Investigation of AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design/DARWin-MEPerformance Prediction Models for Iowa Pavement Analysis and Design

The Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) was developed under National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 1-37A as a novel mechanistic-empirical procedure for the analysis and design of pavements. The MEPDG was subsequently supported by AASHTO’s DARWin-ME and most recently marketed as AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design software as of February 2013. Although the core design process and computational engine have remained the same over the years, some enhancements to the pavement performance prediction models have been implemented along with other documented changes as the MEPDG transitioned to AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design software. Preliminary studies were carried out to determine possible differences between AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design, MEPDG (version 1.1), and DARWin-ME (version 1.1) performance predictions for new jointed plain concrete pavement (JPCP), new hot mix asphalt (HMA), and HMA over JPCP systems. Differences were indeed observed between the pavement performance predictions produced by these different software versions. Further investigation was needed to verify these differences and to evaluate whether identified local calibration factors from the latest MEPDG (version 1.1) were acceptable for use with the latest version (version 2.1.24) of AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design at the time this research was conducted. Therefore, the primary objective of this research was to examine AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design performance predictions using previously identified MEPDG calibration factors (through InTrans Project 11-401) and, if needed, refine the local calibration coefficients of AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design pavement performance predictions for Iowa pavement systems using linear and nonlinear optimization procedures. A total of 130 representative sections across Iowa consisting of JPCP, new HMA, and HMA over JPCP sections were used. The local calibration results of AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design are presented and compared with national and locally calibrated MEPDG models.

[1]  Kyle Hoegh,et al.  LOCAL CALIBRATION OF MEPDG RUTTING MODEL FOR MNROAD TEST SECTIONS , 2010 .

[2]  Mohamed M El-Basyouny,et al.  Independent Review of the "Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide" and Software , 2006 .

[3]  C. Lewis.  Industrial and business forecasting methods : a practical guide to exponential smoothing and curve fitting , 1982 .

[4]  Danny X Xiao,et al.  Evaluation of AASHTO Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide for Designing Rigid Pavements in Louisiana , 2014 .

[5]  Fadi Munir Jadoun.  Calibration of the Flexible Pavement Distress Prediction Models in the Mechanistic Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) for North Carolina , 2011 .

[6]  Jagannath Mallela,et al.  Implementation of the AASHTO Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide for Colorado , 2013 .

[7]  David R Luhr,et al.  Pavement Performance Modeling Using Piecewise Approximation , 2010 .

[8]  Magdy Abdelrahman,et al.  Improving prediction accuracy in mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide , 2006 .

[9]  Rafiqul A. Tarefder,et al.  Local Calibration of MEPDG for Flexible Pavements in New Mexico , 2013 .

[10]  Youngsoo Kim,et al.  Local Calibration of Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide for Flexible Pavement Design , 2008 .

[11]  Baoshan Huang,et al.  Validating MEPDG with Tennessee Pavement Performance Data , 2013 .

[12]  Robert A Rodden,et al.  Review of National and State-Level Calibrations of the AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design for New Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement , 2015 .

[13]  Linda M Pierce,et al.  Implementation of the AASHTO Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide and Software , 2014 .

[14]  Michael S Mamlouk,et al.  Necessary Assessment of Use of State Pavement Management System Data in Mechanistic–Empirical Pavement Design Guide Calibration Process , 2010 .

[15]  Linda M Pierce,et al.  Calibration of Flexible Pavement in Mechanistic–Empirical Pavement Design Guide for Washington State , 2009 .

[16]  Claudia E Zapata.  A National Database of Subgrade Soil-Water Characteristic Curves and Selected Soil Properties for Use with the MEPDG , 2010 .

[17]  Harold L Von Quintus,et al.  Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide Flexible Pavement Performance Prediction Models: Volume I Executive Research Summary , 2007 .

[18]  Ronald Christopher Williams,et al.  Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide Calibration for Pavement Rehabilitation in Oregon , 2013 .

[19]  J S Miller,et al.  DISTRESS IDENTIFICATION MANUAL FOR THE LONG-TERM PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE PROGRAM (FOURTH REVISED EDITION) , 2003 .

[20]  Jussara Tanesi,et al.  Interlaboratory Study on Measuring Coefficient of Thermal Expansion of Concrete , 2010 .

[21]  Ambarish Banerjee,et al.  Regional Calibration of Permanent Deformation Performance Models for Rehabilitated Flexible Pavements , 2011 .

[22]  L Harold,et al.  Local Calibration of MEPDG - An Overview of Selected Studies (With Discussion) , 2008 .

[23]  Danny X Xiao,et al.  Calibration of the Mechanistic–Empirical Pavement Design Guidefor Flexible Pavement Design in Arkansas , 2011 .

[24]  Y. Richard Kim,et al.  Local Calibration of the MEPDG for Flexible Pavement Design , 2011 .

[25]  Jagannath Mallela,et al.  Calibration and Implementation of the AASHTO Mechanistic‐Empirical Pavement Design Guide in Arizona , 2014 .

[26]  Halil Ceylan,et al.  Use of Pavement Management Information System for Verification of Mechanistic–Empirical Pavement Design Guide Performance Predictions , 2010 .

[27]  Amir N Hanna.  Sensitivity Evaluation of MEPDG Performance Prediction , 2013 .

[28]  Linda M Pierce,et al.  Calibration of NCHRP 1-37A software for the Washington state department of transportation : Rigid pavement portion , 2006 .

[29]  Final Document,et al.  Guide for Mechanistic-Empirical Design OF NEW AND REHABILITATED PAVEMENT STRUCTURES FINAL DOCUMENT APPENDIX QQ : STRUCTURAL RESPONSE MODELS FOR RIGID PAVEMENTS NCHRP , 2004 .

[30]  Robert L. Lytton,et al.  Models for Predicting Reflection Cracking of Hot-Mix Asphalt Overlays , 2010 .

[31]  Iliya Yut,et al.  Adaptation of Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide for Design of Minnesota Low-Volume Portland Cement Concrete Pavements , 2008 .

[32]  Ghassan R. Chehab,et al.  Implementing the Mechanistic-Empirical Design Guide Procedure for a Hot-Mix Asphalt-Rehabilitated Pavement in Indiana , 2005 .

[33]  Jagannath Mallela,et al.  Guidelines for Implementing NCHRP 1-37A M-E Design Procedures in Ohio: Volume 4—MEPDG Models Validation & Recalibration , 2009 .

[34]  Iliya Yut,et al.  Implementation of the MEPDG for New and Rehabilitated Pavement Structures for Design of Concrete and Asphalt Pavements in Minnesota , 2009 .

[35]  José Pablo Aguiar-Moya,et al.  Calibrating the MEPDG Permanent Deformation Performance Model for Different Maintenance and Rehabilitation Strategies , 2010 .

[36]  Teresa M Adams,et al.  Development of a Regional Pavement Performance Database for the AASHTO Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide: Part 2: Validations and Local Calibration , 2007 .

[37]  Rui Li.  SENSITIVITY EVALUATION OF THE MECHANISTIC-EMPIRICAL PAVEMENT DESIGN GUIDE (MEPDG) FOR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE PREDICTION , 2013 .

[38]  Kejin Wang,et al.  Task 6: Material Thermal Input for Iowa Materials , 2008 .

[39]  Halil Ceylan,et al.  Iowa Calibration of MEPDG Performance Prediction Models , 2013 .

[40]  Mohamed M El-Basyouny,et al.  Calibration of the AASHTO MEPDG for Flexible Pavement for Arizona Conditions , 2010 .