Recycled Concrete Aggregate as Alternative Pavement

Materials: Experimental and Parametric Study

Ali Alnedawi, Ph.D. 1; and M. A. Rahman, Ph.D. 2

Abstract: Recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) is one of the alternatives to virgin material that has engendered interest in recent years,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

especially as an alternative aggregate. There are limited available studies assessing the suitability of RCA as a base or subbase material
in pavements. Therefore, the present research describes different laboratory experiments to determine the possibility of using RCA as alter-
native subbase material for road pavement in order to conserve natural resources and reduce geoenvironmental effects. Modified compaction
tests, particle-size distribution, Los Angeles abrasion, Atterberg limits, specific gravity, California bearing ratio, and repeated load triaxial
tests were carried out for that purpose. RCA was also reinforced with both biaxial and triaxial geogrids for material optimization. Shakedown
analysis and parametric investigation using some constitutive models were conducted for further assessment. The physical and geotechnical
properties showed that RCA is strong enough and fulfills the local road authority requirements to be used as a subbase material. The resilient
modulus values of the reinforced RCA with geogrid was higher than the unreinforced RCA; in addition, the permanent deformation properties
of reinforced RCA with geogrid was found to be smaller than that of the unreinforced RCA. The shakedown ranges varied from A to B, which
indicates that RCA can be used as pavement subbase material when it is compacted with moisture content less than the optimum. The
parametric investigation showed that some constitutive models are capable for assessing the behavior of both reinforced and unreinforced
materials. DOI: 10.1061/JPEODX.0000231. © 2020 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: Flexible pavement; Recycled concrete aggregate; Geogrid; Resilient modulus; Permanent deformation shakedown
behavior.

Introduction
Large quantities of natural virgin material are being consumed
every year to meet the requirements of various infrastructure proj-
ects in civil engineering applications such as pavement base and
subbase, building and bridge construction, backfilling, general
footpaths, and embankments (Rahman et al. 2014). In addition,
large amounts of construction and demolition (C&D) waste mate-
rials are currently disposed ofin landfills, which creates substantial
pressure on the geoenvironment (Gavilan and Bernold 1994; Hoyos
et al. 2011). Therefore, recycling of reusable C&D materials in civil
engineering applications has been the focus of global research in
recent years in order to conserve natural quarry resources and re-
duce the carbon footprint of projects (Arulrajah et al. 2012).
In 2017, around 6.6 million tons of C&D materials were dis-
posed of in Australia (EPHC 2018). Most of these materials were
disposed of in landfills, which raises geoenvironmental concerns.
Nevertheless, these concerns may be eliminated by recycling these
materials for sustainable engineering applications (Rahman et al.
2013).
Several researchers have investigated the feasibility of reusing
C&D materials in various infrastructure applications such as waste
1
School of Engineering, Faculty of Science Engineering and Built
Environment, Deakin Univ., Locked Bag 20000, Geelong, VIC 3220,
Australia (corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0018
-6696. Email: amaln@deakin.edu.au
2
School of Engineering, Faculty of Science Engineering and Built
Environment, Deakin Univ., Locked Bag 20000, Geelong, VIC 3220,
Australia. Email: a.rahman@deakin.edu.au
Note. This manuscript was submitted on July 14, 2019; approved on
July 22, 2020; published online on October 24, 2020. Discussion period
open until March 24, 2021; separate discussions must be submitted for in-
dividual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Transportation En-
gineering, Part B: Pavements, © ASCE, ISSN 2573-5438.
crushed rock (Huang et al. 2002; Bianchini et al. 2005; and Rao
et al. 2007), recycled crushed brick (CB) (Aatheesan et al. 2010;
Arulrajah et al. 2011), reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) (Chen
et al. 2013; Puppala et al. 2011; Ullah and Tanyu (2019)), recycled
glass (Saberian et al. 2019; Ali et al. 2011; Imteaz et al. 2012) and
recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) (Debieb and Kenai 2008; Gabr
and Cameron 2012; Saberian et al. 2018). Interestingly, Arisha et al.
(2017) investigated several blends of C&D materials and found the
predicted pavement performance of recycled materials was better
than typical unbound granular materials (UGMs).
Utilization of RCA as base and subbase material in flexible
pavements is a valuable option, as roads typically require a large
amount of crushed aggregate (Jayakody et al. 2019). Therefore,
RCA characterization has been one of the main research interests
in pavement engineering over the last decade. It has been found that
there is still a continuing call for more intensive research in this area
due to the wide range in RCA properties, which are directly related
to the source of the demolished structure.
Since the properties of the RCA material are not fully under-
stood compared to natural quarried material, RCA applications in
pavement construction require prerequisite guidelines. In Victoria,
Australia, the guidelines specified by the local road authority,
VicRoads (2011), permit the use of RCA material as pavement sub-
base and light duty base works subject to some requirements. The
guidelines classify the RCA into three types (i.e., Class 2, Class 3,
and Class 4) based on their engineering properties. These properties
include grading, Atterberg limits, California bearing ratio (CBR),
Los Angeles (LA) abrasion values, and flakiness index. However,
none of these tests reflect the field repeated load conditions
(El-Ashwah et al. 2020). Therefore, further research is needed to
investigate the mechanical properties of RCA under repeated loads,
as limited research is available on this topic (Jayakody et al. 2019).
Determination of the deformation and stiffness characteristics of

