Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Establishment of control standard for plastic deformation performance

of graded crushed stone
Gui Xu a, Zhongda Chen a,⇑, Xiaodong Li b, Guanghui Lu c, Dingming Dong d, Zixi Liu e
a
Key Laboratory for Special Area Highway Engineering of Ministry of Education, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China
b
China Design Group Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210014, China
c
Highway Survey and Design Institute of Zhoukou, Zhoukou 466000, China
d
Yan’an Highway Administration Bureau, Yan’an 716099, China
e
Fuxian County Highway Management Branch, Yan’an Highway Administration Bureau, Fuxian 727501, China

h i g h l i g h t s

PDI was proposed as evaluation indicator of plastic deformation performance of GCS.

Typical asphalt pavements with GCS base were selected as analytical objects.

The critical plastic deformation of GCS base at failure was calculated.

Plastic deformation of GCS base at a given time was calculated.

Requirement for PDI values of different highway grades were determined.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Plastic deformation of graded crushed stone (GCS) exceeding a certain threshold is prone to cause the fail-
Received 3 September 2018 ure of GCS base and the excessive deformation of asphalt pavement. However, few studies have been con-
Received in revised form 28 January 2019 ducted regarding a control standard of the plastic deformation performance of GCS. This study attempted
Accepted 20 March 2019
to establish the control standard by setting a threshold of an evaluation indicator. The plastic deformation
index (PDI) was proposed as the evaluation indicator. The plastic deformation of GCS base at failure was
obtained on the basis of the typical asphalt pavements with GCS base and a failure criterion with 4% plas-
Keywords:
tic strain. The plastic deformation of GCS base at a given time (i.e., corresponding to the number of load
Asphalt pavement
Graded crushed stone (GCS)
repetitions) was further calculated based on the stress condition of GCS base and a prediction model for
Plastic deformation performance the plastic deformation of GCS base. The requirement for PDI values of different highway grades were
Control standard determined by the calculation equation of PDI, and the control standard was ultimately established.
Plastic deformation index (PDI) The results showed that: the PDI value should be less than or equal to 1900 mm number for expressway
and first-grade highway; the PDI value should be less than or equal to 2200 mm number for secondary
road.
Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Graded crushed stone (GCS) is an unbound granular material for
road construction, which is easy to obtain and of low cost, and is
commonly used in asphalt pavement [1,2]. GCS base plays a signif-
icant role in spreading the wheel load response, providing support
for the asphalt surface course, and protecting the subgrade under-
neath the base and subbase [3]. And, GCS layer laid between the
asphalt surface course and semi-rigid base is capable of restraining
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: czdchangan@sina.com (Z. Chen).
the reflective crack of asphalt surface course caused by the shrink-
age crack of semi-rigid base [4,5]. Generally, the gradual accumu-
lation of the plastic deformation of materials or the degradation
of material performance results in the failure of pavement struc-
ture during service life [6]. The GCS is possibly prone to develop
large plastic deformation, which causes the failure of GCS base
and the excessive deformation of asphalt pavement, and will fur-
ther result in the failure of asphalt pavement and reduction of driv-
ing comfort. In other words, the plastic deformation of GCS has a
significant effect on the pavement performance and service life of
asphalt pavement [7]. In fact, any material has its own merits
and drawbacks. But more importantly, the merits of GCS outweigh

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.254
0950-0618/Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
384 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394
the drawbacks. The failure of asphalt pavement possibly caused by
the excessive plastic deformation of GCS should be considered in
advance during pavement design for making full use of the merits
of GCS. Therefore, according to the critical failure of GCS, it is cru-
cial to propose a solution that quantitatively controls the plastic
deformation of GCS within a certain threshold during the design
stage to meet the actual requirement of asphalt pavement (i.e.,
the requirement for the plastic deformation performance of GCS).
Currently, some researchers have paid attention to the relevant
research on the plastic deformation of unbound granular materials.
For instance, the shakedown theory focuses on the evolution of the
plastic deformation of material; the concept of the shakedown
limit or limit load is proposed as follows: the material structure
appears the gradual accumulation of plastic deformation under
repeated loading when the material structure is subjected to the
applied load exceeding a certain limiting value; additionally, the
plastic deformation of the material structure remains stable after
its plastic deformation reaches a certain value under repeated
loading when the applied load is not more than a certain limiting
value. Garca-Rojo and Herrmann [8] analyzed the material
response to different loads based on the dissipated energy for
exploring the shakedown of unbounded granular materials. For
low enough load, the unbounded granular materials had no pure
elastic response, but could reach the viscoelastic shakedown. For
high enough load, the system changed its configuration by dissi-
pating enough energy. Boulbibane et al. [9] presented a new mech-
anistic method for the unbound pavement design on the basis of
the shakedown theory. The proposed method gave the predictions
of various failure modes due to the accumulated plastic deforma-
tion and then the shakedown loads were determined. Werkmeister
et al. [10] found that the existing shakedown approach reflected
the partial responses to the deformation of unbounded granular
materials, but not all observed responses. Thus, the authors con-
ducted the repeated load triaxial test and further analyzed the
observed deformation behavior of unbounded granular materials.
Then, the four categories of material responses (i.e., purely elastic,
elastic shakedown, plastic shakedown and incremental collapse or
ratcheting) were modified to three categories of more reasonable
material responses (i.e., plastic shakedown, plastic creep and incre-
mental collapse). Considering that the previously developed pre-
diction model based on the shakedown theory could characterize
the permanent deformation of unbound granular materials layer
[11], Allou et al. [12] improved the prediction model for the low
traffic flexible pavement with unbound granular materials base
and obtained the results of a full-scale experiment on a flexible
pavement. The improved model was mainly concerned with the
relationship between the deformation behaviour of the materials
and the number of load repetitions. Lekarp and Dawson [13] devel-
oped a new model by analyzing the existing analytical models
about the permanent deformation behaviour of unbound granular
materials. The developed model presented the relationship
between the accumulated permanent axial strain at any given
number of load cycles and the applied stresses, and the maximum
shear stress ratio and the length of the stress path in p-q space
were taken into account. The result showed that the calculated val-
ues obtained using the developed model had a very good correla-
tion with the observed values. Chen et al. [14] proposed a cyclic
plasticity model based on the fuzzy plasticity theory to character-
ize the permanent deformation behavior of unbound granular
materials under repeated loads. The authors found that the model
could mimick the behaviors of unbound granular materials under
repeated loads. Cerni et al. [15] presented a model that character-
ized the long-term plastic deformation behaviour of unbound
granular materials. The result showed that the model could assess
the permanent deformation behaviour of unbound granular mate-
rials. Ahmed and Erlingsson [16] explored the plastic deformation
behavior of unbound granular materials based on analyzing three
mechanistic-empirical plastic deformation models. The result
showed that the above these models could reflect the rapid and
slower development processes of plastic deformation behavior of
the materials. Yideti et al. [17] adopted a gradation model with
packing theory to evaluate the plastic deformation of unbound
granular materials and the disruption potential (DP) was taken as
an evaluation indicator. It was found that the plastic deformation
performance of the materials was related to DP. Erlingsson and
Rahman [18] investigated the plastic deformation characteristics
of unbound granular materials by performing the multistage
(MS) repeated-load triaxial (RLT) tests, and modelled the plastic
deformation based on the time-hardening concept. The result
showed that the model could characterize the plastic deformation
behaviour of the materials. Gu et al. [19] presented the prediction
models for the permanent deformation performance of unbound
granular materials on the basis of the performance-related proper-
ties, and found that the model had a better precision. Omer et al.
[20] investigated the effect of physical properties on the anti-
deformation performance of the pure dense well GCS. The authors
considered that the anti-deformation performance of GCS was
greatly affected by the aggregate gradation, moisture and density.
Soliman and Shalaby [21] analyzed the effect of fines content (par-
ticles passing sieve No. 200) and moisture content on the plastic
deformation behavior of unbound granular materials (e.g., lime-
stone and gravel), and found that the limestone with an optimum
fines content of 4.5% and gravel with an optimum fines content of
9% had better plastic deformation performance. Liu et al. [22] stud-
ied the effect of moisture content on the deformation behavior of
GCS. The result showed that the increase of moisture content
reduced the deformation modulus. On the other hand, the selection
for an evaluation indicator of the plastic deformation performance
of GCS is also crucial to establish the control standard. In most
researches, the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) was used to charac-
terize the performances of unbound granular materials (e.g., GCS).
Yohannes et al. [23] found that the CBR was capable of evaluating
the performance of unbound granular materials. Yuan et al. [24]
designed the aggregate gradation of GCS by analyzing the changing
laws of CBR, and the optimum proportion of coarse aggregate to
middle aggregate was further determined. Additionally, CBR value
was also used to assess the other performances of GCS, such as the
packing characteristics of load-carrying skeleton [25] and quality
[26].
To be sure, the above researches undoubtedly have promoted
the development and application of GCS. These researches focused
on the qualitative analysis of the plastic deformation of GCS and
the correlated performance evaluation of GCS. However, few stud-
ies have been conducted regarding quantitatively controlling the
plastic deformation of GCS within a certain threshold according
to the actual requirement of asphalt pavement. In brief, the control
standard of the plastic deformation performance of GCS has been
rarely established, so that it is not conducive to quantitatively mas-
tering the development mode of the plastic deformation of GCS
and may hinder its practical application in future.
In view of this, the focus of this study is to strengthen the
understanding of the control standard of the plastic deformation
performance of GCS. The main processes of this study are summa-
rized below. First, a reasonable evaluation indicator needs to be
prior presented if the control standard of the plastic deformation
performance of GCS can be established. In this study, the plastic
deformation index (PDI) is proposed as the evaluation indicator
of the plastic deformation performance of GCS. PDI is defined as
the product of the area bounded by the plastic deformation curve
and the axis of the time of load repetitions and the round-trip mov-
ing speed of test wheel according to the plastic deformation test.
The plastic deformation test was conducted to quantitatively pre-
 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394 385

