After reading up on the product on the AI Web site, I wondered if anyone from AI had contacted ACPA to alert them to the problem (in case it was an honest error) and what the response had been.
It's a manipulation of data that needs to be fixed before the comparisons in the program can truly be considered "equivalent". Do you want the local concrete producer to walk into the DOT office with a copy of StreetPave to show the materials engineer how much more expensive it makes the next pavement look over its lifetime if he elects to use HMA instead of PCC? You would be well served to let the engineer know that the subgrade number for the asphalt pavement becomes less than reliable in the StreetPave program. Or perhaps it does.Ĭonsider how precious the few projects being let in your county are.
#Asphalt institute pavement design software software#
Now, how many people purchasing the ACPA product are making a roadbuilding decision between HMA and PCC? One would assume concrete producers purchase software to maximize their concrete-production efficiency from concrete industry members, just as asphalt producers purchase software to maximize their asphalt-production efficiency from asphalt industry members, so perhaps it doesn't matter that ACPA has something that appears blatantly underhanded in its marketing arsenal. In other words, the asphalt pavement turns out more expensive to build, in the StreetPave model, than it actually needs to be. 28, 2007, post on its Web site, "StreetPave takes the single subgrade strength value input by the user (only one value is allowed) and inappropriately reduces it prior to running the asphalt thickness design calculation." Because the concrete pavement design doesn't receive a similar reduction, the two pavements cannot be considered equivalent after all, and the asphalt pavement ends up being extraordinarily thick. This means more material and more materials cost in the asphalt equation.Īccording to AI's Nov. This forces the program to add inches of asphalt subgrade to the asphalt pavement in the comparison.
My attempts to clarify that with other engineers went unanswered, but it looks like the StreetPave software literally reduces the subgrade strength of the asphalt design when the user punches in a number. "They made some sort of modification without explaining to the user what it was," Walker said. The software, according to Asphalt Institute's Dwight Walker, uses AI's SW-1 software paradigm, but makes a modification to the data in the asphalt equation. In a nutshell, ACPA developed a software program called StreetPave to assist contractors in determining lifecycle costs for both asphalt and concrete pavements based on what the software determines to be "equivalent" pavement parameters. We're not offending any family members' advertisers by telling asphalt contractors the truth. I complained (loudly) about what I considered unfair tactics while I pilfered the Internet and better primary sources to get the scoop, and then I prepared a scathing editorial for you readers. Therefore, when I hit the roof and started ranting about the American Concrete Pavement Association's (ACPA) manipulation of data to make asphalt pavements appear more expensive to produce than concrete pavements, Chris (the publisher) knew what was coming next. AsphaltPro magazine's owner has no interest in the concrete industry. (from the February Editor's Note of AsphaltPro magazine)
0 kommentar(er)