© ASCE 04020076-1 J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements

J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076

 base and subbase materials under repeated loads assists in rut pre-
diction and better pavement design (Alnedawi et al. 2019a). This
could be achieved by performing a repeated load triaxial test (RLT),
which has been acknowledged as one of the best laboratory tests for
simulating field conditions (Alnedawi et al. 2019c). This test can
measure both resilient modulus (M R ) and permanent deformation
(PD) of the pavement materials at different stress conditions and
numbers of load cycles.
Generally, RCA material is expected to be weak and less durable
when compared with virgin and natural quarry material due to the
existence of foreign material, nominal percentages of RAP and CB,
and additives which are usually nondurable or subject to appreci-
able breakdown. Therefore, improvement of the physical and
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
geotechnical properties of the RCA is required to withstand and
distribute the repeated traffic load to avoid damage to the subgrade.
Several researchers reinforced virgin materials to increase their
stiffness and deformation characteristics (Abu-Farsakh et al. 2007;
Tatlisoz et al. 1998). Chen et al. (2013) found that by incorporating
geogrids with virgin materials, M R increases and PD decreases.
Further, using geogrid-reinforced C&D materials increases the
strength of the materials, which in turn provides internal frictional
and passive resistance from the transverse geogrid ribs (Liu et al.
2009a, b). Conversely, studies by Moghaddas-Nejad and Small
(2003) and Nazzal (2007) showed that the inclusion of geogrid
reinforcement does not always improve the stiffness of aggregates.
As there have been a limited number of studies investigating the
behavior of reinforced RCA, any positive outcomes from reinforce-
ment will further increase the use of RCA material in various civil
applications. It may also enable RCA to be used as a base material.
The objective of this study is to investigate the suitability of
using geogrid-reinforced RCA as a subbase material in order to
conserve the natural resources and reduce geoenvironmental im-
pacts. This study commenced with an experimental investigation of
the physical properties of several local samples of RCA. Secondly,
M R and PD were measured to evaluate the mechanical properties
of the RCA under repeated loads. Thirdly, an attempt was made to
reinforce the RCA material with the inclusion of biaxial and tri-
axial geogrids to enhance the bearing capacity properties. For ad-
ditional assessment, the extracted M R values from the results of
the RLT were used to perform a parametric investigation using
some constitutive-regression models. In addition, these parame-
ters were used to estimate both M R and PD under different loading
conditions.
Materials
The RCA samples were produced by crushing demolished concrete
structures and removing the waste such as brick, glass, asphalt, and
wood. The RCA material was collected from several concrete re-
cycling companies in Victoria, Australia. Representative disturbed
samples were collected and prepared according to Australian stan-
dard (AS) AS1289.1.2.1 (AS 2013), which included packaging,
identification, and storage of the materials.
Experimental Procedure
Various laboratory experiments were conducted on the RCA
material to determine their physical and geotechnical properties.
These tests are summarized in the following sections. Detailed pro-
cedures can be found in the cited standards and specifications.
The maximum particle size of the RCA was 19 mm. The
material was first oven dried at 60°C to prepare the samples
for physical and geotechnical tests. Two different types of geogrid,
© ASCE 04020076-2
J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076
Table 1. Characteristics of the investigated geogrids
Tensile
Geogrid Aperture strength Aperture
reinforcement shape (kN=m) Polymer type size (mm)
Triaxial Triangular 32 Polypropylene 46 × 46 × 46
Biaxial Square 20 Polypropylene 39 × 39
namely biaxial and triaxial geogrids, were used for RCA reinforce-
ment. The characteristics of these commercial geogrids as provided
by the supplier are listed in Table 1.
Several physical and geotechnical tests were conducted on the
RCA including modified compaction test, particle-size distribution,
LA abrasion, Atterberg limits, specific gravity, and CBR. Sample
identification (ID) A was selected for the RLT test.
The modified compaction tests were conducted according to
ASTM D1557 (ASTM 2009) on RCA materials to determine
the maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture content
(OMC). According to the ASTM standard and the maximum par-
ticle size, a cylindrical mold with a diameter of 152.4 mm was used
to compact each layer of sample by applying 56 blows with a 4.9 kg
rammer falling from 450 mm height. As a worst-case scenario,
soaked CBR tests were undertaken according to ASTM D1883
(ASTM 2007a), whereby modified Proctor compaction effort was
used to compact the sample. Samples were compacted in five layers
using a cylindrical mold with an internal diameter of 152 mm and a
total effective sample height of 117 mm including the spacer disc.
The sieve analysis for the RCA material was completed in accor-
dance with ASTM D422-63 (ASTM 2007b). Prior to the sieve
analysis, the samples were washed using distilled water on the
75 μm sieve, and the retained samples were used for further
particle-size distribution tests. The gradation curve of the RCA
samples was aimed to be between the lower and upper bound refer-
ence lines of the subbase specification in accordance with local
road authority specifications (VicRoads 2011).
The LA abrasion tests on the RCA material were carried out in
accordance with ASTM C131 (ASTM 2006) to determine the resis-
tance value of the aggregates by abrasion and impact efforts. The spe-
cific gravity of the RCA material was conducted according to ASTM
D3142 (ASTM 2011), and a 50 mL pycnometer bottle was used for
this study. The cone penetration method was applied to evaluate the
liquid limit values in accordance with ASTM D4318 (ASTM 2010).
The material passing through a 0.425 mm sieve was used to evaluate
the liquid limit, plastic limit, and shrinkage limit values.
The M R and PD tests of the RCA material were carried out using
an RLT apparatus to simulate the traffic loading condition on the
base/subbase layer by applying repeated loads. Due to the effect of
the vertical stress pulse shape, loading frequency, and load rest
period on the mechanical properties (Alnedawi et al. 2019b, e), a
haversine-shaped wave loading pulse was selected and applied with
a resting period of 0.9 s and a loading period of 0.1 s, as per
AASHTO T307 (AASHTO 2017). A moisture content less than
OMC was considered the target moisture content for the RLT to
focus on the effect of moisture history (Bodin and Kraft 2015).
The procedure included compacting the samples at OMC then con-
ducting a dry-back process to reach the target moisture content:
90%, 80%, 70%, and 60% of OMC. This procedure was recom-
mended by Australian authority, Austroads. After compacting the
specimens at OMC/MDD, a dry-back process was performed. This
included placing the unmolded samples in the lab at room temper-
ature. The drying-back period lasted between 1.5 and 2 h and
was found to be slightly dependent on the material. The weight
of the specimen was measured every 30 min to monitor the target
J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements
 moisture content (i.e., target moisture). Before reaching the target
weight, specimens were wrapped in plastic to prevent any excess
moisture loss. Practically, water must be added to the base and sub-
base material to assist in achieving the target density during the
compaction process. However, the pavement must then be allowed
to dry to a condition that resists premature failure of the base and
subbase materials due to traffic compaction.
The lowest moisture content (60% of OMC) was selected to
compare with reinforced samples for their M R and PD values.
Based on Table 2, computer controlled stresses were applied for
different deviatoric stresses and a constant confining stress in accor-
dance with AG-PT/T053 (Austroads 2007).
A cylindrical split mold with an internal diameter of 100 mm
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
The particle-size distribution results of the chosen RCA materi-
als (Sample A) evaluated before and after modified compaction are
shown in Fig. 1.
The results show the RCA material used for this study is a
good quality aggregate, as minimal breakdown occurred during
the compaction efforts. Both gradations are consistent and
within the lower and upper boundary limits, as per local road
authority requirements. The coefficient parameters such as
coefficient of uniformity (Cu ) and coefficient of curvature
(Cc ) satisfied the local authority requirements (Cu > 4 and
1 < Cc < 3), which indicates the RCA material would be a suit-
able alternative for virgin quarry material in pavement subbase

