Paper ICMPA216

8th International Conference on Managing Pavement Assets

EFFECT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ON FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT

PERFORMANCE MODELING

Gupta Ankit1*, Praveen Kumar1 and Rajat Rastogi1

1 Civil Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, India

* Corresponding Author´s Email: ankitdce@iitr.ernet.in

ABSTRACT
A need has been felt by the various implementing organizations to develop an intelligent
pavement performance model that can prioritize pavement maintenance and rehabilitation works,
as this involves cost economics. Such models can forecast the pavement remaining service life
and pavement rehabilitation needs. The flexible pavement deterioration models involve the
complex interaction between vehicles and the environment, and the structure and surface of the
pavement. The road deterioration models predict the deterioration of the pavement over time and
under varying environmental conditions, which, generally, is manifested in various kinds of
distresses. Each mode of distress develops and progresses at different rates in differing
environment scenarios. Performance models relating the pavement material properties to various
environmental factors are analyzed and developed by various researchers. A review of the
literature related to the pavement performance prediction models indicates 'remaining age of the
pavement' in terms of ESAL is the most significant predictor of serviceability. The modulus of
elasticity and resilient modulus of the pavement materials, expressed in terms of various
environmental factors like moisture content and temperature play only a secondary role in
forecasting performance of pavements. But most of these models are found applicable to a
particular set of traffic and environment conditions, thus highlighting the need of model(s) that
can work in varied conditions satisfactorily. The paper presents a detailed review of the effects of
various environmental factors on pavement performance. Limitations and gaps are identified in
the present knowledge on such models.

KEY WORDS: Environmental factors, pavement performance, resilient modulus, moisture,

temperature.

PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE
Performance is a broad, general term describing how pavement condition changes or how
pavement structures serve their intended functions with accumulating use (1). AASHTO (2)
defines the pavement performance as the ability of a pavement to satisfactorily serve traffic over
time. It further defines the serviceability of a pavement as the ability to serve the traffic for
which it was designed. Integration of both definitions will yield a new understanding of the
performance, which can be interpreted as the integration of the serviceability over time (3). The
main task for a pavement engineer is not only to design and construct a pavement but also to
monitor the performance of the pavement in service so as to schedule the maintenance and
rehabilitation works. The factors that are found affecting the performance of the pavements are
presented in Figure 1.
Kumar, Rastogi and Gupta Ankit

FIGURE 1: Factors influencing pavement performance

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATED FACTORS

Environmental conditions have been found to exert significant impact on the performance of
flexible pavements. External factors such as precipitation, temperature, humidity, freeze-thaw
cycles, and depth of water table are the main environmental factors that have exerted major
influences on the pavement performance. The internal factors, such as the susceptibility of the
pavement materials to moisture and freeze-thaw damage, infiltration potential of the pavement,
control the extent to which the pavement will react to the applied external environmental
conditions.
Environmental conditions are the upper boundary in a soil column model and the water would be
an effective lower boundary. There are six main climatic aspects in a coupled soil-climate model:
precipitation, wind speed, air temperature, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure and solar
radiation; the capillary rise also affects the resultant moisture content in the soil (Figure 2). These
parameters are interconnected among them and are used to predict the behavior of boundary
phenomena like infiltration and evaporation.

FIGURE 2: Climatic parameters on soil surface

All the environmental factors are associated with the seasonal variation. Fundamental aspects
which must be considered in the design and maintenance of asphalt pavements include the
 Paper ICMPA216
8th International Conference on Managing Pavement Assets

seasonal variations of the resilient modulus of the asphalt concrete layer and the corresponding
variations in the resilient modulus of the subgrade. In order to incorporate the seasonal variation
of moisture and temperature into the pavement design process, the seasonal changes in the
moduli of various pavement layers must be determined. In other words, there is a need to
quantify the effect of moisture variations on the moduli of unbound materials and the effect of
temperature variations on the modulus of the asphalt concrete layer. This may be accomplished
by studying the factors that affect the modulus for both layers and predicting the modulus from
these factors.

