Pavement Design Guide - A Short Course
Pavement Design Guide - A Short Course
Pavement Design Guide - A Short Course
A Short Course a
O
8&.<7,:āVUR57$QR
LIB y
UNlVEBsi1Y OF Km-.'TUCKY
Purpose and Scope
The methodology as presented herein has roots in both the AASHTO Guide for Design
of Pavement StructUre and also the Kentucky mechanistic-empirical pavement design
systems which are used for structural design of pavements in Kentucky. The procedure
as presented herein uses an AA HTO structural number concept to defme the
structural requirements of the pavement section. However, the minimum required
stru ctural number has been determined on the basis of the Kentucky mechanistic-
empirical pavement design procedure.
The pavements that are to be designed by the information presented in this course and
the accompanying design guide are to be limited to:
Presentation of Material
It is assumed that the participant bas no knowledge of pavement technology and/or
pavement design procedures. Therefore, the material begins with elementary
principles and defmitions. The material is presented in seven parts which can be
classified into five general categories:
Definitions Part I,
Materials---------- Part II, Part ill, and Part IV,
Overview of De ign Part V,
Pavement Failure Mechanism -Part VI,
Design Catalog Part VII.
Course Manual
A manual accompanies the short course. Included in the manual are the following
items:
Course Notes
The slides are normally printed three to a page; however, when charts or graphs are
shown that contain an appreciable amount of detail, they are then printed two per page
or one per page. The pages that have three slides per page also have space provided by
each slide for the participant to write notes.
At the beginning of each part, the objectives for that part are listed, as well as the topics
to be discussed in that part Pertinent comments relating to topics to be discussed in
a particular part are also listed in the beginning of the section.
Computer Programs
Included with this short course is a CD-ROM that contains a full-color version of all
the slides presented in this course. In addition, the CD-ROM contains an EXCEL
spreadsheet program that calculates the life-cycle costs for a particular design project.
The CD-ROM also contains an ACCESS program to calculate ESAL forecasts. Both
programs will be demonstrated during the course.
Pavement Design Definitions
Foundation (Geotechnical)
Parameters
Unbound Materials
Bound Materials
Overview of Pavement
Design
Mechanisms of Pavement
Failure
Design Catalog
Objectives:
To familiarize the participant with all of the components of a pavement structure.
To defme and discuss the traffic parameters necessary to design pavement structures.
Topics:
Comments:
A pavement is an engineered structure designed to transmit loads from vehicle tires to the soil
or rock subgrade. Pavements are normally of multilayer construction with relatively weaker
materials below and progressively stronger ones above. Such an arrangement leads to the
economic use of available materials. Flexible pavements usually consist of several layers
starting with the unbound base on the subgrade (i.e. dense-graded aggregate), one or more
courses of bound base, and fmally the riding surface. Rigid pavements usually consist of two
layers - the concrete slab and the unbound base layers. Modern pavements will often have
a bound drainage layer immediately above the unbound base.
A number of different empirical methods of pavement design have been developed during the
last 60 years. Most are based on observations of the performance of existing roads under a
variety of traffic conditions. In this country, large test tracks using a variety of pavement
structures have been trafficked with specific vehicle types operating With known axle loads.
This has given valuable understanding of the relative damaging effect of different axle loads
on a variety of pavements constructed to different thicknesses. These experiments have
provided the basis for the design procedures used in many parts of the country. These are all
empirically based procedures.
Concurrently with the development of empirical design methods, work has been in progress
relating to a more fundamental design procedure based on structural theory and the behavior
of road material under repeated stress. These procedures are referred to as mechanistic
design. At present, the theoretical approach is proving most useful in interpreting and
extending the conclusions reached from experimental pavement research. Kentucky's
pavement design method currently follows this latter approach, and is called a mechanistic-
empirical procedure.
Traffic information is required by the pavement designer to associate the damaging effects of
the applications of an axle of any load applied to the pavement. The term equivalent single
axle load is used in pavement design methodologies to describe the relative amount of damage
done to the pavement. The most common expression of pavement damage is the 18,000-pound
(80 kN) equivalent single axle load. Load equivalency factors (pavement damage factors) are
used to describe the relative amount of damage for a specific axle loading and axle
configuration in terms of the amount of damage done to the pavement by some number of
equivalent 18,000-pound axle loads. It should be noted that relationships between load
equivalency factors (pavement damage factors) and load is not a linear relationship. Load
equivalency factors are calibrated to specific pavement design procedures. For example, the
load equivalency factors for the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures are
different from the load equivalency factors used with the Kentucky Mechanistic-Empirical
Pavement Design Procedure which are different from the load equivalency factors used with
the Asphalt Institute Thickness Design Asphalt Pavements For Highways & Streets (MS-1).
Also, load equivalency factors used for the design of flexible pavements (asphalt concrete) are
different from the load equivalency factors used for rigid pavements (Portland cement
concrete) for some pavement design procedures. For example, the load equivalency factors for
the AASHTO Guide For Design of Pavement Structures include separate load equivalency
factors for flexible pavements and for rigid pavements. Conversely, the mechanistic-empirical
pavement design procedures developed in Kentucky have been calibrated on the basis of load
equivalency factors used for flexible pavements.
There are four key considerations which influence the accuracy of traffic estimates and which
can significantly influence the life cycle of a pavement. These are:
1. The correctness of the load equivalency values used to estimate the relative damage
influenced by axle loads of different mass and configurations.
2. The accuracy of traffic volume and weight information used to predict the actual
loading projections.
4. The interaction of age and traffic as it relates to the functional and structural
deterioration of the pavement and related changes in pavement serviceability.
Forecasting of ESAL's is perhaps the most critical aspect of pavement design since it involves
forecasting not only the growth in traffic volumes for a particular route but also forecasting
the change in the characteristics of vehicles in the traffic stream. For example, during the past
twenty years, there has been significant growth in traffic volumes and proportions of trucks
in the traffic stream for most major routes. At the same time, the sizes and weights of trucks
in the traffic stream have also increased. As a result, many pavements have deteriorated more
rapidly than expected because the combination of increased traffic volumes, growth in
proportions of trucks, and increases in sizes and weights of trucks.
A computer program to calculate ESAL forecasts is included with this manual. The program
will be demonstrated during the course of this study. Further details on ESAL forecasting is
included in the Design Guide accompanying this manual.
Principles of
Pavement Design
1· 1
Pavement Design
Definitions
I 1-2
Pavement:
• An Engineered
Structure Designed to
Support Traffic Loads
and to Distribute Those
Loads to the Roadbed.
1· 3
Definitions
1·4
~ Subgrade
(Foundation) 1· 5
Definitions
Subgrade
Top Surface of a Roadbed Upon
Which the Pavement Structure
and Shoulders are Constructed
1· 6
Subgrade
-Lowest Member
-Must Support Load
-Considered Top 24"
-Can Be Soil or Rock
-Can Be Modified
1-7
IDefinitions I
Base Courses
Courses 1-t
Unbound Base
Materials
• Immediately Above Subgrade
• Economical Strength
• Provide a Working Platform
• Can Provide Drainage
• Act as a Separation Layer
• Various Gradations fBi
s Section
Asphalt Base
Courses
-Provide Most ofPav~~~
Strength
-Can Provide Drainagc..ow:IO>A-
Asphalt Binder
Courses
-Finer Gradation Than Bases
-Coarser Than Surfaces
-Used in Leveling and Wedging
Surface Course ,_ 14
Definitions
Surface Course
-
The Layers of a Pavement Structure
Designed to Accommodate the Traffic
Load and Which Resists Skidding,
Traffic Abrasion, and the
Disintegrating Effects of Climate.
Also Called "Wearing Course."
1-15
Surface Course
•Top Layer
• Riding Surface
• Thin Lifts
• Finest Gradation t -11
Definitions
Portland Cement
Concrete Pavement
A Pavement Structure Which
Distributes Loads to the Subgrade
Having as One Course a Portland
Cement Slab of Relatively High
Bending Resistance 1-11
PCC Pavements
• Also Called Rigid or PCC
• A Coarse Aggregate, Fine
Aggregate and Portland
Cement Mixture
• Usually a Higher Initial Cost
But a Lower Maintenance
Cost
• Usually Jointed 1· 11
Definitions
1·11
Empirical:
Relying on Experience and/or
Observatio:!i:!Ji/if/hout
Regard tu~ or Theory
I· 20
Mechanistic:
Mechanistic -
Em irical
Based on a Theoretical
System and Adjusted
or Calibrated by
Empirical Means
(Kentucky Method)
Layer Coefficient
Structural Number
An index number derived from an analysis
of traffic, roadbed soil con ditions, and
environment which may be converted to
thickness of flexible p avement layers through
the use of suitable layer coefficients related
to the type of material being used in each
layer of the p avement structure.
1· 14
Definitions
1·25
Obtainin2 ADT
• Vehicle Classification Recorders
(VCR)
• Automatic Traffic Recorders
(ATR)
• Tube Counts (Volume Only)
• Visual Counts
• Weigh-in-Motion (WIM)
1·27
Vehicle Types
1. Motorcycles 8. 4 or Less Axles,
2. Cars Single Trailer
3. Pickup Trucks 9. 5-Axle, Single
4. Buses Trailer
10. 6 or More Axles ,
5. 2-Axle, 6-tlre,
Single Tra iler
Single Unit
11 . 5 or Less Axles,
6. 3·Axle, Single
Multi-Trailer
Unit
12. 6-Axle, Multi·
7. 4 or More Axles,
Tra iler
Single Unit
13. 7 or More Axle,
Multi-Trailer
•••
Percent
Trucks
The Ratio of the Number of
Trucks to the Total Number
of Vehicles in the Traffic
Stream, Expressed as a Percentage
1·21
Importance of
Percent Trucks
• Determines Pavement
Loads, Hence Pavement
Thickness
• Helps to Determine Highway
Capacity
• In a Life-Cycle Cost
Analysis, It's Important in
Calculating User Delay Cosf 1• 311
Lane Distribution
Factor
I·S1
Axle/Wheel
Loads
Whee/Load
-Load in Pounds or Kilos
on Each Wheel
-Wheel Load I Tire Pressure
Equals Tire Contact Area
I·SS
Equivalent Single
Axle Load
(ESAL)
ESAL:
The amount of damage done to a
pavement structure by a 4-tired,
single axle, carrying 18,000 pounds .
I·S7
Load Equivalency
Factor (LEF)
(AlsD C./led Damage F11ctor)
........ ~ .::2
0
,~
~
- /
Tridem:
Three Closely Spaced Axles
1·40
Functional Class
The classification of
highways into different
operational systems based
on the character of service
they provide
1-41
Functional Class
Environment:
*Urban
* Rural
Hierarchy:
*Local
*Collector
*Arterial
1-42
Kentucky
Functional Classes
0 I - Rural Interstate 11- Urban Interstate
02- Rural Principal 12 - Urban Other
Arterial Freeways I Expressways
06- Rural Minor 14- Urban Other
Arterial Prlntlpal Anerial
07- R ural Major 16- Urban Minor
Collector Arterial
08 -Rural Minor 11 -Urban Collector
Collector 19 - Urban Local
09 - Rural Local
Part II: Foundation (Geotechnical) Parameters
Objectives:
To understand the important role the subgrade plays in the life and performance of a
pavement structure.
Topics:
Comments:
The material property used to characterize the roadbed soil for pavement design is the
Kentucky CBR. Details for testing for the Kentucky CBR are presented in the current Edition
of the Kentucky Methods (KM 64-501). Generally, the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) was
originally developed by the California Division of Highways for evaluation of subgrade
quality. The test has been refined, modified, and adapted by others and today is the· most
common test conducted on soils to defme the structural quality of subgrade soils for pavement
design. The methods for performing the test are discussed in detail in this section.
Subgrades typically are constructed of soils from roadway excavation or borrow. However,
subgrades also may be composed of rock. Rock subgrades may exclude shale, include shale
with other rock types, or be constructed entirely of shale. Rock roadbed is utilized for the top
two feet of the roadway when sufficient quantities of suitable rock are available from roadway
excavation.
The majority of pavements constructed in Kentucky are constructed on fine grained soils.
When first compacted, these fine grained soils usually have sizeable bearing strength. If
pavements are constructed immediately after compaction of fine grained soils, then major
problems typically will not be encountered when placing and compacting layers of paving
materials. Problems arise however, when surface and subsurface water penetrates compacted
fme grained soils. Water from rainfall, snow melt, and groundwater seepage enters the fine
grained soil subgrades, causing swelling, and producing a loss of bearing capacity in the
subgrade.
Recent experience in Kentucky has demonstrated the benefits of stabilized subgrades for
providing a stable platform for placement of pavement layers and also for extending the life
of the pavement structure. Methods for stabilization may be characterized into two broad
categories: mechanical stabilization and chemical stabilization. These methods and the
warrants for stabilization are discussed in this section. More detailed information on
stabilization is given in the Design Guide.
It has been demonstrated in recent years that pavement drainage is a critical factor in a
pavement's performance. Kentucky has been using positive drainage systems on major
highways for almost three decades. In general, w ater in pavements may be treated in one of
three ways:
Kentucky's guidelines are generally founded on the belief that water will enter the pavement
structure. Free water may be removed from the pavement system by daylighting the aggregate
base and/or by subsurface piping system. The use of filter materials is required to prevent
clogging of the free-draining aggregate base. Where daylighting is not possible or
recommended, pipe or strip drains are to be used .
The following are warrants for use of underdrain systems:
1. For annual ESAL accumulations of 250,000 or less, daylighting of the base will be
required except in cut sections or other geometries which make daylighting
inappropriate. In these areas, a closed drainage network will be provided.
2. For annual ESAL's greater than 250,000, daylighting will not be permitted. A
closed drainage network will be provided.
3. Open graded free draining aggregate bases will be required for all pavements in
urban areas. A closed drainage system that drains into a storm sewer will be required
for all urban pavement sections.
II
Foundation
Parameters
1·1
Measuring
Subgrade
Strength
1·2
California Bearing
Ratio Test (CBR}
-AASHTO
-ASTM
- Kentucky Method
1· 3
CBR:
Developed by the California
Division of Highways in 1929
to Classify the Suitability of
Soil for Use as a Subgrade
•••
CBR: Definition
CBR defmed as the ratio of the
unit load (psi) required to produce
a certain depth of penetration with
the penetration piston (area of 3.0 sq. in.)
into a compacted specimen of soil at some
water content and density to the standard
unit load required to obtain the same depth
of penetration on a standard sample
of crushed stone 1·5
0.1 1,000
0 .2 1,500
0.3 1,900
0.4 2,300
0.5 2,600 1·6
Comparison of CBR
Testing Procedures
KM64-501
•••
CBR Compaction
ASTM Kentucky
AASHTO Method
• STANDARD • The compaction plunger
- Tbree l.ayers is inserted into the mold
- 56 Blows / l.ayer on the specimen and a
- 5.5 lb. Rammer pressure of 2,000 psi is
• MODIFlED applied gradually over a
- F1vt L.ayers
2-min. interval When
- 56 Blows I Layer
the maximum load is
- 10 lb. Ramm er
reached, it is held for
approximately 1 minute.
•·•
CBR Soaking Time
ASTM Kentucky
AASHTO Method
• Soak in the water Swell readings taken
tAnk for 96 hours. daily.
• Swell is read only at Swell is complete when
the end of 96 hours. two successive 24-hour
r eadings differ by no
more than 0.003 in.
• Minimum swell time must
be 72 hours.
Penetration Values at
Which CBR is Calculated
ASTM Kentucky
AASHTO Method
• 0. 10 • The minimum CBR
• If 0.20 is greater value calculated at
rerun test. the five penetration
values of 0.10, 0.20,
• If 0.20 is greater the
second time, use 0.20. 0.30, 0.40, 0.50
1-12
CBR Soaking Tank
SUBGRADE COMPACTION
COMPACTION CONDITIONS
Dry of Optimum Wet of Optimum
"~s
-z
- =---
tn
~-i--
w
a
MOISTURE
1-211
Soil Suction
Negative
Pore
Pressure
~--------------------~·-~~ ~~----------------------
Apparent Cohesion
-~
Normal Stress 1· 22
PROCESS OF SATURATION
OF TOP LAYER OF SUBGRADE
Resilient Modulus
(M,)
Laboratory Testing
Procedure
Resilient Modulus
PlStr;~~
asJ
Resilient Modulus
Where:
Sd = deviator stress = s1 - s3
s 1 = vertical stress
s3 = horizontal stress
Er= resilient strain
Subgrade
Stabilization
- High Moisture Content
-High Clay Content
-Low CBR
1-28
CBR< 6 --Recommended
CBR> 6 --No
--·
Methods of
Stabilization
- Mechanical
-Chemical
-Others
I ·S1
Mechanical
Stabilization
• Compaction (Cohesive Solis)
- Fine-Grained Clays and Slits
- Strength Increases
- Density Increases
- Permeability Decreases
- Compressibility Decreases
- Shrtnkage Decrease s
• Equipment (Cohesive Solis)
- Sheepsfoot Roller
- Smooth-Wheeled Roller i 1-32
Mechanical
Stabilization
• Compaction (Coheslonless Solis)
- Clean Sands and Gravels
- Not Significantly Affected by Compaction
- Remain Permeable
..,
Chemical Stabilization
*Lime
* Lime - Fly Ash
*Fly· Ash
*Cement
*Asphalt
* Waste by-products
( AFBC, Kiln Dust, et.)
li· SC
Chemical Stabilization
* Lime - Best for Fine-Grained
Soils
Chemical Stabilization
* Cement • Coarse Grained, All
Soils
..,.,
Subgrade Structural
Parameters
Objectives:
To familiarize the designer with the various types of unbound base materials and their
uses.
To discuss the characteristics and warrants for the various types of unbound bases.
Topics:
Comments:
There are currently several types of unbound bases used in Kentucky. Dense-graded
aggregate (DGA), as its name implies, is a dense-graded mixture of crushed stone with a
considerable amount of fmes. These fmes generally contribute to the low permeability and
high stability characteristics of DGA. DGA was first used to take advantage of this low
permeability in trying to prevent water from entering the pavement structure. DGA can also
be used as a separating layer to prevent clay and silt-sized particles from fine-grained material
(such as soil subgrades) from intruding into more open-graded materials such as drainage
blankets.
Crushed stone bases (CSB) were developed in more recent years for use as a fairly high
stability product with a more free-draining ability when compared to DGA. Although the two
gradations currently overlap, changes currently underway in the CSB gradation will move
these two materials further apart. CSB will become a coarser material.
Type I drainage blankets are comprised of #57 stone. This is a very open-graded mixture
with very high permeability (10,000 to 20,000 ftJday). Very high permeability is required for
lateral flow of water through open-graded bases because of low hydraulic gradients in
pavements and the area of flow is small.
Proper filters must be used with an open-graded base to prevent clogging of the materiaL The
use of an open-graded aggregate base material over untreated subgrades and some treated
subgrades requires the use of a filter material to prevent the intrusion of soil into the open
graded aggregate base material. An open-graded aggregate base placed directly on a fine-
grained subgrade may become clogged with fine materials because of stress-induced intrusion
of the subgrade material into the base material and/or the potential for the finer particles to
be washed into the voids of the coarse material. Either condition will result in the overall
reduction of permeability.
It should be noted that the current gradation for DGA will meet filter requirements for use
with many of the fme grained soils in Kentucky. Geotextile fabrics are permitted as an
alternate to the use of graded aggregate filter materials. Specific fabric materials must be
selected so as to function equivalently with a graded aggregate filter. Theoretically, a very
thin, graded aggregate filter (approximately 1 inch) should function satisfactorily. However,
for practical purposes it is recommended that the filter layer be 3 inches thick.
III
Unbound
Materials
DGA Gradation
.• .-
.. -l I 11
... I . •t
It
..."'
c: ..
Iii -~
, II
Q. •
- '
:/ j
~---~-- H
;:
...
...~ .. ~ ~- ~
Q.
v l v VI
1--- -- ~---
•..... ...
Sieve Soze (ln.) •· s
DGA FIRST USED
• 1951-1952
• SOUTHLAND DR., LEXINGTON
• ROAD MIXED
• STABILIZED WITH CALCIUM
CLORIDE
r•.•
• 1953
• PHIL-PINE GROVE ROAD,
CASEY COUNTY
• PLANT MIXED
• NO CALCIUM CHLORIDE
• ·5
DGA Gradation
...,
.~~~~~~~~~=-~~
OA1 ..,
Steve Size (in.)
•••
DGA Permeability
.""
Q.
0.1
0.01
10 100
Percent Passong No. 200 Soeve • _7
DGA Strength
120 ,- - - - -
;
..e
....
100
-/ •- ~
!
;;; 80
~
.2 / •
"
~
0
60
40
r/
·'
., -
=
:::
~ 20
.. I
"' •
" 0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Percent Passong No. 200 Soeve •. 8
WARRANTS FOR
USE OF DGA
• Economical Strength
• Working Platform
• Prevent Water from Entering
Stabilized Layers from Below
• Separation Layer
·-9
Crushed
Stone
Base
f--
r-
l•·10
o ~LW~~~Will~~~-LLUW
Ashland • Alexandria
Highway has sections
with crushed stone base
•·12
Crushed Stone Base
Permeability-
Approx. 1 00 to 1 000 ft./ day
Will Not Meet Filter Requirements
..
0..
c
~
60
40
0.. li
20
0
I-'ll
0.001 0.01 0.1 10
Sieve S1 ze
EARLY USES
•KY 55, Taylor
County
•Louisa Bypass,
Lawrence County
· - 17
Type I · Permeability
10,000 to 20,000 ft./day
Type I · Strength
Unconfined · Somewhat
less than DGA
Confined · Comparable to DGA
I •·18
,.
Disadvantages of Use
Structural Parameters
fo r Unbound Materials
•·20
Part IV: Bound Materials
Objectives:
To discuss and identify the various pavement materials that are cemented with an
asphalt binder or Portland cement.
To discuss the gradations and warrants for the various types of asphalt bound
pavement materials.
To familiarize the participant with the old Marshall and the new Superpave Mix design
methods.
Topics:
Comments:
This section discusses all of the various types of asphalt bound materials, including the
gradations, normal range of percent of asphalt binder material, permissible range of layer
thicknesses, and some of the warrants for their use.
Asphalt binders are discussed. The old viscosity graded binders are discussed, including the
laboratory tests used to grade the binders. It should be noted that this system of grading
binders will shortly be obsolete in Kentucky. The new Performance Graded (PG) binders are
discussed in detail. The PG graded asphalts are a integral part of the new Superpave system
of mixtures. The laboratory tests used to classify the PG binders are mentioned briefly, as well
as how pavement temperature and air temperature are used to help determine the binder
grade to use in a particular mixture.
This section also discusses two asphalt mixture design systems - the Marshall mix design
method and the new Superpave system. The Marshall method also will be shortly obsolete in
Kentucky. The following five steps necessary to perform a Superpave design are discussed in
detail.
1. Calculate ESAL's
2. Select Materials
3. Design Aggregate Structure
4. Design Binder Content
5. Check Moisture Sensitivity
A discussion is also given in this section on Portland cement bound materials. PCC treated
drainage blankets are explained and illustrated (although currently none have been used on
Kentucky highways). The different types of PCC pavements are discussed and explained.
Discussion on the use of PCC pavements and their structural parameters are also given.
IV
Bound Materials
IV ·1
~ -
aterials
Drainage Blanket
Companson of Type II Drainage Blanket
with Type I
120
11n11n .tJJ
100 ~ TYPE I
TYPI! n -
.,
II 1111 II
AC Content • 1.5 • 2 .5%
~
v ~/'
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 10
SIEVE SIZE tiN.) IV- 4
- High Stability
- High Strength
- High Permeability
- Integral Part of Pavement
Underdrain System
- Layer Thickness 4.0 - 6.0 in.
