Combined Feasiblity Report - Two Laning From Nagaur To Tarnau in The State of Rajasthan PDF

Consultancy Services for Preparation of Feasibility Report for Two-
laning of Km. 0+000 to Km. 35+000 of SH-19 section comprising the

Nagaur to Tarnau (Highway-III) (EWC-N) in the State of Rajasthan
FINAL FEASIBILITY REPORT
OCTOBER- 2015
YONGMA Engineering Co, Ltd.

In Consortium with
STERLING Indo Tech Consultants (P) Ltd.
Submitted to:
Submitted by:
Additional Chief Engineer YONGMA Engineering Company Ltd. in Consortium
Public Private Partnership (PPP), with STERLING Indo Tech Consultants Pvt. Ltd.
Public Works Department (PWD), 601, Sunny Mart, New Aatish Market, Jaipur 302020, India
1-Jacob Road, Jaipur-302004, T +91-141-5112700, 2390009, F +91-141-5112701
Rajasthan, India pwdrajdpr@gmail.com, ho@sterlingindotech.com,
anilverma@ymeng.in
Consultancy Services for Preparation of Feasibility Report for Two-laning
Public Works Department of Km. 0+000 to Km. 35+000 of SH-19 section comprising the Nagaur to
Government of Rajasthan Tarnau (Highway-III) (EWC-N) in the State of Rajasthan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
0.1 BACKGROUND
The work for Consultancy Services for Preparation of Feasibility Report for Two-laning of Km.
0.000 to Km. 35.000 of SH-19 comprising the section from Nagaur to Tarnau (the “Highway-
III”) in the State of Rajasthan has been awarded to YONGMA Engineering Company Ltd in
consortium with M/s. STERLING Indo Tech Consultants P Ltd, by Public Works Department,
Government of Rajasthan vide letter no.F-7(25)/PPP/2014-15/Package-11/D-21, dated on 21-
08-2014. The commencement date of the project is 10th September 2014.
0.2 INVESTIGATIONS & EVALUATIONS
Feasibility Study was carried out by YONGMA Engineering Company Ltd in consortium with
M/s. STERLING Indo Tech Consultants P Ltd and the report evaluates Financial Viability in
terms of Financial Internal Rate of Return (IRR) of the homogeneous road sections for optimum
upgrading. The above evaluation has been based on various surveys and investigations carried
out during the course of the study and these include traffic, topography, pavement condition,
inventory and condition of road/structures and material investigations. Special attention has been
given to maximize the use of existing pavement and available land and use of local resources.
Beside, due care is also taken to ensure use of modern construction technology to achieve the
desired quality and performance requirements and attain the intended level of service.
0.3 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTIONS
0.3.1 General
The Project Road starts from Nagaur City (Vijay Vallabh Chowk) at Km. 0+000 and ends at
Tarnau Town on T-Junction of Khatu Road at Km 39+676. The Nagaur-Tarnau Section of the
Project Road is SH-19. The project road traverses through Nagaur district in the State of
Rajasthan. The Present Project Road length is 39.676 Km instead of 35.000 km as per agreement.
Project Road passes through Nagaur City, Rol, Phardod, Tarnau villages and built up areas. A
summary of the project corridor consist the following configuration as given in Table 0.1
Table 0.1: Project Length
Sl.
Description Length (Km)
No.
Nagaur to Tarnau (SH-19)
1 7.0m wide carriageway with 1.0m to 1.5m Earthen shoulder 39.676(100%)
Total 39.676 (100%)
Final Feasibility Report,October-2015 Executive Summary Page - 1

0.3.2 District and Nodal Towns/Villages on the Project Road
The project road passes through Nagaur district of Rajasthan State. The nodal town/villages on
major part of the project road (SH-19) are Nagaur City, Rol, Pharrod, Tarnau.
0.3.3 Traffic Volume
The summary of the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) for the project stretch is given in
Table 0.2
Table 0.2: Average of Traffic Survey Data in October 2014 & January 2015
Vehicle Category Km 6+500 Km 30+640
Tollable Traffic (Nos)

Car/Jeep/Van 1336 1073
Light Commercial Vehicles 640 480
Buses 233 188
2-Axle 210 143
3-Axle 280 258
HCM/EME/MAV (4 to 6) 120 175
OSV (7+++) 0 0
Total Tollable Traffic (Nos) 2819 2317
Total Tollable Traffic (PCUs) 5005 4348
Non-Tollable Traffic (Nos)
2 Wheeler 1368 809
3Wheeler 27 6
Tractors - With Trailer 143 64
Tractors - Without Trailer 24 12
Bi-Cycle 20 9
Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0
Animal-Drawn 20 7
Hand-Drawn 1 0
Exempted Vehicle - Car 13 9
Exempted Vehicle - Bus 1 2
Exempted Vehicle - LCV 8 4
Exempted Vehicle - Truck 11 10
Total Non-Tollable Traffic (Nos) 1636 932
Total Non-Tollable Traffic (PCUs) 1585 814
Grand Total (Nos) 4455 3249
Grand Total (PCUs) 6590 5162
0.3.4 Proposed Developmental Plan/Construction features are summarised as here under:
a) Widening scheme can be summarised as given in Table 0.3

Table 0.3: Summary of Widening Scheme-SH-19
Sl. Length
Description Remarks
No. (km)
A. Existing Road Width 7.0 (Two Lane)
Widening of 2lane to 4-Lane with

IA 4 Lane Proposed in Built up 1.980 strengthening of Existing 2 lane with
with Both Side Drains
Bituminous mix(DBM+BC)
IIA 4 Lane Proposed in Built up 0.220 Widening of 2lane to 4-Lane with
with Both Side Drains Reconstruction of Existing 2 lane
Widening of 2 lane to 2 Lane with Paved
IIIA 2 Lane With Paved Shoulder 35.038 Shoulder with Strengthening of Existing 2
Proposed
Lane
2 Lane With Paved Shoulder 2.130 Shoulder with Reconstruction of Existing 2
Proposed
Lane
New Construction of Pavement for Toll
IVA Toll Plaza-Rigid Pavement 0.300
Plaza
Total Length 39.668 KM
0.3.5 Bypasses and Realignment
Based on the detailed design bypass and realignments have not been proposed for
existing road length of 39.676 Km (Design Length 39.668 Km) long section extending
between Nagaur-Tarnau except improvement of existing curves for which acquisition of
land required .
Clear land available along the project road is 22-25m in the entire project length. In the
settlement areas of Nagaur, Rol, Phardod, Tarnau the land width available is just
sufficient for further widening of road 2 Lane plus configuration. However there are
some constraints in habitated stretches due to which speed restriction proposed at these
locations.
0.3.6 IRC: 37-2012 Method of Flexible Pavement Design –Widening and for New construction
Pavement composition thicknesses were designed for widening, reconstruction and new
construction sections as per IRC: 37-2012. For strengthening of existing flexible road pavement,
overlay thickness were established as per IRC: 81-1997. At Toll Plaza locations provision of
rigid pavement is given and pavement composition was determined as per IRC: 58-2011.
The flexible pavement thicknesses required for pavement widening and New Pavement of
stretches is given in Table 0.4

The Flexible Pavement Crust Thickness has been designed as per Plate no7 and 8 of
IRC 37-2012 taking CBR-12.5% and MSA-24 for 15 Years Design life for Non
Bituminous Sub Base/ Base Course and MSA-11 for 8 Years Design life for
Bituminous Layers for design purpose.
Table 0.4: Flexible Pavement Thickness for Widening of Existing Lane, New pavement and
Reconstruction Stretches
Design Design CBR of

Viscosity Proposed Minimum Pavement
Existing Chainage Traffic Traffic Sub-
Grade of Thickness (mm)
(MSA) (MSA) grade
Bitumen
From To 8 Years 15 Years (%) BC DBM WMM GSB Total
0+000 39+668 11 24 12.50 VG-30 40 50 250 200 540
It is recommended to design the bituminous layers for 8 years considering 11MSA

and non-bituminous considered 24MSA for a design life of 15 years for the entire
stretch considering one homogeneous section.
0.3.7 IRC: 81-1997 Method of Flexible Overlay – For Strengthening of Existing Pavement
The Bituminous macadam overlay Thickness required for 11 MSA and Max Characteristic
Deflection (Dc) of 1.34 mm, Based on Fig.9 (Overlay thickness design curves ) worked out to be 104 mm.
Thickness Required for DBM/ BC = 104 x 0.70 =72.8 mm say 73 mm
Therefore proposed composition for overlay taken as given hereunder in Table 0.5
Table 0.5 Overlay Thickness
Design Characteristic
Description Traffic Deflection BC DBM
Dc(mm)
Stretches proposed for

11 1.34 40mm 50 mm
Strengthening only
For Details of BBD measurements and correction for Temperature and seasonal
corrections see Annexure 3.6.
0.3.8 IRC: 58-2011 Method of Rigid Pavement Design –:
a) Pavement composition thickness for rigid pavements is given in Table 0.6.
Table 0.6: Rigid Pavement Composition
Material Type Thickness (mm)
Pavement Quality Concrete (M-40) 300
Dry Lean Concrete (M-10) 150
Granular Sub-base 150

Subgrade 500
0.3.9 Junction Improvement
SH-19
There are 6 nos. T Junctions, 05 nos. Y Junctions and 8 Cross Junction observed during the site
visit for inventory details. Most of the minor junctions lead to the nearby villages while major
junctions leading to important cities of Rajasthan. Based on reconnaissance survey the details of
major intersections are tabulated here under in Table No 0.7-
Table: 0.7- Intersection
Width
Location Chainage Way to Type Major/ Category of
S. No.
(km) Design (Side) Junction Minor Cross
LHS RHS Road
Start at NH-65 NH-89
1 0+000 0+000 X Major 7.00
Junction (Salasar) (Ajmer)
2 2+050 2+085 LHS Y Minor Salwa 3.75
3 4+480 4+460 BHS X Minor Phagali Bagnada 3.75
4 5+970 5+950 LHS Y Minor Bansara 3.75
5 6+590 6+575 BHS X Minor Bansara Athiyasan 3.75
Hans Mata
6 9+678 9+658 LHS T Minor Mahashakti 3.75
Mandir
7 10+600 10+585 BHS X Minor Sadawa Inada 3.75
8 13+872 13+855 BHS X Minor Gangwana Kherbad 3.75
9 17+403 17+400 LHS Y Major Rol 7.00
Mundwa
10 18+690 18+655 BHS X Major Rol 7.00
Nara Thana
11 19+235 19+200 LHS Y Minor Rol 3.75
DidiyaKalan
12 19+646 19+610 RHS Y Minor 7.00
Julala
Chatwa
13 25+270 25+260 BHS X Minor Bugreda 3.75
Khurd
14 26+155 26+142 BHS X Minor Kaniya Tangala 3.75
15 31+755 31+750 RHS T Minor Mata Sukh 3.75
16 38+350 38+345 RHS T Major Sanju/Rohina 7.00
17 38+650 38+645 LHS T Minor Mehbas 3.75
18 39+108 39+100 LHS T Minor Dharna 3.75
19 39+675 39+668 RHS T Major Khatu 7.00

0.3.10 Proposal of Bridges, Culverts and other Structures
There is no major and minor bridge on the project road. All the structures are proposed to meet
the requirement of configuration of 2-Lane with paved shoulder width as per the provision given
in IRC: SP: 73-2015
a) Major & Minor Bridges
There is no any major/ minor bridge along the Project Highway.
The development proposal for all the existing bridges is tabulated in Table 0.8.
Table 0.8: Summary of Development of Existing Bridges
Width of
Location Type of Length Number Length of Average vertical
carriageway between
(Chainage) Structure (m)* of Spans Span (m) clearance* (m)
kerbs (m)
-NIL-
b) Culverts
There are total 23 existing culverts in the proposed road corridor. A summary of the development
proposal is given in Table 0.9
Table 0.9: Summary of Development of Culverts
Existing Proposed
Type of Culvert
Slab Retained Reconstruction Widening
Slab 21 19 1 1
Pipe 1 -- 1 -
Box 1 - 1 -
Sub -Total 23 19 3 1
TOTAL 23 23
c) ROB at Railway line crossing
The project road does not crossing the railway tracks at any level crossing.
Table 0.10: List of Railway crossing and its Development Proposal

Track Detail
S.No. Location Gauge Type of LC No. Proposal
Crossing
-Nil-
0.3.11 Proposal for Underpass/Flyover
No underpass or flyover is proposed along the project road.
0.3.12 Truck Lay byes
As discussed the Truck lay byes are not to be provided, therefore, has not been proposed.
0.3.13 Bus Shelters
Bus shelters are tentatively proposed on both sides of all built-up locations as per the
recommendations of IRC: 80-1981 and circular no 732 dated 29.07.2015 guideline for
the project formulation for development of state Highways under PPP. However, the
exact locations to be decided on ground in consultation with Independent
Engineers/Client.
Table 0.11: List of Bus Shelters
S.No Design Chainage Side(LHS/RHS)

1 0+200 LHS
2 0+250 RHS
3 13+900 LHS
4 14+000 RHS
5 18+600 LHS
6 18+700 RHS
7 32+400 RHS
8 32+450 LHS
9 38+600 LHS
10 38+700 RHS
1.3.11 Toll Plaza
Location of toll plazas has been proposed based on the traffic dispersal pattern at the respective
homogenous sections, road geometry and vertical profile of the road and the surrounding area.
The location and details of the toll plaza is given in Table 0.12.
Table 0.12: Details Toll Plaza
Toll Plaza Toll Plaza

Tolling Design Bypass > Structure
Location as Location as
Homogenous From km to km Length 5 Cr., if >5 Cr. , if
Per Existing Per Design
Section # (Km) any any
Chainage Chainage
16+005 16+000
THS 1 0+000 to 39+668 39.668 Nil Nil
(SH-19) (SH-19)

Total Design Length (Km) 39.668
0.3.14 The project cost on above items has been worked out based on development proposal of the
project corridor. Total Cost of the Project as assessed at this stage is given in Table 0.13
Table 0.13: Abstract Cost Estimate
AMOUNT
AMOUNT
(Cr.)-If
ITEM OF DESCRIPTION (Cr.) if under
S. NO Under
VGF
Annuity
1 SITE CLEARANCE 0.74 0.74
2 EARTHWORKS 2.90 2.90
3 SUB-BASE COURSE & BASE COURSE 14.11 14.11
4 BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT WORKS 41.18 41.18
5 STRUCTURES
a) Culverts 1.61 1.61
b) Minor Bridge
6 C.C. PAVEMENT 1.28 1.28
DRAINAGE, PROTECTION WORK & RE

7 3.79 3.79
WALLS & Repair & Rehabilitation of Bridges
8 JUNCTION IMPROVEMENT 3.20 3.20
TRAFFIC SIGNS, MARKINGS & OTHER

9 3.19 3.19
ROAD APPURTENANCES
10 TOLL PLAZA (1 Nos.) 2.25 2.25
ARBORICULTURE ( Bus Shelters) & (Bus

11 0.46 0.46
Bay) & Plantation & Truck Lay Bye
13 CIVIL CONSTRUCTION COST 74.71 74.71
Add 25% (if Project Under VGF) or 15% (If
Project Under Annuity) as per Clause 3.16 of
RFP (Including Provision for Physical and
14 18.68 11.21
Price contingencies, interest during
construction and other Financing cost , pre
Construction expenses, etc. on Item No.13
15 TOTAL PROJECT COST 93.39 85.92
16 PROJECT COST PER KM. 2.35 2.17

0.3.15 Results of Financial Analysis

Based on the project structure traffic study and toll rate analysis, financial feasibility analysis has
been carried out as per the methodology outlined .The minimum Equity IRR (Return on Equity)
considered for the project is 15%. Financial indicators are presented in Table 0.14 below.
Table 0.14 Financial Indicators

Total
Sr. Concession Project Equity
Project VGF Remarks
No. Period IRR IRR
Cost (Cr)
Project is
1 93.39 23 Years 4.00% 13.90% 15.00% Viable on
PPP(VGF)
Project is financially Viable on PPP (VGF).
Project is viable with 4.00% VGF in 23 years Concession Period.
0.3.16 Recommendations
Project road is recommended to be upgraded on PPP (VGF) basis.

Rajasthan
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
The Governor of Rajasthan acting through the Additional Chief Engineer (PPP), Public
Works Department (PWD) and Government of Rajasthan (the “Authority”) is engaged in
the development of state highways and as part of this endeavor, the Authority has decided
to undertake two-laning of following roads under Package No. EWC-N through Public
Private Partnership on Design, Build, Finance Operate and Transfer (DBFOT) basis:
i. Km. 0.000 to Km. 34.000 of MDR-103 comprising of the section from Peelibanga to
Lakhuwali (the “Highway-I”)
ii. Km.0.000 to Km. 30.000 of MDR-89 comprising of the section from Talbada to
Hanumangarh (the “Highway-II”)
iii. Km.0.000 to Km. 35.000 of SH-19 comprising of the section from Nagaur to
Tarnau (the “Highway-III”)
iv. Km. 13.000 to Km. 49.000 of MDR-85 comprising of the section from Roopangarh to
Naraina (the “Highway-IV”)
v. Km. 0.000 to Km. 39.000 of MDR-85 comprising of the section from Gegal to
Roopangarh (the “Highway-V”)
In order to fulfill the above, PWD, Rajasthan has appointed M/s. YONGMA Engineering
Company Limited in consortium with STERLING Indo Tech Consultants P Ltd as
Consultant to carry out the Feasibility Study for determining the technical feasibility and
economic & financial viability of the project.
1.2 COMMENCEMENT
The work for Consultancy Services for Preparation of Feasibility Report for Two-laning
of Km. 0.000 to Km. 35.000 of SH-19 comprising the section from Nagaur to Tarnau
(the “Highway-III”) in the State of Rajasthan has been awarded to YONGMA
Engineering Company Ltd in consortium with M/s. STERLING Indo Tech Consultants
P Ltd, by Public Works Department, Government of Rajasthan vide letter no. F-
7(22)/PPP/2014-15/D-10, Dated 19-8-2014 (the “LOA”) and the agreement signed on
3rd September, 2014. The commencement date of the project is 10th September-2014.
Final Feasibility Report Chapter 1 Page - 1

Rajasthan
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project Road (SH-19) Starts from Nagaur City (Vijay Vallabh Chowk) at Km. 0+000
and ends at Tarnau Town on T-Junction at Km 39+676. The Nagaur-Tarnau Section of
the Project Road is SH-19. The project road traverses through Nagaur district in the State
of Rajasthan. The Design of the project length is 39.668 Km instead of 35.000 km as per
agreement. Project Road passes through Nagaur City, Rol, Phardod, Tarnau villages and
built up areas.
The Index Map depicting the project road as here under in Fig. 1.1
Fig. 1.1 Index Map Showing Project Road

Rajasthan
1.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVE
The main objective of Consultancy services is to establish the technical feasibility and
financial viability of the project. The project consists to rehabilitate and improve the
existing 39.676 km long Nagaur to Tarnau section of SH-19 two lane with granular
shoulders through Public Private Partnership (PPP) on Design, Build, Finance, Operate
and Transfer (DBFOT) basis.
The viability of the project shall be established taking into account the requirements with
regard to rehabilitation, and improvement based on traffic volume, existing crust, existing
structure, land width availability and junctions. This may require widening of existing
structure/construction of new culverts. All due considerations to be taken for road safety
in most economical features to be incorporated
Based on the above designs have been done and according to these designs, drawings and
quantities of each item to be executed have been derived to prepare cost estimates. Based
on these inputs economic/financial analysis has been done.
1.5 SCOPE OF SERVICES
As per the Terms of Reference (TOR) the scope of services for the project includes the
following:
 Traffic studies including traffic surveys and Axle load survey and demand forecasting
for next thirty years; traffic pattern during the peak hours, detailed traffic and axle
load survey, demand forecasting for next 10, 20 and 30 years.
 Inventory and condition surveys for road
 Inventory and condition surveys for bridges, cross-drainage structures and drainage
provisions
 Detailed topographic surveys using Total Stations and GPS
 Pavement investigations
 Sub-grade characteristics and strength: investigation of required sub-grade and sub-
soil characteristics and strength for road and embankment design and sub soil
investigation
 Identification of sources of construction materials
 Study the possible locations of toll plaza. Wayside amenities required on tolled
highway shall also be planned

 Location and layout of truck lay byes Rajasthan

 Location and layout of bus bays and bus shelters
 Safety- Proposal includes the provision of Road Signs, Pavement, Markings, Safety
Barriers, Railings, Delineators, Chevron Markings, Traffic Attenuators, Road
Boundary Stones, Km Stones, 200 m Stones, overhead signs on the Project, etc
 Social impact assessment
 Environment impact assessment
 Preliminary design of road, bridges, structures, etc.
 Preparation of Land Plan Schedules and Utility Relocation Plans
 Preparation of indicative BOQ and rough cost estimates
 Preparation of Schedules A, B, C, D and H of the Concession Agreement.
The team leader along with key personnel visited site. The important aspects of the
Project road have been noted down. This includes general description about the project
road, important structures, junctions, pavement conditions and road safety requirements.
The land use details have been collected and strip plans have been prepared as per the
requirement of TOR.

