Comparativo entre as ferramentas AKFAA e BACKMEDINA na retroanálise de estruturas de pavimentos.
Carregando...
Tipo
TCC
Data de publicação
2021-12
Periódico
Citações (Scopus)
Autores
Meira, Daniel
Tavares, Juliano
Tavares, Juliano
Orientador
Silva, Eric Ribeiro da
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Membros da banca
Programa
Resumo
O presente estudo teve como objetivo comparar dois softwares de retroanálise para pavimentação, BAKFAA e BACKMEDINA. Foram avaliados os resultados gerados por ambas as ferramentas computacionais, utilizando os dados do levantamento deflectométrico com equipamento Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) advindos da pesquisa conduzida por Silva (2016). Foi possível observar que as bacias de deflexão retroanalisadas no software BAKFAA apresentaram maior precisão com as bacias medidas encontradas no local, porém com maior variação na amplitude dos módulos de resiliência retroanalisados. Apesar do BACKMEDINA apresentar maior imprecisão das bacias de deflexão calculadas em relação as bacias reais, seus resultados de módulos de resiliência apresentaram, em sua maioria, valores dentro da amplitude dos valores característicos das respectivas camadas. O software BACKMEDINA apresentou-se mais preciso nos resultados dos módulos de resiliência dos materiais das camadas do pavimento, quando comparado com o software mais tradicional BAKFAA.
The present study aimed to compare two paving backcalculation software, BAKFAA and BACKMEDINA. The results generated by both computational tools were evaluated, using deflectometric survey data with Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) equipment from the research conducted by Silva (2016). It was possible to observe that the back-analyzed deflection basins in the BAKFAA software presented greater precision with the basins measured at the site, but with greater variation in the amplitude of the back-analyzed resilience modules. Although BACKMEDINA presents greater inaccuracy of the calculated deflection basins in relation to the real basins, its resilience modulus results presented, for the most part, values within the range of the characteristic values of the respective layers. The BACKMEDINA software was more accurate in the results of the resilience modules of the materials in the pavement layers, when compared to the more traditional BAKFAA software.
The present study aimed to compare two paving backcalculation software, BAKFAA and BACKMEDINA. The results generated by both computational tools were evaluated, using deflectometric survey data with Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) equipment from the research conducted by Silva (2016). It was possible to observe that the back-analyzed deflection basins in the BAKFAA software presented greater precision with the basins measured at the site, but with greater variation in the amplitude of the back-analyzed resilience modules. Although BACKMEDINA presents greater inaccuracy of the calculated deflection basins in relation to the real basins, its resilience modulus results presented, for the most part, values within the range of the characteristic values of the respective layers. The BACKMEDINA software was more accurate in the results of the resilience modules of the materials in the pavement layers, when compared to the more traditional BAKFAA software.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
BAKFAA , BACKMEDINA , retroanálise , backcalculation