Implementation of Darwin – ME Chris Wagner, PE July 26-29, 2010 Kansas City, MO

Hawaii Alaska Does SHA Use or Plan to Use MEPDG? N0 -12 YES Survey

Where are we now?

State implementation activities Validation Activities Status of DARWin ME Planned Activites for DARWin ME

5 Software Capabilities-Import Raw Data Climate: icm files Traffic: AHTD Traffic Monitoring Data

6 Software Capabilities-Traffic Data Check

7 Software Capabilities-Materials E*

8 Software Capabilities- Retrieving Data Very similar tools will be included in DARWin ME

Indiana DOT HMA Materials Characterization Dynamic Modulus District - 6 Nom Max Aggregate Size - 3 Binder Type – 3 Binder Characterization 3 Binders DSR data Traffic Data WIM Station Data Analyzed Load Spectra defined by Volume

Sensitivity of Inputs for Concrete ParameterRoughnessFaulting Percent Slabs Cracked Permanent Curl/Warp Effective Temperature Difference VS Joint SpacingVS Dowel Bar DiameterMS NS Pavement ThicknessSMSVS Modulus of RuptureSNSVS Modulus of ElasticitySNSVS 20-year/28-day RatioSNSVS Indiana DOT: MEPDG Guide for Designers What to Change for Design?

Good Calibration and Implementation Document Montana DOT Major Findings: Preservation Practice Extend Performance Most models adequate for design Re-calibrate unbound materials rutting

Continued MEPDG Validation at Auburn University

S11– As Built – Fatigue Cracking at Auburn University

Continued Validation at Auburn University

What about Polymers?

Strain Response Looking at Strains Directly at Auburn University

Darwin-ME output

DARWin ME Sneak Peek

DARWin ME — Improvements Redesign GUI using.NET 3.5 framework in C# User configurable screens Agency defined data libraries Input control at the central office Expansion capabilities for new analysis engines Improved display on large or multiple monitors Improved error handling stability and error display Multiple project editing Handicap accessibility options Improved reporting (stability, speed and quality) Utilities for importing previous version files, third party data Multiple language extensibility

DARWin ME —Improvements Efficiency Increase software speed Automated thickness optimization Batch mode Sensitivity Functionality SI version Traffic caps Stability Correct reported bugs (Task Force directed) Improve error handling

Enterprise Software

Material Property Inputs

Traffic

Error Checking

Multiple Project Edit

Batch Mode

XML File Formats

Integrated Reports

DARWin ME Development Status Milestones Percent Complete, Date of Completion Kick-Off100% User Requirements Spec & Review/Approval100% Preliminary Design Review100% System Requirement Spec & Review/Approval100% Requirements Tracebility Matrix100% Critical Design Review100% Implementation & Integration Process Audit40%, 7/31/10 Test Readiness Review80%, 6/15/10 Testing Process Audit0%, 9/30/10 Software Alpha Test0%, 8/15/10 Software Beta Test0%, 10/15/10 Acceptance Test0%, 11/30/10 Release0%, 12/31/10

DARWin ME planned activities Unveiling Session at 2011 TRB Roll out webinar FHWA web training 2011 FHWA On-site training Traffic Workshops

Indiana DOT Experience Road AASHTO 93 Thickness Result MEPDG Thickness Result Estimated Contract Saving ($) Actual Contract Saving ($) Total Savings ($) I-46516”-18’ PCCP14”-18’ PCCP$1,475,000 I-465 Ramps ( )12.5”-18’ PCCP11”-18’ PCCP$112,000 $1,000,000 I-465 Ramps ( 40/Wash. St) 12.5”-18’-PCCP12.5”-18’PCCP$0 I-80(mainline)16”-18’-PCCP14”-18’-PCCP$361,000$775,170 I-80(Ramp)12”-18’-PCCP10.5”-18’-PCCP$520,000 SR 1415”-HMA13.5”-HMA$333,000 $155,440 US 23111”-18-PCCP10”-18’-PCCP$333,000 $0 US 231-Ramp10”-18’-PCCP9.5”-18’-PCCP$28,000 US ”-HMA13”-HMA$557,000 $0 SR 6216”-HMA13”-HMA$403,000 $420,548 US 23111”-18’-PCCP10”-18’-PCCP$178,000 $04,300,000 Total Estimated Savings = $10 Million Total Estimated Savings = $10 Million

Evolution The MEPDG is not perfect…..BUT; The MEPDG provides a reasonable and structured platform for continuous improvement.