Design of A Flexible Pavement

Design Of Flexible Pavement For Ease Of Transportation From Esukapalli To Tallapaka
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
It is a well-recognized fact that our pavement design procedures are inadequate in general
and seriously lacking in many particulars. The fact that this statement can be applied on a
county, state or national basis is little consolation to those in Indiana who must design
and build pavements, for ever-changing traffic conditions, in such mileage and at such
unit costs compared to the funds available that a working margin of safety is practically
nonexistent.
Although pavement design procedure went through an uneasy period in the 1920’s when
increased volume and weight of traffic appeared to be damaging to highways then
existing, changes in design of the pavement and the vehicle and, particularly, conversion
to pneumatic tires alleviated the situation until in the early 1930’s the road system was
considered structurally adequate. Commissioner McDonald of the Bureau of Public
Roads made a statement to this effect in 1931, and though the statement recently has been
misapplied in some quarters, this fact does not detract from its value as representing
conditions existing at the time it was made. The total thickness of the flexible pavements
of this day was commonly determined by the general practice of the area and frequently
was a macadam type of construction; either water-bound, bituminous penetrated or both.
At that time, the volume and weight of traffic and the frequency of heavy axle loads were
small compared to present conditions and pavement thicknesses determined by rule-of-
thumb procedures were generally satisfactory.
Beginning in 1940 the number of heavy axle loads per thousand vehicles began to rise
sharply. By 1942 the intensity of heavy axle loads had tripled, and by 1948 the total
number of heavy axle loads was 18 times the number in the 1936-37 period. Also, by
1948 the total number of gross loads of 40,000 pounds or more was 12 times as great and
their frequency was seven times as great in the 1936-37 period1. This tremendous change
in the volume and weight of freight movement which has been imposed on our highway
system has been the cause of much concern to highway engineers and to the general
public. Not only has the geometric design of our highways been changed to accommodate
the greater width of trucks—resulting in increased cost of construction—but the life
expectancy of our highways has been markedly reduced. This has resulted not only in a
greater proportion of highway funds being diverted from improvement of facilities to
maintenance of existing ones, but it has necessitated the construction of pavements of
greater thickness with a resulting reduction in the number of miles of pavement which
can be constructed with available funds. Highway engineers, are faced with a serious
problem—the design of pavements which are adequate to withstand the traffic expected
throughout their life, while at the same time avoiding over design and excessive costs. In
one sense, this may be the root of our dilemma; economic factors require an accuracy in
pavement design that is beyond the precision with which we are able to define the
conditions for design.
In spite of this situation, we must continue to design and build pavements with funds we
know to be inadequate for the needs and with the knowledge that we will receive adverse
criticism from some quarters regardless of our best efforts. While these remarks, and the
entire thesis of this discussion, apply equally well to the design of both rigid and flexible
Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 1

pavements, our subject is directed specifically to the design of flexible pavements. We

look to research to provide the answers to our design problems. But “research” is a broad
term and if we are to proceed logically and directly toward the final goal, we must decide
which of the possible avenues of research endeavor are most likely to produce the
specific information we so sorely need. And so it is our purpose today to present our
ideas of what kind of research is needed. To do so requires that we first briefly review the
research that the Joint Highway Research Project has already accomplished and that is
current.
1.1. PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS:
On this occasion a year ago we presented a discussion in which the problems associated
with flexible pavements were enumerated and past research on these problems was
summarized. At that time we pointed out that flexible-pavement research, or the general
problem of flexible pavement design, consists of two parts: the material design of layers
which make up the pavement system and the thickness design of such layers.
With regard to subgrade soils, our research has taken the form of strength tests in the
laboratory, field strength tests including plateloading tests and performance surveys of
existing pavements. We have utilized both pedological and geological information and
have developed techniques to interpret soil conditions from aerial photographs. As a
result of this work we view the relationship between pavement design and subgrade soil
as a regional problem of soil areas. By this means, we are able to include such factors as
climate and topography and the relationship between grade line and the soil profile. Also,
such an approach allows the accumulation of performance-survey data on a rational basis
and provides a basic grouping on which to conduct strength tests, either laboratory or
field.
With regard to granular base materials, we have conducted studies to determine the effect
of such variables as grading, compaction, angularity of the aggregates, amount and type
of soil fines, and amount of moisture. The studies also have included bituminous bases.
Both laboratory and field strength tests have been utilized in making these evaluations.
Some work has been done on the evaluation, by means of pavement performance
surveys, of various base types as reinforcing layers on different subgrade soils. Also,
because economical pavement design is possible only by including local granular
materials as a portion of the design, we have extended the area or regional concept of
design to include these materials as well as subgrade soils. This area concept also has
been extended to bituminous surface courses because in many cases the type of aggregate
locally available dictates the type of surface for economical design.
In last year’s paper, we also presented a resume of the research conducted by the Joint
Highway Research Project on bituminous surface courses. These studies have been many
and varied and have been conducted on a variety of surfaces ranging from surface-
treatments to hot-mixed bituminous concrete. These latter studies have been aimed at
developing a satisfactory method for the design of bituminous-aggregate mixtures and
have included the evaluation of such variables as type and grading of aggregate, type and
consistency of bituminous material, amount of bituminous material, density and speed of
testing. Among the tests that have been used can be listed unconfined compression,

squeeze and impact tests, laboratory tests under moving wheel loads, Marshall and
triaxial tests.
This information, collected over the life of our research organization, and impressive as it
is when viewed in its entirety, really only forms the background or basic information for
the development of pavement designs in the true sense.
1.2. CURRENT RESEARCH:
In recent years, and especially during the past year, using as a basis the accumulated
essential information just outlined, we have directed our efforts more specifically toward
the development of design procedure, both with regard to material components and
thickness. Our work on the design of bituminous surfacing mixtures continues very
active. We are now working with mixtures that have been and are being used in the
concrete resurfacing program, not only because the design of mixtures for use in
resurfacing is a critical problem in itself, but also because this service condition provides
an excellent basis for a study of the properties of bituminous mixtures.
For example, if shoving or rutting occurs in this use, we know it must be due to lack of
stability in the mixture itself and not because of the movement of lower layers. Also, if
bleeding occurs or the mixture becomes slippery in service, we are quite certain that the
mixture itself is at fault, which might not be the case if it had been placed over an old
bituminous pavement, particularly if numerous patched areas existed. The fact that a wide
variety of mixture types, both with respect to the aggregate and bituminous materials, has
been used in our resurfacing program makes this source of information doubly attractive.
With regard to field performance surveys of flexible pavements, we have concentrated
our efforts during the past year on those high-type pavements constructed on plastic silty-
clay soils and carrying heavy loads. We have found that these pavements, 2 to 14 inches
thick and composed in general of two water-bound macadam layers, a bituminous
macadam layer and a bituminous concrete surface, have not been adequate structurally
and have failed by rutting in the wheel tracks. We have been interested in why this rutting
occurred and have trenched several of these pavements in an attempt to find out. At
locations where the rutting was definite, we have
obtained a cross-section profile of the pavement system by taking elevation readings at
one-foot intervals across one-half the pavement on the top of each pavement layer,
including the sub-grade soil, as it was exposed during the trenching operations.
These measurements cannot be obtained with sufficient accuracy, nor is each pavement
layer sufficiently thick, to make it possible to draw conclusions with respect to each
layer. However, considering the pavement as a whole and working with differences in
elevation between the top of the pavement and the top of the sub grade, we find that the
consolidation which allowed rutting to occur has taken place in both the sub-grade soil
and in the pavement layers themselves. Individual locations vary, but the average values
for the rutting in the outside wheel tracks as determined from six trenches in one road
showed 1.5 inches at the maximum point in the rut. Of this 1.5 inches, it was determined
that 0.6 inches was contributed by consolidation of the sub grade and that 0.9 inches of
consolidation occurred in the pavement itself.
From these data we conclude that, to carry heavy traffic on plastic soils in the State of
Indiana, we must not only build flexible pavements thicker than we have in the past, but

