1985•Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardRequires access

DYNAMIC INTERPRETATION OF DYNAFLECT AND FALLING WEIGHT DEFLECTOMETER TESTS

José M. Roësset, Ko-Young Shao

Open publisher page 35 citations

Abstract

The Dynaflect and the falling weight deflectometer are commonly used for nondestructive testing of pavements. In both cases a dynamic load is imparted, and the determination of the mechanical properties of the pavement, the base, and the subbase is normally performed by comparing the measured deflections at various points along the surface to results of static analyses that consider the subbase as a homogeneous, elastic half-space. In this paper, the displacements obtained from dynamic analyses are compared to those provided by conventional static programs when the subbase is a homogeneous soil stratum of finite depth resting on a much stiffer rocklike material and when the soil properties increase smoothly with depth, as is often the case. The results of these comparisons indicate that for certain ranges of depth to bedrock a static interpretation of the Dynaflect and falling weight deflectometer tests may lead to substantial errors. Situations in which these errors are important are more likely to be encountered with the Dynaflect than with the falling weight deflectometer.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The Dynaflect and the falling weight deflectometer are commonly used for nondestructive testing of pavements. In both cases a dynamic load is imparted, and the determination of the mechanical properties of the pavement, the base, and the subbase is normally performed by comparing the measured deflections at various points along the surface to results of static analyses that consider the subbase as a homogeneous, elastic half-space. In this paper, the displacements obtained from dynamic analyses are compared to those provided by conventional static programs when the subbase is a homogeneous soil stratum of finite depth resting on a much stiffer rocklike material and when the soil properties increase smoothly with depth, as is often the case. The results of these comparisons indicate that for certain ranges of depth to bedrock a static interpretation of the Dynaflect and falling weight deflectometer tests may lead to substantial errors. Situations in which these errors are important are more likely to be encountered with the Dynaflect than with the falling weight deflectometer.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 35 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The Dynaflect and the falling weight deflectometer are commonly used for nondestructive testing of pavements. In both cases a dynamic load is imparted, and the determination of the mechanical properties of the pavement, the base, and the subbase is normally performed by comparing the measured deflections at various points along the surface to results of static analyses that consider the subbase as a homogeneous, elastic half-space. In this paper, the displacements obtained from dynamic analyses are compared to those provided by conventional static programs when the subbase is a homogeneous soil stratum of finite depth resting on a much stiffer rocklike material and when the soil properties increase smoothly with depth, as is often the case. The results of these comparisons indicate that for certain ranges of depth to bedrock a static interpretation of the Dynaflect and falling weight deflectometer tests may lead to substantial errors. Situations in which these errors are important are more likely to be encountered with the Dynaflect than with the falling weight deflectometer.

Key concepts: Falling weight deflectometer, Subbase, Geotechnical engineering, Geology, Structural engineering, Engineering, Subgrade, Mathematics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
DYNAMIC INTERPRETATION OF DYNAFLECT AND FALLING WEIGHT DEFLECTOMETER TESTS — Research Paper | ScholarLens