| Determining the condition of pavement structures
is not easy. It is also extremely important to our daily lives and
helps determine the amount we spend on pavements and their repair.
Here is an introduction to the basics of the subject - an easy to
read, valuable "Back to Basics."
Frank Iddings
Tutorial Projects Editor
|
Figure 1-4
Figure
5-8
INTRODUCTION
The United States' transportation network
incorporates over 15 000 airports and more than 6 44 0000 km (4 000
000 mi)
of highway pavements. This pavement network forms a significant
portion of the national infrastructure and represents a cumulative
investment of billions of dollars over several decades. Hence, there
is a growing need for strategic management of the national roadway and
airport pavement network to preserve this large capital investment.
Typically, pavement management activities require accurate, fast and
cost effective pavement test techniques to record current status of
the pavement structure. NDT techniques provide powerful tools to test
pavement structures in a rapid manner. Significant advances have been
made in the last few years on NDT of pavement structures. These
techniques include nondestructive deflection testing, ground
penetrating radar and spectral analysis of surface waves. The purpose
of this paper is to present commonly used technologies in the NDT
arena and their application in pavement testing. Data analysis for
ground penetrating radar and falling weight deflectometers are
presented in technical papers in this issue, however.
NONDESTRUCTIVE DEFLECTION TESTING
Nondestructive deflection equipment operates by
applying a load to the pavement surface and measuring the resulting
surface deflections using velocity transducers or geophones. The
results obtained from NDT equipment are used for determining the
following in asphalt and concrete pavements:
- asphalt pavements - elastic modulus of
pavement layers; pavement structural adequacy; overlay thickness
design; load limits; remaining structural life
- concrete pavements - concrete elastic modulus
and subgrade modulus of reaction; load transfer across joints; void
detection under concrete slabs; pavement structural adequacy;
rehabilitation design.
At present there are many types of deflection
testing equipment and they can be categorized into three basic types:
static, steady state dynamic and impulse. Each of these types of
deflection equipment are described below.
Nondestructive testing of pavement structures
has gained popularity in the recent past.
Static or Slow Moving Deflection Equipment
Static deflection equipment is used to measure
pavement surface deflections under static or slow moving loads. The
most commonly used static equipment includes the benkelman beam. This
provides deflection measurements at any number of points under a
nonmoving or slow moving load (similar to an "influence line" used
in structural testing of buildings and bridges). This device was
developed at the Western Association of State Highway Organizations
Road Test in 1952 and was the most widely used device until recently.
The benkelman beam test procedure involves the measurement of a
pavement surface rebound with a cantilevered beam as a truck loaded to
80 kN (18 000 lb) on its rear axle moved from rest. Measurements are
made between dual tires on the rear axle at specified intervals in the
outer wheel path.
Several versions of automated benkelman beams
were developed by various manufacturers, typically by mounting the
deflection beams on the truck that provides the axle load. The truck
moves slowly, in the range of 1.6 to 3.2 km/h (1 to 2 mi/h). The main
advantages of these static/slow moving deflection testing devices are
simplicity, low instrument cost and the possibility of utilizing
realistic load levels. The disadvantages of these devices are that
they are slow, labor intensive, do not provide a "true" deflection
basin and suffer relatively poor precision and bias.
Steady State or Dynamic Vibratory Equipment
Steady state or dynamic vibratory equipment uses
a relatively large static preload and a sinusoidal vibration to the
pavement with a dynamic force generator. With some devices, it is
possible to change the magnitude and the frequency of the applied
load. A major problem with this equipment is that the relatively large
static preload may adversely affect the accuracy of the test.
One of the first commercially available steady
state deflection measuring devices is trailer mounted and can be
transported with any standard automobile. Testing is standardized by
AASHTO T256-77 and ASTM D4695-87. The system must be stationary when
measurements are taken. The force generator (counter rotating weights)
must be started subsequent to lowering the deflection sensors
(velocity transducers) to the pavement surface. The maximum peak to
peak dynamic force is 454 kg (1000 lb) at a fixed frequency of 8 Hz.
The load is applied through two 102 mm (4 in.) wide, 406 mm (16 in.)
diameter rubber coated steel wheels which are placed 508 mm (20 in.)
apart. The system is highly reliable (low maintenance) and can produce
a full deflection basin. Disadvantages include a significantly low
dynamic load, relatively large static preload, susceptibility to
errors due to pavement resonance effects and inadequate dynamic load
to test heavy pavements. Standard loading and deflection measurement
locations are shown in Figure 1.
