Chinese Society of Pavement Engineering

International Journal of
Pavement Research and Technology
Journal homepage: www.springer.com/42947

Study of the permanent deformation of three soils employed

in highway subgrades in the municipality of Santa Maria-RS, Brazil
João Paulo Zagoa, Rinaldo José Barbosa Pinheiroa, Magnos Baronia*, Luciano Pivoto Spechta,
Lucas Delonguib, Amanda Vielmo Sagriloa
a
Federal University of Santa Maria, Roraima Avenue, 1000, Santa Maria, Brazil
b Federal University of Santa Maria, VRS 809 Highway, 3013, Cachoeira do Sul, Brazil

Received 30 April 2020; received in revised form 28 October 2020; accepted 12 December 2020; available online 8 January 2021

Abstract

Permanent deformation is associated with wheel track rutting (WTR) and is one of the main causes of defects in the pavements of Brazilian highways.
Seeking to mitigate this situation, this paper presents a study about the permanent deformation of three typical subgrade soils of the Santa Maria region, Rio
Grande do Sul (RS), located in the southern region of Brazil. In addition to the physical, chemical, and mechanical character ization of the materials, this
research presents results from repeated load triaxial tests to obtain the resilient modulus (RM) and the permanent deformation (PD) parameters. The
Compound model of the resilient modulus, posteriorly cited on the Petrobras Asphalt Thematic Network Project, showed the best results. The permanent
deformation tests were conducted using a frequency of 2 Hz and 150,000 load application cycles and posteriorly adjusted to th e Guimarães Model, of which
average statistical correlation was 0.91. However, the predominance of fine materials combined with low compaction energy resulted in high deformation
rates and the occurrence of shakedown in domains: A (plastic shakedown), B (plastic creep) and C (incremental collapse).

Keywords: Subgrade; Permanent deformation; Rutting in the wheel track; Repeated load triaxial tests; Resilient modulus; Shakedown