applications.
and a height of 200 mm was used to prepare the RLT testing sample. The LA abrasion and CBR results of the RCA indicate that the
For the reinforced specimens, the geogrid was placed in the middle materials are strong enough and satisfy the local road authority’s
of the specimen, as applied by Rahman et al. (2013). In addition, requirements for use as subbase and light duty base materials. The
placing the geogrid at 33%–50% of the granular base layer height minimum required CBR values are 100%, 80%, and 20% for
results in a reduction in the measured tensile strain at the bottom of Class 2, Class 3, and Class 4, respectively, which are recommended
the asphalt surface layer as well as the top of the subgrade layer for pavement subbase and light duty base materials (VicRoads
(Ibrahim et al. 2017). 2011). The Atterberg limit results show most of the RCA materials
The samples were mixed and compacted using modified com- are nonplastic due to inadequate clay content, and the specific grav-
paction efforts with the corresponding MDD and OMC. The sample ity of the RCA material is within the typical range (2.65–2.67) of
was also dried back at room temperature to the desired moisture con-
granular sandy materials.
tent (i.e., lower than OMC). Two saturated porous discs, a flexible
rubber membrane, and two O-rings were used to setup the sample on
the testing pedestal plate. Separate samples were prepared using the
same method to determine the M R and PD. Two replicates were pre-
100
pared to confirm the repeatability of the test result. RCA Before Test
90
RCA After Test
80
Upper Limit
Percentage passing (%)

Results and Discussion 70

Lower Limit
60
Physical and Geotechnical Properties 50

The physical and geotechnical properties of all recycled C&D 40

materials used in this study are presented in Table 3. 30

20

Table 2. Applied stresses for PD test 10

Confining Deviator 0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
Stage number stress (kPa) stress (kPa) Cycles Particle size (mm)
1 50 150 10,000
2 50 250 10,000 Fig. 1. Particle-size distribution of RCA (Sample A), before and after
3 50 350 10,000 compaction.

Table 3. Geotechnical properties of RCA materials

AASHTO
Sample ID LL (%) PL (%) PI (%) Shrinkage (%) LA (%) MDD (Mg=m3 ) OMC (%) Gs CBR (%) classification
A 19.00 17.50 1.50 1.20 27.50 1.90 13.50 2.65 175 A-1-a
B 0.00 28.55 0.00 0.40 30.80 1.95 13.20 2.65 190 A-1-a
C 0.00 26.46 0.00 0.00 29.30 1.96 13.20 2.65 200 A-1-a
D 0.00 29.71 0.00 0.00 33.60 1.91 12.20 2.55 190 A-1-a
E 28.63 23.94 5.00 2.40 36.10 1.97 12.30 2.65 190 A-1-a
F 0.00 23.82 0.00 0.00 29.00 2.06 11.20 2.70 220 A-1-a
G 0.00 23.12 0.00 0.00 29.90 2.05 10.80 2.70 260 A-1-a
H 22.76 20.92 2.00 0.80 34.60 1.97 11.20 2.60 240 A-1-a
I 22.28 17.03 5.00 2.00 37.60 2.21 8.80 2.80 280 A-1-a
J 0.00 26.00 0.00 0.00 33.10 1.97 12.50 2.65 185 A-1-a
K 23.24 21.37 2.00 0.80 36.90 1.98 11.70 2.60 190 A-1-a
L 0.00 30.92 0.00 0.00 28.70 2.06 10.50 2.75 185 A-1-a
M 26.60 8.01 9.00 2.80 35.10 1.98 11.00 2.60 205 A-2-4
N 0.00 29.12 0.00 0.00 35.60 2.00 10.40 2.60 210 A-1-a
Note: LL = liquid limit; PL = plastic limit; PI = plasticity index; LA = Los Angeles abrasion value; Gs = specific gravity; and CBR = California bearing ratio.

© ASCE 04020076-3 J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements

J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076

 300.0
60%OMC
Stage 1:
250.0 Static confining pressure = 50 kPa
Dynamic deviator stress = 150 kPa
Resilient Modulus (Mpa)
200.0
150.0
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
100.0
50.0
0.0
0 5000 10000
Fig. 2. Resilient modulus of RCA at different moisture contents.
Resilient Modulus Characteristics
The M R results of the unreinforced RCA material (Sample A) with
various moisture content and deviator stress are shown in Fig. 2.
The results show that the M R value increased with the increase
of deviator stress. The higher M R value was obtained at a deviator
stress of 350 kPa when compared with lower deviator stress. The
increase in M R values with increased deviator stress may be due to a
decrease in the internal voids of the material when subject to higher
stress resulting in the sample becoming denser and stiffer. This ob-
servation is in line with other studies conducted by Smith and Nair
(1973), Kolisoja (1997), Fang-Le and Jian-Zhong (2004), Puppala
et al. (2011), Di Tullio (2015), and Alnedawi et al. (2018a). It was
also found that when the moisture content of RCA increased, the
M R decreased. This finding is also consistent with previous studies
(Laloui et al. 2009; Lekarp et al. 2000; Salour and Erlingsson
2012). In Fig. 3, the M R values obtained from the RCA material
reinforced with biaxial and triaxial geogrids are shown and are
compared with the values from an unreinforced sample. Note all
three samples were prepared at 60% of OMC.
The results also present an overall comparison between rein-
forced and unreinforced RCA material and different deviator and
confining stress. It has been found that the highest M R was for
triaxial-reinforced RCA material, followed by biaxial-reinforced
RCA compared to the unreinforced specimens. The observation
of a higher MR for triaxial RCA compared with biaxial RCA could
be due to the geogrid orientation pattern, stiffer ribs, and the tensile
strength capacity of the triaxial geogrid when compared with the
biaxial geogrid. Several researchers also found consistent M R re-
sults obtained from unreinforced RCA and reinforced RCA spec-
imens (Maher et al. 1997; MacGregor et al. 1999; Gnanendran and
Woodburn 2003). At the end of the RLT test, the M R obtained val-
ues for triaxial RCA and unreinforced RCA were 256 and 232 MPa,
respectively.
Permanent Deformation Characteristics
The RLT apparatus was also used to determine the PD (irrecover-
able strain) of both reinforced and unreinforced RCA material.
© ASCE
J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076
70%OMC 80%OMC 90%OMC
Stage 2: Stage 3:
Static confining pressure = 50 kPa Static confining pressure = 50 kPa
Dynamic deviator stress = 250 kPa Dynamic deviator stress = 350 kPa
15000 20000 25000 30000
Number of Cycles
In Fig. 4, the PD of RCA with varying moisture content were com-
pared. Moisture content showed a clear influence on the PD of the
tested RCA. At the end of the test, the PD was found to be 4,398,
6,840, and 8,733 μ€ for the specimens with moisture contents of
60%, 70%, and 80%, respectively. A specimen prepared at 90% of
OMC had premature failure during Stage 2. This observation is
consistent with previous studies such as Arnold (2004), Bodin
and Kraft (2015), and Alnedawi et al. (2018b).
It can be clearly seen that PD increased with an increase in de-
viator stresses, as reported by Uthus (2007), Li et al. (2013), and
Alnedawi et al. (2017). After a certain number of loading cycles,
the PD curve flattened to a horizontal straight line at the first stage
of stresses (deviator stresses of 150 kPa) with the exception of
Stages 2 and 3 (250 and 350 kPa), in which the behavior started
to show a steeper upward curve. The flattened line could be because
the material response had become elastic with increasing load
cycles at 150 kPa of deviator stress.
Arulrajah et al. (2011) observed a similar response in their study
on unreinforced recycled brick. It is also observed in Fig. 5 that the
PD for unreinforced RCA is higher than that of the reinforced RCA.
The triaxial RCA specimens reflected a lower PD compared to the
biaxial and unreinforced RCA. This could be because the geogrids
increase the internal frictional and passive resistance from the trans-
verse geogrid ribs.
The PD results can be shown in terms of the relationship between
permanent strain rate and permanent strain as proposed by Dawson
and Wellner (1999). Permanent strain rate versus the accumulated
permanent strain relationships of both unreinforced and geogrid-
reinforced RCA are shown in Figs. 6 and 7, respectively.
This way of presenting the accumulation of PD clearly shows that
the behaviors of all tested samples were plastic in the first and second
stages of the RLT test. However, after the postcompaction period was
completed, the response becomes entirely resilient, and no additional
permanent strain was observed. In Stage 3, the strain rate for all tested
samples continued to increase as shown by a steep PD increase.
It is noted that there was no significant difference among the
replicate specimens as they showed the same behavior for both
M R and PD properties.
04020076-4 J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements
 450.0
Stage 1: Stage 2: Stage 3:
Static confining pressure = 50 kPa Static confining pressure = 50 kPa Static confining pressure = 50 kPa
Dynamic deviator stress = 150 kPa Dynamic deviator stress = 250 kPa Dynamic deviator stress = 350 kPa
400.0

