TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1684
99-0693 61
Westergaard Curling Solution Reconsidered
ANASTASIOS M. IOANNIDES, CRAIG M. DAVIS, AND CHRISTOPHER M. WEBER
An in-depth and systematic examination is presented of the effect of tem-
perature gradients on slab-on-grade pavements. The main objective for
the examination was the development of practical design tools for use in
a typical engineering office. This has been achieved by a critical recon-
sideration of the literature, a synthesis of currently available analytical
resources, and the implementation of recent technological achievements
promulgated in related areas of engineering. Prominent among these are
the application of the principles of dimensional analysis, the finite element
method, advanced statistical regression analysis, and artificial neural net-
works (ANN). A number of ANNs have been trained for the curling prob-
lem, and in several instances they are found to be more efficient predictive
tools than corresponding statistical regression equations. It is found that
the most important shortcomings of the Westergaard curling solution are
the assumption of continuous contact between slab and subgrade (infinite
slab self-weight) and the explicit treatment of only daytime conditions.
Although Westergaard’s curling-only predictions are significantly infe-
rior to those from ANN and statistics, his load-plus-curling predictions
exhibit approximately the same scatter as those from these two more mod-
ern and nominally more sophisticated tools. The case of Westergaard’s
curling solution can serve as an example pointing to the usefulness and
desirability of theoretical solutions, even when these are achievable only
on the basis of considerable abstraction and simplification.
Beginning with the pioneering work of Professor Harald Malcolm
Westergaard (1888–1950) in the early 1920s (1), conventional slab-
on-elastic foundation analysis for portland cement concrete (PCC)
pavements has proceeded on the basis of six limiting assumptions:
(a) infinite slab size; (b) full contact between slab and subgrade (no
temperature differential through the slab thickness); (c) single slab
panel (no load transfer); (d ) single placed layer (no base); (e) semi-
infinite foundation (no rigid bottom); and ( f ) single tire print. Fur-
thermore, the analysis is most commonly performed within the context
of linear elasticity and of medium-thick plate theory (2), which
imposes the additional restriction of no compressibility within the
thickness of the placed layer(s). With regard to the subgrade, the pre-
ferred idealization has been that of the dense liquid (DL) foundation
(3). A significant portion of the technical literature in this area over
the last 75 years has dealt with a discussion of the necessity, signifi-
cance, and repercussions of these assumptions, as well as with the
potential means for overcoming them. Barely a year after the publi-
cation of his first paper in English on the response of pavement slabs-
on-grade, Westergaard himself (4) returned to the topic by grappling
with the uniform contact restriction, thereby affirming its status as the
most detrimental one among all assumptions made.
Significant progress has been made in the intervening years in
understanding the curling phenomenon, to the point where it would
perhaps be inconceivable to design a PCC pavement responsibly
without due consideration of the appreciable contribution of thermal
stresses. The purpose of this paper is to present an in-depth and sys-
tematic examination of the effect of temperature gradients on slab-
on-grade pavements, conducted at the University of Cincinnati,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Cincin-
nati (ML-0071), P.O. Box 210071, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0071.
Paper No.
whose main objective has been the development of practical design
tools for use in a typical engineering office. This has been achieved
by a critical reconsideration of the literature, a synthesis of currently
available analytical resources, and the implementation of recent
technological achievements promulgated in related areas of engi-
neering. Primary among these analytical resources and technologi-
cal achievements are the application of the principles of dimensional
analysis, the finite element method (FEM), advanced statistical
regression techniques, and the science of artificial neural networks
(ANNs). Results and conclusions presented vindicate the multifac-
eted approach adopted for investigating this problem and reveal the
enduring value of pioneer methods of analysis, while encouraging a
healthy sense of optimism concerning the progress achieved over
the years.
PIONEER CURLING ANALYSIS
In attempting to address the uniform contact limitation, Westergaard
(4) retained all other restrictions noted previously, while intro-
ducing four additional assumptions: (g) infinite slab self-weight;
(h) applicability of the principle of superposition with regard to
the summation of load-induced and thermal stresses; (i) adequacy
of considering a linear temperature variation through the slab thick-
ness; and ( j) that slab response under nighttime conditions is a mir-
ror image of the corresponding behavior under daytime conditions.
At first glance, these new restrictions appear to doom any obtained
solution to being hopelessly unrealistic. The consequence of the infi-
nite self-weight assumption is that the slab remains in contact with the
subgrade, which seems hardly justifiable if the purpose of Wester-
gaard’s new analysis is the elimination of the uniform contact restric-
tion. In addition, the principle of superposition can be accepted only
if boundary and support conditions remain unchanged, a condition
ensured by (g) but hardly reflecting the slab field behavior responsi-
ble for the deterioration spawning engineering interest in the curling
phenomenon in the first place.
