2

  
p T s
Interface Deflections Example
Surface Vs Interface Deflections

 Compare the results from the example:

 Surface deflection = 43 mils
 Interface deflection = 40 mils

 Top layer compression = 43-40= 3 mils

 Compression percentages:

 Top Layer = 3/43 ×100 ≅ 7%

 Subgrade Layer = 40/43 ×100 ≅ 93%
Two-Layer Vertical Stress
• What thickness do we
have to use to protect
the subgrade?
Critical Tensile Strain – two layer
• The critical tensile strain, e, at the bottom of the first layer for a two-
layer system can be determined by:

q
e F
E
e

The critical tensile strain under

dual wheels or dual-tandem
wheels is obtained from the same
equation, but the strain factor
needs to be corrected!!
Example
Layered Elastic Analysis
• Assumptions are the same as Burmister assumption
• Consider multiple wheel loads
• Determine stress, strain, deformation at any
location
• Has limitations
– Linearity assumption – materials are stress dependent
– Elastic material assumption – asphalt is visco-elastic
material and has non-recoverable deformation
Design Considerations for Minimize
AC Pavement Responses
• Fatigue consideration: minimize the critical tensile
strain in upper layers (AC, base) to prevent fatigue
and reflective cracking.
• Rutting consideration: minimize vertical strain and
avoid permanent deformation in the lower layers
(subgrade)
• Subgrade protection: retain soil swelling pressure,
provide adequate frost protection
• Adequate wearing surface: withstand high shearing
and compressive stress from heavy wheel loads,
provide resistance to abrasion
  Likely cause of increased
• Resulting damage from a ESALs: increased bus traffic.
marked increase in ESALs.
Problems
1. Calculate the surface deflection under the centre of a tyre (a = 152 mm, p
= 552 kPa) for a 305 mm pavement having a 345 MPa modulus and
subgrade modulus of 69 MPa from two-layer theory. Also calculate the
interface deflection and the deflection that takes place within the
pavement layer.
2. A circular load with a radius of 152 mm and a uniform pressure of 552
kPa is applied on a two-layer system. The subgrade has an elastic
modulus of 35 kPa and can support a maximum vertical stress of 55 kPa.
What is the required thickness of full depth AC pavement, if AC has an
elastic modulus of 3.45 GPa. Instead of a full depth AC pavement, if a
thin surface treatment is applied on a granular base (with elastic modulus
of 173 MPa), what is the thickness of base course required?
3. A plate bearing test using 750 mm diameter rigid plate was made on a
subgrade as well as on 254 mm of gravel base course. The unit load
required to cause settlement of 5 mm was 69 kPa and 276 kPa,
respectively. Determine the required thickness of base course to sustain a
222.5 kN tyre, 690 kPa pressure and maintain a deflection of 5 mm.
Analytical Models
• A number of different types of models (mostly computer based) can be
used to predict the state of stress in a pavement under simulated wheel
and environmental loading conditions.
• The models that primarily fall into this category are those based on
multilayer elastic (MLE) theory and FE analysis. The MLE models are
considered satisfactory for predicting flexible pavement response under
external wheel loads and are also relatively easy to operate, fast
executing, and widely used. They are not capable of predicting pavement
response associated with any environmental loading (i.e., that due to
daily temperature changes, temperature gradients, moisture variations,
etc.). FE models are also very good for predicting pavement response
and are capable of considering both wheel and environmental loading.
Unfortunately, they are complicated to operate and time-consuming, and
therefore are not typically used for M-E flexible pavement design.
Another emerging analytical modeling approach, fracture mechanics,
may eventually find its way into future M-E design procedures.