MODELS BASED ON ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS

Such models include the effect of various environmental factors like temperature of soil and
surroundings, freeze and thaw cycles, humidity and precipitation, and movement of ground
water, capillary water or surface water on the performance of the pavements. These factors affect
the main engineering properties of the materials used in the construction of the pavements and
cause deterioration in those properties with time thus affecting the performance of the
pavements. There are several studies in the literature about the environmental influences on the
various properties of the pavement. In the AASHTO method many modifications has been done
after considering the environmental factors. In the case of flexible pavements, three major
environmental effects are of particular interest:
• Temperature variations for the asphalt concrete. The dynamic modulus of asphalt
concrete mixtures is very sensitive to temperature. Temperature distributions in asphalt
concrete layers are predicted and then used to define the stiffness of the mixture
throughout the sublayers. Temperature distributions are also used as inputs for the
thermal cracking prediction model.
• Moisture variation for subgrade and unbound materials. The resilient modulus input of
unbound materials is defined as being at optimum density and moisture content. A
correction factor is defined to adjust the resilient modulus based on predicted moisture
content.
• Freezing and thawing for subgrade and unbound materials. The resilient modulus of
unbound materials, located within the freezing zone, increases during freezing periods
and decrease during thawing periods.

Resilient Modulus Models

Resilient modulus, MR, of soils was introduced as an important material parameter in the 1986
AASHTO Guide for design of pavement structures (4). In the new MEPDG Design Guide (5),
the resilient modulus also plays a major role in representing the properties of the materials in
various pavement layers. Due to complexity of conducting resilient modulus testing, there have
been numerous efforts to develop predictive equations by incorporating state variables such as
confining stress, bulk stress, deviatoric stress, and soil physical properties.
The importance of the water content in affecting the resilient modulus of soils has been well
documented by the past researches. For example, Pezo et al. (6), Mohammad et al (7), Wolfe and
Butalia (8) have observed the significant influences exerted by the water content on the measured
resilient modulus of the cohesive soils. The moisture content of the subgrade soils underneath the
pavement is usually varied over time. According to Uzan (9), clayey soils underneath the
pavement exhibit an increase in moisture content to about 20 to 30 percent higher than the plastic
Kumar, Rastogi and Gupta Ankit

limit of the soil. This occurs during the first three to five years of pavement service. Similarly,
Elfino and Davidson (10), Thadkamalla and George (11), and Uzan (9) indicated that the
moisture content of the subgrade soils would vary with season until reaching equilibrium
moisture content (EMC). In view of the sensitivity of the resilient modulus of cohesive soils to
the water content and stress state and the likelihood of the soils’ moisture variation underneath
the pavement, it is important to develop a simple and accurate prediction equation for predicting
the variation of resilient modulus due to changes in stress and moisture content of cohesive soils.

Seed et al. (12) proposed a relationship where resilient modulus is a function of bulk stress.

M R = K1 (θ / pa ) K 2 (1)

Moossazadeh and Witczak (13) proposed a relationship known as the deviatoric stress model for
cohesive soils.

M R = K1 (σ d / pa ) K 2 (2)

For many slightly cohesive fine grained soils, the resilient moduli obtained from the repeated
load triaxial test can be modeled as a bilinear function of the applied deviator stress. Confining
pressure is considered constant in this model according to Thompson and Robnett (14). The
disadvantage of the model is that the effect of confining pressure was not considered.

M R = K1 + K 2 ( K 3 − σ d ) σ d ≤ K3 (3)

M R = K 4 − K 5 (σ d − K 3 ) σ d ≥ K3 (4)

Where K1, K2, K3, K4 and K5 are material constants obtained from laboratory repeated tests.
Carmichael and Stuart (15) related the resilient modulus (in ksi) to the soil class, bulk stress and
water content of granular soils as follow:
Log (M r ) = 0.523 − 0.0225w + 0.544 log θ + 0.173SM + 0.197GR (5)

Where, SM is a “silt factor” which is equal to one for soils classified as SM and zero for all
others; and GR is “gravel factor” which is equal to one for soils classified as GM, GW, GC or
GP and zero for all others.

