SPECIFICATION FOR THE HDM-4 ROAD DETERIORATION MODEL NOTES ON PAVEMENT AGES Introduction HDM-III used 3 pavement ages,

resets depending on treatment type and different ages were used in different distress models. With the enlargement of the modelling base in HDM-4, it is thought that the definitions and applications of pavement ages may need review. Pavement Ages in HDM-III The three pavement ages in HDM-III were defined in Watanatada et al. (1987) as: AGE1 AGE2 AGE3 preventive treatment age, defined as the number of years elapsed since the latest preventive treatment, reseal, overlay, pavement reconstruction or new reconstruction surfacing age, defined as the number of years elapsed since the latest reseal, overlay, pavement reconstruction or new construction construction age, defined as the number of years elapsed since the latest overlay, pavement reconstruction or new construction

Pavement ages are used in the following deterioration models, based on Watanatada et al. (1987) and checks on the source code (RDMPV88.FOR). Cracking AGE2 is used to determine whether the crack progression models should be applied. Ravelling AGE2 is used to determine whether the ravelling progression model should be applied. Potholing AGE2 is used to determine whether the potholing progression model should be applied. Rutting It was the intention that, when AGE3 = 0, the first year rut depth increment would use the absolute model given in Paterson, 1987. Thereafter, an incremental form of the model is applied which directly incorporates AGE3 as a variable. In my version of the code, the absolute expression is applied when RDMA = 0, not when AGE3 = 0. This implies that, if an old pavement is specified in the input data with zero rut depth, HDM-III will, in the first analysis year, calculate the rut depth using the absolute model form intended for a new pavement. Have any HDM-III users noticed this occurring? It is also noted that, in this version of the code, the rehabilitation factor RH is hard coded as zero and does not appear in the treatment resets. i.e. RH is not used. -1-

The same comments apply to both mean and STD of rut depth. Roughness AGE3 is a variable in the structural component of the incremental roughness progression model. Treatment Interventions and Resets All three ages can, potentially, be applied in treatment interventions if minimum intervals or scheduled policies are specified. For example, if a preventive treatment is specified with a minimum interval of 5 years, reconstruction would not be applied if AGE1 < 5 years even though condition responsive conditions for reconstruciton are met. AGE1 is set to zero after preventive treatment, seal, overlay or reconstruction. AGE2 is set to zero after seal, overlay or reconstruction. AGE3 is set to zero after overlay or reconstruction. Pavement Ages in HDM-4 It is thought that the use of the three pavement ages in HDM-III is generally satisfactory. The only area of doubt concerns the reset of AGE3 after overlays. Where a thin overlay is used, this may lead to inaccurate predictions of rut depth and roughness. These aspects are discussed below. Rutting - Densification Component In the case of thin surfacings, the densification component of the rut depth model is mainly derived from the base and lower layers. It therefore seems incorrect to use AGE3 = 0 after applying an overlay; AGE3, for this purpose, should only be reset to zero after a reconstruction that involves replacement of the base and/or subbase. This only becomes of significance if the HDM-III incremental model is used, where AGE3 is a variable in the expression. For the first year after overlay, following the logic of the HDM-III code, the absolute model will mostly not be applied; assuming that rut depth was greater than zero before overlay, it is reset to 0.15x the old value and is thus greater than zero (see above). The new rut depth will, however, be quite small and as subsequent incremental increase is a function of RDMa it will be less than that for a new pavement. It thus appears that HDM-III is giving the right answer although maybe for the wrong reasons. The only case where the HDM-III logic may give an incorrect result is where the existing pavement has a rut depth of zero as already mentioned. If a linear incremental model is used (see my notes on this subject) age is not a variable in the expression so the choice of age reset has no significance.

Rutting - Plastic Flow Component

-2-

The plastic flow model, as proposed in the HTRS report, is incremental in form and does not use age directly as a variable. The model is, however, non-linear with time and if, as has been proposed, a simplified form of the model is derived then age will undoubtedly become a variable in the expression. In this case the choice of age becomes problematic if there are multiple asphalt layers of different ages. It might be expected that the surfacing age will predominate where the latest surfacing has a thickness greater than, say, 50 mm but not for seals or thin overlays over existing thicker bituminous layers. It is suggested that the definition of age is carefully considered if a simplified plastic flow model is developed. Roughness The roughness progression model, originally estimated from Brazilian data, contains an age term that was defined in Paterson, 1987 as age of pavement or overlay. In HDMIII, AGE3 is used in the expression which is compatible with the definition of AGE3 in the model. The definition of AGE3 here creates a bias when comparing thin overlays and seals, especially if the pavement age is high prior to treatment. This may be one of the reasons why HDM-III tends not to favour seals as maintenance treatments; not only does a thin overlay give a greater reduction in roughness than a seal, but the subsequent progression is also lower due to AGE3 being reset to zero. There is thus an argument for changing the definition of AGE3 by resetting only after an overlay greater than a certain thickness, say, 50 mm. Conclusions It is proposed that, in HDM-4, the following changes are made to the definition and application of pavement ages with respect to HDM-III: 1. For thin overlays (< 50 mm) AGE2 is reset to zero but not AGE3. 2. If an analysis section is specified with AGE3 > 0 and RDM = 0, RDM is reset to a nominal value (e.g. 1 mm) at the end of the first analysis year. 3. If, after a treatment, AGE3 > 0 and RDM = 0, RDM is reset to a nominal value (e.g. 1 mm). 4. If a simplified plastic flow model is developed, the age term should be a value between AGE2 and AGE3 depending on the relative thicknesses of the old and new asphalt layers. Mike Riley 12/4/96

-3-