MEPDG-2 TableOfContents

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.

Preface | v
PREFACE
This document describes a pavement design methodology that is based on engineering mechanics and
has been validated with extensive road test performance data. This methodology is termed mecha-
nistic-empirical (M-E) pavement design, and it represents a major change from the pavement design
methods in practice today.
Interested agencies have already begun implementation activities in terms of sta training, collection of
input data (materials library, trac library, etc.), acquiring of test equipment, and setting up eld sec-
tions for local calibration. This manual presents the information necessary for pavement design engi-
neers to begin to use the MEPDG design and analysis method.
This manual refers to AASHTOWare Pavement Me Design, M-E Pavement design software which
is commercially available through AASHTOWare, AASHTOs software development program (see
http://www.aashtoware.org/Pavement/Pages/default.aspx). AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design has
been revised from the software described in the previous edition of this manual based upon evaluations
performed by state Departments of Transportation and others in the community of practice.
The following table summarizes the key dierences noted between the format and calibration factors
used in the MEPDG version 1.1 software and the AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design software.

vi | MechanisticEmpirical Pavement Design Guide
Table i-1. Summary of Key Differences in Software Format and Calibration Factors
Format and AASHTOWare Pavement

Calibration Factors MEPDG Version 1.1 ME Design
Output Format Excel-based PDF- and Excel-based
Climatic Data in Output Summary Not included Included
Axle Configuration Data in Output Not included Included
Summary
Special Axle Load Configuration Included Not included
Reflection Cracking Not included Included
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (CTE) CTE for Basalt of 4.6 CTE for Basalt of 5.2
PCC Zero Stress Temperature PCC Zero Stress Temperature PCC Set Temperature
(Range 60o to 120oF) (Range 70o to 212o F)
Heat Capacity of Asphalt Pavement Default value of 0.23 BTU/lb-oF Default value of 0.28 BTU/lb-oF
Thermal Conductivity of Asphalt Default value of 0.67 BTU/(ft) Default value of 1.25 BTU/(ft)(hr)(F)
Pavement (hr)(F)
Surface Shortwave Absorptivity Default value of 0.95 Default value of 0.85
Global Calibration Coefficient for kS1 granular of 1.63 kS1 granular of 2.03
Unbound Materials and Soils in Flexible
Pavement Subgrade Rutting Model
Global Field Calibration Coefficients kf2 of -3.9492 kf2 of 3.9492
in the Fatigue Cracking Prediction Model kf3 of -1.281 kf3 of 1.281
in Flexible Pavement
Global Field Calibration Coefficients in the kt (Level 1) of 5.0 kt (Level 1) of 1.5
Thermal Cracking Model for HMA kt (Level 2) of 1.5 kt (Level 2) of 0.5
kt (Level 3) of 3.0 kt (Level 3) of 1.5
Global Field Calibration Coefficients in the k2r of 0.4791 k2 of 1.5606
Rut Depth Prediction Model k3r of 1.5606 k3 of 0.4791
Calibration Coefficients in the Rigid C1 of 1.29 C1 of 1.0184
Pavement Faulting Prediction Model C2 of 1.1 C2 of 0.91656
C3 of 0.001725 C3 of 0.0021848
C4 of 0.0008 C4 of 0.0008837
C7 of 1.2 C7 of 1.83312
Calibration Coefficient in the Rigid APO of 195.789 C3 of 216.8421
Pavement Punchout Prediction Model aPO of 19.8947 C4 of 33.15789
bPO of -0.526316 C5 of -0.58947

| vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Purpose of Manual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Overview of the MEPDG Design Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. Referenced Documents and Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.1 Test Protocols and Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2 Material Specications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3 Standard Practices and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.4 Referenced Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3. Significance and Use of the MEPDG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1 Performance Indicators Predicted by the AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design. . . . . . . . . 17
3.2 MEPDG General Design Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.3 New Flexible Pavement and HMA Overlay Design Strategies Applicable
for Use with AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.4 New Rigid Pavement, PCC Overlay, and Restoration of Rigid Pavement Design
Strategies Applicable for Use with AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.5 Design Features and Factors Not Included Within the MEPDG Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4. Terminology and Definition of Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.1 General Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.2 Hierarchical Input Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.3 Truck Trac Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.4 Smoothness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.5 Distress or Performance Indicator TermsHMA-Surfaced Pavements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.6 Distress or Performance Indicator TermsPCC-Surfaced Pavements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5. Performance Indicator Prediction MethodologiesAn Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.1 Selecting the Input Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.2 Calibration Factors Included in AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.3 Distress Prediction Equations for Flexible Pavements and HMA Overlays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.4 Distress Prediction Equations for Rigid Pavements and PCC Overlays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
6. General Project Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
6.1 Design/Analysis Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
6.2 Construction and Trac Opening Dates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
7. Selecting Design Criteria and Reliability Level. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
7.1 Recommended Design-Performance Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
7.2 Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
8. Determining Site Conditions and Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
8.1 Truck Trac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
8.2 Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

viii | MechanisticEmpirical Pavement Design Guide
8.3 Foundation and Subgrade Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

8.4 Existing Pavements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
9. Pavement Evaluation for Rehabilitation Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
9.1 Overall Condition Assessment and Problem Definition Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
9.2 Data Collection to Define Condition Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
9.3 Analysis of Pavement Evaluation Data for Rehabilitation Design Considerations. . . . . . . . 103
10. Determination of Material Properties for New Paving Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
10.1 Material Inputs and the Hierarchical Input Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
10.2 HMA Mixtures; Including SMA, Asphalt-Treated or Stabilized Base Layers, and
Asphalt Permeable-Treated Base Layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
10.3 PCC Mixtures, Lean Concrete, and Cement-Treated Base Layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
10.4 Chemically Stabilized Materials; Including Lean Concrete and Cement-Treated Base Layers 116
10.5 Unbound Aggregate Base Materials and Engineered Embankments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
11. Pavement Design Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
11.1 New Flexible Pavement Design StrategiesDeveloping the Initial Trial Design . . . . . . . . 129
11.2 New Rigid Pavement Design StrategiesDeveloping the Initial Trial Design . . . . . . . . . . 136
12. Rehabilitation Design Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
12.1 General Overview of Rehabilitation Design Using the AASHTOWare Pavement
ME Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
12.2 Rehabilitation Design with HMA Overlays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
12.3 Rehabilitation Design with PCC Overlays. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
13. Interpretation and Analysis of the Results of the Trial Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
13.1 Summary of Inputs for Trial Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
13.2 Reliability of Trial Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
13.3 Supplemental Information (Layer Modulus, Truck Applications, and Other Factors) . . . . 183
13.4 Predicted Performance Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
13.5 Judging the Acceptability of the Trial Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
Abbreviations And Terms

Abbreviations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
Index
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

