PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT (Tura Dalu CS)

Alliance Engineers and Consultants
WIDENING AND UPGRADATION TO 2-

LANE WITH PAVED SHOULDER
CONFIGURATION AND GEOMETRIC
IMPROVEMENT OF NH-51 (TURA-
DALU) IN THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA
ON EPC MODE
Pavement Design Report
CLIENT: Contractor:
M/S Manaranjan Brahma
Kokrajhar, Assam- 783380

WIDENING AND UPGRADATION TO 2- LANE WITH PAVED SHOULDER CONFIGURATION AND GEOMETRIC IMPROVEMENT OF NH-51 (TURA-DALU) IN THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA ON EPC MODE
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 4
2 EXISTING CONDITION OF THE ROAD.................................................................... 6
3 CLIMATIC CONDITION OF THE AREA ................................................................... 7
4 DRAINAGE CONDITION ........................................................................................... 7
5 MATERIALS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION ..................................................... 8
5.1 Embankment and Subgrade Material ....................................................................... 9
5.1.1 Cement Stabilisation ...................................................................................... 10
5.2 Aggregates for work.............................................................................................. 11
5.2.1 Granular Sub Base (GSB) .............................................................................. 11
5.2.2 Aggregates for Wet Mix Macadam (WMM) .................................................. 12
5.2.3 Bituminous Concrete or Surface Course (BC) ................................................ 13
5.3 Cement Content .................................................................................................... 15
5.4 Lime for Pre-Treatment ......................................................................................... 15
6 SCOPE OF PAVEMENT DESIGN ............................................................................. 15
6.1 Methodology of Proposed Pavement Design ......................................................... 16
6.2 CBR values for the proposed highway................................................................... 16
6.3 Design Traffic ....................................................................................................... 18
6.3.1 Cumulative Million Standard Axles (CMSA) ................................................. 18
7 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS .................................................. 18
7.1 Selection of a Trial Section ................................................................................... 18
7.2 Parameters for the Design ..................................................................................... 19
7.2.1 General .......................................................................................................... 19
7.2.2 Mechanical Properties of different Layers ...................................................... 20
7.3 Input Parameters ................................................................................................... 22
8 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE MODELS ................................................................. 23
8.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria ...................................................................................... 23
ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 2

8.2 Fatigue Cracking Performance of the Bituminous Layer ....................................... 23
9 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ...................................................................................... 24
9.1 Calculations as per IRC 37:2018 ........................................................................... 24
9.1.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria ............................................................................... 24
9.1.2 Fatigue Performance model for Bituminous Layer ......................................... 24
9.2 Calculations Derived from IIT-PAVE software ..................................................... 25
9.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................ 25
10 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 25

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT
1 INTRODUCTION
The Government of Meghalaya through NHIDCL has awarded the construction of “ 2-lane
with Geometric Improvements of Tura Dalu road under JICA funding from km 85.000 to
95.000 & km 101.00 to km 145.00 to 2- Lane with pave shoulder of Tura Dalu section of
NH-51] (Design Length- 54.000 Km) in The State Of Meghalaya under EPC mode to the
executing agency M/sManaranjana Brahma.
The Project Highway comprises the section of National Highway – 51 commencing from Km
85.000 to 95.000 & Km 101.000 to Km 145.000 i.e. from Tura to Dalu in the state of
Meghalaya to be upgraded to 2 lane standard from existing Single lane.
The Development of the Project Highway shall include design and construction of the Project
Highway as described in this Schedule-B and in Schedule-Cof the Contract agreement.
The Project Highway shall be designed and constructed in conformity with the Specifications
and Standards specified in Annex-I of Schedule-Dof the contract agreement.
The EPC Contractor shall be responsible for engineering surveys, investigation and detailed
engineering designs and prepare the working drawings for all the components relevant for the
improvement and up-gradation of the Project Highway to fulfil the scope of the project.
These shall comply with design specifications and standards given in Schedule–D. The
designs for different project facilities shall follow the locations and indicative designs given
in Schedule–C and shall comply with design specifications and standards outlined in
Schedule–D.
The guidelines for design of pavement for the project stretch as per Clause5 of Schedule B of
the contract agreementare as follows :
5.1 Pavement design shall be carried out in accordance with the IRC:37-2012.

