See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/279931635

Mechanistic-Empirical design of a long life flexible pavement in Northern

California

Conference Paper · January 2011

CITATION READS

1 28

6 authors, including:

Venkata Lakshman Mandapaka Imad Basheer

State of California 96 PUBLICATIONS   2,308 CITATIONS   
4 PUBLICATIONS   24 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Khush Sahasi Rongzong Wu

State of California University of California, Davis
3 PUBLICATIONS   24 CITATIONS    64 PUBLICATIONS   151 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

SHRP 2 View project

FWD Data Analysis View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Imad Basheer on 19 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Mechanistic-empirical design of a long life
flexible pavement in
Northern California, USA
Venkata L Mandapaka1, 4 Imad Basheer, Khushminder Sahasi
B.E., M.S., PE (CA2) PhD., PE (CA2) ME., PE (CA2), FIGS
Caltrans3 Caltrans3 Caltrans3
2389 Gateway Oaks, ste 200, 2389 Gateway Oaks, ste 200, 2389 Gateway Oaks, ste 200,
Sacramento, CA-95833, USA Sacramento, CA-95833, USA Sacramento, CA-95833, USA
001-919-760-9840 001-916-274-6155 001-916-274-6081
venkata.mandapaka@dot.ca.gov imad.basheer@dot.ca.gov khushminder.sahasi@dot.ca.gov

John T Harvey Rongzong Wu Carl L. Monismith

PhD. PE (CA) PhD., PE (CA) Professor
Civil & Env. Engg. Civil & Env. Engg. 215 McLaughlin
3153 Engineering III 3153 Engineering III UC Berkeley, CA
University of California, University of California, USA-94720-1712
Davis, CA, USA Davis, CA, USA 001-510-665-3560
001- (530) 754-6409 001-530-752-7708 clm@ce.berkeley.edu
jtharvey@ucdavis.edu rzwu@ucdavis.edu

Abstract: This paper discusses the process involved to design a long life flexible pavement to carry 125 million
Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESALs) over a 40-year period, using Mechanistic-Empirical (M-E) design
procedures. The pavement section is located on Interstate-5, Tehama County in Northern California, USA. The
pavement section was identified to be distressed by extensive fatigue cracking and rutting. Coring data showed
extensive delamination and stripping in the existing asphalt layer at different depths. Available pavement
rehabilitation history, coring data and Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) analysis were used to determine the existing
pavement structural sections. Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) testing was performed over the pavement to
calculate the stiffness of the existing materials using backcalculation analysis. Traffic data (axle load spectra) was
obtained from the closest weigh-in-motion station and the climate data was obtained from a nearby weather station.
Based on the traffic and climatic conditions, the materials to be used in each layer of the structural section were
determined. The long life flexible pavement is designed using a three-layer system consisting of a rut resistant
surface layer, a stiff intermediate layer, and fatigue resistant rich-bottom layer. The mix design to determine the
asphalt content in each layer was performed based on Repeated Simple Shear Test-Constant Height (RSST-CH).
The materials were tested for model parameters that were useful for the M-E design of the pavement using
customized Caltrans software (CalME). The tests performed to determine the model parameters were flexural
fatigue test (AASHTO T-321), RSST-CH (AASHTO T-320) and Hamburg wheel test (AASHTO T-342). The
intermediate layer was designed to have a maximum of 25% reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP). Based on the
traffic, climate and material inputs, a long life pavement has been designed for a life of 40 years. The optimal
structural sections that were designed for this project are presented in this paper along with material characterization
method and future enhancements to the design process.

________________
1 Corresponding Author 2 California 3 California Department of Transportation
4 Presenting Author
Introduction and objective
Since 1970, California’s population has nearly doubled to 37 million, while the network has
grown at a far slower rate. In this period, the estimated annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) has
quadrupled to nearly 400 billion. Much of the reconstruction, preservation and rehabilitation
work is done at night or with extended closures with 24-hour operations due to extremely heavy
traffic volumes and resulting economic loss due to delays. As a consequence, design lives are
being increased, wherever possible, to minimize both life-cycle cost and future traffic delays.
Mechanistic-Empirical (M-E) pavement design is a new method used to analyze and design
pavements. This method combines mechanistic models; which calculate the primary response of
a pavement to stresses, strains, and displacement, and empirical models, which then relate the
calculated response to pavement performance.
One of the goals of M-E design method implementation in California, USA is to help meet the
competing design requirements of reduced construction time, which is primarily dependent on
total pavement cross-section thickness, and longer life, through use of innovative construction,
materials and structures that cannot be considered using the current empirical methods. A Long
life flexible pavement design methodology has been developed by the University of California
Pavement Research Center (UCPRC) in collaboration with California Department of
transportation (Caltrans). Figure 1 shows the methodology that was followed to perform a long
life flexible rehabilitation project over Interstate-5 in Tehama County, California.
The main objective of this paper is to present the methodology followed to design a long life
flexible pavement using the California M-E methodology.

