Authors : Muhammad Yasin; Puguh Budi Prakoso; Yasruddin

Volume/Issue : Volume 8 - 2023, Issue 5 - May

Google Scholar : https://bit.ly/3TmGbDi

Scribd : https://shorturl.at/wxCQT

DOI : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7962364

Abstract : Indonesia has regulations and guidelines for designing pavement structures modified by several developed countries. One of the pavement methods used in Indonesia is the Pt T-01-2002-B method derived from AASHTO 1993. However, today Indonesia has an update on the pavement method used, namely the Pavement Design Manual 2017 method sourced from AASHTO and AUSTROAD. The purpose of this study is to determine the results of comparing the thickness of flexible pavement between the Pt T-01-2002-B and MDP 2017 methods by varying the CBR value and traffic load. Then analyze the results of thick planning using Finite Element Analysis modeling in the ANSYS program which aims to determine the value of stress that occurs in the subgrade. From the results of the research conducted, it was found that the variation of CBR value > 1.5% overall pavement thickness produced using the Pt T-01-2002-B method was thicker than MDP 2017 method. However, at CBR 1.5%, the MDP 2017 method produces a much thicker pavement than the Pt T-01- 2002-B method. The large difference in pavement thickness between the two methods is due to differences in design parameters and the selection of pavement materials. Based on the stress results, the Pt T-01-2002-B method is considered more conservative than the MDP 2017 method. However, in soil conditions with CBR values below 2.5%, the MDP 2017 method is considered more conservative.

Keywords : Flexible pavement; Pt T-01-2002-B; MDP 2017; odemark method; finite element analysis; stress