Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
I1:'
I
I
i
i
I
t.
IRC:58-2002
2002
''!ii';
IRC:SS-2002
,--1
il
't
j
'l'
J'
Published by
THE INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS
Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road,
New Delhi-110011
Price Rs.200/
(plus packing and
postage)
IRC:58-2002
First Published
First Revision
Reprinted
CONTENTS
July, 1974
June, 1988
Reprinted
IRC:58-2002
Page
Second Revision
Reprinted
March, 1991
October, 2000
December, 2002
November, 2004
... (i) to
(iv)
1.
Introduction
2.
Scope
3.
General
4.
5.
14
6.
Design of Joints
25
7.
29
8.
30
APPENDICES
33
Printed at Aravali Printers & Publishers (P) Ltd., New Delhi-110020 (500
copies)
53
59
62
65
6. Westergaard Equation
67
IRC:58-2002
S.C. Sharma
(Co-convenor)
3.
Members
4.
M.K. Agarwal
5.
P. Balakrishnan
6.
7.
D.P. Gupta
8.
9.
House
ADG (R) being not in position, the meeting was presided by Shri N.K. Sinha, DG (RD) &
Addi. Secretary to the Govt. of India, MORT&H.
(i)
IRC:58-2002
11. H.L. Meena
Secretary
to the Govt. of Gujarat, R&B,
Block
No.14/1, Sardar Bhavan,
Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar-3820 l 0
23. Ninnal Jit Singh
IRC:58-2002
Chief Engineer, Zone-III, Delhi P.W.D.,
MSO Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi110002
DG (RD) & AS, MOST (Retd.), S~l08, Panchshila Park, New Delhi110017
2 L H.R. Sharma
&
Transport
Highways,
Delhi-110001
&
New
(ii)
IRC:58-2002
37. The Director
(R&D)
The Engineer-in-Chief
(R.R.
Sheoran),
Haryana
35. The Director & Head (S.K. Jain), Civil Engg. Department
Bureau of
Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan,
Bahadur
Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110002
9,
3 8.
The Director
(S. Saravanavel),
Highways
Research
Station, P.B.
No.
2371,
76,
Sardar
Patel Road, Chennai-600025
39.
The Director
General of Works
Engineer-in-Chiefs
Branch,
AHQ,
Kashmir
House, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi110011
Ex-Officio Members
40. The President,
(S.S. Rathore), Secretary to the Govt. of
Gujarat, Indian Roads Congress R&B, Block No.14/1,
Sardar Bhavan,
. Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar-382010
41. DG
(RD)
meetings
held on
42. The Secretary,
Prof. C.E.G.
Justo
1.
Corresponding
Members
Emeritus Fellow, 334, 25th Cross, 14th:
Main,
Banashankari 2nd Stage, Bangalore560070
2.
I.J. Mamtani
3.
N.V. Merani
4.
Principal
Secretary,
Maharashtra
PWD(Retd), A~4-7/1344,Adarsh
Nagar,
Worll, Mumbai-400017
Prof. N. Ranganathan Head of Deptt. of Transportation Plg.,
SPA (Retd.), Consultant, 458/C/SFS,
Sheikh Sarai,
New Delhi110017
5.
Prof.
c.G.
pt May and
2nd
in
(
i
v
)
IRC:58-2002
The
draft
was
discusse
d
in
detail by
the
Ex-Officio Members
Corresponding
Members
H.S. Bhatia
R.K. Jain
Raman
Kaparia Dr.
S.C. Maiti
Prof. B.B. Pandey
Y.R. Phull
C
ol
.
S.
Y.
R
a
w
o
ot
Kanti Bhushan
Bhaumik
D.C. De
IRC:58-2002
H.K. Kulshrestha
S.M. Sabnis
A.U. Ravi
Shankar
Members
Conveno
r
CoConven
or
Member
Secretar
y
=:=
3.
Brajend
ra
Singh
V.K.
Sinha
Prof.
A.
Veerara
gavan
GENER
AL
IRC:58-2002
(ii)
(iii)
IRC:58-2002
'r'
of
5
IRC:58-2002
IRC:58-2002
. d termmed However,
"factual 1data is not available, and
average
da~nual gro~th
rate of 7.5 per cent may be a opte .
lo~~:
-~~l~
he t re imprint is
tangentia o
is max1~um when th . ~h wheels are tangential to
the .
longitudmal edge. W en el
and when the tyre
position
ower
t t esses are
gitudinal edge there is a
transvers
s, s
e
r
.JOlll
1' on
h from
.
t aye
is even 1 cm a:' . . . he flexural stress. Observation
5
of the
.
significant reduction m t
. .
heel aths for
two-lane
lateral distribution ch~ra.ctde:1stics tohf twvery
vehicles
travel
I dia m jcates a
two~way
n
per cent of the total
few
roa ds
twom
.
ffi
25
along the edge. A de:;~~lt~e~~l~s may be considered as a
very lane two-'."'ayco?1m fi desi n against fatigue
failure. In case conservative estimate _or
d~vided
highways, 25 per cent of of four-lane and mult1-l_ane .
redominant traffic may be the total traffic in the
direction Iof p of new highway links,
f avement
n
case
taken
for d
esign
0 p
:
1 data from roads
of
ble
where no traffic _count ~ata is avai a a/be used to
predict the similar classification and importance m
design traffic intensity.