RCA RCA+Biaxial RCA+Triaxial

350.0

300.0
Resilient Modulus (Mpa)

250.0
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

200.0

150.0

100.0

50.0

0.0
0 10000 20000 30000
Number of Cycles

Fig. 3. Resilient modulus of reinforced and unreinforced RCA.

10000
60% MC 70% MC 80% MC 90% MC
9000

8000

7000
)
Permanent Deformation (

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

Stage 1: Stage 2: Stage 3:

1000 Static confining pressure = 50 kPa Static confining pressure = 50 kPa Static confining pressure = 50 kPa
Dynamic deviator stress = 150 kPa Dynamic deviator stress = 250 kPa Dynamic deviator stress = 350 kPa

0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Number of Cycles

Fig. 4. Permanent deformation of RCA at different moisture contents. MC = moisture content.

Shakedown Behavior different ranges of PD response: plastic shakedown, creep shake-

down, and incremental collapse, which are Ranges A, B, and C,
The concept of shakedown behavior was derived from the plasticity respectively. Werkmeister et al. (2005) and Gu et al. (2017) pro-
theory that deals with the irreversible responses of materials (Yideti posed boundaries to identify the shakedown ranges as given in
et al. 2014). According to the shakedown theory, there are three Table 4.

© ASCE 04020076-5 J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements

J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076

 4000
Stage 1: Stage 2: Stage 3:
Static confining pressure = 50 kPa Static confining pressure = 50 kPa Static confining pressure = 50 kPa
Dynamic deviator stress = 150 kPa Dynamic deviator stress = 250 kPa Dynamic deviator stress = 350 kPa
3500

RCA RCA+Biaxial RCA+Triaxial

3000
)
Permanent Deformation (

2500

2000
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1500

1000

500

0
0 10000 20000 30000
Number of Cycles

Fig. 5. Permanent deformation of reinforced and unreinforced RCA.

1.0E-02
60% MC 70% MC 80% MC 90% MC

1.0E-03
Permanent Strain Rate (% per cycle)

1.0E-04

1.0E-05

1.0E-06

1.0E-07
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.010
Permanent Strain

Fig. 6. Permanent strain rate of RCA at different moisture contents.

Alnedawi et al. (2019d) found that these boundaries are not be on the curve angle of the PD versus the log number of loading
applicable for the behavior of other materials, as earlier high- cycles, which was comprehensively described in their study. The
lighted by Gu et al. (2017). Therefore, they proposed different three approaches proposed by Werkmeister et al. (2005), Gu et al.
techniques to determine the shakedown ranges based on the (2017), and Alnedawi et al. (2019d) were used to evaluate

© ASCE 04020076-6 J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements

J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076

 1.0E-02
RCA RCA+Biaxial RCA+Triaxial

1.0E-03
Permanent Strain Rate (% per Cycle)

1.0E-04
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1.0E-05

1.0E-06
0.000 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005
Permanent Strain

Fig. 7. Permanent strain rate of reinforced and unreinforced RCA.

loadings almost ceases at a constant level, and the response from

Table 4. The boundaries of the shakedown ranges then on is purely resilient. Nevertheless, according to the shake-
Shakedown down criteria by Alnedawi et al. (2019d), the RCA (80% of
criteria Ranges Boundaries of the shakedown ranges OMC) classified as Range B. Since Ranges A and B are permitted
Werkmeister A PD5000 − PD3000 < 4.5 × 10−5 in pavement design, we conclude that RCA can be used as pave-
et al. (2001) B 4.5 × 10−5 < PD5000 − PD3000 < 4.5 × 10−4 ment subbase material when the samples are dried back to a mois-
C PD5000 − PD3000 > 4.0 × 10−4 ture content less than the optimum. This finding aligns with
previous studies that show compaction at OMC leads to greater
Gu et al. (2017) A PD5000 − PD3000 < 6.0 × 10−5
B 6.0 × 10−5 < PD5000 − PD3000 < 6.0 × 10−4
PD than samples tested at lower moisture contents (Bodin and
C PD5000 − PD3000 > 6.0 × 10−4 Kraft 2015).
Note: PD5000 and PD3000 are the accumulated PDs at the 5,000th and
3,000th load cycle, respectively. Parametric Investigation
The use of constitutive models to predict the MR and PD character-
istics of UGMs has been extended in recent years. Estimating the
Table 5. Shakedown ranges for tested RCA M R and PD of UGMs using constitutive models is one of the guide-
lines of several mechanistic-empirical pavement design methods
Werkmeister Gu et al. Alnedawi
Variable et al. (2001) (2017) et al. (2019d) (Erlingsson and Rahman 2013). The constitutive modeling is gen-
erally used to predict the nonlinear behavior of granular materials
RCA (60% of OMC) A A A under repeated loads. Conducting RLT tests on a regular basis is not
RCA (70% of OMC) A A A
feasible, as it is a complex, costly, and time-consuming test. There-
RCA (80% of OMC) A A B
RCA (90% of OMC) C C C
fore, constitutive models have been introduced to predict both M R
Biaxial RCA (60% of OMC) A A A and PD. However, it is not known whether the existing constitutive
Triaxial RCA (60% of OMC) A A A models are suitable for RCA materials since these models are typ-
ically based on virgin UGMs. Moreover, the role of these models is
to predict the behavior of UGMs under different load cycles and
stresses (Gu et al. 2016), and the regression parameters of these
the shakedown behavior of the tested unreinforced and rein- models can be used for behavior evaluation as conducted by Qiao
forced RCA. et al. (2015), Gu et al. (2016), Romanoschi (2016), and Qamhia
It can be seen from Table 5 that only RCA (90% of OMC) was et al. (2017).
categorized as Range C based on the three shakedown criteria, In this study, the measured MR and PD values from the results of
which means the sample had an incremental collapse. the RLT tests were analyzed by nonlinear regression analysis to
Other samples were categorized as Range A of the shakedown develop correlations for the constitutive model parameters using
behavior, as the accumulated PD under a certain number of cyclic Eqs. (1)–(8) to provide a further assessment of the tested RCA.

