MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7048799423

Lightweight Cellular Concrete: Applicability of Pavement Subbase Layer Materials

2021· dissertation· en· W7048799423 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSuperconducting and THz Device Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubbaseSubgradePavement engineeringDurabilityQuality (philosophy)Material propertiesBase course
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is the second-largest country in the world and has over 1.04 million km of roads. Residents and industries rely on the road network as it contributes significantly to quality of life. Pavement structures built over weak subgrade soil suffers from freeze-thaw and frost heave, this also leads to increased total cost of maintenance and rehabilitation and can also have an adverse environmental impact. Therefore, this research has proposed different solutions to solve these challenges, Lightweight Cellular Concrete (LCC) is one of the materials that has been applied in this type of situation which can provide technical, economic, and environmental benefits. 
\nThe use of Lightweight Cellular Concrete (LCC) in transportation infrastructure has been growing in recent years. LCC is a versatile material that contains several benefits to pavement construction, such as excellent flowability, good freeze-thaw resistance, and sustainability. As the subbase layer's quality and strength requirements are not as harsh as the base layer, LCC becomes a feasible material to be implemented to protect the weak soil roadbed. However, there is a lack of mechanical analysis and design guidelines for LCC usage in pavement design. The on-field pavement performance is also lacking with the LCC materials.
\nThree different densities of LCC are considered and evaluated in this research. Laboratory tests and pavement performance analysis using different evaluation methods were used in this research. Laboratory tests were performed at the Centre for Pavement and Transportation Technology (CPATT) at the University of Waterloo. The tests evaluated various properties including mechanical properties, durability, microstructure of LCC, and other LCC properties. Overall, it was found that the LCC is a stiffer material compared with unbound granular material but weaker than chemically stabilized base materials. The density of the LCC greatly influences its properties. The 475 kg/m3 and 600 kg/m3 densities were found to have a better pore structure than the 400 kg/m3 density LCC. Moreover, the 475 kg/m3 and 600 kg/m3 densities were discovered to be durable after 180 cycles of freeze and thaw cycling. 
\nThe pavement performance analysis was performed using three different methods: the failure criteria analysis, granular base equivalency method, and the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) software. In the failure criteria analysis, LCC sections outperformed the granular subbase section in both fatigue cracking and rutting. The allowable loads of LCC sections were found to be at least 1.6 to 7 times of granular sections, showing that LCC sections' bearing capacity is greater than that of granular sections based on the testing. In the granular base equivalency method, the LCC sections could reduce their layer thickness compared to the unbound granular subbase section by 44% to 65%. MEPDG results showed that pavement with LCC as a subbase layer also demonstrated superior performance than the granular subbase section, especially in heavier traffic road class. 600 kg/m3 density LCC is suitable for major arterial roads with 7,500 Average Annual Daily Truck Traffic (AADTT). On the other hand, lower densities like 475 kg/m3 density and 400 kg/m3 density could be applied in lower-traffic road classes such as major arterial with 5,000 AADTT, minor arterial road, and collector. Therefore, the pavement design using LCC as the subbase layer should consider the road class to determine the density to be used. 
\nThe main findings from this research are (1) LCC with density above 400 kg/m3 are able to support the pavement, and the traffic could be open after three to seven days when the construction finished. (2) The pore characteristics of LCC were found to be relevant to its mechanical properties. The 475 and 600 kg/m3 densities LCC demonstrated better pore shape than the 400 kg/m3 density LCC. Even though the 475 kg/m3 density LCC had more significant results of circularity and solidity than the 600 kg/m3 density LCC, it was found that 600 kg/m3 density LCC had greater average thickness between pores, leading to a better strength than the 475 kg/m3 density LCC. (3) The 475 and 600 kg/m3 density LCC have excellent freeze-thaw resistance when it can maintain its moisture, this could benefit when LCC is applied in areas that have a higher water table. (3) According to MEPDG and Weslea results, the LCC sections have better pavement performance in rutting and fatigue cracking than granular section and could be considered in reducing the subbase thickness. (4) It was found the 600 density LCC pavement could withstand up to 7,500 AADTT major arterial road. For road classes that have lower traffic volume, lower densities of LCC could be considered. The above analysis showed that using LCC as a subbase material could provide a more durable pavement in Canada.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicSuperconducting and THz Device TechnologyFrench-language works237,207