IY · 5
Base Mixtures
Types of Bases
Class I
Class Cl
Class CK
Asphalt Cement Content
3.5- 6.5 °/o
rv. 1
100
I
(!)
z
1
Cii ..
~
ll.
,....
z
w
.. v
ll
II
0
a:: 4()
w
0..
20
1--- v·.v
-~---
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 10
•
SIEVE SIZE {I N.j fV . S
100
llllllllf I f ll
(!)
z
Ill
CLASS I BA S E - '1;
~ 10 CLASS CK BASE_
CLASS Cl BASE !/
v
!Z
w
li
10
40
v
~ ....... ~ v~~'
v
0
0.001 0,01 0. 1 10
SIEVE SIZE (I N.J
1¥ · 10
High Strength
High Stability
Leveling and Wedging
Can be Used as Thin Base Course
Layer Thickness 1.5 - 2.0 inches
IV -14
Types of Surface Mixtures
• Class I
- Class 1..0
- Class 1-20130
- Class 1-40/20
• Class N
- Class N-30
• Class AK
- CiassAKJA
- Class AK/8
- CiassAKJS
IV - 16
IV·20
Layer Coefficients
Asphalt Materials
• SUdace =0.40- OM '>
Asphalt Binder
..
~· I
_,~-T'
tt j II
-- ~ -
I
,...,
. ".........
J '
· "
PG Grades
jPG64-22 j
PG = Performance Grade
·.- ·.~,..,. ,.
Asphalt Mix
Design Methods
Marshall Method
Superpave Method
Marshall
Method
50 Blows
75 Blows
112 Blows
~~--- ~-
- I _.. • ~ I U 0
~~~
~=~ o U I U o
---_ -
Laboratory llx Design Properties
......... ~ ...._"'
·- - -....
Cit - uu ('lUI
0-
.. -!Mill
-!Mill ...
.......
U&a
......
uu
(Wit
Q.I(WII
,...
Ma!MAI
....
·-
uu
M- uu
-fla.t uu tufiU!
'----
IJ
f l•-•-••·-
--c.•·---
Five Steps in Superpave
Mix Design
1. Calculate ESAL's
2. Select Materials
3. Design Aggregate Structure
4. Design Binder Content
5. Check Moisture Sensitivity 'N·ST
1. Calculate ESAL's
<300,000
<1,000,000
<3,000,000
<10,000,000
<30,000,000
<100,000,000
~1 00 ,000, 000
'N ·38
2. Select Materials
A. Binder Grade
2. Select Materials
B. Coarse Aggregate Angularity
Depth from Surface
Tra ffic
ESAL's x106 <4.0 in. >4.0 ln.
<.3 551- ..J-
<I 651- -/-
<3 75/- 50/-
<10 85/80 60/-
<30 95/90 sons
<100 100/100 95190
> 100 100/100 100/100 ., .•
2. Select Materials
C. Fine Aggregate Angularity
(AASBTO T -304 Method A)
Depth from Surface
Traffic
ESAL's x106 <4.0 in. >4.0 in.
<.3
<1 40
<3 40 40
<10 45 40
<30 45 40
<100 45 45
> 100 45 45 IV-41
2. Select Materials
C. Fine Aggr egate Angularity
(AASBTO T-304 Method A)
~X
v lO<rto
2. Select Materials
D. Flat and Elongated Particles
(ASTM D 4791)
Traffic
ESAL's xJ06 Maximum, Percent
<.3
<1
<3 10
<10 10
<30 10
<100 10
> 100 10
2. Select Materials
D. Flat and Elongated Particles
(ASTM D 4791)
2. Select Materials
E. Sand Equivalent Test
{AASHTO T 176)
Traffic
ESAL's x106 Sand Equivalent Minimum, Percent
<.3 40
<1 40
<3 40
<10 45
<30 45
<100 50
> 100 50 IV-45
2. Select Materials
E. Sand Equivalent Test
(AASHTO T 176)
G1odoMod
__/ oyllllda
..lt-
..,..... - o.,..-,
IV-46
3. Design Aggregate
Structure
(Superpave Mixture Gradations)
37.5 mm (1.5")
25.0 mm (1.0")
19.0 mm (0.75")
12.5 mm (0.50")
9.5 mm (0.38") rv -c
Densification Curves for Trial Blend
100
10 100 1000
Number of GyratiOns
ortland Cement
Type ill Drainage Layer
IS to JO It 1J to lO tt
(1)/I'Cl' 0>) 11CP
Wit'•~
Stnad a.~
Structural
Parameters
Elastic Modulus - 3.5 to 5.5 million psi
Flexural Strength- 500 to 750 psi
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, (k)
IV-62
Objectives:
To give a historical perspective on highway design, including early highways, and early
road tests conducted in this country and in Kentucky.
Topics:
Pavement design has been an evolutionary process throughout history. This section gives a
brief review of some of the highlights and advancements in pavement technology and
pavement design through time. In this country, much of pavement design information and
procedures are based upon early road tests conducted in the last 60 years. Major strides were
made in the understanding of pavement behavior, performance, failure and design as a result
of these early road tests. The most used pavement design system in this country today
(AASHTO) was a direct development of one of these road tests.
Research and large-scale road tests are continuing today. The Strategic Highway Research
Program, begun in the late 1980's and continuing through the early 1990's was the most
massive highway research program ever attempted in this country. The Superpave mixture
design system was one of the major products of that r esearch effort. In addition, massive data
bases were developed on design and pavement performance from hundreds of pavement
sections scattered throughout the nation. Pavement performance data is still being collected
and analyzed from these sites. Other large-scale test roads are currently in operation in the
country. The Mn!Road test site in Minnesota is providing valuable performance data on PCC
pavements. The WES Track project in Nevada is currently testing numerous design sections
of flexible pavements.
The Kentucky Highway Department has maintained a aggressive research program since the
early 1940's. Research in the pavements area has always been a high priority of Department.
Research projects such as full-depth asphalt pavements, design and testing of aggregate bases,
break-and-seat and overlay of PCC pavements, various asphalt mixture designs, pavement
performance analysis, and development of Kentucky's pavement design method have all been
a major part of the research effort of the Department.
Since the early 1980's, the Department of Highways has been actively engaged in the
development, maintenance, and implementation of a pavement management program. There
is currently almost 20 years of pavement performance data available. This information is used
in predicting future conditions on various highway networks in the state, and it is also used
in helping to develop future rehabilitation and funding needs.
Non-destructive testing has been an important part of the highway program in Kentucky since
the early 1960's. Roughness testing for ride quality has been used for several decades in
Kentucky. Kentucky now uses second and third generation devices that measure roughness
and rutting. Skid testing to determine pavement slipperiness is also regularly used at selected
sites. Kentucky began non-destructive structural testing of pavement in the early 1970's with
Models 400 and 400B Road Rater. The Road Rater imparts a sinusoidally varying (at a rate
of 25 Hz) load to the pavement and the pavement response is measured by a series of
geophones. The Division of Operations, Pavement Management Branch currently has a Model
2000 Road Rater. The Kentucky Transportation Center operates a JILS 20 model falling
weight deflectometer (FWD) for measuring the structural capacity of a pavement. It differs
from the Road Rater by imparting an impulse load to the pavement instead of a sinusoidal
load. Much information can be obtained from these devices including the effective structural
thickness of an in-service pavement that can be used in determining overlay thickness on a
rehabilitation project.
This section also discusses in detail the three major methods of pavement design. The
AASHTO pavement design equations for rigid and flexible pavements are discussed. Design
examples are given. The AASHTO design method was developed from empirical data from
the AASHO Road Test of the late 1950's and early 1960's. The system has undergone a
number of revisions from the 1972 Design Guide. There have been revisions in 1986 and in
1993. A new AASHTO Design Guide is scheduled to be published in 2002. It will be a radical
departure from the earlier guides and will be largely a mechanistic design method calibrated
with empirical data.
The theory for a simplified mechanistic design method was frrst developed in 1885. A major
improvement to the method was published in 1943 by Burmister in which his system permitted
multiple layers to be in the pavement structure. Mechanistic systems depend solely on
theoretical information to develop the pavement thickness design. The Asphalt Institute has
a mechanistic design method. Example designs from the Asphalt Institute' s method are given.
Finally, the current state of the practice in pavement design is given in the section. The
number of states using the various methods are discussed.
v
Overview of
Pavement Design
Y·t
Historical Context of
Pavement Design
Y· 2
Beginnings of First
Modern Paved R oads
1. Asphalt Pavements
• Parts, 1854
• Natural Rock Asphalt
• Crushed to Fine Gradation
• Lay-Down Temperature • 250 °C
• Spread with Rakes
• Compacted with Heavy
Iron Rammers
V·5
Beginnings of First
Modern Paved Roads
1. Asphalt Pavements
- First Asphalt Pavement In U.S.,
1870, Newark, N.J
- First Sheet Asphalt Pavement In
U .S., Pennsylvania Ave., 1876,
Washington, D.C.
- First Asphalt Concrete Specs,
1890's
V· l
Beginnings of First
Modern Paved Roads
2. Concrete Pavements
• Portland Cement • Patented
1824- .Joseph Aspdln
- Portland Cement - Refers to
Portland Stone Mined in
Dorset England
- Early Experiments in
Scotland in 1865 v-7
Beginnings of First
Modern Paved Roads
2. Concrete Pavements
- Weak Concrete First Used
as Base for Stone Sett, Brick
- First Concrete Pavement in US
Was Bellefontaine, OH, 1891
-First Serious Concrete Use
Was in the U.S. in the first
Decade of the 20th Century v-•
-Four
4. Loads:
-18 ki ~~~'-7KD~~ Axles
-32 ki ....P"~~ ag~ Axles
Atl~le&IEJ&J~:JH~!!)l Load v.13
0 Road Test
2. The Beh~UtiM'-bf.
4-inch
oad Test Results
Outer Wbeelpath Was
ore Than in the Inner
ASH{)-Road
L..
Test Results
6. Develop~of Structural
Distress Was
Confmed~o Critical Periods:
7 1953
nJ.ckiM••
li.UO
U,IH
... ,..
ts,OOO
1. tlt
19. )50
u.na
.u.soo
u 6.14o lll .OOO J&.6to 11,1-00
y ASHO T1I'IDIMG5
0 ~ 0 (J "'0 "'
(J ~0 0 ~ 0 - "'0 Ul"'
~ 0~
I
Marjlond I
1' M1ryYf¥ld I
I'
~ 00
Afqbalflq
~
North Car~ 1m I
Col~tdo
It'D$~;,.911 n I
.."'
0
Washingfotl
ColorHe I
-
..(»
0 0 ~
==
Pwto Ric 0 Alaimta,, I
0 0
~
~ ~· .,
Delaware 0
i
-
CD/ifornia
~
CD I Califon1ia
Orlawrttr II
n..(» CDr
~
.....-...
I ~ .
=~
I
l(orthCor ,,.{1(]
>
I
-z
Pulfto Ricp
-2
CJ)
l ~ ,
~
NewNt1./c
~0 New ltltxicc
,r
Q
~
~111
Arilon. • A1izant1
~ WJ'"i"9 11
W'l, '"f
00
~
I>
'tfut Virgil qf II
a
~
WtsfViroin l> l>
=
< X
Ttl(as
Missoun·
. II
c
.,
Q
,r Tuas
l~ssDuri
Q
I
- ,
r
(7)
X
Q
~
- NI
0 ~=
..,
O'l
(D:
~
~ ~
= ....
MarJ/altd Noqland I
Alob(llfla
I
Waslungtc
NO!IIt CrJr ,,. .., I
r .........
~
~
NorlhCat 'fltitrl
~as!Ji.BJI.Ic n
Dtlawarr
P~rlo
Arizona
·:}~
Ri 0
l l 0~
!18
1\)0
•
Arizo11a
Alabam11
.A
California
C1lorado
..,
I
I
~~
-,t.
•o
0
r
~
c. ....
~
~
~ riJ
~ ~
CD
California #twMtric I CD
NtwMtxic~
~ Pvedo Ric~ t I
~~ -z ~
CJ)
Colorado I z Dtloratt ~
, ~
~
Wyowting ~ 0 Wnt Vi'l' i9
(j)
t r riJ
....
),
Wtsl Yirg1~ia < ~ W~~n~ittt
riJ
I ~-
Tfras I •
I ., l>
TutiS l> rot
~
-, ~
M/Uollri a X NiSJfflri X
=
I
~i i
-cob rr1
- C»
I riJ
I
l
=
t I
riJ
W ASHO Road Test Results
MINIMUM LABORATORY C B R" VALUE
2 ~
4 I
s 7 8 • to 20 ~0 440 !!0 ED 10 ~0~10 00
en
l&J ~-
- ~----
G
z •
---
,
t-r 6
(.';\ [.......--"'
v v
/
,.,.. ~
~
_...
---
[:::::==- L---
z
~ 8
....,....,.... ...... (il
v
/
v
./
v
.........
v-- ---- ------ Curve Umltlno E WL
W\Jn loft)
f-
/
-----
1&1 lA lAM than 112
> / (lil.. / .........
--- Leu thon 1
---
I
/ /
:. 10
~ ,• v
/ v ~
--
- -- - ---
II
Ill
1- 2
2- 3
f-
_---- -- - ---
a / / /
/
. ..... ,., N 3-S
z 12
v v
f-
~~/
6 - 10
ct I.-/ I.., V1 10 - 20
l&J
en
ct
m
14
v/ ~ //
~"'
~/
-7
/
/
v
....
--
-- --- --- -- V11
V111
IX
20-40
40-eo
80-160
-
- -
/
1 16 ~
~
.,.., r- - X IS0-320
~~
en / /"' /
en
1&1 18 / ~ ........
/
/
.,..,...-
~ v~
_,/ /
/ / /,
() 20 ........... /
""
X
t- / / v~ v ,. . . , /
ez 22
v "'
hi"\
vy
m 24 ~ ""
:J! v"' I .54
8 26
t<entuctly Department of Hlthwa'a
PC1
v·21
OBJECTIVE:
To Determine Relationship
£___r--< '
Between Number of
Repetitions of Specified Axle " ,,.....-,.--,...,
Loads of Different Magnitudes ,..___,-"'-..J...J
and Arrangements and the
Performance of Different
Thicknesses of Flexible
and Rigid Pavements
Test
6. Axle Load~s,~~~t;t;rl:r
7. Cost- $27,000,
8. Tangent Lengthv U.,...--L_j
Loops 3 throug ~6"'-F.....>f'=.:(
Loop 1 = 2000 ft.
Loop 2 = 4400 ft. V-23
1111111111 Tilt
AASHO Road Test
........
J"- T• lle.flto'el~
LoopJ
Lane 1 - 12000 Single r--1--1-h'*'e 1-30000 Single
Lane 2- 24000 Tandem "1--',.--t.-,t-,.;" e 2 - 48000 Tandem
--h
Gl f ... .
lGlh
r... h r
Gl l= ~ !.!'
r... ~ I I
~ l¢ ..... •••
fct h ••
Gl t¢-..... •••
(<I: ~
1lt., .......
V-21
V-30
AASHO ROAD TEST RESULTS
Rigid Pavements
1. Of Panel Length, Subbase Thickness, or
Slab Thickness, only Slab Thickness had
Significant Effect on Strains
2. Faulting Mostly Occurred at Cracks, not
Transverse Joints
3. No Cracking Attributed Solely to
Environmental Changes (in Traffic Loops)
4. Pumping a Major Cause of Failures (most
material ejected along the edge, not joints: Y-S1
Later Activities
-SHRP
-Mn/Road
-WesTrack
y.s:z
SHRP
(Strategic Highway
Research Program)
$150,000,000 Research Program
Financed by Congress under the
Federal-aid Highway Program
Y-SS
SHRP
Began in 1987
Concluded in 1993
Additional $1 08,000,000
for Implementation
SHRP
Four Major Areas of Research
Asphalt
Concrete and Structures
Highway Operations
Pavement Performance
V·SS
SHRP Products
Asphalt
Superpave System
v. 36
SHRP Products
Concrete and Structures
1. !'.'DT Tools to Assess Condition of
Concrete Pavements
2. New Strategies to Protect and
Rehab Concrete Pavements
3. New Concrete Mix Designs
4. New Ways to Detect, mitigate, and
Prevent Alkali-Silica Reactivity
5. New Guidelines for HPC in Pavements
y.~
SHRP Products
Highway Operations
1. Pavement Preservation
2. Work Zone Safety
3. Snow and Ice Control
Y·38
SHRP Products
Long-Term Pavement
Performance (LTPP)
Over 2000 Pavement Sections
Monitored (20-Year Program)
General Pavement Sections (GPS)
(7 inKY)
Special Pavement Sections (SPS) v.s
SHRP Products
Long-Term Pavement
Performance (LTPP)
Pavement Monitoring Procedures
Materials Testing Procedures
Equipment Standards
Calibration Procedures
¥· 40
Mn/Road Project
Constructed
1990
* Otsego, MN
V· 41
Mn/Road Project
Objectives
1. Evaluate Effects of
Heavy Vehicles on
Pavements
2. Evaluate Seasonal
Changes on Materials
* 3. Improve Design and
Performance of Low-
Volume Roads v.u
Mn/Road Project
* Center Proving
Ground
Kentucky
Activities
Y-55
Full-Depth Asphalt - US 60
Constructed 1971
Boyd County
Design CBR = 3
Thickness = 10"-18"
Length = 5 miles
Control Section
6.5" AC
19" DGA
Y-56
Full-Depth Asphalt - US 60
Experimental Instrumentation
Weigh-in-Motion Scales
Solar Radiation
Temperature Measurement
Road Rater Testing
Y·r1
Full-Depth Asphalt- US 60
Findings
VIbratory Rollers were Accepted
for General Use
~Dregate aaS8
JBSI -KY&ij
KY627
Cl 100
c
~ ~r-~~~~~--~-.~~~--~
-"'
~
c
~~----~-----+~-+--~-----
~ ~~----~--~~~----~--~
Q)
~20 ~------:!.-.-;....o~-+--_;_:;._~.;.._-
0.001 0.1 10
KY627
..... .._.._ ca-••,_
. . c.. .----··"-
~..._.._.
....
.; 00 r-l--1-- r-,..... 1-
·; 1--..--
i- I-
~ •o
g
•o
0~~~~~~~-L_L
I•H . . . . 1•'"- · - ...... *"L a-H ..... S- t,..
WI'IC ... u .... a lltft
14VCAAOC S T ftC.&a A ft C A
W IM I : e1, e a o IN
W IIC a _ 4ST a o IH.
w•• • :. •• .• a o ' ""'·
v.a
KY627
KY627
y.g
KY627
IConclusion I
No Significant Difference
in the Performance of
Any of the Sections
y ••
Comparisons of Base Gradations
Ol 100
c
·~ ~f---~~~~~~~~~794-------~
('0
~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~-+~~~-
'E
C1l
...
(,.)
C1l
00
~ 20
O.D01 0.1 10
=
.,....
Q
ROAD NO: I 64
COUt'TY:
,..011 :
TO: US 60
FII~KLIII
us 127
LEIICTH:
liP' : H .ll
KP : S7.90
.,....
I l
COWTIIACTOR rOll HOY 62 ACTION : !load l uild era In, .
~
StP 8) EDGE DIIA liiS
=
Q
YlS~AL COSDITIOW S~RYtY
(Ot~tk :l
CRACKISCi /1.~,1.11
POISTSI
IWCIKU!I
~
18 I)
_!!._ -"- .z ()
u liAS£ fA l LUktS' -
FA\:LTJNCi/
RAYtllliG - WW
or; or
S P4Lll NG
P'ATCIUNG
stCtl OI'
9
6
l2
9
6
i/ $
z --
:J
---- 5
.2_ ~.5 L
~
3
5 _L
3
II.~
..£...!!!...
~
=
·~
APPE AA~Ct
=
DEPAR'l'M!:NT OF HIGHWAYS
Ollllllon ol Openlone
0 Dlltrlal
ICounty IRNI IRoedName
From To
·~
~ t...qlh ,.La_ IPrqedNo. ,~
·~ Nole:
~ I. CONXT10N SURVeY
=
EXTENT 8EVERfTY POINTS
F- In~ ~ Sight Mode riM s--
Ctlddr1! 1 2 3 .. 5 s 2 3
• 5 s
S.. Flllulw (f•~AW 1 2 3
• 5 1 2 3 4 5
0 Ra"*G ~lng)
~ Ofs.dlon
1
1
1.5
1.5
2
2
2.5
2.5
3
3
1
1
1.5
1.5
2
2
2.5
2.5
3
3
u
~raoo. Fw - 1 Poor -3 V«yPoof · 5
2 ..
~
.. RIOEABIUTY
~=
8/W:
~=
Rl
~ Total
C..: ~
RONJWAY CHARAC'TeRSIJTlC RATER A88Essr.ENT
PCC N; AC I PCC ~~? 0 .... o ... v- 0Na~U~~r __
Curt.&O~ ~ IIWC&a.. T~~(AC) Oller
---------------·
Shouldera
-
Hgh / Low
--------- Pr.....-on: ~ & ~ (Pefcenl)
I
STATEWIDE RANKING:
DI8TRK:T RECOMMENlATlONS DISTRICT RANKING:
5.0
Very Good 4.0
Good
3.0
Fair
2.0
Poor 1.0
Very Poor 0.0
V·71
Pavement Condition Criteria
RJDEABD..ITY INDEX {PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEXl
•Critical Rl' s
Condition Points
" •
.. .. ·--
• <-..o
..... • •
•
f
~
'
••
•..
••
I
~
:
••
... :
....
Rideability
i ... • • t I
t..
I •••••
~=
f: If~
u
:I
.." .. Ii
... ·I .... .... .... I
u
Y·74
Rutting
• ··--
. _..,..
.i . I....••••
I ,
f
•
.....
~
' • ••
f
,.., , .... , ... ,.. lOOt
YMr y. 75
Backcalculation of Materials Properties
--
1-64 Carter County, MP 161.0- 171 .61
~A~\
!-
.5
j-
l:
-
,...'a ,., ,.., '" "'
w._..,
tC7 "'
,. tft t7t 1n
Y·IO
Breaking and Seating, FHW A SP 202
(Western Ky. Parkway), 1-71
ethods of Design
1. Empirical (Concept of AASHTOJ
Examples
2. Mechanistic
Examples
3. Mechanistic-Empirica
Exam les v-•
Y· t1
Terminal Serviceability
Y·M
Y· l5
y ••
Structural Number
• Determined from the AASHTO Equation
or Nomograph
• Relates Material Thickness and
Structural Value
SN • [¥>1
Where lit • mater1&llayer coefficlent for lAyer I
0 1 • mater1&l thlckness for layer I
i Y· f1
Pavement Drainage
y ••
Drainage Coefficient
y ••
SN/Elastic Modulus Relationship
Asphalt Concrete
•
. v
~,,
/
1/
I
,.... u
0
o-o.-...-......_~.,~
- ...... ...... .......
....... c-...
.._. • 0. o..k <a.-..u ........ Ul
V-100
'"" ••
OlO - - - - - - - - - - lG
.....
'""
,.
.,.,
~
I
---------~-
:
----------
'. - .:;,
i
i:. ____________il ________ _.. I
ll
u
...
~ v·101
Layer Coefficient, Cement Treated Base
ll ------------- ------------
,.
.
___________ .,._
- -~---------
•••
.
u
. r---------:---f--------.; 1
" : 1 1
:: j ----- -------1---------~
l
fll $u4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,..... . . . . ~..,..,
V-102
OlD
: : = .. fj
1
•.• J : -c : ~ ! ,,
!·----,; -------.a----- ·}----+:
0~ l .. ..
- " .."
... -----;;-
...
nr"" 1.1.
