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 !!!!!
[email protected] Objectives
State Implementation Activities Status of MEPDG
General Overview of ME Design Benefits and Issues of Implementation Current State of the Practice
[email protected]
What else happened in 1958 ?
Construction finished on the AASHO Road Test
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
1950s Construction Methods...
(AASHO, 1961)
[email protected]
Question ?
Why was the original AASHO Road Test conducted ?
How much did it cost ?
[email protected]
Objectives
[email protected]
The Big Picture
EICM
Climate Inputs
Material Properties
Traffic
Transfer Functions
Predicted Performance
Mechanistic Analysis
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
Local Calibration Benefits
Local Data Set
National Data Set
Test Section Observations
[email protected]
Traffic
Improved traffic characterization Ability to deal with changing load types
ESAL18k
Load Spectra
[email protected]
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
[email protected]e s e d th
Materials
Enhanced definition of material properties Relate material properties to performance Material Aging
Layer Coefficient
Modulus
[email protected]
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
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)
[email protected]
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
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
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 ?
[email protected] Climate
Site specific climate considerations
Material properties effected by climate PCC Joint openings, Curl / Warping
Extrapolated from Ottawa, IL
800 Weather Sites
[email protected] 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.
[email protected] 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
[email protected] LCCA
Pavement Performance Initial Construction First Rehab
Time
[email protected]
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 (%)
[email protected]
Integration
Pavement Design Materials Selection
Communication
Pavement Management
Construction
Objectives
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
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*
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
Using MEPDG for Design
State specific guidance is necessary
Pavement Design Manual Distress criteria and limits Design parameters to change
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
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..
[email protected] Other Work Lead State Implementation Plan Both [email protected] 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
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
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 !!!
[email protected] Help Wanted
Contact the DGIT
Research Proposal Review Training Technical Assistance
[email protected]
AASHTO Implementation
Joint Technical Committee on Pavements
April 10-11, 2007 MEPDG Roll Out Workshop Irvine, CA
Subcommittee of Design & Materials
Full AASHTO Balloting
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
[email protected]
Perspective
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
[email protected]
Questions ??
BEAT BAMA !!!
www.trb.org/mepdg www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/dgit/
[email protected]