California Mechanistic-Empirical Design System

CalME software

CalME is a program developed by the UCPRC in collaboration with Caltrans for analysis and
design of rehabilitation, using asphalt overlays, and new flexible pavements. CalME predicts the
rutting and fatigue cracking performance of new flexible pavements and asphalt overlays. The
effect of the interaction of traffic, climate, structure and environment is considered in the
software. The rutting and fatigue modals are calibrated using Heavy Vehicle Simulator (HVS)
and Westrack results. The long life rehabilitation design of the pavement presented in this paper
has been performed using this software. Further details about the software can be found in [1].

CalBack software

CalBack has been developed by the UCPRC in collaboration with Caltrans as a tool for
calculating material moduli of existing pavements from deflection data. Back-calculation is a
widely used procedure for the non-destructive quantification of resilient moduli of existing
pavement layers. It involves utilizing deflection data and the use of multilayer elastic analysis
(MLEA) in an iteretative procedure to determine the most reasonable set of in situ moduli that
will minimize the difference between measured and calculated deflections [2]. This software is
used to analyze the deflection data (as obtained from the jobsite) to determine the moduli of the
various layers in the current project.
Available history, Coring, Ground Existing structural section (thickness,
Penetrating Radar (GPR) material type, etc.)

Falling weight deflectometer Determine Modulus of each existing

layer (FWD analysis) using “Calback
program”

Existing pavement characteristics and its condition (number of layers, thickness,

moduli, etc.), number of lanes, etc.

Existing pavement condition analysis For Rehabilitation design only

Traffic, climate, design life and Determine material to be used in each

pavement structure layer (e.g. PG grading)

Test for rutting and fatigue

modal parameters (AASHTO
T320, AASHTO T 321 (for each
HMA material)

Inputs required for Long life flexible pavement design using Mechanistic Empirical design
method (CalME program used in this design) including reliability analysis and design
criteria performance thresholds (rutting, fatigue)

NO Run Mechanistic
Have performance
Empirical analysis
criteria met?

YES
Final Long life flexible pavement

Structural Design

Figure 1: Long life Flexible pavement design methodology

CalME and Calback were developed such that the backcalculated moduli from the CalBack
software can be directly uploaded into the CalME software to perform the rehabilitation design
[2].

Existing Pavement Details

Pavement site location and current condition:
The pavement section of I-5 is in District 2, Tehama County, California, USA from post mile
(PM) 37.5 to PM 41.5. Two lanes in each direction are identified from the as-built information
with an additional lane in the southbound (SB) from PM 39.4 to 40.6. As per the as-built
drawings, the existing structural section consists of variable thickness of HMA layer, cement
treated base and aggregate subbase. The subgrade type that was found in this area is SW (Well
graded sand with little or no silt) according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS)
classification) [3]. Based on the visual survey, the pavement section was identified to be
distressed by extensive fatigue cracking (especially reflection cracking) and certain sub-sections
with rutting. Cores retrieved from various locations within the project limits revealed some
delaminated and stripped areas in the existing asphalt concrete (AC) layer at different depths.

Data collection
A series of tests have been performed to determine the current condition of the pavement and
hence determine the structural section that will be adequate for a 40 year design life. The series
of steps performed to analyze the existing pavement section is as presented in Figure 1 and the
significance of each step is as mentioned below.

Coring
A coring plan has been developed based on the Caltrans Highway Design manual (HDM) [3] to
determine the existing structural section of the pavement and also assess the current condition of
the underlying layers. A minimum of 2 cores per lane mile were taken over the project limits.
Coring was also performed to observe the pattern of cracking and it was found that there were
areas with top-down fatigue cracking. Coring data showed that there are certain delaminated and
stripped areas in the existing AC layer at various depths.