Carmichael and Stuart (15) developed the following formula for predicting the resilient modulus
of both cohesive soils:
M R (ksi) = 37.431− 0.4566( PI ) − 0.6179(%W ) − 0.1424( S200 ) + 0.1791(σ 3 ) − 0.3248(σ d ) + 36.422(CH ) + 17.097( MH ) (6)

Where, CH = 1 for CH soil and = 0 for other soils and MH = 1 for MH soil and = 0 for other
soils.
 Paper ICMPA216
8th International Conference on Managing Pavement Assets

Uzan (9) proposed a new model that considers the effect of shear stress on the resilient modulus.
The Uzan Model is expressed as follows.

M R = K1 (θ ) K 2 (σ d ) K 3 (7)

Where, K1, K2, K3 are regression analysis constants evaluated by multiple regression analysis of
the experimental data. Uzan Model considers both the effect of bulk stress (θ) and deviator stress
(σd), which is directly related to the maximum shear stress τmax = σd/2. Therefore Uzan model
was able to resolve or remedy one of the deficiencies in the bulk stress model by considering the
effect of shear stress.
Witczak and Uzan (16) modified the model by including the octahedral shear stress in the model
instead of the deviator stress. The Witczak and Uzan new model is as follows.
MR
pa = K1 ( pθa ) K 2 ( τpocta ) K 3 (8)

Where, τ oct = 3
2
(σ 1 − σ 3 ) (9)

The stress and resilient modulus were normalized with respect to atmospheric pressure that helps
in non-dimensionalizing the constants. The resilient properties of the soil depend on confining
and normal stresses and deviator or shear stress states. The octahedral normal and shear stress
provided a better representation for the stress states of a material in which normal and shear
stresses change during loading.
Jin et al. (17) evaluated the seasonal variation of the resilient modulus of granular soils for
flexible pavement design. Field temperature and moisture content underneath the pavement were
monitored using soil moisture-temperature cells over a period of one year. Regression equation
was developed to determine resilient moduli under the site specific environment of Rhode Island
and is given by equation,

Log Mr = 0.8956 + 0.278 (log θ) – 0.0202 (w/c) – 0.0091 (T) + 0.0038 (γd) R2=0.82 (10)

A theoretical model was also developed to predict the change in resilient moduli due to the
change of temperature and moisture conditions. It is given by the equation,

∆Mr = K1 K2 θ K2-1 (∆θT + ∆θS) (11)

Where, T and S denote the temperature and suction.

The generalized model adopted by MEPDG (5) is given below

k2 k3
 θ  τ 
M R = k1 pa    oct + 1 (12)
 pa   p a 

The coefficients k1, k2, and k3 in the previous equations are regression constants.
Most of the Highway Agencies do not routinely measure resilient modulus in the laboratory;
however, the resilient modulus used for design was estimated either from experience or from
Kumar, Rastogi and Gupta Ankit

other material properties (18). The current MEPDG (5) adopts the following model to predict the
change of modulus due to a change in degree of saturation of the soils:

MR b−a
log =a+ (13)
 −b
+ k m (S − S opt )
M Ropt 
1 + EXP ln
 a 

Where, MR/MRopt = resilient modulus ratio; MRopt = resilient modulus at a reference condition; a
= minimum of log(MR/MRopt); b = maximum of log (MR/MRopt); km = regression parameter; S =
degree of saturation and Sopt = degree of saturation at a reference condition.
The MEPDG (5) equation is very general and relies on empirical regression constants. More
importantly, the M-E equation does not combine the effects of state of stress and water content.
Brahmajaree et al. (19) investigated the effects of climatic factors on flexible pavement behavior
by evaluating seasonal variations of pavement layer properties, especially asphalt concrete elastic
modulus and subgrade resilient modulus, which vary throughout a year depending on
temperature and moisture conditions. Nonlinear regression is used to characterize the results
showing that the relationship between time and material properties could be represented by a
sinusoidal pattern. The seasonal variation of elastic modulus and subgrade resilient modulus
(MR) will vary similarly as shown by equation:

E AC or MR = A + Bsin(2πfT + C )
(14)

Where A = average value; B = amplitude; T = time of observation; f = frequency (number of

increment per cycle) and C = phase angle.
The models developed by the authors for elastic modulus and subgrade resilient modulus are:

π 
E AC = 2480 − 134.13 *  * Month + (− 11.16 )
6  R2 = 0.61 (15)
π 
MR = 148.51 − 10.24 *  * Month + 6.96 
6  R2 = 0.763 (16)
Temperature Prediction Models

George and Hussain (20) used a simplified approach, in which the effective monthly temperature
of the asphalt layer was estimated using the following empirical equation:

 76.2   84.7 
Tasp = Tair 1 +  −  (hasp + 304.8)  + 3.3
 ( h asp + 304. 8)    (17)

The approach was of significance as it is generally found difficult to find the temperature of the
asphalt layer once laid and compacted.

AASHTO (4) defined the temperature dependence of the asphalt concrete by the following
equation
 Paper ICMPA216
8th International Conference on Managing Pavement Assets

Log(Eac) = 6.451235 – 0.000164671 T 1.92544 (18)

Diefenderfer et al. (21) developed models for predicting the daily maximum and minimum
pavement temperatures. These are given as follows:

Tp max = 2.78752 + 0.6861 Ta max + 5.6736*10 -4 Rs – 27.8739 Pd (19)

Tp min = -1.2097 + 0.6754 Ta min + 3.7642*10 -4 Rs + 7.2043 Pd (20)

It is anticipated that the models presented within this study will be of benefit to those who need
to determine the pavement temperature profile in order to calculate in situ pavement engineering
characteristics.

Freeze and Thaw Effects on Soil Resilient Modulus

Freezing and thawing has significant effects on the soil resilient modulus. The penetration of
freezing temperatures into moist pavement subgrade soils can cause more severe effects than the
effects of any of the water content changes likely to occur as a result of seasonal variations in
precipitation. Freezing of soil moisture can transform a soft subgrade into a rigid material, at the
stress levels existing in pavements. Thawing of the same material can produce a softening effect
such that for some time after thawing, the material has a resilient modulus that is only a fraction
of its prefreezing value (22).
The variation in resilient modulus of the clay before and after one cycle of freezing and thawing
was recorded by Bergen and Monismith (23). Resilient modulus values of the clay after thawing
were reduced to values ranging from 52 to 60 percent of the prefreezing values. The freezing and
thawing on a different CH soil (from Tennessee) exhibited resilient modulus decreases of up to
49 percent of the unfrozen value (14).
Chamberlain et al. (24) investigated freeze-thaw effects on resilient modulus of a low plasticity
natural clay subgrade obtained by core sampling. They concluded that the decreases in resilient
modulus accompanying freezing and thawing were caused by the increases in water content and
decreases in unit weight that occur when soils are frozen with free access to water (open-system
freezing). The recovery of the resilient modulus following the thaw induced decreases was
attributed to decreasing water content (drying) and increasing dry density.

Enhanced Integrated Climatic Model

NCHRP (5) reported a mechanistic model of one dimensional heat and moisture flow that
simulates changes in the behavior and characteristics of pavement and subgrade materials
induced by environmental factors. It is named as Enhanced Integrated Climate Model (EICM).
Daily and seasonal variations of temperature and moisture within the pavement structure are
induced using weather history at the project site. This model consists of three major sub-models:

The Climatic-Materials-Structural Model (CMS Model) originally developed at the
University of Illinois (25): The CMS model is a one-dimensional, forward finite
difference heat transfer model to determine frost penetration and temperature distribution
in the pavement system. The model considers radiation, convection, conduction, and the
effect of latent heat. The input to the model includes the following: (i). Heat capacity of
the pavement materials; (ii). Thermal conductivity of the pavement materials; (iii).
Kumar, Rastogi and Gupta Ankit

Pavement surface absorptivity and emissivity; (iv). Air temperature; (v); Wind speed; and
(vi). Incoming solar radiation.
The one-dimensional finite difference calculation performed by the CMS model uses two
boundary conditions: the upper boundary at the pavement surface and the lower boundary
at a constant temperature node beneath the ground.