5.2 Type of pavement:Flexible Pavement will be designed in accordance with the IRC:37-
2012.
5.3 Design Requirements:Design requirement for the flexible pavement shall be in

accordance with section 5 of the IRC: SP-73-2015,and the IRC: 37-2012 or the latest version
of both.
5.3.1 Design Period and strategy: Flexible pavement for new pavement or for widening and
strengthening of the existing pavement shall be designed for a minimum design period of 15
years. Stage construction shall not be permitted.
5.3.2 Design Traffic : The design traffic specified in the IRC: SP-73-2015 Section 5.4.1 (i)
shall be applied,
5.3.3 Subgrade Soil: The requirements for the Subgrade’s CBR specified in IRC: SP-73-
2015,IRC: 37-2012 and MoRTH (Specification of Roads and Bridges) shall be satisfied.
In this instant proposal, the pavement design has been carried out as out as per the guidelines
of IRC 37:2018 as per the requirement of clause 5.3 of the contract agreement.
The Design Director and his team have carried out detailed surveys and investigations to
finalize the pavement design of project road in conformity with the stipulations of IRC. This
report highlights the “Pavement Design” undertaken for the project road in greater details.
The pavement industry looks for ways of improving lower quality materials that are readily
available for use in road way construction. Cement /lime treatment has become an accepted
method for increasing the strength and durability of soils and marginal aggregates, reducing
quantity of aggregates. Indian roads congress (IRC) developed a special publication for mix
design of base/subgrade.No pavement design guideline is presently available cement treated
sub base. To overcome this problem, the objective of present research work is to develop a
pavement design chart using cement and lime stabilized sub base for rural and urban roads
with light and medium traffic (up to 50 MSA). It not only saves money but also helps to
increase life cycle of roads.
We have designed cement stabilised subgrade, subbase and base for the concerned highway
according to IRC-37:2018, IRC-SP 89 Part II:2018 and MoRTH section 400.

The cement stabilised base and subbase of a road section is the future for National Highways
as it has proved to be more beneficial in terms of cost effectiveness , strength and durability
in its use all over the world.
2 EXISTING CONDITION OF THE ROAD

The project road passes through district West Garo Hills of Meghalaya state. The headquarter
of the district is at Tura which is the second largest town in the state after Shillong, the capital
of the State Meghalaya. As per census of lndia, the population of the district is 5,18,390 and
area of the district is 3677 Sq. Km. The National Highway 51 connects Paikan on NH-37 In
the State of Assam 0.000 of NH-51 is at Paikan and after traversing 21.82 Km in Assam and
then It traverses in Meghalaya and connects Tura and thereafter extends further to Dalu in
Meghalaya, near the Bangladesh border.
The commercial traffic, though not quite enough all along 12 months, gain its peak October
onwards carrying mainly the quarry materials, coats and bamboo to Bangladesh So the
upgrading of this road to National Highway (NH) standard for the present is quite reasonable
keeping the provision for ultimate State highway standard.
NH51 North section starts at the Kilometer Post of 85 on the existing road and ends at
Kilometer Post of 95 on the existing road before entering Tura city. The NH51 South section
starts at Kilometer Post of 101 on the existing road after Tura city and ends at Kilometer Post
of 145 in Dalu. The intersection of NH51 with NH62 at the south end is about 575m far from
the Kilometer Post of 145.M/S Manoranjan Brahma has been awarded the contract for the
construction of the road through international competitive bidding.

Map 1: Map showing the state of Meghalaya and Project Alignment
3 CLIMATIC CONDITION OF THE AREA

The climate of the district is largely controlled by South-West monsoon and seasonal winds.
The West Garo Hills district being relatively lower in altitude to the rest of Meghalaya,
experiences a fairly high temperature for most part of the year. The average rainfall is
330cms. of which more than two-thirds occur during the monsoon, winter being practically
dry. The district has mostly dense tropical mixed forest, and a small patch of temperate forest
in the higher parts of the Tura range
4 DRAINAGE CONDITION
The Tura range forms watershed in the West Garo Hills district, from which the rivers flow
towards Bangladesh plains in the south and the Brahmaputra valley in the north and the west.
The important rivers of the north group are the Kalu, Ringgi and the Didak. The important
rivers of the southern group are the Bhogai, Dareng etc. The Tura range is also the source of
the Simsang (Someswari), one of the major rivers of Meghalaya, whose valley is of the most
important feature in the South Garo Hills.
Someswari: This is the largest and the second longest river in the whole district. The river is
locally known as Simsang. It starts from Nokrekmountains and runs towards the east, passing
through Rongrenggre, Williamnagar the headquarters of East Garo Hills district,
Nongalbibra, Siju, Rewak and lastly Baghmara the headquarters of South Garo Hills district.