Introduction Several mathematical models are used in order to preview the

Among the many highway distresses, deformations caused by
the repetitive action of loads are prominent and consist of the
resilient deformation, related to the fatigue life of the asphalt layer
(evidenced by the presence of cracks on the surface) and
permanent deformation (PD), associated with wheel track rutting.
This last has consequences for the user and pavement, since it
increases the operating cost of transport and impairs rolling
comfort and safety [1-5]
Considering that the subgrade is the foundation on which the
other layers of the pavement are built, it must be properly designed
and protected. The improvement of laboratory and calculation
techniques has enabled the evolution of empirical methodologies
based on the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) for mechanistics,
considering soil deformability, among others.
* Corresponding author
E-mail address: capzago@hotmail.com (J. P. Zago);
rinaldo@ufsm.br (R. J. B. Pinheiro); magnos.baroni@gmail.com (M.
Baroni); luspecht@ufsm.com.br (L. P. Specht);
lucas.delongui@ufsm.br (L. Delongui); amandavs94@gmail.com (A.
V. Sagrilo).
Peer review under responsibility of Chinese Society of Pavement
Engineering.
ISSN: 1997-1400 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42947-020-0129-6
Chinese Society of Pavement Engineering. Production and hosting by Springer Nature
permanent deformation of granular materials and soil, such as
Monismith model [6] and Barksdale [7] In this sense, Guimarães
[8] proposed a mechanistic-empirical method to predict permanent
deformation in tropical soils and granular materials. This
methodology was endorsed by the new National Pavement Design
Method, developed through a partnership between the National
Department of Transport Infrastructure (DNIT), the Alberto Luiz
Coimbra Institute of Engineering Post-Graduation and Research
(COPPE), and the Petrobras Asphalt Thematic Network (REDE).
This is an update of the technique used in Brazil since the 1960s
and includes technologies already adopted in other countries.
Soils and granular materials, subjected to cyclic traffic loading,
can be evaluated accordingly to the shakedown theory, proposed
by Werkmeister et al [9]. It says that permanent strains stabilize
after successive loading cycles and the mechanical response is only
resilient, if the stress is low. That behavior is highly desired for
pavement uses, in order to avoid the contribution of soils and
granular materials in wheel track rutting (WTR).
This study aims to characterize three existent soils in the south
of Brazil, regarding resilient and permanent deformation
modelling and verify its relation with the soil physical, chemical
and mechanical characterization. Also, check if the soils present
an accommodation of the resilient and permanent deformations
along the lifespan-shakedown and perform the adjustment to
730 J. P. Zago et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 729-739
mathematical models found in literature-Monismith [6],
Barksdale [7], and Guimarães [8].
Permanent deformations
Upon receiving the demands of vehicle wheels, the pavement
suffers a total specific deformation (εtot) consisting of the sum of
three parts: the resilient or elastic specific deformation (ε r), the
specific permanent deformation (εp), and the viscoelastic
deformation (εve), indicated by Eq. (1).
𝜀𝑡𝑜𝑡 = 𝜀𝑟 + 𝜀𝑝 + 𝜀𝑣𝑒 (1)
The elastic deformation ceases after applying the load, while the
plastic deformation causes permanent deformation. However, both
affect the life of the pavement, which is why they deserve attention,
especially the last. Viscoelastic deformation, which occurs in
asphalt mixtures, will not be addressed in this work. Plastic or
permanent deformation is an irreversible deformation that occurs
on the pavement and is common on the tracks where the wheels
make contact, in urban bus corridors, and in parking yards covered
with asphalt concrete.
The main factors affecting permanent deformation in soils and
granular materials are: (a) stress: stress state, rotation of the
principal stresses with wheel load displacement, and stress history;
(b) load: magnitude, number of applications, duration, frequency,
and load sequence; (c) humidity: moisture content, material
permeability, degree of saturation, and pore pressure; (d) aggregate:
type of aggregate, particle shape, particle size, fines percentage,
maximum grain size, and specific gravity [8,10-13]. Permanent
deformations significantly increase with the increase in deviator
stress. However, the rate of increase of the permanent deformation
decreases as the number of cycles increases. As the humidity of
the specimen increases, the deformation also increases. After
completing the permanent deformation tests, the specimen is
hardened, which results in increased resilient modulus (RM)
during and after the PD test [14-23].
When studying two volcanic rock saprolitic soils in the Santa
Maria region, Peraça [20] found that the reduction in the
compaction degree from 100% to 90% resulted in an increase of
the specific permanent deformation of a soil from 4% to 15% and
on the other, from 4% to 12%. In this sense, Núñez et al. [24] found
that the increase of 2% above the optimum moisture content raised
the permanent deformation of gravelly silty sand, typical of the
central region of RS, from the 4% plateau until the plastic rupture.
According to Medina and Motta [5], employing mechanistic
design methods, it means, basead on performance tests and
mathematical behavior modeling, the maximum acceptable values
for WTR are from 10 mm and 20 mm, according to the highway
traffic. These authors suggest a value of 13 mm as a reference for
high-traffic highways and a maximum of 16 mm in order not to
compromise safety. In this sense, DNIT [25] warns that, in
pavements with small cross-sections, rutting greater than 13 mm
creates conditions for water accumulation to be sufficient for
potential aquaplaning situations.
The calculation of the permanent deformation of the pavements
is obtained from the sum of the contribution of each layer,
according to Eq. (2).
𝑑𝑃𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 =  (𝜀𝑝𝑖 . ℎ𝑖 ) (2)
where, 𝑑𝑃𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 : total permanent deformation of the layers; 𝜀𝑝𝑖 :
specific deformation of each layer; ℎ𝑖 : thickness of each layer.
Thus, all pavement layers are subject to these deformations,
which requires research on the behavior of the various materials
that make up the structure in order to support the mechanistic
calculations of performance prediction.
One of the widely employed permanent deformation
mathematical model is the Monismith model (described by
Monismith, Ogawa, and Freeme, 1975) [6]-Eq. (3), as well as the
Barksdale model-Eq. (4). As an objective, this paper seeks to
employ the methodology proposed by Guimarães [8], whose
model was adopted by Petrobras Asphalt Thematic Network and
inserted in the standard of DNIT 179/2018 [26]. The behavioral
pattern of the various materials regarding the influence of stresses
on the accumulated permanent deformation led to Eq. (5).
Guimarães’ model is relevant, since it considers the particularities
of the soils and granular materials that occur in tropical areas, such
