首页> 外文期刊>The international journal of pavement engineering >Nonrecovered compliance from dynamic oscillatory test vis-a-vis nonrecovered compliance from multiple stress creep recovery test in the dynamic shear rheometert
【24h】

Nonrecovered compliance from dynamic oscillatory test vis-a-vis nonrecovered compliance from multiple stress creep recovery test in the dynamic shear rheometert

机译:动态振荡流变仪的动态应力测试中未恢复的合规性与动态剪切流变仪中多次应力蠕变恢复测试中的不可恢复性合规性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Nonrecovered compliance is presently being viewed as the most appropriate rheological parameter for evaluating the propensity of an asphalt binder to resist permanent deformation or rutting in the pavement wheel paths. The nonrecovered compliance can be obtained in two ways using two different types of tests in the dynamic shear rheometer. One is through the dynamic oscillatory test using a frequency, time, strain or stress sweep, wherein the data generated is in terms of the complex modulus and phase angle that can be used in a proper mathematical form to obtain the nonrecovered compliance. The other is through the multiple stress creep and recovery test wherein the nonrecovered strain at each stress level after 10 cycles of creep and recovery is divided by the stress value to obtain the nonrecovered compliance. The two methods are very different in the way data gets generated and handled and, also, in the level of ease or difficulty in data generation. With two methods competing to come up with the same outcome, it is important to see a comparison of the merits and demerits of each of the methods in order to ascertain which of the two is more reliable, more fundamental, easier to use and better to implement. The purpose of this paper is to provide a one-on-one comparison between the two methods using the same set of binders and also to look at the possible benefits of one over the other.
机译:目前,未恢复的顺应性被视为最合适的流变参数,用于评估沥青结合料抵抗路面轮径中永久变形或车辙的倾向。使用动态剪切流变仪中的两种不同类型的测试,可以通过两种方式获得无法恢复的柔度。一种是通过使用频率,时间,应变或应力扫描的动态振荡测试,其中生成的数据是根据复数模量和相角表示的,可以以适当的数学形式使用这些数据以获得不可恢复的依从性。另一个是通过多次应力蠕变和恢复测试,其中在蠕变和恢复10个循环后每个应力水平下的未恢复应变除以应力值以获得未恢复的柔度。两种方法在生成和处理数据的方式以及在数据生成的难易程度上都有很大的不同。当两种方法竞争得出相同的结果时,重要的是要比较每种方法的优缺点,以便确定两种方法中哪一种更可靠,更基础,更易于使用且更好实行。本文的目的是提供使用同一组粘合剂的两种方法之间的一对一比较,并探讨一种方法相对于另一种方法的可能益处。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号