The upper course of this river is not navigable due to the high number of cataracts and
numerous huge stones. However, the lower course has many deep pools and falls. They are
Mirik, Matma, Kan´chru Suk, Jamiseng, Warisik, Bobra, Goka etc. The chief tributaries are
Chibok, Rongdik, Rompa and Ringdi rivers
Jinjiram: It starts from Derek village and its main tributary starts from Upot Lake. It runs
towards the east connecting with Gaguariver, then runs through the border of Goalpara
towards Phulbari and reaches Hallidayganj where it enters the Goalpara district. It is the
longest river in the Garo Hills districts.
Kalu: Locally this river is called Ganol. Its sources start from Tura peak and runs towards the
west through Damalgre, Garobadha and Rangapani before it enters Goalpara district. Its chief
tributaries are Dilni and Rongram rivers
Didak: It stars from Anogre village and runs through Garo Hills district before it enters into
Goalpara district.
Bogai: Locally known as Bugi. Its source starts from the southern side of Nokrekmountains
and runs through Dalu village and enters into Mymensingh district in Bangladesh.
Rongai: Starts from Arabela peak and runs through Ringgegre village and then falls into
Jinjiramriver. Locally known as Ringgeriver.
Dareng or Nitai: The source is on the southern side of Nokrekmountain. It runs southwards
through Silkigre and enters into Bangladesh. It has many famous deep pools like Warima,
Rong´ang, Bamon etc. where Bamon is the deepest. The chief tributaries are Kakija, Daji and
Rompa.
5 MATERIALS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

Sources of Material: The Contractor shall notify the Engineer of his proposed sources of
materials prior to delivery. The Contractor shall submit the samples of from the sources of
materials to the Authority’s Engineer for Pre-Construction review. Tests as per the QAP
submitted by the contractor and duly approved by the Authority/Authority’s Engineer are to
be jointly carried out before approving the sources.

5.1 Embankment and Subgrade Material

The materials suitable for subgrade construction:
 Materials from swamps, marshes and bogs;

 Peat, log, stump and perishable material: any soil that, classifies as OL, OI, OH or Pt
in accordance with IS:1498
 Materials susceptible to spontaneous combustion;
 Materials in a frozen condition;
 Clay having liquid limit exceeding 70 and plasticity index exceeding 45; and
 Materials with salts resulting in leaching in the embankment.
 Expansive clay exhibiting marked swell and shrinkage properties ("free swelling
index" exceeding 50 per cent when tested as per IS: 2720 - Part 40} as a fill material.
CCS/CS can be used for soil modification and strengthening of subgrade under the guidelines
laid down in IRC-37:2018. Cement stabilized materials can be used for modification or
improvement of subgrade soil if the soil conforms to the requirements stated in Table 6 of
IRC-89:2010. While keeping in mind the economic standpoint of the proposed project
IRC:89 suggests mix in place stabilisation for the subgrade soil with only granular and silty
cohesive soil.
Table 1 Table 6 of IRC-89:2010
In case mix in stabilisation is performed for subgrade soil using mechanical equipment, the
cement content can be as minimum as .5 percent. However extensive laboratory tests are
needed to be performed to arrive at the minimum cement content. In case the soil is highly

plastic that is plasticity index of the soil is greater than 20, it needs to be stabilized with 2%
percent lime before adding CS/CCS to the selected soil.
5.1.1 Cement Stabilisation

According to IRC SP 89-2010, generally granular soils free of high concentration of organic
matter or deleterious salts are suitable for cement stabilisation. The suitability of soils, can be
advantageous to keep the following criterion in view:
 Plasticity Product (PP) expressed as product of PI of soil and percentage fraction

passing 75 micron sieve should not exceed 60.
 Uniform coefficient of soil should greater than 5 and preferably greater than 10.
 Highly micaceous soils are not suitable for soil stabilisation
 Soils that are having organic content higher than 2 percent and also these soils have
sulphate and carbonate concentration greater than 0.2 percent are not suitable for
cement stabilisation.
The selection of the stabilizer is based on plasticity is based on plasticity and particle size
distribution of the material to be treated. The appropriate stabilizer can be selected according
the criterion shown in Table 5 (IRC SP 89 2010).
In case of High Clay Content in certain soils, lime and cement are needed to be added
separately to soil so that full modification of soil properties can be achieved.

