Post on 16-Oct-2020
State Agency Initiative
Tommy E. NantungINDOT Office of Research and Development
Transportation Research Board88th Annual Meeting
Sunday, January 10, 2009
Traffic Load Spectra
INDOT Research and Development
Spectra
Materials, Design
INDOT Pavement Steering
, gFeatures, and
Climateg
Committee
INDOT Pavement
Specifications and Design Manual
INDOT Pavement Engineering Office,
Planning OfficeWIM and Traffic
D tData
Review Preparedness Traffic Data Weigh-In-Motion
D t A i iti Preparedness (Data, Knowledge,
and Equipment)
Traffic Data Processing Plan Data Acquisition
and Pre-Processing
Weigh-In-Motion D t P i d Identify errors and Truck Weight Road
G D t Data Processing and Analysis
yissues in traffic data Group Data
Verification
Database Database Development for
Load SpectraGIS Software for
Load Spectra TWRG Deployment
Data Equipment Knowledge
Level 1 Some sites Some sites
Level 2 Study Some regions
Level 3a Study Some regions
Level 3b Coverage counts Coverage counts
Review Preparedness Traffic Data Weigh-In-Motion
D t A i iti Preparedness (Data, Knowledge,
and Equipment)
Traffic Data Processing Plan Data Acquisition
and Pre-Processing
Weigh-In-Motion D t P i d Identify errors and Truck Weight Road
G D t Data Processing and Analysis
yissues in traffic data Group Data
Verification
Database Database Development for
Load SpectraGIS Software for
Load Spectra TWRG Deployment
Required input dataBasic inputs such asp
AADTT, % truck, and O i l dOperational speed
Traffic volume adjustment factor such asMonthly adjustment class distribution and hourly Monthly adjustment, class distribution, and hourly distribution
Other general traffic inputs such asAxle numbers for single, tandem, tridem, and quad axle groups Axle load distribution, andAxle load distribution, andAxle configuration
Review Preparedness Traffic Data Weigh-In-Motion
D t A i iti Preparedness (Data, Knowledge,
and Equipment)
Traffic Data Processing Plan Data Acquisition
and Pre-Processing
Weigh-In-Motion D t P i d Identify errors and Truck Weight Road
G D t Data Processing and Analysis
yissues in traffic data Group Data
Verification
Database Database Development for
Load SpectraGIS Software for
Load Spectra TWRG Deployment
I-74
N1 2 4 3
Review Preparedness Traffic Data Weigh-In-Motion
D t A i iti Preparedness (Data, Knowledge,
and Equipment)
Traffic Data Processing Plan Data Acquisition
and Pre-Processing
Weigh-In-Motion D t P i d Identify errors and Truck Weight Road
G D t Data Processing and Analysis
yissues in traffic data Group Data
Verification
Database Database Development for
Load SpectraGIS Software for
Load Spectra TWRG Deployment
Planning data: 126,005 AADTWIM actual data: 101,199 AADT
T k Cl Di t ib ti
WIM actual data: 101,199 AADT
Truck Class Distribution
35.00
40.00
45.00
50.00
Unclassified trucks
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
Truc
k V
olum
e (%
)
0.00
5.00
C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 C13 C0
Truck Class
Review Preparedness Traffic Data Weigh-In-Motion
D t A i iti Preparedness (Data, Knowledge,
and Equipment)
Traffic Data Processing Plan Data Acquisition
and Pre-Processing
Weigh-In-Motion D t P i d Identify errors and Truck Weight Road
G D t Data Processing and Analysis
yissues in traffic data Group Data
Verification
Database Database Development for
Load SpectraGIS Software for
Load Spectra TWRG Deployment
Indiana has 56 WIM sites, 7 more to comeProvide files for:Provide files for:
Monthly Adjustment FactorVehicle Class DistributionHourly DistributionAxle Load Distribution
GroupsA for AADTT = 1 to 3,000B for AADTT = 3,001 to 6,000C for AADTT = 6,001 to 20,000D f AADTT 20 000D for AADTT > 20,000
Review Preparedness Traffic Data Weigh-In-Motion
D t A i iti Preparedness (Data, Knowledge,
and Equipment)
Traffic Data Processing Plan Data Acquisition
and Pre-Processing
Weigh-In-Motion D t P i d Identify errors and Truck Weight Road
G D t Data Processing and Analysis
yissues in traffic data Group Data
Verification
Database Database Development for
Load SpectraGIS Software for
Load Spectra TWRG Deployment
Review Preparedness Traffic Data Weigh-In-Motion
D t A i iti Preparedness (Data, Knowledge,
and Equipment)
Traffic Data Processing Plan Data Acquisition
and Pre-Processing
Weigh-In-Motion D t P i d Identify errors and Truck Weight Road
G D t Data Processing and Analysis
yissues in traffic data Group Data
Verification
Database Database Development for
Load SpectraGIS Software for
Load Spectra TWRG Deployment
Generate locations of WIM and AVC in GIS mapsOne click to a GIS map to export traffic data to MEPDG
Review Preparedness S iti it A l i
Design Features, Materials, and Preparedness
(Data, Knowledge, and Equipment)
Sensitivity Analysis Materials, and Construction data
requirements
Identify errors, sensitive and critical, Experimental Design Mini LTPP Project ,
and importance of parameters
p gfor Material Inputs
jConstruction
Field Monitoring and Field Monitoring and Field and Lab
TestingData Collection and
Analysis Local Calibrations
FlexData
AC - MixEquipment Knowledge
Rigid Data Equipment Knowledge
Level 1Some sites,
(Research &
Level 1 x
Level 2
Level 1Study (Research &
M-T)
Level 2 Study (Research & Level 2
Level 3 Default N/A
M-T)
Level 3 Default
Soil Data Equipment Knowledge
Level 1 On-going study
Level 2 On-going study
Level 3 Default
Review Preparedness S iti it A l i
Design Features, Materials, and Preparedness
(Data, Knowledge, and Equipment)
Sensitivity Analysis Materials, and Construction data
requirements
Identify errors, sensitive and critical, Experimental Design Mini LTPP Project ,
and importance of parameters
p gfor Material Inputs
jConstruction
Field Monitoring and Field Monitoring and Field and Lab
TestingData Collection and
Analysis Local Calibrations
Percent Slabs Parameter Roughness Faulting Percent Slabs Cracked
Level 3Modulus of Rupture S NS VSModulus of Rupture S NS VSCompressive Strength S NS VS
Level 2Compressive Strength S NS VS20-year/28-day Ratio S NS VS
Level 1Modulus of Rupture S NS VSModulus of Elasticity S NS VS20 year/28 day Ratio S NS VS20-year/28-day Ratio S NS VS
Percent Slabs Parameter Roughness Faulting Percent Slabs Cracked
Permanent Curl/Warp Effective Temperature VS VS VSEffective Temperature Difference
VS VS VS
Joint Spacing VS VS VS
D l B Di MS MS NSDowel Bar Diameter MS MS NS
Pavement Thickness S MS VS
Poisson’s Ratio MS MS SPoisson s Ratio MS MS S
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion VS VS VS
Th l C d ti it S MS VSThermal Conductivity S MS VS
Parameter IRI Alligator Cracking
Permanent Deformation
AC Thermal Fracture
AC Thickness S VS S VSPG-Grade NS S S S
|E*| NS S S NSPoisson’s Ratio NS NS NS NSAir voids (L1) NS S NS NS
Effective Binder Content (L1) NS NS NS NSSurface Short Wave S NS S S
Average Tensile Strength NS NS NS S|D*| NS NS NS VS
Coefficient of Thermal Contraction NS NS NS NS
Thermal Conductivity NS NS NS NS
Heat Capacity NS NS S VS
Review Preparedness S iti it A l i