A different steady state dynamic deflection
device uses the electrohydraulic dynamic force generating system.
Different models are available with different load magnitudes. One has
a peak to peak rated loading from 227 to 1360 kg (500 to 3000 lb);
another has a peak to peak rated loading from 454 to 2270 kg (1000 to
5000 lb); a third has a peak to peak rated loading from 454 to 3630 kg
(1000 to 8000 lb). Different loading plate sizes are used for various
models. Deflections are measured by four velocity transducers. One
transducer is located in the center of the loading plate and the other
three are attached to a bar, normally at 305 mm (1 ft) intervals. The
system can measure the full deflection basin and was widely used in
the past due to its reliability. However, the disadvantages include
low load levels relative to actual truck loading, a relatively large
static preload and susceptibility to measurement errors due to
pavement resonance. Standard load wheel/geophone configurations are
shown in Figure 2.
The WES 71 kN (16 000 lb) vibrator, developed by
the US Army Waterways Experiment Station is contained in an 11 m (36
ft) semi trailer. It uses a 7260 kg (16000 lb) static preload and a
dynamic force generator produces a peak to peak loading of around 13
600 kg (30 000 lb). The dynamic load is measured by a set of load
cells mounted on the 457 mm (18 in.) loading plate. Deflections are
measured by velocity transducers at preselected distances from the
loading plate. The entire operation is automated and this device is
specifically developed for airfield tests. This is a large unit which
is not commercially available at this time. The advantages of this
unit include: the large variable loading range of up to 13 600 kg (30
000 lb); variable load frequency ranging from 5 to 100 Hz; and
applicability for use on heavy pavements. Disadvantages include: its
size; potential susceptibility to measurement errors due to pavement
resonance; and its general unavailability attributable to its one of a
kind status.
Impulse Deflection Equipment
Currently, impulse deflection equipment is the
most popular and widely used pavement deflection measurement
technology. All impulse type NDT devices produce a transient load to
the pavement surface typically lasting 25 to 30 ms. The impulse load
is generated by a falling mass from one or more predetermined heights.
The resulting load pulse is transmitted to the pavement as a half sine
wave. The peak deflections and load magnitude are captured, reported
and automatically stored. Testing procedures with impulse load devices
are documented in ASTM 4694-96 and ASTM D4695-03. Figure 3 shows a
typical time history plot of a falling weight deflectometer load
pulse.
Impulse load devices can apply loads from 1360
to over 22 700 kg (3000 to over 50000 lb) based on the device used.
This equipment has a relatively low preload so its influence on the
pavement response is negligible.
Deflections are most commonly measured with
velocity transducers (seven or more) which are mounted on a bar and
automatically lowered to the pavement surface with the loading plate.
One transducer is located in the center of the loading plate and
others are located at different distances from the loading plate as
shown in Figure 4.
The Federal Highway Administration's long term
pavement performance study specifies deflection sensor spacings at 0,
0.2, 0.3, 0.5, 0.6, 0.9 and 1.5 m (0, 8, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 60 in.)
for its testing programs.
The resulting deflections form a "basin" whose
depth and shape is used to calculate the material properties of the
constitutive pavement layers. These material properties are used to
estimate the stress and strain conditions within the pavement
structure under the current and expected future traffic conditions.
The magnitude of these working stresses and strains are used to
estimate the bearing capacity of the pavement and to predict the rate
of future deterioration. This information, in turn, is used to assess
whether the pavement can meet its expected service life or requires
strengthening to meet the anticipated loading conditions.
Typical uses of impulse deflection testing
equipment include the following:
- estimation of pavement layer moduli
- overlay design and estimation of remaining
life
- load transfer and void determination for
concrete pavements
- network level monitoring.
Advantages of impulse deflection testing
equipment include high productivity, realistic pavement loading
levels, low static preload, rapid data acquisition and the ability to
measure and record a deflection basin. However, initial costs for the
impulse equipment are higher than their predecessors (static and
vibratory devices) and they are more complex in nature.
ROLLING WHEEL DEFLECTORS
Background
A rolling wheel deflectometer, as its name
suggests, is a device designed to measure and record pavement
deflections at highway speeds, thus increasing productivity by an
order of magnitude as compared to the falling weight deflectometer.
However, the rolling wheel deflectometer is still in the prototype
stage and production models are currently not available.