The CRREL Frost Heave and Thaw Settlement Model (CRREL Model) originally
developed at the United States Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory
(CRREL) (26): The CRREL model is a one-dimensional coupled heat and moisture flow
program for the subgrade soil at temperatures that could be above, below or at the
freezing temperature of water. In addition, the model predicts the depth of frost. The
CRREL model uses the temperature profiles through the asphalt layers as established by
the CMS model to compute changes in the soil temperature profile, and thus frost
penetration and thaw settlement.

The Infiltration and Drainage Model (ID Model) originally developed at Texas A&M
University (27): The ID model in the EICM uses a numerical technique to compute the
degree of drainage (drained area / total area) versus time of an initially saturated granular
base course with lateral drainage overlaid on a permeable or impermeable subgrade. This
analysis assumes that the base course is a free draining material. Pavement Evaluation
Module of the ID model evaluates the relative adequacy of the base course design in
terms of the amount of time that is required to reach a critical degree of saturation.
Eventually, the more rapidly the base course can drain the more effective it will be as a
load carrying member of the pavement structure under wet conditions. Moreover, the
infiltration module of the ID model affords the probabilistic analyses of rainfall amount
patterns derived from the precipitation model or from actual rainfall amount. The output
of the ID model includes the following: a) Degree of saturation of the base course, b) The
degree of drainage over consecutive dry days, and c) The probability if a dry/wet base
course exists.

The original version of the EICM, referred to simply as the Integrated Climatic Model, was
developed for the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) at Texas A&M University, Texas
Transportation Institute in 1989. The current EICM computes and predicts the following
information for the entire pavement/subgrade profile: temperature, resilient modulus adjustment
factors, pore water pressure, water content, frost and thaw depths, frost heave, and drainage
performance. The EICM uses a three-step process to calculate the water contents in the base and
subgrade layers. First, the equilibrium water contents were determined by assuming a hydrostatic
suction profile above the water table. Second, the shape of the moisture characteristic curves was
established from a series of regression equations. Third, the gravimetric water contents were
computed from the moisture characteristic curves for the suction estimated in first step (27 and
28).
Birgisson et al. (28) provided detailed comparisons between field measurements and predictions
obtained from ICM, in terms of seasonal variations in temperature, moisture content, and layer
moduli, at two representative flexible pavement test sections at the Minnesota Research Project
(Mn/ROAD) site. The trend of the predicted moisture content was shown to correspond well to
the measured, except during spring thaw when the ICM does not account for the critical increase
in volumetric moisture content.
 Paper ICMPA216
8th International Conference on Managing Pavement Assets

Richter and Witczak (29) used two versions of the ICM in evaluating the moisture prediction
capabilities of the Integrated Climatic Model (ICM), Versions 2.1 and 2.6, using data collected
as a part of the Long Term Pavement Performance Program (LTPP) Seasonal Monitoring
Program (SMP). It was found that the agreement between monitored moisture contents and those
predicted using ICM Version 2.1 was poor. On the other hand, an overall agreement was
observed between the monitored moisture contents and those predicted with ICM Version 2.6.
Heydinger (30) analyzed data from SMP testing at a test site in Ohio for the seasonal variations
of moisture and temperature. The analyses were performed using daily averages for air and soil
temperatures and monthly measurements of soil volumetric water content. It was found that
subgrade resilient modulus varies seasonally due to changes in moisture content. Subgrade
resilient modulus decreases with increase in moisture content.

