j o u r n a l o f t r a f fi c a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n g i n e e r i n g ( e n g l i s h e d i t i o n ) 2 0 1 5 ; 2 ( 2 ) : 1 0 7 e1 1 5

H O S T E D BY Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

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

Original Research Paper

A numerical test method of California bearing

ratio on graded crushed rocks using particle
flow modeling

Yingjun Jiang a,b, Louis Ngai Yuen Wong b,*, Jiaolong Ren a,c
a
Key Laboratory for Special Area Highway Engineering of Ministry of Education, Chang'an University, Xi'an 710064,
China
b
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 639798, Singapore
c
School of Transportation, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China

article info abstract

Article history: In order to better understand the mechanical properties of graded crushed rocks (GCRs)
Available online 21 February 2015 and to optimize the relevant design, a numerical test method based on the particle flow
modeling technique PFC2D is developed for the California bearing ratio (CBR) test on GCRs.
The effects of different testing conditions and micro-mechanical parameters used in the
Keywords: model on the CBR numerical results have been systematically studied. The reliability of the
Graded crushed rocks numerical technique is verified. The numerical results suggest that the influences of the
Particle flow modeling loading rate and Poisson's ratio on the CBR numerical test results are not significant. As
California bearing ratio such, a loading rate of 1.0e3.0 mm/min, a piston diameter of 5 cm, a specimen height of
Numerical test 15 cm and a specimen diameter of 15 cm are adopted for the CBR numerical test. The
Micro-mechanical parameters numerical results reveal that the CBR values increase with the friction coefficient at the
Mesoscopic mechanism contact and shear modulus of the rocks, while the influence of Poisson's ratio on the CBR
values is insignificant. The close agreement between the CBR numerical results and
experimental results suggests that the numerical simulation of the CBR values is promising
to help assess the mechanical properties of GCRs and to optimize the grading design. Be-
sides, the numerical study can provide useful insights on the mesoscopic mechanism.
2015 Periodical Offices of Chang'an University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on
behalf of Owner. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

cracking, rutting, and other pavement distresses. Therefore,

1. Introduction
Graded crushed rocks (GCRs) are used extensively as tradi-
tional construction materials for roads (Hadi and
Bodhinayake, 2003). The poor performance of GCRs base
layers in flexible pavements may be manifested by fatigue
a rigorous assessment method for GCRs is necessary in road
engineering applications.
The California bearing ratio (CBR) test is frequently used
for assessing granular materials in base, subbase and subgrade
layers of road pavements (Al-Amoudi et al., 2002; ASTM
D 1883e14, 1999; Attoh-Okine, 2004; Duncan-Williams and

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 65 67905290.