Rajasthan
CHAPTER - 2
DESIGN STANDARDS
2.1 GENERAL
The formulation of the design standards is required in order to avoid any inconsistency in
design from one section to the other and provide desired level of service and safety. For
this project it is proposed to follow Design Standards given in IRC codes, guidelines and
special publications, and MORTH circulars as applicable to National Highways. Where
the said standards are silent the following standards shall be referenced and the one
considered the best and most relevant adopted:
 American Association of State Highway and Transport Officials (AASHTO)

standards
 British Standards
 Any other National or International Standard as considered suitable
The standards have been framed based on IRC: SP-73-2007
2.2 ITEMS DETAILED FOR DESIGN STANDARDS
The design standards of all the elements of a highway corridor can be grouped into the
following categories as given in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Categorization of elements for design standards
Category Design element

Design service volume standards
Design Capacity
Design capacity standards
Cross-sectional elements ; Sight distance
Geometric Design
Horizontal curves; Vertical curves
Pavement Design CBR, Traffic, Structural Strength
Grade Separators and Cross Drainage Underpasses; Flyover / ROBs
Structures Bridges and Culverts
At grade intersections
Intersections and Interchanges
Grade separated intersections
Acceleration and deceleration lanes
Slope protection Side slopes; Slope protection
Final Feasibility Report, October-2015 Chapter 2 Page - 1

Rajasthan
Category Design element

Drainage System Longitudinal, Cross Drainage
Guard Rails & Safety Barriers
Traffic Signals, Road Signage &Pavement
Safety Measures
Markings
Footpaths and Sidewalks
Highway Landscaping
Toll Plaza Complex
Road Furniture
Truck Lay bys, Truck Parking
Bus Stops and Bus Bays
2.3 CAPACITY STANDARDS
The main reference for the determination of standard capacities for roads in India is the
Indian Road Congress code (IRC: 64-1990). Table 2.2 summarizes the capacity
standards and design service volumes for various categories of roads in flat terrain for
the peak hour traffic in the range of 8-10% of design service level corresponding to a
Level of Service (LOS-B) with the curvature of the road being low (0-50 degrees per
Km).
Table 2.2: Design service volumes in PCUs per day
Design Service Volume in PCUs per day

Nature of Terrain Two lane
Intermediate Two lane with Minimum 1.5
Single lane without granular
lane m Paved Shoulders
Shoulders
Plain 2000 6000 15000 18000
Rolling 1800 5700 11000 13000
Mountainous and Steep 1600 5000 7000 9000
2.4 GEOMETRIC DESIGN STANDARDS
2.4.1 Design Standards
Design Standards for major features have been extracted from IRC: SP: 73-2007
standards conforming to design speeds 100kmph, 80kmph and 65 Kmph as given in
Table 2.3.

Rajasthan
Table 2.3: Geometric Design Standards for the Project Corridor
Sl. Standards For 2-

Description
No. Lane
1. Design speed
Rural Section 100kmph /(80Kmh)*
Built-up Section 80kmph /(65Kmh)*
Mountainous& Steep 60kmph/(40kmh)*
2. Proposed ROW
Open Area-Rural 30m
Bypasses 30m
Built-up Area 15 m *
3. Embankment Height from H.F.L. ( Sub Grade Bottom) 600mm
4. Roadway
i. Lane width 3.5 m
ii. Paved shoulder
Width in Rural Section 1.5 m
Width in Built-up Section 1.5 m
iii. Granular shoulder width in Built up Section 1.0 m
iv. Granular shoulder Rural Section 2.5 m
v. Cross slope in lanes and paved shoulders 2.5%
vi. Cross slope in Cement Concrete Surfacing 2.0%
vii. Cross slope in granular shoulders 3.0%
5. Edge strip kerb shyness

Median side (In Urban / Built-up Area) 0.25m
6. Side walk 1.5m
7. Utility Corridor 2.0 m
8. Sight distance
i. Desirable Minimum for 100kmph/for 60kmph 360m/180m
ii. Safe Stopping Distance for 100kmph/for 60kmph 180m/90m
9. Horizontal curvature

Rajasthan
Sl. Standards For 2-

Description
No. Lane
Requiring no super elevation 2000m

ii. Absolute minimum for 100 kmph 360 m
iii. Absolute minimum for 80 kmph 240 m
iv. Absolute minimum for 65 kmph 150m
v. Absolute minimum for Mountainous Terrain 75m
10. Maximum Super elevation 7%
11. Rate of change of super elevation 1 in 150
12. Vertical Alignment

Minimum distance between PVI 150m
13. Gradient: Ruling and Limiting 3.33% & 5.0%
14. Minimum length of vertical curve 60m (100kmph)

40m (60 kmph)
15. Maximum grade change not requiring vertical curve 0.5%
16. Vertical clearance to road bridge over road 5.5 m
17. Vertical Clearance to road bridge over rail 6.75m
18. Embankment side slope

In normal section 2H: 1V
In pitching proposed sections 1.5H: 1V
In high embankment (>3m) Side Slopes to be
protected by turfing
or stone/cc block
pitching
( )* Absolute Minimum
The Project corridor is proposed to be improved as per the improvement proposals

detailed above. The proposed centerline will generally follow the centerline of the
existing road and the use of existing carriageway shall be done to the maximum extent.
Besides, all geometric improvement shall be proposed considering the availability of
ROW.

Rajasthan
Vertical Profile
The Profile of the Project Corridor would be finalized on the basis of DTM data
collected during the topographic survey. In addition to the standards and guidelines set
in this chapter, there are other considerations to finalize the vertical profiles, which are
presented below:
 Minimum distance between two PVIs (Point of Vertical Intersection) is 150m
 Minimum longitudinal gradient is 0.5%, for longitudinal drainage for Kerbed

Pavements
 Minimum length of a vertical curve is 60m.
 Maximum Longitudinal gradient for vertical profile of all the structures approaches is
2.5 %.
 Minimum K (rate of change of vertical curvature) value as 75 for the summit curve
and 45 for valley curve.
2.4.3 Typical Cross-sections
Typical Cross-sections formulated for possible staged improvement of the project

corridor are:
 Improvement: two lane carriageway with 2.5m granular shoulders on both sides.
 Cross-section shall be finalized in accordance with PWD, Rajasthan officials.
2.4.4 Transition Curves
IRC geometric design standards for rural highways, IRC: 73-1980 suggests that the
length of the transition curve should be the larger of the two values arrived at on the
basis of the following criteria:
i) Rate of change of centrifugal acceleration and
ii) Rate of change of super elevation (not steeper than 1 in 150)
2.5 STANDARDS FOR PAVEMENT DESIGN
2.5.1 Flexible Pavement
Designs for new pavement and overlays shall be dealt in accordance with Indian and
international practice. The Preliminary Designs are carried out on the basis of sub-grade

Rajasthan
4 day soaked CBR. Flexible pavement for new carriageways shall be designed in
accordance with the guidelines of IRC: 37-2012. The structural coefficients of various
layers shall be suitably modified to suit the Indian conditions. The resulting pavement
compositions from both the methods along with suggested future overlays have been
compared based on their performance as reflected in life cycle cost analysis.
The new flexible pavement structure shall comprise of Bituminous Concrete wearing
course on bituminous base course of Dense Bituminous Macadam (DBM). Below the
bituminous layers, a Granular base course with well-graded aggregates in the form of
Wet Mix Macadam (WMM) shall be laid on top of GSB layer. All these layers shall be
constructed to the requirements of MORT&H specifications. The drainage layer, which
is a part of the Granular Sub Base (GSB) layer, shall be provided extending over the full
width of formation to the embankment slope, which will also act as drainage layer both
for surface and capillary water that would affect the structural performance of the
pavement.
New rigid pavement, for the proposed 2-lane plus carriageway, as per requirement, shall
be either being plain-jointed type PQC(Pavement Quality Concrete). Rigid Pavement
shall be designed in accordance with the method prescribed in IRC: 58 -2011,
“Guidelines for the Design of Plain Jointed Rigid Pavements for Highways”, or any
other international standard method / guidelines like the PCA Method of Design of Rigid
Pavements.
The initial design of overlays on the existing carriageway shall be in accordance with
IRC: 81-1997 using BBD deflections. The requirement of future overlays shall be linked
to the pavement condition as reflected by pavement roughness and the composition and
timings shall be based on economic analysis.
Hard shoulder is required to be integrated with that of the carriageway pavement. Thus
requires the thickness of pavement structure to be the same thickness as that for the
traffic lanes since the lower layer of the sub-base for the carriageway is extended to the
full width of formation for the lateral drainage of any water percolating into the
pavement.
2.6 CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
2.6.1 Cross Drainage structures

Rajasthan
Cross Drainage structures basically comprise of Major Bridges, Minor Bridges and
Culverts. The standards / specifications for classifying these are given as:
2.6.2 Major Bridge
Bridges having an overall length more than 60.0 m
2.6.3 Minor Bridge
Bridges having length varying between 6.0m to 60.0m are termed as minor bridges.
2.7 SLOPE PROTECTION
The foregoing slopes require an appreciable width of land. It is therefore felt that the
side slopes of 1V:2H to be provided.
The side slopes shall be protected against erosion as per Clause 4.2.7.9 of IRC:SP: 73-
2007. The embankments less than 3m height shall be turfed and stone pitching shall be
provided for protection of embankment having height more than 3 meters.
2.8 INTERSECTIONS AND INTERCHANGES
At grade intersections adversely influence the quality of highways in terms of speed,

capacity and safety because of interruptions to the flow of traffic. Thus the basic
requirement for the design of intersections is not only to cater for safe movements for the
drivers, but also to provide them full traffic information by way of signs, pavement
markings and traffic signals. Further, simplicity and uniformity should be the guiding
principles for intersection design to ensure the safe passage of maneuvers and reduce
conflict points, either by elimination of certain maneuvers or separated in space,
horizontally or vertically or time. Based upon these principles, at-grade intersections
have been categorized as Minor/Canalized (with or without acceleration and deceleration
lanes) / Staggered / Rotaries / Signalized intersections depending upon the following
parameters.
 Traffic volume and number of lanes on the project road;
 Traffic volume and number of lanes on the cross road;
 Turning traffic volumes;
 Type and category of cross road;
 Site conditions / constraints; and
 Any local importance.

Rajasthan
2.8.1 At Grade Intersection
At-grade intersections shall be designed according to IRC:SP:41-1994 ‘Guidelines for

the Design of At-grade Intersections in Rural and Urban Areas’ and the MORTH Type
Designs for Intersections on National Highways. For the design of elements not covered
in the said publications the AASHTO’s Green Book on Geometric Design shall be
followed.IRC: 92-1985 gives guidelines for the design of interchanges and shall be
followed. However an interchange is a highly developed feature and may require the use
of other international standards such as these given in the AASHTO’s publication ‘A
Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets’.
2.9 DRAINAGE SYSTEM
An effective surface and sub-surface drainage system of pavement structure shall be

designed as stipulated in IRC SP: 42-2014. The drainage system shall be planned and
designed for the drainage of medians, toll plazas, wayside amenities, truck parking areas,
bus-bays and other highway features ensuring that there shall be no pooling of water at
any time on the highway.
Table 2.4: Recommended cross slopes in various elements for proper surface
drainage
Recommended
Element
Slope
Lanes and paved shoulders with Bituminous Concrete Surfacing 2.5%
Lanes and paved shoulders with Cement Concrete Surfacing 2.0%
Cross slope in earthen/granular shoulders 3.0%
2.10 SAFETY MEASURES
Safety measures are the most important aspects to be considered in Highway Projects in
the present scenario. The elements these safety measures would take into consideration
and their specifications are given as follows:
2.10.1 Pedestrian Guard Rails and Safety Barriers

Rajasthan
The Safety Barrier shall conform to MORTH Circulars. Safety barriers shall be located
at sharp horizontal curves, high embankments, bridge approaches as per provisions of
IRC: SP: 73:2007.
2.10.2 Highway Signs
The design and location of route marker signs for National Highways shall be as per
IRC: 2-1968. IRC: 67-2012 is also to be referred.
The design and placement of Highway kilometer stones, their dimensions, size, color and
arrangement of letters shall be in accordance with IRC: 26-1967, IRC: 8-1980 and
Ministry Circulars.
The design, location and materials to be used for road delineators shall be as per IRC:
79-1981.
Standards prescribed by MORTH Fifth Revision shall be followed for overhead signs.
2.10.3 Pavement Markings
Pavement markings shall be as per IRC: 35-2015.These markings shall be applied to

road centre lines, edge line, continuity line, stop lines, give-way lines, diagonal/chevron
markings, zebra crossing and at parking areas by means of an approved self-propelled
machine which has a satisfactory cut-off value capable of applying broken lines
automatically.
2.10.4 Traffic Signals
The traffic signals, their configuration, size, location and other requirements shall be
constructed as per Clause 13 of IRC: 93 - 1985. Construction requirements shall
conform to IS: 7537- 1974, unless otherwise stated in IRC: 93-1985. Posts shall be
painted and protected as per Clause 3.7 of IS: 7537-1974.
2.11 HIGHWAY LANDSCAPING
IRC: SP: 21-2009 “Manual on Landscaping” shall guide the plantation of rows of trees
with staggered pitch on either side of the road. The choice of the trees shall also be made
as per the same code. Local, indigenous species that grow in the project area
microclimate shall be planted. Indicative arrangements for plantation of trees shall be in
accordance with the MORTH Technical Circular No. NHI-41 (34)/69. A spacing of 10-
15m c/c is recommended for spacing of trees parallel to the roads. Setback distance of

Rajasthan
trees needed in different situations shall be as per the IRC: SP: 21-2009 and the IRC: 66-
1976.
Shrubs in medians shall not normally exceed 1-1.5m in height and shall be as per IRC:
SP: 21-2009. To ensure survival from herbivorous animals, shrubs/plants containing
latex are recommended.
Construction of Cement Concrete (CC) (M-20) footpaths for pedestrians shall be as per
MORTH Specifications.
2.12 TOLL PLAZA COMPLEXES
Toll Plaza shall be design as per Standard drawing of State PWD, Rajasthan.
2.13 ROAD FURNITURE
Road furniture such as Traffic signs, Kilometer posts, Hectometer stones, and ROW
pillar etc. on the Project Highway provided as per IRC Codes shall meet requirements of
MORTH Specifications. Where any item is not covered by it, then its specification shall
conform to BIS /AASHTO / ASTM /British Standards in that order of precedence.
2.14 TRUCK LAY BYS
Standard drawing as per MORTH and IRC specification shall be used.
2.15 BUS STOPS AND BUS SHELTERS
The layout, design and location of the bus stops shall be as per IRC: 80-1981. The bus
stop layout shall provide safe entry and exit of buses from the project corridor and safe
movement of passengers. The shelter structure shall be structurally safe and functional so
as to protect the waiting passengers adequately from sun, rain and wind. The covered
structure shall be of steel pipes and with fiberglass roof. The seating and plinth of the
structure shall be of coursed stone masonry
2.16 DESIGN METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN STANDARD FOR STRUCTURES
Alternative structural arrangements with associated costs shall be proposed for all major
bridges, and shall be submitted to client for their review and approval. The structural
arrangement approved by client shall be adopted for preliminary and detailed designs.
The type of structural arrangement shall be finalized based on detailed survey and sub-
soil investigations.
The design of new structures shall be based on the following materials and loading-

Rajasthan
Materials
Concrete Grade
Grade of concrete in various elements shall be as under for moderate conditions of

exposure:
• All PSC members - M40/M35
• All RCC members - M30 for bridges with PSC spans and other
major bridges
- M25 for minor bridges
M20 for culverts
• All PCC members - M25 for bridges with PSC spans and major
bridges.
- M15 for minor bridges and culverts
Reinforcement Steel
- High yield strength deformed bar shall be of grade Fe415
- Mild steel bars shall be of grade Fe240
Exposure Condition
Moderate exposure conditions shall be considered while designing various components

of all the structures.
Concrete Clear Covers:
For all reinforcement - As per Cl. 304.3 of IRC: 21
For prestress cable - As per clause 16 of IRC: 18 duct to outer

most fibre of girder
Bearings
Reinforced elastomeric bearings shall be proposed for short span simply supported
superstructures. Elastomeric bearings shall be designed as per IRC: 83-2015 (Part II) and
shall conform to the MOST’s Specifications for Road & Bridge Works (5th Revision).
RCC solid slab superstructures of culverts and minor bridges shall directly rest on
pier/abutment caps with a tar paper in between.

Rajasthan
Pot fixed/Pot PTFE sliding bearings shall be proposed for long span simply supported
superstructures and continuous superstructures. These bearings shall be designed and
supplied by the approved manufacturers. The loads and forces on the bearings shall be
calculated to enable the manufacturer to design these bearings and these shall conform to
the MOST’s Specifications for Road & Bridge Works (5th Revision).
Expansion Joints
The following types of Expansion Joints shall be adopted:
Filler type expansion joints shall be proposed for minor bridges with solid slab
superstructures having span lengths not exceeding 10 metres. These types of joints shall
conform to the MOST's Specifications for Road & Bridge Works (5th Revision).
Single Strip seal expansion joints shall be proposed for superstructures having
movements up to 80mm. ( 40mm).
Modular strip seal expansion joints shall be proposed for continuous superstructures
where anticipated movements are more than 80mm.
The strip seal and modular strip seal joints shall conform to the MOST's Specifications
for Road and Bridge works (5th Revision).
Miscellaneous
An asphaltic concrete wearing course shall be provided over the deck slab. It shall
consist of a coat of mastic asphalt 6mm thick with a prime coat over the deck before the
wearing course is laid. The insulating layer of 6mm thick mastic asphalt with 75%
limestone dust filler and 25% of 30/40 penetration grade bitumen shall be laid at 375 F.
Two layers of 25mm each of asphaltic concrete shall be laid over the mastic asphalt.
Drainage spouts with gratings at the top shall be provided on the bridges to ensure proper
drainage of surface water.
An approach slab 3.50m long and 300mm thick resting on the bracket taken out from the
dirt wall shall be provided on both sides of the bridge resting on the 150mm thick
leveling course. The gap between the approach slab and dirt wall shall be filled with
bituminous joint filer sealing compound.
Weep holes shall be provided behind abutment and wing wall to avoid building up of
hydrostatic pressure behind them. Weep holes shall be provided 150mm, above the low

Rajasthan
water level or bed level whichever is higher. In case of stone masonry weep holes of
150mm.diameter or 80X150mm. size in 1:20 slope shall be provided.
MORTH Specifications
The specifications for Road and Bridge Works of Ministry of Road Transport &
Highways published by Indian Road Congress shall be used for materials to be used for
construction of bridges.
SUB-SOIL INVESTIGATION
Detailed sub-soil investigations shall be carried out at all proposed bridge locations.
One borehole at abutment location shall be drilled for structures of length between 6m to
60m.Two boreholes i.e. one at abutment location and one at intermediate location
between abutments shall be drilled for each bridge having overall length more than 60
metres.
The sub-soil exploration and testing shall be carried out through the sub-soil consultant
empanelled by the MORTH. Sub-soil investigation shall be done as per IRC 78-2014.

