South African Mechanistic Design Method

(SAMDM)

Hechter Theyse – PMC

Louw Kannemeyer - SANRAL
Wynand Steyn - CSIR
 Historical Overview – SAMDM

• The SAMDM used since 1980s in various forms

• Any method is better than no method
• National DoT insisted that consultants design using SAMDM
• Attempt to introduce more “Science” and reduce “Art”
• ELSYM 5
• SAMDM used for developing design catalogues in 1984 and 1995
• TRH 4
• Wide-scale design software implementation since 1995
• MEPADS, Rubicon, Cerano
• Further development of engineering models slowed down because of
a lack of funding since early 1990s

Slide 2
 Typical SA Pavement and SAMDM

SA Pavement Structure Current ME

Damage Model
35mm Wearing course Asphalt Fatigue – Freeme 1970s
Permanent Deformation FOS
150 mm Crushed stone base
Maree 1970s to 1980s
Effective Fatigue and Crushing Failure
150 mm Cemented subbase De Beer 1980s

150 mm Granular upper Vertical Strain Criteria

selected subgrade Dorman and Metcalf 1965
150 mm Granular lower Vertical Strain Criteria
selected subgrade Dorman and Metcalf 1965

Vertical Strain Criteria

In situ subgrade
Dorman and Metcalf 1965

Current SAMDM has number of limitations, i.e. no damage

models for plastic deformation in Asphalt layers, number of
Slide 3
models outdated, etc, etc
 SAMDM - Current status
• Summary
• Classical ME design method - single estimate of bearing capacity
• Critical layer approach – distress mechanisms disconnected
• Separated resilient response and damage models
• Material resilient response
• Recommended Mr and Poisson’s Ratio values
• Conflict between slow and dynamic test results
• Users are disillusioned with the method
• Counter-intuitive and inadmissible results
• Extreme sensitivity of the method to input data
• Inconsistent input
• Resilient response (FWD, MDD, Laboratory)
• Strength parameters
• Statements made that ME-design is not possible due to:
• Too many unexplained effects (chaos)
• Getting the right answers for the wrong reasons (i.e. SAMDM
correctly predicted expected life, but predicted failure layer as being
subgrade, yet it actually is base !)
• SAMDM require extensive revision !!!
Slide 4
 SAMDM Revision
Theory Reality

• Overall objective =
• To develop a design method that is:
• Accurate (theory must agree with reality)
• Impartial in terms of pavement type selection
• Unbound (Crushed stone, natural gravel)
• Stabilised (Cement, Foamed-bitumen, Emulsified-bitumen)
• HMA
• Concrete (not included in flexible pavement design R&D process)

• Pavement Design Task Group

• Submitted R&D framework in November 2005
• Characteristics of new pavement design method
• R&D topics
• Demand analysis (Traffic and environment)
• Material resilient response models
• Pavement resilient response models
• Damage models
• Probabilistic and recursive schemes
• Each R&D topic have a number of identified R&D needs
• Each R&D need translated into one or more detailed project briefs to
Slide 5 address the need – November 2006
 New South African Pavement Design Method (SAPDM)

• Two components
• Information system based on past performance
• Mechanistic-Empirical analysis system
• Mechanistic-Empirical analysis system
• Two components
• Engineering models
• Simulation schemes
• Based on separated response analysis
• Resilient response and damage models
• Static resilient pavement response analysis
• Damage modelling
• Stiffness reduction for bound layers
• Material resilient response and damage model calibration
• Field variables – Temp, MC, Dens, etc.

Slide 6
 SAPDM Integration of Design Methods

User Design application

Design Method
Young professional Design scenario:
• Routine and preliminary design
• Low risk
• Low design experience
• Use only known materials
• Conventional material classification

Seasoned Design scenario:

Performance • Important design
professional based ME-design
• Medium risk
information component
system • Seasoned professional designer
• Test input parameters for materials

Design scenario:
Design specialist • Very important design, high risk
• Special investigations
• Specialist designer
• Unusual materials
• Test input and performance of materials

Slide 7
 SAPDM - Engineering Models of M-E Component
Input layers

Geometry

Axle load Fixed

Computer
solution
Traffic histogram load
Damage models
data Contact stress Fixed
histogram contact stress
Thermal cracking
Resilient
response models Fatigue

HMA
Grading Plastic strain/
Mr = Constant permanent deformation
Binder
content Top-down cracking
HMA

Binder
properties Plastic strain/

Unbound
Mr = f (Temp) permanent deformation
Temperature
Other
Resilient
Structural
Other response
capacity
Mr = f (Dens, analysis Crushing
estimate
saturation)

Stabilized
Grading Stiffness reduction
Material data

Atterberg Plastic strain/

Mr = f (Bulk
limits permanent deformation
and shear
Unbound

Moisture stress)
Other
content
Plastic strain/

Subgrade
Density
permanent deformation
Mr = f (Strain)
Other Other

UCS Linear
visco-elastic
Stress and
Stabilized

strain at break
Time/previous
loading Other?

Other
Slide 8
 Summary of issues

• Demands
• Traffic - Traffic volume, axle load and contact stress information system
• Environment – Information system for country (temperature, rainfall
etc)

• Material resilient response models

• Static vs dynamic tests and analyses

• Pavement resilient response model

• Improved load characterisation and interface conditions
• Sub-layering – stress, density, saturation, temperature
• Effective stress in unbound granular materials

• Damage models
• Appropriate critical parameter
• Proper material strength characterisation
• No log-log damage models – improved computing capabilities
• Include effect of field variables

Slide 9
 SAPDM Revision - Fundamental Principles

• Validate and calibrate method thoroughly before

release:
• Reality checks
• Benchmark data sets
• LTPP data
• Ensure input and theory agree:
• Understand boundary conditions and fundamentals of tests
• Extract the correct input from the test
• Don’t fit performance data to a specific damage
model formulation – formulate the damage model
according to trends in the performance data
• Critical parameter selection
• Damage model “shape”
Slide 10
 SAPDM Revision - Fundamental Principles

• The accuracy of the design method is determined by

the accuracy of the engineering models included in
the method
• Simulation schemes
• Mirror the characteristics of real-life behavior and performance
• Present data in a handy format
• Do nothing to improve accuracy
• Supplement the design method with comprehensive
engineering practice guideline documents

Slide 11
 SAPDM Revision – Current Status

• South African Pavement Design Method Process

• Phase 1 – Develop Detailed Project Briefs – November 2006
• Phase 2 - Inception Phase – July 2007
• Investigate available solutions
• Finalize project methodology
• Finalize cost and resource allocation
• Inception Report Peer Review – November 2007
• Phase 3 – Project Delivery - Anticipated Start Date February 2008
• Immediate Deliverables (12 to 18 months);
• Short Term Deliverables (18 months to 3 years);
• Medium Term Deliverables (3 to 5 years), and
• Long Term Deliverables > 5 years.

• Pavement Research Advisory Committee website

• Coordination of pavement research in SA
• www.prac.co.za

Slide 12
Slide 13