Westergaard (4) offered only scant discussion of these self-
evident shortcomings of his new analysis, but he proceeded quite
confidently with the development of practical design tools, intended
to complement the tool chest he had already started to compile for
load-induced stresses. The new tools he derived were in the form
of the well-known equations for curling stresses at the interior and
at the edge of a pavement slab, coupled with the widely used chart
of the C-coefficient. The latter is necessary for accommodating the
pronounced effect of slab size in curling stress calculation. Fur-
thermore, Westergaard (4) stipulated that superposition be used in
calculating critical combined (load-induced plus thermal) stresses
under interior and edge-loading conditions, during daytime condi-
tions. Apparently unwilling to allow curling stresses to be subtracted
from load stresses, Westergaard stopped short of recommending
the application of superposition under nighttime conditions. The
62 Paper No. 99-0693
conventional practice of applying superposition under nighttime
conditions cannot be traced to Westergaard.
On account of their manifestly “weak foundation,” it is quite con-
ceivable that these new tools could have been considered as unlikely
to be useful in practical applications, and their developer himself
could have been dismissed as a dweller in the proverbial academic
ivory tower. Indeed, relatively few practicing engineers today would
recognize these widely used tools as Westergaard’s, let alone appre-
ciate their feeble technical basis. Instead, it is quite natural to see the
aforementioned curling equations and C-coefficient chart ascribed to
Bradbury (5), even in such respected textbooks as those by Yoder and
Witczak (6 ) and Huang (7). In this manner, Westergaard became the
first on a long list of unsung heroes in the area of curling analysis,
whose only consolation may be found in the thought that uncited imi-
tation is the highest form of flattery. To Bradbury’s credit, however,
it must be freely admitted that his verbatim reproduction of Wester-
gaard’s work lent it the credibility that it sorely needed at the time.
This promoted its adoption by the industry, a task to which a respected
practitioner was much better suited than a university professor. Inter-
estingly, the conventional practice of applying superposition under
nighttime conditions also cannot be traced to Bradbury.
SUBSEQUENT ADVANCES IN
CURLING ANALYSIS
Just as Westergaard (4) had returned to the slab-on-grade problem,
seeking to eliminate the uniform contact restriction, a series of inves-
tigators after him have tackled the four additional assumptions he had
introduced in his curling analysis. Perhaps the first such attempt
focused on the elimination of the limitation of a linear temperature
distribution, and this should be rightfully credited to the British
researcher J. Thomlinson. Like Westergaard, Thomlinson (8) sought
“a rational theory . . . in a form that can be applied directly to practi-
cal problems,” yet produced what at first sight might be perceived as
an intimidating sequence of theoretical manipulations. Although his
solution to the problem of a nonlinear temperature gradient is com-
plete, Thomlinson (8) failed to present it as a step-by-step approach
to the solution of practical problems, despite the fact that he even pro-
vided the tools for determining the diurnal variation of slab temper-
atures. Consequently, his truly pioneering effort remained largely
unknown, with subsequent investigators either totally ignoring it or
citing it inadequately.
The next Westergaard curling assumption to be challenged was,
not surprisingly, that of continuous contact between the slab and the
subgrade, by explicitly accommodating the actual unit weight of the
concrete slab. This enhancement was made possible through the use
of an iterative scheme implemented in an FEM code, developed at
the University of Kentucky by Huang and Wang (9). Naturally, this
computerized implementation of curling analysis simultaneously
addressed the slab size effect, accommodated multiple wheel-loads,
eliminated the need for superposition, and permitted the examination
of daytime and nighttime conditions independently. The Kentucky
code, which eventually became known as KENSLABS (7), retained
all other Westergaard assumptions, including that of a linear tem-
perature gradient. Nonetheless, its methodology became widely
adopted, as evidenced by its subsequent incorporation—sometimes
without adequate citation—in several similar FEM codes.
The assumption of a single-placed layer (no base) in curling analy-
sis was first tackled by Korovesis (10), who implemented Huang’s
iterative approach into ILLI-SLAB (11) and extended it to the case of
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1684
a two-layer slab on grade. In addition, Korovesis adapted the multi-
layered FEM program ROOF (12), creating the ILLI-LAYER code,
suitable for analyzing pavement systems incorporating more than two
placed layers. Although Korovesis retained a linear temperature dis-
tribution through each placed layer, multiple layers now permitted the
piecewise examination of a nonlinear distribution. In addition, the
presence of adjacent slab panels and the provision of load transfer
were accommodated in Korovesis’s curling analysis.
