Mechanistic Empirical Pavement Design Guide

MEPDG : Where are We Now?
Louisiana Transportation Engineering Conference

Baton Rouge, LA February 12, 2007
Chris Wagner, P.E.

FHWA Resource Center
Auburn and LSU Common Denominator
BEAT BAMA !!!!!

Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov
Objectives
State Implementation Activities Status of MEPDG
General Overview of ME Design Benefits and Issues of Implementation Current State of the Practice
What else happened in 1958 ?

Construction finished on the AASHO Road Test
Whats Being Used (2003 survey)

Design Procedures
1972 AASHTO Guide 1986 AASHTO Guide 1993 AASHTO Guide Agencys own pavement design guide or combination of AASHTO/Agency design procedures
DOTs
3 2 26 17
1950s Construction Methods...
(AASHO, 1961)
Question ?
Why was the original AASHO Road Test conducted ?
How much did it cost ?
Objectives
The Big Picture

EICM
Climate Inputs
Material Properties
Traffic
Transfer Functions
Predicted Performance
Mechanistic Analysis

Loads and Layer Stiffness E* Mr
Mr
Mechanistic Analysis
Layered Elastic Analysis
Strain Calculations at Critical Locations
E = /
Empirical Portion of MEPDG
Predicted Performance
of e Lin
y alit u Eq
= Empirical Shift Factor
Observed Performance
Test Section Performance

100 90 Alligator Cracking (% of Total Lane Area) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Log Damage (%)
Local Performance Data
Local Calibration Benefits

Local Data Set
National Data Set
Test Section Observations
Traffic

Improved traffic characterization Ability to deal with changing load types
ESAL18k
Load Spectra
1950s Vehicle Loads...

n o y e b s s n n o o i i t t a a l c o i l . p p n a r p o i a t u d Ext a a c o l h l t i w tota d e s u e b d l shou Who drove these trucks ?
Pg 7: AASHTO 72 Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov
e s e d th
Materials

Enhanced definition of material properties Relate material properties to performance Material Aging
Layer Coefficient
Modulus
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
M odulus (psi)
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0 0 6 12 18
Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov Pavement Age (month)
24
30
36
42
48
54
60
Aging
1,400,000
Dynamic Modulus (psi)
1,200,000
AC at 1/2" Depth AC at 5" Depth AC at 10" depth
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120
Pavement Age (month)
1,000,000
900,000
What happened here ??

800,000
700,000
M odulus (psi)
600,000
Granular Base
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60
Pavement Age (month) Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
Granular Base
M odulus (psi)
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
Input Value
Soil
10,000
0 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60
Pavement Age (month) Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov
AASHTO Materials Characterization

How do you Characterize your materials ??

SMA Superpave HMA Hveem HMA Polymer Modified Warm Mix Asphalt RAP
Are they all ai = 0.44 ?

Climate
Site specific climate considerations

Material properties effected by climate PCC Joint openings, Curl / Warping
Extrapolated from Ottawa, IL
800 Weather Sites

Major Advantages

Modular system that allows for incremental enhancement Produces a more reliable design No longer dependent on the extrapolation of empirical relationships Excellent for forensic analysis
Answers What if. questions
Calibrate to Local Materials, Traffic, Climate.

Reasons for Change

Reduce Over-and-Under Design Costs

Legislative Mandate
Consider Alternative Designs/Unique Conditions

Rational Basis for Warranties, LCCA, PRS, QA/QC, Pay Factors

Forensic Investigations

Impact of Management Decisions on Pavement System

Tie Design to Construction
LCCA
Pavement Performance Initial Construction First Rehab
Time
PRS Example
60
Contractor Builds 12% Va

50
Bottom Up Cracking (%)
40
8% Air Void Spec Limit

30
$$$
20
10
0 4 8 12
Air Voids (%)
Integration
Pavement Design Materials Selection
Communication
Pavement Management
Construction
Objectives
Implementation Team
Develop a Team and Plan

Include In-House Experts; Pavements Materials and Traffic, PMS Consider Regional or Multi-State Effort; PFS Contract with Consultant or University Include Upper management Personnel
Data Collection - Traffic

Most States Have Inadequate Data Some are Planning Regional Weight Data by Roadway Classification (TRB Session 283) Share Collection and Storage Efforts with Other Offices Using Traffic Data Enhance WIM Quality and Magnitude Integrate with PMS
Data Collection - Materials

Most States Need Additional Equipment Several are Determining Mr, FWD, DCP and CBR Relationships for Catalog Testing Equipment for CTE and E* Predictive Equations for E*
Practical Considerations

You have to design before you build MEPDG is used for Design and Forensic Evaluation Dont need to use all distress predictions for design Do not need Level 1 for all Inputs Do not throw out past experience
Using MEPDG for Design
State specific guidance is necessary

Pavement Design Manual Distress criteria and limits Design parameters to change
Implementation Timeframe

Some DOTs Already Underway Others are Awaiting Other Efforts:

NCHRP Projects FHWA Research Projects Copy Other State Approaches AASHTO Adoption Windfall from Gas Tax Revenues Hell Frozen
Who will use the MEPDG?

