me design v2.2 training webinar (slides)

• This Webinar is being presented from a computer with a resolution of 1280 X 1024.

• Using a similar setting on your machine may improve your viewing experience.

WELCOME TO THE

WEBINAR

AASHTOWare: Pavement ME DesignFY15 Enhancements

Enhancements to AASHTOWare Pavement ME®

Design:Version 2.2


Moderators:• Judith Corley-Lay; NCDOT and

Chairperson, AASHTOWare ME Design Task Force

• Vicki Schofield, AASHTO

Presenters:• Harold L. Von Quintus, P.E.,

ARA• Michael I. Darter, P.E., ARA

Presentation will be available for viewing on the ME-Design Resource website:

http://www.me-design.com

1. Judith Corley-Lay; NCDOT, Chairperson2. Vicki Schofield, AASHTO Project Manager3. John Donahue, Missouri DOT4. William Barstis, Mississippi DOT5. Jay Goldbaum, Colorado DOT6. Marta Juhasz, Alberta Transportation 7. Mehdi Parvini, California DOT8. Felix Doucet, TAC Liaison9. Gary Crawford/Tom Yu, FHWA Liaison


Task Force Members:

Announcements:

1. 2nd Edition of the MEPDG Manual of Practice is now available through the AASHTO Bookstore.

2. Webinars are planned for software releases that include enhancements which impact the predicted distresses.

3. AASHTO is performing a Technical Audit of the software in FY16, which is schedule for completion in February 2016.


Process for Revising the Software:

1. Suggested revisions are received from users and AASHTO members.

2. ME Design Task Force monitors on-going/completed NCHRP, FHWA, and pool fund projects applicable to the MEPDG.

3. ME Design Task Force members review and prioritize all potential suggested revisions and enhancements.


Topics:1. Enhancements

What is the enhancement?• Explained through addendum

How to access/use the enhancement?

What is the impact on the predicted distress?

2. Uploading Old Project Files3. Questions and Answers


Addendum are available through the ME-Design Resource Website for downloading the software:

http:www.me-design.com



Topics:1. Enhancements:

a) AC Layer Dependent Plastic Deformation Coefficients

b) New PCC Calibration Coefficientsc) New Normalized Axle Load Spectra Defaultsd) Rehabilitation Input Levels 1 & 2 for PCC Overlay

of Flexible Pavementse) Reflection Cracking Transfer Functions

2. Uploading Old Project Files3. Questions and Answers

Enhancement:

AC Layer Dependent Plastic Deformation Coefficients


• Enhancement added in FY2014 and included in software release 2.1

• NCHRP Project 9-30A; Report #719• Addendum #FY15.2


Version 1.1 and earlier versions: One set of plastic deformation coefficients assumed for all AC

layers, regardless of the properties.

Version 2.1 enhancement: Plastic deformation coefficients can be entered for each AC

layer (new and existing AC layers).




AC Layer Properties



Project Calibration Coefficients


Addendum #FY15.2:

Determining the plastic deformation coefficients

Plastic Deformation Coefficients



Coefficient GlobalMixture

Layer 1 Layer 2Kr1 -3.35 -2.25 -1.95Kr2 1.5605 1.5605 1.5605Kr3 0.4791 0.30 0.30

Layer dependent plastic deformation coefficients:

Minimal to moderate impact on rutting.

Enhancement:

New LTPP Normalized Axle Load Spectra Defaults


• LTPP/FHWA Pool Fund Study• Olga Selezneva, Principal Investigator• Addendum #FY15.1

New LTPP NALS Defaults

Version 2.1 and earlier versions: One set of default NALS was included in software; developed

from NCHRP Project 1-37A. NCHRP 1-37A default NALS represents overall average from

WIM sites in all functional classes; questions were raised about its accuracy.

Version 2.2 enhancement: LTPP defined WIM sites as their “gold standard;” primarily

interstate WIM sites used to generate LTPP default NALS. 4 NALS added as default NALS in the software.