..
4.5:
Temperature Differential
365xA{(l+r)n -1}
(I)
C=
Where
.
number of axles during the design penod.
C ==Cumulative
.
A ==Initial
operational.
of commercial
in
r == Annual rate of
growth decimals).
traffic
(expressed
n == Design period in
years.
cement concrete pavements is taken as 1.25 mm, the kvalue is determined from the pressure sustained at this
deflection. As
7
6
IRC:58-2002
TABLE 1.
REcoMMENDED
Zone
TEMPERSATURE
CONCRETE
FO, R
LABS
States
"C in
Slabs of Thickness
DIFFERENTIALS
Temperature Differential,
15cm
20cm
25cm
30cm
12.5
13.1
14.3
15.8
IRC:58-2002
16.4
16.6
standard correlations
75 cm plate
obtained
givenvalue
by : by experimentally
(
2) where, k75 and k30 are the k-va1ues obtained on 75 cm
and 30 cm diameter plates respectively. Equation 2 is
regarded as
III
Maharashtra,
Kamataka, South M.P.,
Chattisgarh, Andhra
Pradesh, Western Orissa
and North Tamil Nadu,
excluding hilly regions
and coastal areas.
IV
17.3
21.0
VI
19.0
16.4
20.3
17.6
Coastal areas
bounded
by hills.
14.6
15.8
17.0
16.2
Coastal areas
unbounded by hills.
15.5
17.0
19.2
19.0
k-value is influenced
by test
I
approximate only.
However, in case of layered
construction, the tests with smaller plates give greater
weightage to the stronger top layer, and direct conversion
to 75 cm plate values by the above correlation somewhat
over-estimates the foundation
strength, andonly.
such conversion must be regarded as very
apr,roximate
The subgrade soil strength and consequently the
strength of the foundation as a whole, is affected by
its moisture
content. The design strength obviously must be the minimum
that will be available under the worst moisture
conditions encountered. The ideal period for testing the
subgrade strength would, thus, be during or soon after
the monsoon when the subgrade would have attained its
highest moisture content. Annexure-4 of IRC:37-2001
may be referred for further details.
of the year,
moisture must
the expected
the subgrade
9
IRC:58-2002
IRC:58
-2002
3.
k-value of
(kg/cmvcm)
Effective k (kg/cmvcm)
Effective k
2.
CBR
VALUES
FOR
50
subgrade,
granular
(kg/cm2/cm
2.8
5.6
8.4
s2
k-value
(kg/cm2/cm)
2.1
10
15
TABLE
3.5
15
10.8
17.3
10
7.6
12.7
--
20
14.1
22.5
--
--
DRY L EAN
CONCRETE SUB-BASE
20
6.9
2.8
6.2
layer sub-base
of thickness
in cm
22.5
15
30
3.9
4.4
5.3
7.5
8.8
6.3
9.2
10.2
11.9
100
HOMOGENEOUSSOIL SUBGRADE
4
3 CBR
Soaked
value%
over untreated
4.2
4.8
14.0 22.2
5.5
2.1
2.8
5.6
9.7
9.7 13.8
4.2
16.6
4.8
5.5
27.8
20.8 27.7
38.9
41.7
kg/cm2/
~~C~r IQO mm of DLC and 41.7 kg/cmvcm for 150 mm
of
4.6.2.
Separation layer between sub-b
d pavement : Foundation layer below concrete slabs
s~~:l an s~ooth to reduce the inter layer friction. A
separation memb'!.::: o rrurumumthickness of 125 micron
polythene is recommen
to reduce the friction (Ref. IRC: 15-2002) between
ded slabs and dry lean concrete sub-base (DLC).
-~concrete
3of
46
t. h.
. Dr_amag the
layer : To facilitate
e
..
quickdisposal
1
0
IRC:58-2002
IRC:58-2002
4. 7.
Characteristics
contained
of Concrete
4. 7 .1.
Design strength : Since the concrete
pavements fail due to bending stresses, it is necessary that
their design is based on the flexural strength of
concrete. The relationship between the flexural strength
and compressive strength may be worked out as given in
Appendix-5. The mix should be so designed that the
minimum structural strength requirement in the field is
met at the desired confidence level. Thus, if
S1 = characteristic flexural strength at 28 days.
S = target average flexural strength at 28 days.