5.2 Aggregates for work
5.2.1 Granular Sub Base (GSB)

The material to be used for the work shall be natural sand, moorum, gravel, crushed stone, or
combination thereof depending upon the grading required. Materials like crushed slag,
crushed concrete, brick metal and kankar may be allowed only with the specific approval of
the Engineer. The material shall be free from organic or other deleterious constituents.
The material shall have a 10 per cent fines value of 50 kN or more (for sample in soaked
condition) when tested in compliance with BS:812 (Part 111). The water absorption value of
the coarse aggregate shall be determined as per IS: 2386 (Part 3); if this value is greater than
2 per cent, the soundness test shall be carried out on the material delivered to site as per IS:
383.
The IRC 37:2018 clause 7.2.1 states that:” If the design thickness of the granular sub-base is
less than or equal to 200 mm, both drainage and filter layers cannot be provided separately
(considering the minimum thickness requirements given in 7.2.2). For such cases, a single
drainage-cum-filter layer with GSB gradation V or VI of MoRTH
specifications may be provided. The material shall be free from organic or other deleterious
constituents and shall conform to the gradings given in Table 400-1 and physical
requirements given in Table 400-2 of MoRTH (Revision Five).
The clause 401.2.2 of MoRTH states that “If the water absorption of the aggregates
determined as per IS:2386 (Part 3) is greater than 2 percent, the aggregates shall be tested for

Wet Aggregate Impact Value (AIV) (IS:5640). Soft aggregates like Kankar, brick ballast and
laterite shall also be tested for Wet AIV (IS:5640).
5.2.2 Aggregates for Wet Mix Macadam (WMM)

Coarse aggregates shall be crushed stone. If crushed gravel/shingle is used, not less than 90
per cent by weight of the gravel/shingle pieces retained on 4.7mm sieve shall have at least
two fractured faces. The aggregates shall conform to the physical requirements set forth in
Table 400-10 of Morth Section 400 below.
Table 2 Table 400-10 of MoRTH(5th Revision)
If the water absorption value of the coarse aggregate is greater than 2 per cent, the soundess
test shall be carried out on the material delivered to site as per IS:2386(Part-5).
The aggregates shall conform to the grading given in Table 400-11.

Table 3 Table 400-11 of Morth (Road and Bridge Works)
5.2.3 Bituminous Concrete or Surface Course (BC)

The aggregates shall satisfy the physical requirements specified in Table below for
Bituminous Concrete.

Property Test Test Method Specification
Cleanliness (dust) Grain Size Analysis IS:2386 Part 1 Max 5% passing

0.075 mm Sieve
Particle Shape Flakiness and IS:2386 Part 1 Max 30%

Elongation Index
(Combined)
Strength* Los Angeles IS:2386 Part 4 Max 30%

Abrasion Value or
Max 24%
Aggregate Impact
Value
Durability Soundness Sodium IS:2386 Part 5 Max 12%

Sulphate
Max 18%
Magnesium
Sulphate
Water Absorption Water Absorption IS:2386 Part 3 Max 2%
Stripping Coating and Striping IS:6241 Maximum retained

of bitumen coating 95%
Aggregate Mixture
Water Sensitivity** Retained Tensile AASTHO T283 Min 80%

Strength
Polishing Polished Stone BS: 812 part 114 Min 55

Value
Table 4Physical Requirement of Coarse Aggregate for BC
* Aggregate may satisfy requirements of either of these two tests
**The Water Sensitivity test is only required if the minimum retained Coating in the stripping
test is less than 95%

5.3 Cement Content

Cement for cement stabilisation shall comply with the requirements of IS: 269. 455 OR 1489.
The quantity of cement to be added as per cent by weight of the dry soil shall be specified in
the Contract. Also if lime is used as pre-treatment for highly clayey soils, the quantity as per
cent by weight of dry soil shall be specified in the Contract. The mix design shall be done on
the basis of 7-day unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and/or durability test under 12
cycles of wet-dry conditions. The laboratory strength values shall be at least 1.5 times the
minimum field UCS value stipulated in the Contract.
5.4 Lime for Pre-Treatment

