Assessment of fracture criteria for cracking behavior of asphalt concrete using various SCB specimen sizes

IF 3.1 2区 材料科学 Q2 ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL
Ramin Momeni, Sadjad Pirmohammad
{"title":"Assessment of fracture criteria for cracking behavior of asphalt concrete using various SCB specimen sizes","authors":"Ramin Momeni,&nbsp;Sadjad Pirmohammad","doi":"10.1111/ffe.14416","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this research, five fracture criteria (maximum tangential stress (MTS), generalized maximum tangential stress (GMTS), minimum strain energy density (SED), generalized minimum strain energy density (GSED), and modified maximum tangential stress (MMTS)) were evaluated for asphalt concrete using fracture data from tests conducted under various loading modes and conditions. Tests were performed on semi-circular bend (SCB) specimens of various sizes. Based on the results, the MTS criterion tends to overestimate fractures, while the GMTS criterion exhibits more precise predictions. The SED and GSED criteria inaccurately predict fractures, especially under certain loading conditions. The MMTS criterion shows superior predictive capability for asphalt concrete fractures. Specimen size influences fracture resistance, with larger specimens exhibiting higher fracture values. Overall, the MMTS criterion closely mirrors the crack growth behavior of asphalt concrete, highlighting its precision in predicting fracture results. The errors between the predictions of the fracture criteria MTS, GMTS, SED, GSED, and MMTS, and the experimental results ranged from 0% to 42.8%, 0% to 22.5%, 0% to 52.7%, 0% to 42.4%, and 0% to 14.5%, respectively.</p>","PeriodicalId":12298,"journal":{"name":"Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures","volume":"47 11","pages":"4269-4291"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ffe.14416","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this research, five fracture criteria (maximum tangential stress (MTS), generalized maximum tangential stress (GMTS), minimum strain energy density (SED), generalized minimum strain energy density (GSED), and modified maximum tangential stress (MMTS)) were evaluated for asphalt concrete using fracture data from tests conducted under various loading modes and conditions. Tests were performed on semi-circular bend (SCB) specimens of various sizes. Based on the results, the MTS criterion tends to overestimate fractures, while the GMTS criterion exhibits more precise predictions. The SED and GSED criteria inaccurately predict fractures, especially under certain loading conditions. The MMTS criterion shows superior predictive capability for asphalt concrete fractures. Specimen size influences fracture resistance, with larger specimens exhibiting higher fracture values. Overall, the MMTS criterion closely mirrors the crack growth behavior of asphalt concrete, highlighting its precision in predicting fracture results. The errors between the predictions of the fracture criteria MTS, GMTS, SED, GSED, and MMTS, and the experimental results ranged from 0% to 42.8%, 0% to 22.5%, 0% to 52.7%, 0% to 42.4%, and 0% to 14.5%, respectively.

使用不同尺寸的 SCB 试样评估沥青混凝土开裂行为的断裂标准
在这项研究中,利用在各种加载模式和条件下进行的试验所产生的断裂数据,对沥青混凝土的五种断裂标准(最大切向应力 (MTS)、广义最大切向应力 (GMTS)、最小应变能密度 (SED)、广义最小应变能密度 (GSED) 和修正最大切向应力 (MMTS))进行了评估。测试在不同尺寸的半圆形弯曲(SCB)试样上进行。结果表明,MTS 准则往往会高估断裂情况,而 GMTS 准则的预测结果更为精确。SED 和 GSED 标准对断裂的预测不准确,尤其是在某些加载条件下。MMTS 标准对沥青混凝土断裂的预测能力更强。试样尺寸会影响抗断裂性能,尺寸较大的试样会表现出更高的断裂值。总体而言,MMTS 准则密切反映了沥青混凝土的裂缝生长行为,突出了其预测断裂结果的精确性。断裂标准 MTS、GMTS、SED、GSED 和 MMTS 的预测结果与实验结果之间的误差分别为 0%至 42.8%、0%至 22.5%、0%至 52.7%、0%至 42.4%、0%至 14.5%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
18.90%
发文量
256
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures (FFEMS) encompasses the broad topic of structural integrity which is founded on the mechanics of fatigue and fracture, and is concerned with the reliability and effectiveness of various materials and structural components of any scale or geometry. The editors publish original contributions that will stimulate the intellectual innovation that generates elegant, effective and economic engineering designs. The journal is interdisciplinary and includes papers from scientists and engineers in the fields of materials science, mechanics, physics, chemistry, etc.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信