Z, = tolerance factor for the desired confidence level, known
as the standard normal variate (Table 5).
a = expected standard deviation of field test samples; if it
s=
S1+Z a
5.
....;.,1J
VARIATE
VALUES OF TOLERANCE
Accepted
proportion of
low results
(tolerance)
4.7.2.
Modulus of elasticity and poisson's
ratio : The modulus of elasticity, E, and Poisson's ratio, ,
of cement concrete are known to vary with concrete
materials and strength. The elastic modulus increases with
increase in strength, and Poisson's ratio decreases with
increase in the modulus of elasticity. While it is
desirable that the values of these parameters are
ascertained experimentally for the concrete mix and
materials actually to be used in the construction, this
information may not always be available at the design
stage. Even a 25 per cent variation in E and values does
not have any significant effect on.jhe flexural stresses in
the pavement concrete. It is suggested that for design
purposes, the following values may be adopted for concrete
for the flexural strength of
4.5 MPa (see Appendix-5).
a
TABLE
Quality Level
Nonna!
FOR DIFFERENT
(18:10262)
Standard
Variate,
z,
Modulus of elasticity of
value. concrete,
Poisson's ratio
4.7.3.
The
E =Experimentally determined
Or 3.0 x 105 kg/cm2
= 0.15
I in
15
I in
20
1 in
Fair
Good
Very
Good
Excellent
40
I in
100
1.5
0
1.6
5
1.9
6.
2.3
3
1
2
1
3
IRC:58-2002
IRC:58
-2002
TABLE
6.
Stress Ratio
0.45
0.46
0.47
0.48
0.49
0.50
0.51
0.52
Allowable
Allowable
Repetitions
6.279xl07
l.4335xl07
5.2xl06
2.4xl06
2531
l.287xl06
1970
7.62xl05
1451
4.85xl05
1099
3.26xl05
832
Stress Ratio
Repetitions
0.66
0.67
0.68
5.83xl03
4""4lxl03
3.34xl03
0.69
0.70
0.71
0.72
0.73
4.2577
SR-0.4325
[
Log10 N
]3.268
When 0.45 S SR S 0.55
0.9718-SR
for SR >0.55
0.0828
0.53
0.54
0.55
0.56
0.57
0.58
2.29xl05
l.66xl05
l.24xl05
9.4lxl04
7.12xl04
5.4xl04
0.74
0.75
0.76
0.77
0.78
0.79
630
477
361
274
207
157
0.59
0.60
0.61
0.62
0.63
0.64
0.65
4.08xl04
3.09xl04
2.34xl04
l.77xl04
1.34xl04
l.02xl04
7.7xl03
0.80
0.81
0.82
0.83
0.84
0.85
119
90
68
52
39
30
1
4
IRC:58-2002
IRC:58-2002
PAVEME
NT
DIRECTION OF VECHICLE
MOVEMENT
---------~----------------~-~---
PAVEMENT
~-------~----------i-----~--~--SINGLE AXLE
1.Jlm
~-------~----------------~-~--TANDEM AXLE
1
6
1
7
IRC:58-2002
.>
a
t
ten t
sio h
n
e top during
night
hours,
whereas,
tension _is produced during the day-time at
the bottom of the slab in the interior as well
as at the edge.
IRC:58-2002
Calculation of Stress
Edge stress
Due to load : Since the loads causing
failure of pavements are mostly applied by
single and tandem
Wher
e
Ste
E
Ea.tC
= -2-
m
a
x
i
IRC:58-2.002
IRC:58-2002
40
c
L
~----------------------- ~
15
E=3x l 05 kg/cm2
stiffness, cm
.gCpl) 10
i:.r.1
Poisson's ratio
c~o.o
10
15
20
5.2.2.
Corner stress : The load stress in the comer
region may be obtained as per Westergaard's analysis, modified
by Kelly, from the following equation:
Sc
3P[1-(a..fi.J1.
112
l
Lil
or
2]
Where
Sc
load stress in the comer region, other notations remaining the
same as in the case of edge load stress formula, kg/cm2
P
Wheel Load, kg
IRC:58c20
02
Lil
Bil
1
2
0.040
3
4
0.175
0.440
5
6
0.720
0.920
of Coefficient C:
or
Bil
0.000
1.030
8
9
10
1.080
1.075
11
12
1.077
1.050
1.000
25
Appendix-1
gives ready-to-use charts for the
calculation of load stresses in the edge region of rigid
pavement slabs for single and tandem axle loads of different
magnitudes for sub bases having k values in the range of 6,
8, 10, 15 and 30 kg/ cm2/cm.
A user friendly computer programme is also enclosed
in a Floppy for computation of stresses at the edges.
5.4. Stress Ratio and Fatigue Analysis
For a given slab thickness and other design
parameters, the flexural stress at the edge due to the
application of a single or tandem axle loads may be
determined using the appropriate stress chart. This stress
value is divided by the design flexural strength of the
cement concrete, to obtain the stress ratio in the pavement.