DISCUSSION
Environmental models consist of relation between the various pavement structure properties with
the environmental variables. Damage in the pavement is due to number of ESALs and change in
the temperature and moisture. A major finding among the models discussed above is that damage
is the important parameter resulting due to change in environmental conditions and this depends
upon the subgrade modulus and ESALs. Another significant point to be noted is that
environmental factors follow the periodical waveform pattern. Various temperature prediction
models are also discussed above for which the maximum and average temperature conditions
along with the depth of the layer below the surface are important. For computation of structural
number, structural layer coefficient and drainage coefficient are important which ultimately
depends on the environmental factors. Also all the models are site specific as the environmental
conditions are different at each and every place so calibration factors play an important role in
deciding the accuracy of the model. Much of the work has been done on this area but still the
effect of nearby ground conditions of pavement, its moisture ingress phenomenon is not well
defined. Additional research on the topic is needed and it may include an analysis of
temperatures, solar radiation measurements, moisture movement, freezing and thawing in
various materials used in different layers of a pavement and effect of seasonal variations to
produce real-time pavement temperature profiles. Different material types have different
responses to climatic variations. Unbound materials are affected by moisture change and by
freeze-thaw cycles during winter and spring seasons. Asphalt concrete responds to temperature
variations, which affects directly the dynamic modulus of the mixture. Temperature is also the
cause of thermal cracks, either from a single thermal variation or from repetitive cycles of
warm/cool temperatures. It is recommended that an effective subgrade resilient modulus be used
to represent the effect of seasonal variations, especially for moisture-sensitive fine-grained soils
or for locations with significant freeze-thaw cycles. The effective resilient modulus is the
equivalent modulus that would result in the same damage to the pavement as if seasonal modulus
were used.

CONCLUSIONS
This paper has reviewed and examined the effects of various environmental factors on flexible
pavement performance modeling. Various models were proposed by different researchers in the
Kumar, Rastogi and Gupta Ankit

world considering these environmental factors. Following are the conclusions drawn from the
review of the literature:

Various number and types of performance models are available in the literature, which
considers the effect of environmental factors in prediction of pavement performance. The
critical environmental variables affecting pavement performance are integrated in these
models, and the effects of these factors on pavement serviceability are thoroughly
investigated and quantitatively evaluated.

Environmental factors quite uncertain in nature and vary from places to places so they
become important in analyzing the performance of the pavement. Correlation of various
environmental factors with the structural properties has been taken care of in certain models.

These models incorporate various environmental variables which include precipitation, wind
speed, air temperature, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure and solar radiation.

The structural properties of the pavement layers get affected due to change in environmental
conditions which results in structural and functional distress in the pavements.

Resilient modulus of the pavement layers is very sensitive to change in stress conditions and
moisture content, so it is important to accurately predict it. Environmental factors directly
affect material properties of the pavement layers and variation in the resilient modulus is
indicative of that.

Temperature prediction models were also developed to study the in situ pavement
temperature profile and pavement engineering characteristics.

Enhanced Integrated Climatic Model (EICM) is a mechanistic model of one dimensional
heat and moisture flow which simulates changes in the behavior and characteristics of
pavement and subgrade materials induced by environmental factors.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS OF RESEARCH

The review and study of number of environmental factors affecting pavement performance has
indicated certain gaps on which further research is needed. These are:

Most of the models (considering environmental factors) are limited to the materials used in
the AASHO road test. The experimental data may not represent the true deterioration
mechanism of in-service pavements because of the complex interaction between the various
environmental factors and external load application.

Effect of moist soils around the pavement and the mechanism of moisture movement is still a
field which is not discovered much. Much of the roads pass through agriculture land and
problem of moisture ingress is always associated with it. The deterioration mechanism of
moisture movement need to be developed to account for its effect. Additional research on the
topic is needed and it may include an analysis of temperatures, solar radiation measurements,
moisture movement, freezing and thawing in various materials used in different layers of a
pavement and effect of seasonal variations to produce real-time pavement temperature
profiles.

It is recommended that an effective subgrade resilient modulus be used to represent the effect
of seasonal variations, especially for moisture-sensitive fine-grained soils or for locations
with significant freeze-thaw cycles. The effective resilient modulus is the equivalent modulus
that would result in the same damage to the pavement as if seasonal modulus were used.
 Paper ICMPA216
8th International Conference on Managing Pavement Assets

Non linear models should be developed to achieve better accuracy with incorporation of
specific environmental calibration coefficient taking in account the vast variation in
temperature of freezing and thawing condition and hot and humid climate. The materials
investigation is also important as different types of materials are used in pavement layers.