sent the calculation equation of PDI. Second, the typical asphalt

pavements were selected as the analytical objects according to dif-
ferent highway grades. Combined with the calculation parameters
of PDI, the plastic deformation of GCS base at a given time (i.e., cor-
responding to the number of load repetitions) was obtained by
analyzing the plastic deformation of GCS base at failure. Third,
the requirement for PDI values of different highway grades were
determined by combining the calculation equation of PDI with
the plastic deformation of GCS base at a given time. Finally, the
control standard of the plastic deformation performance of GCS
was established. Additionally, an example showed the application
of the developed control standard. The results of this study should
has significant practical value for instructing the material design of
GCS and contribute to quantitatively making the plastic deforma-
tion performance of GCS meet the prescribed requirement of
asphalt pavement. Fig. 2. PDI defined by the time of load repetitions.

2. Evaluation indicator of plastic deformation performance of
GCS
An evaluation indicator is a precondition of establishing any
control standard. For GCS, the development mode of the plastic
deformation of GCS should be fully taken into account, and the cal-
culation method of the evaluation indicator is preferably simple
and intuitive. In general, the area bounded by the plastic deforma-
tion curve of GCS and the axis of the number of load repetitions is
in accordance with the above requirements; meanwhile, the plastic
deformation of GCS during the preloading stage is not recorded in
the plastic deformation test (Note: this test is conducted with ref-
erence to the rutting test [27]), considering that the external fac-
tors (e.g., the uneven area of specimen surface) may affect the
real plastic deformation of GCS, as shown in Fig. 1. Additionally,
the meaning shown in Fig. 1 is also re-expressed in Fig. 2 for sim-
plifying the numerical calculation, since the plastic deformation of
GCS is recorded by the time of load repetitions in the plastic defor-
mation test, i.e., the definition of PDI is ultimately given in Fig. 2.
Thus, PDI is defined as the product of the area bounded by the plas-
tic deformation curve and the axis of the time of load repetitions
and the round-trip moving speed of test wheel
(unit : mm  number), as expressed by Eq. (1).
Z tb
PDI ¼ At  Nd ¼ f ðtÞ dt
ta
recorded plastic deformation, respectively (hereafter abbreviated
as initial time and terminal time, respectively).
PDI is proposed as the evaluation indicator of the plastic defor-
mation performance of GCS. And, Eq. (1) was simplified by using an
approximate trapezoid area method for avoiding the complicated
integrating operation, i.e., the shadowed area shown in Fig. 2 was
approximately replaced by the sum of several trapezoid (or trian-
gle) areas. Then, PDI is calculated by Eq. (2).
X
n
di þ diþ1
PDI ¼  Dt  N d ð2Þ
2
i¼1
where Dt is the interval time of the recorded plastic deformation
(hereafter abbreviated as interval time); and di is the plastic defor-
mation of GCS at a given time.
Fig. 2 shows that it is essential to reasonably determine the ini-
tial time (i.e., preloading stage), terminal time and interval time
(i.e., time step). First of all, the plastic deformation of GCS was
obtained by conducting the plastic deformation test with reference
to the rutting test. The diagrammatic sketches of the rutting test
and the testing specimens molded using the wheel rolling machine
are shown in Figs. 3 and 4, respectively; Fig. 5 shows the geometric
sketch of mold; moreover, combined with Fig. 3, Fig. 6 shows the
detail loading sketch of GCS specimen in order to present the speci-
ð1Þ

where At is the area bounded by the plastic deformation curve of

GCS and the axis of the time of load repetitions; Nd is the round-
trip moving speed of test wheel (Nd ¼ 42 number/min ± 1 num-
ber/min); and t a and t b is the initial time and terminal time of the