Ql
---
''' ""· ~~
Scttt dP<IftiOfirOI!'I~OI'M....,.....,9", .... ~.,.....,.. c,.J!I.....
01 ~ 0. ._,~.,.,.\ION
WI k*........,.,..N(;MRI"~
....... ~h ...
1J1
,.,.._...UI
\ v-103
Estimation of Modulus of Subgrade
Reaction
Erampl e
0 58 : 6 1n<:hes
E 511 : l0,000 p SI
1,000,000
'40oo,ooo
0,000 ~
......
I'--
........
,:;::: :---t:---
I I II I I
Su b ba se EIOIIIC:
"'"' "''"- ·'
~
1'\.
1'\.
Compo site Modulus of
Sub9r ade Reoc:t10n,
" '-I':
k• (pel)
~~i
Mo dulus , E (pao)
- --
~ 58
1:::::- 1--. r- -...I' :::..: t--
..... 1:3= ::::: ....... t'~t:--.,
'-... ~
i'\.. I'. "" i'.. Au1:;.:;, . ' ; : : ; , . ,.
-
1'--- I' ~ ~ ........ t:': ~ "' :\. o., l ~ )
~~~
15,000 1"--- ['..
..... r:--: ~ b.. ....... ~
t--- ....... ::-...; ~ ....... ~ ~
........ ...... 10 ~t.::::~ "' "' "~ I'\. I'\.
I'\. I'\.
1-
I ' ::--;:~ ~~ "" 1'\. 1'\. "' I'-: 1'\.
~~ '<.~
1'..::: ["\.. '-I'-:
-~.
~ I'-:
1'-I'-: "'
f- -f-
I 1'\. "' "' ['\. ['\. '\:
·"
1'\.
" " "\ '\:
I_
1-
' ~ ~SB '\ '\ r'\
_.. 14 10
• ~ "" "
-- -- --
1000-- _II 12 I
r-
2000 r- "" "" 1'\.
lOOO
:1000
1'000
-
---- - -
:::::::
r- ..._
1--
1-- r- !-....
t---
1'-
1---
r--
'
'\~,~~
10,000
12,000 ::::: ::- t-- ..._ 1-- r-~ t- 1'-
"<<
tG,OOO
l.O,OOO
- 1-- r--
~ r- ......
r-- 1-- r-- 1-- r- t--- ....... f'..
I'--
-
r- t- :::-... f'..
~
r- ....... '1::'-
r--
;-.._
'
:'\., ~/
" 1"\
....... r-.. "
" "
['\..
I-
1-
Roadbe d
Soil Rn 1loen t
1- Modulus , M 11 (p si)
I'
"' ~
I'\:
~
1'-
I I I I I I I '"' "'
Figure 3.3. Chart for Estimating Composite Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k., Assuming a
Seml-lnflnlte Subgrade Depth. (For prnctlcal purposes, a seml-lnnnite depth l~
considered to be greater than 10 feet below the surface or the subgrude.)
Flexible Pavement Design Chart
,..,.f..:~:. ~
- O.:ID + - - - - - - - + 2. 32*109lh- 8.07
1094
0.40 + - - 5 19
(SNt-1) •
./
<40
~"
-zo / ~"
~·o
=
v ~r
/
~7
~
/
7
/
/
/
~
//)
w
/ '?-'
as/
/J ~
TO ~./. /~ tr
10
Eaomple: ti'.
z.o ~
50
1 I T -, 2
W 11 x 5 al0 '' T I' 4
R • 95 °/o o..lon Structural Number, SN
so: 0 .35
M : 5000 pai
11
6PSI ~ 1.9
Solution: SN : 5.0
Figure 3.1. Design C hart for Based on Usin~ Mean Values for Each Input
Rigid Pavement Design Chart, Part I
~
t
75 18.42
215.63" rfJ. - b 25
(tc!k> .
.,
4.0 u
'0
u
(I) l .S .:\
c
•
~
.;
...
::ll
:J
a:
u
u
-s•
:g
"~ r·c;•...
o.
:J ~
'0 ..J
~ 0
~
•...
u
-ti
~
a
6
u
fj
E ffectlve Modulus of SubcJrode •
2
f:aomple :
Reaction, k (pci)
... . 72 pel So • 0 . 29
Ec • 5 • Kf> pel R • 95% (Z 11 • · l.a45)
sic • 6150 pal !::::. PSI • 4 .2 - U : t.l'
J • ! .2 w. • 5J a 106 (lllllp ESAU
cd • 1.0 Sohllon o 0 =10.0 iftc:Ma (11eore1t
llalt ·lncll , fr- ....... , 2)
Figure 3.7. Design Chart for Rigid Pavement Ba.o;ed on Using Mean Values for Each Input Variable (Segment I)
Rigid Pavement Design, Part II
f7 / / / / / /
~ r7[Iv
/
/ v v/ / / / /
v v
/ v 17v / / / v v
0
[7 [7
/
17
v v ./
v v v
[7 17 17 v v 1/ /
v v v 1/ 7 /
I 0>
ooo
----------+--------------~
...
I
1::
•
I
... ~.~
s•...,\
ft •11()
I
'\
I
tO
I •
10
I I
toO
I I
to
I
At hobllttr, R (%)
f1gllre 3.7. Contlnutd- Oeslln Chart ror RJcld Pa..,ments ~on Using Mnn Values ror
ltlocb Input Yarlablt (Sqmtnl 2)
Loss of Support
1000
- - /
f-----·
- v /
11701 /
v
-m
n::::
gg
<I>~ 100 r--- v vv
-,____ --
n ~
lO'" ~ -
c.l: v /
28. 50 f- - /
"'0!;.
0
-"'
:: / v
~v
CD 0
"'- / /
&(/)
-c / v
:;-g vv / ~
tl iii
v
~
.-"
2.~ /
(/)::0
c: ..
'C'" 10 () "" //
'8g0
~ <:> ~
:: "',.. IL
L \.. I
v0
5
~ v/ I' L \..
1/
l( v v . . . v I
~v
v v v ..
/
v f 0l
5 10 50 100 500 1000 2000
Effec:live Modulus of Subgrade Reacloon. k lpcol
Figure 3.6. Correction of Effective Modulus or Subgrad~ Reaction for Pot~nllal Loss or Subbase Support (6)
Rigid Pavement Design Parameters
I v:11o
Typical Loss of Support Values
Cement Treated Granular Base
(1,000,000 - 2,000,000 psi) 0.0- 1.0
Lime Stabilized
(20,000 - 70,000 psi) 1.0-3.0
UnBound Granular Materials
(15,000 - 45,000) 1.0- 3.0
Fine Grained or Natural Subgrade Mtls
(3,000 - 40,000 psi) 2.0-3.0 r v-111
,..lOt •. :~: .• ]
- 0.20 + - - - - - -- + 2.32*1091o"R - 8.07
1094
0 . 40 + - - 5 u
(SNt-1) •
\_
~.i ..: -c -E
Oesion S«vlceobility Lou, 6PSI /
!! • ~~
~~ ~~
.... f/)0
s.o;:: ~~
..; ..
....2
I~
-; ~~, --~~~- c
1-20
/~,.
IJ"
v~
-
<::'
4!!} ~
~~,
1.0 c;<t
t
-.., as -
v ~7
1C
0 ::>
c! ' ~g
..,_, "8
a:
G>~
5
....
b
• - •o -
€~
-. ·g c:
Q>.!!
:: = /
/
/
~ w
• .os =
.':::=;n!! go
w"'
~ -1
/ /
~
-.a
i7i ml
// ~
ro l/ lh r
1.~,
-, ~
10
Eaomple• ZD
50 I I
W11 x 5 xi01 t
Figure 3.1. Design Chart for Flexible Pavements Based on Using Mean Value.c; for Each Input
Flexible Example I
Design Inputs
• SN = 5.7
• Layer Coefficients
- AC Surface -- 0.44
- AC Base -- 0.40
- Type II Drainage Blanket-- 0.18
- DGA --0.14
rv-114
Flexible Example I
Thickness Determination
Layer SN
AC Surface 1.5" x 0.44 0.66
AC Base 8.5" X 0.40 3.40
Type II DB 6" x 0.18 1.08
DGA 4" X 0.14 0.56
Total 5.70 v -115
Rigid Pavement Design
Example I
• Design Traffic-- 18,000,000 ESAL's (12,000 ADT)
• Initial Serviceability -- 3.75
• Terminal Serviceability -- 2.5
• Reliability-- 95% (Rural Arterial)
• Overall Deviation -- 0.39
• PCC Modulus of Rupture-- 600 psi
• PCC Elastic Modulus -- 4,000,000 psi
• Subgrade CBR -- 7.0
• Load Transfer Coefficient-- 2.7
rY:; 116
Rigid Example I
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction
v·117
Rigid Example I, Modulus of Subgrade Reaction
Exomplt
Dsa =6 1nches
Esa = 20,000 psi
M11 : 7,000 Pll
['\
1,00 0,000
•'
00,000
t--.. ':--.... I'- I\: ' '\
~
" Composite Modulus of
' "' ~~
~~
t-. t-.
.......
I' J-::::::t-..
t--.. f". ~ ~ c"- ~ ~ ' ['.,["\.. I'\. I'\.
f"'-.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
r--. L' ~ !:': ~
['.,
' r-...
v,' ~
I'\. I'\.
I" ~
1'\.
' "<q. !'\. 1'\, '' 1'\.~
~
['., 1'\.
" ~
' I'\. " 1'\.
1-
~· " t-....
"""\ ~
r'\: !":. R
t'\. ['., ~
"'
l <mch~) "' t'\.. ' '
I
~
I·~ ~SI 1'\. r'\ I'-K
1000 '- IB IS
2000 t- t-
r- t--t-...
-~--
14 li 10
' 1'\
1'\
I'\.
3000 1-t- r--1--t-... 1"-- 1'\
~i'<
!1000 1-1- t-- t-.._ t--- r-... t"--
7000 t-
t- t- t-- 1-- 1"-- f'.
10,000
12,000 ~ t- 1--
16,000 1-t- ..... t-
20,000
t-- t- I"-- r-...
~ t-. '- r- t-. ~
1"-- t"--
t"-- r-...
"';<., f\.}..1
t--- t- 1--..... t- r-... t-- r--.. f', ['\,
t- t-.. t-. 1-... ....... :--.... f"'-.. :-....
1""-- ....... ........ ......
.......... ' "' ['.,
-
- Roadbed
Soil Res thtnl
t--..
" "" "
1"'- ...... :--... 1'\::
1'\::
- Modulus , M 11 (ps i )
"" 1'\::
I I I I I I " K
Figure 3.3. Cba rt for Estimating Composite Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k.., Assumlng a
Seml-Jnfln lte Subgrade Depth. (For practical purposes, a seml-lnnnlte depth Is
cons idered to be greater than 10 feet below the surface of the subgrade.)
Rigid Example I
109
r a 1'61 ]
lo[ 4.5 - 1.s
7
1.624*10
1 + - --.....
(0+1)8.16
1100
I I OC')
t OOO
.00
~
.;
....
:J
-s•
100
•
r
·~
!
-1
0
ti
0
100 ~ 10 2
800 500
Figure 3.7. Design Chart for Rigid Pavement Based on Using Mean Values for Each Input variable (Segment 1)
Rigid Example I
Do- Slob T~u. 0 hncl>n ) / v v/ /
/ vv VL VL L
v/ v /
/ / /_
-
vv / '/_ / v v
)I'> '/ v v v v v
0
IO - v/ '/ v v v / v/
- 7/17/ '7 1/ v 1/ / / /
- s ·Y.00v•o79/ ~ y' . ~ ~
7 / / / / / / / v
••,_ -;~ / 7 7 •/ / / / v /
·- .
i
..
0
•
/ 7 [7/ / / / /
/ / v
c ••
'/ / v/ ,/ /
/ v v/
"7 v v / 7 v /
?0 17 7 [7 / ./ /
·- / / v 17
/ /
(ll>,...lt~~ 18- u p EquowoiMt So"9t. A• l..
\
1000- 100 .., lO > I 0>
100
·-
NO TE• Applicotlon o l rellobllly
\
1n lhlt cl>orl r equlfea
lhe uae ol mean values
lor al lhe lnpul vorklblu .
~\.
0
Oi>t~.~
~.~,;~
·t
.... " 'f ... o:> ~ 1 'j'
Figure 3.7. Cootlnued- Oulgn Chart for Rigid ~vemeots Based on Using Mean Values for
Each Input Variable <Se!lment 2)
Rigid Example I
Structural Thickness
v-121
Computer Software
• AASHTO Darwin 3.0
• ACPA •• PAS-S
• Other
V-122
Mechanistic (Single Layer)
1. Developed by Boussinesq - 1885
2. Surface < 4.0" thick
3. Ratio of EP/ Es < 1 (Thin Surface
and Thick Base)
4. Load Radius Large Compared to
Pavement Thickness
5. Pavement Consists Primarily of
One Layer - Mostly Subgrade
l v-123
'zr
i
2.
ar
!
E
a~
v
~r~ V-125
I
b._ -r::;::::~r-u-z.or--:.
I~ ~~
t--J_-+--lJ.L ,~~; ~ I I ) J~ ~pro.25
2
-
~~-"s{j ~1s
1
3
"' \ 1\ } I
~"''~"'-I"
1\l i\
' ::'\_l• h
I ~iP 11 1
\ //~ NUIDbers on curves f.-
.. s ·, indicate r/a
~
6
\ ', \ f\ I\ " . II~~ ~ .__
1
'\ \ \ I I!J~
8
\\ I 'II
9 \ liM
10 \ I I I!If V-126
Mechanistic (Single Layer)
Tangential Stresses
0
..l xlOO (\ )
q
0.1 Q.2 0.3 OA Q.6 Q! 1.0 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 20 31 40 50 60 Ill 100
~
0
1-.....,
1\
r... D I~ ~o.zs ~
~ t; ~Iii
1
II 1.5/ k::;;;
2/ J,' 1--- I
/ v: vv ~ ~ I;;; ~ Nuabers on curves
indicate r/a
~ I I
l#~ I I I
5 I I i I I i I l
V-127
1
e z =E [a z - f.! (a r + a1)]
1
e r =E [a r - J..L(a t+ az )]
1
et ==E [a t - r11(a z +a)]
r
Mechanistic (Multi-Layer)
(Layer-Elastic)
1. Multi-Layer Theory- Burmister, 1943
2. Material Properties of Each Layer Ar.:
Homogenous (Isotropic)
3. Each Layer Has Finite Thickness
Except Bottom Layer
4. Bottom Layer - Infinite Half-Space
5. All Layers Infinite in Horizontal
Direction
V-130
Mechanistic (Multi-Layer)
(Layer-Elastic)
6. Full Friction Developed Between
All Layers
7. Surface Shearing Forces (Frictional)
Are Not Present
8. Only Two M aterial Properties per
Layer:
Poisson's Ratio
Elastic or Resilient Modulus
V-131
Mechanistic (Multi-Layer)
p · ..,., • ..t b ...
v-132
Mechanistic (Multi-Layer)
Limitations of Layer-Elastic Theory
1. Assumes All Materials Are Linear
Over All Stress Ranges- Not True
2. Assumes Material Response Is
Non-Viscous (Strain Remains
Constant Over the Time Which the
Load Is Applied)- Not True
3. Assumes All Deformation is
Recoverable - Not True V-133
Mechanistic (Multi-Layer)
Deflection at Interface of Two-Layer System
0
.. .. .~ .. .. .. ..F . . ... ... ... ... .. ..
· '1 r.r:.i P' J:u~ ·
~E
l = t=;
I ---~~ ..,.
0
"'
E
)
I a,
..
. .L~Ja-
:.:.::- T'"
r- .
~
L
I'
§ I E1
- =1 Deflection= ~a F
E2 2
V-134
Mechanistic (Multi-Layer)
Critical Strains
eo.pr... • t.v• · ~r&La - cv.cc1.q .
.
I WHEEL LOAD
ASPHALT CONCRETE
GRANULAR BASE
GRANULAR SUBBASE
Mechanistic ulti-La
Failure Criterion for Fatigue
(Tensile Strain - B ottom of Asphalt)
1 .E~3 ~ .
" i Asphalt Institute Equation~
c
...
I'll
......... ...........,
~
i
-Shell Equation r
<i5
C1> 1.E-04
~
II)
c --=
Q)
..... '" ...........
"
1 .E~5
""
'J.. 1"
.~ ~-, '
~'-.,.
I
-
""' ~~ ~
I•
-
....... ......
,...
i- -Asphalt Institute Equation
I
~
'"
""'"""" t'--..
1
1.0E-05
-Shall Equation
' "~
1 .E+04 1 .E+06 1 .E+08 1 .E+10 1 . E+12 1 .E+1
Number of Repetitions V-137
Mechanistic (Multi-Layer)
Co1nputer Prograins
ELSYM5
* Multiple Wheel Loads
* Interface Slip
CHEVRON
* Layer-Elastic Only
BISAR
*Interface Friction Can Be Specified
*Horizontal Loading (Braking)
SDEL
* Stress Dependent Elastic Theory V-138
phalt Institute
Mechanistic
Design
Method
v-139
V-140
Asphalt Institute Mechanistic
Design Met"'od
Example 1
Untreated Aggregate Base 12.0 ln. Thickness
,i
I·
-- f-- 1--
t--
I I II II II I II I I
' 42 ' 48 '59 '68 '73 ' 81 ' 87
V-142
Mechanistic-Empirical
(Kentucky Method)
t v-144
Mechanistic-Empirical
(Kentucky Method - 1948)
v·145
Mechanistic-Empirical
(Kentucky Method -1948).
2 - 2
(f) 1
w
I
u
z
,_~
z
w ~
~
w
~
a.
0
z
<t
w
(/)
<t
en I I I
I i
- -"1
I
I 1. l
aI I
(/)
(f)
w
l. . 1- '' ! I
1
z
--,
• J
~-!
l'
~
u ! I 1
:I: I
1-
i
0
w
z l 1- -
Q'l ' I
~ I
-- - -- 1 -
0
u
_CL I
-·
Mechanistic-Empirical
(Kentucky Method - 1948)
MINIMUM LABORATORY CBR VALUE
. --i---·- - -l-l--1- .
0 I
2 2 t - - - - + - - - 1 - - 1-.J---1~-l--i---------t--+---11--+- 1---l-+--l--1
~ I
CD
~ 241-----1--- -+--1 --t---t--J-t-t-----J--~---t--t.- +-~-~
0
0 26l----_.l._ __,__.____._ -1--L---L-l--1._ ____ __. _ _ _ .. - - __......___...__ - '- ' - -
Fig. 22
Mechanistic-Empirical
(Kentucky Method - 1948)
MJNIMUM LABORATORY C B R VALUE
2 3 4 ~ 7 8 ! 10 :;10 ::t~n -to !!O 110 70 1n~1n nn
(I)
l.IJ ~-
-~--
:X:
0
z
4
v
iG\ v~
v - ~~
~ -- l------
...,:-
z
6
~ ...... v v v t::===-::
(j) - ~
~ Curve UmltlnG E WL
~ ....... I- CmiHion)
8 v vv v v ~
l.IJ
> v (ii).. vv. 1/ v ~
--
l------
--
lA
I
LaM than 1/2
L.Me than I
a ....... / 3-S
"'v
I / --
z 12 f-
~~v -----
~
ct 6 - 10
-- -- /
I/ V1 10-20
v/ ~ v7v,. v v --- - --
/
l.IJ 14 V11 20-40 f-
(I) ./ ~----_.;:-:;;. VIH 40-80
C(
CD IX 80-160
·-
-- -
/ /
I 16 X 1&0-320
v /. v v ~--=
I--
v~
(I) /
(I)
l.IJ 18 v ... " /
/
~-
z
X: v/ ""~
,-..... /""
v""'
/
/
0 210
:X:
t- v / ,..,~ 1.-/
..," ./V\ v,.
e 22 // ,.'9
z _,"'
a:a 24
~ v"'
8 26
Kentuck~ Deportment of HIGhwct~• Materiel• fteaearctl
OC1
Laborotor'
I ~~·
Mechanistic-Empirical
(Kentucky Method - 1959)
Design Data
Traffic Analysis
Traffic vs. Pavement Life
Performance Inspections
Rutting Measurements
Roughness
Pavement Deflections
(Benkelman Beam) m".
I;;,V-150
Benkelman Beam
18,000
v-151
,, :Benkellna
- Z5 -
.120
.100
~
'
AIWEMEJifT
TRAFFIC - D£FLECTtON
4i1ROUP
'
' '· ~-
' ..... r....
0
•
---
_, l ...... t..-r'F . .. _ \ . e
....... t.._.,..... ..._..., •
~
......
........... ......_
'
~~
'""''! .......
......
•
.000
lA II • IV V VI vtl IX
~ GROUPS BY ~ EWL'S
.J
fj "\
I '
~ 08
~
~.()60 r\.
...i5 '\.
i'..
~ .040 i'-.
~
·- ~
.000
Ql 10 100 1000
E WL' a (MI LLIO NS)
~"'-........
--....... t--.1
..
.0000 2 .. •
"TOTAL PAVEM~T
8
THICKNESS
10
EXCLUOfNO
12
TISM
...
(INdHES)
•• 18
28
;:;;
~
<.:> v
~
~
2-4
v
.....
20
v
~
d v I('
1--'
~
w
w
16
v
I 12
./
/
/
I
8
. :,....
v
~ 0
0.1 10 100 1000
EWL ' • (MILLIONS)
F ig. 16: Plot o £ Thi c knesses and E WL'e Inte rpo l ated ! rorn
Figs. 1 4 and 1 5 £or Co rreapondi.ng D e£\ec tio ne .
Kentucky Method - 1959 Revision
LA80RATORV CBR \.MU IE
(I)
Ill
X
-
4
,.,. ·- ...- - --
~
-- 7
b.'-'~
I !t ' l
-
4110 ~[) <11110 ~o fiO 1n 10 Q, .IU
0
z
6
_.,......- :..-~
~
---
...- ...- ~ -- -
.-" -~:~o.•
,.....,.. ';:;-'"
~
eur- u......
....- -
EWL
(i) / ..........
-
----
.......
8
~ v v v v ------
?
(ij)..,.
/
-- -- ~
Ill
lA
I .....
t.e.s ...... 112
~
---<
v -- --
10
v 7 f--'
~ ~ .,. v
II t-2
JY
0
z
4
12
vv/ ~ /
v - --
- -- ---------
---- ---- ---
J" ~ ,
.... ~V' ........ 1........
Ill
IV
v
VI
2-3
3 - 6
6 - 10
10 - 20
-
Ill ,...__
-- --
14 Vtl 20- 40
v~ ~./ ~~
~ ---
(I)
~ ~--- ~ 40- 80
Ci IX
--
..,; ~ 80- 160
-
v ,.,.,. ... vu
-
l 16 7 X 160 - 320
~-
1
(I)
~/ f.-
(I)
Ill v ..,; ~/ /
...--
z 18 "'
liC // ,"' .r-
_,~ ./
0
-··-· ,~
- /..,;
,.,. /
~
IX
//
. ~ ,_,"" ~
0
I&J
z
22
v . . , ,"" ~X
m 24
2
0
v'
o a , .,
l<enlud& o.p, ...... H
••
Fl.ElCIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN CURVES
Kentucky Method - 1959 Revision
.·
MINIMUM LABORATORY COR VALUE
2 3 4 5 6 7 89!Q_ 20 30 40 50 60 708090100
v ~ f-
.....
~
~~~~"
~~------ .--- ~ ~~
~ r- ~ r-:; ""
(I)
LLI
::J:
0
z
,.
-
-
A /~
(M) ~
~
v 1--- r-
,.....