Various techniques like Finite Element Method, Artificial Neural Network, Genetic
Algorithm, and Cellular Automata can be used for investigating the effects of environmental
factors on performance prediction models. Much more accuracy is expected to be achieved
from these methods as compared to simple regression analysis.

LIST OF NOTATIONS
Mr or MR or MR Resilient Modulus
θ Bulk Stress
σ1, σ2, σ3 Principal Stresses
σd Deviatoric Stress
W or w or w/c Water Content (%)
γd Dry Density (kg/m3)
pa Atmospheric Pressure
EAC Asphalt Concrete Elastic Modulus (psi)
Tasp Effective Surface Layer Temperature (°C)
Tair Measured Mean Air Temperature (°C)
hasp Thickness of the Surface Layer (mm)
T Temperature of the Asphalt Concrete (in °F)
Tp max Predicted Daily Maximum Pavement Temperature (°C)
Tp min Predicted Daily Minimum Pavement Temperature (°C)
Ta max Daily Maximum Ambient Temperature (°C)
Ta min Daily Minimum Ambient Temperature (°C)
Rs Calculated Daily Solar Radiation (kJ/m2 day)
Pd Depth from the Surface (m)
S200 % passing sieve #200

REFERENCES

1. George, K. P., Rajagopal, A.S., and Lim, L. K. (1989). Models for Predicting Pavement
Deterioration, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research
Board, No. 1215, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 1-7.
2. AASHTO T307-99, 2003, “Determining the Resilient Modulus of Soils and Aggregate
Materials.” Standard Specifications for Transportation Materials and Methods of
Sampling and Testing. American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials.
3. Yoder, E. J. and Witczak, M. W., 1975, “Principles of Pavement Design”, 2nd Ed., Wiley,
New York.
4. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 1986,
“Guide for Design of Pavement Structures”, Washington, DC.
Kumar, Rastogi and Gupta Ankit

5. NCHRP, 2004, “Mechanistic-Empirical Design of New and Rehabilitated Pavement

Structures”, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, NCHRP Project 1-37A,
National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
6. Pezo, R. F., Claros, G., Hudson, W. R. and Stoke, K. H., 1992, “Development of a
Reliable Resilient Modulus Test for Subgrade and Non Granular Subbase Materials for
Use in Routine Pavement Design”, Research Report 1177-4f, Center for Transportation
Research, University of Texas, Austin, Tex.
7. Mohammad, L. N., Puppala, A. J. and Alavilli, P., 1996, “Resilient Modulus of
Laboratory Compacted Subgrade Soils”, Transportation Research Record 1504, pp. 87-
102.
8. Wolfe, W. E. and Butalia, T. S., 2004, “Continued Monitoring of SHRP Pavement
Instrumentation Including Soil Suction and Relationship with Resilient Modulus”, Report
No. FHWA/OH-2004/007.
9. Uzan. J., 1998, “Characterization of Clayey Subgrade Materials for Mechanistic Design
of Flexible Pavements”, Transportation Research Record 1629, TRB, National Research
Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 188-196.
10. Elfino, M. K. and Davidson, J. L., 1989, “Modeling Field Moisture in Resilient Modulus
Testing”, Geotechnical Special Publication, No. 24, ASCE, pp. 31-51.
11. Thadkamalla, G. B. and George, K. P., 1995, “Characterization of Subgrade Soils at
Simulated Field Moisture”, Transportation Research Record 1481, pp. 21-27.
12. Seed, H. B., Chan, C. K. and Lee, C. E., 1967, “Resilience Characteristics of Subgrade
Soils and their Relation to Fatigue Failures in Asphalt Pavements”, Proceedings of First
International Conference on the Structural Design of Asphalt Pavements, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, pp. 611-636.
13. Moossazadeh, J. and Witczak, M. W., 1981, “Prediction of Subgrade Moduli for Soil that
Exhibits Nonlinear Behavior”, Transportation Research Record 810, TRB, National
Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp 9-17.
14. Thompson, M. R. and Robnett, Q. L., 1976, “Resilient Properties of Subgrade Soils”,
Transportation Engineering Series No. 14. Illinois Cooperative Highway and
Transportation Series No. 160, University of Illinois.
15. Carmichael, R. F. III and Stuart, E., 1985, “Predicting Resilient Modulus: A Study to
Determine the Mechanical Properties of Subgrade Soils”, Transportation Research
Record 1043, pp. 145-148.
16. Witczak, M. W. and Ujan, J., 1988, “The Universal Airport Pavement Design System,
Report I of IV: Granular Material Characterization”, University of Maryland.
17. Jin, M. S., Lee, K. W. and Kovacs, W. D., 1994, “Seasonal Variation of Resilient
Modulus of Subgrade Soils.” Journal of Transportation Engineering, ASCE, 120(4), pp.
603–616.
18. George, K. P., 2004, “Prediction of Resilient Modulus from Soil Index Properties”.
Report No. FHWA/MS-DOT-RD-04-172.
19. Brahmajaree, N., Lavansiri, D., and Tepsittitarakorn, S., 2009, “Effects of Seasonal
Variations on the Flexible Pavements in Thailand” Proceedings of 6th ICPT, Sapporo,
Japan, pp. 283-290.
 Paper ICMPA216
8th International Conference on Managing Pavement Assets