E-mail addresses: jyj@chd.edu.cn (Y. Jiang), LNYWong@ntu.edu.sg (L.N.Y. Wong).
Peer review under responsibility of Periodical Offices of Chang'an University.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2015.02.004
2095-7564/ 2015 Periodical Offices of Chang'an University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Owner. This is an open
access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
108 j o u r n a l o f t r a f fi c a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n g i n e e r i n g ( e n g l i s h e d i t i o n ) 2 0 1 5 ; 2 ( 2 ) : 1 0 7 e1 1 5
Attoh-Okine, 2008; Taskiran, 2010). The CBR test was originally
developed by the California Department of Transportation and
was subsequently incorporated by the Army Corps of Engineers
for the design of flexible pavements (Al-Amoudi et al., 2002;
Attoh-Okine, 2004; Duncan-Williams and Attoh-Okine, 2008;
Taskiran, 2010). It has become so globally popular that it is
incorporated in many international standards (ASTM D
1883e14, 1999). However, engineers always encounter
difficulties in obtaining representative CBR values for design
(Al-Amoudi et al., 2002; Attoh-Okine, 2004; Duncan-Williams
and Attoh-Okine, 2008; Taskiran, 2010). Due to limited budget
and occasional poor project planning, GCRs investigation data
are insufficiently obtained in many cases (Al-Amoudi et al.,
2002). On the other hand, laboratory CBR test is often laborious
and time consuming. The test results are also significantly
influenced by the sample disturbance and laboratory testing
conditions (Al-Amoudi et al., 2002; Link et al., 1999; Taskiran,
2010; Yildirim and Gunaydin, 2011). Therefore, the
development of reliable prediction models might be useful to
supplement or replace some of the CBR tests, and to validate
the experimentally determined CBR values.
Some attempts of such prediction model development were
found in the literature. The effects of soil types and character-
istics on CBR values have been studied (Agarwal and Ghanekar,
1970; Black, 1962; Degraft-Johnson et al., 1969; Stephens, 1990;
Taskiran, 2010). Prediction of CBR of fine grained soils by artifi-
cial intelligence methods was studied by Taskiran (2010). A
correlation between CBR and plasticity index (PI) for cohesive
soils was developed by Black (1962). A correlation for CBR
using the concept of suitable index which varied with
plasticity and grading characteristic was suggested by Degraft-
Johnson et al. (1969). A correlation equation between CBR and
either liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL) or PI was developed by
Agarwal and Ghanekar (1970). However, they were not able to
establish any significant correlation among these parameters.
Instead, they obtained an improved correlation when
optimum moisture content and LL were included. It was found
that the grading constant is the best parameter to describe the
influence of grain size distribution on CBR. In the same study,
CBR was found to be most dependent on maximum dry
density (MDD) and least dependent on optimum moisture
content. Using grading constant, MDD and optimum moisture
content as independent variables, several equations for CBR
were presented. Stephens (1990) evaluated the performance of
existing models for some selected natural soils and these
models were found to be generally unsatisfactory. Another
method for the estimation of CBR was presented by British
Highways Agency (1994), which made use of PI for British soils
compacted at natural moisture content where the correlations
were given in the format of a table. NCHRP (2011) suggested
some correlations for describing the relationship between soil
index properties and CBR. A best-fit equation was proposed by
NCHRP for clean, coarse grained soil. This equation was
limited to D60 values varying between 0.01 and 30 mm. For
D60 smaller than 0.01 mm, the recommended value of CBR
was 5% whereas CBR value of 95% was recommended for D60
greater than 30 mm. A review of the above literature reveals
that satisfactory correlations could not always be obtained,
even for specific soils encountered locally. Many of the
proposed correlation equations suffered from a relatively low
degree of correlation coefficient. A reliable estimation of CBR is
thus difficult to obtain by using the conventional statistical
methods. Besides, in most studies, CBR was expressed in
terms of only one or two soil properties groups, with reference
to soil parameters including plasticity, gradation and
compaction properties. For example, PL belongs to plasticity
group, while optimum moisture content is in compaction
group. The reason for this undesirable correlation is due to
inadequate representation of soil properties groups, existence
of complex relationships among the parameters and
unpowerful methods of calculations (Taskiran, 2010).
Most of the above-mentioned models were developed based
on statistical correlations, often inadequately supported by
mechanics-based analysis. Besides, more attention has been
placed on soil than on GCRs. Research on the effects of
composition and structure of GCRs on the CBR can help raise the
GCRs performance and improve the material design. The CBR of
GCRs depends on the quality and size of aggregate, aggregate
gradation and MDD, etc. However, it is very challenging to
perform an in-depth and comprehensive investigation of the
properties of GCRs simply by directly observing and recording
the movement of the GCRs in response to loading in the labo-
ratory CBR study. Particle flow modeling is one of the most
rapidly developing numerical methods, which overcomes the
limitation associated with the macroscopic continuum
assumption of relevant conventional numerical techniques.
Based on the microscopic mechanical properties of the indi-
vidual particles, the particle flow modeling has been success-
fully used for modeling the macroscopic material deformation
behavior in rock, soil and other civil engineering materials
(Bardet and Proubet, 1991, 1992; Lorig et al., 1995; Shen and Yu,
2011; Vu-Quoc and Zhang, 1999; Yoon, 2007; Zeghal, 2004; Zhang
and Wong, 2012; Zhou et al., 2009). With the rapid advance of
computational efficiency, particle flow code (PFC) offers a
powerful tool for investigating the key attributes of GCRs, which
possess a discrete particle nature and non-linear mechanical
property (Itasca Consulting Group, 2004). To our best
knowledge, although PFC has been used extensively in civil
engineering analysis, the use of this technique for modeling
the CBR test is limited.
In the present study, a CBR numerical test method (NTM) of
GCRs using the PFC2D is proposed. The effects of testing con-
ditions including loading rate, piston diameter and specimen
size on the stability of CBR numerical results are analyzed.
The optimized testing conditions for the CBR NTM are sub-
sequently recommended. Finally, the CBR NTM is validated by
laboratory tests and an analysis of the mesoscopic mecha-
nism of CBR test is performed. The investigation of the present
study is based on one typical limestone which is commonly
found and used in Ankang District in China.
2. CBR NTM on GCRs
2.1. Research approach
The research approach of investigating the CBR values of GCRs
is based on both laboratory physical study and numerical
study (Fig. 1). Eventually, based on a reliability analysis, a CBR
numerical test of GCRs is developed.
 j o u r n a l o f t r a f fi c a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n g i n e e r i n g ( e n g l i s h e d i t i o n ) 2 0 1 5 ; 2 ( 2 ) : 1 0 7 e1 1 5 109

