01151054

Component

https://doi.org/10.3141/2153-07

http://scholar.google.com...pata&publication_year=2010

Calibration and validation of the "Mechanistic–Empirical Pavement Design Guide" (MEPDG) for state department of transportation (DOT) networks requires detailed information for a variety of pavement inputs. The biggest database resource that most states possess is their pavement management system (PMS). It is understandable for any DOT to maximize the use of this resource to the greatest extent possible. However, before any state uses PMS data in MEPDG calibration, it is important that a careful comparison be made of the equality of the measurements, data, and so forth in the PMS database with national Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) values. The purpose of this paper is to review possible differences between several key data found in a state PMS database and the LTPP database. Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) PMS data are used for this purpose. The specific variables examined in this paper deal with distress type (rutting, cracking, and roughness) and nondestructive deflection testing (NDT) backcalculated moduli to predict in situ pavement layer properties. It was concluded that significant differences did exist between the ADOT PMS values and LTPP measurements. Differences were found between ADOT’s NDT measurements and LTPP data in rut measurements, asphalt cracking, international roughness index, and all layer backcalculated moduli. Consequently, ADOT may incur significant expense to calibrate the MEPDG to Arizona conditions. The paper discusses several possible reasons for differences between the PMS data of a specific agency and those in the LTPP database.

01320944

10-2941

English

pp 58-66

2010

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board

9780309143004

Print

Figures (5) ; Maps (1) ; Photos (2) ; References (17) ; Tables (1)

Calibration; Nondestructive tests; Pavement cracking; Pavement design; Pavement distress; Pavement layers; Pavement management systems; Roughness; Rutting; State departments of transportation

International Roughness Index; Long-Term Pavement Performance Program; Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide

Layer moduli

Arizona

Design; Highways; Pavements; I22: Design of Pavements, Railways and Guideways

PRP, TRIS, TRB, ATRI

Jan 25 2010 11:26AM

• CalME, a Mechanistic–Empirical Program to Analyze and Design Flexible Pavement Rehabilitation
• Characterization and Development of Truck Axle Load Spectra for Implementation of New Pavement Design Practices in Louisiana
• Comparison of Flexible Pavement Distresses Monitored by North Carolina Department of Transportation and Long-Term Pavement Performance Program
• Confidence Level and Efficient Sampling Size of Roughness Measurements for Pavement Management in Maryland
• Developing an Overall Combined Condition Index for Pervious Concrete Pavements Using a Specific Panel Rating Method
• Development of a Global Positioning System–Based Vehicle Tracking System for the Minnesota Road Research Facility
• Effect of Frequency of Pavement Condition Data Collection on Performance Prediction
• Evaluation Method for Transverse Cracking in Asphalt Pavements on Freeways
• Index of Foreign Object Damage in Airfield Pavement Management
• Integration of "Mechanistic–Empirical Pavement Design Guide" Distresses with Local Performance Indices
• Optical Texture-Based Tools for Monitoring Pavement Surface Wear and Cracks Using Digital Images
• Pavement Performance Modeling Using Piecewise Approximation
• Pavement Rehabilitation Project Ranking Approach Using Probabilistic Long-Term Performance Indicators
• Quantitative Performance Evaluation Algorithms for Pavement Distress Segmentation
• Runway Instrumentation and Response Measurements
• Use of Pavement Management Information System for Verification of "Mechanistic–Empirical Pavement Design Guide" Performance Predictions
• Validation and Implementation of Ontario, Canada, Network-Level Distress Guidelines and Condition Rating