20. George, K. P. and Husain, S. 1986, “Thickness Design for Flexible Pavement: A
Probabilistic Approach”, Transportation Research Record N1095, Transportation
Research Board, National Research Council. Washington, D.C., pp. 26-36.
21. Diefenderfer, B. K., Al-Qadi, I. L. and Diefenderfer, S. D., 2006, “Model to Predict
Pavement Temperature Profile: Development and Validation.” Journal of Transportation
Engineering, ASCE, 132(2), pp. 162–167.
22. Hardcastle, J. H., 1992, “Subgrade Resilient Modulus for Idaho Pavements”, Final
Report of ITD Research Project RP 110-D, Agreement No. 89-47, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, pp. 252.
23. Bergan, A. T. and Monismith, C. L., 1973, “Characterization of Subgrade Soils in Cold
Regions for Pavement Design Purposes”, Highway Research Record, pp. 431.
24. Chamberlain, E. J. and Gow, A. J., 1979, “Effect of Freezing and Thawing on the
Permeability and Structure of Soils”, Engineering Geology, Vol. 13, pp. 73–92.
25. Dempsey, B. J., Herlach, W. A. and Patel, A. J., 1985, “The Climatic-Material-Structural
Pavement Analysis Program, FHWA/RD-84/115”, Vol. 3, Final Report, Federal Highway
Administration, Washington D.C.
26. Guymon, G. L., Berg, R. L. and Johnson, T. C., 1986, “Mathematical Model of Frost
Heave and Thaw Settlement in Pavement”, Report: U. S. Army Cold Region Research
and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, New Hampshire.
27. Lytton, R. L., Pufahl, D. E. and Michalak, 1993, “An Integrated Model of the Climatic
Effects on Pavements”, FHWA Report No. FHWA-RD-90-033, Mclean, Virginia.
28. Birgisson, B. and Roberson, R., 2000, “Drainage of Pavement Base Material: Design and
Construction Issues.” Transportation Research Record 1709, Transportation Research
Board, National Research Council. Washington, D.C.
29. Richter, C. A. and Witczak, M. W., 2001, “Application of LTPP Seasonal Monitoring
Data to Evaluate Volumetric Moisture Predictions from the Integrated Climatic Model”.
Paper presented at 80th Annual Meeting, Transportation Research Board, Washington
D.C.
30. Heydinger, A. G., 2003, “Evaluation of Seasonal Effects on Subgrade Soils”,
Transportation Research Record 1821, Washington D.C., pp. 47-55.