Ground penetrating radar (GPR) data analysis

The section of Interstate-5 in the Tehama County, California, USA was built in 1960. A number
of overlays and mill & overlays have been performed over the project limits since the pavement
was built. Hence, it was identified from the coring data that the there is a variability in the
structural section of the pavement. Therefore, it was decided to perform a GPR analysis to
determine the structural section variations of each segment of the pavement.
Structural section determination
Based on the available history, coring and GPR analysis, the following segments with different
structural sections have been identified as shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Existing pavement section on I-5 Red Bluff PM 37-41.5
 Lane details PM Pavement section (coring, GPR, available history)
Existing Existing CTB2 Existing AS3
1
From To HMA (ft) (ft) (Var)
NB-L1 37 40.5 1.0 0.4-0.5 Var (>1.2 ft)
NB-L1 40.5 41.5 0.8 0.4-0.5 Var (>1.2 ft)
NB-L2 37.03 40.5 1.05 0.4-0.5 Var (>1.2 ft)
NB-L2 40.5 41.5 0.8 0.4-0.5 Var (>1.2 ft)
SB-L1 36.6 41.5 0.96 0.4-0.5 Var (>1.2 ft)
SB-L2 36.6 39.5 1.0 0.4-0.5 Var (>1.2 ft)
SB-L2 39.5 40.4 0.8 0.4-0.5 Var (>1.2 ft)
SB-L2 40.4 41.5 0.7 0.4-0.5 Var (>1.2 ft)
SB-L3 39.4 40.6 1.0 0.4-0.5 Var (>1.2 ft)
1
Hot mix Asphalt 2 Cement Treated Base 3 Aggregate Subbase

Falling weight deflectometer (FWD)

FWD testing was done in Southbound (SB) lanes 1, 2 and 3 and a 1.3 mile section in Northbound
(NB) lane 2 (from PM 37.3-38.6) according to the California test method-356 . The deflection
data obtained from the FWD testing and its corresponding structural section (shown in Table 1)
were used as inputs in CalBack to determine the resilient modulus of the CTB and subgrade
(AS+Subgrade). FWD testing for the remaining section of northbound lane 2 and the whole of
northbound lane 1 could not be performed due to time constraints over the design project
completion. However, it was observed that the variation in the modulus of subgrade and CTB for
various sections were not significant. Hence, the stiffness values obtained for the 1.3 mile section
in northbound direction were considered as representative for the entire northbound direction.
Table 2 shows a summary of the modulus estimated for the existing structural layers. The
resilient modulus of the asphalt layer was not reported, as it is decided to completely remove the
asphalt layer and build the new structural layers on top of the existing CTB. This is due to the
delaminated and stripped areas present at variable depths and at indistinct locations as found
from coring and GPR analysis.
Table 2: Summary of Backcalculated moduli of existing structural layers

Lane PM
details Existing Existing Modulus Modulus Modulus
HMA(in) CTB(in) HMA (ksi) CTB (ksi) SW (ksi)
From To
SB-L2 37.5 38.4 9.5 5.8 344.7 946 28.6
SB-L2 38.4 40 10.5 5 399 509 32.4
SB-L2 40 41.5 9.5 6 252 640 18.9
SB-L3 39.4 40.6 12 4.5 810 1302.3 35.6
SB-L1 37 38 11.5 5 428 502 32.3
SB-L1 39 40.2 11.5 5 439 681 35
NB-L2 37.3 38.6 12 5 439 1048 19.9
 Based on the testing and analysis performed (so far), the existing structural section thickness,
type of material in each layer and the current condition of the pavement (distress, etc.) in each
segment have been determined.

Traffic
The pavement is subjected to a traffic characterized by load spectrum Group 1a in CalME as
defined in [2]. The rehabilitation design life was selected to be 40 years accounting for an
equivalent traffic of 125 million ESALs; or a Traffic Index (TI) of 16.0 [3].

Material Selection and Characterization

Based on the long life design approach as used for the I-710 project [4], the following materials
have been chosen to design the long life pavement in this project:

• HMA type A ¾ in, course, PG-64-28 PM (Rut resistant layer)

• HMA type A ¾ in, course, PG-64-16 (stiff layer)
• HMA Rich Bottom ¾ in, course, PG-64-10 (fatigue resistant layer)
The asphalt concrete three-layer system will be placed directly on top of CTB after milling off
completely the existing asphalt concrete. Material testing was performed by UCPRC to
determine the model parameters for ME design. Tests namely, flexural fatigue test (AASHTO
T321) and rutting test (AASHTO T320) were performed to obtain the fatigue and rutting model
parameters needed for running the CalME. The rutting model parameters available in the CalME
materials library were used for the Red Bluff location on I-5 design as the full testing to obtain
the model parameters could not be performed. The complete testing could not be done due to the
time constraints over the project completion deadline. A comparative study between the model
parameters as obtained from the flexural fatigue test and the limited rutting test for each material
and the available default material parameters showed that the Red Bluff materials were better
performing than the default materials. Hence, the use of default values for rutting model
parameters produced a conservative design for the pavement. Table 3 shows the modal
parameters for the various models (fatigue model, rutting model and master curve for HMA
modulus) available in the CalME software.
Table 3: Modal parameters for distress models in CalME software

Rutting
(Permanent
Deformation)
Material A alfa tref rrrRMS
PG 64-10 0.80366 3.2231 0.1 0 1.8063 1 3.4295
PG 64-10 RB 0.22916 4.0589 0.1 0 1.9711 1 3.4748
PG 64-28PM 1.2379 2.5495 0.1 0 3.1077 1 3.66
Fatigue
Material A a0 a1 meref eEref rrRMS
PG 64-10 151.2162 -0.35766 0 200 -5.9161 3000 -2.9581 0 7.3679
PG 64-10 RB 2491.208 -0.74099 0 200 -6.4907 3000 -3.2454 0 7.6002
PG 64-28PM 4887.232 -1.4535 0 200 -7.6899 3000 -3.845 0 3.1343
Master curve
 Material aaaaT A VTS Eref Tref alfa RMS
PG 64-10 2.301 -0.48565 0.71225 1.4327 9.6307 -3.5047 6919.493 20 1.7974 410.2384
PG 64-10 RB 2.301 0.36142 0.80643 0.95098 9.6307 -3.5047 4786.348 20 1.8337 403.838
PG 64-28PM 2.301 0.29364 0.7201 1.1053 9.6307 -3.5047 3982.03 20 1.7676 147.0319

Design Concept and Recommendation:

The Incremental-Recursive design procedure in CalME [1] was used to design the pavement
structure. The incremental recursive procedure works in the increments of time and uses the
output from one increment, recursively, as input to the next increment. The procedure predicts
the pavement in terms of layer moduli, crack propagation, permanent deformation and roughness
as a function of time. It does not carry an automatic design for required conditions, but helps to
check the performance of the design prepared by Caltrans present method [3].
The main concept of the pavement design is to reduce the horizontal tensile strain at the bottom
of the asphalt layer and the vertical compressive strain on the top of the subgrade layer.

Concept of long life pavement:

A full depth HMA design will consist three HMA layers namely;
1) Surface layer (Rut resistant)
2) Intermediate layer ( high stiffness)
3) Base layer ( Rich bottom; fatigue resistant)
The surface layer is designed such that it is rut resistant. So, modified asphalt is used in this layer
that is good for rutting and also for fatigue behavior. The thickness of the surface layer depends
on the traffic and the Nominal Maximum size of Aggregate (NMA). The intermediate layer r is
designed to take the maximum traffic loads. This layer is the thickest among the three layers. The
material used in this layer can be normal binder or modified binder. Finally, the Bottom layer is
binder-rich layer that is designed to take care of the high horizontal tensile strains that occur at
the bottom of the asphalt layer (standard layer). The thickness of the layer is normally 2-3 inches.
The minimum depth below which the rich bottom is to be constructed is 6 in. This is done to
avoid the possible damage to the layer due to the lack of shear resistance.The material used in the
intermediate layer is used in the rich bottom except 0.5% additional asphalt is added and the air
voids content is further reduced by 2% (The air void content in the rich bottom is 3-4%). The
higher asphalt content in this layer makes it more resistant to moisture damage.

Structure Design
Due to the variation in the existing HMA layer (0.7 ft to 1.0 ft), two pavement structures (for
thinnest and thickest existing AC sections) have been designed as shown in Figure 2 below.
Section 1 is designed for the removal of the 0.7 ft HMA (thin section) and Section 2 is designed
for the removal of 1.0 ft HMA and re-construction over the existing CTB layer. The pavement
segments with other existing HMA sections are removed down to the CTB layer and rebuilt
(maintaining same grade) by varying the middle PG 64-10 (25% RAP) layer.
Section 1 Section 2
OGFC 0.1 ft OGFC 0.1 ft

PG 64-28 PM 0.3 ft PG 64-28 PM 0.3 ft

PG 64-10 0.2 ft (25% RAP)

PG 64-10 Rich Bottom 0.2 ft PG 64-10 0.5 ft (25% RAP)

PG 64-10 Rich Bottom 0.2 ft

Old CTB 0.5 ft (Variable 4-6 in)

Old CTB 0.5 ft (Variable 4-6 in)

AS (variable) + Subgrade

AS (variable) + Subgrade

Figure 2. Structural section of pavement

Table 2 shows a summary of the new proposed pavement section built over the existing CTB
layer at the various uniform locations identified within the project limits with the measured and
estimated existing HMA thickness.

