AASHTO LCG-1-2010 Guide for the Local Calibration of the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (Supplement to AASHTO MEPDG-1).pdf

《AASHTO LCG-1-2010 Guide for the Local Calibration of the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (Supplement to AASHTO MEPDG-1).pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《AASHTO LCG-1-2010 Guide for the Local Calibration of the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (Supplement to AASHTO MEPDG-1).pdf（202页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Guide for the Local Calibration of the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide November 2010November 2010 2010 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.ii | Guide for the Local Calibration of the

2、Mechanical-Empirical Pavement Design Guide 2010, by the American Association of State Highway and T ransportation O cials. All rights reserved. is book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form without written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America. Publicati

3、on Code: LCG-1 ISBN: 978-1-56051-449-7 2010 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law. | iii American Association of State Highway and Transportation Of cials Executive Committee 2009/2010 President: L

4、arry L. “Butch” Brown, Sr., Mississippi Vice President: Susan Martinovich, Nevada Secretary-T reasurer: Carlos Braceras, Utah REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVES REGION I Joseph Marie, Connecticut, One-Year Term Gabe Klein, District of Columbia, T wo-Year Term REGION II Dan Flowers, Arkansas, One-Year Term Mik

5、e Hancock, Kentucky, T wo-Year Term REGION III Nancy J. Richardson, Iowa, One-Year Term omas K. Sorel, Minnesota, T wo-Year Term REGION IV Paula Hammond, Washington, One-Year Term Amadeo Saenz, Jr., T exas, T wo-Year T erm NON-VOTING MEMBERS Immediate Past President: Allen Biehler, Pennsylvania AASH

6、TO Executive Director: John Horsley, Washington, DC 2010 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.iv | Guide for the Local Calibration of the Mechanical-Empirical Pavement Design Guide REGION I Delawa

7、re Robin Davis (Design) Maryland Tim Smith (Materials) New York Wes Yang (Design) Vacant (Design) Vacant Design) REGION II Alabama Larry Lockett (Materials) Arkansas Phillip McConnell (Design) Louisiana Je Lambert (Design) North Carolina Judith Corley-Lay (Vice Chair) South Carolina Andy Johnson (De

8、sign) Kentucky Paul Looney (Design) REGION III Kansas Andy Gisi (Design) Minnesota Curt T urgeon (Materials) Missouri Jay F . Bledsoe (Design) Missouri David Nichols (Chair) Ohio Aric Morse (Design) Iowa Chris Brakke (Design) REGION IV California Bill Farnbach (Design) Colorado Richard Zamora (Desig

9、n) Oklahoma Je Dean (Design) Wyoming Rick Harvey (Materials) Vacant (Design)Joint Technical Committee on Pavements 2008/2009 Chair: David Nichols, Missouri Vice Chair: Judith Corley-Lay, North Carolina Secretary: Pete Stephanos, FHWA 2010 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportati

10、on Officials. All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law. | v Preface is guide is to provide guidance to calibrate the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) software to local conditions, policies, and materials and to conduct the local calibration process. e guid

11、e does not provide guidance for determining the inputs and running the MEPDG software. A separate document, the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design GuideA Manual of Practice, provides guidance for using the MEPDG software to analyze and design new pavements and rehabilitation strategies. e Manual

12、of Practice is referenced throughout this guide.Version 1.0 of the MEPDG software is currently available. It should be noted that version 2.0 of the MEPDG software is in the process of being developed. Version 2.0 may include di erent transfer functions for selected distresses based on the results a

13、nd recommendations from other on-going NCHRP projects. If any of the transfer functions are revised, the Guide for Local Calibration and the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design GuideA Manual of Practice for the MEPDG software may need to be revised accordingly. 2010 by the American Association of

14、State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law. 2010 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law. | vii Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

15、-1 2.0 TERMINOLOGY AND DEFINITION OF TERMS .2-1 2.1 Statistical Terms .2-1 2.2 MEPDG Calibration Terms 2-3 2.3 Hierarchical Input Level Terms .2-3 2.4 Distress or Performance Indicator Terms 2-4 3.0 SIGNIFICANCE AND USE 3-1 4.0 DEFINING ACCURACY OF MEPDG PREDICTION MODELS 4-1 4.1 Calibration .4-1 4.