© ASCE 04020076-7 J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements

J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076

 For MR prediction, Seed et al. (1967), Uzan (1985), and AASHTO Table 6. Regression parameters of M R models
(2002) developed Eqs. (1)–(3), respectively Samples
Models
 k
θ 2 Parameters RCA Biaxial RCA Triaxial RCA (Equation no.)
M R ¼ k1 ð1Þ
Pa K1 2.938 10.296 11.145 Eq. (1)
K2 2.368 1.571 1.877
 k  k R2
θ 4 σd 5 0.852 0.781 0.870
M R ¼ k3 Pa ð2Þ K3 0.145 0.237 0.327 Eq. (2)
Pa Pa K4 0.138 0.161 0.767
 k  k K5 1.549 0.917 0.733
θ 7 τ oct 8 R2 0.989 0.876 0.914
M R ¼ k 6 Pa þ1 ð3Þ K6 0.062 0.200 0.159 Eq. (3)
Pa Pa
K7 0.144 0.041 0.706
where M R = resilient modulus; θ ¼ σ1 þ σ2 þ σ3 ; σd =pdeviator
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

K8 2.872 1.886 1.458

stress; Pa = atmospheric pressure (101.5 kPa); τ oct ¼ 2σd =3; R2 0.992 0.905 0.922
σ3 = confining stress (kPa); and K 1 –K 8 = regression parameters.
Barksdale (1972), Sweere (1990), Wolff and Visser (1995),
Theyse et al. (1996), and Alnedawi et al. (2019d) proposed
Eqs. (4)–(8), respectively, for PD prediction Table 7. Regression parameters of PD models
Samples
PD ¼ a þ b logðNÞ ð4Þ Models
Parameters RCA Biaxial RCA Triaxial RCA (Equation no.)
PD ¼ aN b ð5Þ a −8.856 −9.021 −4.571 Eq. (4)
b 2.572 2.558 1.348
PD ¼ ðcN þ aÞð1 − e−bN Þ ð6Þ R2 0.728 0.809 0.842
a 3.878 × 10−5 2.473 × 10−5 2.56 × 10−4 Eq. (5)
b 1.101 1.135 0.853
PD ¼ e N ðe
c s Bσc
− 1Þ ð7Þ R2 0.931 0.959 0.960
a 0.027 −0.124 0.132 Eq. (6)
PD ¼ aebN þ ceDσd ð8Þ b 0.134 0.073 0.027
c 1.06 × 10−4 1.01 × 10−4 5.256 × 10−5
where PD = permanent deformation; N = number of loading cycles; R2 0.927 0.956 0.965
σc = vertical stress (kPa); and a, b, c, s, B, and D = regression c −2.188 −0.403 5.271 Eq. (7)
parameters. s 0.296 0.539 0.286
Calibration for the prediction models [Eqs. (1)–(8)] was con- B 0.002 4.632 × 10−5 1.241 × 10−6
ducted with the corresponding samples based on the M R and R2 0.985 0.995 0.994
a 0.114 0.151 0.158 Eq. (8)
PD data to establish the regression parameters. No boundary con-
b 8.139 × 10−5 6.780 × 10−5 5.349 × 10−5
ditions were applied in the regression process. The coefficient of c 0.217 0.136 0.122
determination (R2 ) was considered for each tested sample to assess D 0.006 0.007 0.006
the prediction accuracy. R2 0.996 0.969 0.966
In Table 6, Parameter K 1 of Eq. (1) showed a higher value for
triaxial RCA, followed by biaxial RCA and RCA with values of
11.145, 10.296, and 2.938, respectively. The same observation
was noted for Parameter K 3 in Eq. (2). This could be due to the was observed for RCA in comparison to both triaxial and biaxial
proportional relationship between K 1 and M R . RCA. An excellent fit was noted for Eqs. (7) and (8) with an R2 of
Lower values for K 2 were observed in comparison to K 1 , as more than 0.96. This could be attributed to the inclusion of the
found by Ba et al. (2011). The constitutive model by AASHTO stresses as a prediction factor in addition to the number of load cycles.
(2002) [Eq. (3)] showed an excellent fit for RCA, biaxial RCA, It was evident, as previously discussed, that constitutive models
and triaxial RCA, with an R2 of 0.992, 0.905, and 9.222, respec- can be used to predict the M R and PD of RCA at different load
tively. This high prediction accuracy could be related to the adop- cycles and stresses. In addition, some regression parameters show
tion of the octahedral shear stress in the model. that it is possible to assess the behavior of both reinforced and un-
Table 7 gives the regression parameters of PD models. Negative reinforced RCA based on their values.
values for Parameter a [Eq. (4)] were observed for the three tested
samples.
In contrast, Parameter b recorded positive values, which could Conclusions
mean that Parameter b is linked to the log number of loading cycles.
The positive values mean that the PD increased in relation to the The results show that the RCA material used in this research is a
increase in load cycles, as highlighted by Sweere (1990). In Eq. (5), good quality alternative aggregate for many reasons. First, minimal
Parameter a recorded 2.56 × 10−4 for triaxial RCA and 2.473 × breakdown occurred during the compaction efforts. Second, both
10−5 for biaxial RCA and indicates that the type of the geogrid gradations are consistent and within the lower and upper boundary
can be evaluated using Parameter a. The same observation was limits, as per local road authority requirements. Third, LA abrasion
noted for Parameter c in Eq. (6). Parameter B [Eq. (7)] was and CBR results of the RCA indicate that the materials are strong
1.241 × 10−6 , 4.632 × 10−5 , and 0.002 for triaxial RCA, biaxial enough and satisfy the local road authority requirements for use as
RCA, and RCA respectively. subbase and light duty base materials. Moreover, Atterberg limit
It can be concluded that Parameter B can be used to compare results show most of the RCA material is nonplastic due to inad-
between unreinforced and reinforced specimens, since a high value equate clay content.