If the stress ratio is less than
0.45, the allowable number of repetitions of the axle load
is
infinity. Cumulative fatigue damage is determined for different
axle loads and the value of the damage should be equal
to or less than one. The procedure of estimating fatigue
damage is given in Appendix-2.
5.5. Erosion Consideration
AASHTO Road Test has indicated that there is an
important mode of distress in addition to fatigue cracking that
must be considered in the design. This is the erosion of
material from the bottom of the pavement. Analysis by
Portland Cement Association has indicated that the erosion
was caused largely by tandem and multi-axle vehicles and
that single axles were mostly responsible for fatigue
cracking. Since tandem axles form a small part of the total
commercial vehicles on Highways in India, erosion analysis
is not necessary at present. Record of
IRC:58-2002
22
23
IRC:58-2002
IRC:58-2002
values
6.1.
Expansion joints
ii)
Contraction joints
iii)
Construction joints
25
IRC:58-2002
IRC:58-2002
TABLE
7.
Slab thickness, cm
IRC:15-2002)
Unreinforced slabs
15
20
25
30
35
4.5
4.5
4.5
5.0
5.0
Where
(3
joint width, cm
modulus of the elasticity of the dowel, kg/cm2
P1
Each dowel bar should transfer load that is less than the
design load for the maximum bearing pressure. Following
equation based on the expression given by the American Concrete
Institute (ACI), Committee-Zzf may be used for calculation of
the allowable bearing stress on concrete:
Fb =
Where
(l 0. 16 - b) f,k
9.525
dowel diameter, cm
ultimate compressive strength (characteristic strength) of the
concrete, kg/cm- (400 kg/cm? for M40 concrete)
8.
FOR AN AXLE
Slab thickness,
cm
Diameter, mm
20
25
30
35
25
25
32
32
LOAD OF
10.2 T
500
500
500
500
250
300
300
300
IRC:58-2002
Note : The values given are for general guidance. The actual values should be
calculated for the axle load considered in the design.
in which
area of steel in cm-, required per m length of joint
b
28
IRC:58-2002
bfW
2SA
B' xP
in which
IRC:58-2002
L
B*
permissible bond stress of concrete (i) for deformed tie bars24.6 kg/cm2, (ii) for plain 'tie bars-17.5 kg/cm2
TABLE
9 :
Slab
Thickness
(cm)
15
20
25
30
Appendix-d.
35
30
OF Two-LANE
RIGID PAVEMENTS
DETAILS OF Trn
Diameter
(d) (mm)
8
10
10
12
12
16
12
16
12
16
33
52
39
56
45
80
37
66
32
57
53
83
62
90
72
128
60
106
51
91
44
51
51
58
58
72
58
72
58
72
48
56
56
64
64
80
64
80
64
80
Note:
design parameters :
S = 1250 kg/cm2 for plain bars, 2000 kg/cm2 for deformed bars; bond
stress for plain bars 17.5 kg/cm2, for deformed bars 24.6 kg/cm2
':::::::z;:
IRC:58-2002
formula:
A=
in
whic
h
LfW
2S
area of
steel in
cm2
A
L
.~"i:::II
"
-----------,.....
..,
e
n
c0
distance in m between
free transverse joints
(for
longitudinal steel) or free
longitudinal joints {for
transverse steel),
'--~-1----1------1--"ff.
c
o
~ -a~,~ ~
.
.
0
1----1--1 ~
Q)
base
weight of
,....
...,
:ri
II
II
II
II
U
Q)
-t t T
slab in kg/m2
~
Cf) Cf) (!)
S
allowable working
stress in steel in kg/cm
c
as 50 to 60 per cent of the minimum yield stress
Q)
of steel).
E
-f
Oi
c
and
e
o
--1-
(usual
ly
taken
N
0
.
!
.
.-
Q)
ro
0..
"O
0i
.S en Q)
)
en
.... . en
Cf)
'----+---ttl!-/.-i<---1------r
~Q?r-,-M
(usually taken
as 1.5), W
o
0
I
I"
f
coefficient of friction
between pavement and sub-base/
.
.
O
.
.
.c
-.-#,~--J{--
-~~~-
"'
~
~
.
-----l--1
0
N
L{)
L{)
32
33
I
IRC:58-2002
:g c
-o
c
C
I
)
--
l
O
~
i
n
,_
'E !
: !:
!:
'E
~
~
~
~
~
(
"
)
--------.-----------
;
:
.:.
c
~
:
c
c
~
0
t.D
II
tQ
.11
t t
1l
o a
u-> r")
.,..- .,-
II
t t
~ ~o
-V.
..
~V.
~v.
I'
I
,..-....
.
8
,..-....
U)
I
I
tD
(].)
(
]
i1.---1---+---
E(
].)
0
..