Fig. 1 e Scheme of CBR NTM on GCRs.

2.2. Numerical model then filled up by circular particles of various sizes. The grading
of the particles is controlled by monitoring the area of the
2.2.1. Specimen modeling generated particles. Afterwards, wall c is then applied to
To construct the CBR numerical specimen, orthogonal walls a, compact the top of the specimen in order to achieve the
b, d are first defined (Fig. 2). The space bounded by the walls is dimension requirements of the CBR numerical test.

2.2.2. Contact models

Taking into account of the non-linear mechanical properties
of particle materials, this paper adopts the Hertz-Mindlin
contact model (hereafter denoted as Hertz model) and slip
model to describe the constitutive relation of the contact
among the GCRs. The Hertz model is defined by the shear
modulus, Poisson's ratio and density of the two contacting
balls. In Hertz model, the forces and relative displacements
are nonlinearly related by the non-constant contact stiffness.
The slip model is defined by the friction coefficient at the
contact, which is taken to be the minimum friction coefficient
of the two contacting entities. Details of the models can be
referred to the user manual of the code (Vu-Quoc and Zhang,
1999).

2.2.3. Numerical simulation of penetration test

After the specimen is built, the top wall c is removed (Fig. 3).
Walls r1 and r2 are created to simulate the surcharge weight
which is placed on the test specimen surface, while walls r3,
Fig. 2 e Specimen for CBR numerical test. r4 and r5 are created to simulate the penetration piston. The
110 j o u r n a l o f t r a f fi c a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n g i n e e r i n g ( e n g l i s h e d i t i o n ) 2 0 1 5 ; 2 ( 2 ) : 1 0 7 e1 1 5

above dimensions are adopted according to the test methods

of soils for highway engineering (TMSHE).
During the numerical simulation, the penetration piston is
forced into the test specimen at a constant loading rate. The
displacement and contact force of wall r3 are simultaneously
monitored, and a load-penetration curve is obtained (Fig. 4).
The load on piston at penetration of 2.5 mm can be read
from the load-penetration curve. The CBR value is subse-
quently obtained by dividing the load on piston by 7.0 MPa and
multiplying by 100.