List of Figures | ix
LIST OF FIGURES
1-1 Conceptual Flow Chart of the Three-Stage Design/Analysis Process for the AASHTOWare
Pavement ME Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1-2 Typical Differences Between Empirical Design Procedures and an Integrated M-E
Design System, in Terms of HMA-Mixture Characterization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1-3 Typical Differences Between Empirical Design Procedures and an Integrated M-E Design
System, in Terms of PCC-Mixture Characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1-4 Flow Chart of the Steps That Are More Policy Decision-Related and Are Needed
to Complete an Analysis of a Trial Design Strategy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1-5 Flow Chart of the Steps Needed to Complete an Analysis of a Trial Design Strategy. . . . . . . . . . . 8
3-1 New (Including Lane Reconstruction) Flexible Pavement Design Strategies That Can Be
Simulated with AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design (Refer to Section 11.1);
Layer Thickness Not to Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3-2 HMA Overlay Design Strategies of Flexible, Semi-Rigid, and Rigid Pavements That Can Be
Simulated with AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design (Refer to Section 12.2); Layer Thickness
Not to Scale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3-3 New (Including Lane Reconstruction) Rigid Pavement Design Strategies That Can Be
3-4 PCC Overlay Design Strategies of Flexible, Semi-Rigid, and Rigid Pavements That Can Be
5-1 Graphical Illustration of the Five Temperature Quintiles Used in AASHTOWare
Pavement ME Design to Determine HMA-Mixture Properties for Load-Related Distresses . . . 38
5-2 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Total Rutting Resulting from Global Calibration Process. 41
5-3 Comparison of Cumulative Fatigue Damage and Measured Alligator Cracking Resulting
from Global Calibration Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5-4 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Lengths of Longitudinal Cracking (Top-Down
Cracking) Resulting from Global Calibration Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5-5 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Transverse Cracking Resulting from Global
Calibration Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5-6 Comparison of Measured and Predicted IRI Values Resulting from Global Calibration
Process of Flexible Pavements and HMA Overlays of Flexible Pavements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5-7 Comparison of Measured and Predicted IRI Values Resulting from Global Calibration
Process of HMA Overlays of PCC Pavements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5-8 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Percentage JPCP Slabs Cracked Resulting from
Global Calibration Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5-9 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Transverse Cracking of Unbounded JPCP
Overlays Resulting from Global Calibration Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5-10 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Transverse Cracking for Restored JPCP
Resulting from Global Calibration Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

x | MechanisticEmpirical Pavement Design Guide
5-11 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Transverse Joint Faulting for New JPCP
Resulting from Global Calibration Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
5-12 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Transverse Joint Faulting for Unbound JPCP
Overlays Resulting from Global Calibration Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5-13 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Transverse Joint Faulting for Restored (Diamond
Grinding) JPCP Resulting from Global Calibration Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5-14 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Punchouts for New CRCP Resulting from Global
5-15 Comparison of Measured and Predicted IRI Values for New JPCP Resulting from Global
5-16 Comparison of Measured and Predicted IRI Values for New CRCP Resulting from Global
7-1 Design Reliability Concept for Smoothness (IRI). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
9-1 Steps and Activities for Assessing the Condition of Existing Pavements for Rehabilitation
Design (Refer to Table 9-2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
11-1 Flow Chart for Selecting Some Options to Minimize the Effect of Problem Soils on
Pavement Performance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
11-2 Limiting Modulus Criteria of Unbound Aggregate Base and Subbase Layers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
12-1 Steps for Determining a Preferred Rehabilitation Strategy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
12-2 Flow Chart of Rehabilitation Design Options Using HMA Overlays. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
12-3 Site Features Conducive to the Selection of the Rubblization Process for Rehabilitating
PCC Pavements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
12-4 Recommendations for a Detailed Investigation of the PCC Pavement to Estimate Remaining
Life and Identifying Site Features and Conditions Conducive to the Rubblization Process. . . . . 161
12-5 Evaluate Surface Condition and Distress Severities on Selection of Rubblization Option . . . . . 162
12-6 Foundation Support Conditions Related to the Selection of the Rubblization Process. . . . . . . . 163
12-7 Overall Design Process for Major PCC Rehabilitation Strategies of All Pavement Types. . . . . . 166


List of Tables | xi
LIST OF TABLES
5-1 Typical Input Levels Used in Recalibration Eort of AASHTOWare Pavement
ME Design Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5-2 Reection Cracking Model Regression Fitting Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5-3 Assumed Eective Base LTE for Dierent Base Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
7-1 AASHTOWare Pavement ME DesignDesign Criteria or Threshold
Values Recommended for Use in Judging the Acceptability of a Trial Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
7-2 Suggested Minimum Levels of Reliability for Dierent Functional Classications
of the Roadway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
8-1 Minimum Sample Size (Number of Days per Year) to Estimate the Normalized Axle-
Load DistributionWIM Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
8-2 Minimum Sample Size (Number of Days per Season) to Estimate the Normalized Truck
Trac DistributionAutomated Vehicle Classiers (AVC) Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
8-3 TTC Group Description and Corresponding Truck Class Distribution Default Values
Included in AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design Software. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
8-4 Denitions and Descriptions for the TTC Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
8-5 Summary of Soil Characteristics as a Pavement Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
9-1 Checklist of Factors for Overall Pavement Condition Assessment and Problem Denition . . . 87
9-2 Hierarchical Input Levels for a Pavement Evaluation Program to Determine Inputs for
Existing Pavement Layers for Rehabilitation Design Using AASHTOWare Pavement
ME Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
9-3 Field Data Collection and Evaluation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
9-4 Guidelines for Obtaining Non-Materials Input Data for Pavement Rehabilitation. . . . . . . . . . . 94
9-5 Use of Deection Basin Test Results for Selecting Rehabilitation Strategies and in
Estimating Inputs for Rehabilitation Design with AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design . . . . 96
9-6 Summary of Destructive Tests, Procedures, and Inputs for the AASHTOWare
Pavement ME Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
9-7 Models/Relationships Used for Determining Level 2 E or Mr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
9-8 Models Relating Material Index and Strength Properties to Mr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
9-9 Distress Types and Severity Levels Recommended for Assessing Rigid Pavement
Structural Adequacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
9-10 Distress Types and Levels Recommended for Assessing Current Flexible Pavement
Structural Adequacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
10-1 Major Material Types for AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
10-2 Asphalt Materials and the Test Protocols for Measuring the Material Property Inputs
for New and Existing HMA Layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
10-3 Recommended Input Parameters and Values; Limited or No Testing Capabilities for HMA
(Input Levels 2 or 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
10-4 PCC Material Input Level 1 Parameters and Test Protocols for New and Existing PCC . . . . . 117
10-5 Recommended Input Parameters and Values; Limited or No Test Capabilities for PCC
Materials (Input Levels 2 or 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

xii | MechanisticEmpirical Pavement Design Guide
10-6 Chemically Stabilized Materials Input Requirements and Test Protocols for New and
Existing Chemically Stabilized Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
10-7 Recommended Input Levels 2 and 3 Parameters and Values for Chemically Stabilized
Materials Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
10-8 C-Values to Convert the Calculated Layer Modulus Values to an Equivalent Resilient
Modulus Measured in the Laboratory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
10-9 Unbound Aggregate Base, Subbase, Embankment, and Subgrade Soil Material
Requirements and Test Protocols for New and Existing Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
10-10 Recommended Input Levels 2 and 3 Input Parameters and Values for Unbound Aggregate
Base, Subbase, Embankment, and Subgrade Soil Material Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
11-1 General IRI Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
11-2 Range and Median Slab/Base Friction Coecients by Base Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
12-1 Denitions of the Surface Condition for Input Level 3 Pavement Condition Ratings and
Suggested Rehabilitation Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
12-2 Candidate Repair and Preventive Treatments for Flexible, Rigid, and Composite Pavements . . . 149
12-3 Summary of Major Rehabilitation Strategies and Treatments Prior to Overlay Placement
for Existing HMA and HMA/PCC Pavements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
12-4 Data Required for Characterizing Existing PCC Slab Static Elastic Modulus for HMA
Overlay Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
12-5 Recommendations for Performance Criteria for HMA Overlays of JPCP and CRCP . . . . . . . 157
12-6 Recommendations for Modifying Trial Design to Reduce Distress/Smoothness for HMA
Overlays of JPCP and CRCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
12-7 PCC Rehabilitation OptionsStrategies to Correct Surface and Structural Deciencies
of All Type of Existing Pavements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
12-8 Summary of Key Aspects of Joint Design and Interlayer Friction for JPCP Overlays . . . . . . . . 168
12-9 Data Required for Characterizing Existing PCC Slab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
12-10 Description of Existing Pavement Condition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
12-11 Summary of Factors That Inuence Rehabilitated JPCP Distress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
12-12 Guidance on How to Select the Appropriate Design Features for Rehabilitated JPCP Design. . 174
12-13 Recommendations for Modifying Trial Design to Reduce Distress/Smoothness for JPCP
Rehabilitation Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
12-14 Summary of Factors That Inuence Rehabilitated CRCP Distress and Smoothness . . . . . . . . 177
12-15 Guidance on How to Select the Appropriate Design Features for Rehabilitated CRCP Design . .178
13-1 Reliability Summary for Flexible Pavement Trial Design Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
13-2 Reliability Summary for JPCP Trial Design Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
13-3 Guidance for Modifying HMA Trial Designs to Satisfy Performance Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
13-4 Guidance on Modifying JPCP Trial Designs to Satisfy Performance Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
13-5 Guidance on Modifying CRCP Trial Designs to Satisfy Performance Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188

Chapter 1: Introduction | 1
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
The overall objective of AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design is to provide the highway community
with a state-of-the-practice tool for the design and analysis of new and rehabilitated pavement struc-
tures, based on mechanistic-empirical (M-E) principles. This means that the design and analysis pro-
cedure calculates pavement responses (stresses, strains, and deections) and uses those responses to
compute incremental damage over time. The procedure empirically relates the cumulative damage to
observed pavement distresses. This M-E based procedure is shown in owchart form in
Figure 1-1.
AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design represents a major change in the way pavement design is per-
formed. AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design predicts multiple performance indicators (refer to
Figure 1-1) and it provides a direct tie between materials, structural design, construction, climate, trac,
and pavement management systems. Figures 1-2 and 1-3 are examples of the interrelationship between
these activities for hot mix asphalt (HMA) and Portland cement concrete (PCC) materials.
1.1 PURPOSE OF MANUAL

This manual of practice presents information to guide pavement design engineers in making decisions
and using AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design for new pavement and rehabilitation design. The man-
ual does not provide guidance on developing regional or local calibration factors for predicting pavement
distress and smoothness. A separate document, Guide for the Local Calibration of the Mechanistic-Em-
pirical Design, provides guidance for determining the local calibration factors for both HMA and PCC
pavement types (2).
1.2 OVERVIEW OF THE MEPDG DESIGN PROCEDURE

AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design is a production-ready design tool to support the day-to-day
operations of public and private pavement engineers. When analyzing a pavement design project using
AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design, whether new construction, an overlay, or restoration, an iterative
process that follows three basic steps is utilized:

2 | MechanisticEmpirical Pavement Design Guide
1. Create a trial design for the project.

2. Run AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design to predict the key distresses and smoothness for the
trial design.
3. Review the predicted performance of the trial design against performance criteria and modify trial
design as needed in order to produce a feasible design that satisfies the performance criteria.
Pavement responses (stresses, strains, and deflections) are combined with other pavement, traffic, cli-
mate, and materials parameters to predict the progression of key pavement distresses and smoothness
loss over time. These outputs are the basis for checking the adequacy of a trial design.
AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design software also includes an automated process to iterate to an

optimized thickness.

New Pavement
STAGE 1EVALUATION Rehabilitation
Design and Analyses INPUTS FOR DESIGN Design and Analyses
(See Chapter 11) (See Chapter 5) (See Chapter 12)
Climate/Environment Analysis
Site Investigations [Section 8.3]: [See Section 8.2]: Pavement Evaluation [Chapter 9]:
Borings and Field Testing; Soils Temperature and Moisture Distress Surveys; Nondestructive
Testing in Laboratory; Testing; Ride Quality Testing;
Drainage; Volume Change; New Materials Analysis [See Chapter 10]: Borings and Cores; Materials
Frost Heave Hot Mix Asphalt Testing
Portland Cement Concrete
Cementitious Materials
Unbound Granular Materials
Paving Materials Soils/Embankment Materials Rehabilitation/Repair Materials
Traffic Analysis [See Section 8.1]:

Truck Classification and Volume
Design Criteria Axle Load Distribution Design Criteria
[See Section 7.1] Forecasting [See Section 7.1]
Analyze Performance STAGE 2ANALYSIS

of Pavement Design
Modify Design
Features or Reliability
Materials Analysis
[See Chapter 13] Pavement Response Model [See Section 7.2]
Calculate Stresses, Strains, Deflections
NO
Calculate Incremental Damage

Has Design Distress Transfer Functions and
Criteria Been Pavement Distress Models [See Chapter 5]
Met?
Distortion; Load Non-Load
Roughness;
Rutting Related Related
YES IRI
Faulting Cracking Cracking
STAGE 3STRATEGY SELECTION
Engineering and Constructability Life-Cycle

Viable Design Alternative
Analysis Cost Analysis
Select Policy Issues and Decisions

Strategy
Figure 1-1. Conceptual Flow Chart of the Three-Stage Design/Analysis Process for AASHTOWare
Pavement ME Design

1993 Design Guide, ME Design Guide,

Empirical Thickness Design M-E-Based Feature Design
Procedure Procedure
1. Project Selection
HMA-Mixture Characterization:
2. Project Planning Dynamic modulus, creep-
compliance, tensile strength,
Poissons ratio
Air voids, density, VMA,
HMA Layer Characterization: effective asphalt content,
3. Structural Design;
Structural Layer Coefficient gradation, coefficient of
ASSUMED Material
thermal expansion
Properties
Asphalt properties
No direct tie between resilient 4. Plan Preparation and