.
i
i
.
~
fl
Ci5
,
c
0
N
(
]
.
)
E
c
(
]
.
)
~
--- ----
.g
co
.
_
I
J
"
6
>
(
;
)
"
8
c
(].
)
en
Q)
"'-~--1--1---l~ 32
(
]
.
-o/;
U
)
(].
)
U
)
U
)
co
U)
(I'.)
.J
co
-0
c
o
0
.
.
.
'
6
>
i
i
c
U
)
(
]
.
)
U
)
U
)
.,,:(/
~
~
--
0
C')
L
(
)N
.O
L()
L()
0
N
:
;
~
,----- -- ---1---1---;L
(
)C
'
)
0
C
'
)
L()
0
N
N
34
:!
L ( )
.,. .. .
L()
--
.,....
35
~
.
0
IRC:58-2002
:
B
0
I
R
" O
~
i:::
c:
~---~~--.---.---,-y---,----,-,~.
()
0
~
".
."
:I""
:
i"
.....-..
.....-..
(/)
(
/
)
a0
c
:0
c :
...
"'
. .-
II
"O
I
I
(ti
10
a0
o... o
a
. o..- UJ
a
r- ("')
i j'. + -+ ~
Cl')
-- - -
"
O
(
t
i
....J
0
0
<'>
Q)
....J
Q)
.....-..
~
D
J
Q)
co
c:
E
~
Oi
U5
....
Q)
ro
0..
"O
o,
n::
.!:
(/) Q) (/) (/)
c:
Q
)
-----.
E'
(
/
(/)
(/)
c:
(U
Oi
(0
c
:
Q
)
c
:.;
.
.
S
-~
N
'
<
'
<
t
'
N
(
t
>
U
05
.
-"
U
5
.
gj
~
~
o,
n::
c:
(/)
(l)
..~....
(/) (/)
(/)
..'(/)
.-........
Q)
-<
--<
--~
(X)
(0
-e--
------
---------~
36
37
IRC:582002
:
--..----,
--{0
~-1--11~J~liH----l--I,_
--
~
-1--- ---1-
IRC:
58200
2
:c8
<
X
)
1---1---l--
(
'
)
(
0
(
'
)
--1--+-M~,--l---l---l-
~
~
e
n
II
"'O
(1J
0
_l,.._i....-'-'>--_I
~
c
--
"
'
"
)
'
"
c
.o
.
N
(
'
)
I
I
"
'(
0
(
<
)
1
J
0
.
.
J
Q
)
.
.
Q
)
Q
)
T
u
c
a
)N
enQ
)
c
.
:
.(
.
.
~-
c
Q
)
E
Q
ro
Ci5
>
(
1
J
>
0
.
.
~0
O
'
.
'
.
'
.
~
1--l--l--l--.1--l.
.
s
--1--+---+----jf---l---l--l----l--1--l--- ~
0
~
e
n
W
~
~
0
~
~
0
~
~
0
-~
Q
)
ne
enQ
)
'
-
U
5
3
9
38
IRC:58-2002
IRC:58
-2002
":";;"::
c
~
..0....
0
C\I
II
" O
c 0u
_J
Q)
--,--,--,----,.-,--~---~~-----~~
0
ME
ME E:t----1'--!-l---l,.;ipjEi~c---f--J---l.
~
.?;l
._
'-~I
~
~
"O
~~-a, -a,~x
..:::.::: ..:::.::: ..::ir:::..:::.:::
....
en
- ---00888--~ :ri ~ ~ g
,
rn
---
Q)
C. i5.,
c Q) E (!)
II
er:
.
en
(!)
(I)
co
c,
"O
"6)
en
(!)
'-
II
11
U - 11
Jl+----
e
r
:
(
!
)
(
I
)
.
.
.
.c
(
!
)
en
en
~
(
!
)
--
I--J---l-
1---r--+-1---1-
(
)!
c,
rn
.
s
0
-.
---
"6)
U
5
c>
o
-------.ro
so
1
1
1
~
41
40
IRC:582002
~......
::::
a
~
"'
"i : t
:: :
ME
<')
-
..
<
:
C
"
,_
.c
:
:g
IRC:582002
I I I
"'
.
~
I
,--.
<:).)
(JJ
E
u
0)
0
)0)
0)0
')
cc
.::.c..:::.
:::..:::.:::..:
::.:::
c:
"'
~
II
0
0
II II II
IJ
-e-
"'
coco
io
~~C'0
. ::.::: cc
cc
.::ii!
"N""
.x:
tf
II
- 0
c0o
_J
+
+
(J I
/J /j
""
Q)
,
-
/ W1
Ol
0;
E
~
(
J
c:
~II
//;v;
c:
Q)
E
Q)
.
.
c
.
Q
ro
r;
c
o
I
N
0.
..
