PAVEMENT DESIGN
AND ANALYSIS
(CE-860)
Fall Semester 2018
LEC-03
Dr. Arshad Hussain
[email protected] , Office Room # 111, Tel:
05190854163, Cell: 03419756251
School of Civil & Environmental Engineering (SCEE)
National University of Science and Technology (NUST)
NUST Campus, Sector H-12, Islamabad
(20th Century)
EVOLUTION OF PAVEMENT DESIGN
METHODOLOGY
Pavement design:
1) Mix design of material
2) Thickness design of structural layers
Pavement design philosophy:
1) Empirical
2) Mechanistic ( Theoretical , Analytical, Structural)
3) Mechanistic-Empirical
DESIGN APPROACHES
Road Note 29 (TRRL, UK 1960, 1970,
Empirical)
Road Note 31
The Asphalt Institute Manual Series
AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement
Structures
ROAD NOTE 29
A guide to the structural design of Pavements for
new roads …TRRL, UK 1960, 1970,
Empirical Approach: study performance of
experimental sections built into in-service road
network
Foundation soil CBR .. Upto 7 %
Traffic.. Upto 100 Million Eq. Standard Axles
Specification of material
Design life..20mm rutting or severe cracking
ROAD NOTE 29
Performance data interpreted in light of structural
theory, mathematical modeling of pavement
behavior, simulative testing of road materials and
pavements
The Structural Design of Bituminous Roads..
TRRL Laboratory Report 1132 published in 1984
Structural design criteria:
1) Critical stress and strain
2) Permissible strains induced by standard 40 KN
wheel load at pavement temperature of 20o C
ROAD NOTE 31
A guide to the structural design of bitumen-
surfaced roads in tropical and sub-tropical
countries ( Overseas Edition 1962,1966,1977)
For traffic upto 30 msa in one direction, for >30
msa use TRRL 1132 with calibration to local
conditions
subgrade strength by CBR method
6 Sub-grade strength classes(2,4,7,14,29,30+)
8 Traffic classes (0.3.0.7,1.5,3.0,6.0,10,17,30)
Design charts for 8 type of road base/surfacing
material
THE ASPHALT INSTITUTE (MS-1)
Thickness Design-Asphalt Pavements for Highways and
streets ( 1964,1981,1991)
Initially developed from data of AASHO Road test
Design charts in latest edition developed using DAMA
elastic –layered pavement analysis program that modeled
two stress strain conditions ( mechanistic based design
procedure uses empirical correlations)
Roadbed soil strength characterized by Mr
AC by Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson’s ratio
The design charts for 3 MAAT/ computer program for full
depth asphalt concrete or with emulsified base/ untreated
aggregate base are given
AASHTO GUIDE FOR THE DESIGN OF
PAVEMENT STRUCTURES
Approach : study performance of trial sections
constructed to a wide range of overall thickness
round a close loop trafficked by repetitions of
known axle loads
Developed empirical model by regression analysis
from data of ASSHO Road Test
Interim guide 1961,1972, 1981
ASSHTO Guide for the design of Pavement
Structures (1986,1993)
AASHTO GUIDE…………..contd.
Performance period Roadbed soil resilient
Analysis period modulus
Traffic ..Load Resilient modulus for
Equivalence Values unbound material
Reliability Elastic model for
Standard deviation asphalt concrete
Serviceability Layer co-efficient
Drainage
AASHTO GUIDE…………..contd.
Log(W18)= Zr x So+9.36 log10 (SN+1)-0.20
+
Structural design model/equation
log10[ΔPSI/4.2-1.5]
0.40 + 1094
( SN+1) 5.19
+ 2.32x log10 ( Mr) – 8.07
SN = a1D1 + a2 D2 m2 + a3D3m3
PAVEMENT RESPONSES
Flexible Pavements
Given Wheel Load
150 psi
Wearing C.