~
v-----
__ ~ -t:=::: ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ /
~
...... an / 1--' ~ ~0 ~ ~~ ~ /
z
V"/ " L_ v;l v v ~ 1--' ~~
I"'"""
~ [::2; ~ V"
LLI
:E
LLI
·-I"' VL v ~v
~v
> ~
f . L ~ ~~ ~ ~
v
lA
~ v v .....
v/ / v v v ~~
0
z v®.
c(
LLI
(I) .
·-
~
.·-.... / / ~/ /~ v
.L.
v ,
v ,. ~
I""
....
(j
v / ~L v~ vL / c v,.. /
"'
~ Cww l.llllittng EWL
-- v/
~
-
nA
v
Ill
IV
2-3
3-6
0
-
n~ /L VL v
VI
6-10
10 - 20
LLI
z
_ L~ v VII
VII
20-40
40-80
~
n..,.
... IX eo- 160 \
V/
X 160 - 320 .
0
,. .... I I J
::v DNISION OF RESEARCH .MI«JARY. 1959
Kentucky Method - 1959 Revision
MINIMUM LABORATORY CBR VALUE
2 4 6 7 8 9 10 20
en
lLI
%
z0
Curve
e( 4..
~~ rov
i~ "C!J
,o'f. ~~~
~~ e~
~0 0~~
~e~~e' 1. AASHO Design System
~0 Based on EAL
2.Increased Traffic
v-159 Volumes and Weights
1968 Revision
1. Extensive Benkelman Beam
Measurements Throughout State
2. Tremendous Scatter in Data
3. Partially Due to Effects of
Temperature
4. Temperature Corrections
Reduced Scatter But Not Enough
' v -160
1968 Revision
5. Concluded that Surface Deflections
Were Not the Key Attribute
6. Concluded Only a Layered System
Analysis Would Provide More
Insight
7. CHEVRON N-Layer Computer
Program Used to Run a Large
Array of Problems v-1s1
~ lltft..( C TIC N
IN'C MI!: '
..
Q "'
•O C l eo-~.
...=I)
'~ O lUO~ ------.- ••••
---._
..
~
\C
aJ Q-\
~ ~
~
..UJ, '"' ..
~
I
1.)
<
1
. .....---
~
~
lL
w
c.
~ .c')
<
J
_....
Cl
. • I·
--
=
1-
0... --
?.J ' 5 OXIQ~ 1 •.!~--------
- -~ , __ ~ J -
I ) n 4 oxro·
l
_....
r;#j
=
l +
~~ I . t
=
I I
- • t-1·
I .. ' I I
aJ 3 . 0XIO-~
. - -~'
=
2(. i
..--.-- ---
1
t·. L,
I
~
__\.OXlO" -~-- 1 t·
Z8! • I. .:.J
~·
0 •
I .
O(~f.C TI I:'N
111CN£1
"
10 ox•o-:----_
"
t S.OXIO~--
Z OOXI'O~
t' !t 0 1(10-
-......
--
----• ....____
--
-
9 ~
~ ~O.OlliO
•o r- -
'·' t~
.....
r --
~ -
-- 1
I
....... - ....... I - ....
r ··-
1~~~-- --
.A --- ~I -
-- ! . ...
1 95~
L- - · - --
1
KENTUCKY
FLEX8.E ..: II· ··-. l
~ l- - --
VI
l= . .t 'H.
1
. - I·!-
.: ' ~·t·
---------~ - 11 l.L1··
I '
-- • • ... 1
Kentucky Method - 1968 Revision
Critical Strains
1.E-02
c
n:l
.!:: 1.E-03 + - - - - - - " "-......:'
Cl)
~
(/)
cQ)
......
U 1 .E~
<(
- SHELL - AS PH. IHST.
1.E-OS L------------___;.;.---'---
1.E+OO 1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E+OS 1.E+06 1.E+07 1.E+08
Number of Repetitions
V-164
200)(10~
~ -- •.
' ....
- ·-">-'- -
...
·-..
- \C
~
25 O lCIO '~'-, /
30 0lC IO-~ ,
""-·.,.'.,. ,
Yll
~
1.oxto8
~
SUBCR.t.DE VIII
STR AIN
18 OXI0 6 lll
~
<
••
\lj
••
Q
Jut AC TO OGA
AASHO EAL
so· F
Kentucky Method
1973 Revision
1. AC Modulus Substituted for
AC Temperature
2. Unlike 1968 Curves, DGA
Modulus Allowed to Vary
3. The Idea of Traffic Level Curves
Abandoned for EAL's
v-168
1973 Revision
10
10 100 10,000
C B R
v -169
~?
1973 Revision
ll J~--rTJ I I:~~f I I I
30
--+- ~ I· II I t~--
DESIGN CURVCS
Kentucky ethod
1981 Revision
...0 ~
§ I 1/
I
I
. ---'- I=
/
1
v
/
.....
7
17 / - ~
""""
,.,
~
<:; .....
~ ...,.,..
0
u.. I - ~ - / / / ~wentyFou]
I=
"7 J
1--
/ l/ v ..,. Tires I ::::
1
G.l 10°
C7'
0 - Six Axles:~
E I I 1-7 f-· II"' 7
0
1
I
II
I
-1- 1- '-- v t-- ./
./
~ ./
IL iii
0
_,
17-= 1-
__, ~
_I I / ./ ..... - I--I-
I I I 1/ / v
E I I II / v -~ v ==
t=
I= I 1/ l .-J
v / / ./
v =
=
-
1- 1--
[1L. - lr-
J 7 ~ / /
I , 7 7
7 ..-'
·-
I
I
I
'(
17 7
7
7
~
7
7 - v - I--
1-
=
~ I J ~
V- f-- ~
-
~~~J II lrl r 111 J IIII Jj k'; II ~I ~ III I I IIIII II II II II II II IJII UHI IIIII I1111 IIIII IIIII IIII I IIIII IIIII III II II II II I I 1111 IIIII II Ill
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Tota l Load on Configu ration. K ips
Kentucky ethod
34 34
)'
~-
~
r ~~~rM ~I
1--, !.-
32 1--
'-- 1-
1-
~ ll 32
30 1 -
__.
- ,;'
a~
VI ~!Ltr
30
28
/v v ·//
28
v
26
- -
, 3$'~ Aej 1- 1-
1-
1- /
v~--"
v
,;'
~ ltV
vv.
Vol 'I t,lll 26
V/V. v ~~~
r. l ·~· ~~
1- v ·' ,;' /
v
~ vv V/
1/ / 'I
24
It ·- - / _..3
v k v
,;'
~v /
24
v I en
~
. . . v ,"'
/
"' ~o)" ~VII' w
IJJ
X 22 - ,_ ,- - ~ .....
kv~-' /
/ / :Lk:: v
22 i3
/ 17 ,"'
u / ~~ z
~ / /
- J
v ,"' Vv~-"
/
/ / [;.0V l/ v -
"'
....
"' 20 - !7' v / / ~
, "v /..o!"" /
v:;v v v· v
20 :!)"'
~
z z
X - ......... 1/ l/ X
u
u
x - / / .a"'V /-::: 1/
i I8 ~
..... 18 /.,.. _,9
~ ;....- ,. . v v v
_J
~
..... ,..,~-' v [/:; /
/
,.., ....
//
/ I;
~~-
v ,/ / V.v /
./
/
~~
..J
~
.....
0
..... 16 - - -· ·-1-
/
~ /
)"' v 7 / 7 :..... / / I;
,I••
v / ,,. /~
I6 ~
/ ....~--
/ :..... 17,.., ~ ?.....- / ,16.
~ v v .,/
14 I4
L ~)" / :..... '/" V: ~/ ~ / ,~ /
v - ,7
/
/
/ /
vv / ,v ~ :/ /I/:..... /
::;;; I;
~ 1-1-
~/~
12 I2
k
/ / /
/ ~
v
/
/ "'v
7:,... ~
/
:;:
~ vt
,..:..... ~v
,30·
.......... /
~~ ~~ ~~bv vvv
/ / !-'
/ / / /
10
, I0
~
/ /
~ 1- "y ~ (-
....
v"
~~
/
1-
t7 v v ~)"' vv v-.;o
8
/
~ P' t:/ ~-- ~ 1- vv 1- 8
/ 1/ v v loo t--
v 1/v I/
/
6
v t%- j v / v .-· [/ ,v
6
lo• 10~ 108
20
- - 1-1--4--1-1-1-++-1 6
-1--1- 4
! - 1 - 1- 1--
1- r-+-t- t- 1- 2
1- 1-1--1-
(I)
26 26
24
16 -
-1~2
0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0
~· ~& ~6 ~· ~·
REPETITIONS Or AN 18 KIP ( 80 KN) EOUIVALCNT 1\XLCLOAO
Current Practices
in Pavement Design
-Number of States Using AASHTO
-Catalogs of Design
v-1n
Current Practices
in Pavement Design
V-178
Current Practices
in Pavement Desi
Alaska -State Procedure
California- State Procedure
Hawali - California Procedure
Idaho- Mod. California Procedure
Kentucky - KY Method
Minnesota - State Procedure
New Hampshire- State Procedure
New York- State Procedure
Pennsylvania- State Procedure
V-179
Current Practices
in Pavement Desi
Alaska- No Rigid Pavements
California- State Procedure
Hawaii - PCA Method
Iowa - PCA Method
Kentucky - KY Method/AASHTO (86/93)
New Hampshire- State Procedure
New York- State Procedure
Pennsylvania- State Procedure V-180
Current Practices
in Pavement Desi n
Illinois
Rigid (Finite Elements)
Flexible (Finite Elements)
No State - Asphalt Institute
V-181
Current Practices
in Pavement Desi n
Objectives:
To acquaint the participant with the various methods or modes of pavement failures.
Topics:
Comments:
Pavements may fail in a variety of modes. Failures may be the result of poor materials, poor
construction techniques, environmental distress, poor drainage, weak subgrades, heavy traffic
loads, or any combination of the preceding items.
Pavements that are designed with insufficient thickness will provide a poorer quality and
shortened service life, and the effects of all the factors listed above will be magnified. It is
important for the designer to be able to interpret pavement distresses and to be able to identify
the causes of those distresses. This ability will assist the designer, in the future, when choosing
among competing alternate rehabilitation strategies.
VI
Mechanisms of
Pavement Failure
.... . f
Failure Mechanisms
Flexible Pavement
Yl - 2
VI
Mechanisms of
Pavement Failure
Vl -1
Failure Mechanisms
Flexible Pavement
Vl-2
.:..~_._,_,.;."" ..~ .. ·~
. .
0
..... -~
••
---
L
.. - ;
•
II.,_______,,
Time
lk T ime
Maxwell Model
s
E=- ( 1 +-t)
G
2G 11
Time Vl· 8
Kelvin Model
G
E=-
s [1 - exp( - -G t)
2G 11
~
c
0
':1
..
~
l:!
c::
Q
Time
Vl·l
Burgers Model
s Go s Gt
e=- (1 +- t ) +- ( 1 - exp(- -t)J
2G0 11 2G 1 11
Time Vl-10
G
·~
' ...........:..,
'• ,..
Yl -11
DYNAMIC MODULUS
G'
I G"
Design Catalog
Yl-1
YI·S
Updated Warrants for Use
YI·S
Catalog Development,
Flexible Pavements
• Kentucky's Mechanistic-Empirical Procedure
• Utilize Standard Parameters
- Structural Layer Coefficients
• Asphalt Concrete 0.44
• Dense Graded Aggregate 0.14
- 33 o/o AC Design
• Convert to AASHTO Structural Number
• 95o/o Reliability or Better
Kentucky Mechanistic
Empirical Design Procedure
- / J
- -- I I v 32
I v v1/V
32
1- II
~
2,000,000 ESAL's v v 7 v 1/ VII
30 I 30
Subgrade CBR 4.0 v I IVV
I
v vI~ ITv Jl~
...._ - J
v
-
~ II
28 28
/ 'JI
~ vv vv
- -,1
/
~ IV v
~ I 'I IV
... . /
33'1C. AC
Y(
;zVj vv
26 26
z' / v vv II
~
I - ·-!... v x / ~~ / ~ 24
en
24
/ :1
v
"L v
v
v t%v.~ v.~ I I
Ul
w
r 22
II V j
4
/ :; ~ w
22 ~
u v '//V/ VI
~
Total Pavement Thickness /'I" /v; !/ z
v ,)"v // v
~ / II'
. 23.8 inches II'
,..:~
// ~v 1/
en VI /
"'~
en 20
w
z v y -"'Vv~ /
6'
v ,/ v Y. v ~v v 20
z
~ ~
~ .... 7
~
r 18 - --. - ,,Y / /v / II' 8 v ""l.·)' v" /
I' l'
18
u
t
.....
...J / v v -"'v /9
10 ~ ..... II' / V/
/
/ v ...J
v vy ,..Y~ ~v
<l / ~~ <l
..... II' / ;" ~ I ..... / I .....
7v
~vvv
0 16 16 ~
.....
/
/
/ v 1-'.Y .... /v 12
14
/
/ :..- "'~-" /I v
/ v / /~ _... 16 ~/ / // I
~v Vk"
14 ~ 14
v /v / II' v :, ~a
20 - ~ /
v I/ v -"')" --/v v .... /v ,,/ "
,7
v~
12 / 12
/ /v ii' ~ v .... v /v ~- /
v V- 7~ ,/ :711'
Vv
/ 1-"
10
/ / /v / / vJO /
10
/v
~
/ v
~~
,-"
~ ~v ~ ~/
/ /
·-
v I .I v /II'
~
/v v ;K)
8
6
vv / v /)I
Vv / v
~ ~ ~v v /
V/ j v 1/ II' /!.-"
~ .....
/ /
·- "T " r-
8
6
10. 10.
REPE Tl TIONS OF AN 18 KIP I 80 KN I EQUIVALENT AX LE LOAD
VII· 8
e
Kentucky Mechanistic
Empirical Design Procedure
IVR-9
Conversion to AASHTO
Structural Number
500,000 5.93 5.51 5.14 4.81 4. ~ 4.29 4.07 3.90 3.76 ~ 3.47
750,000 6.16 5.74 5.37 5.07_,... A.78 4.55 4.32 1)2-- ~7 3.82 3.69
1,000,000 6.35 5.93 5.57 [723 4.94 4.7j_ ~ 4.28 4.12 3.97 3.83
2,000,000 6.81 6.39 6.02 5.67 ~ [0.13 4.87 4.69 4.49 4.33 4.20
3,000,000 7.16 6.71 6.31 5.95 5.64 5.37 5.14 4.92 4.72 4.56 4.42
4,000,000 7.39 6.94 6.52 6.16 5.85 5.57 5.30 5.08 4.91 4.72 4.58
5,000,000 7.60 7.11 6.68 6.32 6.00 5.72 5.44 5.23 5.05 4.87 4.72
6,000,000 7.76 7.30 6.85 6.45 6.13 5.82 5.57 5.36 5.15 5.00 4.84
7,000,000 7.95 7.41 6.97 6.58 6.23 5.93 5.67 5.44 5.27 5.08 4.92
8,000,000 8.09 7.57 7.10 6.68 6.32 6.02 5.n 5.56 5.36 5.15 5.01
9,000,000 8.19 7.67 7. 18 6.80 6.44 6.10 5.86 5.63 5.43 5.27 5.08
10,000,000 8.32 7.76 7.30 6.87 6.51 6.21 5.93 5.70 5.50 5.34 5.15
11,000,000 8.42 7.88 7.37 6.95 6.58 6.28 6.00 5.77 5.57 5.38 5.23
12,000,000 8.54 7.96 7.46 7.03 6.65 6.32 6.08 5.82 5.63 5.44 5.30
13,000,000 8.62 8.03 7.53 7.1 0 6.72 6.39 6.13 5.87 5.70 5.51 5.36
14,000,000 8.71 8.12 7.60 7.16 6.78 6.45 6.16 5.95 5.73 5.57 5.43
15,000,000 8.81 8.19 7.67 7.23 6.82 6.51 6.23 6.00 5.79 5.63 5.46
16,000,000 8.90 8.26 7.73 7.26 6.88 6.57 6.29 6.03 5.85 5.66 5.51
17,000,000 8.97 8.32 7.80 7.33 6.94 6.61 6.32 6.09 5.87 5.72 5.57
18,000,000 9.04 8.39 7.83 7.39 6.97 6.67 6.38 6.15 5.93 5.77 5.60
19,000,000 9.11 8.47 7.90 7.44 7.03 6.71 6.44 6.18 5.99 5.80 5.66
20,000,000 9.19 8.52 7.96 7.47 7.08 6.74 6.45 6.22 6.02 5.86 5.70
Catalog of Structural Numbers
9
• CBR 1
CBR2
•• CBR3
CBR4
8 •
-o--
CBR 5
CBR6
CBR7
CBR8
7
--<>- CBR9
CBR10
z CBR 11
en 6
0
....
:I:
en 5
~
4
4 2 3 4 5 61 5 2 3 4 5 61
10 10 106 2 3 4 5 61
101 2 3 4
ESAL
Catalog Development,
Rigid Pavements
• PCC Thickness Determined Using the Kentucky
Rigid Pavement Design Catalog
Vll-14
Catalog of PCC Pavement Thickneses
03/16/99
ESAL
1 2 4 5 7 9 10 11
1,000,000 9.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0
2,000,000 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 8.0
3,000,000 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
4,000,000 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
5,000,000 9.0
6,
11 ,000,000
12,000,000
13,000,000
14,000,000
15,000,
1
Catalog of PCC Pavement Thicknesses
12
• CBR2
--
.~ 11 •
CBR6
CBR 11
t /)
t/)
Q)
r:
~
u 10
·-
.r::.
1-
u
u
D. 9 -
8
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 107
ESAL
Vll-16
e
Catalog Design Parameters
Vl - 17
Vl-18
Subgrade Strength
Design Value Selection
Vl-21
VI-2S
Subgrade Stabilization
• Subgrade CBR Less Than 6
• Chemical Stabilization (Lime or Cement)
- 5 - 6 percent by dry weight
• Mechanical Stabilization
- Blending of Soil Aggr egate MU:tures
- Coarse Grained Soils Only
Vl-26
Estimation ofESAL's
Vl-28
ESAL Estimation Cont.
Detailed Traffic Knowledge
SI!!IJie Unit Trucks Gross Vehicle Weight ESAL's/Truck
Two Axles 13,000 pounds 0.1 to 0.2
26,000 pounds 1.1 to1.3
40,000 pounds 1.7 to 1.9
Three Axles 42,000 pounds 0.8 to 1.0
46,000 pounds 1.2 to 1.4
50,000 pounds 2.2 to 2.4
90,000 pounds 28.0 to 52.0
Four Axles 66,000 pounds 1.3to1.5
70,000 pounds 2.3 to 2.5
74,000 f:nds 2.7 to 2.9
100,00 pounds 9.0 to 11.0
Automobiles 4000 oounds 0.01 ESAL's/Auto
Vl-29
Vl-30
VII· 32
Design Parameters
• Design Subgrade Strength
- CBR3
- Obtained from Geotechnical Branch
• Design Traffic
- 13,829,000 ESAL's
- 14,900 AADT
- Mainline Pavement
- Obtained From the Division Multi-Modal
Programs
VII· 33
Catalog of Structural Numbers Catalog of PCC Pavement T hick neses
GBR
ESAL'S
1 2 J 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
10,000 3.83 3.31 2.89 2.59 2.32 2.12 1.97 1.83 1.73 1.60 1.50
25,000 4.41 3.86 3.46 3.11 2.84 2.66 2.48 2.33 2.23 2.10 1.97
50,000 4.78 4.26 3.84 3.50 3.24 3.02 2.84 2.69 2.55 2.45 2.33
75,000 5.00 4.49 4.06 3.74 3.47 3.25 3.05 2.91 2.76 2.66 2.53
100,000 5.14 4.64 4.22 3.90 3.63 3.40 3.20 3.05 2.91 2.81 2.68
250,000 5.59 5.13 4.72 4.42 4.13 3.90 3.70 3.54 3.38 3.25 3.12
500,000 5.93 5.51 5.14 4.81 4.55 4.29 4.07 3.90 3.76 3.61 3.47
750,000 6.16 5.74 5.37 5.07 4.78 4.55 4.32 4.12 3.97 3.82 3.69
1,000,000 6.35 5.93 5.57 5.23 4.94 4.71 4.48 4.28 4.12 3.97 3.83
2,000,000 6.81 6.39 6.02 5.67 5.37 5.13 4.87 4.69 4.49 4.33 4.20
3,000,000 7.16 6.71 6.31 5.95 5.64 5.37 5.14 4.92 4.72 4.56 4.42
4,000,000 7.39 6.94 6.52 6.16 5.85 5.57 5.30 5.08 4.91 4.72 4.58
5,000,000 7.60 7.1 1 6.68 6.32 6.00 5.72 5.44 5.23 5.05 4.87 4.72
6,000,000 7.76 7.30 6.85 6.45 6.13 5.82 5.57 5.36 5.15 5.00 4.84
7,000,000 7.95 7.41 6.97 6.58 6.23 5.93 5.67 5.44 5.27 5.08 4.92
8,000,000 8.09 7.57 7.10 6.68 6.32 6.02 5.77 5.56 5.36 5.15 5.01
9,000,000 8.19 7.67 7.18 6.80 6.44 6.10 5.86 5.63 5.43 5.27 5.08
10,000,000 8.32 7.76 7.30 6.87 6.51 6.21 5.93 5.70 5.50 5.34 5.15
11,000,000 8.42 7.88 7.37 6.95 6.58 6.28 6.00 5.77 5.57 5.38 5.23
12,000,000 8.54 7.96 7.46 7.03 6.65 6.32 6.08 5.82 5.63 5.44 5.30
13,000,000 8.62 8.03 7.53 7.10 6.72 6.39 6.13 5.87 5.70 5.51 5.36
14,000,000 8.71 8.12 7.60 7.16 6.78 6.45 6.16 5.95 5.73 5.57 5.43
15,000,000 8.81 8.19 7.67 7.23 6.82 6.51 6.23 6.00 5.79 5.63 5.46
16,000,000 8.90 8.26 7.73 7.26 6.88 6.57 6.29 6.03 5.85 5.66 5.51
17,000,000 8.97 8.32 7.80 7.33 6.94 6.61 6.32 6.09 5.87 5.72 5.57
18,000,000 9.04 8.39 7.83 7.39 6.97 6.67 6.38 6.15 5.93 5.77 5.60
19,000,000 9.11 8.47 7.90 7.44 7.03 6.71 6.44 6.18 5.99 5.80 5.66
20,000,000 9.19 8.52 7.96 7.47 7.08 6.74 6.45 6.22 6.02 5.86 5.70
Structural Cross Section
V11- 35
V11- 36
Flexible Pavement Thickness Determination,
Maxim urn Asphalt Design
Layer SN
AC Surface 0.44 x 1.25" 0.55
AC Base 0.40 x ? .? ?.??
Type II DB 0.18 x 4.0" 0.72
DGA 0.14 x 4.0" 0.56
Total 1.83
Luu SN
AC Surface 0.44 x 1.25" 0.55
AC Base 0.40 x 14.5" 5.80
Type n DB 0.18 X 4.0" 0.72
DGA 0.14 x 4.0" 0.56
Total 7.63>7.59
Design OK
Vll-38
Flexible Pavement Material Selection, Maximum
Asphalt Section
Material Type Lift Thickness (in)
Tmet Desi&n
Surface 1.25"
Base 14.5"
Type IT DB 4.0"
DGA 4.0" VII- 39
PG Binder Selection
VII- 40
• PG 64-22
• <5% Trucks or
• < 7,500 ADT or
• < 5,000,000 Design Lane ESALS
• PG 70-22
• 5- 10% Trucks or
• 7,500 - 15,000 ADT or
• 5,000,000- 10,000,000 Design Lane ESALS
• PG 76-22
• > 10% Trucks or
• > 10,000,000 ESALS
VII- 41
Where:
D00A = depth of the DGA
Dease= depth of the AC Base
DAc = total depth of asphalt materials
----------~= ----------------
Vll-43
Y.w .stf
AC Surface 0.44 X 1.25" 0.55
AC Base 0.40 X D8 ?.??