© ASCE 04020076-8 J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements

J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076

 The M R , PD, and shakedown responses of reinforced RCA were
used to evaluate the feasibility of using geogrid-reinforced RCA as
alternative subbase material in pavement engineering. RLT tests
were performed on unreinforced RCA and reinforced RCA materi-
als with biaxial and triaxial geogrids. The results from the RLT tests
were compared between the unreinforced and geogrid-reinforced
RCA. The M R values of the geogrid-reinforced RCA were found
to be higher than the unreinforced material, and the PD values of
the geogrid-reinforced RCA were lower than the respective unrein-
forced material. This conclusion is based on samples dried back at
60% of OMC. Therefore, further research adopting various mois-
ture contents is required to confirm this finding and to investigate
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
the effect of the moisture content on the reinforced RCA.
The shakedown analysis showed the shakedown ranges varied
from A to B according to the concepts of Werkmeister et al. (2001),
Gu et al. (2017), and Alnedawi et al. (2019d). This means that RCA
can be used as pavement subbase material when it is dried back at a
moisture content less than the optimum.
The parametric investigation showed the possibility of using
some of the existing constitutive models to predict the deformation
and stiffness behavior of RCA material under repeated loads. An
excellent fit was observed for the M R prediction model developed
by AASHTO (2002) and PD models developed by Theyse et al.
(1996) and Alnedawi et al. (2018c). In addition, the regression
parameters can also be used to assess the behavior of both rein-
forced and unreinforced RCA material.
Data Availability Statement
All data, models, and code generated or used during the study
appear in the published article.
References
AASHTO. 2002. Guide for the design of new and rehabilitated pavement
structures. AASHTO NCHRP Project 1-37A. Washington, DC:
AASHTO.
AASHTO. 2017. Determining the resilient modulus of soils and aggregate
materials. AASHTO T-307-99. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
Aatheesan, T., A. Arulrajah, M. W. Bo, B. Vuong, and J. Wilson. 2010.
“Crushed brick blends with crushed rock for pavement systems.” Proc.
Inst. Civ. Eng. Waste Resour. Manag. 163 (1): 29–35. https://doi.org/10
.1680/warm.2010.163.1.29.
Abu-Farsakh, M. Y., M. D. Nazzal, and L. N. Mohammad. 2007. “Effect of
reinforcement on resilient and permanent deformations of base course
material.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2004 (1): 120–131. https://doi.org/10.3141
/2004-13.
Ali, M. M. Y., A. Arulrajah, M. M. Disfani, and J. Piratheepan. 2011.
“Suitability of using recycled glass–crushed rock blends for pavement
subbase applications.” In Proc., Geo-frontiers 2011, Conf. on Geotech-
nical and Foundation Design, 1325–1334. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Alnedawi, A., R. Al-Ameri, and K. P. Nepal. 2019a. “Neural network-
based model for prediction of permanent deformation of unbound
granular materials.” J. Rock Mech. Geotech. Eng. 11 (6): 1231–1242.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2019.03.005.
Alnedawi, A., K. P. Nepal, and R. Al-Ameri. 2017. “A comparison study
between basalt and granite crushed rocks under repeated traffic loads.”
In Proc., 1st MoHESR and HCED Iraqi Scholars Conf. in Australasia.
Baghdad, Iraq: Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research.
Alnedawi, A., K. P. Nepal, and R. Al-Ameri. 2018a. “Mechanistic behavior
of open and dense graded unbound granular materials under traffic
loads.” Int. J. GEOMATE 14 (45): 124–129. https://doi.org/10.21660
/2018.45.7336.
© ASCE 04020076-9
J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076
Alnedawi, A., K. P. Nepal, and R. Al-Ameri. 2018b. “Moisture content
effect on permanent deformation behaviour of unbound granular mate-
rials.” Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 9 (10): 1856–1862.
Alnedawi, A., K. P. Nepal, and R. Al-Ameri. 2018c. “Permanent deforma-
tion prediction model of unbound granular materials for flexible pave-
ment design.” Transp. Infrastruct. Geotechnol. 6 (1): 39–55. https://doi
.org/10.1007/s40515-018-00068-1.
Alnedawi, A., K. P. Nepal, and R. Al-Ameri. 2019b. “Effect of cyclic load
characteristics on unbound granular materials.” Transp. Infrastruct.
Geotechnol. 6 (2): 70–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40515-019-00070-1.
Alnedawi, A., K. P. Nepal, and R. Al-Ameri. 2019c. “Effect of loading
frequencies on permanent deformation of unbound granular materials.”
Int. J. Pavement Eng. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2019
.1656807.
Alnedawi, A., K. P. Nepal, and R. Al-Ameri. 2019d. “New shakedown
criterion and permanent deformation properties of unbound granular
materials.” J. Mod. Transp. 27 (2): 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1007
/s40534-019-0185-2.
Alnedawi, A., K. P. Nepal, R. Al-Ameri, and M. Alabdullah. 2019e. “Effect
of vertical stress rest period on deformation behaviour of unbound
granular materials: Experimental and numerical investigations.” J. Rock
Mech. Geotech. Eng. 11 (1): 172–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge
.2018.05.004.
Arisha, A. M., A. Gabr, S. El-Badawy, and S. Shwally. 2017. “Performance
evaluation of construction and demolition waste materials for pavement
construction in Egypt.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 30 (2): 04017270. https://doi
.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002127.
Arnold, G. K. 2004. Rutting of granular pavements. Nottingham, UK:
Univ. of Nottingham.
Arulrajah, A., J. Piratheepan, T. Aatheesan, and M. W. Bo. 2011.
“Geotechnical properties of recycled crushed brick in pavement appli-
cations.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 23 (10): 1444–1452. https://doi.org/10
.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000319.
Arulrajah, A., J. Piratheepan, M. M. Disfani, and M. W. Bo. 2012.
“Geotechnical and geoenvironmental properties of recycled construc-
tion and demolition materials in pavement subbase applications.” J. Ma-
ter. Civ. Eng. 25 (8): 1077–1088. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT
.1943-5533.0000652.
AS (Australian Standards). 2013. Methods of testing soils for engineering
purposes: Sampling and preparation of soils—Disturbed samples:
Standard method. AS1289.1.2.1. Sydney, NSW: AS.
ASTM. 2006. Standard test method for resistance to degradation of small-
size coarse aggregate by abrasion and impact in the Los Angeles
machine. ASTM-C131. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2007a. Standard test method for CBR (California bearing ratio) of
laboratory-compacted soils. D1883-07. West Conshohocken, PA:
ASTM.
ASTM. 2007b. Standard test method for particle-size analysis of soils.
ASTM-D422-63. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2009. Standard test methods for laboratory compaction character-