2.3. Determination of testing conditions Fig. 4 e A load-penetration curve obtained by CBR NTM.

2.3.1. Specimen dimensions

respective CBR values. The results are plotted in Fig. 6. As
Since the specimens for CBR tests are laterally confined, the
shown, the CBR value decreases with the increase of the
dimensions of the numerical specimens and hence confine-
specimen height. When the specimen height is larger than
ment effect can be reasonably expected to influence the
15 cm, the gradient of the curve becomes gentler. For each
representativeness of the CBR test results. The specimen di-
3 cm incremental increase of specimen height, the
mensions are thus also investigated in the present numerical
percentage decrease of the CBR value is only 0.4% of its
study.
original value.
CBR numerical tests are conducted on specimens with
To summarize, when the specimen height and specimen
different diameters, including 9, 12, 15, 18, 21 and 24 cm, while
diameter are respectively larger than 15 cm, the specimen
the specimen height is fixed at 15 cm. The results are plotted
dimensions have no significant influences on the CBR nu-
in Fig. 5. As shown, the CBR value decreases as the specimen
merical results. The specimen height of 15 cm and specimen
diameter increases. When the specimen diameter is larger
diameter of 15 cm are thus chosen in the subsequent study.
than 15 cm, the gradient of the curve becomes gentler. For
each 3 cm incremental increase of specimen diameter, the
2.3.2. Piston diameter
percentage decrease of the CBR value is only 0.7% of its
The influences of different piston diameters are studied by
original value. As such, the specimen diameter is chosen to
obtaining the CBR curves with different piston diameter-
be 15 cm for the subsequent investigation of the influence of
specimen diameter ratios of 1:1.5, 1:2, 1:2.5, 1:3, 1:3.5, 1:4, 1:4.5
specimen height.
and 1:5, while the specimen dimension is fixed at 15 cm. The
The standard specimen height in CBR test is 15 cm. Nu-
results are plotted in Fig. 7. As shown, the CBR value decreases
merical analyses are conducted on a number of specimen
with the increase of the piston diameter. The maximum CBR
heights, including 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21 and 24 cm, to obtain the
value is 1.65 times of the minimum CBR value in the tested
range. It illustrates that piston diameter has a significant
effect on the numerical CBR results. Taking the TMSHE into
consideration, a piston diameter of 5 cm is adopted in the
subsequent CBR numerical study.

2.3.3. Loading rate

The influences of different loading rates are studied by
obtaining the load on piston curves at loading rates of 1.0, 2.5,
5.0, 10.0 and 15.0 mm/min. The results are plotted in Fig. 8. As
shown, the load on piston curves are very close to each other.
When the loading rate increases from 1.0 to 5.0 mm/min, the