Fig. 1. PDI defined by the number of load repetitions. Fig. 3. Plastic deformation test with reference to the rutting test.
386 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394

wheel is 230 mm ± 10 mm; the test wheel is a solid rubber tire

(Note: the outer diameter is 200 mm; the width is 50 mm; the rub-
ber layer thickness is 15 mm); the mold is composed of steel base-
plate and steel lateral plate, and the inner dimension of the mold is
300 mm in length, 300 mm in width, and 100 mm in thickness, as
shown in Fig. 5. The testing conditions include the following
aspects: the test material is limestone and the aggregate gradation
is shown in Table 1; the optimum moisture content and maximum
dry density of GCS is 3.4% and 2.47 g/cm3 , respectively; the testing
specimen specification is 300 mm  300 mm  100 mm; the test
states of the testing specimen are mainly the optimum moisture
content state and water-saturated state; the preliminary test time
is 60 min and is adjustable according to the actual requirement.
The prepared processes of the testing specimens were as follows:
(1) the optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of
GCS were determined by using the vibratory compaction method;
(2) GCS mixture was prepared on the basis of the specimen vol-
ume, maximum dry density and optimum moisture content; (3)
GCS mixture was poured into the mold and was compacted by
the wheel rolling machine according to the Standard Test Methods
of Bitumen and Bituminous Mixtures for Highway Engineering
Fig. 4. Diagrammatic sketch of wheel rolling method. (JTG E20-2011) [27], and the main technical parameters of the
machine comprises the following aspects: the wheel width is
300 mm; the compaction line load is 300 N/cm; the roller com-
paction distance is 300 cm. In summary, the test processes of the
plastic deformation test were carried out in the following order:
first, GCS specimens with the mold under the optimum moisture
content state and water-saturated state were placed on the test
bench, respectively; then, the test wheel was located in the central
part of GCS specimens, and the walking direction was in accor-
dance with the rolling direction of GCS specimens; finally, the plas-
100

tic deformation test was conducted according to the testing

standard mentioned above, and the plastic deformation of GCS
was recorded.

300 0
Determination of the initial time. The plastic deformation incre-

30 ments of GCS were used as the index for determing the initial
time. Fig. 7 shows that the plastic deformation increments of
GCS are significantly decreased from 0 to the 10th min. This
indicates that the external factors, such as a few uneven area
Fig. 5. Geometric sketch of mold (mm).
of GCS specimen surface, may be eliminated in about 10 min.
Meanwhile, it is found that a significant inflection point exists
in the 10th min or so. Seen from the above analysis, the recom-
mended initial time is the 10th min, i.e., the 0–10 min is recom-
Test wheel mended as the preloading stage. In future, the plastic
Loading area deformation of GCS is recorded from the begining of the 10th
min in the plastic deformation test.

Determination of the terminal time. The plastic deformation
50

increments of GCS were also used as the index for determining

the terminal time. Considering that the plastic deformation
Round-trip walking direction increments of GCS in the subsequent test time were signifi-
300

cantly less than those of 20 min before, Fig. 8 shows the test
results based on the interval time of 2 min for more visually
230 ± 10 identifying the development trend of the plastic deformation
100

increments of GCS. As can be seen from Fig. 8, the plastic defor-

300
Fig. 6. Loading sketch of GCS specimen (mm).
fic process of GCS specimen subjected to load pressure. The testing
standard comprises the following contents [27]: the standard load
is 0.7 MPa (i.e., the test wheel pressure is set to
0.7 MPa ± 0.05 MPa); the round-trip moving speed of test wheel
is 42 number/min ± 1 number/min; the walking distance of test
mation increments of GCS decrease gradually from the 40th to
the 120th min, especially the decrease extent is the largest from
the 40th to the 60th min. The plastic deformation increments of
GCS are still increasing from the 60th min to the 70th min, but
the increase extent has been smaller. Additionally, the partial
deviation between Fig. 8(a) and (b) needs to be illustrated: com-
pared with Fig. 8(a), the reason for the relatively large increase
extent of the plastic deformation increments of GCS after
60 min presented in Fig. 8(b) may be the effect of experimental
error or test states of the testing specimen. But more impor-
tantly, the plastic deformation in the first 60 min of GCS should
 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394 387

Table 1
Aggregate gradation of GCS.

Sieve size (mm) 31.5 19 9.5 4.75 2.36 0.6 0.075

Passing percent (%) 100 64 47 36 28 17.5 7.5

Fig. 7. Plastic deformation increments of GCS between 0 and the 20th min: (a) Optimum moisture content state; (b) Water-saturated state.

Fig. 8. Plastic deformation increments of GCS between the 40th min and the 120th min: (a) Optimum moisture content state; (b) Water-saturated state.

be able to reflect the plastic deformation characteristics of GCS.

On the other hand, the using more test data to establish the cal-
culation model of PDI would increase the test time and work-
load, so that the proposed method may be hardly beneficial to
be popularized and applied. Thus, the recommended terminal
time is the 60th min. That is, the test time is set to 60 min in
actual application. The test time is not very long so that the test
efficiency may be greatly improved and the data analysis pro-
cess may be significantly accelerated.