Direct tie between HMA
modulus or structural layer Project Specifications
properties to establish mix design
coefficient and mix design
criteria
criteria/properties
5. Bid Letting, Contractor
Selection; Low-Bid Process
Volumetric and Mechanical
Properties:
Density, air voids, effective
Volumetric Properties:
asphalt content, VMA,
Air voids, total asphalt
VFA, Gradation
content, VMA, VFA,
6. HMA-Mixture Dynamic modulus, flow
gradation,
Design time or number, creep
Asphalt properties
compliance, tensile strength
Asphalt properties
7. Quality Assurance
Volumetric Properties Plan Volumetric Properties
Contractor Quality Plan Agency Acceptance Specifications
As-Built Plans 8. Construction of Project As-Built Plans
9. Pavement Management Database: Distress Predictions;

No Distress Predictions
Structure and Material Properties Confirmation of Design
Expectations
10. Monitoring Performance and Distress over
Time; PMS Database
11. Data Feedback Through PMS Database
Figure 1-2. Typical Differences Between Empirical Design Procedures and an Integrated M-E Design
System, in Terms of HMA-Mixture Characterization

Guide for Design of Pavement Structures ME Design Guide,

Empirical Thickness Design M-E-Based Feature Design
Procedure Procedure
1. Project Selection
PCC-Mixture Characterization:
2. Project Planning Elastic modulus,modulus of rupture,
Poissons ratio
Air content, unit weight,
water-cement ratio, amount
PCC Layer Characterization: of cement, gradation
3. Structural Design;
Modulus of Rupture Coefficient of thermal
ASSUMED Material
expansion
Properties
Cement type (properties)
4. Plan Preparation and

Limited tie between PCC layer Direct tie between PCC properties
Project Specifications
properties and mix design to establish mix design
criteria/properties criteria
5. Bid Letting, Contractor

Selection; Low-Bid Process
Volumetric and Mechanical
Properties:
Volumetric and Mechanical Unit weight, air content,
Properties: water-cement ratio, amount
Air content, water, slump, of cement, gradation
cementratio, gradation, 6. PCC-Mixture
Elastic modulus, modulus of rupture
Cement type Design
Coefficient of thermal expansion
Modulus of rupture Cement type (properties)
7. Quality Assurance
Volumetric and Volumetric and
Plan
Mechanical Properties Mechanical Properties
Contractor Quality Plan Agency Acceptance Specifications
As-Built Plans 8. Construction of Project As-Built Plans
9. Pavement Management Database: Distress Predictions;

No Distress Predictions
Structure and Material Properties Confirmation of Design
Expectations
10. Monitoring Performance and Distress Over
Time; PMS Database
11. Data Feedback Through PMS Database
Figure 1-3. Typical Differences Between Empirical Design Procedures and an Integrated M-E Design
System, in Terms of PCC-Mixture Characterization

The M-E approach makes it possible to optimize the design and to more fully ensure that specic
distress types will be limited to values less than the failure criteria within the design life of the pavement
structure. The basic steps included in the MEPDG design process are listed below and presented in ow
chart form in Figures 1-4 and 1-5. The steps shown in Figures 1-4 and 1-5 are referenced to the appro-
priate sections within this manual of practice.
1. Select a trial design strategy. The pavement designer may use an agency-specic design procedure to
determine the trial design cross section.
2. Select the appropriate performance indicator criteria (threshold value) and design reliability level
for the project. Design or performance indicator criteria should include magnitudes of key pavement
distresses and smoothness that trigger major rehabilitation or reconstruction. These criteria could be a
part of an agencys policies for deciding when to rehabilitate or reconstruct. AASHTOWare Pavement
ME Design allows the user to select the performance indicator criteria to be analyzed. The user can
uncheck the box next to the criteria that needs no evaluation. (See Section 4.1 for denitions.)
3. Obtain all inputs for the pavement trial design under consideration. This step may be a time-con-
suming eort, but it is what separates the MEPDG from other design procedures. The MEPDG allows
the designer to determine the inputs using a hierarchical structure in which the eort required to quan-
tify a given input is selected based on the importance of the project, importance of the input, and the
resources at the disposal of the user. The inputs required to run the software may be obtained using one
of three levels of eort and need not be consistent for all of the inputs in a given design. The hierarchical
input levels are dened in Sections 4 and 5. The inputs are grouped under six broad topicsgeneral
project information, design criteria, trac, climate, structure layering, and material properties (including
the design features).
4. Run AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design software and examine the inputs and outputs for
engineering reasonableness. The software calculates changes in layer properties, damage, key distresses,
and the International Roughness Index (IRI) over the design life. The sub-steps for step 4 include:
a) Examine the input summary to ensure the inputs are correct and what the designer intended. This
step may be completed after each run, until the designer becomes more familiar with the program
and its inputs.
b) Examine the outputs that comprise the intermediate processspecic parameters, such as climate
values, monthly transverse load transfer eciency values for rigid pavement analysis, monthly layer
modulus values for exible and rigid pavement analysis to determine their reasonableness, and calcu-
lated performance indicators (pavement distresses and IRI). This step may be completed after each
run, until the designer becomes more familiar with the program. Review of important intermediate
processes and steps is presented in Section 13.
c) Assess whether the trial design has met each of the performance indicator criteria at the design
reliability level chosen for the project. As noted above, IRI is an output parameter predicted over
time and a measure of surface smoothness. IRI is calculated from other distress predictions (refer to
Figure 1-1), site factors, and initial IRI.

d) If any of the criteria have not been met, determine how this deficiency can be remedied by altering
the materials used, the layering of materials, layer thickness, or other design features.
5. Revise the trial design, as needed. If the trial design has input errors, material output anomalies, or
has exceeded the failure criteria at the given level of reliability, revise the inputs/trial design and rerun
the program. An automated process to iterate to an optimized thickness is done by AASHTOWare
Pavement ME Design to produce a feasible design.
General Project Design/Analysis Information

Section 3.2
Pavement Rehabilitation
Section 12.1
New Design or Lane Reconstruction

Section 11.1 for HMA-Surfaced Pavements
Section 11.2 for PCC-Surfaced Pavements A
See Figure 1-5a
1Select Trial Design

Strategy and Cross Section
2.aSelect Failure
2.bSelect Reliability Level
Limits or Design Criteria
Section 7.2
Section 7.1
Values selected in balance

with one another;
Chapter 8
3Select Hierarchical
Input Levels
Section 5.3
B
See Figure 1-5a
Figure 1-4. Flow Chart of the Steps That Are More Policy Decision Related and Are Needed to Com-
plete an Analysis of a Trial Design Strategy

B
See Figure 1-4
4Determine Site Conditions and Factors

(Chapters 8 and 9)
Existing Truck Traffic and Baseline Condition

Where Applicable
Axle Weights
4.aDetermine Truck Traffic Inputs Truck Volumes
(Section 8.1) Other Truck Factors
Project future truck traffic over design life
4.bDetermine Climate Inputs Latitude, Longitude, Elevation