State DOTs Main User

Pavement Designers Upper Management

Remaining Service Life, What if questions

Academia Industry Consultant Designers

Warranty, Design Build, PRS, PWL etc..

Other Work Lead State Implementation Plan Both Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov Unknown
Things to remember
All pavement design systems need:

Quality Materials Characterization Quality Traffic Data Calibrated to local conditions Focused on the structural design aspects Has limitations
The MEPDG is one tool for a designer

Version 1.0 Changes

State DOTs will receive 2 copies soon Batch Mode Model Recalibration Use of Volumetrics in rutting model Computer Program Stability Perpetual Pavement Concept Calculation of ESALs
NCHRP Draft Research Results Digest
More Information

www.trb.org/mepdg www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/dgit
Webcast Workshops Traffic, Climate, Materials, Introduction

ARA bugtracker website Local Calibration Guide and Users Manual NHI Course: Hands on Application of MEPDG
Read
the book !!!

Help Wanted
Contact the DGIT

Research Proposal Review Training Technical Assistance
AASHTO Implementation
Joint Technical Committee on Pavements
April 10-11, 2007 MEPDG Roll Out Workshop Irvine, CA

Subcommittee of Design & Materials
Full AASHTO Balloting
Interim Guide Spring 2008 ? Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov
Perspective
1960 Completion of Road Test Experiment 1961-62 AASHO Interim Guide for the Design of Rigid and Flexible Pavements 1972 AASHTO Interim Guide for the Design of Pavements 1981 Revised Chapter III on Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Design 1986 Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures 1993 Revised Overlay Design Procedures 1998 Supplement to Concrete Design Procedures
Perspective
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Questions ??
BEAT BAMA !!!

www.trb.org/mepdg www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/dgit/

Mechanistic Empirical Pavement Design Guide

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Mechanistic Empirical Pavement Design Guide

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

MEPDG : Where are We Now?

Louisiana Transportation Engineering Conference

Chris Wagner, P.E.

Auburn and LSU Common Denominator

BEAT BAMA !!!!!

What else happened in 1958 ?

Whats Being Used (2003 survey)

1950s Construction Methods...

How much did it cost ?

The Big Picture

Strain Calculations at Critical Locations

Empirical Portion of MEPDG

= Empirical Shift Factor

Test Section Performance

Local Performance Data

Local Calibration Benefits

National Data Set

Test Section Observations

Improved traffic characterization Ability to deal with changing load types

1950s Vehicle Loads...

Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov Pavement Age (month)

Dynamic Modulus (psi)

AC at 1/2" Depth AC at 5" Depth AC at 10" depth

Pavement Age (month)

What happened here ??

Pavement Age (month) Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov

Pavement Age (month) Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov

AASHTO Materials Characterization

How do you Characterize your materials ??

Are they all ai = 0.44 ?

Site specific climate considerations

Material properties effected by climate PCC Joint openings, Curl / Warping

Extrapolated from Ottawa, IL

800 Weather Sites

Answers What if. questions

Calibrate to Local Materials, Traffic, Climate.

Reasons for Change

Reduce Over-and-Under Design Costs

Rational Basis for Warranties, LCCA, PRS, QA/QC, Pay Factors

Impact of Management Decisions on Pavement System

Contractor Builds 12% Va

Bottom Up Cracking (%)

8% Air Void Spec Limit

Air Voids (%)

Develop a Team and Plan

Data Collection - Traffic

Data Collection - Materials

Using MEPDG for Design

State specific guidance is necessary

Some DOTs Already Underway Others are Awaiting Other Efforts:

Who will use the MEPDG?

State DOTs Main User

Pavement Designers Upper Management

Remaining Service Life, What if questions

Academia Industry Consultant Designers

Warranty, Design Build, PRS, PWL etc..

Other Work Lead State Implementation Plan Both Christopher.Wagner@dot.gov Unknown

All pavement design systems need:

The MEPDG is one tool for a designer

Version 1.0 Changes

NCHRP Draft Research Results Digest

Webcast Workshops Traffic, Climate, Materials, Introduction

the book !!!