istics of soil using modified effort. ASTM-D1557. West Conshohocken,
PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2010. Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and plas-
ticity index of soils. D4318-10. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2011. Standard test method for specific gravity, API gravity, or den-
sity of cutback asphalts by hydrometer method. D3142/D3142M-11.
West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
Austroads. 2007. Austroads repeated load triaxial test method: Determi-
nation of permanent deformation and resilient modulus characteristics
of unbound granular materials under drained conditions. AG-PT/T053.
Sydney, NSW, Australia: Austroads.
Ba, M., M. Fall, F. Samb, D. Sarr, and M. Ndiaye. 2011. “Resilient modulus
of unbound aggregate base courses from Senegal (West Africa).” Open
J. Civ. Eng. 1 (1): 1. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojce.2011.11001.
Barksdale, R. D. 1972. “Laboratory evaluation of rutting in base course
materials.” In Proc., 3rd Int. Conf. on the Structural Design of Asphalt
Pavements. London: Grosvenor House.
Bianchini, G., E. Marrocchino, R. Tassinari, and C. Vaccaro. 2005.
“Recycling of construction and demolition waste materials: A chemical-
J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements
 mineralogical appraisal.” Waste Manage. (Oxford) 25 (2): 149–159.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2004.09.005.
Bodin, D., and J. Kraft. 2015. Effect of moisture content and laboratory
preparation conditions on the permanent deformation of unbound
granular materials. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Austroads.
Chen, Q., M. Abu-Farsakh, G. Z. Voyiadjis, and G. Souci. 2013. “Shake-
down analysis of geogrid-reinforced granular base material.” J. Mater.
Civ. Eng. 25 (3): 337–346. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943
-5533.0000601.
Dawson, A. R., and F. Wellner. 1999. Plastic behavior of granular materials.
Rep. No. ARC Project 933 Reference PRG99014. Nottingham, UK:
Univ. of Nottingham.
Debieb, F., and S. Kenai. 2008. “The use of coarse and fine crushed bricks
as aggregate in concrete.” Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (5): 886–893.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.12.013.
Di Tullio, P. 2015. The effect of fines content on strength of granular
materials. Hamilton, ON: McMaster Univ.
El-Ashwah, A. S., E. Mousa, S. M. El-Badawy, and M. A. Abo-Hashema.
2020. “Advanced characterization of unbound granular materials for
pavement structural design in Egypt.” Int. J. Pavement Eng. 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2020.1754416.
EPHC (Environment Protection and Heritage Council). 2018. National
waste report. Victoria, Australia: Dept. of the Environment, Water, Her-
itage and the Arts, Dept. of the Environment and Energy.
Erlingsson, S., and M. S. Rahman. 2013. “Evaluation of permanent defor-
mation characteristics of unbound granular materials by means of multi-
stage repeated-load triaxial tests.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2369 (1): 11–19.
https://doi.org/10.3141/2369-02.
Fang-Le, P., and L. Jian-Zhong. 2004. “Modeling of state parameter and
hardening function for granular materials.” J. Cent. South Univ. Technol.
11 (2): 176–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-004-0037-y.
Gabr, A., and D. Cameron. 2012. “Properties of recycled concrete aggre-
gate for unbound pavement construction.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 24 (6):
754–764. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000447.
Gavilan, R. M., and L. E. Bernold. 1994. “Source evaluation of solid waste
in building construction.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 120 (5): 36–52.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1994)120:3(536).
Gnanendran, C. T., and L. J. Woodburn. 2003. “Recycled aggregate for
pavement construction and the influence of stabilization.” In Vol. 21
of Proc., Conf. of the Australian Road Research Board, 1755–1768.
Melbourne, VIC, Australia: Australian Road Research Board Transport
Research.
Gu, F., Y. Zhang, C. Droddy, R. Luo, and R. Lytton. 2016. “Development of
a new mechanistic empirical rutting model for unbound granular
material.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 28 (8): 04016051. https://doi.org/10.1061
/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001555.
Gu, F., Y. Zhang, X. Luo, H. Sahin, and R. L. Lytton. 2017. “Characteri-
zation and prediction of permanent deformation properties of unbound
granular materials for pavement ME design.” Constr. Build. Mater.
155 (Nov): 584–592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.08.116.
Hoyos, L. R., A. J. Puppala, and C. A. Ordonez. 2011. “Characterization of
cement fiber-treated reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregates: Prelimi-
nary investigation.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 23 (7): 977–989. https://doi
.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000267.
Huang, W. L., D. H. Lin, N. B. Chang, and K. S. Lin. 2002. “Recycling of
construction and demolition waste via a mechanical sorting process.”
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 37 (1): 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921
-3449(02)00053-8.
Ibrahim, E., S. El-Badawy, M. Ibrahim, A. Gabr, and A. Azam. 2017.
“Effect of geogrid reinforcement on flexible pavements.” Innovative
Infrastruct. Solutions 2 (1): 54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-017
-0102-7.
Imteaz, M. A., M. M. Y. Ali, and A. Arulrajah. 2012. “Possible environ-
mental impacts of recycled glass used as a pavement base material.”
Waste Manage. Res. 30 (9): 917–921. https://doi.org/10.1177
/0734242X12448512.
Jayakody, S., C. Gallage, and J. Ramanujam. 2019. “Performance charac-
teristics of recycled concrete aggregate as an unbound pavement
material.” Heliyon 5 (9): e02494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon
.2019.e02494.
© ASCE 04020076-10
J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076
Kolisoja, P. 1997. Resilient deformation characteristics of granular materials.
Tampere, Finland: Tampere University of Technology Finland.
Laloui, L., R. Charlier, C. Chazallon, S. B. Erlingsson, P. Hornych, P.
Pavšič, and M. Sršen. 2009. “Water influence on mechanical behaviour
of pavements: Constitutive modelling.” In Water in road structures,
193–216. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Lekarp, F., U. Isacsson, and A. Dawson. 2000. “State of the art. I: Resilient
response of unbound aggregates.” J. Transp. Eng. 126 (1): 66–75.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2000)126:1(66).
Li, L., S. Saboundjian, J. Liu, and X. Zhang. 2013. “Permanent deforma-
tion behavior of Alaskan granular base materials.” In Proc., ISCORD
2013: Planning for Sustainable Cold Regions, 428–435. Reston, VA:
ASCE. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784412978.042.