(Section 8.2)
Identify appropiate weather situations
4.cDetermine Foundations and
Subgrade Soil Inputs Determine properties of the foundation and/or
(Section 8.3) embankment soils
A
See Figure 1-4
Establish overall condition of existing pavement

4.dPavement Evaluation for (Section 9.2)
Rehabilitation
(Chapter 9) Determine material properties of existing pavement layers
(Section 9.3)
5Determine Material Properties/Features D

of New Paving Layers (Chapter 10) See Figure 1-5b
HMA Layers (Section 10.2)
PCC Layers (Section 10.3)
Chemically Stabilized
Layers (Section 10.4)
Unbound Aggregate Layers

(Section 10.5)
C 6Execute AASHTOWare
Pavement ME Design
See Figure 1-5b
Figure 1-5a. Flow Chart of the Steps Needed to Complete an Analysis of a Trial Design Strategy

7Interpretation and Analysis of

C Trial Design Strategy
See Figure 1-5a
(Chapter 13)
Check reliability of trial design;

Yes do calculated reliabilities No
exceed target reliability levels?
Unacceptable design; check calculated distresses and

supplemental information; if unacceptable, revise design
features of trial design and rerun AASHTOWare Pavement
Check calculated distresses and ME Design (Sections 13.4 and 13.5)
supplemental information
(Section 13.3)
D
See Figure 1-5a
Determine reason for

unreasonable parameters, make
corrections, and rerun
AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design
Are there unreasonable

No calculated parameters; Yes
distresses, properties, etc.?
8Trial Design Strategy Is

Acceptable! Store Results
Figure 1-5b. Flow Chart of the Steps Needed to Complete an Analysis of a Trial Design Strategy

Index | 195
Index
A C
AADTT 77, 189 C-values xii, 123
Abbreviations viii, ix, 189 calibration v, vi, vii, ix, x, 1, 13, 20, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30,
absorptivity vi, 111, 113, 115, 117, 119, 121 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47,
aggregate base viii, x, xii, 13, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 48, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 61, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67,
59, 70, 110, 123, 129, 131, 133, 134,135, 137,157, 68, 69, 74, 77, 78, 79, 81, 92, 95, 100, 101, 103,
159, 187 111, 112, 116, 127, 130, 136, 138, 139, 140, 168,
aggregate base materials viii, 123, 134, 159 171, 191, 192, 193, 194
aggregate blend 113 calibration data set 30, 37
aggregate interlock 58, 59, 64, 138, 175, 177, 191 Calibration Guide 27
air void content 26, 114, 137 California Bearing Ratio 11, 82, 100, 189
air voids 4, 12, 42, 98, 101, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, CBR 82, 98, 99, 100, 123, 126, 132, 189
135, 159, 186, 193 cement-treated base layers viii
alkali silica reactivity 26 chemically stabilized materials viii, xii, 116, 121, 122,
analysis parameters 153, 166 151,193
AREA method-based procedures 106 classication properties 89, 103, 123
asphalt classication 102 classications of the roadway xi, 74
asphalt permeable-treated base layers viii climate vii, 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 17, 18, 35, 36, 37, 66, 75, 81, 82,
asphalt permeable yreated base mixes 109 87, 93, 140, 173, 184, 185, 193
asphalt treated permeable base 21, 26, 189 composite pavements xii, 20, 24, 86, 92, 143, 145, 146,
ASR 26 149, 152, 153, 164
ATPB 22, 25, 26, 27, 133, 189 condition assessment viii, xi, 85, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93
Atterberg limits 83, 91, 98, 103, 126 conductivity vi, 13, 36, 111, 113, 115, 117, 119, 121, 122,
automated vehicle classiers xi 124, 125, 127
AVC xi, 76, 77, 78, 79, 189 contact friction 53, 54, 101, 137, 138, 171, 172, 174, 178
average annual daily truck trac 77, 189 crack and seat 22, 96, 118, 145, 146, 152, 169
axle-weight 75 crack LTE 34, 64, 140, 141, 152, 158, 165, 177, 185, 188
axle spacing 33, 34, 78 CRCP x, xii, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 34, 36, 61, 63, 65, 67,
68, 94, 102, 104, 117, 136, 139, 140, 141, 142,
B 145, 147, 149, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157,
158, 164, 165, 166, 169, 170, 176, 177, 178, 179,
base/slab friction coecient 140
185, 188, 189, 191, 193, 194
base erodability 139
creep compliance 4, 12, 36, 38, 47, 102, 110, 111, 112,
bedrock 21, 24, 25, 110, 131, 132, 137, 138
114, 187, 192
best t-based procedures 106
critical factor 34, 53, 141, 177
bottom-up transverse cracking 33, 54
critical pavement responses 17, 30, 37, 39, 46
Bradburys curling/warping 63, 191
CTB bases 28
break and seat 22, 23, 118, 145, 146, 152
CTB layers 45

