Implementation of the AASHTO Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide and Software (2014) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 57-72
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 57... ...
57 1. Responding agencies.
|
From page 58... ...
58 Answer Options Response Percent Response Count Dowel bar retrofit 59.6 34 Cold in-place recycle with an asphalt overlay 50.9 29 Unbonded JPCP concrete overlay 47.4 27 Crack or break and seat with an asphalt overlay 36.8 21 Other1 24.6 14 Hot in-place recycle without an asphalt overlay 19.3 11 Bonded JPCP concrete overlay 17.5 10 Hot in-place recycle with an asphalt overlay 17.5 10 Rubblization with a concrete overlay 15.8 9 Full-depth reclamation without an asphalt overlay 14.0 8 Cold in-place recycle without an asphalt overlay 12.3 7 Unbonded CRCP overlay 10.5 6 Crack or break and seat with a concrete overlay 7.0 4 Bonded CRCP overlay 3.5 2 1Responses included: rubblization, microsurfacing, chip seal and gravel overlays, asphalt overlay and geogrid, ultra-thin bonded asphalt overlay, asphalt rubber open-graded friction course, full- and partial-depth concrete repair, tie bar retrofit, crack sealing, joint resealing.
|
From page 59... ...
59 Answer Options Response Percent Response Count Limited availability of personnel 1.8 1 Limited support from upper management 1.8 1 Too time consuming 1.8 1 Limited knowledge/experience in mechanistic-empirical design 0.0 0 1Do not agree with much of the modeling, too many bugs, too costly to implement at this time, and pavement performance not accurately predicted for asphalt pavements.
|
From page 60... ...
60 10. Within your department, how effective is coordination across various agency functions?
|
From page 61... ...
61 14. Is the MEPDG/AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design™ data available electronically?
|
From page 62... ...
62 Answer Options Response Percent Response Count Research Director 0.0 0 State Maintenance Engineer 0.0 0 Other1 29.8 17 1Construction engineer, FHWA Division on federal projects, committee approval, Design Director, Assistant Executive Director for Infrastructure, district office, Planning/Engineering Director, Transportation Engineer Specialist, project committee, no formal approval.
|
From page 63... ...
63 23. Is there an MEPDG champion in your agency?
|
From page 64... ...
64 Answer Options Response Percent Response Count Design Office 26.1 12 Traffic Office 23.9 11 Planning Office 8.7 4 Construction Office 4.3 2 Maintenance Office 4.3 2 Other1 34.8 16 1Final decision not yet made, MEPDG not implemented yet, Chief Engineer, Rutgers University, Geotechnical Office, Pavement Design Coordinator, traffic, materials and pavements will all be involved in future implementation, and Consultant and Industry representatives.
|
From page 65... ...
65 31. Which pavement types (by functional class)
|
From page 66... ...
66 Answer Options Do Not Use Default Value Regional Value Site-specific Value Response Count Mixture volumetrics 0 4 15 7 19 Mechanical properties 0 9 11 5 19 Thermal properties 0 11 4 0 15 All concrete layers 4 5 8 1 17 Poisson's ratio 0 17 4 2 20 Unit weight 0 9 13 6 20 Thermal 0 14 4 3 19 Mix 0 4 13 9 19 Strength 0 4 14 8 19 All chemically stabilized layers 8 4 6 1 18 Poisson's ratio 1 10 2 4 16 Unit weight 1 5 7 4 16 Strength 1 4 9 5 17 Thermal 1 13 0 1 15 All sandwiched granular layers 7 3 7 2 18 Poisson's ratio 2 11 2 4 17 Unit weight 2 6 9 4 17 Strength 2 6 9 6 17 Thermal properties 2 12 1 2 14 All non-stabilized base layers 4 3 6 4 15 Poisson's ratio 0 18 3 3 23 Modulus 0 5 16 8 24 Sieve analysis 0 5 17 6 22 All subgrade layers 4 2 5 6 15 Poisson's ratio 0 19 3 1 22 Modulus 0 5 17 11 24 Sieve analysis 0 8 14 9 23 All bedrock layers 8 6 3 7 22 Poisson's ratio 2 12 1 3 17 Unit weight 2 11 2 3 17 Strength 2 10 2 4 17 33. Does your agency use nationally or locally calibrated prediction models (select all that apply)
|
From page 67... ...
67 Answer Options Do Not Use National Calibration Local Calibration Plans for Local Calibration Response Count All CRCP models 17 3 2 4 23 IRI 1 1 0 1 2 Punchouts 1 1 0 1 2 34. Where has your agency focused the implementation effort (select all that apply)
|
From page 68... ...
68 37. What type of MEPDG/AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design™ training program is available for your agency's personnel (select all that apply)
|
From page 69... ...
69 40. Indicate cost savings.
|
From page 70... ...
70 • Traffic is such a key component, and has changed significantly from previous design methods, that it requires its own analysis or research project. • This is a pavement design.
|
From page 71... ...
71 Agency Begin Implementation Complete Implementation Estimated Years to Implement Iowa 2006 2014 8 Kansas 2012 2014 2 Kentucky 2000 2014 14 Maine 2012 2013 1 Manitoba 2007 2015 8 Maryland 2008 2014 6 Michigan 2011 2014 3 Missouri 2005 2008 3 Nevada 2007 2015 8 New Jersey 1998 2017 19 New Mexico 2008 2013 5 New York 2010 2016 6 North Carolina 2003 2013 10 Ohio 2008 1 -- Oklahoma 2004 2016 12 Ontario 2011 2016 5 Oregon 2006 2009 3 Quebec 2008 2020 12 South Carolina 2008 2018 10 Tennessee 2007 2016 9 Vermont 2002 2018 16 Virginia 2007 1 -- Wisconsin 2004 2013 9 1No response.
|
From page 72... ...
Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.