If needed for pre-treatment of highly clayey soils, Clause 402.2.2 shall apply. Except when
otherwise specified, the soil used for stabilisation shall be the local clayey soil having a
plasticity index greater than 8. Lime for lime-soil stabilisation work shall be commercial dry
lime slaked at site or pre-slaked lime delivered to the site in suitable packing. Unless
otherwise permitted by the Engineer, the lime shall have purity of not less than 70 percent by
weight of Quicklime (CaO) when tested in accordance with IS: 1514. Lime shall be properly
stored to avoid prolonged exposure to the atmosphere and consequent carbonation, which
would reduce its binding properties.
6 SCOPE OF PAVEMENT DESIGN

(i) As per clause 5.1 of Schedule B, Pavement design shall be carried out in accordance
with the IRC:37-2018.
(ii) As per clause 5.2 of Schedule B, Type of pavement: Flexible Pavement will be
designed in accordance with the IRC:37-2018.
(iii) As per clause 5.3 of Schedule B, Design Requirements: Design requirement for the
flexible pavement shall be in accordance with section 5 of the IRC: SP-73-2015, and the IRC:
37-2018 or the latest version of both.
(iv) As per clause 5.3.1 of Schedule B, Design Period and strategy : Flexible pavement for
new pavement or for widening and strengthening of the existing pavement shall be designed
for a minimum design period of 15 years. Stage construction shall not be permitted.

(v) As per clause 5.3.2 of Schedule B, The design traffic specified in the IRC: SP-73-2015
Section 5.4.1 (i) shall be applied. IRC SP:73 2015 clause 5.4.1(i) specifies a minimum traffic
intensity of 20 msa.
(vi) As per clause 5.3.3 of Schedule B, The requirements for the Subgrade’s CBR specified in
IRC: SP-73-2015, IRC: 37-2018 and MoRTH (Specification of Roads and Bridges) shall be
satisfied.
6.1 Methodology of Proposed Pavement Design

The design of flexible pavement for widening of existing carriageway has been carried out in
accordance with IRC-37:2018 (Tentative guidelines for the design of Flexible
Pavements).The detailed methodology is given in the following sections and the summary of
the proposed design is given below.
The design shall involve consideration of the following input variables:
 Design Traffic & Axle load spectrum

 Effective CBR of subgrade
6.2 CBR values for the proposed highway

The summarised CBR values of cement stabilised OGL soil test values are shown below. The
pavement design has been done by targeting a design CBR value of 15%. The full test report
is attached as Annexure-1. The cement stabilisation of OGL soil is a trial and error method
and the properties of the soil has been tested with cement content percent of 2.60%, 2.80%
and 3.00%. Clause 6.2.2 of IRC:37-2018 states that for National Highways 90th percentile
subgrade CBR value neds to be adopted.
Table 5:Table Showing CBR values for different cement content percentage
Chainage Cement Stabilised Soil

2.60% 2.80% 3.00%
CBR CBR CBR
85+000 15.29 19.22 26.19
85+750 16.3 21.93 27.2
86+000 16.64 18.66 24.28
86+750 14.28 19.22 24.73

Chainage Cement Stabilised Soil

2.60% 2.80% 3.00%
CBR CBR CBR
87+250 16.64 17.76 23.72
88+000 17.31 19.22 22.37
88+500 14.73 16.75 23.5
89+000 16.64 18.66 24.06
89+750 14.76 18.77 24.73
The 90th percentile CBR values for the three combinations are listed below:
CC 2.60% = 14.1579
CC 2.80% = 16.53
CC 3.00% = 22.2645
Since we are targeting a CBR value of 15% and considering error during construction we will
be selection a cement content percentage of 2.80% for our design.
Design CBR = 15%

Design Thickness of Cement Stabilised Subgrade = 300 mm
Cement Content = 2.80%
CBR considered for Embankment soil = 8%
6.3 Design Traffic

The traffic loading in terms of the cumulative number of standard axles for the given period
has been computed using the following relationship:
Where,
N = 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 (CVPD).
D = Lane distribution factor
F = Vehicle Damage Factor (VDF).
n = Design life in years.
r = Annual growth rate of commercial vehicles in decimal (e.g., for 5 per cent annual
growth rate, r = 0.05) as per IRC 37-2018, clause no. 4.2.2.
6.3.1 Cumulative Million Standard Axles (CMSA)

Since commercial traffic was found to be less during our traffic survey, data from IRC SP 73
as schedule D of contract agreement is referred with as 20 MSA for design of bituminous
layer and of granular layer.
7 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS
7.1 Selection of a Trial Section