Determination of the interval time. The interval time (i.e., time
step) has a significant effect on the accuracy of PDI. The PDI
value is more accurate when the interval time is shorter (i.e.,
the number of trapezoid (or triangle) is more), but the calcula-
tion procedure is more complex. Conversely, the calculation
procedure is simple, but the error of PDI value is larger. There-
fore, a critical task was to determine a reasonable interval time Fig. 9. PDI value of GCS at different interval time.
to balance the common requirements of the accuracy and speed
of calculation of PDI. Combined with the recommended initial
time and terminal time, Fig. 9 shows that the plastic deforma- 5 min and 10 min are smaller, but the D-value of the interval
tion of GCS at the interval time of 2 min, 5 min, 10 min and time of 15 min is significantly larger (Note: the D-value refers
15 min were substituted into Eq. (2) to calculate the PDI value to the difference value between the calculation value of PDI
of GCS, respectively. Compared with the exact value of PDI, under each interval time and the corresponding exact value of
the difference value (D-value) of the interval time of 2 min, PDI. And, the exact value of PDI was calculated by the corre-
388 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394
sponding software according to the definition of Eq. (1), such as
Origin software). The above D-value indicates that the partial
shadowed area is inevitably eliminated when the curved sur-
face area is approximately replaced by the sum of several trape-
zoid (or triangle) areas. Generally speaking, the above
approximate trapezoid area method should be feasible as long
as the interval time is small enough. Meanwhile, since PDI is a
relative value, it could be considered that the smaller D-value
is also accepted. However, the interval time of 15 min omit a
larger part of shadowed area and produce larger error, so the
15 min taken as the interval time is inappropriate. On the other
hand, since the D-values of the interval time of 2 min, 5 min and
10 min are relatively smaller, these three types of interval time
basically meet the accuracy requirements and are all suitable as
the interval time. Furthermore, compared with the interval time
of 10 min, the calculation of PDI at the interval time of 2 min or
5 min should need more data and the calculation process may
be relatively cockamamie. The recommended interval time is
10 min according to the comprehensive considerations, i.e.,
the 10 min is recommended as the time step. Finally, the PDI
value of GCS can be calculated by using an appropriate amount
of partial data instead of all data.
In summary, the reasonable initial time (i.e., preloading stage),
terminal time and interval time (i.e., time step) of the recorded
plastic deformation are the 10th min, 60th min and 10 min based
on fully reflecting the plastic deformation characteristics of GCS,
improving the test efficiency and the convenience of application,
respectively. Hence, the plastic deformation of the 10th min for
GCS is equivalent to zero due to the 0–10 min taken as the preload-
ing stage; the 10 min is taken as the time step. The calculation
sketch of PDI value of GCS is shown in Fig. 10. Consequently, Eq.
(2) is further rewritten by the following equation.
PDI ¼ ðd10 =2 þ d20 þ d30 þ d40 þ d50 þ d60 =2Þ  Dt  Nd
where d10 ; d20 ; d30 ; d40 ; d50 and d60 are the plastic deformation of GCS
in the 10th min, 20th min, 30th min, 40th min, 50th min and 60th
min under standard load of 0.7 MPa, respectively, d10 ¼ 0; and Dt is
the interval time or time step (Dt ¼ 10 min).
The calculation equation of PDI was established by using the
test results of the plastic deformation of GCS under standard load
of 0.7 MPa in laboratory test (Note: the plastic deformation test
was conducted with reference to the rutting test). Thus, the plastic
deformation of the corresponding time points of GCS base at failure
was substituted into Eq. (3) to determine the requirement for PDI
values of the typical asphalt pavements for establishing the control
standard of plastic deformation performance of GCS. Considering
that the actual stress values of GCS base for different types of
Fig. 10. Calculation sketch of PDI value of GCS.
asphalt pavements are usually different from the standard load
of 0.7 MPa in laboratory test, it is essential to perform the equiva-
lent conversion of the plastic deformation under different stresses
for simplifying calculation. This study took the stress of 0.7 MPa as
the reference standard, and the specific equivalent conversion was
as follow: the plastic deformation in the 60th min under different
stresses when GCS base reached the failure criterion were con-
verted into the plastic deformation in the 60th min under the
stress of 0.7 MPa when GCS base reached the failure criterion.
Therefore, according to the results of the authors’ research group,
the plastic deformation of GCS at a given time (i.e., d10 ,
d20 ; d30 ; d40 ; d50 and d60 ) is calculated by the following prediction
model for plastic deformation of GCS.
dt ¼ ½0:02087N0:31500 þ ð1:07800  109 N þ 0:83410Þð1
 1:430pþ0:261
p h
 e0:00122N Þd60;ps ð4Þ
ps 100
where N is the number of load repetitions in laboratory test, and
N ¼ Nd  t, t is the test time, i.e., the corresponding cumulative
equivalent single axle loads in pavement design; h is the GCS base
thickness; d60;ps is the plastic deformation of GCS in the 60th min
under standard load of 0.7 MPa; p is the vertical compressive stress
of GCS base; and ps is the standard load (ps = 0.7 MPa).
3. Analysis parameters of control standard established
3.1. Selection of typical asphalt pavements and stress analysis of GCS
base
Considering that it is impractical to select all asphalt pavements
as the analytical objects to establish the control standard (i.e., the
ð3Þ permissible value of PDI), the selected typical asphalt pavements
are an optional strategy for realizing the purpose. The selected typ-
ical asphalt pavements should cover the major pavement types to
meet the practical requirements. This study mainly takes into
account the asphalt pavement with composite base, i.e., the
asphalt pavement with GCS base and semi-rigid subbase, as shown
in Fig. 11. The primary reason for the asphalt pavement with GCS
base and semi-rigid subbase used as the analytical object is as fol-
lows: (1) in terms of economic benefits, GCS is an unbound granu-
lar material for road construction, which is easy to obtain and of
low cost; (2) in terms of performance advantage, GCS layer has
good capability of stress dispersion, so GCS layer laid between
the asphalt surface course and semi-rigid base in asphalt pavement
plays a significant role in restraining the reflective crack of asphalt
surface course caused by the shrinkage crack of semi-rigid base;
meanwhile, the semi-rigid layer has good integrity, enough
mechanical strength, water resistance and frost resistance; (3)
the asphalt pavement with GCS base and semi-rigid subbase
Fig. 11. Sketch of asphalt pavement with composite base.
 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394
should be able to make best use of the advantages and bypass the
disadvantages when the advantages of GCS base and semi-rigid
subbase are fully combined, so that the asphalt pavement has bet-
ter performance.
The first thing to illustrate is that the asphalt pavement with
GCS base and semi-rigid subbase has been hardly specified in the
current specifications. The typical asphalt pavements in this study
were selected on the basis of the similar requirements in the cur-
rent specifications to be closer to meet the actual requirements.
In other words, the corresponding material parameters and struc-
ture parameters of the selected typical asphalt pavements were
determined according to the Specifications for Design of Highway
Asphalt Pavement (JTG D50-2017) [28] and Technical Standard of
Highway Engineering (JTG B01-2014) [29].Table 2 presents the
characteristics of asphalt pavement with composite base. Pave-
ments A and B are mainly applicable to the secondary road; Pave-
ments C, D, E and F are mainly applicable to the expressway and
first-grade highway. According to the Technical Standard of High-
way Engineering (JTG B01-2014) [29], the definition of highway
grade in China is as follows: the secondary road is a two-lane high-
way designed for vehicles driving, and the annual average daily
designed traffic volume of secondary road should be more than
5,000 to 15,000 passenger cars; the first-grade highway is a multi-
lane highway that controls access optionally according to the
needs, which is designed for vehicles driving in divided directions
and divided lanes, and the annual average daily designed traffic
volume of first-grade highway should be more than 15,000 passen-
ger cars; the expressway is a multilane highway that controls all
access, which is specially designed for vehicles driving in divided
directions and divided lanes, and the annual average daily
designed traffic volume of expressway should be more than
15,000 passenger cars.
The semi-rigid subbase thickness was preliminary determined
by taking the design deflection as the checking index. The design
deflection is defined by the following description: the required sur-
face deflection value of asphalt pavement is correspondingly
obtained when the asphalt pavement has been subjected to the
cumulative equivalent single axle loads in the design service life
and the pavement condition is still better than the limit state stan-
dard of each highway grade; under this condition, the design
deflection is defined as the required surface deflection value of
asphalt pavement. Additionally, the surface deflection represents
the vertical displacement of asphalt pavement under the design
axle load, which is an index to reflect the total stiffness of asphalt
pavement. The asphalt pavements with combined base are mainly
analyzed in this study, i.e., from the top layer to bottom layer, the
structure layers are the asphalt surface course, GCS base, semi-
rigid subbase and subgrade, respectively. The procedure followed
to design the asphalt pavement is as follows: first, the suitable
asphalt pavements are preliminarily selected according to the clas-
sification of highway grade and cumulative equivalent single axle
loads in the specification, as tabulated in Table 2; then, the cumu-
Table 2
Characteristics of asphalt pavement with composite base.
Pavement type
Asphalt surface course
Thickness Modulus
(cm) (MPa)
A 8 1400
B 10 1400
C 15 1400
D 18 1600
E 20 1600
F 22 1600
389
lative equivalent single axle loads of each asphalt pavement is
divided into three grades; the trial calculation of asphalt pave-
ments presented in Table 2 are constantly performed on the basis
that the calculated surface deflection values should not exceed the
design deflection values; finally, the semi-rigid subbase thickness
for each asphalt pavement is obtained from the results of the trial
calculation, and more types of asphalt pavements are further
determined, as shown in Table 3.
The plastic deformation of GCS base was mainly caused by the
vertical compressive stress, so only the vertical compressive stress
was analyzed in the stress analysis of GCS base. Meanwhile, the
effect of asphalt surface course parameters on the vertical com-
pressive stress was also taken into account to acquire more types
of asphalt pavements, so that the selected typical asphalt pave-
ments have better generality.The vertical compressive stress of
GCS base was calculated by Bisar and the details consisted of the
following aspects. (1) According to the basic national conditions
of China, the axle load of the single axle-two wheel set with 100
KN was adopted as the design axle load in asphalt pavement
design. The calculation parameters of the design axle load are as
follows: the design axle load = 100 KN; the tire ground pres-
sure = 0.70 MPa; the diameter of equivalent circle = 21.30 cm; the
two wheel center distance = 31.95 cm. (2) The set parameters in
Bisar are: (a) ‘‘Loads”: stress = 700 kPa; radius = 0.1065 m (i.e.,
the radius of equivalent circle); the (X Coordinate, Y Coordinate)
of load number 1 and 2 are (-0.1598, 0) and (0.1598, 0), respec-
tively; (b) ‘‘Layers”: the thickness, modulus elasticity and Poisson’s
ratio of the each layer of asphalt pavements were input, respec-
tively; (c) ‘‘Positions”: the positions referred to the calculation
position of the vertical compressive stress of GCS base. (3) Only
the calculation positions of one side for the single axle-two wheel
were analyzed because the loading position of the load was sym-
metrical. (4) The trial calculation of the vertical compressive stress
of GCS base at different positions were performed, such as the
wheel gap center, the middle position between the wheel gap cen-
ter and single wheel center, the inner side edge of the single wheel,
the single wheel center, and the outer side edge of the single
wheel. (5) The corresponding position was regarded as the calcula-
tion position of the vertical compressive stress of GCS base by tak-
ing the maximum vertical compressive stress of the corresponding
position as the value of the vertical compressive stress of GCS base.
Finally, the results of the trial calculation indicate that the calcula-
tion position should be the single wheel center. As can be seen
from Table 4, pavement A includes twenty-seven types of typical
asphalt pavements. For pavements A, B, C, D, E and F, a total of
one hundred and sixty-two types of typical asphalt pavements
were selected as the analytical objects. It was very cumbersome
to present the calculated results of all asphalt pavements due to
the excessive amount data. Hence Table 4 only presents the verti-
cal compressive stress of GCS base for pavement A (Note: the fol-
lowing intermediate calculation processes also mainly presented
the calculated results for pavement A).
Pavement structure layer
Graded crushed stone base Semi-rigid subbase Subgrade
Thickness Modulus Thickness Modulus Modulus
(cm) (MPa) (cm) (MPa) (MPa)
15 450 1700 50
15 450 1700 50
18 450 2000 50
18 450 2000 50
18 450 2000 50
20 450 2000 50
390 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394