D F
data element 75 falling weight deectometer 14, 96, 106, 189
DCP 82, 83, 89, 91, 95, 98, 100, 103, 123, 127, 159, 161, fatigue cracks 44, 45, 90
189 fatigue damage ix, 30, 33, 34, 38, 44, 50, 53, 54, 61, 65,
default values xi, 31, 32, 75, 79, 109, 111, 112, 113, 124, 141, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 167, 170, 179,
125, 126, 127, 132 185, 189, 192
deection basin tests 18, 89, 90, 91, 95, 96, 102, 104, faulting vi, x, 3, 18, 33, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 65, 66,
123, 127, 161 72, 73, 77, 87, 90, 94, 104, 138, 139, 149, 152,
deection hardening 96 164, 166, 168, 171, 172, 173, 175, 182, 184, 185,
deection softening 96 191, 192, 192, 194
density 4, 12, 36, 57, 82, 83, 93, 98, 101, 103, 104, 110, Federal Highway Administration iv, 13, 14, 15, 84, 189
112, 116, 123, 124, 125, 126, 131, 132, 187, 191 FHWA 14, 15, 32, 75, 89, 189
design-performance criteria vii, 71 lter fabrics 130
design/analysis life vii, 69 exible pavement vi, vii, viii, ix, xi, xii, 13, 20, 21, 22, 23,
destructive testing 87, 97 24, 26, 27,28, 30, 35, 37, 38, 42, 48, 50, 51, 52, 70,
destructive tests 90, 97, 98 71, 79, 83, 94, 100, 102, 103, 105, 122, 125, 129,
diamond grinding x, 24, 25, 62, 90, 147, 166, 170, 174 130, 134, 136, 148, 152, 153, 165, 168, 169, 170,
distress vii, ix, x, xi, xii, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 13, 14, 17, 18, 171, 172, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 182, 183, 184
19, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 45, 51, exural strength 12, 36, 98, 102, 117, 118, 121, 122, 172,
53, 65, 67, 69, 71, 72, 73, 74, 77, 81, 83, 86, 87, 173, 175, 183
88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 103, 104, 105, 107, ow chart ix, x, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 131, 145, 158
130, 136, 139, 143, 144, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, foundation vii, x, 8, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25,
151, 152, 153, 156, 157, 158, 161, 162, 166, 170, 32, 33, 37, 39, 40, 65, 67, 75, 82, 83, 87, 90, 92,
171, 172, 173, 175, 176, 177, 181, 182, 184, 185, 95, 98, 103, 106, 109, 123, 126, 129, 130, 133,
187, 188, 193 138,152, 155, 159, 161, 163, 183, 187, 193, 194
distress prediction vii, 4, 5, 6, 26, 27, 29, 30, 35, 36, 37, freeze-thaw cycles 66, 87, 192
53, 69, 72, 74, 81, 83, 182 frost heave-thaw weakening 18
distress severities x, 162 full-depth reclamation 23
distress types xi, 6, 32, 74, 89, 104, 105, 150, 181, 184 functional classications xi, 74, 78
dowel bar retrot 24 FWD 87, 94, 96, 104, 106, 111, 112, 121, 123, 124, 127,
dowel stiness factor 59, 194 155, 156, 159, 167, 169, 189
drainage 3, 15, 17, 18, 23, 26, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90,
91, 92, 93, 130, 132, 133, 136, 137, 149, 150, 151,
160, 166, 172, 174, 175, 179, 187
G
geogrids 27, 130
drying shrinkage 63, 185, 188, 194
geotextiles 130
dual tire spacing 80
global calibration vi, ix, x, 20, 23, 26, 27, 28, 30, 34, 36,
dynamic cone penetrometer 13, 82, 98, 100, 161, 189
37, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, 52, 54,
dynamic modulus 4, 12, 19, 36, 38, 42, 53, 96, 102, 110,
55, 56, 57, 61, 62, 63, 65, 66, 67, 68 ,69, 92, 100,
111, 112, 114, 155, 167, 174, 178, 183, 187, 191
103, 111, 138, 171
global calibration process ix, x, 20, 23, 26, 27, 36, 37, 41,
E 43, 44, 45, 47, 49, 52, 54, 55, 56, 61, 62, 65, 67,
edge drains 24, 91, 101, 133, 159, 170, 174, 175 68, 92, 103
EICM 19, 37, 38, 83, 173, 189 GPR 13, 18, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 95, 105, 106, 107, 189
elastic modulus xii, 5, 19, 36, 46, 53, 63, 95, 102, 106, Guide for Design of Pavement Structures 5, 13, 74, 129
108, 116, 117, 118, 121, 127, 131, 132, 152, 156,
159, 161, 164, 167, 169, 170, 172, 174, 178, 179,
183, 191
H
heat capacity vi, 36, 111, 113, 115, 117, 119, 121, 122
embankment viii, xii, 3, 8, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 40, 123,
hierarchical input vii, viii, xi, 6, 11, 31, 35, 90, 91, 109,
124, 125, 129, 130, 131, 132, 137 187
169
empirical design procedures ix, 4, 5
hierarchical structure 6
endurance limit 30, 43
high-plasticity soil 18
engineered embankments viii, 123
high-tensile stress 34
equivalent single-axle loads 19
erosion 33, 34, 64, 88, 139, 141, 175, 184, 188
ESAL 19, 183, 184, 189

Index | 197
HMA vi, vii, viii, ix, x, xi, xii, 1, 4, 7, 8, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, JPCP ix, x, xii, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 33, 53, 55, 56,
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 35, 61, 62, 65, 66, 67, 72, 94, 96, 101, 104, 136, 137,
36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 145, 147, 149, 151, 152,
50, 51, 52, 69, 70, 71, 77, 86, 90, 91, 94, 96, 97, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 164, 165, 166, 167,
98, 100, 101, 102, 107, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 179,
114, 115, 121, 123, 129, 131, 133, 134, 135, 137, 182, 184, 188, 190, 191, 192, 193
141, 145, 146, 147, 148, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, JPCP Slabs ix, 55, 152
155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 163, 164, 165, 166, JULEA 30, 37
167, 168, 170, 171, 172, 174, 175, 178, 179, 183,
184, 185, 186, 187, 189, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195
HMA-layer thickness ratio 47
L
lane reconstruction ix, 7, 17, 21, 24
HMA-mixture characterization ix, 4
lane widths 81
HMA-surfaced pavements vii, 7, 18, 20, 32, 51, 145, 148
lateral distortions 159
HMA mixtures viii, 26, 27, 30, 39, 43, 91, 101, 102, 109,
lateral wander of axle loads 81
110, 111, 112, 113, 115, 129, 134, 187, 191, 192
layer modulus viii, xii, 6, 37, 89, 90, 96, 102, 103, 104,
HMA overlay design vii, ix, xii, 20, 22, 146, 156, 164
105, 123, 135, 161, 183
hot mix asphalt 1, 12, 189, 191
layer thickness ix, 7, 17, 21, 22, 24, 25, 37, 47, 87, 89, 90,
91, 92, 97, 98, 105, 107, 129, 134, 135, 156, 161,
I 169, 179, 185
in-place pulverization 22, 23 LCCA 165, 190
in-place recycling 23, 110, 147, 148, 150, 151, 153 lean concrete viii, 23, 24, 27, 59, 99, 101, 110, 116, 121,
in-place stiness 82 122, 137, 138, 190
incremental damage 1, 3, 27, 30, 35, 42, 43, 70, 76, 77, level of condence 76
194 life-cycle cost 3, 19, 163, 165, 166, 190
incremental damage index approach 42 life-cycle cost analysis 3, 19, 163, 165, 166, 190
incremental distortion 39 lime cement y ash 110, 121, 122, 137
indirect tensile strength 36, 38, 63, 102, 110, 112, 114, load-related alligator cracking 18
117, 187, 191 load-related longitudinal cracking 18
input level vii, xi, xii, 6, 7, 11, 19, 30, 31, 36, 47, 49, 89, load transfer eciency 6, 15, 58, 94, 96, 107, 176, 190,
90, 99, 101, 103, 105, 109, 110, 112, 113, 114, 192
115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 122, 123, 125, 126, local calibration 1, 13, 23, 26, 27, 29, 36, 37, 40, 46, 48,
146, 147, 169 63, 95, 116, 130, 139, 154, 194
input parameters xi, xii, 29, 77, 78, 92, 112, 113, 114, long-life pavements 30
115, 118, 119, 120, 123, 125, 127, 186 long-term pavement performance 14, 17, 70, 190
integrated climatic model 14, 19, 189 longitudinal cracking ix, 18, 32, 42, 43, 45, 105, 134, 142,
integrated M-E Design ix, 4, 5 149, 150, 177, 184, 187
interchanges 86 LTE xi, 3, 7, 17, 18, 19, 34, 53, 58, 59, 64, 72, 77, 86, 89,
interface friction 27, 100, 148, 151 90, 93, 94, 96, 107, 124, 130, 138, 139, 140, 141,
International Roughness Index 6, 189 142, 151, 152, 155, 158, 165, 166, 167, 175, 176,
intersections 76, 86 177, 178, 182, 184, 185, 188, 190, 192
IRI ix, x, xii, 3, 6, 17, 18, 32, 51, 52, 65, 66, 67, 68, 71, LTPP 14, 15, 17, 26, 32, 34, 37, 41, 51, 65, 66, 74, 75,
72, 73, 74, 90, 94, 130, 136, 138, 141, 146, 148, 153, 78, 79, 92, 95, 103, 104, 106, 125, 126, 132, 190
156, 157, 166, 171, 174, 182, 184, 185, 187, 188, LTPP Distress Identification Manual 95
189, 192, 193
IRI Values ix, x, 52, 67, 68, 153
ISLAB2000 30
M
maintenance 69, 71, 72, 86, 87, 91, 93, 103, 133, 148,
184
J material density variations 104
Jacob Uzan Layered Elastic Analysis 30 material properties viii, xii, 4, 5, 6, 8, 19, 36, 40, 85, 101,
joint random spacing 139 106, 109, 111, 112, 113, 115, 117, 119, 122, 123,
joint reseal 24 125, 126, 127, 144
joint skew 139 maximum dry density 123, 124, 125, 126
joint spacing 23, 27, 94, 138, 167, 168, 172, 173, 175, maximum faulting 57, 58, 59, 60
188 mean distress 73, 74