as Brazil [8].
𝜀𝑝 = 𝐴𝑁 𝐵 (3)
where, 𝜀𝑝 : specific permanent deformation; N: number of load
application cycles; A,B: experimental parameters;
𝜀𝑝 =𝑎 + 𝑏. 𝑙𝑜𝑔(𝑁) (4)
where, 𝜀𝑝 : specific permanent deformation; a,b: experimental
parameters; N: number of load application cycles;
𝜎 𝜎
𝜀𝑝 (%) =𝜓1 ( 3 )𝜓2 ( 𝑑 )𝜓3 𝑁 𝜓4 (5)
𝜌0 𝜌0
where, 𝜀𝑝 (%): specific permanent deformation; 𝜓1 , 𝜓2 , 𝜓3 , 𝜓4 :
regression parameters; 𝜎3 : confining stress in kgf/cm²; 𝜎𝑑 :
deviator stress in kgf/cm²; 𝜌0 : reference stress (atmospheric
pressure, considered as equal to 1 kgf/cm²); N: number of load
application cycles.
The permanent deformability parameters (ψi) are obtained by
nonlinear multiple regression, using the method of minimizing the
sum of the squares of the residuals, calculated by a statistical
technique.
In addition, in paving works, after a high number of load
application cycles, permanent deformation may rupture or stabilize.
After a certain number of cycles, this stabilization is denominated
shakedown. In order to assess whether the evolution of a
permanent deformation reaches the shakedown limit, it is
necessary to identify to which stress level the specimens subjected
to cyclic loads present only elastic deformations, from a certain
number of load applications [10,27-28].
If the material presents a behavior located in Range A, it means
that the accommodation state: the material responds only
elastically, without permanent deformations, characterizing
shakedown. This range is perceived when the rate of PD increase
reaches 10-7 (×0,001 m/cycle). In Range B, the failure may happen
at a high number of solicitations or in a higher stress state, without
achieving the desired increasing rate. Range C behavior means
failure or collapse, in other words, the permanent strains increase
indefinitely, without decrease in ratio [9]. Guimarães [8] suggest a
behavior type AB, found for tropical soils, which the material
present expressive strains in the early ages and, after some loading
cycles, stabilizes. The main ranges are displayed in Fig. 1.
Reinforcing the importance of studying this subject, Medina and
Motta [5] emphasize that the study of permanent deformation and
the prioritization of materials that present shakedown should be
considered in the selection of road pavement materials and,
consequently, in the elaboration of the mechanistic-empirical
dimensioning.
 J. P. Zago et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 729-739
Fig. 1. Ranges of shakedown theory (adapted from [29]).
About the shortcomings of previous research, the pedological
region was approached in studies of Peraça [20], Santos [30],
Pascoal [31]. Peraça [20] submitted two soils from the central
region of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil to resilient modulus and
permanent deformation and posteriorly adjusted to south-african
mathematical models that considers the rupture by shear of
subgrade. Santos [29] studied soils from the region approached in
this paper and evaluated regarding resilient modulus only. Pascoal
[30] approached the influence of compaction energy of a soil from
the central region of Rio Grande do Sul, with lateritic behavior, on
resilient and permanent deformation, for models presented in this
paper, mainly Guimarães model. The advance of the work, in
relation to those developed for the same area of interest, is to
demonstrate the adjustment for classical mathematical models
(Monismith [6] and Barksdale [7]) and recent models (Guimarães
[8]) for permanent deformation, for other soils, relating also with
MCT classification.
Materials and methods
The study of the permanent deformation of the three pavement
subgrade soils consisted of different stages. In the field, the soils
in the deposits and in the track were collected; in the laboratory,
characterization and repeated load triaxial tests were performed to
provide the mechanical and deformability characteristics of the
soils; and finally, on the cabinet stage, the test results were
analyzed and consolidated. More information, in addition to what
is presented in this paper, can be found at Zago [32].
3.1. Location, characterization of the areas and sampling
The three soils studied are Instruction Field soil (IF), Canabarro
soil (CQ) and Industrial District soil (TR). Location and
coordinates are demonstrated in Fig. 2 [33].
Fig. 2. Soil sampling locations-Santa Maria-RS (adapted from
[33]).
731
The Santa Maria Instruction Field soil deposit belongs to a
military organization of the Brazilian Army, denominated the
Santa Maria Instruction Field (SMIF). The site is formed of
argisols from the São Pedro Unit (sandstone red dystrophic argisol),
developed on river terrace deposits. Below the terrace, materials
are the sandstones of the Caturrita Formation [34]. The material
explored in the soil deposit comprises horizons A and B of the
argisol and a changing horizon C, which corresponds to the terrace
itself (where chalcedony and quartz granules are found), with
approximately 4 meters of height (Fig. 3(a)).
The Industrial District soil deposit is located in the urban area
west of the municipality of Santa Maria, in the district of the same
name, accessed by BR 287/RS. The geological area of the
Industrial District is encompassed by the Santa Maria Formation-
sandstone, with rocky substratum formed by coarse, feldspathic
and porous sandstone [35]. Its origin is fluvial, and feldspar is
evidenced by white dots corresponding to this mineral already in
an altered state (kaolinites). It has little resistance to erosion. In
addition, the soil pedological horizons reach the depths of 2 to 3
meters and are of red yellow argisoil (Fig. 3(b)) [36].
The Canabarro soil deposit is located to the west of the
municipality of Santa Maria. Based on the geological map of the
state of RS [37], it was found that the soil deposit area is on the
Santa Maria Formation, which the lower unit is the Passo das
Tropas Member, composed of sandstones and conglomeratic
sandstones with subordinate mudstones. The Upper Unit, the
Alemoa Member, is composed of solid clayey siltstone,
corresponding to moderately sinuous deposits, floodplain, and
lacustrine river channels. A red argisol develops on these units.
Horizon A is approximately 1 m thick, with a darker, brownish
coloration. Horizon B has approximately 2 m of height, and with
color resembling shades of reddish brown, with no organic matter
(Fig. 3(c)).
3.2. Laboratory tests
Traditional characterization tests (particle size analysis,
Atterberg limits-liquidity and plasticity limits, specific gravity,
soil classification, and chemical analysis), compaction tests,
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) and expansion were performed at
the Civil Construction Material Laboratory (LMCC) of UFSM.
The results of the resilient modulus (RM) tests [38] are presented
to evaluate the resistance gain after performing the permanent
deformation (PD) tests [26]. Table 1 shows the summary of the
tests performed. The maximum tolerance allowed was of optimum
moisture content (OMC) ± 1%, accepting specimens with a
compaction degree greater than or equal to 98% (CD ≥ 98%).
Fig. 3. View of the quarry profiles of soils (a) IF; (b) TR, and (c)
CQ.
732 J. P. Zago et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 729-739