Rajasthan
CHAPTER 3
ENGINEERING SURVEYS AND INVESTIGATIONS
3.1 ROAD INVENTORY AND PAVEMENT CONDITION

An inventory of the Project Road has been carried out with visual observations supplemented with
measurements using tape and topography survey at site. All existing details like terrain, land-use,
surfacing type and width, shoulder surfacing type & width, sub grade, local soil type, curve detail,
intersection details, retaining structures details, location of water bodies, height of embankment or
depth of cut, cross drainage structures, road side facilities, existing utility services, general
drainage condition etc., were recorded. The road inventory has been referenced to the existing
kilometer posts established along the roadside. A detailed road inventory is presented in the
Appendix 3.1
Fig. 3.1: Start of the Project Road Fig. 3.2: End of the Project Road Tarnau
The Project Road (SH-19) Starts from Nagaur City (Vijay Vallabh Chowk) at Km. 0+000 and
ends at Tarnau Town T-Junction at Km 39+676. The Nagaur-Tarnau Section of the Project Road
is SH-19. The project road traverses in Nagaur district in the State of Rajasthan. The Project Road
passes through Nagaur City, Rol, Phardod, Tarnau villages and built up area. The length of the
project road is given in Table 3.1 below
Table 3.1: Length of Project Road in the Influence Districts
Location
S. No Name of District Length Percentage
From (Km) To (Km)
1 Nagaur 0+000 39+676 39.676 100%

Rajasthan
3.1.1 Terrain
Project Road is passing through plain terrain.
3.1.2 Land Use
Generally the horizontal alignment of the Project Road is mostly in rural area flared up with
agricultural land use. In the built-up areas both residential and commercial buildings have
developed abutting the road corridor. A detail of the land use pattern along the project road is
given in Road Inventory. Appendix 3.1
3.1.3 Carriageway and Roadway width

The detailed inventory on existing carriageway reveals that the project road stretch comprises of
mainly two lane single carriageway with 1.5m to 2.5m earthen shoulder configuration. Summary
of lane configuration for the entire stretch is presented below in Table 3.2
Sl. No. Description Length (Km)
1 7.0m wide carriageway with 2.0m to 2.5m Earthen shoulder 39.676 (100%)
Total 39.676 (100%)
3.1.4 Surfacing Type

The entire project road stretch is of Flexible type pavement.
3.1.5 Shoulder
Shoulder width varies from 2.0m to 2.5m along the Project Road. The shoulder is in fair/poor
condition.
3.1.6 Embankment Height
The average height of embankment varies from ground level to about 1.0m to 1.5 m.
3.1.7 Right of Way
Clear land available along the project road is 22-25m in the entire project length. In the settlement
areas of Nagaur, Rol, Phardod, Tarnau the land width available is just sufficient for further
widening of road 2 Lane plus configuration. However there are some constraints in habitated
stretches due to which speed restriction proposed at these locations.
3.1.8 Villages and Towns

The villages and towns through which the project road traverses are listed in Table 3.3

Rajasthan
Population as per
S.No Name of Settlements Existing Chainage
Census-2011
1 Nagaur City 0+000 1+500 1,02,872
2 Rol 18+100 19+600 7,359
3 Phardod 31+600 33+050 5,237
4 Tarnau 38+400 39+400 5,544
3.1.9 Side Drain

Road side drainage is noticed inadequate in habitation sections of the road.
3.1.10 Horizontal Curves
The existing horizontal geometry of the entire section of the project road requires meeting the
Highway standards stipulated by IRC. However the project road consist sharp curves with
deficient geometric at the following locations including settlement stretches as given below:
 Nagaur City (0+000 to 1+500)

 Rol (18+100 to 19+600)
 Pharrod (31+600 to 33+050)
 Tarnau (38+400 to 39+400)
The project road having sufficient ROW and Horizontal Geometry is meeting the highway
standard stipulated IRC.
3.1.11 Road Junction

There are 4 nos. major and 15 nos minor junction exists as per topographical survey. Most of the
minor junctions lead to the nearby villages while major junctions leading to important cities of
Rajasthan. Based on reconnaissance survey the details of major intersections are tabulated in
Table 3.4

Rajasthan
Table 3.4 List of Intersections
Category Width
Location Way to Type Major/ of
S. No.
(km) (Side) Junction Minor Cross
LHS RHS
Road
Start at
1 0+000 X Major NH-65 (Salasar) NH-89 (Ajmer) 7.00
Junction
2 2+050 LHS Y Minor Salwa 3.75
3 4+480 BHS X Minor Phagali Bagnada 3.75
4 5+970 LHS Y Minor Bansara 3.75
5 6+590 BHS X Minor Bansara Athiyasan 3.75
Hans Mata
6 9+678 LHS T Minor Mahashakti 3.75
Mandir
7 10+600 BHS X Minor Sadawa Inada 3.75
8 13+872 BHS X Minor Gangwana Kherbad 3.75
9 17+403 LHS Y Major Rol 7.00
Mundwa Nara
10 18+690 BHS X Major Rol 7.00
Thana
11 19+235 LHS Y Minor Rol 3.75
DidiyaKalan
12 19+646 RHS Y Minor 7.00
Julala
13 25+270 BHS X Minor Bugreda Chatwa Khurd 3.75
14 26+155 BHS X Minor Kaniya Tangala 3.75
15 31+755 RHS T Minor Mata Sukh 3.75
16 38+350 RHS T Major Sanju/Rohina 7.00
17 38+650 LHS T Minor Mehbas 3.75
18 39+108 LHS T Minor Dharna 3.75

Rajasthan
S. No. Location Way to Type Major/ Category Width
(km) (Side) Junction Minor of
19 39+675 RHS T Major Khatu Cross
7.00
Road
3.1.12 Road Signs

Informatory signs exist to guide the drivers along the highway from safety point of view. The
adequacy of road signs has been assessed based on required driver safety and incorporated
accordingly.
3.1.13 Pavement Condition Survey

The pavement is flexible type having earthen/granular shoulders. Pavement condition is fair
except few locations. The pavement is showing signs of distress at some locations, due to
 Lack of pavement drainage

 Inadequate maintenance
The defects noticed are:
 Cracking (alligator, transverse, longitudinal, edge cracks)

 Rutting
 Edge breaking
The shoulders are earthen/granular with fair condition. The road surface is black topped with the
Bituminous Concrete.
Table 3.5 Criteria for Classification of Pavement Sections
Classification Pavement Condition

Good No cracking, rutting less than 10mm.
Fair No cracking or cracking confined to single crack in the wheel track
with rutting between 10mm and 20mm.
Poor Extensive cracking less than 20% or rutting greater than 20mm
Very Poor/Failed Sections with cracking exceeding 20% (Need for Reconstruction)

Rajasthan
3.2 BENKELMAN BEAM DEFLECTION TECHNIQUE
Benkelman Beam Deflection Technique is useful in evaluating the strengthening requirements of

the existing flexible road pavements. The basic principle of deflection method considers the
performance of flexible pavements which is closely related to the elastic deflection/deformation of
pavement under the wheel loads.
The amount of pavement deflection under an applied design wheel load or its rebound deflection
on removal of this load is a measure of the structural stability of the pavement system. Larger
rebound deflection indicates weaker pavement structure indicative of strengthening and/or higher
overlay thickness for the pavement.
Structural strength surveys for existing two lane pavements using Benkelman Beam Deflection
Technique were carried out in accordance with the procedure given in IRC: 81-1997 “Guidelines
for Strengthening of Flexible Road Pavements using Benkelman Beam Deflection Technique”. On
the Project Highway the BBD test has been conducted in 14 stretches, with each stretch of 300 m
length for each set of test.
Table 3.6 Characteristic Deflection along the Project Road
Chainage, Km Characteristic
Test Section
From To Deflection(mm), Dc
1 0+000 0+300 1.33
2 3+000 3+300 1.34
3 6+000 6+300 1.29
4 9+000 9+300 1.04
5 12+000 12+300 1.09
6 15+000 15+300 1.12
7 18+000 18+300 1.07
8 21+000 21+300 0.68
9 24+000 24+300 1.08
10 27+000 27+300 1.04
11 30+000 30+300 1.13
12 33+000 33+300 1.02
13 36+000 36+300 1.05
14 39+000 39+300 1.03

Rajasthan
Details of BBD measurements and correction for Temperature and seasonal corrections enclosed in
Annexure 3.6.
3.3 TRIAL PITS
The investigations were carried out along the existing road using trial pits made as under:
Test Pit – 1.0m x 1.0m at every 3 Km or change of soil strata.
At small pit locations following information were collected:
 Pavement Composition
 Soil samples were collected for their Classification
At Large pit locations following tests were conducted:
 Pavement Composition
 In-situ density test at sub-grade top by Core Cutter method
 Characterisation (grain size and Atterberg limits)
 Laboratory moisture-density characteristic
 Laboratory CBR (4-day soaked condition and swell)
3.3.1 Pavement Composition
For each test pit, the following information is recorded:
 Test pit reference (Identification number, location)

 Pavement composition (material type and thickness)
 Sub-grade type (textural classification) and condition (dry, well)
A broad variation in pavement thickness along the project road was observed. The In the Flexible
Pavement the thickness of bituminous varies from 40 mm to 120 mm. While non-bituminous
depth varies from 100 mm to 330 mm. Pavement composition of the existing road is given in
Table 3.7.
Table 3.7: Pavement Composition of the Existing Road
Test Pit Total Bitumen, Total Non- Total Depth,

S.No Side
Location mm Bitumen, mm mm
1 1+600 LHS 110 180 290

Rajasthan
Test Pit Total Bitumen, Total Non- Total Depth,
S.No Side
Location mm Bitumen, mm mm
2 4+600 RHS 100 150 250
3 7+600 LHS 90 130 220
4 10+100 RHS 60 100 160
5 14+000 LHS 70 120 190
6 16+800 RHS 100 200 300
7 19+800 LHS 100 200 300
8 22+600 RHS 80 170 250
9 26+350 LHS 100 170 270
10 29+300 RHS 110 210 320
11 32+400 LHS 40 295 335
12 35+400 RHS 120 300 420
13 39+000 LHS 120 330 450
3.3.2 Characterization of Sub-grade
The details of all the tests carried out on sub-grade for their Physical, Strength and Stability
Characteristics are given in Table 3.8
Table 3.8: Different Tests carried out on Sub-grade Soil
S.No Test Parameters Method Reference

1 Water Content IS:2720 (Part 2)
2 Grain Size Analysis IS:2720 (Part 4)
3 Atterberg Limits IS:2720 (Part 5)
4 MDD-OMC (Compaction) IS:2720 (Part 8)
5 CBR IS:2720 (Part 16)
6 Free Swell Index IS:2720 (Part 40)
The laboratory test results consist of Gradation, Atterberg limits, compaction characteristic
(maximum dry unit weight and optimum moisture content relationship as per heavy compaction),
CBR (4 days soaked), and free swelling index etc. for the sub-grade soils underneath the existing
pavement. Test report is as per actual result of the test conducted on the samples collected from
the site.

Rajasthan
Project Name: Nagaur - Tarnau, Highway No. 3 (Package No. EWC-N) Summary of Test Results
Modified
Natural Moisture Content
Free Swell Index % (IS :

Sieve Analysis % by Atterberg's Limit
Proctor Test 4 days Sosked CBR (%) IS :
2720 Part 40 - 1977)

Weight (IS: 2720 Part - (IS : 2720, Part - 5 -
IS Classification
Chainage (Km) (IS : 2720 Part - 2720 Part - 16 1987)
4 - 1985) 1985)
8 :1983)
Pit No.
Side
(%)
Average CBR
Plastic Limit
Liquid Limit
Index (PI) %
Dry Density
Sand (4.75-
<0.075 mm
Granular >
Maximum
Plasticity
55 Blows
55 Blows
55 Blows
Silt+Clay
OMC (%)
075) mm
4.75 mm
(gm/cc)
(PL) %
(LL) %
(%)
1 L.H.S. 1.200 SW -SM 4.37 15.38 70.16 14.46 NP NP NP 0.00 2.036 7.5 13.32 13.49 13.56 13.46
2 R.H.S. 4.200 SW -SM 3.98 17.67 71.85 10.48 NP NP NP 0.00 2.044 8.0 14.21 13.98 14.08 14.09
3 L.H.S. 7.200 SW -SM 4.17 7.94 81.77 10.29 NP NP NP 0.00 2.065 8.2 12.84 13.10 13.24 13.06
4 R.H.S. 10.300 GW -SM 5.11 25.99 65.87 8.14 NP NP NP 0.00 2.028 7.8 15.45 15.28 15.69 15.47
5 L.H.S. 13.250 GW -SM 5.12 31.31 59.16 9.53 NP NP NP 0.00 2.058 8.0 14.24 14.34 14.11 14.23
6 R.H.S. 17.000 GW -SM 4.68 31.36 60.94 7.70 NP NP NP 0.00 2.014 7.6 15.21 15.45 15.32 15.33
7 L.H.S. 19.800 GW -SM 5.22 37.56 52.10 10.34 NP NP NP 0.00 2.032 8.4 14.89 15.08 14.76 14.91
8 R.H.S. 22.800 GW -SM 5.10 45.68 44.18 10.14 NP NP NP 0.00 2.052 8.0 15.22 15.04 15.48 15.25
9 L.H.S. 25.600 GW -SM 4.77 21.81 69.46 8.73 NP NP NP 0.00 2.059 7.5 15.74 15.42 15.33 15.50
10 R.H.S. 29.500 GW -SM 5.24 21.57 67.06 11.37 NP NP NP 0.00 2.038 7.8 13.58 13.79 13.38 13.58
11 L.H.S. 32.000 SW -SM 5.28 13.25 75.06 11.69 NP NP NP 0.00 2.046 8.0 13.96 13.62 13.39 13.66
12 R.H.S. 35.000 SW -SM 5.59 14.09 77.94 7.97 NP NP NP 0.00 2.018 7.8 12.89 12.74 12.57 12.73
13 L.H.S. 38.000 SW -SM 4.46 16.67 74.62 8.71 NP NP NP 0.00 2.014 8.0 13.52 13.26 13.71 13.50

Rajasthan
Sand Quarry
Sources of natural sand have been primarily identified for construction works and are given in
Table 3.9
Table 3.9 Lists of Source of Materials
S.No Location District State

1 Roopangarh Ajmer Rajasthan
Aggregates
The aggregates to be used for the project are from Government approved quarries in the project
vicinity. The Quarry List presented below:-
S.No Location District State

1 Gagwana Nagaur Rajasthan
3.4 INVENTORY AND CONDITION SURVEY OF BRIDGES AND CULVERTS
There is no bridge observed during the site visit. There are 1 No. Pipe, 21Nos. Slab & 1 No Box
culvert on the Project Road, the summery and details of culverts are presented in Table 3.10 &
Table 3.11 respectively. And the detailed development proposal of the each culvert has been given
in Chapter-5: Improvement/ Upgrading Proposals.
Table 3.10Summary of Existing Bridges & Culverts
Bridges Culverts
S.No Causeway
Major Minor Pipe Slab Box
1 Nil Nil 1 21 1 Nil
Final Feasibility Report, October- 2015 Chapter 3 Page - 10

Rajasthan
Table: 3.11 Details of Culverts
Proposed Existing Width of

S. No. Type Span(m) Remarks
Chainage Chainage Structure
1 0+905 0+905 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
2 1+115 1+125 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
3 1+220 1+235 Box Culvert 1x1.5 12 m
4 1+465 1+475 Slab Culvert 1x4.3 12 m
5 3+172 3+202 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
6 4+235 4+255 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
7 5+438 5+458 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
8 6+343 6+363 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
9 8+870 8+890 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
10 10+183 10+198 Slab Culvert 1x3 12 m
11 11+308 11+325 Slab Culvert 1x3 12 m
12 13+140 13+156 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
13 14+600 14+616 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
14 15+480 15+495 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
15 17+103 17+105 Slab Culvert 1x3 12 m
16 17+790 17+792 Slab Culvert 1x3 12 m
17 18+870 18+905 Slab Culvert 1x3 12 m
18 20+515 20+535 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
19 21+250 21+262 Pipe Culvert 1x1.2 12 m
20 21+510 21+522 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
21 23+845 23+855 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
22 25+930 25+938 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
23 32+610 32+616 Slab Culvert 1x2 12 m
Final Feasibility Report, October- 2015 Chapter 3 Page - 11

Public Works Department Consultancy Services for Preparation of Feasibility Report for Two-laning of Km. 0+000 to
Km. 35+000 of SH-19 section comprising the Nagaur to Tarnau (Highway-III) (EWC-N) in
Government of Rajasthan
the State of Rajasthan
CHAPTER – 4
TRAFFIC SURVEY & ANALYSIS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The Governor of Rajasthan acting through the Additional Chief Engineer (PPP), Public
Works Department, and Government of Rajasthan (the “Authority”) is engaged in the
development of state highways. The Chapter deals with depiction of Traffic Studies
carried out for the project and the result of analysis. Projected traffic, capacity analysis
and the up gradation of road commensurate with the desired level of service is also
discussed in this report.
4.2 PROJECT BRIEF
The Project Road starts from Nagaur City (Vijay Vallabh Chowk) at Km. 0+000 and ends
at Tarnau Town on Khatu Road at Km 39+676. The Nagaur-Tarnau Section of the
Project Road is SH-19. The project road traverses through Nagaur district in the State of
Rajasthan. The Present Project Road length is 39.676 Km instead of 35.000 km as per
agreement. Project Road passes through Nagaur City, Rol, Pharrod, Tarnau villages and
built up areas
4.3 STUDY OBJECTIVE
For making the proper assessment of traffic volume, base year traffic and its projection,
Consultants, M/s Sterling Indotech Consultant Pvt Ltd YONGMA Engineering Company
Ltd in consortium with M/s. STERLING Indo Tech Consultants P Ltd, have carried out
the necessary traffic surveys and investigations. The base year traffic data is the primary
input for determination of future traffic demand. With a view to estimate the base year
traffic volume in respect of goods and passenger carrying vehicles, the Classified Traffic
Volume Count (CTVC) surveys, Turning Movement Count (TMC) Survey, Pedestrian
Count Survey and Axle Load Survey were conducted. For the purpose of traffic
estimation and projections the year 2014-2015 has been taken as the base year.