Regrettably, the work of Korovesis (10) has remained in relative
obscurity, as it has not been widely published following the author’s
repatriation to Greece. Albeit quite preliminary in nature and incom-
plete in several respects, it spawned considerable interest in non-
linear curling analysis of multilayered pavements, culminating in
the work of Khazanovich (13). The latter complemented the contri-
butions of Thomlinson (8), Huang and Wang (9), and Korovesis
(10) with achievements promulgated in the former Soviet Union,
notably those by Korenev and Chernigovskaya (14). The result was
the development of a robust and practical scheme for the nonlinear
curling analysis of multilayered slabs on grade, which Khazanovich
(13) implemented in a drastically expanded version of the ILLI-
SLAB FEM code, called ILSL2. This generalized FEM formulation
accommodates simultaneously a nonlinear temperature distribution,
loss of support, multiple placed layers, and load transfer, thereby
effectively eliminating all of Westergaard’s assumptions, except the
one pertaining to the absence of a rigid subgrade bottom.
CURLING DATA INTERPRETATION
It is apparent that the development of computerized analysis pro-
grams, notably those based on the FEM, enhance the engineer’s
ability to eliminate many of the constraints imposed by the origi-
nal assumptions implicit in the closed-form solutions presented
by Westergaard (1,4). This ability in itself, however, is not ade-
quate in extracting meaningful conclusions of a sufficiently general
nature so that they become of value to practicing engineers and
pavement designers. To address this limitation, Ioannides (15) out-
lined a methodology founded on an application of the principles of
dimensional analysis for the interpretation of analytical (e.g., from
FEM analyses) and field data. The methodology consists of identi-
fying the dimensionless independent and dependent variables gov-
erning the problem, generating analytical or collecting field data
from a relatively small experimental factorial, and establishing pre-
dictive algorithms through the use of statistical analysis. This
methodology has been successfully used in a wide variety of appli-
cations (16,17 ) and has been incorporated into the mechanistic-
empirical design procedure for PCC pavements developed under
NCHRP project 1-26 (18).
In applying the dimensional analysis-FEM-statistics methodology
to the curling problem, Ioannides and Salsilli-Murua (19) identified
the following governing independent variables: (a/l), (L/l), (W/l), and
(α∆T ), in which a is radius of tire print; l is radius of relative stiff-
ness; L is slab length; W is slab width; α is coefficient of linear expan-
sion of PCC; and ∆T is linear temperature differential between top and
bottom of slab. The fact that these variables are already evident in
Westergaard’s work testifies to the enduring value of the latter. The
dimensionless form of the bending stress dependent variable had
already been identified by Ioannides (15) as (σh2/P), with σ the bend-
ing stress (assumed to be positive if tensile at the bottom of the slab);
h the slab thickness; and P the total applied load. To eliminate the slab
size effect, (L /l) was set to about 16, whereas (W/l) ranged between
Ioannides et al.
3.6 and 7.7, values at which analytical and numerical investigations
had resulted in infinite-slab responses. The bending stress response of
the slab on grade under combined edge-load-plus-curling conditions
was quantified by the dimensionless multiplier ρ, to be applied to the
corresponding Westergaard load-induced stress. A predictive statisti-
cal equation was derived for ρ, whose coefficient of determination,
R2, was 0.985. The ratio of (predicted/observed) values for the 12
cases considered averaged 1.005, with a coefficient of variation of 16
percent. Despite these nominally impressive statistics, Ioannides and
Salsilli-Murua (19) pointed out that the applicability of their regres-
sion expression was limited by their inadequate consideration of the
slab unit weight, γ, and of the magnitude of the applied load, P, espe-
cially for slabs of a lesser size than that considered in their study. Note
that in this context, “predicted” refers to responses calculated by
means of various proposed algorithms, whereas “observed” denotes
FEM results.
These remarks anticipated the definition of two additional inde-
pendent variables governing the curling phenomenon by Lee (20), as
TABLE 1 Comparison of Statistical, ANN, and Westergaard Predictions
Paper No. 99-0693 63
follows: Dγ = (γh2/kl2); and DP = (Ph /kl4), in which k is modulus of
subgrade reaction. Consequently, using enhanced methods of statis-
tical analysis, namely, projection pursuit regression techniques (21),
Lee (20) derived more elaborate expressions for the prediction of
edge bending stresses under curling-only and combined-load-plus-
curling conditions in PCC slabs on grade.
ADVANCED STATISTICAL REGRESSION,
ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORKS,
AND WESTERGAARD
The improved predictive abilities of Lee’s advanced statistical regres-
sion algorithms are reflected in the high R2 values reported, which are
reproduced in Table 1. Because of the limitations of this parameter
alone to quantify the goodness-of-fit achieved (19), during the Uni-
versity of Cincinnati study it was considered desirable to calculate
the corresponding values of the (predicted/observed) ratio and to com-
64 Paper No. 99-0693
pare these statistics to those that might result from using the original
approach suggested by Westergaard (1,4). These comparisons are also
shown in Table 1. Furthermore, in an effort to enhance and make less
arbitrary the painstaking process by which the functional forms of
complicated regression algorithms are established and possibly
improve the predictive ability of such tools, a series of artificial neural
networks (ANNs) were trained for this purpose (22). The same data-
base of FEM results compiled by Lee (20) and used for the derivation
of his statistical algorithms was employed. The corresponding per-
formance statistics pertaining to these ANNs also are included in
Table 1.