Table 3
Design deflection and semi-rigid subbase thickness.

Pavement type A B C
6 3 7.5 12 6 11 16 10 15 20
Cumulative equivalent single axle loads (10 )
Design deflection (0.01 mm) 33.4 27.8 25.3 29.1 25.8 23.9 23.9 22.0 20.8
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 26 35 40 30 36 40 28 33 36
Pavement type D E F

Cumulative equivalent single axle loads (10 ) 6 15 20 25 20 30 40 30 40 50

Design deflection (0.01 mm) 22.0 20.8 19.9 20.8 19.2 18.1 19.2 18.1 17.3
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 27 29 32 27 31 34 27 30 33

Table 4
Vertical compressive stress of GCS base for pavement A (kPa).

Asphalt surface modulus (MPa) 1300 1400 1500

Asphalt surface thickness (cm) 7 8 9 7 8 9 7 8 9
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 26 327.4 299.2 274.6 323.2 295.0 270.4 319.3 291.0 266.6
35 331.1 305.2 280.8 329.0 301.1 276.8 325.2 297.2 273.0
40 334.9 307.1 282.9 330.9 303.1 278.9 327.1 299.2 275.1

3.2. Plastic deformation of GCS base at failure Table 6

Calculated results of d60;p for pavement A.

The plastic deformation of GCS base at failure was primarily Cumulative equivalent single axle loads (106 ) 3 7.5 12
analyzed for obtaining the calculation parameters of PDI (i.e.,
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 26 35 40
d10 ; d20 ; d30 ; d40 ; d50 and d60 ). According to the literatures [30–32], d60;p (mm) 1.92 1.54 1.37
4% plastic strain can be regarded as the failure criterion of GCS.
For the typical asphalt pavements (i.e., A, B, C, D, E and F), the plas-
tic deformations of GCS base at failure were calculated by Eq. (5),
as given in Table 5. In addition, the d60;ps values of the typical asphalt pavements (i.e., A,
dph;p ¼ eph;p  h ð5Þ B, C, D, E and F) were substituted into Eq. (4) to calculate the plastic
deformation of GCS base at a given time, i.e., d10 ; d20 ; d30 ; d40 ; d50 and
where dph;p is the plastic deformation of GCS base at failure; and d60 . Finally, the requirement for PDI values of the typical asphalt
eph;p is the plastic strain of GCS at failure (eph;p ¼ 4%). pavements were calculated by substituting the d10 ; d20 ; d30 ; d40 ; d50
and d60 into Eq. (3).
3.3. Calculation of Plastic deformation of GCS base at a given time

The corresponding plastic deformation of GCS base in the 60th

min when GCS base reached the failure criterion, denoted as d60;p ,
could be acquired by further analyzing the plastic deformation of
GCS base at failure (dph;p ) presented in Table 5. In other words, it
can be considered that GCS base is damaged when the plastic
deformation of GCS base in the 60th min reaches the correspond-
ing d60;p value. According to Eq. (4), the d60;p was calculated by
Eq. (6), as shown in Table 6.
dph;p
¼ ½0:02087N0:31500 þ ð1:07800  109 N þ 0:83410Þð1
d60;p
 e0:00122N Þ
Then, according to the stress of 0.7 MPa taken as the reference
standard, the d60;p under different stresses were converted into
the plastic deformation of GCS base in the 60th min under the
stress of 0.7 MPa (denoted as d60;ps ) by Eq. (7). The conversion
results is shown in Table 7.
 1:430pþ0:261
d60;p p the actual value, since the elimination of the plastic deformation
¼ ð7Þ
d60;ps ps
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Plastic deformation of GCS base at a given time
Table 7 presents the conversion results of d60;ps for pavement A.
It can be seen that this study adopts many varieties of asphalt sur-
face modulus, asphalt surface thickness and semi-rigid subbase
thickness to enrich the types of the typical asphalt pavements.
Therefore, this seems to support that the typical asphalt pave-
ments selected in this study should be feasible to lay the founda-
ð6Þ tion for establishing the control standard of the plastic
deformation performance of GCS in most potential applications.
Table 8 presents the calculated values of the plastic deformation
of GCS base for pavement A at a given time, i.e.,
d10 ; d20 ; d30 ; d40 ; d50 and d60 . The calculated results show that the
plastic deformation of GCS base during the preloading stage is
eliminated, i.e., d10 = 0. It appears that the calculation method used
in this study makes the plastic deformation of GCS base closer to
of GCS base during the preloading stage is taken into accounted.