Fig. 3 e Simulation of loading conditions in CBR numerical

test. Fig. 5 e Effect of specimen diameter on CBR.
 j o u r n a l o f t r a f fi c a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n g i n e e r i n g ( e n g l i s h e d i t i o n ) 2 0 1 5 ; 2 ( 2 ) : 1 0 7 e1 1 5
Fig. 6 e Effect of specimen height on CBR.
load on piston value only increases by 0.06 times. The loading
rate thus has an insignificant effect on the CBR numerical
results. Adopting a high loading rate can increase the
efficiency of the modeling, while it will require more
computing resources. To optimize the computation with
regard to the TMSHE, the suggested loading rate in the
present CBR numerical test is 1.0e3.0 mm/min.
3. Micro-mechanical parameters
3.1. Influences of micro-mechanical parameters
The micro-mechanical parameters obtained from the cali-
bration should reflect the physical properties (size, shape,
surface properties, mechanical properties, etc.) of the crushed
rocks, as well as the crushing process of the rocks. This sec-
tion analyzes the influences of different micro-mechanical
parameters of the GCRs on the CBR values.
3.1.1. Friction coefficient at the contact
Numerical analyses are conducted to obtain the CBR values
for different values of friction coefficient m at the contact
including 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7 and 0.9, while the shear modulus
Gand Poisson's ratio v are fixed at 8 GPa and 0.2 respectively.
The results are plotted in Figs. 9 and 10.
As shown in Fig. 9, the gradient of the load on piston
decreases when m gradually increases. For m is higher than
0.7, the load-penetration curves are very close to each other.
As shown in Fig. 10, when m is lower than 0.7, the CBR value
increases almost linearly with m For each 0.2 increment of m,
the CBR value has a percentage increase of approximately
Fig. 7 e Effect of piston diameter on CBR.
111
Fig. 8 e Load-penetration curves corresponding to different
loading rates obtained by CBR NTM.
30%. When m increases from 0.7 to 0.9, the CBR value only
has a percentage increase of 3%. An increase of m represents
an increase of surface roughness of individual crushed
rocks, which prohibits the relative movement among the
GCRs. The particle system will then tend to form a more
stable skeleton structure, hence offering a higher resistance
to external and larger CBR values. It also indirectly shows
that GCRs containing a high degree of angularity and rough
surface texture can help enhance the engineering
performance of the GCRs. However, when m reaches a
certain level, the stone skeleton has already attained a high
level of stability. Further increasing the value of m will not
effectively increase the CBR value. In our study, similar CBR
curves are obtained for m higher than 0.7. In the meanwhile,
the typical m value of rocks is not less than 0.3. In our
present calibration of numerical study, our preliminary
choice of m is 0.5. The final calibrated value is confined
between 0.3 and 0.7.
3.1.2. Shear modulus
Numerical analyses are conducted to obtain the CBR values
for different values of shear modulus, including 6, 7, 8, 9 and
10 GPa, while the friction coefficient at the contactand Pois-
son's ratio are fixed at 0.35 and 0.2 respectively. The results are
plotted in Figs. 11 and 12.
As shown in Fig. 12, CBR value increases linearly with shear
modulus. In the present study, every 1 GPa increment of shear
modulus leads to an approximate 19% increase of the CBR
value. Therefore, the shear modulus in future numerical
Fig. 9 e Load-penetration curves corresponding to different
friction coefficients at the contact.
112 j o u r n a l o f t r a f fi c a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n g i n e e r i n g ( e n g l i s h e d i t i o n ) 2 0 1 5 ; 2 ( 2 ) : 1 0 7 e1 1 5
Fig. 10 e Effect of friction coefficient at the contact on CBR.
simulation can be quickly determined by the linear
relationship of CBR and shear modulus established above.
3.1.3. Poisson's ratio
For the GCRs used in road base, the Poisson's ratio typically
ranges between 0.15 and 0.35. Numerical analyses are con-
ducted to obtain the CBR values for different values of Pois-
son's ratio, including 0.15, 0.20, 0.25, 0.30 and 0.35, while the
friction coefficient at the contact and shear modulus are fixed
at 0.35 and 8 GPa respectively. The results are plotted in Figs.
13 and 14.
A comparison of Figs. 9, 11 and 13, and Figs. 10, 12 and 14 is
performed to study the degree of influence of different pa-
rameters on the CBR values. The general trend of influence of
friction coefficient on the CBR results is similar to that of shear
modulus and Poisson's ratio. The CBR value increases by 34%
when the Poisson's ratio increases 133% from 0.15 to 0.35.
Such a CBR percentage increase is comparable to that caused
only by 33% increase of shear modulus from 6 GPa to 8 GPa.
The above illustrates that Poisson's ratio has a less degree of
influence on CBR numerical analyses, while the friction co-
efficient has the least influence relatively. To simplify the
parameter calibration procedures, only one single Poisson's
ratio based on the typical rock property is chosen and used
throughout the entire numerical study. Poisson's ratio will not
take part in the parameter calibration processes.
3.2. Calibration of micro-mechanical parameters
According to the Hertz model and the slip model, the key
parameters in characterizing the constitutive relationship of
the contact are friction coefficient at the contact, shear
Fig. 11 e Load-penetration curves corresponding to
different shear moduli.
Fig. 12 e Effect of shear modulus on CBR.
modulus and Poisson's ratio. These parameters are dictated by
the properties of GCRs. However, the circular particles adop-
ted in the PFC2D cannot directly reflect the angular and platy
nature of the crushed rocks and the voids of GCRs. In order to
reveal the influences of these factors on the numerical model,
calibration is performed based on those micro-mechanical
parameters according to the following procedures. Note that
the specimen height and diameter are both fixed at 15 cm,
while the piston diameter is fixed at 5 cm.
(a) Obtain CBR values for three to five different sets of GCRs
in the laboratory.
(b) Based on the properties of GCRs, develop a preliminary
set of micro-mechanical parameters. Perform numeri-
cal analysis by PFC2D to determine the CBR values of the
specific set of GCRs tested in step (a).
(c) Compare the CBR values obtained from laboratory study
in step (a) and numerical study in step (b). If the
Fig. 13 e Load-penetration curves corresponding to
different Poisson's ratios.
Fig. 14 e Effect of Poisson's ratio on CBR.
 j o u r n a l o f t r a f fi c a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n g i n e e r i n g ( e n g l i s h e d i t i o n ) 2 0 1 5 ; 2 ( 2 ) : 1 0 7 e1 1 5 113