Load Only
For the load-only case, the limits of applicability of the infinite-slab
assumption have been established by using the FEM (23), and they
range from about 3.5l to about 8l, depending on the response
considered. For the case of the edge bending stress, the infinite-slab
criterion is practically satisfied for values of (L/l) exceeding about
5. Ioannides et al. (17 ) presented a simple statistical regression
equation to accommodate the slab size effect at (L/l) values
between 3 and 5, whose R2 coefficient was 0.996 for the 12 cases
considered. In deriving his more elaborate statistical expressions,
Lee (20) emulated the methodology used by Ioannides (17 ) but
focused on improving the predictive ability of their simpler algo-
rithm, as well as accommodating explicitly the effect of slab width
(W/l).
Table 1 shows that on the basis of the average (predicted/observed)
ratio for the edge load bending stress, ANN and Westergaard compare
favorably with statistics, but the closed-form predictions are rather
conservative, presumably more so at smaller slab dimensions. Inter-
estingly, the fact that Westergaard’s minimum ratio is below unity
suggests shortcomings in the mesh used to perform the corre-
sponding FEM analyses. Thus, Westergaard may be in error when
considering short slabs, but his error is always on the safe side.
Curl Only
Salsilli-Murua (24) presented additional statistical regressions to
predict curling behavior, but his equations were limited in effec-
tiveness by the fact that the slab self-weight variable still was miss-
ing. An interesting effort into identifying the elusive self-weight
variable was made by Crovetti (25), but his study was inconclusive
in this regard. At about the same time, a review of the Russian liter-
ature by Lev Khazanovich (personal communication, 1993) led to
the rediscovery of the pertinent variable as (γh2/kl2), first presented
by Koronev and Chernigovskaya (14). Working largely indepen-
dently, Lee (20) also identified the same variable, which he finally
incorporated into his more elaborated statistical algorithms.
For the daytime curl-only condition, Table 1 indicates that the
Westergaard closed-form approach is quite limited in precision,
whereas both statistics and ANN perform quite well, if not entirely
satisfactorily. It is important to point out that not only does the slab
self-weight need to be accommodated in this case, but also the slab
size correction is more significant for curling, persisting much
beyond 5l, up to almost 15l. The latter effect was known to West-
ergaard (4), whose chart for the C-coefficient extended to more than
11l, even as it can be argued that he may have underestimated the
slab self-weight and loss of support effects.
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1684
These comments are brought into sharper focus when nighttime
statistics are considered in Table 1. Although the R2 value reported by
Lee (20) for this case is practically identical to that reported for day-
time curling, the predictive ability of the nighttime statistical algo-
rithm is significantly inferior to that of the corresponding daytime
equation. A similar deterioration in the predictive ability of ANN also
is observed. This suggests that the interactions among the governing
independent variables are significantly more complicated under night-
time conditions than under daytime curling. The deterioration of
the predictive ability of Westergaard’s closed-form approach is even
more devastating; estimates in several cases appear only a little bet-
ter than a mere guess. The error introduced is certainly much higher
than what would be tolerated by a desire for a simple yet conserva-
tive solution. These remarks also apply to the graphical comparison
in Figure 1, in which slightly improved predictions by ANN are ob-
served. It is, therefore, natural to ask: Why would Westergaard pre-
sent such a solution? Light on this issue is shed by the examination of
the load-plus-curling condition discussed in the following.
Load Plus Curling
Despite the obvious limitations in its applicability, the principle of
superposition was recommended by Westergaard (4) for accommo-
dating the combined load-plus-curling under daytime conditions. It
was noted earlier that this could be tolerated because of his other
assumption concerning continuous contact between slab and sub-
grade. Yet, his total stress was to be the sum of his load stress plus his
curl-only stress, whose shortcomings were noted earlier. These limi-
tations are particularly severe for nighttime conditions, under which
it has also become conventional more recently to apply superposition.
Darter (26) was among the first to suggest modifying the Westergaard
sum by premultiplying the curl-only stress by a correction factor, R,
for which statistical regression equations could be obtained, based on
FEM data. Darter’s early expressions, however, involved individual
inputs, not dimensionless variables, and were, therefore, lengthy and
of limited scope of applicability, especially beyond the actual cases
considered. Korovesis and Ioannides (27) also pointed out the limita-
tions of the principle of superposition, and they provided some sug-
gestions concerning the estimation of the magnitude of error that
can be expected. The statistical algorithm presented by Ioannides and
Salsilli-Murua (19) was yet another effort to overcome the limitations
of superposition and of Westergaard’s curl-only stress by avoiding the
calculation of the latter altogether. Interestingly, however, the overall
predictive ability of that algorithm was scarcely improved over that
of the principle of superposition.