Q:
c:
(JJ
Q)
1
-
(JJ (JJ
..'.-...
c>o
-0
"6>
c:
(JJ
0N
(1)
(
J
J
J
)
Q)
E
Q)
er:
/
;
OJ
Q)
0...
"' U5
~
N
er:
.....c
(
J
J
I
/
I
/
_
/
;
/
I/
I
I
(j)
vv
.: Vj
~
ID
./
o
(j)
ID
..,.
o~
0
N
N
0
-.:i
42
43
I
R
C
:
5
8
2
0
0
2
~_;_~-,-~~~.-~~-,~~-r~~~T
"
c.
(
L
~
E
.
.
.c
(
L
l
E
'
(
L
l
c>
I
R
:0
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.V
cJ
.
8
0
N
_
J
(
L
l
~
E(
L
l
"
O
c
cu
t:
..
o
,"
Ci:'.
.
VJ (Ll VJ VJ
(
L
l
E
(
C
l
)
!
)
c
u
C
l
.
'
O
m
a
'
.
c
V
J
(
!
)
V
J
V
J
.
.
~
.
.
.
.
C
l
)
'(O
0
-e
Cl
\.{)
44
45
IRC:S
S-2002
~
'1 : j
... .. .
:;::
~
~I
.C:1
'i:1
,---.
_
c
I
I
I
~
:;
:
a
~
"
"
.'i
:
IRC:SS
-2002
::
:~
0
r
C
X
)
"
O
_
J
0
I
r
o
(
!
(
!
)
E
(
!
)
"O
(
!
)
tro
:.
"
O
.c
c
r
o
(
!
)
(
!
)
>
(
!
)
0
.
E
(
l
)
r
o
i
i,
0
.
.
"
O
(/)
.C
f
)
c.
_
.
c
(!)
(/)
(/)
!)
0
i
e
r
:
.
!
;
(
/
)
(
!
)
(
/
)
(
/
)
(
.
.
.
.
.
C
f
)
U
)
U
)
U)
U)
U
)
C
0
-e--
C
0
C
0
46
47
I
I
R
.
"
:.
:
"
"
.c
.c
.
..
"
'
~
~
~
c:
0
N
C
'
t
"
(
O
.....
Q)
.......
(/)
0
.
.
Q
)
~Q)
"
(
1
J
!
.:
.
.c
:Q
)
E
Q
)
>
(
1
J
.s
U) Q) U) U)
1
J
0
.
c
o
"O
C
'
t
"
(
O
1
J
0
.
.
Q
)
~
E
!
:
Q
)
E
Q
)
(
1
0
.
}
2
O
l
~
.
U
)
U
5
>
48
49
......
c
Q.)
E
Q.)
IRC:582002
'"O
+ -'
>CLC1J
---,_
'" 1 ; j
.;;;:.. . .
c0
'" O
r n
oc
.s
~
~
(/) Q.)
(/) (/)
Q )
I
.~
~
....+-' I
I
I
I
I
t- 1 --1l-
I
I
I
(/)
i :::
~
s,
VJ
.
.
I
...... 1_
.. I
I
1
I
1
I
L
I
I
1 1
I
I
\
I
I
..\.
I
'
'
.
.
.
.
lil
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
"
_
J
Q
.
)
I
I
I
~
EQ
.
)
'
"
cO
c
o
..
.I
s s
+~
I
I
.
.,
N
N
IRC:5 M~MM~M
8- -.--:
2002 ---rr-r~-~
:E
c :
N
N
"
'
~~~Q~
Il~
en
Q.)
.)r:;
s....:..
.a
(ti
Ci)
(
"
)
---
(")
-----
M-
<I"
0>0>0>0>0)
...::.:::
..:-::: x
.:.c:: ~
..........
(/)
IO
f-----EEEEE
Il
(X)
f-----1~--+~--+~-L~-l-~.....L~-1-~J_~J
~
J_
~
I
I
...
51
5
0
ii
. It
.-
tfiHii
f
t
... IRC:582002
IRC:58
-2002
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
""
(0
'<t
M
ILLUSTRATIVE
EXAMPLE OF
SLAB
THICKNESS
DESIGN
Appendix
-2
eo
Eo
A
cement
concrete
pavement is to be designed
for a two lane two-way
National
Highway
in
Karnataka State. The total
two-way traffic is 3000
commercial vehicles per day
at the end of the construction
period. The design parameters
are:
c
~o
'<t
: .c
+-'
.0 (IJ U5
of
concr
ete
(
!
)
10 x
10-6/C
=
= 8 kg/cm2
Tyre
press
ure
0.075
Rate
of
traffic
increa
se
N
Spa
cin
g
of
con
trac
tion
join
ts
Width of slab
c,.o..