16、2 Validation .4-3 4.3 General Approach to Local Calibration-Validation .4-44.3.1 T raditional ApproachSplit-Sample .4-44.3.2 Jack-knife TestingAn Experimental Approach to Re ne Model Validation .4-4 5.0 COMPONENTS OF THE STANDARD ERROR OF THE ESTIMATE .5-1 5.1 Distress/IRI Measurement Error .5-2 5.2

17、 Estimated Input Error 5-3 5.3 Model or Lack-of-Fit Error .5-3 5.4 Pure Error 5-3 6.0 STEP-BY-STEP PROCEDURE FOR LOCAL CALIBRATION 6-1 7.0 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS AND STANDARDS .7-1 7.1 Referenced Documents 7-1 7.2 Test Protocols and Standards 7-1 APPENDIX: EXAMPLES AND DEMONSTRATIONS FOR LOCAL CALIBRA

18、TION . A-1 A1. Background A-1 A2. New Flexible Pavements and Rehabilitation of Flexible Pavements A-2A2.1 Demonstration 1PMS Data and Local Calibration A-2A2.1.1 Description of PMS Segments A-2A2.1.2 Step-by-Step Procedure .A-2A2.2 Demonstration 2LTPP Data and Local Calibration A-34A2.2.1 Descriptio

19、n of LTPP Test Sections Used in DemonstrationA-34A2.2.2 Step-by-Step Procedure .A-35A2.3. Summary for Local/Regional Calibration Values .A-62A2.3.1 Comparison of Results: PMS Segments and LTPP SPS Test Sections A-62A2.3.1.1 Alligator (Fatigue) Cracking T ransfer Function A-63A2.3.1.2 Rut Depth T ran

20、sfer Function A-64A2.3.1.3 ermal Cracking T ransfer Function A-65A2.3.1.4 IRI Regression Model . A-66A2.3.2 Application of Results from Local Calibration Process for Pavement Design . A-66 2010 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. Duplicatio

21、n is a violation of applicable law.viii | Guide for the Local Calibration of the Mechanical-Empirical Pavement Design GuideA2.4 Attachments A-68A2.4.A Attachment ADescription of PMS Segments A-68A2.4.A.1 HMA Full-Depth New Construction/Reconstruction Projects A-68A2.4.A.2 HMA Overlay of Flexible Pav

22、ement Projects . A-72A2.4.B Attachment BPlots of Time-History Performance Data A-73A2.4.B.1 Full-Depth HMA, New Construction . A-74A2.4.B.2 HMA Overlays of Flexible Pavements, Rehabilitation . A-80A2.4.C Attachment CDescription of LTPP Projects . A-84A2.4.C.1 Full-Depth and Conventional New Construc

23、tionLTPP SPS-1 Projects . A-84A2.4.C.2 HMA Overlays of Flexible PavementLTPP SPS-5 Projects A-85A2.4.D Attachment DPlots of Time-History Performance Data for the LTPP SPS Projects A-86A2.4.D.1 Full-Depth and Conventional HMA, New Construction . A-86A2.4.D.2 HMA Overlays of Flexible Pavements, Rehabi

24、litation . A-90 A3. New Rigid PavementsJointed Plain Concrete Pavements A-94A3.1 Demonstration 3LTPP and PMS Data and Local Calibration A-94A3.1.1 Description of LTPP And PMS Segments . A-94A3.1.2 Step-by-Step Procedure . A-94A3.2 Attachments A-117A3.2.A Attachment ADescription of MODOT LTPP and PMS

25、 JPCP Segments A-117A3.2.A.1 Design (Analysis) Life . A-117A3.2.A.2 Analysis Parameters A-118A3.2.A.3 T ra c . A-119A3.2.A.4 Climate A-124A3.2.A.5 Pavement Surface Layer ermal Properties A-124A3.2.A.6 Design Features for JPCP Sections A-124A3.2.A.7 Pavement Structure De nition . A-126A3.2.B Attachme