Liu, C. N., Y. H. Ho, and J. W. Huang. 2009a. “Large scale direct shear tests
of soil/pet-yarn geogrid interfaces.” Geotext. Geomembr. 27 (1): 19–30.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2008.03.002.
Liu, C. N., J. G. Zornberg, T. C. Chen, Y. H. Ho, and B. H. Lin. 2009b.
“Behavior of geogrid-sand interface in direct shear mode.” J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Eng. 135 (12): 1863–1871. https://doi.org/10.1061
/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000150.
MacGregor, J. A. C., W. H. Highter, and D. J. DeGroot. 1999. “Structural
numbers for reclaimed asphalt pavement base and subbase course
mixes.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1687 (1): 22–28. https://doi.org/10.3141
/1687-03.
Maher, M. H., N. Gucunski, and W. J. Papp. 1997. “Recycled asphalt pave-
ment as a base and sub-base material.” In Vol. 1275 of Testing soil
mixed with waste or recycled materials, 42–53. West Conshohocken,
PA: ASTM.
Moghaddas-Nejad, F., and J. C. Small. 2003. “Resilient and permanent
characteristics of reinforced granular materials by repeated load triaxial
tests.” Geotech. Test. J. 26 (2): 152–166.
Nazzal, M. D. 2007. Laboratory characterization and numerical modeling
of geogrid reinforced bases in flexible pavements. Baton Rouge, LA:
Louisiana State Univ.
Puppala, A. J., L. R. Hoyos, and A. K. Potturi. 2011. “Resilient moduli
response of moderately cement-treated reclaimed asphalt pavement
aggregates.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 23 (7): 990–998. https://doi.org/10
.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000268.
Qamhia, I. I. A., L. C. Chow, D. Mishra, and E. Tutumluer. 2017. “Dense-
graded aggregate base gradation influencing rutting model predictions.”
Transp. Geotech. 13 (Dec): 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2017
.07.002.
Qiao, Y., A. Dawson, A. Huvstig, and L. Korkiala-Tanttu. 2015. “Calcu-
lating rutting of some thin flexible pavements from repeated load tri-
axial test data.” Int. J. Pavement Eng. 16 (6): 467–476. https://doi
.org/10.1080/10298436.2014.943127.
Rahman, M., A. Arulrajah, J. Piratheepan, M. Bo, and M. Imteaz. 2013.
“Resilient modulus and permanent deformation responses of
geogrid-reinforced construction and demolition materials.” J. Mater.
Civ. Eng. 26 (3): 512–519. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943
-5533.0000824.
Rahman, M. A., M. Imteaz, A. Arulrajah, and M. M. Disfani. 2014. “Suit-
ability of recycled construction and demolition aggregates as alternative
pipe backfilling materials.” J. Cleaner Prod. 66 (Mar): 75–84. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.005.
Rao, A., K. N. Jha, and S. Misra. 2007. “Use of aggregates from recycled
construction and demolition waste in concrete.” Resour. Conserv.
Recycl. 50 (1): 70–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.05
.010.
Romanoschi, S. A. 2016. “Empirical models for permanent deformation of
subgrade soils from the data collected at the pavement subgrade perfor-
mance study.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 29 (3): 04016236. https://doi.org/10
.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001785.
Saberian, M., J. Li, B. Nguyen, and G. Wang. 2018. “Permanent deforma-
tion behaviour of pavement base and subbase containing recycle con-
crete aggregate, coarse and fine crumb rubber.” Constr. Build. Mater.
178 (Jul): 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.05.107.
Saberian, M., J. Li, and S. Setunge. 2019. “Evaluation of permanent de-
formation of a new pavement base and subbase containing unbound
J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements
 granular materials, crumb rubber and crushed glass.” J. Cleaner Prod.
230 (Sep): 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.100.
Salour, F., and S. Erlingsson. 2012. “Pavement unbound materials stiffness-
moisture relationship during spring thaw.” In Proc., Cold Regions
Engineering 2012, 402–412. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Seed, H. B., F. Mitry, C. Monismith, and C. Chan. 1967. Prediction of
flexible pavement deflections from laboratory repeated-load tests.
NCHRP Rep. No. 35. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
Smith, W., and K. Nair. 1973. Development of procedures for characteri-
zation of untreated granular base course and asphalt-treated base
course materials. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration.
Sweere, G. T. H. 1990. Unbound granular bases for roads. Delft,
Netherlands: Technische Universitiet Delft.
Tatlisoz, N., T. B. Edil, and C. H. Benson. 1998. “Interaction between
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY on 10/24/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
reinforcing geosynthetics and soil-tire chip mixtures.” J. Geotech. Geo-
environ. Eng. 124 (11): 1109–1119. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
1090-0241(1998)124:11(1109).
Theyse, H., M. De Beer, and F. Rust. 1996. “Overview of South African
mechanistic pavement design method.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1539 (1):
6–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198196153900102.
Ullah, S., and B. F. Tanyu. 2019. “Methodology to develop design guide-
lines to construct unbound base course with reclaimed asphalt pavement
(RAP).” Constr. Build. Mater. 223 (Oct): 463–476. https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.06.196.
© ASCE 04020076-11
J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements, 2021, 147(1): 04020076
Uthus, L. 2007. “Deformation properties of unbound granular aggregates.”
In Fakultet for ingeniørvitenskap og teknologi. Trondheim, Norway:
Norwegian Univ. of Science and Technology.
Uzan, J. 1985. “Characterization of granular material.” Transp. Res. Rec.
1022 (1): 52–59.
VicRoads. 2011. Section 820: Crushed concrete for pavement subbase and
light duty base. Melbourne, Australia: Roads Corporation of Victoria
(VicRoads).
Werkmeister, S., A. Dawson, and F. Wellner. 2001. “Permanent deforma-
tion behavior of granular materials and the shakedown concept.”
Transp. Res. Rec. 1757 (1): 75–81. https://doi.org/10.3141/1757-09.
Werkmeister, S., A. R. Dawson, and F. Wellner. 2005. “Permanent defor-
mation behaviour of granular materials.” Road Mater. Pavement Des.
6 (1): 31–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2005.9689998.
Wolff, H., and A. Visser. 1995. “Incorporating elasto-plasticity in granular
layer pavement design.” In Proc., Int. Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts. London: Institution of
Civil Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1680/itran.1994.27137.
Yideti, T. F., A. Dawson, and B. Birgisson. 2014. “Implementation of
shakedown and packing theories for unbound granular materials.” In
Proc., of the 10th Int. Conf. on the Bearing Capacity of Roads, Rail-
ways and Airfields, edited by A. Loizos, I. Al-Qadi, and T. Scarpas,
1–10. Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis.
J. Transp. Eng., Part B: Pavements