Rigid Pavement Analysis and Design using Mechanistic-Emperical Approaches - PMED, MnPAVE, and Pitt Rigid

Abstract: Mechanistic–Empirical (M–E) pavement design has undergone significant evolution over the past two decades, offering a more rational approach to predicting pavement performance. Several software tools have been developed to support this framework under diverse climatic, material, and traffic conditions. Among these, AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design (PMED) serves as a globally recognized platform adaptable to local calibration. At the same time, MnPAVE and Pitt Rigid represent state-specific tools designed for Minnesota and Pennsylvania, respectively. Despite their successful local performance, limited research has systematically compared their predictive performance, sensitivity, and flexibility across input ranges. This study conducts a comparative evaluation of PMED, MnPAVE, and Pitt Rigid by designing a standardized test pavement section in each software, assessing variations in design life, performance indicators, and climate–material interactions. This paper highlights the impacts of key parameters, such as predicted distress, reliability, and layer thickness optimization. The findings highlight the strengths, limitations, and areas for potential improvement of each platform. While MnPAVE and Pitt Rigid are customized for local applications in the two states, these tools are very efficient and easy to use for practitioners, needing only key inputs to characterize rigid pavements. The study will also guide refinements in M–E design methodologies and motivate state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) to develop or adapt regionally calibrated pavement design tools for enhanced reliability and efficiency.