Table 5
Plastic deformation of GCS base at failure.

Pavement type A B C D E F
GCS base thickness h (cm) 15 15 18 18 18 20
Plastic deformation of GCS base at failure dph;p (mm) 6 6 7.2 7.2 7.2 8
 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394 391

Table 7
Conversion results of d60;ps for pavement A (mm).

Asphalt surface modulus (MPa) 1300 1400 1500

Asphalt surface thickness (cm) 7 8 9 7 8 9 7 8 9
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 26 3.34 3.45 3.54 3.36 3.46 3.55 3.37 3.48 3.57
35 2.67 2.75 2.82 2.67 2.76 2.83 2.69 2.77 2.84
40 2.36 2.43 2.50 2.37 2.44 2.51 2.38 2.45 2.52

Table 8
Plastic deformation of GCS base for pavement A at a given time (mm).

Asphalt surface modulus (MPa) 1300 1400 1500

Asphalt surface thickness (cm) 7 8 9 7 8 9 7 8 9
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 26 d10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d20 1.06 1.09 1.12 1.06 1.09 1.12 1.07 1.10 1.13
d30 1.58 1.63 1.67 1.59 1.64 1.68 1.59 1.64 1.69
d40 1.90 1.96 2.01 1.91 1.97 2.02 1.92 1.98 2.03
d50 2.10 2.17 2.22 2.11 2.18 2.23 2.12 2.19 2.24
d60 2.23 2.30 2.36 2.24 2.31 2.37 2.25 2.32 2.38
35 d10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d20 0.84 0.87 0.89 0.85 0.87 0.90 0.85 0.88 0.90
d30 1.26 1.30 1.33 1.26 1.30 1.34 1.27 1.31 1.34
d40 1.52 1.56 1.60 1.52 1.57 1.61 1.53 1.57 1.62
d50 1.68 1.73 1.77 1.68 1.73 1.78 1.69 1.74 1.79
d60 1.78 1.83 1.88 1.78 1.84 1.89 1.79 1.85 1.89
40 d10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d20 0.75 0.77 0.79 0.75 0.77 0.79 0.75 0.78 0.80
d30 1.11 1.15 1.18 1.12 1.15 1.19 1.12 1.16 1.19
d40 1.34 1.38 1.42 1.35 1.39 1.43 1.35 1.39 1.43
d50 1.48 1.53 1.57 1.49 1.54 1.58 1.50 1.54 1.58
d60 1.57 1.62 1.66 1.58 1.63 1.67 1.59 1.64 1.68

Table 9
Requirement for PDI values of pavement A (mm  number).

Asphalt surface modulus (MPa) 1300 1400 1500

Asphalt surface thickness (cm) 7 8 9 7 8 9 7 8 9
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 26 3252.6 3356.4 3445.4 3268.2 3371.7 3460.5 3282.6 3386.2 3474.1
35 2598.3 2674.9 2746.1 2604.5 2687.0 2757.6 2615.8 2698.4 2768.6
40 2296.7 2369.9 2432.6 2307.3 2380.4 2442.9 2317.4 2390.5 2452.6

Table 10
Requirement for PDI values of pavement B (mm  number).

Asphalt surface modulus (MPa) 1300 1400 1500

Asphalt surface thickness (cm) 9 10 11 9 10 11 9 10 11
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 30 2917.5 2976.4 3033.0 2923.8 2988.3 3044.6 2935.5 2999.6 3055.2
36 2492.6 2548.2 2596.7 2503.1 2558.3 2606.3 2513.0 2567.9 2615.5
40 2258.4 2308.7 2352.6 2267.8 2318.0 2361.4 2276.9 2326.4 2369.6

4.2. Control standard of plastic deformation performance
According to the plastic deformation of GCS base at a given time
(i.e., d10 ; d20 , d30 ; d40 ; d50 and d60 ), the requirement for PDI values of
the typical asphalt pavements were calculated by Eq. (3), as sum-
marized in Tables 9–14.
The statistical method was used to process the above calculated
results of PDI for different highway grades in order to obtain the
representative values of PDI. Table 15 presents the representative
values of PDI under the corresponding guaranteed ratio based on
the classification of expressway and first-grade highway or sec-
ondary road. Then, the representative values of PDI were modified
by using the approximate value method, and the thresholds of PDI
were further determined. Furthermore, the thresholds of PDI are
regarded as the control standard to control the plastic deformation
performance of GCS, as given in Table 16. The details are as follows:
(1) the PDI value of GCS should be less than or equal to
1900 mm  number for expressway and first-grade highway; (2)
the PDI value of GCS should be less than or equal to 2200
mm  number for secondary road. Although the developed control
standard is a range value with upper limit, the much smaller PDI
value may be not the most appropriate under the premise of satis-
fying the thresholds of PDI. The much smaller PDI value imposes
higher requirements for material design and construction technol-
ogy in practical engineering applications; but in fact, it is difficult
to comprehensively meet the higher requirements in some cases.
Therefore, the determinaton of PDI value of GCS in practical engi-
neering applications should comprehensively take into account
392 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394

Table 11
Requirement for PDI values of pavement C (mm  number).

Asphalt surface modulus (MPa) 1500 1600 1700

Asphalt surface thickness (cm) 14 15 16 14 15 16 14 15 16
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 28 2821.0 2847.3 2871.9 2828.3 2854.6 2879.2 2835.2 2861.5 2886.2
33 2532.4 2555.7 2577.8 2538.7 2562.2 2584.2 2544.9 2568.3 2590.3
36 2343.8 2365.4 2385.8 2349.7 2371.3 2391.6 2355.3 2377.0 2397.2

Table 12
Requirement for PDI values of pavement D (mm  number).

Asphalt surface modulus (MPa) 1500 1600 1700

Asphalt surface thickness (cm) 17 18 19 17 18 19 17 18 19
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 27 2616.8 2636.8 2655.4 2623.1 2643.1 2661.3 2629.0 2649.2 2667.1
29 2421.7 2439.9 2457.0 2427.3 2446.0 2462.4 2433.0 2451.6 2467.7
32 2276.1 2293.4 2308.9 2281.6 2298.8 2314.0 2286.7 2303.8 2318.9

Table 13
Requirement for PDI values of pavement E (mm  number).

Asphalt surface modulus (MPa) 1500 1600 1700

Asphalt surface thickness (cm) 19 20 21 19 20 21 19 20 21
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 27 2461.7 2477.2 2492.4 2467.2 2482.9 2498.3 2472.5 2488.4 2504.0
31 2199.5 2213.1 2226.7 2204.4 2218.4 2231.9 2209.1 2223.2 2236.7
34 2028.2 2040.9 2053.1 2032.6 2045.4 2057.8 2036.9 2049.9 2062.1

Table 14
Requirement for PDI values of pavement F (mm  number).

Asphalt surface modulus (MPa) 1500 1600 1700

Asphalt surface thickness (cm) 21 22 23 21 22 23 21 22 23
Semi-rigid subbase thickness (cm) 27 2246.9 2259.8 2272.4 2252.2 2265.3 2278.1 2257.2 2270.3 2283.4
30 2070.6 2082.2 2093.9 2075.3 2087.2 2099.0 2079.7 2092.0 2103.8
33 1941.3 1952.3 1963.1 1945.7 1956.7 1967.6 1950.0 1961.1 1972.2

Table 15 5. Applied analysis

Representative value of PDI.

