Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Development of a flexible pavement design catalogue based on mechanistic–empirical pavement design approach: Egyptian case study

  • Technical paper
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In many regions around the world, the empirical pavement design methods are the only pavement design choices available to pavement engineers. These empirical methods have several limitations. The Mechanistic–Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) is the latest pavement design approach and is considered an advanced tool to provide a reliable and economic design. Due to its sophisticated and complex nature in terms of the need for a large amount of data input in addition to its constrained availability, the MEPDG is of limited usage in those regions. The main objective of this study is to initiate a procedure to create a flexible pavement design catalogue based on the MEPDG approach and in accordance with a region’s traffic loading, climate, and local material characteristics. This procedure consists of three different tasks. The first task is concerned with establishing the MEPDG data inputs from actual local roadway pavement materials and available regional traffic and environmental information, thence arranging these data inputs in the form of different design combinations. The second task is running the AASHTOware simulations for these different design combinations. The final task is the development of the mechanistic–empirical pavement design catalogue. For each design combination, the design case for which the predicted distresses are within the acceptable performance criteria is selected as a design solution. Accordingly, this research provides a procedure to develop a flexible pavement design catalogue using the MEPDG approach based on the regional conditions. The described approach was applied to the Egyptian pavements, for which a design catalogue is presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. ARA Inc (2004) ERES consultants division. Guide for Mechanistic–empirical design of new and rehabilitated pavement structures. NCHRP Project 1–37A transportation research board of the national academies. Washington, DC

  2. Darter M (2006) NCHRP project 1-40D (02), technical assistance to NCHRP and NCHRP project 1–40A: Versions 0.9 and 1.0 of the ME pavement design software. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, http://www4.trb.org/trb/crp.nsf/AllProjects/NCHRP

  3. Abdullah A (2012) Development of a flexible pavement design procedure based on the mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide: a case study, Master thesis, the University of Texas at Arlington. http://hdl.handle.net/10106/11530.

  4. AASHTOWare pavement ME design. https://me-design.com/MEDesign/?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

  5. Xiao et al (2011) Mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide (MEPDG): a bird’s-eye view. J Mod Transp 19:114–133

  6. Boone J (2013) Comparison of Ontario pavement designs using the AASHTO 1993 empirical method and the mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide method. Master Thesis, University of Waterloo, Ontario

  7. El-Badawy S, Bayomy F, Santi M, Clawson C (2011) Comparison of Idaho pavement design procedure with AASHTO 1993 and MEPDG Methods. proceedings of the first integrated transportation and development institute Congress. In: Al-Qadi I, Murrell S (eds) Published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 13–16 March, pp 586–595

  8. Bayomy F, El-Badawy S, Awed A (2012) Implementation of the MEPDG for Flexible Pavements in Idaho, (Report No. FHWA-ID-12–193). ITD Project RP 193, NIATT Project KLK557. National Institute for Advanced Transportation Technology, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho: US

  9. El-Badawy S, Bayomy F, Santi M (2012) Regional calibration of the MEPDG rutting models – Idaho Case Study, 10th international congress on advances in civil engineering. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

    Google Scholar 

  10. Darter M, Titus-Glover L, Von Quintus H (2009) Implementation of the mechanistic-empirical pavement design Guide in Utah: validation, calibration, and development of the UDOT MEPDG User’s Guide (Report No. UT-09.11). Utah: US

  11. Von Quintus H, Moulthrop J (2007) Mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide flexible pavement performance prediction models for Montana: Volume I Executive Research Summary (FHWA/MT-07-008/8158-1). Montana: US

  12. Li J, Pierce L, Uhlmeryer J (2009) Calibration of flexible pavement in mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide for Washington State. Transportation research board, journal of the transportation research board, No. 2095, pp 73–83. Washington, DC: US

  13. Souliman M (2009) Calibration of the AASHTO MEPDG for flexible pavements for Arizona Conditions. Master’s Thesis, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ: U.S.

  14. Hall K, Xiao D, Wang K (2011) Calibration of the MEPDG for Flexible Pavement Design in Arkansas. Paper No. 11-3562, TRB 90th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers CD-ROM. Washington, DC: US

  15. El-Badawy S, Bayomy F, Fugit S (2012) Traffic characteristics and their impact on pavement performance for the implementation of the mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide in Idaho. Int J Pavement Res Technol IJPRT 5(6):386–394

    Google Scholar 

  16. Haj Chhade R, Mrad R, Houssami L, Chehab G (2018) Formulation of traffic inputs required for the implementation of the ME PDG in data-scarce regions: Lebanon case study. J Mater Civ Eng 30(9):04018198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kim S, Ceylan H, Heitzman M (2005) Sensitivity study of design input parameters for two flexible pavement systems using the mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide. In: Proceedings of the Mid- Continent Transportation Research Symposium, Ames, Iowa