The major contribution of Lee (20) has been the identification of
the additional dimensionless variable that governs this combined
load-plus-curling case, which he termed DP. Consequently, he ob-
tained individual predictive regression algorithms, pertaining to
daytime and nighttime conditions, respectively. In contrast, a single
ANN was trained for the combined load-plus-curling case. Further-
more, the ANN predictions for the load-only and for the curling-
only conditions from the previous ANNs trained were employed in
the combined stress calculation, whereas Lee had opted to use the
Westergaard (4) curling closed-form expression instead of his own
statistical one.
Table 1 suggests that the single ANN trained is considerably supe-
rior to the individual statistical algorithms in this case, at least from
the viewpoint of the coefficient of variation (COV). The performance
of all three predictive tools once again is much worse under night-
Ioannides et al.
FIGURE 1 Maximum edge bending stress predictions for curl-only case, nighttime.
time than under daytime conditions. In contrast, the reported R2 val-
ues might create the impression that the statistical algorithms are
equally effective for these two conditions, confirming the reserva-
tions expressed by Ioannides and Salsilli-Murua (19) concerning the
limitations of R2 as a measure of goodness-of-fit.
Figures 2 and 3 present graphically a comparison of the three pre-
dictive tools for the maximum edge bending stress under load-plus-
curling conditions. It is observed that Westergaard’s predictive
ability is not considerably inferior to that of ANN or of statistics! In
fact, Figure 2 shows that for the daytime, Westergaard’s prediction
is hardly distinguishable from the corresponding ones from statis-
tics and ANN. The major source of the discrepancies from all three
predictive tools is the complicated nature of the nighttime curling
phenomenon, as indicated in Figure 3. This is not the first time that
the sum of Westergaard’s rather imprecise solutions leads to a sat-
isfactory answer. Lev Khazanovich and Robert K. Kumapley (per-
sonal communication, 1997) have pointed out that this is also the
case in the original derivation of the edge loading (load only) for-
mula by Westergaard (28). The question that now arises is on what
grounds did Westergaard perceive that despite the limitations of his
curling stress formulae, and of the applicability of the superposition
principle, his summation would be quite satisfactory? Then again,
that would be a question as to the source of ingenuity, which would
hardly belong within the scope of an engineering paper.
SIGNIFICANCE OF WESTERGAARD’S
ASSUMPTIONS
Improved predictive tools, implementable on a personal computer,
such as Lee’s statistical algorithms and the ANNs trained in this
Paper No. 99-0693 65
study, permit an evaluation of the repercussions of the various
assumptions made by Westergaard (1,4) in his load-only and curl-
ing analyses. For instance, it was noted earlier that Westergaard’s
C-coefficient chart permits determination of this multiplier only as
a function of the dimensionless slab length (L/l). In this study, the
variation of the C-coefficient with the dimensionless slab self-
weight term, Dγ, and its sensitivity to the sign of the dimensionless
temperature differential (α∆T), that is, to the day-to-night variation,
was investigated. The chart in Figure 4 was obtained for the day-
time curl-only condition by using the statistical algorithm by Lee
(20) for a variety of Dγ values; the Dγ = 3. 0E-5 curve corresponds
approximately to the typical concrete unit weight, γ, of 23.6 kN/m3
(150 lb/ft3). The dimensionless slab width (W/l) was maintained at
5, and the dimensionless temperature differential (α∆T) was set
at +14.85E-5, corresponding to α = 9.9E-6 e/°C (5.5E-6 e/°F) and
∆T = +49°C (+27°F). It is observed that the C-coefficient is appre-
ciably sensitive to the value of Dγ. As expected, the Westergaard
curve represents the upper limit for C as Dγ tends to infinity. For
typical values encountered in practice, Westergaard’s estimate of
C would be approximately 15 percent too high (conservative).
Interestingly, the (L /l) value at which C attains unity is higher for
lower Dγ values. Recall that C is thought to rise above unity because
“the subgrade reaction actually reverses slightly the curvature that
temperature curling tends to produce” (7 ). Such reversal would be
more pronounced in lighter slabs, that is, those of lower (L/l) or
of lower Dγ, or both. Thus, an increase in concrete unit weight
tends to make a slab behave as if it were longer than it really is; the
reverse would also be true, and it would be practically significant
when light-weight concretes are used. Figure 4 reveals some weak-
nesses in the statistical algorithm used, manifested in the “kinks”
occurring between (L /l) of about 7 and 10.
FIGURE 2 Maximum edge bending stress predictions for load-and-curl, daytime.

FIGURE 3 Maximum edge bending stress predictions for load-and-curl, nighttime.

