1987Unpublished venueRequires access

EVALUATION OF PAVEMENT DEFLECTION MEASURING EQUIPMENT. FINAL REPORT

W R Hudson, G E Elkins, Waheed Uddin, K T Reilley

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

This report documents the research performed on evaluation of pavement deflection equipment under Contract DTFH61-85-C-00115 for the Federal Highway Administration. The following devices were included in side-by-side field tests conducted in the Austin, Texas area during the week of August 11, 1986: the Benkelman Beam, C.E.B.T.P. Curviameter, Dynaflect, Dynatest Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD), Kuab FWD, Phonix FWD, and the Road Rater. The report includes descriptions and comparisons of the devices through information obtained from a literature search, field tests and user survey conducted for this study. The side-by-side test program was performed over a broad range of pavement structures, including thick and thin flexible and rigid pavements, and composite pavements. The measured deflections were compared statistically. Mechanistic interpretations of the measured deflection basins were made and compared. The report concludes that, based on the interpretation of field data, all devices gave comparable results on the tested pavements, except the Curviameter which gives invalid results on rigid and composite pavements. In addition, the Benkelman Beam and Curviameter exhibited much larger variability in comparison with the other devices.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This report documents the research performed on evaluation of pavement deflection equipment under Contract DTFH61-85-C-00115 for the Federal Highway Administration. The following devices were included in side-by-side field tests conducted in the Austin, Texas area during the week of August 11, 1986: the Benkelman Beam, C.E.B.T.P. Curviameter, Dynaflect, Dynatest Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD), Kuab FWD, Phonix FWD, and the Road Rater. The report includes descriptions and comparisons of the devices through information obtained from a literature search, field tests and user survey conducted for this study. The side-by-side test program was performed over a broad range of pavement structures, including thick and thin flexible and rigid pavements, and composite pavements. The measured deflections were compared statistically. Mechanistic interpretations of the measured deflection basins were made and compared. The report concludes that, based on the interpretation of field data, all devices gave comparable results on the tested pavements, except the Curviameter which gives invalid results on rigid and composite pavements. In addition, the Benkelman Beam and Curviameter exhibited much larger variability in comparison with the other devices.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 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

This report documents the research performed on evaluation of pavement deflection equipment under Contract DTFH61-85-C-00115 for the Federal Highway Administration. The following devices were included in side-by-side field tests conducted in the Austin, Texas area during the week of August 11, 1986: the Benkelman Beam, C.E.B.T.P. Curviameter, Dynaflect, Dynatest Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD), Kuab FWD, Phonix FWD, and the Road Rater. The report includes descriptions and comparisons of the devices through information obtained from a literature search, field tests and user survey conducted for this study. The side-by-side test program was performed over a broad range of pavement structures, including thick and thin flexible and rigid pavements, and composite pavements. The measured deflections were compared statistically. Mechanistic interpretations of the measured deflection basins were made and compared. The report concludes that, based on the interpretation of field data, all devices gave comparable results on the tested pavements, except the Curviameter which gives invalid results on rigid and composite pavements. In addition, the Benkelman Beam and Curviameter exhibited much larger variability in comparison with the other devices.

Key concepts: Falling weight deflectometer, Deflection (physics), Structural engineering, Vertical deflection, Engineering, Geotechnical engineering, Beam (structure), Forensic engineering

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
EVALUATION OF PAVEMENT DEFLECTION MEASURING EQUIPMENT. FINAL REPORT — Research Paper | ScholarLens