The history of rolling wheel deflectometers
dates back to the 1970s. Harr at Purdue University pioneered the
measurement method used in the rolling wheel deflectometer devices
presented in this tutorial. The technique promised deflection
measurements at any speed. A set of four noncontact optical range
finders mounted at consistent intervals on a structurally stiff beam
form the basic instrument. One optical sensor is mounted near the load
tire; the other three are mounted ahead of it and out of the influence
of the depression (deflection) basin. These optical sensors operate on
the principle of optical triangulation and measure the distance down
to the pavement as the rolling wheel deflectometer moves forward. A
simple algorithm is used to calculate the pavement deflection as the
beam is transported over the pavement.
The deflection measurement procedure first
identified by Harr is a two step process. In its simplest form, three
equally separated points are measured on the pavement surface ahead of
the load wheel. "Measured" in this sense means gaging the distance
from a reference datum down to the pavement surface using noncontact
optical sensors. When the rolling wheel deflectometer has moved
forward, a distance equal to the sensor separation distance, the same
three points on the pavement are again measured; but now using the
second, third and fourth sensor. In this second step, the load wheel
is now located at the rearmost of the three points.
A major problem with the Harr approach is that
it required the mounting beam to remain perfectly straight at all
times during the measurement process. Therefore, beam bending due to
temperature and dynamic loading had to be prevented. Thermal bending
could be prevented by controlling the temperature of the beam but the
dynamic problem was only solved in the 1990s with a deceptively simple
solution: allow the beam to bend, but measure the bending and apply
the appropriate corrections. To quantify the beam bending, a laser
beam was projected along the long axis of the beam and optical
transducers were used to monitor the amount of bending. In 1992, the
US government funded the development of a prototype rolling wheel
deflectometer using this approach.
Prototypes
A prototype version of a rolling wheel
deflectometer was developed for testing airfield pavements. This
version of a rolling wheel deflectometer continuously measures the
maximum pavement deflection near a loaded test wheel while traveling
at 6.4 km/h (4 mi/h) along the pavement (although it has been operated
at 32.2 km/h [20 mi/h] in recent experiments).
This prototype rolling wheel deflectometer used
a series of dual triangulating lasers to determine the maximum
deflection. The beam bending is continuously monitored using
additional optical alignment sensors mounted on each pavement height
sensor. The accuracy (one standard deviation) of the rolling wheel
deflectometer pavement height sensor was 20 µm (8 x 10-3 in).
A parallel rolling wheel deflectometer
development effort uses the same "spatially coincident" methodology
for measuring pavement deflection. The research and development has
been sponsored primarily by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
and the Small Business Innovation Research program.
In July 2003, a comprehensive field test was
made in College Station, Texas, sponsored by the FHWA and the Texas
Department of Transportation. The rolling wheel deflectometer was
tested on six pavements representing a range of surface
characteristics and deflection levels. A total of 38 individual
sections were designated for testing of the rolling wheel
deflectometer's effectiveness over a wide range of conditions.
Falling weight deflectometer and rolling dynamic deflectometer data
were collected over the same sections for comparison to the rolling
wheel deflectometer data. In addition, two test sections were fitted
with multidepth deflectometers to provide a reference deflection for
comparison to the rolling wheel deflectometer. The test results from
the rolling wheel deflectometer measurements over six test roads
ranging in length from 3.2 to 25.7 km (2 to 16 mi) suggest that the
rolling wheel deflectometer technique produced a good repeatability in
terms of both deflection magnitude and trends in pavement stiffness.
However, the rolling wheel deflectometer experiences a warming up
effect prior to stabilization of readings, where the first one or two
runs of the repeated measurements show systematically higher
deflections than the others.
According to the report prepared for the Texas
Department of Transportation and the FHWA, the 16.2 m (53 ft) trailer
was custom designed and built specifically for the rolling wheel
deflectometer. Its length minimizes pitching of the reference beam,
thereby minimizing the laser range needed to accommodate bouncing of
the trailer during normal operation. In addition, its natural
frequency of 1.45 to 1.8 Hz is low enough that it does not couple with
the high frequency vibration of the 7.8 m (25.5 ft) aluminum beam.