Ioannides et al. Paper No. 99-0693 67

FIGURE 4 Effect of slab self-weight on C-coefficient, daytime.

The corresponding behavior of the C-coefficient under night-
time conditions yields curves that are considerably different from
those in Figure 4, evincing increased sensitivity of C to Dγ under
nighttime conditions. Even for the highest Dγ value assumed here,
corresponding approximately to γ = 35.3 kN/m3 (225 lb/ft3), the
C-coefficient predicted by Lee’s statistical algorithm is about 45 per-
cent lower than Westergaard’s. This affirms that the continuous
contact assumption by Westergaard is more restrictive under night-
time than under daytime conditions. It may be concluded, therefore,
that Dγ and the sign of ∆T are the most important factors omit-
ted from Westergaard’s C-coefficient chart. Figure 5 illustrates
the relative contribution of both these effects. The discrepancy
between C-values predicted by Lee’s statistical algorithm and the
upper-limit curve (approximately 5 percent during the day and 50 per-
cent during the night) illustrate graphically the shortcomings of
Westergaard’s curling-only analysis.
It was noted above that for both Figures 4 and 5, (W/l) was set to
5, as this factor was expected to be largely inconsequential (19).

FIGURE 5 Effect of slab self-weight on C-coefficient, daytime and nighttime.

68 Paper No. 99-0693
This expectation is found to be justified when results from above
are compared with those for (W/l) set at 3 and 7. The value of C
increases as (W/l) increases, but for the daytime such an increase is
about only 3 percent for the range of (W/l) considered here. The
effect of (W/l) is reversed and somewhat more pronounced under
nighttime conditions. The corresponding decrease in C for the range
of (W/l) considered is about 20 percent. For both daytime and night-
time conditions, however, the influence of (W/l) is significantly
smaller than that of (L/l) and of Dγ.
Turning now to the load-plus-curling problem, it is desirable to
evaluate the contributions of the dimensionless slab weight term, Dγ,
and of the dimensionless applied load term, DP, omitted in Wester-
gaard’s analysis. To present these effects graphically, the correction
factor, R, which—in accordance with Lee’s algorithm—needs to be
applied to the Westergaard curl stress before this is added to the load-
induced stress, is plotted against the dimensionless temperature dif-
ferential (α∆T ) for various values of Dγ in Figure 6. The divergence
of the R-value from unity provides a measure of the discrepancy
introduced by direct application of the principle of superposition, as
suggested by Westergaard (4). It is observed that R decreases rapidly
as |α∆T | increases, but once again the daytime and nighttime values
are not mirror images of one another. The drastic diminution of R
does not, of course, suggest that the curling contribution to the com-
bined stress is necessarily reduced, as well; it merely reflects the
increasingly conservative nature of Westergaard’s curl prediction
(overestimate), especially during the night and at higher |α∆T |. It is
also noted that R-values are lower for the lighter slabs, reflecting
the fact that Westergaard’s solution corresponds to infinite Dγ. The
discontinuity observed at α∆T = 0 is attributable to the fact that at this
point, R is indeterminate, because curling stress tends to zero as
|α∆T | tends to zero. Consequently, the significance of this disconti-
nuity is not as pronounced as might be inferred from Figure 6. Both
statistics and ANNs ignore such “boundary conditions” and may,
therefore, lead to discontinuities that are counterintuitive. An analo-
gous example is offered by the AASHTO PSI equation, which does
not predict PSI = 5.0 at zero distress.
FIGURE 6 Effect of slab self-weight on combined stress factor R, daytime and nighttime.
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1684
In comparison to Dγ, the dimensionless applied load term, DP, has
a much smaller effect, especially during the day. As DP increases
from 20E-5 to 60E-5, corresponding approximately to the range of
27 to 80 kN (6,000 to 18,000 lbs), R increases by about 5 percent dur-
ing the day and 55 percent during the night. The apparent increased
sensitivity of R to DP during the night is a mere reflection of the
greater shortcomings of Westergaard’s curling-only solution when
applied to this part of the daily cycle. Furthermore, the sensitivity of
R to a second aspect related to the applied load, namely, to the dimen-
sionless load size ratio, (a/l), is found to be relatively unimportant
here, although this variable had been found in many other instances
to be of paramount significance. Implicit in Westergaard’s applica-
tion of the principle of superposition for the determination of the
combined stress is the assumption that the contribution of the level
of the external load P and of its distribution a, that is, of DP and of
(a/l), is adequately accounted for in the determination of the load-
only stress. Results obtained in this study bear out that this assump-
tion is a reasonable one to make in the pursuit of a practical and
simple solution.