Table 1
Resilient modulus tests performed.
Nº Soil E PD F Quantity Observations
1 IF Standard Before 1 Hz 3 per soil Performed while obtaining the compaction curves
2 TR proctor PD 3 per soil RM representative of the soil
3 CQ energy 2 Hz 1 per soil Before PD test, with all the procedures preconized by DNIT 134/2010
4 During 2 Hz 10 per soil RM calculated during the PD test, from the elastic deformations and height
PD of the specimen.
5 After 10 per After the PD test, with all the procedures preconized by the DNIT
PD soil 134/2010.
Observation: 1 The methodology predicts 10 tests, but only 9 were possible (1 specimen broke). E = compaction energy; f = frequency.

In order to determine the permanent deformation, it was used the Table 2

methodology recommended by the Network Procedure 03/2010- Relation of stresses of the permanent deformation tests. Caption:
permanent deformation in soils and gravel [39], based on the (*) initial hit, common to all tests.
model described by Guimarães [8], performing triaxial long-term
repeated load tests, exceeding 150,000 cycles, followed by the Test Stress (kPa) N
assessment of the total permanent deformation. 3 𝜎𝑑 𝜎𝑑 /3
Summarizing, after obtaining the optimum moisture content, the 0(*) 30 30 1 1
specimens were stored in a humid chamber until the date of the test 1 40 40 1 150,000
(minimum of 12 hours and a maximum of 30 days). After 2 80 2
assembling the specimen, the test began with the initial application 3 120 3
of a first and only hit to the specimen, of deviator stress (σ d) and 4 80 80 1
confining stress (σ3) equal to 30 kPa, to correct any gaps between 5 160 2
the load application rod and its fitting in the top cap. The Network 6 240 3
Procedure 03/2010 suggests the application of 10 pairs of stress. 7 120 120 1
Thus, a stress pair was applied in each sample according to Table 8 240 2
1. It adopted a frequency of 2 Hz (120 cycles per minute), with a 9 360 3
duration of 0.1 seconds of loading and 0.4 seconds for rest. The 10 70 70 1
COPPE, a precursor of paving studies in the country, has used the
frequency of 2 Hz in its tests. Other studies [12] found that raising Table 3
the frequency from 1 Hz to 2 Hz does not change the results of the Main results of the soil characterization tests.
PD in graded gravel and soils. Also, the DNIT 179/2018 [26] Soil (mean of four samples)
standardizes the determination of PD of soils and gravel, for which IF TR CQ
the frequency of 2 Hz is recommended. Table 2 shows the
Gravel1 (%) (> 2.0 mm) 0 2 1
employed stresses for permanent deformation tests.
Coarse sand (%) (0.6-2.0 mm) 4 3 7
Medium sand1 (%) (0.2-0.6 mm) 26 19 18
Results presentation and analysis
Fine sand1 (%) (0.06– 0.2 mm) 24 21 15
Silt1 (%) (2µm-0.06 mm) 21 15 17
4.1. Characterization tests
Clay1 (%) (< 2µm) 25 40 42
Atterberg limit - LL (%) 36 42 42
The results shown in Table 3 represent the mean of four tests per
Plasticity limit - PL (%) 17 21 23
soil type from two samplings. It was verified that the largest
Plasticity Index - PI (%) 19 21 19
fraction present from the IF soil, based on the particle size using
USCS classification SC/CL CL CL
deflocculant, is sand (54%), while the predominant fraction of soils
TRB classification A6 A 7-6 A 7-6
TR and CQ is clay. Also, note the higher presence of silt in the IF
Trilinear classification Clay Sand Sand
soil (21%).
Sand Clay Clay
The soil IF presented high loss of mass by immersion in water,
MCT classification NA’/NG’ LG’ LG’
characteristic of a non-lateritic behavior. The high laterization
Weathering index (Ki) 2.52 2.37 2.63
index (e’), associated with index c’, qualifies it as a non-lateritic Weathering index (Kr) 2.07 1.83 2.00
soil. On the other hand, in soils TR and CQ, the loss by immersion Caption: 1Classification according to ABNT NBR 6502 [28].
was lower and showed laterization indices, that indicate lateritic
behavior, classifying them as LG’ (lateritic clays and sandy 1.83 and 2.0, respectively, considered lateritic soils since they are
lateritic clays), as found by Santos [29]. This behavior is due to in the range of 1.33 <Kr ≤ 2. These indices corroborate the
iron and aluminum hydroxides present in lateritic soils, which Miniature, Compacted, Tropical (MCT) classification of
form stable aggregations, even in the presence of water [40]. materials regarding lateritic behavior. [41].
The results of the Ki index-higher than 2.0-allow us to infer that
they are poorly weathered materials, with the CQ soil as the least 4.2. Resilient modulus (RM)
weathered and the TR soil as the most affected by this process. The
Kr of the IF sample (2.07) indicates a non-lateritic soil since it is The original resilient modulus test predicts three pairs of stresses
superior to 2.0. In contrast, samples TR and CQ have indices of for conditioning, of 500 cycles each. It was standardized that the
 J. P. Zago et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 729-739
sample would be submitted a given pair of stresses for as long as
it could withstand all 500 predicted cycles. Thus, for the IF soil,
only the 1st conditioning pair was performed, while the others
lasted until the 2nd. A reduced conditioning is proposed for
subgrade soils must be subjected to 500 conditioning cycles at a
stress pair of 0.07 MPa and 0.07 MPa [38], even though for this
article it was employed full conditioning.
The poor resilient performance of the soils, requiring
adjustments in the conditioning phase or premature
discontinuation of the excess deformation test, also occurred in
other studies of soils in the state of Rio Grande do Sul (RS) [19,30].
Moreover, this reduction in the number of cycles does not affect
the results, given that the RM depends on the state of soil stress
and, in the conventional pavement study-as in this case-the
subgrade is subject to low stresses. The following correlations-Eqs.
(6), (7) and (8)-were obtained for the three soils based on the
behavior model [42]. Fig. 4 shows the resilient modulus modelling
according to deviator stress (Fig. 4(a)) and confining stress (Fig.
4(b)) for the studied soils.
Soil IF 𝑅𝑀 = 239.51𝜎3 0.98 𝜎𝑑 −0.72 (𝑅2 = 0.853) (6)
0.32 −0.53 2 The total specific deformation allows us to calculate the
Soil TR 𝑅𝑀 = 181.01σ3 σd (𝑅 = 0.923) (7)
Soil CQ 𝑅𝑀 = 215.02σ3 0.23 σd −0.292 (R² = 0.756) (8)
where, RM: resilient modulus (MPa); 𝜎3 : confining stress (MPa);
𝜎d : deviator stress (MPa).
4.3. Permanent deformation
The permanent deformation data was fitted by Monismith model
adapted by Guimarães et al. [43], Barksdale [7], and Guimarães [8]
in addition to the shakedown approach [9,20].
4.3.1. Total permanent deformation
The values presented in Table 4 were obtained for the total
permanent deformation. It is showed the stresses, the moisture
content of each sample and total plastic deformation at the cycle
(a)
(b)
Fig. 4. Comparison (a) RM vs σd and (b) RM vs σ3-three soils.
733
n (𝐸𝑝𝑛 ), for cycles 1; 1,000; 10,000 and 150,000. In addition, a
specific deformation of the sample at the end of the test is
presented- 𝐸𝑝150,000 (%). For the stress states recommended by the
Network Procedure 03 [38], in general, the deformations were
higher, considered more expressive as the ratio 𝜎𝑑 ⁄𝜎3 increases.
The highest total plastic deformation (Ep) recorded for the soils
IF, TR, and CQ were, respectively, 6.11 mm, 8.51 mm, and 8.304
mm at the end of test n. 6, with σ 3 of 80 kPa and σd of 240 kPa.
These values indicate the deformations to be suffered by the first
20 cm of the subgrade, with 150,000 load applications, provided
they are subjected to the above stress state. This value of 20 cm
corresponds to the height of the specimen used in the test and is
related to the fact that the first centimeters of the subgrade are the
most affected by the stresses. From this depth, the deformations
reduce considerably.
These values are expressive, since they correspond, respectively,
to 47%, 68%, and 64% of the 13 mm limit, a reference deemed
appropriate for the WTR. However, it is worth mentioning that this
level of stress is much higher than the subgrade is generally
subjected to, due to the legal loads applied to the road axes.
deformation for any subgrade height, with that of the IF soil 3.15%,
of the TR soil 4.44%, and of the CQ soil 4.33%. After 10,000
cycles, the specimens had deformed on average 97% of the final
value. Test n. 9 was completed with a few cycles (only 4 for the IF
soil, 23 for the TR soil, and 11 for the CQ soil) due to the high-
stress deformations. Fig. 5 indicates the accumulated PD, plotted
with a vertical axis on the logarithmic scale, due to the high
deformations of test n. 9.
Observe that the deformation tends to become constant, showing
minimal variation after a certain number of load application cycles.
The smallest deformation occurred in test n. 1, which has the
lowest confining and deviator stresses. Several authors [8,22,40]
found the decrease in clayey soil PD with the increasing number
of cycles. Fig. 5 illustrates the PD of IF soil in order to exemplify
the observed behavior. It was observed a similar behavior between
soils, possibly explained by the similar particle size composition
with the predominance of fine particles, see Fig. 6. However, a
more detailed analysis indicates that the CQ soil presented the
largest deformations in 5 of the 9 tests, followed by the TR soil in
3 and, finally, the IF soil in only 1 test.
For comparison purposes, the algebraic sum of the deformations
of the 9 tests were: IF soil (25.113 mm), TR soil (28.711 mm), and
CQ soil (33.204 mm), regarding the peculiarities of each stress
state analyzed and OMC tolerance of ± 1%, which exerts
considerable influence.
The lowest permanent deformation of the IF soil can be
attributed to the larger sand fraction (54%). On the other hand, the
CQ soil, which has a higher percentage of clay (42%), obtained the
largest deformations, possibly due to the contribution of this
fraction.
The tests were very sensitive to the variation of the deviator
stress, even causing the specimen to break in test n. 9. In the case
of soil IF, for example, for the σd⁄σ3 ratio equal to 3 of tests n. 3 and
6 (corresponding to a 200% increase of σ d), there was an increase
of 444% and 322%, respectively, of Ep150.000 . On the other hand,
unlike the deviator stress, it is impossible to categorically state
whether the increase of the confining stress increases or decreases
the deformation since it depends on the stress state. The RM of the
three soils increased “during” the permanent deformation test,
showing an overconsolidation of the material due to the loading
process.
734 J. P. Zago et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 729-739

Table 4
Results of the permanent deformation test– three soils.
Nº 𝜎3 𝜎𝑑 𝜎𝑑 ⁄𝜎3 Wspecimen CD 𝐸𝑝1 𝐸𝑝1,000 𝐸𝑝10,000 𝐸𝑝150,000 𝜀𝑝150,000
Soil