How to retrieve the additional

LTPP NALS?LTPP NALS included under “Traffic” tab.



Addendum #FY15.1Four LTPP NALS:

1.Global 3. Typical2.Heavy 4. Light



How different are the

additional NALS?

Minor difference between typical and global LTPP

NALS.



What difference do the new NALS make in the flexible pavement distress predictions?

NCHRP 1-37A

LTPP Global

LTPP Heavy

LTPP Typical

LTPP Light

Biggest difference is for cracking.



What difference do the new NALS make in the rigid pavement distress predictions?

NCHRP 1-37A

LTPP Global

LTPP Heavy

LTPP Typical

LTPP Light

Biggest difference is for cracking.



NCHRP 1-37A default NALS and LTPP Heavy NALS result in about the same predicted distress.

Other LTPP NALS result in less distress.



Use of global NALS or agency local NALS:No impact on predicted distress.

Poll Questions #1, #2, and #3.


Enhancement:

New PCC Calibration Coefficients


• NCHRP 20-24, Task 325• Dr. Julie Vandenbossche, Principal

Investigator• Addendum #FY15.3


Version 2.1 and earlier versions: JPCP & CRCP calibration coefficients and standard deviation

equations were based on results from CTE test method that was found to be in error (over prediction of CTE about 0.8).

CTE method was revised and corrected (AASTHO 336). NCHRP 20-24, Task 325 evaluated and recommended a revised

set of calibration coefficients and standard deviation equations using the revised (correct) CTE test method.




Version 2.2 enhancement: New JPCP & CRCP global calibration coefficients and

standard deviation equations from Task 325 replaced the older set of values.

Now, a designer must enter the “correct” CTE values and use the new global calibration coefficients and standard deviations.



Version 2.2 enhancement: States that have locally calibrated using the

“correct” CTE values should continue to use these local calibration coefficients and standard deviations (e.g., Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Mississippi, Utah, Wyoming, etc.) and inputting the “correct” CTE values.

New JPCP Calibration Coefficients


NCHRP 20-24, Task 325 Addendum #FY15.3

New CRCP Calibration Coefficients


NCHRP 20-24, Task 325Addendum #FY15.3

Impact of New Global Calibration


• Version 2.2 new global calibration for JPCP and CRCP should not result in significantly different designs on average since the same field sections with the same performance trends were used.

• Of course, some designs will be a little thicker and some thinner due to variations involved.

Enhancement:

Rehabilitation Input Levels 1 & 2 for PCC Overlays of Flexible Pavements


Rehabilitation Input Levels 1 & 2 for PCC Overlays of Flexible Pavements

Version 2.1 and earlier versions: Only rehabilitation input level 3 could be used for PCC overlays

of flexible pavements, while rehabilitation input levels 1, 2, & 3 were used for AC overlays.

Version 2.2 enhancement: Rehabilitation input levels 1, 2, and 3 are applicable for both

PCC and AC overlays of flexible pavements. Level 1: Backcalculate HMA “Damaged” Modulus Level 2: Enter % Alligator Cracking (not patched) Level 3: Enter Ratting: “Good”, “Fair”, etc.


Rehabilitation Input Levels 1 & 2 for PCC Overlays


AC Layer Properties

Rehabilitation Input Levels 1 & 2 for PCC OverlaysNo addendum for this enhancement, because rehab

input levels 1 and 2 are the same as for AC pavements.


Rehabilitation Input Level 1 for PCC Overlays


Rehabilitation Input Level 1: HMA Modulus from backcalculation in cracked areas

Rehabilitation Input Levels 1 & 2 for PCC Overlays


Use of rehab. input levels 1 & 2, in comparison to level 3 :No impact on bias of predicted PCC distress.

Enhancement:

Reflection Cracking Transfer Function from NCHRP 1-41


• NCHRP Project 1-41• Dr. Robert L. Lytton, Principal Investigator• Addendum #FY15.4

Reflection Cracking Transfer Function from NCHRP Project 1-41

Version 2.1 and earlier versions: Prediction of reflection cracks was based on an empirical

regression equation and only applicable to load-related cracks.

