Skip to Main Content
Skip Nav Destination
ASTM Selected Technical Papers
Resilient Modulus Testing for Pavement Components
By
GN Durham
GN Durham
editor
1
Durham Geo-Enterprises
Search for other works by this author on:
WL DeGroff
WL DeGroff
editor
2
Fugro South
Search for other works by this author on:
WA Marr
WA Marr
editor
3
GEOCOMP/GeoTesting Express
Search for other works by this author on:
ISBN-10:
0-8031-3461-4
ISBN:
978-0-8031-3461-4
No. of Pages:
282
Publisher:
ASTM International
Publication date:
2003

Many agencies still use empirical correlations developed to determine design subgrade resilient modulus based on California Bearing Ratio (CBR), R-Value or Soil Support Value (SSV) for pavement design projects. These relationships do not consider the stress dependency of the laboratory determined resilient modulus value. Backcalculated subgrade modulus values from Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) tests are also used for this purpose. This study was conducted to determine the relationships between laboratory determined subgrade resilient modulus and the results of Lime Rock Bearing Ratio (LBR) and FWD tests for certain Florida subgrade soils. Laboratory resilient modulus values were determined using subgrade soil samples collected from nine pavement sections. The resilient modulus values were computed by considering stress levels under a standard dual wheel in three typical pavement sections. The roadway sections were selected from various locations in Polk County, Florida. FWD tests were conducted along the selected roadways and LBR tests were conducted on bulk subgrade soil samples. Preliminary relationships to determine design subgrade resilient modulus equivalent to AASHTO Road Test subgrade from FWD and LBR tests were developed for considered typical pavement sections.

1.
Abatech, Inc.
,
2001
, “
Deflection Analysis of Pavement Structures (DAPS™) Software User Manual
,” Doylestown, PA.
2.
Abatech, Inc.
,
2001
, “
Elastic Layered System Software (ELSYS™) Software User Manual
,” Doylestown, PA.
3.
AASHTO
,
1993
, “
Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures
,”
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
,
Washington, D.C.
4.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
,
2000
, “
Flexible Pavement Design Manual
,” Tallahassee, FL.
5.
Huang
,
Y. H.
,
1993
,
Pavement Analysis and Design
,
Prentice Hall, Inc.
,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ
.
6.
Nazarian
,
S.
,
Rojas
,
J.
,
Pezo
,
R.
,
Yuan
,
D.
,
Abdullah
,
I.
, and
Scullion
,
T.
,
1998
, “
Relating Laboratory and Field Moduli of Texas Base Materials
,” Preprint CD-ROM, 77th Annual Meeting,
Transportation Research Board
,
Washington, D.C.
7.
Tam
,
W. S.
and
Brown
,
S. F.
,
1998
, “
Back-analyzed Elastic Stiffness: Comparison Between Different Evaluation Procedures
,” First International Symposium on Nondestructive Testing of Pavements and Backcalculation of Moduli,
Baltimore, MD
.
8.
Thompson
,
M. R.
,
1989
, “
Illi-pave Based NDT Analysis Procedures
,”
Nondestructive Testing of Pavements and Backcalculation of Moduli
, ASTM STP 1026,
Bush
A.J.
 III
and
Baladi
G.Y.
, Eds.,
American Society for Testing and Materials
,
Philadelphia, PA
.
9.
Von Quintus
,
H. L.
,
Killingsworth
,
B. M.
,
1998
, “
Comparison of Laboratory and Insitu Determined Elastic Layer Moduli
,” Preprint CD-ROM, 77th Annual Meeting,
Transportation Research Board
,
Washington, D.C.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this chapter.
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal