| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 土木工程學系 === 85 === The way which uses the steady-state deflection indices to
evaluate pavement strength belongs to the pavement evaluation
system. So far the three indices---the Dynaflect Maximum
Deflection ( DMD ), the Surface Curvature Index ( SCI ), and the
base Curvature Index ( BCI ), have been frequently used to
formulate the criteria to evaluate pavement strength
qualitatively. For the impulsive deflection indices, those rules
may not be the same. This study is, thereby, motivated to
develop impulsive deflection indicThe outcome of this study
indicates that the impulsive deflection indices developed in
this study are not as same as the steady-state deflection
indices. It is concluded that there is apparent relation between
the W7 index and the subgrade strength, so is the relation
between ( W1 - W4 ) index and the subgrade strength. Besides,
the prominent index which is the most interpretable index to the
pavement strength capacity is concerned with the type and the
total thickness of the pavement. As the pavement totalPavement
remaining life is the main consideration of pavement strength
capacity in this study. When pavement remaining life is less
than two years, the section is viewed as weak. Therefore, the
criteria of indices are concerned with the in-situ subgrade
strength and the traffic demand. As the traffic demand changes,
so does the criteria of the prominent index to the pavement
strength capacity change. It is more reasonable and thorough.
The output of flied example evidences that these results
discovered by this study is as practical as worthful.
|
|---|