=
=
4.5 m
3.5 m
0
N
II)
II)
II)
0
(')
N
"I"
II)
(')
""
53
52
IRC58
I
R
C
:
5
8
2
0
0
2
T
a
class, tons
axle loads
19-21
0.6
34-38
17-19
1.5
30-34
15-17
4.8
26-30
13-15
10.8
22-26
Axle
class, tons
- 2002
Single Axles
Tandem Axles
Per
cen
tag
e
of
Load in tonnes
Expec
ted
Load
in
tonne
s
repetit
ions
E
xp
ec
te
d
re
pe
tit
io
ns
axle loads
0.3
11-13
9-11
Less than 9
22.0
23.3
30.0
18-22
14-18
Less than 14
0.3
0.6
1.8
7.0
Total
93.0
Total
1.5
0.5
2.0
71127
177820
569023
1280303
2608024
27622135
3556397
2
01
81
16
41
12
Less 0than
10
36
32
28
24
20
16
Less than 16
, oa
Present Traffic = 3000 cvpd,
Design life = 20 yrs, r =
0.075
Cumulative repetition in 20
yrs. = 3000 x 3651 \ (l.075)20
-1]
0.075
(AL),
Axle load
AL
Fatigue
Stress,
Stress .
Fatigue
Expected
x 1.2
kg/cm2
ratio
repetition,
life, N
life
t
fr
n
o
consumed
m
c
h
ar
ts
(
(2)
(3)
(4)
1
(5)
(6)
Ratio
)
(5)/(6)
Si
n
gl
e
ax
le
20
25.19
24.0
0.56
vehicles
Front
axles
of the
comm
ercial
vehicl
es
carry
71127
lxl03
much
lower
94.
0.76
18
21.6
16
19.2
35564
35564
71128
213384
177820
59273
237093
22.98
20.73
0.51
0.46
177820
569023
4.85xl05
14.33xl06
54
0.37
0.04
18.45
Infinite
14
16.8
Tande
m
36 axle
43.2
0.41
0.00
128030
x 20.07
0.45
32
18.40
0.40
38.4
35560
Infinity
Cumulative fatigue life consumed
0.0
0
1.17
06
55
'
!
f
!
=
r
IRC:58-2002
Trial thickness = 33 cm
Stress
Stress,
AL
Axle
load Fatigue
Fatigue
Expected
(AL),
repetition
ratio
kg/cm
xlife,
1.2N
life 2
tonnes
consumed
n
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
(6)
(5)
71127
20
2.16xl0
24.0 5
0.33
24.10
0.53
IRC:58-2002
18
177820
21.98
21.6
0.14
l.29xl06
0.49
1
6
1
9
35560
62.8
0.44
19.98
.2
569023 Infinity
0.00
..
u
l06
14
128030
16.8
Infinity
[i-(a.J2
Com
3hP2
12J1.2]
er
Stres
s :
The 98 percentile axle load is 16
tonnes. The wheel load
therefore, is 8 tonnes.
'
0.39
17.64
0.00
Infinity
Tandem Axle
36
19.38
43.2
0.43
3
5
5
6
0
I
0.00
Cumulative
fatigue life
consumed
Radius of
relative stiffness,
l = 4
E
h
3
1-,-----
ST"'"
c~.:
3xl05 kg/cm-
33 cm
0.15
8 kg/cm-
= 17.3
3
x
l
0
kg/cm2
L
450 cm
x
3
3
350 cm
1
103.5 (see below under
comer stress)
Lil
C
2)k
12 (l-
:. 1
4.4;
0.55from Fig. 2.
1
2
(
1
0
.
1
5
2
)
k
103.5 cm
a
radius of area of
contact of wheel.
Considering a
single axle dual
wheel
'
s .
qxn
7t
a0.8521x-+-
0.5227 x q)
0.5]0.5
56
57
IRC:5
8-2002
IRC:582002
W
h
e
r
e
DESIGN
Load
Cle distance
between two tyres
== 31 cm
OF DOWEL BARS
Appen
dix-3
Design Parameters
s
q
==
tyre
pressure
8000
31 (~
x !..)
J.sLo.8521
0.5
x~
+-;
0_5227
s
98
to
n
n
e.
T
h
e
w
h
ee
l
lo
a
d,
th
er
ef
or
e,
is
80
00
g
(dual
whe
el
lo
a
d)
Percentage of load
ooof
transfer
[
2
7
l
F2YSlab thickness, h
Joint width, z
.
2
3
+
4
3
1
.
6
0
)
'
5
2
6
.
5
1
c
m
3
x
8
40
33 cm
2
.
c
m
332
:.
Come
r
Stress
~
)
3 x 8000
0.2961
332
103.5
Radius of
relative stiffness,
l= 103.53 cm
Permissible bearing stress in
concrete is
ll -
calculated as under:
F _
(10.16-b)fck
b
9
.
5
2
5
1
5
.