Type II DB 0.18 X 4.0" 0.72
DGA 0.14 X ( 2.5 + 2D8 ) ?.??
Total 1.27
=
Remaining SN 7.59- 1.27 6.32, =
Therefore:
6.32 = 0.40 x D8 + [0.14 X (2.5 + 2D 8 )],
Solving for D8 gives 8.8, use 9.0
Therefore:
D VII- 44
Flexible Pavement Thickness Determination,
Maximum Aggregate Design
Layer SN
AC Surface 0.44 x 1.25" 0.55
AC Base 0.40 x 9.0" 3.60
Type II DB 0.18 x 4.0" 0.72
DGA 0.14 x 20.5 2.87
Total 7.74 > 7.59
Design OK
V11- 45
Target Design
Surface 1.25"
Base 9.0
Type U DB 4.0"
DGA 20.5'' VII· 46
Flexible Pavement, Final Design,
Maximum Aggregate Design
• AC Surface
- 1.25" (single layer)
• AC Base
- 9.0"
- Class I, (3 + 3 + 3)
• Drainage Blanket
- 4"
- AC Treated Type II
• DGA
- 20.5" ( 5 + 5 + 5 + 5.5)
• Non Intersections,
- AC Binder Grade PG-64-22
VII· 47
• PCC Pavement
-11.0"
• Drainage Blanket
- 4.0"
- AC Treated, Type II
• DGA
- 4.0"
VII· 48
;
VII- 49
VII- 50
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Parameters
VII- 51
• User Cost
- less than 5,000,000 ESAL's No User, Cost Initial Cost
- 5,000,000-10,000,000 ESAL's $1,000/day
- 10,000,001- 15,000,000 ESAL's $2,000/day
- 15,000,001 - 20,000,000 ESAL's $3,000/day
• Length of Construction
- Initial Construction -- 120 days
- Rehabilitations - 30 days
Discount Rate
n 0 2 4 6 8 10
YEAR COST P/F PW P/F PW P/F P/F PW P/F PIF
0 PWOF CONS1RUC1TON 1,917,652 1.00 1,917,652 1.00 1,917,652 1.00 too 1.917,6521 1.00 1.00
10 PW OF REHABIUTAllON #1 297,719 1.00 297,719 0.82 244,234 0.68 0.56 1~245 0.46 0.39
20 PW OF REHABIUTAllO~ 12 418,953 1.00 418,953 0.67 281,943 0.46 0.31 1ll,6S2 0.21
l) PW OF REHABIUTAllON f3 297,719 1.00 297,719 0.55 164,362 0.31 0.17 51,836 0.10
(1,1,M,22Z) (1, 100,222) 0 (534,511) 0 (114,744)
1,751, 1,751,82
DisC<UltRae
0 2 4 6 8 10
YEAR P/F P/F PW P/F PW P/F PW P/F P/F
0 PW OF CONSlRUCllON 1.00 1.00 1 .~.555 1.00 1.~.555 1.00 1.00 1.00
10 PW OF REHAB IUTAllON 1#1 1.00 240,AOO 0.68 197,978 0.56 0.46 0.!1
~ PW OF REHABIUTAllON 12 1.00 197,218 0.46 1~747 0.31
40 PW OF SALVAGE (2341746) 0 (107,962) 0
ost 2,188,4
'
9) 18
Spreadsheet Procedures
• Selection of Structural Number and PCC
Thickness
• Determination of Initial Cost and Life
Cycle Cost
VII- 55
VII- 56
Pavement Design Workshop
m .
Distribution Responsibilities
• Project Manager ~5.000.000 ESAL ·sand
~I mile
• C 0 . Destgn Stan· >5.000.000 FSAl s or
>I mJie
. -.
C.O. Staff Distribution List
• Location Engmcer
• Project Manager
• Plan Processmg
• Consultant (lfNeccssarv)
Revised TD 61-29E
• Pavement Destgn <20.000,000 ESAL's &
Off the NatiOnal Htghway System
• Re' tsed Stgnature Block .
KENTUCKY
. ................ ... .
......... ....
TRANSPORT AT ION CABINET
!PAVEMENT DESIGN FOLDER I
.!
;.... ... ..... ... ...................... ·r , ....... ....... T. ....... ...... .. ... . . ......... ... t·· .... ......... .. ·~·
:. . . . .o. . . . . . . . .'D·~-~-i9·~. ·E:~;~~ii~~ . s·~-~~~ ·:,y..................i. · · . .o . . . . .;. T.y.p·i~-~-i. s·e·~·ii~~·~. ~-~·d- . O'~b·i·i~................. . .........1
:. . . . .0 .............P·a·v·a·r:n-e·ni.D'e.s'i'g.n. schedule ..... · .. ·o ·. .l comp.ariso.n (;I :Aitern.a tives................
r1. . . .o0 . . . . . . . . .Special. Notes and aii(;".. .......................................
. Provisions ;
fy:r;·~ s·~·i·~~~ic;·~ 'J·~-~-iir.·~
1 0
,.......b . ..........Initial
ijf'8.. Cost l
. . T......................... ~~=-----•
,,.. ·,.. ,,. ,·.: .. C'ycie"c·0-~t· :M <:.·~-=··"~
·SUBMITTED:
)•''' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " " '' ' ' ' ' '
I . , : P .E .
: . ''
00
'
0
'" ''
0000 0000
'' "'''''''''''''''
:
•>••••••••••••••••••••••••••!
~ Date: 0
'' ''''''"'''''''''
, j
~'''"'''''''''"'''''''''';
i
·APPROVED: j Project Manager . jDate: .....,:
~----~------------------~
Yfultimodal Programs
• Contact for mformallon and quest1ons
regarding ESAL."s
• Contact Rob Bostrom
• (502) 56-t-7686
Djvision of Materials
• Contact for l.Jlformauon and questions
regardmg asphalt
• Contact Allen Mcvcrs
• (502) 564-3 160
~ Geotechnical Branch
• Contact for information and questtons
regardmg subgrade and soil stab1hzatton
• Contact Bill Bro~ les
• (502) 56-1-2374
For Projects
Off The National Highway System
less than 20,000,000 ESAL'S,
less than 15,000 ADT,
and less than 20°/o Trucks
April1999
Table of Contents
Background and Scope ............................................................. .................... ............................ 3
Historical Data for Forecasting Eq uivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL,s) ............................ 10
This guide is intended to be used for new construction projects only. This guide provides a
methodology for the structural design of pavements for projects off the National Highway
System, less than 20,000,000 ESAL's, less than 15,000 ADT, and less than 20% trucks. The
methodology as presented has roots in both the AASHTO Guide For Design of Pavement
Structures and also the Kentucky mechanistic-empirical pavement design systems which are
used for structural design of pavements in Kentucky.
The procedure as presented uses an AASHTO structural number concept to define structural
requirements of the pavement section. However, the minimum required structural number has
been determined on the basis of the Kentucky mechanistic-empirical pavement design procedure.
The structural capacity of the subgrade soil has been defined in terms of a California Bearing
Ratio (CBR) determined by the current Kentucky Method (Note: The Kentucky Method for
CBR Tests is different from the AASHTO and ASTM Methods for CBR Tests). The fatigue
requirements of the pavement structure used in this guide are based on Equivalent 18,000 lb Axle
Loads (ESAL's) as determined using load equivalency factors developed for the Kentucky
mechanistic-empirical pavement design procedure. (Note· Kentucky load equivalency factors
are different from AASHTO load equivalency factors)
The intent of this "guide" is to provide the roadway designer with a simplified, straightforward
methodology for developing the structural design for pavements off the National Highway
System, less than 20,000,000 ESAL's, less than 15,000 ADT, and less than 20% trucks. Thjs
guide is intended to be self-sufficient with the exception of (1) forecasts for ESAL's, (2)
recommended design CBR, (3) special notes and special provisions not included in the Standard
Specifications or Standard Drawings, and (4) pavement policy guidelines which may be subject
to periodic modifications such as guidelines for surface type selection. This guide includes a
discussion relating to ESAL' s and the prediction of ESAL's. Also included is a discussion
relating Kentucky CBR with typical soil types and provides general guidelines for estimating a
design CBR. A listing of Special Notes and Special Provisions most typicall y used in pavement
design is included in an Appendix of this guide. Applicable policy documents are included in an
Appendix.
Also included are discussions defining the responsibilities of the roadway designer for
documentation of pavement design computations and related submittals. The guide also includes
discussions regarding the role of the Pavements Branch, Division of llighway Design for
providing assistance in the implementation of this guide.
!Pavement Design Guide April 1, 1999 4
Subgrade Strength
The material property used to characterize the roadbed .soil for pavement design in this guide is
the Kentucky CBR. Details for testing for the Kentucky CBR are presented in the current
Edition of the Kentucky Methods (KM 64-501). Generally, the California B earing Ratio (CBR)
was originally developed by the California Division of Highways for evaluation of subgrade
quality. The test has been refined, modified, and adapted by others and today is the most
common test conducted on soils to define the structural qual ity of subgrade soils for pavement
design.
Briefly, the test consists of (1) compacting a subgrade sample at optimum moisture content, (2)
applying a surcharge to the sample to represent the thickness of pavement over the subgrades, (3)
soaking the sample to simulate a saturated subgrade condition, and (4) forcing a three square
inch plunger into the sample. The amount of force required to obtain a penetration of 0.1 inch is
expressed as a percentage of the standard load for crushed road base material 1000 lb to
determine the CBR value. The variations in procedures for conducting the CBR test primarily
relate to the application of the surcharge and the duration of soaking the sample.
Subgrades typically are constructed of soils from roadway excavation or borrow. However,
subgrades also may be composed of rock. Rock subgrades may exclude shale, include shale with
other rock types, or be constructed entirely of shale. A Rock roadbed is utilized for the top two
feet of the roadway when sufficient quantities of suitable rock are available from roadway
excavation.
Typicall y, CBR tests and soil classification tests will be performed by the Division of Materials,
Geotechnical Branch. If the design CBR is determined by the Division of Materials, CBR and
soil classification tests will be performed on bag samples of soil obtained from roadway cut
sections. A similar set of tests will be performed for CBR and classifications from fill sections
whenever the project is expected to be in a borrow situation. Typically, the design CBR for soil
subgrades will be recommended as the lowest value from laboratory tests (unless there is an
isolated value). For larger projects with twenty or more CBR tests, the design CBR will be
selected statistically as the 90 th percentile value. Higher design CBR' s may be recommended
for projects involving rock roadbed or bank gravel.
Bank Gravel 6 to 9
The results of slaking tests are used to classify shales as " durable" or "nondurable. Nondurable
shales are subdivided into classes for design purposes only. Classifi cation of shales and typical
correlations with Jar Slake Test results are listed in the table below.
Durable Shale ~ 95 6
Nondurable Shales
Class I 80 to 94 4 or 5
Class II 50 to 79 3 or 4
Class ill ~ 49 1 or 2
!Pavement Design Guide April 1, 1999 6
The design CBR also may be estimated on the basis of soil classifications. The following table
may be used to estimate design CBR.
High Compressibility
(Liquid Limit Greater Than 50)
Low Compressibility
(Liquid Limit Less Than 50)
Clayey Gravel or
clayey sandy gra,ei(GC) 5 to7
SilT) Gravel or
silT) sand:. gravel (GM) 5 to 7
Gravel or Sandy
Gravel (uniformly
graded) (GU) 5 to 7
Gra,·el or Sandy
Gravel {poorly
graded) (GP) 5 to 7
Gravel or Sandy
Gravel (well
graded) (GW) 5 to 7
!Pavement Design Guide Apri l 1, 1999 7
Subgrade Stabilization
The majority of pavements constructed in Kentucky are constructed on fine grained soils.
Approximately 85 percent of the soils consist of clay and silt. When first compacted, these fine
grained soils usually have sizeable bearing strength. If pavements are constructed immediately
after compaction of fine grained soils, then major problems typically will not be encountered
when placing and compacting layers of paving materials. Problems arise however, when surface
and subsurface water penetrates compacted fine grained soils. Water from rainfall, snow melt,
and groundwater seepage enters the fine grained soil subgrades, causing swelling, and producing
a loss of bearing capacity in the subgrade. The most susceptible, adverse period occurs when a
fine grained soil subgrade has been exposed to the wetting conditions of winter and early spring.
During periods before paving, rutting may develop in the softened subgrade. This may slow or
even halt construction traffic. This also may impede compaction of the lifts of the pavement
structure, resulting in a weaker pavement structure than initially designed . Therefore, the
weakened subgrade not only slows construction but also limits the long-term life of the pavement
structure.
Recent experience in Kentucky has demonstrated the benefits of stabilized subgrades for
providing a stable platform for placement of pavement layers and also for extending the life of
the pavement structure Methods for stabilization may be characterized into two broad
categories· mechanical stabilization and chemical stabilization.
Methods for mechanical stabilization of subgrade soils include the following approaches.
The above techniques for mechanical stabilization of subgrade soils have been used in Kentucky
to varying degrees. Laboratory studies of blending stone aggregate into soil subgrades have
shown that mixing stone aggregate with subgrade soils of minimum clay content is effective in
improving the bearing capacity of the subgrade soil. Conversely, if the percent finer than 0.002
mm-particle size is greater than 15 percent, there is a reduction in bearing strength. Therefore,
mechanical stabilization by adding stone aggregate to the soil may be ineffective in soils with a
high clay content. The use of geofabrics, such as geogrids, also have been used in Kentucky
These have been demonstrated to improve the bearing capacity of granular bases and granular or
coarse grained subgrade soils. However. the use of geogrids with fine grained soils having high
clay contents should be approached with greater caution.
Chemical stabilization of subgrade soils were used sparingly in Kentucky prior to the mid
1980' s. Stabilization prior to the mid 1980's was with portland cement. Since then, there has
been much greater emphasis on the use of the chemical stabilization of subgrades.
Commercially available stabilizers have included hydrated lime and cement. Both have been
demonstrated as effectively stabilizing subgrade soils as stable paving platforms and are believed
to contribute to extending the fatigue life of pavement structures. Portland cement has been
!Pavement Design Guide Apri l 1, 1999 8
demonstrated to be more effective at stabilizing more granular, coarse grained subgrades.
Hydrated lime has been demonstrated to be more effective at stabilizing fine grained soils with
high clay content. Other by-product materials such as lime or cement kiln dust have been used
experimentally for soil stabilization.
Typically, all subgrade soils having a CBR 6 or less are recommended for stabilization. The
stabilized subgrade soil layer typically is treated as both an improved subgrade layer serving as a
stable paving platform as well as a structural layer for extending the life of the pavement
structure. Typically, blending about 5-6 % of hydrated lime or portland cement by dry weight
with the subgrade soil will result in a stable paving platform and structurally significant layer of
the pavement system.
Analyses of chemically stabilized subgrade soils have indicated very high strengths of the
stabilized layers (much greater than a CBR 7). However, the long-term strength gain
characteristics still are not completely defined As such, structural credit for these layers in
excess of a CBR 7 are not currently recommended The layer coefficients associated with these
structural parameters to be used in this design guide will be defined elsewhere in this document
Traffic information is required by the pavement designer to associate the damaging effects of the
applications of an axle of any load applied to the pavement. The term equivalent single axle load
is used in pavement design methodologies to describe the relative amount of damage done to the
pavement. The most common expression of pavement damage is the 18,000-pound equivalent
single axle load. Load equivalency factors {pavement damage factors) are used to describe the
relative amount of damage for a specific axle loading and axle configuration in terms of the
amount of damage done to the pavement by some number of equivalent 18,000-pound axle
loads. As an illustration, one application of a 12,000-pound single axle load would be expected
to do an amount of damage to the pavement equivalent to 0.2 applications of one 18,000-pound
single axle load. Stated another way, five applications of a 12,000-pound single axle load will
do the same amount of damage to the pavement as one application of an 18,000-pound single
axle load. It should be noted that relationships between load equivalency factors (pavement
damage factors) and load is not a linear relationship.
Load equivalency factors are calibrated to specific pavement design procedures. For example,
the load equivalency factors for the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures are
different from the load equivalency factors used with the Kentucky Mechanistic-Empirical
Pavement D esign Procedure which are different from the load equivalency factors used with the
Asphalt Institute Thickness Design Asphalt Pavements For Highways & Streets (MS-1). Also,
load equivalency factors used for the design of flexible pavements (asphalt concrete) are
different from the load equivalency factors used for rigid pavements (portland cement concrete)
for some pavement design procedures. For example, the load equivalency factors for the
AASHTO Guide For Design of Pavement Structures include separate load equivalency factors
for flexible pavements and for rigid pavements. Conversely, the mechanistic-empirical
pavement design procedures developed in Kentucky have been calibrated on the basis of load
equivalency factors used for flexible pavements.
Equivalent 18,000 pound Single Axle Loads (ESAL' s) for pavement design purposes typically
will be provided by the Division of Planning. However, the following discussion is provided as
a general description of the parameters associated with the determination of ESAL' s for
pavement design purposes. There are various approaches which can be used to convert a mixed
stream of different classifications of vehicles, different axle loads, and different axle
configurations into an equivalent number of 18,000-pound single axle loads (ESAL' s) and to
sum these over the design period.
There are four key considerations which influence the accuracy of traffic estimates and which
can significantly influence the life cycle of a pavement. These are:
1. The correctness of the load equivalency values used to estimate the relative
damage induced by axle loads of different mass and configurations;
2. The accuracy of traffic volume and weight information used to represent the
actual loading projections;
4. The interactions of age and traffic as it relates to the functional and structural
deterioration of the pavement and related changes in pavement serviceability.
A procedure has been developed for the forecasting of ESAL's for selection of
SUP E RP AVE mix d esig n criteria has been developed by the Kentucky Transportation
Center a nd is outlined in Research Report KTC-99-1, " Development of ESAL Forecasting
Procedures for SUPERPAVE Pavement Design" . This procedure has been developed
utilizing M icrosoft ACCESS and historical data obtained from the Division of
Transportation Planning, it provides a means to estimate ESAL's from known historica l
data or information provided by the user. Th is procedure should be used with caution, in
that its original intent was the estimation of E SAL's for SUPERPA VE mix design and not
(or pavement structural design.
There may be those occasional circumstances when ESAL's are not provided by the Division of
Planning. For those limited conditions, the following discussion is provided to allow the
designer to estimate ESAL's for purposes of pavement design :
where: ADT is the average daily traffic at the mid-year of the design life,
ESAL ' s per Truck is the amount of pavement damage associated with one
application of a typical truck in the traffic stream,
The Division of Transportation Planning maintains historical records of ESAL's per truck. As
the size and weights and styles of trucks change, so do the typical ESAL's per truck. Following
are some general guidelines for ESAL's per truck which may be used for estimating ESAL's in
the absence of more definitive information from the Division of P lanning.
If the Pavement Designer has only General Knowledge of the Traffic Stream
Trucks are predominately Light Trucks (delivery trucks, very few heavily loaded trucks with few
overweight vehicles)
Trucks are predominately Heavy Trucks (trucks hauling aggregates, grain, steel, coal, or concrete
with a significant number of overweight vehicles)
If the Pavement Designer has more detailed knowledge of the Traffic Stream
An Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) is the measure of the amount of damage done to the
pavement by one application of a single axle load (four tires) weighing 18,000 pounds. Thus, the
ESAL ' s per truck varies dependent upon the number of axles per truck and the specific loadings
on each axle or axle group. Following are typical ranges for ESAL's per truck based on
assumed gross vehicle weights (GVW) and assumed distributions of loadings to the various
axles or axle groups.
Automobiles
The following CATALOGS OF STRUCTURAL DESlGNS will be used to define the structural
requirements for a given pavement section based on the CBR for the subgrade soil/rock and the
forecast ESAL's for the design life. The Kentucky procedure for flexible pavement design is
based on layer elastic principles. The required pavement structure layer thicknesses are
determined on the basis of critical strains at the bottom of the asphaltic concrete layer and top of
the subgrade layer. The results of these analyses have been summarized in the form of graphical
illustrations for various percentages of asphalt in the total pavement structure (33% Asphalt, 50%
Asphalt, 75% Asphalt, and 100% Asphalt). There also have been computerized solutions for
these analyses. However, these analyses still require the designer to apply judgement and
experience in the selection of the appropriate percentage of asphalt concrete in the pavement
structure. For example, what conditions are more appropriate for a 33% Asphalt design as
compared with a 75% Asphalt design . AJso, the mechanistic concepts used in the development
of the Kentucky system are such that substitution ratios for materials varies from one percent
asphalt design to another percent asphalt design. Thus, proper adjustment to a percent asphalt
design not already evaluated requires a detailed elastic layer analysis. Detailed elastic layer
pavement analyses are not practical for projects such as those covered by this guide.
The AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (1993 Edition and earlier editions) is an
empirical pavement design procedure. The AASHTO procedure is based on structural layer
coefticients which define the structural capacity of the various layers in the pavement structure.
The summation of the various layer coefficients multiplied by the thickness of each layer results
in a Structural Number (SN) which is an index value defining the structural integrity of the
pavement structure. This concept is much less theoretically sophisticated than
mechanistic-empirical procedures such as those developed by the Asphalt Institute or the
Kentucky procedure. However, the structural number concept is easily used.
The CATALOG OF PCC STRUCTURAL DESIGNS has also been developed based on the
AASHTO and Kentucky procedures, thicknesses of portland cement concrete pavement (PCC)
for selected levels ofESAL's and CBR' s wherein the use ofPCC pavement has been historically
and economically feasible are included in Table 2.
!Pavement Design Guide April 1, 1999 14
The required pavement design for this project is determined on the basis of the required
STRUCTURAL NUMBER. The required pavement STRUCTURAL NUMBER is determined
from the CATALOG OF STRUCTURAL NUMBERS for the design CBR and design ESAL's.
Required pavement thicknesses are determined using the following equation:
a 1 is the structural layer coefficient for the first layer of the pavement structure,
typically the asphalt surface layer for pavement designs in Kentucky. Typical
layer coefficients for asphalt concrete surface courses in Kentucky are 0.40 to
0.44. This range of layer coefficients applies for all surface courses used in
Kentucky except for Open Graded Friction Courses (OGFC) which are assigned
no structural credit for pavement design purposes.
a2 is the layer coefficient for the second layer of the pavement structure.
typically the asphalt concrete binder layer or asphalt concrete base layers for
pavement designs in Kentucky. Typical layer coefficients for asphalt concrete
binder courses in Kentucky are 0.40 to 0.42. Typical layer coefficients for asphalt
concrete base courses in Kentucky 0.36 to 0.40.
a3 is the structural layer coefficient for the aggregate base layer of the pavement
structure. Typical layer coefficients for aggregate base layers in Kentucky are
0. 11 to 0. 14.
a., is the structural layer coefficient for chemically modified roadbed soils.
Typical layer coefficients used for chemically modified roadbeds in the design of
pavements in Kentucky are 0.08 to 0.10. These are based on the assumption that
chemical modification increases the CBR of the soil to a value greater than a CBR
6.
Structural layer coefficients for other materials typically used in Kentucky are:
Sh ould er Design
Pavement shoulders should be designed to meet appropriate geometric criteria. Thickness
should be determined to insure adequate structural support is provided to meet any anticipated
shoulder traffic. Typically shoulders should be designed to accommodate a minimum of 20% of
the mainline ESAL's In situations where earth shoulders would be warranted, it may be
necessary to provide an additional 2 feet of full depth pavement to insure adequate edge support.