(kPa) (kPa) (%) (%) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (%)

1 40 40 1 14.8 99.8 0.033 0.384 0.420 0.444 0.2227
2 80 2 14.8 99.6 0.199 1.126 1.179 1.237 0.6223
3 120 3 14.5 102.0 0.108 2.287 2.340 2.415 1.2224
4 80 80 1 14.4 99.9 0.336 1.370 1.417 1.448 0.7294
5 160 2 14.5 99.8 0.240 4.540 4.608 4.722 2.4181
IF

6 240 3 14.2 100.3 0.229 5.905 5.983 6.115 3.1539

7 120 120 1 14.7 100.0 0.466 1.865 1.942 2.006 1.0116
8 240 2 15.3 102.0 0.317 4.868 4.948 5.076 2.6040
9 360 3 14.9 99.5 1.096 - (*) - (*) - (*) - (*)
10 70 70 1 14.5 102.0 0.314 1.604 1.652 1.650 0.8321
1 40 40 1 18.7 98.9 0.360 0.880 0.948 0.985 0.4947
2 80 2 18.2 100.0 0.034 1.010 1.073 1.112 0.5591
3 120 3 17.4 102.7 0.076 3.384 3.441 3.491 1.7768
4 80 80 1 19.1 98.4 0.336 1.573 1.672 1.757 0.8860
5 160 2 18.0 98.3 0.304 3.292 3.374 3.449 1.7549
TR

6 240 3 18.3 99.6 0.370 8.329 8.422 8.514 4.4464

7 120 120 1 18.6 99.4 0.476 1.952 2.060 2.164 1.0938
8 240 2 17.9 100.5 0.655 5.738 5.816 5.881 2.9291
9 360 3 186 102.0 0.701 - (*) - (*) - (*) - (*)
10 70 70 1 17.6 101.3 0.424 1.141 1.265 1.358 0.6835
1 40 40 1 19.9 98.7 0.247 0.606 0.674 0.739 0.3708
2 80 2 18.9 101.3 0.181 2.368 2.429 2.467 1.2491
3 120 3 18.7 98.9 0.181 2.461 2.526 2.617 1.3258
4 80 80 1 18.8 100.5 0.399 2.394 2.451 2.507 1.2694
5 160 2 19.0 99.7 0.431 3.928 4.005 4.073 2.0788
CQ

6 240 3 196 99.1 0.456 8.119 8.207 8.304 4.3318

7 120 120 1 18.7 100.1 0.641 3.965 4.024 4.052 2.0679
8 240 2 18.7 102.0 0.471 6.508 6.594 6.711 3.4719
9 360 3 20.0 99.5 0.708 - (*) - (*) - (*) - (*)
10 70 70 1 18.8 100.5 0.513 1.608 1.674 1.734 0.8744
Caption: 𝐸𝑝𝑛 – permanent deformation accumulated after “n” load application cycles;
𝜀𝑝150,000–specific permanent deformation after 150,000 load application cycles.
(*)-no reading, given that the specimen broke.

4.3.2. Research on Shakedown occurrence

For the material to be effectively in shakedown, a numerical
analysis of the rate of increase of permanent deformation per load
cycle is required, which should be of the order of 1 x 10-7 meters

Fig. 5. Accumulated permanent deformation–IF soil. Fig. 6. Permanent deformation at 150,000 cycles– three soils.
 J. P. Zago et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 729-739
Fig. 7. Graph of the shakedown analysis– IF soil.
[27]. In the case of the IF soil, tests 4 and 10 reached this rate,
with 130,000 and 100,000 hits, respectively, shaping the
shakedown condition in domain A (plastic accommodation [9]),
as shown in Fig. 7.
In the case of soil IF, tests 1, 2, 3, and 7 also reached this rate of
deformation at some point, but it was impossible to identify if they
would continue this tendency, given the end of the experiment with
150,000 hits. The results of the shakedown occurrence
classification, under the deformation rate criteria of 10 -7 m /cycle,
and the proposed DNIT standard [26] are shown in Table 5.
By the 10-7 m/cycle rate criterion, most obtained the B
classification [9] since, despite appearing to present shakedown
behavior, they did not reach the required deformation rate.
However, it is possible that they would reach level A with a higher
number of load application cycles. Test n. 9 was classified as level
C (collapsed) by both methodologies, since the sample for all the
materials could not support the whole test without breaking.
The criterion studied by DNIT is less restrictive, but may be
considered appropriate for the case study, given that the efforts and
rigor of the subgrade performance specifications are considerably
lower than the base layer, in which the 10-7 m/cycle is based on
studies conducted by Werkmeister [9].
4.3.3. Guimarães model parameters
The Guimarães model [8] parameters were obtained from
nonlinear regression, using the method of minimizing the sum of
squares of the residuals, with a 95% confidence level, using the
Statistical Software (version 8.0), according to Table 6-Eqs. (9),
Table 5
Result of the shakedown occurrence– three soils.
Soil Criterion Test
1 2
IF 10-7m/cycle rate B B
DNIT 179/2018 Proposal A A
TR 10-7m/cycle rate B B
DNIT 179/2018 Proposal A A
CQ 10-7m/cycle rate B A
DNIT 179/2018 Proposal A A
735
(10) and (11). The stresses were calculated in MPa and ρ0 equal to
0.1 MPa. The mathematical regression for Monismith [6] and
Barksdale [7] models are also presented in Table 6, Eqs. (12) to
(28) and Eqs. (29) to (55), respectively, to be discussed in the next
item (4.3.4).
All permanent deformations with the respective stress states
associated with the number of hits were considered, totalizing 803
records for the IF soil, 806 records for the TR soil, and 805 records
for the CQ soil. Test n. 9 only included the final deformation,
measured with a caliper in a function of errors in the intermediate
readings resulting from the high deformations, as already stated. A
good coefficient of determination was obtained in all three soils:
soil IF (R² = 0.92), soil TR (R² = 0.92), and soil CQ (R² = 0.90)
and the equations that represent the material behavior are
respectively in Eq. (9), Eq. (10) and Eq. (11).
Nevertheless, the calculations disregarding the first three hits of
each test significantly improved the correlations of the three soils
(increasing R2 to 0.95 for each soil). Allied to this, it reduces the
sum of squares of the residue by 47% on average. Note that for the
4thhit, the condition of N = 4 was maintained in the regression
calculation. The DNIT standardization proposal for the calculation
of permanent deformation predicts 50 initial hits with σ d = 30 kPa
and σ3 = 30 kPa to ensure full contact between the piston and the
cylinder head, preventing that any slack or surface adjustment be
read as deformation of the specimen [26].
4.3.4. Monismith parameters, and its adaptation by Guimarães
et al. and Barksdale
The calculation of the parameters by the Monismith model
resulted in a low correlation (R²) for all materials: IF soil (average
of 0.45), soil TR (average of 0.55), and soil CQ (average of 0.50).
These values indicate that this model does not adequately represent
the permanent deformation of these soils. The plotting of the power
regression graphs, resulting from the Monismith (1975) model,
leads to an overestimation of the deformations, mainly from the
number of shakedown cycles.
In this context, Guimarães et al. [43] propose an adaptation in
this model, approaching a straight line from the identification of
the number of cycles in which the shakedown (NSD) was reached,
considerably improving the correlation, as shown in Table 7.
However, in the impossibility of determining the NSD, the
“logarithmic” regression proposed by Barksdale [7] showed better
behavior and framing than Monismith (1975) in all tests, also
shown in Table 7.
Fig. 8 shows this regression for the TR soil, situated between the
Monismith (1975) curves (original and adapted).
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
B A B B B B C A
A A AB AB A AB C A
A B B B B B C B
AB A AB AB A AB C A
B B B B B B C B
A A AB AB AB AB C A
736 J. P. Zago et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 729-739