4.4 IDENTIFICATION OF HOMOGENOUS SECTIONS (HS)
The project road has been divided into two homogenous sections with respect to variation
in traffic volume based on location of major intersections & major settlements. These two
homogenous sections are given in Table 4.1 below:
Table 4.1: Traffic Homogenous Sections
Homogenous From Length Remarks

Section (Km to Km) (Km)
HS-1 0+000 to 19+000 19.000 Nagaur to Rol
HS-2 19+000 to 39+676 20.676 Rol to Tarnau

Based on the homogenous sections proposed above, traffic survey has been performed at
locations mentioned in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2: Traffic Survey Locations and Durations
Sr. Location
Type of Traffic Survey Duration Landmark/ Station
No (Km)
1 7 Days 16+000 Near Rol Village
Classified Volume Count
2 7 Days 34+500 Near Pharrod Village
1 Intersection Volume Count 12 Hours 19+000 At Rol junction (T)
1 24 Hours 16+000 Near Rol Village
Axle Load and OD Survey
2 24 Hours 34+500 Near Pharrod Village

CVC Location at Km 16+000 near Rol village
CVC Location at Km 34+500 near Pharrod village

4.5 CLASSIFIED TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNT
The Classified Traffic Volume Count has been carried out at 2 locations.
 1st count in October 2014

 2nd count in February 2015
Nagaur@
Km 0+000
Toll Plaza (CVC 1st) IVC @Km
@Km 16+000 19+000 at Rol
CVC 2nd @Km

34+500
Rol(SH-19)
Tarnau@Km
39+676

Fig. 4.1: Traffic Survey Location Map
All 2 locations were on SH-19, the vehicle classification was done as per IRC: SP 19-
2001 and IRC: 9-1972 code requirements and vehicle category modified as per the
revised tolling policy.
The purpose of the survey is to calculate the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) in all the
traffic homogenous sections and to convert the traffic into PCU, for Capacity Analysis
and fixing of concession period. Vehicle classification and PCU factors as adopted
tabulated as hereunder:
Table 4.3: Vehicles Classification System
Motorized Traffic
 2-Wheeler- Scooter, Motor Cycle etc 0.5
 3-Wheeler- Auto Rickshaw, Tempo 1
 Passenger Car – Car, Jeep, Taxi, Van, Utility Vehicle 1
 Bus (Mini Bus) 1.5
 Bus (Standard Bus) 3
 Light Commercial Vehicle (Freight) 1.5
 Truck
 MCV (2-axle Rigid Chassis) 3
 HCV (3-axle Rigid Chassis) 3
 HCV (4-6 Axle trucks) 4.5
 HCV (>6 Axle trucks) 4.5
 Earth Moving Equipments (EME) & Heavy 4.5
Construction Machinery (HCM)
 Agriculture Tractors (with trailer) 4.5
 Agriculture Tractors (without trailer) 1.5
Non-Motorized Vehicle
 Cycle 0.5
 Cycle Rickshaw 2
 Animal Drawn Vehicle 6

 Hand Cart 3
Categorization of vehicles as per the types mentioned in the toll policy is presented in the
table below. This will help to understand the total number of tollable vehicles under
different toll rates categories. Table below presents the average & traffic count conducted
in the month of Oct 2014 and February 2015.
Table 4.4: Categorization of Vehicles as per the types mentioned in Toll Policy
 1st Traffic count survey in Oct. 2014 (ADT)

Buses 217 186
2-Axle 207 133
3-Axle 253 237
HCM/EME/MAV (4 to 6) 106 160
OSV (7+++) 0 0
2 Wheeler 1454 721
3Wheeler 18 3
Bi-Cycle 26 8
Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0
Animal-Drawn 10 6
Hand-Drawn 0 0

 2nd Traffic count survey in Feb. 2015 (ADT)

Buses 230 176
2-Axle 192 140
3-Axle 277 250
HCM/EME/MAV (4 to 6) 125 174
OSV (7+++) 0 0
2 Wheeler 1012 737
3Wheeler 34 8
Bi-Cycle 14 10
Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0
Animal-Drawn 30 8
Hand-Drawn 2 0

 Average Traffic count (Both 1st and 2nd, ADT)

Buses 223 181
2-Axle 199 137
3-Axle 265 244
HCM/EME/MAV (4 to 6) 115 167
OSV (7+++) 0 0
2 Wheeler 1233 729
3Wheeler 26 6
Bi-Cycle 20 9
Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0
Animal-Drawn 20 7
Hand-Drawn 1 0

4.6 DATA ANAL

4.6 DATA ANALAYSIS – Origin Destination Survey
During the OD Survey all the relevant information was collected from the vehicle
operators in pre-designed format by stopping vehicles at random sample basis. The
collected data includes vehicle number, origin and destination place, commodity carried,
distance traveled etc.
4.6.1 Zoning System
For analysis of O-D data and preparation of trip tables for studying the regional
interaction, a zoning system was developed. Project influence area and trip generating
and attraction points were the major consideration while developing zoning system. In
all, a 29-zone system was developed. Out of which, 9 are immediate influence zones
(zones falling along the project corridor) and remaining zones are external. The list of
traffic zones is presented in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5: Traffic Zoning System
Zone Code Zone Description

Immediate Influence Area/Zone (Along Project Corridor)
1 Nagaur
2 Pharrod
3 Rol
4 Tarnau
5 Zayal
6 Degana
7 Didwana
8 Kuchaman City
9 Makrana,Khatu
Intermediate Influence Area/Zone
10 Ganganagar,Hanumangarh
11 jodhpur,Bikaner
12 Jaisalmer, Barmer
13 Ajmer,Pali,Sirohi

Zone Code Zone Description

14 Jaipur
15 Sikar,Jhunjhunu,Churu
16 Alwar,Dausa,Bharatpur
17 Bhilwara,Kota,Udaipur
Broad Influence Area/Other States
18 Punjab
19 Ahemdabad,Surat, Vapi, Vadodara & Ankleshwar
20 Rest of Gujarat
21 Mumbai
22 Rest of Maharastra
23 Uttar Pradesh & Uttrakhand
24 Madhya Pradesh & Chhatisgarh
25 Delhi & Gurgaon
26 Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Himanchal Pradesh and Punjab
27 Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Orissa, Sikkim, Assam
Meghalaya, Mijoram, Tripura, Manipur, Nagaland, Arunachal
28
Pradesh
29 Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamilnadu & Kerla
4.6.2 Goods Vehicles – Commodity Analysis
Different commodities recorded during the O-D survey were classified into 17 categories.
Due consideration has been given to include all possible commodities moving along the
project Road. The list of Commodities Code is presented in Table 4.6.
Commodity
Commodity Type Description
Code
1 Empty No Load
2 Perishable Products Vegetables, Fruits,Fish, Meat, Milk Products.Egg etc
3 Food Products Rice, Wheat, Pulses,Grains,Jaggery,Mustard
4 Cash Crops Cotton, Jute, Sugarcane, Tea,Groundnut,Tobacco

Commodity
Commodity Type Description
Code
5 Consumer Products Parchun, Soap,Detergent powder,Agarbathi
6 Petroleum Products Oil, Gas, Lubricant, Petrol & Diesel
7 Building Materials Sand, pipe, Bricks, Tiles
8 Cement Cement, Lime stone
9 Marble Marble
10 Stone Product Stone and Stone Powder
11 Courier Services Parcel, Courier and Postal Servises
12 Paper Products Cartoons and Paper etc

Wood and Forest
13 Timber, Match Box, Furniture
Products
Machine and Machine
14 Auto Parts, Machinery, Parts etc
parts
15 Metals Iron Items, pipes, Iron Plates etc
Rubber & Plastic
16 Rubber, Tyres, Plastic etc.
Products
17 Miscellaneous Animal Food, Glass, Bottles, Scrap etc.
Commodity pattern shows prominent movement of food items, building materials and
household items along the Project Road. Distribution of various commodities is presented
in Table 4.7 and is graphically presented in Fig. 4.2 below
Table 4.7 Commodity Distribution
Type of Commodity % Distribution

Empty 46.67%
Perishable Products 4.76%
Food Products 3.81%
Cash Crops 3.33%
Consumer Products 1.90%
Building Materials 6.19%
Cement 4.76%
Petroleum Products 2.38%
Stone Product 10.97%

Type of Commodity % Distribution

Courier Services 0.00%
Paper Products 0.95%
Wood and Forest Products 0.95%
Machine and Machine parts 2.38%
Metals 3.33%
Rubber & Plastic Products 0.00%
Miscellaneous 7.62%
Fig. 4.2: Commodity Distribution Chart
4.6.3 Goods Vehicles – Load Analysis
Survey data is analyzed to assess the load distribution for commercial vehicles. The Load
distribution observed for different vehicle types is grouped into various ranges. The load
distribution is shown in Table 4.8 and is graphically represented in Fig. 4.3.

Table 4.8: Load Distribution of Freight Vehicles
Gross Vehicle
2 Axle 3 Axle MAV Remarks
Weight (Tonnes)
<12.5 15% 25% 10% No Overloading
12.5 to 20 62% 5% 20% No Overloading

Overloading in 2 Axle
20 to 25 23% 8% 7%
Trucks
Overloading in 3 Axle
25 to 60 0% 62% 60%
Trucks
Overloading in 4-6
>60 0% 0% 3%
Axle Trucks
Fig. 4.3: Load Distribution of Goods Vehicles
The average and maximum load for freight vehicles is given in Table 4.9.
Table 4.9: Load Distribution of Freight Vehicles
Avg. load (Tonnes)

Vehicles
Inclusive Empty Haulage Max. Load Passed
2 Axle 17.30 25.30
3 Axle 27.04 57.85
4-6 Axle 32.86 71.10

4.6.4 Major Trip Generators
Major Passenger/Freight trip generators inferred from the analysis of OD data is

presented in Table 4.10
Table 4.10 Major Traffic Generators
Zones Goods Vehicles

Nagaur 32.09%
Pharrod 1.40%
Rol 4.65%
Tarnau 6.51%
Zayal 3.72%
Degana 1.86%
Didwana 9.77%
Kuchaman City 3.72%
Makrana,Khatu 6.51%
Ganganagar,Hanumangarh 0.47%
jodhpur,Bikaner 7.44%
Jaisalmer, Barmer 0.47%
Ajmer,Pali,Sirohi 2.33%
Jaipur 6.51%
Sikar,Jhunjhunu,Churu 2.79%
Alwar,Dausa,Bharatpur 0.47%
Bhilwara,Kota,Udaipur 2.37%
Ahemdabad,Surat, Vapi, Vadodara & Ankleshwar 0.93%
Rest of Gujarat 0.47%
Mumbai 0.47%
Rest of Maharastra 0.47%
Madhya Pradesh & Chhatisgarh 0.47%
Delhi & Gurgaon 2.79%
Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Himanchal Pradesh
0.93%
and Punjab
Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamilnadu & Kerla 0.47%
4.7 AXLE LOAD SURVEY
Axle load survey was conducted as km 16+000 and Km 34+500 to estimate vehicle
damage factor (VDF). Vehicle Damage Factor (VDF) is required in the design of
overlays on existing pavement and new pavement design for Additional
Lanes/Widening/Realignment/Reconstruction.

4.7.1 Analysis for Vehicle Damage Factor (VDF)
VDF is a multiplier for converting the number of commercial vehicles of different axle
loads to the number of standard axle load repetitions. Design of new pavement for
Additional Lanes/Widening/New Construction/Reconstruction or strengthening of
existing pavement is based upon the cumulative number of 8.16 tone Equivalent Standard
Axles (ESA) that will pass over during the 15-year design period. Cumulative Standard
Axles (CSA) is calculated in accordance with the guidelines provided in IRC: 37-2012
and IRC: 81-1997 It has been ascertained that the damaging effect of axles on flexible
pavement is approximately proportional to the fourth power of the axle load.
Equivalency factors as recommended by IRC have been used to convert the axle load
spectrum into an equivalent number of standard axles. The VDF values are used in
calculating the design traffic (in MSA) for pavement design.
4.7.2 VDF
VDF calculated as per Axle load survey for calculating the MSA are given in Table 4.11.
Table 4.11: Adopted Vehicle Damage Factors
Year Year
Type of Vehicle 2014 2014
VDF@ Km 16+000 VDF@ Km 34+500
LCV 1.28 1.20
BUS 1.00* 1.00*
2 Axle 6.24 3.37
3 Axle 5.62 7.37
MAV (=> 4 axle) 11.26 4.70
4.8 DATA ANALYSIS – Turning Movement Count Survey
The following major intersection/junctions were identified to conduct the turning

movement count survey. The turning movement count surveys were carried out for 24
Hrs under the supervision of consultant’s team.

Table 4.12: Summary of Turning Movement count survey at Km 19+000 (Rol)
Total Slow Moving
Total Slow Moving

Total Fast Moving
Total Fast Moving

Total Vehicles
Distributional
Directional
Total PCU
Vehicles
Vehicles
PCU
PCU
Direction
D-1 to D-2 1034 3 1037 1416 4 1420 19%

D-1 to D-3 757 42 799 751 23 774 14%
Total Traffic From D-1 1791 45 1836 2167 27 2194 33%
D-2 to D-1 1036 61 1097 1300 32 1332 20%
D -2 to D-3 667 17 684 588 21 609 12%
D-3 to D-1 759 43 802 728 21 749 14%
D -3 to D-2 1121 26 1147 1261 72 1333 21%
Total From all Directions 5374 192 5566 6044 173 6217 100%
Table 4.13: Peak our Traffic in Nos. and PCU
Direction from (A) Direction from (B) Direction from (C) Total Total
Time
Outflow B C Inflow Outflow A C Inflow Outflow A B Inflow Outflow Inflow
Vehicles
12:00-
13:00
Slow 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fast 146 70 76 184 158 100 58 159 173 84 89 134 477 477
Total 146 70 76 184 158 100 58 159 173 84 89 134 477 477
PCU
12:00-
13:00
Slow 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fast 173 95 78 206 171 113 58 190 188 93 95 136 532 532
Total 173 95 78 206 171 113 58 190 188 93 95 136 532 532
Summary of the peak hour traffic in PCU on cross road is presented in Table 4.12 given
below.
4.9 DATA ANALYSIS – Pedestrian Count Survey
In order to assess the pedestrian cross flows at/close to major human settlements along
the project road, this survey was conducted at locations, where there were significant
pedestrian cross movements. The Surveyors counting the pedestrians crossing the road at

the intersection were located away from the shoulder where there was 50m clear visibility
on either direction of road for counting pedestrian/animals across as well as along the
project road. The data collected will be used to assess the requirements for establishment
of pedestrian facilities.
In order to assess the need of controlled crossing facility for pedestrians and animals at
predetermined locations, the Consultants have calculated the pedestrian vehicular conflict
index, which is the product of the number of pedestrian crossing the road and square of
the number of motorized vehicles on the road. The number of pedestrian crossing the
project road in the peak hour is in Table 4.14
Table 4.14: Summary of Pedestrian Count Survey
S. Location
Project Road Peak Hour P V PV2/108
No. (Km)
1 Nagaur-Tarnau 19+000 12.00-13.00 105 232 0.06
The selection criteria for adopting control measures at mid-block pedestrian crossings
were based on IRC: 103-1988 “Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities”. The code suggests
controlled crossing measures for pedestrian, if the value of PV2 value is more than 1x108
for undivided roads and 2x108 for divided roads. In the event of the project road being
widened, the need for controlled crossing facilities is to be established. The total traffic
volume (expressed in AADT) was projected to obtain the Trigger Year of development of
controlled crossing facilities, based on the Pedestrian Vehicle Conflict Index, When PV2
value is more than 1x108 and improvements will be necessitated.
4.10 GROWTH RATE
4.10.1 Growth Rate (Forecasted)
 The registered motor vehicle of the states in the PIA, are weighted in the ratio of
their influence in each category of vehicle are presented below:

Table 4.15: Registered Motor Vehicle in PIA
Year Cars/Jeep Buses LCV Trucks

2007-08 591183 59678 48335 216149
2008-09 658925 63139 52404 228018
2009-10 740951 66973 55664 247538
2010-11 841769 71266 60792 273345
2011-12 942798 76262 65792 302065
The actual achieved growth in NSDP in the PIA is presented below:
Table 4.16 Growth in NSDP states in PIA
Year NSDP RJ NSDP PB NSDP HR

2006-07 13,43,50,0000000 10,00,72,0000000 10,47,05,0000000
Year on year Growth
2007-08 5% 9% 8%
2008-09 8% 6% 8%
2009-10 5% 6% 12%
2010-11 11% 7% 10%
2011-12 11% 6% 8%
Hence the expected growth rate on the PR or PIA is projected considering the NSDP of
Rajasthan and elasticity as calculated from previous year Registered motor vehicles &
NSDP (Rajasthan).
Table 4.17: Forecasted Growth Rates
Bus TRUCK
MAV OSV
Car/ Tractors
Mini Mini Standard MCV HCV (up to (more
Year 2W 3W Jeep/ Taxi LCV HCM/EME &
LCV Bus Bus 2-Axle 3-Axle 6 than 6
Van Trailers
axles) axles)
2014-2017 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%
2018-2022 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%
2023-2027 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%
2028-2032 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%
2033-2037 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%
2038-2042 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%
2043-2047 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%

4.11 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
4.11.1 Traffic Projection
7 days Classified Traffic Survey Count is carried out at 2 locations,
The traffic (AADT) at all two survey locations is projected to analyses the concession
period based on the traffic capacity parameters. Maximum capacity for 2-Lane plus
(7.00m) is considered as 18,000 PCUs based on Standard Capacities for roads in
Rajasthan, approved by Cabinet Note of Govt. of Rajasthan.
 1st Traffic count survey in Oct. 2014 (AADT)

Buses 220 188
2-Axle 215 136
3-Axle 264 248
HCM/EME/MAV (4 to 6) 107 164
OSV (7+++) 0 0
2 Wheeler 1613 800
3Wheeler 18 3
Bi-Cycle 26 8
Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0
Animal-Drawn 10 6
Hand-Drawn 0 0


 2nd Traffic count survey in Feb. 2015 (AADT)

Buses 246 188
2-Axle 205 150
3-Axle 296 268
HCM/EME/MAV (4 to 6) 133 186
OSV (7+++) 0 0
2 Wheeler 1123 818
3Wheeler 36 9
Bi-Cycle 14 10
Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0
Animal-Drawn 30 8
Hand-Drawn 2 0

 Average Traffic count (Both 1st and 2nd, AADT)

Buses 233 188
2-Axle 210 143
3-Axle 280 258
HCM/EME/MAV (4 to 6) 120 175
OSV (7+++) 0 0
2 Wheeler 1368 809
3Wheeler 27 6
Bi-Cycle 20 9
Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0
Animal-Drawn 20 7
Hand-Drawn 1 0

Table 4.18: Traffic Projection (PCUs)
Avg. Projected
Year Km 16+000 Km 34+500 Remarks
Traffic
Total Traffic PCUs
2015-16 6590 5162 5876 Base Year
2016-17 6920 5420 6170 1st Oct-2016 Appointed Date
2017-18 7266 5691 6479
2018-19 7629 5976 6803
2019-20 8010 6275 7143
2020-21 8411 6589 7500
2021-22 8832 6918 7875
2022-23 9274 7264 8269
2023-24 9738 7627 8683
2024-25 10225 8008 9117
2025-26 10736 8408 9572

2026-27 11273 8828 10051 For 10Years
2027-28 11837 9269 10553
2028-29 12429 9732 11081
2029-30 13050 10219 11635
2030-31 13703 10730 12217

2031-32 14388 11267 12828 For 15years
2032-33 15107 11830 13469
2033-34 15862 12422 14142
2034-35 16655 13043 14849
2035-36 17488 13695 15592

2036-37 18362 14380 16371 For 20Years
2037-38 19280 15099 17190

Avg. Projected
Traffic
2038-39 20244 15854 18049
Average Level of Service B for
2039-40 21256 16647 18952
Two Lane with Paved Shoulder
2040-41 22319 17479 19899
2041-42 23435 18353 20894 For 25Years
2042-43 24607 19271 21939
2043-44 25837 20235 23036
2044-45 27129 21247 24188
2045-46 28485 22309 25397
2047-48 29909 23424 26667
4.12 MILLION STANDARD AXLES (MSA)
Design method considers traffic in terms of the cumulative number of standard axles
(8160kg) to be carried by the pavement during the design life.
The project road has been divided into two homogenous sections with respect to variation
in traffic volume based on location of major intersections & major settlements. Design
Traffic in MSA for 8 and 15 years (post construction) is tabulated below.
Table 4.19: Summary of Calculated MSA
MSA
Section CVPD Growth Rate
8 Years 15 Years
0+000 to 19+000 1574 5%
11 24
19+000 to 39+676 1261 5%

4.13 HOMOGENOUS SECTIONS FOR PAVEMENT DESIGN
Based on the traffic and pavement consideration the Project Road is divided into two
homogenous sections. For Pavement design homogenous sections rearranged clubbed as
whole section in one and adopted MSA for pavement design is presented below:
Table 4.20: Homogenous Sections for Pavement Design
MSA MSA
Homogenous Length
Description Expected Expected
Section # (km)
( 8 years) ( 15 years)
For Overlay and Reconstruction
1 from Nagaur to Tarnau 39.700 11 24
(from km 0.000 to 39.676)
It is recommended to design the bituminous layers for 8 years at considering
11MSA and non-bituminous considered 24MSA for a design life of 15 years for the
section.