we must also use reinforcing layers that are more stable in themselves. Whether or not
this can be accomplished by a change in construction procedure or whether the types of
reinforcing layers need to be changed remains to be demonstrated. In this connection it
may be well to point out that, in general, those pavements which have rutted or
consolidated under traffic and then have been resurfaced seem to be structurally adequate
at the present time. This performance survey work has been valuable and more of it needs
to be done.
A third phase of our current research program on flexible pavements is concerned with
laboratory studies to develop a specific design procedure. This involves the determination
of the strength characteristics of sub grade soils and granular base materials. For this
purpose we are using the triaxial compression test. We believe that the triaxial test is
fundamental and its use will eventually lead to pavement design on a rational basis. This
work is being continued, and we have recently purchased new equipment to extend the
scope of the program to granular materials with larger maximum aggregate size.
1.3. NEED FOR TEST SECTIONS:
But with all of this effort, past and present, we feel definitely that our research program
on flexible pavement design will remain deficient and fall short of the goal unless our
laboratory program is benefited by companion studies in the field. The evaluation of any
material in the laboratory, soil, base course or bituminous surface, requires the test
specimens of that material be made. The test results are valid only if the specimen is truly
representative of the material as it is used in the field. To cite a case in point, evidence
from our plate-loading tests on simulated pavement bases indicates that a given thickness
of a given granular material compacted in the same way does not result in the same
reinforcing layer when placed on a poor soil as when placed on a good one. In addition to
such difficulties, it is an indisputable fact that many features of pavement design such as
climate, drainage, construction procedure and wheel loadings do not lend themselves to
laboratory evaluation.
Most of us, when we think of experiments in the field, think immediately of some kind of
a test road. Our original conception may be a modest one, but when we get down to cases
we find that to include the variables we would like to compare requires several miles of
virgin grade with soil conditions absolutely uniform. We think about it a little longer and
we decide that to eliminate chance results each section will have to be duplicated and we
double the length of our road. Next, we discover that a location with uniform soil
conditions cannot be found, or some other variable conditions beyond our control exists,
and we must double our road again. And finally, if we discuss the matter with someone
else and consider the inclusion of additional variables he thinks are important, we find
that our test road will have to be built under two separate contracts and will have to be
doubled again because now the contractor variable will have to be considered.
These remarks are facetious, but they illustrate the point that full-scale test roads
incorporating a number of variables are difficult to plan and construct, are expensive, are
time consuming and in general yield results applicable to a limited condition of soil,
climate and traffic. On the credit side, it can be said that such test roads, when they are
well planned and executed, can yield very valuable results. It seems to be a fact that any

highway department can stand the strain of a full-scale test road only about once in every
10 years and at that rate we can’t hope to keep pace with changing traffic conditions.
Our purpose in making these remarks is not to criticize the building of test roads, we will
be happy to participate anytime one is built. We want to make sure that you don’t confuse
the test sections we propose with the common conception of a test road. We sincerely
believe that the most direct and practical procedure to accomplish the field research
needed for flexible pavement designs— and the procedure most likely to keep pace with
changing traffic conditions—is the installation of planned test sections in as many
construction contracts as feasible.
Our procedure would be to plan test sections around the proposed design, keeping them
limited to those that would not interfere materially with the regular construction and
would therefore involve little or no additional expense. In each case, we would keep the
number of variables at a minimum and in many cases we would hope that this number
would be only one or two. With this procedure the lengths of the test section would have
to be only sufficiently long to be representative of conditions as they existed on any
contract job and another condition of soil or traffic would be obtained by repeating this
section in another contract or contracts.
There isn’t sufficient time here to cover completely the range of variables we would
include in such a planned test-section program. An example or two may be helpful in
understanding the proposal so that you may evaluate its merits in your own minds. To
take a real case, a contract proposal now existing for a high-type flexible pavement to
carry heavy loads on a plastic soil specifies seven inches of sub-base material extending
to the ditch line, seven inches of water- bound macadam constructed in two layers, two
and one-half inches of bituminous concrete base, one and one-half inches of binder, and
one inch of bituminous concrete surface. You will recognize that this pavement differs
from those constructed in the past, which have proved to be inadequate, in three respects.
First, the overall thickness has been increased by seven inches of sub-base; second,
instead of a trench section drainage is provided by carrying the sub-base through the
shoulder; and third, the bituminous penetration macadam has been replaced with
bituminous concrete base and binder courses.
These differences from previous design form the basis for a selection of variables we
would include in this contract. It would involve three test sections; one section of the
proposed design except that the sub-base would be omitted; one section in which the
pavement would be trenched and the sub-base would not be carried to the ditch; and one
section of the proposed design except that the bituminous concrete base and binder
courses would be replaced with bituminous penetration macadam.
Some of you will recognize this contract as one for which we have submitted proposed
test sections more numerous than has just been outlined. The test sections just
enumerated are more in keeping with the proposal we are trying to illustrate.

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Khan (1998) describes the Group Index Method and California Bearing Ratio Method
for design of flexible pavements. In Group Index Method the thickness is obtained by
first determining the Group Index of soil. The curves are plotted between Group Index of
subgrade and thickness for various traffic conditions. In California Bearing Ratio
Method, the curves are plotted between California Bearing Ratio Percent and depth of
construction.
Arora (2003) have reported various methods for design of flexible pavements. These
various methods are Group Index Method, CBR Method, California Resistance Value
Method and
McLeod Method. In the Group Index Method, the thickness of base and surfacing is
related to the volume of traffic. In CBR Method the curves are plotted between CBR and
pavement thickness for light, medium and heavy traffic. California Resistance Value
Method uses California Resistance value, called R-value. In Mcleod Method curves are
plotted between depth of construction and CBR for traffic conditions.
Punmiaet. al (2005) have reported stresses in homogeneous mass; elastic deformation

under circular load and Burmister analysis for flexible pavement. Charts for vertical
deflections have been developed. The design curves by Group Index Method and
California Bearing Ratio Method have been developed. In Group Index Method, the
curves are plotted between Group Index and thickness. In California Bearing Ratio
Method curves are plotted between thickness of construction and California Bearing
Ratio.
Subagio et.al (2005) discusses a case study for multi layer pavement structural analysis
using methods of equivalent thickness. An approximate method has been developed to
calculate stresses and strains in multilayer pavement systems by transforming this
structure into an equivalent one-layer system with equivalent thicknesses of one elastic
modulus. This concept is known as the method of equivalent thickness which assumes
that the stresses and strains below a layer depend on the stiffness of that layer.
Das (2008) discusses the reliability issues in bituminous pavement design, based on
mechanistic-empirical-approach. Variabilities of pavement design input parameters are
considered and reliability, for various proposed failure definitions, of a given pavement is
estimated by simulation as well as by analytical method. A methodology has been
suggested for designing bituminous pavements for a given level of overall reliability by
mechanistic empirical pavement design approach.
Tarefderet. al (2010) present that reliability is an important factor in flexible pavement

design to consider the variability associated with the design inputs. In this paper,

subgrade strength variability and flexible pavement designs are evaluated for reliability.
Parameters such as mean, maximum likelihood, median, coefficient of variation, and
density distribution, function of subgrade strength are determined. Design outputs are
compared in terms of reliability and thickness using these design procedures. It is shown
that the AASHTO provides higher reliability values compared to the probabilistic
procedure. Finally, the reliability of the flexible pavement design is evaluated by varying
hot mix asphalt properties. Alternative designs are recommended for the existing
pavement thickness by modifying material and subgrade properties to mitigate different
distresses.
According to Rahman et. al (2011), design of flexible pavement is largely based on