Table 1 e Apparent density of aggregates. 5. CBR mesoscopic mechanism of GCRs

Aggregate size (mm) 19.0e31.5 9.50e19.0 4.75e9.50 <4.75
Apparent density (kg/m3) 2712 2709 2692 2681
difference is less than 10%, that particular set of micro-
mechanical parameters will be adopted. Otherwise, the
parameters will be adjusted for another round of nu-
merical test until the previously mentioned criterion is
met.
4. Reliability analysis for CBR NTM
4.1. Raw materials and micro-mechanical parameters
The aggregates used in the present study are limestone,
which is commonly found and used in Ankang District in
China. Refer to Tables 1 and 2 for the density values and
micro-mechanical parameters of the aggregates respec-
tively. The apparent density values are experimentally
determined, while the micro-mechanical parameters are
obtained based on the approach and results presented in
Section 3.
4.2. Reliability of the numerical model
Table 3 compares the CBR values obtained from the
numerical analysis. The laboratory tests were first
performed on nine groups (A to I) of specimens containing
different gradings. The results are shown in the column of
Lab result (%). The numerical results obtained by the PFC
simulation are shown in the adjacent column. The error
between the laboratory results and numerical results is
then computed. As shown, the differences between the two
values are all less than 7%, returning an average difference
of 4.5%.
The numerical analysis of CBR not only provides insights on
the CBR behavior of different GCRs macroscopically, but also
reveals the displacement of GCRs and associated micro-me-
chanical behavior. These help enhance our understanding of
the mechanical and engineering performance of the GCRs.
5.1. Displacement vector field
Displacement vector field can help vividly reveal the move-
ment of the GCRs in response to external loading. Fig. 15
shows the displacement vectors in the CBR specimen at
three different depths of piston penetration. Each arrow
represents a displacement vector of a particle. The pointing
direction indicates the direction of the particle motion. The
length of the vector represents the magnitude of the
displacement.
As shown, when the piston penetration is 0.80 mm, con-
spicuous displacement vectors only develop within a finite
region below the piston, which is enclosed within line A. In the
region outside line A, the displacement vectors appear as
scattered tiny dots. The above illustrates that the shallow
piston penetration only induces a small displacement among
the particles. When the piston penetration reaches 1.60 mm,
the magnitude of the displacement vectors, as well as the
extent of deformation zone significantly increase (enclosed by
line B). It illustrates that the induced particle displacements
increase with the increase of the piston penetration. When
the piston penetration further increases to 2.50 mm, the
above-mentioned trend continues (indicated by line C). The
disturbance zone indicating the occurrence of particle
displacement increases to reach the bottom of the specimen.
During the entire penetration process, as the piston penetra-
tion increases, the lengthened displacement vectors of the
particles point are dominantly downwards. The particles close
to the two side walls mainly appear as discrete dots. These
phenomena indicate that the particles experience a higher
degree of vertical displacement than lateral displacement.

Table 2 e Micro-mechanical parameters. 5.2. Meso-mechanical properties

Parameter Friction Shear modulus (GPa) Poisson's

Fig. 16 illustrates the evolution of the contact conditions
coefficient ratio
among the particles when the piston penetrates into the
Value 0.35 8.0 0.2
specimen. The black lines of the network represent the

Table 3 e Measured results and simulation results of CBR test.

