ABSTRACT

Pavement design has traditionally been based on empirical methods, and the current Norwegian pavement design method appears as purely empirical to the user. However, for years there have been ideas to include analytical aspects into the design process. Mechanistic-empirical design is used in different pavement design software in different parts of the world. In this paper three different mechanistic-empirical design software tools, PMS Objekt, MMOPP and ADtoPave, are considered for Norwegian conditions. The outputs from these software tools are compared against empirical output from the Norwegian design method. The study is based on a literature review and a case study. The case study is a mix of real and fictitious data. However, the material data used are already in the software. The empirical analysis was conducted by using Handbook N200 from the Norwegian Public Roads Administration (NPRA). The pavements analysed in the case study were the one found empirically, an under-designed one, an overdesigned one and an optimum pavement from each software tool. The following three questions are discussed: (1) How is the usability, (2) which results are found for the case study, and (3) are these software suitable for Norwegian conditions? All the software give different results, but all indicate if the pavements are within their design criteria. The software have different advantages, limitations and complexity. Considering Norwegian conditions, PMS Objekt seems to give the best results, taking frost heave into account.