Rajasthan
CHAPTER 5
IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL/UPGRADING PROPOSALS
5.1 GENERAL
This chapter is intended to give brief descriptions concerning the various improvement
proposals for the up-gradation of existing two lane carriageway facility of 39.676 Km (
Design length 39.668 Km.) of SH-19 Nagaur-Tarnau comprising the section from Nagaur
to Tarnau (the “Highway-III). The improvement proposal is based on the findings from
various engineering surveys and investigations carried out on the project road section and
as discussed in Chapter 3: Engineering Survey and Investigation and Chapter 4:
Traffic Survey and Analysis
4- Lane and 2-Lane with paved shoulder of 1.5m (B/S) wide have been proposed for the
project road section. The proposal is in conformity with the provisions of IRC: SP: 73-
2015 except few locations due to land availability constraint.
Improvement proposals for a highway essentially consist of two components, viz.

Geometric and Structural. Geometric improvement deals with visible dimensions of
roadway and is dictated by the traffic and economic considerations. Geometric design
involves several design elements such as horizontal and vertical alignments, sight
distance consideration, cross sectional elements, lateral and vertical clearances,
intersection treatment, control of access, etc.
The structural component deals with the pavement and embankment design aspects, i.e.
the ability of the highway to adequately carry and support the vehicle/wheel loads over
the design period.
The Improvement proposals for the proposed up-gradation of existing 2-lane to two lane
with paved shoulders and necessary geometric Improvements and required realignments.
 Pavement – strengthening and reconstruction

 Bridges and Cross-Drainage Structures
 Safety and
 Road Appurtenances
5.2 GEOMETRIC DESIGN PROPOSALS
The proposal for the improvement of the geometric elements of the Existing Highway
includes:-
 Improvement to cross-sectional elements

 Alignment Design

Rajasthan
5.2.1 Improvement to Cross-Sectional Elements
Proposed Cross Sectional Elements
Lane Width
The lane width is proposed to be 3.5m and thus for 2-lane the carriageway width will be
7.0m plus 1.5 m paved Shoulder and 1m granular shoulder on either side. In case of the
divided 4 lane carriageway, 7.5m carriageway each direction has been proposed.
Paved Shoulders
The paved shoulder of 1.5m proposed on either side for 2 lane carriageway.
Median
The median of 1.5m wide has been proposed in urban stretches with 225mm (above BC
top) high non-mountable concrete kerbs on either side.
Utility Corridor
All utilities coming in construction zone to be relocated in the proposed utility corridor
i.e. outermost 2m width of ROW edge on either side.
Side Slopes
For fill sections, the following side slopes are proposed:
Embankment height up to 3.0m - 2H: 1V and Considering the Embankment
Material property.
Embankment height from 3.0m to 6.0m- 2.5H: 1V and Considering the Embankment
Material property
Embankment height exceeding 6.0m - To be designed as per material property and
as per IRC:75-1979
Cutting Sections - 1H: 1V and with considering the material
Property of the cutting material
Cross-fall
For Two laning the cross-fall for the pavement will be 2.5% for the Flexible Pavement
and 2% for the Rigid Pavement with a crown in the centre and for granular shoulders will
be 3.0%.

Rajasthan
As far as possible the proposed development shall be constructed within the available
ROW.
Typical Cross Section
The typical cross sections to be followed in the project stretch are detailed in Volume-2
(Drawings).
5.2.2 Widening Scheme
The existing project road section of SH-19 has multi-dimensional facts with respect to
land use and road geometry and considering all these aspects the section-wise policy
adopted for development based on the investigations is given in Table 5.1. As directed by
Client during various site visits, site investigations, concentric widening from existing 2-
lane to 2-lane with paved shoulder and in main Nagaur & Tarnau built-up area existing 2-
lane to 4-lanes with granular shoulder.
Table 5.1 Tentative Widening Scheme
Existing Desig
Design Chainage
Chainage n Proposal for
S.No TCS Description
Lengt Proposed Pavement
From To From To h (m)
Two lane-
Strengthening of
1 0+000 0+743 0+000 0+740 0.740 TCS-1 Flexible
Existing 2 Lane &
Pavement Widening for 4 Lane
Two lane-
Reconstruction of
2 0+743 0+963 0+740 0+960 0.220 TCS-3 Flexible
Existing 2 Lane &
Two lane-
Strengthening of
3 0+963 1+403 0+960 1+400 0.440 TCS-1 Flexible
Existing 2 Lane &
Two lane- Strengthening of

4 1+403 11+665 1+400 11+660 10.260 TCS-2 Flexible Existing 2 Lane &
Pavement Widening to Two
Lane Plus
Two lane- Reconstruction of
Pavement Widening to Two Lane
Plus

Rajasthan
Existing Desig
Design Chainage
Chainage n Proposal for
S.No TCS Description
Lengt Proposed Pavement
From To From To h (m)
Plus
Two lane-
Toll
7 15+855 16+155 15+850 16+150 0.300 Flexible Construction of Toll
Plaza
Pavement Plaza

Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Pavement Widening to
4 Lane
Plus
Chainage Reference

Rajasthan
The existing available Kilometer stones/Permanent structures etc. have been used as
referencing pillars. Development proposal has been decided based on the Design
Chainage system. The difference observed of the reference point between existing
Chainage and design Chainage has been analyzed and presented in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2 Reference Point Existing Chainage Vs Design Chainage
S.No. Existing Km. Stone Design Chainage

1 0 0.000
2 1 0.978
3 2 1.965
4 3 2.963
5 4 3.974
6 5 4.976
7 6 5.976
8 7 6.976
9 8 7.976
10 9 8.978
11 10 9.982
12 11 10.979
13 12 11.980
14 13 12.980
15 14 13.981
16 15 14.981
17 16 15.983
18 17 16.997
19 18 17.962
20 19 18.961
21 20 19.976
22 21 20.984
23 22 21.985
24 23 22.986
25 24 23.959
26 25 24.987
27 26 25.983
28 27 26.989
29 28 27.989
30 29 29.007
31 30 30.000
32 31 30.991
33 32 31.987

Rajasthan
S.No. Existing Km. Stone Design Chainage

34 33 32.980
35 34 33.990
36 35 34.954
37 36 35.989
38 37 36.984
39 38 37.991
40 39 38.987
End at Existing
41 Chaiange 39.676 39.668
The widening scheme can be summarized as given in Table 5.3.
Table 5.3: Summary of Widening Scheme
Sl. Length
Description Remarks
No. (km)
A. Existing Road Width 7.0 (Two Lane)
Widening of 2lane to 4-Lane with

4 Lane Proposed in Built up
I 1.980 strengthening of Existing 2 lane with
with Both Side Drains
Bituminous mix(DBM+BC)
4 Lane Proposed in Built up Widening of 2lane to 4-Lane with

II with Both Side Drains 0.220 Reconstruction of Existing 2 lane

2 Lane With Paved Shoulder
III 35.038 Shoulder with Strengthening of Existing 2
Proposed
Lane

2 Lane With Paved Shoulder
IV 2.130 Shoulder with Reconstruction of Existing 2
Proposed
Lane
New Construction of Pavement for Toll

V Toll Plaza-Rigid Pavement 0.300
Plaza
Total Length 39.668 KM
All the above schemes are general policy decisions; these will be dependent on the
precise geometric configuration, realignment, re-sectioning, reconstruction, exact land
widths available etc.

Rajasthan
5.2.3 Alignment Design
The entire geometric design has been based on the ground modeling by highway civil 3D
design software. The design of proposed alignment for 4-lane and 2-lane with paved
shoulder has been carried out based on the widening scheme as discussed above.
Horizontal Alignment
Efforts have been made during design of horizontal alignment to accommodate the
proposed highway within the available ROW, without compromising with the design
standards as adopted and as discussed in Chapter 2: Design Standards. A minimum
radius of 360m has been kept along with a good balance between additional land
acquisition, structure and highway geometric. The super-elevation and the length of the
transition curve have been finalized with maximum super-elevation of 7%.
Vertical Alignment
Vertical Alignment is designed for minimum criteria of Intermediate Sight Distance

(ISD). The existing road profile is reviewed on the basis of cross-sections taken at regular
intervals with the help of Digital Terrain Model (DTM) which is generated from SRTM
(Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission satellite imagery data) and Topographical survey
data.
The flow accumulation and catchment area is designed through Arc GIS 10.0 using
SRTM data for analysis of hydrological details of cross drainage structure. The location
and sizing of all new culverts and raising of embankment is based on hydrological study
of the project area.
Where improvement of existing road geometrics to the prescribed standards is not

possible the existing road geometrics shall be improved to the extent possible within
available ROW.
5.3 PROPOSAL FOR BYPASSES AND REALIGNMENTS
Based on the detailed design bypass and realignments have not been proposed for
existing road length of 39.676 Km (Design Length 39.668 Km) long section extending
between Nagaur-Tarnau.
5.4 HOMOGENOUS SECTIONS FOR PAVEMENT DESIGN
5.4.1 Homogenous section for pavement design of widening of existing lane
Considering the traffic generation/distribution points and analysis of traffic data as given
in Chapter 4, it was inferred that the total project stretch has been divided into two

Rajasthan
homogenous sections as stated in chapter-4 for the traffic point of view. Now clubbed as
one homogenous section for pavement design purpose.
The Expected MSA as per traffic and BBD analysis is presented in Chapter 4: Traffic
Survey and Analysis and Chapter 3: Engineering Survey & Investigation.
5.5 PAVEMENT OPTIONS
Pavement is the most significant component of a road and therefore its design strengths
must be assured to support the projected traffic loading throughout the design period. The
purpose of the pavement study is to make analysis of different pavement alternatives to
provide a basis for selection of the most advantage solution, considering all costs
occurring during the life of the pavement, viz. construction costs, maintenance costs and
costs for the road users.
In pavement option study, the following is studied in detail:
 New flexible pavement on the widening part and for full reconstruction stretches
 Flexible overlay over the existing pavement
 Flexible pavement for partial reconstruction stretches of existing pavement.
The different pavement design methods for above pavement options are studied and
applied, which are given in Table 5.4
Table 5.4 Pavement Design Methods
Pavement Option Option Type Design method

1 New Flexible Pavement IRC: 37-2012
2 Flexible Overlay IRC: 81-1997
3 Rigid Pavement IRC:58-2011
5.5.1 IRC: 37-2012 Method of Flexible Pavement Design Widening and for new
construction
The basic objective of pavement design is to increase the fatigue life of pavement by
restricting the tensile strain caused by traffic in the bituminous layer to 70 micro strains
and also to construct rut resistant pavement by limiting the vertical sub grade strain to
200 micro strains during the design life. This is ensured following the guidelines laid
down in IRC: 37-2012.
Design Life
For the design of pavement, the design life is defined in terms of the cumulative number
of standard axles that can be carried before strengthening of the pavement is necessary.

Rajasthan
It is recommended that pavements should be designed; as per IRC: 37-2012.
However, to enhance the financial viability of the project, pavement design in stages is
adopted satisfying the following minimum design requirements;
The thickness of sub-base and base layers is designed for a minimum design period of 15
years and the initial bituminous surfacing for a minimum design period of 8 years.
Vehicle Damage Factors
The vehicle damage factor is a multiplier to convert the number of commercial vehicles
of different axle loads and axle configuration to the number of standard axle load
repetitions. It is defined as equivalent number of standard axle per commercial vehicle.
The VDF varies with the vehicle axle configuration, axle loading, terrain, type of road
and from region to region. The vehicle damage factors arrived are presented in Chapter
4: TRAFFIC SURVEY & ANALYSIS
Design Traffic
The design traffic is considered in terms of the cumulative number of standard axles to be
carried during the design life of the road. This can be computed using the following
equation:
N={365*[(1+r) n-1]*A*D*F}/r
Where,
N=the cumulative number of standard axles to be catered for in the design in terms of
msa
A=Initial traffic in the year of completion of construction in terms of the number of

commercial vehicles per day
D=Lane distribution factor
F=Vehicle damage factor
n=Design life in years
r=Annual growth rate of commercial vehicles
The traffic has been used from the projected traffic computed in Chapter 4
For 2-lane section the directional and lane distribution factor is assumed as 1 and 0.5
respectively

Rajasthan
The design traffic is then computed for design life location wise is presented in Chapter
4: TRAFFIC SURVEY & ANALYSIS
CBR Value
The average CBR value of existing sub grade soil for the entire stretch is considered as
12.5% (refer Table 3.14 of Chapter 3: Engineering Survey and Investigation)
Pavement Materials
The general specifications sections and characterization of material is presented in Table

5.5
Table 5.5 Materials Specification and Characterization
S.No Pavement Layers and Materials Sections Remarks

Details
Minimum Soaked CBR
1 Embankment Construction Section 305
12.50%
Minimum Soaked CBR
2 Sub-grade Section 305
12.5%
Minimum compacted
Granular Sub-base Upper Layer thickness 150 mm
3 Section 401
Lower Layer Grading 1 of Table 400-1
Grading 1 of Table 400-2
Thickness of single layer
4 Base Course – WMM Section 406
shall be 75mm-200mm
5 Prime Coat Section 502
6 Tack Coat Section 503
Thickness of Single layer
7 Dense Bituminous Macadam Section 505
shall be 50mm-100mm
Thickness of Single layer
8 Bituminous Concrete Section 507 shall be
30mm/40mm/50mm
Thickness of single layer
9 Dry Lean concrete Section 601
shall be 100mm and 150mm
Thickness shall be as per
10 Pavement Quality Concrete Section 602
Design.
The flexible pavements would be designed as a three layered system consisting of typical
component layers, namely sub-grade, sub-base & base course (granular) and binder &
surface course (bituminous).
Existing ground to be checked for suitability and loosened & re-compacted to desired
MDD and CBR.

Rajasthan
The Flexible Pavement Crust Thickness has been designed as per Plate no7 and 8 of
IRC 37-2012 taking CBR-12.5% and MSA-24 for 15 Years Design life for Non
Bituminous Sub Base/ Base Course and MSA-11 for 8 Years Design life for
Bituminous Layers for design purpose
Table 5.6 Flexible Pavement Thickness for Widening of Existing Lanes, New
Pavement and Reconstruction Stretches as per IRC-37:2012
Design Design CBR of

Viscosity Proposed Minimum Pavement
Existing Chainage Traffic Traffic Sub-
Grade of Thickness (mm)
(MSA) (MSA) grade
Bitumen
From To 8 Years 15 Years (%) BC DBM WMM GSB Total
0+000 39+668 11 24 12.50 VG-30 40 50 250 200 540
It is recommended to design the bituminous layers for 8 years considering 11MSA

and non-bituminous considered 24MSA for a design life of 15 years for the entire
stretch considering one homogeneous section.
Calculations carried out as per IRC-81:1997, the stretches of the project road
recommended for strengthening of existing pavement are to be overlaid , tabulated as
hereunder:-
The Bituminous macadam overlay Thickness required for 11 MSA and Max Characteristic
Deflection (Dc) of 1.34 mm, Based on Fig.9 (Overlay thickness design curves) worked out to be
104 mm.
Thickness Required for DBM/ BC = 104 x 0.70 =72.8 mm say 73 mm
Therefore proposed composition for overlay taken as given hereunder in Table 5 .8
Table 5.8 Overlay Thickness
Design Characteristic
Description Traffic Deflection BC DBM
Dc(mm)
Stretches proposed for

11 1.34 40mm 50 mm
Strengthening only

Rajasthan
For Details of BBD measurements and correction for Temperature and seasonal corrections
see annexure 3.6.
5.5.2 IRC: 58-2011 Method of Rigid Pavement Design.
Rigid pavement for new carriageway has been designed as per IRC: 58-2011.
Wheel Load
A tyre pressure of 8kg/cm2 may be adopted for the design.
For important roads, such as Expressway, National Highways and other roads where
there will be uninterrupted traffic flow and high volume of truck traffic, the suggested
value of Load Safety Factor (LSF) is 1.2. For roads of lesser importance having lower
proportion of truck traffic, LSF may be taken as 1.1. For residential and other streets that
carry small number of commercial traffic, the LSF may be taken as 1.0.
It is recommended that the basic design of the slab be done with a 98th percentile axle
load, and the design thereafter checked by for fatigue consumption for higher axle loads.
Design Period
Normally, cement concrete pavements have a life span of 30 years and should be
designed for this period.
Design Traffic
Design traffic of 25% of the total 2-lane two way commercial vehicles may be considered
as a very conservative estimate for design against fatigue failure. In case of four-lane and
multi-lane divided highways, 25% of the total traffic in the direction of predominant
traffic may be taken for design of pavement.
Temperature Differential
Temperature differential between the top and bottom of pavements causes the concrete
slab to warp, giving rise to stresses. For this purpose, guidance may be had from Table
5.7
Table 5.7 Recommended Temperature Differentials for Concrete
Temperatures Differentials, C
Zone States in Slabs of Thickness
15cm 20cm 25cm 30cm
1 Punjab, U.P., Uttaranchal, Gujarat,
Rajasthan, Haryana and North 12.5 13.1 14.3 15.8
M.P., excluding hilly regions.

Rajasthan
Considering all the stipulation of IRC 58-2011 the proposed rigid pavement is presented
in Table 5.8
Table 5.8 Proposed Rigid Pavement thickness
Material Type Thickness (mm)

Pavement Quality Concrete (M-40) 300
Dry Lean Concrete (M-10) 100
Granular Sub-base 150
Sub-grade 500
5.6 JUNCTIONS DESIGN
Road junction/intersection is a key element of highway design. The efficiency, safety,

speed, cost of operation and capacity of road system depends very much on the
intersection design. The choice between an at-grade and grade separated junctions at a
particular site depends upon various factors such as traffic, economy, safety, aesthetic
delay etc. Grade separated junctions generally are more expensive initially and are
justified in certain situations. The main objective of intersection design is to reduce the
severity of potential conflicts between motor vehicle, buses, trucks, bicycles, pedestrians
and facilities while facilitating the convenience, ease, safety and comfort of people
traversing the intersections. The design should be fitted closely to the natural transitional
paths and operating characteristics of the users.
Design of a safe intersection depends on many factors as given below:
 Human factors
 Traffic considerations (mainly design hour turning movements, type of movement
and vehicle speeds)
 Road and environmental considerations (sight distance, conflict area, geometric
features)
 Economic factors
Generally intersections can be classified into three categories depending on the traffic
condition. These are
 Uncontrolled intersections at-grade;

 Intersections with Priority Control;
 Time separated/signalized intersection at-grade;
 Space separated intersections/Grade separated intersections
5.6.1 General Criterion for improvement proposal at junction

Rajasthan
 A signalized intersection besides other warrants is justified if the major street has
a traffic volume of 650 to 800 vehicles per hour (both directions) and Minor
Street has 200 to 250 vehicles per hour in one direction only. The detailed
warrants for signalized intersection are laid down as per IRC: 93-1985.
 The vehicular under/overpass structures will be provided at the intersection of the
Project Highway with all the National Highways and State Highways, Such
under/over passes will also be provided across other categories of roads carrying
an average daily traffic of more than 5000PCUs on the date of inviting bids. (As
per Clause:2.13.2, IRC:SP:84-2014)
 An interchange, besides any overriding necessity, is justified when the total traffic
of all the arms of the intersection is in excess of 10,000 PCU’s per hour. The
detailed warrants for interchanges are given in IRC: 92-1985.
 Grade separations should be provided across existing railway crossings if the
product of ADT (fast vehicles only) and the number of trains per day exceeds
50,000 within the next 5 years. For new constructions such as bypasses, grade
separations should be provided when this figures is greater than 25,000.
The geometric design of junctions has been done taking into account the site
conditions, turning movement characteristic, level of services, overall economy and
operational safety.
5.6.2 Details of Junctions improvement proposal
All major/minor junction on the project highway need to be upgraded and merged.
5.6.3 Design of Bridges and Cross-drainage Structures
One minor bridge exists on the project road and the same has been proposed to be
retained. The development proposal for all the existing bridges is tabulated in Table 5.9.
Table 5.9: Summary of Development of Existing Bridges
Location Type of Length Number Length Average Width of

(Chainage) Structure (m)* of of vertical carriageway
Spans Span(m) clearance*(m) between
kerbs(m)
-Nil-
a) Culverts
There are total 23 existing culverts in the proposal road corridor. A summary of the
development proposal is given in Table 5.10.