  18. Mohammad LN, Kim M, Raghavendra A, Obulareddy S (2014) Characterization of Louisiana asphalt mixtures using simple performance tests and MEPDG. Louisiana Transportation Research Center. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Characterization-of-Louisiana-Asphalt-Mixtures-Mohammad-Saadeh/4d3ace4da7df7655fb23bc90fcfdf5928daf774f

  19. El-Badawy S (2012) Recommended changes to designs not meeting criteria using the M-E pavement design guide. Int J Pavement Res Technol 5(1):54–61

    Google Scholar 

  20. Alqaili AH, Alsoliman HA (2017) Preparing data for calibration of mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide in central Saudi Arabia. Int J Civ Environ Struct Constr Archit Eng 11(2):248–255

    Google Scholar 

  21. Sadek HA, Masad EA, Sirin O, Al-Khalid H, Sadeq MA, Little D (2014) Implementation of mechanistic-empirical pavement analysis in the State of Qatar. Int J Pavement Eng 15(6):495–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/10298436.2013.837164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Chehab GR, Chehade RH, Houssami L, Mrad R (2017) Implementation initiatives of the mechanistic-empirical pavement design guide in countries with insufficient design input data: The case of Lebanon. In Proceedings of the international congress and exhibition sustainable civil infrastructures: innovative infrastructure geotechnology, 147–167. Springer, Cham, Switzerland

  23. Bayomy F, Khedr SA (2010) Dynamic characterization of Egyptian Hot mix asphalt concrete for highway pavement design and evaluation, NIATT Project No KLK478 2014. University of Idaho, Moscow

    Google Scholar 

  24. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials AASHTO guide for design of pavement structures, 1993

  25. El-shaib MS et al (2017) Comparison of AASHTO 1993 and MEPDG considering the Egyptian climatic conditions. Innov Infrastruct Solut. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-017-0067-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. El-Badawy S, Bayomy F, Santi M, Clawson C (2011) Comparison of Idaho pavement design procedure with AASHTO 1993 and MEPDG method. In: Al-Qadi I, Murrell S (eds) Proceedings of the first integrated transportation and development institute congress, Published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 13–16 March, pp 586–595

  27. Aguib A, Khedr S (2016) The mechanistic-empirical pavement design: an egyptian perspective. functional pavement design – Erkens et al. (Eds)© 2016 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-02924-8 - CAT# K27629

  28. Egyptian Code for Rural and Urban Roads Construction EC (2008)

  29. Maupin GW, David Jr, Mokarem W (2006) Investigation of proposed AASHTO rut test procedure using the asphalt pavement analyzer. final, Virginia: Virginia Transportation Research Council. http://www.virginiadot.org/vtrc/main/online_reports/pdf/07-r11.pdf

  30. Khedr SA, Saudy MM, Khafagy M (2014) Development of asphalt binder performance grades for Egypt. The Second Australasia and South East Asia structural engineering and construction conference (ASEA-SEC-2), Sustainable solutions in structural engineering and construction, pp393–398, Bangkok, Thailand

  31. Wagdy E (2019) Performance characteristics and economic study of bituminous concrete using different industrial wastes as filler. Master thesis, Mansoura University, Mansoura

  32. Saudy MM, Khedr SA (2016) Evaluation of normal and modified egyptian asphalt according to conventional and modern grading systems. The First European and mediterranean structural engineering and construction conference (EURO-MED-SEC-1), Istanbul, Turkey

Download references

Acknowledgements

The publication was supported by the American University in Cairo (AUC) faculty support grants.

Funding

The research leading to these results received funding from the American University in Cairo (AUC) faculty support grants under Grant Agreement No. (SSE-CENG-M.S-FY20-FY21-RG(1-20)-2019-Sep-28-09-16-18).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Construction Engineering Department, School of Science and Engineering, American University in Cairo (AUC), AUC Avenue, P.O. Box 74, New Cairo, 11835, Egypt

    Maram Saudy & Safwan Khedr

  2. Department of Construction Management and Interior Design, Ball State University, Muncie, IN, USA

    Tamer Breakah

  3. Faculty of Engineering, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

    Sherif El-Badawy

Authors
  1. Maram Saudy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tamer Breakah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sherif El-Badawy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Safwan Khedr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behave of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saudy, M., Breakah, T., El-Badawy, S. et al. Development of a flexible pavement design catalogue based on mechanistic–empirical pavement design approach: Egyptian case study. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 6, 206 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00573-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00573-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation