Investigation of flexible pavement maintenance patching factors using a finite element model

Journal of Infrastructure Preservation and Resilience

Table 3 Pavement effect of small size repairs for circle and rectangle at different time and locations

	Time	Period description	Location	Comparison %
Horizontal strain E11 /MPa	0.17s	End of the 1st loading	Bottom of surface layer	10.75
	57.77s	End of loading	Bottom of surface layer	16.44
	59.03s	End of recovery	Bottom of surface layer	32.23
	0.17s	End of the 1st loading	Bottom bonding area	24.80
	57.77s	End of loading	Bottom bonding area	28.99
	59.03s	End of recovery	Bottom bonding area	50.46
Vertical Displacement U3 /mm	0.17s	End of the 1st loading	Center of the repairs	0.49
	57.77s	End of loading	Center of the repairs	0.71
	59.03s	End of recovery	Surface bonding area (rutting)	28.65
	59.03s	End of recovery	Surface bonding area (heaving)	22.94
Vertical shear stress S13/MPa	0.17s	End of the 1st loading	Surface bonding area	1.01
		End of the 1st loading	Bottom bonding area	10.88
	57.77s	End of loading	Surface bonding area	0.90
		End of loading	Bottom bonding area	10.75
	59.03s	End of recovery	Surface bonding area	39.44
		End of recovery	Bottom bonding area	13.27
	0.17s	End of the 1st loading	under the imprint	-9.30
	57.77s	End of loading	under the imprint	-9.20
	59.03s	End of recovery	under the imprint	-2.91

Note: Comparisons indicates the percent improvement of the circle shape compared to the rectangular one. Positive number means circle shaped patch is performs better than rectangular one for the corresponding impact factor. And the larger the positive percentage is, the more noticeable this corresponding improved effect is