See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282157935

An Evaluation of Life Cycle Cost Analysis of

Airport Pavement

Article in International Journal of Engineering and Technical Research · August 2015

DOI: 10.17577/IJERTV4IS080396

CITATIONS READS

0 125

4 authors:

Anik Das Saurav Barua

University of Wyoming University of Information Technology and Sci…
8 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS 10 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Md Nasim Khan Md Mizanur Rahman

University of Wyoming Bangladesh University of Engineering and Te…
3 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS 36 PUBLICATIONS 43 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Consultancy Services for Assessment of Road Design and Pavement Standards of LGED View project

Class Lecture Materials View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Anik Das on 25 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 4 Issue 08, August-2015

An Evaluation of Life Cycle Cost Analysis of

Airport Pavement
Anik Das Md. Nasim Khan
Lecturer, Lecturer,
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
University of Information Technology and University of Information Technology and
Sciences (UITS) Sciences (UITS)
Dhaka, Bangladesh Dhaka, Bangladesh

Saurav Barua Md. Mizanur Rahman, PhD

Lecturer, Professor,
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
University of Information Technology and Bangladesh University of Engineering and
Sciences (UITS) Technology (BUET)
Dhaka, Bangladesh Dhaka, Bangladesh

Abstract— A runway pavement is considered as one of the transportation officials. The final outcomes of LCCA
central facilities in an airport. Ensuring safety for aircraft approach is the choice of one alternative to another as well as
operations and providing adequate comfort to the passenger are the choice of most cost effective solution for a particular
the major features while budgeting the construction cost of a situation. Now a days, LCCA is being used as a decision
pavement. The target of this research is to render a life cycle making tool when selecting a pavement type and is also used
cost analysis (LCCA) approach for newly designed runway to measure different maintenance and rehabilitation strategies
pavements to select the most cost effective pavement. Some within the same pavement type. The intent of this paper is to
particular groups of aircraft traffic from the website of Hazrat explore the application of LCCA in pavement type selection
Shahjalal International Airport in a particular day were taken
and developing a comparative relationship of runway
for the analysis. A flexible and a rigid runway pavement were
designed considering annual departures and growth rate for the
pavements (flexible and rigid) with comparative costs that
respective aircrafts by using FAARFIELD software. The influence the analysis procedure for selection of the pavement
thickness of flexible and rigid pavement was found about 37 types.
inch and 31.5 inch respectively. As per FAA standard, an
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
analysis period of 20 years was selected. The costs for the both
pavements were evaluated for this analysis period by an excel After the introduction of the concept of LCCA methodology
spreadsheet. Initial costs and maintenance costs were for the design and selection of pavement type in 1960s, the
incorporated and the result was checked by the FAA method of principles have been progressed by the various agencies and
economic analysis with a recommended discount rate. officials. The concept of life cycle cost along with different
Comparative results showed that initial construction costs of other costs should be considered in the analysis life cycle cost
concrete pavement was higher (about 21%) than the asphalt was recommended by the AASHTO Pavement Design Guide
pavement. However, total life cycle cost of concrete pavements in 1972 [1]. The application of the life cycle cost concept and
served much lower than that of asphalt pavement at the end of detailed discussions about the various costs that should be
the design period including maintenance and rehabilitation costs regarded in LCCA was encouraged by the AASHTO
in it. In this case, around 4% of costs would be saved if rigid
Pavement Design Guide 1993 [2]. To demonstrate the
pavement was used instead of flexible pavement.
application of LCCA concept in pavement investment
Keywords— Runway pavement, FAA, FAARFIELD, Rigid decisions, FHWA in 1994 stated that 28 out of 38 states
pavement, Life cycle cost analysis responded [3]. RealCost, a Microsoft Excel based
deterministic and probabilistic LCCA program was
developed by FHWA in 2004 to perform the LCCA
I. Introduction operations. [4].
The installation of pavements in airport that can affirm their
total predicted load applications over a 20-year design life is III. FAARFIELD
the requirement of FAA in Advisory Circular 150/5320-6E.
Sometimes, the main consideration is only focused to the FAARFIELD stands for Federal Aviation Administration
initial construction cost and the maintenance and Rigid and Flexible Iterative Elastic Layered Design is an
rehabilitation costs sometimes not to take as a consideration. airport pavement thickness design software program. The
Life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) is a necessary economic software was developed by FAA (Federal Aviation
evaluation tools for providing necessary guidance to choose Administration) for designing of new and overlay flexible
the most cost effective alternative decisions of many and rigid pavement. Both layered elastic and three-