26、nt BPlots of Time-History Performance Data A-126 2010 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law. | ix List of Figures Figure 1-1. Conceptual Flow Chart of the ree-Stage Design/Analysis Process for the

27、MEPDG .1-2 Figure 6-1. Flow Chart of the Procedure and Steps Suggested for Local Calibration; Steps 1 rough 5 6-2 Figure 6-2. Flow Chart of the Procedure and Steps Suggested for Local Calibration; Steps 6 rough 11 6-3 Figure A2-1. General Location of the Roadway Segments Selected for Demonstrating t

28、he Local Validation-Calibration Process Using Kansas PMS Data A-8 Figure A2-2. Comparison of Predicted and Measured Rut Depths Using the Global Calibration Values and Local Calibration Values of Unity A-16 Figure A2-3. Comparison of Predicted and Measured Fatigue Cracking Using the Global Calibratio

29、n Values and Local Calibration Values of Unity . A-17 Figure A2-4. Comparison of Predicted ermal Cracking and Measured T ransverse Cracking Using the Global Calibration Values and a Local Calibration Value of Unity A-17 Figure A2-5. Comparison of Predicted and Measured IRI Using the Global Calibrati

30、on Values and Local Calibration Values of Unity A-18 Figure A2-6. Comparison of the Intercept and Slope Estimators to the Line of Equality for the Predicted and Measured Rut Depths Using the Global Calibration Values A-19 Figure A2-7. Comparison of the Intercept and Slope Estimators to the Line of E

31、quality for the Predicted and Measured IRI Using the Global Calibration Values A-20 Figure A2-8. Comparison of Predicted and Measured Rut Depths Using the Subgrade and HMA Local Calibration Values for the PMS Segments A-26 Figure A2-9. Comparison of Measured and Predicted Values of Fatigue Cracking

32、Using Di erent Value for the C 2 and f1Parameters for PMS Segments FDAC-C-3 and FDAC-S-4 . A-27 Figure A2-10. Comparison of Predicted and Measured Fatigue Cracking Using the Local Calibration Values for the PMS Segments . A-28 Figure A2-11. Comparison of Predicted ermal Cracking and Measured T ransv

33、erse Cracking Using the Local Calibration Value for the PMS Segments .A-30 Figure A2-12. Comparison of Predicted and Measured IRI Values Using the Global Calibration Values A-31 Figure A2-13. Comparison of the Standard Error of the Estimate for the Global-Calibrated and Local-Calibrated T ransfer Fu

34、nction A-32 Figure A2-14. Rut Depths Measured Over Time for the Kansas SPS-1 Project . A-38 2010 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.x | Guide for the Local Calibration of the Mechanical-Empirica

35、l Pavement Design Guide Figure A2-15. Determination of the Resilient Modulus of the Subgrade Using Laboratory Test Data Included in the LTPP Database . A-41 Figure A2-16. Determination of the Resilient Modulus of the Unbound Aggregate Base Layer Using Laboratory Test Data Included in the LTPP Databa

36、se A-41 Figure A2-17. Comparison of Predicted and Measured Rut Depths Using the Global Calibration Values A-43 Figure A2-18. Comparison of Predicted and Measured Fatigue Cracking Using the Global Calibration Values A-44 Figure A2-19. Comparison of Predicted ermal Cracking and Measured T ransverse Cr

37、acking Using the Global Calibration Values A-45 Figure A2-20. Comparison of Predicted and Measured IRI Using the Global Calibration Values A-46 Figure A2-21. Comparison of Predicted and Measured Rut Depths Using the Local Calibration Values for the Subgrade, Unbound Aggregate, and HMA Layers A-53 Fi

38、gure A2-22. Comparison of Measured and Predicted Values of Fatigue Cracking for Speci c Test Sections A-54 Figure A2-23. Comparison of Predicted and Measured Fatigue Cracking Using a Local Calibration Values for the HMA Mixture at Is Air Void Dependent A-55 Figure A2-24. Comparison of Predicted erma