Grading Percentage passing (%) for sieve size (mm) Lab result Numerical result (%) Error (%)
(%)
31.5 19.0 9.50 4.75 2.36 0.60 0.075
A 100 64 52 40 34 25 15 495 525 6.1
B 100 64 52 40 32 21 11 564 580 2.8
C 100 64 52 40 30 17 7 595 627 5.4
D 100 61 48 35 30 22 13 518 552 6.6
E 100 61 48 35 28 18 9 579 595 2.8
F 100 61 48 35 26 15 6 655 676 3.2
G 100 58 44 30 25 18 11 626 642 2.6
H 100 58 44 30 24 15 8 657 688 4.7
I 100 58 44 30 22 13 5 692 736 6.4
114 j o u r n a l o f t r a f fi c a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n g i n e e r i n g ( e n g l i s h e d i t i o n ) 2 0 1 5 ; 2 ( 2 ) : 1 0 7 e1 1 5
Fig. 15 e Deformation of GCRs at different depths of piston penetration. (a) 0.80 mm penetration. (b) 1.60 mm penetration. (c)
2.50 mm penetration.
particleeparticle and particle-wall contact forces. Thicker
lines represent a larger magnitude of contact force.
As shown, when the piston penetration depth is 0, i.e. the
piston has not yet acted on the numerical specimen, the
contact force among the particles are generally evenly
distributed. When the piston penetration depth reaches
1.75 mm, a remarkable force concentration occurs around the
piston. When the piston penetration depth reaches 2.50 mm,
the force concentration around the piston further increases,
which reaches the bottom of the specimen. During the entire
loading process, although the contact forces on and close to
the side walls also increase with the piston penetration depth,
local force concentration is absent. The above phenomena
illustrate that the evolution of the contact force network in the
vertical direction is more prominent than that in the lateral
direction.
The above numerical results suggest that the CBR NTM can
not only replicate the process of laboratory CBR test, but also
provide more insights than those available by the conven-
tional laboratory CBR test.
6. Conclusions
A numerical test method based on the particle flow modeling
technique is developed for the CBR test on GCRs. The effects of
different testing conditions on the CBR numerical results have
been systematically studied. The loading rate has a negligible
effect on the numerical results. The CBR value of GCRs in-
creases with the piston diameter, while it decreases with the
Fig. 16 e Visualization of mesoscopic contact force in the numerical specimen. (a) 0 mm penetration. (b) 1.75 mm
penetration. (c)2.50 mm penetration.
increase of the specimen dimensions. When the specimen
height and diameter are both larger than 15 cm, the specimen
dimensions have insignificant effects on the CBR numerical
values. Based on the present study, a loading rate of
1.0e3.0 mm/min, a piston diameter of 5 cm, a specimen height
of 15 cm and a specimen diameter of 15 cm are recommended
for the CBR numerical test.
The micro-mechanical parameters have the following in-
fluences on the CBR numerical results. The CBR curves
become gentler and the CBR values increase when the friction
coefficient at the contact increases. For friction coefficient at
the contact greater than 0.7, such a variation trend is less
remarkable. In contrast, the shear modulus has a far more
influence on the CBR curves. The CBR value increases linearly
with shear modulus. The influence of Poisson's ratio on the
CBR numerical test is not significant. Parameter calibration is
subsequently performed by comparing the CBR value ob-
tained from laboratory study and numerical study. Using the
Ankang limestone as an example, the results illustrate that
the percentage error between the numerical results and lab
results is less than 7% with an average value of 4.5%.The
reliability of the CBR numerical test is thus verified.
A detailed analysis of the mesoscopic behavior of the GCRs
in the CBR test reveals the followings. When the piston
penetration increases, the change of the displacement vector
magnitude and the contact force is more prominent in the
vertical direction than in the lateral direction. It illustrates
that in the CBR test of GCRs, the dominant effect of the piston
on the GCRs is reflected in the vertical direction rather than in
the lateral direction. In addition, the disturbance of the piston
 j o u r n a l o f t r a f fi c a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e n g i n e e r i n g ( e n g l i s h e d i t i o n ) 2 0 1 5 ; 2 ( 2 ) : 1 0 7 e1 1 5
is not restricted to those shallow particles in vicinity of the
piston. A significant disturbance effect on the deeper particles
