Mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide calibration for pavement rehabilitation.

Details

• Creators:
  Williams, R. Chris ; Shaidur, R.
• Corporate Creators:
  Iowa State University. Institute for Transportation
• Corporate Contributors:
  United States. Federal Highway Administration
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  Alligator Cracking Calibration Hot Mix Asphalt Longitudinal Cracking Overlays (Pavements) Pavement Design Pavement Distress Pavements--Cracking Pavements--Design And Construction Pavements--Maintenance And Repair Pavements--Overlays Rehabilitation (Maintenance) Rutting

  More +
• Publication/ Report Number:
  SPR 718
• Resource Type:
  Tech Report
• Geographical Coverage:
  Oregon
• Edition:
  Final report.
• Corporate Publisher:
  Oregon. Dept. of Transportation. Research Section
• Abstract:
  The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) is in the process of implementing the recently introduced AASHTO
  
  Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) for new pavement sections. The majority of pavement work
  
  conducted by ODOT involves rehabilitation of existing pavements. Hot mix asphalt (HMA) overlays are preferred for both
  
  flexible and rigid pavements. However, HMA overlays are susceptible to fatigue cracking (alligator and longitudinal
  
  cracking), rutting, and thermal cracking. This study conducted work to calibrate the design process for rehabilitation of
  
  existing pavement structures. Forty-four pavement sections throughout Oregon were included. A detailed comparison of
  
  predictive and measured distresses was made using MEPDG software Darwin M-E (Version 1.1). It was found that Darwin
  
  M-E predictive distresses did not accurately reflect measured distresses, calling for a local calibration of performance
  
  prediction models. Darwin M-E over predicted total rutting compared to the measured total rutting and most of the rutting
  
  predicted by Darwin M-E occurs in the subgrade. For alligator (bottom-up) and thermal cracking, Darwin M-E
  
  underestimated the amount of cracking considerably as compared to in-field measurements. A high amount of variability
  
  between predicted and measured values was observed for longitudinal (top-down) cracking. The performance (punch-out)
  
  model was also assessed for continuously reinforced concrete pavement (CRCP) using Darwin M-E's default (nationally
  
  calibrated) coefficients.
  
  Four distress prediction models (rutting, alligator, longitudinal, and thermal cracking) of the HMA overlays were calibrated
  
  for Oregon conditions. It was found that the locally calibrated models for rutting, alligator, and longitudinal cracking
  
  provided better predictions with lower bias and standard error than the nationally (default) calibrated models. However,
  
  there was a high degree of variability between the predicted and measured distresses, especially for longitudinal and
  
  transverse cracking, even after the calibration. It is believed that there is a significant lack-of-fit modeling error for the
  
  occurrence of longitudinal cracks. The Darwin M-E calibrated models of rutting and alligator cracking can be implemented,
  
  however, it is recommended that additional sites be established and included in the future calibration efforts to improve the
  
  accuracy of the prediction models.
  
  
• Format:
  PDF
• Collection(s):
  US Transportation Collection
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha-512:113472fe1dc294a07c9c3974973b7a709cbe508e915db4db44a9be2921515cfd700c475a134b01030b00ec411b2274b6c03454dab8902330432765c73090a747
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/25790/dot_25790_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 2.47 MB ]