A trial section satisfying the CBR Design and Design Traffic has been proposed for the
pavement design as per IRC 37:2018-

Layers Thickness (mm)

BC 40
DBM 70
WMM 150
GSB 200
CS Subgrade 300
7.2 Parameters for the Design
7.2.1 General
For the given traffic volume, which is expected in the design life, there can be large number
of combinations for the pavement depending on the availability of materials. A strong
subgrade and a strong base along with fatigue and rut resistant bituminous are very important
for a good performing pavement.
With every load repetition, flexible pavements are subjected to compression/tension at

different layers. Fatigue and rutting, induced by traffic repetitions, are generally the main
modes of pavement failures. The tensile strain at the bottom of the bituminous layer, and the
compressive strain on the subgrade are generally considered to be indicative parameters for
fatigue and rutting failures respectively. The pavement crust is to be such that the tensile
strain at the bottom of the bituminous layer and compressive strain on the top of subgrade are
to be less than the allowable strains. In case of cement treated base/sub base construction, the
tensile stress at the bottom of cement treated layer is to be such that, the cumulative fatigue
damage is less than 1.
Allowable strains for the expected traffic are calculated using the fatigue and rutting models
given IRC 37:2018 (Equation 6.1 to 6.5). With the assumed pavement crust, the strains at
critical locations are calculated using IITPAVE software. The adequacy of the design is
checked by comparing these strains with allowable strains as predicted by the fatigue and
rutting models. A satisfactory pavement design is achieved through iterative process by
varying layer thickness/ pavement layer materials.
The various parameters governing the design are given below.

7.2.2 Mechanical Properties of different Layers

GSB
The elastic/resilient modulus value of the granular layer is dependent on the resilient modulus
value of the foundation or supporting layer on which it rests and the thickness of the granular
layer. A weaker support does not permit higher modulus of the upper granular layer because
of the larger deflections caused by loads result in de-compaction in the lower part of the
granular layer. Equation 7.1 of IRC 37:2018 may be used for the estimation of the modulus of
the granular from its thickness and the modulus value of the supporting layer.
MRGRAN = 0.2(h)0.45* MRSUPPORT -----------------(7.1)
Where,
h = thickness of granular layer in mm
MRGRAN = resilient modulus of the granular layer (MPa)
MRSUPPORT = (effective) resilient modulus of the supporting layer (MPa)
As stated previously in these guidelines, the granular base and granular sub-base are
considered as a single layer for the purpose of analysis and a single modulus value is assigned
to the combined layer. Thus, when the pavement has the combination of granular base and
granular sub-base, the modulus of the single (combined) granular layer may be estimated
using equation 7.1 taking the MRGRAN as the modulus of the combined granular layer and
MRSUPPORT as the effective modulus of the subgrade. However, when a cement treated or
emulsion/foam bitumen treated base layer is used over the granular sub-base, both the layers
have to be considered separately in the analysis and separate modulus values have to be
assigned for the GSB and the treated base layers. Equation 7.1 can be used to estimate the
modulus of the granular sub-base taking MRGRAN as the modulus of the granular sub-base
layer and MRSUPPORT as the effective modulus of the subgrade.

WMM
Wet Mix Macadam shall be prepared in an approved mixing plant of suitable capacity having
provision for controlled addition of water and forced/positive mixing arrangement like
pugmill or pan type mixer of concrete batching plant. For small quantity of wet mix work, the
Engineer may permit the mixing to be done in concrete mixers.
Optimum moisture for mixing shall be determined in accordance with IS: 2720 (Part-8) after
replacing the aggregate fraction retained on 22.4 mm sieve with material of 4.75 mm to 22.4
mm size. While adding water, due allowance should be made for evaporation losses.
However, at the time of compaction, water in the wet mix should not vary from the optimum
value by more than agreed limits. The mixed material should be uniformly wet and no
segregation should be permitted.
DBM
Resilient modulus of bituminous mixes depends upon the grade of binder, frequency/load
application time, air voids, shape of aggregate, aggregate gradation, maximum size of the
aggregate, bitumen content, etc. Indicative maximum values of the resilient moduli of
different bituminous mixes with different binders are given in Table 9.2 for reference. The
modulus values given in Table 9.2 are based on a number of laboratory tests conducted on
bituminous mix specimens as per ASTM:4123 upgraded now to ASTM: D7369-09 . ASTM:
D7369-09 essentially retains most of the features of ASTM 4123 but recommends that
Poisson’s ratio also be measured. ASTM:4123 permits the use of assumed Poisson’s ratio
values. These guidelines recommend measurement of the resilient modulus at a temperature
of 35oC as per ASTM:4123 [37] with an assumed Poisson’s ratio value of 0.35. A loading
pulse of 0.1 second duration followed by a rest period of 0.9 second is adopted. Bituminous
mixes undergo reduction in air void content, harden with time and the modulus value will
increase due to ageing effect and the actual modulus values could be more than those given in
Table 9.2. For the measurement of the resilient modulus of DBM, 150 mm diameter
specimens should be used because of the larger size of aggregates used in the DBM mixes.