IJERTV4IS080396 www.ijert.org 352

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 4 Issue 08, August-2015

dimensional finite element based design theories are Both the flexible and rigid pavements were designed by
implemented in it. In Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5320-6E FAARFIELD based on FAA Advisory Circular AC 150/5320-
“Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation”, it is referenced 6E [5]. The thickness of flexible and rigid pavement were
that FAA developed this computer program for the easement found 37 inch and 31.5 inch respectively. Layer thicknesses
of pavement engineers by implementing the thickness design are presented in the following Fig. 1 and Fig. 2.
procedures in it [5]. The internal airplane library of the
FAARFIELD consists of six airplane groups: Generic,
Airbus, Boeing, Other Commercial, General Aviation, and
Military [5]. Also the aircrafts maximum gross weights,
landing gear configuration, and contribution to CDF are
implemented in it. For a newly pavement design, the number
of annual departures are introduced as well as the annual
growth that expected in the following years [5]. Finally, the
design life of 20 years for any project according to the FAA
criteria must be introduced usually [5].

IV. RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES

Airplane were selected from a library and placed in a list of
design airplane. For selecting required airplane lists, a
comprehensive tabulation of different airlines of Hazrat
Shahjalal International Airport had been enlisted for a
particular day. Then the forecasting of the annual departures
in each airline groups was conducted. Forecasted annual
growth factor for Asia region was taken From ICAO
Environmental Report 2010 [6]. The value was in the range
of 2% to 4%. Table I shows the assumed annual departures of
each airline groups.
Fig. 1. Final Design Thickness of the Flexible Pavement
TABLE I. DETERMINATION OF APPROXIMATE ANNUAL DEPARTURES
[7]
No. of
No. of Annual
Departures
Airlines Departures Airplane Name
(Approximate)
(Approximate)
Per Day
A 310-325, MD
United
9 3240 83, A 72-212,
Airways
Dash 8-100
A 340-300, A
330-300, A 330-
200, A 321-200,
Turkish
3 1080 A 320-200, B
Airlines
777-300 ER, B
737-800, B 737-
900 ER
Regent B 737-700,
10 3600
Airways Dash 8
A 310-300, B
Biman
737-800, B 777
Bangladesh 10 3600
ER, B 787-8,
Airlines
DC 10-30
Novoair 4 1440 Jet MB 145 EU
A 330-200
Cargo, A 320-
Qatar
2 720 200, A 330-200,
Airways Fig. 2. Final Design Thickness of the Rigid Pavement.
A 330-300, A
340-600
Air Arabia 3 1080 A 320 A runway surface area of Hazrat Shahjalal International
Kingfisher Airport was considered for the calculation shown in Fig. 3.
2 720 A 320
Airlines The runway length was 3200 m and width 46 m.
A 319-100, A
320-200, A 330-
Eithiad 300, A 330-200,
2 720
Airways A 321-200, A
340-500, A 340-
600, B 777-200
B 777
Lufthansa 2 720
Freighter(Cargo)

IJERTV4IS080396 www.ijert.org 353

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 4 Issue 08, August-2015

TABLE III. INITIAL COSTS OF RIGID PAVEMENT

Cost
Item/Layer Per Cubic Meter Per Square Meter
($) ($)
Subgrade
$441,600.00
Compaction
Crushed
Aggregate $1,233,830.40
Subbase
Cement Treated
$4,187,545.60
Base

PCC Surface $16,423,030.40

Prime Coat
$142,784.00
(1 Layer)
Fig. 3. Runway Location Map of Hazrat Shahjalal International Airport
PCC Joint Sealing $2,815.08

V. COST ANALYSIS Inset Light

$471,040.00
Premium
We estimated life cycle costs of flexible and rigid pavement
considering initial costs and maintenance and rehabilitation Sub Total $21,844,406.40 $1,058,239.08
costs. Unit prices for each item were taken from Pavinars-
Webinars for the Pavement Community, “New developments
Total $22,902,645.48
in airfield pavements”, 2013 [8].

1) Initial Costs Initial cost of rigid pavements is about 20.98 % higher than
Thickness related items are calculated in terms of cubic meter flexible pavement in the following Fig 4.
and rest of the items are computed through the square meter.
The cost calculations of both the pavements are shown in
Table II and Table III.