mean modulus 167 permanent curl/warp eective temperature dierence

MEPDG v, vi, vii, viii, 1, 6, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 26, 139, 140
27, 35, 39, 42, 50, 52, 73, 85, 96, 109, 112, 114, plasticity index of the soil 51
115, 123, 124, 125, 129, 143, 145, 150, 151, 152, Poissons Ratio 4, 5, 13, 36, 63, 106, 111, 112, 115, 117,
154, 155, 157, 181, 190 118, 121, 122, 124, 126
Miners hypothesis 43, 53 Portland cement 1, 3, 12, 15, 18, 20, 60, 133, 190
MnRoad experiment 37 pre-overlay treatment 92, 144, 145, 147, 148, 152, 153
mud-jacking 147 protocols and standards vii, 11
punchouts x, 18, 34, 61, 63, 64, 65, 67, 94, 104, 140, 141,
147, 149, 152, 154, 155, 157, 158, 164, 166, 169,
N 176, 177, 178, 179, 185, 188, 193
National Cooperative Highway Research Program 14,
15, 190
National Highway Institute 13, 14, 15, 190 R
natural soil 137 RAP ix, 23, 24, 34, 38, 58, 82, 92, 110, 112, 137, 138,
NCHRP 14, 15, 45, 75, 78, 83, 111, 112, 116, 124, 190 156, 159, 183, 185, 190
NDT 89, 96, 151, 190 realignment projects 75, 76
NHI 13, 14, 15, 133, 144, 190 reconstruction ix, 6, 17, 21, 23, 24, 30, 69, 71, 123, 143,
noise attenuation values 26 147, 148, 150, 158, 174, 178, 179
non-materials input data xi, 94 referenced documents vii, 11, 13, 15
non-destructive deection testing 117, 190 reference temperature 113, 115
regression equations 17, 31, 103, 126, 132
regression tting xi, 48, 50
O rehabilitation viii, x, xi, xii, 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 13, 15, 17, 18, 22,
optimum moisture content 39, 123, 124, 125, 126, 132
23, 25, 29, 30, 32, 69, 70, 71, 75, 76, 77, 83, 85,
86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99,
P 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, 109, 123, 126,
parameter xi, xii, 2, 6, 9, 14, 17, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 153,
35, 36, 39, 46, 48, 50, 54, 64, 77, 78, 80, 81, 82, 155, 156, 157, 158, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165,
95, 100, 105, 110, 112, 113, 114, 115, 117, 118, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175,
119, 120, 122, 123, 124, 125, 127, 137, 140, 141, 176, 177, 178, 179
150, 151, 153, 158, 161, 165, 166, 172, 177, 183, rehabilitation design vii, x, xi, xii, 1, 3, 18, 75, 83, 85, 86,
184, 185, 186, 187, 191 87, 89, 91, 92, 95, 96, 97, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103,
pavement evaluation data viii, 103, 153 104, 105, 107, 109, 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149,
pavement evaluation program xi, 85, 90, 91 150, 151, 153, 155, 157, 159, 161, 163, 164, 165,
pavement preservation programs 27 167, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 176, 177, 179
PCC vi, vii, viii, ix, x, xi, xii, 1, 5, 7, 8, 14, 18, 19, 22, 23, reinforcement depth 140
24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 33, 35, 36, 48, 50, 51, 52, reliability vii, viii, x, xi, xii, 3, 6, 7, 9, 17, 19, 30, 56, 71,
53, 54, 57, 58, 59, 60, 63, 64, 66, 69, 71, 79, 87, 72, 73, 74, 77, 79, 81, 83, 156, 171, 173, 176, 181,
88, 89, 90, 91, 96, 98, 101, 102, 106, 110, 116, 182, 190, 193
117, 118, 119, 120, 123, 136, 137, 139, 145, 146, remaining life x, 90, 103, 158, 161, 162
148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, residual error 30, 41, 44, 45, 56, 74, 193
158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, resilient modulus xii, 11, 15, 18, 19, 27, 35, 36, 38, 40,
168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 82, 83, 93, 96, 98, 99, 102, 103, 121, 122, 123,
178, 179, 183, 185, 188, 190, 191, 193, 194, 195 124, 125, 126, 130, 132, 134, 155, 159, 183, 187,
PCC overlay vii, viii, ix, 23, 25, 27, 35, 53, 117, 145, 150, 192
155, 164, 165, 168, 171, 174, 176, 178, 179 resources 6, 35
PCC-surfaced pavements vii, 7, 23, 33, 71 restoration vii, 1, 23, 24, 27, 69, 143, 154, 164, 166, 167,
PCC pavement types 1 170, 174, 189
PCC Slab Static Elastic Modulus xii, 156, 169 rigid pavement vi, vii, viii, ix, xi, 6, 14, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23,
performance indicator criteria 6 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 32, 35, 46, 48, 50, 51, 53,
performance indicators vii, 1, 6, 17, 19, 32, 33, 35, 71, 77, 57, 71, 79, 104, 106, 116, 125, 129, 136, 143, 146,
171, 176 147, 151, 152, 153, 170, 171, 175, 176, 179, 182,
performance values viii, 184 183, 184, 185
roughness 3, 6, 13, 14, 29, 51, 130, 147, 157, 184, 189