Table 6Table 9.2 of IRC 37-2018
BC Layer
According to IRC-37:2018, for expressways and national highways, even if the design traffic
is 20 MSA or less, VG40 or modified bitumen shall be used for surface course and VG40
bitumen shall be used for the DBM. In view of the overlap in the viscosity ranges specified in
IS:73 for VG30 and VG40 bitumen, it is recommended that the VG40 bitumen used in the
surface, binder and base bituminous courses shall have a minimum viscosity of 3600 Poise at
600 C temperature to safeguard against rutting. The design of pavement shall be carried out
based on the actual values obtained with field designed DBM/BM mix subject to the
maximum values indicated in Table 9.2 for the selected mix (DBM/BM mixes with selected
unmodified binder) for an average annual pavement temperature of 35 0C. For the climatic
conditions prevailing in the plains of India, the Average Annual Pavement Temperature is
expected to be close to 350C. Volume of air voids and Bitumen Content is considered to be 3
and 11.5 percent respectively..
7.3 Input Parameters

The mechanical properties of all the layers are summarized below:
Design Elastic Modulus of GSB & WMM 278.2 Mpa

Poisson’s Ratio for WMM, GSB, DBM,BC 0.35
Type of Binder for BC VG 40
Elastic Modulus for Binder at 250C 5000 Mpa
Volume of Air Void at BC 3 percent
Volume of Bitumen Content at BC 11.5 percent

Poisson’s Ratio of Bituminous Layer 0.35

CBR of CS Subgrade 15%
CBR of OGL soil 8%
Modulus of CS Subgrade 99.59 Mpa
Modulus of Embankment soil 66.60 Mpa
Figure 7-A Design Mechanical Properties of the Pavement Layers
8 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE MODELS
8.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria

As per equation 3.2, IRC: 37-2018 rut life in number of standard axles is given below:
Where,
NR = Subgrade Rutting Life (Cumulative number of standard Axles of 80 KN load that can
be served by the pavement before a rutting depth of 20 mm or more occurs.)
ϵv = Vertical Compressive strain at the top of the subgrade calculated using linear elastic
layered theory by applying the standard axle load at the selected surface.
IITPAVE software is used in these guidelines for the analysis of pavements. For the
computation of stresses, strains and defections in the pavement, thicknesses and elastic
properties (elastic modulus and Poisson’s ratio) of different layers are the main inputs. For
the calculation of vertical compressive strain on top of the subgrade, horizontal tensile strain
at the bottom of the bottom bituminous layer , the analysis is done for a standard axle load of
80 kN (single axle with dual wheels). Only one set of dual wheels, each wheel carrying 20
kN load with the centre to centre spacing of 310 mm between the two wheels, applied at the
pavement surface shall be considered for the analysis. The shape of the contact area of the
tyre is assumed in the analysis to be circular. The uniform vertical contact stress shall be
considered as 0.56 MPa.
8.2 Fatigue Cracking Performance of the Bituminous Layer

As per equation 3.4, IRC:37-2018 fatigue life in number of standard axles is given below:

Where,
C= 10M, M= 4.84*(Vbe/(Va+Vbe) – 0.69)

Vbe = Percentage of bitumen content
Va = Percentage of Air Void in BC

MRm = Elastic Modulus of Bituminous Layer at 350C
Nf = Fatigue Life of Bituminous Layer
ϵt = Tensile strain at the bottom of Bituminous Layer
The factor ‘C’ is an adjustment factor used to account for the effect of variation in the mix
volumetric parameters (effective binder volume and air void content) on the fatigue life of
bituminous mixes [9] and was incorporated in the fatigue models to integrate the mix design
considerations in the fatigue performance model.
9 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
9.1 Calculations as per IRC 37:2018
9.1.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria

Permissible vertical strain at subgrade = 4.54 x 10-4
9.1.2 Fatigue Performance model for Bituminous Layer

Permissible tensile strain at the bottom of bituminous layer = 2.01 x 10-4

9.2 Calculations Derived from IIT-PAVE software

Output Page of the Model is shown below:
From IIT Pave results,
Vertical Strain at subgrade = 3.208 x 10-4
Tensile Strain at the bottom of the bituminous layer = 1.644 x 10-4
9.3 Analysis
Performance Permissible Maximum Design Check
Criterion
Vertical Strain at 4.54 x 10-4 3.208 x 10-4 SAFE
subgrade
Tensile Strain at 2.01 x 10-4 1.644 x 10-4 SAFE
Bituminous Layer
10 CONCLUSION
 The subgrade shall be designed for a CBR of 15 percent of Embankment. The use of
cement stabilised subgrade gives us a flexibility with the CBR value.
 The trial section selected is good for construction

Layers Thickness (mm)

BC 40
DBM 70
WMM 150
GSB 200
CS Subgrade 300
 The cement content of subgrade to be fixed at 2.80 %
Design Director
Navarun Vashisth


Annexure-1

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT (Tura Dalu CS)

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

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

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT (Tura Dalu CS)

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Alliance Engineers and Consultants

WIDENING AND UPGRADATION TO 2-

M/S Manaranjan Brahma

Kokrajhar, Assam- 783380

2 EXISTING CONDITION OF THE ROAD.................................................................... 6

3 CLIMATIC CONDITION OF THE AREA ................................................................... 7

4 DRAINAGE CONDITION ........................................................................................... 7

5 MATERIALS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION ..................................................... 8

5.1 Embankment and Subgrade Material ....................................................................... 9

5.1.1 Cement Stabilisation ...................................................................................... 10

5.2 Aggregates for work.............................................................................................. 11

5.2.1 Granular Sub Base (GSB) .............................................................................. 11

5.2.2 Aggregates for Wet Mix Macadam (WMM) .................................................. 12

5.2.3 Bituminous Concrete or Surface Course (BC) ................................................ 13

5.3 Cement Content .................................................................................................... 15

5.4 Lime for Pre-Treatment ......................................................................................... 15

6 SCOPE OF PAVEMENT DESIGN ............................................................................. 15

6.1 Methodology of Proposed Pavement Design ......................................................... 16

6.2 CBR values for the proposed highway................................................................... 16

6.3 Design Traffic ....................................................................................................... 18

6.3.1 Cumulative Million Standard Axles (CMSA) ................................................. 18

7 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS .................................................. 18

7.1 Selection of a Trial Section ................................................................................... 18

7.2 Parameters for the Design ..................................................................................... 19

7.2.1 General .......................................................................................................... 19

7.2.2 Mechanical Properties of different Layers ...................................................... 20

7.3 Input Parameters ................................................................................................... 22

8 PAVEMENT PERFORMANCE MODELS ................................................................. 23

8.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria ...................................................................................... 23

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 2

8.2 Fatigue Cracking Performance of the Bituminous Layer ....................................... 23

9 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ...................................................................................... 24

9.1 Calculations as per IRC 37:2018 ........................................................................... 24

9.1.1 Subgrade Rutting Criteria ............................................................................... 24

9.1.2 Fatigue Performance model for Bituminous Layer ......................................... 24

9.2 Calculations Derived from IIT-PAVE software ..................................................... 25

9.3 Analysis ................................................................................................................ 25

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 3

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 4

5.3 Design Requirements:Design requirement for the flexible pavement shall be in

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 5

2 EXISTING CONDITION OF THE ROAD

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 6

Map 1: Map showing the state of Meghalaya and Project Alignment

3 CLIMATIC CONDITION OF THE AREA

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 7

5 MATERIALS SUITABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 8

5.1 Embankment and Subgrade Material

 Materials from swamps, marshes and bogs;

Table 1 Table 6 of IRC-89:2010

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 9

5.1.1 Cement Stabilisation

 Plasticity Product (PP) expressed as product of PI of soil and percentage fraction

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 10

5.2 Aggregates for work

5.2.1 Granular Sub Base (GSB)

ALLIANCE ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS 11

5.2.2 Aggregates for Wet Mix Macadam (WMM)

Table 2 Table 400-10 of MoRTH(5th Revision)

The aggregates shall conform to the grading given in Table 400-11.