CONCLUSIONS
The pioneering analysis of Westergaard (4) of the curling phenom-
enon in PCC pavement slabs-on-grade is reexamined in this paper,
by using a number of computerized resources that have come into
increasing use in the last 2 decades. Prominent among these are the
finite element method, advanced statistical regression analysis, and
artificial neural networks. The main purpose of this effort has been
the assessment of the repercussions of Westergaard’s restrictive
assumptions and their possible elimination in the development
of practical solutions to the problem, accessible to the practicing
pavement engineer and designer.
The methodology employed in this study proceeded from a critical
reconsideration of the literature in this area, which permitted the enu-
Ioannides et al.
meration of the limiting assumptions inherent in Westergaard’s analy-
sis and the identification of the most significant contributions of the
last 75 years in addressing them. It has been pointed out that many of
the investigators responsible for the enhancement of engineering
knowledge in this field have remained as unsung heroes, a fate from
which even Westergaard was not entirely exempt. The most important
shortcomings of the Westergaard curling solution are his assumption
of continuous contact between slab and subgrade (infinite slab self-
weight) and his explicit treatment only of daytime conditions. Both
these limitations were overcome 2 decades ago by the introduction of
an iterative FEM scheme by Huang and Wang (9), but the lack of a
comprehensive method of curling data interpretation has inhibited the
appreciation of the overriding significance of these restrictions.
Such a data interpretation method was formulated by Ioannides
(15) and was applied to the curling problem first by Ioannides and
Salsilli-Murua (19) and more recently (and most fruitfully) by Lee
(20). Accordingly, the principles of dimensional analysis are employed
in the identification of the governing dimensionless independent and
dependent variables, a small factorial of data is generated or collected,
and advanced statistical regression techniques are applied in the
derivation of predictive algorithms. It is reiterated that mature engi-
neering judgment and in-depth understanding of the mechanics of the
phenomenon investigated remain the most reliable guides in the for-
mulation of the functional form of the resulting statistical predictive
algorithms. For this reason, establishing an appropriate and effective
algorithm can be a time-consuming and frustrating exercise, not a task
that can be entrusted blindly to chance.
An alternative to the use of statistics that might place fewer demands
on the developer of practical solutions is offered by the science of
ANNs. In this study, several ANNs were trained, and in several
instances they were found to be more efficient predictive tools than
the corresponding statistical regression equations. The main finding
of the study, however, has been the mutual verification of the robust-
ness of the ANNs trained and of the statistical regression algorithms.
Equally significant is the conclusion that although Westergaard’s
curling-only predictions are significantly inferior to those from ANN
and statistics, his load-plus-curling predictions exhibit approximately
the same scatter as these two more modern and nominally more
sophisticated tools. The practical implications of this conclusion are
that superposition can be applied for the combined stresses as Wester-
gaard (4) had suggested (for which numerous examples are available
in standard textbooks), whereas Westergaard’s curl-only stresses
should not be relied on or be compared to in situ measurements, say.
The ANNs trained during this study provide an additional, easy-to-
use tool for design office application.
These observations provide the strongest evidence vindicating
Westergaard’s curling analysis, laden as it was with unrealistic as-
sumptions and mathematical manipulations. Thus, the case of Wester-
gaard’s curling solution can serve as an example pointing to the
usefulness and desirability of theoretical solutions, even when these
are achievable only on the basis of considerable abstraction and sim-
plification. Theory and practice can stray from one another only so
far before they each become unreliable: engineering judgment is the
leash that connects the two, and Westergaard appears to have been
blessed with a longer one than most.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research was funded in part by a subcontract from the Univer-
sity of Washington under an FHWA contract. Additional funding
Paper No. 99-0693 69
was provided by the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio. The
authors thank Steven Forster of FHWA, Donald J. Janssen of the
University of Washington, Seattle, and Mark B. Snyder of the Uni-
versity of Minnesota, Minneapolis. Ying-Haur Lee of Tamkang
University, Taiwan, generously made his database of FEM results
available to the research team. Roger W. Meier of the University of
Memphis, Tennessee, permitted the use of his ANN computer pro-
gram, BACKPROP 3.0. The authors gratefully acknowledge the
contributions of these agencies and individuals and are especially
indebted for the fruitful discussions with these people on the subject
matter of this paper.
REFERENCES
1. Westergaard, H. M. Stresses in Concrete Pavements Computed by Theo-
retical Analysis. Public Roads, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1926, pp. 25–35. Also
appeared as Computation of Stresses in Concrete Roads. HRB Proc., 5th
Annual Meeting, Part I, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.,
1926, pp. 90–112.
2. Timoshenko, S., and S. Woinowsky-Krieger. Theory of Plates and
Shells. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959.
3. Winkler, E. Die Lehre von der Elastizität und Festigkeit (The Theory of
Elasticity and Stiffness). H. Dominicus, Prague, 1867.
4. Westergaard, H. M. Analysis of Stresses in Concrete Pavements Due
to Variations of Temperature. HRB Proc., Vol. 6, National Research
Council, Washington, D.C., 1927, pp. 201–217.