Index | 199
rubblization process x, 157, 159, 160, 161, 163

rut depth vi, 14, 18, 33, 39, 41, 51, 71, 72, 192, 193, 194
T
temperature gradient 23, 33, 34, 57, 65, 79, 139, 188
rutting vi, ix, 3, 18, 33, 39, 40, 41, 74, 91, 94, 97, 98, 100, tensile creep 47, 192
107, 146, 147, 149, 151, 153, 157, 158, 159, 184, test protocols vii, xi, xii, 11, 85, 109, 111, 116, 117, 121,
186, 187 123, 124
thermal conductivity vi, 13, 111, 113, 115, 117, 119, 121,
S 122
sample size xi, 75, 76 thermal contraction 63, 111, 113, 115
saturated hydraulic conductivity 36, 124, 125, 127 three-stage design ix, 3
severity levels xi, 89, 94, 104 threshold values xi, 29, 71, 72, 73, 74, 86
set temperature vi, 120, 139, 140, 177, 178 tied concrete shoulder 138, 139
shoulder condition 86, 93 tire pressure 36, 75, 81
skid resistance 26, 93 top-down cracking ix, 34, 45, 53, 170, 172, 191, 192, 194
SMA viii, 104, 105, 109, 110, 133, 167, 168, 175, 177, trac v, vii, xi, 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 14, 17, 18, 19, 26, 27, 29, 30,
190 31, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 42, 53, 54, 56, 58, 59, 64,
smoothness vii, x, xii, 1, 2, 6, 17, 18, 19, 32, 35, 51, 65, 65, 67, 69, 70, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 86, 88, 92,
66, 67, 72, 73, 81, 86, 87, 93, 95, 130, 136, 141, 93, 94, 95, 98, 105, 110, 111, 113, 123, 136, 138,
147, 148, 156, 157, 158, 164, 166, 171, 173, 175, 140, 146, 147, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157,
176, 177, 181, 184, 185, 187, 188 163, 168, 172, 175, 177, 179, 183, 184, 189, 190,
smoothness degradation 51 197
software v, vi, xi, 2, 6, 14, 19, 23, 26, 27, 29, 30, 37, 46, trac opening dates vii, 29, 69
58, 69, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 85, 92, transverse cracking ix, 18, 23, 33, 34, 46, 47, 49, 51, 53,
95, 98, 111, 112, 125, 127, 129, 132, 134, 135, 54, 55, 56, 66, 72, 94, 105, 138, 139, 141, 154,
139, 143, 146, 154, 155, 156, 167, 170, 173, 181, 157, 158, 168, 170, 171, 172, 175, 182, 184, 185,
183, 184 187, 191, 193
Soil Conservation Service Series 82, 92 transverse joint faulting x, 33, 56, 57, 61, 62, 171, 172,
soils vii, x, 3, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 26, 41, 82, 83, 84, 91, 192, 194
92, 93, 95, 96, 99, 100, 110, 122, 125, 130, 131, trenches 41, 89, 91, 97, 98, 146
132, 133, 159, 187, 192 trial design viii, ix, xi, xii, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 18, 19, 26, 30, 35,
soil strata layers 89, 95 37, 63, 69,71, 72, 74, 75, 77, 129, 132, 135, 136,
spalling 18, 26, 65, 66, 88, 149, 152, 175, 193 143, 156, 158, 171, 172, 173, 175, 181, 182, 183,
specications vii, 4, 5, 11, 14, 26, 69, 112, 113, 124, 126, 185, 187, 188
132, 158, 164, 166, 174 truck-volume distribution 75, 78
specic gravity 11, 12, 101, 111, 113, 124, 125 truck trac vii, xi, 8, 26, 31, 32, 36, 38, 42, 54, 75, 76,
stabilized base layers viii, 20, 109 77, 78, 79, 80, 110, 111, 113, 123, 147, 153, 184,
staged construction 27 189, 190
standard error 27, 29, 30, 35, 36, 37, 41, 44, 45, 47, 52, truck trac classication 32, 190
56, 61, 65, 66, 68, 72, 73, 74, 76, 190, 193 truck trac terms vii, 31
strain hardening 39, 153 TTC xi, 32, 78, 79, 80, 190
structural deciencies xii, 153, 164, 165 TTC groups xi, 32, 78, 80
structurally deteriorated 29, 69
structural response model 30, 39, 42
structure layering 6
U
ultimate shrinkage 117, 120, 139, 140, 179
subbase layers x, 23, 27, 134, 135, 136, 137 unbound aggregate base materials viii, 123
subgrade layer 20, 21, 24, 69, 129, 132, 133, 155, 167 unbound aggregates 23, 24
subgrade soil material xii, 123, 124, 125
subgrade soils vii, 82, 83, 110, 130
Superpave Gyratory Compactor 12 V
surface distortion 39, 104, 147, 148 VFA 4, 111, 112, 114, 135, 190, 193
surface distress 51, 69, 92, 103, 107 volumetric properties 4, 36, 86, 101, 103, 110, 112, 113,
surface shortwave absorptivity vi, 111, 113, 115, 117, 119 135
survey 3, 18, 83, 86, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 100, 103, volumetric tests 83
107, 155, 162, 170

W
weather stations 19, 36, 81, 82
weighing-in-motion 75, 190
Westergaards nominal stress factor 63, 195
WIM xi, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 190
Y
Youngs modulus 104, 105
Z
zero-stress temperature 63, 117, 141, 178, 194


MEPDG-2 TableOfContents

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MEPDG-2 TableOfContents

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MEPDG-2 TableOfContents

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

Format and AASHTOWare Pavement

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

8.3 Foundation and Subgrade Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

Abbreviations And Terms

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

1.1 PURPOSE OF MANUAL

1.2 OVERVIEW OF THE MEPDG DESIGN PROCEDURE

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

1. Create a trial design for the project.

AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design software also includes an automated process to iterate to an

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

Traffic Analysis [See Section 8.1]:

Analyze Performance STAGE 2ANALYSIS

Calculate Incremental Damage

STAGE 3STRATEGY SELECTION

Engineering and Constructability Life-Cycle

Select Policy Issues and Decisions

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

1993 Design Guide, ME Design Guide,

No direct tie between resilient 4. Plan Preparation and

Contractor Quality Plan Agency Acceptance Specifications

As-Built Plans 8. Construction of Project As-Built Plans

9. Pavement Management Database: Distress Predictions;

11. Data Feedback Through PMS Database

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

Guide for Design of Pavement Structures ME Design Guide,

4. Plan Preparation and

5. Bid Letting, Contractor

Contractor Quality Plan Agency Acceptance Specifications

As-Built Plans 8. Construction of Project As-Built Plans

9. Pavement Management Database: Distress Predictions;

11. Data Feedback Through PMS Database

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

General Project Design/Analysis Information

New Design or Lane Reconstruction

1Select Trial Design

Values selected in balance

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

4Determine Site Conditions and Factors

Existing Truck Traffic and Baseline Condition

Project future truck traffic over design life

4.bDetermine Climate Inputs Latitude, Longitude, Elevation

Establish overall condition of existing pavement

5Determine Material Properties/Features D

HMA Layers (Section 10.2)

PCC Layers (Section 10.3)

Unbound Aggregate Layers

2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

7Interpretation and Analysis of

Check reliability of trial design;