P avement Drainage
Adequate drainage should be provided to the pavement structure to insure a successful pavement
service life is achieved. Various types of pavement drainage systems have been utilized
throughout Kentucky. For pavements designed using this guide the following criteria should be
utilized:
Design ESAL's
Less than 1,000,000 ESAL's DGA Base
1,000,000-5,000,000 ESAL' s Daylighted Crushed Stone Base (CSB)
5,000,001 - 20,000,000 ESAL's Drainage Blanket and Piping System
From a pavement engineering perspective, there are some variations in proportions of paving
materials which are better suited to specific engineering applications that others. For example,
pavement structures with thick aggregate bases (33% to 50% asphalt concrete) typically would
be expected to provide better performance over soil subgrades with the water table close to the
surface or where the soils are known to be highly moisture sensitive. Conversely, pavement
structures with thick asphalt layers typically will provide better performance over rock roadbed
subgrades or chemicall y modified roadbeds
Development of alternate pavement designs should typically involve a " maximum aggregate"
design, a " maximum asphalt concrete" design, and a Portland cement concrete design for
comparative analyses. Other alternate pavement designs should be considered where specific
project considerations indicate a need. Each alternate considered should meet or exceed
Structural Number requirements identified in the CATALOG OF STRUCTURAL NUMBERS.
The Life Cycle Cost Analysis will include the analysis of both initial construction costs and
rehabilitation costs at selected intervals over a analysis period of 40 years. In addition, user costs
will be considered at various levels based on the design ESAL of the project. Material costs will
be determined based on values obtained from the average unit bid summary. The rehabilitation
scenarios which are presented may not be the actual rehabilitation schedule for a specific
pavement, however they do provide a good estimation of the cost associated with maintaining a
pavement structure for 40 years. A spreadsheet is avai lable to assist in conducting the life cycle
cost calculations. Specific inputs to this procedure are as follows:
R ehabilitation Scenarios:
Flexible Pavements
Rehabilitation 1, Year 10
Mill 1 5" - l 5" Overlay
Rehabilitation 2, Year 20
Mill 1 5" - 3 5" Overlay
Rehabilitation 3, Year 30
Mill 1.5" - 1.5" Overlay
Rehabilitation l , Year 15
Clean and Reseal Joints
Rehabilitation 2, Year 30
Clean and Reseal Joints
User Costs:
Length of Construction
The intent of this expanded pavement design guide is to provide the roadway designer with
sufficient information for effective design of pavements off the National Highway System, with
less than 20,000,000 ESAL's, less than 15,000 ADT and less than 20% trucks. The CATALOG
OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT STRUCTURAL NUMBER S presented earlier in this GUIDE
provides required STRUCTURAL NUMBERS (SN's) for CBR's 1 to 11 and for a range of
ESAL's from 10,000 to 20,000,000. The CATALOG OF REQUIRED P CC TIDCKNESSESS
presented earlier in this GUIDE provides required PCC THICKNESSES for CBR's 1 to 11 and
for a range ofESAL's from 1,000,000 to 20,000,000.
There will be two sets of criteria for the process of submitting and approving pavement designs
done under the guidelines of this guide. These criteria and procedures are as follows:
The Project Manager will be responsible for distribution of the approved pavement design for
these projects. The distribution list includes the Location Engineer, Plan Processing Review, and
the consultant, if necessary.
The Pavement Branch staff in the Division of Highway Design will be responsible for
distribution of the approved pavement design for these projects. The distribution list includes the
Location Engineer, P lan P rocessing Review, and the consultant, if necessary.
All pavement designs will be submitted to the Pavement Branch of the Division of Highway
D esign in a Pavement Design Folder. The cover sheet for this folder is attached to this
document. The cover letter will identify the project information and a summary of the pavement
design type selection. The cover letter will also show a checklist of what documentation is
included in the pavement design folder. The fo llowing items should be included in the pavement
design folder:
The Division of Highway Design Pavement Branch will send out periodic updates of all
applicable notes and provisions to all district design personnel.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Staff from the Division of Highway Design will be available to provide assistance to roadway
designers for application and implementation of these guidelines. The Central Office pavement
design staff have been assigned as liaisons for support purposes. When pavement designs are
submitted to the Central Office they should be directed to their respective district liaison. The
following page lists district assignments for the pavement design staff.
!Pavement Design Guide April 1, 1999 22
Appendix A
Examples
KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CABINET D 61-29E
DIVISION OF HIGHWAY DESIGN REV . 3- 99
PAVEMENT BRANCH
Pavement Design <20,000,000 ESAL's Sheet 1
& off the National Highway System
PAVEMENT
Traffic Lanes
1 DGA BASE 4" DEPTH
120 ASPH BASE CLASS I PG64-22 10~" DEPTH (4"+ 4"T2~")
154 ASPH SURF C~ASS I-20/30 PG64-22 1~" DEPTH
Shoulders
(2' @ 2%)
(Remaining 6' @ 8 %)
NOTE :
Shoulders shall be paved full width within the guardrail limits or 200 feet .
The remainder of the project shall be constructed with shoulders as other-
wise shown or matching existing .
Asphalt Seal required from outside edge of paved shoulder to a point two
feet down existing ditch or fill slope . Two applications of the following :
_2·_: 2%
-
8%
EARTH
EXAMPLE
(I) SHOULDER SHALL BE WIDENED 2 FEET WHERE GUARDRAIL IS REQUIRED.
0 ASPHALT SEAL.
4/.
EARTH
4" DCA 4" DCA
Traffic Lanes
Widening
1 DGA 4" DEPTH
18 DRAINAGE BLANKET TYPE II-ASPH 4" DEPTH
120 ASPHALT BASE CLASS I PG64-22 11~" DEPTH(4"+4"+3~")
Overall
190 LEVELING AND WEDGING PG64-22 TON (Est . from X-Sect . )
118 ASPH BASE CL I PG70-22 3" DEPTH
158 ASPH SURF CL I-40/20 PG70-22 1,..." DEPTH
Shoulders
1810 STANDARD CURB AND GUTTER LINEAR FOOT
Longitudinal Pavement Edge Drains
78 CRUSHED AGGREGATE SIZE NO 2 TON
1000 PERFORATED PIPE-4IN FOOT
1010 NON-PERFORATED PIPE-4IN FOOT
8100 CONCRETE-CLASS A CU FT
(Cont . on Sheet No . 2)
NOTES :
(1) All longitudinal pipe drainage systems for the pavement drainage blanket shall
be outletted to a Headwall , Median Box Inlet , a Ditch Box , or Curb Box Inle
Outlets shall be in a fill section whenever possible . Outlet spacing sha
not exceed 500ft except grades 1 ~ or less , then the spacing of outlets shal
not exceed 250ft . All sags shall have an outlet . The Design Engineer shall
spot these on the plans or in the proposal .
SPECIAL NOTE
(2068) WET BOTTOM BOILER SLAG (1-1-99)
(2128) MINERAL ADMIXTURES IN PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE (1 - 1-99)
( ) PAVEMENT SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE OUTLET (3-16-98) Attached
( ) PERFORATED PIPE - 4in FOR AGGREGATE BACKFILLED TRENCH
(3-16-98) Attached
BOYD CO.
OOS TP 02601 015
\_.....---T
_R_A_F_F_IC TRAFFJ C LANE <WIOENI N~-......~
_ L_A_N_E_ _.....f-_
ITEM • EXAMPLE 2
1.25 AS I 40 ,20 PG70·22 !OVERALL)
3" A8 "I" PG70-22 <OVERALL)
20" ;EE CRO~CTIO..NS
3. 5" AB "I" PG64·22 STD. CURB &
KEYWAY GUTTER SEE
4" A8 T' PG64-22
2%
4 " AB " I " PG64-22
2%
CUR. STD.
DWG. RPM-100 I S'l.
----=
12" EARTH
4' DCA
TYPE II ASPH
4 'Perforate d P~e
WIDENING
TRAFFIC LANE <NEW PAVEMENT> SEE CROSS SECTIONS
B'l.
2%
EARTH
Appendix B
Listing of Typically Used Special Notes
March 18, 1999
-8PECIAL NOT E-
SP ECIAL NOTE FOR
BITUMINO US
5X (2104) ASPHALT PAVEMENT REINFORCEMENT (l-1-99)
( ) ASPHALT PAVEMENT REINFORCEMENT WITH GEOGRIDS (EXP) (3-16-98) Attached (project specific)
( ) POLYPROPYLENE FIBER REINFORCED ASPHALT MIXTURES (EXP) (11-6-92) Anacbed
( ) ASPHALT LEVELING AND SEAL COURSE (3-16-98) Attached
9X (2134) SUPERPAVE MIXTURES (1-1-99)
( ) STONE-MATRIX ASPHALT SURFACE (EXP.) (3-3-98) Attached
( ) STONE-MATRIX ASPHALT BASE (EXP.) (3-3-98) Attached
9Y (2 135) MATERIAL TRANSFER VEHICLE (1-5-99)
( ) ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE REPAIR (6-30-98) Anached
GENERAL
3M (2068) WET BOTTOM BOILER SLAG (1-1-99) Boyd, Greenup, Lawrence, Lewis
Note that Blast Furnace Slag may be utilized...
Est. at 110 /b/sq ydlin. (2.35 kglsq mlmm)
( ) EXCELSIOR BLANKET (9-2-94) Anached
11 (20 I0) VARIABLE MESSAGE SIGNS (1-1-99)
( ) SMARTSONlC CONSTRUCTION ZONE SAFETY SYSTEM (6-30-98) Attached
8K (2129) STABILIZED SOIL SHOULDERS(Approval Pending)
c: 'data wp\specnot.wp
SPECIAL NOTE FOR PAVEMENT SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE OUTLET
Lse ooproximorel y one rretric ton of Crushed Aggregate Si ze No. 2 at
all Perforated Pipe Headwall Out ets as illustrated in the detail below .
Place Crushed Aggregate Size No. 2 to o minimum depth of IOOmm as
detailed belo w.
Use Dense Graded Aggregate <DGA> removed during placement of The
Crushed Aggr-eogote Size No. 2 to dress exis t ing shoulders where DGA is
exposed . Waste other materials removed during placement of the Crushed
Aggr-egate Size No. 2 as direcred by the Engineer . The Deportment will
make no direct payment for disposal of wasted material.
The Deportment will consider payment for- Cr-ushed Aggregate Size No. 2 as
full compensation for all materials. labor. and other- i nciden tals necessary to
place Crushed Aggregate Size No. 2 for vegetation control and/or erosion
control or pavement edge drain outlets .
See current Srondord Drawing RDP-010 for dimensions and other dera·ls.
' 4
0. 60m
I. 0 . 60 m
Apply section 704, Underdrains, of the current edition of the Standard Specifications except use
coarse aggregate for the backfill and partially wrap the aggregate with geotextile fabric as shown
in the edge drain derails. Apply section 215.03.04 of the current edition of the Standard
Specifications except use Type IV fabric secured ro the inside face of the trench with steel pins at
intervals of 1.5 meters. Place the fabric on the s ides and bottom of the trench with suitable
equipment without stretching it. Place the filter aggregate in the trench without damaging.
displacing or dislodging the fabric. Fold the fabric over the backfilled trench and secure ir with
steel pins at inrervals of 1.5 meters.
Appendix C
Listing of Typically Used Special Provisions &
Pavement Policy Documents
March 18, 1999
- SPECIAL PROVISION-
c:\data\wp\specnol. wp
3/30/99
NOTES (MYBIDCODE)
1.) USE A MINIMUM OF 4" (100mm) AGGREGATE BASE UNLESS SUBGRADE IS AGGREGATE AND
AND CBR IS GREATER THAN 6
2.) LIFT THICKNESSES- 2" TO 4" (50mm-100mm) ASPHALT BASE CLASS I
3" TO 4.5" (75mm-115mm) ASPHALT BASE CLASS CI
4" TO 6" (100mm-150mm) ASPHALT BASE CLASS CK
1. 5" TO 2" (40mm-50mm) ALL ASPHALT BINDER CLASSES
1. 25" (30mm) ASPHALT SURFACE CLASS I (1" -1. 5" or 25mm-40mm)
1. 5" (40mm) ASPHALT SURFACE CLASS AK/B OR AK/A OR AK/S
3.) AASHTO STRUCTURAL COEFFICIENT -ASPHALT SURFACE - 0.44
ASPHALT BINDER - 0.42
ASPHALT BASE - 0. 4 0 (0.30 for old asphalt)
STABILIZED AGG BASE - 0.20
(Use Break & Seat curves) BREAK & SEAT CONC. - 0.20 (up to 0.35)
CONCRETE OVERLAY- 0.30-0 . 50 (0.6 7 new cone.)
DGA/CRUSHED STONE - 0.14 (use 0 .11 for old DGA)
DRAINAGE BLANKET-II - 0.18 to 0.24 (0.14-TYPE - I)
LIME/CEMENT/ROCK ROADBED - 0.11
(FROM TTN: BR1) WHEN USING TENSAR: DDGAnew = 0. 8* (DDGAold) - 2
NOTE - Put Tensar at midpoint of DGA if Dnew>10" and at bottom of DGA if Dnew<10")
NOTE - TRAFFIC BOUND BASE IS #610's OR #710's MIXED INTO #2 STONE.
4.) RESILIENT MODULUS= 1500*CBR
5.) USE DGA WHEN< 11000 1000 ESALs DURING DESIGN LIFE (OR FOR CURB & GUTTER)
ALWAYS USE DGA WHEN USING A DRAINAGE BLANKET LAYER
USE CSB FOR 110001000 TO 5 1000 1000 ESALs OVER DESIGN LIFE (EXCEPT CURB & GUTTER)
6.) NOTE FOR BRIDGE REPLACEMENTS -
SEE STANDARD DRAWING NO. RBB-001 FOR SHOULDER PAVING AT BRIDGE ENDS. APPLY THE 1:25
PAVED SHOULDER TAPER TO BOTH SHOULDERS AT BOTH ENDS OF THE BRIDGE. IF THE SHOULDERS
ARE TO BE PAVED THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT 1 THEN CONTRARY TO THIS STANDARD DRAWING 1 THE
SHOULDERS WITHIN THIS TAPER AREA MAY BE PAVED THE SAME AS THE REMAINING SHOULDER."
7.) NOTE FOR FULL DEPTH DGA SHOULDERS (NOT 2 1 SHOULDERS WITH EARTH OUTSIDE PAVEMENT):
ASPHALT SEAL REQUIRED FROM OUTSIDE EDGE OF PAVED SHOULDER TO A POINT
TWO FEET (0.6 METERS) DOWN THE DITCH OR FILL SLOPE. TWO APPLICATIONS OF
291 Emulsified Asphalt RS-2 2.40 lb/sq yd (1.3 kg/sq m)
100 Asphalt Seal Aggregate 20 lb/sy (size no. 8 or 9m) (10 .8 kg/sq m)
8.) CHANGED PLAN NOTES:
275 - CALLS FOR CEMENT STABILIZED ROADBED
276 - CALLS FOR LIME STABILIZATION
447 - OPTION A WARRANTS
448 - OPTION B
9.) 358 ASPHALT CURING SEAL APPLICATION RATE
LIME MODIFIED ROADBED (Special Provision 84C) 2 . 0 lb/sy (1 . 1 kg/sq m)
PORTLAND CEMENT MODIFIED ROADBED (Stnd Specs 304) 2.0 lb/sy (1 . 1 kg/sq m)
OR 0.25 gal/sy
DGA FILTER LAYER FOR DRAINAGE BLANKETS 1.6 lb/sy (0 . 9 kg/sq m)
STABILIZED AGGREGATE BASE (Special Provision 70D) 1.2 lb/sy (0 .7 kg/sq m)
10.) 2702 SAND FOR BLOTTER 2 to 3 lb/sy (1.1 - 1.6 kg/ sq m)
OR 5 lb/sy (2.7 kg/sq m) MAX.
11.) CARRY LOWER COURSES OF PAVEMENT 12" PAST CURB AND GUTTER (whether Asphalt. or DGA)
(MYBl!.. vuE)
FOLLOWING IS A LISTING OF BID ITEM CODES, BID ITEM DESCRIPTIONS, POLISH
RESISTANT AGGREGATE REQUIREMENTS, AND GUIDELINES FOR I MPLEMENTATION:
AK SURFACES
ASPHALT
OPEN-GRADED SURFACE
267 PG 64-22
266 PG 70-22
268 PG 76-22 W/50\ER
I. All Interstate Roads, Parkways with ADT greater than 6,000, and all other roads with ADT greater than 15.000
A. 45 mph or higher Bituminous Concrete Surface, Class l-20/30 (20% polish resistant aggregate
required and limit amount of uncrushed sand to maximum of 30%)
All Bituminous Concrete Surface, Class l-Q (No restrictions on aggregate type)
OTHER SURFACES - Considered on a project to project basis: Open Graded Friction Course, Bituminous Concrete
Surface, Class N-30, Bituminous Concrete Binder Class I-0, and Sand Asphalt, Type II.
Note 1. Traffic volumes shown are for two lane roadways. For four lane roads, determine the equivalent two lanes volume
for the shoulder or outside lanes from the attached chart.
Note 2. Lower category surfaces may apply when the project quantity of the wearing course is less than 500 tons.
Note 3. Stage construction or special mixtures may be specified for roadways where pavements may develop significant rut
depth.
Note 4. Class N-30 surface may be applied for roadways with traffic volumes greater than l ,500 ADT and speeds less than
50 MPH where pavements require extraordinary rutting resistance. Class N-30 mixtures are specificaHy noted for
application at intersections with high truck and turning movements. Class I-0 Binder may be used for roads with
ADT less than 1,500 at locations which require extraordinary rutting resistance.
Note 5. Higher category surfaces and aggregate may be utilized when warranted by design, materials, or traffic and safety
considerations. Exceptions for use of a lower category surface may be made with the approval of the State
Highway Engineer in special cases when warranted by design, materials, or traffic consideration.
APPROVED:
WARRANTS FOR ASPHALT BINDER SELECTION
*For Example:
If lhe required PG Grade Binder is PG 64-22 and the pavement conditions are such that there are
locations of severe rutting and demonstrated high pavement stresses, increase the performance
grade (PG) of the asphalt binder to a PG 70-22 or PG 76-22 dependent upon lhe extent and
severity of the distresses.
5. The use of other melhods for modification of asphalt binders and techniques for pavement reinforcement
may be considered on a project specific basis. Examples of olher applications include lhe use of fibers,
paving fabrics, geogrids, stress absorbing membrane interlayers, etc.
6. A PG 58-22 asphalt binder may be used as lhe virgin binder in mixes containing Recycled Asphalt
Pavement (RAP).
7. PG 76-22 wilh 50% Elastic Recovery and PG 70-22 Asphalt Cement Binders shall be used only in the top
ponions of lhe pavement srrucrure (lhe top 100 to 125 mm ( 4 to 5 inches)) for the driving lanes only. A
PG 64-22 Asphalt Cement Binder will be used for all olher applications excepting for Recycled Asphalt
as discussed in Category 6 above or olher special considerations identified on a project specific basis.
8. Exceptions for lhese warrantS may be made by the Designer on a project specific basis. The basis for
exceptions shall be documented in lhe project file. This documentation will be used for refmement of lhese
guidelines.
APPROVED: /Z-L~tP
~
/~£?
Paul Toussaint, Division Administrator ~
Federal Highway Administration
pa·Jrodc/1211611996
,.
ce&
Cc-1r
9L ss
Commonwealth of Kentucky
j ames C. Cadell, Ill Transportation Cabinet Paul E. Patton
Secretary of Transportation Frankfort, Kentucky 40622 Govemor
T. Kevin Flanery
Deputy Secretary March 2, 1999
As a result of our February 19, 1999 Pavement Committee meeting, we have revised our asphalt
guidelines and warrants. The revisions are intended to be effective with the January 2000 bid
letting. Attached for your review and approval are:
If you concur with these guidelines, please provide a signature of approval in the designated
signature block and return to Mr. Trevor Booker, Division of Construction, 501 High Street,
Frankfort, Kentucky 40622.
Sincerely,
~-!.
~ta~· ~~wa
.. Engineer
JMY/IKDffB
Attachments
BINDER PERFORMANCE
GRADE {PG) CATEGORY
• For Example: lfthe required PG Binder is PG 64-22 and the pavement conditions are such that
there are locations of severe rutting and demonstrated high pavement stresses, increase the PG
of the asphalt binder to a PG 70-22 or PG 76-22, depending on the extent and severity of the
distresses.
5. The use of other methods for modification of asphalt binders and techniques for pavement
reinforcement may be considered on a project-specific basis. Examples of other applications
include the use of fibers, paving fabrics, geogrids, stress-absorbing membrane interlayers, etc.
6. A PG 58-22 Asphalt Binder may be used as the virgin binder in mixes containing Recycled
Asphalt Pavement {RAP).
7. PG 76-22 and PG 70-22 Asphalt Binders shall be used only in the top portions of the pavement
structure (the top 4 to 5 inches) for the driving lanes only. A PG 64-22 Asphalt Binder will be
used for all other applications except for RAP as discussed in Category 6 above or other special
considerations identified on a project-specific basis.
8. Exceptions for these warrants may be made by the Designer on a project-specific basis. The basis
for exceptions shall be documented in the project file. This documentation will be used for
refinement of these guidelines.
When the plan quantity is 1,000 tons or greater of one mixture type, apply compaction Option A
of Section 402 of the Standard Specifications to all of the following:
Use compaction Option A, of Section 402 of the Standard Specifications, for all individual
mixtures placed on driving lanes at one inch or greater thickness on the above-listed applications.
For group jobs, any single pavement/subsection must be 1,000 tons or greater before Option A
applies.
Accept other mixtures and quantities of less than 1,000 tons, including those for shoulders,
leveling and wedging, and thin scratch courses (those less than one inch thick), by compaction
Option B of Section 402 of the Standard Specifications. For resurfacing mixtures requiring
Type E polish-resistant aggregate, apply Option B density requirements.
The Department may apply compaction requirements to other mixtures, or quantities, when
deemed necessary because of specialty applications or other considerations. The Division of
Highway Design, the Division of Highway Operations, or the Division of Materials will
recommend special applications to the State Highway Engineer for approval.
The Department will include a statement in the project proposal indicating whether compaction
Option A or Option B applies.
APPROVED
APPROVED
Jesse Story, P. E. Date
Kentucky Division Administrator, FHWA
KENTUCKYDEPARTMENTOFIDGHWAYS
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
GUIDELINES FOR ESAL CLASS SELECTION FOR
SUPERPAVE SHOULDER MIXTURES
When selecting the ESAL Class for Superpave asphaJt mixtures for shoulder applications, the
Department will use one Class lower than that specified for the corresponding mainline
Superpave mixture. When the mainline Superpave mixture is a Class 1 mix, the Department will
use Class 1 for the corresponding Superpave shoulder mixture also.
The Department may apply a different ESAL Class to a particular Superpave shoulder mixture
when deemed necessary because of specialty applications or other considerations .
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
GUIDELINESFORSELECTINGSUPERPAVESURFACE
MIXTURE SIZE AND LIFf THICKNESS
When selecting a Superpave asphalt surface (wearing course) mixture, the Department will
specify:
The Department may select a different size of, or lift thickness for, a particular Superpave
mixture when deemed necessary because of specialty applications or other considerations .
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
APPROVED
APPROVED
Jesse Story, P. E. Date
Kentucky Division Administrator, FHWA
!P avement Design Guide April 1, 1999 25
Appendix D
Pavement Design Submittal Forms
KENTUCKY TRANS ORTATION CABINET
PAVEMENT DESIGN FOLDER
Sta. to Sta. MP to MP to
APPROVED: Date:
----------------------- Project Manager
APPROVED : Date:
----------------------- C.O. Highway Design
KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CABINET D 61-29E
DIVISION OF HIGHWAY DESIGN REV . 3 - 99
PAVEMENT BRANCH
Road Name F. P .
e \ VEMENT
l raffic Lanes
Shoulders
e DESIGNED DATE------- P . E .
