Abstract
The mechanistic-empirical method (E-M) of design the initial structure adopted for the pavement should be checked for performance criteria and changed if they are not met. In this context, the sensitivity analysis may help to understand that changes can be made. Thus, this study aims to compare the sensitivity of E-M AASHTO, applying the Mechanistic Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) software, and the software ELSYM5 for variation in thickness and resilient modulus of flexible pavement layers. Therefore, simulations were performed on software to estimate the pavement performance. The results were adjusted by regression models and regression coefficients were used to determine the significant parameters in predicting performance and to compare applied methods as sensitivity. Distress estimated by the MEPDG software were sensitive to at least one of the parameters under consideration, while the performance predicted by the computer program ELSYM5 was sensitive to variations in the thickness of the asphalt layer and the sub-base and the subgrade resilient modulus. It was concluded that there are differences in sensitivity observed in both softwares, however, the ELSYM5 is a viable alternative to the use as an E-M method of design. Keywords: Sensitivity analysis, Mechanistic-empiral method, MEPDG software, Software ELSYM5.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