Design Features, Materials, and Preparedness
(Data, Knowledge, and Equipment)
Sensitivity Analysis Materials, and Construction data
requirements
Identify errors, sensitive and critical, Experimental Design Mini LTPP Project ,
and importance of parameters
p gfor Material Inputs
jConstruction
Field Monitoring and Field Monitoring and Field and Lab
TestingData Collection and
Analysis Local Calibrations
Group or Screen
FieldNumber Input name Typical Value Proposed Indiana value Status of
input Comments
Design Features 34 Slab thickness (inch) This field is not an input, it comes
from Layer #1 input Input in parameter #66 Option
Permanent Curl/Warp S iti d Do not change this 35
/ pEffective Temperature difference (degrees)
-10 -10 Sensitive and Critical
gvalue until further research
36 Joint Spacing (feet) 15-30 9" to 12" = 20 feet, 13" to 16" = 18 feet
Sensitive and Critical
Can be changed to optimize the curling stress
37 S l T None, Liquid, Silicone, and Sili f d I INDOT Manual 37 Sealant Type None, Liquid, Silicone, and Performed Silicone or preformed ImportantINDOT Manual
Chapter 52
38 Dowel Transverse Joint Check item Check this item Sensitive and Critical
39 Dowel Diameter (inches) 1" to 1.5"Thickness <9" = 1",
between 9" to 12" = 1.25", >12" = 1.5"
Sensitive and Critical
INDOT Standard Drawing E-503-CCPJ-01
40 Dowel Spacing (inches) 12" 12" ImportantINDOT Standard Drawing E-503-CCPJ-01
41 Edge support: Tied Shoulder Based on design Based on design Sensitive and
Critical
INDOT Standard Drawing E-503-CCPJ-07
50% to 70% for sawed
42 Edge Support: Long Term LTE (%)
50% to 70% for sawed longitudinal joint with tie bar,
30% to 50% for construction longitudinal with tie bar, 0% for
no tie bar
60% ImportantNot critical to Indiana
43 Edge support: Widened Sl b Check item
Check this item if the slab width is wider than 12 Sensitive and
C iti lSlab feet Critical
44 Edge Support: Slab width (feet) 12 to 14 feet Slab width Sensitive and
CriticalLane + widen edge
12234
55
6
7 8
Map of soil of Indiana (finishing January 2009)Level 1 soil inputp
FWD seasonal testingLog k1 = 6.660876 - 0.22136 x OMC - 0.04437 x MC -0.92743 x MCR -0.06133 x DD + 10.64862 x %comp + 0.328465 x SATU-0.04434 x % p%sand - 0.04349 x %SILT -0.01832 x %CLAY + 0.027832 x LL - 0.01665 x PI
k 3 952635 0 33897 OMC 0 076116 MC 2 45921 MCR k2 = 3.952635 - 0.33897 x OMC + 0.076116 x MC - 2.45921 x MCR -0.06462 x DD + 6.012966 x %comp + 1.559769 x SATU + 0.020286 x %sand + 0.002321 x %SILT + 0.011056 x %CLAY + 0.077436 x LL -0.05367 x PI
k3 = 2.634084 + 0.124471 x OMC - 0.09277 x MC + 0.366778 x MCR -0.01168 x DD - 1.32637 x %comp + 1.297904 x SATU -0.01226 x %sand
0 00512 x %SILT 0 00492 x %CLAY 0 05083 x LL + 0 018864 x PI- 0.00512 x %SILT - 0.00492 x %CLAY -0.05083 x LL + 0.018864 x PI
Review Preparedness S iti it A l i
Design Features, Materials, and Preparedness
(Data, Knowledge, and Equipment)
Sensitivity Analysis Materials, and Construction data
requirements
Identify errors, sensitive and critical, Experimental Design Mini LTPP Project ,
and importance of parameters
p gfor Material Inputs
jConstruction
Field Monitoring and Field Monitoring and Field and Lab
TestingData Collection and
Analysis Local Calibrations
Group or Screen
FieldNumber Input name Typical Value Proposed Indiana value Status of
input Comments
Design Features 34 Slab thickness (inch) This field is not an input, it comes
from Layer #1 input Input in parameter #66 Option
Permanent Curl/Warp S iti Do not change this 35