Appendix E
Example Pavement Design Submittal Folder
KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CABINET
PAVEMENT DESIGN FOLDER
County Harlan Item No. 11 -133.00 UPN FD04 048 0038 001-005 065D
-----------------
Road Harlan-Evarts Road Route KY 38
DOCUMENTATION
Existing : Type
------------------------------- Thickness
Length 3 . 64 Miles . Design Speed 45 M. P . H. Design CBR 9*
Shoulders
1 DGA BASE FULL DEPTH
120 ASPHALT BASE CLASS I PG64-22 4" DEPTH
149 ASPH SURFACE CL I-0 PG64-22 1. 2 5" DEPTH
NOTE :
Increase bottom 6 . 5" of DGA 10% by weight for Rock Roadbed construction ,
including shoulders .
e DESIGNED DATE P . E.
21.
4/.
N
Pavement Design Catalog Version 1.0 Apri/-99
Sufact
~lOIII In
U)oo<l
li)'0<2
llylll
.. Dos~
125
440
4 40
OOD
-
U)oor Tlwckntn (n)
us[
4SO
4.SO
G.OD
U~erDc-riMd Thk.'-ne» (m.)
lot"'*"
•~I
4.119
40D
0.00
Sl1ooAder SN
1.251 D55
4.0D 110
110
O.OD
M.w*w
125
40D
40D
OOD
-
c-.- ThctMu Cnl
125
40D
DOD
DOD
SN
DSS
UCI
UCI
000
Maximum Asohalt Oeslan
Sort-
eo..
loy~~
li)'0<2
lrr•l
I
lornCodo
I
~
MoiNno -
miA>p~~ s..~ CL ~ PG54-22
3101
3101
3101
2 056 679
I
l«nCodo
I
ShdclotiiUN!Solodlon
Dol<lll*>n
14$11111 Cone SUfoto a- 1-0
3101
3101
)Ia!
I
Uyll4 OOD OOD 000 000 li)'0<4 Ill! BiConce...a... l )101 120 llil Cone a- Cl&ts I lte1
~
DB DOD O.OD a.oe a.eo O.OD DOD 000 DOO !8 ~llri•T,.I-Asph IJ 44 18 ~-•T,.I-At!il 21•.&4
DGA 40D 40D e.so IIJ.IO Ul ISO IOSO Otl I DGA 1351 I DGA 1158
MoclfiodR-..1 O.OD OOD 0,00 000 O.OD 000 000 IIMR-.d 13 Uociliod R . - ..... IJIWiodR.- lA
ToiiiSN 4M TaSN 4M
o.-O<
- --
llooo'IO<
- -
Maximum Aqqreqate Oeslan Maximum AQareoate Oesian Initial Cost 2.3-4&618
llyOI Tl'l<lnon (i\)
UOOrOolnod ~ '"' c:.noou;....,-'"'
SU!oto
-1-!nSS
0.11!10
us l?sl us! usI
SN
055 125 I~
SN
o.ss ~ ... 8oso
I
..... Coclo~
mr-"""'iifa.1-ml 1'()54.22
lh!Coot
I »• I 148 Bi Cone Sorfou Clusl-0 l4lJ
U)oorl 2.74 30D u 10 120 lOD lOD 120 llylll Ill! ~Cone 8oso Cl&tsl ltOI lllllliiConc8osoCiml 3101
li)'0<2 2.74 10D ).0 00 120 lOD OOD 120 llyll2 120 Bi Cone llo10 Cl&ts I 3101 120 Bi Cane 8oso C... I 31.0~
llyorl OOD DOD 00 O.OD 000 OOD 000 llyOI) 1211 Bi Cone S..o Cluol SIOI 120 Bi Cone 8oso Cl&ts I )Ia!
llyor4 a.o OOD 000 000 000 li)'0<4 120 1M Cone S..o Cl&ts I 3101 120 Bi CaneS... Cossl nat
ta~a....,..TmU\slft tt ~-~~- rmu.;.n 1144
~
DOO DO 0.0 DOD 000 OOD 000 27 44
~
000
1147 1lSO IS-S ItS 16 I) SO 18SO 150 I DGA 13.58 I DGA n.sa
ModiMdR.-d 000 000 00 000 000 000 000 l.lodR.-d 131.lod&4~ IAI ll llod&dRo~ 1M
ToiJISN 454 TalliSH ··a. ·"
l>o'9'0K DosirO<
-
PCC Pavement PCC Pavement Initial Cost: 2 920 459
llylf Thkknoll (n.) U...Ow_l_lt>l C...OU:ion1 -In I
Dosign Ncminal lloHone Shcl.ldo< u.-
I ~
~!I
PCC P1Yomonl Tticknooo fll) 8D 8.01 ~~·-:o:. 8.01:: . : 800 000 PCCPIYimOnt • 2011IPCcP.v0111611l·ll"""'...,.,...r I 2CIIIIPCCPI\Iomonl-llincllnon<tlnf I 381
AC Sl>ol*j" s..fJ<o 0.00 1,25 ACSI!ooJdorSorf,., ,,, ·::--:"
ACSI>oul4o<8oso 000 000 AC-e...
loyorl 4 000 4 00 Uylll 120 84 Cone a... Cos• I 31 ,01
lly0f2 000 000 loylf2 12! 84 Cane Ban Clna I 31.01
loy•) 000 OOD ll'f'tl, llll 84 Cone Boso et.u I 31.01
uy"4 DOO 000 loy0f4 120 Bi Cane e... a... J )( 01
OBTiwclnou (") 00 ool 0,0 0.0 000 000 08ThidntiJ I 1BIDrNo81"*ol· lrt:•._~ 12744 18 Dt~Siriii-Trt:•._~ ,, 27.44
DGA Tliclnus {in) 40 40 4.0 lS 400 5SO DGA l DGA lS8 1 DGA 11.58
Mo<l6od R-..1 0.0 0.0 :: 000 DOD IIMR.-d ll Modilo<llluodbtd 1-48 lll.lodf'06R.- 1.481
Hoskinston
Project
VICINITY MAP
/) /J-o..c~·
Transportation Cabmet l/90
Pace 1
Deparunent of Highways
Division of Design
) .
I: . '-
. ,.
DESIGN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Roadway Classification:
Local_ _ _ _Collector_ _..:..X~_.....Arterial _ __
~__Urban_ __
Interstate_ _ _.Rural_ _....:X
_ _ _E
. xception to design speed critena Wlll have to be obtained from FHWA
Number of Lanes 2 2 2
/1 . ~~
Approved By:_-w:;::;;~::;.,....,,..........,....,..,
w:;;l=i(j T E.B.M;....,.-- ,!V
.---,...
--:----------
for LOCallon Da1e I
Comments:
Alternate 1B is the recommended alternate
Date 7 7
Harlan County, Item No. 11-133.00
Harlan- Evarts Road (KY 38)
FD04 048 0038 001 -005 065D
COMMENTS
KY 3 8 in the area of the subject project is posted for a 55 mph speed limit. The Design Team has
selected a 70 km/hr design speed for the subject project (reconstruction of KY 38). Projects to
reconstruct KY 38 from the end of the subject project at Brookside to Evarts have been completed
within the past 8 years. The projects reconstructed the existing road to a 40 mph design speed in
spots and just resurfaced other areas leaving sections of roadway that do not meet any design speed.
The 70 km/hr design speed was selected for this project because it allows the use of a 175 meter
radius for horizontal curves. A 90 kmlhr design speed has a minimum radius of305 meters. Using
this radius places the new roadway further into the mountain, increasing the excavation and the thus
the construction cost from 12 million dollars (70 km/hr) to 19 million dollars for a 90 kmlhr design
speed.
ll
SUFNEY
J.6m J.6m 2.4m
IBm 0.6m'lJ.6m0.6m
P/IVED (f)
®
..2fro/ohf U~ Stop,
li
SUFNEY
J.6m J.6m
®
I ... 4D7. 2.D7. 2.D7. 41)7.
TYPICAL SECTION
~
"Tl~
~
ooo
-o..-
-· (; ~::X::
3 0~
-
("") ~"'1
C) z ooc;;-
0. 0:::2
0
(]) Widen 0.6m wtrx-e Guordrollls r(J(1Jir«J.
® 811umlnous Seol '
\./) ::: ~ I
!'T> , oo
-gtT1
-·
("")
~ c...> <
c...> ..... ~
0
;:j
(-'>
g, a NOTE:
SUPERELEVATED SHOOWERS - CONSTRUCT TO
STANDARD SUPERELEVATKJH. EXCEPT NCJT FLATTER
T SWPE INDICATED FOR NORIIAL SECTKJH.
Harlan County
(KY 38) Harlan - Evarts Road
FD04 048 0038 001-005 065 D
Item No. 11-133.00
ALTERNATES
The project begins at east end of the Corps of Engineers roadway improvement for the
tunnel project and extends a distance of approximately 5. 8 kilometers to the west end of the
bridge over Clover Fork at Brookside.
Three Alternates (1, 2 & 3) were presented at the preliminary line and grade inspection.
Alternate 1 generally followed the existing roadway. Alternates 2 and 3 provided for improved
horizontal alignment and were generally located fwther from Clover Fork. The cost estimates were
$12,600,000., $19,100,000., and $16,800,000 respectively.
The Do-Nothing Alternate would retain the existing roadway which does not meet the
needs of the traffic.
Alternate 1A was proposed for discussion at the Preliminary Line and Gtade Inspection
because of the difficulty of maintaining traffic at Coxton during construction. This Alternate would
primarily use Alternate 1 except moving the alignment south to the west of Coxton and north of
Clover Fork at Coxton adding two river crossings. It was determined that the aligrunent north of
Coxton would be in the floodway. It would be difficult if not impossible to obtain approval for this
alternate.
Alternate 1B was then proposed to move the aligrunent back to the south side of Clover
Fork at Coxton and provide a temporary detour to the north of Clover Fork using the existing
crossing and providing a temporary crossing. The estimated cost is $10,700,000.
MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC
Maintain traffic on existing roadway except at Coxton where a temporary detour will be provided.
Construct new roadway outside limits of existing roadway. Construct temporary connections to
connect full and partial sections of the new roadway and divert traffic to these locations using one
lane and the shoulder to maintain traffic where necessary. Complete construction of the remaining
left and right halves of the new roadway. Construct the approaches to the bridges, railroad and
beginning of project. Traffic may restricted to one lane at approach construction during working
hours. Shift traffic crossover points allow completion of roadway at these points and complete
construction
Harlan County
(KY 38) Harlan - Evarts Road
FD04 048 0038 001-005 065 D
Item No. 11-133.00
Alternate lB
1. There may be wetlands on this project subject to Environmental Analysis by the Department.
2. The proposed alignment of the relocated Harlan-Evarts Road (KY 38) crosses a drain at
Station 4+640+/-. The existing 914 x 914 mm (3'x3') reinforced concrete box culvert at 0 degree
skew is being replaced with a 1200 mm (48") pipe culvert at the same skew. The proposed pipe
fits the existing channel on the inlet end. The proposed pipe provides for a 40 meter channel
change (the proposed roadway fills the existing channel) and moves the outlet 35 m southeast.
3. The proposed alignment of the relocated Harlan-Evarts Road(KY 38) crosses a drain at
approximate Station 4+840+/-. The existing 1219 x 1219 (4 'x4') mm reinforced concrete box
culvert at 0 degree skew is being replaced with a 1350 mm (54") pipe at the same skew. The pipe
fits the existing channel on the inlet end. The proposed pipe provides for the filling of 30 m of
existing channel under the proposed roadway and provides for the minimization of any water-
related impact at this crossing.
4. The proposed alignment of the relocated Harlan-Evarts Road(KY 38) crosses a drain at
approximate Station 5+240+/-. The existing 5 m reinforced concrete bridge at 0 degree skew is
being replaced with a 1800 x 1200 nun (6 'x4 ' ) reinforced concrete box culvert at 30 degree skew.
The culvert fits the existing channel on both ends. The proposed culvert provides for the filling of
3 5 m of existing channel at the KY 3 8 crossing of the existing drain and provides for the
m.irUrnization of any water-related impact at this crossing.
5. The proposed alignment of the relocated Harlan-Evarts Road(KY 38) crosses a drain at
approximate Station 6+560+/-. The existing 1372 mm (54') reinforced concrete pipe at 15 degree
skew is being replaced with a 2400 x 1800 nun (8'x6 ' ) reinforced concrete box culvert at the same
skew. The culvert fits the existing channel. The proposed culvert provides for an avoidance of any
channel change at the KY 3 8 crossing of the existing drain and provides for the minimization of
any water-related impact at this crossing.
Note: Proposed pipe and culvert sizes shown hereon are preliminary estimated sizes.
1
.:PA?Vdn-. 6-/
L&.o lii./INic
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY &/Jl!!J Aibc,Jro,V
J AMES c. CODELL, Ill TRANSPORTATION CABINET
40622
&:rt;;c_r P AUL E. PATTON
SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION FRANKFORT, KENTUCKY fr<_ ~ G OVERNOR
T. KEVI N FLANERY
D EPUTY SECRETARY
INTRA-DEPARTMENTAL MEMO
In response to your October 16, 1996 request for traffic fo recasts on the subject
project, we are providing current year ADTs, construction yea r (1999) ADTs, design
year (2019) ADTs, truck percentages, and estimated equivalent axleload
accumulations on the attached map and worksheet.
If you have any questions, please call Rob Bostrom of this Division.
BSS:KL
Attachments
c: Gary Sharpe
Daniel Jewell, D-11
zo YEAR fORECAST
Ref. Stations .• • •.•••.. 1995 Vol. Count Q Stn 758 1995 Aggregated ESALs, FC 7
PTR Rpt, Stn 758 1995 Aggregated ESALs, FC 7
11995 Coal Haul Report
TRAFFIC PARAMETERS:
Cnstrctn Yr Amual Years to Mid-term Cnstrctn Yr Mid· term
Forecast Change Mid-term lncrennt Forecast Forecast
Vo l~.~ne ( AAD T) 8,069 X 1.0250 10.0 = 2,260 + 8,069 = 10,329
Percent Trucks CXT> 7.5 X 1.0071 10.0 = .551 + 7.500 = 8.1
Percent Trucks Hauling
Coal (XCT) 1.6 X .9735 10.0 = -.389 + 1.6 = 1.3
Non-Coal Trucks:
Axles/Truck (A/NCT) 2.881 X 1.0014 10.0 = .040 + 2.881 2.921
EALs/Axle (EAL/NCA) .244 X 1.0000 10.0 . 000 + .244 = .244
Coal Trucks:
Axles/Truck (A/CT) 4.5n X 1.0000 10.0 = .000 + 4.5n = 4.5n
EALs/Axle (EAL/CA) 1.625 X 1.0000 10.0 = .000 + 1.625 = 1.625
M E MOR AN D U M
BY: DrumyMole~
GeotechniccJB';'~~h '-
An abbreviated geotechnical engineering report has been completed for the subject project.
The drilling and sampling was obtained by Rhodes , Incorporated. The testing was performed by
the Geotechnical Branch. The purpose of the investigation was to define the soil and subsurface
conditions. Reduced size geotechnical notes sheet, cut stability and embankment stability sheets
are attached. The CADD input for the cut and embankment stability sheets is being sent to T.H.E.
Engineers via E-Mail for incorporation into the roadway plans.
A Select Rock Quantity Estimate was submitted by the design consultant. Based on these
estimates. a sufficient amount of durable sandstone from roadway excavation will be available on
this project for all embankment construction and to perform all the following applicable notes
requiring this material.
1). All soils, whether from roadway or borrow, may require manipulation to obtain proper
moisture content prior to compaction. Direct payment shall not be permitted for
rehandling, hauling, stockpiling, and/or manipulating soils.
Memorandum(R-4-98)
D. Kra tt
Page 2 of3
2). In accordance with Section 207 of the current Standard Specifications, the moisture content
of embankment material shall not vary from the optimum moisture content as determined
by KM 64-511 by more than + 2 percent or less than -4 percent. This moisture content
requi rement shall have equal weight with the density requirement when determining the
acceptability of embankment construction. Refer to the Family of Curves for
moisture/density correlations.
3). Excavation of surfaces ditches and channel changes adjacent to embankment areas shall be
performed prior to the placement of the adjacent embankments. The material excavated
for the channel changes and surface ditches is suitable for embankment construction if
dried to proper moisture content in accordance with Section 207 of the current Standard
Specifications.
4). The contractor is responsible for conducting any operations necessary (such as construction
of temporary drainage ditches, etc.) to excavate the cut areas to the required typical
section. These operations shall be incidental to the roadway price.
5). The contractor shall conduct grading operations in such a manner that durable sandstone
from roadway excavation shall be stockpiled separately or otherwise manipulated so that
ample quantities are available for those areas requiring said material. No direct payment
will be allowed for such necessary manipulating as stockpiling, hauling and/or handling
the material.
7). All Earth Cores shall be constructed with non-erodible material only, meeting the
requirements of the current edition of Special Provision 69.
8). Soil horizons and slopes on the project may be subject to erosion. Necessary procedures
in accordance with Sections 212 and 213 of the Standard Specifications for Road and
Bridge Construction. current edition, shall be followed on construction to control the
erosion and water pollution.
9). Any saturated, unstable material encountered in existing creek beds and/or drainage swales
within embankment foundation limits shall be drained.
lQ). Foundation embankment benches shall be placed in accordance with Standard Drawing
RGX-010 at the locations listed below and/or as directed by the Engineer.
6+430 to 6+450. left side
11 ). The project should be designed for a 0.6 meter rock roadbed utilizing durable sandstone
from roadway excavation, using a CBR design value of 9.0.
Memorandum(R-4-98)
D. Kratt
Page 3 of3
12). The recommended rock swell factor is estimated to be ten (10) percent for material
excavated below the rock disintegration zone (RDZ).
Attachment
VI C> ...... ::r:
0 0 ~
Q. Ql l>
Ql 3 :0
::r: r
~
II 0 z -< l>
z
J.. p
0 VI ()
.7 :J = CXI
0
.
N
.A
:::::
I
c
'.0'""""
0 0 z
0 -i
~ -<
. ........ . - 0
.I' , ,
~S8en
J ,/\
I 7
Research Report
KTC-99-1
by
Brad W. Rister
Research Engineer
and
David L. Allen
Chief Research Engineer
in cooperation with
Transportation Cabinet
Commonwealth of Kentucky
and
March, 1999
1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.
KTC-99-1
4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date March 15, 1999
Development of ESAL Forecasting Procedures
for Superpave Pavement Design 6. Performing Organization Code
9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
16. Abstract
This report documents the analysis methods used to develop the Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) forecasting program for
Superpave projects. In addition, this report discusses the procedures used in the ESAL forecasting program to forecast ESALs in the
design lane for pavement resurfacing/overlay projects which are consistent with the Superpave process of asphaltic mixture design.
19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21 . No. of Pages 22. Price
20
Unclassified Unclassified
EXECUTfVESU~Y
This report documents the analysis methods used to develop the Equivalent Single
Axle Load (ESAL) forecasting program for Superpave projects. In addition, this report
discusses the procedures used in the ESAL forecasting program to forecast ESALs in the
design lane for pavement resurfacing/overlay projects which are consistent with the
Superpave process of asphaltic mixture design.
ACKNOWLEGEGMENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
2
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The prediction model developed in UKTRP 85-30 is still used by the Cabinet's
traffic forecasting function. However, the advent of Superpave as the Cabinet's asphalt
pavement mix has been the impetus for this study since all Superpave mixes require an
ESAL value. Therefore, it was necessary to develop a simplified model to be used for
Superpave projects. The model developed uses the same traffic parameters used by the
Cabinet's traffic forecasting function, but makes several simplifying assumptions to
arrive at a forecasted ESAL value. These assumptions consist of applying growth rates to
the present independent variables (AADT, %T, Aff, ESAL/A, AICT, and ESALICA)
based on the functional class growth rates provided in the Aggregated 1997 ESAL table
(Appendix A.). Note, a default growth rate of 2 percent is used for the AADT growth
rate for all functional classes in this model. The functional class growth rates are applied
to the present independent variables using the compound interest equation at the median
forecast year, i.e. present %T* ((l-growth rate)" (number of forecasted years/2)]. After
the application of all growth rates, the new independent variables are substituted into
equation 1 to calculate a total median year daily ESAL value. Next, ESALs are
forecasted in the design lane for Superpave projects, by taking the product of the total
median year daily ESAL calculation and multiplying it by (365 days * number of
forecasted years * a lane distribution factor) (equation 2). Note, it is not recommended to
use this procedure of forecasting ESALs for the Superpave Mix Design except for a
"ballpark" estimate.
3
Lanedist = lane distribution factors are based on report UKTRP 85-30,
modifications have been made for 6 and 8 lane roads (Table
1).
This program was designed to give the user two different functions for forecasting
ESALs in the design lane for Superpave projects. The first function will allow the user to
forecast ESALs in the design lane using collected traffic data, collected by the Division
of Planning. In order to forecast ESALs in the design lane using collected traffic data the
user will perform a search on the data base by typing in the county name, route prefix,
route number, route suffix, beginning rnilepoint, ending milepoint, and the number of
forecasted years. The second function of the program will allow the user to forecast
ESALs in the design lane, using user defined data input. Both procedures for forecasting
ESALs in the design lane will be discussed in detail in the, "Procedures for using the
ESAL Forecasting program" in section 4.0 of this report.
In order to forecast ESALs using collected traffic data, five databases of traffic
information provided by the Division of Planning were combined into one master
database using Microsoft Excel. The five databases consisted of: Volume.dbf;
Class97b.txt; Sta_tonsC.xls; the lane file (Countsta.xls) from the Highway Inventory
System (HIS) database; and the Aggregated 1997 ESAL table with three-year averages
with smoothed growth rates. A brief description of each database, a sample of the
databases, and where they can be located for future reference is listed in Appendix A.
"Volume.dbf' was used as the base file for the master database to which the other
four databases were attached. The "Volume.dbf' file provided county number, station
number, route prefix, route number, route suffix, beginning milepoint, ending milepoint,
and an estimated annual average daily traffic volume (AADT) for 23,237 stations located
in the 120 counties in Kentucky. The second database used was "Class97b.txt" which
matched up to "Volume.dbf' by county and station number. "Class97b.txt" contained
actual multiple year AADT counts, percent trucks, axles per trucks, percent coal trucks,
and axles per coal truck for various station numbers. For each station number, the latest
actual data for (percent trucks, axles per trucks, percent coal trucks, and axles per coal
truck) was matched to the "Volume.dbf" file. The third database used was
"Sta_tonC.xls" which matched up to "Volurne.dbf' by county and station number. This
database contained annual coal tonnage hauled on coal hauling routes in Kentucky. The
4
annual coal tonnage hauled was divided by (365 days * 40 tons per truck) to obtain the
number of coal trucks per day. This calculated number of coal trucks per day was
compared to the number of coal trucks per day found in the "Ciass97b.txt" database in
which the higher of the two values was used in the master database. The fourth database
used was the lane file "Countsta.xls" obtained from the HIS database housed at the
Division of Planning. This database matched to "Volume.dbf' file by county and station
number and provided the number of lanes and functional classification for each station
number in the master database. The last database used was the 1997 aggregated ESAL
table with three-year averages with smoothed growth rates. This database was used in
two ways. First, in the insistence that the "Ciass97b.txt" database did not provide data on
percent trucks, axles per truck, or axles per coal truck to be attached to the "Volume.dbf'
database--values for these categories were based on matching the functional
classification. Second, the equivalent single axle loads per axle for both trucks and coal
trucks (ESALIA, ESALICA) were used based on the matching functional classification of
the two databases.
