Skip to contentU.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration
Asset Management | Bridge Technology | Operations | Pavement
FHWA > Asset Management > Pavement Health Track > PHT Final Report > PHT Version 2.0 Output Validity Test

Enhancement of the Pavement Health Track (PHT) Analysis Tool Final Report

PHT Version 2.0 Output Validity Test

New HMA Evaluation

The new PHT version 2.0 with calibrated model predicts lower IRI value than that of previous version for all weather and pavement condition. This is an improvement over previous model with accelerated deterioration under same conditions. The IRI results by climate zone and HMA thickness are illustrated in Figure 34 through Figure 36.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 4 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final IRI in inches per mile over RSL Term IRI ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 34. IRI by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 4 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 6 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final IRI in inches per mile over RSL Term IRI ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 35. IRI by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 6 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 8 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final IRI in inches per mile over RSL Term IRI ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 36. IRI by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 8 inches

Regardless of base type and traffic loading or climate zone, each pavement section has experienced lower rutting in the new version of PHT. This is an improvement as the rate of rutting decreased/increases as a function HMA thickness. The Rutting results by climate zone and HMA thickness are illustrated in Figure 37 through Figure 39.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 4 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Rutting in inches over RSL Term Rutting ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 37. Rutting by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 4 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 6 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Rutting in inches over RSL Term Rutting ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 38. Rutting by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 6 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 8 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Rutting in inches over RSL Term Rutting ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 39. Rutting by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 8 inches

The new PHT models are predicting progressive fatigue cracking as a function of loads and are showing improved sensitivity to climate than the previous version except for the pavement with cement treated stabilized base. This is a significant improvement over the previous version of the PHT analysis tool. The Percent Cracking results by climate zone and HMA thickness are illustrated in Figure 40 through Figure 42.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 4 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Fatigue Cracking in percent over RSL Term Fatigue Cracking ESALs. In all cases except for pavement with cement treated stabilized base, values for PHT Version 2 show improved sensitivity to climate than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 40. Cracking Percent by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 4 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 6 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Fatigue Cracking in percent over RSL Term Fatigue Cracking ESALs. In all cases except for pavement with cement treated stabilized base, values for PHT Version 2 show improved sensitivity to climate than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 41. Cracking Percent by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 6 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 8 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Fatigue Cracking in percent over RSL Term Fatigue Cracking ESALs. In all cases except for pavement with cement treated stabilized base, values for PHT Version 2 show improved sensitivity to climate than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 42. Cracking Percent by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 8 inches

Except for pavements under climate zone-1, all the pavements have experienced significantly lower Transverse cracking length than the previous PHT version. As distress propagation of transverse cracking is independent of loading, the models do not show any sensitivity regarding traffic loading. This is a significant improvement on the previous version. The Percent Cracking results by climate zone and HMA thickness are illustrated in Figure 43 through Figure 45.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 4 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Transverse Cracking in inches per mile over RSL Term Transverse Cracking ESALs. In all cases except for pavement in climate zone 1, values for PHT Version 2 show less transverse cracking than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 43. Cracking Length by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 4 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 6 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Transverse Cracking in inches per mile over RSL Term Transverse Cracking ESALs. In all cases except for pavement in climate zone 1, values for PHT Version 2 show less transverse cracking than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 44. Cracking Length by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 6 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for HMA thickness of 8 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Transverse Cracking in inches per mile over RSL Term Transverse Cracking ESALs. In all cases except for pavement in climate zone 1, values for PHT Version 2 show less transverse cracking than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 45. Cracking Length by Climate Zone for HMA Thickness of 8 inches

New JPCP Evaluation

Most of the pavement sections have predicted IRI value higher than the previous version of PHT. This is an improvement over previous version. One pavement in climate zone 3 and with low traffic load has experienced lower predicted IRI value than that of previous version. The IRI results by climate zone and JPCP thickness are illustrated in Figure 46 through Figure 48.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for JPCP thickness of 8 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final IRI in inches per mile over RSL Term IRI ESALs. In most cases, values for PHT Version 2 have higher IRI values than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 46. IRI by Climate Zone for JPCP Thickness of 8 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for JPCP thickness of 10 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final IRI in inches per mile over RSL Term IRI ESALs. In most cases, values for PHT Version 2 have higher IRI values than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 47. IRI by Climate Zone for JPCP Thickness of 10 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for JPCP thickness of 12 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final IRI in inches per mile over RSL Term IRI ESALs. In most cases, values for PHT Version 2 have higher IRI values than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 48. IRI by Climate Zone for JPCP Thickness of 12 inches