Base
Sub-base
3 psi Sub-grade
Load Distribution in Flexible Pavements
PAVEMENT RESPONSES
Load related responses:
1) Vertical ( compressive)stresses and strains
2) Shear stresses and strain
3) Radial ( compressive or tensile) stresses and
strain
Temperature induced responses:
1) Shrinkage stresses and strains ( temp: cycling)
2) Low temperature cracking
3) Thermal cracking
PAVEMENT RESPONSES
Critical responses:
1) horizontal tensile stress/strain at the bottom of
bound layers
2) Vertical compressive stress/strain at the top of sub-
grade
Calculating responses:
1) Using equations
2) Graphical solutions
3) Elastic layer computer programs
i) CHEVRON ii) ELSYM5
iii) ILLI-PAVE iv) MICH-PAVE
PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE
PREDICTION MODELS
Performance prediction models are also
called distress models or transfer
functions
Models relate structural responses to
pavement distress
1) Fatigue cracking Model
2) Rutting Model
3) Thermal cracking Model
PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE
PREDICTION MODELS
Fatigue cracking Model
Nf = f1( εt ) –f2 ( Es)-f3 (General form)
Nf = 0.0796( εt ) –3.291 ( Es)-0.854 (A. Inst)
Nf = 0.0685( εt ) –5.671 ( Es)-2.363 (Shell)
Nf = 1.66x 10-10 ( εt ) –4.32 (TRRL)
Nf = 5.0 x 10-6 ( εt ) –3.0 (IDOT)
PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE
PREDICTION MODELS
Rutting Model(subgrade strain model)
Nf = f4( εv ) –f5 (General form)
Org f4 f5 Allowable Rut
Depth mm
Asp Inst 1.365 x 10-6 4.447 13
Shel 1.94 x 10-7 4.00 13
TRRL 6.18 x 10-8 3.95 10
PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE
PREDICTION MODELS
Permanent deformation model
log εp = a + b (log N) or εp = A (N)b
a = Exp estb material/stress condition
parameter
A= antilog of “a”
b= 0.1---0.2
PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE
PREDICTION MODELS
Asphalt concrete Rutting Model
log εp = Cv + C1(log N) +C2 (log N)+ C3 (log N)
Cv depends on temp and deviator stress
C1, C2 are constants
Sub-grade Rutting Model
log εp = Cv + C1(log N) +C2 (log N)+ C3 (log N)
Cv depends on moisture and deviator stress
PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE
PREDICTION MODELS
Thermal Cracking Model
1) Low temperature cracking
2) Thermal fatigue cracking
3) Models like that Shahin-McCullough model
are quite complex , but examine both types of
cracking.
DESIGN PARAMETERS
Subgrade
Loads
Environment
SUBGRADE
Characterized by strength
and/or stiffness
◦ California Bearing Ratio (CBR)
Measures shearing resistance
Units: percent
Typical values: 0 to 20
◦ Resilient Modulus (MR)
Measures stress-strain relationship
Units: psi or MPa
Typical values: 3,000 to 40,000 psi
Picture from University of Tokyo Geotechnical Engineering Lab
SUBGRADE
Some Typical Values
Classificatio
CBR MR (psi) Typical Description
n
Gravels, crushed stone and
sandy soils. GW, GP, GM,
Good ≥ 10 20,000
SW, SP, SM soils are often
in this category.
Clayey gravel and clayey
sand, fine silt soils. GM, GC,
Fair 5–9 10,000
SM, SC soils are often in this
category.
Fine silty sands, clays, silts,
organic soils. CL, CH, ML,
Poor 3–5 5,000
MH, CM, OL, OH soils are
often in this category.
LOADS
Load characterization
Tire loads
Axle and tire configurations
Load repetition
Traffic distribution
Vehicle speed
LOAD QUANTIFICATION
Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL)
◦ Converts wheel loads of various magnitudes and repetitions ("mixed
traffic") to an equivalent number of "standard" or "equivalent" loads
◦ Based on the amount of damage they do to the pavement
◦ Commonly used standard load is the 18,000 lb (80 kN) equivalent
single axle load
Load Equivalency
◦ Generalized fourth power approximation
4
load
relative damage factor
18,000 lb.
TYPICAL LEFS
Notice that cars are insignificant and thus
usually ignored in pavement design.
LEF EXAMPLE
The standard axle weights for a standing-room-only
loaded Metro articulated bus (60 ft. Flyer) are:
Axle Empty Full
Steering 13,000 lb. 17,000 lb.
Middle 15,000 lb. 20,000 lb.
Rear 9,000 lb. 14,000 lb.
Using the 4th power approximation, determine the total
equivalent damage caused by this bus in terms of ESALs
when it is empty. How about when it is full?
TYPES OF RIGID PAVEMENT
Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement (JPCP)
TYPES OF RIGID PAVEMENT
Jointed Reinforced Concrete Pavement (JRCP)
TYPES OF RIGID PAVEMENT
ContinuouslyReinforced Concrete
Pavement (CRCP)
Thanks