5
2
k
g
/
c
m
fck
=
characteri
stic
compressi
ve
strength
of
concrete
cube
400
kg/cm-
for
M-40
grade
.
h
th flexural
strength of
the
The comer stress is less t an
e
h.. kn
of 33 cm
.45 kg/cm' and
conc
.
rete,
.,
i
.
e
as
su
m
ed
is
sa
fe.
the pavement t ic
ess
curing concrete
b
= diameter of the
dowel bar= 3.2 cm
(assumed)
F
=
(
1
0
.16-3.2)
x
b
400
9.525
292 kg/cm-
Assu
med
spaci
ng
betw
een
the
dowe
l bars
First dowel bar is placed at a distance
32 cm
15 cm
from the
pavemen
t edge
59
58
IRC
:58200
2
IRC:58-2002
Bearing stress in
dowel bar
(P1 x k) x (2+j)z)/
(4j33EI)
e
m
149
2x
41
50
0
{2
+
(0.
23
8x
2)}
4x(0.238)3
x2.0xl06x5.1
47
276
kg/cm
which
is less
than
2
9
2
k
g
/
c
r
r
i
-
(l+ 103.53-32+103.53-64+103.53-96)P
103.53
103.53
103.53 t
2.145 Pt
Load carried by = (8000 x 0.4) I 2.145
= 1492 kg
the outer
dowel bar, Pt
=
Check for
Bearing Stress
Moment of Inertia of Dowel= .nb4/64
= .n x (3 .2)4/64
= 5.147 cm+
Relative stiffness of dowel bar embedded in concrete =
/3
Vkb/ 4 EI
ly;
41500x3.2
[ 4x2.0x106 x5.147J
=
0.
2
3
8
60
61
I!
IRC:
SS2002
DESIGN
OF TIE
BARS
IRC:58"2002
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
4
Design Parameters
Slab
Thickness
33 cm
Lane width, b
3.5 m
Coefficient of
friction,
f
1.5
xn
i'
,...,.
--
4
=
.nd
3.77 cm
1.13
sq.
cm.
Peri
mete
r of
tie
bar,
P
Density of
concrete, kg/m3
Allowable
tensile
stress
bars, in plain
Spacing of tie
bars
~-
t;:
f;.
'
1
0
0
Allowable. tensile
stress in deformed
bars,
kg/cm2 (As per
IRC:2 l-2000)
2000
1
.
1
3
/
3
.
3
2
6
Allowable bond
stress for plain tie
17.5
bars,
3
3
.
9
7
c
m
Provide at a spacing of 34
cm c/c
kg/cm2
Allowable bond
stress for deformed
24.6
Le
ng
th
of
tie
ba
r,
L
2xS
xA
BxP
f
btw
3.5xl .
5x0.33x2400
1250
17.5x3.77
2
x
1
2
5
0
x
1.
1
3
I
=
4
2.
8
2
c
m
Increase length by 10
cm for loss of bond
due to painting and
another 5
cm for
tolerance
in
placement. Therefore,
the length is
42.82 + 10 + 5
cm, Say 58 cm
57.82
2.
Spacing and length of the
deformed tie bar
Area of steel bar per
metre width of joint
to resist the frictional
force at slab bottom
=
3.326 cm2/m
62
63
~.
r.
~:
IRC:58-2002
IRC:58-2002
btw
As
2.079 cm2/m
Spacing of tie bars
A/A s
lOOxl.13/2.079
= 54.35 cm
Provide at a spacing of 54 cm c/c
2 x 2000 x 1.13
24.6 x 3.77
48.74 cm
Increase length by I 0 cm for loss of bond due to painting arid
another 5 cm for tolerance in placement. Therefore, the length
IS
0.7 x .jf";;
Where fer
fek =
48.74 + 10 + 5
Appendix-S
0.36 x fek0.7
or crushed aggregates
For M40 concrete, fer values from the above three equations are
obtained as 44.27(IS:456), 37.26 (gravel) and 47.61 kg/cm
(crushed rock) respectively. Hence, a flexural strength of 45 kg/
cm- is recommended for M40 concrete. The relation between
flexural strength and compressible strength depends upon the
nature of aggregates, type of cement, additives and other
factors. Flexural strength determined from flexure tests,
therefore, should form the criterion for evaluating the strength
of pavement concrete.
MODULUS OF ELASTICITY
Pavement concrete is subjected to dynamic loading and the
ratio of static and dynamic moduli on the same concrete is
found as 0.8. The modulus value increases both with age and
strength but the variation is small.
64
IRC:58-2002
65
IRC:582002
JJ;
Appendix6
WESTERGAARD
EQUATION
b
10
Where,
6
6
on
pavement thickness, cm
E =
=
=
=
b
t
f
f
J[_
{
67
1
F
-ft
'"It
er
[(0.852.1 Pd/q.n)+ (S/.n) (P d/0.5227 q)Yi]Yi
for single axle dual wheels
IRC:58-2002
Pd