Faulting models are less sensitive to pavement thickness than the previous version. Since faulting is caused mainly due to difference in elevation across a joint or crack usually associated with un-doweled joint construction as well as base and sub-base strength, this is an improvement over previous version of PHT. The Faulting results by climate zone and JPCP thickness are illustrated in Figure 49 through Figure 51.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for JPCP thickness of 8 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Faulting in inches over RSL Term Faulting ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 show less sensitivity to pavement thickness than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 49. Faulting by Climate Zone for JPCP Thickness of 8 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for JPCP thickness of 10 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Faulting in inches over RSL Term Faulting ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 show less sensitivity to pavement thickness than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 50. Faulting by Climate Zone for JPCP Thickness of 10 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for JPCP thickness of 12 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Faulting in inches over RSL Term Faulting ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 show less sensitivity to pavement thickness than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 51. Faulting by Climate Zone for JPCP Thickness of 12 inches

The distress propagation of percent of slab cracking as reported by the new PHT tools shows lower responsive to traffic loading than previous version and reach beyond the critical distress value at the end of the analysis period. Except for pavement sections within climate zone 3, all others are experiencing higher slab cracking percentage. The increase of cracking percentage for climate zone 4 is extremely high. The sensitivity with respect to pavement thickness has also increased. The Cracking Percent results by climate zone and JPCP thickness are illustrated in Figure 52 through Figure 54.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for JPCP thickness of 8 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Cracking in percent over RSL Term Cracking ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 show less sensitivity to traffic loading than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 52. Cracking Percent by Climate Zone for JPCP Thickness of 8 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for JPCP thickness of 10 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Cracking in percent over RSL Term Cracking ESALs. Except for pavement sections in climate zone 3, values for PHT Version 2 show a higher slab cracking percentage than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 53. Cracking Percent by Climate Zone for JPCP Thickness of 10 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for JPCP thickness of 12 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Cracking in percent over RSL Term Cracking ESALs. Except for pavement sections in climate zone 3, values for PHT Version 2 show a higher slab cracking percentage than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 54. Cracking Percent by Climate Zone for JPCP Thickness of 12 inches

AC/AC Evaluation

The distress propagation as well as improvement reported by PHT 1.1 for A/C shows similar trend that of HMA pavements. The IRI results by climate zone and AC overlay thickness are illustrated in Figure 55 through Figure 57.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 2 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final IRI in inches per mile over RSL Term IRI ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 55. IRI by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 2 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 3 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final IRI in inches per mile over RSL Term IRI ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 56. IRI by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 3 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 4 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final IRI in inches per mile over RSL Term IRI ESALs. In all cases, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 57. IRI by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 4 inches

The Rutting distress estimates from the newer PHT version shows a slower rate of progressive rutting as a function of load and pavement thickness compare to the previous PHT version. This is an improvement over the previous version. The Rutting results by climate zone and AC overlay thickness are illustrated in Figure 58 through Figure 60.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 2 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Rutting in inches over RSL Term Rutting ESALs. Values for PHT Version 2 show lower rates of progressive rutting as a function of load and pavement thickness than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 58. Rutting by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 2 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 3 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Rutting in inches over RSL Term Rutting ESALs. Values for PHT Version 2 show lower rates of progressive rutting as a function of load and pavement thickness than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 59. Rutting by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 3 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 4 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Rutting in inches over RSL Term Rutting ESALs. Values for PHT Version 2 show lower rates of progressive rutting as a function of load and pavement thickness than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 60. Rutting by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 4 inches

The alligator cracking distress estimates from the newer PHT version show a similar trend as the new HMA pavements. The Cracking Percent results by climate zone and AC overlay thickness are illustrated in Figure 61 through Figure 63.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 2 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Fatigue Cracking in percent over RSL Term Fatigue Cracking ESALs. Values for PHT Version 2 show greater sensitivity to cracking distress than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 61. Cracking Percent by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 2 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 3 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Fatigue Cracking in percent over RSL Term Fatigue Cracking ESALs. Values for PHT Version 2 show greater sensitivity to cracking distress than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 62. Cracking Percent by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 3 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 4 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Fatigue Cracking in percent over RSL Term Fatigue Cracking ESALs. Values for PHT Version 2 show greater sensitivity to cracking distress than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 63. Cracking Percent by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 4 inches

The transverse cracking distress estimates from the newer PHT version show a similar trend as the new HMA pavements. The Cracking Length results by climate zone and AC overlay thickness are illustrated in Figure 64 through Figure 66.

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 2 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Transverse Cracking in feet per mile over RSL Term Transverse Cracking ESALs. Except for climate zone 1 values, which track closely, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 64. Cracking Length by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 2 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 3 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Transverse Cracking in feet per mile over RSL Term Transverse Cracking ESALs. Except for climate zone 1 values, which track closely, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 65. Cracking Length by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 3 inches

This figure contains four scatter graphs, one for each of four climate zones, comparing predicted values from PHT Version 1 and PHT Version 2 for AC overlay thickness of 4 inches using data for an analysis period of 60 years. The plots show values for RSL Final Transverse Cracking in feet per mile over RSL Term Transverse Cracking ESALs. Except for climate zone 1 values, which track closely, values for PHT Version 2 are lower than those for PHT Version 1.
Figure 66. Cracking Length by Climate Zone for AC Overlay Thickness of 4 inches
Updated: 11/22/2013