5. Bradbury, R. D. Reinforced Concrete Pavements. Wire Reinforcement
Institute, Washington, D.C., 1938.
6. Yoder, E. J., and M. W. Witczak. Principles of Pavement Design,
2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1975.
7. Huang, Y. H. Pavement Analysis and Design. Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, N.J., 1993.
8. Thomlinson, J. Temperature Variations and Consequent Stresses Pro-
duced by Daily and Seasonal Temperature Cycles in Concrete Slabs. Con-
crete Constructional Engineering, Vol. 36, No. 6, 1940, pp. 298–307;
No. 7, pp. 352–360.
9. Huang, Y. H., and S. T. Wang. Finite-Element Analysis of Rigid Pave-
ments with Partial Subgrade Contact. In Transportation Research
Record 485, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1974,
pp. 39–54.
10. Korovesis, G. T. Analysis of Slab-On-Grade Pavement Systems Sub-
jected to Wheel and Temperature Loadings. Ph.D. thesis. University of
Illinois, Urbana, 1990.
11. Tabatabaie, A. M., and E. J. Barenberg. Finite-Element Analysis of
Jointed or Cracked Concrete Pavements. In Transportation Research
Record 671, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1978,
pp. 11–19.
12. Barzegar, F. Layering of RC Membrane and Plate Elements in Nonlin-
ear Analysis. Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 114, No. 11, 1988,
pp. 2474–2492.
13. Khazanovich, L. Structural Analysis of Multi-Layered Concrete Pave-
ment Systems. Ph.D. thesis. University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill., 1994.
14. Korenev, B. G., and E. I. Chernigovskaya. Analysis of Plates on Elastic
Foundation. Gosstroiizdat, Moscow, 1962 (in Russian).
15. Ioannides, A. M. Analysis of Slabs-on-Grade for a Variety of Loading
and Support Conditions. Ph.D. thesis. University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill.,
1984.
16. Ioannides, A. M. Extension of Westergaard Solutions Using Dimen-
sional Analysis. Proc., 2nd International Workshop on the Design and
Evaluation of Concrete Pavements, CROW/PIARC, Sigüenza, Spain,
1990, pp. 357–388.
17. Ioannides, A. M., R. A. Salsilli, I. Vinding, and R. G. Packard. Super-
Singles: Implications for Design. Proc., 3rd International Symposium on
Heavy Vehicle Weights and Dimensions, Queens’ College, Cambridge,
U.K., 1992, pp. 225–232.
18. Calibrated Mechanistic Structural Analysis Procedures for Pavements,
Phase 2. Vol. 1, 2. Final Report, Project 1–26, University of Illinois,
Urbana, Ill., 1992.
19. Ioannides, A. M., and R. A. Salsilli-Murua. Temperature Curling in
Rigid Pavements: An Application of Dimensional Analysis. In Trans-
70 Paper No. 99-0693
portation Research Record 1227, TRB, National Research Council,
Washington, D.C., 1989, pp. 1–11.
20. Lee, Y.-H. Development of Pavement Prediction Models. Ph.D. thesis.
University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill., 1993.
21. Friedman, J. H., and W. Stuetzle. Projection Pursuit Regression. Jour-
nal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 76, 1981, pp. 817–823.
22. Davis, C. M. Applications of Neural Networks in the Interpretation of
Concrete Pavement Behavior. M.S. thesis. University of Cincinnati,
Cincinnati, Ohio, 1998.
23. Ioannides, A. M., M. R. Thompson, and E. J. Barenberg. Westergaard
Solutions Reconsidered. In Transportation Research Record 1043,
TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1985, pp. 13–23.
24. Salsilli-Murua, R. A. Calibrated Mechanistic Design Procedure for
Jointed Plain Concrete Pavements. Ph.D. thesis. University of Illinois,
Urbana, Ill., 1991.
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1684
25. Crovetti, J. A. Design and Evaluation of Jointed Concrete Pavement Sys-
tems Incorporating Free Draining Base Layers. Ph.D. thesis. University
of Illinois, Urbana, Ill., 1994.
26. Darter, M. I. Design of Zero-Maintenance Plain Jointed Concrete Pave-
ment: Vol. I—Development of Design Procedures. Report FHWA-RD-
77-111. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C.,
1977.
27. Korovesis, G. T., and A. M. Ioannides. Discussion of “Effect of Concrete
Overlay Debonding on Pavement Performance,” by T. Van Dam, E.
Blackmon, and M. Y. Shahin. In Transportation Research Record 1136.
TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1987, pp. 129–132.
28. Westergaard, H. M. New Formulas for Stresses in Concrete Pavements of
Airfields. Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers. Vol.
113. New York, 1948, pp. 425– 439.
Publication of this paper sponsored by Committee on Rigid Pavement Design.