| ||Format||Pages||Price|| |
|PDF (580K)||35||$25||  ADD TO CART|
|Complete Source PDF (2.9M)||159||$55||  ADD TO CART|
Cite this document
Fatigue characterizations obtained using three laboratory repeated-load, flexure test methods were compared. The test methods included uniaxial stress fields (beam specimens), biaxial stress fields (plate specimens), full stress reversal, and no stress reversal. In addition, specimens were sawn from field-compacted asphaltic concrete, and test results were compared with those from laboratory prepared specimens.
The degree of stress reversal and possibly the type of stress field to which the specimens were subjected were found to influence the resultant slope and intercept of the fatigue curve. The results of a comparison of fatigue characterizations obtained with laboratory and field-compacted specimens were not clear due to differences in the air void contents of the two mixtures.
An analysis to determine the minimum number of specimens required for fatigue characteristics using the beam test method suggested (but did not prove) that approximately ten specimens having 3 in. (76 mm) widths and depths should be used.
fatigue (materials), fatigue life, fatigue tests, materials tests, stresses, strains, compacting, stiffness, flexible pavements, bituminous concretes, asphalts, aggregates, beams (supports), slabs
Assistant professor and highway research engineer, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.
Professor and research engineer, Texas A&M University, College Station, Tex.