TABLE II. INITIAL COSTS OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT

Cost
Item/Layer
Per Cubic Meter Per Square Meter
($) ($)
Subgrade
$441,600.00
Compaction
Crushed
Aggregate $4,271,109.56
Subbase
Stabilized Asphalt
$7,896,514.56
Base
Lower Surface
$2,691,993.60
Course HMA
Upper Surface
$2,333,061.13
Course HMA
Prime Coat
$142,784.00
(1 Layer) Fig. 4. Variation of Initial Costs between the two Pavements
Tack Coat
$388,608.00
(4 Layer) 2) Maintenance and Rehabilitation Costs
Inset Light
$471,040.00
Premium
Calculation of maintenance and rehabilitation costs are
Runway Grooving $294,400.00 derived with the percentage of initial costs required for
each year. The results are shown in the Table IV and Table
Sub Total $17,192,678.85 $1,738,432.00
V.
Total $18,931,110.85

IJERTV4IS080396 www.ijert.org 354

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 4 Issue 08, August-2015

TABLE IV. MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION COSTS OF FLEXIBLE

PAVEMENT

Year Description Cost ($)

1 to 4 Crack Sealing and Patching $75,724.44

5 to 9 Crack Sealing and Patching $236,638.89

10 to 14 Crack Sealing and Patching $378,622.21

Mill and Replace 0.05m
15 $5,549,440.00
HMA
16 to 19 Crack Sealing and Patching $75,724.44

20 Crack Sealing and Patching $56,793.34

Total $6,372,943.33

TABLE V. MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION COSTS OF RIGID

PAVEMENT
Fig. 5. Variation of Maintenance and Rehabilitation Costs between the
Two Pavements
Year Description Cost ($)
3) Life Cycle Costs
1 to 9 None $0.00
Calculation of the life cycle costs involves the summation
10 to 14 Crack Sealing and Patching $343,539.69 of the initial, maintenance and rehabilitation costs of both
the pavement to make a comparative decision. Rigid
15 Slab Replacement $114,513.23
pavement serves much lower costs (about 4%) in its whole
15 to 19 Crack Sealing and Patching $515,309.53 design life than the flexible pavement. This is shown in the
following Fig. 6.
20 Slab Replacement $274,831.75

20 Crack Sealing and Patching $137,415.88

Total $1,385,610.05

Maintenance and rehabilitation costs requires for rigid

pavement are about 78.26% lower than the asphalt pavement.
The main reason behind this lower costs that there are no
costs required for the maintenance activities of rigid
pavement in first 9 years in this case. The results are almost
follow the same pattern for other different data sets. The bar
diagram in Fig. 5 shows the variation of the costs.

Fig. 6. Variation of Life Cycle Costs between the two Pavements

IJERTV4IS080396 www.ijert.org 355

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 4 Issue 08, August-2015

VI. VERIFICATION OF COST ANALYSIS WITH FAA ACKNOWLEDGMENT

METHOD We would like to express our earnest and deepest gratitude to
The outcomes of the costs of flexible and rigid pavements are Dr. Md. Mizanur Rahman, Professor, Department of Civil
verified by a method provided by FAA procedures. The Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and
desired results are found as the rigid pavement serves lower Technology for his constant guidance, invaluable supervision
costs (about 4.58%) throughout its design period than flexible and hearty support at every stage of this research work.
pavement. The percentage of the cost efficiency of rigid
pavement is almost same as the previous calculations.
Despite some variations, this checking ultimately ensures the REFERENCES
results and decisions are similar that came from the previous [1] AASHTO, “AASHTO Interim Guide for Design of Pavement
calculations. Structures”, American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C, 1972.
[2] AASHTO, “AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures”,
CONCLUSIONS American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials,
Washington, D.C, 1993.
The overall study is made to find an answer of the question
[3] Applied Research Associates, Inc (ARA), “Life Cycle Cost Analysis
and that is which pavement type is the most cost-effective For Airport Pavement”, Final Report, Airfield Asphalt Pavement
throughout its design life. From this research work, it is found Technology Program, 2011.
that rigid pavement serves about 4% lower costs than the [4] FHWA, “RealCost (version 2.1) User Manual,” Pavement Life-Cycle
flexible pavement throughout its design period. Later the Cost Analysis,” Office of Asset Management, FHWA, Washington,
results was verified by the FAA method of economic analysis D.C, 2004.
without considering other alternatives and it was observed [5] FAA , A/C: 150/5320-6E, “Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation”,
that rigid pavement serves about 4.58% lesser amount of Washington, D.C, 2009.
costs than flexible pavement. [6] International Civil Aviation Organization , “ICAO Environmental
Report 2010: Aviation and Climate Chang”, Montreal: ICAO & FCM
Communications Inc, 2010.
[7] DAC Departures, Hazrat Shahjalal International Airport.
http://shahjalalairport.com/index.php/departures, [accessed on
19/01/2014]
[8] Braham, A., “New developments in airfield pavements.” Pavinars:
Webinars for the pavement community, University of Arkansas, 2013.

IJERTV4IS080396 www.ijert.org 356

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)

View publication stats