39、l Cracking and Measured T ransverse Cracking Using the Local Calibration Values for the HMA Mixture. A-57 Figure A2-25. Comparison of Predicted and Measured IRI Values Using the Global Calibration Values A-59 Figure A2-26. Comparison of the Standard Error of the Estimate from the Global and Local Ca

40、libration Process A-60 Attachments Figure A2.4.B.1-1. Full-Depth HMA, New Construction. . A-74 Figure A2.4.B.2-1. HMA Overlays of Flexible Pavements, Rehabilitation. . A-80 Figure A2.4.D.1-1. Rut Depth Measurements and Predictions with the Global Calibration Values .A-86 Figure A2.4.D.1-2. Fatigue C

41、racking Measurements and Predictions with the Global Calibration Values . A-87 Figure A2.4.D.1-3. T ransverse Cracking Measurements and ermal Cracking Predictions with the Global Calibration Values . A-88 Figure A2.4.D.1-4. IRI Measurements and Predictions with the Global Calibration Values A-89 Fig

42、ure A2.4.D.2-1. Rut Depth Measurements and Predictions with the Global Calibration Values . A-90 Figure A2.4.D.2-2. Fatigue Cracking Measurements and Predictions with the Global Calibration Values .A-91 2010 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserv

43、ed. Duplication is a violation of applicable law. | xi Figure A2.4.D.2-3. T ransverse Cracking Measurements and ermal Cracking Predictions with the Global Calibration Values . A-92 Figure A2.4.D.2-4. IRI Measurements and Predictions with the Global Calibration Values A-93 Figure A3-1. General Locati

44、on of the Missouri LTPP and PMS Roadway Segments Selected for Demonstrating the Local Validation-Calibration Process A-96 Figure A3-2. LTPP T ransverse Cracking A-101 Figure A3-3. Illustration of Initial IRI Backcasting for G01-S-S1 . A-105 Figure A3-4. Illustration of Field Measurement of Permanent

45、 Curl/Warp E ective Temperature A-106 Figure A3-5. Comparison of Predicted and Measured T ransverse Joint Faulting Using the Global Calibration Values A-109 Figure A3-6. Comparison of Predicted and Measured IRI Using the Global Calibration Values A-110 Figure A3-7. Di erent Stages of Faulting Develo

46、pment A-112 Figure A3-8. E ect of Parameter C 1on Faulting Prediction A-112 Figure A3-9. E ect of Parameter C 3on Faulting Prediction A-113 Figure A3-10. E ect of Parameter C 7on Faulting Prediction A-113 Figure A3-11. E ect of Parameter C 8on Faulting Prediction A-114 Figure A3-12. Comparison of Pr

47、edicted and Measured Faulting Using the New Faulting Local Calibration Values for MODOT LTPP and PMS Segments . A-116 Figure A3-13. Locations of WIM Sites in Missouri from Which T ra c Data Were Obtained for Validation-Recalibration A-121 Figure A3-14. Summary of Years of WIM Data Available . A-122

48、Figure A3-15. Monthly T ruck Volume Adjustment Factors for 29-1005 . A-122 Figure A3-16. Cumulative Single Axle-Load Distribution for Class 5 T rucks on MODOT Heavy Duty Pavements Pertaining to TTC 1 A-123 Figure A3-17. Cumulative Tandem Axle-Load Distribution for Class 9 T rucks on MODOT Heavy Duty

49、 Pavements Pertaining to TTC 1 A-123 Figure A3-18. Lateral T ruck Wander and Mean Number Axles/T ruck for 29-1005 A-124 Attachments Figure A3.2.B.-1. PMS Sites . A-127 2010 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.xii | Guide for the Local Calibration of the Mechanical-Empirical Pavement Design Guide List of Tables Table 5-1. Summary of Major Components of Calibration Error Dependency . 5-2 Table 6-1. Rec