摘要
为了指导福建省高速公路沥青结合料选择,搜集、分析了福建省8个地区的气候和交通荷载数据,采用SHRP、LTTPbind2.1和LTTPbind3.1共3种沥青路面温度模型分别计算了福建省沥青路面典型结构温度,按照PG性能等级标准计算得出各种条件下沥青结合料性能等级。结果表明:(1)3个温度模型计算的低温性能等级基本一致,且与工程实际较为吻合;(2)3个温度模型计算的高温性能等级差异较大,LTTPBind 3.1温度模型确定的高温性能等级最高,而SHRP温度模型确定的沥青结合料等级最低。对于高温性能等级,LTTPBind 3.1温度模型比SHRP温度模型得到的结果高1-2级;LTTPBind 3.1温度模型与LTTPBind 2.1温度模型的结果相当或偏高1个等级;(3)SHRP温度模型计算得到的沥青结合料高温性能等级明显低于工程实际,LTTPBind 2.1温度模型得到的一般路段的中面层高温性能等级低于工程实际,而LTTPBind 3.1温度模型得到的结果与工程实际较为吻合,建议结合LTTPBind 3.1温度模型计算结果和已有工程经验,综合指导福建省沥青结合料性能等级选择;(4)福建省高速公路沥青路面沥青结合料的选择过于单一,没有考虑温度、交通荷载条件进行合理选择,这可能会造成中、重交通的一般路段和长大纵坡路段沥青结合料高温性能不足;(5)针对福建省的中、重交通的一般路段和长大纵坡路段分别提出了沥青结合料的选择原则和建议。
In order to guide asphalt binder selection for expressway in Fujian province, the climate and traffic load data in 8 regions of Fujian Province are collected and analysed, and the temperature of typical asphalt pavement structure in Fujian Province are calculated by using 3 asphalt pavement temperature models （ SHRP, LTFPbind 2. 1 and LTTPbind 3.1 ） , and the performance grades of asphalt binder under all kinds of condition are calculated according to the PG performance standard. The result shows that （1） The low - temperature performance grades calculated by the 3 temperature models are same and basically consistent with that of engineering practice. （2） The high temperature performance grades calculated by the 3 temperature models are quite different, the grade determined by the LTFPBind 3. 1 model is the highest, while that determined by the SHRP model is lowest. For higher temperature performance grade, the grade calculated by LTI＇PBind 3. 1 model is 1 grade or 2 grades higher than those calculated by SHRP model, while the grade calculated by LTTPBind 3. 1 model is the same or 1 grade higher than those calculated by LTTPBind 2. 1 model. （3） The high temperature performance grades of asphalt binder calculated by SHRP temperature model are significantly lower than that in engineering practice, and the grades of middle layer of general section calculated by LTFPBind 2. 1 model is lower than that in engineering practice, while those calculated by LTrPBind 3. 1 model is in good agreement with the engineering practice. It is recommended to combine the calculation result of the LTYPBind 3. 1 model with existing engineering experience to comprehensively guide the selection of the performance grade of asphalt binder in Fujian Province. （4） The selected asphalt binder type for asphalt pavement in Fujian Province is too single, it does not consider the temperature and traffic load conditions, which may cause that high temperature performance of asphalt binder for medium and heavy traffic in general
作者
曾俊铖
ZENG Jun-cheng(Fujian Expressway Group Co. , Ltd. , Fujian Fuzhou 350001, China)
出处
《公路交通科技》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2018年第6期8-13,29,共7页
Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development
关键词
道路工程
性能等级
模型分析
沥青结合料
车辙
road engineering
performance grade
model analysis
asphalt binder
rut