is also numerically obtained. When the penetration depth of
the piston reaches 2.50 mm, its disturbance reaches the par-
ticles located in the bottom of the specimen.
Acknowledgments
This research is supported by the Program for New Century
Excellent Talents in University (NCET-08-0749) and Funda-
mental Research Funds for the Central Universities
(CHD2012JC054). The first author thanks the Nanyang Tech-
nological University for the opportunity to conduct research
there as a visiting researcher.
references
Agarwal, K.B., Ghanekar, K.D., 1970. Prediction of CBR from
plasticity characteristics of soil. In: Proceeding of 2nd South-
east Asian Conference on Soil Engineering, Singapore, 1970.
Al-Amoudi, O.S.B., Asi, I.M., Wahhab, H.I.A., et al., 2002. Clegg
hammereCalifornia-bearing ratio correlations. Journal of
Materials in Civil Engineering 14 (6), 512e523.
ASTM D 1883e14, 1999. Standard Test Method for California
Bearing Ratio (CBR) of Laboratory-compacted Soils. American
Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken.
Attoh-Okine, N.O., 2004. Application of genetic-based neural
network to lateritic soil strength modeling. Construction and
Building Materials 18 (8), 619e623.
Bardet, J.P., Proubet, J., 1991. A numerical investigation of the
structure of persistent shear bands in granular media.
Geotechnique 41 (4), 599e613.
Bardet, J.P., Proubet, J., 1992. Shear-band analysis in idealized
granular material. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 118 (2),
397e415.
Black, W.P.M., 1962. A method of estimating the California
bearing ratio of cohesive soils from plasticity data.
Geotechnique 12 (4), 271e282.
British Highways Agency, 1994. Design Manual for Roads and
Bridges (DMRB). The British Highways Agency, Birmingham.
Degraft-Johnson, J.W., Bhatia, H.S., Gidigasu, D.M., 1969. The
engineering characteristics of the lateritic gravels of Ghana.
In: Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Mexico, 1969.
115
Duncan-Williams, E., Attoh-Okine, N.O., 2008. Effect of geogrid in
granular base strengthdan experimental investigation.
Construction and Building Materials 22 (11), 2180e2184.
Hadi, M.N.S., Bodhinayake, B.C., 2003. Non-linear finite element
analysis of flexible pavements. Advances in Engineering
Software 34 (11/12), 657e662.
Itasca Consulting Group, Inc, 2004. Particle Flow Code in 2
Dimensions (PFC2D) User's Manual. Itasca Consulting Group,
Inc., Minneapolis.
Link, R.E., Pandian, N.S., Sridharan, A., et al., 1999. California
bearing ratio test simplified. Journal of Testing and
Evaluation 27 (1), 72e75.
Lorig, L.J., Gibson, W., Alvial, J., et al., 1995. Gravity flow
simulations with the particle flow code (PFC). ISRM News
Journal 3 (1), 18e24.
NCHRP, 2011. Guide for mechanistic-empirical design for new
and rehabilitated pavement structures. In: Appendix CC-1:
Correlation of CBR Values with Soil Index Properties. A.R.A.,
Inc., Illinois.
Shen, S., Yu, H., 2011. Characterize packing of aggregate particles
for paving materials: particle size impact. Construction and
Building Materials 25 (3), 1362e1368.
Stephens, D.J., 1990. Prediction of the California bearing ratio.
Civil Engineering in South Africa 32 (12), 523e527.
Taskiran, T., 2010. Prediction of California bearing ratio (CBR) of
fine grained soils by AI methods. Advances in Engineering
Software 41 (6), 886e892.
Vu-Quoc, L., Zhang, X., 1999. An accurate and efficient tangential
forceedisplacement model for elastic frictional contact in
particle-flow simulations. Mechanics of Materials 31 (4),
235e269.
Yildirim, B., Gunaydin, O., 2011. Estimation of California bearing
ratio by using soft computing systems. Expert Systems with
Applications 38 (5), 6381e6391.
Yoon, J., 2007. Application of experimental design and
optimization to PFC model calibration in uniaxial
compression simulation. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences 44 (6), 871e889.
Zeghal, M., 2004. Discrete-element method investigation of the
resilient behavior of granular materials. Journal of
Transportation Engineering 130 (4), 503e509.
Zhang, X.P., Wong, L.N.Y., 2012. Cracking processes in rock-like
material containing a single flaw under uniaxial
compression: a numerical study based on parallel bonded-
particle model approach. Rock Mechanics and Rock
Engineering 45 (5), 711e737.
Zhou, J., Wang, J., Zeng, Y., et al., 2009. Simulation of slope
stability analysis by particle flow code. Rock and Soil
Mechanics 30 (1), 86e90.