/ pEffective Temperature difference (degrees)
-10 -10 Sensitive and Critical
gvalue until further research
36 Joint Spacing (feet) 15-30 9" to 12" = 20 feet, 13" to 16" = 18 feet
Sensitive and Critical
Can be changed to optimize the curling stress
37 S l T None, Liquid, Silicone, and Sili f d I t tINDOT Manual 37 Sealant Type None, Liquid, Silicone, and Performed Silicone or preformed ImportantINDOT Manual
Chapter 52
38 Dowel Transverse Joint Check item Check this item Sensitive and Critical
39 Dowel Diameter (inches) 1" to 1.5"Thickness <9" = 1",
between 9" to 12" = 1.25", >12" = 1.5"
Sensitive and Critical
INDOT Standard Drawing E-503-CCPJ-01J
40 Dowel Spacing (inches) 12" 12" ImportantINDOT Standard Drawing E-503-CCPJ-01
41 Edge support: Tied Shoulder Based on design Based on design Sensitive
and Critical
INDOT Standard Drawing E-503-CCPJ-07
50% 70% f d
42 Edge Support: Long Term LTE (%)
50% to 70% for sawed longitudinal joint with tie bar,
30% to 50% for construction longitudinal with tie bar, 0% for
no tie bar
60% ImportantNot critical to Indiana
43 Edge support: Widened Check itemCheck this item if the slab
width is wider than 12 Sensitive 43 Slab Check item width is wider than 12 feet and Critical
44 Edge Support: Slab width (feet) 12 to 14 feet Slab width Sensitive
and CriticalLane + widen edge
Final preparation for input files (October 2008)Changes in INDOT Pavement Design ManualChanges in INDOT Pavement Design ManualChanges in INDOT Standard SpecificationsTraining October 12 13 and 14 2008Training October 12, 13, and 14, 2008
INDOT pavement designers, FHWA Indiana OfficeIndustry representativesIndustry representatives
Start January 1, 2009Another training March 16 and 17 2009Another training, March 16 and 17, 2009
ConsultantsHMA and Concrete industry participantsy p p
I-465 in IndianapolisJPCP – MEPDG 13 inches
JPCP – AASHTO 1993 15 inches
SR-13 in Hancock Co.HMA – MEPDG 11 inches
HMA AASHTO 1993 12 5 inchesHMA– AASHTO 1993 12.5 inches
Review Preparedness S iti it A l i
Design Features, Materials, and Preparedness
(Data, Knowledge, and Equipment)
Sensitivity Analysis Materials, and Construction data
requirements
Identify errors, sensitive and critical, Experimental Design Mini LTPP Project ,
and importance of parameters
p gfor Material Inputs
jConstruction
Field Monitoring and Local Field Monitoring and Field and Lab
TestingData Collection and
AnalysisLocal
Calibrations
HMA local calibrationINDOT implemented Superpave in 1996INDOT implemented Superpave in 1996Tune-up and refinement
1996 to 2000Changes in standard specification
2000 to 2005T d f diffTremendous performance difference
RuttingFatigue crackingFatigue crackingThermal cracking
What to calibrate to?No full depth LTPP section in IndianaPavements prior to 2005 do not represent current practices
Concrete Pavement local calibrationAdopted drainable base in 1992Adopted drainable base in 1992Changes in standard specification since thenNo pavement joint faulting in IndianaHave to calibrate only against mid-slab cracking
Do your homeworkTraffic and soil inputs are the most difficult to pmake them correct (error prone)
Take a lot of efforts and expertisek l fTake a lot of time
Find errors in input parameters first and do local calibration (smaller errors)calibration (smaller errors)Simplify the inputs
Provide input files, catalog of local inputsp , g pShow to the potential users the locations of each input
Buy-in from your executive staffDon’t throw away your AASHTO 1993 yet