Análise comparativa de projetos de reforço obtidos por meio de retronálises

Abstract

The present study aims to analyze the mechanistic-empirical method of pavement reinforcement layer design (MeDiNa), which performs the reinforcement design based on the fatigue curve of the material and the prediction of cracks, and compare it with the empirical method of design presented by the DNER-PRO 011/79 standard which is aimed at maximum deflection. For this, we used the deflectometric data presented in the descriptive report of the executive project for the recovery of the Federal Highway BR-406/RN obtained through nondestructive structural assessment with the Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) equipment. Thus, a backcalculation of deflectometric basins of two homogeneous segments was carried out in the BackMeDiNa software, and then imported the values of elastic modules backcalculated into the MeDiNa software, where the structure proposed by the highway recovery project was evaluated and a new intervention proposal was designed. for the segment, comparing the results presented by the MeDiNa mechanistic-empirical method and the PRO 011 empirical method. It was found that when performing the backcalculation of the deflectometric basins of the segments in the BackMeDiNa software, it was observed that the analyzed segments are not homogeneous because the deflections measured in the survey basin are very different from the other basins. In addition, when analyzing the reinforcement proposal presented by the PRO011 method from the backcalculation of the deflection basins of the segments, it was observed that the reinforcement thicknesses presented do not support the requests of the segments presenting structure rupture before the end of the period of the 10 year project. When dimensioning a new reinforcement proposal, the thicknesses obtained for the segments were higher than those presented by the empirical method.