CALIBRATION OF NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING
EQUIPMENT
Periodic calibration of deflection testing
equipment is necessary to obtain accurate pavement deflection data. To
address this, the Strategic Highway Research Program and Long Term
Pavement Performance program developed a set of standardized falling
weight deflectometer calibration procedures and also set up four
regional falling weight deflectometer calibration centers. The
procedures were subsequently adopted as an American Association of
State Highway Transportation Officials provisional standard,
"Practice for Calibrating the Load Cell and Deflection Sensors for a
Falling-Weight Deflectometer." The calibration centers are located at
Austin, Texas; Maplewood, Minnesota; Denver, Colorado; and Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania.
GROUND PENETRATING RADAR TECHNIQUES
Ground penetrating radar technology is typically
used in the following applications:
- pavement layer thickness determination
- subsurface moisture detection
- subsurface void detection
- the detection of concrete pavement
deterioration
- discontinuity detection.
Ground penetrating radar transmits short pulses
of electromagnetic energy into the pavement from an antenna attached
to the survey vehicle. These energy pulses are reflected back to the
antenna with an arrival time and amplitude that vary according to the
depth and nature of dielectric changes in the underlying material
(air/asphalt/base) as shown in Figure
5. The reflected energy captured
by the antenna is displayed on an oscilloscope as a radar waveform. A
radar waveform consists of a series of reflected energy pulses. The
underlying layer properties and thicknesses can be obtained by
carefully analyzing the radar waveform.
The pavement layer thicknesses and properties can
be calculated by measuring the amplitude and arrival times of the waveform
peaks corresponding to reflections from the interfaces between the layers.
Figure 6 shows the processed
pavement layer information from ground penetrating radar testing performed
along an asphalt roadway. The peak, A1 in
Figure 5, corresponds to a reflection from the pavement surface.
Peaks A2 and A3 are reflections
from the pavement layer interfaces. Knowing the speed of the wave along
with
t1 and
t2,
the thickness of the base and subgrades can be calculated. The magnitude
of the peaks A2 and A3 are proportional
to the ratio of the dielectric constants of layers two and three. If
the dielectric constants are similar, no peaks will be detected. In
most pavements, there is a sufficient difference in dielectric constants
of the main pavement layers to accurately measure the various layer
thicknesses. However, in some cases, such as a cement stabilized base
under a concrete slab, the dielectric constants are not sufficiently
different to resolve the thicknesses of the two layers.
Since the radar pulse has its own width, the
layers must be thick enough for the reflections from each layer to be
clearly resolved. This minimum thickness can be calculated from the
radar pulse width (in nanoseconds) and the radar velocity in the
medium. For the horn antennas commonly used for this application, this
thickness is approximately 63.5 mm (2.5 in.) in asphalt. With ground
coupled dipole antennas, such as those commonly used for geotechnical
applications, the transmit pulses are two to three times longer (due
to ringing) and the thickness resolution is limited to much thicker
layers.
To resolve pavement layer properties from radar
data, two important assumptions were made: the layers are homogeneous
and the layers are nonconductive. These assumptions are not always
true. For example, when the layers within the asphalt are not uniform,
which may occur due to overlays, intermediate reflections will occur
within the asphalt layer. This error can be corrected by recognizing
the possibility of layering within the asphalt and by incorporating
this layering into the pavement model. The second assumption is
generally valid for asphalt but may be less valid for concrete and
base material due to higher moisture content. Further details on the
pavement layer thickness measurements are presented in a technical
paper in this issue.
The benefits of using the ground penetrating
radar technique in pavement testing include:
- high productivity - data collection can often
be done at highway speeds
- accurate, specific location information for
better planning
- rapid data acquisition
- elimination of lane closures, reducing cost
and improving worker safety
- collection of hundreds of kilometers of
information in a single day
- improvement of falling weight deflectometer
determination of elastic modulus and pavement load capacity through
providing additional information regarding pavement layer thickness at
each falling weight deflectometer drop test location.
SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF SURFACE WAVES
The spectral analysis of surface waves is a
relatively new in situ seismic technique for determining pavement
layer properties and thicknesses. Testing is performed on the surface,
allowing for less costly measurements than with traditional borehole
methods. The basic setup of the spectral analysis of surface waves
technique is shown in Figure 7.
A dynamic source is used to generate surface
waves of different wavelengths (or frequencies) that are monitored by
two or more receivers at known offsets. Data obtained from forward and
reverse configurations are averaged together.
This technique uses dispersion of surface waves
to produce a surface wave velocity cross section of the subsurface. As
shown in Figure 8, longer wavelengths travel deeper into the
subsurface than shorter wavelengths. Thus, different depths of the
subsurface can be characterized by generating longer and shorter
wavelengths. The velocities of different wavelengths can be determined
by calculating the phase difference between two receivers for each
wavelength generated.
