Abstract
Overlays have been extensively employed as an effective preservation or rehabilitation tool to extend the service life of concrete bridges and pavements, especially concrete slabs suffering from salt scaling and abrasion. However, limited attention has been paid to the durability and performance of these overlays which can be jeopardized when they are exposed to freeze/thaw and wet/dry cycles, deicer applications, studded tires, and their coupled effects. Various overlays feature different engineering properties, and they might be only effective in specific service environments but not in others, and research is lacking to examine their ability to adapt to different environments. This study subjected five overlay products on concrete slabs to the combined action of freeze/thaw (F/T) and wet/dry (W/D) cycles with periodical exposure to either 15 wt.% NaCl solution or 15 wt.% MgCl2 solution, to simulate the typical field scenarios in an accelerated manner. The bond strength, splitting tensile strength, and abrasion resistance of the overlaid concrete slabs were tested to evaluate the effectiveness of various overlays against the deicer scaling and the abrasion by studded tires. Based on the experimental data, this study demonstrated a multi-criteria decision-making method, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation (FCE) combined with analytic hierarchy process (AHP), for the selection of optimal overlays in three different service scenarios (e.g., states of Washington and Oregon [USA] and British Columbia [Canada]). The analysis results indicate that one epoxy overlay exhibited the comprehensively best performance and could be a promising candidate in all three given scenarios, another polymer overlay took second place, while the adaptability of the three cement-based overlays varied in different environments.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Washington State University, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Pullman, USA (GRID:grid.30064.31) (ISNI:0000 0001 2157 6568)
2 Yunnan Institute of Building Research, Yunnan Key Laboratory of Building Structure and New Materials, Kunming, China (GRID:grid.30064.31)
3 Ministry of Education, Key Lab of Structure Dynamic Behavior and Control, Harbin, China (GRID:grid.419897.a) (ISNI:0000 0004 0369 313X); Harbin Institute of Technology, School of Civil Engineering, Harbin, China (GRID:grid.19373.3f) (ISNI:0000 0001 0193 3564)
4 University of Jinan, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Preparation and Measurement of Building Materials, Jinan, China (GRID:grid.454761.5) (ISNI:0000 0004 1759 9355)