Contents Expressway/First-grade Secondary An example was given to show the application of the developed
highway road control standard presented in Table 16. The raw material of GCS is
Average value (mm  number) 2352.3 2714.0 limestone, and the aggregate gradation is tabulated in Table 1. GCS
Standard deviation 252.5 372.5 specimens were molded by the wheel rolling machine according to
(mm  number) the specimen specification (i.e., 300 mm  300 mm  100 mm),
Coefficient of variation (%) 10.7 13.7
optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of GCS
Number of sample 108 54
Coefficient of guarantee ratio 1.65 1.35 (i.e., 3.4% and 2.47 g/cm3 , respectively), and 98% compaction. The
Representative value 1935.7 2211.1 loading sketch of GCS specimen is shown in Fig. 6. The test pro-
(mm  number) cesses were as follows: (1) GCS specimens with the mold were
placed on the test bench; (2) the test wheel was located in the cen-
tral part of GCS specimens, and the walking direction was in accor-
Table 16 dance with the rolling direction of GCS specimens; (3) the round-
Control standard of PDI value of GCS for different highway grades. trip moving speed, wheel pressure, and walking distance of test
Highway grade Expressway/First-grade Secondary wheel were 42 number/min ± 1 number/min, 0.7 MPa ± 0.05 MPa
highway road and 230 mm ± 10 mm, respectively; (4) the test time was 60 min,
Threshold of PDI 6 1900 6 2200 and the 0–10 min was the preloading stage and the remaining time
(mm  number) was the formal test stage. The plastic deformation of GCS speci-
mens were recorded in the 10th min, 20th min, 30th min, 40th
the following aspects: thresholds of PDI; material design; construc- min, 50th min and 60th min (i.e., d10 , d20 ; d30 ; d40 ; d50 and d60 ),
tion technology. In brief, the common requirements for the above respectively.
three aspects needs to be balanced under the premise of satisfying The PDI value of GCS was calculated by substituting the
the thresholds of PDI. Moreover, the developed control standard is d10 ; d20 ; d30 , d40 ; d50 , and d60 into Eq. (3). Table 17 shows that the
conductive to instructing the material design of GCS to make its PDI value of GCS is approximately 1893 mm  number. As can be
plastic deformation meet the actual requirement of different high- seen from Table 16, the PDI value of GCS for this example meets
way grades, e.g., the aggregate gradation of GCS is designed by the the requirement for PDI values of all highway grades. Additionally,
requirement for PDI values of the given highway grades. the PDI value is very close to 1900 mm  number. Therefore, when
 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394
Table 17
Calculated results of PDI value of GCS.
Testing specimen
PDI value (mm  number) Test value
Average value
the GCS given in this example is applied to expressway and first-
grade highway, the construction quality may need to be further
strengthened to minimize the effect of improper construction
operations on the PDI value of GCS.
6. Conclusions
This study addressed the control standard of the plastic defor-
mation performance of GCS. The control standard was established
by setting a threshold of an evaluation indicator. PDI was proposed
as the evaluation indicator and its calculation equation was given.
A total of one hundred and sixty-two types of typical asphalt pave-
ments were used as the analytical objects based on six types of the
typical asphalt pavements (i.e., A, B, C, D, E and F), which should be
able to cover the major pavement types. The requirement for PDI
values were calculated by the calculation equation of PDI (i.e., Eq.
(3)) on the basis of the selected typical asphalt pavements with
GCS base and a failure criterion with 4% plastic strain. Finally,
the control standard was presented according to the classification
of different highway grades. The major findings of this study are as
follows:
(1) PDI reflects the developmemt mode of the plastic deforma-
tion of GCS, and is capable of characterizing the plastic
deformation performance of GCS. The key calculation
parameters of PDI are the plastic deformation of GCS in the
10th min, 20th min, 30th min, 40th min, 50th min, and
60th min, i.e., d10 ; d20 ; d30 ; d40 , d50 and d60 . According to the
typical asphalt pavements and the plastic deformation of
GCS base at failure, the d10 ; d20 ; d30 , d40 ; d50 and d60 are deter-
mined by using the prediction model for the plastic defor-
mation of GCS base, respectively. PDI can be acquired by
Eq. (3) simply and conveniently.
(2) Generally, the semi-rigid layer has good integrity, enough
mechanical strength, water resistance, and frost resistance;
and more importantly, GCS layer can effectively spread the
wheel load response and furtherrestrain the reflective crack
of asphalt surface course caused by the shrinkage crack of
semi-rigid layer. For the asphalt pavement with GCS base
and semi-rigid subbase, it is believed that the combination
of GCS base and semi-rigid subbase should be able to make
best use of the advantages and bypass the disadvantages,
and is of great significance to further developing a new type
of asphalt pavement with better performance. Therefore, the
asphalt pavements with GCS base and semi-rigid subbase
recommended as the analyzed pavement types should be a
good choice.
(3) According to the selected typical asphalt pavements, the
requirement for PDI values of different highway grades were
determined by combining the relationship between PDI and
the plastic deformation of GCS at a given time. Then, the
control standard for the plastic deformation performance
of GCS could be clearly classified on the basis of the classifi-
cation of highway grades. The PDI value of GCS can be sim-
ply and conveniently determined by conducting the plastic
deformation test. The PDI value should be less than or equal
to 1900 mm  number when GCS is used in expressway and
first-grade highway; the PDI value should be less than or
393
I-1 I-2 I-3
1848 1925 1907
1893
equal to 2200 mm  number when GCS is used in secondary
road. Moreover, the PDI value that is not too small under the
premise of satisfying the thresholds of PDI could be more
appropriate in light of the comprehensive consideration of
the actual feasibility of material design and construction
technology. The further application and popularization of
the asphalt pavements with GCS base and semi-rigid sub-
base in road construction may be greatly promoted.
(4) The developed control standard could contribute to control-
ling the plastic deformation of GCS within a set threshold to
meet the prescribed requirement of asphalt pavement. The
material design of GCS (e.g., gradation design) may be quan-
titatively instructed by the developed control standard. In an
engineering application, the PDI value of GCS is firstly deter-
mined by the data of the plastic deformation test; then, the
suitability of the material design of GCS is judged by com-
paring the calculated value of PDI with the developed con-
trol standard. In addition, the test operation and
calculation method are also simple and convenient for prac-
tical application. However, further work will also need to be
done. A trial pavement section is used to further test and
improve the developed control standard. Hence the combi-
nation of laboratory test and trial pavement section will be
taken into account in future study.
Conflict of interest