empirical methods using layered elastic and two-dimensional finite element analysis.
Currently a shift underway towards more mechanistic design techniques to minimize the
limitations in determining stress, strain and displacement in pavement analysis. In this
study, flexible pavement modeling is done using ABAQUS software in which model
dimensions, element types and meshing strategies are taken by successive trial and error
to achieve desired accuracy and convergence of the study.
Ameriet. al (2012) have used finite element method to analyse and design pavements.
Finite element method is able to analyse stability, time dependent problems and problems
with material nonlinearity. In this paper, a great number of the prevalent pavements have
been analyzed by means of two techniques: Finite element method and theory of
multilayer system. Eventually, from statistical viewpoint, the results of analysis on these
two techniques have been compared by significance parameter and correlation
coefficient. The results of this study indicate that results of analysis on finite elements are
most appropriately compiled with results came from theory of multilayer system and
there is no significant difference among the mean values in both techniques.
Jain et. al (2013) discuss about the design methods that traditionally being followed and
examine the “Design of rigid and flexible pavements by various methods and their cost
analysis by each method”. Flexible pavements are preferred over cement concrete roads
as they have a great advantage that these can be strengthened and improved in stages with
the growth of traffic and also their surfaces can be milled and recycled for rehabilitation.
The flexible pavement is less expansive also with regard to initial investment and
maintaince. Although rigid pavement is expansive but less maintenance and have good
design period. It is observed that flexible pavements are more economical for lesser
volume of traffic. The life of flexible pavement is near about 15 years whose initial cost
is less needs a periodic maintenance after a certain period and maintenance costs very
high. The life of rigid pavement is much more than the flexible pavement of about 40
years, approximately 2.5 times life of flexible pavement whose initial cost is much more
than flexible pavement but maintenance cost is very less.

Dilip et.al (2013) discuss the uncertainty in material properties and traffic
characterization in the design of flexible pavements. This has led to significant efforts in
recent years to incorporate reliability methods and probabilistic design procedures for the
design, rehabilitation, and maintenance of pavements. This study carries out the
reliability analysis for a flexible pavement section based on the first-order reliability
method and second-order reliability method techniques and the crude Monte Carlo
Simulation. The study also advocates the use of narrow bounds to the probability of
failure, which provides a better estimate of the probability of failure, as validated from
the results obtained from Monte Carlo Simulation.
Maharaj and Gill (2014) performed axisymmetric finite element analysis by varying
different parameters to develop design charts. The parameters varied are thickness of
pavement, pressure and elastic modulus of subgrade. The pavement and base course has
been idealized as linear elastic material while the subgrade has been idealized as
nonlinear material by Drucker-Prager yield criterion. The pavement, base course and soil
have been discretized by four nodedisoparametric finite elements. Four types of design
charts have been developed. Each of the design charts has three parameters. For two
known parameters, the third parameters can be obtained.
CHAPTER 3
3.1.FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT:
Road transport is the only transport that provides door to door service to its customers.
Road surface or pavement is the durable surface material laid down on an area intended
to sustain vehicular or foot traffic, such as a road or walkway. Road surfaces are
frequently marked to guide traffic. A highway pavement is a structure consisting of
superimposed layers of processed materials above the natural soil subgrade, whose
primary function is to distribute the applied vehicle loads to the sub-grade. The pavement
structure should be able to provide a surface of acceptable riding quality, adequate skid
resistance, favorable light reflectingcharacteristics, and low noise pollution. The ultimate
aim is to ensure that the transmitted stresses due to wheel load are sufficiently reduced, so
that they will not exceed bearing capacity of the subgrade. Basically, all hard surfaced
pavement types can be categorized into two groups, flexible and rigid.
Flexible pavements are those which are surfaced with bituminous (or asphalt) materials
and a rigid pavement has concrete surface. This gives an overview of pavement types,
layers and functions as well as the cost analysis. Most of the Indian highways system
consists of flexible pavement.The wearing surface of flexible pavements usually is
constructed of bituminous materials such that they remain in contact with the underlying
material.Traffic loads are transferred by the wearing surface to the underlying supporting
materials through the interlocking of aggregates, the frictional effect of granular

materials, and cohesion of fine materials.The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test is an
empirical method of design of flexible pavement design. It was developed by the
California Department of Transportation before World War II.
The samples to be prepared at optimum moisture content (OMC) corresponding to the

Proctor Compaction and soaked in water for a period of four days before testing. . It has
been reported that, soaking for four days may be very severe and may be discarded in
some cases. This test method is used to evaluate the potential strength of sub grade, sub
base, and base course material for use in road and airfield pavements. The Indian Road
Congress (IRC) encodes the exact design strategies of the pavement layers based upon
the sub grade strength which is most commonly expressed in terms of the California
Bearing Ratio (CBR).With the CBR value of the soil known, the appropriate thickness of
construction required above the soil for different traffic conditions is determined using
the design charts, proposed by IRC. CBR value can be measured directly in the
laboratory test in accordance with IS: 2720 (Part-XVI) on soil sample procured from the
work site. Laboratory test takes at least 4 days to measure the CBR value for each soil
sample under soaked condition. This test requires experience without which the results
may be inaccurate.
CBR can also be used for measuring the load-bearing capacity of unimproved airstrips or
for soils under paved airstrips. The harder the surface, the higher the CBR rating. A CBR
of 3 equates to tilled farmland, a CBR of 4.75 equates to turf or moist clay, while moist
sand may have a CBR of 10. High quality crushed rock has a CBR over 80. The standard
material for this test is crushedCalifornia limestone which has a value of 100, meaning
that it is not unusual to see CBR values ofover 100 in well compacted areas. As per IRC
recommendation, California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value of subgrade is used for design of
flexible pavements. California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value is an important soil parameter
for design of flexible pavements and runway of air fields. It can also be used for
determination of sub grade reaction of soil by using correlation. It is one of the most
important engineering properties of soil for design of sub grade of roads. CBR value of
soil may depends on many factors like maximum dry density (MDD), optimum moisture
content (OMC), liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL), plasticity index (PI), type of soil,
permeability of soil etc.These tests can easily be performed in the laboratory. the
estimation of the CBR could be done on the basis of these tests which are quick to
perform, less time consuming and cheap, then it will be easy to get the information about
the strength of subgrade over the length of roads, By considering this aspect, a number of
investigators in the past made their investigations in this field and designed different
pavements by determining the CBR value on the basis of results of low cost, less time
consuming and easy to perform tests. In this study, attempts have been made to seek the
values of CBR of different soil samples and correlate their CBR values for the design
purpose of flexible pavement as per guidelines of IRC: SP: 37-2001.
3.2. COMPONENTS OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT:
3.2.1. Sub grade soil:

The subgrade is usually the natural material located along the horizontal alignment of the
pavement and serves as the foundation of the pavement structure. It also may consist of a

layer of selected borrow materials, well compacted to prescribed specifications. It may be

necessary to treat the subgrade material to achieve certain strength properties required for
the type of pavement being constructed.
Soil is an accumulation or deposit of earth material, derived naturally from the
disintegration of rocks or decay of vegetation, that can be excavated readily with power
equipment in the field or disintegrated by gentle mechanical means in the laboratory. The
supporting soil beneath pavement and its special under courses is called sub grade.
Undisturbed soil beneath the pavement is called natural sub grade. Compacted sub grade
is the soil compacted by controlled movement of heavy compactors.
3.2.2. Soil Types:
The wide range of soil types available as highway construction materials have made it
obligatory on the part of the highway engineer to identify and classify different soils. A
survey of locally available materials and soil types conducted in India revealed wide
variety of soil types, gravel, moorum and naturally occurring soft aggregates, which can
be used in road construction. Broadly, the soil types can be categorized as Laterite soil,
Moorum /red soil, Desert sands, Alluvial soil, Clay including Black cotton soil.
Gravel: These are coarse materials with particle size under 2.36 mm with little or no _nes
contributing to cohesion of materials.
Moorum: These are products of decomposition and weathering of the pavement rock.
Visually these are similar to gravel except presence of higher content of fines.
Silts: These are finer than sand, brighter in color as compared to clay, and exhibit little
cohesion. When a lump of silty soil mixed with water, alternately squeezed and tapped a
shiny surface makes its appearance, thus dilatancy is a specific property of such soil.
Clays: These are _ner than silts. Clayey soils exhibit stickiness, high strength when dry,
and show no dilatancy. Black cotton soil and other expansive clays exhibit swelling and
shrinkage properties. Paste of clay with water when rubbed in between fingers leaves
stain, which is not observed for silts.
3.2.3. Sub-base:
Located immediately above the subgrade, the subbase component consists of material of
a superior quality to that which is generally used for subgrade construction. The
requirements for subbase materials usually are given in terms of the gradation, plastic
characteristics, and strength.
In cases where suitable subbase material is not readily available, theavailable material
can be treated with other materials to achieve the necessary properties. This process of
treating soils to improve their engineering properties is known as stabilization.
Sub-base materials comprise natural sand, gravel, laterite, brick metal, crushed stone or
combinations thereof meeting the prescribed grading and physical requirements. The sub-
base material should have a minimum CBR of 20 % and 30 % for traffic upto 2 msa and
traffic exceeding 2 msa respectively. Sub-base usually consist of granular or WBM and
the thickness should not be less than 150 mm for design traffic less than 10 msa and 200
mm for design traffic of 1.0 msa and above.

