English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The Pavement ME Design method considers the hot mix asphalt (HMA) dynamic modulus (E*) as the main mechanistic property that affects pavement performance. For the HMA, E* can be determined directly by laboratory testing (level 1) or it can be estimated using predictive equations (levels 2 and 3). Pavement-ME Design introduced the NCHRP1-40D model as the latest model for predicting E* when levels 2 or 3 HMA inputs are used. This study focused on utilizing laboratory measured E* data to compare NCHRP1-40D model with Hirsh model. This comparison included the evaluation of the binder characterization level as per Pavement ME Design and its influence on the performance of these models. E*tests were conducted in the laboratory on 25 local mixes representing different road construction projects in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The main tests for the mix binders were dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR) and Brookfield Rotational Viscometer (RV). Results showed that both models with level 3 binder data produced very similar accuracy. The highest accuracy and lowest bias for both models occurred with level 3 binder data. Finally, the accuracy of prediction and level of bias for both models were found to be a function of the binder input level

Comparison of Witczak NCHRP 1-40D & Hirsh dynamic modulus models based on different binder characterization methods: a case study