Surface wave velocities and shear wave
velocities are related to each other by Poisson's ratio. Hence, the
shear wave velocities can be obtained from surface wave velocities by
using inversion methods. Spectral analysis of surface waves can thus
be used to map shear wave velocities as a function of depth and
chainage, allowing for calculation of the stiffness (maximum shear
modulus Gmax) of a site.
The operation of the system is simple, being a
multichannel seismograph where an impact source like a sledgehammer is
used. Tightly spaced shots are generated (typically two times the
geophone separation) to cover all the depths of interest. To obtain
low frequencies for deeper penetration, a drop weight can be used as
an impact source. Data are acquired in a profile mode and shear wave
velocity cross sections are produced as a final product.
The dispersion curves can be interpreted using
several options which produce different degree of accuracy in the
final shear wave velocity profile. A simple empirical analysis can be
done to estimate the average shear wave velocity profile. Forward
modeling of fundamental mode rayleigh wave dispersion as well as full
stress wave propagation can be performed for greater accuracy. A
formal inversion scheme may also be used. By incorporating the
background information on the site with the above analytical
approaches, the resolution of the final profile may be quantified.
The spectral analysis of surface waves offers
significant advantages than traditional borehole measurements. The
spectral analysis of surface waves is a global measurement where a
much larger volume of the subsurface is sampled. The resolution in the
near surface (top 7.6 m [25 ft]) is typically greater than with other
methods. Significant cost savings can be obtained using spectral
analysis of surface waves at sites with favorable surface wave
propagation characteristics.
The spectral analysis of surface waves can be
used for pavement testing, mapping subsurface stratigraphy, mapping
bedrock topography, mapping of subsurface cavities and old mine
workings, mapping of low velocity/density zones, mapping of fracture
zones in bedrock and calculation of shear wave velocities and site
stiffness (Gmax).
SUMMARY
Nondestructive testing of pavement structures
has gained popularity in the recent past. The key information derived
from these tests include the following:
- pavement layer thicknesses
- pavement layer structural properties
- void detection under concrete slabs
- load transfer properties across concrete
pavement joints.
The measured pavement layer properties are used
to determine structural integrity of the pavement structure, assess
the remaining structural life of the pavement, determine overlay
design, apply load restrictions and so on. It is often preferred to
use fast, economical and repeatable pavement test techniques than
traditional destructive test techniques. In urban roads, typically
there are numerous structures such as gas lines, water mains, cable
television and telephone conduits of different diameters at various
depths and diameters. The presence of the above makes the use of
nondestructive test techniques extremely important.
REFERENCES
ASTM International, ASTM D4694-96, Standard Test
Method for Deflections with a Falling-weight-type Impulse Load Device,
West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 1996.
ASTM International, ASTM D4695-03, Standard
Guide for General Pavement Deflection Measurements, West Conshohocken,
Pennsylvania, 2003.
American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials, "Benkelman Beam Apparatus," AASHTO
T256-77, Washington DC, 1977.
Briggs, R.C., R.F. Johnson, R.N. Stubstad and L.
Pierce, "A Comparison of the Rolling Weight Deflectometer with the
Falling Weight Deflectometer," Nondestructive Testing of Pavements
and Backcalculation of Moduli, Vol. 3, ASTM STP 1375, S.D. Tayabji and
E.O. Lukanen, eds., West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, American Society
for Testing and Materials, 1999.
ERES Consultants, "Rolling Wheel Deflectometer
(RWD) Demonstration and Comparison to Other Devices in Texas,"
Champaign, Illinois, ERES Consultants, 2004.
GeoVision, Web site <www.geovision.com>,
2004.
National Research Council, SHRP P-397, Ground
Penetrating Radar Surveys to Characterize Pavement Layer Thickness
Variations at GPS Sites, Strategic Highway Research Program,
Washington DC, National Research Council, 1994.
Shahin, M.Y., Pavement Management for Airport,
Roads and Parking Lots, New York, Chapman & Hall, 1994.
Washington State Department of Transportation,
WSDOT Pavement Guide, Vol. 2, Olympia, Washington, 1995.
* Dynatest Consulting,
Inc., Production and Support Center, 13953 US Highway 301 South,
Starke, FL 32091; e-mail <rbriggs@dynatest.com>.
Copyright © 2004 by the American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc. All
rights reserved.