3.2.4. Base:
The base course lies immediately above the subbase. It is placed immediately above the
subgrade if a subbase course is not used. This course usually consists of granular
materials such as crushed stone, crushed or uncrushed slag, crushed or uncrushed gravel,
and sand. The specifications for base course materials usually include more strict
requirements than those for subbase materials, particularly with respect to their plasticity,
gradation, and strength. Materials that do not have the required properties can be used as
base materials if they are properly stabilized with Portland cement, asphalt, or lime. In
some cases, high-quality base course materials also may be treated with asphalt or
Portland cement to improve the stiffness
characteristics of heavy-duty pavements.
The recommended designs are for unbounded granular bases which comprise
conventional water bound macadam (WBM) or wet mix macadam (WMM) or equivalent
confirming to MOST specifications. The materials should be of good quality with
minimum thickness of 225 mm for traffic up to 2 msaan 150 mm for traffic exceeding 2
msa.
3.2.5. Bituminous surfacing:

The surface course is the upper course of the road pavement and is constructed
immediately above the base course. The surface course in flexible pavements usually
consists of a mixture
of mineral aggregates and asphalt. It should be capable of with-standing high tire
pressures, resisting abrasive forces due to traffic, providing a skid-resistant driving
surface, and preventing the penetration of surface water into the underlying layers. The
thickness of the wearing surface can vary from 3 in. (7.62 cm) to more than 6 in. (15.24
cm), depending on the expected traffic on the pavement. The quality of the surface course
of a flexible pavement depends on
the mix design of the asphalt concrete used.
The surfacing consists of a wearing course or a binder course plus wearing course. The
most commonly used wearing courses are surface dressing, open graded premix carpet,
mix seal surfacing, semi-dense bituminous concrete and bituminous concrete. For binder
course, MOST specifies, it is desirable to use bituminous macadam (BM) for traffic upto
o 5 msa and dense bituminous macadam (DBM) for traffic more than 5 msa.
3.3. DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT AS PER IRC-37-2012 :

The design of the pavement layers to be laid over subgrade soil starts off with the
estimation of subgrade strength and the volume of traffic to be carried. The Indian
Road Congress (IRC) encodes the exact design strategies of the pavement layers
based upon the subgrade strength which is most commonly expressed in terms of the
California Bearing Ratio (CBR). For the design of pavement CBR value is invariably
considered as one of the important parameter. With the CBR value of the soil known,
the appropriate thickness of construction required above the soil for different traffic
conditions is determined using the design charts, proposed by IRC. CBR value can be
measured directly in the laboratory test in accordance with IS:2720 (Part-XVI) on soil

sample procured from the work site. Laboratory test takes at least 4 days to measure
the CBR value for each soil sample under soaked condition. In addition, the test
requires large quantity of the soil sample and the test requires skill and experience
without which the results may be inaccurate and misleading.
Using the following simple input parameters, appropriate designs could be chosen for
the
given traffic and soil strength:
_ Design traffic in terms of cumulative number of standard axles; and
_ CBR value of subgrade.
3.3.1. DESIGN TRAFFIC:
The method considers traffic in terms of the cumulative number of standard axles (8160
kg) to be carried by the pavement during the design life. This requires the following
information:
1. Initial traffic in terms of CVPD
2. Trace growth rate during the design life
3. Design life in number of years
4. Vehicle damage factor (VDF)
5. Distribution of commercial traffic over the carriage way.
Initial traffic:
Initial traffic is determined in terms of commercial vehicles per day (CVPD). For the
structural design of the pavement only commercial vehicles are considered assuming
laden weight of three traffic or more and their axle loading will be considered. Estimate
of the initial daily average traffic own for any road should normally be based on 7-day
24-hour classier traffic counts (ADT). In case of new roads, traffic estimates can be made
on the basis of potential land use and traffic on existing routes in the area.
Trace growth rate:

Trace growth rates can be estimated (I) by studying the past trends of traffic growth, and
(ii) by establishing econometric models. If adequate data is not available, it is
recommended that an average annual growth rate of 7.5 percent may be adopted.
Design life:
For the purpose of the pavement design, the design life is defined in terms of the
cumulative number of standard axles that can be carried before strengthening of the
pavement is necessary. It is recommended that pavements for arterial roads like NH, SH
should be designed for a life of 15 years, EH and urban roads for 20 years and other
categories of roads for 10 to 15 years.
Vehicle Damage Factor:

The vehicle damage factor (VDF) is a multiplier for converting the number of
commercial vehicles of different axle loads and axle configurations to the number of
standard axle-load repetitions. It is defined as equivalent number of standard axles per
commercial vehicle. The VDF varies with the axle configuration, axle loading, terrain,
type of road, and from region to region. The axle load equivalency factors are used to
convert difierent axle load repetitions into equivalent standard axle load repetitions. For
these equivalency factors refer IRC:37 2001. The exact VDF values are arrived after
extensive field surveys.
Vehicle distribution:
A realistic assessment of distribution of commercial traffic by direction and by lane is
necessary as it directly affects the total equivalent standard axle load application used in
the design. Until reliable data is available, the following distribution may be assumed.
 Single lane roads: Traffic tends to be more channelized on single roads than two
lane roads and to allow for this concentration of wheel load repetitions, the design
should be based on total number of commercial vehicles in both directions.
 Two-lane single carriageway roads: The design should be based on 75 % of the
commercial vehicles in both directions.
 Four-lane single carriageway roads: The design should be based on 40 % of the
total number of
 commercial vehicles in both directions.
 Dual carriageway roads: For the design of dual two-lane carriageway roads
should be based on 75 % of the number of commercial vehicles in each direction.
For dual three-lane carriageway and dual four-lane carriageway the distribution
factor will be 60 % and 45 % respectively.
3.3.2. CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST:

California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test was developed by the California Division of
Highway as a method ofclassifying and evaluating soil-sub grade and base course
materials for exible pavements. CBR test, an empirical test, has been used to determine
the material properties for pavement design. Empirical tests measure the strength of the
material and are not a true representation of the resilient modulus. It is a penetration test
wherein a standard piston, having an area of 3 in2 (or 50 mm diameter), is used to
penetrate the soil at a standard rate of 1.25 mm/minute. The pressure up to a penetration
of 12.5 mm and it's ratio to the bearing value of a standard crushed rock is termed as the
CBR.
In most cases, CBR decreases as the penetration increases. The ratio at 2.5 mm
penetration is used asthe CBR. In some case, the ratio at 5 mm may be greater than that at
2.5 mm. If this occurs, the ratio at5 mm should be used. The CBR is a measure of
resistance of a material to penetration of standard plunger under controlled density and
moisture conditions. The test procedure should be strictly adhered if high degree of
reproducibility is desired. The CBR test may be conducted in re-moulded or undisturbed
specimen in the laboratory. The test is simple and has been extensively investigated for
field correlations of flexible pavement thickness requirement.