After completing the master database in Microsoft Excel, it was then imported
into Microsoft Access 97. The completed master database can be viewed in the ESAL
Forecasting program by holding down the shift key on the keyboard as the program is
loading. The data file name is combine 22. However, precaution should be taken as to
not alter the original data. The column headings used in the master database are as
follows: county number, station number, route prefix, route number, route suffix, starting
milepoint, ending milepoint, ADT, percent trucks, axles per truck, ESAUaxle, functional
classification, number of lanes, number of coal trucks, axles per coal truck, ESAL/coal
axle, lane adjustment factor, an indication if percent trucks is actual or estimated data, an
indication if axles per truck are actual or estimated, an indication if the number of coal
trucks is actual or estimated, and a RSE_UN IQUE code so that this database can be used
with Arc View software.
This program can be updated, on a yearly base, by importing an identical database as
described above into the program. Data formatting should parallel that of the combine 22
master database, which can be viewed in the design view of the combine 22 database. To
update the query, the new database would replace the combine 22 database in the
calculate ESAL's query. To update or change growth rates for the Aggregated 1997
ESALs table, simply go to the 3-year average table and update. To change lane
distribution factors go to the lane table and update. To change the AADT growth rate go
to the ADT growth rate table and update.
To access the ESAL forecasting program, there are a few hardware and software
requirements. The requirements are listed below as well as on the inside jacket of the CD
case.
5
Hardware/Software:
1.) i486 or Pentium processor.
2.) Windows 95, 98 or Windows NT.
3.) If using the CD version from the CD reader the CD-ROM drive
must be 1Ox or higher. If the CD-ROM drive is less than a lOx it
is recommended that the ESAL forecasting program be copied to
the hard-drive.
4.) The hard drive will need a total of 100-MB, and approximately 6
MB of hard disk space to store the program.
5.) A minimum of 16MB ofRAM is required.
6.) Screen resolution set at either 800x600 or 1024x768.
7.) Microsoft Access 97.
Instructions to access the ESAL forecasting program from the CD are listed below
and on the inside jacket of the CD case.
Instructions to install the ESAL forecasting program from the 3.5" diskettes to the
hard-drive are listed below and on the front label of the diskettes. Note: in order to copy
the ESAL forecasting program to your hard drive the program must be unzipped. The
diskettes have a self-extracting program loaded on them called PKUNZIP version 2.60.
This program is a SHAREWARE product, and is being used as an evaluation copy.
6
5.) After choosing the proper directory, click "Extract" button. If the
user has not already created the directory to extract the program to,
click Yes to create directory.
6.) Follow the on-screen instructions and insert diskettes.
7.) The program will be extracted when the (A) drive directory is
displayed.
8.) Go to the directory where the ESAL forecasting program has been
stored.
9.) Double click on the ESAL Forecasting program.
10.) In introduction screen (Figure 1) of program click button to enter
into program.
This program forecasts Equiv alent Single Axle Loads (ESALs) in the design
lane for Superpave projects
The collecled traffic data ust'd in thi' program io; from the Kenruck:
T ran,.nonar ion ( ahin£'1. Divi\ion of Plan ninf!.
Click: ro
open
program
The next section will outline the procedures for using the ESAL forecasting
program to forecast ESALs in the design lane for pavement resurfacing/overlay projects
which are consistent with the Superpave process asphaltic mixture design. When
opening the program, the first screen that will appear is the Introduction Screen (labeled
Start in the database) (Figure 1). After arriving at this screen, the user will need to click
on the box "Click: to open program". This will take the user to Screen One (Figure 2).
This !JCreen dlsptays the organlmJon chart of the ESAl forecasting program and Hetp (?)
buttons for each Screen used In the program.
Screen One displays the organization chart or layout of the ESAL forecasting
program. At the bottom of Screen One, the statement "Click raised buttons to proceed"
indicates that the user can go to multiple sections of the program from Screen One by
clicking on any of the raised buttons. The buttons consist of; Start Screen which takes
the user back to the Introduction Screen, Screen Two-standard data input, Screen
Four-detajled data input, or any of the Help screens. Note: after entering Screen Three
the user has the option of going to Screen Four, and the Help screens can be accessed
inside any of the other screens.
Screen Two is the standard data input screen (Figure 3). The purpose of this
screen is to forecast ESALs in the design lane using the master database. First, the user
8
will need to identify the search criteria for searching the master database. The search
criteria are the seven yellow boxes located on Screen Two; county name, route prefix,
route number, route suffix, beginning milepoint, ending milepoint, and number of
forecast years. Second, after identifying the search parameters the user will click on the
button labeled "Click: to find matching records". This will take the user to Screen Three
(Figure 4).
The details for filling in the seven yellow boxes found on Screen Two are listed
below and on the Help screen for Screen Two in the Program.
I. Enter county name: in this box the user v.<ill type in one of the 120 county
names in Kentucky. In addition, there is a drop down box that will allow
the user to pick from a list of county names in Kentucky if desired.
2. Enter route prefix: in this box the user \\<ill type in the route preftx. There
is a list of route preftxes for all of the Parkways in Kentucky located on
the right side of Screen-Two.
J. Enter route number: in this box the user will type in the route number.
There is a list of route numbers for all of the Parkways in Kentucky
located on the right side of Screen-Two.
4. Enter route suffix: in this box the user will type in a route suffix if
applicable. Applicable route suffixes for this box are located in the drop
•
down menu. If a route suffix is not applicable to the route the user is
evaluating, then the user must leave the default value of "Na" in this box.
The following is a list of route sufftxes that appear in the drop menu: A,
9
B, C, E, ED, EN, EX, H, J, M, N, Na, RA, RP, S, T, U, W, WB, WN, X,
XN.
5. Enter beginning m.ilepoint in this box the user wiJI type in the beginning
m.ilepoint of the section of roadway to be evaluated. Note that the
beginning m.ilepoiot must be less than the ending m.ilepoint.
6. Enter ending m.ilepoint: in this box the user will type in the ending
m.ilepoint of the section of roadway to be evaluated. Note that the ending
milepoint must be greater than the beginning milepoint.
7. Enter number of years: in this box the user will type in an integer value
from I to 50 to represent the number of years the user would like to
forecast the design ESALs in the critical lane.
8. Click to fmd matching records: by clicking this button the program will
query the database for the records that match the criteria input in numbers
1-7 above, and send the user to Screen-Three. Screen-Three will allow
the user to view all of the matching records, print preview all of the
matching records, and go to Screen-Four to calculate ESALs, if the data
shown in Screen-Three is inadequate or if no matching records were
found for the criteria
Screen Three is the standard data output screen (Figure 4). This screen shows the
results of the search criteria defined in Screen Two. As an example, Figure 4 shows
actual output that was obtained from a search on I-75 in Fayette County.
HIGHWAY DETAILS
·~: 11'Pfl'"WI'Jii1i·lilii'lii"1
' County number: I 34 AOT: 54,000 . FC: jl
, Station number: I 34P90
Route prefix: I PSfceoltrucJ(s: r;- r 17.700 AIT: r;-1 ~.53 ESAIJA: 0.217
' ote: ~cr~t· n-Threr di~pla~~ the record' that match thl' critcri:l that "ere entered on Screen-T"o. If
th ere "ere no matching record\ for the <.pt•dfied crit<-ri:l then the u~er can go bach to ~creen-T"o to
perform a IH'" \carch or go to ~crecu-Four to calculatl' 1:- ~\I.\ ''ith u~cr defined d:~ta.
l)j,,J.aunt a·: I hi' pam·t·tlurl ul lua tl ''tau:... I " \ I ' ll'l'' dt l.ault llllurnwli(ln
It \,llllplt luawtion.ll d:a-' rll'lault' .ttlcl :.,!1"111\ th r ,tit <kt.urlt a"umption') tu
fHodllll I" \ I ' lui \uplrp.aH \II\ lh·,•~• It j, lltfl 1\'.llflllllll tllcllur "'' 111
prudurin:.. [ ' \l' 1111 P:t\ t>lllt>lll Dl',a:..n t-\l'eptlor .t "hallparl," t''tintatt'.
I. Highway details: displayed in the highway details box are the items such
as: county number, station number, route prefiX. route number, route
stffix. beginning milepoint., ending milepomt. number of lanes, and lane
distribution factor for the records that match the search criteria.
Lane distribution factors are based on Kenrucky Transportation
Research repon UKTRP-85-30. Modifications have been made
for 6 and 8 lane roads (Table 2).
II
t..., \1,: c .1 hit.:l ~ ''"~" 1 ~ ·11• uld !'It' ~J.J,d;t'd \\llh lht' 11 1 \l~,,,n of
.l .... 1 p,,;,. _n,, • l ..c "'"'urn~~ ,,f th, numbt'l ,,f ~Cl:ll 11\h.k~ per
where growth rates have already been applied to (AADT, %T, AfT, ESAUA,
A/CT, and ESAUCA) based on the Functional Classification growth rates
provided in the Aggregated 1997 ESALs table. Note: in order to get median year
daily ESALs, the growth rates are calculated at the median year using the
compound interest equation i.e. : %T*[(I .,.growth rate)"(N/ 2)). The growth rate
for AADT was assumed to be 2 percent for all functional classes. The
Aggregated 1997 ESALs table with growth rates can be viewed below.
.::- ..:
11 2
2
1
1
1
0.398
0
0.556
0
0
1.989
0
• " 1- .- 2 1 0.946 0 0 0
Screen Four is the detailed data input screen (Figure 5). The purpose of this
screen, and with the addition of Screen Five (Figure 6), is to forecast ESALs in the design
lane based on user defined data. This function of the program can be used if the
information obtained from a forecast on Screen Three proves to be inadequate, if no
information is available from the master database to forecast ESALs in Screen Three, or
for a widening project where the lane information provided from the master database
would be inadequate.
12
Ew•lttMlC.._
t - IUII~ 11 · ~1n~
S1 5 liN, I WIY
The details of using Screen Four are listed both below and in the Help screen for
Screen Four in the program.
I. Enter functional classification: the user must enter a numeric value in this
yellow box. The different functional classes are located on the right side
of Screen-Four. There is a drop-down box located in the yellow box to
allow the user to pick the functional class from a list.
2. Enter lane distribution factor reference #: the user must enter a value from
the Jane distribution factor reference # list located on the right side of the
screen. The values correspond to the rype of Jane layout the user is
evaluating. A value must be entered into the yellow box. There is a drop-
down box located in the yellow box to allow the user to pick the Jane
distribution factor reference # from a hst.
3. Click to calculate ESALs: after both one & two above have been
completed, click this button to go to Screen-Five to complete the ESAL
calculating process with user defmed data.
13
Screen Five is the continuing screen to forecast ESALs using user-defined data
(Figure 6). The values entered on both Screen Four and Screen Five will be used to
forecast ESALs on Screen Five.
Da111 •r ur• 1~'.1 ~tggrng~:r.1 I-SIII < -hr£'i' l '-•<'• .OU<'> .. ~,.. C:1lc:ulltt your own I-SAI s Willi rout o.tt· valu~
<m~tn"-1 I)!(INi r •alto>
The details of using Screen Five are listed both below and in the Help screen for
Screen Five in the program.
I. Enter ADT: in this box an ADT value as spectfied in the adjacent box
"Enter one way ADT", or"Enter two way ADT' must be entered
2. Enter number of years: in this box a numeric value greater than zero must
be entered to forecast ESALs.
3. Enter a value for one of the following if applicable: if the user is
calculating ESALs in a coal-hauling region, there are two different ways
to input in the number of coal-trucks per day. The user can enter the
number of coal trucks per day or the annual coal tonnage. If annual coal
tonnage is entered, the number of coal trucks per day is derived by
dividing annual coal tonnage by (365 days • 40 tons). NOTE: only enter
coal information in one box; leave the other box defaulted to zero. If
there are no coal trucks on the srudied route, leave both values equal to
zero. ' t' ......
14
.t. If lane configuration is ( > 6 lane, 1 way ) then Enter number of lanes in
box. If lane configuration is not ( > 6 Lane, I way ) leave the default
value of 1 in the box:_this box should always have the default value 1 in
it, unless the user has picked the ( > 6 lane, 1 way ) configuration on
Screen-Four. If the user has picked the ( > 6 lane, I way) configuration
then the user must input in the number of lanes in the yellow box.
5. ESALs can be calculated for two different scenarios on Screen-Five. The
user can use the values from the 1997 aggregated ESALs 3-year average
values based on functional class, or the user can calculate ESALs with
user defined data. NOTE: if the user calculates ESALs with user deftned
data, all yellow boxes (percent trucks, axles per truck, ESALs per axle,
axles per coal truck, ESALs per coal axle), must have a value entered.
6. Lane distribution factors are determined by the lane distribution factor
reference # the user entered on Screen-Four. Lane distribution factors are
based on Kentucky Transportation Research report UKTRP-85-30.
Modifications have been made for 6 and 8 lane roads (Table 3).
. f:actors or equations
T able 4 Laoe d'tStn'buuon
Lane layout Lane d1stribuuon factors or equations
I lane. !way I
2 or 3 lanes, 2 way .5
4 ian~. I V.11Y .35
4 O! S lane. 2 WO\ 497-(1.84... 142"(%uucks))•{ADn•( 10"-6)
5 lane. I wa~ 3
G lane, I way 325
> 6 lane. I wa\ (I =oflanes)4>.1
~~e.2"'?.Y. 325
> 6 lane, 2 way 25
(ADT*( 1-%T)*.OOS)"'((ADT*%T}-CT)*(Arr)*(ESAUA)-(CT*A/CT*ESAUCA)
where growth rates have already been applied to (ADT, %T, AfT, ESAUA,
A/CT, and ESAUCA) based on the Functional Classification growth rates
provided in the Aggregated 1997 ESALs table. Note: in order to get median year
daily ESALs, the growth rates are calculated at the median year using the
compound interest equation i.e.: %T*((l+growth rate)"(N/2)]. The growth rate
for ADT was assumed to be 2 percent for all functional classes. The Aggregated
1997 ESALs table with growth rates can be viewed below.
15
cr Number of coal trucks per day
AT Axles per truck
ESAUA Equivalent standard axle loads per truck axle
NCT Axles per coal truck
ESAUCA = Equivalent standard axle load per coal truck axle
Number of forecast years
Lanedist = Lane disaiburion factor
It is encouraged that the user consult with the Division of Multirnodal programs (1 -
502-564-7678) when using the ESAL forecasting program to forecast ESALs in the
design lane for pavement resurfacing/overlay projects. The information used in the
ESAL forecasting program uses default information to produce ESALs for Superpave
Mix Design. It is not recommended for use in producing ESALs for Pavement Design
except for a "ballpark" estimate.
In the event that this program will become a tool in future ESAL forecasting, it is
recommended that the collected traffic data utilized in this program be standardized, and
updated annually. Also, consideration should be given to editing the forecasting
equation. Applying growth rates only to the median year does not fully estimate the total
ESAL value in the design lane for the full design life of the Superpave project. A
suggested measure would be to integrate the equation as follows (present independent
variable* SXo axdx = axlln a) where a = (1 + growth rate) and x =years. By integrating the
application of the growth rates, a more accurate total ESAL value would be obtained,
thus allowing for a more accurate ESAL forecast.
16
APPENDIX A
(database files)
Volume.dbf
Volume.dbf file came from the Division of Planning's "historic.dbf' file that is
stored on the mainframe Traffic Volume Summary file. The data contact person is Greg
Witt from the Division of Planning (1-502-564-7183). The ADT value used from this
database is located in column VOL1. The last number in the four-digit number in the
VOLl column is a power of ten number. For example the number 6581, is
658*10" 1=6580, and 1302 is 130*10"2= 13,000. When receiving this file, the last
number in the VOLl column will need to be separated from the first three. In Excel,
highlight the VOL! column, then go to the data command. In the data command list
pick fixed width, then separate the first three munbers from the fourth. In the adjacent
column write an equation that will multiply the first three numbers by the fourth raised
to the tenth power. This will give the ADT value for this record. Copy the equation
down for all ADT values.
For the files from the other database to match to this "Volume.dbf' database, the
county number must be combined with the station number. To do this, make a separate
column adjacent the station number. Write an equation using the concatenate function
to combine both county number and station number into one. NOTE: the station number
has three values. It can be three numbers or a mixture of numbers and text values.
Volume.dbf
CONUMBER S1ATION RTPREFIX RTNUMBER RTSUFFIX STARTMPT ENDINGMPT VOL1
1 A57 KY 55 9.335 10.059 6581
1 A47 KY 55 10.059 10.316 1302
1 A46 KY 55 10.316 10.47 1272
1 A43 KY 55 10.47 10.61 4 2002
1 A41 KY 55 10.614 10.72 2452
KY
--- 1 A 58 55 10.72 10.84 1912
1 A26 KY 55 10.84 11.17 1962
1-·
1 A13 KY 55 11.17 11.19 2592
Class97b.txt
Class97b.txt was a text file that was originally called "Class97.pm". This file comes
from the processed classification summary data developed by the Traffic & Safety
Section at the Kentucky Transportation Center. The data contact person is Greg Witt
from the Division of Planning (1 -502-564-7183). In this file the county number must be
combined with the station number. However, the station number does not have three
values in all cases. The length (len) function combined with an (IF) statement must be
used in Excel to add a leading zero or zeros to any station number that does not have
three values. The length function would be used to tell how many values were present in
each cell in the station number column. The (IF) statement would be used after the
length function. If the station number length equaled 1, then add two zeros, if the station
number length equaled 2, then add one zero, and if the station number equaled 3 then put
17
the station number as it exists in the cell. Then copy this equation down for all station
numbers.
Next, the latest year data was saved in each identical county number/station number
combination. This gave the most up-to-date information for each station number. This
saved data was copied to a blank sheet in the ''Volume.dbf' file where an (Vlookup)
equation was used to match identical station numbers between both files. The (Vlookup)
equation was used to match the percent truck ''TR", axles per truck "A_T", percent coal
trucks "CTR", and axles per coal truck "A_CT" values to the ''Volume.dbf'. If there was
not a match between station numbers, a ''N/ A" value was placed in the cell. To eliminate
the ''NIA" value the (ISERROR) function was used to put a zero in for all cells that had
the ''N/A" value.
Class97b.txt
CoN umber Station# Rt.Prefix Rt.# Milepoint ADT TR CTR A_T A_CT FC AF Year
1 A54 0 0 745 0.015 0 2 0 9 1 86
1 8 KY 55 12.5 9150 0.113 0 3.257 0 6 0.932 96
1 A07 KY 55 11 5961 0.078 0 2.492 0 6 0.981 79
1 A07 KY 55 11 3925 0.093 0 2.667 0 6 0.97 80
1 A07 KY 55 11 7716 0.088 0 3.104 0 6 0.954 83
1 A07 KY 55 11 7716 0.064 0 2.905 0 6 0.972 86
1 A07 KY 55 11 5961 0.078 0 2.492 0 6 0.981 79
1 A07 KY 55 11 3925 0.093 0 2.667 0 6 0.97 80
1 A07 KY 55 11 7716 0.088 0 3.104 0 6 0.954 83
1 A07 KY 55 11 7716 0.064 0 2.905 0 6 0.972 86
1 A13 KY 55 10.5 10800 0.044 0 3.835 0 6 0.961 92
1 A13 KY 55 10.5 10800 0.044 0 3.835 0 6 0.961 92
Sta tonsC.xls
Sta_tonsC.xls was an Excel file that came from the "Coalseg.lst database. The
"Coalseg.lst", file comes from the Division of Planning's coal haul team. This coal haul
team converted the "Coalseg.lst" to a format that included station numbers along with the
annual tons hauled.
To determine how many coal trucks were hauling daily through these station
numbers, the yearly tonnage was divided by 365 days * 40 tons per truck. The combined
county number/station number was compared to the station numbers of the "Volume.dbf'
file. In the 'Volume.dbf' file, the number of coal trucks provided from the
"Class97b.txt" file and the "Sta_tons.xls" were compared. The value that gave the largest
number of coal trucks per day was used.
Sta tonsC.xls
County# Station# Route pre Route# Beg mile End mile tons
1 1288 cu 9008 48.9 57.791 16931
1 1A47 KY 55 10.1 10.316 16931
•
1 1A46 KY 55 10.316 10.47 16931
l8
Countsta.xJs
Countsta.xls was an Excel file that came directly from the Division of Planning's
Highway Information System (HIS) database. The data contact person is Greg Witt from
the Division of Planning (1-502-564-7183). This file matched to the ''Volume.dbf' by
the combination of county and station number. The (Vlookup) function was used to
bring in the functional class information (FC) and the number of lanes.
Countsta xJs
County# route Route# start. Mp End mp station# F.C. #of lanes
1 CR 1026 0 2.722 1053 9 2
1 CR 1041 0 2.064 1095 9 1
1 CR 1043 0 0.849 1122 9 1
1 CR 1045 0 0.44 1121 9 1
1 CR 1046 0 1.477 1096 9 1
1 CR 1046 1.477 1.887 1074 9 1
1 CR 1046 1.887 2.3 1074 9 1
1 CR 1049 0 1.856 1069 9 1
Aggregated 1997 ESALs - The three-year averages using the smoothed growth rates
table comes from the Traffic and Safety Section at the Kentucky Transportation Center.
The data contact person is Dave Cain ( 1-606-257 -4513). The table is generated each
June with the latest year traffic data.
The data for percent trucks (%T), axles per truck (NT), and axles per coal truck
(NCT) are matched based on functional class to the records in the "Volume.dbf' file if
the values for these categories are zero. The values for EALs/A and EALs/CA are
matched between the two files by functional classification.
After the master database is completed the (ISERROR) function is run on all cells to
take out any ''N/ A" values since Microsoft Access will not recognize ''N/ A" values. In
the event that a blank space is found in the database, a zero value is entered because
Microsoft Access cannot recognize blank spaces. Also, four columns are created to
determine if the percent trucks, number of coal trucks per day, axles per truck, and axles
per coal truck are actual or estimated data.
e growth rates
Aggre1 ated 199 7 ESALs - Three-year averages usmg smoothd
Agg. Class FCs T% GR AfT GR EALs/A GR AJCT GR EALs/CA GR
I 1 28.653 1.000 4.493 0.092 0.217 1.000 4.778 0.000 0.880 1.989
II 2,6 11.635 1.000 3.490 0.535 0.251 1.000 4.956 0.000 2.639 2.000
Ill 7,8,9 7.770 1.000 2.936 0.983 0.219 0.000 4.595 0.000 1.235 0.000
IV 11 13.406 1.000 4.076 1.000 0.183 0.000 4.778 0.000 0.880 0.000
v 12,14 6.262 1.000 3.042 0.398 0.209 0.556 4.590 0.000 1.048 0.000
VI 16,17,19 5.238 1.000 2.772 0.946 0.171 0.000 4.083 0.000 0.594 0.000
19
• •
APPENDrX B
(sample output)
Data type
Forecasted ESAl.Js A = actual data E = estimated data I = insufficient data
County Fayctle
County# Station Rt.Preflx Rt.# Rt.Sufflx Mllepolnts ADT %T Data AfT Data ESAUA FC Lanes Dally# ot Data AICT Data ESAUC Lane Years Forecasted
type type coal trucks type type dlst. ESALs
Star End
)4 J 4P90 75 na 98.5 16 103.69 54000 17 70 A 4.530 A 0.217 4 7 E 4 778 [! 0.88 0.384 20 40,156,077
34 34336 75 na 103.69 108.2 35700 2810 A 4 .456 A 0.217 4 101 A 4 906 A 0.88 0.417 20 46,299,338
34 34250 75 na 108.2 109.70 50600 13.41 I· 4 .076 E 0183 II 6 7 E 4.778 E 0.88 0.325 20 18,695,649
34 34392 75 na 109.70 111.22 55800 2090 A 4331 A 0.217 6 140 A 5 257 A 0.88 0.325 20 41 ,237,517
20