Rajasthan
Table 5.10 Summary of Development of Culverts
Proposed
Type of Culvert Existing
Retained Reconstruction Widening
Slab 21 19 1 1
Pipe 1 -- 1 -
Box 1 - 1 -
Sub -Total 23 19 3 1
TOTAL 23 23
5.6.4 Proposal of New Bridges
Drainage condition of the existing road section does not necessitate provision of any new
major or minor bridges.
5.6.5 Improvement Proposal of Railway Level crossings
The project road does not crossing the railway tracks at any level crossing.
Table 5.11: List of Railway crossing and its Development Proposal
Track Detail
S.No. Location Gauge Type of LC No. Proposal
Crossing
-Nil-
5.7 ROAD FURNITURE AND OTHER FEATURES
5.7.1 Introduction
The road furniture, traffic safety features and other facilities included in the design are:
 Bus Shelters
 Road Markings
 Traffic Signs
 Kilometer Stone Details
 200m Stones and Boundary Stones

Rajasthan
 Delineators and Object Markers
 Guard Post
 Crash Barrier
 Road Studs
5.7.2 Bus Shelters
Bus shelters are tentatively proposed on both sides of all built-up locations as per the
recommendations of IRC:80-1981 and circular no 732 dated 29.07.2015 guideline for the
project formulation for development of state Highways under PPP. However, the exact
locations to be decided on ground in consultation with Independent Engineers/Client.
Table 5.13: List of Bus Shelters
S.No Design Chainage Side

(LHS/RHS)
1 0+200 LHS
2 0+250 RHS
3 13+900 LHS
4 14+000 RHS
5 18+600 LHS
6 18+700 RHS
7 32+400 RHS
8 32+450 LHS
9 38+600 LHS
10 38+700 RHS
5.7.3 Truck Lay byes
As discussed the Truck lay byes are not to be provided, therefore, has not been proposed.
5.7.4 Road Markings
Road markings perform the important function of guiding and controlling traffic on a
highway. The markings serve as psychological barriers and signify the delineation of
traffic paths and their lateral clearance from traffic hazards for safe movement of traffic.
Road markings are therefore essential to ensure smooth and orderly flow of traffic and to
promote road safety. The Code of practice for Road Markings, IRC: 35-2015 has been
used in the study as the design basis.
The location and type of marking lines, material and color is followed using IRC: 35-
2015 – “Code of Practice for Road Markings.”
The road markings were carefully planned on carriageways, intersections and bridge
locations.

Rajasthan
5.7.5 Cautionary, Mandatory and Informatory Signs
Cautionary, Mandatory and Informatory Signs have been provided depending on the
situation and function they perform in accordance with the IRC: 67-2012 guidelines for
Road Signs.
5.7.6 Kilometer Stone Details
The details of kilometer stones are in accordance with IRC: 8-1980 guidelines, Kilometer
stones are located on the left-hand side of the road as one proceeds from the station from
which the Kilometer count starts. On divided roads with a central median, kilometer
stones would be provided at the left on both sides of the road i.e independently for each
direction of travel. Kilometer stones shall be fixed at right angles to the centre line of the
carriageway.
5.7.7 200m Stones and Boundary Stones
The details of 200m stones and boundary stones conform to IRC: 26-1967 and IRC: 25-
1967. 200m stones are located on the same side of the road as the kilometer stones. The
inscription on the stones shall be the numerals 2, 4, 6 and 8 marked in an ascending order
in the direction of increasing chain age away from the starting station. The numerals shall
be black on a white background. Boundary stones shall be located on either side of the
road opposite every 200m stone and kilometer stone. In addition these shall be fixed at all
angular points of the boundary. Where the boundary is on a curve or the land is of
significant value and likely to be encroached upon, the boundary stones, as required, shall
be installed at closer intervals.
5.7.8 Delineators and Object Markers
Roadway delineators are intended to mark the edges of the roadway so as to guide drivers
on the alignment ahead. Object markers are used to indicate hazards and obstructions
within the vehicle flow path, for example, channeling islands close to the intersections.
Delineators and object markers are provided as per the details given in the drawings and
are provided in accordance with the provisions of IRC: 79-1981. They are basically
driving aids and should not be regarded as substitutes for warning signs, road markings or
barriers. Delineators are provided for all curves of radius less than 600m. They are not
provided at locations where Chevron sign boards are provided.
5.8 DESIGN OF TOLL PLAZA
Toll plaza location is one of the most important aspects of any toll scheme. The key
factors that govern the optimum location of toll plaza are:
 Minimum traffic diversion from project road to surrounding road network

Rajasthan
 Revenue collection
 Local issues and local tollable traffic
 Compatibility with National Highways Act
 Engineering issues
5.8.1 Toll Plaza Locations
Location of toll plazas has been proposed based on the traffic dispersal pattern at the
respective homogenous sections, road geometry and vertical profile of the road and the
surrounding area.
Also while fixing the toll plazas for this project, the proposed Toll Plaza locations for the
preceding and succeeding packages were considered.
The location of the toll plazas is based on the following:
 Distance between the toll plazas

 Distance from nearest major settlements and municipal limits
 Maximum capture of tollable traffic to increase financial viability
 Avoidance of bridges and culverts
 Avoidance of junctions
 Avoidance of sharp curves
The locations for the toll plaza for the different section are given under Chapter 7:
Financial Analysis and Recommendation
5.8.2 Toll Plaza Design
A width of 3.2m between two up-standing kerbs of tollbooth islands is considered

optimum in order to channel vehicles and to ensure they stop close enough to the toll
collector.
One extra lane 4.5m width should be provided in each direction, in addition to toll lanes,
for Non-Toll-able/exempt vehicles and oversized (extra wide) vehicles, which cannot
pass through regular toll lanes.
Number of Toll Lanes
The minimum toll lanes required with semi-automatic toll system for the projected peak
hour traffic is considered as 2+2 Toll lanes along with extra lane for oversized vehicle on
either side.

Rajasthan
CHAPTER 6
COST ESTIMATE
6.1 GENERAL
The Project cost estimates have been prepared based on various items of works required for
upgrading & improving the existing carriageway by:
 Reconstruction of existing poor stretches

 Widening existing two lane stretches to 2-lane Plus
 Widening certain existing 2-lane stretches to 4-lanes in built up sections
 Strengthening
 Providing granular shoulder on either side just adjacent to paved shoulder.
6.2 ESTIMATION OF QUANTITIES
The quantities of major items of works have been worked out based on following:
 Site Clearance: The area considered for Site Clearance is the area within the proposed
Right of Way.
 Earth Works: This item provides for roadway excavation, earthwork in embankment,
sub-grade and shoulders, medians, islands including disposal of surplus earth and
unsuitable material. In this stage, the construction of embankment height has been taken as
per site condition. Sub-grade soil having a CBR>=12.5% will be taken from borrows area.
It is also to be ensured that during construction the existing 500mm thick
embankment/existing ground below the sub-grade is re-compacted to MDD and have CBR
value >=12.5%
 The pavement quantities like GSB, WMM & Bituminous items etc. have been worked out
based on Typical Cross Sections, pavement design done based on traffic and with CBR
12.5%
 Culverts: The estimation of quantities for culverts is based on site conditions. Also,
 Drainage, Protection Works, Traffic Signs and Markings: Proposed as per site
requirement and as per stipulated norms.
 The Bus shelters have only been provided near built-up/inhabited areas
 Toll Plazas Project Road is having open tolling system and numbers of Toll Plazas are
calculated accordingly.
6.3 PROJECT COST
After various site visits, site investigations and detailed discussions with Client the following
considerations have been concluded for Cost-estimating the improvements of the Project Road
Highway-III, Package-EWC-N, Nagaur-Tarnau (Design Length 39.668 km) long stretch.
1)The pavement quantities like GSB, WMM & Bituminous items etc. have been worked
out based on Typical Cross Sections, as explained in chapter 5.
2) Reconstruction considered from existing GSB layer top in poor carriageway stretches
and considered from sub-grade where vertical profile is to be improved and similarly
from sub-grade where new culverts are proposed.

Rajasthan
3) Drainage layer extended to outer edge of shoulder/embankment only in the stretches of

widening and reconstructions.
4) 1.0m Granular shoulder provided both sides in all 2-lane plus stretches.
5) 01 Toll Plaza with 2+2 Lane along with extra lane for oversize vehicles on either side
based on average PCU as directed vide ACE letter no 732 dated 29.07.2015
6) Cost of Toll Plaza considered as per Circular No. ACE/PPP/PA- 773 of PPP Div PWD
Jaipur dated 07.08.2015
7) All Junctions developments considered as per IRC Guideline
8) RCC covered Drains of 1m width considered in Built-up sections
9) Bus shelter considered only at Built-up location (both sides)
10) Basis of Rates have been considered as per BSR NH Circle Bikaner(Nagaur
District)-2013 and escalated for year-2015 as directed vide ACE letter no 732 dated
29.07.2015.
GENERAL - ABSTRACT
AMOUNT
AMOUNT (Cr.)
S. NO ITEM OF DESCRIPTION (Cr.)-If Under
if under VGF
Annuity
1 SITE CLEARANCE 0.74 0.74
2 EARTHWORKS 2.90 2.90
3 SUB-BASE COURSE & BASE COURSE 14.11 14.11
4 BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT WORKS 41.18 41.18
5 STRUCTURES
a) Culverts 1.61 1.61
b) Minor Bridge
6 C.C. PAVEMENT 1.28 1.28

Rajasthan
AMOUNT
AMOUNT (Cr.)
S. NO ITEM OF DESCRIPTION (Cr.)-If Under
if under VGF
Annuity
DRAINAGE, PROTECTION WORK &

7 RE WALLS & Repair & Rehabilitation of 3.79 3.79
Bridges
8 JUNCTION IMPROVEMENT 3.20 3.20
TRAFFIC SIGNS, MARKINGS &

9 3.19 3.19
OTHER ROAD APPURTENANCES
10 TOLL PLAZA (1 Nos.) 2.25 2.25
ARBORICULTURE ( Bus Shelters) &

11 0.46 0.46
(Bus Bay) & Plantation & Truck Lay Bye
12 CIVIL CONSTRUCTION COST 74.71 74.71
Add 25% (if Project Under VGF) or

15% (If Project Under Annuity) as per
Clause 3.16 of RFP (Including Provision
13 for Physical and Price contingencies, 18.68 11.21
interest during construction and other
Financing cost , pre Construction
expenses, etc. on Item No.12
14 TOTAL PROJECT COST 93.39 85.92
15 PROJECT COST PER KM. 2.35 2.17
The Abstract of Cost and Indicative BOQ are as hereunder in Table 6.2 and Table 6.3 :-
Table: 6.2 Abstract of Cost

Rajasthan
S.No Amount project Amount project

Bill No
. Under VGF Under Annuity
1 BILL NO. 1 – SITE CLEARANCE 0.74 0.74
2 BILL NO. 2 - EARTHWORKS 2.90 2.90
3 BILL NO. 3 – SUB-BASE COURSE & BASE COURSE 14.11 14.11
4 BILL NO. 4 – BITUMINOUS WORKS 41.18 41.18
5 BILL NO.5 - BOX CULVERTS AND PIPE CULVERTS 1.61 1.61
6 BILL NO.6 - CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT 1.28 1.28
7 BILL NO.7 -DRAINAGE & RETAINING WALL 3.79 3.79
8 BILL NO.8 - JUNCTION IMPROVEMENT 3.20 3.20
BILL NO.9 - TRAFFIC SIGNS, MARKINGS &
9 3.19 3.19
OTHER ROAD APPURTENANCES
BILL NO.10 - TOLL PLAZA (2+2 Lane along with
10 2.25 2.25
Extra lane for oversized vehicles)
11 BILL NO.11 - BUS SHELTERS & PLANTATION 0.46 0.46
12 Civil Construction Cost 74.71 74.71
Add 25% (if Project Under VGF) or 15% (If Project Under
Annuity) as per Clause 3.16 of RFP (Including Provision for
Physical and Price contingencies, interest during 18.68 11.21
construction and other Financing cost , pre Construction
expenses, etc. on Item No.12
Total Project Cost 93.39 85.92

Cost Per Km 2.35 2.17
Table: 6.3 Indicative BOQ
BSR
Item Amount
Item Description Unit Qty Rate
No. (Rs.)
No.
BILL NO. 1 – SITE CLEARANCE
Clearing and grubbing road land

including uprooting rank vegetation,
grass, bush, shrubs, saplings and
1.01 trees of girth upto 300mm, removal
of stumps, disposal of unserviceable
material and stacking of serviceable
material upto 1000 m from road
boundry as per MoRTH
Specification : 201
By mechanical Means.
R-2/
1.01a Hact. 32 12127.5
6.2.1 In area of light jungle 388,080

Rajasthan
Item BSR Description Unit Qty Rate Amount

No. Item Dismantling of flexible pavements (Rs.)
No. and disposal of dismantled materials
upto a lead of 1000 metres, scaking
1.02 serviceable and unserviceable
materials separately as per MoRTH
specification claue : 202
By Mechanical Means :
R-2/
1.02a Cum 157.7 -
9.2.1 Bituminous courses
R-2/ Reinforced cement concrete with
1.02b cleaning, straightening and cutting of Cum 1584.3 -
7.1.5
bars and seprating out from R.C.C.
Scarifying, including picking up scarified
R- material and stacking of old serviceable
1.03 material with in a lead of 100 metres
2/8.0 [MoRTH specification: Clause 501].
Kankar/Gravel metal crust upto 150mm
R- thick with pickaxes with all lift and lead
1.03a Sqm 175,190 15.2
2/8.4 upto 1000m for reusable materials. 2,665,428
Dismantling upto 1.5m in foundation
and/or 1.5m above ground level
including T&P and scaffolding wherever
R- necessary, sorting the dismantled
1.04 material, disposal of unserviceable
2/7.0
material, and stacking serviceable
material within a lead of 1000m.
[MoRTH Specification clause 202]
R- Cement concerte plain 1:2:4 mix and
1.04a precast cement concerte blocks. Cum 421.7 791.6
2/7.1.4 333,800
R- Dismantling Brick/Tile work In
1.04b cement mortar Cum 8433.6 475.2
2/7.2.2 4,007,457
TOTAL FOR BILL NO. 1
7,394,765
BILL NO. 2 - EARTHWORKS
Earth work in excavation including
stacking/ disposal of surplus earth
with all lifts and lead upto 1000
2.01 meters exclusive of compensation of
-
earth (MoRTH specification Clause
301 to 305).
mechanically by power shovel
R-3/ including mechanical loading and
2.01a Cum 66,182 38.0
3.1.2 carriage upto 1 km by tipper/dumper 2,517,315
Construction of embankment with
approved material obtained from
R-3/ borrow pits with all lifts and leads,
(3.1.2+ transporting to site, spreading,
2.02 6+7+9. grading to required slope and Cum 168 -
2+10+ compacting by vibratory roller 8-10
11.1) Tonne to meet requirement of Table
300-2 including cost of
compensation for earth taken from

Rajasthan

No. Item private land with ALL lead As per (Rs.)
No. MoRTH specification Clause No.
305.
Construction of sub grade and

earthen shoulders with approved
R-3/ material obtained from borrow pits
with all lifts and leads, transporting
(3.1.2+
to site, spreading, grading to require
2.03 6+7+9. slope and compacted by vibratory
Cum 155,468 170
26,439,053
2+10+ roller 8-10 Tonne to meet
11.1) requirement of Table 300-2 as per
MoRTH specification Clause No.
305.
TOTAL FOR BILL NO. 2 28,956,368
BILL NO. 3 – SUB-BASE COURSE & BASE COURSE
Providing, laying, spreading and
compacting specified graded crushed
stone in sub-base course including
premixing the material at OMC in
mechanical mixer (Pug mill),
carriage of mixed material, laying in
uniform layers with motor grader,
R-
F.E.loader on a prepared surface and
3.01 4/(4+4. compacting with vibratory
1) compactor to achieve the desired
density including all material,
labour, machinery, lighting
barricading and maintenance of
diversion complete.[MoRTH
specification Clause 401] with 9 km
lead
For Grading I Material
3.01a Cum 65,122 1,091
71,050,207

Rajasthan

No. Item Providing, laying, spreading and (Rs.)
No. compacting crushed graded stone
aggregate of as per table 400-10 and
400-11 to Wet Mix Macadam
specification including premixing
the material with water to OMC in
mechnical mixer as per approved
design mix, carriage of mixed
R- material by Tipper to site, laying in
uniform layers with motor
3.02 5/(2+2. grader/F.E. Loader/paver finisher in
Cum 41,366 1,693
70,051,008
1a) sub base / base course on a well
prepared under base and compacting
with vibratory roller to achieve the
desired density including lighting,
guarding, barricading and
maintance of diversion etc.
(MoRTH specification : Clause
406) by mechanical means with
lead up to 9km.
BILL NO. 4 – BITUMINOUS WORKS
Providing and applying primer coat
over prepared surface or granular
base with bitumen emulsion as per
IS: 8887 & manufacturer’s
R- specifications @ 7.5 kg /10 sqm with
a self propelled or towed bitumen
4.01 5/(4+4. pressure sprayer equipped for
Sqm 153,422 39.08
5,996,299
1) spraying the material uniformly at
specified rates and temperatures
including cleaning of road surface as
per MoRTH specification CIause-
502,112
specifications @ 6 kg /10 sqm with a
self propelled or towed bitumen
4.02 R-6/ 5 pressure sprayer equipped for
spraying the material uniformly at
502,112
On granular surface treated with
R-6/
4.02a primer and on hungary bituminous Sqm 414,701 13.40
5.1 surface @3.0/10 sq.m. 5,555,081
R-6/ On Bituminous surface @ 2.5 Kg/10
4.02b sq.m.
Sqm 414,701 15.77
5.1 6,538,079

Rajasthan

No. Item Providing and laying Dense (Rs.)
No. Bituminous Macadam on prepared
surface with specified graded
crushed aggregates as per table 510
and design mix for base/binder
course including loading of material
with F.E loader, heating of binder
(including cost of antistripping
compound wherever required)
aggregate and filler in hot mix plant
40-60 TPH transporting the mixed
R-6/
4.03 material by tippers and laying with
20 sensor paver finisher as per clause
507.3.5 to the required level and
grade, rolling by self propelled
power rollers and vibratory rollers or
pneumatic tyred roller 150-250KN.
TP=0.7MPa to achieve the desired
density (approved by the
department) but excluding cost of
primer/tack coat. [MoRTH
Specification : Clause 507,112] with
4.50 % Bitumen
R-6/
with bitumen grade 60/70 additional
(20+20
4.03a lead of mix material 9 KM. from Cum 23,643 8,869.61
.2+20a plant to site. 209,705,951
(i)
Providing and laying bituminous
concrete as per design mix on prepared
surface with specified graded stone as
per table 500 - 18 for wearing course
including loading of aggregate with F.E.
Loader and hot mixing of binder
(including cost of anti-stripping
compound, wherever required) and 3%
cement filler with aggregates in hot mix
R-6/ plant 40-60 TPH Transporting the mix
4.04 material with tipper to paver and laying
21
with sensor paver finisher (as per clause
507.3.5) to the required level, grades
and rolling with vibratory compactor
and pneumatic tyred roller 150 - 250 KN,
TP = 0.7 MPa, to achieve the desired
density (approved by the department)
excluding cost of primer/tack coat
(MoRTH Specification : Clause -
509,112)
R-6/ 30-45 mm compacted thickness with 6%
(21+21 binder grading - 2 with additional lead of
4.04a mix material 9 KM. from plant to site. 11,089.50
.1+21a 183,955,447
(i) Cum 16588.26
BILL NO.5 - BOX CULVERTS AND PIPE CULVERTS