The authors certify that there are no conflict of any interests
with the manuscript.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of test condi-
tions from Key Laboratory for Special Area Highway Engineering
of Ministry of Education. The authors would also like to acknowl-
edge the editors and reviewers of this paper for their very valuable
comments and remarks.
References
[1] M.N.S. Hadi, B.C. Bodhinayake, Non-linear finite element analysis of flexible
pavements, Adv. Eng. Softw. 34 (11-12) (2003) 657–662. 10.1016/S0965-9978
(03)00109-1.
[2] C. Lima, L. Motta, Study of permanent deformation and granulometric
distribution of graded crushed stone pavement material, Procedia Eng. 143
(2016) 854–861, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.06.141.
[3] Y.J. Xiao, E. Tutumluer, J. Siekmeier, Resilient modulus behavior estimated
from aggregate source properties, Geo-Frontiers 2011: Advances in
Geotechnical Engineering-Proceedings of the Geo-Frontiers 2011 Conference,
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2011, pp. 4843–4852, https://doi.
org/10.1061/41165(397)495.
[4] Y.C. Guo, S.N. Wang, C.H. Ruan, A.Q. Shen, L.G. Wang, Mechanical analysis of
asphalt pavements with a graded crushed stone base under dynamic load, J.
Highway Transp. Res. Dev. (English Ed.) 10 (4) (2016) 13–20, https://doi.org/
10.1061/JHTRCQ.0000529.
[5] S.J. Ma, X.Y. Wang, Z. Hu, The analysis of the thickness of the layers influence
on graded broken stone stress state, Mech. Mater. 587–589 (2014) 952–955,
https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.587-589.952.
[6] R.W. Sharp, Pavement design based on shakedown analysis, Transp. Res. Rec.
1022 (1985) 99–107.
[7] S. Werkmeister, A.R. Dawson, F. Wellner, Pavement design model for unbound
granular materials, J. Transp. Eng. 130 (5) (2004) 665–674, https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2004)130:5(665).
394 G. Xu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 383–394
[8] R. Garca-Rojo, H.J. Herrmann, Shakedown of unbound granular material,
Granular Matter 7 (2–3) (2005) 109–118, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10035-004-
0186-6.
[9] M. Boulbibane, I.F. Collins, A.R.S. Ponter, D. Weichert, Shakedown of unbound
pavements, Road Mater. Pavement Des. 6 (1) (2005) 81–96, https://doi.org/
10.1080/14680629.2005.9690000.
[10] S. Werkmeister, A.R. Dawson, F. Wellner, Permanent deformation behaviour of
granular materials, Road Mater. Pavement Des. 6 (1) (2005) 31–51, https://doi.
org/10.1080/14680629.2005.9689998.
[11] F. Allou, C. Chazallon, P. Hornych, A numerical model for flexible pavements
rut depth evolution with time, Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech. 31 (1)
(2007) 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.521.
[12] F. Allou, C. Petit, C. Chazallon, P. Hornych, Shakedown approaches to rut depth
prediction in low volume roads, J. Eng. Mech. 136 (11) (2010) 1422–1434,
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000165.
[13] F. Lekarp, A. Dawson, Modelling permanent deformation behaviour of
unbound granular materials, Constr. Build. Mater. 12 (1) (1998) 9–18,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-0618(97)00078-0.
[14] C. Chen, L. Ge, J.S. Zhang, Modeling permanent deformation of unbound
granular materials under repeated loads, Int. J. Geomech. 10 (6) (2010) 236–
241, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000025.
[15] G. Cerni, F. Cardone, A. Virgili, S. Camilli, Characterisation of permanent
deformation behaviour of unbound granular materials under repeated triaxial
loading, Constr. Build. Mater. 28 (1) (2012) 79–87, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2011.07.066.
[16] A. Ahmed, S. Erlingsson, Evaluation of permanent deformation models for
unbound granular materials using accelerated pavement tests, Road Mater.
Pavement Des. 14 (1) (2013) 178–195, https://doi.org/10.1080/
14680629.2012.755936.
[17] T.F. Yideti, B. Birgisson, D. Jelagina, A. Guarin, Packing theory-based framework
to evaluate permanent deformation of unbound granular materials, Int. J.
Pavement Eng. 14 (3) (2013) 309–320, https://doi.org/10.1080/
10298436.2012.736620.
[18] S. Erlingsson, M.S. Rahman, Evaluation of permanent deformation
characteristics of unbound granular materials by means of multistage
repeated-load triaxial tests, Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2369
(2013) 11–19, https://doi.org/10.3141/2369-02.
[19] F. Gu, Y.Q. Zhang, X. Luo, H. Sahin, R.L. Lytton, Characterization and prediction
of permanent deformation properties of unbound granular materials for
pavement me design, Constr. Build. Mater. 155 (2017) 584–592, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.08.116.
[20] O.G. Omer, A.E.M. Mohamed, A.M. Elsharief, Effects of gradation, moisture and
density on strength, stiffness and deformation resistance of pure crushed
stone base blend, IJSBAR 14 (1) (2014) 455–469.
[21] H. Soliman, A. Shalaby, Permanent deformation behavior of unbound granular
base materials with varying moisture and fines content, Transp. Geotech. 4
(2015) 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2015.06.001.
[22] B. Liu, Q. Su, D.P. Pham, Influence of water content on strength and
deformation properties of graded crushed stone under both static and
dynamic stress conditions, Electron. J. Geotech. Eng. 21 (22) (2016) 6827–
6840.
[23] B. Yohannes, K. Hill, L. Khazanovich, Mechanistic Modeling of Unbound
Granular Materials, Tech. Rep. MN/RC 2009-21, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, U.S, 2009.
[24] P. Yuan, R.B. Zhou, Z.L. Dong, Y. Luo, Influence on cbr for graded crushed rock
on the base of port, Adv. Mater. Res. 838–841 (2014) 962–966, https://doi.org/
10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.838-841.962.
[25] T.F. Yideti, B. Birgisson, D. Jelagin, Influence of aggregate packing structure on
california bearing ratio values of unbound granular materials, Road Mater.
Pavement Des. 15 (1) (2014) 102–113, https://doi.org/10.1080/
14680629.2013.863160.
[26] S.H. Kim, J.D. Yang, J. Kwon, Effects of using screening materials in the graded
aggregate base layer of flexible pavements, Int. J. Pavement Eng. 18 (2) (2017)
97–107, https://doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2015.1036868.
[27] Ministry of Transport of the People’s Republic of China, Standard test methods
of bitumen and bituminous mixtures for highway engineering, China
Communications Press, Beijing (2011) (in Chinese).
[28] Ministry of Transport of the People’s Republic of China, Specifications for
design of highway asphalt pavement, China Communications Press, Beijing
(2017) (in Chinese).
[29] Ministry of Transport of the People’s Republic of China, Technical standard of
highway engineering, China Communications Press, Beijing (2015) (in
Chinese).
[30] G. Jin, Laboratory Study of Triaxial Test on Graded Broken Stone, Ms, Dalian
University of Technology, Dalian, 2007 (in Chinese).
[31] L. Wang, X.G. Xie, H.J. Ba, Critical stress and plastic deformation of graded
aggregate material under long-term dynamic repeat load, J. Tongji Univ. (Nat.
Sci.) 38 (9) (2010) 1293–1297, https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.0253-
374x.2010.09.007 (in Chinese).
[32] D. Li, Research on Mechanical Characteristics and Design Method of Graded
Crushed Stone Material, Phd, Chang’an University, Xi’an, 2013 (in Chinese).