The significance of the CBR test emerged from the following two facts, for almost all
pavement design charts, unbound materials are basically characterized in terms of their
CBR values when they are compacted in pavement layers and the CBR value has been
correlated with some fundamental properties of soils, such as plasticity indices, grain-size
distribution, bearing capacity, modulus of sub-grade reaction, modulus of resilience,
shear
strength, density, and molding moisture content.
CHAPTER 4
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
1. SOIL TESTINGS:
For checking the properties of the soil, reported different properties like maximum dry
density (MDD), optimum moisture content (OMC), liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL),
plasticity index (PI), etc.
COLLECTION OF MATERIALS
The materials were obtained from the nearby borrow areas, where plenty amount of
material is available for the construction purpose. The material which is collected for
testing is different in quality and property, so that the material was separately tested in the
laboratory so as to design the soil sub grade.

1.1. DETERMINATION OF LIQUID LIMIT-BY CASAGRANDE

APPARATUS:
Procedure:
 Take representative soil sample of approximately 120gms passing through 425

micron IS sieve and mix thoroughly with distilled water in the evaporating dish to
a uniform paste.
 The paste shall have a consistency that will require 30 to 35 drops of the cup to
cause the required closure of the standard groove.
 Leave the soil paste to stand for 24 hours to ensure uniform distribution of
moisture through out the soil mass.
 Remix the soil thoroughly before the test.
 Place a portion of the paste in the cup above the spot where the cup rests on the
base, squeeze down and spread in to position with a few strokes of the spatula as
possible and at the same time trim to a depth of 1cm at the point of maximum
thickness.
 Make a clean, sharp groove by a grooving tool along the diameter through the
centerline of the cam follower.

 Drop the cup from a height of 10 + 0.25 mm by turning the crank at the rate of
two-revolutions/ sec, until the two halves of the soil cake come in contact with the
bottom of the groove along the distance of about 12mm.
 Record the number of drops required to cause the groove close for the length of
12mm.
 Collect a representative slice of sample of soil approximately the width of spatula,
extending from about edge to edge of the soil cake at right angle to the groove in
to an air tight container and keep in the oven for 24hrs,maintained at a
temperature of 1050 to 1100C and express its moisture content as the percentage
of the oven dried weight.
 Transfer the remaining soil in the cup to the evaporating dish and clean the cup
and the grooving tool thoroughly.
 Repeat the operation specified above for at least three more additional trials
(minimum of four in all) with soil collected in evaporating dish to which
sufficient water has been added to bring the soil to more fluid condition.
Fig: 2.6.2 Divided soil cake before test
Fig: 2.6.3 Soil cake after test
 In each case record the number of blows and determine the moisture content as
before.
 The specimens shall be of such consistency that the number of drops required to
close the groove shall not be less than 15 or more than 35.

Report:
 Plot a flow curve with the points obtained from each determination on a semi
logarithmic graph representing water content on the arithmetical scale and the no.
of drops on the logarithmic scale.
 The flow curve is a straight line drawn as nearly as possible through the four or
more plotted points.
 The moisture content corresponding to 25 drops as read from the curve shall be
rounded off to the nearest second decimal and is reported as liquid limit of the
soil.
Observations (Sample-1):
S.No Determination 1 2 3 4 5 Remark

No.
1 Container 1 2 3 4 5
Number
2 Weight of 76 79.5 76 82.5 78.5

container + wet
soil (gm)
3 Weight of 66.56 68 65 68.5 65

container + dry
soil (gm)
5 Wt. of container 35 35 35 35 35
(gm)
6 Wt. of dry soil 31.56 33 30 33.5 30

(gm)
7 Moisture 30.15 34.84 36.67 41.74 45

content %
8 Number of 35 26 21 19 11
blows
Table 1: Determination of Liquid Limit (LL).
Graph 1: Liquid limit test Curve.
Result: Moisture content at 25 blows from the graph.
Liquid Limit (LL) = 29%.

S.No Determination 1 2 3 4 5 Remark

No.
1 Container 1 2 3 4 5
Number
2 Weight of 76 79.5 76 82.5 78.5

container + wet
soil (gm)
3 Weight of 66.56 68 65 68.5 65

container + dry
soil (gm)
5 Wt. of container 35 35 35 35 35
(gm)
6 Wt. of dry soil 31.56 33 30 33.5 30

(gm)
7 Moisture 30.15 34.84 36.67 41.74 45

content %
8 Number of 35 26 21 19 11
blows
Table 2: Determination of Liquid Limit (LL).
Graph 2: Liquid limit test Curve.
Result: Moisture content at 25 blows from the graph.
Liquid Limit (LL) = 33%.
1.2. DETERMINATION OF PLASTIC LIMIT AND PLASTICITY

INDEX:

Procedure:
 Take representative soil sample of approximately 20g from the portion of the
material passing 425 micron IS sieve and mix thoroughly with distilled water in
an evaporating dish till the soil mass becomes plastic enough to be easily molded
with fingers.
 In the case of clayey soils, leave the soil mass to stand for 24 hours to ensure
uniform distribution of moisture through out the soil.
 Form a ball with about 8 grams of this soil mass and roll between the fingers and
the glass plate as shown in Fig: 2.7.1 with just sufficient pressure to roll the mass
into a thread of uniform diameter throughout its length.
 The rate of rolling shall be between 80 and 90 strokes/minute counting the stroke
as one complete motion of the hand forward and back to the starting position
again.
 Continue the rolling till the thread crumbles exactly at 3mm diameter.
 If the soil thread doesn’t crumble exactly at 3mm knead the soil together to a
uniform mass and roll it again.
 Continue this process of alternate rolling and kneading until the thread crumbles
under the pressure exactly at 3mm diameter.
 Collect the pieces of crumbled soil thread in an airtight container and determine
its moisture content.
 Determine the plastic limit for at least two points of the soil passing 425 micron
IS sieve.

S.No. Determination No . 1 2 3 Remark
1 Weight of container +
wet soil (gm)
dry soil (gm)
3 Wt. of container (gm)
4 Wt. of dry soil (gm)
5 Moisture content %
Table 3: Determination of Plastic Limit (PL)
Plastic Limit(PL) =
Plasticity Index (Pl) = LL - PL = 45.60 – 25.35 = 20.25 %
S.No. Determination No . 1 2 3 Remark
wet soil (gm)
dry soil (gm)
3 Wt. of container (gm)
4 Wt. of dry soil (gm)
5 Moisture content %
Table 4: Determination of Plastic Limit (PL)
Plastic Limit(PL) =
Plasticity Index (Pl) = LL - PL = 45.60 – 25.35 = 20.25 %

Report:
 Report the individual and the mean of the results as the plastic limit of the soil to
the nearest second decimal.
1.3. PROCTOR DENSITY (IS: 2720 - PART 7):

Compaction is the process of densification of soil mass by reducing air voids. The
purpose of laboratory compaction test is so determine the proper amount of water at
which the weight of the soil grains in a unit volume of the compacted is maximum, the
amount of water is thus called the Optimum Moisture Content (OMC). In the laboratory
different values of moisture contents and the resulting dry densities, obtained after
compaction are plotted both to arithmetic scale, the former as abscissa and the latter as
ordinate. The points thus obtained are joined together as a curve. The maximum dry
density and the corresponding OMC are read from the curve.
Procedure:
 Take a representative oven-dried sample, approximately 5 kg in the given pan.

Thoroughly mix the sample with sufficient water to dampen it with approximate
water content of 4-6 %.
 Weigh the proctor mould without base plate and collar. Fix the collar and base
plate. Place the soil in the Proctor mould and compact it in 3 layers giving 25
blows per layer with the 2.5 kg rammer falling through. The blows shall be
distributed uniformly over the surface of each layer.
 Remove the collar; trim the compacted soil even with the top of mould using a
straight edge and weigh.
 Divide the weight of the compacted specimen by 944 cc and record the result as
the bulkdensity
 Remove the sample from mould and slice vertically through and obtain a small
sample for water content.
 Thoroughly break up the remainder of the material until it will pass a no.4 sieve
as judged by the eye. Add water in sufficient amounts to increase the moisture
content of the soil sample by one or two percentage points and repeat the above
procedure for each increment of water added. Continue this series of
determination until there is either a decrease or no change in the wet unit weight
of the compacted soil.