Rajasthan

No. Item Dismantling up to 1.5m in (Rs.)
No. foundation and/or 1.5m above
ground level including T&P and
scaffolding wherever necessary,
5.01 R-2/ 7 sorting the dismantled material,
disposal of unserviceable material,
and stacking serviceable material
with in a lead of 1000m. [MoRTH
Specification clause 202]
Reinforced cement concrete with
R-2/ cleaning, straightening and cutting of
5.01a 11.55 1584
7.1.5 bars and seprating out from R.C.C.
Cum 18,299
R-2/ Cement concerte plain 1:2:4 mix and
5.01b precast cement concerte blocks. 129.80 792
7.1.4 Cum 102,750
R-2/ Rubble stone masonry in cement mortar
5.01c 114.80 413
7.3.2 Cum 47,461
Dismantling of flexible pavements and
disposal of dismantled materials upto a
lead of 1000 metres, scaking serviceable
5.02 R-2/ 9
and unserviceable materials separately as
per MoRTH specification claue : 202
R-2/ By Mechanical Means

9.1
R-2/ Bituminous courses
5.02a Cum 124.07 158
9.2.1 19,560
R-2/ Removing hume pipes class NP3 / NP4
5.03
7.7
R-2/ 300 mm to 600 mm dia
5.03a Meter 0.00 56
7.7.1 -
R-2/ Above 600 mm to 900 mm dia
5.03b Meter 24.00 63
7.7.2 1,521
R-2/ Above 900 mm dia
5.03c Meter 0.00 88
7.7.3 -
Earth work in excavation for
foundation of structure complete
with all lift, dewatering, shoring and
shuttering etc. including refilling of
trenches in 250 mm layers, ramming,
5.04 B-2/ 1 watering and disposal of surplus
earth with all lifts and lead upto 1000
meters exclusive of compensation of
earth as per MoRTH specification
Clause 301 to 305
B-2/ In ordinary soil
1414.45 177.50
1.1 251,068
B-2/ Depth upto 3 metre
5.04a Cum
1.1.1

Rajasthan

No. Item Providing and laying Plain cement (Rs.)
No. concrete mix with stone aggregate 20
mm nominal size mechnically
mixed and vibrated in foundation
5.05 R-7/ 2 up to a depth of 1.50 metres
below ground level and/or 1.50
metres above ground/bed level as
per MoRTH specification : clause
1000 & 1700.
P.C.C. grade M-15 in foundation &
R-7/
5.05a plinth upto 1.5 mtr. from ground Cum 222.07 3858.75
2.1 level 856,907
B-2/
5.06 Cum 33.34 4410.00
3.2 P.C.C. grade M20 147,039
Providing, laying & fixing in
position RCC spun or hume pipes
ISI marked with proper jointing in
required slope packed in the gasket
of hume or spun yarn and neatly
R-7/
5.07 finished with rich grout of cement
12 moratar 1:3 or having flexible rubber
ring joint made with prefectly air and
water tight including testing of joints
as per MoRTH Specfication : Clause
: 1000 & 2900
R-
5.07a 7/12.2.4
600 mm dia Meter 0.00 1984.50 -
R-
5.07b 7/12.2.5
900 mm dia Meter 0.00 4002.08 -
R-
5.07c 7/12.2.6
1000 mm dia Meter 102.50 4410.00
452,025
R-
5.07d 7/12.2.7
1200 mm dia Meter 0.00 4988.81 -
Providing and laying Cement concrete
for plain/reinforced concrete in open
foundation as per drawing and technical
5.08 specification as per MoRTH
Specification : Section 1500, 1700 &
2100 including form work at any level.
B-3/ R.C.C. grade M20 upto 5 metre height
5.08a Cum 2.05 4685.63
3.7.1 9,604
5.08b Cum 0.00 5181.75
3.8.1 -
5.08c Cum 125.20 5071.50
3.9.1 634,976
Providing & fabricating steel
reinforecemnt for RCC work including
cutting, bending, placing in position and
5.09 R-7/3
binding complete including cost of
binding wire as per MoRTH
Specification : Section 1000 & 1600
5.09a R-7/3.2 Fe 415 Steel reinforcement Tonne 10.44 59535.00

621,714

Rajasthan

No. Item Providing A.C pipe Weep holes 150mm (Rs.)
dia in Masonry/Plain
No. Concrete/.Reinforced Concrete
5.10 B-3/12 abutment, wing wall/return wall Meter 178.00 198.45
complete as per drawing and technical
specfication as per MoRTH Specification
Clause 2205 35,324
Back filling behind abutment, wing wall
and return wall in 150mm layers, with
mechanical compaction, complete with
5.11 B-1/3 all lead and lift as per drawing and
technical specification as per MoRTH
Specification : Clause : 304
B- Gravelly material
5.11a Cum 723.05 661.50
1/3.1 478,297
B- Sandy material
5.11b Cum 0.00 330.75
1/3.2 -
Filter media behind abutment, wing wall
and return wall, complete as per drawing
5.12 B-1/4 and technical specification as per Cum 80.78 576.61
MoRTH Specification : Clause:2504
46,581
R-7/
5.13 plinth upto 1.5 mtr. from ground Cum 279.30 3858.75
2.1 level 1,077,749
Reinforced cement concrete
JAIPU approach slab including
R reinforcement and formwork
5.14 complete as per drawing and
BSR/1
4.9.1 MoRTH specifications section 1500,
1600, 1700, 2704.
Cum 562.80 8491.46
M 30 grade 4,778,991
Provision of reinforced cement
concrete crash barrier at the edges of
the road, approaches to bridge
structures and medians, constructed
with M-20 grade concrete with
HYSD reinforcement conforming to
IRC: 21 and dowel bars 25 mm dia ,
JAIPU 450 mm long at expansion joints
filled with pre-moulded asphalt filler
R
5.15 board, keyed to the structure on P.Rmt 370.60 2681.28
BSR/8. which it is built and installed as per 993,682
35 design given in the enclosure to
MoRTH Circular No. RW/ NH-
33022/ 1/ 94-DO III dated 24th June
1994 as per dimensions in the
approved drawing and at locations
directed by the Engineer , all as
specified as per MoRTH
specification Cl. 809.

Rajasthan

No. Item S & F in position precast R.C.C. stone (Rs.)
(M-15 mix) of standard IRC design
No. including finishing in cement sand
5.16 R-8/1 mortar 1:3, painting with enamel paint,
printing letters and numerals etc.
complete (MoRTH specifications clause
: 800)
Guide stones
5.16a R-8/1.4 Each 14.00 441.00
6,174
5.16b R-8/1.5 Boundary pillars Each 0.00 441.00 -
Painting two coats after filling the
surface with synthetic enamel paint in all
5.17 R-11/2 shades on new plastered or concrete Sqm 277.57 55.13
surface as per MoRTH specification 15,301
clause 803
Providing and laying Dry Boulder
5.18 R-7/14 Pitching in flooring at all levels as per Cum 480.64 1157.63
MoRTH Specification Clause: 2500 556,396
Providing and laying graded stone
aggregate Filter Material underneath
pitching on slopes complete as per
5.19 B-5/2 Cum 225.57 1543.50
drawing and technical Specification as
per MoRTH Specification : Clause 2504
348,165
Curtain wall complete as per
5.19a drawing and Technical specification
Providing and laying stone masonry
work in cement mortar 1:3 with
mechanical mixer for foundation (any
level) complete including all scaffolding
5.19b R-7/6.2 etc. but excluding pointing and plastering Cum 25.57 3307.50
as per drawing and technical
specification as per MoRTH
Specification : Section 1000,1400
Random rubble masonry 84,561
5.20 R-7/2.1 plinth upto 1.5 mtr. from ground Cum 47.77 3858.75
level 184,328
Providing and laying flooring of Rubble
stone/ C.C M15 block over bedding
5.21 B-5/4 complete as per drawing and technical
Specification : Clause 2505,1700
Rubble stone laid in cement mortar 1:3
5.21a B-5/4.1 Cum 8.64 3,308
28,577
Cement concrete block of M-15 grade
5.21b B-5/4.2 including form work Cum 14.45 4,190
60,530
Providing and laying stone masonry
work in cement mortar 1:3 with
mechanical mixer for foundation (any
level) complete including all scaffolding
5.22 R-7/6.2 etc. but excluding pointing and plastering Cum 353.78 3307.50
as per drawing and technical
Specification : Section 1000,1400
Random rubble masonry 1,170,122

Rajasthan

No. Item Providing Cement plaster 12mm thick in (Rs.)
cement mortar 1:3 at all levels as per
5.23 No.
R-7/11
MoRTH Specfication: Clause:1000 &
Sqm 271.57 137.81
1300 37,426
Providing and laying Dry Boulder
5.24 R-7/14 Pitching in flooring at all levels as per Cum 163.41 1157.63
MoRTH Specification Clause: 2500 189,164
Providing and fixing 20mm thick
B-
5.25 3/13.2.2
compressible fibre board in expansion Sqm 8.50 915.08
joint complete. 7,778
Providing and laying Rubble stone in
cement sand mortar 1:3 in flooring at all
5.26 R-7/13
levels as per MoRTH Specfication :
Cum 69.17 3528.00
Clause : 1400 244,046
Providing and laying 25mm thick
bitumen mastic wearing coat with
bitumen of grade S 35 as per Table 500-
27, 15% by weight on prepared base
5.27 B-4/6
including the coarse aggregate as per Sqm 1783.00 826.88
table 500-29, and lime stone powder as
filler, complete including tack coat as per
MoRTH specification : clause 515 1,474,318
Providing and laying bituminous
surface with specified graded stone as
21
509,112)
R-6/ 30-45 mm compacted thickness with 6%
(21+21 binder grading - 2 with additional lead of
mix material 9 KM. from plant to site. Cum 71.32 11089.50
.1+21a
(i) 790,903
JAIPU Providing and fixing Drainage
R Spouts complete as per drawing and
5.29 BSR/R Technical specification. Nos. 6.00 1600
-
14/14.1 9,598
Providing and fixing 80mm NB GI
pipe rail on crash barrier complete
5.30 N.S. with fixtures as per drawings and
Lm 370.60 247
Technical Specifications 91,523

Rajasthan

No. Item Providing and fixing in position (Rs.)
No. Tar paper bearings true to line
5.31 N.S. and level complete as per drawings Sqm 8.80 150
and Technical Specifications
Section 2000. 1,320
Providing and fixing in position
B- Expansion Joints complete as per
5.32 drawings and Technical
3/13.0
Specifications Section 2600. -
B- Providing & Fixing in position
5.32a 3/13.2. 20mm thick pre-moulded joint Lm 456.00 424
3 filler in expansion joint complete. 193,555
Repair of drainage spouts as per
5.33 N.S. Technical Specification Clause 2705 Nos. 38.00 500
and as directed by the Engineer. 19,000
BILL NO.6 - CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT
trees of girth upto 300mm, removal
6.01 of stumps, disposal of unserviceable
Specification : 201
R-2/
6.01a Hact. 0.01 12127.5 152
6.2.1 In area of light jungle
Dismantling of flexible pavements
and disposal of dismantled materials
upto a lead of 1000 metres, scaking
6.02 serviceable and unserviceable
materials separately as per MoRTH
specification claue : 202
By Mechanical Means :
R-2/
6.02a Cum 175 158
9.2.1 Bituminous courses 27,590
with all lifts and leads, transporting
(3.1.2+
Cum 2,975 170
505,930
305.

Rajasthan

No. compacting specified graded crushed
R-
6.04 4/(4+4. compacting with vibratory
lead
6.04a Cum 881 1,091
961,474
Construction of dry lean cement concrete
sub- base over a prepared sub - grade
with coarse and fine aggregate
conforming to IS : 383, the size of
coarse aggregate not exceeding 25 mm,
aggregate cement ratio not to exceed 15 :
1, aggregate gradation after blending to
be as per Table 600 -1, cement content
not to be less than 150 Kg/Cum,
6.05 R-9/1 optimum moisture content to be Cum 881 2,426
determined during trial length 2,137,472
construction, concrete strength not to be
less than 10 Mpa at 7 days, mixed in a
batching plant as per mix design,
transported to site, laid with a hydrostatic
paver with electronic sensor, compacting
with 8 -10 tonne vibratory roller,
finishing and curing complete as per
MoRTH specification clause 601.

Rajasthan

No. Item Construction of un-reinforced, dowel (Rs.)
No. jointed, plain cement concrete
pavement over a prepared sub-base
with 43 grade cement @ 400 Kg per
cum, coarse and fine aggregate
conforming to IS: 383, maximum
size of coarse aggregate not
exceeding 25 mm, mixed in a
batching and mixing plant as per
approved mix design, transported to
site, laid with a fixed form or slip
6.06 R-9/3 form paver, spread, compacted and Cum 5225.85
finished in a continuous operation 1,762.50 9,210,561
including provision of contraction,
expansion, construction and
longitudinal joints, joint filler,
separation membrance, sealant
primer, joint sealant, debonding
strip, dowel bar, tie rod, admixtures
as approved, curing compound,
finishing to lines and grades as per
drawing complete as per MoRTH
specification clause 602.
BILL NO.7 -DRAINAGE & RETAINING WALL
A. COVER DRAIN
7(A).0 trenches in 250 mm layers, ramming,
B-2/ 1 watering and disposal of surplus
1
Clause 301 to 305
B-2/
In ordinary soil
1.1
B-2/
Depth upto 3 metre Cum
1.1.1 7378.4 177.50 1,309,684
Providing and laying Plain cement
concrete mix with stone aggregate 20
7(A).0
R-7/ 2 up to a depth of 1.50 metres
2 below ground level and/or 1.50
1000 & 1700.
R-7/
plinth upto 1.5 mtr. from ground Cum
2.1 level 691.725 3858.75 2,669,194

Rajasthan

No.
7(A).0 Item
B-2/ (Rs.)
P.C.C. grade M20 Cum
2a No.
3.2 3408.5 4410.00 15,031,485
Providing & fabricating steel
reinforecemnt for RCC work including
7(A).0 cutting, bending, placing in position and
R-7/3
2b binding complete including cost of
binding wire as per MoRTH
Specification : Section 1000 & 1600
7(A).0
R-7/3.2 Fe 415 Steel reinforcement
3 Tonne 170.425 59535 10,146,252
Providing A.C pipe Weep holes
150mm dia in Masonry/Plain
Concrete/.Reinforced Concrete
7(A).0
B-3/12 abutment, wing wall/return wall Meter
4 complete as per drawing and
technical specification.[MoRTH
Specification Clause 2205] 1604 198.45 318,314
TOTAL FOR DRAIN 8020 Rmt.
29,474,929
B. TOE WALL
trenches in 250 mm layers, ramming,
7(B).01 B-2/ 1 watering and disposal of surplus
Clause 301 to 305
B-2/
In ordinary soil
1.1
B-2/
Depth upto 3 metre Cum 440.00
1.1.1 177.50 78,101
Providing and laying Plain cement
concrete mix with stone aggregate 20
7(B).02 R-7/ 2 up to a depth of 1.50 metres
below ground level and/or 1.50
1000 & 1700.
7(B).02 R-7/
plinth upto 1.5 mtr. from ground Cum 40.00
a 2.1 level 3858.75 154,350
7(B).02 B-2/
P.C.C. grade M20 Cum 9.00
b 3.2 4410.00 39,690

Rajasthan

No. Item Stone masonry work in cement mortar (Rs.)
1:3 with mechnical mixer for foundation
No. complete including all scaffolding etc.
7(B).03 B-3/ 2 excluding pointing and plastering as per
drawing and technical specification as
per MoRTH Specification : Section
1000,1400
B-3/ Random Rubble masonry
2.2 (coursed/un-coursed)
7(B).03 B-3/
Up to 5 meter height Cum 216.00 3423.26
a 2.2.1 739,425
Providing and laying Cement concrete
for plain/reinforced concrete in open
foundation as per drawing and technical
7(B).04 B-2/ 3 specification as per MoRTH
Specification : Section 1500, 1700 &
2100 including form work at any level.
7(B).04 B-2/ P.C.C. grade M20
Cum 40.00
a 3.2 4410.00 176,400
Providing Cement plaster 12mm thick in
R-7/ cement mortar 1:3 at all levels as per
7(B).05 MoRTH Specfication: Clause:1000 &
Sqm 400.00
11 55,125
1300 137.81
Back filling behind abutment, wing wall
and return wall in 150mm layers, with
mechanical compaction, complete with
7(B).06 B-1/ 3 all lead and lift as per drawing and
technical specification as per MoRTH
Specification : Clause : 304
7(B).06 B-1/
Gravelly material Cum 700.00 661.50
a 3.1 463,050
Providing A.C pipe Weep holes 150mm
dia in Masonry/Plain
Concrete/.Reinforced Concrete
7(B).07 B-3/12 abutment, wing wall/return wall Meter 400.00 198.45
complete as per drawing and technical 79,380
specfication as per MoRTH Specification
Clause 2205
TOTAL FOR TOE WALL 400 Rmt.

1,785,521
C. UNLINED DRAIN
Construction of unlined surface
drains of average cross sectional area
0.40 sqm in soil to specified lines,
grades, levels and dimensions to the
N.S. requirement of clause 301 and 309.
Excavated material to be used in
7(C embankment within a lead of 50
).01 metres (average lead 25 metres)
Mechanical means
N.S. RM
56572.8 71.0 4,016,725
D. PEDESTRAIN GUARD RAIL

Rajasthan

No. Item Providing, fixing and erecting 50 (Rs.)
No. mm dia tubular steel pipe railing as
per IS 1239 in 3 rows duly painted
on medium weight steel channels
7(D).01 N.S. (ISMC series) 100 mm x 50 mm x P.Rmt 2,200.00 1197.315
1.2 meter high above ground, 2 mm 2,634,093
centre to centre, complete as per
approved drawings as per MoRTH
specification Cl. 808.
BILL NO.8 - JUNCTION IMPROVEMENT
trees of girth upto 300mm, removal
8.01 of stumps, disposal of unserviceable
Specification : 201
R-2/
8.01a Hact. 1.13 12,128
6.2.1 In area of light jungle 13,730
Earth work in excavation including
stacking/ disposal of surplus earth
with all lifts and lead upto 1000
8.02 meters exclusive of compensation of
earth (MoRTH specification Clause
301 to 305).
mechanically by power shovel
R-3/ including mechanical loading and
8.02a Cum 6228.68 38
3.1.2 carriage upto 1 km by tipper/dumper 236,915
(3.1.2+ with all lifts and leads, transporting
Cum 7983.68 170
1,357,709
305.

