M-E Perpetual Pavement Design N3 and N4 - Aapaq.org
M-E Perpetual Pavement Design N3 and N4 - Aapaq.org
M-E Perpetual Pavement Design N3 and N4 - Aapaq.org
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
29-Sep-11<br />
M-E <strong>Perpetual</strong> <strong>Pavement</strong> <strong>Design</strong><br />
P<br />
Log <br />
A<br />
Threshold<br />
Strain<br />
t<br />
D 1<br />
E 1<br />
D 2<br />
E 2<br />
Log N<br />
No Damage Accumulation<br />
v<br />
D 3<br />
E 3<br />
What is the Endurance Limit for HMA<br />
Material<br />
Properties<br />
M‐E<br />
Analysis<br />
σ, ε<br />
Response<br />
Environment<br />
<strong>Pavement</strong> Structure<br />
Transfer Function<br />
Traffic<br />
<strong>Pavement</strong> Performance<br />
• 1972 – Monismith estimates about 70 <br />
• 2001 – I-710 designed at 70 <br />
• 2002 – 70 used by APA<br />
• 2007 – NCHRP 9-38 Lab Study<br />
– 100 for unmod binders<br />
– 250 for mod binders<br />
– More severe than field<br />
• 2007 – MEPDG uses 100 to 250 <br />
• 2008 – Field measurements show higher<br />
strains<br />
Depth, in.<br />
0<br />
5<br />
10<br />
15<br />
20<br />
25<br />
30<br />
Case Study – Test Track <strong>N3</strong>,<strong>N4</strong><br />
Test Section<br />
N1 N2 <strong>N3</strong> <strong>N4</strong> N5 N6 N7 N8<br />
15 50 mm 230 mm<br />
<strong>N3</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>N4</strong><br />
• <strong>Design</strong>ed at 230 mm for 10 million ESAL<br />
• Constructed in 2003<br />
• Subjected to 30 million ESAL<br />
• Very minor cracking<br />
No significant rutting<br />
• No significant rutting<br />
• Satisfactory IRI<br />
• Sections continued to be trafficked<br />
35<br />
40<br />
Modified HMA (PG 76-22)<br />
Unmodified HMA (PG 67-22)<br />
Improved Roadbed (A-4(0)) Soil<br />
SMA (PG 76-22)<br />
Unmodified HMA (PG 67-22), Opt +0.5%<br />
Crushed Aggregate Base Course<br />
1
29-Sep-11<br />
<strong>N3</strong><br />
<strong>N4</strong><br />
entile<br />
Perce<br />
100%<br />
90%<br />
80%<br />
70%<br />
60%<br />
50%<br />
40%<br />
30%<br />
20%<br />
10%<br />
Strain Levels<br />
Average<br />
+15<br />
-15<br />
<strong>N3</strong><br />
<strong>N4</strong><br />
Fatigue endurance Limit<br />
0%<br />
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450<br />
Microstrain<br />
Depth From <strong>Pavement</strong><br />
Surface, in.<br />
Case Study: Test Track N8 <strong>and</strong> N9<br />
0.0<br />
5.0<br />
10.00<br />
15.0<br />
20.0<br />
25.0<br />
Lift 1<br />
Lift 2<br />
Lift 3<br />
2.3 PG 76-28<br />
2.0<br />
2.9 PG 76-28<br />
3.5<br />
2.8<br />
Lift 4 1.9<br />
6.4<br />
N8<br />
Section<br />
N9<br />
SMA<br />
Dense Graded HMA<br />
250 mm 350 mm<br />
Moisture Content = 10.8%<br />
Unit Weight = 133.4 pcf<br />
Moisture Content = 18.0%<br />
Unit Weight = 126.2 pcf<br />
Dense Graded HMA<br />
PG 64-22<br />
Rich Bottom Layer<br />
PG 64-22<br />
Aggregate Base<br />
(Track Fill)<br />
Subgrade<br />
(A-7-6 Soil)<br />
3.1<br />
Lift 1<br />
Lift 2<br />
Lift 3<br />
Lift 4<br />
26 2.6<br />
3.2<br />
Lift 5<br />
8.4<br />
Moisture Content = 12.9%<br />
Unit Weight = 133.8 pcf<br />
Moisture Content = 17.2%<br />
Unit Weight = 126.9 pcf<br />
100%<br />
90%<br />
Strain Distributions<br />
End Result<br />
80%<br />
70%<br />
N9<br />
N8<br />
Perc centile<br />
60%<br />
50%<br />
40%<br />
No rehab since construction<br />
30%<br />
20%<br />
10%<br />
Fatigue endurance Limit<br />
0%<br />
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200<br />
Longitudinal Strain<br />
130 mm mill <strong>and</strong> inlay in 2008<br />
<strong>Pavement</strong> Failure at 3 million ESAL<br />
133 mm mill <strong>and</strong> inlay in 2010 with HPM<br />
2
29-Sep-11<br />
NCAT Test Track Results<br />
2003 Test Sections<br />
entile<br />
Perce<br />
100%<br />
No Fatigue<br />
90%<br />
Fatigue<br />
80%<br />
70%<br />
60%<br />
50%<br />
40%<br />
30%<br />
20%<br />
10%<br />
0%<br />
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200<br />
Microstrain<br />
N1 2003<br />
N2 2003<br />
<strong>N3</strong> 2003<br />
<strong>N4</strong> 2003<br />
N5 2003<br />
N6 2003<br />
N7 2003<br />
N1 2006<br />
N2 2006<br />
<strong>N3</strong> 2006<br />
<strong>N4</strong> 2006<br />
N8 2006<br />
N9 2006<br />
N10 2006<br />
S11 2006<br />
S13 2000<br />
Fatigue<br />
Ratio<br />
4.5<br />
4.0<br />
3.5<br />
3.0<br />
2.5<br />
2.0<br />
1.5<br />
1.0<br />
0.5<br />
0.0<br />
Fatigue Cracking Occurred<br />
Fatigue Cracking Absent<br />
Max Ratio = 2.11<br />
N1 2003 N2 2003 <strong>N3</strong> 2003 <strong>N4</strong> 2003 N5 2003 N6 2003 N7 2003<br />
Section<br />
Fatigue Ratio<br />
6<br />
5<br />
4<br />
3<br />
2<br />
1<br />
2006 Test Sections<br />
Fatigue Cracking Occurred<br />
Fatigue Cracking Absent<br />
Max. Ratio = 2.18<br />
PerRoad 3.5<br />
• Sponsored by APA<br />
• Developed at Auburn University / NCAT<br />
• M-E <strong>Perpetual</strong> <strong>Pavement</strong> <strong>Design</strong> <strong>and</strong> Analysis Tool<br />
– Features layered elastic analysis<br />
– Uses Monte Carlo simulation to model variability<br />
– Generates pavement response distributions<br />
ib ti<br />
0<br />
N1 2006 N2 2006 <strong>N3</strong> 2006 <strong>N4</strong> 2006 N8 2006 N9 2006 N10 2006 S11 2006<br />
Section<br />
3
Change language