Version 2.2 enhancement: Integrated the ME based fracture mechanics model in the

software for predicting reflection cracks. Applicable to load and non-load related cracks of flexible, semi-

rigid, intact PCC, and fractured PCC pavements.


Reflection Cracking IntegrationBased on results and methodology developed from

NCHRP Project 1-41A special thank you to:

Bob Lytton and Sheng Hu (Texas Transportation Institute) provided a lot of information and explanation on the models/equations.

Halil Ceylan completed the neural networks; the final product was not possible without Halil’s effort and assistance.


Reflection Cracking IntegrationDocuments: Addendum #FY15.4 Enhancement has a large impact on the total predicted cracking

for AC overlays and existing AC pavements.


Reflection Cracking Integration

Expanded Pavement Design Types:i. Overlay Design with Seal

Coatsii. Overlay Design with

Interlayersiii. Overlay of Semi-Rigid

Pavements


Reflection Cracking IntegrationPerformance Criteria:


AC overlay of AC pavement

AC overlay & seal coat of AC pavement

AC overlay & interlayer of AC pavement

AC overlay of AC pavement



AC overlay of Intact JPCPAC overlay of Fractured JPCP AC overlay of CRCP



Semi-rigid pavement

AC overlay of semi-rigid pavement


AC over ACAC over Semi-Rigid


Software now considers fatigue and transverse cracks separately.

Reflection Cracking IntegrationAC over Fractured JPCP


Software now considers crack spacing in fractured slab and load transfer efficiency of cracks.

Reflection Cracking

Integration

Semi-Rigid Pavements:



Sensitivity of load transfer efficiency or crack severity:


Reflection Cracking Integration Example, Overlay of

Flexible Pavement


Reflection Cracking Integration Example, Overlays of

Intact and Fractured JPCP


Reflection Cracking Integration Example, New Semi-

Rigid Pavement


Reflection Cracking IntegrationCalibration Coefficients, AC over

Flexible Pavements:


Fatigue Cracks

Transverse Cracks

Reflection Cracking IntegrationCalibration Coefficients, AC

over JPCP:


Transverse Cracks

Reflection Cracking IntegrationCalibration Coefficients, AC over

Fractured JPCP/CRCP:


Transverse Cracks


Calibration Coefficients, AC over

Semi-Rigid Pavements:



Calibration Coefficients, Semi-Rigid Pavements:



Observation from calibration sites: Seal coats and interlayers do

not result in significant difference in reflection cracking from AC over AC.

Important to verify predictions using agency specific data.



Topics:1. Enhancements:2. Uploading Old Project Files3. Questions and Answers

Uploading Old Project Files


When opening an old project file for: New design, there should be no differences. Rehabilitation, difference will be with:

Amount of fatigue and transverse cracks in the existing pavement.

Load transfer efficiency of cracks in the existing layer. Calibration factors.



• Open an old project in ME Design • Click the “+” sign next to “ME Design

Calibration Factors” node• For AC overlay projects, double click

“Rehabilitation Flexible” node• For New AC projects, double click “New

Flexible” node



Click “Update Open Projects” tab at the bottom of the window

Poll Questions #4 and #5.



QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION

We welcome comments & suggestions for future webinars.

Thank you for Attending the Webinar!AASHTOWare Pavement ME-Design Contacts:

• Vicki Schofield, [email protected]: (202) 624-3640

• Judith Corley-Lay, [email protected]

ME Design Resource Websitehttp://www.me-design.com


Help Desk, Customer Support: ARA Staff:

• Deepak Raghunathan, ARA Inc. [email protected]

Phone: (217) 356-4500• Biplab Bhattacharya, P.E.

[email protected]

Other ARA Staff:• Chad Becker

[email protected]• Harold Von Quintus, P.E.

[email protected]• Michael I. Darter, P.E.

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


http://www.me-design.com/