Rajasthan

No. compacting specified graded crushed
R-
4/(4+4. compacting with vibratory
8.04
lead
8.04a Cum 2157.30 1,091
2,353,691
Providing, laying, spreading and
compacting crushed graded stone
aggregate of as per table 400-10 and
400-11 to Wet Mix Macadam
specification including premixing
the material with water to OMC in
mechnical mixer as per approved
design mix, carriage of mixed
material by Tipper to site, laying in
R-
uniform layers with motor
5/(2+2. grader/F.E. Loader/paver finisher in
Cum 3114.34 1,693
8.05 5,273,944
1a) sub base / base course on a well
prepared under base and compacting
with vibratory roller to achieve the
desired density including lighting,
guarding, barricading and
maintance of diversion etc.
(MoRTH specification : Clause
406) by mechanical means with
lead up to 9km.
R- specifications @ 7.5 kg /10 sqm with
a self propelled or towed bitumen
8.06 5/(4+4. pressure sprayer equipped for
Sqm 12718.17 39.08
497,072
1) spraying the material uniformly at
502,112

Rajasthan

No. Item Providing and applying primer coat (Rs.)
No. over prepared surface or granular
specifications @ 6 kg /10 sqm with a
self propelled or towed bitumen
8.07 R-6/ 5 pressure sprayer equipped for
spraying the material uniformly at
502,112
On granular surface treated with
R-6/
8.07a primer and on hungary bituminous Sqm 19067.35 15.77
5.1 surface @3.0/10 sq.m. 300,611
R-6/ On Bituminous surface @ 2.5 Kg/10
8.07b sq.m.
Sqm 19067.35 13.40
5.1 255,414
Providing and laying Dense
Bituminous Macadam on prepared
surface with specified graded
crushed aggregates as per table 510
and design mix for base/binder
course including loading of material
with F.E loader, heating of binder
(including cost of antistripping
compound wherever required)
aggregate and filler in hot mix plant
40-60 TPH transporting the mixed
R-6/
8.08 material by tippers and laying with
20 sensor paver finisher as per clause
507.3.5 to the required level and
grade, rolling by self propelled
power rollers and vibratory rollers or
pneumatic tyred roller 150-250KN.
TP=0.7MPa to achieve the desired
density (approved by the
department) but excluding cost of
primer/tack coat. [MoRTH
Specification : Clause 507,112] with
4.50 % Bitumen
R-6/
with bitumen grade 60/70 additional
(20+20
8.08a lead of mix material 9 KM. from Cum 953.37 8,869.61
.2+20a plant to site. 8,456,001
(i)

Rajasthan

No. Item Providing and laying bituminous (Rs.)
No. surface with specified graded stone as
21
509,112)
R-6/
30-45 mm compacted thickness with 6%
(21+21
8.09a binder grading - 2 with additional lead of Cum 695.86 11,089.50
.1+21a mix material 9KM. from plant to site. 7,716,743
(i)
Providing and laying of interlocking
R- concrete block pavements having
8.10 11/33.1 thickness 80mm as per drawing and
Sqm 7742.16 595.35
4,609,295
technical specifications.
P & F precast cement concrete M-15
grade kerb over 20 mm thick base of
cement mortar 1 : 6 including jointing
8.11 R-8/3
with cement mortar 1:4 and painting with
RM 4342.00 214.9875
933,476
enamel paint complete as per MoRTH
specification clause:1000 & 1700.
BILL NO.9 - TRAFFIC SIGNS, MARKINGS & OTHER ROAD APPURTENANCES
Providing and laying of hot applied
thermo plastic compound inclusive of
type-1 reflectorising glass beads as per
table 800.3, 800.4 applied in uniform
thickness of at least 2.5 mm and spread
uniformlywith reflectorising glass beads
9.01 R-11/12 type-2 in addition @ 250 gm/scm with a Sqm 14273.6 882
road marking machine as per IRC : 35 12,589,315
complete with traffic diversion
arrangement as per MoRTH specification
clause 803.4. ( '-do- without surface
applied galss beads type-2 but including
of type 1 galss beads. )

Rajasthan

No. Item Providing and erecting a "Thrie" (Rs.)
No. metal beam crash barrier comprising
of 3 mm thick corrugated sheet metal
beam rail, 85 Cm above road/ ground
level, fixed on ISMC series channel
vertical post, 150 x 75 x 5 mm
JAIPU spaced 2 m centre- to- centre, 2 m
R high with 1.15 m below ground level
9.02 , all steel parts and fitments to be
P.Rmt 1400 4189.5
BSR/8. 5,865,300
37 galvanized by hot dip process, all
fittings to conform to IS: 1367 and
IS: 1364 , metal beam rail to be fixed
on the vertical post with a space of
channel section 150 x 75 x 5 mm ,
546 mm long complete as per Clause
810.
Supply of Cat's Eye made of aluminium
alloy size 75 x 100 x 22 mm having 21
9.03 R-8/25 bi-convex lenses embedded in circular Each 7874 231.525
disk of ABS plastic on each side.
1,822,935
Fixing of cat's eyes on road surface/walls

R- including transportation, excavation
9.03a Each 7874 66.15
8/28.4 etc. complete. 520,839
9.04 N.S. Sign Board LumSump Provision
Kilo Metre Stone (Reinforced
cement concrete M15grade kilometre
9.04a stone of standard design as per
IRC:8-1980, fixing in position
including painting and printing etc)
9.04b 5th kilometre stone (precast) Each
Ordinary Kilometer stone
9.04c Each
(Precast)
9.04d Hectometer stone (Precast) Each
Retro- reflectorised Traffic signs Each
9.05e 90 cm equilateral triangle Each
9.05f 60 cm equilateral triangle Each
9.05g 60 cm circular Each
9.05h 80 mm x 60 mm rectangular Each
9.05i 60 cm x 45 cm rectangular Each
9.05j 60 cm x 60 cm square Each
9.05k 90 cm high octagon Each
9.05l 60 cm high octagon Each
9.05m Direction and Place Identification Each

signs upto 0.9 sqm size board.
Direction and Place Identification
9.05n signs with size more than 0.9 sqm Each
size board.
9.06o Overhead Signs Board Each

Rajasthan

No.
9.07P Item Cantilever Sign Board Each (Rs.)
No.
10,293,771.41
P & F precast cement concrete M-15
grade kerb over 20 mm thick base of
cement mortar 1 : 6 including jointing
9.05 R-8/3
with cement mortar 1:4 and painting with RM 3960 214.9875
851,351
enamel paint complete as per MoRTH
specification clause:1000 & 1700.
BILL NO.10 - TOLL PLAZA TOLL PLAZA (2+2 LANE)
Toll Plaza With 2+2 Lane along
10.01 with extra lane for oversize
vehicle on either side
Central Portion of Rigid
Pavement ( M-40)
Canopy ,
Provision of Administrative
Building, Rest Room, Generator
Room, Medical and Traffic Post
Toll cabins and automatic
barriers,
Necessary Road Furniture,
Signage, Display Boards,Kerb,
Foothpath, electrification, high
mast lights, computers etc.
Provision for weigh in motion,
Static weigh bridge and
Generator Etc.
Provision of Water Supply. Nos 1 22500000 22500000
BILL NO.11 - BUS SHELTERS & PLANATION
11.01 Bus Shelter
with all lift, dewatering, shoring
and shuttering etc. including
refilling of trenches in 250 mm
B- layers, ramming, watering and
11.01a
1/1.1.1 disposal of surplus earth with all
82 178 14626
lifts and lead upto 1000 meters
exclusive of compensation of
Clause 301 to 305 In ordinary
soil Depth upto 3 metre Cum

Rajasthan

No. Item
R-3/ (Rs.)
No.
(3.1.2+
11.01b 6+7+9. Earth filling in foundation with 36 170 6122
2+10+ available earth including
11.1) watering & compacting Cum
R-3/
(3.1.2+
11.01c 6+7+9. 12 170 2007
2+10+ Filling basement with new earth
11.1) including watering & compacting Cum
11.01d B-2/3.2 PCC M15 with 20mm down 12 3859 45533

aggregate for levelling course Cum
Brickwork in CM 1:3 for
11.01e R-7/4.1 54 4134 222016
foundation Cum
12mm Plastering in CM 1:3 upto
11.01f R-7/11 77 137.8 10570
basement Sqm
R-
11.01g 7/(4.1+ Brick Masonry in CM 1:3 for 71 4261.2 301690
5) walls Cum
11.01h B-2/3.7 RCC beam with M20 concrete 1 4410.0 5292

(20mm down aggregate) Cum
11.01i B-2/3.8 RCC chajja with M25 concrete Cum 2 4851.0 7277
RCC facia with 1:3 CM, 20mm
11.01j R-11/32 3 385.9 965
thick Sqm
11.01k B-2/3.7 RCC roof slab with M20 concrete Cum 25 4410.0 109368
R-
11.01l 7/(4.1+ 4 4261.2 15142
5) Parapet wall with brick work Cum
Outside plastering with 1:3 CM,
11.01m R-7/11 483 137.8 66550
20mm thick Sqm
Inside plastering with 1:3 CM,
11.01n R-7/11 288 137.8 39745
20mm thick Sqm
Plastering with CM 1:3 for roof,
11.01o R-7/11 130 137.8 17916
12mm thick Sqm
Flooring with CC 40mm thick
with 20mm down aggregate and
11.01p R-7/1.3 4 3307.5 11894
floating coat of 20mm thick CM
1:3 finished with red oxide Sqm
R- Sitting platform 100mm thick
11.01q
11/31.2
35 3638.25 126247
with bottom support Sqm
2 coat painting outside with a
11.01r R-11/2 coat of primer with water bound 483 55.125 26620
cement paint Sqm
2 coat painting inside with a coat
11.01s R-11/9 of primer including ceiling with 497 19.845 9865
washable distemper Sqm

Rajasthan

No. Item Reinforcement for roof, beam, (Rs.)
11.01t R-7/3.2
No. 2 59535 147504
chejja & platform TONNE
Planting of Trees and their
Maintenance for one Year
(Planting of trees by the road side
(Avenue trees) in 0.60 m dia holes,
1 m deep dug in the ground, mixing
11.02 N.S. Nos 3937 870 3425016
the soil with decayed farm
yard/sludge mannure, planting the
saplings, backfilling the trench,
watering, fixing the tree guard and
maintaining the plants for one year)

Rajasthan
CHAPTER 7
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Background
The main objective of financial analysis is to assess the likely returns to the investors
under realistic conditions/assumptions. In the present studies the financial viability of the
project is assessed, assuming minimum Equity IRR to be >=15%, on the basis of project’s
financial internal rate of return on investments, which is estimated on the basis of cash
flow analysis.
The analysis attempts to ascertain the extent to which the investment can be recovered
through toll revenue and the gap, if any, be provided through grant. This covers aspects
like financing through debt and equity, loan repayment, debt servicing, taxation,
depreciation, etc. The viability of the project is evaluated on the basis of Equity IRR. The
Equity IRR is estimated on the basis of cash flow analysis, where both costs and revenues
have been indexed to take account of inflation.
7.2 Homogenous Sections
The Project Road has been divided into one tolling homogenous sections with respect to
traffic volume based on location of major intersections/settlements. The traffic
homogenous sections are re-arranged/clubbed for tolling, tolling sections are presented
below.
Table 7.1: Details of Toll Homogenous Sections

Tolling From Design Bypass Structure
Location as per Location as per
Homogenous km to Length >5 Cr., >5 Cr., if
Existing Design
Section # km (Km) if any any
Chainage Chainage
HS-1 (SH-
Km 16+000 Km 16+000 0+000 39.668 - -
19) to

Rajasthan

Tolling From Design Bypass Structure
Location as per Location as per
Homogenous km to Length >5 Cr., >5 Cr., if
Existing Design
Section # km (Km) if any any
Chainage Chainage
39+668
7.3 Traffic Count
The Classified Traffic Volume Count is carried out at 2 locations in the month of
 1st Count – in October 2014

 2nd Count – in February 2015
Table below presents the average of traffic count conducted in the month of Oct 2014 and
February 2015.
Table 7.2: Categorization of Vehicles as per the Types mentioned in Toll Policy (AADT)

Buses 233 188
2-Axle 210 143
3-Axle 280 258
HCM/EME/MAV (4 to 6) 120 175
OSV (7+++) 0 0
2 Wheeler 1368 809
3Wheeler 27 6
Bi-Cycle 20 9
Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0

Rajasthan
Animal-Drawn 20 7
Hand-Drawn 1 0
The traffic (AADT) at all survey locations is projected to analyses the concession period
based on the traffic capacity parameters. Maximum capacity for 2Lane (7.00m) & 2 lane
with Paved Shoulder are considered as 15,000 PCUs & 18,000 PCUs respectively based
on Standard Capacities for roads in Rajasthan, approved by Cabinet Note of Govt. of
Rajasthan.
Table 7.3: Traffic Projection (PCUs)
Sr Avg. Projected
No. Traffic
Traffic Projection in Terms of PCU
2015 6590 5162 5876 Base Year
2016 6920 5420 6170 Bidding Year
Start of Concession 01st
2017 1 7266 5691 6479
Oct-2016
2018 2 7629 5976 6803
2019 3 8010 6275 7143
2020 4 8411 6589 7500
2021 5 8832 6918 7875
2022 6 9274 7264 8269
2023 7 9738 7627 8683
2024 8 10225 8008 9117
2025 9 10736 8408 9572
2026 10 11273 8828 10051
2027 11 11837 9269 10553
2028 12 12429 9732 11081
2029 13 13050 10219 11635
2030 14 13703 10730 12217

Rajasthan
Sr Avg. Projected
No. Traffic
2031 15 14388 11267 12828
2032 16 15107 11830 13469
2033 17 15862 12422 14142
2034 18 16655 13043 14849
LOS B of Two lane with
2035 19 17488 13695 15592
Granular Sholuder
2036 20 18362 14380 16371
2037 21 19280 15099 17190
2038 22 20244 15854 18049
LOS B of Two lane with
2039 23 21256 16647 18952
Paved Shoulder
2040 24 22319 17479 19899
2041 25 23435 18353 20894
2042 26 24607 19271 21939
2043 27 25837 20235 23036
2044 28 27129 21247 24188
2045 29 28485 22309 25397
2046 30 29909 23424 26667
Hence maximum concession period of 23 years can be considered for the project road.
7.4 Cost of the Project
The costing of the project is done as per the details covered in this report.
Civil Construction Cost = 74.71 Cr
TPC (Total Project Cost) = 93.39 Cr
7.4.1 Phasing of the Capital Cost
The total cost for the proposed project road has been computed based on the 2014-15
prices. The annual phasing of capital cost is made as per the work schedule. Construction
cost is phased over a 1.5 years construction period from Oct 2016 to March 2018 as 60%
and 40% respectively.

Rajasthan
7.5 Toll Rates
Toll rates have been taken as per the FEE RULES NOTIFICATION of Government of
Rajasthan published 18th March-2015.
The project road is considered in one tolling homogenous sections with one toll plazas.
The toll rate applicable for the toll plazas as applicable is presented in Table 7.4 below.
Table 7.4: Toll rates applicable for project road in 2018-19
Mini- Bus/2A 3-6 Axle

Year Car >=7 Axle
Bus/LCV Truck Truck
2015-16 (Base Rate of fee
1.05 1.60 3.15 5.25 6.30
per Km) (in Rs.)
Toll Plaza-1(Rs.) 50 75 145 245 295
7.5.1 Toll Revenue
The toll revenue is the product of the forecast traffic expected to use the road and the
appropriate toll fee for the vehicle category. A toll indexing pattern @5% per year has
been adopted and rounded off to nearest five Rupees. Toll revenues have been calculated
for each of toll fee structure proposed above is given below in Table 7.5
Table 7.5 Expected Toll revenue earning from the Toll Plaza
Financial
S.No Total Revenue (Cr.)
Year
1 2018 11.01
2 2019 12.16
3 2020 13.52
4 2021 14.77
5 2022 16.51
6 2023 18.40
7 2024 20.55
8 2025 22.47
9 2026 24.90
10 2027 27.85

Rajasthan
11 2028 30.82
12 2029 34.20
13 2030 38.02
14 2031 42.35
15 2032 46.83
16 2033 52.06
17 2034 58.02
18 2035 64.59
19 2036 72.05
20 2037 79.86
21 2038 89.24
7.6 Operation and Maintenance Period Expenses
Routine maintenance costs comprise of maintenance of the pavement, collection of litter,

traffic management (policing), accident repairs and all ancillary works including
beautification.
The periodic maintenance costs include cost of overlay, repair/renovation of road

furniture, drains, buildings etc. The periodic maintenance includes periodic renewals at
every 6 years as per circular (Circular No ACE/PPP/PA/489 dated 25 Nov, 2014)
7.7 Results and Analysis
Based on the project structure traffic study and toll rate analysis, financial feasibility
analysis has been carried out as per the methodology outlined in earlier sections. The
minimum Equity IRR (Return on Equity) considered for the project is 15%. Financial
indicators are presented in Table 7.6 below.
Table 7.6 Financial Indicators
Total
Sr. Project Concession Project Equity
VGF Remarks
No. Cost Period IRR IRR
(Cr)
Project is
1 93.39 23 Years 4.00% 13.90% 15.00% Viable on
PPP(VGF)

Rajasthan
Project is financially Viable on PPP (VGF).

Project is viable with 4.00% VGF in 23 years Concession Period.
7.8 RECOMMENDATIONS
 Project is Financially Viable on PPP (VGF).

 Project is viable with 4.00 % Grant in 23 years Concession Period including
construction period.
Hence consultant recommends the project to be taken up on PPP (VGF).

Combined Feasiblity Report - Two Laning From Nagaur To Tarnau in The State of Rajasthan PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Combined Feasiblity Report - Two Laning From Nagaur To Tarnau in The State of Rajasthan PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Consultancy Services for Preparation of Feasibility Report for Two-

laning of Km. 0+000 to Km. 35+000 of SH-19 section comprising the

YONGMA Engineering Co, Ltd.

0.2 INVESTIGATIONS & EVALUATIONS

0.3 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTIONS

Table 0.1: Project Length

Nagaur to Tarnau (SH-19)

1 7.0m wide carriageway with 1.0m to 1.5m Earthen shoulder 39.676(100%)

Total 39.676 (100%)

Final Feasibility Report,October-2015 Executive Summary Page - 1

0.3.2 District and Nodal Towns/Villages on the Project Road

0.3.3 Traffic Volume

Vehicle Category Km 6+500 Km 30+640

Tollable Traffic (Nos)

0.3.4 Proposed Developmental Plan/Construction features are summarised as here under:

a) Widening scheme can be summarised as given in Table 0.3

Final Feasibility Report,October-2015 Executive Summary Page - 2

Table 0.3: Summary of Widening Scheme-SH-19

A. Existing Road Width 7.0 (Two Lane)

Widening of 2lane to 4-Lane with

Total Length 39.668 KM

0.3.5 Bypasses and Realignment

Final Feasibility Report,October-2015 Executive Summary Page - 3

Design Design CBR of

0+000 39+668 11 24 12.50 VG-30 40 50 250 200 540

It is recommended to design the bituminous layers for 8 years considering 11MSA

Stretches proposed for

0.3.8 IRC: 58-2011 Method of Rigid Pavement Design –:

a) Pavement composition thickness for rigid pavements is given in Table 0.6.

Table 0.6: Rigid Pavement Composition

Material Type Thickness (mm)

Pavement Quality Concrete (M-40) 300

Dry Lean Concrete (M-10) 150

Granular Sub-base 150

Final Feasibility Report,October-2015 Executive Summary Page - 4

0.3.9 Junction Improvement

Table: 0.7- Intersection

Final Feasibility Report,October-2015 Executive Summary Page - 5

0.3.10 Proposal of Bridges, Culverts and other Structures

a) Major & Minor Bridges

There is no any major/ minor bridge along the Project Highway.

Table 0.8: Summary of Development of Existing Bridges

Table 0.9: Summary of Development of Culverts

c) ROB at Railway line crossing

Table 0.10: List of Railway crossing and its Development Proposal

Final Feasibility Report,October-2015 Executive Summary Page - 6

S.No. Location Gauge Type of LC No. Proposal

0.3.11 Proposal for Underpass/Flyover

No underpass or flyover is proposed along the project road.

0.3.12 Truck Lay byes

Table 0.11: List of Bus Shelters

S.No Design Chainage Side(LHS/RHS)

Table 0.12: Details Toll Plaza

Toll Plaza Toll Plaza

Final Feasibility Report,October-2015 Executive Summary Page - 7

Total Design Length (Km) 39.668

Table 0.13: Abstract Cost Estimate

2 EARTHWORKS 2.90 2.90

3 SUB-BASE COURSE & BASE COURSE 14.11 14.11

4 BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT WORKS 41.18 41.18

a) Culverts 1.61 1.61

DRAINAGE, PROTECTION WORK & RE

TRAFFIC SIGNS, MARKINGS & OTHER