Table 6
PD parameters by the Guimarães model [8], Monismith model [6] and Barksdale model [7]– three soils.
Guimarães Model Soil-MCT Classificatio Model R²
𝜎 𝜎
IF- NA’ 𝜀𝑝 (%) =0.593 ( 3 )−0.198( 𝑑 )1.332𝑁 0.042
0.1 0.1
(9) 0.92
𝜎 𝜎
TR-LG’ 𝜀𝑝 (%) =0.385 ( 3 )−0.861( 𝑑 )1.523𝑁 0.075 (10) 0.92
0.1 0.1
𝜎3 0.006 𝜎𝑑 1.212 0.042
CQ-LG’ 𝜀𝑝 (%) =0.869 ( )
0.1
( )
0.1
𝑁 (11) 0.90
Monismith Model IF- NA’ 40/40) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.111(𝑁) 0.066
(12) 0.47
40/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.307(𝑁)0.068 (13) 0.53
40/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.613(𝑁)0.068 (14) 0.36
80/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.425(𝑁)0.053 (15) 0.50
80/160) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.302(𝑁)0.061 (16) 0.33
80/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.788(𝑁)0.139
(17) 0.46
120/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.580(𝑁)0.054
(18) 0.52
120/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.904(𝑁)0.105
120/360) 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑏𝑟𝑜𝑘𝑒
(19) 0.48
70/70) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.557(𝑁)0.040 - -
(20) 0.42
TR-LG’ 40/40) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.310(𝑁)0.044 (21) 0.76
40/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.189. (𝑁)0.107 (22) 0.40
40/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.924(𝑁)0.066 (23) 0.24
80/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.518(𝑁)0.050 (24) 0.59
80/160) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.957(𝑁)0.060
(25) 0.42
80/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.349(𝑁)0.120
(26) 0.48
120/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.627(𝑁)0.053
(27) 0.65
120/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.040(𝑁)0.104
120/360) 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑏𝑟𝑜𝑘𝑒
(28) 0.57
70/70) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.389(𝑁)0.051 - -
(29) 0.84
CQ-LG’ 40/40) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.190(𝑁)0.060 (30) 0.84
40/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.552(𝑁)0.082 (31) 0.39
40/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.708(𝑁)0.061 (32) 0.38
80/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.809(𝑁)0.044 (33) 0.41
80/160) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.062(𝑁)0.067
(34) 0.37
80/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.312(𝑁)0.121
(35) 0.46
120/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.112(𝑁)0.062
120/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.020(𝑁)0.123
(36) 0.51
120/360) 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑏𝑟𝑜𝑘𝑒 (27) 0.52
70/70) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.584(𝑁)0.038 - -
(28) 0.59
Barksdale Model IF- NA’ 40/40) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.1213 + 0.0091ln(𝑁) (29) 0.83
40/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.3395 + 0.0262ln(𝑁) (30) 0.74
40/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.7302 + 0.0469ln(𝑁) (31) 0.68
80/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.4578 + 0.0261ln(𝑁) (32) 0.67
80/160) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.5419 + 0.0842ln(𝑁)
(33) 0.61
80/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.3517 + 0.1763ln(𝑁)
120/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.6225 + 0.0368ln(𝑁)
(34) 0.64
120/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.2017 + 0.136ln(𝑁) (35) 0.69
120/360) 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑏𝑟𝑜𝑘𝑒 (36) 0.68
70/70) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.5915 + 0.0238ln(𝑁) - -
(37) 0.63
TR-LG’ 40/40) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.3109 + 0.0168ln(𝑁) (38) 0.86
40/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.2659 + 0.0277 ln(𝑁) (39) 0.76
40/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.1959 + 0.0570ln(𝑁) (40) 0.54
80/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.5380 + 0.0317ln(𝑁) (41) 0.82
80/160) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.0779 + 0.0677ln(𝑁)
(42) 0.69
80/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.9503 + 0.2450ln(𝑁)
120/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.6449 + 0.0412ln(𝑁)
(43) 0.67
120/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.2746 + 0.1626ln(𝑁)
(44) 0.83
120/360) 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑏𝑟𝑜𝑘𝑒 (45) 0.72
70/70) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.3809 + 0.0266ln(𝑁) - -
(46) 0.94
CQ-LG’ 40/40) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.1853 + 0.0162 ln(𝑁) (47) 0.94
40/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.7055 + 0.0531 ln(𝑁) (48) 0.64
40/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.8090 + 0.0485 ln(𝑁) (49) 0.69
80/80) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.8708 + 0.0382 ln(𝑁) (50) 0.64
80/160) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.2856 + 0.0774 ln(𝑁)
(51) 0.59
80/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.9649 + 0.2347 ln(𝑁)
120/120) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.2407 + 0.0821 ln(𝑁)
(52) 0.64
120/240) 𝜀𝑝 = 1.4273 + 0.2007 ln(𝑁)
(53) 0.63
120/360) 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑏𝑟𝑜𝑘𝑒 (54) 0.70
70/70) 𝜀𝑝 = 0.5978 + 0.0257 ln(𝑁) - -
(55) 0.76
 J. P. Zago et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 729-739 737