Table 2: New pavement section built over existing CTB layer

Direction- Existing PM New pavement section (ft)

Lane No. HMA PG 64-10
thickness (ft) From To PG 64-28 PM PG 64-10 RB
(25%RAP)
NB-L1 37.0 40.5 0.3 0.5 0.2
NB-L1 40.5 41.5 0.3 0.3 0.2
NB-L2 37.0 40.5 0.3 0.55 0.2
NB-L2 40.5 41.5 0.3 0.3 0.2
SB-L1 36.6 41.5 0.3 0.46 0.2
SB-L2 36.6 39.5 0.3 0.5 0.2
SB-L2 39.5 40.4 0.3 0.3 0.2
SB-L2 40.4 41.5 0.3 0.2 0.2
SB-L3 39.4 40.6 0.3 0.5 0.2
RB: Rich Bottom HMA. PM: Polymer Modified. RAP: Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement.

Figure 1 and Figure 2 show the accumulated rutting and cracking for the analysis period of 81
years, respectively. The accumulation of the permanent deformation (in the top layer) and the
fatigue cracking over time is calculated based on the models developed considering the
cumulative effect of traffic, climate, environment and material variables [1].
As shown in Figures 1 and 2, the fatigue life of the pavement was 46.1 years and rutting life
exceeded 81 years.

Rutting vs years
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
Rut depth, in

0.25
0.2 Rut, in
0.15 Rut limit
0.1
0.05
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Years

Figure 1: Accumulated rutting vs Analysis period (Years)

Fatigue vs years
0.3

0.25
Cracking, ft/ftsq

0.2

0.15
Cracking, ft/ftsq
0.1 Crack limit

0.05

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Years

Figure 2: Accumulated Fatigue cracking vs Analysis period (years)

 Summary and Conclusions:
1) The existing structural section analysis was performed to determine the current condition
of the pavement. Available history, coring, GPR data collection and analysis, FWD
testing and analysis were performed as a part of determining the current condition of the
pavement.
2) Traffic data (axle load spectra, truck volume, truck growth rate) were collected from the
nearest Weigh in Motion (WIM) station.
3) Climatic region for the project was based on the California climatic regions (these were
based on the temperature and precipitation ranges over the area).
4) A three-layer system comprised of rut resistant (binder rich bottom) layer, fatigue
resistant (polymer modified) layer, and a stiff layer (PG 64-10) were selected to obtain a
long life design.
5) Materials selected for use use in each layer were tested for the model parameters to
calibrate the fatigue and rutting models (CalME software)
6) Due to the presence of delaminated and stripped areas (in definitely), it was
recommended to completely remove the HMA layer and build the pavement section over
the existing CTB layer.
7) Due to the variability of the existing layer thickness and condition, both a thinner section
and a thicker pavement structures were proposed. The middle layer thickness was varied
as needed to match the existing profile grade.
8) A deterministic analysis (using CalME program) was performed over the thinner section
(worst case) and checked for the accumulation of the rutting and fatigue criteria over the
analysis period. Both the cracking and rutting performances were below the Caltrans
threshold limits indicating adequate and optimal designs.

References

(1) Ullidtz, P., Harvey J., Basheer I., Jones D., Wu R., Lea J., and Lu Q. (2010). “CalME: A
Mechanistic-Empirical Design Program for Flexible Pavement Rehabilitation”. Paper
accepted for publication in the Transportation Research Record number 2153 of the 2010
TRB, 10 pages.
(2) Lu Q. and Harvey J., “Characterization of Truck Traffic in California for Mechanistic
Empirical Design Transportation Research Record”, J. of the Transportation Research
Board, National Research Council, No. 1945, 2006, pp. 61-72.
(3) California Department of Transportation, “Highway Design Manual”, Chapter 600, July
1, 2008.
(4) Carl L. Monesmith, et.al., “The phase one I-710 Freeway Rehabilitation project: Initial
design (1999) to performance after Five-plus years of traffic (2009)”. Summary report
prepared by UCPRC for Caltrans.

View publication stats