CALCULATIONS:
1. Description of Sample = soil (Clayey silt)
2. Weight of Mould = 2310 gm
3. Volume of Mould = 1000 cc
S.No. Determination 1 2 3 4 5
No.
1 Weight of 8930 9237 9649 9749 9700

Mould +
Compacted soil
(gm)
2 Weight of 3387 3694 4106 4206 4157

Compacted soil
(gm)
3 Wet Density 1.509 1.645 1.829 1.874 1.852

γt=wt/v (gm/cc)
4 Crucible No 1 2 3 4 5
5 Weight of 126 111 114 118 128

Crucible + wet
Soil (gm)
6 Weight of 120 103 104 106 111

Crucible + Dry
soil (gm)
7 Weight of water 6 8 10 12 17
(gm)
8 Weight of 36 37 36 37 36
Crucible (gm)
9 Weight of dry 84 66 68 70 74
soil (gm)
10 Water content 7.14 12.12 14.7 17.14 22.97

(%)

11 Dry Density 1.408 1.467 1.594 1.506 1.599

γd=γt/1+w
Table 5: Data Sheet for Proctor Compaction Test.
Standard Proctor Test

Sample-1
1.65
1.594 1.599
1.6
Dry Density(g/cc)
1.55
1.506
1.5
1.467
1.45
1.408
1.4
1.35
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Water Content(%)
Graph 3: Proctor compaction test curve.
Results: (As per Graph Below)
1. Optimum moisture content = 14.73 %
2. Maximum dry density = 1.834 gm/cc

S.No. Determination 1 2 3 4 5
No.
Weight of
Mould +
Compacted soil
(gm)
Weight of
Compacted soil
(gm)
Wet Density
γt=wt/v (gm/cc)
Crucible No
Weight of
Crucible + wet
Soil (gm)
Weight of
Crucible + Dry
soil (gm)
Weight of water
(gm)
Weight of
Crucible (gm)
Weight of dry
soil (gm)
Water content
(%)
Dry Density
γd=γt/1+w

Table 6: Data Sheet for Proctor Compaction Test.
Standard Proctor Test

Sample-2
1.42 1.4077 1.407
1.4 1.3906
1.38
Dry Density(g/cc)
1.36
1.337
1.34
1.32
1.297
1.3
1.28
1.26
1.24
13.04 15027 17.14 21.05 29.31
Water Content(%)
Graph 3: Proctor compaction test curve.
Results: (As per Graph Below)
1. Optimum moisture content = 14.73 %
2. Maximum dry density = 1.834 gm/cc
1.4. THE CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST (IS: 2720 - PART

16):
The California bearing ratio test is penetration test meant for the evaluation of subgrade
strength of roads and pavements. California bearing ratio is the ratio of force per unit area
required to penetrate in to a soil mass with a circular plunger of 50mm diameter at the
rate of 1.25mm / min. The results obtained by these tests are used with the empirical
curves to determine the thickness of pavement and its component layers. This is the most
widely used method for the design of flexible pavement.
Test Procedure:

 The laboratory CBR apparatus consists of a mould 150 mm diameter with a base
plate and a collar, a loading frame and dial gauges for measuring the penetration
values and the expansion on soaking.
 The specimen in the mould is soaked in water for four days and the swelling and
water absorption values are noted. The surcharge weight is placed on the top of
the specimen in the mould and the assembly is placed under the plunger of the
loading frame.
 Load is applied on the sample by a standard plunger with dia of 50 mm at the rate
of 1.25 mm/min. A load penetration curve is drawn. The load values on standard
crushed stones are 1370 kg and 2055 kg at 2.5 mm and 5.0 mm penetrations
respectively.
 CBR value is expressed as a percentage of the actual load causing the
penetrations of 2.5 mm or 5.0 mm to the standard loads mentioned above.
Therefore,
CBR =load carries by specimen/load carries by standard specimen _ 100
 Two values of CBR will be obtained. If the value of 2.5 mm is greater than that
of 5.0 mm penetration, the former is adopted. If the CBR value obtained from test
at 5.0 mm penetration is higher than that at 2.5 mm, then the test is to be repeated
for checking. If the check test again gives similar results, then higher value
obtained at 5.0 mm penetration is reported as the CBR value. The average CBR
value of three test specimens is reported as the CBR value of the sample.
S.No. Dial Guage Readings Penetration Proving Ring Load

Readings
1 0 0 0 0
2 50 0.5 0.1 92.9
3 100 1 0.13 120.77
4 150 1.5 0.15 139.35
5 200 2 0.17 157.93
6 250 2.5 0.19 176.51
7 300 3 0.2 185.8
9 400 4 0.22 204.38
10 500 5 0.28 260.12
11 750 7.5 0.34 315.86
12 1000 10 0.41 380.89
13 1250 12.5 0.47 436.63
C.B.R Value at 2.5 mm penetration = PT/PS * 100

= 176.51/1370 * 100
= 12.88%
C.B.R Value at 5 mm penetration = 260.12/2055 * 100
= 12.65%
C.B.R%
Sample-1
500 436.63
450 380.89
400
350 315.86
260.12
Load(Kg)
300
250 204.38
157.93 176.51 185.8
200
120.77 139.35
150 92.9
100
50 0
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 4 5 7.5 10 12.5
Penetration(mm)
C.B.R2.5 > C.B.R5
Therefore, considering the larger value,
C.B.R = 12.88%
S.No. Dial Guage Readings Penetration Proving Ring Load

Readings
1 0 0 0 0
2 50 0.5 0.6 55.74
3 100 1 0.08 74.32
4 150 1.5 0.10 92.9
5 200 2 0.11 102.19
6 250 2.5 0.12 114.41
7 300 3 0.14 130.06
9 400 4 0.17 157.93
10 500 5 0.18 167.22
11 750 7.5 0.21 195.09

12 1000 10 0.22 204.38

13 1250 12.5 0.24 222.96
C.B.R Value at 2.5 mm penetration = PT/PS * 100
= 8.35%
C.B.R Value at 5 mm penetration = 8.13%.
C.B.R %
Sample-2
250 222.96
195.09 204.38
200
157.93 167.22
130.06
Load(Kg)
150 114.41
102.9
92.9
100 74.32
55.4
50
0
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 4 5 7.5 10 12.5
Penetration(mm)
C.B.R2.5 > C.B.R5
Therefore, considering the larger value,
C.B.R = 8.35%

2. AGGREGATE TESTING:
2.1. AGGREGATE CRUSHING VALUE ( IS: 2386 (Part IV) – 1963):
The aggregate crushing value gives a relative measure of the resistance of an

aggregate crushing under gradually applied compressive load . With aggregate crushing
value 30 or higher’ the result may be anomalous and in such cases the ten percent fines
value should be determined instead.
Procedure:
 The aggregates passing through 12.5mm and retained on 10mm IS Sieve are
oven-dried at a temperature of 100 to 110oC for 3 to 4hrs.
 The cylinder of the apparatus is filled in 3 layers, each layer tamped with 25
strokes of a tamping rod.
 The weight of aggregates is measured (Weight ‘A’).
 The surface of the aggregates is then leveled and the plunger inserted. The
apparatus is then placed in the compression testing machine and loaded at a
uniform rate so as to achieve 40t load in 10 minutes. After this, the load is
released.
 The sample is then sieved through a 2.36mm IS Sieve and the fraction passing
through the sieve is weighed (Weight ‘B’).
6. Two tests should be conducted.
Observation:
weight of aggregates A=2.824kg
weight of aggregates passed through 2.36mm sieve, B=0.741kg
Calculation:
Aggregate crushing value = (B/A) x 100%= 26.23%
Result:

The aggregate crushing value of the given aggregate is 26.23%.
Inference:
The aggregate crushing value of the aggregate for concrete pavement should not exceed
30%
The aggregate crushing value of the aggregate for wearing surface should not exceed
45%.
2.2. AGGREGATE IMPACT TEST (Dry Method):
The aggregate impact value is a relative measure of the resistance of an aggregate

to sudden shock or impact, which in same aggregate differs from its resistance to a slow
or compressive load.
Procedure:

 The cup shall be fixed firmly in position on the base of the machine and the whole
sample is transferred from the measure to the cup and compact it with tamping
rod by giving 25 strokes.
 Compact the sample in the cup by allowing 15 complete free falls of the tamping
rod from a height of 380 mm above the aggregate top surface.
 The time interval between two successive blows should not be more than one
second.
 The crushed aggregate is sieved on IS 2.36 mm sieve till no further significant
amount passes in one minute.
 Weigh the aggregate passing through the sieve as B and the remaining portion as
C accurately to nearest 0.1 g.
 If the sum (B+C) differs from A by more than 1 g, the sample is discarded and a
fresh test is to be made.
 Tabulate the observations and results.
Observations:
1. Total weight of the aggregate filling cylindrical measure A = 0.356

2. Weight of aggregate passing through IS 2.36 mm sieve B = 0.03
3. Weight of aggregate retained on IS 2.36 mm sieve: C = 0.33
4. A – (B+C) =0
Calculations:
The aggregate impact value is expressed as the percentage of the fines formed in
terms of the total weight of the sample.
B
i.e., aggregate impact value = A x100.
Weight of
Weight of Weight of
aggregate passing Percentage
Sl. aggregate in aggregate retained
through 2.36 mm passing Average
No. measure on 2.36 mm sieve
sieve
A B C (B/A) x 100
1 0.356 0.054 0.032 15.16
11.63
2 0.37 0.03 0.33 8.10
Application:
The aggregate impact value is used to assess the suitability of the aggregate in
regard with toughness for using in pavements. This test is used to classify the stones in
respect with their toughness property as indicated below:

Aggregate impact value Conclusion

Up to 10% Exceptionally strong
10% to 20% Strong
20% to 35% Satisfactory for road surfacing
Above 35% Weak for road surfacing
Result:
The aggregate impact value of the given aggregate is = 11.63%
Conclusion:Since the aggregate impact value is in between 10-20%, hence the

aggregates are strong to take sudden loads.
3. BITUMEN TESTINGS:
3.1. PENETRATION TEST ON BITUMEN:
Penetration value is a measure of hardness or consistency of bituminous material.

It is the vertical distance traversed or penetrated by the point of a standard needle in to
the bituminous material under specific conditions of load, time and temperature. This
distance is measured in one tenths of a millimeter. This test is used for evaluating
consistency of bitumen. It is not regarded as suitable for use in connection with the
testing of road tar because of the high surface tension exhibited by these materials.
Preparation of sample:
Soften the material to a pouring consistency at a temperature not more than 90 oC
above the corresponding approximate softening point and stir it thoroughly until it is
homogenous and is free from air bubbles and water. Pour the melt into the container
to a depth at least 10 mm in excess of the expected penetration. Then allow the
sample to cool up to 25oC for about 90-120 minutes (45 mm deep container) or 60-
90 minutes (35 mm deep container). Then the container is placed in water bath for
one hour.

Standard Penetrometer
Procedure:
 Fill the transfer dish with water to a depth sufficient to cover the container
completely. Place the sample in it and put it on the base of the penetrometer.
 Adjust the needle, previously washed with benzene and carefully dried, so that the
tip coincides with its reflection on the surface of the specimen.
 Bring the rack in contact with the plunger and the pointer is set to zero.
 The plunger shaft is released with the help of push-button, simultaneously starting
the stop-watch.The plunger is arrested after 5 seconds and the indicator reading is
noted which gives the penetration number directly.
 At least three such determinations are made for good results.
Precautions:
1. No consecutive determination is made within 10 mm radius of the previous
penetration.All determinations should be done at least 10 mm away from the wall
of the container.
2. After each test, the sample is returned to the water bath and the needle is cleaned
with benzene and carefully dried for next use.For repeated tests on the same
specimen, it is advised that separate needles be used.
3. The depth of penetration is expressed in terms of tenths of a millimetre.
Result:
1. The penetration value of the given sample is :
Comments:
Penetration test is a commonly adopted test on bitumen to grade the material in

terms of its hardness. A 80/100 grade bitumen indicates that its penetration value lies
between 80 & 100.Grading of bitumen helps to assess its suitability in different climatic
conditions and types of construction. For bituminous macadam and penetration macadam,
IRC suggests bitumen grades 30/40, 60/70, 80/100. In warmer regions, lower penetration
grades are preferred to avoid softening whereas higher penetration grades like 180/200
are used in colder regions to prevent the occurrence of excessive brittleness. High
penetration grade is used in spray application works
3.2. DETERMINATION OF DUCTILITY OF THE BITUMEN:
Procedure:
 Melt the bituminous test material completely at a temperature of 75oC to 100oC
above the approximate softening point until it becomes thoroughly fluid
 Strain the fluid through IS sieve 30.
 After stirring the fluid, pour it in the mould assembly and place it on a brass plate
 In order to prevent the material under test from sticking, coat the surface of the
plate and interior surface of the sides of the mould with mercury or by a mixture
of equal parts of glycerine and dextrin
 After about 30 – 40 minutes, keep the plate assembly along with the sample in a
water bath. Maintain the temperature of the water bath at 27oC for half an hour.
 Remove the sample and mould assembly from the water bath and trim the
specimen by levelling the surface using a hot knife.
 Replace the mould assembly in water bath maintained at 27oC for 80 to 90
minutes 8.Remove the sides of the moulds
 Hook the clips carefully on the machine without causing any initial strain
 Adjust the pointer to read zero
 Start the machine and pull two clips horizontally at a speed of 50mm per minute
 Note the distance at which the bitumen thread of specimen breaks.
 Record the observations in the proforma and compute the ductility value report
the mean of two observations, rounded to nearest whole number as the „Ductility
Value‟ Record.
Observations:
I. Bitumen grade = G 40
II. Pouring temperature °C =27

III. Test temperature °C = 37
IV. Periods of cooling, minutes =40
a) In air = 0
b) In water bath before trimming =27
c) In water bath after trimming = 37
a) Initial reading=0
b) Final reading=7
c) Ductility = b-a (cm)=>75
Ductility Value
Result:
The Ductility value of given bitumen is ________________
CHAPTER 5
REDUCED LEVELS BY H.I METHOD

General procedure for measuring elevations using a level:
 Suppose that B, C and D are points whose reduced level is to be determined as in

Figure 1.
Figure 1: points whose reduced level is to be determined
 Place the staff over a bench mark (BM), whose reduced level is known, and set up
the instrument in convenient and safe location where the BM (point A) is visible.

 Take a sight on the staff, that reading is calledbacksight (B.S). See Figure 2.
 Place staff over B. Take a sight on the staff, that reading is called Intermediate
sight (I.S). See figure 2.
 Place staff over C. Since the distance between the level and D is long, so it is not
possible to read the staff over D from the current level position (pos 1). So take
the last reading over C for this position, this will be a foresight (F.S). See figure 2.
Figure 2: Leveling procedure
 Now, move the instrument to a new position (position 2) and take the reading on
the previous position of the staff (over C). This position of staff is known as
Turning Point (T.P) and this reading will be backsight (BS). See figure 2.
 Now, shift the staff to the point D and take reading, this reading will be foresight
(F.S).
Calculations:
1. The height of instrument position(1) can be calculated as:
HI of position 1 = Elevation of BM + BS at BM
2. The reduced level of any point (i) taken from position 1, can be calculated as:
R.L of point (i) = HI of position 1 – staff reading at point (i)
3. The height of instrument position(2) can be calculated as:
HI of position 2 = Reduced level of TP1 + BS at TP1
4. The reduced level of any point (i) taken from position 2, can be calculated as:
R.L of point (i) = HI of position 2 – staff reading at point (i)
5. And so on….
6. Checks:

The following checks on the booking and arithmetic calculations are performed:
A) Number of BS readings = Number of FS readings
B) ∑BS - ∑FS = RL of last point – RL of first point
CHAPTER 6
TRAFFIC
Calculation of Pavement Thickness Case I (Yellow soil (Clayey silt)):
Available Data:
1. Design of CBR of Subgrade Soil : 5%
2. Design Life of Pavement : 15 years
3. Annual Growth rate : 7.5 %
4. Distribution of Commercial vehicle for Single Lane : Double Lane
5. Computation of Design traffic for the end of Design life : 0.75
N = {365×[(1+r)^n-1]/r}×{A×D×F) }
N = Thecommulative no. of standard axles to be catered for in the design in terms of msa.
A = Initial Traffic in the year of completion of completion of construction in term of no.

of CVPD
A = P (1+r)x
P = No. of commercial vehicles as per last count
x = No. of years between the last count and the year of completion of construction
D = Lane distribution factor
F = Vehicle damage factor
n = Design Life in Years
r = Annual growth rate of commercial vehicles
Design Calculation of Pavement thickness:

1. Commercial Vehicle at last count "P" =277 CV/Day
2. r =7.50%
3. x =1 4.
4. A =298 5.
5. D =1 6.
6. F =3.5 7.
7. N =9.94 msa (say 10 msa)
8. Total thickness of pavement for design CBR 5% and Design traffic = 1 msa, of IRC
37, 2001 5% & design traffic 10msa of IRC37, 2001 Total Thickness = 660 mm
9. Total thickness to be provided = 375-150 = 225 mm
10. Pavement composition interpolated as per MORT&H (IRC37-2001 page 24 plate 1)
(a) Granular Sub base = 300 mm
(b) Base course = 250 mm
(c) DBM =70 mm
(d) BC =40 mm

SUMMARY
To summarize very briefly, we have tried to provide a resume of our flexible pavement
research endeavors because we believe that the basic information necessary to the
development of flexible pavement design procedure has been largely obtained. Our
efforts to develop specific design procedure are to be presented by the next speaker. We
feel that a field research program is badly needed and we have suggested that this
program take the form of planned test sections to be incorporated into regular contract
jobs. Laboratory testing of the materials used would be a part of the test program and
adequate field records would be obtained. Economic studies would be applied wherever
possible. We realize the idea of constructing test sections is not new and that the State
Highway Commission of Indiana has done this in several instances in the past. We do
believe that our proposal calls for a new philosophy or plan of action. In short, a
construction contract without a planned variable being included would be the exception
and not the rule.
The basic site test is performed by measuring the pressure required to penetrate soil or
aggregate with a plunger of standard area. The measured pressure is then divided by the
pressure required to achieve an equal penetration on a standard crushed rock material.
The CBR test is described in ASTM Standards D1883-05 (for laboratory-prepared
samples) and D4429 (for soils in place in field), and AASHTO T193. The CBR test is
fully described in BS 1377 : Soils for civil engineering purposes : Part 4, Compaction
related tests, and in Part 9: In-situ tests. The design procedure given by IRC makes use of
the CBR value, million standard axle concept, and vehicle damage factor. Traffic
distribution along the lanes are taken into account. The design is meant for design traffic
which is arrived at using a growth rate.
REFERENCES
Ameri, M., Salehabadi, E.G., Nejad, F.M. and Rostami, T. (2012) Assessment of
Analytical Techniques of Flexible Pavements by Finite Element Method and Theory of
Multi-Layer System, Journal Basic Applied Science Research, Vol.2, No.11, pp.11743-
11748.

Arora, K.R. (2003) Soil mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Standard Publishers
Distributors, Delhi
Das, A.(2008) Reliability Considerations of Bituminous Pavement Design by

Mechanistic-Empirical Approach, the International Journal of Pavement Engineering,
Vol.9, No.1, pp. 19-31.
Dilip, D., Ravi, P. and Babu,G. (2013) System Reliability Analysis of Flexible
Pavements, Journal Transportation Engineering, Vol.139, No.10, pp. 1001-1009.
Jain, S., Joshi,Y.P., Golia, S.S. (2013) Design of Rigid and Flexible Pavements by
Various Methods and Their Cost Analysis of Each Method, International Journal of
Engineering Research and Applications, Vol.3, No.5 pp.119-123.
Khan, I.H.(1998) A Textbook of Geotechnical Engineering, Pentice Hall of India Private

Limited, New Delhi.
Maharaj, D.K. and Gill, S. (2014) Development of Design Chart for Flexible Pavement
by Finite Element Method, International Journal of Latest Research in Engineering and
Computing,Vol.2, Issue 2, March-April,pp.8-23.
Punmia, B.C., Jain, A.K. and Jain Arun, K.(2005) Soil Mechanics and Foundations,
Lakshmi Publications, New Delhi.
Rahman, M.T., Mahmud, K. and Ahsan, K. (2011), Stress-Strain Characteristics of

Flexible Pavement Using Finite Element Analysis, International Journal of Civil and
Structural Engineering, Vol.2, No.1, pp.233-240.
Subagio, B. Cahyanto, H., Rahman, A. and Mardiyah, S.(2005) Multilayer Pavement

Structural Analysis Using Method of Equivalent Thickness, Case Study: Jakarta-
Cikampeck Toll Road , Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies,
Vol.6,pp.55-65.
Tarefder, R., Saha, N. and Stormont, J.(2010) Evaluation of Subgrade Strength and
Pavement Designs for Reliability, Journal Transportation Engineering, Vol.136, No.4, pp.
379-391.

Design of A Flexible Pavement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of A Flexible Pavement

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of A Flexible Pavement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design Of Flexible Pavement For Ease Of Transportation From Esukapalli To Tallapaka

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 1

pavements, our subject is directed specifically to the design of flexible pavements. We

1.1. PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS:

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 2

1.2. CURRENT RESEARCH:

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 3

1.3. NEED FOR TEST SECTIONS:

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 4

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 5

Punmiaet. al (2005) have reported stresses in homogeneous mass; elastic deformation

Tarefderet. al (2010) present that reliability is an important factor in flexible pavement

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 6

According to Rahman et. al (2011), design of flexible pavement is largely based on

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 7

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 8

The samples to be prepared at optimum moisture content (OMC) corresponding to the

3.2. COMPONENTS OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT:

3.2.1. Sub grade soil:

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 9

layer of selected borrow materials, well compacted to prescribed specifications. It may be

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 10

3.2.5. Bituminous surfacing:

3.3. DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT AS PER IRC-37-2012 :

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 11

3.3.1. DESIGN TRAFFIC:

Trace growth rate:

Vehicle Damage Factor:

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 12

3.3.2. CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST:

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 13

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 14

1.1. DETERMINATION OF LIQUID LIMIT-BY CASAGRANDE

 Take representative soil sample of approximately 120gms passing through 425

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 15

Fig: 2.6.2 Divided soil cake before test

Fig: 2.6.3 Soil cake after test

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 16

S.No Determination 1 2 3 4 5 Remark

2 Weight of 76 79.5 76 82.5 78.5

3 Weight of 66.56 68 65 68.5 65

6 Wt. of dry soil 31.56 33 30 33.5 30

7 Moisture 30.15 34.84 36.67 41.74 45

Table 1: Determination of Liquid Limit (LL).

Graph 1: Liquid limit test Curve.

Result: Moisture content at 25 blows from the graph.

Liquid Limit (LL) = 29%.

Department of CE,AITS,Rajampet. Page 18

S.No Determination 1 2 3 4 5 Remark

2 Weight of 76 79.5 76 82.5 78.5

3 Weight of 66.56 68 65 68.5 65

6 Wt. of dry soil 31.56 33 30 33.5 30

7 Moisture 30.15 34.84 36.67 41.74 45

Table 2: Determination of Liquid Limit (LL).

Graph 2: Liquid limit test Curve.

Result: Moisture content at 25 blows from the graph.

Liquid Limit (LL) = 33%.

1.2. DETERMINATION OF PLASTIC LIMIT AND PLASTICITY