Table 7
Main results of the permanent deformation of the three soils.
Influence of the PD on RM (2 Hz) Shakedown research Model Correlation (R²)
Before PD During PD After PD A B C Monismith Barksdale Guimarães
(MPa) (MPa) (1975) (1972) (2009)
IF 184 80/80, 40/40, 211 80/80, Others 120/360 0.45 0.69 0.92
70/70 70/70
TR 208 120/120, 230 40/120 Others 120/360 0.55 0.76 0.92
40/40,
80/80
CQ 202 40/40, 257 40/80 Others 120/360 0.50 0.70 0.90
70/70,
120/120

3. In general, it was realized that the permanent deformations

Fig. 8. Variation of εpx N (logarithmic regression) - test 3 –TR soil.
Conclusions
This research aimed to find relations between physical, chemical
and mechanical characterization of three soils of south of Brazil
and its resilient and permanent deformability. In addition, observe
the adjustment of mathematical models for the studied materials.
Some conclusion were made:
1. The characterization tests, such as granulometry, liquid and
plasticity limits, made it possible to classify the soils
according to TRB and SUCS methodology. Although the
traditional characterization was similar to the three soils, the
MCT classification shows a significant difference, being the
most representative for tropical soils;
2. The soil IF presented the lowest mean value for the resilient
modulus (77 MPa), followed by soil CQ (218 MPa) and soil
TR with 250 MPa. The better performance of soils TR and
CQ can be explained by the laterite behavior, observed in the
MCT tests and chemical analysis, in contrast to the IF soil.
The mean values for RM are adequate for these soils,
considering its particle size and mineralogy. Regarding the
lower resilient performance, the IF soil presented the lowest
algebraic sum of deformations in nine tests, probably due to
the lower amount of sand (54%). In contrast, the CQ soil
presented the highest deformation, possibly due to the higher
presence of clay (42%);
in the three soils were high, possibly due to the presence of
fine grains, as more expressive as the ratio 𝜎𝑑 ⁄𝜎3 increases.
The specimens of the three soils broke in test n. 9, which
presents a higher deviator and confining stresses. On the
other hand, the lower deformation occurred in test n. 1, which
presented lower confining and deviator stresses. At 10,000
cycles, the soils had deformed on average 97% of the final
value. The deformation tended to become constant, varying
very little after a certain number of cycles. The elastic
deformations decreased and the modulus value increased,
following a stabilization trajectory, possibly due to the
hardening of the specimen. The highest values occurred in
the tests in which the deviator stress was equal to the
confining stress;
4. Regarding the reduced rates of increase in permanent
deformation, only tests n. 4 and 10 of soil IF, n. 3 of soil TR,
and n. 2 of soil CQ (Standard Proctor energy) reached the
range A shakedown, due to the criterion of the permanent
deformation increase rate per load cycle (10-7×0,001
m/cycle). The other tests were classified as range B, except
for n. 9, compacted at Standard Proctor energy (range C).
However, it is possible that the tests classified as range B
could reach range A, since there were a greater number of
load cycles;
5. The Monismith model presented the worst statistical
correlations (average of 0.50), increasing with Barksdale's
proposal (R² = 0.72), and culminating with the best results
obtained by the Guimarães model [8], with an average of
0.91. Disregarding the initial three hits of each test, the
determination coefficient raised to 0.95. Therefore,
accordingly to these studies, the Guimarães model seems to
be adequate to represent these soils behavior;
6. Thus, after analyzing all the tests, the studied soils presented
an adequate behavior for a material to be used as road
subgrade.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge CNPq and Petrobras for Technological
Research funding developed by the Group for Study and Research
in Paving and Road Safety (Grupo de Estudos e Pesquisas em
Pavimentação e Segurança Viária-GEPPASV) from Federal
University of Santa Maria (UFSM) and Alberto Luiz Coimbra
Institute of Engineering Post-Graduation and Research (COPPE)
of Federal University of Rio de Janeiro.
738 J. P. Zago et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 729-739
List of terminologies
A,B : experimental parameters;
C,D : coefficients of a very low declivity linear equation;
𝑑𝑃𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 : total permanent deformation of the layers;
𝜀𝑝𝑖 : specific deformation of each layer;
εtot : total specific deformation;
εr : resilient specific deformation;
εp : specific permanent deformation;
εve : viscoelastic deformation;
𝐸𝑝𝑛 : permanent deformation accumulated after “n” load
application cycles;
𝜀𝑝150.000 : specific permanent deformation after 150,000 load
application cycles.
ℎ𝑖 : thickness of each layer. 𝜀𝑝 (%): specific permanent
deformation;
𝜓1 , 𝜓2 , 𝜓3 , 𝜓4 : regression parameters;
𝜎3 : confining stress in kgf/cm²;
𝜎𝑑 : deviator stress in kgf/cm²;
N : number of load application cycles.
NSD : number of load application cycles to achieve
accommodation-shakedown.
𝜌0 : reference stress (atmospheric pressure, considered as
equal to 1 kgf/cm²);
References
[1] E. J. Yoder, M. W. Witczak, Principles of Pavement Design,
2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, USA, 1975, p.
711.
[2] H. Y. Huang, Pavement Analysis and Design, Prentice Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, USA, 1993, p.805.
[3] J. T. Balbo, Asphalt Paving: materials, projects and
restoration, Oficina de Textos, São Paulo, Brazil, 2007,
p.558.
[4] A. T. Papagiannakis, E. A. Massad, Pavement Design and
Materials. John Wiley & Sons. Hoboken, USA, 2008, p.542.
[5] J. Medina, L.M.G. Motta, Pavements Mechanics, 3rd edn.
Editora Interciência Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2015, p.638.
[6] C. L. Monismith, N. Ogawa, C. R. Freeme, Permanent
deformation characteristics of subgrade soils due to repeated
loading, 54° annual meeting of TRB, Washington DC, USA,
1975.
[7] R. D. Barksdale, Laboratory Evaluation of Rutting in Base
Course Materials. 3rd International Conference on Structural
Design of Asphalt Pavements, London, UK, 1972, pp. 161-
174.
[8] A. C. R. Guimarães, A mechanistic empirical method to
predict permanent deformation on tropical soils on
pavements, (Doctoral Thesis), COPPE, Universidade
Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2009.
[9] S. Werkmeister, Permanent deformation behaviour under
granular materials in pavement constructions, (Doctoral
Thesis), Dresden University of Technology, Dresden,
Germany, 2003.
[10] M. Svenson, Ensaios triaxiais dinâmicos de solos argilosos,
(Maters Dissertation), COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio
de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1980.
[11] F. Lekarp, U. Isacsson, A. Dawson, State of the art II:
permanent strain response of unbound aggregates, J. Transp.
Eng. 126 (1) (2000) 76-83.
[12] C. D. A. Lima, L. M. G. Motta, F. T. S. Aragão, Effects of
Compaction Moisture Content on Permanent Deformation of
Soils Subjected to Repeated Triaxial Load Tests, Transp. Res.
Rec. 2673 (2) (2019) 466-476.
[13] F. S. Ackah, N. Zhuochen, F. Huaiping, Effect of wetting and
drying on the resilient modulus and permanent strain of a
sandy clay by RLTT, Inter. J. Pavement Res. Technol. (2020)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42947-020-0067-3.
[14] B. G. Delgado, Deformability analysis of a tropical soil from
west Maranhão as subballast in Carajás Railroad, (Masters
Dissertation), Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto, Ouro
Preto, MG, Brazil, 2012.
[15] A. C. R. Guimarães, A study about permanent deformation
on soils and the shakedown theory aplied to flexible
pavements, (Masters Dissertation), COPPE, Universidade
Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, 2001.
[16] F. Lekarp, I. R. Richardson, A. Dawson, Influences of
permanent deformation behavior of unbound granular
materials, Transp. Res. Rec. 1547 (1996) 68-75.
[17] F. Lekarp, A. Dawson, Modelling permanent deformation
behavior of unbound granular materials, Constr. Build.
Mater. 12 (1) (1998) 9-18.
[18] C. D. A. Lima, Study of permanent deformation of two
graded crushed rock to apply in pavements layers, (Masters
Dissertation), COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de
Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, 2016.
[19] L. O. Nervis, Identification and discussion on distress
mechanisms of unsurfaced gravel roads, (Doctoral Thesis),
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre,
RS, Brazil, 2016.
[20] V. Peraça, Qualifying soils for Road Wearing Courses: An
Approach Based on Mechanics of Pavements and Soil
Mechanics, (Masters Dissertation), Universidade Federal do
Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil, 2007.
[21] M. M. P. Ribeiro, Contribution to study of subgrade soil
permanent deformation, (Masters Dissertation),
Universidade de São Paulo, São Carlos, SP, Brazil, 2013.
[22] D. de S. V. Rezende, Study of the mechanical behavior of
soils for flexible pavement design using repeated loads
triaxial test data, (Doctoral Thesis), Universidade Federal de
Viçosa, Viçosa, MG, Brazil, 2009.
[23] C. Norback, Characterization of resilient module and of
permanent deformation of three soils and soil-gravel
mixtures, (Masters Dissertation), COPPE, Universidade
Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, 2018.
[24] W. P. Núñez, J. A. P. Ceratti, L. A. Bressani, R. J. B. Pinheiro,
V. Peraça, M. L. Nogueira, A rational approach to the
evaluation of soils for low volume roads, Transp. Res. Rec.
2205 (3) (2011) 73-78.
[25] Departamento Nacional de Infraestrutura de Transportes.
Publicação IPR-720: Asphalt pavements restoration manual,
2nd edn. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2006. p. 314.
[26] Departamento Nacional de Infraestrutura de Transportes,
Paving - Soils - Permanent Deformation Determination-
DNIT IE 179/18. Departamento Nacional de Infra-Estrutura
de Transportes. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2018. p. 20.
[27] A. R. Dawson, F. Wellner, Plastic Behavior of Granular
Materials. Report ARC Project 933. Reference PRG 99014.
University of Nottingham, UK, 1999.
[28] S. Werkmeister, A. R. Dawson, F. Wellner, Pavement
 J. P. Zago et al. / International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 14 (2021) 729-739
Design for Unbound Granular Materials, J. Transp. Eng. 130
(5) (2004) 665-674.
[29] C. D. A. Lima, L. M. G. Motta, Study of Permanent
Deformation and Granulometric Distribution of Graded
Crushed Stone Pavement Material, Procedia Eng. 143 (2016)
854-861.
[30] T. A. Santos, L. P. Specht, R. J. B. Pinheiro, J. A. P. Ceratti,
L. A. T. Brito, Resistance and resilient deformability
evaluation of four soils used in road subgrades in the state of
Rio Grande do Sul. Revista Transportes 27 (1) (2019) 48-64.
[31] P. T. Pascoal, Study of compaction influence in resilient
behavior and permanent deformation of a lateritic soil from
Rio Grande do Sul, (Masters Dissertation), Universidade
Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brazil, 2020.
[32] J. P. Zago, Permanent deformation study about three typical
road subgrade soils from Santa Maria – RS, (Masters
Dissertation), Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, 2016.
[33] Google Earth, https://earth.google.com/web/. Accessed in
Sep. 14th, 2016.
[34] K. D. A. Sant'ana, Environmental diagnosis of the physical
environment at Campo de Instrução of Santa Maria, (Masters
Dissertation), Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa
Maria, Brazil, 2012.
[35] C. L. Maciel Filho, Geotechnical characterization of
sedimentary formations from Santa Maria, (Masters
Dissertation), COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de
Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, 1977.
739
[36] C. L. Maciel Filho, Geotechnical cartography of Santa Maria,
Imprensa Universitária UFSM, Santa Maria, Brazil, 1990.
[37] Serviço Geológico do Brasil. Geological Map of the state of
Rio Grande do Sul. (CPRM, 2006),
http://www.cprm.gov.br/publique/media/geologia_basica/ca
rtografia_regional/mapa_rio_grande_sul.pdf. Accessed 29
December 2020.
[38] Departamento Nacional De Infraestrutura De Transportes,
Paving - soils: Resilient Modulus determination . DNIT ME
134/2010. Departamento Nacional de Infra-Estrutura de
Transportes. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2010. 11 p.
[39] Petrobras, Rede temática de asfalto, Execution manual of
monitored sections, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2010.
[40] A. C. R. Guimarães, L. M. G. Motta, C. D. Castro, Permanent
deformation parameters of fine-grained tropical soil, Road
Mater. Pavement Des. 20 (7) (2018) (1-18).
[41] J. S. Nogami, D. F. Villibor, A new soil classification for
highway purposes, Brazilian Simposium of Tropical Soils in
Engineering, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 30-41.
[42] J. A. G. de. Macêdo, Interpretation of deflectometric tests for
structural evaluation of flexible pavements, (Doctoral
Thesis), COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro,
Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, 1996.
[43] A. C. R. Guimarães, L. M. G. Motta, J. Considerations about
the Monismith model of permanent deformation prediction
in soil subjected to repeated loads in pavements, 35ª Reunião
Anual e Pavimentação, Florianópolis, Anais, 2004