The falling weight deflectometer (FWD) test is the most widely accepted and used technique for nondestructive evaluation of pavements. In this test, the pavement response to the impulse load of a falling weight is analyzed or back-calculated to evaluate the in situ pavement layer moduli. FWD back-calculation is mathematically an inverse problem that can be approached deterministically or probabilistically. In this paper, the probabilistic approach to FWD back-calculation is used as a tool to investigate the reliability of different dynamic and static back-calculation procedures. The probabilistic approach to FWD back-calculation, a relatively new approach, is initially introduced and a brief overview of its numerical implementation is presented. The approach is then applied to back-calculate moduli from a set of synthetic FWD data using different back-calculation procedures, such as static and dynamic deflection bowl or dynamic time history procedures. Based on the probabilistic solution for back-calculated moduli from each procedure, the reliability of each procedure is then compared to the others. It is shown that, although widely used, the static FWD back-calculation procedures fail to capture the essential dynamic nature of the test and consequently cannot be relied upon to correctly back-calculate the layer moduli. It is also demonstrated that there is little redundancy in the dynamic deflection bowl back-calculation procedures, potentially producing relatively large uncertainties in the obtained back-calculation results. Finally, it is shown that the dynamic deflection time history back-calculation is the most reliable approach for FWD back-calculation. Using the back-calculated moduli from different procedures, effect of different back-calculation approaches on the pavement life is illustrated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hadidi et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: