Development of Flexible Pavement Database for Local Calibration of MEPDG - Volume 1

The new mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide (MEPDG), based on the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) study 1-37A, replaces the widely used but more empirical 1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures. The MEPDG adopted a mechanistic-empirical pavement analysis and design procedure by using material properties, traffic and climate data for local conditions as input. Among material properties, resilient modulus (Mr) of underlying soil and aggregate layers is one of the important parameters for the analysis and design of flexible pavements. Also, dynamic modulus (E*) of the asphalt mixes and rheological properties of asphalt binders are needed to predict pavement distresses for its design life. To this end, Mr data of 712 samples from five unbound subgrade soils, 139 samples from four stabilized subgrade soils, and 105 samples from two aggregates in Oklahoma were evaluated to develop stress-based models. Among selected models for unbound subgrade soils, the universal model outperformed other stress-based models. For stabilized soils and aggregates, the octahedral model, recommended by the MEPDG, performed better than the other models. Also, reasonably good correlations were established to predict Mr values of these materials by using routine material properties (i.e., gradation, index properties). Furthermore, MEPDG input parameters of three performance grade (PG) binders, collected from three different refineries in Oklahoma, were determined as per Superpave(R) test methods. It was observed that the rheological properties (i.e., viscosity, dynamic shear modulus (G*)) of the same PG grade binders varied significantly based on their sources. The present study is expected to provide ODOT with useful data and correlations that can be used to calibrate the MEPDG for local materials and conditions.

[1]  Ramon Bonaquist,et al.  Refining the Simple Performance Tester for Use in Routine Practice , 2008 .

[2]  Samuel H Carpenter.  Dynamic Modulus Performance of IDOT Mixtures , 2007 .

[3]  Leslie Ann Myers,et al.  Field Evaluation of Witczak and Hirsch Models for Predicting Dynamic Modulus of Hot-Mix Asphalt (With Discussion) , 2005 .

[4]  Musharraf Zaman,et al.  Durability Effects on Resilient Moduli of Stabilized Aggregate Base , 1999 .

[5]  A Shah,et al.  Evaluation of mixtures using dynamic modulus tester: results and practical considerations , 2005 .

[6]  Reynaldo Roque,et al.  Evaluation of a Predicted Dynamic Modulus for Florida Mixtures , 2005 .

[7]  M Shabbir Hossain.  Estimation of Subgrade Resilient Modulus for Virginia Soil , 2009 .

[8]  Amy B. Cerato,et al.  Evaluation and Field Verification of Strength and Structural Improvement of Chemically Stabilized Subgrade Soil , 2008 .

[9]  Ali Honarmand-Ebrahimi.  Regression and neural network modeling of resilient modulus based on routine soil properties and stress states , 2006 .

[10]  Brian K Diefenderfer,et al.  Asphalt materials characterization in support of implementation of the proposed mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide. , 2007 .

[11]  Halil Ceylan,et al.  Iowa’s Rubblized Pavements: Design Properties of Rubblized PCC Layers , 2009 .

[12]  John E. Haddock,et al.  Method To Ensure Stone-on-Stone Contact in Stone Matrix Asphalt Paving Mixtures , 1997 .

[13]  M Musharraf.  Effect of Freeze-Thaw Cycles on Class C Fly Ash Stabilized Aggregate Base , 2003 .

[14]  Transportation Officials.  Report on the 1990 European Asphalt Study Tour , 1991 .

[15]  Matthew W Witczak,et al.  Development of a New Revised Version of the Witczak E* Predictive Model for Hot Mix Asphalt Mixtures (With Discussion) , 2006 .

[16]  K L Smith,et al.  Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of SMA Pavement and SMA Application Guidelines , 2006 .

[17]  Lev Khazanovich,et al.  Mechanistic Modeling of Unbound Granular Materials , 2009 .

[18]  Sam Helwany,et al.  Determination of Typical Resilient Modulus Values for Selected Soils in Wisconsin , 2006 .

[19]  Kevin K McGhee,et al.  A Cost-Comparison Methodology for Selecting Appropriate Hot-Mix Asphalt Materials , 2007 .

[20]  Naji Khoury,et al.  Engineering Properties of Stabilized Subgrade Soils for Implementation of the AASHTO 2002 Pavement Design Guide , 2009 .

[21]  W Ping,et al.  IMPLEMENTING RESILIENT MODULUS TEST FOR DESIGN OF PAVEMENT STRUCTURES IN FLORIDA , 2003 .

[22]  D Brown.  SMA COMES OF AGE , 1997 .

[23]  John E. Haddock,et al.  PERFORMANCE OF STONE MATRIX ASPHALT (SMA) MIXTURES IN THE UNITED STATES , 1997 .

[24]  J G Laguros,et al.  Resilient moduli of raw and stabilized aggregate bases and evaluation of layer coefficients for AASHTO flexible pavement design: volume 1 , 1998 .

[25]  Donald E. Watson.  AN UPDATED REVIEW OF SMA AND SUPERPAVE PROJECTS , 2003 .

[26]  Kevin D Hall,et al.  Evaluating the predictive equation in determining dynamic moduli of typical asphalt mixtures used in Arkansas , 2005 .

[27]  E R Brown,et al.  A NATIONAL STUDY OF RUTTING IN HOT MIX ASPHALT (HMA) PAVEMENTS , 1992 .

[28]  Stephen A Cross,et al.  Determination of Dynamic Modulus Master Curves for Oklahoma HMA Mixtures , 2007 .

[29]  Mihai O. Marasteanu,et al.  Inventory of Properties of Minnesota Certified Asphalt Binders , 2004 .

[30]  Graham C Hurley,et al.  Evaluation of Stone Matrix Asphalt (SMA) For Airfield Pavements , 2010 .

[31]  Musharraf Zaman,et al.  Neural Network Modeling of Resilient Modulus Using Routine Subgrade Soil Properties , 2010 .

[32]  T. Pellinen,et al.  HIRSCH MODEL FOR ESTIMATING THE MODULUS OF ASPHALT CONCRETE , 2003 .

[33]  Jo Sias Daniel,et al.  Mechanistic and Volumetric Properties of Asphalt Mixtures with Recycled Asphalt Pavement , 2005 .